See, the Bulls are keeping opponents guessing. The article goes on with lots about whether D'Antoni should have come to the Bulls. But that take seems pretty forced to me I mean, he passed on winning for money to go to the Knicks? Huh? What winning have we done here? It’s not just money, the money (and the cheap hires that followed) is evidence that the Bulls weren’t super interested in winning either. I don’t see why D’Antoni would want to go to a sitation in which the front office would obviously be working against him. That is, in fact, the exact reason he was leaving Phoenix. The fact that things haven't worked out in New York doesn't mean he should have been eager to jump into this mess.
You don't think D'Antoni would have gotten the bulls more victories last season or this one? Really, you're saying Del Negro is doing just as good a job as D'Antoni would have? And D'Antoni was right to take the money because the free agents are going to go to NY and a roster that is even worse than the bulls before the bulls? Or do you just not like the part where he makes D'Antoni out to be the bad guy for not giving Reinsdorf a chance to make him a better offer?
I think D'Antoni should get us more wins, of course. But you missed my point that D'Antoni or Vinnie or anyone else who's not the ultimate Bulls-style brown noser isn't going to be coaching their own style.
No. It's quite possible that everyone is a bad guy and it's the result of a whole host of bad guys making bad decisions. I think D'Antoni is better than Del Negro and would have gotten more wins last year. The point I was making is that, in the grand scheme of things, D'Antoni would be right not to trust Reinsdorf as committed to winning. It's not like he'd be the only one to listened at what Reinsdorf had to say and decide it wouldn't be a good fit. Reinsdorf cums in his pants for thinkiing of Red Holtzman and D'Antoni is like the antithesis of that. Given that basic reality, it seems like money had nothing to do with it; he listened to Reinsdorf and decided whatever Reinsdorf offered wouldn't be enough to make it a sensible marriage.
Now we've moved on to two wrongs make a right? As a thought experiment, assume for a moment that the bulls were right to let BG go last summer and that they will do everything in their power to sign another big time free agent or remake the roster in a very positive way next year with all the cap space they will have. Assume further that signing Wallace when it looked like that team was on the verge of contending was proof that the bulls management was committed to winning. I know it's hard for you, but try it. In that strange mental frame, does D'Antoni look like a moron for not at least waiting until the bulls countered?
As a thought experiment, if management were actually good at judging talent, we could have a core of Rose, Gordon, Gasol, Noah, Salmons, Okafor, and Taj Gibson. If Jerry weren't such a tightwad, we'd have Hinrich or someone worth his contract, as well. Or Rose, Gordon, Gasol, Noah, Salmons, Gibson, and cap space. There's no 20-20 hindsight in this either, we knew about the trades being talked about at the time. Two of us in this thread realized at the time what it meant to trade Chandler for PJ Brown, letting Gordon walk, ertc. Here we are, 1/2 game behind the Knicks and with less cap space than they have. What gives you any reason to trust the buffoons in charge?
I fail to see how trading Chandler and cap space for an old Ben Wallace and an ancient PJ Brown could be construed as a commitment to winning.
If we had Gasol, who says that we would have gotten Rose? or Gibson, and why the hell would we take Okafor?
Assuming that, I would think the Bulls are not very good at evaluating talent (IIRC Reinsdorf was already saying they were going to play Gordon on the QO and let him walk) and not trust their plan. Talking to them about talent, how they see it and how I, Mike D'Antoni see it, I'd be scared senseless that even when if they thought they were going to sit around for two years and then start trying, what they got wouldn't be very good. That fear would be further exacerbated as time went on by seeing that they're still in danger of not having max cap space and... ... the fact that if this is pretty poor proof. They immediately followed up the Wallace signing with a salary dump. And they were gravely wrong on the fact of being "on the verge of contending". So if I'm D'Antoni, I see a choice between working for Donnie Walsh who 1. Is going to pay me more. 2. Has enthusiastically endorsed my philosophy of play 3. Is backed by an organization with a desire and track record of spending to win. and Jerry Reinsdorf who 1. "Had no intention of paying the former Suns coach the above-market rate he was about to get from the Knicks." 2. Had a track record of skepticism about my philosophy of play 3. Has a track record of repeatedly getting people to assume he's interested in winning by waiting a couple years with cheap teams and then doing salary dumps. I confess, this is an extremely strange mental frame. I don't deny it's the sort of frame Reinsdorf builds for himself, but it's leaving out a whole lot of relevant facts. If you selectively ignore stuff, you can always build whatever sort of picture you want. When you try and take everything in, as much as possible, you tend to get a fuller, better picture of things. Like I said, I don't deny that at some level Jerry Reinsdorf and company want to win. The question is ultimately how do they go about it, how do they think about it, and how important is it. Somehow Vinny Del Negro is part of their answer to those questions.
I think you are a year off on the BG comment, it was the summer after they made the second round with Wallace before Wallace stopped caring when he said that. And part of the experiment was to assume that letting BG walk was the right move. I realize it takes a big leap on your part, but give it a few more tries.
Assuming that, I would think the Bulls are not very good at evaluating talent (IIRC Reinsdorf was already saying they were going to play Gordon on the QO and let him walk) and not trust their plan. Talking to them about talent, how they see it and how I, Mike D'Antoni see it, I'd be scared senseless that even when if they thought they were going to sit around for two years and then start trying, what they got wouldn't be very good. That fear would be further exacerbated as time went on by seeing that they're still in danger of not having max cap space and... ...They immediately followed up the Wallace signing with a salary dump. And they were gravely wrong on the fact of being "on the verge of contending". So if I'm D'Antoni, I see a choice between working for Donnie Walsh who 1. Is going to pay me more. 2. Has enthusiastically endorsed my philosophy of play 3. Is backed by an organization with a desire and track record of spending to win. and Jerry Reinsdorf who 1. "Had no intention of paying the former Suns coach the above-market rate he was about to get from the Knicks." 2. Had a track record of skepticism about my philosophy of play 3. Has a track record of repeatedly getting people to assume he's interested in winning by waiting a couple years with cheap teams and then doing salary dumps. I confess, this is an extremely strange mental frame. I don't deny it's the sort of frame Reinsdorf builds for himself, but it's leaving out a whole lot of relevant facts. If you selectively ignore stuff, you can always build whatever sort of picture you want. When you try and take everything in, as much as possible, you tend to get a fuller, better picture of things. Like I said, I don't deny that at some level Jerry Reinsdorf and company want to win. The question is ultimately how do they go about it, how do they think about it, and how important is it. Somehow Vinny Del Negro is part of their answer to those questions.
Everybody else was wrong about that bulls team, too. I don't think anybody anticipated Wallace falling off like he did. And you seem to be ignoring a lot of facts as well. Gordon demonstrated that he couldn't carry the team anywhere significant offensively. Hinrich couldn't carry the team defensively, or from a leadership position. Deng couldn't stay healthy. Paxson did the smart thing by dumping the salary when he still could. This team would be worst with Wallace still on it and playing dead, and would have no future with BG signed at $11 mil per year unless they did a whole lot more salary dumping. And the team they have now is built to run and hustle and nothing else. So I'm not sure how D'Antoni wouldn't be a good fit. The reason they have been losing is that they don't run enough, but Vinnie plays guys too long to be able to maintain the defensive intensity given the injuries. VDN should actually be complimented on finding the sweet spot of suckitude for this roster.
Except many of us thought Wallace had declined steadily over the past three seasons before we signed him and that the signing was foolish. For the same money, they could have signed Al Harrington AND Drew Gooden.
