Image ImageImage Image

The Kevin Love Thread: Update PG. 67, 78

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

damecurry
General Manager
Posts: 9,300
And1: 1,517
Joined: May 19, 2014
 

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1221 » by damecurry » Fri May 30, 2014 11:52 am

mysticbb wrote:
damecurry wrote:What assets can be sent with Boozer that makes the salaries even and NY want to bother with that? I guess Boozer's an expiring so they can add him to their long list of awful contracts that play out soon, but still, would Phil & co. really want that? Maybe I'm just ignorant, but the sign & trade here sounds really difficult to work out properly. You'd lose butler in that scenario right?


No, Butler would not be involved. The issue for the Knicks would be: getting something in return or let Anthony go without anything. The Bulls have future assets, which contain #16 and #19 pick in the current draft, rights to Mirotic, 2015 Kings pick (Top10 protected), and all of their own future picks. A collection of these assets should provide the incentive for the Knicks to prefer the S&T over losing him for nothing. The Bulls can't afford to lose a core player in such scenario. So, if the Knicks have no interest, I'm sure the Bulls will find takers for Gibson (and getting capspace and a pick/talent back), and Dunleavy (at least for full capspace, I argue that they at least get a 2nd round pick as well). Then they sign Anthony with their capspace after using the amnesty on Boozer, get the #16 and #19 drafted players on board to fill the roster. The Bulls have the chance to create the necessary capspace in order to sign Anthony, which would be the key here. Also, other teams have the capspace as well to do that, which puts the Knicks at an even greater risk of losing Anthony for nothing. Thus, if the Knicks are smart, they take the Bulls S&T offer with Boozer plus future assets.

Obviously, that depends on Anthony really want to be on the Bulls, which I think isn't a given. From my perspective the most likely scenario is Anthony signing a new 5yr contract with the Knicks.


Yeah, that was pretty much my understanding. My question for you is: how are you going to make the salaries work in that S&T? Boozer's contract is only 16.8m, and the bulls are scheduled to be right at the cap. Melo is going to command at least 20+ signing a new deal, probably over 22m. So don't you have to find 5m extra to send them to make the salaries even? I spose if you give em dunleavy, snell and boozer it'll be close, but they'll want future assets/current picks too and that leaves the roster pretty gutted to me.
mysticbb
Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 713
Joined: May 28, 2007
Contact:
   

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1222 » by mysticbb » Fri May 30, 2014 12:06 pm

damecurry wrote:Yeah, that was pretty much my understanding. My question for you is: how are you going to make the salaries work in that S&T? Boozer's contract is only 16.8m, and the bulls are scheduled to be right at the cap. Melo is going to command at least 20+ signing a new deal, probably over 22m. So don't you have to find 5m extra to send them to make the salaries even?


Bulls have unguaranteed min contracts for James, Brewer and Amundson. More than enough salary to add to Boozer in order to pay Anthony his max.

Boozer alone can take on $21.8m (salary + $5m for non tax payer, tax-level will be at $77m), add one minimum deal to that and the Bulls can take on $22.7m, Anthony's max is 22.5m (105% of his previous season salary). Don't see an issue here at all. That would still leave more than enough room between payroll and the $81m APRON in order to fill out the roster to stay below that said APRON.
Even if you believe, such S&T would bring the Bulls over tax threshold, but staying below APRON, the Bulls would just need to send out Boozer plus two unguaranteed minimum contracts (or Snell instead) in order to take on Anthony with $22.5m starting salary (125% +0.1 rule would be invoked here).
damecurry
General Manager
Posts: 9,300
And1: 1,517
Joined: May 19, 2014
 

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1223 » by damecurry » Fri May 30, 2014 12:39 pm

mysticbb wrote:
damecurry wrote:Yeah, that was pretty much my understanding. My question for you is: how are you going to make the salaries work in that S&T? Boozer's contract is only 16.8m, and the bulls are scheduled to be right at the cap. Melo is going to command at least 20+ signing a new deal, probably over 22m. So don't you have to find 5m extra to send them to make the salaries even?


Bulls have unguaranteed min contracts for James, Brewer and Amundson. More than enough salary to add to Boozer in order to pay Anthony his max.

Boozer alone can take on $21.8m (salary + $5m for non tax payer, tax-level will be at $77m), add one minimum deal to that and the Bulls can take on $22.7m, Anthony's max is 22.5m (105% of his previous season salary). Don't see an issue here at all. That would still leave more than enough room between payroll and the $81m APRON in order to fill out the roster to stay below that said APRON.
Even if you believe, such S&T would bring the Bulls over tax threshold, but staying below APRON, the Bulls would just need to send out Boozer plus two unguaranteed minimum contracts (or Snell instead) in order to take on Anthony with $22.5m starting salary (125% +0.1 rule would be invoked here).


Okay, good to know. Thanks for the info. I'm still relatively knew and have plenty left to learn about the cba.
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1224 » by Rerisen » Fri May 30, 2014 1:17 pm

mysticbb wrote:3. Getting a better player than Dunleavy would be good, Afflalo is not that player


The wing we would move Gibson for in this scenario doesn't have to be Aaron Afflalo, if you think his production numbers and abilities are a big phony (his on/off stuff seems puzzling vs his game, while he led the team in WS). Then replace him with someone of similar to Taj value we could move Taj for, but who is going to play 35 minutes or so at the wing and be able to play the majority of the game with Noah, Rose and Love.

Thing with AA though, he is playing as a 1st option for ORL clearly over his head. His role here would be a lowly 3rd option, based on his skill set and abilities, he should certainly be able to be a positive in that role with good coaching and talent balance around him. But again, it could be someone else. MDJ, nice effort for us, but he's getting older and he was a negative in the playoffs. Do we really want him vs LeBron/Wade or even Stephenson/George.

Concerns about Noah's health are real, but if he is down for any length of time in a series, how can the Bulls expect to win anyway. Rose's health concerns are even bigger but we really can't afford the luxury of a backup as good as Gibson or better behind Derrick. We are going to need some luck in the health department at some point.
mysticbb
Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 713
Joined: May 28, 2007
Contact:
   

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1225 » by mysticbb » Fri May 30, 2014 4:21 pm

Rerisen wrote:The wing we would move Gibson for in this scenario doesn't have to be Aaron Afflalo, if you think his production numbers and abilities are a big phony (his on/off stuff seems puzzling vs his game, while he led the team in WS).


The reason for his "good looking" boxscore numbers is the fact that the Magic run plays to make him look good. Those plays put him into better positions, but not his teammates. He doesn't help them to get into better position. But when you look at that, overall there comes out nothing over an average player on offense, what his teammates are doing worse with him on the court, he is making up with having fancier numbers. But as I tried to say multiple times already: it is a TEAM game, the result for the TEAM is important, not the result for an individual player. Afflalo is not helping to improve the team result offensively over an average player, he never did.
And then comes his overrated defense into play, where he always was a negative player, in fact he was in average worse than a replacement player would be defensively.

Rerisen wrote:Then replace him with someone of similar to Taj value we could move Taj for, but who is going to play 35 minutes or so at the wing and be able to play the majority of the game with Noah, Rose and Love.


To get a grasp what "someone similar" means: Klay Thompson in 35mpg measures out to contribute less overall than Gibson in 29 mpg. And yes, Gibson impact defensively is that valuable.

Rerisen wrote:Thing with AA though, he is playing as a 1st option for ORL clearly over his head. His role here would be a lowly 3rd option, based on his skill set and abilities, he should certainly be able to be a positive in that role with good coaching and talent balance around him.


So, you put him not in the best positions for himself anymore, but ask him to make moves off the ball to help the others more? That's exactly what he is not capable of doing. The Magic figured out the best role for him, that maximizes his abilities, but it doesn't help the team overall. That is the truth here. He played that "lesser" role for the Nuggets and didn't help them to play better, why should he do that on the Bulls now?

Rerisen wrote:MDJ, nice effort for us, but he's getting older and he was a negative in the playoffs.


Actually, he wasn't a negative. Boozer was! The Bulls played +7 with Dunleavy on the court and without Boozer against the Wizards. Dunleavy had the bad luck to share the majority of his minutes (69%) with Boozer, in all other minutes the Bulls looked fine with Dunleavy.

Rerisen wrote:Concerns about Noah's health are real, but if he is down for any length of time in a series, how can the Bulls expect to win anyway.


The Bulls have a MUCH better chance with Gibson in that case than with a replacement player we can reasonably expect to be available. Gibson instead of Noah over the past years meant only a slightly less efficient offense while staying the same or even get a little bit defensively. Again, having that quality big off the bench is HUGE for the Bulls.

Rerisen wrote:Rose's health concerns are even bigger but we really can't afford the luxury of a backup as good as Gibson or better behind Derrick. We are going to need some luck in the health department at some point.


If the Bulls had someone similar to Gibson for $8m making that impact like Gibson while being able to play PG/SG I would advocate to keep him too. Gibson is valuable no matter what, even with limited minutes. Again, that a HUGE advantage and you don't give up such advantage for a perceived "balanced roster". There is essentially no chance to get a similar strong player as Gibson for a different position, neither in a trade nor via FA. Those kind of players are on short supply and teams which have such players aren't giving them up unless they have way bigger contract and need to devide the salary better. Gibson at $8m is a bargain for what he does, but the only thing teams reasonably will offer is capspace and picks/talent, because it also makes very little sense to them to trade a better player for a similar player while opening up a hole somewhere else.
For a backup for Rose? Well, the better, the better for the Bulls. Devin Harris was mentioned, and I like the prospect, just can't see the Bulls being able to pay him the money he will get from other teams. The best situation would be someone able to play both, backup PG and next to Rose (maybe Avery Bradley?) for MLE money. Bradley for example could even start on SG next to Rose, can handle the ball some and play defense. That could move Butler to SF and then have Dunleavy as backup for SG/SF. Then add another player capable of playing SF for Bi-Annual or min. Get a 3rd string PF and PG via min, Greg Smith would be the 3rd string C being on the roster already.

Rose - Bradley - ?
Bradley - Butler/Dunleavy - ?
Butler - Dunleavy - ?
Love - Gibson - ?
Noah - Gibson - Smith

Though, Bradley is RFA, which means it would tie up the MLE until the Celtic make the decision to match or not. That would be risky. And the Celtics offered him 24/4 as extension, which would be above the MLE money, but are expected to not give him such offer again. But no idea, tbh ...
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1226 » by Rerisen » Fri May 30, 2014 9:16 pm

mysticbb wrote:To get a grasp what "someone similar" means: Klay Thompson in 35mpg measures out to contribute less overall than Gibson in 29 mpg. And yes, Gibson impact defensively is that valuable.


Certainly he is a great defender. But is it ideal that your backup PF is likely going to be a better player than 2 of your starting wing players?

So, you put him not in the best positions for himself anymore, but ask him to make moves off the ball to help the others more? That's exactly what he is not capable of doing.


You say the Magic have found the best role for him. If he's a big negative in it, how is that his best role. He's not a good playmaker (bad in PnR!) and has the ball too much on that team. I don't think its a good role at all, or he should be a first option on any team.

Why should he not be able to succeed in an off ball role though? That is primarily going to involve shooting, something he is very good at. With just enough individual scoring talent to also take advantage of already broken down defenses. That's exactly the things we need more of.

You mention Denver, but he is a a more versatile player since then. His team played worse with him on the floor, but does that just mean he is a bad player forever, in any team context? That player analysis is nothing more than this one number, we should never look at anything else? Would you also not have wanted Kevin Durant after his first couple years, because of bad team impact numbers, despite all his positive skills?

You might say why make an exception for Afflalo, and not say Carlos Boozer, who some Bulls fans said was simply being used wrong. But Carlos Boozer is not efficient scorer, in any part of his game. He doesn't draw fouls, can't create individual offense, his jumper has slipped, etc. Boozer is also not a good defender, because he is slow, short, often not where he should be, and doesn't give good effort. So Booze has nothing good to leverage. AA though, is not extremely unathletic, or short, is not getting blown by routinely like Nate Robinson (not in the few dozen games I've seen of him), is not routinely getting abused on post ups, nor giving weak effort.

His man defense always looks solid (Opp PER around average, better at SF surprisingly), maybe he's messing up the scheme. But that would be encouraging that he might play better being better coached in a more cogent defensive team system. The overburden on offense also might be sapping some of his defensive energy.

Mike Dunleavy comes to the Bulls (only older) and the advanced numbers suddenly say he is a plus defender, when he was a negative in Milwaukee. Hmm, maybe a great scheme/teammates is good for hiding defensive liabilities. If it can hide Mike, it can surely hide AA.

On offense he is going to space the floor at 42% 3PT greatly. He can also score inside the arc reasonably well (league average or above at every location - see pic).

Image

So what is he doing wrong, that this efficiency isn't translating to an offensive boost? Holding the ball too long (I don't see this guy plays like Corey Maggette or something), or missing the open man. Then coach this out of him, or don't put him in primary set decision making positions. Put him at the end of the playmaking chain, where his job is to score on already created opportunities by Rose and Love, or whoever.

This is an efficient player with a versatile offensive game, and solid physical tools on both ends, which gives a reason to think there should be more to get out of this guy than has been found.

I know this won't move you, and that likely you will simply re-quote his past plus/minus iterations over and over as damming him forever. But my view on players is more than that, especially when they have plus skills.

Actually, he wasn't a negative. Boozer was! The Bulls played +7 with Dunleavy on the court and without Boozer against the Wizards. Dunleavy had the bad luck to share the majority of his minutes (69%) with Boozer, in all other minutes the Bulls looked fine with Dunleavy.


