Blog a Bull: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Sounder At Heart for Seattle Sounders Fans!

Sam Smith-esque trade idea of the week: get in on Jason Kidd deal

That's right, I'm putting on my sweater-vest again, and trying to come up with a midseason trade for the Bulls. Not sure if it's really to make the team better as much as more interesting, as to be honest I can't stomach watching this same group much longer.

As far as why to trade at all, The Bulls aren't losing enough to have true lottery dreams, and with the pick they'll likely get I wouldn't want another young player clogging up the roster. (then again, I said the same thing last year and am pretty happy with Noah) And, as currently constituted they won't do much in the playoffs either. So while I suppose that makes me for the organization's new lowered-expectations of simply making the Eastern Conference playoffs, I still think changes should be made so a playoff run is made with an eye still to the future.

And while the first option would be to deal Wallace, or make some blockbuster acquisition, it just doesn't seem possible

But the Bulls do have a nice congruence [or confluence, or in congruence, or confusing -ed.] of circumstances: a goal (or should-be goal) of developing Thomas and Noah for this playoff push, and some solid performing veterans in Joe Smith and Andres Nocioni. The Bulls should be doing what they can to see if any value can be had for those vets, as not only will they have the highest value but they're blocking their most important projects.

Which brings me to the most recent trade speculation floating around the league: Jason Kidd's latest trade demand. Kelly Dwyer broke down the limited options:

Kidd's agent, Jeff Schwartz, is fresh off issuing New Jersey's front office a trade demand, and though Kidd's age (35 in March) and contract (19.7 million bucks this season, 21.3 million the next) make him a tough sell...

Making things more complicated are the tradeable (we think) contracts that the Nets won't want. The Lakers could send Lamar Odom and Kwame to New Jersey in a half-second for Kidd, but why would the Nets want to rebuild with Odom's contract on the books? Odom's in his ostensible prime, he's not some young stud who can develop on a rebuilding team, and his contract expires the same year as Kidd's.

It makes sense that a rebuilding team wouldn't want Odom, but as I stated above the Bulls shouldn't be rebuilding just yet, and acquiring Odom can make sense as long as it means dealing out two other veteran big-men.

Here is my proposed 3-team deal with the Bulls/Lakers/Nets.

Lakers (acquire Jason Kidd, Joe Smith, and Jamaal Magloire): Figure that a triumvirate of Bryant/Kidd/Bynum can give them a 2-year championship window. Smith is a veteran having a great season and thus a great role-playing fit for a contender. Magloire (or as later mentioned, Jason Collins) can be the stopgap center (taking Kwame's role) until Bynum returns.  Dealing Kwame's monster expiring deal is their best chance to get a player of Kidd's caliber (or perhaps more importantly, stature) around Kobe, so it seems like now is the time to strike.

Nets (acquire Jordan Farmar, Andres Nocioni, Kwame Brown, Chris Duhon, picks and cash): Are likely resigned to not getting much more than expiring deals and mid-level prospects and picks for Kidd at this point. Nocioni's deal is long and mean (though front-loaded, which is less mean), but perhaps their previously reported interest in the 'tough guy' isn't extinguished even though they're dealing Kidd. Getting a point guard prospect seems like a must, and it can be hashed out between them and the Lakers as to whether it's Farmar or Javaris Crittenton. Another negotiating wrinkle could be forcing L.A. to take Jason Collins (another year on his deal) instead of Magloire, and to make up the salary difference the Lakers could deal Chris Mihm's expiring deal (with Mihm's consent) back. In terms of draft picks, I'm not sure they couldn't get either (or both) the Bulls or Lakers first round selections, and as an added asset: by coincidence the Nets owe their 2009 second rounder to Seattle, and both the Bulls (Knicks) and Lakers (Bobcats) have extra 2009 picks to even out that debit.

Bulls (acquire Lamar Odom, Darrell Armstrong, Bostjan Nachbar): I like this deal for the Bulls because even though it's technically 3-for-3, it still serves as roster consolidation, as it'd replace two players ahead of Noah and Thomas with one. And while Odom is highly paid ($13.2m+$14.1m), it's still only one additional season (same as Smith, and three fewer than Noc), and it'll give Paxson 2 straight years of fat expiring deals (Odom and then Wallace) in case the 'right' superstar comes along. And while he's having a poor season (and overall just aint that great), as previously discussed on this site Odom can still help on the court too. As Hollinger says, he's high-volume and medium-efficiency, but, unlike most of the current Bulls roster, is someone who can create shots and has a more diverse offensive game beyond jumpshooting. He rebounds well enough (14.1 rebound rate this year, compared to 12.9 for Smith and 10.4 for Noc) to stay at the PF spot but can play multiple positions. In this deal the Nets stand to simply trade away bodies, so Armstrong is coming over to take Duh's spot as backup point (asking for Marcus Williams is a bit greedy), and the Bulls and Nets can negotiate whether Nachbar or Antoine Wright is their new backup SF.

New Bulls roster (IR: Nichols, Curry, Khryapa):
Hinrich/Armstrong
Sefolosha/Gordon
Deng/Nachbar/Griffin
Odom/Thomas
Wallace/Noah/Gray

This new Bulls team would be (most importantly?) different, but also both better suited for this year's playoffs and beyond. None of the Bulls young talent is touched, and in fact they'd get opportunity for a developmental boost simply by having fewer guys in their way. Financially the Bulls are in better shape with a big expiring deal next year, and the long-term commitment to Nocioni off the books.

And the rest of this season becomes a lot more fun to watch.

