# REPORT: Hinrich to the Bulls?



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

*Hinrich to the Bulls?*

http://nbadraft.net/draftbuzz008.htm

It is interesting that they are saying that Hinrich has been told if he is there by 7 the Bulls will take him.

I am not sure this is the best solution for the Bulls, but it would be a backup for Crawford. This could put some downward pressue on Crawford's demands in upcoming Free Agency now that Williams is out of the picture. 

That is my speculation on what it means if Hinrich is taken because as far as I knew, the Bulls had planned to trade a PG anyway, with the thought of drafting one being unlikely. Williams injury for the upcoming season is in effect as if he had been traded because he will not be available. In the scenario where he was traded, a vet PG probably would have been brought in, but Crawford is in the drivers seat without the Bulls having a viable future at the PG spot, to put some pressure on.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

That was a surprised but I guess it shouldn't be since Jay is gone for next season. Anyways the Bulls already have their core players IMO in Curry, Chandler, and Crawford. It is time to add role players around them. Hinrich is a hard nosed player who would be a terrific compliment to those guys as he is a player who does not need to be a star but be a winner. Old school attitude maybe just what the Bulls need especially with their Gen Y core players.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> That was a surprised but I guess it shouldn't be since Jay is gone for next season. Anyways the Bulls already have their core players IMO in Curry, Chandler, and Crawford. It is time to add role players around them. Hinrich is a hard nosed player who would be a terrific compliment to those guys as he is a player who does not need to be a star but be a winner. Old school attitude maybe just what the Bulls need especially with their Gen Y core players.


I agree, but why not trade down to get him


----------



## shroombal (Jul 17, 2002)

trade down to the wiz?


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

My God! The stupidest thing the Bulls could do would be to draft a point guard-they just got over a controversey at PG (luckily) I dont think they need another-just DRAFT WADE! My God-he is a safe, great pick, I cant believe we might mess this up!


----------



## Gibson (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree, but why not trade down to get him


Because if you trade down... he wont be there. His stock has been sky rocketing as of late, and he may not even be there at 7. nbadraft.net has him going to Miami at #5!


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree, but why not trade down to get him


Word is that Hinrich is a very highly pursuited player and has infact supercede Ford in many GMs mind as the premier PG of this draft so he might not be available at a later pick. If it is possible to acquire a player of Hinrich's talents at a later I would go for it because it would also probably mean that the Bulls get another quality player in return.


----------



## shroombal (Jul 17, 2002)

if not 7...hinrich will go at 8...if not 8... then 10 with the Wiz..

So if you want Hinrich you will have to stay put...or even trade up


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

I know. It doesnt make sense. But what about this?

Draft hinrich, pull the trigger on Boston trade for walker. Just add Crawford, in place of williams. 

I know you don't win with a rookie pt guard. But i wonder why hinrich is mentioned coming to us.


----------



## Chicago_Cow (Mar 5, 2003)

Where's the link that we will take Henrich? Great, let's take a pg when we have positions such as sf and sg to fill.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Nah, what we REALLY should do is draft another PF. We can't get too many of them. Maybe we should trade Tyson Chandler to Toronto for their #4 pick, and get that Chris Bosh action up in here. That's always worked out for us in the past.

Yeah, let's do it. Or let's pick up Nick Collison with #7. But since he played like a real college power forward, let's make him into a small forward. Yeah, let's do that.

Or even better: let's draft another Dukie. Brand ended up being a part of our organization, right? Or Jay (not his fault, but hey... there's obviously something about Duke that loves Chicago)? So why not go ahead and get the sleeper of the draft: DAHNTAY JONES!!

Oh, but Jones isn't a power forward. I forgot. Let's trade down to Seattle so that we can get Collison AND Mike Sweetney, and also look into Jerome Beasley, James Lang, and Josh Powell. Then we could have a lineup of:

Tyson Chandler at the point
Mike Sweetney at the SG
Jerome Beasley as a SF
James Lang as the PF
and Eddy Curry as the C,

with Donyell Marshall, Lonny Baxter, Dalibor Bagaric, and Josh Powell off the bench.

I can't wait for the season to begin!


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

:laugh: :laugh:


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> I know. It doesnt make sense. But what about this?
> 
> Draft hinrich, pull the trigger on Boston trade for walker. *Just add Crawford, in place of williams. *
> ...


careful, tbf. :naughty: that'll get you tarred and feathered with the "Jamal Crawford Is The Second Coming" brigade around here.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

Hinrich's rights put the Bulls back in the position of having depth at PG. This once again opens the door to alot of trade possibilities. As Truebluefan suggests, maybe there's a blockbuster deal on the table that includes Crawford. Could the Bulls live with a PG tandem of Hinrich and one of the following: Tyronn Lue, Antonio Daniels, Kenny Anderson, Darryl Armstrong, Speedy Claxton, or even Mark Jackson?

