Trade with the Bulls, from a Bulls fan...?

larcat · Post #1 » by **larcat** » Mon May 30, 2011 5:23 pm

After watching the post season this year, I assume you guys want to start Teague over Kirk. Kirk gets paid way too much to come off the bench.

Would you take:

CJ Watson, Korver and one of our late 1st round picks this year for Hinrich?

Salaries work out, and we have 2 late first rounders this year.

You get a serviceable backup 1 to back up Teague, and a 3 point specialist that you can use as a situational guy or package and trade off. Korver isn't amazing, but he is certainly more asset than liability.

johnny878 · Post #2 » by **johnny878** » Mon May 30, 2011 5:53 pm

hawks gave up bibby(korver) and essentially 2 first round picks to get hinrich. so why would they trade him for one late first, a player that id never want on the floor(watson) and 10 mil left on korvers contract

bsanders · Post #3 » by **bsanders** » Mon May 30, 2011 10:26 pm

no

Korver and Watson have 2 years left on their contracts, and Kirk only has 1 year left. talent wise it is a lateral move at best and financially, the Hawks don't get a good deal

jagstang76 · Post #4 » by **jagstang76** » Tue May 31, 2011 11:07 am

bsanders, the big difference here is Kirk is the defensive guard we've been needing. He and Teague play well together as well. It gives us a solid group of guards who are capable on both ends of the floor. Watson wasn't bad this season, but I'd much rather have Kirk and Teague. I wouldn't mind having another solid shooter, but we are a shooting-heavy team as it is depending on if we are able to keep Crawford.

NWO4Life · Post #5 » by **NWO4Life** » Tue May 31, 2011 2:06 pm

No, Hinrich has more value as an expiring contract next year and is a better player than both youve mentioned. We have more pressing needs than the services of Korver and this proposal dilutes our team and doesn't seem to help us get better. IMHO had Kirk been healthy we may have advanced past the Bulls this year.. Again I say not interested.

Ruhiel · Post #6 » by **Ruhiel** » Tue May 31, 2011 4:24 pm

yes dilution, but what is Hinrich's expiring good for? Are we still looking for Dwight or guys with size that can frustrate Dwight.

evildallas · Post #7 » by **evildallas** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 2:38 am

Hard to assess the value of Kirk's expiring contract until the new CBA is reached. Once the financial rules are in place then it'll be more apparent who's being shopped from other teams.

D21 · Post #8 » by **D21** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 2:33 pm

larcat wrote: Kirk gets paid way too much to come off the bench

It doesn't make sense if you don't look at the starting PG salary.

Hinrich behind Paul ? YES, it's too much for a backup PG
Hinrich behind Teague who is set for the next two seasons at 1,579,920 and 2,433,077 ? NO, it's not too much.

parson · Post #9 » by **parson** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 3:32 pm

Jeff Teague is the reason we should keep Hinrich (barring some wonderful trade).

Teague has already proven he can take over a game, both offensively and defensively (anyone remember the POR game?). But he still is lacking in the everyday game: setting up his teammates, running the offense and, hopefully, making his teammates look good.

Let's use Hinrich to allow Teague to play those minutes that best suit him. Let Hinrich, at first, take the pressure situations and let Teague learn on the fly.

There are 96 minutes, together, in the PG and SG positions. Joe can take 35-40 and Hinrich and Teague can share the remaining 56-61.