share

Baby Bulls

Chicago is in an interesting position in the Nba Draft. First question they have to answer is do they want to resign Ben Gordan? In the immediate future I think they need Gordon but in the longterm i don't think he is where the team is heading. I wouldn't pay Gordon over 10 million. Now they also hold the two picks at16 and 26. There has been talks they want to trade these for the 11th or another pick so that they don't have to take on two salaries if they resign Gordon. And if they keep the picks who should they draft? Are they in running for the bigs in phoenix. what do you guys think

CorningKingsFan31
CorningKingsFan31's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/11/2009
Posts: 73
Points: -2
Offline
let gordon go

i sya let him walk. trade up to at least 11 and take tyreke evans to fill gordons void. then you would have:

rose/hinrich
evans/hinrich
salmons/tim thomas
PF/C - tythomas/noah/miller

then try to see if you could swing like next years 1st and tythomas and change to toronto for bosh.

then you have

rose/hinrich
evans/hinrich
salmons/thomas
bosh/noah
noah/miller. solid players throughout

and you have a lil money to add a threat guy like korver or somthing along those lines

CorningKingsFan31
CorningKingsFan31's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/11/2009
Posts: 73
Points: -2
Offline
not a bulls fan

just saying this would help in the longterm cuz paying ben gordon to be inconsistent and in a start/6th man role is not the way to go

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
No way Evans is available at

No way Evans is available at pick 11. The Bulls should just let Gordon go. Keep picks 16 &26. There is no need to panic. Add two solid first rounders too your roster. Sign Rashad McCants or Glen Davis through free agency or both of them depending on the cost. The Bulls are in a great position, I think they are starting to overthink things though. No need to trade up to 11, that would be stupid. Why give up two first rounders for one first round player. There isn't that big of a drop off in talent between pick 11 & 16.

futureGM22
futureGM22's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 41
Points: 36
Offline
Luol Deng

I agree that letting Ben Gordon go would be the easiest thing to do for the cap situation and for rotation minutes. You totally left Luol Deng out of the depth chart. I think that they would benefit from trading up, but I don't think Tyreke Evans will be available and I don't think he is the answer. Next year the Bulls will play John Salmons at the 2 with Luol Deng at the 3. I believe the Bulls need some depth at the wing, then target a free agent to take up some minutes in the post. I say they trade up and take Chase Budinger.

New depth chart:

Rose/Hinrich
Salmons/Hinrich/Budinger
Deng/Budinger
Thomas/ Free agent
Noah/Miller

thetruth
thetruth's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 2423
Points: 270
Offline
i think the bulls

should let gordon go as well. and use the first round picks on a guard and a big man.

futureGM22
futureGM22's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 41
Points: 36
Offline
Good Point

Good Point gatorheels
Budinger or Clark or Terrance Williams may still be available at 16 and by keeping the picks you can get another role player with the 26th pick

WindyCity23
WindyCity23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 23
Points: 6
Offline
I agree

That they don't need to trade up because I think the back end of the draft has very good value. However, if they do trade up, It needs to be for DeMar DeRozan or some other 2 guard. If they let Ben Gordon go, then they CAN'T trade Hinrich because the back court would be very thin. If anyone is to be traded, it might be Tyrus Thomas to try to get another big or back court depth, in which case, trading Hinrich would make more sense. I still wouldn't give him up though.

ctw724
Registered User
Joined: 04/09/2009
Posts: 501
Points: -29
Offline
Draft DeJuan Blair and then trade for Bosh later

I would go with Blair. He's a PITTBull in the paint. Secondly, I would look to trade Tyrus and Luol for Chris Bosh, maybe bring in a third team. That turns into a NASTY Frontcourt.

DanJ
Registered User
Joined: 06/20/2009
Posts: 3
Points: 0
Offline
Nothing Less Than Greatness is Acceptable

The Bulls are in an interesting place right now. The financial decisions they make this summer will have multi-year effects. The bottom line is to acquire a superstar partner for Derrick Rose. He is the real deal. We haven't one since Michael and Scottie moved on. All the great teams had pairs of superstars. Bird/McHale/Parish, Magic/Kareem/Worthy, Hakeem/Clyde, Robinson/Duncan, Duncan/Ginobili/Parker, Oscar and Lew Alcindor, etc... The Bulls need to build a team that has the potential to win a championship every year. They won't, but they could. Look at what the Spurs have done. What four championships in the past decade. That's what we want again in Chicago. We have one piece in Rose. I don't care if they trade everyone but Rose. Get Bosh or acquire and draft the most marketable players possible!

RickyRubio9
RickyRubio9's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/01/2008
Posts: 2080
Points: 1069
Offline
They definitely should trade upto the 11th pick

then draft Blair? Even if undersized because Miller and Thomas will be free agents after this season and they're going to need some big men, but If I remember correctly Blair was undersized so maybe just stay with the 16th pick and take a chance on Mullens and let him learn from Miller as well as Noah who is becoming a solid player.

futureGM22
futureGM22's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 41
Points: 36
Offline
Mullens will be gone

It has been a rumor for a long time that Mullens has a promise from the Pistons and they pick right before the Bulls at #15 so he'll be gone by the time the Bulls are on the clock for the first time

ctw724
Registered User
Joined: 04/09/2009
Posts: 501
Points: -29
Offline
Blair over Mullens

He's going to be a better pro than Mullens because he has more HEART and basketball INSTINCTS, not too mention TOUGHNESS. Keep in mind, if they need size they have Omer Asik coming in 2010.

Think BIG:

Rose-Wade-Bosh in 2010!!!

RickyRubio9
RickyRubio9's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/01/2008
Posts: 2080
Points: 1069
Offline
WHOA

Bulls are getting both Wade and Bosh? You are thinking big.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
The Bulls aren't going to

The Bulls aren't going to get Wade or Bosh....stop living in a fantasy land. To be honest Chicago doesn't even need them. Let your young talent develop. Rose, Salmons, Deng, Thomas, Noah is a great starting lineup. Add two really good players from this years first round picks and all of sudden you have a great team that can win a championship. Trade Hinrich and get something good in return like future picks or to clear cap space. I'm telling you signing Glen Davis would be huge. If the Bulls draft Mullens at #16 that would be a complete disaster. Blair would be a good pick at 16 but there is no need to trade up to #11 just to take him. If Blair falls to 16 great if he doesn't it isn't the end of the world. James Johnson, Clark, Hansbrough would all help out the Bulls and all would be solid picks at 16. At least one of these players will be there at 16, more than likely a few of them, so the Bulls will have thier pick. Like I said no need to panic Chicago, you are in a great position. Just play it smart, take the best player available at 16 & 26 then sign a couple bargain free agents.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
Bulls do have the ability,

Bulls do have the ability, at least one of the Bulls beat reporters said it, to take on 2 max contracts during the summer of 2010 (of course, depending on where they go this off-season). So, I don't think that Wade/Bosh is impossible...I just don't think it's going to happen. Of course, having Rose and Bosh in the fold already (if the Bulls could pry him away from Toronto this summer) will make it a very attractive destination for a SG who might not have as much time left as some of the other big time 2010 free agents. The way that Wade plays, with his injury history already, and the fact that he was "old" as a rookie (I know that seems ridiculous but compared to LeBron, Bosh, Carmello etc. he is a couple of years older) and will be 28 in 2010 he might be looking to go to a team where he could be 1a, 1b, or even 1c. He might not be able to hold up in his mid thirties if he keeps up his current pace. Plus, Chicago is his hometown.

That being said, I think that the Bulls should try to move up without giving up much. If New Jersey is willing to give #11 for #16 and #26 I think it should be a done deal already. #11 could produce a solid rotation guy for the Bulls moving forward. PITTBulls, I wouldn't mind seeing Blair on the Bulls at all. I think that he could have a solid, 10-year career and if he stays healthy and slim he could be a lot better than that. He has looked like a beast in the 2 workouts I have seen videos of, his height is off-set by his ridiculous wingspan, and his offensive game looked phenomenal against the "defensive stopper" Hasheem Thabeet in the 2 games that I saw them go at it. We have of course discussed this on NBADraft.net boards before but I think that Blair will go the Bucks at #10 where he could actually start at PF with Bogut (C), Jefferson (SF), Redd(SG), and Sessions (PG). I think that his rebounding ability (and it's not like he is a terrible offensive player either) would help the Bucks get into the postseason in the East (assuming they aren't just destroyed by injuries again). I also don't see the Bulls being aggressive enough to move into the Top 10 to get Blair...only if someone like DeRozan, Hill, or Harden is within reach and they are in love with one of those guys.

@gatorheels...I know that you and I don't agree on Hinrich or McCants (I respect your opinions, I just disagree) but I think if you take McCants and put him on the 2008-2009 Bulls playoff team he barely touches the court in the playoff series. Obviously you have Gordon and Rose, but Hinrich can play both positions and was able to do a pretty good job defending Allen and Pierce (and sometimes Rondo, although he was borderline unstoppable in that series). I know that you are getting rid of Gordon in the scenario where you have the Bulls bringing in McCants but I don't see that being a major upgrade from what they already had in place. I don't think that he brings enough to the table to replace Gordon and he doesn't play both guard positions or defend like Hinrich. It would actually be a downgrade, although we can both agree that it would be a major financial help. I don't know about Davis coming in either. I don't think that he is as good as he looked in the playoffs this year either. I think that it's silly to take time away from Noah or Thomas, 2 guys with some upside AND can get off the ground, to put in a guy who averaged 7 and 4 last year. Yes, he did play out of his mind in the playoffs, but if Powe and Garnett weren't injured he doesn't get NEARLY the touches he got. I think that the 2009 playoffs were the exception not the rule. I don't see the Bulls offering significant money to either player, although playing with Tyrus could be enticing for Davis. I would be VERY surprised if Tyrus is still here for the 2010-2011 season though. Of course, I haven't seen McCants play that much so I could be missing something but I don't see him getting significant minutes with Salmons, Hinrich, and/or Gordon being there ahead of him. Even with Hinrich and Gordon gone, I think that Salmons gets the lions share of the minutes at SG.

I am wondering what the significance of Johnny Flynn working out for Chicago is. I think that the Bulls might take a PG at their draft spot, even if they move to #11, and use him for a trade. I think if someone like Flynn falls he could end up netting the Bulls more talent in a trade (and allow them to hold onto Hinrich as a backup PG/SG) than they might get by just drafting a guy at #11, #16, 0r #26.

ctw724
Registered User
Joined: 04/09/2009
Posts: 501
Points: -29
Offline
Bulls don't need Wade or Bosh...

And I'm from Fantasyland?

I can say with confidence that the Bulls would love to trade for Chris Bosh. Also, if things breakdown with BG7, don't be surprised to see them put their focus on DWADE in 2010. Getting Bosh could be the key to that, given they have the same agent.

Chris Bosh vs. Tyrus Thomas (head to head)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=thoma...

It's really not that close. Bosh has OWNED him so far. Two things to look at are the steals and blocks. They are virtually identical. CLEARLY, Bosh would be an upgrade.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
@PITTBulls

I agree with you. The Bulls don't NEED Wade or Bosh but what they have now will NEVER be enough to seriously contend for a title unless half of the Eastern Conference catches Swine Flu or something. Like I said before, Toronto might be willing to get rid of their superstar in Bosh and take on guys like Deng and Thomas (maybe 2009 #11 (or #16 & #26) because it doesn't seem to be easy for them to hang on too American-born superstars.

