# deng needs to go



## bullsboy (Oct 27, 2008)

u see today why,the team need him and he's invisible,he;s hiding,period he's a cancer


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Dude,

What bulls team are you watching. The player that needs to go is Thomas. I mean this is his 4th year and he is a bust. What is he tonight 1 for 8 with 3 TO. For the season he is averaging 8 pts and 6 boards. He was really the 2nd pick in the draft and he is awful. He takes too many bad jump shots and has a zero basketball IQ. The sad fact is Aaron Gray in outplaying thomas. He is quickly appoarching Brad Sellers like bust.

david


----------



## TheDarkPrince (May 13, 2006)

giusd said:


> Dude,
> 
> What bulls team are you watching. The player that needs to go is Thomas. I mean this is his 4th year and he is a bust. What is he tonight 1 for 8 with 3 TO. For the season he is averaging 8 pts and 6 boards. He was really the 2nd pick in the draft and he is awful. He takes too many bad jump shots and has a zero basketball IQ. The sad fact is Aaron Gray in outplaying thomas. He is quickly appoarching Brad Sellers like bust.
> 
> david


Agreed. I'm pretty much done with Tyrus. The guy just doesn't have any basket ball IQ, and from the looks of things never will. However, i'm starting to not like Deng too much either. I'll give him until the all star break, but that big contract was a mistake imo.


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

I actually think BG is the one who needs to go. When he's in the line up with D-rose, it makes the bulls offense look so awkard. BG is trying to do too much with the ball when he isn't capable of creating for himself or teammates. The ball should be in D-rose's hand everytime, he's unstoppable when is guarded one on one. take it to the rim and finish strong or create open shots for teammates. the bulls offense look so much more smoother when BG is not in the game or at least not dribbling the ball.

What the Bulls really need is someone who is a decent post up player. The ball should be in D-rose's hand all the time, and occasionally when teams double up on him, he can dump the ball into someone with legit size who can create for himself. This is how the NO Hornets play. ball is in CP3's hand majority off the team, when other teams adjust, David west is there to take the pressure of CP3 in the half court. it gives different looks on the offense. I think Deng would fit really well if we find a decent player who can post up. BG's role should be nothing more than what the B.J armstrong, John pax did before. standing behind the 3 point line for open shots. 

BG might put up good numbers, but its misleading, if you watch the bulls games carefully, you will see he makes no impacts.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

Trade the team(including Rose) for Kaman!!! 


Relax guys, the Bulls players usually get off to slow starts. It should be pretty encouraging that our record isn't 1-7 with this tough schedule.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

aaaaannnd this is when the Post-Game Venting thread becomes a good idea again


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

giusd said:


> Dude,
> 
> What bulls team are you watching. The player that needs to go is Thomas. I mean this is his 4th year and he is a bust. What is he tonight 1 for 8 with 3 TO. For the season he is averaging 8 pts and 6 boards. He was really the 2nd pick in the draft and he is awful. He takes too many bad jump shots and has a zero basketball IQ. The sad fact is Aaron Gray in outplaying thomas. He is quickly appoarching Brad Sellers like bust.
> 
> david



I got to admit I had high hopes after the first game from Thomas this year but he again just plays way to wild and doesnt have a feel for the game. I think he is the piece we need to move at the deadline.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

I think Thomas is similar to Tyson Chandler. Both will never be more than a third-tier offensive threat. I think VDN is either testing out to see Tyrus offensive potential or he just doesn't have any choice but to utilize Thomas (since we're short on bigs).

Tyrus should not be a focal point of any type of offense. His wild play I think is related to the fact that we don't have an interior scorer. He's kinda pushed into that role and felt that he's responsible for that.

Look at Chandler. With David West doing much of the scoring bulk at PF, Chandler's game flourishes. Chandler is still very much the same player he was when he played for us. Easy dunks, putbacks, alley oops. Nothing new. He's just in a way better situation. Running with PG like CP3 and complemented by David West scoring ability.

If we ever get a good big man to play at C who takes care of the scoring load there. And we can minimize Tyrus FG attempts and utilize him according to his skill set. I think you will have a different opinion on Tyrus. That's why, I try not to deal Tyrus yet until we get a real big man. Hopefull Chris Kaman is that guy.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Sith said:


> I actually think BG is the one who needs to go. When he's in the line up with D-rose, it makes the bulls offense look so awkard. BG is trying to do too much with the ball when he isn't capable of creating for himself or teammates. The ball should be in D-rose's hand everytime, he's unstoppable when is guarded one on one. take it to the rim and finish strong or create open shots for teammates. the bulls offense look so much more smoother when BG is not in the game or at least not dribbling the ball.
> 
> What the Bulls really need is someone who is a decent post up player. The ball should be in D-rose's hand all the time, and occasionally when teams double up on him, he can dump the ball into someone with legit size who can create for himself. This is how the NO Hornets play. ball is in CP3's hand majority off the team, when other teams adjust, David west is there to take the pressure of CP3 in the half court. it gives different looks on the offense. I think Deng would fit really well if we find a decent player who can post up. BG's role should be nothing more than what the B.J armstrong, John pax did before. standing behind the 3 point line for open shots.
> 
> BG might put up good numbers, but its misleading, if you watch the bulls games carefully, you will see he makes no impacts.


Yeah, he clearly looks like a player playing for a contract.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Who would trade for Deng? He is up and down. I think it is safe to say so far he has not played to the level he is getting paid to play early on. So to just say he needs to go, go where? 

Trade TT in a package for kaman.


----------



## nybullsfan (Aug 12, 2005)

I think it's a bit too early to right off deng. Would I have liked him to show signs of a post game? sure. Would I have liked him to attack the basket more this season? sure. But for right now we need all the scoring we can get, In fact deng has been playing better these past couple of games. I would like to believe his slump has to do with getting use to rose uptempo game, but we shall see.


----------



## darlets (Jul 31, 2002)

nybullsfan said:


> I think it's a bit too early to right off deng. Would I have liked him to show signs of a post game? sure. Would I have liked him to attack the basket more this season? sure. But for right now we need all the scoring we can get, In fact deng has been playing better these past couple of games. I would like to believe his slump has to do with getting use to rose uptempo game, but we shall see.


Yeah Deng seems to be on the improve. Don't see him going anywhere. We need to trade for a side kick for Rose, so we become an attractive place in 2010 and Rose doesn't go insane in the mean time. Failing that, hopefully Rose can develop into a very solid player.


----------



## Cager (Jun 13, 2002)

I agree with RSP83 on his comments regarding Chandler. I actually thought Noah could be Chandler with better hands. I'm not so sure now as his effort is not consistent.

Thomas needs to focus on defense and driving to the basket. I would hesitate to trade him just to get rid of him but I wouldn't be opposed to trading him. He needs some full time coaching.

Deng is very disappointing. Is it really possible that he peaked two years ago ? He has lost his confidence and is either forcing things or hiding.

I feel sorry for Ben because he continues to be the Bulls #1 option. Teams have learned to double team him before the pick and roll starts. Ben really needs to play off someone else who gets double teamed but the Bulls have no one. This is an issue Ben and the Bulls have had for three years where teams just double team Gordon. Perhaps Rose can take over but the real answer is getting a low post threat. How many years have we been saying that?


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

The problem I have with Thomas and Noah is that neither one of them can effectively run the pick & roll.... Chandler could, when he caught the ball.


