Simmons: Reinsdorf Runs Bulls Like Small Market Team

[coldfish]

How are the Lakers and Knicks doing running their teams like there are no limitations? Better yet, see if they keep running them that way under the new CBA.

There was a study on spending versus winning. Can't find the link. The Knicks have been just awful. If you taken them out, there is a strong correlation between spending and winning + playoff performance. As Doug just noted, including the Lakers.

to paraphrase a currently running commercial, "The new CBA changed EVERYTHING". If you are going to throw money around, you damn well better pick the right players, and the right mix of players. Making one bad choice can tie your hands for years to come. Let's hope that Melo doesn't turn out to be that bad choice for the Bulls.

Oh, I agree with you there on multiple counts. Look at the rosters of San Antonio, Indiana and Miami. You don't see Boozer like players getting $17M. You don't see teams paying Andrew Bynum $6M to not play. You don't see $20M going to a guy not playing.

And as much as I worry about Melo at $20M, I think that Rose at $20M is your bigger risk at this point. There really isn't much point in beating that dead horse more but at times it seems that people forget just how damaging it is to a team to pay a guy $20M to not play.

[Stratmaster]

Lol... and you guys are insinuating that what he said wasn't correct? We 100% do not run like we are the third biggest market. Who are we trying to kid here?

How are the Lakers and Knicks doing running their teams like there are no limitations? Better yet, see if they keep running them that way under the new CBA.

Your response is not really relevant. I am surprised you mentioned the Lakers though. One bad year makes us run better I guess.

The Bulls have had a better record than the Lakers for 4 straight seasons managing themselves like a "small market team"

[organix85]

How are the Lakers and Knicks doing running their teams like there are no limitations? Better yet, see if they keep running them that way under the new CBA.

Your response is not really relevant. I am surprised you mentioned the Lakers though. One bad year makes us run better I guess.

The Bulls have had a better record than the Lakers for 4 straight seasons managing themselves like a "small market team"

And what is your point? Please explain to me how either of these (which are what Simmons said) are not true:

* Jerry is making big time profits
* We are not spending as much as we could be

[Stratmaster]

There was a study on spending versus winning. Can't find the link. The Knicks have been just awful. If you taken them out, there is a strong correlation between spending and winning + playoff performance. As Doug just noted, including the Lakers.

to paraphrase a currently running commercial, "The new CBA changed EVERYTHING". If you are going to throw money around, you damn well better pick the right players, and the right mix of players. Making one bad choice can tie your hands for years to come. Let's hope that Melo doesn't turn out to be that bad choice for the Bulls.

Oh, I agree with you there on multiple counts. Look at the rosters of San Antonio, Indiana and Miami. You don't see Boozer like players getting $17M. You don't see teams paying Andrew Bynum $6M to not play. You don't see $20M going to a guy not playing.

And as much as I worry about Melo at $20M, I think that Rose at $20M is your bigger risk at this point. There really isn't much point in beating that dead horse more but at times it seems that people forget just how damaging it is to a team to pay a guy $20M to not play.

I agree on Rose. The reason Melo scares me is we already have 20 mil sitting on Rose's shoulders. The bulls would be paying roughly 40 million for 2 roster spots. And i believe neither of the two players has ever won a conference finals series, much less a championship.

[Mech Engineer]

Arguably the four most successful franchises in the NBA today are San Antonio, Miami, Indiana, and Oklahoma City. How big of markets are they? Compare that to the three biggest markets in the NBA - Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York. Of the four teams in those markets, two didn't even make the playoffs and neither of the two playoff teams even made it to the Conference Finals.

What does "small market" even mean anymore? Is San Antonio a huge market? They don't even have an NFL team. How about Oklahoma City? One of them will make it the Finals. Maybe we should operate like a small market considering the league's most successful franchises are from small markets.

Simmons has become increasingly annoying.

The point is you try to combine the smarts of San Antonio with the big market spending ability of Chicago to have a clear advantage. You don't try to have OKC type spending in Chicago or New York type spending in OKC. When you supposedly have a San Antonio or OKC smart FO in a big market, you should be in a different tier. Only a few places can afford this luxury.

The fact that San Antonio is doing so well highlights the problems in NY and Chicago.

[Stratmaster]

Your response is not really relevant.

So it is irrelevant to refute the claim that the Bulls run like they are a small market team, which obviously refers they refuse to spend the gazillions of dollars they make as a big market team, by comparing their current level of success to the two largest market teams? Who have done the opposite?

No, cause you are assuming I think spending money foolishly is correct. What Simmons said is that we operate like the smaller market teams (i.e. not NYC and LA). That's true.

OK, I guess I took the comment to be a criticism in comparing the bulls to other large market teams. So you think he meant it as a compliment?

[Trm3]

We're getting mad at what Simmons said but he IS spot on...we seriously got rid of Kyle Korver to save $500,000...didn't want to re-sign Nate cause he'd cost too much and I'm pretty sure we'll let DJ go, cause he'll cost too much...we'll take care of our own, but when it comes to getting FA's or players we need..we are cheap until proven otherwise.

[Stratmaster]

Your response is not really relevant. I am surprised you mentioned the Lakers though. One bad year makes us run better I guess.

The Bulls have had a better record than the Lakers for 4 straight seasons managing themselves like a "small market team"

And what is your point? Please explain to me how either of these (which are what Simmons said) are not true:

* Jerry is making big time profits
* We are not spending as much as we could be

No, he is insinuating the Bulls are not spending as much as they SHOULD be. I am assuming. I mean not spending as much as you "could" be is not always a bad thing, and I assume we both agree he was being critical of the Bulls, not complimentary, correct? The bulls have spent their money in a much better fashion than the two bigger market teams. So why would anyone be critical of the Bulls as compared to other big market teams.

Geesh, I get that it is always cool to bash the front office. But I guess my question looking at it the way you are looking at my comments would be what the hell is his point?

[Betta Bulleavit]

Let me just say this first and foremost. F*** a Bill Simmons and a Charles Barkley. Those two spew more non sense than any two people that I know. They are great at making strong statements with weak foundations. To me, that's the worst type of commentary.

With that said, I don't think that anybody can look at how the Bulls are run and not come to the conclusion that the team is run like a business. I have never denied that. My position has always been that there is no problem with any organization being run like a business so long as the understanding is that winning is ultimately good for business. Has JR always thought like that? No. But I do think that he is wise enough to understand that you don't carry a 100 million dollar plus payroll for a team that the entire world knows isn't a serious contender.

I think that JR and GarPax's mindset is that we are one big chip and a role player or two away from being able to win it all. I believe that they did value Deng and had nothing but positive things to say about him. But at the same time, they also knew that having him here on a 13-14 per year contract wasn't going to be conducive to them acquiring that "big fish" type of player that was going to put us over the top. Therefore, re upping him long term made little sense if they main goal is to win.

As it pertains to guys like Korver, Nate and Omir, you could make a case that at least a couple of those guys should have been kept. Particularly Korver and Nate as Asik was offered a crazy deal by the Rockets that they haven't been able to unload to this day. But at the end of the day, these guys were role players. We didn't win with them and we haven't won without them. Are we really going to use those moves as examples of why the Bulls are "run like a small market team"? Seriously...

[Stratmaster]

We're getting mad at what Simmons said but he IS spot on...we seriously got rid of Kyle Korver to save $500,000...didn't want to re-sign Nate cause he'd cost too much and I'm pretty sure we'll let DJ go, cause he'll cost too much...we'll take care of our own, but when it comes to getting FA's or players we need..we are cheap until proven otherwise.

So the Bulls are a small market mentality because they wouldn't and/or won't pay 2 bench players who nobody else wanted? But they aren't a big market spending team for paying Rose 20 mil, Taj 9 mil, Boozer 16 mil, Deng whatever he was making, Noah his salray etc.

This board is crazy sometimes. We have whined for years about Boozer, Taj and Deng being overpaid. We have 20 mil being spent on a player who hasn't played in the playoffs for 3 straight seasons, and we whine about our front office being misers. Crazy. Batsh** crazy.

[Pnjguy]

Really disappointed in Simmons here. I honestly don't get where he's coming from. He either doesn't know the ramifications of the repeaters tax or he thinks Luol Deng is better than Carmelo Anthony and Kevin Love.

[Betta Bulleavit]

We're getting mad at what Simmons said but he IS spot on...we seriously got rid of Kyle Korver to save $500,000...didn't want to re-sign Nate cause he'd cost too much and I'm pretty sure we'll let DJ go, cause he'll cost too much...we'll take care of our own, but when it comes to getting FA's or players we need..we are cheap until proven otherwise.

So the Bulls are a small market mentality because they wouldn't and/or won't pay 2 bench players who nobody else wanted? But they aren't a big market spending team for paying Rose 20 mil, Taj 9 mil, Boozer 16 mil, Deng whatever he was making, Noah his salray etc.

This board is crazy sometimes. We have whined for years about Boozer, Taj and Deng being overpaid. We have 20 mil being spent on a player who hasn't played in the playoffs for 3 straight seasons, and we whine about our front office being misers. Crazy. Batsh** crazy.

I tried to And1 this 10 times but I couldn't.

But you're right. People tend to be very selective in the facts that they push when it comes to their own agenda. The Bulls have had no issues committing money to players that they felt were integral to the long term success of the team. A small market mindset would have used the contracts of Boozer, Rose, Deng and Noah as a reason as to why we had to pawn Taj off for cheap assets. But people don't want to see that.

[ptpablo]

Does anyone remember how funny and smart Simmons used to be many years ago when he just wrote the sportsguy column on espn.com page 2 I think it was called?

Seems like another lifetime. I swear he's become dumberer over time.

He is a guy I would like to sit and talk ball over a beer. I really enjoyed his stuff then.

Now I just read all of you, it is so much better.

[MAQ]

This guy is writing too much about the Bulls for my liking.

He is definitely running with us as his theme right now.

No doubt...And I can't really call this a Bulls hating agenda because he did pick us to win the title before the season.

[Red Larrivee]

Simmons is awful but he's not wrong here.

Sent from The HTC One Max using Tapatalk

[ChiTownNation]

We had the 4th highest payroll entering the season and didn't make cost cutting moves until after we knew rose was done. Check your facts Simmons.

http://blog.surepayroll.com/nba-payrolls-2013-2014/

The author of that may need to check his own facts... pretty sure we didn't spend 80 million this year.

This is entering the season. My point is Jerry wasn't being cheap this year until the Rose injury. Once that happened the front office had no choice but to avoid the repeater tax to give us more Summer flexibility. Nobody is saying the Clippers are operating like a small market team when they spent less than the Bulls this year even with the cost cutting the Bulls did. I actually think it can be argued that the Bulls have the most tradable "assets" (2 1sts, Mirotic, Gibson, Butler, future 1sts) of any contending team (aside from maybe GS), which to me sounds more like a smart team than a cheap one.

[sonny]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g12tzdqCRHM[/youtube]

Like what Doc said, Simmons is an idiot.

Was Bill lying though?

[sonny]

Arguably the four most successful franchises in the NBA today are San Antonio, Miami, Indiana, and Oklahoma City. How big of markets are they?

And OKC traded a top 15 player for financial reasons.

[Notbeat]

Breaking news from Bill Simmons: The weather in Chicago. It's so cold. But a city like...hmmm Boston? The weather there is perfect for a guy like Kevin Love to thrive and win championships.

[MAQ]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g12tzdqCRHM[/youtube]

Like what Doc said, Simmons is an idiot.

Was Bill lying though?

That's exactly what I thought to myself when I saw it live, and exactly what I thought when I watched the youtube clip here a year later. Bill said nothing wrong in this statement.