2012-2013 NBA thread

[Soxbadger]

I also think given the market for centers, you wouldn't have much difficulty trading him 6 months from now.

 

I believe Asik has to consent to be traded at 6 months, otherwise its not for a year.

 

Zoom would know more than me.

[RZZZA]

Disregard anything having to do with money. Does Asik make the Heat better, yes or no?

[Soxbadger]

Of course, if you can just sit Asik on the bench and use him sparingly when you need a big guy against certain teams.

 

They have Dexter Pittman, he wouldnt even start for most college teams.

[Chisoxfn]

NO I WAS NOT.

 

ASIK IS NOT FREE WE CAN NOT LIVE IN FANTASY LAND.

 

I ASSUMED THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTOOD ASIK HAS TO BE PAID TO PLAY.

 

Sorry I didnt make that clear, this is literally become the dumbest argument Ive had today, and I argue with stupid people for a living.

Coming from the guy who thinks Thibbs should be fired and that Rose's injury is 95% on him, well, that doesn't say much. The point is, given the overall market, Asik isn't going to be ridiculously overpaid. As a UFA he probably gets paid more on average over the contract, however, the CBA prevented teams from offering more. What did the Rockets too, they back loaded it with one large deal but the overall average contract is probably consistent (if not less) then he would get as a UFA, which means, there is potential value to trade him a year from now, in which case, the contract really doesn't matter much (it isn't like the Bulls can spend the money elsewhere, so by matching him they at least get the benefit of trading him for a TPE or draft pick or something else so that they don't waste the asset).

[bmags]

I just can not believe this argument.

 

At least Zoom understands so I have that going for me.

 

For comparison here is Joel Anthony's contract;

 

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jul/2...anthony-072310/

 

5 years 18mil.

 

If the Bulls could sign Asik for that, Id do it every day of the week.

 

The current offer the bulls have to match is:

 

3 years 25 mil

 

I just assume that the people in this thread know sports and know that Asik is going to cost more than 2x the amount of Anthony. So you cant say "Oh well hed improve the Heat at the expense of Anthony" because the salaries dont match.

 

You are full of s***, just admit it. In basketball, talent evaluations are made all the time without the basis of money. Your first analysis was totally based off of talent solely focused on free throw shooting, and now you are claiming it's only due to money. You are mitt romney.

[Chisoxfn]

I just can not believe this argument.

 

At least Zoom understands so I have that going for me.

 

For comparison here is Joel Anthony's contract;

 

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jul/2...anthony-072310/

 

5 years 18mil.

 

If the Bulls could sign Asik for that, Id do it every day of the week.

 

The current offer the bulls have to match is:

 

3 years 25 mil

 

I just assume that the people in this thread know sports and know that Asik is going to cost more than 2x the amount of Anthony. So you cant say "Oh well hed improve the Heat at the expense of Anthony" because the salaries dont match.

As a UFA, I would not be surprised to see Asik get significantly more then 3yrs 25M.

[Soxbadger]

Coming from the guy who thinks Thibbs should be fired and that Rose's injury is 95% on him, well, that doesn't say much. The point is, given the overall market, Asik isn't going to be ridiculously overpaid. As a UFA he probably gets paid more on average over the contract, however, the CBA prevented teams from offering more. What did the Rockets too, they back loaded it with one large deal but the overall average contract is probably consistent (if not less) then he would get as a UFA, which means, there is potential value to trade him a year from now, in which case, the contract really doesn't matter much (it isn't like the Bulls can spend the money elsewhere, so by matching him they at least get the benefit of trading him for a TPE or draft pick or something else so that they don't waste the asset).

 

Come on man I explicitly didnt say those things.

 

1) I never said thibs should be fired, I said he should be a wait and see after this season.

 

2) I never said Rose's injury was "95%" on Thibs, I said that Thibs should have been more careful. Where is that a percentage? Thibs could have been 1% responsible and thats still to much in my opinion.

 

Now in terms of the bulls trading etc, that would be true if I had any faith in the Bulls actually being able to make good trades.

