# Grade Our Off-Season



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

So I saw the article below and was wondering how you guys would rate our offseason.


http://www.hoopsdaily.com/content/nba-central-division-season-grades


> Chicago Bulls:
> Ronnie Brewer with his Bulls uniform
> Draft Picks: Kevin Seraphin, France Sent to Washington Wizards
> Additions: Carlos Boozer (Jazz 5 years 80 million), Ronnie Brewer (Memphis 3 years 12.5 million), Kyle Korver (Jazz 3 years 15 million), Omer Asik (Turkey), CJ Watson (GSW 3 years 10.2 million)
> ...


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Honestly, you have to say B for now. 

They had a chance to be superior. I'm not blaming anybody, but they didn't hit the home run. Oh well. They're going to be a much better team, barring injury, and it'll be organic instead of pre-packaged success, so that counts for something.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

I agree with the article and Love what we have done so far this offseason. I gave us an A.

I think we will be a top 5 team in the NBA this year. And it is nice to see us really put together a deep and talented young team that will stay together while in their primes for at least the next three years. We picked up a defensive coach and greatly improved our teams scoring efficiency.

Also just wanted to point this out:

Players we Lost 
Last Year
Warrick FG% .482
Miller FG% .430
Hinrich fg% .409
Murray FG% .392

New Guys 
Last Year
Boozer FG% .562
Korver FG% .493
Brewer FG% .487
Watson FG% .468

The difference in FG% is enormous. We will be missing a lot less shots this year. 

I also think we will be _the_ best rebounding team in the NBA. So very good defense, very efficient offense, best rebounding, and great depth= contender. And we still got money to spend...


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

I'm very happy with the Bulls off-season. I like that we put ourselves in position to land a premiere FA even though we didn't land one. I also like how the Bulls quickly implemented plan B and rounded out this roster. Could you imagine if we walked away with just signing Amare to the max and no one else...

We addressed a big concern by signing Booze. He is our first legitimate, back to the basket, low-post scorer since Brand was here. That also improved our depth by moving Gibson to the bench. We also addressed the major need of a pure shooter by signing Korver. Hinrich was replaced with Brewer, who is younger and on a better contract. Our overall depth is also the best since the 90's.

Also, let's not let the signing of one of the best defensive minds in the game in Coach T go unnoticed. I understand he is a first time coach, but he has been around the block.
Sure a month ago we envisioned watching LBJ or Bosh or Wade playing at the UC ... but all in all, I'm am extremely excited and happy with the off-season of the Chicago Bulls.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

The only team that has done more to improve their club than the Bull is the Heats... Grading o a curve, that's an "A". We're still not finished, but I'm VERY pleased with this off-season.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Wynn!, you're right, it is grading on a curve. But someone blew the curve to bits. The games have to be played, and who knows, maybe we come out on top, but the bar has been set, and it is not by us.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Good Hope said:


> Wynn!, you're right, it is grading on a curve. But someone blew the curve to bits. The games have to be played, and who knows, maybe we come out on top, but the bar has been set, and it is not by us.


Some kid definateley blew the curve. I think we are doing our best to sit next to him and cheat off of him though.

I definateley see where you are coming from. I just think the whole Miami thing is what it is and it was out of our hands. We did what we had to to put ourselves in the right position. It didn't work out, whatever.

That being said we have done a phenomenal job adding quality guys that really fill our weaknesses. We just seemed to have made so many smart moves and brought guys in on excellet contracts (especially considering the market) I think this offseason in a round about way has put us into contention for a title over the next few years and that's all I was really hoping for. It might be a long shot based soleley on the Heat's ridiculous squad, but it is a legit contender. And anything can happen in a playoff series or with injuries or whatever.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Yeah, no complaints. (Otherwise, I'd have to change my name )

But we have to be realistic, too. We did about as good as we could have hoped, given the circumstances beyond our control. And like I said, our changes are organic, meaning we built on our core foundation of Rose, Noah, Deng (sorry Kirk), which "feels" better. Maybe that means we'll have better long term success? 

But we were aiming for bear and got some meaty squirrels instead.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

I rated it an A. Based on those choices, I think it's really somewhere in the B+/A- region. The Bulls had the 2nd best offseason and dramatically improved the team. Had we been promised all this 3 months ago, we'd be happy. It is only the LeBron mania (which all now seems to have been somewhat of a ruse) that changed perspective. Still, it's obvious Miami got an A+ and we're well behind their offseason.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Its a B, I really dont know how you can go higher or lower. An "A" grade should only be given out to a team that made themselves championship contenders. The Heat got Bosh, Wade and Lebron, thats an A grade I dont see how anyone can grade us as an equal right now.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Its a B, I really dont know how you can go higher or lower. An "A" grade should only be given out to a team that made themselves championship contenders. The Heat got Bosh, Wade and Lebron, thats an A grade I dont see how anyone can grade us as an equal right now.


We went from a team that won 41 games. To a team that last I checked had the 4th best odds to winning the NBA championship (according to vegas). Which means we are a contender. I think an improvement that dramatic warrants an A, regardless of what could have happenned.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> We went from a team that won 41 games. To a team that last I checked had the 4th best odds to winning the NBA championship (according to vegas). Which means we are a contender. I think an improvement that dramatic warrants an A, regardless of what could have happenned.


I don't know about those odds, are we up there with the Lakers, Heat, Magic and Nuggets? I don't know for sure. As is I think we are one bench weapon away form getting an A grade. Don't take the B grade as a slap in the face , its better than we were last season but we aren't there just yet.


----------



## taco_daddy (Jun 13, 2004)

Good Hope said:


> Honestly, you have to say B for now.
> 
> They had a chance to be superior. I'm not blaming anybody, but they didn't hit the home run. Oh well. They're going to be a much better team, barring injury, and it'll be organic instead of pre-packaged success, so that counts for something.


Yea, what Good Hope said.

I bet you DaBabyBullz voted F. We lost Kirk and a first round draft pick and we didn't get Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Ginobli, Joe Johnson, Kevin Durant, and 12 first round draft picks in return. Plus, we kept Deng. Just keeping Deng by himself would warrant an F in DBB's mind.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> I don't know about those odds, are we up there with the Lakers, Heat, Magic and Nuggets? I don't know for sure. As is I think we are one bench weapon away form getting an A grade. Don't take the B grade as a slap in the face , its better than we were last season but we aren't there just yet.


Ok so I made a mistake we have the 5th best odds. But better odds than the Nugetts. Still I think any time you are expected to be a top 5 team in the NBA I think you have to be considered a contender. Also We have the youngest team out of the teams above us. I think it is safe to assume we will get better faster than the other teams. 

http://sports.bodog.com/sports-betting/basketball-futures.jsp 



> Odds to win 2011 NBA Championship All wagers have action.
> Atlanta Hawks
> 28/1
> 
> ...


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i say b- or c+...i felt they improved more than slightly but not as much if they just did the boozer move.

boozer is a big addition and should help alot.

trading the 17th pick and kirk to me was a failure of sorts and forced the bulls to aquire 3 players and pay 12 mil. or so a year to replicate what he does (defense , outside shooting , backup point guard) for 8 or so mil...and he does it all at 1 time plus some pretty good players still available at the 17 spot.

they could have given away kirk's salary if they struck a deal and needed the room , they could even have had the option of sending the pick to miami for beasley.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

taco_daddy said:


> Yea, what Good Hope said.
> 
> I bet you DaBabyBullz voted F. We lost Kirk and a first round draft pick and we didn't get Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Ginobli, Joe Johnson, Kevin Durant, and 12 first round draft picks in return. Plus, we kept Deng. Just keeping Deng by himself would warrant an F in DBB's mind.


Haha, I know right.

I am fully expecting 2 more F's. Bulls 96, and BullHitter. Then the dissatisfied triumverate will have spoken and the rest of the board will fill out the thread with A's and B's.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Odd's are just that odd's, I dont use them as some sort of measuring tool for how good of a team they are. Not yet, I still think we have some question's to answer before we can for sure label the Bull's the fifth best team in the NBA. Is Boozer going to be fully healthy, will Deng stay healthy, is Noah fully recovered, how much more improved is Rose, can Tom T actually coach lol. 

I also would not write off the Thunder and Blazers out of that fifth spot just yet.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> i say b- or c+...i felt they improved more than slightly but not as much if they just did the boozer move.
> 
> boozer is a big addition and should help alot.
> 
> ...


I respect this opinion. I just don't agree with it. You can't just say Hinrich filled all the roles of the players we signed. Although I like Hinrich he was extremeley unproductive on the offensive end of the court and was playing a ton of minutes by default. He would not have played near as much if we had other quality options. He was basically a big PG forced to play out of position because of Rose. Paying him 9 mil to play out of position and not produce offensiveley is really a ton of money. Money that we are using to basically build a team how we would like to around our young core. 

For Hinrich's 9 mil we basically fit in 3 young players. Brewer (who certainly brings some things to the table that Hinrich didn't) CJ Watson (better offensiveley than Hinrich), and Omer Asik (who might be a solid backup Big. Those guys will likeley contribute more minutes to our team than Hinrich. And it also keeps us from having to put Pargo/Brown/Hunter etc on the court. 

I think at worst dumping Hinrich and spending the money on Fa's is a wash. i'm not too worried about the 17th overall pick those guys are basically a coin flip to figure out if they will ever even contribute.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

As I have rated several times…it is “C” (no more detail this time)




caseyrh said:


> So I saw the article below and was wondering how you guys would rate our offseason.


Then, after getting just only 6 “A” from 17 ratings




caseyrh said:


> …I am fully expecting 2 more F's. Bulls 96, and BullHitter. Then the dissatisfied triumverate will have spoken and the rest of the board will fill out the thread with A's and B's.



 I am speechless


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Odd's are just that odd's, I dont use them as some sort of measuring tool for how good of a team they are. Not yet, I still think we have some question's to answer before we can for sure label the Bull's the fifth best team in the NBA. Is Boozer going to be fully healthy, will Deng stay healthy, is Noah fully recovered, how much more improved is Rose, can Tom T actually coach lol.
> 
> I also would not write off the Thunder and Blazers out of that fifth spot just yet.


If Vegas thinks the Bulls are the 5th best team in the NBA than that is good enough for me. You won't find more reliable rankings than Vegas. Hundreds of millions of dollars will be on the line here, so I am sure they have looked at it from every angle.

But even though we have concerns you are neglecting other teams concerns. Just look at the teams above us. 

Lakers: an old team that is now older, Kobe is injured and declining, Bynum is due for knee surgery in 2 weeks, Artest is a lunatic.

Orlando: Added nothing of value in fact downgraded from Barne for Duhon, their top 4 (Howard, VC, Lewis, Nelson) all actually got worse last year. 

Miami: is stacked but still things like chemistry and injuries will certainly be a concern for them

Boston: Is older and more injury prone, doubt they have much left in the tank.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

D. Huge let down. Loads of cap space wasted on Boozer who is even more fragile than Dung. Korver and Brewer basically equal Hinrich. Pretty much a wasted offseason in my book.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Actually, after reading option F, that should be the choice. Sacrificed Hinrich, who is better than anyone we added, and got overpaid and over-rated guys like Boozer now. Between the 2 dookies, we'll have what, 20 mill tied up and they'll play a combined 100-120 games or so of 160?


----------



## S.jR. (May 18, 2010)

Yea I think im leaning towards a B only in comparison to the Heat. If those 3 guys go back to their team or just Wade/Bosh go to Miami our moves vs. their roster without Lebron would bump up that grade. It just sucks they set the standard and not us.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Bulls have done some underrated moves. I like the Boozer addition. Agreed on the fact you will own the defensive boards.

