Image ImageImage Image

Doug on "2014 Plan"

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

User avatar
Mech Engineer
RealGM
Posts: 16,802
And1: 4,804
Joined: Apr 10, 2012
Location: NW Suburbs

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#81 » by Mech Engineer » Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:56 pm

Wingy wrote:
BuffaloBull wrote:
Wingy wrote:
How are we getting this #2 guy while keeping Noah, Deng and Taj around?

Also, I feel you grossly overrate our assets. Mirotic could be really good, but my guess is that he's a 3rd option type at best. Butler/Teague/late picks...if they "pan out" they are solid role players...guys that can be signed any offseason.


You trade one of them, keep the rest. Adding a guy in 2014-2015 under this scenario isn't so much a talent for talent trade as it is either an outright signing/sign and trade or a leverage scenario on a 2015 guy.


So who's trading a championship level #2 for any of those guys..except for perhaps Noah...but we just left our pants down on that one by letting Omer walk.


To add to that, that player has to want the Bulls and we have not seen that with any superstar ever in a trade(Melo - NY, Howard -NJ, Paul -LA). Love might want LA or OKC because he can go to a stacked team. And, Minnesota or any other team will want pure talent back first than money, cap space etc.. Even some small market owners probably are not so concerned about tax.
Wingy
RealGM
Posts: 16,135
And1: 7,084
Joined: Feb 15, 2007

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#82 » by Wingy » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:04 pm

Concept Coop wrote:
Wingy wrote: :roll:

Is that you Jerry? Why can't we afford it again?

Are we Memphis or Charlotte all of a sudden?

I love how so many have just rolled over, continue to pass their money and accept the team's self imposed hard cap while arguing with other fans as if to say "what the hell's wrong with you for asking your team to spend like all the other big markets?"

We have people who make smart basketball decisions in GarPax. When I say spend, it's spending with those guys at the helm...not the boobs the Knicks have had over the years...so don't try to throw back the spending for spending's sake.

What cap space? The other guys are gonna be on the books still and we can't just absorb a max type player in a mid-season trade...and once we do have space, those All Star guys will be UFAs able to go anywhere they want.


Look at the new CBA, then get back to me. If you don't have the cap space, you don't get the player.

New Jersey would love to pay the tax and give Dwight the max. But that's not an option any more. If a team doesn't like what we have to offer, they don't have to take it, like they used to.

Having a 15 million obstacle is not a good thing.


I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like you are talking free agency and I'm talking trades...

I admittedly have not read the CBA in any detail, but I think if anything came out of it where you needed cap space to make a trade...I'm pretty sure that would've been big news.

I'm talking trading for Aldridge/Love, not signing them as free agents 3 years from now.

They will be expiring the same year as Omer's pill year. That's a good thing to pull off a trade in the offseason before that last contract year...or if the teams try to cling and hold out hope of resigning and then finding out they can't...it's good to have at the trade deadline so they can reset the deck and trade them for a player that's coming off the books in that immediate offseason.

Maybe I'm wrong and there's something I totally missed about the new CBA, but I still am pretty sure you still have to trade money for money...and as I said, there's no way we'll have enough cap room to just absorb those guys in an offseason or deadline deal prior to them actually expiring and hitting the open market.
dice
RealGM
Posts: 44,059
And1: 13,007
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#83 » by dice » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:08 pm

Rerisen wrote:Maybe the FO really is deluding themselves to believe that what they have done this offseason IS going for it?

i think letting asik walk signaled the end of any such line of thinking
God help Ukraine
God help those fleeing misery to come here
God help the Middle East
God help the climate
God help US health care
Wingy
RealGM
Posts: 16,135
And1: 7,084
Joined: Feb 15, 2007

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#84 » by Wingy » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:09 pm

Concept Coop wrote:
Wingy wrote:
Rerisen wrote:We should get such a young player as above, to start developing *right now* if we want their impact to coincide with Rose's prime.


Winner!

Hardly.

At what cost? If Rose comes back at 100%, we are a few minor moves from being a title contender. We won't be better than Miami, but we could luck into an All-Star and still not be. If the only end game to please you is to be better than Miami, or start over...we'll be starting over until LeBron retires.

