Hinrich and Rose - bosom buddies?
by OldSkoolSloan on May 21, 2008 3:10 PM CDT
100 comments
For one year, maybe. Trading Hinrich while his value is lowest doesn't make sense and I think we can package him more effectively later.
Judging by the board, it seems we all agree that if we draft Rose, that’d mean we’d be looking to move Hinrich. However, I think we’d be better off standing pat for one year. Across the board, our roster has very little market value. I mean, almost all our guys, Hinrich included, had horrible years this year. I think playing one year under a new coach, in a coherent scheme, and alongside Rose would lead to improved play and trade value for Hinrich, and all the other Bulls. If nothing else, a return to the average would mean better trade value.
I know $11million is a lot to pay Hinrich for splitting point duties with Rose (he probably can’t handle a full load right away). But if we allow his trade value to rise the first half of 08/09, we’d have Gooden’s $7 million coming off the books the summer of 2009 as trade bait before the deadline. And if we go the whole 08/09 season, we’d have Hughes’ $13.6 coming off the books in 2010 to package with Hinrich. That huge expiring contract is a big commodity, I know, but it might mean we could go after a scoring forward.
I just don’t see the sense in trading Hinrich while his market value is artificially low (in my opinion). Of course, this means that we'd be looking at a qualifying offer for either Deng or Gordon with the risk that one might walk. There are probably other holes in my theory, but feel free to poke away. DraftExpress salary sheet for the Bulls.
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.
1 recs |
100 comments
Email
Print
Comments
!!!!!
Theres teams desperate for a PG…Magic would gladly take him…So will the Heat…or Portland….His value is still there..it wont be impossible to trade him..
by SK23 on May 21, 2008 3:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
But for whom?
The Magic have no good bigs to trade us (I’m assuming we’d want a 3, 4 or 5 as we can’t take a guard back), Portland is LOADED with guards and they can’t take on another (even an upgrade) without sending us one. And Jack was playing well for them, so was Sergio R. Maybe trying to combine Hinrich/Thomas and parts for Marion, but even that’s tough.
I think we’re better off holding and letting his value rise and then making a move.
by OldSkoolSloan on May 21, 2008 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the Bulls keep Hinrich through next season
his value will plummet with his (non)playing time.
By all means, unload him now, while other GM’s still remember who he used to be.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on May 21, 2008 3:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
At the same time, everyone will be expecting him to be moved now
If other GM’s think Paxson is in a position where he has to get rid of Hinrich, that’ll even further limit his value in a trade. If the Bulls keep Hinrich and he works well as a back up to both guard spots, a role in which he probably would thrive, then his value in a trade or to the team will only increase.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on May 21, 2008 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But if a number of GM's are looking to pick up Hinrich
then economic principles say his market value will rise to what is fair. Even if a number of GM’s are looking to pick him up on the cheap.
"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 May 21, 2008 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His value would rise w/ competition amongst GM's to acquire him
but not as much as it would if he were to have a bounce back season and prove to be a veteran voice on a young squad.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on May 22, 2008 8:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the Bulls draft Rose
Hinrich’s pt will go down so much that by the end of the season he will be strictly thought of as a bench player…and not even the first man off the bench, as that will likely be either Gordon or Thabo, whichever one is not starting.
Sad to say, but Hinrich’s trade value will never be higher.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on May 22, 2008 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
alec, I know you're a smart guy, you've shown hints of it so many times
Break on through, man, don’t let the clowns around here drag you down. Hinrich is better than Thabo. If he bounces back to performance levels prior to last season, he is immensely better than Thabo. Just because Hinrich’s name can unfunnily be made into “Hinebrick”, doesn’t mean that he’s actually a completely useless player. The guy can play.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on May 22, 2008 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gosh, you guys know how much I hate
to put things in terms of my own personal experience….
But let me just say I have a lot of experience holding on to things too long, and a lot of experience dumping stuff too early…and of those two ways to be wrong, holding on too long is by far the worse. You just keep chasing what you thought was value down, down and down, until you end up just having to dump it.
That’s where I see the Bulls headed with Kirk if they don’t move him soon.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on May 22, 2008 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm all for moving a player too early rather than too late
The problem is, it’s already “too late” for Kirk. Why not try to see if he can recoup some value?
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on May 22, 2008 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My main concern about Kirk is that,
particularly if we draft Rose, he will no longer be a vital cog for us. But that doesn’t mean he couldn’t still be perceived as a vital cog for another team—a team in need of an upper-half point guard.
