Houston Coming after Dunleavy, Bulls unwilling to move him

jc23 · Post #101 » by **jc23** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:40 pm

we should offer them mdj and taj for asik and after they say yes we yell...SIKE!.

blumeany · Post #102 » by **blumeany** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:40 pm

I'm no Dunleavy fan, but the only logical scenarios where you would trade him would be:

A. If you were getting a more attractive player who fills a bigger need back.
B. If you were getting a really sweet draft pick.
C. If you were planning on bringing over Mirotic AND a bigger FA or two.
D. If you were not counting on a big free agent, planning on keeping Boozer until his deal expires, and hoping to get Mirotic with that Dunleavy money.

I don't see A or B happening, unless Houston is really desperate right now. C. is our best case scenario IMO. D. is the most likely scenario IMO.

dice · Post #103 » by **dice** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:42 pm

Mightymosdef wrote:You say half a season yet you're judging Marco's last season to MDJ's half a season this year..the hypocrisy haha.

i have not brought up marco last season. you're confusing me with someone else haha lol roflcopter meh blah puke

i'm comparing careers. nothing more, nothing less

Post #104 » by **HomoSapien** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:42 pm

Mightymosdef - enough with the taunting haha's and LMFAO's. You are derailing the discussion.

Dice, keep it civil. No more gradeschool comments.

Post #105 » by **HomoSapien** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:44 pm

kyrv wrote:
dice wrote:
Mightymosdef wrote:
LMFAOOOOOO

why are you laughing your ass off off off off off off?

you can be distracted by a half season of marco shooting lights out in the spurs' system if you like. i prefer to take the broader view

One year ago Marco sucked. No worries.

Kyrv, this is a silly post. You're generalizing everyone to make a snarky comment. Marco had a ton of supporters last year. I was a big fan of his and wanted him back.

Evil_Headband · Post #106 » by **Evil_Headband** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:45 pm

HomoSapien wrote:
Evil_Headband wrote:
HomoSapien wrote:A reluctance to trade Dunleavy would support the rumor that Boozer is unlikely to be amnestied.

I see no connection. 1) We don't know what is being offered 2) The Bulls can still trade Dunleavy in the off-season 3) The Bulls could decide to keep Dunleavy regardless if Boozer is amnestied or not

There's a definite connection. People keep saying that we can just trade Dunleavy in the off-season. That's easier said than done. If going into the off-season with max capspace was the priority, then getting rid of Dunleavy for an expiring would be a priority. Everybody assumed that trading Dunleavy was a given.

Well, now there's rumors that the Bulls are unwilling to move him and this is coming after Boozer revealed that he'll only be amnestied if we're getting a star. These to me go hand in hand. If Boozer is coming back, then Dunleavy should be returning as well.

I, for one, never thought it would be a good idea to trade Dunleavy unless the Bulls got good value back. I know initially a lot of fans wanted to trade him for tanking purposes but I also didn't see value in that. I also don't know that having max cap space is a priority unless a Superstar is willing to sign (BTW, unlikely).

Why would they have difficulty trading Dunleavy after the season? More teams will have cap space and there will be TPEs, too. My preference is to only trade Dunleavy when you know you have somebody better to sign with the space. Otherwise, keep him.

Post #107 » by **HomoSapien** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:51 pm

Evil_Headband wrote:
Why would they have difficulty trading Dunleavy after the season? More teams will have cap space and there will be TPEs, too. My preference is to only trade Dunleavy when you know you have somebody better to sign with the space. Otherwise, keep him.

Because you're limiting what you can get back for him. You can no longer accept an expiring contract as you need immediate salary relief. I can't imagine any team with capspace absorbing a 34 year old's contract unless a drat pick is attached. Team's with a TPE is the best case scenario, but you still have to find a team that is actively looking to take on salary and simultaneously think that Dunleavy is their best available option. In other words, a lot has to align for this to happen.

