The Chicago Bulls 2007 Offseason Thread

[1908]

If he really wants to get traded, he's going to have to compromise. LA isn't going to give him away, and nobody is going to trade for him without assurances he'll stick around.

He has an opt-out clause, a trade kicker, and a no-trade clause in his current contract. No trade clauses are unheard of in the NBA. He won't be eligible for one with his new team. I don't think he'll be anxious to tear up his existing contract in favor of a new one with his new team. Kobe holds the majority of the cards here with his no-trade and opt-out clauses in hand.

[jersey cubs fan]

If he really wants to get traded, he's going to have to compromise. LA isn't going to give him away, and nobody is going to trade for him without assurances he'll stick around.

He has an opt-out clause, a trade kicker, and a no-trade clause in his current contract. No trade clauses are unheard of in the NBA. He won't be eligible for one with his new team. I don't think he'll be anxious to tear up his existing contract in favor of a new one with his new team. Kobe holds the majority of the cards here with his no-trade and opt-out clauses in hand.

 

Sounds like he does, but it also sounds like he will have to compromise if he really wants to be traded.

[rawaction]

If he really wants to get traded, he's going to have to compromise. LA isn't going to give him away, and nobody is going to trade for him without assurances he'll stick around.

He has an opt-out clause, a trade kicker, and a no-trade clause in his current contract. No trade clauses are unheard of in the NBA. He won't be eligible for one with his new team. I don't think he'll be anxious to tear up his existing contract in favor of a new one with his new team. Kobe holds the majority of the cards here with his no-trade and opt-out clauses in hand.

 

Sounds like he does, but it also sounds like he will have to compromise if he really wants to be traded.

 

Exactly. Whatever Kobe wants, he will get.....if he wants it bad enough. The Bulls do have to take the opt out into account also. They may just have a 2-year window regardless, due to Wallace's age among other factors.

[Soul]

If he really wants to get traded, he's going to have to compromise. LA isn't going to give him away, and nobody is going to trade for him without assurances he'll stick around.

He has an opt-out clause, a trade kicker, and a no-trade clause in his current contract. No trade clauses are unheard of in the NBA. He won't be eligible for one with his new team. I don't think he'll be anxious to tear up his existing contract in favor of a new one with his new team. Kobe holds the majority of the cards here with his no-trade and opt-out clauses in hand.

 

Sounds like he does, but it also sounds like he will have to compromise if he really wants to be traded.

 

Exactly. Whatever Kobe wants, he will get.....if he wants it bad enough. The Bulls do have to take the opt out into account also. They may just have a 2-year window regardless, due to Wallace's age among other factors.

 

I'm not sure how much Wallace has to do with it. I totally agree if we acquire Kobe and give up Gordon, Deng, TT -- then we definitely set up a short window to win it. But that's because we just traded away the core future of the team for a superstar who's future is right now.

 

I dunno. I'm torn on this deal. Who can say Deng, Gordon, and TT won't be the dynamic threesome that carries us to the title in a couple years? How can anyone just say that? You've all seen Deng, he's not done getting better. TT has just scratched the surface.

 

I love Kobe, don't get me wrong. But I'd hate to be sitting here in 2010 watching the Lakers go places with players we developed. Nobody is able to win it alone, not even Kobe. You gut out the rest of the team, who is really going to help him? Wallace, Noc, Hinrich? I can't say that's better than what we have right now.

Edited June 18, 2007 by Soul

[1908]

Sounds like he does, but it also sounds like he will have to compromise if he really wants to be traded.

All sides often have to compromise to a degree to get a deal done, but I suspect the majority of the compromising will be on the Lakers' end. If he doesn't change his mind, they're looking at losing Kobe in two years and getting nothing in return unless he approves a trade. If he decides he's only willing to go to a team with very limited assets like the Knicks, they're royally screwed.

[1908]

I love Kobe, don't get me wrong. But I'd hate to be sitting here in 2010 watching the Lakers go places with players we developed. Nobody is able to win it alone, not even Kobe. You gut out the rest of the team, who is really going to help him? Wallace, Noc, Hinrich? I can't say that's better than what we have right now.

This is why I like the wait-for-the-unhappy-Kobe-to-hit-the-free-agent-market-in-two-years plan.

[Derwood]

I love Kobe, don't get me wrong. But I'd hate to be sitting here in 2010 watching the Lakers go places with players we developed. Nobody is able to win it alone, not even Kobe. You gut out the rest of the team, who is really going to help him? Wallace, Noc, Hinrich? I can't say that's better than what we have right now.

This is why I like the wait-for-the-unhappy-Kobe-to-hit-the-free-agent-market-in-two-years plan.

 

in 2 years, he'll want $30 mil/year or something outlandish.

[Guest]

I love Kobe, don't get me wrong. But I'd hate to be sitting here in 2010 watching the Lakers go places with players we developed. Nobody is able to win it alone, not even Kobe. You gut out the rest of the team, who is really going to help him? Wallace, Noc, Hinrich? I can't say that's better than what we have right now.

This is why I like the wait-for-the-unhappy-Kobe-to-hit-the-free-agent-market-in-two-years plan.

 

in 2 years, he'll want $30 mil/year or something outlandish.

 

Few good teams can budget enough in the salary cap to pay Kobe if he wants something ridiculous. And one of the reasons Kobe wants to leave LA is to go to a good team.

[Soul]

I love Kobe, don't get me wrong. But I'd hate to be sitting here in 2010 watching the Lakers go places with players we developed. Nobody is able to win it alone, not even Kobe. You gut out the rest of the team, who is really going to help him? Wallace, Noc, Hinrich? I can't say that's better than what we have right now.

This is why I like the wait-for-the-unhappy-Kobe-to-hit-the-free-agent-market-in-two-years plan.

 

in 2 years, he'll want $30 mil/year or something outlandish.

 

In 2 years he'll be 30, too though.

[Keener98]

I love Kobe, don't get me wrong. But I'd hate to be sitting here in 2010 watching the Lakers go places with players we developed. Nobody is able to win it alone, not even Kobe. You gut out the rest of the team, who is really going to help him? Wallace, Noc, Hinrich? I can't say that's better than what we have right now.

This is why I like the wait-for-the-unhappy-Kobe-to-hit-the-free-agent-market-in-two-years plan.

 

in 2 years, he'll want $30 mil/year or something outlandish.

 

In 2 years he'll be 30, too though.

 

Still pretty young albeit with alot of mileage. Hell look at the contract Ben Wallace got from us, and he was over 30.

[jersey cubs fan]

It surprises me how willing many Bulls fans are to wait and be patient.

 

NBA basketball teams don't really seem like they develop to me. You either have a great player, and therefore a chance to win, or you don't. There's a certain amount of improvement, but the Bulls are 4 years into the Skiles era, with a lot of time already invested in the development of players that so far don't seem capable of winning but 1 series in a weak conference playoff. The idea of waiting for free agents doesn't make much sense either, with the Bulls awful history of signing quality free agents and with so few teams succeeding in the free agency game.

 

I would think the chances the Bulls ever win a title by drafting and developing their own is extremely small. Detroit pretty much toyed with this bunch and the Pistons were embarrassed by Cleveland, who has one thing the Bulls clearly don't, a great player.

 

Do people really think this Bulls core stands a chance of winning 60 and a title in the next couple years without going outside the organization to get a great player?

 

I think calling for them to stick with what they have is just begging them to try and win 50 and have a respectable showing in the playoffs, but nothing more. Outside of Detroit, which didn't even draft and develop it's own, when was the last title won by a team that lacked a superduperstar?

[RynoRules]

I agree with goony here. I don't think the "waiting to develop" thing works quite as well in the NBA. You need a star. You might argue the Pistons are an exception. Ok. Look at the current version of the Pistons. They didn't develop - they are a hodge-podge of parts all of whom (excepting Prince) played in at least one other city. In other words they changed the pieces around until they found a winning formula. They are an exception rather than the rule, and they got beat this year b/c the overwhelming best player on the court played for the other team.

 

The Bulls can't win with the team they have now. They'll be good, no doubt. But the Detroit series illustrated just how weak they are up front and just how few of them have the ability to get their own shot off (Deng and Gordon, but Gordon can't do it agianst the best defenders). Spencer Hawes won't change that. Kobe Bryant will.

[rawaction]

It surprises me how willing many Bulls fans are to wait and be patient.

 

NBA basketball teams don't really seem like they develop to me. You either have a great player, and therefore a chance to win, or you don't. There's a certain amount of improvement, but the Bulls are 4 years into the Skiles era, with a lot of time already invested in the development of players that so far don't seem capable of winning but 1 series in a weak conference playoff. The idea of waiting for free agents doesn't make much sense either, with the Bulls awful history of signing quality free agents and with so few teams succeeding in the free agency game.

 

I would think the chances the Bulls ever win a title by drafting and developing their own is extremely small. Detroit pretty much toyed with this bunch and the Pistons were embarrassed by Cleveland, who has one thing the Bulls clearly don't, a great player.

 

Do people really think this Bulls core stands a chance of winning 60 and a title in the next couple years without going outside the organization to get a great player?

 

I think calling for them to stick with what they have is just begging them to try and win 50 and have a respectable showing in the playoffs, but nothing more. Outside of Detroit, which didn't even draft and develop it's own, when was the last title won by a team that lacked a superduperstar?

 

I agree with most of what you said, but that's the point though. Detroit has won, so it is possible to win without a star. And they have been at the top of the conf. with pretty much the same core players. I'm one of the people that wants Kobe badly, but I don't see how the Bulls can't do what Detroit has done. As you said, the East is weak. The Bulls competed with Detroit pretty well, and they have played some great games with Cleveland over the last few years. I think the Bulls are one player away from arguably being the best team in the East. That player doesn't have to be a star. A Rasheed Wallace type player would put them over the top.

[jersey cubs fan]

I agree with most of what you said, but that's the point though. Detroit has won, so it is possible to win without a star. And they have been at the top of the conf. with pretty much the same core players. I'm one of the people that wants Kobe badly, but I don't see how the Bulls can't do what Detroit has done. As you said, the East is weak. The Bulls competed with Detroit pretty well, and they have played some great games with Cleveland over the last few years. I think the Bulls are one player away from arguably being the best team in the East. That player doesn't have to be a star. A Rasheed Wallace type player would put them over the top.

 

It's the exception that proves the rule, kind of like being satisfied with an 83 win team because STL won it that way or not worrying about a very slow start because Houston had a great second half. Detroit didn't just draft and develop their own though, the whole team was pretty much brought in from other teams. Trades were made.

 

People are clamoring to stay the same, and even talking of signing Kobe as a free agent. With the salary cap, it will be impossible for them to keep all their players (and sign them to the contracts they will require) then sign Kobe.

 

1 team out of the past however many dozens of champions has done it without a superstar. I think it's a huge mistake to try and repeat that sort of flukey result.

[rawaction]

I agree with most of what you said, but that's the point though. Detroit has won, so it is possible to win without a star. And they have been at the top of the conf. with pretty much the same core players. I'm one of the people that wants Kobe badly, but I don't see how the Bulls can't do what Detroit has done. As you said, the East is weak. The Bulls competed with Detroit pretty well, and they have played some great games with Cleveland over the last few years. I think the Bulls are one player away from arguably being the best team in the East. That player doesn't have to be a star. A Rasheed Wallace type player would put them over the top.

 

It's the exception that proves the rule, kind of like being satisfied with an 83 win team because STL won it that way or not worrying about a very slow start because Houston had a great second half. Detroit didn't just draft and develop their own though, the whole team was pretty much brought in from other teams. Trades were made.

 

People are clamoring to stay the same, and even talking of signing Kobe as a free agent. With the salary cap, it will be impossible for them to keep all their players (and sign them to the contracts they will require) then sign Kobe.

 

1 team out of the past however many dozens of champions has done it without a superstar. I think it's a huge mistake to try and repeat that sort of flukey result.

 

Again, I agree. And I would rather they go after Kobe ASAP. I just don't think the way they are going is a mistake. It's how they got to be one of the top 7-8 teams in the NBA. Granted they won't have top 10 picks after this year to add to the numerous top 10 guys they already have, but I think adding an inside player that can score a little and play some D would go a long way to giving the Bulls a legit shot to win it all.

[1908]

It surprises me how willing many Bulls fans are to wait and be patient.

I think you've missed my point. I'm all for the Bulls landing a superstar on the cheap and becoming a consistent championship-contending team. I don't want the Bulls to give up too much for Kobe or any other superstar and turn into the Minnesota Timberwolves of the East, though.

 

I also think you're wrong about NBA players not developing. Deng, Gordon and Tyrus all have significant room for improvement, and Deng and Gordon are borderline All-Stars in terms of productivity already.

 

EDIT to add:

 

Outside of Detroit, which didn't even draft and develop it's own, when was the last title won by a team that lacked a superduperstar?

How many titles did Dominik Wilkins win? Charles Barkley? Reggie Miller? Kevin Garnett? Talent wins, no doubt about it, but gutting a team to land that one mythic superstar is a fools errand in my mind.

Edited June 18, 2007 by 1908

[1908]

People are clamoring to stay the same, and even talking of signing Kobe as a free agent. With the salary cap, it will be impossible for them to keep all their players (and sign them to the contracts they will require) then sign Kobe.

They won't have to keep all their players. But they also wouldn't need to give up Deng, Gordon, Tyrus and whomever they draft with this year's lottery pick for Kobe either.

 

What package do you suggest the Bulls offer for Kobe?

[RynoRules]

It surprises me how willing many Bulls fans are to wait and be patient.

I think you've missed my point. I'm all for the Bulls landing a superstar on the cheap and becoming a consistent championship-contending team. I don't want the Bulls to give up too much for Kobe or any other superstar and turn into the Minnesota Timberwolves of the East, though.

 

I also think you're wrong about NBA players not developing. Deng, Gordon and Tyrus all have significant room for improvement, and Deng and Gordon are borderline All-Stars in terms of productivity already.

 

EDIT to add:

 

Outside of Detroit, which didn't even draft and develop it's own, when was the last title won by a team that lacked a superduperstar?

How many titles did Dominik Wilkins win? Charles Barkley? Reggie Miller? Kevin Garnett? Talent wins, no doubt about it, but gutting a team to land that one mythic superstar is a fools errand in my mind.

 

Wilkins, Barkley and Miller played in a very different era, IMO. Hard to compare. But since you did, Barkley, Wilkins and Miller ran into someone better than they (I know you know hoops well enough to know who I am referring to). Barkley and Miller were very close to winning a title and came up just short, in fact (though Miller was stopped by Shaq and Kobe, again, better superstars).

 

Garnett, IMO, is a victim of horrendous mismanagement that makes Hendry look like a genuis.

[Exile on Waveland]

It surprises me how willing many Bulls fans are to wait and be patient.

I think you've missed my point. I'm all for the Bulls landing a superstar on the cheap and becoming a consistent championship-contending team. I don't want the Bulls to give up too much for Kobe or any other superstar and turn into the Minnesota Timberwolves of the East, though.

 

I also think you're wrong about NBA players not developing. Deng, Gordon and Tyrus all have significant room for improvement, and Deng and Gordon are borderline All-Stars in terms of productivity already.

 

EDIT to add:

 

Outside of Detroit, which didn't even draft and develop it's own, when was the last title won by a team that lacked a superduperstar?

How many titles did Dominik Wilkins win? Charles Barkley? Reggie Miller? Kevin Garnett? Talent wins, no doubt about it, but gutting a team to land that one mythic superstar is a fools errand in my mind.

 

All superstars don't win titles. However, basically every team that wins a title has a superstar (actually, most have two). So, citing the exception-that-proves-the-rule Pistons or a few stars that haven't won is neither cogent nor persuasive.