Having one of the NBA's premiere post players and a perennial MVP candidate are pretty good. Of course they don't NEED them, hell if they did and weren't able to get them what would be the point in watching? Right? But, they need to make some significant upgrades. The guys that they have are good but not great (with the exception of Rose, of course) and the future superstar that they already have is unique in that he can instantly help make other star players better. He can improve their statistics, he can be unselfish, and he can set them up to maximize their potential. I don't see Wade staying at a high level after he's 33 or 34, so the 2010 free agent summer will probably be his last "prime" contract. He'll be 28 and throws himself around right now without much help. At least it looked like a one man show to me this season. Imagine if he had Rose and Bosh alongside him. He also would be treated VERY well in Chicago, which has something to offer Wade that every other city can't. He is a very charitable person who still comes back to the Chicago area and donates a lot of his time and money. If he was going to leave $30,000,000.00 on the table (which is the amount of money a max contract is lessened if a player leaves his existing team) by leaving Miami and going elsewhere I feel that Chicago would be his most likely destination. Rose and Wade, two hometown guys leading the Bulls into championship contention with the help of an All-Star center (or PF) in Bosh. If Bosh comes in via trade I see it being VERY possible.

I don't think that it's going to happen, I think it's a bit of a long shot. A lot of things have to go right. But, it seems as logical to me as does any other 2010 free agent situation.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
Scott & PITTBulls.....I

Scott & PITTBulls.....I think the main difference between are opinions is that I am very patient while you guys want a championship now. Ha

I agree Bosh would be an upgrade over Thomas now but...Tyrus hasn't reached his peak yet plus he is young & cheaper

Every team in the league wants Wade & Bosh. So I can't blame you for dreaming.

I think Big Baby would be a solid guy coming off the bench for the Bulls. I'm assuming he doesn't want huge money. I certainly wouldn't overpay for him. I would rather have Glen Davis over Blair anyday.

I would much rather have picks 16 & 26 in this draft then just the 11th pick. Think about it really. Would you rather have just Blair or Hansbrough & Derrick Brown?? Just to give you an example.

McCants is 6'4" with a 6'11" wingspan. He can defend just fine when he wants to even though that is not his strength. Hinrich does play better Defense. McCants would be a downgrade at first if he replaces Gordon but...McCants is younger, longer, hasn't even been given a fair chance yet, has tons of potential, plus is cheaper. I don't think Gordon plays excellent defense either.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
@gatorheels

Sorry, I edited my comment on you a bit so I changed my thoughts on Wade a bit. I don't necessarily want a championship now (well I do want it now, who doesn't?) and I can wait. I think that the Bulls are in a very good spot right now and this is a very pivotal spot for them. Firstly, this isn't a LeBron/Cleveland situation with Rose/Chicago. Chicago is a big market, the Bulls are his favorite team, the Bulls will cater to him completely and have the ability to add YOUNG talent around him, and BJ Armstrong is his agent (who is a good friend of Paxson and Reinsdorf). So, the Bulls have 10-15 years with him, barring injury. It's not a given but that's what I feel. The thing is that Gordon and Hinrich both have limitations but I think that they both are better than McCants in a significant way. Gordon has borderline-elite scoring ability (only shooting though) and Hinrich has been one of the best perimeter defenders in the NBA since he came into the league while being able to play above average at PG and can play the 2 next to Rose. In NBA terms, I can't think of anything McCants does that is above average compared to other NBA shooting guards. He had a pretty good rookie year, but I don't see anything that he has done that is better than Hinrich offensively. According to statistics that is, like I said I haven't seen that much of him since UNC or Minnesota his rookie year.

Plus, if the Bulls are hoping to be a playoff team with a VERY young PG (and superstar) and a team with limited playoff experience among it's younger veterans it seems like bringing in someone with some veteran leadership who has sniffed the playoffs at least once in his career would make more sense as well.

Now, if the Bulls lose Gordon and can get something really good for Hinrich...I wouldn't be opposed to bringing McCants in for the big mid-level to back up Salmons. I do agree with you that he would be a great 3rd guard to bring in and would be good insurance in case Deng gets hurt again and Salmons has to move back to the 3. I guess McCants would be a great fall back plan if Hinrich gets moved to bring in low post help, I just don't think that bringing him in makes the team better than we currently are with Gordon and Hinrich.

I saw what you said about him, he is a good player, but I don't see him being a difference maker on a title team (not calling the Bulls anywhere near a title team yet). I see him moving in and out of the starting lineup for most of his career, although he could be a very solid rotation piece on a good team. I could be way off base though. Maybe he could be an amazing value who could put up 20 ppg if given the chance. Hell, he wasn't able to log more than 20 minutes a game between 2 of the worst teams in the league last year in Sacramento and Minnesota. But, maybe Sacramento and Minnesota don't know what the hell they are doing and that's why they are 2 of the worst teams in the league right now.

doubledribbler
Registered User
Joined: 03/02/2009
Posts: 1199
Points: 1331
Offline
The Bulls Need to Take a Step Backwards

It's kind of funny that everyone is saying that the Bulls are an up and coming team. They were an up and coming team a couple of times in the past 8-10 years. I really think that they would have beaten Orlando if they had played them, but would have lost to Cleveland. Who knows, they were playing out of their minds after the trade.

I think the Bulls are in a great position. I think they really need to take a step back though to really get to an elite level. What I mean by that is that I think they don't even need to consider signing Gordon unless it is for a 1 year deal again, which is highly unlikely unless they just gave him a ridiculous 1 year salary. Trade Deng. I really wouldn't want much for him. I think Portland would have interest and maybe see if you can pry away a couple of their younger guys that aren't getting tons of time. Personally, I would take an expiring contract for him. Trade Hinrich. I think he had a good year this past year, but I think this was the type of year that they needed from him to increase his value. I think he had more value last year to the Bulls as a mentor to Rose, but he's really not needed anymore. Get rid of Tyrus. He's too inconsistent. He's plays like Kenyon Martin after the surgeries.

Don't trade for Chris Bosh unless you don't have to give up too much. He's an All-Star, but I see him being another Jermaine O'Neal before injuries. Which is good, as long as long as he's not your best player. I think Wade would come back to Chicago. I would take my chances with him, but I agree that he probably won't have too many years left because of how he plays. I don't think that is a big deal when you consider how small the window is to really win a championship. Think Phoenix and Dallas. I actually like the idea of Rashad McCants. He's underrated, plus he can probably be had for cheap. I think you keep the two picks since there probably isn't going to0 be much difference in the level of player, unless maybe that is your only chance to take a guy like Blair. He's the physical type of rebounder they need. Your two picks are still going to be relatively cheap.

You guys probably think I went trade crazy, but I think the Bulls will have a nice core of Rose, Salmons, and Noah and all of them at reasonable contracts. I guarantee that they get at least one of the big free agents it's just a matter of who. Add that to who they get this year and next and I think they can really be contending in 2010/2011.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
@doubledribbler

This is going to come off harsh and I apologize. Maybe I am lumping you together with some of the meatball sports radio callers that I have to hear in Chicago (670 and 1000) who talk about getting rid of Deng for nothing. But, I have to call you out here.

First of all, Deng was hurt last year. He's only 24, he'll most likely be able to recover (he almost made it back for the playoffs this past year) and if he doesn't the Bulls will get most of that money back from insurance. 2007-2008 was considered a step back for Deng (who was 22) and it was still pretty close to what Salmons did last year at 29, by far the best season of his career.

Deng 2007-2008 (22 years old, "bad year") - *injured most of 2008-2009*
17ppg, 6.3 rpg, 2.5 apg, 1 spg
Salmons 2008-2009 (29 years old, "career year")
18.3, 4.2 rpg, 3.2 apg, 1 spg

The Bulls are NOT in financial trouble. Having a starter who at 21 put up nearly 19 and 7 make over $10,000,000.00 is NOT outrageous when he is only 24 and hasn't even reached his prime. Also, his size gives the Bulls opponents match-up problems at 6'9'' with over a 7'0'' wingspan and is actually FASTER than Salmons.

You know, anyone who says that they would take an expiring contract for Deng is ridiculous.
Trading him for an expiring contract? That's stupid. He has one and a half injury prone, bad seasons and you think that he should just be given away? Gordon had a bad 2007-2008 season too (so did Hinrich) where they all seemed to take a bit of a step back. Good thing they did too, it got us Rose. 2008-2009 Gordon was injury free and eventually found his spot on the Bulls and had a nice season, culminating in a great playoff series. Have you watched any Bulls games or are you one of those Bulls fans who blames Deng as the reason the Bulls don't have Gasol, Garnett, or Kobe?

Trade him to Portland? Why in the hell would they add someone with a large contract to their team when their young core is already in the playoffs? They aren't going to be able to afford Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Bayless, Webster, Outlaw, Fernandez, etc. as it is. They are going to need to trade some of their younger guys who don't play much for expiring contracts. You have it mixed up.

The beginning of the 2008-2009 Bulls season had Drew Gooden, Andres Nocioni, and Larry Hughes competing with Deng (and Gordon, too) for shots since they either played the same position or were selfish ball-hogs who were playing for a contract. Oh, and they also had a 20-year old rookie PG taking over too. Oh, and a FIRST TIME EVER coach. Never was an assistant, never coached an 8-year old team, never. First time.

So Deng was injured, had a 20 year old rookie point guard, had to compete with a bunch of selfish bums who were playing only for themselves since everyone knew that they weren't in the Bulls' longtime plans, had a coach who was developing an offense as he went along, and was injured at the ripe old age of 24 years old.

Even though the Bulls are in NO financial trouble or restrictions at all, you would trade him away for an expiring contract for no reason? Please, stop and think. You are selling low and getting nothing in return for a guy who could come close to 20 and 10. Oh, and if you don't think that it's possible for a guy who put up 19ppg and 7.5rpg as a 22 year-old to improve to 20ppg and 10rpg when he's 26, 27, or 28 you are crazy. Oh, and you aren't even factoring in the wonderful player the Bulls are getting in return (you know, the expiring contract we would get back for Deng) and how he might effect the development of the high powered core of Rose, Noah, and Salmons. Which is really a core of - "Rose". That's it.

Stop and think. Trading away core players when their value is low for nothing makes the worst kind of basketball sense. Now, his contract makes him harder to move for VERY good players because he has to show that he can recover from his injuries and regain his form but saying that a core of Rose, Salmons, and Noah is solid is just plain dumb. Salmons had a career year last year and is going to be 30 in December. I like him, but he will probably be retiring by the time Rose signs his next contract. A core is a group of young players that a team can grow with and contend for a title with.

Expiring contact? For what reason? The Bulls have enough cap space right now to sign 2 max contract free agents right now and still have Rose be a part of the equation. If Gordon resigns, then Hinrich will be gone and the Bulls will STILL have enough room to sign 2 max free agents and hang onto Rose.

I know that dreaming big can come off sounding silly but what you are talking about makes us a 8th seed or end of the lottery franchise for another season. Why? It doesn't make sense. The Bulls can keep everyone they have, Tyrus Thomas, Noah, Deng, Hinrich, Salmons, and Rose and STILL they would have enough room to add Wade and Bosh. Seriously, they would. Especially since they could easily move Hinrich's contract (which DECREASES in value every year) if they were going to add Wade to the mix. He's a legit NBA PG who is one of the best perimeter defenders in the league. Why on earth would they want to trade Deng away for nothing? Just so they can add nothing back? Expiring contracts are fools gold if a team isn't in financial trouble. The Bulls aren't. They have been Top 5 in attendance SINCE Jordan left, I think they are actually 3rd. They have $22 million dollars in salaries coming off the books after 2009-2010 (not factoring in Gordon, who will obviously effect that number for better or worse if he resigns or not). Also, if Jerome James can't play due to injury this year (which will most likely happen) they actually have an insurance policy covering 80% of his $6.5 million dollar contract meaning they will have an extra $5 million to work with too.

Now, I know that it sounds like I am down on Salmons but I am not. The point is, sending Deng packing for anything other than elite level talent is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN, and it shouldn't. He still has tremendous upside. Hell, he is only 1 year older than Tyler Hanbrough and has proven that he can produce in the NBA. I would love to see the Bulls move Salmons to SF and ship Deng out of town, but only if he's travelling with Tyrus and some draft picks for Chris Bosh or Amare. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
McCants could EASILY average

McCants could EASILY average 20pts a game if he gets enough playing time. McHale hated McCants so that ruined his time in Minnesota. He was only with the Kings for like half a season, so you couldn't expect him to play much. Especially since the Kings already have a star at SG in Kevin Martin. I think McCants is better than Hinrich. McCants is a much better scorer. I guess if you need defense & ball handling you take Hinrich. If you need scoring, length, & swag you take McCants. It just depends on the type of player you think the Bulls need I guess. I am obviously a McCants fan but I am not giving a biased opinion. I just know what he is truly capable of. More than likely the Bulls don't sign him so this argument is pointless really. McCants will probably end up signing with the Bobcats ha just a guess.

But yeah trading both 1st round picks for just pick 11 would be stupid. No need to do that just to get Blair especially since he is undersized with bad knees. Hansbrough & Derrick Brown seems like a safer & smarter option and they would help out the Bulls more than Blair I think. Also I'm not sure how much money the Bulls have to spend in free agency but why not go after Big Baby. He is a proven player and he is bigger than Blair with a better jumpshot.

Everybody want to trade Tyrus Thomas but I don't see why. He has rare skills.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
@gatorheels

I hear you on the McCants thing. We are going to have to agree to disagree on a couple of players who MIGHT make an all-star team or two if they are lucky so it's kind of a silly discussion, you are right.

We will have to agree to disagree on it being better to have #16 & #26 instead of #11 too. I think that the Bulls could swoop back into the end of the first or early second and get someone if they REALLY liked a guy there. It seems like some teams are going to just sell the pick. Like I said in my previous rant (above) they could probably give some of the millions they will get in return from Jerome James' fatness (insurance from medical retirement) if they like someone that much. I disagree with people who think that #11 isn't MUCH, MUCH better in this draft than #16. I think that #11 could net a much stronger contributor than #16. If the Bulls keep #16 and #26 and take Hanbrough (who I don't think will last to #16 anymore) and Brown they would have to be thinking about moving a couple of players. I don't see how either of them would be able to get significant contributing minutes with this current team. Although it seems like I am madly in love with Deng if you read my above post, I am not. I just think that he is going to start and get the majority of the SF minutes in 2008-2009. The Bulls HAVE to see if he can regain his previous upwardly trending form and Derrick Brown would be behind Deng and Salmons at the #3 and Noah, Thomas, and then Hanbrough at the #4. One of the other draft sites (cough, draft express . com, cough) has Brown projected as a mid 2nd rounder. I think that he could go a lot higher but I think that the Bulls could just wait and buy a pick to take him. Having #11 could put them more into the drivers seat to get what they want in what is turning out to be a very interesting draft.

piratejp
Registered User
Joined: 06/11/2009
Posts: 309
Points: -46
Offline
McCants

He sure looked good for the Kings last year once he got in the game. Doubt the King's will be matching any crazy offers, so someone with a need at SG could surely do much worse.

maravich44
Registered User
Joined: 06/02/2009
Posts: 432
Points: 242
Offline
Thomas has fallen in love

Thomas has fallen in love with the 15 foot jump shot. He's not. Unlimited potential only goes so far. He doesn't seem to listen to his coaches, and is very frustrating to fans.

If I hear Pittsbulls plan one more time, I think I will puke. They don't need an undersized power forward with bad knees. Even though it would be wonderful to get Bosh and Wade and have him on the same team with Rose, I don't think he realizes that it is highly unlikely. Wade loves Miami, is the man and will be paid much more money there. No one would be happier if this were to happen. If It does, I'd even live ith Blair AND Young! It won't though. Lots of guys at 16 and 26 that can help their rotation which is short. If Deng is healthy and Thomas somehow learns his role, we have a nice team. If we were to add Bosh or Stoudemire with some of our disposable parts, we could be a contender.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
Agree Brown wouldn't see

Agree Brown wouldn't see significant minutes but he offers quality depth. Blair wouldn't start either. Nobody at #11 is going to be that much better than a player at #16....that is an easy decision. If the Bulls trade both picks for #11 that is just straight up dump. Now if the Bulls can get up to picks 6, 7, or 8 that is a different story.

So if #11 is MUCH MUCH better than #11, who would the Bulls take at #11??? Don't say Blair...cuz he isn't any better than Hasnbrough

Deng is definitely a solid starting SF. No need to trade him unless you get some quality in return.

Scott I think you are underestimating this draft like most people in the world ha. I think this draft is really deep.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
Blair

I don't really like Dejuan Blair all that much but he does something at an elite level already. It's also something that the Bulls SORELY need. That's rebounding. The Bulls were 20th in the NBA last year in rebounding.