Boozer is certainly bad, but if Dunleavy was only bad with Boozer, how much of his good without him was because of being with Noah and Taj? Mike's matchup was Ariza and he got outplayed.

Again, having that quality big off the bench is HUGE for the Bulls.


It's a nice luxury, just not sure how much he would need to play in a playoff series where we are trying to maximize our best players minutes.

More concernedly, I think its a question if Jerry is going to pay for such a team going forward. Whether we got Melo OR Love, if we did it while keeping Taj, the roster is going to get very expensive fast, as soon as Jimmy needs re-signing in a year. That worry isn't related to trading Taj for a guy like Afflalo though, since he's just as expensive. But rather a fear we won't keep that salary slot at all.
User avatar
Mech Engineer
RealGM
Posts: 16,802
And1: 4,804
Joined: Apr 10, 2012
Location: NW Suburbs

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1227 » by Mech Engineer » Fri May 30, 2014 9:31 pm

Rerisen wrote:It's a nice luxury, just not sure how much he would need to play in a playoff series where we are trying to maximize our best players minutes.

More concernedly, I think its a question if Jerry is going to pay for such a team going forward. Whether we got Melo OR Love, if we did it while keeping Taj,the roster is going to get very expensive fast, as soon as Jimmy needs re-signing in a year. That worry isn't related to trading Taj for a guy like Afflalo though, since he's just as expensive. But rather a fear we won't keep that salary slot at all.


I think the cap limit is supposed to increase a lot. We might have another 4-5 million increase in cap-space in a year again. Taj's salary and Jimmy's salary(if it is MLE numbers) are going to be bargains and will not impact the overall numbers at all. The Bulls need to plan based on what the cap/tax levels will be in 2/3 years and not what it was last year.

I am sure the Bulls financial guys are on top of this. It is just a big mystery for us fans but we will probably know their thinking in a month.
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1228 » by Rerisen » Fri May 30, 2014 9:40 pm

Mech Engineer wrote:I think the cap limit is supposed to increase a lot. We might have another 4-5 million increase in cap-space in a year again. Taj's salary and Jimmy's salary(if it is MLE numbers) are going to be bargains and will not impact the overall numbers at all. The Bulls need to plan based on what the cap/tax levels will be in 2/3 years and not what it was last year.

I am sure the Bulls financial guys are on top of this. It is just a big mystery for us fans but we will probably know their thinking in a month.


A Love max deal should start somewhere around 17, 18m. If so, for 2016,

Rose: 20.1
Love: ~17
Noah: 13.4
Taj: 8.5
Jimmy: ~5

Already at about 64 million (the cap) and still need 8 players. We don't want all minimums if we are serious about competing, probably still have a Room guy, maybe get an MLE (need a starting wing, that doesn't totally stink), which case well over 70m, more like 75+ ... Hope Jerry is ready to make good on paying for a winner.
User avatar
Mech Engineer
RealGM
Posts: 16,802
And1: 4,804
Joined: Apr 10, 2012
Location: NW Suburbs

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1229 » by Mech Engineer » Fri May 30, 2014 9:49 pm

Rerisen wrote:
Mech Engineer wrote:I think the cap limit is supposed to increase a lot. We might have another 4-5 million increase in cap-space in a year again. Taj's salary and Jimmy's salary(if it is MLE numbers) are going to be bargains and will not impact the overall numbers at all. The Bulls need to plan based on what the cap/tax levels will be in 2/3 years and not what it was last year.

I am sure the Bulls financial guys are on top of this. It is just a big mystery for us fans but we will probably know their thinking in a month.


A Love max deal should start somewhere around 17, 18m. If so, for 2016,

Rose: 20.1
Love: ~17
Noah: 13.4
Taj: 8.5
Jimmy: ~5

Already at about 64 million (the cap) and still need 8 players. We don't want all minimums if we are serious about competing, probably still have a Room guy, maybe get an MLE (need a starting wing, that doesn't totally stink)... Hope Jerry is ready to make good on paying for a winner.


I think you are looking at the cap in 14-15 but it will be more the year after that. I like Love for the numbers you wrote above ~ 17/18 million to go with his age compared to the 21-22 million for Melo with his age. Plus, Love is replacing Mirotic's skill-set/future salary in a sense(5-6 million) to get somebody else.

My point is this is playing into Jerry's plans even if he is frugal. Even Love's salary of 17 million might be a bargain in 2 years and you use the MLE to get another good wing player(that is the big problem though!).
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1230 » by Rerisen » Fri May 30, 2014 9:53 pm

Mech Engineer wrote:My point is this is playing into Jerry's plans even if he is frugal.


Yeah but moving Taj plays into his frugalness even more, without even trying to arrange a Boozer and assets package first. And some of the things we are hearing such from Ralph, that the Bulls may already have suitors lined up to take Taj if necessary.... worrying.

I hope it doesn't happen, and we explore every possible avenue to keep our core pieces. I want Taj or if not him, someone else that is also a very good role player in an important position. He figures to impact winning more than Mirotic for the first couple years even, should it come to that.
User avatar
Mech Engineer
RealGM
Posts: 16,802
And1: 4,804
Joined: Apr 10, 2012
Location: NW Suburbs

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1231 » by Mech Engineer » Fri May 30, 2014 10:11 pm

Rerisen wrote:
Mech Engineer wrote:My point is this is playing into Jerry's plans even if he is frugal.


Yeah but moving Taj plays into his frugalness even more, without even trying to arrange a Boozer and assets package first. And some of the things we are hearing such from Ralph, that the Bulls may already have suitors lined up to take Taj if necessary.... worrying.

I hope it doesn't happen, and we explore every possible avenue to keep our core pieces. I want Taj or if not him, someone else that is also a very good role player in an important position. He figures to impact winning more than Mirotic for the first couple years even, should it come to that.


I don't want to comment on somebody's rumors whether it is true or false. But, the point is even if the Bulls are frugal, the increase in cap-space in the next few years should give Jerry the confidence to keep Taj without it impacting taxes.

We know the Bulls will spend as long as the cap allows it especially when they have Derrick. They are not trying to tank. The only worry should be will they spend on 6-8 rotation players to go over the tax-line if it comes to that. That is where the issue has been, IMO rather than just spending to the tax limit.
TheGameChanger
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,432
And1: 366
Joined: Aug 08, 2013

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1232 » by TheGameChanger » Fri May 30, 2014 11:43 pm

I Came up with this trade for Kevin Love. Assuming Minny Decides to Rebuild.

Bulls Out - Boozer,Gibson,Mirotic,16,19,Kings Pick
Bulls in - Love,Martin

Minny Out-Love,Martin
Minny in - Boozer,Frye,Picks 7,14,16,18,27,Kings Future 1st

Lakers out - Pick 7
Lakers in- Mirotic,Pick 19

Suns out- Fyre,14,18,27
Suns in -Taj Gibson
aaqubed
RealGM
Posts: 10,684
And1: 830
Joined: Jun 02, 2002

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1233 » by aaqubed » Sat May 31, 2014 1:03 am

Rerisen wrote:
Mech Engineer wrote:I think the cap limit is supposed to increase a lot. We might have another 4-5 million increase in cap-space in a year again. Taj's salary and Jimmy's salary(if it is MLE numbers) are going to be bargains and will not impact the overall numbers at all. The Bulls need to plan based on what the cap/tax levels will be in 2/3 years and not what it was last year.

I am sure the Bulls financial guys are on top of this. It is just a big mystery for us fans but we will probably know their thinking in a month.


A Love max deal should start somewhere around 17, 18m. If so, for 2016,

Rose: 20.1
Love: ~17
Noah: 13.4
Taj: 8.5
Jimmy: ~5

Already at about 64 million (the cap) and still need 8 players. We don't want all minimums if we are serious about competing, probably still have a Room guy, maybe get an MLE (need a starting wing, that doesn't totally stink), which case well over 70m, more like 75+ ... Hope Jerry is ready to make good on paying for a winner.


The cap will likely be at 66.5 in 2015-16. The tax is projected to be at 81M. I think that's more than enough breathing room for JR. Let's say we add an MLE level player at $5.5M that year and two firsts (some of those would be traded away, but let's assume we keep two of the four we might have in the next two years) at a combined $3M. We're still nowhere close to the tax line, with likely another room exception player one year and a BAE player next.
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1234 » by Rerisen » Sat May 31, 2014 1:28 am

aaqubed wrote:The cap will likely be at 66.5 in 2015-16. The tax is projected to be at 81M. I think that's more than enough breathing room for JR. Let's say we add an MLE level player at $5.5M that year and two firsts (some of those would be traded away, but let's assume we keep two of the four we might have in the next two years) at a combined $3M. We're still nowhere close to the tax line, with likely another room exception player one year and a BAE player next.


A big thing to watch is if we give away assets just to get someone to take on Boozer. And I don't mean for Melo or Love.
mysticbb
Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 713
Joined: May 28, 2007
Contact:
   

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1235 » by mysticbb » Sat May 31, 2014 7:02 am

Rerisen wrote:Certainly he is a great defender. But is it ideal that your backup PF is likely going to be a better player than 2 of your starting wing players?


Ideal in terms of what? What does "ideal" even mean? Again, if I can get a player who makes a similar impact per possession a different position, sure that would be better, but such players are on a short supply. But having the backup PF/C being better than your wing players can still be MUCH better for a team than dealing him for worse wing players. That is the point. It is a team game, and there about 242/3 min per game to fill with players. Getting the most out of that is the important thing. Ideally, each one is a great player, just that there are 29 other teams also want that "ideal situation" and the ability to sign such players is limited by the CBA.

Rerisen wrote:You say the Magic have found the best role for him. If he's a big negative in it, how is that his best role.


He is a big negative, because of defense, not because of offense. Overall his offensive impact is average; he himself produces at an above average efficiency, but the fact that a team has to run the plays for him in order to get that efficiency out of him, while then putting everyone else into worse positions, makes the end result 0 (as in average). He had the same 0 impact over average on offense on the Nuggets with limited shots and an even higher efficiency.

The Magic now used him in a fashion to maximize his individual value, not the overall team value, because they are only interested in the former not the latter at that point. They also wouldn't per se have the means to do something incredible different, thus they can let the average offensive player get his, but such a player in such a role will put a limit on the overall team result.

Rerisen wrote:That's exactly the things we need more of.


But not from a player hurting the defense in the process, making the overall team play worse. We saw that with Boozer (and please, check out Boozer's numbers in Utah and say again, that he would be inefficient). What you just want to believe is that Afflalo would somehow solve the problem, because you aren't taking the overall effects into account. You simply see the good coming out of him, while ignoring the reality. You see potential, where I simply look at the facts. We saw Afflalo in that lesser role, we saw him in the bigger role, both times 0 impact over an average player on offense while clearly a negative impact on the defensive end.
Players aren't going to change as much as you believe; they are pretty constant (showing an improvement early in their career, then a plateau level, than a decline, the differences in quality are usually just seen in the amount of years in that plateau level and that a better quality player can actually stay longer during his decline). You want to believe that a player, all of the sudden, becomes someone different or makes a different impact in a different situation. While the latter can be true, it is hardly some groundbreaking shift; usually the players are already used a very good way, because the guys responsible for putting the players into such position are living basketball 24/7, even more than any of us are doing. And that's likely the difference here between you and me; I don't believe that I can do a better job than the Magic and Nuggets coaching staff; I'm rather sure that they are pretty good at what they are doing and trying to find the best solutions for the respective players. Afflalo played on a really good team in Denver, he played on a worse team in Orlando, he shifted efficiency for a higher usage (and that at a below average rate, I might say, talking about overall efficiency here, not just scoring). He would do a similar thing on the Bulls, and would overall not help the team play better basketball, while the fans will point out his scoring and efficiency, as if that would be all that matters at the end, and not the game result achieved as a team.

Rerisen wrote:His team played worse with him on the floor, but does that just mean he is a bad player forever, in any team context?


Again, the guy is an average impact player offensively, he was that in different situation. His "more versatility" is seen in his on-ball play, not his off-ball play, and yet, it still adding value to the team overall results over an average offensive player.

Rerisen wrote:That player analysis is nothing more than this one number, we should never look at anything else? Would you also not have wanted Kevin Durant after his first couple years, because of bad team impact numbers, despite all his positive skills?


Again, you let yourself get away with a belief; the belief that you would judge a player on more than I would do, while in fact, given our discussion, the major difference between you and me is actually based on the fact that I look at the overall context and overall impact on the game, while you look at some potential boxscore numbers and that those are supposed to help. What else are you looking at? Shooting numbers, that's all you want to use here, because you feel that those would be the key element now. You even shifted the focus, because before that you put your focus on "2nd ball handler". Always, a specific part, where you believe a solution would be there and it would be easy. While I look at the effect of a player on the overall game, knowing that you can't just raise the "attack level" of a player and expect that nothing else will change and then the team will win. That is not how basketball works.
At no point did I say anything close to be as foolish as Winston said about Durant. Let alone that Durant had a better value in my metric than in pure APM anyway, the fact was that Durant was young and showed a steady improvement of his numbers through his first two years. Sure, I did not expect him to take off like he did in season 3, but I back in 2009 I would have taken him over Blake Griffin, if Durant would have been available in the draft (I wasn't particular high on Griffin, and I have to admit that I was wrong about him as a draft prospect, I underestimated his improvements from 2008 to 2009).
But yeah, you are back to believing that I would simply use +/- numbers and then would run with those as my judgement. I explained multiple times to you that I'm not doing such foolish thing, but you can't restrain yourself, I guess.

Rerisen wrote:The overburden on offense also might be sapping some of his defensive energy.


It was the same when he had a lower usage on the Nuggets. And it is really funny to see that you see all the potential in Afflalo to have a bigger impact on the Bulls. May it be possible that you rather want to see that instead of having done a proper analysis WHY Afflalo did not have that impact in Denver or Orlando as you believe he should have based on his scoring numbers? I give you a hint: It is a team game! Go from there and look how Afflalo's teammates are producing worse numbers with him on the court. And then shift your focus to he defensive end and see WHY they are playing worse defensively too. Can you imagine that there was a reason the Nuggets traded Afflalo for Iguodala and added a 1st to that as well? Try to understand why someone like Iguodala is worth more than Afflalo despite his unsexy scoring numbers, that might be the first step to understand basketball better and understand why I would advocate Iguodala over Afflalo pretty easily.

Rerisen wrote:Mike Dunleavy comes to the Bulls (only older) and the advanced numbers suddenly say he is a plus defender, when he was a negative in Milwaukee. Hmm, maybe a great scheme/teammates is good for hiding defensive liabilities. If it can hide Mike, it can surely hide AA.


Actually, Dunleavy was a plus defender before, just not in that season before coming to the Bulls. We have evidence for Dunleavy that he can be that "plus defender", we don't have that for Afflalo. And when we look at the overall value, it is pretty constant for Dunleavy, only the off/def split makes that seem inconstant. For the last 7 years Dunleavy ranges between 0.6 and +1.8 in my metric for an average of +1.0, while having +1.1 in this season and having +0.8 last season. He presents a typical variance for a player. Afflalo since 2009 has in average -1.1, ranging between -0.5 and -1.6, with -1.1 this season, and -1.0 last season. He had in average -1.0 from 2009 to 2012 on the Nuggets, he is about the same on the Magic. Dunleavy on the Pacers was about the same as he was on the Bucks as he was now on the Bulls in terms of overall value. So, the player values aren't exactly the same from year to year, but they are close. In my metric I see very rarely shifts from year-to-year which are bigger than 1.5 in either direction, most times those are related to young players making a jump or players getting injured. The average is about +/-0.3 from yr-to-yr. So, when you see that, you might understand why I have so much confidence in those numbers, because the amount of players making a bigger shift is small. And the probability that a "soon-to-be" 29yr old will make a jump like that in the positive direction isn't particular big.

Rerisen wrote:On offense he is going to space the floor at 42% 3PT greatly.


Floor spacing does NOT happen by simply making 3pt shots at a higher percentage. A player with a league average value there may even make a bigger impact with that. It depends on the movement and overall location of ALL players on the court, and that 42% shooter might make it tougher to have the necessary separation between players on the court to have in fact a better floor spacing among the players.

Rerisen wrote:Then coach this out of him


He will be 29yr olds start next season, and that's your solution? Really? He couldn't learn that for the bigger part of his life as well as in 7 years in the NBA; and your solution is "coach this out of him"? Brilliant, I bet nobody else thought of that before ...

Rerisen wrote:Put him at the end of the playmaking chain, where his job is to score on already created opportunities by Rose and Love, or whoever.


Sounds good, he did that on the Nuggets. Had a similar effect overall on the team result ... Really, when you believe there is a simple solution, you should consider the possibility that the people doing that as their job (in the best basketball league on Earth, I might add), will likely have already thought about that as well.

Rerisen wrote:But my view on players is more than that, especially when they have plus skills.


See, you simply dismiss the facts, because you not only believe you can judge a player better than me, but also have the impression that you have simple solutions for supposed problems at your disposal which the NBA coaches never have thought about ... Yeah, players change, some situations are better for them and the team overall than others; there is variation in their performances based on circumstances, that is clear. But in almost no cases a shift of circumstances for a 29yr old will make a big dent on the overall performance level we already saw from him. We are not talking about a rookie here, we are talking about a player being in the league for 7 years. And the only realistic way of him making an improvement in terms of overall impact on the game will be him in a much lesser role, where he can used in specific matchups which are favourable for him. But that will not happen in 30+ mpg, but 15 to 20 mpg. In that case you can make use of the "plus skills", while avoiding exposing the "minus skills".

Rerisen wrote:Boozer is certainly bad, but if Dunleavy was only bad with Boozer, how much of his good without him was because of being with Noah and Taj? Mike's matchup was Ariza and he got outplayed.


Basketball isn't 1on1, it is TEAM game. Looking at a player and decide his value based on "he got outplayed", is missing the point of the game.

Rerisen wrote:It's a nice luxury, just not sure how much he would need to play in a playoff series where we are trying to maximize our best players minutes.