You don't throw away the opportunity to compete over the next 3 years, to HOPE that a Harrison Barnes is a top 10 player.


The HOPE is that said young player becomes comparable to Luol Deng...not a top 10 player. It's the freeing of cap space and added flexibility to then go and try to add the perennial All Star to pair with the younger, developing pick and Rose.
User avatar
Concept Coop
Analyst
Posts: 3,040
And1: 608
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#85 » by Concept Coop » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:18 pm

Wingy wrote:I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like you are talking free agency and I'm talking trades...

I admittedly have not read the CBA in any detail, but I think if anything came out of it where you needed cap space to make a trade...I'm pretty sure that would've been big news.

I'm talking trading for Aldridge/Love, not signing them as free agents 3 years from now.

They will be expiring the same year as Omer's pill year. That's a good thing to pull off a trade in the offseason before that last contract year...or if the teams try to cling and hold out hope of resigning and then finding out they can't...it's good to have at the trade deadline so they can reset the deck and trade them for a player that's coming off the books in that immediate offseason.

Maybe I'm wrong and there's something I totally missed about the new CBA, but I still am pretty sure you still have to trade money for money...and as I said, there's no way we'll have enough cap room to just absorb those guys in an offseason or deadline deal prior to them actually expiring and hitting the open market.


Essentially, if we don't have the cap space, we don't get player X. You can't do a sign and trade puts you over the cap anymore.

Let's say it is Kevin Love 2 years from now, demanding a trade and we are an option. If the Wolves don't want Asik, we are screwed. If the Wolves want us to take a bad contract, we are screwed.

To match the salary of a bad contract AND Kevin Love, the Wolves would have to value Asik AND we would have to send ANOTHER 10+ million back for Love's salary.

If we don't have Asik's monster deal, we can better absorb Love's salary. If we have more, smaller expirings, we can better absorb Love's salary.

The Bulls management - which has proven to be one of the best - did the right thing by letting Asik walk. You don't give up that much flexibility for Omer Asik.
Real GM Bulls Board: Step 2 - Anger
User avatar
Concept Coop
Analyst
Posts: 3,040
And1: 608
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#86 » by Concept Coop » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:21 pm

Wingy wrote:The HOPE is that said young player becomes comparable to Luol Deng...not a top 10 player. It's the freeing of cap space and added flexibility to then go and try to add the perennial All Star to pair with the younger, developing pick and Rose.


If Barnes doesn't become Deng, you set yourself back. Deng is not a negative contract - when we are ready to move him, we can do so. No point in setting the team back and taking on so much risk at this stage in the process.
Real GM Bulls Board: Step 2 - Anger
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#87 » by Rerisen » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:23 pm

Concept Coop wrote:If Barnes doesn't become Deng, you set yourself back. Deng is not a negative contract - when we are ready to move him, we can do so. No point in setting the team back and taking on so much risk at this stage in the process.


You have to take risk. There is no path to a title without it.

The Bulls are not going to out value Miami and beat them through Free Agency paying market value to a whole team of players, while also spending considerably less.

Just not going to happen.
BullsFTW
Head Coach
Posts: 6,550
And1: 1,893
Joined: Apr 08, 2012
       

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#88 » by BullsFTW » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:24 pm

Here's my plan...tank the 2014 season and hope of getting in the top 3 and select Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker.
User avatar
Concept Coop
Analyst
Posts: 3,040
And1: 608
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#89 » by Concept Coop » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:24 pm

To those who are piling on the Bulls, know this:

We want the Bulls to be what the Nets are: Owner willing to pay the tax, desirable destination for a top 10 player.

Well, the Nets are willing to pay the tax - as much as it takes. And Dwight wants to go there. So - what's the hold up? They don't have the cap space. It doesn't matter whose money it is, or whether they are willing to spend it. That's not all it takes anymore.

You can't dig yourself these holes with negative contracts. The Bulls are wise to start ridding themselves of them and not giving them out.
Real GM Bulls Board: Step 2 - Anger
Wingy
RealGM
Posts: 16,135
And1: 7,084
Joined: Feb 15, 2007

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#90 » by Wingy » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:29 pm

Why would we be doing a sign and trade? Do you mean trade and extend?
Ralphb07
RealGM
Posts: 27,042
And1: 5,965
Joined: Jul 04, 2004
Location: Palm Bay, FL

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#91 » by Ralphb07 » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:30 pm

Buffalo has brought up very good point.


Also just because the plan might be 2014, don't be mistaken that if someone of value becomes available before then the Bulls just say oh well our plan is 2014 so no thanks. The only thing holding up the Bulls going for Howard is Howard not wanting to come here.

What people need to realize is you need certain windows of opportunity in place. That's all the Bulls are doing. They are saying that they want to rebuild in 2014, but like I said above, that doesn't mean they won't land a true #2 before then if one becomes available.
BullsFTW
Head Coach
Posts: 6,550
And1: 1,893
Joined: Apr 08, 2012
       

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#92 » by BullsFTW » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:31 pm

I think if there's any free agent our FO is after, it's Kevin Love...

Deng + Taj + Bobcats for K-Love in 2014 or sign him out right in 2015.
User avatar
DuckIII
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 71,608
And1: 36,951
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Location: On my high horse.
     

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#93 » by DuckIII » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:33 pm

Here is my view of doug's article. Which is a dim view, though doug knows I respect him immensely as a sports writer.

Regarding his take on the Bulls' theoritical 2014 plan, even if you accept the theory of it (which is that the 2014 plan even exists, and if it does, means using the money on free agency rather than to facilitate trades, which are two very big assumptions), the numbers he uses to establish an absence of max capspace aren't even consistent with the existence of the plan. Here is his premise:

The theory goes that the Bulls will be maximum room under the cap in order to make a bunch of moves, however, it's unlikely to work out nearly so well in practice.


Here is the conclusion:

They'll have less than max cap room to fill out the team.


Here are his assumptions to reach it (with a presumed cap of $62 million):

That puts them at 39 million. Let's assume they keep Taj Gibson, now the salary is back up to 48-50 million.


(a) If the plan is to actually go after free agents, and get as much possible to do so, why would I assume the Bulls will retain Gibson at all rather than trade him for a cheaper asset (like a mid-first round pick, which he's presumably worth, or another young player with more years on his rookie deal yet to come)?

(b) Or, if that is is the plan, why would I assume that Taj's deal would be in the $10-$11 million range in that year (or in any year, frankly). For starters, that likely exceeds his market value. Which is admittedly a guess. But more importantly, if the Bulls are actually attacking a 2014 plan, they won't pay him that since it harms the plan.

(c) Or he gets $9 mil per (far more reasonable) and then the Bulls have $14 mil under the cap, which brings me to this:

Butler
Teague
2 rookies


Why am I assuming these contracts will all be on the books? The Bulls, if max space is their actual plan, will simply dump the next two first round picks, or Teague or Butler or some combination thereof, to reach their goal. They did this before when they packaged Hinrich and dumped a first to the Wizards. Prior to 2010, teams dumped first rounders to keep those salaries off the books. Its a standard strategy.

Again, its doug's assumption this is the plan, not mine. I'm just showing that if it IS the plan, the hurdles doug jumps to reach the conclusion that there will not be max space are, in my view, invalid and inconsistent with the assumption of the plan's existence.

Then doug names off possible free agents and says, essentially, "who knows?" Always a valid point regarding any plan. Such as with regard to the following supposedly superior plan:

Now instead of this, let's say the Bulls dumped Deng for Richard Jefferson and Harrison Barnes, a deal that was reportedly on the table. The Bulls would add Barnes and about four million in salary to this current core. All of a sudden things look a lot better. Maybe they also dumped Noah for Thomas Robinson, a deal that may have also been on the table, and they don't keep Taj Gibson and amnesty Boozer immediately.


The "who knows?" assumptions: (1) The first deal was even on the table at all, as reported; (2) that deal, if available, was completely without regard to who was going to be available when GS picked (i.e., if Barnes was there, as he was, GS still would have done it); (3) even more tenuously, the completely unrumored Noah for Robinson deal was available; and (4) most importantly, that Robinson and Barnes are equal to or better than Noah and Deng (which is a huge leap, given the statistical likelihood of success for any lottery pick) or that they even pan out as players of value at all.

Moreover, this speculative plan includes the use of capspace, which doug's criticism of the alleged current plan claims is not valuable because we likely won't get anyone. And if we won't get anyone, as an assumption, I'd rather have Deng and Noah at that stage than Barnes and Robinson, plus a 2013-14 plan that doesn't intentionally waste one fully healthy year of Rose's career (which doug's plan requires).

Final assumption:

If you were really playing for 2014 which of those situations is really better? The second one, it's not even close.


Which is that the "2104" plan completely ignores trying to win in 2013-14, which it obviously is not. Which is why the Bulls aren't trading Noah and Deng for lottery picks. It is not only illogical for the Bulls to burn 2 years of Rose's career, but it is also clearly not the plan. And you'd have to assume it to be the plan for any of this to make sense. Yes, the Bulls appear to have a plan that involves 2014, but it is not one geared to completely sacrifice Rose's next fully healthy year when all indications are that they will still be in a position to field a contending team that year.

In short, the 2014 plan is equivalent to the underwear gnome plan

1: Make it to 2014
2: ????
3: Championship


Which renders it identical to Doug's plan, only with less question marks, since Noah and Deng are known commodities.
Once a pickle, never a cucumber again.
User avatar
Concept Coop
Analyst
Posts: 3,040
And1: 608
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#94 » by Concept Coop » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:33 pm

Rerisen wrote:
Concept Coop wrote:If Barnes doesn't become Deng, you set yourself back. Deng is not a negative contract - when we are ready to move him, we can do so. No point in setting the team back and taking on so much risk at this stage in the process.


You have to take risk. There is no path to a title without it.

The Bulls are not going to out value Miami and beat them through Free Agency paying market value to a whole team of players, while also spending considerably less.

Just not going to happen.

This line of thinking doesn't work. Teams stay in the lottery for YEARS and never get out. Hell, we did it, before stumbling into Derrick Rose.

There is nothing wrong with being a top 5 team in the NBA for 5-10 years. Each year you have a shot to win a series here or there that gets you to the big series.

We can have the flexibility to land a big free agent, and NOT turn our best players into lottery tickets. Again, Deng IS a tradable asset. If his salary is ever in the way of getting a top 10 player, it CAN and WILL be moved.

It's not one or the other; it's not rebuild OR be flexible.

The Bulls should continue to make wise moves and stay on the path they are on. Build the team with the best mix of talent and flexibility.

If we hurt our winning percentage (which you all seem to want), we hurt our desirability. Players are willing to take less to play for a championship - we can't lose that.
Real GM Bulls Board: Step 2 - Anger
User avatar
LoveDaBoo
RealGM
Posts: 17,079
And1: 1,962
Joined: Jun 12, 2009
     

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#95 » by LoveDaBoo » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:33 pm

coldfish wrote:
BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:
DuckIII wrote:I wish I wasn't in my car so I could blast this.

Same here man.

Cosidering I'm stopped by this train, let me quickly respond.

For those criticizing the FO, what exactly was your TITLE-WINNING 2012/2013 plan with your franchise player coming off a torn ACL?

Nobody specifically answers that question on this board.


Cut brewer.
Cut watson
Sign Hinrich
Trade Korver + future first for Mayo
Retain Asik

Hope to tread water until Rose gets back in January then catch fire with
Rose / Hinrich
Mayo / Hinrich / Rip
Deng / Rip / Butler
Boozer / Gibson
Noah / Asik

That team could win a title next year depending on how well Rose responds.

No, it couldn't.
Wingy
RealGM
Posts: 16,135
And1: 7,084
Joined: Feb 15, 2007

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#96 » by Wingy » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:36 pm

Concept Coop wrote:To those who are piling on the Bulls, know this:

We want the Bulls to be what the Nets are: Owner willing to pay the tax, desirable destination for a top 10 player.

Well, the Nets are willing to pay the tax - as much as it takes. And Dwight wants to go there. So - what's the hold up? They don't have the cap space. It doesn't matter whose money it is, or whether they are willing to spend it. That's not all it takes anymore.

You can't dig yourself these holes with negative contracts. The Bulls are wise to start ridding themselves of them and not giving them out.


I thought the hold up was that NJ's trade offer was pure **** and Orlando was willing to take their chances elsewhere, but maybe that's just me.
User avatar
RoseTheFuture22
Veteran
Posts: 2,947
And1: 404
Joined: Dec 16, 2008

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#97 » by RoseTheFuture22 » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:38 pm

Concept Coop wrote:
Mech Engineer wrote:To wait for Mirotic or Kevin Love dream scenario( it is a lot of alignment) is really crazy.
Everybody knows you don't make hasty decisions. The biggest issue is don't hesitate to spend whichever the Bulls can when they have Rose healthy and optimize his complementary cast every year.

The Heat lucked into being a dynasty. We don't have the luxary of being bad enough to build the way OKC did; hell, we've gone that route and it didn't work. The Lakers got very lucky with Kobe and Bynum, and were gifted Gasol.

Those are not options for us to pursue. They are either going to happen by a future HOF deciding to come here, or they won't. You can't really plan for that.

Throwing money around isn't going to do anyone any good. Especially this season.

Absolutely right, Miami should NOT be a model for building a championship team. What we're trying to basically do right now is be the Spurs(post-Robinson) and luck into getting stars late in the draft like Tony and Manu. In order to get our true 2nd option we should really do it through trade, the draft and free agency can be used to find a 3rd option.
User avatar
Concept Coop
Analyst
Posts: 3,040
And1: 608
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#98 » by Concept Coop » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:39 pm

Wingy wrote:Why would we be doing a sign and trade? Do you mean trade and extend?


A trade and extend is a sign and trade. I was using Love as an example, if he pulled a Dwight and demanded out.

Whether it is a sign and trade or simply a trade, again, if you don't have the cap space, you can't make the trade.
Real GM Bulls Board: Step 2 - Anger
User avatar
Concept Coop
Analyst
Posts: 3,040
And1: 608
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#99 » by Concept Coop » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:41 pm

Wingy wrote:
Concept Coop wrote:To those who are piling on the Bulls, know this:

We want the Bulls to be what the Nets are: Owner willing to pay the tax, desirable destination for a top 10 player.

Well, the Nets are willing to pay the tax - as much as it takes. And Dwight wants to go there. So - what's the hold up? They don't have the cap space. It doesn't matter whose money it is, or whether they are willing to spend it. That's not all it takes anymore.

You can't dig yourself these holes with negative contracts. The Bulls are wise to start ridding themselves of them and not giving them out.


I thought the hold up was that NJ's trade offer was pure **** and Orlando was willing to take their chances elsewhere, but maybe that's just me.

In the past, Orlando would have had to settle for pure ****. Now, they have leverage. If Dwight wants to go to a team that doesn't have the cap to sign him outright - Orlando has to like what it gets in return. Otherwise, Dwight can sign with his team for the MLE, which will never happen.

People want us to be the Nets, but what are the Nets, really? The owner can have all the money in the world and be willing to spend it, but the NBA has guidelines in which a team can spend money.
Real GM Bulls Board: Step 2 - Anger
Wingy
RealGM
Posts: 16,135
And1: 7,084
Joined: Feb 15, 2007

Re: Doug on "2014 Plan" 

Post#100 » by Wingy » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:44 pm

Concept Coop wrote:
Wingy wrote:Why would we be doing a sign and trade? Do you mean trade and extend?


A trade and extend is a sign and trade. I was using Love as an example, if he pulled a Dwight and demanded out.

Whether it is a sign and trade or simply a trade, again, if you don't have the cap space, you can't make the trade.


I'm probably just looking at it wrong, but I see sign/trade as something that's always occurred after the player has already hit the open market...whereas a trade and extend occurred while they still had time on their deal (ie - trade deadline trade).

Again, I could be offbase, but I'm talking trade before they actually expire so you have to give salary back to get said star and I don't understand why they'd dislike Omer since he's just a walking expiring contract at that point in there to match salary in a trade.

Return to Chicago Bulls