0 recs  |  Comment 109 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Creative
I find this creative, but somehow, I am just not a fan of anything that has the Bulls acquiring Lamar Odom.  I just don't like his game.  He strikes me as a fine 3rd option, who gathers some rebounds, scores some points, but never really does anything to turn his team into a winner.  In other words, I think he'd fit in perfectly on the team we have right now...passive, looking for someone else to do the big thing, never really stepping up when the time comes for someone to act.

by balta1701 on Jan 28, 2008 9:17 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I get your point
Odom doesn't really change the demeanor of the team. He does have skill though, which is also deficient on this roster.

Plus I'm sick of watching Nocioni 'step up'.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 28, 2008 10:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

HOMER TRADE ALERT!!!
C'mon guys, take off your red and white colored goggles and think about this for a second:

-- Why would the Lakers trade Odom and Farmar for a 34-year-old point guard and garbage?

-- Why would the Lakers essentially trade Lamar Odom for Chris Duhon and Joe Smith?

-- And why wouldn't the Lakers just offer Farmar and Brown to the Nets for Kidd without including the Bulls scrubs?

Nice try, guys. Kupchak is stupid, but he ain't that stupid!!!

by biggame james on Jan 30, 2008 3:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

TRADE MACHINE ALERT
as in, use it. your questions will be answered.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 30, 2008 3:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting
Odom is a lot more of a roadblock to Tyrus getting minutes than either Noc or Joe Smith's knees.  And next year is TT's breakout year.  Or he's a bust.  Plus, TT's going to be getting more and more valuable minutes at the end of this year as they drain more and more fluid out of Smith's knee and Noc is forced to log heavy minutes as SF.  So do you really want to short-circuit that by getting a 35+ minute PF to play ahead of him?
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 28, 2008 9:43 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

uh...
Smith and Noc get more minutes as is, and Odom's only going to play less as he goes along, plus he's usually missing 20 games a season if that's a 'bonus' for you.

If Tyrus booms (he already broke out as far as I'm concerned, ha) then he can take the starting role. Granted this involves a real coach.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 28, 2008 10:25 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

for some reason I want to talk about this more
what exactly does "next year is TT's breakout year.  Or he's a bust." mean? I don't like your criteria for evaluating Tyrus (4 minutes at a time) so far, so I'm skeptical I'll like your answer.

I think if Odom is starting and Tyrus plays 15-25 minutes a game on a GOOD team (and having 4 good bigs...er 3+Wallace, isn't overdoing things), that's progress. He doesn't have to start and play 35 minutes to not get some arbitrary 'bust' label at age 22, and getting junk minutes on a junk team to end to this season will likely facilitate bad habits anyway.

Plus, it seems that your crediting this idea of waiting until guys get hurt for young players to see action as some brilliant scheme from the coaching (and management?) staff, and not what it is: them falling ass-backwards into competence.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 12:35 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I would expect TT
to be playing consistent, meaningful minutes and having an impact.  I don't care whether it's starting or coming off of the bench like BG, he should be playing at least half of the minutes at PF and putting up solid if not above average numbers.  He's already demonstrated he can do these things in certain situations, so I would expect the next leap to be his ability to do them consistently.  Over the last month his minutes have been increasing, so he's going to get a shot to show what he can do again.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 12:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's my point
as this team descends in the crapper, there's no meaningful minutes to be had.

'half' the minutes seems arbitrary, but it works for me. I'm not unconvinced they couldn't swing a Tyrus/Odom frontcourt at times too. Again, 4 big men doesn't seem like too much, and I think it's less than 5.

And I still cringe when you mention this 'shot' Tyrus is getting. Quit giving the organization any credit and join us who think they're just complete idiots who are now forced to play Thomas out of unintended circumstances. join us....

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 3:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The Dark Side is enticing
but I still have to pass.  If the team is ever going to be good, the players have to be consistent.  Tyrus was going to get another shot regardless of whatever else happened.  The fact that it happens sooner is gravy.  The young guys always get a chance, it's just nice when they push the older guys out instead of being given the spot.  Hopefully tonight is the first of many good nights for TT.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 6:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Right now
I'd be happy with a deal the includes my Grandmother at this point. Anything to make it more watchable.

I can see someone taking Noc or Smith as they are having relatively good years and are overvalued as well. Duhon on the other hand...I guess if he is an upgrade to a desperate team it is possible.  I am not sure if we actually get anything with this deal but we do get rid of things and get us in position for the coming years when some really talented players hit open season.  And perhaps by then Noah and Thomas and Deng will have kicked it up a notch.  

by cranscape on Jan 28, 2008 9:46 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I wouldn't give up a lottery pick either
unless it gets Wallace off of the roster.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 28, 2008 9:47 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I know you wouldn't
another lottery pick would give you more opportunity to get in arguments over the wacky idea of playing them.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 28, 2008 10:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

not to mention
more chances for cute little snide remarks from you :-)
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 9:18 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I like this
from many perspectives.  From a salary perspective, it makes sense since the Lakers will have to move a big contract in addition to Kwame's in order to get Kidd, and it's going to be hard for them to try to pawn off Vlad Rad.  The Nets are going to have to take at least one bad contract back in return, and Noce's seems to be one of the lesser evils in this category, except for the years (which would be a dealbreaker for me if I were the Nets).  The Bulls are obligated for that aggregate cap hit anyway, so might as well consolidate it into one player who frees up minutes at the 4.  From a talent perspective, the Bulls get significantly better.  I am not trying to sound crazy, but Odom would draw double-teams at the four, would rebound than anyone else on the team could, with the possible exception of Noah and Thomas closer to their potential, and would probably be the high scorer on the team and should be first option on offense.  He could put up sick numbers, maybe even 20 and 10, on the Bulls because there's such a glaring need for production out that spot.  Assuming he can stay healthy, of course.

by messwiththebull on Jan 28, 2008 10:37 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Wow
This is a great trade, and one that really works for all teams. Nets get expirers, a young PG, and, uh, Noce. Kobe gets to play with Kidd. And I've always thought Odom was somewhat under-rated; not necessarily what you want as a second scoring option (as he was with the Lakers), but a decent third option, which, presumably, he could be if playing alongside Gordon and Deng. (And indeed, with the emergence of Bynum this year--and subsequent demotion of Odom to third option--the Lakers have been pretty good.) And having Wallace and Odom's salaries expire at the same time is also a nice ace in the hole. And finally, yes, clearing out one body in front of Ty would be good.  

This should really happen. I forsee a nightmare scenario, however, with all the GMs ready to pull the trigger, and then Pax suddenly backs out, saying, "I just couldn't trade Nocioni to a team in our conference."

by BenGo07 on Jan 28, 2008 11:59 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

definitely interesting
i kinda like it, i think odom would be a pretty decent fit on the remaining bulls squad; they could run the offense through him, and he can do what he does best which is essentially create for himself and others.  could lead to more open looks for deng and gordon when they're back too.  im not 100% certain that LA does the deal though; they'd be painfully thin up front for the rest of the year, but i guess they'd have to take a chance because the squad they have now probably isn't a realistic contender

bigger organizational question for the bulls: what to do in the future?  would you then extend deng and gordon and hope to land a big FA when odom and corpse come off the books?  completely gut the squad by signing and trading deng and/or gordon and hope to make a big splash when odom and corpse expire?  lots of directions to go from there.

by Mike C on Jan 29, 2008 12:01 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

I like Odom
and thought he was always a unique player that gives a little bit of everything( statically ) and could spread the floor better for Deng and BG. And Bostjan Nachbar has a good J and i think could be a key role player to a contending team or a playoff team, maybe even ship him out for another player like a Chris Wilcox but lets be real here, if Pax does this trade ill be happy for a couple of years knowing Pax is a bit hesitant to pull the trigger. But all around good trade for everyone.

by eross226 on Jan 29, 2008 1:02 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

I'd take this trade
Any trade that keeps the under-used young guys leaves this Bulls fan happy. And who knows, maybe Odom could score some points for us. I'm on board.

by ForWhomTheBullTolls on Jan 29, 2008 1:51 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Not sure...
the lakers would do it (or any other team for that matter anyway).

Why would the lakers trade an emerging point guard (Farmar) and get rid of an important piece like Odom, just to get one or two good years from Kidd ?

At the moment, they are contenders for the title (with a healthy Bynum), and Kobe being far (I guess, but you never know) from being over-aged, they figure that the'll only get better with the continuous improvement from the youngs (Bynum, Farmar, ...).

If they do this trade, they shorten their window of opportunity for a title.

The Game chose him !

by Diabolo on Jan 29, 2008 2:54 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Because Kobe
is getting older and doesn't have a huge window for a playoff run. Chances are that in the next two/three years Kobe/Kidd/Bynum would all have enough game in them to make a good run.

by cranscape on Jan 29, 2008 8:30 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Now to get
this trade to Pax's desk.
Yes, the game is on in Iowa.

by sue369 on Jan 29, 2008 6:44 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Amen to that
TMD- http://playahatersblog.blogspot.com

by TMD on Jan 29, 2008 10:00 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Where do I sign up?
Just hoping we also see more of this from Lamar.

by paxson43 on Jan 29, 2008 7:01 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

My goal is to move Wallace
This trade, while interesting , doesn't move Wallace.  Noc is one of the few players giving effort.  With Deng out, maybe for an extended period, (I wouldn't be surprised if Deng isn't injured the rest of the year), we need Noc.  Odom has become very mediocre.  No deal for me.

by chgobr on Jan 29, 2008 7:33 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

"we need Noc"
for what?

If Deng's out for the majority of this season, it's doomed either way.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 9:08 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Matt's probably correct
About Deng's presence/absence vis-à-vis the Bulls' success the rest of the season.

That said, I'm still not sure how Deng's being out for the remainder evinces a valid criticism of Matt's proposed Odom-acquisition.  With Odom, the Bulls would have a PF who - if healthy - is swift/skilled enough to handle significant playing minutes at SF; moreover, his defense at either position would have to better than what Nocioni provides.  In Matt's scenario, the Bulls would also add Nachbar to their SF depth, who could provide jump-shooting off the bench (though not as efficiently as Nocioni, which sounds weird to say), and would only be a third-option at SF if Deng can return.

I guess, personally, I'd just prefer the following lineup - on aesthetic grounds, as well as in terms of production-potential - to the non-Deng lineup the Bulls have been sending to the floor:

PG Hinrich
SG Sefolosha
SF Odom
PF Thomas
 C Noah/Wallace

Dumping Wallace, while a noble sentiment, is practically intractable; though there may be some viable scenario, I doubt Paxson has enough creativity to arrive to it.

by jpx7 on Jan 29, 2008 12:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

giving effort
if by "giving effort" you mean chucking shots at an insanely high rate, never closing out on your man, playing the defense of a 6th grader, and complaining to the officials at every call...then I'd say yep you're right!

by ScottieCartwright on Jan 29, 2008 9:59 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's one way to look at it
or you could look at it as giving consistent effort that translates into the 4th highest PER on the team behind Deng, Smith and Noah.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 10:07 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I look at it as PER being friendly
to high usage chuckers.
Fire Boylan!

by hscs on Jan 29, 2008 10:09 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It is
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 10:24 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

PER
Noc has played in every game.  Deng has played 33 games, Noah has played 35, and Smith has old-man knees...so he should be HAPPY that he's 4th in that list??

That says nothing for him because in reality if he were THAT efficient, he'd be 1st among those

by ScottieCartwright on Jan 29, 2008 10:14 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Deng has still played more minutes than Noc
and Smith isn't far behind.  So the minutes are about the same.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 10:24 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

At first
I was all against your trade because ODOM isn't quite the guy I always thought he could have been, but then I looked at the lineup and thought, why the hell not.  We'll lose my favorite to watch Bull (Noc) and our very solid offseason pickup Smith, but we'll play the Odom cards that say if Kobe's out Odom's better.

I think having the flexibility of Odom with our smallish guards could really help us.  Odom can handle the ball and play anywhere from 1-4 (though is best suited for 3/4).  I like thinking we'd space the floor with Lamar, Sef, Gordon, Deng during some stretches, or even use Lamar's every other game rebounding strengths to play a very fast paced run and gun with Hinrich-Gordon-Sef-Deng-Odom......could be interesting too.

We've all seen Lamar when he's good (when he's on he's great)....

I'd hate to lose Noc though in this deal, and I DEFINATELY would not part with our first round draft picks for this deal because I don't think Odom's stock is high enough to warrant his salary or the loss of Nocioni, who's been more vital to our team than anyone else this year....(I know we're in last place, but we'd be nipping on Miami territory without Noc).

I still think I'd like to see a Deng/Gordon trade for a superstar......first.

by majoyenrac on Jan 29, 2008 7:49 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Wasn't Odom a big part of
the O'Neal trade to Miami?

Let's book it!

by hhi on Jan 29, 2008 8:05 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

don't see
NJ taking this trade.  It's not like the Nets have to trade Kidd and they really get a lot of flotsam in this trade.  The nicer pieces (and I am including Odom) go elsewhere.  Not to mention, it's not like they are dying for another SF (call him a PF if you want but, ...come on).  And taking the productivity vortex that is Kwame Brown only adds to their "losing" column leaving the "gaining" column especially bare.
As for the Bulls making this trade, I would be fine with it.  Nocioni isn't worth anymore than Odom and Duhon/Smith won't be worth much for much longer.  I'm so sick of this team that it would be refreshing to deal some pieces.  Although, losing 'bright spots' Nocioni and Smith means we leave ourselves with more disappointments than we had before the deal.  But, at this poin, whatever.  
"...Keeping 'SlowHand' alive since aught-five"

by CookDing on Jan 29, 2008 8:14 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Jordan Farmar struck many
as a goofy-looking, strange-sounding afterthought coming into the predraft camp, but he surprised a lot of people with his athleticism (Didn't he have one of the highest verticals at the camp?) and has continued to surprise in the nba.  Maybe he needs a sleeker head to make people believers.

Farmar is a good player.  Is Kidd better?  Yes.  And don't limit Kidd's career to only one or two more years.  His below-the-rim game could keep him in the game for a good five more years.

The question that jumps out from the Nets' perspective: Why in the world would they add Farmar AND Duhon when they already have Kidd's heir-apparent on the roster in Marcus Williams?  

Matt, this whole deal sounds like nothing more than a (not so veiled) attempt to move your nemesis off the Bulls roster.

by alec on Jan 29, 2008 9:46 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Duhon's just an expiring contract
and reports indicate the Nets aren't thrilled with Marcus Williams anyway.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 9:48 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I like this proposal
TMD- http://playahatersblog.blogspot.com

by TMD on Jan 29, 2008 10:02 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Matt's right
Williams has Eddy Curry like physical fitness issues.  Clubs aren't sure if it's just a lack of effort or if Marcus Williams, like Curry, just isn't really into basketball for winning and more into it for the salary and lifestyle.

Marcus Williams was stealing notebook computers while on scholarship at UCONN.  He was a top prospect coming to UCONN.  He was the next of kin of  Ben Gordon.  He had amazing recruits around him.  you had all these pieces in place and the kid still had one thing on his mind, getting money.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 12:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Kidd
yeah, I agree he probably will be in the league for maybe 5 more years...but he will only be effective for maybe 2-3 of those 5.

by ScottieCartwright on Jan 29, 2008 10:04 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Odom is wack
They hate him here in LA and for good reason.

He shows up about once every 4 games.

 Yeah, he's a stat filler but he couldn't give a shit about the game.

Once he lost his son a couple years ago, it killed any basketball motivation he once had.  

Plus his health is a another issue.

by Option27 on Jan 29, 2008 10:03 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Losing his son...that's a tough thing,
and more than any father should have to bear.  I believe Odom's rep his entire career is summed up in your second sentence.  He is the consummate underachiever...a huge talent who just doesn't seem to care.  Even before he was drafted there was the pot-smoking stuff.  

There's no way in the world Paxson would ever invite Odom onto his team.

by alec on Jan 29, 2008 10:39 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If so
Pax is just not cut out for this NBA GM thing.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 10:51 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It's not like
One of those things where Pax is known to only bring in Pax kinda players.

I think Pax is at the point where he's willing to give up on some of his self loved players. If it will help the team.

But bringing in Odom won't help the team and that is what was meant. He isn't the guy that's gonna help your team out immediately or for the future.

Now if you're talking on just taking on a bad contract to match with Wallace's when both are up, then I'm sure there are plenty other options out there

by Option27 on Jan 29, 2008 10:55 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think the league is over what Odom could be
even underachieving, he can play. And it's not like he's been seen as a bad locker room influence (as if this team has steered clear of that, heh).

Nocioni shouldn't be on the 'loved' list for Pax. They could use guys who try less and play more.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 11:10 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Odom does have a good game.
But if you love Tyrus, you'd better find a way to ensure that he and Tyrus were never left alone together in the same room.  

Tyrus is too impressionable, and Odom's laid-back, who-gives-a-shit attitude could infect Tyrus like an air-borne virus...with permanently disabling effects.

by alec on Jan 29, 2008 11:52 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He was
really good as a color commentator maybe he should has stuck to that
TMD- http://playahatersblog.blogspot.com

by TMD on Jan 29, 2008 1:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Changing scenery is what Odom does best
High schools?  Check.
Colleges?  Check.
NBA clubs?  Check.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 12:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I like the idea
of changing up the team, because a change is needed.  But, I don't think Odom is the answer.  And, I KNOW Nachbar isn't the answer!

Also, it doesn't seem like the Lakers are in too much of a hurry to go after Kidd.  The rumors are that the Mavericks have moved to the forefront in the race for Kidd.  They can't match up the contracts, as of yet, so perhaps the Bulls can hop onto that trade, and see if we can't get something out of that trade.  Now that I think of it, I wouldn't want part of that, considering Paxson would probably ask for Trenton Hassell or the washed-up Eddie Jones.  We already have enough of those guys on our team!

It is being said that Paxson is willing to trade Duhon, Khryapa, and Thomas.  Although, reports are saying that he won't trade Thomas "just to trade him."  I'm glad to see that he's not thinking like an NBA Live team owner, and that of an actual GM.  My guess is we make no deals that are worth any ink, seeing how we won't get much in return for Duhon and Khryapa.

by BigScott03 on Jan 29, 2008 10:28 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

getting in on a Dallas deal
the idea is taking the high-salaried piece the Nets wouldn't want. In the Mavs case that would mean taking (likely) Jason Terry. Or Jerry Stackhouse. Both have deals longer than Odom.

None of these guys are 'the answer', but I think it allows Tyrus or Noah to become that answer, and/or position the Bulls cap-wise to acquire that answer after the season (when Odom's an expiring deal).

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 10:35 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

What do you think of
trying to sway the Nets into giving us Jefferson?  Is his contract too big to consume, even if we can dump some of our longer year, higher pay salaries, along with other non-pertinent players (such as Duhon and Khryapa)?  I'm not sure the Nets would go for this, but if they were truly wanting to dump salaries, they might.  Although, I do know if they were going to start "rebuilding," they would have to find suitors for Vince Carter, as well, and that is unlikely to happen, so we would most likely end up with unwanted players in that trade.  

Oh well.  I guess we're just getting desperate now.

by BigScott03 on Jan 29, 2008 11:07 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Why?
Kidd's not good enough anymore to push the Bulls into title contention.  He wouldn't want to be here as much as he doesn't want to be in NJ.

by snley on Jan 29, 2008 10:52 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Not so sure
Kidd is a strong defender and a tremendous distributor, both of which would complement Gordon.  He also brings much needed backcourt size.  We get rid of the Corpse, freeing up time for the young frontcourt guys.  Kidd gets everyone the ball in position to score (TT gets oops, Deng gets passes slashing to the basket, Gordon gets passes off curls or spotting up).  The Bulls become more of a transition-oriented team, where they are able to take advantage of their athleticism and mask their lack of a half-court "go to" scorer.

Kidd, Duhon
Gordon, Thabo
Deng, Noc
Smith, TT
Noah, Gray

It could work.  It would definitely be more fun to watch.

Noah is a hussle machine, and Matt Duhon is our best guard.

by preverbal on Jan 29, 2008 11:05 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Back court size? What the hell?
What's this obsession?
Let us prepare for glory! --Michael Redd

by tyger1147 on Jan 29, 2008 11:21 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It's just a hot phrase
Everyone says the Bulls need backcourt size, so surely we can use it to justify stupid trade proposals.  Who cares if it's true or significant?

by snley on Jan 29, 2008 1:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You're an ass
No analysis, just insults.  The thought was thrown out there for discussion.  No need to be a prick about it.

Backcourt size is significant.  Unless you like getting abused by big backcourts.  And its not some "hot" phrase that is currently in vogue for no reason.  It was, point of fact, a significant factor in the Bulls dynasty's domination, but judging by the tenor of your comments, you were probably being swaddled in the late 90's and missed it.

Noah is a hussle machine, and Matt Duhon is our best guard.

by preverbal on Jan 29, 2008 2:25 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It's still ridiculous.
What does being big help? There's no inherent winning by simply being tall.
Let us prepare for glory! --Michael Redd

by tyger1147 on Jan 29, 2008 3:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Its not inherent winning
Its a matchup advantage.  All other things being equal, size is an advantage in basketball.  This is not news.

Size is one reason why Gordon is a liability on defense.  It is why Hinrich frequently has to guard opposing 2s.  It is also a reason why he gets into such foul trouble -- he has to guard bigger and stronger players almost every game.

Noah is a hussle machine, and Matt Duhon is our best guard.

by preverbal on Jan 30, 2008 11:58 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Pardon my insult.
My previous comment was harsh and, as you point out, I did not provide any analysis.  I think the issue of size in the backcourt is greatly overblown.  Yes, it'd be nice to see Thabo develop as a "big" defender when matchups warrant.  My problem, though, was the idea of trading the 6'3" Hinrich for the 6'4" Kidd is somehow adding size to our backcourt.  That one inch is minimal and doesn't address the real cause of lack of size in the Bulls backcourt: 6'3" Ben Gordon.  Plus, as Kidd's quickness and athleticism have diminished, is that going to create a need to also carry a smaller, quicker defensive specialist?

I may be quite younger than you, but that does not diminish the validity of my opinions.  Again, I apologize for analysis lacking from my previous post.  I am old enough, though, to have watched all 6 Bulls championship seasons.

by snley on Jan 29, 2008 3:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No problem
And no, your age doesn't diminish your opinions.  Your last comment expressed a rational and reasoned opinion that can facilitate a continued discussion.

If you look at Hinrich and Kidd side by side, you will see that there is a significant size difference between them, not just height but physical bulk and strength.  Would that make a meaningful difference?  Maybe not, given that Matt thinks Kidd is no longer a strong defender.  I have only watched a handful of Nets games this year -- maybe he's fallen off.

Anyway, it was just a thought.

Noah is a hussle machine, and Matt Duhon is our best guard.

by preverbal on Jan 30, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Size matters
when our primary obstacles to winning the East maintain an arsenal to exploit it.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 2:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

well said
Noah is a hussle machine, and Matt Duhon is our best guard.

by preverbal on Jan 30, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Just cause the salaries match
Doesn't mean the trade makes sense.

WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD NJ DO THIS!?

by Option27 on Jan 29, 2008 10:57 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Kidd wants out
and is old.  NJ gets rid of their "cancer" (as my Nets fan friend is now calling him) and picks up Hinrich, a "promising" young replacement.  They also get needed frontcourt help in Wallace and sacrifice the injury-ravaged Krstic, who may or may not be done.

The Bulls get rid of their "cancer" in Wallace.  They sacrifice Hinrich for a PG who will help all the other guys develop offensively now.  They take a flier on Krstic, who again may or may not be done.

Maybe the Nets wouldn't want to take on the Bulls salaries.  Maybe they wouldn't want to give up on Krstic.  But fundamentally, why is this an insane trade idea?

Noah is a hussle machine, and Matt Duhon is our best guard.

by preverbal on Jan 29, 2008 11:19 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Simply put
As much as I think Kirk can be a great PG one day, his value is at it's lowest and the only team maybe willing to take on BODY's contract is a team that is already in contention and could use someone like him for strictly defense.

by Option27 on Jan 29, 2008 11:22 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

My guess would be that people
around the league have noticed Kirk's recent scoring binge.  

They are seeing what he can do when used as a legitimate scoring option.  I bet his value right now is at or near a two year high--not quite as high as when he was first chosen for the national team, but higher than any time subsequent.

by alec on Jan 29, 2008 11:42 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

scoring binge?
i wouldn't exactly call hitting 30+ twice a scoring binge...an offensive burst maybe.

A scoring binge is something like when Kobe hit 40+ for 5 games in a row, or whatever the amount of games

by ScottieCartwright on Jan 29, 2008 11:48 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's just it.
I think people, and nba gm's are no exception, are so short-sighted that when they see something like Hinrich's latest outburst, they automatically extrapolate it into the future.

by alec on Jan 29, 2008 11:58 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I often wrestle with that idea
I don't think GM's are THAT short-sighted, but they do make moves that would suggest otherwise.

But also, GMs like to 'fix' things, and take other teams mistakes to try and look like geniuses if it works.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 12:09 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Heh.
I have no idea how one judges such things (does contract situation matter?), but I'll call BS while wondering if anyone has even noticed.
Let us prepare for glory! --Michael Redd

by tyger1147 on Jan 29, 2008 11:49 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No need to call BS
when we have our own built-in Kirk-O-Meter on the site.  To calculate the current state of the Kirk-ceiling opinion,  just go back and bring up Sue's posts on Kirk's big game threads.

by alec on Jan 29, 2008 12:35 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

kidd is playing on borrowed time
he's turning 35 shortly and you can practically smell the HGH on him.  Am I the only one who thinks this?  He could be done at any moment.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 1:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I sure hope not
I hope all the HGH stuff stays out of the NBA.....although it is interesting that Kidd is playing perhaps his best basketball ever AFTER having mircoscopic knee surgery well into his 30's.....hhhmmmph.

I really hope all that nonsense stays out of the NBA though....I suppose we'll see.

by majoyenrac on Jan 29, 2008 2:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

OT
Apparently Joe Smith is out tonight with the flu.

MORE TYRUS AND JOAKIM!

by Option27 on Jan 29, 2008 11:10 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

it's a smokescreen
pax saw my trade idea and is sitting Smith

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 11:13 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Then by all means
trade for somebody to fill up that PF spot ahead of TT ;-)  But seriously, Noc starting at the 3 means TT or worst case Noah has to start at the 4, right?  Boylan wouldn't start Gray and Wallace would he?  And certainly not Viktor, right?
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 11:15 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

depends on how that big man coach
meeting went. Maybe Gray learned new skills, and Boylan feels like knowledge is power (if only it was speed) and Gray 'earned' the spot. And he's been looking to get Gray in because he's a good kid and deserves a chance and blah blah blah ::barf::

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 11:17 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If Joe doesn't go
I would expect Noah to get the start at the 5 and Wallace to start at the 4.  Conceivably, Boylan could just keep Wallace at the 5 and start Thomas at the 4 though.

Who knows?  The staff is unpredictable.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 12:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Brand-wagon
What about Elton Brand? Is there any conceivable way we can bring him back to Chi-town? Say for Gordon, Duhon, Tyrus and our No. 1?

by ForWhomTheBullTolls on Jan 29, 2008 11:12 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Actually Matt
Your obviously well researched trade idea(s) look pretty good.

All be it at this point though, this season has all of us in such disarray from where and what we thought the Bulls would or could have been at the half way mark -
I'd take just about ANYTHING right now that would represent something better (or at the very least, NEW) to look watch...
This same cliche' every day - so predictable that it's become BORING as well as painful...

Which brings to mind - who would you suggest for a new coach?
No matter WHO the Bulls bring in player wise, it seems rather obvious that they aren't going anywhere with who they have now...

Is it spring training yet?

by Bluelou on Jan 29, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Immediacy Trade Order
This is how I rank the roster in terms of players that should be traded first.
  1. Gordon
  2. Hinrich
  3. Wallace
  4. Deng
  5. Duhon
  6. Nocioni
It's difficult to see which of these players are even desired by any other team in the NBA at their present contract status.  Due to the BYC status for Hinrich and Noc I think all deals are going to be made in the Summer after we secure a new head coach.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 12:28 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

The fact that Wallace isn't first
Just had me stop reading the rest immediatly

by Option27 on Jan 29, 2008 12:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Despite Wallace
Ben Gordon is still the weakest link in the regular rotation.  He's nowhere close to where I thought he would have to be by season four of his NBA career to overcome his height and lack of defense.  Where I had him pegged to career development similar to Isiah Thomas, he's looking for like a Steve Francis clone with a better attitude.

Ben Gordon cannot stop anyone in the NBA.  Therefore he must be an elite scorer that puts people in foul trouble.  He's showing us that he is neither.

If we can sign and trade Gordon it will be a miracle.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 1:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

We'd have to get someone
who could replace his average scoring for us since he is one of our major contributors.  Who can give us an expected 20 points a night?  Sure, get rid of him, but don't underestimate what he has given the team.  Often times we are only in games at all because he is scoring big.  I am all for finding a consistent player, but who would that be?

by cranscape on Jan 29, 2008 2:52 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree
When dealing your leading scorer, or what for the most part is your leading scorer, you need to acquire something of compatible value unless you are making a roster spot open for a player already on your roster that can be your scorer.

There aren't enough Michael Jordan's running NBA clubs right now to generate for us what Joe Dumars trade of former Pistons leading scorer Jerry Stackhouse did for Detroit.

Looking at Stackhouse's career actually makes me think Ben Gordon will be just like him, but with lesser production due 5 inches of height.  Stack's numbers are almost the same across the board except for the free throw attempts.  Stack gets to the line.  He makes 82% of them.

This is why I think Gordon's game must focus on getting to the line.  I thought we'd see this happen this year.  We haven't.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 3:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

getting to the line
it's not because he isn't trying...he drives pretty consistently, he just doesn't get the calls....then lots of times he does his patented flailing of the arms act hoping to make the ref blow the whistle, but to no avail...

by ScottieCartwright on Jan 29, 2008 3:23 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

What I ponder
Can Ben benefit from losing weight?

Iverson is best 6'0 guard I have ever seen at getting to the free throw line.  He lists at 180.  Ben is 200.  I think these numbers are off a little.  I'd say Ben looks more like 215 and AI is probably hovering at 180.  Is AI quicker?  Yes.  A whole step quicker?  No.

Some numbers.
AI: 4.5 minutes per free throw attempt
BG: 7.5 minutes per free throw attempt
AI: 41.8 mpg career
BG: 30.3 mpg career
AI: 9.29 attempts per game
BG: 4.04 attempts per game

For Ben to be effective in the NBA he has to find ways to get to the line.  How does he do it?  I have no idea.  Who teaches Dwayne Wade?

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 5:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

eh
i doubt weight or quickness has anything to do with it.  Plus even if it does, I would be worried if Ben just dropped 20 pounds all of a sudden, or even in an off-season.

He had 4.35 attempts p/g in his senior year at UConn (170 attempts in 39 games).  I can't see how he would make THAT big of a leap from his last year in school to his rookie season, even from then up until now.

Basically, if you got to the line a lot when you were in college, that trend most likely will continue in the NBA (maybe except for someone's rookie year where they won't get a lot of calls)...if you weren't someone who got to the line a lot, then I expect the same.

Point is, I don't see Ben all of a sudden becoming an 8-9 FT/game player anytime soon.

by ScottieCartwright on Jan 29, 2008 6:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Which is why
NBA teams need miracles to contend with a primary scorer that's 6'1.5".  8-9 FTA per is one miracle.

by NBA Observer on Jan 29, 2008 6:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed. The list has to start with Wallace.
  1.  Wallace
  2.  Hinrich
  3.  Nocioni
  4.  Gordon
  5.  Deng
I don't list Duhon because he seems like obvious cap filler in a trade accompanying one or more of these five contracts.   4 & 5 obviously because you'd like to get something in return for these assets.  1 is impossible to deal so he's listed there just out of principle.  Ideally, if the Bulls could move 2 & 3 without having to package one from the new young core and without having to take on a worse contract (unless it is for a superstar), I will be ecstatic.  I wonder if NJ would have any interest in Hinrich seeing as they'll still need someone to run the PG and who could they sign in the free agent market for that position considering their cap status even without J Kidd?  

But let's be real:  Paxson is going to do nothing.  He may do something in the offseason, or he may wait to see if Derrick Rose bails him out, but he's not going to be aggressive or proactive.  He tried it with Wallace and Chandler and it traumatized him.

by messwiththebull on Jan 29, 2008 12:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Wallace and Chandler
Those roster moves were made in the offseason.
Fire Boylan!

by hscs on Jan 29, 2008 12:51 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Wallace is the only guy who needs to be moved
and only because he has a negative impact in the locker room which would be multiplied if he was benched like he should be.  All the rest of the guys are fine, but just being asked/trying to do too much.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 29, 2008 12:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Here's my list of trades in order
  1. Wallace (though he's in it for the long haul because of his sulking ways and ridiculous salary and "diminished skills". I don't buy that he's got diminished skills, I do buy that he has diminished effort, and is dogging it for us every night.
  2. Deng (most value on the team, he's a .com stock say in late 1999 pre the Nasdaq blow up)
  3. Gordon--I like BG, but the guys got gobs of value and I'd be happy to part with him and Luol if it brought in a superstar
  4. Andres Nocioni--he's been our most consistent and thus his trade value is at its peak.  I'd want to keep him and trade Deng first, but I wouldn't be upset if we kept Deng and parted with Noc for the right deal (I just know Deng's more valuable, but I'm not sold Deng is or will be THAT much better).
  5. Duhon.  I'm tired of the Duhon experience.  If he had any value, I'd love to list him first.
  6. Joe Smith.  I'd like to keep him, reasonable salary, very reasonable when you see the production, but again I can part with him for the right pieces.
  7. Tyrus Thomas.  Mgmt seems to be giving up on him, so why don't we use him for a trade while we still have time to do so.  He seems very skilled and still raw, I would like to see him get the starting nod and forgo this season, but it ain't happening.
  8. Kirk Hinrich.  I don't want to trade a good player for 25 cents on the dollar.  Kirk seems to be finally bouncing out of his horrendous slump.  I don't want to see a Tyson part 2, with a very solid player who hit a funk that we trade for nothing and then see that player thrive again in the new environment.  I think with Gordon and Deng out we're seeing that Kirk can play on the offensive side of the game as well as on the D. I still can't explain what happened to him in Nov, Dec, and start of Jan, but I hope he's back.  If he keeps playing at an advanced level, I see him as a big trade piece next year if we don't do anything again and flounder.  I still have in at the end of any "meaningful" trade piece because I would include him for a superstar, but that's about it.  Kirk's been a solid player and Kirk will return to being a solid player.....he hit a funk at a bad time for us Bulls.  Although to be honest his BYC status makes him tough to trade either way.
I am not sure I want Kidd on our team either because his shooting woes make Hinrich look like Reggie Miller/Ray Allen. Plus Kidd isn't the defender he once was and is getting older every second, why have 2 washed up guys making over $14M/yr?  Kidd ain't washed up this year--he's still solid, but who knows what'll happen next year.  Deng isn't quite Richard Jefferson, and Gordon isn't quite Vince Carter.....Kidd won't have the ridiculous stats on our offensively challenged staff.  Last year I'd say yeah, this year I say no after how badly we've played.

9)/10/11) Griffin/Khryapa/Gray--who cares

Let's keep Noah and Thabo Sefalosha at least.  I'd love to say keep Noah, Sef, and Thomas, but management seems fed up with Tyrus (why he barely even gets garbage time minutes is beyond me).

by majoyenrac on Jan 29, 2008 1:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i like this deal
but i doubt the lakers are giving jordan farmar up, him and bynum are the future for the lakers.  there is no doubt they need kidd, so they will probably be more willing to let go of their rookie pg, j crit (not trying to be hip, no idea how to spell his name and i dont feel like looking it up)  he is a project and probably wont be any good for a another year or two, similar to lou williams in philly.  lamar odom is more talented than anyone on the bulls roster right now, so adding him would be an upgrade.  As mentioned earlier, odom's biggest weakness really is himself, so maybe a change of scenery will get him going. and hopefully he would be motivated by finally getting away from kobe, i dont think those two like one another.  if this deal is available, i'd do it, but in a dream world i would deal odom for wallace straight up.hah

by Conor on Jan 29, 2008 12:52 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

HOMER TRADE ALERT!!!
C'mon guys, take off your red and white colored goggles and think about this for a second:

-- Why would the Lakers trade Odom and Farmar for a 34-year-old point guard and garbage?

-- Why would the Lakers essentially trade Lamar Odom for Chris Duhon and Joe Smith?

-- And why wouldn't the Lakers just offer Farmar and Brown to the Nets for Kidd without including the Bulls scrubs?

Nice try, guys. Kupchak is stupid, but he ain't that stupid!!!

by biggame james on Jan 30, 2008 3:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Kidd to Houston??
Maybe? Nets would have to waive a couple guys too.
"I took a couple of bad shots," Gordon said

by BNeL21 on Jan 29, 2008 1:11 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Why would the Lakers
and Nets involve the Bulls? LA isn't likely to trade Farmar, given his showing this year. I Trade Machined Odom, Kwame, and Crittenton direct to Nets for Kidd and Magloire. Would the Nets really rather have Noc, Du, Picks and Cash instead of Odom? I don't see LA insisting on the Bulls inclusion, just so they can get Joe Smith.

In a perfect (rebuilt) Bulls world, Noc only gets a Stackhouse-like 25 min. And Joe Smith might get 20 or so DNPs, 'cause he's not even needed. But Odom would require 35 mins, and that cuts into TT's time and development.

by marionette on Jan 29, 2008 3:24 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I don't get why Odom's 'required' of anything
And that's the very reason that the Nets wouldn't want him, why should thay play Odom so much if they're rebuilding without Kidd?

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 29, 2008 3:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Odom's talent level
compared to Nocioni's would make it harder for Tyrus to take Odom's minutes (than Noc's), is my point/theory.

And if you were NJ, you'd really do that trade?

by marionette on Jan 29, 2008 4:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

13 million is a lot to pay
for Lamar Odom, who doesn't play defense and has a PER beneath that of Nocioni.  But yes, I think we'd be a better team.  

by Freethefro on Jan 29, 2008 3:57 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I'm also wondering
if the shitstorm in LAC land will result in Magette being traded....

by Freethefro on Jan 29, 2008 4:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Talk about who doesn't play defense!
But it would be nice to see a Bulls player getting massive FTAs again. I'm one who would prefer Elton Brand, though. Much better solution than Gasol, etc.

by marionette on Jan 29, 2008 5:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Chicago Bulls.
Start posting about the Bulls »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
The Bulls and Young Talent
Blogabull_s_small
Sign up for BlogABull game previews

Recent FanPosts

Small
Interesting Trade Idea: S-Jax & Anthony Randolph
Small
Kudos Bulls. You've surprised early.
Bolo_picture_small
What about Iverson?
Sports
I'm Happy to Have a Break From Tyrus. He's gone anyways.
Small
Game Preview # 6: Bulls vs Charlotte Bobcats
Small
Why isn't there more talk of LeBron...
Small
Contract/Cap Question for BAB
Jayhawk_small
Game Preview # 5: Bulls at Cleveland Cavaliers
Small
We've Got To Rescue D. Wade

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS


Guy who does everything

Blogabull_s_small your friendly BullsBlogger