Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
By 2004-2005, I think that we will see a rotation that plays JWill, Rose, Curry, and Chandler an average of 37 mpg each during the regular season, 40 mpg each in the playoffs. I also think that by that time Hassell is a 30 mpg player for a championship-level team, whether that is off the bench or as a starter. This leaves 62 mpg during the regular season and just 50 mpg during the playoffs.

If we paid Crawford and Fizer their qualifying offers, we will be slotted to pay Crawford ($3.5M), Fizer ($4.9M), and Robinson ($6.8M) at a total of $15.2M in 2004-2005. And if either Crawford or Fizer turn out to be really good players, it is very possible that we will have to pay them much more.

Fizer, Crawford, and Robinson all view themselves as starters and are unlikely to be happy sharing 62 mpg in the regular season and just 50 mpg in the playoffs. And these mpg projections are assuming that we do not draft anyone or sign anyone between now and 2004-2005 that plays significant minutes. Also, Bagaric, Hoiberg, Mason, Baxter, etc. do not play significant minutes.

$15.2M is a lot of money for players who do not play very much. Over on the RealGM board, I have argued that trading Crawford, Fizer, and Robinson for Rashard Lewis is not such a crazy idea. We could offer him the 2002-2003 max (probably $10.6M) for seven years without any raises. In 2004-2005, he would save us $4.6M versus keeping Crawford, Fizer, and Robinson.

Relative to how much we would be "overpaying" for Crawford, Fizer, and Robinson, $10.6M for Lewis in 2004-2005 would be a great bargain. If we slot him for 37 mpg in the regular season and 40 mpg in the playoffs, we just need to find a combination of players who could give us 25 mpg in the regular season and just 10 mpg in the playoffs. With the extra $4.6M that should not be difficult. With that extra money and future draft picks, we also should have no trouble finding back-ups in case some of our big minute players become injured.

Later on down the line, at $10.6M per year, Lewis will become more and more of a bargain. In fact, his salary might be low enough that it might pressure JWill, Curry, and Chandler to accept less than the max with max raises if they become less than full-fledged superstars.

Finally, it appeared that Krause was willing to throw about this same kind of money to Tim Thomas, Eddie Jones, and Antonio Davis, and Lewis is much more proven than Thomas and much, much younger than Jones and Davis. What he would be paying Lewis is about what he gave to Mercer and Robinson combined. Call me crazy, but I think Lewis is worth more than Mercer and Robinson combined.

Now it would be great if we could get the Sonics to throw in a center or a #1 pick, but it is very difficult to trade quantity for quality, especially young quality. It would not surprise me if the Sonics rejected this deal.

Lewis would give us the big SF to match up with McGrady, Garnett, Gasol, Van Horne, Bender, etc. We also could slide him over to PF when Curry or Chandler are resting. (In a lot of ways, he reminds me of a younger and more talented Robert Horry.) He already is a slightly above average defender, and as we become less reliant on him on the offensive end (as Curry, JWill, and Chandler mature), I suspect that he could become more and more of a defensive stopper for us. He apparently already has a very good understanding of defensive team play.

One bad thing about this trade though is that we would have nothing else tradewise to ever talk about, since we would have no one left to trade. We would be forced to sit back and watch the team grow rather than talk about moves that we could make to improve the team.

If I believed (1) that Robinson or Crawford was a big upgrade over Hassell or (2) that there is a good chance JWill will not be good enough to merit playing him 37 mpg in a couple of years, or (3) that Crawford is likely to be a lot better than JWill, or (4) that Fizer and Crawford will be happy with limited playing time and will re-sign with contracts that are less than $7M combined for the two of them, then I would think long and hard about this deal. Otherwise, I think it is a good deal for the Bulls.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,118 Posts
The quick answer is that the Bulls are paying a lot more to Crawford/Fizer/ERob than they are worth by a significant amount.

Trading them for Lewis makes sense because Lewis has done a lot more to show that the kind of money he is asking for may one day be worth it for him. The other's have not and ERob looks like he is jacking the Bulls right now.

The problem with Krause is that he will talk up his players no matter what. Even Oakley last year at the end when it came down to the trade deadline, Krause was talking him up. The problem is that you know he doesn't mean all of it. Look at the Brand deal and the words said before that went down. He does it to raise the profile of his players so that when he deals tem he will get the most he can. That is fine and dandy because usually the hype caused among the Bulls fan hanging on Krause's every word drives up the relevant vaule of the players. The problem is that when it comes time for Krause to resign players, he is going to have to pay. This was part of the issue with players like Pippen. He was constantly praised by the Bulls as a GREAT player, but they refused to renegotiate his contract when it was obvious he was severly underpaid. Krause let him wallow in it and that was a major point that poisoned the franchise for so long.