Evil_Headband · Post #108 » by **Evil_Headband** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:01 pm

HomoSapien wrote:
Evil_Headband wrote:
Why would they have difficulty trading Dunleavy after the season? More teams will have cap space and there will be TPEs, too. My preference is to only trade Dunleavy when you know you have somebody better to sign with the space. Otherwise, keep him.

Because you're limiting what you can get back for him. You can no longer accept an expiring contract as you need immediate salary relief. I can't imagine any team with capspace absorbing a 34 year old's contract unless a drat pick is attached. Team's with a TPE is the best case scenario, but you still have to find a team that is actively looking to take on salary and simultaneously think that Dunleavy is their best available option. In other words, a lot has to align for this to happen.

If Dunleavy were a FA at the end of the season, you don't think he could get a 1 year deal at $3.3 million? I think he could. Apparently teams want him now (even enough to give asset(s) back) and it was a common opinion that the Bulls signed up to a bargain contract last summer.

Post #109 » by **HomoSapien** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:08 pm

Evil_Headband wrote:
HomoSapien wrote:
Evil_Headband wrote:
Why would they have difficulty trading Dunleavy after the season? More teams will have cap space and there will be TPEs, too. My preference is to only trade Dunleavy when you know you have somebody better to sign with the space. Otherwise, keep him.

Because you're limiting what you can get back for him. You can no longer accept an expiring contract as you need immediate salary relief. I can't imagine any team with capspace absorbing a 34 year old's contract unless a drat pick is attached. Team's with a TPE is the best case scenario, but you still have to find a team that is actively looking to take on salary and simultaneously think that Dunleavy is their best available option. In other words, a lot has to align for this to happen.

If Dunleavy were a FA at the end of the season, you don't think he could get a 1 year deal at $3.3 million? I think he could. Apparently teams want him now (even enough to give asset(s) back) and it was a common opinion that the Bulls signed up to a bargain contract last summer.

I think you're looking at it all wrong. A contender would likely be willing to give Dunleavy that contract, but teams with capspace usually aren't contenders.

Mightymosdef · Post #110 » by **Mightymosdef** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:11 pm

HomoSapien wrote:Mightymosdef - enough with the taunting haha's and LMFAO's. You are derailing the discussion.

Dice, keep it civil. No more gradeschool comments.

My apologies chief! I'll just let it go

Evil_Headband · Post #111 » by **Evil_Headband** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:22 pm

HomoSapien wrote:
Evil_Headband wrote:
HomoSapien wrote:
Because you're limiting what you can get back for him. You can no longer accept an expiring contract as you need immediate salary relief. I can't imagine any team with capspace absorbing a 34 year old's contract unless a drat pick is attached. Team's with a TPE is the best case scenario, but you still have to find a team that is actively looking to take on salary and simultaneously think that Dunleavy is their best available option. In other words, a lot has to align for this to happen.

If Dunleavy were a FA at the end of the season, you don't think he could get a 1 year deal at $3.3 million? I think he could. Apparently teams want him now (even enough to give asset(s) back) and it was a common opinion that the Bulls signed up to a bargain contract last summer.

I think you're looking at it all wrong. A contender would likely be willing to give Dunleavy that contract, but teams with capspace usually aren't contenders.

I think a bad team would be the ideal team to trade him to in the off season. Often bad teams have several holes to fill and have to overpay to get a decent vet guy who is often willing to play for less with a good team. Now, the bad team can get Dunleavy at a decent contract. Win-win! (Besides for Dunleavy.)

Post #112 » by **HomoSapien** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:27 pm

Evil_Headband wrote:
HomoSapien wrote:
Evil_Headband wrote:
If Dunleavy were a FA at the end of the season, you don't think he could get a 1 year deal at $3.3 million? I think he could. Apparently teams want him now (even enough to give asset(s) back) and it was a common opinion that the Bulls signed up to a bargain contract last summer.

I think you're looking at it all wrong. A contender would likely be willing to give Dunleavy that contract, but teams with capspace usually aren't contenders.

I think a bad team would be the ideal team to trade him to in the off season. Often bad teams have several holes to fill and have to overpay to get a decent vet guy who is often willing to play for less with a good team. Now, the bad team can get Dunleavy at a decent contract. Win-win! (Besides for Dunleavy.)

But how likely is that? A young bad team may add a guy like Dunleavy with their remaining capspace, but they aren't going to open up the off-season by doing a trade like that.

Evil_Headband · Post #113 » by **Evil_Headband** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:34 pm

HomoSapien wrote:
Evil_Headband wrote:
HomoSapien wrote:
I think you're looking at it all wrong. A contender would likely be willing to give Dunleavy that contract, but teams with capspace usually aren't contenders.

I think a bad team would be the ideal team to trade him to in the off season. Often bad teams have several holes to fill and have to overpay to get a decent vet guy who is often willing to play for less with a good team. Now, the bad team can get Dunleavy at a decent contract. Win-win! (Besides for Dunleavy.)

But how likely is that? A young bad team may add a guy like Dunleavy with their remaining capspace, but they aren't going to open up the off-season by doing a trade like that.

Alas, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one!

micromonkey · Post #114 » by **micromonkey** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:42 pm

Well they did make a move with Deng but a move that got them below the tax will make them move heaven and earth.

We will have to see the end result--I can't see how clinging to Dun and Hinrich helps the team a season or 2 from now. And lets be honest we are not doing jack this year and probably very limited next. And if replacing Deng with Dunleavy and waiting for mirotic unless something falls into their lap as a total win
/win is the plan it's not a good one.

Pnjguy · Post #115 » by **Pnjguy** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:45 pm

The Bulls don't have to trade him, therefore he probably won't be. They're not going to take anything less than a first rounder, and no one will give that.

chadrucf · Post #116 » by **chadrucf** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:06 pm

Mightymosdef wrote:
dice wrote:do you know what hypocrisy means?

I do being that I'm studying medicine.

The hippocratic oath has nothing to do with the definition of hypocrisy. They are completely different concepts. But surely as a graduate med student you would know that.

aramada · Post #117 » by **aramada** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:07 pm

Bulls Out: Hinrich, Dunleavy, Snell, Pick
In: Afflalo, A Brooks

Orlando Out: Afflalo, Moore
Orlando In: Montejunas, Snell, Hinrich, Pick

Houston Out: Montejunas, Brooks
Houston In: Dunleavy, Moore

Bulls upgrade their starting line-up, Orlando get 2 young players, a pick, and an expiring. Houston gets Montejunas more playing time as he requested and Dunleavy in

Mightymosdef · Post #118 » by **Mightymosdef** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:14 pm

chadrucf wrote:
Mightymosdef wrote:
dice wrote:do you know what hypocrisy means?

I do being that I'm studying medicine.

The hippocratic oath has nothing to do with the definition of hypocrisy. They are completely different concepts. But surely as a graduate med student you would know that.

Being that I'm still studying..how would that be relevant seeing as I'm far from acting practicing yet??

swing..miss.

Jeffster81 · Post #119 » by **Jeffster81** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:19 pm

No love for Morey after Asik. Morey wants Dunleavy on a discount? Whatever. If Morey wants MDJ, then he needs to pony up for the price.

donaldtrump_00 · Post #120 » by **donaldtrump_00** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:22 pm

Houston has a real chance to win a championship this year so they're obsessed to have a shooter with next to harden and d12. parsons isn't enough. im sure they regret signing brewer in the first place because hes not what they need. but depending on next year dunvealy could be of great service for chi. we all know chi needs as many shooters as possible. id turn offers down also. kirk id let go and just pick up ben Gordon first thing in the offseason. hes going to be cheap. hurry up and make up for 09.