Bulls extended AK/ME?

[samwana]

At least he improved after his disastrous start.

[The Explorer]

If GarPax got 18 years, AKME will get similar. It's only year 5 of 18 for them. 13 more years until change in 2038.

[CROBulls]

If GarPax got 18 years, AKME will get similar. It's only year 5 of 18 for them. 13 more years until change in 2038.

18 years only after 17 years and billboard happening.

[dougthonus]

I'm going to look on the bright side for two simple reasons. First, there is simply no logical reason to believe that a replacement would be an improvement. Second, having better job security probably increases the chances tad they will do wise long-term moves rather than dumb short-term moves.

I think the logical reason to think a replacement would be better is that he seems to be a bottom 3 GM in the league. More or less anyone that qualifies to be interviewed has a fair chance of being better.

[dougthonus]

Did Paxon give his pictures to AK?

Pax at least drafted a few all stars and got us to the conference finals.

Akme has not even won 2 playoff games in 6 years. This is moronic.

Took Pax 9 seasons to build a team that got to one conference final. And in those 9 seasons the Bulls won 50+ games once (the conference finals season). But the Bulls did go .500 or worse 6x in that time.

After one year, Pax got the Bulls into the playoffs 10 of the next 11 seasons and had only one season under .500. He also started with fewer assets and a worse cap situation and did so without making short term oriented moves.

AK has made the playoffs once in five years and has been below .500 in four out of five years while also trading forward future assets to try and win now with short term players.

It's not even a comparison as to which of these two did better. Pax was a high average to above average executive. AK is one of the worst in the league, in the clearly does not belong in this job and has displayed gross incompetence.

[Dan Z]

I don’t really pay attention to the front offices of other teams but do they all do dumb stuff and eventually get it right? Maybe?

“Even a stopped clock is right twice a day”.

[Jcool0]

Read on Twitter

[Jcool0]

Pax at least drafted a few all stars and got us to the conference finals.

Akme has not even won 2 playoff games in 6 years. This is moronic.

Took Pax 9 seasons to build a team that got to one conference final. And in those 9 seasons the Bulls won 50+ games once (the conference finals season). But the Bulls did go .500 or worse 6x in that time.

After one year, Pax got the Bulls into the playoffs 10 of the next 11 seasons and had only one season under .500. He also started with fewer assets and a worse cap situation and did so without making short term oriented moves.

AK has made the playoffs once in five years and has been below .500 in four out of five years while also trading forward future assets to try and win now with short term players.

It's not even a comparison as to which of these two did better. Pax was a high average to above average executive. AK is one of the worst in the league, in the clearly does not belong in this job and has displayed gross incompetence.

6 of the 10 playoff teams lost in round 1.

[Dan Z]

I'm going to look on the bright side for two simple reasons. First, there is simply no logical reason to believe that a replacement would be an improvement.

Sure there is. Its not guaranteed, but there are perfectly logical reasons to believe in the likelihood.

Outside of Nico Harrison (who was saved by the lottery but already revealed to be a moron), AK is in my opinion the worst GM in the NBA. Sure I don't follow the other teams like I follow my own, but it would be an uphill battle to convince me there are any worse. And if there are some that are worse, the number would be very small. The likelihood heavily favors an improvement. Assuming AK has autonomy to operate of course, and all evidence is that he does.

More importantly, this is not a "be careful what you wish for" situation like with Paxson. It was always a very real possibility that we would end up with a worse GM than Pax. Pax was, at minimum, an average and moderately competent GM. There was significant room beneath him in the quality department. Which has been confirmed with horrible clarity in real life.

Second, having better job security probably increases the chances tad they will do wise long-term moves rather than dumb short-term moves.

Good point. Lets hope. This summer should give us a decent idea.

I don't have a high opinion of AK but IMO he's not nearly as disastrous as posters like you believe he is. But if we were going to hire a new exec from among the 29 other execs I'd probably agree that odds are we get at least a small improvement. But that's not the case. We'd most likely be hiring from among an enormous group of people currently within and outside the nba, and among that group of nobodies and has-beens, I don't see any particular reason to think they'd be better than AK. AK has made a number of outright bad moves which are very frustrating, and I don't think he's good, but his objective results have been nearly average. Not saying that's all or even primarily what he should be graded on, but it's perhaps the single most relevant objective measure.

You really think AK is an average GM? Meaning he's done better than 14 other GM's in the league.

[Red8911]

AK had one very good off season where he signed Ball, Demar, AC, also trading for Vuc was a good move at the time before the deadline even though it didn’t work out at the end.

Other than that though AK hasn’t had much success and a bit surprised that he got an extension after missing the playoffs so much when that has been his primary goal. Reinsdorfs must be very patient to continue working with someone who has failed.

I’m not going to say it’s a bad move to keep him longer, many fans here have been hard on AK. A lot of times you do need luck too. He was stuck with Lonzos injury, then Zach’s contract.Let’s see what he does in the next couple of years. Now is his chance to redeem himself.

[League Circles]

Pax at least drafted a few all stars and got us to the conference finals.

Akme has not even won 2 playoff games in 6 years. This is moronic.

Took Pax 9 seasons to build a team that got to one conference final. And in those 9 seasons the Bulls won 50+ games once (the conference finals season). But the Bulls did go .500 or worse 6x in that time.

After one year, Pax got the Bulls into the playoffs 10 of the next 11 seasons and had only one season under .500. He also started with fewer assets and a worse cap situation and did so without making short term oriented moves.

AK has made the playoffs once in five years and has been below .500 in four out of five years while also trading forward future assets to try and win now with short term players.

It's not even a comparison as to which of these two did better. Pax was a high average to above average executive. AK is one of the worst in the league, in the clearly does not belong in this job and has displayed gross incompetence.

I'd agree Pax was better but not nearly by the margin you suggest. First of all I'd suggest that they inherited relatively similar situations. Next, Pax absolutely made some win-now moves early on - signing Scottie Pippen, hiring Skiles who is the quintessential win now coach, drafting old man Hinrich, trading Eddy Curry for Antonio Davis etc. Then Pax had mostly similarly mediocre results as AK has had (very near 500) other than Derrick Rose era for a few short years. Then of course you're conveniently ignoring the last several terrible years of his regime. If he gets credit for anything after 2009, he should get equal blame for everything up until AK was hired.

[Dan Z]

Took Pax 9 seasons to build a team that got to one conference final. And in those 9 seasons the Bulls won 50+ games once (the conference finals season). But the Bulls did go .500 or worse 6x in that time.

After one year, Pax got the Bulls into the playoffs 10 of the next 11 seasons and had only one season under .500. He also started with fewer assets and a worse cap situation and did so without making short term oriented moves.

AK has made the playoffs once in five years and has been below .500 in four out of five years while also trading forward future assets to try and win now with short term players.

It's not even a comparison as to which of these two did better. Pax was a high average to above average executive. AK is one of the worst in the league, in the clearly does not belong in this job and has displayed gross incompetence.

I'd agree Pax was better but not nearly by the margin you suggest. First of all I'd suggest that they inherited relatively similar situations. Next, Pax absolutely made some win-now moves early on - signing Scottie Pippen, hiring Skiles who is the quintessential win now coach, drafting old man Hinrich, trading Eddy Curry for Antonio Davis etc. Then Pax had mostly similarly mediocre results as AK has had (very near 500) other than Derrick Rose era for a few short years. Then of course you're conveniently ignoring the last several terrible years of his regime. If he gets credit for anything after 2009, he should get equal blame for everything up until AK was hired.

You think signing a 38 year old Scottie Pippen for the last year of his career is a win-now move? haha!

Hinrich was a good pick in the 2003 draft. Who would you pick over him? I could see an argument for David West (#18) and Josh Howard (#30), but that's about it.

The Eddy Curry trade was a good one, even though he screwed up by trading LaMarcus Aldridge for Tyrus Thomas.

On October 4th, 2005, the Chicago Bulls signed-and-traded center Eddy Curry, center-forward Antonio Davis and a 2007 1st round draft pick (Wilson Chandler) to the New York Knicks for guard Jermaine Jackson, forwards Mike Sweetney and Tim Thomas, a 2006 1st round draft pick (LaMarcus Aldridge), a 2007 1st round draft pick (Joakim Noah), a 2007 2nd round draft pick (Kyrylo Fesenko) and a 2009 2nd round draft pick (Jon Brockman).

[Jcool0]

After one year, Pax got the Bulls into the playoffs 10 of the next 11 seasons and had only one season under .500. He also started with fewer assets and a worse cap situation and did so without making short term oriented moves.

AK has made the playoffs once in five years and has been below .500 in four out of five years while also trading forward future assets to try and win now with short term players.

It's not even a comparison as to which of these two did better. Pax was a high average to above average executive. AK is one of the worst in the league, in the clearly does not belong in this job and has displayed gross incompetence.

I'd agree Pax was better but not nearly by the margin you suggest. First of all I'd suggest that they inherited relatively similar situations. Next, Pax absolutely made some win-now moves early on - signing Scottie Pippen, hiring Skiles who is the quintessential win now coach, drafting old man Hinrich, trading Eddy Curry for Antonio Davis etc. Then Pax had mostly similarly mediocre results as AK has had (very near 500) other than Derrick Rose era for a few short years. Then of course you're conveniently ignoring the last several terrible years of his regime. If he gets credit for anything after 2009, he should get equal blame for everything up until AK was hired.

You think signing a 38 year old Scottie Pippen for the last year of his career is a win-now move? haha!

Hinrich was a good pick in the 2003 draft. Who would you pick over him? I could see an argument for David West (#18) and Josh Howard (#30), but that's about it.

The Eddy Curry trade was a good one, even though he screwed up by trading LaMarcus Aldridge for Tyrus Thomas.

On October 4th, 2005, the Chicago Bulls signed-and-traded center Eddy Curry, center-forward Antonio Davis and a 2007 1st round draft pick (Wilson Chandler) to the New York Knicks for guard Jermaine Jackson, forwards Mike Sweetney and Tim Thomas, a 2006 1st round draft pick (LaMarcus Aldridge), a 2007 1st round draft pick (Joakim Noah), a 2007 2nd round draft pick (Kyrylo Fesenko) and a 2009 2nd round draft pick (Jon Brockman).

Kirk was a fine pick... The hallmark of Paxon... Never going to be mistaken for a #1 guy but wont be out of the league in 3 years. Kyle Korver was a better player so was West and maybe Boris Diaw... But at that time there was no one in that range that should of been taken over Kirk. Bulls probably could of traded up for Wade if they really wanted to, but that was to risky for play it safe Pax.

[ScrantonBulls]

AK had one very good off season where he signed Ball, Demar, AC, also trading for Vuc was a good move at the time before the deadline even though it didn’t work out at the end.

Other than that though AK hasn’t had much success and a bit surprised that he got an extension after missing the playoffs so much when that has been his primary goal. Reinsdorfs must be very patient to continue working with someone who has failed.

I’m not going to say it’s a bad move to keep him longer, many fans here have been hard on AK. A lot of times you do need luck too. He was stuck with Lonzos injury, then Zach’s contract.Let’s see what he does in the next couple of years. Now is his chance to redeem himself.

In what world was trading for Vuc a "good move"? They traded for him when his value was at an all time high, while having an outlier 3-pt shooting season. It was a disasterous trade. I'm wondering how one could justify that being a "good move".

[Dan Z]

I'd agree Pax was better but not nearly by the margin you suggest. First of all I'd suggest that they inherited relatively similar situations. Next, Pax absolutely made some win-now moves early on - signing Scottie Pippen, hiring Skiles who is the quintessential win now coach, drafting old man Hinrich, trading Eddy Curry for Antonio Davis etc. Then Pax had mostly similarly mediocre results as AK has had (very near 500) other than Derrick Rose era for a few short years. Then of course you're conveniently ignoring the last several terrible years of his regime. If he gets credit for anything after 2009, he should get equal blame for everything up until AK was hired.

You think signing a 38 year old Scottie Pippen for the last year of his career is a win-now move? haha!

Hinrich was a good pick in the 2003 draft. Who would you pick over him? I could see an argument for David West (#18) and Josh Howard (#30), but that's about it.

The Eddy Curry trade was a good one, even though he screwed up by trading LaMarcus Aldridge for Tyrus Thomas.

On October 4th, 2005, the Chicago Bulls signed-and-traded center Eddy Curry, center-forward Antonio Davis and a 2007 1st round draft pick (Wilson Chandler) to the New York Knicks for guard Jermaine Jackson, forwards Mike Sweetney and Tim Thomas, a 2006 1st round draft pick (LaMarcus Aldridge), a 2007 1st round draft pick (Joakim Noah), a 2007 2nd round draft pick (Kyrylo Fesenko) and a 2009 2nd round draft pick (Jon Brockman).

Kirk was a fine pick... The hallmark of Paxon... Never going to be mistaken for a #1 guy but wont be out of the league in 3 years. Kyle Korver was a better player so was West and maybe Boris Diaw... But at that time there was no one in that range that should of been taken over Kirk. Bulls probably could of traded up for Wade if they really wanted to, but that was to risky for play it safe Pax.

What makes you say they could've traded up for Wade? Miami wanted to trade the pick?

[ScrantonBulls]

You think signing a 38 year old Scottie Pippen for the last year of his career is a win-now move? haha!

Hinrich was a good pick in the 2003 draft. Who would you pick over him? I could see an argument for David West (#18) and Josh Howard (#30), but that's about it.

The Eddy Curry trade was a good one, even though he screwed up by trading LaMarcus Aldridge for Tyrus Thomas.

Kirk was a fine pick... The hallmark of Paxon... Never going to be mistaken for a #1 guy but wont be out of the league in 3 years. Kyle Korver was a better player so was West and maybe Boris Diaw... But at that time there was no one in that range that should of been taken over Kirk. Bulls probably could of traded up for Wade if they really wanted to, but that was to risky for play it safe Pax.

What makes you say they could've traded up for Wade? Miami wanted to trade the pick?

Because he has the power of hindsight and the Miami front office didn't, of course.

[League Circles]

Sure there is. Its not guaranteed, but there are perfectly logical reasons to believe in the likelihood.

Outside of Nico Harrison (who was saved by the lottery but already revealed to be a moron), AK is in my opinion the worst GM in the NBA. Sure I don't follow the other teams like I follow my own, but it would be an uphill battle to convince me there are any worse. And if there are some that are worse, the number would be very small. The likelihood heavily favors an improvement. Assuming AK has autonomy to operate of course, and all evidence is that he does.

More importantly, this is not a "be careful what you wish for" situation like with Paxson. It was always a very real possibility that we would end up with a worse GM than Pax. Pax was, at minimum, an average and moderately competent GM. There was significant room beneath him in the quality department. Which has been confirmed with horrible clarity in real life.



Good point. Lets hope. This summer should give us a decent idea.

I don't have a high opinion of AK but IMO he's not nearly as disastrous as posters like you believe he is. But if we were going to hire a new exec from among the 29 other execs I'd probably agree that odds are we get at least a small improvement. But that's not the case. We'd most likely be hiring from among an enormous group of people currently within and outside the nba, and among that group of nobodies and has-beens, I don't see any particular reason to think they'd be better than AK. AK has made a number of outright bad moves which are very frustrating, and I don't think he's good, but his objective results have been nearly average. Not saying that's all or even primarily what he should be graded on, but it's perhaps the single most relevant objective measure.

You really think AK is an average GM? Meaning he's done better than 14 other GM's in the league.

I said his objective results, meaning wins and losses. I do think he's probably below average, but his record has been average. I don't think there's a fair way to quantify what assets an exec inherits or the value of current position in terms of quality of assets.

[Jcool0]

You think signing a 38 year old Scottie Pippen for the last year of his career is a win-now move? haha!

Hinrich was a good pick in the 2003 draft. Who would you pick over him? I could see an argument for David West (#18) and Josh Howard (#30), but that's about it.

The Eddy Curry trade was a good one, even though he screwed up by trading LaMarcus Aldridge for Tyrus Thomas.

Kirk was a fine pick... The hallmark of Paxon... Never going to be mistaken for a #1 guy but wont be out of the league in 3 years. Kyle Korver was a better player so was West and maybe Boris Diaw... But at that time there was no one in that range that should of been taken over Kirk. Bulls probably could of traded up for Wade if they really wanted to, but that was to risky for play it safe Pax.

What makes you say they could've traded up for Wade? Miami wanted to trade the pick?

In John Paxson’s first draft as general manager, months after succeeding Jerry Krause, he had trade talks with the Raptors to move from the Bulls’ seventh pick to Toronto’s fourth.

Paxson’s target? Wade, who went fifth to the Heat out of Marquette.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2016/07/07/bulls-pursuit-of-dwyane-wade-began-with-2003-nba-draft/

[Jeffster81]

Time to relegate the Bulls to the G League.

[League Circles]

After one year, Pax got the Bulls into the playoffs 10 of the next 11 seasons and had only one season under .500. He also started with fewer assets and a worse cap situation and did so without making short term oriented moves.

AK has made the playoffs once in five years and has been below .500 in four out of five years while also trading forward future assets to try and win now with short term players.

It's not even a comparison as to which of these two did better. Pax was a high average to above average executive. AK is one of the worst in the league, in the clearly does not belong in this job and has displayed gross incompetence.

I'd agree Pax was better but not nearly by the margin you suggest. First of all I'd suggest that they inherited relatively similar situations. Next, Pax absolutely made some win-now moves early on - signing Scottie Pippen, hiring Skiles who is the quintessential win now coach, drafting old man Hinrich, trading Eddy Curry for Antonio Davis etc. Then Pax had mostly similarly mediocre results as AK has had (very near 500) other than Derrick Rose era for a few short years. Then of course you're conveniently ignoring the last several terrible years of his regime. If he gets credit for anything after 2009, he should get equal blame for everything up until AK was hired.

You think signing a 38 year old Scottie Pippen for the last year of his career is a win-now move? haha!

Hinrich was a good pick in the 2003 draft. Who would you pick over him? I could see an argument for David West (#18) and Josh Howard (#30), but that's about it.

The Eddy Curry trade was a good one, even though he screwed up by trading LaMarcus Aldridge for Tyrus Thomas.

On October 4th, 2005, the Chicago Bulls signed-and-traded center Eddy Curry, center-forward Antonio Davis and a 2007 1st round draft pick (Wilson Chandler) to the New York Knicks for guard Jermaine Jackson, forwards Mike Sweetney and Tim Thomas, a 2006 1st round draft pick (LaMarcus Aldridge), a 2007 1st round draft pick (Joakim Noah), a 2007 2nd round draft pick (Kyrylo Fesenko) and a 2009 2nd round draft pick (Jon Brockman).

Pippen was signed to a 2 year deal, and it wasn't for the purpose of losing games or accelerating development of young guys.

Hinrich was a pretty good pick, but was abnormally old and that's the kind of guy you take if you want immediate impact.

I'd agree the Curry trade was a good one, though I think my memory was wrong - IIRC Davis came back in the Jalen Rose trade, so nevermind on that one.

Bottom line, nothing Pax did for years was based on a notion that we needed to take a patient approach to getting high end talent. It was "get this ship in order asap to become respectable". Without the predictable Skiles burnout failure and the ensuing miracle Derrick Rose luck, there is a very high likelihood that that team would have been "in nba hell" just like we allegedly were.