Regardless, The Fizer/Crawford/ERob deal makes sense because it gets rid of Fizer and ERobbery and replaces them with a guy that can fill both of their roles a lot better than they could. Crawford is the gravy that gets the deal done, though I am not sold Seattle wants Crawford that much.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,802 Posts
Well, I know I am in the minority, but I think Lewis is a marginal upgrade over E-Rob at most.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Oh, man, BCH, your blessing for this trade is the kiss of death.:uhoh:

I bet you would be willing to trade Fizer, Crawford, and Robinson for Jerry Lewis.

Seriously, your point about taking the things that Krause says about players with a grain of salt makes a lot sense. A good GM will always try to cast all of his players in the most favorable light, especially those whom he might considering trading.

I think you brought up the Pippen thing just to egg people on, but I will leave it at that, since that topic has been debated to death and we certainly don't need another rerun of that here.

I think that the reason this trade makes sense for both teams is that Radmanovich brings the Sonics a lot of the same things that Lewis brings. We don't have a player like either one of them, so that is why Lewis's value is higher here than in Seattle. Crawford and Fizer are going to be in a minutes squeeze here, but eventually will have a lot of playing time in Seattle, so they are more valuable there. Occasionally, trades make sense for both teams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Originally posted by ace20004u
Well, I know I am in the minority, but I think Lewis is a marginal upgrade over E-Rob at most.
Yes, Ace, I have seen you say similar things other places. How come?

In my opinion, Lewis brings Wally/M Miller shooting (less accurate than Wally but more three pointers) in a bigger and slightly more athletic body than Wally/M Miller. His range will open up the court for JWill, Curry, Chandler, and Rose in a way that ERob's baseline jumpers will not.

He also is a strong rebounder for a SF (7 rpg) who eventually could slide over to PF when Curry or Chandler are out of the game. At age 22, he already apparently has a strong understanding of team defense, and is an average one-on-one defender. He is a good athlete and apparently a hard worker and unselfish player, so it seems very possible that this 22 year-old could become a very good to great defender in the future, especially if his offensive role becomes less prominent here than it was in Seattle. He also gives us someone to guard the big SFs that are becoming more and more prevalent.

Robinson gives us shooting range that is below average for a small forward, ball handling and passing skills that probably are below average for a power forward, average at best defensive ability, average rebounding, and high chance of becoming injured. Guys who can hit a 15 foot jumper and run the floor just are not worth $5-$7M a year. Robinson may have made sense before we had Rose, before Artest became pretty good, and before Hassell became pretty good. We needed someone who could create scoring opportunities. But now he really doesn't have a place on a team like ours. If he became a defensive stopper, then yes, but until then, I just don't see players like Eddie Robinson playing for championship-level teams. Players like Lewis (Peja, Hedo, Horry, Sean Elliott) find their way on to championship-level teams all of the time.

Perhaps most importantly, Lewis is 22 and Robinson is 26. We have every reason to believe that Lewis will only get better and better, while there have to be more question marks about Robinson.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,118 Posts
I don't think Fizer/Crawford/ERob is enough to get Lewis, I just think that was part of the question posed.

Lewis is the better SF than ERob in all the ways you mentioned and he doesn't have a bum toe that may never heal.

Lewis is a better PF than Fizer. He is bigger, has more range, has better handles, is a better passer and is more able to rebound.

Lewis efectively replaces those two players at a level that is significantly higher. It is about consolidating talent and getting a better deal because of it. ERob is stealing over $6Mil a year and whatever Fizer is making is too much.

It makes too much sense though. I doubt it will happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,175 Posts
I don't think Fizer is making too much. He was picked behind Miles and Martin but his numbers are as good if not better (in fewer minutes.) I think Fize needs to be more aggressive defensivly and pass more on offense but he's a good 6th man. My views of Fizer are starting to change. But he's replacable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Lewis trade is not going to happen, but we still have the minutes crunch problem

I forgot a few things with the Lewis trade.

If Lewis signs for more than $5.3M, then he become a BYC player, which makes it next to impossible to move him.

