To celebrate the first snow dusting, let's propose a trade

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 9:07 AM CST

How's this one:

Bulls trade: Tyrus Thomas, expiring and very good Drew Gooden and a lottery protected first round pick in next years draft.

Bulls receive: Luis Scola and Shane Battier from the Rockets.

Why this works for the Bulls--obviously Scola is a starting quality big who'll stay on the books, play very well and be cheap for the next 2 years. Battier is a very smart player, an all league defender and a Paxson kind of guy (winning program, etc).

Why this works for the Rockets.....folks expected the Rockets to go basically 70-12 this year and so far they're 6-4 in the tough West and after getting creamed by the Lakers a week ago and losing to the injured Spurs,etc they might need a change and the going in this trade would be good for them....I know Battier's been hurt and I believe will be back shortly if he is not back. Battier is a similarly skilled, more sane but infinitely less talented version of Ron Artest. Having Artest has made Battier to some extent even more of a premium player to them than Nocioni, and if they cut Artests minutes to give Battier time, that could cause locker room issues. The Rockets add a lot of talent in this deal with Gooden manning the Post alongside Yao (Gooden's jump shooting outside game, and ability to grab boards will work well with a player who is as awesome as Yao Ming can be. Rockets also benefit in that they can slowly build and train Tyrus Thomas (look what they've done to Carl Landry).....

Bulls lineup post trade:

Rose-Gordon-Deng-Scola-Noah, with Battier and Nocioni filling in at the 3-4 spots entirely and Thabo still having a role.

I don't think this trade makes the Bulls moves done, as I think when Kirk is back the next trade to be made is now Kirk and very likely Nocioni out the door for another piece.....maybe we hold off on making a trade for Scola and Battier once Hinrich is healthy too, but I think this works considering really the Rockets don't have any bad contracts, they have 2 superstars who are paid accordingly, 2 mid level contracts (expiring Artest and 3 yrs left with Battier) and from the Rockets perspective, while Kirk is an upgrade over Rafer, Kirk's contract is looong, and them having Artest and Gooden up expring (witht he little odds and ends players) that might be nice for them to get another missing piece if this tandem didn't work (and I think it might work).

The Rockets lineup is scary:

Alston-TMAC-Artest-Gooden-Ming is a solid top 5 with Landry, Hayes, Brooks and the upside that is Tyrus on their bench, and add to that a possible 15th pick from the Bulls in next year's draft....(we don't need to get younger and get 2 starter quality players--one of whom is actually better (Scola) than he's shown given the amount of players around him in Houston)....Houston also has about $20M in expiring deals this offseason to maybe resign Artest or go a different direction with maybe Shawn Marion and Boozer and or Lamar Odom and still get a veteran's minimum.

Bulls lineup of the future then would have a lock at the 1-3-4 spots (Rose-Deng-Scola) I think Gordon is gone (I think he's gone either way :( ) but I think he's gone, but in his place we get a legit PF, something we haven't had in forever. I understand we maybe could have done better to get Scola last year for far far less, but we didn't.......plus Battier can be a real Adrian Griffin, a veteran player who is supposed to be a great team leader, but one who can actually play and can play very well)....

As I've said before, I really do hate the idea of giving up on Tyrus, he is just 22.....but at the same time we have to start investing to keep Rose, and much as I like Tyrus's upside he's not looking to ever be a back to the basket post player and while Tyrus might end up being a billion times better than Scola when Tyrus is 28, he also likely will do so not as a Bull either way, and might even never amount to anything and be the thorn in our cap that causes us to never be an elite team.....

I think this would be a nice trade for both clubs. What do you think?

FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.

Tweet Comment 47 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

"very good Drew Gooden"

lets trade for THAT guy! :)

(actually, his value may be pretty high right now, relative to his career)

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2008 9:59 AM CST reply actions

very good Drew Goodn

Also implies very good for an expring $7.2M deal, and he doesn’t need a lot.

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 10:41 AM CST up reply actions

Scola

I wanted Scola before the Spurs traded him for nothing to Houston. I think the trade was for Duhon & a pick.

Right now with Scola being 28ish, Im not sure it the right move building around Rose.

by Jesse07 on Nov 17, 2008 2:40 PM CST up reply actions

28ish

is hardly 35ish, he’ll give you at least 4 if not 5 more solid years….that’s more than enough.

We’re so trained to say when a guy’s 28 their old….that’s really prime. Scola came into the league late, but he’ll be good for a few more years…

We’ve been trained with all these 20-21 yr olds (and most of them being on our Bulls) to think that 27-28 is GASP ancient, but that’s silly. Scola too only has 2 more years, so we’re not quite burdened with him if he unlikely did slip at age 30…

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 2:56 PM CST up reply actions

"I wanted Scola before the Spurs traded him for nothing to Houston. I think the trade was for Duhon & a pick."

um….congrats?

Rockets didn’t want an expiring deal, they wanted a non-guaranteed deal, which is why they took that Greek dude Spanoulis and cut him.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2008 3:56 PM CST up reply actions

Actually, the Spurs, not the Rockets had no F*ing idea what they were doing

by BigWay on Nov 18, 2008 3:48 AM CST up reply actions

yeah, I meant to say the Spurs wanted the non-guaranteed deal

they wanted to get under the luxury tax.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 18, 2008 8:06 AM CST up reply actions

this trade is stinko from the Rockets perspective, btw.

you’re not giving Battier nearly enough credit.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2008 10:00 AM CST reply actions

I love Battier

But is he needed with Artest? How will he fit with Artest?

They get Tyrus, an expiring deal and a potential #15 pick.

I would like to think they could use the $20M this offseason to improve more than they will with the $7M for Artest’s expirign deal allows them.

Plus Drew’s game with Ming’s won’t make them any worse, and having Tyrus on the sidelines to watch and learn could be a boon for them in a year or two….

But fair enough.

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 10:43 AM CST up reply actions

I suppose

but I think they’ll want to give a Battier/Artest combo more time. They’re trying to win the title this year.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 17, 2008 11:01 AM CST up reply actions

Totally understand taht

But perhaps trade deadline when that lineup falters—and I think it will—they will make a pretty safe for them move for this year and next year/future (expring deals, Thomas, maybe mid 1st round pick and the free agents next year)….Imagine if they nabbed Boozer?

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 11:09 AM CST up reply actions

This is not a safe deal for a title contender.

Yes, if everything is going wrong, maybe they consider a trade, but I don’t think this is the one they consider. If you are a title contender, who do you want on your team, Drew Gooden or Shane Battier. Shane is a proven playoff player where as Drew has been inconsistent his whole career. Plus, as things slow down in the playoffs, you need good defenders and half court players, which is again, Battier. Also, he can hit the 3 to spread the court. I just don’t see this from the Rockets perspective.

by Unrealcity on Nov 17, 2008 11:34 AM CST up reply actions

I don't know about that

Shane was what 0-12 as a Grizzlie, and the Rockets I don’t remember won a playoff series with him on their roster….

Meanwhile Drew Gooden was a starter on the finals team, is EXPIRING…..and having watched a few games of the Rockets so far, I don’t know if they really are contender quality. They’re in the 5-10 range, need something else for that push…..

Who knows too, maybe they sit and work with Tyrus for a month or two (they have that luxury with Ming and Gooden and Landry and Hayes) and by mid to late season he’s a real boost for them.

But fair enough, it’s risky sure, but sometimes risky moves can pay off in the end and the Rockets and Rockets faithful sure aren’t going to like seeing another TMAC-Ming 1st round exit, even if they get paired against the Lakers-Hornets or Jazz….

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 12:46 PM CST up reply actions

Yes, callout Shane Battier for the Grizzlies' playoff record.

Pau Gasol isn’t a winner either, riiiiight?

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Nov 17, 2008 2:23 PM CST up reply actions

I like Battier

But I was merely responding to the playoff winner rep and the comment that Drew isn’t a “playoff player”….

So the only thing you can do is call out that as a statistic.

I do like Battier though and don’t think he or Gasol are ever losers (I don’t think Drew’s bad either, he’s quite good, just on a team that can’t best use his talents with him either playing out of position at the C or a jump shooting PF where we have so many guards….that’s all.

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 2:39 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah, my fault. I didn't get all the way through the post...

…you responded to. I would point out, though, that Battier’s mediocre individual playoff stats would be more relevant than his team’s playoff record.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Nov 17, 2008 3:21 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah

But Battier’s not really a stats kind of guy, he does a lot of the little things that don’t show up in the stat line…..but yeah you do see there that he’s less effective on a stats line than his reg season numbers….chalk that up mostly to him being on outmatched Grizzlies teams (going against those Mavs powers) and then the Rockets playing against the Jazz (who’s defensive ace AK47 negates the strength of Battier—and remember too that TMAC really choked last year…I think in the past TMAC hasn’t choked, his team just wasn’t great….last year sans Ming his team wasn’t great either, but he didn’t help them much in my eyes and I watched the whole series, I think he had 1 TMAC type of game.

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 3:54 PM CST up reply actions

I watched that whole series last year,

and I don’t think T-Mac choked. It was just like watching the Bulls try to beat the Jazz, only instead of having everyone able to shoot jumpshots and not attack the rim, you had 3 people who could shoot jumpshots, and one attack the rim.
Bobby Jackson [was that his name? I’ve kind of blocked it from memory] was AWFUL. Their backup PG they traded. And Aaron Brooks wasn’t too good either. Eck. It was just bad times.

by Prevenge on Nov 18, 2008 2:36 AM CST up reply actions

I thought

he totally choked in the 4th especially and I thought AK47 destroyed him with his D.

I’ve rarely seen TMAC look so average, still good, but not like the top 5-10 player he’s normally been especially in big moments.

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 9:38 AM CST up reply actions

Battier and Artest play the same position, and both defend well, but they are very different.

Where this shows up is the team dynamic. Battier is the consummate “glue-guy”—he’s the one holding that team together, both with on-court and locker room chemistry and leadership. He’s what Adrian Griffin was supposed to be on the Bulls last year, except you don’t have to avert your eyes when Battier enters a game. (Also, he doesn’t vote to suspend rookies.)

Artest is the classic hot-headed tough guy. If it weren’t for his high level of skill, he’d be considered only a thug, he’s that intense and physical. But the man can play ball, so it’s worth it for the Rockets to gamble with him.

But that’s exactly what it is with Artest—a gamble. Battier will be there to fill the void if the Rockets end up having to send Artest home in the middle of this season. Battier is the best insurance policy the Rockets could have at SF right now.

So it’s not as though Battier and Artest are duplicative, exactly.

"It’d be ridiculous to hate someone for simply what they say in a sports blog. But I greatly dislike every syllable of your angst-filled, smarmy, nondescript, half-assed, elitist-garbage responses." –Rogerspark Kris

by bullhockey on Nov 18, 2008 1:42 AM CST up reply actions

Agree

Whole-heartedly….but I also know the Rockets faithful see what Artest can do and know he’s on the cheap….

Plus I wonder if Houston might want to have $20M this offseason to bring in Boozer, as a TMAC-Boozer-Ming lineup with their little pieces around them would be fantastic…..and frankly that on paper looks better than a TMAC-Artest-Battier-Ming lineup….nobody can stop them inside and this trade prepares them for that as they get under the Battier contract and Artest contract, for while Battier’s “the consumate glue-guy” he’s also not an all league player and the Rockets faithful have had 2 superstars and haven’t gotten it done (they might be losing patience)…..they could be major players…..with this cap room,a nd I personally don’t see their current lineup winning the West let alone the championship….

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 9:42 AM CST up reply actions

My biggest issue with this trade

Is that it ties up 2010 money. We reduce money this year, taking back the smaller side of the deal, but Battier is tied up until 2011 ($7.35 mil in 2010)

--Torch

by torch on Nov 17, 2008 10:04 AM CST reply actions

Teh problem

with us of all teams putting all our eggs in the 2010 basket is that we’re not a contender and haven’t done anything besides keeping the same guys employed for teh Hinrich era, so it might be hard to still draw a big free agent our way….

Plus I don’t know what we’d need with Rose-Deng-Scola-Battier and hopefully still Gordon and assuming he learns to play Noah.

Battier is a premier defender, Deng is a solid all around guy, Scola can score with the best of them—ift hat’s his role-which it isn’t on his current team….

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 10:46 AM CST up reply actions

And Battier's so far when healthy worth every penny of his $7.3M/year

He’s a leader on and off the court and a upper tier defender.

