Is this year just a fluke?

[DuckIII]

-= original quote snipped =-


Cliff Levingston's biggest Paxson related fear is his supposed love for Nocioni. Cliff Levingston has said it once and will say it over and over again, but Nocioni is significantly overrated on this board, all of RealGM and in the general public. He's a classic tweener in that he brings a lot of faults to both the 3 and 4 positions and generally hurts your team as much as he helps (if not more, in the mold of Eddy Curry, he's never had a season with a positive +/- on/off court rating). Cliff Levingston really hopes that Pax doesn't have Nocioni at the forefront of his long-term vision, because if he does, we're going to be mediocre for a while.

And you know I agree with you. I think he could be a big help, and have lots of success, on a different roster. But he's just taking up minutes on this one.

[Rerisen]

What is weird, and kind of depressing for the Bulls brass really, is that due to the very fact the team is so young and had such (relative) success last year, agents can indeed use the fluke argument in putting forth the case that Gordon and Deng should command salaries equal to as if the Bulls had actually accomplished what everyone expected this year. The Kobe rumors, coach firing and paltry play of Ben Wallace can also be tossed in as diversions.

Even if the Bulls can get away with coming right back with the same exact offers they gave Deng and BG this year, and it is accepted, you have to wonder if that is a smart move to pay both those guys on top of what we already have Kirk and Noc down for. Because as easily as this season being a fluke, it might not be as well. Or at least the team's true talent level could be somewhere in the middle of this year and last. And then you have a high priced team of young guys all paid up in full for several years, but only amounting to a annual 45 win team or something.

[Friend_Of_Haley]

I agree with the sentiment that we have a good basic core and that just some consolidation trades are all we need.

Here's some basic packages I think we can make some deals along. The only players I really want to see traded this season is Wallace and Duhon. Other players aren't untouchable or anything, but I'd rather wait and see what they can do.

Wallace and Duhon: I think together we can take back an equally worse or slightly better contract. Larry Hughes, Stephon Marbury (buy out), etc. This is just about clearing minutes for the young guys.

Nocioni and Tyrus and #1: This is assuming that out pick doesn't end up top 3-5. If you add a filler like Griffin, we can take back about $16M in this deal, but we need to wait until the off season.

Nocioni and Hinrich and #1: If you could move a package like this for a "true" PG I would do it.

Nocioni: Just traded alone, I'd like to see if we get a SG/SF player as opposed to Nocioni who is more SF/PF. It doesn't help consolidate things, but it relieves some front court clogging.

Joe Smith and fillers: I'm not big on trading Joe Smith since he is serviceable and there is no long term risk to keeping him, if we can sell high and in return take back a similar player who will be here for more long term I'd consider it.

S&T Gordon or Deng: This would just be in the case that someone throws an absurd offer their way like something in the 5/70 range. This type of deal won't help our consolidating efforts, but if it comes to this, we could take back some contracts that expire before 2010 and be set up nicely.

Any combination of the above packages could net good returns too.

Those are some of the types of packages I could see to improve our team. None of them will bring in a superstar like Kobe, but I think that any of those packages could net better players who would make us a better team. None of them would leave us in a situation where we didn't at least have a very solid top 8/9 man rotation. I'd throw in our first rounder into any deal as long as it isn't top 5. We won't have the minutes to give out anyways, so the most value a low lottery pick can have for us is in trade value.

[anorexorcism]

With the way things are going, I'm about ready to call the past three years a fluke.

--'04-'05 we took advantage of two of our divison rivals taking suspension hits (fight at the Palace) and the other losing Boozer. At the same time we couldn't handle Washington.

--'05-'06 we miraculously made the playoffs, had Milwaukee not lost TJ Ford and had Artest not created a sideshow in Indy and demanded his trade and all that, we would not have gotten lucky those last two weeks and gone on that ridiculous run.

--'06-'07 the Bucks entire team pretty much was injured, the Pacers traded away about 80% of their roster to try to "restore their image" and fired Carlisle, and even outside our division the Heat were without Shaq and Wade a majority of the season, the Sixers lost AI, and the Celtics were trying to tank for Oden.

