Hollinger's Team Forecast: Chicago Bulls

[From the FanShots. Always an interesting read. -ed.]

Outlook
Chicago still has as much young talent as any team this side of Portland, and its potential for cap space in 2009 and again in 2010 (when Hughes comes off the books) makes its future a lot brighter than its present.
But we're dealing with 2008-09 here, and it could be another rocky year in the Windy City. While winning the lottery helps, NBA point guards typically need at least a year before their play really zooms upward, so Rose may have his struggles -- especially since he played only one year of college ball and needed half of that season to get his bearings.

It's a similar situation up front, where Thomas and Noah are undoubtedly talented but still learning how to be pros, and giving up both pounds and experience to their opponents every night. It doesn't help that two of Chicago's best players play the same position, meaning they have to either go small to get Deng and Nocioni on the court at the same time or, more logically, trade Nocioni for a true frontcourt player.

Either way, it seems more likely that they miss the playoffs than make it. There are a great many wild cards here -- how well Rose plays, how well the young bigs adjust to their increased roles and how Del Negro handles his first coaching assignment -- but ultimately too many of those have to turn in Chicago's favor to consider it likely that the Bulls will return to the postseason.

Prediction: 39-43, 4th in Central Division, T-9th in Eastern Conference

9 months ago Belize Comment 62 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

mentiones Beasley several times

mentions that he’s a space cadet once. Which is enough, no?

management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces! Be a 'Nazi' when it comes to thread duplication!

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Sep 30, 2008 2:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

lol

Can I offically start chanting “Fuk Beasely” now?

by Belize on Sep 30, 2008 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with this Hollinger

that PHI will be a killer, maybe even better than DET (IMO).

He has IND and CHA in (besides the other obvious candidates) while MIA and CHI are tied/short of the playoffs, along with WAS, MIL, ATL, NY, and NJ.

Each year there’s at least one surprise, but I still can’t see CHA. I know the coach is “great” and all, while ours is a blank. IND’s coach is pretty great too (no " " needed), but I still like MIA and Bulls to make it in.

Would any of BOS/DET/PHI/ORL/CLE/TOR/MIA/CHI be a surprise, though?

by marionette on Sep 30, 2008 5:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

So wait...

Was he calling Nocioni one of our best players?

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Sep 30, 2008 5:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

It appears so

But at least he recommends the Bulls trade Nocioni

by wojcmic1 on Sep 30, 2008 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Funny...

That a lot of the Hollinger guys around here also seem to be Nocioni dis-loyalists (Matt, I guess I’m looking at you). How do you feel that Hollinger just called Nocioni one of our best players?

You can flag me for trolling if you like, but Hollinger is ridiculous if he thinks this nonsense.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Sep 30, 2008 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Flip Side of that...

… Hollinger must think Nocioni has some value for the league, so it makes it even dumber we haven’t traded him.

But seriously, I don’t have much difficulty reconciling my like for Noc as a player with my dislike for him as a contract and within the context of this team and the future. At a better price or on a team that didn’t give a shit about money, I’d be ecstatic about him.

by Sports2 on Sep 30, 2008 7:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well sure...

But this team does give a shit about money (as you of course know, but bear with me, I get angry at Hollinger sometimes), in fact it’s the main reason our leading scorer will be playing on the QO next year. That alone makes me hate Noc (admitidly through no real fault of his own I guess).

I used to love watching Mad Dog Madsen play too, but if any team is struggling to find ways to get that guy minutes then they have serious serious problems and should consider changing sports.

Not that Noc is nearly as bad as Madsen, but his role on the Bulls should be as a role player only. A guy that comes in and maybe hits a key three, or at most instills a little passion and toughness before he limps off the court with one of the myriad of injuries he will no doubt incur (but probably play through) next year and becomes our second highest paid cheerleader.

Noc is plenty fun to watch (albeit frustrating), but he should be our THIRD or FOURTH guy off the BENCH next year at best. That just tells me that Hollinger doesn’t watch or even remotely understand the Bulls, he merely watches the stats. Even then I don’t understand his statement:

“It doesn’t help that two of Chicago’s best players play the same position, meaning they have to either go small to get Deng and Nocioni on the court at the same time or, more logically, trade Nocioni for a true frontcourt player.”

You realize of course that he’s saying that Nocioni should be stealing minutes from Tyrus next year right? Noah too. Not just that, but the Bulls will be trying to find ways to do it. As if VDN might actually gameplan for this retarded scenario. That’s just garbage, and also completely ridiculous (except maybe the part where he says they should trade Nocioni, again as if ANYONE wants that salary albatross on the books).

