# Who would be a better fit for a S&T?



## Chi-City (Jul 13, 2005)

For Curry if that's what he wants. If we have a chance to get Boozer or Harrington via S&T with Tyson playing C.

I personally think we should wait till the trading dealine to trade him. There has to be a team that isn't working out and maybe by then teams can surpass his heart condition a little bit.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Chi-City said:


> For Curry if that's what he wants. If we have a chance to get Boozer or Harrington via S&T with Tyson playing C.
> 
> I personally think we should wait till the trading dealine to trade him. There has to be a team that isn't working out and maybe by then teams can surpass his heart condition a little bit.


If you were Utah or Atlanta, why would you do those deals?


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Mikedc said:


> If you were Utah or Atlanta, why would you do those deals?


I wouldn't, but they might. From what I've read/heard, Utah was pretty anxious to get out from under Boozer's contract and its length. Trade Boozer, take back Eddy at only 2/3 years guaranteed for less money plus, say, Pike's expiring deal. Certainly its risk/reward. 

Tangent: I think Utah needs to give Boozer another chance. I think he'll mesh wonderfully with Deron Williams and Kirilenko in Sloan's system.

Atlanta? I don't know about Atlanta. Again, its kind of a risk reward thing. These teams probably don't need to offer that much by way of years and guaranteed money to top what the Bulls are offering (in guaranteed $, that is).

Just speculating, of course. And thinking wishfully. :biggrin:


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I think it has to be New York or Memphis. These are the types of teams that have shown legitimate interest in Curry.

One interesting scenario might be in Seattle. I don't know if Johan Petro is the long-term answer there, but they could certainly use some size to complement their perimeter attack. They picked up my favorite journeyman, Mikki Moore, to try and fill the spot. There's hope in Petro and Swift, but that hope is merely speculative and not really substantiated.

Curry would inject an instant post option into that team's playbook. Unfortunately, I think the only stuff I'd want from the Sonics for Curry would be Flip Murray and Vladimir Radmanovic. Those guys are talented, but I don't know how well they fit into our team. Vlad is a TRUE perimeter shooting big; that might be helpful. Also, both are RFA's so they'd be signing up for a while.

But they'd make a great 3rd team in a 3-way trade.

New York, we're probably looking at Sweetney and some trash. Memphis, maybe Battier and a pick?


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

Please be aware that any Curry S and T's must include fat filler to manipulate the salary diffs required to get around Eddy's BYC status likely triggered in a S and T 

Furthermore such filler we give out has to equal cap clearing salary we get back

Thanks so much

Now back to the regular trade posting scenarios that have no regard for these fundamental requirements for anything to even at least be semi plausible

Have a nice day


----------



## L.O.B (Jun 13, 2002)

Would the Clippers be so stupid to trade Brand back to us? 

Brand and Tyson would be an awesome combination.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Curry starting at $6M and inking a 3 year gt'eed $21M deal with the Hawks and throwing Pike in ( to make it work given CBA/BYC dictates ) for Al Harrington could also be a sign and trade that works

We get a productive big in Harrington now as well as holding his bird rights and it laregly knocks Atlanta out as being a dominant player for a big man like Nene next summer 

It could serve as a strategic move for Chicago in this respect


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

so lets see if i got it right.

for trading curry you need .

1. big contract filler, big enough to handle curry's byc status
2. a young player probably a big would be best.
3. a team that would actually want curry even at this risk.

the most like suspect seems to be ny which definitely has the 1st 2 and possibly all 3.

i agree that memphis also makes some sense, but who would they give up ?

and the rebounding of a team that has gasol and curry in the paint seems on the troubling side.

tim thomas or penny and mike sweetney for eddy curry and AD seems like a good basis for a deal.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> so lets see if i got it right.
> 
> for trading curry you need .
> 
> ...


I would say Penny,Sweetney and a #1 next year would do it and before anyone says Penny ? :hurl: 

Hes a big veteran guard who could play all 3 positions and is a expiring contract.He played with and for Skiles in Orlando and Phoenix .His comments when Skiles was hired .

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/change_feature_040122.html



> Scott’s a guy who appreciates hard work, a complete no-nonsense guy,” says Phoenix guard Penny Hardaway, who both played with Skiles (in Orlando) and for Skiles. “Off the floor, he’s a very cool guy, great to be around, really nice. But on the floor he wants you to do your job like a professional.”


Sweetney gives us a low post scorer on a rookie deal and the pick gives us an asset to use next summer.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Would Mickael Gelabale, Johan Petro and Reggie Evans be enough?

Or Mickael Pietrus and Troy Murphy?

Again, assuming the contracts can match up?


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Not a big fan of Penny,Sweets,#1 for Eddy. Basically b/c we have no one to play backup C behind Tyson. Sweets,Thella,Allen and maybe Songalia(if we get him) are all PF. If Memphis would give us Wright,#1,Dahntay Jones for Curry then I am all over that.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Basghetti80 said:


> Not a big fan of Penny,Sweets,#1 for Eddy. Basically b/c we have no one to play backup C behind Tyson. Sweets,Thella,Allen and maybe Songalia(if we get him) are all PF. If Memphis would give us Wright,#1,Dahntay Jones for Curry then I am all over that.


Call me crazy, but I'm not sure Pax is going to leap at the chance to trade for a guy who just a few days ago broke into a house, terrorized everyone in it by smashing down doors and brandishing a loaded pistol, and physically assaulted his wife.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Call me crazy, but I'm not sure Pax is going to leap at the chance to trade for a guy who just a few days ago broke into a house, terrorized everyone in it by smashing down doors and brandishing a loaded pistol, and physically assaulted his wife.


That'll break one's jib faster than wearing corn rows.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Crazy idea:

Would it work with Sacramento?

Something along the lines of Peja, Darius S for AD and Curry?

Not a contract guru, but we haven't heard anything recently about Darius, Peja wants to come, Eddy could rejoin Brad Miller! :banana: 

Probably not. :eek8:


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

Basghetti80 said:


> Not a big fan of Penny,Sweets,#1 for Eddy. Basically b/c we have no one to play backup C behind Tyson. Sweets,Thella,Allen and maybe Songalia(if we get him) are all PF. If Memphis would give us Wright,#1,Dahntay Jones for Curry then I am all over that.



A.D would be the backup center at least for next year 

Tyson/AD/Allen depending upon the matchup 
Songalia/Sweetney/Allen/Big O 
Deng/Nocioni
Kirk/Ben
Duhon/Penny

at least for next year


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

Good Hope said:


> Crazy idea:
> 
> Would it work with Sacramento?
> 
> ...


 :biggrin: Sac traded Cwebb so they could keep Peja hes not going anywhere .


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

TRUTHHURTS said:


> :biggrin: Sac traded Cwebb so they could keep Peja hes not going anywhere .


Honestly, I hope Eddy's not going anywhere. 

But it might make sense for Sacramento to reload with Eddy (if they have some confidence in his health). 

Oh well, there are probably hundreds of other reasons this can't work (Machinehead mentioned a few, I see.)

But I don't see Paxson, this time around, just doing an S and T just to do one (though Ofella, Pike and Griffin turned out alright). I think he will insist on getting an "asset" he wants, not just the best of a bad bunch, else he lets Eddy walk after playing for the QO. 

As with the last time, however, a lot depends on the ability of the player to rationally evaluate his worth in the league. If Eddy has some idea about that, and its too far out of line with Pax, then they'll part company. Hopefully, they aren't so far apart that they can't adjust and find some reasonable middle ground.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

I'd take Boozer for Noc & Curry in a HEARTBEAT

C Chandler
F Boozer
F Deng
G Gordon
G Hinrich

:banana:


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I'm having a very hard time imagining any team offering a good deal for Curry. Basically his value is in the toilet. If he's healthy, then we'll probably not get back half of what he's worth.

And short of any other information, I still think he's much more likely to be healthy than not when all is said and done.

The obvious solution then, is to hope he stays healthy and keep him.

Short of the Knicks, who don't care about financial risk, I just have a hard time seeing any team out there wanting to trade their relatively sure thing for a risk. Lots of teams will probably give us bad deals, but its hard to say who'd give us a good one.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

If I were the Bulls, I might call up Toronto. For one, they seem like they're in utter disarray. With Rob Babcock admitting they're probably taking a step back this year, one has to wonder how much even a good guy like Chris Bosh will tolerate. Even if he keeps quiet about it, I could easily imagine some behind the scenes "I'm not going to re-sign, so trade me or I walk for nothing" action going on.

They also have Alvin Williams, who's due to make a fortune but probably never gonna play again.

Perhaps a deal of Curry, Nocioni, and our #1 pick next year for Bosh, Araujo and Williams would be beneficial for everyone involved.

