Blazers, Bulls Discussed Aldridge For Noah During Offseason

[DanTown8587]

There is a VAST difference between Kevin Love and LaMarcus Aldridge. The raw stats would say there isn't but the fact the PER is over 5 points apart (27.9 v 22.7) and the TS is miles apart (.589 for Love, .515 for Aldridge) explains the gulf.

Really, Aldridge is a very good volume scorer and there is of course good value in that at the PF spot. My only point on Aldridge is that trading Noah, Butler (at the time), and then limiting Mirotic's value is basically an all-in move. Lets say Derrick isn't hurt, you're really telling me that

Rose/Hinrich
Snell
Deng/Dunleavy
Boozer/Gibson
Aldridge

Is a title winner? That team can't guard the Pacers now and against Miami, you're getting into a scoring battle with two guys are aren't efficient against three who are. You can't really let Deng walk, you're capped out, you have limited assets to get any sort of secondary ball handler.

I just don't see how going from Boozer to Aldridge makes up for the fact that you don't have a C and you're paying 40 million to guys at the PF/C spot and none of them are efficient scorers.

I'm a huge believer in getting the best player from a trade and worrying about the rest later. You're right, the Bulls probably wouldn't have won a championship with the team above. Then again, they probably wouldn't have won a championship with the team before that either.

Mirotic's value isn't limited necessarily. He could play off the bench behind Aldridge and you could also play them together in a high-scoring lineup. There would have been options, but again that's stuff you figure out later after you get the best player.

I normally agree with that when you're talking about high level players like Love or Anthony but not in the case of a guy like Aldridge. At his best, Aldridge is a volume scoring PF who isn't that remarkably efficient. The problem I always had with getting Aldridge was now your team is severely limited.

Let's say you do that deal, do you let Deng walk? If you do, you don't really have that much cap space and if you don't, you're tied into a team of Aldridge, Deng, and Rose. The Bulls getting Aldridge to replace Boozer makes a ton of sense but to replace Noah? What's the identity of that team?

And of course Mirotic's value is limited, he's not coming to sign here to backup Aldridge, at that point, he'll just stay in Europe.

This "figure it out later" idea is great when you're getting something that is hard to find on the market, but tell me again why getting Aldridge isn't similar to the time the Bulls acquired Carlos Boozer?

[Tenchi Ryu]

Hindsight man....

Excuse me for a moment.




Guilty as sin as thinking Noah was untouchable. Hell I thought him Jimmy and Taj were. Nowadays?

Don't let the door hit ya on the way out

[WinCity]

We're the antithesis of Miami and it clearly shows in the standings as well. You have to take calculated risks. Much like this board though, the front office refuses to do so unless it is so lopsided that they don't have to explain themselves to the media.

How so?

We did the exact same thing they did in 2010. We took a calculated risk. They won the stakes of getting the best player in the game, we lost.

Taking a punt on Beasley & Oden doesn't mean they're the antithesis of the Bulls. It's also a lot more easier to be risk adverse when you have 2 rings to fall back on.

Didn't they also shed salary by amnestying Miller to save on the luxury tax?

I agree. However, I do think we need to change our approach and embrace becoming the antithesis to MIA in terms of team building. Lets face it: CHICAGO is not a desirable destination. As much as we might love the city the cold is definitely an issue, the taxes dont help and perhaps the shadow of MJ is more than a myth. Also, we know players have taken issue with the sundering of the MJ era dynasty. All in all we are not going to attract the marquee established talent in free agency/trade demand situations. So, I think we should take embrace the small market team building concept i.e. build through the draft via our picks and trading for other teams under valued picks. After all that is our best strength anyway. We draft well. So like the Spurs and OKC look to the draft for talent acquisition. This is also how we built the MJ dynasty (MJ, Pip, Grant, Kukoc) and the current core of our team (Rose, Noah, Deng). Play to your strengths not your weaknesses.

[Rerisen]

The whole Aldridge discussion has little relevancy without talking about Asik. Keeping Omer was the move, well argued for at the time for precisely this kind of scenario, that would have made this debate relevant. Without him, it would have just been plugging one hole to open another one.

[DanTown8587]

The whole Aldridge discussion has little relevancy without talking about Asik. Keeping Omer was the move, well argued for at the time for precisely this kind of scenario, that would have made this debate relevant. Without him, it would have just been plugging one hole to open another one.

I'll let you go figure out what the team's payroll would like with Omer on it, then realize how crazy that sounds to actually say the Bulls should have kept him.

[WinCity]

The whole Aldridge discussion has little relevancy without talking about Asik. Keeping Omer was the move, well argued for at the time for precisely this kind of scenario, that would have made this debate relevant. Without him, it would have just been plugging one hole to open another one.

I agree. Noted the same earlier in this thread. If we had kept Omer we could have been aggressive in the trade market instead of passive. Obviously, you dont resign Omer to such a contract to keep him as a backup but to consolidate along with other assets into a star/second option. Gar's bluster about hitting a "homerun" smacks of total malarkey when you consider the squandering of assets like Omer, the trade exceptions, and now possibly Deng. Frankly, between this "homerun" nonsense and allowing the bench mob to dissolve I have zero confidence or trust in Gar. Frankly, the man is liar. At least Pax never promised more than he could deliver.

[Rerisen]

The whole Aldridge discussion has little relevancy without talking about Asik. Keeping Omer was the move, well argued for at the time for precisely this kind of scenario, that would have made this debate relevant. Without him, it would have just been plugging one hole to open another one.

I'll let you go figure out what the team's payroll would like with Omer on it, then realize how crazy that sounds to actually say the Bulls should have kept him.

Is Miami's payroll right now 'crazy'? How about Dallas when they won in 2011.

[kodo]

LMA has always suffered from perception. He wasn't considered a superstar, even by Portland, which makes no sense from a production standpoint.

PPG & PER:

LMA: 22.5 ppg 22.7 PER
Wade: 19.6 ppg 22.6 PER
Bosh: 14.8 ppg 19.3 PER
Westbrook: 21.6 ppg 21.4 PER
Griffin: 20.9 ppg 20.7 PER
Dwight: 18.7 ppg 23.0 PER

While not a 1A championship star like Lebron or MVP Rose, he's still more than capable of being that 2nd star comparable to all the other 2nd stars of contending teams.

And being that 2nd star is something nobody else on this team, including Noah, have any chance of becoming.

Previous to this year he was the most underrated player in this league. I'm glad he's finally getting some well deserved recognition.

[Rerisen]

If people are going to rate Aldridge only by efficiency then they should be rolling around on the floor laughing at paying Deng 12 to 14 million. But reality is some player's seem to impact their team's winning and losing a lot more than just certain raw stats show. Deng is one of them and so is Aldridge for several years running now.

Of course if you look at PER, Aldridge is already in the NBA elite tier by that as well.

[Indomitable]

Yes - we had about 400 pages worth of discussion on this.

Is there a point to this thread?

[kingkirk]

I agree. However, I do think we need to change our approach and embrace becoming the antithesis to MIA in terms of team building. Lets face it: CHICAGO is not a desirable destination. As much as we might love the city the cold is definitely an issue, the taxes dont help and perhaps the shadow of MJ is more than a myth. Also, we know players have taken issue with the sundering of the MJ era dynasty. All in all we are not going to attract the marquee established talent in free agency/trade demand situations. So, I think we should take embrace the small market team building concept i.e. build through the draft via our picks and trading for other teams under valued picks. After all that is our best strength anyway. We draft well. So like the Spurs and OKC look to the draft for talent acquisition. This is also how we built the MJ dynasty (MJ, Pip, Grant, Kukoc) and the current core of our team (Rose, Noah, Deng). Play to your strengths not your weaknesses.

Agreed, and to be fair, i think this is the path we are going this off season when we look to add Mirotic, our pick and most likely the Cat's pick.

Whilst its also a trend to say we don't trade well, i beg to differ. Rightfully so, you pointed that we have not been good at trading for or signing established stars.

My question is, how many teams are actually good/great at this?

We have been really good at trading for picks which we turn into talent. Our last 4-5 seasons has been based around this and the Bulls rising back up the NBA ranks is thanks to trading for picks which would later become Deng, Noah, Taj, Asik.

We are doing that again by trading for Mirotic & the Cat's pick.

Going back to your point, we haven't been great at trading for established guys and we haven't been willing to give up a collective of our assets that we developed for these noted players.

Having said all this, if we're good at bringing in young talent, which is our forte, why do the deal with Portland that likely would have included 2 of Mirotic, Cat's Pick or Butler?

That would go against our M.O and supposed strengths (not saying you were suggesting that, just a general comment).

[kingkirk]

Yes - we had about 400 pages worth of discussion on this.

Is there a point to this thread?

I dare say there is more of a point to this thread than there is this comment. Please do not derail this thread any further.

[WinCity]

I agree. However, I do think we need to change our approach and embrace becoming the antithesis to MIA in terms of team building. Lets face it: CHICAGO is not a desirable destination. As much as we might love the city the cold is definitely an issue, the taxes dont help and perhaps the shadow of MJ is more than a myth. Also, we know players have taken issue with the sundering of the MJ era dynasty. All in all we are not going to attract the marquee established talent in free agency/trade demand situations. So, I think we should take embrace the small market team building concept i.e. build through the draft via our picks and trading for other teams under valued picks. After all that is our best strength anyway. We draft well. So like the Spurs and OKC look to the draft for talent acquisition. This is also how we built the MJ dynasty (MJ, Pip, Grant, Kukoc) and the current core of our team (Rose, Noah, Deng). Play to your strengths not your weaknesses.

Agreed, and to be fair, i think this is the path we are going this off season when we look to add Mirotic, our pick and most likely the Cat's pick.

Whilst its also a trend to say we don't trade well, i beg to differ. Rightfully so, you pointed that we have not been good at trading for or signing established stars.

My question is, how many teams are actually good/great at this?

We have been really good at trading for picks which we turn into talent. Our last 4-5 seasons has been based around this and the Bulls rising back up the NBA ranks is thanks to trading for picks which would later become Deng, Noah, Taj, Asik.

We are doing that again by trading for Mirotic & the Cat's pick.

Going back to your point, we haven't been great at trading for established guys and we haven't been willing to give up a collective of our assets that we developed for these noted players.

Having said all this, if we're good at bringing in young talent, which is our forte, why do the deal with Portland that likely would have included 2 of Mirotic, Cat's Pick or Butler?

That would go against our M.O and supposed strengths (not saying you were suggesting that, just a general comment).

Well let me clarify the 2 isssues I think plague this team. First, in free agency I think the Bulls are hurt by environmental issues beyond their control i.e. cold weather and taxes, but also issues that came about due to management mistakes i.e. tearing apart the MJ dynasty, and rightly or wrongly the cheap label, which I think they are moving towards nullifying now as tax payers.

However, regarding trading I think their is a tendency withing management to favor our guys, guys we scouted and have observed closely, internally. I think we trust our own talent base too much. I think we have been to conservative and unwilling to risk what we have even if it means consolidating talent. Then of course this inevitably leads to losing our talent base as we simply cant keep all those pieces here e.g. Omer, BG, and trade exceptions. We see our talent, know we have something good, perhaps not great but good, and think "why risk a move? If we lose this guy or this asset its not so bad A bundling assets and making a bad move."

In regards to drafting I think we should simply look to be more aggressive there. Trade into the draft. Instead of a consolidation move for established talent consolidate for a high lotto pick and if that's not there look for a Paul George or Bynum later in the draft who can be developed. Forget about signing big names or making big trades. Gar's promise of a "homerun" move proved to be foolish at best, or even a lie at worst, given this team has never been willing to make moves like that. Basically I dont want to see this team cling to a guy like Deng if at the deadline we cant reach sign him to terms we like, or at least agree in principal. Move him and Booz and invest in the draft by not just tanking for our pick but acquiring some more picks, even late 1sts can be useful given our talent scouting prowess. Like you I think our windows starts in 2 seasons. Thats 2 seasons to develop these young players and get in gear just as MIA's window is closing. Paul George was playing at an all star level in his 3rd year. He reached superstar level in his fourth. This is a deep draft and even if we cant get lucky enough to get a high pick maybe a Paul George is there for us. If he is in this draft I trust GarPax to capitalize. I dont trust in GarPax to capitalize on an opportunity to acquire KLove, or Durant if/when they become available.

[DanChee33]

Not sure where you stood (I think the same as me) but I leaned towards moving Noah for Aldridge. I've always felt if you could get a good offensive talent for Noah you do it.

I leaned towards wanting to do a Aldridge-for-Noah swap 1/1. I just remember there was a sizeable group saying Noah was a better player than Aldridge and wondering if Aldridge would even be that much of an upgrade over Boozer. In general, the thread criminally underrated Aldridge.

Fast forward to present day and Aldridge is an MVP candidate for a 23-5 Blazers squad.

And before you leaned towards wanting to do a Aldridge-for-Noah swap 1/1, I wanted the FO sign Asik. I explained the reason: with this sign we had our starting C in Asik, and now we could do a deal centered around Noah. Your answer was "no, Asik is just a bench player, we shouldn't give that money for him. Noah is better, etc.".

Surprise, surprise.

[kingkirk]

I think we showed Asik more than fair value for his role on this team. We offered him 4 years and 25 million i believe.

For a guy who just came of a season where he gave us 3 points & 5 boards in 15 minutes, that would have made him a very rich back up center.

How many back up centers in this league are paid 6.25 million annually and are actually worth that coin? Omer isn't even worth the 8 million he is getting right now on this season's production.

Then, on top of that, if we were to match the Rockets offer and pay him 15 million next season, with Aldridge making 16 himself and Rose close to 19, this team is extremely limited.

What happens to Deng? Taj?

I don't think its as simple as saying we should have resigned Asik, looked to have moved Noah for a 4 like LaMarcus then making a run for it.

[DanTown8587]

The whole Aldridge discussion has little relevancy without talking about Asik. Keeping Omer was the move, well argued for at the time for precisely this kind of scenario, that would have made this debate relevant. Without him, it would have just been plugging one hole to open another one.

I'll let you go figure out what the team's payroll would like with Omer on it, then realize how crazy that sounds to actually say the Bulls should have kept him.

Is Miami's payroll right now 'crazy'? How about Dallas when they won in 2011.

The Bulls are paying the tax for the second year in a row and they're paying it to the tune of $90 million in cash so yes, the Bulls are already paying a commensurate amount of luxury tax as those two teams. If the Bulls had kept Omer, they'd have a higher payroll than Miami currently AND they'd still be without a two guard who can create.

And this summer, you'd have no cap space meaning at all when you amnestied Boozer to match Omer's cap spike so the Bulls would be in the tough spot of competing for a title or letting Luol walk for free.

[Rerisen]

Once Boozer was amnestied there would be no bad contracts on the team. Boozer and Noah currently make on average more money combined than Omer and Aldridge would make. Except for Omer's balloon year, in which even in that one, they would only make 2 million more than Boozer and Noah combined next year. 2 Million is about the difference between Kirk Hinrich and CJ Watson, or Mike Dunleavy and Anthony Morrow, all inconsequential differences as far as impact. But 4m less to the payroll.

How the Bulls could not build a financially manageable team without Noah and Boozer, but with Omer and LaMarcus instead would be puzzling to me. Omer would then be resigned after his 15m year to a more normal contract, of course based on the team's success and his own individual play to that point.

We knew that if the Bulls were to have resigned Omer they would have 3 years to make a move with either Noah or Omer or be virtually guaranteed to lose Deng, and of course amnesty Boozer. But Noah for Aldridge would have been that move that set up the new core of the team.

The rest of the team could and would be different if the Bulls resigned Asik, obviously Hinrich would never even be here. Mirotic likely would not be in the plans, and/or would be traded. Other choices would have to be made, about whether to keep Gibson as a backup to both big positions, of that wasn't deemed viable or worthy, trading him for an equivalent priced wing, say such as an Afflalo or Wes Mathews type.

Even without having re-signed Asik, the Bulls do not have enough flexibility to compete talent wise with Miami. The only way to do that was by keeping assets on board, which the Bulls could control via having their rights, and still having enough talent to trade for a star without opening up another huge hole. If Mirotic comes next year, it really won't matter that much if Deng is re-signed or not, as to how much we can add to the team. In fact, if he's not re-signed the team is likely to get worse despite opening up a small window of flexibility, but not one nearly big enough to close the talent gap, or even to replace what is lost in Deng. Unless it is done via trading Deng right now and tanking.

The Bulls are in a top 3 US market and among the most profitable NBA franchises, if not the most profitable. If they paid out 15m more in any given year, they would still likely be among the more profitable. "Pay for a winner" in the guise of keeping a legit contender together, was tested and failed once with Omer, and it will be tested again next year with Deng. Stay tuned for the result. If 'winner' only means you win the title *first*, instead of just being a legit contender, then its pretty much a self defeating prophecy that will never come about.

[Rerisen]

Then, on top of that, if we were to match the Rockets offer and pay him 15 million next season, with Aldridge making 16 himself and Rose close to 19, this team is extremely limited.

What happens to Deng? Taj?

It's not like Omer was making 15m every year.

Bulls could have amnestied Boozer prior to this year if they had a replacement like LMA. LaMarcus trade rumors started well before the point that decision would have to have been made. At that point Omer would only be making 5m.

I think we could very well have been under lux tax, resetting the repeater in that scenario. Especially if we never overpaid Hinrich.

People act now like its crazy the Bulls would ever have matched. Apparently seeming to forget that there were several reports that the Bulls actually would match for a time, and no one batted an eyelash at the time as if that was some totally untenable crazy position. Here is a quote from Doug's blog at the time:

However, the latest word from Chris Sheridan is that the Bulls will match Asik. Other reports after this have sprung up with league sources saying they think the Bulls will match Asik as well.

What's interesting about this is that Aggrey Sam of CSN discussed the opposite a few days ago. Other local beat reporters have said the Bulls front office is torn on the issue. KC Johnson reported the other sources saying the Bulls would match but fell short of saying he aggrees with them.

[Ice Man]

Fast forward to present day and Aldridge is an MVP candidate for a 23-5 Blazers squad.

Kevin Love is twice the player. Such is Minnesota, Garnett faced the same issue.

[DanChee33]

How many back up centers in this league are paid 6.25 million annually and are actually worth that coin? Omer isn't even worth the 8 million he is getting right now on this season's production.

Behind Howard? And what about the season before?

I was always saying that Omer isn't a back up center. Last season he showed I'm right. I said FO should sign him and trade Noah (and assets if necessary) for a 2nd option. Noah was/is our best trade asset to get a player we could contend with. In almost every rumour Noah is the player the other team asks. If we had Asik - a starter quality center - we could make a deal using Noah without having a hole at C.

And I never said Omer is better than Noah. Noah is superior, but he has trade value we had to use to build a better team. And Omer could be a good starting C for us.
We're not the Lakers, we have to give something to get something.

And +1 everything Rerisen said.