# This team has to be kept together



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Obviously there has been a lot of talk out there about options , however slight , materialising for a Garnett type player 

I believe with this year's free agency and draft's this year and next with what we are able to probably take out of the draft ..that we will be contending for the Conference title in 3 seasons and therefore starting to play for Championships 

Do we really want to gut that depth we are building for Kevin Garnett ...if we believe we are probably going to get there without him ? 

We know that Wade, James , Bryant , Tim Duncan , Dirk , EB , are not going anywhere but do we really want to give it all away for 30 year old Kevin Garnett ? 

Or not build proper complementary depth and just add say a Paul Pierce ?

The more I think about it it seems the best way forward is to build complementary pieces this current team through free agency and the draft rather than gut it / disrupt it through trade

Thoughts ?


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Your wrong, were competing for a championship this year.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Obviously it depends on the player available but I do agree that I don't see any player being made available for whom I'd risk breaking up this core for. 

Just imagine this team plus Nazr, Gooden, Aldridge and Brewer. Even if Aldridge doesn't develop into the 18 and 9 player we might hope, it's a vastly improved team.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Draft LaMarcus Aldridge or Andrea Bargnani with the top pick.

Select Ronnie Brewer or Richard Roby for the 2nd first round pick.

In FA look at Nazr Mohammed as a stopgap or stand pat on the money and wait for '07 offseason.

Keep the core.


----------



## jordanwasprettygood (Feb 18, 2006)

I agree, we must keep the core intact. 

I really don't think we need any dominant superstar additions. All we need are solid, but not necessarily spectacular, bigs and an odd big guard to give Ben/Kirk a breather. Noc, Ben and Kirk have had solid playoffs. Luol has disappointed me a little but he is a much better player than he is playing right now, also it is his first postseason. Tyson has been ok all in all; next year hopefully we can slide him back to PF. Heck even Sweets has played pretty decent. 

If we draft Aldridge/Tyrus and a Brewer type, and sign one or two bigs (Nazr/Pryzbilla/Nene etc), I will be very happy with the makeup of our team for next season and beyond.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Tyrus Thomas does not help the Bulls. Why would any Bulls fans want him?


----------



## jordanwasprettygood (Feb 18, 2006)

HKF said:


> Tyrus Thomas does not help the Bulls. Why would any Bulls fans want him?


Well, you're probably right, he's not a center, and probably redundant w/Tyson, but I just named the two bigs that I know about. I know absolutely nothing about Bargnani aside from people on this board, so I don't want to act all smart and throw his name around (not saying you are doing this). If we get the overall #1 of course I would love for us to pick Lamarcus, but heck, we could end up with the 5th pick.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

TripleDouble said:


> Obviously it depends on the player available but I do agree that I don't see any player being made available for whom I'd risk breaking up this core for.
> 
> Just imagine this team plus Nazr, Gooden, Aldridge and Brewer. Even if Aldridge doesn't develop into the 18 and 9 player we might hope, it's a vastly improved team.


I'm starting to think if we can draft Aldridge there's really no use for Gooden. Noc should be getting around 20 minutes at the 4, meaning most of the backup minutes. There's really not enough room for 3 players at that spot.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

HKF said:


> Tyrus Thomas does not help the Bulls. Why would any Bulls fans want him?


Malik Allen is the Bulls starting PF at this time. Thomas isn't an ideal draft pick for the Bulls but let's not get carried away. His athleticism and ability to finish around the rim would be huge plusses.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> I'm starting to think if we can draft Aldridge there's really no use for Gooden. Noc should be getting around 20 minutes at the 4, meaning most of the backup minutes. There's really not enough room for 3 players at that spot.


You may be right. I like the idea of hedging the bet by getting a lot of quality PFs and Cs. If Aldridge pans out, worst thing that happens is that Gooden gets dealt. 

I could see Nene too because of his ability to play C.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

Frankensteiner said:


> I'm starting to think if we can draft Aldridge there's really no use for Gooden. Noc should be getting around 20 minutes at the 4, meaning most of the backup minutes. There's really not enough room for 3 players at that spot.


Basically, what I would like to see:

PG- Hinrich/Duhon
SG- Brewer/Gordon(getting more minutes)
SF- Deng/Nocioni
PF- Aldridge-or-Bargnani-or-Thomas/Nocioni
C- Nazr-or-Przybilla/Chandler

That to me is a top 3 team in the East and one that could realistically contend within 2/3 years.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I say take Aldridge and Brewer, unless he's taken by then. Then I say we go with Ager or GANSEY, if available... Ager is an athletic defender from a really good system and can provide some outside shooting, which fits in nicely with the Bulls.