For the Bulls, it maintains our cap space next year at about the $12-14M and gives us Bosh, who's a very good player, and Araujo, who's a very big player even though he currently appears to be a questionmark to even last as a career backup. In return, we have to waste some dollars paying off Williams' dead salary and Araujo's likely worthless salary.

For the Raptors, it lets them take their almost certainly worthless expenditure on Williams and Araujo and take a flyer on Curry who would be productive for them if he's healthy. Although Curry's a salary risk, the worst case with him is no worse than the situation they're already obligated to. They also get a pick and a solid, tough player in Nocioni, so even if Curry doesn't work out they're at least getting something back for Bosh.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Mikedc said:



> If I were the Bulls, I might call up Toronto. For one, they seem like they're in utter disarray. With Rob Babcock admitting they're probably taking a step back this year, one has to wonder how much even a good guy like Chris Bosh will tolerate. Even if he keeps quiet about it, I could easily imagine some behind the scenes "I'm not going to re-sign, so trade me or I walk for nothing" action going on.
> 
> They also have Alvin Williams, who's due to make a fortune but probably never gonna play again.
> 
> ...



raptors ain't trading bosh for nobody


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

The ROY said:


> raptors ain't trading bosh for nobody


Yeah, I started to envision the absolutely insane backlash Babcock would get from trading Bosh for Curry, then I realized it'd never even get that far. Chuck Swirsky would straight-up murder Babcock at his desk the second the trade was consummated.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Right... and it'd be folly for the Bulls to trade Elton Brand.

For that matter, wasn't Vince Carter an institution up there in Toronto? I was told on more than one occasion that Vince = Basketball in Canada.

I'm not saying its gonna happen, but I have a really hard time seeing how it couldn't. I don't see how they can get competitive, and if they can't get competitive, I don't see how they can keep Bosh.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> Would Mickael Gelabale, Johan Petro and Reggie Evans be enough?
> 
> Or Mickael Pietrus and Troy Murphy?
> 
> Again, assuming the contracts can match up?


didn't gelabale sign with real madrid?

the sonics would need to add salaries anyway.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

I like the Pietrus and Murphy idea.

Here's another one, a trade between us and the Wolves.

Wolves got Curry, Pike, and filler

Bulls got Wally and Olowokandi

Wolves got a good young Center to play alongside KG. Pike's contract is up next year. filler ... a draft pick perhaps?

We got a very good shooter in Wally who also can play a little SG. A perimeter lineup of Hinrich, Wally, and Deng sounds good. Deng (not Wally) will guard the Kobe's of the league. Olowokandi's contract is up next year. He will give us temporary depth at Center. Our lineup will look like:

Hinrich/Duhon
Gordon/Wally/Basden
Deng/Nocioni/Wally
Chandler/Harrington/Allen
Davis/Olowokandi/Harrington

That looks like a deep team to me. The problem is would Wally be willing to play behind Gordon?

EDIT: Wally's contract might look bad, but Davis and Olowokandi is off the book next year.


----------



## 4door (Sep 5, 2005)

NO MORE POWER FORWARDS!!!!!!!!!!! We have Chandler, he has 70 million coming to him, we are not getting Al Harrington, we are not getting Boozer, and we are not getting Evans, we are not getting Sweetney... 

You can't move Chandler to center, he needs to be able to move more and guard weaker players. he is not strong enough to be a great center, he could be a great power forward. And if Atlanta wanted curry they could have had him. Utah would NEVER take curry. You think Sloan wants Eddy Curry? You think Skiles is strict with what he wants out of a player? They signed Okur to 8M+ for the next 4 years, and Eddy can't play Power Forward. It will NEVER happen! Here is a much more realistic deal that would make both teams better.

Wizards: Curry/Pike
Bulls: Haywood/Hayes (Pax loves this guy)/Steve Blake (replaces Pargo)

Haywood is a 10pt 7rb 2blk guy who is a hard worker, young, and has a GREAT contract! 4Million a year for the next 4 years! We would have Hayes for 2 years at around 2 million a year! He is more athletic, younger, and a better defender and rebounder than Pike. Steve Blake is exactly the type of hard working, pass-first point guard that Skiles/Pax loves. The Bulls overall gain scoring, rebounding, and defense. Wizards get a 18pt a game center who can help give their scorers more room on the wing.

Wizards: Jamison/Jeffries/Curry/Butler/Arenas - Bench: Daniels/Atkins/Thomas/Pike/Ruffin
Bulls: Chandler/Deng/Haywood/Gordon/Hinrich - Bench: Hayes/Nocioni/Duhon/Songalia/Harrington


NO MORE POWER FORWARDS!!!!


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> Right... and it'd be folly for the Bulls to trade Elton Brand.
> 
> For that matter, wasn't Vince Carter an institution up there in Toronto? I was told on more than one occasion that Vince = Basketball in Canada.
> 
> I'm not saying its gonna happen, but I have a really hard time seeing how it couldn't. I don't see how they can get competitive, and if they can't get competitive, I don't see how they can keep Bosh.


How many fans were *really* upset Brand was traded? I mean, "I'm not going to follow the team or buy tickets anymore" mad. I bet you could count them on one hand.

By the time VC was traded, I bet more Raptors fans loathed him rather than loved him.

Anyway, I don't disagree that trading Bosh might be the only way the Raptors can get out of their rut -- well, that and not making staggeringly bad decisions on draft night -- but trading Bosh for (probably) a lesser player with a health issue would be a real tough sell to the fans.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

I honestly think the Lakers would have a good offer in Mihm, Medvedenko and Miami's 2006 First Round Pick for Curry.

Mihm is a solid NBA C and would be the perfect fit playing in Chicago. Curry's stock is really low right now, so that's probably the most you could get for him.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Damian Necronamous said:


> I honestly think the Lakers would have a good offer in Mihm, Medvedenko and Miami's 2006 First Round Pick for Curry.
> 
> Mihm is a solid NBA C and would be the perfect fit playing in Chicago. Curry's stock is really low right now, so that's probably the most you could get for him.


If we threw in Hinrich, could we get Odom too?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> How many fans were *really* upset Brand was traded? I mean, "I'm not going to follow the team or buy tickets anymore" mad. I bet you could count them on one hand.
> 
> By the time VC was traded, I bet more Raptors fans loathed him rather than loved him.
> 
> Anyway, I don't disagree that trading Bosh might be the only way the Raptors can get out of their rut -- well, that and not making staggeringly bad decisions on draft night -- but trading Bosh for (probably) a lesser player with a health issue would be a real tough sell to the fans.


I think the "official season is a wash thread" started the day Brand was traded.


----------



## nanokooshball (Jan 22, 2005)

QO for curry and get nene or trade AD for boozer if curry wont accept the offering contract


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Damian Necronamous said:


> I honestly think the Lakers would have a good offer in Mihm, Medvedenko and Miami's 2006 First Round Pick for Curry.
> 
> Mihm is a solid NBA C and would be the perfect fit playing in Chicago. Curry's stock is really low right now, so that's probably the most you could get for him.


man, shut up


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> How many fans were *really* upset Brand was traded? I mean, "I'm not going to follow the team or buy tickets anymore" mad. I bet you could count them on one hand.
> 
> By the time VC was traded, I bet more Raptors fans loathed him rather than loved him.
> 
> Anyway, I don't disagree that trading Bosh might be the only way the Raptors can get out of their rut -- well, that and not making staggeringly bad decisions on draft night -- but trading Bosh for (probably) a lesser player with a health issue would be a real tough sell to the fans.


They could trade Charlie V for Curry and keep Bosch

Villa +EWill

Deal Araujo ( 2 more years ) for a heavily conditional first to a team starved for size

We send Pike with cash to nullify the cost 

Deal done

*

Curry
Bosch
Graham
Petersen
Alston

Rose ..(ugh) off the books after next season

*

Chandler
Songaila
Deng
Hinrich
Duhon

Harrington
Villanueva 
Nocioni
Basden
Gordon


Davis
Allen
E.Williams
Griffin
Pargo



Everyone happy ?


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Damian Necronamous said:


> I honestly think the Lakers would have a good offer in Mihm, Medvedenko and Miami's 2006 First Round Pick for Curry.
> 
> Mihm is a solid NBA C and would be the perfect fit playing in Chicago. Curry's stock is really low right now, so that's probably the most you could get for him.


Given the circumstances..Mihm could be workable but Eddy would need to resign and go at $7.4M starting given Mihm is at $3.7M and Eddy would be BYC

The Lakers would also need to palm between $2.6M to $5M off on somebody for someone that you really don't need or use and that are expiring contracts

The only players you have in that range are Slava and Devean George 

A cap friendly team is not taking on Devean George ..even for 1 year at $5M and cash considerations as they would still be $2M out of pocket..plus you'll need him 

Someone could take Slava at $3M with $3M of cash considerations ..but that leaves you with 2 big men out and one back

You have Curry, Brown and Bynum.. and Brian Cook . Its pretty thin..unless Mitch has some cheap vet role players lined up ( I am assuming that Vlade really can't go around again )

If Mihm came back to Chicago with a conditional 1st round pick ..for Curry ..who knows what Pax would make of this


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

My opinion!

