That leaves the Bulls with roughly $4.5 million of salary-cap space remaining with the roster at 10 players. Another center and shooting guard are the final targets.
over 1 year ago
your friendly BullsBlogger
534 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Here's what I'd do with that $4.5M
Try to nab Shaquille O’Neal. Look I know Shaq isn’t great, but if he can buy in for 15 MPG as our backup C, he’s still a beast….and the fact that he’s still not signed should tell him something…though who knows. I’m kind of surprised Cuban hasn’t locked him up already. But we could do a 2 yr $7.0M offer as a last resort, which would leave us essentially the minimum for Byars if we truly want another SG (which I think is not needed anymore). Shaq ain’t a running C, I get that, but he will give us flexibility against some of the bigs, and it’s not like Brad Miller was a running C either (and while Shaq’s 39 going on 400lbs, he still can wear the other team C’s out by trying to guard him, which could help when in the end of games he’s on the bench and we’re running with Noah-Rose on the court…..plus a Boozer-old man Shaq combo on the inside would be something to see….
Ok so that’s not likely to work—Shaq’s probably gonna end up in Atlanta for the MLE for 2 yrs. Then why don’t we:
Nab Rasho Nesterovic for a 1 yr $3M deal and use the remaining $1.5M for Byars and that Samuels guy from our summer league camp.
If that doesn’t work, um I guess Josh Boone is my 3rd fave left C.
Then Kurt Thomas, who’s more reliable to stay in shape unlike Shaq but who well isn’t as good as even old man Shaq.
Last resort C is Kwame Brown
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Forgot about Rasho
I’d rather have Rasho over Shaq or Thomas.
I can predict the future using Norm Van Lier's crystal balls.
"Sam has a tendency to denigrate reports coming from any reporter who didn’t also cover the day Naismith first put up the peach baskets." - snley
by NBA Observer on Jul 20, 2010 8:31 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe with me
It’s all if Shaq bought in…..just because he is a bear to guard even if he’s 15% of his former glory. I keep thinking of Noah and Miller both hacking away at him int he playoffs, literally hanging onto him and yet Shaq still would have the strength to get a shot off…..having that in the playoffs for a quarter would be really nice so that when we tire the other teams bigs out, we bring Noah back in and run away….
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
by majoyenrac on Jul 20, 2010 8:34 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'd prefer Rasho too
He’s a serviceable NBA big man. Shaq is done and is a locker room problem. Thomas isn’t a true center.
I’d take Shaq for the vet minimum to be our enforcer. That’s about it.
by RM on Jul 20, 2010 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions
me too
i just dont know what kurt thomas has left to offer. i mean if noah were to miss a few games, we’d be relying on kurt thomas and asik.. i know that rasho is not that much better, but still i just think he’s a got a little more left than thomas.
I'm cuckoo for Kukoc!!!
I think Rasho may be done
he was DNPd for like half their games. Not saying that’s a determining factor (who knows what the Raptors do) but I’d rather get the guy I know could still play a bit in Thomas, who subbed in for Bogut for heavy minutes late last season.
Forget Shaq. The time to be ‘risky’ was 2 weeks ago, not with the end of the roster.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Havent seen Rasho play until now...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0qCnDmEMEE
I really like what he can bring to the table as a backup center. Can somewhat spread the floor, block rebound, shoot, but he doesn’t add alot of versatility. That was the problem with miller is he was decent at spreading the floor and could semi-shoot. Shaq showed us in the playoffs why we need shaq. Noah didnt have the size to guard bigger centers and that Bulk down low is what we have severly lacked. I Personally would rather have that for the versatility it gives us, but this rasho guy does fit our offense better. Either way…PLEASE DONT SIGN KURT THOMAS!
by mazzimo on Jul 20, 2010 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
no shaq
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions 18 recs
Rec.
Terrible Idea to bring in Shaq…
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
To each their own
I don’t think it’s a big risk at all. And think Shaq in spurts is solid. But Cleveland promised him too much.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Course he also made what $20M last year
He’s signing for the cheap, and thus I’m sure we could say, look this is what we see, if you don’t agree, go to Cuban for more $$.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
by majoyenrac on Jul 20, 2010 8:59 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
DID YOU SEE SHAQ IN CLEVELAND
Shaq’s not a risk, no. He’s just guaranteed to be terrible.
Go Rockets/Nets[CDR]/Bucks[Jennings]!
We wouldn't play him starter minutes
He isn’t at all what he was, but he still wears the opponents out with his physical play.
He’s our #2 C coming in, his PER is still solid. He can still have a good game here and there (remember game 1 against us). And he knows a little bit aobut winning.
We’re not paying him $20M like the Cavs did. If he wants to work he’s going to have to accept his role, something that will be crystal clear before he signs. Shaq’s not gonna do an A.I. thing as his PR guys are too strong. I bet he’ll go to Atlanta.
Worst case is he’s a big body when we play the big C’s out there, and can tire ’em out. best case is we get a turn back the clock a bit game from him every so often and pay him $3-4.5 or whatever we have left to do so.
Not a risk, could be a nice reward. He’s still a very physical player.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
If not, then we go for Nesterovic
He wasn’t my only option, though he’s the “best available” left C.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Bulls should sign Shaq for the sole reason of annointing Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah, maybe Deng as well
Shaq has a history of convincing players with great potential and heart that they could dominate in ways they couldn’t imagine – Wade, Kobe (though I’m sure he already thought as much, he learned some things being around the big aristotle), Pierce (“P.P is the f’n truth”).
by pinoyboxer on Jul 20, 2010 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
And LeBron
oh wait, we already projected inadequacy on him. I can’t keep all this straight sometimes.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
All he had to tell Lebron was it's great to play
where you can wear sunglasses year round, that way people can’t see the bullshit in your eyes when you’re lying to em.
by pinoyboxer on Jul 20, 2010 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
They should bring him in
for the sole reason of putting the beatdown on Bron, Wade, and Bosh when they go to the basket.
"In order to have a winner, the team must have a feeling of unity; every player must put the team first- ahead of personal glory" - motivational sign at Halas Hall.
Shaq's friends with those guys
well, not Bosh, but w/e
"I'm going to enjoy an apple in bed." - Derrick Rose
But Shaq burned many a bridge out of Miami
And Shaq wants to at least get a shot at tying KoMe Bryant now that Kobe’s got a 5th ring to Shaq’s 4th.
I don’t think Atlanta has enough future upside with the saddled contract of JJ…..I think we have many a question, but it’s on Rose, a seemingly bonafide stud.
I don’t think OKC is interested nor is Shaq to going to small market.
i think Cuban would love him and Shaq vice versa, but the Mavs are looking more and more like Shady Pines retirement home and less like a contender (and they just finished overpaying Dampier and saddling their flexibility to dramatically overpay for Brendan Haywood at 5 yrs$54M or whatever it was…that’s a bad signing nobody is talking about.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
by majoyenrac on Jul 20, 2010 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is from Stein
The Mavericks have abandoned the idea of a Shaq signing completely…Atlanta, then, stands as the only team with a confirmed "live" interest in O’Neal. But Shaq, at last report, still wants assurances of a healthy slice of playing time as well as a salary that starts above the $5.8 million mid-level exception
Forget about the money, do you really want the team to devote many minutes to Shaq? Boozer and Noah are starting. That, hopefully, will take at least 70 out of 92 available minutes. Still left are cheap but young and in need of further development (=playing time) Taj and Asik. They should both at least get 10 min a game. When’s Shaq going to get his “healthy slice of playing time.”
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
by snley on Jul 20, 2010 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
No
I hadn’t heard that and all I knew was he wasn’t going to Atlanta which were willing to PAY the man.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
48 X 2 = 96... not 92
Sorry to be a stickler.
Carlos has provided us with a great winter drinking game. Evertime Booze puts up a shot, you put one down.
by Another Afflicted Chicago Fan on Jul 23, 2010 8:09 AM CDT up reply actions
I'd rather not have our guys rely on Shaq to do that.
Let their game speak for themselves. Moreso, I hate the thought of Shaq passing out another one of his asinine nicknames for Rose. If I had t come online and one day read how Shaq decided to randomly call Rose “The Green Lantern” I’d ralph all over my keyboard. >_<
by Dr. Handsome, D.D.S. on Jul 20, 2010 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions
byars isnt getting
anything more than the minimum, let alone a guaranteed roster spot
aren't there other serviceable bigs available besides Shaq and KT?
Etan Thomas
One of the Collins boys
Tonie Battie
Rasho (mentioned above)
I’d be fine with any of those guys, and even Kurt Thomas. You have to think the majority of the big minutes will be split three ways with Noah, Booz and Taj, with Asik getting a few here and there. The 5th big should be able to throw his body around and not be a threat to complain if there are no minutes available, which I would see as a problem with Shaq and Kwame.
a couple of options
Sean Williams
Josh Boone
SHUT DOWN THE CARTER
on a Collins’ twin on my roster, but give me Etan Thomas, maybe Josh Boone
by QUINTEN DALEY on Jul 20, 2010 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions
Last time: Get Xavier Henry!!!
James Johnson’s expiring contract (as of now, until they pick up his 3rd year option) and a future first round pick. That could work, no? Pay $1.7 million instead of $8-$10 million on Henry. Sell the future first come draft time for $3 million.
Go Heisley!!!
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 8:47 AM CDT reply actions 6 recs
Has anyone reported him to be available?
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
Available?
Not that I have seen. Just reports that the Griz apparently want to incentivize Henry’s contract in order to arrive at the 120% scale rookie contract.
I can predict the future using Norm Van Lier's crystal balls.
"Sam has a tendency to denigrate reports coming from any reporter who didn’t also cover the day Naismith first put up the peach baskets." - snley
by NBA Observer on Jul 20, 2010 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions
I think more than anything
The Grizz have plenty of guys still on the roster who can do what Henry does, so they are in no hurry to sign him, so they figured they’d play hardball at first.
Not really good business practice pissing off your first round draft pick, but I don’t see it hurting them in the long run either.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 9:00 AM CDT up reply actions
In all honesty, if I were him, I wouldn't sign it.
He can either go over to Europe, get better, make just as much money, and try again with the Grizzlies next year, or he can sit out a year, working out and such, and re-enter the draft.
The latter would obviously suck, but it would also have huge rewards.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I don't think the Grizzlies would let it come to that, though, and they'd probably trade him...
…since they have no room for him anyway.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Eventually they'll get over themselves and pay him the extra 350K.
It’s not often a team will trade someone within a couple months of them drafting him, unless there’s an agreement worked out prior to the pick.
As I said, "it's not often" logic doesn't work here...
…as “it’s not often” a team low-balls their lottery pick. But here it is.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
You don't need to tell me what does and doesn't "work."
It’s become apparent that all you enjoy doing is begging and pleading for things that are unrealistic at best.
What's that matter?
We should only think of the most realistic options? What fun is that? We should only concern ourselves with the five or six options that are the most likely, then when CJ Watson signs, wow! that’s out of nowhere. Who would have thought that?
I guess we should only discuss Jason Smith or Brandon Bass or Anthony Parker!
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
at least try and keep it in fewer places?
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions
right, i will
and one has closed comments now
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
it was in a thread 6 days ago
shoulda rec’d it. In fact, do so now it’ll pop back up. then I can delete all this, yeeaaaahhhh.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions
interesting note
only person to rec that fanshot was me. I blame whichever jerkoff put the fanshots on the left side.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
I thought it'd be lame to rec myself. Especially after over-tweeting it :P
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
can't rec yourself
ohhhhh how I’ve tried.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
That'd be a nice add-on feature, provided all self-rec'ers are publicly outed
(and properly humiliated)
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
nooooo it's not showing up
maybe only 5 rec’d fanshots at the same time? I should be able to move these around as I please, stupid ‘wisdom of crowds’.
So make a new thread then :)
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Not really surprised you don't know how your blog works...
Btw, I mentioned the same thing about Henry that tyger just did a few days ago in a related thread that you also deleted. It’s like you’re paying the hosting bills for this site or something.
That's all I'm saying.
I don’t see the need to bring a far-fetched Xavier Henry idea into a 4-5 threads.
What's more unrealistic about Henry than talking about, say, CJ Watson as a Bull?
He wasn’t even reportedly “on their radar” much until suddenly he was.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
by Sports2 on Jul 20, 2010 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
CJ Watson was available
CJ Watson was no more unrealistic than JJ Redick seeing as how both of them were restricted free agents. There’s nothing unrealistic about getting a free agent, I think people just assumed the Bulls wouldn’t go for another RFA after the JJ Redick disappointment. As it happens, they weren’t willing to wait on another one, but Golden state was willing to trade him for nothing.
If you’re talking about getting a player that another team has other contract, and has never put on the block, you’re talking about something that almost never happens. The only way it would happen is if the team that goes for the player is really aggressive and overpays. So now we’re talking about something the Bulls will never do.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
CJ Watson was a restricted free agent and former D-Leaguer rumored to be on his way out in GS.
