Wait, another trade possibility. I really like it (Elton Brand)
by CJ Bulls on Jan 27, 2009 1:29 PM CST
Email
PrintChad Ford's latest chat inspired me to put together an Elton Brand trade:
Bulls get:
Elton Brand
Kareem Rush
76ers get:
Ben Gordon
Drew Gooden
Cedric Simmons
Deal works for the 76ers because it dumps the suddenly bad contract of Elton Brand with several expirings. But the expirings also have talent so they can still make a playoff run. BG gives them the shooter they've desperately been seeking as well. With Brand and Gooden out as free agents, they would also be under the cap in order to re-sign BG. Presumably next season Speights could help fill Brand/Gooden shoes.
Deal works for the Bulls because they get a low post presence (hooray). They also get value for BG in case he's leaving this summer. Brand's contract is a bit much, but it still should allows the team to be under the cap in 2010 if they want to go out of there way to be (ahem Noc/Tyrus/Thabo have to go). It also avoids the luxury tax for both teams.
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.
108 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Been there, done that.
Brand is a stat collector on bad teams…and we don’t need an injury prone undersized PF.
BTW, why would Gordon waive his no trade clause to go to Philly?
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
The team that I see Ben
waiving his no trade is with Houston. Go after Brand and McGrady ala Danny Ainge style. Dump this team and take a gamble. Rose, Brand, and McGrady.
Then marvel at how they become the Orlando Magic of the early 00's.
McGrady and Brand miss too many games due to injury at this stage in their careers…
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
Brand has never been an injury problem until the last two seasons
sounds closer to an aberration than in the same heap with McGrady.
Good Lord that would be awful
McGrady can’t even play the back ends of back-to-backs anymore.
Vinny Del Negro interviewed for the job today. I mean come on! Nobody else thinks this is nuts?
by Juiceboxjerry on Jun 6, 2008 4:21 PM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Jan 27, 2009 1:57 PM CST up reply actions
Danny Ainge style
which one of those players is anywhere near Garnett?
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 27, 2009 2:21 PM CST up reply actions
Derrick Rose
just playing. But something has to be done. I want to see Paxson make a move that shows he has a big ones
Because Philly will be under the cap this offseason if Brand is moved
They can re-sign Gordon. Plus, he will get all the minutes he wants over there.
could work.
I mean the getting Gordon to accept the trade part.
I’d rather just trade them Hinrich instead, but yeah…
Also, you’d have to think the Sixers would want Tyrus or Noah.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 27, 2009 2:28 PM CST up reply actions
That may be the case, but then you are messing with the salary structures a bit
You could add Jason Smith to the deal and sub out Simmons for Tyrus. I wouldn’t mind throwing in TT to put a deal over the top as you know.
I’d suggest TT over Noah for 2010 reasons. And Noah would seem like a nice fit next to Brand.
2010?
You just acquired Elton Brand and nearly $16m in 2010
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 27, 2009 2:44 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah but check out the numbers
16 Brand
11.3 Deng
9 Hinrich
6.9 Noc
5.5 Rose
3.1 Noah
You’re only at 52 million. No you move Noc and this year’s 1st rd pick for an expiring and suddenly you’re at 45 million. Enough to make a free agent run. Joe Johnson perhaps. Again if you choose that route.
I actually think you try and move Hughes along with others (Thabo or Noah or 1st pick) for another veteran to fill out the roster. But that’s me.
by CJ Bulls on Jan 27, 2009 3:13 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Bulls
are a bad team, hence a stat collector may just work in this case
by bullschwaa on Jan 27, 2009 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Bulls mgmt
does not like players who score like Gordon or people who rebound and score consistently, they prefer upside even when buried on the bench.
I have a hard time seeing what Brand does on the court to affect winning.
One playoff run in his illustrious career. Additionally, when he joined Philly, they played worse than at the end of last season…then he goes out with an injury, and suddenly, they started playing better.
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
that's your analysis?
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 27, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions
Here's what he does to affect winning
scores points, rebounds, blocks shots, plays defense.
I am a believer in the stats can lie on bad teams. But Brand is pretty well solidified as a good player. He’s not a superstar, but he is good.
And I don’t see your point when the people we are trading are not winners either.
by CJ Bulls on Jan 27, 2009 4:22 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Brand playoffs
He played for the Bulls post Jordan which severely hampers playoff aspirations, don’t hold that against him. Paul Pierce played on a historically bad Celtics team prior to the Championship season, so what? The guy can play when other good to great players are on the team.
Tmac
is through. He’s done. Too expensive, no return.
Press the trade button. At this point no one will be missed!
Pierce was an outstanding defender early in his career
But I don’t see how “the right team” would be the Bulls. TMac gets traded from title contending Houston to dreg Chicago and this suddenly makes him find the fountain of youth?
To sports and tyger
I know that’s wrong but that was the perception. If you remember that’s what the announcers would talk about during the Finals last year.
I know what you're saying
But Pieerce was on the crappy perennial Celtics teams that were ridiculously bad. Once they got Ray and Garnett, that had to rejuvinate him.
Tmac is on a good team. The Rockets have a chance to make waves. He should have enough motivation, or all that he can, at this point. Being traded to the Bulls now would do nothing for his mojo, except shoot it down.
Besides that, his physical health is what concerns me more than desire to play.
Press the trade button. At this point no one will be missed!
Tmac might not be idle
but you see what I’m trying to say? Paxson should make some bold moves and try and go after some of these players. It’s not going to take one move it will take a couple. Combining a couple of superstars with Rose wouldn’t be a bad idea.
you mean superstar names?
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 27, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions
I have a similar post up now, too.
Apparently you posted this while I was working on that. A few ideas:
—We can’t trade Ben. He won’t waive his Bird rights unless (maybe) he’s going directly to a championship caliber team. It would be dumb of him to do it because he’d basically be throwing away potential money, and he doesn’t strike me as dumb.
—Philly isn’t just going to give Brand away without some piece for the future. In your proposal, that’s Ben, and in another universe with different contract rules, I could see them going for it. They need an SG. But any trade is going to have to give up at least one guy who can be a rotation player for them.
by arjoseph on Jan 27, 2009 2:12 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
But he's not throwing away potential money
as noted in the post and above, the 76ers are under the cap next year without Brand. They can re-sign Ben. In fact, they’re more likely to pay him now than the Bulls would be.
Ben is frustrated here and it would give him a chance to play where they could use a great shooter. He would seem to fit in pretty well there.
thankfully the Bulls need no such thing.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 27, 2009 2:44 PM CST up reply actions
We don't need good anything,
don’t you know.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Well what do you think this team needs more
good shooting or interior scoring/defense. I would prefer the latter for now.
I'm confused
Brand’s contract is a bit much, but it still should allows the team to be under the cap in 2010 if they want to go out of there way to be (ahem Noc/Tyrus/Thabo have to go)
How does trading Tyrus & Thabo allow the team to be under the 2010 cap?? They are on their rookie deals and if you don’t want them just don’t resign them. I think Noc and Kirk should be the priority to trade to get under the cap.
I vote for Thomas to play, play more and play regularly.-Sam Smith
Those two are restricted free agents in 2010.
So you would have to cut them in order to get under the cap. Their cap holds are so large (15mm for tyrus, 10mm for thabo), they are the priority.
No thanks
Brand is 30 years old. Amare, Boozer, Milsap, and Bosh all are available or will become available in the near future. Brand is not good as any of those 5 players and he is the oldest. That is a bad contract. In 2-3 years, Brand will be playing at PJ Brown levels but making Jermaine Oneal money.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 10:40 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
No, his contract doens't call for JON type money.
Second, unless his injuries just totally wipe him out, I don’t see any reason to think Brand won’t be an 18-20 point + 8-10 rebound guy until he’s 35-36. Most players like him do.
And those other guys aren’t necessarily going to be available to us.
The way I look at it, the question is who is Elton Brand? Is he just playing his way back and not fully healthy yet, or is he never gonna get healthy again. And the system seems to be a dreadful fit for him.
That being said, I don’t know if DRose is the prototypical PG you pair up with him. But that’s why we need a real coach teaching DRose.
When I look at a potential trade, what I see is this:
We expand what CJ Bulls said to include Tyrus Thomas to the Sixers and Louis Williams to the Bulls
If we get Brand, Thomas pretty obviously doesn’t have a role with us, but the Sixers could use him. Likewise for Louis Williams, who’s a very good shooter and signed to a fairly reasonable contract.
The only problem when I look at the deal in total is that I don’t know why the Sixers would really want to trade away Williams and take back Gordon, who’s sure to want more money for similar contributions.
by Sports2 on Jan 28, 2009 12:22 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Not with our
projected draft picks…..
If we somehow look closer to the playoffs sure, but I’d say no. Brand has a huge contract, has injury woes and is hardly young and really hasn’t ever proven a real winner since he’s been on nothing but losers.
I like a trade maybe including Noah to get it done, but no draft picks, not with what I think will be a hihg Bulls pick this year.
This years draft class
is weak. Better this year than ever. You can protect it for the top three if needed.
They say that
every year. THis year’s class was projected really weak after pick 2, and look what’s happened….
That's not true at all
This was known for the last few years as one of the strongest draft classes ever. Mayo, Beasley, Rose were all considered viable #1 picks before the season started. In fact, I remember the warning was get your players this year because next year is so terrible. It’s the same reason guys like Blake Griffin and Hasheem Thabeet stayed in school. They knew they could be top 5 picks with even marginal improvements.
That's
The exact opposite of what I was hearing going into the draft.
Folks were thinking Mayo wasn’t quite what they thought he’d be after having a good but not great college year.
Kevin Love was a bit risky given that he was overweight and might have been too slow (he lost a lot of the weight).
