# Salmons won't play tonight/trade being finalized



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

KC:



> Bulls management has told Salmons to remain at team hotel as it works to finalize a trade. Won't play vs. Knicks


http://twitter.com/KCJHoop


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

*Salmons gone?*



> Bulls management has told Salmons to remain at team hotel as it works to finalize a trade. Won't play vs. Knicks.


 - K.C. Johnson

Shame! Salmons had some good games for the Bulls. Wonder who they are getting back.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Houston or San Antonio is my guess.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Houston or San Antonio is my guess.


Chris Bosh is mine. :lol:

Still, you think Noah isn't traveling with the team ONLY because of the plantar fasciitis?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Interesting, keep an eye on San An-Indy's box score to see if Roger Mason plays tonight.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

TwinkieTowers said:


> Chris Bosh is mine. :lol:
> 
> Still, you think Noah isn't traveling with the team ONLY because of the plantar fasciitis?


I think if Bosh was in play it would have made a bigger splash or something more would have leaked out and not just from a bulls beat writer. I bet its a smaller deal to San Antonio but hey I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

Interesting

I liked Salmons, wish he was about 5 years younger however, but at his age and the possibility of him opting in its best he goes. 

Hope he does well wherever he lands


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

He may have opted out of his contract, but obviously the Bulls did not want to take that risk. 

We now have enough to sign one max fa this summer.


----------



## fuzznuts (May 23, 2006)

truebluefan said:


> We now have enough to sign one max fa this summer.



Hope the Bulls front office has what it takes to put us in position for two max FAs


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Speculation is mounting

ESPN radio says portland

*johnhollinger*



> Just a thought: 3rd team in Cle-Was could be Chicago. Z, Moon for Salmons, Jamison, and then trade Gooden into newly created Chi exception


This is just guesses.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

ok forget what Hollinger said the Clippers are the 3rd team


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

daldridgetnt (Twitter)

Source says Salmons not going to "any of the Texas teams," for what it's worth. Still evolving, obviously.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Well that is a big relief for me. As long as we don't take salary back (which I am sure we wouldn't) this should take the guess work out of whether or not we can afford a max contract.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Some Bulls fans are very upset that we traded our 3rd leading scorer for scraps. This is not about talent. This is about this summer and beyond.


----------



## MicCheck12 (Aug 12, 2005)

Clippers.? any idea what the trade could be.?


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

MicCheck12 said:


> Clippers.? any idea what the trade could be.?


Reports say Salmons for Blake Griffin.


----------



## MicCheck12 (Aug 12, 2005)

deal


----------



## MicCheck12 (Aug 12, 2005)

It's no longer the Clippers. Unless, you guys want Gooden again. We just completed a three way trade


----------



## Bulls rock your socks (Jun 29, 2006)

truebluefan said:


> Speculation is mounting
> 
> ESPN radio says portland
> 
> ...


its def not that. that deal doesnt involve us.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> Not finalized, but two sources say Bulls and Bucks may be closing in on deal sending Salmons to MKE for Kurt Thomas, Francisco Elson.
> 
> Would make sense, as Bulls could then move Tyrus Thomas separately, clear Salmons/T Thomas off books and be max player in summer..


 - david aldridge


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

HB said:


> - david aldridge


Makes sense. I think nothing is close with a TT trade yet because he is playing. 

Lets see what happens tomorrow.


----------



## Bulls rock your socks (Jun 29, 2006)

boring trade....zzzzzz


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

truebluefan said:


> Makes sense. I think nothing is close with a TT trade yet because he is playing.
> 
> Lets see what happens tomorrow.


Kurt thomas is playing tonight for the bucks, trade makes a lot of sense for both teams we need a redd replacement and 2010 doesn't mean anything to us, our cap spaces comes in 11


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

WojYahooNBA Bulls and Bucks have reached agreement to trade Chicago's John Salmons for Kurt Thomas and Francisco Elson, a league source tells Y!

Someone else saying the same thing


----------



## BullFan16 (Jun 2, 2003)

this trade is awful...at least they are expiring contracts but this trade basically says the bulls dont care about this season at all...devin brown sucks, kurt thomas sucks, francisco elson would lose one on one to dalibor bagaric..... if we screw up this offseason, paxson and foreman need to get the hell out


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

You Milwaukee folk, how's the D from Kurt Thomas in his ripe old age? Still solid in the limited minutes he gets?


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

K. Thomas has never had a defensive rating above 105. Very, very solid. He could be this half-season's Antonio Davis/PJ Brown.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Sheridan is reporting this trade could be expanded tomorrow to include TT. Bucks are trying to get Murphy. If they fail, its possible TT could be traded.


----------



## Bulls rock your socks (Jun 29, 2006)

wth salmons and tyrus for those oldies?


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I hate to be a downer but the bulls dont have any players left to compete for the playoffs.

Salmon's was a solid player and his scoring and d will really be missed by this team.

d


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

King Joseus said:


> You Milwaukee folk, how's the D from Kurt Thomas in his ripe old age? Still solid in the limited minutes he gets?


He has been decent.


----------



## Bulls rock your socks (Jun 29, 2006)

yea i agree. we dont have enought length at the guard. so it looks like its gunna be 1 and done in the playoffs this years.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Bulls rock your socks said:


> yea i agree. we dont have enought length at the guard. so it looks like its gunna be 1 and done in the playoffs this years.


Was likely to be that way with Salmons, too.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

To be a homer, the lack of guard length didn't stop the 06-07 Bulls from advancing past the first round.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Rumors are swirling that the deal is not Thomas/Elson but Warrick/Elson. 

We shall see.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

giusd said:


> I hate to be a downer but the bulls dont have any players left to compete for the playoffs.
> 
> Salmon's was a solid player and his scoring and d will really be missed by this team.
> 
> d



Sure, but who cares? It's not about this season and never has been. It makes it less fun to watch, but the Bulls are going to take a hit this season to take a shot at moving up to the next level next year, as they have to do.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

The 40 or so games left, I think we'll miss Salmons. He is our 3rd best scorer, and 2nd best shot creator. 

But, I'll take the short-term hit for possible long-term gain.

Plus, Devin Brown supposedly can do many things John can. This also could mean more opportunity for James Johnson. Maybe he sees this as motivation to get things together.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

I actually really like Warrick and would rather see the deal be for him from an entertainment aspect


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

I hope its not warrick, but from a talent swap perspective it makes the deal more even


----------



## Bulls rock your socks (Jun 29, 2006)

i like warrick. and we have 30 some games left not 40.


----------



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

Warrick and Alexander is fine. Good bye Salmons. I will miss your constant jab steps. Thank again for game 6 against Boston and the great 2nd half of last season to lead us to the playoffs.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Warrick or Alexander, but not both. The Bulls have enough athletic 'tweener forward projects as it is.


----------



## bullsger (Jan 14, 2003)

http://blogs.dailyherald.com/node/3470




> Milwaukee has four expiring contracts available and any combination of two players would work in this deal.
> 
> Early reports had the Bulls receiving veteran big men Kurt Thomas and Francisco Elson from the Bucks. Later in the night, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that power forward Hakim Warrick and seldom-used small forward Joe Alexander were headed to the Bulls.
> 
> It’s also possible the players are yet to be determined. It’s my understanding the Bulls want the big men as replacements if they end up dealing Brad Miller. Warrick didn’t play at all against Houston on Wednesday, but Kurt Thomas did.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

TwinkieTowers said:


> Warrick or Alexander, but not both. The Bulls have enough athletic 'tweener forward projects as it is.


If it is Alexander, he won't ever play. The Bucks sent him to the D-League, and that's a good place for him for the rest of his career.


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

looks like its done


> The Bulls and Bucks have finally settled on a package for John Salmons, as Milwaukee will trade the expiring contracts of Joe Alexander and Hakim Warrick.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

Hakim will help you guys, Alexander is a ****ing joke.. and lives up to his role in this deal as an expiring contract


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Why was the team not immediately announced?

KC Johnson



> Although it's likely Hakim Warrick and Joe Alexander are headed from the Bucks to the Bulls on Thursday instead of big men Kurt Thomas and Francisco Elson, there's a reason no trade has been officially announced.
> 
> League sources said the Bulls were active in the discussions between the Kings and Rockets that resulted in the trade sending Kevin Martin to Houston and Tracy McGrady to the Kings.
> 
> ...


http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/02/bulls-keeping-busy-as-trade-deadline-approaches.html

ESPN said the players changed because the Bucks were trying to move Warrick to another team. The talks fizzled out.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

ESPN News is still saying Salmons for Thomas and Elson. 

Needs updated badly.


----------



## Bulls rock your socks (Jun 29, 2006)

espn is so slow on updated everything.......


----------



## bullsger (Jan 14, 2003)

From the Hollinger chat


> John Hollinger
> (1:27 PM)
> 
> 
> Coming shortly ... I'm going to need to exit and post my trade grades. Before I go, two pieces of news to share. First, one tidbit that went unreported in Salmons deal is that Bucks got rights to swap first-round picks with Bulls, top-10 protected.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Hollinger:

one tidbit that went unreported in Salmons deal is that Bucks got rights to swap first-round picks with Bulls, top-10 protected.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/30889


----------



## bullsger (Jan 14, 2003)

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/salmons_trade_100218.html?rss=true



> The Chicago Bulls traded John Salmons to the Milwaukee Bucks for Joe Alexander and Hakim Warrick (pronounced Ha-keem). In addition, Chicago traded the Bulls' regular second round draft choices in 2011 and 2012. Also, Milwaukee has the option in NBA Draft 2010 of switching first round picks with Chicago, so long as Chicago's first round pick is not a top 10 selection.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Alexander has been a colossal disappointment and Warrik is the original Thomas, dont see what this trade does other than guarantee cap space in 2010. Heck I think the Bulls just made the Bucks a bit better.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

thebizkit69u said:


> Alexander has been a colossal disappointment and Warrik is the original Thomas, dont see what this trade does other than guarantee cap space in 2010. Heck I think the Bulls just made the Bucks a bit better.


Cap space for 2010 is the goal.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

WTF, why the Bulls trade second round picks like they are nothing! Careless thinking, sure the chances of finding Michael Redd's and Boozer's are rare but its not impossible. Great trade for the Bucks in the long run.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Alexander has been a colossal disappointment and Warrik is the original Thomas, dont see what this trade does other than guarantee cap space in 2010. Heck I think the Bulls just made the Bucks a bit better.


Bulls FO didnt want to take that chance that John would opt in. It is about money. 

I like Warrick Alexander better than Thomas Elson. 

I dont like the draft picks. The Bulls must think they wont need them after this summer.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

Are the Bucks getting 18ppg solid John Salmons or 12 ppg 38% shooting crappy John Salmons... how he been looking?


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

roux2dope said:


> Are the Bucks getting 18ppg solid John Salmons or 12 ppg 38% shooting crappy John Salmons... how he been looking?


He's improved over the season.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> WTF, why the Bulls trade second round picks like they are nothing! Careless thinking, sure the chances of finding Michael Redd's and Boozer's are rare but its not impossible. Great trade for the Bucks in the long run.


Historically you only get 2nd round steals in the early-2nd round. Our 2nd rounders will most likely be in the middle to back-end, which RARELY nets you anything (like, even more rare than getting a good 2nd rounder to begin with). Can you name a contributing NBA player who was drafted in the 45-60 range? I can't...

Edit: I got curious and looked. In the past 5 years, I see the following:

- Marc Gasol (#48 in 2007)
- Ramon Sessions (#56 in 2007)
- Paul Millsap (#47 in 2006)
- Louis Williams (#45 in 2005)

A few other recognizable names, but none of them are NBA starters and barely rotation players. And again, you see most of these come up in the 40's and below.

Statistically there is about a 1-2% chance of getting a truly good player from the late 2nd round, is all I'm saying.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Historically you only get 2nd round steals in the early-2nd round. Our 2nd rounders will most likely be in the middle to back-end, which RARELY nets you anything (like, even more rare than getting a good 2nd rounder to begin with). Can you name a contributing NBA player who was drafted in the 45-60 range? I can't...


Manu Ginobili!


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

The Bucks tend to spin 2nd rouund picks into gold, Ill take em


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

TwinkieTowers said:


> Manu Ginobili!


Ehh, I edited my post -- in the past 5 years, there have only been 3 or 4 good contributing players draft in the late 2nd round. 

Going back further, you see some foreigners sneak into that range because teams like the Spurs were ahead of the curve. I don't see this as the case anymore, the Europe game is far more transparent than is was 5-10 years ago.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

So since Salmons and TT both are gone, does this mean its time to play JJ some back up at SF? 

I wonder if Warrick can play at SF? 

Hinrich can in spots.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

truebluefan said:


> So since Salmons and TT both are gone, does this mean its time to play JJ some back up at SF?
> 
> I wonder if Warrick can play at SF?
> 
> Hinrich can in spots.


I hope you guys decide to play hinrich at small forward when you play against us


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

roux2dope said:


> I hope you guys decide to play hinrich at small forward when you play against us


He can guard the bigger players once in a while. Kirk plays good D. 

He has played some limited SF before last years trade deadline.


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

The 2 trades might have been a big mistake, especially the Salmons trade and the reason why the Bulls won't make the playoffs. If the Bulls don't make the playoffs, then the Bucks will get their lottery pick. You should have made it "lottery protected", not "top 10 protected" Gar! That shows a sense of cockiness on his part by automatically assuming we were in the playoffs. 

Thomas did not have to be traded and could of contributed significantly these last several games. It would of been his time to shine. Management knew our bigs had injuries. I can see why they got Warrick since they wanted Thomas traded, but he didn't have to be. He was acting professional! I understand why they traded John. They needed cap room, but they didn't have to trade Thomas, thus trading for Warrick b/c they are simlar players. They could have kept Thomas until the end of the season and traded Salmons to a team not in their division. We then wouldn't have needed Warrick. He is a nice veteran player similar to Thomas, but he does not bring the energy like Thomas. That is the problem with our current bench. No energy!

We better hope other teams start having some bad luck and that we squeeze into the 8th spot now. Another loss will really bring this team down emotionally, I think. Is anyone else worried?


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

BullsBaller said:


> The 2 trades might have been a big mistake, especially the Salmons trade and the reason why the Bulls won't make the playoffs. If the Bulls don't make the playoffs, then the Bucks will get their lottery pick. You should have made it "lottery protected", not "top 10 protected" Gar! That shows a sense of cockiness on his part by automatically assuming we were in the playoffs.
> 
> Thomas did not have to be traded and could of contributed significantly these last several games. It would of been his time to shine. Management knew our bigs had injuries. I can see why they got Warrick since they wanted Thomas traded, but he didn't have to be. He was acting professional! I understand why they traded John. They needed cap room, but they didn't have to trade Thomas, thus trading for Warrick b/c they are simlar players. They could have kept Thomas until the end of the season and traded Salmons to a team not in their division. We then wouldn't have needed Warrick. He is a nice veteran player similar to Thomas, but he does not bring the energy like Thomas. That is the problem with our current bench. No energy!
> 
> We better hope other teams start having some bad luck and that we squeeze into the 8th spot now. Another loss will really bring this team down emotionally, I think. Is anyone else worried?


After Salmons got traded it's very obvious that our talent depth took a big hit. Flip is not as good as Salmons, I think many people already know that. But, at least we don't have to give Pargo big minutes (actually... for whatever reason, Vinny is starting to give Pargo more minutes and reduce Flip's lately).

I don't really care about Tyrus. I think Warrick is doing OK. What I like about Warrick is that we know what we're going to get from him night in night out. 8-10 points, 6-8 rebounds. Warrick hangs around the basket all the time, looking for easy baskets; it is something Tyrus have not been able to do consistently.

With Noah being out for another 2 weeks, our talent depth situation is something that we just have to deal with currently. BUT! THIS IS FOR VINNY: Despite or lack of depth, that doesn't mean we should limit ourselves to 6-men rotation! BE CREATIVE! We got JJ and Murray on the bench who is capable of doing more than just sits on the bench or play garbage minutes.

About the playoff race, I don't really know what's going to happen. Probably we'll squeeze in the 8th spot. Honestly, with how depleted our team looks right now, I don't want to put too high of a hope. Let's hope the team stays competitive and find a way to get over the situation. My biggest concern is Vinny Del *****. I think he has the potential to be a good coach in the future. But, the pace of his development is too slow compared to Derrick's and where the team is trying to get. We need a new coach next year, a much more experienced one. EDIT: Part of this business is to develop basketball players; NOT Basketball Coach!


----------

