Completely serious trade Derrick Rose idea
by Sports2 on Jul 13, 2009 12:34 PM CDT
Email
PrintAs I said, we're at a crossroads. some win now guys and some win later guys. Up to this point, we've largely talked about building the team around Derrick Rose, since he's clearly going to be our best player and his best years are clearly ahead of him.
I'm going to suggest we do the opposite. Our current older players are not bad. They're good compliments if we had those stars to put them around. The problem is we don't, and our star is only 20 years old.
As I mentioned before, I think we don't have enough cap space next year without making trades that undercut our ability to actually land a FA. And if we do nothing, we've got an incoherent mix of young and old without the obvious ability to get better.
The best case scenario I see presented is something like we dump Hinrich, Salmons opts out, and we get Dwyane Wade next year". That leaves us with a team of
Rose
Wade
Deng, JJ
?
Noah
That's nice, but the reality is that Wade is in his late 20s, in his prime, and is quite a bit more "ready to win" than the rest of the team. It's not the sort of fit anyone will be looking for. The problem is, to get Wade, we'd have to jettison most of our veteran complementary players. It doesn't look like a very well-conceived plan to me, which is why I'd have preferred to keep Gordon and then make a push for Bosh, who could have been the third leg of a team that would all hit its prime together. But that's not gonna happen now. But since that's water under the bridge, the question is how, if we got Wade, we'd build a good enough team around him to win. We'd need exactly the sort of complementary guys - Miller, Salmons, Hinrich - that we wouldn't be able to keep.
I think the solution is to look at what we could get for Rose, and consider if we couldn't get Wade now, thus enabling us to keep the veteran sort of players around him we'd need to win with.
Besides the general theory that you need to build a team of appropriately complementary, mostly similarly aged players to win with, we also might be presented with another requirement. Opportunity.
I think under normal circumstances, any call to the Heat about Wade would be met my laughter and a quick hang up. However the recent going on in Miami, I think, create at least some potential for getting him.
Wade has been offered an extension, within a context of some disagreement about whether he'd sign one. The Heat and Wade seem to be playing a game of chicken. Wade says he won't sign till the Heat get better, and the Heat say they can't make a decision about getting help until they've got Wade locked up.
Sounds like a breakdown in trust to me. I have to think that if Wade follows through and doesn't sign the extension, the Heat have to at least consider moving him
Oh, did I mention that Wade wants to play with Carlos Boozer?
Boozer, for his part, is a guy the Jazz are deperately trying to unload with little salary coming back, given their financial situation and desire to keep Paul Millsap. Understandable... I'd rather have Millsap too, but I'd take Boozer.
So why not try for two great tastes that taste great together (and want to be together), and land both Wade and Boozer. And oh, by the way, have a solid, mostly veteran team to put around them.
Here's the deal:
Bulls trade Derrick Rose, Tyrus Thomas, and Tim Thomas to Miami and Jerome James's 80% insured contract (true cost $1.3M) to Utah.
Bulls receive Dwyane Wade and Carlos Boozer
1- Hinrich
2- Wade
3- Deng, Salmons
4- Boozer, Johnson
5- Noah, Miller
I don't know if that's a title team or not, but it's certainly a contender, and it's a young one that can conceivably be kept together for several years. This is the best we could conceivably do, and I think it works pretty well for the Jazz (mission accomplished on immediate savings for Boozer) and the Heat, if things are actually deteriorating that badly with Wade.
This is a repost of my original post at S2. What do you all think? I think Rose is one of the few players who might make the Heat consider. And I think Wade is one of the few players who, especially with Boozer as well, might turn the rest of this team into something good.
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.
81 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well for one
Having Deng, Boozer and Wade as starters could equal huge time for the bench players because of injuries.
Rumor has it Alex Brown keeps Chris Simms' right index finger in his back pocket for good luck.
Meh... even if they miss some time, that team still gets to the playoffs
Get healthy then and they’ve got a good chance.
yes, if the three best players on a team get injured, the team is worse off
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
by tyger1147 on Jul 13, 2009 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I THINK THE GUY WHO POSTED THIS
IS THE MOST FUCKED UP MAN ON THE PLANET!!!
by Zoro on Jul 13, 2009 8:34 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
probably not enough interior defense to win a title with that team, but it certainly gets you a very competitive team.
the perimeter defense would be pretty phenomenal though with Kurt, Wade, and Deng.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Jul 13, 2009 12:44 PM CDT reply actions
Gonna disagree there
Miller is not an awful defender, and Boozer, while bad defender, is a strong guy that can play man defense against the opposing team’s big guy. Which is also what I’d have Miller doing. I think a motivated Boozer in the playoffs is a lot better than regular Boozer too.
Both of which facts are important because… they leave Chandler free to do what he’d actually do best, had he had much opportunity at any point so far in his young career: play the weakside help defensive role, play weaker guys but still guys that are slower than him, and generally wreak havoc and stay free to stop penetration from guards or double bigs who need doubling.
In general, this would have the basic precepts of a good defensive frontcourt. I’d like Boozer to be better, sure, but defensively it doesn’t compare any worse than the Lakers (Bynum, Odom, Gasol), for example.
Chandler? Do you mean Noah?
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Jul 13, 2009 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
What does Tyson Chandler have to do with this?
I’m not trying to be rude, I just think I must be missing something.
by Rose Colored Goggles on Jul 13, 2009 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I think he just confused Noah and Chandler. Easy to do since they play the same way.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Jul 13, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions
It's a fun idea to think about, for any team
What kind of player would make a team stop and think about moving their franchise player? If I was Pat Riley, the only guys I would think about moving Dwyane Wade for (other than the obvious LeBron, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard)
Kevin Durant
Brandon Roy
Derrick Rose
Imagine if Presti calls up and offers Durant, James Harden, and Nick Collison for Dwayne Wade. Who says no to that deal?
The Chicago Bulls.....the more profitable Los Angeles Clippers.
OKC would never offer that much for Wade. It'd be insanity, even though Wade is the current second best player in the league behind LeBron.
Kevin Durant is the real deal and Harden looks very good. Plus, Collison is a league average big man.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Jul 13, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions
As we're discussing this under a "Bulls trade Rose" thread, I think the what the 'potenial-filled' team thinks is irrelevant.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
we've gone over this a fair amount here
but i think it is far from a certainty that james’ contract is going to be covered by insurance.
It is paid by insurance...
It’s just that it’s disqualified to be absolved from the luxury tax calculation because the injury must have occurred on the team applying for that injury claim.
you're right
i confused the cap calculation and the actual payment in my head
one thing that I do like about this trade is that it's now oriented. It makes the Bulls
a very good to great team, today, not some nebulous time in the future. Needless to say, I’m pretty tired of waiting around for the Bulls to get serious about winning.
Also, Dwyane Wade has long been my favorite player to watch in the NBA, so that would be rad as well.
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Jul 13, 2009 1:07 PM CDT reply actions
I agree
D-Wade is one the of the most entertaining to watch in the league, and his game very closely resembles early ‘90s Jordan (although not quite at that level, obviously). I’m sick of being told to wait for next year, they’ve been saying that for 11 years. This is not the Cubs, let’s get something done.
by Rose Colored Goggles on Jul 13, 2009 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Trade Derrick Rose for Wade, who can choose to freely come back to Chicago next year if he wishes...
and play WITH Derrick?
But to play with Derrick, they have to jettison Tyrus, Miller, and either Salmons or Kurt. Or both
Basically a whole team worth of quality players. As I pointed out, the remaining team around Wade and Rose would be poorly constituted to contend immediately.
Which means that Wade would have to wait a couple years to contend (which is exactly what he’s complaining about now), and then, when (and if) we finally build the the right components around he and Derrick, he’s on the downside of his career as the rest of the team is on the upside.
Wade’s not going to do that. He’s not going to waste the prime of his career on hoping Jerry Reinsdorf ponies up.
Well he's not going to to stay in Miami either if your assumptions are correct, so where's he going to go?
Tell me a better landing spot for Wade- a place who can pay him max $, pair him with another legitimate, young, complimentary SUPERSTAR? And then take into consideration that Chicago is his hometown… I’d say we have a good chance to keep both. And I don’t give a shit if we get rid of Tyrus, Miller, Salmons or Kirk… For all we know, James might be just as good as TT is now, and I wouldn’t plan on playing Salmons & Kirk much if we have Rose/Wade… Deng + Rose + Noah + Wade seems like a damn good core to me. I actually think Wade would rather join a young & competitive team who will be ready to win in 1-3 yrs, then an aging team that might have a 1-3 yr window, max.
New York to play with D'Antoni?
1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box
by fundamentallysound on Jul 13, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions
I think Wade is trying to get away from carrying mediocre teams
The Chicago Bulls.....the more profitable Los Angeles Clippers.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 13, 2009 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions
or
Cavs (Lebron)
Houston (Yao)
change of heart with the Heat and recruiting Bosh there
New York
New Jersey (Devin Harris)
OKC
I actually think Wade would rather join a young & competitive team who will be ready to win in 1-3 yrs, then an aging team that might have a 1-3 yr window, max.
