And you overrate Melo, and every other 20 pt scorer who is a mediocre defender who's only made it out of the first round of the playoffs once. At this point Melo is at best a front running quitter. We're not talking about a guy where management failed to put quality players around him. The Nuggets lost because Melo didn't take them anywhere. In the long run, the Nuggets are better off starting over than trying to win with Melo. And playing one guard and three or four forwards is another in the long list of asinine ideas you come up with.
You do realize that Luol Deng has only made it out of the first round just once, right? You said the same things about Amare when he was a free agent, and look at what he's doing for the Knicks.
The Nuggets are weird. I think the franchise is more concerned about putting together a team that will pack their arena during the regular season than they are about winning a championship. They put together a good collection of talent which is almost exclusively designed to run opposing teams out of home games, relying on the atmosphere issues. The Nuggets have made running and gunning the face of their franchise, which is good and fine until the playoffs roll around. I don't think 'Melo's reputation plays out if he's traded to a more focused team. He's a brilliant player and was a good defender in college. I think he becomes a much better defender, and shoots more effectively while scoring less points. It's kind of sad, but I look at his reputation as a product of his team's mentality. We've been debating this for months, and I don't think that much has changed. I would include Noah in a deal for 'Melo, provided he is willing to sign an extension. It's still a stars league, and he would provide an undeniable talent upgrade. But none of this is going to happen. The Bulls won't sign 'Melo unless we are able to ship Deng, because our franchise isn't really hellbent on winning, either. Denver will not take back Deng. And 'Melo has shown no interest in playing in Chicago. It is what it is.
I think I made the point that the Bulls have the #1 defense right now and that's with Boozer playing and without Noah for much of the season. Defense isn't our problem - Thibs' team oriented schemes work well even with Boozer, who has the same reputation as Melo, no? Our problem is clearly having all our scoring concentrated in 3 guys (one who's hurt a lot) and nobody beyond Rose who can really get his own shot. The last two games are a pretty good indication of what having guys to take some of the scoring burden off Rose can mean. Against Dallas, without Boozer, Rose takes 28 shots to score 26 points. Yikes! Against Cleveland, with Boozer, Rose takes 20 shots to score 24 points. As for whether the Bulls will make a deal for Melo, I agree with you and transplant 100%. I'd be shocked if they do it. But there's nothing wrong with wanting them to do it. Miami and the Bulls have almost identical records. The difference between the two teams is that Miami looks like a team that the regular season is a tune up for the playoffs, while the regular season for the Bulls is what counts to them, and perhaps getting out of the 1st round for a change. In a 7 game series, it seems far more likely (to me) that one of Wade or LeBron (or Bosh) can carry the team to a win in any of the games. When the Bulls' opponent gets to watch game films of all 82 Bulls games to prepare for the series, and the films after each game of a playoff series, they're going to see that Zone Defense works against the Bulls for long stretches, and aggressive double team of Rose exposes the rest of the players for not being very good ballhandlers or getting their own shots. The idea of getting Melo is that you double team Rose and Melo gets to go 1 on 3 instead of 1 on 5, and he's going to have a much easier time of it than he does in Denver. I'm not hellbent on getting rid of Deng or anything. He is a solid player for us, and we could certainly do worse. It's just that he has the big contract that makes deals work under the CBA, and in this case we're talking about a guy in Melo who is an actual big upgrade.
Yup, this is another thread where we find faux-arguments about Anthony but are basically all in agreement. We all like Deng (and most of us think he's worth his contract); but at the same time we acknowledge that other teams aren't looking for a fair-value contract, they're looking for a dump on a one year rental. All of us, or almost all of us, would include Noah in a package, even though we recognize that he is a talented two-way player. And none of us are convinced that the Bulls are willing to do whatever it takes to put together a championship team.
