David Kaplan: There will be meaningful change after this season

[Mech Engineer]

I will throw up in my coffee if Gar is made the scapegoat and Pax still has control. And, hopefully don't bring back the 80s by promoting Doug Collins as the GM. I know he will probably get the Pat Riley Miami role but even that, the Bulls need a new perspective.

If this is true, my faith in Michael Reinsdorf will be restored. I was hoping he would be the one to get rid of Paxson because he doesn't look at Pax as his son like Jerry does. And, Michael is probably more knowledgeable about the recent trends in the NBA than Jerry.

Look, the financial constraints will not go away with the Bulls. All we can hope for is somebody who can build a team creatively and in a modern way within those financial constraints. And, that is definitely not Gar or Paxson or Doug Collins.

[Payt10]

I mean we all know whats going to happen. Pax "retires" and they replace him with Doug Collins.

That's the only way I see meaningful change being made: If Paxson retires. I don't see Jerry firing him.

As for the replacement: You'd think it'd have to be someone already within the organization. Colins may not want it, but I could see it going to their G-League GM or something.

Masai Ujiri would be the ultimate pipedream, or Sam Hinkie, but I don't see that ever coming to fruition.

Honestly not sure about even Hinkie... it's not like you can "Process" the draft anymore. What else would have have up his sleeve?

I think calling Hinkie just a draft guy is selling him short. The guy knows how to acquire assets through all available avenues. He's as forward-thinking as it gets, and probably would have done a hell of a lot better at rebuilding Philly if they let him finish what he started, instead of getting Colangelo in there to muck everything up.

[Mbrahv0528]

How much does Kaplan know versus guess? I have no idea of his credibility, since I don't listen to his show.

He's well connected in Chicago sports. He's not someone that just says stuff often.

I hate to say it because of his homerish-ness with the Cubs, but you're right. He's well connected and he isn't the type to say things without something backing it up. That being said..I'll believe it when I see it .

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

[HomoSapien]

I mean we all know whats going to happen. Pax "retires" and they replace him with Doug Collins.

That's the only way I see meaningful change being made: If Paxson retires. I don't see Jerry firing him.

As for the replacement: You'd think it'd have to be someone already within the organization. Colins may not want it, but I could see it going to their G-League GM or something.

Masai Ujiri would be the ultimate pipedream, or Sam Hinkie, but I don't see that ever coming to fruition.

I'm surprised Pax hasn't actually retired. He doesn't seem to be enjoying himself and his reputation gets worse by the season. He's not even a beloved Chicago figure anymore. It seems like most people no longer even view him as a former player. He's just a mediocre executive.

If we're really going to go outside hire, you can't do better than Masai. Washington supposedly offered him a contract starting at $10m a season. Who knows what Paxson or Forman make, but even if we allocated their salary plus Felicio's towards Ujiri (meaning he's only allowed to replace Felicio with a minimum value player) then it's not that big of a hit. I said it before, but my dream scenario is that we get Masai and then have him poach Nick Nurse.

[musiqsoulchild]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

[HomoSapien]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

Almost every GM out there has to operate within certain boundaries their owner has laid out. Reinsdorf's not unique in that way. A different guard dog is necessary because the team building lacks creativity and innovation. Unless Reinsdorf is preventing them from making trades/pursuing stars, then he's not the only problem.

[Mech Engineer]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

There are many successful teams like the Spurs, for a while OKC, Miami who have been successful not blowing money like the Knicks.

The Bulls spend enough to be successful in the NBA. They are not the Mavs or Warriors or Lakers but their spending is enough to build a contender if not for the pathetic GMs they have.

Offcourse, if they spend more, it gives them more room for error but this is definitely not a top 3 reason for their current condition.

[musiqsoulchild]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

There are many successful teams like the Spurs, for a while OKC, Miami who have been successful not blowing money like the Knicks.

The Bulls spend enough to be successful in the NBA. They are not the Mavs or Warriors or Lakers but their spending is enough to build a contender if not for the pathetic GMs they have.

Offcourse, if they spend more, it gives them more room for error but this is definitely not a top 3 reason for their current condition.

Ownership Philosophy
Loyalty
Financial implications

For me these are the top 3 reasons why the Bulls FO is largely irrelevant to the performance of this franchise.

Thibs and NOT GarPax was fired because of ownership philosophy.

We hold on to players too long because of some loyalty. Rose, Noah should have been traded earlier for example.

The same loyalty applies to holding onto folks like Gar, Pax, Pax's brother...etc.

Our "infusion" of fresh talent into the FO has been:

1) Doug Collins
2) Horace Grant

I mean..really?

[JohnnyKILLroy]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

There are many successful teams like the Spurs, for a while OKC, Miami who have been successful not blowing money like the Knicks.

The Bulls spend enough to be successful in the NBA. They are not the Mavs or Warriors or Lakers but their spending is enough to build a contender if not for the pathetic GMs they have.

Offcourse, if they spend more, it gives them more room for error but this is definitely not a top 3 reason for their current condition.

Don’t forget the Jazz. I wish we were the Jazz.

[coldfish]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

Almost every GM out there has to operate within certain boundaries their owner has laid out. Reinsdorf's not unique in that way. A different guard dog is necessary because the team building lacks creativity and innovation. Unless Reinsdorf is preventing them from making trades/pursuing stars, then he's not the only problem.

The Bulls operate like a mid market team. Knowing that they could be one of the highest spenders out there is disappointing. I will stick forever with my mantra that the Bulls are cheap.

With that said, JR gives his FO a tremendous amount of leeway. He isn't Jerry Jones micromanaging the team. He didn't force the Bulls to hire Hoiberg, Boylen, etc. He didn't demand that they sign Thad Young. Draft Doug Mcdermott. The bad decisions of the past 8 years or so are on Gar and/or Paxson.

Just look at the draft. Here is a team of players that was on the board for Chicago from 2012 to 2017:
PG Malcolm Brogdon
SG Donovan Mitchell
SF Kyle Anderson
PF Draymond Green / Larry Nance
C Jokic / Gobert

Its not realistic to expect a FO to hit on 100% of their picks but they are getting close to hitting on 0% of their picks since Butler/Mirotic. That's not on Reinsdorf.

[HomoSapien]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

Almost every GM out there has to operate within certain boundaries their owner has laid out. Reinsdorf's not unique in that way. A different guard dog is necessary because the team building lacks creativity and innovation. Unless Reinsdorf is preventing them from making trades/pursuing stars, then he's not the only problem.

The Bulls operate like a mid market team. Knowing that they could be one of the highest spenders out there is disappointing. I will stick forever with my mantra that the Bulls are cheap.

With that said, JR gives his FO a tremendous amount of leeway. He isn't Jerry Jones micromanaging the team. He didn't force the Bulls to hire Hoiberg, Boylen, etc. He didn't demand that they sign Thad Young. Draft Doug Mcdermott. The bad decisions of the past 8 years or so are on Gar and/or Paxson.

Just look at the draft. Here is a team of players that was on the board for Chicago from 2012 to 2017:
PG Malcolm Brogdon
SG Donovan Mitchell
SF Kyle Anderson
PF Draymond Green / Larry Nance
C Jokic / Gobert

Its not realistic to expect a FO to hit on 100% of their picks but they are getting close to hitting on 0% of their picks since Butler/Mirotic. That's not on Reinsdorf.

To add on to that, here's anoter roster that we easily could have built that probably would have made us contenders in the East:

C. J.Collins/Lopez/
PF.Mirotic/Gibson/Portis
SF.Butler/McDermott/Valentine
SG.Moore/Holiday
PG.Dinwiddie/Rondo/Archi

It wasn't the ability to spend that prevented us from having this roster.

[CBS7]

Oh come on, get on the fire everybody in the building from Pax down to the janitorial staff and start over train.

Oh I'm on the train. I just disagree that the situation is so bleak it would take a new GM years to right the ship. Our franchise is a mess, but the pick/cap (and roster to a lesser extent) situation isn't.

[musiqsoulchild]

Almost every GM out there has to operate within certain boundaries their owner has laid out. Reinsdorf's not unique in that way. A different guard dog is necessary because the team building lacks creativity and innovation. Unless Reinsdorf is preventing them from making trades/pursuing stars, then he's not the only problem.

The Bulls operate like a mid market team. Knowing that they could be one of the highest spenders out there is disappointing. I will stick forever with my mantra that the Bulls are cheap.

With that said, JR gives his FO a tremendous amount of leeway. He isn't Jerry Jones micromanaging the team. He didn't force the Bulls to hire Hoiberg, Boylen, etc. He didn't demand that they sign Thad Young. Draft Doug Mcdermott. The bad decisions of the past 8 years or so are on Gar and/or Paxson.

Just look at the draft. Here is a team of players that was on the board for Chicago from 2012 to 2017:
PG Malcolm Brogdon
SG Donovan Mitchell
SF Kyle Anderson
PF Draymond Green / Larry Nance
C Jokic / Gobert

Its not realistic to expect a FO to hit on 100% of their picks but they are getting close to hitting on 0% of their picks since Butler/Mirotic. That's not on Reinsdorf.

To add on to that, here's anoter roster that we easily could have built that probably would have made us contenders in the East:

C. J.Collins/Lopez/
PF.Mirotic/Gibson/Portis
SF.Butler/McDermott/Valentine
SG.Moore/Holiday
PG.Dinwiddie/Rondo/Archi

It wasn't the ability to spend that prevented us from having this roster.

It wasnt the ability to spend that kept us from having Jimmy, Niko, Rondo, Moore and Dinwiddie?

It most definitely was money and clash of philosophy as the 2 major reasons for not retaining those folks

[dice]

That's the only way I see meaningful change being made: If Paxson retires. I don't see Jerry firing him.

As for the replacement: You'd think it'd have to be someone already within the organization. Colins may not want it, but I could see it going to their G-League GM or something.

Masai Ujiri would be the ultimate pipedream, or Sam Hinkie, but I don't see that ever coming to fruition.

Honestly not sure about even Hinkie... it's not like you can "Process" the draft anymore. What else would have have up his sleeve?

Agree. Not sure what Sam Hinkie's ever done to want him to be running your basketball operation. The only thing we know about him is that he's really really good at building an NBA team that can lose more games than anyone.

the sixers would very likely be better now had hinkie stayed on. and they're good to begin with. because of hinkie. despite colangelo and elton trying to muck things up

[Mech Engineer]

A meaningful change would be to tell Finance that we will be making less profit this coming season.

And signing off on max spending. And spending on getting accomplished coaches.

This is all money related. Has got nothing to do with the FO.

You can replace one guard dog with another, the rancher is still the same

There are many successful teams like the Spurs, for a while OKC, Miami who have been successful not blowing money like the Knicks.

The Bulls spend enough to be successful in the NBA. They are not the Mavs or Warriors or Lakers but their spending is enough to build a contender if not for the pathetic GMs they have.

Offcourse, if they spend more, it gives them more room for error but this is definitely not a top 3 reason for their current condition.

Ownership Philosophy
Loyalty
Financial implications

For me these are the top 3 reasons why the Bulls FO is largely irrelevant to the performance of this franchise.

Thibs and NOT GarPax was fired because of ownership philosophy.

We hold on to players too long because of some loyalty. Rose, Noah should have been traded earlier for example.

The same loyalty applies to holding onto folks like Gar, Pax, Pax's brother...etc.

Our "infusion" of fresh talent into the FO has been:

1) Doug Collins
2) Horace Grant

I mean..really?

Actually the Bulls don't have much loyalty except for Paxson. Again, Gar is just bad background music to Pax's mistakes. All the other roles are controlled mostly by Paxson or they are not so impactful. Every franchise has loyal employees, long term scouts etc..

Again, Thibs was fired because he couldn't get along with Paxson. Paxson wants to coach from the background and he is drunk with reacting to what he perceives as winning coaching strategies and Thibs wouldn't stick to that. If Thibs was following Paxson's orders, he would still be employed. Look at the current team philosophy of playing to their weakness of 3pt shooting...it's because Paxson is enamored with playing that style.

There is no loyalty to players from Reinsdorf except an odd irrelevant case or two. Was he loyal to Felicio or was it Pax's decision?

[johnnyvann840]

Honestly not sure about even Hinkie... it's not like you can "Process" the draft anymore. What else would have have up his sleeve?

Agree. Not sure what Sam Hinkie's ever done to want him to be running your basketball operation. The only thing we know about him is that he's really really good at building an NBA team that can lose more games than anyone.

the sixers would very likely be better now had hinkie stayed on. and they're good to begin with. because of hinkie. despite colangelo and elton trying to muck things up

Meh- they're decent but really not all that good for everything they had to endure. Currently 5th in a crappy horrid Eastern Conf. They're 1-4 in their last 5 games and they are a .500 team since December 1st.

