I come in peace (Bulls fan) - Rose trade discussion

[HINrichPolice]

First of all, I'm a huge Bulls fan (born and raised in the Chicago area), but I lived in LA for 5 years. Things I miss most about the LA area - fried chicken from Honey's Kettle, a truffle burger from Umami Burger (Santa Monica location only), and tonkatsu ramen from Daikokuya.

As you know, the Bulls are having quite a few chemistry issues. I think it's time, and it's sad for me to admit, that we consider parting ways with Derrick Rose.

If you haven't paid attention, he played really well after Christmas - FG%, 3pt%, turnovers, shot selection all vastly improved. It seems that wearing a mask affected him physically and mentally because once it came off, we saw a different player. With more confidence came more aggression and willingness to play like young Rose. The problem is that he and Butler never figured out how to play well TOGETHER. When Butler had big games, Rose didn't. When Rose had big games, Butler didn't.

Rose is obviously also a fan of the LA area - he likes not having the same level attention he gets in Chicago, he's comfortable there as he trains there in the offseason, etc. I could see him wanting to be in LA long term if offered the right money.

And obviously, you have a young PG in D'Angelo Russell to complicate matters. It seems that he had a rough start and then showed flashes as expected. I'm not sure what Lakers' fans perspective on him is, especially after the Nick Young thing.

Having said all that, I think Jordan Clarkson could be a good fit with Jimmy Butler. And I think Derrick Rose provides the star power that LA craves, especially now that Kobe is gone.

Talent wise, Derrick Rose is in a different tier than Clarkson if we assume that Derrick continues to progress from the post-Chirstmas version of Derrick (he was a trainwreck prior to Christmas). If he had post Christmas numbers throughout the entire season and the Bulls were winning more, I think he then re-establishes himself as all-star caliber.

So no specific trade to propose. Just wanting to hear your thoughts on Clarkson, Russell's trajectory/chemistry fit with the team, Rose providing star power, and what kind of trade you'd consider that involves Clarkson and Rose.

[Marionettetc]

Want no part in Rose. He's been done for years and won't be worth whatever he's going to demand on the market.

You have to consider the fact that some fans of the Bulls would be happy getting a no defense second round pick for their supposed "franchise" player, and what that says about Derek's value right? You're basically saying Rose is negative value on the court.

So why would anyone else want Rose, when they could even just sign him in free agency if they really wanted to?

[ak7]

Well we certainly have nothing to gain immediately from a Clarkson/Rose trade which is what you'd want if you traded one of your best young assets. I can't see a scenario working out with Clarkson (unless you overpay).

Furthermore, we just spent the past three seasons throwing out a practically disabled star to sell tickets, I would think the front office would want to move on from that.

[Slava]

Bulls might be best served to wait till the end of free agency and find takers for Rose with teams who couldn't net a good PG. Brooklyn, NYK and Kings might be good candidates.

I do think Russell is a long term SG who will score but Lakers wouldn't have much of a need for another scoring PG, someone in the mold of Huertas who can organize an offense and facilitate better flow is a better fit for us as he showed last season. I'd be interested in a Clarkson S&T but not for Rose. Someone like Covington from Philly might be a better trade target for us.

[SubZero]

Be useful

-Slava

[HINrichPolice]

Want no part in Rose. He's been done for years and won't be worth whatever he's going to demand on the market.

You have to consider the fact that some fans of the Bulls would be happy getting a no defense second round pick for their supposed "franchise" player, and what that says about Derek's value right? You're basically saying Rose is negative value on the court.

So why wold anyone else want Rose, when they could even just sign him in free agency if they really wanted to?

Well, he's certainly not done. After Christmas, he's put up his best stats since his MVP year. However, I do agree that he'll likely ask for a lot more than he's worth when he's a Free Agent.

And I'm not saying Rose for Clarkson straight up. You said that. So no, a negative value is not an accurate representation of what I feel Rose's value is.

[HINrichPolice]

Bulls might be best served to wait till the end of free agency and find takers for Rose with teams who couldn't net a good PG. Brooklyn, NYK and Kings might be good candidates.

I do think Russell is a long term SG who will score but Lakers wouldn't have much of a need for another scoring PG, someone in the mold of Huertas who can organize an offense and facilitate better flow is a better fit for us as he showed last season. I'd be interested in a Clarkson S&T but not for Rose. Someone like Covington from Philly might be a better trade target for us.

How do Lakers fans feel about the Russell/Clarkson backcourt pairing now and into the future? Do they complement each other or does one likely have to go?

[HINrichPolice]

Well we certainly have nothing to gain immediately from a Clarkson/Rose trade which is what you'd want if you traded one of your best young assets. I can't see a scenario working out with Clarkson (unless you overpay).

Furthermore, we just spent the past three seasons throwing out a practically disabled star to sell tickets, I would think the front office would want to move on from that.

I'm curious. Do LA fans want a legit rebuild (several year long plan and primarily via the draft)? I feel like LA fans would be impatient and would jump at a chance to have legit starpower.

[Slava]

Bulls might be best served to wait till the end of free agency and find takers for Rose with teams who couldn't net a good PG. Brooklyn, NYK and Kings might be good candidates.

I do think Russell is a long term SG who will score but Lakers wouldn't have much of a need for another scoring PG, someone in the mold of Huertas who can organize an offense and facilitate better flow is a better fit for us as he showed last season. I'd be interested in a Clarkson S&T but not for Rose. Someone like Covington from Philly might be a better trade target for us.

How do Lakers fans feel about the Russell/Clarkson backcourt pairing now and into the future? Do they complement each other or does one likely have to go?

Neither has to go, Clarkson will peak as a 6th man scorer and Russell is a complete SG who has to play next to a pass first PG. So if Clarkson sees himself as more than that, he'll have to go. The man we need to move is Lou Williams.

[Slava]

Well we certainly have nothing to gain immediately from a Clarkson/Rose trade which is what you'd want if you traded one of your best young assets. I can't see a scenario working out with Clarkson (unless you overpay).

Furthermore, we just spent the past three seasons throwing out a practically disabled star to sell tickets, I would think the front office would want to move on from that.

I'm curious. Do LA fans want a legit rebuild (several year long plan and primarily via the draft)? I feel like LA fans would be impatient and would jump at a chance to have legit starpower.

Legit star power is ok, Rose is not legit star power, infact he's a negative value player right now and you can't even bank on him to play games when he's physically healthy yet mentally injured. He was talking about a new contract like a year ago with 2 years left on his current deal so I'm not even sure where his head is with respect to the game.

[ak7]

Well we certainly have nothing to gain immediately from a Clarkson/Rose trade which is what you'd want if you traded one of your best young assets. I can't see a scenario working out with Clarkson (unless you overpay).

Furthermore, we just spent the past three seasons throwing out a practically disabled star to sell tickets, I would think the front office would want to move on from that.

I'm curious. Do LA fans want a legit rebuild (several year long plan and primarily via the draft)? I feel like LA fans would be impatient and would jump at a chance to have legit starpower.

I don't know. I can't actually answer that. I feel like we've been rebuilding for three seasons now. We rebuilt (more like patched) the Howard debacle, and then the two lottery seasons.

I would jump at the chance to land Durant or a Westbrook type. Otherwise, I just want the front office to not screw things up - whatever that may mean.

[ALL HAIL]

Bulls might be best served to wait till the end of free agency and find takers for Rose with teams who couldn't net a good PG. Brooklyn, NYK and Kings might be good candidates.

I do think Russell is a long term SG who will score but Lakers wouldn't have much of a need for another scoring PG, someone in the mold of Huertas who can organize an offense and facilitate better flow is a better fit for us as he showed last season. I'd be interested in a Clarkson S&T but not for Rose. Someone like Covington from Philly might be a better trade target for us.

How do Lakers fans feel about the Russell/Clarkson backcourt pairing now and into the future? Do they complement each other or does one likely have to go?

Neither has to go, Clarkson will peak as a 6th man scorer and Russell is a complete SG who has to play next to a pass first PG. So if Clarkson sees himself as more than that, he'll have to go. The man we need to move is Lou Williams.

We both agree that he's best utilized right now vas a scorer to get him "loose", but Russell isn't a "complete" SG at all, and he doesn't need a traditional pass first PG to be effective.

What he needs, on offense, is another veteran ball handler in the lineup with him who is, at least, equally as unselfish as he is. That other ball handler could come from any position though (ie. Batum at SF, Butler as swingman, or Clarkson as combo).

What he needs, on defense, is to be surrounded by defensive stalwarts -- at least two in the starting lineup, and a few more off the bench.

His defensive chemistry needs, right now, are faaar more pressing than his needs on offense.

On the defensive side, he needs multiple, multiple BODIES (4-5 by my count). On offense, he really only needs another one or two other guys who can handle and share the ball.

Heuertas fits the bill as a veteran unselfish ball-handler, but if you go with him, you'd have to have upper tier defensive players at SF and C to have any chance at balance.

A Lance Stephenson/Jimmy Butler-type player, to me, is a better template for what would give Russell and this team the type of chemistry and balance it so desperately needs.

[HINrichPolice]

How do Lakers fans feel about the Russell/Clarkson backcourt pairing now and into the future? Do they complement each other or does one likely have to go?

Neither has to go, Clarkson will peak as a 6th man scorer and Russell is a complete SG who has to play next to a pass first PG. So if Clarkson sees himself as more than that, he'll have to go. The man we need to move is Lou Williams.

We both agree that he's best utilized right now vas a scorer to get him "loose", but Russell isn't a "complete" SG at all, and he doesn't need a traditional pass first PG to be effective.

What he needs, on offense, is another veteran ball handler in the lineup with him who is, at least, equally as unselfish as he is. That other ball handler could come from any position though (ie. Batum at SF, Butler as swingman, or Clarkson as combo).

What he needs, on defense, is to be surrounded by defensive stalwarts -- at least two in the starting lineup, and a few more off the bench.

His defensive chemistry needs, right now, are faaar more pressing than his needs on offense.

On the defensive side, he needs multiple, multiple BODIES (4-5 by my count). On offense, he really only needs another one or two other guys who can handle and share the ball.

Heuertas fits the bill as a veteran unselfish ball-handler, but if you go with him, you'd have to have upper tier defensive players at SF and C to have any chance at balance.

A Lance Stephenson/Jimmy Butler-type player, to me, is a better template for what would give Russell and this team the type of chemistry and balance it so desperately needs.

What is Clarkson missing that doesn't make him an easy answer as far as a long term backcourt partner for Russell?

[HINrichPolice]

Legit star power is ok, Rose is not legit star power, infact he's a negative value player right now and you can't even bank on him to play games when he's physically healthy yet mentally injured. He was talking about a new contract like a year ago with 2 years left on his current deal so I'm not even sure where his head is with respect to the game.

He was a negative value player prior to Christmas. And with the cap rising, his salary, while still not matching his output, only makes him a net negative if your primary goal is to not use up cap room. But as far as being a nightly threat and someone that defenses have to adjust to, he's already back to that level and getting better.

I'm encouraged by his health, but not encouraged by his fit with Butler and Hoiberg's offensive philosophy. Butler fitting with Hoiberg is a whole different topic, but I have more faith in Butler to figure it out than Rose.

[Slava]

Legit star power is ok, Rose is not legit star power, infact he's a negative value player right now and you can't even bank on him to play games when he's physically healthy yet mentally injured. He was talking about a new contract like a year ago with 2 years left on his current deal so I'm not even sure where his head is with respect to the game.

He was a negative value player prior to Christmas. And with the cap rising, his salary, while still not matching his output, only makes him a net negative if your primary goal is to not use up cap room. But as far as being a nightly threat and someone that defenses have to adjust to, he's already back to that level and getting better.

I'm encouraged by his health, but not encouraged by his fit with Butler and Hoiberg's offensive philosophy. Butler fitting with Hoiberg is a whole different topic, but I have more faith in Butler to figure it out than Rose.

For Rose's output to match his salary he has to be as good as Butler, anyways he might be a good reclamation project for someone like Dallas once his current deal expires and Chicago might want to give him another year because what he brings back in a trade is likely not worth much to you guys.

[ALL HAIL]

Neither has to go, Clarkson will peak as a 6th man scorer and Russell is a complete SG who has to play next to a pass first PG. So if Clarkson sees himself as more than that, he'll have to go. The man we need to move is Lou Williams.

We both agree that he's best utilized right now vas a scorer to get him "loose", but Russell isn't a "complete" SG at all, and he doesn't need a traditional pass first PG to be effective.

What he needs, on offense, is another veteran ball handler in the lineup with him who is, at least, equally as unselfish as he is. That other ball handler could come from any position though (ie. Batum at SF, Butler as swingman, or Clarkson as combo).

What he needs, on defense, is to be surrounded by defensive stalwarts -- at least two in the starting lineup, and a few more off the bench.

His defensive chemistry needs, right now, are faaar more pressing than his needs on offense.

On the defensive side, he needs multiple, multiple BODIES (4-5 by my count). On offense, he really only needs another one or two other guys who can handle and share the ball.

Heuertas fits the bill as a veteran unselfish ball-handler, but if you go with him, you'd have to have upper tier defensive players at SF and C to have any chance at balance.

A Lance Stephenson/Jimmy Butler-type player, to me, is a better template for what would give Russell and this team the type of chemistry and balance it so desperately needs.

What is Clarkson missing that doesn't make him an easy answer as far as a long term backcourt partner for Russell?

Well, unless Clarkson and Russell are playing with at least two other really strong defensive players I don't like their fit at all.

His defense is what makes him a questionable long-term fit next to Rplayer. Russell and Clarkson have never played defense before and are both bad on that end. To truly mature as an all-around player, Russell should have a backcourt mate who sets the defensive intensity bar much higher than either Russell or Clarkson currently have theirs set.

[john248]

There's no point in trading for a player who's injury prone. His production is highly replaceable too considering he's no where near what he was pre-injury. The point is to see how he does moving forward rather than what he was at his best, and the reality is he's not going to give much more than Jordan Clarkson. This isn't me pumping up Clarkson either because I see him as a highly replaceable player too. I'd rather see a JJ Redick type than Rose.

[Marionettetc]

Want no part in Rose. He's been done for years and won't be worth whatever he's going to demand on the market.

You have to consider the fact that some fans of the Bulls would be happy getting a no defense second round pick for their supposed "franchise" player, and what that says about Derek's value right? You're basically saying Rose is negative value on the court.

So why wold anyone else want Rose, when they could even just sign him in free agency if they really wanted to?

Well, he's certainly not done. After Christmas, he's put up his best stats since his MVP year. However, I do agree that he'll likely ask for a lot more than he's worth when he's a Free Agent.

And I'm not saying Rose for Clarkson straight up. You said that. So no, a negative value is not an accurate representation of what I feel Rose's value is.

Any team willing to take Derrick's last year as a salary dump wouldn't want to give anything up to get him. He's a free agent in 2017, why would anyone trade for 1 year of broken down rose - just to do the Bulls a favor?

No one is going to trade an actual asset for negative value 20m/year.

Alright... I got halfway through this thread and can't help but think... "Jordan Clarkson and change for Rose? I'm in."

And that makes me sad.

[stan francisco]

Players who come crashing down from the skies to the floor every second basket they make don't interest me. Wade interests me, but only because he was forced to stop doing that a while back. For me, Rose is a no. He's a star with a superstar paycheck. I'm looking for a superstar with a star paycheck.

[Frank Dux]

I don't think you're going to fool many Laker fans into thinking Rose is still a star player. I'm happy for him that he had a few good months this year, but in reality, he hasn't been a star since the 2011-12 season.

I'm not a big fan of the guy. He's introverted, says a lot of dumb stuff, and he just doesn't seem like the type of guy who I would want to add into our locker room. He just seems to have a dark cloud over him wherever he goes, always a distraction, and doesn't handle media well.

For his sake, I hope he stays healthy. But I would not want him here. Especially a trade involving Clarkson who has no injury issues, and his career trajectory is only rising.