SB Nation User Blog: dakoose

Luxury tax question, with regards to 2010 free agency.

dakoose — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:52:13 -0000

I'm no capologist, so I have a question for any of you that know how the NBA's salary cap and luxury tax system work:

There's a lot of talk about the Bulls not likely to exceed next year's cap in the free agency orgasm to avoid paying the tax. That's where I'm confused. Luxury tax is not enforced upon passing the cap, rather it's enforced after passing the luxury tax threshold. Even if the Bulls are to resign Tyrus for the QO of 6.25 million and (gulp) retain John Salmons and his 5.8 million dollar contract next year, the payroll sits at ~44 million. This year's tax threshold is 69.92 million. Assuming that goes down next year to say, 65 million, that leaves the Bulls roughly 21 million dollars to get a big name guy, leaving three empty roster spots, which could be filled with the remaining dollars.

All that said, I've seen several people on this site talk about the Bulls not being able to afford a max-contract guy. Am I missing something, as after doing the math the Bulls have more than enough room for a max contract(~16 million) before hitting the tax threshold?

Goodell fines Titans owner $250,000 for gesture.

dakoose — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:45:13 -0000

Goodell fines Titans owner $250,000 for gesture.

Goodell has lost his damn mind.

Who Else Hates This Team?

dakoose — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:52:38 -0000

No way around it, I'm starting to hate the Bulls. Watching this team is a chore and I find it more and more difficult warding off the anger that accompanied watching this awfully coached basketball teams. This is going to be a rant, so if you like, feel free to stop reading now.

I don't hate everyone on this team, just most of 'em. Luol, Miller, Noah and Kirk get a pass in my book, as they all make the best of their abilities and contribute consistently.

Derrick Rose- Plays like a fuc*ing wuss. For all his immense potential, his head isn't right. He has no idea how good he is and for a while I was pinning the blame on Vinny and the supporting cast, but it's clear that this kid isn't gonna be "it." How many more times is this kid gonna pass up on huge mis-match and isolation opportunities before you guys see what I see? He's got zero tenacity and none of the voracity that all the really good ones have. Noah's got it, it's just too bad he doesn't have the gifts to be great. Derrick was at the rim four or five times tonight with easy finishes there to be had but he kicked it out or turned it over. A player with star qualities makes things happen at the hoop and/or go es to the line. Derrick doesn't. He lacks vision while still making rookie mistakes and commits loads of stupid turnovers. Put Jenning's brain in Rose's head and you got yourself a perennial MVP candidate. Could he turn himself around, maybe, but I don't see it happening, at least not with this coaching staff. Which brings me to................

Vinny- Everyone with a brain knows that he's entirely bereft of any basketball acumen. He's not a tactition and has no knowledge of X's & O's, so one would think he would be good at managing personalities, right? The players don't respect him, and why should they? Would you respect a coach who's vocabulary is limited to "Run, shoot with confidence, be aggressive, run, run, shoot with confidence, push the ball."? I wouldn't. He doesn't deal with the players well, as evidenced by his issues with Joakim, Gray, Tyrus and most likely other incidents we haven't heard about. This was a terrible hire and to compound the problem Paxson hired this awful coach during the developmental years of the most physically gifted Bull since Jordan or Pippen. Unreal!

John Salmons- I was bullish on Salmons coming into the season, and if he were shooting better, I wouldn't be as upset with him, but the guy is black hole on offense. He drains the shot clock and stagnates the offense. He's an awful passer and rebounder, so if he's not scoring 20 ppg he kills your team. I hope and pray he opts out of his deal after the season, but if he keeps going like this there's no way that happens. This team needs offense badly and the guy looked upon to be either our highest or second highest scorer has fallen flat on his face. No way around it.

James Johnson- I get peeved watching any out-of-shape athletes play professional sports, but JJ is just a kid. He should be in the best shape of his life, instead he comes in with worse conditioning than myself. Inexcusable.

Gray/Hunter- These are players of extremely little consequences, but seeing Gray goofing around on the bench and Lindsey getting jiggy with it in the pre-game huddle pisses me off to no end. These are million dollar players? Lucky SOBs'.

There's a lot more where this came from, but this is a Sat night and I getta get out and do something to clear my head of the dreadful Bulls basketball that consumed the last few hours of my day. I suggest you all do the same.

Can Kelenna Azubuike Be Had?

dakoose — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:27:13 -0000

Y'all probably don't keep a close eye on the Bulls, but as a Bulls fan with a lot of free time in the PM I've watched my fair share of Warriors basketball the last couple of years. One guy that's always stood out to me is Kelenna Azubuike, and being that the Bulls suck at putting the ball in the basket and also lack any semblance of a competent shooter, Azubuike came to mind as a good trade target.

When it comes to your management's view of it's own players, I'm clueless, so I'm looking for a little help here. What's Azubuike's status in Warrior land? Is he loved by the fans? Does Nelson value him as an asset or does he deem him expendiable? Basically, what would it take for the Bulls to land Kelenna Azubuike? All feedback is appreciated.