[1908]

All superstars don't win titles. However, basically every team that wins a title has a superstar (actually, most have two). So, citing the exception-that-proves-the-rule Pistons or a few stars that haven't won is neither cogent nor persuasive.

How cogent is my Wolves of the East example?

[1908]

Wilkins, Barkley and Miller played in a very different era, IMO. Hard to compare. But since you did, Barkley, Wilkins and Miller ran into someone better than they (I know you know hoops well enough to know who I am referring to). Barkley and Miller were very close to winning a title and came up just short, in fact (though Miller was stopped by Shaq and Kobe, again, better superstars).

 

Garnett, IMO, is a victim of horrendous mismanagement that makes Hendry look like a genuis.

Barkley and Miller also didn't get very close until they were paired with an All-Star level player or two.

 

What's your suggested trade to bring Kobe to the Bulls?

[Exile on Waveland]

All superstars don't win titles. However, basically every team that wins a title has a superstar (actually, most have two). So, citing the exception-that-proves-the-rule Pistons or a few stars that haven't won is neither cogent nor persuasive.

How cogent is my Wolves of the East example?

 

Very. Gutting the entire team for Kobe isn't a good idea. If the Bulls enter next season with something like Duhon-Bryant-Nocioni-Brown(?)-Wallace, I don't think they're much better off, and they are certainly worse off long term.

[Keener98]

All superstars don't win titles. However, basically every team that wins a title has a superstar (actually, most have two). So, citing the exception-that-proves-the-rule Pistons or a few stars that haven't won is neither cogent nor persuasive.

How cogent is my Wolves of the East example?

 

Very. Gutting the entire team for Kobe isn't a good idea. If the Bulls enter next season with something like Duhon-Bryant-Nocioni-Brown(?)-Wallace, I don't think they're much better off, and they are certainly worse off long term.

 

There is no chance that would be the team. One of Hinrich or Gordon will be here. One of Deng or Thomas would be as well, I believe.

[1908]

All superstars don't win titles. However, basically every team that wins a title has a superstar (actually, most have two). So, citing the exception-that-proves-the-rule Pistons or a few stars that haven't won is neither cogent nor persuasive.

How cogent is my Wolves of the East example?

 

Very. Gutting the entire team for Kobe isn't a good idea. If the Bulls enter next season with something like Duhon-Bryant-Nocioni-Brown(?)-Wallace, I don't think they're much better off, and they are certainly worse off long term.

There is no chance that would be the team. One of Hinrich or Gordon will be here. One of Deng or Thomas would be as well, I believe.

I've seen a lot of suggested trades involving one of the guards, Deng, Thomas, and this year's first rounder.

[Exile on Waveland]

Wilkins, Barkley and Miller played in a very different era, IMO. Hard to compare. But since you did, Barkley, Wilkins and Miller ran into someone better than they (I know you know hoops well enough to know who I am referring to). Barkley and Miller were very close to winning a title and came up just short, in fact (though Miller was stopped by Shaq and Kobe, again, better superstars).

 

Garnett, IMO, is a victim of horrendous mismanagement that makes Hendry look like a genuis.

Barkley and Miller also didn't get very close until they were paired with an All-Star level player or two.

 

What's your suggested trade to bring Kobe to the Bulls?

 

It's a difficult question. The Bulls biggest need is and remains an interior scorer. Now, in the East, adding Kobe could easily make them the favorites. But is that the goal? Favorites in the East? I wouldn't think so. Personally, I don't really remember the details of the rumored Gasol trade (you can refresh me), but I likely would've done that.

 

As for Kobe, I'd push for Gordon-Nocioni (S & T)-Thomas/#9 pick and PJ Brown (S & T) if needed for salary purposes. If it gets to Deng-Gordon-Thomas/pick, I think I'd pass. I'd pass because the Bulls should be able to get something pretty damned good for Gordon-Nocioni-Thomas/pick and still have Deng, Hinrich and Thomas/pick.