Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,882 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
:grinning:


Chris Mills is God freakin' awful. He hasn't got off the IR yet with one of those wink wink ;) ;) injuries. You know, those chronic minor types Dalibor could never free himself from. Well anyways, Boston got Chris Mills in the Lafrentz trade. They were counting on him, since he's a 6 million dollar ish expiring contract. But now, they can void Vin Baker (well, in two weeks time). That frees them of his max contract straight off the bat, and they can deal Mills, who has value, to better their team.


Boston desperately craves a power forward who can rebound. Now we've got 3. They can't have Tyson, but AD and JYD are theirs for the taking. I cannot be arseholed to look it up but JYD for Mills *SHOULD* work straight up. It will require sweeteners, because although JYD has a bit of a git of a contract, he's by far the better player. Perhaps throw in Dallas' first rounder this year, which Boston owns.


As for AD, I doubt they will touch his deal. He basically is Vin Baker. Same max deal (well, a bit lesser), same number of years, same lack of performance. He does however have a lower blood alcohol level and can board with the best of em. He's old slow and limited, but he is the kind of player they are after. So you have to at least give them the sales pitch.



So a couple of scenarios based on the two.......


1) Jerome Williams and Chris Jefferies

for

Chris Mills and Dallas' first round draft pick




Clears up a big contract, although Jerome is a player. Also frees up what little obligation we have with the expendable CJ. Dallas aren't doing all that well. They won't be lottery, but a high 20's pick is definitely worth having.






2) Antonio Davis and Chris Jefferies

for

Chris Mills, Michael Stewaht, Jumaine Jones, Dallas' first




Again, we clear a arsetickler of a contract in AD, and gain some big cap relief. Stewart is, uh, a body. And combine his contract with Scottie Pippen's and that's 10 million dollars cleared off next year, too. Jumaine Jones is the type of player we need. He's not exactly that good, but for 1.5 million for 3 years we get a scoring small forward. Beats Walt Williams, right? For them, Jefferies is kinda a lesser JJ, and AD fills their need and is an probable starter for them.

Oh yeah, this would coincide with Jay's buyout, so we would be able to keep Doop. WOOHOO!!!! :rock:





Looking at both scenarios I still get the feeling we're being short arsed, but at the same time I would do both of those deals. We're losing on the player front in both deals but clearing a couple of ******* contracts. In the first one we don't gain much more than cap relief, plus that pick. In the second one we get a player who can help us right now as well as a lot of long term cap flexibilty and a first. I'd do the second ahead of the first, but I doubt Boston does. Anyway, worth an ask. :whoknows:


(Additional - I did look them both up, and they do both work under the cap. :woot: . Although the second one not until the 15th of Feb)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,073 Posts
ShamBulls,u allways got something in your hat.

Well,I like the cap space,I don't like giving JYD.A.D,ok,but Boston won't touch it(they know they r not running for Championship with him and spend it elsewhere.

I got a dif' idea,based on your vision with the Vin situation.

3 way trade based on my thoughts that Jamal won't be here next year anyway:

Chicago trades: SF Chris Jefferies (2.5 ppg, 0.9 rpg, 0.3 apg in 5.5 minutes)
SG Jamal Crawford (16.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.8 minutes)
SF Eddie Robinson (5.9 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 1.1 apg in 18.3 minutes)
Chicago receives: SG Jiri Welsch (8.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 2.2 apg in 25.7 minutes)
SG Chris Mills (8.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 2.2 apg in 25.7 minutes)
PG Frank Williams (4.6 ppg, 1.1 rpg, 2.3 apg in 13.1 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -12.0 ppg, -1.8 rpg, and -2.4 apg.

Boston trades: SG Jiri Welsch (8.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 2.2 apg in 25.7 minutes)
SG Chris Mills (8.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 2.2 apg in 25.7 minutes)
Boston receives: PF Othella Harrington (4.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 0.5 apg in 34 games)
C Kurt Thomas (11.5 ppg, 8.9 rpg, 1.9 apg in 45 games)
Change in team outlook: +7.1 ppg, +8.6 rpg, and +0.2 apg.

New York trades: PF Othella Harrington (4.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 0.5 apg in 14.1 minutes)
C Kurt Thomas (11.5 ppg, 8.9 rpg, 1.9 apg in 33.2 minutes)
PG Frank Williams (4.6 ppg, 1.1 rpg, 2.3 apg in 13.1 minutes)
New York receives: SF Chris Jefferies (2.5 ppg, 0.9 rpg, 0.3 apg in 12 games)
SG Jamal Crawford (16.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 5.5 apg in 42 games)
SF Eddie Robinson (5.9 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 1.1 apg in 34 games)
Change in team outlook: +4.9 ppg, -6.8 rpg, and +2.2 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED


We give JC,but get worth in Jiri and Frank williams to back Kirk.
we get rid of one of the best contracts ever,that will be ERobs.
we also get the cap room from Mills.

Boston trades Big for small.with no Vin KT can sure help them,so can Othella(aha).

Zeke gets what he wants (as allways).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,882 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Well that went well. :cry:


It strikes me as a universal thing around all Bulls message boards that people laugh at any proposition designed to save us a lot of money, i.e. giving up an asset for cap relief.


Well I ask why.


The owns don't want to throw any more money at this losing venture. Yes the Bulls are making money, but they are losing games. For all intents and purposes, they are a losing venture. They are paying 53 million for a 13 win return. We are currently at the limit of what the ownership will be willing to spend on a non successful team. It doesn't need highligthing that we qualify as a non successful team. We have 6 overpaid players, plus Jay's contractual baggage. The only way we are going to be able to put more money into team salaries is to spend as much as we free up.


I didn't phrase that very well. Let's start again.


We can't add to this payroll. Pax doesn't seem to want to use the MLE. The only expiring deals we have are Brunson Gill and Doop for the minimum, Fizer's 3.7, and the option on Corie's 1.6 which we'll probably take up. (Jay's buyout details pending) I haven't included Crawford in that, because I assume that, barring atrade, whatever money we save with Fizer + others is going back into Jamal. That puts us basically at the level we're at now, and with a no better team. And still 25 million a year in AD, JYD and ERob - minimal impact for half our cap, and for another 2 years.

We HAVE to cut payroll to be improve this team.

The 3 contracts that need shifting are AD, ERob, and JYD, obviously.



I would clearly prefer to move ERob and/or AD, because JYD actually performs. But barring clever manipulation of the expansion draft, JYD is the only one we can get away from. In terms of play, we could fill JYD's spot in the rotation without missing a beat. We don't have any players who can do what he does but we can fill his 20 minutes at the forward spots easily enough. He's a performer, and even though his contract is a bit of a bugger it ain't all bad. But because of that, it's the one we have to get away from.


We need to be free of one. I would prefer it, obviously, to be AD. But I don't see how this is possible, outside of a deal such as this. I would lap up that AD for Mills/Yogi deal. We get 6 million off the cap with Mills, enabling us to use the MLE on someone who could help more than AD, as well as two first rounders. Then the following year, Michael Stewart and Pip are gone and we can match Chandler and Curry without hesitation. It clears up our financial situation immeasurably, and again, we can largely offset losing AD with the return of Chandler and playing Fizer more. Michael Stewart would also have a spot, although we wouldn't ever have to play him.



To me, it makes perfect perfect sense. We shed a lot of payroll, clear the 3 backup power forward thing, don't go backwards that fr in the short term.....I'd do em. Either of em. :grinning:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
Well that went well. :cry:


It strikes me as a universal thing around all Bulls message boards that people laugh at any proposition designed to save us a lot of money, i.e. giving up an asset for cap relief.


Well I ask why.


The owns don't want to throw any more money at this losing venture. Yes the Bulls are making money, but they are losing games. For all intents and purposes, they are a losing venture. They are paying 53 million for a 13 win return. We are currently at the limit of what the ownership will be willing to spend on a non successful team. It doesn't need highligthing that we qualify as a non successful team. We have 6 overpaid players, plus Jay's contractual baggage. The only way we are going to be able to put more money into team salaries is to spend as much as we free up.


I didn't phrase that very well. Let's start again.


We can't add to this payroll. Pax doesn't seem to want to use the MLE. The only expiring deals we have are Brunson Gill and Doop for the minimum, Fizer's 3.7, and the option on Corie's 1.6 which we'll probably take up. (Jay's buyout details pending) I haven't included Crawford in that, because I assume that, barring atrade, whatever money we save with Fizer + others is going back into Jamal. That puts us basically at the level we're at now, and with a no better team. And still 25 million a year in AD, JYD and ERob - minimal impact for half our cap, and for another 2 years.

We HAVE to cut payroll to be improve this team.

The 3 contracts that need shifting are AD, ERob, and JYD, obviously.



I would clearly prefer to move ERob and/or AD, because JYD actually performs. But barring clever manipulation of the expansion draft, JYD is the only one we can get away from. In terms of play, we could fill JYD's spot in the rotation without missing a beat. We don't have any players who can do what he does but we can fill his 20 minutes at the forward spots easily enough. He's a performer, and even though his contract is a bit of a bugger it ain't all bad. But because of that, it's the one we have to get away from.


We need to be free of one. I would prefer it, obviously, to be AD. But I don't see how this is possible, outside of a deal such as this. I would lap up that AD for Mills/Yogi deal. We get 6 million off the cap with Mills, enabling us to use the MLE on someone who could help more than AD, as well as two first rounders. Then the following year, Michael Stewart and Pip are gone and we can match Chandler and Curry without hesitation. It clears up our financial situation immeasurably, and again, we can largely offset losing AD with the return of Chandler and playing Fizer more. Michael Stewart would also have a spot, although we wouldn't ever have to play him.

To me, it makes perfect perfect sense. We shed a lot of payroll, clear the 3 backup power forward thing, don't go backwards that fr in the short term.....I'd do em. Either of em. :grinning:
What you say makes a whole lot of sense to a certain line of thinking. However, I ultimately think it's the wrong way to go about things.

I'll give both the short version and the long version.

Short version. **** Reinsdorf. He and the rest of the ownership reaped considerable dividends in terms of depressed salaries by stocking the largely with guys on rookie scale and scrubs. The original phrase was close to right: they've made money by losing.

Longer version, It's easy to say they aren't going to spend more if it doesn't mean winning, but it seems to me they aren't going to win more without spending. What you have in an inexorible race to the bottom and complete starting over. You trade JYD for nothing and we basically tread water over the remainder of the year even if Tyson comes back healthy. Even if Tyson's better than JYD, he is, you reduce the net benefit of his return.

and then if you use a consistent rationale, do you keep Jamal? Probably not. Because you're not winning, you're not going to pay him. Then at best your MLE (if you use it) is going to plug a hole. Your draft pick might have to change to accomodate letting him walk. You head into the next season doing pretty much what you did the last season... treading water. And the longer that goes on, the more fans drift away and the more marketing opportunities you lose.

From a slightly different perspective, how would they turn into a winning venture if they don't throw money at it? They tried that once by going the minimum salary route for guys like Bryce Drew as the starting PG before Brand, Miller, and Artest were coming into their own. Look at the money that was spent on their supporting cast, short of Mercer. It was woeful. Hell, they had to give big money to guys like Perdue just to make the league salary minumum for a team. And they got exactly what they paid for from that supporting cast... nothing.

So what happend. Lo and behold Reinsdorf supposedly wakes up one day and says... we need a star here, we're losing games and losing fans. Nice of you to notice Jerry. And thus we begat Jalen Rose by giving up two young all-stars and two decent role players. Why? On the surface you could say this is because we decided we'd spend money in order to win, but if you look deeper we only got to that point of desperation because we weren't willing to spend money in the time before. If we'd only had been willing to spend some more on decent role players in the first place, we wouldn't have gotten there.

Making that mistake again is NOT what I want to see happen. If these kids are going to turn out to be something, they need time and realistic expectations of them. Stripping the team of veteran players who can play (even if they're overpaid) is a step in the wrong direction. It will increase pressure and expectations on the kids and reduce wins. In turn, this will lead to more desperation and pre-mature trades.

Nope. The Bulls need to accept the fact that overpaid players are the cost of their prior bad decisions. At the same time, a good supporting cast is an investment in the future. If they trade off the bad old investments they run a pretty high risk of spoiling the future ones. And if they're going to do that, well, they might as well just give up and officially admit themselves as the Clippers East.

The alternative is they spend a bit more in an investment to actually bring back wins and a winning culture. As profitable as the Bulls are now, they need to get better to be more profitable in the long-run. Fans are already leaving and interest has waned considerably since the "good old days". And every year of losing and every sign from the ownership to wait till next year (such as a trade of a competent player like JYD for a gimp and a low pick) sends a signal to fans that they should look elsewhere.

You want to know why fans don't like salary dumps? Because it means the Bulls are tanking (again). We've been through enough of that bull**** and we see clearly that there's no reason to expect that even in the long-run it will make us win more.

In the long run, I think dumping is the "bottom-feeder" solution... you can be profitable in a couple of ways in the NBA- you can minimize costs and make your on-court performance a secondary priority like the Clippers, or you can try to maximize profits by making the most competitive, marketable team out there like the Lakers, Kings, or Mavs. Both visions lead to profitability, but I think the former vision is really no vision at all. It's the cheap-o middle-manager dumbass guide to running things. Don't rock the boat, be happy with what you've got. You'll always make some profit, but never a lot.

The latter vision admittedly holds out the possibility for loss in the short term or even in the long term if you turn out to be extravagently foolish (like Paul Allen, for example). But I'm not arguing for foolish spending, just a recognition of the bigger picture. In the long run, you'll make bigger bucks if you invest to win. People like winners. They spend money to see winners win and to wear winners' clothes.

That's a pretty disorganized bunch of thoughts, but it really doesn't have to be more disorganized than this:

I'm a huge and lifelong Bulls fan. But if I see those *****s tank again, I'm out of here. I want to root for a team that wants to win big in both areas, not a team run by Bill Lumbergh.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top