ImageImageImage

kirk hinrich?

Moderator: THE J0KER

Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#41 » by Leto » Fri Jul 4, 2008 4:03 am

Nutty Nats Fan wrote:
Hinrich has much higher value than Camby for reasons I already stated.

You seem to be a bit confused. Hinrich doesn't have much higher value than Camby.

Hinrich has a worse contract and just had a down year. What if that continues? His contract gets uglier.

Camby was DPOY 2 seasons ago and was running up this season. He has been healthy and hasn't shown any signs of slowing down. He doesn't play a physical game, so his body has less wear and tear. No reason why he shouldn't continue to be effective.

Oh yeah, and Camby only has 2 years left. He is off the books in time for your team to go after Wade, Bosh, or Lebron.


You're right. Hinrich did have a bad year. As did the Bulls. It might be better for the Bulls to hold on to him for another year and play with Rose. It really won't be that much of a problem since Duhon has basically been sent packing. In fact, a starting backcourt of Hinrich and Rose would be pretty dynamic since they can both gaurd either the 1 or 2 spot with Gordon off the bench subing for either of them and Thabo subing Deng at the 3 spot. I'd say by next year all the Bulls players will have higher trade value because 1) I don't see them having another bad year and; 2) Rose is going to make them alot better. And, ya never know, you might get lucky and pick up a great PG next year picking 15-20th in the draft.
EMB6903
Pro Prospect
Posts: 769
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 19, 2006
Location: Denver, CO

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#42 » by EMB6903 » Fri Jul 4, 2008 4:14 am

you would be happy going into the season with a hinrich/rose back court? youre one of the only bulls fans that Ive talked to who wouldnt be disapointed if that were the case.
Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#43 » by Leto » Fri Jul 4, 2008 4:28 am

EMB6903 wrote:you would be happy going into the season with a hinrich/rose back court? youre one of the only bulls fans that Ive talked to who wouldnt be disapointed if that were the case.



The Bulls have a good team and Rose is going to make them better. Kirk can play either the 1 or the 2 and while some folks want to trade him, others do not. Paxson is pretty deliberate and he won't make any hasty trades anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if he just goes with the team we have into the season and see what happens. Kirk would definately make a good mentor for Rose. And, like I mentioned, it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see a starting backcourt of either Rose and Gordon or Rose and Hinrich. Either way, that's an impressive 3 gaurd rotation.
The Rebel
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 25,186
And1: 11,359
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
 

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#44 » by The Rebel » Sat Jul 5, 2008 7:14 am

Leto wrote:
eathy wrote:mm i wouldn't do it if the 1st was unprotected. the west has gotten even tougher this season, and we barely snuck into 8th seed.

Camby + Chucky + 1st rounder (lottery PROTECTED, Nuggets or Charlottes) for Hinrich + Gooden

??

u get a lot of salary relief dumping Hinrich's contract and getting Chucky's expiring.
Chucky will serve as the backup PG in your team... sometihng that you'll need.
You won't need Gooden, with Camby... as he'll take up your other player's minutes.
Also we could use Gooden, since Najera is likely going to be gone.
We could use Kirk... u know why.


We really couldn't do Gooden because we're too thin at that spot in terms of scoring. Plus, Hinrich > Camby and Gooden > Chucky. And, we don't need a PG--that's why we're looking to move Hinrich. Gordon and Thabo can fill in as back ups. Also, hit or miss first rounder is just too low of a pick to give up that much with no chance of getting lucky for giving up the better players. I would be willing to do Hinrich for Camby and first rounder top 3 protected but I couldn't go any more than that since its us thats taking the risk of losing value should you actually miss the playoffs. Further, its highly unlikely that you do miss the playoffs so we're looking at a mid to low first round pick with an outside chance of getting into the top 10. Really, you guys are getting a good deal here. Yes, you'll lose a draft pick but you have to take risks in this league if you're going to get better. And, like I said, you probably make the playoffs in which case it is highly unlikely you would get a player as good as Kirk. And, in two years, you won't get anything for Camby.

Its a risk for both teams but you are starting out with the better value. That puts us behind the eight ball because the draft is no gaurantee you get anything.


Talk about a homer, With the season Hinrich had last year, he has much less value then many Bulls fans will admit, the guy could go on to show that last year was a fluke, or he could continue on his downward slide like a ton of examples that had a couple of good years in the right system, but were nothing more then overpaid journeymen for the rest of their careers. Camby meanwhile won the dpoy in 07 and had a much better season statistically this year, while showing over the last few years that he can stay healthy.

AS for contracts, Hinrich may have a decent in that it goes down every year (hopefully his production does not follow though), Camby has the best contract in the league, if he does not produce he makes 25% less, plus it expires in 2 years which is the year every team seems to want. Same with age, after the debacle that were the Bulls last year, you would think that they would understand the concept of filling a hole that you have for next year, as opposed to hoping and praying that one of your young bigs develop somewhere down the road.

As for the Chucky for Gooden part of the swap, I would rather the team use the small buyout on Atkin's deal, and spend the money on a big that understands what the word defense means.

Now if you ask me in a Camby for Hinrich I think the pick should be coming from Chicago especially with Camby being a center, and I think most knowledgeable fans and more importantly GMs would agree, after all look what O'neal brought back, and honestly with the way he is paid, missed games, and has had his production decline the last couple of years, does anybody really think he has more value then Camby?
The Rebel
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 25,186
And1: 11,359
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
 

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#45 » by The Rebel » Sat Jul 5, 2008 7:29 am

Leto wrote:
EMB6903 wrote:you would be happy going into the season with a hinrich/rose back court? youre one of the only bulls fans that Ive talked to who wouldnt be disapointed if that were the case.



The Bulls have a good team and Rose is going to make them better. Kirk can play either the 1 or the 2 and while some folks want to trade him, others do not. Paxson is pretty deliberate and he won't make any hasty trades anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if he just goes with the team we have into the season and see what happens. Kirk would definately make a good mentor for Rose. And, like I mentioned, it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see a starting backcourt of either Rose and Gordon or Rose and Hinrich. Either way, that's an impressive 3 gaurd rotation.



Even the great tandem of Jordan and Pippen needed rebounders and defenders at the big positions before they started winning, you can talk all you want about your three guard rotation, just have fun watching your team get eaten up once again in the middle, as happened last year. Paxson and you will have to accept that the only good big that has been traded (without a sign and trade) for a bunch of **** in the last few years has been Chandler and Bulls fans still complain about that whole deal, defensive centers hold a ton of value, especially when they are considered in the top 4 throughout the league.
Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#46 » by Leto » Sat Jul 5, 2008 3:11 pm

The Rebel wrote:
Leto wrote:
EMB6903 wrote:you would be happy going into the season with a hinrich/rose back court? youre one of the only bulls fans that Ive talked to who wouldnt be disapointed if that were the case.



The Bulls have a good team and Rose is going to make them better. Kirk can play either the 1 or the 2 and while some folks want to trade him, others do not. Paxson is pretty deliberate and he won't make any hasty trades anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if he just goes with the team we have into the season and see what happens. Kirk would definately make a good mentor for Rose. And, like I mentioned, it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see a starting backcourt of either Rose and Gordon or Rose and Hinrich. Either way, that's an impressive 3 gaurd rotation.



Even the great tandem of Jordan and Pippen needed rebounders and defenders at the big positions before they started winning, you can talk all you want about your three guard rotation, just have fun watching your team get eaten up once again in the middle, as happened last year. Paxson and you will have to accept that the only good big that has been traded (without a sign and trade) for a bunch of **** in the last few years has been Chandler and Bulls fans still complain about that whole deal, defensive centers hold a ton of value, especially when they are considered in the top 4 throughout the league.


What are you talking about? The Bulls were one of the best rebounding teams in the league last year. They at least had a positive differential in rebounding whereas the Nuggets averged fewer rebounds per game than their opponents. So, its the Nuggets that suck at rebounding. Our interior defense is fine with Noah and Thomas. Plus, those guys are young. Camby is going to be like 80 next year. No way I trade Hinrich for Camby unless he comes with a first roud pick. We don't need a 1-2 year rental of an old guy as a return for a solid PG unless he comes with sweetner.
Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#47 » by Leto » Sat Jul 5, 2008 3:28 pm

We really couldn't do Gooden because we're too thin at that spot in terms of scoring. Plus, Hinrich > Camby and Gooden > Chucky. And, we don't need a PG--that's why we're looking to move Hinrich. Gordon and Thabo can fill in as back ups. Also, hit or miss first rounder is just too low of a pick to give up that much with no chance of getting lucky for giving up the better players. I would be willing to do Hinrich for Camby and first rounder top 3 protected but I couldn't go any more than that since its us thats taking the risk of losing value should you actually miss the playoffs. Further, its highly unlikely that you do miss the playoffs so we're looking at a mid to low first round pick with an outside chance of getting into the top 10. Really, you guys are getting a good deal here. Yes, you'll lose a draft pick but you have to take risks in this league if you're going to get better. And, like I said, you probably make the playoffs in which case it is highly unlikely you would get a player as good as Kirk. And, in two years, you won't get anything for Camby.

Its a risk for both teams but you are starting out with the better value. That puts us behind the eight ball because the draft is no gaurantee you get anything.[/quote]

Talk about a homer, With the season Hinrich had last year, he has much less value then many Bulls fans will admit, the guy could go on to show that last year was a fluke, or he could continue on his downward slide like a ton of examples that had a couple of good years in the right system, but were nothing more then overpaid journeymen for the rest of their careers. Camby meanwhile won the dpoy in 07 and had a much better season statistically this year, while showing over the last few years that he can stay healthy.


With the season Hinrich had we might be better off just keeping him until his trade value goes back up. As it is, he is undervalued because you want to judge him just on the past season. Again, if you don't want him, then play out the season with what you have. But, there is no way I give Hinrich for Camby stright up. Add a first round pick and you've got a deal.

Nuggets fans overvalue Camby alot more than they will admit. He's 35 years old. He's in decline. Its over for him. You aren't going to get anything for him in another year.


AS for contracts, Hinrich may have a decent in that it goes down every year (hopefully his production does not follow though), Camby has the best contract in the league, if he does not produce he makes 25% less, plus it expires in 2 years which is the year every team seems to want. Same with age, after the debacle that were the Bulls last year, you would think that they would understand the concept of filling a hole that you have for next year, as opposed to hoping and praying that one of your young bigs develop somewhere down the road.


Its a huge generalization and a fallacy to claim every team in the league is shooting for the FA market in 2010, therefore, they will make stupid trades to get as far below the cap as possible. No superstar FA is going to go to a team that sucks.

The Bulls did not have a hole last year in their frontline. They had Ben Wallace and Joe Smith--two quality veterans. Wallace, however, I think started showing his age as his production went way down. Furthermore, the chances of Camby's production going down are far greater than Hinrich's precisely because Camby is turning 80 next year.

As for the Chucky for Gooden part of the swap, I would rather the team use the small buyout on Atkin's deal, and spend the money on a big that understands what the word defense means.


Yes, maybe you guys can get Dwight Howard for Atkins.



Now if you ask me in a Camby for Hinrich I think the pick should be coming from Chicago especially with Camby being a center, and I think most knowledgeable fans and more importantly GMs would agree, after all look what O'neal brought back, and honestly with the way he is paid, missed games, and has had his production decline the last couple of years, does anybody really think he has more value then Camby?


No way the Bulls are trading Hinrich for Camby unless Denver sends a first round pick with Camby. We don't need him. He's old. In decline and in a year or two will be baggage. On the other hand, Kirk will still have 6 more years of quality PT. Basically, you guys can keep Camby. I won't care.
Nutty Nats Fan
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 7,096
Joined: Aug 12, 2007

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#48 » by Nutty Nats Fan » Sat Jul 5, 2008 5:27 pm

Leto, you can keep claiming Camby is in decline, but the numbers prove you wrong. There is nothing showing Camby will be "baggage" in two years. So you can just drop that now, it doesn't help your argument.

Edit: Fixed a typo.
Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#49 » by Leto » Sat Jul 5, 2008 6:51 pm

Nutty Nats Fan wrote:Leto, you can keep claiming Camby is in detail, but the numbers prove you wrong. There is nothing showing Camby will be "baggage" in two years. So you can just drop that now, it doesn't help your argument.


I'd say we are at an impasse. You guys keep Camby and we'll keep Hinrich. There is no way we are trading Hinrich for Grandpa Camby straight up. GL next year.
Nutty Nats Fan
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 7,096
Joined: Aug 12, 2007

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#50 » by Nutty Nats Fan » Sat Jul 5, 2008 6:57 pm

You don't speak for your FO, do you? :P

And it sure is an impasse, when you won't even look at what the facts back up. Camby isn't in decline. And Camby's game doesn't involve him taking much of a beating. He has been healthier the past two years, and it could be said, since he lost time earlier in his career to injury, he is fresher than some other players his age.
Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#51 » by Leto » Sat Jul 5, 2008 7:34 pm

Nutty Nats Fan wrote:You don't speak for your FO, do you? :P

And it sure is an impasse, when you won't even look at what the facts back up. Camby isn't in decline. And Camby's game doesn't involve him taking much of a beating. He has been healthier the past two years, and it could be said, since he lost time earlier in his career to injury, he is fresher than some other players his age.


You refuse to accept the fact that he's old. Hinrich is going to last another 8-10 years. How long you think Camby will play and be effective? Hinrich will be effective for 8 more years. By the time Rose and the rest of the Bulls mature enough, Camby will be in a nursing home and the trade will be for naught. The Bulls are not going to trade their assets for old people. Go find another PG.
Nutty Nats Fan
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 7,096
Joined: Aug 12, 2007

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#52 » by Nutty Nats Fan » Sat Jul 5, 2008 8:45 pm

I don't refuse to accept the fact he is older, but Camby could be very effective for the remainder of his contract. That's all the Bulls need. They don't want Camby past two years, because they are going for Lebron, Bosh, or Wade. Plus you seem to be ignoring the fact his contract is only two years. After he puts up another great season, he will be a top center on an expiring contract. His value will go up.

Hinrich has a long contract. There are no guarantees he will bounce back from his down year. He is not as valuable an asset you make him out to be. The Bulls are not getting a superstar for him. They won't get a player of Camby's ability for him.

The Bulls are getting a player playing his best Basket on a short contract. The Nuggets are getting a player playing some of his worst on a long contract.

That's a big risk for the Nuggets.
ambiglight
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,367
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 03, 2007

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#53 » by ambiglight » Sun Jul 6, 2008 9:02 pm

Nutty Nats Fan wrote:I don't refuse to accept the fact he is older, but Camby could be very effective for the remainder of his contract. That's all the Bulls need. They don't want Camby past two years, because they are going for Lebron, Bosh, or Wade. Plus you seem to be ignoring the fact his contract is only two years. After he puts up another great season, he will be a top center on an expiring contract. His value will go up.

Hinrich has a long contract. There are no guarantees he will bounce back from his down year. He is not as valuable an asset you make him out to be. The Bulls are not getting a superstar for him. They won't get a player of Camby's ability for him.

The Bulls are getting a player playing his best Basket on a short contract. The Nuggets are getting a player playing some of his worst on a long contract.

That's a big risk for the Nuggets.


camby's playing his best basketball?
SnakefromHell
Banned User
Posts: 1,507
And1: 0
Joined: Sep 12, 2007

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#54 » by SnakefromHell » Sun Jul 6, 2008 9:22 pm

I find it funny we Nugget fans trying to up Camby's value with Bulls fans as if they're really the team's GM and we're the GM of the Nuggets.

The bottom line is Hinrich is still 26? Camby is 33. Unless he uses drugs there's no way an all star potential, all defensive PG like Hinrich could become an Anthony Carter after just one down season. It's not going to snowball like crazy. Maby Bulls' performances were affected because of the Kobe trade demand saga, not only Hinrich... but he got the most pressure due to the demand of his job of running the team... and he was asked to score a lot because there's no other perimeter scorer on the team aside of Gordon.

I'll take my chances with a player who still has 10 more years in the L than someone who's historically been injury prone and only 2-4 years left in his career... and value is going down. He played the most games in his career last season, but who here can guarantee he will play 70+ games again next season? Swapping Camby for Hinrich is too good to be true if it happens. I understand negotiations because we want the Bulls to throw in a draft pick or a player, but to reject a proposal like this because Hinrich is < than Camby is a joke... cmon.
Nutty Nats Fan
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 7,096
Joined: Aug 12, 2007

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#55 » by Nutty Nats Fan » Sun Jul 6, 2008 9:27 pm

ambiglight wrote:
Nutty Nats Fan wrote:I don't refuse to accept the fact he is older, but Camby could be very effective for the remainder of his contract. That's all the Bulls need. They don't want Camby past two years, because they are going for Lebron, Bosh, or Wade. Plus you seem to be ignoring the fact his contract is only two years. After he puts up another great season, he will be a top center on an expiring contract. His value will go up.

Hinrich has a long contract. There are no guarantees he will bounce back from his down year. He is not as valuable an asset you make him out to be. The Bulls are not getting a superstar for him. They won't get a player of Camby's ability for him.

The Bulls are getting a player playing his best Basket on a short contract. The Nuggets are getting a player playing some of his worst on a long contract.

That's a big risk for the Nuggets.


camby's playing his best basketball?

He had a career high in rebounds, assists, and most blocks since his 2nd season. Maybe best was too strong, but someone in decline is not setting career highs like Camby did.
Nutty Nats Fan
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 7,096
Joined: Aug 12, 2007

Re: kirk hinrich? 

Post#56 » by Nutty Nats Fan » Sun Jul 6, 2008 9:31 pm

I'll take my chances with a player who still has 10 more years in the L than someone who's historically been injury prone and only 2-4 years left in his career... and value is going down.

Snakey, a player with two years left, is not dropping in value. After this season, he is an expiring contract. Meaning his value goes up. For some vet team trying to make a final push to the playoffs, Camby would be ideal.

Money talks in the NBA. That's why expirings are so valuable. That's what makes Hinrich less desirable. He has four years left. Camby has two.

Return to Denver Nuggets