Xavier Henry was a lottery pick THREE WEEKS AGO!
by pooriejay on Jul 20, 2010 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I gotta agree here
the rarity of such a move makes it less realistic. Nobody loses their new draft smell that quick. Not that talking about realism is that important here, but saying it’s comparable to CJ Watson just isn’t true.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
haha "new draft smell"
Although I think Hasheem Thabeet lost his in record time, and guess what team drafted him…
Superteams suck.
by Juiceboxjerry on Jul 20, 2010 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions
basically
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Is it more or less than the rarity of invoking a pointless contract fight with your lottery pick?
I mean, I agree, but you can point to various past situations (Steve Francis and Ricky Rubio spring to mind) and see that occasionally this stuff does happen.
Through in the Arn Tellem connection and the fact the Griz have no obvious place to play him, and I don’t see why they wouldn’t at least consider a trade.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
Going to Europe
Is a pretty drastic move for a lot of people, if a guy’s dream is to play in the NBA, not sure if he’ll leave if he has that opportunity.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 9:21 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Of course it is.
It’s also a big deal to sign 4 years to a team that has zero playing time for you.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
not really
you still get paid, and the Grizzlies are nothing if not a fluid situation.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
They won't have no playing time for him for four years
With the Grizz, it probably won’t even be four months before at least one of the guys is moved.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions
yeah, I think Henry freaking out over PT would be just as impetuous as Heisley wanting to trade him
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions
Well, I just wouldn't want to be in Memphis.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Have you ever been to Memphis?
I LOVE that city. Course I love the R&R/rockabilly roots there.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Yup
And they’ve got Sun Records (which is as must a must see tour as any I’ve been to, and I’ve been all over)…
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Correct me if I am wrong...
But he couldn’t re-enter the draft next season, as his draft rights are held by Memphis…Henry going to Europe is the equivalent of Asik (or Fran Vazquez) being Europe, drafted by an NBA team, with rights held until they are traded or renounced.
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
by Dionysus2.0 on Jul 20, 2010 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions
i think in order to be eligible
he’d have to sit out an entire year without playing for anyone, right?
"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"
by Jaina on Jul 20, 2010 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
yeah, I think you can't play any pro basketball for a year
if you want to re-enter draft. Tyger would be a bad agent.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions
That is correct...
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
by Dionysus2.0 on Jul 20, 2010 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Yea, that roster is the problem
If you don’t want to pay the guy the market rate of 120% and instead opt for 100% with incentives to get to 120% then you’d hope there were not 3-4 guys playing in front him as an obstacle to meeting those incentives.
Furthermore, they just dropped a max deal on Rudy Gay a few weeks earlier.
I can predict the future using Norm Van Lier's crystal balls.
"Sam has a tendency to denigrate reports coming from any reporter who didn’t also cover the day Naismith first put up the peach baskets." - snley
by NBA Observer on Jul 20, 2010 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
no
But maybe Heisley values a $10 million swing. Why pay to develop Henry when he won’t get the minutes? They already have Mayo, Gay, Young and Carroll who represented 92% of the team’s SG minutes and 97% of the team’s SF minutes from last season, and none of them are “past their prime”. I just don’t see where they get the minutes. Once they re-signed Gay and Mayo proved he’s not a PG, Henry has go to be out the door. My guess is that they thought they were going to lose Gay and would move Mayo to PG, leaving a gaping hole at SG.
There’s nothing now.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Becuse they can move one of the other guys later
You let them all play and determine who is the best guy to keep. Why move Henry before you find out if he’s better than Mayo for example?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Because Heisley is cheap.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Then wouldn't they move Mayo or Conley then?
If you’re cheap, rookie talent is your best option to fill out the roster while being competitive. I’d think that would make it less likely they move the rookie.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions
but why piss off that cheap rookie talent by dicking him out of money?
if you had to pick a team that could mess up something like trading a lottery pick for small savings, Heisley would be near the top of the list, right?
or hell, if Mayo’s available, then do that. i’d want him much more than Henry anyways.
Like I said elsewhere, not a great move
But Heisley’s obviously a bit out there.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions
I appreciate your trying to rationalize the situation and possibilities.
However, I think that we’re discussing, at least in terms of building a winning team, an irrational owner.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Carroll is absolute garbage...
I have seen the grizzlies play 3 times recently and carroll is useless…they wont be keeping him…
Good choice of words there.
His nickname is the Junkyard Dog due to his scrappy play. For the record: I went to Mizzou, I don’t research third stringers’ nicknames often.
How would this trade work cap wise?
Does Henry have an expected cap hold, and how much is it?
While you're a very valuable poster here
It’s really time to STFU about Xavier Henry. Yeesh.
"You can't be afraid to play somebody because they've got 3 really good players. How are you going to win if you're afraid to play? We're not going to be afraid to play - we're going to fight, we're going to attack, we're going to throw it out there and see what happens." - Carlos Boozer
woot! let's talk about CJ watson's press conference!!!!!
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
What's wrong with that?
Talking about something that has actually happened. As opposed to something that will never happen. Like trading for Xavier Henry, or trading Taj for Terrence Williams…
What's your problem? Did I sleep with your wife or something?
::blech::
So getting Xavier Henry or Terrence Williams has a 1% chance of happening. Getting Jason Smith is a 2% chance of happening. Getting Anthony Parker or Antonio McDyess is like a 3% chance. The latter are chat-worthy but the former are not?
Get over yourself you wannabe blogmaster. ugh
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I guess I do it because it's fun for me.
And that’s all this blog is. Fun. I would have put the chances of the Bulls giving up a rookie contract and a future pick just to get rid of Hinrich’s contract at pretty much nil before it happened.
After that, anything seems realistically possible. I guess I must refer to the ages-old blogism, if you don’t like what I write, ignore it.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with Tyger
Seriously let him speak. I’d like this option and well it’s at least conceivable considering Memphis is treating him very oddly for a what #12 pick. Remember the crap Orlando got for drafting Vasquez bc they wasted a lottery pick.
I don’t know why Memphis is low balling their lottery pick (and dramatically overpaying for Rudy Gay around the same time). They def can trade him….
Though I don’t think we have much left to trade right now, so it’s a long shot.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
umm
is it wrong if Id be happy with Gravis Vasquez?
All I want in life is for UC fans to chant: Deeeeeloooonte during Heat games
Fran not Greivis
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
I DON't KNOW THEN
What you are talking about. The MAGIC blew a lottery pick on Fran Vasquez
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
grizzlies got greavis and xavier…just sayin either would be a good look
All I want in life is for UC fans to chant: Deeeeeloooonte during Heat games
* proceeds to kick rocks @ benny the bull*
All I want in life is for UC fans to chant: Deeeeeloooonte during Heat games
Did u ever see him play in college though...
…wow, he was seriously the most annoying college player I’ve ever seen. Ever.
JAMES JOHNSON!
, Taj and a future 2nd round pick for henry. Then Sign Samardo Samuels from our summer league squad.
I'd love to get X Henry...
I think most people would. Especially if we can give up JJ and a pick for him. Fuck yeah, sign me up.
But I don’t bring it up often because
A) It’s seems highly unlikely
B) Nobody disagrees, so there isn’t much to talk about.
Ask me about Tom Thibodeau!!!
www.kidronmusic.com/podcast.html
i watched a lot of KU games
and X Henry never impressed me that much, besides his NBA body. i thought he was over rated in the draft.
by rocky_mountain_bull on Jul 20, 2010 10:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Why we just signed CJ Watson
and Calderon is over 8 million per season for the next three season…what do u want to hear…WAY OVERPAID….contract too long…Not happening…No thanks…next subject please…
by mazzimo on Jul 20, 2010 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
yeah no sh*t
just making fun of tyger’s obsession of the moment
"I'm going to enjoy an apple in bed." - Derrick Rose
I wouldn't mind taking a chance on Rashad McCants for the last SG slot. He's a big time talent, but he has a bad rep
for being a bad attitude guy. I’m not exactly sure why, though.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 9:35 AM CDT reply actions
because he has a bad attitude, probably
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I know, but I don't know of any documented incidents that have lead to that reputation. Plus, we need a misunderstood
high upside talent on the team now that Tyrus is gone. :)
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions
there was just the incident last week of him not showing up to summer league
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions
the one where his mom was sick in North Carolina and he went to go see her?
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions
yeah, that one
another situation he didn’t handle (or his handlers didn’t handle) right.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions
sounded more like a miscommunication to me, but I'm biased because I like Rashad.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions
A miscommunication is not handling it right.
Especially when it’s your career on the line. Just takes a simple phone call, or even a text message.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah
You need to be proactive on this shit, especially when you know you have a reputation. If my boss already put me on probation, and I decide to skip work the day of the big meeting because my mom is sick, I sure as hell would be calling real early to explain the situation and apologize. Even then I should expect repercussions.
You don’t get the same excuses and rights as everyone else, when someone is already giving you a chance you might not deserve.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
besides, why even take a chance on a bad attitude with that roster spot
they won’t play enough to get any untapped upside out of them, and the Bulls would rather not be bothered with a project, and Thibs is on his first year at the head chair. We’re clearly going for a sum > parts thing for 3 years of 50ish wins, why derail that for the 11th man?
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions
because I like Rashad McCants and want to see him succeed :-(
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 9:48 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
There's the question of whether McCants can be a good boy as an 11th man...
if he is playing regularly, he’s fine. The problems for him have been that he sees himself as a star and has chaffed when asked to play a reserve role (or share the spotlight in college). If we’re looking for a guy to be the 11th guy on the roster, that’s probably not the personality you want to go with.
If you’re a bottom-feeder team that’s looking for a cheap SG to get big minutes, then I think he’s a good fit. But I’d definitely have concerns about him fitting in as an end-of-the-bench guy.
by SouthernCub on Jul 20, 2010 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions
You're right. Ignore my Rashad McCants delusion everyone.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
I like Sean May,
and I’d like to see him succeed, but I don’t want him anywhere near the Bulls 11th roster spot.
LeBron is an Asshole
surprised Jordan hasn't signed up McCants
got the N.C. connection throughout the franchise, and if he can get Tyrus, Rashad, and Livingston to realize their potential, he’ll have repaired his exec. reputation…he likes to gamble as well.
by pinoyboxer on Jul 20, 2010 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
McCants or Larry Hughes
I can predict the future using Norm Van Lier's crystal balls.
"Sam has a tendency to denigrate reports coming from any reporter who didn’t also cover the day Naismith first put up the peach baskets." - snley
by NBA Observer on Jul 20, 2010 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Will Larry Legend be in the league next season?
by Stay Chisel on Jul 20, 2010 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Was Larry in the league last season?
LeBron is an Asshole
THe Un-Legend
is still waiting for his next contract I believe…..
If the Clipps want to sabotage Vinny they can bring him to LA.
I’m surprised Prokerov hasn’t overpaid just to pay him something, or that Kahn hasn’t given I think it was Charlotte where he ended the year last year, can’t remember. But I’m surprised Kahn hasn’t given Charlotte Sessions and the rights to Rubio for Larry un-legend yet….I guess we’ve still got time.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Larry Hughes got picked up by MJ's Bobcats.
And chucked 3s in the playoffs
by JockstrapNoah on Jul 20, 2010 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions
He's had lots of little moments that add up...
For example, he got a lot of publicity in North Carolina for saying that playing at UNC was similar to being in prison.
He’s not like a Ron Artest kind of crazy or anything – he’s just a malcontent.
by SouthernCub on Jul 20, 2010 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I would be willing to wager on
Roger Mason or Keith Bogans as the shooting guard that we sign, then probably Kurt Thomas at center. Then bringing in John Lucas III, Samardo Samuels, and Morris Almond from the SL roster. That’d be 15. Unless we can get Jeremy Lin who apparently we could be interested in. Swap him for either Almond or Lucas. I’ll go ahead and predict:
Roger Mason, Kurt Thomas, John Lucas, Samardo Samuels, Morris Almond
Bulls’ lineup/rotation
Rose/Watson/Lucas
Brewer/Watson/Mason/Almond
Deng/Korver/Johnson
Boozer/Gibson/Samuels
Noah/Thomas/Asik
A vision without a plan is just a dream. A plan without a vision is drudgery. But a vision with a plan can change the world.
I think you have it
Swap Mason for Bogans, but otherwise this is realistic.
Earl Barron
Why not give him a shot? He has paid his dues and would be another big body that should come cheaply. He was a D-League all-star last year and did a nice job with the Knicks on a 10-day contract.
I will never doubt the Chairman again.
I assumed he was going back to the Knicks
but I don’t see any deal announced yet.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions
He's likely going back there
but I think they are only looking to give him the vet minimum. He still hasn’t signed.
If we give him two years we might be able to steal him. It’s worth it for what will be our 3rd center.
I will never doubt the Chairman again.
They have Timofey Mozgov and Turiaf at center, so maybe he's low on their priority list.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
potential trade targets?
