# Krause's biggest rebuilding mistake



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Biggest Mistake* 

Every year, we have way too many young, unproven guys on the team. This has Krause's biggest mistake in the rebuilding. 

The worst was the year we drafted Brand, Artest, Little Jake, El-Amin, Guyton and traded for Drew. 

Let's look at Bags. He was drafted at a very young age. I personally don't think he will be an average NBA backup, but I could be wrong. If he gets a little better, there is a very good chance he will just sign with another team rather than remain Curry's backup. 

*Solution* 
Krause needs to do a house cleaning over the next 12 months. Keep the gems (Chandler, Curry, and a few others) and purge the team of much of the rest. Even if the trade does not bring back even close to the same talent. WE NEED SOME VETS.

*How it could\should work out*
Bags - OUT
Fizer & JCraw - Better show a lot more soon (esp if Baxter and JWill emerge)
Mason & Hassel - May the best man win[


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

From what I've seen so far. You've got things a big wrong. Krauses biggest mistake was drafting Jay Williams at 2 instead of trading with the Clippers for their two first rounders and Lamar Odom. It is now clear that Jay WIlliams will not amount to anything as an NBA player. We can expect Mason to start over JC, AND JWill and we can expect Hassell to play over everyone else at the 2. Baxter will start over Chandler, and Curry will hold his own over Bags.

Or, we could say, hey, it's only summer league, and leave it at that.


----------



## SS_Solid_Snake (Jul 15, 2002)

Yeah, 4 Summer Leauge games and the guy is dubbed a bust, lol.


----------



## TJ (Jul 23, 2002)

Biggest mistake: Drafting Fizer!!!!!

No question that Fizer is good player but not
with the Bulls. We could have had Mike Miller
and been much better off.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> Krauses biggest mistake was drafting Jay Williams at 2 instead of trading with the Clippers for their two first rounders and Lamar Odom. It is now clear that Jay WIlliams will not amount to anything as an NBA player. We can expect Mason to start over JC, AND JWill and we can expect Hassell to play over


That's the craziest statement I've heard in a long time. How do figure that you can exaluate players from 4 summer league games, escpecially when these games aren't really taken seriously by most of these guys. Why would we want Odom (excellent player, but one puff away from a 1-year suspension) Wilcox ( a pf that we don't need) and Ely (another pf we don't need). Theoretically, we could have had the Clips pick Butler for us, but the Cavs tried that and it didn't work. Barring career-ending injuries, JWill will be an excellent pg if not an all-star, JC will start over Mason easily, end of story.


----------



## Wishbone (Jun 10, 2002)

Louie -- no offense, but you've got to do a better job of recognizing sarcasm.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

biggest mistake? When the new CBA came into affect he still thought money would get FA to move. But he corrected that in the draft.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Jerry K's gaffes post-dynasty (too many to name), but here are a few, in order of importance:

1. Letting MJ leave organization, while allowing Cartwright, Myers, BJ Armstrong, even Pax to take on roles in the organization; this was an EGO decision by the Jerry's... to try to build their own dynasty without a certain number 23.

2. Trading Pip for scraps (Roy Rogers and a 2nd round pick); Pip was screwed by the Bulls for a long time and this was the culmination of it

3. Hiring Tim Floyd, JK's fishing buddy; he grew tired of losing, didn't earn the respect of younger players (like Artest and Crawford), and stubbornly stuck to his veterans

4. Drafting Brand over Francis; Krause went with the safe pick (and we all know Krause loves big men), but Francis, Davis, and Miller were the franchise players in that draft

5. Attempting to sign 2 full-boat free agents; unless you were happy with Brad Miller and Ron Mercer.. this plan failed miserably

6. 2000 draft - taking Fizer and Crawford; admittedly that year's draft was one of the worse in years.. but we should have come out with O'Neal (trade from Portland) or Darius Miles, it didn't happen though

There are many more, but let's hope Jerry K doesn't fumble the plan this time around. JK is a good scout and evaluator of talent, but his days as an effective 21st century GM are long gone. Here's hoping the young kids can play some winning and exciting bball, so the perception around the NBA about the Bulls can change.

VD


----------



## Jammer (May 28, 2002)

I think that time will show that the biggest re-building mistake was taking J-Will at #2, versus the other players available.

But that won't be Jerry's biggest mistake.

His biggest mistake was thirty years ago.

It cost the Bulls between 1 and 4 championships.

To provide a quick history lesson.

The Bulls in the early 70's had a team consistently winning 50+ games. High scoring forwards who rebounded in Chet Walker and Bob Love, a rebounding defensive center in Tom Boerwinkle, and Jerry Sloan and Norm Van Lier at guard. The biggest ***** in that team, besides no bench, was Van Lier, who was not a scorer, and did not possess a reliable outside shot.

Coach Dick Motta wanted Tiny Archibald in the 1970 draft. The same Tiny Archibald who two years later averaged 35 ppg and 12 apg. For his first 8 years, Tiny averaged 24 + ppg while shooting nearly 50 % from the field. 

