Image ImageImage Image

McGraw: Bulls SG issues

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

User avatar
Tommy Udo 6
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 42,507
And1: 28
Joined: Jun 13, 2003
Location: San Francisco/East Bay CA

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#61 » by Tommy Udo 6 » Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:43 pm

SpinninHouse wrote:Acquiring in the SG poses a problem on a couple fronts. 1) With injury histories to Noah and Boozer, it's very difficult to include Taj in a deal. 2) With long term money tied up in Boozer, Noah, and Deng and a full max looming for Rose, we don't have the money to sign a SG to a long term deal.

I think our only chance is using a MLE exception. But if I'm not mistaken, we need to not have any cap space. Don't we have 1 or 2 million left in cap space?


We get an MLE on July 1, 2010 only. We passed it up because we were far under cap then. We dont have option to get another one until July 1, 2011 - if the new CBA allows it. If we were $2 mil under on July 1, we would have received the MLE since it is greater than $2 million.

SJax third year is the first season of Rose's extension. We would have all season to dump that expiring salary for cap space. I dont see a Lux Tax problem with SJax - and none at all if we trade Deng for him.
The gem cannot be polished without friction, nor man perfected without trials.
- -- Chinese proverb
imagge
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,822
And1: 700
Joined: Feb 13, 2009

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#62 » by imagge » Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:46 pm

BR0D1E86 wrote:
Well, the quote is pretty straightforward, so I can't agree that it is taken out of context. I mean...he said what he said...he can't back track now. But besides that, he was still 100 percent correct. We're now facing a lockout b/c of those 2 contracts...And b/c of KG's eventual extension...and so on and so forth.

It’s used on this board to prove that Reinsdorf is cheap (as in, “ZOMG, he didn’t even want to pay Jordan!!!”) when in reality he was afraid that it would f- the salary structure of the league.

That’s what I mean by out of context. And you’re right that he was right.


I am not using that statement to prove he was cheap. I am suggesting that the type of players the Bulls brought in and the salaries that were payed to the other players on those teams does suggest that JR will not pay top dollar for players.
User avatar
Red Larrivee
RealGM
Posts: 42,361
And1: 19,297
Joined: Feb 15, 2007
Location: Hogging Microphone Time From Tom Dore

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#63 » by Red Larrivee » Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:56 pm

With Deng, Boozer and Noah being the players they are. And Rose being the player he is, I don't see how Reinsdorf won't pay the tax to improve this team. If he didn't, it'd be an indefensible and embarrasing move.
JasonFTW
RealGM
Posts: 10,431
And1: 463
Joined: Oct 30, 2010

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#64 » by JasonFTW » Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:59 pm

If the bulls can't get Jackson hopefully we can get something that can benefit this team, people on here say with Jackson he will give us an edge and this team definitely needs that. I want this organization to do whatever it takes to make this team a true contender now instead of next season.
BULLHITTER
Banned User
Posts: 4,814
And1: 19
Joined: Dec 05, 2007

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#65 » by BULLHITTER » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:05 pm

With Deng, Boozer and Noah being the players they are. And Rose being the player he is, I don't see how Reinsdorf won't pay the tax to improve this team. If he didn't, it'd be an indefensible and embarrasing move.


in the name of fiscal responsiblity, he most definitely can NOT pay the luxury tax. for example, look at the arguments for and against melo/mayo/jackson; i'd hazard that the same arguments made on realgm for and against that group that any of the 3 make the bulls immediate contenders or not just drag out the process of waiting and waiting and waiting. at some point you either take the plunge and risk it or not. with the aforementioned group of core guys how many 'better' players than those 3 does anyone expect the bulls to seriously go for?
User avatar
puma0821
Senior
Posts: 724
And1: 4
Joined: Feb 14, 2009
Location: Des Moines, IA

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#66 » by puma0821 » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:06 pm

panthermark wrote:I'd think Smith is probably the easiest to obtain. It is easier to match his salary.....and his brother's "tweets" have given the Bulls a little leverage. But true, we do have to wait for the Melo situation to unfold first. I'm cool with that.


Can anyone explain? What did JR's bro tweet?
Mc Nutt in ya face, biatch!
Bulltalk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 37,842
And1: 9,277
Joined: Jun 25, 2002
Location: Seattle Area
       

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#67 » by Bulltalk » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:12 pm

Tommy Udo 6 wrote:
SpinninHouse wrote:Acquiring in the SG poses a problem on a couple fronts. 1) With injury histories to Noah and Boozer, it's very difficult to include Taj in a deal. 2) With long term money tied up in Boozer, Noah, and Deng and a full max looming for Rose, we don't have the money to sign a SG to a long term deal.

I think our only chance is using a MLE exception. But if I'm not mistaken, we need to not have any cap space. Don't we have 1 or 2 million left in cap space?


We get an MLE on July 1, 2010 only. We passed it up because we were far under cap then. We dont have option to get another one until July 1, 2011 - if the new CBA allows it. If we were $2 mil under on July 1, we would have received the MLE since it is greater than $2 million.

SJax third year is the first season of Rose's extension. We would have all season to dump that expiring salary for cap space. I dont see a Lux Tax problem with SJax - and none at all if we trade Deng for him.


Exactly. Some people aren't using their imaginations here.
"I'm a truth teller. All I do is tell the truth."

(Donald Trump - 8/11/16)
User avatar
organix85
General Manager
Posts: 8,604
And1: 331
Joined: Jan 27, 2010

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#68 » by organix85 » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:12 pm

puma0821 wrote:
panthermark wrote:I'd think Smith is probably the easiest to obtain. It is easier to match his salary.....and his brother's "tweets" have given the Bulls a little leverage. But true, we do have to wait for the Melo situation to unfold first. I'm cool with that.


Can anyone explain? What did JR's bro tweet?

I don't know the exact quotes and I'm too lazy to look them up... but I believe he said something along the lines of "JR would be good on the Bulls" or that he'd "love to play for the Bulls".
TyrusRose2425 wrote:Imagine how much more athletic Noah would be if he didn't have his big ass ball sack dragging him down
panthermark
RealGM
Posts: 21,709
And1: 4,009
Joined: Mar 15, 2010
Location: Undisclosed: MJ's shadow could be lurking....
         

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#69 » by panthermark » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:13 pm

puma0821 wrote:
panthermark wrote:I'd think Smith is probably the easiest to obtain. It is easier to match his salary.....and his brother's "tweets" have given the Bulls a little leverage. But true, we do have to wait for the Melo situation to unfold first. I'm cool with that.


Can anyone explain? What did JR's bro tweet?

I'm sorry, it was a single tweet...not tweets...

As the J.R. Smith trade rumors to Chicago continue to float out there, his brother, Chris, is in full favor of the athletic Nuggets shooting guard moving to the Windy City. On Wednesday he tweeted this: "I #pray @JR_Swish goes to the bulls...... #wishfulthinking" . . .

http://www.denverpost.com/nuggets/ci_16 ... s:+Nuggets
Jealousy is a sickness.......get well soon....
User avatar
DuckIII
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 71,854
And1: 37,253
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Location: On my high horse.
     

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#70 » by DuckIII » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:14 pm

BULLHITTER wrote:
With Deng, Boozer and Noah being the players they are. And Rose being the player he is, I don't see how Reinsdorf won't pay the tax to improve this team. If he didn't, it'd be an indefensible and embarrasing move.


in the name of fiscal responsiblity, he most definitely can NOT pay the luxury tax. for example, look at the arguments for and against melo/mayo/jackson; i'd hazard that the same arguments made on realgm for and against that group that any of the 3 make the bulls immediate contenders or not just drag out the process of waiting and waiting and waiting. at some point you either take the plunge and risk it or not. with the aforementioned group of core guys how many 'better' players than those 3 does anyone expect the bulls to seriously go for?


(1) I agree that its time to spend, financially, for an upgrade. And these guys are upgrades.

(2) The issue, though, is what the asking price - not payment price - is to effect the trade. That is where it becomes touchy. For example, the Rumorpress article says that Memphis is asking for something like Taj, Asik, Johnson, Char pick and a Bulls #1 pick for Mayo. That is a preposterous. So, if the trade demands for guys like Jax are similarly preposterous, then the Bulls don't need to jump now. And yes, they'd be better off getting a slightly lesser upgrade while maintaining a better balance of remaining assets/bench.

There is value in waiting, unless the only reason you are waiting is to save some money.
Once a pickle, never a cucumber again.
chadrucf
RealGM
Posts: 10,000
And1: 5,016
Joined: Jan 07, 2010

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#71 » by chadrucf » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:17 pm

Tommy Udo 6 wrote:A fiscally responsible trade is Deng for Jackson & filler. It saves the Bulls one full year of Deng & also meets an immediate need. However, Deng is very well liked by managaement & I dont think he is on the trading block..


Luckily, there is a balance between basketball and business. Giving Deng away for nothing would be "fiscally responsible", just as giving away Boozer/Noah/Rose would. I'm glad it's not a race to see who can put together the lowest payroll in the league. JR is not a Cuban or Buss, but he actually cares about winning games. He wont be able to sell the fans/coach/players/board on a Jax for Deng swap. Its bad for basketball and bad for business.
User avatar
ChiBulls09
Junior
Posts: 426
And1: 191
Joined: Apr 10, 2009
   

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#72 » by ChiBulls09 » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:18 pm

If we flunk out at the deadline, we can always get Michael Finley for a super cheap contract who had a .47 3 pt fg % with the Celtics in '09.
DropStep
Senior
Posts: 563
And1: 325
Joined: Feb 28, 2009

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#73 » by DropStep » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:20 pm

puma0821 wrote:
panthermark wrote:I'd think Smith is probably the easiest to obtain. It is easier to match his salary.....and his brother's "tweets" have given the Bulls a little leverage. But true, we do have to wait for the Melo situation to unfold first. I'm cool with that.


Can anyone explain? What did JR's bro tweet?


http://www.denverpost.com/nuggets/ci_16943584

As the J.R. Smith trade rumors to Chicago continue to float out there, his brother, Chris, is in full favor of the athletic Nuggets shooting guard moving to the Windy City. On Wednesday he tweeted this: "I #pray @JR_Swish goes to the bulls...... #wishfulthinking" . . .

I am for patience, long term vision, prudence, and having leverage in negotiations. Prying assets out of reluctant teams by overpaying rarely pans out, and GarPax seem to agree. At some point a team will be selling a guard we can use. Today is not our only chance. Stay the course, thousand points of light.
panthermark
RealGM
Posts: 21,709
And1: 4,009
Joined: Mar 15, 2010
Location: Undisclosed: MJ's shadow could be lurking....
         

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#74 » by panthermark » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:20 pm

Bulltalk wrote:
Tommy Udo 6 wrote:
SpinninHouse wrote:Acquiring in the SG poses a problem on a couple fronts. 1) With injury histories to Noah and Boozer, it's very difficult to include Taj in a deal. 2) With long term money tied up in Boozer, Noah, and Deng and a full max looming for Rose, we don't have the money to sign a SG to a long term deal.

I think our only chance is using a MLE exception. But if I'm not mistaken, we need to not have any cap space. Don't we have 1 or 2 million left in cap space?


We get an MLE on July 1, 2010 only. We passed it up because we were far under cap then. We dont have option to get another one until July 1, 2011 - if the new CBA allows it. If we were $2 mil under on July 1, we would have received the MLE since it is greater than $2 million.

SJax third year is the first season of Rose's extension. We would have all season to dump that expiring salary for cap space. I dont see a Lux Tax problem with SJax - and none at all if we trade Deng for him.


Exactly. Some people aren't using their imaginations here.

It would be nearly impossible to dump that salary for cap space during S-Jax's 3rd year. You would have to find a team with a TPE that was willng to absorb that contract without sending any salary back in return.....or find some team with enough cap room to take on his contract. I can't see that happening. If you want to trade him for an expiring contract BEFORE Roses contract kicks in, he would have to be traded basically 14 months from now.
Jealousy is a sickness.......get well soon....
panthermark
RealGM
Posts: 21,709
And1: 4,009
Joined: Mar 15, 2010
Location: Undisclosed: MJ's shadow could be lurking....
         

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#75 » by panthermark » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:21 pm

DropStep wrote:http://www.denverpost.com/nuggets/ci_16943584

As the J.R. Smith trade rumors to Chicago continue to float out there, his brother, Chris, is in full favor of the athletic Nuggets shooting guard moving to the Windy City. On Wednesday he tweeted this: "I #pray @JR_Swish goes to the bulls...... #wishfulthinking" . . .

I am for patience, long term vision, prudence, and having leverage in negotiations. Prying assets out of reluctant teams by overpaying rarely pans out, and GarPax seem to agree. At some point a team will be selling a guard we can use. Today is not our only chance. Stay the course, thousand points of light.

+10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Jealousy is a sickness.......get well soon....
User avatar
PMONSTER
Head Coach
Posts: 6,400
And1: 1,301
Joined: Nov 28, 2009
     

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#76 » by PMONSTER » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:22 pm

Whenever I read articles like this the only thing I think about is Deng. I feel like if we paid him what he was worth then we could have done a lot of things. Now it just feels like we are handcuffed.
NBA Playoffs.... I can never wait!
User avatar
DuckIII
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 71,854
And1: 37,253
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Location: On my high horse.
     

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#77 » by DuckIII » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:22 pm

Tommy Udo 6 wrote:A fiscally responsible trade is Deng for Jackson & filler. It saves the Bulls one full year of Deng & also meets an immediate need. However, Deng is very well liked by managaement & I dont think he is on the trading block..


It would be fiscally responsible. It would not be basketball responsible since it does nothing to change our status as a borderline contender and, arguably, makes us worse in both the short and long term.
Once a pickle, never a cucumber again.
BULLHITTER
Banned User
Posts: 4,814
And1: 19
Joined: Dec 05, 2007

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#78 » by BULLHITTER » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:22 pm

(2) The issue, though, is what the asking price - not payment price - is to effect the trade. That is where it becomes touchy. For example, the Rumorpress article says that Memphis is asking for something like Taj, Asik, Johnson, Char pick and a Bulls #1 pick for Mayo. That is a preposterous. So, if the trade demands for guys like Jax are similarly preposterous, then the Bulls don't need to jump now. And yes, they'd be better off getting a slightly lesser updgrade while maintaining a better balance of remaining assets/bench.

There is value in waiting, unless the only reason you are waiting is to save some money.


won't disagree with any of that; but i suppose then it comes down to negotiating skills (i can't recall an instance where the bulls have at leat recently been successful in this area) and whether or not they are calling bluff. i think the term previously was called "dithering". i don't know what to believe re: reports on what the bulls are being asked for in trade, but they were "waiting" annually for a "superstar" during the entire hinrich/gordon/deng run, "waiting" for 2010, and once again with lots of blather about available SG's (and this isn't about who i favor), waiting for the "perfect storm" of conditions to favor them in a deal and it's once again being brought up and debated. i once had quite a bit of faith in their ability to "go for it"; nowadays, not nearly as much.
User avatar
DuckIII
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 71,854
And1: 37,253
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Location: On my high horse.
     

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#79 » by DuckIII » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:25 pm

PMONSTER wrote:Whenever I read articles like this the only thing I think about is Deng. I feel like if we paid him what he was worth then we could have done a lot of things. Now it just feels like we are handcuffed.


There is a difference between being handcuffed and sitting on your hands by choice. Yes, both immobilize your hands, but the latter can be corrected by exercising your independent ability to stand up.

Deng restricts nothing. JR, if he won't add salary in the form of a 2 guard to round out our otherwise extraordinarily high quality starting unit, is simply choosing to be restricted.

And the point is that he told us he wouldn't do that to himself if it meant the difference between contending and not contending. And I think we are pretty much there (although I actually consider us a contender, just one with a very narrow margin for error).
Once a pickle, never a cucumber again.
cot2
Inactive user
Inactive user
Posts: 2,034
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 16, 2010

Re: McGraw: Bulls SG issues 

Post#80 » by cot2 » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:26 pm

Bulltalk wrote:
Tommy Udo 6 wrote:
SpinninHouse wrote:Acquiring in the SG poses a problem on a couple fronts. 1) With injury histories to Noah and Boozer, it's very difficult to include Taj in a deal. 2) With long term money tied up in Boozer, Noah, and Deng and a full max looming for Rose, we don't have the money to sign a SG to a long term deal.

I think our only chance is using a MLE exception. But if I'm not mistaken, we need to not have any cap space. Don't we have 1 or 2 million left in cap space?


We get an MLE on July 1, 2010 only. We passed it up because we were far under cap then. We dont have option to get another one until July 1, 2011 - if the new CBA allows it. If we were $2 mil under on July 1, we would have received the MLE since it is greater than $2 million.

SJax third year is the first season of Rose's extension. We would have all season to dump that expiring salary for cap space. I dont see a Lux Tax problem with SJax - and none at all if we trade Deng for him.


Exactly. Some people aren't using their imaginations here.

Again, it is not a luxury tax problem, but a possible extension problem. I think that these can all be part of the new CBA.
Soft cap at a level of the %BRI similar to today’s -> The owner will start with a lower number but will eventually give something similar.

Harder cap -> set at approximately equal to current luxury tax level, owners would want to closer to current cap. Bird rights, and exceptions still work up to the hard cap. Luxury tax of 2x amount over the soft cap, versus current 1x.

Hard cap -> Teams over the hard cap would not have to immediately cut players, but cannot even sign draft picks, or use Bird rights, until they get below the threshold, and pay 3x for any salary over the hard cap limit. Expect to see teams sending out picks, and other assets to take good players of their rosters.

Max 3 year deals -> No player options, only team options, larger signing bonus, cap hit over non-option years

End restricted FA -> Bone to players

Rookie contracts structure remains the same, but scale decreases 15%, draft picks of teams over the hard cap go into a pool for a supplementary draft based teams finish, if not sold, or traded before the draft.

No max salary -> More balance around the league, little chance for another Heat situation, unless players would be willing to take 50% of market value, instead of 90%.

If these were part of the new CBA, other teams would be able to outbid the Bulls for Rose, as they could not exceed the hard cap. At the very least multiple teams will have to send out great assets to dump salary, so being able to move $10M of SJax expensive, if even possible.

Return to Chicago Bulls