http://www.nbcchicago.com/sports/basketball/Is-Kirk-Hinrich-Minnesota-Bound.html Is Kirk Hinrich Minnesota Bound?Rumors have Bulls sending Hinrich to Timberwolves By TOM FORNELLI Updated 12:45 PM CDT, Sat, May 30, 2009 While the NCAA and University of Memphis are all focused on what Derrick Rose may or may not have done before going to college for a year, Rose's current team is going about the business of improving a playoff team next season. With Gar Forman taking over for John Paxson as the team's general manager, his first order of business is June's NBA draft. Now, the Bulls seem to be pretty high on Syracuse point guard Johnny Flynn, and on the surface, it seems like an odd move. First of all, Flynn probably won't even be around by the time the Bulls get to make their first round selection, so if they were going to draft him they'd have to trade up. Second of all, the Bulls already have their point guard. His name is Derrick Rose, and he's not very good on standardized tests, but he's outstanding on a basketball court. Some theories as to why the Bulls would take Flynn say that the team is considering moving Rose to the two-guard, which to be pretty blunt about it, is downright stupid. So there has to be something else in the works here, right? Turns out there may be. Some people think that the Bulls are interested in Flynn because they're looking to move Kirk Hinrich in a trade. A trade that would land them the draft pick necessary to grab Flynn.Sources close to me have told me that Kirk Hinrich will be traded sometime before next season starts. His status seems to be independent on whether the Bulls are able to bring back Gordon. So where is Hinrich going to go? Well, Captain Kirk was nearly traded to Minnesota not too long ago, and it seems the Timberwolves are still interested in him. According to a report from Minneapolis radio station KFAN, the Bulls would send Hinrich to the Wolves for the #6 pick in the draft, or possibly straight up for Mike Miller. Now rumors are rumors and we can't be sure how valid these are, but given the Bulls interest in Flynn and the fact that they've come close to sending Hinrich north before, this idea isn't exactly insane. Of course, giving Hinrich's value to the team as a backup guard who can play on both ends of the court -- he gave Paul Pierce fits in the playoffs -- we're not so sure why the team would want to move him. We tend to think that if the Bulls were to lose both Hinrich and Ben Gordon in the same offseason, that could only be considered a step backwards.
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-bulls-confidential/2009/05/hinrich-to-be-traded.html Hinrich to be traded Doug Thonus Sources close to me have told me that Kirk Hinrich will be traded sometime before next season starts. His status seems to be independent on whether the Bulls are able to bring back Gordon. Realistically, we all knew Hinrich wouldn't be too long for the Bulls after drafting Derrick Rose, so if this proves true, then it shouldn't serve as a big surprise. Perhaps the only surprising thing about the rumor is that his status is independent of Gordon's status. Paxson had talked in the past about not wanting to enter next season without either guy. Now it appears that the Bulls are rebuilding entirely around Rose, or at least that's my take on a decision to trade Kirk regardless of whether Ben comes back. The team seems like it would take an awfully big step backwards if it loses both players. There's this rumor out there from kfan, no idea who the heck this guy is, or how credible he is, but I'm all over this deal if it's available and Hinrich is going: Don't really know why the Bulls, who now have a nice three-guard combo, would go for this, but the Mix hears that the Wolves could offer the No. 6 pick in a very weak draft for Bulls guard Kirk Hinrich. Think of it: A combo guard who can even defend (including forwards as big and strong and talented as Paul Pierce). One down side: He has already been in the league for five years. Trent Tucker's idea might be even better: Offer Mike Miller for Hinrich. Seems like a deal too good to be true for the Bulls even in a weak draft. (Be sure to leave your comments in the box below, I'd love to hear your thoughts)
On a talent basis, it's hard to like the deal. But from a financial perspective, the Bulls would take a backup guard who'd earn a rookie salary while freeing up enough money to sign Gordon and still be a player for the 2010 FA class. I expected a lot of negative reaction to this trade rumor, but as I looked around at other forums last night, the bigger Bulls ones were heavily in favor of making this deal. A lot of posts about how stupid Minny would be for making the deal. I found that quite surprising. The rumor comes out of Minny, and it was reported that Pax talked to Hinrich and told him that he was being discussed with Minny at the trade deadline last season. It's still my position that Rose/Gordon/Hinrich is a really fine back court, but I also get the sense that Hinrich won't accept the 6th man role; he wants to start. Minny would be a good fit for him. What I'd love to see is the Bulls go after Bosh. He's announced he's not going to sign with Toronto and will leave via FA in 2010. We could make our play for that 2010 FA a year early this way. Bosh is 25 years old and already a 4-time all star. We have Deng and expiring contracts of Jerome James and Tim Thomas to dangle as trade bait while giving us the flexibility to sign him to a long term max deal. I'd like to see the Bulls snag a backup SF in the deal (Kopono or Graham). Rose/Rookie Gordon/Rookie Salmons/Kopono Noah/Miller Bosh/Thomas (Salmons or Kopono could play backup G minutes if necessary)
If the Bulls can get just the 6 pick without taking on any cap, I'd say go for it. It's a win-win for both teams.
I think you would have to see who is available at 6 before pulling off this deal, unless some miracle happens in wich Griffin, Rubio, or Tyreke slips to six, I don't think this draft has anyone who can be has good as Kirk has been these past couple of years, if this trade is made with those three names off the board its nothing more than a financial move. We are OK with the cap right now because Rose has a couple years left on his rookie contract, and we have not signed BG yet. However, looking at the long term picture if we sign BG, keep Deng, and sign Rose to an extension in a couple of years. That leaves a limited amount of cap room to sign a top tier player. As much as I hate to say it in my opinion this team cant afford to keep Deng and Gordon.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me unless Hinrich asked to be traded. He's definitely a starter at pg in the league, but there's no reason he couldn't be a great sixth man. And while I'm glad to see the bulls seem to understand that there should be a relatively lower ceiling to what they should sign Gordon for, it doesn't make any sense to me to move Hinrich and then not sign Gordon if you are trying to compete. It makes even less sense to draft a pg prospect when you have a guy who's guaranteed to get 40+ minutes a night already playing the position. Nobody develops in 8 minutes a night. So either they are positioning for a big free agent bonanza, or Forman is out of his mind. Or it's another stupid internet rumor.
There's no indication the Bulls want to pay Gordon less than what Hinrich made. I think the offers they made to him the past two seasons exceeded Hinrich's deal. Given what the three blog posts say: 1) Hinrich is gone regardless of whether Gordon signs. 2) There's no chance Hinrich is going to be starting PG on the Bulls with Rose here. 3) The Bulls are willing to play another PG spot minutes and move Rose to the 2 for those minutes. I concur Hinrich could be a great 6th man for us, but he simply may not be willing to play that role and he may be hellbent on playing PG. I'm not so sure Hinrich starts at PG for that many teams. He doesn't start over Rondo (Boston), Miller (Philly), Harris (NJ), Calderon (Toronto), Williams (Cavs), Milwaukee (if they keep Sessions), Orlando, Miami, San Antonio, Houston, Dallas, New Orleans, Memphis, Denver, OKC, Phoenix, LA Clippers. He arguably starts for the Knicks (though Duhon seems to be set there), Detroit, Indiana, Atlanta (would he really beat out Bibby?), Miami (29 year old Hinrich vs. Chalmers who had a very nice rookie season), Charolotte (Felton is pretty good), Washington (only if Arenas doesn't come back). He surely starts for Portland, Minny, Lakers, Golden State, Sacramento. If the Bulls trade Hinrich for the pick, the pick makes $6M, freeing $3M to pay Gordon (up to $12M to start). After the season, the contracts of Miller, Thomas, and James expire, freeing up $25M in salaries. Do they pay Gordon $12M? I don't think so, but maybe $10M. There's no reason to squeeze a guy you want to keep - you want him happy, and he's actually worth that kind of money. It's not a MAX deal or anything suggesting he's in that category.
I don't really want to argue, but Hinrich definitely starts in Dallas next to Kidd if they keep him, Charlotte (Felton isn't a Brown favorite, Hinrich would be) Milwaukee for sure, Miami, Washington (everybody moves up a spot to their natural positions), OKC (Westbrook isn't a point), Houston, there's probably only 7 or 8 teams he definitely doesn't start for. And if the Hinrich trade is independent of BG contract ordeal, then it stands to reason that they aren't willing to pay BG big money since they'd have the money they need to sign BG if they move Hinrich in the right deal. Ergo, they aren't going to break the bank to sign Gordon. And $10-$12 mil is out of the question. They won't go over Mo Williams, an all-star who's only making around $9. And anything over $7-8 is overpaying.
Westbrook is a point, Hinrich wouldn't be starting PG in Dallas (you said he's a starting PG in this league). Brooks in Houston is 6'0" and averaged 17 PPG on 45% shooting in the playoffs in only 34 MPG - I think Houston is quite high on the guy. You got it backward - there's only 7 or 8 teams he DOES start for. Minny being one of them. Williams would get a lot more than $9M after becoming an All-Star. He signed his $8M/year contract in 2007. The $11M that Rip makes is a more reasonable benchmark, or the $11M Monta Ellis makes, or the $9.9M Mike Miller makes, the $10M Kevin Martin makes. Or better yet, the $9.5M Hinrich makes or the $10.4M Deng makes if you want to look at our own salary structure. If they're going to move Hinrich regardless, it means he's gone regardless / they want him outta here. In reading what Thonus says, Hinrich for #6 saves us $9.5M off our books. Subtract Gordon's $6.4M and we're $2.4M already under the LT. Without the cap hold for #6, we're $18.3M under the LT, suitable to sign #6, Gordon, and Salmons. $2.5M for the 6th pick, $3M bump for Salmons to $10M leaves a bit over $12M which can be used to sign Gordon. Whether it's $7m or $12.5M, they have the flexibility. To boot, they have Miller and Tim Thomas and Jerome James coming off the books after next season for another $25M in flexibility - to sign 1 or 2 FAs, re-sign Miller (I would presume), absorb the bumps in salaries, etc. It'd be my preference that Kirk stays and the Bulls go over the LT threshold for one season, but management is too anal to do the right thing.
Because the marginal improvement the bulls gained from not having Hughes still means they are at best a first round loser. So why spend the money? Rose/Salmons/BG or Hinrich still isn't good enough to get this team anywhere, so why keep both? And when your best players aren't good enough to get you anywhere in the playoffs, why would you spend the extra money on them?
You missed the point. The $13M the Bulls paid Hughes was a penalty of sorts, since the Bulls didn't want to play him. It was no worse than paying the LT. You seem to think going into the LT for one season would be worse, I don't see it.
I wouldn't be surprised if they're moving Kirk to clear salary and use the pick as an enticement in a big trade. My guess is that any team trading a big kahuna is going to want some combination of a good young player or two, and a draft pick might be more palatable to a lot of teams who are strapped for cash than Kirk, who's signed for 4 more years albeit on a reasonable contract. We can't afford to keep everyone anyways so if that's the plan then I think it's a sensible move especially since Kirk still has trade value and he's probably not going to be unseating BG or Rose anytime soon.
I think something fishy is goin on here. If Kirks trade is independent of Gordon's signing, then it kinda seems like we could end up relying to heavily on whoever we get in this trade if Gordon doesnt sign. This just seems weird to me for something reason. It's still stupid if we lose Gordon and Hinrich in the same offseason and plan on competing next season
Hinrich has 3 years left. I find it hard to believe that a Hinrich trade is independent of a BG resigning. Sounds like the positive corporate spin machine, kind of like the excuse that not going over the LT puts an upper limit on the offer they can make to keep BG. Convenient but not really true. The bulls have to make a choice. Hinrich and BG are both legitimate players deserving consistent big minutes. How big is a matter of debate, but given the fact that Rose is going to get big minutes at the PG spot and Deng ostensibly will be the starter at the SF spot and get big minutes based on his contract, there just aren't enough minutes left to split between Hinrich, BG, and Salmons, arguably the best value out of the three. So the bulls have to move one. Hinrich would seem to make the most sense since he arguably has the most value and would bring the most in return and the bulls have the most leverage since he is signed to a reasonable contract. BG could walk and leave the bulls with nothing but some cap flexibility. So if you think you can resign BG to a reasonable enough deal, you move Hinrich. That is, if you want to compete on the court next year. If you're more worried about free agency in a year, then the play is to lose in a bidding war for BG thereby blowing somebody else's cap space and sign some D-leaguers for a year. I guess if you're sure you're going to be able to get somebody you move both, but that's a pretty bold move.
Salmons is pretty good insurance if Gordon walks and they trade Hinrich. It'll be really tough if Deng shows up with turf toe, leaving a gaping hole in the frontcourt that's pathetically thin as it is. And as near as I can tell, Hinrich is worth Mike Miller or 6th pick in a weak draft. I wouldn't say his trade value is all that high. The reality is that his stats have steadily declined the past three seasons, and as a PG he's never averaged 7 APG, has a career 41% FG shooter with a career PER of 14.8.
Riiight. But the guy who has a career PER of 16.3, can't guard many of the guys at his position, and is a shaky ballhandler is worth ~$11 mil?
If $9M is "reasonable contract" for the 14.8 PER guy, $11M seems fair for the 16.3 PER guy. Especially when you consider the past 3 seasons: Hinrich PER: 13.9, 13.1, 17 Gordon PER: 17, 16.5, 17.8 Gordon's also missed 12 games in his entire career, 10 of those last season. You can expect the guy to actually play for his pay as well.
