# #2 - Chicago on the Clock



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

Sorry for posting another draft thread, but I'm doing a board to board mock draft. I will keep the results updated on the draft board. 

I'll tally the votes after 24 hours.

I won't include a poll, so there's less chance of "outsiders" purposely messing up the voting. Tiebreakers will go into OT for four hours.

Make your selection for the #2 pick *(ignore trade possibilities)*. If there isn't a good fit and you want to trade, draft for value. The Bulls are now on the clock. Good luck!


The Draft so far --

1. Toronto- Andrea Bargnani
2. Chicago- 
3. Charlotte- 
4. Portland- 
5. Atlanta- 
6. Minnesota- 
7. Boston- 
8. Houston- 
9. Golden St.- 
10. Seattle- 
11. Orlando- 
12. New Orleans- 
13. Philadelphia- 
14. Utah- 
15. New Orleans- 
16. Chicago- 
17. Indiana- 
18. Washington- 
19. Sacramento-
20. New York- 
21. Phoenix-
22. New Jersey-
23. New Jersey-
24. Memphis-
25. Cleveland-
26. LA Lakers-
27. Phoenix-
28. Dallas-
29. New York-
30. Portland-


----------



## nybullsfan (Aug 12, 2005)

lamarcus aldridge


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

The bulls trade with portland for the 4th pick and Miles and send the 2nd pick that Portland uses to draft Adam Morrison.

david


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Brandon Roy


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Tyrus Thomas


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Lamarcus Aldridge


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Brandon Roy

(to trade for Lamar Odom) 


No, really --> Aldridge.


----------



## BULLS23 (Apr 13, 2003)

We should take LaMarcus Aldridge


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Aldridge.


----------



## LegoHat (Jan 14, 2004)

If Bargnani is gone, I'll take Aldridge.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

LaMarcus Aldridge.

(Pains me to vote that, but I can't get myself to take Roy without moving down a few spots and Bargnani is who I really want.)


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Aldridge.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Morrison


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Take Aldridge and send the Knicks and thank you card.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

all this conjecture has my head spinning, but my head says aldridge though my heart says gay. (lol)


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

Count me in the LaMarcus Aldridge camp if Bargnani is gone.


----------



## goblue2525 (May 24, 2006)

Aldridge


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

Aldridge


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

It appears to be a landslide for Aldridge, which is what I expected to begin with lol.


----------



## Plush4life (May 26, 2006)

Wow, I am truly dissapointed in the intelligence of fellow bulls fans.

Morrison


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

Brandon Roy.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Plush4life said:


> Wow, I am truly dissapointed in the intelligence of fellow bulls fans.
> 
> Morrison


I wouldn't say I'm disappointed in their intelligence, but I'm disappointed in their thinking. I'm no Morrison fan, but I'd rather have him (or just about anyone else) besides Aldridge.

I think there's a very good chance Aldridge turns out to be just not that great an NBA player. I don't think he'll be a bust, per se, but I don't think he'll ever live up to what you'd expect from a #2 pick.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Tyrus Thomas


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Same thing can be said about Morrison

Ya'll talking as if it's a GIVEN he'll be a star in the NBA. He could be just as big of a dissapointment as anyone else in the top 6.

Oh yeah

ALDRIDGE


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

Brandon Roy


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Tyrus Thomas


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Aldridge


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

Roy.


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

Ridge


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Roy

If not Roy, any reasonable pick but Thomas.


----------



## Plush4life (May 26, 2006)

I am as confident as one can be about this. Adam Morrison will have a FAR better career that Lamarcus Aldridge. As will Brandon Roy. 

Im not trying to be the guy who goes against the majority so I can say I told you so. If one watched the ncaa,the nba, and PLAYS the game of basketball, its pretty clear to see Morrison will be a catalyst for excitement wherever he is. And Roy will be a solid player his whole career.

Aldridge will play for 5 different teams throughout his career.

C'mon Pax!!

IS THIS WHO YOU WANT AT #2?

http://www.clutchcity.net/nbadraft/profiles/2006/lamarcus_aldridge/?fuseaction=video&VideoID=4


----------



## K-Dub (Jun 26, 2005)

Brandon Roy.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

LaMarcus Aldridge

(the only other people I could live with at two on draft day are Adam Morrison and Rudy Gay)


----------



## Shabadoo (Feb 12, 2005)

Lamarcus Aldridge


----------



## realbullsfaninLA (Jan 8, 2003)

Morrison or Roy is neck and neck for me. Based on what I've seen of Aldridge, I'd take a gamble on Obryant before I drafted him.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Morrison. Then trade Morrison for Brewer down the draft with another team.


