# Deng contract extension falls apart?



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/23574724/report-bulls-extension-talks-with-luol-deng-stalled



> “We were optimistic,” the source said of the mentality Deng's camp had heading into the late August meeting, approximately two weeks ago. “Our goal was to get an extension done this summer. If that's not what they want to do, so be it.


Looks like Deng will test the free agent market in 14.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Seems like the right move for both sides, frankly.


----------



## bullsger (Jan 14, 2003)

*Re: Deng contract extension done?*

http://espn.go.com/chicago/nba/story/_/id/9658990/report-chicago-bulls-table-luol-deng-contract-extension-talks



> The agent for Luol Deng said the Chicago Bulls forward will explore free agency in 2014 after the team tabled contract extension talks until after the upcoming season, according to a report.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Changed the thread title because "extension is done" made me thing we extended him when I read it (even though I'd heard earlier that there wasn't much progress on that front).

Interesting that we tabled talks so early... I don't know if that's because the parties were so far apart or what, but you'd think they'd have at least a little more time to talk before it became an in-season (or even pre-season) distraction. Hard for me to have an opinion on this without knowing what the parties are offering.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Dornado said:


> Changed the thread title because "extension is done" made me thing we extended him when I read it (even though I'd heard earlier that there wasn't much progress on that front).
> 
> Interesting that we tabled talks so early... I don't know if that's because the parties were so far apart or what, but you'd think they'd have at least a little more time to talk before it became an in-season (or even pre-season) distraction. Hard for me to have an opinion on this without knowing what the parties are offering.


I read that the extension talks were tabled before numbers were even discussed. To me, thta sounds like ReinsGarPax told Deng's camp that they wanted to wait until next offseason no matter what.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Rhyder said:


> I read that the extension talks were tabled before numbers were even discussed. To me, thta sounds like ReinsGarPax told Deng's camp that they wanted to wait until next offseason no matter what.


Which is the smart thing to do. You still don't know how Butler's going to progress this coming season, which will affect how important (or not) it is to keep Deng around, and Deng's big expiring contract (attached to a borderline all-star) is a great trade chip this coming season. Committing long-term money to Deng at this point never made sense, unless Chicago was getting a monster discount on him.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bogg said:


> Which is the smart thing to do. You still don't know how Butler's going to progress this coming season, which will affect how important (or not) it is to keep Deng around, and Deng's big expiring contract (attached to a borderline all-star) is a great trade chip this coming season. Committing long-term money to Deng at this point never made sense, unless Chicago was getting a monster discount on him.



I'll tell you what, though. It's going to be awfully hard for the Bulls to deal Deng this year if they are shaping up like the championship contender they view themselves to be. You basically have one more year with the Deng + Boozer complementary pieces. If you trade Deng during the season, it's highly possible any package coming back makes you less of a win-now team than before, even if it's better in the long term. I'm not sure the Bulls would be willing to do anything they think takes them out of contention this season. They would probably rather let Deng walk for nothing.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

jnrjr79 said:


> I'll tell you what, though. It's going to be awfully hard for the Bulls to deal Deng this year if they are shaping up like the championship contender they view themselves to be. You basically have one more year with the Deng + Boozer complementary pieces. If you trade Deng during the season, it's highly possible any package coming back makes you less of a win-now team than before, even if it's better in the long term. I'm not sure the Bulls would be willing to do anything they think takes them out of contention this season. They would probably rather let Deng walk for nothing.


You get that Chicago would be making a trade to improve their chances of winning a title, right?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bogg said:


> You get that Chicago would be making a trade to improve their chances of winning a title, right?



Thanks for the smug tone!

And no, I don't "get" that in the abstract that Chicago trading Deng would improve their chances of winning a title. Please provide for me the names of the players for whom you think Deng could realistically be traded for next year that would improve, and not reduce, the chance of winning a title next year. I'll bet it's a short list. A Deng trade is likely going to bring back younger players and picks. Now, if you're talking about trading Deng + other assets (Bobcats pick, Mirotic, etc.), perhaps you can improve the team immediately. Still, cohesion matters (see, e.g., Los Angeles Lakers), and a big midseason shakeup has a good chance of derailing your win-now prospects.

