[ehmunro]

Originally Posted by essbee

I just don't understand why Cleveland would be willing to take Ben's contract. It gives them a nice defensive front court but the cost seems too high and Ben is slower on response time than he used to be. I think Joe Smith is very effective at this point and is a pretty smart player so that's the part of the trade that I like, but like you said it's the only real upgrade I see. Honestly without any tradeable assets I can't give Ferry too low of a mark b/c what else could he do? They weren't going to get any elite players.

He would have been better off with a Gooden for Smith deal and then trading Shannon Brown for West. At least then he would have added a couple of role players, and Smith would have fit with AV and Zydrunas. By taking on two cancers Ferry's taking a huge gamble on two players with zero upside. So the bright side of the deal remains that Ferry's done in Cleveland.

[Brandname]

Originally Posted by essbee

I just don't understand why Cleveland would be willing to take Ben's contract. It gives them a nice defensive front court but the cost seems too high and Ben is slower on response time than he used to be. I think Joe Smith is very effective at this point and is a pretty smart player so that's the part of the trade that I like, but like you said it's the only real upgrade I see. Honestly without any tradeable assets I can't give Ferry too low of a mark b/c what else could he do? They weren't going to get any elite players.

The reason we were willing to take Wallace's contract is because it was the only way to get a deal done. We have limited assets, so we aren't going to make a killing in any trade.

With Hughes going out, the albatross contracts kind of balance out. We've been trying to get rid of Hughes for as long as they have been trying to get rid of Wallace. I think Hughes is a little better than BW, but I think the rest of the trade balances out in the Cavs' favor.

[liekomgj4ck]

I love how almost no one in this thread has talked about the trade from the Bulls perspective

[futuristxen]

Plus Wallace as an overpaid backup is less hurtful to us than Hughes as an overpaid starter. It's funny that he's in Cleveland after afterthing. He's played for Cleveland, Chicago, and Detroit. All of whom are fierce rivals.

[essbee]

Originally Posted by ehmunro

He would have been better off with a Gooden for Smith deal and then trading Shannon Brown for West. At least then he would have added a couple of role players, and Smith would have fit with AV and Zydrunas. By taking on two cancers Ferry's taking a huge gamble on two players with zero upside. So the bright side of the deal remains that Ferry's done in Cleveland.

speaking of which, what's the over/under on "teams played for" in Wally's career now? I say he plays for 8 teams when it's all said and done.

[essbee]

Originally Posted by liekomgj4ck

I love how almost no one in this thread has talked about the trade from the Bulls perspective

Yeah it's shocking that people would talk more about the team with playoff relevance that went to the finals last year. Shocking.

[Brandname]

Originally Posted by liekomgj4ck

I love how almost no one in this thread has talked about the trade from the Bulls perspective

I'm not even sure I really understand it from the Bulls' perspective. They get someone who plays the same position as Ben Gordon. And they get Gooden, who I'm not sure is any better than Joe Smith.

It seems to me that they were just desperate to get rid of Ben Wallace.

[thaKEAF]

Originally Posted by essbee

Yeah it's shocking that people would talk more about the team with playoff relevance that went to the finals last year. Shocking.

Pretty much.

[Diable]

I guess that Hughes is insurance against Ben Gordon leaving.You know that the Bulls are never going to pay him the sort of deal he seems to think he deserves.Probably won't have to with so few teams having much capspace and a lot of FA's available this summer.