PigSooie Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 My guess would be Boston. The Grizzlies are terrible. The schools here suck, but she did some good things. When she first took the job, the schools were some of the worst in the country. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 So it seems like Kobe is really pushing for a trade to the Bulls. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I guess it will depend largely on how much they have to gut the team. He's really good, and he would probably make the Bulls the team to beat in the East. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 He is really good. I agree. Duh. However, he an and a marginal star (Odom) couldn't do all that much so I'm not sure what he would do with two even more marginal stars (Hinrich and Wallace). The rumored deals involve some combination (though not all) of Gordon/Deng/Tyrus Thomas/the number 9 pick. For some reason I think Thomas may end up as the best part of the Bulls' side of that. ::shrug:: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Bulls fans seem to love Tyrus Thomas from who I've talked to, so maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure he'll ever be more than a good defensive player and a mediocre offensive threat. And you guys just signed Ben Wallace to like a huge contract to be a good defensive player with no offense. I'm not sure I'll ever understand why you guys signed Wallace. That trade has never made any sense to me... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted June 20, 2007 Author Share Posted June 20, 2007 Bulls fans seem to love Tyrus Thomas from who I've talked to, so maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure he'll ever be more than a good defensive player and a mediocre offensive threat. And you guys just signed Ben Wallace to like a huge contract to be a good defensive player with no offense. I'm not sure I'll ever understand why you guys signed Wallace. That trade has never made any sense to me...Your Heat might have a few clues about that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Bulls fans seem to love Tyrus Thomas from who I've talked to, so maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure he'll ever be more than a good defensive player and a mediocre offensive threat. And you guys just signed Ben Wallace to like a huge contract to be a good defensive player with no offense. I'm not sure I'll ever understand why you guys signed Wallace. That trade has never made any sense to me...Well, I think his post game will develop. He's only 21. He has developed a basic jump-hook and I think he'll develop another post move or two. He's more athletic than Wallace and Chandler (I think that's the trade you're talking about) ever were. Chandler and Wallace are similar players, but Wallace is a much better post defender than Chandler--it's hard to imagine Chandler do a good job defending Shaq. It's not saying much, but Thomas' second half showed that he already is a better offensive player than Wallace. Thomas had the highest +/- per 48 of anyone on the team. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Your Heat might have a few clues about that. So we played like absolute crap and Dwyane Wade forgot how to play basketball and Luol Deng scored like a thousand points because of Ben Wallace? I get it now. It makes perfect sense. Jorge, I was referring to the Wallace move. It just seemed like a lot of money for what amounted to not a huge upgrade. You guys were already one of, if not the best defensive teams in the league and what you really needed was a good post threat on the offensive side of the ball. Ben Wallace is not that. I really think that was a move that was meant for a "win now" mindset, and I don't think you guys are built to win now. I really think thats a move that hurts your team more in the long run than if you don't get him at all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I'm not really sure that there was a solid scoring center available. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Thats why I feel they are better off not making a move there. It seemed like it was just a move to energize the base and show they are committed to winning and blah blah blah, but I feel like it wasn't worth it for them. I mean, yeah, they got past the Heat, but I really think they get past the Heat this year with the same lineup as last year. The Heat were awful this season. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
boywiththorninside Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 The word on the street is David Stern is going to fix it so the Knicks land Kobe. I mean this literally. I overheard two guys on Atlantic Avenue discussing this very thing. They said Stern is going to fix this just like he fixed the '85 draft with Ewing. I hope they're right. And, really, why wouldn't they be? One of them was wearing a Marbury jersey. They're obviously in the know. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 LOL@STERN I kinda doubt he's going to NY unless it's a three team deal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chendizzle Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 In his article yesterday, Bill Simmons proposed this trade, with Lakers also getting the Bulls #9 pick. Some sort of trade like this would give the Celts a nucleus of Al Jefferson, Ben Gordon, Ty Thomas, Gerald Green and hopefully Corey Brewer with the 5th pick, and then Theo Ratliffe's expiring contract. But who am I kidding, Ainge won't do anything successful with this draft. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted June 21, 2007 Author Share Posted June 21, 2007 In his article yesterday, Bill Simmons proposed this trade, with Lakers also getting the Bulls #9 pick. Some sort of trade like this would give the Celts a nucleus of Al Jefferson, Ben Gordon, Ty Thomas, Gerald Green and hopefully Corey Brewer with the 5th pick, and then Theo Ratliffe's expiring contract. But who am I kidding, Ainge won't do anything successful with this draft.What a fucking nightmare that would be for the Bulls. I know, let's trade away the nucleus of our young, up-and-coming team for an aging, disgruntled superstar! If they do anything even remotely like that (read: if they trade for Kobe), I might have to find a different team to cheer for. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 He's only 29. That deal would give the Bulls a starting lineup of Bryant-Hinrich-Deng-Nocioni?-and Wallace. Which would be the team to beat in the East. I kinda doubt they're going to trade Thomas AND Sefolosha, though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted June 21, 2007 Author Share Posted June 21, 2007 He's only 29. That deal would give the Bulls a starting lineup of Bryant-Hinrich-Deng-Nocioni?-and Wallace. Which would be the team to beat in the East. I kinda doubt they're going to trade Thomas AND Sefolosha, though.I don't think trading away that much talent just to get Kobe and a couple of guys I've never heard of is a way to build a team. The Bulls are good right now -- maybe they need another piece or two to be complete, but not someone like Kobe. A trade of this magnitude would set them back rather than move them forward. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Why wouldn't the Bulls want Kobe Bryant? He's the best player in the NBA. Of course it has to be the right deal, and they don't want to give up too much, but writing off a deal for Bryant all together would be stupid. If they put out the starting lineup that Jorge just posted, they would be the best team in the East. Of course they will be weary of giving up too much of their future, but if they have a chance to win now, why wouldn't they take it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 I don't think trading away that much talent just to get Kobe and a couple of guys I've never heard of is a way to build a team. The Bulls are good right now -- maybe they need another piece or two to be complete, but not someone like Kobe. A trade of this magnitude would set them back rather than move them forward.I couldn't disagree more. He is exactly the type of player they need--a superstar scorer. The problem with trying to build a team of all good, not great, players is that there gets to a point where you can't do much more. As far as I can tell, they have good players at all 5 starting positions presently. All just one or two notches down from All-Star caliber except for Thomas, who isn't there yet. So what do you do from that point? They could add a 20-10 type power forward, but they'd probably have to give up a big piece of their core to get that type of player, too. The other option is an elite scorer like Bryant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
boywiththorninside Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 I'm not a Bulls fan, I don't follow them closely, but I wouldn't trade Ben Gordon. From what I've seen, he's one of the best young players in the NBA. He could be a premier scorer in the league. Kobe's great, but the guy's got baggage. He's like A-Rod. Unbelievable talent, but neverending drama. It's always something with him. I don't think a change of teams would alter that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Always something. Somtimes that thing is winning 3 championships. Gordon would be a premiere scorer were he not incapable of passing well out of a double team. Also, he can't play D. Of the Bulls three best players--Deng, Gordon, and Hinrich, Gordon is the one they're keen on dealing if possible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
boywiththorninside Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Kobe's won, no doubt. But how many more rings would Kobe have if he could have avoided the drama and stayed with Shaq? Perhaps a few more. The thing is he can't avoid the headlines or the intrasquad turmoil. Like A-Rod, it follows him. Beware of the drama, that's all I'm saying. I know we're talking about different sports, but, as a Yankees fan, I can attest to the fact that having the best player in the game on your team isn't all it's cracked up to be. Additionally, Ben Gordon brought a championship to my undergrad school, so I'm completely biased and blind to any of his shortcomings. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 What a fucking nightmare that would be for the Heat. I know, let's trade away the nucleus of our young, up-and-coming team for an aging, disgruntled superstar! If they do anything even remotely like that (read: if they trade for Shaq), I might have to find a different team to cheer for. See what I did there? It's the same deal, except Kobe is better than Shaq was at that point (though the Bulls don't have anyone on Wade's level, either.) Basiaclly, the NBA is the only league where you can trade 3/5 of yoru starting lineup for a superstar and get better. Kobe makes them a much better team now and in the future. I'd love it if they didn't do this trade. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted June 22, 2007 Author Share Posted June 22, 2007 The price for Kobe is just way too high. If the Bulls need a superstar scorer, I'd rather see who they can sign in free agency. Trading away everyone who's mentioned in this hypothetical three-team trade does not make them a better team, no matter what anyone says. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 If you guys gvie up Gordon, Tyrus Thomas, and your first round pick for the next 2 years (Thats what I think it would take), you'd absolutely be a better team. No question. You'd be in the finals next year, I'd say. What killed the Bulls all year? No consistent scoring. Deng showed that he could be a huge force on the offensive end at times, but he also dissapeared. Gordon's got the prettiest looking shot I've ever seen, but he can't create his own shot, and is also really streaky. He also plays no defense. Hinrich is a nice scorer, but he'll never be a huge threat. Ben Wallace is almost a 0 on offense. The NBA is the only sport where if a superstar like KObe becomes available and you can get him and keep a few good pieces around him (like what the Heat did) you are going to be a major force. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted June 22, 2007 Author Share Posted June 22, 2007 I'm not convinced. I'll continue to pray that they don't do anything like this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 I'm not convinced. I'll continue to pray that they don't do anything like this. As an eastern conference rival, me too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.