It was supposed to be a big draft up until Jan-Feb of last year, then the analysts were souring a bit on it going up to the day. It was all get #1 or #2 for the superstars, the rest of the draft is a big step down.
Mayo rose up again in predraft highlights, but at the time was only considered possibly a #2 simply because Riley was putting feeler’s out there for the can’t miss Beasley after he thought the Bulls were picking his lock Rose.
You're not seeing context
yeah he wasn’t superstar level like Oden/LeBron, but he was considered a very good prospect. The drafts depth was considered fantastic.
Again
revisionist history, the draft was definately waning going into the draft day. The talked changed from being a great draft, to being a thinner draft.
But oh well, I’m not going to take the time to find all the myriad of articles….so we’ll just disagree. It doesn’t matter. Facts are facts, most drafts produce a lot of very good picks, and next year might be another solid year, I don’t want to give up our lottery pick, especially picking up a guy nearing 30 and injured again and even when he was playing wasn’t fitting in well with the Sixers, who have done far better without him, who has a huge contract to pair with our other guy who’s not quite performing up to his contract and on top of that give up a draft pick..
I am not going to spend time on this
THough I appreciate your preserverance. I do know up and going into the draft, there was talk that the draft had 2 lock superstars and the rest they thought were going to have some role players.
In Jan/Feb last year they were talking great things of this draft, but then it became up on lottery day must get #1 or #2.
Sept 2008 was a few months AFTER the draft.
The picks for rookie of the year were mostly the 2 Euro’s (not drafted this year) and Oden and Beasley.
Rose went from lock #1 or #2 can’t miss to possibly a good player in 5 years but a project….
Mayo they thought was not athletic enough. Concerns were about Beasley’s attitude, though the consensus was he was a lock star in a few years.
All going into the draft it was #1 or #2 only….then the weeds.
Chad Ford September 2008
“NBA scouts continue to offer dire warnings about the NBA draft class of 2009. After two stellar years, thanks to amazing college freshman classes, a draft drought may be on the way”
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftWatch-080922
NBAdraft.net
“With the 2008 draft in the books, it’s time to look ahead to next year’s class of draft hopefuls. While 2009 lacks the overall talent and depth of 2008, there’s sure to be some late bloomers that come out of the woodworks to help bolster this group.”
http://www.nbadraft.net/node/1362
CNNSI
“For the last two years, the college basketball world has been agog over freshmen. This fixation might have offended purists, but it was a boon to the sport because it perfectly matched the "Who’s next?” ethos that drives today’s sports culture. Since freshmen were dominating the sport at the very moment the NBA instituted its 19-year-old age minimum, it made sense to conclude that every year was going to be the “Year of the Freshman”.
Turns out, not so much. Whereas the stellar high school class of 2006 (led by Greg Oden and Kevin Durant) was followed by the STRATOSPHERIC class of ‘07 (Michael Beasley, Derrick Rose, Kevin Love, O.J. Mayo), the class of ’08 is, in the words of longtime recruiting maven Clark Francis, "the worst class I’ve seen in the 25 years I’ve been doing this." That assessment may be a tad harsh, but there is no question there will be a significant dropoff next season. And as the annual, frenetic July recruiting season gets underway in a few weeks, it will become further apparent that the classes of ’09, ’10 and ’11 are not going to measure up, either."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/seth_davis/06/23/hoop.thoughts/index.html
Which players like Brand have been 18-8 at 35 years old.
Because I tried to come up with one or two, but couldn’t do it…and no, Karl Malone is not like Elton Brand.
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
by Dionysus2.0 on Jan 28, 2009 12:57 PM CST up reply actions
What guys are like Elton Brand?
There’s a pretty limited list of guys around his size that has averaged > 20 and 10 through age 29
Also worth noting is Brand will turn 34 a couple months before his contract expires, so it’s a pretty academic nit you’re picking.
He’ll play most of it at ages 30-33. Given that his game doesn’t appear to rely on superb athleticism or anything, I think it’s reasonable to think that he’ll be fine.
Wallace was older and relied a LOT more on athleticism.
So, maybe, but not for the same reasons.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
So?
I’m not arguing for Brand. My point, that you further supported w/o realizing it, is that they aren’t good comparables, which is what you wanted to do.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
No
I was merely pointing that out for reference. They are better comparables than you think given the ages and the undersized tag. Ben Wallace at his peak actually might have been better than Brand has been (considering what Ben Wallace did for a champion—he was AMAZING against Shaq, a prime Shaq in the finals no less).
I, and you, listed the reasons they aren't good comparables.
Reasons to compare: “good”, “undersized”, between 29-32
Reasons NOT to compare: reliance on athleticism, actual age, style of play, injury issues, winnerness
I know which list I’m going with.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Again
Just pointing out for reference….
Age is close.
Injury more a concern for Brand than Wallace and that’s what keeps the “age” more in line….
Brand being undersized means he does rely far more on athleticism than you’d like to think (As Wallace did and does).
Winnerness I know is in favor of Wallace and style of play is detrimental to Wallace….I’m not about to say they are truly identical players, not at all, but there’s a lot of issues given his track record and a contract that pays him an extra year and is 42% higher than Ben’s was…..
But I think we both kind of agree and are arguing on semantics, so be it, agreed.
Wow that is a pretty limited list...
I wasn’t trying to pick nits, but the only names I thought of were Chris Webber and both Malones.
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
He's actually very similar to Malone in almost every way (save durability) through age 29
he’s just a very slightly lesser version in most respects, with the exception that Brand over his career is a MUCH better shot blocker than Malone (odd given Malone’s tremendous athleticism vs. Brand’s pedestrian leaping ability). Also, Malone was able to operate at about the same efficiency as Brand but had a 5% higher USG-r. So Malone was the better player, which is obvious before even doing the comparison, but they are very similar players and Malone was effective well past 34.
by fundamentallysound on Jan 28, 2009 5:49 PM CST up reply actions
I had thought of Malone as much more of a scorer.
And pretty much a lock for the Hall of Fame, especially given the overall high level of play of his teams during his career…but the other numbers are not that far apart.
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
what makes brand so much more available than the 4 players listed?
All will be free agents. Amare and Boozer are rumored to be on the block. And there is no way Milsap and Boozer both stay in Utah, one of them is guaranteed to move.
Brand also has a long history of injuries. So the idea that his body may break down even more significantly once he is over 30 can’t be so cavalierly dismissed.
And in the last couple years of Brand’s contract he will be making close to $16-17 million. I don’t think his on court production will justify those numbers. They don’t justify those numbers now so you are trading valuable assets for a guy you hope comes back from injury 100%.
And as you alluded to in your post, Brand is a horrible fit next to Rose. Philadelphia played much better once he left because they could run the floor without him at the 4. You put him on the floor with Rose and you have the same problem. Your best players are all open court players but Brand is a half court plodder. Far more so than any other guy i listed.
I’d take each of the five guys listed before Brand. There are too many question marks about Brand for me to want him on the Bulls.
And a bit unrelated, there is no way Philadelphia trades for Gordon unless they are sure they can sign him to a contract and there is no way he goes there unless he is sure that he can get more money from them than any other place. I just don’t know if that can be made to happen.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 1:55 PM CST up reply actions
What makes Brand more available?
if any of them are, is that trading for Brand conveys different kinds of certainty. I agree that in a vacuum, Brand is the least of the five. But when you start looking at them, all have pretty serious warts when you consider the sort of moves you’d have to make to get them.
When you actually consider the risks involved, Brand vs. Amare, Boozer, or one of those other guys isn’t the no-brainer it looks like at first.
1. Injuries. Amare had freaking microfracture surgery. And he’s a guy super reliant on his athleticism. What happens if it goes away quickly? Boozer has missed a ton of time since signing with the Jazz and continues to miss a ton of time. I don’t “cavalierly dismiss” Brand’s injury issues, but comparing his style of play to theirs, and his injury history to theirs makes his look less severe.
2. Attitude. Amare should scare us because why on earth would a team consider trading Amare Stoudemire? Is he really that much of a malcontent that the Suns wouldn’t laugh at the notion of trading him? Boozer’s most widely known for completely screwing over a team that tried to do him a favor. Brand probably fits that description too, but the point is there are significant risks.
3. Contract. What makes it worse in the case of Boozer and Amare is that there’s significant uncertainty about their contract status. Trading for them now is super risky because they can simply walk away if they’re dissatisfied with us in a year. And given their fickle natures, that’s a real concern. It’s not a concern with Brand because he’s locked up.
4. Expense.Brand is going to cost $16.4M per year. I’d be pretty surprised if Boozer and Amare sign for any less. So at the end of the day, they’re better, yes, but also more expensive.
5. Cost of acquisition. We don’t have the cap space to go out and sign one of those other guys, and to get it we have to give up several player anyway. Without certainty of actually getting a free agent. If we trade for an impending free agent, we don’t have the certainty of keeping them. So we run a pretty serious risk of giving up a lot of stuff and getting hosed. On the other hand, Brand’s value is at an all-time low. Hell, Ford hypothesized Hughes+Tyrus might get him. That’s, well, pretty much a no-brainer. I think it’d take more, but the point is yes, Brand isn’t as good, but he very likely might come for a lot less.
In short, there are huge questions surrounding all of those guys. At least Amare and Boozer. There are less around Millsap and Bosh, I suppose, in terms of attitude and injury, but that just means they’re less likely available and will be more expensive to get.
I, personally, would take Brand over Boozer and likely Millsap
all contracts being equal. Boozer, for lack of a better term, has a shady personality. You have to question how team oriented he really is. Millsap scares me only because Utah runs a system that he’s successful in. He’s not a low post player. In the no system sytem we run, he might not be nearly as successful.
You don't think Brand's departure from LA was shady?
You don’t think Brand might have the same problems here he’s having with the Sixers?
