# Next season roster



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Quick recap on what next season's roster is looking like so far, and a few thoughts on advantageous moves we might want to make. This assumes an 8-9 man primary rotation

Starters:
PG - Rose
SG - Butler
SF - Deng
PF - Boozer
C - Noah

2nd string / main rotation backups:
PG - Hinrich
SG - ??
PF - Gibson
C - ??

3rd string / non-rotation backups:
PG - Teague
SG/SF - Snell
PF - Murphy and/or M. Thomas
C - Nazr

The only gaps to fill appear to be in the 2nd unit. Backup C is a major need to keep Noah's minutes modest and for keeping him healthy. Crossing my fingers for Chris Kaman taking the vet min. For backup SG, Marco is certainly an option, though wouldn't mind exploring more offensive pop to take that slot. Nate would nice but I don't see him taking the vet min again.

As far as trades go, I would like to see us pursue trade options for Deng and Boozer (and they may already be doing this, esp. with Deng), with the primary focus on getting suitable weapons against Miami. My favorite ideas:

1) Trade Deng to the Kings for a re-signed Tyreke Evans. Evans is a restricted FA so there are likely some cap rules to follow with trade fillers, etc. Beyond that, I believe the Kings need a guy like Deng badly, and they just drafted McLemore as their future SG which makes Evans' future with them up in the air. For the Bulls, Evans' playmaking abilities and ability to score at the basket should help Rose a ton. It also moves Butler to SF where I believe he is better suited. 

2) Trade Boozer + assets (e.g., Bobcats pick? Mirotic?) for an upgrade. This one is hard to pull off b/c there aren't tons of tradeable upgrades out there, and it may also require a 3-way. Aldridge, Horford, Love, Jefferson are all possibilities. Horford is my favorite and with Atlanta seemingly blowing up their team, we might try making a bid. Though the key here is figuring out who wants Boozer and going from there. (I have to believe some of the bottom feeders could desperately use Boozer's production and can easily absorb the 2 years left on his contract)

Even with nothing but 2 free agent signings (backup C and backup scoring guard), I think we're looking at a solid 50-60 win season. However we'll hit the same roadblock with Miami in the East, and even past that, you'll run into Oklahoma City or one of the very good West teams in the Finals. I don't see us getting over the Miami hump without a move or two involving Deng/Boozer. Thoughts?


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

I like the Tyreke option... 

Would love to see a Love/Aldridge trade of some sort, but probably most unlikely.... And Kaman would be great. 

Do not want to trade Mirotic, but would move the Charlotte pick... 

Question... If we move Deng, and his salary, then proceed to amnesty Boozer the following year, couldn't this potentially set us up nicely in FAgency to make a splash... Would still have a core of Rose/Butler/Noah... Plus whatever we got from Deng trade, and then a bigger name FA... Throw in Mirotic at that time and I'm liking the direction of the team... If indeed that is the plan. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

Can anyone fill me in on what is going on with Kamen? I love the idea of him coming to the Bulls, but have not heard his name mentioned for some time.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Fergus said:


> Can anyone fill me in on what is going on with Kamen? I love the idea of him coming to the Bulls, but have not heard his name mentioned for some time.


I don't think there is anything to report other than wishful thinking. Kaman would be a great fit with Chicago, but it's up to him obviously if Chicago fits what he wants. 
As far as I know, there are no "rumors" of Kaman to Chicago floating around. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

My favorite idea post draft without trading of course.

1) Re-sign Belinelli with the non Bird exception.

2) Sign Zaza Pachulia to a 1-year MMLE deal.

If we accomplish both, I doubt we sign any vet minimum players unless Murphy is not making the roster. I don't think management would see value in adding a 14th member of the bench at the cost of $2M. Injuries later in the year could change that.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Houston just traded TRob to Portland... 

I know Chicago was a possible destination for Robinson... But, what foes this mean for Portland? They seem to be building for the future... Is Aldridge a possibility? 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

Unless we are giving away Deng, Boozer or Noah, I do not see any way Aldridge will be joining the Bulls. It is frustrating that other teams are able to make these kinds of moves with free agents and during the draft, but the Bulls just sit idle. However, that is the what the result of the current CBA. I would love it if the Blazers would trade Aldridge for Boozer, but that is not likely to happen.