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 10:46 AM CST up reply actions

Ok, throw out salary considerations

Between Deng and Battier – where do the minutes go?
I don’t really see either of them playing the 2 or the 4.

Is Battier content playing 10-13 mpg?
Is Noc happy always playing the 4?

I’m not down on Battier, I’m just not sure he fits with this roster.

--Torch

by torch on Nov 17, 2008 12:09 PM CST up reply actions

I think

Battier makes Nocioni completely expendable. Battier fits in the 2-4 slots to get time.

This’ll make Matt happy, make me upset, but if it makes our team better (and I think Battier will) we’ll be fine.

by majoyenrac on Nov 17, 2008 12:47 PM CST up reply actions

Ok, but how to we expend him?

--Torch

by torch on Nov 17, 2008 4:03 PM CST up reply actions

Nocioni's

tradeable, very tradeable, I’m sure teams like Miami, Utah, etc would love to have him and a deal is out there….but I don’t think it’s a smart move now to trade Noc until we at least get a real back to the basket PF.

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 9:43 AM CST up reply actions

I disagree

I’d consider it a victory if the Bulls don’t have to throw in a sweetner to get a team to take on Noc.

For instance, the Hornets need a bench peformer real bad. Would they take Noc for the expiring Mike James? I’m not so sure.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 18, 2008 10:04 AM CST up reply actions

I think they

would definately do taht, but do the Bulls want Mike James even if he’s expiring…I can tell you hell no.

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 10:19 AM CST up reply actions

well, they should

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Nov 18, 2008 6:16 PM CST up reply actions

Plus

A negative side of this trade is that we have a now superflous Nocioni (team player anyway) even more on our bench. I’d much rather have him than Hughes and in this case we do get a true PF in Scola….that is the big upside that can’t be forgotten.

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions

The deal isn't happening without Hinrich

So then we come out ahead in 2010 and beyond since we get rid of Hinrich at $9.25 million in 2010 and $8.25 in 2011.

by BigWay on Nov 18, 2008 3:42 AM CST up reply actions

Trade

I would make that trade . Scola could be here for a while. Thomas is not that good a basketball player. He is just a leaper. Gooden is not going to be resign anyway.

www.TwinTrophies.com

by Diehard BullsFan on Nov 17, 2008 8:22 PM CST reply actions

I make this trade in a heart beat, Houston, not so much

Houston already made it’s big gamble for this season, so

This one is good for debate, but in reality Both Battier and Scola are better than either Gooden and Thomas. Gooden might be a wash. How does this deal make Houston better this year, if the Bulls are getting the 2 better players. Do they see something in Thomas that the rest of us who actually watch the Bulls games don’t see except for one or two halfs per season. Is a middle to late round first round pick enough to put them over the top. No, Houston is clearly playing for this season, not next year and beyond.

Not sure that the Rockets have any interest in trading Scola to anybody, why bother he only makes $3 million per. Does anyone think that Houston thinks Gooden is an upgrade over Scola. Do the Rockets really want to trade Battier with Artest on a one year trial, probably not. Again, unless the Rockets think that Thomas will turn into Amare under their tutelage I see no reason do this deal.

I love Scola’s game, he kills us everytime. I like Battier’s game also, although I agree that he is somewhat of a Nocioni clone. Hey, if one Nocioni is good, two is better, I guess. Also, I agree again, where does Battier get his minutes playing behind Deng with Nocioni already playing backup power forward. Battier averaged 36 mpg last season, Scola only 24. Then again, I am not a huge Deng fan, so less minutes for him doesn’t bother me too much. Scola, Nocioni, Deng, Battier would be a nice 4 man rotation at forward, not too much size, but a lot of heart and toughness, with a decent amount of skill.

I think that Hinrich would have to be in the deal for it to make sense for Houston. Then we need more bodies to make the contracts work since Hinrich makes $10 million all by himself, Scola and Battier make $10 million combined. Gooden and Thomas make another $10 million combined.

So we could do Hinrich straight up for Battier and Scola, but Houston needs Gooden to replace Scola.

Hinrich and Gooden for Battier, Scola, and Rafer Alston works under cap rules, but Houston can’t make this deal until Hinrich is healthy enough to play which will be barely before the trade deadline.

If Houston thinks that Landry could start in place of Scola and that they don’t need Gooden, then they might want Thomas as sweetener, so Hinrich and Thomas for Battier, Scola and Steve Francis to make the cap work, but they get to keep Alston.

If Houston really wants Thomas in addition to Gooden, then we need to take back Rafer Alston and Steve Francis to make the cap work.

Bottom line as a Bulls fan I do any of these deals to get Battier and Scola, but IMHO Houston absolutely has to have Hinrich and probably Gooden to make any deal.

Good thought, but as usual with Pax, not happening.

by BigWay on Nov 18, 2008 3:39 AM CST reply actions

BigWay

Fair enough, I thought the same thing that Kirk might be a necessity and would definately make this year safer for Houston….but it might limit their flexibility in the future too…..from Houston’s perspective I would eye the 2 big prizes in free agency next year (Carlos Boozer a definite 1 and Lamar Odom a definite 2) and that’s really the main drive for the trade I proposed to them…..plus I do think Gooden could supplement Scola’s game and add a new dynamic to that team (they don’t necessarily need a back to the basket scorer like Scola, unless of course he’s all league like Boozer) and we don’t necessarily need a jump shooting big like Gooden….

So I don’t think this trade throws in the towel at all for Houston….I think they would be just as scary afterwards (as Artest and Battier have very similar games, though Artest is crazy and a wildcard and Battier’s consistent and doesn’t play for stats)….but I really think for Houston this is the trade that can help get them over the hump as in if it doesn’t work, they have $20M with Artest, Gooden and a few smaller pieces coming off the books next offseason. They might be able to work out a $15M a year for Boozer and have $5M to get another backup/maybe starting PG…..but Alston’s not bad at all.

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 9:50 AM CST up reply actions

Salary Cap

Just because they have 20 million coming off the books, does not mean they are 20 million dollars under the salary cap. You can only offer a free agent (who’s Bird rights you don’t own, ie. he wasn’t on your team) as much money as the team is below the salary cap.
Houston’s ~15 million over the salary cap. If they had $20 million come off the books, they could offer Boozer $5 million.

by Jamaicanpi on Nov 18, 2008 10:46 AM CST up reply actions

Well touche

Damn, didn’t check Sham…..

Can they go over but they just have to pay luxury tax? Or is that a hard cap (just wondering now, not thinking they will by any stretch)….

I guess though this trade might allow them to keep Artest and possibly Gooden…but yeah Boozers out.

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 11:20 AM CST up reply actions

salary cap

is a “hard cap” unless you are dealing with your current players… and luxury tax is a soft cap.

by Jaina on Nov 18, 2008 11:35 AM CST up reply actions

So

I understand that if we wanted Ben Gordon we cuold go into the luxury tax to get him…

But say if we want Lamar Odom, can we go into the luxury tax to get him (just throwing that out there, I don’t want Lamar with Deng so highly paid, or I don’t know if I want him)….

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 1:18 PM CST up reply actions

right

we can go into the luxury tax to keep ben. we couldn’t go into the luxury tax to get odom, since we’d already be over the salary cap, preventing us from offering anything to any free agent. if we acquired him in a trade, i believe then we could go over the luxury tax to keep him.

by Jaina on Nov 18, 2008 1:25 PM CST up reply actions

Great

Thought that was the case…..my bad on not checking this trade out……

Oh well it still might be a viable one for teh Rockets, just not quite as solid as I initially thought in my head. Still saves them money and might save them in the future from doing an all out rebuild from a team that wasn’t really ever a title threat (not past first or even 2nd round)….

by majoyenrac on Nov 18, 2008 1:37 PM CST up reply actions

Actually, that's not true.

The NFL has a hard cap—it can’t be exceed for any reason. The NBA has a soft cap, meaning it can be exceeded in exceptions. The luxury tax isn’t any sort of cap at all. It’s simply a tax on those above a certain level. Any “cap” is only imposed by an individual team. But it’s not a cap.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Nov 18, 2008 1:38 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

To prove I'm not talking out of my ass....

Google found me this:

The NBA has a soft cap. A hard cap doesn’t allow the cap to be exceeded for any reason. A soft cap, which the NBA has, contains exceptions which allow teams to exceed the cap under certain conditions. In fact, historically very few teams are ever under the cap during a season.

Heh. I must have read that site before.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Nov 18, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs