IF True and CP3 opts out, do we.............

[step]

I love CP3, but this is a trash option. He has, at most, one high level season left in him.

To be fair, people have been saying this about Paul for several seasons now.

The odds of people being correct on this point increase every year though right? How long do you think Chris Paul will play at a high level?

I could see some justification in such an idea if he was here to mentor someone, then you can write off that last 1-1.5 years as the youngin steps up. But I have to side with Doug, serious reservations on a contract that long.

[Leslie Forman]

Yes, you can.

Steven Adams just did it. He signed an extension with the Pels on November 23, adding 2 years to his deal. He made $29.5 million this season. He'll make $17 million next season.

You're right, I got confused over the wording.

Salary may increase (or decrease) in the extended term by up to 8% (instead of 5%) of the salary in the first year of the extension.

I assumed it was counting the last year of the previous contract as part of the "extension."

[JohnnyTapwater]

YES YES YES

[kulaz3000]

I'd be all for Chris Paul as an option if he is looking to give us a chance.

Sure, he is old and injury prone, but he is an all-time great as far as leadership goes, and he would make us a contender like he has for the Suns. Not to mention, if we do somehow retain Coby in this scenario, I know those two have a good relationship, and he could do wonders for his game and player development.

That said, if we do go with Chris Paul and he is happy to sign with us, we would need a capable point guard to have as a backup, because you know that Chris Paul is going to go down at some point in the season, ideally during the regular season and not the playoffs.

[GoBlue72391]

If we can get Paul for that, I don't know how we don't do it. Sure it's a lot of money, but it's only a three-year deal and with Vuc and Zach it doesn't make sense to do anything but try to go for it.

I don't know about that. How many years do you really think Paul has? 1? 2? Are the Bulls set to go all in this year as a 30 win team to really compete? It isn't the worst. By getting Vuc, we already committed to short term goals, but adding a guy who will be 37 next year as a crucial piece sure seems like an extremely short term fix with risk of really hurting you in two years.

I would feel better about us getting to the 2nd round once with this squad before falling apart and rebuilding, but I think the most likely scenario is you only get 1 good year out of Paul, possibly 0 and possibly 2, but most likely 1.

For me it's not about going all in on a team with no prior playoff experience, it's about bringing in a respected vet with a HOF resume at a position of need who will help develop our young players and instill a winning mentality to a team that's used to losing. I know he's never won a ring, but he has a ton of playoff experience and has been around the block and the players will respect and listen to him. Kind of like the affect Thad has had, just way more.

Looking at what he did with the Thunder and Suns, he could really help to change the culture and accelerate the development of our young players. He would go a long way to cutting down or even eliminating all those close losses in crunch time that we're so prone to as well.

I don't see this as a short term move, I see it as investing in our future and a move that could potentially have a long term lasting impact on our team and our player's development.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

[HomoSapien]

If we can get Paul for that, I don't know how we don't do it. Sure it's a lot of money, but it's only a three-year deal and with Vuc and Zach it doesn't make sense to do anything but try to go for it.

I don't know about that. How many years do you really think Paul has? 1? 2? Are the Bulls set to go all in this year as a 30 win team to really compete? It isn't the worst. By getting Vuc, we already committed to short term goals, but adding a guy who will be 37 next year as a crucial piece sure seems like an extremely short term fix with risk of really hurting you in two years.

I would feel better about us getting to the 2nd round once with this squad before falling apart and rebuilding, but I think the most likely scenario is you only get 1 good year out of Paul, possibly 0 and possibly 2, but most likely 1.

For me it's not about going all in on a team with no prior playoff experience, it's about bringing in a respected vet with a HOF resume at a position of need who will help develop our young players and instill a winning mentality to a team that's used to losing. I know he's never won a ring, but he has a ton of playoff experience and has been around the block and the players will respect and listen to him. Kind of like the affect Thad has had, just way more.

Looking at what he did with the Thunder and Suns, he could really help to change the culture and accelerate the development of our young players. He would go a long way to cutting down or even eliminating all those close losses in crunch time that we're so prone to as well.

I don't see this as a short term move, I see it as investing in our future and a move that could potentially have a long term lasting impact on our team and our player's development.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

My response was going to be similar to this. Trading for Paul isn't just about Paul, but it's about bringing respect back to this franchise and trying to maximize the rest of the roster. As long as he can give you two productive years, it's a win. The final year of his contract should be a tradeable asset or he simply just comes off the books and you make an attempt to re-tool the roster around Zach after Paul is gone.

Based on his current play, I think he has two years left in him if he remains healthy. It's a gamble, but it's the type of gamble I'm okay making. There aren't many players available in free-agency that move the needle. He's one of them.

[2018C3]

Chriss Paul is 36. He's not the right fit for where this team is at. The Bulls already have vets, and if i were to take a risk, it would be on a younger athletic player whos best days are in front, and not behind.

[Jeffster81]

I rather pay for future production and not past production. Paul is probably better right now but I rather have the higher ceiling player in Ball.

[HomoSapien]

I rather pay for future production and not past production. Paul is probably better right now but I rather have the higher ceiling player in Ball.

