CHICAGO BULLS: No habrá paz para los malvados Moderadores: tiko5, hastrakan, der König81

[PinHeadKnickJR]

Como era evidente por la pasta, Wade se queda una temporada más.

[FiReGuN]

Y encima dicen que Butler se quiere ir a Cavs.. que no nos va a dar ni picks..

Y que alguien me explique porque Rondo sigue aquí.. Si están tan seguros de largar a Butler perdiendo así toda esperanza en PO.. ¿para que queremos a Rondo? No tiene sentido. A Wade te lo tienes que comer, pero a Rondo lo puedes largar pagandole 3M. Mejor que juegue el paquetazo de Payne a ver si mejora algo y de paso perderemos aun más y tendremos mejor pick el año que viene.

[Dexter__Morgan]

Qué deprimente es todo, por favor. Qué habremos hecho para merecer a los inútiles de GarPax. Que se vayan bien a la mierda.

[72-10]

Ahora que no, que dice Jimmy que no se quiere ir a Cleveland.

Según cuentan han ido Irving y LeBron, que están cabreados con Gilbert, diciéndole que aquello es una casa pvtas y que se quede. No sabéis vosotros donde estoy, diría él jajaja.

[Tony Adams]

Que se vengan aquí el Calbo y su amigo si tan a disgusto están en Cleveland

Dí que sí, Güade, por eso están todos los equipos peleándose por ti

[Rawld Rädagastauskas]

Presumirle un plan trazado a GarPax más allá de salvar su culo me parece aventurado.

Y sin plan.... como que no han dado motivos para que les envíen a la mierda....

[PigheadedCobra]

Hombre, Wade es junto a Jimmy de lo poco potable que tenemos, sobrar no sobra.

[Tony Adams]

En un escenario sin Jimmy, no necesitamos jugadores potables porque se van a perder partidos a cholón. Puestos a arrastrarnos por ahí, tener a una estrella de 35 años en pista es un estorbo. Entiendo que para algún fan de la ciudad de Chicago será uno de los pocos alicientes de la temporada, pero es que a mi Chicago me pilla muy lejos y no le tengo ningún cariño por ello.

Lo de su tuit, después de la serie que se marcó contra Boston, pues eso

[FiReGuN]

En un escenario sin Jimmy, no necesitamos jugadores potables porque se van a perder partidos a cholón. Puestos a arrastrarnos por ahí, tener a una estrella de 35 años en pista es un estorbo. Entiendo que para algún fan de la ciudad de Chicago será uno de los pocos alicientes de la temporada, pero es que a mi Chicago me pilla muy lejos y no le tengo ningún cariño por ello.

Es mucho mejor que se jugara 30 minutos Valentine por partido por ejemplo, a ver si se puede sacar un jugador decente ahí.. y de paso Wade, algún día que esté con la inspiración, te hace ganar un partido que sólo nos baja posiciones en el draft.

Y lo mismo se aplica a Rondo e incluso a Robin Lopez.

[Tony Adams]

Rondo tiene eso de que quiere ser entrenador y siempre está con los jóvenes del equipo, aconsejándoles y organizando partidillos y sesiones de tiro los días de descanso y demás.

A RoLo yo sí que me plantearía darle puerta, me parece un jugador bastante válido para un equipo con ciertas aspiraciones y quizá se pueda sacar algún joven por él. Claro que GarPax se traerían algún matado tipo Payne y, por el camino, lo mismo pierden alguna ronda también.

Lo que está claro es que, desde el mismo momento en que Jimmy salga por la puerta, o se ponen en modo tanque o se avecinan años durísimos.

[mantenido]

Parece que buscan a Teodosic

[Rawld Rädagastauskas]

Parece que buscan a Teodosic

me he ido a Hoopshype y he sacado los jugadores con contrato para el año que viene. He puesto las posiciones yo mismo. Es esto:

PLAYER 2017/18
Cameron Payne PG $2,203,440
Rajon Rondo PG $13,397,000
Jerian Grant PG $1,713,840
Isaiah Canaan PG $1,577,230
Dwyane Wade SG $23,800,000
Denzel Valentine SG $2,186,400
Jimmy Butler SF $18,696,918
Paul Zipser SF $1,312,611
Bobby Portis PF $1,516,320
Robin Lopez C $13,788,500

De 10 jugadores tenemos 4 PG, 2 SG, 2 Sf, 1 PF y 1C.

Eso sin contar que con la QO tenemos a MCW (otro PG) y a Mirotic.

Es decir, de bases vamos sobrados.... ahora, que alguno sepa jugar a esto....

