<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (such sweet thunder @ Jan 13 2008, 11:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't think there's any need to parse the statements that are coming out in the press. To me, the idea that the Bulls need or want their players to take ownership is starkly incongruent with how they've run business over the last four or five years. It's always been Skiles and Pax, brothers in arms with one unified vision. And to any player who wouldn't fall in line, the door. All for the better too -- Skiles had a system that covered for the teams gaping lineup wholes and played up the limited strengths. It wasn't pretty but the Bulls weren't prepared to do anything else. Now the unified vision is long gone, and even more than that, unless the Bulls drop mad cash on some uber name this off season -- which just isn't going to happen -- the players can feel comfortable here on out that they don't have to buy into the team framework.</div> I don't know that there ever was one unified vision. Perhaps for a moment it seemed that way, but my guess at this point is that it was just due to coincidence at a given moment of time. What I think there is, however, is a distressing lack of leadership. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jan 14 2008, 01:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MikeDC @ Jan 13 2008, 06:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jan 13 2008, 07:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>"It's a situation we felt got out of hand," Wallace said. "Our big thing is regardless of what happened between a coach and a player, it should never get to the point where you don't respect a grown man. You have to always respect that fact." Boylan applauded his players' decision and said the message sent to Noah was a cumulative one that also addressed Noah's habitual tardiness. "We talked about the team taking some ownership in their group and they have," Boylan said. "They came to me and expressed some hesitation as far as letting Joe just have one game to sit. They felt it deserved more. I backed my team and the decision they made and appreciate the leadership they have shown."</div> I don't know how else to read it. The first paragraph says the players were upset that Noah didn't respect the coach. The second paragraph shows Boylan respects the players' decision. The third paragraph is the "here's the rope, go hang yourself" bit. </div> I don't so much disagree with one and two, but it seems that the first paragraph seems to be a cumulative one, not just about the latest incident. Having the colleagues rather than the bosses handing out discipline treads on very dangerous ground. It gives lots of opportunities for abuse due to popularity, perceived threats, all kinds of stuff. That's why you avoid it in the first place. The second paragraph... well, what else is Boylan supposed to do? He's at least smart enough to know he's not in any sort of control of the situation. The third paragraph is prophetic. </div> If Boylan wanted to overrule the players, we probably wouldn't have heard about the whole thing in the press - Noah just would have played tonight as if nothing happened. There are all kinds of organizations where "colleagues" hand out discipline. You have the players' unions in sports (like when a player gets suspended by the league, they negotiate or fight it or determine a lesser or greater penalty). Or unions in general. Fraternities. Congress. Medical associations, the Bar. In fact, any kind of club (or in this case team) where the membership elects its leaders. </div> I think if Boylan had overruled the players we would have heard about it. That certainly happened in New York and I don't see why it wouldn't happen here. Regarding clubs, I don't think the players' union is analogous. It almost inevitably sticks up for its members (even in the ridiculous cases) vs. the league. Having witnessed Unions politics up close, I wouldn't seek to emulate that example either. But far beyond all of that, this is a situation in which the membership didn't elect its leader (the coaches). Beyond that, even the elected leaders (the team captains) weren't the guys doing the "leading". Which is what it all comes back to. I don't think Noah being punishment as he was was incorrect. I think the manner in which it was handled is symptomatic of a whole host of problems with the team, and potentially counterproductive. By the last part, where do we go from here with Noah? One possibility is he gets the message and gets his act together. Another possibility is he concludes his teammates hate him, he retreats into whatever "shell" Thabo has been hanging out in, and bridges are burned. That's a pretty high risk approach.
First of all ..Jim Boylan has just sent a mesasge around the league that he is a players coach He's facilitory rather than a lead from the front Coach but is he assertive enough ? I strongly doubt Scott Skiles would have permitted such a situation to exist - he probably would have given Noah a week in the first place anyway Boylan's style is fine if your a true vet team with strong leadership but this team has no genuine leadership. The people that have those skills and are best suited to it , Griffin and Duhon , are marginal role players and therefore its hard to maintain leadership, discipline and respect from those that make a poultus more than the marginal role player Skiles was this team's leadership and now that he's gone and we haven't got it where we need it this team will continue to be the chicken with its head cut off So I have doubts as to whether Gasol and McGrady types in possible trade scenarios changes anything Sadly , the one that was in our grasp that got away , may have been Brandon Roy I wonder whether the guy we really need to go after is Jason Kidd Would the Nets be interested in dealing Kidd and Collins for Wallace and Hinrich ? Would the Clippers be interested in dealing Corey Maggette for Ben Gordon and Viktor Khyrapa? Would the Grizzilies be interested in swapping Nocioni with Mike Miller ? Note : The Clippers have the lowest ranking offense in the league - hence the suggestion of Gordon and his outside shooting to pair up with the post precense of Kaman and Brand ( when healthy ) If we give Kidd $20M over 2 seasons on top of the $21M that he makes next season that means he costs us $41M over 3 years instead of the $45M over the next 4 that Hinrich makes We also save big money on Wallace's contract as well as freeing up playing time for Thomas and Noah who run with Deng and Maggette with Kidd Collins Smith Deng Maggette Kidd <u>bench</u> Noah Thomas Sefolosha Miller Duhon
This team pisses me off. You just want to see them turning the corner, but I think it just is never going to happen. I'd keep Gordon, Deng, Smith, and Gray. Then use Sefolosha, Thomas, Noah, Hinrich, Nocioni, Wallace in trades. You should be able to get at least one allstar, and another borderline allstar at the least. Go for a shooting guard and go for a big. Just secure those two players. Then sign up veterans to shore up the team for the year, and you're moving for the future. We are in a situation where we can keep our two best players, Gordon and Deng, who are great 2nd options from what we keep being fed, and we can trade the other guys around them to bring in stars. Well keep Gordon/Deng, and bring in those stars to play with them. I think Boston is an example of how you can sign up a bunch of really good role players (althoguh I think Posey was the holy grail of them). Trade the garbage, keep Gordon/Deng, and lets move on. I don't care if Artest and O'neal are the two stars we get, I'll take that, its better than anything we'll have now.
