Hello all. I want to put in my 2 cents on this who to draft issue. Here you go. Derrick Rose. I believe Rose is the player that most of us want, so I won't have to convince many of you. There are so many reasons to take this kid. He'll be the best athlete in the league at his position, and he's bigger than average for his position. He'll be the fastest guy in the league leading a fast break. He's smart. He makes his teammates better. He shows leadership qualities. He's a high character guy. He plays good defense. Paxson has GOT to take him. Beasley, who I'll grant is a mammoth talent, could be a 20/10 guy right away, but Zach Randolph was one of those just a year ago. Does Beasley make his teammates better? Is he a team leader? Does he always play hard? Could he have some character issues? Why doesn't he play great defense? Add to this that I think Beasley is going to measure out at 6' 9" instead of 6' 10". That's a little bit shorter than ideal for a power forward. This will not keep him from being productive, but combining his size with the fact that he has holes in his game, I don't see him as a player who is going to lead his team to championships. Some may argue "But we have Kirk Hinrich to play the point, and he's pretty good. Plus, we need a scoring big man." This is all fair, but Kirk Hinrich is not nearly a good enough basketball player to change who we draft. Actually, no one on our roster should impact who we draft. At the top of the draft, when you have an opportunity to draft a potentially transcendent NBA player, you take him, and you build your roster around him. If you draft for need, you just might take Bowie over Jordan. And at least Bowie was a center. I already mentioned Randolph above, but a player Beasley often gets compared to is Carmelo Anthony. What has that guy won? Does he look like he's going to lead the Nuggets to even an NBA finals? He is a statistically impressive player whose game does not really better his teammates. Beasley could be like that. Meanwhile, look at the teams with the best point guards in the league. I believe the top five point guards in the league are Paul, Deron Williams, Steve Nash, Tony Parker, and Chauncey Billups. All of them play for elite NBA teams. (Nash and the Suns are beginning to fade, but we know how good he has made that team over the last few years). A great point guard makes a very good team. I don't think any power forward this side of center-in-disguise Duncan or maybe KG has that kind of effect on a team. It's Rose, Paxson. Don't screw it up.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (darius miles davis @ May 21 2008, 01:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It's Rose, Paxson. Don't screw it up.</div> +1 I think Beasley make the other guys a bit better because he will draw a lot of attention. I think Rose makes the other guys a lot better.
Amen!!!! Although I'm still living the pipedream that Chicago still Fancies Brook Lopez and is willing to trade with Minnesota for thier #3 and a package of other picks (ie; a second rounder pick/both 2nd round picks...or even a throw in of Boston's 1st rounder next year in the place of the higher second rounder this year). Ahhhh....one can dream...lol
I agree. There is no one on the roster who is good enough to make us look at a different position in the draft. Knowing that, when you get lucky and have the 1st overall pick....you take the best player period. That's Derrick Rose. If Paxson screws this up, I am officially on the fire Pax bandwagon.
Great analysis, but I don't see mention of money, cap flexibility, luxury tax, and that kind of thing in it. These things seem to be the motivating factor behind personnel moves more than anything. Consider that Hinrich makes $11M or so. Is there a team out there who'll trade for him with that salary? Does Pax want to keep him as SG at that price, along with the $12.5M+ Hughes? Really expensive for a backup player in either case... Then there's the fact that the Bulls have won 47 and 49 games with Kirk as the primary PG. "good enough" perhaps. The flip side is that Paxson traded away Aldridge to get Thomas, and Noah is the prototype Pax player (winning college program). He accumulated cap space at the expense of winning and keeping players so he could sign Wallace, then traded him for Hughes and Gooden. The point being he has an investment in these guys; maybe taking Beasley would be seen as admitting failure on those fronts. I've quickly come around to taking Rose, then trying to consolidate some talent we have in the backcourt to get us a 5th starter who can play at both ends of the floor. Point being, that if it's time to admit Hinrich hasn't turned out to be the savior, we may as well take an honest look at Thomas and Noah at the same time. Also Deng. He's a silky smooth SF and a great all-round guy. Thing is that he is who he is, which is unless he adds 10PPG to his scoring, he's going to be about 15th best SF in the league. Maybe an upgrade is in order. Moves I'd consider: Gordon to Seattle for Collison. Gordon, Hinrich, and Deng to Seattle for Durant. Gordon, Hinrich, and Deng to Phoenix for Amare. See where I'm going with this line of thinking? The money comes into play, too, as you have a big contract plus two soon-to-be big contracts outbound. With Gordon and Hinrich gone, you'd have a three guard rotation of Rose, Hughes, and Thabo, with the ability to re-sign Duhon. Hughes and Thabo are well suited to play alongside Rose.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 10:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Great analysis, but I don't see mention of money, cap flexibility, luxury tax, and that kind of thing in it. These things seem to be the motivating factor behind personnel moves more than anything. Consider that Hinrich makes $11M or so. Is there a team out there who'll trade for him with that salary? Does Pax want to keep him as SG at that price, along with the $12.5M+ Hughes? Really expensive for a backup player in either case... Then there's the fact that the Bulls have won 47 and 49 games with Kirk as the primary PG. "good enough" perhaps. The flip side is that Paxson traded away Aldridge to get Thomas, and Noah is the prototype Pax player (winning college program). He accumulated cap space at the expense of winning and keeping players so he could sign Wallace, then traded him for Hughes and Gooden. The point being he has an investment in these guys; maybe taking Beasley would be seen as admitting failure on those fronts. I've quickly come around to taking Rose, then trying to consolidate some talent we have in the backcourt to get us a 5th starter who can play at both ends of the floor. Point being, that if it's time to admit Hinrich hasn't turned out to be the savior, we may as well take an honest look at Thomas and Noah at the same time. Also Deng. He's a silky smooth SF and a great all-round guy. Thing is that he is who he is, which is unless he adds 10PPG to his scoring, he's going to be about 15th best SF in the league. Maybe an upgrade is in order. Moves I'd consider: Gordon to Seattle for Collison. Gordon, Hinrich, and Deng to Seattle for Durant. Gordon, Hinrich, and Deng to Phoenix for Amare. See where I'm going with this line of thinking? The money comes into play, too, as you have a big contract plus two soon-to-be big contracts outbound. With Gordon and Hinrich gone, you'd have a three guard rotation of Rose, Hughes, and Thabo, with the ability to re-sign Duhon. Hughes and Thabo are well suited to play alongside Rose.</div> very good analysis I agree on everything except the theory of trading those players for the players your requesting....don't you think the other team wouldn't want to take the trade for the very reason that Chicago is getting rid of them. Trading a single player (ie; one contract) for multiple potential headache contracts. I don't see teams biting.
