2018-2019 Official NBA thread

[Jenksismyhero]

I love how "we need more energy and spirit" was the reason to get rid of Fred, so they just replace him with a guy whose been sitting on the same bench the last 4 years. I'm sure that same (old) voice will really change things!

This organization is such a joke. I'm sure Fred has to be thrilled he got paid 25 million and is now able to leave that disaster behind.

Edited December 3, 2018 by Jenksismyhero

[bmags]

16 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

 

If I was hired coach I'm firing every holdover to make sure there's no pipeline to Gar like Randy Brown and (apparently) Boylen. What an awful front office culture.

[Dick Allen]

4 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

I love how "we need more energy and spirit" was the reason to get rid of Fred, so they just replace him with a guy whose been sitting on the same bench the last 4 years. I'm sure that same (old) voice will really change things!

This organization is such a joke. I'm sure Fred has to be thrilled he got paid 25 million and is now able to leave that disaster behind.

I agree with this. If he was the answer, what has he been doing while an assistant? Why wasn’t what they needed coming out, and if he was being suppressed and it was recognized, why did it take until now to make a change? I don’t know if Hoiberg is any good. I really don’t think anyone could make a conclusion. He probably did need to go, but he was set up to fail, and he failed. Pop would have failed with the rosters they provided.

[bmags]

We can all laugh at this when it's terribly wrong, but I do think, should Bulls be in that under 28 win mark, that Paxson/Forman are gone and Doug Collins leads a team to find a new GM/President.

[Soxbadger]

2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I agree with this. If he was the answer, what has he been doing while an assistant? Why wasn’t what they needed coming out, and if he was being suppressed and it was recognized, why did it take until now to make a change? I don’t know if Hoiberg is any good. I really don’t think anyone could make a conclusion. He probably did need to go, but he was set up to fail, and he failed. Pop would have failed with the rosters they provided.

Pop would have won a lot more games than Hoiberg. Maybe they wouldnt be champions, but theyd be a lot better.

[Jenksismyhero]

22 minutes ago, bmags said:

We can all laugh at this when it's terribly wrong, but I do think, should Bulls be in that under 28 win mark, that Paxson/Forman are gone and Doug Collins leads a team to find a new GM/President.

No chance. Jerry is loving this. They're going to get a high draft pick and then sell fans on the future. If anything GarPax will get promoted and maybe they bring in someone "new" (of course it will be someone in-house) who can be the GM for the public but really all control stays with GarPax.

[bmags]

31 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

No chance. Jerry is loving this. They're going to get a high draft pick and then sell fans on the future. If anything GarPax will get promoted and maybe they bring in someone "new" (of course it will be someone in-house) who can be the GM for the public but really all control stays with GarPax.

No, I think Jerry very much hates this. 

[Balta1701]

6 minutes ago, bmags said:

No, I think Jerry very much hates this. 

Well that payroll is pretty low and they're still filling out the arena. 

[Kyyle23]

Pretty sure Michael is the Reinsdorf that is at the top now

[Chisoxfn]

2 hours ago, Soxbadger said:

Pop would have won a lot more games than Hoiberg. Maybe they wouldnt be champions, but theyd be a lot better.

Technically he's in charge of the Bulls defense, which had some good statistical season under Boylan (up until this year and I can't really blame him on that). Either way, I laugh at how irate everyone is over this. If there is one thing we do know, its that Fred was not a "special" coach.  The Boylan moves seems odd but making a move this early and given how critical the long-term development of this current core is to the franchises future, they absolutely had to give a ringing endorsement to Boylen (anything other than that would create just a chaotic window into contention).  They also must at least see some long-term fit from him, albeit, if they really believed long-term, he'd get a 4 year deal. 

The reality is they'll take a deeper look at everything this off-season and if its a total disaster, then I'm sure everything will be on the table. Somehow I don't see that being the case and my guess is Pax finally decided he needed to make the move now vs. later.  I'm presuming Pax saw the lockeroom souring and turning the wrong way and wanted to get ahead of that with a change (and that is why everything happened when it did).

I really can't argue the move and find it so odd that so many people that weren't big Fred fans are now speaking up glowingly for him.  By the way, the couple people I know who are close to NBA circles have long told me the Bulls are the sleeper team out there in terms of how they are building a nucleus of talent. Odd fit but you can't get overly worked up about that this early in the rebuild. The major issue is/will be how do they add those extra pieces via free agency (or getting lucky and getting a top pick which can be converted into a difference maker).  

I also think the past year of Thibs era shed at least some light that things weren't entirely on Pax. Of course I've been the long-time Paxson defender and I say that from the perspective if they wanted to make a change, so be it, but I can also envision a future where this team is a regular conference contender again and it happening under Paxson's leadership. I can't predict championships because I think there is too much luck once you get to that point. I think great GM's can regularly make their team's conference contenders but being a title contender involves a bigger component of luck (i.e., normally there can only be 1 best roster and typically that is fielded by the best player and well, sometimes, you have zero ability to get said player).  But I do think good GM's can find ways to be above average to very good on a regular basis and I think Pax has that ability.  

[Chisoxfn]

3 hours ago, bmags said:

If I was hired coach I'm firing every holdover to make sure there's no pipeline to Gar like Randy Brown and (apparently) Boylen. What an awful front office culture.

Didn't Hoiberg hire Boylen?  

[Balta1701]

2 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

Technically he's in charge of the Bulls defense, which had some good statistical season under Boylan (up until this year and I can't really blame him on that). Either way, I laugh at how irate everyone is over this. If there is one thing we do know, its that Fred was not a "special" coach.  The Boylan moves seems odd but making a move this early and given how critical the long-term development of this current core is to the franchises future, they absolutely had to give a ringing endorsement to Boylen (anything other than that would create just a chaotic window into contention).  They also must at least see some long-term fit from him, albeit, if they really believed long-term, he'd get a 4 year deal. 

The reality is they'll take a deeper look at everything this off-season and if its a total disaster, then I'm sure everything will be on the table. Somehow I don't see that being the case and my guess is Pax finally decided he needed to make the move now vs. later.  I'm presuming Pax saw the lockeroom souring and turning the wrong way and wanted to get ahead of that with a change (and that is why everything happened when it did).

I really can't argue the move and find it so odd that so many people that weren't big Fred fans are now speaking up glowingly for him.  By the way, the couple people I know who are close to NBA circles have long told me the Bulls are the sleeper team out there in terms of how they are building a nucleus of talent. Odd fit but you can't get overly worked up about that this early in the rebuild. The major issue is/will be how do they add those extra pieces via free agency (or getting lucky and getting a top pick which can be converted into a difference maker).  

I also think the past year of Thibs era shed at least some light that things weren't entirely on Pax. Of course I've been the long-time Paxson defender and I say that from the perspective if they wanted to make a change, so be it, but I can also envision a future where this team is a regular conference contender again and it happening under Paxson's leadership. I can't predict championships because I think there is too much luck once you get to that point. I think great GM's can regularly make their team's conference contenders but being a title contender involves a bigger component of luck (i.e., normally there can only be 1 best roster and typically that is fielded by the best player and well, sometimes, you have zero ability to get said player).  But I do think good GM's can find ways to be above average to very good on a regular basis and I think Pax has that ability.  

I don't know where you're getting the "many people speaking glowingly of Hoiberg", I think a lot of us are in the same boat as you - he seemed to be doing ok with that team last year, but no one really had a huge amount of confidence in him or thought he was anything special at best, and overall he was a poor hire, which reflects on the people above him.

Furthermore, we heard people saying the Bulls were a sleeper team this season here at this website, and so far we're staring at 5-19. You're not wrong - there is a little smattering of talent now in Chicago, with a handful of starting caliber players, and there is a path back to winning with Paxson as GM - but it requires one thing in addition to what you've said - no busts. So far, they have done a decent job with these last 2 first round picks getting reasonably good players out of them, even if the guys never turn into stars. But before that - Valentine looks like a failed pick, Portis is a backup, etc. One reason the 76ers were down so long despite a huge number of high picks was that every other one busted - Turner, Okafor, Carter-Williams, and now Fultz. If Paxson can continue successfully finding a good player every single year out of his top 10 pick, then soon enough he will be outside of the top 10 again...but that's a big IF. One year where the top 10 pick busts or gets hurt, and suddenly now the previous years' picks are hitting extension time,  and your free agency dollars have evaporated. 

So, the path to Paxson being a good GM is - continue hitting on all his draft picks.  If one or two of those miss, then this is the Bulls position for a long time.

[southsider2k5]

15 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I don't know where you're getting the "many people speaking glowingly of Hoiberg", I think a lot of us are in the same boat as you - he seemed to be doing ok with that team last year, but no one really had a huge amount of confidence in him or thought he was anything special at best, and overall he was a poor hire, which reflects on the people above him.

Furthermore, we heard people saying the Bulls were a sleeper team this season here at this website, and so far we're staring at 5-19. You're not wrong - there is a little smattering of talent now in Chicago, with a handful of starting caliber players, and there is a path back to winning with Paxson as GM - but it requires one thing in addition to what you've said - no busts. So far, they have done a decent job with these last 2 first round picks getting reasonably good players out of them, even if the guys never turn into stars. But before that - Valentine looks like a failed pick, Portis is a backup, etc. One reason the 76ers were down so long despite a huge number of high picks was that every other one busted - Turner, Okafor, Carter-Williams, and now Fultz. If Paxson can continue successfully finding a good player every single year out of his top 10 pick, then soon enough he will be outside of the top 10 again...but that's a big IF. One year where the top 10 pick busts or gets hurt, and suddenly now the previous years' picks are hitting extension time,  and your free agency dollars have evaporated. 

So, the path to Paxson being a good GM is - continue hitting on all his draft picks.  If one or two of those miss, then this is the Bulls position for a long time.

So I quit reading when you mentioned this teams record as if anyone else could have done anything with this steaming pile of trash after the injuries. 

[Balta1701]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

So I quit reading when you mentioned this teams record as if anyone else could have done anything with this steaming pile of trash after the injuries. 

That, uh, had nothing to do with any commentary on Hoiberg, it was a response to people calling them a "sleeper team". 

[Chisoxfn]

12 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

That, uh, had nothing to do with any commentary on Hoiberg, it was a response to people calling them a "sleeper team". 

I should point out the sleeper comment was more about how they were positioning for the long term...not them being a potential playoff team. My comment on odd fit essentially alluded to the fact that the roster construction still needs work...but talent accumulation and cap space all are well positioned. Nothing is a gimme though and lots of work ahead but a year and a quarte in, I personally am more optimistic vs less.  Excited to see how things look when everyone comes back.

Seperately, I do not think Valentine or Portis would register as busts. Look at their production vs others in their draft class. Could better picks have been made...sure, but neither of them are busts and both have proven to be solid role players (especially Portis). Neither of them were top ten picks either. But they are/were better then a number of players picked above them.  

The bulls have been one of the best drafting teams in the NBA over the Gar/Pax era. You can debate a lot of things but their drafting has been in the top ten percent of the league if not better.

[Jack Parkman]

In the NBA where stars mean everything, I'm not sure it isn't a more prudent draft strategy to go with the guy with the higher ceiling over the "safe guy" every time. This is the one league where I'd rather draft guys that have a legitimate chance to both completely suck and be a star. There are no sure things in basketball. Swing for the fences every year, even if you strike out more often than not. The only time where it is ok to draft a "safe" player is after pick 20 and in the 2nd round, and even then I don't believe there is such a thing in basketball. 

[SoxAce]

 

Haha this guy definitely has some Popovich in him. 

[Kyyle23]

Jason, I appreciate your enthusiasm but I couldn't disagree with you more on pretty much every facet of this organization. They haven't positioned themselves for anything because in the end, the same guys who fucked things up multiple times with multiple coaches will do it again.  You keep buying in and they keep letting you down

 

[joejoedairy]

It's crazy we've had two different Jim Boylen's as replacement coaches.

[Balta1701]

9 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

In the NBA where stars mean everything, I'm not sure it isn't a more prudent draft strategy to go with the guy with the higher ceiling over the "safe guy" every time. This is the one league where I'd rather draft guys that have a legitimate chance to both completely suck and be a star. There are no sure things in basketball. Swing for the fences every year, even if you strike out more often than not. The only time where it is ok to draft a "safe" player is after pick 20 and in the 2nd round, and even then I don't believe there is such a thing in basketball. 

If the Bulls keep getting "good to very good players" in the draft, and they wind up in a position where they have 4 of them still on rookie deals - you're talking about a team with a ton of cap space and a ton of assets to trade, including its upcoming first round picks. Pair up 3 of those "very good" players with an elite trade/FA player and you've got a possibly workable plan. But, have just 1 of those draft picks bust, and now you're needing to replace him with another $15 million player, your cap space is gone, and you don't have the resources to go after at top flight player. It's a knife edge strategy that requires you to have no more Denzel Valentines. 

[bmags]

15 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

Technically he's in charge of the Bulls defense, which had some good statistical season under Boylan (up until this year and I can't really blame him on that). Either way, I laugh at how irate everyone is over this. If there is one thing we do know, its that Fred was not a "special" coach.  The Boylan moves seems odd but making a move this early and given how critical the long-term development of this current core is to the franchises future, they absolutely had to give a ringing endorsement to Boylen (anything other than that would create just a chaotic window into contention).  They also must at least see some long-term fit from him, albeit, if they really believed long-term, he'd get a 4 year deal. 

The reality is they'll take a deeper look at everything this off-season and if its a total disaster, then I'm sure everything will be on the table. Somehow I don't see that being the case and my guess is Pax finally decided he needed to make the move now vs. later.  I'm presuming Pax saw the lockeroom souring and turning the wrong way and wanted to get ahead of that with a change (and that is why everything happened when it did).

I really can't argue the move and find it so odd that so many people that weren't big Fred fans are now speaking up glowingly for him.  By the way, the couple people I know who are close to NBA circles have long told me the Bulls are the sleeper team out there in terms of how they are building a nucleus of talent. Odd fit but you can't get overly worked up about that this early in the rebuild. The major issue is/will be how do they add those extra pieces via free agency (or getting lucky and getting a top pick which can be converted into a difference maker).  

I also think the past year of Thibs era shed at least some light that things weren't entirely on Pax. Of course I've been the long-time Paxson defender and I say that from the perspective if they wanted to make a change, so be it, but I can also envision a future where this team is a regular conference contender again and it happening under Paxson's leadership. I can't predict championships because I think there is too much luck once you get to that point. I think great GM's can regularly make their team's conference contenders but being a title contender involves a bigger component of luck (i.e., normally there can only be 1 best roster and typically that is fielded by the best player and well, sometimes, you have zero ability to get said player).  But I do think good GM's can find ways to be above average to very good on a regular basis and I think Pax has that ability.  

Here's the fatal flaw that I think your "view from nowhere" approach to grading paxson/forman misses out:

- The last ten years have seen that tandem punch out a coach, nearly kill a player, play a player with a broken leg, publicly feud with a coach/use exit interviews to try and plant players against the coach/fire coach/send out an incredibly immature press release disrespecting the coach, hire new coach/consistently undercut coach/say the coach is the whole problem and never them/fire coach after delivering him a horrible team/turns out the coach was a disaster that they hired but that's the coaches fault

And that's a high level view. The view of the bulls front office and exec culture around players is NOT positive.

And you still expect that the bulls, which cannot differentiate itself with money offers, will be able to use their money to sign a star.

It's going to be very difficult. Dwyane wade signed at Gandalf age because it was his home town. 

They essentially need a player whose overwhelming sentimentality toward Chicago overcomes the perception that the front office will throw anyone under the bus to keep their positions including coaches and players. Never themselves, though, never themselves. It's always somebody else's fault.

[Chisoxfn]

6 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

Jason, I appreciate your enthusiasm but I couldn't disagree with you more on pretty much every facet of this organization. They haven't positioned themselves for anything because in the end, the same guys who fucked things up multiple times with multiple coaches will do it again.  You keep buying in and they keep letting you down

 

I almost didn't make my post cause I know I'm on an island with my stance. Haha.  I've also said, I have zero problem if the Reinsdorf's go another direction either, but I think under Pax we will see this team as an eastern conference contender in the next 2-3 years.  That said, if the chemistry all blows up and they miss badly in the off-season, things could change pretty quickly. I'm presuming Boylan could be the last coach they hire, depending on how everything goes.   Or Boylan could be the transitional guy (but that means the roster is doing its thing and they think there is the right long-man to gain new guys.

I haven't really paid much attention to Boylen other then noticing he was always very engaged on the sidelines and usually yelling or smiling.  I remember when Hoiberg hired him as his top assistant I was impressed at his resume (but a resume is purely a resume). He's worked with some all time greats so for now I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.  

[Chisoxfn]

Separately, I should have a made a post about it at the time (or maybe I did and just don't remember) but I thought the quote from Carter calling out a lack of leadership was really interesting (happened like a week ago).  I have to imagine there was more to that comment then just a rookie airing frustration.

On a sidenote, did something happen with Blakeny and Fred?  

[bmags]

9 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

I almost didn't make my post cause I know I'm on an island with my stance. Haha.  I've also said, I have zero problem if the Reinsdorf's go another direction either, but I think under Pax we will see this team as an eastern conference contender in the next 2-3 years.  That said, if the chemistry all blows up and they miss badly in the off-season, things could change pretty quickly. I'm presuming Boylan could be the last coach they hire, depending on how everything goes.   Or Boylan could be the transitional guy (but that means the roster is doing its thing and they think there is the right long-man to gain new guys.

I haven't really paid much attention to Boylen other then noticing he was always very engaged on the sidelines and usually yelling or smiling.  I remember when Hoiberg hired him as his top assistant I was impressed at his resume (but a resume is purely a resume). He's worked with some all time greats so for now I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.  

I think you are right to emphasize that the team is structurally in a good position.

I think you underemphasize the reputation and culture that surrounds the Bulls.

Among other things, it also severely bothers me that such a high-revenue franchise has among the smallest staffs including maybe the smallest scouting and development staff in the game.

[Soxbadger]

9 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

Separately, I should have a made a post about it at the time (or maybe I did and just don't remember) but I thought the quote from Carter calling out a lack of leadership was really interesting (happened like a week ago).  I have to imagine there was more to that comment then just a rookie airing frustration.

On a sidenote, did something happen with Blakeny and Fred?  

https://clutchpoints.com/bulls-rumors-fred-hoiberg-gave-zach-lavine-freedom/

There is something on Athletic but I think you need to be a subscriber.

Seems Blakeney called out Hoiberg for taking him out of a game.