SB Nation User Blog: Sports2

Thoughts on trades that work for the Bulls

Sports2 — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:34:59 -0000

Consistent with my thoughts on the season, I see three sorts of trades that make sense and have some likelihood of working out for the Bulls.

1. Trade for a FA target if their team falls apart. That'd be Wade (very unlikely since the Heat look good), James (pretty unlikely, but we're hearing rumblings of unhappiness), or Bosh (They're 3-4, and looking better but not outstanding). This really doesn't need any analysis in basketball terms. The only relevant fact is if one of these guys tells his team he wants to be traded and he wants to come here. Otherwise, a deal like this ain't getting done because a team won't trade a superstar unless he is holding a gun to their head.

Still, this is the sort of deal in which I'd consider trading Luol Deng and/or, since we'd both get an upgrade in talent and offset most of the salary of the incoming star. That would allow us to, potentially, add that star (say Bosh) and then go out and make a pitch to a guy like James that he could and should come join up with a Rose, Bosh, Noah trio.

Example: Deng, Tyrus, JJ, Pick for Bosh. That, I think, still leaves us with enough cap space to make a realistic pitch for Lebron or Wade. Dynasty baby.

2. Trade for a player that combines short-run help and an expiring contract. The goal here is to clear additional cap room (by offloading Salmons and maybe punting on our "Tyrus Problem") and getting back a guy who is obviously better than those guys.

Example: Trade James/Salmons/Tyrus for Tmac and change. I'd be willing to throw in James Johnson too.

Another idea would be the much mentioned Boozer for Jerome James + Salmons/Tyrus idea. I'm a little iffier on that since I think we're weaker on the wings than up front (who'd replace Salmons in the backcourt?), but it'd probably be an upgrade.

3. Trade Trade for a younger player on a rookie deal we can afford to keep without giving up on FA dreams. And oh yeah, the youngster needs to really be able to play. Tyrus, who we can't afford to re-sign, would be the obvious bait, but if we found a team willing to take on salary next year too, that would be ideal (That is, Salmons or Kirk, perhaps).

Example: I think the early returns on James Harden are looking pretty good, but I don't see that the Thunder have immediate plans for him, and they look like the stereotypical team that is just a veteran or two away. Kirk + Tyrus for James Harden, Sean Livingston and Etan Thomas works in the trade machine. I think this would be a calculated risk, because we remove a veteran at a time we need to make a playoff push, but I strongly believe Harden would contribute immediately and we'd cover two others bases. We both create more cap space for next year (Harden will make several million less than Kirk) and we cover our SG position in the long run since it's unlikely we actually fill it in free agency next summer. Similar targets might be Gerald Henderson, Stephen Curry, Brandan Wright, Eric Gordon etc.

What I really think about the Pacers

Sports2 — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:54:12 -0000

Firing Mel Daniels over his (rumored) spilling the Pacers guts to Peter Vecsey seems like more of a distraction from the story Vecsey ran with than the story itself. Last year Vecsey got loudly bashed by the Bulls organization for writing that John Paxson was going to step down as GM. And after loudly bashing Vecsey, Paxson.... stepped down as GM.

So that brings us to the Pacers and Larry Bird. Based on the various articles and interviews directly with him I've heard, I find it very believable that Bird might step down at the end of the year. He's never looked like a man happy with "living the life" to me. And if that's the case, I think it's especially improper to extend the coach. If you're a short-timer, don't commit the team to a multi-million dollar expenditure to lock in your buddy. That's not right in any case, but it's especially not right in the case of a that's already struggling financially in a small market

When you see stuff like that going on, it explains why the Pacers are struggling so badly. Good businesses don't do that. Also, good businesses don't have to hire pollsters to tell them what their fans are thinking. It's a relatively extravagant expense that doesn't yield any thing useful. If the Pacers brass is too dense to figure it out on their own, they're going to be too dense to figure out how to use the information they paid for.

At the end of the day, the "cultural" problems are important, but the biggest killer is that this team has repeatedly made poor decisions on talent. Looking across this team, what I see is a serious lack of NBA talent. We've got one star, Granger, and one guy, Dunleavy, who's an above average but not star player who must be accounted for by opposing defenses. And of course, he's going to be returning for a career threatening injury (or not), so we don't know what he'll really bring. We've guys are are legitimate NBA starters, Murphy and Ford, but who are certainly not above the average for what NBA starters should be.

That's 4 guys, and maybe only 3, with any credibility at all. And you need five guys to start. As prospects go, I think Hibbert and Hansbrough are decent, but good teams don't rely on big contributions from prospects. I think Rush is a mediocre prospect. They're not proven players. Jeff Foster is an above average backup, but paid a lot. Sol Jones is fine, but I'm not sure he's much better than a replacement level player.

Dahntay Jones, Earl Watson, Luther Head... none one of these guys brings much of value in my eyes. If you disagree, fine, but I think if anyone of them went down today, we could find a free agent off the street who could perform at basically the same level. That's especially bad when it comes to D. Jones, a guy we've locked into for 4 years.

So this team has 3-4 good players and three prospects who might become good players but aren't now. And by the way, it's not like we project them to be all-stars. Can't win with that.

Unfortunately, I don't see any easy ways out, either. Not that there ever is from bad decisions, but the Pacers are capped out, don't have a surplus of draft picks, and don't have players and contracts that look to be in obvious demand to, well, anyone. So I don't see any obvious means of improvement through trade. To get shorter contracts (and thus flexibility), we'd have to give up talent, and we don't have much talent to give up. To get more talent, we'd have to give up shorter contracts, and we don't have much in the way of short contracts to give up.

Poor management? Check!

Poor talent? Check!

Poor finances? Check!

In short, this team has been run into the ground.

Big Baby Davis has thumb broken by college teammate

Sports2 — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:44:59 -0000

Big Baby Davis has thumb broken by college teammate

Salacious speculation: Tyrus?

If I were Jerry Reinsdorf (a double duty fanpost)

Sports2 — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 02:57:27 -0000

Not in Reinsdorf's position with my desire to win basketball games, but in Reinsdorf's position with his prioritization of cost, flexibility, loyalty and winning, I'd be thinking hard about what the new CBA is gonna look like.

I've been mulling over what the likely effects are of the CBA negotiations coming down the pike. Everything I read seems to indicate the owners are going to push hard for a smaller cap, a hard cap, shorter contracts and probably smaller contracts. I've seen lots of folks that suggest the new CBA will benefit the owners. I've seen no one suggest the new CBA will benefit the players (versus the current situation).

These facts might make a cautious owner with an eye on the bottom line not want to sign any contracts next summer (under the current CBA) - during the "2010 bonanza" - because they could be especially overpriced under the new CBA.

For that matter, it might also behoove them to make an Okafor for Chandler type trade with Luol Deng. The idea being that Deng's contract, while in line with what a player like Deng could expect under the current CBA and good economic times, is prohibitive and out of line with what you'll pay Deng under the upcoming CBA. Which would be another reason to trade him (in addition to the ones I wrote here, but didn't have the guts to post here after that trade Rose fanpost).

Anyway, since Jerry proclaimed Deng a future all-star, trading him is either exactly what he's thinking or the last thing he's thinking. I guess we'll see. Of course, Jerry's got a lot of other stuff on his mind at the moment. Continue reading after the jump to find out what's up with Jerry's latest adventure...

... turns out his bid to buy the NHL's Phoenix Coyotes is in a bit o' trouble.

Glendale and the NHL are desperately trying to salvage an offer for the Phoenix Coyotes that was put in jeopardy after confidential Bankruptcy Court files were leaked that showed the bidder wanted guarantees of millions of dollars from the city and an escape clause to move the team.

Chicago sports mogul Jerry Reinsdorf, who with other investors has offered $148 million for the professional hockey team, was outraged by the leak of court documents Friday and threatened to withdraw his offer. It left Glendale and NHL officials scrambling over the weekend to repair relations with one of the few potential buyers wanting to keep the Coyotes in the Valley

This went down on Monday. What's really interesting to me is there's another ownership group that has apparently bid significantly more, and plans to move the team to Ontario (where, you know, they actually like hockey).

Moyes' attorneys had indicated to Glendale before filing that they planned to submit the documents to the judge under seal.

Glendale and the NHL, however, painted it as a ploy by Moyes to undermine Reinsdorf's bid, which does not include money to repay $104 million Moyes said he loaned to the team.

Moyes prefers a $212.5 million offer from Canadian businessman Jim Balsillie that would move the team to Ontario and put some money back
in Moyes' pocket.

One document was removed from the Web site by the court clerk. Another document containing a brief summary of the sealed facts remains.

Glendale City Manager Ed Beasley asked Baum to hold in contempt Moyes' counsel at Phoenix-based Jennings, Strouss and Salmon.

So basically it seems to me that the Canadian guy is offering $60M more dollars, plus he's not asking for millions of dollars of subsidies from the city of Glendale, AZ, population 250,000, to support hockey in a place where no one gives a shit about it.

This seems to me like a pretty classic case of the local government throwing good money after bad. It's spent an ass-load to build a hockey arena, and there's just not much of a market for it in Phoenix. The team is pretty much bankrupt. Shouldn't they just let it go instead of wasting more money on it (Yeah, if the Coyotes leave, they don't get any money from leasing them the arena, but if that's offset by paying out millions in subsidies, they're pretty well screwed there anyway. From the documents, Reinsdorf's proposal mostly seems to center around getting more revenue from the city by imposing taxes on restaurants and hotels servicing Arizona Cardinals fans.

Anyway, it appears Jerry was dealt another blow today when the bankruptcy judge overseeing the case ruled bidders who intend to move the Coyotes can enter the auction for the team.

U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Redfield T. Baum ruled Wedneday that PSE Sports and Entertainment, led by Jim Balsillie, will take part in the highly anticipated Sept. 10 auction, along with other qualified bidders, looking to take over the Phoenix Coyotes.

That ruling is a blow to the city of Glendale and the National Hockey League, which have animatedly voiced disapproval of moving the team to Hamilton, Ontario, as proposed by Balsillie.

"From the time his bid was launched, Jim Balsillie has said that all he is asking for is a chance to bid for the Coyotes at auction through the bankruptcy court process on a level playing field and let the best bid win," Bill Walker, Balsillie’s spokesman, said in a statement. "That’s fair and transparent. It’s the best outcome for creditors and for the future of the franchise."

Attorney Gary Husk, who is representing the city of Glendale, said the west suburb is supportive of having a "Glendale-only option," so that "reduces the risk a little bit."

Glendale built Jobing.com Arena, where the Coyotes play.

Husk said the ruling expedites the process and will provide for a side-by-side comparison, but it isn’t detrimental to Glendale.

"The side-by-side analysis will be very positive to determine which bidder has the more favorable proposal, not only for the city of Glendale but for all the creditors."

National Hockey League owners on July 29 voted to back Jerry Reinsdorf’s $148 million bid to buy the Phoenix Coyotes hockey team from owner Jerry Moyes. Reinsdorf owns the Chicago White Sox and Bulls.

The Coyotes are in Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization and the NHL and Moyes are battling over who can buy the team. Moyes wants to sell the Coyotes to Research in Motion CEO Balsillie for $213 million.

Reinsdorf’s $148 million bid to buy the Phoenix Coyotes hockey team includes little or no cash from him or any of his investors. Instead it centers on assuming and reworking debt. His offer is a stark contrast with the $213 million all-cash bid tendered by Balsillie. Balsillie would use part of his personal fortune to buy the Coyotes.