[Chisoxfn]

You are full of s***, just admit it. In basketball, talent evaluations are made all the time without the basis of money. Your first analysis was totally based off of talent solely focused on free throw shooting, and now you are claiming it's only due to money. You are mitt romney.

Who gives a s*** about the money. Worse case he's a 15M expiring which in and of itself has massive value if the Bulls are over the cap and want to add additional assets. I realize the luxury tax might be an issue but in reality, the luxury tax doesn't exactly prevent the Bulls from signing players, etc. They would still be significantly over the cap.

 

And if they want to clear money for 2014, I fully believe the Bulls could move Asik's contract. If they have another strategy, well they still have an asset that can be used to match salaries, etc, which is pretty key in the NBA.

 

And whether it is 6 months or next off-season, I don't really care too much. That still is in plenty of time to prepare for the 2013 season, which is the more important season anyway. I don't get all that hyped about 2014 since there aren't even any good FA's that year that help the Bulls. I've long argued Bulls should go for broke for Dwight.

[Soxbadger]

You are full of s***, just admit it. In basketball, talent evaluations are made all the time without the basis of money. Your first analysis was totally based off of talent solely focused on free throw shooting, and now you are claiming it's only due to money. You are mitt romney.

 

No Im not.

 

The arguing about Asik started about MONEY.

 

Why would I think all of a sudden we were talking with no money involved?

 

How does that make any sense?

 

You are just upset because you didnt know the NBA rules.

 

Read the threads, go back to the 2011-2012, see how I was the person defending Asik.

 

It makes no sense that Id all of a sudden not like Asik, its only because of MONEY. I just assumed people understood that contracts impact a players value to a team.

 

[Soxbadger]

Who gives a s*** about the money. Worse case he's a 15M expiring which in and of itself has massive value if the Bulls are over the cap and want to add additional assets. I realize the luxury tax might be an issue but in reality, the luxury tax doesn't exactly prevent the Bulls from signing players, etc. They would still be significantly over the cap.

 

And if they want to clear money for 2014, I fully believe the Bulls could move Asik's contract. If they have another strategy, well they still have an asset that can be used to match salaries, etc, which is pretty key in the NBA.

 

And whether it is 6 months or next off-season, I don't really care too much. That still is in plenty of time to prepare for the 2013 season, which is the more important season anyway. I don't get all that hyped about 2014 since there aren't even any good FA's that year that help the Bulls. I've long argued Bulls should go for broke for Dwight.

 

You have a lot more faith in the Bulls front office than I do. And as much as I am in the minority on Thibs, keeping Asik at 25 mil for 3, is a minority position.

 

But thats why I come to message boards, if I just wanted to hear my opinion, Id talk to myself.

[Chisoxfn]

Come on man I explicitly didnt say those things.

 

1) I never said thibs should be fired, I said he should be a wait and see after this season.

 

2) I never said Rose's injury was "95%" on Thibs, I said that Thibs should have been more careful. Where is that a percentage? Thibs could have been 1% responsible and thats still to much in my opinion.

 

Now in terms of the bulls trading etc, that would be true if I had any faith in the Bulls actually being able to make good trades.

I don't know, I've seen you slam Thibbs for everything. I've watched the team, I've heard the players, I've heard the experts, and I've heard nothing but 100% praise for the way he coaches and prepares his team, for his in-game changes, etc. How often did you see Thibbs run with the 2nd unit for extended periods because it worked. A lot of coaches wouldn't do that (that is an in-game adjustment). He would occasionally go to the bench early, use different guys (e.g., make adjustments).

 

I really think the only way you don't complain about Thibbs is if he won a title. And to be honest, that isn't always the best way to gauge a coach. Heck, given the Spurs got destroyed in the playoffs, why shouldn't Pop be fired? He didn't even have an injury to its MVP and starting center as an excuse.

 

And I'm only being an ass to point out these things because you have been so strong on the other side, constantly berating about it, and quite frankly being in the vast majority. I truly think you are one of those fans that will constantly whine and complain and never appreciate anything unless you win (even if it is due to pure luck or in spite of many things).

[Chisoxfn]

Come on man I explicitly didnt say those things.

