How nuts is this?

Is there any word that the Bulls are actually thinking about doing this?

This move would be so dumb it's not even worth talking about.

 

The quote from KC says that the possibility of doing so was always on their minds, since they signed him to the contract they did. Nothing was said about it being imminent.

But I suppose you could ask, "Why did KC bring this up?"

Fair question.

There is a sense in which, once Derrick comes back, Nate will be superfluous. But that's asking a lot of Teague, and Nate's salary doesn't seem to be relevant either way to the tax issue.

But that's reading between the lines. What KC said is that the possibility of cutting Nate exists, and that doing so was predicated on whether Teague was going to be ready to perform. He's a lot closer than we (you, Denny) thought about two weeks ago. But nothing said about it being a done deal.

 

This is a quote:

The Bulls signed the veteran guard to a deal that doesn't become fully guaranteed until Jan. 10. That means they can waive Robinson with no penalty any time before that date, an option that always has been under consideration internally.

Teague's development, not to mention Derrick Rose's expected return, could make Robinson expendable.

 

Honestly, I'm surprised Robinson is even on a partially-guaranteed contract as it is. I can't wrap my mind around why he's been such a floater these past few seasons despite his offensive productivity. He's seemingly a tenuous figure on most teams as of late, despite being better than several other players on their bench.

 

It's Jan. 10th, Bullsger.

I don't know why Nate hasn't stuck anywhere. Maybe it's the Peter Pan philosophy?

I don't see a reason to cut him. Marquis does need to play more, but I do think he replaces Kirk at PG more than he replaces Nate. Nate has an important role for the team, though you can't rely on him to be the starter.

Well, he did sign that contract, so they must have talked about that possibility, and he must have been cool with it, for whatever reason.

Go Bulls!

 

I would just like to add that this quote makes me never want to go visit Rumor Central.

 

Nate is not a replacement for Hinrich. Teague might be, in time.

 

I've always thought Teague replaces Hinrich moreso than Nate. Both good defenders, and Teague is surprisingly good at running the team when I've seen him play.

I don't see Nate being buried at the end of the bench when Derrick gets back either.

Is Derrick going to go heads first into playing huge minutes? How good will his offense be? It could be quite bad the first month or so until he gets his legs underneath him again.

If I recall correctly, one of the biggest holes this team has had the last two years is a guy who can score in bulk and create his own shot. Who else can do that besides Nate?

 

Uh, nvm.

 

Agreed that he is a bargain. I'll wait and see what the Bulls are up to.

The positive in this story is that Teague is farther along than we dared hope at the beginning of the year.

And investment wise, that's the guy that matters most.