Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    298
    vCash
    1500

    Bulls waive Malcolm Thomas

    The Chicago Bulls have released Malcolm Thomas. A little unexpected in my opinion, but with the way Erik Murphy played in the Summer League I understand. What do you guys think?

    http://my.chicagotribune.com/#sectio.../p2p-76766057/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    27,989
    vCash
    2440

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southern Illinois
    Posts
    491
    vCash
    1500
    Not to happy with the move, but we are already paying two PFs too much money and with our salary, someone had to go. If we can find a 7 footer I will be happy but what Thomas was making, I'd prefer Thomas over Gibson. Gibson has disappointed the last 2 seasons for me, not sure if anyone else feels this way. Without Asik, Gibson's numbers have fallen but in any case he isn't worth 8 mil a year which we gave him as of right now now. Who knows what can happen? I will still support anyone wearing a Bulls jersey no matter what.


    BEST PLAYER IN THE NBA!!!!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    54,430
    vCash
    1500
    Oh well, not a huge deal if Murphy can play well given the opportunity.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,752
    vCash
    1500
    Its a crowded position and unless TAJ was our backup C for this season, it was obvious that he would go.

    But in my opinion, and unless TAJ really improves his mid range, i could see Malcolm as PF and TAJ as backup C.

    But any other thing is probably good aswell.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    23,677
    vCash
    1500
    ummmm who?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,809
    vCash
    1500
    Reinsdorf saving money again

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    67,776
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvaged Ship View Post
    Reinsdorf saving money again
    That's the opposite of true if we're planning on releasing him to sign Camby

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chicago , IL
    Posts
    17,247
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by kingbrentg View Post
    That's the opposite of true if we're planning on releasing him to sign Camby
    Then he should have made that deal after he had Camby in the bag .

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    67,776
    vCash
    1500
    Thomas' deal becomes guaranteed tomorrow though. Camby's decision could take until next week.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,809
    vCash
    1500
    We couldn't have both Camby and Thomas? Its a straight forward cost cutting move. It was 250k guaranteed to keep Thomas and whatever additional the luxury tax would have been. Absolute peanuts in the big picture, but to our ownership every penny of profit is important.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    67,776
    vCash
    1500
    Because we need 7 bigs on the roster? That's largely unheard of, especially when we're undoubtedly going to still need to add another guard at some point during the season/offseason.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    23,677
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvaged Ship View Post
    We couldn't have both Camby and Thomas? Its a straight forward cost cutting move. It was 250k guaranteed to keep Thomas and whatever additional the luxury tax would have been. Absolute peanuts in the big picture, but to our ownership every penny of profit is important.
    why are you upset over cutting someone who might(and i cant stress that word enough)see 10 minutes...and i mean total,not 10 mpg ?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    3,855
    vCash
    1500
    I like Thomas and I'm kinda hoping we trade taj as part of a deal for a 2nd star. Then we can resign Thomas and have him and Murphy as back-up PFs depending on match-ups

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,408
    vCash
    1500
    I like Thomas, and would have liked to see him make the roster, but this is in no way a big deal. He likely would not see any playing time unless someone was injured.

    Anyone looking at this is a cost cutting move, in any negative light, doesn't get the big picture. OF COURSE IT IS A COST CUTTING MOVE! And get this.....think about it for a minute....it is the right KIND of cost cutting move.

    People should be upset if the front office is dumping valuable, CONTRIBUTING players, because of cost. People should also be fine with cost cutting moves for the 13th man on the roster. It generally means that the player being cut, is in no way an important contributor to the team, and the money is being saved for someone that might be.

    Bottom line, Thomas is a nice bench guy, but he is replaceable in every sense of the word. There are other, more pressing, needs on this team right now, and guaranteeing a guy 250k + what it would cost in luxury tax is just not good business, when he isn't someone who makes any sort of difference or impact on the team in a positive way. (Not that Thomas was bad, or a negative...he just isn't important.)

    Some people just want to complain about any move that involves the Bulls dumping money. Doesn't matter who that player is, it is looked at as "Oh there goes Reinsdorf again, counting his pennies." smh

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •