Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,297 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
While the Bulls sit on their thumbs and ponder if they should match Omer Asik's contract and dragging their feet on Tom Thibs contract, other teams like the Heat, Pacers and Nets are all trying to get significantly better. At some point the Bulls will just end up being the Cavs of the 90's or the Bucks of the 80's, how much longer can they just sit around while other teams keep getting better and better.

The Bulls front office is doing just enough to stay competitive and keep their jobs by playing it ultra safe. Its only a matter of time before the freaking NETS become a better team than the Bulls. I would have never in a thousand years thought that the Nets and Clippers would become better teams than the Bulls in the past couple of years.

The Bulls are very close to being surrounded by teams like the Pacers, Heat, Thunder and Nets.... The Bulls title window will slam shut if we continue trying to play it safe. We have 1 impact player while other teams around us are arming themselves with multiple impact players. Continuing to bring the sharpest damn blade to a gun fight is not the way to win.
 

·
Anti Monday Morning QB
Joined
·
6,181 Posts
It is true that management follows the conservative road. However, while conservative we have put ourselves in a position for a consolidation trade or going after a max FA next offseason, if we gauge that one will sign with us. Don't re-sign Omer, sell Deng to a team under the cap for a draft pick and or expirings, and amnesty Boozer. We could have our #2 as soon as next season and still have enough money to re-sign Taj.

13-14 could be starting with
Rose/Teague
Deng Trade pick / xxx
xxx / Butler
Bynum / Gibson
Noah / xxx

We would fill the starters holes with short contract MLE type guys over the next couple of years (like we did with Rip). And hopefully have our #6-8 guys locked down on the bench for under $10M assuming both Butler and Teague pan out.

Next year's FA features:
Dwight
Chris Paul
Bynum
Harden (restricted)
Al Jefferson
Josh Smith
Stephen Curry (restricted)
Manu Ginobili (age 35)
Monta Ellis
Kevin Martin

There will probably be tons of competition for the top three guys, which is good if we have max level cap space. If we get some sort of verbal commitment from Bynum, Harden, or maybe Jefferson I'd say we sell Deng immediately. However, I have a feeling that GMs already have feelers out to agents about intentions, and can hear back if a player is commital or not before they actually can talk to the players. I doubt we sell Deng and Boozer on the hopes we end up with Josh Smith lets say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,297 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Lakers just added Steve Nash for basically a bunch of late first round draft picks. Add them to a growing list of teams that have surpassed the Bulls as title contenders.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
It is true that management follows the conservative road. However, while conservative we have put ourselves in a position for a consolidation trade or going after a max FA next offseason, if we gauge that one will sign with us. Don't re-sign Omer, sell Deng to a team under the cap for a draft pick and or expirings, and amnesty Boozer. We could have our #2 as soon as next season and still have enough money to re-sign Taj.

13-14 could be starting with
Rose/Teague
Deng Trade pick / xxx
xxx / Butler
Bynum / Gibson
Noah / xxx

We would fill the starters holes with short contract MLE type guys over the next couple of years (like we did with Rip). And hopefully have our #6-8 guys locked down on the bench for under $10M assuming both Butler and Teague pan out.

Next year's FA features:
Dwight
Chris Paul
Bynum
Harden (restricted)
Al Jefferson
Josh Smith
Stephen Curry (restricted)
Manu Ginobili (age 35)
Monta Ellis
Kevin Martin

There will probably be tons of competition for the top three guys, which is good if we have max level cap space. If we get some sort of verbal commitment from Bynum, Harden, or maybe Jefferson I'd say we sell Deng immediately. However, I have a feeling that GMs already have feelers out to agents about intentions, and can hear back if a player is commital or not before they actually can talk to the players. I doubt we sell Deng and Boozer on the hopes we end up with Josh Smith lets say.
But what have the Bulls actually done to make you able to sell this "position"? Have we not been hearing about trades and trade assets since 2005 on Bulls forums? Where is the trade that has produced anything since that time?

If we can agree on something, it's that we better ACT next year right? If Paxson can't make a sale on a big free agent or get someone big via trade, then he or he and his puppet have to go, right?
 

·
Ethical Hacker
Joined
·
485 Posts
I'm so tired of hearing people say how well the Bulls have positioned themselves (especially after they've done nothing). Deng has been on the trade block his entire career. The time to trade him was during the 2012 draft. Boozer is not a tradeable commodity at the moment. He won't be one next year either. And Jerry Reinsdorf will not amnesty a player and eat his enormous contract, that's not how he works.

The wait until next year excuse doesn't work for the CUBS and it sure as hell doesn't work for the Bulls. All this team is doing is milking Derrick Rose for all he's worth and ruining his career in the process. They're going to run him into the ground this way. And at some point, he'll get the picture and bolt.
 

·
Anti Monday Morning QB
Joined
·
6,181 Posts
I'm so tired of hearing people say how well the Bulls have positioned themselves (especially after they've done nothing). Deng has been on the trade block his entire career. The time to trade him was during the 2012 draft. Boozer is not a tradeable commodity at the moment. He won't be one next year either. And Jerry Reinsdorf will not amnesty a player and eat his enormous contract, that's not how he works.

The wait until next year excuse doesn't work for the CUBS and it sure as hell doesn't work for the Bulls. All this team is doing is milking Derrick Rose for all he's worth and ruining his career in the process. They're going to run him into the ground this way. And at some point, he'll get the picture and bolt.
They certainly did not position themselves for this offseason. And the lack of moves is driving people nuts, which is funny because we are in pick the best of the available scraps mode due to the Rose injury and tax implications.

This is our worst offseason in terms of flexibility. Yes, Nash was traded and so was Joe Johnson. So what? Most of you clamoring for a move don't understand that Rose is a huge question mark. We can afford to wait a year and wait for a consolidation trade to happen (our best odds at a #2) or trade Deng for cap space, amnesty Boozer and go after a FA. Whether or not which is right, I'm not sure but certainly am leaning consolidation trade.

I view the core as:
Rose
Noah

And I'm willing to give Noah up in a consolidation trade should the player we get back a better center.

The time to trade Deng was not this offseason (probably best we could have gotten was Jeremy Lamb for him. THe time to trade him was for Pau Gasol.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
They certainly did not position themselves for this offseason. And the lack of moves is driving people nuts, which is funny because we are in pick the best of the available scraps mode due to the Rose injury and tax implications.

This is our worst offseason in terms of flexibility. Yes, Nash was traded and so was Joe Johnson. So what? Most of you clamoring for a move don't understand that Rose is a huge question mark. We can afford to wait a year and wait for a consolidation trade to happen (our best odds at a #2) or trade Deng for cap space, amnesty Boozer and go after a FA. Whether or not which is right, I'm not sure but certainly am leaning consolidation trade.

I view the core as:
Rose
Noah

And I'm willing to give Noah up in a consolidation trade should the player we get back a better center.

The time to trade Deng was not this offseason (probably best we could have gotten was Jeremy Lamb for him. THe time to trade him was for Pau Gasol.
Once again, you talk as if this consolidation trade WILL happen, and yet what have they done in 7 years?

The two deals Paxson has pulled is trading Eddy Curry for a couple first rounders and trading a first round pick for a pick to get Luol Deng.

What about that in 9 f-ing years gives you credibility when you say we're going to pull of a consolidation trade. Did you mean with a new GM??
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,320 Posts
Once again, you talk as if this consolidation trade WILL happen, and yet what have they done in 7 years?

The two deals Paxson has pulled is trading Eddy Curry for a couple first rounders and trading a first round pick for a pick to get Luol Deng.

What about that in 9 f-ing years gives you credibility when you say we're going to pull of a consolidation trade. Did you mean with a new GM??
Did you read his post? Where did he say that the consolidation trade was going to happen? Seems to me he was talking about what he wanted to happen and what would work under the cap.

If everytime you posted about what you thought the Bulls should do someone said "yeah, but they'll never do it!" we wouldn't have much room for conversation, would we?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
Did you read his post? Where did he say that the consolidation trade was going to happen? Seems to me he was talking about what he wanted to happen and what would work under the cap.

If everytime you posted about what you thought the Bulls should do someone said "yeah, but they'll never do it!" we wouldn't have much room for conversation, would we?
Who is the one trying to start a fight "moderator." If I asked someone else if they "read his post" - you'd probably have an episode lol.

He said,

"We can afford to wait a year and wait for a consolidation trade to happen"

Now, the word I see before happen is "TO"

It did not say "to maybe happen" did it?

And Rhyder talks like this all the time. I want to know why he thinks it's likely enough to happen to constantly use language like "wait for it TO happen" despite Paxson's lack of trades in the last 7 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
799 Posts
All these people that are hammering the Bulls to make a move in FA, or trade...what do you want them to do...lol. Next year is gone, Rose will be out for most of the year and not 100% for any of it. There isn't a vet out there that will sign here knowing next year is a wash. The Lakers got Nash because the had the $$ to pay him... The Bulls, do not.

Why make a marginal improvement for next year unless it's a power movement? Would you rather have 44 wins over 35 wins? Knowing the Bulls aren't winning it all next year, give me the 35 wins with a better pick. Then the following years off-season can be really interesting with a ton of flexibility. This off-season I could care less. Plus, am I going to get excited over Jason Kidd coming to Chicago?
 

·
Anti Monday Morning QB
Joined
·
6,181 Posts
Who is the one trying to start a fight "moderator." If I asked someone else if they "read his post" - you'd probably have an episode lol.

He said,

"We can afford to wait a year and wait for a consolidation trade to happen"

Now, the word I see before happen is "TO"

It did not say "to maybe happen" did it?

And Rhyder talks like this all the time. I want to know why he thinks it's likely enough to happen to constantly use language like "wait for it TO happen" despite Paxson's lack of trades in the last 7 years.
I have maintained the stance, the best way to acquire a #2 option is through a consolidation trade. So far, the only one worth giving up the farm for has been Dwight, and I don't want a one-year rental, even moreso now with Rose being out.

This is why I have been against dumping Deng and Boozer simply because they are bad contracts. If we aren't getting at least as good an asset as we get back in the dump, then why get rid of them?

We currently have enough assets to perform a consolidation trade, have the flexibility to be a major player in FA in each of the next three years (whichever year we choose), and have an outside shot at drafting one with the Bobcat pick.

Sell Deng and sell Boozer, and sit tight until someone better signs is not a wise move. Players want to go to a winner. Dumping those guys would put us out of contender status or second tier as some like to think. The sell is we need you to get over the hump, be it consolidation or FA.

We had one shot at having a good team and aquiring a max FA, and it just so happened that was the year Miami orchestrated bringing together the top three guys on the market.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
All these people that are hammering the Bulls to make a move in FA, or trade...what do you want them to do...lol. Next year is gone, Rose will be out for most of the year and not 100% for any of it. There isn't a vet out there that will sign here knowing next year is a wash. The Lakers got Nash because the had the $$ to pay him... The Bulls, do not.

Why make a marginal improvement for next year unless it's a power movement? Would you rather have 44 wins over 35 wins? Knowing the Bulls aren't winning it all next year, give me the 35 wins with a better pick. Then the following years off-season can be really interesting with a ton of flexibility. This off-season I could care less. Plus, am I going to get excited over Jason Kidd coming to Chicago?
Okay, I'm going to make sure I'm clear about one thing. I expect nothing from the team in 2013. So, any time I say anything feel free to assume that into it. I'm not expecting a move that will deliver 9 more wins in 2013. In fact, I'd like 9 less wins. The whole, put the youngest team out there and still try hard way of losing.

I'm upset there weren't any moves with long range planning that could be implied into them. I want a move that says, "okay, we understand we need a second star; additionally we understand Deng and Noah won't be that second star, therefore we wanted to make a move that freed things up for summer 2014 and beyond."

I have not seen that move. I'm waiting. If it doesn't come by next summer, I think it's time to start making very permanent judgments about Paxson, his flunky, et al.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
I have maintained the stance, the best way to acquire a #2 option is through a consolidation trade. So far, the only one worth giving up the farm for has been Dwight, and I don't want a one-year rental, even moreso now with Rose being out.
But what has been the problem. Dwight has a list and Chicago isn't on it right. So you make an offer to Orlando, a damn good one, and you make it contingent on the Bulls having permission to talk to Dwight about a long term deal and get that deal. Then, you provide value as a general manager by GETTING HIM to want Chicago.

You sell everything from the city, to the legacy, to the fact that Deron Williams isn't good enough to take him to a title but Rose is, regardless of what role each player would play in Dwight's mind.

If you can't make a sale, I continue to ask, and I don't get an answer - WHAT is your value as a GM? If you're not making sales and you're not uncovering stars in the draft, what ARE you worth?

This is why I have been against dumping Deng and Boozer simply because they are bad contracts. If we aren't getting at least as good an asset as we get back in the dump, then why get rid of them?

We currently have enough assets to perform a consolidation trade, have the flexibility to be a major player in FA in each of the next three years (whichever year we choose), and have an outside shot at drafting one with the Bobcat pick.

Sell Deng and sell Boozer, and sit tight until someone better signs is not a wise move. Players want to go to a winner. Dumping those guys would put us out of contender status or second tier as some like to think. The sell is we need you to get over the hump, be it consolidation or FA.

We had one shot at having a good team and aquiring a max FA, and it just so happened that was the year Miami orchestrated bringing together the top three guys on the market.
A few counterpoints here.

1. We don't need a #1. We need a #2. We definitely don't need a guy who thinks he's a #1 and just isn't a great #2, let alone a #1. So I was never of the opinion that anyone other than James or Wade would deliver us in the summer of 2010.

Once those guys were gone we should have held the money. "But we would have gone over the cap the next summer." That's why you don't sign Luol Deng and Joakim Noah in tandem to that money.

2. Was Miami a winner in 2009-10? I'm confused. Do guys want to go to a winner, or do they just want to be sold on the idea that they "can win." Your statement has no rational basis. Were the Lakers a winner in 1996? Was Miami a winner in 2004? Were the Sixers the best team in their conference in 1982?

3. Selling Boozer and Deng and waiting until someone signs is a wise move.

But, you still have to be good at your job. Let me say this. No plan or emphasis will ever be good if you're not good. So if Paxson/various flunkies can't sell, guess what? Getting cap space won't matter.

And just because you get cap space doesn't mean you shouldn't be looking for a #2 through draft picks, trading for picks that you plan to use that summer or trades.

I'd target three players if I couldn't get Dwight in trade as PART OF my plan that would also include ditching Boozer and Deng for freedom.

Andrew Bynum, 25 years old (in 2012-13)

> Starting center for two championship teams
> 56.6% FG% Career
> 18.7 PPG
> PER no lower than 20.0 since his second year in the league

Demar DeRozan, 23 years old (in 2012-13)

> Younger than Rose
> Multi-talented swing man with legit size and athleticism
> 49.8% FG% his rookie year when he was not the teams leader, which leads to
> Probably not a #1, yet being forced to play that role on Toronto due to necessity. DeRozan is a #2; and I'll be a darn good one. Playing off of Rose, he's likely a guy who could threaten 50% FG again, just like he did as a 20 year old rookie
> Chance to buy low. Guys who already have served notice that they will be #2 guys, like a James Harden, come with a requisite price tag. DeRozan would likely be easier to get, especially in a deal that sent picks to Toronto, who never has gotten that legit superstar who was as interested in championships as marketing.

DeMarcus Cousins (the reasons for whom I've already gotten into)

I'd combine moves for those three with freedom to sign players. Maybe I get DeRozan and he becomes a legit #2. Now I have money to get tons of good role players to fit around Rose and DeRozan, you know?
 

·
Anti Monday Morning QB
Joined
·
6,181 Posts
3. Selling Boozer and Deng and waiting until someone signs is a wise move.
How? You can sell Deng and Boozer whenever you want, so why do it in a year where you can't go after anyone of note? Lose Deng and Boozer and you get two guys with potential back, and we are in an even worse position without the flexibility to go after an elite FA

But, you still have to be good at your job. Let me say this. No plan or emphasis will ever be good if you're not good. So if Paxson/various flunkies can't sell, guess what? Getting cap space won't matter.

And just because you get cap space doesn't mean you shouldn't be looking for a #2 through draft picks, trading for picks that you plan to use that summer or trades.

I'd target three players if I couldn't get Dwight in trade as PART OF my plan that would also include ditching Boozer and Deng for freedom.
Is it the GM or is it nature? It's obvious a lot of guys don't like the cold weather when they are in a financial position not to have to live there. Those that don't mind the cold weather can have the glitz and glamour of New York. Chicago is blue collar, and that is not attractive to many of the NBA divas.

Andrew Bynum, 25 years old (in 2012-13)

> Starting center for two championship teams
> 56.6% FG% Career
> 18.7 PPG
> PER no lower than 20.0 since his second year in the league
Absolutely would trade for him. He's a FA in a couple season, but bringing him over now and building around Rose might keep the guy here for awhile.

Demar DeRozan, 23 years old (in 2012-13)

> Younger than Rose
> Multi-talented swing man with legit size and athleticism
> 49.8% FG% his rookie year when he was not the teams leader, which leads to
> Probably not a #1, yet being forced to play that role on Toronto due to necessity. DeRozan is a #2; and I'll be a darn good one. Playing off of Rose, he's likely a guy who could threaten 50% FG again, just like he did as a 20 year old rookie
> Chance to buy low. Guys who already have served notice that they will be #2 guys, like a James Harden, come with a requisite price tag. DeRozan would likely be easier to get, especially in a deal that sent picks to Toronto, who never has gotten that legit superstar who was as interested in championships as marketing.
I would trade someone like Taj or the Charlotte pick for him, but no more than that. Move doesn't work out then you lose salary to retool, eating up part of the advantage of selling Deng.

DeMarcus Cousins (the reasons for whom I've already gotten into)

I'd combine moves for those three with freedom to sign players. Maybe I get DeRozan and he becomes a legit #2. Now I have money to get tons of good role players to fit around Rose and DeRozan, you know?
I like him a lot as well, but Sacramento seems to want to build around him at the moment and isn't for sale.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,189 Posts
Like any team, the Bulls must be selective about when to be aggressive and when to be conservative. Whether you like it or not, the D-Rose injury makes it highly unlikely to contend in 2012-13, and therefore the front office is trying to line things up for major title contention in the following season (2013-14). That is resulting in some boring activity right now. Yeah it sucks but guess what, any team's title chances fly out the window when their leader and best player suffers an injury of this magnitude.

I still think they'll be a playoff team next year but let's be honest, Rose will probably not be MVP caliber again until training camp in Fall 2013. So really there's no point in trying to be something we're not for the upcoming season. Use this year as a stepping stone to make us even better for when D-Rose comes back better than ever in 2013-14. For example, use it as an opportunity to find out what we really have with Jimmy Butler, and groom Marquis Teague's talents into the role we'll need from him. Just as importantly, this will involve creating the cap flexibility needed to build up the roster again for when Rose is back to MVP form. This is why Watson, Korver, and Brewer are expendable, by the time Rose is back to form they will be too old or we will have a better option in their place.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
How? You can sell Deng and Boozer whenever you want, so why do it in a year where you can't go after anyone of note? Lose Deng and Boozer and you get two guys with potential back, and we are in an even worse position without the flexibility to go after an elite FA
Are we debating that the Bulls SHOULD HAVE sold Deng and cut ties with Boozer? If you give Deng up for a top pick and an expiring deal, by this time next year our payroll is $10 million lower and then you amnesty Boozer to drop it down to being 25 mill lower.

Cutting ties with Deng OR Noah and Boozer is a great move because the Bulls have no #2. They have #3s who prevent them from having the flexibility go get a #2. #3s are more plentiful than #2s, which is why you get the 2 first, then the 3. What's hard here?

Is it the GM or is it nature? It's obvious a lot of guys don't like the cold weather when they are in a financial position not to have to live there. Those that don't mind the cold weather can have the glitz and glamour of New York. Chicago is blue collar, and that is not attractive to many of the NBA divas.
Always the benefit of the doubt with Paxson. Go ahead and tell me you're "not a supporter" - and yet you bend over backwards to find any plausible reason why he just "couldn't do it."

First, "excuses for why you couldn't do it" will NEVER EVER be as good as doing it. It's like people who offer up "well, Kobe couldn't score like MJ early in his career because Shaq took so many possessions." That's fine if you're arguing that Kobe isn't Voshon Leonard. It doesn't make him a BETTER scorer than MJ. Excuses for why Paxson can't sell doesn't make him a salesman.

I continue to ask, if he can't sell and isn't getting steals who become stars in the draft, what is his value?

I won't buy that you "can't sell Chicago." It's not Cleveland man.

Now, we're not trying to sell a #1 on coming here. We don't need Lebron. We need a guy in Russell Westbrook's league and those guys hardly are in a position to scoff at the opportunity to play with Derrick Rose in Chicago.

Absolutely would trade for him. He's a FA in a couple season, but bringing him over now and building around Rose might keep the guy here for awhile.
The deal here is not whether you would or not, but when the price goes high, which it will, would you pay it?

I would trade someone like Taj or the Charlotte pick for him, but no more than that. Move doesn't work out then you lose salary to retool, eating up part of the advantage of selling Deng.
I'd want to sell Deng in the same deal, so I'd offer the Charlotte pick, Deng, and up to 3 future Bulls first rounders (in years in which we'll still be winning and thus picking low) for Derozan and Calderon (who expires at the end of the year). I just don't care who we keep, because our game should be freedom.

If we were to sell Deng in this deal, you are guaranteed a high pick in 2013 draft. DeRozan gets a year of gutting it out as the team offensive leader, but with the knowledge that Rose is coming back in 13-14 to ease any confidence issues that would come with the losing. You can take the slow track with Noah and now you can amnesty Boozer in the summer and have:

#1 Rose
#2 DeRozan
#3 low end star/all purpose super role player Noah
2013 lotto pick
Tons of money to sign a center

I like him a lot as well, but Sacramento seems to want to build around him at the moment and isn't for sale.
You make him for sale. Noah and the Charlotte pick for starters. Sweeten with Gibson and another first IF necessary. But you try to make this deal before he comes out next season and starts playing even better. But you have to WANT a player like DeMarcus Cousins to go get him. I'm not convinced Paxson does.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
Like any team, the Bulls must be selective about when to be aggressive and when to be conservative. Whether you like it or not, the D-Rose injury makes it highly unlikely to contend in 2012-13, and therefore the front office is trying to line things up for major title contention in the following season (2013-14). That is resulting in some boring activity right now. Yeah it sucks but guess what, any team's title chances fly out the window when their leader and best player suffers an injury of this magnitude.

I still think they'll be a playoff team next year but let's be honest, Rose will probably not be MVP caliber again until training camp in Fall 2013. So really there's no point in trying to be something we're not for the upcoming season. Use this year as a stepping stone to make us even better for when D-Rose comes back better than ever in 2013-14. For example, use it as an opportunity to find out what we really have with Jimmy Butler, and groom Marquis Teague's talents into the role we'll need from him. Just as importantly, this will involve creating the cap flexibility needed to build up the roster again for when Rose is back to MVP form. This is why Watson, Korver, and Brewer are expendable, by the time Rose is back to form they will be too old or we will have a better option in their place.
But this is more "I think we'll be good enough in 2014 to win the championship as currently constituted." So, you want to "see what we have" in Butler, when our problem is at the top of our roster, not the bottom, and then you want to bring back the 2011 Bulls, who were 1-4 v. Miami in the playoffs, and see if they can beat the Heat after they will already have the confidence of 1-2 titles?
 

·
Oladipo for the people
Joined
·
48,150 Posts
Jesus. Your forum is the most depressing, and quite honestly most ridiculous forum on the website.

Que the "Well go post somewhere else then!"

The Pacers are busy improving themselves? According to whom? I'm a Pacers fan, and I see no improvements. In fact there's even rumors we'll lose Hibbert (I doubt it).

The Nets are a team thats surrounding you? Is that a joke? They still stink.

And for the last time, deal with reality. Rose is down and out, and you guys aren't competing next year. You aren't competing with some mid level quasi all star that all of you seem to be wanting to trade for.

"Hey! Lets mortgage the future and try out best next year even with Rose out! Maybe we'll make 8th and put up a scrappy fight!"

Yea. Brilliant plan.

Funny thing is, there's only a couple of Bulls fans who see things realistically, and the rest of you spend your days arguing with them with your asinine stories of how somehow Steve Nash going to the Lakers means the Bulls stink.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,290 Posts
Jesus. Your forum is the most depressing, and quite honestly most ridiculous forum on the website.

Que the "Well go post somewhere else then!"

The Pacers are busy improving themselves? According to whom? I'm a Pacers fan, and I see no improvements. In fact there's even rumors we'll lose Hibbert (I doubt it).

The Nets are a team thats surrounding you? Is that a joke? They still stink.

And for the last time, deal with reality. Rose is down and out, and you guys aren't competing next year. You aren't competing with some mid level quasi all star that all of you seem to be wanting to trade for.

"Hey! Lets mortgage the future and try out best next year even with Rose out! Maybe we'll make 8th and put up a scrappy fight!"

Yea. Brilliant plan.

Funny thing is, there's only a couple of Bulls fans who see things realistically, and the rest of you spend your days arguing with them with your asinine stories of how somehow Steve Nash going to the Lakers means the Bulls stink.
So, R Star, be honest. As an outsider, whose side are you taking. It's kind of vague, your passage, and so I can't tell who you mean to be the fans who see it realistically and who the fans are who argue with them with asinine stories.

By the way, hard to improve for the Pacers. You need a #1 and #2 in this league. If you don't have one, you're actually hurting yourself by winning. Because you'll win some, but you'll inevitably go down the road with a player like Hibbert that you realize can't take you farther than a certain place, and the only way to improve will be to go all the way back and then forge ahead. You could write a book about what a waste the 88-02 years were for the Cavs trying to get to be competitive without a superstar, and having to go backwards to go forward.

So the retort is "so, what are you saying? Tank until you get Lebron in the draft?!" Yes. Unless you're a huge free agent draw a la the 95 Lakers, you're going to need to get lucky and get at least a one-time MVP type in the draft. There are various exceptions we can discuss, but I see that as the Pacers real issue.
 

·
Oladipo for the people
Joined
·
48,150 Posts
So, R Star, be honest. As an outsider, whose side are you taking. It's kind of vague, your passage, and so I can't tell who you mean to be the fans who see it realistically and who the fans are who argue with them with asinine stories.

By the way, hard to improve for the Pacers. You need a #1 and #2 in this league. If you don't have one, you're actually hurting yourself by winning. Because you'll win some, but you'll inevitably go down the road with a player like Hibbert that you realize can't take you farther than a certain place, and the only way to improve will be to go all the way back and then forge ahead. You could write a book about what a waste the 88-02 years were for the Cavs trying to get to be competitive without a superstar, and having to go backwards to go forward.

So the retort is "so, what are you saying? Tank until you get Lebron in the draft?!" Yes. Unless you're a huge free agent draw a la the 95 Lakers, you're going to need to get lucky and get at least a one-time MVP type in the draft. There are various exceptions we can discuss, but I see that as the Pacers real issue.
The Pacers are built like the early 2000 Pistons. I'm fine with not having a superstar. A player like Lebron comes around once every 10 years or so (impact wise).

As far as who's side I take for the Bulls, its yours. Hearing stupid "Why didn't we go after Kidd!?!" or other garbage is crazy to me. The Bulls are winning next year. People complain about not having that all so import #2 to D Rose, yet they want to try to pick up veteran rotation players? No. Stay the course, let Rose take off all the time in the world, and get a lotto pick and hope it ends up being a guy who can be your #2.

That is what makes sense for the Bulls.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top