Firefight

Um, actually, it's right. With Rose healthy, yes, the Bulls are lacking a 2nd star. Boozer, Noah, Deng are not number 2 stars...and to top it, they are paid as number 2 stars... but thats besides the point. With all 3 of them, a deep bench, good defense and rebounding, the Bulls competed the last 2 years with everyone in the NBA. Was it good enough to win a championship? Nope, they didn't, but they could have. They weren't going to be favorites, but only one team can hold that favorite title...

So the Bulls ARE in the position they are now because of the injury...and it's going to force them to do what you have been hoping for...break up the band. Start new around Rose... Let this next season play out. They let Brewer, Korver, CJ go to save cap space, signed a cheaper Hinrich. They SHOULD let Asik walk, amnesty Boozer next year, and then they will be major players in the FA market to land a 2nd star to play along side, a now, healthy DRose. You hope the Charlotte pick turns out ok as a bonus and you hope the Euro PF pans out, again, as a bonus. If neither do, it's still ok, because you have Rose, cap space for a 2nd star, and hopefully a couple good role players (Gibson) still around for the ride.

Rhyder

I'm not going to respond to the "I'm right given the fact the Bulls haven't won a championship under this regime" despite ignoring other factors.

I do not have blind loyalty to management, and it humors me that you lump about 10 of us all into the same group. I am in favor of a consolidatino trade. Trade Deng for a pick and you close consolidation trade doors for the chance to rebuild through the draft one time. You then have to hope that the team is good enough that when the time is right to amnesty Boozer to acquire a max FA, your team is competetive enough that a top UFA actually wants to sign with us.

Outside of Davis who we weren't getting, I was only willing to do that for Beal. After the draft played out, it was clear we had no shot at him. I'm happy that we didn't trade Deng for Robinson or Barnes (while I like them both a lot as prospects), and those two guys who were Sacramento and Golden State were targeting anyways. It's not even clear we could have gotten either of them for Deng. Not trading Deng keeps the consolidation trade door open, which is the much higher percentage play of acquiring a legit #2.

This Oklahoma City theory that you have to rebuild through the draft is the hot opinion right now. Who has done it outside of Oklahoma City? San Antonio, Chicago and no one else? We just didn't do it as successfully because we already had Deng and Noah by the time we got Rose, having started from a base of lower picks.

Da Grinch

the OKC way is pure crap because it relies on being horrible when you have all world talent on the roster.

with durant the team was bad enough to have the 4th pick in the next year's draft and the 3rd pick the year after that.

how many superstars at any point in their development are bad enough they cant elevate their teams past the worst 3rd or 4th teams in the league for 2 straight years ?

and even you manage to make a team that poorly on purpose , you run the risk of your potential superstar being alienated because you aren't trying to win.

the simple truth is the bulls have had plenty of chances to augment rose with a 2nd star , Chris Paul ,deron williams , carmelo anthony ,dwight howard amar'e stoudamire, tyson chandler , chris bosh, andrew bogut, pau gasol , andrew bynum , zach randolph and eric gordon have been traded or on the trade block and all but eric gordon and chis bosh nave been on an nba 1'st 2nd or 3rd team the past few years, and some of them came cheaply .

the opportunity to get a top 25 or so player has been constant the bulls just haven't put themselves in position to acquire any of them.

__________________
Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.

thebizkit69u

Lakers also got Antawn Jamison AND are still leading the Dwight Howard trade talks. They are probably only going to give up Andrew Bynum and draft picks for him. The Lakers have done more to win an NBA title in 2 weeks than the Bulls have done in 2 years.

No more excuses, lets just call the season what it is, a wash.

I think management has basically told us this, with the non impact moves they have made this season and with the fact that they got rid of most of their bench. They keep talking about not hurting their long term goals for a short term fix, the problem is they haven't told us WTF that long term goal is. I assume they are selling us Mirotic, cap room in an overrated 2014 Free Agent class where Kobe Bryant, Dirk Nowitzki, Danny Granger, Paul Pierce and Pau Gasol will all be unrestricted Free Agents, but guess what, there is NO WAY IN HELL anyone of these guys with the exception of maybe Granger will come here.

Guys like James, Wade, Bosh, Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony, Rudy Gay and Zach Randolph will also become unrestricted free agents if they decide to exercise their player options. Also, Monta Ellis and Andre Iguodala can as well, but lets be real, at BEST maybe we have a shot at Gay, Ellis and Randolph. Are you guys willing to give guys like Gay, Ellis and Randolph another MAX deal? Cause thats what they will get.

Our long term plan stinks, its the same plan when they said let Rose develop and then we will build a title winner around him in the great Free Agent class of 2012. We struck out horribly that year when trying to get the best available players.

Hoodey

Why does it humor you? While you claim your loyalty is not blind, you make comments like:

"The Bulls suck and have no chance of beating the superHeat, therefore blame management. Isiah Thomas for GM. Makin moves to make moves!"

Why sarcastically call for Isiah Thomas to be GM if you are just some logical, non-loyalist fan who sits on the sideline and never necessarily supports Paxson with any bias, but rather just supports him when he's made good decisions.

I can tell you I don't think Kobe Bryant is better than Michael Jordan. However, if I make a bunch of arguments that say otherwise, my declaration is worthless. If you're not a Paxson loyalist who desperately wants him to be right, you don't say things like "Isiah Thomas for GM" or "yeah, it sucks to be 15-3."

You do close those doors. But I weigh this.

1. When has Paxson, in all of the time we've been hearing about assets, ever turned them into anything? What trade in the last 7 years has allowed you to tell me I should bank on a consolidation trade as far as future expectations? Where does the rational basis come from? This is like me telling we should pinch-hit for a good player with a guy who averages 5 home runs a year because he might hit a home run. It's "my idea is the idea." "Well, why? There's no evidence." "Well, because it's my idea."
2. You close consolidation trade doors. But that's a pipe dream with no basis in reality. Paxson trades players he's in love with, when many media members say he falls in love with his own guys, for that magical pie-in-the-sky superstar who happens to be unhappy and at the same time is willing to sign a long term deal with the Bulls. What doors do you open by closing this fantasy with no basis in reality?
a) Financial doors - Luol Deng's contract is an embarrassing albatross paid to a player who doesn't warrant it unless you have no grasp on smart NBA decisions. He's flat mediocre and a player who best satisfies college fans who need to just watch Hoosiers a few more times. You trade his deal for an expiring and a lotto pick? Right off the bat you're now able to amnesty Boozer next summer and get under the cap. Cap freedom is great if you want to try to get a #2 star.
b) Draft doors - Because you trade for a Harrison Barnes, you will be a worse team in 2013. Now you get another lotto pick. And, just because Barnes makes for a bad team as a rookie doesn't mean he's not a prospective 2nd star. Even if he busts out, you can be rid of his low deal by the end of the 2014 season now, so you still win. You have financial freedom.

And you playing the "good players won't want to sign with us if we're not competitive card" is freaking hilarious. Derrick Rose is out for the season. Who honestly would look at a 30-52 season and say "yeah, I wouldn't play there. They will still be 30-52 when Rose comes back I'm sure."

Man, this is like talking to a Penn State fan who thinks he's right about everything he's saying lol. Hilarious.

[quote]Outside of Davis who we weren't getting, I was only willing to do that for Beal. After the draft played out, it was clear we had no shot at him. I'm happy that we didn't trade Deng for Robinson or Barnes (while I like them both a lot as prospects), and those two guys who were Sacramento and Golden State were targeting anyways. It's not even clear we could have gotten either of them for Deng. Not trading Deng keeps the consolidation trade door open, which is the much higher percentage play of acquiring a legit #2.[quote]

It was never about who we got back. If you get Harrison Barnes and he's a star, great. You hit a two run homer. If he sucks and you don't exercise the team option, you're still financially free next summer. And that's only a bad thing if you buy the theory that NBA free agents have the mentality of Jimmy Chitwood and wouldn't want to play for a team that was bad with Derrick Rose.

NBA players think like me (when I say that they can look at a team without Rose and logically assess that "me + Rose = good"). Dane Fife and Tom Coverdale think like you.

This shows your lack of grasp of reality. We had Deng in 2007-08. He was making 3 million dollars that year. At 3 million, I love him. At 8 million per on a 3-4 year deal, I still like him a lot.

Now, when we got Rose, did we already "have Deng." Yes. When we won that lottery, did we "have Deng at 9-14.3 million per year on a dreadfully long deal? No.

If we keep Deng, we win more 41 games no matter what we pay him, right? Now, if we sign him for 8 million a year on a 3-4 year deal, I ask you, do we then lose financial flexibility AS we lose lotto picks? No.

If Deng wanted the deal he got, and was prepared to walk if we did not give it to him, we should have let him go as we drafted Rose. That leads to us being a lotto team, not the 8 seed in 08-09, and now you could easily be talking about Demar Derozan and Derrick Rose on a team that will still have financial flexibility and may have another lotto season.