Bulls management deferred to scout Jerry Krause to make the final call with the first round pick. Krause did not go with Motta's strong recommendation. Whoever the hell piece of crap they took, the Bulls would have definately won the 1975 championship, when they had eventual champion Golden State down 3 games to 2 in the Western finals, and would probably have won at least one more championship between 1972 (yes, I remember the Lakers and Bucks well) and 1974. The Bulls, with Nate Archibald, could have definately beaten the '73 Knicks and probably the '74 Celtics. And they would have given the '72 Lakers a hell of a battle.

The result of that pick by Jerry was him having to leave the Bulls organization and become a baseball scout and ultimately a scout with the Lakers. 

Anyway, I think that rather than go against the entire Bulls organization this time around, Jerry may have gone with the flow.

But no matter how many times KC Johnson and Mike McGraw call JWill a point guard, I still don't see it. I didn't see it at Duke. And I don't see it now. JWill is best setting up his own shot. Whether he learns to be a team player we will see.

I also never thought JWill effectively shut down his man (if a decent player) in college. I also don't expect him to lock down anyone in the pros. He is as big and strong and quick as he ever will be.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

Gotta disagree with you on a couple of your points, VD:

_1. Letting MJ leave organization... _ We'll probably never know what was offered and what wasn't. But the fact is the Bulls couldn't in all fairness offer Jordan the only position he truly wanted. Nor should Jordan have had to settle for a subordinate position when other franchises were willing to make him GM. What would you have had Reinsdorf to, fire Krause and replace him with MJ? 

_2. Trading Pip for scraps... _ Lots of debate on what happened here as well. One side has Krause letting Pip choose his team and taking whatever that team was willing to offer in a sign and trade as a sort of farewell thank you to Pip. I honestly don't have a better explanation why Krause would have settled for so little for a still very productive player.

_3. Hiring Tim Floyd... _ No contest, although part of me still would like to see what Floyd could have done with some talent. I prefer Cartwright in any case.

_4. Drafting Brand over Francis..._ Debatable. Hard to call Francis and Miller "franchise players" when their teams are two of the worst in the league. From a production standpoint, Brand has certainly justified his position as a #1 pick, IMO.

_5. Attempting to sign 2 full-boat free agents..._ In hindsight, of course. But you'll never sign a T-Mac if you don't try.

_6. 2000 draft - taking Fizer and Crawford..._ Saying we should have come out with O'Neal or Miles is fine, but at what cost? Certainly you wouldn't have advocated trading for those players if the overall deal were not in the Bulls' favor (or at least somewhat even)? The reports I've read had the Bulls giving up too much for either of those players.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Kneepad *
> Gotta disagree with you on a couple of your points, VD:
> 
> _1. Letting MJ leave organization... _ We'll probably never know what was offered and what wasn't. But the fact is the Bulls couldn't in all fairness offer Jordan the only position he truly wanted. Nor should Jordan have had to settle for a subordinate position when other franchises were willing to make him GM. What would you have had Reinsdorf to, fire Krause and replace him with MJ?
> ...


Kneepad, you're a competent guy. So how about you take a stab at what you think JK's biggest mistake has been thus far?

Never ceases to amaze me how I'll produce a list and others will piggy-back my ideas and subtlely make their 'corrections'. Kneepad, you're too good/smart for that dude.

Couple add'l points:
1. My main point about MJ is that the Bulls should have done whatever it took to keep him in the organization. Jordan was ideally looking for a GM position, offered to him in Charlotte (imagine Jordan w/ Shinn?!!) and taken in Washington. But becuase JK and Jordan's relationship was way past strained, one of them had to go. And that 'one' was MJ.

2. Pip was underpaid as a Bull, period. At his peak (his near MVP season 1994-95) he was still getting under 3 mil. But Roy Rogers? Geez. An NBA Top 50 player (of all time) should get a little more in return.

3. Agreed, Tim Floyd never got much talent. Then again he didn't help Crawford or Artest develop well either.

4. If we were to redo the 1999 draft, believe me, no one would take Elton #1. If you honestly believe Brand rates ahead of Francis and B.Davis, that's fine. I just don't see it. Plus, Krause was pretty determined this time around NOT to build around a young, smallish guard.

5. JK deserves all the blame about the FA's. Why? Becuase he was so boastful and confident in the first place. Its not like he made it a secret. He structured contracts and accumulated draft picks to do just that. But it didn't happen. JK was not in tune w/ modern NBA players.. meanign you can't just flash the cheddar and they'll come.

6. Okay, but picking Fizer will always be questioned in my mind. JK (please look this up if you don't believe me) has taken a PF or C in the 1st rd. in something like 8 out of the 9 last drafts. I really wish he would have tried harder to get a D.Miles, but that's history.


Jerry Krause deserves blame for the Bulls demise. Yes, they have a young team on the verge of being competitive and exciting. But the Chicago Bulls have been the worst team in the NBA the past 4 seasons, period. Next to possibly Cleveland and Memphis of course. Believe me, I love the young studs we have... but JK has made plenty of mistakes in trying to rebuild this team. Any slack he gets, he deserves.

VD


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Vin Diesel *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't agree simply b/c every dynasty in NBA history is followed by bad years. The star players get old and the team is stuck w/ low draft picks. The Celtics were bad for a decade. The Lakers were bad and Philly was terrible. The Bulls, as expected, were bad too. A good GM will turn it around. 

The mistakes I think he has made were drafting Fizer w/ Elton Brand already on the team. I know he had a trade worked out but you just can't rely on other teams.

Meddling too much in the team play. Supposedly he insists on the triangle, etc. I think he should step back a little (if the rumors are true.)

Not drafting Francis. I think he's a franchise player that can win. Houston was considered a play-off contender and when he was out they dropped every game practically. Krause is great at putting together pieces and could have assembled a nice team around Francis.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

Sorry if you feel as though I was nitpicking. I just feel strongly that Krause gets a lot of crap that is undeserved.

_...how about you take a stab at what you think JK's biggest mistake has been thus far?_

Your question is a fair one, but one which I don't feel I can answer just yet. I prefer to look at rebuilding a team as a culmination of moves rather than try to pick apart and analyze each individual move. As an example, you're critical of the drafting of Brand. Fine. But Brand is what enabled the Bulls to acquire Tyson Chandler, and if Chandler becomes a superstar how do you then judge the drafting of Brand?

Krause has made some dumb moves (trading for Drew, drafting El-Amin, etc.). I think Bags may turn out to have been a mistake. But none of these moves have been critical-- yet. The key acquisitions-- Chandler, Curry, Crawford, Williams, Robinson, Rose-- are still too early to judge fairly. My yardstick for Krause's success when the rebuilding first started was a 7th championship within 10 years. At this point I consider the Bulls to be entering year 4 (the season following the lockout and MJ's retirement cannot be counted in fairness as all teams were scrambling just to fill rosters), and they have laid a foundation-- it now remains to be seen whether the pieces of that foundation are the right pieces. If so, Krause will have succeeded. If not, he most likely will have failed.

As for your additional points:

1. Why should the Bulls have done "whatever it took" to keep MJ in the organization? Why is it so damn important?

2. I agree Pip was underpaid as a Bull (although primarily through his own fault and the fault of his agent). And I agree that Krause might have gotten more for Pip in a trade. But Pip was an unrestricted free agent and the Bulls had very little leverage-- Pip made it clear he would not re-sign with the Bulls. That's why I have no choice other than to buy into the theory that Krause and the Bulls sacrificed their own future to a degree in order to satisfy Pip's wish to go to a contending team for big money. By the Bulls agreeing to a sign and trade, Pip got more money than he would have by signing outright with another team as a FA. I have no strong feelings one way or the other whether that was the right thing to do or not, but in any case it's what was done and is now water under the bridge.

4. I'm not saying Brand necessarily rates ahead of Francis and Davis. Just that if he does, he's not at all far behind, and I can't consider it a "mistake" to have taken Brand over the other two. For what it's worth, Brand has put up better production (statistically) in his career so far.

5. I agree JK was over-confident heading into the first FA period. And I'll add that his recruitment ideas were seriously lame. But fact is that the CBA changed after Krause initiated his plan, and the fact that other teams were suddenly able to offer as much "cheddar" as the Bulls derailed the plan. Not all of that was Krause's fault.

6. I believe Fizer was widely considered the best player on the board at #4 when the Bulls took him. The consensus top 3 going into the draft were Martin, Swift, and Fizer (in varying orders). The Clips surprised nearly everyone by reaching for Miles. At the time of that draft, in the position the Bulls were in, I think JK made the right decision taking the best talent.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Krause's mistakes*

Free agency: Yeah, Krause was going to fork over money to TMac, but he totally misjudged the effect of the CBA. Although he offered big money to TMac, he also offered huge contracts to:

* Grant "ankles of steel screws" Hill
* Tim "I changed my mind, I'm staying in Milwaukee" Thomas.
* Eddie "Please God don't make me play for the Bulls" Jones.
* Glen "Don't issue that press release yet" Rice.

In truth, Krause dodged bullets by those four guys standing him up.

* ERob at $6M this year counts as a pretty bad signing in my book.

His good signings, IMO, were Ron Mercer (who got slightly more than ERob, but at least somewhat earned it), and Brad Miller, who came around after being surly and out of shape his first year here.

I don't really consider Brent Barry to be a bad signing. He was slightly overpaid, but he certainly was no worse than ERob was. He's a better player as a 3rd or 4th option on a team- when he's not asked to do too much.

---------------------

With regard to the draft, Brand wasn't a "bad" pick, but if I were starting a team from scratch (as the Bulls effectively were), I'd rather have Baron Davis, Francis, or possibly Andre Miller.

Artest was a very good pick at #16. 

In 2000, the jury is still out, but Fizer doesn't look like the right pick. If he was to be traded for Jermaine O'Neil, he still wasn't the right pick, because Krause should have sealed the deal before picking Fizer (don't trust blindly that the deal will work out). Dillybar over Big Jake is not something I want to contemplate. Contract issues or not, Big Jake was already in the US. It's not like anyone could have forced him to go back to Greece.

-------------------------

All of those issues leave untouched the large number of issues with regard to breaking up the dynasty, alienating the best player of all time, alienating possibly the best coach of all time, and hiring Tim Floyd, who, whether given enough talent to win in the league or not, clearly appeared out of _his league_.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Lizzy *
> 
> 
> I don't agree simply b/c every dynasty in NBA history is followed by bad years. The star players get old and the team is stuck w/ low draft picks. The Celtics were bad for a decade. The Lakers were bad and Philly was terrible. The Bulls, as expected, were bad too. A good GM will turn it around.
> ...


Lizzy, I respectfully disagree about your points about the dynasty.

I agree that many teams after their dynasties are bad for a long, long time. The difference is, those dynasties like the Lakers and Celtics kept their stars around for a while... letting them age and diminish in skills. But the Bulls weren't that way. They left at the top of their games, and the Bulls managment (largely b/c of their hubris) thought they would return to greatness quickly after letting such stars go.

The perception (everywhere except Chicago it seems) is that the Bulls broke up the dynasty too quickly. Period. Yeah, we know Jordan was always iffy his last two seasons and Phil Jackson was contemplating retirement.. but my main question is why the Jerry's didn't try seriously locking these guys up long term? The Bulls could have won at least 2 more championships and been in the conference finals for a long long time (remember how the East is anways). Its a damn shame this wasn't allowed to happen.

Successful franchises rarely break up dynasties, and at that so damn quickly. Overnight the best player ever, arguably the best coach ever, and the dynasty that defined the 1990's was broken up. And for what? 4 seasons of the worst basketball in the NBA. And I know Jerry K's ego factored into this as well... he wanted to build his team w/o giving MJ credit he fully deserved. Listen to Jerry K talk, his hubris amazes me at times, geez.

Don't get me wrong, I love the new-look Bulls. Its just that we've been in the cellar for 4 seasons and may not get out for 2 more. It shouldn't have been like this. MJ should have been allowed to play out his career (and finish w/ his executive one) in Chicago and Bulls get more *bling bling rings.

VD


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

Jammer, they took Jummy Collins that year. 1970, huh, I was around but my memory isn't that good. Pat Williams would have probably still been the GM at the time, though Motta forcing him out turned into a later disaster, (Gar Heard for John Hummer most notably). Was WIlliams still there?
Jimmy Collins was never much of a player and he is who we took.
Here is the first 2 rounds that year

1970 DRAFT

First Round
1 Det Bob Lanier St. Bonaventure
2 SD Rudy Tomjanovich Michigan
3 Atl Pete Maravich Louisiana State
4 Bos Dave Cowens Florida State
5 Cin Sam Lacey New Mexico State
6 Sea Jim Ard Cincinnati
7 Clev John Johnson Iowa
8 Port Geoff Petrie Princeton
9 Balt George Johnson Stephen F. Austin
10 Phoe Greg Howard New Mexico
11 Chi Jimmy Collins New Mexico State
12 Phil Al Henry Wisconsin
13 LAL Jim McMillian Columbia
14 Atl John Vallely UCLA
15 Buff John Hummer Princeton
16 Mil Gary Freeman Oregon State
17 NY Mike Price Illinois

Second Round
1 SD Calvin Murphy Niagara
2 Cin Nate Archibald Texas–El Paso
3 Sea Jake Ford Maryland State
4 Bos Rex Morgan Jacksonville
5 Cin Doug Cook Davidson
6 Sea Pete Cross San Francisco
7 Buff Cornell Warner Jackson State
8 Port Walt Gilmore Fort Valley State
9 Clev Dave Sorenson Ohio State
10 Phoe Fred Taylor Pan American
11 Chi Paul Ruffner Brigham Young
12 Phoe Joe DePre St. John's
13 LAL Earnest Killum Stetson
14 Atl Dan Hester Louisiana State
15 Det Ken Warzynski DePaul
16 Mil Bill Zopf Duquesne
17 NY Howie Wright Austin Peay
.
As for present day mistakes,it is too early to tell because we really haven't truly succesfully rebuilt yet. The CBA and FA changes were big, dumb luck in not signing Rice and Thomas were a boon, It's hard to call a #24 pick a big mistake regardless of circumstance.
The offseason can be boring.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Jammer *
> His biggest mistake was thirty years ago. ... Coach Dick Motta wanted Tiny Archibald in the 1970 draft. ... Bulls management deferred to scout Jerry Krause to make the final call with the first round pick. Krause did not go with Motta's strong recommendation.


Jammer, do you have a source on that? I find it hard to believe that Motta and Pat Williams (who I believe was GM at the time as Songcycle suggested) would have left such a crucial decision to an underling.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

It always amazes me how people can get on Krause for not drafting a shooting PG in Francis or Davis.....and then get on him in the same thread for doing the exact opposite 3 years later?



As for Brand, in the end Chandler is likely to be a better pro, and a better fit up front alongside Curry. ANd if we Hadn't drafted Brand we would not have gotten Chandler.....prolly not even for francis. It is difficult to trade small for big.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Vin Diesel *
> Yeah, we know Jordan was always iffy his last two seasons and Phil Jackson was contemplating retirement.. but my main question is why the Jerry's didn't try seriously locking these guys up long term?


They tried. Bulls made PJ a multi-year offer that would have made him the highest paid coach in the league. PJ declined (didn't want to see the team through rebuilding, needed to get his hip replaced, needed a sabbatical... pick your reason).



