Moderators: HomoSapien, GimmeDat, Payt10, RedBulls23, coldfish, AshyLarrysDiaper, fleet, kulaz3000, Michael Jackson, Ice Man, dougthonus, Tommy Udo 6 , DASMACKDOWN
samwana wrote:Would you rather have Donovan or Zach? AK has chosen Donovan, I'd definitely rather have Zach, but both are sort if the same. Thoroughly mediocre and paid too much over too long a contract.
dougthonus wrote:DuckIII wrote:It’s a much, much better situation than LA. Add Tyrese Maxey to the math of winning a conference championship in the next three years and remove Denver, Minny, OKC and Wemby.
If your only goal is to win a title then jumping from the clippers (0% chance) to the 76ers (like 2% chance) may not be worth giving up 80M dollars and moving away from perfect weather and your preferred city.
That's why I said a gap is there, but the gap isn't as big as it may appear. The 76ers with Paul George would not be favored to come out of the East and also have a ton of high risks towards maintaining anything. I'd give that team no more than a 2 year window to compete and wouldn't put them in my top 5.
If he values getting to the 2nd round or conference finals very highly, Philly is a much, much better choice than LAC. If he wants to win a title, Philly's got virtually no chance even with George.
dougthonus wrote:League Circles wrote:I don't think AK or anyone can afford to care what happens to another middling team (yes, Orlando finished in a 3 way tie for the 5 seed in the weak conference) when deciding what's best for his team. If Orlando is to be specifically feared then half the league would be. Besides, maybe Zach makes them worse for all we know. Not like he's some proven winner.
Of course he shouldn't do that, but I would bet he refuses to do anything with Orlando just on the risk of "Oh no, Orlando screwed us over again" playing out incredibly terribly for him from a PR perspective. Being scared of perception would offer a reasonable explanation for many of AK's actions, that said without being in his head, I have no idea if it is that or a totally different brand of stupidity.
dougthonus wrote:League Circles wrote:I don't think AK or anyone can afford to care what happens to another middling team (yes, Orlando finished in a 3 way tie for the 5 seed in the weak conference) when deciding what's best for his team. If Orlando is to be specifically feared then half the league would be. Besides, maybe Zach makes them worse for all we know. Not like he's some proven winner.
Of course he shouldn't do that, but I would bet he refuses to do anything with Orlando just on the risk of "Oh no, Orlando screwed us over again" playing out incredibly terribly for him from a PR perspective. Being scared of perception would offer a reasonable explanation for many of AK's actions, that said without being in his head, I have no idea if it is that or a totally different brand of stupidity.
DuckIII wrote:dougthonus wrote:League Circles wrote:I don't think AK or anyone can afford to care what happens to another middling team (yes, Orlando finished in a 3 way tie for the 5 seed in the weak conference) when deciding what's best for his team. If Orlando is to be specifically feared then half the league would be. Besides, maybe Zach makes them worse for all we know. Not like he's some proven winner.
Of course he shouldn't do that, but I would bet he refuses to do anything with Orlando just on the risk of "Oh no, Orlando screwed us over again" playing out incredibly terribly for him from a PR perspective. Being scared of perception would offer a reasonable explanation for many of AK's actions, that said without being in his head, I have no idea if it is that or a totally different brand of stupidity.
We’re all speculating as to what exactly it is that makes AK one of the worst 2-3 GMs in the league, but I’m going with cowardice. Which produces desperation. Which produces small minded stupidity. Just a guess.
League Circles wrote:I don't see any reason to think he cares about public perception in the way you might presume most execs naturally do. Ownership has never ever cared about that, going back many decades now. Reinsdorf is perfectly fine with the public ridiculing his managers, and surely AK knows that because it was probably part of the pitch that brought him on.
Like, really? We actually think AK would pass on a deal (surely one of VERY few tangible offers to choose from) that he thought was the best Zach deal because it might make him look bad for making a bad move with the same middling team twice? I just don't see a shred of logic in that. Nobody thinks that way IMO. Because it's completely illogical for a fan to be more mad that 2 bad moves were made with the same team than 2 WORSE moves (by definition) made with two separate teams. I mean it's not like Orlando projects as any kind of powerhouse at any point on the horizon. They're just a team.
