ImageImageImage

McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,292
And1: 19,304
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#1 » by shrink » Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:27 pm

Chi Guy wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5027781
The lack of a promising young big man eliminated the Chicago Bulls from being a serious player in trading for Kevin Garnett when he was traded from the Minnesota Timberwolves three years ago, said the general manager who dealt him.

Kevin McHale, who was the Timberwolves general manager from 1995-2009, traded the franchise's biggest star in July of 2007 to the Boston Celtics for a package of players built around 6-foot-11 Al Jefferson, then a 22-year-old coming off his first significant NBA season, averaging 16 points and 11 rebounds during the 2006-07 season.

McHale said the Bulls, long rumored in deals for Garnett, who was drafted out of Farragut Academy in Chicago in 1995, couldn't compete with the top two bidders.

"I talked to the Bulls some about things, but at the end it really came down to I thought the best offer was to get a good, young big man, either Al Jefferson -- who we ended up taking -- or we were talking to the Lakers about Andrew Bynum," McHale said Thursday on "The Waddle & Silvy Show" on ESPN 1000. "Both of those guys were involved. It was just the decision that we wanted to go with a big guy and try to get a post-type player and a defender.

"We talked to [the Bulls] off and on. I just didn't think that the pieces fit quite as good."


I never bought the CHI offer from summer of 2006. I don't think the front office or the fans were ready to move Garnett until 2007, after the failed season.
moss_is_1
RealGM
Posts: 10,971
And1: 2,385
Joined: May 20, 2009
   

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#2 » by moss_is_1 » Sat Mar 27, 2010 6:51 pm

I'd much rather have Al then to have Deng and possibly tyrus thomas....Bynum is intriguing because him and Love would pry look better together, but I still think that Al is the better player..and trading KG out of the west is a better plan.
User avatar
Tekkenlaw
Starter
Posts: 2,078
And1: 39
Joined: Apr 16, 2008

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#3 » by Tekkenlaw » Sat Mar 27, 2010 8:18 pm

moss_is_1 wrote:I'd much rather have Al then to have Deng and possibly tyrus thomas....Bynum is intriguing because him and Love would pry look better together, but I still think that Al is the better player..and trading KG out of the west is a better plan.
Think about what the Wolves could have moved Odom's 14 million expiring contract for though. Although Bynum has attitude issues that Jefferson doesn't.
User avatar
Foye
Club Captain- German Soccer
Posts: 25,056
And1: 3,613
Joined: Jul 29, 2008
Location: Frankfurt
 

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#4 » by Foye » Sun Mar 28, 2010 6:29 pm

moss_is_1 wrote:I'd much rather have Al then to have Deng and possibly tyrus thomas....Bynum is intriguing because him and Love would pry look better together, but I still think that Al is the better player..and trading KG out of the west is a better plan.


This. :clap:
Worm Guts
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Posts: 27,352
And1: 12,212
Joined: Dec 27, 2003
     

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#5 » by Worm Guts » Sun Mar 28, 2010 6:41 pm

moss_is_1 wrote:I'd much rather have Al then to have Deng and possibly tyrus thomas....Bynum is intriguing because him and Love would pry look better together, but I still think that Al is the better player..and trading KG out of the west is a better plan.


I think keeping KG in the West would have been better. It's not like KG is going to be an impact player by the time we're good, and we'd be stealing young talent from a Western Conference.
User avatar
casey
General Manager
Posts: 7,660
And1: 7
Joined: Jun 18, 2005
Contact:

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#6 » by casey » Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:18 pm

People say that all the time about trading big time players. It makes no sense. If you're going to rebuild why does it matter that you're making a team in your conference better? I'd rather have that team good right now, and then by the time we're coming up they will be going down.
"I'm Ricky Rubio."
--Ricky Rubio
moss_is_1
RealGM
Posts: 10,971
And1: 2,385
Joined: May 20, 2009
   

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#7 » by moss_is_1 » Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:06 am

casey wrote:People say that all the time about trading big time players. It makes no sense. If you're going to rebuild why does it matter that you're making a team in your conference better? I'd rather have that team good right now, and then by the time we're coming up they will be going down.

