McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Quote:
The Bulls have 12 players under contract at $67.54 million. This includes center Aaron Gray, who received a qualifying offer from the Bulls, and both draft picks.
The Bulls are required to add a 13th player, which will probably be a backup point guard. Anthony Roberson and Demarcus Nelson might battle for that job in summer league, while the Bulls are very interested in bringing back veteran Lindsey Hunter as a player or coach.
Nothing says the Bulls can't pay a small amount of luxury tax next season. But obviously, they're not going to add much more to the payroll. So even low-priced free agents such as Rodney Carney or Kareem Rush are a long shot.
Definitely need to sign at least 1 more youngin' guard who can play the point, and hopefully defend both guard positions. Or, just sign a 3rd string PG who can defend, then sign a cheap big guard who can defend. There should be dozens of those types available.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Quote:
Originally Posted by yodurk
Standing pat makes sense. Assuming good health, we already have a playoff worthy 8-man rotation:
Guards -- Rose, Salmons, Hinrich
Forwards -- Deng, Tyrus, Johnson
Centers -- Noah, Miller
Sorry, but unless Rose becomes a near 20ppg 10apg guy, that is not a playoff roster. Period. Every team is getting better except ours. At best, swapping out deng for Rose, is a lateral move. At worst, it is a regression, even if mildly. So unless there's VAST improvement from mr Rose, we won't be as good as we were last year.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Krakken
Sorry, but unless Rose becomes a near 20ppg 10apg guy, that is not a playoff roster. Period.
Wow...ok, disagreed. Completely.
Rose WILL be a near 20 ppg guy. I don't see how the number of assists he averages is that important, more so than his impact on the game. The point remains that most of us expect he builds off an outstanding rookie season.
Quote:
Every team is getting better except ours.
Serious?! That couldn't be further from the truth. A few of the top-heavy teams are making short-term moves, true. Lakers, Cavs, Spurs, and maybe Boston (if the Sheed signing goes through). But they were contenders anyways.
I challenge you to list out any of the 14 lottery teams who finished behind the Bulls; and make an argument for why/how any of those teams leap-frogged us. It certainly wasn't due to the draft! lol!
Quote:
Might want to lower your expectations a bit.
I only expect 40-45 wins, plus a #6-8 playoff seed.
I made a prediction last year of 41-41 and nailed it. Partly luck true, but I don't think I've been drinking much Kool-Aid either.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Looking closer at the 14 lotto teams, this is what I personally concluded:
1) Kings -- added a raw rookie; long ways to go
2) Wizards -- possible 40-45 win team if Arenas comes back healthy; Foye and Mike Miller were good additions, but still so weak on the interior. I'll put them neck and neck with the Bulls
3) Clippers -- will be better with their nucleus of Gordon, Thorton, and Griffin; but not playoff worthy in the West
4) OKC -- will be better due to internal improvement primarily; horrible defense and no interior whatsoever; no playoffs in the West
5) Minny -- lol at their draft; long ways to go
6) Memphis -- major chemistry issues to overcome; don't count on Randolph making a difference; no playoffs in the West
7) Golden State -- I love the Curry & Ellis backcourt, and an Amare trade could help them; still, they are in the West and a notch below the Bulls at the moment.
8) Knicks -- Looking to lose David Lee for nothing, replacing him with Jordan Hill. Might get an aging Kidd if they're lucky. Lock for the lotto, IMO.
9) Toronto -- disarray; drafted a raw rookie and otherwise the same team as last year. Bosh unhappy. Definitely didn't leap frog the Bulls, unless they have a miracle turn around.
10) Milwaukee -- dismantling their team for financial reasons; lock for the lottery.
11) New Jersey -- no Vince Carter; more pressure on Harris & Lopez to carry them. Not much talent or significant additions beyond those 2 guys. Will fight for 35-40 wins, but pretty certain they are lotto bound.
12) Charlotte -- No major additions; heading in the right direction given their decent finish last season, but Gerald Henderson isn't likely to vault them past the Bulls. Definitely could compete w/ us for that 8th seed.
13) Indiana -- Hansbrough as their pick and no other additions isn't likely to be improvement; I also don't think Granger continues the steep upward climb he's been doing. Very likely a lotto team.
14) Phoenix -- declining for sure; near lock for the lotto in the West.
And then a few noteworthy playoff teams...
15) Pistons: Losing Rasheed for nothing, and just a terrible frontcourt. Bulls backcourt alone is better than theirs. Rose > Gordon, Hinrich > Stuckey, Salmons = Hamilton. Unless something really unforseen happens.
And then there is Philly, Miami, Atlanta -- hard to say what those teams will do. They all had good seasons, but are hard pressed to look any better this upcoming season.
To say the Bulls are not looking to be a playoff team is a joke, IMO. They have a very high chance unless we have serious injury problems (which I'd argue can take down anyone).
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Krakken
Sorry, but unless Rose becomes a near 20ppg 10apg guy, that is not a playoff roster. Period. Every team is getting better except ours. At best, swapping out deng for Rose, is a lateral move. At worst, it is a regression, even if mildly. So unless there's VAST improvement from mr Rose, we won't be as good as we were last year.
Might want to lower your expectations a bit.
This guy is drinking the cool aid! If you look at the Boston series you will find that every game we won, BG was not the leading scorer. However, every game we lost, BG was the leading scorer. This is not a coincidence! We will be fine without BG. I'll say it right now. We will be better! Of course this depends on injuries, but with BG gone the Bulls now have the ability to always play like a team, continuously moving the ball around to find the open player. KH will obviously get more minutes w/o BG, thus a couple extra points. Rose has been practicing like a MFer and his points will go up as well. You add these 2players points increases with the points increase from Salmons, Tyrus, and a healthy Deng due to ball movement and that is all the points you need to fill the BG void.
2010
KH +4 pts. (Just due to minutes increase)
Rose +4 pts. (Due to practice. Especially just by improving his free throws)
Salmons +3 pts. (Due to better ball movement)
Deng +4 pts. (Due to better ball movement & being healthy)
Thomas +3 pts. (Due to better ball movement & wanting to get more money) Total
17 pts.
These I believe are prety conservative numbers and don't include the small addition from James Johnson, nor the decrease in the oppositions points due to better defense.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Btw, I thought Krakken was not a big BG fan, right? Didn't you say at one point last year that Gordon's shot selection was having a bad effect on the team (or something of that effect)? That was you, right?
Not calling you out, just curious where the difference in opinion comes from.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Honestly they shouldn't stay pat as it is.
If they don't make a major move to bring an all star big man this summer then they should do some signing to cover the depth because honestly our depth isn't that good think about for a second.
It's one of the what ifs and it is very possible. Ben Gordon is gone now which John Salmons will probably start at SG and Kirk Hinrich will come off the bench to play both point and SG which assuming the Bulls stand pat.
Starting line up and depth chart be something like this:
Which you see the depth chart above isn't to good but isn't to shabby, now say Luol Deng went down a injury or assuming he isn't healthy and is not ready to go depth chart with the rotation look like this with out Deng
Noah/Miller
Tyrus/Gibson/JJ
Salmons/JJ
Kirk
Rose
Which you will see John Salmons most likely will start SF if Deng goes down but who is going to back up Kirk at SG? Who is going to back up Rose at PG? Keep in mind assuming with the roster we have right now assuming we stand pat with the exactly roster we have right now. That same goes someone like Kirk or Salmons if one of them goes down a injury who is going to back up who? We don't have the depth to cover those areas incase someone goes down with a injury. This team shouldn't and didn't need to go through to play seven guys every single game. We need depth...
I would sign a cheap veteran point guard that can still some what contribute or sort someone like Tyrone Lue for example.
Get a shooting guard someone like Anthony Parker, Dionte Christmas(Give him a shot.), M. Daniels(one year only.), and whoever is a free agent at the SG position.
Same with the big sign a veteran big for the MLE or veteran minimum someone like I don't know Theo Ratiff.
Just for depth purposes and incase someone goes down with a injury.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Quote:
Originally Posted by pduh
Honestly they shouldn't stay pat as it is.
If they don't make a major move to bring an all star big man this summer then they should do some signing to cover the depth because honestly our depth isn't that good think about for a second.
It's one of the what ifs and it is very possible. Ben Gordon is gone now which John Salmons will probably start at SG and Kirk Hinrich will come off the bench to play both point and SG which assuming the Bulls stand pat.
