Image ImageImage Image

Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP)

Moderators: HomoSapien, Tommy Udo 6 , RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper, Payt10, Ice Man, fleet, dougthonus, kulaz3000, GimmeDat, DASMACKDOWN

User avatar
The Explorer
General Manager
Posts: 9,251
And1: 1,380
Joined: Jul 11, 2005
 

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#81 » by The Explorer » Mon Oct 7, 2019 1:23 pm

NWIBullsFan wrote:
bledredwine wrote:
Chicago-Bull-E wrote:No surprise, I’ve been saying this is how the Bulls are run and have been for decades. Always avoiding luxury tax, never taking that next step. The funny part is the stans that seem to buy into some logic that JRs first priority is winning. It of course is not.


It’s nice to see someone else that gets it.


Gets what, the fact that you can make up anything negative you want about Reinsdorf, and lots and lots of Bulls fans will believe it?

"Always avoiding LT"? No, they've paid it twice, and would have paid it a third time if Deng would have signed the above-market extension the Bulls offered. Even though Rose was out for the year and there was zero chance of winning anything, they were more than willing to pay the LT.

This is a guy who approved a $58,270,000 payroll in 96-97, when the Salary Cap was $24.3 million. That's 239.8% of the cap.
This is a guy who approved a $61,330,670 payroll in 97-98, when the Salary Cap was $26.9 million. That's 228.0% of the cap.

With today's cap, that equals payrolls of $261,717,120 and $248,839,200.

So Reinsdorf only pays big $$$ when his team has a superstar and a chance to win a title? AWESOME!!! That's exactly what I want from an owner/GM/front office, when you spend big with no chance of winning, they call you "the Knicks".

Just the facts, ma'am.


Only 1 conference finals game win in 20 years.
Only 4 all-star players produced in 20 years.
A win-loss record of 758-916 since 1999.
Multiple players/staff ripping the Bulls org upon exit
Zero top tier players acquired via free agency or trade

Facts.
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#82 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 1:32 pm

The Explorer wrote:
NWIBullsFan wrote:
bledredwine wrote:
It’s nice to see someone else that gets it.


Gets what, the fact that you can make up anything negative you want about Reinsdorf, and lots and lots of Bulls fans will believe it?

"Always avoiding LT"? No, they've paid it twice, and would have paid it a third time if Deng would have signed the above-market extension the Bulls offered. Even though Rose was out for the year and there was zero chance of winning anything, they were more than willing to pay the LT.

This is a guy who approved a $58,270,000 payroll in 96-97, when the Salary Cap was $24.3 million. That's 239.8% of the cap.
This is a guy who approved a $61,330,670 payroll in 97-98, when the Salary Cap was $26.9 million. That's 228.0% of the cap.

With today's cap, that equals payrolls of $261,717,120 and $248,839,200.

So Reinsdorf only pays big $$$ when his team has a superstar and a chance to win a title? AWESOME!!! That's exactly what I want from an owner/GM/front office, when you spend big with no chance of winning, they call you "the Knicks".

Just the facts, ma'am.


Only 1 conference finals game win in 20 years.
Only 4 all-star players produced in 20 years.
A win-loss record of 758-916 since 1999.
Multiple players/staff ripping the Bulls org upon exit
Zero top tier players acquired via free agency or trade

Facts.

It's disingenuous to exclude the dynasty (and the years before it) but then include the years immediately after it which were a natural consequence of riding out a great group until they were old as hell. If you exclude the dynasty in evaluating I think you should also exclude perhaps the two years following it.

All the other things you mention, how do the other 29 teams stack up in those metrics? We've also had multiple players speak highly of the Bulls org upon leaving.

The Bulls have unquestionably been one of the best teams in the NBA in getting high quality free agent players under JR. It's not even debatable. Have LA and Miami and perhaps one or two other teams done even better? Sure. They've gotten legit superstars in their primes whereas we only get all stars.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
User avatar
coldfish
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 47,441
And1: 15,899
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
 

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#83 » by coldfish » Mon Oct 7, 2019 2:38 pm

NWIBullsFan wrote:NBA Champions and the Luxury Tax:

(The 2004-05 season was the last one where they didn't set the LT threshold until AFTER the season ended, meaning teams had to guess whether or not they were in LT territory)

2001-02: LT not triggered, Lakers won the title with the 12th-highest payroll in the league

2002-03: Spurs $187,000 LT

2003-04: Pistons $756,627 LT

2004-05: LT not triggered, Spurs won the title with the 24th-highest payroll in the league

2005-06: Heat did not pay LT

2006-07: Spurs $196,082 LT

2007-08: Celtics $8,218,368 LT

2008-09: Lakers $7,185,631 LT

2009-10: Lakers $21,430,778 LT

2010-11: Mavericks $18,917,836 LT

2011-12: Heat $6,129,340 LT

2012-13: Heat $21,430,778 LT

2013-14: Spurs did not pay LT

2014-15: Warriors did not pay LT

2015-16: Cavs $54 million LT

2016-17: Warriors did not pay LT

2017-18: Warriors $32.3 million LT

2018-19: Raptors $21.4 million LT

The last 6 NBA championships have been won by 3 taxpaying teams and 3 non-taxpayers.

There have been 18 seasons with a Luxury Tax:

2 seasons, the LT did not trigger:
2001-02 Lakers were almost certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 12th highest payroll.
2005-06 Spurs were certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 24th highest payroll.

