RealGM

The Orlando Sentinel wrote:Nets' point guard Jason Kidd, during his stop in Orlando last week, had an interesting perspective on Magic center Dwight Howard.

He said that as Howard continues to develop, he will become a free agent magnet, attracting other top players if the Magic can stay salary-cap flexible.

"What's probably going to happen is he's going to have everybody coming to Orlando to play, so that would just make his game a lot easier," Kidd said. "As he gets older, he will mature into that body. It's just scary, because he could become another Shaq, one of the most dominating players in the game."

==============================================

This is yet another reason why I say that this Bulls club has been poorly planned, in that it should have been built from the inside out, rather than from the outside in. When you develop a young Center first, you get quality free agent wing players wanting to sign with you or be traded to your club, to become the next Kobe/Shaq wannabes.

It's how Houston got Tracy McGrady after drafting Yao Ming. Portland already grabbed Roy in their own draft, bypassing this stage altogether. Was that not the rationale behind Michael Finley going to Dallas and then San Antonio? (Nowitzki/Duncan) Isn't that why Sam Cassell signed with the Clippers? (Elton Brand)

You can argue that the Lakers got Kobe first, then Shaq, but unless you're prepared to explain how free agent big men are going to be beating down the door to play with Ben Gordon, don't bother. Not to mention the need for a modern day equivalent to Death Row Records in Chicago and the need for that big man to also want to rap in a cold-weather climate. Plus, any big man who signs with us is going to have to fight to get touches with all the young, developmental projects we have going on right now.

How many free agent big men are going to want to deal with that? And, isn't there far less competition for free agent wing players than for post players who can score? Or even post players in general? That's how you wind up paying Ben Wallace $60MM.

People keep blaming Jerry Krause's 2000 offseason for the Bulls failure to attract free agents. This is a big part of our free agency problem. We're trying to catch fish with no bait on our hook. We have no carrot to dangle.

Well you look at all the quality big men we have passed on...

We traded Elton Brand who has made the playoffs once and passed on Pau Gasol who has never won a playoff game. There are no Dwight Howards or Tim Duncans that we have missed out on so it is a foolish discussion.

And the 2000 off-season we had a 20-10 guy on our roster and still no one wanted to sign with us. Tell us what you could have done to get us a free-agent magnet big man.

I don't know how much of a factor it'll play into things. Ultimately money and/or winning determines free-agency success.

That being said we grabbed the top free-agent two seasons ago in Ben Wallace.

Joe Smith is like a power forward version of Finley.

Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol have both said that they would prefer to be traded to Chicago. Apparently lots of top coaches showed interest in our team. I don' think it's a big issue.

I agree with the last two posters, but I also agree that we lack the big marquee name to attract FA's. I once though BG was going to be that player, despite being a small two guard, and I thought Deng would be ready to go to that level after last years playoffs (And I think he still can be....).
Its been a long ongoing debate how much a team can actually do without a Jordan/Kobe/Shaq type player, and so far, I can see making a case for the side that believes you need a star to really advance in the post season.


***The Heat series does not count in my mind really, that series seemed to be the beginning of the end for the Heat in retrospect.***

Action Paxson wrote:Well you look at all the quality big men we have passed on...

We traded Elton Brand who has made the playoffs once and passed on Pau Gasol who has never won a playoff game. There are no Dwight Howards or Tim Duncans that we have missed out on so it is a foolish discussion.

And the 2000 off-season we had a 20-10 guy on our roster and still no one wanted to sign with us. Tell us what you could have done to get us a free-agent magnet big man.

We were also the most abysmal franchise in the league with nothing else going for us, but I guess that doesn't count if you've already made up your mind.

Trade picks for a young backcourt player who Elton was willing to re-sign to play with, long enough to buy time to take another stab later. You take Elton under your arm and you say, "This is your franchise. We're building around you. Now, you give us a list of young wing players who you think you can play well off of, and we'll sit down and come up with a short list, prioritize it, and then devise a list assets that we can offer for one of those player."

But, oh wait. The only assets we had to work with were future picks. But, hey, THAT wouldn't deter a free agent. Would it?

It's all Jerry Krause's fault.

Is that what this thread is, a we shouldn't have traded Elton thread? Christ almighty.

Did we get any premier free-agents when we had Jordan though? I mean we got Brian Williams who wanted a championship, but that's about it.