Bottom line:

PG - Rose/Watson
SG - Brewer/Korver
SF - Deng/Johnson
PF - Boozer/Gibson
C - Noah/Osik

Starting 5 alone is one of the most balanced in the league, and i'd be suprised if you didn't finish within the Top 3 in the conference.


----------



## taco_daddy (Jun 13, 2004)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Actually, after reading option F, that should be the choice.


As expected.


----------



## BullNuts (Jan 18, 2010)

Da Grinch said:


> i say b- or c+...i felt they improved more than slightly but not as much if they just did the boozer move.
> 
> boozer is a big addition and should help alot.
> 
> ...


Kirk's uninspiring play the last 2 years is why he is gone.


----------



## BullNuts (Jan 18, 2010)

Wade County said:


> Bulls have done some underrated moves. I like the Boozer addition. Agreed on the fact you will own the defensive boards.
> 
> Bottom line:
> 
> ...


What's exciting from listening to their interviews is they all seem to be embracing their roles. Brewer knows he's starting. The rest know they'll be bench role players. They have also all performed at high levels in those roles. 

This is the closest the Bulls have been to intelligently filling out a roster since the glory days. Prepping for FA 2010 really positioned this team to put together a nice squad. Now they have to execute their roles. The roles have been defined in advance of the signings, which is smart. Gar's planning and execution is something we haven't seen around Bulldom in a long time.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Honestly, i'd rather Brewer and CJ Watson to Kirk Hinrich.

Starting lineup lacks shooters, but I guess that's what Korver's there for.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

caseyrh said:


> I respect this opinion. I just don't agree with it. You can't just say Hinrich filled all the roles of the players we signed. Although I like Hinrich he was extremeley unproductive on the offensive end of the court and was playing a ton of minutes by default. He would not have played near as much if we had other quality options. He was basically a big PG forced to play out of position because of Rose. Paying him 9 mil to play out of position and not produce offensiveley is really a ton of money. Money that we are using to basically build a team how we would like to around our young core.
> 
> For Hinrich's 9 mil we basically fit in 3 young players. Brewer (who certainly brings some things to the table that Hinrich didn't) CJ Watson (better offensiveley than Hinrich), and Omer Asik (who might be a solid backup Big. Those guys will likeley contribute more minutes to our team than Hinrich. And it also keeps us from having to put Pargo/Brown/Hunter etc on the court.
> 
> I think at worst dumping Hinrich and spending the money on Fa's is a wash. i'm not too worried about the 17th overall pick those guys are basically a coin flip to figure out if they will ever even contribute.


kirk played alot of minutes because it was good for the team, the 3 players i was posting of were korver, brewer and watson , not asik who was a bulls draft pick.

bottom line kirk is a proven starter in the league and the 3 guys they signed were not as good as him , not individually and not collectively, if kirk were on the team with them none of them would play more than him.

financially kirk will take in 17 mil. the next 2 seasons ...the bulls 3 free agents who are not boozer will make over 25 mil.

paying 3 guys to do the work of 1 is almost always a bad idea.

the 17th pick can be a very good player , just because some GM's pick poorly is no reason to not pick which seems to be what you are implying.

in 2005 the 17th pick was granger.
in 2006 the 17 pick was shawne williams but rondo was still available.
in 2007 the 17th pick was sean williams but alot of good players were still undrafted like splitter rudy fernandez, afflalo , jared dudley , aaron brooks and wilson chandler
in 2008 the 17th pick was roy hibbert, the next 2 picks were javale mcgee and jj hickson , there were still players like george hill and batum available.
last year the 17th pick jrue holiday, and there were alot good players still available like collison,ty lawson casspi the bulls very own taj gibson.

draft picks are the easiest and usually the least expensive way a team can aquire good talent...judging by the drafts track record there is a good chance there were a few players better than korver brewer or watson available at 17


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

Not sure why some of us are not happy with the moves. The Bulls did what they could have done, and did pretty well. It was not their fault that they couldn't land any of the top 3. The whole league got played by those 3 guys. 

Look at the Knicks, Nets, Clippers, and Cavs who were all on the same boat as us, and they aren't looking as good. With our current roster, we are very flexible. One thing that we have now that people don't realize is smaller contracts; they are easier to move should one of the top players becomes available. If not, we are a very balance and good team with those guys. We may not be championship contenders, but who are? It is all about who will win in the playoffs. The Eastern conference has been represented by 3 different teams these past 3 years. We are in a conference with a lot of possibilities. GOO BULLS.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I give them a solid B.

The "A" was reserved for only if we landed one of the big three.

After striking out on them, we've done about as well as possible by landing one of the better PF's in the league and some very solid role players. 

I almost said "B+", but losing Brad Miller brings us down to a B. 

IMO, Brewer will be than Hinrich at SG...for this team, that is. Watson, Korver, and Gibson off the bench is way better than our backup unit from last year.

I think we have a real chance at the #2 seed in the East, but only if we stay reasonably healthy. That is always the big "if" when you have Boozer and Deng on your squad.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> kirk played alot of minutes because it was good for the team, the 3 players i was posting of were korver, brewer and watson , not asik who was a bulls draft pick.
> 
> bottom line kirk is a proven starter in the league and the 3 guys they signed were not as good as him , not individually and not collectively, if kirk were on the team with them none of them would play more than him.
> 
> ...


Actually the 17th pick has turned out to be surprisingly good one the last few years. but that is just luck related. Once you get to players that are still available at that range you are pretty much flipping a coin just to get a guy that can contribute in the NBA. I am not saying there isn't value in those picks. I just don't think there is a ton of value in those picks. Even less value for a team that is actually under the cap and can spend the cap savings on FA's. 

