Image ImageImage Image

Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter

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

Little Nathan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,044
And1: 3,626
Joined: Mar 11, 2013
Location: Germany
   

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#21 » by Little Nathan » Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:15 am

dice wrote:
dougthonus wrote:
dice wrote:and if he has a breakout year (very unlikely given that he'll turn 27 during next season) he could potentially be dealt at the trade deadline


Players on QOs are rarely traded because they have no trade clause and their bird rights don't come with them, so teams still have to use an exception or cap room to sign them the following season.

true, but a contending team might be interested as a rental/FA feeler

I think this is what it comes down to for me. How likely is it that we can get any value for Dunn next season, especially considering the trade restrictions? I have no interest in keeping Dunn long-term, but given our cap situation it doesn't really matter whether we keep Dunn to try to get value or just let him go. Might as well try to get something if the FO sees any chance to do that.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,803
And1: 3,769
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#22 » by sco » Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:56 am

Little Nathan wrote:
dice wrote:
dougthonus wrote:
Players on QOs are rarely traded because they have no trade clause and their bird rights don't come with them, so teams still have to use an exception or cap room to sign them the following season.

true, but a contending team might be interested as a rental/FA feeler

I think this is what it comes down to for me. How likely is it that we can get any value for Dunn next season, especially considering the trade restrictions? I have no interest in keeping Dunn long-term, but given our cap situation it doesn't really matter whether we keep Dunn to try to get value or just let him go. Might as well try to get something if the FO sees any chance to do that.

IMO, the reasons not to keep Dunn are more about opportunity cost than actual cost. First, there is the roster spot. IMO, keeping Dunn for 1 year @ $7M, will likely losing Harrison, who I like better. I think Shaq is an equivalent defender and a guy who hurts you less on offense (IMO Dunn still wants to be a PG and wants the ball too much on offense, where Shaq isn't a ball dominant guy). Shaq will also likely cost less, probably a lot less to lock up for a few years. Then there is the issue of positional minutes. Is Dunn your back-up PG? SG? SF? I would much rather give Arci, Sato and Hutch (and Shaq) those minutes, not to mention our pick and/or any number of vet FA's we could get at vet min.
:clap:
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,615
And1: 6,819
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#23 » by dougthonus » Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:03 pm

dice wrote:
dougthonus wrote:
dice wrote:and if he has a breakout year (very unlikely given that he'll turn 27 during next season) he could potentially be dealt at the trade deadline


Players on QOs are rarely traded because they have no trade clause and their bird rights don't come with them, so teams still have to use an exception or cap room to sign them the following season.

true, but a contending team might be interested as a rental/FA feeler


It is possible, just that because the player typically has no future value for the acquiring team, the return is very low. Also, for Dunn, since he loses the ability to be moved in a S&T for more money over the summer, he typically has incentive to reject such a trade unless he feels the trade will give him the opportunity to improve his value considerably.
Evil_Headband
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,888
And1: 587
Joined: Feb 25, 2008
   

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#24 » by Evil_Headband » Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:06 pm

Is the salary cap expected to go way down in coming years due to the lack of revenue this year? If so, that really complicates free agent decisions.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,615
And1: 6,819
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#25 » by dougthonus » Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:07 pm

Kurt Heimlich wrote:You must offer the QO before you get matching rights. So the risk is getting stuck with Dunn for 1 year at $7.1M. Which is on the fringe of being an overpay but only for one year.

I honestly have no feel for where AK and new mgmt are going to go with this team. If they offered him the QO I'd probably buy in, but my knee jerk reaction says he's not worth it.


The Bulls won't be under the cap, and because the deal is for one year, it doesn't harm them in any way except raw dollars. It won't get them near enough to the tax to be impactful that it would stop other moves and won't extend past this season.

The upside is pretty low if he takes the QO as well, because of the trade rules (Dunn gets a no trade clause and loses bird rights in a trade), it's extremely unlikely you could move him. The deal would be if you wanted to eventually keep him on a long term deal after another year of evaluation which isn't overly likely either.

I view this situation largely as a shrug either way. There's really no likely upside or downside to the move given the complete lack of opportunity cost but also minimal opportunity for gain.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,803
And1: 3,769
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#26 » by sco » Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:37 pm

When is the QO deadline? Oct?
:clap:
User avatar
Ccwatercraft
Analyst
Posts: 3,204
And1: 1,355
Joined: Jul 11, 2017
       

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#27 » by Ccwatercraft » Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:54 pm

So real quick question here, his average starting games was prorated down because we reduced the number of games?

if we would have been allowed to play the last eight games would the average have gone below the 38.5?

Dunn might be the only one getting a raise as a result of the Coronavirus
TeamMan
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,214
And1: 397
Joined: Dec 11, 2002

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#28 » by TeamMan » Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:29 pm

sco wrote:
MalagaBulls wrote:Not sure I agree with the criteria. His QO is now 7M instead of 4.6M.

Read on Twitter

Man, I really hope this makes it easier for Bulls not to make the QO.

I like Dunn, but the opportunity cost of keeping him (vs. presumably a much lower deal to Shaq) is way too high.

First, this is fallout from the Gar/Pax FO.

They wanted to play him so that they could trade him, but the injury destroyed that.

The Bulls need the cap space for signing FAs but it could work out if they use him in a S&T for a higher tier FA.
User avatar
DASMACKDOWN
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 24,434
And1: 9,402
Joined: Nov 01, 2001
Location: Cookin' with Derrick Rose

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#29 » by DASMACKDOWN » Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:33 pm

What you have to do in this league is compare market rates. Thats the true indicator.

Offering 7 mil for a 1 year deal for Kris Dunn is easily market rate. Probably under.

Lets do comparisons. Sato makes 10 mil per for 2 more seasons.

I think after all the complaining coming into this season, it proved throughout the year that Sato clearly isnt the answer either. Nor was he better than Kris Dunn in the same role.

I actually think Kris Dunn brings more to the table then Sato. Sato is considered a better shooter, but he doesn't shoot. And when he did this year wasnt that great.

Ive said this tons of times before, but Dunn is essentially Marcus Smart. Marcus Smart makes 13 mil a year.

I would certainly give him the QO.

This last season was so terrible, im not sure we saw anyone be the best versions of themselves. But what we did see is that Dunn can be valuable in any role.
The quest for #7
Little Nathan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,044
And1: 3,626
Joined: Mar 11, 2013
Location: Germany
   

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#30 » by Little Nathan » Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:24 pm

Some people seem to forget how completely unplayable Dunn is on offense. You're playing 4 vs 5 with him. He's not even close to being Marcus Smart.
User avatar
Showtime23
Veteran
Posts: 2,993
And1: 914
Joined: Oct 12, 2018

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#31 » by Showtime23 » Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:47 pm

sco wrote:
Little Nathan wrote:
dice wrote:true, but a contending team might be interested as a rental/FA feeler

I think this is what it comes down to for me. How likely is it that we can get any value for Dunn next season, especially considering the trade restrictions? I have no interest in keeping Dunn long-term, but given our cap situation it doesn't really matter whether we keep Dunn to try to get value or just let him go. Might as well try to get something if the FO sees any chance to do that.

IMO, the reasons not to keep Dunn are more about opportunity cost than actual cost. First, there is the roster spot. IMO, keeping Dunn for 1 year @ $7M, will likely losing Harrison, who I like better. I think Shaq is an equivalent defender and a guy who hurts you less on offense (IMO Dunn still wants to be a PG and wants the ball too much on offense, where Shaq isn't a ball dominant guy). Shaq will also likely cost less, probably a lot less to lock up for a few years. Then there is the issue of positional minutes. Is Dunn your back-up PG? SG? SF? I would much rather give Arci, Sato and Hutch (and Shaq) those minutes, not to mention our pick and/or any number of vet FA's we could get at vet min.


exactly not only it costs 7mil which is big money for a bench guy that cannot score, your literally sacrificing a roster spot whose not going to be here long term. You cannot whine why this roster sucks when you keep gifting minutes to the wrong guy.
while i want shaq waived, much better than Dunn as long as he gets 1 mil.
Bulls shouldnt do non for profit for Dunn. He wasnt drafted a Bull, and will run away to a contender as soon as he pad his stats.