This is the key issue, and I think you’re dead wrong. First, you’ve got Wade’s own words to that effect. He doesn’t want to wait around and hope, and he’s said as much. Second, Wade is 30 in three years. Why the hell would he want to wait 3 years and then still be carrying a team that’s much younger than him?
I spose that’s mostly a matter of speculation about what Wade wants, but he’s saying it right there in black and white print. It’s not like the Bulls team I suggested there would have “a 1-3 yr window, max.”
In three years, those guys would be:
1- Hinrich 31
2- Wade 30
3- Deng 26, Salmons 32
4- Boozer 30, Johnson
5- Noah 26, Miller 35
- I think Salmons will be replaceable.
- I think Miller will be an effective player until 37-38.
- And we’d have Asik coming around, and plenty of chances to add backups to replace those two.
If one imagines that a well conditioned player can go until 34-35, we’d still have another 4-5 years of contention after the initial three seasons, so we’re talking about a 7-8 year window of opportunity with what I’d consider to be near certainty.
On the other hand, by trying to keep Rose, we waste a couple years filling in the roster around those guys, and end up with a 5-6 year window of opportunity. And with less certainty because there’s no reason to expect Jerry actually decides he wants to win after Wade is locked in as a hometown cash cow.
he’s saying it right there in black and white print
First, NBA players never lie, right? And second, I don’t expect Wade to say he doesn’t want to win now. Who would say that? BUT, I truly think Miami is far far away from contending and Wade is just preparing them for next year when he waves goodbye. Softening the blow.
Just my opinion on the teams you mention...
The Cavs don’t want another ball dominant guard (not that James is a G, but you know what I mean). They’ll go after a big, if they can even afford another max player, which I actually doubt. (At guard, James would probably be best served playing with superstar PG… like Rose… but I won’t even go there).
Yao’s career is possibly over. No one is going to Houston until that all pans out, and it looks like that might take 1-2 yrs. Artest didn’t even stick around.
Is Miami in position to pay Wade and a Bosh? Do you think Beasley and Bosh’s game compliment each other? Maybe, but they still have mad holes to fill. I believe Wade + Bosh (or even Boozer) on the Bulls is 10x closer to competing than the duo on that same Heat team.
The New York Knicks has jack shit. No one is going to NYC next year. They have royally effed themselves (well, the Bulls kinda helped with that over the past few years) and I love it.
New Jersey is good, but they are still in NJ and I don’t think they’re moving to Brooklyn anytime soon. I think they only become really attractive if they move to Brooklyn, in which case Hova has a chance to land someone. I do think they have a few nice pieces… but if Devin Harris was a future superstar, Dallas wouldn’t have traded him.
OKC doesn’t need anything and if your argument is Wade wants to win now and not wait on youngins, well that team is disqualified. I think that team knows they don’t have to do much except wait to let all their pieces develop, so I don’t know how interested they’d be in Wade. And it’s OKC… how boring and blah:)
Pat Riley is a gambling man
but I don’t think he would trade Wade for Rose. The Heat are as dependent on Wade as Cleveland is dependent on James – i.e. – he is the guy who keeps fans interested. I just don’t see them trading him unless they absolutely have to, and than, the bidding could get very high.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 13, 2009 1:39 PM CDT reply actions
I agree this is the biggest hurdle
I didn’t say it explicitly, but my thinking for this idea is that it only works if Wade goes along the same directions he has and turns down the extension. The Heat aren’t exactly a money-making proposition these days I think, and if he words things strongly enough I could see the Heat feeling their hand is being forced.
wow
cant get mad at the idea…but wow
I was watching the 1995 Playoffs VS the Magic's and remembered how much I hated Horace Grant. Horace Grant - i hope you burn in bball hell
Why not just wait til next year?
Given the Jazz salary issues and published reports, we can easily get Boozer this offseason. If we trade Hinrich, we can bring in Wade and resign Boozer, if we trade Hinrich.
Isn’t Rose/Wade/Deng/Boozer/Noah better than Hinrich/Wade/Deng/Boozer/Noah?
It’s true that only by trading for Wade can we be sure that we’ll get Wade. But if he wouldn’t come to the Bulls as a FA then the chances are that he’ll still opt out after next year and we’ll be left with nothing, again.
the only way
that I would trade Rose at this point is if we got Wade next summer and nothing else. I’m not convinced Wade and Rose make a great team in the backcourt and you could probably get some great pieces to put alongside Wade, Hinrich (would be a great backcourt fit with Wade I think) and Deng for Rose.
