Balta1701

Wasn't there a clause in the amnesty rule where you could only amnesty players you had when the CBA was signed? i.e. you couldn't trade for a guy with a bad contract then use amnesty to get out of that contract?

Signing anyone for the MLE puts the Bulls well into luxury tax territory, by $5 million +. Who knows...they might think Rose and Deng could be back by January, and if they can hold the fort down until then with around a .500 record they could still get a middle-seed in the playoffs and be the #5 team that absolutely no one wants to face. Would require JR to really, truly, go "All in" on this Bulls team, because that would be the kind of state where they'd consider amnesthitizing Boozer after the 2013 season to get under the tax if it doesn't work.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 15, 2012 -> 11:39 PM) I had Sprint before AT&T, and while their service is good, their customer service is brutal...they make AT&T seen like the American Express of cellular carriers. I haven't dealt with their wireless customer service much, but "Brutal" pretty accurately describes most of my other interactions with ATT customer service as well.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 16, 2012 -> 08:29 AM) So only do we have turnstiles which you need an ID to get through, they also have put the same thing on the elevators, which you have to get through the turnstiles to get on to. They even have most of Financial Plaza blocked off. But don't you feel safer?

QUOTE (danman31 @ May 16, 2012 -> 02:50 AM) Right, I'm just saying it's time to stop blaming the injury for his struggles. He was raw when the Sox picked him. He probably just isn't good enough. There's plenty of room to blame the injury. He basically lost >1 key year of development. He's guaranteed to be behind the curve, and that's a place few ballplayers recover from.

I fully endorse Will Ohman's use against any lefty in the league, and I will forever hold Will Ohman completely blameless when a righty hits a HR off him, because he should only be facing a righty in garbage time. Yesterday he hit a lefty with a pitch. These things happen. That one was a failure. But you don't respond to that by asking if he can get the next righty out.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 16, 2012 -> 07:24 AM) Just as De Aza isn't a CF'er Dunn isn't a #3 hitter and certainly isn't any long-term solution. As far as SP goes I think we're closer to mediocre than to being solid. Can you give any actual reason why we should believe you other than repeating it and hoping you're not challenged on it?

Think about the scenarios. In a game where you have a 1 run lead, do you want Adam Dunn bunting to be a baserunner or swinging for the fences? Probably swinging for fences, he can turn that into a 2 run lead pretty quick. In a tie game, bunt for a baserunner or try to hit a solo shot? Solo shot gives you the lead, bunting requires 2 hits to bring him in. Easy call. One run deficit? Easy. Tie the game on 1 swing. 2 run deficit or lead? Ok, now you've at least got a case where the extra baserunner can be useful in breaking things open. I might consider it then. The other benefit could be forcing the shift to adapt...but is it worth having Adam Dunn spend time practicing such things, when it took moving heaven and Earth to get him back to being a functional ballplayer this year? I dunno.

QUOTE (High Mileage @ May 16, 2012 -> 12:05 AM) Frenchy makes $2.5M this year and there is a $4M mutual option for him next year. Rudiments has been a pleasant surprise but I still think I would rather see Mitch Maier. Dyson is and always has been a non-prospect. He's 27 already, 4 days younger than Melky. You're looking at last year's deal, he played 2011 for $2.5 million. Late last season Jeff Francoeur signed a 2 year, $13 million deal. He earns $6 million for the 2012 season and $7.5 million, guaranteed, for the 2013 season.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 15, 2012 -> 09:59 PM) By "here", you mean this thread? Yes, no one in this thread agrees with me. I did not use the word "here" in that post yet you quoted it as though I did.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ May 15, 2012 -> 09:46 PM) Rios is a better CF'er than De Aza. The White Sox would be a better team switching Rios to CF and De Aza to RF. The beauty of this move is it costs no money and blocks no prospects. You keep saying that, no one agrees with you, people pepper you with numbers, you ignore them and repeat what you said before as if no one made any points in disagreement.

QUOTE (Jake @ May 15, 2012 -> 09:51 PM) Doesn't count towards salary cap? No. That's the point of the amnesty, that contract is removed from counting on the cap/tax number.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 15, 2012 -> 09:39 PM) I can only imagine what the long way of saying Sprint is then... "Better than AT&T?" Seriously don't know, but can't stand AT&T. It's on my list of companies I'll be dumping when i move next.