Just went through Sham’s site to find guys who may be had for nothing, or less than nothing (i.e. Bulls get paid to take), or for James Johnson:
Bigs
Chris Wilcox (1yr, $3m)
David Andersen (1, $2.5)
Solomon Jones (1, $1.5)
Ryan Hollins (2, $4.9)
Kris Humphries (1, $3.2)
Brandon Bass (3, $12)
Jason Smith (1, $2.2)
Antonio McDyess (1, $4.9 + $2.6 buyout)
SG
Anthony Parker (1, $2.85)
Wayne Ellington (1 + rookie deal TOs, ~$1m)
Daequan Cook (1, $2.2)
Willie Green (1, $4)
Marco Belinelli (1, $2.4)
Nick Young (1, $2.3)
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 10:24 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Bass would be a great pick up to fill in during Boozer's inevitable injuries
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
by snley on Jul 20, 2010 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Isn't that what Taj is for?
And yes, I realize that someone would then have to backup Taj. However, that person wouldn’t get any playing time on most nights, and I don’t see a player with Bass’s talent being happy to come in as a 3rd string PF. I also don’t see any reason to bury Taj who would be one of the top backup PFs in the league and who we already know can start without killing the team with any obvious weaknesses.
I’d rather go after someone who is a legitimate Center. Bass always seemed even on the short side for a PF.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
I think it'd be nice to have someone with Bass's scoring ability around if Boozer goes down
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
I'd take Bass or McDyess if they are available.
I like Parker too, mentioned him a while back, but that was before we had Brewer / Watson so I couldn’t see how it would work. Now that we do, I think he’d be a great fit as a veteran backup.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
And if nothing else
This list shows we do have at least a few options that wouldn’t be a complete disaster.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions
why wouldn't Parker just be the backup 2?
I don’t see a minutes crunch disgruntling him. If he wound up beating out Watson for the first guard off the bench job, more power to him.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
No, I meant
Before we had Brewer I liked him, but I thought it might hinder us from getting a better starting SG, I of course didn’t know we could get Watson and Brewer for as cheap as we did. Now that the roster is put together, he seems like a great fit as a backup with the group we have put together.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions
I see what I did.. worded that completely wrong.
I meant I figured he would be available, but didn’t see a great fit originally (I was somewhat under the assumption a SG would cost more than he did), but now that we have the guys we do and the cap space we have, I think he would be a good addition.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
gotcha :)
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't think they're available for free/cheap
We’d have a better shot of getting Parker, who I really like on the wing. Great defender, okay shooter.
Will McDyess come off the bench
in a wheelchair, with crutches, or with a walker and a colostomy bag…
Wayne Ellington
Could develop like Redick did. (Very similar after their rookie years). Can shoot from three. Can’t really play the PG at all but Watson should handle that role. I’d definitely take him off their hands for nothing.
I will never doubt the Chairman again.
by nateroth on Jul 20, 2010 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
How's about Jeff Foster?
Or Josh McRoberts. Pacers would probably like to save a little dough, and those guys could all be useful. Foster was hurt last year, but I heard him on the radio saying he’s ready to roll now.
McRoberts is a guy the idiotic Pacers have done absolutely nothing with, but has a ton of skills. Every time they actually let him on the court, he played well and he played hard.
Still, my priority would still be a full court press for Henry. Besides him, none of the other SG’s seem very impressive. I don’t know what Nick Young’s problem is, because he got a lot of minutes and was absolutely garbage in them, but he’d be moderately interesting because he can run, jump, and shoot.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
Foster makes too much
McRoberts makes too little, I don’t see why the Pacers would give him away even if they weren’t using him.
Nick Young’s problem is that all he wants to do is shoot. It’s an intentionally unimpressive list, these are guys to get for effectively nothing.
The Henry thing still seems like a pipe dream to me. Then again I was legitimately curious about Gilbert Arenas
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Foster makes $6.6M
If the Bulls have $6M in cap space, + James Johnson at $1.7M, they should be able to acqure Foster $6.7M.
I actually think the Bulls have a bit more cap space than KC reports. I’m being pretty conservative, I think, in my estimates, and I have them at http://sportstwo.com/s2/NBASalaries.php#jump_CHI. Add two more cap holds to my number, and you’ve still got close to $6M in cap space.
The ESPN Trade Machine has Boozer listed at $14.4M, and they’re usually pretty accurate, so my number might be over-estimating.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
I'm trusting someone simply told KC the figure
and he didn’t run his own numbers. As we’ve seen the Bulls are being quite generous with the front-loading so far.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
As they were in the past...
It makes a lot of sense to front load a deal…its better for the player, better for future trade flexibility and better for the long term finances of the Org…
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
by Dionysus2.0 on Jul 20, 2010 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, that really got us out of that Ben Wallace jam.
Oops, no, it actually ended up being the difference between being right up to the LT line, likely losing our SG, and generally having to sign a bunch of asshats like Jannero Pargo for a couple years.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
They were able to move...
both Kirk and Noc for cap space this summer.
That Ben Wallace signing turned out to be one of the worst contracts in the league…and yet, somehow he got traded for a guy on a shorter contract Gooden and Larry Hughes…
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
by Dionysus2.0 on Jul 20, 2010 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions
Misleading rubbish
The Bulls took back more salary and for just as long (via Hughes) in moving Wallace. About the same amount of headache too.
Kirk had to have a pick unloaded to move him and Noc was moved for bigger contracts and ones that, themselves, had to be moved.
In short, they were all bad contracts, and talking up how much better front-loading made them was like talking up what a nice artist Hitler was. At best it’s trivial, and more likely, it’s pretty irrelevant.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
by Sports2 on Jul 20, 2010 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
it's worse for present flexibility
which is especially important in an offseason when you’re under the cap.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
future flexibility is always better than current flexibility
Who wants to be better “now” when you can be better in the future?
—it’s a strategy that works in perpetuity
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
isn't it basically acknowledged
that we aren’t going to have flexibility in the future because of Rose and Noah’s extensions?
by tuff-gong on Jul 20, 2010 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
seems kinda moot...
but the org would be likely to frontload contracts to avoid unnecessarily going into the tax.
though I might be wrong, what with all the 3 year deals.
Basically.. it's common sense
And they are three year deals. So it leaves us flexibility if a true superstar does become available down the road, that we could make a trade for. I guess some people would rather be the Knicks stuck with guys like Eddy Curry, or go back to the Paxson Bulls with Kirk Hinrich, Larry Hughes or Ben Wallace.
I’d think people would be happy the front office has learned from it’s mistakes of overpaying role players.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions
I thought
Ronnie and CJ at least were 3 yr deals but the 3rds a team option….
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Considering we had enough financial flexibility
To sign everyone we wanted, and even offer guys we didn’t get like Redickand we still have cap space, wouldn’t it make sense to frontload them? Seeing as we had enough flexibility to pay them now, isn’t that the right move?
Just because it’s potentially good financially for JR down the road, doesn’t make it a negative move.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
"sign everyone we wanted"
oh my god.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Ronnie Brewer says: "You guys loved me all along!!!"
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
That were available.
Who did we not sign because of financial flexibility?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions
They didn't have enough for two max guys.
Maybe they could have got two of them if they did.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Maybe.
I really don’t know it. I have no idea how much they could have changed their minds or not.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Unless *everyone* surrounding the situation was lying
Including the Bulls, agents, reporters and the players. Everyone made it seem as if the Bulls could have offered to max contracts if necessary. You think they couldn’t have dumped JJ or Taj if necessary?
They all accepted less than the max in Miami
and the Bulls could have still made moves if required to free up more money. There’s no reason to believe that money was the sticking point.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
well, I guess we should do better to separate 'we' and 'the Bulls'
maybe this is all they could’ve dreamed of.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Typo.. whatever, you knew what I meant.
Obviously they failed, that’s a given. If you want to bitch about that, go ahead. Their use of cap room is obviously not the problem though.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Gar: Lebron, we're going to have to ask you to take a little less than the max.
So that we have room for the Big Prize, CJ Watson.
by JockstrapNoah on Jul 20, 2010 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions
We didn't not sign LeBron because we couldn't afford him.
How is that relevant to this discussion?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree
The intent was obviously to note that the Bulls had the cap-space to sign the players they wanted.
That those players did not sign does not reflect a paucity of cap-space to sign them; it was, instead, the result of non-fiscal contingent factors.
Not sure, I'm sort of randomly replying, didn't follow the conversation.
We got a lot of good pieces. We probably won’t know if the Bulls got everyone they wanted, and most likely they didn’t.
by JockstrapNoah on Jul 20, 2010 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Of course they didn't get the players they wanted
But I don’t see a single guy we lost out on because we couldn’t afford them. Morrow went cheap, Redick we signed, the Big 3 said no to us.
Bitch about their inability to talk them into coming or picking the wrong guys, sure, but their use of salary cap space seems pretty logical.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed.
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
Well, at least there's another one.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
How dare I discuss things so unrealistic!
I mean, the Bulls would never give up a draft pick in such a deep draft just to RID themselves of Hinrich’s contract. It will NEVER, EVER, EVER happen. I blame my desire to discuss far-fetched ideas on the organization and Kirk Hinrich.
I feel better now.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You're going straight to hell
Where you’ll be forced to talk about Kirk and his stupid wrist bracelet tattoo for all eternity.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
by Sports2 on Jul 20, 2010 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
what, so when you die, you go to Blog-a-bull?
A true friend stabs you in the front - Oscar Wilde
by dantheman3k on Jul 20, 2010 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Most appealing
SG list: Parker or Ellington
-We could use a little more shooting on this team and either one can provide it. I am not sure Ellington would be available for free, but I think he would be a really good pickup. He still shot decently last year even in limited playing time. Parker is a little old, but he shoots well and plays enough defense that he would be useful.
Bigs list:
Wilcox is somewhat appealing to me. He is athletic and a pretty decent defender. Still only 28 despite being in the league for 10 years. Other than that, Bass seems like too much money and years for an undersized PF.
by JSB on Jul 20, 2010 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Never underestimate the stupidity of David Kahn.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'd roll the dice on Bass and Beli
Bass is a competent backup 4. I’m not sure why he would be available, though.
Belinelli can shoot the ball a little. Plus, he might get a few Italian showgirl types out to the UC.
by Stay Chisel on Jul 20, 2010 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions
SVG reportedly had issues with Bass's defensive acumen and was hesitant to give him playing time
With Rashard Lewis, Ryan Anderson, and Marcin Gortat all deserving playing time too, Bass appears to be a luxury Orlando no longer wants
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
McDyess and Parker, sign me up.
"Boozer's dumb ass jumped. So I dunked on his ass."-Joakim Noah
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 20, 2010 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions
the raptors will need to dump a contract to sign matt barnes
reggie evans?
"I've hacked into your brain. You're throwing a party and no one's showing up."
glad to see
my post at 12ish AM mentioning the actual signing of CJ got taken down from fanshots.
i believe there’s a difference between actually trading for/signing someone versus “reports” of CJ watson to bulls?
…
by grabmesomeBOOZ on Jul 20, 2010 10:41 AM CDT reply actions
and since im back on here...
we should take a flyer on mccants. seen his name tossed around these boards and others.
by grabmesomeBOOZ on Jul 20, 2010 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions
there's a difference
it was discussed in the original fanshot. I didn’t see the need for another. Take it up with the board of directors.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions
even when the fanshot has
much more info than the original? i figured a “clean” fanshot would work better than cluttering a 300+ comment thread with the details of the move.
i guess now i know
by grabmesomeBOOZ on Jul 20, 2010 10:49 AM CDT reply actions
Nope.
Comments + Page Views = Google Juice.
Thomas, Miller, Salmons, James, Pargo, Gray, MLE, and (there is no LLE thanks to the Pargo signing) will not be here with a Max Free Agent...don't get too attached.
by Dionysus2.0 on Jul 20, 2010 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions
heh
that’s not the reason, but all your comments are so precious I don’t see why we’d trash them all for a clean fanshot at 300 comments.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
What about Fernandez?
The Wes Matthews to Portland deal will most likely be completed by this evening. Given what they will be paying him, the limited minutes available there at SG, and Rudy’s reported desire to be moved, it seems highly likely that Rudy will be moved. (This is the view of the writers on the Blazers’ blog at The Oregonian.) We don’t have tons to offer, of course, but we were apparently on Rudy’s alleged “wish list” of five teams. Do you think that the Blazers would give us Rudy in exchange for a package centered on our future number one from the Bobcats? Should we do it if they were. (Rudy is scheduled to make about 2.2 million next year nd would seem like a nice complement to Brewer at SG>)
by thelivingant on Jul 20, 2010 11:02 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I meant for there to be a question mark
What I wanted to ask is whether we should give up our future number one from the Bobcats IF Portland were willing to give us Fernandez in return. I can imagine that pick turning out to be valuable if Larry Brown leaves as coach. That team could get pretty bad if Brown is not around.
by thelivingant on Jul 20, 2010 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't think I want Fernandez now.
