# Bulls' 2014-15 rotation



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Well that concludes an interesting free agency. Gasol signs for $6.5M starting salary, Mirotic signs for $5.5M, and Hinrich for the $2.5M exception. We may still have some minor moves to make, but for the most part we have our main rotation set. Trades could still happen of course (side note: Thibs yesterday said "the wings are something we need to address")

That gives us a fairly clear cut 10-man rotation:

Starters -- Rose, Butler, Dunleavy, Gasol, Noah
Bench -- Hinrich, Snell, McDermott, Mirotic, Gibson

Thoughts on the rotation?

Personally I think it's a very good team but still 1 player away from a legit championship level team. In that sense I can't help but feel disappointed in our free agent haul, even though I think we brought in some really nice players in Gasol, McDermott, & Mirotic (who can all score, by the way). 

Strengths -- highly versatile squad, can trot out alot of different types of lineups; should still have a great defense; much improved offensive production; passing will be top notch; deeper squad of shoots which will help spacing; Gasol will be the best low-post scorer we've had in years.

Weaknesses -- lacks top heavy scoring, will be susceptible to scoring droughts too frequently; lacks enough off the dribble shot creators, Rose (still) being the only player on the roster who fits this description. 

Melo would've solved all the weaknesses IMO, and Lance would've solved half of them. That is why I am a little disappointed. Maybe we can swing a trade at some point to jump on someone to help in one or both areas. There are also poorer but cheaper versions of players out there that fill some of these weaknesses like Jordan Crawford, Rodney Stuckey, and Evan Turner. But all would be at lower than ideal levels and have major weaknesses in other areas. 

So in summary I expect a fun team that will win alot of games and should be favored to make the EC Finals. Ultimately I do not see us good enough for a title though, still 1 player away, and Cleveland I actually think will be very good out of the gates, as will Washington, so making the Finals certainly isn't a given.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

the team lacks a starting caliber sf, 

pretty much the way the roster is set up either McDermott has to be very good very soon or they will have to trade for a good small forward out of their excess of power players to balance out their roster.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> the team lacks a starting caliber sf,
> 
> pretty much the way the roster is set up either McDermott has to be very good very soon or they will have to trade for a good small forward out of their excess of power players to balance out their roster.


Ideally I would like Jimmy Butler better starting at SF. I think that's his more natural position, offensively as the 3rd ballhandler and defensively against the more physical wings where he thrives. 

The problem as I've stated in other places is the NBA's depth at SG sucks these days. Bulls fans talk as if there's a mythical player out there who can handle the ball, shoot the 3-ball, and score 15+ ppg. Sure there are a few guys like that but it's a supply & demand problem, so those guys are hard to get and expensive to keep. Afflalo comes close (which is why the Bulls looked at him) but even he has some notable flaws. 

So the other option is to look at the Jordan Crawford or Stuckey types, but really do you want those kind of guys starting? 

Another idea is to move Rose to a 2-guard role, and find a good PG since that's the deepest position in the league. I sort of like that option the best b/c it increases the possibility of flat out getting the most talent on the floor. Rose should be able to defend most SG's b/c the position is so weak and smaller than ever before. 

Either way, we don't have cap space or even exceptions to spend anymore, so this would need to be done via trade.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> the team lacks a starting caliber sf,
> 
> pretty much the way the roster is set up either McDermott has to be very good very soon or they will have to trade for a good small forward out of their excess of power players to balance out their roster.


That pretty much sums it up for me as well. Nicely stated.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> *the team lacks a starting caliber sf, *
> 
> pretty much the way the roster is set up either McDermott has to be very good very soon or they will have to trade for a good small forward out of their excess of power players to balance out their roster.


This is a bit of hyperbole to me... we may not have a great or even 'above average' starting 3 on the team, but to say we don't have anyone that is "starting caliber" is extreme. We were 38-23 with Dunleavy Jr. starting at the 3 last year.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Dornado said:


> This is a bit of hyperbole to me... we may not have a great or even 'above average' starting 3 on the team, but to say we don't have anyone that is "starting caliber" is extreme. We were 38-23 with Dunleavy Jr. starting at the 3 last year.