Combine not paying Deng with a take-it-or-leave-it stance to Noah on a 3 year 24 million dollar deal and now you're not feeling pressured to sign Boozer when you miss on Lebron. Lose again in 2010 and you could be talking about Rose, DeRozan, Cousins and role players with tons of money.

But what you need is to not say, "oh my god, not give a huge deal to Deng?! Oh my god, look at the 2002 Bulls! We could become that team permanently if we don't do this deal now.

Face it. If Paxson was the GM in 86 there would have been no Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant. The idiot would have given Oakley and Woolridge long term deals.

__________________
I'm just here to talk about basketball. Feel free to exchange ideas with me, disagree or debate. I'm not interested in what you think of me as a person and/or large posts about this. Debate the ideas, or don't. If you have something about me like a really weird post of a link of me on the radio, just PM me.

Hoodey

But you're doing what a lot of Bulls fans like to do. You're completely ignoring what actually happened and replacing it with what you WISHED happened.

WAS Durant alienated? No. Did your last post wish he was? Yes. It's kind of like, "did the Bulls do better than .200 v. Miami in the playoffs in 2010?" Not even a little. Do some of the fans of the status quo WISH they did? Yep.

And to answer your question, no, even superstars are not going to lead a team past a terrible record if you gut the team. You gut the team because you have the balls and the confidence in your ability to add stars.

Can't disagree here with your point. With some of the players on your list? Yes. Carmelo Anthony will never win anything. He is, at his very best, George Gervin/Bernard King/Dominique Wilkins incarnate.

__________________
I'm just here to talk about basketball. Feel free to exchange ideas with me, disagree or debate. I'm not interested in what you think of me as a person and/or large posts about this. Debate the ideas, or don't. If you have something about me like a really weird post of a link of me on the radio, just PM me.

thebizkit69u

I would not consider Durant's first and second years as him playing so bad that they could not improve. The guy averaged 20 ppg his rookie year and then 25 his sophmore year, you have to take into consideration that he had a horrifically bad supporting cast his rookie year with Wally Sczerbiak and Chris Wilcox as the 2 next best players... Just to compare, Lebron James had Boozer, Ilgauskas and Ricky Davis as his running mates in his first year.

Da Grinch

this is ridiculous , if you cant read what's being written please do us all a favor and inferring what isn't there , My post was about the OKC model . the idea of getting great talent and still sucking so you can get more , its a bad idea if for no other reason than the really good talent are usually impact players immediately , and good players are typically demanding not just among their teammates but of management as well.

its hard to suck under those circumstances , for every Durant who was quietly patient there were a Jordan a Lebron and a Shaq who instantly made their team too good to be among the worst 3 or 4 teams in the league and would have pitched a fit if they felt their team was content to sabotage their efforts to win.


I dont know why you seem to have such a hard on for Anthony , its come out in other posts and to say the least its weird , I actually just rolled out names that were on the all nba teams the last 3 seasons and his name was among them (bosh and eric gordon were the exceptions and I even noted them as such) just guy who are clearly among the top 2 dozen or so in the nba who have been for the taking if paxon/Gar were looking to improve.

__________________
Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.

Da Grinch

as far as James' supporting cast goes , they had those same guys the year before and went 17-65, then added lebron and they were 18 games better at 35-47, he was an impact rookie like most superstars as rookies

__________________
Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.

Hoodey

It's not sabotage though. I realize this is like trying to convince a guy who thinks Obama is a terrorist muslim that he isn't one, but I'll proceed nevertheless.

Long-term, foregoing a Luol Deng or demanding he sign a very friendly deal is the opposite of sabotage. The Sonics/Thunder tried as hard as they could. They just did so without bringing any Luol Deng's in on terrible deals.

You can say anything you want about the OKC method, but the "sign Deng to a ridiculous deal" method is still stupid.

Did the 84-85 Bulls pay out a big deal to a player like Deng? Or did they wait for Scottie Pippen. Remember, the 85 Bulls were 7th in the East out of 11 teams in 85. They were knocked out of the playoffs in 4 games.

Did they offer a player like Luol Deng a 2 million a year deal (remembering the difference in how big deals were then)?

No. Their big expenditure was George Gervin for 800K. In 85-86?

They were the 5th worst team in the league, but to be fair, Jordan was out all year.

Here were their salaries in 85-86:

1 George Gervin $806,000
2 Dave Corzine $710,000
3 Michael Jordan $630,000
4 Sidney Green $350,000
5 Quintin Dailey $325,000
6 Kyle Macy $305,000
7 Orlando Woolridge $300,000
8 Charles Oakley $225,000
9 Gene Banks $225,000
10 Jawann Oldham $175,000
11 John Paxson $175,000
12 Mike Smrek $135,000
13 Billy McKinney $125,000

By 87-88 was anyone above that 800K?