[FiReGuN]

Y que desde luego Teodosic esta lejos de solucionar nada.

Enviado desde mi Aquaris E5 HD mediante Tapatalk

[PigheadedCobra]

El Draft es la madrugada del jueves al viernes, verdad? a que hora?

[ManiacRR]

A la 1:30 empieza creo.

[Dexter__Morgan]

No sé por qué nadie querría jugar en los Bulls, y lo he leído en Marca (y su nula credibilidad), pero esto se dice:

"El base de los Raptors sigue deshojando la margarita de su futuro y ya cuenta con un nuevo pretendiente encima de la mesa. Después de verse obligado a seguir en los Bulls parece que Jimmy Butler ha comenzado a moverse en lo que a captación se refiere y ya ha empezado a trabajar para que Lowry termine en Chicago."

[Jimmy Buckets]

Lo de "verse obligado" a seguir en los Bulls... Salvo especulaciones de la prensa, en todo momento Butler ha dicho que quería quedarse en Chicago, y no solo ahora, sino todo el año, a pesar de que GarPax siempre se han mostrado tibios con él. Es increíble lo bien que funciona la prensa de Chicago cuando se trata de hacer creer a todo el mundo -literalmente- que los cambios o casi cambios impopulares son siempre responsabilidad de otros. "Oye, mira, es que Jimmy Butler quería irse y nosotros solo respondimos a su petición, pasa que no lo quieren ni regalao". Como si no llevaran año y pico metiéndolo en cada rumor, o no le hubieran dado un roster de mierda pretendiendo que alguien se tragase que estaban construyendo entorno a él.

Yo si fuera él sí que pediría el traspaso. No sé si se pensará que puede arreglar lo que no hacen o hacen mal el par de inútiles de arriba, pero si lo piensa, está equivocado.

Por cierto, de RealGM, por dar un poco de perspectiva...

For 2014 on, I feel it's too early to compare their careers to Butler. So we will go from 2004-2013 and individually look at CONSENSUS who was/is better than Butler and look at the percentage of picks to see if it's worth it to trade Butler away for the Bulls.

EDIT: I am making Butler the comparison line because I often hear that Butler is not a #1 who can lead us to a chip. That the Bulls should tank to find their KD or LeBron or Westbrook or cp3 or Steph as that is the "only way" to acquire a #1. (I personally think that Butler is good enough, but this isn't for me.)

We are looking for players that are of the CONSENSUS opinion are better than Butler. Aka the reason to tank.

2004
Emeka Okafor
Ben Gordon
Shaun Livingston
Devin Harris
0

2005
Marvin Williams
Deron Williams
Chris Paul
Raymond Felton
1

2006
LaMarcus Aldridge
Adam Morrison
Tyrus Thomas
Shelden Williams
0.5

2007
Kevin Durant
Al Horford
Mike Conley
Jeff Green
1

2008
Micheal Beasley
OJ Mayo
Russell Westbrook
Kevin Love
1

2009
Hasheem Thabeet
James Harden
Tyreke Evans
Ricky Rubio
1

2010
Evan Turner
Derrick Favors
Wesley Johnson
DeMarcus Cousins
0.5

2011
Derrick Williams
Enes Kanter
Tristan Thompson
Jonas Valunciunas
(Butler drafted at #30)
0

2012
MKG
Bradley Beal
Dion Waiters
Thomas Robinson
0

2013
Victor Oladipo
Otto Porter
Cody Zeller
Alex Len
0


In ten years of #2-5 picks, around 4 or 5 players were better than Butler out of 40. I like simple math so I'm gunna say 4, since LMA and DMC are debatable. 4/40 picks are undebatably better than Butler. That's a 10% chance you end up with a player better than Butler if you have picks in those ranges.

There are a few camps in the Butler debate, trade if the Godfather offer is there, trade for what Celtics fans feel is market, or don't trade at all.

*GODFATHER OFFER: #3 pick this year, (2018 Lakers/2019 Kings or 2018 Nets) plus Brown/Crowder.
*PERCEIVED MARKET: #3 pick plus Brown/Crowder

Let's see if can try to make some estimations for the Bulls chances of rebuilding a contender


CHANCE WE REPLACE BUTLER OVER NEXT FIVE YEARS W/ GODFATHER OFFER)

Let's use some basic probability...
0.9x, x=P(Player better than Butler)


1 pick = 10% chance we find a new Butler (80% chance we don't)
2 picks = 19% chance we find at least one new Butler (81% chance we don't)
3 picks = 27% chance we find at least one new Butler (73% chance we don't)
4 picks = 35% chance we find at least one new Butler (65% chance we don't)
...
7 picks = 47% chance we find at least one new Butler (53% chance we don't)
Hint: That progression is not linear.