If your argument is that trading Deng might improve title chances in some years other than next year, that was the entire point of my post. I was observing that it would be difficult for the Bulls to reduce their chance to win next year in exchange for improved chances sometime down the line.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

jnrjr79 said:


> Thanks for the smug tone!
> 
> And no, I don't "get" that in the abstract that Chicago trading Deng would improve their chances of winning a title. Please provide for me the names of the players for whom you think Deng could realistically be traded for next year that would improve, and not reduce, the chance of winning a title next year. I'll bet it's a short list.
> 
> If your argument is that trading Deng might improve title chances in some years other than next year, that was the entire point of my post. I was observing that it would be difficult for the Bulls to reduce their chance to win next year in exchange for improved chances sometime down the line.


My point is that Deng, on an expiring contract, is a very useful trade chip. Deng, on a four- or five-year contract, has very little trade value. Players become available every year, and it's a good idea to have the ability to put together a package for a disgruntled star. That doesn't mean you _have_ to trade Deng. If the right package is there, great. If not, you decide if it's worth bringing Deng back at the price he'll command on the open market. Railing about how Deng can't be traded because nobody's shopping an obvious upgrade _right now_ is shortsighted at best.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Hard to see how anyone is going to give up anything better than Deng for a team that wants to make a run. When teams trade for expiring contracts they give up things that aren't in their long term plans, but anything better than Deng is going to be worth a lot. I could see the Bulls just trying to get value for Deng though. I'm not convinced that they are going to view this year as all or nothing, because they make a lot of moves that revolve around what they see as being fiscally responsible.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Diable said:


> Hard to see how anyone is going to give up anything better than Deng for a team that wants to make a run. When teams trade for expiring contracts they give up things that aren't in their long term plans, but anything better than Deng is going to be worth a lot. I could see the Bulls just trying to get value for Deng though. I'm not convinced that they are going to view this year as all or nothing, because they make a lot of moves that revolve around what they see as being fiscally responsible.


Well, they have some combination of Deng, their picks, a Charlotte first-rounder, Butler, and the Euro forward (Mirotic?) that everyone seems to like so much. If a star should find his way to the trade block, Chicago has all the pieces necessary to put themselves in the drivers' seat. It makes no sense to shoot that all to hell by giving Deng a long-term deal right now.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bogg said:


> My point is that Deng, on an expiring contract, is a very useful trade chip. Deng, on a four- or five-year contract, has very little trade value. Players become available every year, and it's a good idea to have the ability to put together a package for a disgruntled star. That doesn't mean you _have_ to trade Deng. If the right package is there, great. If not, you decide if it's worth bringing Deng back at the price he'll command on the open market.



This nuanced take is not what you put forth before. You just treated it like anyone would be stupid not to realize that a Deng trade, in the abstract, is something that improves the team. This is far from a sure thing. Certainly, if you look at some of the theoretical Aldridge trades that were floated in concept, those might weaken the term in terms of a single season. If the point is you should trade Deng if it makes the team better now, well sure, I doubt you'll get much disagreement there.



> Railing about how Deng can't be traded because nobody's shopping an obvious upgrade _right now_ is shortsighted at best.


That's a strawman. Nobody is railing about how Deng can't be traded. I merely pointed out the Bulls may be reluctant to trade him this year for a package that might be beneficial in the long-term, but hurt the team's championship aspirations in this particular season.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bogg said:


> It makes no sense to shoot that all to hell by giving Deng a long-term deal right now.



I feel like you're again arguing against positions nobody is taking. Not a single person in this thread has stated that the right move is to extend Deng long-term now. The only debate seems to be centered around whether to let him play out his final year versus trying to trade him.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

jnrjr79 said:


> This nuanced take is not what you put forth before. You just treated it like anyone would be stupid not to realize that *a Deng trade, in the abstract, is something that improves the team.*


I get that you guys might have some sort of Hoodey-related PTSD, but how do you get "Deng has to go, getting rid of him will make the team better" from



Bogg said:


> Deng's big expiring contract (attached to a borderline all-star) is a great trade chip this coming season.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bogg said:


> I get that you guys might have some sort of Hoodey-related PTSD, but how do you get "Deng has to go, getting rid of him will make the team better" from


Ha, as though that was your only statement. How about something a little more pertinent?



