And if we could get Miller and Kaman at the same time?

by bull83 on Dec 17, 2008 8:58 AM CST

What would you say to a three team trade that could get us Kaman, Miller and saving money to resign BG at the same time? Before starting to criticize my idea, try to understand my points.

So, what I propose is simple:

Bulls send: Hinrich, Gooden, Nocioni and Noah

Clippers send: Kaman, Ricky Davis and Hart

Kings send: Miller and Udrich

Bulls receive: Kaman, Miller and Hart

Clippers receive: Nocioni, Noah and Udrich

Kings receive: Gooden, Hinrich and Davis

My conclusions about this trade:

Bulls

Clippers and Kings want to trade Kaman and Miller, respectively. We need big mans who can score and rebound at the same time, so, why not get them both. By getting rid of Hinrich and Nocioni contracts, we could save some money to re-sign Gordon next year.

Money going out: $27,446,663

Money coming in: $ 23,359,000

Savings: 4,087,663

The only question that is bothering me is sending away Noah. But with Miller and Kaman he wouldn’t get much playing time anyway.

Clippers

The Clippers need a good backup to Thorton and Davis. And they get that with Noc and Udrich. Plus, they get in Noah a good prospect that would allow them to ship Camby - if they wanted, which I doubt - or replace him in two years, when his contract runs out.

Kings

Want to trade Miller and need a good PG. Hinrich is one of the best and is available, since now we have Rose. That makes Udrich expandable, since Kirk would play most of the time. They would get Ricky Davis to help on the SF position, since they only have Jason Salmons. And Gooden could do some of the things Miller do, excluding the defense.

Bulls rotation

Rose/hart/hunter

Gordon/Hughes

Deng/Thabo

Kaman/TT

Miller/Kaman/Gray

With all the crazy trades that have been made, who know's if this wacky can go throo. Ok, I’m ready now. Start criticizing…

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 21 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Nice

Then we would have Millers contract and Hughes contract both expring in 2010. That would make us players.

In the mean time I wouldn’t playe Miller and Kaman at the same time; maybe start Kaman and rotate Miller in.

But your right if you can have them both why not?

by J Theory on Dec 17, 2008 9:19 AM CST reply actions

I wanted to mention that but I forgot

With Miller and Hughes coming of the books in 2010, we would save $24,202,676

http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)

by bull83 on Dec 17, 2008 9:25 AM CST up reply actions

Long terms thoughts

It works in the trade machine

We send out $19 mil in 2010 salary, getting $11.3 mil back – a $7+ mil savings, which is good – enabling us to play in the sweepstakes..

However, we send out $19.5 mil in 2009 salary, getting $22.65 mil back, which seriously inhibits our ability to resign Gordon this offseason. Which leaves us either starting Larry Hughes next season or going after someone like Kyle Korver.

Basically I don’t think we can do this if both A) we don’t pay the luxury tax, and B) Ben Gordon is in our longterm plans. I imagine that both A) and B) are true.

--Torch

by torch on Dec 17, 2008 12:01 PM CST reply actions

thanks for doing the '09 math

I had a feeling they were taking back too much in that 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 Dec 17, 2008 12:47 PM CST up reply actions

Not really

If the database of sportscity is correct, and my equations are also correct, we will save more money…

Getting Salary in 2009
Kaman – $10,400,000
Miller – $12,250,000
Total: $ 22,050,000

Losing salary in 2009
Hinrich – $ 7,500,000
Noc – $ 9,500,000
Noah – $2,046,000
Ruffin (expire contract) – $1,141,838
Gray (expire contract) – $ 711, 517
Hart (expire contract) – 2,484,000
Total: $23,383,000

Savings: $ 1,333,000

p.s. I’m not an expert on contracts, but I think this is right. If someone wants to check it out to confirm if i’m right our wrong, please do

http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)

by bull83 on Dec 17, 2008 1:15 PM CST up reply actions

Sorry, found one mistake, but nothing important

Getting salary in 2009 – $ 22,650,000
Losing – 23,383,000

Savings: 733,000

One number changes everything… LOL

http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)

by bull83 on Dec 17, 2008 1:30 PM CST up reply actions

I don't think it's fair to count the expirings as 'losing' contracts

as that money is there or not regardless of the trade.