He’s still every bit the player he was a week ago, but the Bulls can’t promise him minutes at this point. I’m not interested in dealing with his pouting problems. (well, with Thibs having to deal with his pouting problems)
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Yeah, now that we have Korver, Brewer and Watson
Rudy makes less sense.
by pooriejay on Jul 20, 2010 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
My thoughts too
We already know for a fact that Rudy will pout when not given minutes.
Someone on the current Bulls roster will likely eventually complain about minutes, but it doesn’t make sense to trade for someone who will walk in the door complaining.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
Unless they take James Johnson off of the Bulls roster.
Then it would be worth it.
by JockstrapNoah on Jul 20, 2010 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good write up on Da Bulls on BDL
All I want in life is for UC fans to chant: Deeeeeloooonte during Heat games
Seriously
isnt it time to pull the trigger on the Gortat, Peitris (spelling) for Deng move?
I would do it in a heart beat. Unload Dengs contract and get back two warm bodys that can actually play basketball..
Rose/Watson
Brewer/Peitris
Peitris/korver/JJ
Boozer/taj/Gortat/asik/Noah
Noah/Gortat/Boozer/Asik/taj
Get it done!
You would fail as a GM then.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 6 recs
Not anymore
Pietrus is hurt for about 25-30 games it seems a year (compared to Dengs 12 that we all hate). Deng’s a better player than Pietrus, and I think for depth off hte bench now I’d rather sign one of these bigs…..
I think Deng + Shaq, Deng + Rasho as our big off the bench is better than Pietrus + Gortat.
If we had more minutes to spare maybe I’m for it, but our moves now (Boozer then Watson, Korver, Asik, and Brewer) have me happy we still have Deng.
If we had a Wade or Lebron, then trade Deng for a solid backup C that can start and a good 2/3 when not injured….but now without either of those (and with our underrated moves, I like Deng where he’s at)….how funny 1 week can be.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
by majoyenrac on Jul 20, 2010 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
but I hate when people double up.
Rose/?
Brewer/ Watson
Peitrus/ Korver/ JJ
Boozer/ Taj
Noah/ Gortat/ Asik
One three point shooter and a PG.
Watson is a PG,
who could conceivably play some SG…
and that Deng trade would be downright goofy now, not to say it wasn’t always.
by tuff-gong on Jul 20, 2010 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
why is it goofy?
Large contract, injury prone and can’t hit threes, or won’t. You get a serviceable big behind Noah and a defensive athletic wing that can hit big 3’s.
???
but Gortat and Peitrus make more than Deng.
also…
Asik is supposed to more or less duplicate Gortat, and Peitrus is a poor man’s Deng except with a better outside shot and not nearly as good of a rebounder.
Hasn’t Peitrus also had a pretty lengthy injury history?
by tuff-gong on Jul 20, 2010 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
... No they don't.
Deng (4 years, $50M) > Pietrus (2 years, $10M) + Gortat (4 years, $28M).
If you meant just 2010-11, Pietrus/Gortat make about 700K more than Deng, but we have about 5 million in cap space and we’d fill 2 roster spots as opposed to 1.
Filling the 5th bigman spot and back up wing
By trading your starting SF does not really make sense.
You’ve added two bodies, you didn’t add anything else, Luol will be about playing 35 minutes a game, Pietrus and Gortat combined would play that much. You still need to fill the same amount of court time that you did before the trade.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not a Deng hater, let me get that out of the way.
I respect what he does and don’t think his contract is bad as a lot of people do. That said, it will probably be something we’re looking to get rid of in a couple years.
I’m 50-50 on this deal, though I think it’s highly unlikely at this point.
Why would the Bulls be looking to get rid of his contract
When he’s still the starting SF? You can’t just say something like that and not justify why it’s likely.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
i think the key words are "in a couple of years"
A couple of years from now we could (should) be paying Deng, Boozer, Noah and Rose all $10 million plus a year. If that isn’t a championship core, than you start looking for pieces to move to bring in another superstar or open up cap space for young players. Boozer/Deng being the oldest and most injury prone, probably will be the first to hit the door.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly.
You can’t move Noah, Rose or Boozer and you’ll probably have to upgrade a position somewhere. Deng is the most likely to be injured and/or ineffective in two years.
He's probably going to be injured or ineffective in 2 years
at age 27?
If you believe that, that’s fine, but the probability is that he’s going to be about the same player he is now.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
That's fine
But why move him for a guy who is already 27 (what Deng is in two years) and is already more injury prone.
If you want to trade Deng, fine, but why trade him for the guy that you don’t want him to be and a back up big man that will be on the court 10 minutes a game?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 21, 2010 8:21 AM CDT up reply actions
A) I'm really not even 100% on this trade. As I said before, I'm 50-50. Just trying to present the reasons why the Bulls would consider it. That said, I don't think it'll happen.
B) Gortat would get more than 10 minutes. Brad Miller got over 23 on this team last year. Maybe I’m too worried about Noah’s foot, but if he misses time, this team suffers. Asik can’t be counted on.
C) I don’t know what “the guy you don’t want him to be” means exactly, but I like Pietrus because he can shoot, defend and has a cheap, short-term contract (2 years $10M).
"Filling the 5th bigman spot and back up wing by trading your starting SF does not really make sense."
This may be slightly reductive, but spot-on nonetheless.
Everyone keeps tossing out this "5th big man" term
Is there any doubt he’d be, at least, our 4th big man? And possibly our 3rd? Not to mention, Noah’s plantar fasciitis is a little troubling. Remember the last time he missed significant time? (hint: we lost 10 in a row). I wouldn’t like to see that happen again with Kurt Thomas or Omer Asik starting at C instead of B-Rad.
Yes, there is doubt
We’ve never seen Asik play, and we know Taj is at least a mediocre starter in the NBA. Gortat had a few good playoff games, but has averaged 10 – 15 minutes a game. He’s at best a 4th big man.
And my point stands even if he’s the fourth big man.
If the Bulls are concerned Asik can’t get the job done, they’ll sign someone. They’ve filled every other major hole on the roster.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Deng is a defensive athletic wing
Who hit 3’s at a higher percentage than Pietrus, and Pietrus is injury prone too, more so than Luol (76% of games played vs. 82%).
You’re trading a top 10 starting SF, for a 5th big man and a back up wing. That’s why it’s goofy.
The only reason it was ever discussed is because people thought we might sign the best player in the game, who happens to play Luol’s position. It makes no sense with the team we have.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
Deng does not nor has he ever hit 3s at a higher percentage than Peitrus.
but aside from that I agree.
He has the last three years?
09/10 – Luol .386 vs Pietrus .379
08/09 – .400 vs .359
07/08 – .364 vs .361
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
That's fine but that wasn't the argument.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I thought the argument was "who is the better 3 point shooter?"
Clearly, it’s Pietrus.
I would suggest the argument is exactly what I said it was
Deng shoots at a higher %.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions
I was going back to the original statement from SoulEater
“Large contract, injury prone and can’t hit threes, or won’t. You get a serviceable big behind Noah and a defensive athletic wing that can hit big 3’s.”
I kind of skipped over the part about Pietrus shooting a higher 3P% because A) I know it to be untrue and B) I don’t think it matters because 2 of the last 3 years Deng only shot 20 threes while it’s a big part of Pietrus’ game.
While, he obviously didn't know A
And that’s who I was replying to.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Why is it better
when a less efficient player shoots more? According to your argument if we had a third player who shot .300 from 3, but shot way more than either Deng or Pietrus, then he would be the best of the bunch. Increased volume is never good at a lower efficiency
by MrPants on Jul 20, 2010 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 6 recs
You're missing the point
If Deng shot as many threes as Pietrus, I don’t think he’d hit nearly as many. There’s a reason it was completely cut out of his game for over 2 years.
Does everyone really have a problem saying Pietrus is a better 3 point shooter?
Yes, I have a problem with it.
You’re assuming that small sample size invalidates Deng’s superior percentages. Sample size may make a number less trustworthy because it’s more susceptible to luck or other vagaries, but it doesn’t instanly make it wrong. Here are some other things to consider:
(1) While the sample sizes were smaller, Deng has posted a better percentage in three separate seasons. Unless he’s getting exactly the same lucky breaks over such large periods of time, I don’t think the sample size diminishes his percentages that much.
(2) Deng is a better shooter on long 2’s (16-23 feet) than Pietrus and has been for every year of their careers. And those are much larger sample sizes (at least for Deng).
(3) Deng’s 3% has been trending upward over his career while Pietrus’ has remained relatively stable. It’s pretty common for players to (a) get better at shooting in general over their careers and (b) extend their ranges with practice. See, e.g., the careers of dozens of NBA players. Deng has demonstrated this development. Pietrus has not.
(4) Deng’s lack of threes for the past two years might be attributable to VDN + Boylan not emphasizing it and/or developing systems to place him behind the line. Now, maybe, as yfbb half-jokingly suggests below, Deng is simply too absent-minded to remember to step behind the line. Considering how smart he is as a player, however, I think it’s more likely a failure of coaching — a failure that Thibs has been on record as saying he’s going to fix. So we’ll see. Maybe Deng is preternaturally indispossed to stepping behind the line. But I doubt it.
by arjoseph on Jul 20, 2010 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions 6 recs
What is joke-worthy?
The post by arjoseph was an impeccable refutation. Even if you dispute some of its premises, you can’t argue that it was poorly stated or unsubstantiated.
What's a joke?
The fact that he eviscerated your argument?
by Stacey_Is_King on Jul 20, 2010 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Except for the giant contradiction
Pietrus is a more efficient scorer than Luol Deng. The stats support this. The stats also show, based on eFG, TS%, shot selection(tips, dunks, close, jump) as well as FTA per FGA that the ONLY thing that allows Pietrus to score more efficiently then Luol is the number of 3 pointers Pietrus scores. If you watch them play you see that this is also the case. Yet some how, Luol is also better then Pietrus at this? More potential? Probably, hopefully. Theres no reason to assume that scoring will scale linearly with increased attemps, this is very often not the case in basketball. Hopefully with a real coach and another year of practice Lu can surpass him. But until proven otherwise I don’t see how you can say he is better at the one thing that makes Pietrus more efficient them him.
by reprisal on Jul 20, 2010 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
What is your basis for saying that "there's no reason to assume
…that [Luol Deng’s three-point percentage, since that’s what we’re actually discussing] will scale linearly with increased attempts?" Can you throw some stats my way? I’m seriously asking, not trying to be snarky. As a pre-emptive counter argument, here are some players whose percentages either increased or stayed in the same ballpark with increased attempts year-over-year in the beginning of their careers: Anthony Morrow; Gilbert Arenas; Q-Rich (who actually seems to shoot a lot better on threes the more he shoots, not the other way as some seem to be positing as some type of axiom); Michael Finley; Allan Houston; Mo Williams (who is particularly instructive on this point); Joe Johnson; Jim Jackson; Raja Bell. There are more, but I’m getting tired. Each of those guys didn’t shoot particularly well on threes (or particularly often) in their first couple of years, then improved and shot more. There are also players out there whose three point shooting never varies much from their first couple of years (of both the good and bad variety, and Pietrus seems to be in this camp). But, based on the shooting history of these players I’ve named (and the more I can name, but this reply is already getting too long — maybe I should make a fan post), I think it’s more than an “assumption” that Deng has actually improved his shot and will still shoot the same (or a higher) percentage if he takes more attempts.
if you want to argue Deng will be a better 3pt shooter
in the future or has the potential to be a better 3pt shooter, than you would have a valid point.
But to say:
(1) While the sample sizes were smaller, Deng has posted a better percentage in three separate seasons. Unless he’s getting exactly the same lucky breaks over such large periods of time, I don’t think the sample size diminishes his percentages that much.
When in two of those seasons Deng shot less than 25 3pters and in the third he is .07% better on 200 less attempts is ridiculous and I don’t care how many people rec your original post.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 11:53 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I rec this post
It’s obvious to me Pietrus has been better on this account. That doesn’t mean I prefer Pietrus to Deng after considering them as complete players, but it’s odd, to me, to not concede such an obvious point.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
Nobody has explained yet
how the lack of attempts invalidates Deng’s percentages. Yes, Deng and Pietrus were only .07% different in one of those years, but the other two years the gaps were bigger. Even if they were exactly the same, my point about sample size still stands — a small number of attempts doesn’t automatically mean that the percentage is invalid, especially when that percentage is repeated year after year.
Depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
You are correct if you mean to say an estimator based on a very small sample is not necessarily invalid.
You are not correct if you mean to say an estimator based on a very small sample is anywhere near as valid as an estimator based on a very large sample.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
I am definitely not saying your second point.
I am simply arguing against the people who seem to be saying that Deng’s 3pt% is invalid simply because of a small sample size, and who go the extra step to say (without any citation or evidence) that increasing the sample size will have a detrimental effect on the percentage made; in other replies, I’ve offered contradictory examples that, at the very least, tend to disprove that negative correlation (and might even support the opposite correlation). I’ve also offered some reasons why I think we can trust Deng’s percentage despite the insecurity inherent in a small sample size.
All try to address your last few posts here
It’s not that the sample size invalidates Deng’s percentage (necessarily). I think Deng’s improvement is real, maybe not .400 real, but he has become much better, and can continue to do so. However, his percentage is almost certainly not better than Pietrus’ in a statistically significant way. If he had made one less 3, in each of the last 3 years, then he would have been worse in every year. This doesn’t mean Deng is worse either, it just means these stats are not that useful to us.
Finding good stats for this is very tricky, especially with out synergy sports, or the ability to send complex queries to a database directly. What we can say, as Basketball Smurf described pretty well below, not all 3s, even assisted 3s, are created equal. For 2 years Lu took practice 3s; he took almost all of them completely open, with no defender remotely close to him. He took 0.4 per game, he will never get much more than that, because the situation only happens so often. You’d expect someone to knock these down at their highest percentage and I expect him to continue to score these chances at a high rate.
This past year he added more open catch and shoot 3s (up to 1.2 per game) . These were fairly similar to his practice 3s, so he still shot well on them. However this is a variable percentage shot. Its quality depends on your concentration, how fast your release is, how close your defender is, how quickly he can recover, his ability to challenge your shot, etc, etc. The more attempts you take, the more likely it is some of them are near the lower end of your range; assuming you have good decision-making. Having a coach who runs quality plays and more offensive threats on this team should help offset this problem. Counteracting that to some degree is that the more you make these, the more defensive attention you receive. This is what helps space the floor. Last year Lu was our 2nd or 3rd best 3pt shooter, but no one’s scouting report said to worry about that. They probably still wont worry about it too much.
As for comparable, its difficult, but I found a few pretty good ones I think. In Shawn Marion‘s 3rd season his 3pt shooting to a big jump, .393 on 1.5 attempts. The following season he raised his attempts to 4.5 a game, slipping only slightly to .387. He may have gotten a little lucky that season, or maybe it just took defenses that long to adjust, but in the following 6 seasons he kept shooting 3-4 a game but never over .340. Theres no way Lu is going to keep jacking up shots like Marion. Id see him settling in more like Tayshaun, a guy who has shot a strong percentage on a decent number of attempts. His attempts have varied as much as his percentage, his highest totals being on the strongest Piston’s teams. Seems to me like he has a comfort zone for taking 3s and takes them when get gets them in the offense, but wont go beyond that. Which is probably for the best.
Most of these guys
are guys who improved their 3 point shot. I don’t think anyone is arguing that a player can not improve their 3…that’d be ludicrous. I tried to find a few examples where a player shot a high percentage on limited attempts one year, then increased attempts the following year to see how instructive the percentage was.
Can't believe I have to put it this simply:
Deng career 3PT%: 30.9 on 327 attempts
Pietrus career 3PT%: 35.9 in 1428 attempts
by pooriejay on Jul 20, 2010 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
As if guys don't improve their 3 pt shooting
The last 3 years, which is more relevant, Deng has obviously improved his shot.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Really? If it improved so much over the last 3 years how come he only attempted it 40 in 2 of those years?
Seriously, in 07-08 and 08-09 he averaged 21 three point attempts. Half of those were desperation, shot-clock-saving heaves.
because the coaches absolutely sucked?
Really?
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
He was told by Skiles to shoot the long 2s instead
Vinny either encouraged the same thing or didn’t try to break Deng of the habit. I’d agree, we can’t assume Deng will shoot the 3 at such a high rate as his attempts increase. At the same time, there’s not much distance between a 3 and where he takes many of his jumpers.
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
by snley on Jul 20, 2010 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think Vinny actually "coached"
he just wanted “the guys” to “work hard”. I read that interview with Vinny from yesterday, and then the Thibs’ interview. WOW what a difference!
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
well the reason Skiles told him to stop shooting 3s
is because he sucked at shooting them and it was hurting his overall game. Skiles doesn’t have a problem with the guys on the Bucks shooting 3s because they make them. Hopefully Deng has improved his 3pt shot to where he can start shooting a high volume with a high percentage but right now I would go with Pietrus being better from distance.
But Deng is better at everything else, so I would take Deng
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Thank you.
I don’t know if people got too pulled up in the Deng vs. Pietrus overall argument (obviously I vote Deng) or what, but “Pietrus is a better 3 point shooter than Deng” should be a very obvious statement to make.
Deng vs. Pietrus+Gortat, though, including contract length and salaries? Different argument.
The only stat you've given to prove the "obvious" statement
is number of attempts. I gave you lots of reasons above why that’s not really any proof at all, but all you said was “ugh.” I fail to see how it’s “obvious.”
I'll say it again:
Deng career 3PT%: 30.9 on 327 attempts
Pietrus career 3PT%: 35.9 in 1428 attempts
How is that not convincing enough for you?
Because he changed his shot
You’re discounting the fact he’s a different player now.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions
wait
because Deng shot .07% better on 3pters this season than Pietrus he is a better 3pt shooter, despite the fact that Pietrus took more than 3 times as many 3’s as Deng this year?
I don’t get that. Is Deng a better 3pt shooter than Ray Allen? Deng didn’t even take enough 3 pters this year to qualify in the NBA.com rankings. Sample size matters.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Can't believe it's taken this long for someone else to see it that way.
Pietrus is considered a 3-point shooter. Deng is not. Until he does anything worse recognizing from 3 point distance, it’s laughable to say otherwise.
Shaq is better than Noah
Just look at their career numbers.
How can you not be convinced?
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
by runningman on Jul 20, 2010 6:17 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
hah!
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
You ignore the fact
that the replacement shot isnt another Luol 3 point attempt. Its a Luol long 2(more or less) Pietrus’ eFG last year was .540 Luol’s was .482. Pietrus’ TS% was .555 Luol’s was .531.
If you factor in that shooting 3s also helps other players offense, simply by being farther way from the post for double teams, etc. It really is pretty obvious.
eFG – This statistic adjusts for the fact that a 3-point field goal is worth one more point than a 2-point field goal.
TS% – True shooting percentage is a measure of shooting efficiency that takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws.
by reprisal on Jul 20, 2010 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
In other words:
TS% and eFG will be higher for those who take more 3’s and FTs. So it’s a proxy for number of attempts in this argument. For instance, Jarvis Hayes had a eFG% of .512 last year; is he a better shooter than Deng? Is he even a better 3-point shooter? I pose the same question regarding Jeff Green, Lamar Odom, Keith Bogans, Willie Green, Acie Law, Ron Artest, Andre Iguodala, Mario Chalmers, and Rudy Gay, all of whom have higher eFG% than Deng but post worse FG% and 3pt%.
by arjoseph on Jul 20, 2010 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
It goes back to
Why is it better
when a less efficient player shoots more? According to your argument if we had a third player who shot .300 from 3, but shot way more than either Deng or Pietrus, then he would be the best of the bunch. Increased volume is never good at a lower efficiency
eFG and TS% are measures of scoring efficiency. They show that Pietrus is more efficient despite shooting a lower raw percentage. So “better 3-point shooter” is definitely a subjective statement.
TS% is generally a better metric with Deng, since he closes the difference, or surpasses many of those guys in efficiency by getting to the free throw line because he does not attempt those 3s and attempts shots closer to the basket. That of course doesn’t help with spacing the floor, for what ever thats worth.
by reprisal on Jul 20, 2010 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
If hypothetically
Player A shoots .35% from 3 over 250 shots a year, or 1000 shots for his career
Player B shoots 37% from 3 for 120 shots a year or 480 shots for his career
And Player C shoots 34% from 3 for 330 shots a year 1320 for his career.
I’m going to say Player C is likely the best long range shooter, followed by player A and then followed by player B….just as a 3pt shooter.
Player C has the lowest % but shoots the rock quite a bit more and isn’t that much lower.
Player A shoots quite a bti more than player B and has a higher % than player C, but I’d say given the more attempts I’d slightly prefer player C.
Player B has a nice sampling as a shooter, the highest % would tell you he’s efficient at it, but I’d go with Players A and C as more tried and true (less variable to fall) shooters because they’ve done a good percentage over quite a lot more attempts.
Deng seems like he can now hit the 3 ball well right now, but Pietrus has shot the ball much better over many more attempts that the standard deviance favors Pietrus, as Deng’s numbers could fall back if he forces the 3 again, and he still needs more attempts to prove that good % under small amt of attempts would hold up over many more attempts.
But still Deng overall > Pietrus, I’m just chiming in.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
I disagree that "better 3-point shooter" is subjective.
It is definitely objective, but I think there’s a disconnect in perspective. Some seem to be arguing that “better” means “almost as accurate but more prolific.” Some argue (like me) that “better” simply means more accurate. Both are objective statements.
I know that TS% and eFG% measure efficiency, and the fact that Pietrus’ numbers are higher certainly mean that he has scored more efficiently than Deng in the past. I haven’t argued against that. We all know that Deng takes lots of long twos, statistically one of the least efficient shots in the game. Pietrus doesn’t. Win, Pietrus.
But “efficiency” wasn’t pooriejay’s argument. He said “‘Pietrus is a better 3 point shooter than Deng’ should be a very obvious statement to make.” And he’s wrong.
Well the problem with ignoring scoring effeciency
is that the end result seems to be Deng is padding his 3 point percentage by choosing to take a large portion of his shot attempts as long 2s as opposed to taking more 3s at a reduced percentage, even tho that would most likely produce more efficient offense…is that really better?
If you're saying that Deng is "padding" his 3pt%
by taking “better” threes than Pietrus, I’d like to see some evidence, because I doubt it. Looking at the past three years, here’s the percentage of assisted threes taken by Deng: 96.9, 87.5 (his best year percentage wise), 75.0. That’s a high ratio, so those are probably quality looks. But here’s Pietrus’ assisted ratios for those same years: 86.2, 91.3, 89.4. Exact same ballpark of lots of quality spot-up looks in rhythm off of passes for both. I don’t see the “padding.”
For 3 straight years Deng took less than 25 3pt shots
its not padding. Its an incredibly small sample size. If Deng was as confident in his 3pt shot as the people on BaB are, why in the hell did he not take more before this season? Is he dumb? Are you telling me Deng can shoot 39% from 3pt range, but he chooses to shoot one foot in front of the line? Are you calling Deng insane? Or if someone simply explained to Deng 3 is more than 2, would his world open up and he’d transform into Reggie Miller?
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 11:59 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Deng is working within whatever offensive system is in place.
If that system doesn’t plan for him to be behind the line, no, he’s not going to be behind the line. It’s not like he’s a completely free agent on the floor as you would be in a pick-up game — they’re running plays. Also, as we know, Deng is a good rebounder at his position; he’s probably looking to crash the boards more than most and thus brings himself inside the line instead of hanging back. There are plenty of good, basketball-related reasons why he hasn’t shot the shot as much that are much more plausible than insanity or stupidity.
Basically
I agree best 3 point shooter isnt subjective, thats why you have to use efficiency. On average when an otherwise great shooter takes a heat check 3 with 20 seconds on clock, it hurts your team. Passing up a 3 to attack the rim can also greatly help a team. But passing up 3s can also hurt your team. Part of being a great 3 point shooter is having the right 3 point shot selection. If Lu is really a better 3 point shooter than Pietrus he needs to shoot more. If he would be hurting the team by shooting more, then he isnt as good.
I agree with your hypothetical statements.
But I’ve seen no evidence that Lu would hurt the team by shooting more threes, meaning I’ve seen no evidence that he would shoot a worse percentage if he shot more threes. I know pooriejay has been repeating the same mantra about Deng’s career average (which is weighted down by his rookie year, when he took the most attempts and shot the worst), but that doesn’t prove anything. He’s a better shooter than he used to be, and I don’t see any argument that his recent 3pt% is a mirage. More 3-point attempts from him can only be a good thing, and I think we’re going to see him taking the shot a lot more this year. If he does, any argument for Pietrus over him based on efficiency evaporates.
i agree Deng should take more 3s
I think what is getting lost in translation is the question of whether he could take more 3s and maintain his efficiency. In a perfect world, Deng would shoot 3’s at the same rate no matter how many he took. But in an NBA game, its not that simple.
The reason Deng hasn’t take more 3s in the past is because he doesn’t get enough “comfortable” looks (as in comfortable for him) to set and shoot. If he had more “comfortable” looks, presumably he would shoot more 3s (b/c if you got an open look and felt good about it why wouldn’t you shoot).
The difference between Deng and someone who is a prolific 3 pt shooter is that a prolific 3 pt shooter is taking 3s no matter what. Deng is shooting open 3s when he is comfortable. Ray Allen is shooting contested 3s because its part of his game to shoot 3 to 5 3’s a night. There are only going to be so many clean looks during a game. So even though Deng’s percentage may be higher, Allen is the better shooter b/c he is taking the more difficult 3pt attempts.
As Deng starts to shoot more 3s, less and less will be under circumstances where he feels most comfortable. The more he shoots, the more attention the defense pays to him, the less comfortable those shots become. Even with Thibs encouragement, I don’t see him taking more than 1.5 to 2 a game. Which is fine, taking the corner 3 consistently would be a big improvement. But don’t go signing him up for the 3pt contest yet.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 21, 2010 12:21 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree with your points in the abstract.
