Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

121 - 140 of 258 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
One would think, but just two weeks ago some were advocating trading Jimmy Butler after he called out the head coach. And the idea of trading Gasol has been bandied about through much of this season. Crazy if you are trying to "win now" I agree.

"Stand Pat" though, even with this roster, doesn't likely get you by Lebron and the Cavs or the Warriors or Spurs.

No banner gets raised to the rafters for finishing 2nd in your conference.

What move do you believe wins the Bulls a championship this season?

If the answer to the foregoing is that you believe no such plausible move exists, is it your position that the Bulls should move into a win-later posture and rebuild?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
One would think, but just two weeks ago some were advocating trading Jimmy Butler after he called out the head coach. And the idea of trading Gasol has been bandied about through much of this season. Crazy if you are trying to "win now" I agree.

"Stand Pat" though, even with this roster, doesn't likely get you by Lebron and the Cavs or the Warriors or Spurs.

No banner gets raised to the rafters for finishing 2nd in your conference.
Aw c'mon, Nick Friedell and maybe a couple posters wanted to trade Butler. Friedell's excuse is that he just lost his mind. As for those posters, none of those them are likely to win "best in breed."

The Bulls are playing some pretty good basketball lately. I'm getting to like their roster and IF Rose can continue on the path he's been on the last couple games AND Dunleavy can come back healthy, I do believe I could get to LOVE this roster.

It's shaping up to be a fun season.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
What move do you believe wins the Bulls a championship this season?

If the answer to the foregoing is that you believe no such plausible move exists, is it your position that the Bulls should move into a win-later posture and rebuild?
It isn't my job to know all the possible moves that exist and which ones would win a championship.

I learned long ago that anything dug up just gets "attack the sourced" and its a fruitless endeavor since I am not in the room.

Its GarPax's job to know and do that.

12 + seasons, 1 ECF loss for Paxson.

Its a tough call about this season, given the Gasol situation and the young players on the roster. Of course, that is the way they decided to build the team.

I do think they should decide upon "win later" which would mean exploring trades that maximize chances 2-3 years from now or "win now" which would maximize chances this season. Trying to do both, if the goal is to win the title, isn't the way to go IMO.

The teams they are going up against this season for the title are in "win now" mode.

My money is on "stand pat."
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
It isn't my job to know all the possible moves that exist and which ones would win a championship.

I learned long ago that anything dug up just gets "attack the sourced" and its a fruitless endeavor since I am not in the room.

Its GarPax's job to know and do that.

12 + seasons, 1 ECF loss for Paxson.

Its a tough call about this season, given the Gasol situation and the young players on the roster. Of course, that is the way they decided to build the team.

I do think they should decide upon "win later" which would mean exploring trades that maximize chances 2-3 years from now or "win now" which would maximize chances this season. Trying to do both, if the goal is to win the title, isn't the way to go IMO.

The teams they are going up against this season for the title are in "win now" mode.

My money is on "stand pat."
Pretty much the response I expected. Actually taking a position would inhibit you from being able to criticize the course of action no matter what it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Pretty much the response I expected. Actually taking a position would inhibit you from being able to criticize the course of action no matter what it is.
My position is I think they will "stand pat."

What is yours? What do you think they should do and what do you think they will do? Any thoughts?

12 years. 1 ECF loss for Paxson.

I think we can both agree that if the goal is to "win now" a move needs to be made, yes? Or do you like this rosters chances against the Cavs, Warriors and Spurs? If you like their chances, why do you like them?

What move? Neither you or I know what is available and we don't know for certain if the goal is even to "go for it" this season. I can't see this front office parting with McDermott or Mirotic this year and any kind of "win now" trade would likely involve some of them. Those guys are precious to the front office. And Mirotic (and Portis perhaps) will help be the long term Gasol and Noah replacements.

12 years. 1 ECF loss for Paxson. Can you be critical of that? Or is that a good job in your books?

I think that's a bad job. What do you think? Any thoughts?

---

I think they should pick "win now" or "win later" as trying to do both at the same time likely won't work, assuming the goal is to win a championship. It should be clear to see what type of move is what. And, yes, there is no way to know what trades are really available, unless something basically incontrovertible comes out in the news. Gasol doesn't help much with "win later." The right 18+ PER ish wing player likely would be quite useful for a "win now" run.