Bogg said:


> You get that Chicago would be making a trade to improve their chances of winning a title, right?


That is a blanket statement that trading Deng "improves the team," and delivered with an attitude that it would be impossible to hold a contradictory view.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

jnrjr79 said:


> Ha, as though that was your only statement. How about something a little more pertinent?
> 
> 
> 
> That is a blanket statement that trading Deng "improves the team," and delivered with an attitude that it would be impossible to hold a contradictory view.


...........okay............

Chicago would only make a trade if it improved the team.

*NOT*

Trading Deng would make Chicago a better team.

I hope this clears up any confusion


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

I expect that we will extend Deng next offseason unless a consolidation trade becomes available during the regular season this year.

I'm ok with that dependent upon who becomes available. Assuming we do not trade Deng, we are in win now mode and if Mirotic or the Bobcat pick pan into something, win later as well.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I am perfectly OK not extending Deng right now. IMO, Deng and his agent seem to be asking for a very large contract similar to his last extension. I certainly want him to stay but we can't have him taking up a huge portion of the salary cap especially when we may find ourselves with other big holes to fill.

I also really want to see what other teams are willing to offer him on the open market. Although based on this past summer a reasonable guess is that he can either take the money for a bad team, or take less money for a contender. That seems to be the tradeoff in the new CBA...see Smith, Josh...and Jefferson, Al.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bogg said:


> ...........okay............
> 
> Chicago would only make a trade if it improved the team.
> 
> ...



This continues to miss the point. The point is about _when_ the improvement occurs and whether the Bulls would deal Deng for long-term improvement if it caused a potential short-term hit.

Also, your new statement is not at all what you said before. So, sure, you seem to have cleared up your own confusion. Anyway, I can't really understand the attitude given.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Here are my thoughts:

• No extension, unless he agrees for $7M/3 years.

• Letting him go after this season will make the team financially much better. 

• Knowing the limitations, greed and incompetency of upper management, no trades should be considered until the end of the season.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

deng is going to get his money unless he gets hurt .

he's still relatively young and productive, he may not get the years he wants and that is probably where the bulls talks wore down and ended so quickly .

he is worth his money , he's is just not worth it to the bulls the main things he provides most teams get cheaper that what deng wants for his services...heck they do have butler who provides basically what deng provides(just not as well) for a fraction of deng's compensation.

they should have put deng on the trading block the moment rose's acl tore.(boozer too)


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> ...deng is going to get his money unless he gets hurt .


Are you seriously thinking that someone will pay him $12M/5 years ?!

I don’t think there is any team in NBA who finds that feasible, regardless of their short or long term plans or present needs.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Bulls96 said:


> Are you seriously thinking that someone will pay him $12M/5 years ?!
> 
> I don’t think there is any team in NBA who finds that feasible, regardless of their short or long term plans or present needs.



i dont think he'll get 5 years but 12 mil. is very realistic maybe 3-4 years.

monta ellis stupidly turned down 3/36 mil a few months ago and deng is much better than him.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

jnrjr79 said:


> This continues to miss the point. The point is about _when_ the improvement occurs and whether the Bulls would deal Deng for long-term improvement if it caused a potential short-term hit.


That's all well and good. You still can't trade Deng for anywhere near as much when he's on a four-year deal as you can with him attached to an expiring contract. The whole point was that he's way more useful on the trade market if you don't extend him right now. 



jnrjr79 said:


> Also, your new statement is not at all what you said before. So, sure, you seem to have cleared up your own confusion. Anyway, I can't really understand the attitude given.


No, what I said was that Deng makes it much easier for Chicago to upgrade their roster mid-season on his current contract than he would on a new one. Then we somehow got into a debate about whether I said he _had_ to go to kick off a rebuilding effort.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> • Knowing the limitations, greed and incompetency of upper management, no trades should be considered until the end of the season.