In short, Jerry's business accumen basically amounts to getting an incedibly sweet deal from powerbrokers who are willing to ignore $60M in cash. Score!

Completely serious trade Derrick Rose idea

Sports2 — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:27:34 -0000

As I said, we're at a crossroads. some win now guys and some win later guys. Up to this point, we've largely talked about building the team around Derrick Rose, since he's clearly going to be our best player and his best years are clearly ahead of him.

I'm going to suggest we do the opposite. Our current older players are not bad. They're good compliments if we had those stars to put them around. The problem is we don't, and our star is only 20 years old.

As I mentioned before, I think we don't have enough cap space next year without making trades that undercut our ability to actually land a FA. And if we do nothing, we've got an incoherent mix of young and old without the obvious ability to get better.

The best case scenario I see presented is something like we dump Hinrich, Salmons opts out, and we get Dwyane Wade next year". That leaves us with a team of
Rose
Wade
Deng, JJ
?
Noah

That's nice, but the reality is that Wade is in his late 20s, in his prime, and is quite a bit more "ready to win" than the rest of the team. It's not the sort of fit anyone will be looking for. The problem is, to get Wade, we'd have to jettison most of our veteran complementary players. It doesn't look like a very well-conceived plan to me, which is why I'd have preferred to keep Gordon and then make a push for Bosh, who could have been the third leg of a team that would all hit its prime together. But that's not gonna happen now. But since that's water under the bridge, the question is how, if we got Wade, we'd build a good enough team around him to win. We'd need exactly the sort of complementary guys - Miller, Salmons, Hinrich - that we wouldn't be able to keep.

I think the solution is to look at what we could get for Rose, and consider if we couldn't get Wade now, thus enabling us to keep the veteran sort of players around him we'd need to win with.

Besides the general theory that you need to build a team of appropriately complementary, mostly similarly aged players to win with, we also might be presented with another requirement. Opportunity.

I think under normal circumstances, any call to the Heat about Wade would be met my laughter and a quick hang up. However the recent going on in Miami, I think, create at least some potential for getting him.

Wade has been offered an extension, within a context of some disagreement about whether he'd sign one. The Heat and Wade seem to be playing a game of chicken. Wade says he won't sign till the Heat get better, and the Heat say they can't make a decision about getting help until they've got Wade locked up.

Sounds like a breakdown in trust to me. I have to think that if Wade follows through and doesn't sign the extension, the Heat have to at least consider moving him

Oh, did I mention that Wade wants to play with Carlos Boozer?

Boozer, for his part, is a guy the Jazz are deperately trying to unload with little salary coming back, given their financial situation and desire to keep Paul Millsap. Understandable... I'd rather have Millsap too, but I'd take Boozer.

So why not try for two great tastes that taste great together (and want to be together), and land both Wade and Boozer. And oh, by the way, have a solid, mostly veteran team to put around them.

Here's the deal:

Bulls trade Derrick Rose, Tyrus Thomas, and Tim Thomas to Miami and Jerome James's 80% insured contract (true cost $1.3M) to Utah.
Bulls receive Dwyane Wade and Carlos Boozer

1- Hinrich
2- Wade
3- Deng, Salmons
4- Boozer, Johnson
5- Noah, Miller

I don't know if that's a title team or not, but it's certainly a contender, and it's a young one that can conceivably be kept together for several years. This is the best we could conceivably do, and I think it works pretty well for the Jazz (mission accomplished on immediate savings for Boozer) and the Heat, if things are actually deteriorating that badly with Wade.

This is a repost of my original post at S2. What do you all think? I think Rose is one of the few players who might make the Heat consider. And I think Wade is one of the few players who, especially with Boozer as well, might turn the rest of this team into something good.

The Pistons have reached deal in principle with Ben Gordon

Sports2 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:03:42 -0000

The Pistons have reached deal in principle with Ben Gordon

[From the FanShots. More later, count on it. -ed.]

The Pistons have reached deal in principle with Bulls guard Ben Gordon, a source with knowledge of talks tells Y! Sports Adrian Wojnarowski

My James Johnson Profile

Sports2 — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:59:39 -0000

Good:

He's got excellent size and athleticism for both forward spots. He's a ridiculous 257lbs, but he's really athletic, posting good times in the sprint and agility drills, bench pressing a ton, and jumping out of the gym.

In short, he compares very well physically to plenty of successful players. The closest contemporary comparison might be Ryan Gomes, but with way more athleticism. Perhaps Lebron James if Johnson loses 10-15 lbs. Yes, really.

He's a trained martial arts expert, which suggests to me excellent body control and the potential for good discipline.

Productively, he's demonstrated good but not great returns to his unworldly physical abilities. First, Wake Forest played at an NBA Pace. That's something that's not generally noted, but it's pretty important when considering how guys adjust. For example, Blair and Pitt played a game that had something like 80 possessions per 48 minutes. The slowest paced NBA team, the Blazers, played 86.6. The Bulls played 93 I think. Wake Forest played about 90 possessions per 48 minutes. So he might be a bit more used to that sort of play from the get-go.

Within this background, he produced at good but not great levels. He's got range out to the 3 point line, he can rebound, and he finished pretty well. He appears to be able to pass the ball.

Bad:
The only physical negative I see is that weight. He's got 12% body fat in a world where the average successful NBA SF has 6-7% and the average PF has 8-9%. With proper conditioning, I'd guess his proper playing weight would be about 245lbs.

Statistically, he was right on the margin of "troubling" in two areas. First, he fouled quite a bit, though he's not a foul machine. Second, he was just under 70% as a free throw shooter, which isn't all that great, but marginally acceptable. Third, for a guy with his physical tools, he really didn't get to the line a lot compared to what really top notch guys do.

Other:
* He apparently annoyed Chris Paul so badly that Paul told the Hornets not to draft him if available. Usually good players want their college teammates, especially if they think they can be good pros. That's sort of annoying.
* He's talked about an MMA career if basketball doesn't work out. The upside of that is he's a bad ass. The downside is I don't want him thinking aobut what happens if basketball doesn't work out.
* He came to basketball a bit late. I think I read he only started playing a couple years into high school.

Conclusions:
James Johnson has the tools to be an absolutely spectacular player. His physical gifts are second to none, even for the NBA. And his skills are impressive. He's demonstrated every tool you'd want from a basketball player on the court. Except... an overwhelming commitment and drive to succeed.

That's the common theme.

Physically he's gifted, but he's not in the best shape he could possibly be in. Productively, he's demonstrated superb skills, but hasn't produced to the level one could imagine a player with his skills producing at. In short, it's all there, and even if he half-asses it, he can still be useful. But if he really commits and works his ass off, he could be amazing.

Draft Poll for pick #16

Sports2 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:32:38 -0000

So who do the Bulls actually draft with the #16 pick? For purposes of this poll, I mean who do we pick first. If you think we trade up or trade down with the purpose of targeting one of these guys, that's ok too.

My take: when push comes to shove, I think the Bulls take Gerald Henderson, because despite the manner in which we've discussed it here, the Bulls are planning for Gordon to play somewhere else. With Henderson's selection, that will become even more of a fait accompli. I've seen various rumors that he's their target (Givony at DX) and they are, in fact, willing to move up to get him (Ford).

Suffice to say I wouldn't move up to get him, but I do believe the Bulls will draft him based on the fact it will seal a non-deal with Gordon, and the fact that he seems to be exactly the sort of prospect they typically take. Solid but not great athleticism, good knowledge of the game, not a great shooter, from a big college program. He's the quintessential safe pick in a draft full of questions.

Poll

Who do the Bulls draft with the #16 pick (or if they combine picks and trade up, I suppose).

James Harden

11 votes

Gerald Henderson

17 votes

Tyler Hansbrough

9 votes

Ty Lawson

0 votes

James Johnson

13 votes

Terrence Williams

7 votes

DeJuan Blair

45 votes

BJ Mullins

9 votes

Sam Young

0 votes

Someone else

0 votes

They trade out of the draft

10 votes

121 votes | Poll has closed

A look at the 26th pick and the 2nd round

Sports2 — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:58:47 -0000

[Note by your friendly BullsBlogger, 06/24/09 1:27 PM CDT: Well, someone has to look at this part of the draft, right? For what it's worth (not much), in the couple mock drafts I participated in I selected Sam Young in one, and Chase Budinger (when Young was gone) in another -ed.]

Hopefully it's better than Stephen A. Smith's

Starting premises

1. Here's what I think about this draft. None of the guys we're likely to get at the #16 pick really excite me. Yet, it might have decent value in trade. I hope to god we can package the pick with players to get Bosh, Amare, or hell, even Kevin Love.

2. I don't see any realistic option James Harden or Blake Griffin, who are the only guys I'd be animated to move up to get.

Thus, in my ideal world, we'd be left with the #26 pick after trading the #16 pick.We haven't devoted as much thought about what to do there.

At #26, the best value I see left on most boards is Chase Budinger. He seems like an obvious fit for the Bulls. He's an excellent, floor spacing shooter, and not a terrible distributor. Compared to the other SG prospects we've talked about, he produced similar or better, but with less good teammates around him. He measures out quite well athletically. So he's the guy. If he's not there, I don't have a problem with Ellington or even Jermaine Taylor. But while Buddinger was probably overrated as a lottery pick, he seems to have fallen further than he should.

Next, I see several players that look worth a shot in the second round, and several reasons to pick up a second rounder to get them.

First, the Bulls need to fill out their roster and will be under the gun financially. Second rounders are the cheapest way to fill out your roster.

Second, there are several guys there who fit the profile for NBA success. My prime target would be Jeff Pendergraph. If you compare his size and athleticism to successful NBA players, he compares very well to guys like Okafor, Horford, and even Amare. That is, he's not as good as Amare, but he's definitely got and NBA body. Second, he's been talked about up and down as a tireless worker. He seems like the prototype 2nd round steal, and would be at a need position. Trade a future 2nd and get him. We'll need depth up front.

If, for some reason, we don't have the #26 pick, Danny Green and Jermaine Taylor both look like they may be there in the second round, and both look like they've got NBA bodies, athleticism, and skills. Again, the cost is very low, and, we need to fill the roster, and they appear to have (for second round picks) relatively good profiles.

So in summary, this might be a weak draft, but I see particular guys that are worth going and taking a flyer on, given that the cost of doing so is low.

If we come out of tomorrow night with

1. A trade of #16 + players for a better frontcourt

2. Buddinger to space the floor in a few minutes

3. A decent chance to make it cheapo like Pendergraph

So that's my thinking on what a successful (in somewhat realistic terms) draft would look like. Now if we can trade Lebrond for #26, I'm all for that too.

Sam Smith on the Radio this AM

Sports2 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:16:25 -0000

Not a big deal, but Sammie was on the Steve Sczczczczcaben (however you spell that guy's name) show this morning on Fox radio, and when talking about Phil Jackson coming back, said Jackson has a great relationship with ownership and management in LA. Paraphrasing, he said the Lakers are one of the league's best run team. The ownership is top notch, he said, fair and willing to pay at all levels, and, along with management, is willing to give him a voice in making player decisions and running the team.

The kicker... Smith goes on "pretty much the opposite of the situation he had in Chicago". :D

Part of that, I'm sure, was a swipe at Krause, but Smith went to pretty great length talking about the (high) quality of Jerry Buss's ownership.