http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=7...asc&start=0 Take it for what its worth. Its similar to the New York deal I proposed, just with a Cleveland twist on it. That'd give us: PG-Larry Hughes/Chris Duhon SG-Ben Gordon/Thabo Sefolosha SF-Luol Deng/Andres Nocioni PF-Tyrus Thomas/Joe Smith C- Drew Gooden/Joakim Noah/Aaron Gray Not the greatest, but we dump both Hinrich and Wallace's awful contracts in this trade.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Dec 28 2007, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=7...asc&start=0 Take it for what its worth. Its similar to the New York deal I proposed, just with a Cleveland twist on it. That'd give us: PG-Larry Hughes/Chris Duhon SG-Ben Gordon/Thabo Sefolosha SF-Luol Deng/Andres Nocioni PF-Tyrus Thomas/Joe Smith C- Drew Gooden/Joakim Noah/Aaron Gray Not the greatest, but we dump both Hinrich and Wallace's awful contracts in this trade.</div> It would be better for Gordon to play point than Hughes. It's shown in Cleveland that he is bad at the point guard spot. And plus Hughes has a horrible contract and very injury prone. The Bulls are better off keeping Wallace and Hinrich.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumpman @ Dec 28 2007, 12:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Dec 28 2007, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=7...asc&start=0 Take it for what its worth. Its similar to the New York deal I proposed, just with a Cleveland twist on it. That'd give us: PG-Larry Hughes/Chris Duhon SG-Ben Gordon/Thabo Sefolosha SF-Luol Deng/Andres Nocioni PF-Tyrus Thomas/Joe Smith C- Drew Gooden/Joakim Noah/Aaron Gray Not the greatest, but we dump both Hinrich and Wallace's awful contracts in this trade.</div> It would be better for Gordon to play point than Hughes. It's shown in Cleveland that he is bad at the point guard spot. And plus Hughes has a horrible contract and very injury prone. The Bulls are better off keeping Wallace and Hinrich. </div> Didn't the Cavs go on some huge streak into the finals last year when Hughes was point guard? I was thinking, wow this trade sucks. But then the realization of what Wallace's value actually is. Not only does he suck. Not only does he have a horrible contract. But he also shredded up the chemistry on this team, is a complete malcontent, and got his coach fired. His value is so negative that this is the best the Bulls can do. The question comes, are the Bulls better off trading Wallace and having to give up another piece to move him, or are they better off just cutting him. Why not send him home? If someone like Tim Thomas or Eddie Robinson acted like this they would be sent home. Hell, they were 100x the team players and hustlers as Wallace. God I hate Ben Wallace.
Does Cleveland have any high draft picks on the way? I can't see the Bulls making this move unless a lottery pick, from them or a third team is included -- and if it does happen, let the record show that I predicted Paxson would try to move talent for a lottery picks to buy a little more leash.
I hope everyone realizes that instead of signing Wallace, he could have signed Gooden and saved about $10M/year in the process. I will say that Gooden is exactly what I'd like to see at the PF position for us. I'm lukewarm about Hughes though. The backcourt would be Hughes and Duhon with Gordon off the bench. Good D, but both guys really struggle with their shooting enough to make the team not much fun to watch. Duhon, Hughes, Gooden, Deng, and one of Nocioni (3 forward scheme) or Noah or Thomas (3 forward scheme) or Smith at C.
I think Paxson would be making this trade with the intention of ending Boylan's mad scientist experiment, bringing Gordon back into the starting lineup, and making him the focal point of the offense. No longer will Hinrich be the focal point of the offense, dribbling around like a madmen with nowhere to go.
I would hate to see this trade go through - personally I don't want Drew Gooden to leave. Unfortunately, the Cavs will never get a solid PG straight up for Hughes, so someone else must be involved. So I don't like this trade for Cleveland, because Ben Wallace doesn't offer nearly as much as I think Gooden does. Granted, Hinrich offers more than Hughes, but the Cavs' game is built around having big men who can shoot the mid range jumpshot, especially after screens. Walace can't offer that, so I don't like this trade.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Dec 28 2007, 02:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think Paxson would be making this trade with the intention of ending Boylan's mad scientist experiment, bringing Gordon back into the starting lineup, and making him the focal point of the offense. No longer will Hinrich be the focal point of the offense, dribbling around like a madmen with nowhere to go.</div> Boylan was likely encouraged to put Gordon on the bench by Paxson. Paxson won't be making a trade to force Gordon into the starting lineup
To provide a bit more analysis than that, as much as I hate to say it, this trade isn't outlandish. Wallace for Hughes is probably fair. They have pretty much equivalent contracts, but Wallace's goes in a direction that favors the Cavs with their luxury tax. And he might bring a bit more help in the short term. But Hinrich for Gooden? I actually like Gooden a fair amount. Although he's a bit of a boneheaded player, I agree he brings exactly what we need. However, Kirk is at the absolute low point in his value. He's still fairly young, on an ok and declining deal, and has no injury history. I think he's likely to bounce back to his form over the last several years, each of which have been an order of magnitude better than Gooden. Thus, this trade would make me seriously ill. Plus, I don't think Duhon, Hughes and Gordon is all that promising a backcourt. I'd be perfectly willing to entertain something like Duhon and Nocioni instead of Hinrich. That gets us (theoretically) a big guard in Hughes and gets the Cavs both a forward and a PG who can help them.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Dec 28 2007, 01:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumpman @ Dec 28 2007, 12:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Dec 28 2007, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=7...asc&start=0 Take it for what its worth. Its similar to the New York deal I proposed, just with a Cleveland twist on it. That'd give us: PG-Larry Hughes/Chris Duhon SG-Ben Gordon/Thabo Sefolosha SF-Luol Deng/Andres Nocioni PF-Tyrus Thomas/Joe Smith C- Drew Gooden/Joakim Noah/Aaron Gray Not the greatest, but we dump both Hinrich and Wallace's awful contracts in this trade.</div> It would be better for Gordon to play point than Hughes. It's shown in Cleveland that he is bad at the point guard spot. And plus Hughes has a horrible contract and very injury prone. The Bulls are better off keeping Wallace and Hinrich. </div> Didn't the Cavs go on some huge streak into the finals last year when Hughes was point guard? I was thinking, wow this trade sucks. But then the realization of what Wallace's value actually is. Not only does he suck. Not only does he have a horrible contract. But he also shredded up the chemistry on this team, is a complete malcontent, and got his coach fired. His value is so negative that this is the best the Bulls can do. The question comes, are the Bulls better off trading Wallace and having to give up another piece to move him, or are they better off just cutting him. Why not send him home? If someone like Tim Thomas or Eddie Robinson acted like this they would be sent home. Hell, they were 100x the team players and hustlers as Wallace. God I hate Ben Wallace. </div> They had Gibson playing point.
Arguably, last season the Cavs were at their best with Hughes at the Point and Pavlovic playing the 2. However, Hughes has said this season that he doesn't want to play the point guard role. Hinrich would certainly help the Cavs at the point, since they desparately need a true point guard. However, Wallace just wouldn't help them much. Yes, Gooden can suffer mental lapses often, but when he's playing well he can be one of the better Power Forwards in the League. He is a great rebounder and has a good jumpshot that takes him out to 18 or so feet. Wallace just cannot do that, and that is the reason wy I don't want this trade to happen. A big man who can shoot is more integral to the Cavs' game plan than a true PG.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Dec 28 2007, 09:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Arguably, last season the Cavs were at their best with Hughes at the Point and Pavlovic playing the 2. However, Hughes has said this season that he doesn't want to play the point guard role. Hinrich would certainly help the Cavs at the point, since they desparately need a true point guard. However, Wallace just wouldn't help them much. Yes, Gooden can suffer mental lapses often, but when he's playing well he can be one of the better Power Forwards in the League. He is a great rebounder and has a good jumpshot that takes him out to 18 or so feet. Wallace just cannot do that, and that is the reason wy I don't want this trade to happen. A big man who can shoot is more integral to the Cavs' game plan than a true PG.</div> How's about Nocioni (a combo forward who can shoot) and Duhon instead of Hinrich?