Yes, that's very true, but the Bulls would be able to move that money to other contracts.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ May 15, 2012 -> 09:10 PM) Not really. Rose and Noah is about 30 (don't have the exact #), let's call Gibson $7 mil for argument's sake. Let's say they have $8 mil with the rest of the roster and picks to make it a round number. The cap this year was $58 mil. That leaves them $13 mil to play with. I would call that a "major deal". Edit- if you want to be technical about it and say a max deal, they can still get there considering I think the first year of a new max is $15 point something mil. Now add in a single rookie, every rookie contract is $1 million or more. Or we sell those picks off for the future, and leave a weaker roster. Te reason the bulls built a deep bench is that Boozers $15 mil a year non max deal left them another $5 mil to play with. Thats what the Bulls wouldn't have to play with after 2014, and that's after 2 down years and whatever draft pick te bulls got after losing next year. It's doable but I'm still concerned that it jut doesn't give you a path back to the top unless you win the lottery in there or have someone hand you a star.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ May 15, 2012 -> 08:41 PM) I fully expect the Bulls to do the easiest thing possible: keep as much of the team together as possible until after 2013/2014. At that point, Deng's contract expires and they can easily amnesty Boozer if they haven't already. Pretty much everyone else is on a short-term contract that they can easily let expire. That would leave them with Rose, Noah, Gibson unless someone makes him a stupid offer, and a bunch of cap space. Hopefully they can pick up one solid late-round pick in that stretch, then they'll probably get Charlotte's pick in 2016 (it's top-12 protected before that). If things go well between now and then (which I doubt), they can keep Deng and/or Boozer. It's going to take a major increase in the cap for the Bulls to be able to offer a major deal after 2014 if the have more than Noah and Rose. If Gibson gets more than the full MlE, the Bulls might not be able to offer a max deal.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 08:21 PM) The point is to avoid the luxury tax and lose games. Check and check. Then the question is the follow up move. The bulls still couldn't get themselves into a position to offer a solid deal on the FA market even if theymove Noah, unless they also move their draft picks away and try to get down to just Deng and Rose, and that's not a good place to start at with nothing other than Picks. I'm intrigued by the concept but I just am trying to see how it would allow a path back to a top 3 seed after next year.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 07:57 PM) Without Deng, Boozer, Noah, and Rose for most of 2012-2013, the Bulls are looking at top 5. One other big question would be who would take on Noah's contract while giving the Bulls little money back, and why you'd do that if you also didn't get some daft help back.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:44 PM) That is why you cut Boozer. With Deng and Rose out for significant parts of next year, and then not at 100% for more, there is no reason for him to be here. Keepin mind, you're not cutting him, you're buying out $45 million of his deal, to avoid a couple million in luxury tax.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:38 PM) It makes sense if you are looking towards 2013-2014, because there really is no way for the Bulls to get seriously under cap by then without trading everyone but Rose. So youd be paying next year, so that you can keep the entire team for a few years. But the real problem with that concept is that the tax becomes a much harsher penalty if you cross it in multiple years, and if the Bulls try to keep both Gibson and Asik, while also maintaining some semblance of a backcourt bench and holding Boozer, they will be across the tax every year. No one would care about them being over the Tax if they'd made a finals run this year. Well maybe they'd care, but they'd probalby have pushed it to keep the band together. This injury screws everything up.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:35 PM) It makes no sense to go over the tax next year. 2012-2013 is a lost season. First, actual important fix. Bulls are vastly over the cap and have no real chance of getting under it without removing 2 contracts. Second...staying under the tax level could really hurt the roster. The easiest way to stay under that level is to allow Asik to go or to give up Brewer/Korver/Hamilton for nothing. Those could certainly happen...but then you need someone to take that player on for nothing.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:33 PM) I really cant see Asik coming back long term if they plan on keeping Taj. Now would be the perfect time to try and get anything for him. I have been a big fan of Asik, but the reality is that unless the Bulls plan on being the NBA version of the Yankees, some of these guys have to go. In terms of front court the Bulls should keep Taj/Noah (unless you can get a better deal for Noah than Asik all things being considered). Their best option is to draft well and pick guys that make sense (ie Shelvin Mack, or player who can score) as opposed to Jimmy Bulter (who I like, but the Bulls already had Brewer who is quite similar.) The Bulls really could go over the tax if they wanted, but that's management's choice. Brewer will very likely be gone after next season, maybe earlier if they are trying to move him as a tax casualty.

QUOTE (59th street @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:30 PM) You have to remember this is from the same guy that states his "opinion " is a fact. He really knows very little about a lot. And how exactly does a person with 8 posts know this much about Greg? Getting annoyed with him after 7 posts I could understand, that's normal. Knowing his tendencies that well?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:22 PM) Asik, Gibson and Butler would stay. Asik is an RFA this year and isn't going anywhere. Same for Taj next year. My worry there is that the Bulls are already extremely close to the luxury tax threshold...keeping Asik might well put them over. Rose's extension doesn't show up on here yet, but the Bulls would be somewhere near $68-69 million with that. If the luxury tax limit is $71 million, then they could be choosing between the Boozer amnesty (leaving them weak in the 2014 front court) or paying the Tax in a lost season in order to keep Asik. And with the multi-year tax becoming so much stronger now, it's hard to see Bulls management going for that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:18 PM) The Bulls won't need Tim Duncan though. If you can find a legit second scorer to go with the core, you have a better playoff team in the long run. Aside from Rose and Deng, didn't your scenario move most of the "Core" players away? You amnestitized Boozer and suggested trading Noah. Asik might not even be back this season, Gibson would be a RFA after next year, and the remaining bench mob save Butler would be gone.