Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

181 - 200 of 258 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
The front office told this team last year to basically stop listening to Thibs because the savior Hoiberg is coming. And then once Hoiberg arrives you basically cut his coaching nuts off by empowering Jimmy to say and do whatever the hell he wants on and off the court.
This was a nice fan narrative last year, true, but I feel pretty confident in saying the front office did not say or even imply this message to its player. Either the tuning out Thibs part, nor the fact that a savior coach was on the way. Bulls message boards and fans said these things, sure, you're absolutely right. Fan narratives have a way of not matching reality unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately). This goes for alot of things BTW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,297 Posts
Discussion Starter #182
I agree with alot of this, but this is partly Jimmy's problem too. It's on the players to buy into the coach's system. I don't even know what the so-called Hoiball looks like b/c our players haven't been running it. I can't think of many championship teams who consistently break the offense and play iso ball. Jimmy's best work has been iso ball, but in the playoffs iso ball doesn't work -- it's too stoppable when you are scouted closely by a playoff opponent. So Jimmy needs to grow as a player and learn to play a team concept. Fact of the matter is Jimmy has been quite a ball stopper on offense this year. I had the same complaint with Noah. Good passers but they don't keep the ball moving. Watch the Spurs or Warriors and that's the gold standard for team ball movement. Hoiberg is preaching it but I literally don't think our players know how to play that brand of ball. Which is a big frigging problem b/c I don't think you can win a championship unless players learn how to do that. So we either go get new players, or Hoiberg's challenge is to teach them on the fly (which leads to more losses). It goes back to the Bulls needing to choose a path and commit to it. They are stuck at a crossroads and need to pick a direction. This is on the front office to figure out at this point and I'm still waiting for some personnel movement. I'd like to give Hoiberg a fair shot (he hasn't had one) and it's also up to Jimmy and the players to play the team concept rather than iso ball.
Jimmy is feeling himself, try telling him that ISO doesn't work.. It sure as hell has worked getting him paid.

What it all comes down to is, are the Bulls willing to re-shuffle THIS YEAR? If they let Gasol walk for nothing, just so they can get a short term financial boost in the playoffs, I would be absolutely disgusted. We all know they are going to lose to Cleveland, heck they might lose to someone in the first round.

The front office continues to fail miserably at their jobs. Niko sucks, McDermott sucks, Snell sucks, Taj is meh, Noah is done, Rose is meh, Jimmy does what Jimmy does and Hoiberg sucks. This whole team is just mediocre suckage, their offense sucks, Stacy King is starting to get on my damn nerves when having to remind us every fucking basket that Jimmy is the best player on the court, the lovabull's suck, I'm tired of seeing Hinrich's sucky face for the past decade.... :vuvuzela: Just to throw that in there too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,297 Posts
Discussion Starter #184
This was a nice fan narrative last year, true, but I feel pretty confident in saying the front office did not say or even imply this message to its player. Either the tuning out Thibs part, nor the fact that a savior coach was on the way. Bulls message boards and fans said these things, sure, you're absolutely right. Fan narratives have a way of not matching reality unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately). This goes for alot of things BTW.
Come on, how many years have we heard now that Hoiberg was going to be the next coach? 2? You think players don't see/hear that and then stop playing as hard for Thibs or listen to Thibs as much because they all know hes gone anyways?

You think implementing minute restrictions, practice restrictions, personal masseuses for individual players and so on doesn't undermine what a coach is trying to do?

I get you don't like Thibs, I get that you are in the small minority that think the players just all of a sudden magically gave up on Thibs, just because. So there is no real reason to debate back and forth on this topic. BUT, Hoiberg is a different topic worth talking about.

I do feel like the front office cut Hoibergs coaching nuts off by not punishing Jimmy for calling out Hoiberg in the first quarter of the SEASON! You think Hoiberg doesn't want to sit Jimmy on the bench when he does stop the ball on almost every single offensive possession?
 