Also, I did some online research on Kamen. According to what I read, Kamen has not a real defensive force for some time (if at all). However during his time with the Clippers, he did have a decent offensive game. Since then injuries have slowed him, weakening his offensive skills.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Free agent recruiting, Day 1....Bulls have reached out to multiple scoring combo-guards: Mo Williams, Monta Ellis, and Will Bynum. I assume we gave Nate a buzz too. Sure appears they want some dynamic scoring punch off the bench, ala what Nate gaves us last year. Very glad to see that. Hopefully we snag one of those guys for a good deal since we're over the cap. Also I just noticed how many small scoring guards are on the FA wire this year...have to wonder what type of offer Nate gets with so many similar players out there. Likewise I wonder if the Bulls are trying to keep some leverage by poking around to other possibilies.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Free agent recruiting, Day 1....Bulls have reached out to multiple scoring combo-guards: Mo Williams, Monta Ellis, and Will Bynum. I assume we gave Nate a buzz too. Sure appears they want some dynamic scoring punch off the bench, ala what Nate gaves us last year. Very glad to see that. Hopefully we snag one of those guys for a good deal since we're over the cap. Also I just noticed how many small scoring guards are on the FA wire this year...have to wonder what type of offer Nate gets with so many similar players out there. Likewise I wonder if the Bulls are trying to keep some leverage by poking around to other possibilies.


I've also heard OJ Mayo's name in some rumors... it does seem like we're going to address the backcourt... though I don't think we can afford most of these options, so I'm a little confused.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Ya, unless there is a trade (deng/boozer) we are not signing anyone unless it's for the min.... 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Dornado said:


> I've also heard OJ Mayo's name in some rumors... it does seem like we're going to address the backcourt... though I don't think we can afford most of these options, so I'm a little confused.


Off the top of my head...could easily see a sign-and-trade of Mo Williams for Hinrich. 

Hinrich has a good track record of mentoring young PGs, and the Jazz just acquired a promising one in Trey Burke. Hinrich also has an expiring contract. 

Mo would become our 6th man and backup combo-guard.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

> Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA
> 
> Bulls pursuing Mike Dunleavy Jr., with mini mid-level, sources tell Y! Sports. If Rockets snare Dwight Howard, Dunleavy major target there.


Dunleavy a target, apparently.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I would love to add Dunleavy... he's a versatile offensive weapon and a solid shooter... smart player.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Updated roster w/ Dunleavy agreeing to terms. Dunleavy no doubt is taking Belinelli's spot. (Next move will hopefully be a backup 5 for Noah, ideally one with a little scoring punch.)

Starters:
PG - Rose
SG - Butler
SF - Deng
PF - Boozer
C - Noah

2nd string / main rotation backups:
PG - Hinrich
SG/SF - Dunleavy
PF - Gibson
C - ??

3rd string / non-rotation backups:
PG - Teague
SG/SF - Snell
PF - Murphy and/or M. Thomas
C - Nazr


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

I like the Dunleavy signing... Nothing earth shattering, but these are the kind of signings I expected with limited cap room... As long as we have free space next year... 

Really hope something happens with Deng (resign/trade)... Don't want to let him walk next year for nothing...


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

RE: my placeholder for a backup C with scoring pop...some guys with sources on realgm are saying the Bulls are targeting Elton Brand and Andray Blatche. IMO, Brand is more likely to sign here, but I prefer Blatche's size and youth. I guess it's good we're at least eyeing some offensive-minded bigs for backup C. Still feels like we're a little underwhelming on the offensive side, though we're moving in the right direction with all these 3-pt shooters.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

While I like the Dunleavy signing, he is also good enough to start in case Deng goes in a consolidation trade this season.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> While I like the Dunleavy signing, he is also good enough to start in case Deng goes in a consolidation trade this season.


Where there's smoke, there's fire. The Bulls certainly appear to be up to something with regard to Deng. Not too surprising as most of us predicted Deng could get moved with his contract expiring, Jimmy's emergence, and him turning 30 before too long. And now the signing of Dunleavy and drafting of Snell makes SF our deepest position. 

Still really wishing for Tyreke Evans via S&T, though not getting my hopes with no rumors out there linking the Bulls to Evans. So far it's been the Pelicans making an offer sheet of 4 yrs, $48M to Evans (not yet accepted by Evans). Thing is, that is less than Deng's original contract and should be doable by the Bulls if they felt compelled to swap Deng in S&T. I think the Bulls could convince Evans to come here with an open starting slot, the winning environment, and his Memphis buddy in Rose talking to him. Hopefully could compensate the Kings as well to make it happen.

Another less complicated (but riskier) deal would be Deng for Eric Gordon, which the Pelicans would almost certainly do if they sign Evans. I know Derrick would love bringing Eric Gordon here. Really hard to get a read on what the front office thinks of Gordon's play style and injury history combined with the money still owed to him.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

yodurk said:


> RE: my placeholder for a backup C with scoring pop...some guys with sources on realgm are saying the Bulls are targeting Elton Brand and Andray Blatche. IMO, Brand is more likely to sign here, but I prefer Blatche's size and youth. I guess it's good we're at least eyeing some offensive-minded bigs for backup C. Still feels like we're a little underwhelming on the offensive side, though we're moving in the right direction with all these 3-pt shooters.


I heard Blatche verbally agreed to a 1.2 million (above minimum) deal to return to the Nets. Not sure if this is set in stone as they announced Korver would be heading there and that's not for sure yet.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Where there's smoke, there's fire. The Bulls certainly appear to be up to something with regard to Deng. Not too surprising as most of us predicted Deng could get moved with his contract expiring, Jimmy's emergence, and him turning 30 before too long. And now the signing of Dunleavy and drafting of Snell makes SF our deepest position.
> 
> Still really wishing for Tyreke Evans via S&T, though not getting my hopes with no rumors out there linking the Bulls to Evans. So far it's been the Pelicans making an offer sheet of 4 yrs, $48M to Evans (not yet accepted by Evans). Thing is, that is less than Deng's original contract and should be doable by the Bulls if they felt compelled to swap Deng in S&T. I think the Bulls could convince Evans to come here with an open starting slot, the winning environment, and his Memphis buddy in Rose talking to him. Hopefully could compensate the Kings as well to make it happen.
> 
> Another less complicated (but riskier) deal would be Deng for Eric Gordon, which the Pelicans would almost certainly do if they sign Evans. I know Derrick would love bringing Eric Gordon here. Really hard to get a read on what the front office thinks of Gordon's play style and injury history combined with the money still owed to him.


Interesting on the Tyreke front. I hadn't thought of that as a possiblity for us. We'll know for sure during the 7/10-7/16 window when our TPE can be used until it expires.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Anyone else find it interesting that we haven't seen a single bit of news on Nate Robinson suitors? Guess it could just be waiting for the bigger names to get snagged (Howard, Smith, Evans, etc.) before teams move onto the Nates of the world with their remaining cash.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Anyone else find it interesting that we haven't seen a single bit of news on Nate Robinson suitors? Guess it could just be waiting for the bigger names to get snagged (Howard, Smith, Evans, etc.) before teams move onto the Nates of the world with their remaining cash.


I have heard that the Knicks and the Mavericks have shown interest.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Bulls have supposedly contacted the following about playing for us with no indication how talks have gone. These are how I rank them in each group:

Andre Blatche (now expected to re-sign with BRK)
Ronny Turiaf
Elton Brand
Jason Maxiell
Ryan Hollins
Malcolm Thomas

Nate Robinson
Mo Williams
Marco Belinelli
Will Bynum
Carlos Delfino
Randy Foye
Tracy McGrady
Raja Bell

Rumored in trade discussions for:
OJ Mayo
Monta Ellis

Absent a trade, it wouldn't surprise me to sign one guy from each group.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

With the Dunleavy signing, I can't see the Bulls bringing in another wing player, (McGrady, Marco, etc) ... Other than a back-up big, unless there is a trade, I think the roster is set...


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> I have heard that the Knicks and the Mavericks have shown interest.


Saw this regarding Nate and the Knicks:

Marc Berman ‏@NYPost_Berman 15h
As tweeted yesterday and wrote in today's Post, #Knicks discussed Nate Robinson with his agent yesterday but told club has minimal interest


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I've seen a few folks propose trading our traded player exception from the Korver trade for Robin Lopez, who the Pelicans appear to be dangling to free up cap space. He would be a terrific addition for backup C. Maybe not stellar defensively but more athletic than his brother Brooke, and is also decent offensively. Still not likely to happen though, this is just fan speculation, nothing more.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

yodurk said:


> I've seen a few folks propose trading our traded player exception from the Korver trade for Robin Lopez, who the Pelicans appear to be dangling to free up cap space. He would be a terrific addition for backup C. Maybe not stellar defensively but more athletic than his brother Brooke, and is also decent offensively. Still not likely to happen though, this is just fan speculation, nothing more.


Are you allowed to have both Noah and Lopez on the roster, or is there some sort of NBA hair-limit....?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Robin Lopez would be a great backup C. However, after using the MMLE (still a bit of a surprise to me), I can't see the Bulls signing anyone to a multi-year deal at this point, at least above the vet minimum, anyway. I would assume Lopez costs more than a 1-year deal.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

I think the Bulls could possibly steal a guy for the min that could pass up more money with another team if they want to play on a playoff team... Maybe increase their own stock on a one year deal, just like Nate Robinson did. 
As bottom feeders now in FA, we are gonna have to wait for Dwight to sign. Once he goes, then all the Free agents will start to fall in place. 

I find it interesting guys like Tyreke and Iggy are faced with the problem that the only teams that have money to sign then are, bad teams.... I would assume once Dwight signs, the other teams that missed out on him will use their cleared cap space to sign the leftovers like Tyreke and Iggy...


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> Robin Lopez would be a great backup C. However, after using the MMLE (still a bit of a surprise to me), I can't see the Bulls signing anyone to a multi-year deal at this point, at least above the vet minimum, anyway. I would assume Lopez costs more than a 1-year deal.


Lopez's contract is already set if we were to trade for him. He's at about $5M/yr for these next two seasons if he's not waived before Friday.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

King Joseus said:


> Lopez's contract is already set if we were to trade for him. He's at about $5M/yr for these next two seasons if he's not waived before Friday.


That 5 million contract would cost the Bulls 13.75 million when you factor in the luxury tax hit.

I doubt we spend that kind of money for Robin.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Anyone know if there's a list out there with NBA teams' remaining cap space and MMLE exceptions? 

Especially interested in which team if any might snag Nate Robinson. I have to imagine the number of suitors is shrinking fast. 

If for whatever reason we can't keep Nate, I hope Mo Williams is an option. Would love him here, very similar to Nate offensively and not the liability defensively (better size mainly). A consolation prize might be Toney Douglas...he basically fits the mold of spark scorer off the bench like Nate and Mo, plus is arguably a better defender than both of them.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Are you just trolling, or do you actually think that?


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

You know, there's not enough activity on this site at this time to make trolling the other team's board fun...

Try Real GM.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

It was obviously just a little fun joke


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

But I do think it's weird that you guys aren't mad that he kept toyin with you about coming back. Besides that i'm sure he will be ready and as good as ever for opener


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

We are mad. I'm mad. Can't you tell?


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

you look beautiful Noah


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

Bet i'm the first person that's ever said that about poor Noah


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

I think there is an annoyance factor with Nate that people just don't want to deal with. 82 games is a long time. 

If Mo Williams is a spark plug type, let's go with him.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

It would be funny if Noah was annoyed by Nate.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Bulls seem to be remaining patient while the FA signings have dragged to a halt.

Still alot of guys out there to be had, but not many teams have money to offer at this point beyond the vet minimum.

We still need a backup C pretty badly, IMO, and a scoring combo guard, ala Nate, is not far behind on the needs list.

Of the guys left, I'm going to reverse my stance and say try to grab Cole Aldrich for the backup C. I did a little research on him and his per minute production is actually not bad. He has ridiculous length so I am sure Thibs can make the most out of him. If he wants to increase his value, there's no reason he shouldn't sign with the Bulls where Thibs would make him a better player and he'd get a shot at solid minutes.

For the scoring combo guard off the bench, still wishing for either Nate's vet min signing or lucking into Mo Williams. I think both guys are trying to get paid, though, and aren't getting any good offers.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Bulls seem to be remaining patient while the FA signings have dragged to a halt.
> 
> Still alot of guys out there to be had, but not many teams have money to offer at this point beyond the vet minimum.
> 
> ...


They are set with Nazr as their backup big. 

I would have liked Aldrich as the backup 5, but the Bulls just continue to do the predictable.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Bulls seem to be remaining patient while the FA signings have dragged to a halt.
> 
> Still alot of guys out there to be had, but not many teams have money to offer at this point beyond the vet minimum.
> 
> ...


I heard we have minimum offers out to Nate Robinson, Rodrigue Beaubois, and Elton Brand now that Wayne Ellington, Andre Blatche, Ronny Turiaf, and Jermaine O'Neal have all signed. I have also heard that we have had conversations with Samuel Dalembert and Cole Aldrich, although the Dalembert discussions might possibly have been linked when we were trying to work out a deal for Monta Ellis. I'm expecting Dalembert ends up in Dallas and is an unrealistic target for us.

As I suspected, a lot of teams are using their MMLE to offer above minimum deals to two players so they can have their pick of the bottom feeders. I did like our strategy of using the full MMLE on MDJ, so not complaining at all there. I also did not expect Chris Kaman and Zaza Pachulia to command MLE deals.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> They are set with Nazr as their backup big.
> 
> I would have liked Aldrich as the backup 5, but the Bulls just continue to do the predictable.


Minimum contracts were signed last year through August. Perhaps the Bulls want to evaluate what Erik Murphy has to offer.

I'd take a flier on Aldridge. He's a good shot blocker and above average rebounder that would help us against the Indiana and Brooklyn types, but I would expect that Nazr would be ahead of him in the rotation.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I thought Greg Stiemsma would have been a nice cheap option as a rim protector off the bench, now that he's gone I guess I'd like to see us land Elton Brand, if at all possible. Basically anybody that give us minutes ahead of Nazr Mohammed would make me happy at this point.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

thebizkit69u said:


> They are set with Nazr as their backup big.
> 
> I would have liked Aldrich as the backup 5, but the Bulls just continue to do the predictable.


The Bulls are NOT set with Nazr as there back-up... He is a rotational big that can play some minutes, but not a full-time back-up. 

I think getting another C on this roster is way more important than another combo-guard.

Maybe the Bulls can afford to go small with Boozer/Gibson playing together while Noah sits, only because they can go big with the guards (Butler/Snell) ...but I'd still like another Center to round out the roster....


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Firefight said:


> The Bulls are NOT set with Nazr as there back-up... He is a rotational big that can play some minutes, but not a full-time back-up.
> 
> I think getting another C on this roster is way more important than another combo-guard.
> 
> Maybe the Bulls can afford to go small with Boozer/Gibson playing together while Noah sits, only because they can go big with the guards (Butler/Snell) ...but I'd still like another Center to round out the roster....



Just keep in mind the Bulls seem to think Taj is the primary backup. That seems to be continually overlooked on this board. Nazr is the third string center. I'd still be happy if another vet minimum big is signed, but we're not paying Taj $8M/season to just play 14 minutes a game at the 4.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

I agree the Bulls main rotation will be Noah/Boozer/Gibson... And the fact I want another big signed is taking nothing away from Taj.... 

I just think our 12/13th guy should be another big instead of a guard.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> but we're not paying Taj $8M/season to just play 14 minutes a game at the 4.


I still can't believe Monta Ellis is getting paid 25 mil over 3 years, thats a hell of a deal. Taj making around the same as Ellis is almost laughable.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> I still can't believe Monta Ellis is getting paid 25 mil over 3 years, thats a hell of a deal. Taj making around the same as Ellis is almost laughable.


Monta isn't an incredibly efficient player offensively or defensively. He'd be best to use as a sixth man on our roster. Paying a small that kind of money just to fulfill a role doesn't seem advantageous. I think that contract is fair but I don't think Monta would push us over into the realm of favorites. However, it did seem like we were targeting him if we could.

I know you have not been a big fan of Taj due to his lack of scoring ability, but people are undervaluing his contributions to the team because of an injury riddled down 4th season. Seasons two and three out of him were pretty good particularly in the improvement department.


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

sign tim ohlbrecht as a back up big.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> They are set with Nazr as their backup big.
> 
> I would have liked Aldrich as the backup 5, but the Bulls just continue to do the predictable.


Nazr should be the 3rd string center. I really hope the front office is thinking this way at least. With the team's injury history and Thibs' demanding defensive style, depth is important to keep minutes in check. And so Nazr isn't playing 40 mpg whenever Noah has to miss games. This team's #1 goal needs to be going into the playoffs healthy and you need a Spurs-like 10-12 man rotation to make that realistic, unless they magically become as durable as Lebron James.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Just keep in mind the Bulls seem to think Taj is the primary backup. That seems to be continually overlooked on this board. Nazr is the third string center. I'd still be happy if another vet minimum big is signed, but we're not paying Taj $8M/season to just play 14 minutes a game at the 4.


That may be right, however Thibs apparently didn't get the memo as he rarely played Gibson at the 5 spot last year, opting instead to play Noah 40+ minutes per game (with dire consequences since Noah runs more than any other player in the league...). 

Against Miami in the playoffs I think Gibson is a good backup C due to their small ball, but what about if/when we play Indiana (Hibbert) or New Jersey (Lopez)?


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Rhyder said:


> Monta isn't an incredibly efficient player offensively or defensively. He'd be best to use as a sixth man on our roster. Paying a small that kind of money just to fulfill a role doesn't seem advantageous. I think that contract is fair but I don't think Monta would push us over into the realm of favorites. However, it did seem like we were targeting him if we could.


A sixth man who probably plays 35 mpg. While I agree that Ellis probably doesn't win us a title, but I can for damn sure tell you that at with his contract and career numbers, he would be a HUGE upgrade over Jimmy at the 2, its not even debatable. 



> I know you have not been a big fan of Taj due to his lack of scoring ability, but people are undervaluing his contributions to the team because of an injury riddled down 4th season. Seasons two and three out of him were pretty good particularly in the improvement department.


I'm not a big fan of Taj because hes not much help on offense and his biggest defensive impact was when he was playing alongside Omer. I understand that injuries slowed him down last season, but he hasn't really improved as a player. I think Taj is just a solid defensive big, nothing more. 

Contract wise, its starting to look like a flop. Just look at some of the contracts signed lately for pretty good players.

*Taj Gibson 28 years old 4 years 38 million (9.5 per year) 2012-13 8 ppg 5 rebounds*

Monta Ellis 27 years old 3 years 25 million (8.3/8.5 per) 2012-13 19 ppg 6ast 4 rebounds

Tony Allen 31 years old 4 years 20 million (5 per) 9 ppg 5 rebounds arguably the games best defending 2 guard. 

JJ Hickson 24 years old 3 years 15 million (5 per) 13ppg 10 rebounds 56%fg 

Carl Landry 29 years old 4 years 26 mil (6.5) 11 and 6 

JR Smith 27 years old 4 years 24.7 mil (6.2) 18 ppg 3ast 5 reb

Kevin Martin 4 years 30 mil
OJ Mayo 3 years 24 mil


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> *Taj Gibson 28 years old 4 years 38 million (9.5 per year) 2012-13 8 ppg 5 rebounds*
> 
> Monta Ellis 27 years old 3 years 25 million (8.3/8.5 per) 2012-13 19 ppg 6ast 4 rebounds
> 
> ...


Out of the guys you listed, I think Kevin Martin > JR Smith > OJ Mayo > Monta when you consider contracts and fit.

If we could have traded Taj for Monta, I would have been more intrigued, but that was not going to be possible without us trading ~4-5 million more in salary to get a deal done. I would have been even more intrigued in such a deal had we drafted Mason Plumlee to at least cover frontcourt depth.

The problem with Monta as a starter is that he really only helps our transition game. He needs the ball in his hands to be effective which is why he is better off the bench to maximize his minutes in that role. If we are trying to beat Miami, Rose would end up having to guard Wade with Monta and he in the backcourt together.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

For me, it's Mayo > Ellis > Martin. I think Mayo's a more balanced player, while Ellis is more explosive offensively and Martin's more of an offensive role player/defensive liability.

The Taj contract makes sense, it's just that there are a ton of really reasonable contracts being signed this year. Why? Mainly the new CBA cap rules, a general unwillingness to spend, no bar-setting free agent causing GMs to start tilting. We can expect better value over the next several years, but when we signed Gibson none of this was clear yet.

Also, I think what he offers defensively that doesn't show up in the stat sheet is valuable. I also think even at his age, we're still waiting to see his best basketball. That's not great, but it does take bigs a little longer to reach their full potential. Taj's minutes got eaten up by Boozer, who was playing well and with more stability, and from Noah, who was having a career year.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

yodurk said:


> That may be right, however Thibs apparently didn't get the memo as he rarely played Gibson at the 5 spot last year, opting instead to play Noah 40+ minutes per game (with dire consequences since Noah runs more than any other player in the league...).
> 
> Against Miami in the playoffs I think Gibson is a good backup C due to their small ball, but what about if/when we play Indiana (Hibbert) or New Jersey (Lopez)?



My recollection is Taj got a lot of the backup 5 minutes (well, at least, what minutes were available with Thibs running Noah into the ground) and Nazr was pretty much out of the rotation entirely after playing very poorly in limited action early. Nazr then worked himself into the rotation when injuries necessitated it and started playing better.

Anyway, I think what I mean to say is Thibs used Taj as the backup center when the Bulls' bigs were healthy. Noah just didn't sit for long stretches. I think the FO is pretty intent on making sure Thibs doesn't run Joakim into the ground again this season.

I agree Taj is fine against Miami. I also think he's fine against New Jersey. Lopez is going to take plenty of shots away from the basket. Indiana is a bit of a concern, but that's when you might lean on Nazr more. 

Simply put, I think the Bulls are happy to run Taj as the primary backup center given there are so few teams in the league that could really take advantage of him from a size perspective. If you have to adjust the substitutions a bit for those situations, it's not the end of the world. I'm all for the Bulls signing another big for depth/injury purposes, but to me, it's perfectly clear the Bulls front office wants to see a 3-man rotation at the 4 and 5. You're wasting a lot of money on Taj if he's backing up Boozer only.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> I'm not a big fan of Taj because hes not much help on offense and his biggest defensive impact was when he was playing alongside Omer. I understand that injuries slowed him down last season, but he hasn't really improved as a player. I think Taj is just a solid defensive big, nothing more.



This is one of those areas where the actual data doesn't back up the eye test.



> The Bulls blew the league away on both ends with the Taj Gibson–Joakim Noah pairing in 2011-12, and in many more minutes last season Chicago scored above its overall rate with those two on the floor, per NBA.com


http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-t...ll-survive-the-last-days-of-the-cba-provision

I noticed that snippet last week while reading Zach Lowe's column about potential amnesty candidates. Pretty interesting.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> This is one of those areas where the actual data doesn't back up the eye test.


Well the data proves that he hasn't improved much since entering the league and there are defensive stats out there that point to Taj's best season was when playing heavy minutes alongside Omer.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well the data proves that he hasn't improved much since entering the league and there are defensive stats out there that point to Taj's best season was when playing heavy minutes alongside Omer.



Does it? Then why don't you share it with us?


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Elton Brand is going to sign a one year deal with the Hawks... 

I know his name was floated around here as a possibility... 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> Does it? Then why don't you share it with us?


Seriously? You wan't to make the argument that Taj has taken the next step in his development?

The guy has basically had the same stats through out his career. Taj got paid because of the 2011-12 campaign where he and Omer were arguably the best defensive pairing big's in the NBA.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Seriously? You wan't to make the argument that Taj has taken the next step in his development?
> 
> The guy has basically had the same stats through out his career. Taj got paid because of the 2011-12 campaign where he and Omer were arguably the best defensive pairing big's in the NBA.



I think you need to go back and read my post, because whatever you're commenting on here, it doesn't address what I was talking about.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> This is one of those areas where the actual data doesn't back up the eye test.


I grabbed this data from 82games.com, but this is my own table.

+/- is not a perfect stat, but it's the best stat available I can see that shows minutes played with a certain frontcourt mate. Over the past three seasons:

12-13	MIN	+/-	Per 36
Noah	516	89	6.2
Booz.	254	-16	-2.3
Deng	157	28	6.4
Nazr.	118	14	4.3

11-12	MIN	+/-	Per 36
Asik.	620	115	6.7
Noah	173	50	10.4
Booz.	36	24	24.0
Scali	14	20	51.4

10-11	MIN	+/-	Per 36
Asik.	514	113	7.9
Noah	420	10	0.9
Thms	279	86	11.1
Booz.	261	35	4.8
Deng	28	1	1.3


TOTAL	MIN	+/-	Per 36
Asik.	1134	228	7.2
Noah	1109	149	4.8
Booz.	551	43	2.8
Thms	279	86	11.1
Deng	185	29	5.6
Nazr.	118	14	4.3
Scali	14	20	51.4

Data would suggest he played better with Asik, but +/- is a noisy stat. You can also make the argument that he is better along side a Center factoring Thomas in as well.

More interesting that he is positive with every player he plays with in total. That seems very telling. It also seems that he should limit his minutes with Boozer.

Bring Scal out of retirement!


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Thanks for posting that, Rhyder. Pretty interesting numbers.

The comment I was trying to address by Bizkit was "I think Taj is just a solid defensive big, nothing more." According to the Grantland piece, the Bulls actually play better on offense _and_ defense with Gibson in the game, which was certainly news to me. If we're simply talking about whether Taj was a better defender when Asik was around, well of course he was. You can take a lot more risks in trying to get steals/blocks/stops when you have an elite rim protector playing behind you. That makes perfect sense.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

I'm a fan of Taj... He has plus post/on ball defense. Is a sound rebounder and plus shot blocker. Has good energy, etc... 

The 2 things I took from last season that was a concern was his shot selection, and his ability to knock down the mid range jumper. 

He puts the ball on the ground to often for his ability, and those failed moves, often lead to turnovers. 
The other thing was his poor jumpshot. He seemed more confident the previous year, which resulted in some big makes.. But last year he seemed unsure. This is the area of his game that needs to improve for his contract to be worth it. If he knocks down that jumper, plus all the defense... Then he is the perfect guy for this squad.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Firefight said:


> I'm a fan of Taj... He has plus post/on ball defense. Is a sound rebounder and plus shot blocker. Has good energy, etc...
> 
> The 2 things I took from last season that was a concern was his shot selection, and his ability to knock down the mid range jumper.
> 
> ...


I think that's a pretty fair assessment... Taj always reminded me a bit of PJ Brown - but PJ could knock down that midrange jumper with consistency. Taj's confidence in that shot did seem lacking last year... if we've got Noah working the offensive boards and Rose crashing to the rim, we need Taj to be able to step out to 15 and knock down a jump shot... that look will be open. That, and the pick and roll is so much more effective when there's a legitimate threat of the guy picking and popping every once in a while.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> Thanks for posting that, Rhyder. Pretty interesting numbers.
> 
> The comment I was trying to address by Bizkit was "I think Taj is just a solid defensive big, nothing more." According to the Grantland piece, the Bulls actually play better on offense _and_ defense with Gibson in the game, which was certainly news to me. If we're simply talking about whether Taj was a better defender when Asik was around, well of course he was. You can take a lot more risks in trying to get steals/blocks/stops when you have an elite rim protector playing behind you. That makes perfect sense.


Its a misleading statement to say that the Bulls play better on offense when Taj is on the court. If you replaced Boozer for a full 82 game season with Taj, I highly doubt the Bulls are a better offensive team. Defense on the other, I completely agree. 

When I said Taj is a solid defensive big, well thats what he is. His offensive numbers are below average. Hes a 31% shooter from the baseline (Which is his favorite shot mind you), a poor free throw shooter and is very limited offensively. Last year against .500 opponents he averaged 6.7 ppg on 42% shooting, now I'm sorry but that's not very good. 

He was such a liability on offense against the Heat, that he wasn't even used in game 5 much. He shot a staggering 28% in games 3,4 and 5. I can't imagine that over the course of a full season, the Bulls will play better offensively, especially against .500 teams with Taj starting over Boozer... I'm not even a BOOZER fan.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Its a misleading statement to say that the Bulls play better on offense when Taj is on the court. If you replaced Boozer for a full 82 game season with Taj, I highly doubt the Bulls are a better offensive team. .



In fact, it appears to be the very opposite of misleading. It's just simple factual data. Do you have anything to back up the notion that the numbers are misleading? It appears Bulls are not worse on offense with Taj. The surprising fact is they scored more with him on the floor. Why? Is there some explanation for that (lineups, times Taj is in the game vs. starters, etc.) that explains that away? I just don't know. But, as best I can tell it's not _misleading_ to say the Bulls are better on offense when he's on the floor. That seems to be the case. It's curious.

And I agree, I'm no huge Boozer proponent, but nothing I was saying was meant to advocate that Taj should start over him. I was simply saying that the data seems to indicate the Bulls play well enough on both ends with Taj on the floor to allow him to be the primary backup for both the 4 and 5 positions.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> In fact, it appears to be the very opposite of misleading. It's just simple factual data. Do you have anything to back up the notion that the numbers are misleading? It appears Bulls are not worse on offense with Taj. The surprising fact is they scored more with him on the floor. Why? Is there some explanation for that (lineups, times Taj is in the game vs. starters, etc.) that explains that away? I just don't know. But, as best I can tell it's not _misleading_ to say the Bulls are better on offense when he's on the floor. That seems to be the case. It's curious.
> 
> And I agree, I'm no huge Boozer proponent, but nothing I was saying was meant to advocate that Taj should start over him. I was simply saying that the data seems to indicate the Bulls play well enough on both ends with Taj on the floor to allow him to be the primary backup for both the 4 and 5 positions.


Its imperfect data, basketball metrics are still in the very early stages and IMO still don't beat the Eye test. Numbers are numbers and I accept that, but it doesn't mean you ignore everything else. Boozer is an incredibly flawed player but offensively he is a KNOWN commodity. Taj's stats prove that hes not as versatile or talented on offense as Boozer and that's not even taking into consideration that teams don't have to guard Taj but they do have to guard Boozer, and IMO that still matters.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Its imperfect data, basketball metrics are still in the very early stages and IMO still don't beat the Eye test. Numbers are numbers and I accept that, but it doesn't mean you ignore everything else. Boozer is an incredibly flawed player but offensively he is a KNOWN commodity. Taj's stats prove that hes not as versatile or talented on offense as Boozer and that's not even taking into consideration that teams don't have to guard Taj but they do have to guard Boozer, and IMO that still matters.



Like I said, I'm not arguing starting Taj over Boozer. I know there are a lot of folks who do want that, but I think it's crazy. Still, it's not "imperfect" to note the simple fact that the Bulls scored more with Taj on the floor. I'm wondering why the hell that is, because I agree, the "eye" test would seem to indicate that (1) Boozer is a better scorer, (2) Boozer is a better passer, and (3) Boozer creates better spacing for other players. 

So, an interesting phenomenon to try to figure out.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

jnrjr79 said:


> Like I said, I'm not arguing starting Taj over Boozer. I know there are a lot of folks who do want that, but I think it's crazy. Still, it's not "imperfect" to note the simple fact that the Bulls scored more with Taj on the floor. I'm wondering why the hell that is, because I agree, the "eye" test would seem to indicate that (1) Boozer is a better scorer, (2) Boozer is a better passer, and (3) Boozer creates better spacing for other players.
> 
> So, an interesting phenomenon to try to figure out.


Couple factors could be the time they are on the floor. Taj is usually playing on the second unit against other teams seconds units... And that has been a strong suit for this club. Our second unit and depth has generally been much better than other teams... So the scoring is going to usually reflect that...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Firefight said:


> Couple factors could be the time they are on the floor. Taj is usually playing on the second unit against other teams seconds units... And that has been a strong suit for this club. Our second unit and depth has generally been much better than other teams... So the scoring is going to usually reflect that...


I think Nate Robinson is the biggest reason for the Taj stat. When your third leading scorer and at times the teams first option is a bench player, well obviously the offense could be a bit better.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Speaking of defensive big men, looks like we might be in the hunt for Camby once he gets bought out.

https://twitter.com/JaredZwerling/status/357714572578263041


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Showtyme said:


> Speaking of defensive big men, looks like we might be in the hunt for Camby once he gets bought out.
> 
> https://twitter.com/JaredZwerling/status/357714572578263041


This I would like. Unfortunately we will get zero offensive production from Camby, but I really think this would help Taj... Gibson supposedly has worked on his jumpshot big time, so he could maybe provide the offensive punch from the post positions on the 2nd unit. 

Taj seems to play his best defense along side another defensive player... And even at his age, Camby is still a respected defensive presence. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Camby isn't the player he once was, but with Noah's injury issues, I'd absolutely appreciate him for a little extra big man depth. The Bulls would have a pretty solid 5-man rotation with him aboard.


----------

