Gasol to Bulls trade nixed?

by BullsAttitude on Mar 4, 2008 9:08 PM CST Comment 15 comments

Ric Bucher on NBA Coast-2-Coast stated that Grizzlies GM Chris Wallace has taken heat for the Gasol to Lakers trade, but he has found out from league sources that a Gasol to the Bulls for Joakim Noah, Joe Smith and Andres Nocioni was nixed by Owner Michael Heasley.

The Owner was the one pushing for the trade to the Lakers for Brown's expiring contract.

So, from the looks of it, Paxson was working hard to get Gasol but the Grizzlies owner didn't want talent in return, just a salary dump.

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.

0 recs | Comment 15 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

His franchise is a reflection of his incompetence

''We had conversations with Chicago that were non-satisfactory,'' said Heisley, a St. Charles resident. ''They didn't want to take on the luxury-tax situation, and Los Angeles was.

''In this league, if you're in a big-market area, you can afford to do those things. We negotiated as hard as we could for quality players, and [the Bulls] refused to give up anybody in their core group. What they offered were guys who play on the second and third team, so we turned them down.''

Heisley can kiss my ass. Paxson offered him an entire serviceable starting front-line, and Noah and Noc will be productive for years.

If he really thinks that Noah and Nocioni aren't quality players, maybe that's part of the reason his franchise sucks as much as it does.

And don't even get me started on how inappropriate it was for him to make ANY comments about the situation in the first place.

by BullsFanInSeattle on Mar 4, 2008 9:17 PM CST reply actions

''They didn't want to take on the luxury-tax

situation, and Los Angeles was." Of course LA is going to take on the luxury-tax when you have a Superstar in Kobe Bryant;that you have to keep happy and that you need to have a contending team around him.

Add Gasol to the Bulls, do we become an NBA contender, I still don't think so with the current team.

Gasol was a final piece that might put the Lakers over and help them win a title. He was not that final piece for us, we still need that leader on the floor first.

by BullsAttitude on Mar 4, 2008 9:46 PM CST reply actions

I agree

I'd much rather have Noah, Noc, Gooden, and Hughes rather than Gasol and Wallace.

I just think it was highly inappropriate for an NBA owner to comment in the way he did - as well as to imply that Paxson didn't make a good-faith offer. Heisley is lower than a snake's belly in a dry river-bed.

If the powers that be want OK City to have a franchise, they'd be much better off relieving the Memphis owner of his ballclub than moving the Sonics out of town.

by BullsFanInSeattle on Mar 4, 2008 10:38 PM CST up reply actions

Link?

by YaoPau on Mar 4, 2008 11:52 PM CST reply actions

Hey BullsAttitude!

I see your point, but the thing is the Bulls could have offered expiring contracts and didn't.

I guess to me it would have been worth it to get a very high quality player for next to nothing.

Gasol would have been the best player on this team, and going forward that would have been something good. In the end we have to get better by having better players.

Continually we get in the wrong frame of mind when it comes to salary. We pay lesser players too much and then complain about how much players make who at least approach earning their salaries. If you can get Gasol for a song, then get him and figure out how to dump Nocioni on someone this summer.

by Sports2 on Mar 5, 2008 8:12 AM CST reply actions

Gasol would have......

been a great addition to this team and something to build with. He is can work the low post and would have improved our shooters by opening up space for them.

The reason I posted this was people were all over Paxson (which yes he hasn't been perfect) for not trying hard enough or not wanting to part with certain players. In which this shows he was trying and had a deal that was ready to go through.

It was the Grizzlies owner who nixed the trade, saying the Bulls didn't offer quality players to the Grizzlies. And exactly what did they get from the Lakers?

The owner is contradicting himself in stating they tried to get quality players, but then he wanted expiring contracts.

Well, we could have offered Duhon, Smith (who comes off the books next year) and Griffin, plus a 2nd round pick for Gasol. Why wouldn't he have taken that instead?

Is it because he wanted Deng, he already has Rudy Gay at that position. Who was he not offered that he felt he should have got?

Gasol would be a great addition, but would not be a player to build around. That's the reason he is doing well in LA cause there is no pressure on him to lead, just play his game and take a backseat to Kobe.

by BullsAttitude on Mar 5, 2008 9:22 AM CST reply actions

i thought his quote was

when he realized no one was offering anything good he decided to settle for financial relief instead.

however, noah and noc?? if this is true, he really does look like a moron.

also could have offered khryapa at the time...

by Jaina on Mar 5, 2008 9:28 AM CST up reply actions

Grizzlies are about unloading contracts

not acquiring better players. They want them on the cheap. They traded Battier for Gay because Battier's rather respectable contract was still too expensive for them.

Chicago has been pretty adamant about staying under the cap. The contract extensions all follow the same pattern of fitting them into a long term plan to stay under the cap and improve the team.

The Kids Must Stay In The Picture!!!

by NBA Observer on Mar 5, 2008 9:58 AM CST reply actions

Well, to stay under the cap at least.

I dunno about improving the team :|

by Sports2 on Mar 5, 2008 10:02 AM CST up reply actions

Hate to get into semantics, but the Bulls want to

stay under the luxury tax threshold. Few teams actually stay under the cap. I would love to see a movement to get the cap abolished as the luxury tax seems to be a strong enough deterrent to spending. Not that I really want to see a luxury tax either.

by snley on Mar 5, 2008 10:14 AM CST up reply actions

You're right!

by Sports2 on Mar 5, 2008 10:52 AM CST up reply actions

Sorry, have to disagree

The cap allows for what, $5 mil average per player for year? Creates a market that nets BW $15 mil? I'd say that's about enough for my tastes.

by California Al on Mar 5, 2008 12:39 PM CST up reply actions

Respectfully

Gay was way more valuable than Battier, in hindsight. He's a burgeoning star in this league, and a wise cap move as well.

Drew Gooden beard meter - 6 (Old Amish Carpenter)

by cubbybear on Mar 5, 2008 2:10 PM CST up reply actions

Grizzlies Ownership/Management is terrible.

I mean we can't judge Pax or anyone else based on speculation over what happened in broken down trade talks with the Griz. I choose instead to judge Pax on his indecisiveness at times, the BW signing and numerous examples of him falling in love with some of his "assets". Whether this trade for Gasol falling through can be blamed on Pax or not, the bottom line is that Griz management makes no sense and we can't judge him for anything that occurred in this situation.

by Coach Van Lier on Mar 6, 2008 8:50 AM CST reply actions

Listened to Simmons' podcast

Bucher was on, saying that Wallace was ready to take Joakim, Smith, and Nocioni for Gasol, but the owner nixed it in favor of cap relief. But, at this point it's pointless to moan about it. There are still options available for this team in the offseason, Paxson just needs to go about this intelligently.

Dickey Simpkins>Ben Wallace

by Ozzie Montana on Mar 8, 2008 12:29 AM CST reply actions