Of all the above posts, 4Door makes the best suggestion. If you have to do a S&T, go with the Wizards. You get a decent, team oriented center in Heywood and a decent SF/SG type with potential in Hayes.

I do not like the suggestions for trades with Toronto, the Lakers or the Wolves. None of them improve the team. 


My guess is that a S&T is not going to happen at this time. It is obvious that the health issues (and perhaps some work ethic issues) have raised real concerns about Curry's long term potential with GMs throughout the NBA. Maybe once Curry has played some games, assuming he is in shape and productive, the S&T offers will start getting interesting.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

The best fit would be Tim Duncan. San Antonio really needs to improve by additition through subtraction.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

I think there is no way some of the deals offered will even interest the other team.
Guys , you gotta remember Eddy's value is of damaged goods , team don't want to take a risk on him , the only one that we heard would consider is crazy rich NY , and the risk would be MLE like...

Bosh is completely out of the question , at least in the deals proposed , we'd have to give way more to get him.

GS might be a suiter , since they have a defensive Center but no offensive Paint player (Biedrins is very young and they just picked Ike for post scoring). But rather than sending Pietrus and Murphy , they'd want to lose Foyles awful contract. Pietrus and Murphy are contributors , they won't trade both for someone with his pro career at risk.
The point now might be minimizing the loss, not losing Eddy for nothing (to retirement or signing with a different team after playing for the QO). Teams would take a reasonable risk on Eddy (I guess for up to 2 years guarenteed in a longtermer) but not if they have to give current contributers in return (to some level).
If Pax is not willing to gaurentee Eddy for more than 1 year and there is a suitable team willing to take a bigger risk I think we should trade for future options (a draft pick , not Miami's!! , or maybe a young player).

GS is expecting to have a good season , there best in years. They got Baron at Midseason and their play jumped to playoffs level. They Added Ike , Taft and Ellis via draft and signed JRich and Murphy longterm. They are a very deep team at all positions now , except Center , and they want to succeed *now!!!!* :

Baron/Fisher/Ellis
JRich/Pietrus/Ellis
Dunleavy/Pietrus/Cheaney
Murphy/Ike/Caparnaka
Foyle/Biedrins/Taft

They have no offensive Center , and Eddy is exactly that. But still , Murphy and Pietrus is way to much to ask (imo) for a very risky situation. Piertus is their main Wing of the bench and Murphy is their starting PF and top rebounder.

But what would they be willing to give up , and still be successful this upcoming season: 
*Biedrins is one - maybe still not ready to contribute , but as I see it has great future in the league.
He's big , quite athletic , aggressive and with the right court attitude , with good cordination. Of course he will never be the offensive player Eddy is , but he'l definately be a better rebounder and defender , and still have some offense (offensive cordinationwise - he's somewhere between Eddy and Tyson). He's 19 , and last season , at 18 , he showed some serious potential when getting the minutes. I know many of you won't agree with me on this , but I think eventually Biedrins will be a better nba player than Curry.
*future picks don't hurt them now.

So something in the likes of

Eddy (S&T) for Biedrins and a future 1st rounder (fillers - caparnaka?? / Taft / Ellis / Ceaney...) GS owns a future Sixers deal as well.

Other option - if we go for Pietrus we'd have to send back at least one 2/3. Of course Pike is the man on the mission (they actually can use a sharpshooter with their slashers). 

maybe Eddy , Pike and our future 1st rounder for Pietrus , Biedrins Fillers and a 2nd rounder.

Pax can also take one of GS's awful contracts (Foyle or Fisher) if he get's something he likes in return. they are both conributing ok role players , but Mullin signed them to rediculous contracts. Taking them from him will come in heavy price. But I'm not sure he wants to get rid of them just yet (maybe he still believes those are good contracts) as much as he wants an above 0.500 season. a playoffs season.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Another team that might be willing to take the risk on Eddy sine they expect success *now* is NJ!

Kidd is getting old (33 next season) , often injured , and if the want to go with their backcourt dream team trio they must do it now. Vince ain't getting younger either (29 next season). They did not sign Reef cause of health issues. So now their Bigs are Kristic , Collins , Marc Jackson and uncle Cliffy. A healthy Eddy could give them the edge they need (still a risk , but for them , maybe worth taken now)

What do the Nets have to interest us - an *Unprotected* Clips 2006 pick. It was protected before , and lost it's protection in 2006. The Clips relaced Simmons with Cuttino , and their draft pick is 18 and not coming this season (I think???). NJ also own their own pick so they still have a draft night going.
Other than the Clips pick - I'd go for Jason Collins. Yeah , he's a by the book role player , far from flashy - but he's reasonably young (26) , signed to a very reasonable contract , and it turns out he's a very efficient player to have on court since his impact defensively teamwise is huge (reminder) . He also can be a very suitable replacement for AD at a reasonable price (I think he's signed to 20-24 mil per 4 years)

So something in the likes of

Eddy for Collins , future rights for Mile llic , and the Clips unprotected 2006 1st rounder

If fillers are needed or NJ asks for another big they are welcome to Allen when he's tradable , or even Othella in a different situation (where we get more). Maybe we can also ask for Zoran Planinic , whom I know little about his potential.

Talentwise - we lose in present , no doubt. But we get a nice replacement for AD in tough defender Collins , and we get a future unprotected Clips pick (It can turnout a very high pick , or maybe with our luck it will be Clips season :biggrin: ).

this way , at least we don't lose Eddy for nothing , like we lost JWill. 2 top picks in 2 years is too much. and yet - NJ has to be willing to take the risk , and remember , thats why Eddy ain't got his worth by the numbers!

Oh , and just a thought - Antoine wright might be obtainable in this kind of trade.

A Package of Eddy , Othella and Pike might be worth lots for Nets - They Get a paint scoring Center (Kristic can play the 4 some and has some range to open up the paint for Eddy to work) , and they get a solid PF sub of the bench guarenteed only for one year. Pike as another Vet sharpshooter. Eddy to complete a very strong starting roster and Pike and OH to solidify their Bench.

Maybe Eddy , OH and Pike for Collins , wright (Fillers??) and a future 1st 

Othella was very efficient for us in his role but if we sign Songaila (after Allen) it won't hurt us. Pike is hardly used anyway and we'd have to send him to replace Wrights assumed position off the bench . Pike is ok as a sub as long as his player is worth 36-40 minutes (Vince and RJeff in his case , plus NJ has Vaughn, McInnis , Planinic and Lint as wing Subs. But at bigs OH would be very valuable for them off the bench.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

rlucas4257 said:


> Would Mickael Gelabale, Johan Petro and Reggie Evans be enough?
> 
> Or Mickael Pietrus and Troy Murphy?
> 
> Again, assuming the contracts can match up?


I like the Seattle trade. Since Gelabale signed in spain perhaps recently signed Damien Wilkins instead. Petro is about as raw as they get but very few individuals on this planet share his physic. I love Evans and his Ethic. Him and Tyson on court at the same time means we have no post scoring on one hand - but Our backcourt could throw any good or bad shot they want since it's very likely we'll get the ball again with those two top rebounders.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Toronto seems like a good option too. But getting Bosh will take more than offered in thread. Perhaps a healthy Eddy would help , but it ain't the case. Bosh is the only totally untouchable guy on their team. I agree you never know what Bob will do next , but I guess Charlie Villaneuva is 2nd on the untouchable list.

Maybe Eddy and something for Joey Graham , Bonner and Denvers 2006 1st rounder owned by Raps (likely in the 20's)

In any case of trade , the other team must be willing to take the risk og gaurenteeing Ed for more than 1 year (as Pax wants). Raps might agree to take risk on 2 grnteed since anyway they are stuck with Jalens contract for those 2 years (and Williams 7 mil) and won't be players in FA market. thats why I also think they won't lose talent to get rid of Alvins contract - They need to add talent , not send and they can also trade his contract in it's last year where it's worth something (and Jalens contract is done - by then they'd have Bosh on Max)


----------



## jminges (Aug 25, 2005)

Mitch Kupchak, the Lakers GM, said (on radio) they're done with offseason moves. So, no Odom for Curry.

Heard that Minnesota may be interested, maybe Curry and Nocioni for Olowakandi and Szczerbiak?


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Does anyone think that maybe Pau Gasol is available? If we send a first-rounder, AD, and Curry, and get back Gasol and Cardinal, it might actually be a viable trade.

Warrick figures to eat into some of Gasol's minutes, and a lot of people in Memphis aren't really huge fans of him. Davis could even help them some this year, and Curry might explode on a team like Memphis as a powerful post-scoring threat. For the Grizz, it gives them a crack at Curry for a contract, a first round pick, and a ton of cap space.

Stoudamire/BJax
Mike Miller/Eddie Jones/Dahntay Jones
Battier/Jones/Dahntay/Warrick
Warrick/Antonio Davis
Curry/Wright

That's a pretty stacked team. A much more explosive lineup than what they've had. And with a first rounder and cap space next year, they figure to do more than just improve.

For us, Gasol plays F and Chandler plays C. Cardinal is our true long-range shooting big, although he's sort of pricy.

Hinrich/Duhon
Gordon/Basden
Deng/Nocioni/Cardinal
Gasol/Cardinal/Othella/Songaila
Chandler/Allen/Songaila

I like this a lot. Gasol and Chandler up front is a pretty sweet frontcourt.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

jminges said:


> Mitch Kupchak, the Lakers GM, said (on radio) they're done with offseason moves. So, no Odom for Curry.


The deal to the Lakers never made sense. Of course, they would never do Odom for Curry. Even Mihm of Curry wouldn't work for anybody. Well, except for the Bulls if you like Mihm or really don't like Curry.

Curry wouldn't like it - I don't see the lakers offering a better contract than Kwame got - two years guarenteed and then a team option. That's what Curry is turning down from the Bulls. 

Lakers can't do it - If you are gambling big time on Kwame, can you really afford to gamble big time on Curry too. Too much risk.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Showtyme said:


> Does anyone think that maybe Pau Gasol is available?


Not for Curry.


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

"Mitch Kupchak, the Lakers GM, said (on radio) they're done with offseason moves. So, no Odom for Curry."

That was a poor report misinterpreting Kupchak's statement - of which I was there to take at the McKie press conference. 

He said the core was basically in place - that LA probably wouldn't spend the rest of their mid-level unless a free agent who they thought would go for more became available (read Sprewell). Kupchak also said they would like to balance the roster via trade. He also said that both Kwame and Mihm aren't necessarily true back to the basket centers - they're both fours who can play five. Until Bynum is ready, the Lakers don't have a true center - and Bynum won't be ready this year.

LA for the most part seems to be waiting for Chicago and Curry to work things out on the off chance that Paxson can't get a better offer - and that the two sides for whatever reason cannot come to terms - and Paxson doesn't want to do the qualifying offer.

The most likely path is that Curry is a Bull for one more year - and then walks. Paxson may hope that a S&T can be fashioned next summer - knowing that this could be another Stromile Swift situation where the Bulls get nothing for him.

The LA package as I've heard it is Mihm + George + Miami 2006 #1 for Curry and Pike (and possibly Pargo). The Lakers have gotten a lot of calls this summer for Mihm and George.

If the demand was Odom - the Lakers would just run with what they have - no one in LA is confident they'll get Curry - because it's not likely.

LA is close to a deal bringing in Kapono - but it is rumored to be held up in case LA gets Curry because they certainly don't need Pike and Kapono. 

Other packages can be fashioned - perhaps Vlade instead of George - saving some money - maybe a kid from LA like Cook - Chicago probably can have Slava - but what I've learned is that the above is more or less what's been "discussed" through Curry's agent as go between between the two teams.

But like I said - Chicago is the front-runner to land Curry either for 1 year - or possibly a multi-year deal.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

emplay said:


> "Mitch Kupchak, the Lakers GM, said (on radio) they're done with offseason moves. So, no Odom for Curry."
> 
> That was a poor report misinterpreting Kupchak's statement - of which I was there to take at the McKie press conference.
> 
> ...


Some of the principals in a trade with LA were basically what I threw out there a week ago

Everything comes down to who wants to pay Eddy big guaranteed money..because that it about the only way he will be signed and traded ( and of course what value the Bulls get back )

But from the Lakers perspective is MK really wanting to meet an asking price from Camp Curry of 6 years and $60M gtd?

I would not think so ..and why should he there is no market for his services ?

By insisting on big gte'd money now ..Camp Curry just may as well as get it done with already and sign the QO ...its the only realistic way to go forward from here for them and the Bulls

As to whether Pax risks losing Eddy for quids next summer ..well he probably likes his chances given that he will hold all the aces with respect to cap room next summer and the only teams that will have outright money to compete with Chicago in a bid are 

Atlanta
New Orleans
Charlotte

I can't imagine Eddy signing with any of these teams just to cut off his nose to spite his face and leave his family and hometown if all things are equal ( as it relates to salary )

Curry will sign for the QO and it will be a "to be continued" next summer but with the Bulls holding good position again to ward off the market should they wish to keep him 

Just for the exercise however - on the theoretic Chris Mihm trade..

If we signed Eddy at $7M starting on a 6 year and $60M deal that MK wanted to accept I believe we could only accept back 50% of the value of his new contract or 120% of his last year's salary whichever was the greater

So it means that $4.4M would be the salary point we could accept back ( given that this is approximately 120% of Curry's salary last year ) 

It would be subject to the 115% swings in differentials which means that , approximately , we could accept back between $3.8M and $5M from the Lakers 

Chris Mihm earns $3.8M this year....however the Lakers have to accept Eddy back at the nominal value of his 1st year's contract and can apply the 115% salary rules..which means that to take Eddy back at $7M and with Chris Mihm's cost being at $3.8M .. *the Lakers would need to add another $2.2M to $3.2M in salary to make it work.*

If we added Pike and Pargo to the Lakers at $4M and accepted back Devean George and Smush Parker we would have $8.4M going out and $9.5M coming back in ..so it work out for us - CBA wise 

The Lakers however would have $11M coming in and $9.5M going out.so it works for them too - CBA wise

* Lakers give :

Chris Mihm, Devean George and Smush Parker

Bulls give :

Eddy Curry , Eric Piatowski and Jannero Pargo

*

This exchange of players satisfies keeping cap space for John Paxson given that George and Parker expire at the end of the season and Mihm is only on at a cost of 1 more year at $4.4M . We get a 3rd string back up point guard and a big wing defender for rent for one season

The issues are give for get and long term commitment 

#1. Would the Lakers give up their 1st round pick in 2006 ?

#2. Would Mitch Kupchak guarantee Eddy Curry for 6 years at $60M ?

What does it effectively cost him .. Chris Mihm and a #1 pick ( top 10 protected )

From the Lakers perspective I reckon that is a risk worth taking 

I wonder if the Lakers were prepared to take that risk and if MK picked up the phone and told Pax he was prepared to go to 6 years and $60M with that package in a sign and trade as to whether Pax would seriously consider it 

If Pax still believes in Eddy's capacity to dominate and for the fact that he still holds the Aces next summer ..I would expect him to consider it but still refuse and let the QO play out and come back for Round 2 with Camp Curry next summer


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

I have from the highest of sources that Curry is asking for $8-$10 mil a year. LA seems open to a 3-yr deal with the third year team option.

The key with Curry is not TOTAL contract or years - but total GUARANTEED money.

Lakers cannot trad Smush btw until Dec 15th - just signed but can LA can hit the price range discussed - a throw in player if needed could be Tony Bobbitt for salary matching - probably with some cash to pay for a buy-out. The core though does work Mihm + George for Curry ($8 mil) + Pike. Pargo I'm sure can be arranged and I've heard from a Laker source inside the organization that he's patiently waiting LA's decision.

I've checked the cap worthiness of the above trade with with CBA expert Larry **** - for the record.

Paxson may indeed try to keep Curry a year for the reasons we both describe above.

I've heard that LA will trade the Miami 2006 pick before that draft - and would part with it here. The actual Laker 2006 pick goes to Boston (or Atlanta depending on conditions).

Kupchak would give $16 mil guaranteed - max $20 mil. That made a lot of sense when all Chicago would offer was $5 mil. Now it sounds like the offer is $12 mil (Sam Smith).

There are some intangible reasons Curry may want to go to LA on a 2yr + T.O but I think he'd staying with enough guarantees in Chicago is certainly a desire.

As far as John Paxson - he's in the driver's seat - as long as he's willing to risk losing Curry for nothing next summer - and wants to put up with Curry, DNA test, etc for another year.

BTW LA is trying to get a back up center regardless of Curry - Doleac, Laettner, etc.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

emplay said:


> I have from the highest of sources that Curry is asking for $8-$10 mil a year. LA seems open to a 3-yr deal with the third year team option.
> 
> The key with Curry is not TOTAL contract or years - but total GUARANTEED money.
> 
> ...


