atl/chicago (thoughts?)

stayinschool33 · Post #1 » by **stayinschool33** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:51 am

hawks trade bibby,rights to d anderson(or S Jones) and s+t childress to chicago for:
Heinrich,Noah and Thebo

Kirk,Law,West
J Johnson, Thebo,West
M williams,Richardson
J smith,Noah
Hortford Zaza, Jones
we need to bring in a veteran or udfa to compete at sg/sf, but does this make our team better?

Harry10 · Post #2 » by **Harry10** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 6:04 am

it would be better if the Hawks got Gordon instead of Kirk

stayinschool33 · Post #3 » by **stayinschool33** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 6:08 am

well that would work too, since he will get a similar contract now

m23uza1hem36 · Post #4 » by **m23uza1hem36** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:10 pm

Pretty even, don't know what the reason for it would be other then the Bulls dumped a guard.

geeman · Post #5 » by **geeman** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:53 pm

I like it but sub marvin for Josh chill

evildallas · Post #6 » by **evildallas** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:38 pm

Either variant is fine for us, but I don't see Chicago dealing Noah and the only big they get back in the rights to Andersen. Childress doesn't make a lot sense with Nocioni still being paid and the Marvin version looks ackward when they pay Deng.

I can see where Bibby would work for them to dump salary, especially in a deal for Gordon and another salary since the market for Gordon seems to be drying up a bit (Hornets are the only team I hear about in the hunt). I think they can do better value for Hinrich from some other teams (Nuggets have bigs to give up, Miami can offer an ending contract, Clippers can offer a Maggette sign and trade although position-wise that may not work).

raleigh · Post #7 » by **raleigh** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:57 pm

On second thought: Bibby/Jones -for- Hinrich/Simmons?

evildallas · Post #8 » by **evildallas** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:41 am

mrhonline wrote:On second thought: Bibby/Jones -for- Hinrich/Simmons?

I think you still need another contract from Chicago to work under the cap (or at least a higher contract than Simmons). Bibby and Jones = approx. 15.8M Hinrich and Simmons = approx. 12M

Maybe Bibby = Hinrich and Simmons is just filler to make the math work.

Hmmm, I'm interested. It's allows for slower development from Acie, but I'm not sure that is necessary. Hinrich will be in the last year of his deal when Acie is coming off his rookie deal (and Horford as well). Committing approximately 9M per to paying Hinrich makes it dicey on whether we can afford to sign both Childress and Marvin long term, but I already had questioned the wisdom in that. I can see reasons for and against it. I guess the big questions are was last year an abomination for Hinrich, how much does Bibby have in the tank, and how soon will Acie be our best PG option if ever? I'm not sure of the answers to those questions.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #9 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:50 am

Remember...Chicago is going to be very hesitant in trading away Hinrich for an expiring after the Chandler situation. They also don't have to trade him because he has proven he can guard the SG position while someone like Gordon can't.

raleigh · Post #10 » by **raleigh** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:51 am

I think you still need another contract from Chicago to work under the cap (or at least a higher contract than Simmons). Bibby and Jones = approx. 15.8M Hinrich and Simmons = approx. 12M

Chicago has a trade exception to swallow Jones up with. In other words, it would then be two trades:

1.) Hinrich+Simmons (~$12M) -for- Bibby (~$15M)
2.) Jones -for- nada.

ommitting approximately 9M per to paying Hinrich makes it dicey on whether we can afford to sign both Childress and Marvin long term, but I already had questioned the wisdom in that..

As do I.

I guess the big questions are was last year an abomination for Hinrich, how much does Bibby have in the tank, and how soon will Acie be our best PG option if ever?

Just my opinion:

1. I believe last year was an aberration for Hinrich. That whole team regressed.
2. A couple of years, but even when healthy he's inconsistent on O, and awful on D. I'm not impressed by Bibby.
3. I'm not sold on Law, but either way you can play him next to Hinrich in stretches. Plus, Hinrich's deal shouldn't be that tough to trade.

Post #11 » by **Jamaaliver** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:51 am

I really like the intial trade. K Hinrich is a throwback at PG. J Noah is a high energy defensive big man, though he admittedly has some maturity concerns, he and Horford would be a fearsome duo in the post.