I think you're right on the grounds that the Bulls would not incur Anthony's salary and keep around Deng at the same time. It certainly goes along with the way the Bulls generally operate. However, the fact that this is how the Bulls operate does not make it the best, or only solution. Or an unrealistic one. How the Bulls (generally) operate, for instance, is not how the Lakers, Magic, Celtics, Knicks, Spurs, or Heat have generally operated. There are obvious basketball and business cases to be made for having them both. From a basketball perspective and a business perspective. 1. Deng is our best wing defender, and the second best spot up shooter we have. Thus, he's the best alternative to play on a team with Melo if we want to maximize our wins. 2. Maximizing our wins, and winning a title, brings in lots of revenue. Spending more money is sometimes necessary to make more money. These points are not only obvious, they've been successfully demonstrated by other teams over and over. Now, if someone wants to argue as to why they wouldn't work in the particulars of this case, I'd be interested to hear about why. If the answer is simply that the Bulls don't think like that, ok, but that doesn't make the idea unrealistic, it makes it unrealistic to believe the Bulls would run with an idea that's been successfully used by other teams. And even then... as a Bulls fan, it'd be worth mulling over the whys of that answer
Is anyone willing to argue that Denver is able to build a contending team? I'm not, and don't blame him for wanting out. As to the question about whether Deng and 'Melo can start together, it's really two questions. Can Deng guard shoot guards and can 'Melo and Deng coexist on offense. Both questions seem to have pretty easy answers. There are no explosive shooting guards in the league right now, besides arguably Dwayne Wade. I think Deng does just fine against the Ray Allen's and Kobe Bryant's, as he has in the past. On offense, 'Melo played point guard for stretches at Syracuse. He has the ability to handle like a guard, and Deng has been our most prolific spot up shooter. They would be just fine in the starting lineup together. Noah, Boozer, Anthony, Deng, Rose, that's a team that could win a championship.
Wait, I'm confused. Are you saying we can get Melo without giving up Deng or Noah? And that the only thing stopping the Bulls from doing so is their unwillingness to go all out to build a championship team?
There's (at least) two separate and worthwhile questions. It's worth knowing the answer to "what's the best trade the Bulls could make", because it's good to know yourself. It's good to think out which of the alternatives would lead to the best outcome on the court. A team that's deluded about the talent it has, whether it makes trades or not, is in trouble. Of course it's also worth knowing what trades would be accepted by other parties. At this point, I'm coming to the conclusion that the Bulls can't make a competitive offer out of the alternatives that would leave them demonstrably better on the court. But on the other hand, I don't think that comes down to inclusion of Deng vs. inclusion of , say, Brewer/Korver/Bogans (who would add up to pretty much the same salary). It's my reasoned opinion, however, that the Bulls would be better off on the court by keeping the former and trading the latter, for the reasons that have been ably laid out by such sweet thunder. It's also my reasoned opinion, based on numerous reports suggesting the Nuggets don't want to have anything to do with Lu's contract, that they would prefer the latter set of guys, who are all signed to much shorter term deals.
My goodness. If all we need to do is trade Asik, Gibson, Korver, Brewer, Watson, Bogans, or any combination thereof to get Melo, why, yes, I'd do that. There's a verse in the Bible, applied to Paul when he's testifying before a court about the resurrection of Jesus, in which one of the judges says: "Paul, your great learning has driven you insane!" If you think you can justify that this trade makes sense for Denver to do, I think it will apply to you (generic). And if it turns out to be the case, then that's pretty close to a miracle, and all props to you for having believed it.
I find lots of interesting stuff to think about in these situations though. Could the Nuggets build a contender? Probably not. Billups and K-Mart are clearly on the downhill slope, and even though I really like Ty Lawson, it's no slam on him to say he's not Chauncy Billups. But it's worth thinking about that they did build a contender, and thinking about what lessons are there. Where do we want to be with Derrick and Joakim in a few years? Do we want them to be on an otherwise aging team that "contended" but couldn't quite get over the hump? The Nuggets were a "contender", I think, but not all contenders are created equal. The Nuggets put together what was actually a heck of a team. Billups, Melo, KMart, Nene and Smith, with top notch depth and defenders added in (Birdman, Kleiza/D. Jones/Afflalo, Lawson). That got them to the conference championship game two years ago, but then last year their coach got cancer, the replacement seemed to go nuts, guys played hurt, and things sort of fell apart. I think it's important to consider just how big the window of opportunity is a team can open up, and it's important to consider just how much you leave to chance and injury. Maybe if everything turned the Nuggets way, and they got a lot of breaks, they could have won a title over the last couple years. But if they get a couple bad breaks, and the Lakers don't, coupled with an aging team, and you're pretty much back to square one.
I misspoke. Obviously, I think Noah is included in any offer. I just got a little carried away with my projection.
It does seem miraculously unfair, doesn't it? Well, welcome to the NBA. What did Pau Gasol get traded for? That's right, Kwame Brown. What did the Nuggets acquire superstar Chauncy Billups for? That's right, the expiring corpse of Allen Iverson. What did the Cleveland Cavaliers get for Lebron? Big fat nothing. What did the Raptors get for Bosh? Big fat nothing. You're totally right in arguing that a trade has to make sense for Denver. On the other hand, I think your (admittedly unstated but strongly implied) beliefs about what makes sense for Denver are pretty close to totally wrong. Denver is looking more and more likely to get utterly hosed. While we look and say "Hey, Carmelo is a great player, they should get a lot for him", the reality we've seen in the NBA time and again is that teams losing great players don't get a fair return.
Hey, I acknowledge the possibility of miracles. But I don't think you should trivialize them. The Gasol trade was truly manna from heaven for LA, and every GM in the league, as soon as they heard of it, said, "We could have done better than that!" It was the Jerry West pipeline that delivered Gasol to LA for such garbage in return (eh, Marc Gasol is not garbage, but...) The KG trade was also a gift, with a McHale pipeline, but there was a "kernel of hope" so to speak in the form of Baby Al. Chauncy? superstar? I think Dumars really thought AI might be worth something, and more importantly Detroit was looking to reload (hello Ben Gordon and Charlie V!) And Toronto and Cleveland were delusional enough to think LeBron and Bosh was coming back. Denver has a clearer picture and can take their time. They don't have to take back garbage. We have no gems to offer them. And our garbage doesn't clear out the very next year. They have more flexibility just letting Melo walk than taking on our players. Maybe its worth it to them if they really need to be sure they'll have Ronnie Brewer and Kyle Korver for an extra year or so...I don't know. Now, are you implying that Chicago should make this deal without a commitment from Melo, and that's what's holding up the deal, and is a sign of "no balls" on the part of Bulls' management?
Oh, its cool SST, by this time, I was digesting the fact that MikeDC is saying exactly that we should expect such a miracle! Insane, or a prophet? You decide!
What makes you think Denver has a clearer picture or better options than those other teams? They've got less than a month left, and it appears to me that they've blown their chance at something approaching a "fair trade" when dealing with the Nets. I think a big difference in how we're looking at this is in how we look at the power structure in places here. Jerry West, for instance, had nothing to do with the Gasol trade. Really... he retired in 2007, and Gasol was traded in 2008. The power that really mattered in that case was that Gasol wanted to go to a very good team. Every GM in the league bitched about it, but if they really thought Gasol would happily come play with them and sign an extension, they were totally and completely wrong. I think the same is true of McHale. Perhaps there's more of a pipeline effect there, but there are still significant limits. Without Pierce and Ray Allen, that pipeline doesn't matter. Larry Bird runs the Pacers, but McHale wasn't gonna have any luck sending KG there. Because they blow. Great players have a lot of power to call their shots, and that means their old teams won't get much value. That's my working theory for the Melo trade as well.... No. With respect to the Bulls, I was mostly arguing against Transplant's belief that the only way to do the trade, from the Bulls side of things, was to trade Deng. From a winning basketball and titles perspective, there's a strong argument to be made for keeping Deng. Were I Chicago (or New York or New Jersey or anyone), I wouldn't deal more than a minimal package for Melo without a commitment he'd extend. There's a lot of conflicting info out there about where he's willing to go, but it's worth investigating from the Bulls perspective, and pretty aggressively. I certainly think if the Bulls are willing to give up significant pieces for him (and we are all agreed on that), then it's worth making a pitch as well. Because at the end of the day, that's what these deals come down to. It's not pipelines, so much as selling the player on a realistic plan for a championship.
