Hindsight is always 20/20, so I try to evaluate past moves through both
the lens of how reasonable the situation looked at the time and how
reasonable the decision looks after time has passed. Here's a review
of all major moves in the past year that will effect the Bulls going
forward.
Drafting Derrick Rose #1 overall. Many felt this was the obvious choice, but there were plenty of reasons to take Michael Beasley who would have fit in perfectly with the Bulls existing core while Rose forces the Bulls to recycle much of their roster. The decision clearly looks like an A/A as Derrick looks to have the highest ceiling of his draft class.
Luol Deng signs a monster extension for 71 million over six years. At the time, Luol Deng looked like a good fit with Derrick Rose. He doesn't need to handle the ball much to get his points, he's a good teammate, he's still young, and he has good size for his position. He appears to be a solid starter at SF for the next 8 or so years. The money offered to him seemed a bit excessive though even at the time prior to the NBA markets crashing and Luol Deng being injured.
The Bulls didn't play hard ball with Deng like they did with Gordon and likely could have negotiated a much better deal if they did. Deng's contract at this point is way underwater in value, meaning no team would give up cap space / an expiring for him. The Bulls could trade him, but only by taking back someone else's crap.
It wasn't great at the time, and it's turned out far worse as Deng hasn't rebounded to play better, and he's been hurt with a serious, potentially chronic problem.
At the time the deal was made, I'd have graded it a D+ for management. They let their personal like for Deng allow them to vastly overpay for his on court skills.
-edit -
A long time listener has pointed out that I was also extremely enthusiastic about having Deng back and defended his deal. I was truly happy to have Deng locked up long term, but the salary exceeded the maximum I said I would have spent prior to him agreeing to a deal. Thus despite my personal excitement I can't go higher than C+ when even upon further reflection. I confess to being at least a little hypocritical in that regard, as I was excited to have him back, but I can't say it was a strong negotiation from management's perspective.
- /edit -
Using hindsight, this deal is an F. Deng is probably one of the bottom five contracts in the NBA at this point. Injuries and a crashing NBA salary structure make this deal so much worse than it would have been otherwise. A healthy Deng may upgrade it back to D/D+, but the falling salary structure of the NBA probably keeps it at lower than C level.
Ben Gordon signs the qualifying offer after initially rejecting a six year 54 million dollar offer only to come back and attempt to take it in the 11th hour only to be rejected by management at that point.
At the time, Ben Gordon's fit on the team was a question mark. Would the Bulls want to build around two small guards, neither of which are expected to be good defenders? Would Gordon take the ball out of Rose's hands too much? The Bulls played hard ball with Gordon's negotiation and won, but then they threw back the prize.
Gordon's initial cold-shouldering of Rose may have played a part in the Bulls decision not to allow him to take the offer after their deadline passed. Given the lack of teams expected to have cap space in 2009, the Bulls probably figured they could get Gordon back at the same offer next year, possibly less.
Gordon goes on to have an excellent season and an electrifying, though brief, playoffs. His value skyrockets, and the Bulls lose him. Neither side desired to continue the relationship this off-season, and Gordon was priced out of the Bulls range as the Pistons paid him almost 12 million per season.
At the time the decision was made to not keep Ben Gordon, I'd qualify it as a C. The Bulls were never likely to get a scorer as good as Gordon at that price level, but the question of fit makes their concerns valid. Using hindsight, the Bulls get a D for the decision. Gordon proved he was better than the Bulls expected and has now had three straight seasons of efficient, volume scoring. He'd look like a gem on a 6 year 54 million dollar deal at this point, and the fit with Derrick Rose looked very good as well. I would wager they'd take this one back given a choice, especially if they could also reverse the Deng decision.
Trading Drew Gooden / Andres Nocioni for John Salmons / Brad Miller looked like a good trade at the time, but Luol Deng's injury changed it from a good trade into a great trade. The move catapulted the Bulls into the playoffs which they otherwise would have missed. They got the two best players in the deal and dumped the worst contract which makes the deal an absolute steal for them. It also facilitated the Bulls run at a star in 2010 free agency.
Bulls get an A+/A+ for this move.
Trading Thabo Sefolosha for a late 1st round pick. While many people are critical of this trade, it was an extension of the prior trade because it freed up enough salary for the Bulls to remain under the luxury tax. It also freed up considerable salary this off season to give the Bulls some flexibility to stay under the tax while acquiring the first round pick. Thabo Sefolosha requires an extension next off-season, one we wouldn't have been able to give him if we pursued an 2010 max FA.
The Bulls parlayed him into a longer term asset, how well that asset does is up for debate. Bulls fans probably would be jumping up and down over this trade had the Bulls selected Dejuan Blair over Taj Gibson. I for one will wait to see how both players do before judging. I can't bring myself to be too upset over passing on a guy missing two ACLs though. Blair's upside is that he helps you for two years as a role player. That may well be more than Gibson's ever likely to do, but it's not so high that I'm crying myself to sleep every night.
Bulls get an A for the move at the time, but a temporary B- based on how they used the pick. If Gibson surprises then they can upgrade back to A or slide down to C. Given that Sefolosha had no future here either way, and his salary was directly replaced by Pargo, I don't see the move as a big talent loss even for a season.
All in all, the Bulls have done well where they've typically done well (draft and trades) and struggled where they've typically struggled (FA extensions). These patterns seem to date back throughout the entire reign of Paxson as a GM.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Tags: ben gordon, Brad Miller, chicago bulls, derrick rose, evaluation, gar forman, hindsight, john paxson, john salmons, Luol Deng, Taj Gibson, thabo sefolosha
How about some other moves?
Tyrus Thomas pick A/C- :Tyrus has been a disappointment so far especially offensively
The Noah pick C/B :At the time I though we were picking another Mark Madson. However, Noah has surprised us with rebounding and defense. Now if he could learn on offensive move.
Doug - You did a podcast (#55 I believe) shortly after Deng signed his deal and you were pretty frickin' happy with the contract. You compared his age, performance and deal with those of Prince, Butler, etc and it really did look reasonable. Given that podcast and analysis, this statement: "At the time the deal was made, I'd have graded it a D+ for management. They let their personal like for Deng allow them to vastly overpay for his on court skills." seems completely ridiculous. Now, given the injuries and changing cap situation, the F- hindsight grade is probably fair.
For your retropsective analysis you almost have to view the Deng, Gordon and Salmons moves in totality rather than individually.
I essentially agree with your "at the time analysis". But I would give both the Deng and Gordon moves a C at the time.
I felt that Deng was a massive overpay(although, it was pretty much market value for what the market was paying others at that time, see Andre Iguadala,Josh Smith).
Not letting Gordon sneak back in the door at 6/54 was a mistake, but one that I was only 50/50 on anyway.
We all seem to agree that the Salmons move has turned out much better than anyone thought when he was acquired.
Therefore, once we acquired Salmons, the real argument becomes is a Gordon/Salmons wing combo better than a Salmons/Deng, or even Gordon/Deng.
We won't really have the answer until sometime into the upcoming season. If Salmons and Deng both average 18ppg and we play better team defense as well as more coherent team offense, then we appear to have make the right overall decisions.
All of this ignors personality/team chemistry issues, and I have always felt that there was something amiss with Gordon as a teammate.
It would have been really interesting to see how Deng would have faired in free agency this summer if the Bulls had not signed him last summer.
Unfortunately, all pre 2009 contracts are going to look increasingly bad in a shrinking cap environment. Gordon, essentially, got a pre 2009 deal, in 2009, he may be the last of the pre bad ecomony contracts, so his deal may look really bad in the next few seasons.
On a year by year basis, he makes about $800,000 less each year than Deng, the value of a minimun contract.
So over the next five years would you rather have Gordon or Deng, are the Bulls a better team with Gordon/Salmons or with Salmons/Deng at the wings positions.
We shall see.