I can't imagine that GarPax is pleased with the 2 year, 8 million dollar contract they signed Hinrich to at this point, given what he's been able to produce.
Two things are certain. It was foolish to get rid of Omer Asik. It was foolish to sign to sign Kirk Hinrich to a 2 year, 8 million dollar contract, as its obvious he's not worth it. Its sad to see a management team that was gifted a MVP flounder so. He're hoping they can match Krause and build a title winner around their young, MVP talent. Of course, if they continue to alienate him in the press, then he just might "lebron" them.
Actually, it's fine to sign Kirk to $4M/year. But you better be signing guys ahead of him to whatever sized contracts required. Nobody'd have an issue with signing Kirk at $4M if we were paying OJ Mayo $10M to be the starting SG. Mayo is an example, I can think of a few others like James Harden and Kevin Martin, who were clearly available (traded for one another) or Tyreke Evans who was rumored available and an obvious trade target.
I don't get how anything can be certain at this point. I really liked Asik and wish the Bulls would have matched, but signing him to a 3-year/$25mil contract was anything but a no-brainer. I mean I think Asik is worth it even as a backup center, but a lot of people whose opinion I greatly respect think I'm full of shit on this. As for Hinrich, lots of Bulls' fans, maybe the majority, pretty much gave up on this season before it started. To them, it's all about 2013-14. If Hinrich is a key contributor to a championship team next season, most will consider his contract to have been a bargain. Now I understand that you don't believe this can happen, but that doesn't mean it's not possible. Although you claim that the Bulls' management team is floundering, I think most fans and media are surprised at how well the Rose-less Bulls have done. Of course, I join you in the hope that the Bulls can win a championship. It's really, really hard to win a NBA championship. Yeah, the Bulls once won 6 in 8 seasons, but they had the best player in the history of the game. Now, they don't have the best active player...or the second-best. In fact, at this point, we really don't know what we have in Derrick Rose. He may be no better than a top-20 player. And as for team management alienating Rose, I don't see it. I hoped that they'd be patient with Rose and IMO they certainly have been.
It may be hard to win a championship, but it's not so hard to compete for one. Teams have proven this true, even if by simply going deep into the LT. It's much easier to not compete. Signing Kurt for $4M is how you do that. Especially as 6th man and not paying the LT.
So you don't think the Rose-less 39-31 Bulls are competing effectively? I think they're competing their bloody asses off. Give them some reasonable facsimile of Rose and they're the #2 team in the East with at least a puncher's chance at taking the Heat. Here's hoping that Rose gets his comfort level to the point where we can have reason to chase more than moral victories.
No, I agree with Reggie Rose. Tex Winter used to brag about the triangle that it was the kind of offense teams without talent could run and win basketball games. The Bulls employ a system under Skiles and now Thibs that wins REGULAR SEASON games. Slow down the game to a snail's pace (Kirk's dribbling is great for that!). Focus on defense because you only need guys who can run and jump to do that, rather than guys who can run and jump and get their own shots and make them (expensive!). I mean no offense, but if someone thinks adding a 100% healthy Rose to this roster means we're a good bet to beat the Heat in 7 in the playoffs, it's delusional. If management believes it, they're incompetent. But they want the fans to believe it. PROFIT.
You really contend that the jury is still out on Hinrich? For the first 1/3 of that 2 year contract, you'll at least admit he's been overpaid for the production he's given, yes? He's been an injured, unproductive mess of a player the last 3 seasons for the most part. I guess you can think that he might turn it around and earn his salary and be a starter on a NBA title contender. You could also think that Nazr will make the all-star team next season or that Nate Robinson will develop a solid point guard game over the off-season, but that likely isn't going to happen either. I'd rather be paying Asik 6 million this season than giving 4 million to Hinrich. Better use of funds. A replacement level PG/SG could have given us more production for cheaper this year. You are right, *anything* can happen, but the wise move is to try and anticipate what is likely to happen. Not sure about that one. I think most thought they would make the playoffs but were not likely have home court in the 1st round and not be a threat to win the title. If you have a young NBA MVP on your team, you should be able to build around that player and win or come very close to winning a title. Look at the list of MVPs. http://www.nba.com/history/awards/mvp-award-winners/index.html The Bulls currently have that caliber of player on their roster and he has yet to enter his prime. He's a MVP asset, not just a 'top 20.' Well they certainly did it by leaking the medically cleared story to Melissa Isaacson. They have wisely hushed up since and are minding their place, although the damage is done. Let's hope these poor moves don't lead the Bulls losing the best asset they have had since Jordan.
