ESPN Insider: #5 + Tyreke for Noah + 29

dukeknicksirish · Post #1 » by **dukeknicksirish** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:55 am

Noah/Hayes
Cousins
Williams/Outlaw
Thorton
Isaiah/Jimmer

Looks solid down-low and a promising upbringing at the guard positions. Use cap for a SF and you have a good lookin team.

Thoughts?

Post #2 » by **pillwenney** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:59 am

Wait, what about this on insider? Like, are they talking about this like it could happen? Or is this just some idea some person had?

bibby1023 · Post #3 » by **bibby1023** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:07 am

What the?! I'm wondering the same thing. Is this a rumor/source type thing...if it's actually be discussed I wouldn't be to happy if we did it.

Post #4 » by **City of Trees** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:13 am

Yea can you add some information here or is this just something you created in your head?

sackings916 · Post #5 » by **sackings916** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:14 am

This cant be the whole deal can it? I love Noah and think he would be a perfect fit for this team and as a frontcourt partner to Cousins, but Im not giving up Tyreke, the #5 and our cap space just for him. Some type of combination of Hayes,Salmons,Garcia or Outlaw has to be going the other way.

Post #6 » by **KF10** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:45 am

So we drop 24 spots to switch from Tyreke to Noah? I pass.

Inigo_Montoya · Post #7 » by **Inigo_Montoya** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:58 am

Every once in awhile I consider signing up for Insider but then they troll with material like this and I'm reminded to keep my money. I like Noah a lot but that is too much.

Post #8 » by **Wolfay** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:23 am

They have the same thread on the Chicago board and apparently it's just a (bad) idea.

Post #9 » by **pillwenney** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:27 am

The value is obviously out of whack, but I'd love it as the principle of a deal. We just have to find a way to not lose so much value. Find a way to get like at a 12-18ish pick instead of 29, and throw at least Outlaw in there, and I'm on board.

bibby1023 · Post #10 » by **bibby1023** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:39 am

getting taj gibson in return will be nice, not sure what his contract looks like

RIPskaterdude · Post #11 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:22 am

pillwenney wrote:The value is obviously out of whack, but I'd love it as the principle of a deal. We just have to find a way to not lose so much value. Find a way to get like at a 12-18ish pick instead of 29, and throw at least Outlaw in there, and I'm on board.

If it was something like Noah + 11-14 pick for Evans + 5th + Salmons, I could MAYBE go for it, but...I would rather see what we get at #5 instead. I think Noah is pretty overrated due to the good defensive system in Chicago. No way he's the same player here in Sacramento, imo.

Post #12 » by **pillwenney** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:27 am

Chicago had a great defense for a while before Thibodeau. He just bumped it from great to truly elite. Noah is a huge difference maker there, and perhaps more importantly, I think he could be a culture-changer for the franchise.

And really, there's no point in including Salmons in any trade. We have the amnesty provision and he is clearly the one to use it on.

Post #13 » by **City of Trees** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:29 am

pillwenney wrote:Chicago had a great defense for a while before Thibodeau. He just bumped it from great to truly elite. Noah is a huge difference maker there, and perhaps more importantly, I think he could be a culture-changer for the franchise.

And really, there's no point in including Salmons in any trade. We have the amnesty provision and he is clearly the one to use it on.

No way Maloofs will pay him to walk...but thats beating a dead horse

Post #14 » by **pillwenney** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:39 am

Why not? Would they rather pay him to sit on the bench? I don't see how that makes any sense.

This is all probably moot, because there's not really any logical reason for the Bulls to do it.

Post #15 » by **City of Trees** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:52 am

pillwenney wrote:Why not? Would they rather pay him to sit on the bench? I don't see how that makes any sense.

This is all probably moot, because there's not really any logical reason for the Bulls to do it.

i agree with your point about Salmons riding the bench. Amnesty is by far the way to go..

However you must put yourself in the shoes of a "former playboy lifestyle owner gone broke", who has stopped spending money (evident in leagues lowest payroll) in Sacramento as of late. Dont see them letting the teams highest paid player walk and in return forcing them to replace the contract just to meet league minimum again.

Post #16 » by **pillwenney** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:58 am

I don't buy the idea that the Maloofs won't spend money on anything nearly as much as others. I just think nobody wants to come here unless we give them a contract we're going to regret.

RIPskaterdude · Post #17 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:59 am

Unless they trade the #5 pick for pure salary, a la Deng.

SacKingZZZ · Post #18 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:03 am

Hahaha, wouldn't get my hopes up Bulls fans. Would be an awesome fit and this team would have two of the best fundamental post defenders in Noah and Hayes, but this is ridiculous.

SadKingsFan · Post #19 » by **SadKingsFan** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:29 pm

pillwenney wrote:The value is obviously out of whack, but I'd love it as the principle of a deal. We just have to find a way to not lose so much value. Find a way to get like at a 12-18ish pick instead of 29, and throw at least Outlaw in there, and I'm on board.

SadKingsFan · Post #20 » by **SadKingsFan** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:29 pm

SacKingZZZ wrote:Hahaha, wouldn't get my hopes up Bulls fans. Would be an awesome fit and this team would have two of the best fundamental post defenders in Noah and Hayes, but this is ridiculous.

I want Hayes GONE