The move that no one talks about
by Dils on Nov 16, 2009 12:38 PM CST
Email
Print
Over the last few years there have been changes to this team whether it be a new coach, a new General Manager, or changes in the roster. We've seen over paid players, players traded and players let go. We've also talk about the salary cap and players we had to let go as we prepare for 2010. But there is one move that wasn't made that sticks in my crawl. It may seem minor but it should reinforce the thought that this organization has no true plan...
I remember sitting on the couch on draft night awaiting the Bulls turn to pick a player with their 16th pick. I know at the time it seemed anti-climatic because the pick wasn't a top 5 pick, but yet and still it's a chance for a team to improve if they trust their scouts and draft smartly. To be honest , like many others here that night, if there was any chance of him falling to number 16 I wanted the Bulls to take Dajuan Blair. But as the Bulls pick drew near I started to realize something... Ty Lawson was still on the board.
I realize that during the offseason, all the Bulls could think about was getting some depth at the 3 position considering that they had already decided BG's fate and were going to be moving Salmons to the 2-guard spot and were trying desperately to move Tyrus. But here's my beef: What ever happened to taking the best player on the board? Right now the Bulls are struggling with FG%, 3pt shooting, and free throw shooting right?. Well right now Ty Lawson is among the top 7 in 3pt % (50.0), FG% (52.7), and Free throw% (94.1). If it wasn't for Brandon Jennings, this kid may be in the lead right now for ROY. It's the type of move that gives you productive depth and helps shape the plan. Don't believe me? Ask Miami how Mario Chalmers is working out.
You know sometimes it just isn't that hard to make the right choice. How difficult would it had been for the Bulls to draft a true PG that could back up your star PG for the next 5 years and oh by the way, give you some flexibility when it comes to maybe trading the great Kirk Hinrich? But no. We have a rookie tweener who's stuck on the bench right now. Meanwhile, the guy they took a flier on with their 26th pick is the one that is contributing. That fact alone let's you know that this organization has no clue what the plan is. Because if they felt so strongly about Taj Gibson, they would've taken him with the 16th pick. I mean why take the chance on another team grabbing him right?
So for those waiting for 2010, hoping that the Bulls make a big splash realize this: If we as fans can see how bad this franchise is being ran, what do you think Dwayne Wade, Joe Johnson, and Chris Bosh see?
FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.
79 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You can see why they picked JJ though
Nobody knew if Luol would be healthy, the Bulls weren’t planning on extending Tyrus, so the door was open for JJ to make a big contribution as early as next year. I’m guessing their thought process was “Blair rocks but he’s an injury concern, who knows what he’ll be 3-4 years down the line when we make our run. Lawson’s solid, but his playing time will always be limited with Rose here. JJ is iffy, but he’s athletically gifted, still fairly new to basketball, and he could give us a longterm scoring option at SF/PF, which is what we need.”
There was a good chance that #16 pick would be the highest we’d have in awhile. The Bulls thought JJ could become a core piece, and they took a calculated risk with him. I think it’s good logic. So far it looks like a bad move, but I think it’s way too early for to make a real judgment.
by YaoPau on Nov 16, 2009 2:20 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
I see what you're saying
and really this post is more about the organization than it is a slight to JJ. I hope JJ turns out to be great but in terms of the present, Ty Lawson made a lot of sense. Besides with way Salmons and Pargo are are playing, wouldn’t it be nice to maybe rotate Lawson in and move Hinrich to the 2-guard while resting Rose at times during the game? Lawson at this time is playing behind Chancey Billups. If he’s good enough to play behind Billups, I think he could play behind or with Rose.
I think the issue is that the Bulls are terrible at evaluating talent.
Anyone with a basic understanding of how statistics translate from the NCAA level to the pro level could see that Ty Lawson was going to be very, very good. People wanted to knock him for his lack of height, but he’s jacked and so fast that he can get to the rim at will. I actually think he runs an offense better than Rose (at this point, granted Lawson is a bit older) and he’s a more efficient scorer. He doesn’t have Derrick’s ceiling, but I think he’s definitely going to be a lot better than Captain Clank.
Just think, the Bulls could have drafted Lawson, immediately shipped Kirk out of town for expirings, and then re-signed BG. It would have made the most sense.
Derrick / Lawson
BG / Salmons
Deng / Salmons
Tyrus / Taj
Noah / Brad
looks a whole helluva lot better than our current roster.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 16, 2009 3:24 PM CST up reply actions
Exactly!!
This stuff is not that hard to figure out and it’s frustrating as hell sitting back and watching this team make moves that are so obvious are not going to work. If for nothing else, just to help Rose in terms of minutes, it made since to draft this guy. What in the world what it have cost you? But they were so hell bent on proving a point to Tyrus. Just like they were so hell bent on proving a point to BG. It’s really ridiculous
In addition to JR not wanting BG, Kurt is like a son to JR.
