Blog a Bull: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Check out our NFL Scoreboard: scores, schedule and blogs Bar-right-arrows

Pax: "There's not a deal to be done"

Blogabull_s_tiny by your friendly BullsBlogger on

KC Johnson's account of Paxson's talk with the media today:

There is simply no equal value for Bryant in a trade. And the Lakers weren't interested in conducting a fire sale. So when rumors got out of hand on Wednesday, involving virtually every player on the Bulls' roster, Paxson knew he had to do what he did Thursday.

"It's time to put it to rest," Paxson said. "Today sends a message that our guys don't have to worry about anything anymore."

UPDATE: Much more from Mike McGraw of The Herald.

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.

0 recs | Comment 153 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

bye bye Kobe fan club
The greatest individual non-trade performance of all time in the universe.

by hscs on Nov 1, 2007 2:58 PM CDT   0 recs

Hey atleast we have
Ben Wallace and he can air ball free throws in clutch moments.
''This whole parties out of control!''-Moose

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 1, 2007 2:58 PM CDT   0 recs

remember in atl
when he hit those 2 ft's to go into ot....classic

by milesgmsu on Nov 1, 2007 3:25 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

or Game 4 of the first round last year?
When he nailed them to seal the sweep? I remember chanting for him in Miami watching the front running heat fans leave.

by SRQman on Nov 1, 2007 10:54 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

it was fun while it lasted
at least it was nice to dream what it would be like to have "superstar" on this team

by ScottieCartwright on Nov 1, 2007 3:00 PM CDT   0 recs

Paxson is so goddam
cautious!  He will only consider a deal if 1) it's for somebody else's player on his roster, or if 2) the other team is willing to GIVE him a player in a fire sale.  What's wrong with a deal that benefits both teams?  No matter how the Kobe deal eventually wirks itself out, the Lakers will be the loser.  Does Paxson have to crush them in order to budge?  What an idiot!

by alec on Nov 1, 2007 3:02 PM CDT   0 recs

when did he ever trade
in a fire sale?

by milesgmsu on Nov 1, 2007 3:25 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

The evil media kills the trade.
Not sure what he means. I think Kobe has second thoughts. Like he always does.
''This whole parties out of control!''-Moose

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 1, 2007 3:03 PM CDT   0 recs

Depression sets in
''This whole parties out of control!''-Moose

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 1, 2007 3:04 PM CDT   0 recs

I don't buy it
And no one else should.

Pax is pretty much putting things to rest . . . for now!

He would be stupid to say that the Kobe deal ain't gonna happen ever. He simply just slammed the door on it for now.

I think we all pretty much know the talks are gonna continue again either in December or close to the trading deadline.

Pax knows what he's doing even if it means lying to the media.

He also knows that once the Lakers start struggling, which they are . . they'll get more desperate to make a deal.

So for now, yeah the deal is dead. But anyone that thinks it's dead forever should wake up.

And the Bulls players know this too by the way. I still see it as being a distraction.

by Option27 on Nov 1, 2007 3:05 PM CDT   0 recs

I don't think it's a distraction either way
and yes, re-open things in December when Noc and Smith (and a lot of others around the league) are tradeable.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 1, 2007 3:07 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

So if you're one of the Bulls players mentioned
You honestly think the trade is dead? C'mon now, they're not fools. As long as Kobe is out there, everyone on the Bulls that the Lakers are targetting are gonna have it on their minds

by Option27 on Nov 1, 2007 3:09 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

They won't admit it
They say all the right things but there is no doubt that they think about it

by Option27 on Nov 1, 2007 3:10 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I know you're
probably right.  But this just pisses me off so much.  Paxson is such a baby.

by alec on Nov 1, 2007 3:09 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

What, then
are the Kobe criers?

by marionette on Nov 1, 2007 3:13 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Paxson is a
gutless baby.  He needs to have a trade weighted so heavily in his favor before he'll dip his toe in the water.

by alec on Nov 1, 2007 3:16 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

What in God's name are you talking about?
Getting Kobe in return for most of our best players won't get the Bulls closer to a championship.

by 1958ChiTown on Nov 1, 2007 3:21 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Would you rather have Isiah?
It gets frustrating sometimes, especially with all the trade talk put out there by the irresponsible hacks at espn.com, but things could be much worse.  As much as I would love to see Kobe come to the Bulls, I'm glad Paxson is holding out for the best deal possible.  The longer he waits, the more likely the trade will be strongly in the Bulls favor.  The Kobe trade, if/when it happens, should be about making the Bulls one of the best teams in the NBA, not just one of the best teams in their conference, which they already are.  Ask the Bears and Cubs how things work out when you set lower expectations just to beat out your mediocre direct competition.  I'd much rather have someone cautious like Paxson than have a GM who makes huge mistakes only to try to correct them with even bigger mistakes.  

by snley on Nov 1, 2007 6:25 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Pax is pretty much putting things to rest
Exactly.
He's doing what any GM SHOULD do in this situation if he's not pulling the trigger RIGHT NOW: Stop the madness of speculation.

But you're right Opt - the deal WILL be revisited at some point - whether NOW or LATER.

Is it spring training yet?

by Bluelou on Nov 1, 2007 3:16 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

We can wait
and see,what we can do with out KB.Paxson did a right thing for his team.We are not desperate to get Kobe.And we will see how Lakers will handle Kobegate.I'm sure they will be happy to get PJ,Nocioni,Gordon,and 1-st peak in December.They would be in a worse situation then,and we will get Kobe as a Christmas Gift.
Time is working for Da Bulls!

by Azabullsfan on Nov 1, 2007 3:07 PM CDT   0 recs

ahhhhhhhhhhhhh
this sucks. This fucked up all my Bulls excitement.
''This whole parties out of control!''-Moose

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 1, 2007 3:11 PM CDT   0 recs

Ben Wallace really needs to go.
That was a bad sign plan a simple. Sorry I would rather have Tyson.
''This whole parties out of control!''-Moose

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 1, 2007 3:12 PM CDT   0 recs

joejoe, I swear to god
you can pause and get all your jarbled thoughts into one comment, ya know?

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 1, 2007 3:17 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Thank God.
Paxson is wise. He couldn't let the distraction hover over the team without any comment.

Let's play some basketball.

by 1958ChiTown on Nov 1, 2007 3:17 PM CDT   0 recs

Damn ESPN is slow to catch on.
''This whole parties out of control!''-Moose

by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Nov 1, 2007 3:21 PM CDT   0 recs

I hear
Paxson's asking that the retroactive rights to Shaq get thrown in the deal before he'll revisit it.

by alec on Nov 1, 2007 3:22 PM CDT   0 recs

I think the Lakers
need to remind Kobe they are his employer and he is getting paid very well to produce for them. Go out and get a couple of good players to compliment him and call it good enough until his contract is up. God I hate whiney men.
Racecar spelled backwards is racecar.

by sue369 on Nov 1, 2007 3:22 PM CDT   0 recs

Sue, I think
you'd forgive Kobe if he came to the team...unless you're referring to me, that is.  

by alec on Nov 1, 2007 3:26 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Alec
I hate Kobe.
Racecar spelled backwards is racecar.

by sue369 on Nov 1, 2007 3:29 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

don't bait eachother
and alec, just stop posting for a few hours.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 1, 2007 3:31 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I can
appreciate that.  Certainly, there are plenty of reasons not to like the guy.  Maybe I'll just think about those for a while.  It might help me get over my frustration at Paxson for passing on this deal.  But as long as Matt keeps this thread current I'll probably still post to it.

by alec on Nov 1, 2007 3:35 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Wow...
I wish I knew what year you lived in.

You do know this is 2007.

You do know that stars call the shots, right?

You do know that Michael would have pulled the same shit if the Bull fucked him over the way the Lakers fucked Kobe.  Kobe, doesn't want to leave L.A.   Kobe wants to play for a team that is willing to bring in the parts to win.  L.A. has shown that they are not.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 4:11 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I really don't
give a damn what Kobe does or does not want just as I don't care what you have to say. I don't like Kobe so I am happy. If you are not that is your problem.
Racecar spelled backwards is racecar.

by sue369 on Nov 1, 2007 4:23 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I see why you won't like him..
you prefer average stiffs like Kirky over superstars.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 4:25 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

You don't see
anything. Kirk has nothing to do with this. I have never liked Kobe. Ever.
Racecar spelled backwards is racecar.

by sue369 on Nov 1, 2007 4:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

let's not make this
Chad comprehenshion day.

we all know you like Kirk Hinrich, like him more than the Bulls, and say as much quite often.

No need to reiterate it to every nitwit who comes in and freaks out.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 1, 2007 4:45 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Did you even
read what I said? I didn't say anything about liking Kirk.
Racecar spelled backwards is racecar.

by sue369 on Nov 1, 2007 7:04 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

matt
can u take a cue from pax and delete anythread wit kobe in it now  thaaaaaanks

by milesgmsu on Nov 1, 2007 3:24 PM CDT   0 recs

Let's all remember that report
The Lakers are high on Nocioni

If there is any truth to the report, that means it will come up again in Dec most likely

by Option27 on Nov 1, 2007 3:27 PM CDT   0 recs

That report was like christmas morning
so yeah, I do remember it. :)

It's not just about Noc, the whole league will be in play by then. Remember, Noc is a base-year player himself (like Hinrich), so including him is complicated even after December 15th

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 1, 2007 3:29 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

this isn't over
because if it were, then the contract no-signings would be all for naught...there's a reason that BG and Lu weren't extended...and my guess is that it wasn't just a money issue.

by ScottieCartwright on Nov 1, 2007 3:29 PM CDT   0 recs

I agree on that much
I think the 'low-ball' offer was Pax saying he wanted to remain flexible in a trade situation, so for the team to give up that flexibility you take the pay cut.

Don't tell Sam Smith they turned down $10m though, he may weep into his bowl of shredded wheat.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 1, 2007 3:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

agree
Matt you said it before I did but I do think Pax offered less then they would have normally to remain more flexible for future trades

By not signing Deng and Gordon and not trading Pax can watch a very good team get to playoffs and evaluate all players for another valuable year and Bulls franchise will be sucess this year regardless.  Next summer then becomes the key year and Bulls have some flexibility without too much downside as it seems there are not teams that can come in and steal Deng / BenG by overpaying.  At end of year Bulls will only have few long term big contracts and better idea of Thomas / Noah / Thabo as they then address roster, including Deng / Gordon

by NY Chicago Fan on Nov 1, 2007 3:44 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

clarify - sucess
I meant above that Bulls Franschise will be finiancially a sucess and a good one in managements eyes.  They might not get to finals like us fans would like but for Bulls management as long as they are top 4 seed and battle well in 2nd round or conf finals then Bulls year will be probably considered sucessful behind closed doors as they understand only 1 team can make it out of East to finals

by NY Chicago Fan on Nov 1, 2007 3:48 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

if mgmt
thinks like that...then they should all be fired

by ScottieCartwright on Nov 1, 2007 3:53 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm a realist
Basketball is entertainment and a game I love to play but the Bulls aren't going to do things just because we want them to, its still a business with millions of dollars involved

and I'm not saying Bulls can't eventually win a championship, but I bet they value having a sucessful, popular playoff team while maintaining flexibility and finiacial sense

by NY Chicago Fan on Nov 1, 2007 6:32 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Disagree!
I thought you were commenting on the Cubs for a second.  Anyway, Paxson/Skiles/Reinstorf are not like that.  Paxson wants to win the whole damn thing.  He's very competitive as everyone could see when he played.  You will see when we get Kobe.  
Is it me or does Lebron walk like a duck?!

by GranvilleWaiters on Nov 1, 2007 9:28 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

No rings for that
They don't give out rings to the team with the most roster flexibility and fiscal discipline.

When you have a chance to get a player of Kobe's ability, you've got to do it.  Deng, Gordon and PJ's contract means you have Bryant at about the same salary those two would have made after their extensions.  It also solves the problem the Bulls have in getting points from someone when the defense throws everything it has at you yet you can still score.

by nateroth on Nov 1, 2007 5:09 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

The Spurs have a lot of rings
thanks to roster flexibility and fiscal discipline.

by hscs on Nov 1, 2007 5:11 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

you left off
Tim Duncan.

The number 1 reason why they won championships.  

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 5:28 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

yup
and a roster chock full of middling players with bad contracts would have had the same amount of success as Kevin Garnett and the T-Wolves.

by hscs on Nov 1, 2007 6:20 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

bs
"thanks to roster flexibility and fiscal discipline."

that is NOT why they won rings.  They won because of Tim Duncan.

Yes, teams with decent support around their stars can't win championships but without Duncan all the flexibility and fiscal discipline in the world wouldn't have won shit.

As a matter of fact, this year's bulls team seems pretty flexible and disciplined (Wallace?) but they ain't gonna win it all.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 6:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

hate to attack
but I'm not sure if you understood I was commenting on how well the Spurs have distributed their financial resources over the years. I agree Tim Duncan has been a (the!) big reason why the Spurs have won a bunch of games, but poor management of the team would have meant mediocrity for San Antonio. Ginobili, Oberto, and Bonner, or Hudson, Jaric, and Blount. You get the picture now I'm sure.

Off to return the CBA to the vault!

by hscs on Nov 1, 2007 6:40 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

i get it i get it
look at the Knicks for crying out loud.  High pay roll shit team.

I'm saying that all the fiscal responsibility in the world is useless with out stellar standout talent.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 7:16 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

The
difference is Kobe is no Duncan.  TD, among a few other Spurs, took less money to give the management more money to sign other good players with.  Kobe on the other hand signed a huge contract, which he knew would hinder the Lakers' ability to bring in other good players.
I agree the Bulls could use a true stud, I just don't believe Kobe is the right stud.

by duaneo88 on Nov 1, 2007 7:33 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

what?
Duncan and Kobe make the same.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 7:49 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Actually
Kobe makes a few  million more. I'm sure you know TD just signed an extension for 2 years / 20 mil per that will last through 2011/2012. So in 2011/2012 TD will make 20 mil, Kobe will make 24.8 mil (shamsports for that info).  
That 4.8 mil, plus Bowen signing for less money, is the difference between, oh lets say getting a Robert Horry instead of a Mark Blount.
TD could have signed for 30 mil a year, instead he took 20. Do you see Kobe doing that? There is no way.

by duaneo88 on Nov 1, 2007 8:26 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I see what you're saying
When I say they made the same I was talking about this year and the next two.  But Kobe would sign for less if that meant that he could have a winning team.  If he just was in it for the money, he'd stay in Los Angeles and collect checks.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 8:46 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

attack! attack!
A few bad contracts can hurt a team for a long time, and the original flexibility comment was in regards to the Bulls being able to resign their own "stellar standout talent".

by hscs on Nov 1, 2007 8:50 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

It helps when...
You have you superstar to build from the start and you then draft well in the lower rounds to surround him with talent.

The Bulls have no one on their roster the caliber of TD.  If they got Kobe or TD it would be in the middle of their careers.

The situation would be quite different had the Spurs not sucked at the right time and failed to get a player the caliber of TD.

For all the flexibility we extol, remember the Spurs were ready to jump on Jason Kidd had the Nets not signed him.

"If you're not going to compete, then I'll dominate you." MJ

by Rankdog on Nov 1, 2007 8:52 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

And they would have had to let Tony Parker go
so maybe that didn't work out so bad for the Spurs.  Kidd > Parker, but Kidd < Parker + Eva.

by Scotter on Nov 1, 2007 9:39 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

No question
it definitely worked out better for the Spurs.  My point being they were ready to tear up that payroll flexibility and replace their young talent with a big contract for an aging superstar.  Its completely by accident they have flexibility that the currently do.  They can thank Kidd and the Nets for that.
"If you're not going to compete, then I'll dominate you." MJ

by Rankdog on Nov 2, 2007 12:14 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Hurray
No Kobe!
Not need to worry for a while.

by AngryAsianAce on Nov 1, 2007 3:29 PM CDT   0 recs

Thank God
The ONLY thing Kobe guarantees is a bunch of unhappy teammates. I firmly believe that the team we currently have has a far greater chance of winning a championship in the next 5 years than a team with Kobe. Kobe changes everything about how the team plays, it's not just a change at SG.

Personally the only thing that disappointed me was the "for now."

by nas on Nov 1, 2007 3:31 PM CDT   0 recs

Um, I'm listening to 570 AM here in Los Angeles
And they just said . . . .

"Breaking news! John Paxson has been quoted as saying Kobe Bryant will never be a Bull"

Was KC at the listening to the same thing as they were?

This is huge if true

by Option27 on Nov 1, 2007 3:36 PM CDT   0 recs

"For now" or "Never"?
"To be or not to be a Bull?",that is a quastion.

by Azabullsfan on Nov 1, 2007 3:41 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Might just be
their interpretation of his comments.
Racecar spelled backwards is racecar.

by sue369 on Nov 1, 2007 3:42 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

yeah
I thought that at first but they kept insisting he said never.

by Option27 on Nov 1, 2007 3:44 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Even if he did say that,
I'd guess it was just some over-emphasis in an attempt to end the Bulls' involvement in the all the rumors.  It's sports, so we all know nothing is forever - people unretire, franchise players get traded, etc.
"They had me do a psychology test and I asked Coach Skiles if that affected his coaching. He laughed and said, `No way.'" (Joakim Noah)

by wjb1492 on Nov 1, 2007 4:12 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Nothing personal-just business?
One imporatnt quote from reprt-"Paxson doesn't think he needs to address the players about putting an end to trade discussions with the Lakers. He thinks they'll get the message through the media."-May be he doesn't want to give any personal promisses,so he wound't look like a lier in
December.

by Azabullsfan on Nov 1, 2007 4:08 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

The players are not kids, they're adults!
This is a business.  Players in all sports shake off trade rumors all the time.  You don't need to baby them.
Is it me or does Lebron walk like a duck?!

by GranvilleWaiters on Nov 1, 2007 9:19 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

maybe
Paxson doesn't want Kobe because he didn't go to college...it would go agains the mold of "hard-working player from a successful school/bball program"

by ScottieCartwright on Nov 1, 2007 3:56 PM CDT   0 recs

If that was true.....
Why did Paxson and Skiles go to L.A. two summers ago to try and talk to Kobe about joining the Bulls when he was a free agent.  Paxson does want Bryant.  Kobe himself said he was close to signing with the Bulls back then.
Is it me or does Lebron walk like a duck?!

by GranvilleWaiters on Nov 1, 2007 9:16 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

If they really wanted Kobe
they would've worn their best jeans on the trip.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 1, 2007 10:23 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

open letter (venting & sick of this)
Kobe: you're too good for LA to just give you away, and too expensive for a team to get you and still be a contender. If you really want to force the issue stay at home and refuse to play until LA gets desperate. Or just deal with it.

Lakers:  Either call Kobe's bluff and tell him to shut up & be happy, or be prepared to get less for him. But don't expect other teams to bail you out to save face. It's not that the Bulls think Deng is as good as Kobe, they just don't want to give you "fair value" when they have no reason to.

Kobe salivators:  this current Bulls team could be a 50-win team for the next several years. Probably not enough to win a championship, but still good and exciting for a long time. Kobe & a depleted Bulls roster, on the other hand, won't last as long, and probably wouldn't beat the best of the West in a 7-game series in the short-term anyway. So if it doesn't get a championship, why give up so much for a 30yo who may only stick around 2yrs? When it gets you no further than you are now?

Mariotti, Bill Simmons, Barkely, or whoever else thinks Paxson has no guts/balls:  no more complaining unless you specifically identify the trades/proposals that Paxson turned down. Or at least preface every paragraph with, "I have no idea what the specifics might be, or what's best for the team, and really...I don't know my ass from my elbow anyway."

Deng & Gordon: Chill. You'll get paid eventually. in the meantime work on that inside game and cutting down turnovers.

Sorry, I had to vent. Feel free to add an open letter of your own.

by T Maple on Nov 1, 2007 4:26 PM CDT   0 recs

I just don't get it...
You say it yourself:

"Probably not enough to win a championship, but still good and exciting for a long time."

Then who cares?  If they can't win a championship then they need to make a change.  All that matters is championships.  I don't care how exciting the Bulls were in the 80's, its the 90's that mattered.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 4:35 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

doesn't matter w/o a championship?
I'm not saying I don't care if they never win a championship, or that I don't want them to win one,  but I do disagree that that's "all that matters." Would you want to be Miami Heat fan lately? That team is really depressing to me. How long did the feel-good vibe of that championship last? Would I take that over being good, respected, and fun to watch for a decade? Call me crazy, but I'm not sure I would.

I know "one and done" and "great for several years but not a champ" is a false dichotomy. And I do think Paxson should be willing to make big moves that'll bring us closer. I was hoping for Gasol last year, who's not half the player Kobe is. But he wouldn't have been as costly--we'd still have a more promising future.

And again, I don't think a Kobe Bulls roster is any guaranteed trophy anyway.

by T Maple on Nov 1, 2007 7:53 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

you and i are not that far apart...
Ideally, you want a sustainable team that can be comptetive at the highest levels.  You want to be the 90's bulls or more current Spurs.  Or even the Kobe/Shaq lakers.  Or even the Detroit Pistons.  there are countless examples.  But in order to do that you need better talent than what we have right now.  And Kobe Bryant doesn't guarantee anything but he brings us closer to that.  Closer than Ben Gordon will anyhow.

by Chad on Nov 1, 2007 8:10 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Dear Mr. T,
or is it Ms. T (ah, the delights of anonymity), Mariotti, Bill Simmons, Barkely, and I guess that would be me, we all think that Paxson is a gutless weenie.

Paxson has never been proactive in anything.  Even as a player, he just hung around, waiting for someone to throw him the ball, so he could try to heave in a long-shot--the same thing he's doing now with this Kobe