----------



## mr.ankle20 (Mar 7, 2004)

aldridge


----------



## AnaMayShun (Jun 22, 2002)

Looks like Aldridge is going to win the #2 spot here. But I'd still rather have Tyrus Thomas on this team.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

LaMarcus Aldridge.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

We have a WINNER :clap: 

You have to realize, Aldridge was ALREADY a Bull, so it only makes sense.

When he's the NEXT finesse foward behind Bosh and next to Frye, you guys won't be so mad.


----------



## smARTmouf (Jul 16, 2002)

LaMarcus Aldridge!

Ayo The Roy,...I remember when you LOATHED LaMarcus...

Glad people have come to there senses.


----------



## Thorgal (Feb 1, 2003)

LaMarcus Aldridge


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

smARTmouf said:


> LaMarcus Aldridge!
> 
> Ayo The Roy,...I remember when you LOATHED LaMarcus...
> 
> Glad people have come to there senses.


La Ridge = the truth

6"11 F/C >>> 6"8 SF/PF

I still love Thomas's game more than Aldridge's but Obviously we'd benefit alot more having La Ridge.


----------



## BDMcGee (May 12, 2006)

The ROY said:


> La Ridge = the truth
> 
> 6"11 F/C >>> 6"8 SF/PF
> 
> I still love Thomas's game more than Aldridge's but Obviously we'd benefit alot more having La Ridge.


Yeah, I have to agree. If Tyrus had measured out at 6'9 or 6'10 it would have made a lot of sense to draft him, but after hearing that he's only 6'8 it probably wouldn't be smart to use the #2 pick on him. It appears he'll have the same fate as Hakim Warrick. Both are talented, extremely athletic players with no pro position. Aldridge would make a lot more sense due to his being 6'11. Some people feel he's a stiff, but he has a lot of talent for a big-man. Still, I think Brandon Roy is better than him so I would prefer Roy.


----------



## taurus515th (Oct 13, 2005)

trade the picks for a proven vet. lol i really do not know 1 month i was for Aldridge, then Williams then Tyrus, then Roy, then Williams again lol. wut ever Paxson decides im all for it. :clap:


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

taurus515th said:


> trade the picks for a proven vet. lol i really do not know 1 month i was for Aldridge, then Williams then Tyrus, then Roy, then Williams again lol. wut ever Paxson decides im all for it. :clap:


I think we should all be happy come draft day regardless, if the picks seem a little suspect, it's not hard to give Pax the benefit of the doubt, given the talent in the draft and Pax's track record. 

Ridge Pax Ridge damn you!


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

taurus515th said:


> trade the picks for a proven vet. lol i really do not know 1 month i was for Aldridge, then Williams then Tyrus, then Roy, then Williams again lol. wut ever Paxson decides im all for it. :clap:


LOL, My #1 choice of Bargnani hasn't changed, but my 2nd choice has. Aldridge for height, and height alone. Gay for a really athletic bigger guy that hopefully dunks like Dominque Wilkins...entertainment alone is worth a lot. Morrison for his scoring ability. Thomas for an athletic big man (Stoudamire type). Roy for a big guard that might turn into a Jordan-type player (nowhere near his level, but good all around hopefully) The reason for flip flopping with my 2nd choice is need vs best player. I believe in drafting best player, regardless of who you have. But with an already solid core that I like, and isn't missing a whole lot to be contenders it's hard not to go for a position of need. 

*In the end, what it SHOULD all come down to is this: You draft for BPA and HOPE and PRAY for a superstar*. Fill the needs in Free Agency, where you'll be able to get good quality guys, but most likely no superstars. Only way you get a superstar aside from the draft is to overpay in a trade or just overpay them badly in FA.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

We constantly hear trade the pick for a Vet, trade the pick for a Vet. What the hell are these draft day trades? Do they ever happen? The only one I can think of in recent history is Chandler for Brand, and that was just stupidity on Krause's part, so its not like we'd be able to get that caliber of player in a pick trade in a draft without a Lebron or Oden.


----------



## HINrichPolice (Jan 6, 2004)

Ronnie Brewer.

http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=522193&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

sloth said:


> We constantly hear trade the pick for a Vet, trade the pick for a Vet. What the hell are these draft day trades? Do they ever happen? The only one I can think of in recent history is Chandler for Brand, and that was just stupidity on Krause's part, so its not like we'd be able to get that caliber of player in a pick trade in a draft without a Lebron or Oden.