If Kirk gets relegated to the Bulls bench, he will not only have lost any real value to us, but he will likely also have lost any cache he may have had as being a starter. We will then be as desperate to move him as we are now desperate to move guys like Nocioni and Hughes.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on May 22, 2008 11:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think a big part of the assumption for the "keep Kirk" crowd
is that the guard logjam will be resolved otherwise and there will be enough minutes to spread around.
And in spite of the ”#1s start” reaction I know I’ll get, I still think it’s wise if the Bulls take Rose to not throw him into the fire too quickly. If he’s showing he’s absolutely ready to start and play 35 minutes a game, do an inseason trade of Kirk and hand the reins to Rose.
The kid hasn’t even started draft workouts yet. If he’s the Bulls pick, I hope he’ll be great and blow all the expectations out of the water. But in case it’s a little slower than that, why not hedge bets.
My Bulls may suck, but my Jayhawks are National Champs!
by wjb1492 on May 22, 2008 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats what ive been saying
And seriously, who expects rose to play 48 minutes a game. I would be surprised if the rookie was able to handle 20 minutes per game. I mean he is a rookie, one of the biggest challenges for rookies is hanging on an 48 min for 82 games per season. It takes time learning how to pace yourself and the guys in the nba, Surprise Surprise, are alot better then in college.
Jeez, alot of people are acting like rose will come in and pick up where he left off at memphis (which means blowing second halves, which should fit into the bulls philosophy) but not even chris paul or deron williams were able to be big impact players thier rookie year. Deron Williams was still surrounded by Okur, Boozer, Kirelenko, and was being coached by Sloan, that combo trumps anything the bulls have right now! It took chris paul an entire year to become a huge impact player, which is extremely quick and who knows if rose will truly be able to mimik that success just because he draws comparisons to chris paul. I mean kobe and lebron draw comparisons to Jordan but it doesnt mean that the two are gonna have the same sort of career as jordan.
If rose is a better player then hinrich, i can see the bulls moving hinrich….eventually….but i sure as hell dont see it happening this season UNLESS rose is able to play at an allstar level right off the bat, at 19. The chances are real slim, but hey they can happen. Until it happens though you dont just get rid of your veteran pg who “really isnt that bad but he isnt pure and had a crappy season and will never be an all star so that equals he sucks by our logic” without knowing you have indeed an upgrade which makes his job obsolete. I get hinrich has to go if rose is gonna be what we think he is (and i also believe he will be what many believe he will be) but at least logically consider that theres a considerable ammount of work that pushes a player into allstar level, and its hard for rookies who are getting used to the whole system to find the time to get that work in.
gahhh..
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 22, 2008 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And me.
If Rose and Hinrich are both here, Hinrich will be the starting PG to start the season. I’d be wiling to guarantee it.
by tyger1147 on May 22, 2008 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your right
Hinrich will start but as we all know he will get into very early foul trouble and Rose will play very early on and dominate. I figure it will take about 1-2 months before VDN makes D Rose the starting PG for the Chicago Bulls..
by Bulls4Ever on Jun 19, 2008 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Bulls would be better off
resigning Duhon to his correct place in the food chain-back-up pg-than keeping Kirk around and watching his trade value (which, if the Bulls draft Rose, will be Kirk’s ONLY value to the team)plummet.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on May 22, 2008 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok, you've said it enough
I’m still not buying it though. There’s still minutes, unless you’re worried about Thabo and Hughes taking them.
And I’m sure GMs will ‘remember’ who Hinrich was. If he plays better, in any role, it’ll help his value.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 22, 2008 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figured that might
bring you into the conversation.
I think it’s a moot point anyway, as the Bulls are likely to choose Beasley.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on May 22, 2008 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“If rose is a better player then hinrich, i can see the bulls moving hinrich….eventually….but i sure as hell dont see it happening this season UNLESS rose is able to play at an allstar level right off the bat, at 19.”
Rose is a far superior player than Hinrich. Right now. The second he steps onto the floor he will be the best guard on the bulls even with Hinrich's experience playing with these guys rose will be better. Allstar level is not needed, especially and obviously if the issue is Rose v. Hinrich for starting point guard. Kirk is bad and the offense was stuck with him in the driver seat. Once u see the bulls offense run by Rose u will realize that Hinrich plays in slow motion especially for a starting NBA point guard. He is obsolete and we can get an instant tremendous upgrade... so do it. keeping kirk only cuts into Rose's minutes on the court, no he wont play 48 minutes, but if kirk is here he will play less and that is not good for the bulls. period.Yea it took paul and deron a couple of years, but thats why rose will be the #1 pick, he is better and good enough to not have an immediate impact
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 22, 2008 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
dude wheres half my post....
after the gray i had typed… something like… once we see the offense run by rose it will be clear that hinrich plays in slow motion especially for a an NBA point guard. The second Rose puts on a bulls uni the offense will be better with him than Kirk, even given that kirk has played as captain of this team for several years. Picco u make it sound like u want to see if Rose can earn his minutes from kirk and that is just crazy. if kirk is on the bulls, Derrick Rose will play less and that is not good no matter what. Rose need not reach allstar level in his first year to deserve the lions share of starting minutes especially if the issue is Rose v. Hinrich
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 22, 2008 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look man
Derrick Rose has yet to play a single minute of nba basketball and everyone is talking about him as if he has proven himself in the nba. Things happen to rookies, some just cant make the transition right (joe smith) some get injured (jay will) some take drugs and screw up thier life..Like i said, i do believe Rose will be better then hinrich at the pg position, but i mean i think its crazier to say that he will be good right off the bat. Like Wjb said, we gotta cover all bets, and yes, i want rose to earn the position of a starter, its not crazy its common sense.
You cant tell how well a guy is gonna translate into the nba until he actually plays in it. I mean of course i want Rose to get alot of minutes (i dont want the bulls to do the tyrus thomas treatment on him) but at the same time, you should play the one who is more productive right? Its simple, if rose is as good as we all think he is, then its only a matter of time before rose gets that starting job, tyrus was a raw talent that needed to be taught the game more, while rose is polished talent that will show off his abilities in games and practices, it will be difficult to hide his abilities.
So him earning his spot shouldnt really threaten any fans of his, cuz if you believe all the things you say, then his talent should seep out in the minutes he plays. Im not anti rose, and though i am a hinrich fan i am also a strong bulls fan, i understand hinrich may have to go in order to make more room for rose and build around him, but it just doesnt make any sense why hinrich cant co-exist with rose. The money issue is not an issue at the moment, hinrichs value really wont plummet that much (i think every gm in the world will understand why he is on the bench if rose is doing what we believe he will) and even if he gets on the bench, he will not be a bench warmer, and should easily see at least 15 min per game (personally i beleive he will see at least 20), He wont be using 48 min of playtime (and neither will rose) and he will do nothing more then give the team more depth and flexibility. Really there is no problem with keeping both on the team.
There is one reason that you give away hinrich and one reason alone, we in exchange for him will be getting a superstar or all star that will nicely compliment rose. I dont think its elton brand (paxson seems content on keeping the role of the youngest roster in the nba right now, probably because he can now build around a young number 1 draftee) and the 4 position isnt too bad right now (gooden is good and can give us a double double, and tyrus still can improve alot more), i think sg will be the area that would need improvement.
And it doesnt have to be rose v hinrich, there is this concept of teamwork involved in nba teams….
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 22, 2008 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
is it just me
or does piccolo have by far the highest words per comment ratio.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 22, 2008 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry
I get that from teachers too, a 3 page essay is way too short for me…i also try to cover all bases in my posts and despite all my words i always fail to do so….sorry.
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 22, 2008 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You should intern for Simmons
Rusty Longley v 2.0
by Ozzie Montana on May 22, 2008 5:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A Skiles to Rose's Anfernee
If I’m Pax I’m willing to give Kirk half a season to a full season, especially if we don’t get any good trade offers. Within that first half-to-full season, Kirk can be for Rose what Skiles was for Anfernee Hardaway—just a steadying influence to help his younger and more athletic replacement adjust to the NBA.
And within that time, Kirk should be able to put his woes from last season behind him.
"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 May 22, 2008 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
problem is PT
Kirk has a good attitude, he already has his long-term contract, and he knows Rose is a better player (unlike Hughes), so I think he would be able to come off the bench and play effectively.
But how is the PT going to work between Rose, Hinrich, Thabo, and Gordon? It’s going to take a genius of a coach to somehow figure out how to get all these guys averaging 30 min per game (prob have to play some small ball).
Well we might get away with Thabo getting 25 min, especially against teams without a stud at SG, but Rose should be playing at least 35+ min and Kirk/BG need at least 30 min. I’m getting dizzy thinking about it, so would be easier for everything to just trade Kirk away.
by Orange Juice on May 21, 2008 3:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
it's not that hard
if Noc is dumped, Thabo can get some minutes backing up Deng.
Hughes is also a problem. I know it’s easy to just say sit him, but guys paid that much usually find a way to play somehow.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 21, 2008 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I think Hinrich is safe for at least one more season for a couple of reasons. First of all he is the only other pg on the team and of course as great as rose is, he probably cannot play 48 minutes per game, especially in his rookie year. Of course there are possible solutions to this by getting cheaper pgs to give rose a rest.
Reason number two is Hinrich is the veteran pg on the team, and he isnt a guy "you have to get rid of" in terms of production, personality, or ethic. Hinrich can play the point and knows how the system and the other guys on the roster and for that reason should be around for one more year until rose develops chemistry and abilities fit for the nba.Reason number three is that rose has not entered the nba yet, im sure he has alot of upside, but by trading hinrich NOW without testing the water with rose can possibly be a step back. It would be in teh bulls best intrest to have hinrich on the roster so that any steps the bulls take this upcoming season will be steps forward. So in other words hinrich would remain a fail safe just in case rose gets injured, isnt that good to begin with, etc…
Reason number Four is that Hinrich had been given a huge deal by the bulls that really exclaimed job security more than anything else. For that reason i think hinrich is guaranteed at least one more year with the bulls (because paxson truly is a nice guy).
Reason number five is somethign haters wont believe but, i think hinrich deserves one more year to show improvement and in the best case of the organization raise his value. NOTE: DERRICK ROSE WILL NOT PLAY 40 MINUTES HIS ROOKIE YEAR, he is not used to that playing time and he would be pushing it not to mention there is no pg who isnt going to hold back against the rookie. So Hinrich WILL get a chance to show his skills, my guess is they both get around 24 minutes sharing the pg job effectively (or hinrich will be pushed to sg at times when defense is needed)
From what i believe i know of hinrich, i think he wont fuss and will play harder if he gets a reserve role on the bulls, maybe its cuz im a fan but i still believe he is a starter on many nba teams, and until rose blossoms into a star, hinrich will be there. And ideally after rose blossoms into a star hinrich will still be there backing up this organization, really one bad year does not a crappy player make. I mean there are still larry hughes and Carmello anthony fans out there so…
Again ill say this motto, The bulls organization, from owner and gm to guys like shannon brown, all deserve one more chance….Hinrich Gordon, Deng Thomas are the four players that i believe more then anyone else deserve a another chance and so i expect them to remain with the bulls for one more year. Thats all i ask people respect from me, is that desire to give those players One More Year!!
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 21, 2008 3:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
okay the formatting thing bugs me, why did it do that
it was so not on purpose…
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 21, 2008 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
are you saying
Melo is the same as Hughes?
Sign Alex Gordon to a life time contract!!!
by eboston on May 21, 2008 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WHat?!?!
Where did you find that?
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 21, 2008 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OH this?
” I mean there are still larry hughes and Carmello anthony fans out there so…”
two players (of perhaps many) who had fairly bad season(s) or are not very productive despite thier strengths yet still have faithful followers. I didnt compare them to eachother, but clumped them into a group which probably has more then a dozen other members that i cant think of.
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 21, 2008 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That and Pax will stick to Kirk
Kirk’s his first draft pick, His proxy on the court (they essentially play the same game anyhow), he’s considered the team captain and we don’t have anyone else to defend our perimeter as well as him anyhow.
Kirk will stay in for a while.
by Alighieri on May 21, 2008 9:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
John Paxson and Hinrich don't
play anything alike.
formerly sbulls
by Scotter on May 21, 2008 10:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
what was he thinking? I can’t think of two PGs whose games are farther apart.
by sic on May 22, 2008 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Neither was a pure PG--
both were basically there to hit open jumpers.
It has become a strained analogy because Kirk seemed to miss his open jumpers. A lot. And before this past season, Kirk was expected to slash to the basket… at least a little bit… on day games during weekends… (he has failed to do this recently). He also developed a reputation as a defensive stopper. So yeah, the analogy is definitely a strained one.
"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 May 22, 2008 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One also played with a top 5 nba all time great
Who didnt like people who missed open shots. I wonder if that factors into the argument any?
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 22, 2008 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well said
all ur points made sense to me. we should see what they all have to offer after a terrible season and now the sudden craze of the draft. again i feel that if the bulls do have to cut down on the gaurds, obviously duhon (even though i might be one of the few if not only guy who didnt have a problem withi him), hughes(even though it seems impossible, i wish issah was still around, im sure he wouldve taken larry). i sill say rose would have the same problems on defense, gaurding bigger guys when gordon is on the floor with him. so if we can get something for gordon, i’ll be fine with it.
Ralph Wiggum, a smarter man than Jim Boylan
by Yibs on May 22, 2008 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ummm no....
