ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 04:13 PM) I don't know how many minutes Foye gets, but he's consistently been a 25 mpg type guy (including on a good Clippers team last year). I expect him to get solid minutes at both positions. And it isn't like the signing of Foye has prevented the Bulls of signing anyone else (and that is even if they sign Foye). He's probably the best guard on the market right now and you are talking about a vet min deal. Foye would be a drop-off from Rip or Belinelli at the 2.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 04:14 PM) The other question is whether Mayo takes 4M to play with the Bulls. They could have offered more money (up to $5.1 mil with the trade exception) and more than 2 years if they really wanted. I don't think he would have turned down more money, more years and the same access to minutes if it was out there (I honestly don't know if it was to be fair though. Tax issues could have also been in play on the years).

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 04:12 PM) Is it possible the Bulls were waiting to see what was gonna happen with Asik before they started doing something? Hoops hype has Bellinelli and Foye in the top 3 of SGs still available. Foye shot a ton of 3's last year and made a respectable 38% of them, better than Bellinelli's respectable 37%. Foye is a career 36.6% 3-point shooter that's highly inconsistent with his stroke (see his 32.7 and 34.6% totals the previous two years). Belinelli is a career 39% shooter coming off his worst year (though some would argue that's because he didn't play with Chris Paul). Foye at SG is also a bad idea defensively. And they've known what kind of offer Asik was going to get for weeks.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 04:05 PM) I actually think Hinrich is a more important piece and I'm probably higher on Mayo then anyone on this board. However, Mayo absolutely can't play the point. The Bulls clearly needed a PG, hence why they made Hinrich a priority. That said, if you want to completely give up on this year, then I'd argue Mayo would be the better get (as I think he can turn into a solid 2). Just no. Getting a long term option at the 2 is far more important than whether we get Kirk Hinrich or some other reject at PG in the 50 or so games this year. Barring a miraculous comeback by Rose, they're not making any kind of noise in the playoffs this year anyways (assuming they even make it, which would require near perfect health). I'd MUCH rather have Mayo and someone like Aaron Brooks than splurge for Kirk.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 04:05 PM) Well, I'm not quite sure you can say Teague is a better option then Foye. I fully expect Foye will get a lot of minutes at the point early in the year (as Teague is adjusting). The guy was a late 1st round pick. The odds that he amounts to anything are very low. I'm not saying that Teague is better than Foye, I'm saying that the impact that Foye could make in those 10-15 minutes he gets instead of Teague (unless he plays the 2 as well, in which case, ugh) is of little significance in the big picture.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 03:45 PM) The big thing with Foye is he gives you another guy capable of playing some minutes at the point, which with Rose out and Teague being a complete rookie, is pretty important if the Bulls plan on making the playoffs. Especially if Hinrich goes down with injury. And no, I'm not saying he's a good point, rather that he can/has played the point, so in a pinch it is an option. So if their two best options at the point are out, he's useful. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement. The only situation where I'd tolerate him is IF Kirk did get hurt. I'd have absolutely no problems with a 28/20 type split at the position between Kirk and Teague. It's not like Foye playing 10 of those minutes would make a massive difference on your record.

QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 03:45 PM) Bro, C.J. Watson wasn't good either. He was seriously one of the most ineffieint PGs in the NBA these last two seasons. Foye and his 51% TS% is better than Watson and his 49% TS%. They both blow. A 51% TS% is far from good from a guy that's supposed to be a "quality bench player". Plus the Bulls already decided they had to spend $4 million to bring back Captain Kirk to take on their stop-gap PG/eventual combo guard role. They added 3 players this off-season that are primarily point guards and none of them are particularly good.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 03:39 PM) Foye is actually a relatively solid bench player. Same can be said for Belinelli. Doesn't matter cause Rose isn't right, but these are pretty solid under the radar signings that keep the bench strong. I do agree with you regarding Mayo. I said I don't really have a problem with Belinelli, though I fear he's our starting 2-guard. Foye just isn't good. Yes, if you let him shoot 10 times he can score 11 points, but there are plenty of better options for taking those shots.

QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 03:29 PM) Bellinelli can create his own shot. Much better than Korver could. Foye can drive the lane just fine. These guys are a big improvement over C.J./Lucas Take a look at C.J. Watsons at-rim percentage and efficiency with the Bulls. Then take a look at Randy Foye's at-rim percentage and efficiency with the Clippers. It's an improvement. I don't think you really watch these guys or looked at the stats at all. Belinelli, Foye and Kirk combined for 4.3 attempts at the rim last year, and that's with all of them getting very solid minutes on different teams. To put that in perspective, Luol Deng had 3.4 attempts at the rim last year and isn't really a driver either. Foye took over 3 times as many shots from behind the arc as he did at the rim. Also, Foye and Hinrich aren't terribly useful at all the second Rose gets back. Whether they're better than C.J. and Lucas is only part of the equation. The Bulls also dumped 2, maybe 3 of their wings to get these guys and they will have to absorb a lot of minutes there.

QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 03:26 PM) I think the plan is to send Rips contract out in a S&T for Foye. I really like what we're doing in the offseason. Adding a bunch of guys off the bench who can handle the ball, drive the lane and create their own shot. Randy Foye would be a nice combo guard for us. None of those guys can drive.

QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 03:13 PM) I don't know what people expect out of bench players. We're signing bench players and people act like we should be signing super stars. Bellinelli and Foye are an answer, they're an answer to bench depth, that's all. People were clamoring that we need more offense, and now that we're trading a bit of our defense for offense off the bench, people are still unhappy. wth? They're not really adding offense, that would imply that any of these guys could create offense/score with some kind of efficiency. Belinelli is alright, but he can't create his own shot at all. He's basically replacing Korver, and he may be the starting 2 if they dump Rip to save money. Foye is a chucker that can't drive and can't guard anyone. Kirk used to be decent but he's fading a bit. He also can't get to the basket and is only an okay shooter. Foye and Hinrich have zero upside and Belinelli has little. If they're going to spend $4 mil on another guard, at least use your trade exception to go after Mayo (he signed for 2 years at 4 per roughly) or get Gerald Green (even less). Those two might have been long term answers.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:54 PM) Looks like the Bulls are looking to sign both Bellinelli and Randy Foye...sign me up! You seem to have a thing for 2nd round picks and bad players. Randy Foye is not the answer to anything.

Thank god. $15 mil in year three for a guy that didn't even play 15 MPG for us this year would have been beyond absurd.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 21, 2012 -> 01:28 AM) I like Moore and I wanted the bulls to draft him. Maybe could be a very poor mans Wade. That's just bad Badger. Wade is a really good penetrator and a mediocre shooter while Moore is an effective jump-shooter and they make up most of his shots. Size and college stats aren't all that meaningful when comparing them when there's such a giant gap in athleticism and skill sets. Their offensive abilities don't really match up. He's more like a poor man's OJ Mayo.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Jul 20, 2012 -> 09:45 PM) Just thinking out loud here, could this all be a potential sign and trade for Asik? Maybe not for both the Purdue guys but just Moore would at least give us something back for Asik. No. They can't trade Asik to the Rockets under any circumstances, and they can't trade him for a year without his consent.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 18, 2012 -> 05:13 PM) I feel like that whole team just quit believing when they lost LeBron. The opposite effect of what this year's Bulls team did with all of the injuries before the playoffs. Then after the ACL injury, you saw them underperform as did the LeBron-less Cavs. At least offensively, they just didn't have the horses to pick up the slack. They surrounded Lebron with a bunch of catch-and-shoot guys. Without him, Williams and Jamison just don't have the talent to create the shots Lebron did and everyone suffers. Defensively, yeah, lack of effort was probably a big factor. Lebron was their best defender, but he doesn't totally explain a 10 PPG drop-off. I suppose more offensive mistakes that led to points could also explain part of it.

QUOTE (Boogua @ Jul 18, 2012 -> 04:48 PM) 19.3, 17.2, 20.8, and 20.0 were his PER the years before he went to the Celtics. Year one with the Celtics he has a PER of 25.2. His offensive winshares were 0.2 lower in that year than the previous 4 years combined. He was just a much better player with the Celtics. Oh, and feel free to look up how many games Jamison, Williams, and Varajao played in/ started the year after Lebron left. That whole roster basically missed time due to injury. It's not like he was consistently a 25 PER player in Boston, that was his career high by several points. He had 7 seasons in his entire career where he cracked a 20 PER and 2 of them were on the Warriors. Injuries weren't the reason they were horrible that year. They even added Ramon Sessions and JJ Hickson played a lot more and they were still brutal. Those two and Jamison were all healthy on that 1-36 stretch (think about that a second). Williams was actually traded for Baron Davis (who was less horrible than Williams), and Varejao still played almost 60 games (plus being injury prone is one of his major issues anyways). That team wasn't suddenly playoff caliber if they all played 82 games.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jul 18, 2012 -> 03:50 PM) I understand that. If the payout is 8/1 on the Bears winning the Super Bowl, then the payout should be 1/8 on them not winning. That's not remotely how it works. They only have to pay out one bet for the Super Bowl winners bet. If they provided bets on NOT winning the Super Bowl, they'd have to pay out 31 different bets every year. The odds would be drastically different.