Which leads us to '08. For the first time since '03-'04, with the exception of Washington, the entire Eastern Conference is stable. For the first time rosters aren't taking major injury hits, no one has gotten in major suspensions, and no major trades really occurred that made a contender or 4-6 seed worse/gone to tank mode. All trades that occurred seemed to make Eastern teams better at the expense of Western conference teams.

In fact the suckier teams all improved in the offseason--Boston got better, Orlando got better, Atlanta is playing better, Charlotte got better, and no one really seems to be "losing players to injury/trade" except for Miami. Even Washington is surviving without Arenas.

So really when you look at it from this stance, it's only natural that we suck now. Four non-playoff teams are now making serious pushes or have even become contenders in one season. Thus someone has to go down.

[Cliff Levingston]

What is weird, and kind of depressing for the Bulls brass really, is that due to the very fact the team is so young and had such (relative) success last year, agents can indeed use the fluke argument in putting forth the case that Gordon and Deng should command salaries equal to as if the Bulls had actually accomplished what everyone expected this year. The Kobe rumors, coach firing and paltry play of Ben Wallace can also be tossed in as diversions.

Even if the Bulls can get away with coming right back with the same exact offers they gave Deng and BG this year, and it is accepted, you have to wonder if that is a smart move to pay both those guys on top of what we already have Kirk and Noc down for. Because as easily as this season being a fluke, it might not be as well. Or at least the team's true talent level could be somewhere in the middle of this year and last. And then you have a high priced team of young guys all paid up in full for several years, but only amounting to a annual 45 win team or something.

Cliff Levingston thinks it would still be smart to pay them. The real mistakes on this roster from a salary standpoint are:

1. Wallace, quite obviously.
2. Nocioni, being paid as a starter to be a bench player.
3. Hinrich, not being hugely overpaid or anything but has probably come very close to his ceiling as a bit of a tweener guard.
4. Joe Smith, who's worth every penny this season, but we didn't need him to take minutes from our young guys.

Cliff Levingston thinks it would be dumb to pass on re-signing our two best players because we made bad signings before them.

[BULLHITTER]

finally!!a reason to post!! j/k

great thread.....imo there's a case to be made for both sides, but from my perspective i'd add that until this season's debacle, which couldn't have been predicted by paxson, this year would have been the signature season in whether to move forward with the "core".

if gordon and deng, sans extensions,blows up,hinrich moves forward to allstar status, wallace plays as though he's earning his money, and based on last year's potential thomas becomes a factor off the bench, (sure,maybe that's a perfect world scenario,but hey, it worked for boston,eh?) the bulls are challenging for the EC, and now it becomes a matter of sigining his "stars" to good deals. unfortunatley, that hasn't happened, and though it's hurt his ability to deal anybody on the short term (read; by the deadline) it's made it clear that movement must be made after this season (coach notwithstanding) that a shakeup is needed.

looking around the league, teams generally stay with a group (particularly if their winning games, regardelss of reg/post season) for around 3-4 years; alternatively, if a "big" deal comes along, of course all bets are off, but moreover, teams just don't trade as whimsically as is bandied about by the fans nature.

the point i'm getting at is this; as in an interesting earlier thread, what paxson does at this point is HUGE; the consensus is that the bulls have talent. how does it fit? how can it be improved, and is improving it quickly for a veteran "star" outweigh moving some core guys to move up in the draft and let the noah's and thomas' develop. paxson's gotta figure out who're the keepers. he's also got to determine what kind of personality or leaders he's got from those keepers.

is an outspoken guy like noah? is it an edgy type like thomas? tough call; glad i don't have to make it. but the point made earlier about figuring out the sets, then just beating you on talent is spot on, in my esteemed opinion. additionally, this team lacks the mental wherewithal (toughness) to get to the next level. they can do it for certain games, i.e."redemption" their performances this season against the pistons, or even last year's heat series. the team was mentally tough enough to remember the whippings they received and brought consistent focus and energy. those are the bulls i thought they'd become; they haven't. they can do it for some games, but consistency is lacking, and that's within the "core"; that's been an issue even in previous "slow starting" seasons, so it's time for some tough decisions.

i've got my choices and their consistent with the more rational of the opinion herein, but this is a challenging situation for paxson; i hope he makes the right decision.

for the record; imo, noc, hinrich, and if there is a god, wallace should be moved; i can elaborate, but it's been posted elequently by CL; anybody else, the variables are the essence of the transaction.

