Chicago Bullseye 70

[Fred]

dougthonus wrote:

In fact, in the past six seasons under Paxson, the Bulls have had as many playoff appearances (4) and series wins (1) as the entire 30 year history of Clipper basketball.

Of course, for the past six seasons, the Western Conference has been much better than the East. I'd argue that if the Clippers played in the East for the past 6 seasons, and the Bulls played in the West, the numbers would look quite a bit different. We've only had to play the Lakers, Spurs, Houston, Utah, etc. twice a year for the past 6 years. Based on our performances on the West Coast over the past 6 years, I'd like to publicly thank the NBA for putting Chicago in the East.

 

[dougthonus]

The key to understanding my point is what we have to show for it "as of July 2009". Of course, "not every player you take stays with your organization for 15 years and then retires." That's absolutely true. But solid organizations turn solid high picks into other assets. You don't let them walk away for nothing, and the Bulls petty and pathetic actions (pulling a contract off the table that Ben wanted to sign just before the 08 training camp) made zero compensation a realistic possibility. That's exactly what happened.

In the Paxson era:
Crawford -> Used to clear out bad contracts
Curry -> #2 and #9 picks
Chandler -> Contract dump (2nd rounder + Adrian Griffin), though NO can't move him for an expiring contract now.
Hinrich -> On extension
Gordon -> Left for nothing
Deng -> On extension
Tyrus -> On team
Thabo -> 1st rounder -> Taj Gibson
Noah -> On Team
Rose -> On Team

So what are you complaining about?
10 1st rounders on the team in the Paxson era:
5: Still on the team
2: Traded for future 1st round picks that were at least as great or greater than their value
1: Used to dump bad salary off the team
1: Dumped himself as bad salary after signing extension
1: Leaft for nothing with no purpose whatsoever

9 of those 10 draft picks are either:
1) On the team
2) Moved in such a way where the Bulls got full market value or better for the player

 

[Shakes]

Well if we're talking Paxson you can strike Brand, Fizer and Williams off as not his fault.

From the other 5:

Curry: Hard to give Paxson credit because if he was a really great GM he would have traded a guy who was never actually very good but vastly over-rated before the heart condition lowered his value. Still what he got was an excellent return.

Chandler: Basically had little option but to sign him to the contract that he did given the Curry situation. Also had little option but to dump him while he could after we got Wallace. It's not like the Hornets haven't tried to dump him as well, so I'll call this one a wash.

Tyrus: Terrible draft decision, but I can understand the logic of trying for a star given the situation we had at the time.

Rose: Well if you wanted to keep Gordon, Beasley was the pick. As soon as Rose was drafted both our guards were out the door sooner or later. But if Rose turns out to be clearly the better player then you've got to do it. Unlike most people I think the jury is out on this pick, as I don't think it's a lock that Rose turns out to be the better player (although chances seem good).

Gordon: Would have been nice to get something for him, but really I think up until the Rose pick we intended to re-sign him, and after the Rose pick it was too late to really put a trade together given it'd have to be a sign and trade. Again hard to blame Pax for it, since he could hardly have planned to land Rose.

I'd say Pax hasn't been given any easy decisions, especially if he had no say in the (even at the time) horrible Deng contract. Still pretty much every extension/contract given under his run has been pretty bad. Pippen, Wallace, Deng and Noc were clearly stinkers, and it's only the declining nature of Kirk's that keeps it from that category.

 

[dougthonus]

I'd say Pax hasn't been given any easy decisions, especially if he had no say in the (even at the time) horrible Deng contract. Still pretty much every extension/contract given under his run has been pretty bad. Pippen, Wallace, Deng and Noc were clearly stinkers, and it's only the declining nature of Kirk's that keeps it from that category.

Duhon's 3 year deal was a good signing
Nocioni's 3 year deal (initial contract, remember he was a Euro FA signing not a draftee) was a good signing
Joe Smith for 2 years was a good signing
Darius Songiala, Othella Harrington, Malik Allen, and Jannero Pargo were very good finds off the scrap heaps or for cheap.

His major signings have been poor, but they've all be in the " MAX > signing > MLE " range which leads to the most difficult negotiations.

Overall, I agree with your theory that his extensions, especially the major ones have been the worst part of what the team has done. I just wanted to point out it's not all bad.

 

[Shakes]

Yes, I thought afterwards that Noc's original deal was a great signing, and he did well with Duhon. But I was really talking about the big ticket items, with small signings the downside of a mistake is much smaller, so it's easier to have a good record.

The big deals are always the hardest to get right, and the track record is downright scary, and I guess one of the reasons why I think it's probably for the best that we erred on the side of not signing BG.

 

[??? ??????]

The whole Ben Gordon thing really wasn't on the signings. It was on Reinsdorf. John Paxson masterly crafted the Bulls salary structure so that Gordon and Deng could both get lucrative extensions. But Derrick Rose messed everything up. But that's all on Reinsdorf. You would hope that the Bulls would just go into the luxury tax a little to offer Gordon a lucrative extension, but they chose not to, and used Rose's salary (that was greater than what the 9th pick...or a pick in the 20's [what the Bulls were expecting], and that additional, unexpected money, gave the Bulls a luxury tax bind) and the big time offer for Deng

HOWEVER, even with that, Gordon still gave the Bulls a free pass in building towards a contender, when he agreed to a $54 million over 6 year deal that was not all that lucrative, for what Gordon had done for the Bulls. And once again, this is all on Reinsdorf, because he is the one who wouldn't let Gordon sign the deal. If Paxson was the one in charge, he would have been running to Gordon's house, and throwing on a few more million.

I'm not going to blame Hinrich, Deng, and Nocioni for taking the deals they did. Nor Ben Wallace. Nor Derrick Rose. Not John Paxson. The only one I blame is Jerry Reinsdorf.

I think not letting Gordon sign the $54 million over 6 year deal will go down as one of the dumber moves in NBA history. The Bulls used the #3 pick on Gordon, and in terms of career achievement, he lived up to his pick, and he is gone, for nothing. That is ridiculous. We're going to lose Tyrus Thomas (what we got out of our #2 pick in 2006) for nothing too next summer.

 

[Shakes]

The only way we lose Tyrus for nothing is if we renounce him, and we'll only do that if we think we can get a big name free agent to use the cap space on. If it looks like the big names are staying put or going elsewhere we can always sign Tyrus instead.

As far as not letting Gordon take the deal, we really had to cut our nose off to spite our face there I think. The Bulls front office could hardly be credible in future deals if they set a deadline for a take it or leave it deal and then backed down and let him sign past the deadline. Sometimes you have to show you're willing to hurt yourself to backup your threats.

 

[houheffna]

I think not letting Gordon sign the $54 million over 6 year deal will go down as one of the dumber moves in NBA history. The Bulls used the #3 pick on Gordon, and in terms of career achievement, he lived up to his pick, and he is gone, for nothing. That is ridiculous. We're going to lose Tyrus Thomas (what we got out of our #2 pick in 2006) for nothing too next summer.

Really should reconsider using Gordon and NBA history in the same sentence. The two just don't fit at this time. The dumb move was Gordon not signing the contract from the year before. Again, Arenas called him out on it, breaking a silent code across the league concerning players commenting on other players' business. That is how stupid Gordon (and Deng) were at the time. So again, NBA history, Kobe, Lebron, Gordon? No. Don't see it happening.

 

[Fred]

dougthonus wrote:

The key to understanding my point is what we have to show for it "as of July 2009". Of course, "not every player you take stays with your organization for 15 years and then retires." That's absolutely true. But solid organizations turn solid high picks into other assets. You don't let them walk away for nothing, and the Bulls petty and pathetic actions (pulling a contract off the table that Ben wanted to sign just before the 08 training camp) made zero compensation a realistic possibility. That's exactly what happened.