Opting out and "hoping" to resign
isnt shady, at least not Boozeresque. Altho I’ll never understand what the Cavs were thinking, players are pretty much always going to try and get as much guaranteed money as they can.
Dunleavy claims him and Brand reached
a verbal agreement on a contract. The Clippers also went out and signed Davis to pair with Brand. So yes, he did the same exact thing as Boozer.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 7:18 PM CST up reply actions
except Brand exercised his option
where as Boozer convinced Cleveland to decline their option
I wouldn't go for Boozer w/o a guaranteed extension, that's for sure.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
why question how team oriented Boozer is?
Isn’t that same guy who put up big numbers in Utah and Cleveland. Who rode the bench for Team USA? Doesn’t all the above apply to Brand? Here’s a hint – if you pay them the money, they will come and play.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 6:59 PM CST up reply actions
This is the same Boozer
who skipped town on cleveland and jetted off to utah to miss one out of every 3 games they’ve played.
that was about money
i don’t give a crap about him leaving town. He didn’t owe cleveland shit. This is a business.
Boozer is also a guy with a 24 PER, which judged by past performance, isn’t out of the ordinary.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 7:15 PM CST up reply actions
Why trade away the team for a year-and-a-half?
I mean, sign him outright, or get an extension in the trade, sure.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
why would you have trade away the team to get Boozer
he is an unrestricted free agent at the end of this season. It would probably take Gooden and SImmons (for their expiring deals), and a couple of young players (Thabo and pick/Tyrus) with us taking back Boozer and Harpbring.
In my mind that is a 2 players no one wants, some young players we don’t value or need for a chance at a top tier power forward. I think it would take more players to get Brand. I can’t see why Gordon would agree to go to Philadelphia without being assured that the 76ers would sign him to a huge deal. And don’t the 76ers already have a similar player on a much better contract? Why would Gordon give up his bird rights for a chance that the 76ers may offer him a big deal?
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 29, 2009 2:22 PM CST up reply actions
OK salary cap help
Bird rights only matter if the team is over the cap. The 76ers would be under the cap NULLIFYING the bird rights. They could just sign him outright or s&t him outright. It wouldn’t matter. Who is more likely to sign ben, the bulls right now or the 76ers who JUST traded for him. Gordon is more likely to get a deal with that team.
The 76ers biggest weakness is no 3pt shooters. They don’t have a similar player on their roster.
its not an either or option with Gordon
Yes, Philly may be more likely to sign him than the Bulls, but they might be more likely to sign him even if he isn’t traded. If he accepts that trade, it hurts his chances to cash in with OKC or Miami or whoever else will be under the cap this season. He also loses bargaining power with the 76ers. Gordon isn’t going anywhere this season.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 29, 2009 2:47 PM CST up reply actions
okay I misunderstood you
but I still don’t see why the 76ers trade Brand for the right to sign Gordon to a huge contract or sign and trade him later. It seems like a big gamble/hassle that could easily and probably better be completed at the end of the season. If they are going to make that trade, than why not just wait until the end of the season when they can negotiate with Gordon first and see if they can sign him to a contract that they like.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 29, 2009 3:00 PM CST up reply actions
basically why put themselves in the Bulls position with Gordon
I don’t know if he is worth it to them.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 29, 2009 3:01 PM CST up reply actions
Well that's the point. Is he?
Not a lot of teams can offer him money. You could sign Gordon for a bargain. The 76ers don’t seem to think Brand fits their team. He would be a great fit here.
He's only
an unrestricted free agent if he chooses to opt out (Boozer).
I know he said he would, but with 2010 upcoming and his injury, coupled with his past injuries and given the market that’s a year away, it might be better for him to keep his $12M contract, play out 2009/2010 and get back to the near superstar he was last season….
So I think if he has a good agent, he doesn’t opt out, UNLESS some sort of Marion for Boozer trade happens.
I think therefore the Jazz are close to losing Millsap because they’re on the cusp of the luxury tax right now and Millsap’s an unrestricted free agent.
i think you win in this league with the better players
so you can do all the permutations and mental acrobatics you want, I’ll take the best players and you can have all the guys without the attitude. The team with the best collection of players wins. Its not a morality play.
I would rather get a guy who isn’t past his prime, who is closer in age to Rose, who hasn’t spent years playing for horrible teams – all those guys (Boozer, Milsap, Amare, Bosh) have contributed to winning teams. Brand puts up numbers on horrible teams. If Brand is so great, why are the 76ers so willing to trade him so soon? Brand’s numbers have been on steady decline for the last few years. Shouldn’t we be getting a guy on the upswing to play with Rose, especially if they are signing a new contract.
Bosh and Amare will all be entering primes at the start of their new contracts. Milsap is still a young player. Boozer is in his prime and has put up pretty consistent numbers the past few years. The gap between those 4 and Brand will grow over the next few years, not to mention other power forwards we aren’t even talking about. I don’t want to pay 16.4 million a year for a guy who is declining, whose all-stars days may be behind him, and who in the last couple years of his contract may not even be in the top players at his position.
Amare has proven he can come back from his injury.
Cost of acquisition? So we have to give up the brigade of losers we have on this team to get a top notch player? So be it. Who in the hell are you worried about keeping? And even if you do go for Brand, if he plays mediocre or worse you are stuck with him. Once you trade for Brand that contract isn’t moving on. He would be too old. If you create the cap space and don’t get a free agent, how are you any worse off than you are now. But if you trade for Brand, the worst of the 5 players (with the possible exception of Milsap) you are stuck with him.
Really how much does this team improve with Brand? Can you build a team around Brand and Rose when they play different styles and one is declining while the other is just starting to learn the NBA game? This seems like a plan for mediocrity and disappointment.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 7:11 PM CST up reply actions
Larry Hughes is a better player than Thabo.
Hey, like I said, I like the better players too. But most everything you say bad about Brand can be said about the other guys. If Amare is so great, why would the Suns trade him? And so forth…
I have no idea why the Suns would trade Amare
his production has leveled off, but his ability clearly hasn’t. But Amare has proven he can play at a high level very recently (last year) and be a very good player on a very good team. Brand has done neither of those things. Amare has complained that he wants to be the man in Phoenix. Well, shouldn’t he be the man! That franchise is being run almost as poorly as the Bulls.
And my bringing up why would the 76ers trade Brand if he was so great was in response to your question of why would the Suns trade Amare if he was so great – you brought that up first. :)
You still have no answer to why the Bulls would want to pair a declining player with a escalating salary with Rose. You still can’t answer why we should acquire a declining player when 4 guys who are improving are on the market.
Finally, Larry Hughes is not a better basketball player than Sefolosha.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 7:33 PM CST up reply actions
I think my answers were pretty straightforward. But to clarify
1. It’s questionable how much and whether he declines.
2. It’s questionable whether those other 4 guys are actually available and actually improving. It’s possible some of them decline as well.
And just to throw it out there, If we traded for Brand, he’d be 30, 31, 32, and 33 in his years under contract with us. Then his contract is up and we’ve got space to go get someone else (perhaps earlier via trade).
Boozer will be 28 next year. So if we get him this summer under a 5 or 6 year deal, we’ll have him when he’s 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and possibly 33. If your complaint is that Brand is going to be “declining” from this point forward, then you shouldn’t want Boozer either, because he’d be declining for most of his contract with us, and certainly from the point where Rose is going to have a couple years of experience under his belt and really be rocking.
Bo / Br
28 / 30
29 / 31
30 / 32
31 / 33
32
33
The problem is
you don’t just get 24 year old all-stars to play on your team. It doesn’t happen. You need to sacrifice to win. draft picks just delay this team even more. Every good team has veteran stars. It’s a piece of being good
Cleveland-Zydrunas
LA-Kobe
Boston-everyone
New Orleans-Peja
Orlando-Turkoglu
Utah-Okur
Spurs-Duncan
You can’t win without veterans. I would like to see this team win sometime in the next 3 years.
I don't understand your point at all
You don’t think that Amare, Boozer or Milsap would come here if they were offered more money than other places? You don’t win without veterans – well okay, way to oversimplify. Hughes is a veteran. So is Hinrich. You can look at that same list and say you don’t win without stars. I mean a lot of those guys are the 2nd, 3rd or 4th best players on their team. I don’t think this supports your argument
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 28, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions
The point is it's highly unlikely.
I don’t get how you have Millsap in all-star company when he’s had half a good year. But fine, if you want to gamble that’s one decision. But how are you signing him away when 1) you’re over the cap and 2) the jazz can match any offer as he is a restricted free agent.
Amare is getting the max no matter where he goes.
And Boozer is a worse player than Brand. Not to mention Boozer has been rumored to want to sign with Miami since 2 years ago and you have the whole Bulls aren’t under the cap problem.
I see it’s much easier to say no to a player like Brand and hope something better comes along. But frankly, it’s not likely. All of these available players aren’t really that available. Brand can be had at a discount right now, and I think the Bulls should take advantage of that situation.
And to answer your question, when I listed the veteran players, I meant good veterans. Hinrich is ok and Hughes is bad. The players listed above are all former or current all-stars (with the exception of Okur).
Boozer is as available as Brand, the Jazz don't want to lose him for nothing
Amare is on the trade market just like Brand. He would cost more but of course, he is a better player. You can make the trade than sign them to the contract. And if they walk, so what. You just cleared out cap space for other 2010 free agents.
And what prevents the Bulls from working out a sign and trade with Utah? The Jazz are in danger of losing Boozer for nothing. He and the Jazz organizaton have incentive to both work out a sign and trade, like Orlando and Seattle than for Rashard Lewis. If they aggressively pursue Boozer why wouldn’t he come to Chicago. I think Boozer is just as likely to end up in Chicago as Brand.
To your claim that Brand is better than Boozer, sInce Brand had his career best PER in 05-06 of 26.67, his per has been 23.17, 17.72, 14.63. In that same span Boozer’s PER has been 21.48, 24.11, 21.83, 24.69. So I don’t know if he is a worse player than Brand. Over the last 3 years, Boozer has clearly been his equal or better. Not to mention I think he is a better fit with Rose because he moves up and down the court better. As does every other player I mentioned.
In regards to Milsap, he is a potentially cheaper option the Bulls would have to overpay to get, but who I think will likely be better than Brand as early as next season (If he isn’t already). The bulls should be trying to build for 2-3 years down the road. Milsap has a per of 20.62, and is a young improving player. He isn’t a great player, but in his 3rd year he is already a borderline all star, who also allows you to potentially resign other guys. If the Bulls are willing to overpay for Milsap than they could potentially put together an attractive enough deal of expiring contracts and picks to bring him to Chicago.
And to your other point – New Orleans, Cleveland, Orlando and Utah are all led by “24 year old all stars” or younger. You get the star players, veterans will follow. See Boston. Or Cleveland. Or San Antonio.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 29, 2009 1:29 AM CST up reply actions
What prevents the Bulls from working out a sign and trade with Utah
What prevents it is that if they sign and trade someone to the Boozer to the Bulls, they have to take a roughly similar amount of salary back from us.
That goes on their tax and pushes them into the luxury tax when they re-sign Millsap.
That is exactly the same problem they would have with Millsap too. If the Jazz let Millsap go, they’re going to keep Boozer. But if they keep Boozer, even expiring contracts from us are going to still count on their salary and put them over the tax.
So basically, a sign and trade for either of those guys is a complete non-starter.
what if the bulls traded
gooden and thomas/Sefo or Noah for Boozer right now? The point is Boozer is an attainable player. Milsap is less attainable because of his restricted free agent status and his dirt cheap contract. But more creative ownership than the Bulls have made it happen before.
Maybe I underestimate the player Brand is. But I don’t think he would turn the Bulls into a winner. I think he would have the same impact in Chicago as he does in Philadelphia, none. Of all the players who may possibly come available over the next 2-3 years, Brand is the least desirable of any those players in my mind. That is my main point. He wouldn’t fit and he is overpaid. Why get locked in to mediocrity when you can either hit a home run or be patient and wait for something to develop down the line?
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 29, 2009 11:08 AM CST up reply actions
Perhaps because this team started the patience route in 1998.
It’s now 2009.
I think you hit the crux of your point. You don’t like Brand. He’s actually been more productive than Boozer in his career and has been a lesser injury risk. Look at the career stats of games played. Brand has played in less than 60 games twice, Boozer 3 times. The only thing Boozer has on Brand is age at 2 years. But that seems more than offset by Brands length and more importantly, defense. No to mention this scenario involves moving pieces we might lose anyways, so the Bulls are acquiring him for little. That Jazz couldn’t afford to take on Gordon.
And finally, this doesn’t hamstring the team as much as you think. If they make this deal, there still is a relatively reasonable path to get under the cap for a max free agent in 2010 (cut loose TT/Thabo, trade Noc or Hinrich).
I think making a bold move to improve the team is something the Bulls should jump at. Finding out how these players even adapt to a low post threat would be worth watching alone.
Do you think really think the Jazz says yes?
Pax: “Hey, how about Gooden and Thabo for Boozer”.
Kevin O’Connor: “Sure, let’s do it quick before you change your mind and take that spectacular offer off the table!”
Unless the Jazz say yes, he’s not attainable.
What are the financial ramifications if the Jazz sign up for this and trade us Boozer for Gooden and Tyrus. When you figure in minimum salary players, cap holds, etc, they’ll have about $63M in salary commitments. Figure the luxury tax threshold to be at $71M again. If the Jazz have to pay more than $8M to re-sign Millsap (and they will, since he’ll be an RFA and teams will make offers that make it hard for the Jazz to match), they’ll have to pay several million dollars in extra luxury tax.
So it’s pretty much a complete non-starter to trade for Boozer now, for the Jazz. At least unless they get something really great back. And Gooden + one young guy of dubious quality isn’t really great.
And suppose they lost their minds and did that trade. Then we’ve got Boozer and he wants the max this summer. For a guy that’s missed like half his games over the last few years, and who once prominently screwed over Jim Paxson, who is both the GM’s big brother and himself an employee of the Chicago Bulls.
Sounds pretty risky to me. And especially since, by the logic you positied above, Boozer will be declining for most of the time he’s here :)
whatever
we’ll just have to disagree. We can easily throw in a pick to make it work. The reason Utah trades Boozer is because they are likely to lose him for nothing at the end of the season. I said Thabo or Noah or Thomas. You obviously missed that part. The last 3 seasons Boozer has higher numbers than Brand, he would potentially cost less to acquire via trade (especially if we took back a Harpbring or a bad Jazz contract), he’s younger, has a roughly similar injury history, but is 2 years younger and better in the open court. So agree to disagree. You aren’t changing my mind, and it doesn’t seem like I’m changing yours
And the fact of the matter is your trade is equally implausible because there is no way Gordon agrees to give up his bird rights without being assured of a contract in the 10 million a year region at least.
by Basketball Smurf on Jan 29, 2009 2:14 PM CST up reply actions
Let's try
To go after AK47. Bulls can have a bit of the upper hand for him, and I think he’s a much better player than he’s allowed to show in the recent Jazz system.