Did the Lakers get anyone in their prime because of Shaq? I mean they got an old Malone and Payton who were trying to pick up a ring too, but I can't think of anyone major? Horrace Grant may be the closest thing.

I think things like these are overrated. Players care more about the overall environment of the team and city. That's why the Suns seem like a good destination for a lot of people. It's a great city, a fun team to play with, and in the past pretty much everyone seemed happy playing there.


Edit- We should really stop bringing up the loss of Brand. As Skiles would say, that is "neither here nor there." Paxson had nothing to do with it. I wish we kept Curry and Chandler but I've never heard anyone say, man I wish I could play with these guys:

I disapprove of what the OP says and will not fight to the death for his right to say it.

Where do players like Andrew Bynum, Brad Miller, Tyson Chandler, Andris Biedrins, Carlos Boozer, Amare Stoudamire, Troy Murphy and others slot in on your list? Are they other-worldly special too?

Or just, coincidentally, completely by no fault of anything forseeable by John Paxson, better than Ben Wallace or any other PF or C currently on our roster?

THE troy murphy?

jack finn wrote:THE troy murphy?

lol... I was thinking the same thing.

bullzman23 wrote:Did we get any premier free-agents when we had Jordan though? I mean we got Brian Williams who wanted a championship, but that's about it.

Did the Lakers get anyone in their prime because of Shaq? I mean they got an old Malone and Payton who were trying to pick up a ring too, but I can't think of anyone major? Horrace Grant may be the closest thing.

I think things like these are overrated. Players care more about the overall environment of the team and city. That's why the Suns seem like a good destination for a lot of people. It's a great city, a fun team to play with, and in the past pretty much everyone seemed happy playing there.


Edit- We should really stop bringing up the loss of Brand. As Skiles would say, that is "neither here nor there." Paxson had nothing to do with it. I wish we kept Curry and Chandler but I've never heard anyone say, man I wish I could play with these guys:
(picture)
(picture)

Jordan's team was Jordan's team. There was no free agent need. Saying that the free agency strategy failed in that environement is like saying that a bank's lending pratices must be strict because Bill Gates never borrowed money from it. There was no need.

Same for Shaq and Kobe.

Magilla_Gorilla wrote:-= original quote snipped =-




lol... I was thinking the same thing.

Other than, arguably, Tyrus and Noah, who we JUST got (how many years later than Murphy came out?) name a PF or C on our roster who you WOULDN'T trade for "THE Troy Murphy".

Not to mention that, by picking on the weakest example in the whole list of several names, you deliberately avoid the greater point, trying to turn this into a Troy Murphy thread. Probably a deliberate distraction.

Nets' point guard Jason Kidd, during his stop in Orlando last week, had an interesting perspective on Magic center Dwight Howard.

He said that as Howard continues to develop, he will become a free agent magnet, attracting other top players if the Magic can stay salary-cap flexible.

"What's probably going to happen is he's going to have everybody coming to Orlando to play, so that would just make his game a lot easier," Kidd said. "As he gets older, he will mature into that body. It's just scary, because he could become another Shaq, one of the most dominating players in the game."

I hate to point this out as we're lamenting over all the franchise big men we've passed up but Rashard Lewis will absolutely wreck any and all cap flexibility the Magic will have in the near future. That is all

High impact free agency signings are for decent teams, I'd say .500 or better as a rough guide, who need that extra something. Pointing to established, championship teams, who picked up hangers on, is not the way to examine the viability of free agency as a way to improve your ball club.

SensiBull wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Jordan's team was Jordan's team. There was no free agent need. Saying that the free agency strategy failed in that environement is like saying that a bank's lending pratices must be strict because Bill Gates never borrowed money from it. There was no need.

Same for Shaq and Kobe.

I'll re-read your original post to see if I'm misunderstanding something, but wasn't the point that you need top players to attract good free-agents? Haven't we already shown that we're attractive to top guys like Wallace, Gasol, and Kobe?

The Magic already attracted Rashard Lewis, but they also paid him like $40 million more than anyone was willing to offer. I suspect that a small FA market had more to do with Lewis wanting to play in Orlando than Dwight Howard

SensiBull wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



We were also the most abysmal franchise in the league with nothing else going for us, but I guess that doesn't count if you've already made up your mind.

Trade picks for a young backcourt player who Elton was willing to re-sign to play with, long enough to buy time to take another stab later. You take Elton under your arm and you say, "This is your franchise. We're building around you. Now, you give us a list of young wing players who you think you can play well off of, and we'll sit down and come up with a short list, prioritize it, and then devise a list assets that we can offer for one of those player."

But, oh wait. The only assets we had to work with were future picks. But, hey, THAT wouldn't deter a free agent. Would it?

It's all Jerry Krause's fault.

Isn't this exactly the sort of thinking that got us Tyson Chandler for Elton Brand? Elton Brand is not a franchise PF. You admit that. You're saying, by building outside in, we screwed ourselves. But how many teams have screwed themselves by building inside out?

Memphis tried to put a team around Gasol. Didn't come close.
Clippers tried to put a team around Brand. Didn't come close.

I can make this list last for as long as you'd like, because history has shown that title winners are either hugely dominant bigmen teams, which we had no shot at with Brand, or amazingly stacked with talent teams, which we really had no shot at with Brand, also. If we developed around Brand, and even got us that FA you so dream about in, lets say Tracy McGrady, we're still screwed. We become a low seed on the pure talent of those two, get no draft picks to enhance our position, and slowly age. At best, we're contender for 1,2 years, if we assemble some nice pieces using the MLE and draft.

The bottom line is, you either get damn lucky with a bigman, or you get damn lucky with the talent you find in the draft.

Krause's entire reason for trading Brand was based on your own thoughts: You need a great bigman. He traded Brand for 2 chances, basically. Their names were Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler. Everyone laughs now, but Eddy Curry's development at age 18 was unreal. Tyson Chandler's athleticism for a 7'1'' lengthy player was virtually unheard of. He took a chance, and lost big.

What exactly are you advocating? Building around a second-tier postplayer, getting that FA with a ton of capspace, and then getting really lucky?

It didn't work.

Instead, we tried to stack our team with talent, like Detroit did. So far, hasn't worked. Doesn't really look like its going to work. But then you have to ask yourself, how has our luck been? I'd say its been slim to none, actually. No players have developed that no one saw coming, and it doesn't look like Aaron Gray will become Shaq any time soon. And thats what it really comes down to.

Okay, I reread the first post and I guess the point was that you need a top big man to attract top wing free-agents. That being said, have we lost out on any big man that would help us do this.

Also, Sham...have you documented any posts that I've written to use against me in the future?

Sham wrote:By the way, this is the same Ben Wallace that you advocated trading Tyson for. In case you'd forgotten. You'd have made this abhorrent mistake of losing an uber young big and being stuck with an old crap one, too.

Ouch. Thats gonna leave a mark.

Sham wrote:

jack finn wrote:THE troy murphy?

Best response ever.

Where do players like Andrew Bynum, Brad Miller, Tyson Chandler, Andris Biedrins, Carlos Boozer, Amare Stoudamire, Troy Murphy and others slot in on your list? Are they other-worldly special too?

You're not exactly making your point here. Dwight Howard is other worldly good. He's MVP good. He's holy-frigging-Jesus-we-need-to-stop-that-guy-for-like-a-decade good. He's got the level of goodness that reminds people, rightly, a prime Shaq.

You CAN'T NAME anyone comparable, because there isn't one. What you list are decent players, with some very good ones on there.

Now if you're pissed off that the Bulls didn't start out 1-19 in 2003, with the worst GM in the recent history of NBA basketball, making an awful trade to lose their superstar, and somehow getting away with it to win the number 1 overall pick, then you're entitled to that beef, but it seems farfetched.

If you also wish to beef that we didn't draft every single good big man ever, then that's also your beef, but it seems a little pointless.

Now if you want to beef about dumping Chandler and signing Wallace instead, you have yourself a case. But do you really, REALLY have to keep finding new ways to rephrase the same point? All the damn time? Do you have to find these new ways of plugging the same agenda?

What are you going to learn from or educate people with this point? That we don't have an elite young big? No, we don't. It's a point so irrefutable that it doesn't need making.



By the way, this is the same Ben Wallace that you advocated trading Tyson for. In case you'd forgotten. You'd have made this abhorrent mistake of losing an uber young big and being stuck with an old crap one, too.

A trade for him is not a $60MM deal. Is it? And to selectively pick ONE advocation out of the many that I made grossly misrepresents my position on how this team should be built overall.

I also advocated keeping Curry. I've advocated pursuing Boris Diaw AND Joe Johnson. I've advocated keeping LaMarcus Aldridge.

So, feel free to remove the context of the argument. It makes you look like you caught someone in a lie, and that's just so "sexy" when you do that.

Oooooooooooooo..