Send him packing send ben packing too that clears your PT issue… oh whats that you can save money too and not keep guys like Ben Gordon who want to be way overpaid.
by TRiCioNeRo on May 21, 2008 3:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Start Kirk at 2
Haven’t see much discussion about keeping Kirk in the backcourt with Rose. Why not? Kirk can guard their best guard, letting Rose focus on offense. Kirk was shooting, what, near 40% from behind the arc at some point? Rose we’ll get him good looks and he can knock them down. When Rose goes to the bench move Kirk over to the 1 and have BG come in. Thabo rounds the guards with Duhon not resigned and Hughes banished to the end of the bench.
by The90sBullsRevival on May 21, 2008 5:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
A couple others here did too, but we seem to have been shouted down by the sheer massive quantity of Hinrick hate.
To me, a Rose/Hinrich/Sefolosha back court beats the Rose/Gordon/Sefolosha one hands down.
Joakim Noah for player/coach!
by marionette on May 21, 2008 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what about the Rose/Gordon/Hinrich backcourt?
if you’re worried about guarding twos, then what’s Hinrich’s real worth?
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 21, 2008 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm worried about
who Gordon’s guarding. I already know you don’t, Matt.
But I am beginning to change my position that BG is more tradeable than Kirk. I really don’t know what GM would be interested in him, especially considering the possible salary demands. Kirk’s deal isn’t good, but at least it’s a known quantity, and decreasing.
Joakim Noah for player/coach!
by marionette on May 21, 2008 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
good point
i thought i always heard that kirk used to be a 2 gaurd anyways. the only reason we got him to play the point was because jay williams got hurt. i think having kirk and rose in the backcourt solves the problem of guys blowing by gordon and getting shots in or having other bulls players come to help and pick up fouls. to me that was a huge problem last year. many times i believed gordon’s defense was they score a 2 against me, i’ll jack up a 3 at the other end.
Ralph Wiggum, a smarter man than Jim Boylan
by Yibs on May 22, 2008 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kirk becomes one of the worst 2-guards in the league?
all the stuff he does well only has value as a point, because otherwise his inability to score makes him a liability. I’d say 6th man is his best chance of contributing.
Supposedly Rose can guard big guards anyway, and if not him and Gordon will just shoot their way out of that sticky issue.
Does it REALLY matter who starts between the three? I guess not. But this all goes to the better players getting more minutes, and this team has a history of coaches who aren’t too good at figuring that out.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 21, 2008 6:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really? One of the worst?
Would he be worse than Morris Peterson/Bonzi Wells/Pargo? Worse than Willie Green? Anthony Parker? Ronnie Brewer? Maurice Evans/Keith Bogans? Devin Brown/Daniel Gibson? All listed as starters on playoff teams? I won’t bother listing the non-playoff teams. He’s not Kobe, Vince, Stephen Jackson, Jason Terry (although that one is arguable), Ray Allen, Manu Ginobili, whoever . . . but we already knew that.
by arjoseph on May 21, 2008 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm hoping that
My Bulls may suck, but my Jayhawks are National Champs!
by wjb1492 on May 21, 2008 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn it, that's twice I've managed to post right in the middle!
Anyway, I was trying to say that I hope the bad lineups is one of the problems that a new coach solves.
Maybe Pax is taking so long on the coaching search to make sure he gets Skiles the third…
My Bulls may suck, but my Jayhawks are National Champs!
by wjb1492 on May 21, 2008 6:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Totally agree.
I think the guy to go is Ben Gordon. It’s too bad, because I think he’s a useful player, but he’s already expiring and Hughes is taking his roster spot. Kirk already guards 2s, he’s a good shooter when he doesn’t have to create his own shot, and he’d provide depth at PG. I think having a backcourt of Rose and Hinrich (each getting about 30 min avg toward the end of the season; Hinrich getting more at the beginning as we work Rose into the NBA) is our best bet, with Thabo and Hughes off the bench. There’s no way that we’re not giving Hughes at least 15 mins; he makes too much money, and he’d become too much of a distraction. He was the price to pay to get rid of Wallace, and we have to pay it.
by arjoseph on May 21, 2008 6:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
why does everyone value 'guarding 2s'
and hate scoring points?
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 21, 2008 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Three answers:
(1) I care more about point differential than scoring points, which is the importance of defense. I think Rose+Hinrich (with Thabo as first guard off the bench) leads to the best point differential of any backcourt combination.
(2) If your PG is always guarding a SG (which in many cases takes more energy), he will have less energy in transition and in half-court offense. If Gordon starts at the 2, Rose will be burning more energy on the defensive end. If neither Gordon or Hinrich are at the 2, I think we’re sacrificing lots of other things. Do people honestly want Hughes or Thabo to start next season? And if not, who is this magic 2-guard that we’re going to obtain for that role?
