Houston Coming after Dunleavy, Bulls unwilling to move him

[HomoSapien]

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.

[kingkirk]

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

How do you make this connection?

I mean, can't it be that Houston has offered us trash that is not worth worth Dunleavy and his shooting for whilst he is on a good contract?

Also, can you guys stop mentioning Terrence Jones. He is a 22 year old PF with 3 point range who fits their system and is having a break out year. He is not being moved for Dunleavy.

[HomoSapien]

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

One has nothing to do with the other.

It absolutely does. For the Bulls to be a factor in free-agency, Boozer and Dunleavy would have to be moved. Boozer has said that he was told by the Bulls that being amnestied was a longshot. If we're not moving Boozer, then it no longer makes sense to move Dunleavy.

There is a very clear connection here.

[League Circles]

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.

The first part doesn't affect the second part. Yes, IF maximizing cap space were the priority, MDJ would be dealt, but Boozer may be amnestied without maximizing cap space being the priority. Rather, just clearing enough cap space to sign mirotic and one more 5 mil player or so may be the priority.

[HomoSapien]

I mean, can't it be that Houston has offered us trash that is not worth worth Dunleavy and his shooting for whilst he is on a good contract?

Sure, that's one possibility, but it's unlikely that not a single team in the NBA would be willing to trade an expiring for Dunleavy. If we want to trade him, to clear that contract, then he's a easy guy to move. If you're keeping Boozer, then it makes no sense to trade Dunleavy. It's really unlikely that you'll be getting a better player in a Dunleavy trade, so if Boozer is staying you may as well keep MD.

[DanTown8587]

You can take a 33 year old MDJ over a Marco that's 27, the best 3 pt shooter, and better in PER ranking.

I'd rather have the better player.

PER is a stupid stat. but dunleavy's career PER is significantly higher

and marco is not the best 3 pt shooter

Yes a stat that many professionals look at is stupid..right.

My bad he's currently #2 he was #1. Funny..MDJ isn't even top 25 lol.

Last 2+ years, minimum 200 attempts from three

Guy A - 299 attempts, 128 makes, .428%, 15th in the league
Guy B - 284 attempts, 107 makes, .377%, 91st in the league

Guy B by month
.591%
.414%
.423%
.360%

[HomoSapien]

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.

The first part doesn't affect the second part. Yes, IF maximizing cap space were the priority, MDJ would be dealt, but Boozer may be amnestied without maximizing cap space being the priority. Rather, just clearing enough cap space to sign mirotic and one more 5 mil player or so may be the priority.

Sure there is several possible outcomes here, but it still supports the theory that the Bulls actually aren't after cap space.

In the Boozer thread, I said that that Boozer's comments about probably not being amnestied to me meant two things:

1.) Melo isn't coming.
2.) Mirotic probably isn't coming.

If Melo and/or Mirotic don't join the Bulls then, they may as well keep Dunleavy and Boozer. All the information we have seems to suggest that this is exactly what's going to happen.

[kingkirk]

Sure, that's one possibility, but it's unlikely that not a single team in the NBA would be willing to trade an expiring for Dunleavy. If we want to trade him, to clear that contract, then he's a easy guy to move. If you're keeping Boozer, then it makes no sense to trade Dunleavy. It's really unlikely that you'll be getting a better player in a Dunleavy trade, so if Boozer is staying you may as well keep MD.

Why maximise cap space if we have no assurances from Anthony?

Why look to dump guys like Dunleavy and Gibson unless some assurance is given?

Perhaps we don't want to get burned again like 2010, so giving up players for nothing, or offers that are seemingly poor ones, is a good decision.

Mike is on a good deal and can be easily dumped if necessary, be it now or in the off season.

[dice]

Hate to break it to u but he has a higher PER which involves more than shooting so aside from D(which both suck at) Marco is the better player. Cool curry and them are better but Marco is still better than MDJ haha.

haha? what grade are you in?

i'll make this as clear as i can: marco has been better THIS SEASON. he has NOT had the better career. if i could be guaranteed that marco would play like he has so far this season, i'd happily swap out dunleavy for him. that guarantee does not exist. dunleavy did not suddenly get old and unproductive at age 33. nor did marco magically enter his prime and have his production skyrocket because he turned 27. he's having a good year, plain and simple

[Rerisen]

Apparently not only fans, but other GMs also got the wrong idea about the Deng trade. That it meant the Bulls were tanking, giving up, or just generally throwing cargo over the side.

The Deng trade was about Deng and Deng only, and the very unique and massive salary relief afforded by the Bynum contract.