Tyler Hanbrough is not an elite rebounder, Blair is. I think that's the problem with this draft. There aren't a lot of well rounded, polished players. There aren't many players who have unique match up ability or elite skills. That's the thing with Tyrus Thomas. He has a unique skill that he is one of the NBA's best at, shot blocking, that will allow him to add the "gravy" of an offensive game to and be a legit NBA starter. Even though a #2 draft pick (technically #4, but really #2) should be hopefully a dominant player the Bulls went with a guy who was the best at something they were lacking. The Bulls wanted a shot blocking, athletic player to replace Chandler and they got it. This draft doesn't have any studs lying around after #4 or #5 (some would say after #1, but I think that's a little silly) so taking Blair (who I don't think will fall) immediately gives the Bulls something they need. They get the best rebounder they can get for the price, which would be relatively cheap in NBA terms. What does #11 make? $2,000,000.00 to $3,500,000.00 a year over 4 years? Plus, if one of the big guys (Noah or Thomas) get hurt or get moved for something other than a big man, Blair would be ready to contribute from Day 1. His offense isn't terrible, either. Did you see how he manhandled Hasheem Thabeet when they played? And that's the big "defensive stud" of this draft. He had 8'' on him and Blair still put up 22 points and had 23 rebounds versus Thabeet's 5 points, 4 rebounds, and 2 blocks. Oh and he threw his ass onto the floor like a rag doll. I don't love Blair but I think that he would be a contributer on most NBA teams right now. Take the majority of the playoff teams this year and I think that Blair would make their rotation. If the Bulls had him this year for the Celtics playoff series, which is basically the barometer I REALLY use when I judge what the Bulls need (the season had to many trades and coaching/rookie pg learning curves to really be a good judge), I think that Dejuan Blair would have helped the Bulls win the series. There were times where Ben Gordon would run down the court, jack up a shot, and everyone in the entire stadium knew the Bulls had NO CHANCE of getting a second chance bucket. I think that Blair would change that and could do it for cheap. I don't know if Hansbrough could do the same thing, although he might be one of the steals of this draft. That guy has done everything that he has been asked to do on the basketball court his whole life. I wouldn't put it past him to become a pretty damn good NBA player, although I think that Blair (and I think most people agree) has a better chance of being "better than average".

Also, I really do see a guy like DeRozan or Hill being in the #9, #10, #11 range. Even Jennings could be there, which could net the Bulls a REALLY good veteran in a trade without them having to give up any of the core guys (or he has already shown that he can handle riding the bench in the pros, ha). Wouldn't Jennings sweeten the pot for a potential Bosh trade with Toronto? They could maybe nab DeRozan at #9 and get Tyrus and Jennings from us. That's a pretty good haul for Toronto for a guy who could just leave outright after next season. There always seems to be a guy who slips out of the Top 10 in every draft who could easily have gone Top 5, but based on team needs he fell further down. Getting a guy like that at #16 might not be possible. I think that this draft is weak, but that doesn't mean that the Bulls couldn't steal a perennial all-star because some of these lottery teams constantly screw up their draft picks. Plus, with the 2010 free agency period being the equivalent to the search for the holy grail, some silly things could happen on Thursday that none of us can predict. Some teams might sell off a VERY GOOD veteran, like Jefferson for Yi last year, to get a longer term project who will help them more in 2011-2012 and fit around whoever they think will sign with them next summer. I think that a team like Portland would sell #24 for cash (if they can't crack the lottery like they want to) and the Bulls could sneak in and get a guy they like there.

I mean look, there are 30 NBA teams, right? Out of those teams, about 8 guys are REALLY part of the rotation, at the most right? So, 8 X 30 = 240. If the average, decent NBA player plays 12 seasons and you don't include the second round (which is stupid but I'll just do it for easier math) 1/3 of the first round guys end up not making the rotation over their 12 year career. That means that 10 out of 30 picks this year won't be in a rotation for a decade, just statistically. I don't know if this draft is BETTER than past drafts but I think there isn't a worse chance that 10 guys are busts this year over other years (Bust isn't the right word, playing 6 years in the NBA isn't a bust but it isn't what a GM is looking for in a 1st round pick either). So I know that you think this draft is pretty good, but just going by the numbers I disagree. So, would I want to pick on the bottom half (#16) and near the end (#26) of the first round if 10 guys are going to bust? Remember, that is not including ANYONE in the second round, which NEVER happens (hell in 2000, which people call a terrible draft, Redd was a 2nd rounder and the best player). So, being able to pick 5 spots ahead makes a big difference unless the guy who the Bulls want will be there at #16 anyway. I don't think that's the case. I don't think that the Bulls like anyone THAT much who will fall to #16 FOR SURE. I think that they would be more excited to get their hands on the guy who falls out of the Top 10. Using my VERY simplistic math (I know that it's not a good equation, the 10 out of 30 thing, but I just made it up on the fly though so it's not bad considering) the odds that the Bulls will get a solid prospect at #26 aren't very good. Plus, there aren't that many projects with tremendous upside in this draft, which usually pushes some REAL quality guys further down in the first round. This year isn't the case so I think that teams will be taking less risks because there isn't the temptation of a huge payoff with a lot of these guys. The Bulls aren't like some other teams in the league, they have some very distinct needs and some very distinct strengths.

ctw724
Registered User
Joined: 04/09/2009
Posts: 501
Points: -29
Offline
DeJuan Blair vs. Tyler Hansbrough

By the numbers, Blair was the better all-around players. He has the advantage on Hansbrough in ORBs, DRBs, Assists, Blocks, and Steals.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=tyler-hansbrough&p1=dejuan-...

I like Hansbrough, but I prefer DeJuan Blair for the Bulls.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
If the Bulls are going to

If the Bulls are going to trade up they need to crack that top 10. Hill would help out the Bulls a lot. Jennings, Flynn, DeRozan would all be great trade bait. Tyreke Evans would be a great pickup too either trade him or see if he can play alongside Rose. That would be fun to watch.

Hansbrough & Derrick Brown wouldn't even be my first choice for the Bulls at picks 16 & 26. I was just using that as an easy example. Being realistic on who could be there I would pick James Johnson at 16 & Nick Calathes at 26. Just my personal opinion. I really like Calathes. I also think James Johnson is a stud.

I agree also that a lot of picks in the 1st round will turn out being busts. But I think a player picked at 11 has an even higher chance at busting than both players taken at picks 16 & 26.

I can't wait for the Draft. Should be interesting. I hope there are a ton of trades. The Bulls are one of my favorite teams just because I am a huge Tyrus & Noah fan. So I am hoping the Bulls draft wisely too.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
PITTBulls- Hansbrough runs

PITTBulls- Hansbrough runs the court much better than Blair. Blair might have better stats but that is purely because he was asked to do WAY MORE. Pitt had no depth. Hansbrough was surrounded by a ton of talent. Stats don't mean everything. Blair can't shoot either, Hansbrough can knock dow midrange jumpshots all day. Just a thought.

ctw724
Registered User
Joined: 04/09/2009
Posts: 501
Points: -29
Offline
They can't win in the playoffs without a Post Presence

Blair gives them that more than Hansbrough or Johnson would. Blair can run too you know.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=23-james-johnson&p1=dejuan-...

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
IF you think a 6'6" player

IF you think a 6'6" player is going to be a dominate post presence in the playoffs then you are crazy. He won't be able to score. He won't be able to defend. He will get some rebounds due to using his weight to box out but thats it, he won't be a dominate rebounder. Not to mention he has bad knees. That doesn't sound like somebody you want to trade both 1st round picks for. Like I said Hansbrough runs better, can score easier on the nba level, and is healthier, proven winner.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
Blair

He had knee problems in high school but I don't think that is an immediate sign of future injury. It's not like he is 30 and just had both knees redone.

There is a bit of history in the NBA where shorter guys are able to overcome their height disadvantage, Barkley and Rodman come to mind. Reggie Evans is another who doesn't have the advantage of basketball IQ that Blair has. I did mention too that Blair went head to head against Thabeet and manhandled him. I don't think that Thabeet would be called a "college defender" either. He is THE elite low post defender in this draft and is 7'3''.

Also, I'll be honest I don't REALLY know how wingspan translates to NBA on-court success. I mean, I can make a pretty good guess but I don't know if having a standing reach similar to a 6'10'' guy makes a 6'6'' guy almost the same size. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. But, what I do STRONGLY believe is that Blair can physically play taller than just 6'6''. He probably would be in the middle at about 6'8'' if his arms and wingspan are that freakishly long. 6'8'' isn't bad for a PF at all and he really knows how to use his weight to his advantage too. If you took DeJuan Blair's head and put it in Eddy Curry's body you would have a guy who averages 35 and 20. Without being 6'11'' (and can do a standing backflip like Curry could do when he came into the NBA as a rookie) Blair could still put up a double-double from the start. Now, so could Joakim Noah right now, but I would place my money on Blair if I needed an offensive rebound.

doubledribbler
Registered User
Joined: 03/02/2009
Posts: 1199
Points: 1331
Offline
Blair and some other thoughts...

I'm not saying Blair is going to be some dominant player, but he put up some nice numbers last year, especially rebounding wise. Despite those bad knees. He destroyed a player that a lot of people love (not me) in Thabeet. I think he brings a consistency to every game. Speaking of consistency that's one thing I like about Hansborough (sp?). That and the fact that he is very effecient. I think he makes an role player on a good team. As a Bulls fan I would love to get him. By the way I do not live in Chicago, nor have I ever, so I don't get to listen to your talk radio up there. :)

As for McCants, I think he is probably a knucklehead, but I think he can play. He could probably average 20 a game, but I doubt he would be effecient at doing it. I see him doing somewhere between 12-15 a game if he ever starts to get some solid minutes. He will never start on a championship caliber team though.

The core of Rose, Noah and Salmons that I mention, I don't mention so much as them being a superstar group. Rose is the only one that will ever be, but I see the other two as potentially big pieces in any future championship that they might try to attain. I think those three could easily start and then you could fill in two true stars at either shooting guard, small forward and/or power forward and have a nice team. You probably really have a nice team if you can get Salmons to be your 6th man, just not the 6th man behind Ben Gordon.

I don't blame Deng for anything. I understand he is young, but I have never thought much of him as a player. He had a nice year in the playoffs a few years ago, but he never built on that. I don't hold injuries against him either. I'm not saying that the Bulls have to do anything with him. I understand they have the money to sign two max players, but in reality, you have to have a bench and you'll be inking Rose to a longterm max deal soon and who knows how much you decide to give Noah and/or Tyrus if you keep them. I think it is important to keep long term in mind. The Bulls will not be a championship team next year. So if they are not going to be a championship team, they need to do everything they can to get in position to do so. Besides I really don't think he complements Rose's game very well. As far as the trades, especially with Portland it wouldn't be a complete salary dump. Realistically you have to get something for a solid player. With Portland I would really be interested in guys like Kopponen, Batum, Fernandez, and Bayless. Don't worry I'm not one of those guys on here that think that you can get all of them for him. By the way Paul Allen is the owner. Regardless of who's extensions are coming up the guy can foot the bill if he is willing and he always seems to be willing to spend

I love Hinrich. I was glad the Bulls did not trade him and really thought he would bounce back. I think he plays hard, he hustles and he is a good leader and his defense has been great since day one. If and when he is traded he will have another solid year. Unfortunately, 9 million a year is way too much for a backup point guard. Once again, I am thinking long term success. The Bulls are still a couple of years from winning it all. Guys like Amare and Bosh, are extremely talented by may be too soft to really lead a team to the championship. If I had to pick I would take Amare though.

ctw724
Registered User
Joined: 04/09/2009
Posts: 501
Points: -29
Offline
An undersized big-man can't do well in the playoffs?

That's just not true.

Adrian Dantley (6'6"), Dennis Rodman (6'7") , Wes Unseld (6'7") and Dolph Schayes (6'7") or Paul Silas (6'7"), who all won NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS. Also, let's not forget Barkley (6'6") either, who made it to the Finals. Don't discard won't you don't know or understand!!! A few of those guys are even Hall a Famers.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
Time will tell. Dont ever

Time will tell. Dont ever compare Barkley to Blair...that is a disgrace. Tell Blair to get a jumpshot. You named 5 guys in history that are short PFs who had success. The odds of Blair being a starting PF for a championship team are d#mn near 0.

chibulls88
Registered User
Joined: 06/16/2009
Posts: 50
Points: -178
Offline
Baby Bulls

Two questions to ponder...please answer

If Gordon is willing to resign for about $7 mil a year should we do it?