So don't pay for past production. Pay for current production. He's currently an All-Star point guard who led his team to the second-best record in the league and is on the verge of bouncing the defending champs. We're talking about Paul as if he's washed up. We had a thread like the last season and the year before, and in hindsight, we absolutely should have tried to acquire Paul both times.

[kulaz3000]

I rather pay for future production and not past production. Paul is probably better right now but I rather have the higher ceiling player in Ball.

So don't pay for past production. Pay for current production. He's currently an All-Star point guard who led his team to the second-best record in the league and is on the verge of bouncing the defending champs. We're talking about Paul as if he's washed up. We had a thread like the last season and the year before, and in hindsight, we absolutely should have tried to acquire Paul both times.

Yeah, you're talking about a player who is going to get votes as the MVP this season. It's a matter of how much more he has left in the tank, because if he is playing at an MVP level, albeit, not a serious contender for it, just the fact that he is even in talks shows how much of an impact he is making CURRENTLY at his age to a team.

[HomoSapien]

I rather pay for future production and not past production. Paul is probably better right now but I rather have the higher ceiling player in Ball.

So don't pay for past production. Pay for current production. He's currently an All-Star point guard who led his team to the second-best record in the league and is on the verge of bouncing the defending champs. We're talking about Paul as if he's washed up. We had a thread like the last season and the year before, and in hindsight, we absolutely should have tried to acquire Paul both times.

Yeah, you're talking about a player who is going to get votes as the MVP this season. It's a matter of how much more he has left in the tank, because if he is playing at an MVP level, albeit, not a serious contender for it, just the fact that he is even in talks shows how much of an impact he is making CURRENTLY at his age to a team.

Agreed. People are talking about him as if him falling off the cliff is a foregone conclusion, but other All-Time great point guards like John Stockton and Jason Kidd remained impact contributors till the end (Stockton more so). If Paul isn't derailed by injuries (and of course that's not a given) then I could see him always being an impact player.

[GoBlue72391]

Yeah, I really don't see CP3 falling off a cliff as he gets (even) older. His game isn't based on athleticism and his basketball IQ will still be there when he's 70, let alone 36. I could see some modest regression to his shooting efficiency and defense 2+ years from now, but even then that's still not a bad PG.

I know he's old for the NBA, but he's only 36 and that's still pretty young for normal people. Not everyone ages the same, and his game has as good of a chance as anyone's of lasting up to and past 40. If the player in question was, say, a 36-year old Russell Westbrook I would say hell no.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

[TheStig]

The question is, why would CP3 want to come here? The suns are better and can afford to pay him.

[kulaz3000]

The question is, why would CP3 want to come here? The suns are better and can afford to pay him.

Will they though? The Suns are notoriously cheap, and him opting out indicates that he wants to reup for his last big contract. They would be wise to give him what he wants, but there is a chance they don't. And if they decide not to give him the contract he is seeking, then yeah, why not go to an upcoming team who is willing to pay him what he is asking for? Plus, he is familiar with the head coach and had success together, with less talent than what he would have with the Bulls - not to mention he will be in the Eastern Conference.

Who knows though!

[WindyCityBorn]

The question is, why would CP3 want to come here? The suns are better and can afford to pay him.

They can keep him.

[waffle]

lets not lose the fact that he just turned down 44 million. Whoa. That's crazy

[TheGOATRises007]

CP3 has looked pretty poor vs the Lakers(I know he's injured).

I'd be wary of committing to him with his injury woes and age.

[greenwing]

If the Bulls can somehow make the move, I would be fine with Chris Paul for a Lauri Markannen sign and trade. The Suns would get a nice piece to go along with Ayton and wouldn’t lose Paul for nothing. Then try to bring back Theis or sign a vet PF and you’re set for next season.

Paul
Lavine
Williams
Theis
Vucevic

Sixth man = White

Coby gets to play with his mentor and learn to eventually be the long-term starter. I think that squad could make some noise next season with a full year of Vucevic and Paul helping elevate Williams’ and White’s games.

[TheStig]

The question is, why would CP3 want to come here? The suns are better and can afford to pay him.

Will they though? The Suns are notoriously cheap, and him opting out indicates that he wants to reup for his last big contract. They would be wise to give him what he wants, but there is a chance they don't. And if they decide not to give him the contract he is seeking, then yeah, why not go to an upcoming team who is willing to pay him what he is asking for? Plus, he is familiar with the head coach and had success together, with less talent than what he would have with the Bulls - not to mention he will be in the Eastern Conference.

Who knows though!

The suns are cheap with the LT (sound familar?) Most of their guys are on rookie deals and they're already paying CP3 more this year and on the books for more next year. It's actually cheaper for them next year and just adds 2 years. I can't see how they don't.

[dougthonus]

On a 1-year deal, sure why not. But I don't see any way AKME commits themselves to 3 years of CP3.

Especially not when it's already pretty well know that they really, really want Lonzo.

1 year isn't going to be an option. Paul isn't opting out of 1 year 45M to sign a different 1 year deal with us for 30M.

Exactly. And I'm not sure AKME would choose 1 year of Paul over Lonzo being here for 4-5 years, even if it was an option.

I would if it were an option. Though it isn't.