Long term, the results do matter. 12 years and 1 ECF loss is pretty poor performance. I'd be disappointed if the 12 turns into 18 with no real results. I'd imagine most Bulls fans would be as well.

What do you think they should do? What do you think they will do?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
My position is I think they will "stand pat."

What is yours? What do you think they should do and what do you think they will do? Any thoughts?
I asked you what you think the team should do (i.e. what should the course of action be, not what do you think it will be). You tend to criticize the FO for whatever it does or does not do. Not saying what you would do differently conveniently allows you to criticize everything, because you don't plant your flag on what the correct course of action would be.

And yes, I have actually taken a position and expressed it, if you've read the board. I believe the team needs another wing with plus defensive ability if there is going to be any shot at getting past Cleveland. I would favor moving a big + a draft pick (including the Sacto pick) if necessary to acquire that type of player (e.g. Ariza). Even if Dunleavy comes back, he's not going to be of particular use against LeBron, and I think it's a problem if Jimmy is the only guy on the roster capable of that assignment.

12 years. 1 ECF loss for Paxson.
Yes, I believe I've read you post this somewhere before...

I think we can both agree that if the goal is to "win now" a move needs to be made, yes? Or do you like this rosters chances against the Cavs, Warriors and Spurs? If you like their chances, why do you like them?
Yes, I agree. I would also say that there may not be any move of any kind that could get any team in the NBA past the Warriors, but I don't think that means that everyone should just tank/rebuild and wait for Steph to retire.

What move? Neither you or I know what is available and we don't know for certain if the goal is even to "go for it" this season. I can't see this front office parting with McDermott or Mirotic this year and any kind of "win now" trade would likely involve some of them. Those guys are precious to the front office. And Mirotic (and Portis perhaps) will help be the long term Gasol and Noah replacements.
See above. I wasn't asking you to identify the exact parts of the trade, but rather just the concept of what you think should happen. You dodged, presumably because then you're locked in to a position that may make it harder for you to do what you like to do - criticize whatever actually happens.


12 years. 1 ECF loss for Paxson. Can you be critical of that? Or is that a good job in your books?

I think that's a bad job. What do you think? Any thoughts?
I think on the whole the Bulls have an above average FO. They draft better than most. They manage salary flexibility effectively. They have no particular track record, though, in being able to consummate a big in-season trade. It's a mixed bag.

The truth that you consistently fail to acknowledge is that the Bulls had an inarguably fantastic roster in 2012 that had a significant chance of winning an NBA title. Then Derrick Rose's series of injuries happened. At that point, any chance of winning a title was basically out the door until after his contract ran its course. I believe the FO has done basically the best possible job possible in building this year's roster around the diminished Derrick, which is all you can ask it to do.

But you don't actually look at context, or at least, haven't made any posts that indicates you do.

I think they should pick "win now" or "win later" as trying to do both at the same time likely won't work, assuming the goal is to win a championship. It should be clear to see what type of move is what. And, yes, there is no way to know what trades are really available, unless something basically incontrovertible comes out in the news. Gasol doesn't help much with "win later." The right 18+ PER ish wing player likely would be quite useful for a "win now" run.
The Spurs consistently pick both and it works for them. It's specious to suggest that both goals cannot be pursued simultaneously. I do agree, though, that it may be possible to swing a deal this year that gives up some future assets in exchange for an increased chance at the title, but looking at this as just a binary situation is an oversimplification.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD DO? It's incredible to me that you won't say. Crazy, really.

Long term, the results do matter. 12 years and 1 ECF loss is pretty poor performance. I'd be disappointed if the 12 turns into 18 with no real results. I'd imagine most Bulls fans would be as well.

What do you think they should do? What do you think they will do?
What is your definition of poor? By your metric, I'd imagine 3/4 of the league is doing a poor job.

