MJs speach

[Newskoolbulls]

I dont get it. I am the type of guy who doesnt like to hold grudges, MJ should have just ended his grudge with JK and said thank you to him and even explain that he had his differences, similar to what he did with Tex. Also MLE old do you think I am since your always taking shots at me like I am a little boy.

 

[houheffna]

It takes smart management and spending money. You can't just throw money at crap and expect to win. But when you aren't willing to pay the luxury tax for Pau Gasol, you're franchise isn't probably going to be one that wins a championship unless you luck into a guy....like the GOAT.

Of all examples, the Gasol situation has nothing to do with any organizational ineptitude concerning winning championships. That was actually the right decision...

 

[Newskoolbulls]

There were mixed feelings after Michael Jordan's acceptance speech at the Naismith Hall of Fame on Friday.

Some, including Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo! Sports, felt as though Jordan's speech was "petty."

Jordan took shots at former Bulls general manager Jerry Krause, ignored long-time trainer Tim Glover and admonished Jeff Van Gundy and Byron Russell for their insignificance.

Even when touching on his family, Jordan said: "I wouldn't want to be you guys."

A high-ranking team executive believes that Jordan is the only one who could get away with a speech like the one he made.

"That's who Michael is," the executive told Yahoo! Sports. "It wasn't like he was out of character. There's no one else who could've gotten away with what he did tonight. But it was Michael, and everyone just goes along."

Added a Hall of Famer after the festivities: "M.J. was introduced as the greatest player ever and he's still standing there trying to settle scores."

 

[TheStig]

??? ?????? wrote:

TheStig wrote:

??? ?????? wrote:

TheStig wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Newskoolbulls wrote:

I loved it all except for his talk on Krause. He could have sqaushed it and made it good but no he had to take shots at him. Krause never said organizations win championships he said they were a big part of it. I cant believe how hated Krause is when Phil Jackson was a bigger dick than him. Krause is a legend for what he did and I hope he one day gets inducted. I also didnt like the freeze out talk in the all-star game, George Gervin looked upset.

Gotta disagree with ya NSB, I loved the way he called out Krause. Little bum.

Krause did say that organizations win championships. He said it at the start of training camp in 1997, right before the "Last Dance."

Krause is a jackass that let his ego get the best of him. He was so confident that he could build a title team without Jordan. How did that work out? Badly.

As for the freeze out, they did it to the best player ever and they got called out. It was all part of his motivation talk. It was great.

I didn't hear the speech but Krause is right. Organizations do win championships, espically in this league. Just not his. Look at the Lakers and Celtics, they have won more rings than all the other teams combined. How many noncompetitive lakers teams do you remember in the last 30 years? A couple here, a couple there? Sorry but Organizations do win rings.

Now Krause in his case was wrong because his team didn't do anything past the dynasty but in general they do.

Krause should have expanded that to organizations willing to pay to keep their good players win championships.

They weren't the only teams willing to pay. The knicks have had the highest payroll for the last 4-5 yrs and can't even get into the playoffs. I am sure others have out spent them. But the fact that the lakers got stars from elsewhere. Kareem, Oscar, Shaq, Kobe, and Gasol all came from other teams. The Celtics were more home grown but the Lakers really get business done. It really is organizations, espically before the bulls dynasty.

It takes smart management and spending money. You can't just throw money at crap and expect to win. But when you aren't willing to pay the luxury tax for Pau Gasol, you're franchise isn't probably going to be one that wins a championship unless you luck into a guy....like the GOAT.

Exactly, hats off to the Lakers organization. They do everything they can to maximize their financial, location and management advantage. The lakers have continually been good and will be good. Its no wonder that half the teams in the league haven't won a ring. I mean look at the current makeup of the league, all the contenders either drafted a top 10 player or are the lakers or celtics. If MJ wouldn't have come here, we would be like the blackhawks a few years ago.

 

[fola]

houheffna wrote:

I never thought I would see the day that Rickey Henderson would give a classier speech than Jordan...

ya know... i totally agree.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

It takes smart management and spending money. You can't just throw money at crap and expect to win. But when you aren't willing to pay the luxury tax for Pau Gasol, you're franchise isn't probably going to be one that wins a championship unless you luck into a guy....like the GOAT.

Of all examples, the Gasol situation has nothing to do with any organizational ineptitude concerning winning championships. That was actually the right decision...

Its called dumb luck for a reason. Unless you say the 1.7% chance panning out the whole way.

 

[??? ??????]

houheffna wrote:

It takes smart management and spending money. You can't just throw money at crap and expect to win. But when you aren't willing to pay the luxury tax for Pau Gasol, you're franchise isn't probably going to be one that wins a championship unless you luck into a guy....like the GOAT.

Of all examples, the Gasol situation has nothing to do with any organizational ineptitude concerning winning championships. That was actually the right decision...

There is nothing about a capped out team not trading for Pau Gasol that can be seen as the right decision.

The Bulls got Derrick Rose, but that was purely from dumb luck.

 

[houheffna]

There is nothing about a capped out team not trading for Pau Gasol that can be seen as the right decision.

The Bulls got Derrick Rose, but that was purely from dumb luck.

Luck is part of the game. You want to give Rose back and take Gasol? I don't think so. Gasol is not a good enough player to make the Chicago Bulls a championship team even when they were at their best. That is why they didn't make that move.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

There is nothing about a capped out team not trading for Pau Gasol that can be seen as the right decision.

The Bulls got Derrick Rose, but that was purely from dumb luck.

Luck is part of the game. You want to give Rose back and take Gasol? I don't think so. Gasol is not a good enough player to make the Chicago Bulls a championship team even when they were at their best. That is why they didn't make that move.

So I take it you don't pay your bills and buy lottery tickets instead? Thats about the same situation and relying on that slim chance is dumb and it certainly wasn't their game plan. I think you fail to see that getting Rose was a freak accident and really defied all odds.

Why wouldn't we have had a chance at a ring with adding a 20/10 pf? PF was our weakest position. We would have upgraded it to our best position. We probably don't beat Boston, but we are in the ecf. Going forward into this year, I don't see why we wouldn't have had a chance at a ring. The lakers wouldn't have won it without Gasol and we would have had a shot against Cleavland and Orlando.

 

[houheffna]

Gasol cannot be the best player on a championship team, he is not good enough for that. You still don't beat the Heat in '06 or the Pistons in '07 because they were far superior without Gasol and still would have been if Gasol had landed in Chicago.

What do you mean by accident, the Bulls got Rose by accident? The league rules intentionally set it up so that non-lottery teams are put into the lottery to possibly get a chance at the top pick...by accident. Which means the Bulls had less than a 2% chance of getting Rose...by accident. Someone had to win the lottery. A certain amount of luck is needed for every team involved. The intentions are that a team wins the lottery...so winning is an incident, the Bulls happened to win, that is not an accident. The accident talk doesn't make sense to me, neither does "dumb luck" you either lucky or you ain't.

By the way, the Lakers wouldn't have won it without Gasol is like saying the Bulls wouldn't have won without Pippen or the Heat wouldn't have won without Shaq. The point is that neither Pippen, Shaq (at that point in his career) or Gasol were the best players on their team. Gasol would have been the best player on the Bulls by far, and that is not good enough to beat Lebron or Orlando or Detroit.

 

[??? ??????]

Pau Gasol could have been the best player on a championship player if paired with Ben Gordon, and one other legitimate player.

The trade would have left the team, something like:

PG-Kirk Hinrich/Chris Duhon
SG-Ben Gordon/
SF-Luol Deng/Andres Nocioni
PF-Pau Gasol/Joe Smith
C- Joakim Noah/Ben Wallace

If you leverage Ben Wallace's expiring contract properly (which would have been this year), and sign some quality players to the MLE, you could build a team that has a chance at competing.

Ben Gordon might not be a legitimate superstar or anything of that nature, but if you put him on the strong side, while posting up Gasol, he would put up 25 PPG easily.

 

[houheffna]

Don't think so.

First the trade was to happen in 2007 at the trade deadline so Noah more than likely would not be in the picture, neither would Rose, who will be a better player than Gasol. I would rather have Rose and take a chance on someone in the future, like 2010 than be stuck with Gasol and Gordon anyday. That team does not beat Lebron, Orlando or Garnett's Celtics.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

Don't think so.

First the trade was to happen in 2007 at the trade deadline so Noah more than likely would not be in the picture, neither would Rose, who will be a better player than Gasol. I would rather have Rose and take a chance on someone in the future, like 2010 than be stuck with Gasol and Gordon anyday. That team does not beat Lebron, Orlando or Garnett's Celtics.

Gasol was traded in 2008 not 2007. Noah was on the roster and would not have been included. The lakers gave up scraps and bums for him. No one was asking for anything close to a lottery pick. It would have been a deal that would be PJ Brown, Joe Smith and Thabo. Maybe a protected first. That team doesn't beat any of those teams a 100% but it is easily top 4 in the east and has a strong 7 games against each of them. I wouldn't rule them out, I'd give them 50/50 shot. Espically if we still got Miller/Salmons deal sone.

 

[mlewinth]

TheStig wrote:

houheffna wrote:

Don't think so.

First the trade was to happen in 2007 at the trade deadline so Noah more than likely would not be in the picture, neither would Rose, who will be a better player than Gasol. I would rather have Rose and take a chance on someone in the future, like 2010 than be stuck with Gasol and Gordon anyday. That team does not beat Lebron, Orlando or Garnett's Celtics.

Gasol was traded in 2008 not 2007. Noah was on the roster and would not have been included. The lakers gave up scraps and bums for him. No one was asking for anything close to a lottery pick. It would have been a deal that would be PJ Brown, Joe Smith and Thabo. Maybe a protected first. That team doesn't beat any of those teams a 100% but it is easily top 4 in the east and has a strong 7 games against each of them. I wouldn't rule them out, I'd give them 50/50 shot. Espically if we still got Miller/Salmons deal sone.

If the argument here is should we of gotten Gasol, my thought is 100%, unequivically NO! Look ,say what you want about John Paxsons, "patientce" when it comes to making trades, but I have to give them credit in terms of managing their cap space. If the Bulls got Gasol they would of been capped out. That team would not of been a top eastern conference team, let alone a championship calibur team. THe best player on our team would of been PAU GASOL! Granted we had a better "team" surrounding him than LeBron, Dwight (at the time), Wade, those stars alone may make their respective teams better than us with Gasol and with nothing else, the second you put anyone around those other stars, they beat us.

We were in a pretty shitty situation 2 years ago. Our team sucked. We had no stars. Everyone was comming up for new contracts. We werent good enough to attract free agents and honestly, even if we were, what big free agents have switched area codes in the last 2 years....maybe just Garnett, who was 32 when he was traded. DRose dropping into our laps changed everything. The basketball gods were upon us and next season D WADE baby!

 

[mlewinth]

TheStig wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Newskoolbulls wrote:

I loved it all except for his talk on Krause. He could have sqaushed it and made it good but no he had to take shots at him. Krause never said organizations win championships he said they were a big part of it. I cant believe how hated Krause is when Phil Jackson was a bigger dick than him. Krause is a legend for what he did and I hope he one day gets inducted. I also didnt like the freeze out talk in the all-star game, George Gervin looked upset.

Gotta disagree with ya NSB, I loved the way he called out Krause. Little bum.

Krause did say that organizations win championships. He said it at the start of training camp in 1997, right before the "Last Dance."

Krause is a jackass that let his ego get the best of him. He was so confident that he could build a title team without Jordan. How did that work out? Badly.

As for the freeze out, they did it to the best player ever and they got called out. It was all part of his motivation talk. It was great.

I didn't hear the speech but Krause is right. Organizations do win championships, espically in this league. Just not his. Look at the Lakers and Celtics, they have won more rings than all the other teams combined. How many noncompetitive lakers teams do you remember in the last 30 years? A couple here, a couple there? Sorry but Organizations do win rings.

Now Krause in his case was wrong because his team didn't do anything past the dynasty but in general they do.

It is defiantly a combination of both the organization and the players, but it still goes 80/20 players. 90% of the teams who win championships do so on the heels of some draft pick that they made. Almost always either those picks were "obvious choices" (EX: LeBron, Rose), or they were complete dumb luck (EX: Scottie Pippen, Kobe Bryant) Ask Jerry West who he feels deserves the credit for the Lakers recent success? Sure he forsaw talent in Kobe Bryant, but I have no doubt that Jerry was just making a trade that he felt improved the team when he went after the 13th pick and had no idea that Kobe would be a MVP and one of the best 2 guards ever. If Kobe didn't become "insane Kobe", these last 4 titles don't happen.

Putting together teams is alot of dumb luck. GM's can make any projection they want to make, but the players still need to go out there and have the will to compete. The players are who at the end of the day puts the teams on their backs and wins championships.

 

[??? ??????]

TheStig wrote:

houheffna wrote:

Don't think so.

First the trade was to happen in 2007 at the trade deadline so Noah more than likely would not be in the picture, neither would Rose, who will be a better player than Gasol. I would rather have Rose and take a chance on someone in the future, like 2010 than be stuck with Gasol and Gordon anyday. That team does not beat Lebron, Orlando or Garnett's Celtics.

Gasol was traded in 2008 not 2007. Noah was on the roster and would not have been included. The lakers gave up scraps and bums for him. No one was asking for anything close to a lottery pick. It would have been a deal that would be PJ Brown, Joe Smith and Thabo. Maybe a protected first. That team doesn't beat any of those teams a 100% but it is easily top 4 in the east and has a strong 7 games against each of them. I wouldn't rule them out, I'd give them 50/50 shot. Espically if we still got Miller/Salmons deal sone.

It was a sign and traded PJ Brown, Tyrus Thomas, and some draft picks.

 

[??? ??????]

mlewinth wrote:

TheStig wrote:

houheffna wrote:

Don't think so.

First the trade was to happen in 2007 at the trade deadline so Noah more than likely would not be in the picture, neither would Rose, who will be a better player than Gasol. I would rather have Rose and take a chance on someone in the future, like 2010 than be stuck with Gasol and Gordon anyday. That team does not beat Lebron, Orlando or Garnett's Celtics.

Gasol was traded in 2008 not 2007. Noah was on the roster and would not have been included. The lakers gave up scraps and bums for him. No one was asking for anything close to a lottery pick. It would have been a deal that would be PJ Brown, Joe Smith and Thabo. Maybe a protected first. That team doesn't beat any of those teams a 100% but it is easily top 4 in the east and has a strong 7 games against each of them. I wouldn't rule them out, I'd give them 50/50 shot. Espically if we still got Miller/Salmons deal sone.

If the argument here is should we of gotten Gasol, my thought is 100%, unequivically NO! Look ,say what you want about John Paxsons, "patientce" when it comes to making trades, but I have to give them credit in terms of managing their cap space. If the Bulls got Gasol they would of been capped out. That team would not of been a top eastern conference team, let alone a championship calibur team. THe best player on our team would of been PAU GASOL! Granted we had a better "team" surrounding him than LeBron, Dwight (at the time), Wade, those stars alone may make their respective teams better than us with Gasol and with nothing else, the second you put anyone around those other stars, they beat us.

We were in a pretty shitty situation 2 years ago. Our team sucked. We had no stars. Everyone was comming up for new contracts. We werent good enough to attract free agents and honestly, even if we were, what big free agents have switched area codes in the last 2 years....maybe just Garnett, who was 32 when he was traded. DRose dropping into our laps changed everything. The basketball gods were upon us and next season D WADE baby!

We were already capped out in 2008. Gasol just would have sent us into the luxury tax, which was a big no no for the Bulls organization.

 

[Riker]

Newskoolbulls wrote:

There were mixed feelings after Michael Jordan's acceptance speech at the Naismith Hall of Fame on Friday.

Some, including Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo! Sports, felt as though Jordan's speech was "petty."

Jordan took shots at former Bulls general manager Jerry Krause, ignored long-time trainer Tim Glover and admonished Jeff Van Gundy and Byron Russell for their insignificance.

Even when touching on his family, Jordan said: "I wouldn't want to be you guys."

A high-ranking team executive believes that Jordan is the only one who could get away with a speech like the one he made.

"That's who Michael is," the executive told Yahoo! Sports. "It wasn't like he was out of character. There's no one else who could've gotten away with what he did tonight. But it was Michael, and everyone just goes along."

Added a Hall of Famer after the festivities: "M.J. was introduced as the greatest player ever and he's still standing there trying to settle scores."

Who is Tim Glover? Get your facts straight smartass. Why are you such a schmuck that you misinterpret "I wouldn't want to be you guys" he said to his family. Are you Special person? Or you just can't grasp the context of that sentence? You didn't hear him mention "high expectations" right after? Of course you didn't.

Go salivate over Jordan Rules...at first I thought you might be one of those internet lost causes, now I know you're a lost cause.

Yeah, you're a real genius, he dissed Krause, he dissed a guy who tried to get rid of Pippen TWICE during their championship years.



This is amazing, some people on this forum........why are you so frustrated? Go outside...breathe

 

[houheffna]

Riker...two points

1. Those were a sports journalists statements. That is Newskool's fault for not putting them in proper quotation and then citing the author as he should have.

2. You are the one who seems frustrated. Everything you say is vitriolic. That is very unnecessary.

 

[TheStig]

??? ?????? wrote:

mlewinth wrote:

TheStig wrote:

houheffna wrote:

Don't think so.

First the trade was to happen in 2007 at the trade deadline so Noah more than likely would not be in the picture, neither would Rose, who will be a better player than Gasol. I would rather have Rose and take a chance on someone in the future, like 2010 than be stuck with Gasol and Gordon anyday. That team does not beat Lebron, Orlando or Garnett's Celtics.

Gasol was traded in 2008 not 2007. Noah was on the roster and would not have been included. The lakers gave up scraps and bums for him. No one was asking for anything close to a lottery pick. It would have been a deal that would be PJ Brown, Joe Smith and Thabo. Maybe a protected first. That team doesn't beat any of those teams a 100% but it is easily top 4 in the east and has a strong 7 games against each of them. I wouldn't rule them out, I'd give them 50/50 shot. Espically if we still got Miller/Salmons deal sone.

If the argument here is should we of gotten Gasol, my thought is 100%, unequivically NO! Look ,say what you want about John Paxsons, "patientce" when it comes to making trades, but I have to give them credit in terms of managing their cap space. If the Bulls got Gasol they would of been capped out. That team would not of been a top eastern conference team, let alone a championship calibur team. THe best player on our team would of been PAU GASOL! Granted we had a better "team" surrounding him than LeBron, Dwight (at the time), Wade, those stars alone may make their respective teams better than us with Gasol and with nothing else, the second you put anyone around those other stars, they beat us.

We were in a pretty shitty situation 2 years ago. Our team sucked. We had no stars. Everyone was comming up for new contracts. We werent good enough to attract free agents and honestly, even if we were, what big free agents have switched area codes in the last 2 years....maybe just Garnett, who was 32 when he was traded. DRose dropping into our laps changed everything. The basketball gods were upon us and next season D WADE baby!

We were already capped out in 2008. Gasol just would have sent us into the luxury tax, which was a big no no for the Bulls organization.

Exactly, it would have been a one time luxury tax payment. The only time we will have cap space is next year and its not even clear atm if we could sign a max fa unless Salmons opts out. 2010 looks like its going to be a bust for everyone but maybe Miami. Look at the 2000 offseason with Tim Duncan, Grant Hill and Tmac all being on the fa market. TD stayed and both the stars went to one team in a good climate.