Asik-Mirotic-Thoughts

I haven't read much about Mirotic here so I thought I'd share some thoughts.

As most of you here will recall, I loved watching Omer Asik play defense and was pretty ticked about the Bulls failing to match Houston's offer. You also know that I tend to be supportive of Bulls' ownership and management, but didn't in this case.

By NBA rules, Asik's 2014-15 cap hit for the Bulls would have been nearly $15mil. Besides the obvious luxury tax implications, one explanation for why the Bulls didn't match Houston was that this was the most likely year the team could bring PF Nikola Mirotic over from Europe. The reason that it was the most likely year is that it is the earliest opportunity for the Bulls to offer Mirotic a contract that starts at a salary higher than the NBA rookie scale. Beginning in 2014-15, the Bulls can treat Mirotic as a free agent salary-wise.

By all accounts I've seen, Mirotic (just turned 22) very much wants to try himself against NBA competition, but he's already a bona fide star in Europe and is making more than a NBA rookie scale contract would pay him (starting salary of around $1.3mil).

In practical terms for the Bulls, because they are and will remain well over the salary cap for the foreseeable future, being able to pay Mirotic as a free agent means being able to offer him either the full mid-level exception (starting salary of $5mil) or the "mini" or "taxpayer" mid-level exception (starting salary of $3.3mil).

Cutting to the chase, if the Bulls had matched Houston's offer, with Asik's $15mil cap hit that season, they would almost certainly have been a luxury taxpayer in 2014-15 and therefore only been able to offer Mirotic the taxpayer-MLE of $3.3mil. This might have been a pay-cut for Mirotic and Mirotic might have balked.

While I knew that Asik's 2014-15 salary had an impact on the Bulls' ability to bring Mirotic "across the pond," I was pissed about losing Asik and never brought it up. Besides, Mirotic was and still is only a Euro-prospect. The thing is that Mirotic is looking more and more like a real deal player.

As most of you know, I often post on RealGM. There's a moderator/poster there with the screen name of MortenJensen. He's from Denmark and is a published NBA writer. He recently posted this about Mirotic

I trust Morten...he knows what he's watching.

While losing Asik still hurts, if Mirotic turns out to be a real and long-term contributor, it will ease my pain some.

Before others hit me with it, yeah, the Bulls could have kept Asik and still been able to offer the full MLE to Mirotic. Besides amnestying Boozer's 2014-15 salary (a given in any Mirotic full-MLE scenario):

- They could have let Gibson walk rather than offer him an extension.

- They could let Deng walk when his contract expires after the 2013-14 season rather than re-sign him (they might still let Deng walk, but don't need to in order to sign Mirotic to the full-MLE).

This all is a little complicated and requires long-term thinking. I apologize if I didn't explain myself well enough.

 

I'm not getting your reasoning. You do mention this, but sort of shrug it off:

Asik would be making $15M at a time the Bulls would no longer be obligated to pay Deng (minus $14.3M), and could use amnesty on Boozer (minus $17M). I think they'll make an effort to re-sign Deng, but certainly not at $14M. Taj's salary range makes sense.

Asik only will make $15M for a season once in his life. If the Bulls were going to pay the LT for just one season, 2014-15 would be my choice instead of THIS season.

As for full MLE, couldn't the Bulls make a similar offer to Mirotic as Houston did to Asik? $5 + $5 + $15 gets him a 3 year/$25M deal. It's just back-loaded. He'd still be a wealthy young man able to afford a mansion and to party on Rush street to his heart's content.

 

As for your last part, no...you can't have that sort of increase, $10mil in year 3, or anything remotely close to it, under the current CBA.

The key part of this is that while it's true that Asik's $15mil would only be for one season, it would be for the first season that the Bulls would be able to bring Mirotic over for more than the NBA rookie scale. I couldn't find a way for the Bulls to pay Asik $15mil and offer Mirotic $5mil and still stay under the luxury tax. Maybe you can.

 

You said they could treat him like a FA. Asik was a FA and got that 5+5+15 deal.

Also, unless Mirotic is very clearly a real deal (kick-ass basketball player), I wouldn't want to be offering him huge bucks to come here. He could be as good as Marco. That is to say he'd be pretty good, but not $5M/year good.