----------



## Nu_Omega (Nov 27, 2006)

Deng will be Deng. He'll be a good-to-have player that will never be flashy, be the 3rd option in the team, know his role and does job. Chances of him getting into a highlight reels is gonna be ZERO.

All i'm hoping is that he gets his mid-range game back and contribute 15ppg and 7 rpg on a CONSISTENT basis. The rest doesn't matter.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Nu_Omega said:


> Deng will be Deng. He'll be a good-to-have player that will never be flashy, be the 3rd option in the team, know his role and does job. *Chances of him getting into a highlight reels is gonna be ZERO.*
> 
> All i'm hoping is that he gets his mid-range game back and contribute 15ppg and 7 rpg on a CONSISTENT basis. The rest doesn't matter.


Funny you should mention it, Deng's finish on the fast break feed from Sefolosha is currently the "Play of the Day" on NBA.com


----------



## Nu_Omega (Nov 27, 2006)

Haha, maybe i should add "individual highlight reel not involving team play".


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I love these chants for "TRADE **insert player**", and yet people have no idea or solution who would come in to take their place. 

Like just trading a guy simply makes your team better. Nice joke fella.

Yeah, let's just trade Deng...maybe we can magically summon the reincarnation of Grant Hill circa 1996 to take his place!


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> I love these chants for "TRADE *insert player*", and yet people have no idea or solution who would come in to take their place.


+1....but you know fans will be fans. its their inherent, unalienable right to say "so and so sucks" and "the gm's an idiot", all the while knowing that the instant any of these guys play to their capabilities, or a trade they approve of is made, the wind will blow in the completely opposite direction, and the most current lovefest will occur. hell, wait til rose does something unappreciated by the common fan. no player in any sport will ever be exempt; it's the nature of fandom, unfortunately.

it's why i enjoy making fun of so many of the "far right" crowd; you know, the crowd that likes to spit the "he'll never", and "i'm telling you".........:clap2:

btw, deng 19pts 10 boards.....but HE needs to go....


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I just remembered the plays that probably prompted this thread. Deng had 2 very bad and crucial turnovers in the 4th quarter, both of which led to Bibby 3-pointers.

Yes those were terrible plays. No, they are not a common occurrence with Deng. He actually had 0 turnovers in the game at that point.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

Yea, I agree with the level-headedness by some posters. Luol Deng is a prototypical 3rd scorer on a contending team. He will never be the go-to-guy or even a legit #2 option, but as a #3, he's fine. He's 23. Rose is 20. 

I really thought Tyrus would blossom this year into perhaps that #2 option down low, but it just isn't clicking with him. John Paxson had one bad year (really). The Chandler for Wallace swap (essentially) and Thomas over Aldridge are his two biggest mistakes. But that's the past. 

Deng is a good signing at his price and I think that we can guarantee 18/7 out of Deng for the next 10 years or so. Rose looks like he'll be able to average 25/5/8 at some point in the next five years. We need a 20/10 big man to complement those two guys.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

giusd said:


> Dude,
> 
> What bulls team are you watching. The player that needs to go is Thomas. I mean this is his 4th year and he is a bust. What is he tonight 1 for 8 with 3 TO. For the season he is averaging 8 pts and 6 boards. He was really the 2nd pick in the draft and he is awful. He takes too many bad jump shots and has a zero basketball IQ. The sad fact is Aaron Gray in outplaying thomas. He is quickly appoarching Brad Sellers like bust.
> 
> david



Isn't he in his third year, or am I on the pipe again?


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

jnrjr79 said:


> Isn't he in his third year, or am I on the pipe again?


I'm pretty sure it's year three.


----------



## Jonathan Mardukis (Nov 12, 2008)

T.Shock said:


> Deng is a good signing at his price and I think that we can guarantee 18/7 out of Deng for the next 10 years or so. Rose looks like he'll be able to average 25/5/8 at some point in the next five years. We need a 20/10 big man to complement those two guys.


1. We don't need a 20/10 big man. Rose has the rarest of combos:

a. Size - 6'4"
b. The ability to get up
c. MOST IMPORTANT - Ridiculous quickness

Really the only players I've seen have that combo or better as guards were Wade, who is bigger but not as quick, and Jordan, who was bigger, quicker and got up higher.

As with Jordan, we don't need a traditional post up center clogging the lane. First, the idea of a 20/10 center is ridiculous these days. They're as coveted as Rose. Second, I don't want a 20/10 "big", because there is no such thing as a big, only centers and PFs and I don't want a PF who will be great in the regular season and get shut down by OTHER great PFs in the playoffs. 

Our only real play is to base our offense around Rose and make it easy for him to have a lane to the basket by finding him a Scottie Pippen like player (Earl Clark) who can kill teams off of Rose's penetration if they overcommit. Then we need A center. Someone like Kaman. I'm thinking that, when Gordon can be traded, Gordon and Gooden for Kaman will be mighty nice to a cheap owner like Sterling.

Kaman
Noah
Clark
Sefolosha 
Rose

Regardless of whether Paxson's tired holdovers, Deng, Nocioni and Hinrich are still around, that lineup is very realistic and could win quite a bit of games next year AND into the future.

2. The very reason that Jordan was great and Rose is going to be great is quickness. It's so underrated.

Quickness is the difference between Jordan and guys like Bryant, McGrady, Carter, Erving, etc. All of those guys could get up like Mike, but Mike had the quickness to blow by multiple defenders and give himself multiple steps to sprint and take off to the basket. Bryant kind of turns the corner with a guy still on his shoulder a lot and he gets cut off because the footspeed isn't there either.

To get Jordan you'd have to start with Bryant and then you'd have to give him Isiah Thomas' first step. Then, offensively, you'd have Jordan.

Ditto with Rose. He'll be better than Paul and Williams because he's noticeably quicker than Paul and WAY quicker than Williams.

Derrick Rose is basically Tony Parker if he was 3" taller, 20 lbs. heavier and could jump about 12" higher. He's basically the NFL linebacker version of Tony Parker with a lot more vert.

The dunk on the breakaway he had the other night where he just jumped over a guy basically; I felt like Darth Vader. It was a presence I hadn't felt anywhere in basketball since 1989, when AIR Jordan was still throwing it down on multiple defenders.

*Ironically, Deng is as slow as Rose is quick. And this is what I always said would doom him. 

He's molasses slow with very little agility. That's why it's not good to be 6'9" at SF unless you're a world class ELITE athlete or you have Bird's precision and feel for the game. Deng isn't the former and hasn't the latter. 

One alarming weakness can preclude everything good about you in the NBA. It sucks, because it's not a great moral proposition. But it's true. Deng can be as "solid" as he wants. He's slow as all hell.*

Get Earl Clark and a presence at center and this is the kind of team you could have:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWZGkl6cH_4

This teams fans got so obsessed with values that I think we forgot how good they were.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

bullsboy said:


> u see today why,the team need him and he's invisible,he;s hiding,period he's a cancer


:thinking2:


I'm sure not seeing what you are talking about.

In the last game he put up 19/10 and a block.

The game before he put up 20/7, with a block and a steal.

That might not be all-star $70M performance, but its hardly "invisible" to the point where "he has to go."

A cancer?

Nope. I'm not following you at all.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I don't get why so much is made of the $70 million contract, to be quite honest. You really have to look at contracts in terms of annual price.

SUPERSTARS earn somewhere in the vicinity of $14-15 million per season. For example, Gilbert Arenas just got extended for 6 years, $111 million. That averages a whopping $18.5 million per season. Now THAT'S a max contract.

Luol Deng is earning nowhere near the max. $70M over 6 years averages $11.67 million per season. That's paltry compared to what most all-stars are making (excluding those on rookie contracts). It's also right on par with guys who are normally considered 3rd options on their teams.

Peja Stojakovic's contract averages $12.6M per season. This is more than Deng for a lesser player who didn't even play much his first 2 seasons with the Hornets.

Richard Jefferson's contract averages close to $13M per season. IMO, he's not any better than Deng; probably right on par.

Let's not enough bring up Rashard Lewis.

Face it folks, what we have here is a #3 player and we paid him like one.


----------



## Jonathan Mardukis (Nov 12, 2008)

yodurk said:


> I don't get why so much is made of the $70 million contract, to be quite honest. You really have to look at contracts in terms of annual price.
> 
> SUPERSTARS earn somewhere in the vicinity of $14-15 million per season. For example, Gilbert Arenas just got extended for 6 years, $111 million. That averages a whopping $18.5 million per season. Now THAT'S a max contract.
> 
> ...


Here's the problem, and what I don't think you get.

The entire league is overpaying forwards and combo guards. It's because of the fact that their stats aren't in the same proportion to their effect on the game as a true center or PG.

Think about it. A true center who averages 20 and 10 is much more valuable than a PF that does it. Because the center probably does it on 53% FG, not 47%. You can run your offense through that true center well into the playoffs and that center yields a lot of positional advantages that aren't there forwards. Ditto true PGs v. combo guards like Arenas and wack "media" superstars like McGrady and Anthony.

They all get the max. Dwight Howard, Lebron James and Chris Paul won't make much more than Carmelo Anthony or some superstar combo guard that gets paid, and yet their effect on the game is much greater.

Dwight Howard may not have much better statistical prowess than Carlos Boozer last year, but who effects the game more? Put Howard with Deron Williams and they're deep into the finals.

So maybe, relative to the 22 dumb butt GMs we didn't overpay Deng. Problem is, they're ALL overpaying forwards.

Why? Because forwards and combo guards get you REGULAR SEASON wins, and stupid NBA fans think that REGULAR SEASON wins and playoff prowess are directly proportional. 

The guy who signed Deng to that money is dumb. Whoever paid Peja that money is an even bigger moron. See how THAT works?

Now, why sign Deng when we could free up money for Lebron?

You may laugh, but let's just set it up like this:

1. If we had enough cap room and couldn't sell Lebron on playing in CHICAGO with Derrick Rose as his co-leader, then that's the SALESMAN'S PROBLEM, not the deals problem. It's not a deal that shouldn't sell, it would equate to Paxson not being ABLE to sell it.

2. If we were to free that money up and not sign Lebron or Wade, guess what, there will be 10 other dime-a-dozen forwards like Deng that we can give it to.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

No, I get it just fine.

The underlying cause as you imply is average or above-average players started getting big paychecks at some point in time, that in turn jacks up ticket prices, and since people continue to pay ridiculous prices, the increased revenue and profits can't all go to the owners. Collecting bargaining agreement would never allow it, hence the agreement allows for a much larger salary cap to go with salary restrictions on max players. When you have a huge salary cap of $55 million bucks, and only 1/3 of that goes to your best player, that leaves a ton of money to throw at your average/above-average players like Deng.

In the perfect world, guys like LeBron and CP3 would be making closer to $30M per season with Deng making more like $5M, but free market antics keep that from happening.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> 1. If we had enough cap room and couldn't sell Lebron on playing in CHICAGO with Derrick Rose as his co-leader, then that's the SALESMAN'S PROBLEM, not the deals problem. It's not a deal that shouldn't sell, it would equate to Paxson not being ABLE to sell it.
> 
> 2. If we were to free that money up and not sign Lebron or Wade, guess what, there will be 10 other dime-a-dozen forwards like Deng that we can give it to.



:lol::lol:

your post would've been a lot simpler if you'd just wrote "fire pax".....:lol:

talk about "dime a dozen"......


----------



## Case (Dec 17, 2007)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> :thinking2:
> 
> 
> I'm sure not seeing what you are talking about.
> ...


Same here.

As an aside, "cancer" is becoming an increasingly overused term among fans who post on message boards. In the past, it was typically used after the words "locker room" (as in, a "locker room cancer") to describe a player whose negative attitude brought down the team. Now, people throw that term into any diatribe against a player they don't like. Disagree with Gordon's salary demands? He's a cancer! Don't like Deng's lack of dunking? He's a cancer too!! However, as long as these things don't affect the team's performance on the court, these players aren't "cancers."


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Case, you're absolutely right. Never realized how much that word is thrown around. It should really be reserved for the Marburys of the world, guys who divide locker rooms and run a team into the ground because of it.

Deng is seriously the furthest thing from this you can imagine, regardless of how big a slump he's in.


----------



## Case (Dec 17, 2007)

yodurk said:


> Case, you're absolutely right. Never realized how much that word is thrown around. It should really be reserved for the Marburys of the world, guys who divide locker rooms and run a team into the ground because of it.
> 
> Deng is seriously the furthest thing from this you can imagine, regardless of how big a slump he's in.


I wanted to use Marbury as an example, but I resisted because I feel that the NY management shares blame for the deterioration of that relationship.

Then again, maybe not. Maybe they're just trying to keep Marbury from tainting the rest of the team - although I have such little respect for most of that roster, I can't imagine who they're trying to protect. David Lee?


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I agree. Deng sucks. Big time. I hope everyone who said I was crazy the last couple years for wanting to dump Deng and wanting Josh Smith see the light now. If they don't, there's no hope for them at all. Bulls should've traded Deng and Gordon when their value was decent. At this point, I'd even trade Deng straight up for Joe Alexander, and he doesn't even get off the bench for that moron Skiles. At least with Joe he COULD turn into something....we all know that Deng is awful relative to the hype and contract he has.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Thank you guys for your input. 

Deng sucks not just because of his limited physical/basketball skills or softness or selfishness or lock of leadership (that he promised everyone last summer) or the fact that he drained team’s financial sources which could be used on FA market …he sucks because of all above mentioned facts together.

But on other hand, I would like to thank him, for revealing Pax’s incompetence.

As I said before, I am not blaming our GM that he tried to “gamble” with Ben, Deng, Sefolosha, Thomas, Noah …no, I can understand his search for a “raw diamond”, but for God sake why he did not trade these “failed samples” in time for a new picks/cap space/solid veteran/new prospects ?! 

IMO our team does not look like any other normal basketball team…it is a fake, phony GM, coach, C, PF, SF, SG… almost everyone, with exemption of Rose and Nocioni.

Thank you Your Cheapness (JR), for your “vision and efforts” to ruin one of the best franchise in modern history.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

Jonathan Mardukis said:


> 1. We don't need a 20/10 big man. Rose has the rarest of combos:
> 
> a. Size - 6'4"
> b. The ability to get up
> ...


I couldn't disagree more. You've filled your team with slashers who can't really knock down an outside jumper with consistency. Rose isn't a great shooter to begin with, but his ability to use his unparalled quickness (on this I agree with you) to get to the rim will force defenses to collapse on him, freeing up shooters on the outside. 

People said Rose reminds him of Jason Kidd, but Rose doesn't see the floor like Kidd does (perhaps he will in the future, but who knows). I honestly believe Rose has the chance to be a better version of Gary Payton. Payton's best teams were when he was surrounded with Gill/Hawkins/Schremph with Kemp and a space eater down low. We need to find a taller 2-guard who is lights out from the perimeter and keep Deng who is an excellent mid-range jump shooter. We need a 4 man like Kemp that can run the floor and has some semblance of a post game. Right now, my ideal line-up would be...

