Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
If we get a high draft pick, which is looking like a good chance right now, we have to try and get Emeka, this guy is like they say "a freak of nature", he scores, rebounds and locks shots, but could he do all this at the 3 spot? If he could mold his game into a SF type player I would have to say that the bulls would be favored to be a top contender in the East next season, as much as I want us to try to make a push for the playoffs, it is just slipping away..... So here is what our lineup could look like next season

Hinrich 15 pts 8asst
Crawford 20 points 6 asst
Emeka 14 pts 8 rbs
Chandler 18 pts 10 rebs
Curry 24 pts 7 rbs

(all of those numbers can easliy be reached by each of those players, so there is no reason why we should expect less, we should easily be able to put up over 90 plus points game)

Bench
AD
JYD
Dupree
Brunson

That is a solid 9 man rotation and I believe the bulls could easily be a contender with that lineup
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,132 Posts
I don't think so, but never say never.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
The Bulls, contenders next year? I don't think so, but maybe may sneak into the playoffs finally.
 

·
"Meow."
Joined
·
5,595 Posts
Did you catch the Curry/AD/Ty lineup the Bulls played against the Sonics? It's not impossible that Ty or Okafor could play the 3, but it would marginalize their games. Both excel on help defense, clogging the paint, and rebounding. Neither has legitimate range or ball handling skills. The farther you take them away from the basket, the less they will contribute. If Given the opportunity, I'm not arguing that the Bulls shouldn't draft Okafor (especially if Deng is not available), but if you acquire him, Paxson would be required to make some difficult personel decisions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,070 Posts
i think Tyson would play sf better than okafor can..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,378 Posts
I don't see the need for Okefor do be moved. There are 96 minutes per game at the 4 and 5 spots. That is 32 mins per game for three players. That should suffice for next year at least and maybe Chandler can play a little 3 if guys need more minutes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Ty does play the 3 at times, but that's normally when the Bulls are in a zone. Maybe when Tyson gets his leg strength and quickness he can hang with the slower 3s, but don't hold your breath.

Okafor at the 3? No. Just forget about that idea. But playing Eddy at the 4 isn't a horrible idea. Especially if he was paired with a bigger guy that can hit a mid range jump shot. I think it would have been pretty cool to see what Eddy and Ming could do on the court together. Maybe the big Russian??
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
58,028 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
Okafor can't play SF.

Chandler can't play SF.
Well well, why not Curry? J/K. The rare rare big man whom can play SF like KG is rare.

-Petey
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,433 Posts
I don't see any reason why we couldn't have a future frontcourt of Curry, Chandler and Okafor.

There's no need to have to label someone a "SF". It's much more important to have talent out there.

Why couldn't this team have three big bodies in the frontcourt, ala some succesful Knicks teams with guys like Ewing, Oakley and Mason/LJ?

The Knicks got by because whoever drew the assignment of guarding the opposing SF was a good defender. With Chandler or Okafor drawing that assignment potentially, I'd feel very comfortable. Kind of like how JYD draws that assignment when he's out on the court.

This lineup can work as long as we have enough shooting talent on the perimeter. Hinrich can shoot with range, and hopefully we can acquire a better SG in a trade for Crawford.

A lineup of Hinrich, Caron Butler (just throwing a name out there), Okafor, Chandler and Curry would be tough. And it would put the pressure on the opponent to try and keep up with us on the interior. We would probably be able to steamroll a lot of Eastern Conference teams because they simply wouldn't have the size to contend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,922 Posts
I'm going to say if Okafor is drafted, I don't think that means we HAVE to trade Tyson.

I think you have to see exactly what Emeka is going to bring to the table next year before you start trading people.

Emeka maybe the next Tim Duncan, but none of what he can do has been proven in the NBA yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
If we want Okafor, we should draft him to play up to his strength, not to what we need him to be. We've seen with a lot of players (Fizer comes to mind) that it doesn't work putting them in a different position.

If we want a SF we should draft or trade for a SF.

Tyson is no SF and can't play the position, same for Okafor.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
780 Posts
If Given the opportunity, I'm not arguing that the Bulls shouldn't draft Okafor (especially if Deng is not available), but if you acquire him, Paxson would be required to make some difficult personel decisions.
has anyone even stoped to think that if we draft Okafor he will be a rookie right???? and what has happend when we start rookies or very young players full time? thats right we suck,i say draft him let him play behind TC and EC (if they are still here) and let the game come to him without all the press...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,817 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!


Well well, why not Curry? J/K. The rare rare big man whom can play SF like KG is rare.

-Petey
Dwight Howard can play SF...He'd be a good pick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,049 Posts
omeka is a must pick for us. team him w/ curry and chandler and it would be a lethal combo. WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER HIGH SCHOOLER YOU DUMMIES WHO WANT ONE. OMEKA HAS LOADS OF POTENTIAL HIMSELF!!!!!!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,840 Posts
I really don't see Emeka Okafor playing SF. The guy just simply isn't a perimeter defender, and neither is Tyson Chandler.


Plus, playing a guy at an un-natural position could potentially damage his career.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
There are several points made by members that I agree with.

1. Okafor can't play SF.

2. Chandler can't play SF well, but probably better than Okafor, but still that is miscasting him enough to be an emergency situation, not a plan.

3. Howard would also probably be a better SF fit than Okafor because he is more finesse and Okafor stronger, but he too would be pretty bad fit there.

4. We don't have to trade Chandler or Curry if we get Okafor. If you could get a star at SF for one of those three it would probably make sense, or certainly if you kept all three in a three man 4/5 rotation, then Davis, Williams, and Fizer if he is still here would all be trade bait to acquire help elsewhere.

5. Of the PF's on the roster or projected to be high picks, only the Junk Yard Dog can be considered for significant minutes at SF. Given the glut at PF and weakness at SF I like the fact Skiles sometimes uses him there, where he obviously is weak on the offensive end, but can guard some SF's while adding great rebounding for that position.

6. Any team that wants Okafor drafting behind us is a potential trading partner to get a SF or SG we could use. He probably has more value to others than he does to us, and plenty of teams would be interested in moving up to get him.

7. I would prefer getting a known quantity and starter quality and good fit for Okafor or Howard in a trade, but we could also make a lessor deal to move down and still pick up someone like Igoudala, Childress, Warrick, Monya, Chiraev, Garcia etc., someone we would feel pretty good about picking say late lottery instead of top two or three.

8. There are two players at SF we could conceivably take with a top 3 or 4 pick even if Howard and Okafor are still on the board. If Deng and/or Smith come out and are available, taking them over Howard or Okafor is something to consider, particularly if the trade options are not too good. I kind of look at it this way, if you think Deng or Smith is someone you can pencil in as a good long term solution at SF, then I would take them over a player considered a little better at PF. The problem with the next tier of SF/SG prospects is that they fall more into the maybe category, and you could get most of them much latter in the lottery. It is not a sure thing that either of those players will come out. I suspect Smith probably will, and Deng might be 50/50. Deng could contribute right away as a very well rounded developed player whereas Smith probably would not be an immediate factor, but if he could be the long term fix might be worth the wait.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top