Blog a Bull: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Race to the BCS: rankings, in-game scores & blogs Bar-right-arrows

The prophecy, or just awful symmetry

Blogabull_s_tiny by your friendly BullsBlogger on in News

We've been hearing reports now that Skiles knew 'something' was up with this team in the preseason that foretold doom.

But meanwhile, I saw worriesome things regarding Skiles himself, especially when he was entertaining the idea of starting Aaron Gray.

And lo and behold, by the end of the season, Aaron Gray started, put up the worst-looking 19 and 22 game possible, and the Bulls lost some ping-pong balls as a result of beating a given-up Raptors team for their 33rd and final win of the season.

0 recs | Comment 100 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

There's no such thing as
as a bad looking 19 and 22. Were you watching the same game I was?  Gray grabbed every rebound that came his way, played decent position defense, passed out of double teams with some modicum of skill, and went to the hole strong.  No one on Toronto could stop him.  I submit that Aaron Gray will have a solid career as a 10-year back-up center for the Bulls. I have to admire a guy who doesn't let the facts interfere with his opinion.  You might not always be right, but you're never wrong.

by Cannoli on Apr 17, 2008 8:38 AM CDT   0 recs

worse, I was AT the game
Toronto could barely be bothered to participate.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Apr 17, 2008 9:24 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I was at the game
too.  Toronto was up by 8 in the first quarter when Gray had a double-double, and Ford was running circles around everyone.  Gray was the only guy trying for the Bulls.  Granted, he wasn't facing Bill Russell, but give the guy a little credit.  He was working hard.  I was out of gas just watching him in the third quarter, and I didn't have to lift anything heavier than a Diet Pepsi.  When we have Kevin Love at power forward next year, he won't have to work so hard;))

by Cannoli on Apr 17, 2008 2:34 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I bet Gray's hoping the Bulls draft Love
Then he won't be the only fatty on the team

by snley on Apr 17, 2008 2:49 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm betting he isn't
because then he'd have to work three times as hard to get any minutes.
Don't tell anybody, but here's hoping TT puts it all together.

by bullshooter on Apr 17, 2008 3:12 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

If Gray's good game
is to be discounted then the other Bulls who put up good numbers last night should be discounted as well.  If Toronto was so not into the game then the notion should be across the board for all the young guys who played well against a disinterested team.

by cranscape on Apr 17, 2008 11:05 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

seems hypocritical, doesn't it
when the four good games that TT had are held up as incontrovertible proof of his impending All-Star'dness...
Don't tell anybody, but here's hoping TT puts it all together.

by bullshooter on Apr 17, 2008 2:26 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

yes, I exaggerated...
:-p
Don't tell anybody, but here's hoping TT puts it all together.

by bullshooter on Apr 17, 2008 2:27 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

He couldn't even make it up the court
He was playing against a disinterested Nesterovic, an underwhelming and undersized Kris Humphries and a bunch of other players for whom the game meant nothing.  In full disclosure, I didn't see his 11/10 in the first quarter, but he was gassed again midway through the third!

When CSN showed the packaged highlight clips of Gray, the obligatory intro picture of him holding the ball clearly demonstrated that he's actually put on weight during the season, placing a further strain on his already questionable conditioning.

That said, I agree that he can be a quality backup center - 10 minutes a game, designed to get easy points against someone else's undersized backups.

On another note, does anyone project TT in the Shawn Marion mold?  While a jump hook would be nice, he's at his best driving and slashing to the basket (he looks like a real athletic 3).  His stunted development as an imposing wing player might be the most damning consequence of the Nocioni contract.

by Gene Banks on Apr 17, 2008 8:46 AM CDT   0 recs

Thanks Matt
One of my favorite NBA players of all time...Three years ago, it actually looked like he might have had a middling career.  I guess I was off base on that one - that guy sucks.

by Gene Banks on Apr 17, 2008 10:50 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Kelly Dwyer is good at prophecies too
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Behind-the-boxscore-where-Dallas-cannot-be-igno? urn=nba,77268

"Here's what Chicago's starting lineup should look like next year:

PG: Kirk Hinrich
SG: Thabo Sefolosha
SF: Luol Deng
PF: Tyrus Thomas
C: Joakim Noah

Bring Aaron Gray (19 points and 22 rebounds) and Ben Gordon off the bench, banish Larry Hughes (1-6 tonight, 38 percent shooting on the season) to the end of the pine, trade Andres Nocioni for a lower-rung draft pick and potential cap relief that can be spent on re-signing the parts to what could be a special, special team.

Find a coach. Find a real coach. Show the coach a tape of this game. Understand that Noah and Thomas are this team's two best passers, and run things through those two. Drink in the potential and watch as it works when you give players consistent minutes and roles they can count on. Watch 55 wins pile up."

I agree that Gray should be our back up center for the next 10 years, especially if he gets into shape.... Maybe Dwyer should be the Bulls coach next year

by shoryuken on Apr 17, 2008 8:47 AM CDT   0 recs

why not the next 20?
Stephen Curry is the lowpost answer!

by hscs on Apr 17, 2008 8:51 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Because in 10 years time, they'll have developed
big, stiff, immobile robots who can do Aaron's job.

by snley on Apr 17, 2008 9:09 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Trade Noc for a draft pick and relief?
That sounds like something I said.

What's Dwyer's user name? He's got to post, or at least read, here. The views and analysis and tone are so similar and BlogABull is, after all, the patron-saint of basketball blogging, he's got to visit every once in awhile. What about Abbot? Does he post here or just lurk/read like he does all blogs?

Let us prepare for glory! --Michael Redd

by tyger1147 on Apr 17, 2008 9:49 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Dwyer posts
at realgm.com under jgeils. And once in a blue moon at http://www.basketballforum.com/chicago-bulls/.

He's mentioned BlogaBull before.  Abbott reads, does not appear to post.

by KT on Apr 17, 2008 9:53 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I have less confidence than Dwyer
in that lineup.

for one: start Ben Gordon, especially if Gooden's also coming off the bench.

A lot also depends on Hinrich escaping the land of suckitude.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Apr 17, 2008 10:05 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

What position do you start Gordon at though?
The 2?  That can't be allowed to happen.  The 1?  That can't be allowed to happen.  He's a bench player until he can demonstrate some modicum of PG skills on the court, not in his individual box score.

I love his ability to score in bunches, it is a rare skill, certainly valuable, but that's about it for Gordon.  When his shot is off and he is unable to score in bunches, he is a borderline liability to have on the court.  He can't get to the line, his FTA number was higher last year, but I wonder how much of those FTA were padded by technical fouls and intentional fouls because I rarely see Gordon attack the rim even though he has shown the ability to.

This is the conundrum Paxson created when he took Gordon with the #3 pick knowing he couldn't play the point and that another undersized combo guard in Hinrich was already starting.  Paxson willingly created an undersized backcourt that can neither run the point nor defend the 1 or 2 on the opposition.  Deng and Iguodala would have been the preferred combination, but we're not here to talk about the past.

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 10:27 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Just curious, when Gordon is brought in off the
bench, what is the position that he plays while he scores bunches of points?  Obviously, it can't be the 1 or the 2.  Is he just a spirit who becomes physically present when he's ready to take a shot like the twins from the shitty second Matrix movie?  

by snley on Apr 17, 2008 10:46 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Bench players play roles as much as positions
Ben Gordon's role would be that of Leandro Barbosa's, or Jannero Pargo's, or previously Bobby Jackson's.  This is should he come off the bench.  Should he start, you would require enough production on the offensive end to outweigh the underperformance in other areas that result from having an undersized backcourt.  You cannot deny that the undersized backcourt is an inherent disadvantage that must be overcome.  The question is has it been, and/or can it be?  