QUOTE (Boogua @ Jul 18, 2012 -> 04:06 PM) They added Parrish who blew up after he came to the Celtics (probably nothing to do with Bird I'm sure). McHale was a rookie who averaged 10 points per game. He averaged 8.5 PPG in the playoffs. Nobody else was really added. They won the NBA championship. I honestly don't even like the stance that I'm forced to take. I agree that Lebron wasn't provided with that much help. I just think it's a bit exaggerated. Mo Williams wasn't a terrible player and averaged 17 PPG before joining the Cavs. Jamison averaged around 20 PPG before going to the Cavs. Varajao was good defensively. Anthony Parker was a good shooter. I don't think Pippen would have been the same player he became without Jordan. I don't think Parrish would have had the same career without Bird. I don't know who you could say that about with Lebron. He's just a ball dominant player that improves his teammates (although a great amount) by driving and dishing. It just seems like he doesn't hold his teammates accountable like Bird and Jordan. And Lebron wasn't forced to leave Cleveland. Look at Olajuwan's Rockets. He went through like a 5+ year stretch where his second best player was Otis Thorpe. That didn't prevent him from ultimately winning two championships. How exactly did Larry Bird help Robert Parrish when he was still on Golden State? Cause he was averaging 17-11 for two years before he ever became a Celtic. The Cavs core was bad, that's why they sucked the second Lebron left. Jamison was a chucker that played huge minutes for bad to mediocre teams to pad his stats and was only there for half a season anyways. He was also a bad defender. Williams could shoot, but couldn't create shots for anyone else and was brutal whenever they really needed him. Varejao was alright as an energy guy when he was actually healthy. The only way that team was beating anyone good is if Lebron averaged 35 a game, and even that wasn't enough in the series against Orlando.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 08:38 PM) The next question is, whether uncle Jerry will be willing to go into luxury tax territory for 2 years of that deal (or at least be willing to risk that). If he says he is, then you at least know you can resign Taj. This year the Bulls will be close, however, depending on how everything works out they may not even touch the luxury tax this year. However, the repeat offender price in yr 3 would be brutal. All stuff that I'm not privy to. IF the Bulls are making this decision and say, if we can't deal Asik we don't match Taj, then they should be running away as fast as possible. I don't know what the front office thinks, but my thought process is, can i trade him, will uncle jerry protect me if I can't trade him (so I can keep Taj). If they match, they're a luxury tax team. From Shamsports, so if the numbers are off, blame them: Rose- $15.5 Boozer- $15 Deng- $13.65 Noah- $11.3 Rip- $5 Asik- $5 Kirk- $3 Taj- $2 Butler- $1 Teague- $.85 Total- $72.3 mil, and that isn't a full roster yet. They basically HAVE to amnesty Carlos after next year, otherwise their options are another tax year, losing Taj, or dumping Deng/Noah somewhere. Then 2014/15 could be rough. You're looking at $45 mil for Rose/Noah/Asik. Boozer would be a whopping $16.8 mil if he's still there. Taj is at least $5 mil, maybe more. They wouldn't have any cap room, so they'd pretty much be forced to keep Deng (Bird rights) or take a major downgrade. Unless they drafted well, they still wouldn't have more than an MLE-caliber SG. That's pretty much guaranteed to be a tax year unless they go REALLY cheap on the wings. Basically unless they REALLY cut costs, Asik locks them into the tax for at least two years, and would cost them someone important to avoid the repeat offender status (2015 is way too far to project, might be tough to avoid it that year too depending on what moves are made). It also kills what could have been a major chance to retool in 2014 free agency (though admittedly it'd require amnesty for Boozer and renouncing Deng). There's still trades, but we know how that typically goes.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 08:31 PM) I'm talking about whether you can trade him. I'm not talking about long-term whether it works. If you can trade him a year from now, then you end up getting an asset out of Asik. That is the question. I'm not looking at what he'll be 3 years from now. A year from now can you trade him for a TPE and a pick (or something along those lines)? If you can, you make this deal and keep working with Asik. If you don't think that sort of market exists, then you don't match. And I'm saying it's not remotely worth taking that risk. The reward is that you get your backup center for a tolerable rate for two years before dumping him. The risk is that you just blew up your roster for a guy that is at best your 6th best player and 4th best big man and possibly even lower overall.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 08:24 PM) Agree on the efficiency. And I love Tyson and Asik is clearly not in the same league as him. However, whose to say Asik can't improve around the hoop. Javal Mcgee was offered 5yrs 50M. Raw and athletic. Lots to still prove. I actually have zero problem if the Bulls don't match either. I am irritated at how they handled this whole situation with Asik and how they failed to turn him into an asset. However, if they match, I'm fine, assuming they intend and believe they can turn him into an asset and have a bigger plan. If the plan is to keep him for 3 years, well the Bulls are likely going to be in trouble. McGee is a bonehead, but has proven production and is way more explosive. There's a very big difference between putting up 11-8 and what you get from Asik.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 08:19 PM) 14.7MPG on the Bulls. Which is a separate argument, but with Noah having ankle injuries, he is the Bulls only backup center. On most teams he gets significantly more minutes then the 14.7. There are more then just a few teams that he probably starts for. He is not a stiff. That is ridiculous. Argue his value to the Bulls, but on the open market, teams will pay him. Look how much Joel Pyrzbilla got in his career. Here's a question, what is the difference between Asik and a guy like Chandler. And I'm not comparing the two, but Chandler isn't all that effective of an offensive player either. Albeit, he will get a lot of outback points and is a better passer (and more efficient at throwing down the dunk). However, Chandler isn't exactly going to create offense. Defensively both are very strong. Chandler can actually catch the ball and dunk with someone within 5 feet of him. He's also consistently shot over 55% from the floor on more attempts, has proven he can handle heavy minutes and his foul rate is considerably lower so he can actually stay on the floor. Not to mention he's played against starters pretty much his whole career instead of playing against second line players. Look at what happened when Asik had to fill in for Noah in the playoffs, he was brutal in 3 games out of 4 when he got minutes. Teams paying him doesn't mean he's good. How many of those contracts to players like DeAndre Jordan and Kendrick Perkins actually work out?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 08:12 PM) I fully understand the semantics of the luxury tax and the teams that are going to offer Asik big money would be those that are likely under the cap, which typically takes the luxury tax concerns out of the question. Cleveland was talking about making Asik a big money offer, but ended up holding off. Had he been unrestricted, he probably gets even more. While some teams would be impacted/hindered from taking on Asik for that 1 yr with 15M, there are plenty of teams that wouldn't be. All we heard 2 years ago about Joe Johnson was how awful the deal was and he'd absolutely never ever be able to be traded. Guess what, he got moved. The NBA is full of crazy people and when it comes to legit 7 foot centers who can play d and are still developing (and how much better Asik gets offensively, i honestly don't think he can make very major improvements, but he should be able to improve). He's also got youth on his side as well. He's still an attractive player. We aren't talking about some 32 year old stiff we'll be overpaying. No, he's a 26 year old stiff we'll be overpaying. Seriously, 14.7 MPG. He's a backup. Joe Johnson is still a player that has actual basketball skills and can score. Yes, his contract is horrible, but he's still a decidedly above average player.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 08:02 PM) Hence my point that the team who acquires him would be paying an average of $10M per year for the 2 years remaining on the deal. However, that $10M/yr is still moveable, in my opinion. I don't think you're getting the point, the average is irrelevant. It isn't like the NHL where they pay the average, it's $5 mil and then $15 mil. Even if you think he's your starting center, that $15 million the second year is a major issue, especially if you can't dump $10 mil of your own bad contracts in the trade. There are probably 20 teams that wouldn't touch it just for luxury tax implications.