Quin Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 10:38 AM) Which means it should be easier for him to learn the game than someone like Rose. Wait, what? And Rose wasn't academically smart. He hasn't shown to be stupid in 101 other ways like Josh Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 10:40 AM) While tanking and hoping for a decent draft pick makes sense on one hand, you have a lot of people paying a lot of money to see the Bulls in person. And for not a lot of payoff since the odds of the Bulls finding someone that can start for them in this draft are pretty slim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 09:16 AM) The potential is mouthwatering. Could a coach like Thibs get through to him? You're clearly not familiar with J-Smoov other than looking at a stat sheet. The guy is a knucklehead that is way more useful to a fantasy team than an NBA team. He's also a bad fit with the rest of the Bulls: another inefficient scorer that can't space the floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Well he tries to space the floor so well with his 20% 20-ft jumpers and 0% three pointers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The thing that really sucks about Smith is that if he abandoned his outside game, I think he could be crazy good. But he won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 11:17 AM) The thing that really sucks about Smith is that if he abandoned his outside game, I think he could be crazy good. But he won't. Meh. His shooting percentage would go up, but his usage rate would go down because of his limited offensive repertoire. It's not like he's a really good post scorer or can take guys off the dribble. If he stops shooting jumpers, he basically becomes a guy that gets you 14 points on 10 shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted February 19, 2013 Author Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 11:17 AM) The thing that really sucks about Smith is that if he abandoned his outside game, I think he could be crazy good. But he won't. He did - Mike Woodson actually got into his head in 2009/2010 and Smith hit exactly zero threes all season long. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3834/c...pb0VYWhX.sCPaB4 He also shot 50% from the field that year for a PER of 21. Of course, he also hit free throws a bit better then, too. (62% vs 50% this year) The moral of the story is that this is not a guy you want to give a max contract to; but they can certainly take Boozer's contract off our hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 For boozer and hamilton (or whatever salary match) id take Smith. For anyone useful on the Bulls, no thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 10:49 AM) You're clearly not familiar with J-Smoov other than looking at a stat sheet. The guy is a knucklehead that is way more useful to a fantasy team than an NBA team. He's also a bad fit with the rest of the Bulls: another inefficient scorer that can't space the floor. Kinda like Carlos Boozer was... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 12:47 PM) Kinda like Carlos Boozer was... I'm not even sure what your point is here. 90-something percent of Bulls' fans wouldn't shed a tear if they used the amnesty clause on him. He's also historically had a better TS% than Smith (they're about a push this year) and J-Smoov is looking for even MORE money than Boozer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 12:47 PM) Kinda like Carlos Boozer was... Boozer isn't an idiot though. Just unathletic and slow on defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 01:09 PM) I'm not even sure what your point is here. 90-something percent of Bulls' fans wouldn't shed a tear if they used the amnesty clause on him. He's also historically had a better TS% than Smith (they're about a push this year) and J-Smoov is looking for even MORE money than Boozer. Mostly that the Bulls are going to waste the opportunity to do nothing, again, and probably waste Rose's career without a title win. They refuse to take any chances to make themselves better for the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 03:45 PM) Mostly that the Bulls are going to waste the opportunity to do nothing, again, and probably waste Rose's career without a title win. They refuse to take any chances to make themselves better for the long run. Do you really think that committing long term money to Josh Smith has even a reasonable chance of "making the bulls better for the long run"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:48 PM) Do you really think that committing long term money to Josh Smith has even a reasonable chance of "making the bulls better for the long run"? Better than adding the Rip Hamiltons and Kirk Hinrichs of the world... Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted February 19, 2013 Author Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:48 PM) Do you really think that committing long term money to Josh Smith has even a reasonable chance of "making the bulls better for the long run"? nothing like giving a max contract to a guy whose entire game is athleticism when said contract would pay him until he's 32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:45 PM) Mostly that the Bulls are going to waste the opportunity to do nothing, again, and probably waste Rose's career without a title win. They refuse to take any chances to make themselves better for the long run. Clearly the way to resolve that is to give a guy that's historically been the second or third best player on a high 40's/low 50's win team a max contract that would pay him comfortably north of $20 million by the end of it. That also says nothing about what they'd have to give up to acquire him in trade (if it could be done for Carlos Boozer and crap, it would have happened already). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:52 PM) Clearly the way to resolve that is to give a guy that's historically been the second or third best player on a high 40's/low 50's win team a max contract that would pay him comfortably north of $20 million by the end of it. That also says nothing about what they'd have to give up to acquire him in trade (if it could be done for Carlos Boozer and crap, it would have happened already). And without creative thinking, we can keep enjoying Marco Bellinili and Nate Robinson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 03:50 PM) Better than adding the Rip Hamiltons and Kirk Hinrichs of the world... Yes. I completely disagree. Tying up a huge contract alongside Rose is the kind of move that makes it harder to find the room to find value players with lower contracts and makes it much more likely that the Bulls will dump contributors like Deng or Noah due to the multi-year luxury tax. Heck, great example; Bulls lost Asik for a similar reason; Smith would certainly cost them Butler in a year or two. For every $5 million they blow on Hinrich, they've wound up signing a guy like Robinson or Korver who has been a legit contributor as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 03:53 PM) And without creative thinking, we can keep enjoying Marco Bellinili and Nate Robinson. I'd rather pay them $3 million and Taj Gibson $9 million than Josh Smith $12 million (and that's low-balling him). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:53 PM) And without creative thinking, we can keep enjoying Marco Bellinili and Nate Robinson. Overpaying a decent but not great player isn't exactly "creative thinking". In fact, that's pretty much what every non-contender does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:54 PM) I'd rather pay them $3 million and Taj Gibson $9 million than Josh Smith $12 million (and that's low-balling him). You can't win an NBA title with one superstar caliber player anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 03:57 PM) You can't win an NBA title with one superstar caliber player anymore. Paying a guy superstar dollars doesn't turn him into a superstar player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:54 PM) I completely disagree. Tying up a huge contract alongside Rose is the kind of move that makes it harder to find the room to find value players with lower contracts and makes it much more likely that the Bulls will dump contributors like Deng or Noah due to the multi-year luxury tax. Heck, great example; Bulls lost Asik for a similar reason; Smith would certainly cost them Butler in a year or two. For every $5 million they blow on Hinrich, they've wound up signing a guy like Robinson or Korver who has been a legit contributor as well. They lost Asik because they tried low balling him. They are lucky that Taj didn't challenge them at the same game or he would be gone too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogua Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 02:57 PM) You can't win an NBA title with one superstar caliber player anymore. The Mavericks won the championship 2 years ago with one superstar caliber player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2013 -> 03:59 PM) They lost Asik because they tried low balling him. They are lucky that Taj didn't challenge them at the same game or he would be gone too. And why might they have done that? It doesn't register to you that paying $15 million a year for a guy playing like an $8 million a year player (Boozer) might cause the Bulls to low-ball a player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts