WT- Nate unlikely to be back (WAIT! + instagram pic pg 81!)

RastaBull · Post #161 » by **RastaBull** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:56 am

I wish Reggie and Camp Rose put the pressure on in this case.

LoveDaBoo · Post #162 » by **LoveDaBoo** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:59 am

MrFortune3 wrote:
Trm3 wrote:I first read that as Wesley Pipes, lol...sorry.

I don't know anything about that..my friend owns part of the business.

get your mind out of the gutter!

I think he was referring to the bong in Half Baked. Get your mind out of the gutter, sir!

RastaBull · Post #163 » by **RastaBull** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:02 am

What irks me is that we aren't going to spend the MMLE on Nate Rob not because we want to spend it on someone else, but because we probably won't use it at all. (Sorry, by "we" I mean GarPax). I've never been a FO basher, and I like Snell pick, but this is going to really frustrate me.

We did this last year, BE CHEAP (and yes, that is exactly what it was/is). I had no problem with it then, not at all. Thought it was a good basketball move and they still put out a solid team.

But we are getting Rose back healthy for a full year and it will likely be the last go around with Noah/Booz/Deng/Rose...to BE CHEAP again is just freakin pathetic. Sure, I'm confident they'll do due dilligence and put out a solid team...but LAST year "solid" was acceptable...this year it shouldn't be, this year they should be going HARD to win.

MrFortune3 · Post #164 » by **MrFortune3** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:04 am

LoveDaBoo wrote:
MrFortune3 wrote:
Trm3 wrote:I first read that as Wesley Pipes, lol...sorry.

I don't know anything about that..my friend owns part of the business.

get your mind out of the gutter!

I think he was referring to the bong in Half Baked. Get your mind out of the gutter, sir!

depends on which one. the one they all smoked was Billy Bong Thorton.

LoveDaBoo · Post #165 » by **LoveDaBoo** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:05 am

RastaBull wrote:What irks me is that we aren't going to spend the MMLE on Nate Rob not because we want to spend it on someone else, but because we probably won't use it at all. (Sorry, by "we" I mean GarPax). I've never been a FO basher, and I like Snell pick, but this is going to really frustrate me.

We did this last year, BE CHEAP (and yes, that is exactly what it was/is). I had no problem with it then, not at all. Thought it was a good basketball move and they still put out a solid team.

But we are getting Rose back healthy for a full year and it will likely be the last go around with Noah/Booz/Deng/Rose...to BE CHEAP again is just freakin pathetic. Sure, I'm confident they'll do due dilligence and put out a solid team...but LAST year "solid" was acceptable...this year it shouldn't be, this year they should be going HARD to win.

You can't assume it's cheapness, though. They have to think about multiple years. Salary juggling is incredibly important, and they might think that a given move now is not worth the risk of hurting us in the future. There's a **** of plates 'a spinnin'.

LoveDaBoo · Post #166 » by **LoveDaBoo** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:06 am

MrFortune3 wrote:
LoveDaBoo wrote:
MrFortune3 wrote:
get your mind out of the gutter!

I think he was referring to the bong in Half Baked. Get your mind out of the gutter, sir!

depends on which one. the one they all smoked was Billy Bong Thorton.

Hehe, yeah. I definitely remember they mentioned Wesley Pipes, tho.

PJ Brown · Post #167 » by **PJ Brown** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:06 am

RastaBull wrote:What irks me is that we aren't going to spend the MMLE on Nate Rob not because we want to spend it on someone else, but because we probably won't use it at all. (Sorry, by "we" I mean GarPax). I've never been a FO basher, and I like Snell pick, but this is going to really frustrate me.

We did this last year, BE CHEAP (and yes, that is exactly what it was/is). I had no problem with it then, not at all. Thought it was a good basketball move and they still put out a solid team.

But we are getting Rose back healthy for a full year and it will likely be the last go around with Noah/Booz/Deng/Rose...to BE CHEAP again is just freakin pathetic. Sure, I'm confident they'll do due dilligence and put out a solid team...but LAST year "solid" was acceptable...this year it shouldn't be, this year they should be going HARD to win.

I will definitely be upset if they don't use it at all. I do, though, get the logic of not spending it on a player, though deserving, who won't be able to get the minutes to justify your "last" (actually only) non-minimum signing. With Rose back, I don't see Nate as the most bang for the buck, which is not to slight his talent, grit, etc.

RastaBull · Post #168 » by **RastaBull** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:09 am

dougthonus wrote:In the sense that I don't think either player can be effective playing off the ball, and I think Robinson destroys you on defense if not matched up with very strong perimeter players, I think it's likely that he and Rose would not form good lineups together. If that's the case, then paying about 8-9 million for him this year in salary + tax seems a bit extreme for a guy who's slated to largely be a backup, and oh by the way, you have two other backups on the roster at his position already.

Like I said, I'd like Nate back, he was my favorite player on the team last season, and I was absolutely thrilled when we signed him in the off-season last year as I've always liked him. I wish things would work out, but it's pretty clear why they won't. If you could ditch Hinrich to make room for Nate (both roster and salarywise) then I think it'd be a great decision, but I don't know if that's possible and doubt the Bulls are willing if it was.

Is this a slight exaggeration? I thought we could offer him at most 3 mil. So with the lux tax isn't that 6 mil. I thought it was a dollar for every dollar, am I mistaken? Or is there something else that increases his possible salary?

Granted, your point would still stand, six mil for a back-up that doesn't play well off the ball (so probably would be limited to court time pairing with Butler or Kirk)...but 8-9 million does make it seem a little worse than it really would be (if I'm correct in my understanding of the tax rules)

bullsnewdynasty · Post #169 » by **bullsnewdynasty** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:12 am

Once again, it's likely that the Bulls' season is going to come down on the shoulders of Derrick Rose in the playoffs. Apparently, it's going to take yet another playoff defeat for Bulls management to realize we don't have enough offense.

RastaBull · Post #170 » by **RastaBull** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:36 am

Nate was on fire in the playoffs. How did the Miami Heat do the most damage to his contributions? They put LeBron on him for long stretches.

When Rose was on fire, how did the Miami Heat do their most damage to his contributions? They put LeBron on him for long stretches.

Nate would be great against the Heat in the playoffs because Miami does not have two LeBrons. If they wanna try and stiffle Rose with LeBron, Nate came make them pay. We've seen the incredible moxy and scoring potential of this guy when you don't take him seriously. I don't think Wade can shut him down like LeBron did. So they put Wade on Nate and LeBron on Rose, who is that other guy Miami will have on the floor in the final quarter of a playoff game...Ray fing Allen. So Allen will be stuck guarding Deng or Butler. C'MON!!!

Nate forces teams like the Heat to make real tough decisions on defense. They have to pick their poison. Of course they'll want to shut down Rose first, but like I said, Nate can make them pay for that decision...we don't and won't have any one else like that (not Butler, not Deng, certainly not Kirk)

Trm3 · Post #171 » by **Trm3** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:36 am

MrFortune3 wrote:
LoveDaBoo wrote:
MrFortune3 wrote:
get your mind out of the gutter!

I think he was referring to the bong in Half Baked. Get your mind out of the gutter, sir!

depends on which one. the one they all smoked was Billy Bong Thorton.

makes me wanna watch the movie again, lol

Chitownbulls · Post #172 » by **Chitownbulls** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 4:57 am

Sign him an find someone who will take teague or hinrichs dumb contract off our hands

4mil for Hinrich was a bad decision.....didn't like it then, don't like it now

LoveDaBoo · Post #173 » by **LoveDaBoo** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:04 am

Trm3 wrote:
MrFortune3 wrote:
LoveDaBoo wrote:I think he was referring to the bong in Half Baked. Get your mind out of the gutter, sir!

depends on which one. the one they all smoked was Billy Bong Thorton.

makes me wanna watch the movie again, lol

Me too. 'S been a while. That flick is underrated.

