Explaining the Bulls Terrible Offense

[Lanky Gunner]

The Bulls are the worst shooting 3 point team in the league by percentage and only 4 teams take fewer 3s per game than the Bulls. No team takes as many 16-23 foot jumps as the Bulls. In fact, the next closest team, Minnesota, shoots 3 (!) less per game than the Bulls. This is even more outrageous when you consider that the Bulls are in the bottom 8 in the league in pace (averaging 2.5 fewer possessions per game than league average), so that a huge percentage of their shots per game are 16-23 foot jump shots. Even more discouraging is that the Bulls don't even shoot that shot better than average. The average rate of makes in that range is 38.5% leaguewide, but the Bulls make them at a rate of just 37.1%.

The Bulls also take the 5th fewest shots at the rim and are the 3rd worst team at finishing at the rim. They are 13th in shots taken in the under 10 foot range, but they are making 50% of these shots, good for the 4th highest percentage. They are also 13th in attempts in the 10-15 foot range, but they are 9th in FG% on shots in that range.

From this it's pretty clear why the Bulls are 26th in offensive efficiency. They don't get to the rim very often and are pretty bad at finishing at the rim. They don't take many threes and they are also the worst team in the league at making the threes they do take. They take more long 2pt jump shots (the game's least efficient shot) than any other team and make that shot at a below average percentage. The Bulls are actually pretty good at scoring inside when it's not at the rim (i.e. from 1 to 15 feet out). So it's pretty clear that they need to be attacking more and trying to get more shots in that area, and they also need to get to attack so that they can get to the line more, as they are 23rd in FT-r.

Overall, in terms of the offensive four factors the Bulls are 3rd worst (28th) in eFG%, 23rd (or 8th worst) in FT-r (which has so far been compounded by the Bulls shooting a horrid 69.1% from the line), 8th in OReb%, and 11th in TO-r (meaning they've been taking care of the ball pretty well).

The good news is that there's a LOT of room for improvement from the offense. The bad news is that Vinny is our coach, we don't really have shooters, and our best FT drawer is on the shelf for 4-6 weeks.

All data available at: http://hoopdata.com/teamshotlocs.aspx

[Grand Champ]

We have played a tough schedule, I think its too early to call our offense that crappy.

[C3]

It would be nice to pick up a three point specialist, I don't think it really needs to be a starter at this time. Any three point chucker, that hits a decent percentage would do. Just someone who could spread things out when were behind.

I also have confidence that the offense overall will improve, once Rose starts playing like Rose.

[Lanky Gunner]

We have played a tough schedule, I think its too early to call our offense that crappy.

I'm looking at the league-wide defensive efficiency ratings, and you know, you're right... the Bulls have played a really tough schedule in terms of the defenses they've faced. Right now, Milwaukee leads the league in Def. Eff. (Skiles is a defensive miracle worker, I swear), Boston is second, Charlotte is third, Miami is fourth, Cleveland is 6th, and San Antonio is 21st (perhaps why the Bulls beat up on them?).

Now, it could be that because most of these teams have only played between 6 and 7 games that the crummy Bulls offense being one of those games has inflated their defensive averages, but I suspect that's not the case for a couple of reasons. The Celtics have been a dominant defensive team ever since KG arrived. Charlotte and Milwaukee are both run by coaches who preach defense and demand effort at that (sometimes to the extent that they throw out garbage offenses just to achieve their defensive goals), and Cleveland has been consistently a very good to great defensive team in the Mike Brown era.

Thanks Grand.Champ, you've turned my frown upside down!

[coldfish]

During the offseason, we had these discussions frequently. The number I point to is true scoring %. It takes into account FT's, FG% and 3 point making and statistically shows how many points you get per shot attempt (better than pps or efg%).

The Bulls have a number of guys as primary scorers who have historically had low TS%. Deng, Rose and Hinrich in particular. Only Salmons has been able to score efficiently in the past.

To that end, the Bulls are going to struggle on offense all year.