Potential Ben Gordon Replacement?

dakoose — Sun, 17 May 2009 23:48:52 -0000

The way things look right now, Ben Gordon will not be a Chicago Bull next year. I'm not saying it won't happen; it just doesn't look very likely. With that said, it's time to start thinking about a replacement for BG. What does Ben bring to the table? Scoring, scoring and some more scoring. There's nobody on the market this offseason that can fill it up like Ben, but there is someone that can be Ben Gordon-lite.

I'm talking about Von Wafer. Wafer and Ben have very similar statistical profiles, shooting almost identical percentages from the field and from three point land. Ben has the edge at the stripe, while Wafer is slightly better in the thievery department. Physically, Ben is short and powerful and Wafer has significantly more height and is a bit smoother moving with and without the ball.

What I like about Wafer is that he offers scoring off the bench and can play alongside Derrick Rose as he doesn't dominate possessions and isn't a high-profile player like Ben is, making it easier for Rose to have full control of the offense. Wafer would be a great kick-out option for Rose and is seemingly a perfect fit for the style of basketball that VDN wants to play.

What do y'all think about bringing in Mr. Wafer?

Need a laugh?

dakoose — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:11:07 -0000

Need a laugh?

Here's a little yahoo snippet:
Larry Hughes is beginning to settle in, Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni has put the versatile guard into the starting lineup in hopes of inspiring ball movement. He's got the ability to make more plays than Wilson Chandler. Hughes got 38 minutes against the Miami Heat, finishing with 19 points and five assists. The ball was in motion from the jump, too, and the Knicks went into the intermission with a 67-59 lead.

That was too good to pass up.

After calming down a bit, here's my (somewhat) clearheaded thoughts.

dakoose — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:56:16 -0000

Quite a lot has taken place within the last twenty-four hours. If everything reported is actually true, the Cubs have traded Jason Marquis and Mark DeRosa and in return received Jose Viscaino and three minor league prospects, and calling them prospects is a bit generous. Here's my take on what has taken place so far:

What I'd like to believe is that these three minor league pitchers will be flipped in a newly structured Jake Peavy deal, but I can't get past the fact that none of those three pitchers are noteworthy. I see no reason why San Diego would have interest in any of them, at least in a deal involving Peavy. Yes, Marquis leaving opens up a hole in the rotation, but just because we have an opening at the back of the rotation doesn't mean we are going to trade for Peavy. A more likely scenario involves a competition between Angel Guzman, Rich Hill, Sean Marshall and Jeff Samardzija for that spot, with Marshall being the favorite and Hill being the dark horse. Remember, Hill was our best pitcher just two short seasons ago.

On the other side of the ball, things are a bit muddied as well, particularly the middle infield. I fully expect Ryan Theriot to be our starting shortstop next year, whether I like it or not. At second base, we lost a very, very good player in Mark DeRosa. Lucky for us, we have a pretty good little guy to replace him, at least against right handed pitching. From a statistical standpoint we don't lose much against right handers, which make up the majority of starting pitchers. DeRo hit .265/.367/.475 against righties, while Fontenot hit .302/.393/.518. Let that slash line sink in a bit. Against right handers, we had a little version of Chase Utley hitting for us. Even when you account for the possible regression, there's no reason to be upset about Fontenot getting say, 450-500 AB's at second base. Where the drop off comes is against lefties, against which DeRo posted a .894 OPS while Fontenot posted a .893 OPS. You might look at that and think thats not much of a dropoff, but Mike only had 21 at-bats against southpaws last year, and has a career .683 OPS against 'em, albeit in a minuscule 73 at bats. I'll just assume he's somewhere in-between those two figures, at about .770 or so. Either way, it's not like he's garbage against lefties. Anyhow, he probably won't get those AB's, as those will go to the newly acquired Aaron Miles, who has a career line of .284/.352/.352 line against lefties, which is pretty similar to Ryan Theriot's career line.

From a performance perspective, we don't seem to be losing that much, if anything at all. What this looks like is that Hendry has been told he won't be given any more cash to spend and therefore if he wants a new toy to throw into right field he's going have to get a bit creative, which is what he has done. While he did lose a great guy and clubhouse presence in DeRo, I think the Cubs will get by just fine. What he ended up with is a very solid platoon at second base, a cheaper alternative in the rotation and enough cash to go out and get that left handed hitting right fielder Lou has presumably been crying for since Fukudome went into his tailspin. What hurts is that one would think that Hendry could have gotten more than three no-name prospects for one of our better offensive players, but hey, maybe Hendry's scouts know a little more about those guys than I have given them credit for.

