long time guy wrote:
Which signing was better than Gasol? I don't count James.
Paxson was roundly criticized here for signing Gasol. A simple bumping of that thread would bare that out
.
Why wouldn't James count? He was a free agent that changed teams.
James was only going to sign with two teams. How is that Paxson's fault that the Bulls were not in the "running"?
Gasol did better than many expected, I doubt many would dispute that. Yet his numbers on the offensive end gloss over the liability he always creates on defense.
Gasol signed for about 7mil a yr. and led the NBA in double-doubles. Avg. About 2 blocks per game. The MVP of the league is a worse defender than Gasol and it didn't hurt GS.
[
quote]The Bulls don't have the cap room to acquire Aldridge. Their problem is that Derrick Rose has been injured for over 3 seasons now. I'm wondering how his injuries are Paxson's fault.
[
/quote]Neither do the Heat yet they're supposedly in contention. As I said, difference between a front office willing to be pro-active and one that's happy standing pat and believing in holding onto their assets.
If Gasol is the Bulls second choice, then what choice are the Heat for Aldridge? A saving face show of interest I guess is all it takes to show the fans you are going for it.
BTW, why are Rose's injuries a legitimate excuse for Paxson but not Thibs? It seems to me they're an excuse for the performance of both or neither.
I grant Thibs an excuse for the previous yrs but not this one. You're criticizing Blatt and suggesting that he failed yet he got to the finals and defeated the great Thibs with a depleted roster.
Quote:
LaMarcus Aldridge is 30 yrs old now and his teams have not fared any better playoff wise than Carmelo Anthony's yet he is a guy the Bulls should acquire? He also has benefitted from having better talent as teammates.
The Blazers have been perpetually plagued by injuries over his entire tenure there. Evaluating individual talent on the basis of team wins and losses alone is almost as dumb in the NBA as it is in the NFL.
Actually it's not and it's even dumber to base the success of a team on the greatness of one player. Happens here all the time and if I search hard enough I'm sure you've done it a few times.
If individual talent doesn't matter then why advocate for the acquisition of Aldridge anyway? He may not improve the team according to your logic.
long time guy wrote:
Hoiberg may turnout to be the Bulls most significant move as Kerr turned out to be Golden State's most significant move last yr. I'm not saying that he will have the same success but I believe he is an improvement over Thibs.
Or perhaps he'll be more akin to other recent coaches hired with no NBA coaching experience, such as Derek Fisher and David Blatt.
Again Blatt made it to the Finals and he is a bad coach Thibs struggles against an inferior Bucks team and loses to a depleted CAVs team and he is a great coach.
Also it's awfully interesting that this barrage of job offers which was supposed to come Thibs way never quite materialized. The coaching hires made this off season did not consist of a who's who list of coaches.