06/19 ESPN & DX.com Speculation

LUKE23 · Post #941 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:39 pm

It's actually not ridiculous to compare their numbers. They were both PG's on lottery teams. Hinrich is a significantly better defender, but Mo is the better offensive player. Hinrich isn't a great creator either, same as Mo. You'd basically be adding him for his defense. I do not trade #8 for him.

Hinrich did not have a good season whatsoever last year, and many Bulls fans would tell you the same.

Post #942 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:41 pm

Dealing our pick for a player is about the last thing I want to see happen. Kirk's a fine player, but I don't think he's an upgrade to Mo so I have to ask myself what the point would be. I suppose the board would be in a holding pattern until the other shoe drops later this summer.

Personally, I don't buy all the rumors, anyway. We're a day away; I can wait until then.

LUKE23 · Post #943 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:42 pm

Yep, I'm in the same boat with dealing the pick. If we're going to trade it, make a splash (i.e. trade up for a guy you really want, or use it in a bigger deal to get a star level player). Hinrich fits neither of these criteria.

europa · Post #944 » by **europa** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:44 pm

I haven't read the past few pages so can someone give me a Cliff Notes version of what I've missed? Is there a rumored deal involving the 8th pick for Hinrich?

If so, I'm starting my draft party a day early. That would be sweet.

Post #945 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:44 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Yep, I'm in the same boat with dealing the pick. If we're going to trade it, make a splash (i.e. trade up for a guy you really want, or use it in a bigger deal to get a star level player). Hinrich fits neither of these criteria.

Yup.

aaprigs311 · Post #946 » by **aaprigs311** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:46 pm

I will be outraged if we give up our pick for another middle of the line PG. If Hammond wants a better defensive PG there's a chance Westbrook drops to us.

LUKE23 · Post #947 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:47 pm

Yeah, Hinrich really overall isn't very much of an upgrade. He's a good defender, but his offense is really struggling right now, and he's not a PG that's going to break you down, get into the lane, and get guys great shots either (evidenced by assist numbers). He's also a poor shooter (41.4% career, 41.4% last season).

You don't trade a lottery pick just to upgrade defense at PG. Not a smart move.

M. Pemulis · Post #948 » by **M. Pemulis** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:47 pm

I don't mind Hinrich for 8 plus filler. We get proven talent instead of unproven talent. We upgrade the PG position, at least in terms of a new defensive mindset. And it frees us to trade Mo and maybe CV for a proven player at the 3.

We overestimate draft picks. The only way I don't like this is if Sessions proves to be a stud next year, which is a major gamble.

Delete

Licensed to Il · Post #949 » by **Licensed to Il** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:50 pm

Luke, you and I seem to disagree on every single player in the league. Which is fine.

But to put KH and MW in the same ballpark as "both starting point gurads on a lottery team" totally discounts the previous three years when KH took a young Bulls team to the playoffs, including a win over the defending champion Heat (not that the Heat were any good that year).

Kirk had a terrible year last year, but at least has a body of work in the NBA as a contributer on a winning team. Mo does not. Now I am the first to admit that you can find good players on bad teams. But in this particular case, I think that Kirk is so far ahead of Mo that I'm not going to extend the debate any further. Point guard is the one position where you have to look at a teams results over the players individual stats. Because it is the one position where said player is asked to sacrifice individual accomplishments for the team.

Kirk is not worth an 8th pick in every draft. And he is not worth the 8th pick to every team. Heck, I don't even know how I feel about us aquiring him after last year. And I am pretty sure SKiles has a bad taste in his mouth over all the Bulls, as most quit on him by November last year.

However... and this is what kills me whenever everyone poo poos Jarrett Jack, Kirk Hinrich, etc... the number one grips of this board for the last three years has been that our guards are chuckers who don't play team ball and run the team properly. And then whenever the name of a tough and steady point guard is brought up.. everyone wants Baron Davis. Sorry, but I really doubt we will be getting the bearded beast of Oakland.

bango_the_buck · Post #950 » by **bango_the_buck** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:51 pm

europa wrote:I haven't read the past few pages so can someone give me a Cliff Notes version of what I've missed? Is there a rumored deal involving the 8th pick for Hinrich?

If so, I'm starting my draft party a day early. That would be sweet.

I think one of the proposed deals on the table involves Hinrich. But I gather there is another that everyone would hate. And then everyone started posting their email addresses trying to get the inside info forwarded to them. I think that sums it up...

Bernman · Post #951 » by **Bernman** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:52 pm

If we trade our pick for Hinrich we better at least acquire another in the mid to late first round so we can gamble on a player with a high ceiling. I'm thinking of your Hicksons and Ajincas. That way you upgrade your roster now and for the future.

LUKE23 · Post #952 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:53 pm

I don't mind Hinrich and I would take him over Mo for this roster. That I'm not debating. What I'm debating is whether giving up #8 along with other assets is a good move to acquire him. In my opinion it is not.

Regarding Hinrich and the playoffs, he also had a better overall roster and a much better coach during that time period. The Bucks have had Porter, Stotts, LK, no small forward worth anything outside of Simmons first year, no PF that was starter caliber any of the years, and Bogut the first two seasons was below expectations.

The Bulls had a better overall roster last year as well, and were still in the lottery.

I think Hinrich overall is better than Mo, but he's not such an upgrade that it warrants moving #8 and another piece of this roster.

Captain Erv · Post #953 » by **Captain Erv** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:56 pm

Is Hammond working for the Bucks or the Bulls?

europa · Post #954 » by **europa** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:56 pm

bango_the_buck wrote:
europa wrote:I haven't read the past few pages so can someone give me a Cliff Notes version of what I've missed? Is there a rumored deal involving the 8th pick for Hinrich?

If so, I'm starting my draft party a day early. That would be sweet.

I think one of the proposed deals on the table involves Hinrich. But I gather there is another that everyone would hate. And then everyone started posting their email addresses trying to get the inside info forwarded to them. I think that sums it up...

Thanks. Is the info coming from wichmae or someone else?

bango_the_buck · Post #955 » by **bango_the_buck** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:59 pm

europa wrote:
bango_the_buck wrote:
europa wrote:I haven't read the past few pages so can someone give me a Cliff Notes version of what I've missed? Is there a rumored deal involving the 8th pick for Hinrich?

If so, I'm starting my draft party a day early. That would be sweet.

I think one of the proposed deals on the table involves Hinrich. But I gather there is another that everyone would hate. And then everyone started posting their email addresses trying to get the inside info forwarded to them. I think that sums it up...

Thanks. Is the info coming from wichmae or someone else?

From wichmae...

aaprigs311 · Post #956 » by **aaprigs311** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:00 pm

I would MUCH rather have Alexander and Mo than just Hinrich. There just isn't a big enough upgrade to give that much up. Seems like we'd almost be doing the Bulls a favor.

fam3381 · Post #957 » by **fam3381** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:01 pm

Here's some more good news about Randolph...his high school team went 13-15 his senior season and they didn't win a playoff game in either of his two seasons there. He'll fit right in with the Bucks I guess.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... e17ad.html

europa · Post #958 » by **europa** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:05 pm

aaprigs311 wrote:I would MUCH rather have Alexander and Mo than just Hinrich.

Is that the reported offer - Mo/8 for Hinrich?

Licensed to Il · Post #959 » by **Licensed to Il** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:06 pm

The first order of business is to change the culture of this team. That was the logic behind a guy like Skiles, that was why Kohl went with Hammonds. That is what every offseason comment has brought up. That means that we aren't going to do Larry Harris type pie in the sky moves like "trading for 3 lottery picks" like some here suggest. And as we move towards that solid foundation of hard nosed team ball, we are going to have to sacrifice "ambition and elite ceiling types" for slightly better than average young veterans.

I don' tlike the idea of #8 for Hinrich. But knowing that we have a steady guy who is going to take care of the ball and stop penetration and work hard every night is such a change from what our backcourt has brought us in the last three years that I would applaud. Is that crazy? Isny Joe Alexander just an extension of Larry Harris quasi-hope and psuedo-enthusiasm? Do we need more prospects and years in the lottery? Or is it time to field a team that is going to share the ball, work the clock, take the right shots at the right time, and bring it every night? Cause that team needs to move Mo and Redd and bring in a Hinrich or a Fisher or a Andre Miller. If we are just going to keep adding one or two guys with potential every offseason and having no chemistry and sucking big time. Well then we take Randolph or Gallinari and get out those bags to put on our heads from last spring.

#8 for Hinrich would piss me off a little. But once I got used to it, I would look forward to the idea of a Bucks team that was in each and every game, without brawling at halftime during a blowout over some junior high foxhole analogy.

TheGhostDog · Post #960 » by **TheGhostDog** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:09 pm

Ugh. I wouldn't mind trading for Hinrich if the trade involved Mo, Redd or CV, because then I could at least reassure myself that we are sending a poison pill to a key rival in the form of an atrocious defender and/or selfish player. With all the dead contract money and defensive liabilities we need to move out why give up one of the few assets we have that's not saddled with a big negative?