Blazers, Bulls Discussed Aldridge For Noah During Offseason

[bledredwine]

now it's up to you to name a trade the bulls didn't do because they "overvalued" their players. you can't. nor have they given an obscene contract to keep one of "their players." witness ben gordon

Um, have you forgotten? Carmelo Anthony. I already said Melo and if we actually had the chance (no clue if we did), LMA as well. We had the chance to land a franchise player who wanted to be here, who can actually lead a team singlehandedly unlike Deng/Noah. We could have also had Monta who isn't a star but would have been a Godsend on this offensively inept team. You have that rare chance to trade for a star? You frickin do it

none of those guys are real stars and none of them did we necessarily have a shot at for a reasonable price. so my questions stand

the knicks paid big money for a "star" and then traded for another. how's that working? and now you wanna repeat their mistake? i take it you're a big j.r. smith fan too:

Stars are rare, and SG's are rare. Great sixth men are rare

meet your new york knickerbockers - the team that has it all

p.s.: monta ellis = j.r. smith. same guy, different tattoos

You just claimed that Melo isn't a star and that JR Smith is as good as monte Ellis? I've seen it all.

[nitetrain8603]

You mean besides the fact that Deng was offered for both KG (along with Chandler and the #2 pick) and Kobe and the fact that Noah was indeed talked about going to Toronto (along with Deng) for Chris Bosh.

Or the fact that the Bulls wanted to sign LeBron and then trade Deng for cap space. You're right, there's a history of the Bulls telling people no on Luol Deng. I think the only guy that is true of is Gasol and considering what Memphis ended up trading Gasol for, I think it'd be fair to say that Luol Deng would have been an overpay.

Okay, now it's up to you to explain if the Bulls made these supposed offers, then why did they fail to land either of these players? Something clearly doesn't add up when the players ended up getting traded for much less.

Simple, the Bulls made their offer to KG in 2006 and he wasn't traded until 2008. Regarding Pau, the issue was also the Bulls reluctance to go into the luxury tax (trading PJ Brown's expiring contract) to get him. They didn't get Bosh because the Raptors were waiting to see what Bosh did and thought that they could convince him to stay if they had a good year (they had just signed Hedo, acquired Bosh's friend in Jarret Jack).

The Bulls FO is screwed either way with people like you. They go all-in in 2010 and sign a guy who just posted a double-double season in Boozer (remember how much people said that if the Bulls just got a scoring PF that they'd be set?), Korver, Asik, Brewer, and Watson. Team is too deep (that team today would have a payroll similar to the Nets) so the Bulls make tough choices on Asik and Korver (the latter someone I didn't agree with trading).

I'm not following your argument.

You chastise the Bulls for lack of move making while not acknowledging they turned the entire roster over for the summer of 2010. The Bulls have made moves; some worked and some haven't. This isn't a team that has sat on it's hands and draft picks.

People selectively judge the FO and just casually ignore times the Bulls take large risks (Tyrus, going all-in 2010, letting Gordon walk for 2010) to slam them for not taking risks.

2010 wasn't much of a risk. You act like that 2008 team was a championship contender. Mark Cuban breaking up a championship team to try to sign CP3/Howard was a risk. Jerry Krause breaking up the Jordan Bulls was a risk. Letting some players go from a first round exit team to try to sign LeBron James? Not really.

2010 was a risk in that the Bulls traded basically a solid part of their rotation (Salmons, Kirk, Gordon, a first). People talk about Gordon walking to this day, imagine if the team missed on Boozer and had to settle for Al Harrington or something. There was of course risk there, there was also reward and that's why the Bulls went for it. Again, the argument you made was the Bulls don't go after things, they did in 2010 and they got plan C instead of A or B.

That's crazy talk. Salmons only had one good year and that was the year he got traded to the Bulls. The following year, he started turning into trash again and we saw the problem others saw. He needed to have the ball and create for himself which he wasn't efficient enough at on a consistent basis. I remember several times, Rose or Gordon would hit him for an open 3, but instead of rising up, he would start dribbling instead of taking the shot.

Gordon was let go the year before and it was clear they didn't value him. JR even told someone here he didn't like Gordon and he wouldn't wear a Bulls uniform again. The Bulls were a fringe playoff team those years. They risked jack. Because even if they couldn't sign anyone at all, that meant they would've gotten really bad and gotten a lottery pick or two which is what they needed. If they succeeded, they would've became a contender. There was very very little risk involved in 2010.

[nitetrain8603]

Um, have you forgotten? Carmelo Anthony. I already said Melo and if we actually had the chance (no clue if we did), LMA as well. We had the chance to land a franchise player who wanted to be here, who can actually lead a team singlehandedly unlike Deng/Noah. We could have also had Monta who isn't a star but would have been a Godsend on this offensively inept team. You have that rare chance to trade for a star? You frickin do it

none of those guys are real stars and none of them did we necessarily have a shot at for a reasonable price. so my questions stand

the knicks paid big money for a "star" and then traded for another. how's that working? and now you wanna repeat their mistake? i take it you're a big j.r. smith fan too:

Stars are rare, and SG's are rare. Great sixth men are rare

meet your new york knickerbockers - the team that has it all

p.s.: monta ellis = j.r. smith. same guy, different tattoos

You just claimed that Melo isn't a star and that JR Smith is as good as monte Ellis? I've seen it all.

I'm convinced people here haven't watched Melo play, especially this year. He is not the reason why the Knicks are losing. They're losing in spite of him, not because of him.

[nitetrain8603]

Simple, the Bulls made their offer to KG in 2006 and he wasn't traded until 2008. Regarding Pau, the issue was also the Bulls reluctance to go into the luxury tax (trading PJ Brown's expiring contract) to get him. They didn't get Bosh because the Raptors were waiting to see what Bosh did and thought that they could convince him to stay if they had a good year (they had just signed Hedo, acquired Bosh's friend in Jarret Jack).

I understand that, but I believe the Bulls exited the KG and Gasol discussions primarily because they took Deng off the table.

Garnett was traded in the summer of 2007, by the way.

You chastise the Bulls for lack of move making while not acknowledging they turned the entire roster over for the summer of 2010. The Bulls have made moves; some worked and some haven't. This isn't a team that has sat on it's hands and draft picks.

2010 was a risk in that the Bulls traded basically a solid part of their rotation (Salmons, Kirk, Gordon, a first). People talk about Gordon walking to this day, imagine if the team missed on Boozer and had to settle for Al Harrington or something. There was of course risk there, there was also reward and that's why the Bulls went for it. Again, the argument you made was the Bulls don't go after things, they did in 2010 and they got plan C instead of A or B.

I think you're actually hurting your own argument given that you're talking about 2010 as the last time the Bulls made a significant move when it's almost 2014.

When you sign Carlos Boozer to a five year deal, you're kind of locked in, especially when over the course of that deal you gave substantial raises to Noah, Rose, and Gibson. The fact you think four years is a long time (especially when Rose has missed 3-4th of those playoffs) is kind of perfect.

In fact, the Bulls roster (if they keep Deng and get rid of Boozer) will only have four holdovers from 2010 on the roster: Rose, Noah, Deng, and Gibson and only three guys if they get rid of Deng. That's called changing your team especially when you're against the cap.

The Bulls will have 4 guys from 2009 when they were a fringe playoff team. 5 if they keep Hinrich. In fact, they would have 5 of their top 6 rotation from that year. Again a year they were bounced by Cleveland rather easily. That's called, not significantly changing your team at all.

[bullsnewdynasty]

I'm convinced people here haven't watched Melo play, especially this year. He is not the reason why the Knicks are losing. They're losing in spite of him, not because of him.

There's a sizable contingent on this board that hates on Melo regardless of what he does. Coincidentally, that group pretty much overlaps with the group that loves Deng.

[Rerisen]

The Bulls will have 4 guys from 2009 when they were a fringe playoff team. 5 if they keep Hinrich. In fact, they would have 5 of their top 6 rotation from that year. Again a year they were bounced by Cleveland rather easily. That's called, not significantly changing your team at all.

If not for Jimmy Butler's development our team might have the same starting lineup next year as it did vs Cleveland 5 years prior. So yeah. At the same time, Dan also makes a valid point that Boozer pretty much hamstrung this roster for 5 years, unless we were willing to risk spending really big on keeping Asik and finding a big deal within 3 years.

That is a big reason why I don't give him a free pass around here. We *needed* Carlos to be that real second option and post player that was so desperately needed for this team and behind Rose, because we had little option to do anything else until either his contract expired or we amnestied him. And he just did not deliver, not even close to the Utah version of himself, and even more so in the playoffs didn't deliver.

At the same time the Bulls didn't press nearly hard enough for alternative dribble creation offense. Once they saw how it was going to go with Carlos, they should have been moving heaven and earth to at least try and get a guy like Jamal or OJ Mayo. While we showed lukewarm interest at times, there was never the feeling or evidence that it was the #1 pressing interest or something truly dire to acquire, when it should have been.

We should now finally get out from under the yoke of Carlos's onerous contract next year, and GarPax will have one more real chance to reshape this team and see if they can finally address the team's achilles. If they chose to re-sign Deng though, the only avenues for addressing them are Mirotic and/or our pick, and the Charlotte pick panning out, and panning out real fast.

[chadrucf]

Garnett wasnt traded the season that was offered. It's not surprising the return was different.

Bryant nixed any trade involving Deng. That's common knowledge.

Probably because the Bulls took Deng off the table after his breakout season.

This is pure conjecture on your part. Your contention that Deng was untouchable isn't borne out by what few facts we do know, like the Garnett, Bryant, Barnes, Anthony trade talks. If anything, Deng has been the Bull connected with the most trade proposals over his tenure.

[chadrucf]

When you sign Carlos Boozer to a five year deal, you're kind of locked in, especially when over the course of that deal you gave substantial raises to Noah, Rose, and Gibson. The fact you think four years is a long time (especially when Rose has missed 3-4th of those playoffs) is kind of perfect.

In fact, the Bulls roster (if they keep Deng and get rid of Boozer) will only have four holdovers from 2010 on the roster: Rose, Noah, Deng, and Gibson and only three guys if they get rid of Deng. That's called changing your team especially when you're against the cap.

There has been roster turnover but very little has been geared toward improving the team in any significant way.

The team has been a perennial contender one healthy season away from a championship. The acquisitions of the draft rights to Mirotic and the Charlotte 1st round draft choice have been steals. Their bench signings (with limited resources) have been superb. What exactly do you expect a team up against the luxury tax to acquire?

As a fan-base, we should count ourselves as lucky, not paint ourselves as martyrs.

[kingkirk]

Anything i add would not do any justice to the flat out great points made by DanTown8587.

Basically, my argument is 'what he said'.

[DanTown8587]

When you sign Carlos Boozer to a five year deal, you're kind of locked in, especially when over the course of that deal you gave substantial raises to Noah, Rose, and Gibson. The fact you think four years is a long time (especially when Rose has missed 3-4th of those playoffs) is kind of perfect.

In fact, the Bulls roster (if they keep Deng and get rid of Boozer) will only have four holdovers from 2010 on the roster: Rose, Noah, Deng, and Gibson and only three guys if they get rid of Deng. That's called changing your team especially when you're against the cap.

There has been roster turnover but very little has been geared toward improving the team in any significant way.

Most teams who contend for titles rarely change over the core of their roster. The day the Bulls signed Boozer, the core was Rose, Boozer, Noah and the ONLY guy I think they would have traded was Deng and they never get enough to justify the risk. People here are not happy the Bulls aren't winning titles yet they also want the Bulls to make tear down trades like Deng for Richard Jefferson and the #7 pick to get Harrison Barnes.

Most teams who win the conference in back to back years rarely make massive changes to the roster.

[bullsnewdynasty]

Garnett wasnt traded the season that was offered. It's not surprising the return was different.

Bryant nixed any trade involving Deng. That's common knowledge.

Probably because the Bulls took Deng off the table after his breakout season.

This is pure conjecture on your part. Your contention that Deng was untouchable isn't borne out by what few facts we do know, like the Garnett, Bryant, Barnes, Anthony trade talks. If anything, Deng has been the Bull connected with the most trade proposals over his tenure.

Again, it's only conjecture if you ignore tons of media reports that suggested otherwise.

[bledredwine]

I'm convinced people here haven't watched Melo play, especially this year. He is not the reason why the Knicks are losing. They're losing in spite of him, not because of him.

There's a sizable contingent on this board that hates on Melo regardless of what he does. Coincidentally, that group pretty much overlaps with the group that loves Deng.

It's comical. Anyone who actually sees Melo play knows how good he is, or you know, how he can sink teams in the forth quarter <like us>. And he gets crap from a few posters that he can't singlehandedly make that garbage Ny team a contender? And how are Deng + Noah soon leading the Bulls without Rose? There's a huge difference between great player and franchise player, top three scorer in the league. Even though I hate this stat, PEr doesn't favor scorers like Melo yet he still has 33% higher PER than either Noah or Deng. That's a tremendous difference. But nope, we wouldn't make that trade, these two are the key to beating the Heat/Pacers. ??? We're screwed. Both of those teams outmatch us easily. Hibbert>>Noah, George>>Deng. West>>Booz. Rose was the difference. Melo? Nearly equals Brons production head to head. Asik? Gave the heat the ****s defensively, he'd be at least equal to Noah offensively with rose/Melo. But that's the past. Still, no way you can argue that wouldn't have straight up been a more talented, better team. And for the record, anyone who watched Melo pre-NY knows how well he can function with a good coach and PG. Indiana has defense like ours. We need to score when they don't. We don't have a bloody chance with the way this roster is constructed. Nate would have been our most talented scorer alongside Booz pardon the way this post is written, currently taking a poop.