JR’s meddling handicaps any plan Paxson may have.
"Then you need a center so if the ball gets stuck between the rim and backboard he can reach up and knock it loose instead of having to spend 15 minutes trying to hit it with a broom stick." – Sam Smith
by Granny Waiters on Nov 16, 2009 11:28 PM CST up reply actions
You gotta think
paxson think of hinrich as a son too…i mean the way they play the way they act….when paxson first started constructing this team, and its initial success…you know paxson saw himself in kirk…
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
yeabut
let’s hope he’s not as emotionally influenced in personnell decisions as the chairman. Though Pax is like a son to J.R.
I’m so happy everyone loves eachother so much it transcends winning!
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2009 11:08 AM CST up reply actions
Paxson/Forman can't evaluate talent now? I think drafting has been their strength...
I’m not sure anybody has an understanding of how point guard stats translate to the pros, especially when that point guard played on a team as stacked as UNC. Lawson had a ton of assists, but who wouldn’t have with Ellington and Hansbrough and Green as options. He shot well, but no team spaced the floor better.
Still, we knew Lawson would be pretty good on offense. But tiny guards usually can’t defend (Watson, Paul, Lowry are the three offhand that break the mold) and chances are Lawson would be negative, quick as he is. If Lawson’s a +4 on offense, the Bulls whiffed. If he’s a +1 or +2, then at a 20-25mpg cap, the high-upside SF who can earn a starting role down the line becomes an option.
Except Johnson has shown me nothing to indicate that he will ever be worth a damn.
And Lawson is a positive on defense if only because he’s got extremely quick hands and steals the ball more than anyone this side of Chris Paul and Rajon Rondo.
Maybe, I’m biased because I knew that Lawson would excel in the pro game. All of his skills translate. He was an athletic freak, he could shoot the hell out of the ball, and he got to the rim whenever he wanted. There was nothing to suggest that he wouldn’t excel in today’s perimeter penetration friendly league.
Johnson on the other hand came in to the draft combine fat. He shot the ball for crap and didn’t rebound it particularly well for someone who spent a lot of time at the PF position. There’s just nothing there to suggest anything worth having outside of some nifty ball handling skills for a guy his size.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 16, 2009 5:44 PM CST up reply actions
For me, it all comes down to JJ's defense
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from APM, it’s that if a guy passes well and plays defense, he’s probably helping your team. You know I think JJ can be a good passer. I have no clue about his defense.
From what little I've seen of him he looks pretty clueless on D.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 16, 2009 6:03 PM CST up reply actions
Also, evidence that Pax can't draft:
Ben Gordon and Luol Deng over Andre Iguodola and Al Jefferson.
Tyrus Thomas over Brandon Roy, Lamarcus Aldridge, and Rajon Rondo.
James Johnson over Ty Lawson, DeJuan Blair, Omri Casspi (plays same position as JJ and is better already), Chase Budinger
Taj Gibson over DeJuan Blair and Chase Budinger.
Since the 2003 Draft they have gotten BPA in the first round exactly 3 times. Kirk, Joakim, and Derrick. That’s it. Every other time, they’ve wiffed on better players.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 16, 2009 5:58 PM CST up reply actions
Heyyyy cheap shots!
Right, what was Paxson thinking taking Tyrus Thomas at #2 instead of #21 pick Rajon Rondo! How could he not see that #7 pick Deng was better than #15 pick Al Jefferson! While we’re on it, how dumb is Pax looking after taking Thabo Sefolosha at #13 over #47 pick Paul Millsap!
And the Chase Budinger love is getting out of hand. The guy’s a pure scorer with a 52.1 TS%. Let’s at least wait till he’s efficient before we again bow down to Morey.
Here’s the flip side. The players picked directly after our guys…
- Kirk Hinrich (#8 TJ Ford)
- Ben Gordon (#4 Shaun Livingston)
- Luol Deng (#8 Rafael Araujo)
- Chris Duhon (#39 Albert Miralles)
#2/#4 Tyrus Thomas (#3 Adam Morrison, #5 Shelden Williams)
#13/#16 Thabo Sefolosha (#14 Ronnie Brewer, #17 Shawne Williams) - Joakim Noah (#10 Spencer Hawes)
Every GM makes bad picks. Did Pax/Gar nail every one? No, but they’ve been better than most.
by YaoPau on Nov 16, 2009 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 6 recs
You also skirted the Roy & LMA issue with Tyrus. Both those guys are better than
Tyrus and Roy is head and shoulders above Tyrus.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 16, 2009 9:29 PM CST up reply actions
You're just being unfair
If Rondo gets picked 21st, 20 teams passed him up. By your logic there’s one good drafting GM for every 20 terrible ones. I’m not saying Gar/Pax are elite drafters, but they’ve been above average.
Break it down by pick, with ranking among next 5 non-Bulls picks:
2003: Hinrich. Next 5 picks? Ford, Sweetney, Hayes, Pietrus, Collison. Rank: 1st of 6
2004: Gordon. Next 5 picks? Livingston, Harris, Childress, Araujo, Iguodala. Rank: 3rd of 6
2005: Deng. Next 5 picks? Araujo, Iguodala, Jackson, Biedrins, Swift. Rank: 2 of 6
2006: Tyrus. Next 5 picks? Morrison, Aldridge, Shelden, Roy, Foye. Rank: 4 of 6
2006: Thabo. Next 5 picks? Brewer, Simmons, Carney, S. Williams, Pecherov. Rank: 2 of 6
2007: Noah. Next 5 picks? Hawes, Law, Thaddeus, Wright, Thornton. Rank: 1 of 6
2008: Rose. Next 5 picks? Beasley, Mayo, Westbrook, Love, Gallinari. Rank: 1 of 6
You’re underestimating how many really bad draft picks there are every year, and I give Gar/Pax credit for their consistency. Tyrus was the only mediocre pick, and he really hasn’t been that bad. I’m not skirting anything.
The more I look at drafts, the more I see how much luck is involved. GMs can’t possibly know everything about a player. Who could’ve guessed that Deng would peak at 21 then have lingering injuries the next two years, that Gordon would work his way out of the locker room, that Tyrus wouldn’t mesh with Skiles and then learn a midrange jumper game, that Noah would turn from freak to professional in two years? Take all the stats, interviews, game film, put it all together, and you can get maybe 60-70% of the full picture. The rest is luck. For every “how you miss him” talent like Rondo, Arenas, Redd there’s a consensus stud who flops like Darko, Marvin Williams, Livingston. Nobody knows. And so, to me, six straight years of solid picks is about as good as you can do.
by YaoPau on Nov 16, 2009 11:41 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
I'm being unfair? It's okay to be in the lottery every year for 7 years
and not come out with a single All-Star to elite level player? That’s unfair? Hmmm. I mean, yes, some of it had to do with where they were drafting each given year, but still there has been All Star to elite talent available and they whiffed on getting it. Roy, Iguodala, Al Jefferson, Rondo those are all guys that have that kind of talent and Gar/Pax missed them. It’s not an answer, to me, to say “well, gee everyone else missed them, too.” I don’t care about the ineptitude of other GMs, I want my GMs to get it right.
I think you’re going too easy on Gar/Pax.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 2:21 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
First off, if you're including Jefferson and Rondo,
then Noah counts in that group. And soon Rose too.
Roy and Iguodala are clearly whiffs, but essentially what’s left of your argument is “It’s okay to be in the lottery every year for 7 years and not get one of these two players?” And the answer is an easy yes. It’s weird to base drafting ability solely on “did you nail all the studs”? That’s more a way to base drafting results, not ability.
Look at Iguodala’s college stats, or Roy’s stats as a frosh/soph and tell me you knew these guys were going to be stars. How could you? 7 professional GMs passed on Iggy, 4 passed on Roy, and you’re railing on Pax. After drafting Michael Jordan in 1984, the Bulls drafting dude said in an interview that Jordan (paraphrasing) “doesn’t project as an elite scorer, but he’s a guy we know we can count on going forward”. There’s bad luck and sometimes good luck :)
I think the middle ground here is that you’re judging based solely on total results. As in "Who cares how many “good” picks they’ve made relative to the other consensus talent on the board? Great picks win games, they haven’t made them, and it cost the Bulls in the process." And I agree. All things considered, one Iguodala or Roy pick probably equates to Hinrich + Gordon + Deng + Tyrus + Thabo, so Pax/Gar could’ve done a lot better. But in evaluating who can draft, I think it’s better to look at who’s consistently doing well than who nails one star in a blue moon.
Don’t forget that the same guys who drafted Michael Jordan in 1984 drafted Keith Lee in 1985 and Brad Sellers in 1986.
by YaoPau on Nov 17, 2009 10:56 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
So, the Bulls can't evaluate elite talent.
And for the record, I always thought Brandon Roy would be a star. He reminded me of Dwyane Wade.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 12:03 PM CST up reply actions
It's not can or can't, they just haven't
Realistically, what were the chances of them landing a player as good as Roy or Iggy given their 5 first rounders from 2003-2006? If you don’t hit a home run in 5 plate appearances, it doesn’t mean you can’t. Hit a couple singles and doubles instead, and you’re still doing pretty good.
Except that's not how the NBA works. You have to hit
a homerun every once in a while in the draft or else you’ll never compete. Sometimes the draft hangs a pitch over the plate and its easy to crush it (see: Cavs picking LeBron), but most of the time you have to make the right call to get a great player. The Bulls have done a poor job of landing the very top-tier players both in the draft and through trades.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 12:24 PM CST up reply actions
well, we'll see with Rose
that they cannot screw up, though the choice was so obvious. I hate the argument of ‘well what would YOU have done’ since they’re paid lots of money to get things right, but in the Rose draft I really saw no other option, and the only way they look bad is if Beasley is a LOT better than what he’s shown so far.
That said, missing on the #2 pick to get Tyrus over a solid double (LMA, Gay) or home run (Roy) is worth more negatively than getting lower picks correct (like Hinrich or Noah, say) over the years.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2009 12:33 PM CST up reply actions
This is essentially what I've been trying to get at.
You can’t miss on the home-run guys when you have a chance to get them. They are so rare and you only get so many cracks at them that you HAVE to get it right. Especially if you’re owner is a cheap asshole who only pays for rookie deals. Gotta get guys that play way above their contract value.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 12:47 PM CST up reply actions
funny thing is
how portland also screwed up by taking lma over roy, if you think about it. and that foye nonsense with minny…. they certainly were playing it pretty loose and risky on the “home run guy”!
the name of the team is The DIAMONDBACKS
My understanding is the Foye deal was pre-arranged
It’s not that much of a risk if you’ve got a handshake deal in place to ensure your guy is there.
The Blazers didn't pick Foye
Boston did, and Portland traded for Foye first before trading for Roy. Maybe this was all prearranged, but it seems complicated, and if they were so sure that Roy and not Aldridge was the superstar, wouldn’t they have just picked Roy with the higher pick?
ask the suns about their "handshake" deal
with the warriors. they thought they were getting stephan curry in an amare deal this summer.
the name of the team is The DIAMONDBACKS
If you have evidence
that any GM knows which players in drafts will become stars, I’d like to see it.
My point is that this is what they get paid to do.
They are paid to identify the stars and select them. The Bulls have done an okay job at getting good players. They’ve done a terrible job at getting star players. At some point, they have to be held accountable for that.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 4:38 PM CST up reply actions
The future is
unknowable. Maybe you’d have an easier time if you accepted that no matter how much you get paid, you don’t become psychic. Why don’t stockbrokers know what’s going to happen in the market, after all it’s their job, right? The whole “they should have known” argument is pretty weak when you consider the fact that nobody knew, and there was no way to know.
People are much more than their projections. If not, a computer would be the best drafter. You can do all the scouting in the world, and come up with the right answer at the time, and still get a dud. So much of a player’s success depends on what happens after the draft. You make the assumption that if Roy had come to Chicago he would have been the same player, and you have no way of knowing if that’s true.
What you’re asking is for is for a GM to be given a small percentage of the knowledge and come out with a perfect answer. Basically, you’re asking for magic because the universe doesn’t work like that. If a person could do that, there are much more lucrative fields to get into other than being a GM.
Calling for an above average GM’s head is just scapegoating for your own general dissatisfaction. You’re delusional if you think that when Gar and Paxson are gone, you’re going to get someone in who knows who the superstars are.
Yao Pau, is absolutely correct when he said it’s fairer to judge them against their peers, which is the only reasonable standard. Paxson/Gar certainly seem to be above average in that regard.
And for the record, they’ve drafted two stars in Rose and Noah, possibly a third in Deng.
Let's imagine for a second...
…that Jordan had taken Roy instead of Morrison and the Blazers were left with the ‘stache. Same hype and all, considering being from Gonzaga and the NCAAs and such, but damn… that’s an NBA-changing decision.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
Tyrus Thomas said he was a SF and they drafted him to play PF.
That’s not bad luck. And Biedrins has more total productivity than Deng. And I’m not convinced Rose is better than those next five.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
im not convinced that biedrins has more total productivity
im assuming you mean, “greater impact”…or possibly, “does more” and i dont buy it. Biedrins is known more for his ability to rebound than anything. Defensively he is okay, offensively he is okay, it possible its the system but theres no way to really confirm even that because he has for so long played with the warriors and his game hasnt really changed, and in terms of what he gives his team statistically the most significant is his rebounding numbers. He also winds up being hurt quite a bit not unlike deng (although i dont think hes had anything super serious)
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/players/21515/Andris_Biedrins
(on the right hand side you can see a quick scouting report and a table that shows the injuries and transactions hes had)
I also wonder why you dont think rose is better than beasley, mayo, westbrook, love and galinari? I get that with brandon jennings dropping 55 and rose playing like crap recently people are down on him, but seriously? Maybe u just mean not enough time has passed for us to completely for certain say he is better than those guys…but really?
westbrook is a derrick rose light no matter what way you look at it, rose is a better player than him and hes shown it in college and in the nba. Beaslely is a head case and though he has alot of potential i think his mentality might always keep him from being a real dominant player (the fears everyone had before the draft seem to be true) Love lacks athleticism and his potential isnt that high either, galinari might end up being a less assertive tony kukoc without the ability to finish at the rim like him, oj mayo is gonna be a good scorer but i dont see him being a dominant one who also will lack other skills (larry hughes without the defense…) Those five were defeated by rose last season in terms of roy honors, and out of all of them rose not only has the most potential, but also the best chance of reaching his potential….before the draft thats what everyone here and everywhere else agreed on…that rose might not be the best player out of the gate, but most likely down the line he would be the better player….i dont know how you take that all away in 9 games…
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
You're right on the first.
But I meant more of the fact that he hasn’t been hurt that, therefore, he contributed more wins to Golden State than Deng. However, Deng played a lot right from the beginning and still has over 4000 minutes more than Biedrins. So you’re right to question it, but you’re reasoning is completely off. I think you lucked into that one. From 2006-2009, Biedrins was more productive than Deng.
I didn’t say Rose wasn’t better; I said I’m not convinced. I didn’t even read what you wrote following that sentence.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
I didn’t even read what you wrote following that sentence.
yea im wordy….
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
Either you did read what I write and you're being an ass....
…which is cool with me but hypocritical on your part, or this is just one helluva coincidence.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
He was quoting you, and then saying "yea im wordy..."
as if to say that he understood why you would skip over his ramblings.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 18, 2009 9:39 AM CST up reply actions
yea...
forgot the quotes…mi mal
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
by piccolomair on Nov 18, 2009 12:22 PM CST up reply actions
Get one thing straight
Rondo would not be as good, if he didn’t play w/ the teammates he has, before Ray and KG, he was headed toward busterdom
by QUINTEN DALEY on Nov 17, 2009 4:42 PM CST up reply actions
That's just not true. Have the big 3 helped? Of course. But he was
showing flashes of being a special player (especially on defense) very early in his career.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
You mean... after spending 2 years in the league?"
I guess this is why so many people have given up on Thomas so quickly.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
also Ronnie Brewer is a lot better than Thabo and would have filled the same role.
Another whiff that I didn’t even count earlier.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 16, 2009 9:30 PM CST up reply actions
I'm with you
Gar Paxdorf hasn’t really whiffed in the draft much, that’d imply a major mistake. Though I suppose Tyrus would be the first big foul-up…and I wouldn’t really call that a scouting mistake: Organizations make foul-ups :)
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 16, 2009 10:06 PM CST up reply actions
Under Paxson, they only scouted the Final Four
I guess under Gar they’ve given up scouting the Final Four entirely, since they didn’t draft Lawson.
Gar had a better cable package.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2009 11:09 AM CST up reply actions
By the way
3 times they’ve gotten Best Player Available in 7 first round pick opportunities? (I’m not counting 2009, you can’t make judgments after 9 games.)
Realize how incredible a ratio that is! You’re including guys picked 20 picks after with some of these. What are the chances that an average #6 pick is better than every other player from picks #7-#26? Tiny, right? And Paxson successfully did it 3 times in 7 tries.
I just wish they didn't draft anymore players that needed development, 'cause they suck at it.
Lawson and Blair were ready to play right away and they would have helped lots. And Budinger’s TS% might not be great, but he does have range and would space the floor better than Hin-brick and Salmons have so far this year.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 16, 2009 9:28 PM CST up reply actions
Wow
If you actually sat there in 2004 and said “hmmm. I think Al Jefferson, a high school kid, is going to be better then Ben Gordon, a player who had just led UCONN to the NCAA championship” you should be running the Bulls.
And I will give you that we should have taken Aldridge and Roy (Rondo has exceeded everyone’s expectations already as evidence by the fact he was traded on draft night) over Thomas in the draft that year. But keep in mind that back then, the Bulls essentially stole that #2 pick from the Knicks in the Eddy Curry deal. So they could take a gamble on TT’s potential based on what he did in the NCAA’s.
I don’t blame Paxson for doing that because EVERYONE who was anyone wanted Thomas over Aldridge the night he was taken. And, on top of that, I still think Thomas can be one the best players out of that draft if he’s given consistent minutes by Del Negro. Just my two cents about the whole thing.
And Pax didn’t even draft Johnson and Gibson…he had that position taken away from him before the draft last year. It’s too early to say who is the best player out of this draft; the season is only 10 games young.
Drafting is the problem
I agree with YaoPau. Bulls can draft.
However they suck at developing the talent they draft…
by JustAnotherFan on Nov 17, 2009 11:45 AM CST up reply actions
2010
Rose/Hinrich
Wade/Hinrich/draft
Deng/JJ
Thomas (Boozer)/Gibson
Noah/Miller
looks a lot better than the roster you suggested. The object is to win a championship, not the 5th seed in the east. A back up point guard instead of Kirk would not improve the team all that much, although I think that Lawson will prove to be a better player than JJ. Of course, if they can’t snag an All-Star in free-agency, we will continue to be the same mediocre team we have been for the last few years.
Wade is not coming. Also, the plan that I outlined would still allow for the possibility of Wade
coming because Hin-brick’s 8 million dollar contract would have been shipped the hell out for expirings, or did you miss that bit? And your scenario is unrealistic because the Bulls won’t have the $ to sign Wade AND TT or Boozer. They have to renounce TT to even sign Wade, and if they sign Wade, they can’t sign Boozer. They only have room for 1 max FA and then a bunch of minimum salary guys. They’d also have to let Miller go. God, you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about at all.
So really your scenario looks like:
Rose / Hinrich
Wade / Hinrich
Deng / JJ (crap)
Taj
Noah / Omer
Not a bad team, but not a championship contender. No team with Taj Gibson starting is contending for a title.
In my scenario, we would have been looking at (assuming a Salmons opt out):
Rose / Lawson
Wade / BG
Deng / filler SF (maybe drafted in 2010 draft)
Blair
Noah / Omer
with the possibility of flipping BG for an even better big man than DeJuan Blair (who is pretty good in case you hadn’t heard).
I like my scenario a lot better and I think that team looks a lot more like a title contender than the real team in your scenario (not the imagined one you cooked up that ignores the salary cap and the rules of the NBA).
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 2:29 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
That second scenario is perfect
unfortunately, I have come to expect faaaaaar less than perfection from Gar PaxDorf. Although, I can also say that I supported the JJ pick at the time, he was talked about as a top 10 pick.
"This is not Vietnam, Smokey, there are rules here." - Walter Sobchak
by Rose Colored Goggles on Nov 17, 2009 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
God...that would have been awful...
I can’t imagine a back court with a rookie as the third guard…with two of three under 6’3"….there is nothing about that roster that looks better than our current roster…
Why isn't your friendly Bulls Blogger friendly?
by Dionysus2.0 on Nov 16, 2009 10:52 PM CST up reply actions
Oh noes! Short guards! Oh wait, Lawson and BG can actually fucking shoot, unlike our current backcourt.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 2:30 AM CST up reply actions
Shooting is overrated.
Oh god, we’re not missing Ben Gordon at all, he caused all of our defensive problems last year! Now that he’s gone Rose can step into his shoes and start playing aggressively, and the Bulls will go 82-0, and EVERYTHING WILL BE DAISIES AND SUNSHINE.
I support the Tornado Release ... and Young Bucks.
BALL MOVEMENT
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2009 1:32 PM CST up reply actions
It's magical. It'll fix everything. Except when it doesn't.
God, this org. sucks.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Nov 17, 2009 1:36 PM CST up reply actions
From KC's mailbag
It looks like VDN is not giving James Johnson much of a leash out there. What gives? Is he doing something wrong? Three to five minutes a game isn’t enough time to even break a sweat. —Keith
In the Charlotte game, Johnson missed a boxout on Vladimir Radmanovich that led immediately to a Radmanovich 3-pointer and that cooked the rook. But afterward, Vinny admitted he probably could’ve gone back to him. Since, it’s been more of the same, with one mistake basically burying Johnson.
Imagine if Reinsdorf buried VDN everytime he made a coaching mistake.
someone did talk about it
http://www.blogabull.com/2009/11/15/1157872/james-johnson-might-have-been-the
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 16, 2009 2:24 PM CST reply actions
Oh I must of missed that
Oh well. Let’s talk about it some more. LOL
The answer to your question is...
They see the same thing we see…..AN ORGANIZATION WITH ITS HEAD UP ITS ASS…. Thats why we all can hope, and make these fun suggestions about who to get, who to trade, who to swap and then trade again….but its ALL for naught!!!!! The organization doesnt care, which you pointed out very clearly in your post….They dont go for the best player available, they try to be slick with picks that they dont really know will work or not. There is nothing left to hope for, we will not be in the running for one of those FA next year, and if we do make a trade, it will be for the wrong reasons and will blow up in their face. Sorry
Eat. Sleep. Pray. Watch chicago play.
P.S.
You've obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a shit about what you think.
by chi_till_eye_die on Nov 16, 2009 4:55 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Why are you a Bulls fan?
You hate the organization, think there’s “nothing left to hope for”?
Yes, let’s judge James Johnson after 9 games of limited playing time. Let’s say a team has no hope when it’s exceeding expectations (being 5-4 after 9).
I say we pick up Iverson
have him guard the 1 and rose or hinrich can guard the 2… let em start but limit his minutes.. hes cheap too
"Triple B's Bulls Bears... Blackhawks (i guess)"
He's not cheap
You will have to pay the luxury tax + lose the cash given back to teams under the tax. I want to say the amount that they would lose out on if they go over the cap is about $3-4million. They’re barely under the cap, so even if you sign him for $2million for the rest of the year you’re going to pay $4million when you include the luxury tax. Add in the extra $3-4million in lost from luxury tax revenues and you just paid Iverson $7-8million to come here.
Not Cheap for a guy with a bad attitude who would want to start over your #1 draft pick and cause locker room problems.
I'm a little disappointed with JJ too.
When I saw him play in the pre-season, I thought he could help the team and somehow I saw a player who could be similar to Paul Pearce in the future (I know, crazy!). Right now, I just can’t understand why we draft him. He’s heavy, isn’t shooting well and isn’t playing great D.
Someone said he wasn’t going to contribute a lot this season, but I can’t understand why you draft a guy like this knowing that injuries could leave the team with a small rotation. Now the Bulls face the consequences of having to play the same seven guys for most of the time
Jannero Pargo = Larry Hughes 2.0
Yea, I can’t really say much about JJ because I didn’t really see him play much and have no idea what the scouting reports said.
One thing, and if my memory serves me correct it makes the org look worse in their decisionmaking, didn’t a lot of the draft day analysts basically say that the JJ pick was pretty surprising at 16?
I can understand taking Taj at 26 instead of 16, and you all should too.
1) They could have 8 guys ahead of Taj and after they use the 16 pick those 8 guys are taken, leaving Taj at the 26 pick to fall into their laps.
2) They could have really liked Taj, even at the 16 pick, but figured (correctly) that he would drop to 26, so they can use their 16 pick and have more quality players to choose from.
3) Maybe they didn’t love Taj as much as we think, maybe they just thought he was the best pick at 26 and he happens to have outperformed the average 26 pick so far this season.
The truth is likely some combination of these 3, but I don’t think it is anything like “we loved Taj more than JJ.” Not that I put much passed our management, but that wouldn’t really make sense on any level, not even the Chicago Bull’s management level.
Also, I read a good article on Slate about Blair’s knees. It is way too soon to rate that pick (or lack of picking him).
If his knees are done after this year, it would’ve been a horrible move to take him with the 16th pick, or anywhere near that. If he makes it 10 years and plays well, people will say he should’ve been picked higher.
In reality, you have to just look at the risk of his knees going out. If it’s a high risk, it’s totally understandable why 15-20 teams passed him up when he was a more skillful player than most others at the 16-36 picks. If it turns out to have been more of paranoia and exaggeration of team doctor reports, or teams just heard his knees were bad and got scared, then yea, you can fault the Bulls (and others) for not taking him in round 1.
But when everybody passes on him from 16-36, it is likely for a reason, and even if they err on the side of caution, that doesn’t mean he was worth the 16th pick. He would more likely have been worth the 26th pick, if anything.
Ty Lawson is another idea, one I mentioned in my player analysis thread. I mean, nobody knew Rose would be this bad out of the gate (hampered by injury or not) and nobody knew Deng would be this good out of the gate (not hampered by injury, playing better). If Deng was playing like shit, maybe we don’t like JJ, but the pick would’ve made more sense to us.
And if Rose were playing 36 quality minutes, Salmons was adjusting well to the 2 and Hinrich just filled in the 12 Rose PG minutes and 15+ Salmons SG minutes, we wouldn’t even be thinking about Ty Lawson right now.
Hell, we could’ve traded some expirings and our 26 pick or something to Washington for the 5 pick, traded that to the Bucks or Knicks for a small piece or future pick and swapped picks with them, grabbing Jennings and having another pick for next year. Could’ve, would’ve, should’ve!!!
Yeah but
To me it doesn’t really matter if everyone is playing up to their potential, Lawson right now would be a contributor to your team as opposed to JJ who isn’t even playing. Besides count me as someone who didn’t believe that everything would just turn around because the roster got taller.
