I'll be honest- I didn't really expect the Bulls to win the East. That doesn't mean that, as a fan, I wasn't rooting for D-Rose and the boys in red, but everyone knew Miami was going to be damn near impossible to beat in a seven game series.
That aside, there's just one word that comes to mind when I think about the Bull's performance: disappointing. You'd think a team that has the NBA MVP and couple of other nice pieces would be able to put up a fight, and at least hold on to a 12 point lead late in the fourth quarter.
The Bull's struggles in this series came down to one factor: lack of a true shooting guard. With all respect to my Iowa boy Kyle Korver, the Bull's line for all guards not named Derek Rose was pathetic. The Korver/Brewer/Watson/Bogans collective managed just 94 points combined in the series (Derek Rose had 117 alone). You're talking a measly 18.8 ppg out of a position that should be getting at least that just from the starter.
In fact, the four man combo matched the output of the struggling Dwayne Wade (94 points). If you want to know why the Bulls lost this series- that's it.
It's not just the lack of points that killed the Bulls in this scenario. The bigger issue is it allowed LeBron James to guard Derek Rose, and The King killed it on defense. You put another scoring threat on the floor, and you can't afford the huge mismatch that's going to be happening somewhere on the court. James can't play out of position defensively and give up major points somewhere else, and Rose draws a much more favorable defensive assignment (did you see how many awful shots he took in the fourth quarters of games 4/5?).
So what's the answer? Lets evaluate the options, taking into account the likely scenario that the salary cap will be moving down in the coming seasons with the re-negotiation of the collective bargaining agreement. We'll also assume the owners will impose a hard cap (see previous post), and for the sake of argument we'll call it $50-$55 million.
As of today, the Bulls have right around $61 million committed to 10 players next season, bringing back every major piece of this year's team, and right around $49 million committed to 5 players in 2012-13, with team options on CJ Watson ($3.7 million) and Taj Gibson ($2.2 million), and a qualifying offer to Derek Rose of just over $9 million (which I'd assume he'd meet). That puts the Bulls right above our proposed cap line, but with good news. You're going to have to clear out salary and roster space to bring in a new player anyway, so it's not an awful scenario.
So the options are: trade, free agent, or draft. Lets start with draft, the most cost effective scenario. Assuming Bulls fans want to win now, this year's draft is the place to look. The Bulls will have two late first round picks, one at #28 and the other at #30. There aren't a ton of sexy names in this year's draft that would suit the Bull's needs- this year's draft class is not particularly deep at any position, especially shooting guard. Alec Burks (Colorado) will likely be gone, and Marshon Brooks (Providence) and Klay Thompson (Washington State) aren't slam dunk stars either. Brooks is considered to be one of the top overall athletes in the draft, and has the ability to score, but there needs improve his 3-point shot. Nolan Smith (Duke) is a bubble first round type guy that has proven he can win, so he might be an option at the #30 pick.
Another interesting prospect to keep an eye on is Tyler Honeycutt (UCLA). He doesn't fit the typical mold for a shooting guard- he's more of a combo G/F player, but would compliment Luol Deng nicely in the Bull's current system. If he's around at pick #28, the Bulls might jump on him. One downside, at the NBA draft combine, Honeycutt couldn't bench press a 185-pound bar a single time. Kind of a head scratcher for a college athlete.
There's always the option to trade up in the draft (less likely in the NBA), but with a relatively thin draft already, I'm not sure you'd gain much. There are really only considered to be two "can't miss" type prospects this year (Kyrie Irving and Derrick Williams), and after that you get a bunch of international players and some risky-types.
One fun one to throw out- Jimmer Fredette. While I don't see the Bulls trading up the board to land the Jimmer, most see him as a "come off the bench and score a ton of points" type- ala Ben Gordon, and he's been turning heads with his defensive ability leading up to the draft. Probably not going to happen, but fun to think about.
More trade and free agent scenarios coming your way later...
The clock is running, and as of now we are officially keeping score.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Jesup High School Football: Coach Bruce Wall vs. the School Board
There's trouble brewing in the small Iowa town of Jesup. And it involves one of small-town Iowa's favorite past-times: high school football.