I think if anything AK's moves show that he could absolutely give AF about public perception. He could have trivially appeared better to most fans by "doing something" at the last 2-3 trade deadlines, but didn't.
That's really one very consistent theme in Bulls management since the Krause days. They do what they THINK is best, regardless of how unpopular it may be. And they are kept on the job for YEARS past when fans clearly want them gone despite that.
DuckIII wrote:I didn’t say win a title. In my two posts breaking this down - a much longer one on the prior page - I was referring to reaching the conference finals or possibly winning the conference and reaching the Finals. That is my definition of contention.
So going by contending rather than absolutely winning it all outright (the odds of winning it all outright at the beginning of a season don’t mean much because with each series win the likelihood increases considerably), Philly is a significantly better option.
1. You keep not mentioning Maxey, but that is the key here (see post on prior page).
2. Philly with Maxey, Embiid and George is at worst the #2 projected team in the East and if actually healthy in the playoffs would be in a dead heat with Boston. And only Boston.
3. It doesn’t matter if you don’t have Philly in your “top 5” to win a title in the next 2-3 years because presumably your top 5 is Boston and 4 WC teams like everyone else’s top 5 would be. Philly would only have to beat one of those teams to reach the Finals and possibly see none of them at all until the ECF.
I just don’t see any argument where Philly and LAC are anywhere near equal footing if PG is choosing based on contending for a title.
dougthonus wrote:League Circles wrote:I don't see any reason to think he cares about public perception in the way you might presume most execs naturally do. Ownership has never ever cared about that, going back many decades now. Reinsdorf is perfectly fine with the public ridiculing his managers, and surely AK knows that because it was probably part of the pitch that brought him on.
Like, really? We actually think AK would pass on a deal (surely one of VERY few tangible offers to choose from) that he thought was the best Zach deal because it might make him look bad for making a bad move with the same middling team twice? I just don't see a shred of logic in that. Nobody thinks that way IMO. Because it's completely illogical for a fan to be more mad that 2 bad moves were made with the same team than 2 WORSE moves (by definition) made with two separate teams. I mean it's not like Orlando projects as any kind of powerhouse at any point on the horizon. They're just a team.
I think if anything AK's moves show that he could absolutely give AF about public perception. He could have trivially appeared better to most fans by "doing something" at the last 2-3 trade deadlines, but didn't.
That's really one very consistent theme in Bulls management since the Krause days. They do what they THINK is best, regardless of how unpopular it may be. And they are kept on the job for YEARS past when fans clearly want them gone despite that.
Making the Vuc trade (need to show we can make big moves)
Keeping Vuc after 1.5 years (need to show we weren't idiots with our first move)
Resigning Vuc (need to show we weren't idiots for trading him earlier and for our 1st move)
All seem like perception could have played a role to me. Granted, it could be they're just horrifically stupid too.
Chi town wrote:DuckIII wrote:dougthonus wrote:
Of course he shouldn't do that, but I would bet he refuses to do anything with Orlando just on the risk of "Oh no, Orlando screwed us over again" playing out incredibly terribly for him from a PR perspective. Being scared of perception would offer a reasonable explanation for many of AK's actions, that said without being in his head, I have no idea if it is that or a totally different brand of stupidity.
We’re all speculating as to what exactly it is that makes AK one of the worst 2-3 GMs in the league, but I’m going with cowardice. Which produces desperation. Which produces small minded stupidity. Just a guess.
Nah. I’d go with Pride. Opposite of cowardice. Believes his own lies. Delusional.
DuckIII wrote:We’re all speculating as to what exactly it is that makes AK one of the worst 2-3 GMs in the league, but I’m going with cowardice. Which produces desperation. Which produces small minded stupidity. Just a guess.
League Circles wrote:It's just strange to me that anyone would think that he'd be motivated to make pretty predictably unpopular moves for the purpose of seeking approval from fans/media when that has clearly never been an organizational priority as opposed to the purpose of he just thought Vuc was better than he was. He wasn't the only one. Vuc was a 2 time all star even though he was probably never that caliber of player.
dougthonus wrote:Stratmaster wrote:Of course he is. But you are ignoring the context, and I will say it again since you ignored it: My point is that the narrative that Lavine was unhappy and "asked to be traded" or "didn't want to be in Chicago" is far, far, far from what actually happened.
What do you think the narrative was? Zach was super happy in Chicago but asked to be traded?
I mean there might be layers to how unhappy he was or what he was unhappy with exactly, but he clearly asked to be traded and wanted to be traded and would not have done so if he was happy to be here and wanted to stay.
jnrjr79 wrote:Stratmaster wrote:He never made "a trade demand" . Billy and AK had been trying to trade him for months before Zach said anything.MrSparkle wrote:
Pretty sure he doesn't like the way the Bulls are coached, doesn't like Vuc's game, and that's why he quit on the team when they were 5-14. I don't blame him in regards to Vuc. They've been a bad pairing, and Lonzo/Demar/Caruso/Javonte were the additions that made us click for 2 months, not Vuc. Still, he got the 3.5X the bags that Vuc did, and a professional making that money should keep a smile on his face and try to elevate/support his team, not pout.
I think on a personal level, they all got along about as well as possible for a group that wasn't gelling at all, WANTED to win, and lost at a really high rate, on a relatively easy schedule. But when he made the trade demand, and on top of it, the Bulls then played better, I believe Billy and AK were like "OK - time to move on," and Zach's probably like 'thank you." Unfortunately for both sides, yet another injury delayed the inevitable.
I also think that Zach and Klutch thought they could be cute and trade their way to the Lakers... but they underestimated that Austin Reaves would have a clearly higher trade value than Zach.
IMO the organization has to keep its thoughts private, but I'm sure they are all incredibly disappointed and pissed off with LaVine for the trade demand, barely a year into his giant 5y max extension that was offered without any pushback. If you're Durant or Kawhi, atleast you back that up with elite play in the worst of times (injuries or bad teammates). Zach had the worst numbers of his career.
Anyway, I'm not debating anything. Just ranting thoughts on Zach and the Bulls. I blame both sides, and I also see both sides. Honestly didn't think it would get to this. This inevitable trade (crap return) is probably going to be the nail in this FO's coffin, if not settling on a 3y deal with Demar. A cap dump would be better, but they're gonna really shoot for some 'replacement level' players that'll just bog the cap and treadmill further down (Herro/Duncan, Gabe/Rui/D'Lo, THJ/Kleiber, or is it a ripe time for 40yo Chris Paul's retirement ceremony in Chicago?). I could see CJ McCollum really fitting AK's (and Billy's) vision as well. 6'2 SG approaching 32yo - what's not to love?
This is exactly what I am talking about in my previous posts.
Again, you're just making this up. It may or may not be true, because none of us knows. It's perfectly possible that the Bulls had been shopping him for years and that he also separately and subsequently made a trade demand. But you can't say "because the Bulls first had trade talks about him, it's not possible he demanded a trade."
My guess (and it's a guess, because we don't know), is that Zach's agent had a conversation with the Bulls' FO indicating Zach would prefer to be elsewhere. That may not be a "demand," but it would be a request. And I'm not critical of him for doing that if he did. If he did it, it appears to have been done privately and did not involve a media circus. Good for Zach!And the Bulls didn't play better without Lavine. Coby White went on a tear and played better; for a short while. It doesn't matter who you put on the court, the Bulls end result is the same. Which makes you wonder what the coach is doing, doesn't it? No matter the level of talent on the court, the result is the same.
Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app
10-15 with LaVine. 29-28 without. 40% win percentage with, 51% without. By definition, the Bulls played better without him. Maybe that's correlation; maybe it's causation. The reason may have been Coby's improved play, but of course, that's directly related to Zach being out, as it allowed Coby to step into the #2 role. And one thing you have to think about when hanging onto core players when that core has hit its ceiling is whether they are standing in the way of the development of up-and-comers.
Now, neither win % is anything to write home about, I agree. But no, it sure doesn't "make you wonder what the coach is doing." Billy is no great shakes, but the Bulls are not an excellent head coach away from being some sort of legitimate playoff team. This team's problem is the roster. Everything else is way, way behind that concern.
League Circles wrote:dougthonus wrote:League Circles wrote:I don't see any reason to think he cares about public perception in the way you might presume most execs naturally do. Ownership has never ever cared about that, going back many decades now. Reinsdorf is perfectly fine with the public ridiculing his managers, and surely AK knows that because it was probably part of the pitch that brought him on.
Like, really? We actually think AK would pass on a deal (surely one of VERY few tangible offers to choose from) that he thought was the best Zach deal because it might make him look bad for making a bad move with the same middling team twice? I just don't see a shred of logic in that. Nobody thinks that way IMO. Because it's completely illogical for a fan to be more mad that 2 bad moves were made with the same team than 2 WORSE moves (by definition) made with two separate teams. I mean it's not like Orlando projects as any kind of powerhouse at any point on the horizon. They're just a team.
I think if anything AK's moves show that he could absolutely give AF about public perception. He could have trivially appeared better to most fans by "doing something" at the last 2-3 trade deadlines, but didn't.
That's really one very consistent theme in Bulls management since the Krause days. They do what they THINK is best, regardless of how unpopular it may be. And they are kept on the job for YEARS past when fans clearly want them gone despite that.
Making the Vuc trade (need to show we can make big moves)
Keeping Vuc after 1.5 years (need to show we weren't idiots with our first move)
Resigning Vuc (need to show we weren't idiots for trading him earlier and for our 1st move)
All seem like perception could have played a role to me. Granted, it could be they're just horrifically stupid too.
It's just strange to me that anyone would think that he'd be motivated to make pretty predictably unpopular moves for the purpose of seeking approval from fans/media when that has clearly never been an organizational priority as opposed to the purpose of he just thought Vuc was better than he was. He wasn't the only one. Vuc was a 2 time all star even though he was probably never that caliber of player.
Stratmaster wrote:dougthonus wrote:Stratmaster wrote:Of course he is. But you are ignoring the context, and I will say it again since you ignored it: My point is that the narrative that Lavine was unhappy and "asked to be traded" or "didn't want to be in Chicago" is far, far, far from what actually happened.
What do you think the narrative was? Zach was super happy in Chicago but asked to be traded?
I mean there might be layers to how unhappy he was or what he was unhappy with exactly, but he clearly asked to be traded and wanted to be traded and would not have done so if he was happy to be here and wanted to stay.
K.C. Johnson said differently. It's funny how everyone in here is a mind reader. there was never a single report that Zach asked to be traded.
Maybe if I put it this way.... it wasn't Zach who came up with the idea of trading him, and the Bulls did that long before Zach was reported to have agreed to work with them to get it done.
coldfish wrote:The good news is that the way things are shaking out, there might be a market for Zach. He won't be the most pursued guy but he could go in a second wave after teams miss out on their first target. At one point I was thinking that Chicago might just trade him for absolute junk.
I will say this. The writing is on the wall. The plan is to bring back the team as is, including giving Demar a big offer. Then trade Zach in a way that allows them to just slide under the tax barrier.
Ayo / Ball?
Coby / Caruso
Demar
Patrick
Vucevic
+ draft pick and random parts that come back in trade for Lavine.
That's your 38-44 Chicago Bulls.
Red8911 wrote:I’m pretty sure there will be more moves this time. AK for the first time sounded like he wanted to make changes. Sure Demar might be coming back and as the best player of this team it’s not a bad move but doesn’t necessarily mean everyone else is coming back as well.
The way I see it only Coby, Ayo, and probably Patrick (despite being a RFA) are safe to return. The rest of the roster can be used in trades including Vuc and AC.