PG-Rose
SG-Gordon
SF-Deng
PF-Thomas
C-Gray

BENCH: Hinrich(combo guard), Hughes(scoring wing), Nocioni(combo forward), Noah(big man who does the dirty work)

In the future, I'd ideally like replace Gordon with someone like Chase Budinger (who unfortunately does not look to be committed enough to become even a complimentary NBA player) and Amare Stoudamire (through FA in 2010). 

But to fill this team with slashes around Rose defeats the purpose of allowing Rose to use his quickness to get to the rim. Either Rose will finish or the defense will collapse and he'll find open guys on the perimeter.


----------



## Cager (Jun 13, 2002)

Bulls96 said:


> Thank you guys for your input.
> 
> Deng sucks not just because of his limited physical/basketball skills or softness or selfishness or lock of leadership (that he promised everyone last summer) or the fact that he drained team’s financial sources which could be used on FA market …he sucks because of all above mentioned facts together.
> 
> ...


YOU ARE AN ASTUTE AND KNOWLEDGEABLE FAN


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> Deng sucks not just because of his limited physical/basketball skills or softness or selfishness or lock of leadership (that he promised everyone last summer) or the fact that he drained team’s financial sources which could be used on FA market …he sucks because of all above mentioned facts together.


what? deng 'broke' his promise so he sucks? got it.....




> But on other hand, I would like to thank him, for revealing Pax’s incompetence.
> 
> As I said before, I am not blaming our GM that he tried to “gamble” with Ben, Deng, Sefolosha, Thomas, Noah …no, I can understand his search for a “raw diamond”, but for God sake why he did not trade these “failed samples” in time for a new picks/cap space/solid veteran/new prospects ?!


so you would suggest that in the future he signs players with the caveat "the clock is ticking, dude, you better produce quick or i'ma trading your arse pronto".........



> IMO our team does not look like any other normal basketball team…it is a fake, phony GM, coach, C, PF, SF, SG… almost everyone, with exemption of Rose and Nocioni.
> 
> Thank you Your Cheapness (JR), for your “vision and efforts” to ruin one of the best franchise in modern history.


a fake basketball team, except for the players YOU like......now that's just precious......:rofl2:

gotta love the fans.....




> YOU ARE AN ASTUTE AND KNOWLEDGEABLE FAN


you oughta know, right?:biggrin:


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

BULLHITTER said:


> what? deng 'broke' his promise so he sucks? got it.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It so obvious that I am not alone with English as a second language, thanks for making me feel good. Did you read entire paragraph ? 

And yes, the clock is always ticking my friend and Pax knows that too (and it has to be on Christmas for him) :

Deng should be traded right after his sissyness reaction to the Posey’s physical play.

Ben should be traded after he refused to sign extension last season.

Thomas and Noah should be traded during the 2008-2009 NBADraft or so.


//….a fake basketball team, except for the players YOU like //

Not just only me. Place the same price tag on each of Bulls plyers, let say 7M and rent them for one year. Guess who will go first and second ?


I hope I did not make you mad; I am so sensitive to pain… almost like your “hero” Deng eace:


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Sith said:


> I actually think BG is the one who needs to go. When he's in the line up with D-rose, it makes the bulls offense look so awkard. BG is trying to do too much with the ball when he isn't capable of creating for himself or teammates. The ball should be in D-rose's hand everytime, he's unstoppable when is guarded one on one. take it to the rim and finish strong or create open shots for teammates. the bulls offense look so much more smoother when BG is not in the game or at least not dribbling the ball.
> 
> What the Bulls really need is someone who is a decent post up player. The ball should be in D-rose's hand all the time, and occasionally when teams double up on him, he can dump the ball into someone with legit size who can create for himself. This is how the NO Hornets play. ball is in CP3's hand majority off the team, when other teams adjust, David west is there to take the pressure of CP3 in the half court. it gives different looks on the offense. I think Deng would fit really well if we find a decent player who can post up. BG's role should be nothing more than what the B.J armstrong, John pax did before. standing behind the 3 point line for open shots.
> 
> BG might put up good numbers, but its misleading, if you watch the bulls games carefully, you will see he makes no impacts.



I really couldn't disagree more with that assessment. Gordon is averaging like one assist a game less than Rose! Besides which he has been our most efficent and prolific scorer. Sure, he looks a little rusty running the offensive sets but he only played one game in the preseason and hasn't really got a chance to gel yet with Rose but I don't believe he is playing selfishly at all. I don't really see how he could be selfish with the ball and average 4 assists per game from the off guard spot or be hoisting up bad shots and shooting such a high percentage. His defense is what it is and it isn't good. Sometimes he is sloppy with the ball and he isn't a pg. Still, he is playing very well and one of the reasons we are being competetive at all, one of the few reasons. I think a lot of it is backlash at his outrageous contract demands, probably justified to an extent too as his demands were really unrealistic. On the flip side of that if he keeps playing well and gels with Rose a little more he may be more valuable than before by a little at least. He certainly isn't someone we should be anxious to get rid of in my book. 


ACE


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Folks, don't look now (and dare I mention anything) but Luol Deng is coming around to his normal self. This is his 5th straight game that I would call productive; all coming on the heels of that dreadful 0-8 shooting performance against Orlando.

If he plays like this, he's definitely earning his paycheck:

20 pts, 9 reb, 2 assists, 1 turnover, 2 steals

More importantly a win in the record book for the Bulls. Deng, Gordon, and Rose seem to be developing some really good chemistry.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Deng, Gordon, and Rose seem to be developing some really good chemistry.


Indeed. I love Kirk, but I'm not so sure he belongs here anymore in his current role (we'd need a backup PG, though). If we can somehow get ourselves a quality big to throw out there with Noah and Tyrus (assuming they are developing), I'll be mighty happy with this team and its future. Amare would be phenomenal in 2010, but that's far too long from now to worry about.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Deng IS coming back to his normal self. I'm thinking big picture here... we will need his two-way game to eventually go up against Lebron in the East.

If I had the choice, I would jettison Kirk before mid-February (when he's finally healthy) and Noch in a heartbeat.


----------



## bullybullz (Jan 28, 2007)

It's time to trade Gordon while his value is somewhat high. Gordon will soon have games of 2-11 shooting or 3-12 shooting. It seems like Rose does not like some of the things Gordon is doing out on the court. You can see it in Rose's facial expressions. It's time to trade Gordon before he becomes a major cancer.

Then trade Nocioni after trading Gordon or Paxson can package Gordon, Nocioni, Simmons, Nichols, Ruffin, cash, future draft pick and see what he can get.

Deng is fine. I said it when he was struggling. I'm never worried about Deng. Remember he still is very young.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

bullybullz said:


> It's time to trade Gordon while his value is somewhat high. Gordon will soon have games of 2-11 shooting or 3-12 shooting. It seems like Rose does not like some of the things Gordon is doing out on the court. You can see it in Rose's facial expressions. It's time to trade Gordon before he because a major cancer.
> 
> Then trade Nocioni after trading Gordon or Paxson can package Gordon, Nocioni, Simmons, Nichols, Ruffin, cash, future draft pick and see what he can get.
> 
> Deng is fine. I said it when he was struggling. I'm never worried about Deng. Remember he still is very young.


:|


----------



## bullybullz (Jan 28, 2007)

LOL!!



> After the final horn, Luol Deng walked over and said something to a fan who early in the game suggested the fifth-year forward, who signed a $71 million contract over the summer, give his money to charity.


http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=250630&src=150


----------



## Nu_Omega (Nov 27, 2006)

bullybullz said:


> It's time to trade Gordon while his value is somewhat high. Gordon will soon have games of 2-11 shooting or 3-12 shooting. It seems like Rose does not like some of the things Gordon is doing out on the court. You can see it in Rose's facial expressions. It's time to trade Gordon before he becomes a major cancer.
> 
> Then trade Nocioni after trading Gordon or Paxson can package Gordon, Nocioni, Simmons, Nichols, Ruffin, cash, future draft pick and see what he can get.
> 
> Deng is fine. I said it when he was struggling. I'm never worried about Deng. Remember he still is very young.



Hmmm..why not trade Larry Hughes? He's 6'5 which is good size for a 2, plays defense and can shoot the ball well? His trade value should be higher than BG.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

superdave said:


> If I had the choice, I would jettison Kirk before mid-February (when he's finally healthy) and Noch in a heartbeat.


Sam Smith has convinced me that we need to trade Kirk Hinrich, but I'm NOT convinced it needs to be this season unless we can score a great deal in the process.

Reason being, Rose is playing too many minutes already, and Kirk offers our best chance of being a playoff team when Rose is on the bench. His $10M salary this year is doable because Rose's rookie contract off sets that. 

But come this summer, I agree he needs to be shipped out (Rose's backup can either be drafted or signed for a modest salary). Hinrich's remaining 3 seasons are for $9.5M, $9M, and $8M. That's a good deal for a team that is desperate for a PG; not too long, not too short, not too expensive. Plus, trading Hinrich sends a major signal to Ben Gordon that says "we want you here". 

Regarding Nocioni, I originally wanted to trade him but I've reverse my stance for 2 reasons:

a) His 3-point shooting & energy off the bench are even more valuable that I expected with Rose's style of play. Rose is just so money with the drive and kick, that having Nocioni playing backup PF causes insane match up problems. It keeps opposing PF's away from the lane and really opens things up. If folks haven't noticed this so far, keep your eyes open b/c it's a pretty cool advantage we have.

b) Nocioni's contract also downscales and isn't too bad for a very good 20 min/game type of player off the bench. It's just a hair larger than the midlevel exception. The length doesn't bother me, because we can use Noch in a variety of ways -- backup, starter, big minutes, small minutes, small forward, power forward.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Sam Smith has convinced me that we need to trade Kirk Hinrich, but I'm NOT convinced it needs to be this season unless we can score a great deal in the process.
> 
> Reason being, Rose is playing too many minutes already, and Kirk offers our best chance of being a playoff team when Rose is on the bench. His $10M salary this year is doable because Rose's rookie contract off sets that.
> 
> ...


The glut is at the backup guard and combo forward positions. In the end, if anything is going to happen this season it'll involve a package of Hinrich or Sefolosha, Gooden or Thomas or Nocioni, and a #1 Draft Pick (if necessary). Meaning that Gordon and Deng are going to be virtually impossible to trade. Rose isn't going anywhere. We have a lack of decent big men as it is which makes me believe that Noah and Gray (both on the rookie scale) are staying. 

I wholeheartedly agree about Noc and have said that after the Jackpot 2010 Free Agency Period (it deserves all caps) I'd like to have this as our rotation...

Point Guard-Rose
Shooting Guard-Free Agent Shooter
Small Forward-Deng
Power Forward-Stoudamire, Bosh
Center-Noah

Guard-Gordon
Wing-Draft Pick or MLE Free Agent
Forward-Nocioni
Post-Draft Pick or Veteran's Min Free Agent

Nocioni provides that ability to play either the 3 or the 4 well, can hit the open shot, and I think every championship contender needs a James Posey type player who may just knock down 4 huge 3s and also smack somebody in the face during the 4th quarter of Game 7. 

This is going to be an unpopular deal, but...

Kirk Hinrich, Drew Gooden for Brad Miller, Kenny Thomas, #1 Draft Pick(Lotto Protected in 2009, Top 3 Protected in 2010)

Both Miller and Thomas expire in 2010 and it would clear an additional 17 million off the cap going into the summer of '10 while also giving us essentially Drew Gooden for an extra year. We'd take on Thomas' contract for Hinrich and get a protected #1 pick for our trouble.


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

Sith said:


> I actually think BG is the one who needs to go. When he's in the line up with D-rose, it makes the bulls offense look so awkard. BG is trying to do too much with the ball when he isn't capable of creating for himself or teammates. The ball should be in D-rose's hand everytime, he's unstoppable when is guarded one on one. take it to the rim and finish strong or create open shots for teammates. the bulls offense look so much more smoother when BG is not in the game or at least not dribbling the ball.
> 
> What the Bulls really need is someone who is a decent post up player. The ball should be in D-rose's hand all the time, and occasionally when teams double up on him, he can dump the ball into someone with legit size who can create for himself. This is how the NO Hornets play. ball is in CP3's hand majority off the team, when other teams adjust, David west is there to take the pressure of CP3 in the half court. it gives different looks on the offense. I think Deng would fit really well if we find a decent player who can post up. BG's role should be nothing more than what the B.J armstrong, John pax did before. standing behind the 3 point line for open shots.
> 
> BG might put up good numbers, but its misleading, if you watch the bulls games carefully, you will see he makes no impacts.


Watching tonight's game just makes me a bigger believer out of what I said before. B Gordon needs to go. He is makign everyone around him worse.


----------



## bullybullz (Jan 28, 2007)

Sith said:


> Watching tonight's game just makes me a bigger believer out of what I said before. B Gordon needs to go. He is makign everyone around him worse.


You are damn right. Start Larry Hughes.


----------



## JPTurbo (Jan 8, 2006)

Gordon is crap. I'm can't believe there are still people who still stick up for him. ALL he can do is get hot in some games and rain threes. Maybe that will be a reason we win a few games throughout the year. But tonight's game was a perfect example of when he is not raining, not only does he contribute nothing positive, but he just chucks up crap and kills any chance the rest of the team has at getting into a rhythm. He can't pass, drive, defend. If he is not shooting well he is a complete waist out there; we might as well be playing 4 vs 5. Bench his *** and let him walk.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

JPTurbo said:


> Gordon is crap. I'm can't believe there are still people who still stick up for him. ALL he can do is get hot in some games and rain threes. Maybe that will be a reason we win a few games throughout the year. But tonight's game was a perfect example of when he is not raining, not only does he contribute nothing positive, but he just chucks up crap and kills any chance the rest of the team has at getting into a rhythm. He can't pass, drive, defend. If he is not shooting well he is a complete waist out there; we might as well be playing 4 vs 5. Bench his *** and let him walk.



At least he scores. I was at the game tonight and the real loser is Luol Deng. 

This guy got 70 MIL and he can't even create a shot for himself. 9 points? 

He really needs to pick it up or there is no hope for ANY sort of contention.


BTW, when Rose gets aggressive, he can really score at will. I don't think anyone can stay in front of him.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Chops said:


> At least he scores. I was at the game tonight and the real loser is Luol Deng.
> 
> This guy got 70 MIL and he can't even create a shot for himself. 9 points?
> 
> ...


Yes my friend , I am not sure how long it will take to VDN and some fans to realize that. Deng and Thomas should be traded as soon as possible, even before we will get rid of Kirk.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Yes, Gordon is "crap".

