ZoomSlowik

Not really possible... Pau- $19.286 Rose- $17-19 mil Gibson- $3.182 qualifying offer, worse if the Bulls have to match an offer Butler- $1.174 mil Mirotic- call it a mil, probably slightly more if he can even come over at that point Golden State pick (Jones)- This year's #7 pick made $2.8 mil Portland's 11th pick (better options than Jenkins at that spot)- This year's #11 made $2.126 mil Bulls' 29th pick- call it a mil First rounder next year- At least a mil, could be a fair amount higher depending on tanking At least two second round picks- maybe half a mil $49-$53 mil depending on Rose's actual salary and where the 2013 pick lands. Also doesn't include any matching offers on Gibson, and you can't sign anyone for 12/13 that is on a 2-year deal. So you've got maybe $10 mil at best depending on the actual cap math and more likely several million less. It's a major stretch since you absolutely have to have as much room as possible to be able to sign that SG.

The scheduling for the Big Ten/ACC is way better. I don't know why they don't matchup the powerhouse schools. That could have been interesting if you had Syracuse/Kentucky and Lousivlle/Florida. They did the same thing last year and it was even more annoying because there were more quality teams.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Jun 1, 2012 -> 11:22 AM) That last post was going off the bolded statement in the quote that said the bulls could resign Taj, Butler, and still have around 5 mill for Martin... From that statement I figured theyd have around 10 if they didnt sign Taj....Once again I will admit I have no idea about the cap situation in the NBA. How we're they allowed to be 11 mill over the cap this year?? You were already only at $5 mil in space with Taj off the roster. Again, Rose+Gasol+Noah+draft picks eats up over $50 million. They're way over the cap because Rose and Noah's extensions hadn't kicked in yet when they signed Boozer. You can go over the cap to keep your own players, but they still count against your cap figure. The salary cap of $58 mil (varies) really only matters when you're trying to sign free agents, which is pretty important here. Edit- Balta's last part didn't include Noah. So you'd have Rose, Gasol, and either Taj/filler or SG/less filler.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Jun 1, 2012 -> 10:46 AM) I have them signing him next year Knocking out resigning Taj, which I had at 5 mill, plus the 5 mill you said they might have for Martin...10 Mil should get one of the free agent sgs next year if they're more about winning a championship than the $$. I'll also add that Im pulling this all out of my ass since the only $$ I'm looking at is the figures on the NBA trade machine. Just trying to kill time before the Sox game. You're not getting it. You keep subtracting guys and then replacing the salary, but it doesn't work that way. You need to add up what you have and compare that to the cap space. Rose+Pau+Noah is like $48 million in salary. Even if you're generous on the cap, that'd leave like $12 million for the rest of the roster. Unless you can convince the other 8 guys to play for free, you don't have enough room to sign a free agent of any consequence. Butler, Mirotic and the first rounder this year are all going to make at least $1 mil, same for the first next year. Then factor in that the cap isn't likely to be $60 mil (admittedly I don't totally know how that works in the new CBA) and my usual salary website doesn't have Rose's yearly cap figures (it may be higher, I'm estimating 17), and you basically are left with only cap space equivalent to the MLE to try to sign your SG, nowhere near enough to get anyone of that caliber. The same is basically true if you keep Rose, Noah and Deng. Their total would be about $5 mil lower. That'd leave a little more room, but by the time you add the draft picks and assorted roster filler, you won't have the room to sign another big time free agent (for this purpose, someone making more than about $8 mil).

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ May 30, 2012 -> 08:39 PM) Maximize Deng's value. He'll be 29 when we're ready for another big run and looking for a new contract. Jeremy Lamb could be a legit #2 option next to Rose. "Maximizing his value" would be getting a better return than that. Ariza thinks he can score even though he can't and Jack is basically a league average PG (albiet he is coming off a good year racking up stats for an awful team). That means it all falls on Lamb to really get your "value". If he pans out, you're probably looking at something like Luol Deng. If he doesn't, ouch. I mean he has potential, but he's probably the 4th best wing in this draft. I don't really have a good example deal, but I'd call "maximizing his value" something like trading him with some filler for better player or a younger, comparable player. It's not like any of Rose, Deng or Noah are ancient. You can still get an extended run out of this. Plus I'm not really sure the difference between what you get at 29 is going to be that different from #10 in this particular draft.

You don't trade for #10 and then take Lamb. He might be there at 29. Edit- Nevermind, wrong Lamb. Still not sure trading your second best player for two guys that should be on the bench and an okay prospect is a good move.

QUOTE (Stocking @ May 30, 2012 -> 07:53 PM) How did this play into that future pick? /not green/ There's a HUGE drop-off after Davis, so they're not likely to improve enough to send the Bulls that pick until it's unprotected in 2016.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 30, 2012 -> 07:45 PM) Anthony Davis and Eric Gordon is a sick two-some to build around. And #11 as well in a draft that's deep but lacks sure things (Kentucky reunion with Terrence Jones?). Too bad the rest of that roster is pretty crappy, I have no idea how they won 21 games.

That result wasn't remotely suspicious.

I thought for sure Brooklyn would get top-3 so they get to keep it and facilitate the Dwight trade.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 30, 2012 -> 04:09 PM) It would be different if we were talking about Davis as a 5-10 pick, but as a #1 over all I just am not crazy about drafting an elite defender and hoping he can improve his offense. Which is why I would trade him for Howard, if Howard would re-sign. 90% of the big men in the league can't score right now anyways. He's going to come in right away and be a double-double threat with good defense and has the mobility, leaping ability, skill base and work ethic to develop into a very solid offensive player. That's extremely valuable. Guys that aren't nearly as good as he is get $10 million a year contracts. The team that gets him is going to have him for 5 years at below market value, probably more given it's advantageous to stay put on your first contract.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 30, 2012 -> 03:27 PM) I do like some guys who can stretch the floor. The problem for me with Davis, is that I just dont think he is that great of an outside shooter. Davis is listed as 6'10 220 and made 3 of 20 3's last year. John Leuer is listed as 6'10 228 and 54/146 of his 3's in his senior year. Now Davis is a much better interior player and has shown freakish defensive ability. But there is always a part of me that is shocked when I realize that Davis is actually the same size as Leuer, who is a player some thought was not big enough for the 4 in the NBA. The real concern is how many teams Davis played that actually had anyone capable of defending him at all. If you look at the tourney, the 2 games he played against teams that had a potential NBA starter at PF or C (KU and IU) he had pretty bad games. Even during the season he didnt play well against UNC (Henson/Zeller) or IU (Zeller). That being said, what else is there? I mean Gilchrist has good upside, but are you going to take him #1 when he didnt even average 12 points and basically just hope that he fulfills his talent. Its just a strange draft, especially since Henson is in the draft and hes basically Davis light. Part of me even wonders if 5 years from now it will turn out that Leonard was the best big in the draft. He does need to add bulk, but so does damn near every big man coming out of college. The bigger concern with Leuer is the defending/rebounding, which isn't an issue with Davis. I wouldn't say he "didn't play well" in games against elite competition. He didn't score in a lot of them, but a lot of that is because he didn't shoot much. He wasn't the focal point of the offense because he was on a loaded team and he's still a work in progress. Look at the games against the better frontcourts... first game against KU: 14 points on 8 shots vs UNC: 7 points, only 6 shots first game against IU: 6 points, only 4 shots, foul trouble second game against IU: 9 points, only 5 shots Baylor: 18 points, still only 9 shots second game against KU: the only "bad" one, 1-10 from the floor but still had 16 boards, 5 assists, 3 steals and 6 blocks That last part is important: he doesn't need to score to make an impact on the game. He's an elite defender and rebounder with major upside on offense.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ May 30, 2012 -> 11:47 AM) Houston is so desperate for a big name, they'd be willing to take that chance. And they actually think Hakeem Olajuwon could convicne Dwight to stick around long - term. Would Dwight sign in Brooklyn if Deron bolted for Dallas? Dwight isn't signing long-term in Houston, especially not if they give up their two best players. He'd be right back where he started. And I have a very hard time seeing Deron leave if they get Davis and still appear to be Dwight's preferred destination. I certainly wouldn't do it for the last 2 or 3 years of Dirk's prime and the rest of that trash roster. It's not like there are any other "instant contender" options out there, except maybe Indiana.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ May 30, 2012 -> 11:28 AM) They do that, we'll trade him to Houston for Kyle Lowry, Kevin Martin, Sam Dalembert and picks I'd imagine. And he refuses to sign an extension, which either kills the deal (see the original Favors offer for Melo) or he signs with Brooklyn anyways.

Just keep Davis and offer the same Lopez and crap package that's been there for 2 years. Dwight is going to sign with Brooklyn anyways after this year. That'd be the same mistake the Knicks made, they were getting Melo anyways but their impatience cost them every role player they had.

Pacers may be screwed anyways without Granger. They don't have a ton of firepower on the perimeter even with him, and he was guarding Lebron as well.

I don't normally gripe about the refs, but how can it be a flagrant when Hansbrough got the ball before the contact to the head?

QUOTE (Jake @ May 22, 2012 -> 04:14 PM) You mean it might be difficult to find a suitable replacement for Carlos Boozer? blasphemy! Carlos has never been able to defend, and his scoring hasn't looked so hot of late either.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 22, 2012 -> 03:40 PM) I agree with most of this. I never said Harden would be easy to replace. It'd be difficult. When I mentioned the Thunder's draft pedigree, I wasn't really talking about Durant. That was a no-brainer, especially when Portland took Oden 1st. Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka were hardly sure things. That was a lot of scouting mixed in with a smudge of good luck. Let me ask you this:: which would be harder to find in the draft? A Wesley Mathews type or a JaVale McGee? Yes, the latter is slow in the head but ridiculously gifted in all other aspects. I'm way too lazy to come up with a comprehensive list. You can find both. Paul Milsap, David West, Carlos Boozer and Chris Kaman were later picks. So were Michael Redd, Danny Granger and Gilbert Arenas (Monta Ellis doesn't count to me since he was a high schooler). Opportunity is also part of it with these guys, someone like Jason Thompson would fit nicely on the right team but has been buried in Sacramento. I feel like the bar to be a serviceable big man is a lot lower than it is to be a top-3 scorer, so I guess I'd lean slightly towards the wings. The "potential" part is the killer though because legitimate big men that can score down low, rebound and defend are about as common as World Series banners in Chicago.

I'd be in, but I'm more of a posting/content guy than a recruiting type. I've got about as many friends as Kip Drordy.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 22, 2012 -> 02:53 PM) With multiple first rounders, which would be the requirement if they dealt Harden, one would think with their draft pedigree they could find a player somewhat similar to Harden. Anthony Davis isn't going #1 because of his offense (and I know you and everyone else knows this. So gould can't say I'm stating the obvious). Bigs > guards/wings 8 times out of 10. You can't really say bigs>guards without taking the players into account (see Bowie, Sam and Oden, Greg). Every situation is different. Harden is a damn good scoring wing. He scored 17 PPG while taking 10 shots. On a team that didn't have Durant and Westbrook, he easily scores 20. That trio also gives the Thunder the luxury of not having to worry about offense since those three combine for like 70 PPG, giving them the flexibility to go all defense with their other guys. If you don't need scoring from your bigs, you can find serviceable guys unless you're the Miami Heat. He also fits very well since he doesn't always have to dominate the ball to score, someone like Monta Ellis or Tyreke Evans doesn't work on OKC. Their "draft pedigree" is pretty much based on hitting with top-5 picks right now. Durant went #2 and would have gone #1 most years, Westbrook went #4 in one of the strongest drafts in recent memory, Harden went #3 (after Hasheem Thabeet, lol). Obviously Ibaka was a good find as a foreigner most had never heard of. Are they going to be able to get an unprotected top-5 pick in this draft or the next for him? That kind of think is generally hard to swing, and they'd still have to hit even if they did. It's not going to be any easier to find a scorer of that caliber with a mid to late round pick than it will be to find a decent big man. You're still taking a hit even if you end up with an Aaron Afflalo or Paul George type just like you'd be taking a hit if you end up with a Taj Gibson or Kenneth Faried. Right now I'd say there's a bigger gap between those guys on the wing than between Ibaka and those bigs. Wait another year and the answer might change, which is the real issue there. Given their needs, Ibaka probably makes more sense. Harden is definitely a better player at this point though and he's not remotely easy to replace.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 22, 2012 -> 01:19 PM) I think the Thunder should go ahead and trade Harden now. They're just not going to be able to keep both he and Ibaka. Harden would net them a bounty (i.e. multiple first-round draft picks). You can't let Ibaka get away. Meh. Harden is definitely a better player, his offensive efficiency was ridiculous. As the Bulls have proven, it's not easy to find a legit scorer on the cheap. The only reason it'd make any sense for OKC is they already have Durant and Westbrook. The problem with that is you need a big and Ibaka's development curve is a huge wildcard. At his current 10-8 level with good defense, you could probably find a reasonable replacement. If he turns into a 15 PPG type, that's another story.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ May 22, 2012 -> 11:16 AM) If the Bulls dealt Boozer for say, Turkoglu, then Hedo becomes a giant expiring the year Harden is a RFA (which also happens to be another nice FA class, that could re-feature LeBron) and with Deng being an expiring as well...the Bulls could make cap room. This wouldn't be a next year move. Deng would still be on the books in the year you'd have to sign Harden to an offer sheet (before the 2013/2014 season). I don't have the exact numbers in front of me (for some reason hoopshype doesn't have Derrick's yearly salaries up yet), but Rose/Noah/Deng is going to be at least $42 mil in 2013/2014. So that's a fringe-y max offer even without counting a qualifying offer to Gibson or any draft picks/cheap guys.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 22, 2012 -> 09:54 AM) Interesting. With so many faults, I wanted to argue this point. I still think I have to given top 5 players are on the court in crunch time, and you simply can't put Dwight out there on offense down two with ten seconds left, because he'll wind up at the stripe and you will wind up losing the game. In typing this response, I discovered our departed Derrick Rose had become quite the efficient player when healthy this year, to the point of landing in the top 10 of PER. Where are you, Felix?! Oh wait, Derrick's dead so it doesn't matter. Full disclosure - I want to put Derrick in here, but exploded legs do not allow. Here are my top 10 players in the NBA - note, this is for a one-year season, not a value moving forward season. Top 10 guys to help win you a championship in 2012-2013: 1. LeBron James - man, I wish he'd have gone to New York. 2. Kevin Durant - love, nerd glasses and all. 3. Chistopher Emmanuel Paul Three 4. D-Wade 5. Kobe Bryant 6. f*** IT IM RANKING DERRICK ROSE HERE f*** YOU ALL 7. Russell Westbrook - he's basically a healthy Derrick Rose at this point. 8. Kevin Love 9. Dwight Howard - achy back, drama, crunch time s***tiness. 10. Blake Griffin - wow, I guess he is a superstar. Apologies to whomever I called out. We party. This logic is brutal. So was Shaq not a top-5 player? You're just going to ignore the other 47 minutes and 50 seconds where he's clearly the best big man in the league? How is Blake right below him with the same weakness and nowhere near the same defensive value? With Lebron and Wade on the same team, Howard probably has a bigger impact on his team's record than anyone in the NBA right now. Orlando has consistently been a good defensive team entirely because of him and he's the best finisher in the league. They've had no business being anywhere near as successful as they have been the last several years, that's pretty much all Dwight. Also, PER. Having a good PER doesn't really mean you're "efficient" even though it's in the abbreviation. It's largely based on rates of stat accumulation, which Derrick is going to do frequently since he's the primary scorer/ball-handler and does it pretty well. True shooting percentage is a far more useful stat for determining the "efficiency" of one's scoring since it doesn't take anything else into account and his scoring efficiency is what most people criticize (I'm not debating the merit, just posting the facts). Rose was 25th among PG's in true shooting percentage. Granted that includes a lot of guys that got hurt or don't shoot nearly often, but it's still hardly an "elite" number.

TalkBulls was going for a while. Then some of the more frequent posters stopped going there, and we kept having to suspend two of the most frequent non-Soxtalk posters. Then the Soxtalk-based people that used to post there a lot (me, Steve, Slav mainly) started going to this thread instead.