In the Paxson era:
Crawford -> Used to clear out bad contracts
Curry -> #2 and #9 picks
Chandler -> Contract dump (2nd rounder + Adrian Griffin), though NO can't move him for an expiring contract now.
Hinrich -> On extension
Gordon -> Left for nothing
Deng -> On extension
Tyrus -> On team
Thabo -> 1st rounder -> Taj Gibson
Noah -> On Team
Rose -> On Team

So what are you complaining about?
10 1st rounders on the team in the Paxson era:
5: Still on the team
2: Traded for future 1st round picks that were at least as great or greater than their value
1: Used to dump bad salary off the team
1: Dumped himself as bad salary after signing extension
1: Leaft for nothing with no purpose whatsoever

9 of those 10 draft picks are either:
1) On the team
2) Moved in such a way where the Bulls got full market value or better for the player

I made it clear I just wasn't talking about the Paxson era. I've been a defender of Pax. But frankly, the best player during the vast majority of that era just walked out the door, so as of JULY 2009, one second round playoff appearance doesn't impress me. Pax did sign Chandler to that ridiculous contract that no one seems to want now. But let's get back to the point.

The majority of All Stars in this league are picked in the top 5 slots of the NBA draft. For example, 8 of the 10 starters in this past year's game were top 5 picks. I can't think of a team with more than 4 top 5 picks in the past 10 years other than the Bulls. (We've had 8).

And yet, AS OF JULY 2009, this organization managed to turn the first 7 of those top-4 picks into Tyrus Thomas and J. Noah. Have the Spurs or Lakers had 1 top-10 pick in the last 10 years? That's the difference between a great organization (Lakers, Spurs) and an incredibly pathetic and incompetent one. (The Bulls)

And now we've put our team in the hands of Gar Forman, who was hired by the man (Krause) most responsible for this debacle over the past 10 years. We have only one player now (Rose) truly desired by the majority of teams in this league. He came to us because of the 1.7% lottery ball.

The Bulls have had EVERY conceivable economic advantage over most of the teams in this league. We acquired Miller and Salmons primarily because of this advantage, taking advantage of team looking to dump salaries. Despite these advantages and many high draft picks, we have little to show for it.

My complaint: Based on what I've seen over the past 10 years, I have no faith in Reinsdorf and Forman to build a championship caliber team around Rose. And based on what we've seen in the past week, what would possibly lead you to believe that this assertion is wrong?

 

[Shakes]

The Clippers (hardly who you want to be compared to mind you!) have had 5 top 5 picks in the last decade (Odom, Miles, Chandler, Livingston and Griffin) and as far as I'm aware they now have zero to show for the first 4.

So I guess it could be worse ...

 

[Fred]

houheffna wrote:

I can understand the frustration but I don't get the Clippers comparison either. But this is not the first time I have heard that. Simply put, The Bulls are one of the premier franchises in sports and the Clippers are routinely seen as the worse. And the contributions Reinsdorf has made to professional sports, just from the standpoint of civil rights and diversity, puts him apart from Mr. Sterling.

How many African-American GM's have the Bulls had? Mr. Sterling had one from 1986 until 2008. When it comes to the basketball, Sterling has walked the walk. I could care less what Reinsdorf has done with the White Sox.

The Bulls were only one of the great franchises from the time Jordan arrived until the time he retired.

 

[Dpauley23]

Why does it matter that Sterling hired African American for the job? Elgin Baylor is right up there with worst gm ever in the league with Isiah Thomas.

 

[Shakes]

Fred wrote:

My complaint: Based on what I've seen over the past 10 years, I have no faith in Reinsdorf and Forman to build a championship caliber team around Rose. And based on what we've seen in the past week, what would possibly lead you to believe that this assertion is wrong?

Remember that people were calling Mitch Kupchak "Mitch Cupcake" and Lakers fans were pretty vocal in their hatred for him after the Shaq trade (and the awful follow up trade of Butler for Kwame). Even Kobe was openly against the guy.

The thing is if Rose turns out to be a superstar of the calibre of Kobe or Duncan then the Bulls will have the sort of situation that the Lakers and Spurs have had. It's a hell of a lot easier to build a team if you already have the super-dooper star in place.

I for one am a lot more worried that Rose wont become a super-dooper star than I am about what we'll do if he does.

 

[houheffna]

How many African-American GM's have the Bulls had? Mr. Sterling had one from 1986 until 2008. When it comes to the basketball, Sterling has walked the walk. I could care less what Reinsdorf has done with the White Sox.

