Your 2011-12 Strike-Shortened Chicago Bulls

Last season, the Bulls surprised the NBA world.  Picked by most of the experts to be a middle of the pack playoff team, they won more regular season games (62) than any other team in the league.  In the NBA as in most major professional sports, when you surprise folks, you win awards and the Bulls were no exception.  Derrick Rose took home the Most Valuable Player award, rookie head coach Tom Thibodeau captured Coach of the Year honors and General Manager Gar Forman shared the Executive of the Year award with Miami Heat President Pat Riley.

Unfortunately, the upstart Bulls couldn't pull off the ultimate surprise, falling to the Heat 4-1 in the Eastern Conference finals.

A Very Good Offseason Played in Two Parts

With two late first round draft picks (#28 and #30 overall), little was expected to come from the June 23rd draft.  What the Bulls needed was veteran help, particularly at shooting guard, and didn't figure to want two rookies taking up valuable roster spots.  Many predicted that the Bulls would trade one or both of these picks.  Again, they surprised.

The Bulls traded the 28th pick and their 2nd-rounder to move up to #23 where they selected 6-10 Euro-League forward Nikola Mirotic.  Some found the selection odd, not because Mirotic isn't a great prospect (some compare him to a young Dirk Nowitzki, the Dallas Mavericks' superstar forward), but because the 20 year old wunderkind had recently signed a long-term deal with the prestigious RealMadrid club that included a prohibitively-high buy-out option for the first 3 years.  For the Bulls, this works out just fine.  Mirotic can polish his game at someone else's expense and should be ready to come over just about when the Bulls can give him meaningful minutes.  After the draft, Mirotic revealed that the only reason he entered the draft was because the Bulls had told him they were interested...nice.

With the 30th overall pick, the Bulls selected Marquette guard-forward, Jimmy Butler.  Butler is 6-7 with an exceptional work ethic, very good defensive instincts and more than reasonable offensive skills.  While Butler only figures to get the occasional minutes in mop-up situations this season, early indications are that he just might be a player.

Eight days after the draft, on July 1, NBA owners announced that they were locking out the players until a new collective bargaining agreement was signed.  The lockout lasted until December 9th.  In the interim, teams could not approach the players or their agents...it was simply a 5+ month time out.

Once the free agency began earlier this month, the Bulls situation was simple.  All of their players were signed with the lone exception of 39 year old third-string center Kurt Thomas.  What the Bulls needed was a legitimate shooting guard.  In the 2010-11 season, the team had filled the position by committee...Keith Bogans, Ronnie Brewer and Kyle Korver shared the job.  While Bogans started every game for the Bulls last season, both Brewer and Korver played more minutes.  The 62 wins notwithstanding, they needed to put this patchwork approach behind them.

Because the team is over the league's salary cap, their alternatives for filling the shooting guard hole were limited - they could sign a free agent for up to the $5 million "mid-level exception" or they could try to obtain a player via trade. 

Throughout the offseason, it seemed that every Bulls' fan had his or her own favorite shooting guard candidate.  Personally, I wasn't very optimistic.  The names most often mentioned fell into 3 categories: over-the-hill big names like Tracy McGrady and Vince Carter, pure "gunners" like Jamal Crawford and J.R. Smith who had well-deserved reputations for finding defense beneath them and excellent players who only the delusional believed would accept the $5million or be made available in a trade.

The early results of the free agent signing period confirmed my fears.  My top two free agent candidates, Caron Butler and Jason Richardson, signed elsewhere for well above the mid-level exception amount.  Nothing seemed to be happening on the trade front.  Bulls' fans, me included, were getting nervous.

Then about two weeks ago, an intriguing rumor came across the wires.  The Pistons and their three-time All Star shooting guard Richard "Rip" Hamilton were working on a buyout of the $12.5 million Hamilton was to be paid this season.  There were even whispers that Hamilton's team of choice was none other than my beloved Bulls.  I don't usually put much stock in rumors, but I badly wanted to believe in this one.

On December 12, the buyout was formally announced.  Hamilton "tweeted" that he was looking at 3 teams, the Bulls being one of them.  It turned out that this was only a tease and Rip quickly signed a 2-year contract with the Bulls for the $5 million ($10 million total) mid-level exception.

The Bulls got their shooting guard.

Then yesterday, the Bulls capped off their offseason by announcing the signing of Rose to a 5-year contract extension.  While this wasn't a surprise, it was easily the most significant move the Bulls have made since, well, when they drafted Rose.

Hoping for a Short, but Sweet Season

The 2011-12 regular season has been shortened to 66 games.  To get these games into the time available, teams will need to play nearly one more game each week.  Back-to-back games will be more frequent and each team will need to play at least one back-to-back-to-back stretch.  A deep roster will be a decided advantage...and the Bulls probably are the deepest team in the NBA.

As NBA fans know, most teams use an 8-man rotation during the regular season then shorten it come playoff time.  A few employ a 9-man rotation.  The Bulls use 10 players every game.  This season, the starters are expected to be Rose (point guard), Hamilton (shooting guard), Luol Deng (small forward), Carlos Boozer (power forward) and Joakim Noah (center).  The "Bench Mob" consists of C.J. Watson (point), Ronnie Brewer (shooting guard-small forward), Kyle Korver (shooting guard-small forward), Taj Gibson (power forward) and Omer Asik (center).  All of these subs figure to play 11+ minutes per game, with Brewer and Gibson getting somewhere around 20 minutes.  The "deep bench," players who often won't play at all in games, will be made up of the rookie Butler, resident cheerleader and pseudo-assistant coach Brian Scalabrine and point guard John Lucas III.

Some thoughts on each of the Bulls rotation players:

Rose: You all know the story...he went from a struggling rookie (though he was Rookie-of-the-Year) to an All Star in year 2 to a truly elite player and MVP last season.  No one's sure what's next, but the kid just keeps working his tail off so it should be great.

Hamilton: He'll be 34 in February and is coming off a season of discontent where he was among the players who boycotted practice in an effort to get his head coach fired (which of course resulted in making it impossible for Pistons' brass to ax the head coach until after the season ended...not too bright, Rip).  He's always been in great shape and this looks to be the case this season as well.  Hamilton is an extremely smart player who knows where to be and what to do when he gets there.  He's a good and willing defender and he can score, averaging 17.7 points per game over his 12-year NBA career.  Though you'll hear that his numbers dropped off last season, this was entirely due to him playing only 27 minutes per game (his per-minute stats were right on his career averages), his lowest minutes total since his rookie season.  I expect the addition of Hamilton to be a huge plus for the Bulls this season.

Deng: Though many claim that last season was Deng's best, statistically he was right around where he's always been.  He did however, add a 3-point shot to his game, taking about 4 per contest and making a very respectable 35% of them.  Coach Thibodeau calls Deng his "glue guy" and he's indispensable to the team's success.  Deng was 3rd in the league last season in minutes played.  The Bulls need similar durability from him this season.

Boozer:  Boozer was the team's big free agent acquisition a season ago.  Injuries have plagued Boozer throughout his career and unfortunately, last season continued the trend...he missed 23 regular season games and was a non-factor through most of the playoffs nursing a "turf toe.".  When he was completely healthy, he was pretty effective on offense.  On defense, well, let's be kind and just say he's never been much of a defensive player.  A healthy Boozer gives the Bulls a much-needed inside offensive weapon.

Noah: Like Boozer, Noah battled injuries over the course of last season and into the playoffs (he missed 34 regular season games).  When healthy, Noah is an energy source for the Bulls and he's one of the best defensive centers in the game.

Watson:  Watson's job is to spell Rose for about 10-12 minutes each game and he's ideally suited to the role.  Like Rose, he's he can carry the offense for stretches and is a better 3-point shooter (39.3% last season) than Rose.  He's also a tenacious defender.  Nice player to have on the roster.

Brewer: Brewer is an exceptional athlete and an elite defender.  His problem has always been his outside shooting (due to a childhood accident, he's unable to get his right elbow to the proper inside position).  Brewer came on offensively late in the season and in the playoffs (he made a kinda stunning 43% of his 3-pointers last postseason).  If he can become more of an offensive threat, the Bench Mob will be in great shape.

Korver:  Korver isn't particularly big...or quick...or fast.  Though he tries hard, he's a bona fide defensive liability.  However, like KFC, he does one thing very right and that's shoot the rock.  Coming off his pretty much insane and record-setting 53.6% 3-point performance during the '09-'10 season, his 41.5% last year was a bit of a disappointment...but it's still very damn good.  Korver's role last season was twofold - be the primary scoring option on the bench mob and play shooting guard with the starting unit down the stretch of games.  With Hamilton on board, Korver will likely see his minutes cut and only see spot action late in games.

Gibson:  Gibson plays defense, rebounds the ball and blocks shots like a NBA starter.  Like Brewer, he's a little offensively-challenged, but still manages to score about 12 points per 36-minutes played.  A great guy to have on the team, and making just a little over $1million/year, he's one of the best bargains in the league.

Asik:  If you're a fan of great defense, do yourself a favor and focus on Asik's work on that end of the floor the next time you watch a Bulls' game.  The guy's a beast.  He has exceptional quickness, instincts and quick feet for a 7-footer.  On offense, watch someone else unless you're a solid screen aficionado (he really does set nice screens).


So how are the Bulls going to do this season?  I expect them to be neck and neck with the Heat winning 50-52 of their 66 regular season games.  Look for a rematch with the Heat in the Eastern Conference finals...this time with a different result.

As I said earlier, this team just loves a good surprise.

The New Economic and Competitive NBA Models

Yeah, yeah, I know...I've been a lazy ass.  My bad.

As you've probably heard and read, the NBA and its players finally reached an agreement and are expected to begin their abbreviated 66-game regular season on Christmas Day.

As expected, the owners pretty much routed the players in these negotiations though it would be inaccurate to say that the owners got everything they wanted...they only got most of what they wanted.

I won't bore you with all the details of the new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between the NBA players and owners.  Rather, I want to focus on the highlights and on some of things casual fans might want to know.

The Economics

In the old CBA, the players were guaranteed 57% of "Basketball-Related Income," aka BRI (BRI includes just about anything you can think of from TV/Radio, ticket sales, concessions, parking...you name it).  Both sides knew that 57% was too high given the current economy so the players quickly moved to 54%.  Though the owners initially were looking for a BRI split that would eventually end up with the owners getting something like 61%, this was pretty much silly negotiating posturing.  The owners hardcore number was 53% (47% for the players).  While this is what the owners wanted, it was only relevant if the 2011-12 season had to be cancelled.  As things played out, it became clear that the owners would accept a 50-50 split if the season could be saved.