Yeah lots of people clamor for that, but I don't believe in it usually. You have a better chance of getting a true superstar in the draft. You'll get good quality players in trades, but rarely a superstar, unless you give way too much for them. We are a few pieces away from a championship, and have no real superstars, so best to hope for one in the draft. IF, on the other hand we were very close to a championship team, as in one player away, and had a superstar, then it'd be worth trading a high pick for a player for more immediate results.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

HINrichPolice said:


> Ronnie Brewer.
> 
> http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=522193&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


Ronnie Brewer #2 man!?

:mrt:

The RealGM Chicago Board is filled with some of the worst opinions I've ever read regarding the Bulls. Which is why I never go there

ex. "Hilton Armstrong is the real deal"

LOL


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Yeah lots of people clamor for that, but I don't believe in it usually. You have a better chance of getting a true superstar in the draft. You'll get good quality players in trades, but rarely a superstar, unless you give way too much for them. We are a few pieces away from a championship, and have no real superstars, so best to hope for one in the draft. IF, on the other hand we were very close to a championship team, as in one player away, and had a superstar, then it'd be worth trading a high pick for a player for more immediate results.


Superstars are traded just like everyone else. Just off the top of my head superstars who were traded in their prime include Julius Erving, Kareem Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain, Charles Barkley, Shaq O'Neal, Nash, McGrady, Pippen... I could go on, but you get the point. Of course those trades don't happen every day, but they do happen.

On the other hand, waiting for the opportunity to draft a superstar can be a bit like waiting for Godot. There just aren't very many of them in any given year, and most of the time they are identified well ahead of time. This year there's only one guy who looks he has a better than even chance of becoming a superstar -- Adam Morrison. Some others (Gay, Bargnani) seem to be good athletes who could become dominant players in the NBA if this, or if that..., but probably not. 

Note that I voted for Aldrich in this thread above, even though he probably won't become a superstar. In part that's because I believe championship teams create superstars at least as often as superstars create championship teams.


----------



## HINrichPolice (Jan 6, 2004)

The ROY said:


> Ronnie Brewer #2 man!?
> 
> :mrt:
> 
> ...


I bet you were also one of the many that wouldn't have drafted Amare at #2.

Now, unless you've seen a good amount of Brewer footage, I'll say your reaction is a result of "mock draft hypnosis" - the phenomenon in which fans simply follow what mock drafts and scouting reports tell them without taking a look for themselves.

In my opinion, the only reason mock drafts have Brewer slated for late lottery and mid 1st round is because of his jumpshot, otherwise, he deserves just as much praise, if not more than Roy, Morrison, and Gay.

EDIT: And I linked to that thread for a reason, because I'm tired of having to repeat the same thing over and over again. Look, IDEALLY, we could trade down from #2 or up from #16 to get him, but if it came down to it, I'd be happy picking Brewer with the #2 pick.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

McBulls said:


> Superstars are traded just like everyone else. Just off the top of my head superstars who were traded in their prime include Julius Erving, Kareem Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain, Charles Barkley, Shaq O'Neal, Nash, McGrady, Pippen... I could go on, but you get the point. Of course those trades don't happen every day, but they do happen.
> 
> On the other hand, waiting for the opportunity to draft a superstar can be a bit like waiting for Godot. There just aren't very many of them in any given year, and most of the time they are identified well ahead of time. This year there's only one guy who looks he has a better than even chance of becoming a superstar -- Adam Morrison. Some others (Gay, Bargnani) seem to be good athletes who could become dominant players in the NBA if this, or if that..., but probably not.
> 
> Note that I voted for Aldrich in this thread above, even though he probably won't become a superstar. In part that's because I believe championship teams create superstars at least as often as superstars create championship teams.



Dr. J wasn't traded cause they wanted to. It was over demands to be traded due to contract conflicts. 

Kareem, who oddly enough was drafted by the Bucks as was Dr. J, also forced his trade to the Lakers. 

*Wilt was traded in his 4th year, and again traded in his 8th year after winning MVP to the Lakers.* 

Barkley was traded when he was 29 years old and again at 32, so that's past his prime IMO. Prime being 22 to 27. Late 20s to early 30s you start slowing down. (I didn't look at the ages on those other guys). 

Shaq wasn't traded either. He left Orlando as a free agent, turning down more money from the Magic to be a damn Laker. When he was traded to the Heat, he was both past his prime, and demanded the trade.

McGrady was traded due to conflicts with Carter, which was funny cause they're cousins. One thing that sucks is that McGrady would be a Bull if not for Jordan. They had a draft day trade all worked out till Jordan threatened to retire (Pippen was the trade piece the Bulls would've used). As much as I loved the guy back then, they should've done it, cause he retired after the next season anyway, and at least we'd still have McGrady, and maybe Phil Jackson too if you think about it. The 2nd time he was traded it was a huge 7 player trade that also involved fellow superstar Stevie Franchise.