3 seasons, the Champs paid less than $800,000 in LT (and 2 of them were accidental, as the LT threshold wasn't set until after the season ended, and the Spurs and Pistons were a little off in their guesses as to what the Threshold would be)

4 seasons, the Champs did not pay any LT


Just have to point out, something like 10% of the teams in the NBA pay the tax in any given year. That in the 16 years where there was a tax, 12 of 16 teams paid it, there seems to be a STRRRRROOOOOONNNGGG correlation between winning a title and paying the tax. Not absolutely necessary but having a "no lux tax" philosophy takes winning an NBA title from really difficult to nearly impossible. Jerry never would have OK's what Toronto did this year, for example.


Its a season out of date but:
https://hoopshype.com/2018/11/16/how-many-times-has-each-nba-team-paid-the-luxury-tax/


At least the Raptors jumped above the Bulls. Effectively in the luxury tax era, the Bulls are 23rd of 30 teams in paying it. I don't know how to justify the Bulls being that low. If you go and say "the Bulls haven't been good enough in the past 20 years to justify the spending", then the obvious response is going to be "OK, if the team has been that consistently bad then there must be a lot of management turnover trying to change things, right?" Well, no.

Which leads to the obvious conclusion supported by the OP: This is exactly what Jerry wants.
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#84 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 3:28 pm

coldfish wrote:
NWIBullsFan wrote:NBA Champions and the Luxury Tax:

(The 2004-05 season was the last one where they didn't set the LT threshold until AFTER the season ended, meaning teams had to guess whether or not they were in LT territory)

2001-02: LT not triggered, Lakers won the title with the 12th-highest payroll in the league

2002-03: Spurs $187,000 LT

2003-04: Pistons $756,627 LT

2004-05: LT not triggered, Spurs won the title with the 24th-highest payroll in the league

2005-06: Heat did not pay LT

2006-07: Spurs $196,082 LT

2007-08: Celtics $8,218,368 LT

2008-09: Lakers $7,185,631 LT

2009-10: Lakers $21,430,778 LT

2010-11: Mavericks $18,917,836 LT

2011-12: Heat $6,129,340 LT

2012-13: Heat $21,430,778 LT

2013-14: Spurs did not pay LT

2014-15: Warriors did not pay LT

2015-16: Cavs $54 million LT

2016-17: Warriors did not pay LT

2017-18: Warriors $32.3 million LT

2018-19: Raptors $21.4 million LT

The last 6 NBA championships have been won by 3 taxpaying teams and 3 non-taxpayers.

There have been 18 seasons with a Luxury Tax:

2 seasons, the LT did not trigger:
2001-02 Lakers were almost certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 12th highest payroll.
2005-06 Spurs were certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 24th highest payroll.

3 seasons, the Champs paid less than $800,000 in LT (and 2 of them were accidental, as the LT threshold wasn't set until after the season ended, and the Spurs and Pistons were a little off in their guesses as to what the Threshold would be)

4 seasons, the Champs did not pay any LT


Just have to point out, something like 10% of the teams in the NBA pay the tax in any given year. That in the 16 years where there was a tax, 12 of 16 teams paid it, there seems to be a STRRRRROOOOOONNNGGG correlation between winning a title and paying the tax. Not absolutely necessary but having a "no lux tax" philosophy takes winning an NBA title from really difficult to nearly impossible. Jerry never would have OK's what Toronto did this year, for example.


Its a season out of date but:
https://hoopshype.com/2018/11/16/how-many-times-has-each-nba-team-paid-the-luxury-tax/


At least the Raptors jumped above the Bulls. Effectively in the luxury tax era, the Bulls are 23rd of 30 teams in paying it. I don't know how to justify the Bulls being that low. If you go and say "the Bulls haven't been good enough in the past 20 years to justify the spending", then the obvious response is going to be "OK, if the team has been that consistently bad then there must be a lot of management turnover trying to change things, right?" Well, no.

Which leads to the obvious conclusion supported by the OP: This is exactly what Jerry wants.

One of the problems with your line of reasoning is that you treat the LT as way less arbitrary than it is. IIRC, Bulls have played close to the LT multiple times. Those years you're effectively counting as "cheap" while disingenuously pointing to teams that essentially went accidentally a few measly dollars over the tax line and accidentally paid a few hundred grand in taxes as "spending big to win".

Here is the reality:

Out of the 18 years referenced, the title winner paid big tax 6 times, moderate tax 3 times, absolutely meaningless marginal, accidentally incurred tax 3 times, and no tax 6 times. It's a huge stretch to call that a strong correlation. Effectively the title winner has paid the tax 50% of the time.

But even more importantly is to look at the context of when and why the teams that paid big tax paid it. It's typically to make a very strong contender an almost sure finals team.

The Bulls have only had three off-seasons when it would have been remotely logical and theoretically possible to go into the tax. All three times they used all their exceptions available and went into the tax once or twice.

You're just straight up ignoring the typical, common, logical method to spend big and actually compete, which is to cut salary, tank/sign free agents, get LOADED, become awesome, and then spend what is needed on depth via exceptions to ensure you truly contend or win.

The terrible problem with the Bulls team building, if there is one for a mediocre team, is simply talent eval, not spending. That's truly what the evidence suggests.