The ultimate agreement was a BRI split within a band of 49%-51%.  The percentage the players receive depends on whether the league's revenue projection is met (50-50), exceeded (51% for players) or falls short (49% for players).

The agreement on the BRI split doesn't actually change any player's salary, so all players will have a 10% deduction from their paychecks which will be deposited into an escrow account.  To the extent that players salaries exceed the prescribed level, the owners will be able to get the money from the escrow account.  If the total escrow account isn't enough to cover the owners' shortfall, the escrow deduction % will be increased the following year.  In the unlikely event that the players' salaries fall below the prescribed level, the owners must immediately cut a check to the players.

As long as the economy doesn't get any worse, the agreed-upon BRI split should put the league, as a whole, on a profitable footing.  It will then be up to the owners to put an expanded "revenue sharing" program in place that moves sufficient money from the big-market teams to the smaller-market teams to ensure that the league continues to have a financially-viable 30-team league.

In purely financial terms, the new CBA ought to work.

The New Competitive Model

This is where it gets interesting...at least to me.

The old CBA had a "Luxury Tax" (LT) provision that required teams whose payrolls were over a certain level ($70mil in 2011) to pay a dollar-for dollar tax on their excess salary.  The intent was to discourage big-market teams from attempting to gain a competitive advantage simply by grossly outspending the smaller-market teams.  What the league learned was that a dollar-for-dollar tax was little more than a speed bump to teams like the Knicks and the Lakers one bit.  For the 2006-7 season, the Knicks willingly paid $45.1mil in luxury tax alone...nearly as much as some of the smaller-market teams were paying in total salary.

In the new CBA, the owners initially proposed a hard salary cap.  A hard cap is foolproof.  Each team can spend only a set amount on players and that's that.  They moved off the hard cap proposal fairly early in the negotiations and eventually settled for a LT that starts at a higher penalty rate ($1.50 tax for each dollar over the tax limit) with the tax rate going higher for each additional $5mil a team exceeds the tax threshold.  As an example, if a team exceeded the tax level by $45mil like the Knicks did 5 years ago, they'd be forced to come up with a total tax payment of about $147.5mil.  As a late concession to the players the owners agreed to delay this new, more punitive LT system until the 3rd year of the new agreement, so the LT remains only dollar-for dollar for this season and next.

While the season 3 graduated tax system is not a hard cap, the NBA hopes that their graduated financial penalties will effectively "even the playing field" in terms of spending on players.  However, keeping in mind that the reason big-spending teams spend big is to gain a competitive advantage, they've also targeted new "competitive penalties" to LT-paying teams. 

One of the key new competitive penalties involves what is called the Mid-Level Exception (MLE).  In the old CBA, any team over the salary cap was allowed to sign one or more free agents so long as the total first-year salaries of these players didn't exceed the average NBA player's salary ($5.8mil last season).  Using this exception, even teams at the top of the spending list could add very solid players to their rosters each season, and since these high-paying teams were among the most attractive franchises to play for, they usually had first choice among the MLE-type free agents.

In the new CBA, the MLE has been reset to a flat $5mil first-year salary with contracts of up to 4 years in length.  However, for LT-paying teams, the MLE is only $3mil and the contract length can't exceed 3 years.  LT-paying teams will no longer be the destination of choice among MLE free agents.

Another competitive penalty for LT-paying teams is that they can no longer use the "Bi-Annual Exception," which, every other year, allows teams to sign a free agent to a 2-year contract starting at $1.9mil.

LT-paying teams also have more restrictive rules with regard to trades than non-taxpaying teams.

Net, in the new CBA, the NBA learned from their past LT mistakes and is aiming for greater parity by attacking the big spenders on both the financial and competitive fronts. 

Is all of this good for the (NBA) game?

Yeah, I think it is.  Each of the past 5 NBA champions were LT-paying teams.  Fans of smaller-market teams stopped believing that their teams could become legitimate contenders and lost interest.  The changes in the new CBA should, over time, give these disaffected fans new hope. 

This said, the new CBA isn't very "Bulls-friendly."  After years of mediocrity, the Bulls finally have an elite team again.  With center Joakim Noah getting his salary bumped from $2.3mil to $11.3mil this season and reigning MVP Derrick Rose set to be extended for a contract starting at over $17mil next season, they'll have an elite payroll to match. Just when the full penalties of the LT kick in, the Bulls team payroll figures to be at its zenith.


A lot has been made of the fact that the Bulls have never paid so much as one penny of LT.  This fact has been used to support the position that the Bulls (i.e., Jerry Reinsdorf) will never pay any LT.  Don't believe it.  Reinsdorf never paid the LT because until now, he didn't have a team that warranted it.

In the end, if you're a Bulls' fan, I wouldn't worry.  The team will pay what it takes to remain an elite team and ideally to become a champion. 

As an NBA and die-hard Bulls fan, it'll be great to have the games back.

Bears' Briggs is way out of line

In 2008, Bears' Pro Bowl linebacker Lance Briggs tested the NFL free agent market and ultimately re-upped with the Bears for 6 years and $36million.  He's exactly mid-way through this contract.