Would they be better right now if he was still there? I don't know that and nobody else does either. Hinkie really doesn't have a proven track record as a professional sports exec, so I'm not sure why people feel like he can run a basketball franchise. As far as Colangelo "mucking things up".. I don't know how much worse it can get than 1-21. The Sixers were 1-21 when Jerry Colangelo came into the picture. I'm not a fan of Bryan Colangelo at all, so maybe Hinkie would have done a better job, but, again, I don't know.

Hinkie had a lot of shots at the draft and he missed on a lot of picks. I would hire him to run my analytics dept for sure, but I'm not sure he's all that great of a sports executive. Maybe he can be, but I don't know because he really has not done anything to make me believe that.

[coldfish]

Oh come on, get on the fire everybody in the building from Pax down to the janitorial staff and start over train.

Oh I'm on the train. I just disagree that the situation is so bleak it would take a new GM years to right the ship. Our franchise is a mess, but the pick/cap (and roster to a lesser extent) situation isn't.

I would say that the Bulls are close to an expansion team. You are right that they don't have any bad deals nor have they given away future picks. That said, they don't have many tradeable assets, foundational players or future pics. Its a clean slate.

Building a team up almost from scratch is pretty dam hard. Not many expansion teams go to being contenders within 3 years. I stick by what I said. Its going to be a while, IMHO, before we see a team winning 55 games in Chicago. If I am wrong, I will be happy.

[kulaz3000]

Oh come on, get on the fire everybody in the building from Pax down to the janitorial staff and start over train.

I know you meant it in jest, but this is a basketball operations issue not an basketball organisation issue as a whole. The marketing side of things for the Bulls has been amazing, and who knows what other people within the organisation do, but only a handful of people within the organisation impact the product on the floor and shouldn't be affected by this 'meaningful' change if they are doing their job.

That said, I'll believe it when I actually see this meaningful change happen. I've heard this song and dance before. Usually it's the head coach or players who are used as the scapegoat, let's see if management changes are on the horizon.

[Jeffster81]

This feels like a situation in which teams talk about a X trade for a bit then it fizzles and dies. Then the "trade talks" leaks a few weeks later, long after talks are dead.

Just pull the dang trigger. Obviously they think a change is needed, so why wait?

[dice]

Agree. Not sure what Sam Hinkie's ever done to want him to be running your basketball operation. The only thing we know about him is that he's really really good at building an NBA team that can lose more games than anyone.

the sixers would very likely be better now had hinkie stayed on. and they're good to begin with. because of hinkie. despite colangelo and elton trying to muck things up

Meh- they're decent but really not all that good for everything they had to endure. Currently 5th in a crappy horrid Eastern Conf. They're 1-4 in their last 5 games and they are a .500 team since December 1st.

Would they be better right now if he was still there? I don't know that and nobody else does either. Hinkie really doesn't have a proven track record as a professional sports exec, so I'm not sure why people feel like he can run a basketball franchise. As far as Colangelo "mucking things up".. I don't know how much worse it can get than 1-21.

except that the 1-21 was intentional. the fans knew it and were OK with it

hinkie proved that he knew how to manage assets. he very likely would not have traded for fultz. he would not have traded for both jimmy butler and tobias harris, if either. i am quite confident that there would be a better supporting cast around simmons and embiid if hinkie were at the helm

Hinkie had a lot of shots at the draft and he missed on a lot of picks.

how many teams in the league have a better 1-2 punch that they drafted than the sixers? bucks w/ giannis and donte? nuggets with jokic and...jamal murray? mavs with luka and...jalen brunson?

embiid and simmons are both long-term franchise cornerstones. tatum might have ended up one as well. the kinds of players that potentially spend their entire careers with the teams that drafted them. most teams don't have one such player. hinkie accomplished exactly what he intended to by taking a lot of swings. will it ever result in a championship? who knows. that's tough to pull off no matter how you go about it. there's always some degree of luck involved

half a dozen teams have had more success than the sixers since ben simmons hit the court. tops. warriors, raptors, bucks, rockets, celtics, jazz