[Rerisen]

Getting rid of Wallace, Noc, Hinrich seems to be the way its ebbing for a lot of folks. But what kind of return do these players bring?

We had a rumor thread a few weeks back about Ben Wallace and Kirk for Gooden and Hughes. The majority of Bulls fans hated this deal, but I think it was actually a pretty fair representation of what kind of players the Bulls could get back for these guys.

If even Deng and Gordon are no longer knocking opposing GM's socks off with their potential (I don't think they are) then we have to look at realistically what the players even lower tiered on the Bulls are going to be worth, considering they are playing for a 16-24 team right now.

[DASMACKDOWN]

Even if the Bulls can get away with coming right back with the same exact offers they gave Deng and BG this year, and it is accepted, you have to wonder if that is a smart move to pay both those guys on top of what we already have Kirk and Noc down for. Because as easily as this season being a fluke, it might not be as well. Or at least the team's true talent level could be somewhere in the middle of this year and last. And then you have a high priced team of young guys all paid up in full for several years, but only amounting to a annual 45 win team or something.

The one good thing about being young in this league, is that you can always be an asset in trades. Someone will always take a chance on you. Guys like Al Harington never really lived up to his hype, but it never stopped teams from requesting his services.

Even Kwame Brown as sorry as he is, next season someone will pick him up giving him another chance. Darko is another great example. Both those guys havent shown anything close to what Deng and Gordon have already done. Darko has been on 3 teams. Kwame is about to see his 3rd team.

[DASMACKDOWN]

I dont get the Noce displeasure though. I think Noce is solid. He isnt overpaid. What does 14/6 in 25 mins usually cost these days? Those are pretty good numbers.

[Hairy Midget]

The 3pt percentage isn't just explained by bad perimeter defense. It can also be caused by bad interior defense which requires a lot of double teaming on anyone in the post. If you double team a LOT it's really hard to get back to shooters consistently.

I think this has to do with the horrible job that Ben Wallace is doing.

[Cliff Levingston]

I think this has to do with the horrible job that Ben Wallace is doing.

It has more to do with how we double anyone, no matter who it is. We also double almost completely from the strong side which allows the passer ample time to see the double and ample opportunity to make an easy pass for a wide open 3.

Conventional thinking is that you don't double team a guy until he shows that he can beat you. We don't wait to see if Eduardo Najera can beat us first; we double team him to make sure he gives that ball up!

[kyrv]

-= original quote snipped =-


It has more to do with how we double anyone, no matter who it is. We also double almost completely from the strong side which allows the passer ample time to see the double and ample opportunity to make an easy pass for a wide open 3.

Conventional thinking is that you don't double team a guy until he shows that he can beat you. We don't wait to see if Eduardo Najera can beat us first; we double team him to make sure he gives that ball up!

I think, ironically, we would double Ben Wallace or Adrian Griffin the post.

[AirP.]

I think this year was a fluke, but this fluke has turned into a virus. We went from a very good team bringing in some talent to develop and make us a better team to shut down the development, play whoever gives you the best that day and live around .500 with next year looking worse then this year.

Hinrich will regain his game in time, I still maintain that his problem is balancing his life between basketball and marriage. No longer is this overachiever living basketball 24/7, he has other things that take up his time now. Not saying he isn't working hard, but I'd bet the farm that he's not spending as much time overall on basketball as he did last year.

Deng, started slow and with injuries has been overall pretty good when he's played.

Gordon, he is what he is, on and off coupled in with a slow starter in the season. He keeps showing why he can't be the #1 option in an offense because he's not consistent enough.

Nocioni, he is what he is part 2. He hustles, he chucks shots but he's a pretty good shot, not a player you want to build around but a guy you want on your team.