To put 7 picks in perspective, even if we get 2 picks from Boston and have our own and assuming that ALL of our picks are top 5 (HUGE ASSUMPTION) in FIVE YEARS of tanking, the Bulls only have a 47% shot at replacing Butler with another Butler, just to end up where they were BEFORE the trade. Even Sacramento struggled to race to the bottom five this year. Tanking to get a top 5 pick is never a sure thing!

Ok, now that is put in perspective... let's look at the chances we land TWO Butlers



CHANCE WE LAND TWO BUTLERS OVER NEXT 5 YEARS W/ GODFATHER OFFER

Let's use Binomial Probability Formula:

P(k out of N)=(N!/(k!(N-k)!)) (p^k) (q^(N-k))

N = picks, k =2, p = P(Butler), q = (1-p)

http://www.dummies.com/education/math/s ... l-formula/
http://vassarstats.net/textbook/ch5apx.html

2 picks = 1% chance we find two new Butlers
3 picks = 2.8% chance we find two or more new Butlers
4 picks = 5.2% chance we find two or more new Butlers
5 picks = 8.1% chance we find two or more new Butlers
6 picks = 11.4% chance we find two or more new Butlers
7 picks = 14.9% chance we find two or more new Butlers



LETS DO THREE BUTLERS!! THE OKC/GOLDEN STATE DREAM!!

Again, we use Binomial Probability Formula:

P(k out of N)=(N!/(k!(N-k)!)) (p^k) (q^(N-k))

N = picks, k =3, p = P(Butler), q = (1-p)

3 picks = 0.01% chance we find three new Butlers
4 picks = 0.36% chance we find three or more new Butlers
5 picks = 0.86% chance we find three or more new Butlers
6 picks = 1.58% chance we find three or more new Butlers
7 picks = 2.57% chance we find three or more new Butlers

So the odds of being the next OKC or Golden State after 5 years of tanking, even with the Boston picks are pretty
low.



THE TANK OR NOT TO TANK, THAT IS THE QUESTION

The big question to ask yourselves as a fan base is, does Butler seem well-liked enough around the league to
recruit one or more stars to the Bulls? Is that probability greater than or less than the Bulls building through the draft?

Keep in mind that Paxson is if nothing else, given us a shot with flexible contracts nearly every season. Even after 2010, we had opportunities to trade for Melo because Paxson signed players to building block contracts that could be stacked to meet any trade package salary total. That's smart. Say what you will about recruiting, but Gasol, Boozer, Wade, Wallace all chose us over other teams that could have paid similar amounts or more. That Chicago can't sign free agents is a load of crap imo. In fact, Durant often cites Gasol signing with Chicago as one of the days that he realized he couldn't recruit anyone to OKC. It was absolutely a factor in him leaving.

Anyway, this isn't perfect or end all be all, this is just meant to give us a perspective of our chances of replicating our current situation, replicating a 2 star situation, or an OKC situation via draft. Draw your own conclusions.

I'll let you guys debate this.


EXTRA CREDIT

If we dont' do a trade, we let Butler walk in 2018, we tank naturally. We have one, maybe two less picks than if we had traded Butler. Look at the odds listed above, does it really hurt our rebuilding process by a ton? Not really, when you look at the percentages. We're all arguing for a small percentage points, even fractions of a percent.

addendum
Also, I could include 2003, but then I'd have to include 2002-2000 as well, notoriously bad drafts, since I would go back to 1997. Either way, it doesn't affect the numbers much, the general discussion remains the same. I think I went back and looked and it was like an additional 7 players out of 70 were CONSENSUS better than Butler if you include 2003-1997. 7/70 is pretty much the same as the 4/40 I used. Feel free to use your own p if you want to make other assumptions (starter level quality, etc), I linked the binomial calculator upthread.

[FiReGuN]

Tiene difícil Jimmy lo de reclutar a alguien, aunque es de alabar su intención siempre de mantenerse en la franquicia y hacerla crecer.. ¿pero quién va a querer venir aquí? En el mejor de los casos me imagino un Carmelo Anthony pagándole el oro y el moro a NYK.. que no creo que a ninguno nos convenza..

