New Benny, and Other changes (Bulls offseason)

[Ryne Ween]

Very critical of this roster here in general. Its obviously not perfect but they went from probably being a lottery team for 3-7 years and likely striking out in the next few FA years to being an ECF team and In good position to add with cap space in the next two years.

 

Think about how awful this team could have been. And don't say we need to tank. 8 teams lost 50+ games last year. 4 lost 60+ games. Taking might get you 5 years in the high end of the lottery that doesn't result in a star player. It's just not a viable option.

[WrigleyField 22]

Plans are overrated. Acquire valuable assets. Minimize risk. Be ready to take advantage of supreme luck.

 

Yea the starting lineup construction makes little sense, but we're on a transition period and we should be a more exciting team in that transition phase now.

[Cubbie Swagger]

Tanking does not work nearly as well in basketball as it does in baseball. How long will it be until Philly wins a ring?

[wolf stansson]

Tanking does not work nearly as well in basketball as it does in baseball. How long will it be until Philly wins a ring?

Neither of us have any statistical or research evidence to back this up, but I think the opposite.

 

The Cubs rebuilt better and faster than almost anyone and it wasn't luck. It was good management and huge resources.

 

Basketball you can rebuild with one player.

[WrigleyField 22]

Yea i don't think theres really strong evidence that tanking is effective in any sport, at least not in a planned sort of way. Even with this Cubs team, some of our best assets now are from just being accidentally bad or selling off short term assets in the middle of an already lost season, not from intentionally tanking a season early on for picks.

 

Its a bit of paradox because high picks absolutely correlate to better talent, but on a team level you dont necessarily see a clear trend of teams building championship rosters that way. It comes down to far more luck than that.

[Cubbie Swagger]

My evidence is this: name some championship teams that were built by completely tanking and loading up on picks intentionally. A team is lucky to be able to draft one star and then acquire some others to put around them. Situations like Curry/Thompson and Durant/Westbrook are extremely rare, and neither of those had anything to do with intentional tanking.

 

Since we already have more than one star to attract other stars, it would be silly to try to suck and get draft picks.

[David]

It is literally impossible for me to overstate how much I do not care how "meaningful" you think my opinions are.

 

The Bulls are goofily flailing, and yeah, it's fun on a freakshow level, but it's kinda ridiculous how they've so readily flown in the face of their own stated intentions AND of the dumbass coach they have. My thoughts on Butler have nothing to do with how this is a pretty hilarious way to not create a viable NBA team in 2016, not try to play to the supposed strengths of your coach, and dumpster diving for old timey marquee names just to try and stir up the local yokels.

 

i seriously love how you like to give everyone crap but get so rankled and defensive when you get made fun of.

[jersey cubs fan]

Tanking does not work nearly as well in basketball as it does in baseball. How long will it be until Philly wins a ring?

Neither of us have any statistical or research evidence to back this up, but I think the opposite.

 

The Cubs rebuilt better and faster than almost anyone and it wasn't luck. It was good management and huge resources.

 

Basketball you can rebuild with one player.

 

You can rebuild with one player but tanking isn't necessarily the best way to find one. When half the league is tanking it no longer increases your odds of landing that one player.

[David]

the only time i advocate sucking out loud on purpose is when there is a peyton, lebron, luck (yeah he's been iffy but as a draft prospect he was in that class iirc), shaq, etc. type talent...as far as baseball, it's got a whole other bunch of factors that make the argument entirely different like the years of development still required when drafted and the impact on draft budget, etc. i'm still not sure if it's generally prudent either way but it obviously worked out for us (both in draft picks and the dudes we were able to get as a result of sucking and not caring what happened those season).

[UMFan83]

Tanking does not work nearly as well in basketball as it does in baseball. How long will it be until Philly wins a ring?

 

Philly is an extreme tanking example, but who knows they have a ton of young talent and assets because of it.

 

Noel, Embiid, Okafor, Simmons, Saric, Kings pick swap in 2017, Lakers 2017 pick (top 3 protected or else unprotected in 2018), Kings 2019 pick (unprotected)

 

All very nice assets to varying degrees and they are way under the cap still. A decent front office could have that team into a legit contender in 2 years IMO.

 

That said was it worth almost destroying the franchise and turning into a laughing stock for 4 years? I don't know we will see.

[David]

Tanking does not work nearly as well in basketball as it does in baseball. How long will it be until Philly wins a ring?

 

Philly is an extreme tanking example, but who knows they have a ton of young talent and assets because of it.

 

Noel, Embiid, Okafor, Simmons, Saric, Kings pick swap in 2017, Lakers 2017 pick (top 3 protected or else unprotected in 2018), Kings 2019 pick (unprotected)

 

All very nice assets to varying degrees and they are way under the cap still. A decent front office could have that team into a legit contender in 2 years IMO.

 

That said was it worth almost destroying the franchise and turning into a laughing stock for 4 years? I don't know we will see.

 

a legit contender to lose to the cavs at best (unless lebron bolts)

[WrigleyField 22]

I mean at least in baseball or football a "successful" tank gets you the guy you want. NBA gets you a 25% chance if there is a Lebron type talent.

 

I mean i think the only truely succesful NBA tank job was the Spurs dealing with a fluke injury to a HOF and then lucking into another HOF, for a quick one year tank. I don't think Phillys outlook will look any better in a few years than had they put out an effort and just drafted well in the mid-lotto and used trade and FA to open up other opportunities.

[UMFan83]

Tanking does not work nearly as well in basketball as it does in baseball. How long will it be until Philly wins a ring?

 

Philly is an extreme tanking example, but who knows they have a ton of young talent and assets because of it.

 

Noel, Embiid, Okafor, Simmons, Saric, Kings pick swap in 2017, Lakers 2017 pick (top 3 protected or else unprotected in 2018), Kings 2019 pick (unprotected)

 

All very nice assets to varying degrees and they are way under the cap still. A decent front office could have that team into a legit contender in 2 years IMO.

 

That said was it worth almost destroying the franchise and turning into a laughing stock for 4 years? I don't know we will see.

 

a legit contender to lose to the cavs at best (unless lebron bolts)

 

We will see, in 2 years and change LeBron will be 34 and will have played about 4,000 less minutes than Kobe did. If Ben Simmons becomes a superstar and they make smart moves with their assets and cap space to build a team around him, they are going to be scary. Still a lot of work to be done but the most painful part, the accumulation of assets, is nearly done.

[UMFan83]

 

Interesting that they would hold 2 separate press conferences instead of just 1.

[David]

[SouthSideRyan]

I mean at least in baseball or football a "successful" tank gets you the guy you want. NBA gets you a 25% chance if there is a Lebron type talent.

 

I mean i think the only truely succesful NBA tank job was the Spurs dealing with a fluke injury to a HOF and then lucking into another HOF, for a quick one year tank. I don't think Phillys outlook will look any better in a few years than had they put out an effort and just drafted well in the mid-lotto and used trade and FA to open up other opportunities.

 

Additionally, in baseball you only need to be in the top 1/3 of the league to have a legit chance at winning it all. In basketball teams on the backend of the top ten are said to be stuck in NBA hell.

[SouthSideRyan]

That said, the Celtics were pretty clear examples of an NBA team that was successful thanks to intentional tanking. Ainge even adapted to not getting the draft pick they were looking for and turned their tank assets Allen and Garnett.

[Rex Buckingham]

Butler will make an AAV of just over $18 million over the next 4 years, free agents who will earn a similar AAV or higher:

 

Timofey Mozgov, Ian Mahinmi (16)

Evan Fournier (17)

Luol Deng, Joakim Noah, Bismack Biyombo (18)

Nicolas Batum(24!)

Harrison Barnes, Chandler Parsons (23.5)

Kent Bazemore, Evan Turner (17.5

Ryan Anderson (20)

Bradley Beal (25.6)

 

Fournier, Beal, and Batum are on 5 year deals, everyone else on 4 year deals...

[David]

Butler will make an AAV of just over $18 million over the next 4 years, free agents who will earn a similar AAV or higher:

 

Timofey Mozgov, Ian Mahinmi (16)

Evan Fournier (17)

Luol Deng, Joakim Noah, Bismack Biyombo (18)

Nicolas Batum(24!)

Harrison Barnes, Chandler Parsons (23.5)

Kent Bazemore, Evan Turner (17.5

Ryan Anderson (20)

Bradley Beal (25.6)

 

Fournier, Beal, and Batum are on 5 year deals, everyone else on 4 year deals...

 

no mention of mike conley?

[Rex Buckingham]

Butler will make an AAV of just over $18 million over the next 4 years, free agents who will earn a similar AAV or higher:

 

Timofey Mozgov, Ian Mahinmi (16)

Evan Fournier (17)

Luol Deng, Joakim Noah, Bismack Biyombo (18)

Nicolas Batum(24!)

Harrison Barnes, Chandler Parsons (23.5)

Kent Bazemore, Evan Turner (17.5

Ryan Anderson (20)

Bradley Beal (25.6)

 

Fournier, Beal, and Batum are on 5 year deals, everyone else on 4 year deals...

 

no mention of mike conley?

 

goodness, not sure how I forgot that... 5 years, 30.6 AAV... Conley is a very good PG, but yeah that's crazy money. For that matter, DeRozan is making 27.8 AAV over 5 also and Hassan Whiteside 24.5 AAV over 4

[Ryne Ween]

Tanking does not work nearly as well in basketball as it does in baseball. How long will it be until Philly wins a ring?

 

Philly is an extreme tanking example, but who knows they have a ton of young talent and assets because of it.

 

Noel, Embiid, Okafor, Simmons, Saric, Kings pick swap in 2017, Lakers 2017 pick (top 3 protected or else unprotected in 2018), Kings 2019 pick (unprotected)

 

All very nice assets to varying degrees and they are way under the cap still. A decent front office could have that team into a legit contender in 2 years IMO.

 

That said was it worth almost destroying the franchise and turning into a laughing stock for 4 years? I don't know we will see.

 

a legit contender to lose to the cavs at best (unless lebron bolts)

 

The designer of that tank and the guy who brought in those "assets" was fired. Suggests to me that Philly themselves don't think it's working. And I know people defend Hinkie. But clueless teams without any solid veteran presence or the ability to have young players learn roles that would eventually allow them contribute to good teams don't develope players and agents don't allow their clients to go to a team like Philly.

 

Per Boston's tank. They had two bad years. It was more a decision to not force something earlier than what they ultimately did. The centerpiece of getting Garnett was Big Al and he was not the result of tanking into the lottery. They also had a star player in his prime.

 

Boston title was much more analogous to the current cavs or the heatles and Definately not a repeatable model for most teams in the NBA to try to copy.

 

Conversely the retool has had proven success. Dallas for example was at the top of the NBA floundered and hired a better coach retooled the core with more old guys like Chandler Kidd Butler and Marion. That produced a championship.

 

The Bulls best chance was to do this. Win as much as possible. Hope Wade has a lot left. Hope Butler continues to flourish. Take a low risk chance on rondo. Make a move for a Aldridge to the Spurs type signing in the next 24 months and hope the cavs get hurt and GSWs plane goes down.

 

Our real problem now is a [expletive] coach that our FO probably will never give up on because he's their idiotic reach guy.

Edited July 7, 2016 by Ryne Ween

[ConstableRabbit]

https://youtu.be/3uIbUo1F2C4?t=31s

[UMFan83]

 

Philly is an extreme tanking example, but who knows they have a ton of young talent and assets because of it.

 

Noel, Embiid, Okafor, Simmons, Saric, Kings pick swap in 2017, Lakers 2017 pick (top 3 protected or else unprotected in 2018), Kings 2019 pick (unprotected)

 

All very nice assets to varying degrees and they are way under the cap still. A decent front office could have that team into a legit contender in 2 years IMO.

 

That said was it worth almost destroying the franchise and turning into a laughing stock for 4 years? I don't know we will see.

 

a legit contender to lose to the cavs at best (unless lebron bolts)

 

The designer of that tank and the guy who brought in those "assets" was fired. Suggests to me that Philly themselves don't think it's working. And I know people defend Hinkie. But clueless teams without any solid veteran presence or the ability to have young players learn roles that would eventually allow them contribute to good teams don't develope players and agents don't allow their clients to go to a team like Philly.

 

Per Boston's tank. They had two bad years. It was more a decision to not force something earlier than what they ultimately did. The centerpiece of getting Garnett was Big Al and he was not the result of tanking into the lottery. They also had a star player in his prime.

 

Boston title was much more analogous to the current cavs or the heatles and Definately not a repeatable model for most teams in the NBA to try to copy.

 

Conversely the retool has had proven success. Dallas for example was at the top of the NBA floundered and hired a better coach retooled the core with more old guys like Chandler Kidd Butler and Marion. That produced a championship.

 

They fired Hinke because they were the laughing stock of basketball and not really making any progress on the court. Drafting guys like Noel, who everyone knew would miss his rookie season, Embiid who was drafted 2 years ago and hasn't played a game, and Saric who everyone knew wouldn't see an NBA court for a couple of seasons, made it so the team on the floor was godawful. Ownership was pushed by the NBA to hire Colangelo to move quicker.

 

So no tanking to that degree did not work for Hinke, but Philly is an extreme example of tanking. They basically exchanged every player with trade value for draft picks for like 3 full seasons and put a d-league team on the court. But all that said, I believe it on the route to working considering all the assets they have now. What they do with those assets and how the young players develop will ultimately determine whether it was actually a success.

 

All moot though because even though I am for tanking as a concept, I would never be in favor of Philly's style of tanking. There are other ways to do it that don't involve putting out an unwatchable product for the better part of a decade.

[Ryne Ween]

 

a legit contender to lose to the cavs at best (unless lebron bolts)

 

The designer of that tank and the guy who brought in those "assets" was fired. Suggests to me that Philly themselves don't think it's working. And I know people defend Hinkie. But clueless teams without any solid veteran presence or the ability to have young players learn roles that would eventually allow them contribute to good teams don't develope players and agents don't allow their clients to go to a team like Philly.

 

Per Boston's tank. They had two bad years. It was more a decision to not force something earlier than what they ultimately did. The centerpiece of getting Garnett was Big Al and he was not the result of tanking into the lottery. They also had a star player in his prime.

 

Boston title was much more analogous to the current cavs or the heatles and Definately not a repeatable model for most teams in the NBA to try to copy.

 

Conversely the retool has had proven success. Dallas for example was at the top of the NBA floundered and hired a better coach retooled the core with more old guys like Chandler Kidd Butler and Marion. That produced a championship.

 

They fired Hinke because they were the laughing stock of basketball and not really making any progress on the court. Drafting guys like Noel, who everyone knew would miss his rookie season, Embiid who was drafted 2 years ago and hasn't played a game, and Saric who everyone knew wouldn't see an NBA court for a couple of seasons, made it so the team on the floor was godawful. Ownership was pushed by the NBA to hire Colangelo to move quicker.

 

So no tanking to that degree did not work for Hinke, but Philly is an extreme example of tanking. They basically exchanged every player with trade value for draft picks for like 3 full seasons and put a d-league team on the court. But all that said, I believe it is working considering all the assets they have now.

 

All moot though because even though I am for tanking as a concept, I would never be in favor of Philly's style of tanking. There are other ways to do it that don't involve putting out an unwatchable product for the better part of a decade.

 

Ok. But I guess my question is this: what do you consider the main currency in the NBA, lottery picks or cap space? The Bulls have virtually no cap holds outside of two years. Why tank when you could be decent and still have the future space.

[Cubbie Swagger]

Okay, but:

 

Like I said before, we haven't even derailed our retooling. If we all agree that an extreme model where you run out a d-league team for a few years is not the best idea, then what is the problem? I know the pieces dont fit, but Rondo could be gone after one year if he doesnt work out, and then we use the combo of Butler and Wade to try to lure other players.

 

Yes, we have directly contradicted the whole, "younger and more athletic" thing, but acquiring Wade does NOT make your team worse, and we haven't made any sort of long term commitment to anyone.