Yes, Toronto was an abberration that JR very well may not have done. Probably not, I'd agree with that. It was also very risky and the likely outcome was that they'd spend big, it would hurt the team performance long term, and they wouldn't win the title. They got pretty lucky and won the title against odds, so good for them it worked out. But now they are definitely going to be worse than they would otherwise have beem for at least a couple years.

That's the short term vs long term dynamic I previously addressed that many ignore.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#85 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 3:32 pm

Ultimately maintaining flexibility and usually spending close to but not over the LT line is both great business and great basketball decision making due to the CBA rules. That's why it's a win win for Jerry. Execution has been mediocre though since the dynasty.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
User avatar
Red Larrivee
RealGM
Posts: 41,527
And1: 17,951
Joined: Feb 15, 2007
Location: Hogging Microphone Time From Tom Dore

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#86 » by Red Larrivee » Mon Oct 7, 2019 3:52 pm

coldfish wrote:
NWIBullsFan wrote:NBA Champions and the Luxury Tax:

(The 2004-05 season was the last one where they didn't set the LT threshold until AFTER the season ended, meaning teams had to guess whether or not they were in LT territory)

2001-02: LT not triggered, Lakers won the title with the 12th-highest payroll in the league

2002-03: Spurs $187,000 LT

2003-04: Pistons $756,627 LT

2004-05: LT not triggered, Spurs won the title with the 24th-highest payroll in the league

2005-06: Heat did not pay LT

2006-07: Spurs $196,082 LT

2007-08: Celtics $8,218,368 LT

2008-09: Lakers $7,185,631 LT

2009-10: Lakers $21,430,778 LT

2010-11: Mavericks $18,917,836 LT

2011-12: Heat $6,129,340 LT

2012-13: Heat $21,430,778 LT

2013-14: Spurs did not pay LT

2014-15: Warriors did not pay LT

2015-16: Cavs $54 million LT

2016-17: Warriors did not pay LT

2017-18: Warriors $32.3 million LT

2018-19: Raptors $21.4 million LT

The last 6 NBA championships have been won by 3 taxpaying teams and 3 non-taxpayers.

There have been 18 seasons with a Luxury Tax:

2 seasons, the LT did not trigger:
2001-02 Lakers were almost certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 12th highest payroll.
2005-06 Spurs were certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 24th highest payroll.

3 seasons, the Champs paid less than $800,000 in LT (and 2 of them were accidental, as the LT threshold wasn't set until after the season ended, and the Spurs and Pistons were a little off in their guesses as to what the Threshold would be)

4 seasons, the Champs did not pay any LT


Just have to point out, something like 10% of the teams in the NBA pay the tax in any given year. That in the 16 years where there was a tax, 12 of 16 teams paid it, there seems to be a STRRRRROOOOOONNNGGG correlation between winning a title and paying the tax. Not absolutely necessary but having a "no lux tax" philosophy takes winning an NBA title from really difficult to nearly impossible. Jerry never would have OK's what Toronto did this year, for example.


Its a season out of date but:
https://hoopshype.com/2018/11/16/how-many-times-has-each-nba-team-paid-the-luxury-tax/


At least the Raptors jumped above the Bulls. Effectively in the luxury tax era, the Bulls are 23rd of 30 teams in paying it. I don't know how to justify the Bulls being that low. If you go and say "the Bulls haven't been good enough in the past 20 years to justify the spending", then the obvious response is going to be "OK, if the team has been that consistently bad then there must be a lot of management turnover trying to change things, right?" Well, no.

Which leads to the obvious conclusion supported by the OP: This is exactly what Jerry wants.


Do the Bulls even have a no luxury tax policy? They paid it in 2012-13, but that was the effect of signing Rose to the max when they expected to contend. Reinsdorf's policy seems to be that he won't pay the luxury tax for a team that clearly doesn't have a shot to win an NBA championship, which makes a lot of sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: 

Post#87 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 4:14 pm

Red Larrivee wrote:
coldfish wrote:
NWIBullsFan wrote:NBA Champions and the Luxury Tax:

(The 2004-05 season was the last one where they didn't set the LT threshold until AFTER the season ended, meaning teams had to guess whether or not they were in LT territory)

2001-02: LT not triggered, Lakers won the title with the 12th-highest payroll in the league

2002-03: Spurs $187,000 LT

2003-04: Pistons $756,627 LT

2004-05: LT not triggered, Spurs won the title with the 24th-highest payroll in the league

2005-06: Heat did not pay LT

2006-07: Spurs $196,082 LT

2007-08: Celtics $8,218,368 LT

2008-09: Lakers $7,185,631 LT

2009-10: Lakers $21,430,778 LT

2010-11: Mavericks $18,917,836 LT

2011-12: Heat $6,129,340 LT

2012-13: Heat $21,430,778 LT

2013-14: Spurs did not pay LT

2014-15: Warriors did not pay LT

2015-16: Cavs $54 million LT

2016-17: Warriors did not pay LT

2017-18: Warriors $32.3 million LT

2018-19: Raptors $21.4 million LT

The last 6 NBA championships have been won by 3 taxpaying teams and 3 non-taxpayers.

There have been 18 seasons with a Luxury Tax:

2 seasons, the LT did not trigger:
2001-02 Lakers were almost certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 12th highest payroll.
2005-06 Spurs were certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 24th highest payroll.