[Dexter__Morgan]

Lo de "verse obligado" a seguir en los Bulls... Salvo especulaciones de la prensa, en todo momento Butler ha dicho que quería quedarse en Chicago, y no solo ahora, sino todo el año, a pesar de que GarPax siempre se han mostrado tibios con él. Es increíble lo bien que funciona la prensa de Chicago cuando se trata de hacer creer a todo el mundo -literalmente- que los cambios o casi cambios impopulares son siempre responsabilidad de otros. "Oye, mira, es que Jimmy Butler quería irse y nosotros solo respondimos a su petición, pasa que no lo quieren ni regalao". Como si no llevaran año y pico metiéndolo en cada rumor, o no le hubieran dado un roster de mierda pretendiendo que alguien se tragase que estaban construyendo entorno a él.

Yo si fuera él sí que pediría el traspaso. No sé si se pensará que puede arreglar lo que no hacen o hacen mal el par de inútiles de arriba, pero si lo piensa, está equivocado.

Esto es digno de estudio, porque uno se mete en foros americanos y la gente tiene en estima a GarPax. Es algo increíble.

Lo que no entiendo es que no salga nadie a decir en voz alta el desastre que estos dos tíos están perpetrando. Sé que no hay ni una voz autorizada en Chicago que no esté a sueldo de la franquicia (Pippen, Kukoc), o que no se moje por estar metido en otra (Jordan, Tito Phil)... pero es que clama al cielo.

[FiReGuN]

Lo de "verse obligado" a seguir en los Bulls... Salvo especulaciones de la prensa, en todo momento Butler ha dicho que quería quedarse en Chicago, y no solo ahora, sino todo el año, a pesar de que GarPax siempre se han mostrado tibios con él. Es increíble lo bien que funciona la prensa de Chicago cuando se trata de hacer creer a todo el mundo -literalmente- que los cambios o casi cambios impopulares son siempre responsabilidad de otros. "Oye, mira, es que Jimmy Butler quería irse y nosotros solo respondimos a su petición, pasa que no lo quieren ni regalao". Como si no llevaran año y pico metiéndolo en cada rumor, o no le hubieran dado un roster de mierda pretendiendo que alguien se tragase que estaban construyendo entorno a él.

Yo si fuera él sí que pediría el traspaso. No sé si se pensará que puede arreglar lo que no hacen o hacen mal el par de inútiles de arriba, pero si lo piensa, está equivocado.

Por cierto, de RealGM, por dar un poco de perspectiva...

For 2014 on, I feel it's too early to compare their careers to Butler. So we will go from 2004-2013 and individually look at CONSENSUS who was/is better than Butler and look at the percentage of picks to see if it's worth it to trade Butler away for the Bulls.

EDIT: I am making Butler the comparison line because I often hear that Butler is not a #1 who can lead us to a chip. That the Bulls should tank to find their KD or LeBron or Westbrook or cp3 or Steph as that is the "only way" to acquire a #1. (I personally think that Butler is good enough, but this isn't for me.)

We are looking for players that are of the CONSENSUS opinion are better than Butler. Aka the reason to tank.

2004
Emeka Okafor
Ben Gordon
Shaun Livingston
Devin Harris
0

2005
Marvin Williams
Deron Williams
Chris Paul
Raymond Felton
1

2006
LaMarcus Aldridge
Adam Morrison
Tyrus Thomas
Shelden Williams
0.5

2007
Kevin Durant
Al Horford
Mike Conley
Jeff Green
1

2008
Micheal Beasley
OJ Mayo
Russell Westbrook
Kevin Love
1

2009
Hasheem Thabeet
James Harden
Tyreke Evans
Ricky Rubio
1

2010
Evan Turner
Derrick Favors
Wesley Johnson
DeMarcus Cousins
0.5

2011
Derrick Williams
Enes Kanter
Tristan Thompson
Jonas Valunciunas
(Butler drafted at #30)
0

2012
MKG
Bradley Beal
Dion Waiters
Thomas Robinson
0

2013
Victor Oladipo
Otto Porter
Cody Zeller
Alex Len
0


In ten years of #2-5 picks, around 4 or 5 players were better than Butler out of 40. I like simple math so I'm gunna say 4, since LMA and DMC are debatable. 4/40 picks are undebatably better than Butler. That's a 10% chance you end up with a player better than Butler if you have picks in those ranges.

There are a few camps in the Butler debate, trade if the Godfather offer is there, trade for what Celtics fans feel is market, or don't trade at all.