Well, I doubt we disagree on our general opinions about the events talked about, but the way we frame them leaves us swaying in different directions about the overall state of the team. Losing Asik blows, and Kirk's injuries this year have been disappointing. I think if we had both for the whole season we might have an extra 5 wins this year. But to nitpick over the "framing" of each issue.... I don't think the Bulls "got rid" of Asik so much as Houston "yanked him away." I'm not clear on the specifics of the financial constraints the Bulls operate under, but I have little doubt GarPax and Thibs were clearly aware of his defensive capabilities and loved him for ite. I'm sure losing him really stung. But they probably couldn't justify the cost.....for whatever reason. Also, I think it's fair to apply the "opportunity cost" valuation method to Asik the same way we apply it to Hinrich. We don't like Cap'ns contract because it was our only ball of wax to spend, and reasonably believe it could've been used to higher impact. I kind of agree. Presumably Asik's deal would guarantee that we'd be lux-tax payers 3 years straight with a really nasty bill when he got paid his 15. Under those conditions, the only way the Bulls would agree to pay it is if we already had a dynasty and needed to spend that much to keep it together. (Under this circumstance our revenue streams are easier to project). But if the team isn't at that level, then you're running the risk of having to implement a scorched-earth policy, potentially when the team is already very good and may have other appealing options that it would be locked away from. So that begs the question......what was the marginal impact of keeping Asik? On this team, maybe not enough to justify the downside risk of keeping him. (Keep in mind I don't like that we lost Asik either). I think management's performance since we acquired Rose has been very good. The biggest thing that went wrong is that he tore his fuckin' ACL. If he didn't.....is there any reason to believe we wouldn't have had a similar record to previous years? I certainly don't think this last offseason is a slam dunk.....I just think it's ambiguous. I don't think measuring GM performance by championships is the best way to evaluate them. Being a GM is playing a winner-take-all equilibrium game where each player has wildly different starting points and the playing pieces occupy the extreme right hand side of the bell-curve, meaning even tiny deviations in talent or luck can create huge swings in outcomes. Ie,........the results are extremely lumpy. And riddled with luck. It naturally leads to their being one or maybe two extremely large winners and a bunch of others that just can't get over the hump. Even if many of the contestants are fairly equal in ability. As Bulls fans we were blessed to be one of those lucky winners for a decade. Then we got blessed again by lucking into a player who looks to be one of the decade's best. But Durant, Lebron, Kobe, Griffin, and Davis are lurking in the same waters, so it remains to be seen if we can catch lightning in a bottle in such a way that the Bulls develop a self-reinforcing stronghold atop the NBA.
The thing about Asik is his contract was $5M. Then $5M. To worry about the $15M the 3rd season now is a major blink in the game of chicken between the Rockets and Bulls. Sign him. Play him a year. Trade him for a draft pick or any other asset, and we're way ahead. Who wouldn't pay him $15M over 2 seasons if he's really that good?
I think that great players, coaches, general managers and franchises ultimately are judged by championships. It might not be necessarily fair, but that's how it works. A great player that gets a horrible team to .500 or a coach that does the same rarely gets the accolade. Its the hardware that matters. We all know MJ, Pip, Krause and Phil (even more w/ lakers) won 6 titles. I know Kobe won 5 and Lebron only won one. It matters. Asik would have cost 5 million dollars this year and next. Hinrich costs basically 4 million dollars this year and next. The frustrating thing is that they make the cheap move in not keeping Asik yet the pocketbook flows for Kirk Hinrich. And Rip makes 5 million to do nothing. 1.3 million for Vlad, who does nothing. If its going to be penny pinching and tax avoidance, at least don't waste the money you do spend. Like Thibs said via JVG proxy, its like you are not interested in winning championships. Also, a big money player in the last year of his deal is an asset usually if you are looking to trade for a stud, high priced player to pair with Rose. I think its interesting that Krause was able to start with a young MVP level talent and build a team around that player that won 6 titles. GarPax are in the same boat. MVP level talent, young, still room to develop. All they have to do is what Krause did, build the team around him. Yes, there is luck involved, but it takes skill as well. I think we are all hoping they can pull a Krause and bring home some titles. Also, many of the financial constraints of the Bulls are self imposed. The owner has consistently said he'd pay for a winner and even if its a mistake, they are paying the tax now. A few extra million dollars to keep a real impact player seems like a good investment, if, like JVG/Thibs care about, you are a franchise interested in winning.
The jury is absolutely still out on Hinrich and his contract. You think he's been a mess of a player and I don't. You're certainly not alone in hating Hinrich's game and I'm not alone in liking it. One thing I do know is that, if he's healthy, the current coach of the Bulls is going to play him significant minutes, the same as every other NBA coach who's had Hinrich has. Wonder why that is? Don't they know his shooting percentage? His PER? The truth is, we don't know what he is. He was the MVP a couple seasons ago. Even if he comes back completely healthy (big if), no one in his right mind would put him ahead of Lebron or Durant. If he comes back just a touch off his prior form, he can easily fall behind players like Paul, Harden and Westbrook and perhaps a few others. If he comes back at say, 80%, maybe he'd be a top-20. You keep trying to pin the "MVP"-based expectation on the team as if you hope to set up the organizational failure scenario in advance. That'll only work on a certain type of fan and I'm not that type. There's currently a team out there that has the best player on earth, another in the top-10 and another in the top-20. While the Heat isn't guaranteed the next several titles, it will be an upset in any season that they don't win. The inability of the Bulls or any other team to pull off a big upset isn't failure.
Its not really an aesthetic thing with Hinrich at this point with me. He isn't producing. Due to injury and age. Hinrich was a good player in his prime. Not great, but good. Not a guy to build a franchise around, but a solid glue guy. He's not that guy anymore. If you break up his current 2 season contract into thirds, I think its safe to say that Hinrich hasn't earned his paycheck for the first third. He's been hurt. He can't put the ball in the hoop as often as he used to on a team that really needs guys that can put the ball in the hoop. He isn't as good a defender as he used to be. As for going forward, I don't like Hinrich's game as the main 2 guard paired next to Rose. We need a bigger guy can can defend and score efficiently and stay healthy. Not an undersized 2 that is scrappy and has some point guard skills, but is a very inefficient scorer at this point. I don't mind him as a backup point guard and for a few backup minutes at the 2. Then again, if Teague could develop a jump shot this summer.... Rose *is* a MVP. If he comes back close to the player he was before, that is the expectation. Its not OK to not convert MVPs into championship teams. If Krause didn't get Pippen, Grant, Cartwright and the rest, and the Bulls never got past the Pistons and never won titles, he would have been seen as a failure. If Kruase didn't do it again and land Rodman, Kukoc, Kerr, Harper and the rest and collect another 3 titles, he would have been seen as a failure. Expectations only suck if you are afraid to fail. Greatness cherishes working with an asset like Rose or Jordan or Lebron or Dirk because you pretty much need one in order to bring home the big prize. As a Bulls fan, I'm happy that we finally, finally have an asset on the team that could be a cornerstone in raising another banner. If GarPax can't do it, Rose could leave. (Based on what Reggie Rose said, I think he will leave) And with him, any hopes of winning another title.
I cannot believe someone would actually argue for the acquisition of Kirk Hinrich as anything but an occasional sub and for more than vet minimum. In a league of 450 players, he might be in the top 350 at this point in his career. Among PGs, he might not even be in the top 60 in the league. Surely we could have found a guy in the top 60 for less than $4M. 82games.com (updated 9 days ago) has him with a PER of 10.8 at PG while opponents have a PER of 17.3. I don't think you can make the case, with a straight face, that his defense makes up for his struggle to maintain a PER of 10. I'm with K4E. He was once good enough that the Bulls plastered his face on Billboards all over the Chicagoland area to sell tickets, though he was never a #1 kind of guy. What we got was a guy who was given and lost the starting job on two other teams, where he ultimately found himself a free agent. He wasn't healthy for those teams, and he's not been for us. Not too shocking.
I believe that Thibodeau has a higher regard for Hinrich's game than you do, and I happen to agree with him, but who knows, you may be right. I agree with you. I've never liked Hinrich as a 2 guard on offense. Part of his value has always been that he can play PG on offense yet effectively defend the SG (important when he's paired with an undersized SG like Ben Gordon), but as a SG he's nothing more than a 38% 3-point shooter with a handle.
The main problem is and always has been that you just don't get the basic nature of the NBA game. You think it's about PER, FG% and such. The guys who actually decide who plays and who doesn't (NBA head coaches) derisively laugh when media members challenge them with such stats. I mean, I'm sure you know best, but I'm not sure I can help you convince the guys who lose their jobs if their teams don't win. I respect that you and those who think like you believe that Hinrich doesn't deserve to play anything but mop-up minutes. I can't help it that those who actually decide who play in NBA games and who don't (i.e., NBA head coaches) keep playing Hinrich big minutes. I mean, you'd think that the fact that if their teams don't win enough games, they'll lose their jobs would be enough incentive. Oh screw it. You guys think Hinrich sucks and I'll never convince you otherwise. But you can't explain why every NBA head coach who has had Hinrich, guys who know TONS more about the NBA than you do and whose livelihoods completely depend on the performance of their teams keep putting Hinrich in the game when guys with better PERs and FG%s are available. In the end, I don't think you know the NBA game better than NBA head coaches. They think Hinrich is good at basketball and so do I.
They don't play Hinrich big minutes. He hasn't played 36 MPG (starter's minutes?) since 2005-2006. He lost his starting job in both Washington and Atlanta. His minutes were reduced his second season in Atlanta. And I think when you pay a guy ~$10M, you're going to play him. Fools gold. Like Rip. At this point, I think he's good at tackling LeBron on a breakaway.
I'm with transplant about Hinrich. There must be a reason that he is starting and Rose wanted him to be back. If Thibs wouldn't like his play then Hinrich wouldn't have play that much. And being 32-17 isn't bad either. We are only seeing stats...and this isn't always enough to see.