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 3:31 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Guess I don't see where the game magically changes
once the reserves start coming in to allow for a switch from playing positions to playing roles.  Yes, starting a small backcourt makes things more difficult.  The Bulls overcame it last year to the tune of 49 wins and a series victory in the playoffs.  No matter if he's starting or coming off the bench, Gordon will have to score to be worth having on the floor.  When he's scoring, he's one of the best players on the team.  That is reason enough for letting him start.  If he was that big of a detriment to the team on the defensive end, it's hard to believe they would have finished so high in terms of defensive efficiency the previous few seasons.  

by snley on Apr 17, 2008 3:38 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

you don't know anything about basketball
Positions are set in stone, and if a player doesn't fit, waive him. Scottie Pippen, Grant Hill, Shawn Marion, Chauncey Billups, Charles Barkley, Sam Cassell, Kevin Johnson, Kevin Garnett, and Dirk Nowitzki never had any success playing out of position at their respective positions.
Stephen Curry is the lowpost answer!

by hscs on Apr 17, 2008 10:59 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I excluded Iverson, Earl Monroe, and Jason Terry
didn't I? Remember that little suckwad Gilbert Arenas? Where did his career go?
Stephen Curry is the lowpost answer!

by hscs on Apr 17, 2008 11:08 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd say
I probably know at least as much about the game as you do, and personally suspect more, but that's neither here nor there.  I'm here to voice my opinion amongst fellow Bulls fans, not to measure and compare the size of our penises.

I realize positions are not set in stone, but you cannot compound this by playing numerous players with undefined positions.  In our backcourt, we have two undersized combo guards.  We are starting a PF at C.  We are playing a SF at the 4.  Deng seems to be a natural 3, so the Bulls considered playing him at the 2, because why would they leave him out?  And why did they consider playing him at the 2?  To potentially exploit matchups where a he could post up undersized guards.  Hmmm..undersized guards.

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 3:36 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Fantastic contradictions
You say that positions aren't set in stone and then follow by deriding the Bulls for playing a PF at C?  Seriously, in today's NBA there's little distinction between the two except your bigger post player is usually the C.  

by snley on Apr 17, 2008 3:41 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Again, my point is
not that positions are set in stone (something I clearly acknowledge) rather that you cannot compound this by playing numerous players with undefined positions.  That's what the Bulls do.  They play Noce and Ty at the 3 and the 4.  They play Ben and Kirk at the 1 and the 2.  They play Deng at the 2 and the 3.  They play Thabo at the 2 and the 3.  They play Noah at the 4 and the 5.  They have Chris Duhon guarding LeBron on occassion.  

For the sake of rotation management alone, this is a problem.  

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 3:44 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Not all of the out of position moves that were
made were good ones.  Lord knows I hated the management of rotations with this team even when they were winning.  

What is the point, though, of quibbling that Noah is a 4 playing the 5?  Who decided that Noah's a 4 and what is expected of him playing the 5 that's not expected of him playing the 4?  Thabo's quick enough to play the 2 and big enough to play the 3, so why not?  If Kirk and Ben are combos, doesn't that make them a better fit for each other?  They're both guards, who cares about who's a 1 and who's a 2.  Noce is a combo himself, and with the right match ups and teammates on the floor (i.e. not Gooden or Smith at the 5) there's nothing wrong with him playing the 4.  Most of the time, Noce shouldn't be playing the 3.  Honestly, the positions in the NBA no longer make any sense and don't really apply to the vast majority of teams.  You have a point, 2 wings, 2 post players.  Or, you have 2 combo guards, 1 wing, and 2 post players.  Or you have, 1 PG, 2 wings, an uberathlete, and a post player.  In the end, it doesn't matter who's what.  What matters is that you have your best 5 players on the floor at the same time and find a way to make it work.  

by snley on Apr 17, 2008 3:57 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

The problem is that those lineups
are suppposed to create advantageous matchups (presumably via "floor spacing") in many regards and we did not see that occur this year, nor in prior years against good teams.  You can have those combo/hybrid lineups, but someone has to play PG.  You can't just not put a PG out there, which is why - to the chagrin of many fans - guys like Chris Duhon had to get so many minutes.  I have no problem playing Noah at the 4 or the 5. He's more of a 4, but he can grow into the 5.   It's just a part of the aggregate issue so I included it.  

I'd guess the disturbing realization may be that no one really has been exceptional enough to firmly claim a spot, so the game of musical chairs exists until that need is able to be met by someone.  I think Thabo can nail down the 2 and that Deng can/already has nailed down the 3.  It seems like Noah is going to be the 5, so since Paxson again (yesterday) referred to him as a starting power forward, I can only assume Gooden will be the 4 until he's dealt.  To me, this means the draft pick needs to address the PG.  

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 4:14 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

And hope to hell
that doesn't mean a three guard lineup with Noc and Gooden at 4 and 5.  

There is something to be said about guys who can play more than one position, but sometimes the combinations of that are suicidal.  If you want rebounding don't put Noc and Gooden at 4 and 5.  They can play those positions adequately at times, but not at the same time nor in that situation where you need rebounds.  And the expectations get overboard as well.  Such as expecting Gordon to be both an exceptional shooter as well as a good good ball handler and distributor because he is combo, gosh darn it. Or putting Thomas in as a 3 while at the same time complaining he isn't under the basket enough as he would be if he was in as a 4.  Can't have everything in other words.  

by cranscape on Apr 17, 2008 4:25 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Right and we can see what playing out of
position can do to a player.  Kirilenko thrived in the 4 and has become a bust at the 3.  Amare was excellent at the 5 but is an absolute terror at the 4.  Duncan wants to play the 4 for a reason.  So does Jermaine O'Neal, who had to play the 5 instead and can't stay healthy.  There is a reason positions exist, why they are specifically named (i.e. "Shooting" guard, "Small" forward), why some players who don't fit are thusly labeled (i.e. "shoot first" PG), why there are certain expectations ("back to the basket" power forward), and so on.  These are not just novelties or byproducts of creativity.

Versatility is great when it is used to take advantage of situtions and that advantage is greater than the disadvantage created.  Versatility should be a weapon, not a crutch.  

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 4:35 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

To your previous post about needing a point on
the floor at all times, it depends on the offense.  If a team runs a motion offense like the Bulls, you can get away with not having a player whose only job is to distribute and get out of the way.  

As to your examples of playing out of position ruining careers, most of them are bullshit.  The only one I'll give you is Kirilenko.  His decline, though, is do as much to the fact that Boozer and Okur have taken his shots and rebounding opportunities as it is playing out of position.  Amare was playing excellent at the 5 before the Shaq trade, so that's moot.  Duncan wants to be a 4 so he can start the All Star game, knowing that Yao gets all the votes at the 5.  Other than that, Duncan's more a 5 than a 4 when you consider he's bigger than the "5's" on the Spurs and usually guards the opponent's largest player during crucial periods of a game.  I would love to see you prove that O'Neal's injuries are due to him playing the 5.  Plus, isn't Jeff Foster considered to be their center?  

The reason positions exist is because people defined them a long time ago.  As the game has evolved, they've come up with special names for types of players who don't fit the original ideals of each position.    

by snley on Apr 17, 2008 7:40 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

You say Duhon guarded Lebron on occasion...
As if other teams somehow had a player that was able to do this well?

What player on the Bulls do you think could possibly check Lebron? What 2 players?

Also, shouldn't Lebron be a power forward by your definition? HE'S HUGE! But wouldn't that also be the absolute WORST possible place to put the best open court player in the game?

"Natural positions"? Bah.

by Khalid El-Amin on Apr 17, 2008 4:19 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Who would I have guard LeBron?
I don't know, but I can assure you I wouldn't put a 6 ft PG on him.  

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 4:29 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I assure you...
There isn't a player in the NBA who can guard him.

by Khalid El-Amin on Apr 17, 2008 4:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I dispute that
I think if the team defense prevents him from driving and a long athletic defender can force LeBron to take jumpers with a hand is his face, the odds of success increase.  Teams do successfully defend LeBron, you know.  It's not easy and does not occur often, but it does happen.  

And in regards to the comment about LeBron being a 4 because he's huge - where did I ever say size dictated position?  Though I will say it does heavily influence where a team would prefer you to play, ultimately it is your style of play itself that identifies your position or lack thereof.  

Here's the problem with playing players with no defined position:  it forces one or more other players to play out of position.  Compound this by playing more of these undefinted players and then you wonder what to do with your roster and the distribution of minutes, and you're still looking for a PG and a PF to this day.

I would like to believe that no team, no GM, no scouting department goes into free agency or the draft and says "We need to draft/sign a shoot first point guard."  Generally these players are signed by teams with little to no other better alternative.  Look at Milwaukee once TJ Ford was dealt and they had to play Mo Williams at the point.  Sure, they have been hit hard by injuries, but the effects of the change at point have been evident.  

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 4:48 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Playing out of position...
Can also force another team to match up with your team too you know.

If you need any evidence of this look no further than Golden State's trouncing of Dallas in the first round of the playoffs last year.

It works both ways.

by Khalid El-Amin on Apr 17, 2008 5:21 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't really
see a guy on the Bulls that warrants that much attention by the other team, out of position or not.  When we play out of position we typically give up something as well and the other team isn't really running in fear either.  

We don't have someone like Dirk who has a range of skills that are hard to match up to, especially his perimeter range for his size. And we don't have players like the Detroit back court who can post up weaker point guards.  When we do have a mismatch I don't see us taking advantage of it often.  It would be great if Deng can learn some post moves for the off chance his speed leave him with a smaller player guarding him.  But that is just a momentary mismatch. I wouldn't list the Bulls as a team that maximizes mismatches or really gains much by playing out of position.

by cranscape on Apr 17, 2008 8:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd rather
have Thabo and Thomas alternate on Lebron.  They might at least be able to wear him out for the second half.  He could shoot right over Duhon flat footed.  But if you remember back to the game where we shut him down...it was Hinrich and the head to arm collision that made the difference.  Perhaps we just need a hard head put in the right place.  In that cast anyone would do.  :)

by cranscape on Apr 17, 2008 4:30 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I hear you on that...
The point is that guarding him (just like Kobe) is a TEAM effort.

Just because Duhon is directly in front of him don't think for a second that every other player on the floor isn't keenly aware of where he is at all times. If they aren't then they should be.

All that being said the guy still almost averaged a triple double. It's ridiculous to think the Bulls were any worse at this than every other team in the NBA.

by Khalid El-Amin on Apr 17, 2008 4:34 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

well, on that point re: team defense
I agree. That's why I'm not amongst the "Ben Goron 2 shorte g3t it no D!" crowd.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Apr 17, 2008 4:42 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Translation please?
I got the Goron (no D) part, but what is "g3t it no D"?

by Khalid El-Amin on Apr 17, 2008 5:12 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Duh...
I figured it out :P

by Khalid El-Amin on Apr 17, 2008 5:29 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Can team defense not be affected like team offense
when you have to play 4-on-5?  We saw what it did on offense with Tyson Chandler (victim of no PG) and Ben Wallace (not a victim of anything).  So why would 4-on-5 defense not create team defense breakdowns?  It seems to have occurred this year.  I'm just trying to understand what happened to this team, and one of the things I can theorize is that the matchups caught up to the Bulls.  Two small guards in the backcourt who can't guard the other team's backcourt, one reason being because they're extremely undersized, has to have an effect on team defense, no?

by messwiththebull on Apr 17, 2008 5:04 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Fair enough...
But to bring up how we played against LeBron is just plain ridiculous.

Everytime we played them he got his points early and often, but for the most part we owned that team anyway.

Bottom line is the W.

by Khalid El-Amin on Apr 17, 2008 5:16 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't think the matchups caught up
as much as they just stopped giving a crap.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Apr 17, 2008 6:02 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

stuff your penis and ego in a sack, mister
If/when the Bulls hire a good coach, I bet the players start fitting wherever they're playing.
Stephen Curry is the lowpost answer!

by hscs on Apr 17, 2008 5:53 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

All those players were good at multiple positions
because they all have a wide range of skills to help them compensate.  The problem with BG is that he only has ONE skill.  Shooting.  He can't dribble. He can't pass.  He can't finish in traffic with big guys.  To suggest he is a combo guard is ludacris. He is strictly a shooting guard who is unfortunately not the ideal height for the position.

by shoryuken on Apr 17, 2008 5:26 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Gordon has played well
in limited minutes at point guard. That didn't happen this season, but it's not a bad idea to have him walk the ball up the court and chuck for 10 possessions.

Chris Duhon, now there's a point guard!

Stephen Curry is the lowpost answer!

by hscs on Apr 17, 2008 5:51 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Or u put a big PG in the backcourt with Gordon.
I would make an offer to Shawn Livingston since he could probably be gotten cheap seeing as though he's coming off this injury.  Include Hinrich and Nocioni/Deng in some sort of deal sending them to L.A. for perhaps a newly signed Livingston (if healthy, the true PG we sorely lack) and Corey Maggette (22ppg, 5rpg and would be in the last year of his deal if he doesn't opt out).  This way Livingston is my starting PG and you pick who you want at the 2/3 spots:

Sefalosha
Gordon
Maggette
Deng/Nocioni (whoever stays)
Hughes

Then up front we go with Gooden and Noah since we are likely going to get rid of Tyrus Thomas (I hate that idea but it seems it could happen).

