The Chicago Bulls haven't exactly set the world on fire during the 2012 NBA Free Agency period, and that has drawn the ire of plenty of Bulls throughout the summer. With Derrick Rose on the shelf until at least January, the Bulls completely dismantled their Bench Mob by letting go of Ronnie Brewer, C.J. Watson, Omer Asik and John Lucas III while also trading away Kyle Korver. They saved money by replacing those players with Nazr Mohammed, Marco Belinelli, and Nate Robinson, but did they help the team stay competitive over the long-term or just slash costs because they could do so?
It's a difficult question for any Bulls fan to answer, but there has been some great writing on the subject. Matt Moore (aka- @HPBasketball) recently tried to navigate the difficult issue in his article on the NBC Pro Basketball Talk blog, and here is what he had to say:
The Bulls are a classic example of what we expect from big-market owners. We expect them to break the bank to build a winner, to use the resources at their disposal to abuse the inherent advantages and develop a contender. The Bulls have instead tried to develop a contender with considerate, you can even say frugal spending, and have done a pretty decent job at it. But they're judged on a big-market curve and it's there that they fail.
...It's infuriating. It's genius. It's frustrating. It's sustainable. It's a bad way to run a team. It's a great way to run a business. And they'll still manage to succeed enough to put the criticism at bay when the ball is tipped. Thank God for Derrick Rose.
SB Nation Chicago's Managing Editor, Ricky O'Donnell, has crafted his own opinion on the Bulls' tepid offseason, so be sure to check out both articles and figure out where you stand heading into what should be a difficult 2012-13 NBA season.