Caloris Surplus: How Much is Too Much?

dakoose — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 19:24:16 -0000

I've been weightlifting for a good year and a half now, it's only been a short while since I began to realize how important a diet is too putting on muscle. I've put on about twenty five pounds in over that year and a half period(5"7-150 to 5"7-175), and as I wasn't incredibly skinny to begin with I feel it's safe to assume something like 7-10 lb's of that was fat. Currently, I measure in at 13% body fat on one of those bioelectric impedence scales, but I have a feeling I'm a bit less than that. Anyhow, I want to start putting on some serious mass and would like some input into how many calories above maintanence I should be taking in to put on clean weight, muscle and only muscle.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems reasonable to think that I could put on somewhere in the vicinity of 1lb of muscle on per week, and not much more than that. However, I have spoken to several traineres that I know and some have recommended gargantuan caloric intakes, sometimes 1500 above my maintanence level of about 2800( as calculated by my BodyGem RMR+ Weightlifting six days a week+ a few cardio seesions/pickup basketball games). Assuming that I am correct with that maintanence figure, and I'm pretty sure it's spot on, a) how much is a reasonable amount of muscle to put on in a week? and b) how many calories should I be taking in to achieve that said mass?I look forward to reading your responses. It seems like there are a lot of knowlefgable folk on this site and I would value your opinions.

For the record, I drew up a mass program last night and have myself taking in 3400-3500 calories daily with about 240 grams protein.

If No Lefty Bat Falls To Us,

dakoose — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 03:29:15 -0000

here is a name that has not been brought up on BCB yet, and he probably won't cost too much: Edwin Encarnaion.

Let me preface this by saying that if the Cubs do indeed acquire Jake Peavy, and it appears that it is becoming more and more likely that the deal goes down, Jim Hendry will not have enough payroll flexibility to acquire a premier lefty. Jim could go out and acquire an OK lefty, maybe someone like Mark Teahen, but wouldn't you rather have a very good right handed hitter as opposed to a so-so lefty?

I know what you all are thinking:"Doesn't Encarnacion play third base? Yes, but Cincinnati, if they do keep him, is looking for him to move into the outfield. And according to the Bill James Defensive Spectrum, and not to mention common sense, right field is easier to play than third base. I'm not sure what it would take to acquire Encarnacion, but from what I have heard Dusty doesn't like him and he is now the most likely Red to be traded. I have heard that San Fransisco could be able to get him for Noah Lowry, who is no big deal.

Here are Encarnaion's career averages: .266/.340/.466. He is only tenty five and although his average dipped last year, his power numbers improved drasticaly, with his ISO going from .149 to .215, and his BB% jumping from 7.2 to 10.8. All signs point to a breakout year for EE in the very near future. I know we are in the same division and that complicates things a bit, but if he could be had for a not-too-steep price, and it appears that he can, I would jump all over that. I'm a big Pie fan, but I would swap him for EE in a heartbeat. Anyone else feel this way, and if not, any other ideas for what Hendry could do if he can't bring in a big lefty stick?

Randy Johnson Revisited.

dakoose — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:30:02 -0000

In an article posted on MLBTR it is being reported that after the Diamondbacks offered Randy Johnson 2-3 million for one year(thats downright insulting) he is looking to find a new team. That is not news. What is news is that he would be satisfied with 8 million, maybe even less. That is very little money and perhaps could end up being the most efficient/valuable contract doled out this off-season. The link for this article is:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/11/dodgers-interes.html

Now before anybody jumps on me for posting about an aged player like Johnson or posting so soon after a different Johnson post let me make a real case for Randy on a point by point basis addressing some of the doubts I have seen expressed about the future hall-of-famer.

- He is too old/injury prone. Yes he is old, but take a look at his innings totals from the last five years. 245.2, 225.2, 205, 56.2, 184. Thats only one season in which he didn't log a significant amount of innings. Yes he is old, but he has been very durable throughout his career and he should be able to make at least 26-27 starts next season.

- His performance level. I'm going to throw some stats out here, starting with the basics and then hitting up some advanced ones and then the Bill James projection for 2009. 2008- 11-10, 30GS, 3.91 ERA, 173K, 44B, 3.93 K/BB. Those are some very,very good numbers. He finished the year with a FIP of 3.76, so he was a bit unlucky last year, posting a BABIP fifteen points lower than his career norm and a league average strand rate, which is below average for Randy. His batted ball stats are the same, and not only did he generate more swinging strikes but he generated more contact aton balls outside of the zone than he has in the last three or four years. His WPA/LI was .91, better than Ted Lilly's .84. Here's the real kicker: Bill James has projected the following line for 2009: 12-7, 3.40 ERA(!), 28 GS, 170 IP, 178 K, 41BB, 4.34 K/BB. That is front of the rotation stuff right there. Those are similar numbers to what Cole Hamels did in the regular season, minus a few innings pitched and starts. his record is also sure to be better than projected. Those numbers could make him the best per-start pitcher on the Cubs next year if we don't get Peavy.

- The bottom line is that signing this good a pitcher for one year at 7-8 million should be nothing short of a no-brainer. Even if he were to get injured he it's not as if his contract would hold back the Cubs at all. Consider that Jason Marquis is going to make more money next year despite not being anywhere close in terms of ability.

Assume that the Cubs bring in two starting pitchers next year to go along with the guaranteed core of Zambrano, Lilly, Harden. Throw in Jonhnson and one of Lowe/Peavy/Dempster/Sheets/Pettite/Wolf/Burnett or any of the other free agent starters and you got a beastly rotation. From a payroll perspective, Johnson shouldn't make too big of a dent on Hendry's offseason plan, as he let Wood walk for a cheaper option and is now rid of Howry's contract. i could be missing something here, so feel free to correct me.