To all the Hollinger guys, remember this “expert analysis” next time you toss his stats out and place him on his untouchable throne.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Sep 30, 2008 8:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't get the over-trashing of Noc.

He seems like a typical 6th man bench scorer on a good team. I can’t think of many teams, if any, where he wouldn’t be the 6th man or better. His contract isn’t ideal but it’s not outlandish. He’s just on the high side of his price range. Look no further than the Posey contact just signed with the Hornets for comparison.

Again:

Pts/40 TS%
Nocioni 21.4 54.9
Gordon 23.3 55.8

by CJ Bulls on Sep 30, 2008 8:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

You really think Nocioni should be our first guy off the bench next year?

That per 40 stat is exactly the kind of nonsense I’m railing against. Are you even remotely suggesting that Noc is on the same level as Gordon, because it’s Gordon (or Heinrich/Rose, depending on who starts) who will be coming off the bench long before Noc gets in the game. Count on that. Ironic that you would drop that tired per 40 stat. As if Noc could even play 40 minutes a game anyway. It’s hypothetical nonsense. Can we please ban that awful stat from this site forever?

But more to the point, my intention wasn’t so much to trash Noc, but to point out Hollinger’s ineptitude and lack of knowledge about the Bulls roster. He’s a stat geek, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he said we were going to be awesome last year. If anyone can show me his pre-season rankings last year where he had us not even making the playoffs I’ll eat my words.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Sep 30, 2008 9:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh wait a minute...

Here it is…

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=HollingerForecastIndex0708

He had us going 55 and 27 for the best record in the East.

Yeah, that guy is a genius and we should definitely read into EXACTLY what he says about us next year!

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Sep 30, 2008 9:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did you see the Bulls losing 49 games before last season?

This seems personal, did Hollinger dip his bald head in oil and rub it all over your mother’s body or something?

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 Oct 1, 2008 8:40 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

There's nothing wrong with per 40 minute stats or per 48 or per 36.

They’re ratios for comparison sake. And those ratios are pretty reliable. How many minutes a guy could actually average in a game has nothing to do with their validity. And there isn’t a significant difference in Nocioni and Gordon’s ability to play extended minutes anyway. Both have had stretches where they were playing 40+ minutes. The problem with CJ’s comparison wasn’t the use of per 40 min stats. It was the lack of context for those stats. How they accumulated those stats is nearly as important as the stats themselves. PER at least picks up some of the context, which is why Gordon had an above-average PER and Nocioni a below-average PER.

Bringing up last year’s rankings is absurd. No one had the Bulls finishing out of the playoffs whether they were using stats or a collection of their grand pappy’s favorite sayings. Hollinger has his flaws, but in comparison to the drivel put out by ESPN’s cadre of former players and a good chunk of the basketball scribes out there Hollinger looks golden. He lost touch with this Bulls team, but that doesn’t make him any different than the majority of the NBA media or event the majority of the Bulls beat writers.

by Scotter on Oct 1, 2008 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My point was not to compare him and Gordon overall

but as a 6th man/bench scorer.

I don’t believe Gordon is a true 6th man. He’s too talented for that label. The point is if you look back Noc shoots a similar TS% and slightly lower pts/40 for the last 3 years. Most people seem to sight gordon as being one dimensional and only good at scoring. As a result, I’m saying if that’s all people view Gordon has, we already have a player that meets those criteria.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's just silly...

If your point wasn’t to compare him to Gordon then why paste his stats directly next to Gordon’s? You have to see how it might seem you are comparing the two.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My point was he fills the role as a good 6th man/bench scorer

Then I used what I believe to be the two best indicators of scoring (pts/min and TS%) up to compare how Noc does against Gordon. I don’t see why that was inaccurate?

My post wasn’t Noc is better than Gordon, just that he fills that role very well. To compare him to the best scorer on the team (and one many feel is a 6th man himself) was just to show he’s not that far off in those areas.

Many people treat him like he has no value, but he’s arguably the 2nd best scorer on an offensively challenged team.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nocioni does

come off the bench and hit those key threes. Unfortunately, its usually on his seventh attempt in seven possessions.

"Worker bees can leave.
Even drones can fly away.
The Queen is their slave."

by jpchi on Sep 30, 2008 8:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Early into the shot clock no less.