We then draft the best player available depending on which pick we get and go forward with the option of moving Maggette and Gooden due to them both having expiring deals and being valuable to someone, or keeping them and having the $16 Mil they make combined come off the books.  And after next season Larry Hughes will likely be moved because he'll have the expiring deal after next season...or we can keep him and let his deal fall off the books and have cap space in the far fetched hopes that we'll get one of the 2003 draft boys.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 17, 2008 8:49 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

So your plan is
trade everybody but BG and hope Livingston can still run?  What do you do with BG if you somehow land Wade?  Move Wade to the 3?
Don't tell anybody, but here's hoping TT puts it all together.

by bullshooter on Apr 17, 2008 10:18 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

First of all...
...does trading Hinrich and either Nocioni or Deng sound like trading everybody?  I don't think so.  It sounds like trading 2 of the 3 worst contracts on the team and upgrading in terms of talent.

As for Gordon, if I'm making this deal he comes off my bench while Sefolosha or Maggette starts at the 2 for me next year and he's likely gone as an unrestricted free agent after next season (if he even signs the qualifying offer this summer and doesn't get a major offer from someone else that we don't match). SO if we were to somehow land Wade in 2010, IF he decides to opt out and when Hughes is off the books as well, chances are Gordon will be long gone.

I don't know what Livingston is or isn't gonna be able to do, but I do know that he is likely going to come cheap to somebody because he's fresh off that injury and he UNQUESTIONABLY has better PG instincts than Kirk.  Hell, a real PG might be the answer to turning a guy like Deng into a perennial all-star and getting the best out of Tyrus Thomas.  Potentially great PGs make everyone better.  He's younger than Deng, has as much upside as anyone in the league, and if he is indeed healthy then I'll take my chances with Livingston at the point.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 17, 2008 10:40 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

My bad
your plan is to get rid of all the guards for a guy who may or may not be able to run or jump.  And then hope that a superstar wants to play here.  Getting rid of everybody is consistent, I'll give you that.    And it's bold.
Don't tell anybody, but here's hoping TT puts it all together.

by bullshooter on Apr 17, 2008 10:48 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Can't run or jump!!
Sounds like what we got now!  And how is getting rid of Hinrich and either Nocioni (my preferred move candidate) or Deng getting rid of all the guards?

Chances are Livingston will be just fine.  I mean, really, most guys these days come back just fine from the knee injuries now...especially when they are young when it happens.  I'd take a chance on him at 5 million a year for a couple years rather than the 9 mil or so Hinrich and Nocioni both make.  If nothing else it gives us financial flexibility we don't have now.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 17, 2008 11:00 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

over the course of those
three comments you had everybody but Thabo leaving.  Can somebody verify that for me?
Don't tell anybody, but here's hoping TT puts it all together.

by bullshooter on Apr 17, 2008 11:38 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

What the hell are you talkin' about????
Of course they will all leave at some point if we don't resign them because they're contracts will be up by 2011.  Come on now!  I have them leaving under certain circumstances.

-Gordon (Likely gone in 2009, IF we sign him to the qualifying offer or if he picks up an offer that we don't match this summer.  I'd like to keep Ben, but only at a reasonable price...about 7 million a season but i suspect he will be offered more by somebody because he can be a sniper)

-Hughes (Likely untradeable so we're stuck with him thru 2010)

-Nocioni (I would like to move his contract if possible)

-Hinrich (I would like to move his contract if possible)

-Deng (Would like to keep, but only at a reasonable price...maybe 7 mil a year or so...here again though someone is likely going to offer him more but we'll see)

-Sefalosha (Will be a Bull through at least 2011 will only be costing a very affordable 3 million at that point)

So again, i would like to move Hinrich and Nocioni.  But Gordon, Deng and Hughes all will have contract situations that could see them gone anywhere from the next few months up until 2010.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 18, 2008 12:02 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

