clips-bulls

dflaschberger · Post #1 » by **dflaschberger** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:05 pm

Just saw a terrible clips bulls deal-reminded me of this one I had

Mobley and Brand (plus cheap filler) for Gordon, TThomas, JSmith and VK (or PJ in a small S&T if necessary)

Clips could easily involve a third team or just move JSmith on-he's got A LOT of value the way he's playing on a reasonable 2 year deal

Why for bulls? Easy-shakeup, win now (or next year)
kirk/duhon
mobley/kirk/thabo
deng/noc/thabo
Brand/noc/noah
wallace/noah/gray

That team competes in tHe East for a few years

Why for clips-they are going NOWHERE. I always thought gordon would work in LA with Livingston. This clears A BUNCH of cap space (let's say they move JSmith to Olrando for Reddick, Garrity and the rights to Fran or a future #1)

Livingston
Gordon
Thorton
TThomas
Kamen

With their top 5 pick this year. I believe they could move magette and package him with Tim Thomas and give Cassell to someone for something. That starting 5 would be well balanced, plus their pick (Mayo or Rose, let's say?).

In 2 years the clips would be nice

DanTown8587 · Post #2 » by **DanTown8587** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:41 pm

The Bulls learned this the very hard way: if you trade low post scoring and not getting a bona fide low post scorer back, you severely stunt the growth of your team.

dflaschberger · Post #3 » by **dflaschberger** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:18 pm

yes, but the clips have Kaman-Tyrus would be GREAT next to him, with thorton a super-athletic 3/4.

My plan depends on the clips getting livingston back-but imagine
livingston/gordon/thorton/thomas/kaman-with a top five pick from this year and A TON of $ flexibility to boot.

waverider · Post #4 » by **waverider** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:19 pm

DanTown8587 wrote:The Bulls learned this the very hard way: if you trade low post scoring and not getting a bona fide low post scorer back, you severely stunt the growth of your team.

That blanket statement is not true - just look at tha Blazers this year after jettisoning Zach! Simply depends on your team assets and talent level.

Post #5 » by **coldfish** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:24 pm

waverider wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

That blanket statement is not true - just look at tha Blazers this year after jettisoning Zach! Simply depends on your team assets and talent level.

Zach isn't a low post scorer in the desirable sense. The goal of low post offense is to either generate high percentage inside shots or draw double teams and kick it to open shooters.

Since Zach doesn't shoot a high percentage or pass the ball, he is the equivalent of a volume perimeter scorer.

dflaschberger · Post #6 » by **dflaschberger** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:29 am

but what about Kaman? you don't really need 2 studs on the block