 

Actually THIS is the wrong year to be over the LT. There'd be no repeater penalties in 2014-15 possible.

And would you rather have Omer or Nazr as our starting C should Noah have to miss some games?

 

The 5-5-15 was only legal under the Gilbert Arenas Provision which doesn't apply to signing an outside free agent. For an outside free agent, since the Bulls are over the salary cap, they only have the mid-level exception (full or taxpayer) and the bi-annual exception (won't have next year 'cause they used it on Belinelli, but will have it in 2014-15).

I hear you on not knowing how good Mirotic is going to be. This is why I didn't use the Mirotic situation to defend management's position at the time. I felt Asik was too good to lose over what amounted to a future maybe. If they sign Mirotic in 2014-15 and it takes the full MLE to do it and he turns out to be a stud, I'll admit I was wrong.

 

Full MLE would be 4 years $24M max deal possible. Same as the Bulls could offer Omer.

Bird in hand.

We can get rid of Elton Brand because we have Tyson Chandler coming in to replace him and who'll also be a surefire 20/10 guy, too.

 

This is an interesting post and all, but its time to stop operating under the assumption that the Bulls cannot and will not pay the luxury tax.

The Bulls are currently paying the luxury tax and Uncle Jerry has said he'd pay for a winner.

As you outlined in your post, this wasn't an Asik now vs Mirotic in the future decision. There are other ways to offer him the full MLE by being under the tax threshold. I think framing it that way ins't the right way to go about things. Perhaps that is what the Bulls were thinking in dumping Asik, but I don't think there is any evidence that this is the case. Its a possible scenario but there is no proof, yes?

At this point, I'd prefer Asik to Gibson. In fact, it looks like Gibson is going to be yet another overpaid guy that's going to be on this roster for years to come. And I'm done letting Bulls management off the hook for not paying the luxury tax when needed. This is a big market, big money team and should pay the tax where it is appropriate. They already are! I'm done altering my expectations otherwise.

The Bulls are masters at asking their fans to say goodbye to productive, impact players for future maybes. That's been the MO for years.

Maybe this guy will be a NBA force, maybe not. Asik is currently a top notch, young defensive center stalwart that is currently 2nd in the NBA in rebounds. That's a great asset. That's a lottery level asset. I also love the flexibility that having Noah and Asik on the team together would have made in terms of managing injuries and for future trade scenarios.

So, interesting theory, but I'd rather have Asik and find another way to get under the tax to give Mirotic the full MLE if that's what is going to take.

----

It is good to hear that he's progressing well in Europe. Unless the Bulls pull off a heist and get a stud to pair with Rose, I'm thinking the Bulls best bet to win the title is when the Heat get older in a couple years. Would have liked Rose - Mirotic - Asik and whoever is left plus future signings to be the core of that future team.

 

I mean, looking at Asik, we gave up having him for a *bargain* for 2 years and paying him about what he's worth for 1 year in the future.

For a franchise that supposedly values defense we're the team that dumped one of the best defensive centers of this era (Tyson Chandler) for nothing and now we've dumped another young, promising defensive big man stud for nothing as well.

But they wring their hands over dumping a non-impact player like Hinrich a couple years ago to make a swing at Wade/Bosh/Lebron and somehow have no problem getting another non-impact player like Taj Gibson locked up for 4 years, 34 million dollars. Frustrating.

 

It's by accident, not by plan. They have a gaping hole at SG and took a worthwhile risk on Rip that didn't pan out. He couldn't even play his way into being interesting trade material for some playoff bound team. Nobody'd take him without a draft pick the Bulls can't afford to lose (and avoid the tax).

I just checked. The Bulls can't amnesty Boozer in time to avoid the tax.

 

Right, but that could have been projected when they made the deal, right? They took a risk that they might pay the tax. Or did they project what the threshhold was incorrectly? Or did other things happen along they way that they did not anticipate?

I'm not holding out any great hope on the deep pockets of Uncle Jerry, and I agree that the tax was likely paid by accident. I just won't accept that anymore as a reason the Bulls don't retain impact players. This franchise should pay the tax from time to time. Keeping a guy like Asik would be one of the times to do it.

They didn't mind paying the tax to bring on Hinirch this season, yes? Take his salary off the books and you are much closer to that LuxTax line.

I think the transcript given by JVG, likely influenced by Thibs, shows what the coach thinks. If you don't keep a guy like Asik, you're not interested in winning.

 

The pattern of not keeping impact players - and dealing away several of our leading scorers - makes us look like a minor league franchise. You expect the guys who play well to move up to the big leagues.

The hope was that Rose would change all that.

 

Pattern? Really? Please don't say that you'd use Eddy Curry's name in the rationale for this statement.

Minor League? Really? Are the Knicks minor league for letting Jeremy Lin walk?

 

Eddy Curry was part of the pattern. You cannot deny it.

Elton Brand.
Jalen Rose.
Jamal Crawford.
Eddy Curry.
Ben Gordon.

All were our leading scorer and traded away or allowed to walk for nothing. Rose had suffered a wrist injury and played hurt for 16 games the season he was traded to Toronto.

Yes. Minor League. Minor league teams are where old players (Antonio Davis, PJ Brown, Adrian Griffin, etc.) go to try and resurrect their careers. Minor league teams are where you develop guys (like Asik) and they move up to the big league teams.

Maybe the team that had a lineup of actual minor leaguers (D-Leaguers) playing for us might ring a bell? You know, Ronald Dupree, Linton Johnson, Chris Jefferies, Rick Brunson, etc. When that team filled the seats, what incentive was there for Reinsdorf to do anything but pay lip service to "paying for a winner?"

Jeremy Lin wasn't the Knicks' leading scorer.

 

Some time I'll have to check and see if the Bulls also have a "trend" of failing to retain their top rebounder or assists leader.

Looks like Deng will be the team's scoring leader this season for the first time in his career. I'm going to miss him.

I think you missed an opportunity to throw Nazr into your "old players" list.

Always good to read Rick Brunson's name again.

Your Lin comment is disappointing. To include Asik in your OP complaint, you added "impact players" to "leading scorers." I thought this was a nice move on your part. However, you can't have it both ways. No, Lin wasn't the Knicks leading scorer, but he was unquestionably an impact player on their team. He instantly became the darling of the entire f'in basketball-watching world while, in the absence of the team's mega-stars, he led the Knicks to their best stretch of basketball last season.

Lastly, yeah, the Brand trade was unfortunate and led to Krause's justifiable demise. And while I think there were good reasons for letting Gordon walk, I can understand the consternation there. But Jalen Rose, Jamal Crawford and Eddy Curry? Yes, JRose once averaged nearly 23ppg for the Bulls, but he made less than 41% of his shots. JCraw is a nice player, but the Bulls weren't the only team that let him get away (the Clippers are his 6th NBA team). And while the Bulls getting to draft DRose is the luckiest thing to ever happen to GM John Paxson, the second luckiest thing is that Eddy Curry and his agent rejected the Bulls' demand that he take that special heart test. Good Lord, Paxson might have actually kept that loser.

 

Deng's nearly been traded a few times.

The pattern seems to me to let a guy be "the #1" on the team for a season, when they don't win (or make it past 1st round), dump him.

As for letting those guys go, I happen to think it'd be better to have Ben Gordon as our 3rd string SG and pay the LT than to have let him walk for absolutely nothing in return. That's true of all 12 to 15 roster spots. Don't lose a guy at any spot unless you're replacing him with someone better or consolidating for a better player in the heart of the rotation.

The Curry trade was very fortunate for the Bulls.

For several years, the Isaiah Thomas years, those Knicks teams were just dreadfully put together. But at least they were willing to pay the LT in a big market. Even so, how have the Knicks and Bulls fared since those days? One team is #3 seed this season and 13 games over .500. That's with a superstar (Amare) out of their lineup for the season.

 

For a thread that you've graced with so much historical perspective, this is truly a "What have you done for me lately?" line of thinking. Fair enough.

While the Knicks (who have only gotten 29 games out of Amare this season) are 3.5 games ahead of the Bulls (who have gotten no games from Rose), if given the choice, I would much rather have this Bulls team than that Knicks team. Do you prefer the Knicks?

 

Personally, I think its time to put this statement to bed.

The Bulls got the better player in this trade, yes?

 

I prefer we bury the Knicks.

We're not.

I don't follow the Knicks that closely. Are they offering some (current carrot on stick) 2014 plan?