3 seasons, the Champs paid less than $800,000 in LT (and 2 of them were accidental, as the LT threshold wasn't set until after the season ended, and the Spurs and Pistons were a little off in their guesses as to what the Threshold would be)

4 seasons, the Champs did not pay any LT


Just have to point out, something like 10% of the teams in the NBA pay the tax in any given year. That in the 16 years where there was a tax, 12 of 16 teams paid it, there seems to be a STRRRRROOOOOONNNGGG correlation between winning a title and paying the tax. Not absolutely necessary but having a "no lux tax" philosophy takes winning an NBA title from really difficult to nearly impossible. Jerry never would have OK's what Toronto did this year, for example.


Its a season out of date but:
https://hoopshype.com/2018/11/16/how-many-times-has-each-nba-team-paid-the-luxury-tax/


At least the Raptors jumped above the Bulls. Effectively in the luxury tax era, the Bulls are 23rd of 30 teams in paying it. I don't know how to justify the Bulls being that low. If you go and say "the Bulls haven't been good enough in the past 20 years to justify the spending", then the obvious response is going to be "OK, if the team has been that consistently bad then there must be a lot of management turnover trying to change things, right?" Well, no.

Which leads to the obvious conclusion supported by the OP: This is exactly what Jerry wants.


Do the Bulls even have a no luxury tax policy? They paid it in 2012-13, but that was the effect of signing Rose to the max when they expected to contend. Reinsdorf's policy seems to be that he won't pay the luxury tax for a team that clearly doesn't have a shot to win an NBA championship, which makes a lot of sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Just to clarify, the tax that year was actually the result of something much less significant and obvious than the rose deal. It was basically spending 10-15 million dollars on the hope that RIP Hamilton might be a little better than Brewer amd Korver and push us over the edge. It was also the most expensive move available other than imagined trades. And they doubled down on the projection by extending Taj to significant money the same offseason, though his deal wouldn't kick in til the following year IIRC.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
ATRAIN53
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,487
And1: 1,204
Joined: Dec 14, 2007
Location: Chicago

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#88 » by ATRAIN53 » Mon Oct 7, 2019 4:42 pm

That advice works when you buy the team for $30 and 30 years later it's valued at 3 BILLION+
You don't have to win or do much, you're just living on the ROI

Who is David Samson?

David P. Samson (born February 26, 1968) is the former President of the Miami Marlins, a Major League Baseball team located in Miami, Florida. He held the position from 2002 until Derek Jeter fired him in September 2017 for being ineffective. He previously held the title of Executive Vice President with the Montreal Expos from 1999 to 2002, working in both cities under team owner and former stepfather Jeffrey Loria.


an excutive who got the job because he married the owners daughter.... :lol:

better advice if you want to keep your job - stay married to the owners daughter :nod:
_txchilibowl_
Senior
Posts: 589
And1: 378
Joined: Aug 17, 2017
     

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#89 » by _txchilibowl_ » Mon Oct 7, 2019 4:46 pm

ATRAIN53 wrote:That advice works when you buy the team for $30 and 30 years later it's valued at 3 BILLION+
You don't have to win or do much, you're just living on the ROI

Who is David Samson?

David P. Samson (born February 26, 1968) is the former President of the Miami Marlins, a Major League Baseball team located in Miami, Florida. He held the position from 2002 until Derek Jeter fired him in September 2017 for being ineffective. He previously held the title of Executive Vice President with the Montreal Expos from 1999 to 2002, working in both cities under team owner and former stepfather Jeffrey Loria.


an excutive who got the job because he married the owners daughter.... :lol:

better advice if you want to keep your job - stay married to the owners daughter :nod:


Stepfather = Loria was married to his mother
Father-in-law = Samson married the daughter
ATRAIN53
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,487
And1: 1,204
Joined: Dec 14, 2007
Location: Chicago

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#90 » by ATRAIN53 » Mon Oct 7, 2019 7:05 pm

_txchilibowl_ wrote:
ATRAIN53 wrote:That advice works when you buy the team for $30 and 30 years later it's valued at 3 BILLION+
You don't have to win or do much, you're just living on the ROI

Who is David Samson?

David P. Samson (born February 26, 1968) is the former President of the Miami Marlins, a Major League Baseball team located in Miami, Florida. He held the position from 2002 until Derek Jeter fired him in September 2017 for being ineffective. He previously held the title of Executive Vice President with the Montreal Expos from 1999 to 2002, working in both cities under team owner and former stepfather Jeffrey Loria.


an excutive who got the job because he married the owners daughter.... :lol:

better advice if you want to keep your job - stay married to the owners daughter :nod:


Stepfather = Loria was married to his mother
Father-in-law = Samson married the daughter


Image

thanks for helping me get my neoptistic facts straight.

that's even better job security for the guy, have your mom mary the owner :rock:
User avatar
coldfish
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 47,441
And1: 15,899
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
 

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#91 » by coldfish » Mon Oct 7, 2019 7:26 pm

League Circles wrote:
Spoiler:
coldfish wrote:
NWIBullsFan wrote:NBA Champions and the Luxury Tax:

(The 2004-05 season was the last one where they didn't set the LT threshold until AFTER the season ended, meaning teams had to guess whether or not they were in LT territory)

2001-02: LT not triggered, Lakers won the title with the 12th-highest payroll in the league

2002-03: Spurs $187,000 LT

2003-04: Pistons $756,627 LT

2004-05: LT not triggered, Spurs won the title with the 24th-highest payroll in the league

2005-06: Heat did not pay LT

2006-07: Spurs $196,082 LT

2007-08: Celtics $8,218,368 LT

2008-09: Lakers $7,185,631 LT

2009-10: Lakers $21,430,778 LT

2010-11: Mavericks $18,917,836 LT

2011-12: Heat $6,129,340 LT

2012-13: Heat $21,430,778 LT

2013-14: Spurs did not pay LT

2014-15: Warriors did not pay LT

2015-16: Cavs $54 million LT

2016-17: Warriors did not pay LT

2017-18: Warriors $32.3 million LT

2018-19: Raptors $21.4 million LT

The last 6 NBA championships have been won by 3 taxpaying teams and 3 non-taxpayers.

