ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 11, 2013 -> 11:54 AM) They won 60 games once. Who cares. Give them a banner along with LeBron's Cavs. Yeah, I get it. Whenever a star is possibly available we're never in the running because of XYZ. Yawn. The Lakers probably end up with him and more anyway. The only reason they didn't win 60 two years in a row is that there was a lockout. They're at least a 50-50 shot to make the Conference Finals. There's 25 or more teams that would trade places with the Bulls. BFD, so the Lakers get Melo. They're going to have Nash, Melo and basically nothing else. They MIGHT have Kobe, they pretty much have to renounce his Bird rights or get him to agree to a massive paycut to have any kind of cap space. The same goes for Gasol. That team is not a lock to be better than the current Knicks. The reason they might have cap space is because there's absolutely nothing on that roster.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 11, 2013 -> 01:07 AM) I don't get it? The Bulls are just boring and terrible. Luol Deng is an old 28. You lock him up now then he becomes impossible to move. Carmelo can become a FA after next year. A franchise with vision would be focusing on him. Yes, winning 60-ish games is SOOO terrible. They're going to have nowhere near enough cap room for Melo. You have to remember that he can get north of $20 million. Rose, Melo and Noah alone is almost over the cap if Melo gets everything he can.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 10:10 PM) It would serve them best to be bad again and get a shot at Wiggins. Could you imagine that s***? LeBron would definitely go back. Irving/Wiggins/LeBron=game over. Or trade Irving for the sickest package in nba history. If Irving and Varejao are relatively healthy, that's way too strong a duo for them to get a top-5 slot in the lottery given how s***ty some of these other teams are. Plus the odds of them winning the lottery two years in a row is pretty slim. They can still wind up with a solid player, though that would require them picking the right guys (Barnes looks like a better fit for them than Waiters and I don't think Bennett was the right choice).

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 05:53 PM) Bulls are reportedly looking to extend the contract of Deng between the value of the Smith and Iggy's deal. I don't want to bash them for the lack of creativity once again, I am just perplexed on their man crush on Deng. This franchise needs to learn to move on. He's a solid player, but not a great one. I'm sure Thibs loves him for his D. That's too much money though, I'd go 3/30 absolute max. His wrist issues seem to be screwing with his jumper and I'm pretty sure that only pays him through age 31.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 03:02 PM) The front office messed up the financial flexibility of this team. Getting mad at Boozer for coming here and...playing pretty much how we expected isn't the best source of anger (but clearly placing any criticism at the feet of the front office is misplaced, because...) I don't understand this "while Rose was out". You'd think with Rose out there'd have been huge offensive stat improvements in Deng, Noah and Boozer right? Wellp. Those points were pretty much distributed among the guards or just not scored. Would it really make you feel better if I explicitly said that it was a bad signing? I said I hated it at the time in my last post. However, he also hasn't been as effective as people thought when they got him. Boozer was supposed to be that #2 guy that would get them 20-10 every year (or at least that's what they told us after they whiffed on Lebron). Instead, he hasn't really been any better than Deng. The point with Rose out is that there were a ton of opportunities to score more points without Rose taking 20 shots a game. Noah and Deng aren't the kind of guys that can get significantly more shots, but Boozer has been in the past. Instead he only scored 16 on a weak TS%. He's an okay player, not a good one. He's a terrible defender and despite some offensive skills, hasn't done much to improve the Bulls' offense. As I posted, the Bulls have been significantly better when he's not on the floor. Even if he were neutral, that would be a huge improvement over what they're getting now. We're also paying him $15 million a year and he's on the wrong side of his peak. That's why people are annoyed with Boozer. I don't see why that's surprising or controversial.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 02:09 PM) I'm not saying I love Boozer with his deal, moreso talking about the critique on message boards and with fans watching the game of Boozer being the worst player ever and completely worthless. The bulls overpaid to get his services in 2010 because they needed scoring and more rebounding inside. The biggest worry was he would barely play because of health, he's played and has been healthy. If I would have told you in 2010 that Boozer would average about 16-10 for next 3 years and play 80% of games I'm guessing most would be pretty pleased. I get that it was annoying in 2011 when he would just iso and shoot a fadeaway, but at some point people have to let it go. Why would people let it go? He's still on the roster. He's messing up their financial flexibility in epic fashion and not giving them the #2 scorer and solid interior presence that people wanted. He only gave them 16 a game even with Rose out and he's likely starting to decline.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 01:51 PM) Boozer was signed in the previous cba in a FA year that saw Rudy Gay and Joe Johnson get the max. That was basically the point I was trying to make. With 1:1 luxury tax penalties and higher max salaries, $15 million for Boozer was steep but in the realm of decency (I hated it personally). Under the current market conditions, which is the main issue in this case, that's a fair amount more than he's worth. Joe Johnson and Rudy Gay didn't exactly bring in a king's ransom in trade, neither would Boozer.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 01:23 PM) People need to take a look at what big men in the NBA make. Boozer really isn't overpaid when compared to his peers. It sucks for salary cap purposes, but it is the reality of the league today. Josh Smith just got $13.5 million a year and he's a fair amount better than Boozer. David West is a little better and just signed for $12 mil a year. Al Jefferson is probably a little better and he got $13.67 mil for 3 (and the Bobcats overpaid a bit). Paul Millsap is at worst a comparable player and he just got $9.5 million a year for two years. That's the most recent sampling of "market value" under the current CBA. Boozer's deal is bigger than all of them. He's not an athletic 7-footer that can defend, so comparing him to those guys doesn't make sense. Those are the guys that get crazy contracts.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 01:03 PM) That sounds about right. I think he will be a great pickup for whoever gets him. Criminally over-criticized among Bulls fanbase. I would say it's pretty warranted. The Bulls have been significantly better with him off the floor the last two years, they were -8.6 and -8.7 per 100 possessions with him out there. To put that in perspective, the Thunder were 7.8 points better per 100 with Durant on the floor this year. Now a lot of that is because Taj is an awesome defender off the bench and Boozer is a horrible defender, but that's still a staggering number. If he were a $5 million big off the bench, things would be different. However, his offense the last two years hasn't been nearly good enough to compensate for his defensive issues. That's why I'm not too worried about the Bulls tossing a Mirotic/Gibson duo out there. Relative to what they have now, that could be a more effective offense/defense platoon if Mirotic offers anything as a floor spacer.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 12:35 PM) If they would have picked up KG or Pau, I'm thinking they probably don't get Rose or win a title anyway. Kind of like when they lost the coin flip and wound up with David Greenwood instead of Magic. It did eventually lead to MJ. It's impossible to predict because every event would unfold differently. They don't get Rose, but there could have been other opportunities to add a big time player. Maybe if the Bulls get Pau, Kobe throws a bigger fit in LA and actually gets traded for that deal centered around Deng. Maybe we have better luck in free agency in 2010 with a bit more name recognition on the roster. Maybe Melo wants to come here if there's a stud big man on the roster. Who knows what would have happened.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 11:50 AM) What "major move" was available to us in the last couple years during the Rose era that wouldn't have involved gutting the entire team except Rose? Harden? Joe Johnson? Dwight Howard? Carmelo? We had no chance at LBJ/Wade/Bosh. I'm all for holding the FO to task over not making moves, but what are these mythical major moves that they could have made the last few years? Getting Garnet/Pau would have been pointless on a pre-Rose team. KG/Pau they definitely should have done something there. Those guys were both better than anything currently available. It might not have put them over the top, but it clearly would have made them better, probably taking them from a 45-50 win team to a 50-55 win team depending on the exact deal. To be fair, they supposedly tried on KG. I forget the exact deal, but supposedly the Bulls offered something big and got turned down a year or two before he was actually traded, so maybe that wouldn't have worked (something like Chandler and the Tyrus and Noah picks). The Pau deal was a joke, but it sounded like they traded him before really evaluating the market (I seem to remember a ton of GM's bewildered at the trade and how little he went for). You can blame the Bulls there, but the same is true for a lot of teams. Dwight and Melo are moot because they weren't signing here (at least that was the situation at the time). OKC moved Harden a year too early for the Bulls. Had they made a decision THIS off-season (which would have been smarter, he was still cheap last year and he'd be a restricted FA this year), the Bulls would be in a much better position with Butler looking like a serviceable piece and Deng having an expiring deal now. Then again, they might have had to pay the tax for a year, which seems to be a deal-breaker for them...

