[Dr. Kerr]

it's interesting to see all the erob hatred. It seems that last year when we got him, most people were happy.

Don't forget that he had an injury last year. So the only think we should complain about is that he may be injury-plagued if he doesn't play this year.

I think it is premature to comment on his game based on what we saw during the regular season since he was still recovering and had a chronic groin problem that may have been related to him trying to compensate for his injured toe.

When he was healthier during pre-season, he was supposedly the best jump shooter on the team (although it does look kinda ugly and doesn't have 3pt range).

And we all know with a groin strain, it is difficult to move laterally, so his defense may have suffered from that.

So we should give him a chance to show what he can do when he is healthy. And there is almost no way to trade him now since he hasn't shown anything.

But i still wouldn't mind a run at harping since erob is a skinny SF like jalen, and we need a more physical one for different matchups.

 

[DSB]

Originally posted by Dr. Kerr
it's interesting to see all the erob hatred. It seems that last year when we got him, most people were happy.

Don't forget that he had an injury last year. So the only think we should complain about is that he may be injury-plagued if he doesn't play this year.

I think it is premature to comment on his game based on what we saw during the regular season since he was still recovering and had a chronic groin problem that may have been related to him trying to compensate for his injured toe.

When he was healthier during pre-season, he was supposedly the best jump shooter on the team (although it does look kinda ugly and doesn't have 3pt range).

And we all know with a groin strain, it is difficult to move laterally, so his defense may have suffered from that.

So we should give him a chance to show what he can do when he is healthy. And there is almost no way to trade him now since he hasn't shown anything.

But i still wouldn't mind a run at harping since erob is a skinny SF like jalen, and we need a more physical one for different matchups.

I hear ya Dr. I think the biggest concern - at least for me - with ERob and JC is attitude more than anything else. If these guys can't contribute on and off the court to the well being of the team, expect JK to make them history!

 

[ChiBullsFan]

I can't understand the hatred either. The most common crap I hear about him is that he is GROSSLY overpaid, and that at that money he should be starting, but he's not good enough.

Now I hate to break it to you fans, but $5.5 million is barely more than than the mid-level exception. It is slightly more than the average league salary these days. I would say that $5.5 million is roughly equivalent to what a bottom-tier starter to high level bench player makes in the league. Basically a 5th to 7th option on a team. Well?! What do you think ERob is?

Instead of criticizing him, why not give him credit for the player he is and will be for the Bulls. He is a GREAT athlete off the bench, a guy who can definitely score and create matchup problems. I don't know about the rest of you Bulls fans, but it's been painful to see how stagnant the Bulls 2nd quarter offense has been the past few seasons. ERob will definitely breathe some life into it and should serve as a nice target for Crawford and Williams.

Assuming he stays healthy, ERob should give us 25 mpg and 9 or 10 ppg. I have no problems with that, and absolutely no problems paying the guy $5.5 million to be doing that. Hey, he's a veteran (which we need) but still young enough that his potential is yet unrealized. Many of you haven't noticed that in the span of two seasons he has gone from strictly a dunker to a guy with a decent offensive repertoire and a nice midrange game (even if it is ugly). If he can become a little more aggressive taking it to the hole in a set offense and work on putting his athleticism and wingspan to use on the defensive end of the floor, he can become very valuable - perhaps even a 6th man of the year.

Let's give the guy a break and just be happy that he will contribute. The more of those guys, the better. He is much more of an asset than a liability. JMSO.

 

[Bighead734]

I do agree to be patient, but its hard when the Bulls are payin him $30 for 6 years.

 

[BamaBull]

LOL Patience? LOL

My source of HATRED over having EROB on the team, comes from his salary for a guy who probably will not play starting minutes, OR, more than three games in a row before going back on the d/l. Its not too hard to remember he had an injured last season..boy is it not hard....he might have played three games in a row..once or twice. The rest of the time he was "resting" his toe. Whatever hatred EROB has incurred from me, is justified. IF he cannot be healthy enough to play, and contribute for the money he is getting, trade em or waive em and take yer losses. Patience? a whole year of patience is sufficient in my book. Now, its time to contribute.:yes:

 

[Salvaged Ship]

You can show patients for a while with high school draft picks who make a set wage. For a 26 year old who is making 6 million a year you expects results, IMMEDIATELY.

Unfortunately people do get injured, and it wasn't like the guy had a chance to show much. But this year he has to produce like Krause thought he would or it will turn out to be the most expensive free agent bust we have ever signed (sorry Mercer).

You sign another teams bench player, a career 7 pts a game player, to a 32 million dollar contract beacuse of potential and the fact no established player would sign with the Bulls. It is a huge roll of the dice considering at the time your team had no star players. You trade your only proven player (Brand) for a high schooler and sign Robinson based on potential. Who was supposed to groom Robinson into a quality player?

That is the Bulls biggest problem, and one Rose pleaded to be fixed. The Bulls are based completely on potential except for Rose. No proven players. There is hardly any quality veteran players with leadership (Blount & Hoiberg do not count). Best was the only other proven guy, and we are going to let him go.

I wouldn't of minded keeping Best if possible. Trade Crawford and maybe Fizer for an experience quality veteran and keep Best. Let Best start and don't put too much pressure on Williams immediately. This would at least keep Rose happy, having his veteran buddy stay around. If the Bulls start out 4-26 this year you can bet Rose is going to start whining.

Krause has not addressed the need for veteran players at all. And I don't just means veterans, but QUALITY veterans. We don't need Blount's, Perdue's, Manning's, or others that have little or no game left. We need experienced players who can still play.

Wake up Krause.

 

[willieblack]

Alright sinkingship...let's say you wake up and it's monday august 5, 2002 only to discover that you are now Jerry Krause...what quality vets would you target and what would be your plan for getting them here in Chicago? :| I ask this question because I'm confused about one thing, If Fizer and Craw are as bad as some posters believe then just what type of quality would we recieve in return from a trade. Hasn't it been written in here over and over again that the trade value for Craw and Fizer is extremely low right now? I just can't imagine getting anybody that would set the league on fire for anyone besides our twin toddlers or Rose and you don't want to move those guys just yet do you?

 

[Salvaged Ship]

Difficult question, willie. First of all, if I wake up tommorrow and I am Jerry Krause I am jumping in front of a bus.

Second, I have no idea what vets to target because I have no idea the value of Crawford or Fizer in a trade, or what is available. If Miwaukee took Kukoc, Leon Smith, and a draft pick for Glen Robinson then I can't see why they wouldn't of taken a Fizer, Crawford combo for Robinson. Despite some off court troubles Robinson is a 21 pt, 6 reb a game guy who is in his prime. Milwaukee gave him away.

I do feel confident that Fizer and Crawford are not part of the Bulls future fab 5, and for some of our youngsters to develop and Rose to be happy we better get more than 21 wins. At some point you have to trade some potential for some proven talent.

 

[transplant]

Originally posted by Dr. Kerr
it's interesting to see all the erob hatred. It seems that last year when we got him, most people were happy.

So we should give him a chance to show what he can do when he is healthy. And there is almost no way to trade him now since he hasn't shown anything.

Agree that we might as well be patient. As you say, he's virtually untradeable and we haven't seen him play healthy since last preseason. ERob is a question that can't be answered for a few months. Put this one in your bring-up file for December.

 

[willieblack]

Originally posted by sinkingship
Difficult question, willie. First of all, if I wake up tommorrow and I am Jerry Krause I am jumping in front of a bus.

Second, I have no idea what vets to target because I have no idea the value of Crawford or Fizer in a trade, or what is available. If Miwaukee took Kukoc, Leon Smith, and a draft pick for Glen Robinson then I can't see why they wouldn't of taken a Fizer, Crawford combo for Robinson. Despite some off court troubles Robinson is a 21 pt, 6 reb a game guy who is in his prime. Milwaukee gave him away.

I do feel confident that Fizer and Crawford are not part of the Bulls future fab 5, and for some of our youngsters to develop and Rose to be happy we better get more than 21 wins. At some point you have to trade some potential for some proven talent.

Fair enough. The only thing that I'm confident about concerning Fizer and Craw is that both can become better players(to what degree, I have no idea)and until we actually know what we have why not take the time to find out? I think it's a fair assumption that we wont challenge for a title for at least 3 to 5 more years. It maybe that Krause is staying pact for continuity's sake...we gonna have to at some point during this young team's development. ERob is in the same boat, he's here now for better or worse, until we line up another all day sucker to take him off our hands if he doesn't pan out. :grinning:

 

[Maestro]

Concerning E-Rob, as we all know last year was a disaster for him, injuries being the problem. Plenty of players lose a season, or portions of one due to injury. That being said this is the year for him to show us his value. I'm still positive about him at this point. This season we will find out if his toe can hold up or if it's going to be a chronic issue. Patience for now.:yes:

 

[MichaelOFAZ]

I have mixed feeling on this topic. On one hand, I agree that we haven't really given ERob a chance to showcase his talents because of his recurring toe injury. And my gut tells me that his inability to rehab his toe and work himself into the line up, is probably not entirely his fault. My suspicion is that Krause probably pulled back the reigns on ERob a bit, so that he could give more playing to Artest in order to drive up his trade value. I remember reading several articles to the effect that the Bulls were trying to shop Artest (due to his "I deserve the max" and "I want to play with a winner" comments). Also, I strongly believe that Krause encouraged Cartright to limit ERobs action and to throw the kids into the fire for two reasons, to accellerate the development of the rooks and to help secure another high lottery pick. So, to some degree, it might not be all ERobs fault.

On the other hand, when ERob has played, I've been less than impressed. His highly dunks are impressive to watch, but at the end of the day, they're still only worth two points a piece. His D wasn't good, he doesn't rebound well, and he doesn't have much range on his J. Based on what I saw last season, he's nothing more that a bench player. Now is it possible that he was just in a funk and that he's really much better than what we've seen so far? Yes. But will he ever be good enough to start for the Bulls, if we expect to be competitive? Probably not. So the question is ... Is he worth what we're paying him? Does he deserve to be the 2nd highest paid player on the team? Is he worthy of a longterm deal? Personally, I don't think so. I hope I am wrong.

So where do we go from here? His market value is way down, so in order to trade him, we're going to have to juice the pot a little. Either give up a draft pick and/or a player like JC (which I am opposed to doing) and trade for someone of comparable salary who's in the last year of his contract. But even then, teams won't want him because right now he's damaged goods. So we'll have to employ Plan B. Put him in when the match up favors Erob the most, let him drive up his stats per minute, and then try to trade him (ala "The Ron Artest approach"). Otherwise it's Plan C ... Keep him and try to develop him into a more well-rounded bench player.

As far as cap space goes, I think some people are a little mistaken (or maybe I am). As it stands, the Bulls will have $30M in committed salary for the 2003/04 season (Rose, ERob, Chandler, Curry, and Williams). They'll have Team Options on Fizer, JC, Hassell, and Bagaric (all of whom would be paid at the Rookie scale, if the option was exercised). Depending on what the salary cap is for the 2003/04 season, the Bulls should have at least $10M to spend as they wish. The CBA allows the Bulls to re-sign any of their draftees for as much as they want (up to the max allowed) without violating the salary cap rules (Ref: Section 6, Articles A and B; "Existing Contracts" and "Veteran Free Agent Exception"). In addition, they'll also have a $1 Million exception (worth about $1.5) and the Mid-Level Exception (worth about $4.7M) at their disposal.