Wallace, a very good ROLE player that enhances a team that has solid scoring from the other positions but if the team doesn't having the scoring, he just kills a team offensivly making not so good of scorers have even tougher defenses to face(4 on 5).

I think the players know the changes are coming, your big free agent signing should NEVER say he's getting old 2 years in on a 4 year 60 million dollar deal. Even though I like hearing that from a development standpoint, it makes me angry as hell to hear him say that 1 year into a fresh 4 year contract... it speaks volumes of what we can expect from him for another 2 1/2 years out of the 4 we signed him for.

[molepharmer]

I don't buy that its totally random chance that our 3 best players would just have career best shooting years all at the same time. There was another factor at work there. A shared goal, drive to achieve something, belief in Skiles system whatever.

On baseball boards I remember the stat inclined folks being loathe to give credence to anything that cannot be measured, such as chemistry, momentum, etc. And I guess you can make a case that baseball being a game of 1v1 matchups, the team factor is a lot less. But I have little doubt chemistry plays a role in basketball and its hard to play the game at your top level if a player is not right mentally. Something definitely happened this year at the start of the season, that just ran this team right off the track they had been going forward on. And they haven't really recovered. It's been a downward spiral that they can't seem to pull out of.

Now if this was a super talented team (say like Dallas last year), then surely they could have recovered from a rocky start. But being that our team depended so heavily on having a elite defense, and a large measure of good defense is effort, it stands to reason once you lost that motivation and effort to play great defense (see related thread about taking charges for instance) you can get to a place where a team like the Bulls cannot recover. And certainly our defense helped cushion our weak offense at times. So it's vicious circle.

Good post. My feelings as well.

The total lack of transition defense provides enough evidence for me to conclude this group isn't putting forth nearly the same effort as previous years. They simply don't seem to care if they get scored upon. By their own admission they're not playing physical enough.

Noah situation - It bothered me a little that the vets were giving the rookie so much grief because basically he hasn't accomplished anything yet. Like they had ???? Besides Wallace, just what have these guys accomplished ??? No Championships. No Finals. No All-Star appearances. Or is it a big deal that they made the playoffs in a league where the majority of teams do.

[Friend_Of_Haley]

I dont get the Noce displeasure though. I think Noce is solid. He isnt overpaid. What does 14/6 in 25 mins usually cost these days? Those are pretty good numbers.

My issue is that, despite his deal declining, it has a large risk of hurting us down the line. Now I know it is important to "win now", but I think our realistic window is down the line a few years anyways, especially after seeing this season play out. He does put up good stats right now, so we would be trading high. Trading high when the future outlook isn't as bright is a good decision.

Furthermore, despite the positives he brings, he also brings some negatives. Included in these negatives are: being a bit of a black hole, not playing smart defense (although he tries), not having a true position, and taking away time from young players like Noah and Thomas.

If this season had gone according to plan and we took the next step, the risk of Nocioni's deal wouldn't outweigh the importance of win now. Now that we have been knocked from that track slightly, we need to evaluate his long term importance to this team, because his importance now isn't as valuable on a team that isn't going anywhere this year, and probably not next year either.

Hinrich is close to being in this position too, but the fact that he is the rare type of player who can fit with Gordon he has more value.

I've always maintained that I like Nocioni as a player and appreciate his intensity. Its fun to watch. I just think when you take everything into consideration it is probably best to take the opportunity to sell high.

I'm not sure if all that I said fits exactly with the feelings of Cliff, Duck, and others that are pro-trade with Nocioni, but I'd assume its something like this.

[Rerisen]

Nocioni is a problem because like Gordon, almost all his value is in the scoring he gives us. Its not like you can really just replace his minutes with Thabo and Tyrus and expect to remain competitive.

So if your going to trade Noc, you have to trade him for offense right back. But that only makes sense if the offense is in the form of a big man. But if it is a big man, then you suddenly have nowhere to play this guy unless you want to permanently bench Noah or Tyrus (as we know it won't be Wallace). If you don't like the prospect of benching one of those guys, then I think you are back to the problem of having to include one in any potential deal.