Maximizing the TEAM overall result, while using the better players in better situations for them. And you believe a 3rd quality big is not helping with that?

Rerisen wrote:More concernedly, I think its a question if Jerry is going to pay for such a team going forward.


APRON will be at $81m next season. Try to get that roster to that payroll. ;) And if that team is successful, the Bulls ownership will pay those below $4m in luxury tax happily. Then Butler needs an extension, but it is also expected that the salary cap raises in a similar fashion, which means we can expect an APRON level at $86m. I think the Bulls can fit that in.

Rerisen wrote:But rather a fear we won't keep that salary slot at all.


Anthony makes it less likely than Love, which is one of the main reason I want to see Love on the Bulls over Anthony.
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1236 » by Rerisen » Sat May 31, 2014 10:20 am

^ Well we aren't going to agree on Afflalo's potential to help a team, because as I expected you have absolute faith in past is prologue about him and that he can never, or super unlikely, to be one. That is essentially the position boiled down. I see a player who has enhanced his skills since Denver, but is no longer in the same role as Denver, thus negating ultimate trust in what he did there as predictor.

Anyhow, this issue, if it is to be an issue, isn't so dire or panic inducing that we would need to move on it simultaneously with getting Love. Keep Taj the first year, or at least to the deadline, and if we are killing the league and our cheap wing situation looks competent - and not like in a Keith Bogans way, as in we are winning but they aren't doing much - then we don't have to change anything.

But I'm looking down the road and seeing a potential problem that might start begging for rebalancing. Luckily if it does, we will have a good means to address it, and it won't be an intractable situation.
mysticbb
Banned User
Posts: 8,205
And1: 713
Joined: May 28, 2007
Contact:
   

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1237 » by mysticbb » Sat May 31, 2014 11:36 am

Rerisen wrote:Well we aren't going to agree on Afflalo's potential to help a team, because as I expected you have absolute faith in past is prologue about him and that he can never, or super unlikely, to be one.


I find those statements amazing, to say the least. I never said that there is "no potential to help", I simply said that this potential is limited. If we add Afflalo instead of Snell, distribute the minutes accordingly to make better use of matchup situations for Butler and Dunleavy as well, he for sure will help to improve the team. Just that this improvement will be LESS than what the Bulls would give up when replacing Gibson with an average player (or even someone worse) in the process.

And when you talk about "faith" it gets quite comical. Basically you want to say that it is better to judge a player based on a believed potential than on his past performances. Especially when we talk about a 7yr vet who becomes 29yr before the start of the next season. You still believe in some sort of "potential", which would just be needed to be activated, as if 7yrs of NBA basketball weren't enough ... how many players with that experience and age changed in a fashion you desired in NBA history? Then compare that to how many did not change! Maybe you get an idea, why I find your idea to be rather unlikely to happen.

Or differently: How good are you at predicting performance levels of players? Have you ever tested that in any way?

Rerisen wrote:thus negating ultimate trust in what he did there as predictor.


Yeah, "ultimate trust", as if that would be the case ... :roll:
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1238 » by Rerisen » Sat May 31, 2014 11:43 am

mysticbb wrote:how many players with that experience and age changed in a fashion you desired in NBA history?


Not very many, I agree! That's the best I can do for you. But I'm not picking random low impact players to be better than they have, most won't be, but there is specific reasons that a player might do better, mostly based on plus abilities that can be leveraged better, while having a team able to cover for weaknesses. We can say no team has yet (despite a change in the player and role) and appeal to authority of NBA people, but those same people gave AA nearly 3x as much as MDJ, so how wise are they then.

My interest is not to change someone's mind though, nor until they can mine, but rather to fully understand their position and reason behind it. Which I think I do yours about this topic. Hammering endlessly beyond that over the same points stops being productive.
User avatar
Mech Engineer
RealGM
Posts: 16,802
And1: 4,804
Joined: Apr 10, 2012
Location: NW Suburbs

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1239 » by Mech Engineer » Sat May 31, 2014 2:51 pm

How the Minnesota writers think about the Bulls chances....they are in the second rung.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wolves/261334971.html
Chi town
RealGM
Posts: 29,423
And1: 9,097
Joined: Aug 10, 2004

Re: Love wants wants LA or NY (update pg 5, Chicago or GS to 

Post#1240 » by Chi town » Sat May 31, 2014 3:02 pm

Good banter gents. Stibb thanks for the thorough analysis. Although I agree with past performance as a predictor I think there are way to many variables in the "team game" explanation than what stats show. Injuries for example... a player underperforming due to injury etc. Confidence is another one... we've seen that with Jimmy.

Overall a really good read.

Return to Chicago Bulls