[nitetrain8603]

When you sign Carlos Boozer to a five year deal, you're kind of locked in, especially when over the course of that deal you gave substantial raises to Noah, Rose, and Gibson. The fact you think four years is a long time (especially when Rose has missed 3-4th of those playoffs) is kind of perfect.

In fact, the Bulls roster (if they keep Deng and get rid of Boozer) will only have four holdovers from 2010 on the roster: Rose, Noah, Deng, and Gibson and only three guys if they get rid of Deng. That's called changing your team especially when you're against the cap.

There has been roster turnover but very little has been geared toward improving the team in any significant way.

Most teams who contend for titles rarely change over the core of their roster. The day the Bulls signed Boozer, the core was Rose, Boozer, Noah and the ONLY guy I think they would have traded was Deng and they never get enough to justify the risk. People here are not happy the Bulls aren't winning titles yet they also want the Bulls to make tear down trades like Deng for Richard Jefferson and the #7 pick to get Harrison Barnes.

Most teams who win the conference in back to back years rarely make massive changes to the roster.

No, what people want is the Bulls to get off their arses and actually make moves towards an actual plan. This is the most frustrating part and I've said it so many times on this board. The Bulls are so conservative, it's disgusting. I mean, they're more conservative than the White Sox, who should be acting like the Bulls do in terms of roster turnover. But they don't.

The Bulls do not have a solid plan or vision other than "staying the course and staying flexible". People here like to target players for the Bulls to go after and how to build the team. The Bulls, simply do not do that. In fact, based off of what I've heard in the front office and what I read here, most of the time, the Bulls RealGM board comes up with ideas before the Bulls front office does, such as a guy like Aldridge or Love. AND THIS IS THEIR JOB AND ONLY OUR HOBBY. You think GarPax is sitting in the front office right now stating, "Okay, how do we fit this team best around Derrick Rose's strengths? What worked in 2010 that's not working now?"

If you think that's the case, I'm happy for your ignorance, because I can tell you, that's not what happens in that front office. They're not thinking like GSW who wants to play fast and shoot threes and acquire players who fit that style. They're not thinking like Houston in pinpointing a star and going all out to get him. They're not acting like the Lakers and actually are cooking up a plan to help them retool on the fly. They're thinking like Chicago, which is sit on your palms and marvel about the hard nosed lunch pail mentality of Joakim Noah and Luol Deng and Kirk Hinrich.

And that's so frustrating. The fact that they are only a reactionary franchise, not a proactive one. I'm going to tell you a story that you may say, "No duh" or even care about or even believe (and that's fine)that just shows me about the Bulls franchise. In the summer of 2010, or rather leading up to it, the Bulls sought out only one star. They thought they could only sign Joe Johnson and they assumed(not us fans), that Boozer would go to New Jersey, LeBron would end up resigning with Cleveland, Bosh would end up in Texas with the Bulls having an outside chance on him, and Wade resigning with Miami. Not once in the previous years leading up, did they think about teaming up any two of the many star FAs available, much less 3. They're plan was Joe Johnson, gauge Chris Bosh, and probably end up with David Lee, but being perfectly content with Taj Gibson as their starting lineup.

It wasn't until FA actually started and they started hearing whispers about Bosh, Wade and/or LeBron being a packaged deal. Even then, they did not believe it and only went after Wade when learning Bosh was going to be packaged and the Bulls being Bosh's second preference if it didn't work out with the Big 3 to which they didn't think about until that summer. In all honesty, they should've thought before, how can we get two of the three because the Bulls at the time, were far away from a championship team. But they didn't.

Joe Johnson, the guy that all of you loathe everyday, was our target. Joe FRIGGIN Johnson.

But cheers to more flexibility and the same ole crap that many of you just like to buy into. The Bulls have had the same core for 5 out out of the last 6 years. They had their chance. The FO likes to push them further onto you guys and you just accept it. Fact is, this team will not win a championship with this core. That's what I'm most concerned about. The fact that they have no plans to change it. Just players around the league they like who they aren't willing to risk it all for.

[bullsnewdynasty]

The team has been a perennial contender one healthy season away from a championship.

In your opinion.

The acquisitions of the draft rights to Mirotic and the Charlotte 1st round draft choice have been steals.

Nobody suggested otherwise.

Their bench signings (with limited resources) have been superb. What exactly do you expect a team up against the luxury tax to acquire?

As a fan-base, we should count ourselves as lucky, not paint ourselves as martyrs.