 

1) I never said thibs should be fired, I said he should be a wait and see after this season.

 

2) I never said Rose's injury was "95%" on Thibs, I said that Thibs should have been more careful. Where is that a percentage? Thibs could have been 1% responsible and thats still to much in my opinion.

 

Now in terms of the bulls trading etc, that would be true if I had any faith in the Bulls actually being able to make good trades.

Outside of the Tyrus Thomas trade w/Portland, they've done a very good job drafting, accumulating assets, etc. Really the only thing they haven't done a good job at is landing the secondary star, which isn't easy to do. Gar/PAX sure get a lot of heat for by and large hitting on a lot of not so high draft picks (clearly Rose makes them significantly better).

 

Again, I'm not saying they are perfect, cause they aren't. At some point those inabilities become a problem, however, sometimes it just isn't meant to be.

[Chisoxfn]

You have a lot more faith in the Bulls front office than I do. And as much as I am in the minority on Thibs, keeping Asik at 25 mil for 3, is a minority position.

 

But thats why I come to message boards, if I just wanted to hear my opinion, Id talk to myself.

I honestly don't know if it a minority decision. I'd say its more 50/50 but understood. And I don't really have a problem of losing Asik, however, if we just lose him, that alone irritates me and would be another mistake by the Bulls front office. Like I said, I believe matching Asik does more good then not (both basketball wise and from a structural perspective in terms of what a smart capologist/gm could do with that contract).

[Soxbadger]

I don't know, I've seen you slam Thibbs for everything. I've watched the team, I've heard the players, I've heard the experts, and I've heard nothing but 100% praise for the way he coaches and prepares his team, for his in-game changes, etc. How often did you see Thibbs run with the 2nd unit for extended periods because it worked. A lot of coaches wouldn't do that (that is an in-game adjustment). He would occasionally go to the bench early, use different guys (e.g., make adjustments).

 

I really think the only way you don't complain about Thibbs is if he won a title. And to be honest, that isn't always the best way to gauge a coach. Heck, given the Spurs got destroyed in the playoffs, why shouldn't Pop be fired? He didn't even have an injury to its MVP and starting center as an excuse.

 

And I'm only being an ass to point out these things because you have been so strong on the other side, constantly berating about it, and quite frankly being in the vast majority. I truly think you are one of those fans that will constantly whine and complain and never appreciate anything unless you win (even if it is due to pure luck or in spite of many things).

 

This is really just so opposite of the truth.

 

If Thibs shows a ton of new stuff on offense this year, Id want him signed immediately. Its not about winning a title, that has a lot of luck, its about making changes. Its about seeing problems and addressing them.

 

Ill use an anecdote.

 

I love Bo Ryan, Im not that huge of a fan of Bielema. Both have had success, but 1 I have utmost confidence in during the game (Ryan), the other I always am concerned about.

 

Without actually keeping a game log myself, its hard to say here are the X times Thibs did something I didnt agree with. The reason I talk about it, is because well I am in the minority, so I have to respond to about 10 posts at a time.

 

It happens.

[Chisoxfn]

This is really just so opposite of the truth.

 

If Thibs shows a ton of new stuff on offense this year, Id want him signed immediately. Its not about winning a title, that has a lot of luck, its about making changes. Its about seeing problems and addressing them.

 

Ill use an anecdote.

 

I love Bo Ryan, Im not that huge of a fan of Bielema. Both have had success, but 1 I have utmost confidence in during the game (Ryan), the other I always am concerned about.

 

Without actually keeping a game log myself, its hard to say here are the X times Thibs did something I didnt agree with. The reason I talk about it, is because well I am in the minority, so I have to respond to about 10 posts at a time.

 

It happens.

Understood. By the way, I want to point out that while we disagree here, you are a good poster, and this has been just good natured debate. However, at this point, we'll just agree to disagree, in regards to this. I wish the Bulls would go out and trade for Dwight or make a serious run (consequences be damned).

 

And just to be an ass, didn't Bo make a pretty big in-game coaching mistake in the most recent NCAA tourneys?

[Soxbadger]

I wish the Bulls would go out and trade for Dwight or make a serious run (consequences be damned).

 

And just to be an ass, didn't Bo make a pretty big in-game coaching mistake in the most recent NCAA tourneys?

 

I agree on Howard completely. Just go for it, whatever happens happens. Sometimes you gotta take risks in live.

 

Yes Bo has made mistakes (hes human). But Bielama didnt even know the rules in the Rose Bowl, and has done so many other things that make me cry.

 

And you dont have to worry, people argue when they care about things. Most of us are Bulls fans, we want the Bulls to win Championships. Id rather be wrong and the Bulls win, then be right have them lose.

 

So its just for fun.

[ZoomSlowik]

Is it realistic for a team to have 5 offensive threats on the court? In an ideal world, that would be great, to have 5 players on the court at all times that are good at both offense and defense.

 

The Heat did it. Battier isn't a world-beater, but you have to cover him in the corner or he'll hit the open 3 on him. The Bulls would have it with their starting lineup if Rose were healthy and Hamilton were healthy and productive. The Spurs did it with regularity.

 

"Offensive threat" doesn't necessarily mean they have to score 15 a game, just that you can't get away with playing 10 feet off him with regularity.

[ZoomSlowik]

And on the flip side, they were significantly better defensively with him on the court, to the point where he was a net gain. I've never said he's a great offensive player. I've said that on the right teams he's a good fit and as a whole he's a great bench center. I also think given the market for centers, you wouldn't have much difficulty trading him 6 months from now.

 

Statistically, he was a net loss even with his very good defense this year. Their D was only 7.5 points per 100 better with him on the floor.

 

And again, he plays less than 15 minutes per game. In what universe is that worth $15 million a year for that third season? That completely destroys their salary structure for that year, as it would for basically any team.

 

It's just not worth it. He's not a star in any definition of the word, and he's not going to start.

Edited July 13, 2012 by ZoomSlowik

[ZoomSlowik]

But the point is, as a 5th option, that sort of percentage is just fine, and as a whole, if your strategy is to leave him open, 52% of your shots is still > the average shooting percentage in the league (excessively) so I don't really see how it is a good strategy to keep fouling him and or letting him have dunks. Seems pretty foolish to me. On a sidenote, if you are playing the Heat, you are going to be doubling Lebron a lot no matter what (irregardless of who your center is) but no team has 5 legitimate offensive options and defensively, they'd be a lot better with a guy like Asik who could just shut down the paint.

 

It's really not, it's well below league average (62%). They're giving up a bunch of offensive opportunities by having him out there and making life harder for the other 4 players. Actually, let's be honest here, he's making life harder for Rose since he's already carrying the rest of the team on his back.

 

The Heat got a lot better offensively when they stopped playing Joel Anthony 30 MPG and they still defended just fine. That's not a coincidence.

[ZoomSlowik]

Coming from the guy who thinks Thibbs should be fired and that Rose's injury is 95% on him, well, that doesn't say much. The point is, given the overall market, Asik isn't going to be ridiculously overpaid. As a UFA he probably gets paid more on average over the contract, however, the CBA prevented teams from offering more. What did the Rockets too, they back loaded it with one large deal but the overall average contract is probably consistent (if not less) then he would get as a UFA, which means, there is potential value to trade him a year from now, in which case, the contract really doesn't matter much (it isn't like the Bulls can spend the money elsewhere, so by matching him they at least get the benefit of trading him for a TPE or draft pick or something else so that they don't waste the asset).

 

He's going to be making $15 million in 3 years. That's absurdly overpaid. That's really the only year that matters since it's cap-killing bad. The average is a little easier to swallow though still bad, $15 mil is abysmal. Every year you keep him at that reasonable salary makes him a lot harder to swallow as the team getting him. You'd also still have to add assets to get anyone good, and the receiving team is either going to dump a huge salary on your or have to be $15 mil under the cap.

 

It absolutely matters for the Bulls because they have to deal with that total for luxury tax payments. It also absolutely destroys any chance you have of being a player in FA in the 2014 off-season. Without Asik, Deng is off the payroll and Boozer can be amnesty'd. With Asik, you're stuck paying something like $35 mil to three frontcourt players (extending Gibson, who is far more important) and another $18 mil or so to Rose. That obviously doesn't leave any space. Assuming they can dump him on someone is a big risk to take for a guy that you can live without.

Edited July 13, 2012 by ZoomSlowik

[Jordan4life_2007]

Oh yes. Chaos and I'm not involved.

[Chisoxfn]

It's really not, it's well below league average (62%). They're giving up a bunch of offensive opportunities by having him out there and making life harder for the other 4 players. Actually, let's be honest here, he's making life harder for Rose since he's already carrying the rest of the team on his back.

 

The Heat got a lot better offensively when they stopped playing Joel Anthony 30 MPG and they still defended just fine. That's not a coincidence.

62% from the paint, but the point was more in argument with Badger who indicated that they would just consistently foul, etc. My point was 52% > overall scoring (not necessarily in the paint scoring percentages).

 

 

[Chisoxfn]

He's going to be making $15 million in 3 years. That's absurdly overpaid. That's really the only year that matters since it's cap-killing bad. The average is a little easier to swallow though still bad, $15 mil is abysmal. Every year you keep him at that reasonable salary makes him a lot harder to swallow as the team getting him. You'd also still have to add assets to get anyone good, and the receiving team is either going to dump a huge salary on your or have to be $15 mil under the cap.

 

It absolutely matters for the Bulls because they have to deal with that total for luxury tax payments. It also absolutely destroys any chance you have of being a player in FA in the 2014 off-season. Without Asik, Deng is off the payroll and Boozer can be amnesty'd. With Asik, you're stuck paying something like $35 mil to three frontcourt players (extending Gibson, who is far more important) and another $18 mil or so to Rose. That obviously doesn't leave any space. Assuming they can dump him on someone is a big risk to take for a guy that you can live without.

8M over the total deal, or approximately 10M over 2 years. That is when the Bulls should be dealing him and that contract is moveable. I'm not saying you will necessarily get a 1st round pick for him, but the financial opportunities alone make it worthwhile. One thing you have to remember is you can't just create payroll, so his contract, in a sense, is a quasi-asset if you utilize it appropriately (along with other assets) to potentially land a star or above average player when otherwise you financially wouldn't be able to do.

 

Now if the plan truly is 2014, well then so be it, but I've yet to see what exactly they will be looking for in that year. Additionally, I still think you can move Asik at the end of the year and thus from a basketball perspective, you get Asik and that is better then not having Asik. Only real loss is Jerry spending potential luxury tax money this year (but that doesn't really prevent the Bulls from making moves, especially if the club plans on moving him a year from now anyway). Yes, it costs money, but unless you think you can't move that deal a year from now (in which case, I think you do have to potentially think hard about not matching), then it really isn't that bad of deal. Expensive yes, but moveable and for the current year better then the alternative.

 

It isn't like the Bulls can take this money and spend it elsewhere. They either match or they let Asik walk and only have the minimum to give to a player to replace him.

[ZoomSlowik]

62% from the paint, but the point was more in argument with Badger who indicated that they would just consistently foul, etc. My point was 52% > overall scoring (not necessarily in the paint scoring percentages).

 

That makes no sense. So because he can't make anything inside or outside of 3 feet that somehow makes him more valuable than someone that can actually score?

[Chisoxfn]

That makes no sense. So because he can't make anything inside or outside of 3 feet that somehow makes him more valuable than someone that can actually score?

What are you talking about? He's clearly not a better low post scorer then the average center. My point was that you aren't going to be better off leaving him wide open and fouling him 24/7. If you did do that, he'd actually end up scoring at a better rate then an overall offense. I was purely defecting Badger's so called strategy, nothing more. In no way am I making a case for Asik being efficient offensively, because he's not, but the strategy proposed wouldn't have been a good strategy, imo (the fouling).

 

I do think teams would leave Asik alone by and large and you would see some 4 on 5 and he has things to do to improve under the hoop at making teams pay when they do completely leave him.