So giving up the 17th pick to ditch a bad contract on a player that is forced to play out of position is a fair trade. And let's face it Hinrich was a bad contract and a guy that really should not be a starting 2g in the NBA. anyone claiming he should be is delirious. Hinrich can be a valuable PG on a few teams but he is definateley miscast as a starting sg and his horrible efficiency and offensive production is testament to that.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

I was just looking at that "A+" Miami roster.... it stinks! Outside of the 3gos it's full of slow, aging players who saw their best years pass them by 5 or 6 years ago. The next best two players are Miller and Ilgauskas... but not prime Miller and Ilgauskas. After that is complete and total crap. Also, I took a look at what happened to Pierce, Garnett, and Allen when they joined forces. Each of their scoring averages went down by about 5 points apiece after the "merger". Anyone thinking that Wade and LeBron are BOTH going to be averaging 30 ppg are living in fantasyland. More likely, both will live around the 25 ppg mark, with Bosh below 20 ppg. They'll account for 70 ppg combined... where are the rest of the points coming from?

Miami may still add some talent... so may we. As of right now, though, our roster is more balanced, younger, faster, and better suited to win in the NBA than the 3gos and Co. Our best defenders happen to be in the same positions as their best offenders. We have depth at every position. Unless each of the 3gos playes 80 minutes against us, we have the advantage. I figure those guys are good for 120 of the 240 minutes in the game. The other 120 minutes are going to come from slow, washed-up, old players. 

That roster is UGLY!


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

^^^Wynn -- point taken, but don't sleep on Haslem. He is still in his prime and is exactly the type of player they need. Tough on the inside, hustler, rebounder, defender. I seem to recall he's gotten the best of the Bulls on multiple occasions.

I agree though, I'm not especially scared of Big Z or Mike Miller, and especially not Juwan Howard or Joel Anthony.

Chalmers is no Rondo, and Anthony is definitely not Kendrick Perkins (comparing to Boston's "big 3").


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Wynn said:


> I was just looking at that "A+" Miami roster.... it stinks! Outside of the 3gos it's full of slow, aging players who saw their best years pass them by 5 or 6 years ago. The next best two players are Miller and Ilgauskas... but not prime Miller and Ilgauskas. After that is complete and total crap. Also, I took a look at what happened to Pierce, Garnett, and Allen when they joined forces. Each of their scoring averages went down by about 5 points apiece after the "merger". Anyone thinking that Wade and LeBron are BOTH going to be averaging 30 ppg are living in fantasyland. More likely, both will live around the 25 ppg mark, with Bosh below 20 ppg. They'll account for 70 ppg combined... where are the rest of the points coming from?
> 
> Miami may still add some talent... so may we. As of right now, though, our roster is more balanced, younger, faster, and better suited to win in the NBA than the 3gos and Co. Our best defenders happen to be in the same positions as their best offenders. We have depth at every position. Unless each of the 3gos playes 80 minutes against us, we have the advantage. I figure those guys are good for 120 of the 240 minutes in the game. The other 120 minutes are going to come from slow, washed-up, old players.
> 
> That roster is UGLY!


Wynn, that's the hope that we can have as Bulls fans. We did the best we could. But don't tell me you or anyone else wouldn't have preferred to bring in LBJ or Wade. 

Losing Kirk does hurt (as does losing Brad). Ronnie Brewer is going to need to exceed his best production. And we are vulnerable to injury because of our high energy style. 

I'm excited for the season, but I have some reservations and regrets. But...the grades given now mean nothing. You have to play the games. I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out. I like our team. I think it's significantly better than it was. 

Go Bulls!


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

it will take the heat another year ot two to be super good. once they have the mle to throw around to upgrade their roster.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> I am fully expecting 2 more F's. Bulls 96, and BullHitter. Then the dissatisfied triumverate will have spoken and the rest of the board will fill out the thread with A's and B's.


EDIT


offseason: C; they got some NEW role players to replace the OLD role players. are these better? well stat-boy seems to point to FG% (useless given how the bulls system may likely deploy them in an entirely different manner than previously) that would indicate such; but i'll wait to see them play with the new team before committing..... brewer is what the bulls HOPED sefolosha would be (except for the 12 mil), two others whose max minutes are around 20 or so; past that they're complete unknowns. i haven't seen watson so i have no comment on him; boozer fills a long time hole, unfortunately missing out on johnson created another so that's a wash. the role players haven't contributed much to any of the teams they've been journeyed around to, so i don't share the unbridled optimism. things STILL revolve around rose's potential, which i personally don't see as the alpha dog on a championship contender....YET. he'll need to be able to carry a team when necessary, which doesn't mean gettng 30 points and 5 assists in a loss; then having the fans suckling his corona like the previous two seasons.

purging the team was an organizational decision that was made based on the PR move of 2010 (no, i didn't think the bulls would get wade or james) but for the amount of time and money the bulls had invested their previous "core" of up and coming talent, i suppose it was time to go in another direction. also fwiw, not being able to move deng (it was widely reported that NO team wanted his deal) i suppose we'll have to see how his game will translate now having a more defined pecking order than before. in other words, if he thought he deserved more shots than gordon and hinrich, what's going to be his MO this season, when he gets less shots than before?

i imaginge they'll be a few wins better; 50ish without any significant injuries but their conservatism imo, will have them remain pretty much as a 4-5 seed like they were before, IF they survive injuries to key players (not a given whatsoever).

EDIT


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Good Hope said:


> Wynn, that's the hope that we can have as Bulls fans. We did the best we could. *But don't tell me you or anyone else wouldn't have preferred to bring in LBJ or Wade*.
> 
> *Losing Kirk does hurt (as does losing Brad). *Ronnie Brewer is going to need to exceed his best production. And we are vulnerable to injury because of our high energy style.
> 
> ...


