OT: Wally to Cleveland, Wallace to Cleveland

Charlie78 · Post #21 » by **Charlie78** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:29 am

Its pretty obvious that the sonics have no interest in spending money until they resolve the lease situation. Bennett is basically preparing himself for an empty house for the next two years. I would be doubtful if they made any moves at all until 2009. Because if seattle keeps them in town they are going to hemoraghe (didnt spell that right) money. At this point I would guess they had no interest in doing anything with wally's expiring and since this saves them some money and wally was a bit of a malcontent they made the move. My question is what do you think Earl Watson is thinking, maybe something like "why not me?"

PDXKnight · Post #22 » by **PDXKnight** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:43 am

Seattle got RAPED in this deal. Cleveland comes out as the obvious winners but Chicago stays about the same.

pr0nny · Post #23 » by **pr0nny** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:53 am

Cleveland made out like bandits. 4 productive (or semi-productive) players. LeBron has a little help now.

Post #24 » by **Tommy Udo 6** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:20 am

Bulls got a Trade Exception of $5.2 million, which they have a year to use. Expires around next trade deadline

Bulls traded all 3 of their players over 30. Oldest Bull is now Larry Hughes at 29

Although Bulls gave up a second rounder, they still have NY's pick in second round of 2009 (E Curry trade)

Most Bulls fans are ecstatic that we were able to dump the Wallace contract & move on.

Hughes gives us height at SG & almost assures Ben Gordon will be traded in off season.

Gooden gives us an offensive post presence

It was our first in-season trade since Nov 2003 - and I'm very happy

The Bulls last trade of any kind was in summer 2006 - with Cleveland! This is certainly becoming a habit since they are in same division.

Odd fact: Bulls are supposed to play Cavs 4 times a year - and they havent met yet! First game in series is March 1

Wizenheimer · Post #25 » by **Wizenheimer** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:06 am

bulls6 wrote:Bulls got a Trade Exception of $5.2 million, which they have a year to use. Expires around next trade deadline

Bulls traded all 3 of their players over 30. Oldest Bull is now Larry Hughes at 29

Although Bulls gave up a second rounder, they still have NY's pick in second round of 2009 (E Curry trade)

Most Bulls fans are ecstatic that we were able to dump the Wallace contract & move on.

Hughes gives us height at SG & almost assures Ben Gordon will be traded in off season.

Gooden gives us an offensive post presence

It was our first in-season trade since Nov 2003 - and I'm very happy

The Bulls last trade of any kind was in summer 2006 - with Cleveland! This is certainly becoming a habit since they are in same division.

Odd fact: Bulls are supposed to play Cavs 4 times a year - and they havent met yet! First game in series is March 1

it will have to be a sign & trade I believe, because he will be RFA. That gives Gordon a lot more power in negotiations then he had last year.

Post #26 » by **Spykes** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 6:42 am

Hughes gives us height at SG & almost assures Ben Gordon will be traded in off season.

I've heard a lot of differing opinions on this from Bulls fans. Some think getting Hughes is a sign that they'll trade him. Some think it won't have any effect one way or another. Others say this trade means they need to keep Gordon.

I don't know who to believe....

Post #27 » by **Tommy Udo 6** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:42 am

Spykes wrote:
Hughes gives us height at SG & almost assures Ben Gordon will be traded in off season.

I've heard a lot of differing opinions on this from Bulls fans. Some think getting Hughes is a sign that they'll trade him. Some think it won't have any effect one way or another. Others say this trade means they need to keep Gordon.

I don't know who to believe....

Bulls fans dont know either.

The Bulls were willing to take ANYONE - even a dead guy - for Ben Wallace. So, acquiring Hughes is probably not a sign in itself. We took who they wanted to give.

Yet, the Bulls cannot afford 3 guards making over $10 million each next season.

If Ben G is traded, it must be a sign & trade - and in order to do that, Ben must find a team willing to pay him what he wants. Bulls are willing to keep him but they are realists. Ben is demanding at least $10 million a season (that's what he turned down last season). It is beginning to seem that Ben's salary demands are just so high that the Bulls are preparing to say good-bye.

If the Bulls cannot agree with him - and he finds no one else who will - then it'll be accepting the Qualifying Offer.

Ben is probably the most likely Bulls guard to be traded. However, he is the top scorer & if Ben has a great rest-of-season, Hinrich may be the one traded.

At least Bulls fans know that the guys making the decisions - Paxson & Boylan - were guards themselves so they will be in a good position to judge who should go or stay.

Post #28 » by **Spykes** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:06 pm

I have a follow up question that anyone who knows can answer...

Say Gordon's agent does go out and start looking for a S&T for him. Now, the team willing that's willing to trade for him after the Bulls sign him, does that team have to be under the cap? Or can any team, regardless of their cap situation, say "We'll be willing to pay you this much if the Bulls S&T you to us."?

Wizenheimer · Post #29 » by **Wizenheimer** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:33 pm

Spykes wrote:I have a follow up question that anyone who knows can answer...

Say Gordon's agent does go out and start looking for a S&T for him. Now, the team willing that's willing to trade for him after the Bulls sign him, does that team have to be under the cap? Or can any team, regardless of their cap situation, say "We'll be willing to pay you this much if the Bulls S&T you to us."?

Gordon would be a restricted free agent so I'm pretty sure the CBA allows all sorts of sign and trade negotiations. I don't think that would be a rules violation.

However, I believe Gordon's immediate BYC status complicates any possible sign and trade. Maybe less so if Chicago's trade partner was under the cap, but since only Philly at this point would be substantially under, I'm not sure the Bulls and Gordon would find a willing trade partner. Especially because just about any team would have to renounce their MLE to be far enough under to absorb the BYC difference.

If Gordon signed for around 9-10 million, that would put that BYC discrepancy around 4 million...maybe a little more. In order for both teams to compensate for BYC, I'd think that would mean at least 32-35 million dollars in contracts would have to be exchanged. That would be really difficult unless a 3rd team was involved. And that adds it's own set of complications.

TheCardinal20 · Post #30 » by **TheCardinal20** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 7:25 pm

As much as I dislike aspects of Ben Gordon's game, I believe he has what it takes to be significant contributer to a championship team due to his elite shooting ability(regardless of what the stats suggest). I just don't see the Bulls letting him go unless Gordon has requested a trade. He is pefect off the bench in the "Microwave" role, but I'm not sure he has the mindset to accept this role. If not, he'll leave the Bulls, and put up 20-25ppg for a really bad team for the next 7 years.

As for this deal...I like Joe Smith and Drew Gooden are the best pieces being moved. Ben Wallace is pretty much the worst player in the NBA at this point in time, and I'm not sure why any team would want him.