The Chicago Bulls are entering a volatile transition period following the dismissal of executive vice president of basketball operations Artūras Karnišovas and general manager Marc Eversley. While the front office has been cleared out, the Reinsdorf family has signaled a starkly different fate for head coach Billy Donovan, doubling down on their commitment to his leadership as the franchise searches for a new top executive.
For a fan base accustomed to a “party line” that often blamed misfortune for the team’s stagnation, the current shift is jarring. President and CEO Michael Reinsdorf has recently moved away from previous narratives, admitting that the 2021-22 roster was not built to compete sustainably at the top of the Eastern Conference. This admission sets the stage for a new era of talent identification and development, but it leaves a critical question: how does the league perceive the man staying on the sidelines?
Understanding how Billy Donovan is viewed around the league is essential to understanding the Bulls’ current leverage. As the team seeks a new decision-maker, Donovan’s reputation acts as both a stabilizer and a potential constraint on the pool of candidates willing to take the job.
A Respectable Tactician and Locker-Room Anchor
Within NBA circles, Billy Donovan is widely liked and respected, recognized for both his personal character and his professional acumen. While he may not be categorized in the same “elite” tier as architects like Eric Spoelstra or Rick Carlisle, he is regarded as a solid tactician and an indispensable leader in the locker room. His ability to develop young talent is a cornerstone of his professional reputation.
The data supports this view of Donovan as a precision play-caller. This season, the Bulls averaged the third-most points off after-timeout (ATO) plays in the league, trailing only the Denver Nuggets and Los Angeles Lakers. While ATO plays are a tiny slice of a full game, they serve as a barometer for a coach’s ability to construct specific, high-leverage options that maximize a player’s strengths.
Donovan himself has remained humble regarding his influence. He noted recently that the public commitment from ownership reflects a mutual respect and he does not expect the franchise to prioritize his personal perspective when selecting a new executive. However, the optics of a “coach-first” commitment are rare in the modern NBA, where the general manager typically holds the mandate to hire or fire the coaching staff.
The Conflict Between Stability and Front-Office Autonomy
The primary tension in the Bulls’ current strategy is the balance of power. Most high-caliber front-office candidates—the likes of Sam Presti or RC Buford—typically demand total control over the basketball operations, including the choice of head coach. By centering the process around Donovan, the Reinsdorfs may be narrowing their scope.
As Donovan is so well-respected, it is unlikely that most candidates would balk at working with him initially. The risk is long-term: if a new executive decides the team needs a different philosophical direction, the “commitment” to Donovan could create a friction point. Donovan holds a strong conviction against “tanking,” a philosophy that may naturally align the Bulls with executives who prefer to remain competitive rather than bottom out for high draft picks.
This commitment to a non-tanking approach is a specific strategic choice. If the NBA eventually implements rule changes to flatten lottery odds, this philosophical alignment may become a non-issue; until then, it defines the narrow path the Bulls are walking.
Addressing the Infrastructure Deficit
The departure of Karnišovas and Eversley highlights a deeper issue: a lack of investment in the “invisible” parts of the game. Under the previous administration, the Bulls operated with a bare-bones staff. The analytics department was among the lowest-staffed in the league, and the firing of shooting specialist Peter Patton—reportedly due to his willingness to criticize leadership rather than his performance—left a void in player development that was never filled.
For the next executive to succeed, ownership must be willing to spend on support staff. The current roster reflects this lack of development, most notably with Patrick Williams. Despite his potential, Williams has struggled with a lack of productivity on the boards and from the 3-point line, issues that may be unfixable without a total change in scenery and a robust development program.
The Bulls are currently leaning on a core of young building blocks to bridge the gap to the next era:
- Josh Giddey: A central piece of the current plan, driving the offense with marginal defensive improvements. His contract is notably flexible, lacking a player option.
- Matas Buzelis and Noa Essengue: Key young assets identified for long-term growth.
- Supporting Cast: Tre Jones, Isaac Okoro, and Jalen Smith are viewed as fit-pieces for the current trajectory.
The Path to Relevance
The Reinsdorfs have a history of hiring administrations that failed to achieve sustainable success. To break this cycle, the current search is being handled differently: the team is employing a professional search firm and committing to in-person interviews, a departure from the phone-based hiring process used in March 2020.
However, the reality remains that the Bulls are not currently positioned as championship contenders. Achieving that status will require more than a new name in the VP office; it requires a string of cohesive, data-driven decisions over several years—a level of consistency the franchise has lacked for a decade.
The next critical checkpoint for the franchise will be the announcement of the new top executive. Whether that hire is a known quantity or a fresh face will determine if the Bulls are truly prioritizing process over personality. Until then, Billy Donovan remains the most stable element in an otherwise uncertain organization.
We want to hear from you. Does keeping Billy Donovan help or hinder the search for a new executive? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Keep reading