I agree with this post, *Good Hope!*, especially the parts I've bolded. Even as a Hinrich and Miller fan, though, I feel we've more than replaced their production. My frustration last season was depth... I felt like our starters were in most games until we had to go to the bench. Replacing Kirk's contract with 3 other players has helped provide some depth. I think I posted elswehere that if we had KNOWN Wade or LeBron were't coming, I'd have hung onto Kirk and then signed Dominique Jones. I hate to lose Miller, too, but couldn't justify matching the deal he signed.

My argument about the 3gos is that they're already being annointed as champions. *I don't think they'll win the championship.* The roster is too flawed. People talk about using the MLE... how many years are they going to need to use the MLE to fill out the rest of their roster? Meanwhile, the bodies they have in place (outside of the 3) are going to be less and less useful. People claiming "anything less than a championship" in one breath and annointed the 3gos in the next just aren't paying attention.

I agree, though, that Miami had the best off-season. I think we were the second best. I think that because of peices we already had in place, though, we are a roster that is competitive with theirs. Maybe they are "A+" while we are "A". We went from *Rose/Hinrich/Deng/Taj/Noah/Miller/Craplist* to *Rose/CJ/Brewer/Deng/Korver/Boozer/Taj/Noah/Asik/Craplist*, basically replacing one starter and our 6th best player with an All-Star starter (Booze), A quality defensive SG starter (Brewer) a back-up PG/SG (CJ), a three point threat from SG/SF (Korver), moved Taj to where he can be more effective from the bench, and added Asik (the biggest unknown of the bunch). That's a MAJOR upgraded roster. None of these players are on the decline. Most of these players still have something to prove, but if each of these players only matches their own production from last season, our team will be one of the top 4 or 5 in the league.

So will Miami...


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

*Outgoing*
Hinrich 33.5 mpg, *10.9 ppg*, 3.5rpg, 4.5apg, .409fg%
Miller 23.8 mpg, *8.8 ppg*, 4.9rpg, 1.9apg, .430fg%
Draft Pick

*Incoming*
Boozer 34.3 mpg, *19.5 ppg*, 11.2rpg, 3.2apg, .562fg%
Brewer 30.0 mpg, *8.8 ppg*, 3.2rpg, 2.7apg, .487fg%
Watson 27.5 mpg, *10.3 ppg*, 2.6rpg, 2.8apg, .468fg%
Korver 18.3 mpg, *7.2 ppg*, 2.1rpg, 1.7apg, .483fg%
Asik 22.1 mpg, *8.9 ppg*, 6.0rpg, 0.7apg, .658fg% (EuroLeague... grain of salt)

No question we're a better club... that's not even mentioning the change at coach.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Re: How good will Miami be?

Coldfish over at RealGM was making some great points in regard to how free throw shooting (yes, free throw shooting) will be an interesting trend to watch in Miami games.

That is to say, all 3 of Wade, Bron, and Bosh rely HEAVILY on free throws to be efficient/effective scorers. They draw alot of fouls and shoot alot of free throws. 

Will the NBA allow these guys to set all-time records at the free throw line? I'm not sure...that would make for very unwatchable games. I'm also not convinced the natural flow of the game will allow for it. If we're correct in saying that, this is a negative thing for Miami.

However, I can also equally argue that they will create so much extra space for each other, that they won't need to draw as many fouls to score effectively. And these guys will be running so many fast breaks with their speed and skill, and aptitude for steals (Wade, Bron, and Chalmers will average a combined 5+ steals a game, most likely). 

I'm unsure what to expect, other than I give Miami the edge to win the East. However, I give the Lakers the edge for the title, at least for now.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Wynn said:


> *Outgoing*
> Hinrich 33.5 mpg, *10.9 ppg*, 3.5rpg, 4.5apg, .409fg%
> Miller 23.8 mpg, *8.8 ppg*, 4.9rpg, 1.9apg, .430fg%
> Draft Pick
> ...


I agree.

People shouldn't sell Ronnie Brewer short either. He is an excellent pick up and probably a better fit for THIS ball club than Hinrich. Brewer is 100x the finisher that Hinrich is, and a darn good ballhandler/passer/defender as well. His weakness is shooting but it's not like Hinrich was ever Steve Kerr for us out there.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

yodurk said:


> I agree.
> 
> People shouldn't sell Ronnie Brewer short either. He is an excellent pick up and probably a better fit for THIS ball club than Hinrich. Brewer is 100x the finisher that Hinrich is, and a darn good ballhandler/passer/defender as well. His weakness is shooting but it's not like Hinrich was ever Steve Kerr for us out there.


And last year Brewer's numbers suffered because of injury. I fully expect him to have better numbers than last season.

Every player we added this summer has a better fg% than Brad or Kirk.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

I'd say B-

They struck out on the guys who would have made them 1st tier contenders, but filled out their roster with solid roleplayers and a balance that will probably make them 2nd tier contenders.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Wynn said:


> Outside of the *3gos* it's full of slow, aging players who saw their best years pass them by 5 or 6 years ago.
> 
> ...
> 
> As of right now, though, our roster is more balanced, younger, faster, and better suited to win in the NBA than the *3gos* and Co.


Thanks for referencing my nickname for those guys!


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

BULLHITTER said:


> EDIT
> in other words, if he thought he deserved more shots than gordon and hinrich, what's going to be his MO this season, when he gets less shots than before?
> EDIT


Deng already has his big contract. There's no need for him to be selfish like he was in 07-08. 

Now that he's cemented as the Bulls third scoring option, and if Thibodeau utilizes him like he vowed he will, we'll likely see Deng perform like he did in 06-07. He'll probably have the name numbers like last season though maybe less scoring, but he'll be a lot more efficient (higher TS%, eFG%).


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Our big hope with this team is that, now we have a team with a rational line up of position players, (except for the lack of a distance shooter in the starting line up), all these guys will be able to shoot at high percentages.