So the Bulls could feasibly (not saying that they would) do the following:

1. Sign a free agent like Tim Duncan to a graduated contract starting at $10M a year, $15M the 2nd year, and so on. As long as the contract does not violate the cap rules at the time it signed, there's not a salary cap violation.

2. Pick up the options on JC, Fizer, and Hassell. Under the "Existing Contracts" exception, the Bulls can excerise their options on these players and still exceed the $40M cap limit. Or they can sign them to a contract extension outright.

3. Spend the $1.5M exception on a veteran bench player.

4. Spend the $4.7M exception on someone like Maggette.

According to my plan ... the Bulls have plenty of options without having to unload ERob. However, unloading ERob wouldn't hurt matters.

 

[BCH]

Just a quick note.

You cannot have cap space and still get the midlevel exception. It is an either/or deal. Either you have cap space or you get the mid level exception. If the cap spce you have is less than the amount of the mid level exception you would get the mid level exception because it has more value. I am assuming that Chicago used their veteran exception on Blount because they did not renounce FAs to get under the cap. This means that the Bulls would not have the veteran's exception to use next year, because it can not be used in consecutive years. They could have used a portion of the mid level this year, but I don't think so, as far as I can tell it hasn't been reported either way.

You also don't get the cap space if you have JC, Fizer, and Hassel on the books in any way. They are going to count against the cap in some form or they are going to be unrestricted FAs. You can't hide them on the side, sign FAs and then exercise Team Options. It doesn't work that way.

I could be wrong on some of this but as far as I know this is how it works.

 

[MichaelOFAZ]

QUOTE]Just a quick note.

You cannot have cap space and still get the midlevel exception. It is an either/or deal. Either you have cap space or you get the mid level exception. If the cap spce you have is less than the amount of the mid level exception you would get the mid level exception because it has more value. I am assuming that Chicago used their veteran exception on Blount because they did not renounce FAs to get under the cap. This means that the Bulls would not have the veteran's exception to use next year, because it can not be used in consecutive years. They could have used a portion of the mid level this year, but I don't think so, as far as I can tell it hasn't been reported either way.

You also don't get the cap space if you have JC, Fizer, and Hassel on the books in any way. They are going to count against the cap in some form or they are going to be unrestricted FAs. You can't hide them on the side, sign FAs and then exercise Team Options. It doesn't work that way.

I could be wrong on some of this but as far as I know this is how it works.[[/QUOTE]

To your first point that you cannot have cap space and still use the mid-level exception. I have to disagree. If the Bulls signed a FA with their remaining cap space, could they not use their mid-level exception to sign another player? According to the CBA, the $1M exception, mid-level exception, and assign player exception can be used as long as the team is at, above, or within the amount of the exceptions at the time the exceptions are used. Therefore if the Bulls sign a free agent with all of their remaining cap space and then later sign other players using th $1M and mid-level exception, they would not violate the terms of the CBA. Case in point, Krause retained the rights to both Best and Oakley for the purpose of signing and trading them. Knowing that he could sign either or both of them using his remaining cap space and would be entitled to the mid-level exception.

To your other point regarding them using the veteran exception on Courie Blount. Not the case, the Bulls used the $1M exception on Blount (worth about $1.4M, which was the exact amount of Blount's contract).

To you last point, you're probably right. The salaries of JC, Fizer, and Hassell are probably on the books until the Bulls choose not to exercise their team option. I was trying to get creative when I pull that idea out my arse.

 

[BCH]

Here is an excerpt I believe you are not reading:

"A team may lose their exceptions (Disabled Player, $1 Million, Mid-Level and/or Traded Player), or never receive them to begin with. This happens when their team salary is so low that when the exceptions are added to the team salary, the sum is still below the salary cap. If the team salary is below this level when the exception arises, then teams don't get the exception. If the team salary ever drops below this level during the year, then any exceptions they still have are lost. "

You Oakley and Best case in point is irrelevant. They were not renounced so they could be used in sign and trade. Because they were not renounced, they have cap value. This cap value allowed the Bulls to have the exceptions. Yes they can be used in sign and trade. But other than the fact that they added to the Bulls salary number, they have nothing to do with the exceptions.

If the exception used for Blount was the $1M exception and not the Minimum Player Salary exception then they can not use it in consecutive years. I do not know where your confusion of this lies. I suggest you read the FAQ again.

 

[Showtyme]

Originally posted by sinkingship
Difficult question, willie. First of all, if I wake up tommorrow and I am Jerry Krause I am jumping in front of a bus.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

LOL.

 

[Electric Slim]

Originally posted by sinkingship
Difficult question, willie. First of all, if I wake up tommorrow and I am Jerry Krause I am jumping in front of a bus.

I'd feel sorry for the bus...

 

[ace20004u]

I absolutely agree with the poster that started this thread. E-Rob played very well for Charlotte (particularly in the playoffs), E-Rob played very well in the preseason for the Bulls, averaging something like 17ppg, 5rpg, 2apg, before injuring himself. Of course a guy with an injury like E-Rob's isn't going to be able t produce! The few times he was able to take the court he didn't play nearly as well as he has in the past. He didn't attack the basket as well, he didn't play as good a defense as I have seen him do in the past. Still, if E-Rob gets healthy and stays healthy, he will be a MAJOR contributor for the Bulls this season. If E-Rob can't get healthy then the Bulls won't be able to trade him anyway.

 

[Dan Rosenbaum]

Bulls 2003-2004 Salary Cap Position

(I will copy this post to the Complete Free Agent Analysis Thread. Please reply to this there, so that not every thread is overwelmed with these technical discussions.)

MichaelofAZ, your post on the Bulls's salary cap position was littered with inaccuracies. BCH pointed out some of the mistakes and was right on everything that he pointed out.

First of all, you were right that the Bulls have $30.1M committed to Rose, Williams, ERob, Curry, and Chandler. Add in another $0.6M for Hassell (we will pick up his option) and another $1M-$4M for our first round draft pick, and we are at $31.7M-$34.7M.

Second, the Bulls have three options with Crawford, Fizer, and Bagaric.

i. They can pick up their options (that decision has to be made early this Fall): Fizer ($3.7M), Crawford ($2.6M), and Bagaric ($1.6M). This option would put the Bulls at $39.6M-$42.6M. Excluding Bagaric, they would be at $38M-$42M.

ii. They can choose to not pick up the options and try to re-sign Fizer, Crawford, and Bagaric with renouncing them. Until they sign with the Bulls or another team, they count against the cap for the Bulls at 300% of their previous year's salary: Fizer ($8.9M), Crawford ($6.1M), and Bagaric ($2.7M). This would put the Bulls at $49.4M-$53.4M. Excluding Bagaric, they would be at $46.7M-$49.7M.

iii. They can choose to not pick up the options and renounce them. In this case they do not count against the cap, but then they are treated like any other free agent in the market, meaning the Bulls can only re-sign them if they stay under the salary cap.

Third, if a team is under the salary cap, they lose their exceptions. (BCH was right about this.)

Thus, if we renounced Fizer, Crawford, Bagaric, our other free agents, and all of our exceptions, we would be at $31.7M-$34.7M. If the cap rose to $44M, then we would have $9.3M-$12.3M to re-sign free agents. (This assumes that we do not sign any other players to more than a 1-year contract and that we do not trade these players for a player with more than 1 year left on their contract.)

Most likely, we will pick up the options for at least Crawford and Fizer, in which case, putting us at best $4M-$6M below the salary cap. More than likely, factoring in other potential free agent signings (including Baxter and Mason), we are likely to only have our mid-level exception next year.

Also, I think that we won't have our million dollar exception, since we used it this year.