Plus, the fact that Rose is from Chicago makes him impossible to trade unless we get Wade to replace him as the hometown hero. But even then, I’d give Wade and Rose a year at least to see how they work.
Couldn't the Heat go right back to the Bulls and pluck at least Boozer from us?
Under this trade scenario, approaching the summer of 2010, the Heat would have an incredibly favorable salary situation…with O’Neal, TiT, TT (if they don’t want to retain him), and Haslem coming off the books. They’d have DRose, Beasely, Chambers (backup), Cook (3pt Shooter), Moon (if he’s resigned this summer), and can probably resign Haslem to a reasonable contract given he’s from Miami and may want to stay close to home.
As I think about it, they could probably make a run at two major FAs and be better than us by the start of the 2010/2011 season.
"Some people want it to happen, some wish it would happen, others make it happen." - Michael Jordan
Come to think of it....I could see the Heat insisting on the Bulls throwing a pick in there as well
Given the lopsided nature of the deal on paper.
btw…between age 22 – 27, DWade has played an avg of 66 games/yr. Between age 28 – 33, wouldn’t those numbers get worse?
"Some people want it to happen, some wish it would happen, others make it happen." - Michael Jordan
Your trade has been rejected.
"That's a spicy meatball-a!" - Vinny Del Negro
by Juiceboxjerry on Jul 13, 2009 4:47 PM CDT reply actions 7 recs
I actually like this idea.
I would hate to see Derrick go… but that team would be fantastic. However:
I think for the Bulls to be title contenders with that roster, one of the big guys (JJ?) might have to be moved for a backup guard. Pargo and Hunter wouldn’t cut it, even with Salmons playing some at the 2.
Also, I don’t know that Utah does this deal. I think they can do better, because all this trade gives them is cap room; the rumored deal gave them that and a young, useful player.
Most importantly, they would need to hire a head coach in order to win a title!
First, that team definately is a title contender.
Second, Utah would want more than James contract for All-star Boozer.
Third, when Paul freaken Millsap averages 20 and 10 or goes for 23.5 and 12.5 in the playoffs make a new fanpost and I’ll congratulate you.
Fourth, Too much worry about the age of players on this site. Teams win with a mix of young emerging players, vets, and rookie contributors. It doesn’t matter if Rose is 21 and Dwade is 28, and Miller will be 45 when they contend.
So let's get this straight
You guys screaming and ranting won’t trade Derrick Rose for a 27 year old NBA Finals MVP and 5 time all-star who’s from Chicago, grew up a Bulls fan, and led the league in pretty much every possible category last year.
Mmmmkay…
Very well thought out, original piece and wouldn't expect anything less from you
Ignore the idiots who can’t get beyond that initial idea of trading Rose
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
basically, Bulls fans can find fault in any star player
I was shocked when people didn’t want to trade Tyrus for Amar’e. Flabbergasted that some people wouldn’t give up Hinrich to get Boozer. But that is what Bulls fan are about. Apparently if you’ve been injured in the past, you are no good forever. Wade is a legitimate MVP candidate every season. Who would want that?
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 13, 2009 11:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Tyrus for Amare
and Rose for Wade are not the same thing.
Aging
Carlos and Dwyane are getting older. I’m not saying these guys wouldn’t win a championship together, who knows? All I’m saying is I would rather keep Derrick and build around him. It’s much safer, it’s much more long-term.
They're also already great and really good.
Derrick Rose is no guarantee.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
He is a guarantee.
Barring any major injuries, Derrick Rose will be at least a second tier talent, more than likely a first tier talent. His work ethic and athleticism will take him very far.
Okay. Boozer is already a second-tier talent (Derrick Rose isn't, yet.)
Wade is already a first-tier talent of the ultimate magnitude.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
Quite possibly...
the dumbest post I have read on Blogabull. Why would you trade your best player for a guy that is a free agent next year? First off, we would not have to give up all of our players to get Wade. We would need to get rid of Kirk which I am happy to do. I am also surprised at all of the people that are receptive to this trade…
Not actually fuck Wade.
But seriously, Rose is 20 years old and pretty phenomenal; we could trade him away and get nothing. This isn’t the same as Tyrus or Hinrich or any of those other scrubs. Thinking that he is means the person suggesting the trade actually has negative foresight.
i think the idea is that you would trade Wade with the notion that
he would sign an extension with the Bulls and be content with the team assembled. So you wouldn’t be trading him away and getting nothing in the proposed deal. You would be trading him away and getting a top 5 NBA player.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 14, 2009 12:36 AM CDT up reply actions
Uh, yeah. I figured that pretty much went without saying
And by the way, what’s “negative foresight”, McCabe?
Rose is not phenomenal. He has the potential to be so. He is not yet.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
No Way
I’d trade Derrick after watching in the playoffs against the Celtics.This kid is gonna win us some championships.He’s just that good.We need to just be patient , play this year out and try to convince Mr. Wade to sign with us next year.
Conflicted
This all comes down to a simple question. How long will D Wade continue to produce at his current level? I look at the guy’s game and it is as close to Jordan’s since the man himself. Then I watch him attack the hoop for 100 games a year and get drilled half the time (and not touched a quarter of the time but a whistle blows). The questions are, is that style of play sustainable, when will he slow down, is he one knock away from a torn ACL, can he alter his game and maintain his production ala Jordan? My initial gut is that he can’t keep it up but then again, he seems to always prove people wrong… The guy was INCREDIBLE last year. I disagree with some posters who think he won’t fit with Rose, that backcourt would absolutely athletically destroy teams on O and D. They would need the current fillers and a Tyrus with a post move to win it all though.
no derrick rose trade
is ever completely serious.
by LoveForTheGame on Jul 14, 2009 11:38 PM CDT reply actions
Its hard enough to aquire a talented, true pg in this game...
We finally got one and you wanna TRADE him? Rose is an emerging superstar with his combination of size, speed and finishing ability, hes the Lebron of point guards! With Wade/Boozer we’ll be definite contenders, with Rose/Lebron we’ll be champions!!
"You never got me down, Ray. Ya hear me? Never got me down."
-Jake Lamotta
by The Red Menace on Jul 15, 2009 8:38 AM CDT up reply actions
Trade
We should trade Rose not for talent but for cap space!
by chapuforyou on Jul 15, 2009 4:20 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
i don't even know why the hell i open these topics.
"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"
by Jaina on Jul 15, 2009 5:25 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Why not
keep Rose and trade for Boozer? That would basically insure that Wade leaves next season, and would make Chicago a very attractive place to land.
I’ll admit I don’t understand NBA economics to know if it’s financially doable, but that seems to make more sense that trading away one of the young stars of the game to make a team that still won’t be Cleveland or Orlando.
DEJESUS!!!
No Chance
This is where I am glad someone other than the poster is running the team. That is a terrible idea and the Bulls would not even consider trading Rose at this point. Why? Because he has the potential to be one of those special players in the league that don’t come around too often. Under those circumstances you surround those players like Rose with talent and try to build around him and use him as someone that attracts talent and makes free agents want to give the Bulls a shot to sign with. Teams do not trade players like Rose for a reason uummmkay.
Yes, Derrick Rose...
“has the potential to be one of those special players in the league that don’t come around too often.”
Dwyane Wade is “one of those special players in the league that don’t come around too often.”
Still No Chance
That would be like the Heat trading Wade after his impressive first year and not waiting for the payoff of him winning a Championship for you. Not going to happen. I would love to have Wade alongside Rose but not at the expense of rose. I don’t think Wade wants to be on the Bulls if they don’t have Rose. Rose is the type of player that makes others want to play with him and the draw to the Bulls. No other player on the Bulls has that think about it. It is insane in my mind to think of trading Rose.
The Dude Abides
It'd be similar to the Heat trading Wade for Duncan or Kevin Garnett four or five years.
That’s not crazy at all.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett
LOL it is crazy and you are spinning your wheels.
First the Bulls front office may be inept but not that foolish. This trade is not and will never happen. The Bulls are building around Rose and you do not trade players you are building around the above mentioned trade involves older players. Rose belongs on our team and why some can not be happy about our best player with real star potential I don’t understand. Wade would want to play with Rose if he came to Chicago he doesn’t want to do it all by himself. Rose will draw interest from other talented FAs for years to come why would we even think of trading him??? Oh yea I forgot the team is not and will not in the near future think of trading him.
The Dude Abides
If NO is really in as much financial trouble as they appear to be… I’d be content with this:
Chris Paul
Peja
for
Rose
Expirings
You can mix and match others on NO depending on which expiring contracts you want to give up (Miller, maybe James too) and perhaps add a pick in to sweeten the deal.
I think that is a much more logical and likely (albeit still not happening) trade.
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.