*GODFATHER OFFER: #3 pick this year, (2018 Lakers/2019 Kings or 2018 Nets) plus Brown/Crowder.
*PERCEIVED MARKET: #3 pick plus Brown/Crowder

Let's see if can try to make some estimations for the Bulls chances of rebuilding a contender


CHANCE WE REPLACE BUTLER OVER NEXT FIVE YEARS W/ GODFATHER OFFER)

Let's use some basic probability...
0.9x, x=P(Player better than Butler)


1 pick = 10% chance we find a new Butler (80% chance we don't)
2 picks = 19% chance we find at least one new Butler (81% chance we don't)
3 picks = 27% chance we find at least one new Butler (73% chance we don't)
4 picks = 35% chance we find at least one new Butler (65% chance we don't)
...
7 picks = 47% chance we find at least one new Butler (53% chance we don't)
Hint: That progression is not linear.


To put 7 picks in perspective, even if we get 2 picks from Boston and have our own and assuming that ALL of our picks are top 5 (HUGE ASSUMPTION) in FIVE YEARS of tanking, the Bulls only have a 47% shot at replacing Butler with another Butler, just to end up where they were BEFORE the trade. Even Sacramento struggled to race to the bottom five this year. Tanking to get a top 5 pick is never a sure thing!

Ok, now that is put in perspective... let's look at the chances we land TWO Butlers



CHANCE WE LAND TWO BUTLERS OVER NEXT 5 YEARS W/ GODFATHER OFFER

Let's use Binomial Probability Formula:

P(k out of N)=(N!/(k!(N-k)!)) (p^k) (q^(N-k))

N = picks, k =2, p = P(Butler), q = (1-p)

http://www.dummies.com/education/math/s ... l-formula/
http://vassarstats.net/textbook/ch5apx.html

2 picks = 1% chance we find two new Butlers
3 picks = 2.8% chance we find two or more new Butlers
4 picks = 5.2% chance we find two or more new Butlers
5 picks = 8.1% chance we find two or more new Butlers
6 picks = 11.4% chance we find two or more new Butlers
7 picks = 14.9% chance we find two or more new Butlers



LETS DO THREE BUTLERS!! THE OKC/GOLDEN STATE DREAM!!

Again, we use Binomial Probability Formula:

P(k out of N)=(N!/(k!(N-k)!)) (p^k) (q^(N-k))

N = picks, k =3, p = P(Butler), q = (1-p)

3 picks = 0.01% chance we find three new Butlers
4 picks = 0.36% chance we find three or more new Butlers
5 picks = 0.86% chance we find three or more new Butlers
6 picks = 1.58% chance we find three or more new Butlers
7 picks = 2.57% chance we find three or more new Butlers

So the odds of being the next OKC or Golden State after 5 years of tanking, even with the Boston picks are pretty
low.



THE TANK OR NOT TO TANK, THAT IS THE QUESTION

The big question to ask yourselves as a fan base is, does Butler seem well-liked enough around the league to
recruit one or more stars to the Bulls? Is that probability greater than or less than the Bulls building through the draft?

Keep in mind that Paxson is if nothing else, given us a shot with flexible contracts nearly every season. Even after 2010, we had opportunities to trade for Melo because Paxson signed players to building block contracts that could be stacked to meet any trade package salary total. That's smart. Say what you will about recruiting, but Gasol, Boozer, Wade, Wallace all chose us over other teams that could have paid similar amounts or more. That Chicago can't sign free agents is a load of crap imo. In fact, Durant often cites Gasol signing with Chicago as one of the days that he realized he couldn't recruit anyone to OKC. It was absolutely a factor in him leaving.

Anyway, this isn't perfect or end all be all, this is just meant to give us a perspective of our chances of replicating our current situation, replicating a 2 star situation, or an OKC situation via draft. Draw your own conclusions.

I'll let you guys debate this.


EXTRA CREDIT

If we dont' do a trade, we let Butler walk in 2018, we tank naturally. We have one, maybe two less picks than if we had traded Butler. Look at the odds listed above, does it really hurt our rebuilding process by a ton? Not really, when you look at the percentages. We're all arguing for a small percentage points, even fractions of a percent.

addendum
Also, I could include 2003, but then I'd have to include 2002-2000 as well, notoriously bad drafts, since I would go back to 1997. Either way, it doesn't affect the numbers much, the general discussion remains the same. I think I went back and looked and it was like an additional 7 players out of 70 were CONSENSUS better than Butler if you include 2003-1997. 7/70 is pretty much the same as the 4/40 I used. Feel free to use your own p if you want to make other assumptions (starter level quality, etc), I linked the binomial calculator upthread.

Evidentemente Butler vale mucho más que el pick 3 de Boston. Pero no hacían falta estos datos para saberlo. Para empezar a hablar te deberían dar mínimo 2 rondas altas y un joven como Jaylen Brown.