When you add in the fact that the Bulls are concentrating on rebounding, which limits their transition opportunities (which are high percentage), its going to be a slog all year long. The defense and rebounding have been pretty darned good though, which will keep the team in most games.

[logical_art]

The Bulls just need Hinrich and Salmons to start shooting at their career norms from distance. That would really help.

[Grand Champ]

We have played a tough schedule, I think its too early to call our offense that crappy.

I'm looking at the league-wide defensive efficiency ratings, and you know, you're right... the Bulls have played a really tough schedule in terms of the defenses they've faced. Right now, Milwaukee leads the league in Def. Eff. (Skiles is a defensive miracle worker, I swear), Boston is second, Charlotte is third, Miami is fourth, Cleveland is 6th, and San Antonio is 21st (perhaps why the Bulls beat up on them?).

Now, it could be that because most of these teams have only played between 6 and 7 games that the crummy Bulls offense being one of those games has inflated their defensive averages, but I suspect that's not the case for a couple of reasons. The Celtics have been a dominant defensive team ever since KG arrived. Charlotte and Milwaukee are both run by coaches who preach defense and demand effort at that (sometimes to the extent that they throw out garbage offenses just to achieve their defensive goals), and Cleveland has been consistently a very good to great defensive team in the Mike Brown era.

Thanks Grand.Champ, you've turned my frown upside down!

I knew I'd be right one of these days and someone would listen to me!

[Lanky Gunner]

During the offseason, we had these discussions frequently. The number I point to is true scoring %. It takes into account FT's, FG% and 3 point making and statistically shows how many points you get per shot attempt (better than pps or efg%).

The Bulls have a number of guys as primary scorers who have historically had low TS%. Deng, Rose and Hinrich in particular. Only Salmons has been able to score efficiently in the past.

To that end, the Bulls are going to struggle on offense all year.

When you add in the fact that the Bulls are concentrating on rebounding, which limits their transition opportunities (which are high percentage), its going to be a slog all year long. The defense and rebounding have been pretty darned good though, which will keep the team in most games.

I just quickly calculated the Bulls True Scoring% as a team and it's comically bad. 48%. Seriously.

[DASMACKDOWN]

During the offseason, we had these discussions frequently. The number I point to is true scoring %. It takes into account FT's, FG% and 3 point making and statistically shows how many points you get per shot attempt (better than pps or efg%).

The Bulls have a number of guys as primary scorers who have historically had low TS%. Deng, Rose and Hinrich in particular. Only Salmons has been able to score efficiently in the past.

To that end, the Bulls are going to struggle on offense all year.

When you add in the fact that the Bulls are concentrating on rebounding, which limits their transition opportunities (which are high percentage), its going to be a slog all year long. The defense and rebounding have been pretty darned good though, which will keep the team in most games.

I dont get it.

Last year did alot of fast breaking and we didnt rebound the ball well.

Vinny said it all offseason that we need to rebound the ball to fast break.

So this year we are rebounding the ball extremely well but now we dont fast break as much.

Somehow that went into a time warp.

[coldfish]

During the offseason, we had these discussions frequently. The number I point to is true scoring %. It takes into account FT's, FG% and 3 point making and statistically shows how many points you get per shot attempt (better than pps or efg%).

The Bulls have a number of guys as primary scorers who have historically had low TS%. Deng, Rose and Hinrich in particular. Only Salmons has been able to score efficiently in the past.

To that end, the Bulls are going to struggle on offense all year.

When you add in the fact that the Bulls are concentrating on rebounding, which limits their transition opportunities (which are high percentage), its going to be a slog all year long. The defense and rebounding have been pretty darned good though, which will keep the team in most games.

I dont get it.

Last year did alot of fast breaking and we didnt rebound the ball well.

Vinny said it all offseason that we need to rebound the ball to fast break.

So this year we are rebounding the ball extremely well but now we dont fast break as much.

Somehow that went into a time warp.