2009 Before (Hinrich/Noc/Noah): 19,445,680
2009 After (Kaman/Miller): 22,650,000

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 Dec 17, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions

Right. That's pretty crappy.

what matt said

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Dec 17, 2008 1:43 PM CST up reply actions

We are not going to sign with them anyway. So, why not?

That’s money we will save. What we do with the money is other thing. I’m not expecting to see Ruffin here next year… Maybe Gray, who knows, but not Ruffin…

http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)

by bull83 on Dec 17, 2008 2:03 PM CST up reply actions

Because they are gone either way

If we make the trade, we don’t have Ruffin, Gray, or Hart after this year.
If we don’t make the trade, we don’t have Ruffin, Gray, or Hart after this year.

That’s also why I said “sending out” instead of “losing.” When evaluating how this deal affects our 09-10 salary cap, contracts that don’t exist in 09-10 don’t matter.

--Torch

by torch on Dec 17, 2008 2:11 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah

I admit I might be wrong, but see this:

This year we save $4mil
Next year we get $6 mil, but we also save $2 mil (harts contract) that comes with the trade. In the end, we wouldn’t lose nothing… and get two good players

Doesn’t one thing annuls the other? Now i’m just asking to try to understand… Nothing more…

http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)

by bull83 on Dec 17, 2008 2:32 PM CST up reply actions

If you're going to look at it that way, then

we are also trading away the $7.1 mil of Gooden’s that comes off the books next summer.

You have to look at it in discrete parts.

Before this trade:
Bulls 08-09 commitment: $69.8 mil
Bulls 09-10 commitment: $57.6 mil
Bulls 10-11 commitment: $48.2 mil

After this trade:
Bulls 08-09 commitment: $65.7 mil
Bulls 09-10 commitment: $61.2 mil
Bulls 10-11 commitment: $40.8 mil

Don’t try to add or subtract from one season’s cap number as you transition to the next season, just look at the totals, assuming no more moves (trades, resignings, extensions) happen.

--Torch

by torch on Dec 17, 2008 3:03 PM CST up reply actions

That doesnt really look so terrible considering

I guess its relative to what else we could while getting rid of Noc and Hinrich’s money tho.

by reprisal on Dec 17, 2008 3:12 PM CST up reply actions

For the actual numbers of this deal

We no longer have the 09-10 salaries for:

Hinrich – $9.5 mil
Nocioni – $7.5 mil
Noah – $2.0 mil

We never had any 09-10 salary for Gooden on the books, so we don’t count that here. Thus we “lose” $19 mil

We now have the following 09-10 salaries :

Miller – $12.25 mil
Kaman – $10.4 mil

Again, we never had any 09-10 salary for Hart on the books, so we don’t count it here. Thus we “add” $22.65 mil

This comes as a net addition of $3.65 mil to our 09-10 books.

Make sense?

--Torch

by torch on Dec 17, 2008 3:09 PM CST up reply actions

Yep. Thanks a lot

It’s great to see how much we could save in 2010. The problem would deffinitly be with next year… :S

http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)

by bull83 on Dec 17, 2008 3:13 PM CST up reply actions

I guess the one argument you could make...

…they’ll probably re-sign Gray, unless, of course, they have two big-bodied centers on the team.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Dec 17, 2008 2:52 PM CST up reply actions

true.

but Gray isn’t a prohibitive salary compared to the minimum (which they’d have to use on a roster spot regardless)….at least I’d certainly hope not. For all we know the Grizzlies will go after him hard and Pax will give Gray a 5 year deal.

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 Dec 17, 2008 3:34 PM CST up reply actions

hah!

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Dec 17, 2008 4:06 PM CST up reply actions

speaking of Miller AND Kaman

Thought this was pretty funny the first couple times I saw it.

Asked what kind of player he expects to be in the next five years, he said: "Not a star, but like, a superstar. Something around, like, Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, something like that."

by BigBenign on Dec 17, 2008 1:04 PM CST reply actions

Love it!

Live!

Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).

by stupidgenius on Dec 17, 2008 3:58 PM CST reply actions

No thanks

Hinrich has ranked behind Beno Udrih in PER for the past two years – why do we want him? And the contract runs past the magical 2010 that the Kings are targeting. The Kings would be more inclined to keep Miller through contract expiration than deal him for Hinrich.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Dec 17, 2008 10:50 PM CST reply actions