Ok...I know I'm wrong here. I have to be, everybody in the world disagrees with me. Even all the people who usually loath the front office. But I don't get it. Exactly how was the Asik contract bad? The way I see it, it was pretty damn good and could have ended up being the best possible was a contract could have been structured.

Year one: 5,000,000

Year two: 5,225,500

Year three: 14,898,938

How the hell does this handicap anything? The first two years we have Asik on an extremely reasonable contract. That third year, though is what everybody seems to have issue with. My question: Why? What we have is ONE year of (massively) overpaying Omer. Let's remember than every single year, there are ALWAYS a handful of teams looking for gigantic expiring contracts at the trade deadline. Every year, this always happens. We could have had an athletic center who could produce as either a starter or a reserve. There would have been plenty of suitors that season. And what if we couldn't find a trade partner? We then have a gigantic expiring contract coming off the books. So where is the bad?

The ONLY thing I can think is that it would have made it far more difficult to sign somebody in the mythical summer of 2014 that the Org (or...i guess...who, actually?) is selling as the new plan. What is so special about that particular offseason? Hasn't it already been pointed out that Deng will likely be the 2nd or 3rd best free agent that year? And even if all they are worried about is re-signing Deng...the Bulls will have Bird Rights...so all having Omer that year would have done would push the Bulls further into the luxury tax, which I will always believe is a shitty, shitty, shitty reason to not do things, despite that it is usually the Bulls' #1 reason for not doing things.

Anyway, I started rambling. How am I wrong? I assume I must be because of how universally praised the decision to not match that contract was. But I just don't get it.