I’m not sure if it applies to Deng. I don’t remember Deng passing up on threes because someone closes out, e.g. I think it’s more common that he’s simply not behind the line when he gets the ball, so the shot isn’t an option.
I also dispute that Pietrus is taking more “uncomfortable” threes than Deng. The percentage of assisted threes for both are practically the same (high 80s to low 90s). I know it’s possible for a shot to be both assisted and contested, but that seems rare; both are most likely shooting the majority of their threes on ball rotation and kick-outs. Orlando’s offense has put Pietrus in the position to shoot that shot much more than Chicago’s offense has put Deng in that position. Maybe some of that is on Deng not setting up behind the line, but I don’t see how it tends to diminish the reliablity of his accuracy numbers.
They dont have to be that uncomfortable
Having to rush your release, or alter the arc of the shot even slightly, is enough to knock a few percentage points off the quality of the attempt.
Obviously Orlando’s offense does help Pietrus…but we cant possibly hope to control this experiment for the Vinny effect.
Deng was bad at shooting 3s and long 2s back then
It was a sensible developmental move, but never used to push Deng’s range further out like it should have been. Anyways, Skiles’s teams usually take a below average number of 3s. The Bucks were 5th in attempts last season, but that was an outlier. The year before they were 24th and his Bulls teams were usually in that vicinity.
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
by snley on Jul 20, 2010 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
arjoseph a couple posts up from here
(4) Deng’s lack of threes for the past two years might be attributable to VDN + Boylan not emphasizing it and/or developing systems to place him behind the line.
Small sample size
and ability to effectively space the floor.
In 07-08 and 08-09 Luol attempted less then one 3 every 2 games. In 09-10 he attempted just over 1. You simply cant consider him a 3 point threat.
Pietrus takes just over 4 threes per game and you have to guard him accordingly. If he only took the widest of open threes then he would presumably hit them at a higher rate. However his coaches ask him to fill a role in an offense. A role that so far Luol cant fill.
I agree that Pietrus isn’t as efficient as you’d like and trade Deng for him only made sense if we got LeBron. But simply comparing FG% is very silly.
by reprisal on Jul 20, 2010 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Deng's new coach considers him a 3-pt threat.
He said he wants him taking more.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
So far he hasnt been
Im cautiously optimistic. Really he should be able to do it. But this digression has been about the prior body of work.
by reprisal on Jul 20, 2010 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
And that's fine.
A 23 ft shot is probably better than a 22 ft shot most of the time. But I don’t think you can call him a “threat” from deep. At least not yet. I’m sure teams would be happy to watch him jack up 4 threes a game.
if 3 pt shooting is more important to you than defensive ability,
why trade for Pietrus when you can start Korver? Korver’s a great SF 3 point threat, and, like, Pietrus, pretty bad on D (OK, he’s worse than P… but c’mon. The point should remain.)
A true friend stabs you in the front - Oscar Wilde
... You completely lost me.
I’m not doubting that Korver could start at SF in the even of a Deng trade, especially alongside Brewer. Pietrus is probably better off the bench, too.
But are you trying to say Pietrus is bad defensively? Because I’m pretty sure he’s commonly regarded as a defensive stopper.
He's OK, but he's not nearly as good as Deng on D.
I would even go so far as to say Pietrus is average on D. If we’re willing to overlook defense for “better” 3 point shooting, let’s just start Korver. I’d rather have Korver than Pietrus starting, in all due honesty…
…but my point is give me Deng over either.
A true friend stabs you in the front - Oscar Wilde
by dantheman3k on Jul 20, 2010 10:26 PM CDT up reply actions
oops
misread that .386 as a .306…didn’t realize he was that good last year.
but you can’t really count the 2 years previous, in which he attempted a combined 42
Why can't you count them?
I think it’s realistic to think that he’s a .380 3-point shooter. It’s buttressed by the fact that he shoots right around .400 on long twos. The 22-foot shots he takes that drive us crazy aren’t that much different than a 24-footer (especially in the corners, where the 3-point line actually is 22 feet away from the basket).
by arjoseph on Jul 20, 2010 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
And it's worth noting
that we have an actual coach who really seems basketball-smart. I bet he tells Deng to stop with the 21-footers and just move 1 foot back for the 3pt shot.
God, exactly right.
People seem to be arguing that since Deng hasn’t shot as many 3’s in the past that he’s actually incapable of shooting them. Which of course is completely erroneous.
by arjoseph on Jul 20, 2010 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
it's just as erroneous to assume
he doesn’t know 3>2
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 20, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
his bones are brittle
it figures that his brain is, too.
maybe he forgot.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
haha yeah
I actually completely agree with this. i still think Pietrus has a little better track record as a 3 point shooter… But it’s moot since Deng is younger and better in every other aspect of the game.
I really hope this is the year he stops shooting the long 2s.
Thibs specifically mentioned designing more plays for the Deng corner three point shot, where he is lights out.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
He mentioned it on his first day
There’s no chance that this isn’t going to be a point of emphasis.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
I'm definitely in favor of it.
Someone in the starting lineup has to hit threes occasionally.
Yes
If we had a superstar win (Lebron or Wade, aka the 2 best players in the game, then I’d be in for trading down Deng’s talent and contract in order to get 2 plug in play good solid role players in Pietrus (starting 3 and backup 2) and Gortat, backup 5, injury insurance in a second.
Since we didn’t land one fo those great 2, why deplete our O further by taking a risk on a bigger injury guy like Pietrus and getting Gortat, who will be used a bit more here perhaps? than in Orlando, but not much more so.
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
"Deng is a defensive athletic wing"
No he’s not. I think you have him confused with Igudola
He's not a athletic freak like Iggy
But Deng can play defense pretty well, and he’s relatively athletic. There is more to athleticism than dunking.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sure.. but I don't know why that matters
It’s a trade for Pietrus we’re discussing.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Sorry but he really isn't
See that’s part of the issue with Deng. I’m not worried about him dunking. I’m worried about him being able to fill a lane on a fast break or start off one with his dribble. Or catching the ball off a Rose or Boozer double team and being able to put the ball on the floor with his dribble and finish.
He’s a decent to good defender, not great. I watched Antwan Jamison play him like a puppet in the playoffs as well so enough with the great defender stuff. Deng proved his value this off season…Not much.
Who said great?
Why would we have traded him? There were no SF’s available that were better than Deng outside of the one who went to Miami.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Well I don't think
A Pietrus/Gortat trade is the worst thing possible. You get an atletic guy in Pietrus with playoff experience that can knock down 3s and a more than serviceable Center in Gortat. Plus you get out of the Deng contract
Why would you want out of the Deng contract?
You’re team is worse.
Rose, Brewer, Pietrus, Boozer, Noah is not as good as that team with Deng.
Adding a 5th big man who will play 15 minutes a game at the expense of making your starting unit worse is stupid.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Grinder I'll be honest
I’m just not that big of a fan of Deng anymore. There was a time I thought he was going to be the next Paul Pierce. But instead he’s everything that is wrong with Stat worshippers. If I have to hear 18 and 8 one more time I’m going to vomit. lol.
He’s just not an impact player to me. He gets his numbers but I swear half the time I don’t know how or when he got them. Maybe Thibs has a plan to use him and maybe with Boozer he’ll have more chance to do other things. I hope he plays well this season and stays injury free and steps back a foot to shoot 3s.
Well he's not a superstar
He’s a guy who is very good. You are trading a guy who is very good for two guys who aren’t. I don’t know how that helps you.
You want to trade him for two guys who have less of an impact than he does? How does that help?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions
All I've seen from
Pietrus in the playoffs is impact. I’ve seen impact from Gortat as well. That’s the one thing I haven’t seen from Deng. I don’t care about his talent, I care about his fit and impact on this team. My God you’re talking about a guy who hadn’t been healthy enough to play in the playoffs in 3 years. What’s more impactful than that?
Then you weren't watching.
Look at what they both did in the playoffs.
Luol at 21: 22,9 and 4 while shooting .524 from the field
at 24: 19 & 5, while guarding LeBron James.
Pietrus:
at age 26: 10 & 2 shooting .483 from the field
at age 27: 8 pts, 1.4 rbs, 0.7 ast, .438 from the field.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Nah I know what I was watching
Deng hasn’t played enough playoff basketball to even warrant the discussion of his impact in them
He plays more than Pietrus?
13,000 minutes vs. 9,000 and he’s younger.
800 playoff minutes vs. 1,100 playoff minutes.
You’re telling me that 300 minutes difference is enough to say Pietrus has more of an impact, even though every single statistical measure says otherwise? More so than the 4,000 more minutes Deng has played in the regular season?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
He's the Bulls 3rd offensive option
and has a good all around game. I think he’s pretty damned good for a 3rd option.
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You don't understand stats if you think you "stat worshippers" love 18 and 8.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I understand them enough
to know it doesn’t mean everything. but every time someone discusses the detriments of Luol Deg, there are a million and one Stats thrown around here. One of them being “18 and 8” or “He’s a great rebounder for his position”
"He's a great rebounder for his position"
there’s a stat in there?
how is that different than saying he can’t shoot 3’s
go ahead, give your argument as to why he sucks without giving a stat or referencing one
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
That's just it
I’m not dependent on stats. I’ve never claimed to be. There seems to be this feeling that if you don’t have stats to make an argument then your argument is void or invalid. That’s BS to me. There are other factors that are involved and if the Bulls spent the whole offseason trying to trade Luol Deng with no success then that tells me more about his relative value the PER.
He’s a good player. But not to the point where it’s inconceivable to trade him for Gortat/Pietrus or Iggy.
No, I'm saying tell me why he sucks. And I'll let you not use stats.
You just typed 50 words without once saying why he’s bad.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Sure...
He’s an unathletic, injury prone SF who’s best shot is the worst in basketball. He can’t dribble or make plays for his teammates. He needs plays ran for him in order to be an effective offensive threat. He routinely disappears in the 4th qtrs of games. Nor is he consistent offensively. He gives a good effort but is not a great defender. He’s a stat stuffer but not an impact player.I’ve never said he’s bad or that he’s a terrible player. But I don’t think he’s the best fit at SF.
To wit:
He absolutely DOES NOT need plays run for him! In fact, that’s one of his biggest offensive strengths.
And his best shot might be the worst in basketball (I agree), but our new head coach has specifically said he wants him to shoot more corner 3’s. It seems reasonable to assume that Deng can just move back a step, so his long 2’s become 3’s. He’s shot well enough from there to show he’s got the capability to take and make that shot.
I think he’s a good fit at SF, and that he’s a better defender than “good”, but I agree he isn’t “great”.
In any case, he’s got a solid all-around game, is a good team player, and is our 3rd option on offense – and a damned good one.
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
i disagree
Deng is a system player. He absolutely does need to be in a structured offense to have the most impact. I think he would be so much more effective in Utah as opposed to Orlando, where they are running much offense but spot up shooting and drive and kick.
For Deng to be effective he has to be on the move, running the baseline and cutting to the basket. You can’t play street ball with Deng, which you can with Rose or a guy like Gordon or Salmons.
That is why Deng struggled so much in VDN “system.” There wasn’t a system, they were playing street ball.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions
But "needs a structured offense" != "needs plays run for him"
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I concur.
Any good offense will have movement designed off of the ball. That’s what Deng needs. Rose and Boozer running a pick-and-roll as the primary scoring option might be one thing. But designing Deng to run off a screen created by Noah is part of a structured offense. It doesn’t mean that a playing is being ran for him. He’s the third option on that play, after Rose and Boozer.
Clearly not having something ran for him but clearly in a structured offense.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
last year Deng had the 2nd most plays
run for him of any player on the team. So I don’t know how you can come to the conclusion he doesn’t need plays run for him. If they are running an off the ball screen for Deng to get a jumper or cut to the basket, that is having a play run for you.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions
That's a fallacious argument
just because the anemic offense of last year’s Bulls ran plays for Deng a lot doesn’t mean he needs it. Anyway, how are you determining that? Usage rate?
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
eye test and usage rate
you can’t say he doesn’t need plays run for him and than when someone points out he had a ton of plays run for him, than say well he didn’t really “need” it.
The Deng jab step 20 ft jumper was a trademark of the Bulls offense this year.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Usage rate doesn't mean
“plays run for a player”, it simply means the number of possessions where that player either took a shot or turned the ball over. And the eye test fails, too, because (Vinny jokes aside) you don’t know what the play was designed to be vs. what transpired on the possession.
The fact that MULTIPLE coaches and other players say that he doesn’t need plays run for him, coupled with the fact that he does well after offensive rebounds or broken plays supports my opinion.
However, I will concede that both sides of this debate are speculation, since we don’t have the playbook along with plays called to know if it was in fact called for Deng or not, but I’ll go with my observation and experts’ opinions in forming my own.
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
right...
….and offensive rebound put back increases your usage but is hardly a play run for anyone.
And as I’ve said, I wouldn’t consider running a screen for Deng while the “actual play” is going on somewhere else is having a play run for him. Sure, he’s moving in a designed way, and if the play breaks down, he may very well take the shot. That doesn’t mean the play was ran specifically for him.