Seattle is almost $10M under the salary cap, and $22.5M under the LT threshold. They'd be $16.25M under the cap, minus Collison. Add back $11M or so for Gordon and they're still $5M under the cap. I think the real problem is that Gordon and Deng might have BYC issues in S&T scenarios. A team like Seattle so far under the cap and with expiring deals like Wilcox and Donyell Marshall, can facilitate these kinds of deals.
very true, they could facilitate the contracts, but would they want to? If you take Durant away from Seattle (OKC)...then thier left with this years bulls "lite" and we saw where that got Chicago. Besides Seattle is trying to rebuild with drafts and weeding out thier salery cap to make room for the free agents in two years, along with keeping cap space for contract extensions of thier best young player (ie Durant & green, along with whomever they pick within the next couple years...if they want to keep em) when it's time to resign. nice conversation we got going...your making great points
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ May 21 2008, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Why would Seattle want to trade Durant?</div> yeah I said that too...but I think he was just using Seattle due to the fact that they have ample cap room....for an example
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ May 21 2008, 09:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Why would Seattle want to trade Durant?</div> I'm suggesting that anyone is probably available for the right price. Does going from 2/5ths of a quality starting lineup to 4/5ths make it worthwhile?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ May 21 2008, 09:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Why would Seattle want to trade Durant?</div> I'm suggesting that anyone is probably available for the right price. Does going from 2/5ths of a quality starting lineup to 4/5ths make it worthwhile? </div> not when 3/5ths that your getting in the trade have already failed....and will want large contracts.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 10:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Consider that Hinrich makes $11M or so. Is there a team out there who'll trade for him with that salary? Does Pax want to keep him as SG at that price, along with the $12.5M+ Hughes? Really expensive for a backup player in either case...</div> Kirk only makes $10M next year, then 9.5, 9 & 8M. This is very reasonable assuming he makes even a slight recovery from last year.
Durant or Amare won't be traded for Hinrich and Gordon. They're basically untouchable unless someone like LeBron or Dwight are in the mix. Otherwise, Phoenix and Seattle will laugh and hang up the phone.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 21 2008, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ May 21 2008, 09:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Why would Seattle want to trade Durant?</div> I'm suggesting that anyone is probably available for the right price. Does going from 2/5ths of a quality starting lineup to 4/5ths make it worthwhile? </div> I have to disagree with this part of your analysis as well. Seattle is moving to a new city. They need a standard-bearer to carry the crowds while their record sucks. The NBA, is after all, a business -- as you argued in the first part of your post. As to your general reach of the argument against Rose, it's kind of frightening. I hope Reinsdorf and Co. look at the big picture, and decide that an uber-star would remedy any harmful salary implications. But I'm not holding my breath. Let's prepare for the worst. It's what we've grown to expect from this franchise.
Phoenix is ~$15M over the cap and $2M over the LT threshold with only 10 players signed. Shaq has a $21M deal for 2 more years each. Who wants him for that price? Nash has $12.25M and $13.125M remaining on his deal. Not sure he's worth it anymore. That leaves Amare's $15M + $16M as a big deal to move, or possibly Diaw's $9M+$9M
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane)</div><div class='quotemain'>I've quickly come around to taking Rose, then trying to consolidate some talent we have in the backcourt to get us a 5th starter who can play at both ends of the floor.</div> Kiss of death, Pax never does what I think would be best
^^ Denny Crane, well the trade you implied, Phoenix would be taking on a lot of extra money. Amare at 15 mill vs. Hinrich at 10 + Gordon resigned at say 8 mill minimum + Deng resigned at say 8 mill minimum. That would be looking at 26 mill vs. 15 mill. As well would Deng be playing PF for the Suns? Would Hinrich play behind Nash and completely remove Barbosa from the rotation? Or would it be: Amare + Barbosa for Hinrich + Gordon + Deng?
^^^ Gordon and Deng are expiring contracts, if Phoenix wants them to be. Otherwise the plan would be for them to sign them after this season, pay the penalties for one year, then let Shaq and Nash walk with replacements ready. That's $48M in contracts gone, with $33M or so inbound. Grant Hill is 36 years old