He can defend, he can pass, he can score a bit, he’s like a super Deng except that he’s proven more comfortable at the 4.
He makes a lot of money, which is a negative, but in return we can ship out some less than desireables in our new team (Hinrich perhaps unfortunately too expensive/declining contract, Nocioni, declining contract doesn’t fit on our “young” team and is a luxury but has a declining contract and Gooden—expiring contract) for AK47 (big contract, Harpring—contract ends in 2009).
Jazz benefit by having the ability to resign Millsap (Harping’s not guaranteed, Korver’s player option is exercized in Chciago) and make a play for Boozer should they choose….they also get Noc (a hard nosed player who seems to fit Sloan’s style), Hinrich a kind of Sloan-lite player who can be a great support for Deron—or whom may still be shipped again in another Jazz trade later….and Gooden who can help give them some scoring to backup the better scorer Boozer (he’s a Boozer lite) but who mostly helps them by expiring. Bulls can even throw in a few more $$ or some add’l incentives (2nd round picks?) , but this seems a good trade.
Bulls benefit by getting the best player in this deal. AK47 is a real lock down defender who will help control our paint. Have Tyrus learn from his example and get a solid 48 MPG at the 4 spot in preimier levels, and have both Tyrus and AK47 slide to some 3 at times and some Tyrus even at the 5 at times with his length.
Korver’s up in 2010 (coupled with Hughes that could be nice if Hughes isn’t already shipped)….Bulls salaries for Hinrich and Noc are replaced at 100% with AK47’s….we lose Ben Gordon in the deal. Jazz get some cap room to keep Millsap with the loss of Korver’s cap hold and likely not guaranteeing Harpring with the now better and younger Nocioni….
Bulls lineup post trade:
Rose/Thabo
Gordon (Rest of this year at least)/Thabo
Deng/Tyrus/AK47/Korver
AK47/Tyrus/Noah
Noah/Tyrus/AK47.
Plus we get our draft pick next year. We’d have a solid star (Rose), 2 possibly all star credible players next to him (AK47 and Deng), 2 more young bigs that still have potential (Noah and Tyrus) and have a new draft pick coming in, wherein maybe we focus on another Big first and then a 2…..
I think this would change us a bit as a defensive minded team with all the athleticism we’ve been seeing.
The Jazz for the rest of this year:
Deron Williams/Kirk/Price
Corey Brewer/Kirk
Nocioni/Millsap maybe?
Millsap and when healthy Boozer
Okur
They retain their big 3 (though one’s hurt) and have more flexibility….
I don't mind acquiring AK47,
but 1) you’re giving up a lot and 2) aren’t AK47 and Tyrus redundant?
They
I don’t know if they’re redundant or not, because AK47 is the real deal and someone we hope Tyrus might become.
Plus Tyrus can make that positon AWESOME for the full 48 minutes. Both AK47 and Tyrus are tweeners, both have nice length and a shot blocking prowess, so both can help control the paint….
Plus we gain anothe $5.4M of expiring heading into 2009/2010 in this deal in Korver (who’s also a shooter that might benefit off the bench with Rose—having him and BG for a bit, and Kover’s better than Kapono who it seems everyone wants because of hte 3pt shot %—even though he’s far inferior in everything else)….
We give up a lot only in that we give up some contracts that we either don’t really want given where our team is (Nocioni) or no longer need because he’s relegated to a pure backup and we have holes (Hinrich).
Our defense would be stellar with this lineup and that’s our biggest problem right now, plus the athleticism and versatility to go small and mix and match is there….add in a draft pick this offseason, then after next year be a semi player using a good portion of the expiring $18-19M in Hughes and Korver for a real player and voila, we’re a real contender.
AK47 is both already there (making Tyrus not redundant) and also a great guide for Tyrus to learn from…..I’d hardly say he’s redundant.
Also
Imagine if we had 2 AK47’s on this team, one who’s more athletic (and crazy :) ) in Tyrus, and one who’s more steady. Wow is what I say, but it might not happen for a bit and is dependant on T2.
Millsap
My hope is to pitch Hughes for an immediately expiring deal, let Gooden walk and throw at least the MLE in the direction of Millsap. He is legit and solves some real problems for the Bulls. Maybe BG gets signed and traded to the Jazz (I’m kind of thinking out loud on that one).
Bottom line is that I want to make moves now (at least this summer) and not wait around until 2010. I think you have to run the team like none of the 2010 FAs will be available. If one or more is on the market, then you make your money as a GM and figure something out at that time.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