Noc is the best when everyone else is playing great and we are building a lead or otherwise feeling good about things. When he is at his worst it is when we are behind or otherwise off and he feels like he needs to take over on his own and do too much. He has no remorse about forcing shots, taking them early, taking ill advised charges, charging recklessly to the basket, getting out of position defensively to double a guy who does not deed doubled etc. He isn’t a guy I want in there when we are anything but well off.

Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.

by cranscape on Sep 30, 2008 11:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Noc 3pt% the last 3 years

2008 36%
2007 38%
2006 39%

That is an above average 3pt% so I don’t get why so many uninformed people take shots at him.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think part of it is his selection

sometimes his 3s seem ill advised and rushed, or contested. i’d love to see a breakdown of his shots vs the shot clock because it seems like the ones he misses the most are the ones he rushes into without ever passing it. it’s fine for him to take them when he’s open, he shoots it at a decent clip.

by Jaina on Oct 1, 2008 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So then people don't like Noc

because he could be a 40% 3pt shooter but takes silly shots sometimes? His TS% and 3pt% are solid. I guess that is what I don’t understand. He takes ill advised shots, but how can people say Ben Gordon for example doesn’t. Noc is a scorer and they sometimes take bad shots. But his shooting %’s are good enough that people should look the other way on these.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll admit with the disdain I hold for his contract, his "passion", and most of his fans

I often forget how good and valuable Noce is

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 Oct 1, 2008 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think the point is that it's inopportune moments

we all cringe when gordon rolls it off his foot in crunch time but really, he doesn’t turn it over any more than kirk does, it just seems to happen at the wrong time. and when watching these one might say “ugh, i’d be happy never to see ben roll it off his foot again!” and cry that he is such a poor ball handler. yes his handle could be improved, but he is a 2 for a reason, not a 1.

it’s the same thing with noc for me. both he and gordon fall into the “so good one moment, so bad the next” category (with gordon being a more extreme case) for me. noc will hit a couple 3s in a row while we’re on a roll, and we all cheer! and the next he is bricking shot after shot early in the shot clock without passing it off while we’re blowing a lead or are behind or something.

i don’t know. i don’t know if i’m explaining myself fully.

by Jaina on Oct 1, 2008 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh, and the other point

is that his contract clearly plays a factor in some people’s dislike for him.

by Jaina on Oct 1, 2008 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My point exactly...

In my original post I stated it’s his strangle hold on the cap that burns me. Noc is fine, just fine, not great, but fine. Certainly not one of our best players though.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's fine

But Noc only accounts for 8mm on the 63.4 million dollar team salary (that’s based on Gordon signing the QO). So he represents 1/8 of the salary cap. His contract is also declining.

He’s currently the 4th highest salary on the team. If Gordon were to sign the 6/59 extension, after next year, he would be the 5th highest paid player on the team. That doesn’t include Gooden who is very close (depending on whether he re-signs with the Bulls.

http://www.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/bulls.jsp

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

4th highest...

On a team at the max end of cap space (with zero inclination to go over).

That puts him behind Hughes, Heinrich, and Deng.

IE: that puts his value over Gordon, and will likely soon effect Tyrus, and Gooden (or whoever we get to replace him). If you think Noah is that guy then great, I hope you enjoy watching long stretches of Aaron Gray if he gets hurt.

We have a lot of young players behind Noc who are arguably better than him already. Granted it’s not Noc’s fault they paid him what they did, but it undoubtedly shapes our roster now and in the future.

And if your response is that I should hate Hughes more, well yeah he’s an even bigger problem, but at least Hollinger wasn’t dumb enough to call him one of our best players… Which is how this whole discussion got started.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

Who do you have better than Noc?

There are tiers:
class by himself: rose
potential great players: gordon, deng
solid players, never great: hinrich, gooden, nocioni
young talents: tyrus, noah
potential players: thabo, gray
everyone else only fills out the roster

I would pay them based on tiers with fluctuation within the tiers. Mainly, Gordon on the lower end of his tier. So hinrich makes 10mm this year, Noc 8mm, and Gooden 7mm. I don’t see how that’s a stretch unless you disagree with all those contracts. And Rose should be paid the most, but thankfully his rookie contract allows otherwise.

Who on that last is better than Noc already?

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Every player on that list is better...

Except for Gray.

And if they aren’t better now they have the potential to be this year.

Thabo might be the one player that I have a question mark about, but he’s shown flashes of becoming a solid NBA player when given the minutes. If he can develop as a guy that can play 1-3 as a lock down defender he’ll be a great asset, especially in the East.

