Source: Bulls stayed active in Howard talks

[houheffna]

You agree? THEY HAVNT WON A GOD DAMN THING BECAUSE OF THE DECISIONS OF THIS CHEAP MOTHERFUCKN BASEBALL LOVER. THE FACT THAT THEY HAVNT EVEN SNIFFED THE FINALS IS A DIRECT INDICATION THAT EVERY DECISION THEYVE MADE HAS BEEN WRONG. HIM AND HIS BUFFON/HENCHMAN GAR/PAX

Why do you keep saying Jordan wasn't a winner? WTF

Right...and everybody would have been soooooooooooooooo happy with Jamal Crawford and Elton Brand along with Tyson Chandler...although you don't get Tyson Chandler unless you trade Elton Brand...you seem to lack common sense.

Which brings me to the "Jordan wasn't a winner" thing....YOU SAID THAT! And you recanted after everybody told you that you were a certified card carrying idiot. Too late. That and the Charles Barkley should have been a 6'4" small forward are some of the dumbest statements I ever heard about NBA basketball. Just showing how much you lack credibility when it comes to the NBA. You don't seem to know what you are talking about.

 

[Crystallas]

What I have learned from this thread:

97Bulls wants us to be more like the Knicks(Alan Houston, Eddie Curry), the Bulk of us want to be more like the Spurs(contender, win championships).

 

[97Bulls]

Right...and everybody would have been soooooooooooooooo happy with Jamal Crawford and Elton Brand along with Tyson Chandler...although you don't get Tyson Chandler unless you trade Elton Brand...you seem to lack common sense.

Which brings me to the "Jordan wasn't a winner" thing....YOU SAID THAT! And you recanted after everybody told you that you were a certified card carrying idiot. Too late. That and the Charles Barkley should have been a 6'4" small forward are some of the dumbest statements I ever heard about NBA basketball. Just showing how much you lack credibility when it comes to the NBA. You don't seem to know what you are talking about.

If you read that interview I linked with Elton Brand. He said the clippers didnt want Tyson Chandler, they wanted Eddy Curry. But obviously were more enamored withh getting Brand cuz Krause was willing to trade him in an effort to get what was projected as the next Shaq (Curry) and the next KG (Chamdler).


Ok now I remember. You took that statement out of context. I stated that in reply to people who said Jordan made Pippen. And that Pippen wasnt a winner. And I replied that Jordan wasnt a winner without Pippen either.

As far as Barkley? Yes i do feel he wouldve been better suited as a SF because he was extremely athletic. He was a PF because he was always fat and out of shape. I kinda likened Barkley to Adrian Dantley. At 6'4, he was just too short. So when i say that, I meant defensively

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

So again I ask the question. Is he supposed to go over the cap or not? Ive been told by alot of Bulls fans that they believe Reinsdorf will go over the cap for a winner? Wheres the fine line? Either your all in or your not. How many teams could compete wwith that Roster that i mentioned that includes Bynum.

pretty sure if the bulls went all in on bynum for a long term max contract(meaning they probably go upwards of 18 mil over the luxury if they were to retain the other contracts) they would end up paying 38 million(because of the harsher rules in 2013-2014)

after 2013-2014, the repeat offender rule is added

so the first year the bulls would pay around 38 mil a year in luxury tax(estimation basing on the bull's current situation, and adding in bynum with minimal changes)

in 2014-2015 with those rules in place, i think they pay around 37-40 million the next year..and the same thing in 2014-2015

in 2015-2016, if the bulls were at the same level in the luxury tax..they would pay 37-40 million again

in 2016-2017,if they were still at the same level over the cap because of bynum and other commitments, they would pay 57 million

i would assume that bynum wants at least a 5-6 year deal..if not more

last year 6 teams were over the luxury tax, only the lakers were more than 10 over..and a bit of that is because of kobe's contract

if the bulls get bynum once his contract expires and retain the rest of the roster, the bulls would be paying around 38 mil a year, and that's pretty nice rounding

and yes, i understand that contracts like deng's and boozers are expiring...but then comes the problem of trying to dump/trade them for assets. Sure, an expiring contract is enticing, but you have to find the right teams that are looking to rebuild and want to give up certain assets..and if those teams are rebuilding, what do you expect as a return?

and then you have rose's escalating contract to worry about as well

on top of all of this, if the bulls are trying to get bynum next year, how could they outright sign him if they are over the cap?....i dont think bynum constitutes any of the exceptions

it would have to be a sign and trade, i think...so i think it would be virtually impossible to have bynum,noah,rose,deng,etc. on the team

and that brings up the question...what do the sixers want? deng and noah maybe? now that's a thought...

 

[97Bulls]

What I have learned from this thread:

97Bulls wants us to be more like the Knicks(Alan Houston, Eddie Curry), the Bulk of us want to be more like the Spurs(contender, win championships).

Then youve learned nothing.

The whole premise is that if the Bulls want to win, theyre gonna have to spend money. Big money. What you want is for the Bulls to build through finding diamond in the rough players that evolve into allstar top five type players, but only want to pay them enough money to buy gas to drive to the game. It just doesnt work that way bro.

 

[97Bulls]

pretty sure if the bulls went all in on bynum for a long term max contract(meaning they probably go upwards of 18 mil over the luxury if they were to retain the other contracts) they would end up paying 38 million(because of the harsher rules in 2013-2014)

after 2013-2014, the repeat offender rule is added

so the first year the bulls would pay around 38 mil a year in luxury tax(estimation basing on the bull's current situation, and adding in bynum with minimal changes)

in 2014-2015 with those rules in place, i think they pay around 37-40 million the next year..and the same thing in 2014-2015

in 2015-2016, if the bulls were at the same level in the luxury tax..they would pay 37-40 million again

in 2016-2017,if they were still at the same level over the cap because of bynum and other commitments, they would pay 57 million

i would assume that bynum wants at least a 5-6 year deal..if not more

last year 6 teams were over the luxury tax, only the lakers were more than 10 over..and a bit of that is because of kobe's contract

if the bulls get bynum once his contract expires and retain the rest of the roster, the bulls would be paying around 38 mil a year, and that's pretty nice rounding
?
and yes, i understand that contracts like deng's and boozers are expiring...but then comes the problem of trying to dump/trade them for assets. Sure, an expiring contract is enticing, but you have to find the right teams that are looking to rebuild and want to give up certain assets..and if those teams are rebuilding, what do you expect as a return?

and then you have rose's escalating contract to worry about as well

on top of all of this, if the bulls are trying to get bynum next year, how could they outright sign him if they are over the cap?....i dont think bynum constitutes any of the exceptions

it would have to be a sign and trade, i think...so i think it would be virtually impossible to have bynum,noah,rose,deng,etc. on the team

and that brings up the question...what do the sixers want? deng and noah maybe? now that's a thought...

Once again, youre centering your post around money. Arent you guys saying Reinsdorf will do whatever it takes to court a contender? Or is it he wil do what it take providing that it doesnt cost him more money than he wants to spend.

I say this because your post doesnt sound like your confident he will go well into the luxery tax to get a winner

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

There's only a handful of players like that in the league though. Kobe...Wade...Kevin Martin MAYBE? Who else can drop those numbers every night?

I agree the the issue at the moment lies with overpaying Boozer, Deng, and Noah, but looking at the situations in which they were signed, it's really hard to blame them at the time except for Deng. When Deng signed his contract extension he really had only one healthy year (granted he was like 18-19 and 8 that year playing in every game) and they were thinking that he would be a better player than he ended up being. When you look at the fiasco that was the summer of 2010, we missed out on probably our top 5 FA targets (Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Joe Johnson, and Amare probably) and had to settle for Boozer. Looking at that summer as a whole, most players not named Lebron, Wade, and Bosh (because they took a little less to have a dance party in Miami) got overpaid. Look at Joe Johnson's contract. He's essentially Rashard Lewis, but more productive. Amare's making like 20M a year. Would you really want Amare for 20M? I think Boozer's deal was the cheapest of all of those actually (15M a year ish?). In the context of that summer, Boozer getting paid what he did wasn't really that surprising. The issue is that his production dropped like 4-5 points per game. That's really about it. Boozer averaged around 19-20 points in Utah as the first option playing with DWill. Here he played as the 2nd or 3rd option (in a system that was very different than how he was used in Utah) and only scores like 15 a game. Perhaps I'm not quite the Boozer hater that everyone else is (though I'd still want to amnesty him after this season).

Then you look at Noah. Imo, it's really hard to say that he's massively overpaid. Big men get paid in this league, that's a fact. Even Darko commanded like 5-6M a year. We've been through this several times. Of all our "overpaid" contracts, I think Noah's is the least overpaid of the bunch...or at least closest to the market value. It's really hard to be upset with Noah really. He's a great energy and hustle guy, plays with 110% heart, and is a legit double double kind of player, even if those numbers are just 10 and 11. His defense is great, his offensive rebounding is elite imo...I can't complain that much about Noah at an average of 12M a year or whatever it is.

the issue with boozer was that he was lumped in with 2010 market and so he was looking to get some money off a viable suitor that may miss out on the other big chickens

i mean boozer was coming off a 20 and 11 season at 28 basically, but you had to think he had maybe two really good years left and then a decline because of his injury history and how that coincides and accentuates the fact that he is basically on the downslope of his career

i mean, he has never been the most explosive player, but he looks even less so than he did in utah...he's made that midrange shot his bread and butter,partly because thibs like to pick and pop with boozer, but also because his physical tools are on the decline imo

plus, you have to think that having d will passing to you certainly helps lol

that said, i mean if they hadn't gotten boozer, they basically strike out in 2010..the bulls were a little desperate but considering the circumstances, it's nothing you look at as an awful mistake, unless you're really putting on the hindsight glasses

i think people would be complaining more if the bulls had ended up with some scraps or even nothing in 2010 rather than ending up with boozer

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Once again, youre centering your post around money.

because that's the basis of trades,free agent signings,etc. in the NBA?

if you really want to think about it, most of the money calculations are moot because there's no way the bulls could get that high over the cap by signing bynum because they can't do that..they would have to do a sign and trade

if you want to take it by principle, one of the ideas is that the luxury tax protocol gets a bit worse after this season

if a team was,say,15 over the tax, they pay 15 next season

in 2013-2014, they pay 28.75 million...13.75 million dollar increase

and if they are over the tax three years in a row, it gets much worse

Arent you guys saying Reinsdorf will do whatever it takes to court a contender?.

i'm honestly new to this convo...so what do you mean by "will do whatever it takes"...there are financial boundaries and means to building the team, this isn't about aesthetics or some grandiose crap about "well he will put his life on the line for this team"..thats inane bullshit that has no relevance

i dont think there is much evidence that the bulls want to go over much more over the tax, that's why they've been skirting with some of these deals..but with rose's contract it's tough to avoid it and fill the roster

Or is it he wil do what it take providing that it doesnt cost him more money than he wants to spend.

what exactly do you have in mind?

I say this because your post doesnt sound like your confident he will go well into the luxery tax to get a winner

i dont think i have seen anything about him wanting to go well into the luxury tax, i could be wrong, but when you do consider that the penalties in the luxury tax are getting harsher, it might not be the worst idea.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

You agree? THEY HAVNT WON A GOD DAMN THING BECAUSE OF THE DECISIONS OF THIS CHEAP MOTHERFUCKN BASEBALL LOVER. THE FACT THAT THEY HAVNT EVEN SNIFFED THE FINALS IS A DIRECT INDICATION THAT EVERY DECISION THEYVE MADE HAS BEEN WRONG. HIM AND HIS BUFFON/HENCHMAN GAR/PAX

Why do you keep saying Jordan wasn't a winner? WTF

because you said it first?

 

[FirstTimer]

I guess you could say every decision has been wrong in hindsight. But you look at how the Bulls have spent their money on their own players and you can't necessarily call them totally cheap. If they are overpaying players there must be some willingness to give out money. Paying Boozer as much as they did? Can't call that a cheap move. Paying Luol Deng like they did? Doesn't seem cheap.

Now I'm not saying the Bulls aren't cheap, but in a year like this one, they're really being necessarily cheap because of the overpaid contracts they gave out before.

Things like not wanting to go after Gasol for luxury tax reasons...that's another story (and to some, pure speculation).

Yeah, I wouldn't consider the Bulls cheap. I'd just consider them stupid with big spending.

I've mentioned it before around here. A team like the Knicks can overpay Chandler or whatever when you have guys like Melo and Amare on the team. It's much dumber to overpay Luol Deng, Carlos Boozer, and Joakim Noah when all you basically have is Derrick Rose and are having to face these super star rich teams.

As far as Barkley? Yes i do feel he wouldve been better suited as a SF because he was extremely athletic. He was a PF because he was always fat and out of shape. I kinda likened Barkley to Adrian Dantley. At 6'4, he was just too short. So when i say that, I meant defensively

Wut?!

 

[Scoot26]

So from this thread can we come to an overall agreement at least that the Bulls are stupid when it comes to who to spend money on?

 

[97Bulls]

because that's the basis of trades,free agent signings,etc. in the NBA?

if you really want to think about it, most of the money calculations are moot because there's no way the bulls could get that high over the cap by signing bynum because they can't do that..they would have to do a sign and trade

if you want to take it by principle, one of the ideas is that the luxury tax protocol gets a bit worse after this season

if a team was,say,15 over the tax, they pay 15 next season

in 2013-2014, they pay 28.75 million...13.75 million dollar increase

and if they are over the tax three years in a row, it gets much worse





i'm honestly new to this convo...so what do you mean by "will do whatever it takes"...there are financial boundaries and means to building the team, this isn't about aesthetics or some grandiose crap about "well he will put his life on the line for this team"..thats inane bullshit that has no relevance

i dont think there is much evidence that the bulls want to go over much more over the tax, that's why they've been skirting with some of these deals..but with rose's contract it's tough to avoid it and fill the roster





what exactly do you have in mind?


i dont think i have seen anything about him wanting to go well into the luxury tax, i could be wrong, but when you do consider that the penalties in the luxury tax are getting harsher, it might not be the worst idea.

Perhaps youve missed some of theses posters pov. Its my understanding that as long as it makes sense. Jerry Reinsdorf will be willing to go over the luxery tax in an effort to have a championship contending Bulls team.

But now that an opportunity may present itself, they (the Bulls fans) rather see Reinsdorf save money. Whats wrong with holding Reinsdorf to his word? The opportunity may be here. Bynum has stated he wants to become a FA. Hes young, hed be the perfect fit for the Bulls. And hed be that other guy Rose needs to take pressure off him.

When I present this. Now the backpedaling begins. Suddenly the guy thats not cheap, and overpays players and willingly goes over the cap, wont be willing to do what you guys are saying he will do. When do you guys draw a line in the sand? Why is average OK? Especially when hes making record profits, top four in ticket prices, and the UC sales out every night.

 

[97Bulls]

So from this thread can we come to an overall agreement at least that the Bulls are stupid when it comes to who to spend money on?

Not really. Because theyre signing players to what their market value is. Thats the difference. Its not like any of the Bulls players outside of Rose are making Kobe type Money.

 

[Scoot26]

Not really. Because theyre signing players to what their market value is. Thats the difference. Its not like any of the Bulls players outside of Rose are making Kobe type Money.

While I didnt mind the Boozer signing at the time and certainly enjoyed our run to the ECF in 2010-2011...and what his deal was is a deal he would have gotten somewhere else, we also all knew what we were pretty much getting in Boozer. He is not going to live up to his contract. It was even worse is how much he declined despite the fact he played his first full season ever this year. The NBA in general over values guys, but we give large contracts to guys who are no better than third options to be 1st or 2nd options.

 

[nwfisch]

Not really. Because theyre signing players to what their market value is. Thats the difference. Its not like any of the Bulls players outside of Rose are making Kobe type Money.

So the Bulls are supposed to overpay Tyrus Thomas and Ben Gordon?

Weird, the worst team in the NBA has both of those players.

 

[97Bulls]

So the Bulls are supposed to overpay Tyrus Thomas and Ben Gordon?

Weird, the worst team in the NBA has both of those players.

Do you know what it means to overpay? Players getting paid market value does not constitue overpaying.

 

[Scoot26]

Do you know what it means to overpay? Players getting paid market value does not constitue overpaying.

The market value itself is often overvalued. Anyone remember Jerome James?

 

[nwfisch]

Do you know what it means to overpay? Players getting paid market value does not constitue overpaying.

So you want the Bulls to overpay Tyrus Thomas and Ben Gordon?



I'm confused. What would you have done different to bring a title post Jordan?

 

[Diddy1122]

As far as Barkley? Yes i do feel he wouldve been better suited as a SF because he was extremely athletic. He was a PF because he was always fat and out of shape. I kinda likened Barkley to Adrian Dantley. At 6'4, he was just too short. So when i say that, I meant defensively

It's statements like this that have no one taking you seriously.

Barkley was a PF because HE WAS A BEAST ON THE LOW BLOCK. 1 of only 5 players in the 20K, 10K, 4K club. He owns the records for Offensive Rebounds in a half (14) & Offensive Rebounds in a quarter (11). He created constant match up problems with his strength, agressiveness on the block, & ball handling ability. Countless times in his career he would grab a defensive board, then take it coast to coast for a 2-hand monster slam. He was one of the most efficient players in NBA History, & could do anything when on the court.

Bill Walton described Barkley the best a few years back:

"Barkley is like Magic [Johnson] and Larry [Bird] in that they don't really play a position. He plays everything; he plays basketball. There is nobody who does what Barkley does. He's a dominant rebounder, a dominant defensive player, a three-point shooter, a dribbler, a playmaker."

 

[FirstTimer]

It's statements like this that have no one taking you seriously.

Barkley was a PF because HE WAS A BEAST ON THE LOW BLOCK. 1 of only 5 players in the 20K, 10K, 4K club. He owns the records for Offensive Rebounds in a half (14) & Offensive Rebounds in a quarter (11). He created constant match up problems with his strength, agressiveness on the block, & ball handling ability. Countless times in his career he would grab a defensive board, then take it coast to coast for a 2-hand monster slam. He was one of the most efficient players in NBA History, & could do anything when on the court.

Bill Walton described Barkley the best a few years back:

Yeah, it's pretty amazing that Barkley was "always fat and out of shape" yet was seen as one of the best running bigs in NBA history along side a guy like Karl Malone.