Only "crap" can shoot a consistent 42% from 3-pt range, and score 21 ppg despite being undersized for the position.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

I've tired of having this debate. Some people will never admit that gordon has real, glaring, and obvious flaws. Others will never admit that he has any value. You guys have fun from here on out. Its like beating my head up against a brick wall.


----------



## JPTurbo (Jan 8, 2006)

Maybe Gordon is not crap. But what he brings to the table is not what I would look for in my starting shooting guard or a player I would pay 70 million to. What he brings is the ability to score in bunches when his shot is falling. To me, that's all he really brings.

But on nights like last night where his shot was not falling, all it does is cripple us. He has no other skill-set to fall back on. He can't say to himself, "Alright my shot is not falling, so I'm going to attack the rim or set up my teammates," because he just doesn't have those abilities. I want a shooting guard that can drive to the basket or create for the rest of the team. Gordon has never been and will never be that guy. There were so many instances last night where we had the ball with 15 seconds on the clock, Gordon gets the ball, and chucks up a long range contested three pointer. It was painful to watch at times. 

Gordon does have value. His shooting could be a quick spark off the bench, and if they aren't falling you put him back there. But that's really all I see from the guy. His deficiencies in every other facet of the game should limit him to that role.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> I've tired of having this debate. Some people will never admit that gordon has real, glaring, and obvious flaws. Others will never admit that he has any value. You guys have fun from here on out. Its like beating my head up against a brick wall.


Exactly.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

Chops said:


> At least he scores. I was at the game tonight and the real loser is Luol Deng.
> 
> This guy got 70 MIL and he can't even create a shot for himself. 9 points?
> 
> ...


Deng was hurt.



> Worse, the Bulls could be without Luol Deng's services Wednesday in Portland. Deng tweaked his left groin at the morning shootaround and played just 26 minutes after drawing the starting assignment on Bryant


http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-081118-chicago-bulls-los-angeles-lakers,0,7484124.story


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

The Krakken said:


> Some people will never admit that gordon has real, glaring, and obvious flaws.


If you're referring to my comments, this couldn't be further from the truth. It only appears this way b/c I am countering the "Gordon is crap" arguments. I am happy to point out his flaws which I have done countless times, particularly in the the many many threads over the summer discussing his contract demands. 

Gordon is far from perfect, but he's also far from crap. His Laker performance was probably his worst game of the season (against the league's best team, mind you), so let's be fair about when to pick apart his flaws. Having watched the entire game, I can say that many of those missed shots last night were NOT bad shot selection. Lakers for some reason were giving him alot of space on the perimeter, he just had a cold shooting night and couldn't knock those down. (Not to say he didn't take some bad shots, but most of them seemed right where he normally makes them)


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

JPTurbo said:


> Gordon gets the ball, and chucks up a long range contested three pointer.


MANY of Gordon's shots were not heavily contested; if you're wondering why he took so many shots in the 1st quarter, it's because the Lakers were constantly leaving him open. Pretty odd strategy considering how Gordon can shoot, but they picked a good night to do so, b/c Gordon was ice cold.

Gordon's worst mistakes usually come when he is trying to be a PG, and he makes an errant drive or pass. I don't fault the guy for taking open 3-pointers, that's totally and utterly his game and he needs to take those. If he passes those up, he's not doing his role for this team.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

yodurk said:


> If you're referring to my comments, this couldn't be further from the truth. It only appears this way b/c I am countering the "Gordon is crap" arguments. I am happy to point out his flaws which I have done countless times, particularly in the the many many threads over the summer discussing his contract demands.


I'm just tired of discussing it. He's not the long term answer at SG, and I'll leave it at that. 



> Gordon is far from perfect, but he's also far from crap.


I stated as much in the last post.



> His Laker performance was probably his worst game of the season (against the league's best team, mind you), so let's be fair about when to pick apart his flaws.


I've been picking apart his flaws from the beginning. His shot selection has been fairly suspect this year.



> Having watched the entire game, I can say that many of those missed shots last night were NOT bad shot selection. Lakers for some reason were giving him alot of space on the perimeter, he just had a cold shooting night and couldn't knock those down. (Not to say he didn't take some bad shots, but most of them seemed right where he normally makes them)


This is where we disagree, and where I believe basketball intelligence comes into question. No, not yours. His. Taking good shots vs bad shots is about more than just "shooting when you are open". Its also about understanding when you DON'T have the hot hand and finding effective ways to contribute, without shooting your team out of the game. Gordon was 3-11 behind the 3 point line last night. And at one point he was 1-10 from 3 (which means he made his last two attempts). He started 1-9 before Kobe even scored his first point. And yet he kept taking shots with a high degree of difficulty. I don't mind the one's where he's open as much.

But I will say this. If you aren't making shots, taking them with 18 seconds left on the shot clock (which by default means that you didn't explore the option of getting a better shot for yourself or your teammates), is a bad shot no matter how gifted a shooter you normally are, or how open you are (unless you are right under the basket). That's what I saw last night.

I'm still waiting for gordon to realize that he isn't the #1 option on this team anymore, and that he doesn't have to force up shots, just because. It's something I'm beginning to believe more and more he just isn't willing to accept. Here's the other thing: He's a volume scorer. He needs a good number of shots to be effective. He's not a volume scorer in the same mold as AI, but when your top scorer is shooting less than 45%, you aren't going anywhere.

So either he has to find more efficient ways to score, or he has to shoot less. Otherwise, as long as he's the "primary offensive weapon" we aren't going anywhere.

Nothing was more striking than the difference between him and Kobe last night. Kobe didn't start shooting until 3 minutes left in the 1st quarter. He chose instead to feed the hot hand early. By then, Gordon was 1-9.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

The Krakken said:


> This is where we disagree, and where I believe basketball intelligence comes into question. No, not yours. His. Taking good shots vs bad shots is about more than just "shooting when you are open". Its also about understanding when you DON'T have the hot hand and finding effective ways to contribute, without shooting your team out of the game. Gordon was 3-11 behind the 3 point line last night. And at one point he was 1-10 from 3 (which means he made his last two attempts). He started 1-9 before Kobe even scored his first point. And yet he kept taking shots with a high degree of difficulty. I don't mind the one's where he's open as much.
> 
> But I will say this. If you aren't making shots, taking them with 18 seconds left on the shot clock (which by default means that you didn't explore the option of getting a better shot for yourself or your teammates), is a bad shot no matter how gifted a shooter you normally are, or how open you are (unless you are right under the basket). That's what I saw last night.
> 
> ...


Understood. I will only say then, that being able to contribute in other ways on a cold shooting night is alot to ask of a NON-All-Star caliber shooting guard. I think that's one of those things that separates good players like Gordon from GREAT players like Wade or Kobe. 

This is perhaps the biggest reason why nobody wants to pay Gordon more than $10M per season. Going beyond that is alot for someone who struggles to contribute on cold shooting nights. 

Think about it -- if people consider Ben Gordon to be pretty much on par with Michael Redd or Jason Richardson (as I do), then folks may notice that Redd or J-Rich are pretty worthless on cold nights as well, if they're looking for it that is. Neither of those guys will dive on the floor for loose balls, go down for rebounds, play tough nosed D. They're just there to take shots as Gordon is.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> I'm just tired of discussing it. He's not the long term answer at SG, and I'll leave it at that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


An excellent observation and solid analyses.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

*Bryant* -- scores 21 points on 18 shots (5rb, 6ast, 3stl, 2blk) -- is among the all time best in the game.

