Doug on "2014 Plan"

[mccluskey]

The other issue with completely bottoming out (i.e. trading Deng and Noah for rookies) is that it doesn't work because you are no longer an attractive destination. A true #2 is likely not going to want to come to the Bulls if they are not winning because they are playing a bunch of rookies. But with supporting players like Deng, Taj, and Noah, to go with Rose, that's a team where a really good scorer is going to be able to imagine the fit really easily. A guy who isn't a vapid moron like Dwight Howard is going to see that and want to join that team. A team where Noah and Deng (known quantities) have been exchanged for Barnes and Robinson is a team filled with question marks. And if one of those guys isn't the player you thought he could be (happens all the time, especially in the mid-lottery) then you've shot yourself in the foot pretty bad.

The Bulls have to serve two masters until they get that #2 guy: field a team that is as competitive as possible "so the guy will want to come here to make a dynasty" while also maintaining the financial flexibility to add him. And that means staying close to the cap line in 2014, so you can threaten a team with an outright signing then or next season if you have to.

Starting next year, megateams will not be able to take players back in sign and trade if they are above the apron. This is a really big deal. I can't stress this enough This is why Marc Cuban didn't just sign all his championship guys longterm and operate from an asset base of longterm contracts. So unless your core is completely in place (and the Bulls' is not, they need a true #2) exceeding the apron just cuts off one of the major avenues you have for getting better.

I know Doug is just painting scenarios, but to all the tank people...I just really have a serious issue with turning our already very good talent (Noah/Deng) into young guys that may never be anything. Every year there are Tyrus Thomas/Hasheem Thabeet whatevers....and I don't want to trade already good talent for one of those.

Maybe I'm naive, but I'd like to move our established talent for established talent. Moves like the Bogut-Monta trade don't know people's socks off, but they are the way I envision roster upheaval happening. Make moves, but don't undercut everything you've done.

these are a couple of excellent posts and I agree 100%.

[aaqubed]

As opposed to which alternative plan? doug's? What is the plan that doesn't depend on luck, variables, etc. I caution you to answer, because if you are aware of such a plan, you should not make it public and instead take it directly to an NBA front office and get yourself a sweet job.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Bulls should blow up the whole roster in order to tank and compete in 2014. I'm suggesting that the Bulls should either have gone for it in 2014 or looked to maximize their talent now.

What they have presently done is taken a "tread water" approach while slowly sinking. They have seen assets walk away without getting a return on them or gaining flexibility from them. In doing so, they are relying on the same "figure out the next move when it becomes available" approach they have in the past, but by waiting they have fewer assets to accomplish "the next move".

If they aggressively kept their assets or maximized their value then they could have treaded water in a better way or attempted to win now in a better way or if they really wanted to go to a cap space plan they could have done that in a better way. The way they choose didn't maximize their odds to win now or later or even play a true middle ground. It maximized profits and then has been wrapped up and resold (by ESPN at least) as a strategy of building for the future.

It isn't. They aren't making cost cutting moves now to build for the future, they're making them to cut costs.

I think it's more like, they're making cost cutting moves now because they don't believe that the moves that they could have made (that would cost lots of money) would actually help them win a title. If Rose were healthy, I'm not sure that they let Asik walk.

[Bruteque]

It's just that for the fans it is the championship and for Reinsdorf's team it is 1.5 rounds of playoffs.

What you mean is:
"Fans (I) know what to do to win a championship - ownership doesn't."

That is silly to me. The Bulls FO has done a great job and clearly wants to win a championship more than us fans do - it's just enjoyment for us. To them, it's much more.

No, what I mean is, the FO and the fans have different objectives.

For example, given the following two choices:

1) 95% chance for 1.5 rounds of playoffs, 1% chance for a championship.
2) 40% chance for 1.5 rounds of playoffs, 10% chance for a championship.

The FO had probably been instructed to take one route, while the fans would take the other route instead. If the FO was shooting for 2), they would probably do a better job than the fans collectively, but at this point it would be pretty safe to say that they obviously weren't.

[Concept Coop]

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Bulls should blow up the whole roster in order to tank and compete in 2014. I'm suggesting that the Bulls should either have gone for it in 2014 or looked to maximize their talent now.

What they have presently done is taken a "tread water" approach while slowly sinking. They have seen assets walk away without getting a return on them or gaining flexibility from them. In doing so, they are relying on the same "figure out the next move when it becomes available" approach they have in the past, but by waiting they have fewer assets to accomplish "the next move".

If they aggressively kept their assets or maximized their value then they could have treaded water in a better way or attempted to win now in a better way or if they really wanted to go to a cap space plan they could have done that in a better way. The way they choose didn't maximize their odds to win now or later or even play a true middle ground. It maximized profits and then has been wrapped up and resold (by ESPN at least) as a strategy of building for the future.

It isn't. They aren't making cost cutting moves now to build for the future, they're making them to cut costs.

No. They're making them to find the best blance of flexiblity and talent.

You're condeming them for not picking one of two polar opposite paths; it doesn't have to be one or the other, and it doesn't have to be today.

[BULLHITTER]

They aren't making cost cutting moves now to build for the future, they're making them to cut costs.

if costs are lowered, the hit from fans staying away is lessened as well.

but i've stated this but it bears repeating. the bulls formula/plan for winning a championship, irrespective of any players must absolutely be done under the LT. if they can accomplish this, they will pay to keep that team, and possibly future acquisitions to maintain it. i just think its their philosophy that its more important to keep a competitive product on the floor (regular playoff appearances), offer hope towards "winning a championship" and keep the business profitable. it's more than a game to JR. it can only be that to the fans, no matter how much knowledge of the salary cap/LT etc. one acquires.

[kyrv]

It's just that for the fans it is the championship and for Reinsdorf's team it is 1.5 rounds of playoffs.

What you mean is:
"Fans (I) know what to do to win a championship - ownership doesn't."

That is silly to me. The Bulls FO has done a great job and clearly wants to win a championship more than us fans do - it's just enjoyment for us. To them, it's much more.

No, what I mean is, the FO and the fans have different objectives.

For example, given the following two choices:

1) 95% chance for 1.5 rounds of playoffs, 1% chance for a championship.
2) 40% chance for 1.5 rounds of playoffs, 10% chance for a championship.

The FO had probably been instructed to take one route, while the fans would take the other route instead. If the FO was shooting for 2), they would probably do a better job than the fans collectively, but at this point it would be pretty safe to say that they obviously weren't.

Those aren't real choices, you are just totally making this up.

In comparison to the average NBA front office, collectively, fans are about 10% as smart as they think they are.

[Concept Coop]

No, what I mean is, the FO and the fans have different objectives.

For example, given the following two choices:

1) 95% chance for 1.5 rounds of playoffs, 1% chance for a championship.
2) 40% chance for 1.5 rounds of playoffs, 10% chance for a championship.

The FO had probably been instructed to take one route, while the fans would take the other route instead. If the FO was shooting for 2), they would probably do a better job than the fans collectively, but at this point it would be pretty safe to say that they obviously weren't.

Please, sir. Tell me what the front office could have done to improve our championship chances by 1,000%.

[DuckIII]

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Bulls should blow up the whole roster in order to tank and compete in 2014.

You absolutely suggested that as a superior plan to what they appear to be doing, which is one of the several things I dispute about your article.

I'm suggesting that the Bulls should either have gone for it in 2014 or looked to maximize their talent now.

Why the need for an extreme either way? What makes that necessarily better in any way than what is currently happening? It looks, to me, like the Bulls are going to blow next season, NOT decide today to waste Rose's next fully healthy season (until perhaps they know more, which was nycrich's point), and then STILL have significant flexibility in 2014. That strikes me as a perfectly reasonable approach to handling a two year window, during which (as I responded to coldfish) two trade deadlines, two NBA drafts, and two free agency periods will come and go.

What they have presently done is taken a "tread water" approach while slowly sinking. They have seen assets walk away without getting a return on them or gaining flexibility from them. In doing so, they are relying on the same "figure out the next move when it becomes available" approach they have in the past, but by waiting they have fewer assets to accomplish "the next move".

Do they still not have draft picks and multiple expiring contracts? Do they still not have Noah's highly desirable contract? Taj? The rights to Mirotic? The Charlotte pick? Deng's expiring deal not this year but next? The Bulls are silly with trade assets, and moveable ones, over the next two years.

If they aggressively kept their assets or maximized their value then they could have treaded water in a better way or attempted to win now in a better way or if they really wanted to go to a cap space plan they could have done that in a better way. The way they choose didn't maximize their odds to win now or later or even play a true middle ground. It maximized profits and then has been wrapped up and resold (by ESPN at least) as a strategy of building for the future.

It isn't. They aren't making cost cutting moves now to build for the future, they're making them to cut costs.

That's your narrative, consistent with your long held view of the FO. These aren't facts. Perhaps you should have written an article explaining how the Bulls moves this summer could have been better executed to maximize current success while preserving flexibility for 2014 success. Then we'd have some assertions of yours, based on proposed moves, to consider. As it stands, you've articulated why the blow it up yesterday plan is superior, and I don't think that argument withholds scrutiny.

What we know is that they threw in the towel for this year in part to save money, right or wrong. And we know we won't have Asik for next year. Outside of that, I don't see how we know more.

[kyrv]

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Bulls should blow up the whole roster in order to tank and compete in 2014. I'm suggesting that the Bulls should either have gone for it in 2014 or looked to maximize their talent now.

What they have presently done is taken a "tread water" approach while slowly sinking. They have seen assets walk away without getting a return on them or gaining flexibility from them. In doing so, they are relying on the same "figure out the next move when it becomes available" approach they have in the past, but by waiting they have fewer assets to accomplish "the next move".

If they aggressively kept their assets or maximized their value then they could have treaded water in a better way or attempted to win now in a better way or if they really wanted to go to a cap space plan they could have done that in a better way. The way they choose didn't maximize their odds to win now or later or even play a true middle ground. It maximized profits and then has been wrapped up and resold (by ESPN at least) as a strategy of building for the future.

It isn't. They aren't making cost cutting moves now to build for the future, they're making them to cut costs.

No. They're making them to find the best blance of flexiblity and talent.

You're condeming them for not picking one of two polar opposite paths; it doesn't have to be one or the other, and it doesn't have to be today.

Doug I think you are kind of deciding what their plan is and then stating it needed to be done now. That just doesn't seem likely. Instead of assuming they don't know what they are doing, I would assume we don't know exactly what the plan is, but if it's 2014, they are more than fine for now.

I like the discussion of alternate plans, but when we get into the territory of assuming we know better, when we don't, I have to pause.

Pure cap space is one tool, it's not the bullet. Having that leverage and being flexible are the main items, and while remaining really good.

[DuckIII]

You're condeming them for not picking one of two polar opposite paths; it doesn't have to be one or the other, and it doesn't have to be today.

Spot on.

[Ralphb07]

I don't think the Bulls trended water with the bench players they got. I think the Bulls looked at the new CBA and realized some of their players were overpaid. The Bulls came in to the summer knowing they would spend the MLE and BPE and felt they could get good players with those. Maybe the Bulls didn't go after a long term player via trade with the non guarantees, but none were really available.

I really like the position the Bulls are in. They added some nice players who I feel could serve as good bench guys in our championship run in Kirk, Belinelli and Butler. They received a TPE of 5 mil to use on acquiring someone down the road and have some nice chips coming their way in Nikola and the Cats pick.

[kyrv]

I don't think the Bulls trended water with the bench players they got. I think the Bulls looked at the new CBA and realized some of their players were overpaid. The Bulls came in to the summer knowing they would spend the MLE and BPE and felt they could get good players with those. Maybe the Bulls didn't go after a long term player via trade with the non guarantees, but none were really available.

I really like the position the Bulls are in. They added some nice players who I feel could serve as good bench guys in our championship run in Kirk, Belinelli and Butler. They received a TPE of 5 mil to use on acquiring someone down the road and have some nice chips coming their way in Nikola and the Cats pick.

We've had many great posts since the new cba about how money needs to be divided up, and how the Bulls have (er, had) the old cba set up. I don't recall anyone disagreeing with this, it was pretty straight forward. Then when the Bulls improved the structure, it suddenly became a problem.

I don't think the Bulls are giving in this season. The Asik thing is painful and was a lose-lose for sure, that's the big loss, although again this board is incredibly split on him anyway.

I feel they are in trouble if they get more injuries, but superior depth like they had is incredibly hard to get and keep long term under the new cba.

And, I guess GarPax didn't fall in love with his role players after all.

[ChicagoStrong]

Then when the Bulls improved the structure, it suddenly became a problem.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Ralphb07]

Doug I think you are kind of deciding what their plan is and then stating it needed to be done now. That just doesn't seem likely. Instead of assuming they don't know what they are doing, I would assume we don't know exactly what the plan is, but if it's 2014, they are more than fine for now.

I like the discussion of alternate plans, but when we get into the territory of assuming we know better, when we don't, I have to pause.

Pure cap space is one tool, it's not the bullet. Having that leverage and being flexible are the main items, and while remaining really good.

KyRV

I think Buffalo is spot on and I think everyone should really read everything he has written in this thread. As a side note I enjoy Buffalo's post a lot. I actually go looking for stuff he writes. He has a great mind....

Once people get away from who we lost and actually just look at this summer of who we got, they will see that this team with Rose is still very competitive but also has flexibility going forward. Gibson on his new deal will still be an asset. The cats pick, Nikola and even the TPE of 5 mil are all assets.

I'm not sure if people listen to Gar on Bulls.com yesterday but there is a 5 minute interview and it was a good listen.

[DanTown8587]

I don't think the Bulls trended water with the bench players they got. I think the Bulls looked at the new CBA and realized some of their players were overpaid. The Bulls came in to the summer knowing they would spend the MLE and BPE and felt they could get good players with those. Maybe the Bulls didn't go after a long term player via trade with the non guarantees, but none were really available.

I really like the position the Bulls are in. They added some nice players who I feel could serve as good bench guys in our championship run in Kirk, Belinelli and Butler. They received a TPE of 5 mil to use on acquiring someone down the road and have some nice chips coming their way in Nikola and the Cats pick.

That's wrong.

If the Bulls were smart, they would have traded Watson+cash to a cap team for a future 2nd, Brewer+cash to a cap team for a future 2nd and done the Korver deal. Then acquire Marco and Kirk with their TPE, then acquire Mayo via TPE to a long term deal. THEN they could have kept Asik. And STILL have their tax payer MLE.

Rose/Hinrich/Teague
Hamilton/Mayo/Belinelli
Deng/Butler/Radmanovic
Boozer/Gibson
Noah/Asik/Mohammed

All that team took was the financial ability to do it. I can see the argument to letting Omer walk due to the cost. But they could have added every single player they've added just by being creative.

[Concept Coop]

That's wrong.

If the Bulls were smart, they would have...

Green font?

[KissedByaRose1]

I'm all for future flexibility but keeping Brewer, Korver, and Watson and then using the MMLE on a SG would still give us a ton of options going forward and we would be a much better team this season as well.

Even letting Asik walk if Rose comes back and that team catches a break or two they could possibly win a title. We got clear downgrades across the board when we didn't necessarily have to if the goal was to have capspace for 2014.

This offseason has shown our owners true colors more than any others before it.

[DanTown8587]

That's wrong.

If the Bulls were smart, they would have...

Green font?

I didn't advocate that plan. But to sit here and say they had to make choices on who they got is wrong. They COULD have kept Omer and added the others, they choose not to. I wouldn't have kept Omer either.

I certainly would have traded Brewer, Watson and Korver for TPE and i feel the only reason they did with Korver was the cap hit.

[DuckIII]

I'm all for future flexibility but keeping Brewer, Korver, and Watson and then using the MMLE on a SG would still give us a ton of options going forward and we would be a much better team this season as well.

Even letting Asik walk if Rose comes back and that team catches a break or two they could possibly win a title. We got clear downgrades across the board when we didn't necessarily have to if the goal was to have capspace for 2014.

This offseason has shown our owners true colors more than any others before it.

Rightly or wrongly (I tend to agree with Transplant, in that its wrongly), the Bulls obviously concluded that this year was a lost year. That is the only definitive takeaway there is, in my opinion.

I don't like it. But given that this is obviously their view, and that I have to accept it, I'm having a hard time being too critical of how they are approaching things going forward (that being staying flexible while preserving the ability to put together a contender in Rose's next full season, rather than deciding, today, to sacrifice that season as well).

[Concept Coop]

This offseason has shown our owners true colors more than any others before it.

Jerry said he would pay for a winner. Next year, we won't be a contender. We've learned nothing about the ownership that we didn't already know.