southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (farmteam @ Jun 17, 2015 -> 10:32 PM) And Q has Toews, Kane, Hossa and Keith. Coaches who win lots of championships tend to have really good players. It would be a pretty easy argument to say that Q had more talent than Phil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 02:01 PM) It would be a pretty easy argument to say that Q had more talent than Phil. you may have a point. but for this discussion. i disagree. hawks roster is what 21, with 2 goalies. bulls roster is what and of that how many can play 20-30+ mins. it takes less players in the nba to make a difference on a team than it will in hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 1. Jackson 2. Q 3. Trestman Pretty easy 1-3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Joe Maddon, and then the rest. This thread is ova. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 07:01 AM) It would be a pretty easy argument to say that Q had more talent than Phil. I disagree. Basketball is a far more individual sport then Hockey. Phil had 2 of the greatest players ever, including the greatest player in NBA history. 40% of his starting lineup were all time greats and during part of the run, a 3rd player, was the greatest rebounder in NBA history (as far as I'm concerned). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 12:00 PM) I disagree. Basketball is a far more individual sport then Hockey. Phil had 2 of the greatest players ever, including the greatest player in NBA history. 40% of his starting lineup were all time greats and during part of the run, a 3rd player, was the greatest rebounder in NBA history (as far as I'm concerned). That player did however have some personal issues, to put it midly, that could have otherwise torn that team apart or made it fairly difficult to keep him on the court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shysocks Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I would have picked Lou Piniella if he were a choice, but given the options you're crazy if you don't choose Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 11:00 AM) I disagree. Basketball is a far more individual sport then Hockey. Phil had 2 of the greatest players ever, including the greatest player in NBA history. 40% of his starting lineup were all time greats and during part of the run, a 3rd player, was the greatest rebounder in NBA history (as far as I'm concerned). Q has the best two way center in the game today, and the best D man in the game today. He also has two other guys who are probably Hall of Famers, and they are doing it during the salary cap era. That is without getting into just the regular old star players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 06:11 PM) Q has the best two way center in the game today, and the best D man in the game today. He also has two other guys who are probably Hall of Famers, and they are doing it during the salary cap era. That is without getting into just the regular old star players. excellent point. also remember that the salary contracts are spread out just perfectly. not all overlapping at one time. so there is a subtle attrition that happens over a period of time and not at one time. i will still keep on saying this. many have to put the value of the goaltender in that equation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 09:20 AM) That player did however have some personal issues, to put it midly, that could have otherwise torn that team apart or made it fairly difficult to keep him on the court. Agree, but raw talent was their and that is a further credit to the coach for getting those personalities to fit in. Either way, while Toews / Kane are two of the best...neither is the greatest ever and as a % of guys played / minutes, your top talent is still far less impactful in NHL vs. hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 10:11 AM) Q has the best two way center in the game today, and the best D man in the game today. He also has two other guys who are probably Hall of Famers, and they are doing it during the salary cap era. That is without getting into just the regular old star players. Bulls did everything in a salary cap era. Bulls teams had 3 HOF with in the post-season a roster that really only went 8 or 9 deep (and that is stretching it given the minutes the starters would log in the NBA in 90's). That is 33% of your roster being HOF'er with 1 the greatest rebounder over, 1 the greatest of all time, and the other a guy who was pretty much the best player in the league when Jordan was out (and the best defensive player in that era....along with Jordan who was incredible as well). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 07:10 PM) Bulls did everything in a salary cap era. Bulls teams had 3 HOF with in the post-season a roster that really only went 8 or 9 deep (and that is stretching it given the minutes the starters would log in the NBA in 90's). That is 33% of your roster being HOF'er with 1 the greatest rebounder over, 1 the greatest of all time, and the other a guy who was pretty much the best player in the league when Jordan was out (and the best defensive player in that era....along with Jordan who was incredible as well). that is kind of a misnomer.... in the nba, the teams can go over the cap and get penalize according to a league approve penalty. hockey has a hard cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (LDF @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 11:48 AM) that is kind of a misnomer.... in the nba, the teams can go over the cap and get penalize according to a league approve penalty. hockey has a hard cap. It is still a cap. And while you can go over, that has a lot to do with bird rights, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (shysocks @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 12:05 PM) I would have picked Lou Piniella if he were a choice, but given the options you're crazy if you don't choose Phil Based off his career or just what he did with the Cubs? I kind of thought this was more about what these guys did with Chicago teams, Pinella shouldnt be anywhere near this list if its just based off of his time with the Cubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 01:10 PM) Bulls did everything in a salary cap era. Bulls teams had 3 HOF with in the post-season a roster that really only went 8 or 9 deep (and that is stretching it given the minutes the starters would log in the NBA in 90's). That is 33% of your roster being HOF'er with 1 the greatest rebounder over, 1 the greatest of all time, and the other a guy who was pretty much the best player in the league when Jordan was out (and the best defensive player in that era....along with Jordan who was incredible as well). The Jordan era cap is nothing like the cap today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 02:12 PM) The Jordan era cap is nothing like the cap today. I don't know if it is really that different. I think players have a different mentality. The top ones wanted to win with their original team. Jordan wouldn't have thought about joining Magic or someone for a super team like Wade and LeBron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shysocks Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 02:03 PM) Based off his career or just what he did with the Cubs? I kind of thought this was more about what these guys did with Chicago teams, Pinella shouldnt be anywhere near this list if its just based off of his time with the Cubs. I was just messing around, as I look back at Piniella's time with Cubs very fondly. The sarcasm was pretty thin though. I agree, I think we're strictly looking at everyone's Chicago careers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 06:53 PM) It is still a cap. And while you can go over, that has a lot to do with bird rights, etc. birds right is a way around the cap. the nba has yet to fix that and it doesn't appear as they want to. it is too profitable not to. nhl no birds right, hard cap nba cap 2014 = 63 mil+ bulls salary = 67 + mil nhl cap 2014 = 69 mil + hawks 67 mil+ lets also not forget about the difference in rosters max number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 12:12 PM) The Jordan era cap is nothing like the cap today. It really isn't that much different, in fact, I'd argue it is easier for good teams to add talent today (vs. mid 90's). Only major difference was individual players could get paid even more. Bulls for years could almost never bring anyone of any value in. Vs. today's age with the MLE and I'd say it is easier for good teams to add quality players vs. the 90's. I can't think of any major FA the Bulls signed during the Jordan era (after they started winning) vs. you look at a lot of title teams today and they get the MLE each year and can continue to add quality players while benefiting from the bird right rules (as long as you are willing to pay the tax). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 04:22 PM) It really isn't that much different, in fact, I'd argue it is easier for good teams to add talent today (vs. mid 90's). Only major difference was individual players could get paid even more. Bulls for years could almost never bring anyone of any value in. Vs. today's age with the MLE and I'd say it is easier for good teams to add quality players vs. the 90's. I can't think of any major FA the Bulls signed during the Jordan era (after they started winning) vs. you look at a lot of title teams today and they get the MLE each year and can continue to add quality players while benefiting from the bird right rules (as long as you are willing to pay the tax). How'd they get Rodman if it wasn't a FA addition? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 01:25 PM) How'd they get Rodman if it wasn't a FA addition? IIRC, Will Perdue was traded for the Worm. I think Bison Dele was the one free agent addition that was at all a memorable player and their were other reasons Bulls were able to get him. This is purely going off of memory. Our draft picks were also always crap and that was an era where you couldn't buy picks (then you got into the new cap era and all of a sudden you could buy picks, like the Bulls did to get Deng (they basically bought the Suns pick IIRC). I also think Bison Dele had some major holdout (again going off my memory) with the Clippers and somehow made his way to Bulls very late in the season (as an unsigned FA). I think he came to Bulls cause he wanted to showcase his talents during post-season and go elsewhere. Turned out to be a great move for purposes of Bulls. Other than that I can't remember a FA doing anything worth a damn. Note: Take that back. We did sign Ron Harper and he had a nice rejuvenation with the Bulls (I think he was coming off injuries, etc, so it wasn't at all a major signing). Harper was 30, pissed at the Clippers, and was coming off an ACL injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 03:25 PM) How'd they get Rodman if it wasn't a FA addition? Traded from Spurs for a radio announcer to be trained later.from Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 01:27 PM) Traded from Spurs for a radio announcer to be trained later.from Nah...that was Wennington (or is Perdue also an announcer)? Bill had the sweetest base line jumper in league history, haha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 03:29 PM) Nah...that was Wennington (or is Perdue also an announcer)? Bill had the sweetest base line jumper in league history, haha. I am thinking of PGL on Comcast. My bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 18, 2015 -> 09:22 PM) It really isn't that much different, in fact, I'd argue it is easier for good teams to add talent today (vs. mid 90's). Only major difference was individual players could get paid even more. Bulls for years could almost never bring anyone of any value in. Vs. today's age with the MLE and I'd say it is easier for good teams to add quality players vs. the 90's. I can't think of any major FA the Bulls signed during the Jordan era (after they started winning) vs. you look at a lot of title teams today and they get the MLE each year and can continue to add quality players while benefiting from the bird right rules (as long as you are willing to pay the tax). does any of this has anything to do with making more money, salary is worth more and specifically rookies are coming in and making an impact. i still say the main bottom line is they make more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.