What good to great moves has this front office made since drafting Rose with the first pick overall?
2012 Chicago Bulls Off Season Thread
- Thread starter CHICAGO
- Start date
- Status
maybe Mirotic and snaking a potential lottery pick out of MJ
Taj needs to get dealt at the deadline
good point
if we let Asik go & get rid of Taj we can kiss Rose's tenure here goodbye... it was all for nothing...
if we let Asik go & get rid of Taj we can kiss Rose's tenure here goodbye... it was all for nothing...
Taj isn't the long-term guy solution at PF in their eyes
we gotta something from them if its still possible if not we will probably match
Not as a starter but I don't think you can do better then Taj off the bench considering he's better then most starters at PF including arguably our current one...
I would keep him over Asik too but thats not in their plans apparently
Kang Deezy
Overall Nice Guy
Rockets did y'all dirty.
I love it.
Bulls are DONE.
I love it.
Bulls are DONE.
In the current collective bargaining agreement, it's known as the Gilbert Arenas rule. In the next CBA, it might be known as the Daryl Morey rule, because the Houston Rockets GM just drove a Mack truck through every one of the provision's current loopholes in agreeing to a three-year, $25.1 million offer sheet with restricted free agent Omer Asik, formerly of the Chicago Bulls.
Let's set aside whether Asik is actually worth $25.1 million over three years for a moment -- we'll tackle that later -- and just ponder the evil genius of the structuring of the contract and how it gives the Rockets a huge advantage in prying him away from the Bulls.
Under the "Gilbert Arenas" provision of the league's collective bargaining agreement, a player such as Asik -- a second-round draft pick coming off his second season -- can be offered only a maximum of the midlevel exception in free agency for the first two seasons but can be offered any amount up to the maximum in years after that.
Houston took advantage of this provision by limiting his offer to three years, rather than the maximum of four, and offering the maximum eligible salary in Year 3. It's so damaging because of how the league assigns the salary cap and luxury tax hits for the respective sides. In Houston's case, the amounts are averaged over the three seasons, requiring the Rockets to have a little more than $8 million in cap room to consummate the deal.
No biggie for Houston; they would happen to have exactly $8 million lying around if they renounce their rights to Marcus Camby, cut Shaun Livingston, Greg Smith, Courtney Fortson and Diamon Simpson, and either waive Jon Leuer or use the stretch provision on Jon Brockman. Houston could also get there by renouncing its rights to restricted free agent Courtney Lee, but that seems more unlikely.
And looking ahead, the Rockets are still in pristine shape going forward. An $8 million cap charge for Asik in 2013-14 and 2014-15 simply isn't going to hurt them.
But Chicago? Holy hell, this is going to hurt. The league calculates the cap charge differently for a team matching the offer sheet, using actual salaries instead of the average. So the Bulls get off easy in the short term; a $5 million cap charge for Asik this year and next should have been in their budget to start.
But then in 2014-15, it jumps up to about $14.9 million. And it's not clear how the Bulls are supposed to handle that, especially given their aversion to the luxury tax and the fact they may be subject to the repeater penalty by then. Between Asik, Derrick Rose, Carlos Boozer and Joakim Noah, they have $61.6 million committed and that's without paying Taj Gibson, retaining Luol Deng, or adding any free agent or draft picks.
They're almost certainly a tax team, in other words, and in fact they're likely to be deep into the tax, even if the league's tax level rises a few ducats by then. Which makes the effective cost of keeping Asik that season closer to $30 million than $15 million. And as much as I may admire his defense and rebounding, it's inconceivable that Asik is worth anywhere near $30 million.
Houston will hope Asik can improve on that prognosis by upping his offensive production to slightly less pathetic levels, with the tutelage of Kevin McHale, but even so his defense justifies the contract.
Are there ways around this? Yes, but the medicine is worse than the disease. If in 2014 the Bulls were to use the amnesty clause on Carlos Boozer, who would be on the final year of his deal, that would cut $15 million from their cap number (and likely from their luxury tax bill) that season, but they would still have to pay Boozer, which would still make Asik's effective cost $30 million -- except in that case, it's $30 million and a starting power forward.
Alternatively, Chicago could use the stretch provision on Asik prior to Year 3. That would cost them $5 million each in 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17, possibly saving them from a luxury tax in all three seasons.
But doing so would give them only two years of Asik, while still paying the entirety of the deal, which means they'll have signed him to a two-year deal for $24 million. Which is about as bad as the effective cost of three years, $39 million that we're presenting as the alternative. (You can also count the tax hits in Years 1 and 2, but they're the same in both alternatives so we'll ignore them for now.)
Basically, there's no easy way out for Chicago, which is why they're unlikely to match Houston's offer sheet. They still have Gibson, who is an absolute defensive beast and is extension-eligible this summer -- presumably on far better terms than Asik's deal. Meanwhile, Chicago can shorten its frontcourt rotation to three men -- Boozer, Noah and Gibson -- while using Luol Deng as a small-ball 4 in stretches.
