Asik Discussion. Pg 50 Sheridan: Bulls will match

[Mech Engineer]

No, it's just a fact that they don't. When Howard has it going, you basically just better focus on stopping the rest of the team. Paying Asik $8M in some ill-conceived effort to shut Howard down is silly.

If somebody can guard Howard one-on-one even for 15/20 minutes and slow him down...it makes a big difference. Double-teaming takes energy from the other guys to make it work correctly.
Look at the Collins guy from Atlanta who slowed down Howard enough that a mediocre cast could beat Orlando. Off-course, in a playoff series ...there will be games Howard goes for 40 pts and Asik/Noah look like crap.


And, it is not just about matching-up against Howard. If you cherry pick statements from one post....it is tough to make any point. There has been numerous posts about Asik's impact. If you think I am so dumb that they have to sign Asik for 8 mil to stop Howard in some series which might not happen...why are you even arguing with me?

The issue now is not about his ability. It is about finances for one year...can the Bulls manage it or not and execute their plan?

[LoveDaBoo]

Paying Asik because he can defend Howard is different from saying:

"lets pay Asik to defend Howard"

But its manifestly stupid either way.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

Its a lost cause at this point. People are as dug in on this issue as they were Rose/Beasley. There has always been a tremendous amount of animosity directed towards Asik - I've never understood it.

[DuckIII]

Paying Asik because he can defend Howard is different from saying:

"lets pay Asik to defend Howard"

But its manifestly stupid either way.

I disagree. Regardless, and you probably stated it elsewhere in the thread, what do you propose the Bulls do? Obviously let him walk, but what about after that?

The Bulls are letting CJ, Lucas and Brewer walk. No need to debate it, its happening. My view is that the Bulls simply must retain Asik and Korver not only to actually play basketball, but also to retain some of these assets without losing them all for nothing.

It is my understanding that Asik's money, of not paid to Asik, basically can't be spent on anyone. Which would leave our offseason at consolidating CJ, Lucas and Brewer into Hinrich and a vet minimum guy like Miles or Green (all of which which I'm totally fine with as roster moves) and then doing literally nothing else but losing two more players with valuable roles on this team.

I'm not even close to one of the chicken littles about how this summer has played out so far, but the result I just described would be completely unacceptable to me both for the present and beyond this coming season.

[AAU Teammate]

Paying Asik because he can defend Howard is different from saying:

"lets pay Asik to defend Howard"

But its manifestly stupid either way.

No, there's a difference. One is saying we value this guy because he is a widebody big man defender. That means Howard, Hibbert etc.

One of the things that makes the Bulls defense elite is that it can guard any format of opposition. Need quick switches on penetrating PGs? Noah is helpful. Need to body up Roy Hibbert? Asik is helpful. And during games you can sub based on what the opponent has out there.

Without Asik we have to put up with Noah guarding big guys, boxing out big guys.

So agree or not, it is not manifestly stupid to want a widebody, beefy defender like Asik. It's something I want, because I want to be able to guard big men with a guy who does it better than Noah. Taking the dollars out of it you of course would agree with that as well, so there's no reason to call people stupid.

[LoveDaBoo]

Its a lost cause at this point. People are as dug in on this issue as they were Rose/Beasley. There has always been a tremendous amount of animosity directed towards Asik - I've never understood it.

Really? He's one of the worst offensive players in the game -maybe the worst. Any player who fumbles away the ball consistently is going to draw a lot of ire from fans. That's a pretty easy thing to understand.

[imagge]

Yep. Only reason it's not justified for Chicago is Noah plays 33+ mpg. Hard to pay market value for 15 mpg out of Asik... Or fathom decreasing Noah and Taj's minutes. Still $25m/3yr for Asik is fair. Houston's far from crazy.

It's fair to a team that wants Omer to be their starter. hell, if it was eight a year over three years, I'd probably match it. It's solely that in the last year, you're paying Omer Asik max money. Not kinda max money, not a lot of money, maximum money. And before someone says "well amnesty Boozer, trade his contract", those are two independent things. The first being, if you amnesty Boozer, wouldn't you rather have cap space than Omer at 15 million? The second is, what if no one worth acquiring for expiring contracts becomes available?

I've seen this Bulls team play for two+ years now. They're a great regular season team for the depth they had. But in the playoffs, lack of difference makers was too great to ignore. If you resign Omer but let Korver, Brewer go, are you really getting better? You're not improving the team (in fact it gets worse) and you still have glaring issues at scoring the basketball.

Don't forget the more punitive tax will be kicking in at the time he reaches 15 mil......

[DuckIII]

Its a lost cause at this point. People are as dug in on this issue as they were Rose/Beasley. There has always been a tremendous amount of animosity directed towards Asik - I've never understood it.

Really? He's one of the worst offensive players in the game -maybe the worst. Any player who fumbles away the ball consistently is going to draw a lot of ire from fans. That's a pretty easy thing to understand.