Because once the season is over upper management will no longer be limited, greedy, or incompetent?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bogg said:


> That's all well and good. You still can't trade Deng for anywhere near as much when he's on a four-year deal as you can with him attached to an expiring contract. The whole point was that he's way more useful on the trade market if you don't extend him right now.
> 
> 
> 
> No, what I said was that Deng makes it much easier for Chicago to upgrade their roster mid-season on his current contract than he would on a new one. Then we somehow got into a debate about whether I said he _had_ to go to kick off a rebuilding effort.



I absolutely agree that he is tradeable now and would be virtually untradeable extended. Of course.

The point I was making is that while he may be very tradeable now, I expect the front office to be gunshy about actually doing so, because they view the team as a title contender and likely will be reluctant to do anything to meddle with the team's prospects at winning a championship this season.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

jnrjr79 said:


> I absolutely agree that he is tradeable now and would be virtually untradeable extended. Of course.
> 
> The point I was making is that while he may be very tradeable now, I expect the front office to be gunshy about actually doing so, because they view the team as a title contender and likely will be reluctant to do anything to meddle with the team's prospects at winning a championship this season.


Well, I think a lot of that depends on the development of Butler. If Jimmy becomes a reasonable do-it-all replacement for Deng (not going to have a debate on how likely that is, just saying _if_ it happens) then Chicago is going to be much more likely to move Deng. If Butler's development stagnates, or he even regresses, then the Bulls' front office probably takes him off the table almost entirely.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

if luol were signed to a perceived bargain , he would be more trade able ... not less no matter the years.

he is only 28, in the middle of his prime.

jnrjr
i absolutely do not believe the bulls FO believes the team is a true contender. i dont see any reason they should have the opinion that they are able to dethrone the heat, these are intelligent people whp have been around the pro game for a number of years

micheal jordan wasn't on a true contender until scottie became a star paxson was on the team he saw it happen .

rose is awesome but he is no mj and there certainly isn't a scottie on the roter


i think the bulls are going to use this as an opportunity to rebuild again this time around rose and try to gain cap space by letting deng and boozer go with and trade taj after he has a bounce back season and and restocks with only an mle deal to mirotic in its place .

we've seen this twice before in the paxson era and i think we'll see it again within the next 2 years


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

If you try to pull that shit with Derek you may as well just trade him now, because he isn't going through a rebuild.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> if luol were signed to a perceived bargain , he would be more trade able ... not less no matter the years.
> 
> he is only 28, in the middle of his prime.
> 
> ...


That isn't the model you look at if you are the Bulls FO. Instead you look for something like the Pistons where you play great defense and put a bunch of solid players around a scorer. If the Bulls can rebound and defend better than anyone else, then they do not need a ton more than they have. 

Then when you look at the Heat, there is not a lot of reason to see them as some irresistible machine. If Wade continues to decline like a skydiver, then that team is just Lebron, Bosh and not much else. Furthermore the Heat are weak where you are fairly strong, on the interior. You don't need the Heat to be a lot worse than they were last year.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Diable said:


> That isn't the model you look at if you are the Bulls FO. Instead you look for something like the Pistons where you play great defense and put a bunch of solid players around a scorer. If the Bulls can rebound and defend better than anyone else, then they do not need a ton more than they have.
> 
> Then when you look at the Heat, there is not a lot of reason to see them as some irresistible machine. If Wade continues to decline like a skydiver, then that team is just Lebron, Bosh and not much else. Furthermore the Heat are weak where you are fairly strong, on the interior. You don't need the Heat to be a lot worse than they were last year.


the problem with that is when the heat played the bulls with a healthy derrick they beat the bulls handily with wade playing pretty bad...they dont need an effective wade to beat the bulls easily they cant stop/slow lebron , but the heat are pretty effective against rose. they cant stop him but they can make him very inefficient and without even boshlike backup firepower that is more than enough.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Da Grinch said:


> if luol were signed to a perceived bargain , he would be more trade able ... not less no matter the years.


Every account I've read was that Deng wasn't going to accept a reduced amount in extension talks. Unless you have information that I don't.



R-Star said:


> If you try to pull that shit with Derek you may as well just trade him now, because he isn't going through a rebuild.


I don't think Chicago _needs_ to go through a full rebuild, though. They're a top-four team in the East with an outside chance at knocking off Miami and they have big expiring contracts each of the next three or four years to package with picks and a prospect or two in trade. They _should_ be among the strongest suitors every time a star becomes available in the next two or three years in order to put themselves over the top.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Bogg said:


> Every account I've read was that Deng wasn't going to accept a reduced amount in extension talks. Unless you have information that I don't.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Chicago _needs_ to go through a full rebuild, though. They're a top-four team in the East with an outside chance at knocking off Miami and they have big expiring contracts each of the next three or four years to package with picks and a prospect or two in trade. They _should_ be among the strongest suitors every time a star becomes available in the next two or three years in order to put themselves over the top.


the perception of his value depends on his production in relation to that paycheck and how much he adds to the ratings/revenue.

basically he is productive and in his prime , but no one outside of Illinois is going to cry if they dont get a deng jersey, no he wont be a bargain unless he starts outproducing his contract which to me is very unlikely , i think he has clearly plateaued and gets a contract that reflects his current production which is about what he makes give or take a million. 

and they have had chances to rebuild around rose and are clearly not taking chances to make that happen, stars are available every year (howard , carmelo, harden, bynum, josh smith , chris paul , deron williams , al jefferson lamarcus aldridge and kevin love would represent an upgrade of sorts and have all been dealt or rumored to be on the trading block in the last few years) but the bulls aren't in mix when it comes to acquiring any top tier talent.

after a while you seriously have to ask why.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Da Grinch said:


> the perception of his value depends on his production in relation to that paycheck and how much he adds to the ratings/revenue.
> 
> basically he is productive and in his prime , but no one outside of Illinois is going to cry if they dont get a deng jersey, no he wont be a bargain unless he starts outproducing his contract which to me is very unlikely , i think he has clearly plateaued and gets a contract that reflects his current production which is about what he makes give or take a million.


I don't disagree with you, I just haven't ready anything saying that Deng is willing to take a deal below his current market value.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Diable said:


> That isn't the model you look at if you are the Bulls FO. Instead you look for something like the Pistons where you play great defense and put a bunch of solid players around a scorer. If the Bulls can rebound and defend better than anyone else, then they do not need a ton more than they have.
> 
> Then when you look at the Heat, there is not a lot of reason to see them as some irresistible machine. If Wade continues to decline like a skydiver, then that team is just Lebron, Bosh and not much else. Furthermore the Heat are weak where you are fairly strong, on the interior. You don't need the Heat to be a lot worse than they were last year.


except for the really important fact that the bulls dont have near the supporting cast for rose that the pistons gave billups .

both wallaces and rip along with billups could all claim to be the best player on a 50 win team

i dont think deng boozer and noah are really on the level in either talent or production of a ben wallace , rasheed or prime rip hamilton.

that being said ...*that* piston team would be unlikely to beat this current heat team because the last time they matched up with lebron as a cav they lost

when his supporting cast was larry hughes , illgaustas drew gooden and sasha pavolvic

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2007.html

lebron and hughes were the only players to even avg. 12 points or 30 minutes

lebron is better now and so is the team around him.

rose is a great player ...but realistically he has to have more around him to believably have a chance


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Bogg said:


> I don't disagree with you, I just haven't ready anything saying that Deng is willing to take a deal below his current market value.



i never said he was going to and i dont believe he will i was just stating there are no inherent bad deals or good ones , it usually comes down to production vs. price.

if he outproduces his deal no matter how he makes or how long it is , he'll have good trade value...if not he wont.

its simple really.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Da Grinch said:


> i never said he was going to and i dont believe he will i was just stating there are no inherent bad deals or good ones , it usually comes down to production vs. price.
> 
> if he outproduces his deal no matter how he makes or how long it is , he'll have good trade value...if not he wont.
> 
> its simple really.