So why on earth is Briggs, through his agent Drew Rosenhaus, requesting a trade if his earlier request for a new contract is not met?

I suppose the flippant answer is because it never hurts to ask.  Also, if you can get past the noble principle that once you sign a contract you should live up to it, you can understand that, since Briggs will be nearly 34 when his current contract ends, he'd like to improve on the $14.4MM left in what likely will be Briggs' NFL career.

However, the timing of the Briggs/Rosenhaus request is a little baffling.  There's clearly no way that the Bears are going to re-work Briggs' contract at this point...the precedent would be awful.  It's just as clear that Briggs would be foolish to attempt to use his only real leverage, a hold-out, this season...from a purely financial perspective, it's extremely unlikely that he can force the Bears' hand and would simply lose his $3.9MM 2011 salary.

The Bears had a surprisingly successful 2010 season and have had a fairly positive 2011 preseason, avoiding key injuries and somehow shoring up their woeful offensive line without making any major personnel additions.  On paper at least, they're a better team than they were entering last season where they fell only one win short of playing in the Super Bowl.  It's not surprising that many on the team have visions of 2011 glory dancing in their heads.

So Lance/Drew, why now?  Very little positive can come from this trade request, and if you actually decide to withhold your services, you'll not only alienate your teammates (who understandably hope that their comrades can get as much as they can from management as long as it doesn't affect them or the team), but league executives as well (what good is signing a contract with someone who's proven that he won't live up to its terms and will put his own selfish interests ahead of the team).  Even if you continue to play under your contract, you're putting yourself unnecessarily under a media/fan microscope...any minor injury or unproductive game will lead to speculation about whether you're using the playing field as your negotiating table. 

Lance, reality check here.  You're unquestionably a very good player, but not remotely a superstar.  You play weakside linebacker in a defensive system designed to make your position look good, but not to rack up sacks or Sports Center highlights.  What you do very well makes for great defense, but isn't very sexy/lucrative.

Drew, by all accounts, you're one of the better/more reasonable player agents.  You understand that your client didn't sign any sort of "home town discount" deal back in 2008.  It was pure market value...the best you could get.  Since you've represented many Bears' players over the years, you also understand how, once a player hangs up his cleats, a former Bear's popularity can translate into very real money in this major market city.  Chicago fans generally LOVE their former Bears' heroes, and Briggs, a very well-spoken guy, has serious post-career potential.

Unless, of course, you allow him to turn himself into a selfish, Super Bowl-sabotaging villain in Bears fans' minds.  Trust me when I tell you that they won't forget this sort of unprecedented betrayal.  If you let this happen, your client's financial opportunities (and your commissions) in Chicago will end on his last NFL snap.

I sincerely believe that Briggs and Rosenhaus have seriously misjudged and mishandled the situation.  They're out on a pretty tenuous limb and have no one to blame but themselves.  Had they had been more patient and private, just between Briggs/Rosenhaus and the Bears brass, they might have gotten something positive accomplished in 2012.  Unfortunately, they put themselves and the Bears in a lose-lose situation.

While some irrevocable damage may have already been done, my advice is for Briggs to publicly "clarify" his stance quickly stating that his agent's attempt to better his lot will have no effect on his play this season.

As a general rule, no matter how far down that wrong road you may go down, the sooner you turn back the better.  Lance/Drew, it's time to try to turn back.

Bears Handing Out Second Chances

When Bears' General Manager Jerry Angelo traded for franchise QB Jay Cutler, he had to give up two future first round draft choices.  In a decidedly left-handed compliment, many fans praised the move in part because as they saw it, "Angelo doesn't know what to do with first-round picks anyway."

In the recently-completed free agent free-for-all, Angelo re-stocked the team's first-round stream, signing 4 former #1s to free agent contracts.  That's the good news.  The bad news is that each of these players is, to varying degrees, considered a disappointment to this point in his career.  Let's meet the Bears' "Hell Bent for Redemption" 2011 free agent class.

Roy Williams WR 6-3 215lbs - 7th overall pick in the 2004 NFL draft

In truth, this is a third chance for Williams.  He got off to a solid start with Detroit, averaging over 60 catches per year in his first 4 seasons and being selected for the 2006 Pro Bowl team.  In 2008, the Calvin Johnson took over Williams' role as the Lions "go-to guy" and Detroit traded Williams in mid-season to the Cowboys for a first-round pick and 3 later-round selections.

Williams' 2 1/2 seasons in Dallas were very disappointing.  Williams never caught more than 38 passes and gained a reputation as a receiver who couldn't (or wouldn't) make the big catch in traffic...some said he had a bad case of "alligator arms."  It probably didn't help his popularity that, despite his lack of production with the Cowboys, Williams confidence/cockiness never wavered.

Williams reportedly signed a one-year $1.5million contract with the Bears.  Frankly, this is dirt cheap for a player of Williams' talent.  It's clear that Williams is placing a bet on himself and hoping that being re-united with Bears' Offensive Coordinator Mike Martz, who he worked under during his best years with the Lions, will put his career back on the rails.

Chris Spencer C 6-3 309lbs - 26th overall pick in the 2005 NFL draft

Bears' longtime alpha male center Olin Kreutz is out and Spencer is in.  Centers aren't often taken in the first round and Angelo's right hand man Tim Ruskell, then the GM of the Seahawks, is the man responsible for giving Spencer this distinction.  To be fair to Spencer, he's only a disappointment relative to where he was drafted.  He's a good player and is a better fit for Martz's offense which values size and strength on the offensive line over speed and quickness.