I hope for Livingston that he can make it back,
but I'm definitely not as confident as you seem to be - that was an absolutely gruesome injury, way worse than your ordinary ACL.  No way I'm trusting him to run a team until he proves he can still do it.  
It takes a special coach to make Aaron Gray a guy you can see.

by wjb1492 on Apr 17, 2008 11:50 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

U are right. 2nd ugliest injury I have ever seen!
Joe Theisman's just turned my stomach!!  But again, if we can get him relatively cheap I think he's worth the risk.  If you pay 5/$47.5 Mil to Kirk, then you can take a 3/$20 Mil chance on Livingston if you move Kirk.  If it doesn't work, never fear because if you make that deal then you've got expiring contracts that worth $16Mil (and possibly Ben Gordon if he signs the QO) next year and Hughes and his $13Mil come off the books the year after that so you'll have money and/or bodies to make moves with.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 18, 2008 12:07 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

By the way, those expiring deals would...
...be in the form of Drew Gooden and Corey Maggette IF YOU MADE THE DEAL I SPOKE OF EARLIER that is.  I also said that those two players and their expiring deals could possibly net you something valuable as well if you decided to move them.  Point being, we will have options again as it seems that with Hinrich and Nocioni's deals in place we don't have many options.

Can somebody tell me why Nocioni is making the type of money he is anyway?  I like Noc, but damn!!

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 18, 2008 12:11 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

If he comes back and proves he can run a team.....
...then we stand no chance at getting him then.  Someone will have picked up a diamond in the rough and we'll be too late to that party.  That's why I say let's take a flier on him.  It can't hurt to do so.  If he can't play anymore then fine.  Buy him out or trade him and move on.  His contract won't be much anyway.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 18, 2008 12:17 AM CDT to parent up   0 recs

As for the superstar...
...part of your comment, if you had read carefully bullshooter you would have noticed that I am of the belief that Luol Deng can be a MUCH better player and possibly who all us Bulls fans want him to be.  BUT with his slashing style of play, he more than anyone else needs to play with a distributor who can take advantage of what he brings to the table.

I had this EXACT same argument with a friend of mine regarding Tyson Chandler when he was traded to N.O.  I knew playing with a PG like Chris Paul (before everyone realized just how good Paul is) would make Chandler a better player.  We see how that's working out.  Take the decision making out of the game for a guy like Chandler and leave it all in the hands of a PG capable of handling such responsibilty.  A novel concept (hardly)!!!

The same thing can happen with Deng and Tyrus Thomas as well.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 17, 2008 11:06 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

are you going schizo on me?
weren't you the guy railing on Deng a few weeks back?  And now he could be great with the right pg?  Huh?
Don't tell anybody, but here's hoping TT puts it all together.

by bullshooter on Apr 17, 2008 11:37 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

Look bullshooter
For the 1000th time, I rail on Deng because his game as it is now is not a 50 million game and not because I don't like him.  Look back through my posts.  But with the right LEAD guard in place, Deng could become who we all want him to be.  You sound like one of those damn politicians in the debate yesterday tryin' to spin my words on me and take them out of context...LOL.

I have always said that I hoped moreso than most that Deng would be a star, but he is not going to "grab the bull by the horns" so to speak.  He doesn't have the tools to dominate a game on his own merit.  But again, with the right type of guy lined up next to him, he will thrive.  I believe that a healthy Livingston would do a better job taking advantage of the strenghts of a guy like Deng.  Could help him become a consistent 23-25 ppg guy and help him take that step we as Bulls fans so desperately need him to take.

But having said all that, this is why I said trade either Deng or Nocioni.  If Deng's contract demands are outrageous (which in my opinion would be to ask for that same 50 million after this horrendous season he had) then he can go to hell...and if this deal I propose is made then Maggette starts at the small forward position and gives us the same 23ppg he averaged this year on the wing and Nocioni backs him up.  Not to mention, Corey will provide an offensive threat at crunch time too.  That's a plus...LOL.

by lexdiamonds0730 on Apr 17, 2008 11:52 PM CDT to parent up   0 recs

If I had
a vote I'd vote for that lineup.

by sue369 on Apr 17, 2008 3:13 PM CDT to parent up