In most towns the size of Jesup (2122 in 2000), the only buzz on high school football is on Friday nights in the fall - the old men in the barbershop, the cheerleaders in the hallways at the high school, and the groundskeepers painting fresh lines on the field. In the Jesup, and ugly battle between the former head coach and the school board has spilled over, finding its way to the Iowa Supreme Court, and capturing the attention of football fans across the state.
In April of 2009, Head Coach Bruce Wall was served a notice of termination of his football coaching contract. The notice cited five reasons:
- Ineffective program leadership
- Failure to maintain student interest and participation in the program
- Ineffective team discipline
- Lack of effective communication with assistant coaches
- Failure to maintain an effective relationship with students and parents
(Board of Directors of Jesup School District vs. Bruce Wall)
Wall responded by requesting a hearing in front of the school board, at which time they threw out two of the reasons (ineffective team discipline and lack of communication with coaching staff), but upheld that the superintendent had met her burden to show grounds for termination.
Determined to win the war, Wall sought a review with an adjudicator, who reversed the school board's decision, finding there was not sufficient evidence for termination. The school board retaliated by seeking judicial review in and Iowa District Court, who reversed the decision of the adjudicator. Wall fired back by appealing to the Iowa Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals found in Wall's favor in a 2-1 split decision. Now, after a unanimous vote (7-0) taken Monday night, the school board is asking that the Iowa Supreme Court rule at the case.
How could it come to this? A small town of 2122 people finds themselves in front of the Supreme Court, arguing over a game- one that is close to the heart of every small town Iowan. As if it's not bad enough to live through legal nightmares at a college and professional level, now it's found its way to the high school level.
How could it come to this? To understand, we have to take a trip back in time to the year 2000...
Bruce Wall's first season at the helm saw Jesup go 1-8. In year two, he improved to 4-5. In the next several years, Jesup went 6-3 in 2002, 8-2 in 2003 (including a playoff game), 5-4 in 2004, 1-8 in 2005 and 2006, and 0-9 in 2007 and 2008.
The wheels started to come off in 2006. Following a blowout loss to Hudson (54-0), the AD initiated a meeting with the school's principle to discuss the football program. The two agreed the program was no longer competitive, and needed to improve. After the season, the principle contacted Wall, and asked him an important question: What have you done to try and improve our team? The principle also noted there should be a mandatory weight program during the off-season (a violation of IAHSAA rules), encouraging athletes to participate in other sports (track, etc.), and starting a flag-football program for 3rd-4th graders.
Wall responded by saying his career record at Jesup translated into a 40.8% winning percentage, up from 35.8% prior to his arrival. He had also ran a flag football team for four years (2000-04), but had no luck getting support from parents in the community. He also proposed a new points system, "Football Off-Season Expectations," that included incentives for lifting weights, speed training, and academic success. Wall also pointed out a mandatory off-season lifting program was illegal per IAHSAA rules.
All was quiet for the next two seasons.
An important note- through the end of the 2008 season, Wall had never received a formal coaching evaluation in person or in writing. That's when the timeline really speeds up:
November 3, 2008 - The principal and AD ask Wall to resign as head football coach, Wall says no
February 27, 2009- Wall receives a formal written evaluation
April 24, 2009- Wall receives his notice of termination
There are a couple of problems here- Last time I checked, there is no football season between February and April. Sounds to me like they tried to throw the paperwork together at the last minute, and didn't give coach much of a chance to fix anything. Call this mistake #1.
Mistake #2 came when you made violating the rules a requirement to keep his job. By making coach set up a mandatory weight lifting program, you are asking him to violate IAHSAA rules. Make no mistake, Coach Wall did try his best. In the majority opinion in Board of Directors of The Jesup Community School District vs. Bruce Wall, Judge P.J. Eisenhauer cited the athletic director as saying:
"...you know, (Wall) opened the weight room. He would get - I know one season he was running out - he would pick up kids and bring them in to lift in the mornings because they didn't have a ride in..."
Sounds like coach was trying to get kids motivated. Eisenhauer goes on to point out that Wall,
"...tried to talk to parents. I know he talked to one. The kid would show up for maybe a week, and then he wouldn't come anymore..."