See http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#65

We would have to (1) greatly expand the trade (Lewis at $6.9M/Booth/Williams/Drobnjak for Fizer/Crawford/Robinson/Guyton/Bagaric works), (2) involve Rose, Payton, and/or Baker (good luck finding something that works and makes sense), (3) or involve a third team (again, good luck finding something that works and makes sense), (4) renounce all of our exceptions and free agents so that we are under the cap and can take on more salary than we give up.

I don't think any of these options are very likely, so trading for Lewis is a longshot at best. Its too bad, though, since I think there is a trade here that would help both teams.

Perhaps a Lewis at $5.3M/Booth for Crawford/Fizer/Robinson and our unprotected #1 pick next year, but I doubt if Seattle or Lewis would go for this sign and trade.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,118 Posts
I am not sure where you are coming from with this but Lewis can opt out of his deal and become an unrestricted FA with Seattle owning his Bird rights. A part of this means he can be a part of a sign and trade deal. This is pretty straight forward for a trade and I am 99% sure it has nothing to do with BYC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,052 Posts
Lewis: Player option?

Lewis stats

In sign and trades the player must agree too, not just the teams. The player can get 12.5% raises instead of 10% according to #71 of the FAQ's. The other point mentioned was that capped out teams can use a sign and trade to get a player like Lewis they normally couldn't get.

I like the idea of this type of player on the Bull to play backup 4 and backup 3(which is why I wanted the Bull to move Fizer and draft Gooden) but why would Lewis agree to this? He would get plenty of minutes but he wouldn't be starting.

Sign and Trade

BCH read this:

Sign & Trade/BYC problem

Lewis 2001/2002 salary

BYC kicks in if a player gets a raise of GREATER than 20%. Last years salary of ~ 4.4 mil x 1.2 = 5.28 mil

He's scheduled to get ~ 4.9 mil this year if he decides to stay(I don't know what he has decided or when he must decide):
4.9 mil x 1.2 = 5.88 mil

I'm not sure which number to use but either way the deal would be JC(~2 mil) & Fizer(~3 mil) and wouldn't include ERob and his 5.7 mil contract because of cap constraints. Since JC is the lure, I don't see Lewis for ERob straight up although that would work too(in terms of cap).

So Rashard: 5.28 mil or 5.88 mil to start and 12.5% raises, plenty of minutes but not starting. Are you interested?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,118 Posts
Ok. The Bulls could renounce FAs and get under the cap and then work something out for Lewis to make more money. But the Sonics would not be able to get back more than 50% of his new deal, assuming that is more than last years salary for him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,052 Posts
As I read it; they can get back the GREATER of last years contract (~4.4 mil) or 50% of the new contract. If he got 10 mil to start then 50% of 10 mil is 5 mil which is greater than 4.4 mil..

This (a max type contract) is assuming that the Bull renounce free agents which is what Krause said he wouldn't do.

The section on Sign and Trade gives an example of how a 3rd team is usually necessary and this may change things but I have a headache and am through with this thread.

3rd party facilitation

Good luck in figuring out this deal. It's too much for me to deal with.
:cool:

P.S.:
The Real GM Trade Checker has one of my targets Jahidi White as a BYC2 player as is Adonal Foyle (the preference of some over Fortson from GS). I believe both of these restrictions come off by mid August.
BYC2 is less restrictive than BYC1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I would like to reorient the discussion back to the original point that I made about the minutes crunch for Fizer, Crawford, and Robinson. Suppose we sign Harpring & Williams. This year, I would be surprised if the combination of Curry, Chandler, JWill, and Rose played less than 130 mpg. That leaves 110 mpg for the rest of the team.

I also do not see Crawford or ERob being significantly better than Hassell at SG or even SF, so we really don't gain much by playing Hassell less than 25 mpg. (Personally, I would like to see him get 30 mpg.)

Assume 25 mpg for Harpring (why would he come here if he was going to play less?) and 15 mpg for S Williams, Bagaric, and Baxter and we have a grand total of 45 mpg for Robinson, Fizer, Crawford, Mason, Hoiberg, Guyton, and whoever else makes the roster.

For those of you who argue that we should give Fizer, Crawford, Robinson, etc. another year to increase their trade value, 45 mpg is not a lot of time to increase their trade value. It is very possible that those players, Robinson included, may have their maximum trade value right now. Very rarely do players increase their trade value sitting on the bench. Also, MBSH mentioned that Crawford's self-confidence is a bit fragile, and this minutes crunch is not likely to help things.

And in 2003-2004, things will only get worse. The big 4 are likely to be seeing 140 mpg. Putting Hassell at 25 mpg, Harpring at a reduced 20 mpg, and our veteran PF/C plus Bagaric and Baxter at a reduced 15 mpg, we now have just 40 mpg to split between Robinson, Crawford, Fizer, Mason, and our #1 pick. And we will be paying around $15M for those 40 mpg.

And then in 2004-2005, will we be able to re-sign Fizer or Crawford with the very limited minutes we will be able to offer them? Probably not. So we will be stuck trying to trade them when their value is lowest, and we likely won't get anything of value for them.

That is why this Lewis trade might have made sense (if it worked CBA-wise) or some other trade that trades quantity and potential for quality.
 

·
Turned Thabo Fanatic
Joined
·
751 Posts
2002-2003 Minutes

NCBullsFan, I agree that the minutes do seem to be in tight demand long term, but I think we could, and perhaps should, try to get by at least until the all-star break with this team so we can see more of what these young talents can do before making our decisions of who to keep and who to jetison.

I could see the minutes breaking out something like this over the 1st 2/3s of the season (give or take 5 minutes per player) given what seems likely to happen to me (never really know with Krause though and some players might exceed expectations or under-acheive thus affecting their minutes):

JWill 24 min - Crawford 24 min
Erob 24 min - Hassell 24 min
Rose 34 min - Harpring/George/Posey 14 min
Chandler 24 min - Fizer 24 min
Curry 24 min - Williams/Willis/Doleac 14 min - Bagaric 10 min

Hoiberg, Mason, Baxter, and Guyton (or Fotsis) would only get time if there are injuries (or blowouts for whichever guy out of the 4 is active). The minutes would increase for the main 11 guys given injuries, particularly if Erob winds up being injured for most of the season again. Also, we may not be able to count on Curry for 24+ minutes if he continues to get in early foul trouble like he did this past season. Perhaps Chandler and Fizer will play together some as well. Crawford may get SG minutes, but if he's competing against both Hassell and Erob there, then it does seem awefully crowded.

By the all-star break we should know a lot more about how good Erob and Crawford are going to be for the Bulls. Depending upon how everyone plays, I could see a deal being made at that time and exactly who gets dealt for what depends upon how everybody plays.

About keeping Fizer and Crawford long-term, with the luxury tax handcuffing teams and them being restricted FAs when their contracts are up, it may not be that difficult for the Bulls to keep them as backups if desired. If they do leave that year, it could be a sign and trade for luxury tax reasons. Of course, you would run the risk of having them go to NY, Dallas or Portland or some team under the luxury tax threshold. We still have plenty of time before we have to deal them if we're worried. However, if Charlotte gets this expansion team, the expansion draft could take away players from teams with great depth (such as the Bulls w/ 2 FAs added).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #18 (Edited)
FF:

I guess that I would like to push for the playoffs next season, even though I don't think we'll get there, barring a big trade or tremendous improvement out of Chandler and Curry. Has a team with a 10 or 11 man rotation with only one player averaging more than 25 mpg ever made a serious run for the playoffs? I don't think it will be a good idea to play another season (or half-season) like an 82-game exhibition season. Players with a strong will to win like Chandler, Rose, and JWill are going to get very frustrated and disillusioned if they are taken out so that we can get a good look at other players.

Also, Harpring or George won't come here to play 14 mpg.

A side note. Thanks to Sicky, I did figure out a reasonable trade for Lewis.

Lewis at $7M and Booth ($4.99M) for Crawford ($2.03M), Robinson ($5.73), and Fizer ($2.95M) works.

We are trading a total of $10.71M and can take back 115% of that plus $100K or $12.42M. (Lewis and Booth only cost $11.99M.)

Like Sicky mentioned above, Lewis counts for the maximum of half of his new $7M or the $4.41M he got last year, i.e. $4.41M. Thus, Seattle is trading a total of $9.4M and can take back 115% of that plus $100K or $10.91M. (Crawford, Robinson, and Fizer only cost $10.71M.)

I think Seattle also would get a $1.28M trade exception, which could be very valuable near the trade deadline as teams try to get under the luxury tax threshhold.

Since Lewis could play some PF as well as being the starting SF (yes, Sicky he would start) and Booth would give us more depth at the PF/C positions, we could conceivably fill out the rest of the roster with veterans or rookies at the minimum, putting us under the salary cap. Then we could sit back and wait for desperate teams to come begging us to help them out of luxury tax hell. I bet by the trade deadline next year, we would have teams falling all over themselves trying to dump salaries on us.

Or we could use our exceptions and sign a player like Michael Redd at the SG position, Darvin Ham or Scott Williams for extra depth PF/C, Tim Hardaway or Greg Anthony for extra depth at PG. And best of all with this trade, we would be right in the thick of it in terms of making the playoffs next year. And as weak as the Eastern Conference is, you just never know how far we could get if we got in the playoffs. It's not like we have to climb over the old Bad Boy Pistons in order to get to the Finals.
 
Joined
·
25 Posts
Jamal/Eddie/Marcus for Rashard/Calvin

Jamal's value has not reached it's maximum because he hasn't had time to prove anything. If he doesn't beat out Jay for the starting point guard job, he can probably still beat out Trenton because he actually has the niche of shooting, which would open up the offense. I believe his defense will be improved to the point that it will hardly be an issue. Plus, he's still the best trading bait on Jerry's plate, so minutes for him at least should be no problem.

Just because Rashard is the cream of this free agent crop doesn't mean we should go after him as we already have a player at the small forward position. That player happens to be our best player at the moment. Rashard doesn't strike me as the 2nd star type because he didn't improve too much this year and that he didn't bring Seattle anything big. He seems like Mike Miller+ exchanging Mike's ballhandling skills for Rashard's rebounding. I wouldn't mind him on the team, but in exchange for a potential important piece (Jamal), I say no !

I view this proposal as a Jamal for Rashard basically because I feel Jamal can be just as efficient if not better than Rashard. From a money standpoint, Jamal alone would be much cheaper and easier for Jerry to keep than Rashard because he's already in deeper engagement than Rashard after developing chemistry with the core and understanding his role with the team. Rashard's a very decent player, but he seems a little lost in the grandiose dreams that he's actually worth the max.

With all this talk of giving up Marcus and Eddie for trash and their inevitable departures from Chicago, Jerry might as well let them walk after their contracts are done and find their replacements. However, I'd prefer that he actually get value for them if he were to let them go, and Calvin Booth doesn't qualify. There's always the Calvin Booth breed in free agency.

As for playoff talk, I feel that we have an outside chance at them considering that we play in the shambled East. I don't think there's as much worry as before as we should definitely be in them by next season. We're still feeling things out because this team has proven nothing yet. To those that think we need to be in the playoffs next season, making them this season or not probably won't matter in the long from a business standpoint because the bulk of those eroded fans probably won't even come back until the championships start rolling in.
 

·
Rollin Wit Da Homies
Joined
·
5,080 Posts
Booth will not come. The Sonics like him, and are paying him lots, and don't want to unload him seeing as how he didn't play any games.

As for the minutes crunch, the solution is simple: Fizer doesn't play much. Thus, he'll get traded. He can only take marginal minutes at SF and whatever backup time behind Chandler, which will probably come out to 22 mpg or so. He will get traded, or after another year of playing limited minutes, he will leave into free agency.

Crawford is NOT in a minutes crunch. He will make the same transition that Antonio Daniels made, going from starting point guard to versatile off-guard/backup PG. Antonio Daniels averaged 26.5 mpg this past year, starting only 13 games, and his minutes are the highest of his career. Crawford averaged 20.9 last year. He will get right around 26 mpg also, and this is a perfectly fine role until he outgrows it, in which case he might be forced to leave the team.

Robinson will never play more than significant bench minutes in this league. If he manages to stay on the floor for up to 18 minutes a game, and contribute with his athleticism cleaning up the boards and getting dunks off of junk plays, then it will be as good as he can be. He'll never, ever live up to his salary. Sad, huh. Unfortunately, he's going to be one of those players that sits on the bench and gets paid a lot... there's a whole bunch of them out there, you know.

As for a Robinson Crawford Fizer for Lewis deal... I can see it happening, but I don't think it would make Seattle a better team. Lewis is a tremendous talent, and basically, Seattle would be burdened with Robinson, just as we were. Do they love Jamal Crawford enough to take on Robinson? Even when they will probably sign Gary Payton (who is 33) to start at least three more years and finish his career there? Do they want a defensive liability at PF in Fizer?

It's too dubious. From Chicago's side, it would be a miracle. From Seattle's side, it's a poor trade that probably wouldn't pan out.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top