You can only trade up if somebody is willing to trade with you. And if you don't have anything to trade... And enough with Wallace. It's so hypocritical to bitch about management not bringing in players when the one time they do go out and get the biggest name free agent, you want to have 20-20 hindsight on the deal.
I liked the signing of Wallace, but it was complicated... ... By the fact that management doesn't know how to treat players (stars!) with dignity. You know, like having Ben Wallace Bobble Head Doll night where the doll is wearing a headband but the team wouldn't allow him to wear it on the court. ... Or the window of opportunity with him was short and the Bulls needed to add talent around him via trades, but didn't. Instead they dumped salary (Chandler) for a high priced player who couldn't get 2" off the ground when he jumped. As for Hinrich/Wade... http://www.desipio.com/?p=172 and http://www.fantasyplayers.com/FeedItem.asp?FEED_ITEM_ID=33920&print=yes 20-20 hindsight is really useful when you see management making the same mistakes over and over again. It gives a reasonable person the expectation of more of the same to come.
I know what what you're going to say, I really do, but why would you draft a guys like Aldridge when he has pretty much the exact same game as Deng. Deng gets 18/8 on long jumpshots just like Aldridge. And yeah, you could have taken Aldridge and moved Deng because you hate Deng, but why not try to pair him with who everybody thought Tyrus could be? That was the bold move. It turned out like Krause trading the sure thing in Brand for Curry and Chandler, but it was a play for a dominant team. And exactly where has Aldridge taken his team? He's a nice player, but you need to try and get a difference maker at 2, not a solid player like Gibson, who you can get at 26. I wouldn't be surprised if Gibson could get 18 and 8.
I don't hate Deng. He's just not going to be THE guy on any good team. I consider myself a Luol Deng fan, even. But I would have dealt him for Pau Gasol when the opportunity was there. It's consistent with my statements that you trade up in every deal and eventually you'll be a contender. Aldridge was and is a sure thing. Immediate contributor at a position of need. Regardless of your skills as a talent evaluator, everything points toward trading him for Tyrus was a move of buffoonery at its best. But I know what to expect from you, too. Aldridge is a career 18.3 PER player, better than Deng by a LOT, and better than anyone on the Bulls except maybe Rose. He plays defense, too. But that 18.3 PER isn't much better than a 12 PER, right?
Better than Deng by a lot? Deng's career PER is 16.5. Give me a break. They're basically the same, nice player. I'd say Aldridge is softer at his position than Deng is. And now he's got a slightly larger contract than Deng.
No, you give me a break. 15 is the (theoretical) average player's PER. As I pointed out, the Bulls have rarely had guys with 18+ PER for just one season, so Aldridge would be one of the few best players we've had since the dynasty. The data shows that 16 PER or less are aplenty for the Bulls. He'd still start for us at PF and we wouldn't look back or for anyone else. I don't see us doing all that great with non-"soft" players. I do see that Portland won 54 last season with him and may win 50 again this season (in spite of a number of devastating injuries). You surely must realize that I don't care about contract size, especially when the team has profited so handsomely without putting a contender on the court. You may find that unless your name is Kurt or Lu, guys with high PER get paid big bucks.
Denny, your logic is so inconsistent faulty its mind boggling. There's no real difference between Deng and Aldridge's PER. Then you say your a fan of Deng but rip him. And just because he has an 18 doesn't make him a great player. It doesn't even make him an all star. So try to relax a little bit. When Aldridge makes it to the second round of the playoffs, let me know.
No, 18 doesn't make him a great player. But 18 makes him a much better player than anyone we've had for more than one season. But 18 is different than 16, and the difference is real. 18 is 1/8th more than 16. 18 is 3 better than the average player PER, 16 is 1 better. 18 is a top 30 player (PER), 16 is a top 100 player. Do tell me, do you really think that a team with a 25 PER player and 11x 16 PER players is going to be better than a team with a 25 PER player and 11x 18 PER players? Look at my signature. I traded up to get a 3rd round pick to draft Deng. But see where he fits in? 4th option, and the salaries matter in this SIM league.