And although he's sort of older and doesn't look all that athletic, I think Mike Gansey is Kirk-lite, another active and solid defender with crazy shooting range and the ability to handle. He's not as strong as Hinrich, who has really put on some serious strength in the last three seasons, but he's as fearless. He's not getting much draft talk right now but I'd not be surprised to see him gone around 19-23. Somewhat of a reach at 16 but if Brewer's gone, Gansey is there in my book with Ager and Hassan and Tucker. Richard Roby I know nothing about and have never seen play except for five minutes during the NIT coverage.

Aldridge is my definite pick at the Knicks pick unless we get #1 overall. Bargnani might have more upside but I see Pax going with the collegiate star, and he'd be a very balanced pick. 7/10 on offense and 8/10 on defense.

But I could see Aldridge, Przy, Chandler, SWEETNEY (yes, it's possible that an offseason with the Bulls could make him into a reliable 3rd offensive option in the post), and Songaila could be the frontcourt rotation of the future. Deng has already shown a willingness to play big when our lineup is playing small, and as he continues to fill out athletically he'll continue to be better and better at that.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> Basically, what I would like to see:
> 
> PG- Hinrich/Duhon
> SG- Brewer/Gordon(getting more minutes)
> ...


I'm not confident that the low post scoring would immediately be significantly upgraded by the addition of any rookie (esp. Thomas) and Nazr or Pryz.


----------



## mgolding (Jul 20, 2002)

This team is winning and developing based on a really admirable attitude and a growing chemistry. Why dispupt this by removing any of the players that contribute to that? To get a star we'd have to give up one or more of Hinrich, Gordon, Deng or Nocioni and they are what is good about this team. As I posted on another thread, this will be the best situation for rookies to come into and develop. We have seen countless young players come into the Bulls over the last 7 years having to try to swim in storms of losses and instability, in the situation as it is now theyll be in a private indoor pool surrounded by life guards. Without significant additions this team could easily be a 50+ win team next season.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

TripleDouble said:


> I'm not confident that the low post scoring would immediately be significantly upgraded by the addition of any rookie (esp. Thomas) and Nazr or Pryz.


I've said this before: post scoring to me is completely overrated. There are no post scorers on Phoneix, Dallas, or Detroit. What they do have though is guys that can attack the rim. Thomas, who I agree is not the most skilled player and probably shouldn't be our first choice, is a guy that can go up and finish in traffic. He's got enough tools to where I think he'll be a good player even if he doesn't develop a classic back-to-the-basket game.

Also, I think some of our current players are also getting better at going to the basket. I see this from Noc, Deng, and Hinrich. Hinrich's FTAs in the last two months have been on the rise (5.19) and even better in the Miami series. And we've averaged over a 100 points in April and in the playoffs. With Thomas or Aldridge, imagine if Hinrich could drive the lane and dish off to someone who could dunk over people instead of a player who can't (Sweetney, Allen), or one who can't hang onto the ball (Chandler). This to me is the biggest thing we lost with Curry.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> I've said this before: post scoring to me is completely overrated. There are no
> post scorers on Phoneix, Dallas, or Detroit. What they do have though is guys that can attack the rim. Thomas, who I agree is not the most skilled player and probably shouldn't be our first choice, is a guy that can go up and finish in traffic. He's got enough tools to where I think he'll be a good player even if he doesn't develop a classic back-to-the-basket game.
> 
> Also, I think some of our current players are also getting better at going to the basket. I see this from Noc, Deng, and Hinrich. Hinrich's FTAs in the last two months have been on the rise (5.19) and even better in the Miami series. And we've averaged over a 100 points in April and in the playoffs. With Thomas or Aldridge, imagine if Hinrich could drive the lane and dish off to someone who could dunk over people instead of a player who can't (Sweetney, Allen), or one who can't hang onto the ball (Chandler). This to me is the biggest thing we lost with Curry.


Good points again. Still, I'd rather have more low post production than less. Is there any reason you only want to sign one player this offseason (do you have someone in mind for 2007?).


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Frankensteiner said:


> I've said this before: post scoring to me is completely overrated. There are no post scorers on Phoneix, Dallas, or *Detroit.*


Rasheed Wallace may have something to say about that 

Plus you don't go far in the post season without inside production from half court sets


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> Tyrus Thomas does not help the Bulls. Why would any Bulls fans want him?


#1 We need an athletic above the rim finisher with great mits on the break ..that ain't Tyson 

#2 His demeanor fits our team identity / culture 

#3 He could end up being the best athlete , if not the best player , in the draft in a few years

#4 We do not need him to be a frontline home run success from Day 1 - we can be patient and develop him behind help we buy in free agency 

And that's for starters without thinking too hard about it


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Frankensteiner said:


> I'm starting to think if we can draft Aldridge there's really no use for Gooden. Noc should be getting around 20 minutes at the 4, meaning most of the backup minutes. There's really not enough room for 3 players at that spot.


I agree that Noc has to be accommodated on the frontline but I do refute your suggestion that for a team that's ready to start winning and going deep now that Aldridge would be a better option than Drew Gooden


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

TripleDouble said:


> Good points again. Still, I'd rather have more low post production than less. Is there any reason you only want to sign one player this offseason (do you have someone in mind for 2007?).


Not really but Gooden/Harrington are probably going to get around $40 M. What's the point of paying them that much money if they're sitting on the bench. I know you made mention of this issue earlier, but I don't believe their contracts will be easy to move. And it would be nice still having cap space during the course of next season (for trades) with NY's 2007 first rounder as a trading chip.

One thing I neglected to mention is the improvement on defense from our front line, which to me is just as important. This is where Thomas might outshine the other two. When people compare us to the Pistons and their frontline, they usually note Rasheed Wallace's offensive skill as the main difference. But the more I thought about it, the Pistons really outclass us on the defensive end. The Wallaces both play solid defense, rebound, and block shots. 

We have Chandler, who's good, but he fouls way too damn much. In fact, we have 3 players (Sweetney, Othella, Chandler) who are in the top 20 of fouls per 48 minutes. Our bigs fouling is a large reason as to why we’re 2nd to last in FTA given up and why we allow more points than what would seem appropriate given the #1 league opponent FG% defense.

Thomas has of course made his mark on defense while Aldridge has great potential on that end with his length and athleticism (and he was a very good rebounder and shot blocker in college). From what I saw in the games and read through scouting reports, these guys aren’t just good weak side shot blockers either. In Thomas' case, even if he's not yet polished offensively, he would help us out on D.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Rasheed Wallace may have something to say about that
> 
> Plus you don't go far in the post season without inside production from half court sets


Rasheed Wallace shoots 5.3 threes a game. Only 16% of his shots are from the inside and he gets to the line only 2.3 times a game. Those don't sound like the numbers of a post up player.

By comparison, our 6'3" point guard gets to the line 3.9 times and shoots 23% of his shots from the inside.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

Frankensteiner said:


> One thing I neglected to mention is the improvement on defense from our front line, which to me is just as important. This is where Thomas might outshine the other two. When people compare us to the Pistons and their frontline, they usually note Rasheed Wallace's offensive skill as the main difference. But the more I thought about it, the Pistons really outclass us on the defensive end. The Wallaces both play solid defense, rebound, and block shots.
> 
> We have Chandler, who's good, but he fouls way too damn much. In fact, we have 3 players (Sweetney, Othella, Chandler) who are in the top 20 of fouls per 48 minutes. Our bigs fouling is a large reason as to why we’re 2nd to last in FTA given up and why we allow more points than what would seem appropriate given the #1 league opponent FG% defense.


Just thought I'd add that Gooden isn't a very good defensive player so that's a reason to be cautious. Also, with the foul issue, Nazr is 11th in PF48Min. This is why I sometimes think we should go after Przybilla for our C spot, despite Nazr being a more rounded player.


----------



## BullSoxChicagosFinest (Oct 22, 2005)

I would definately keep Hinrich, Gordon, Noc, and Deng. The only of those that bothers me is Gordon with his size, but he continues to get better, and he has already been Mr. Clutch in many games. But the size does worry me, so I wouldn't have minded a Pierce deal. I won't shed any tears if Tyson is dealt, but I doubt it since I doubt any teams would want him. But if people are serious about going after Ben Wallace, it would be ridiculous to have both him and Tyson on the roster, or maybe get him at all and expect that much more than Tyson provides, which means a lot of people frustrated with a spot on the floor that doesn't contribute with the offense.

The focus for the offseason has to be the downlow, the inside. Either the draft (Aldrige?), free agency (Gooden?) or trade, I don't know who the answers are, but this has to be the focus. It's amazing what this year's team has done, no inside presence, everyone knows they're a perimeter team, and they still are able to knock down the 3's and are making a playoff run. Add a legit inside presence with the guards on this team, and this team easily challenges the Cavs, possibly a 4 seed lock


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> I agree that Noc has to be accommodated on the frontline but I do refute your suggestion that for a team that's ready to start winning and going deep now that Aldridge would be a better option than Drew Gooden


This is probably where we'll disagree. Offensively they're about the same next season (I think Aldridge will be much better in the long run), Gooden is maybe a better rebounder, and I expect Aldridge to be a better and more willing defender. In other words, their output should be pretty similar. If you have one, what's the point of getting the other (esp. at $40M).