Trust me when I say that I have less tolerance than most for TT, but even I can see that his value is far greater than Noc, now or in the future.

Noah, Heinrich, Rose, Gordon, Deng, and Gooden… All are more valuable to the Bulls than Noc already.

Hell, I’d even say Hughes is about as valuable. Not nearly worth what we are paying him, but if the question “who is better” then it’s probably a toss up between the two. I (unlike most) don’t think Hughes is a bum, just ridiculously over paid with serious shot selection problems.

This is all really moot though. The real question is how valuable are these guys to the Bulls. You mentioned that Noc is a scorer… Well so is Deng and Gordon. Heinrich used to be, and Rose will most likely get his share of buckets next year too. So then what is Noc? A defender? Not likely. Sure he plays with a lot of grit and toughness, but refs have him pretty much in their sights the moment he steps on the floor. Plus, you can’t flop like you used to. Three point specialist? Sure, why not, but so is Gordon and Heinrich at times.

A role player? Probably. He fills a need, but do you really think he’s our fourth best player (cause that’s how they pay him), or should be the first guy off the bench? I say third or fourth guy off the bench at best.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really

Noc is the 10th best player on the bulls? You are delusional, or have some crazy view of the Bulls/watching basketball.

So what is a fair contract for Noc, 2 years 2 million? because that’s what the 10th man on .500 team would get paid.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

O.K. then...

I pose the question to you…

Who on that list is less vanuable to the Bulls than Noc. Because if you really think he’s our fourth best player or the first guy off the bench then you sir are just as delusional as I.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

There's a difference

5 of those players are on rookie contracts. It’s not their fault. For example, Rose on the open market would command more than 8mm.
Noc is easily as valuable as Tyrus and Noah. They have a higher ceiling, but he’s ahead of them right now. Thabo and Gray are both clearly below Noc. And as noted, Hinrich and Gooden are at a similar value and are thus paid in the same price range.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Noc is as valuable as Noah?

Is that a joke? Can Noc play center? If/when Gooden gets hurt next year do you think the Bulls can compete with just Gray?

Clearly you have no idea how valuable Noah and TT are.

TT can guard 3 positions, and actually play PF.

If Noc gets hurt the Bulls have plenty of options at his position.

I don’t know what to tell you if you can’t see that.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought we were discussing salary

on the open market, Noah would command a contract similar to Varejao, which is less than Noc’s contract. I don’t see your point. You just have something against Noc. I don’t see why. What do you think he’s worth? Just so I know.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 9:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

He's worthless...

Happy?

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you don't have an honest value for what noc is worth?

by CJ Bulls on Oct 2, 2008 6:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

His worth is that of a role player...

If you say that’s 2 million dollars then so be it.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 2, 2008 8:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think his contract is close to what he's worth

I was curious what you thought?

by CJ Bulls on Oct 2, 2008 8:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

By the way...

Third or Fourth guy off the bench would qualify him as our 8th or 9th best player. Not 10th as you put it.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You listed players who were better

and said everyone on the list is better with the exception of maybe thabo. That puts him 9th. You then said Hughes was better, contracts aside, so that puts him at 10th.

You clearly assign no value to scoring and too much value to youth. While these players can get better, there is certainly no guarantee.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

I said it was a toss up...

between him and Hughes, and I ALSO said that if the players on that list aren’t better now they have the POTENTIAL to be this year.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey Buddy...

If you are counting me among those “uninformed” people, I actually said that his role should be to hit a key three every now and then. The guy can shoot the 3 just fine IMO.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

First of all,

dude, it was a joke. Second, Noc is a front runner. When we have a lead and he is relaxed, he can make threes all day. But, when we’re behind he starts pressing. He becomes more of a gunner and takes some awful threes. Frankly, I also am biased because we’re paying him 2.5 million more per year to do the things that someone like Jason Kapono does better.

"Worker bees can leave.
Even drones can fly away.
The Queen is their slave."

by jpchi on Oct 1, 2008 8:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm starting to think...

I’ve been debating this issue with Nocioni himself.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 8:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's like talking to a bunch of retards.

Noc scored 21.4 pts/40 last year.
Kapono 15.1

Kapono a spot up shooter. Noc can score in a variety of ways. There is not even close to a comparison between the two.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 1, 2008 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

At least you haven’t resorted to name calling yet.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 10:09 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Douche bag.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 1, 2008 10:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

my mistake

came back drunk, and then seeing a Noc/Kapono comparison threw me over the edge. It wasn’t even your comment. They just have no similarities whatsoever.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 2, 2008 6:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're right!

Nocioni tries to do too much. He should just be a spot up three point shooter because he can’t cut worth shit, has a below average midrange game and takes wild drives to the basket hoping a foul will bail out his poor decision making. The only thing Nocioni does well for his position (besides hit 3s with a lead) is rebound. And can you please stop throwing out the pts/40 stat. Technically, Larry Hughes scores more points per 40 than Kapono, but he shoots under .390, so does it really matter? Fine, so if you disagree with me on who Nocioni should try to be, who do you think he could be?

"Worker bees can leave.
Even drones can fly away.
The Queen is their slave."

by jpchi on Oct 2, 2008 8:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're wrong

i’m done with. there’s no sense in discussing this with someone who has clear biases.

by CJ Bulls on Oct 2, 2008 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

same

"Worker bees can leave.
Even drones can fly away.
The Queen is their slave."

by jpchi on Oct 2, 2008 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't see how

I use facts to attempt to make points. You respond with “Noc sucks. He should play like Jason Kapono. Larry Hughes is bad.”

by CJ Bulls on Oct 2, 2008 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You know,

you use stats which are famously easy to manipulate. You mention the points per 40 minutes played, but you don’t mention the drastic differences in shooting percentage. You can’t see the wood for the trees. You spend so much time looking at one individual statistic that you ignore many of the others. Noc has a place, but you argue that he’s better than he is based on an incomplete premise.
Stats have their place just take them with a grain of salt. Mark Twain once said, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.”

"Worker bees can leave.
Even drones can fly away.
The Queen is their slave."

by jpchi on Oct 2, 2008 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mark Twain said that, but...

When he said that, that was when statistics was pretty rudimentary. I also disagree with your comment that stats are easy to manipulate. He’s not manipulating them, these are common stats used frequently and he should not given a hard time about them. That being said it is important to consider other stats as you mentioned.
I don’t want too get in this tussel, I just want to defend stats.

by Jamaicanpi on Oct 2, 2008 7:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They've done studies you know...

60 percent of the time, it works everytime.

Don't call me doughboy!

by Khalid El-Amin on Oct 2, 2008 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Noc is not the reason or atleast the only reason

Gordon is taking the QO. They Bulls had room under the lux. tax last year to sign him they offered him more. We can debate the worth of Gordon til rooster crows but the Bull did want to pay anymore than are offering. The Lux tax is just an excuse. If they really felt he was valuable and worth what he is demanding they could have signed him before Deng.

Second point…I blame the contract of Wallace (now Hughes) more than anything for our current salary situation. We missed out on a lot of opportunities (Kobe, Garnett, Gasol) because of cap space limited potential trades.

"If you're not going to compete, then I'll dominate you." MJ

by Rankdog on Oct 4, 2008 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is the first outlook I've read

That is is both extremely gloomy and bright

by Option27 on Sep 30, 2008 6:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Which is exactly how we should think of this upcoming season

It’s going to be a lot of fun…and extremely aggravating.

"I’m gonna rise up, gonna kick a little ass. Gonna kick some ass in the USA. Gonna climb a mountain, gonna sew a flag, gonna fly on an eagle. I’m gonna kick some butt, gonna drive a big truck. I’m gonna rule this world. I’m gonna kick some ass. I’m gonna rise up, gonna kick a little ass. Rock, flag, and eagle!"

by Ozzie Montana on Sep 30, 2008 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

As long as

it is growing pains and not death knells I’ll be fine with it.

Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.

by cranscape on Sep 30, 2008 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

has anyone read the insider offseason moves breakdown?

Offseason Moves

Along with re signing Deng, and signing rose – it says:

"• Re-signed Ben Gordon. The Bulls re-signed Gordon to a one-year, $6.4 million deal. Gordon hoped for a long-term contract from the Bulls, but given the crowd in Chicago’s backcourt there was little urgency on their side to pull such a deal together. Instead he’ll play for the one-year qualifying offer and take another shot at free agency next summer, this time as an unrestricted player.

Additionally, there’s the little matter of cap space. Chicago might not be terribly interested in keeping Gordon given that it could create a big chunk of cap space next summer if he doesn’t sign and the Bulls trade one more contract, which would allow them to pursue a major free agent for the frontcourt."

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/trainingcamp08/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=BullsMoves0809

Strange, I never heard this anywhere?

by rquinsee on Sep 30, 2008 11:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs