# KC: Bulls will try to trade pick



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

First off, I didn't catch this segment, but there's a thread about it at realgm.com by a poster with over 500 posts, so I don't see any reason why I can't trust the info. 

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=671002&sid=46dd94ebdc27a7fe19d091a09281b2f3



> They asked him what the Bulls would do with the pick
> 
> He said they're going to try and trade it, but doesn't think that might work out, possibly go to one of the big men in the draft (Jiggets asked about Noah, KC said no, too offensively challenged)


OK, I've got to be honest. If it is true that Paxson wants to trade the pick, I'm somewhat pissed off. The odds were never in our favor that we would win the lottery and grab Oden or Durant. Even back at the trade deadline, it was pretty clear New York was not looking like they would have one of the worst records in the league. Does anyone remember how many teams had a worse record than the Knicks at that point in time?

Paxson should have known the draft prospects well enough even in February to consider that that trading the pick for a veteran could be an option, but he also must have known that we have almost no ammunition to make a draft day trade for a big because we have no midlevel or above salaries, save Wallace and Hinrich. Hinrich is BYC and the team darling, unlikely to be traded, and Wallace is too old and down in production enough to not be an attractive trade target. PJ Brown is likely to retire and has expressed intentions as to a short list of teams that he might be interested in playing for if he comes back. Thus, he's not an ideal candidate for a sign & trade. Nocioni can't be traded before the draft.

So how on earth are we supposed to trade the #9 for a big? Take Randolph for example. How could we trade for him this summer if we even wanted to under the CBA? It's nice to think Duhon's salary and the #9 pick could land us a talented big on a rookie deal, but who is going to trade us a talented big on a rookie deal?

Pax, you're not set up to trade this summer, and that's nobody's fault but yours. Phoenix is talking about trading Shaun Marion again. Do you really think they wouldn't have given us Kurt Thomas's contract for PJ Brown's at the deadline and given it a shot with their core one more time? Marion is so good for that team, so I'm going to have to infer that they're once again desperate for salary relief. We could have helped them and helped ourselves.

At this point, the best way to acquire a big this summer is through the draft. That might not be true if we had the right salaries to throw around, but we don't. So all this trade talk has got me a little bit irritated, and not to mention this talk of acquiring yet another guard or swingman because Paxson doesn't like the bigs in one of the best bigman drafts in recent memory. Anyone else agree?


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Pax screwed up if he wants to make a trade. We had the CONTRACT and the assets to get something done at the deadline. Now we cannot make a deal for anyone b/c of the lack of a large contract. Imagine if Kobe wanted to be here. We'd have to gut the team. If Gasol was still available but a lower price? 

I say stick with the draft. We are in a position to not make a trade for 2-3 years. When Kirk, Lu, or Ben are NOT BYC anymore. Otherwise we are gutting the team to make a trade. 

Pax could have picked up something for PJ. Maybe a salary from NYK that would expire in two years. It would have saved them Tax and giving us an asset for this summer.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

My guess is Paxson thinks that the bigs can be serviceable but doesn't want to wait the time needed for a rookie to fill the role as the Big Man this team needs.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

PJ Brown + #9 pick is going to end up being the trade, and I guess I'm fine with that.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

With all due respect - the draft having 2 potential superstars in Oden and Durant and having the NYC pick - you just have to play the odds. Just imagine if the pick was dealt to get Gasol and then won the #1 or #2 pick. People would have talked about it for years.

There are always risks. Always - you just have to ask yourself if you are willing to play the odds game. It is easy, knowing that the pick did not land in the #1 or #2 position to say it was a mistake - but it was a calculated risk and it was probably a good one to take.


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

cant we just draft whomever on the 28th and do whatever deals we want july 1st? (sign and trade Nocioni for example)


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Mebarak said:


> PJ Brown + #9 pick is going to end up being the trade, and I guess I'm fine with that.


PJ Brown and his non-existent contract? Or the PJ Brown and his 3 year 30 million dollar contract(only the first year guaranteed),that you wanted the bulls to get done for trade reason?

PJ Brown is not going to involved in any sign and trade, im afraid to say. If his going to sign with the Bulls it will be to play with the Bulls, and besides us he will only play for two other teams which is Miami and NO, otherwise he'll just retire.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

kulaz3000 said:


> PJ Brown and his non-existent contract? Or the PJ Brown and his 3 year 30 million dollar contract(only the first year guaranteed),that you wanted the bulls to get done for trade reason?
> 
> PJ Brown is not going to involved in any sign and trade, im afraid to say. If his going to sign with the Bulls it will be to play with the Bulls, and besides us he will only play for two other teams which is Miami and NO, otherwise he'll just retire.


....He will get his 9.5 million dollars for this year...compared the the what, 1.1 million he'd make on the veterans minimum? Portland might be good right off the bat if Oden is truly Duncan like. If not, there is a good chance that they just cut PJ, and then he goes to sign with a contender.

I don't see why he wouldn't agree.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

andalusian said:


> With all due respect - the draft having 2 potential superstars in Oden and Durant and having the NYC pick - you just have to play the odds. Just imagine if the pick was dealt to get Gasol and then won the #1 or #2 pick. People would have talked about it for years.
> 
> There are always risks. Always - you just have to ask yourself if you are willing to play the odds game. It is easy, knowing that the pick did not land in the #1 or #2 position to say it was a mistake - but it was a calculated risk and it was probably a good one to take.


I agree, it was a risk and a worthwhile risk at that. Sure if we knew we'd be picking at the 9th it would have be a given to trade it earlier, but when you have Oden as a possibility you take that risk regardless.

As for trading the pick on draft day, i see that as a high possbility. He could trade it for a lower pick or just trade it out right to get a big man from another team. Im just waiting to see if we read about Paxson asking any of the big man for a second workout...


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

KC Johnson said:


> Bulls will try to trade pick


That's KC, all right -- super sleuth that he is. 

In other news, water remains wet.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Mebarak said:


> ....He will get his 9.5 million dollars for this year...compared the the what, 1.1 million he'd make on the veterans minimum? Portland might be good right off the bat if Oden is truly Duncan like. If not, there is a good chance that they just cut PJ, and then he goes to sign with a contender.
> 
> I don't see why he wouldn't agree.


Im not trying to pick on you, i just don't agree with your unrealistic points at times. No team is going to sign a player for 9.5 million just to trade him, and no team will want a 9.5 million man to play 10 mins a game. It has never happened before and it will never happen in the future, where someone at that age recieved that large amount of money just for trading reasons.

The only player that will realistically be used in a sign and trade is Noc. He is the only sign and trade player worth anything on our team at the moment and i see that if we're going to make a trade he will most definitly be involved. 

As for Oden being the next Duncan, i don't think i've ever heard that comparison. Duncan was offensively and defensively polished by the time he entered the NBA, Oden is not even up to Duncans level offensively and even defensively he still dominates through sheer talent over smarts unlike Duncan.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

kulaz3000 said:


> Im not trying to pick on you, i just don't agree with your unrealistic points at times. No team is going to sign a player for 9.5 million just to trade him, and no team will want a 9.5 million man to play 10 mins a game. It has never happened before and it will never happen in the future, where someone at that age recieved that large amount of money just for trading reasons.
> 
> The only player that will realistically be used in a sign and trade is Noc. He is the only sign and trade player worth anything on our team at the moment and i see that if we're going to make a trade he will most definitly be involved.
> 
> As for Oden being the next Duncan, i don't think i've ever heard that comparison. Duncan was offensively and defensively polished by the time he entered the NBA, Oden is not even up to Duncans level offensively and even defensively he still dominates through sheer talent over smarts unlike Duncan.


Its the simple concept of an expiring contract...quite common in the NBA. This is a bit different, but still falls within the same concept. PJ is basically signing to be an expiring contract to bait a trade.

The trade on paper reads PJ Brown + #9 Pick (whoever we took for them) for Zach Randolph. 

In NBA logic, it breaks down as Cap Relief + #9 pick for Zach Randolph.

In this scenario, PJ Brown would be owed 9.5 million from the Blazers. Zach Randolph is owed 61.3 million. He is deemed as someone they do not want on their team.

So they save 41.8 million on what they would have been paying Randolph, and in addition, get a top 10 pick. 

I don't see whats hard to understand. This is actually a very fair trade given the circumstances of them wanting to push him out. 

It gives us:

PG-Kirk Hinrich/Chris Duhon
SG-Ben Gordon/Thabo Sefolosha
SF-Luol Deng/Andres Nocioni
PF-Zach Randolph/Tyrus Thomas
C- Ben Wallace

Its a fair trade for both sides, and fits both teams' needs.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Mebarak said:


> Its the simple concept of an expiring contract...quite common in the NBA. This is a bit different, but still falls within the same concept. PJ is basically signing to be an expiring contract to bait a trade.
> 
> The trade on paper reads PJ Brown + #9 Pick (whoever we took for them) for Zach Randolph.
> 
> ...


Sloth, i understand what a sign and trade is. I also understand all the other aspects that you mention, but it was very nice of you to share your knowledge with me.

But your missing my point. The point im trying to make is, why would Portland do that? 

If we're talking about Portlands needs, i have a brilliant idea. Lets call Eddie Robionson and sign him up for 9.5 million and trade him to Portland along with the 9th pick and Portland recieves the perfect small forward they have always been looking for.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

kulaz3000 said:


> Sloth, i understand what a sign and trade is. I also understand all the other aspects that you mention, but it was very nice of you to share your knowledge with me.
> 
> But your missing my point. The point im trying to make is, why would Portland do that?
> 
> If we're talking about Portlands needs, i have a brilliant idea. Lets call Eddie Robionson and sign him up for 9.5 million and trade him to Portland along with the 9th pick and Portland recieves the perfect small forward they have always been looking for.


We cannot do that trade with Eddie Robinson. We are over the salary cap, and do not have the 9.5 million in capspace or exceptions to sign Eddie Robinson with. We do not own the Larry Bird Rights to Eddie Robinson either. This trade does not work under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Good attempt, but try again.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Mebarak said:


> We cannot do that trade with Eddie Robinson. We are over the salary cap, and do not have the 9.5 million in capspace or exceptions to sign Eddie Robinson with. We do not own the Larry Bird Rights to Eddie Robinson either. This trade does not work under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
> 
> Good attempt, but try again.


Did you see something fly over your head Sloth?

But thank you for your encouragement. Your ever so knowledegable... how could i have ever realized that it wouldn't have worked out? I guess i was blinded by the sheer talent of Eddie Robionson. I can't possibly ever mangage without our assitence, thank you sloth..


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

DMD, I think you're reading too much into that statement. He may want to trade it, but I doubt he does. I don't think there are any good available big men who fit this team and make sense. 

What concerns me is that Paxson apparently isn't considering Noah because he's too offensively challenged. I think the Detroit series showed that our defense can stand to get better.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

I'm not convinced PJ Brown wants to play in Portland for one year, even for 9 million. He's got to agree to a sign and trade. He might retire, and he might also want to play for a contender. He might also want to play for a team in which he can engineer a no-trade clause. I believe under the CBA, only the Hornets and Heat could offer him a no-trade clause.


----------



## T-Time (Mar 3, 2007)

If anything I think we would trade up to get a big guy if we wanted one so bad otheriwise im pretty sure Pax will stay pat. There has been talk that Atlanta is auctioning off that #11 pick so maybe he goes to the 11th spot to grab one of those big guards.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

It's becoming more clear to me that the Bulls are really conflicted. 

On one hand, they've got Wallace, they know he's declining, but they know they need a guy who can really contribute something major in the next couple of years if they're going to be legitimate contenders.

On the other hand, they know they have a hell of a time getting a guy like that, and they've got some more long-term options that might be available but won't help.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> I'm not convinced PJ Brown wants to play in Portland for one year, even for 9 million. He's got to agree to a sign and trade. He might retire, and he might also want to play for a contender. He might also want to play for a team in which he can engineer a no-trade clause. I believe under the CBA, only the Hornets and Heat could offer him a no-trade clause.


They could give PJ the old wink-wink that they would cut him in training camp. I suspect PJ would be down with the $9M.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

MikeDC said:


> It's becoming more clear to me that the Bulls are really conflicted.
> 
> On one hand, they've got Wallace, they know he's declining, but they know they need a guy who can really contribute something major in the next couple of years if they're going to be legitimate contenders.
> 
> On the other hand, they know they have a hell of a time getting a guy like that, and they've got some more long-term options that might be available but won't help.



Bingo.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I think PJ would sign a deal if he wanted to be traded then *wink* retire. I do not see him objecting to that. Stern might wonder what is going on, but PJ would not have to retire till training camp. He could say he changed his mind over the summer. 

If you can get ZBo for essentially the #9 pick, I think you would have to do it. But I personally rather have Hawes for the long-term. I think it makes more sense with him growing with the core. But he may never get near ZBo's level. 

It's tough. As it is pointed out, the Bulls are probably confused.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> OK, I've got to be honest. If it is true that Paxson wants to trade the pick, I'm somewhat pissed off. The odds were never in our favor that we would win the lottery and grab Oden or Durant. Even back at the trade deadline, it was pretty clear New York was not looking like they would have one of the worst records in the league. Does anyone remember how many teams had a worse record than the Knicks at that point in time?


Well, it all comes down to this: The Knicks were one basket away from being the 6th "seed" in the lottery, which just so happened to have been the one that won the lottery. It was a VERY good move on Pax's part not to move the pick. I'd much rather have Hawes or Young than gut the team for a big that obviously has flaws or he wouldn't have been on the trading block anyway. I'd also rather have a shot at Oden/Durant than trade the pick away for a flawed player. I'm sorry, but there is a flaw in EVERY big that we could've gotten with that pick, whether it be age, salary, character, or in their game. 

I will, however, agree that trading it now makes absolutely no sense either.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

I don't see why it'd be so unrealistic for Portland to accept that deal assuming PJ signed on to it. 

_If_ it's true that they don't want him at all, which seems like the case, that's more than a fair deal for them. Getting the #9 pick in a deep draft (when they are reportedly looking to pick up another pick anyway) and max salary cap relief is pretty solid. When teams look to relieve themselves of such a big contract, they don't truly care of the production they are getting back of that expiring contract. They already got what they wanted. A backup rotation player would be not much more than an added bonus. Of course in this case, Portland is giving up a good player so they should get something worth while which is obviously where our draft pick comes in. That _is_ their bonus. 

When we traded Jamal and JYD to NY a few years ago, sure we got back Othella who helped a bit (and eventually Griffen from Houston who did help even a bit less), but do you really believe if we hadn't got back "O" for that one season, it would've stopped Paxson from making that trade? I think he did mention something about Othella helping when we got him, but get serious. Pax didn't want Jamal and trading the Dog w/ him set us up w/ max cap room last summer. 

Most of those type of trades the team sits on the expiring deal for half a season, one year at most. When Denver traded for Juwon Howard, they sat on him for a year and a half. Again, did Denver really care about Juwon helping them "win" games? No, they ridded themselves of Van Exel and LaFrentz who still had plenty of productive years left. 

New Orleans got rid of Baron Davis for Claxton and Dale Davis. Claxton stuck around for a year (b/c he was still signed) and Dale was waived. 

This kind of thing happens just about every year. Zach is a bit different here since he's a young big guy but he's also considered a black hole by some and definitely overpaid. Not only is Portland getting the full relief of his salary though, they're getting a great draft pick which they happen to be looking for. And they can potentially get under the cap next summer w/ this. I'm not going to act like we aren't doing ourselves a favor here but that's about what Zach's worth at this point. Right in that 7,8,9, 10 spot as far as the draft goes and they can't expect a good player to go with that realistically. Throw in Duhon if you want. 

I don't think Portland is going to think we're fools offering a re-signed PJ. What would be the difference if we had a Theo Ratliff or someone of that nature that's actually signed through to year to send to Portland right now? Something else too is that the Blazers would have plenty of players to give minutes too. What would be the point of giving a lot of minutes to a guy (hypothetically besides PJ Brown) who's only going to be there a year when they have so much young talent who can easily eat them minutes up?

The only thing that's goofy is that this has never been done before. I don't see why Portland would shy away from this IF PJ is down. That's the only thing. Getting him signed up. And I don't see why he wouldn't be b/c he clearly would be waived anyway making him 10 million richer and a free agent to sign w/ anyone he wants or retire. 

We'd get Zach. Portland gets the #9 pick and saves $48 million. PJ gets about $10 million to sign with whomever he wants or retire. I'm sure the NBA would frown a little bit, but they'd get over it.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Hell of a post.

The risk is, if we can get a trade agreed upon before the draft and to get PJ to go with it. I would be afraid we take a guy (i.e. Conley) and a trade cannot go through after July 1st. Then what? I feel that there should be a deal arranged where if plan A doesn't work with Portland, than we have a plan B with them.

We won't find a better player statistically than ZBo in this draft. But we might be able to find a guy who is a better defender and passer but will take a few years to develop. Its a huge questionmark. We know that out of all the guys in the league we can land, ZBo will be at the cheapest price. He has also expresses his wish to come to Chicago.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

You can't even negotiate with Brown so how the hell are you going to send the #9 pick, a pick you must have already made at that point with Brown who can't sign a new contract until July 15th.
Are you high?


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

Amareca said:


> You can't even negotiate with Brown so how the hell are you going to send the #9 pick, a pick you must have already made at that point with Brown who can't sign a new contract until July 15th.
> Are you high?



Call him and ask if he'd like to sign a $10,000,000 contract? Oh, and don't tell David Stern. 