Well, yea, if he suddenly and dramatically improves his quality of play he'll be easier to trade. That's very, very unlikely though. We're not having an abstract discussion, it's about Deng over the next three to five years. He's almost certainly going to roughly sustain his current level of play for a few more seasons and then begin to decline. Signing him to a three-year extension at more than 10 million a year right now, when he's one of Chicago's most attractive trade chips, *is* inherently a bad deal.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Not all that surprising that the two sides couldn't get together on an extension. Unlike Hinrich, Noah and Gibson, Deng's camp didn't bite on the extension the Bulls offered after his 3rd season. By their nature, these early extensions need to be somewhat advantageous to the team (read: below market) and Team Deng seems to favor betting on itself over financial security.

Unanimity is seldom found on this board, but it seems that everyone here is cool with not getting this extension done, me included.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

transplant said:


> By their nature, these early extensions need to be somewhat advantageous to the team (read: below market) and Team Deng seems to favor betting on itself over financial security.


Deng is smart to insist he gets paid in full. This is probably going to be his last big contract, the Lakers have a _ton_ of cap room next summer, and they're going to need something to show for it. Lebron and Melo are both longshots, and Bosh isn't going anywhere if Lebron sticks around in Miami. Luol would be set up to become a very highly-paid consolation prize if the Lakers strike out on the marquee names.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Bogg said:


> *Deng is smart to insist he gets paid in full*. This is probably going to be his last big contract, the Lakers have a _ton_ of cap room next summer, and they're going to need something to show for it. Lebron and Melo are both longshots, and Bosh isn't going anywhere if Lebron sticks around in Miami. Luol would be set up to become a very highly-paid consolation prize if the Lakers strike out on the marquee names.


Well, whether he ends up looking smart depends on some things:

- that he stays healthy

- that he has a good season

- that there's a team out there that both has the cap space and is willing to spend big on a player who holds little attraction to the average fan.

The Lakers is a good call since they could conceivably bring in several big-money FAs so Deng wouldn't have to be the poster boy.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> jnrjr
> i absolutely do not believe the bulls FO believes the team is a true contender. i dont see any reason they should have the opinion that they are able to dethrone the heat, these are intelligent people whp have been around the pro game for a number of years



The Pacers and San Antonio just each took the Heat to 7 games. I think there is virtually no chance the Bulls FO does not see this team as superior to the Pacers and at least equal to San Antonio. Since Rose was last healthy, the Bulls have added Hinrich and Jimmy Butler has emerged as the legit starting 2 guard the team has needed forever. They have added some good shooting this offseason.

It's win now time, and the FO knows it.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> The Pacers and San Antonio just each took the Heat to 7 games. I think there is virtually no chance the Bulls FO does not see this team as superior to the Pacers and at least equal to San Antonio. Since Rose was last healthy, the Bulls have added Hinrich and Jimmy Butler has emerged as the legit starting 2 guard the team has needed forever. They have added some good shooting this offseason.
> 
> It's win now time, and the FO knows it.


there is a boxing axiom "styles make fights"

the spurs and the pacers matched up better with the heat because they have legit go to offense on the interior in hibbert and duncan .

they even went out and got oden to combat that....when was the last time the heat made a move to match up with the bulls?

the answer is they dont.

the bulls dont match up well with the heat at all , in the regular season you can consistently outhustle and outwork your opponents because the season is a grind and for the most part teams rarely put out their top effort then.

the playoffs are different, everyone plays hard every game and the bulls weaknesses are on full display vs. a team like the heat, 

almost everything starts with rose and he is very inefficient vs the heat which makes it an uphill climb from the get go.

also unlike the pacers and the spurs the bulls are usually on their last legs come playoff time , thibs works them very hard and plays his key guys way too much, another factor that hurts them at the end of the season

they lack a strong 2ndary scorer who can create offense for others so it will always come down to rose getting it done and he simply needs more help to reasonably expect him to do that.

and i like jimmy , everyone does, but offensively he only increases the load on rose , he doesn't shoot enough (8.6 attempts per 36 minutes the lowest on the team) and for most of that he will rely on teams playing off him and keying on rose.

and at the end of the season no is going to care if the bulls beat the pacers if they still cant get by the heat.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Bogg said:


> Well, yea, if he suddenly and dramatically improves his quality of play he'll be easier to trade. That's very, very unlikely though. We're not having an abstract discussion, it's about Deng over the next three to five years. He's almost certainly going to roughly sustain his current level of play for a few more seasons and then begin to decline. Signing him to a three-year extension at more than 10 million a year right now, when he's one of Chicago's most attractive trade chips, *is* inherently a bad deal.


if he dramatically improves his play and outproduces his deal , there would less reason to deal him, he's not a bad guy he's a good locker room presence...also i dont see alot of teams out there who would want him so bad they would give up a lot for him on a possible rental, deng wont want to go to a bad team...but the good teams wont want his salary (the lakers and grizzlies could use upgrades but the lakers just cut MWP to save $ and the grizzlies are 3-4 mil from the luxury tax), good teams tend to get what he provides at an extreme discount.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> The Pacers and San Antonio just each took the Heat to 7 games. I think there is virtually no chance the Bulls FO does not see this team as superior to the Pacers and at least equal to San Antonio. Since Rose was last healthy, the Bulls have added Hinrich and Jimmy Butler has emerged as the legit starting 2 guard the team has needed forever. They have added some good shooting this offseason.
> 
> It's win now time, and the FO knows it.


Superior to the Pacers? You're delusional.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Superior to the Pacers? You're delusional.


Delusional? Putting the Bulls above the Pacers is just going with the chalk, man.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Source: Losing Deng Would Upset Thibodeau


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Dornado said:


> Source: Losing Deng Would Upset Thibodeau


Not intended a slam at you, Dornado, but what passes for journalism these days amazes me. Here's the substance of the article:



> “Ask Tom how important he thinks Luol is,’’ the source said. “How happy do you think he would be with that decision?’’


I'm sorry, but it is not news that Thibodeau thinks highly of Deng's game.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Ha, no offense taken... just moving the narrative along...

I also like how the source begs the question and the reporter answers it for him. Couldn't even get the anonymous source to do more than pose the question. Top notch sleuthing there.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> and i like jimmy , everyone does, but offensively he only increases the load on rose , he doesn't shoot enough (8.6 attempts per 36 minutes the lowest on the team) and for most of that he will rely on teams playing off him and keying on rose.



Increases the load? That's just silly. Rose's last running mates were Keith friggin' Bogans and a perpetually injured Rip Hamilton.

You think the Bulls are a bad matchup with the Heat. That's not really true. The Bulls kill them on the boards like everyone else, which is the Heat's big weakness. If Oden is healthy, then sure, the Heat could have finally addressed their one glaring issue. Betting on that health, though, is a risky proposition.

Moreover, nothing in your post re: matchups does anything to make me believe the Bulls FO does not view them as a championship contender in this upcoming season. Quite the opposite.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Increases the load? That's just silly. Rose's last running mates were Keith friggin' Bogans and a perpetually injured Rip Hamilton.
> 
> You think the Bulls are a bad matchup with the Heat. That's not really true. The Bulls kill them on the boards like everyone else, which is the Heat's big weakness. If Oden is healthy, then sure, the Heat could have finally addressed their one glaring issue. Betting on that health, though, is a risky proposition.
> 
> Moreover, nothing in your post re: matchups does anything to make me believe the Bulls FO does not view them as a championship contender in this upcoming season. Quite the opposite.



The heat not being the greatest rebounders is nothing new, but the facts dont back you up here 

The heat outrebounded the bulls 2 out of the 5 playoff games they had....against the pacers and spurs they outrebounded them in 2 out of 14

By any objective measure the pacers are a better rebounding team than the bulls, they led the league in rebounding pct, and margin while the bulls tied the lakers in both at 9th.

The heat were outrebounded on average in the regular seaon and they won 66 games, outrebounding them doesnt mean you win....although if you lose to them on the boards in the playoffs it generally means you got blown out.

Jimmy is a good player but you are overreaching here , the bulls are not more talented that they were in 2011...losing asik hurts more than gaining butler helps especially when you want to talk about rebounding being the bulls way to succeed vs the heat...the lost 5.5 boards in rebounding margin and went from 1st to 9th there, from 2011-12 to 2012-13 if they really felt as you do, they would have matched the rockets offer

I think they know better and saved the cash.


----------