At least not in the sense I thought we were discussing.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
could you quote these multiple coaches and players?
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions
That's a reasonable request
but after some searching, I couldn’t find any direct quotes. So, you can choose to take my word for it or not.
"eye test"
really? You counted over 82 games with just your eyes and your memory?!?!
The Deng jab step 20 ft jumper is a perfect example of plays NOT being ran for him. And, if it were, it’s the absolutely wrong use for him and thus irrelevant.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
If your'e the primary option, sure.
But not if you’re the third option.
Think of it this way: Rose and Boozer run a pick & roll, Brad Miller sets a baseline pick for Deng then fades to the top of the key were Boozer just was.
That’s not a play run for Deng or Miller, but it’s structured and way better for Deng than: Rose and Boozer run the pick & roll, everyone else stand around and wait.
And where did you get the numbers that he had the second most plays ran for him? Not that I’m necessarily disagreeing, I’ve just never heard that being logged somewhere.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
The only thing I can think of
is Usage rate, but I’m waiting to hear from BS before I show how that’s basically irrelevant to my point.
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Wait:
How can you arrive at “needs plays run for him” from “had plays run for them”?
That might be (but probably isn’t) a necessary condition for your claim, but it isn’t a sufficient condition.
Who were the Bulls going to run plays for last year?
Hinrich? Taj? Noah?
Deng got the ball because he was the second best scoring option after Rose. And I didn’t see plays being ran for him. I saw Rose driving and kicking it out, and Deng being the only one prepared to hit the shot.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
How can you be inconsistent
If you are a stat stuffer?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Pietrus is more injury prone and is not an impact player or
even really starting caliber. There’s a reason he’s been a bit player his whole career.
The only thing that Pietrus does better than Luol is shoot threes. I don’t see Pietrus creating for teammates any more often than Deng and his ball handling is only slightly better than Luol’s, but not enough for it to really matter.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Hmmm....
He’s an unathletic, injury prone SF who’s best shot is the worst in basketball. He can’t dribble or make plays for his teammates. He needs plays ran for him in order to be an effective offensive threat. He routinely disappears in the 4th qtrs of games. Nor is he consistent offensively. He gives a good effort but is not a great defender. He’s a stat stuffer but not an impact player.I’ve never said he’s bad or that he’s a terrible player. But I don’t think he’s the best fit at SF.
You can only say those things using stats, so they’re irrelevant.
My counter: Deng is a very long player who uses that to shoot off over people and stay in front of guys. His constant movement keeps the defense on their toes and guessing; they can’t clog the lane for Derrick Rose and he’s always open to bail out teammates in trouble. They simply kick to him and he hits the open shot. He’s a great defender.
I win.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
i think the fact that he gets stats without being noticable
might be a hint that he can get his points, etc without being the focal point of the offense.
by SidM on Jul 20, 2010 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
How is the team better?
You’re upset Deng isn’t a superstar at 25, well Pietrus isn’t either.
You saw him make a few highlight plays.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions
If you dont use stats
or at least a subjective analysis of his play and instead just mention some flimsy message board rumors about trying to dump him your argument is going to look really weak
So, what you're basically saying is:
“Grinder, I’ll be honest: this is a totally sentimental and highly subjective argument I’m making because I personally don’t like watching Deng’s game.”
Which is fine. Spurious, I’d argue, but fine.
by jpx7 on Jul 20, 2010 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
It gives more flexibility
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Wrong
you lost me when you said Deng was athletic.
Deng + athletic = major fail…
Do you watch basketball?
that guys a freaking robot who has the lateral quickness of my 8yr old..
Top 10 starting SF?
LBJ
PP
Ganobli
Grainger
Carmelo
VC
Artest
Hedo
Butler
marion
Prince
R lewis
G Wallace
Odom
J smith
Iggy
Gay
Battier
Ariza
Pietrus
Just to name a few who i think are better. some are borderline but you get the point. Top 10, not a chance..
well
ginobli, Iggy, J smith, rashard lewis, Odom…hell pietrus and VC are pretty questionable…
and come on, Marion, Prince or Battier better than Deng?
You guys missed the point a while ago
its more than Deng Vs pietrus. Its his terrible contract, its the polish hammer we get along with him.
Think guys..
It's not a terrible contract.
That’s the point. Compare him to the other SF’s of similar talent. Look at what Rudy Gay just got.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Well we cant even agree
on who is similiar talent because you think he’s top 10. So how can i compare his contract.
You could do some research.
That’d be an excellent start.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I have all the research I need
Deng is not a top 10 SF in the NBA period….
he’s overpaid..
he doesnt fit this team..
He’s not a good defender.
Ok, I know never to take your posts seriously again
because it’s clear you either
a) irrationally dislike Deng
b) don’t know crap about basketball
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You should really, really try harder to understand basketball.
I mean, really. Your enjoyment would be much higher.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I understand
bball just fine! its you guys who defend dung that im having a hard time understanding..
You have a hard time understanding it
Because you don’t understand basketball.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
If you relly understood it then you wouldn't
get so defensive about opinions. Why do so many people here get their panties in a bunch and get to name calling when Luol Deng name comes up? I don’t get that.
We're defensive about the lack of knowledge.
It’s not simply an opinion to say Deng isn’t good. That’s a value judgement and it’s not opinion that’s irrefutable. It’s not the same as saying you like chocolate more.
Deng shuts guys down routinely on defense. That doesn’t reference a stat, though. Hmm… Deng cuts great without the basket and he’s never out of position on defense. I don’t think there are stats on those things yet.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Ignorance is obnoxious.
That’s why. There is no reason people shouldn’t be informed. If you say something that is wrong, you should be corrected. I would hope people correct me when I’m mistaken.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Right. Ok.
So you’re right? And judging Luol Deng for what he’s actually done in his career is ignorance? Ok. I’ll let his play this season be the judge of that. Unless you’re Phil Jackson using the alias of “Grinder in Training” your opinion is as valid as mine and worth about the same. This thing started with you saying Deng was an “Athletic Defensive wing”
I could’ve called you ignorant and and basketball retarded for that statement but I didn’t. I argued you on the merits of your opinion. No matter how flawed it was. Get over your self righteousness about the game.
Right, all of our eyeballs are crap.
So the only thing we have to differentiate ourselves is the use of stats.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Just because he's merely another BaB member
doesn’t mean the opinions have the same value. One is backed up by statistics, experts’ assessments (i.e. other coaches), and observation. The other is just people saying stuff without supporting it.
Supporting what Kozzer?
What is not supportive about calling Deng an injury prone, nonathletic SF who can’t create his own shot or dribble? Or that he disappears in 4th qtrs. Why do I need to add PER or other stats to make that point?
by Dils on Jul 20, 2010 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Pietrus can't do anything of that sort either, which is why it's so funny everyone thinks he's awesome.
All he can do is hit a 3-point shot. He’s been in the league for 7 years and not once has he put up an average offensive output. Defensively he’s not close to Deng, but I’m sure you can continue to talk more bullshit to convince yourself otherwise.
"Boozer's dumb ass jumped. So I dunked on his ass."-Joakim Noah
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 20, 2010 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Jesus.
I don’t think the argument was if Deng was the better player. I think it was who the better fit was. But you can read what you want to read out of it. A 3pt shooting athletic SF and a better than average Center sure seem like a good fit to me but whatever.
If Pietrus was Ben Gordon from the outside, your point would make more sense.
He’s a good outside shooter, but not elite enough to mask his inability to score from anywhere else on the court. So, even if he was on par with Deng defensively you’re downgrading and thus getting a worse “fit.”
"Boozer's dumb ass jumped. So I dunked on his ass."-Joakim Noah
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 20, 2010 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think that mentioning good and bad points
Is the best way to make your point in lieu of statistics.For instance, in support of Deng over Pietrus (which I cannot even believe is even up for debate):
- While he lacks ball-handling skills (namely a left) he is still quick off the dribble and can take your average SF just on his first step alone.
- He’s is certainly not super athletic, but is long-armed and patient enough on defense that he both frustrates and shuts down an opponent on any given night.
- His perimeter stroke is superior to Pietrus’ because he actually can take a variety of them. Yes, his 3pt effectiveness is primarily from the corner but he is a guy you can count on to spot up from almost anywhere on the floor and put up a quality shot.
- His past wrist injuries, in my opinion, make him hesitant to take the ball to the basket strong like he should. Even then he penetrates far more often than Pietrus and that also results in Deng being a superior rebounder.
- Putting aside his unwillingness to step back a foot to turn a long 2 into a 3, I think he is an intelligent player who plays great team defense and is rarely caught out of position. He does have a tendency to fade in big games, but unlike Pietrus, Deng’s role isn’t just to sit beyond the arc and chuck 3s like their is no tomorrow. There is a reason why Deng has been a consistent starter in this league who has averaged more minutes than Pietrus.
by Dr. Handsome, D.D.S. on Jul 20, 2010 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
What do you mean?
Judge him for what he’s done in his career? What he’s done is far superior to Pietrus and Gortat.
How am I wrong? You haven’t argued me on the merits of my opinion. You’ve argued nothing. You said you don’t like the guy, that doesn’t mean anything.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions
"... what he's actually done ..."
How in the hell do you define this, besides statistical metrics (which you abhor and eschew) or something pulled out of your ass (which I abhor and eschew)?
I dont understand
how you can tell someone they would fail at GM when they would add solid depth at the 5 and a much much cheaper albeit not as good replacement for Deng at the 3. You just signed a sharp shooting 3. Deng is constantly hurt, disappears for large stretches of EVERY game. Shoots the worst dam shot in the NBA most of the time with his LONG 2 and cant stay in front of many of the starting 3’s in the league.
No.. we didn't
We already have the best sharpshooter in the league at the 3 first of all.
Second, Deng now shoots 3’s at a higher percentage so that doesn’t even matter.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions
not only has Pietrus also been hurt
but he’s only averaged 21.5 minutes a game over the course of his career…hence, he’s actually “disappeared” for more than half of EVERY game.
The basis of this being a good trade
is the assumption that Pietrus is better than Deng. No GM in the league would agree with that assumption. So in reality this trade is to bring in an overpaid backup C to play 10-15 minutes a night and an inferior 3 in Pietrus to come off the bench. It just makes no sense at all.
by Dr. Handsome, D.D.S. on Jul 20, 2010 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
Throw in that the Bulls already have both a back-up center...
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think that's the basis of it at all
I’d say it’s splitting up one long, expensive contract into 2 relatively flexible ones while not losing much talent wise.
You assume that we do not miss much talentwise
When in reality we’re putting who at 3 and 2? And will that 3 and 2 pairing be better than Deng/Brewer whose position also maintains offensive depth on the bench?
by Dr. Handsome, D.D.S. on Jul 20, 2010 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
But you are losing
A lot talent wise. That’s the thing.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gortat's contract
Is great for his production and position. RASHARD LEWIS and to a lesser extent bc it’s got 1 more full year and 1 $5M next year Vince Carter are teh inflexible ones.
The Magic want luxury tax relief perhaps, but they’ve kept Gortat for a reason, he’s good/solid and perhaps cheap (even if he kept his low 13.9 PER/14.8 last year in the playoffs PER, he’s still a value for his age game and size in the NBA.
Add in the playoff battles, his success stepping in for Howard when he’s been suspended, and I’d say Gortat is one of hte better contracts the Magic have. THe problem is Lewis and Carter are so inflexible and they think they’re close (and they seem to be close) that they have to take a risk and make a trade. And for them with the fact that Howard never misses a game unless he suspends himself, Gortat’s underused for his pay.
But he’s still a bargain, a true C, 26 yrs old, good defender who’s making what a bit less than now 29-30 year old pretty much just a PF, rew Gooen
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
Fair enough
I don’t have a strong opinion either way on Gortat. I just recall from looking at Magic blogs during the Redick-ordeal that they wanted to dump him.
I think they'd like to dump him
More because they know they could get something for him and can’t really dump Lewis and it’ll be tough to get equal value for Carter (even if Carter’s not great, he’s likely better than the crap they’d get from a trade).
Gortat to them is a cheaper and less used version of Hinrich, a luxury to have, especially when Dwight plays as many minutes and games as he does…..
Andt hey are a team in desperate need of another consistent scorer, whcih Vinsanity didn’t provide, Nelson’s streaky decent, and Lewis shows up every few games and is or last year was pretty downright bad , at least for that contract, he’s never really lived up to that contract for a stretch of games, in the others…..
2010-2011: I put the Scottie-Barkley Rockets feud curse on the Wade-James-Bosh trio.....
not a good defender????
and once again, how is he overpaid if his contract is worth less than current market value?
he isnt a good defender
who you guys kidding. When has he locked a guy down? What has he done that you guys say he’s a good defender?
When he has not locked someone down?
80% of the guys he defends are worse against him than their season averages. Fact.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Go ask Antwan Jamison or
John Salmons if they felt “locked down” by Luol Deng. lol
go ahead, ask them
A SG and a PF? Really? Okay, go ask them.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=denglu01&p2=salmojo01
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
c'mon
Deng guarded both those guys when they played. And both those guys, especially, Salmons last year, see a bunch of minutes at the 3.
by Basketball Smurf on Jul 20, 2010 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions
We also had a rookie PF and an undersized SG
Makes his job pretty tough. He should be even better this year.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Salmons still sucked when he played the Bulls
which ever way you slice it.
And Deng guarded James, didn’t he?
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Jamison would be like,
“uhh no. because I was getting locked down by the Taj.”
by tuff-gong on Jul 20, 2010 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Deng was busy covering LeBron when they played Antawn.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
hee hee
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
PWNDCOMPREHENSIONFAIL
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Correction:
Lebron can’t guard him
by Stacey_Is_King on Jul 20, 2010 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I guess this never happened either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc83b_LBdSw&NR=1
Dils and Bulls4ever are off their rocker.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Wouldn't be BAB with some
heated Deng talk! It’s all good. I’m actually looking forward to seeing what Deng can do with Boozer at the 4 and Thibs system.
really? cause like an hour ago
it seemed like you really were looking forward to him getting traded, or his contract eventually expiring.
A true friend stabs you in the front - Oscar Wilde
the power of argument!!!
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Nah because I think if you scroll up
a bit you’d see that I made a similar comment about Deng and waiting to see how he plays with Thib. It’s called discussion for a reason. There’s no gold prize at the end of this discussion board if I’m right. I can have my opinion, debate it and move on either way. I don’t have to call people ignorant and question their basketball smarts to have a fun debate about it. A month from now I’ll be debating the same points with the same people and that’s why I do it…For fun. It’s called perspective and conversation.
by Dils on Jul 20, 2010 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
He played servicable d against LeBron
…in the playoffs last season.
Polish Hammer won't play that much and you've significantly downgraded your starting 5 to get him. It's a dumb move.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Better question is
does Deng fit better on THIS team than Pietrus and Gortat. I’d say no.
I would like you to prove that somehow.
I’ve laid out plenty of statistical evidence that suggests you are completely ignorant. You have used your opinion, which is worthless.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions
You cant even list the Top
10 SF in the NBA and you call me ignorant. Your a tool. What stats have you given other than your opinion. His 3 point per for the last three years. I gave stats too 50 milly. thats the value of his contract.
Yeah well my rebuttals for you are in
this same thread. You can try reading or keep insulting people’s basketball IQs on a blog. We disagree and I’m cool with that without calling you ignorant.
I could care less if you call me ignorant
The experts and statistics would suggest I’m correct, which is all that matters.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions
The expert Thibs
says Deng is underrated. He’s said that every time Deng comes up.
by JockstrapNoah on Jul 20, 2010 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Cause he knows
the Bulls have probably exhausted every outlet to try and move his ass. Which failed, what else can he do but pump him up and hope his value gets better so they can move him.
Deng was the reason the Kobe trade collapsed
Kobe wanted to be a Bull but not if they were sending Deng to L.A.
don't let the bed bugs bite
by Rex Grossman on Jul 22, 2010 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions
How do you even know what this team is going to do?
Thibadeau laid out reasons he likes Deng and what he’s going to want him to do and how it fits perfectly for what he likes in his offense.
An inside and outside pair that both command double-teams? A guy who can cut to the basket and run around screens and hit 3’s is a pretty perfect fit.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
None of us know
So like I said further up above we’ll have to wait and see but I think a Pietrus /Gortat for Deng trade would be beneficial. But maybe Thibs has a plan.
What is your basis for your opinion if you have no idea how they'd be used?
I’m really confused now.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I really
hope thats how it works out, i really do. Im not saying throw deng away. i just said the Pietrus/ Gortat trade would be a good trade.
You call him "Dung"
and are pretty much saying he’s terrible. So stop your stupid backpedaling.
by kozzer on Jul 20, 2010 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Your backpedaling was
“I’m not saying throw Deng away” when if everything you are saying were true, that’d be the only reasonable option. Good thing for us Bulls fans Deng is a pretty good player.
is that right
Considering this entire discussion started when i mentioned trading deng for pietrus and gortat. You sir fail at reading comprehension..
You said:
- he’s overpaid..
- he doesnt fit this team..
- He’s not a good defender.
- Deng + athletic = major fail…
I stand
by everyone of t hose comments. I suppose fit the team is debatable since none of us know what Thibo will do.
Right, and if they were all true
then the only reasonable option would be to dump him, not start him.
Again, good thing for the Bulls he’s actually a pretty good player.
If you make a statement
Back it up. Why do you stand by those. What makes him overpaid? Why doesn’t he fit the team? In what bizarro world is he not a good defender? How is he not athletic?
by Grinder in Training on Jul 20, 2010 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes, it's not even close.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions
is this a sincere question?
"If I was to answer that question honestly, I would have to lie to you."
- Isiah Thomas, when asked if any teams were interested in trading for Shandon Anderson
Ginobili is a SG, as is Vince Carter, Josh Smith is a PF, Shard Lewis is a PF, Odom is more of a PF
Deng’s better than Gay, Battier, Ariza, Hedo, Marion or Pietrus, Tayshaun Prince sucks now.
On that list the only guys that are demonstrably better and actually play SF are LBJ, Pierce, and Melo.
You could convince me that Granger is better, but I think he’s crap on D and Deng is a very good defender to go with solid offense.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ill give you
Ginobli thats it. those other guys are SF, that is thier position, if they play out of position for the current team there on i cant control that.
You're wrong, but whatever.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions
hahha!
you’re ridiculous!!!
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
by tyger1147 on Jul 20, 2010 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is awesome.
“They are what I say they are. If other people — including the teams that signed their contracts and built the roster, the coaches that put them in roster spots and rotations, and the players themselves — disagree, well . . . I can’t control that.”
by arjoseph on Jul 20, 2010 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
lmao... i was thinking the same thing
“damn those professional scouts, coaches, front office…. I can’t control that Vince Carter plays SG, a position he has probably played his whole life”
I vote for Thomas to play, play more and play regularly.-Sam Smith
So your list is basically
Every guy in the NBA between 6’5 and 6’9 who at least occasionally plays on the perimeter and who at one time in their career might have been better than Deng.
by JSB on Jul 20, 2010 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 7 recs
Let me tell you the guys on that list who are worse and the guys who aren't SF's:
Worse:
VC
Artest
Hedo
Butler
marion
Prince
R lewis
Odom[too inconsistent]
Gay
Battier
Pietrus
Not SF’s:
VC
Ginobli
Josh Smith
Better than Deng:
LBJ
PP
Granger
Carmelo
G Wallace
Iggy
Ariza
I count 7. You could argue Iggy/Ariza, and you could argue Battier/Artest/Rachard. I guess. Marion if he wasn’t old, Prince if it was 2 years ago maybe.
Deng’s contract is worlds better than Gay’s at the very least.
Go Rockets/Nets[CDR]/Bucks[Jennings]!
I'm a big Gerald Wallace fan.
Also: Oh yeah, Rashard Lewis is a PF. I forgot about that. heh
I’d actually rate Carmelo below Deng, because Carmelo sucks, but I don’t really want to get into that argument? Yeeeah.
Go Rockets/Nets[CDR]/Bucks[Jennings]!
There's a difference
between a personal dislike of a player and sheer lunacy.
Carmelo is one the 5 most talented offensive players in the league, if not #1.
As much as I like/appreciate Deng, he never has or never will be that.
"I want to be that guy. I want to be the reason the Bulls are back."- Derrick Rose.
Carmelo's great at being headstrong, posting middling [if not negative] APM's, and playing as little D as possible.
In short, he’s AMAZING, but he needs to grow up in some ways still. His Win Score’s pretty bad, bla bla bla.
But yeah … if you’re just looking at scoring he’s probably the best pure scorer in the game.
Go Rockets/Nets[CDR]/Bucks[Jennings]!
that deal stinks. deng has a vastly superior impact on offense than pietrus. look at this
year. pietrus had an Ortg of 106. he had a usg% of 18. his team had an Ortg of 111. thats not good. deng had a usg% of 22. his Ortg was 106. his teams Ortg was 103.5. thats adequate. deng is a nice third option on a very good team. pietrus, when you consider how bad he is offensively, and how his Dmult numbers are nothing to write home about, and how he doesnt pass, and how he doesnt rebound particularly well…. wait, do people just like him because he looks so much like an ideal NBA wing?
"If I was to answer that question honestly, I would have to lie to you."
- Isiah Thomas, when asked if any teams were interested in trading for Shandon Anderson
holy crap
that was the most epic deng argument ever. anyway, i’m not sure if anyone mentioned, that trade i believe was only to clear cap space. you don’t do it for any other reason i think, as deng is pretty good, gortat and pietrius aren’t really close to his caliber.
I had to stop rec'ing comments
The anti-deng argument was so weak that it was too easy for people to win points by picking it apart.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
by runningman on Jul 20, 2010 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
deng is a good player...his main problem is that he is a dumb player
and that’s mainly because he takes those long two’s. A two pointer from just inside the 3 point line is the dumbest and toughest shot in basketball. If he would just step behind the line and take a 3, then deng could be a borderline all star. Oh yeah, he also needs to not let the guy he is defending hold the ball and tie his shoe.
Luol Deng is dumb?
You could argue he’s not stubborn enough to tell his coaches, no I’m going to start shooting 3’s but that’s about it. The guy is clearly intelligent. If they told him to shoot 3’s, I’m sure he would.
by Grinder in Training on Jul 21, 2010 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions
That trade wouldn't have cleared any cap space
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
I want Shannon Brown
He’d be a great back-up for Brewer and he can be explosive. Roger Mason wants starter minutes so he’ll never sign with the Bulls.
were not gettin shannon now
let him rot in LA
All I want in life is for UC fans to chant: Deeeeeloooonte during Heat games
he was sure good for the Bulls in his brief stint.....
Oz on Swish HR celeb: "That's the way he is. Good for him, enjoy it. I wish he could do it for me, he was a very horseshit player for me.''
Shannon Brown is awful.
"Boozer's dumb ass jumped. So I dunked on his ass."-Joakim Noah
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 20, 2010 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions
true that.
laker fans here in la even wanted his head on a stick at times. phil even held him out of one of the final games entirely because he was so useless. he’s boneheaded and has very low basketball iq.
all he does is jump like hes on a pogo stick. thats it.
someone teach me how to get Sam Smith's job when he retires
He is a prime example
of role players on winning squads being overrated. There are tons of role players on worse teams that are better than Shannon Brown, but because he had a couple of good plays on the way to a championship, there’s a perception that he had a significant contribution.
I’d be happy to let someone else overpay for Shannon while I lowball someone like Luther Head.
So…gotta say it: this sort of vindicates the Ben Gordon thing.
-by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 24, 2010 1:20 PM PDT
Who is the 4 that can shoot the 3?
Bulls have mentioned needing a 4 to shoot the 3 multiple times. (Reminds me a lot of the Noce days). Would Deng fill this role for the Bulls? I mean… does management think Deng will log some minutes at the 4?
When exactly did they mention this?
I have not heard this at all. All Thibs talks about is playing inside out through Boozer.
The Bulls will win 50 games this year and (hopefully) the Central Division for a top 3 seed.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 20, 2010 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions
I will try and find a link
I thought I heard someone from management say it after the Thibs signing.
I think
you’re talking about Anthony Tolliver, from Golden State.
by Johnny 'Thread' Kerr on Jul 20, 2010 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions
By the way...
….what the hell is up with Josh Heytvelt?
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Or Keith Langford...
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
2 words
Deltef schrimph. Or however u spell his name from the ’96 Sonics squad
by d3lushious on Jul 20, 2010 5:37 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
Eddie House or Mike Gansey
ESPN reporting that the Bulls have interest in House. Would love to have him on a 1-year deal if we could. Just a guy who can bomb away when we fall down. Also a guy you want on the court when the other team is fouling. Would give us two great free throw shooters late.
I’d also give Mike Gansey a shot. He played for the D-League Select in Summer League and can really shoot the ball. I doubt he’d get much playing time, but has the ability to just be a gun off the bench who can hit a couple threes. Solid free throw shooter and strong rebounder for his size/position.
ESPN Rumors section
Thnk you need to be an insider to access.
by Niwrad on Jul 21, 2010 2:26 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Just to maintain the high note we're on with all these signings
Felt like looking up some Joakim stats: Averaged a 15 and 13 in the 2010 playoffs.
Really looking forward to this upcoming season. The most excited I’ve been in quite some time.
"Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team." -Scottie Pippen
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
- Jeremy Lin’s teammate snaps a picture of his famous couch
- Dwight Howard picks a strange time to ask for more fourth quarter shots
- Spike Lee texts to thank the coach that cut Jeremy Lin before seeing him play
- LeBron threatened to beat up a heckler. You gotta problem with that, tough guy?
- Jason Whitlock apologizes for his unfunny Jeremy Lin comment on Twitter
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.