The Court of Appeals voted 2-1 to reverse the firing and reinstate Wall. The dissenting opinion, written by Judge JJ Tabor, basically says that firing a coach based on their win loss record fits within the school district's goals and objectives for the program.
You can find the complete opinion here:
http://www.iowacourts.gov/court_of_appeals/Recent_Opinions/20110427/1-106.pdf?search=jesup+community+school#_1
It sucks that a small town has to fall under the dark umbrella of an ugly court case surrounding such an great past time. But in this case, Bruce Wall may be in the right- I certainly feel for him. We'll discuss this issue in depth on tonight's KXNO Prep Report from 6-7 PM. Podcast should be available tomorrow.
In a case like this, someone wins, but the entire town may lose.
The clock is running, and as of now we are officially keeping score.
In most towns the size of Jesup (2122 in 2000), the only buzz on high school football is on Friday nights in the fall - the old men in the barbershop, the cheerleaders in the hallways at the high school, and the groundskeepers painting fresh lines on the field. In the Jesup, and ugly battle between the former head coach and the school board has spilled over, finding its way to the Iowa Supreme Court, and capturing the attention of football fans across the state.
In April of 2009, Head Coach Bruce Wall was served a notice of termination of his football coaching contract. The notice cited five reasons:
- Ineffective program leadership
- Failure to maintain student interest and participation in the program
- Ineffective team discipline
- Lack of effective communication with assistant coaches
- Failure to maintain an effective relationship with students and parents
(Board of Directors of Jesup School District vs. Bruce Wall)
Wall responded by requesting a hearing in front of the school board, at which time they threw out two of the reasons (ineffective team discipline and lack of communication with coaching staff), but upheld that the superintendent had met her burden to show grounds for termination.
Determined to win the war, Wall sought a review with an adjudicator, who reversed the school board's decision, finding there was not sufficient evidence for termination. The school board retaliated by seeking judicial review in and Iowa District Court, who reversed the decision of the adjudicator. Wall fired back by appealing to the Iowa Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals found in Wall's favor in a 2-1 split decision. Now, after a unanimous vote (7-0) taken Monday night, the school board is asking that the Iowa Supreme Court rule at the case.
How could it come to this? A small town of 2122 people finds themselves in front of the Supreme Court, arguing over a game- one that is close to the heart of every small town Iowan. As if it's not bad enough to live through legal nightmares at a college and professional level, now it's found its way to the high school level.
How could it come to this? To understand, we have to take a trip back in time to the year 2000...
Bruce Wall's first season at the helm saw Jesup go 1-8. In year two, he improved to 4-5. In the next several years, Jesup went 6-3 in 2002, 8-2 in 2003 (including a playoff game), 5-4 in 2004, 1-8 in 2005 and 2006, and 0-9 in 2007 and 2008.
The wheels started to come off in 2006. Following a blowout loss to Hudson (54-0), the AD initiated a meeting with the school's principle to discuss the football program. The two agreed the program was no longer competitive, and needed to improve. After the season, the principle contacted Wall, and asked him an important question: What have you done to try and improve our team? The principle also noted there should be a mandatory weight program during the off-season (a violation of IAHSAA rules), encouraging athletes to participate in other sports (track, etc.), and starting a flag-football program for 3rd-4th graders.
Wall responded by saying his career record at Jesup translated into a 40.8% winning percentage, up from 35.8% prior to his arrival. He had also ran a flag football team for four years (2000-04), but had no luck getting support from parents in the community. He also proposed a new points system, "Football Off-Season Expectations," that included incentives for lifting weights, speed training, and academic success. Wall also pointed out a mandatory off-season lifting program was illegal per IAHSAA rules.
All was quiet for the next two seasons.
An important note- through the end of the 2008 season, Wall had never received a formal coaching evaluation in person or in writing. That's when the timeline really speeds up:
November 3, 2008 - The principal and AD ask Wall to resign as head football coach, Wall says no
February 27, 2009- Wall receives a formal written evaluation
April 24, 2009- Wall receives his notice of termination
There are a couple of problems here- Last time I checked, there is no football season between February and April. Sounds to me like they tried to throw the paperwork together at the last minute, and didn't give coach much of a chance to fix anything. Call this mistake #1.
Mistake #2 came when you made violating the rules a requirement to keep his job. By making coach set up a mandatory weight lifting program, you are asking him to violate IAHSAA rules. Make no mistake, Coach Wall did try his best. In the majority opinion in Board of Directors of The Jesup Community School District vs. Bruce Wall, Judge P.J. Eisenhauer cited the athletic director as saying:
"...you know, (Wall) opened the weight room. He would get - I know one season he was running out - he would pick up kids and bring them in to lift in the mornings because they didn't have a ride in..."
Sounds like coach was trying to get kids motivated. Eisenhauer goes on to point out that Wall,
"...tried to talk to parents. I know he talked to one. The kid would show up for maybe a week, and then he wouldn't come anymore..."
The Court of Appeals voted 2-1 to reverse the firing and reinstate Wall. The dissenting opinion, written by Judge JJ Tabor, basically says that firing a coach based on their win loss record fits within the school district's goals and objectives for the program.
You can find the complete opinion here:
http://www.iowacourts.gov/court_of_appeals/Recent_Opinions/20110427/1-106.pdf?search=jesup+community+school#_1
It sucks that a small town has to fall under the dark umbrella of an ugly court case surrounding such an great past time. But in this case, Bruce Wall may be in the right- I certainly feel for him. We'll discuss this issue in depth on tonight's KXNO Prep Report from 6-7 PM. Podcast should be available tomorrow.
In a case like this, someone wins, but the entire town may lose.
The clock is running, and as of now we are officially keeping score.
Why the NBA can't afford a lockout
Take a lesson from Major League Baseball- when you're on top, don't lockout. It took 2 players, 136 home runs in one year, and a hell of a lot of steroids to get people out to the ballpark again. How many points do you think LeBron James will have to score a game to save pro hoops?
While the NFL lockout story is still being written, the NBA is on the verge of making the same mistake. The players recently threw out the latest proposal by the league, in opposition to the proposed hard salary cap and new contract restrictions.
Here's the skinny- the league currently operates with a $58 million per franchise salary cap. Once the teams hit $70.3 million, they start paying a dollar-for-dollar luxury tax. The league is standing hard, saying they need to cut player salaries by an estimated $800 million annually.
The new proposal calls for a hard salary ceiling (no more cap with luxury tax situation) by the 2013-2014 season, with rollbacks over the next three years. If you do the math (and this won't be an exact science, not taking other factors into account), the league currently spends around $1.8 billion in salaries, with a desire to drop to around $1 billion. That would put an effective hard cap of around $35 million per team.
While there are a ton of other factors, the league is still asking for a major reduction in pay- an average of over $25 million per team. The league also wants a lower rookie pay scale, and a "star player" tag, giving teams more lee-way to negotiate with one top level talent.
The players, led by LA Laker point guard Derek Fisher, say a hard salary cap isn't in their game plan. While the league insists everyone will make more money, and everyone will be more competitive, the bottom line is the players will take a major pay cut. Who would want that?
Add the fact that there will be no more "Big 3" situations like we have in Miami and Boston (unless someone takes a major cut to play for a competitive team), and you've got a real game changer in the works in the NBA. Take the Heat- this past season, Bosh and James made $14.5 million each, and Wade made $14 million. That's $43 million right there- and way over the theoretical cap. The Celtics have nearly $41 million tied up in their Garnett/Pierce/Allen trifecta, and another $9 in Rajon Rondo. The new deal could change the landscape of the NBA.
Here's the big problem- there is a gaping difference between the two sides here. If the NFL is a ten-foot gap, the NBA looks like the Grand Canyon.
The even bigger issue is the NBA will suffer a painful, miserable death if they lockout. People don't have a favorable view of these things- it's just the greedy owners and the greedy athletes arguing over who gets the millions...but the bottom line is EVERYONE gets a few million. It's not like we're arguing over how to split a few thousand bucks.
The league insists they are losing $300 million each year. The players say they won't accept a hard cap to reduce costs. TV ratings for the NBA have never been better- over a million MORE people watched the first round games- and that's a million more PER GAME. Overall ticket sales are up around 1% (a big jump for sports).
My suggestion is this- a hard cap is the way to go, but you can't expect teams to reduce salaries by $25 million per team...it's just not reasonable. The league should expand their revenue distribution plan from higher TV ratings to help supplement team salaries. Eliminate the luxury tax system and set the hard cap around $45-50 million. That cuts between $200-$400 million off player salaries, and should make it so everyone can still be competitive.
For a league that is on the upswing, the player and owners need to wake up. Find a way to work this out, and get on it quick.
The clock is running, and we are now officially keeping score.
While the NFL lockout story is still being written, the NBA is on the verge of making the same mistake. The players recently threw out the latest proposal by the league, in opposition to the proposed hard salary cap and new contract restrictions.
Here's the skinny- the league currently operates with a $58 million per franchise salary cap. Once the teams hit $70.3 million, they start paying a dollar-for-dollar luxury tax. The league is standing hard, saying they need to cut player salaries by an estimated $800 million annually.
The new proposal calls for a hard salary ceiling (no more cap with luxury tax situation) by the 2013-2014 season, with rollbacks over the next three years. If you do the math (and this won't be an exact science, not taking other factors into account), the league currently spends around $1.8 billion in salaries, with a desire to drop to around $1 billion. That would put an effective hard cap of around $35 million per team.
While there are a ton of other factors, the league is still asking for a major reduction in pay- an average of over $25 million per team. The league also wants a lower rookie pay scale, and a "star player" tag, giving teams more lee-way to negotiate with one top level talent.
The players, led by LA Laker point guard Derek Fisher, say a hard salary cap isn't in their game plan. While the league insists everyone will make more money, and everyone will be more competitive, the bottom line is the players will take a major pay cut. Who would want that?
Add the fact that there will be no more "Big 3" situations like we have in Miami and Boston (unless someone takes a major cut to play for a competitive team), and you've got a real game changer in the works in the NBA. Take the Heat- this past season, Bosh and James made $14.5 million each, and Wade made $14 million. That's $43 million right there- and way over the theoretical cap. The Celtics have nearly $41 million tied up in their Garnett/Pierce/Allen trifecta, and another $9 in Rajon Rondo. The new deal could change the landscape of the NBA.
Here's the big problem- there is a gaping difference between the two sides here. If the NFL is a ten-foot gap, the NBA looks like the Grand Canyon.
The even bigger issue is the NBA will suffer a painful, miserable death if they lockout. People don't have a favorable view of these things- it's just the greedy owners and the greedy athletes arguing over who gets the millions...but the bottom line is EVERYONE gets a few million. It's not like we're arguing over how to split a few thousand bucks.
The league insists they are losing $300 million each year. The players say they won't accept a hard cap to reduce costs. TV ratings for the NBA have never been better- over a million MORE people watched the first round games- and that's a million more PER GAME. Overall ticket sales are up around 1% (a big jump for sports).
My suggestion is this- a hard cap is the way to go, but you can't expect teams to reduce salaries by $25 million per team...it's just not reasonable. The league should expand their revenue distribution plan from higher TV ratings to help supplement team salaries. Eliminate the luxury tax system and set the hard cap around $45-50 million. That cuts between $200-$400 million off player salaries, and should make it so everyone can still be competitive.
For a league that is on the upswing, the player and owners need to wake up. Find a way to work this out, and get on it quick.
The clock is running, and we are now officially keeping score.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Hawkeyes offer football scholarship to HS Freshman
Seems like recruiting just gets younger and younger every year...
The Iowa Hawkeyes have extend an offer to Brian Allen from Hinsdale Central High School in Illinois. The catch? Allen has never played in a varsity football game, and is just a FRESHMAN.
Here's the story from Hawkeyereport.com:
http://iowa.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1220402
While the move doesn't seem to fit with Iowa's standard M.O., I don't mind the move in this case. Here's a few of the main reasons...
First, the Hawks know this family. They tried hard to recruit Allen's older brother, who ended up choosing Michigan State over Iowa. They obviously have the feeling that the kid comes from a good background, and will continue to work hard as he develops as a player.
Second, he's a non-skill position player. As an added bonus, he's an offensive lineman (see: Kirk Ferentz coaching background) Iowa doesn't miss on these types too often, so they must see something special in the kid. He's already got good size (6'1" - 245 lbs), and finished third in the largest class in Illinois in the state wrestling tournament. Those two factors seem to indicate he's athletic enough and will have the size to be a top notch Big-10 lineman someday. If it was a wide receiver or quarterback Iowa was going after as a freshman, I'd be a lot more concerned.
I don't see Iowa making a habit out of handing out offers to 14-year olds, so the kid must really have something special. It will be fun to see this one play out over the next couple of years.
The Iowa Hawkeyes have extend an offer to Brian Allen from Hinsdale Central High School in Illinois. The catch? Allen has never played in a varsity football game, and is just a FRESHMAN.
Here's the story from Hawkeyereport.com:
http://iowa.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1220402
While the move doesn't seem to fit with Iowa's standard M.O., I don't mind the move in this case. Here's a few of the main reasons...
First, the Hawks know this family. They tried hard to recruit Allen's older brother, who ended up choosing Michigan State over Iowa. They obviously have the feeling that the kid comes from a good background, and will continue to work hard as he develops as a player.
Second, he's a non-skill position player. As an added bonus, he's an offensive lineman (see: Kirk Ferentz coaching background) Iowa doesn't miss on these types too often, so they must see something special in the kid. He's already got good size (6'1" - 245 lbs), and finished third in the largest class in Illinois in the state wrestling tournament. Those two factors seem to indicate he's athletic enough and will have the size to be a top notch Big-10 lineman someday. If it was a wide receiver or quarterback Iowa was going after as a freshman, I'd be a lot more concerned.
I don't see Iowa making a habit out of handing out offers to 14-year olds, so the kid must really have something special. It will be fun to see this one play out over the next couple of years.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
40 inspirational movie speeches in 2 mintues.
Thought this was kind of fun. Get pumped up for the weekend.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Baseball Thoughts 5/4
Baseball season is in full swing, and I couldn't be happier. There's nothing like America's pastime to make you really start thinking of summer.
There have been a couple of things that have caught my eye so far this season-
Andre Ethier has managed to extend his hit streak out to 29 games. It's a pretty impressive feat, but probably not worth getting really excited about until he gets closer to 40. Since 2000, seven players have managed to hit in 30+ consecutive games, but not a single one of them made it to 40 (Jimmy Rollins was the closest in 2005-06 with 38). Even the great Pete Rose, arguably the greatest non-power hitter of all time, only managed to get to 44.
Even though I'm only 26-years old, I'm pretty sure I'll never see anyone match DiMaggio's 56 game streak. That's one of a few baseball records I'd guess will stand the test of time. I'd probably put Pete Rose's hit total in that category (4256), as well as Cal Ripken's consecutive games streak (2632).
I'm also pretty sure I'll never see anyone hit .400, win a batting triple crown, or win 30 games on the mound. I'm sure there are more out there- those are just the first to come to mind. Even in the "post-steroid" era, someday someone will manage to hit 75 home runs in a season, and break Barry Bonds' career home run record. My bet is that A-Rod will be on top of the latter by the time his career is over.
All I can say is thank god for that.
There have been a couple of things that have caught my eye so far this season-
Andre Ethier has managed to extend his hit streak out to 29 games. It's a pretty impressive feat, but probably not worth getting really excited about until he gets closer to 40. Since 2000, seven players have managed to hit in 30+ consecutive games, but not a single one of them made it to 40 (Jimmy Rollins was the closest in 2005-06 with 38). Even the great Pete Rose, arguably the greatest non-power hitter of all time, only managed to get to 44.
Even though I'm only 26-years old, I'm pretty sure I'll never see anyone match DiMaggio's 56 game streak. That's one of a few baseball records I'd guess will stand the test of time. I'd probably put Pete Rose's hit total in that category (4256), as well as Cal Ripken's consecutive games streak (2632).
I'm also pretty sure I'll never see anyone hit .400, win a batting triple crown, or win 30 games on the mound. I'm sure there are more out there- those are just the first to come to mind. Even in the "post-steroid" era, someday someone will manage to hit 75 home runs in a season, and break Barry Bonds' career home run record. My bet is that A-Rod will be on top of the latter by the time his career is over.
All I can say is thank god for that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)