Bulls are crashing the boards with 4 or 5 people right now. Last year, the team would have several people leak out to push the ball. When the 3 remaining guys actually got a rebound, it was off to the races. When they didn't, it was a putback layup. Now, the Bulls are getting far more rebounds, but don't have anyone to outlet to.

If Vinny thinks that using more people to rebound will improve fast break chances, then he is a fool. I'm not sure that is what he meant though.

[Rerisen]

We only have two players over .500TS%. That's bad. Thank god for Noah coming on strong and giving us at least one high efficiency producer even if he isn't scoring a ton.

I think many people expected the team to have these exact weaknesses, but so far, it has been worse than anyone anticipated.

However, Rose can definitely produce better as he gets into game shape. Right now he is below where he was last year. Kirk and Salmons can and should shoot better.

Most of all, I think the Bulls are still in a transition or adjustment phase with this offense. I expected a new hierarchy to get formed this season, but so far its more like random chaos in terms of who is filling the scoring vacuum on a nightly basis. Our preseason wasn't very helpful at all in terms of reestablishing the offensive pecking order, because we didn't have everyone healthy.

At the end of the day, the Bulls offense is still predicated on the long two point jumper. We almost seem eager to get that shot sadly, taking it early and often as if knowing nothing better will be forthcoming. As long as that is the case, we aren't going to have a real good offense.

[Eyeballs]

We have played a tough schedule, I think its too early to call our offense that crappy.

I'm looking at the league-wide defensive efficiency ratings, and you know, you're right... the Bulls have played a really tough schedule in terms of the defenses they've faced. Right now, Milwaukee leads the league in Def. Eff. (Skiles is a defensive miracle worker, I swear), Boston is second, Charlotte is third, Miami is fourth, Cleveland is 6th, and San Antonio is 21st (perhaps why the Bulls beat up on them?).

A good test of this theory is our next game, because the Nuggets are a lousy 22nd in DRtg. Same with the game after that, at TOR, since the Raps are 29th. And the game after that, vs PHI (23rd). And the game after that, at SAC (26th). Then we lose to the Lakers, then the next game is the Nuggets again. So guess what, Bulls fans, we should get hot now.

I'm only kidding about the Nuggets, since they're actually a good defensive team. But at Tor, vs Phi, at Sac, that could be the stretch that gets the offense going.

[hoopdata]

During the offseason, we had these discussions frequently. The number I point to is true scoring %. It takes into account FT's, FG% and 3 point making and statistically shows how many points you get per shot attempt (better than pps or efg%).

The Bulls have a number of guys as primary scorers who have historically had low TS%. Deng, Rose and Hinrich in particular. Only Salmons has been able to score efficiently in the past.

To that end, the Bulls are going to struggle on offense all year.

When you add in the fact that the Bulls are concentrating on rebounding, which limits their transition opportunities (which are high percentage), its going to be a slog all year long. The defense and rebounding have been pretty darned good though, which will keep the team in most games.

I just quickly calculated the Bulls True Scoring% as a team and it's comically bad. 48%. Seriously.

Just for future reference, calculation isn't necessary. TS% at a team level available here: http://hoopdata.com/teamoffstats.aspx

Another interesting stat for the Bulls offense is Derrick Rose's FTR. The league average FTR for point guards last season was 0.275. Rose's was only 0.21. This year Rose is up to 0.25, but is still below the league average, inexcusable given his incredible physical profile (arguably the best for a PG in the league).

And to the person who talked about no one on the Bulls having a TS% over 50%, that's right, but keep in mind that the league average TS% is actually 53.8, so 50% isn't even the benchmark you should be aiming for. Full list of TS% for Bulls players (and league average) here:

[url]http://www.hoopdata.com/scoringstats.aspx?team=CHI&type=pg&posi=%&yr=2010&gp=0&mins=0[/url]

[coldfish]

I don't want to get too statistical. TS% is just a number to put next to a problem.

Quite simply, there are 3 ways to be efficient on offense:
- Hit an absurdly high percentage of your shots. 55%+ Usually by getting inside by driving, posting or offensive rebounds.
- Draw a lot of fouls and hit them at a reasonable %
- Hit a high percentage on 3's.

The only guys on the Bulls who can do any of these things are Noah and Salmons. Derrick needed to either get a 3p shot or learn how to draw fouls and so far, he has shown the ability to do neither.

A perfect example is Deng. He has a respectable, if not great FG% at 44.0%. Overall, he is playing well. Unfortunately, has has to use up a lot of possessions to score because he doesn't get FT's or 3P shots in volume. His TS% is only 49.2%. Many good players have a TS% more than 10 points higher than their FG%.

[jax98]

I don't want to get too statistical. TS% is just a number to put next to a problem.

Quite simply, there are 3 ways to be efficient on offense:
- Hit an absurdly high percentage of your shots. 55%+ Usually by getting inside by driving, posting or offensive rebounds.
- Draw a lot of fouls and hit them at a reasonable %
- Hit a high percentage on 3's.

The only guys on the Bulls who can do any of these things are Noah and Salmons. Derrick needed to either get a 3p shot or learn how to draw fouls and so far, he has shown the ability to do neither.

A perfect example is Deng. He has a respectable, if not great FG% at 44.0%. Overall, he is playing well. Unfortunately, has has to use up a lot of possessions to score because he doesn't get FT's or 3P shots in volume. His TS% is only 49.2%. Many good players have a TS% more than 10 points higher than their FG%.

I apologize in advance for bringing him up, but it's just to provide an example to your explanation.

Ben Gordon has a career TS% of .555% (.573% last season)

His FG% over his career: .438%

TS% puts more emphasis on three-point field goals and free throws. Given Ben are strong in both categories, the TS% in increased dramatically.

In essence: TS% is a better tool than FG%. You can use 3-point field goal percentage as an isolated stat to paint a perfect picture of a players efficiency from behind the arc, but you cannot do that with regular FG% if the player takes a lot of three's.

Efficient basketball is the absolute key to have a successful offense. While that goes without saying, it's still something that often is overlooked. Deng's 20-foot jumpshot is a perfect example of this. If he took a step back and got an extra point, but made it just a little less frequently, that extra point will prove more valuable in the long haul.

Plus, generating free throws can help an offense that struggles from the field to squeeze out those necessary points. This is why people are so caught up in Derrick's foul shots. If he can generate a solid 5-6 points a night just from free throws, his offensive impact and efficiency will increase significally.

Best recipe for a strong offensive team:

- Efficient big men who understand the value of easy points (dunks, lay-ups, free throws)

- Strong three-point shooters (players who shoot over 40% from behind the arc and take over half their shots from three. For example. 2 out of 5 from behind the arc gives a player 6 points on five possessions. 3 out of 6 from two gives a player six points on six possessions. So 40% from three is greater than 50% from two. Meaning Ben Godon's career percentage of .414% from behind the arc is in reality more efficient than a player shooting 50-52% from two)

- Free throw generating players (players who can get a solid amount of attempts a night and hit them at over 80%)

You need more than just one of each, and currently the Bulls have one very efficient big man (Noah), no strong three-point shooters and just two players who generate more than five free throw attempts per36 minutes (Thomas and Miller).

[boogydown]

I still would prefer a Rose - Gordon - Salmons - Deng - Noah lineup right now with Hinrich gone.

With that said, Chicago needs more time. Salmons is slowly turning around, and Hinrich still needs time to adjust. Those two are keys for our 3PT shooting this season.

As for the rest, Rose is going to get his game back eventually, and that is when we can see if we are an average, below average or awful offensive team.

[JeremyB0001]

Not to be obnoxious but the stat is true *shooting* percentage, not true scoring percentage.

[Hangtime84]

So why is the OP hating on Vinny?

[Hangtime84]

Ryan Anderson seems to understands how to be a efficient offensive...shoot 3s, layups, and putbacks