Bottoming Out Together

by stopnpop on Feb 2, 2008 7:05 PM CST

I think it hit me somewhere around the 5:30 mark in the 1st quarter of the Bulls/Wolves game at the Target Center...you know, when the score was 5-2: sweet baby hay-zeus, these teams suck. As a Wolves fan (check out Canis Hoopus) it pains me to see the 2 best midwestern cities have such crappy professional basketball teams. Maybe we should figure out a way to help each other out and get back in the swing of things. We've been tossing around a few trade ideas at Canis Hoopus and we wanted to get you Bulls fans' thoughts on whether or not the following trade idea has a snowball's chance in hell of happening: To the Bulls:

Theo Ratliff
Rashad McCants
Craig Smith

To the Wolves

Ben Wallace
Joakim Noah

Here's how we at Canis Hoopus view the trade: It works for the Bulls because it allows them to get out from underneath the ridiculous Big Ben contract. Smith gives them a young and talented (albeit undersized) post player that could help in the low block off the bench. Shaddy is another young and talented (albeit erratic) perimeter player who shoots above 40% from 3 and can provide some modest insurance at the 2 should the Bulls be unable to re-sign Ben Gordon. Noah's loss hurts but Aaron Gray could turn into a serviceable pro and do a modestly good job on the boards. The Bulls also get to clear Ratliff's $11 million off the books, which combined with the $15 mil they would save on Big Ben would allow them to deal with Gordon/Deng (not to mention allowing them to be major players in a relatively uncontested free agency year). It works for the Wolves because they get the ultimate front line compliment to Big Al Jefferson's post game. Big Al sucks on d and the Wolves need a defensive stopper who can hit the glass and block shots. Noah would be a wonderful compliment to Big Al at the 5 and Big Ben could back up both positions. His contract sucks, but let's face it: the Wolves aren't going to be free agent players for another 2-3 years and they may as well get something in return for Theo's huge contract. That's how we see the potential deal and we'd like to know what you Bulls fans have to say about it. What works or doesn't work? Which team is giving up too much? Too little? Would one of the Wolves' 3 first rounders in the 2009 draft sweeten things up? What say you? Thanks for your time.

FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

That

was a waste of time. Please stop typing.

by chris44 on Feb 2, 2008 7:33 PM CST reply actions

don't mind Chris44, he's a part of my

BaB little-achievers club. It's a mixed bag.

I'll just say 'albeit undersized' is a huge red flag on this team.

Getting rid of Wallace is top priority, but I'd rather use the first rounder, or Thabo, before Noah.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 2, 2008 7:37 PM CST reply actions

Thanks for the reply

While Big Al has turned out alright, the biggest problem with the KG trade is that it short-circuited last year's draft. Had Jefferson been on the roster, Noah becomes the no-brainer pick. Instead, the Wolves brilliant front office selects a 185lbs 6'9" swingman who can't guard the 3 and can't shoot well enough to man the 2. This comes on the heels of them taking 2 6-nothing shooting guards. I'm personally preparing for the inevitable Eric Gordon/OJ Mayo pick. Don't get me wrong, Brewer will turn out to be a good-to-great player (he's going to be a defensive monster with 20 more pounds) as he is a weird cross between Bruce Bowen and Manu, but he can only reach max potential on a good-to-great team where he can do the ever-cliched "little things" and fill up the stat sheet. Noah is the ideal player to compliment Big Al and the Wolves are really the only team with a salary that can realistically absorb Big Ben's contract. At this point in the game, I'd offer up everybody but Jefferson and Gomes for Noah. Are the Bulls that high on Noah? If so, I don't blame them; after Yi, he should have been the Wolves' 2nd highest ranked player with Big Al in the picture. Is there any scenario you could see where the Bulls would part ways with Noah? I'd be more than happy to see the Wolves enter next year with the following rotation: 1- Telfair/Foye 2- Jaric/Foye/Brewer 3- Gomes/(Beasley/Donte Green/Danilo Gallinari)/Brewer 4- Jefferson/Big Ben 5- Noah/Big Ben With 3 first rounders in 2009 and that core group of players, I'd feel pretty damn good about the next 5-6 years.

by stopnpop on Feb 2, 2008 8:48 PM CST up reply actions

I think they are that high on Noah

plus, I doubt after the spat they had this season that they'd trade both him and Wallace to the same team :)

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 2, 2008 8:52 PM CST up reply actions

stupid wolves...

...picking the wrong gator. Well, here's hoping to a McHale-esque lapse of judgment for Mr. Paxson; Noah to the Wolves!!! As for the spat...I think we got the crappy end of that: injured vs. inept? We'll see about that one ;)

by stopnpop on Feb 2, 2008 9:01 PM CST reply actions

stupid brain...

Wrong spat. I forgot Noah and Wallace had it out earlier this year.

by stopnpop on Feb 3, 2008 7:55 AM CST up reply actions

Noah = our future

as far as I'm concerned. I think I'd rather buy Wallace out than use Noah to move him.

For me, that's true of Tyrus Thomas too, even though I'm not a big believer in him. I'd move Tyrus and Wallace, but I'd want some sort of return beyond and expiring contract.

I suggested something like those two (Wallace + Thomas) for Kirilenko in another thread. That'd be more along the lines of what I'd like to see than a pure expiring contract, which wouldn't even get us significantly under the cap this summer anyway.

So... no to the deal you propose. As a side note to that, if I were Kevin McHale I wouldn't touch Wallace with a 10 foot pole. Under most any circumstances. He's a wad of drama and a buyout waiting to happen on your team. You guys seem to be getting your legs under you at least, so I wouldn't go in that direction.

But, if you want him, I'd consider other sorts of deals (some combination of Walker, Jaric, Buckner, Madsen, etc) that don't get us an expiring contract, but might net us moderate savings and let us get rid of Wallace.

I'd also be plenty willing to take a flyer on Gerald Green if it didn't cost us anything much. As an armchair GM, I'd gladly offer your choice of a Viktor Khyrapa or Adrian Griffin and throw in a second rounder. What's your take on him?

If you're inclined to pass one of those deals on to McHale, can I suggest:
Bulls trade: Wallace, JamesOn Curry, Aaron Gray
Wolves trade: Walker, Green, Buckner

Not only does this save money for the Bulls (Walker's last two years and Buckner's last year are non-guaranteed), it's let's both teams do fun things:

The Bulls get to try a lineup with Greg Buckner and Adrian Griffin on the court at the same time, overwhelming the league with scrappiness and incredible "steadying influence".

Duhon / Buckner / Griffin / Thabo / Tyrus Thomas is a lineup I'd fully expect to see at some point.

The Wolves can trot out an entire team's worth short strangish shoot-first guards in Curry, McCants, Telfair and Foye.

How much fun would that be? :D

by Sports2 on Feb 2, 2008 10:33 PM CST reply actions

Fun

Sometimes I think Kevin McHale's goal in life is to run out a lineup consisting of 4 six-nothing guards and Al Jefferson. Weirdly, I could see him making that trade and then picking OJ Mayo or Eric Gordon. (BTW: the big draft buzz in Wolves-land is Derrick Rose...just what the Wolves need: another 6'4" untested guard.) As for Gerald Green, you guys can have him...for cheap. The team didn't extend him his RFA offer in the off-season and he'll walk after the season is done. He's been making some noise about a trade of late, but everybody knows he's damn-near untradable because he's going to be let go. He is tantalizing. If ever the basketball gods could manufacture a wing man, he'd be exactly what the prototype would look like. Perfect form on his jumper, decent ball handler, amazing hops...he's the ultimate NBA Scarecrow <music> if he only had a brain </ music> Green has all the tools to be great and I hope he gets it but I have the feeling that he'll be one of those guys (Tyrus Thomas seems like another) who will go from team to team because GM's will think that they can finally get the guy to perform up to his physical gifts. He'll show it in amazing 6-8 minute bursts right before he tanks it for the next 20 minutes of court time. That being said, I thought he'd get a bit more burn on the Wolves and this lack of playing time should only further his pull to a GM/coach who thinks he can crack the egg.

by stopnpop on Feb 3, 2008 7:53 AM CST up reply actions

Give Gerald Green and Tyrus Thomas

another year and we'll see if your theory holds true. It might, because the small flashes of potential are similiar in both players.

I'm not big on just raw freak potential. I prefer a young player show developed/developing fundamental skills and a strong desire to win and lead. Usually you can determine a "great many" players ability and projected growth after one year of college. I can't understand GM's drafting on just raw potential? I hear so many people saying the draft is a crap shot? In some cases and based on the criteria their using, maybe yes. But if they know what to look, it's really not a crap shot as they suggest.

I'm noticing some good leadership and desire in Derrick Rose. Still I want to see more how he handles the rest of the college season and the NCAA tournament.

by exult463 on Feb 3, 2008 4:15 PM CST up reply actions

Rose

"I'm noticing some good leadership and desire in Derrick Rose. Still I want to see more how he handles the rest of the college season and the NCAA tournament." ...agreed. My main reaction to him is based upon the fact that the Wolves will have taken 3 6'4" guards with their first round pick in the last 4 drafts (their other pick being a 185 lbs swingman who can't shoot). I guess if Kevin McHale really wants to be the Mike Millen of the NBA, this is his big shot, but I'd like to see them take someone with a bit more size. Plus, Memphis has a goofy ass offense and you really can't get a good gauge as to how he'd run a big league offense. He's only had 2 or 3 games with more than 6 assists and he still has a negative ppr.

by stopnpop on Feb 3, 2008 10:10 PM CST reply actions

whoops...

Matt Millen...that just shows you how much I know about the NFL.

by stopnpop on Feb 3, 2008 10:10 PM CST reply actions

The only holdup

Sorry for the late addition of my 2 cents, but here are my thoughts. Your proposed trade would entail John Paxson being forward looking, abandoning his hopes for his original rebuilding plan to work, and admitting that he has failed. While pretty much everyone else on the planet has done this, it's an open question as to whether Pax will come around this season (or ever).

It also would require him to part with not one, but two non-shooting, hard-working bigs. In case you were not aware, this is like nicely requesting an addict to hand you his controlled substances.

On the other hand, he gets one non-shooting big back in Theo, and fulfills another one of his preoccupations in obtaining yet another undersized guy with upside. So who knows.

"Duhon, don't make that garbage-time jumper... Save it for the next game!"

by bullhockey on Feb 4, 2008 9:24 AM CST reply actions

Update

What if the Wolves threw in their 2 mid-to-late 1st rounders from Miami and Boston? Complete breakdown can be found here: http://www.canishoopus.com/blogs/stopnpop/2008/02/04/moving-forward The Bulls would clear $25 million off their books while taking on a talented young 2 (McCants) who shoots above 40% from 3. They would get 2 first rounders and a decent undersized power forward along with enough money to be major players in the upcoming free agency season (RFA's Josh Smith and Emeka Okafor would be nice targets). Basically, both the Wolves and Bulls would admit and correct past failures and make out with what they each need the most.

by stopnpop on Feb 4, 2008 3:56 PM CST reply actions