Rerisen wrote:[Yoda] wrote:Just when I was hoping they would offer a trade including Taj for an elite player.. The Bulls go out and let him recruit. This can not get any worse. This off-season is looking more and more like we will not sign any relevant FA.
People don't seem to grasp that this move is essentially neutering our own bargaining position.
Taj being at the meeting is of negligible value if Noah is already going to be there anyway.
Unless this has all been cooked up months ago with Melo, I'm more concerned then I've ever been about the situation. Especially on top of Rose's clumsy words today.
Ehh you're probably right, but, not necessarily. The Bulls were commended even by the Heatles for their preparation and straight-forward pitch in free agency 2010. Maybe they're prepared to put all options on the table as part of the sales pitch. While it would certainly take some nuance and massaging, the Bulls could well be making the pitch to Melo: "Hey, you're the best pure scorer in the NBA, and we're a pretty good defensive team that needs the kind of scoring you provide. We want you here and are willing to do whatever it takes to land you. Even if it means trading Taj, who is sitting over there, and you've met. Joakim absolutely does not want to lose Taj, nor do we. Taj is one of our best players and a perfect fit for a roster with you on it. So we'd much prefer to figure out how to get you in here on a salary worthy of your talent without giving up Taj. Here's what we have in mind....[discussion of S&T scenarios, what Melo can do to facilitate, what Bulls will be doing to clear space, etc etc.]. But at the end of the day, we are so committed to getting you to Chicago that we are prepared to trade Taj to get it done. We'd just prefer to find another way."
Maybe this is too awkward a scenario to realistically happen - having a player in the room who has to listen to trade scenarios involving him (albeit worst case scenarios) during the pitch. Taj is a team player, but is he that much of a team player? Would any of us be? Tough to say. But it's maybe not utterly fanciful. And, if handled just right, could be very persuasive.






















