Blazers, Bulls Discussed Aldridge For Noah During Offseason

Post #41 » by **kingkirk** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 10:52 pm

Old news is old.

It wasn't a 1 for 1 swap and we were losing more assets than the Blazers were. It also left us with a gaping hole at center with Boozer still on the roster.

Anyways, we've done this thing to death.

Red Larrivee · Post #42 » by **Red Larrivee** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:03 pm

DanTown8587 wrote:There is a VAST difference between Kevin Love and LaMarcus Aldridge. The raw stats would say there isn't but the fact the PER is over 5 points apart (27.9 v 22.7) and the TS is miles apart (.589 for Love, .515 for Aldridge) explains the gulf.

Really, Aldridge is a very good volume scorer and there is of course good value in that at the PF spot. My only point on Aldridge is that trading Noah, Butler (at the time), and then limiting Mirotic's value is basically an all-in move. Lets say Derrick isn't hurt, you're really telling me that

Rose/Hinrich
Snell
Deng/Dunleavy
Boozer/Gibson
Aldridge

Is a title winner? That team can't guard the Pacers now and against Miami, you're getting into a scoring battle with two guys are aren't efficient against three who are. You can't really let Deng walk, you're capped out, you have limited assets to get any sort of secondary ball handler.

I just don't see how going from Boozer to Aldridge makes up for the fact that you don't have a C and you're paying 40 million to guys at the PF/C spot and none of them are efficient scorers.

I'm a huge believer in getting the best player from a trade and worrying about the rest later. You're right, the Bulls probably wouldn't have won a championship with the team above. Then again, they probably wouldn't have won a championship with the team before that either.

Mirotic's value isn't limited necessarily. He could play off the bench behind Aldridge and you could also play them together in a high-scoring lineup. There would have been options, but again that's stuff you figure out later after you get the best player.

Jimmy Forums · Post #43 » by **Jimmy Forums** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:05 pm

So how many pretty good deals have we had reported that we've "discussed" but didn't pull the trigger for one reason or another? I get that this isn't 2k and everything that gets discussed won't happen, but I mean come on, the FO doesn't do anything except look for bargain vets like Mike Dunleavy and Rip Hamilton. DO SOMETHING.

The way our offseason is looking like it'll shape up, there's a possibility that our issues can be addressed very adequately, and if not, these guys gotta get canned. Y'all suck. No eyes for talent. No balls for negotiation. You're incapable.

PMONSTER · Post #44 » by **PMONSTER** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:20 pm

Red Larrivee wrote:.

Your're sig is awesome and depressing at the same time

Red Larrivee · Post #45 » by **Red Larrivee** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:33 pm

Jimmy Forums wrote:So how many pretty good deals have we had reported that we've "discussed" but didn't pull the trigger for one reason or another? I get that this isn't 2k and everything that gets discussed won't happen, but I mean come on, the FO doesn't do anything except look for bargain vets like Mike Dunleavy and Rip Hamilton. DO SOMETHING.

The way our offseason is looking like it'll shape up, there's a possibility that our issues can be addressed very adequately, and if not, these guys gotta get canned. Y'all suck. No eyes for talent. No balls for negotiation. You're incapable.

It's what we've grown to love about the front office. They overvalue their core pieces and expect to get stars through trade for pennies on the dollar. Eventually we can make a scrap book of these things:

Gasol:

Michael Heisley wrote:They didn't want to take on the luxury-tax situation and Los Angeles was. In this league, if you're in a big-market area you can afford to do those things. We negotiated as hard as we could for quality players and Chicago refused to give up anybody in their core group. What they offered us were guys who play on the second and third team, so we turned them down.

Carmelo:

The Chicago Bulls are interested in trading for the Denver Nuggets' Carmelo Anthony, a league source told ESPNChicago.com on Thursday.Another source close to the situation told ESPNChicago.com's Nick Friedell that Noah would not be part of an Anthony deal.

K.C.Johnson wrote:I've heard no scenario in which the Bulls will trade Noah. Even if they did come to the conclusion they'd part with him--and let me stress here again, I've heard exactly the opposite, that they won't.

Aldridge:

According to a report by K.C. Johnson of the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Bulls have made it clear that All-Star center Joakim Noah will not be included in any trade talks with the Portland Trail Blazers for All-Star forward LaMarcus Aldridge. Johnson's article goes as far as to say that any Noah for Aldridge talk is a "non-starter" for the Bulls.

PMONSTER · Post #46 » by **PMONSTER** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:37 pm

Jimmy Forums wrote:So how many pretty good deals have we had reported that we've "discussed" but didn't pull the trigger for one reason or another? I get that this isn't 2k and everything that gets discussed won't happen, but I mean come on, the FO doesn't do anything except look for bargain vets like Mike Dunleavy and Rip Hamilton. DO SOMETHING.

The way our offseason is looking like it'll shape up, there's a possibility that our issues can be addressed very adequately, and if not, these guys gotta get canned. Y'all suck. No eyes for talent. No balls for negotiation. You're incapable.

I mean..... right?

I conceded when people said it takes two to tango.....

But it seems like our FO's standards for a dancing partner is too high right now.

The Kane · Post #47 » by **The Kane** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:42 pm

Over the summer I was pro-trading Noah for Aldridge, mainly because he is an absolute beast against Miami. I love Noah but he doesn't put up great numbers against Miami.

Aldridge puts up 25 & 8 against them. It was really a no-brainer to me, and I think it was a huge mistake not doing it. This season may be lost, but having Aldridge instead of Noah going into next season would've been great.

nitetrain8603 · Post #48 » by **nitetrain8603** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:50 pm

KingCuban wrote:Old news is old.