Of course you could always try the unconventional move of trading Noc for scoring at the Shooting Guard, but to me that doesn't make much sense, since right now until we find someone better, Noc is probably (and sadly) our best big man scorer (when we play him there).

[Bulls_Dynasty6]

I pray to god it is. If not...

Then damn. I'll be a pretty sad SOB in the future years to come.

But, this is a deep draft, so I encourage tanking.

[coldfish]

There are just so many factors on both sides of the "fluke" argument that its really hard to exactly point fingers anywhere. I could have a long post going on about either side of the argument being correct.

Paxson is in a *real*pickle right now, because he has to answer this question and he has to be right.

[bentheredengthat]

Not many things in life are a fluke.

I think we've been getting away with a few things for a long time that are now consistently hurting the team:

1)Thinking that any open jump shot is a good shot - fast break or not
2)Always playing unbalanced lineups - either 3 guards, or undersized center, or 2 sf, or 2 undersized guards, etc, etc
3)Always leaving 3 point shooters open - which is caused by
4)Soft double teams at the free throw line - many times on players who don't need to be double teamed.
5)Starting lineups without any scoring. - we play from behind all the time.
6)pick & roll run with a guy setting the pick who can't do anything with the ball.

I could go on, but the main point is this: pick any two out of the list & don't fix them & eventually the other teams are going know how to exploit the weakness.

[JeremyB0001]

I think a fluke is a big part of it. The putrid offense we played at the beginning of the season was the main reason for the poor start and that's already dissipated. An aberration also seems like a reasonable explanation for our struggles on defense, considering how much defensive talent we have on this squad.

I think poor coaching is part of the reason we've struggled. I agree with the idea that part of the problem is that teams have adapted to our sets and we haven't responded. I don't really agree with the idea that teams have "figured us out" though because that implies that our success over the past three seasons (at least on defense) was a fluke in that it was purely the product of smart schemes and hustle that had an expiration date. I don't really buy the idea that we played great defense for three seasons due to good X's and O's and then after three seasons teams finally put in the necessary effort to figure out how to beat our defense.

maybe last year might have been a fluke. You bring up a good point in the shooting. For instance look at Kirk. Kirk is shooting bad this year, in comparison to last year (45%) But before last season Kirk was a career 40% shooter. He is at 39% now so in reality, he isnt all that far off from what he had been doing the previous 4 seasons.

It's not impossible that our players peaked as a very, very young team but it's highly unlikely. Here are Kirk's TS%'s since he entered the league: 51.0, 49.5, 52.8, 55.9, 47.3. He's not a lock to repeat last year's figure but this season looks like the biggest fluke to me. His per 40 scoring rates look very similar: 13.5, 17.2, 17.4, 18.7, 13.5.

I can see slumps (or flukes of bad play) lasting several weeks even months, but a whole year? If the season to this point has been a fluke, why does it necessarily have to continue to last this entire season? If the team is vastly more talented than it is showing, you would think that at any time now, they would revert to their mean and start putting wins together. But far from that, we don't even look good against the cellar teams in the league. And that hasn't really changed this entire season.

You're looking at things too generally. The evidence seems to very much support the idea that the offensive slumps Lu, BG, and Kirk had at the beginning of the season were flukes because their numbers are way up since. The problem is that their resurgence coincided with a huge regression in the team's defense. I guess time will tell if that's a fluke, but as I noted above, it defies logic that this team is not one of the better defensive teams in the NBA.

With the way things are going, I'm about ready to call the past three years a fluke.

I think you're looking at things a little bit to generally too. For instance, here are our defensive efficiency rankings for the past four seasons: 2nd, 7th, 1st, 16th. Again, the most recent season is the one that looks least like the others. I don't think that can be explained away by the notion that we had easy paths to the playoffs the past three seasons and our defensive efficiency figure from last season would rank 3rd in the NBA right now so I don't think it's an issue of a lot of teams improving and thus leapfrogging us defensively. You can do a similar exercise with our offense which has also regressed considerably.