Starting line up and depth chart be something like this:
Which you see the depth chart above isn't to good but isn't to shabby, now say Luol Deng went down a injury or assuming he isn't healthy and is not ready to go depth chart with the rotation look like this with out Deng
Noah/Miller
Tyrus/Gibson/JJ
Salmons/JJ
Kirk
Rose
Which you will see John Salmons most likely will start SF if Deng goes down but who is going to back up Kirk at SG? Who is going to back up Rose at PG? Keep in mind assuming with the roster we have right now assuming we stand pat with the exactly roster we have right now. That same goes someone like Kirk or Salmons if one of them goes down a injury who is going to back up who? We don't have the depth to cover those areas incase someone goes down with a injury. This team shouldn't and didn't need to go through to play seven guys every single game. We need depth...
I would sign a cheap veteran point guard that can still some what contribute or sort someone like Tyrone Lue for example.
Get a shooting guard someone like Anthony Parker, Dionte Christmas(Give him a shot.), M. Daniels(one year only.), and whoever is a free agent at the SG position.
Same with the big sign a veteran big for the MLE or veteran minimum someone like I don't know Theo Ratiff.
Just for depth purposes and incase someone goes down with a injury.
Isn't this the case with most teams though? I agree our depth wouldn't be that good if someone like KH/Salmons went down, but this is the case for most teams. It is just one of the risks that comes with this game. Look at Washington. They lost Arenas and despite having Jamison/Butler they still didn't do well. We do need a 4th SG, but for a 1 year deal like you mentioned. I like Marquise Daniels. What is Desmond Mason up to? Isn't his contract up this summer? He is another candidate I would like.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Quote:
Originally Posted by BullsBaller
Isn't this the case with most teams though? I agree our depth wouldn't be that good if someone like KH/Salmons went down, but this is the case for most teams. It is just one of the risks that comes with this game. Look at Washington. They lost Arenas and despite having Jamison/Butler they still didn't do well. We do need a 4th SG, but for a 1 year deal like you mentioned. I like Marquise Daniels. What is Desmond Mason up to? Isn't his contract up this summer? He is another candidate I would like.
I understand the risk is part of the game and it goes by any other sports, but in the off-season rather you lose a particular player or not if you have an opportunity to get a certain player for cheap strengthen the depth chart you have to go for it. Times risk can back fired you and this is coming from a person say sometimes you have to take risk for a success and I don't think it's one of them most of the times.
Wizards are pretty much poorly built and Eddie Jordan was known as a horrible coach. It was a matter of time that it's going to catch up to him and get the axe which he did.
As for Desmond Mason I think he is a free agent but I can't remember who his last team play for the Hornets, Thunder, or someone else?
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
When mentioning names like Marquis Daniels and Desmond Mason, keep in mind that the Bulls are dangerously close to the luxury tax right now. I read somewhere that we only have $1M or so left to spend, before we go over the tax line.
The Bulls have given every indication that Reinsdorf will not pay the tax this season, unless it were bringing back a big man who puts us over the top. People can debate whether that's the right approach or not, but the fact remains this is the case.
With that in mind, we will undoubtedly use this remaining money on a cheap 4th guard, who will play for the minimum. It'd be nice to get someone who can play both guard positions. I think that's why we may just keep DeMarcus Nelson. He won't be in the regular rotation; just insurance for any injuries.
I think Devin Brown would be even better; he's play PG for the Hornets and defends both guard spots. He's also a veteran who might keep us afloat during hard (injury-ridden) times. $1M might not be enough though.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Just a question:
I heard (from KC on the radio) that the figure of 1 million from LT-land INCLUDES a cap hold (of about a million) for a thirteenth player, since we have only twelve spots filled. If that is right, we should have a little bit more room for adding said player than we've been saying.
Can anyone corroborate?
__________________
"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." Heb. 11:1
There are better things to hope in than the Bulls, but its fun to try, anyway.