Seriously, we aren't talking about a Joe Smith type deal. You could do the same w/ Sweets if you really wanted to. And someone mentioned a week or so ago we could extend Brown's contract for next year right now if we wanted to anyway. That'd work too.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Amareca said:


> You can't even negotiate with Brown so how the hell are you going to send the #9 pick, a pick you must have already made at that point with Brown who can't sign a new contract until July 15th.
> Are you high?


I'm not sure, but I think the Bulls could resign Nocioni and Brown anytime they like. Brown would not be BYC if his salary didn't increase significantly, although he would have to approve any trade this summer. 

If Portland is the team we're talking about, I don't see why they would cut him, unless he just didn't want to play anymore at all. He might find the idea of mentoring a couple of the better young big men in the game a legitimate passtime for a year and a good introduction into coaching. Of course he'd play some as well. Portland is a nice city, particularly if you have enough money to get a great mansion on the coast and send your kids to private schools.

There are a couple of things that make me think that Mebarak's trade speculation may be valid. First of all, Paxson has said in previous interviews repeatedly that he would consider including the pick for a big man. Secondly, Portland has rather obviously been acting like they might have a mid-round pick this draft by looking at players who might go at that time. They have been even more obvious about their desire to trade Randolf.

The only thing I don't like about all of this is 

1. Zach Randolf is not a center, and the Bulls need a young center.

2. I don't see how the Bulls will get a young center without trading away a lot if they don't draft one.

3. Zach Randolf will take minutes away from Tyrus Thomas.

4. Cheapskate Jerry will not approve resigning Nocioni with Randolf on board.

5. Zach Randolf sucks.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Would you guys trade Thabo and #9 for the #4 pick?


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Schilly said:


> Would you guys trade Thabo and #9 for the #4 pick?


In a heartbeat. Why would Memphis want to do that?


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

McBulls, 

Why do you always spell Randolph as Randolf and Thabo as Thalbo?


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

OK, I think I didn't state my position as clearly as I wish I would have.

I am not suggesting that Paxson should have traded the pick in February, although I was for some sort of Gasol trade. What I wish Paxson would have done would have been to acquire a player with a midsize tradeable contract, like Kurt Thomas, at the deadline. That way, now that he has discovered what his pick is after the lottery, he would actually have the means to trade it and get a good veteran in return.

Of course, this wouldn't matter as much if Paxson liked the draft class, but it sounds like he doesn't think any of the big men he intends to draft will contribute right away, at least offensively. First of all, I have an extremely high regard for lottery picks, and I think very highly of our #9 selection in this particular draft. Secondly, GMs sometimes underestimate what a young player will be capable of. Here is perhaps the greatest quote from a GM of this kind:



> "We wish Jordan were 7-feet, but he isn't. There just wasn't a center available. What can you do? Jordan isn't going to turn this franchise around. I wouldn't ask him to. He's a very good offensive player, but not an overpowering offensive player."
> 
> -- Rod Thorn, then Bulls general manager, after selecting Jordan in the 1984 NBA Draft (Chicago Tribune, June 20, 1984


It's a bad idea to underestimate these draft picks when there is mostly going to be at least one blue chip seven foot prospect there at #9. I think any one of the Yi/Hawes/Noah trio could surprise and be somewhat productive in their rookie year.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

McBulls said:


> In a heartbeat. Why would Memphis want to do that?


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Anyhow, it doesn't have to be some huge under the table deal. The start of free agency is only like 3 days after the draft after all.....


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

DMD, 
As I'm sure you know, talking about the drafting of MJ also illustrates the dangers of drafting a 7 footer for need (ahem, Sam Bowie) ahead of a player who was just plain better. In truth, there were 7 footers available when MJ was picked. Dinner Bell Mel Turpin went #6 and Kevin Willis went #11.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

SALO said:


> McBulls,
> 
> Why do you always spell Randolph as Randolf and Thabo as Thalbo?


My hypothesis is that once a motor program subroutine is established it is executed faithfully unless there is consistent negative feedback. The fact that English is a language full of words like Randolf and Randolph that sound the same when spoken and that Thabo is not a common English language name (i.e. like Pryzibilla) doesn't help error detection. 

In the absense of a spelling checker of some sort one is dependent the complex process of comparing words that are read to those that are being written. Since this process requires efficient operation of several different parts of the brain in real time (e.g., Wernike's area in the postererior parietal cortex, Broca's area in the ventral premotor cortex, the pontine nuclei, the neocerebellar cortex, the inferior olive, the dentate nucleus and the motor cortex; Not to mention the hippocampus) any shift in attention away from proper execution will fail to update the current fallacious motor subroutine related to spelling a particular word.

In short, it's palpable evidence that my brain is in the process of disintegrating. So thank you for the error corrections. I assure you that you would have had to bear many more iterations of the error if you had not pointed it out.

Thabo Thabo Thabo Thabo Thabo Thabo Thabo ... there, that's better

Randolph Randolph ... wait, I hope not to have to learn that name.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

McBulls said:


> My hypothesis is that once a motor program subroutine is established it is executed faithfully unless there is consistent negative feedback. The fact that English is a language full of words like Randolf and Randolph that sound the same when spoken and that Thabo is not a common English language name (i.e. like Pryzibilla) doesn't help error detection.
> 
> In the absense of a spelling checker of some sort one is dependent the complex process of comparing words that are read to those that are being written. Since this process requires efficient operation of several different parts of the brain in real time (e.g., Wernike's area in the postererior parietal cortex, Broca's area in the ventral premotor cortex, the pontine nuclei, the neocerebellar cortex, the inferior olive, the dentate nucleus and the motor cortex; Not to mention the hippocampus) any shift in attention away from proper execution will fail to update the current fallacious motor subroutine related to spelling a particular word.
> 
> ...


Now THAT was some funny ****. :clap:


----------



## Bulldozer (Jul 11, 2006)

SALO, misspelling a name/thing multiple times in similar fashion is common when a person doesn't find that particular subject favorable. Hey, I do the same if not much more blatant, with Spencer "HEE" HAWes :biggrin:


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

MikeDC said:


> DMD,
> As I'm sure you know, talking about the drafting of MJ also illustrates the dangers of drafting a 7 footer for need (ahem, Sam Bowie) ahead of a player who was just plain better. In truth, there were 7 footers available when MJ was picked. Dinner Bell Mel Turpin went #6 and Kevin Willis went #11.


Touche, Mike, touche. Actually, Sam Bowie might have wound up a very good NBA player had it not been for incapacitating injuries. 

I see you mention Jeff Green in another thread, and I have to tell you I like his game a lot. But as for a lot of the other players in Hawes's projected draft range, I'm not sure they're going to be better pros than Spencer. I'm not purely interested in him because he appears to fill a need. I've seen him play, and I really think he's a blue chipper because: he has great post moves, he's about 7 feet tall, and he plays hard. Green I like as well, and what I remember about him is that, low and behold, he has a very solid post game. He's a really good all around player, and he's been compared to Brandon Roy by some as the most complete player coming out this year. On the other hand, a poster I really respect, HKF, thinks Green will only rise to the Shane Battier level because he's just not as talented as some of the other players in this draft. And this I know, HKF watches lots of Georgetown basketball. But he would be a safe pick, and he would give us something we need: post scoring. However, when I look at his body and his game, I see a small forward. He's highly versatile. Honestly, I think he's the best fit for Minnesota. KG needs somebody who can play now.

The other players in Hawes's draft range also have impressive talents, but they have weaknesses which make me think they're no sure things either. I never expected we would look seriously at Conley. He can't shoot very well right now, and he's very small. Then agaiin, if he winds up like TJ Ford, he's going to help some team anyway. I am not a big believer in Julian Wright. I do not want to draft another player who is offensively passive. Corey Brewer has great defensive instincts, but he's also without Green's offensive polish, and he's 6'8 185 lbs. That's Brandon Wright skinny, though it's less of a problem for a 2/3 than a 4. Noah's offensive woes and his corresponding sidespin jumper are well known here. One intangible about Noah that I love, though, is how vocal he is, both on the court and in front of a microphone. If he came a Bull and became at least a pretty good player, he would be the vocal leader of the team, because we don't have one in our core (except for Tyrus screaming a lot). Yi really is a good athlete. From what I've seen, his game reminds me of Bargnani's. My only gripe with him is that I don't really ever see him turning into a center, and thus I don't think he's an ideal fit next to Thomas in the future. I guess when I look at it objectively, that's a pretty small gripe. But he's just not a post player, and I've gleaned that despite being 7 feet tall and madly athletic, he's not known as much of a defensive player. Brandon Wright is too skinny and not nearly the athlete everyone thought he was (before the combine). People really go nuts for this kid, and I just don't see it. He's a true 4 though, and he plays down low, and I like that. 

Horford is solid, solid, solid, and I'd love to pick him. He has the size to play 4/5 in the NBA, plus he's a great athlete with an NBA body, plus he's versatile and good on both sides of the ball right now. That's why he'll never slip to us. All the other top non-Oden/Durant players, except for Green and Horford, have question marks to me. That's why I don't see drafting Hawes over them as a Bowie over Jordan thing. I really think Hawes could be the 4th best player in this draft class, behind Oden, Durant, and maybe Horford.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Great analysis DMD, that's one of the best run throughs of the major options I've seen. I just have a couple areas of disagreement.

A lot of my thinking revolves around Ben and Tyrus, and how I see a guy fitting in with them. 

* First, I don't see Ben and Tyrus to be a very good fit with each other. Neither can hit the broad side of a barn from more than a few feet away. As much as I like Noah, and I really do like him, he's just not very complementary to those two guys. 

* I think Yi could be very complementary to them, however, so I disagree with you there. No, Yi isn't a center, but think in terms of the particular skills we need, not in terms of pure position. We need a guy who's an offensive threat inside and out, and Yi is reputed to be that. 

Having a pure post player, in fact, strikes me as iffy, because the more you operate a guy on the low blocks, the more you will end up pushing Ben or Tyrus away from the basket. You obviously want the options a post scorer brings, but if you get a guy who's solely an inside guy, there will be issues. In that respect, I like Yi because, although he's supposed to have inside game, he can supposedly score from anywhere on the court too. 

Defensively, no, he's not a big strong guy center, but again, I don't think that's purely what we need. With the NBA moving away from really physical play in general, I think just having a long guy who can play man against other really tall guys is enough. We got killed on multiple occasions by guys last year who's main tangible skill is simply being 7 feet tall (Mark Blount, Johan Petro, etc). Basically guys that could shoot over Wallace or Nocioni at will. It didn't help that Wallace is decidedly uninterested in playing man to man, because the points he gives up don't show in his stat line, but if we had a guy who was both tall and mobile we'd alleviate the problem somewhat by allowing Wallace (and Tyrus) to do what they do best... freelance more.

Of course, that's all assuming Yi can actually play. If he can, I think he'd be a very good fit because I see him as a guy who might be able to score in bunches.

I don't see Hawes as a 20ppg scorer. I see him as fairly slow and, if it's possible for a seven footer, to be a below the rim player. He obviously has an array of moves and he's very agile for a guy his size. In a strange way, he reminds me very much of Mike Sweetney. Sweetney's also very agile and has vast array of moves. But he's hampered by being too short, too fat, and too slow. You'd think he'd be a good rebounder, and occasionally he puts up decent numbers, but more often they're poor numbers.

I think Hawes will be better than Sweetney, don't get me wrong. He's not too fat, though he could be in better shape, and he's definitely not too short, though It'd be nice if his arms were longer. 

But here's the thing. He's not as ready as Sweetney was when he hits the league. I don't think he'll be much of a contributor as a rookie, and possibly next year either. He needs to get his body in better shape and adjust to the speed of the game. I think the comparisons to Mihm are probably fairly accurate, with the exception that Mihm was older and in better shape coming in. Nick Collison is another good example of a guy who, while he doesn't have the natural aptitude of Hawes for scoring, was actually a lot more athletic and experienced that him. I don't see his body or athletic ability as currently as good as guys like Bogut or Kaman when they entered the league.

In short, people need to be realistic. Playing center in the NBA, and scoring a lot, is probably one of the most difficult things to do. Hawes had a very strange one year college experience and has a below average body compared to most centers. He'll probably fill in, get hard, and be a decent player, but I think it'd be extraordinarily unfair to expect much of him in the short term.

Say two years from now, what do we get. We've got a guy who, I think could score 15 a game and guard opposing big men. He'll be quite a lot better in half-court sets than in transition. I don't see him being more than an average rebounder or defender, but that's ok. I'll take that.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

MikeDC said:


> Great analysis DMD, that's one of the best run throughs of the major options I've seen. I just have a couple areas of disagreement.
> 
> A lot of my thinking revolves around Ben and Tyrus, and how I see a guy fitting in with them.
> 
> ...


What keeps Sweetney from being a good player? Do you remember his first month as a Bull? People were thinking Sweetney for Curry was a decent trade straight up. Basically, Sweets's whole problem on offense is conditioning and weight. When he's been in decent condition, he's been able to score despite his lack of lift. I think Sweetney must either have terrible metabolism or a staggering lack of self control at the table. Either way, he can't keep the weight off, and that's not Hawes's problem. Hawes looks like he might have a very good body for a center someday. Oden is a total physical freak, and none of us should ever expect a 19 center to be built like that.

Sweetney's other problem is that he can't move his feet defensively, so he gets into foul trouble. Being taller, Hawes has the good fortune of being able to check centers instead of power forwards, so whereas he's not fast, he doesn't need to be as fast as Sweetney would have to be to be an effective defender. In 31 games at Washington last year, he fouled out two times and had four fouls once. He averaged 2.3 fouls per game in 29 minutes. For a freshman who was a big part of that team, I don't think those numbers scare me. 

Whereas I know Hawes will have to get into shape to be at NBA conditioning level, I don't think he has any major hurdles, like Sweetney's weight problem, that will keep him from getting there. 

I think Hawes will score more than 15 per game in his peak years.

BTW, does Yi have any midrange game? All I have seen from him is hoisting 3 pointers and blowing by people for dunks.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> What keeps Sweetney from being a good player? Do you remember his first month as a Bull? People were thinking Sweetney for Curry was a decent trade straight up. Basically, Sweets's whole problem on offense is conditioning and weight. When he's been in decent condition, he's been able to score despite his lack of lift. I think Sweetney must either have terrible metabolism or a staggering lack of self control at the table. Either way, he can't keep the weight off, and that's not Hawes's problem. Hawes looks like he might have a very good body for a center someday. Oden is a total physical freak, and none of us should ever expect a 19 center to be built like that.
> 
> Sweetney's other problem is that he can't move his feet defensively, so he gets into foul trouble. Being taller, Hawes has the good fortune of being able to check centers instead of power forwards, so whereas he's not fast, he doesn't need to be as fast as Sweetney would have to be to be an effective defender. In 31 games at Washington last year, he fouled out two times and had four fouls once. He averaged 2.3 fouls per game in 29 minutes. For a freshman who was a big part of that team, I don't think those numbers scare me.
> 
> ...


Some great posts here.

I agree that comparing Hawes to Sweetney is grossly unfair to Hawes. I mean, the first thing that comes to mind when Sweetney's name comes up is underachiever (because of weight, conditioning, etc). From most reports I've read, Hawes is VERY serious about his NBA career and is generally a hard worker.

As for Yi, most of the reports on draft express seem to indicate that mid-range is the strongest part of Yi's offensive game...he gets into trouble when he starts shooting from downtown.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

transplant said:


> Some great posts here.
> 
> I agree that comparing Hawes to Sweetney is grossly unfair to Hawes. I mean, the first thing that comes to mind when Sweetney's name comes up is underachiever (because of weight, conditioning, etc). From most reports I've read, Hawes is VERY serious about his NBA career and is generally a hard worker.
> 
> As for Yi, most of the reports on draft express seem to indicate that mid-range is the strongest part of Yi's offensive game...he gets into trouble when he starts shooting from downtown.


Guys, I know I did compare Sweetney and Hawes, but I think I pointed out that I see some major differences too. 

The idea wasn't that they're the same player, it was just that comparing them can be illuminating.

But to further the point, Sweetney didn't have an obvious weight problem coming out of Georgetown. He measured in at 262lbs before the draft and now he reportedly (via Sam Smith) can't get under 300. He was also called "a coaches dream" because of his work ethic. So, um... just because those things are said about Hawes doesn't mean they'll play out that way.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

MikeDC said:


> Guys, I know I did compare Sweetney and Hawes, but I think I pointed out that I see some major differences too.
> 
> The idea wasn't that they're the same player, it was just that comparing them can be illuminating.
> 
> But to further the point, Sweetney didn't have an obvious weight problem coming out of Georgetown. He measured in at 262lbs before the draft and now he reportedly (via Sam Smith) can't get under 300. He was also called "a coaches dream" because of his work ethic. So, um... just because those things are said about Hawes doesn't mean they'll play out that way.


Despite being in the Pac-10, I have not seen Hawes play and don't have an informed opinion about him, but FWIW, Mike Sweetney is whom I also thought about when people were talking about a complete offensive game but having athletic limitations. 

Hawes doesn't look like he'll have weight problems and he's already 7 feet tall, but hopefully that's enough to escape the ghosts of the Eric Montross and Jon Koncak and other slim, trim slow white centers. His first year stats look promising enough, but it seems given his age and the skills he brings, that he would benefit more by staying in college and developing his skills and athleticism internally.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

No offense, but the same could be said about any of these guys.

Heck, when it comes to Noah, Donovan said Horford would be the best player. 

That's why the draft is a crapshoot. IF Randolph didn't come with baggage, he wouldn't be available. There are no perfect players in the draft (not even Oden or Durant - Though they have the best shot at being difference making complete players)or available via trade.


----------