It wasn't a 1 for 1 swap and we were losing more assets than the Blazers were. It also left us with a gaping hole at center with Boozer still on the roster.

Anyways, we've done this thing to death.

Add that one to the list as to why we don't do moves.

We're getting lesser talent back
We're getting the best talent in the trade, but they're getting the overall better players
We're getting a high draft pick, but we won't know if he pans out
We can't trade for X, even though he's a huge upgrade at this position, because we'll have to give up our overrated Y player who will leave a hole.

We're the antithesis of Miami and it clearly shows in the standings as well. You have to take calculated risks. Much like this board though, the front office refuses to do so unless it is so lopsided that they don't have to explain themselves to the media.

LobosJordan · Post #49 » by **LobosJordan** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:50 pm

Dominater wrote:Too bad Noahs untouchable

Sounds familiar

weneeda2guard · Post #50 » by **weneeda2guard** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:55 pm

My stance was always the same

We were and still are in dire need for a 2nd superstar

Miami is still sitting in our way, Indy is now a powerhouse no matter how much we remain condescending towards them, okc spurs clippers are still there. Our roster don't stand up to theirs, our coaching does but our talent doesn't

In this circumstance you grab Aldridge and just start to build from there

Now we look at it and deng for asik could be very possible right now. Surprise center problem taken care of

weneeda2guard · Post #51 » by **weneeda2guard** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:57 pm

Double

dumbell78 · Post #52 » by **dumbell78** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 12:29 am

This is the ultimate Groundhog Day thread. :roll:

Anyways we all know we're holding out for the KLove blockbuster trade! Gar is gonna hit a home run, I just feel it in my bones. :lol:

Post #53 » by **kingkirk** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 12:31 am

nitetrain8603 wrote:We're the antithesis of Miami and it clearly shows in the standings as well. You have to take calculated risks. Much like this board though, the front office refuses to do so unless it is so lopsided that they don't have to explain themselves to the media.

How so?

We did the exact same thing they did in 2010. We took a calculated risk. They won the stakes of getting the best player in the game, we lost.

Taking a punt on Beasley & Oden doesn't mean they're the antithesis of the Bulls. It's also a lot more easier to be risk adverse when you have 2 rings to fall back on.

Didn't they also shed salary by amnestying Miller to save on the luxury tax?

chadrucf · Post #54 » by **chadrucf** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 12:55 am

KingCuban wrote:
nitetrain8603 wrote:We're the antithesis of Miami and it clearly shows in the standings as well. You have to take calculated risks. Much like this board though, the front office refuses to do so unless it is so lopsided that they don't have to explain themselves to the media.

How so?

We did the exact same thing they did in 2010. We took a calculated risk. They won the stakes of getting the best player in the game, we lost.

Taking a punt on Beasley & Oden doesn't mean they're the antithesis of the Bulls. It's also a lot more easier to be risk adverse when you have 2 rings to fall back on.

Didn't they also shed salary by amnestying Miller to save on the luxury tax?

Exactly correct. If you want to make arguments against the front office, the shining counter-example used shouldn't be MIami.

Post #55 » by **kulaz3000** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:27 am

A (fill-in-the-blank) trade was discussed but didn't happen article, months after it really matters get released now. Who really cares? It's like mentioning every time you get a call from a telemarketer, it's irrelevant. Meh.

bullsnewdynasty · Post #56 » by **bullsnewdynasty** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 2:37 am

Seems like the Bulls are only willing to make a trade if they are straight up robbing the other team. Combine that with reports that the Bulls value their players much higher than any other team and it's no surprise that they are among the least active teams in the trade market. Basically the definition of a conservative, reactive front office.

In my opinion, Paxson and Forman are a point A to point B management team. Bring in defensive minded, high character guys to get the team from perpetual lottery to a respectable playoff team. After the lottery miracle in Rose, they have been unable to put the pieces together to push the team to the next level. Dare I say that someone like a Jerry Krause would be much more effective at getting the Bulls from point B to C. Put modern day Paxson in the front office for the Jordan Bulls and do you really think that he would have pulled the trigger on Rodman and the Oakley trade?

Post #57 » by **DJhitek** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 2:54 am

Again, if this was true, this might not be indicative of the front office view now. At the time, the Bulls were expecting Rose to be fully healthy and probably felt Noah and Butler were more important than just Alridge.

I would have taken that deal and not looked back, but the Bulls would be wise not to view Rose in the same manner anymore. Maybe that changes the mindset some, but in the end. I wouldn't hold my breathe....

bullsnewdynasty · Post #58 » by **bullsnewdynasty** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 2:56 am

If the Bulls didn't want to trade Noah for Carmelo, there's absolutely no way they are going to trade him for Aldridge.

Post #59 » by **DJhitek** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 3:04 am

bullsnewdynasty wrote:If the Bulls didn't want to trade Noah for Carmelo, there's absolutely no way they are going to trade him for Aldridge.

Eh, they probably felt Deng had a similar impact to winning because of his defense. I mean, I would have traded Noah and Deng for Melo but Melo's scoring is highly overrated if he is not interested in team ball or defense.

Red Larrivee · Post #60 » by **Red Larrivee** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 3:44 am

DJhitek wrote:Eh, they probably felt Deng had a similar impact to winning because of his defense. I mean, I would have traded Noah and Deng for Melo but Melo's scoring is highly overrated if he is not interested in team ball or defense.

To a degree, but he's a perennial all-star with a scoring title under his belt. If you look at past scoring champions, most of them are hall of famers or close to it. Carmelo, NBA championship or not, is likely a hall of famer.

Regardless, as long as Forman and Paxson are running things, I'm sure more instances of them overvaluing core players will continue.