Kirk Hinrich

evildallas · Post #41 » by **evildallas** » Wed May 28, 2008 4:03 am

No way do the Hawks do anything with Hughes. He's got another 2 years on that high dollar contract. You should get something really nice for taking that big contract off their hands.

Post #42 » by **BrooklynBulls** » Wed May 28, 2008 5:02 am

evildallas wrote:No way do the Hawks do anything with Hughes. He's got another 2 years on that high dollar contract. You should get something really nice for taking that big contract off their hands.

Ok, no Hughes, no Claxton. So maybe Hinrich/Gooden for Bibby/S&T Childress?

Harry10 · Post #43 » by **Harry10** » Wed May 28, 2008 5:27 am

BrooklynBulls wrote:Kirk would be in a pretty much perfect situation in a rotation of Law, Hinrich, Johnson. Kirk is not a spectacular shooter, but he's better than he was this season. Really, he is. I've watched him, and I was surprised at how much better his stroke was in 06/07...but even more surprised by his stroke in 07/08. He will probably bounce back to have more of the season he had in 05-06. Kirk will do a good job on most PG's, and a great job on some SG's. He gives Ray Allen, Wade living hell.

He's a capable PG, not turnover-happy, but uncreative. He'd excel with 2 playmakers in the starting lineup in Johnson and Smith.

His deal is declining, so his value to contract ratio rises every year
I don't know if your team has the pieces necessary to get a deal done, without including more players from the Bulls side. In terms of value, he does seem to be worth an expiring+Jack+#13, so gauge your offers accordingly.

Looking over your roster, I would be interested in Bibby's expiring, Pachulia, and Childress, as well as future 1sts. Thats not to say all of the above in the deal, but these are the pieces we're willing to accept that you'd be willing to give up.

honestly, as a bulls fan.... what is Kirk's defense like?

Post #44 » by **BrooklynBulls** » Wed May 28, 2008 6:19 am

Harry10 wrote:
honestly, as a bulls fan.... what is Kirk's defense like?

He's very tenacious. Extremely solid fundamentally, but cheats. He'll grab a jersey, hold an arm, touch an elbow. He won't do it much, but he'll do it. Unfortunately, that makes him foul prone, since he tends to be a bit overaggressive, and he has not yet earned a Bowen-like reputation. He does get bullied by the SG's and PG's that are large and can post up- Baron Davis, Vince Carter. He does hold his own with a lot of the elite SG's and PG's, however. He's a bit worse on the lightning bugs...he has no idea how to control Tony Parker, but 29 other teams don't either.

He's a fantastic matchup defender, he'll defend well in transition, his rotations are always crisp and on time. This season, there's no doubt he was a worse defender, but this season, he was a worse everything. And with the failings of the TEAM defense, he overcompensated, and attempted to do too much, leading to a lot of foul trouble.

Basically, you want him as a defender, he's a good player to have. As a creator, he's mediocre, but far from bad. As a shooter, he is very streaky, but is capable of creating his own shot, especially with an explosive guard next to him (Gordon). If you look at his splits with Gordon vs. with Duhon or Sefolosha, he shoots both a higher volume, and a much higher percentage when he's with Gordon. Its very simple...he's good when he's not the focus of the defense.

Basically, I don't really want him traded. But getting Rose puts the roster glut over the edge...3 rotation guys have got to go.

CWell · Post #45 » by **CWell** » Wed May 28, 2008 1:36 pm

trickydik wrote:i don't think the hawks would want hughes , reading your boards i can see how you would love us to take his contract on but i don't think that's going to happen.

we are kind of a tough trading partner , because i don't see us breaking the bank for kirk and i think the only way the hawks would get him is most likely bibby for kirk+filler which isn't likely to happen , i don't see us giving up childress as he is our 6th man and nothing is really wrong with him.

i think the hawk fans are just looking for what we could get for a bibby expiring and hinrich's name was brought up due to a down year and thinking we could get him at a discount due to the bulls drafting rose.

i like kirk but i don't think the hawks are willing to part with any of the core pieces to get him , i'm pretty sure it's bibby and fillers would be about all we could/would offer.

in reality i don't see the hawks doing much this offseason , probably a backup C and they may get into the 2nd round of this year's draft.

The Hawks don't want Hinrich either but the discussion still goes on.

conleyorbust · Post #46 » by **conleyorbust** » Wed May 28, 2008 2:05 pm

BrooklynBulls wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Ok, no Hughes, no Claxton. So maybe Hinrich/Gooden for Bibby/S&T Childress?

On Claxton: From what I understand, if he decides to retire due to injury in Atl he will come off the cap but if he is traded and retires he counts against the cap for the duration of his contract.

That means his negative value to another team is greater than to us.

Post #47 » by **CBS7** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:03 pm

BrooklynBulls wrote:he has no idea how to control Tony Parker, but 29 other teams don't either.

Actually, he's done great against Parker the last few years unless I'm mistaken.

tyrissius · Post #48 » by **tyrissius** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:04 pm

would hawks be willing to take on salary as in kirk/nocioni for bibby/zaza

Post #49 » by **CBS7** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:05 pm

Rip2137 wrote:You know another reason it won't happen?

Mike D'Antoni loves Thabo. He likes Hinrich. The Knicks probably don't love that 6th pick. They also have a low post scorer or two that the Knicks could use.

Seriously, if the Bulls don't select rose and trade with the Knicks to add a post scorer it would be another notch in Paxons belt of inept GM'ing.

They could trade Larry Hughes, Kirk Hinrich, Thabo and Noah

to the knicks for:

Zach Randolph, Jamal Crawford, Mady Collins and the 6th pick.

The Knicks get a guy with a huge contract in Huges that comes off right when they said they want to be under the cap, they get their point guard and they get a couple of guys in Thabo and Noah that fit perfectly into Mike D'Antoni's system.

The Bulls get to add a low post scorer, they can move Jamal Crawford in the two guard spot and draft Rose and BPA at the 6th pick.

Rose
Crawford
Deng
Gooden
Randolph

Hinrich
Hughes
Richardson
Lee
Noah

Looks like an improvement to me.

That trade looks terrible from the Bulls POV, that lineup is just terrible defensively. Randolph will never play in a Bulls uniform. We have a better version of Crawford in Ben Gordon, and the 6th pick isn't worth the rest.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #50 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Wed May 28, 2008 4:19 pm

tyrissius wrote:would hawks be willing to take on salary as in kirk/nocioni for bibby/zaza

I think the fans would but definitely not the owners.

evildallas · Post #51 » by **evildallas** » Wed May 28, 2008 6:19 pm

tyrissius wrote:would hawks be willing to take on salary as in kirk/nocioni for bibby/zaza

Actually, no I wouldn't. Even though there salaries reduce over time, the two of them price out as more than a max player. I don't think your get that level of impact from them combined. They just don't fit my roster management philosophy. They've been compensated a little too well for what they've done and the potential they shown, but it results in an investment in mediocrity. A lot of teams do it (and we seem destined to repeat the mistake), but while it may make you competitive for the playoffs it leaves you unlikely to challenge for a championship.

JoshB914 · Post #52 » by **JoshB914** » Wed May 28, 2008 8:02 pm

No way I take on Nocioni and Kirk's salaries. Maybe Hinrich, but not both of them.

Post #53 » by **BrooklynBulls** » Wed May 28, 2008 9:48 pm

JoshB914 wrote:No way I take on Nocioni and Kirk's salaries. Maybe Hinrich, but not both of them.

I don't think we'd ask you to. I mean, you have zero need for Noc. All the deals I made up, I left Noc out. He's...an awful fit. Do you have a counterproposal?