Teamwork is going to have to be our calling card -- teamwork and toughness. 

Go Bulls!


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Good Hope said:


> Teamwork is going to have to be our calling card -- teamwork and toughness.


I'll give this to the Bulls -- I fully expect they will be very easy to root for, even outside of Chicago.

This is a group of really good guys. Our star player is one of the most likable and fan favorite players you could ask for. 

And most importantly, we are the David to the evil Goliath that the 3 egos created in Miami. Everyone loves the underdog. And I do believe we have a fighter's chance to beat them should we meet come playoff time.

This aspect alone is worth extra credit, so I might revise my grade up to a "B+".

I also can't shake this Star Wars analogy in my head of Lebron James as Anakin Skywalker (the chosen one who turns to the dark side), followed by Derrick Rose as Luke who eventually brings balance to the Force.


----------



## Wishbone (Jun 10, 2002)

yodurk said:


> I agree.
> 
> People shouldn't sell Ronnie Brewer short either. He is an excellent pick up and probably a better fit for THIS ball club than Hinrich. Brewer is 100x the finisher that Hinrich is, and a darn good ballhandler/passer/defender as well. His weakness is shooting but it's not like Hinrich was ever Steve Kerr for us out there.


I can't bash the Brewer signing. Back in the 06 Draft (I think it was '06 -- whenever we drafted Tyrus and Thabo)
I was actually really hoping for Lamarcus or Brandon Roy at #2 - and if they did get Lamarcus (and held on to him) I was hoping, hoping, hoping that Brewer was going to drop to us at 16. Of course with all the trading around the Bulls did, they certainly could have had Philly draft Brewer over Thabo and then trade him to us for Carney... and watching Brewer develop over his first couple years, I was definitely even more pissed the Bulls didn't get him. Kinda wish we had Brewer on board this whole time. 

That said, I still feel some regret at giving away Hinrich and the draft pick for essentially nothing. Hinrich would still have a very useful role as a back-up on this team. Even if it is a grossly overpaid backup... it would be nice to have a tough, defensive minded PG who can also distribute the rock. Then the draft pick could have been someone James Anderson, and there's our shooter off the bench. 
I haven't checked the salaries to see if it would still fit - I suspect Boozer's deal + Hinrich's deal would not have provided the cap space to also bring in Brewer, Korver and the #17 pick ... 
and if it boils down to an overpaid Hinrich vs. a slightly underpaid Brewer, I take Brewer every time.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

yodurk said:


> I also can't shake this Star Wars analogy in my head of Lebron James as Anakin Skywalker (the chosen one who turns to the dark side), followed by Derrick Rose as Luke who eventually brings balance to the Force.


But you have to consider the alternative universe in which the Empire is able to complete the Death Star and torch the Rebellion.

:whiteflag:


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Good Hope said:


> But you have to consider the alternative universe in which the Empire is able to complete the Death Star and torch the Rebellion.
> 
> :whiteflag:


:laugh:

Darth Sidious: "Gooooood, goooood"


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

This off-season can't possibly be an A. 
1) We didn't get any 1 of the Big 3. Just 1! That is all we needed. Without 1 of them it is just a disappointment.
2) Not only didn't management get any of the Big 3 but also, they couldn't stop the Big 3 from joining in Miami. 

Chicago's approach was not as good as Miami's. Period! They had a much better strategy and they executed it to the T. It is all about an Excellent Execution of an Excellent Strategy for things like free agency. It is no different than in the corporate world b/c when it is all said and done, it is a business. Companies succeed over their competitors because of their strategy and execution. Miami beat us in free agency. That does not mean they will beat us in the season b/c there are a lot of variables, but Miami deserves an A for free agency thus Chicago can’t have an A.

I would say the strategy was a B. The Bulls were able to cut salary while still being competitive, make the playoffs, and retain an enticing core. If you look at GarPax's decisions leading up to free agency you can see they were *mostly proactive.* Got rid of some big contracts in exchange for 2010 expirings, didn’t resign BG, got assets back for Thomas, etc…

The execution of the strategy is a D. GarPax made mostly reactive decisions just before and in free agency. 1) They got rid of Capt’n Kirk to make room for a 2nd max free agent only after Miami did so. If Miami hadn’t of done that, then I don’t think GarPax would of either. That is a classic example of reactive decision-making and you just can’t beat out your competitor when you do that. 2) Management signed Boozer only after Bosh announced he was going to Miami the night before. 3) They appointed Pippen as Ambassador after free agency was pretty much over and only after Wade made his statement about former player’s involvement with the organization. This is why I said they were *mostly proactive *leading up to free agency. They probably should of hired Pippen last summer in order to improve their image around the league. 

*The strategy is a nice B and the execution is a D* b/c they didn’t score the winning touchdown. Not getting at least 1 of the Big 3 after all the sacrifice is a huge let down. They were reactionary in almost every aspect once FA started. GarPax’s decisions were based on the decisions of their competitors. The execution wasn’t narrow enough in scope. It was also disingenuous. Instead of going to pretty much every big free agent and saying, “we want you,” they should have bypassed either Wade or LeBron. Which 1 do you want? Be specific. Choose 1! They didn’t have the luxury of signing all 3 like Miami. Targeting Bosh before those 2 would have been the key. Altogether, I gave the *Bulls a C. *


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

BullsBaller said:


> This off-season can't possibly be an A.
> 1) We didn't get any 1 of the Big 3. Just 1! That is all we needed. Without 1 of them it is just a disappointment.
> 2) Not only didn't management get any of the Big 3 but also, they couldn't stop the Big 3 from joining in Miami.
> 
> ...