The Bulls signed Mike Dunleavy with the intention of competing this year, to be a good complimentary piece next to Derrick. No reason the same thinking wouldn't carry over to next year, when they expect Derrick to be back, and would like to be a good team again.

[League Circles]

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.

The first part doesn't affect the second part. Yes, IF maximizing cap space were the priority, MDJ would be dealt, but Boozer may be amnestied without maximizing cap space being the priority. Rather, just clearing enough cap space to sign mirotic and one more 5 mil player or so may be the priority.

Sure there is several possible outcomes here, but it still supports the theory that the Bulls actually aren't after cap space.

In the Boozer thread, I said that that Boozer's comments about probably not being amnestied to me meant two things:

1.) Melo isn't coming.
2.) Mirotic probably isn't coming.

If Melo and/or Mirotic don't join the Bulls then, they may as well keep Dunleavy and Boozer. All the information we have seems to suggest that this is exactly what's going to happen.

Very little information we have supports that. Reinsdorf said mirotic is coming this summer (or next at the latest), and the math, Ralph, and the writers suggest it'll require cap space.

There are multiple reasons why boozer might be either lying, misunderstanding, or being lied to, not to mention that Mirotic can easily be construed as a star to fit the criteria.

[HomoSapien]

Sure, that's one possibility, but it's unlikely that not a single team in the NBA would be willing to trade an expiring for Dunleavy. If we want to trade him, to clear that contract, then he's a easy guy to move. If you're keeping Boozer, then it makes no sense to trade Dunleavy. It's really unlikely that you'll be getting a better player in a Dunleavy trade, so if Boozer is staying you may as well keep MD.

Why maximise cap space if we have no assurances from Anthony?

Why look to dump guys like Dunleavy and Gibson unless some assurance is given?

Perhaps we don't want to get burned again like 2010, so giving up players for nothing, or offers that are seemingly poor ones, is a good decision.

Completely agree about Gibson, but I don't about Dunleavy. He's pretty replaceable. If you want to be a factor in free-agency, then it's better to be safe and just trade him. There's no guarantee that we can find a team that will absorb a 34 year old role player.

[Mightymosdef]

Hate to break it to u but he has a higher PER which involves more than shooting so aside from D(which both suck at) Marco is the better player. Cool curry and them are better but Marco is still better than MDJ haha.

haha? what grade are you in?

i'll make this as clear as i can: marco has been better THIS SEASON. he has NOT had the better career. if i could be guaranteed that marco would play like he has so far this season, i'd happily swap out dunleavy for him. that guarantee does not exist. dunleavy did not suddenly get old and unproductive at age 33. nor did marco magically enter his prime and have his production skyrocket because he turned 27. he's having a good year, plain and simple

Lol likewise, so you're comparing a 33 MDJ to a 27 Marco? You
I can't argue this years Marco and last years MDJ but u can judge the careers for a guy that still has 4-7 more years with a guy that's 2 or less years from the end?

The hypocrisy

[dice]

Hate to break it to u but he has a higher PER which involves more than shooting so aside from D(which both suck at) Marco is the better player. Cool curry and them are better but Marco is still better than MDJ haha.

haha? what grade are you in?

i'll make this as clear as i can: marco has been better THIS SEASON. he has NOT had the better career. if i could be guaranteed that marco would play like he has so far this season, i'd happily swap out dunleavy for him. that guarantee does not exist. dunleavy did not suddenly get old and unproductive at age 33. nor did marco magically enter his prime and have his production skyrocket because he turned 27. he's having a good year, plain and simple

Lol likewise, so you're comparing a 33 MDJ to a 27 Marco? You

i don't know what you're trying to say here. but i don't think the age difference is as notable as you seem to think it is

I can't argue this years Marco and last years MDJ but u can judge the careers for a guy that still has 4-7 more years with a guy that's 2 or less years from the end?

The hypocrisy

what may i ask is hypocritical about looking at an entire career rather than half a season? do you know what hypocrisy means?

[HomoSapien]

Very little information we have supports that. Reinsdorf said mirotic is coming this summer (or next at the latest), and the math, Ralph, and the writers suggest it'll require cap space.

Here's what Reinsdorf said:

"We have the rights to (Nikola) Mirotic, who's probably the best player in Europe. He's going to come either this year or the following year at the latest."

He's not promising that Mirotic will come this year, just that he expects Mirotic to join the team within two seasons.

Reinsdorf also said this:

"We're not starting from scratch," Reinsdorf said. "We still have Noah and Derrick and (Mike) Dunleavy and Taj Gibson and (Carlos) Boozer. We've got a pretty good base.

It's weird to include Dunleavy and Boozer in this statement. He could have easily have just said that Rose, Noah, and Gibson is a good base instead.