Do you believe that Derrick Rose's injuries were the fault of the FO? Do you believe that those injuries have anything to do with the team's chances to contend over the past 5 years? It's incredibly myopic to keep acting like those injuries are not the most significant thing that's happened to the team by many orders of magnitude.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Do you believe that Derrick Rose's injuries were the fault of the FO? Do you believe that those injuries have anything to do with the team's chances to contend over the past 5 years? It's incredibly myopic to keep acting like those injuries are not the most significant thing that's happened to the team by many orders of magnitude.
At some point, **** happens. Over the course of 12 years there will be good luck (landing the pick to draft Rose to begin with) and bad luck (Rose injury).

Without the good luck / miracle of landing the Rose pick, there would have been no MVP to lead the Bulls to their lone ECF appearance.


Then it very well could have been 12 years, 0 championships, 0 trips to the finals, 0 ECF appearances. I think that's bad, although I think I could think of some people that may defend it. :)


If we were talking about this FOs first 5 years on the job, I think you could point to this.

The thing is though, Paxson has been GM / VP long before they drafted Derrick Rose.

12 years. 1 ECF loss. That's bad if the goal is to win championships.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
At some point, **** happens. Over the course of 12 years there will be good luck (landing the pick to draft Rose to begin with) and bad luck (Rose injury).

Without the good luck / miracle of landing the Rose pick, there would have been no MVP to lead the Bulls to their lone ECF appearance.


Then it very well could have been 12 years, 0 championships, 0 trips to the finals, 0 ECF appearances. I think that's bad, although I think I could think of some people that may defend it. :)


If we were talking about this FOs first 5 years on the job, I think you could point to this.

The thing is though, Paxson has been GM / VP long before they drafted Derrick Rose.

12 years. 1 ECF loss. That's bad if the goal is to win championships.

Good job continuing not to say what you would do. Impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD DO? It's incredible to me that you won't say. Crazy, really.
Maybe you missed this.

K4E said:
I think they should pick "win now" or "win later" as trying to do both at the same time likely won't work, assuming the goal is to win a championship. It should be clear to see what type of move is what. And, yes, there is no way to know what trades are really available, unless something basically incontrovertible comes out in the news. Gasol doesn't help much with "win later." The right 18+ PER ish wing player likely would be quite useful for a "win now" run.



Looks like we actually agree.

The Bulls roster needs a move in order to make a "win now" run.

The target is a wing (2/3).

I would also add that if a potential superstar does become available (ex: Cousins) the Bulls should go whole hog in order to land that type of player.

Ariza would be an OK fit. Will Barton? Much depends on if Dunleavy can go. (something neither one of us really knows) Neither of these guys really put the Bulls over the top but it would perhaps help.

Someone making 100s of thousands of dollars a year should know better than me though. The right move may be to scrap it and realize that you can't beat the Cavs / Warriors / Spurs with this roster and maximize your opportunities 2-3 years from now.

Then you are looking at an entirely different set of moves. You have to have a goal first, though.

Or, the goal might be to just make the playoffs for another year and have a stockpile of young players to replace guys like Gasol / Noah as they age out / opt out and continue making the playoffs and little else for years on end. That has proven to be a good business model for the Bulls.

-----

And yah, we'll disagree on if getting to the eastern conference finals 1 time in 12 years is a good track record. To each their own I guess.

Most very good to great NBA organizations do better than that.

But, we've disagreed on a lot over the years, right? :)

12 years. 0 Championships. 0 NBA Finals Appearances. 1 Eastern Conference Finals loss.

That can't be disagreed upon, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Just curious, what big would you be in favor of moving for Ariza in the big plus pick swap?

Not Gasol, right? Need him.

Mirotic? (would the front office part with him?)
Gibson? (very instrumental in the Bulls success over the last 2 weeks)
Noah? (most likely candidate, but a sad way for him to go out)

How many of those three?

Concerned at all about all the SFs that are still on the roster? Dunleavy. Snell. McDermott. I'd imagine one of those would be out the door as well, yes?

If you lose Gibson, are you rolling with Mirotic / Gasol at the 4 / 5?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
What is your definition of poor? By your metric, I'd imagine 3/4 of the league is doing a poor job.
On a results-only basis, the past 12 seasons for the Bulls have been good, not great. Seven NBA teams have clearly had a better run during this period than the Bulls because they've won a NBA title(s). While I'm not a "championship or bust" fan, winning a title justifiably buys a FO a whole lot of cred.

