Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 94 of 120 FirstFirst ... 44849293949596104 ... LastLast
Results 1,396 to 1,410 of 1798
  1. #1396
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    23,801
    Quote Originally Posted by infinity2152 View Post
    Are you saying they'll carry dead money in that third year, if they trade Melo now and Felicio is an UFA in that third year? Genuinely curious, not sure how dead money works with FA's. Felicio would also be a big expiring next year, if they decide to trade for a big name, Melo's stretched contract is worse than worthless.
    Yes, Dead money is carried. the same way we basically carried Wades Ridiculous amount last season despite him not being on the team.

    and BTW, Felecio has 3 years remaining. I am not sure where your getting this two from. IF felecio only had two years left (and expired in time for 2020) nobody would mind his contract. but he is signed through 2021 unless one of his years is non guaranteed (And i am not aware of that)


    ‎"If your going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big"

    -Rem Koolhaas

  2. #1397
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,871
    You are correct, he has three years left. Retract the whole Felicio argument, don't know why I thought he had 2 left, have looked at the Bulls cap a ton the last few weeks, lol. A straight trade would save them a little money, but not enough for a first. We could use our cap space for better things than just moving Felicio with no return.

  3. #1398
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Lynwood , IL
    Posts
    42,843

  4. #1399
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,871
    Smart could really help Lavine and Dunn's development, going against him in practice all season. Plus defense and energy are contagious. He'd be better on a contender, but short-term, he could push those young guys hard.

  5. #1400
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    23,801
    I love smart but dont think we are there. I would want a guy like him locked up for multiple years. But i would rather keep flexibility for us in these next two offseasons.

    Hood and Parker are both to me higher upside guys anyway in terms of getting value back if you trade them. a guy like smart reminds me alot of Taj (only different position) a guy who you love, your not willing to let go of. but just not the difference maker you need on a team at the point where ours is. to me Smart is basically a 6th man and we need starters/stars.


    ‎"If your going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big"

    -Rem Koolhaas

  6. #1401
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,871
    Would prefer Hood to Smart, but Smart's intangibles!! Just on a short term, maybe big 1 year or fair two year second year option, really think he would push these young guys to their limits. We're not trying to contend now, anything that can help them develop is huge. Cleveland has much more reason to keep Hood than the Celtics to match 14+ this year on Smart. Only way Cleveland doesn't match that is if it's a long term contract.

    Dunn and Lavine will have to work hard as hell to score on Smart in practice, and we just paid Lavine a ton, hoping he gets better.

  7. #1402
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    23,801
    Quote Originally Posted by infinity2152 View Post
    Would prefer Hood to Smart, but Smart's intangibles!! Just on a short term, maybe big 1 year or fair two year second year option, really think he would push these young guys to their limits. We're not trying to contend now, anything that can help them develop is huge. Cleveland has much more reason to keep Hood than the Celtics to match 14+ this year on Smart. Only way Cleveland doesn't match that is if it's a long term contract.

    Dunn and Lavine will have to work hard as hell to score on Smart in practice, and we just paid Lavine a ton, hoping he gets better.
    I just get the feeling if u sign smart we are going to be comited to him for a long time. This FO seems to love guys like him. Noah and taj. Kirk Deng. Jimmy. He just seems like the type the front office would sacrifice a potential FA signing to retain or value much higher and refuse to trade.

    I just dont think we are there yet. We need to focus on getting starters B4 shelling out money for 6th men.

    Just for refefence but i am not saying i would not do a 1 year deal but do u think this FO would let him walk after that or want to retain him.

  8. #1403
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownbullsBG7 View Post
    He can't guard any position 1,2,3,4, or 5. So again, why can't he play on the wing?
    Chris Duhon could come out of retirement and play on the wing, but would it make sense?

    Playing him out of position all year will at the very least hurt his offense and probably increase injury potential. So could he? Sure. Would it be a good decision for him or the Bulls? No.

  9. #1404
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    His issues with Defense relly nothing on physical ability or work to do so. When he is locked up he is actually solid. His issues come with mental mistakes and loosing his guy more than his ability to do so.

    I dont beleive he will ever be elite but he isnt exactly as BAD as some of you seem to think. and to say he cant defend 1-5 Chitown isnt worth responding to when the Bucks have been one of the better defensive teams in the nba for years.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAy4lHdSLiE
    You lose all credibility by saying the Bucks have been a good defensive team in recent years. If anything they've been bad, and even worse with Parker on the floor.

  10. #1405
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,281
    Quote Originally Posted by chisox721 View Post
    You lose all credibility by saying the Bucks have been a good defensive team in recent years. If anything they've been bad, and even worse with Parker on the floor.
    They were good defensively under Kidd. Especially in the playoffs. I know they gave the Bulls fits with their length and activity. They’ve been one of the top steals teams in the league the past few years.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #1406
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,203
    Quote Originally Posted by chisox721 View Post
    Chris Duhon could come out of retirement and play on the wing, but would it make sense?