LoveDaBoo · Post #174 » by **LoveDaBoo** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:07 am

Chitownbulls wrote:Sign him an find someone who will take teague or hinrichs dumb contract off our hands

4mil for Hinrich was a bad decision.....didn't like it then, don't like it now

Agreed, but good luck with that. Kirk's probably here to stay. Unfortunately, that means Nate's not.

Let's not over-rate Nate, though. He's super-fun to watch, and he was big for us in a lost season, but he's not some great player. In what kind of scenario is he the difference between us winning a championship or not? That'd have to be a razor-thin margin, and there's a future to consider.

Trm3 · Post #175 » by **Trm3** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:09 am

Actually I'd like to keep Hinrich..when Hinrich was healthy we had a really good record with him, he ran the offense well.

Have him and Nate running the second team..and throw Nate in when u need help on offense in crunch time w/ Rose and sub Hinrich in for defense..then again, we have Butler and Deng for that.

Amazing what combinations we could do..just amazed on how much I hated Nate until this past season..total 180 on the guy.

Imagine small ball against the Heat...Rose/Nate/Butler/Deng/Noah..f*** you Miami!

Chitownbulls · Post #176 » by **Chitownbulls** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:26 am

I can see Nate being apart of the future for the next 3-4 years, his scoring could be big for us off the bench...hinrich should be gone next year if he doesn't resign for like 1-1.5mil...he needs us more than we need him imo

Post #177 » by **Rerisen** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:34 am

Offensively we make up rationales for why we can lose one of our best offensive players last year, probably the best, and likely replace him with someone just flat out worse. It's weird.

Defensively, would anyone ever write that we don't need Gibson or Deng because they just duplicate what Noah does? We don't need Jimmy Butler because he just duplicates Kirk a solid fundamental defender?

This team is badly lopsided toward defense and losing Nate for a worse offensive fill in is only going to increase the imbalance.

Clinging to that #5 offensive rating from 2012 is very dated comfort as well. Even then it was overly bolstered by offensive rebounding, which teams buckle down on stopping late in games. This team will also have a 2 year older Boozer, no Korver, and an unknown production level from our MVP, trying to ringlead it all on that end.

Take Nate off this team and we may well have been the worst offensive team in the league last season. Expecting Rose alone to not only perform like an MVP, but bring all our other struggling committee scores back up to respectability, and drag that rating all the way up from bottom third, to top 5 or 7, which is championship level, is expecting a hell of a lot.

Is Nate the ideal guy, position, height, etc, to be that secondary creator and assistance as a playmaker? No he is not. But who are we going to get in his place that is better, as good, or that we can afford. Hard to see a positive answer.

KiLleRInStiNcT7 · Post #178 » by **KiLleRInStiNcT7** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:47 am

Rose/ Buckets/ Lu/ Boozer/ Noah/ Kirk/ Nate/ Tony/ Taj/ Nazr/

I think that team could MAYBE beat Miami or at least take them to a game 7 in the ECF.

Without Nate I doubt the Bulls have enough scoring to beat Miami.

Chitownbulls · Post #179 » by **Chitownbulls** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 6:03 am

Without Nate Robinson the Bulls lose in the 1st round of thr playoffs

Without Nate Robinson we get swept by the Miami Heat

But yet, we don't want to give this man a dirt cheap multi year contract...but we will sign an injury prone declining offensively challenged kirk hinrich 4 mil

Keller61 · Post #180 » by **Keller61** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 6:04 am

bullsnewdynasty wrote:Once again, it's likely that the Bulls' season is going to come down on the shoulders of Derrick Rose in the playoffs. Apparently, it's going to take yet another playoff defeat for Bulls management to realize we don't have enough offense.

What do you mean "yet another?" We've only had one playoff defeat with this core, and that was their first run and Thibs' rookie season. I think we'll do better on the second try. Have you seen Derrick Rose's shoulders lately? They look ready to carry a big load.

I think we are title contenders with the team as it is, assuming Rose returns to form. I do think having Nate would increase our chances significantly, though.