# Rockets pursuing Asik? (Update: 3 day timer likely to start Friday or Sat)



## Ragingbull33 (Apr 10, 2005)

NBA sources: Rockets GM Daryl Morey planning to meet with Bulls restricted free agent center Omer Asik tonight in Los Angeles.

http://twitter.com/MarkBermanFox26/status/219170783921045504


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Work a sign and trade with them for Kevin Martin. They're rumored to wanting to amnesty him anyways to open up more space.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> Work a sign and trade with them for Kevin Martin. They're rumored to wanting to amnesty him anyways to open up more space.


That would be difficult to make salaries match as I think Omer can only make ~$5ish million his first two years. It would have been virtually impossible under the old CBA, and not fluent enough with the new one to know if rules got more lax. Turning Asik + Rip lets say into Kevin Martin would be a great move if there is some way to make it work.

Sign a starting PG with our MMLE (Kidd, Billups, ?) and then add a vet minimum big man and maybe an undrafted rookie to round out the frontcourt.

Kidd / Teague / Partial guaranteed contract (Rose)
Martin / Korver / Butler
Deng / Korver / Butler
Boozer / Taj
Noah / FA / Rookie

That would certainly be interesting especially if Rose can return in January or Febuary, and allows us all the flexibility in the world next offseason to sign or trade Taj, Korver, and K Mart.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Rhyder said:


> That would be difficult to make salaries match as I think Omer can only make ~$5ish million his first two years. It would have been virtually impossible under the old CBA, and not fluent enough with the new one to know if rules got more lax. Turning Asik + Rip lets say into Kevin Martin would be a great move if there is some way to make it work.
> 
> Sign a starting PG with our MMLE (Kidd, Billups, ?) and then add a vet minimum big man and maybe an undrafted rookie to round out the frontcourt.
> 
> ...


Asik+Korver for Martin

PG-(MMLE)/Teague/Lucas?
SG-Martin/Hamilton/Butler
SF-Deng/Butler/Hamilton
PF-Boozer/Gibson/Scal
C- Noah/Gibson/minimum


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> Asik+Korver for Martin
> 
> PG-(MMLE)/Teague/Lucas?
> SG-Martin/Hamilton/Butler
> ...


Under the old CBA, whatever player you were signing and trading's salary would be halved, making it very difficult to trade big contracts unless you got multiple players involved to make the percentages work. Asik can be signed by another team to $5M in year 1. If that's halved, $2.5 million. We would have to add ~$7.5M in salary I think by memory.

If willing to pay the tax, we could do something like Asik + Brewer + 1 of Korver/Hamilton. However, we are going to have trouble fielding 12 players and we don't know how much LT JR is willing to pay this season.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

KC Johnson: 
Hearing Rockets prepared to offer Omer Asik in the $8 million range annually.


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

blazer, wolves and rockets interested in omer.

would it be possible to swing a s&t with portland for wes matthews?

i like omer for 5mio but 8 is to much for a backup c. the bulls have no flexibility already.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> Work a sign and trade with them for Kevin Martin. They're rumored to wanting to amnesty him anyways to open up more space.


come on now.



mvP to the Wee said:


> KC Johnson:
> Hearing Rockets prepared to offer Omer Asik in the $8 million range annually.


lol. morey would be putting his career on the line with something like that.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Rockets and Asik agree to 3 year 25.1 million dollar deal. Final year will be 15.1 million.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> Rockets and Asik agree to 3 year 25.1 million dollar deal. Final year will be 15.1 million.


Holy cow. 

Do we intend to match that? I know it's a lot of money for the final year, but it's only one year and he's our best interior defender.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



garnett said:


> Holy cow.
> 
> Do we intend to match that? I know it's a lot of money for the final year, but it's only one year and he's our best interior defender.


But they have some other contracts hitting big money then. Namely Noah's.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

well... that's too bad. I really like Asik as a defensive center, but I don't really see how we can match that if it really is 15 million in that last year.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> KC Johnson:
> Hearing Rockets prepared to offer Omer Asik in the $8 million range annually.


It's all over twitter that Omer signed a 3-year 25.1 million dollar offer sheet. Hollinger states his max deal for three years can only be structured:

12-13: $5.0M
13-14: $5.2M
14-15: $14.1M

Total = $24.3M

Don't think the Bulls should match that one. We'd be pushing the tax without signing Taj next season and only 7 guys under contract. The year after, we wouldn't be able to go after a max level guy even if we don't re-sign Luol and amnesty Boozer, basically forcing us to re-sing Luol, which then screws up when Boozer's contract was up. Re-signing Asik kills our future flexibility, and given a choice between keeping Taj or Asik, I think Taj is the right answer.

Too bad, as I wanted to trade Asik last year for another player or a pick.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Do you match under the premise that you have a couple of years to move him before that big number kicks in?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

How do you fix the Rockets? With an aluminum ****ing baseball bat. Darryl Morey can't be fired soon enough for me.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Bye bye Omer. 

15 million for a defensive center with horrible hands? Let Houston give out one of the worst contracts in history, don't match it.

Things keep getting better for our bulls, lost or will horribly over pay our back up big , draft a backup instead of making a splash and we still have not commited long term to one of the best coaches in all of basketball.

Gotta love the bulls front office.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



thebizkit69u said:


> Bye bye Omer.
> 
> 15 million for a defensive center with horrible hands? Let Houston give out one of the worst contracts in history, don't match it.
> 
> ...


Its not 15 mil a year. If there's one thing that drives me nuts its people who skew shit to try to prove their point.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Can't believe that I am saying this but DON'T MATCH IT. $15M for a back up and offensively challenged center. Spend that money on physical therapy for Noah and Boozer.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

I actually would match it. He's on reasonable salary for 2 years and then ugly for 1 year, but that one ugly year he's an expiring and can be used as a huge trade asset.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> I actually would match it. He's on reasonable salary for 2 years and then ugly for 1 year, but that one ugly year he's an expiring and can be used as a huge trade asset.


Smart man.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> I actually would match it. He's on reasonable salary for 2 years and then ugly for 1 year, but that one ugly year he's an expiring and can be used as a huge trade asset.


I don't view the $15M dollar value as much of a problem, much better than if his contract could be structured 8/8/8. However, do you bank on trading Asik as a large expiring, or do you bank on being able to retool when Deng's contract is up a year sooner, you can amnesty Boozer and go after a max FA? Having Asik is not worth not being able to sign a good FA if we can't find a consolidation trade.

Although it seems that I value Asik less than most on the forum. Keep in mind that Asik is a 10-15mpg rotation player in the playoffs. Is that role worth paying $8M per year and losing our flexibility for three years. To me, no way.


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

This does put the Bulls in sort of a bind. The actual deal Houston offered is $25 million over 3 years, with the contract back loaded so the last year it big. I am glad for Omer, whom I like, but agree with several of the posters like PD and theBizKit that it is too much to pay. Even with the arguement that "mvP to the Wee" made about using the 3rd year of the contract as trade bait is not enough to justify the move in my view.

So what are the options?

The free agent centers available, include players like Aaron Gray, Eddy Curry, Hasheem Thabeet and Daniel Orton. There more free agents out there but if you do not want to pay big money, this is the kind of player you may be faced with signing. Looking at these names, sort of helps me understand why Houston made the offer it did to Asik. Maybe the Bulls could find someone in Europe, however I keep remembering Dragon Tarlac (uhhh).

What I would have liked to see, is the Bulls take someone like Festus Ezeli or Bernard James in the draft, then spend money in free agency on a point gaurd. However, they seemed to have through Teague had more long term potential.

Since they did take Teague, I hope the pass on matching the Houston offer and then go after the best free agent back up center they can find. We could be in a lot of trouble if Noah missed any significant games to injury this year.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Fergus said:


> The free agent centers available, include players like Aaron Gray, Eddy Curry, Hasheem Thabeet and Daniel Orton. There more free agents out there but if you do not want to pay big money, this is the kind of player you may be faced with signing. Looking at these names, sort of helps me understand why Houston made the offer it did to Asik. Maybe the Bulls could find someone in Europe, however I keep remembering Dragon Tarlac (uhhh).
> 
> What I would have liked to see, is the Bulls take someone like Festus Ezeli or Bernard James in the draft, then spend money in free agency on a point gaurd. However, they seemed to have through Teague had more long term potential.
> 
> Since they did take Teague, I hope the pass on matching the Houston offer and then go after the best free agent back up center they can find. We could be in a lot of trouble if Noah missed any significant games to injury this year.


I think they should use the MMLE on the best starting PG willing to take a 1 or 2 year deal, with the following year as a team option if the player wishes to add that. Sign a vet minimum big on a one or two year deal, and then add a fifth frontcourt guy going the undrafted rookie approach.

MMLE PG/Teague/JLIII (Rose)
Rip/Korver/Butler
Deng/Butler/Korver
Boozer/Gibson
Noah/Vet/Rookie

Does someone have a list of the UFA bigs available? I don't have time today to do the research myself.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Let him go.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Also, we could have the full MLE to use if we do let Asik go. Haven't done the math to see what other players we could retain. I would like to keep Korver out of he, CJ, Brewer, and JL3 if possible.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



R-Star said:


> Its not 15 mil a year. If there's one thing that drives me nuts its people who skew shit to try to prove their point.


First of all, I never said Omer will be making 15 million a year. The fact that hes going to be paid 15 million in the last year of his deal is what I was referring to. Thats just way too much money to pay a backup big, especially a defensive minded big who is backing up a defensive minded big. 

I like Omer but no way in hell should we match the offer. Year 3 would be a joke, paying a combined 25+ million for Omer and Noah alone?! As for the trade idea, It sounds good in theory but who knows what our situation would be like in 3 years, If Noah got injured it would almost make a guy like Omer a must keep, and at 15 million thats just a problem I would not wan't the Bulls to be dealing with.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Why not split the MLE between Oden and Brandon Roy?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



thebizkit69u said:


> Why not split the MLE between Oden and Brandon Roy?



Last I heard, Oden isn't looking to sign with anyone until next season.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



thebizkit69u said:


> Bye bye Omer.
> 
> 15 million for a defensive center with horrible hands? *Let Houston give out one of the worst contracts in history, don't match it.*
> 
> ...


DeAndre Jordan is making substantially more than this and he's a much more limited player than Asik. He literally isn't good at anything. I get that you guys love hyperbole, but this contract is hardly terrible by the standards of NBA big men. It really isn't surprising at all. There's a thread on this board where lots of people predicted that Asik would get this sort of contract about 2 or 3 months ago. It certainly isn't a bargain, but this is the way things are. 

Hard to see how you put this on the Bulls front office. Explain to me what they've done wrong here. They drafted a good foreign player. He worked out pretty well and in fact he performed well enough that he made a ton of money. How does this reflect poorly on Paxson and Forman? Were they supposed to bench Asik so that no one would figure out he could play? Maybe hire Tonya Harding to whack him on the knee with a piece of pipe?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Diable said:


> DeAndre Jordan is making substantially more than this and he's a much more limited player than Asik. He literally isn't good at anything. I get that you guys love hyperbole, but this contract is hardly terrible by the standards of NBA big men. It really isn't surprising at all. There's a thread on this board where lots of people predicted that Asik would get this sort of contract about 2 or 3 months ago. It certainly isn't a bargain, but this is the way things are.
> 
> Hard to see how you put this on the Bulls front office. Explain to me what they've done wrong here. They drafted a good foreign player. He worked out pretty well and in fact he performed well enough that he made a ton of money. How does this reflect poorly on Paxson and Forman? Were they supposed to bench Asik so that no one would figure out he could play? Maybe hire Tonya Harding to whack him on the knee with a piece of pipe?


Let me know what he does so much greater than Jordan. I'll answer with nothing. Is he a noticeably better shot blocker, rebounder, defender? No. 

I'm so ****ing tired of people just coming up with utter bullshit when talking about players. "Oh Omer Asik is so fluid and smooth." (that was Adam) no he ****ing isn't. Asik is a good backup center. Not great. Not starting quality. No. 


Can we quit this? Can we quit trying to overrate players to try to make yourselves look like some sort of brilliant talent scouts?


----------



## Ben (Nov 7, 2006)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Diable said:


> DeAndre Jordan is making substantially more than this and he's a much more limited player than Asik. He literally isn't good at anything. *I get that you guys love hyperbole*, but this contract is hardly terrible by the standards of NBA big men. It really isn't surprising at all. There's a thread on this board where lots of people predicted that Asik would get this sort of contract about 2 or 3 months ago. It certainly isn't a bargain, but this is the way things are.
> 
> Hard to see how you put this on the Bulls front office. Explain to me what they've done wrong here. They drafted a good foreign player. He worked out pretty well and in fact he performed well enough that he made a ton of money. How does this reflect poorly on Paxson and Forman? Were they supposed to bench Asik so that no one would figure out he could play? Maybe hire Tonya Harding to whack him on the knee with a piece of pipe?


The sentence before the bolded one makes the bolded one so much better.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

I don't see what the big deal is with paying him so much money for only one year. Amnesty Boozer if you have to who's getting a similiar amount every year and doing absolutely nothing on the court. Asik guards the C's Noah can't, he's good insurance when Jo gets injured and apart from Rose the reason why we're a good team is our big men depth and interior defense. If we want any chance at beating the Heat over the next 5 years we need interior D and Asik is our best interior defender. 

First I read posts complaining the Bulls won't spend any money, then when the chance comes to do so they say don't spend money. One year of big money isn't the end of the world, particularly when the first two were relatively cheap.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Rhyder said:


> It's all over twitter that Omer signed a 3-year 25.1 million dollar offer sheet. Hollinger states his max deal for three years can only be structured:
> 
> 12-13: $5.0M
> 13-14: $5.2M
> ...


1. Who cares about the tax? The tax has to do with Reinsdorf's profits, something I'm not remotely concerned with. I understand concern over the cap, because that governs who your team can and can't sign. I'm not concerned with Jerry's profitability.

2. Why would that force us to re-sign Deng!? Seriously, why!!? Isn't the argument for the Boozer signing that we had to sign him because Deng was signed. Well, if we didn't sign him, we'd be that much closer to being under the cap wouldn't we. Amnesty was not forseeable, but we could amnesty Deng right now.

This whole idea of having to sign one mediocre guy because you signed another mediocre guy is ridiculous. You win with stars. Derrick Rose plus another legit star in a good league. So the only thing you HAVE to do when dealing with non-stars is make sure you don't commit to them in a way that will prevent you from signing STARS. 

And before jnr chimes in, I'm not claiming that having cap space guarantees you a second star. You need a GM who can make a sale or even find a great player in the draft. If you don't have a good or great GM, no strategy will work. 

3. Neither Asik or Gibson matter. Gibson isn't worth big money either. Nothing more than 5-6 mill at the most. He's another player who CAN'T f-ing SCORE. If Gibson had a dribble drive game and a mid range jumper, great. He has neither. If we're going to win it's going to be through a second star. And if we have a good enough second star, worrying about Gibson or Asik will be moot. 

But, much like yourself, I doubt Paxson or Forman or whoever their new "don't blame me" deflection clown is is probably not thinking "second star or die." They're probably thinking about things like useless defensive centers who are inconsistent defensively, have a mid major college offensive game and play 14 minutes a game.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



mvP to the Wee said:


> I actually would match it. He's on reasonable salary for 2 years and then ugly for 1 year, but that one ugly year he's an expiring and can be used as a huge trade asset.


Can you please stop talking about trade assets until Paxson or Forman or "garpax" actually uses an asset (drum roll) in a trade?!

Since 2005 we've been "oozing with oodles of assets" (yes, that phrase that would make Boy George harder than a slab of granite was used on this board with giddy glee; it was really hard to read).

What has it materialized into? What?! I'm begging for any of you to tell me. 

You matching it is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard and qualifies you to be the picture of Bernstein's definition of "basketball dumb." 

I'm a harsh critic and even I expect nothing of the 2013 Bulls. So you get out of next year and you have:

Rose at around 19 mill per for years
Boozer for 2 years at 15.3 and 16.8
Deng expiring at the end of 2014
Noah for 3 years at 12, 13 and 14
The Bulls payroll for 2013-14 can be in the mid 50s at it's absolute lowest, maybe more like 60.

Now you go into 2014 and you have a chance to find out if we really can beat the Heat. I say no, but you get to find out. Then at the end of that season, Deng is gone, you can amnesty Boozer and honestly, if you sign the right guy, Noah as your #3 at 13 mill with only 2 more years after 2013-14 is not god awful, and you have the Charlotte pick 2 drafts away at the most.

Under your "let's match it" rationale, now you're going into the summer of 2014 still at 54 the following season amongst only Rose, Boozer, Noah and Asik. 

Wow. That's awful.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Fergus said:


> This does put the Bulls in sort of a bind. The actual deal Houston offered is $25 million over 3 years, with the contract back loaded so the last year it big. I am glad for Omer, whom I like, but agree with several of the posters like PD and theBizKit that it is too much to pay. Even with the arguement that "mvP to the Wee" made about using the 3rd year of the contract as trade bait is not enough to justify the move in my view.
> 
> So what are the options?
> 
> ...


Or you could have traded Deng for Andre Drummond, because you're not playing for a ring next year anyway. Even if we get no one, revert back to the fact that we're not playing for a ring next year anyway lol.

The Asik offer is reason to yawn about a guy who played 14 MPG, averaged 2.9 PPG, 4.4 RPG, can't score or threaten the basket in any way that says "NBA" to the novice viewer and is frankly inconsistent with his rah rah defense --- making some decent scratch for being worse than Will Perdue. 

Good for him; time to move on.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Rhyder said:


> Also, we could have the full MLE to use if we do let Asik go. Haven't done the math to see what other players we could retain. I would like to keep Korver out of he, CJ, Brewer, and JL3 if possible.


When you say "keep Korver" tell me that you mean on a one year deal, right??


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



garnett said:


> I don't see what the big deal is with paying him so much money for only one year. Amnesty Boozer if you have to who's getting a similiar amount every year and doing absolutely nothing on the court. Asik guards the C's Noah can't, he's good insurance when Jo gets injured and apart from Rose the reason why we're a good team is our big men depth and interior defense. If we want any chance at beating the Heat over the next 5 years we need interior D and Asik is our best interior defender.
> 
> First I read posts complaining the Bulls won't spend any money, then when the chance comes to do so they say don't spend money. One year of big money isn't the end of the world, particularly when the first two were relatively cheap.


So you don't see any issue with giving out a contract NOW that would put the Bulls over the cap, or too close to the cap to get a guy who is actually worth 15 mill in the summer of 2014 if we let Deng walk and amnesty Boozer.

Good god, now I know how we got in this mess.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> When you say "keep Korver" tell me that you mean on a one year deal, right??


Keep Korver as in pick up his option, yes. Even if we waive everyone and sign a real MLE FA, it's going to be tough to fill in the holes. Keep Korver for depth, simply because you can. I'd rather split the MLE in some way on a vet PG for no more than 2 years and SG. Definitely wouldn't mind rolling the dice on Roy. Give him a 2-year $5M deal with a team option for $5M in year 3 or something along those lines.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> 1. Who cares about the tax? The tax has to do with Reinsdorf's profits, something I'm not remotely concerned with. I understand concern over the cap, because that governs who your team can and can't sign. I'm not concerned with Jerry's profitability.


If you are over the LT for two consecutive seasons, you can only sign minimum players. I don't want to be put in that situation simply to keep Asik.



> 2. Why would that force us to re-sign Deng!?
> 
> This whole idea of having to sign one mediocre guy because you signed another mediocre guy is ridiculous. You win with stars. Derrick Rose plus another legit star in a good league. So the only thing you HAVE to do when dealing with non-stars is make sure you don't commit to them in a way that will prevent you from signing STARS.
> 
> And before jnr chimes in, I'm not claiming that having cap space guarantees you a second star. You need a GM who can make a sale or even find a great player in the draft. If you don't have a good or great GM, no strategy will work.


Have some foresight. When Deng's contract is up, we would have too much money tied up in players to even sign a MLE player. So do we go after some $3M value backup, or do we amnesty Boozer and still not have enough room under the cap to go after a max player. Lose Deng and Boozer, and you are looking at signing a Marcus Thornton type to replace the loss of both of them. Re-signing Asik means we have no shot at grabbing a star in FA until after Asik's contract is up. That basically means Boozer is here for the duration of his contract as well. Let Asik walk, and you can be a max player FA player next offseason (if we choose).



> 3. Neither Asik or Gibson matter. Gibson isn't worth big money either. Nothing more than 5-6 mill at the most. He's another player who CAN'T f-ing SCORE. If Gibson had a dribble drive game and a mid range jumper, great. He has neither. If we're going to win it's going to be through a second star. And if we have a good enough second star, worrying about Gibson or Asik will be moot.
> 
> But, much like yourself, I doubt Paxson or Forman or whoever their new "don't blame me" deflection clown is is probably not thinking "second star or die." They're probably thinking about things like useless defensive centers who are inconsistent defensively, have a mid major college offensive game and play 14 minutes a game.


Having a quality bench matters. Signing Taj at $5-6M would be a good value for a 7th man. Signing Asik at $8M as an 8th/9th is not a good use of funds at all. I really wish we had traded Asik for a draft pick last offseason and signed a vet FA big to be fourth in the rotation if letting him walk should he gotten this offer was in the cards.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



thebizkit69u said:


> Why not split the MLE between Oden and Brandon Roy?





Hoodey said:


> Or you could have traded Deng for Andre Drummond, because you're not playing for a ring next year anyway. Even if we get no one, revert back to the fact that we're not playing for a ring next year anyway lol.
> 
> The Asik offer is reason to yawn about a guy who played 14 MPG, averaged 2.9 PPG, 4.4 RPG, can't score or threaten the basket in any way that says "NBA" to the novice viewer and is frankly inconsistent with his rah rah defense --- making some decent scratch for being worse than Will Perdue.
> 
> Good for him; time to move on.


You always do this in your posts...

How do you know the Bulls didnt try to trade Deng for a lottery pick in this yrs draft? Maybe the other team said no, and the Bulls moved forward.... You often speak like you know the absolute truth, when in fact, your words, are nothing but opinions, just like everyone else.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

With Dwight most likely going to the Nets it makes it even more important that we sign Asik. Howard throws Noah around like a rag doll because he's a PF playing C whereas Asik usually does a good job on him. We have no hope of beating a Howard lead team with Noah guarding him.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



garnett said:


> With Dwight most likely going to the Nets it makes it even more important that we sign Asik. Howard throws Noah around like a rag doll because he's a PF playing C whereas Asik usually does a good job on him. We have no hope of beating a Howard lead team with Noah guarding him.


Well, first, Howard isn't a guarantee to go to Brooklyn...but, if he does, I don't see that as a reason to go out and overpay Asik. Yes, Howard has his way with Noah, but he has his way with most players. Brooklyn, if they get Dwight, doesn't become a serious threat in my eyes. DRose has owned DWill. Williams just doesn't have the quickness on defense to slow Rose. On the other end, Rose is strong enough to not get pushed around by Williams. Getting JJ and Howard is nice, but they are losing every other part of their team. Without any depth or a bench, it just isn't going to work. Basketball might be a sport driven by individuals, but it still takes a team to win...and Brooklyn just isn't going to have a great team, or at least a good enough team to warrant us running out to overpay Asik.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Rhyder said:


> Have some foresight. When Deng's contract is up, we would have too much money tied up in players to even sign a MLE player. So do we go after some $3M value backup, or do we amnesty Boozer and still not have enough room under the cap to go after a max player. Lose Deng and Boozer, and you are looking at signing a Marcus Thornton type to replace the loss of both of them. Re-signing Asik means we have no shot at grabbing a star in FA until after Asik's contract is up. That basically means Boozer is here for the duration of his contract as well. Let Asik walk, and you can be a max player FA player next offseason (if we choose).


I guess I'm kind of arguing your point here, but my point is that under no circumstances do we re-sign Deng. His contract has been an exercise in overpaying utter mediocrity and those who disagree with me on most things will argue that "well, we had to sign Boozer, because we'd lose the cap room the following year." Why? Because of Deng's contract that you don't give to a player in year one of a superstars career unless he's going to be Scottie Pippen/Kevin McHale, etc. 

Does it mean I want Asik here? No. That's a strawman. I'm saying even if somehow, by some freak accident it would look like "we're better off keeping Deng at point X." No, we're not. Not unless he wants to come back at half of what he's making now. 



> Having a quality bench matters. Signing Taj at $5-6M would be a good value for a 7th man. Signing Asik at $8M as an 8th/9th is not a good use of funds at all. I really wish we had traded Asik for a draft pick last offseason and signed a vet FA big to be fourth in the rotation if letting him walk should he gotten this offer was in the cards.


Having a quality bench matters as a difference between two teams who have stars like Miami's and Oklahoma City's. Accumulating well paid bench players (for their role) while failing to address the fact that we don't have a second star is futile. This organization needs to ask "how do we get that star."

It appears Miami can think big. Now, we see freaking New Jersey ERR Brooklyn can think big. John Paxson is apparently above that. Or, for anyone else, John Paxson and whoever his deflection flunkee is nowadays.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Firefight said:


> You always do this in your posts...
> 
> How do you know the Bulls didnt try to trade Deng for a lottery pick in this yrs draft? Maybe the other team said no, and the Bulls moved forward.... You often speak like you know the absolute truth, when in fact, your words, are nothing but opinions, just like everyone else.


It's hilarious. There is always this presumption that Paxson can make a good trade. Fans here were giddy in 2005 because we were "oozing with oodles of assets." Ever since then I've heard year after year of talk about trade assets, consolidation trades, etc. And why wouldn't you talk about TRADES if you're Pro Paxson. You know he can't sell crap right? You know that what Jerry West DELIVERED when he inked Shaq, or the Riley sales job in 2010 just isn't in Paxson's DNA right? 

So I've been hearing about all of these trades, and NOTHING. Since 05, what has this man or his flunkee EVER traded for? EVER?!?! Seriously, I'd like to know. 

But the best part is, despite the fact that he hasn't traded for a mop bucket in 7 years, somehow there's this presumption that he's offered no good deals ever, and that he's always looking.

So you tell me. Is there a boycott of the man? Will nobody deal with him? Because I'm trying to figure out how a guy who causes his supporters to get excited about trade assets can't make a trade. It's funny to me.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



garnett said:


> With Dwight most likely going to the Nets it makes it even more important that we sign Asik. Howard throws Noah around like a rag doll because he's a PF playing C whereas Asik usually does a good job on him. We have no hope of beating a Howard lead team with Noah guarding him.


But you're paying Noah 12 million. If he's a "PF playing C" who can be exposed by centers, is that good money.

Here's the point. You, or Paxson, is like a bad chess player. It starts off with committing your bishop to a square with no attacking possibilities. Next thing you know you make a constricting pawn move. So to try to generate something you're making risky rook moves. Before you know it, you're placing your queen on risky squares to try to generate something.

Noah was BAD MONEY! He was a role player who is NOT a starting center if you want to compete for a title. So, instead of acknowledging that, moving him and trying to gain flexibility to get out from under a player with a flawed contract, you're contemplating sacking your queen for a knight (signing Asik). Much like the sacrifice by the 1400 rated player against the expert, signing Asik will turn out to be a disaster.

Contracts don't have independent vacuum values. They fit together. Before you sign Noah, you better foresee problems that signing a 6'11" 245 player with PG shoulders who gets thrown around like a rag doll will potentially cause.

The definition of an "unforeseen problem" is signing this guy and it leading to you feeling like you need to pay OMER ASIK 15 million.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Firefight said:


> Well, first, Howard isn't a guarantee to go to Brooklyn...but, if he does, I don't see that as a reason to go out and overpay Asik. Yes, Howard has his way with Noah, but he has his way with most players. Brooklyn, if they get Dwight, doesn't become a serious threat in my eyes. DRose has owned DWill. Williams just doesn't have the quickness on defense to slow Rose. On the other end, Rose is strong enough to not get pushed around by Williams. Getting JJ and Howard is nice, but they are losing every other part of their team. Without any depth or a bench, it just isn't going to work. Basketball might be a sport driven by individuals, but it still takes a team to win...and Brooklyn just isn't going to have a great team, or at least a good enough team to warrant us running out to overpay Asik.


You're kind of focusing on one advantage and ignoring another. 

If Rose penetrates by Williams, guess whose waiting in the paint? Howard. I don't think Bulls fans get the idea that if you only have one scorer, the other team will play defense as a team on that scorer and then try to outscore you on the other end.

Now, on the other end, Howard has an advantage on Noah right in front of the basket. Hm.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Three years is a long time, who knows which players will or won't be here? Noah is valuable on this team because he's pretty much our second playmaker as pathetic as that sounds. If we can get another player or two that's actually capable of dribbling a basketball then Noah's strength isn't really needed and he just becomes another overpaid defensive C. Asik's deal is peanuts compared to his so maybe in a couple of years we look to trade Noah and we go forward with a true C that won't be manhandled for the next 8-10 years. 

And just for the record yes I think Noah's deal is atrocious.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Anyone who thinks Noah is on anything but a fair deal is naive/delusional/in denial about the pay NBA centers earn.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> Anyone who thinks Noah is on anything but a fair deal is naive/delusional/in denial about the pay NBA centers earn.


 I was going to say the same thing but figured I would get bashed for loving Paxson some how.

You can't compare Noah to Howard or great centers of the past, because the NBA game has changed. That's one reason I wish we would of traded Asik last year when his value was the highest. Asik is a good defender, but has zero offense. His defense is useless against teams like the Heat and most of the NBA because they don't have dominate centers anymore... That's why teams can win without a great center (nowadays)...

Noah is perfect for todays NBA... He isn't the perfect fit for the Bulls because they need more offense, but if they get a second scorer behind Rose, and have Boozer or Deng as a 3rd option, then Noah, and what he brings to the table every night is perfect.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



garnett said:


> Three years is a long time, who knows which players will or won't be here? Noah is valuable on this team because he's pretty much our second playmaker as pathetic as that sounds. If we can get another player or two that's actually capable of dribbling a basketball then Noah's strength isn't really needed and he just becomes another overpaid defensive C. Asik's deal is peanuts compared to his so maybe in a couple of years we look to trade Noah and we go forward with a true C that won't be manhandled for the next 8-10 years.
> 
> And just for the record yes I think Noah's deal is atrocious.


Okay, but you're still concentrating on what I've finally figured out is the fallacy of Bulls fandom.

You're talking about improving the Bulls roster from the bottom end instead of the top.

The Bulls bottom and middle roster is fine. It's not going to supplant a second star like Westbrook or Wade in the playoffs because the NBA doesn't work that way.

We need improvement on the TOP end. We need to figure out how to get there as quickly as possible; mainly by cutting salary and not adding more bad salary while also taking some risks in the draft or as far as trading for picks. 

This idea that if we add Nash or add Roy or re-up Asik, or a million things I've heard from Bulls fans, how does it help the top of our roster?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> Anyone who thinks Noah is on anything but a fair deal is naive/delusional/in denial about the pay NBA centers earn.


But this is your problem jnr. You view contracts in terms of equity and not in terms of a plan to construct a quality team that works together under financial rules.

We signed Deng and Noah and therefore "had to" sign Boozer. In the meantime, while there are many scenarios where all three of those COULD BE good contracts for teams in vastly different situations, we don't have a number 2. The top of our roster is very weak. You know how I know? KC Johnson, who always wants to know why people are so mad at the Bulls, finally said the other day, "well guys, the Bulls have never had a second star. Their depth is the second star." Bernstein accurately refuted that by pointing out that depth won't beat legit second stars in the playoffs.

I'm really not concerned with whether or not Noah's deal is FAIR. Is it good for the Bulls? No. Because in unison, the Boozer, Deng and Noah deals have left us with no second star and no money to get one if one becomes available. 

If this team had a young Paul Pierce as our second star and we had a chance to land Noah, might it be good? Sure. Might it be good if we had Scottie Pippen making 19 mill but we just barely had 11 to offer Noah? Sure. 

Has it been good for us? No. Is it fair? I'm not concerned with the perception of sweat to money ratio for these guys. I don't care if they've "put their dues in" "sweating it out." That's Bob Knight, Gene Hackman in Hoosiers rah rah crap.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Firefight said:


> I was going to say the same thing but figured I would get bashed for loving Paxson some how.
> 
> You can't compare Noah to Howard or great centers of the past, because the NBA game has changed. That's one reason I wish we would of traded Asik last year when his value was the highest. Asik is a good defender, but has zero offense. His defense is useless against teams like the Heat and most of the NBA because they don't have dominate centers anymore... That's why teams can win without a great center (nowadays)...
> 
> Noah is perfect for todays NBA... He isn't the perfect fit for the Bulls because they need more offense, but if they get a second scorer behind Rose, and have Boozer or Deng as a 3rd option, then Noah, and what he brings to the table every night is perfect.


But how has it changed? You always hear this. Look at the power players for recent champions

99 - Duncan 
00 - O'neal
01 - O'neal
02 - O'neal
03 - Duncan
04 - Wallace
05 - Duncan 
06 - O'neal
07 - Duncan
08 - Perkins
09 - Bynum
10 - Bynum
11 - Chandler

In those 13 years, I see:

1. A startling 10 years in which the winning team had a guy who could function in a traditional post pivot role and be an offensive threat, sometimes with another guy who could do so (Robinson, Gasol).
2. Two years in which the starting center was a muscle bound goon who pushed people around
3. One year in which the center was 7'1" with out-of-the-gym leaping and 60%+ FG shooting mostly off of threats created by others - great help and man defense and the ability to hold his ground.

Did Bosh change things? Yes. But Noah is not Bosh. Bosh was able to exploit the fact that Perkins isn't there to score, he's there to beat you up, but Bosh was too great of a combination of atheliticism AND scoring offensively for Perkins to match up. 

You're using an extreme example - "Bosh victimizing Perkins" and then trying to apply it to a guy in Noah who has NO HOPE OR DREAM to do what Bosh did. 

If Noah starts handling the basketball like Bosh and gets his explosiveness, sure, I'll start listening. Until then you're retreading this "game is changing" stuff from Sam Smith, Mark D'Antoni, etc. And guess what. The idea of the Suns abandoning the center sounded great at the time with their big regular season winning totals and their plausible deniability that something could come in the future. But nothing ever came. They ended up sucking it in the playoffs. 

At the end of the day Noah traded for Bosh is the same as Noah traded for Bynum. I'll take a legit second star just as soon as I'll take a legit center like Bynum. Noah is neither.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> But this is your problem jnr. You view contracts in terms of equity and not in terms of a plan to construct a quality team that works together under financial rules.
> 
> We signed Deng and Noah and therefore "had to" sign Boozer. In the meantime, while there are many scenarios where all three of those COULD BE good contracts for teams in vastly different situations, we don't have a number 2. The top of our roster is very weak. You know how I know? KC Johnson, who always wants to know why people are so mad at the Bulls, finally said the other day, "well guys, the Bulls have never had a second star. Their depth is the second star." Bernstein accurately refuted that by pointing out that depth won't beat legit second stars in the playoffs.
> 
> ...



All of this invective is entirely unrelated tommy post, but thanks.

In the future, you can keep commentary about my "problem" the hell to yourself.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> All of this invective is entirely unrelated tommy post, but thanks.
> 
> In the future, you can keep commentary about my "problem" the hell to yourself.


You made a one line post that I directly argued with. You called Noah's deal fair, the proper refutation of which is that it's not about fair. You have 60-some mill to come up with at the very least a superstar, a second star and a group of role players who play off of them. One superstar and a bunch of random pieces with no second star doesn't get it done.

And it is a problem. It's a flaw in vision that allows GMs like Paxson (plus flunky) to sell a fan base on big regular season win totals and no better than a 20% winning percentage in the playoffs against teams that really matter.

You're easily sold a bill of goods. The Cubs for 104 years have loved people like you. This fan base needs to be smart, know what WINS and demand it. They're about to get it in the Formerly New Jersey Nets for crying out loud (not that they'll beat the Heat, but that has more to do with Deron Williams being overrated).


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> You made a one line post that I directly argued with. You called Noah's deal fair, the proper refutation of which is that it's not about fair. You have 60-some mill to come up with at the very least a superstar, a second star and a group of role players who play off of them. One superstar and a bunch of random pieces with no second star doesn't get it done.
> 
> And it is a problem. It's a flaw in vision that allows GMs like Paxson (plus flunky) to sell a fan base on big regular season win totals and no better than a 20% winning percentage in the playoffs against teams that really matter.
> 
> You're easily sold a bill of goods. The Cubs for 104 years have loved people like you. This fan base needs to be smart, know what WINS and demand it. They're about to get it in the Formerly New Jersey Nets for crying out loud (not that they'll beat the Heat, but that has more to do with Deron Williams being overrated).



Again, shut up already with your opinions about me and other posters. I assume you fail to see the rank hypocrisy in it, given your signature.


----------



## Bubbles (Nov 12, 2005)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Hoodey is WIN METHOD


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> Again, shut up already with your opinions about me and other posters. I assume you fail to see the rank hypocrisy in it, given your signature.


First, I do have to say how awesome it has been and will be to see you enforce policy when you're telling other people to shut up.

It has nothing to do with YOU as a person. It's behavior focused. It's the way you think about things, in this case "contract fairness" - which has absolutely nothing to do with building a title team. 

Did the Bulls win because Scottie Pippen was being paid fairly? Or did they win because he was just really freaking good, and a top 25 player ever that Krause got for nothing.

So it has nothing to do with you as a person. I'm hardly saying you're this unintelligent person who is incapable of seeing things. I think it's about the behavior of having a logical flaw in the way you frame contract fairness. For all I know you could be like Sam Smith as a person, you could just as easily be like Charles Grodin or Mother Teresa. So cut the "personal attack" crap. 

"Focus on the behavior, not the person."


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

And jnr, it's no different than the analysis I'd expect you to offer up if I was coming on here for years like "get McGrady, get Melo, get Amare" - which is the equally flawed "because they're marketable, they must lead to championships" logic. I'd expect you to say "hey, that behavior is flawed; that is your problem."


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> First, I do have to say how awesome it has been and will be to see you enforce policy when you're telling other people to shut up.
> 
> It has nothing to do with YOU as a person. It's behavior focused. It's the way you think about things, in this case "contract fairness" - which has absolutely nothing to do with building a title team.
> 
> ...



You have no idea what my behavior is. You just make up bullshit (i.e. make assumptions or simply lie) about me and other posters to further your agenda. It's dishonest and weak.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> And jnr, it's no different than the analysis I'd expect you to offer up if I was coming on here for years like "get McGrady, get Melo, get Amare" - which is the equally flawed "because they're marketable, they must lead to championships" logic. I'd expect you to say "hey, that behavior is flawed; that is your problem."



This seems to be a non-sequitur. In any event, you conflate behavior and opinion.

For the record, as to what seem to be your two main hypotheses, I agree the Bulls need a second star. I disagree with your assessment of what an NBA center must be (and the contention that Noah's contract stands in the way of acquiring a 2nd star). But you don't care about that. You'll just tell me what my opinion is, then tell me how that opinion leads to my "problem" as a person and a fan. It's obnoxious. But you know that already.

Whatever. Continue having fun parroting radio hosts rather than developing your own ideas and simply having a civil discussion about basketball, I guess.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> You have no idea what my behavior is. You just make up bullshit (i.e. make assumptions or simply lie) about me and other posters to further your agenda. It's dishonest and weak.


Again, like many on this forum, you're hear to post about me and psychoanalyze people so you can demonize them and determine that "they're just bad" when they make accurate refutations of your points.

Your behavior, the one I was talking about, was calling Noah's deal "fair." There is nothing to assume there.

You said, and I quote:

"Anyone who thinks Noah is on anything but a fair deal is naive/delusional/in denial about the pay NBA centers earn."

This is the behavior of thinking that "contract fairness" has anything to do with championships. If you said it or if Oprah or JFK or Carrot top said it, it would be equally fraught with flaw.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> This seems to be a non-sequitur. In any event, you conflate behavior and opinion.
> 
> For the record, as to what seem to be your two main hypotheses, I agree the Bulls need a second star. I disagree with your assessment of what an NBA center must be (and the contention that Noah's contract stands in the way of acquiring a 2nd star). But you don't care about that. You'll just tell me what my opinion is, then tell me how that opinion leads to my "problem" as a person and a fan. It's obnoxious. But you know that already.
> 
> Whatever. Continue having fun parroting radio hosts rather than developing your own ideas and simply having a civil discussion about basketball, I guess.


How can you say Noah's contract doesn't get in the way in tandem with Boozer's and Deng's? I'll agree that it is the best of those three contracts, but they all combine to get in the way because they're all over 10 million for no player who is a second star.

As far as our ideas of what a center should be, mine is superior. Where are all the championships for YOUR idea of what a center should be? Where are all the Joakim Noahs starting for title teams? Oh yeah, that's right, Andrew Bynum never made mean faces and shot six shooters with a wild haircut running down the floor with a gap in his teeth. I guess I like championship centers. I went to the circus when I was 9. I'm kind of over that.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> *How can you say Noah's contract doesn't get in the way in tandem with Boozer's and Deng's?* I'll agree that it is the best of those three contracts, but they all combine to get in the way because they're all over 10 million for no player who is a second star.
> 
> As far as our ideas of what a center should be, mine is superior. Where are all the championships for YOUR idea of what a center should be? Where are all the Joakim Noahs starting for title teams? Oh yeah, that's right, Andrew Bynum never made mean faces and shot six shooters with a wild haircut running down the floor with a gap in his teeth. I guess I like championship centers. I went to the circus when I was 9. I'm kind of over that.



I believe he only mentioned Noah's contract.


And do you sincerely believe that jnjr's opinion is based on Noah making mean faces, having long hair, and shooting the six shooter, or are you just trying to start a fight? Have you considered that maybe his opinion is based on legitimate basketball related factors? Seems like you already have your mind made up on that one.

I'm getting really ****ing tired of the constant derailing of threads to argue the exact same point, and the constant baiting. Maybe start a "we need a superstar and Boozer/Deng/Noah (or any other Bull that comes up in conversation) are the problem" thread and put your thoughts on that topic there?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Dornado said:


> I believe he only mentioned Noah's contract.
> 
> 
> And do you sincerely believe that jnjr's opinion is based on Noah making mean faces, having long hair, and shooting the six shooter, or are you just trying to start a fight? Have you considered that maybe his opinion is based on legitimate basketball related factors? Seems like you already have your mind made up on that one.
> ...


Yawn, I'm unmoved. 

If you're not willing to argue how Noah fits into a championship team, then don't chime in to OTHERS talking about his pay with "his contract is fair" - if you're not willing to then discuss how fairness factors into championships.

And Noah and Deng's contracts cannot be separated from Boozers. Remember that we "had to sign Boozer" and could not hold the money over until the following offseason. Why? Well because "we were going to lose the cap room." Why? Noah and Deng. 

So who is better for championships based on basketball related factors? Bynum or Noah?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Dornado, it's so funny. The same "Fire Pax, Fire Skiles" Jib crowd who practically claimed to own opinion on the Bulls in 05-07 is still talking down to people and if you disagree with them, if what has happened disagrees with them and even as the entire radio community of Chicago is ridiculing the "plan" then, well, you're just a bad guy.

Now go ahead and argue in favor of Paxson and or Paxson and his flunky and then claim that you're "not a Paxson supporter" lol.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

By the way, I'd say that if we want to get into psychoanalyzing others to figure out who is a bad guy or who baits people, you two sound pretty angry to me lol.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> But how has it changed? You always hear this. Look at the power players for recent champions
> 
> 99 - Duncan
> 00 - O'neal
> ...


Are you quoting me? ...or putting words in my mouth? I have no idea where this is coming from considering I never brought up Bosh and I certainly didn't write the bolded line that you are saying I did.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> How can you say Noah's contract doesn't get in the way in tandem with Boozer's and Deng's? I'll agree that it is the best of those three contracts, but they all combine to get in the way because they're all over 10 million for no player who is a second star.


That's slippery slope argument. Under your line of logic, every contract is an impediment. 

Noah's deal is fine. I would happily unload Deng (especially now after what may be his lone All-Star appearance) or Boozer.

Rose + Noah + 2nd star is a championship core in my book. Not in yours.



> As far as our ideas of what a center should be, mine is superior. Where are all the championships for YOUR idea of what a center should be? Where are all the Joakim Noahs starting for title teams? Oh yeah, that's right, Andrew Bynum never made mean faces and shot six shooters with a wild haircut running down the floor with a gap in his teeth. I guess I like championship centers. I went to the circus when I was 9. I'm kind of over that.



First, you have your cake and eat it, too by defining two types of winning centers. Second, you fudge your examples a bit by citing Duncan, which is a bit of a great area. Third, you confuse correlation with causation. Fourth, you fail to acknowledge the changing of the NBA game. Fifth, you don't sufficiently acknowledge what just happened with this year's NBA champion.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> Dornado, it's so funny. The same "Fire Pax, Fire Skiles" Jib crowd who practically claimed to own opinion on the Bulls in 05-07 is still talking down to people and if you disagree with them, if what has happened disagrees with them and even as the entire radio community of Chicago is ridiculing the "plan" then, well, you're just a bad guy.



Pot, may I have the pleasure of introducing you to kettle?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Firefight said:


> Are you quoting me? ...or putting words in my mouth? I have no idea where this is coming from considering I never brought up Bosh and I certainly didn't write the bolded line that you are saying I did.


It's the only example of the "game changing" at the center position. If you're not using that, then what argument is there lol?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> That's slippery slope argument. Under your line of logic, every contract is an impediment.
> 
> Noah's deal is fine. I would happily unload Deng (especially now after what may be his lone All-Star appearance) or Boozer.
> 
> Rose + Noah + 2nd star is a championship core in my book. Not in yours.


Okay, so you've never supported Deng's contract? Because I thought you were in favor of his contract. 

If, however, you're not, then we agree. I've already said that Noah's contract if paired with Rose and Scottie Pippen at 19 mill, would be fine. 

At the end of the day, Paxson and a lot of his supporters (or supporters of "the plan") are only now demanding a second star with Noah's contract and thought that Deng/Noah/Boozer was a great idea. 

I would assume that this is kind of implicit in, "yeah, being 15-3 sucks."



> First, you have your cake and eat it, too by defining two types of winning centers. Second, you fudge your examples a bit by citing Duncan, which is a bit of a great area. Third, you confuse correlation with causation. Fourth, you fail to acknowledge the changing of the NBA game. Fifth, you don't sufficiently acknowledge what just happened with this year's NBA champion.


Please explain this paragraph further, as I genuinely feel that this is interesting. 

1. What two types of winning centers have I defined?

2. Is Duncan really a grey area. Those who are in favor of their GM building a regular season/6'9" or 245 lb. intensive fools gold team will say "Duncan is a PF." However, is there really a difference between centers who have made a living in the post and Duncan? Olajuwon was 7'0" 255. Duncan is 6'11" 260 with strikingly similar post game. Is Duncan a defender who makes his living by threatening double digit shot blocks if you keep attacking the paint with weak floaters? No. But he "walks like a duck" a lot more if that duck is an elite post center than if that duck is Joakim Noah.

3. What is the correlation that I am confusing with causation? I need to know before I respond to that part. 

4. Has the NBA game really changed at the highest levels? Or, is what WINS titles still the same thing that won titles in 1998, 1990 and 1982. I realize the Phoenix Suns and Chicago Bulls made drastic changes. But have title winners? And please make this a reply that doesn't gush over the 04 Pistons as if they are the only team to ever win a ring. I have read enough "2007 Bulls forum" for a life time. 

5. I sure did. Did you see my post to Firefight. Bosh has changed the game. But giving an example that starts "okay, first you get Lebron James and already have Wade on the team, then you move Chris Bosh down to the five to exploit Kendrick Perkins" is kind of like saying "you can win with crap at center, Jordan did (LOL)." 

The Bosh thing was a brilliant move by Spoelstra. He was Bobby Fischer or Garry Kasparov playing a new wrinkle in a chess opening. And instead of countering like Spassky or Karpov, Brooks looked more like Samuel Reshevsky. 

However, Noah is not Bosh and if they face Andrew Bynum, I seriously doubt that that is an accurate refutation.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> Pot, may I have the pleasure of introducing you to kettle?


What, are you saying I do that to others? No. I call out others for their behaviors, but I don't attempt to brand them beast. You guys decide someone disagrees with you, you tell them to shut up, and if they respond in kind, you attempt to turn it into an issue that needs to be moderated away. 

The difference is, I'm not mad about you doing it. So long as opinions are not being moderated out, I could care less what you think of me. I get mad when the entire focus shifts from "your argument is bad for reason X, Y, Z" to "shut up and stop being ____" That said, I hardly want something done about it. You guys appear to want something done (to be on the course to wanting me banned).


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> Dornado, it's so funny. The same "Fire Pax, Fire Skiles" Jib crowd who practically claimed to own opinion on the Bulls in 05-07 is still talking down to people and if you disagree with them, if what has happened disagrees with them and even as the entire radio community of Chicago is ridiculing the "plan" then, well, you're just a bad guy.
> 
> Now go ahead and argue in favor of Paxson and or Paxson and his flunky and then claim that you're "not a Paxson supporter" lol.


What? Seriously..... what?

I'm only asking you to comport yourself with a little maturity and intellectual honesty for the purpose of better discussion on this message board. Quit trying to play the victim. I'm not in the "jib" crowd, nor am I in the "Fire Pax, Fire Skiles" crowd... nor was I really a member of any "crowd" that I can recall. I've agreed with some moves the Bulls have made (I was high on Taj Gibson, thought that was a good pick, for example) and disagreed with others (like trading Tyson Chandler for nothing and then signing an old-ass Ben Wallace). 

Believe it or not, I'm actually a "superstars win championships" guy, not that you've ever actually taken the time to read any of my basketball opinions. There is no group out to get you... most of the posters I think you have an issue with are probably over at realgm (though maybe you've been banned there). Maybe we can find you a tinfoil hat to wear.



Hoodey said:


> What, are you saying I do that to others? No. I call out others for their behaviors, but I don't attempt to brand them beast. You guys decide someone disagrees with you, you tell them to shut up, and if they respond in kind, you attempt to turn it into an issue that needs to be moderated away.


First, we can't "decide someone disagrees" with us, because I'm fairly certain we all have our own opinions on basketball... there is no consensus among moderators about what opinion people should have on the Bulls... if there is, it is news to me. Secondly, there are plenty of people that express all sorts of opinions on this board that don't seem to be running into the resistance you are running into, what does that tell you? It honestly isn't about your message, but how you choose to communicate with people, which is typically belligerent.

No more back and forth on this by the way - if you have an issue with board moderation you are free to send PMs to the moderators. Posts not related at least in some way to Omer Asik signing an offer sheet with the Rockets are going to get removed.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Dornado said:


> What? Seriously..... what?
> 
> I'm only asking you to comport yourself with a little maturity and intellectual honesty for the purpose of better discussion on this message board. Quit trying to play the victim. I'm not in the "jib" crowd, nor am I in the "Fire Pax, Fire Skiles" crowd... nor was I really a member of any "crowd" that I can recall. I've agreed with some moves the Bulls have made (I was high on Taj Gibson, thought that was a good pick, for example) and disagreed with others (like trading Tyson Chandler for nothing and then signing an old-ass Ben Wallace).


I do find one thing funny though. You had that jib crowd and the crowd that sarcastically said "oh yeah, fire Pax, fire Skiles." Now, magically, you still have all of these people arguing for the same kind of players - solid fundamental guys with low ceilings and high probabilities of hitting those low ceilings, with good defense and effort, but incomplete offensive games/the inability to break someone down one on one (by the way, I don't think you need a ton of guys who can do this, but title teams should have at least two, probably three).

So you still have guys who like the same players and defend the same things, but now that things haven't gone so well for John Paxson, these people are like "oh sure, I may support all of the same things, but I'm not a Paxson supporter." 

Okay sure. It's like the guy who argues Kobe is better than Michael when Kobe is up, then when he's down still argues against Michael, but when you ask him "so, do you think Kobe is better than Michael," he says, "I never said that."

Well, you may say one thing, but the things you CONSISTENTLY ARGUE FOR say something else. I can say "hey, I'm not a guy who wants a bunch of street ballers on the team. I never said that." But, if I turn around and argue that the Bulls should get Marbury, McGrady, Carmelo, etc. - is there really validity to what I SAY I am. 



> Believe it or not, I'm actually a "superstars win championships" guy, not that you've ever actually taken the time to read any of my basketball opinions. There is no group out to get you... most of the posters I think you have an issue with are probably over at realgm (though maybe you've been banned there). Maybe we can find you a tinfoil hat to wear.


I'm not saying you guys are out to ban me, but the entire cycle usually starts with "you attack other posters" when really, I promise you I will vehemently attack your opinions if you argue on the wrong side of the "plan" - but I have no problem with any of you as people. I don't think you are an idiot, nor do I think that about jnr. It's actually more frustration because in the case of jnr, he's really smart, so I'm almost dumbfounded by some of the fundamental things we disagree on. 



> First, we can't "decide someone disagrees" with us, because I'm fairly certain we all have our own opinions on basketball... there is no consensus among moderators about what opinion people should have on the Bulls... if there is, it is news to me. Secondly, there are plenty of people that express all sorts of opinions on this board that don't seem to be running into the resistance you are running into, what does that tell you? It honestly isn't about your message, but how you choose to communicate with people, which is typically belligerent.
> 
> No more back and forth on this by the way - if you have an issue with board moderation you are free to send PMs to the moderators. Posts not related at least in some way to Omer Asik signing an offer sheet with the Rockets are going to get removed.


Okay, I do approach this as if it's all one big discussion on the good of the Bulls team, but I can see how there are threads where even though it goes to the big picture, it should inevitably either go back to the specified topic and you should start a thread on the big picture, so I will. 

But to be sure, when I said to jnr "this is your problem" it was more to say, "it's problematic that you believe this" - but I will make sure I edit a bit better in the future.

Cheers.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Chris Sheridan tweeted that the Bulls will match Asik's offer sheet. He didn't say that he had confirmation, so it could just be speculation. In any case, if true, here's the Bulls payroll over the next few seasons.

12-13
$15.507 - Rose
$15.000 - Boozer 
$13.365 - Deng
$11.300 - Noah
$5.0000 -- Rip
$5.0000 -- Asik
$3.0000 -- Hinrich
$2.1560 -- Taj
$1.0670 -- Butler
$1.0??? -- Teague

Total = ~$72,395,000

Assuming that means Korver is gone and we are already paying tax for next season.

13-14
$16.670 - Rose
$15.300 - Boozer 
$14.275 - Deng
$11.100 - Noah
$5.2000 -- Asik
$3.0000 -- Hinrich
$1.0670 -- Butler
$1.0??? -- Teague
$1.0??? -- '13 Rookie

Total = ~$68.612M

Taj is a FA and most likely is gone if we do not want to pay the tax two consecutive seasons or amnesty Boozer. I don't like either option, especially the amnesty Boozer to sign Taj one as it kills our future max FA player flexibility.

14-15
$17.833 - Rose
$16.800 - Boozer 
$14.900 -- Asik
$12.200 - Noah
$1.113 -- Butler
$1.0??? -- Teague
$1.0??? -- '13 Rookie
$1.0??? -- '14 Rookie

Total = $65.846M

Can't be max FA players until 15-16.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

So we need to find a way to flip Asik for something of value before the big number hits, I guess


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Dornado said:


> So we need to find a way to flip Asik for something of value before the big number hits, I guess



Yeah, that's my big takeaway from this. If Asik is re-signed, it seems like dealing his expiring would provide a lot of flexibility.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> Yeah, that's my big takeaway from this. If Asik is re-signed, it seems like dealing his expiring would provide a lot of flexibility.


And if we can't, we lose Deng and Taj in the meantime while waiting for the 15-16 offseason. To me, that is not worth it at all.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> Yeah, that's my big takeaway from this. If Asik is re-signed, it seems like dealing his expiring would provide a lot of flexibility.


That's a very specific basket to be putting your eggs in, is it not? 

As I've asked before. Other than Allen and Garnett, what is the history of consolidation trades mattering to a champion - ever??

You're banking on a superstar who can put you over the top also being unhappy and wanting to leave a team and sign a long term deal.

Paxson is now pushing the "land of realized expectations" to what, 12 years after he was hired? And some people seem to be okay with that. I'm telling you guys. Jerry Angelo is sitting somewhere now like "how come I couldn't get those expectations" lol


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Rhyder said:


> And if we can't, we lose Deng and Taj in the meantime while waiting for the 15-16 offseason. To me, that is not worth it at all.


Oh, I'm with you. I'm on the record saying I would not match. I'm simply trying to express what the Bulls FO may be thinking. 2014 consolidation trade featuring, among other assets, expiring contracts.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> That's a very specific basket to be putting your eggs in, is it not?


It sure is. I'm not for it.



> As I've asked before. Other than Allen and Garnett, what is the history of consolidation trades mattering to a champion - ever??


Off the top of my head - Pau Gasol.



> You're banking on a superstar who can put you over the top also being unhappy and wanting to leave a team and sign a long term deal.
> 
> Paxson is now pushing the "land of realized expectations" to what, 12 years after he was hired? And some people seem to be okay with that. I'm telling you guys. Jerry Angelo is sitting somewhere now like "how come I couldn't get those expectations" lol


What are our options? It seems as simple as 1) consolidation trade (or should this just be called "trade"?) or 2) cap space for free agency. We're not going to be in a position to tank hard enough to feel secure simply via the draft.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

Aggrey Smith reporting on Twitter that the Bulls have not received an offer sheet from Houston on Asik as of yet today.

Smokescreen, or are they trying to work out a Dwight deal that would obviously supercede an Asik signing?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> It sure is. I'm not for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Off the top of my head - Pau Gasol.


Yeah, but I'd have a hard time saying you could rely on a Gasol-type trade. Wasn't the owner of Memphis a Chicago guy who was willing to take less from LA specifically because he hates Jerry Reinsdorf? I've heard that on the score over and over again.



> What are our options? It seems as simple as 1) consolidation trade (or should this just be called "trade"?) or 2) cap space for free agency. We're not going to be in a position to tank hard enough to feel secure simply via the draft.


I'd start with identifying who will be a legit #2 type and trying to secure that player in the meantime. 

I'll defer to Epstein, who talks about not wanting to pay big contracts to known commodities who will be 28 when you sign them, because you want to really get that 24-28 time period on your team. The guys who are going to be the #2 stars of 2015 likely ARENT considered that now.

This sales job of "well, we aren't doing anything now, but just wait till mid-season 14-15 or summer 2015" isn't working on me.

I don't like where we are now, and feel it was easily avoidable with a commitment to flexibility. You ask me "Where would you go from here." In good faith, I answered you with at least a top of my head answer. As someone who has already not been happy, come on. Riding with Asik and hoping for "consolidation 14-15." For real??


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Rhyder said:


> Aggrey Smith reporting on Twitter that the Bulls have not received an offer sheet from Houston on Asik as of yet today.
> 
> Smokescreen, or are they trying to work out a Dwight deal that would obviously supercede an Asik signing?


Supposedly it's because the players from the Camby deal need to pass their physicals before Houston technically has the cap space to sign the offer sheet w/Omer.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> Yeah, but I'd have a hard time saying you could rely on a Gasol-type trade. Wasn't the owner of Memphis a Chicago guy who was willing to take less from LA specifically because he hates Jerry Reinsdorf? I've heard that on the score over and over again.


I don't know anything about that theory. You just asked for an example of a recent consolidation trade and that's what came to mind.



> I'd start with identifying who will be a legit #2 type and trying to secure that player in the meantime.
> 
> I'll defer to Epstein, who talks about not wanting to pay big contracts to known commodities who will be 28 when you sign them, because you want to really get that 24-28 time period on your team. The guys who are going to be the #2 stars of 2015 likely ARENT considered that now.


Understood. I think people get a little to wrapped up in the youth thing, though. By and large, NBA championship teams are veteran teams. Though, I suppose with one-and-done players, a lot of 24 year-old players are pretty seasoned.




> I don't like where we are now, and feel it was easily avoidable with a commitment to flexibility. You ask me "Where would you go from here." In good faith, I answered you with at least a top of my head answer. As someone who has already not been happy, come on. Riding with Asik and hoping for "consolidation 14-15." For real??



Let's be clear. I'm against re-signing Asik and have indicated that consistently. But, I think it's important to be honest about what Asik is as a player and what the Bulls' realistic options are for improvement. Cap space looks not possible until 2014 at the earlierst (and later if Asik is matched and not traded). So, a trade (be it for a high draft pick or an active player who you intend to fill thta #2 role) seems to be the only possible option. The odds of pulling off such a trade would seem to go up when you've got some good expiring salaries to work with.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*

the more i think about the more i like the bulls matching Omer at this price , obviously ideally he could be had for less but I see him as a starting center caliber player and an avg salary of 8mil. is far for that .

especially considering his main flaw as a player is offensive polish , which players tend to get as they play more.

also maybe this will be the impetus for removing Boozer for a better piece.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...oach-tom-thibodeau-gar-forman-twitter-kcjhoop

*With Asik decision looming, Bulls seek to pare salary*
_It all boils down to financial flexibility as they look to go forward_
July 12, 2012|By K.C. Johnson, Chicago Tribune reporter



> The three-day clock on the Bulls' decision to match Omer Asik's three-year, $25.1 million offer sheet from the Rockets will start Friday or Saturday after the Rockets spent Thursday preparing to use the amnesty provision on Luis Scola in an attempt to land Dwight Howard eventually.
> 
> Sources have indicated any potential pursuit of Howard won't affect Asik's offer, which Bulls management hasn't tipped its hand on matching or declining. Management is said to have gone back and forth on the decision, which would ensure the franchise entering luxury tax territory for the first time.
> 
> With Derrick Rose's maximum extension beginning next season and the need to re-sign Taj Gibson eventually, the Bulls could become a repeat tax offender, which is more punitive under terms of the collective bargaining agreement.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I'm sensing we may match... to prepare, I'm trying to talk myself into Omer Asik being worth the money, so, cherrypicked highlights it is:


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



jnrjr79 said:


> I don't know anything about that theory. You just asked for an example of a recent consolidation trade and that's what came to mind.


It's been rehashed repeatedly on the score. Basically the Memphis owner hates Jerry and loved the idea of helping LA out with a generous trade offer.



> Understood. I think people get a little to wrapped up in the youth thing, though. By and large, NBA championship teams are veteran teams. Though, I suppose with one-and-done players, a lot of 24 year-old players are pretty seasoned.


I'm not on the youth thing per se. I'm on the better #2 player thing. And if you're not going to get in on Howard or someone in that middle-age range, you might as well try to get a #2 on the "junk bond" market, so to speak. 



> Let's be clear. I'm against re-signing Asik and have indicated that consistently. But, I think it's important to be honest about what Asik is as a player and what the Bulls' realistic options are for improvement. Cap space looks not possible until 2014 at the earlierst (and later if Asik is matched and not traded). So, a trade (be it for a high draft pick or an active player who you intend to fill thta #2 role) seems to be the only possible option. The odds of pulling off such a trade would seem to go up when you've got some good expiring salaries to work with.


But now you're talking about a 2015 expiring. So you wouldn't even DRAFT that player until 2014. Now we're waiting till 2017 for our potential #2 to develop into a #2??


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Da Grinch said:


> the more i think about the more i like the bulls matching Omer at this price , obviously ideally he could be had for less but I see him as a starting center caliber player and an avg salary of 8mil. is far for that .
> 
> especially considering his main flaw as a player is offensive polish , which players tend to get as they play more.
> 
> also maybe this will be the impetus for removing Boozer for a better piece.


You see him as a starting caliber center? For a championship team or anything close to it?

His problem is not "offensive polish." Scottie Pippen needed offensive polish. His problem is the lack of any offensive ability whatsoever. He's a stiff.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Rockets pursuing Asik?*



Hoodey said:


> But now you're talking about a 2015 expiring. So you wouldn't even DRAFT that player until 2014. Now we're waiting till 2017 for our potential #2 to develop into a #2??


No. Like I said, the #2 role should be fulfilled through trade, not the draft.


----------