    Playing him out of position all year will at the very least hurt his offense and probably increase injury potential. So could he? Sure. Would it be a good decision for him or the Bulls? No.
    That makes zero sense. How would that increase injury odds? How would his offense drop? He is a st and of. He has played plenty minutes at the st spot. So because you say he can't play the wing, he Can't?

    He wouldn't only play the 3. He wouldn't even get his majority of minutes from there.

    Lol at Duhon, great comparison.

  12. #1407
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownbullsBG7 View Post
    That makes zero sense. How would that increase injury odds? How would his offense drop? He is a st and of. He has played plenty minutes at the st spot. So because you say he can't play the wing, he Can't?
    Why did Toronto choose to basically never have DeRozan guard the opponents best wing during the regular season? Same question with LeBron. The more effort you have to give on defense the more it impacts your offensive efficiency and wears down your body. That's not rocket science.

    Parker didn't check athletic wings on Milwaukee. Normally Giannis would get whoever moved better and that's not even taking into account the 15% of Parker's minutes that came with no center, which basically meant it was him. So I'll reiterate since you must not have gotten it the first time. Could he played SF? Sure. Would it be a good idea for him or the Bulls? No.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownbullsBG7 View Post
    He wouldn't only play the 3. He wouldn't even get his majority of minutes from there.
    Lets assume the Bulls sign Parker and no other moves are made. There are 96 minutes allotted to the PF/C position. Big men, in my perceived order of rotational depth would be Lauri, Carter, Parker, Portis, Felicio, Lopez. Let's assume Lopez and Felicio aren't in the rotation. If your opinion is that the majority of of Parker's minutes (lets say 20 out of 30) would be at PF, then your opinion is also that the combination of Lauri, Carter and Portis would receive a likely average of 25 minutes per. Does that make sense to you from a player development standpoint?

  13. #1408
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by fanatic View Post
    They were good defensively under Kidd. Especially in the playoffs. I know they gave the Bulls fits with their length and activity. They’ve been one of the top steals teams in the league the past few years.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Kidd got fired because of how bad his defensive philosophy was.

  14. #1409
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    23,801
    Quote Originally Posted by chisox721 View Post
    Why did Toronto choose to basically never have DeRozan guard the opponents best wing during the regular season? Same question with LeBron. The more effort you have to give on defense the more it impacts your offensive efficiency and wears down your body. That's not rocket science.

    Parker didn't check athletic wings on Milwaukee. Normally Giannis would get whoever moved better and that's not even taking into account the 15% of Parker's minutes that came with no center, which basically meant it was him. So I'll reiterate since you must not have gotten it the first time. Could he played SF? Sure. Would it be a good idea for him or the Bulls? No.



    Lets assume the Bulls sign Parker and no other moves are made. There are 96 minutes allotted to the PF/C position. Big men, in my perceived order of rotational depth would be Lauri, Carter, Parker, Portis, Felicio, Lopez. Let's assume Lopez and Felicio aren't in the rotation. If your opinion is that the majority of of Parker's minutes (lets say 20 out of 30) would be at PF, then your opinion is also that the combination of Lauri, Carter and Portis would receive a likely average of 25 minutes per. Does that make sense to you from a player development standpoint?
    Your still assuming Parker cant or wont play the 3. Alot of us here think he can. And as far as questions about defense or whatever. What so we currently have at the 3 who is either better or has more upside. Nwaba Denzel and Hutch don't deserve to be nba starters yet.

    Parker could at least give us a solid starter for this team. I dont want to go intp the season with any of the guys we have holding this team back from showcasing whay it can be.

  15. #1410
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,203
    Quote Originally Posted by chisox721 View Post
    Why did Toronto choose to basically never have DeRozan guard the opponents best wing during the regular season? Same question with LeBron. The more effort you have to give on defense the more it impacts your offensive efficiency and wears down your body. That's not rocket science.

    Parker didn't check athletic wings on Milwaukee. Normally Giannis would get whoever moved better and that's not even taking into account the 15% of Parker's minutes that came with no center, which basically meant it was him. So I'll reiterate since you must not have gotten it the first time. Could he played SF? Sure. Would it be a good idea for him or the Bulls? No.



    Lets assume the Bulls sign Parker and no other moves are made. There are 96 minutes allotted to the PF/C position. Big men, in my perceived order of rotational depth would be Lauri, Carter, Parker, Portis, Felicio, Lopez. Let's assume Lopez and Felicio aren't in the rotation. If your opinion is that the majority of of Parker's minutes (lets say 20 out of 30) would be at PF, then your opinion is also that the combination of Lauri, Carter and Portis would receive a likely average of 25 minutes per. Does that make sense to you from a player development standpoint?
    Today's game is predicated on finding the matchup up you want. So even if we had a kawhi at the 2 to guard the best wing player, they will keep screening until they get the matchup they want.

    No that's your minute distribution not mine. Portis would be gone. I've stated before it would most likely have to be a sign and trade involving Portis

    Also that statement up Parker playing 15% of his minutes without a center on the floor is a lie. More like 15 minutes total.

Page 94 of 120 FirstFirst ... 44849293949596104 ... 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
  •