I wouldn't want KG to have assraped us more than 2 times a season...
User avatar
casey
General Manager
Posts: 7,660
And1: 7
Joined: Jun 18, 2005
Contact:

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#8 » by casey » Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:02 am

Why though? Another two losses and another home sellout. Seems like a good thing to me. :dontknow:
"I'm Ricky Rubio."
--Ricky Rubio
User avatar
horaceworthy
Head Coach
Posts: 6,650
And1: 250
Joined: Jan 17, 2006
Location: Ruining Fuddrucker's for everyone

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#9 » by horaceworthy » Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:44 am

I can see the logic in it a little if you're trading a young player. If we had known KG would break down so quickly, it wouldn't have mattered.
"A while back,'' Cardinal said, "I took a picture of the standings and texted it to Love, just to bust his chops,'' Cardinal said. "He sent me a picture back of a snowdrift.''
MN Die Hard
Analyst
Posts: 3,396
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 27, 2005

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#10 » by MN Die Hard » Mon Mar 29, 2010 1:44 pm

"Both of those guys were involved. It was just the decision that we wanted to go with a big guy and try to get a post-type player and a defender.


And a defender?? Who would that be?
B Calrissian
Head Coach
Posts: 6,928
And1: 17
Joined: Sep 22, 2007

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#11 » by B Calrissian » Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:19 pm

MN Die Hard wrote:
"Both of those guys were involved. It was just the decision that we wanted to go with a big guy and try to get a post-type player and a defender.


And a defender?? Who would that be?


Image
User avatar
mandurugo
Starter
Posts: 2,120
And1: 231
Joined: Aug 14, 2002

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#12 » by mandurugo » Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:11 pm

moss_is_1 wrote:I'd much rather have Al then to have Deng and possibly tyrus thomas....Bynum is intriguing because him and Love would pry look better together, but I still think that Al is the better player..and trading KG out of the west is a better plan.


I think the problem with Bynum has turned out to be that he has so many nagging injuries. It seems like he misses double digit games every year, which makes him pretty tough to build around. A healthy Bynum probably would be a better player than Jefferson, but the actual Bynum is more complicated to assess.
User avatar
Esohny
RealGM
Posts: 11,613
And1: 339
Joined: Apr 18, 2009
Location: Saint Paul
     

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#13 » by Esohny » Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:19 pm

mandurugo wrote:
moss_is_1 wrote:I'd much rather have Al then to have Deng and possibly tyrus thomas....Bynum is intriguing because him and Love would pry look better together, but I still think that Al is the better player..and trading KG out of the west is a better plan.


I think the problem with Bynum has turned out to be that he has so many nagging injuries. It seems like he misses double digit games every year, which makes him pretty tough to build around. A healthy Bynum probably would be a better player than Jefferson, but the actual Bynum is more complicated to assess.


True.
SMAC-K wrote:Mayo>>>>Love and that 5th pick
OJ Mayo is one of the best defenders in the league, hes a two way player and hes a great passer and playmaker.
User avatar
BrooklynBulls
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 32,734
And1: 2,655
Joined: May 13, 2007
Location: Avidly reading WillPenney.com
Contact:

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#14 » by BrooklynBulls » Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:15 pm

B Calrissian wrote:
MN Die Hard wrote:
"Both of those guys were involved. It was just the decision that we wanted to go with a big guy and try to get a post-type player and a defender.


And a defender?? Who would that be?


Image


Now it makes sense why Ratliff's stuck around the league so long. Dude's got 3 arms.
Narf
Head Coach
Posts: 6,550
And1: 882
Joined: Sep 05, 2009

Re: McHale: Bulls didn't have Pieces for Garnett 

Post#15 » by Narf » Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:04 pm

BrooklynBulls wrote:
B Calrissian wrote:
MN Die Hard wrote:"Both of those guys were involved. It was just the decision that we wanted to go with a big guy and try to get a post-type player and a defender."
And a defender?? Who would that be?


Image


Now it makes sense why Ratliff's stuck around the league so long. Dude's got 3 arms.
Wait for it























Wait for it























That's what she said

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves