New Benny, and Other changes (Bulls offseason)

[WrigleyField 22]

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.

They werent really a true tank team though. Just a crappy team who had failed to build a winner. Not like they sold off their prime player to go for a high pick.

[UMFan83]

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.

 

Main NBA currency is draft picks and young talent with upside. Everyone has cap space this summer and everyone will have cap space next summer. The Lakers are an historically great franchise in a great city and have been desperate to have anyone take their cap space. The Bulls had a 21 year old All-Star PG in Rose, they had Noah and Deng and they had enough cap space for a max FA and could have rather easily opened up the space for a second and then ended up with Carlos Boozer and the majority of the bench mob. The Knicks routinely strike out in FA and ended up having to trade to get Melo. Melo was a FA that summer but the Knicks felt compelled to trade half their team for him in February because they were worried he wouldn't choose them in open FA.

 

Cap space does mean something (although this year and next year it matters less because EVERYONE has cap space) and it has value but not like 1st rounders and young talent.

[David]

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.

 

we actually did get younger and more athletic too though

[Sammy Sofa]

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.

 

I gotta give you credit for some pretty primo trolling here.

[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.

 

we actually did get younger and more athletic too though

Haha. Thats actually a really funny point. Yes, we did get younger and more athletic compared to last year's team. Gasol, Noah, and Rose were old and/or broken. Obviously, though, we didnt get as young and as "athletic" as we originally planned.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, but the goal shouldn't have been to just technically get younger and more athletic seemingly to without thought to the type of team you're actually ending up with. Getting younger and more athletic while constructing a Frankenstein's monster of a team that pretty much runs as an antithesis to every other team in the league and general ideas of of the type of team you need in 2016 AND specifically in the face of the team you seemingly want to construct based on the coach you hired seems like a pretty counter-intuitive approach to building a team.

 

Basically it seems like Mirotic and McDermott improving feels like the real key to this team doing anything; Rondo and Wade are basically just window dressing to keep people interested.

[David]

Yeah, but the goal shouldn't have been to just technically get younger and more athletic seemingly to without thought to the type of team you're actually ending up with. Getting younger and more athletic while constructing a Frankenstein's monster of a team that pretty much runs as an antithesis to every other team in the league and general ideas of of the type of team you need in 2016 AND specifically in the face of the team you seemingly want to construct based on the coach you hired seems like a pretty counter-intuitive approach to building a team.

 

Basically it seems like Mirotic and McDermott improving feels like the real key to this team doing anything; Rondo and Wade are basically just window dressing to keep people interested.

 

this is just let's see how good and entertaining we can be throwing some good players together while we wait for free agents and cap flexibility. it's as good an approach as any.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, but the goal shouldn't have been to just technically get younger and more athletic seemingly to without thought to the type of team you're actually ending up with. Getting younger and more athletic while constructing a Frankenstein's monster of a team that pretty much runs as an antithesis to every other team in the league and general ideas of of the type of team you need in 2016 AND specifically in the face of the team you seemingly want to construct based on the coach you hired seems like a pretty counter-intuitive approach to building a team.

 

Basically it seems like Mirotic and McDermott improving feels like the real key to this team doing anything; Rondo and Wade are basically just window dressing to keep people interested.

 

this is just let's see how good and entertaining we can be throwing some good players together while we wait for free agents and cap flexibility. it's as good an approach as any.

 

That's the main thinking I disagree with; this feels more like just chucking horsefeathers at the wall and see what sticks. You gotta at least make an effort to try and construct a team/coach situation that has a real chance of gelling or works as a reaction to how the game is played today. This seems to be flying completely in the face of both of that.

[David]

Yeah, but the goal shouldn't have been to just technically get younger and more athletic seemingly to without thought to the type of team you're actually ending up with. Getting younger and more athletic while constructing a Frankenstein's monster of a team that pretty much runs as an antithesis to every other team in the league and general ideas of of the type of team you need in 2016 AND specifically in the face of the team you seemingly want to construct based on the coach you hired seems like a pretty counter-intuitive approach to building a team.