We lose some experince, but gain depth and versatilty.

Kirk
JJ
JSmoove
Horford
Noah

It has potential

raleigh · Post #12 » by **raleigh** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:59 am

I really like the intial trade.

The problem with the initial trade is that the Bulls aren't trading their starting center for Solomon Jones.

AirGordon · Post #13 » by **AirGordon** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:08 am

No way. That is a horrible trade IMO. The Bulls get ripped off big time in that trade.

So we give up Hinrich, Thabo and Noah for basically nothing of value for our team? Hinrich for Bibby straight up is sort of a rip off as it is since Hinrich has more value than Bibby.

Than we throw in Thabo and Noah (2 of our best young players) For Childress and Jones?

You do realize Noah is our starting center and a big piece for our teams future? I mean he had a pretty good rookie season and will only get better. Thabo also turned it on towards the end of last season and is expected to get more playing time next season.

Both of them were recent lottery picks that still have alot of upside. Noah is 23 and Thabo is 24 so they are both pretty young. We just drafted Rose #1 so he will only help their development.

What would we need Childress for? He plays small forward the same position Deng (one of our best players) and Nocioni plays. So what sense would that make for us? There would be no playing time for him.

Hinrich, Hughes and Gooden are all trade possibilities (Gooden not so much) The rest of our team especially our young players are not going anywhere unless we are getting someone like Brand or Melo in return.

We are building around Rose. Trading 2 of our best young players (Noah and Thabo) for nothing that would help us makes no sense.

With that said unless we are getting Horford or Johnson back in return I cant really see the Bulls making any trades with the Hawks.

Something like Bibby for Hinrich could work (seems doubtful though) the problem is we dont want a pg in return. We are already set at pg with Rose now, so we just need a decent backup to play close to 15 mpg. If we resign Duhon than we are set with our backup.

evildallas · Post #14 » by **evildallas** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:29 am

Most of realize that the first trade wouldn't be accepted and same have posted that. Too one sided.

We also realize that Childress doesn't make sense with Nocioni and Deng already there.

Good luck going after Brand or Melo. You just don't have the ammo without including Rose.

No way you get Horford or Joe, so we can stop discussing that avenue.

The Bibby for Hinrich thing is really not about position coming back, it's about salary relief only. I feel you guys can get actual assets for Hinrich, so I don't see you settling for a salary dump. However, I do feel you need to make a move with Hinrich this summer. Once he is relegated to the bench, his perceived value will drop.

AirGordon · Post #15 » by **AirGordon** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:39 pm

I feel like we actually do have the players to get Brand or Melo without giving up Rose (IMO neither one is worth Rose anyways) Rose is pretty much untouchable.

As for Bibby for Hinrich it is allways a possibility but I think we can get something better in return.

JoshB914 · Post #16 » by **JoshB914** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 3:20 pm

stayinschool33 wrote:hawks trade bibby,rights to d anderson(or S Jones) and s+t childress to chicago for:
Heinrich,Noah and Thebo

Kirk,Law,West
J Johnson, Thebo,West
M williams,Richardson
J smith,Noah
Hortford Zaza, Jones
we need to bring in a veteran or udfa to compete at sg/sf, but does this make our team better?

That deal seems pretty unfair for Chicago. You give up your first round pick who looked solid last year, a decent PG in Hinrich, and a raw but talented guard in Thabo who was used incorrectly under Skiles. In return you get a average to above average PG who is on the decline in Bibby, a center who likely will never play in the NBA, and a good role player in Chilldress.

evildallas · Post #17 » by **evildallas** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:20 pm

AirGordon wrote:I feel like we actually do have the players to get Brand or Melo without giving up Rose (IMO neither one is worth Rose anyways) Rose is pretty much untouchable.

As for Bibby for Hinrich it is allways a possibility but I think we can get something better in return.

I agree with the second part about getting more for Hinrich. Although Bibby and a future 1st (lottery-portected in first 2 years) for Hinrich/Simmons might start to be competitive depending on whether Bulls management wants to take back a long contract now. On the other count, I would like to hear what you think you can offer for a player like Brand or Melo though. Brand is probably the more acquirable, but you'd have to have him agree to an extension before making the plunge.