*Gordon* -- scores 23 points on 21 shots. (5rb,4ast, 2stl) -- is apparent crap who contributes nothing when he's not scoring.

Gordon frustrates me at times, too. This wasn't the game to be going off on Gordon, though. If we had ANYONE in the frontcourt who earned their draft position, Gordon's efforts from SG would have been fine. Did anyone really expect Gordon to outplay Kobe? Gordon's contributions from SG were more than adequate to balance the production from their superstar if the rest of our team were doing their jobs.

As for Deng -- it was a disappointing line. He still outperformed his opposite on the Laker.

Neither is an all-star. Both can exist on a championship squad.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Wynn said:


> ...As for Deng -- it was a disappointing line...



Not to me or other hundreds of Bulls fans, who are confident that Deng’s presence on this team is a big mistake.
I can see his "attorney" –Yodurk, is already rushing with a counterargument


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Deng (in a down year) is:

75th in the league in scoring (14.4ppg -- between Nene & Rasheed) *Career 15.6*
105th in FG% (39.3% -- between TMac & Rip) *Career 47.6*
72nd in rebounds (6rpg -- tied with Varejao, Nesterovic, & Tyrus Thomas) *Career 6.4)*
60th in minutes played (34.4 -- between Shawn Marion & Kobe) *Career 33.4*

Seems about where a team's third best player should be. And I think in the best of all worlds we would hope that Deng was our third best player.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Deng is still the best player on that team, he's just playing in a system unkind to slashers.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Bulls96 said:


> Not to me or other hundreds of Bulls fans, who are confident that Deng’s presence on this team is a big mistake.
> I can see his "attorney" –Yodurk, is already rushing with a counterargument


Uh...thanks?


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> Not to me or other hundreds of Bulls fans, who are confident that Deng’s presence on this team is a big mistake.


must be the same hundreds posting here everyday, huh?

or the same hundreds that believe the bulls can get a cheaper, better replacement.....

or the hundreds that think 10-12 games is enough to judge him on a 6 year contract.



> Deng is still the best player on that team, he's just playing in a system unkind to slashers.


i think he'll find his niche in time; too bad the "hundreds" that think he stinks won't be supporting him when he does; or will they?:whoknows:


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

Wynn said:


> Deng (in a down year) is:
> 
> 75th in the league in scoring (14.4ppg -- between Nene & Rasheed) *Career 15.6*
> 105th in FG% (39.3% -- between TMac & Rip) *Career 47.6*
> ...


Excellent post. Based on Deng's career so far, if he plays between 34-38 minutes a game we can expect...

(all per game)
12-14 FGA
45-50% FG%
4.5 FTA
75-80% FT%
16-18 PPG
6-7 RPG
1-2 APG

At the end of the day, Luol Deng will put up the same numbers Josh Howard does and Howard made an All-Star Team and when Dallas was a contender and made the Finals, he was the third best player on the team. His shot just isn't dropping right now. If he can boost that FG% up to his career average (which is something that Hollinger stresses early in the year, namely that if a guy has shot 45% or better his entire career and starts off the first 10 shooting 40%, chances are he'll get back to his career average by the end of the year), then Deng should put up 17 and 7 this year.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

The problems are at the power forward and center position.... I think this is plainly obvious to anyone watching the game.

Gooden is streaky and limited by his size.... Noah and Thomas are still in the process of breaking my heart (I really want to love these guys) and Aaron Gray... well... in the time it took me to write this he may or may not have been able to change ends defensively.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

btw, josh is expected to make 11,835,000.00 in the last year of his deal in 2011. right about what deng makes.

comparable stats; comparable salaries; whodathunkit?....hmmm.....maybe pax knows a LITTLE bit about what he's doing, no?


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

BULLHITTER said:


> ...or the same hundreds that believe the bulls can get a cheaper, better replacement,
> 
> or the hundreds that think 10-12 games is enough to judge him on a 6 year contract...


We already have one and as you said, in much cheaper and better version. His name is A. Nocioni. This is exactly why we should trade Deng, while a few folks/teams in NBA may thing that Deng is special or may be above average SF.

We been watching him since 2004 and I am sure everyone (with exception of Pax and Deng’s supporters) knows his “number” –an average (-) bench player with a very low stamina. I personnaly, made my mind when Deng was “disciplined” by Posey. However, some people may say it started even early, when he refused to accept Josh Smith challenges, back in spring 2004.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Understood. I will only say then, that being able to contribute in other ways on a cold shooting night is alot to ask of a NON-All-Star caliber shooting guard. I think that's one of those things that separates good players like Gordon from GREAT players like Wade or Kobe.
> 
> This is perhaps the biggest reason why nobody wants to pay Gordon more than $10M per season. Going beyond that is alot for someone who struggles to contribute on cold shooting nights.
> 
> Think about it -- if people consider Ben Gordon to be pretty much on par with Michael Redd or Jason Richardson (as I do), then folks may notice that Redd or J-Rich are pretty worthless on cold nights as well, if they're looking for it that is. Neither of those guys will dive on the floor for loose balls, go down for rebounds, play tough nosed D. They're just there to take shots as Gordon is.


Agreed.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Wynn said:


> *Bryant* -- scores 21 points on 18 shots (5rb, 6ast, 3stl, 2blk) -- is among the all time best in the game.
> 
> *Gordon* -- scores 23 points on 21 shots. (5rb,4ast, 2stl) -- is apparent crap who contributes nothing when he's not scoring.


It isn't so simple. Again, Kobe got his IN THE FLOW of the offense. He MADE SURE that Pau AND Bynum got theirs and were INVOLVED in the offense. Gordon just kept right on shooting, regardless of whether or not him taking the shot was the best option or not. As I alluded to, when you are CLEARLY off, and STILL jacking up shots with 18-20 seconds on the clock, you are not considering what is best for the offense at that point.



> Gordon frustrates me at times, too. This wasn't the game to be going off on Gordon, though. If we had ANYONE in the frontcourt who earned their draft position, Gordon's efforts from SG would have been fine. Did anyone really expect Gordon to outplay Kobe? Gordon's contributions from SG were more than adequate to balance the production from their superstar if the rest of our team were doing their jobs.


A few plays make a huge difference. When we are out-talented the way we are on most nights, we can ill afford wasted posessions with "heat checks". Especially, when the person doing the "heat check" is CLEARLY ICE COLD.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Dre™ said:


> Deng is still the best player on that team, he's just playing in a system unkind to slashers.


No. He's not the best player on this team. And with each passing game, the gap is widening.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Wynn said:


> Deng (in a down year) is:
> 
> 75th in the league in scoring (14.4ppg -- between Nene & Rasheed) *Career 15.6*
> 105th in FG% (39.3% -- between TMac & Rip) *Career 47.6*
> ...


I agree. Deng doesn't disappoint me because I know what we have. He'll figure it out. But he's not scottie pippen in his prime. And scotties not coming back.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Bulls96 said:


> We already have one and as you said, in much cheaper and better version. His name is A. Nocioni. This is exactly why we should trade Deng, while a few folks/teams in NBA may thing that Deng is special or may be above average SF.
> 
> We been watching him since 2004 and I am sure everyone (with exception of Pax and Deng’s supporters) knows his “number” –an average (-) bench player with a very low stamina. I personnaly, made my mind when Deng was “disciplined” by Posey. However, some people may say it started even early, when he refused to accept Josh Smith challenges, back in spring 2004.