With Rose assuming some of the ballhandling responsibilities while Hinrich settles in, I don't see it being much of a problem.

Lets keep this in mind also. Paxson is building the team around TC and EC. Paxson is going to want his PG to set those two up the way Parker has set up Duncan and Robinson in SA. Hinrich has been described as a selfless player who sometimes needs to be encouraged to shoot, something he does very well, btw. In time, Hinrich can be to TC and EC what Parker is to Duncan and the Admiral. In fact, I think he can be better because he's just as athletic, and he's bigger and stronger than Parker.

So pair Hinrich up at the point with the right veteran free agent, let him lean on Rose when he needs to, and yes, I can easily see Hinrich at point for the Bulls. But only if a trade of Crawford brings the Bulls a quality player in return.


----------



## laso (Jul 24, 2002)

It would be crazy to get rid of Crawford now. C;mon, let's not trade for the sake of trading. We would be creating a huge need by looking to fill another need. Let's face it, Crawford had a great final stretch last year. He's one of the bright lights of our franchise. Why fix it if it's not broken?

How abouth this for a thought? Can't we draft Hinrich and keep him? This gives us, once again, a very good rotation at pg. Without last year's controversy of who's the starter. Hinrich looks like a guy who could accept his role as backup and create a light whenever he comes in from the bench. He's a good defender and has decent size for a pg, so in some situations you can play him with Jamal. And he's a great shooter, so he'll make you pay when you double Curry.

Sure, we still need a SF. So get him through free agency. howard comes to mind. Maggette as well. And maybe, with a combo of Jalen, a healthy E-Rob and Hassell, you can survive at that spot.

Getting Hinrich makes a lot of sense.


----------



## jwill22bulls (Jun 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
> Nah, what we REALLY should do is draft another PF. We can't get too many of them.


Tell that to the Clips :laugh: 

Anyway, I really don't think a pg should be addressed with our first round pick. Heres an idea though. If Barbosa is still avilable by the time round 2 comes around, we should take a shot at him. He could ba a GREAT PG one day. And its not like we'd be gambling a 1st rounder on him.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

There's talk that the Bulls are looking to deal their three second round picks for a lower first round pick. If the Bulls selected Hinrich at #7, maybe they'd use that late first round pick on Boris Diaw-Riffiord. Who's to say that while BJ and Pete may have travelled to France to see Pietrus they came home more impressed with Diaw-Riffiord? Kirk and Boris would certainly fill needs at their respective positions of PG and SF.


----------



## DYNASTY (Jun 18, 2003)

thats a stupid pick.


----------



## Modena360 (May 22, 2003)

*That is a brilliant move by Pax b/c:*

He know can use Hinrich has a PG for part of a deal to get a vet. Very smart. I think Dallas or maybe even Boston would do the deal now. I really like Finley or Walker to come in b/c then they can decide what they want to do with Rose. He might stay if Juwan Howard is coming. I didnt really like Walker till I saw him on Sports Sunday. He lost weight, and looks like a great leader for the team. He WOULD NOT stand for Jalen picking his *** on D-Fence.

PG: Crawford/Mason/Rod Strictland or someone like that
SG: Finley and Rose are interchangeable but I would like to have 
SF: Walker now. Hassel/2nd round Pick
PF: Tyson/Baxter
C: Eddy/Howard/Blount (I really like that group of big-men)


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DYNASTY</b>!
> thats a stupid pick.


:jawdrop: 

*How does one respond to a statement fraught with so much depth and insight?*


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

I think the Heat or the Clippers are going to take Wade...

Heinreich is the best of the rest as far as coming in and making a contribution. He can play either guard spot.

Too bad he makes me think of Steve Nash.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

why dont we just draft Troy Bell(sshh.... he's better then Heinrich) in the 2nd round and call it a day?


----------



## Fizer Fanatic (Jun 20, 2002)

Hopefully this is disinformation to keep other teams guessing at what we'll do before the draft. What'll we do if/when JWill makes a successful recovery, start 3 PGs alongside TC and EC? A backup PG can be had in the 2nd round, via free-agency or on our current team (Mason/Brunson). As for Hinrich's ability to play SG, I'd much rather have the size of a Wade, Pietrus or Hayes at that position even though Hinrich does have some good attributes for a SG.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

We spent the whole off-season shopping PGs because we had too many. Now, with Jay's injury, we want to draft another?!?!

Why not let Crawdaddy see what he really can do? Why not spend this time letting Mason, Jr. show us whether we keep him past his contract? As *Fizer Fanatic!* points out, what happens if Jay makes a full recovery?

We (as fans) spent all last off-season hoping that we'd address our serious need at the swing positions -- instead we get a highly touted but undersized PG. I've come to accept that, and feel that (pre-accident) Jay was going to become an impact player. I don't, however, want to see the Bull do the same thing this year. If we don't draft a swing player, I really hope Pax has a trade already lined up to bring us an upper echelon guy.

If not, we've been screwed.


----------



## Chicago_Cow (Mar 5, 2003)

There're still too many Crawford haters around here. If you want to draft Heinrich, why don't we just bring back Bryce Drew instead of wasting a lottery pick on a loser?


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

It seems to be the consensus of most people that the Bulls first choice in the draft would be Dwayne Wade, a combo guard who states, "I led the team in assists last year; I was second on the team in assists this year. I feel that I have a great knack for finding open guys. I'm not selfish at all. In the long run, when it's all said and done, I think I will be a point guard."

If he's gone, however, when it's the Bulls turn to select, why is it considered a stretch to think that they might choose Kirk Hinrich, a combo guard who also has a great knack for finding open guys, isn't selfish, and when all is said and done will probably make his mark in the league as a point guard.

Dwayne Wade: 6'4.75" (in shoes), 212 lbs.
Kirk Hinrich: 6'3.75" (in shoes), 186 lbs.

The biggest physical difference of course is that Wade has an enormous wingspan for his size (6'10.75" to Hinrich's 6'6"). 

Wade's obviously a more physical player while Hinrich is a better shooter.

So if you had to choose between the two of them, Wade wins, hands down. But to me, it sure seems that both players would fill similar roles with the Bulls. So, under certain circumstances, why not Hinrich? Frankly, I consider him a better all-around talent than either Hayes or Pietrus. And while those two may fill a need at the swing position (if they can be productive immediately), Hinrich would most definitely fill the gap created by Williams' accident as JC's backup.

To me, if Wade's off the board and the Bulls can't trade the pick, Hinrich is the logical choice.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

If the Bulls draft hinrich I feel pretty certain they would be drafting him for some other team. I can't see any possibility of the Bulls trading Crawford right now and if they did I would be severely dissappointed. I'm glad that the Walker trade won't go through. Walker can't play defense worth a crap and he jacks threes like he is afraid the NBA is going to get rid of the 3pt line. Heck, Boston has had to draw up their whole offense around Walkers deficencies, I don't want the Bulls to have to do that.


----------



## Chicago_Cow (Mar 5, 2003)

What role are you talking about? Here's the bottom line: Wade can play sg but Heinrich can't play sg. Last but not least, Crawford is our pg and we don't need another rookie pg looking for minutes in order to prove himself.

P.S.: Regardless of what your daddy and mommy had told you, SIZE does matter.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Three possibilities:

1) Draft for Bulls
2) Draft for another team (via trade)
3) Smokescreen to drive up his value

Maybe the Bulls org'n isn't as sold on Jamal at PG as everyone on this board. Maybe.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

From what I've read about Hinrich...

He's 6'4" and can shoot. He's suited to play SG, though he may be considered a tad undersized. I don't think he is though.

If the Bulls drafted him, they'd have:
PG Crawford
SG Hinrich
SF Rose

Plus Hinrich gives the Bulls some backup at PG.

Maybe it's not such a bad fit.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

KC says this in the Trib today:

Divided opinion in management on whom to draft—Marquette's Dwyane Wade, Georgia's Jarvis Hayes, French swingman Mickael Pietrus, Kansas' Kirk Hinrich—was another. 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...5bulls,1,4636069.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Interesting b/c we hadn't heard Hinrich's name as a serious consideration up until last night. Wow.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Chicago_Cow</b>!
> What role are you talking about? Here's the bottom line: Wade can play sg but Heinrich can't play sg. Last but not least, Crawford is our pg and we don't need another rookie pg looking for minutes in order to prove himself.
> 
> P.S.: Regardless of what your daddy and mommy had told you, SIZE does matter.


I disagree wholeheartedly. Because of the kinds of players we have, I look at our backcourt in terms of a rotation. With Wade you'd see a three man guard rotation comprised of Crawford, Rose and Wade, with both the PG and SG spots being considered interchangeable. I don't think that concept would be altered at all if you substitute Hinrich's name for Wade. If Kirk is paired with the 6'5" JC, does it really matter who's labeled the PG? It sure didn't seem very important last season when everyone wanted to see Crawford and the 6'2" Williams on the floor at the same time. And if he's matched with JR, again, why should it matter who's playing which guard position?