Nash, is interesting if you know the whole story (which I didn't know till I just looked it up lol). I remember the Suns with Kidd and KJ at guard, and didn't realize that Nash started his career as a Sun. He was a Sun for 2 years, then traded to the Mavs when the coach for the Suns who was responsible for drafting him went to the Mavs and initiated the trade. Part of that trade was the pick for Shawn Marion. But in regards to this discussion, Nash isn't relevant cause he was a nobody when they traded for him after his 2nd year, and was booed in Dallas initially. When he went back to the Suns, it was because Cuban low-balled him and the Suns offered him much more money. 

As for Pippen, he was traded past his prime at 33 years of age, in part of a rebuilding of the Bulls.

So of all the guys you listed, only ONE, Wilt, was actually traded in his prime, without forcing the trade first. McGrady-Francis is somewhat of a superstar trade, but it was a star for a star, and 5 other players were involved. So as I said before in a prior post, you just don't get superstar players in trades while they're in their prime. It does happen, but very few and far between.


----------



## TheDarkPrince (May 13, 2006)

LaMarcus Aldridge


----------



## darlets (Jul 31, 2002)

HINrichPolice said:


> EDIT: And I linked to that thread for a reason, because I'm tired of having to repeat the same thing over and over again. Look, IDEALLY, we could trade down from #2 or up from #16 to get him, but if it came down to it, I'd be happy picking Brewer with the #2 pick.


I've never seen the guy play. What do you like about him?


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

HINrichPolice said:


> I bet you were also one of the many that wouldn't have drafted Amare at #2.
> 
> Now, unless you've seen a good amount of Brewer footage, I'll say your reaction is a result of "mock draft hypnosis" - the phenomenon in which fans simply follow what mock drafts and scouting reports tell them without taking a look for themselves.
> 
> ...


You simply don't take a guy slotted for the late teens or so at #2. It'd be better to wait and see if he's around at 16 if you want him, and if someone does happen to take him, work out a draft day deal with them. He'd cost a lot more at #2 if nothing else. If you're that impressed with him it's your opinion and not going to argue that, but don't you think it'd make more sense to trade for him after he's picked rather than take him 15+ spots too high?


----------



## HINrichPolice (Jan 6, 2004)

DaBabyBullz said:


> You simply don't take a guy slotted for the late teens or so at #2. It'd be better to wait and see if he's around at 16 if you want him, and if someone does happen to take him, work out a draft day deal with them. He'd cost a lot more at #2 if nothing else. If you're that impressed with him it's your opinion and not going to argue that, but don't you think it'd make more sense to trade for him after he's picked rather than take him 15+ spots too high?


Who says that after workouts and official measurements that Brewer will stay at #16? On Draftexpress.com, he's already as high as #11 to Orlando.

Who says that we'd be able to cook up a draft day deal that the other team will agree to? Obviously, said team would have chosen him because they see something in him. Trades aren't that simple. 

Is there a history of teams that missed out on their guy that have proceeded to cook up a trade for that guy's draft rights? I can't think of such a case. I could be wrong, but aren't all draft day trades cooked up before the actual draft? "Hey, if so and so falls to you, this is the package I'll offer for him."


----------



## HINrichPolice (Jan 6, 2004)

darlets said:


> I've never seen the guy play. What do you like about him?


Before anyone thinks I'm claiming to be from Arkansas, with access to all Arkansas games, I fully admit to having limited exposure to him. I saw a several hours of Arkansas games from his freshman year and sophomore and only highlights from this past year. As everyone else, I've read all the scouting reports possible on Brewer.

Here's the clincher for me.

The biggest knock on Brewer is his jumper. However, anyone that's watched him shoot it from the perimeter would have to say to themselves, "his jumper isn't any worse than Tayshaun Prince. In fact, he gets up quicker and has a more fluid motion." Once I caught some footage of Brewer's shooting, all the knocks on his jumper went out the door. The way he elevates and releases is smooth and quick.

People have been touting Roy as a possible #2 pick. I say, "what does Roy have that Brewer doesn't?" There really isn't much. Like Roy, Brewer is a mature player who takes pride in his defense. He has high bball IQ (his dad coached him in AAU). He's versatile and understands team concept. He has great atheltic ability and even more length and size than Roy.

It's solidified in my mind that Brewer is a better prospect than Roy. If Roy can be so easily talked about with the #2 pick, then so should Brewer. Considering our needs at guard, Brewer brings everything that Roy would bring.


----------



## HINrichPolice (Jan 6, 2004)

Not sure if anyone has posted this on bbb.net, and I know highlights don't tell the whole story, but don't tell me that this doesn't make you question Roy over Brewer.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/mockdraft?round=1


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

HINrichPolice said:


> Before anyone thinks I'm claiming to be from Arkansas, with access to all Arkansas games, I fully admit to having limited exposure to him. I saw a several hours of Arkansas games from his freshman year and sophomore and only highlights from this past year. As everyone else, I've read all the scouting reports possible on Brewer.
> 
> Here's the clincher for me.
> 
> ...


I personally rank Roy ahead of Brewer, but I love them both. Check the sig. Roy is more skilled, but Brewer is longer and more athletic. Either one would be a perfect fit here. If we had the chance to get them both, I'd do it. I realize that's not likely to happen, but it gives you an idea of how much I like those two.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

HINrichPolice said:


> Who says that after workouts and official measurements that Brewer will stay at #16? On Draftexpress.com, he's already as high as #11 to Orlando.
> 
> Who says that we'd be able to cook up a draft day deal that the other team will agree to? Obviously, said team would have chosen him because they see something in him. Trades aren't that simple.
> 
> Is there a history of teams that missed out on their guy that have proceeded to cook up a trade for that guy's draft rights? I can't think of such a case. I could be wrong, but aren't all draft day trades cooked up before the actual draft? "Hey, if so and so falls to you, this is the package I'll offer for him."


Well, projected at 10 and taken at 2 is still very costly. You're right about them being "planned" ahead of time as a rule. But draft day trades are very very common. I usually forget about them and when I'm looking up guys I see "draft rights traded for such and such" on a lot of them. With us not having a 2nd round pick it makes it harder of course to trade up from 16, but it'd still be smarter than taking him at 2. I'm sure that these draft day trades are at least part of the time an instance where a team is waiting on a guy and someone else grabs him so they offer a trade. Unless it was someone they were in love with, they'd most likely work out a trade for players or additional picks. If the Bulls were dumb enough to draft a guy like that at a position of strength, they might as well trade a guard to make the deal happen if need be. If by some freak chance he moves up to 2, then w/e. I still think it'd be dumb as hell to take a SG at #2 when our best player is a SG already, and Dallas is proving that you can get by with a shorter guard. It's just how you use your players, you don't have to have a 6'6" guard, or a 7' 300 lb center.


----------



## Thorgal (Feb 1, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> One thing that sucks is that McGrady would be a Bull if not for Jordan. They had a draft day trade all worked out till Jordan threatened to retire (Pippen was the trade piece the Bulls would've used). As much as I loved the guy back then, they should've done it, cause he retired after the next season anyway, and at least we'd still have McGrady, and maybe Phil Jackson too if you think about it.



Hello, didn't we win the title in that season and the one in the season after with Pip & MJ playing together...?

Do you think that would be possible with 18-19 years old T-Mac playing instead of Pip?


----------



## KGBULLS06 (May 24, 2006)

Tyrus Thomas!!!! Can't pass up a chance for a Shawn Marion clone. We know he can perform in clutch situations. Only thing, is he right for the team? Heigth is a major factor. I've seen Aldridge play down here in Texas. He is to soft and his mind falls out of games. He didnt perform in the clutch. Are best luck is free agency or trade for a center, rather then drafting him. MY FIRST POST!!!!


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Roy


----------



## archie (May 30, 2003)

morrison


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Thorgal said:


> Hello, didn't we win the title in that season and the one in the season after with Pip & MJ playing together...?
> 
> Do you think that would be possible with 18-19 years old T-Mac playing instead of Pip?



AS I SAID, if you'd read the whole thing, Jordan retired after that season (which we won our 3rd straight title in) and we were left with nothing. IF we had done the trade, we'd have lost Jordan, but had a superstar on the team to replace him and maybe Jackson would've stuck around to try and rebuild the team again. As much as I'd hate to give up a championship, I'd rather have stayed competitive with a superstar on the team and maybe our HOF coach. And I think if Jordan would've stuck around, winning a championship with T-Mac instead of Pip would've been harder, but not impossible. I think long term, which is why I'd rather keep our young guys and high draft picks rather than trading them for an old vet star or wasting all our money on a 30+ year old guy in FA.


----------



## dogra (Nov 12, 2003)

Bargnani.

What? He's off the board? Mother****!

Okay, I guess I'll have to go with LaMarcus Aldridge.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

Thanks Bulls fans. Great job with the voting.


----------