(3) That’s it. I only actually have two answers, but lists are always better in threes.
by arjoseph on May 21, 2008 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, I disagree with point (1)
because Gordon’s so much better on offense than Hinrich (and I believe better with Rose than Hinrich would be with Rose) that it’d make up for it.
As for (2) if it’s that big a deal, have Gordon check the SG. Team defense, people. If the times are THAT tough, Hinrich can come in and contribute his two fouls.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 21, 2008 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I envision a
3 guard rotation, each guy getting 32 minutes. So, it’s fine by me if Thabo starts, seriously (Ronnie Brewer looked good at Utah this year, BTW). They’d all play about the same amount anyway.
Perhaps this is not realistic with the untradeable Hughes here, so there go some of my Sefolosha guard minutes, I’m sure.
At SG, I see Kirk spotting up from 3 and dogging his man like a smaller, but more flexible Raja Bell. And you wouldn’t waste a roster spot and $$$ on an inferior backup PG.
Before the Hughes trade, I was hoping to see if Thabo’s addition could help save the midget back court from themselves, in a manner of speaking. Now I just want to draft Rose, and fix that Achilles heel. Rose/Gordon/Hinrich looks like the same old deal: small on D and unbalanced offensively, unless Rose can rein in BG.
Joakim Noah for player/coach!
by marionette on May 21, 2008 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What do you mean reign in BG?
Rose would lead to Gordon getting to play more like Ray Allen and less like a poor man’s Arenas. That’s a good thing. Gordon hasn’t been a guy just jacking up shots.
formerly sbulls
by Scotter on May 21, 2008 9:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon is a natural shooting guard and one of the best
pure shooters in NBA history. 10th all time in career 3FG% with at least 400 more career 3FGA than 5 of the guys above him. Over 40% every year of his career. Rose means less of Gordon driving into traps or traffic and more open catch and shoot situations. Gordon is likely to become more efficient with a player like Rose.
Hinrich is no where near the efficient shooter that Gordon is, and is not a natural SG and doesn’t benefit from increased time spent in that role. Hinrich’s value as a defender is relentlessly pestering high usage players like Wade and wearing them down. I wouldn’t mind keeping Gordon and Hinrich or a year if meant Hughes never played, but Gordon becomes more efficient playing with Rose and Hinrich likely doesn’t.
formerly sbulls
by Scotter on May 21, 2008 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
counterpoint
Gordon’s short :-p
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 21, 2008 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
size doesnt matter
as long as the ball goes in the hole… so i’ve heard
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 21, 2008 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Matt, whose side
are you on, anyway—the Gordon is great camp? or the Gordon is limited camp?
Gordon and Rose would be extremely dangerous together (think a better version of Mobley Francis). And if there are any bigs who can cheat and recover, and block the layup attempts or pull-up jumpers of bigger guards, theoretically, Noah and Thomas should be able to do this. And Gooden should be big enough to help clog the lane. Team defense is indeed the order of the day.
Hinrich can become that instant defensive stopper 6th man, a shorter Bruce Bowen with a better offensive repertoire.
And lastly, 234L, who is this person you refer to as F. Hinrich anyway?
"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 May 21, 2008 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe
the “F” is an abbreviation for a verb.
by arjoseph on May 21, 2008 11:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really, doctor, you think so?
So all those times people type stfu they’re not talking about a Catholic Saint with a Chinese last name?
"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 May 22, 2008 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, just trying to be helpful.
I didn’t realize that you were just acting dumb for the sake of a joke. I thought it was an honest question. My bad; I’ll try to approach the blog more cynically next time.
by arjoseph on May 22, 2008 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There, there, arjoseph,
I was just trying to be funny both times.
Cheers!
"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 May 22, 2008 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was joking with the 'short' comment
Gordon’s limited, yet great at what he’s good at.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 22, 2008 9:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Counter-counter point
I know that BG is a sweet shooter, and I know that him “being short” is not much of a comeback to his talents, as many other talented basketball players are/have been short. Ideally, we could keep Gordon and play a Gordon/Hinrich/Rose backcourt. Based on our cheap-ass owner and the contract situations, however, I don’t think that’s going to happen. He wants to be paid at a price higher than a complementary player, and that’s all he’ll ever be. He might be a great scorer, and there’s definitely a place for those guys on championship teams (Steve Kerr, anyone?), but his lack of size means that he’ll always depend on someone else to create a shot for him (his efficiency goes way down when he has to create his own shot because he’s so short/small), which means he’ll always be a complementary player. You could say the same thing about Kirk perhaps, and that he doesn’t deserve his current contract, but the fact is we’re already paying him and BG is practically off the books at this point.
By the way, Hinrich has also shot “over 40% every year of his career.” 40% is not a great benchmark to prove someone is a good shooting guard. BG shoots 43% career. He had one year above that (same as Hinrich). Would you rather have BG or Ricky Davis (career 44.9%)? BG shoots like a good shooting PG, not a good shooting SG. (But who knows, maybe with a “true” PG beside him, he’ll turn into Reggie Miller.)
by arjoseph on May 21, 2008 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
um...
40% on threes is, I believe, what he said.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on May 21, 2008 11:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if rose....
if rose starts at pg, kirk becomes a backup pg or sg. frankly kirk is not a better shooter or scorer than either BG or Larry hughes. BG’s jump shot is much sweeter than Kirk’s and if one of the two is going to stick around it should be BG who brings a unique skill set to the team, unlike Kirk who brings nothing but mediocre blah.
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 22, 2008 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I think, long term, I’d rather deal Hinrich and keep Gordon. But keeping Hinrich around for one year and allowing him to mix in shooting guard, focus on his D (for which GMs around the league really love him), split minutes at point with Rose all while getting just enough minutes to tantalize (a la Calderon) would really beef up his trade value. Dealing Hinrich, maybe with Gooden, would free cap space to re-sign Gordon (assuming he steps up at 2). If we’re not liking what we see from Thomas he could be trade bait as well.
by OldSkoolSloan on May 22, 2008 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You must be watching a different Larry Hughes than me
My Bulls may suck, but my Jayhawks are National Champs!
by wjb1492 on May 22, 2008 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
another thing
is gordons terrible ball handiling. how many last year did he dirbble around and either losing the ball by himself, or dribbling out the clock and passing it off to tyrus or wallace with like 4 secs on the clock. 2 things that i remember very well was a close game against the magic, closing seconds and he dribbled at the top of the key with howard on him and dwight stripped gordon clean and made a fast break dunk. another was a game where he dribbled out the clock and everyone figured he’d shoot it and with 2 secs, he passed it to noch, who caught the ball with a surprised look and instantley yelled at gordon. i know theres been more, but thats just wat i remember now.
Ralph Wiggum, a smarter man than Jim Boylan
by Yibs on May 22, 2008 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree it would be great if
BG no longer had that role of end-of-game one-on-one savior. I think I’d appreciate him more.
But instead of the eternal B-a-B argument re: BG vs Cap’n Kirk, can we simply agree that they both are limited?
I almost feel Pax should trade whoever brings the most in return. (Or both of ‘em. That’d end the debate!)
Joakim Noah for player/coach!
by marionette on May 22, 2008 7:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading whoever brings the most is way too logical
Within all of this debate, I think the Bulls are still at the pre-lottery stage of players not being untouchable. If there is a great trade out there for any of them, take it. No matter who Pax drafts, the Bulls have too many players who need minutes everywhere but center, so he should jump on anything that seems clearly in the Bulls favor.
I just don’t see the need yet to start searching for trades to get rid of anyone (with the exception of Larry, I suppose), just for the sake of getting rid of them.
My Bulls may suck, but my Jayhawks are National Champs!
by wjb1492 on May 23, 2008 12:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
KC Johnson said
tonight on CTL that he could see a Rose/Hinrich back court.
by sue369 on May 21, 2008 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i thought i was the only
one who had that nightmare last night…. spooky.
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 21, 2008 10:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
tears start flowing
just thinking about it
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 22, 2008 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've come to the conclusion to keep Hinrich.
There’s more important things to do this summer.
Steps for Paxson to take in order of importance:
1. Evaluate and draft the better player of Rose and Beasley
2. Hire the best coaching staff available for developing guys
3. Re-sign Deng for five years. At the lowest possible amount, but whatever it takes.
4. Re-sign Gordon. Extension. QO. Sign-and-trade. Whatever. He needs to be on the team next year.
5. Trade Nocioni. For whatever.
If Paxson does those five things, in my opinion, it will be a successful off-season. That’s a lot of work. He can do more, but that’s a lot in itself.
During this upcoming season he can look for trade partners for Hughes, Hinrich and possibly Gooden (since he’s a fat expiring contract-although I like the DG/TT combo). Next off-season, he’ll continue that, he’ll have to figure out what to do with Gordon for the long haul, and he’ll have to evaluate and possibly extend Thomas and Sefolosha. And maybe he’ll re-sign Gooden if he and Thomas are working out.
Anyway, at this point, that’s my stance for the off-season. Of course, Paxson has to listen to all offers that might help the team, so that makes it that much harder.
by tyger1147 on May 21, 2008 5:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
heh
I was puzzled myself.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on May 21, 2008 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
I guess my intelligence is thought to be so smart that it’s unfathomable I make mistake. Thanks for the flattery. However, I am human, and I do make mistakes.
Thanks again for the compliment. : P
by tyger1147 on May 21, 2008 10:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ha
your “intelligence is thought to be so smart…” priceless
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 22, 2008 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
When is intelligence dumb? That'd be a good riddle.
by OldSkoolSloan on May 22, 2008 10:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
apparantly @8:58 PM PDT on may 21
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 22, 2008 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
$10 million a year
is too much for a backup pg… but maybe its worth it to ease any growing pains… Hughes Gordon AND Hinrich at sg is too much tho.
F HINRICH
by 234L on May 21, 2008 6:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Real Hinrich
Rose/Hinrich backcourt gives us (Finally) what should be our first look at the real Hinrich, he has been and always will be doomed to be an undersized (NBA) shooting guard. He was one of the best (2nd best) shooting guards of his draft class and the Bulls proceeded to make him the starting point. Now he gets one year to prove he can still be that player, then after that he should be shipped/shopped! http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/Kirk_Hinrich And yes according to what I have seen for $11,250,000 I Too am a Kirk h8tor!
by A Train Afro 53 on May 21, 2008 11:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I understand that Kirk h8tor talk.
But I try not to focus attention on Kirk. He didn’t call the Bulls up when he was drafted and say now I want to play PG.
He didn’t demand publically the 10+ million a year (as Ben is supposely done?)
He didn’t ask for the Bulls to give him entitlement starting status, a force trading away Jamal Crawford.
It wasn’t Kirk’s fault that the organization had no off season structure development plan for his growth?
I’m not a Kirk h8Tor or a h8tor of Paxson, but I seems apparent to me where the fault points.
by exult463 on May 22, 2008 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He didn't force the Bulls media department
to put that giant facial advertisement of him with makeup and lip stick just off the expy 94 two years ago symbolizing the new face of the organization..
by exult463 on May 22, 2008 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Skiles
I celebrated the day he left, and mourn the day Paxson hired him. He doesn’t help develop players at all. The entire coaching staff needs to be replaced.
by exult463 on May 22, 2008 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually liked skiles
The guy really seemed like a genius to me in terms of coaching, i just wish he had a more personal way of teaching players.
im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.
by piccolomair on May 22, 2008 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bulls guards ???
Have many holes in their game and it becomes apparent when their are compared against this potential #1 pick in Rose…
1) Kirk issues: large contract, unclutch performances, lack of moxy as NBA PG, average to below average shooter, doesn’t make great passes consistently to make others better, defense overrated. and lacks drives to the basket. Kirks positives: and nice combo 3rd guard who can start in event of injuries at either guard position.
2) Ben Gordon issues: short for SG, lacks good handles and drives to the basket, poor defense, very limited on defense and PG skills, takes too many jump shoots. Ben positives: good streaky scorer.
3) Hughes issues: being on the Chicago Bulls. Hughes positives: that I don’t have to waste time trying to think of any.
4) Thabo issues: numbers game on the bulls team at the guard position, Thabo positives: can be moved between SF and SG as a safety net in the event the Bulls get lucky and unload Kirk, Ben Gordon and Hughes and draft Derrick Rose.
5) Duhon issues: because Kirk was so below average so often as a starter, Duhon looked more than serviceable. Duhon positives: He is really a serviceable backup.
The sad point is Kirk is probably a good guy, but was mismanged by the Bulls organization with limited instructions for continued development, entitlement and lots of money before he really justified his place in the NBA. He really should niw be in a position on this team to be like his mentor, yet slightly better. But, not positioned in the same class as Wade, Lebron and Kobe on his team which forces undue pressure and criticism because of the expectations.
by exult463 on May 22, 2008 1:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
HINRICH IS A FUCKIN BUM
all that say otherwise obviously didn’t watch many bulls games from last year? if he’s so great why cant he throw a consitant alley oop pass?? his defense is over-rated and his offense is ‘average’ on a GOOD day. fuck him, the guy looks like he’s gunna lay down on the sidelines to take a nap- AT TIP OFF. non-aggresive douche.
by AFireInside661 on May 29, 2008 6:40 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Blog a Bull
Related FanShots on Blog a Bull
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