Teams can definitely survive without a starting caliber SF, but it's hard to thrive. At this point in his career, Dunleavy is not a top 30 SF in this league. Therefore, he is not "starting caliber".


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Dunleavy is the most obvious trade piece we have. He has a small contract of only $3M and its expiring. We don't really need him yet he can provide value to contenders as a rotation player and shooter off the bench. Bottom line he is expendable.

Wonder if we could find a taker for Dunleavy + Anthony Randolph (expiring $1.8M) + draft picks. I would do that for sure if it brought us a solid starter at SG to fill some of our skill gaps. A few possibilities are Jeremy Lamb or Alec Burks. I see both those guys being expendable on their current clubs. OKC has plenty of wing talent and Utah just drafted Exum to go with Trey Burke while paying Hayward the max.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

I suppose I have to assume that Dunleavy is the presumptive starting 3, but it will be interesting to see if McBuckets can make a run at it. It seems you'll basically always have one of Butler + Snell on the floor to guard the opposing team's more dangerous wing, and then Dunleavy or McBuckets there on the weaker wing.

Any chance Mirotic gets some burn at the 3 at some point? The Bulls are going to have to get creative with the logjam at the 4 & 5 spots and relative thinness at the 2 and 3.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

RollWithEm said:


> Teams can definitely survive without a starting caliber SF, but it's hard to thrive. At this point in his career, Dunleavy is not a top 30 SF in this league. Therefore, he is not "starting caliber".


Look, Mike Dunleavy Jr. is about as un-sexy as it gets at this point in his career... getting that out of the way lest I be accused of overrating Dunleavy too much... but I think he's a 'starting caliber' NBA 3. Your argument that he isn't assumes a couple of things: 1) that there are only 30 'starting caliber' small forwards in the NBA and that 2) he isn't among the top 30. On the first point, I'd say that while ranking guys is fun for fans, it isn't really quite so simple as saying 'these are the top 30 guys, they should be starting'... Mike Dunleavy may offer more value to one team than he does to another... in our case we needed outside shooting desperately and Dunleavy is respectable in that department. I don't necessarily believe there are only 30 guys capable or worthy of starting at the 3 in the NBA. On number 2, accepting your premise that he has to be in the top 30... I would only say that there are a few starting SF's I'd strongly consider taking him over, at least for the Bulls (Demare Carroll, Michael Kidd Gilchrist (for now), Kyle Singler (he'll play the three in Detroit now, right?), Wes Johnson, Tayshaun Prince, whoever is starting in Philly, etc...). MDJ may fall in the top 30. 

All of that being said, I'm hoping by some miracle Doug McDermott can overcome Thibodeau's aversion to playing rookies (by playing enough D to get on the court).


----------



## KFitz14 (Jun 3, 2014)

Pretty deep thus far, hopefully they can add a true SG at the minimum, either have Bairstow or another minimum guy as a 5th big, and get a 3rd PG.

Dornado's point about there being some really bad starting 3s around the league stands. Even the teams going for a championship have some holes in their starting lineup. The Spurs start Danny Green, who is remarkably similar to Dunleavy at last as stat lines go (better on defense and better 3pt % but that may be due to the Spurs' system getting him more open shots). The Thunder started Perk and Thabo. The Heat started Rashard F*cking Lewis for chrissakes.

The Bulls depth will help them keep people healthy (assuming Thibs actually uses that depth) and slowly work in the young guys to the point that they might be getting big minutes in the playoffs and being ready for it and not just being thrown into the fire. I could see either McDermott or Mirotic (if he can handle defending smaller/more athletic wings or switch and have Taj guard them) getting significant playing time at the 3.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Any chance Mirotic gets some burn at the 3 at some point? The Bulls are going to have to get creative with the logjam at the 4 & 5 spots and relative thinness at the 2 and 3.


That's a great question. Hard to know what Thibs will decide. I personally think Mirotic can play SF in a pinch and that is part of the reason why Dunleavy is expendable. That would alleviate the log jam and help upgrade the backcourt by trading Dunleavy.

SF -- Butler, McDermott, Snell, Mirotic
PF -- Gasol, Gibson, Mirotic
C -- Noah, Gasol, Gibson

And that is without dipping into our 3rd stringers. IMO, Butler will go back to playing 28 min/game and McDermott, Snell, and Mirotic will all be getting around 18-20 min/game. That doesn't leave much if any time for Dunleavy, we can definitely move forward without him now that Mirotic is locked in.


----------



## KFitz14 (Jun 3, 2014)

I don't think they part ways with Dunleavy because he took a discount to sign with them and they aren't going to get anyone better in a trade or with the cap space they would open up. Plus, this team could always use shooting and Dunleavy (along with McDermott potentially) is the best pure shooter they have.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

yodurk said:


> That's a great question. Hard to know what Thibs will decide. I personally think Mirotic can play SF in a pinch and that is part of the reason why Dunleavy is expendable. That would alleviate the log jam and help upgrade the backcourt by trading Dunleavy.
> 
> SF -- Butler, McDermott, Snell, Mirotic
> PF -- Gasol, Gibson, Mirotic
> ...



I keep thinking Taj + MDJ + potentially a pick would make an intriguing offer for a solid wing player, but I'm struggling to think of who could be on the block either this offseason or at the deadline.

I'm beginning to think a deadline deal makes a little more sense. It would be nice to give Mirotic, McDermott, and Snell some burn over the season to see how you feel about their abilities before deciding whether to pull the trigger on something.

I also think the Love thing should remain in play. The Timberwolves reportedly want Butler + Gibson + Mirotic + McDermott. I'm not sure that deal leaves the Bulls with enough on the wing. But say you take McDermott out, add a first rounder or two, and take back Kevin Martin. That would be interesting. Noah + Love with Gasol as a scoring 6th man seems to make a heck of a lot of sense. Baristow I suppose is your 4th big in that scenario.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

Agree completely with Grinch about the assessment of our roster. 

I'd also add that we need to be in the hunt for a JLIII/Nate type player for the veteran's minimum. 

As for the actual rotation:

We have the possibility of being 10 deep but I don't think we'll have a bench mob the same way we did Thibs' first 2 years. I think we'll platoon offense/defense for a lot of the game so we'll see a bunch of lineups that splice the bench and starters together. 

In particular I think Thibs will want to use lineups with Rose and McDermott/Mirotic to space the floor, but I doubt they start. 

I'm expecting to see a very egalitarian distribution of minutes. No one's going to have a career year statistically. Most of our top players will be in the 24-32 mpg range.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> I keep thinking Taj + MDJ + potentially a pick would make an intriguing offer for a solid wing player, but I'm struggling to think of who could be on the block either this offseason or at the deadline.
> 
> I'm beginning to think a deadline deal makes a little more sense. It would be nice to give Mirotic, McDermott, and Snell some burn over the season to see how you feel about their abilities before deciding whether to pull the trigger on something.
> 
> I also think the Love thing should remain in play. The Timberwolves reportedly want Butler + Gibson + Mirotic + McDermott. I'm not sure that deal leaves the Bulls with enough on the wing. But say you take McDermott out, add a first rounder or two, and take back Kevin Martin. That would be interesting. Noah + Love with Gasol as a scoring 6th man seems to make a heck of a lot of sense. Baristow I suppose is your 4th big in that scenario.


Agree completely about your intuitions for trade possibilities. 

This offseason leaves us weak on the perimeter, but well positioned to create attractive packages in trades. We're well below the tax line and all of our guys are on value contracts except for Rose. 

The way our team is setup we have 2-3 years with the team as it's currently constructed. I think we'll be involved in a lot of deadline talks this year and next.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

KFitz14 said:


> I don't think they part ways with Dunleavy because he took a discount to sign with them and they aren't going to get anyone better in a trade or with the cap space they would open up. Plus, this team could always use shooting and Dunleavy (along with McDermott potentially) is the best pure shooter they have.


Very possible the Bulls are thinking this way. Though I think they have plenty of shooting now with McDermott, Mirotic, and Snell looking good as a shooter in SL. Hinrich, Rose, and Butler will all hit some 3's as well, albeit less efficiently than Dunleavy.

Dunleavy packaged with draft picks might get us a decent guard/wing player. We have our 2015 first-rounder and the Kings' protected 1st. For instance Dunleavy could be used in S&T for Jordan Crawford who the Bulls are rumored to like: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/source...wford-with-sign-and-trade-deal-035003396.html

If I'm OKC, I would prefer Dunleavy over a guy like Jeremy Lamb. Lamb is more talented but OKC doesn't need his talent, they would fare better with Dunleavy's steady veteran presence and standstill shooting.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> Any chance Mirotic gets some burn at the 3 at some point? The Bulls are going to have to get creative with the logjam at the 4 & 5 spots and relative thinness at the 2 and 3.


From what I've seen of Mirotic he lacks the lateral quickness needed to play the three in the NBA... maybe I'm wrong, maybe we can cover for him by switching on screens and having other versatile defenders around him, but from what I've seen he looks like a 4/5. 



rosenthall said:


> I'd also add that we need to be in the hunt for a JLIII/Nate type player for the veteran's minimum.


Jimmer time?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Dornado said:


> From what I've seen of Mirotic he lacks the lateral quickness needed to play the three in the NBA... maybe I'm wrong, maybe we can cover for him by switching on screens and having other versatile defenders around him, but from what I've seen he looks like a 4/5.



Given the report that the Bulls intend to sometimes run a Taj-Noah-Gasol front 3, I wonder if you could also run Taj-Mirotic-Noah/Gasol with Taj guarding the 3.

I just can't quite figure out how the minutes are going to work in this frontcourt unless we're going full-on Spurs rotation mode (which would be a new thing for Thibs, obviously).


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Given the report that the Bulls intend to sometimes run a Taj-Noah-Gasol front 3, I wonder if you could also run Taj-Mirotic-Noah/Gasol with Taj guarding the 3.
> 
> I just can't quite figure out how the minutes are going to work in this frontcourt unless we're going full-on Spurs rotation mode (which would be a new thing for Thibs, obviously).


If you ask me, putting Taj & Mirotic out there at the 2 forward position makes alot more sense than Taj/Noah or Taj/Gasol. Mirotic can at least go out to the 3-pt line to spot up and stretch the floor just like Dunleavy, and Taj could draw the tougher defensive assignment based on the team we're playing.

Taj-Noah-Gasol on the floor together just seems like it would clutter up the paint as all 3 of them play 18 feet inward.

However neither option is something we'd do frequently, IMO.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Your medeocre package for Love will be defeated by this.



> Cavs working three team deal w/ Warriors/TWolves. Warriors get multiple 1st rnd picks. Wolves get Klay and Tristan Thompson. Love to Cavs


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Ballscientist said:


> Your medeocre package for Love will be defeated by this.


Thanks, bruh.

If you're going to post a rumor, include a link/source.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Ballscientist said:


> Your medeocre package for Love will be defeated by this.


Also, ballscientist, this is a thread about the Bulls rotation in the Bulls forum... your post is not on topic. We're glad to have you share your opinion on the matter at hand, but please do not disrupt the Bulls forum with off-topic posts.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Dornado said:


> This is a bit of hyperbole to me... we may not have a great or even 'above average' starting 3 on the team, but to say we don't have anyone that is "starting caliber" is extreme. We were 38-23 with Dunleavy Jr. starting at the 3 last year.


that's foolishness , just because they had a nice record with him in that role does not mean he is good enough for it .

if you go by bulls record when they were starting the bulls did better with mike jr than deng.....now try to find people who think mike Dunleavy jr is a better small forward than deng and you'll know how far their records take them.

mike is at best a fringe starter at this point in his career , but is best used off the bench.

butler could be it but then the team would be even weaker at shooting guard


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Ideally I would like Jimmy Butler better starting at SF. I think that's his more natural position, offensively as the 3rd ballhandler and defensively against the more physical wings where he thrives.
> 
> The problem as I've stated in other places is the NBA's depth at SG sucks these days. Bulls fans talk as if there's a mythical player out there who can handle the ball, shoot the 3-ball, and score 15+ ppg. Sure there are a few guys like that but it's a supply & demand problem, so those guys are hard to get and expensive to keep. Afflalo comes close (which is why the Bulls looked at him) but even he has some notable flaws.
> 
> ...


ideally the bulls would get a pg who is big enough to defend 2's and can space the floor....I have always felt rose was better at attacking a defense than setting up teammates.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> *that's foolishness* , just because they had a nice record with him in that role does not mean he is good enough for it .
> 
> if you go by bulls record when they were starting the bulls did better with mike jr than deng.....now try to find people who think mike Dunleavy jr is a better small forward than deng and you'll know how far their records take them.
> 
> ...


You call it foolishness, but we essentially agree. I'm not saying he's a guy you want starting on a championship contender... I'm just saying "not a starting caliber SF" is too harsh.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Gibson should be starting. Gasol should be coming off the bench.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

HKF said:


> Gibson should be starting. Gasol should be coming off the bench.


Why? I love Taj as much as any Bulls fan, but we could really use the added offensive versatility that Pau would give us, and Taj has shown he can thrive coming off the bench and still play heavy minutes. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just curious as to your rationale.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

HKF said:


> Gibson should be starting. Gasol should be coming off the bench.


Doesn't matter who starts where. If Thibs can manage to keep all three healthy for the playoffs, that's one helluva 3 big rotation... with Mirotic at the back-up SF/PF.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The Bulls told Taj that he should expect to start. He is better than Gasol as of today. Gasol cannot guard 4's. He's strictly a 5 now. He should be backing up Noah.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Dornado said:


> You call it foolishness, but we essentially agree. I'm not saying he's a guy you want starting on a championship contender... I'm just saying "not a starting caliber SF" is too harsh.


if a team started 5 players of mike Dunleavy jr's caliber they would not only not make the playoffs they may be the worst team in the league.

just because he happens to start does not make him a starting caliber player 

keith bogans started for the bulls a few years ago for the bulls for example (who may have been talentwise the worst player on the roster)


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

HKF said:


> The Bulls told Taj that he should expect to start. He is better than Gasol as of today. Gasol cannot guard 4's. He's strictly a 5 now. He should be backing up Noah.


Gasol won't guard 4's most of the time. I think Thibodeau will start him with Noah, where Noah guards the best opposing big man. Most of the time that will be the PF. Gasol will take the weaker big man.

However I could see Gibson & Noah closing out games together more times than not, especially if they are protecting a lead. If we're down and struggling to score or take care of the ball, that is where Gasol is used to close games.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I just personally think that Gibson is better than Gasol now. No reason to appeal to Gasol's seniority, considering he is on a new team and nearing the end of his career. Noah and Gibson play really well together and Taj could have a breakout year as a starter.

Personally, I was shocked he didn't win 6th man last year. Thought that was a travesty.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

If Gasol embraced the role he could be a 6th man of the year candidate in that scenario as the first big off the bench... with 96 available minutes at the 4 and 5 Noah, Gibson and Gasol are all going to get plenty of run, regardless of who starts. I just hope Noah and Gasol can both stay healthy.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> that's foolishness , just because they had a nice record with him in that role does not mean he is good enough for it .
> 
> if you go by bulls record when they were starting the bulls did better with mike jr than deng.....now try to find people who think mike Dunleavy jr is a better small forward than deng and you'll know how far their records take them.
> 
> ...



Most excellent teams still have a fringe starter at one position or another.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

That's hard to say who will get what minutes. Partially because you don't know if Rose will stay healthy. If he goes down, everyone will get shuffled down a position. Like maybe Hinrich would see minutes at the 2 if Rose is healthy, but if Rose goes down, Hinrich would see his minutes at the 1 instead. Then you'd have Butler and Snell who might have seen minutes at the 3 see theirs point more towards the 2 only. If healthy though, I'd like to see something like this:

Rose (30) Hinrich (18)
Butler (28) Snell (20)
McDermott (25) Dunleavy (18) (Mirotic (5)
Gibson (30) Gasol (6) Mirotic (12)
Noah (28) Gasol (20) Bairstow (fouls/emergency/garbage)

I'd LIKE to see Rose and Noah get more burn, but I would prefer to keep their minutes down so they can stay healthy. If McDermott plays well enough to warrant 25 minutes, I'd say we're onto something. Mirotic playing 17 is a bit light. Bairstow, in 2/3 of the 3 quarters I saw of the Nuggets game, was pretty underwhelming. He did show a nice shot once, but usually he was like a bull in a china shop, just out there hammering guys out of control. Not counting on him at all, which makes it a really good thing that we got Gasol so we don't have to.


----------