:soapbox:
The only reason the bulls didn't land the big three and Miami did is because they all made a pact to play together 2 years ago. Miami already had wade and the money to get the other 2 so they did it. All the rest of your "front office execution" stuff is nonsense. We did what we had to to get give ourselves a shot. In fact I think it was wideley recognized that we had the best situation. We were the logical choice unfortunateley those guys made a decision based on emotion (friends) not Logic.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> Originally Posted by BullsBaller
> This off-season can't possibly be an A.
> 1) We didn't get any 1 of the Big 3. Just 1! That is all we needed. Without 1 of them it is just a disappointment.
> 2) Not only didn't management get any of the Big 3 but also, they couldn't stop the Big 3 from joining in Miami.
> ...


+1; at the end of the day, riley and wade had more juice than the bulls front office. imo, a C is representative of the how they recovered to salvage the offseason of 2010 hype, which is all it really was, HYPE. since there's not a shread of proof regarding when or IF the "big 3" decided to hook up prior to the offseason, the sale job miami did usurped the typically conservative bulls; yea, they took a shot....woot....oh wait, BIG woot.....




> The only reason the bulls didn't land the big three and Miami did is because they all made a pact to play together 2 years ago.


really? did they seek your counsel?.....link?



> Miami already had wade and the money to get the other 2 so they did it. All the rest of your "front office execution" stuff is nonsense.


execution was what was needed, they didn't get it done. what part of that is nonsense?



> We did what we had to to get give ourselves a shot. In fact I think it was wideley recognized that we had the best situation. *We were the logical choice unfortunateley those guys made a decision based on emotion (friends) not Logic*


oh yea, that sounds plenty logical.....

typical pom-pom homeristic opinion.....


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

BULLHITTER said:


> really? did they seek your counsel?.....link?


You ask and you shall receive:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100708

By Bill Simmons from ESPN. You can read the full article but here is an exerpt:

_



*A few weeks after the 2008 Summer Olympics, Someone Who Knows Things told me the following rumor: LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and Chris Paul became such good friends during the 2007 Olympic trials, and then during their 2008 Olympics excursion in Beijing, that they actually made a pact in China to play together. You know, like one of those pacts in a chick flick where two friends agree to get married if both of them are single when they turn 40. 



As the rumor went, the 2010 free agents (LeBron, Wade and Bosh) would sign with the same team (at that point the Knicks if they created enough cap room), then Paul would join them in 2012 (or sooner). I thought this was the craziest thing I had ever heard -- so crazy, I only mentioned it once (in a November '08 column). *

Click to expand...

_Sorry about interfering with your constant whining.




> execution was what was needed, they didn't get it done. what part of that is nonsense?


 the execution part...






> oh yea, that sounds plenty logical.....
> 
> typical pom-pom homeristic opinion....


I love how you think you are more credible because you constantly hate on the bulls. 

Sorry I am happy the bulls are considered a top 5 team in the NBA...


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> A few weeks after the 2008 Summer Olympics, Someone Who Knows Things told me the following *rumor*: LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and Chris Paul became such good friends during the 2007 Olympic trials, and then during their 2008 Olympics excursion in Beijing, that they actually made a pact in China to play together. You know, like one of those pacts in a chick flick where two friends agree to get married if both of them are single when they turn 40.
> 
> As the *rumor* went, the 2010 free agents (LeBron, Wade and Bosh) would sign with the same team (at that point the Knicks if they created enough cap room), then Paul would join them in 2012 (or sooner). I thought this was the craziest thing I had ever heard -- so crazy, I only mentioned it once (in a November '08 column).





> Someone Who Knows Things told me the following rumor


did you miss this? *somebody *who knows "*things*" TOLD ME a "*rumor*".....roflmao....

ohhhhh, so if it's a RUMOR *you* by into, it's all good.....it was a rumor, that doesn't make it true; unless casey buys it....right? gtfo



> Sorry about interfering with your constant whining.


given i haven't posted in months.....sorry about interfering with your daily "suck the bulls FO off" campaign.....




> I love how you think you are more credible because you constantly hate on the bulls


i love even more how you think you know what others think....on second thought, i REALLY love how you think an innoucuous BS opinion about a professional sports franchise's business dealings gives anybody "credibility".....amongst who? other fans?



> Sorry I am happy the bulls are considered a top 5 team in the NBA...


lakers
denver
orlando
boston
miami
milwaukee
portland
OKC
SA 

off the top of my head....

talk about illogical nonsense.....can all make a case for "top 5" as much if not MORE than the bulls. considering they haven't PLAYED any games yet, whatever BS list you got that assertion from, cash it in now cause it's probably not going to be worth shyt come season. btw, kwame and josh say hello:baseldance:

I've asked you to calm down twice now. This is the third time. Please lay off the personal attacks. -jnr


shake a pom pom, dude.....the luvabulls have openings.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

BULLHITTER said:


> ohhhhh, so if it's a RUMOR *you* by into, it's all good.....it was a rumor, that doesn't make it true; unless casey buys it....right? gtfo
> .


Funny thing is. It's a rumor that turned out to be *TRUE*. Which actually makes it a fact. I love how you want to treat it like it is some far fetched report that may or may not happen. And yet it actually did happen. You asked for a link and you got one from a credible source from ESPN. Now you are trying to back-pedal like always.



> given i haven't posted in months.....sorry about interfering with your daily "suck the bulls FO off"campaign.....


Dude I am a bulls fan. I am sorry that me being happy that our team dramatically improved offends you. I wsih you weren't such a Hater but it is what it is.


> i love even more how you think you know what others think....on second thought, i REALLY love how you think an innoucuous BS opinion about a professional sports franchise's business dealings gives anybody "credibility".....amongst who? other fans?


:wtf:



> *lakers*
> denver
> *orlando
> boston
> ...


The teams in bold have better odds to win the championship then us, every other team in the NBA has worse odds.

I know that you think I should believe you over Vegas. But I will exercise intelligence and go with Vegas odds considering there is an enormous amount of money invested in those unbiased rankings. On the other hand you have proven to be extremeley biased and inaccurate.



> btw, kwame and josh say hello:baseldance:


? OK. tell them I said hi.





> shake a pom pom, dude.....the luvabulls have openings


Ill have fun watching the Bulls be a good team this year. You on the other hand will continue to stew over the fact that we are good. Who's in the better spot?

But I do love how you are a member on a Bulls Forum and yet your primary objective is to whine, complain about, and hate on the Bulls. And you have the Balls to make fun of a Bull's Fan for being... GASP, A BULLS FAN.


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

caseyrh said:


> The only reason the bulls didn't land the big three and Miami did is because they all made a pact to play together 2 years ago.


So? What does that have to do with grading the Bulls' off-season? Collusion is all part of strategy and how you execute that strategy. It happens in the Political and Corporate World's, and yes, sports, as well. Anyone is naive to think otherwise. Your making it as an excuse for why the Bulls didn't get a Top 3 free agent when it was Bulls Brass, which I respect their decision, who decided not to do any dirty work. Miami did decide to go that route it seems and it paid off. 



caseyrh said:


> Miami already had wade and the money to get the other 2 so they did it. All the rest of your "front office execution" stuff is nonsense.


That is not true. Miami made a last minute move just before free agency to dump cap space, so they could then sign 3 max free agents, including Wade. The Heat could only sign 1 Max FA and resign Wade before this move. On 6/23, they dealt Daquean Cook+18th pick for the 32nd pick. That move gave them an extra $3.5 mill to put them over the hump. On 6/24, the Bulls dealt Hinrich to give them the ability to sign 2 Max FAs, thus compete with the Heat in free agency. It was a reactive move. You may think it is nonsense, but open both teams' news archives and compare them. You will see GarPax made several moves only after Riley made his. That is not a coincidence. 



caseyrh said:


> We did what we had to to get give ourselves a shot. In fact I think it was wideley recognized that we had the best situation. We were the logical choice unfortunateley those guys made a decision based on emotion (friends) not Logic.


I am not arguing that GarPax didn't put this team in a good position and couldn't agree more with you that we were widely recognized as the best situation. At least by the media that is. I did give them a B for strategy. However, you asked people to grade the off-season and in doing so, what matters are results, not how hard GarPax tried. Yes, they gave us a "good shot", but look at the results relative to 1) who we could have had and 2) who we gave up in the course of all this. If you do that and are objective about it, then you can't possibly give the off-season an A.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

BullsBaller said:


> So? What does that have to do with grading the Bulls' off-season? Collusion is all part of strategy and how you execute that strategy. It happens in the Political and Corporate World's, and yes, sports, as well. Anyone is naive to think otherwise. Your making it as an excuse for why the Bulls didn't get a Top 3 free agent when it was Bulls Brass, which I respect their decision, who decided not to do any dirty work. Miami did decide to go that route it seems and it paid off.


Grade them however you want. I just won't knock the Bulls for not getting the big three, if they never actually had a chance. Which according to many different sources (I linked to one in this thread) is what seems to be the case.




> That is not true. Miami made a last minute move just before free agency to dump cap space, so they could then sign 3 max free agents, including Wade. The Heat could only sign 1 Max FA and resign Wade before this move. On 6/23, they dealt Daquean Cook+18th pick for the 32nd pick. That move gave them an extra $3.5 mill to put them over the hump. On 6/24, the Bulls dealt Hinrich to give them the ability to sign 2 Max FAs, thus compete with the Heat in free agency. It was a reactive move. You may think it is nonsense, but open both teams' news archives and compare them. You will see GarPax made several moves only after Riley made his. That is not a coincidence.


So what? Why does it matter when Miami aquired 3.5 mil more in cap space? All that matters is that they had the cap space and Wade when FA started. Which is what my comment was about. Who cares about the detailed timeline? I fail to see how this relates to anything regarding the big three agreeing to sign together. Unless you are saying that we basically should have dumped everyone but Rose in order to put ourselves in a similar spot to Miami (although we still wouldn't have the advantage of wade being basically a returning player).



> I am not arguing that GarPax didn't put this team in a good position and couldn't agree more with you that we were widely recognized as the best situation. At least by the media that is. I did give them a B for strategy. However, you asked people to grade the off-season and in doing so, what matters are results, not how hard GarPax tried. Yes, they gave us a "good shot", but look at the results relative to 1) who we could have had and 2) who we gave up in the course of all this. *If you do that and are objective about it, then you can't possibly give the off-season an A*.


I can easily be objective about it and give the Bulls an A. We have very likeley improved this team by 10-20 wins, in one off-season. Just looking at that alone is tremendous. We have basically built a young team around Rose, our young franchise player. It will unquestionably be the best team we have had since Jordan left (long time). Vegas says we have the 5th best chance at winning the championship. Middle of the pack to top 5 in one offseason is pretty impressive.

If you want to give the Bulls a C for not getting one of the big three then thats fine. But I think it's silly to get on top of your soap box and rant about the corporate world, strategey and execution, blah, blah, blah, etc... When basically what it comes down to is that 2 years ago the 3go's pinky swore to play together, a rumor that was so strange and unprecedented that noone really trusted, it turned out to be true, and that's that. Nothing we could have done about it. 

We did what we could but it was out of our hands. And then rebounded excellently after that. We got Boozer pretty cheap (considering the market especcially), We got Korver, Brewer, Watson, Asik, K Thomas. All on good deals. We still got a couple mil to spend and will add likeley another solid player. I believe none of these contracts increase. Which is excellent foresight by our management as it should allow us to re sign Noah, Rose, Gibson when the time comes and still stay around the luxury tax. We have a very good current team and didn't sacrifice any of our future for it.

All in all A for the offseason in my opinion can't wait to watch us play this year.


----------

