I hope this isn't true. We don't need two aging players on big contracts. Also, I think this is too much to give up even for Garnett. We would be trading the two players on the team with the most potential.

I think most fans will expect the Bulls to now win at least 2 playoff series (I see them as a top 3 team in the East now).
The team is fine the way it is.
Don't forget you could get a player potentially better than Garnett in the draft with Oden. That draft has been reported to being arguably the best draft for big men ever.

Bulls should do anything they can to get Garnett.  I agree that they should hang on to Ty2 if they can, but the article mentions how Minnesota covets him.  I like the idea of trading the right to swap next year instead.  Big Ben and Garnett would be a great improvement over the frontcourt mess we had last year(duh).  Right now the Bulls have the assets to pull off a good deal, for someone better than PJ Brown.  Not that I want to get rid of Deng, but with Noc and Ty2(PF tho he is) that is one position where we have great depth.  I doubt Minnesota will pull the trigger on this even tho it seems like a reasonable trade... but what could we get around the league for Ty1 and Deng?  

I haven't even fully taken in the news from yesterday about Wallace joining the Bulls. This Garnett deal would definitely make us a title contender. I'd like to see our players grow together and giving up Deng and Thomas would hurt the Bulls, but it would be awesome to have both Wallace and Garnett on the team. I know what to think of this. Once again, in Pax we trust.

I dont think this is a good move. To lose three up and coming guys in Chandler, Deng, and Thomas, for one player, even one like Garnett, I dont think is the right move. The other thing is the Minnesota seems dead set on keeping Garnett, and doing this could take time away from the other potential Chandler deal. I don't like that one either, but it is better than this one because it would keep Deng and Thomas around, and we would only lose one member of our core, and not three.

wants to and half doesn't.

I think this team, with Wallace and Brown but without Chandler, will be able to compete all season and into May.  I'd really like to see what they are capable of doing and I'd hate to trade away two more of them, just to have another all-star come and take up more cap and hurt the chances of resigning our young core guys.

I mean, I like that Pax is thinking big. But a deal for Garnett--after a huge deal for Wallace--starts to feel awfully corporate: big spending for short-term gains, no loyalty to your people, and so on. It messes up my naive little narrative about the Bad News Bears-ish Bulls, the team of hard-working underdogs who couldn't score and made stupid mistakes but always seemed to pull even with the big guys in the end. It turns us into the generic Big Time Team willing to throw money at a changing cast of superstars.

On the other hand, those would be some pretty impressive short-term gains. And Chandler has had his chance and missed it, Thomas is unproven, and Deng--well, that would be a shame, but we'd still be retaining a good chunk of the actual core: Hinrich, Gordon, Noce.

Do we trust the Daily Southtown? (Sounds small-timey, like the Mayberry Eagle.) Why would they know about this before, say, the Trib or the ST?

Does this trade match up?  Don't the salaries need to be within 20% or something?

What in the hell is the Daily Southwestern anyway?   Keep in mind "Paxson didn't return a phone call"...no way would this happen... not even Sam Smith would make that up

When did our players become so great that there's no way we can can justify trading them for a superstar like Garnett?  Look, I like our core group of guys too, but the fact is that we weren't that great last year with them.  We went .500 last year, and we had a losing record almost all season long.  What's a better data sample to draw conclusions from: the first 72 games of the season (during which we sucked), or the last 10 games of the season (in which we beat a lot of teams with nothing to play for) and a few playoff games?

I would make that Garnett trade in a minute.  We're trading Chandler anyways, and if the most we can get for him is P.J. Brown and J.R. Smith, that should tell you where his value is right now.  I like Deng a lot, but he and Noce play the same position.  I'd hate to give up Thomas, but there's no way Minnesota makes the trade unless he's in it.  With Wallace and Garnett, we immediately would become the favorites to win the East.  We'd finally have a low post scorer, and Wallace and Garnett might be the two best defensive players in the league.  It's probably a pipe dream, because Minnesota doesn't look like they're trading KG this summer, but if we get the opportunity, I'm sure Pax will leap on it.

i think, in this situation, you have to look at the big picture.  a starting lineup of hinrich, ben, noce, garnett and wallace would be THE contender for the championship.  It gives you probably a three year window to make it happen.  Certainly, you're giving up the future after that three years, but that's a price to pay.  If you can make that trade, I don't see how you don't.
Sure, Garnett's old(er) and hasn't won a championship, but the dude's still a freak.  Paired with Wallace, what front court would be better than our's.  And imagine KG's impact on our slashing perimeter players, what with his fantastic passing ability.  That team would be a terror.  Plus, we'd still have some pieces to bring off the bench (Du at either guard spot, Thabo at 2 and 3).  
I agree that it would be preferable to keep Ty2 and trade the Knicks pick, but we can't do that.  At the least, we'd have to wait until the season ended and we swapped our pick for Knicks to then trade.  We can't ship the right to trade.  I think the league office would have a field day with that.
Really, how can anyone advocate trading Ty1 for PJ fucking Brown but not making a trade for Garnett-one that would make us an instant favorite to bring home a championship (or two).