As for your remark about size...sorry but I'm just not going to touch that one. :grinning:


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

If we draft Hinrich, I'm turning the draft off right then and there. I'd seriously think of hunting down Pax when I was in Chicago this weekend.

Ridiculous. Rex Walters was an awesome KU player, too.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> If the Bulls draft hinrich I feel pretty certain they would be drafting him for some other team. I can't see any possibility of the Bulls trading Crawford right now and if they did I would be severely dissappointed. I'm glad that the Walker trade won't go through. Walker can't play defense worth a crap and he jacks threes like he is afraid the NBA is going to get rid of the 3pt line. Heck, Boston has had to draw up their whole offense around Walkers deficencies, I don't want the Bulls to have to do that.


Actually I have to disagree with you here... look at Walker's three point shooting attempts before and after Jim O'Brian took over as coach... there's a big jump. He always shot quite a few, but he didn't really become a jacker until he was told to.

Defensively, I don't think he's a lock down guy, but he's not awful at all. But he's also not the kind of wing defender we'd want to throw on TMac either, so I agree that he's a dubious fit.


----------



## Coyat (Jun 18, 2003)

I'm ok with Hinrich.. as long as Wade and Pietrus are off the board. Seeing how Hinrich played 2 last yr. in college, i can see him doing the same in NBA. A Crawford/Hinrich tandem would be nice.. although it's just making up for the loss of JWill. We still need a solid 2 or 3 for the future and I believe Wade/Pietrus is it. Unless both of those players are gone by no. 7 and the Bulls don't want to trade for a vet and go down in the draft, take Hinrich.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I think Hinrich will be a solid pro, but I severely doubt he can guard SGs in the nba, so it would have to be at the 1. 

Regardless, if the Bulls are going to draft a Kirk, it should be Kirk Penney, in round 2... after taking Dwyane Wade in the first.

What really sucks is that I have a class during the draft tonight.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

IMO Pax would not draft Hinrich and pair him with Crawford in the backcourt. No way.

You draft Hinrich to be a PG behind Crawford or instead of Crawford.... not with Crawford


----------



## bullsinjection (May 15, 2003)

Maybe Milwaukee will exchange Kukoc for E-Rob if we draft Hinrich at the #7 and give him to them for the #8? Pietrus or Hayes will still be there and Milwaukee guarantees that they get their guy.

:wbanana:


----------



## Bini (Jun 26, 2003)

I wouldnt mind Hinrich, hes got the attitude the Bulls need right npw. Hes got skills, he can shoot, hes good. Though, we'd probably be better off with Dwayne Wade.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> IMO Pax would not draft Hinrich and pair him with Crawford in the backcourt. No way.
> 
> You draft Hinrich to be a PG behind Crawford or instead of Crawford.... not with Crawford


Nice call! ;-)


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> Interesting b/c we hadn't heard Hinrich's name as a serious consideration up until last night. Wow.


Sure we did.


Krause predicted it on Channel 5 on Sunday night.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> Nice call! ;-)



Well, if JWill and Jamal could play together, I don't see why Hinrich and Jamal couldn't play together...

... but it's still possible one of them gets traded


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> It seems to be the consensus of most people that the Bulls first choice in the draft would be Dwayne Wade, a combo guard who states, "I led the team in assists last year; I was second on the team in assists this year. I feel that I have a great knack for finding open guys. I'm not selfish at all. In the long run, when it's all said and done, I think I will be a point guard."
> 
> If he's gone, however, when it's the Bulls turn to select, why is it considered a stretch to think that they might choose Kirk Hinrich, a combo guard who also has a great knack for finding open guys, isn't selfish, and when all is said and done will probably make his mark in the league as a point guard.
> ...


Kudos to you, Kismet, for making the right call. :greatjob:


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> If we draft Hinrich, I'm turning the draft off right then and there. I'd seriously think of hunting down Pax when I was in Chicago this weekend.
> 
> Ridiculous. Rex Walters was an awesome KU player, too.


So Retro... 

When are you thinking of going off on your "Paxson Manhunt."


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> If we draft Hinrich, I'm turning the draft off right then and there. I'd seriously think of hunting down Pax when I was in Chicago this weekend.
> 
> Ridiculous. Rex Walters was an awesome KU player, too.


:rocket: :rocket: :rocket: :rocket: :rocket: :rocket:


----------