I'm not so much against Gooden, just don't want him in combination with any other highly rated PF in the draft. But if Paxson drafts Roy, I'd welcome Gooden with open arms.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

absolutely!!

NO TRADES!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Frankensteiner said:


> Rasheed Wallace shoots 5.3 threes a game. Only 16% of his shots are from the inside and he gets to the line only 2.3 times a game. Those don't sound like the numbers of a post up player.
> 
> By comparison, our 6'3" point guard gets to the line 3.9 times and shoots 23% of his shots from the inside.


Anyone who watches Sheed would be aware of his penchant for shooting the 3 ..perhaps too much 

He is a true inside / outside player however and is just as effective in the post ..probably moreso when he decides to go in and flash his spin - turn around J moves 

He is a true finesse post player that probably should use this element of his game more as he used to but as players like he and Chris Webber got older , for longevity , they tend to shoot way too much from outside 

All your stats tell me is that he's taking easier options ( although perhaps less efficient ) and his team still wins ..but they would win more if Sheed played the post more as he most certainly can

In fact - interesting to note in the game I saw him play against Milwaukee the other day he was giving Bogut fits in the post


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> #1 We need an athletic above the rim finisher with great mits on the break ..that ain't Tyson


Funny, Chandler did this about 2 times a game when Jalen Rose was here.

Not sure Thomas is a very good fit in Skiles very structured offense. I like him as much as a prospect in general but agree that Aldridge or Bargini are a better fix.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

The FA target should be Nene. 

The draft pick will be one of the 3, TT, Aldridge, Bargnani. 

Its not a bad way to round out the Frontline. Any left over money should go for a big wing and the second first round pick should either be a freak or a project. I still think at 16, Saer Sene could be an interesting option.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> The FA target should be Nene.
> 
> The draft pick will be one of the 3, TT, Aldridge, Bargnani.
> 
> Its not a bad way to round out the Frontline. Any left over money should go for a big wing and the second first round pick should either be a freak or a project. I still think at 16, Saer Sene could be an interesting option.



I go Nene as well (if healhty because he can truly play center - giving us Chandler and Nene to man the C spot).

Rlucas, would you try to trade down if you were gonna grab Sene? Might we pick up a second rounder or two to move down? Also, I'd wait, on the off chance a guy like Brewer slips to 16.



What about John Salmons or DeMarr Johnson in FA for our big guard spot?


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

Bonzi Wells would be a good target for a big guard, provided he's no longer a penis (a fact he seems to admit is no longer the case). He could be our post up threat too, for those thinking we need that. Skill-wise, Bonzi is a perfect fit. Attitude wise, that's the big question.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

chifaninca said:


> I go Nene as well (if healhty because he can truly play center - giving us Chandler and Nene to man the C spot).
> 
> Rlucas, would you try to trade down if you were gonna grab Sene? Might we pick up a second rounder or two to move down? Also, I'd wait, on the off chance a guy like Brewer slips to 16.
> 
> ...


I think Sene around 20 would be right. Yes I would trade down. I saw the tape of his performance against the top HS (minus Oden) kids in the country at the Nike camp and he was dominant against one of the best big classes in history. I think, as most internationals do on draft day, he will be in the mocks around 12-18 but will end up going 22-24. So trade down, or pick up another pick. He could be this years Johan Petro, who was a pretty good find for Seattle and shows alot of upside. 

Demarr Johnson would be a great pickup at the big guard spot. Salmons would be ok as well. Whichever guy is more versatile or athletic, go with. Both guys do have handles. So whoever is going to finish at the rim better would be my choice.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Tyrus Thomas is 6'9 200 lbs. How is he going to help the Bulls now? He's so skinny and he's going to contribute at the 4 spot?


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

HKF said:


> Tyrus Thomas is 6'9 200 lbs. How is he going to help the Bulls now? He's so skinny and he's going to contribute at the 4 spot?


I tend to agree but one of the Bulls most glaring weaknesses has been the lack of bigs who can finish at the rim. Plus, I think people are longing for some more SC coverage too.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Tyrus Thomas is 6'9 200 lbs. How is he going to help the Bulls now? He's so skinny and he's going to contribute at the 4 spot?


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

Tyrus Thomas is 6'9 200 lbs. How is he going to help the Bulls now? He's so skinny and he's going to contribute at the 4 spot?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Tyrus Thomas is 6'9 200 lbs. How is he going to help the Bulls now? He's so skinny and he's going to contribute at the 4 spot?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Bunch of bloody jokesters. 

Draft Aldridge and Brewer. Go after Nazr Mohammed or Joel Pryzbilla.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Ben Wallace would be a good mentor for the young big we draft with the NY pick. I'd offer him the max. At the least it would force one of our main rivals to match the offer. If he signed, the Bulls would have a pass to the NBA finals for the next few years while the young pick developed.

Hinrich/Duhon
Gordon/2nd pick
Deng/Nocioni
Nocioni/Chandler/1st pick/Songalia/Sweetney
Wallace/Chandler/Sweetney/Allen

Bulls would be the best rebounding team in the NBA.
The best defensive team in the NBA.
They already have enough scoring, but the new pics would presumably add strength there as well.

Failing to get Wallace, I'd try to get both Przybilla and Gooden as FAs. Or Nene + Gooden if Nene's knees are truely OK, and he hasn't lost too much mobility.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

We match up well on the perimeter against Miami and are the quicker team and that has allowed us to have certain advantages but under no circumstances should we just be happy with the current group. 

I would draft 2 players who fit our style of play in the draft and play it safe via fa hoping to use the money next year instead of this summer. I think next year at the trade deadline being under the cap with 2 rookies and Gordon/Duhon will be the a good time to see what moves are to be made.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

johnston797 said:


> Funny, Chandler did this about 2 times a game when Jalen Rose was here.
> 
> Not sure Thomas is a very good fit in Skiles very structured offense. I like him as much as a prospect in general but agree that Aldridge or Bargini are a better fix.


From what I've seen of Tyrus in the tourney , you can pretty much throw anything in his general direction and one hand , two hands , forwards, backwards, sideways , in the air or off the floor on a bouce pass at full pelt ...and he's catching it and finishing 

Its not about the College and Pro games being different its more about innate skill and ability ..and offensively in a fast paced push game ..Tyrus , already , is a better finisher than Tyson 

By a considerable margin 

Athletically , when it comes to rebounding and weakside shotblocking capacity - I think they are the same and I give control of the ball in these categories to Tyrus but greater effectiveness to Tyson because of his length 

If we can draft Tyrus and develop him slowly and appropriately during his rookie contract - he grows another inch or two and stacks on 25 pounds to come in at 6'11 and 240 he will, IMO , be a considerably better player than Tyson Chandler , and Tyson toward the end of his contract in this scenario would be a nice luxury - but ultimately unnecessary.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> Tyrus Thomas is 6'9 200 lbs. How is he going to help the Bulls now? He's so skinny and he's going to contribute at the 4 spot?


You've repeated a question you already asked and which was answered on Page 2 of the thread 

I don't know why you persist in asking it

Debate the points with your opinions if you wish to but you don't really add anything by repeating the same question


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> The more I think about it it seems the best way forward is to build complementary pieces this current team through free agency and the draft rather than gut it / disrupt it through trade


Definitely!



> I'm not so much against Gooden, just don't want him in combination with any other highly rated PF in the draft. But if Paxson drafts Roy, I'd welcome Gooden with open arms.


I'm starting to agree with this aswell, plus if we draft a big, sign another in free agency it'll start causing some problems. With Nocioni's spectacular play as of late, I wouldn't want to chew into his minutes at that spot either.

One thing that I've been thinking alot of is who to sign, do we go after guys that fill a void, but essentially won't suit our playing style? Frankensteiner pointed out some good things, which has me a bit reluctant on Nazr Mohammed, and the more I think about Gooden, the more I see him not suiting our playing style.
Plus I don't think we have to go out and build a contending team straight away, just keep adding little by little and see how things go. We've shown we can hang with Miami, but if we improve to say, the 4th seed, I don't see us beating Detroit anytime soon, not just yet. Don't hate me Sloth!!!

My plan as follows.
Sign Randy Livingston for another year. Why ruin the mojo.
Decline options held on Othella Harrington and Eddie Basden. Part ways with Jannero Pargo. Encourage Darius Songalia not to pick up his player option, if he does it's not really that big of a deal anyways.

Draft Tyrus Thomas, we probably would need to get the #1 to do so, but if not I'm still hoping that Portland will take Morrison or Aldridge instead.
Trade down our pick to Portland (30th and 31st) or Minnesota for both of their second rounders and pick Bobby Jones and James White.

Sign Joel Przybilla and Jackie Butler.
Token signing of Toni Kukoc, so he can finish off his career where he started it.

Przybilla, Butler, Sweets
Allen, Chandler, Thomas
Nocioni, Deng, Kukoc
Gordon, Jones, White
Hinrich, Duhon, Livingston


----------



## SPIN DOCTOR (Oct 31, 2002)

Frankensteiner
Bonzi Wells would be a good target for a big guard, provided he's no longer a penis (a fact he seems to admit is no longer the case). He could be our post up threat too, for those thinking we need that. Skill-wise, Bonzi is a perfect fit. Attitude wise, that's the big question.[/QUOTE]

Good thought Frankensteiner, I feel the same way.

My perfect offseason would be :

Nene - biggest upside of all the bigs.
Bonz - with the exception of Big Ben, he the best baller in FA, and the price should be right. He has been a good teamate in Sac-Town.

Fills the gaps with skilled players.

Backups _ Nazr & Gooden would be good additions also, even at a significant contract commitment, there is always a market for bigs.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> Bonzi Wells would be a good target for a big guard, provided he's no longer a penis (a fact he seems to admit is no longer the case). He could be our post up threat too, for those thinking we need that. Skill-wise, Bonzi is a perfect fit. Attitude wise, that's the big question.


 He's in a contract year, and I don't trust him. 

Anyway, I can't envision signing more than one large contract in free agency because having too many talented players on one roster can cause chemistry problems, and we have too many players to extend in the future. So that's my prediction. 

I also think Gooden is the best, most solid basketball player in free agency. Mohammed is older and has questionable motivation. Nene hasn't produced good stats, either. Wilcox and Pryzbilla also have questionable motivation. So, I would like to see us go for Gooden; factoring in Paxson's past history, it's a strong bet that he'll go for the best overall player, rather than choosing the best center.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> You've repeated a question you already asked and which was answered on Page 2 of the thread
> 
> I don't know why you persist in asking it
> 
> Debate the points with your opinions if you wish to but you don't really add anything by repeating the same question


I had left the thread but had problems with the server, that's why it did it. Sorry.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

HKF said:


> I had left the thread but had problems with the server, that's why it did it. Sorry.


We forgive you.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> We forgive you.


Speak for yourself! :curse: 

:biggrin:


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

McBulls said:


> Ben Wallace would be a good mentor for the young big we draft with the NY pick. I'd offer him the max. At the least it would force one of our main rivals to match the offer. If he signed, the Bulls would have a pass to the NBA finals for the next few years while the young pick developed.
> 
> Hinrich/Duhon
> Gordon/2nd pick
> ...


I've considered this idea as well, and I think it's a decent one. As soon as the FA signing period starts, throw the boat at Ben Wallace just to see what happens. It's a long shot, so if it appears pretty obvious that it's not going to happen, just drop it and then move on to our more likely candidates, like Pryz, Gooden, etc. 

As we've discussed ad nauseum around here, there's no guy in FA that's a hand in glove fit for our team, due to either talent, position, or jib, and Ben Wallace is probably the only guy that does exactly what we need at the position we need it and has the jib to go along with it. So, we might as well use our cap space to our advantage and put Detroit on the hot seat and see what happens. And getting him would be such a boost to our frontcourt that we could probably afford to take whatever guy we get in the draft and bring him along slowly.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

I agree completely. I think throwing the Max at Wallace is a no-brainer. What's the alternative? A substantial, non-max contract to Joel P., Nene, or Nazr? Meh. Wallace instantly makes us a title contender. The others do not. Yes, we may "overpay" him towards the end of the contract if his age slows his athletic ability, but hopefully by then if we've resigned out core the improvement of Kirk, Deng, Ben, Noc, etc. will offset Big Ben slowing. He'd be a great piece in a transition to a sustained period of high level basketball. You can always resign your own guys. We just have to pony up the dough and do it.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> I agree completely. I think throwing the Max at Wallace is a no-brainer. What's the alternative? A substantial, non-max contract to Joel P., Nene, or Nazr? Meh. Wallace instantly makes us a title contender. The others do not. Yes, we may "overpay" him towards the end of the contract if his age slows his athletic ability, but hopefully by then if we've resigned out core the improvement of Kirk, Deng, Ben, Noc, etc. will offset Big Ben slowing. He'd be a great piece in a transition to a sustained period of high level basketball. You can always resign your own guys. We just have to pony up the dough and do it.



I agree we should make a move for Wallace, if nothing else it will make Detroit sign him to a max deal, still, unless Detroit gets bounced in the playoffs I doubt Wallace would leave.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I almost made this into a new thread but decided it would fall into this thread well enough.



> The more I think about it it seems the best way forward is to build complementary pieces this current team through free agency and the draft rather than gut it / disrupt it through trade
> ...
> I'm not so much against Gooden, just don't want him in combination with any other highly rated PF in the draft. But if Paxson drafts Roy, I'd welcome Gooden with open arms.


I agree with the premise of this thread... we HAVE to consider that the current squad should no longer be considered just a transition team of pieces of talent. But I don't think Gooden is that elite that another highly rated PF couldn't develop behind him. A guy like Aldridge would have plenty of minutes between F and C to work around Gooden's 28-31 mpg.

Anyway, I'm just stunned by how good we might be right now. You have to consider that if we advance, we might even have a slim shot at the EC Finals. We weren't supposed to even take 2 games from Miami; I think there's a chance we take 3 and even 4. The momentum is definitely with us right now, and Miami looks like its self-destructing, while we look like we're our very best basketball at the same time.

If this team makes it to round 2 and pushes it to 6 games, how important is it to make huge changes? Because it's one thing to fly into the playoffs with a crazy and improbable run at the end of the regular season; it's quite another thing to legitimately beat real contenders in a 7-game series. This team is proving its worth, and I just wonder if we'd really need to look into making dramatic changes.

If we add Aldridge and an athletic guard (Brewer or best available), then pick up just one of Nazr, Przy or Wilcox this summer... when we get Songaila back, condition Sweetney and Chandler into shape rather than have them "play their way" into it... isn't that enough?

Hinrich's looking like an All-Star, Nocioni is right there as well, and Gordon's bringing a more consistent and defined game. Deng's maturing at just the right rate: fast enough because he's an important piece, but not at a burn-out pressure pace, because he's not the guy we're pinning all of our hopes on. At this rate, with an offseason of conditioning for him too, he's going to explode into a serious player.

In other words, I think our guys are going to start achieving this playoff-level game in the regular season. What happens when Hinrich, Gordon and Noce are averaging 16/7a, 18/3a, and 17/9r? And Deng comes alongside with 15/7r?

I know that in some other threads, people have begun considering this in terms of offseason acquisitions and finding minutes for them. I think that the way we might have to start thinking is that among the 1-2-3 spots, we're only looking for 10-15 mpg guys. We're basically looking for a starting frontcourt, but again, aren't we winning our games playing small lineups?

*If we're able to do this against Shaq and Co., doesn't that say something about how good we are RIGHT NOW?*

This will be more meaningful if we do win tonight's game at least, but is this happening in anyone else's mind? Instead of envisioning Al Harrington and hoping for Nazr Mohammed to provide some crafty inside moves on half-court offense, I think a rookie LaMarcus or Drew Gooden or even a Melvin Ely with just SOME offensive ability inside would add just enough balance to REALLY open up the game for the guards.

But they've gotten so good at this tight offensive execution and running around to get open, I think it's important that our big be versatile enough to fit into this perfectly as well. And I don't know that Al Harrington and/or Nazr Mohammed can fit as well as Gooden and/or LaMarcus.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

wonderful read show...

got me all excited here at work!!!


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

Showtyme said:


> I agree with the premise of this thread... we HAVE to consider that the current squad should no longer be considered just a transition team of pieces of talent. But I don't think Gooden is that elite that another highly rated PF couldn't develop behind him. A guy like Aldridge would have plenty of minutes between F and C to work around Gooden's 28-31 mpg.


But in addition to that you also have to factor in Noc's 20 minutes at the PF spot because that's where he's most effective. Will Aldridge have enough minutes at that point?

Plus, Aldridge isn't a C. And what happens if we can't have Aldridge and settle on Thomas or Bargnani? Those guys can't play C, not even sporadically.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> But in addition to that you also have to factor in Noc's 20 minutes at the PF spot because that's where he's most effective. Will Aldridge have enough minutes at that point?
> 
> Plus, Aldridge isn't a C. And what happens if we can't have Aldridge and settle on Thomas or Bargnani? Those guys can't play C, not even sporadically.


Aldridge can take minutes at C. He patrols the paint and plays like a center on defense, and will win matchups on offense. He's more like a third forward, I suppose, but we start Mike Sweetney at center, give Tyson 20ish minutes, and Malik Allen or Schmuke gets the rest. Aldridge might be as legit a center as Chandler is, and is a more of a center than those other three guys.

The fact is, we don't have a real center right now (some will even argue that Tyson is still a PF more than a C) and if we can defend Shaq without one, then someone will have to tell me why we ever need one. I'll submit that Shaq is no longer the dominant player that he once was, but he's still a top 3 center in the league. If we can defend a team with a center like Shaq basically with no center of our own, I don't see why we ever need a "true" center.

And I foresee Aldridge getting 15-20 mpg early in the season if he becomes a Bull, then working him in more until he basically completely eclipses Malik's minutes and takes some from Sweetney too. LaMarcus has Malik's jumper and is a better rebounder and defender than Malik or Luke. Between LaMarcus, Tyson, and Gooden, I think we'd have enough minutes to go around. Sweetney, Songaila and Malik would fill in the gaps.

Important in doing a minutes-breakdown is to remember that it's rare that guys actually get out there and actually only play for 10 minutes every single night, coming out to 10 mpg. It's more likely that Skiles benches a starter and puts in a bench guy for 20-25 minutes on several nights, then on other nights those guys don't play at all. And that's why we're not "wasting" Songaila or Sweetney if they are those "sometimes" guys that play big on one night and just spell starters on other nights.

Anyway. I'd love for them to get out there, get aggressive, and prove me right again tonight.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Aldridge may or may not be a center, but do the Bulls really want a pure center short of a Greg Oden? Having some big lumbering center trying to fit into the Bulls' speedy offensive sets doesn't seem right. That's why we don't see Schensher playing 20 minutes a night. Aldridge so ideal because he's so mobile and he has a decent back-to-the-basket game. Noah would also have been great because he like to run too.

I sense that Nocioni will be playing the rest of his career as a combo forward for the Bulls, which is why I don't think Paxson will be trying to get two bigs with "star" potential. I believe the lineup for years to come will be Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, Nocioni, and (big guy, Aldridge?).


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

Showtyme said:


> Aldridge can take minutes at C. He patrols the paint and plays like a center on defense, and will win matchups on offense. He's more like a third forward, I suppose, but we start Mike Sweetney at center, give Tyson 20ish minutes, and Malik Allen or Schmuke gets the rest. Aldridge might be as legit a center as Chandler is, and is a more of a center than those other three guys.
> 
> The fact is, we don't have a real center right now (some will even argue that Tyson is still a PF more than a C) and if we can defend Shaq without one, then someone will have to tell me why we ever need one. I'll submit that Shaq is no longer the dominant player that he once was, but he's still a top 3 center in the league. If we can defend a team with a center like Shaq basically with no center of our own, I don't see why we ever need a "true" center.
> 
> ...


Okay, reading this post, I just got a new comparison for LaMarcus Aldridge.

A rich man's Malik Allen??

I know it sounds kinda stupid, but when you think about it, it kind of fits.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

rosenthall said:


> Okay, reading this post, I just got a new comparison for LaMarcus Aldridge.
> 
> A rich man's Malik Allen??
> 
> I know it sounds kinda stupid, but when you think about it, it kind of fits.


Ack! If that's true, give me Thomas or Bargnani!


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

jbulls said:


> Ack! If that's true, give me Thomas or Bargnani!


Okay, maybe a Paul Allen's Malik Allen might be a little more appropriate?

I think LaMarcus will be a decent player, his style of play just strikes me as similar to Malik's. I think he'll be much better though.

Everyone likes to compare prospects to players that are better than them, but similar in style, I just figured I'd turn the tables.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

jbulls said:


> Ack! If that's true, give me Thomas or Bargnani!


Thomas is a rich man's Hakim Warrick and Bargnani is a rich man's Nickoloz Tskitishvili.

Edit: I just realized how close I am with the Thomas/Warrick comparison.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

TwinkieTowers said:


> Thomas is a rich man's Hakim Warrick and Bargnani is a rich man's Nickoloz Tskitishvili.
> 
> Edit: I just realized how close I am with the Thomas/Warrick comparison.


Personally I don't think they are remotely close 

They can run and jump but that's about it 

Thomas has a much bigger base than Warrick

Much bigger


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Personally I don't think they are remotely close
> 
> They can run and jump but that's about it
> 
> ...


http://nbadraft.net/profiles/hakimwarrick.asp 
http://nbadraft.net/profiles/tyrusthomas.asp 

I'll say this: if Thomas is unable to fill out his body he will become the next Hakim Warrick with better shotblocking ability.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

TwinkieTowers said:


> http://nbadraft.net/profiles/hakimwarrick.asp
> http://nbadraft.net/profiles/tyrusthomas.asp
> 
> I'll say this: if Thomas is unable to fill out his body he will become the next Hakim Warrick with better shotblocking ability.


So 

nbadraftnet is a decent site but its hardly the bible and their scouting reports are remarkable for their sameness

Your telling me that if Hakim had of been two years later he would have been a top 3 lock this year ?

Doubt it 

There is a reason why Thomas is a top 3 lock

Thomas just doesn't just rebound and block ..its how he controls the ball while he's in the air ..stuff that was eerily reminiscent of what Bill Russell could do 

The Texas Elite 8 game was a very good insight into this


----------