·
X-Mas Taker
Joined
·
8,947 Posts
Did I say Jimmy was THE problem? I said Jimmy has A problem. As great as he's been overall, he has not been useful when it comes to proficient team ball movement. Again I ask you to look at the Warriors and Spurs, and tell me how Jimmy's offensive style of play would fit into that. In those systems Jimmy would either need to change his style of play, or accept scoring 12-14 ppg. Jimmy has been a ball stopper and could be better off the ball as well (though that Gasol alley-oop play has been money).

Let me be clear, this is not to target Jimmy. There are problems well beyond Jimmy on this team. But I do think Jimmy has been a participant in 1 of the team's biggest problems, and as our best player & now a max paid player, he can fairly be critiqued for it. Jimmy's likely not going to ever win a championship unless he does a better job with a move-the-ball team style offense.
on those teams (spurs, warriors) jimmy wouldn't play as much and if he didn't play the way they wanted him to play he'd play even less...especially on the spurs where pop wouldn't stand for it.

so I will ask it again is hoiberg's style really that important ?


draymond avg 34.4 minutes to lead the warriors
kawhi leonard leads the spurs in minutes with 32.6 no one else is even at 30

if playing fast was soo important jimmy would play less.

as much as its jimmy's responsibility to play within the confines of a system its up to his coach to enforce that system.

not just for jimmy but for everyone, and it isn't happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
so I will ask it again is hoiberg's style really that important ?
There is not really a need to even call it "Hoiberg's style" since Hoiberg is trying to just coach general good team basketball principles. This unicorn that is called "Hoiball" took on a life of its own, primarily by fans from what I've seen, probably b/c it was successful in the college ranks and has a catchy name to it. But really the so-called Hoiball has another name, and it's just good team basketball that is hard for opponents to defend.

So...with that being said, YES the style of play that Hoiberg emphasizes really is that important. Because it's the same fundamental principles that have won many championships. Contrast that to Thibodeau who only wanted to practice defense, and as such his teams were ill prepared to score in playoff basketball situations. I thought the goal is win in the playoffs so that's kind of a big deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
Come on, how many years have we heard now that Hoiberg was going to be the next coach? 2? You think players don't see/hear that and then stop playing as hard for Thibs or listen to Thibs as much because they all know hes gone anyways?

You think implementing minute restrictions, practice restrictions, personal masseuses for individual players and so on doesn't undermine what a coach is trying to do?

I get you don't like Thibs, I get that you are in the small minority that think the players just all of a sudden magically gave up on Thibs, just because. So there is no real reason to debate back and forth on this topic. BUT, Hoiberg is a different topic worth talking about.

I do feel like the front office cut Hoibergs coaching nuts off by not punishing Jimmy for calling out Hoiberg in the first quarter of the SEASON! You think Hoiberg doesn't want to sit Jimmy on the bench when he does stop the ball on almost every single offensive possession?
That's well and good, but not what you said. Maybe I just took it too literally.

Thibs is a fine coach. I don't dislike him. I think he made some poor decisions and it was time for a change. He'd be great for a team that needs to be micromanaged, for instance a young talented roster in need of direction. I don't think that was this Bulls team anymore. He was a great breath of fresh air after Del Negro. I'd love Thibs as an assistant coach like he was for Boston. Let him focus on what he does best (defense) where you have a shield like Doc Rivers to communicate with players and manage minutes.

It's funny because when Blatt got fired the other day, I wondered if Cleveland would reach out to Thibodeau. Someone mentioned jokingly that Lebron might want to quit with Thibodeau yelling at him constantly. It was a joke but most jokes have some truth to them. I really couldn't see Coach Lebron wanting to be micromanaged by Thibodeau like he did in Chicago.

So as for Hoiberg, I've already said I wasn't a fan of what Jimmy said earlier in the year, and especially the timing of it so early in Hoiberg's tenure here. There are alot of coaches with Hoiberg's personality style who have succeeded just fine -- some coaches yell alot, some don't. I've said many times before Hoiberg is bringing a paradigm shift to this team that not everyone will adjust to. In reality whether it was planned or unplanned, this season is a transition year to figure out who fits into this philosophy and who doesn't. Let me point out Hoiberg was .500 his 1st year of college coaching and improved his team nearly every year as he recruited players he likes; so there could be merit to his success being tied to a good coupling of personnel to his system. (Let's hope because that is what would help the Bulls success, right?)

Maybe Hoiberg did lose credibility from what Jimmy said, maybe he didn't; we haven't heard much on that front though, so let's not pretend to know.
 

·
X-Mas Taker
Joined
·
8,947 Posts
There is not really a need to even call it "Hoiberg's style" since Hoiberg is trying to just coach general good team basketball principles. This unicorn that is called "Hoiball" took on a life of its own, primarily by fans from what I've seen, probably b/c it was successful in the college ranks and has a catchy name to it. But really the so-called Hoiball has another name, and it's just good team basketball that is hard for opponents to defend.

So...with that being said, YES the style of play that Hoiberg emphasizes really is that important. Because it's the same fundamental principles that have won many championships. Contrast that to Thibodeau who only wanted to practice defense, and as such his teams were ill prepared to score in playoff basketball situations. I thought the goal is win in the playoffs so that's kind of a big deal.
you know he got the job selling them something right ?

every coach interviews for his job and they all have to bring something to the table that would make a front office pay them 7 figures.

fred hoiberg got this job off his rep of being an offensive guru whether it was well deserved or not .

just like the front office had to then try to sell us on why hiring hoiberg was a good idea, and in truth it really hasn't worked out at all

they are 6th overall in defensive efficiency and 22nd on offense

last season in a season thibs supposedly lost the team they were ranked 11th in both offense and defense and by every objective metric this season isn't as good as last season.

personally I think he was set up and was given an entrenched team made for a power style of basketball , physically this team is big and slow and a little long in the tooth .

at the same time I believe fred told them he could make it work however unrealistic that may be

its not really made to play an uptempo style of basketball and it neither fred not thibs fault , its the front office at fault in this, its their job to access the team and make adjustments and it clearly wasn't done.

thibs clearly practiced offense , that eyesore of an offense didn't happen by accident , and last years version was11 spots better than the "general good team principles" hoiberg is drilling into the bulls this season and in thibs 2nd season its was 5th overall in offensive efficiency.

he was simply a very good coach who had his team and its fanbase believing they were title contenders

at the end of it all this bulls team is essentially scores like your average lottery team and that isn't what the hoiberg era was supposed to be about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
you know he got the job selling them something right ?
Pretty sure Hoiberg didn't have to "sell them" anything, since the front office basically handpicked him and didn't interview anyone else. I assume that largely due to Hoiberg's excellent 5-year stint at Iowa State.

thibs clearly practiced offense , that eyesore of an offense didn't happen by accident , and last years version was 11 spots better than the "general good team principles" hoiberg is drilling into the bulls this season and in thibs 2nd season its was 5th overall in offensive efficiency.
Thibodeau ran basic offensive sets that his players proved capable of running and did not require much practice time. There was enough talent in Pau, Jimmy, Dunleavy, even Rose, where that is all it took to have a decent regular season offensive rating. This approach is not adaptable to the playoffs though, when your opponent scouts you and adjusts closer than ever. This is why we struggled with Milwaukee in the first round and why Cleveland beat us without 2 of their 3 best players. Our offense was too simple and easy to stop when you're playing against it in 6-7 straight games. Now granted I am not pinning that all on Thibodeau. I've said here before, Thibodeau tried but quickly gave up on a more complex offense b/c the players sucked at running it (literally identical to this season). So he went to a simpler offense that cranked out more regular season wins, but was easier to pick apart by a playoff opponent. I honestly can't predict if our current players are capable of playing in a complex Spurs/GS like offense, but I do know Thibodeau and Hoiberg have both tried it and it hasn't worked out. Hoiberg seems more reluctant to give up on it cold turkey, though, which again hurts you in the short term, and has the risk that it may never pan out, but if it works out you have a more potent team in the long run.

at the end of it all this bulls team is essentially scores like your average lottery team and that isn't what the hoiberg era was supposed to be about.
The Hoiberg era has a ways to go. It is not pretty so far but like I said, this has turned into a transition season, as far as transition seasons go you could do worse than floating around .600 winning % for most of the year. The front office wanted to invest in Hoiberg, so it's up to them to give him the horses he needs, like they did for Thibodeau when he came aboard. Again I'll point to Hoiberg's 1st season at Iowa State: 16-16 overall record & 3-13 in conference. He was handed a roster that he didn't help mold. The more he molded his roster, the better success he had. As far as I know, the plan was that Hoiberg and Bulls front office were going to be a collaborative relationship where Hoiberg can help mold the team. He deserves more than a half season or even 1 full season to fully judge.
 

·
X-Mas Taker
Joined
·
8,947 Posts
Pretty sure Hoiberg didn't have to "sell them" anything, since the front office basically handpicked him and didn't interview anyone else. I assume that largely due to Hoiberg's excellent 5-year stint at Iowa State..

c'mon now obviously they endorsed him because he sold them on him.



Thibodeau ran basic offensive sets that his players proved capable of running and did not require much practice time. There was enough talent in Pau, Jimmy, Dunleavy, even Rose, where that is all it took to have a decent regular season offensive rating. This approach is not adaptable to the playoffs though, when your opponent scouts you and adjusts closer than ever. This is why we struggled with Milwaukee in the first round and why Cleveland beat us without 2 of their 3 best players. Our offense was too simple and easy to stop when you're playing against it in 6-7 straight games. Now granted I am not pinning that all on Thibodeau. I've said here before, Thibodeau tried but quickly gave up on a more complex offense b/c the players sucked at running it (literally identical to this season). So he went to a simpler offense that cranked out more regular season wins, but was easier to pick apart by a playoff opponent. I honestly can't predict if our current players are capable of playing in a complex Spurs/GS like offense, but I do know Thibodeau and Hoiberg have both tried it and it hasn't worked out. Hoiberg seems more reluctant to give up on it cold turkey, though, which again hurts you in the short term, and has the risk that it may never pan out, but if it works out you have a more potent team in the long run.
golden state and san Antonio's offenses aren't complex at all, pretty much all of the league runs the same stuff and simply emphasizes different things...golden state learned Kerr's offense in a preseason and from the start of the season were the best offense in the league.


The Hoiberg era has a ways to go. It is not pretty so far but like I said, this has turned into a transition season, as far as transition seasons go you could do worse than floating around .600 winning % for most of the year. The front office wanted to invest in Hoiberg, so it's up to them to give him the horses he needs, like they did for Thibodeau when he came aboard. Again I'll point to Hoiberg's 1st season at Iowa State: 16-16 overall record & 3-13 in conference. He was handed a roster that didn't he didn't help mold. The more he molded his roster, the better success he had. As far as I know, the plan was that Hoiberg and Bulls front office were going to be a highly collaborative relationship where Hoiberg can help mold the team. He deserves more than a half season or even 1 full season to fully judge
its college , all nba coaches excel there , saying he did well at college is like saying jimmy butler did well at college

of course he did its a lower form of basketball. and in college he could recruit , heck tim Floyd did well at iowa state

and in truth head coaches deserve the least time to evaluate and judge , there are no "projects" in coaching I am reserving judgement on freddy but early returns have him at mediocre , the players seem to like him but aren't exactly bending to his will.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,320 Posts
draymond avg 34.4 minutes to lead the warriors
kawhi leonard leads the spurs in minutes with 32.6 no one else is even at 30

if playing fast was soo important jimmy would play less.
On this topic, I do think that if the Bulls had the kind of favorable point differential the Warriors and Spurs have had Jimmy Butler would likely play less. The Warriors and Spurs are blowing people out and have the luxury of resting guys for much of the 4th quarter... the Bulls are grinding it out against average NBA teams, leaving Hoiberg to rely on Butler for heavier minutes. Not having Mike Dunleavy Jr. doesn't help either.
 

·
X-Mas Taker
Joined
·
8,947 Posts
On this topic, I do think that if the Bulls had the kind of favorable point differential the Warriors and Spurs have had Jimmy Butler would likely play less. The Warriors and Spurs are blowing people out and have the luxury of resting guys for much of the 4th quarter... the Bulls are grinding it out against average NBA teams, leaving Hoiberg to rely on Butler for heavier minutes. Not having Mike Dunleavy Jr. doesn't help either.
the bulls aren't the only team that have to grind out games but jimmy still leads the league in minutes

as a head coach hoiberg has to decide what is more important and so far he has clearly decided its more important for players to play instead of playing the style he coaches
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,320 Posts
the bulls aren't the only team that have to grind out games but jimmy still leads the league in minutes

as a head coach hoiberg has to decide what is more important and so far he has clearly decided its more important for players to play instead of playing the style he coaches
Yeah, I'm just saying he'd likely be playing less if we had more 4th quarter leads (since you brought up the Spurs and Warriors).

The bolded part seems a little odd... don't you think Hoiberg probably believes he can play Jimmy Butler and get him to play his preferred style? Why should those things be mutually exclusive?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
the bulls aren't the only team that have to grind out games but jimmy still leads the league in minutes

as a head coach hoiberg has to decide what is more important and so far he has clearly decided its more important for players to play instead of playing the style he coaches
What are your thoughts on Jimmy Butler alluding to wanting to play more than he was? You keep bringing this up as a Hoiberg decision without addressing the Jimmy Butler part of the decision.

Jimmy averaged 35 min/game in the season's first 10 games. As we got into December, I recalled Jimmy post-game comments about not wanting to come out of games. Something like "I can handle a few extra minutes, I want to be out there, etc.). I doubt it's coincidence that his minutes started going up after that and now he's at 38 per game.

I still don't like it, and I think Jimmy needs to be smart enough to know this is a marathon. Though understandable given he is a competitor. He has earned the right to ask for more time as our best player. Of course some will perceive as Hoiberg being a pushover. I'd hope the conversation went down more as two guys talking and coming to an agreement. Though I won't pretend to know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,297 Posts
Discussion Starter #195
Thibs is a fine coach. I don't dislike him. I think he made some poor decisions and it was time for a change. He'd be great for a team that needs to be micromanaged, for instance a young talented roster in need of direction. I don't think that was this Bulls team anymore. He was a great breath of fresh air after Del Negro. I'd love Thibs as an assistant coach like he was for Boston. Let him focus on what he does best (defense) where you have a shield like Doc Rivers to communicate with players and manage minutes.

So as for Hoiberg, I've already said I wasn't a fan of what Jimmy said earlier in the year, and especially the timing of it so early in Hoiberg's tenure here. There are alot of coaches with Hoiberg's personality style who have succeeded just fine -- some coaches yell alot, some don't. I've said many times before Hoiberg is bringing a paradigm shift to this team that not everyone will adjust to. In reality whether it was planned or unplanned, this season is a transition year to figure out who fits into this philosophy and who doesn't. Let me point out Hoiberg was .500 his 1st year of college coaching and improved his team nearly every year as he recruited players he likes; so there could be merit to his success being tied to a good coupling of personnel to his system. (Let's hope because that is what would help the Bulls success, right?)

Maybe Hoiberg did lose credibility from what Jimmy said, maybe he didn't; we haven't heard much on that front though, so let's not pretend to know.
THIS team needs micromanagement! Lol. He's also literally better at Everything than Hoiberg, but alas, that chapter is over.

He did lose credibility, he lost some when he flat out lied about Joakim Noah sitting, he was pantsed by Butler and was even slapped down by Rose when Hoiberg talked about improving the pace, Rose said his pace was fine.

Don't get me wrong, I want Hoiberg to succeed but in order for that to happen the front office has to support him and he flat out needs to prove that he can actually coach in the NBA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Thibs was chastised for playing Jimmy Butler heavy minutes.

Hoiberg is doing the same thing.

What in the name of Jen Swanson is going on over there?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
Thibs was chastised for playing several players - more than just Jimmy Butler - heavy minutes. With Hoiberg you can really only nitpick Jimmy, and you guys keep ignoring the fact Hoiberg was playing him 35 min/game in the first 10 games until Jimmy commented on it. Also context is key, let's look more than just 1 number on a piece of paper. With Thibs it was things like 42 minutes for Jimmy or Gasol on their 4th game in 5 nights...or up/down 12 points with 2 minutes to go (game essentially decided) and your starters are still out there on the floor. Thibs did that sort of stuff all the time and it drove me nuts. So far I've seen less of that from Hoiberg, though sample size is still small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,297 Posts
Discussion Starter #198
Thibs was chastised for playing several players - more than just Jimmy Butler - heavy minutes. With Hoiberg you can really only nitpick Jimmy, and you guys keep ignoring the fact Hoiberg was playing him 35 min/game in the first 10 games until Jimmy commented on it. Also context is key, let's look more than just 1 number on a piece of paper. With Thibs it was things like 42 minutes for Jimmy or Gasol on their 4th game in 5 nights...or up/down 12 points with 2 minutes to go (game essentially decided) and your starters are still out there on the floor. Thibs did that sort of stuff all the time and it drove me nuts. So far I've seen less of that from Hoiberg, though sample size is still small.
LOL, Hoiberg would play these guys 40 minutes a night if he could and at times he does. I can make the easy argument that Hoiberg is running Jimmy into the ground more so than Thibs did last year, you forget that last years offense actually resembled an offense, you think playing 40 minutes of Thibs ball is more taxing than Hoibergs 40 minute offense of constant ISO, make your own damn plays type of sets for Jimmy? Pau also plays big minutes, lets not act like hes getting the Tim Duncan treatment lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Jimmy Butler was leading the league in MPG last season. He's leading the league this season.

Gasol's are down to 31.7 from 34.4. This is natural for a 35 year old player and 30+ is likely too many for guy his age, if you are a minutes zealot. St Popovich would not play his 35 year old center 31.7 minutes a game. Abuse, if you are of that ilk.

Other than that, its pretty much the same. Certainly not a huge change at all. Other than the offense being much worse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
LOL, Hoiberg would play these guys 40 minutes a night if he could and at times he does. I can make the easy argument that Hoiberg is running Jimmy into the ground more so than Thibs did last year, you forget that last years offense actually resembled an offense, you think playing 40 minutes of Thibs ball is more taxing than Hoibergs 40 minute offense of constant ISO, make your own damn plays type of sets for Jimmy? Pau also plays big minutes, lets not act like hes getting the Tim Duncan treatment lol.
Well I'm glad you can pretend to know what any person "would do if he could", or that you are tracking precisely how much tax Jimmy is putting on himself out on the floor. Not sure I would call less than 32 minutes per game "big minutes" but whatever. I was mainly re-stating some of the major complaints about Thibodeau. Reality is the sample is too small on Hoiberg to make a long term conclusion as I said, and these comments were more about Thibodeau, less about Hoiberg. Though since you guys love railing on Hoiberg like it's a hobby, it'd be great to take some of the additional context into consideration rather than just looking at 1 number on a piece of paper. I brought up some of these points and it doesn't seem to be resonating. So whatever, moving on.
 
181 - 200 of 258 Posts
Top