There have been 18 seasons with a Luxury Tax:

2 seasons, the LT did not trigger:
2001-02 Lakers were almost certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 12th highest payroll.
2005-06 Spurs were certainly NOT a LT team, not with the 24th highest payroll.

3 seasons, the Champs paid less than $800,000 in LT (and 2 of them were accidental, as the LT threshold wasn't set until after the season ended, and the Spurs and Pistons were a little off in their guesses as to what the Threshold would be)

4 seasons, the Champs did not pay any LT


Just have to point out, something like 10% of the teams in the NBA pay the tax in any given year. That in the 16 years where there was a tax, 12 of 16 teams paid it, there seems to be a STRRRRROOOOOONNNGGG correlation between winning a title and paying the tax. Not absolutely necessary but having a "no lux tax" philosophy takes winning an NBA title from really difficult to nearly impossible. Jerry never would have OK's what Toronto did this year, for example.


Its a season out of date but:
https://hoopshype.com/2018/11/16/how-many-times-has-each-nba-team-paid-the-luxury-tax/


At least the Raptors jumped above the Bulls. Effectively in the luxury tax era, the Bulls are 23rd of 30 teams in paying it. I don't know how to justify the Bulls being that low. If you go and say "the Bulls haven't been good enough in the past 20 years to justify the spending", then the obvious response is going to be "OK, if the team has been that consistently bad then there must be a lot of management turnover trying to change things, right?" Well, no.

Which leads to the obvious conclusion supported by the OP: This is exactly what Jerry wants.

One of the problems with your line of reasoning is that you treat the LT as way less arbitrary than it is. IIRC, Bulls have played close to the LT multiple times. Those years you're effectively counting as "cheap" while disingenuously pointing to teams that essentially went accidentally a few measly dollars over the tax line and accidentally paid a few hundred grand in taxes as "spending big to win".

Here is the reality:


Ummm, no. Here is the reality:

The luxury tax payments are distributed to non luxury tax paying teams. For example, last year there were $153.5m paid by 5 teams. The other 25 got a check for over $6m. Effectively, that first penny of luxury tax costs an organization over $6m, so yeah, it really is an arbitrary line.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q19
To understand the consequence of crossing the tax line, consider a team just below the tax line that suffers injuries and needs to sign a replacement player. This team would pay the player's salary, pay tax on the amount by which they are now above the tax line, and forfeit any tax distribution they otherwise may have received.


So it really is an arbitrary line that costs millions of dollars for the first penny over it.


If you recall, the Bulls made a killing last year by selling capspace to teams near the tax line to get them under that number.
https://www.nba.com/article/2019/01/21/houston-rockets-carmelo-anthony-trade-chicago-bulls

I'm not going to go back and forth on your points because like in this incidence, they aren't based in reality. Its just spin.
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#92 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 7:35 pm

coldfish wrote:
League Circles wrote:
Spoiler:
coldfish wrote:
Just have to point out, something like 10% of the teams in the NBA pay the tax in any given year. That in the 16 years where there was a tax, 12 of 16 teams paid it, there seems to be a STRRRRROOOOOONNNGGG correlation between winning a title and paying the tax. Not absolutely necessary but having a "no lux tax" philosophy takes winning an NBA title from really difficult to nearly impossible. Jerry never would have OK's what Toronto did this year, for example.


Its a season out of date but:
https://hoopshype.com/2018/11/16/how-many-times-has-each-nba-team-paid-the-luxury-tax/


At least the Raptors jumped above the Bulls. Effectively in the luxury tax era, the Bulls are 23rd of 30 teams in paying it. I don't know how to justify the Bulls being that low. If you go and say "the Bulls haven't been good enough in the past 20 years to justify the spending", then the obvious response is going to be "OK, if the team has been that consistently bad then there must be a lot of management turnover trying to change things, right?" Well, no.

Which leads to the obvious conclusion supported by the OP: This is exactly what Jerry wants.

One of the problems with your line of reasoning is that you treat the LT as way less arbitrary than it is. IIRC, Bulls have played close to the LT multiple times. Those years you're effectively counting as "cheap" while disingenuously pointing to teams that essentially went accidentally a few measly dollars over the tax line and accidentally paid a few hundred grand in taxes as "spending big to win".

Here is the reality:


Ummm, no. Here is the reality:

The luxury tax payments are distributed to non luxury tax paying teams. For example, last year there were $153.5m paid by 5 teams. The other 25 got a check for over $6m. Effectively, that first penny of luxury tax costs an organization over $6m, so yeah, it really is an arbitrary line.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q19
To understand the consequence of crossing the tax line, consider a team just below the tax line that suffers injuries and needs to sign a replacement player. This team would pay the player's salary, pay tax on the amount by which they are now above the tax line, and forfeit any tax distribution they otherwise may have received.


So it really is an arbitrary line that costs millions of dollars for the first penny over it.


If you recall, the Bulls made a killing last year by selling capspace to teams near the tax line to get them under that number.
https://www.nba.com/article/2019/01/21/houston-rockets-carmelo-anthony-trade-chicago-bulls

I'm not going to go back and forth on your points because like in this incidence, they aren't based in reality. Its just spin.

You just proved my point.

You are dividing teams that "spend big" and teams that are "cheap" effectively into tax paying vs non tax paying teams. First of all, that's the basketball analysis version of ranking players by PPG or some silly counting stat.

But more importantly, you're treating the two teams (one just under LT like the Bulls have often been), and one just over LT like several finals winners in the LT era, as being cheap vs spendy, when the actual salaries to players (the actual theoretical roster quality not skewed by LT which is just a tax, not money spent on additional player quality) may literally be separated by less than one million dollars, but, as you say, actually costs the owner quite a few million.

It's ridiculous.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#93 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 7:47 pm

Counting LT instances as how hard an owner tries to win vs spending is exactly the same as when stupid announcing teams say stuff like "this is the first player who wears jersey number 4 that has ever had 19 points, 4 rebounds, 7 assists and one technical free throw in the first three quarters of a road game in November since 2008!!!

LT level is an arbitrary line in the sand as regards player quality. It is NOT an arbitrary line in the sand as regards business costs.

A good team could sign one additional scrub 14th man to a minimim deal, pay 10 milliom dollars for it due to tax implications, and people would say look look look that team is spending LT to go for it! Whrnin reality they just don't have shrewd people like JR and Irwin Mandel who know that a different 14th man is not worth 10 million dollars.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
chefo
Junior
Posts: 377
And1: 601
Joined: Apr 29, 2009

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#94 » by chefo » Mon Oct 7, 2019 8:29 pm

@League Circles

I'm with coldfish here because I also don't see what the fundamental basis of your argument is. We've had this discussion on the board every time an article came out and we've had to talk GarPax and Reinsdorf, and you seem to think that the Bulls are not unreasonably managed for profit at the expense of on court production, if I understand you correctly.

That's your take.

Other fans look at it from a different angle--by all accounts, the Bulls spent almost two decades being the NBA's financial champs, or runner-ups, almost year-in-and year-out. The owners of the club have had well in excess of a billion of profits to show for it. Capitalism at its finest. Kudos to them. They somehow keep fans engaged.

But that something has generally been decent enough to make the playoffs on a tight budget, while selling hope--which is precisely in the spirit of the quote in the OP. On the court, the Bulls have made one ECF appearance and a couple of semis, which for 20 years, and almost 4-5 distinct iterations of the team, is not quite what one can call a superior achievement.

Since it is the fans that pay for the tickets, merchandise, ridiculously overpriced food and parking, cable subscriptions and everything else, it is not unreasonable for the fans to get upset when all they get is dysfunction and a crap product for years running, while the team is making new records of profitability. The Bulls have been selling crappy Chevys for Cadillac prices lately--good for the bottom line of the franchise, but not for the average paying customer because fans want on-court wins, not cash considerations for the ownership.

At this point, we've had so many little nuggets of the Bulls' cheapness and management style that I'm not sure how somebody can defend their actions as a fan. Short of a Reinsdorf publicly coming out and saying something of that nature, on tape, this is as much evidence as any reasonable person would need to make a conclusion. Maybe it's just the dirty laundry being aired, but it sure stinks on a consistent basis. As a management consultant--hell yeah, I'd be a GarPax super-fan, if I'm a Bulls' shareholder--they should be lifers and have enough for a nice mansion in Florida when they retire, and I've mentioned as much before. They've been rock stars running a business.

But again, that's not the issue--I am a (paying) fan, so I don't care how much money the owners make. I care that the team, whether because of budget constraints, or ineptitude in some minor detail, or whatnot, has not been able to put a coherent product on the floor for quite some time...
User avatar
johnnyvann840
RealGM
Posts: 32,693
And1: 17,149
Joined: Sep 04, 2010

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#95 » by johnnyvann840 » Mon Oct 7, 2019 9:36 pm

chefo wrote:@League Circles

I'm with coldfish here because I also don't see what the fundamental basis of your argument is. We've had this discussion on the board every time an article came out and we've had to talk GarPax and Reinsdorf, and you seem to think that the Bulls are not unreasonably managed for profit at the expense of on court production, if I understand you correctly.

That's your take.

Other fans look at it from a different angle--by all accounts, the Bulls spent almost two decades being the NBA's financial champs, or runner-ups, almost year-in-and year-out. The owners of the club have had well in excess of a billion of profits to show for it. Capitalism at its finest. Kudos to them. They somehow keep fans engaged.

But that something has generally been decent enough to make the playoffs on a tight budget, while selling hope--which is precisely in the spirit of the quote in the OP. On the court, the Bulls have made one ECF appearance and a couple of semis, which for 20 years, and almost 4-5 distinct iterations of the team, is not quite what one can call a superior achievement.

Since it is the fans that pay for the tickets, merchandise, ridiculously overpriced food and parking, cable subscriptions and everything else, it is not unreasonable for the fans to get upset when all they get is dysfunction and a crap product for years running, while the team is making new records of profitability. The Bulls have been selling crappy Chevys for Cadillac prices lately--good for the bottom line of the franchise, but not for the average paying customer because fans want on-court wins, not cash considerations for the ownership.

At this point, we've had so many little nuggets of the Bulls' cheapness and management style that I'm not sure how somebody can defend their actions as a fan. Short of a Reinsdorf publicly coming out and saying something of that nature, on tape, this is as much evidence as any reasonable person would need to make a conclusion. Maybe it's just the dirty laundry being aired, but it sure stinks on a consistent basis. As a management consultant--hell yeah, I'd be a GarPax super-fan, if I'm a Bulls' shareholder--they should be lifers and have enough for a nice mansion in Florida when they retire, and I've mentioned as much before. They've been rock stars running a business.

But again, that's not the issue--I am a (paying) fan, so I don't care how much money the owners make. I care that the team, whether because of budget constraints, or ineptitude in some minor detail, or whatnot, has not been able to put a coherent product on the floor for quite some time...


Pretty much how I feel about it. I used to be one of the defenders of the FO, but as you've stated, it's become impossible for me to do with a straight face anymore. My frustrations have peaked and 20 years have now passed and this team, rich in history, globally supported and highly profitable, has made one ECF's appearance in the last two decades. It's not enough. There are no more excuses. Injuries? Every team has them. Budget constraints are obvious but even so, JR has said he will pay the tax for a contender. GarPax have failed to bring that situation to fruition in far too many seasons now. So, the blame must be shared among ownership and the power structure.
I am more than just a serious basketball fan. I am a life-long addict. I was addicted from birth. - Hunter S. Thompson
User avatar
johnnyvann840
RealGM
Posts: 32,693
And1: 17,149
Joined: Sep 04, 2010

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#96 » by johnnyvann840 » Mon Oct 7, 2019 9:38 pm

Also agree with the point CF was trying to make about the line between tax payers and non tax payers never being insignificant simply because non tax payers are always at least $6 million up before they even pay dime one due to the sharing of the tax pool among them. So, there really is an arbitrary line. At a minimum it is a $6 million difference even if a team is only a few hundred grand over the tax line for whatever reason.. 13th man, 14th man or signing a star to a large deal.
I am more than just a serious basketball fan. I am a life-long addict. I was addicted from birth. - Hunter S. Thompson
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#97 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 10:51 pm

chefo wrote:@League Circles

I'm with coldfish here because I also don't see what the fundamental basis of your argument is. We've had this discussion on the board every time an article came out and we've had to talk GarPax and Reinsdorf, and you seem to think that the Bulls are not unreasonably managed for profit at the expense of on court production, if I understand you correctly.

That's your take.
Sort of. I mostly only write these things to correct gross inaccuracies and add lots of needed context to shallow analysis. I don't believe in the notion of there being an amount of spending/profit that is reasonable, in the sense that I don't believe fans are owed anything. I do believe though, that the financial management of the Bulls doesn't meaningfully limit their title chances, and I believe analysis of the context that I provide supports that.

Other fans look at it from a different angle--by all accounts, the Bulls spent almost two decades being the NBA's financial champs, or runner-ups, almost year-in-and year-out. The owners of the club have had well in excess of a billion of profits to show for it. Capitalism at its finest. Kudos to them. They somehow keep fans engaged.

But that something has generally been decent enough to make the playoffs on a tight budget, while selling hope--which is precisely in the spirit of the quote in the OP. On the court, the Bulls have made one ECF appearance and a couple of semis, which for 20 years, and almost 4-5 distinct iterations of the team, is not quite what one can call a superior achievement.

I think there is no evidence to support the claim that the Bulls operate on a "tight budget". If they did, they wouldn't routinely, almost without a single excpetion, use every normal salary cap exception available to them other than imaginary trades which people pretend are common but are in fact rare, and they rarely ever make specific suggestions. Criticing the Bulls for not going into LT enough is like saying "they haven't had enough 10 rebound per game guys over the past 20 years" or "their pace isn't high enough (which is an absurdly ridiculous metric filled with at least 50% pure statistical noise)." It's an arbitrary metric.

I absolutely agree the Bulls have not had superior achievement in the last 20 years. Never said they have. They obviously haven't. They've basically been average, which is basically what I have been ranking the FO as for years now. I usually come in to defend against the extremists that claim the Bulls are "the worst managed team in sports" or "Garpax are the worst managers ever". Those claims are preposterous and not supported by any evidence, so I call them out as the emotional nonsense they are.

Since it is the fans that pay for the tickets, merchandise, ridiculously overpriced food and parking, cable subscriptions and everything else, it is not unreasonable for the fans to get upset when all they get is dysfunction and a crap product for years running, while the team is making new records of profitability. The Bulls have been selling crappy Chevys for Cadillac prices lately--good for the bottom line of the franchise, but not for the average paying customer because fans want on-court wins, not cash considerations for the ownership.

The fans BEGGED for the crap product, the tanking team. Not me though. It's an area where I think the organization has made many mistakes. I never would have made the Rose, Jimmy, or Niko trades, to name just a few. I've disagreed vocally with many moves in recent years and even way back to Pax's beginning. Though to be clear I do still think Pax is at least a bit above average as an executive. What I like is that I think luck has a lot to do with high level success (like JR lucking into MJ), and I think the FO and ownership are prudent enough to not radically screw up good luck when they get it.

At this point, we've had so many little nuggets of the Bulls' cheapness and management style that I'm not sure how somebody can defend their actions as a fan.

I reject the idea that we've seen many nuggets of cheapness. I think we've seen very, very few, and many, many more nuggets of spending a lot. Now I'm not suggesting that JR spends because he wants to win above finances. He spends on multiple coaches at a time, on the advocate center, on good teams, and on players he doesn't want for purposes of trade asset accumulation because he's smart enough to know that winning is highly, highly profitable. Managment style is a different discussion. I personally like the old style, tight lipped, **** the media style, but I can understand those who don't. This discussion is about financial willingness to invest to compete. I'm comfortable with it. I don't understand why those who aren't continue to be fans. Masochism, I guess.

Short of a Reinsdorf publicly coming out and saying something of that nature, on tape, this is as much evidence as any reasonable person would need to make a conclusion. Maybe it's just the dirty laundry being aired, but it sure stinks on a consistent basis. As a management consultant--hell yeah, I'd be a GarPax super-fan, if I'm a Bulls' shareholder--they should be lifers and have enough for a nice mansion in Florida when they retire, and I've mentioned as much before. They've been rock stars running a business.

But again, that's not the issue--I am a (paying) fan, so I don't care how much money the owners make. I care that the team, whether because of budget constraints, or ineptitude in some minor detail, or whatnot, has not been able to put a coherent product on the floor for quite some time...

What conclusion? That's the thing. People feel a need to make binary conclusions. They feel they have to conclude which singular priority JR has, whether the FO is terrible or great, etc etc. I feel no such need to draw binary conclusions. Ultimately this has been an unbelievably successful ownership under JR, and a very mediocre last 20 years. There is a lot of context needed to evaluate deeper than that, those are just the facts.

The Bulls have had an incoherent team for the past two seasons (to be clear, that's exactly how long it has been in bad shape) because the fan base outside of myself and some others absolutely, positively begged for us to tank to shoot for the moon. I regret that they did. I think it's going OK in it's execution so far and I'm excited about the potential this team has, but I think we'd have been better off not tanking.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
League Circles
RealGM
Posts: 29,688
And1: 7,376
Joined: Dec 04, 2001
       

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#98 » by League Circles » Mon Oct 7, 2019 10:56 pm

johnnyvann840 wrote:Also agree with the point CF was trying to make about the line between tax payers and non tax payers never being insignificant simply because non tax payers are always at least $6 million up before they even pay dime one due to the sharing of the tax pool among them. So, there really is an arbitrary line. At a minimum it is a $6 million difference even if a team is only a few hundred grand over the tax line for whatever reason.. 13th man, 14th man or signing a star to a large deal.

It's insignificant precisely because in many cases it's just 6 million dollar out of the owner's pocket that amounts to an absolutely meaningless, few hundred grand difference on the court.

Again, only 6 of the 18 years since the LT was created has the title winner paid big tax. 9 of 18 they've either paid no tax at all or accidentally paid less than a million bucks.

The measure that matters in the environment of a cap system with multiple complex exceptions and luxury tax rules isn't how many times did you pay LT, it's what moves did you make when you were good enough to justify committing more to in lieu of retaining flexibility to improve otherwise. I detailed the exact three times the Bulls have been in that position since the dynasty. I'd say JR proved he'll commit when it's warranted based on the evidence of using all exceptions (other than the imaginary trade exceptions which can really only ramp up spending in future years anyway), as well as re-signing bench players to significant long term contracts such as Taj, Nocioni, etc.
https://august-shop.com/ streetwear & sneakers
bledredwine
RealGM
Posts: 10,807
And1: 2,933
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
   

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#99 » by bledredwine » Mon Oct 7, 2019 11:33 pm

League Circles wrote:
The Explorer wrote:
Only 1 conference finals game win in 20 years.
Only 4 all-star players produced in 20 years.
A win-loss record of 758-916 since 1999.
Multiple players/staff ripping the Bulls org upon exit
Zero top tier players acquired via free agency or trade

Facts.

It's disingenuous to exclude the dynasty (and the years before it) but then include the years immediately after it which were a natural consequence of riding out a great group until they were old as hell. If you exclude the dynasty in evaluating I think you should also exclude perhaps the two years following it.

All the other things you mention, how do the other 29 teams stack up in those metrics? We've also had multiple players speak highly of the Bulls org upon leaving.

The Bulls have unquestionably been one of the best teams in the NBA in getting high quality free agent players under JR. It's not even debatable. Have LA and Miami and perhaps one or two other teams done even better? Sure. They've gotten legit superstars in their primes whereas we only get all stars.


Excellent, name all of these fantastic stars that we’ve acquired in free agency.
User avatar
Chicago-Bull-E
RealGM
Posts: 10,206
And1: 2,823
Joined: Jun 27, 2008

Re: Advice Jerry Reinsdorf gave former Marlins president: "Finish 2nd place every year" (full quote in OP) 

Post#100 » by Chicago-Bull-E » Mon Oct 7, 2019 11:36 pm

Great stuff by Coldfish, as always.
KC: Do you still think you're a championship-caliber team?
Gar: I never said that and correct me if I'm wrong

Return to Chicago Bulls