If you want to get value out of Dunn, sign a multi yr 4/25 with team option. long term is only way you get a 1st pick.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 12,883
And1: 8,062
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#32 » by TheSuzerain » Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:51 pm

DASMACKDOWN wrote:What you have to do in this league is compare market rates. Thats the true indicator.

Offering 7 mil for a 1 year deal for Kris Dunn is easily market rate. Probably under.

Lets do comparisons. Sato makes 10 mil per for 2 more seasons.

I think after all the complaining coming into this season, it proved throughout the year that Sato clearly isnt the answer either. Nor was he better than Kris Dunn in the same role.

I actually think Kris Dunn brings more to the table then Sato. Sato is considered a better shooter, but he doesn't shoot. And when he did this year wasnt that great.

Ive said this tons of times before, but Dunn is essentially Marcus Smart. Marcus Smart makes 13 mil a year.

I would certainly give him the QO.

This last season was so terrible, im not sure we saw anyone be the best versions of themselves. But what we did see is that Dunn can be valuable in any role.

Uhhhh Dunn can certainly not be valuable in any role.

In fact, he only has one role he can be valuable in which is defensive guard off the bench.

Is a player who fills that role worth clinging to at this point of our rebuild? Certainly not. Let him walk unless he'll sign for a deal that has immediate trade value (e.g. cheap with team control in the form of a team option).
OzmanTheWizard
Ballboy
Posts: 4
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 08, 2013

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#33 » by OzmanTheWizard » Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:52 pm

DASMACKDOWN wrote:
Offering 7 mil for a 1 year deal for Kris Dunn is easily market rate. Probably under.

Lets do comparisons. Sato makes 10 mil per for 2 more seasons.

I think after all the complaining coming into this season, it proved throughout the year that Sato clearly isnt the answer either. Nor was he better than Kris Dunn in the same role.


Sato shouldn’t factor into any decision the team makes on Dunn. Sato sucks and is not starter material.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,615
And1: 6,819
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#34 » by dougthonus » Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:06 pm

TeamMan wrote:First, this is fallout from the Gar/Pax FO.


Fallout is a pretty irrelevant word to use in this situation. What is the fallout, that if we want to keep Dunn on a one year deal it will now cost 3M more?

They wanted to play him so that they could trade him, but the injury destroyed that.


They were also trying to win games, and Dunn was actually one of the productive people on the team this year.

The Bulls need the cap space for signing FAs but it could work out if they use him in a S&T for a higher tier FA.


Their cap doesn't change due to this situation, they were over the cap before and after this change and not in the threat of paying the luxury tax before or after this change. There is no meaningful change to their ability to bring in talent regardless of what they do with Dunn.
ChettheJet
Starter
Posts: 2,235
And1: 530
Joined: Jul 02, 2014
       

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#35 » by ChettheJet » Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:51 pm

Ccwatercraft wrote:So real quick question here, his average starting games was prorated down because we reduced the number of games?

if we would have been allowed to play the last eight games would the average have gone below the 38.5?

Dunn might be the only one getting a raise as a result of the Coronavirus


It looks that way. He was injured and may have come back but with Porter healthy unlikely Dunn goes back to starting if he comes back. But the Games Started would have been divided by 82 instead of 65 they did play and his % would have dropped either way. So he got lucky.

My first problem with Dunn is the injuries while generally he looks like a solid pro before he gets hurt. A different thing each time and as much as the games missed it's the time he takes after returning to get back into step with the rest of the lineup to get back to what he looked like before getting hurt. The same issue repeats each year with each new injury. He runs the offense well enough, he's very good on defense but he seems to be a reluctant outside shooter, without 3pt range and the defense can either leave him alone or back off and dare him to shoot. That would be OK if the Bulls always had 4 other shooters on the floor but they've never had that.

I would see if another team is interested in him at the QO and see if there's a trade to be made or that he could be included in. I would rather keep Harrison because he's also good on defense, can penetrate and can work on his shot for a far lower price. He and Mokoka as the last 2 of 6 guards would be fine, I'd sure like to move on from Arcidiacono.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,803
And1: 3,769
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#36 » by sco » Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:36 pm

ChettheJet wrote:
Ccwatercraft wrote:So real quick question here, his average starting games was prorated down because we reduced the number of games?

if we would have been allowed to play the last eight games would the average have gone below the 38.5?

Dunn might be the only one getting a raise as a result of the Coronavirus


It looks that way. He was injured and may have come back but with Porter healthy unlikely Dunn goes back to starting if he comes back. But the Games Started would have been divided by 82 instead of 65 they did play and his % would have dropped either way. So he got lucky.

My first problem with Dunn is the injuries while generally he looks like a solid pro before he gets hurt. A different thing each time and as much as the games missed it's the time he takes after returning to get back into step with the rest of the lineup to get back to what he looked like before getting hurt. The same issue repeats each year with each new injury. He runs the offense well enough, he's very good on defense but he seems to be a reluctant outside shooter, without 3pt range and the defense can either leave him alone or back off and dare him to shoot. That would be OK if the Bulls always had 4 other shooters on the floor but they've never had that.

I would see if another team is interested in him at the QO and see if there's a trade to be made or that he could be included in. I would rather keep Harrison because he's also good on defense, can penetrate and can work on his shot for a far lower price. He and Mokoka as the last 2 of 6 guards would be fine, I'd sure like to move on from Arcidiacono.

Forgot about Mokoka...I'd take him 10 out 10 times over Dunn for that roster spot.
:clap:
User avatar
MikeDC
Senior
Posts: 744
And1: 116
Joined: Jan 23, 2002
Location: DC Area

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#37 » by MikeDC » Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:50 pm

drosestruts wrote:I don't see the issue here. We have three restricted free agents this summer: Dunn, Valentine, and Harrison. If we renounce all three, we're still above the cap so Dunn's 1-year qualifying offer being $3M more should be meaningless to us.

If AK and the front office want to take a look at him in their system, under their coach (fingers crossed), I feel there's no harm in accepting the qualifying offer.


The thing is, the answer to all of those "IF" questions should be no.

The money is basically irrelevant. What's scarce here is opportunity. Barring some kind of massive trade, we have LaVine, Coby, and Otto Porter as players who should be getting full time minutes and who I don't want to take away minutes from to give to Kris Dunn.

So the best case scenario is that Dunn is a backup playing limited minutes. But... you've got Sato, Arci, and Crutch, whom we're all stuck with, and who, in various ways might be better players than Dunn, and who would similarly be fighting for minutes with him.

Then you've got the possibility we draft another guard or wing, which seems likely since the most touted players in this draft who might be available to us are guards and wings. As with the starters, I don't want one of these guys sitting on the bench because Kris Dunn needs minutes. Assuming

So, I look at this and I think
1. Money aside, there's not much of a role for Dunn here. He's probably the 2nd or 3rd G/F off the bench.
2. Money not aside, isn't there some FA out there who's a better fit or a better player for $7M? Probably
3. The combination of these factors isn't all that conducive to good play. Bringing in a guy at a relatively high price to play a small to nonexistent role is not just bad business, it is the sort of thing that generates bad feelings sometimes. Better to just avoid it.
Chi town
RealGM
Posts: 17,265
And1: 3,605
Joined: Aug 10, 2004

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#38 » by Chi town » Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:54 pm

DASMACKDOWN wrote:What you have to do in this league is compare market rates. Thats the true indicator.

Offering 7 mil for a 1 year deal for Kris Dunn is easily market rate. Probably under.

Lets do comparisons. Sato makes 10 mil per for 2 more seasons.

I think after all the complaining coming into this season, it proved throughout the year that Sato clearly isnt the answer either. Nor was he better than Kris Dunn in the same role.

I actually think Kris Dunn brings more to the table then Sato. Sato is considered a better shooter, but he doesn't shoot. And when he did this year wasnt that great.

Ive said this tons of times before, but Dunn is essentially Marcus Smart. Marcus Smart makes 13 mil a year.

I would certainly give him the QO.

This last season was so terrible, im not sure we saw anyone be the best versions of themselves. But what we did see is that Dunn can be valuable in any role.


I like Dunn more than Sato too. People forget how good Dunn was defensively. He fits the mold of gritty, tough, defensive player that can defend multiple positions like Evs has said he wants.

I think Sato is tradeable. He has one more year left like Thad.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,803
And1: 3,769
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#39 » by sco » Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:02 pm

Chi town wrote:
DASMACKDOWN wrote:What you have to do in this league is compare market rates. Thats the true indicator.

Offering 7 mil for a 1 year deal for Kris Dunn is easily market rate. Probably under.

Lets do comparisons. Sato makes 10 mil per for 2 more seasons.

I think after all the complaining coming into this season, it proved throughout the year that Sato clearly isnt the answer either. Nor was he better than Kris Dunn in the same role.

I actually think Kris Dunn brings more to the table then Sato. Sato is considered a better shooter, but he doesn't shoot. And when he did this year wasnt that great.

Ive said this tons of times before, but Dunn is essentially Marcus Smart. Marcus Smart makes 13 mil a year.

I would certainly give him the QO.

This last season was so terrible, im not sure we saw anyone be the best versions of themselves. But what we did see is that Dunn can be valuable in any role.


I like Dunn more than Sato too. People forget how good Dunn was defensively. He fits the mold of gritty, tough, defensive player that can defend multiple positions like Evs has said he wants.

I think Sato is tradeable. He has one more year left like Thad.

I like Sato more than Dunn, I just he isn't the offensive liability that Dunn is. I don't know what happened to Sato's game last season, but I'll chalk it up to a bad scheme and no chemistry opportunity with starters. I think he tried too hard to be the facilitator to Lauri and Zach, which did nobody any favors - Lauri was afraid of the ball for 1/2 the season and Zach needed teammates to add their own offense. That said, I think Sato is best used off the bench. I wouldn't mind trading Sato, but the fact that he can play the 1-3 has value next season.
:clap:
TeamMan
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,214
And1: 397
Joined: Dec 11, 2002

Re: Marks: Dunn to receive higher QO because he was deemed a starter 

Post#40 » by TeamMan » Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:14 pm

dougthonus wrote:
TeamMan wrote:First, this is fallout from the Gar/Pax FO.


Fallout is a pretty irrelevant word to use in this situation. What is the fallout, that if we want to keep Dunn on a one year deal it will now cost 3M more?

They wanted to play him so that they could trade him, but the injury destroyed that.


They were also trying to win games, and Dunn was actually one of the productive people on the team this year.

The Bulls need the cap space for signing FAs but it could work out if they use him in a S&T for a higher tier FA.


Their cap doesn't change due to this situation, they were over the cap before and after this change and not in the threat of paying the luxury tax before or after this change. There is no meaningful change to their ability to bring in talent regardless of what they do with Dunn.

You've ignored the possibility that they could refuse to give him the QO.

That's 7 Mil that would not be added to the cap.

As far as Dunn's play is concerned, he was a poor SF. I'm not a stats freak but I would guess that he was at least in the bottom 3rd of the league.

If you believe that the Bulls were trying to win games this season, then I have to strongly disagree.

The Gar/Pax FO had made decisions about how the players were going to fit into the Lux Tax projections for the future. In their wildest fantasies they may have also believed that it would help them win games.

But the "Puppet" (AKA Boylen) was clearly being "influenced" to play the players, in the positions, that fit into the Gar/Pax plan.

Boylen made no experiments as coach that did not fit into the Gar/Pax plan. And the end effect was another year of tanking (planned or not).

Return to Chicago Bulls