Of the 23 NBA teams that haven't won a title in the past 12 seasons, only the Cavs have played in more playoff series (17) than the Bulls (15) and they've certainly come closer to a title than the Bulls. However, they've also had 4 sub-.500 seasons during this period (to the Bulls 2) and finished dead last in the division 3 times (the Bulls only finished last in Paxson's first season).

Indy and OKC/SEA also have played in 15 playoff series over the past 12 seasons. Both of these teams have a lot more sub-.500 seasons (6 and 5, respectively), but have also either gone farther (OKC made the Finals once) or in the case of Indy gone to the conference finals more often (3 times).

I guess this is a case of one man's poor/bad being another person's pretty good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
I guess this is a case of one man's poor/bad being another person's pretty good.
If the goal is to win championships, its poor.
If the goal is to at least make the NBA Finals, its poor.
If the goal is to make the Conference Finals more than once a decade, its poor.

If the goal is to be above .500, make the playoffs and make a lot of money, its very good.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
Maybe you missed this.
I didn't miss it. Saying the Bulls should win now or win later isn't saying much of anything. Which course would you take?

Looks like we actually agree.

The Bulls roster needs a move in order to make a "win now" run.

The target is a wing (2/3).

I would also add that if a potential superstar does become available (ex: Cousins) the Bulls should go whole hog in order to land that type of player.

Ariza would be an OK fit. Will Barton? Much depends on if Dunleavy can go. (something neither one of us really knows) Neither of these guys really put the Bulls over the top but it would perhaps help.

Someone making 100s of thousands of dollars a year should know better than me though. The right move may be to scrap it and realize that you can't beat the Cavs / Warriors / Spurs with this roster and maximize your opportunities 2-3 years from now.
I don't see any scenario where the right move is to scrap it, though I suppose it depends what you mean by that.

Then you are looking at an entirely different set of moves. You have to have a goal first, though.

Or, the goal might be to just make the playoffs for another year and have a stockpile of young players to replace guys like Gasol / Noah as they age out / opt out and continue making the playoffs and little else for years on end. That has proven to be a good business model for the Bulls.

-----

And yah, we'll disagree on if getting to the eastern conference finals 1 time in 12 years is a good track record. To each their own I guess.

Most very good to great NBA organizations do better than that.

But, we've disagreed on a lot over the years, right? :)

12 years. 0 Championships. 0 NBA Finals Appearances. 1 Eastern Conference Finals loss.

That can't be disagreed upon, right?
So you agree Thibs was a failure?

(I don't actually believe that, but you do.)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
If the goal is to win championships, its poor.
If the goal is to at least make the NBA Finals, its poor.
If the goal is to make the Conference Finals more than once a decade, its poor.

If the goal is to be above .500, make the playoffs and make a lot of money, its very good.
You understand this is not actually true, right? At least if you are evaluating performance correctly within the context of the league as a whole.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
You understand this is not actually true, right? At least if you are evaluating performance correctly within the context of the league as a whole.
What isn't true?

A reasonable goal would be to make the NBA Finals at least once over a 12 year span for a large market team, right?

You realize 0 trips to the Finals is pretty poor performance, don't you?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
So you agree Thibs was a failure?

(I don't actually believe that, but you do.)
1 trip to the ECFs over 5 years is better than 1 trip over 12 years.

Its, like, over 2 times better, wouldn't you say?

So, no, I would not say Thibs was a failure. I would also say he's not in the Pop / Riley / Jackson echelon since he has not won the big one.

He had a number of successes (not as a head coach) before joining the Bulls though that I could point to. Ring with the Celtics. Reinventing the way defense is played in the NBA. Also Gold Medals with team USA while with the Bulls. Also a track record of getting along with front offices (Celtics) and other organizations (Team USA, still employed there) while coach-choker Paxson has a different track record.

And, a coach is only as good as the roster he's given. Thibs almost always got the most out of the roster he was given to coach.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
I don't see any scenario where the right move is to scrap it, though I suppose it depends what you mean by that.
It would depend on what would be available if Gibson, Gasol, Noah, Rose were put up on the block.

What assets could be acquired for a 2-3 year down the road "win later" run.

Teams do this all the time. Its not that complicated a scenario. Just off the top of my head, the Celtics started down this road a few years ago. The Cavs and the Warriors were in the business of getting lottery picks a few seasons back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
I didn't miss it. Saying the Bulls should win now or win later isn't saying much of anything. Which course would you take?

Maybe you missed it, but didn't I say a 18+ PERish SG/SF?

K4E said:
I think they should pick "win now" or "win later" as trying to do both at the same time likely won't work, assuming the goal is to win a championship. It should be clear to see what type of move is what. And, yes, there is no way to know what trades are really available, unless something basically incontrovertible comes out in the news. Gasol doesn't help much with "win later." The right 18+ PER ish wing player likely would be quite useful for a "win now" run.
Ariza doesn't really fit that criteria, but he's an OK wing if Dunleavy can't go. Who to give up though and would the Rockets want that player? Many like the job Mirotic is doing at the 3 as well.

Will Barton might fit. The issue there is the Bulls already have 3 high usage main guys in Rose, Gasol and Jimmy, with Mirotic also needing to put up a lot of shots. And the Nuggets probably like having a younger highly productive player on a good contract.

As far as the course to take, it would depend entirely on the moves that were available, which I don't know. Is Boogie Cousins available for the right price and what would that price be? I don't know. Is there a team that would give the Bulls a good chance at an impact draft pick for Gasol? I don't know.

I don't think "stand pat" will result in a championship this season though. But, guys could get hurt on other teams and perhaps a guy like Mirotic will take a serious step forward. Or Rose miracle of miracles returns to past greatness.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
Maybe you missed it, but didn't I say a 18+ PERish SG/SF?
No. You said they should either win now or win later. Of course, you have to make that decision before you can get to who they should acquire once they choose a course.

It's funny to me that you are so critical and yet you cannot even address your own fundamental position (an incorrect one, but your position nonetheless) that the team must choose between current competitiveness and future competitiveness.

Ariza doesn't really fit that criteria, but he's an OK wing if Dunleavy can't go. Who to give up though and would the Rockets want that player? Many like the job Mirotic is doing at the 3 as well.
Mitotic is doing better at the 3 then I would have guessed, but a lot of his production still comes when he slides down to the 4 during games. And obviously he can't keep up with LBJ. I like the guy going forward, but you have to give something to get something.

Will Barton might fit. The issue there is the Bulls already have 3 high usage main guys in Rose, Gasol and Jimmy, with Mirotic also needing to put up a lot of shots. And the Nuggets probably like having a younger highly productive player on a good contract.
I think the Bulls have plenty of scoring firepower between Butler, Pau, and Rose. what they really need is that 3-and-D type of player.

As far as the course to take, it would depend entirely on the moves that were available, which I don't know. Is Boogie Cousins available for the right price and what would that price be? I don't know. Is there a team that would give the Bulls a good chance at an impact draft pick for Gasol? I don't know.
The latter can be answered easily. There is no team that is going to give an impact draft pick for Gasol. If you want that, you're giving up Portis, Mitotic, or obviously Butler.

I don't think "stand pat" will result in a championship this season though. But, guys could get hurt on other teams and perhaps a guy like Mirotic will take a serious step forward. Or Rose miracle of miracles returns to past greatness.
So what would you do? Are you willing to deal a current rotation player and future draft picks to try to improve the team this season?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,415 Posts
What isn't true?

A reasonable goal would be to make the NBA Finals at least once over a 12 year span for a large market team, right?

You realize 0 trips to the Finals is pretty poor performance, don't you?
Are you speaking statistically? Once every 15 years would be the statistical norm. And I don't believe market size has any real correlation to performance, no. Do you? Ask the Knicks how much that helps. Best market in the country!

In terms of the conference finals, in the last 12 seasons 10 teams have made the conference finals more than once. 7 more have made it just once. So, more or less, the Bulls have done better than 13 teams, the same as 7 teams, and worse than 12 teams.

So, no, if we're being honest, it hasn't been "pretty poor," which necessarily would be below average. It also has been far from great.
 
121 - 140 of 258 Posts
Top