There are multiple reasons why boozer might be either lying, misunderstanding, or being lied to, not to mention that Mirotic can easily be construed as a star to fit the criteria.

I don't really see the benefit of Boozer lying. What does he have to gain by lying? Either he'll be amnestied or he won't. It won't change his value or perception around the league. I also don't see why the Bulls would lie to him. They're not dicks. They're not going to purposely mislead him.

If Boozer and Gibson are both on the roster, Mirotic won't be. He's too valuable to them for them to risk screwing up his development.

[Mightymosdef]

haha? what grade are you in?

i'll make this as clear as i can: marco has been better THIS SEASON. he has NOT had the better career. if i could be guaranteed that marco would play like he has so far this season, i'd happily swap out dunleavy for him. that guarantee does not exist. dunleavy did not suddenly get old and unproductive at age 33. nor did marco magically enter his prime and have his production skyrocket because he turned 27. he's having a good year, plain and simple

Lol likewise, so you're comparing a 33 MDJ to a 27 Marco? You

i don't know what you're trying to say here. but i don't think the age difference is as notable as you seem to think it is

I can't argue this years Marco and last years MDJ but u can judge the careers for a guy that still has 4-7 more years with a guy that's 2 or less years from the end?

The hypocrisy

what may i ask is hypocritical about looking at an entire career rather than half a season? do you know what hypocrisy means?

I do being that I'm studying medicine.

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

[dumbell78]

Sure, that's one possibility, but it's unlikely that not a single team in the NBA would be willing to trade an expiring for Dunleavy. If we want to trade him, to clear that contract, then he's a easy guy to move. If you're keeping Boozer, then it makes no sense to trade Dunleavy. It's really unlikely that you'll be getting a better player in a Dunleavy trade, so if Boozer is staying you may as well keep MD.

Why maximise cap space if we have no assurances from Anthony?

Why look to dump guys like Dunleavy and Gibson unless some assurance is given?

Perhaps we don't want to get burned again like 2010, so giving up players for nothing, or offers that are seemingly poor ones, is a good decision.

Completely agree about Gibson, but I don't about Dunleavy. He's pretty replaceable. If you want to be a factor in free-agency, then it's better to be safe and just trade him. There's no guarantee that we can find a team that will absorb a 34 year old role player.

Yeah I dont see the connect either, I think youre reading too much into it. MDJ can easily be moved to a team like GSW for a TPE in the summer. 1 yr remaining at little over 3 mil is a value contract at this point.

He can be moved on draft day with one of our picks or even after if it means we target someone with great value.

[HomoSapien]

Why maximise cap space if we have no assurances from Anthony?

Why look to dump guys like Dunleavy and Gibson unless some assurance is given?

Perhaps we don't want to get burned again like 2010, so giving up players for nothing, or offers that are seemingly poor ones, is a good decision.

Completely agree about Gibson, but I don't about Dunleavy. He's pretty replaceable. If you want to be a factor in free-agency, then it's better to be safe and just trade him. There's no guarantee that we can find a team that will absorb a 34 year old role player.

Yeah I dont see the connect either, I think youre reading too much into it. MDJ can easily be moved to a team like GSW for a TPE in the summer. 1 yr remaining at little over 3 mil is a value contract at this point.

He can be moved on draft day with one of our picks or even after if it means we target someone with great value.

Yikes. If we prefer to trade Dunleavy during the draft with one of our draft picks, then we are only hurting ourselves.

If Dunleavy makes it past the trade deadline, then I'd be willing to sig bet that we will be returning with generally the same core.

[dumbell78]

Completely agree about Gibson, but I don't about Dunleavy. He's pretty replaceable. If you want to be a factor in free-agency, then it's better to be safe and just trade him. There's no guarantee that we can find a team that will absorb a 34 year old role player.

Yeah I dont see the connect either, I think youre reading too much into it. MDJ can easily be moved to a team like GSW for a TPE in the summer. 1 yr remaining at little over 3 mil is a value contract at this point.

He can be moved on draft day with one of our picks or even after if it means we target someone with great value.

Yikes. If we prefer to trade Dunleavy during the draft with one of our draft picks, then we are only hurting ourselves.

If Dunleavy makes it past the trade deadline, then I'd be willing to sig bet that we will be returning with generally the same core.

Im not saying Im in favor of those examples but if it means the difference in saving a few mil and landing a Melo type, then it is possible. The Bulls are in no rush to dump ppl just yet without any strong indications in FA. 2010 was a valuable lesson for them.

BTW- Im on record for moving MDJ along too, just doesnt have to be at the trade deadline.

[kyrv]

marco is signed next season and not as good as dunleavy. that's why we chose dunleavy in the first place

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.