Since the discussion seems to be getting jumbled by multiple different points, I think I should clarify my positions because things changed dramatically before and after the ACL tear.

2011: I wanted the Bulls to be more proactive at the trade deadline when they had a gaping hole at SG. They didn't do it. The situation was poorly addressed the next offseason with Rip Hamilton who was a questionable fit and never healthy.

2012: After the Rose ACL tear I wanted the Bulls to pick a lane, either retooling or going for a championship again with an improved roster. They did neither, they decided to pay luxury tax by maintaining the core of the roster but offloading key bench pieces that weakened the roster - Asik, Korver, etc. They also hard capped themselves by signing a broken down Hinrich. The Bulls reportedly had an opportunity to deal Deng for a pick, now they may lose him for nothing.

2013: Still failed to address glaring offensive issues including shooting and shot creation.

My overarching criticism which I have addressed in the thread is that the Bulls are way too eager to make certain players untouchable in trade talks involving star players. This has persisted since the beginning of the Paxson era.

[bledredwine]

^^^ thank you. What brought the Bulls out of obscurity? 1.7% and a great coach. Proof of that is the team right now. We've stood pat with minor additions every year despite obvious weaknesses that need to be addressed. We had the chance for a number two, even one option..., pass. When's the last time we got one of those? Now we might let Deng walk. What team has been this conservative? The Spurs, because their starting five has a lot more talent than ours. Take a look at the contenders on both sides and how much they've changed over the last few years? We weren't even willin to pay Jamal Crawford during a contending year or even re-up Nate after a fantastic season. We were supposed to contend this year a well. When we let Nate go, I said watch how crappy our offense will be without Rose. Well, we get to see it all season now! Proof is in the pudding. Ok time to get off of the pot.

[otwok]

Joe Johnson on the Boozer contract would have been a good deal. I would've been okay with the 2010 offseason if we substituted Boozer with JJ. We have Taj starting, and JJ as our starting two, we probably win that Miami series.

[nitetrain8603]

Joe Johnson on the Boozer contract would have been a good deal. I would've been okay with the 2010 offseason if we substituted Boozer with JJ. We have Taj starting, and JJ as our starting two, we probably win that Miami series.

We come closer, no way do we win though. Noah and Taj and even Boozer now, are not enough of a threat offensively to score. And that's what the Bulls need from down low.

[kingkirk]

And he gets crap from a few posters that he can't singlehandedly make that garbage Ny team a contender? And how are Deng + Noah soon leading the Bulls without Rose?

Season 2013-14

Chicago Bulls 11 - 16
New York Knicks 9-19

The standings say that the Bulls led by fringe all stars in Jo & Deng have more wins that the Knicks led by superstar scorer Melo this season.

[nitetrain8603]

^^^ thank you. What brought the Bulls out of obscurity? 1.7% and a great coach. Proof of that is the team right now. We've standed pat with minor additions every year despite obvious weaknesses that need to be addressed. We had the chance for a number two, even one option..., pass. When's the last time we got one of those? Now we might let Deng walk.

They won't let Deng walk. But he's part of the problem, even if he doesn't intend to be. Simply because the Bulls will hardcap themselves like they did with Hinrich. If the Bulls had a Lavine and Embiid(2 rookie contract guys who look like they'll be able to at least consistently create their own offense next year), then signing Deng at 12-13 million per would make sense.

Re-signing Deng for that amount of money when you still have no one outside of Derrick who can consistently create offense, and even then, not knowing whether or not he will still be able to do that, is even worse. Rose going down this year should've been the final straw. It should've been the road sign for the Bulls to say, "Okay, it's time to address our shortcomings." But they're not. And they won't.

[nitetrain8603]

And he gets crap from a few posters that he can't singlehandedly make that garbage Ny team a contender? And how are Deng + Noah soon leading the Bulls without Rose?

Season 2013-14

Chicago Bulls 11 - 16
New York Knicks 9-19

The standings say that the Bulls led by fringe all stars in Jo & Deng have more wins that the Knicks led by superstar scorer Melo this season.

Again, you are not watching the games and that's clear by what you posted. Melo is not the issue. Also, what's the Bulls records in those games without Rose? What is their winning % compared to Melo's? Without looking it up, I bet you it's a hell of a lot lower.

Melo is a better player than either one of them and that's not deabatable. Melo is better player than both combined. Especially when you have a guy like Asik as the replacement for Noah. Even then, if you weren't confident in Asik in 2010, you can still sign a guy like Samuel Dalembert on the cheap. Defensive big men specialist are almost a dime a dozen and are much harder to find than superb offensive talents who when coached and pushed on defense, can play that side too.