The Bulls were only one of the great franchises from the time Jordan arrived until the time he retired.

Mr. Sterling and Mr. Reinsdorf have nothing in common. Reinsdorf has been adamant in both leagues for equal employment opportunity and diversity and has been cited by both commissioners because of it. You could care less about what he did for the White Sox but baseball and basketball represent major sports organizations in this country. He has walked the walk many times over.

As a black man who finds it hard to get a job, especially in corporate America, I don't discount what he does for one team as opposed to another. Did you not read about the corporate position he created for Randy Brown?

The Bulls to this day are considered one of the most prestigious sports franchises and one of the most recognizable sports franchises in the world. Which explains their ability to sell tickets and merchandise. I am sorry but one free agency signing, which in my view is clearly justified, does not show Reinsdorf to be anything else but a shrewd owner. I have no problem with that.

Why does it matter that Sterling hired African American for the job? Elgin Baylor is right up there with worst gm ever in the league with Isiah Thomas.

It matters because opportunity MUST be there. That is why the NFL, NBA, and MLB have put forth certain rules and regulations that will steer more teams to hire minorities for coaching and corporate positions. NBA has done well, MLB is getting better and the NFL is far behind. When someone who doesn't have to and who is not black steps up to the plate and asks for more minorities to be interviewed and hired for positions in sports, I find that commendable, and in some instances groundbreaking.

 

[Diddy1122]

houheffna wrote:

How many African-American GM's have the Bulls had? Mr. Sterling had one from 1986 until 2008. When it comes to the basketball, Sterling has walked the walk. I could care less what Reinsdorf has done with the White Sox.

The Bulls were only one of the great franchises from the time Jordan arrived until the time he retired.

Mr. Sterling and Mr. Reinsdorf have nothing in common. Reinsdorf has been adamant in both leagues for equal employment opportunity and diversity and has been cited by both commissioners because of it. You could care less about what he did for the White Sox but baseball and basketball represent major sports organizations in this country. He has walked the walk many times over.

As a black man who finds it hard to get a job, especially in corporate America, I don't discount what he does for one team as opposed to another. Did you not read about the corporate position he created for Randy Brown?

The Bulls to this day are considered one of the most prestigious sports franchises and one of the most recognizable sports franchises in the world. Which explains their ability to sell tickets and merchandise. I am sorry but one free agency signing, which in my view is clearly justified, does not show Reinsdorf to be anything else but a shrewd owner. I have no problem with that.

Why does it matter that Sterling hired African American for the job? Elgin Baylor is right up there with worst gm ever in the league with Isiah Thomas.

It matters because opportunity MUST be there. That is why the NFL, NBA, and MLB have put forth certain rules and regulations that will steer more teams to hire minorities for coaching and corporate positions. NBA has done well, MLB is getting better and the NFL is far behind. When someone who doesn't have to and who is not black steps up to the plate and asks for more minorities to be interviewed and hired for positions in sports, I find that commendable, and in some instances groundbreaking.

How the heck did this turn into Reinsdorf becoming the champion of all races? Who cares if he's an equal opportunity employer? The fact still remains that he's beyond shrewd, he's a downright penny pincher when it comes to the Bulls, the most profitable bball franchise over the past 10yrs.

If you haven't read Doug's well done article about Reinsdorf, you should.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chi...fact-or-fiction-jerry-reinsdorf-is-cheap.html

Plain & Simple, the Bulls have been a cash cow since Jordan. They've made more profit than any other team post-Jordan. They were atrocious from 98-04 yet still were in the top 3 in attendance in the league. If Jerry truly cared about winning & brining a championship back here, the LT would be an afterthought. It's always dicey bringing up his White Sox spending because there's no salary cap in baseball, but he has proven over the years to have no problems in taking on or giving big salaries to win a World Series. When it comes to the franchise that has made him more money than anything else, he's checking hotel room service receipts.

 

[houheffna]

The part about diversity was showing him as someone of character, not just some beast that owns a team with no conscience as he is portrayed at times on this forum, largely because he didnt resign a one-dimensional undersized SG.

What moves would you have liked to see the Bulls make that they didn't make because of his penny pinching? Give me some examples over the past 10 years.

 

[Rerisen]

Deng for Gasol.

Shot down by J.R. due to money concerns.

Followed by this the 2nd time we had a chance at him.

"We had conversations with Chicago which were non-satisfactory," Heisley said in the Commercial-Appeal. "They didn't want to take on the luxury-tax situation and Los Angeles was. In this league, if you're in a big-market area you can afford to do those things.

 

[Diddy1122]

Rerisen wrote:

Deng for Gasol.

Shot down by J.R. due to money concerns.

Followed by this the 2nd time we had a chance at him.

"We had conversations with Chicago which were non-satisfactory," Heisley said in the Commercial-Appeal. "They didn't want to take on the luxury-tax situation and Los Angeles was. In this league, if you're in a big-market area you can afford to do those things.

See? Heisley gets it. Why doesn't Reinsdork?

 

[houheffna]

Reinsdorf felt that Gasol was not a good enough player to go over the luxury tax, he was more than willing to go over the luxury tax for better players but not Gasol. I disliked it at the time, but I don't think the Bulls would have gotten much farther if they had Gasol. Reinsdorf was willing for the right players but not for Gasol. That was a judgment call but he has been consistent in this philosophy. I personally wanted Gasol, somebody, but at the time, that was Reinsdorf's decision.

How the heck did this turn into Reinsdorf becoming the champion of all races? Who cares if he's an equal opportunity employer? The fact still remains that he's beyond shrewd, he's a downright penny pincher when it comes to the Bulls, the most profitable bball franchise over the past 10yrs.

The same way that Gordon is a "good citizen" who doesn't cause any problems, so is Reinsdorf, we vilify and want to kill the owner but while we are handing out halos, I thought Reinsdorf should get some props for going beyond the call of duty also.

 

[Hendu0520]

Great episode Fred. I think not signing Ben Gordon is a mistake, not getting Gasol for Deng, Trading Chandler for P.J. Brown and J.R. Smith and we traded JR to Denver for cash I think. Lately we are slightly upper/middle of the pack in salary, but as Doug and Fred both point out Chicago is the 3rd largest market why are we middle of the pack with salaries? And as far as the draft we might have drafted well but half of them were lost for nothing so there again Reinsdorf and his GM's have all been mediocre. Mediocre as we all know does not win championships.

As for the previous 10 yrs he was even worse. Look at Scottie Pippen's salaries throughout the 90's he never got paid by Reinsdorf! 2million was his largest salary with the Bulls and as soon as he signed with the Rockets he quadrupled his salary, that is outrageous! 2 years Jordan made 30 and 33 million other than those 2 years Reinsdorf did not have any outrageous or high contracts. For years Jordan wasn't even the highest paid player in the league, it was absolutely horrible. And maybe Jordan and Jackson don't leave if it weren't for Krause and Reinsdorf thinking giving 33 million and Jordan getting injured would be a bad move in hine sight. That is just a rediculous statement after Jordan made him millions if not billions of dollars over the years, one year not winning and Jordan getting injured would not have been a waste! Also Krause was quoted after drafting Jordan that "he doesn't expect this Jordan kid to come in and turn the team around, that would be expecting too much, we would have drafted a Center if one was available." Meaning Reinsdorf and Krause would have picked Sam Bowie if they had the 2nd pick in the draft and they would have never won anything an be considered one of the worst franchises ever!

Lastly, Sports franchises are part of the entertainment industry. This isn't his Newspaper or a Hotel it is a Basketball Team. He doesn't own the team outright per say, the City of Chicago is represented by the team and therefore the fans of said City should be able to voice their opinions on how he is running the team. Chicago is on the uniform.
He may be a great business man but that is not my concern and does not help me any. Actually him being a good business man is now hurting me so I don't like it. Maybe that is a selfish view but as a fan I can not sit and say it's ok not to spend money on the team because that's what any smart and greedy person would do, please. I could care less if he is making money as long as my team is good and winning. Winning is always the bottom line to fans.