this is the deal.... http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...4~2015~3025&teams=22~22~22~27~27~27&te=&cash=
Ike, Frye or Shavlik can be pressed into duty for the remainder of the season and I'm sure we can get a least a little productivity out of one of them.
funny, according to storytellers website, RLEC would put the bulls right under the salary cap interesting....
THIS DOES WORK TOO.... http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...~3025~2429~1981&teams=4~4~4~4~22~22&te=&cash=
Hey this works too http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...~771~2022&teams=22~22~4~4~4~4~4~4~4&te=&cash=
None of this is probably going to happen, but do people think Deng and Hinrich would really make us contenders now? I don't. I can see a much better argument for Butler.
with all of the other talent this roster has? Sure. The question rises, about what you have to give up. A starting 5 of Hinrich/Roy/Deng/LMA/Oden is very, very good and it's not like we need Kirk or Deng to be the best players on the roster.
I agree. Butler would make the "Big 3" become the "Big 4". And that, my friends, is what championships are made of.
My only problem with that is that you start getting into the 2001 Blazers mindset of "STOCKPILE GREAT PLAYERS AT EVERY POSITION REGARDLESS OF CHEMISTRY". There's something to be said for role players, and the NBA isn't a fantasy league.
We all thought Bob Whitsitt was a wheeling-dealing genius, too. The pressures of success destroyed him. I hope the same doesn't happen to KP.
I would put Hinrich and Deng in the "good to very good" category, with Deng having the potential to be a near all-star level player (maybe). I agree that you can't have scorers at every position, but players with complimentary skill sets are a different animal. Hinrich is a very good defender, a so-so scorer and good distributor, Roy: brilliant facilitator and scorer and adequate defender, Deng: good mid-range shooter, pretty good defender, good rebounder, LMA: rounding into a great two way player, but still a mediocre rebounder, Greg: already a great rebounder and decent post defender, the rest remains shrouded in mystery. To me this puts the team on par with the kinds of rosters the early nineties Blazers fielded, not the (mostly) selfish hodgepodge Whitsitt compiled.
There's no rule that says superior players can't play roles. In fact, I'd prefer to have a superior player as a role player than a guy who's lucky to be in the NBA or in a rotation. It's about attitude and it's about coaching. I don't think that Roy or Oden or Aldridge or Hinrich or Deng--or even Butler, for that matter--have exhibited a reluctance to do what's best for the team. Maybe it's because the Big Three are young, or maybe it's because they understand that's how success is achieved as a team. Ed O.
Whittsitt also revealed some what ruefully that he wasn't a chemistry major ... and it showed. My thought is that if KP has a moderate upgrade to Blake at the 1 and big upgrade to Nicolas' raw game at the 3 as targets, then he's thinking about the chemistry issues that could arise and will act accordingly. KP may not be a chemistry major, but he's shown himself to be helluva alchemist.
I can't imagine the Bulls would trade Deng and Hinrich for that. Deng's playing well now that he's finally healthy, and that'd be a pretty pointless exercise on the Bulls' part. I don't know if Nocioni is considered an SF (he's just an F), but I'll poop with joy if it were Hinrich+Noc for those three. For you guys... well, start learning these phrases: toughness, energy, veteran leadership, mopey, missed assignments, streaky, long-term contracts.
Not sure why people are in love with Hinrich and Deng, when have they done anything of remembrance? Butler > Deng and Kirk put together IMO. Butler single handedly puts us into the playoffs with ease. I dont know if Kirk and Deng would do it for me.