If Jordan Hill drops and is available at 7 (for 16 and 26) should we trade for him?

doubledribbler
Registered User
Joined: 03/02/2009
Posts: 1199
Points: 1331
Offline
Re-Signing Gordon

To chibulls88, I think for $7 million, the Bulls should definitely resign Gordon, but I think that he has to be ok with coming off the bench. Gordon is easily one of the most explosive players on the offensive end, but he gets abused defensively. I think his best spot is coming off the bench. I think the only problem with that is Deng. He seemed to be really sensitive about not playing in crunch time last year after the big Salmons/Miller trade. Personally, if the game is winding down, I am playing Rose, Gordon, and Salmons, but realistically depending on the matchup you could play small and put in Deng at PF. To tell you the truth, I think he might actually cash in this year from somebody so $7 is probably going to be out of the question.

They should never trade for Hill. I really don't think he will ever be better than Blair or Hansborough and probably not really much better than any other one of the top power forwards. I think you can draft him if he falls to you, but not give up two picks for him. I

doubledribbler
Registered User
Joined: 03/02/2009
Posts: 1199
Points: 1331
Offline
The Undersized Big Man

I'm going to have to go with Pittbulls on this topic. Don't under-rate someone because of their size. There are a ton of GM's that draft these massive 7 footers that are useless. Seriously who was the last great 7 footer that got drafted? Regardless of if you like Dwight Howard or not, the guy is an "under-sized" center so was Amare. There are maybe a handful of decent 7 footers in the NBA. This thinking is keeping the Collins twins in the NBA (Jarron and Jason), even though all they do is set picks. At the PF spot is 6-8 really that much different than 6-10? Especially when the 6-8 guy is probably more athletic and quicker. Speaking of 6-8 guys, I remember quite a few times watching Dennis Rodman shut down Shaq in his prime. None of the 7 footers were able to do that. The neck up is completely useless in basketball. A lot of these guys just have long necks and big heads. Long arms help to make up the size difference in a player, just like leaping ability and strength. Being shorter is actually an advantage defensively because you can get more leverage on a taller player. Think Chuck Hayes and what he did against the Lakers.

ctw724
Registered User
Joined: 04/09/2009
Posts: 501
Points: -29
Offline
It's Not Zero when other players have done it

Blair will do just fine in the NBA. I wasn't comparing Blair to Barkley, just proving your point wrong. You said, an undersized guy can't be effective in the playoffs. Well, I named you some players that were.

gatorheels
gatorheels's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/25/2009
Posts: 3232
Points: 1493
Offline
Yeah you are right,

Yeah you are right, undersized guys can find a way to be effective. I like Blair, I just think he is going to be a solid guy coming off the bench. I don't see him as a starter. Of course I could be wrong. My whole point wasn't to bash Blair it was simply to say trading up just to get Blair would be stupid when he could possibly fall to you at 16. If not you can still get quality players at #16 & #26. If the Bulls could trade up to get Hill I think that would be a good move. Hill offers solid defense & rebounding not to mention he can run the floor and has great size with a long wingspan. If Gordon is willing to re-sing for 7 million I think it would be best to re-sign him. He has proven to be a clutch player in the playoffs.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 538
Points: 329
Offline
All about Blair

The Bulls take productive players who are going to MOST LIKELY provide similar production in the NBA. What will Blair be able to do? Well, he'll be able to be one of the league leaders in offensive rebounds in a relatively short amount of developmental adjustment time and has a basketball IQ that is high enough to be able to run different offensive/defensive sets with Derrick Rose. I think that he has shown the ability to put up some points, too. Once again, if the Bulls bring back Gordon, we could seriously look at their performance against the Celtics in the playoffs and use that (and what Orlando and Cleveland have) as a bit of a bench mark for the Bulls. What would have helped Chicago win against the Celtics (especially against a Celtics team with Garnett and Powe)? Adding Deng gives the Bulls more athletic mid-range and low-post scoring threat who is also fast enough to run the court in transition. Noah 6'1'', Thomas 6'9.5'', Deng 6'9'' (with a 7'0'' wingspan). They are all athletic, properly sized bigs who are as fast as many of the guards in the league. None of them are offensive rebounding standouts. Against the Celtics I couldn't believe how many times Gordon would take a quick shot and not one Bulls player was standing in the post. Blair probably would sprint down the court to the block, making the opposing team's bigs expend a bit of energy getting the ball and could even haul down 3+ second chances a game. That makes a big difference when the majority of a 7-game series went to multiple overtimes.

I am kind of scattered in my thoughts here but I guess it boils down to this. If the Bulls think that the current roster could be a Top 5 team in the East as currently constructed (not that much of a stretch in my opinion, they might have been a 4 seed if they had Salmons, Miller and Deng for ALL of 2008-2009) then they should look to add pieces that can provide something the Bulls need help in. One in post scoring. I don't know if that can be added through the draft. Maybe Hill, who I would much rather see on the Bulls than Blair. Barring a miracle, Griffin and Hill will be gone by the time Chicago drafts. So, getting a guy who could improve the team immediately (they were 20th in the NBA in rebounds last year) would be smarter than adding another shooter or a back-up point guard. Then, when next off-season (or the next trading deadline comes around) you can afford to lose a guy like Noah (the Bulls best current rebounder and someone the Suns reportedly like, seriously) to bring in Amare/Bosh if they are available because you have another rebounding presence.

In the meantime, you do what Paxson and the Bulls have been doing since Paxson took over in 2003. You put out the best team you can and create a perennial playoff contender even if you don't have all-stars at every position. Guys who maximize their talents and have a clearly defined role worked in 2005-2006 when the Bulls were what? 3rd in the East? Then you are an attractive, large market playoff team for top tier free agents.

xoboawaosa
Registered User
Joined: 07/26/2012
Posts: 6
Points: -4
Offline
Think BIG:

Think BIG:

RSS: Syndicate content