Omer Asik

Good call on Asik, Smash. I wish the Bulls in hindsight had the space to re-sign him.
Bill Simmons in particular has been bashing Chicago lately for letting Asik walk, but I don't recall him being so adamant about it last summer.

What were the Bulls supposed to do? If they had traded Asik in the middle of last season as the #1 seed, they would've compromised that potential playoff run. Also, I don't recall any rumors of teams flooring Chicago with big offers for Asik. Morey found a loophole in the CBA that not only made it unreasonable for Chicago to match, but also would've made it difficult to trade Asik. Asik's cap numbers in Houston are 8.3 mil each year but would've been about 5/5.2/14.8 for Chicago. The latter is a lot harder to trade, especially for someone unproven in major minutes, which raises another important point: the Bulls would've never received fair value for Asik in a trade, because he wasn't going to get the opportunity to fully showcase himself on that team.

Though I liked the move for Houston, I also realize that it was a gamble, as exerting that much effort on defense for 30 minutes is more difficult than doing it for 12-15 minutes per game. There was also the possibility that Asik wouldn't be as much of a defensive force without an elite defensive coach like Thibs. Again, I liked the signing for Houston, but there were legitimate reasons that people questioned the deal.

Given the contracts Chicago has on the books (particularly Boozer) and the reality that they have a better all-around center in Noah and a more versatile defender in Gibson, the Bulls made the only choice they could. If Chicago had matched on Asik, then Simmons and others would've been trashing the Bulls in the summer of 2014 for not having any cap space to be a player in free agency because they committed $15 million to their backup center for 2014-15. Chicago's front office made some cheapskate moves, but I don't fault them for how the Asik situation played out.
 
simmons has been wearing me out lately. love him, but damn he overreacted after westbrook went down. give kd a chance to figure how to adjust minus westbrook.

smash, can you enlighten me about the loophole morey has exploited. lin's offer sheet was the same as asik's, right? back-loaded for nearly 15 mil that third year. so i thought morey really put himself in a bind when it came to 2015. but then i saw lin has the same 8-8-8 mil style deal. how does that work where you can back load an offer sheet for another team, but make it even for your team? by the time i learn this current cba, players will be locked out again. lol.
 
It has to do with Lin and Asik being restricted free agents with Early Bird rights.

The Bird exception allows teams over the cap to re-sign their own free agents. It takes three seasons for a team to have full Bird rights to a player. The Early Bird exception is similar, but it applies to players who have only had two seasons toward establishing Bird rights. The Early Bird exception only allows teams to re-sign their own free agents up to a salary near the league average (apparently it's 104.5% of the previous season's average salary).

A previous loophole in the CBA was exposed when Gilbert Arenas became a free agent after his second year in the league (he was a second round pick). Golden State, with Arenas' Early Bird rights, could only offer him a starting salary around $5 million per season since their team was already over the cap. Washington, who had a bunch of cap space, were able to offer Arenas a contract that started around $8 million and averaged about $10 million a year. Even though Arenas was a restricted free agent, Golden State couldn't match because it exceeded that $5 million starting salary they could offer with Early Bird rights (and no cap space).

So the Arenas provision was put in place in the 2005 CBA. Restricted free agents with one or two years in the league are now limited to offer sheets that start near that league-average mark (the aforementioned 104.5% of the previous year's average), which allows a team to use the Early Bird exception to match an offer from a team with cap space; last summer, that figure was set at $5 million (due to the lockout messing up the previous season's figures). The second year can only be a 4.5% raise on the first year's salary; last summer, that was $5.225. The third year is where it gets tricky.

Asik had only played two seasons, so the Bulls only had Early Bird rights (and no cap space). The Rockets were able to offer Asik 3 years, $25.1 million because they had more than $8.37 million in cap space (the average salary of that contract). The Arenas provision gave the Bulls a chance to match using their Early Bird rights with a 5/5.2/14.9-structured deal. That third year would have especially problematic due to the new progressively harsh luxury tax. Lin's situation was the same.

I believe Houston is actually paying both Lin and Asik 5/5.2/14.9 each year, but for salary cap purposes the annual hit is 8.37/8.37/8.37. I think that's why one site shows the former and another shows the latter.
 
As for Simmons, I generally like him, but the more that ESPN tries to push him as a serious analyst, the more problematic I find his shortcomings. He clearly follows the league closer than most--I'm confident that he watches a lot more games than most ex-players on TV--but sometimes he's out of element. For example, Zach Lowe was a great get for Grantland, but putting his columns in the same place as Simmons' makes the latter look bad. Same goes when they're both on Simmons' podcast.

There was one such podcast recently in which they were discussing the possibility of amnestying Kobe. Simmons was talking as if the Lakers could see how far along Kobe was in October, then making that decision. The problem with that is that teams can only use the amnesty during a one-week window in July. I think Jalen Rose made the same mistake in a subsequent podcast with Simmons. Those errors are understandable for a writer whose primary purpose is entertainment, but he needs to be a bit sharper if you're going to push him as an NBA analyst.
 
As for Simmons, I generally like him, but the more that ESPN tries to push him as a serious analyst, the more problematic I find his shortcomings. He clearly follows the league closer than most--I'm confident that he watches a lot more games than most ex-players on TV--but sometimes he's out of element. For example, Zach Lowe was a great get for Grantland, but putting his columns in the same place as Simmons' makes the latter look bad. Same goes when they're both on Simmons' podcast.

There was one such podcast recently in which they were discussing the possibility of amnestying Kobe. Simmons was talking as if the Lakers could see how far along Kobe was in October, then making that decision. The problem with that is that teams can only use the amnesty during a one-week window in July. I think Jalen Rose made the same mistake in a subsequent podcast with Simmons. Those errors are understandable for a writer whose primary purpose is entertainment, but he needs to be a bit sharper if you're going to push him as an NBA analyst.

My friends and I were discussing basically the same topic--that Simmons has made more blunders in this year than we've recalled in the past. Personally, I think running Grantland could have something to do with it; sufficiently balancing both that site and a position as a NBA analyst has to be extremely difficult.
 
My friends and I were discussing basically the same topic--that Simmons has made more blunders in this year than we've recalled in the past. Personally, I think running Grantland could have something to do with it; sufficiently balancing both that site and a position as a NBA analyst has to be extremely difficult.
So maybe it is a real thing. I thought perhaps I was just being nit-pickier.
 
Back
Top