You're not the only Hinrich hater and you're not the only Bulls fan to bemoan the fact that Reinsdorf's not Mark Cuban. The difference is that, on this site, you make about 70% of the posts. On other sites, your sort of posting represents a much smaller proportion. If you hate Bulls management, this is the place to be.
You're not the only Hinrich hater and you're not the only Bulls fan to bemoan the fact that Reinsdorf's not Mark Cuban. The difference is that, on this site, you make about 70% of the opinion posts. On other sites, your sort of posting represents a much smaller proportion. If you hate Bulls management, this is the place to be.
Hardly. Pippen Ain't Easy and BlogABull are two sites with lots of people who speak the truth about management. Those off the top of my head, I'm sure there are others. Additionally, numerous sportswriters and others affiliated with the NBA as former players, coaches, or management have outright accused Bulls management of the same things I do. You'd think a bunch of good guys running a quality organization would get the same treatment as the Warriors, Mavericks, Spurs, Blazers, etc. they don't for good reason. Attacking these messengers doesn't change the truth, it only makes one look unwilling to see the truth. Fans watch the team choose profit over a better roster year after year. They call The Chairman cheap. I am quite sure he's not cheap, just looking to milk the franchise for every nickel of profit he can. To see how he can eat Boozer's contract and not hurt the bottom line requires the sort of sophisticated ability to read corporate books: P&L, Balance Sheet, and Cash Flows. Profit = Income - Expenses With or without Boozer, the Income is roughly the same. Expenses are the same because they're paying Boozer either way. The Bulls did spend the cash that the Lakers are paying to The Chairman to cover their share of Boozer's pay. Just a shade more and that is it. The Bulls might have traded Kirk and Dunleavy and a first for Afflalo and Gee, but it would have meant paying the tax next year, and only next year, assuming they re-sign Jimmy at MAX. It would also mean $3M+ less profit. You bet Afflalo and Gee give us a better chance to win. Profit ruled the day once again. I gave one example of players that could be had. We would have been able to keep Taj, even, in this scenario, and plugged our gaping hole on the wing.
http://www.blogabull.com/2013/7/2/4485682/chicago-bulls-nba-free-agency-derrick-rose-mike-dunleavy A great read.
And one from this month. http://www.blogabull.com/2015/2/16/8046565/chicago-bulls-trade-deadline-assets-nba Taj Gibson was mentioned as a possible trade candidate, but that was more speculation than a legitimate trade rumor. The Bulls have also been linked to Arron Afflalo, but Grantland's Zach Lowe says the Nuggets' asking price for Afflalo is high (multiple first-rounders), and Chicago seems hesitant to part ways with those types of assets: I understand the hesitation about trading future firsts, because those rookie contracts are valuable (and will become even more valuable with the exploding cap) and the Bulls have generally done a nice job picking late. But the Bulls are in position to win now, and if there's a good deal out there that could be made by cashing in on a future draft pick, I'd be for it.
What site do you read? http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1373389#start_here Long thread agreeing with me, except for a small number of stubborn supporters.
Agreeing with you? Which you? It's a dual slam thread, with hate liberally thrown at both Thibodeau and Hinrich. We know how you feel about Hinrich, but you're also a die-hard Thibodeau fan.
No. Criticizing Hinrich is like shooting fish in a barrel...if playing time was determined by fan vote. Thibodeau's a great coach. He disagrees with you and most Bulls fans when it comes to Hinrich and his is the only vote that counts. Other Kirks haters who like Thibodeau like using the term "blind spot" or claim some "personal" relationship between Thibodeau and Hinrich. Of course it's all nonsense. Thibodeau is manic about trying to win every game. Thibodeau plays Hinrich over available alternatives because he trusts Hinrich more than the alternatives. IMO, Hinrich has been bad this season. Thibodeau continued to play him big minutes even when Hinrich was hurt. That's on Thibodeau.
I can see from Thibs' POV that if Kirk played as well as last season, which is shit, he's probably still a better option than the younger guys who are a less known quantity. But look at the roster. It's not Thibs' fault there's nobody better than a ~10 PER kind of player to use. I don't hate Kirk. I just think he should be playing at the end of games when we're up 15 or down 15. We certainly shouldn't have signed him over lots of other players out there for that kind of money (this contract and last contract). Including Ramon Sessions.