It's starting to look like Monta and AK47 made a major mistake by opting out. There's very little cap space left out there to get the kind of deals they're looking for. Monta's was especially dumb because the Bucks offered him 3-35 (his option plus a 2-24 extension) before he hit the market. But he thinks he's Dwyane Wade (seriously, look it up) so he deserved a max. I suppose it's possible one of those guys still eeks out a decent deal, but it's looking more likely that they might have to settle for something closer to the MLE than 8 figures.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 12:29 AM) Or LaMarcus Aldridge, or Kevin Garnett, or Kobe Bryant, or Pau Gasol or 2000 FA or 2010 FA. I'm getting sleepy just thinking about the Bulls post-98. This is a terrible organization that lucked into the lotto one year and is too incompetent to take advantage. #butweplayhard Or people can actually discuss the merits of the player/deal in question instead of just b****ing that they're not making moves. If all we want is moves, why don't we make Kenny Williams the GM? It's not like they're the Bobcats, they're highly competitive. A smart organization always tries to get better, but they also don't jump on the first deal that comes along just because it's there. It's not like we're talking about Durant or Harden. You have to be at least a little careful, otherwise you can end up like the Cavs or Magic.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 12:13 AM) This is what I'm talkin' about. You sound just like a 90's Knicks, Pacers or Jazz fan would had the internet been then what it is today. "Well, we only lost by an average of 5.2 ppg. We're not that far off." Stop. That's just not good enough. If you want to chop down the second greatest player of all-time, you must get someone a lot better than Monta Ellis. Fixed it for you.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 12:07 AM) The Bulls had nobody that could put the ball on the floor and dish like Ellis can in '11. That and no Boozer would give you a much better shot. Look, there's no '06 Kobe Bryant out there. There's no perfect fit. This organization needs to stop being so f***ing lame and do something, even if it's questionable. Thibs is all that? Let me see it. If he's the next George Karl (lots of regular season wins and nothing else), then get him outta here. They had Rose. They had plenty of open looks that series because the Heat were so worried about stopping him, they just bricked them constantly. It's not like Ellis was any better against the Heat this year. They don't need to find '06 Bryant, they just need a guy that is somewhat of a threat, helps space the floor a bit and doesn't kill them with stupid decisions and bad defense. Butler looks like he'll be at least serviceable for about 1/10th the price. They already have a high volume shooter at the point with middling efficiency, they don't need to put a chucker next to him with even weaker efficiency and no size. This is especially true if they're still rolling with Deng, who has a slightly better TS% than Ellis over the last several years when you look at the average. If they can get someone that's actually good, okay. See what happens with Love and whether Portland actually gets desperate enough to get Aldridge. Let the Kings get Ellis and then wonder why they still suck when they got such a great scorer.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 11:53 PM) Butler is way better than questionable. With the minutes he played last year and how effective he was in most of the games, I'm kind of already sold on him. We'll see. I don't think he's going to be a liability, but I'm not convinced he'll be very good either. He was solid defensively and showed flashes on offense, but he also played like 7 million minutes and scored about 14 a game at the end of the year. I do like that he can get to the line, hopefully his 3-point percentage wasn't a fluke.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 11:50 PM) Noah/Taj/Deng/Ellis/Rose with Butler/Dunleavy as the 6th and 7th menn. That's some serious length and athleticism. I'll roll with that against the Heat. I don't care. The Bulls had their chance in '11 and got rolled. I don't want to go with that crap again. It would be the exact same crap. You'd still see the Heat pack the paint and laugh while the Bulls' brick jumpers. The Bulls would also be using a 6'3" SG instead of a 6'7"-ish one. The only reason the result might improve at all is getting Boozer's ass off the floor, but then again the backup bigs would be terrible.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 11:42 PM) Disagree. And if thibs is as good as Bulls fans say he is (there's more to being a good coach then beating up on awful eastern conference teams), he should be able to do something with Ellis. Because Jimmy Butler as a full-time 2 guard is a losing proposition. Unless the NBA lets Thibs put a shock collar on Monta that gives him 10,000 volts every time he takes a bad jumper, overplays a passing lane or slacks off defensively, I wouldn't expect miracles. How about Butler plays a full year before you toss him on the trash heap? He was a useful player last year that played on both ends of the floor. Every contender has at least one questionable player in the starting lineup, and Butler could easily be better than "questionable".

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 11:26 PM) I'm not talking about one season...talking about a career here. I'm not saying Ellis would be perfect but depending on what you give up, he clearly would make the Bulls a better team. I'm sick of the Bulls cheap attitude. They could have had Mayo a year ago (which would have been better then Hinrich). Gar just can't execute the transactions. Very smart basketball wise and a good judge of talent...can't execute big moves though (and I'm going to say that until proven otherwise). He's very far from perfect. He's a below average shooter with poor shooting efficiency and uses a very high number of possessions. Oh, and he's a bad defender. Basically his only plus skill is getting to the rim, which he can't do while Rose has the ball. He just can't take his usual 18-20 shots with Rose here, it would end poorly.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 11:28 PM) Ellis sucked last year. But stop it. The Bucks were never a good fit for him. And he's clearly better than Nate. Ellis shot 36.1% on nearly 5 attempts per game his last full year at GS. If he could do that, combined with his ability to put the ball on the floor and his defensive ball-hawking (he's usually in the top 10 in steals), he'd be much more impactful than Nate. Problem is that Rose is not a true PG and ball-dominant as f***. Could he adjust his game? I doubt it. That 36.1% was his best year by a fair margin. He's a career 31.8% shooter on way more attempts than he should take. He's basically a 6'3" version of Nate. The guy is not good.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 11:13 PM) Not near the defensive liability as Nate (and that isn't a compliment to Monte). Nate is just a disaster on D though. Ellis is much better then Nate. Nate is the better shooter though. Lets not compare a guy who is a 20 PPG scorer with 5-6 APG over multiple NBA seasons to Nate. Not fair. Nate seriously was better last year. Don't let Monta's high usage rate fool you, Robinson's PER was a point higher, his TS% was like 5 points higher and he had the same points and more assists per 40 than Monta did and a lower turnover rate. Now you can say that Nate usually isn't that good, but a $10 million a year player shouldn't be remotely comparable to a veteran minimum guy.

I wouldn't give up anything remotely useful for Ellis or pay him anything close to the contract he turned down from the Bucks. He can get to the rim, but he does so much other stupid s*** to negate that value. He shot 28.7% from three last year and took FOUR per game. He really loves the long pull-up jumper with 18 seconds left on the shot clock. All of his dumb shots make him less efficient than Luol Deng, only he uses even more possessions. That's his BETTER end of the floor too, Thibs might murder him before the first game because of his defense. Seriously, Nate was better last year at 1/10th the expected price.

New trailer for GTAV. That game looks ridiculously good.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 6, 2013 -> 04:41 PM) That's the thing. I don't think they would trade him no matter what. I think they're going to ride or die with the Rose/Noah/Deng/Boozer core, which is so sad. I'd be shocked if Rose or Noah go anywhere and I also expect them to hang onto Deng unless they get a Gasol-like giveaway. Boozer, I'm fairly sure he's gone after this year to avoid the repeater tax and bring over Mirotic.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 6, 2013 -> 03:10 PM) Maybe they shop Monroe now? Because yeah. I don't see how you can play all three of them together. And no Quinarvy, there's no way we can get him. I think they almost have to. They already had a bit of a conumdrum with a Drummond/Monroe frontcourt since Greg isn't very quick and neither of them hits jumpers. Now they added Smith, who can't shoot either and is a better fit at the 4. Teams need centers so you'd think they'd get some talent for him. However, you also don't generally see teams trade young bigs that are cheap and can score.