Spencer reportedly signed a two-year $6million contract...pretty good money for an NFL center.  Despite some early training camp talk that guard Roberto Garza may move over to start center, I don't believe it for a minute.  Spencer's the guy.

Amobi Okoye DT 6-2 292lbs - 10th overall pick in the 2007 NFL draft

Okoye was only 19 when Houston drafted him.  The Texans play a 3-4 defense so they lined Okoye up at nose tackle.  In today's NFL, there aren't many successful nose tackles who weigh in under 300 pounds and Okoye wasn't the dominant force inside that the Texans had hoped.  Coming out of college, many scouts compared Okoye to former Bear Pro-Bowler Tommie Harris because of his size and explosive quickness.  The Bears hope that he'll flourish in the Bears' 4-3 defensive scheme and specifically at Harris's "3 technique" tackle position.

Of all the Bears' free agent signings, I'm most intrigued by Okoye.  Okoye signed a one-year deal (amount undisclosed) so like Roy Williams, he's betting on himself.  He's also betting on the expectation that, unlike Houston, the Bears will put him in a better position to succeed.  He's talented, motivated and by all reports, a hard worker.  Despite the fact that he has 4 NFL seasons under his belt, he just turned 24.  Keep an eye on this kid.

Vernon Gholston DE 6-3 262 - 6th overall pick in the 2008 NFL draft

Coming out of Ohio State where he starred at defensive end, Gholston simply blew the scouts away at the Indianapolis combine.  Speed, quickness, strength, you name it...Gholston's marks were off the charts.  The Jets picked him to be a featured player in new coach Rex Ryan's attacking defense, moving him from defensive end to outside linebacker.  Visions of Lawrence Taylor danced in Jets fans' heads.

Whether it was the change of position, the transition from college to the pros or something within him, Gholston was remarkably unproductive in New York.  The New York press labeled him one of the most spectacular "busts" in NFL history and while they can be accused of being a little quick on the trigger (he's only played 3 seasons), the numbers don't lie...no sacks in 3 years.

Gholston's picture tops this article.  The old line about a guy who "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" unfortunately comes to mind.  

Still, the Jets' Ryan was complimentary of Gholston's coachability and progress, "The guy is an excellent teammate. He did what was asked and he got better."  When asked about Gholston's low production, Ryan said, "Well, then I failed as far as the numbers go...but I thought he got better. We'll see what happens to him. He's not done playing"

Like Okoye, the Bears are hoping that the combination of a change of position (he'll have his hand on the ground with the Bears), the tutelage of Defensive Coordinator Rod Marinelli (great reputation working with defensive linemen) and a change of scenery will bring out the best in Gholston.

Gholston is yet another one of the once-highly-touted Bears' free agent signees who agreed to a one-year deal (amount undisclosed).  Like Okoye, he's a low-risk/high-reward proposition.

Other Bears' Free Agent Signees

The Bears didn't limit themselves to signing other teams' former first round picks.  For starters, they re-signed several of their own free agents, including DT Anthony Adams, outside linebacker Nick Roach who figures to start alongside stud LBs Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs and center-guard Edwin Williams.

To add depth to the running back position, the Bears signed former Cowboys' RB Marion Barber.  A 4th round pick in 2005, the 5-11 221lb Barber is a tough inside runner who has had two 900+ yard seasons in his 6 years in the league.  He signed a two-year $5million deal and figures to be used in short-yardage situations while providing solid insurance in the event starter Matt Forte gets injured.

Last offseason, Martz told Angelo that his offense needed a big block-first tight end so they signed the genuinely massive 6-2 288lb Brandon Manumaleuna.  As advertised, Manumaleuna wasn't much of a receiving option, but unfortunately he also wasn't much of a blocker.  Martz got a do-over and this time the Bears went with the Steelers' Matt Spaeth.  At 6-7 270lbs, Spaeth is also a block-first TE, but provides a bigger target and more speed than the failed Manumaleuna.

On special teams, the Bears told longtime punter Brad Maynard to take a hike and signed Jets punter Adam Podlesh.  Rather than giving you a rundown on Podlesh, I'll let highly-respected Bears' Special Teams Coach Dave Toub handle the honors.

"Podlesh was always our No. 1 guy," Toub said. "He was always our No. 1 guy. He's the guy we targeted early way back. We were so happy to get him. As soon as we were able to call him, we tried to recruit him just like we were in college again. He fits us. He's very athletic, he runs a 4.4 [40 yard dash], he's got a great hands, he's a directional punter. He's a young Brad Maynard is what he is. He's reaching his prime right now. Again, we're very happy and pleased to have him in the mix."

Not sure what I can add other than that I was a Maynard fan and Toub better be right.

The Bears also let longtime special team stalwart Rashied Davis sign with Detroit and signed the Cowboys special teams captain and sometimes WR Sam Hurd.  Again, I'll turn it over to Toub.

"We targeted Hurd during the offseason as a guy we would try to get no matter what as a free agent," Toub said.  "He's an excellent special teams player. He's going to bring a lot to the table for us."

On this one I completely agree with Toub.  Davis was a good player, but Hurd is better.

Frankly, I think every single free agent signing the Bears made this offseason makes sense on some level.  Williams, Barber, Spaeth and Hurd are clear upgrades.  Much as I respect Kreutz, I think that right now, Spencer's a better player and better suited to the Martz offense.  Okoye and Gholston are fun gambles because they're both cheap...neither is expected to play a key role.

With all this said, a big part of the Bears' free agent story isn't what they did, but what they didn't do...specifically, other than the Spencer-for-Kreutz change that many feel is a net negative, they didn't bring anyone in to help shore up the 2010 team's glaring weakness on the offensive line (though I guess you could say Spaeth gets half credit).  Williams and Barber are fine offensive additions, but they won't matter much if Cutler spends another season on his back, and they certainly won't matter if Cutler gets broken and the team's fortunes depend on backup QB Caleb Hanie.

The only meaningful addition to the O-line is first-round tackle Gabe Carimi.  Right now, the depth chart has 2011 7th-round pick J'Marcus Webb as the starting LT, the most important position on the offensive line when it comes to the prospective health of a team's QB.  I understand that Martz and offensive line coach Mike Tice are high on Webb and they know a whole lot more about football than I do, but I'd be less than honest if I didn't say that I remain nervous about LT and Cutler's health.  I'm not worried about Spencer at center and I remain a fan of Garza at guard.  Carimi may have some growing pains, but I like him at right tackle.

The other guard is an issue.  Chris Williams, the Bears former first-round pick and failed LT of the future is now a reclamation project at guard.  One of what I felt were the defining moments of the 2010 season for Williams was when the overrated/underachieving Albert Haynesworth of the Redskins flat-out freight-trained Williams like he wasn't there and destroyed poor little Cutler.  Forget being a highly-touted first-round tackle...if Williams can't be a competent guard, Tice needs to replace him with a mediocre journeyman like Omiyale.

The weakness of the O-line remains the "elephant in the room" for this Bears' team.

If the Bears were making a meal, I'd praise them for their eye for value in terms of the side dishes and agree that those side dishes could be spectacular.  My problem is with the main course whose success depends on the quality of their iffy offensive line.

It seems that they're confident in their meal.

The proof is in the tasting.

NBA Lockout

In a few days, the NBA is going to lock out its players.  It's pretty much inevitable.

You're going to hear and read all sorts of rhetoric from the two sides and from media members who don't really "get it."  They'll try to make this a "good guys-bad guys" thing and it's anything but. 

As Michael Corleone said, "It's not personal, Sonny...it's strictly business."

It's my hope here to take the saber-rattling out of this situation and give you a clearer idea of what's truly going on.  Warning: this isn't really about sports, but the basic business dynamics don't require an MBA (come to think of it, I've never found anything that requires an MBA...but I digress).

Finance 101

You'll hear it said that "the NBA is making money," which is both true and completely irrelevant.  The NBA is a league and it doesn't make anything.  If you want to know the financial health of the NBA, you have to ask the profit or loss question 30 times...once each for the 30 actual businesses/teams that make up the NBA. 

Obviously, every business would like to make a profit, but depending on their situation, this can be difficult if such "hidden expenses" like interest on debt and the amortization/depreciation of assets are high.  A business could be reasonably healthy, but because of these expenses, may show a loss.  This is one of the reasons why accountants and financial types keep track of "operating income."  Operating income excludes these hidden expenses leaving a purer picture of revenue less operating expenses.

If you're running at an operating loss, it pretty much means that what you're paying to make your widgets is more than what you can sell them for...not good.

According to Forbes magazine, in 2010 twelve of the NBA's 30 teams posted an operating loss.  That's 40% of the teams in the league and that's a decidedly bad thing.  However, in my opinion, it's not quite that bad since 2 of the 12 operational losers have purely self-inflicted wounds.  The Portland Trailblazers (owner is Microsoft co-founder and noted philanthropist, Paul Allen) and Dallas Mavericks (owner is Mark Cuban, who probably bought the team because of it's name) both spend on players' salaries like they're mega-market teams though they clearly are not.  Put another way, they're irresponsible, but can afford to be.  Oh yeah...Cuban was rewarded for his fiscal irresponsibility with an NBA title this season.

Mismanaged or Just Mid-Market?

You'll likely hear that a big part of the problem in the NBA is that too many franchises are mismanaged.  I don't know if they are or aren't.  However, it's pretty obvious that, if you're the New York Knicks, Chicago Bulls or the LA Lakers, you can charge a lot more for your tickets than if you're the New Orleans Hornets, Sacramento Kings or Milwaukee Bucks.  Even more important, big market teams can make several times what mid-market teams can make in local TV and radio contracts.

It's not a level playing field.

Still, some mid-market teams made money in 2010.  Perhaps the most notable was the Oklahoma City Thunder who posted a remarkable operating income of $12.5MM.  The Thunder is the city's only big league franchise...ever.  In baseball terms, they're strictly Triple-A.  However, when the New Orleans Hornets needed an alternative place to play due to Hurricane Katrina, OKC was chosen and the city received the NBA so enthusiastically that the league helped engineer the move of the struggling Seattle Supersonics franchise to OKC. 

The Thunder inherited a young superstar named Kevin Durant who was joined by star-in-his-own-right point guard Russell Westbrook in 2008.  The Thunder's front office has done a very good job of building around their nucleus and the team has been exciting and very successful on the court.

Some will point to the Thunder as an example of a mid-market team that has done it the "right way."  While I give credit to the Thunder, for the 2009-10 season, they paid Durant and Westbrook a combined $8.6MM.  Durant alone will jump to $13.6MM in 2011-12 and Westbrook will soon follow that same path.

Good-bye OKC operating income.

The Crux of the Matter

Based on the current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the NBA players and owners, only about 20 of the current teams can be expected to break even or better in terms of operating income.  In the simplest terms, this means that either the league needs to eliminate "fringe" franchises or significantly change the CBA...ideally by enough to make the current 30 teams viable.

The truth is that neither the owners nor the players want contraction.  For the owners, contraction's a bad idea for two reasons - 1) having 30 significant media markets included enhances their leverage in terms of the national TV contracts and 2) having these markets in the fold minimizes the chances of the formation of a rival league.  While rival leagues seldom succeed for long, they always seem to do two things while they live - raid a couple of your superstars and generally increase players' salaries.

The players, particularly the non-stars, don't want contraction for the most obvious of reasons...fewer job opportunities.

From the owners' perspective, this is where the argument ends.  Contraction or making the CBA more mid-market-friendly.  In the soon-to-commence public relations war, the players and their representatives will seek to add a 3rd alternative...increased revenue sharing.

NBA Revenue Sharing

As I mentioned at the beginning of this article, when taken in total, the NBA is profitable.  The players, while acknowledging the financial problems of the smaller market teams, will claim that the dollars are there...they just need to be distributed more equally.

At first hearing, this may sound good, but it's an absolute non-starter from the owners perspective, and any reasonable business perspective.  If you just bought a mega-market NBA franchise and paid the huge premium for the privilege, you are going to have a very serious and completely reasonable problem if someone tries to cut the (large) anticipated revenue stream that was used to set your purchase price.  You'll also scream bloody murder over the fact that a significant change to the revenue sharing rules would cause the asset you just paid $500MM for to be reduced to $300MM.

When it comes to revenue sharing, it's one of those situations where you simply can't change the rules in the middle of a game.


So What's Next?

The owners pretty much laid their cards on the table when they introduced their $62MM "Flex Cap" proposal.  If the union doesn't accept this in the next few days, the owners may go back to their silly posturing about a $45MM "hard cap" and the elimination of guaranteed contracts.

The problem here is that the owners' Flex Cap proposal may be close to their best offer (though the owners very purposely left key final details open to negotiation).  The union treated the owners proposal like a posturing move (that is, they crapped all over it).  It's possible that the players' representatives made a tactical error here that may cost both sides time and money only to have them end up in the same place they could be right now.

At the risk of repeating myself, the key point is that the owners are determined to come away with a CBA that works for 30 teams, not the current 20 teams who are or could be (if not for owner largesse) in the black in terms of operating income.

The players don't want to give up what they have and this is understandable.  However, if they aren't ready to accept something very close to the owners' Flex cap proposal, the 2011-12 NBA season is unquestionably in jeopardy.

As fans, we're definitely on the outside looking in, but I hope that this helps you be a better consumer of the stuff that the media's about to throw at you.

Bulls Draft: Smart, Not Spectacular

In a typical NBA draft, there are about 15 or so players who will stay in the league longer than 5 years.  Only a handful will become impact players.

By all accounts, the 2011 draft class was an exceptionally weak one.

So if you're the Bulls and you come in with the  28th, 30th and 43rd picks, you're expectations should be adjusted accordingly.  The Bulls didn't find their shooting guard of the future, but then again, they didn't expect to.

Having established themselves as legitimate title contenders, the Bulls entered the draft with a dream and a plan.  The dream was that they could somehow use their picks and a non-rotation player or two in a trade that would net them a shooting guard like the Grizzlies' O.J. Mayo or Houston's Courtney Lee, both players for whom the Bulls showed interest at the February trade deadline.  It didn't happen in February and it didn't happen on Draft Night.

Since the dream didn't materialize, Bulls management moved quickly on their plan.  Though they had 3 picks, Bulls' General Manager Gar Forman made it clear that they wanted no more than 2 rookies on their roster.  The truth is that they preferred zero or one, leaving more room for veterans who could help the team immediately.  Though their dream didn't come true, they executed their plan very nicely.

Nikola Mirotic

First, they traded their #28 and #43 picks for the Minnesota Timberwolves' 23rd overall pick.  With that pick, they selected 20 year-old Montenegro-born power forward Nikola Mirotic.  The 6-10 power forward has two things the Bulls really like.  First, he's got talent...loads of it.  Second, because of his contract obligations playing for the prestigious Real Madrid team, he won't be available for at least two years, saving the Bulls a roster spot.  According to DraftExpress.com, for my money the foremost published source for talent evaluations of NBA prospects, "Chicago just drafted the 7th most talented player in the draft with the #23 pick."  Most scouts I've read agree and feel that Mirotic would have been a top-10 selection if not for his contract commitments.  The truth is that the Bulls are more than happy to have Mirotic develop his game overseas where he can get much more game action against quality competition.

While those fans whose only form of gratification is the immediate variety will be disappointed that they'll have to wait to see Mirotic in a Bulls' uniform, for Bulls' management, this was Christmas in June.

Jimmy Butler

At #30 the Bulls selected 6-8 Marquette swingman (shooting guard/small forward) Jimmy Butler. Butler's life story would be made into a movie except it already was.  If you saw "The Blindside," just substitute Butler for Baltimore Ravens offensive tackle Michael Oher and switch from the gridiron to to the hardwood and the stories are virtually identical.  Suffice it to say that if it's true that it's not what you achieve, but what you overcome that matters most, this kid's character is off the charts.

Character is great and all, but can the young man ball?  Playing in the tough, tough Big East Conference last season, Butler averaged 16 points and 6 rebounds per game while shooting 49% from the field and 35% from the 3-point arc.  Good numbers.  And before you go thinking that Butler is one of those productive college players who lack the athleticism for the NBA, be advised that he posted a 39-inch vertical leap at the combine, just an inch short of what Derrick Rose did. The two words most often associated with Butler are versatility and defense...good words.

While it's always a longshot for a 30th pick to make it in the NBA, Jimmy Butler's overcome much worse.


It's not surprising that few fans are doing cartwheels over the Bulls' draft.  Still, I think the Bulls did a great job of executing their pre-draft plan and for this deserve at least polite applause.

NBA Proposal - A Hard Cap by Any Other Name

NBA Commissioner David Stern and the NBA owners got down to business yesterday.  They jumped off their kind of silly saber-rattling initial proposal (a $45million hard cap and the end of guaranteed-contracts) and unveiled what they're really looking for.

The current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the league and the players includes a "soft" salary cap that is set at 51% of league basketball-related income divided by 30 teams.  For the 2010-11 season, the team salary cap was just over $58million.  However, the current CBA contains several "exceptions" which allow teams to exceed the cap.  This is why it gets its "soft" designation.  The fact is that only about 1/3 of the teams in the league are actually at or under the current cap and teams like the Los Angeles Lakers and Orlando Magic have payrolls of around $90million.  So yes, it can often be a very soft cap.

What the owners proposed is something they're calling a "flex cap" which is ironic because its revolutionary feature (for the NBA) is that it is in fact a hard cap design.  In essence, the owners' proposal would retain its main salary cap and would even increase it to $62million.  They would also retain the key salary cap exceptions including the "Larry Bird" exception (allows a team to go over the cap to sign its own player) and the "Mid-Level" exception, or MLE (allows a team that's over the cap to sign one or more free agent players so long as the total salary added doesn't exceed the league's average salary, currently around $5million).  Sounds reasonable so far.

The Catch

The owners proposal was for a yet-to-be-negotiated minimum team salary and a maximum team salary.  It's the maximum team salary that is controversial because, as the owners presented it, none of the exceptions that allow teams to exceed the salary cap figure would apply when it comes to the maximum team salary, that is, the maximum team salary is the hard cap.

Cleverly, the owners didn't propose the upper and lower bands of their proposal.  Essentially, they've told the players that "once you buy into our overall design, we can be somewhat flexible about the actual numbers."  The problem is that the players have said that they'll never accept a hard cap and correctly see that this is exactly what the owners have proposed.

The Philosophy of a Hard Cap

Most fans view a hard salary cap as a way for the owners to control overall player salary costs.  However, the truth is that the NBA has a very effective control of overall player salaries built in to the current CBA.  The players' salaries are guaranteed not to exceed 57% of revenues.  An 8% deduction is taken from each player's salary and put into an escrow account.  If player salaries exceed the 57%, the owners receive the overage from this escrow account, and if the total escrow account is insufficient, player salary deductions are increased the following season.

So why a hard cap?  Why not just fiddle with the 57% figure?  Good question and it's exactly the question the players are asking.  The reason is that, for the NBA, the hard cap is about enhancing competition (or "parity"), not cost control.  The current CBA includes a "Luxury Tax" provision that sets the tax level at 61% of basketball-related income (divided by 30 teams).  Last year the tax trigger was about $70million, or $12million over the salary cap.  For each dollar a team exceeds the $70million level, that team must pay a dollar of tax.  After the season, the tax pool is divided among the teams that did not have to pay the tax.

The plain truth is that the Luxury Tax has been a failure.  For the 2010-11 season, 7 teams exceeded the tax trigger point.  The combined record of these 7 teams was 352-242 and only one of them had a losing record (Utah Jazz at 39-43).  Once again, the league champion was among the Luxury Tax teams (Dallas Mavericks at $86.6million).

By insisting on an absolute maximum salary, the league hopes that their mid-market teams like the Sacramento Kings, Minnesota Timberwolves and Cleveland Cavaliers will be better able to compete with their big-market brothers and that this will open the road to their financial health.

Hard Cap Not All the Owners Want

Sort of lost in all the talk about the owners' hard cap/flex cap proposal is that they also want a 50%-50% revenue split with the players.  As mentioned, the players currently receive 57%.  This is hardly an insignificant aspect of the owners' proposal and may actually be more important to the owners than the hard cap since, in the end, virtually all labor negotiations are about how the revenue pie is split.

Unfortunately for fans, this situation is looking very similar to the NHL negotiations of a few years ago.  In that case, the owners insisted on both a bigger piece of the pie and a hard cap.  The players said they were flexible on the revenue split, but would never accept the hard cap. 

The entire 2004-05 NHL season was lost.