L8'ner would be perfect for PJax's scheme

Pargo is a fit 

As is Piatowski 

If L8'ner is a possibility then I hear ya re Smush ..but Brian Cook or Luke Walton may have more appeal than Tony Bobbit

And what I have been told corresponds exactly to what your saying about the guaranteed component of negotiations 

But I also heard that its 6 years and $60M - gteed which would start him at just over $7M per and obviously averaging at $10M per

A team option after 3 years could work but CC may balk as that effectively is only 3 years gteed ..still better than only 1 year gteed ..and if there is no problems the Lakers would obvioulsy exercise the option.

if they didn't and with 3 years under his belt and no worries he's going to get his on the market anyway even if the Lakers let him go


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

If the Lakers were only going to gtee $20M max than a team option after 3 and starting at $7M puts them at $24M 

MK may be better to average the offer at $10M per season for 6 years and have a team option at 2 years 

2 years is still sufficient time to get allay concerns 

Mihm and a draft pick will cost $10M for the same period of time 

So its a $10M gambit over 2 years for MK


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

Walton can't be included til Dec 15th just re-signed.

If it came down to Brian Cook being included - I don't think the Lakers would hesitate - but with Malik Allen, Othella, Tyson and possibly Songaila - didn't see either Slava or Cook as realistic - though I was told the Bulls want a vet wingman. Deng is recovering from surgery, etc - thus George.

LA would want the 2 yr guaranteed and the option on the third to preserve their goal of cap space. They would have the option on both Curry and Kwame Brown - so if it's working keep em - or if they don't think they can get the free agent they want.

As far as the money - I was told $8-10 guaranteed per season - that's the starting range in year one - the final numbers if a deal was agreed to would obviously be up to all the parties involved.

I am pretty confident the Lakers have been so slow in making other moves because of the long shot hope at Curry.

Thanks for the feedback - I look forward to seeing how this unfolds.

Eric


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

E.

I guess it doesn't much matter as the 3rd "throw in"

In the theoretic trade that I threw out that included George and Pike and Pargo..LA had to make another $700K to make it work 

If its Tony Bobbit or whoever ..its a scrub so who cares

The real deal when it all strips down is Chris Mihm and a 1st round pick for Eddy Curry ..

IF 

Camp Curry would accept $20M gteed for 2 with a 4 year option from the Lakes that would give him his $60M 

and 

IF 

Pax thinks Mihm and a 1st is value enough for Curry whilst he gets to keep his cap space 

While I am not panting for Devean George ..he definately could help us with Deng being slow to rehab -plus he's an expiring contract..good jib etc

The trade does make some sense for both teams ..moreso for the Lakes than the Bulls I admit but Chris Mihm and a pick in the #10 to #16 range is about as good as you could expect if you wanted to deal him 

I just think that if Pax refuses and denies Eddy that gteed money it just creates bad blood that doesn't augur well down the road..in which case 

Mihm and a #1 and calm waters ?

or 

Eddy and blue sky or dark and stormy??????????

Who knows?


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

Except it's the Miami pick - closer to 25-30 if the Heat play as expected.

. . . and there's very little else LA can do to up their offer.

Up to Pax . . . bottom line (assuming Curry and LA are in synch as I've been lead to believe)


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

emplay said:


> Except it's the Miami pick - closer to 25-30 if the Heat play as expected.
> 
> . . . and there's very little else LA can do to up their offer.
> 
> Up to Pax . . . bottom line (assuming Curry and LA are in synch as I've been lead to believe)


Why would not LA up the spem count on the deal by including their pick ( lottery protected up to say #10 ?) which would give the Bulls a pick in a likely 12 to 18 range ?

Miami's pick is obviously less attractive 

I have heard that Pax is open to no real cap impact and a decent first round pick plus with one or two serviceable players on ending or short term contracts. Mihm and George fit that bill plus the Lakes could offer up a more decent draft pick ( their own ) over Miami's

I think it would be a stretch for Pax to do this deal anyway but at least its in the ballpark. Miami's pick weakens a position which is already not super strong for the Bulls who really don't have to do anything if they don't want to


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

As I said above LA already traded away their 2006 pick to Boston - who has conditionally traded it to Atlanta.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

emplay said:


> As I said above LA already traded away their 2006 pick to Boston - who has conditionally traded it to Atlanta.


OK .. I missed that bit. I didn't know


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

To rejig it 

If Curry went out at $10M on an averaged deal over 6 with a team option after the 2nd year ( such that MK only gtees $20K ) 

We would have $9M going out and $11.8M coming back in . IF , Slava was included instead of Bobbitt or some other scrub

I would expect Pax to cut Slava which means that it would help if cash considerations of $3M were part of the deal ( the cost of Slava's salary )

We cut Slava , Lakers resign him for the minimum - he still gets paid the $3M he is owed on Chi's books for 1 year 

Lakers get their man back who they would have been paying $3M to anyway , Their man picks up an extra $800K , and he's cost neutral for Chi and only included to make the deal work

With Eddy at $5M ( 50% of new base salary in Year 1 greater than 120% of his previous one ) and Pike and Pargo we're at $9M going out

The Lakers would have $14M coming back in and $11.8M going out

The only problem is is that with Chicago at $9M out and $11.8M in we would have to dump $800K on a 3rd party team to make it fit CBA wise

So if the LA package was Mihm, Slava, George *Bobbitt* and $3M cash.... Tony Bobbitt would need to be parked somewhere for 12 months . LA would probably need to send a 2RM with him 

So if this could be arranged such that we only had $10.9M coming back ..it might just scrape in and work .. structurally that is


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

Keep in mind that the Lakers have Vlade Divac's $5.4 mil salary to work with. Whoever acquires Vlade before the end of Septembe can buy him out for $2 million. 

The way I originally heard the deal had Vlade in it instead of George - so that could be a different wrinkle altogether.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mihm, Divac and George are at $14.2M

Curry, Pike and Pargo are at $14M coming in for the Lakers

Its $9M out for the Bulls and Mihm and George in an $8.8M. Of course the 1st round pick doesn't count against our cap

Vlade gets shipped to a cap friendly 3rd team with cash considerations to cover his $2M cost ( if that's his buyout )

Works ..if you find a 3rd team to take Vlade with cash and then buy him out


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

Making it as simple as possible 

1) George + Mihm + Miami pick for Curry + Pike

Curry can be signed for a salary starting at ~$7,909,474-$8,091,771.

The Bulls increase their salary total by $5,793,417 (George + Mihm - Pike). Second year additional salary of $4,214,241 (Mihm).

2) Vlade + Mihm + Miami pick for Curry + Pike

Curry can be signed for a salary starting at ~$8,537,790-$8,582,646

The Bulls increase their salary total by $2,792,817 (Mihm + Vlade bought out at $2 mil - Pike). Second year additional salary of $4,214,241 (Mihm).

3) Either of the above deals with other throw ins from LA that could include Cook, Vujacic, Bobbitt, Jones or Medvedenko - with Pargo as the throw in on the Chicago side (but BYC). LA has a trade exception that could swallow up Pargo BTW at up to 1,174,200 mil. 

Those are finances that Paxson has to work with if interested. I doubt he wants to add millions of dollars to his payroll.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

emplay said:


> Making it as simple as possible
> 
> 1) George + Mihm + Miami pick for Curry + Pike
> 
> ...


I don't think #1 and #2 work . Because of the salary and BYC issues involved you need a 3rd team to receive between $3M to $5M of salary . 

Let's say you have Eddy at $8M starting - he's only worth $4.4M to us going out ..plus we have Pike at $3M ..so we have 115% around either side of $7.4M which is a range of say $6.3M to $8.3M we could accept back

Mihm and George are at $8.8M 

We're $500K out ..which means we would have to throw in Pargo for say $1M and at that level there is no BYC attributable

So it could work for us ..but you would have $8.3M going out and $12M coming in with Eddy at $8M and Pike and Pargo at $4M - therefore you arfe going to fall out of the 115% differential requirement

You need either Vlade or Slava to go to a 3rd team with cash considerations in a dump where they would cut the guy and free the roster space immediately but be compensated for the cost by having either of these guys on their payroll by way of cash considerations 


Given Vlade's buyout clause of $2M if that is accurate .. then this is the most logical guy to include given that Slava , whilst a scrub , still has some utility in a reserve role


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

If we want to make it as simple as possible, lets not trade Curry for that tripe.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Tripe..now there is a word that you don't hear bandied around in these here days..its just like my Pappy used to curse 

That and cochamamie 

Hey.. I don't think Pax would do a deal that amounted to Mihm and a late 1st round pick for Curry 

Just illustrating that a trade is possible with that package and that Huck gets his first round draft pick he's seeking plus a big man back on a short term deal and the holy cap is preserved 

It fits parameters but as I said earlier in the thread he can just QO him and take his chances next summer when he still holds the aces


----------



## jminges (Aug 25, 2005)

What is it about Scott Skiles that players like Jason Kidd and Eddy Curry don't want to play for him?

I could see Eddy signing an offer sheet and asking Chicago not match it, e.g. Odom and Richardson.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> If we want to make it as simple as possible, lets not trade Curry for that tripe.



Thats the most intelligent post I have read on this thread and it is only one sentence compared to numerous rambling diatribes. Good call Mike!


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

jminges said:


> What is it about Scott Skiles that players like Jason Kidd and Eddy Curry don't want to play for him?
> 
> I could see Eddy signing an offer sheet and asking Chicago not match it, e.g. Odom and Richardson.


First, does Eddy Curry not want to play for Skiles?

Second, Eddy would have to actually get an offer sheet in order to make a request that it not be matched. I don't see anything to suggest he will get such an offer in the next 19 days.


----------



## jminges (Aug 25, 2005)

Ron Cey said:


> First, does Eddy Curry not want to play for Skiles?


I guess I'm reading the radio replay wrong. But when your coach says he will bench you for an extended amount of time if you don't shoot more with your other hand... and questions your heart and work ethic on radio - all of the while singing praises of the other guy seeking a max contract - I wouldn't think Eddy would be too fond of him. Knowing, in retrospect, he shot a much higher field goal per. in the triangle, the last year the Bulls ran the system his sophmore season - he shot a higher field goal per. than Shaq that year... and then Skiles comes, and his field goal per. dropped off tremendously, as did his health.

I think if a sign and trade fails, he'll subject himself to a DNA test and sign with Altanta (if at the max).


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

Sausage - #1 and #2 specifically work - compensating for BYC - I have verified these numbers with noted CBA expert Larry ****. As long as Curry's numbers are specifically in the range noted - no third team is needed. As long as the difference between the salaries are within 25% and $100K - it's cap kosher.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ace20004u said:


> Thats the most intelligent post I have read on this thread and it is only one sentence compared to numerous rambling diatribes. Good call Mike!


http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=diatribe

No "bitter criticism" going on here Ace 

Would have thought you understood the meaning of the word given your last line of defense over the years with Jamdrop and all the HaTeRz who would launch into their 'diatribes"

I don't know why theoretic discussion over workable sign and trades bothers you so and compels you to honk in support of lead goose..but hey whatever floats your boat

Feel better in the affirmatory tug ?

Good.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

emplay said:


> Sausage - #1 and #2 specifically work - compensating for BYC - I have verified these numbers with noted CBA expert Larry ****. As long as Curry's numbers are specifically in the range noted - no third team is needed. As long as the difference between the salaries are within 25% and $100K - it's cap kosher.


Ok..overlooked that new CBA is 125% and not not 115% as previous 

But still Curry at $8M starting and Pike and Pargo would equal $12M in for the Lakers

They would need to give $9.5M out to comply

Mihm , George and Bobbit are at cost of $9.5M - of course the 1st round pick doesn't count

We'd have $9.5M in and $8.8M out

So with the extra 10% in the diffs - no Vlade or Slava in a dump


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Not sure anyone cares but I think the Bulls should jump on the Mihm,George,Miami pick,Bobbitt for Curry,Pike,Pargo. That is a good deal I think. Thanks to sausage and emplay for all the info in this thread. Really good stuff. Everyone and their opinions aside this is quality info and I for one appreciate it. A very good point was made by one of them about George being a vet wing so Deng can take it slow at start of season coming back from injury.


Hinrich,Duhon,Bobbitt
Gordon,George,???
Deng,Nocioni,Griffin
Chandler,Songalia,Harrington
Mihm,Davis,Allen

That sounds good to me and as sausage says it would be good for team harmony instead of a disgruntled Curry playing one year for QO.


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

Sausage - I broke it down without Pargo because he'd be BYC at any significant salary.

The 2 trades work under the cba Mihm + (George or Vlade) + Miami pick

Should Pargo come to LA via sign and trade - it'd probably be for the Laker trade exception - or something simple like that.

I took him out because a big deal like that isn'y going to be held up because of Pargo.

Throw in's can be included and Curry's salary adjusted accordingly - but I know those two scenarios are sound.

It all comes down to Paxson - assuming LA and Curry are game on their end.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

I don't get why Chicago fans are getting so giddy over Chris Mihm.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> I don't get why Chicago fans are getting so giddy over Chris Mihm.


Hardly giddy

Just an OK back up and a legit Center in a 5 man rotation

Chandler, Songaila Mihm , Jeffries ( FA target ) + one of Wilcox or Nene


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Why would the bulls trade for Mihm? He would at best be a bench player taking up considerable cap space. He is a career backup center. Why would skiles and pax want him on the bulls. To watch the game and be a practice player.

This is just silly. How about we trade curry for kobe since that makes as much sense as some of the curry for Mihm trade ideas.

david


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

giusd said:


> Why would the bulls trade for Mihm? He would at best be a bench player taking up considerable cap space. He is a career backup center. Why would skiles and pax want him on the bulls. To watch the game and be a practice player.
> 
> This is just silly. How about we trade curry for kobe since that makes as much sense as some of the curry for Mihm trade ideas.
> 
> david


How much do you consider reasonable to pay for a back up Center ?

Pssst. Mihm has been a starter for most of his time in the league but I do think he's best suited as a 3rd big to alternate between the 5 and 4 spots 

Anyway he earns less that the league average at $4.4M


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

The idea of Curry for Mihm makes me physically ill. I just don't see the benefit. I'd rather take a chance that we lose Curry for nothing but retain a chance of keeping his services rather than use Mihm as some sort of crappy insurance/consolation prize.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Curry essentially for Mihm(and a first rounder by the way) makes you ill. Is that sort of like how Crawford essentially for Othella Harrington made people ill? Boy that one turned out like crap didnt?


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=diatribe
> 
> No "bitter criticism" going on here Ace
> 
> ...


Diatribe is often used to describe opinions that are rather lengthy. I suggest you read the origins of the word before you link me to the definition. Perhaps my use of the word was a little colloquial but, hey, I have an English degree, I can be colloquial and outside the box if I want to. 

The theoretic discussion of a workable sign & trade bothers me because the sign & trade's being discussed are crappy from top to bottom. Curry has much more value than Mihm or any of the other garbage you have been suggesting we deal him for. Obviously it is your right to do so but it is also my right to dissent. And I wasn't aware that Mike DC was the "lead goose". Even so, sounds like someone is bitter about that perception of him. While I won't call Mike the lead goose I will say that concerning your trade proposal Mike is dead on. 

I am a poster here just like everyone else. If it burns your biscuits that I feel strongly that Mike's post was the smartest thing I have heard in this thread then I am sorry for you. I WILL affirm whatever I wish without fear of repercussion of your caustic wit or lack thereof.

Carry on.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Curry has much more value than Mihm or any of the other garbage you have been suggesting we deal him for


See that is your opinion and you are entitled but due to several circumstances including his heart this is just not true. His value is very low right now. That is a fact.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Machinehead said:


> How much do you consider reasonable to pay for a back up Center ?
> 
> Pssst. Mihm has been a starter for most of his time in the league but I do think he's best suited as a 3rd big to alternate between the 5 and 4 spots
> 
> Anyway he earns less that the league average at $4.4M


I think Mihm is a pure 5 and won't do much for us as a 4. But a 5 is EXACTLY what we'd need if we didn't have Curry.

If the Bulls did something like this deal, Mihm is going to play 30 or more minutes per game for us. He's not going to be a bench player. He may even be our starting 5.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Basghetti80 said:


> Curry has much more value than Mihm or any of the other garbage you have been suggesting we deal him for
> 
> 
> See that is your opinion and you are entitled but due to several circumstances including his heart this is just not true. His value is very low right now. That is a fact.



It is my opinion. Thats a large part of why people post on boards like these...to share opinions. Just like your opinion is that because of some minor heart infraction that Eddys value is very low. I do not think, even with the heart issues, that Currys value has ever dropped to Chris Mihm levels. Sure, Eddy has some minor heart issues...Mihm on the other hand simply has no heart and very little talent either. You state your own opionion as fact and that simply is not the case.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Basghetti80 said:


> Curry essentially for Mihm(and a first rounder by the way) makes you ill. Is that sort of like how Crawford essentially for Othella Harrington made people ill? Boy that one turned out like crap didnt?


If we can add 4 players of quality like Duhon, Gordon, Deng and Nocioni while losing Curry, the Bulls could be better off. Quality big men are harder to replace than guards.

That does not seem to be happening this year. And our position in the east is slipping by the minute.... Paxson may be building the Grizzlies of the east here.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Basghetti80 said:


> Curry essentially for Mihm(and a first rounder by the way) makes you ill. Is that sort of like how Crawford essentially for Othella Harrington made people ill? Boy that one turned out like crap didnt?