No, they were not.

When we all know Paxson would have ran his own mother over if he could have given Oakley or Woolridge some terrible long deal.

By the way, even with Jordan, the greatest ever, in 86-87 the Bulls were the 8th worst team in the 11 team East. They were swept out of the playoffs.

I have a "hard on" for anyone who is more marketing syrup than they are rated based on their ability to win titles.

Was Tracy McGrady really any good as a title winner? No. He never got out of the first round. Did he appeal to a bunch of kids who want marketing syrup shoved up their fanboy noses? Yes. Did ESPN treat him as if he was some legit force and potential future legend? Yes they did.

Anthony will never win a thing, just like McGrady.

__________________
I'm just here to talk about basketball. Feel free to exchange ideas with me, disagree or debate. I'm not interested in what you think of me as a person and/or large posts about this. Debate the ideas, or don't. If you have something about me like a really weird post of a link of me on the radio, just PM me.

Da Grinch

still caught up in inferring thing that i haven't posted and lumping fans together ....its not smart and in reality it just makes you look foolish.

I am pretty sure I am one of Paxson's harshest critics around here

but i'll indulge your silliness .

paying deng is not the problem , nor boozer , nor noah , because as players the 3 of them are above avg. starters its that they provide only so much and dont really give the team what it needs to win against elite teams .

they are basically 3 guys who would be well suited to be the 3rd or 4th best player(depending on the year they are having ) on a championship team, and the 3 of them dont mach up well vs. most standard championship level #2's.

some dullards cant seem to grasp that its not the players fault a player is getting a great salary , its managements job to acquire and keep assets to build a winner, if it takes a certain amount of money then fine pay them , but at some point if its not working out , you have to cut loose those guys to get the ones that help you get to the goal of winning titles



i named about 12 players because they were on the trading block and for the most part acclaimed enough by sportswiters to be on the all nba teams

thats not marketing that got carmelo on them , I understand there is some deep seeded issues you got going that prevents you from seeing the obvious proof that anthony actually has won quite a bit .

championships from high school to aau to college , internationally and been in the playoffs every season he has been in the nba, the best he's done in the nba is the conference finals which is at least as good as any bull , very few players can actually match anthony's accomplishments as far as winning goes, but if you cant see that there is little you can be counted on to see, so its best to just move on.

__________________
Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.

yodurk

To address the thread topic of how to fix the Bulls...I'm just going to say priority #1 is getting D-Rose rehabbed and healthy again. Nothing else matters at this point, he is our franchise player.

The upcoming season may very well be a lost season, but maybe Rose comes back in January and is playing full strength again by April. It is unlikely but not impossible.

With that said, I think the front office is trying to tread this line of,

a) Don't make any bold moves until we know exactly how Rose is doing health wise, and be sure to retain flexibility. The rationale being that it's impossible to build around your franchise player unless you have realistic expectations on how well and how quickly he comes back from a serious injury. And,

b) Don't preclude the ability to make a deep playoff run if said franchise player comes back strong and ahead of schedule.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Bulls made some bold moves as the all-star break draws closer. By that point we know how Rose is doing on his recovery timeline and we can see if/how much guys like Boozer and Rip are declining relative to last year.

I am not sure if it's the "best" approach or not, yet; just that I believe this is their chosen approach. Either way, their options are obviously very limited for the time being until Derrick is back. Assuming Derrick comes back strong by spring time, I would expect a far more aggressive summer next year.

The bottom line is that Derrick's ACL tear put the whole franchise in a holding pattern for 12 months.

Da Grinch

generally ACL tears limit a player's ability to come back at full strength because when he is fully healthy he is out of shape .

and it takes time to regain trust in his knee again .

in general a player isn't full strength again mentally and physically until sometime during the following season from which they returned from injury.

at this point rose isn't expected until march , so next season even if he comes back a month or 2 early should still be a throwaway season.

__________________
Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.

yodurk

Odds are, you are right.

But I think the front office would be kicking themselves if Rose proves to be the exception (he's young and an athletic freak, after all), and then to have a crap team around Rose if he's ready to tear it up in the playoffs..well, that would be unfortunate. They would be kicking themselves even more if suddenly the Heat have a Bulls-esque meltdown due to their franchise player tearing an ACL (or equivalent). You never know what can happen.

All I'm saying is the Bulls probably don't feel like they know enough about Rose's recovery timeline to starting making bold moves this summer. It's like shooting hoops in the dark. By all-star break, the matter should be a bit more clear.

Da Grinch

fair enough.

__________________
Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.