It is definitely easy to understand fans blowing highly visible, though not all that impactful, plays out of proportion relative to all of the other things players like Asik do to help the team win and compete. No doubt.

One need not read message boards for very long, where even the most observational and passionate fans come, to see that offensive issues (successes and failures both) vastly outweigh everything else in the minds of most basketball fans. Most fans, understandably, follow the ball. That does not, however, render their opinions more justifiable than others.

[LoveDaBoo]

So agree or not, it is not manifestly stupid to want a widebody, beefy defender like Asik. It's something I want, because I want to be able to guard big men with a guy who does it better than Noah.

But that's not what I was responding to. I was pointing out the fact that the argument that Howard-to-Brooklyn makes matching Asik more sensible is wrong, and needs to go away.

Taking the dollars out of it you of course would agree with that as well, so there's no reason to call people stupid.

I didn't call anyone stupid. I said that argument is stupid. And you never take dollars out of it.

[1rage]

so Offensive Rebounding where his rate is in the top 10 throughout the league, and huge screens aren't part of the offense anymore.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

so Offensive Rebounding where his rate is in the top 10 throughout the league, and huge screens aren't part of the offense anymore.

Its all about buckets son...

[BuffaloBull]

You don't match Asik, and you are going to spend the next few years looking for him. And given how long it takes for good centers to develop (Hibbert and Noah are both examples of this), the only way it would make sense to not match Asik is to have his replacement ready to go now, which the team clearly doesn't.

This is a team that has the stated philosophy of winning with defense and rebounding first. Asik is a flawed player who happens to be elite at the two planks of your system. So you keep him, at least for the medium term, and find needed scoring elsewhere.

Losing Asik does not buy you any meaningful flexibility until the last year of his contract, and even that is not the end-all people make it out to be. There's no reason you can't move things around, or just wait to retool the year after when Omer's contract is expired. In all likelihood, this team is not going to go back into true FA again: with Rose and Noah + any other mature players (Taj, a resigned Deng) on mature contracts you will never enough space to have a major rehaul like 2010. I can see making room for one guy in the right offseason if necessary, but the main point is probably to cycle salaries so you don't have to pay the repeater tax.

[PistolP]

You don't match Asik, and you are going to spend the next few years looking for him. And given how long it takes for good centers to develop (Hibbert and Noah are both examples of this), the only way it would make sense to not match Asik is to have his replacement ready to go now, which the team clearly doesn't.

We aren't looking to replace a starter though like Noah or Hibbert. Asik plays 15 mpg. We have a guy ready and able to play backup C for 5-10mpg. His name is Taj Gibson. We just need another big body to play C for 5-10mpg. It won't take years to fill that role...it's a cheap revolving door that allows cash to be spent on upgrades elsewhere (hopefully).

[LoveDaBoo]

Its a lost cause at this point. People are as dug in on this issue as they were Rose/Beasley. There has always been a tremendous amount of animosity directed towards Asik - I've never understood it.

Really? He's one of the worst offensive players in the game -maybe the worst. Any player who fumbles away the ball consistently is going to draw a lot of ire from fans. That's a pretty easy thing to understand.

It is definitely easy to understand fans blowing highly visible, though not all that impactful, plays out of proportion relative to all of the other things players like Asik do to help the team win and compete. No doubt.

Wow. You're dug in all the way on this one, eh? Having a super-high turnover rate is "blowing a few plays out of proportion" now? The man turns the ball over a quarter of the time.

One need not read message boards for very long, where even the most observational and passionate fans come, to see that offensive issues (successes and failures both) vastly outweigh everything else in the minds of most basketball fans. Most fans, understandably, follow the ball. That does not, however, render their opinions more justifiable than others.

No on likes it when a player consistently loses the ball. There's no mystery to that. No one said anything about any opinion being more justifiable. What I said was that it's hard to believe anyone wonders why Asik is oft-criticized by fans. The reasons why are pretty obvious, IMO.

[Mech Engineer]

^^^^BuffaloBull..

It seems like the anti-Asik signing people are looking at the 15 mil payment in a vacuum and are going crazy over that.
There is no plan which makes the Bulls a contending team in 13-14 without matching Asik unless some miracle trade happens. The savings from Asik not being matched will go to average rotation players who will not make a difference in winning a c'ship or not. As you have described, it is a much more complicated issue with factors like assets, defense, big man scarcity in the league, Thibs's system of winning, expiring contract etc..

The arguments are:
1. The Bulls are not going to be able to sign Taj
2. The team will go over LT and lose that MLE signing.

The Bulls can sign Taj depending on other factors not just related to Asik. Asik is one of the factors.
They can do some creative thinking on Taj's contract like back-loading his contract and paying him less in that Asik's balloon year.

Rerisen mentioned about the talent level of MLE signings and its impact for the Bulls.

[LoveDaBoo]

so Offensive Rebounding where his rate is in the top 10 throughout the league, and huge screens aren't part of the offense anymore.

So, by this reasoning, the offense should be pretty good with Asik on the floor, right?

Make a wild guess at how many Bulls have a lower points per possession rate on the floor.

[BuffaloBull]

You don't match Asik, and you are going to spend the next few years looking for him. And given how long it takes for good centers to develop (Hibbert and Noah are both examples of this), the only way it would make sense to not match Asik is to have his replacement ready to go now, which the team clearly doesn't.

We aren't looking to replace a starter though like Noah or Hibbert. Asik plays 15 mpg. We have a guy ready and able to play backup C for 5-10mpg. His name is Taj Gibson. We just need another big body to play C for 5-10mpg. It won't take years to fill that role...it's a cheap revolving door that allows cash to be spent on upgrades elsewhere (hopefully).

That's an assumption that implies great health from all our main bigs. If I knew Omer was only going to play 15 minutes every game, that's one thing. But if Noah or Gibson is out for any extended amount of time, having a fourth big that you actually trust to play is hugely important. I don't trust the front office to find a Kurt Thomas every year to pick up the slack, because there just aren't that many Kurt Thomases out there to be had.

Cheap out on your big rotation, and it may really come back to bite you. At some point, you have to pay for value, and keeping Asik onto his next contract means the Bulls can still be the Bulls defensively, even if one of their bigs goes down for an extended period. To me, that's less a luxury than a necessity with the way the Bulls play defense and how much effort they expect from their big men defensively.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

You don't match Asik, and you are going to spend the next few years looking for him. And given how long it takes for good centers to develop (Hibbert and Noah are both examples of this), the only way it would make sense to not match Asik is to have his replacement ready to go now, which the team clearly doesn't.

We aren't looking to replace a starter though like Noah or Hibbert. Asik plays 15 mpg. We have a guy ready and able to play backup C for 5-10mpg. His name is Taj Gibson. We just need another big body to play C for 5-10mpg. It won't take years to fill that role...it's a cheap revolving door that allows cash to be spent on upgrades elsewhere (hopefully).

That's an assumption that implies great health from all our main bigs. If I knew Omer was only going to play 15 minutes every game, that's one thing. But if Noah or Gibson is out for any extended amount of time, having a fourth big that you actually trust to play is hugely important. I don't trust the front office to find a Kurt Thomas every year to pick up the slack, because there just aren't that many Kurt Thomases out there to be had.

Cheap out on your big rotation, and it may really come back to bite you. At some point, you have to pay for value, and keeping Asik onto his next contract means the Bulls can still be the Bulls defensively, even if one of their bigs goes down for an extended period. To me, that's less a luxury than a necessity with the way the Bulls play defense and how much effort they expect from their big men defensively.

The Knicks just paid 39 year old Marcus Camby 4.5 million dollars a year for 3 years. Good backup bigs aren't cheap.

[DuckIII]

Wow. You're dug in all the way on this one, eh? Having a super-high turnover rate is "blowing a few plays out of proportion" now? The man turns the ball over a quarter of the time.

I am definitely dug in on matching Asik. Which I'll get back to in a minute.

He does have a high turnover rate. But that results in a career average of 0.9 turnovers a game. Relative to the defense, screens and rebounds he produces, focusing on his bumbled passes is clearly blowing those isolated plays dramatically out of proportion. But like I said, most fans just follow the ball and scoring reigns supreme.

Getting back to matching Asik, I was still hoping you'd respond to this:

Regardless, and you probably stated it elsewhere in the thread, what do you propose the Bulls do? Obviously let him walk, but what about after that?

The Bulls are letting CJ, Lucas and Brewer walk. No need to debate it, its happening. My view is that the Bulls simply must retain Asik and Korver not only to actually play basketball, but also to retain some of these assets without losing them all for nothing.

It is my understanding that Asik's money, of not paid to Asik, basically can't be spent on anyone. Which would leave our offseason at consolidating CJ, Lucas and Brewer into Hinrich and a vet minimum guy like Miles or Green (all of which which I'm totally fine with as roster moves) and then doing literally nothing else but losing two more players with valuable roles on this team.

I'm not even close to one of the chicken littles about how this summer has played out so far, but the result I just described would be completely unacceptable to me both for the present and beyond this coming season.

Its one thing to not care for Asik. That can be debated. But its another to advocate not retaining him, given the implications of what that means for this Bulls team. So, what is your plan after we let him walk for nothing, along with CJ, Lucas and Brewer? How do you turn that decision into a positive?

[BULLHITTER]

The Knicks just paid 39 year old Marcus Camby 4.5 million dollars a year for 3 years. Good backup bigs aren't cheap.

camby has more skill and a deeper resume than asik past, now and moving forward. AND, fwiw, if asik's deal was the same as camby, the bulls wouldn't be wavering.