Thus, in all likelihood, Houston is going to end up with Asik. I have to admire their cleverness in pulling this off, but I also have to shake my head that this was allowed under the CBA.
When they get around to the next one, maybe they'll realize that it's unfair to count the tax and cap hit in the season it hits for the matching team, while allowing the offering team to offer only one season at the higher level. Houston drove a truck through this loophole, but in the future requiring four-year deals for Arenas contracts will at least require teams to offer a more genuine maximum deal. Doing so in this case would have made it a four-year, $39 million deal from the Rockets, required nearly $10 million in cap space (and requisite harder decisions from the Rockets), and likely pushed them to a different alternative.
Let's set aside whether Asik is actually worth $25.1 million over three years for a moment -- we'll tackle that later -- and just ponder the evil genius of the structuring of the contract and how it gives the Rockets a huge advantage in prying him away from the Bulls.
Under the "Gilbert Arenas" provision of the league's collective bargaining agreement, a player such as Asik -- a second-round draft pick coming off his second season -- can be offered only a maximum of the midlevel exception in free agency for the first two seasons but can be offered any amount up to the maximum in years after that.
Houston took advantage of this provision by limiting his offer to three years, rather than the maximum of four, and offering the maximum eligible salary in Year 3. It's so damaging because of how the league assigns the salary cap and luxury tax hits for the respective sides. In Houston's case, the amounts are averaged over the three seasons, requiring the Rockets to have a little more than $8 million in cap room to consummate the deal.
No biggie for Houston; they would happen to have exactly $8 million lying around if they renounce their rights to Marcus Camby, cut Shaun Livingston, Greg Smith, Courtney Fortson and Diamon Simpson, and either waive Jon Leuer or use the stretch provision on Jon Brockman. Houston could also get there by renouncing its rights to restricted free agent Courtney Lee, but that seems more unlikely.
And looking ahead, the Rockets are still in pristine shape going forward. An $8 million cap charge for Asik in 2013-14 and 2014-15 simply isn't going to hurt them.
But Chicago? Holy hell, this is going to hurt. The league calculates the cap charge differently for a team matching the offer sheet, using actual salaries instead of the average. So the Bulls get off easy in the short term; a $5 million cap charge for Asik this year and next should have been in their budget to start.
But then in 2014-15, it jumps up to about $14.9 million. And it's not clear how the Bulls are supposed to handle that, especially given their aversion to the luxury tax and the fact they may be subject to the repeater penalty by then. Between Asik, Derrick Rose, Carlos Boozer and Joakim Noah, they have $61.6 million committed and that's without paying Taj Gibson, retaining Luol Deng, or adding any free agent or draft picks.
They're almost certainly a tax team, in other words, and in fact they're likely to be deep into the tax, even if the league's tax level rises a few ducats by then. Which makes the effective cost of keeping Asik that season closer to $30 million than $15 million. And as much as I may admire his defense and rebounding, it's inconceivable that Asik is worth anywhere near $30 million.
Houston will hope Asik can improve on that prognosis by upping his offensive production to slightly less pathetic levels, with the tutelage of Kevin McHale, but even so his defense justifies the contract.
Are there ways around this? Yes, but the medicine is worse than the disease. If in 2014 the Bulls were to use the amnesty clause on Carlos Boozer, who would be on the final year of his deal, that would cut $15 million from their cap number (and likely from their luxury tax bill) that season, but they would still have to pay Boozer, which would still make Asik's effective cost $30 million -- except in that case, it's $30 million and a starting power forward.
Alternatively, Chicago could use the stretch provision on Asik prior to Year 3. That would cost them $5 million each in 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17, possibly saving them from a luxury tax in all three seasons.
But doing so would give them only two years of Asik, while still paying the entirety of the deal, which means they'll have signed him to a two-year deal for $24 million. Which is about as bad as the effective cost of three years, $39 million that we're presenting as the alternative. (You can also count the tax hits in Years 1 and 2, but they're the same in both alternatives so we'll ignore them for now.)
Basically, there's no easy way out for Chicago, which is why they're unlikely to match Houston's offer sheet. They still have Gibson, who is an absolute defensive beast and is extension-eligible this summer -- presumably on far better terms than Asik's deal. Meanwhile, Chicago can shorten its frontcourt rotation to three men -- Boozer, Noah and Gibson -- while using Luol Deng as a small-ball 4 in stretches.
Thus, in all likelihood, Houston is going to end up with Asik. I have to admire their cleverness in pulling this off, but I also have to shake my head that this was allowed under the CBA.
When they get around to the next one, maybe they'll realize that it's unfair to count the tax and cap hit in the season it hits for the matching team, while allowing the offering team to offer only one season at the higher level. Houston drove a truck through this loophole, but in the future requiring four-year deals for Arenas contracts will at least require teams to offer a more genuine maximum deal. Doing so in this case would have made it a four-year, $39 million deal from the Rockets, required nearly $10 million in cap space (and requisite harder decisions from the Rockets), and likely pushed them to a different alternative.
- Status