Simmons: Reinsdorf Runs Bulls Like Small Market Team

[musiqsoulchild]

It's interesting to me that about 60% of the board shares that same opinion that the Bulls are run like a small market team, but that when Simmons says it everyone calls foul and yells conspiracy!

I came in here to post this very thing....

60% of this board vs. Simmons though....there should be some sort of demarcation between how an analyst thinks vs. a rabid fan of the game.

Simmons is hoping for just that....the 60-70% of the fans that will create the traffic for his articles.

[Peelboy]

Re: Korver/Asik

Rose was actually expected back before the end of 2013, apparently by March via some rumors.

Yet Jerry also was one of the guys that was ok with Rose sitting out the whole year, in fact, almost seeming to endorse it with his comments about MJ.

You have to wonder if Rose missing the year was really all decided at the very top before the season when Korver and Asik were lost.

We always say they were let go because Rose got hurt, but Rose was expected to be there before the playoffs based just on the medical timetable and words from Gar, Pax, & Thibs - thus if he did come back, we could have used Kyle and Omer.

So, was Jerry the one that scuttled the season, and in doing so, green lighted Rose's super cautious comeback, realizing they had decided the team was not going for it long before? And then que Reggie's rant in response. Reggie never initially wanted his brother to miss the season, in fact, said he definitely wasn't the day after the surgery.

Makes you think.

I don't disagree with anything you say here, just want to add that Rose was expected back but given the lateness of his expected return, IIRC there was significant question about whether the Bulls would be playoff contenders, plus other questions about how effective he'd be in his first few months back (i.e. the stretch run and the playoffs). So in a question of "tying up financial assets in the hopes that we make the playoffs and Rose is good enough quickly enough to make us a real contender" v "maximizing flexibility for the real contending year of 2013-14," there was a lot that could make one lean towards the latter.

Regardless there certainly was enough doubt to dispel the "these moves are made because Bulls are cheap and don't care about winning unless it comes cheap" claim.

[Stratmaster]

The last one being 4 seasons ago.

In a world of perfect parity, you'd win a title once every 30 years, so the Lakers winning four years ago hasn't exactly been a poor achievement, five titles in the past 13 years sets the up to have won their allotment of titles for the next 150 years.

the financial climate in the NBA is spectacularly different now than it was then.

Okay....

I'm not the one who brought up the Lakers as a loser franchise who's sucks despite spending lots of money. You are. It was a ridiculously false statement to make. I don't know why you said it. The Lakers are probably in the top 10 in total wins over any five year period in the history of the NBA, probably top five in most five year periods.

p.s. i think some guy named Kobe had more to do with that than the front office throwing money around.

Sure, so did some other dudes named Shaq, Gasol, Odom, Bynum, and a host of other role players that they were able to assemble and keep together because they were willing to spend huge amounts of money.

I'm not saying that spending = winning. You need good decision making too. However, good decision making at 90 million will probably trump good decision making at 70 million most times. There are obviously some caveats to that when you bring in guys who are artificially underpriced (like LeBron on a 15 million dollar deal or something).

Excuse me? Where did I say the Lakers were a loser franchise who suck? I don't appreciate the way you paraphrased me, thank you. The Bulls won 6 titles in the 90's, so are they forever an exceptional organization because of that? That is easily their share for about 150 years.

Is the Lakers front office now the same one that won the championships? So wtf has that got to do with anything?

Spending more can be a sign of a bad front office. You pretty much seem to agree with that above. So I guess my point is that the bulls current FO has made good decisions and the current Lakesr and Knicks front office poor ones.

[sonny]

First, thanks for posting that as it contained some information that I wasn't really aware of. Based on that, I could see how Simmons may have gotten the idea that Doc had given up on the Celtics. However, I still feel like his departure was due more to not wanting to be a part of a rebuild rather than quitting on the team as it was constructed.

But he signed the extension in 2011 knowing that a rebuild was probably gonna happen soon, unless we're to believe he expected the Ray/PP/KG core to last until 2016.

Ainge even states that him and Doc talked about it and he was on board.

So if I sign a 5 year extension in 2011, knowing that a rebuild is coming, saying that I'm prepared to go through that and then when it's time to rebuild only 2 years later, I start talking about it's time to go back to broadcasting or look for another position, that's not quitting on a team?

Especially when they expected to remain with them, he didn't even make it halfway through the extension.

[HomoSapien]

It's interesting to me that about 60% of the board shares that same opinion that the Bulls are run like a small market team, but that when Simmons says it everyone calls foul and yells conspiracy!

I came in here to post this very thing....

60% of this board vs. Simmons though....there should be some sort of demarcation between how an analyst thinks vs. a rabid fan of the game.

Simmons is hoping for just that....the 60-70% of the fans that will create the traffic for his articles.

Why should there be? First of all, Simmons' appeal is that he is the super fan. He's never really been marketed as an analyst in the same way as someone like Doug Collins is. You're penalizing Simmons because you don't agree with his opinion. You're basically arguing that it's a unworthy opinion, essentially because you don't share it.

Second, Simmons is worth $15m. He has moved past being concerned about hits on a single article.

[sonny]

People are holding out hope on this summer, Homo, its the true test of all the mumbo jumbo about paying for a winner, or reinvesting from the Deng trade, etc.

If they fail to achieve anything of note, then his words will be cemented much more.

Eh, I doubt it.

We've been talking about flexibility, assets, plans and stars since 03. Another failed plan won't do much because it's on to the next plan.

[League Circles]

It's interesting to me that about 60% of the board shares that same opinion that the Bulls are run like a small market team, but that when Simmons says it everyone calls foul and yells conspiracy!

Well if the 60% is accurate, that still leaves hundreds or thousands of posters (like me) to disagree with Simmons.

On another note, for those who think losing Asik was a cheap move or a move done due to Rose's injury, I've always thought it was simply because they looked at the team, and considering that it wasn't any kind of title favorite on paper, concluded that they were better off with the flexibility to make big moves this summer than they would be with Omer on a huge deal.

[organix85]

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?

No, I don't think it is. I wouldn't disagree with anyone that says he probably meant it in a derogatory way actually. I don't think the statement in itself was false though. I think someone can debate with him that they wouldn't be in a better position if they spent more, but not that the statement isn't true.

What he said was pretty much in line with what a lot of people have said and agreed upon in here. It seems like one of those situations where it's ok for us to bash him cause he's our owner, but we will attack outsiders for the same comments. It is undeniable that we do not run like the Lakers or Knicks and it is undeniable that JR is profiting like crazy every year... my educated guess is moreso than a team like the Knicks.

[musiqsoulchild]

I came in here to post this very thing....

60% of this board vs. Simmons though....there should be some sort of demarcation between how an analyst thinks vs. a rabid fan of the game.

Simmons is hoping for just that....the 60-70% of the fans that will create the traffic for his articles.

Why should there be? First of all, Simmons' appeal is that he is the super fan. He's never really been marketed as an analyst in the same way as someone like Doug Collins is. You're penalizing Simmons because you don't agree with his opinion. You're basically arguing that it's a unworthy opinion, essentially because you don't share it.

Second, Simmons is worth $15m. He has moved past being concerned about hits on a single article.

It isnt about money...Simmons is looking/sounding like a lost kid who needs validation from others to find his true self-worth.

Sheesh....have you seen him in the playoffs recently, Homo...he's been pretty unbearable. Even Jalen sometimes recoils away from Simmons.

[HomoSapien]

It's interesting to me that about 60% of the board shares that same opinion that the Bulls are run like a small market team, but that when Simmons says it everyone calls foul and yells conspiracy!

Well if the 60% is accurate, that still leaves hundreds or thousands of posters (like me) to disagree with Simmons.

On another note, for those who think losing Asik was a cheap move or a move done due to Rose's injury, I've always thought it was simply because they looked at the team, and considering that it wasn't any kind of title favorite on paper, concluded that they were better off with the flexibility to make big moves this summer than they would be with Omer on a huge deal.

Yet in this thread, I'm seeing people who are notorious for criticizing the FO getting upset with Simmons because he blasted their beloved team. I saw the same fans develop a conspiracy theory that Steve Kerr was trying to convince Carmelo Anthony to stay in NY because he said the Bulls lacked talent. Well it's obvious to anyone that they do.

We need to develop thicker thin here. Not everyone is out to get the Bulls.

[sonny]

It's interesting to me that about 60% of the board shares that same opinion that the Bulls are run like a small market team, but that when Simmons says it everyone calls foul and yells conspiracy!

Well if the 60% is accurate, that still leaves hundreds or thousands of posters (like me) to disagree with Simmons.

On another note, for those who think losing Asik was a cheap move or a move done due to Rose's injury, I've always thought it was simply because they looked at the team, and considering that it wasn't any kind of title favorite on paper, concluded that they were better off with the flexibility to make big moves this summer than they would be with Omer on a huge deal.

Do you mean with Rose being out?

[HomoSapien]

It isnt about money...Simmons is looking/sounding like a lost kid who needs validation from others to find his true self-worth.

He's a writer. I think all writers seek validation of their work.

Sheesh....have you seen him in the playoffs recently, Homo...he's been pretty unbearable. Even Jalen sometimes recoils away from Simmons.

I agree. He's not a good TV guy. That still has nothing to do with his comments.

[Betta Bulleavit]

First, thanks for posting that as it contained some information that I wasn't really aware of. Based on that, I could see how Simmons may have gotten the idea that Doc had given up on the Celtics. However, I still feel like his departure was due more to not wanting to be a part of a rebuild rather than quitting on the team as it was constructed.

But he signed the extension in 2011 knowing that a rebuild was probably gonna happen soon, unless we're to believe he expected the Ray/PP/KG core to last until 2016.

Ainge even states that him and Doc talked about it and he was on board.

So if I sign a 5 year extension in 2011, knowing that a rebuild is coming, saying that I'm prepared to go through that and then when it's time to rebuild only 2 years later, I start talking about it's time to go back to broadcasting or look for another position, that's not quitting on a team?

Especially when they expected to remain with them, he didn't even make it halfway through the extension.

I suppose that I can concede that. Particularly after your previous post. Still though, Simmons doesn't know what the hell he's talking about as it pertains to the Bulls. I think his commentary has been way off base.

[Rerisen]

To some extent I agree. However, the thought that if the Bulls don't get Melo or Love (not what you said, i know) they are failures is as misguided as thinking that they were failures for not getting LBJ/Bosh/Wade.

In the case of Love, it takes three to Tango, and in the case of Melo, I still don't really believe he plans on leaving NY... but of course I have no way of knowing ... just my guess.

Melo and Love are just the most obvious rewards to point to as 'doing something'

But even if we don't get them, it doesn't mean we have to take the most basic conservative, and likely dead-end path.

We can still do trades, consolidate picks, existing talent, go for an upside guy, or try to trade for a proven performer like Afflalo. These may well be the moves or at least attempted moves that tell us if this team is really being creative in trying to go for it, or just happy to put out a team that will grind along into the early playoff rounds without much more potential.

When/If we hear the words 'flexibility for the future' and/or "2015, 2016" we'll know the die has been cast in Simmons favor.

[Stratmaster]

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?

No, I don't think it is. I wouldn't disagree with anyone that says he probably meant it in a derogatory way actually. I don't think the statement in itself was false though. I think someone can debate with him that they wouldn't be in a better position if they spent more, but not that the statement isn't true.

What he said was pretty much in line with what a lot of people have said and agreed upon in here. It seems like one of those situations where it's ok for us to bash him cause he's our owner, but we will attack outsiders for the same comments. It is undeniable that we do not run like the Lakers or Knicks and it is undeniable that JR is profiting like crazy every year... my educated guess is moreso than a team like the Knicks.

I have never criticized the Bulls front office on the basis that they won't spend money. Spending it just to spend it would be stupid.

[musiqsoulchild]

Melo and Love are just the most obvious rewards to point to as 'doing something'

But even if we don't get them, it doesn't mean we have to take the most basic conservative, and likely dead-end path.

We can still do trades, consolidate picks, existing talent, go for an upside guy, or try to trade for a proven performer like Afflalo. These may well be the moves or at least attempted moves that tell us if this team is really being creative in trying to go for it, or just happy to put out a team that will grind along into the early playoff rounds without much more potential.

When/If we hear the words 'flexibility for the future' and/or "2015, 2016" we'll know the die has been cast in Simmons favor.

I think this sums it up pretty much.

I will go one step further, if we dont make it to the ECF (Health = perennial caveat), then its on the FO.

Because there should be no way that a team of Rose + Noah + Taj + Butler + All the assets we have should not be in the ECF's.

If we arent in the ECF, it means that the FO didnt manage said assests properly. And that, ladies and gentlemen, will not fly.

Already, if the Hawks win again this year, we will probably see a weaning away of interest from basketball.....the Bulls FO/ownership cannot afford that.

[DJhitek]

It's interesting to me that about 60% of the board shares that same opinion that the Bulls are run like a small market team, but that when Simmons says it everyone calls foul and yells conspiracy!

I came in here to post this very thing....

60% of this board vs. Simmons though....there should be some sort of demarcation between how an analyst thinks vs. a rabid fan of the game.

Simmons is hoping for just that....the 60-70% of the fans that will create the traffic for his articles.

Of course, but that doesn't make the message or perception any less relevant.

[Stratmaster]

To some extent I agree. However, the thought that if the Bulls don't get Melo or Love (not what you said, i know) they are failures is as misguided as thinking that they were failures for not getting LBJ/Bosh/Wade.

In the case of Love, it takes three to Tango, and in the case of Melo, I still don't really believe he plans on leaving NY... but of course I have no way of knowing ... just my guess.

Melo and Love are just the most obvious rewards to point to as 'doing something'

But even if we don't get them, it doesn't mean we have to take the most basic conservative, and likely dead-end path.

We can still do trades, consolidate picks, existing talent, go for an upside guy, or try to trade for a proven performer like Afflalo. These may well be the moves or at least attempted moves that tell us if this team is really being creative in trying to go for it, or just happy to put out a team that will grind along into the early playoff rounds without much more potential.

When/If we hear the words 'flexibility for the future' and/or "2015, 2016" we'll know the die has been cast in Simmons favor.

To some extent I agree (that is becoming a common phrase for me). But I also have the opposite fear. They dumped Deng for space and promised they would use the money for talent. If Melo and Love end up not being viable I fear they might feel pressured to overspend on "best available".

[organix85]

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?

No, I don't think it is. I wouldn't disagree with anyone that says he probably meant it in a derogatory way actually. I don't think the statement in itself was false though. I think someone can debate with him that they wouldn't be in a better position if they spent more, but not that the statement isn't true.

What he said was pretty much in line with what a lot of people have said and agreed upon in here. It seems like one of those situations where it's ok for us to bash him cause he's our owner, but we will attack outsiders for the same comments. It is undeniable that we do not run like the Lakers or Knicks and it is undeniable that JR is profiting like crazy every year... my educated guess is moreso than a team like the Knicks.

I have never criticized the Bulls front office on the basis that they won't spend money. Spending it just to spend it would be stupid.

Well, "spending it just to spend it" is quite extreme. I think most would agree we don't want that. However, there have been plenty of debates here over the years of moves where we sacrificed opportunities to improve due to what seemed to be financial incentives. Most recently, a number of people didn't like the Deng move. There was very very little benefit to the on the court product as a result of that. It was pretty clear that it was primarily to earn JR some more cash. Yea, some restrictions may have come as a result of repeatedly being the tax... yada, yada... but c'mon, let's just be in agreement that it was primarily to not pay some extra dough.

[Stratmaster]

Melo and Love are just the most obvious rewards to point to as 'doing something'

But even if we don't get them, it doesn't mean we have to take the most basic conservative, and likely dead-end path.

We can still do trades, consolidate picks, existing talent, go for an upside guy, or try to trade for a proven performer like Afflalo. These may well be the moves or at least attempted moves that tell us if this team is really being creative in trying to go for it, or just happy to put out a team that will grind along into the early playoff rounds without much more potential.

When/If we hear the words 'flexibility for the future' and/or "2015, 2016" we'll know the die has been cast in Simmons favor.

I think this sums it up pretty much.

I will go one step further, if we dont make it to the ECF (Health = perennial caveat), then its on the FO.

Because there should be no way that a team of Rose + Noah + Taj + Butler + All the assets we have should not be in the ECF's.

If we arent in the ECF, it means that the FO didnt manage said assests properly. And that, ladies and gentlemen, will not fly.

Already, if the Hawks win again this year, we will probably see a weaning away of interest from basketball.....the Bulls FO/ownership cannot afford that.

But wait. "if healthy", don't you think the Bulls would have made the ECF the last two seasons? So by that measurement, the Bulls FO has been golden.