 

Basically it seems like Mirotic and McDermott improving feels like the real key to this team doing anything; Rondo and Wade are basically just window dressing to keep people interested.

 

this is just let's see how good and entertaining we can be throwing some good players together while we wait for free agents and cap flexibility. it's as good an approach as any.

 

That's the main thinking I disagree with; this feels more like just chucking [expletive] at the wall and see what sticks. You gotta at least make an effort to try and construct a team/coach situation that has a real chance of gelling or works as a reaction to how the game is played today. This seems to be flying completely in the face of both of that.

 

i just don't see how they could have constructed a better team than this one for the short term given what the circumstances and opportunities are. get talent first then worry about fit. it's not like this is the team for the long haul, anyway.

[Sammy Sofa]

It's not, but people keep talking like it's just a Band-Aid to a period of huge opportunity, as if the Bulls are going to be THE ones with the salary cap advantage as opposed to EVERYONE being the ones with that advantage. I don't think it's a stretch at all to want a smarter FO; I think that sentiment is pretty unanimous here. Just because you or I can't think off the top of our heads right at this moment how we could construct a better team doesn't mean it's not do-able. I mean, I'm not a fan of Hoiberg, but this is setting up a situation where you're really setting him up to fail and forcing yourself to have to replace your coach yet again, which just reflects back on how poor a choice it was in the first place, and then makes this current path of team-building all the more inexplicable. This seems like a very Hendry-like, reactionary, flailing approach to team-building.

[David]

but basketball isn't anything like baseball

 

where hendry really failed was in not having any sort of organizational structure, throwing player development to the wayside, and he didn't look for the right attributes in good players...it's hard to even compare any of that to basketball. the stuff the cubs under hendry (and prior) were really bad at was producing talent from within and that doesn't even really exist in any sort of similar way in basketball. hendry didn't suck because he signed free agents.

 

and "fit" (and this is more a point in your favor regarding this conversation) isn't any sort of issue in baseball. it's just too different to even try to compare how teams should be run and how they should be built and what the goals for a team should be.

 

 

in baseball, to try to be a champion, you just have to be good enough to be in the top 30% or so that has a shot at the playoffs and so you can just try to be as good as possible and you can give yourself a shot fairly easily. in basketball, if you actually want to win championships, you have to try all sorts of crap to be one of the best 2-3 teams in the league (conversely, your odds of actually winning a title are much higher if you are one of those top 2-3 teams as compared to baseball)... or you can choose to just be competitive and entertaining until you get lucky...and really, in either case, whether you try or not, you have to be really really lucky to be one of those teams.

[Sammy Sofa]

I wasn't comparing basketball to baseball like they're the same sport; it was comparing organizational attitudes and lack of direction. This isn't a criticism hinged on how they sign FA, nor is it ignoring that the Bulls have been better at things like drafting and player development. It's a comparison based mostly out of a seeming lack of any kind of real focus or direction in terms of how they want to build a team for any kind of sustain success. Hell, you can compare it to the Bears until recently (including in how they are, yes, all but ignoring clear trends in how teams have the best shot of succeeding right now); all of this makes the Hoiberg signing even more inexplicable, so he's likely a dead man walking and you'll be switching him out sooner rather than later for a new approach. And yeah, it's nice that Wade and Rondo aren't anchors, but it's also seemingly done with the idea that they're suddenly going to be dominating FA thanks to the cap expansion. Why? Everyone will have the money, and it's not like it hasn't been an uphill battle to get impact players to sign here and that's unlikely to change, especially since they've likely just set themselves up to be hugely in flux again in the short term.

[David]

I wasn't comparing basketball to baseball like they're the same sport; it was comparing organizational attitudes and lack of direction. This isn't a criticism hinged on how they sign FA, nor is it ignoring that the Bulls have been better at things like drafting and player development. It's a comparison based mostly out of a seeming lack of any kind of real focus or direction in terms of how they want to build a team for any kind of sustain success. Hell, you can compare it to the Bears until recently (including in how they are, yes, all but ignoring clear trends in how teams have the best shot of succeeding right now); all of this makes the Hoiberg signing even more inexplicable, so he's likely a dead man walking and you'll be switching him out sooner rather than later for a new approach. And yeah, it's nice that Wade and Rondo aren't anchors, but it's also seemingly done with the idea that they're suddenly going to be dominating FA thanks to the cap expansion. Why? Everyone will have the money, and it's not like it hasn't been an uphill battle to get impact players to sign here and that's unlikely to change, especially since they've likely just set themselves up to be hugely in flux again in the short term.

 

wade has a lot of pull around the league and can be a significant factor in giving us more than a puncher's chance at one of the big FA in 2017, along with having jimmy butler to play alongside. there's not much more you can do than that and hope you get one of the big dudes to sign on the dotted line.

[Sammy Sofa]

I wasn't comparing basketball to baseball like they're the same sport; it was comparing organizational attitudes and lack of direction. This isn't a criticism hinged on how they sign FA, nor is it ignoring that the Bulls have been better at things like drafting and player development. It's a comparison based mostly out of a seeming lack of any kind of real focus or direction in terms of how they want to build a team for any kind of sustain success. Hell, you can compare it to the Bears until recently (including in how they are, yes, all but ignoring clear trends in how teams have the best shot of succeeding right now); all of this makes the Hoiberg signing even more inexplicable, so he's likely a dead man walking and you'll be switching him out sooner rather than later for a new approach. And yeah, it's nice that Wade and Rondo aren't anchors, but it's also seemingly done with the idea that they're suddenly going to be dominating FA thanks to the cap expansion. Why? Everyone will have the money, and it's not like it hasn't been an uphill battle to get impact players to sign here and that's unlikely to change, especially since they've likely just set themselves up to be hugely in flux again in the short term.

 

wade has a lot of pull around the league and can be a significant factor in giving us more than a puncher's chance at one of the big FA in 2017, along with having jimmy butler to play alongside. there's not much more you can do than that and hope you get one of the big dudes to sign on the dotted line.

 

Agreed, but Wade isn't here for the long haul and having this weird, nebulous approach to what type of team they are that's seemingly completely contrary to the type of coach they're invested in doesn't seem like a good recipe to appeal to the type of big FA we do want them to sign to stick around for a while.

[WrigleyField 22]

While I will gladly remain skeptical that it could just he FA fluff pieces, there is at least some indication that Hoiberg and Rondo really hit it off talking about the system Hoiberg wants to run, and that it was a big selling feature. Maybe Hoiberg has a better idea what he can utilize in his system than we do.

 

Wade on the other hand is just talented emough still that you worry about fit after talent.

 

It could certainly blow up, but playing copy cat to the rest of the league isn't exactly a sure bet, especially when the best team who does it best just added a top 5 player.

[David]

it's crazy as hell to me that it's been almost as long since that 2010 offseason as it was between the 2003 draft class and 2010 free agency. time horsefeathering flies.

[Ryne Ween]

I wasn't comparing basketball to baseball like they're the same sport; it was comparing organizational attitudes and lack of direction. This isn't a criticism hinged on how they sign FA, nor is it ignoring that the Bulls have been better at things like drafting and player development. It's a comparison based mostly out of a seeming lack of any kind of real focus or direction in terms of how they want to build a team for any kind of sustain success. Hell, you can compare it to the Bears until recently (including in how they are, yes, all but ignoring clear trends in how teams have the best shot of succeeding right now); all of this makes the Hoiberg signing even more inexplicable, so he's likely a dead man walking and you'll be switching him out sooner rather than later for a new approach. And yeah, it's nice that Wade and Rondo aren't anchors, but it's also seemingly done with the idea that they're suddenly going to be dominating FA thanks to the cap expansion. Why? Everyone will have the money, and it's not like it hasn't been an uphill battle to get impact players to sign here and that's unlikely to change, especially since they've likely just set themselves up to be hugely in flux again in the short term.

 

wade has a lot of pull around the league and can be a significant factor in giving us more than a puncher's chance at one of the big FA in 2017, along with having jimmy butler to play alongside. there's not much more you can do than that and hope you get one of the big dudes to sign on the dotted line.

 

Agreed, but Wade isn't here for the long haul and having this weird, nebulous approach to what type of team they are that's seemingly completely contrary to the type of coach they're invested in doesn't seem like a good recipe to appeal to the type of big FA we do want them to sign to stick around for a while.

 

I don't want them to sign Anthony morrow and josh smith because we think Hoiberg is some three point offense guru. I'm not even sure what he's done to earn that reputation. I am Definately against an NBA team playing to a coaches system.

 

Did they have a plan? No. Does the FO suck? Yes. Do I think they salvaged a team when we almost became unwatchable? Yes.

 

I actually have this weird faith that Wade knows what he is doing in coming here and I'm way more willing to trust him than GarPax helming a ground up rebuild.

[Cubbie Swagger]

I like how after all these years, there are still people holding out for GarPax and Reinsdorf to have "a plan". I would literally rather roll a pair of dice. It would be more successful.

 

And, again, Wade does literally nothing to derail any sort of "plan" we might have had before. Signing Wade and Rondo for only 1 guaranteed year isn't going to do any harm. All it does is buy us some time. If this year goes well, maybe we keep rolling with it and try to add another piece. If it's a disaster, we can continue with our rebuild.

[Cubbie Swagger]

I actually have this weird faith that Wade knows what he is doing in coming here and I'm way more willing to trust him than GarPax helming a ground up rebuild.

You know what, you may be on to something. I almost brought this up earlier.

 

Isn't it possible that Wade takes on a bit of that Lebron-ish role and sort of becomes Hoiberg's right hand man? I can't imagine that a guy like Hoiberg is going to aggressively push his unproven system on a guy like Wade who has won rings. I could see Hoiberg making some adjustments to his system to cater to his roster. I mean, doesn't he have to?

[David]

the whole notion of a "plan" outside of "let's make sure we have cap space when good guys are available" is silly anyway

[Cubbie Swagger]

the whole notion of a "plan" outside of "let's make sure we have cap space when good guys are available" is silly anyway

Holy crap, dude. We agree on so much stuff.

 

Somebody hacked your account, didn't they?

[Sammy Sofa]

While I will gladly remain skeptical that it could just he FA fluff pieces, there is at least some indication that Hoiberg and Rondo really hit it off talking about the system Hoiberg wants to run, and that it was a big selling feature. Maybe Hoiberg has a better idea what he can utilize in his system than we do.

 

Wade on the other hand is just talented emough still that you worry about fit after talent.

 

It could certainly blow up, but playing copy cat to the rest of the league isn't exactly a sure bet, especially when the best team who does it best just added a top 5 player.

 

It's not that they just need to copy everyone else, but to put together a team that flies so much in the face of what is typically working, and after hiring a coach they seemingly wanted to steer the team in the direction of the latter makes it seem a bit like flailing. To me, Hoiberg is big part of the glaring issue. Again, if Mirotic and McDermott actually step up and improve like we hope and need them to, things will be very different, but as it stands, adding Rondo AND Wade to go with Butler just seems like a really odd approach with a coach like this. It's not that it can't work, but it seems like the FO is sort of wildly oscillating around with what they want to do.

[bcl412]

 

Rose and Wade may be the most opposite personalities in the NBA

[Cubbie Swagger]

What happens when Bobby Portis becomes a max player in the next 2 years or so? What happens if Valentine becomes a star?

 

So much upside is being overlooked.

[David]

Something I didn't notice last year...after coming back from his surgery, Niko shot 44.5% from 3 on 137 attempts...which is 6.3 (!!) per game.

 

that many attempts would've been good for top 15 in the league in a full season

 

 

for reference, curry shot 45.4% on 11 attempts per game (holy crap)