> Originally posted by *Vin Diesel *
> Successful franchises rarely break up dynasties, and at that so damn quickly. Overnight the best player ever, arguably the best coach ever, and the dynasty that defined the 1990's was broken up.


The way I remember it, Phil Jackson declined the Bulls offer to re-sign. Then MJ choose to retire. Neither one had a gun to their head as I recall.

Are you saying they should have re-upped Pip and the rest of the gang, found a new coach, and forged on?



> Originally posted by *Vin Diesel *
> It shouldn't have been like this. MJ should have been allowed to play out his career (and finish w/ his executive one) in Chicago and Bulls get more *bling bling rings.


As I recall, a quite generous offer was made for MJ to return as a player. I believe also an offer was made for him to basically select a coach of his choosing to replace Phil. MJ declined. Something about wanting to only play for Phil.

Seriously... it amazes me that the perception remains that the Bulls "broke up the dynasty".


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Kneepad *
> 
> They tried. Bulls made PJ a multi-year offer that would have made him the highest paid coach in the league. PJ declined (didn't want to see the team through rebuilding, needed to get his hip replaced, needed a sabbatical... pick your reason).
> 
> ...


Kneepad, you are right on all counts. Jackson turned down multi year offers on more than one offseason and in his final year with the Bulls, Reinsdorf stated publicly that Jackson was welcome back if he so chose. Jordan would have been paid $36 by the Bulls if he had stuck around for another year and Pippen was only traded after MJ's retirement. If we had gotten more for Pippen, we would have won more games, not have gotten Brand in the draft the next year and would not gotten these other great draft picks and would have been stuck in mediocity for years.


----------



## Jammer (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Kneepad *
> 
> Jammer, do you have a source on that? I find it hard to believe that Motta and Pat Williams (who I believe was GM at the time as Songcycle suggested) would have left such a crucial decision to an underling.



KNEEPAD:

I've read in two places (not web sites) that Coach Motta was strongly in favor on drafting Tiny Archibald, and that scout Jerry Krause strongly favored the actual player selected (which is Jimmy Collins thanks to Songcycle) with the Bulls 1970 number 11 pick. 

I'll look up the name of one of those books, but I can't remember off hand. Anyway, the Bulls GM at the time supposedly trusted Jerry Krause's judgement more since he had seen the player's in question more frequently. So, in theory, he might have a better grasp on their talents. Tiny Archibald was not forecast anywhere near #11. He actually went #19, but was often forecast lower.

Anyway, the bottom line was that Krause's opinion, at the time, seemed to carry more weight than Motta's. After everyone saw where the Bulls could have been (Tiny averaged at least 14 ppg MORE than Norm Van Lier, say 24 ppg versus 10 ppg, but Tiny had year's of 35 and 27 ppg also), which would have results in lots more wins.

Supposedly Motta's love for Krause basically forced Jerry out of the organization (Motta couldn't stand it, basically knowing where the team would have been if Tiny had been drafted).

I think I can locate one of the two sources. I don't know if I'll remember the second.

-- Jammer


----------



## Jammer (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Songcycle *
> Jammer, they took Jummy Collins that year. 1970, huh, I was around but my memory isn't that good. Pat Williams would have probably still been the GM at the time, though Motta forcing him out turned into a later disaster, (Gar Heard for John Hummer most notably). Was WIlliams still there?
> Jimmy Collins was never much of a player and he is who we took.
> Here is the first 2 rounds that year
> ...



Great post, Songcycle.

Thank you for the assist.

-- Jammer


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

No need to track down sources any further, Jammer. I wasn't looking for you to quote chapter and verse. I was just curious if you had any more details, which you provided in your post. It all seems very plausible now that you've elaborated a bit more.

The only thing I'm still wondering about is I recall Krause's exit from the Bulls organization in the 70's having to do with some other incident. Krause was in fact named GM at one point, but something happened and he resigned very quickly after accepting the position.

I'll try to find out more details on that.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Kneepad *
> 
> They tried. Bulls made PJ a multi-year offer that would have made him the highest paid coach in the league. PJ declined (didn't want to see the team through rebuilding, needed to get his hip replaced, needed a sabbatical... pick your reason).
> 
> ...


The perception comes from a few things:

1. The Jerry's 'reluctantly' gave one year offers to MJ each of his 3 seasons back (I believe). As well, there was little/no effort to sign these guys long term, MJ, Pip, and Jackson included. As to whether MJ and Phil actually wanted 1 year deals, I am not sure.

2. Jerry Reinsdorf, after giving Jordan a 1yr./30mil contract, said 'I know I'm going to regret that someday'. WTF? That's the greatest baller ever and Jerry's pinching pennies after all the value he's added to the Bulls? Man.

3. The Jerry's announced Tim Floyd's signing weeks before Phil Jackson officially said he was out. In fact, many speculate a deal was in the works even earlier than that (as Krause and Floyd were seen together before his eventual signing).

My belief is that management wanted to move in another direction altogether, completely starting from scratch (no MJ, Pip, Phil, or anyone else of notoriety). Why else would they announce Floyd's hiring so quickly after the '98 championship? The Jerry's knew MJ would never play for Floyd and that Phil was now officially ushered into semi-retirement.

So yeah likely it was a combination of factors leading to the breakup, I just believe management had the upperhand and was the catalyst in making it happen.