I admit Deng playing up to his contract (or most of it). has been a pleasant surprise. But Salmons is a career 8ppg scorer and Hinrich hasn’t shot well for 2 years and my goodness Pargo wasn’t even in the league last year. So the addition of an actual backup PG that’s a true PG, would have been a welcome addition. The roster the way it’s comprised now does not help Rose. He could of had at least 10 assist against the 76ers but no one on this team can shoot.
I said it last year that Salmons and Deng on the court at the same time would be an issue for the offense and sure enough it is. Everybody is slamming Rose but I knew he would have a down year because the guy who played in the back court with him last year DEMANDED A DOUBLE TEAM. There is no space on the floor for him to create and when he does, these guy’s can’t hit a shot anyway. Lawson may have helped with that.
nice
i dont entirely agree with your view…but i do like your argument and your points….
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
The problem with your theory is that during draft night it looked like Rose, Hinrich and Salmons would be eating up almost all the 96 minutes a night at the two guard spots.
On the other hand, we had TT at PF (supplemented by Noah/Miller combo on the floor at times) and then Deng, coming off a tough injury and not fully healed at the 3. With Salmons moving to the 2, we really had no PF or SF depth, so I understand their POV of taking a SF and PF.
Hindsight is 20/20, if we knew Salmons would not adjust particularly well to the 2, Rose would struggle and Deng would play so well, of course nobody would’ve taken JJ.
The only problem I have with the JJ pick is if they thought that he could not immediately contribute as a back of the rotation guy (10-15 minutes a night filler at SF). If that is the case, then I hate the pick. So far, that has been the case, but it’s much easier to hate the pick than it was in the summer.
YEY 2k10
alright right now im extremely excited….I was playing 2k10, and i just finished the offseason…the bulls sucked for me, during the season the moves i made got me javale mcgee for pargo, raja bell for salmons, kyle korver and a number 1 draft pick for Tyrus and James Johnson….i cleared up some cap room and went through the season.
The jazz’s draft pick got me the number 3 pick overall, i initially planned on getting aldrich and picking up a guy named michael washington in the second round, and getting the best available player with pick number 20…. I checked to see who was available in the 2010 free agency, and to no surprise there was nobody. Aside from Joe Johnson no guards that i wanted (wade, manu) were available, and bosh amare and lebron didnt opt out.
Anyway i go into the draft and low and behold, Alrich is picked up 2nd…derrick favors went at number 1….so guess who is sitting on the board with my number 3 pick….JOHN FREAKIN WALL!!!! I didnt even bother scouting him cuz i was sure he would be gone at number 1 …and at number 3….COINCIDENCE or a repeat of legendary proportions?!?!
So i picked up wall, and with my number 20th pick i picked up some euro pf who had range and decent post defense…i did nab Washington with my second round pick…
I go check out the free agency, and i am undewhelmed by everything i see…then i notice HIM…in my brothers association he retired (and my brother started a couple of association modes and though they always had different players opt this guy always retired he said…in his current association, wade does opt out cuz his team sucks) so i look at my roster and say …why not….i signed shaq to a 1 year 5 million contract. I did pay alot more than he was asking (he was only asking for 3) but i had a ton of capspace and a 1 year deal didnt matter….played a game agaist the nuggets (who made it to the conference finals before bowing out to the lakers in 6) and i couldnt help but love my team….heres what my team is
Rose/Hinrich
Wall/Raja/Hinrich
Deng/European Big man
Noah/Taj/Washington
Shaq/McGee/Fresno
This team is freakin awesome…although you would think shaq kills it…he actually does the opposite. with rose and walls ability to penetrate i get the inside defense all in a mess on the other team, which frees shaq up enough for a lob and he either draws a foul or gets a post shot in, he gets doubled and noah runs through the lane with a dunk (i got a real good clip of noah and shaq playing a two man game that results in noah dunking on the birdman…NICE!!!) wall and rose are not good 3pt shooters, but they have great midrange shots in the game, and both finish at the rim real well as well as pass it out. Raja and hinrich add defense and 3pt shooting off the bench and luol deng is solid for me…washington is a jordan hill esque pf, solid size, nice athleticism…nothing special but cna dunk the ball with some authority, while the euro guy is basically a project big man with no awareness but can play the 3 and post some sfs up…
All in all this team is awesome…and i wonder if the bulls can get john wall next year somehow…in the game he seems like a dwayne wade light…and ive heard the comparisons being made….
Im sorry……its just….i like my team so much i wanted to rant about it…thanks for listening!!
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
Oh man, I wish I had NBA 2k10
ARGH.
…
ARGH.
I’d play as the bucks. Wooo, Jennings. :P
Trade as many spaces for picks as possible, and voila.
I support the Tornado Release ... and Young Bucks.
BTW, this move has been talked about.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
btw, I already pointed that out
:-p
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2009 12:23 PM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