For me, that would be even worse. Hinrich would be the key to the trade for the Cavs, and I think they'll need to get him if they are to deal Gooden to the Bulls (I would rather they kept him, but Ferry has other ideas). A three-for-two deal makes little sense for the Cavs, because they really need to improve their starting 5, rather than add depth and weakening the starters.
I'd rather give up Hinrich than Duhon and Nocioni. This is one of those cruel joke trades, where the average fans might be thinking they're getting something good in Hinrich, and that Ben Wallace could be salvaged, but in reality, both are crappy bench players. Duhon would get that offense running smooth, and I'd hate to give Lebron another scoring option. I'll give them the two garbage players on the Bulls instead.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Dec 28 2007, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>For me, that would be even worse. Hinrich would be the key to the trade for the Cavs, and I think they'll need to get him if they are to deal Gooden to the Bulls (I would rather they kept him, but Ferry has other ideas). A three-for-two deal makes little sense for the Cavs, because they really need to improve their starting 5, rather than add depth and weakening the starters.</div> I could be wrong I suppose, but I think two out of Wallace, Nocioni and Duhon would start for the Cavs
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Dec 28 2007, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'd rather give up Hinrich than Duhon and Nocioni. This is one of those cruel joke trades, where the average fans might be thinking they're getting something good in Hinrich, and that Ben Wallace could be salvaged, but in reality, both are crappy bench players. Duhon would get that offense running smooth, and I'd hate to give Lebron another scoring option. I'll give them the two garbage players on the Bulls instead.</div> Although he's sucked this year, Kirk has rated out under my system as the 7th best perimeter player (SG, PG, SF) with 1-6 years of experience. That doesn't mean he's a superstar or anything, but he's certainly a well above average player and the best Chicago Bull over the period. He's clearly not garbage. In fairness, Gooden was the 9th best PF/C in the same data
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MikeDC @ Dec 28 2007, 07:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Dec 28 2007, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>For me, that would be even worse. Hinrich would be the key to the trade for the Cavs, and I think they'll need to get him if they are to deal Gooden to the Bulls (I would rather they kept him, but Ferry has other ideas). A three-for-two deal makes little sense for the Cavs, because they really need to improve their starting 5, rather than add depth and weakening the starters.</div> I could be wrong I suppose, but I think two out of Wallace, Nocioni and Duhon would start for the Cavs </div> They are trading two of their starters If you just added those three to the cavs, maybe Duhon would start.
The more I think of this, the more liekly I think this is to happen, and here's why. I think the consensus is that Kirk is the best player going in this deal. That would mean Cleveland would have to give something else back...and that'd be the first round pick this year. Newble is the logical third guy to balance out the salaries. that lets us give Memphis a Tyrus, Nocioni, Newble, 2 draft picks for Gasol deal. We get to use Newble as filler instead of Duhon, who would have been wasted in Memphis with their plethora of point guards. Then we're left with: PG-Ben Gordon/Chris Duhon SG-Larry Hughes/Thabo Sefolosha SF-Luol Deng/Thabo Sefolosha/Viktar Khryapa PF-Drew Gooden/Joe Smith C- Pau Gasol/Joakim Noah/Aaron Gray Khryapa and Sefolosha would get their big breaks. Then we could go make one last consolidation trade of Noah, Duhon, Sefolosha, Khryapa, Smith, future picks? for Kenny Thomas and Ron Artest. Then you would patch your roster with the veterans floating around...say Earl Boykins, Ruben Patterson, and PJ Brown. PG-Ben Gordon/Earl Boykins SG-Ron Artest/Larry Hughes SF-Luol Deng/Ruben Patterson PF-Drew Gooden/PJ Brown C- Pau Gasol/Aaron Gray I think this trade followed by two consolidation trades is our best bet at winning this thing. We keep the only two players worth a damn on this roster (Gordon and Deng), getting rid of all the crap. The core would have a good shelf life, and we would just have to keep working on retooling the bench around these guys, but I think this might be what Paxson has in mind if he makes this trade.
Interesting trade, but it's rare for teams in the same Conference, let alone the same division making a deal. Larry Hughes recently said he prefers not playing PG and likes being the SG. It's a big risk for both teams.