No. Nocioni is NOT better than Deng on any given day. Though he isn't as bad as gordon in the following regard, his propensity to disrupt any offensive rythm with an ill-advised 3 pointer early into the shot clock pretty much does away with any craftiness advantages. For every posession he gains us with a flop or good defensive play, he gives it right back with a bad shot. He's a good 6th or 7th man, but not a replacement for deng.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I love Andres Nocioni but for the most part his man defense and off-ball defensive positioning is absolutely terrible.

I'm pretty sure he's still gazing off in the stands right now as Lamar Odom cuts behind him to the hoop...

Nocioni is a luxury as a role player, I'd like to keep it that way.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> No. Nocioni is NOT better than Deng on any given day. Though he isn't as bad as gordon in the following regard, his propensity to disrupt any offensive rythm with an ill-advised 3 pointer early into the shot clock pretty much does away with any craftiness advantages. For every posession he gains us with a flop or good defensive play, he gives it right back with a bad shot. He's a good 6th or 7th man, but not a replacement for deng.



Nocioni has his own problems, like everybody else. 

But, IMO his positive impact on game’s result is 100% better than Deng’s. 
Forget about shots % my friend, or any other statistics. Winning the games this is what we are looking for and champ-Nocioni knows how to make it possible. 

He can create his own shot, he can defend, he can drive to the basket, he can post, he can do almost everything better than Deng, not to mention his main advantage –fearless character, emotional leadership and desire to win every game. That is what counts after all. 

Try that...place both Nocioni and Deng on NBA market, for the same fix price, and see who will go first. eace:


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> It isn't so simple. Again, Kobe got his IN THE FLOW of the offense. He MADE SURE that Pau AND Bynum got theirs and were INVOLVED in the offense. Gordon just kept right on shooting, regardless of whether or not him taking the shot was the best option or not. As I alluded to, when you are CLEARLY off, and STILL jacking up shots with 18-20 seconds on the clock, you are not considering what is best for the offense at that point.


here's where i have a problem with your logic. please for the sake of the fans, tell us where or who the bulls Pau and Bynum might be? further, even he was CLEARLY off, he's the team's number one scoring option. you can dislike that, but it doesn't make it any less true. therefore, what you're suggesting is that he take less shots so that a lesser scorer can see IF he's going to have a big night. well, after 10 games who would you nominate as someone not getting enough shots? since deng is the beneficiary of being assisted on the lion's share of his shots, AND the offense routinely flows to him, who are you suggesting is a better option that gordon trying to find his offense, an offense without any competent bigs to take up the slack?



> A few plays make a huge difference. When we are out-talented the way we are on most nights, we can ill afford wasted posessions with "heat checks". Especially, when the person doing the "heat check" is CLEARLY ICE COLD.


if you believe last nights game was a matter of a few plays making the difference, i'll have to stop responding to your posts; you CLEARLY don't know what you're looking at. that's not a defense of 6-22 shooting, but allowing 60 points in the paint doesn't have *any* bearing on the 2 guard missing 16 of 22.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> Nocioni has his own problems, like everybody else.
> 
> But, IMO his positive impact on game’s result is 100% better than Deng’s.
> Forget about shots % my friend, or any other statistics. Winning the games this is what we are looking for and champ-Nocioni knows how to make it possible.
> ...


I'm pretty sure every single NBA GM would prefer Deng to Nocioni if the price tag was the same. And I mean every single one.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Dornado said:


> I'm pretty sure every single NBA GM would prefer Deng to Nocioni if the price tag was the same. And I mean every single one.



This is why Deng was not able to find any offer this summer and got lucky by shoplifting Bulls office on 70M ?!


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

BULLHITTER said:


> here's where i have a problem with your logic. please for the sake of the fans, tell us where or who the bulls Pau and Bynum might be? further, even he was CLEARLY off, he's the team's number one scoring option.


He's not so much better than, say, rose for example to afford himself that luxury when he's off like he was last night. Or even Deng for that matter. He may be the best scoring option when he's on. But when he's not on, he isn't. That's my point.




> you can dislike that, but it doesn't make it any less true. therefore, what you're suggesting is that he take less shots so that a lesser scorer can see IF he's going to have a big night.


We've gone through this. I'm suggesting he take BETTER SHOTS. I have no problem with the number, just the situation under which he shoots them. Oftentimes they are either difficult shots or they give no thought to getting a better shot. An open three is not a good shot when you are 1-8 from three, and struggling with your shot, and jacking them up with 20 seconds left on the shot clock. Sometimes you just don't have it.



> well, after 10 games who would you nominate as someone not getting enough shots? since deng is the beneficiary of being assisted on the lion's share of his shots, AND the offense routinely flows to him, who are you suggesting is a better option that gordon trying to find his offense, an offense without any competent bigs to take up the slack?


Again, you are missing the point. Ben has become so predicatble on offense, that it hurts the offensive FLOW. He gets the ball, teams know what he's going to do. One way or another, he's GOING to shoot, unless they run a set play with him as the setup man (rare). It isn't a coincidence that he's been struggling lately (he's something like 12-41 in his last 2 games). He is making himself TOO easy to defend by looking ONLY for his offense.




> if you believe last nights game was a matter of a few plays making the difference, i'll have to stop responding to your posts; you CLEARLY don't know what you're looking at. that's not a defense of 6-22 shooting, but allowing 60 points in the paint doesn't have *any* bearing on the 2 guard missing 16 of 22.


IT wasn't an indictment of ONLY Gordon, or even last night. Just his contribution to an ongoing problem. And while we can continue to indict our frontcourt while defending or ignoring Gordon's shot selection, it does nothing to solve the problems that we have. We have a problem in the FRONTCOURT AND THE BACKCOURT. THe two problems are not mutually exclusive. It isn't an either or proposition, as that creates a false dichotomy. Its both.

If after my explanation you feel you must stop responding to me, I understand. I'd planned on leaving this discussion alone anyway, as I'm thoroughly convinced that there's nothing Gordon could do, short of LITERALLY PULLING A GUN on ROSE, or Morphing in to MJ, to change the minds of his supporters or detractors here.


----------



## TheDarkPrince (May 13, 2006)

Dre™ said:


> Deng is still the best player on that team, he's just playing in a system unkind to slashers.


Deng is not the best player on the Bulls, Rose is already. And since when has Deng been know as a slasher? He's a set shooter from about 17-20 feet, he almost never drives.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

For what it's worth, *Krakken!*, I pretty much agree with your take on Gordon. My argument was more with the "Gordon is a piece of crap who contributes nothing" contingent. In my ideal world, we find a scoring big and a well rounded SG to fill out the starting five. Gordon off the bench is where I think he's most ideal.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Wynn said:


> For what it's worth, *Krakken!*, I pretty much agree with your take on Gordon. My argument was more with the "Gordon is a piece of crap who contributes nothing" contingent. In my ideal world, we find a scoring big and a well rounded SG to fill out the starting five. Gordon off the bench is where I think he's most ideal.


I agree. His contributions are VERY Valuable, when contained to what they are. I'd like to keep him as our 6th man. Though that may not be possible with the kind of money he wants. We may be stuck in an "either-or" pattern with him for a while. We'll see.

Its funny, as I was one of Gordon's BIGGEST and most outspoken supporters in recent years. However, Rose has been a revelation for me, and my belief in what we need from gordon over the LONG TERM has dramatically changed. I don't think Gordon thinks of himself as a role player, but he needs to become one if we are going to succeed.


----------