Re: McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Quote:
Originally Posted by yodurk
Looking closer at the 14 lotto teams, this is what I personally concluded:
1) Kings -- added a raw rookie; long ways to go
2) Wizards -- possible 40-45 win team if Arenas comes back healthy; Foye and Mike Miller were good additions, but still so weak on the interior. I'll put them neck and neck with the Bulls
3) Clippers -- will be better with their nucleus of Gordon, Thorton, and Griffin; but not playoff worthy in the West
4) OKC -- will be better due to internal improvement primarily; horrible defense and no interior whatsoever; no playoffs in the West
5) Minny -- lol at their draft; long ways to go
6) Memphis -- major chemistry issues to overcome; don't count on Randolph making a difference; no playoffs in the West
7) Golden State -- I love the Curry & Ellis backcourt, and an Amare trade could help them; still, they are in the West and a notch below the Bulls at the moment.
8) Knicks -- Looking to lose David Lee for nothing, replacing him with Jordan Hill. Might get an aging Kidd if they're lucky. Lock for the lotto, IMO.
9) Toronto -- disarray; drafted a raw rookie and otherwise the same team as last year. Bosh unhappy. Definitely didn't leap frog the Bulls, unless they have a miracle turn around.
10) Milwaukee -- dismantling their team for financial reasons; lock for the lottery.
11) New Jersey -- no Vince Carter; more pressure on Harris & Lopez to carry them. Not much talent or significant additions beyond those 2 guys. Will fight for 35-40 wins, but pretty certain they are lotto bound.
12) Charlotte -- No major additions; heading in the right direction given their decent finish last season, but Gerald Henderson isn't likely to vault them past the Bulls. Definitely could compete w/ us for that 8th seed.
13) Indiana -- Hansbrough as their pick and no other additions isn't likely to be improvement; I also don't think Granger continues the steep upward climb he's been doing. Very likely a lotto team.
14) Phoenix -- declining for sure; near lock for the lotto in the West.
And then a few noteworthy playoff teams...
15) Pistons: Losing Rasheed for nothing, and just a terrible frontcourt. Bulls backcourt alone is better than theirs. Rose > Gordon, Hinrich > Stuckey, Salmons = Hamilton. Unless something really unforseen happens.
And then there is Philly, Miami, Atlanta -- hard to say what those teams will do. They all had good seasons, but are hard pressed to look any better this upcoming season.
To say the Bulls are not looking to be a playoff team is a joke, IMO. They have a very high chance unless we have serious injury problems (which I'd argue can take down anyone).
i would say the bulls are not so talented that they can afford to lose their best scorer from an avg. offensive team and exect their fortunes to be the same as last season...outside of rose the team no one projects to really improve over last season to make up for that or really decline for that matter ...at best a slight decline is probably the most logical reasoning.
the knicks haven't lost lee yet and it looks like only portland will bid on him if any1 at this point ...he has no offers at this point except the knicks 4 years 32 mil.and there is a strong possibility the blazers wont jack up his price on the knicks because the knicks could return the favor next year on aldridge...for the blazers he will just be their backup 4 how much will is he really worth to them?
any1 else needs a sign and trade because they only have the mle...so they
with added depth they project to a .500 team
the pistons have only lost sheed iverson and amir johnson at this point, mcdyess is making up his mind and they have aquired charlie V and gordon...iverson seemed to hurt rather than help last season and johnson was a nonfactor ...i dont think they are any worse unless mcdyess chooses another team ...but he seems to like it there alot.
the pacers i dont see being much better either
washington if healthy might be a 50 win team seeing as they were a 45 win team 2 years ago but added some good depth in nick young ,miller and mcghee and foye...their best players 2 yrs. ago arenas , butler haywood jamison are still there ....probably wont be fully heathy given their history but should make playoffs or at least should beleive they will.
the raptors added hedo I think they they will be much improved because their team is as much about collective confidence as it is about talent, i think they will be in serious contention for a playoff spot.
the bobcats filled a whole at the 2 , but rooks generally dont add to wins much i dont see henderson as the exception to the rule...i expect trades, it is after all a larry brown team.
milwaukee will be bad
new jersey will be in my opnion a 30 win team with no vince hoping for improvements from yi and lopez to fill the void.
i think there is some serious competition from the lower teams, 2-3 playoff teams could be bumped, i think the bulls chances are better than the 76ers should they lose miller , crawford could continue his bad luck in atl., but i dont think the bulls should stand pat at this point which is what they seem to want to do.
__________________
Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.
McGraw: Bulls figure to stand pat with Gordon gone
Linear Mode