VD


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Jammer *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A similar thing almost happened during Krause's stint with the Washington Bullets, when he apparently wrote a scouting report of Wes Unseld that ended with "Do not draft this player under any circumstance". This was recounted in a Washington Post article last year


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

Whew, the posts are coming fast and furious today. How's a guy supposed to get any work done? 

_The Jerry's 'reluctantly' gave one year offers to MJ each of his 3 seasons back (I believe)._

This is BS. What makes you think so?

_As well, there was little/no effort to sign these guys long term, MJ, Pip, and Jackson included. As to whether MJ and Phil actually wanted 1 year deals, I am not sure._

I, and others here, have told you Phil wanted one year deals because he didn't want to commit longterm to eventual rebuilding. Pip was signed through 99 so he was a non-issue. MJ also preferred one-year deals because he tied himself to Phil.

_Jerry Reinsdorf, after giving Jordan a 1yr./30mil contract, said 'I know I'm going to regret that someday'._

It's true JR said that (or words to that effect). What is missing from the printed words are the context in which they were said, and the tone of voice in which they were said. This was a very informal, light-hearted situation celebrating the signing of Jordan's contract, and JR's comment was an off-hand comment that was intended as humor. Obviously JR misspoke and it fell flat, and Jordan certainly took it in a way in which it was not intended. JR has insisted that's all it was, and I see no reason not to believe him. He did pony up the $$$, didn't he? Don't actions speak louder than words?

_The Jerry's announced Tim Floyd's signing weeks before Phil Jackson officially said he was out._

Floyd was hired in July. I'm pretty sure you are mistaken that PJ had not already said he was out-- he definitely had. Just how long were the Bulls to wait? They hired Floyd because they could not afford to be left high and dry without a decent head coach. Initially, Floyd was hired under some title other than coach to leave every possibility open that PJ would reverse his decision, but that was largely a PR move as everyone knew at that point there was no way he was coming back.

As for Krause's earlier recruitment of Floyd, he was only doing what every good manager does-- it's called networking. Krause did the same thing in wooing Jackson while Collins was coach. Funny Jackson didn't seem to mind then.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Kneepad, 

You have no idea how JR said those words. You had MJ come out and express his displeasure over those words and then you have JRs account. You state it like it is fact how he said it when all you have is conjecture.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Kneepad *
> Whew, the posts are coming fast and furious today. How's a guy supposed to get any work done?
> 
> _The Jerry's 'reluctantly' gave one year offers to MJ each of his 3 seasons back (I believe)._
> ...



Floyd was officially named 'head coach' January 14th, 1999. The previous 6 months he served as 'Director of Basketball Operations'. Coincidentally, the day before (January 13th) MJ retires for the second time.

Floyd was appointed July 23, 1998 at the position mentioned above:

"Should Phil not return, Tim will succeed him as head coach," was the exact quote that Reinsdorf said that day. What a bunch of bologna.

That's six months time (it was during the NBA lockout) that the Bulls made no major moves to keep Phil or MJ around. Its not like it happened overnight. A painful 6 months, especially seeing the Spurs win it that year.

Do you have a link concerning Reinsdorf's quote, or the 'light manner' in which he said it? (Of course I'm not expecting it, its just that I hadn't heard it ever referred to in that light). Maybe it was in jest... but whatever perception (that the Jerry's had it in for MJ and Phil) has become a reality amongst Bulls fans in Chicago and worldwide. The perception, plain and simple, is that the Jerry's broke up the dynasty (and a great one at that) prematurely, largely b/c of asinine egos and power plays from management.

Kneepad, you make great points, but not enough to sway me dude. We had a great thing going here, and it should have never come to that kind of conclusion, and that quickly.

Peace.

VD


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by *BCH *
> You have no idea how JR said those words.


Yes I do. It was on TV.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Vin Diesel *
> That's six months time (it was during the NBA lockout) that the Bulls made no major moves to keep Phil or MJ around.


What exactly would you have had them do?

No, sorry, don't have any links to Reinsdorf's quote. A link wouldn't help anyways-- you really have to see and hear it.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Kneepad *
> 
> Yes I do. It was on TV.


JRs comments were to MJ and not public. JRs response to MJs anger may have been public. You have no idea in what context the words were said to MJ.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

GB, focus on the Bulls. Don't bring up the past. This is now. truebluefan


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

BCH, you've been great lately, but you are 100% wrong here. We are talking front page headlines in the sports sections here and massive coverage on TV and radio. Jackson and Jordan were offered top money to return and said no. It was their choice. Kneepad is exactly correct and you are totally inaccurate. I have more on this thread and will post later.


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Songcycle *
> BCH, you've been great lately, but you are 100% wrong here. We are talking front page headlines in the sports sections here and massive coverage on TV and radio. Jackson and Jordan were offered top money to return and said no. It was their choice. Kneepad is exactly correct and you are totally inaccurate. I have more on this thread and will post later.


BCH is talking about the specific "I'm going to regret this" quote said by Reinsdorf after signing Jordan. I think.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

Vin Diesel, you are totally wrong and you are not even close to the truth and the things you say are revisionist and innacurate history. If you are getting your stuff from Lacy Banks or Chad Ford then you have bad judgement. Are you making things up? Much of this has to do with hating Chicago because we won so often same as in baseball where they hate the Yankees. There is absolutely no basis in fact for your misstatements.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Lizzy *
> 
> 
> BCH is talking about the specific "I'm going to regret this" quote said by Reinsdorf after signing Jordan. I think.


Lizzy, Reinsdorf who is no dummy and does not do things on the spur of the moment signed Jordan to the biggest contract in the history of pro sports. He gave him more money than the NBA salary cap. He also paid his full salary of $4mil to play in the minor leagues for the White Sox for two years when he wasn't even a decent minor leaguer. He was obviously kidding and shame on anyone who didn't realize it. Giving a pro athelete $30 mil and then the max raises the following years is more respect in and of itself than anything else conceivable. Action speaks louder than words and Reinsdorf acted big time money wise for MJ and for Jackson and made Jackson more than one multi year offer at top money and if Jackson had stayed, he would have been the highest paid coach in the NBA. I am really tired of hearing these silly revisionsist arguments. I went through it on Sportstalk, RealGM, and I'll do it this time on Basketballboards. The money was there for Phil and MJ and if they stayed, Scottie would have had a great offer too, maybe not for 7 years, but serious money. People, want to go a few more rounds, I have facts, you have fairy tales. (Not you Lizzy, you're okay) Lets go people. I'm game to fight tonight and the truth will out. Lets take off the gloves and get into it.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

It occurs to me that people are always pissed off that sports figures just "do it for the money", but when I look at the end of the Bulls dynasty, it occurs to me that PJ and MJ's mindset was something like this (simplified):

"No amount of money is worth putting up with JK for another year. It's obvious Reinsforf isn't going to get rid of him, and its obvious that he's eager to get rid of us to prove he can do it on his own".


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

Songcycle - I was just clarifying what I thought BCH and Kneepad were referring discussing. I'm not anti-Jerry's.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Lizzy *
> Songcycle - I was just clarifying what I thought BCH and Kneepad were referring discussing. I'm not anti-Jerry's.


Lizzy, I know and I did exclude near you the end from this stuff and praised you on another thread. I do apologize to you beacuse I wind up writing one long paragraph with out proper boundaries to mark new stuff. I apologize to you as this is my fault for not seperating things properly.

I do want you to know that I highly respect your opinion and enjoy reading your opinions even if we are on a different track (Lamar Odom) though more often than not I totally agree with you and look forward to reading your opinion.

This is really my fault because I am a journalist and an editor and know the rules of writing, but on this forum I do get hot and bothered on certain subjects and don't proof my stuff, though I know I should. You are one of the finest posters here Lizzy and I'll try to do things in a slower manner so I don't goof up like I did with you.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Lizzy is correct, I am just talking about Reinsdorf's comment to Jordan.

I am not getting into why Jordan and PJ left. They obviously could have stayed but chose not to. The obviously had something left to offer because both are back in the NBA with another team and both are successful. Whether you see that as their fault or someone else's fault is totally up to interpretation, but they both left under poor circumstances as well as Scottie Pippen.


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

Songcycle - thanks! I think we see eye to eye on a lot of stuff. Besides, arguing about Odom can be fun. It's harmless!

BCH - Phil, MJ and Pippen all left under bad circumstances. Then Pippen left Houston under equally bad circumstances, Jerry West left the Lakers shortly after Phil arrived due to some issues they had and most of the previous Bulls players are still involved w/ the Bulls. Those facts alone lead me to believe that Krause gets a lot of unfair blame. Again - he is partially responsable but if you read a column in SI or listen to sports talk radio - he is 100% to blame. That isn't fair, IMO. I think I've made this point a million times like a broken record. I apologize.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Jerry West was still with the Lakers as a consultant until recently. I have yet to read one article that says he left because of anything Phil Jackson did. If Phil wanted to be GM, he could have been, instead the Lakers hired Kupchak.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by *BCH *
> Jerry West was still with the Lakers as a consultant until recently. I have yet to read one article that says he left because of anything Phil Jackson did. If Phil wanted to be GM, he could have been, instead the Lakers hired Kupchak.


It is really obvious that Jerry West left because of Phil Jackson. He was near the end of a major league cheap contract that was about to escalate big time and he built a championship team and he said bye bye.
Plus Phil is porking the owmers daughter A gentleman, which West is, does not throw public accusations. 100 percent wrong again BCH, but those are the facts. Phil wants control.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

If Phil wanted control why didn't he take it? Prove me wrong. If what you say is true he could have had it. Why didn't he? The simple and truthful answer is because he didn't want it. It is obvious West left because Jackson forced him out? Where? Show me something that insinuates Phil wanted him gone at least. 

If he said bye bye why was he still consulting the Lakers? You think he is the type of guy to do it for the money? 

Why is Kupchak the guy West tapped to succeed him the GM in LA?

You want to say I am 100% wrong and you have brought absolutely nothing to the table. Absolutely nothing.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

You are getting upset with me for asking you to show me something that suggests Phil wanted WEst's job? You say it was common knowledge. Show me is all I am asking.

Why would West walk away? You think it might be because he didn't need the $4mil? Or maybe it is because the reality is, and this has been reported, that he frets over ever little detail and he was burned out with the Lakers? 

Once again. He never left the Lakers. He did several things for the franchise in a capacity that allowed him to step away a bit and recover from the burnout. 

Songcycle, if you have a problem with me take it up in a PM.

Here is an article written about his retirement. Seems to mention something about burnout:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/news/2000/08/07/west_retires_ap/

Another, without any mention of PJ trying to be GM as well:

http://detnews.com/2000/pistons/0008/12/sports-102239.htm

Dupree seems to agree with me:

http://www.usatoday.com/community/chat/2002-03-20-dupree.htm


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

Wrong! Have a nice life.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

You think this is some sort of personal contest. I find it more important that people don't take what you say as gospel and that they go out and educate themselves. I have provided the information for them to make up their own mind. This is an open forum, you have an opportunity to provide any information you want to disprove me. You asked for proof, I provided those that read this board more than enough, so they don't have to rely on what you say.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Are divergent opinions on certain topics not allowed here?

A lot of what we are arguing about here is *opinion*. No one here is privy to the actual details of what went down with the Bulls, with the Lakers, with MJ, etc. Published reports offer conflicting versions. 

Now, if someone wants to propose and enforce a political decision about what "the truth" is, then inevitably this board will suffer for it.


------



BCH, 

You have provided as factual information as possible. I personally think you can let your "defense" rest upon that and have no fear that anyone will misconstrue what you're saying.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Mikedc *
> Are divergent opinions on certain topics not allowed here?
> 
> A lot of what we are arguing about here is *opinion*. No one here is privy to the actual details of what went down with the Bulls, with the Lakers, with MJ, etc. Published reports offer conflicting versions.
> ...


I agree with you. I am not against opinion. I am an opponent of opinion stated as fact.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

ok i just got here. Lets all just back off on this one. Agree to disagree and drop it. Why do i say that? Because no one really knows what really went on. BCH can offer posts to support his arguement. Songcycle could offer posts to prove his, but then nothing is resolved. Its interpretation and opinion. Both opinions are equal. Lets just say we dont know! If not i will lock this thread because its getting no where.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by *BCH *
> You think this is some sort of personal contest. I find it more important that people don't take what you say as gospel and that they go out and educate themselves. I have provided the information for them to make up their own mind. This is an open forum, you have an opportunity to provide any information you want to disprove me. You asked for proof, I provided those that read this board more than enough, so they don't have to rely on what you say.


Pardon me but having a link does not make it real. Just because someone wrote an article once, does not mean it is gospel.
An intelligent person (which you are) and a fair minded unbiased person (which you are not) who followed the news of the day when it happened and lived through it, knows you are wrong.
Revisionist nonsense in these days of the internet is common and you are a major proponent of such fantasies.
Want to show me a link that Rhode Island is bigger than Texas? It may be available on the web.
I read every paper, every day in Chicago, even when there four daily papers and I read every Bulls story since the day we were awarded a franchise and I have been attending games since the first year when they were at the Amphitheatre.
This is not a personal contest, you could care less about me than I care about you, big deal. Those who know me here know I care about reality and factuality. You ain't close on those scores.
Want to quote revisionist history? If thiis board lasts long enough you'll be proven wrong.
Good luck with Larry Hughes who you have strongly touted. I am sure he will win multiple rings for you.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Songcycle,

I am posting articles written at the time. I am posting articles written by major publications. I am not being revisionist in any way. I have not claimed these articles are gospel. I have explicitly stated they are presented to support my argument and allow anyone else following it to read and form their own opinion about Jerry West and Phil Jackson. 

I have asked that you do the same. You don't have to.

This where it ends and this is where we can agree to disagree. You don't have to take it to a personal level or try and invoke the Wizards. We can resolve these things.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by *Songcycle *
> Vin Diesel, you are totally wrong and you are not even close to the truth and the things you say are revisionist and innacurate history. If you are getting your stuff from Lacy Banks or Chad Ford then you have bad judgement. Are you making things up? Much of this has to do with hating Chicago because we won so often same as in baseball where they hate the Yankees. There is absolutely no basis in fact for your misstatements.


Songcycle, what the hell are you talking about? I don't hate Chicago, in fact I live there and have followed its teams for many years.

<span style="font-family:Verdana; font-size:11px; color:#FFFF00; background:#000000">*** The name calling is unacceptable. Don't do that again. — Ron ***</span>


Hey I don't ask that you agree with me. Hell, myself and Kneepad have been going back and forth on this thread, but we don't disrespect each other or each other's knowledge of the game... that's not right. And because you did that with me, I expect a prompt apology. Since none will be given on your part, believe me your empty criticism will not soon be forgotten.

By the way, if my 'theory' on the Jerrys and the breakup of the dynasty is incorrect... then why did ESPN make a SportsCentury episode devoted fully to this? I remember watching it a couple months ago, and the spin they gave it was favoring my opinion (as is widely regarded around the league and by the media) that the Jerry's stubbornly broke up the dynasty prematurely. Yeah, but hey ESPN isn't credible and I wouldn't believe what you see on SportsCenter either (sarcasm here smart guy).

VD


----------