Despite how well Harrington etc played it was a bad deal and we will have wished we had kept Crawford before it is all said and done. All just my opinion of course.


----------



## jminges (Aug 25, 2005)

jnrjr79 said:


> The idea of Curry for Mihm makes me physically ill. I just don't see the benefit. I'd rather take a chance that we lose Curry for nothing but retain a chance of keeping his services rather than use Mihm as some sort of insurance/consolation prize.


"Curry essentially for Mihm(and a first rounder by the way) makes you ill. Is that sort of like how Crawford essentially for Othella Harrington made people ill? Boy that one turned out like crap didnt?"

Good point, it's a move that essentially trades off offense for defense and better fundamentals.

Mihm is more of a four than a five. He plays sort of like Dalembert, contests every shot.. doesn't give up anything.. very athletic.. a true Scott Skiles type of player. He'd be an excellent compliment to Chandler. He gives you what Antonio Davis does - passion. I think his main problem last year was that Odom isn't a post player, not the type of player Chandler is.. having a few swatters in the paint is sort of like Ben and Rasheed (minus the offense) Wallace. I think it makes sense for both teams.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

jminges said:


> "Curry essentially for Mihm(and a first rounder by the way) makes you ill. Is that sort of like how Crawford essentially for Othella Harrington made people ill? Boy that one turned out like crap didnt?"
> 
> Good point, it's a move that essentially trades off offense for defense and better fundamentals.
> 
> Mihm is more of a four than a five. He plays sort of like Dalembert, contests every shot.. doesn't give up anything.. very athletic.. a true Scott Skiles type of player. He'd be an excellent compliment to Chandler. He gives you what Antonio Davis does - passion. I think his main problem last year was that Odom isn't a post player, not the type of player Chandler is.. having a few swatters in the paint is sort of like Ben and Rasheed (minus the offense) Wallace. I think it makes sense for both teams.


Are we talking about the same Chris Mihm?

I would certainly not say Eddy is a great defender, but he *MUST* be an ok defender or the Bulls wouldn't have been such a great defensive team with him playing big minutes. At most, we can say that Curry is a bad defender but isn't so bad that he makes a team a poor defensive team, because the Bulls were an indisputably good defensive team with him.

Mihm's reputation is one of tissue soft defense and to boot the Lakers were a wretched defensive team last year. Thus, one can't even say of him what one can say of Curry, that at least his defense is proven not to hurt.

On top of that, he's been chronically injured except last year.

Blech.


----------



## jminges (Aug 25, 2005)

The same Chris Mihm that was on the Lakers last year, except one year removed as a starter.

23-12 on Camby.. 18-10 on Curry.. 11-14 on O'Neal.. 11-21 on Brown.. 14-17 on Olowokandi..

He isn't nearly the gifted offensive player that Curry is; but he tries hard on the glass and he will get his team points in the paint. I think a lot of people measure a player by statistics, but his true value is how hard he works. He fouls out frequently on the road because he tries to do too much - sort of like Chandler on the defensive end - tries to block every shot he can - and no one told him not to. I think under Skiles, as Jackson had said, he'd be given direction to not swat at the ball so often. He does work hard and he earns every penny he's paid, and he's actually well underpaid.

Chicago was a great defensive team last year, but it was because of Deng, Hinrich, Duhon and Chandler - by comparison Butler, Atkins, Brown and Odom (in the low post). I think someone brought this up earlier, Curry scores in bunches in the first half, and turns it over frequently in double teams. I think Mihm would only strengthen a very good defensive team.

Only trying to justify my responce. I'm not saying I'm right, those are just my thoughts...


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ace20004u said:


> Diatribe is often used to describe opinions that are rather lengthy.


In the subcontext of the primary root which is denunciation. But hey this isn't class and your the wordsmith with an English degree so far be it from me to question the improper use of the Queen's English..oh that's right it wasn't ..it was "colloquial". Got it.



> The theoretic discussion of a workable sign & trade bothers me because the sign & trade's being discussed are crappy from top to bottom. Curry has much more value than Mihm or any of the other garbage you have been suggesting we deal him for.


Actually he doesn't..try asking a few people in the know. 

Where was that offer sheet for Big Ed this summer exactly ??? I forgot. What about offers of S and T's with KG ?

Look..its OK . Most fans are homers who have their heads so far up their players arse..or their own..they can't see daylight

There is realism ( in realisation of an asset ) and then there is retention ..because your stuck and can't cash in your chips ( if you want to at least _consider_ this as an available option )



> Obviously it is your right to do so but it is also my right to dissent.


Would not have it any other way ,Citizen 



> And I wasn't aware that Mike DC was the "lead goose". Even so, sounds like someone is bitter about that perception of him.


LOL..yeeeeaaahhh. Uh huh.

Hey ..Mike's the bomb

I wasn't calling him a goose , per se , merely observing the tenents of geese psychology/behaviour as a metaphor in how it relates to support /togetherness in the group dynamic ( maybe for one who is not strong enough to make a point of his own ?? ) ..y'know Gestalt theory with Geese metaphors that Phil Jackson used to sage up the team psychology and group bonding during the championship years



> While I won't call Mike the lead goose I will say that concerning your trade proposal Mike is dead on.


Hey ..I sorta agree which is what I have said on two seperate occasions throughout this thread

Understand that its not a trade proposal I personally am advocating or endorsing..merely looking at financial / structural fits of what's possible , if worst comes to worst , and Camp Curry demand a sign and trade to a team that is going to guarantee him more money than what the Bulls are 

And if we refuse and with a year under his belt without incident his market is going to open up wider and Chicago has no control over whether he stays or goes. For the fact that he went through this whole incident and we refused him the opportunity of earning much more guaranteed money than we were prepared to pay..there is a greater likely chance that we lose him for zip.

And if worse really comes to worse and despite what the imminently qualified Dr ScottMay tells us , Eddy can't play and is done ... then we still lose him for zip

In retrospect..would one want no compensation or a $4M back up Center who is a legit 7 footer and a 1st round pick

Granted , no one can crystal ball and see into the future.. all you can do is realistically risk assess and make your decisions

I think Curry has worth ..but not right now and I don't know whether we will see that worth for another season possibly 2 seasons 

I don't believe we are going to see anything meaningful from his this season given the mental toll this is all taking and as I suspect , a deterioration in his physical conditioning..mental strength has never exactly been Eddy's strong suit

Then there is the focus of the summer ..much what did Michael Olowokandi's head in ..instead of focusing on the now. Olowokandi was playing one game and his team was playing another . The result ? The up and coming Clips , still an inexperienced team ( as we are ) suffered 

Next summer in UFA ... Eddy will be advised not to work out... so his conditioning next summer will be an issue again and you may not see any production from him as you would expect ( in the worst case scenario until Christmas time next year )

Gee.. that's 6 seasons where he may have been lucky to have two halves of a season where he was in shape to a level where he was expected so that he could be the contributor that we needed him to be

For a team that wants to progress and be on the up... to have a guy like that with that history over 6 seasons just might give me pause for thought ,that ,notwithstanding the look and the the hope of what we want him to be and what he teases us in being ... how is he helping the team now and next season with what is likely to happen

Is it too big an amount of "slack" to cut him for what we are still hoping for him and what he has not yet properly delivered and based on historical evidence /performance ( influenced I think by a weak mindset ) ..where the odds are against him from ever delivering to the level we continue hoping for ?






> Carry on.


Aye Skip


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

For the record .. I think Chris Mihm is a sound player 

I mean my duds don't blow up into a circus big top when I think about him ..but he's OK

For anyone that has watched him periodically over the last few years he actually plays tougher than his rep... a rep that was unfairly bestowed upon him when Jamal Magliore punked him in predraft workouts way back when 

After that , and his rookie season where he _did_get sorted out a bit ..it is almost as though he has made it a point to body up and play tough..and the guy can get up and block but he does need to be more selective 

I agree with mingy ..he needs to play his D a bit smarter and curb his "point to prove" enthusiasm

I do like though that he does play with a bit of a chip on his shoulder like he needs to prove a point

He also over the last two seasons found a couple of moves that work for him on the offensive end and is reliable enough ( without being an offensive dominator ) 

The argument that the Lakers sucked defensively so therefore so too must Mihm ..and the corresponding argument with Chicago being good and so therefore Eddy was too..is a bit too simplistic for me ..and does not necessarily follow

You could levy that argument at Larry Hughes who excites the crap out of me as a defender ..and is one of real quality ( notwithstanding some of the risks he takes ) but the Wizards sucked almight arse defensively.

Does that mean Loz sucks as a defender too ?

Of course not - its absurd

I _do_ think Eddy made some marginal improvement ..but he's still not great and is still way prone to prolonged defensive brain farts. JMO

Back to Mihm.. I kind of think of him as a cut or two above Scot Pollard from a few years ago.. serviceable ( but not spectacular ) big man that is a contributor 

To say that Chris Mihm plays with no heart or to fall on to the convenient label that has never left him is lazy and clear , IMO , that those that make such attestation aren't watching him or paying attention

I'm not talking him up as the best thing since sliced bread..just trying to be fair and objective as to what I think where he is realistically at


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> The argument that the Lakers sucked defensively so therefore so too must Mihm ..and the corresponding argument with Chicago being good and so therefore Eddy was too..is a bit too simplistic for me ..and does not necessarily follow


No, but as a general proposition we know that Chicago can be good with Eddy. We don't have any evidence that a team can be good with Mihmsy-poo, but there's some evidence to think he can't.



> You could levy that argument at Larry Hughes who excites the crap out of me as a defender ..and is one of real quality ( notwithstanding some of the risks he takes ) but the Wizards sucked almight arse defensively.
> 
> Does that mean Loz sucks as a defender too ?
> 
> Of course not - its absurd


But according to my rating system, which I tend to trust, the Wizards were a significantly better defensive team than the Lakers. The Lakers were the worst team in the league by a rather wide margin. They were the only team 2 deviations below the average (the Spurs were the only team 2 above). The Wizards were slightly below average but within a standard deviation of the average. The Bulls were slightly above the standard deviation.

Again, of course you're right a good defender can be on a bad defensive team and vice versa, but I'm just pointing out that at the extremes team performance should lead us to some basic conclusions.

Given that they both played quite a bit, it does suggest 
Eddy might be bad, but is unlikely to be _*that bad*_ a defender if the Bulls were _*that*_ good. 
Mihm might be good, but is unlikely to be _*that good*_ a defender if the Lakers were _*that*_ bad.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> No, but as a general proposition we know that Chicago can be good with Eddy. We don't have any evidence that a team can be good with Mihmsy-poo, but there's some evidence to think he can't.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well colour me confused

Defense in what you give up starts on the perimeter 

Lauded defenders Bryant and Butler were on the wings

So much for reputations 

To pin lousy defense rap on Mihm because the Lakers sucked defensively when they had the above mentioned on the wings is a rather spurious argument in my opinion 

And its one of those times that "ratings systems" should not circumvent what you see with your own eyes

I just don't agree with the tread of your connection as to how you've arrived at an opinion in Mihm which I don't believe does him justice ..an opinion I have formed from watching him


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

And to me it doesn't matter as to the varying degrees of suckiness ... Wizards sucked arse defsnsively as did the Lakers

And Larry Hughes can still play defense


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Well colour me confused
> 
> Defense in what you give up starts on the perimeter
> 
> ...


Err, if you buy into the reps of Bryant and Butler as being good defenders, doesn't that point the finger even more strongly at Mihm?



> And its one of those times that "ratings systems" should not circumvent what you see with your own eyes


Yet, in this case it doesn't. My rating system matched up pretty well with what I saw with my own eyes.

Outstanding - Spurs
Good - Pistons, Grizzlies, Nets, Pacers, Bulls
Average to good - Rockets, Heat, Nuggets, Cavs, Mavs, Jazz
Very average - Hornets, Sixers, Clippers, Bobcats, Sonics, Knicks
Average to bad - Celtics, TWolves, Warriors, Magic, Kings, Wizards
Bad - Raptors, Hawks, Suns, Blazers
Really bad - Bucks
Really really bad - Lakers

As far as making distinctions between bad and really bad, of course there's a distinction. Aside from the Suns, who were an unbelievably potent offensive team, not a single team I rated out as bad made the playoffs. All the teams that rated out as good or better did make the playoffs. The middle of the road teams were a mixed bag.



> I just don't agree with the tread of your connection as to how you've arrived at an opinion in Mihm which I don't believe does him justice ..an opinion I have formed from watching him


Fair enough, I've watched him and rated him both and I don't see anything special at all. Not saying he'd totally **** or anything, but he's not worth going out of the way for either.

We can keep Curry this year at the QO, and the worst case is he dies, can't play, or walks for nothing next year. In which case, we can go after Jake Voskuhl, Jason Collier, Pryzbilla, Jarron Collins, Didier Ilunga-Mbenga, Keith Van Horn, Francisco Elson, Scot Pollard, or Jackson Vroman or any number of other guys who are pretty much equivalent to Mihm. Not even to mention the better guys like Nene.

Point is, the "sure thing" we're getting in Mihm when we give up on the higher risk but higher reward Curry is no better than we can get if we keep Curry (and thus the chance at the higher reward) and it turns out to not pay off.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> Err, if you buy into the reps of Bryant and Butler as being good defenders, doesn't that point the finger even more strongly at Mihm?


That's my point ...the rep and the actuality 

Effectively what you are saying with this comment that Chris Mihm has to shoulder a greater element of responsibilty for their crap defense than what Bryant and Butler do 

No matter how you slice it up that is just not a fair comment IMO 

Defense works outside / in 







> Fair enough, I've watched him and rated him both and I don't see anything special at all. Not saying he'd totally **** or anything, but he's not worth going out of the way for either.


I've said he's not the panacea but he's not as garbage in the overreaction to him that some people have 



> We can keep Curry this year at the QO, and the worst case is he dies, can't play, or walks for nothing next year. In which case, we can go after Jake Voskuhl, Jason Collier, Pryzbilla, Jarron Collins, Didier Ilunga-Mbenga, Keith Van Horn, Francisco Elson, Scot Pollard, or Jackson Vroman or any number of other guys who are pretty much equivalent to Mihm. Not even to mention the better guys like Nene.


I don't think I would rather have any of these guys over Mihm and for those we could likely get for cheaper are not worth having anyway 

I don't think Curry is going to work out for us this year if we retain him on the QO .. I think there is a risk that his focus will be out of whack and that with wider market openness next year if he's healthy he is more likely to flip the bird and march





> Point is, the "sure thing" we're getting in Mihm when we give up on the higher risk but higher reward Curry is no better than we can get if we keep Curry (and thus the chance at the higher reward) and it turns out to not pay off.


Like I said earlier .. its a tough one for me because he is the bigger talent - that's not on question but we run real risk of losing him for nothing 

Its probably fair enough to run the risk of retaining him if he can get all his crap together rather than accept Chris Mihm and a 1st round pick given that we still hold leverage to some degree ( although not as much as now ) next summer by virtue of the amount of cap space we have

Having said that ..and again as I said earlier ... I don't think we will see the best of Eddy Curry ( if we retain him long term )for at least another two seasons - given that his head will be out to lunch this season and next summer as will his body for the start of this season and next ( given the advice his agent gives him not to work out in UFA ) 


Do we wait another 2 years on the lug??

I mean at what point does hope turn to hopelessness?


----------



## emplay (Jun 9, 2003)

Covering the Lakers I saw the team up close all season. There were numerous problems to say the least defensively.

Chucky Atkins at guard let everyone in the league blow by him. His back up at the point, Tierre Brown was no better. There was literally no defense at the point - none.

Inside, Mihm gave a ton of effort and is a better player than your average scrub - a pleasant surprise actually - was paired with Lamar Odom in the middle. Basically the combination was soft - bottom line. Odom undersized, Mihm still learning what it takes to be a starter in the league getting his first chance at legit minutes and constant penetration at the point - bad combination.

Caron Butler proved to be average defensively - much less effective than expected. Kobe who is a strong defender had no help - so over time his effort and that side of the ball drifted.

It was for all intensive purposes a clusterf--k.

Mihm is an asset with limited upside - a solid player with a strong work ethic and great attitude.

Curry is the opposite - an asset with huge upside - but far greater downside (heart issue) - his work ethic has been questioned from day 1. The Lakers are in a position where they don't expect to win for 2 years - they are at a point to take risks.

The Bulls are potentially on the verge of competing deep into the playoffs - and need stable contributors with medium risk - a disenfranchised Curry is a gamble.

I'm not sure what Paxson's decision will be, but I can see both sides.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

emplay said:


> Mihm is an asset with limited upside - a solid player with a strong work ethic and great attitude.


I think this is a very fair assessment of the guy. He's not going to put up Curry's scoring numbers (16.1), but given the same minutes, he'll score 10, grab maybe 8 boards, and generally won't be an embarassment on the court.

He's young, too, so he could be part of a team's plans for a few years yet.

I agree with King, and as I stated earlier, if we are going to lose Curry, we're going to need a C to replace him in the rotation. Guys like Allen and Songaila aren't going to do much of anything to offset losing an actual C in the rotation.

Mihm would fit us quite nicely, I'm convinced. He could play backup C, and Chandler and he would get along fine with Chandler playing some PF in a twin towers configuration.

I certainly don't see him as a downgrade from AD, in fact, I see him as something of an upgrade.


----------

