PDA

View Full Version : David Lee to the Bulls? Win now or wait?



Pauleboman
07-26-2009, 04:39 PM
Chuck Swirsky-ESPN
http://espn.go.com/chicago/columns/blog?post=4353450&name=swirsky
I would take Lee in a heartbeat for a deal but if that sacrifices 2010 SuperStar chances forget it.Id roll with the team as it is..Would You?

Draco
07-26-2009, 04:44 PM
Arent there enough threads about this?

Again.. my vote; No to Lee. Maybe to Boozer: I like the idea the media floated around of a 1 year deal to secure our PF position and showcase the team for other players in 2010.

I did like this from Chuck:


Remember, if the Bulls make a commitment to picking up a player this offseason with long-term ramifications, it all but eliminates them from the 2010 free-agent class. If you're a free agent in 2010 and the list narrows to the Bulls, Knicks and Heat, it's a no-brainer. The Bulls easily have better assets right now than NY and Miami.

Good ole Chuck Swirsky.

fishfan79
07-26-2009, 04:46 PM
hmm except wade + beasley + whomever coming to miami is better miami can sign multiple superstars


still I would love to see lee goingto chicago means boozer will be even cheaper for miami to swipe

Shahrose
07-26-2009, 04:51 PM
Arent there enough threads about this?

Again.. my vote; No to Lee. Maybe to Boozer: I like the idea the media floated around of a 1 year deal to secure our PF position and showcase the team for other players in 2010.


completely agree

Pauleboman
07-26-2009, 04:55 PM
Arent there enough threads about this?

Again.. my vote; No to Lee. Maybe to Boozer: I like the idea the media floated around of a 1 year deal to secure our PF position and showcase the team for other players in 2010.

I did like this from Chuck:



Good ole Chuck Swirsky.

No because I would like to see Lee as Power Forward.Are you kiddin the guy stays healthy and is natsukow..
Good ol Swirsky good post thought I would share ..

abe_froman
07-26-2009, 04:56 PM
depends on who's moved or whats the price.if reasonable i'd do either

Pauleboman
07-26-2009, 05:06 PM
depends on who's moved or whats the price.if reasonable i'd do either

The Knicks would want to include a bad contract with Lee in any sign-and-trade, and not take a long-term deal back.

That's the problem. Is Lee worth $10 million-$12 million per year? Absolutely. But if the Knicks want value and expiring contracts in return, then what?

Remember, if the Bulls make a commitment to picking up a player this offseason with long-term ramifications, it all but eliminates them from the 2010 free-agent class. If you're a free agent in 2010 and the list narrows to the Bulls, Knicks and Heat, it's a no-brainer. The Bulls easily have better assets right now than NY and Miami.

I would just go with the team now and wait for free agency next season because the Bull are one of the few right now who will have cap space and talent for a superstar to want to play for the Bulls..

Draco
07-26-2009, 05:12 PM
The Knicks would want to include a bad contract with Lee in any sign-and-trade, and not take a long-term deal back.

That's the problem. Is Lee worth $10 million-$12 million per year? Absolutely. But if the Knicks want value and expiring contracts in return, then what?

Remember, if the Bulls make a commitment to picking up a player this offseason with long-term ramifications, it all but eliminates them from the 2010 free-agent class. If you're a free agent in 2010 and the list narrows to the Bulls, Knicks and Heat, it's a no-brainer. The Bulls easily have better assets right now than NY and Miami.

I would just go with the team now and wait for free agency next season because the Bull are one of the few right now who will have cap space and talent for a superstar to want to play for the Bulls..

Would be nice to give credit to Chuck Swirsky for that passage.. beyond having provided a link in the first post.

JVene
07-26-2009, 05:17 PM
The Knicks would want to include a bad contract with Lee in any sign-and-trade, and not take a long-term deal back.

That's the problem. Is Lee worth $10 million-$12 million per year? Absolutely. But if the Knicks want value and expiring contracts in return, then what?

Remember, if the Bulls make a commitment to picking up a player this offseason with long-term ramifications, it all but eliminates them from the 2010 free-agent class. If you're a free agent in 2010 and the list narrows to the Bulls, Knicks and Heat, it's a no-brainer. The Bulls easily have better assets right now than NY and Miami.

I would just go with the team now and wait for free agency next season because the Bull are one of the few right now who will have cap space and talent for a superstar to want to play for the Bulls..


The knicks dont want expiring contracts back, we have enough of those we would rather just let him walk rather than help you out. We would want at least a 1st rounder and one of your guys still on their rookie contracts.

I know the Bulls are a better spot for a superstar than NY but Miami is far in away more attractive than both. The most obvious is Wade, Chicago doesnt have anyone close. Second there is no state taxes. Third would you rather work in the winters of Illinois or go clubing after an easy game in South Beach. Its a no brainer and im a huge knicks fan.

Draco
07-26-2009, 05:22 PM
I know the Bulls are a better spot for a superstar than NY but Miami is far in away more attractive than both. The most obvious is Wade, Chicago doesnt have anyone close. Second there is no state taxes. Third would you rather work in the winters of Illinois or go clubing after an easy game in South Beach. Its a no brainer and im a huge knicks fan.

If I'm Lebron or Bosh.. I'd rather play with D-Rose than Wade simply because Rose's role is meant to help facilitate the success of other players.

Pauleboman
07-26-2009, 05:26 PM
The knicks dont want expiring contracts back, we have enough of those we would rather just let him walk rather than help you out. We would want at least a 1st rounder and one of your guys still on their rookie contracts.

I know the Bulls are a better spot for a superstar than NY but Miami is far in away more attractive than both. The most obvious is Wade, Chicago doesnt have anyone close. Second there is no state taxes. Third would you rather work in the winters of Illinois or go clubing after an easy game in South Beach. Its a no brainer and im a huge knicks fan.

Well obviously your not the GM of the Knicks,but a columnist wrote the post not me.Did you read the link provided to start the thread are you just talkin smack?I dont even have to be a genius or bias.The bulls have a great situation going and looking good..Surf or Ski it wont matter because the the Bulls have great fans and is the best city.Its perfect outside right now by the pool.

b_rad23
07-26-2009, 05:29 PM
If I'm Lebron or Bosh.. I'd rather play with D-Rose than Wade simply because Rose's role is meant to help facilitate the success of other players.

:confused:You wouldn't say that if you were from anywhere else.

Wade is a much better player. He's better defensively and he's even a better facilitator (see: more assists). Really, Wade is better at every aspect of the game.

Heat have much more space, more picks, etc.

madiaz3
07-26-2009, 05:30 PM
Well obviously your not the GM of the Knicks,but a columnist wrote the post not me.Did you read the link provided to start the thread are you just talkin smack?I dont even have to be a genius or bias.The bulls have a great situation going and looking good..Surf or Ski it wont matter because the the Bulls have great fans and is the best city.Its perfect outside right now by the pool.

I'm sure people in LA think they live in the best city, same with Miami, Chicago, NY etc.

abe_froman
07-26-2009, 05:31 PM
The Knicks would want to include a bad contract with Lee in any sign-and-trade, and not take a long-term deal back.

That's the problem. Is Lee worth $10 million-$12 million per year? Absolutely. But if the Knicks want value and expiring contracts in return, then what?

Remember, if the Bulls make a commitment to picking up a player this offseason with long-term ramifications, it all but eliminates them from the 2010 free-agent class. If you're a free agent in 2010 and the list narrows to the Bulls, Knicks and Heat, it's a no-brainer. The Bulls easily have better assets right now than NY and Miami.

I would just go with the team now and wait for free agency next season because the Bull are one of the few right now who will have cap space and talent for a superstar to want to play for the Bulls..
not necessarily,it all depends on how much they would cost,it can be done to be one max+role(depending what the role is paid..or if another is moved..say hinrich)and might go into lux depending on who the player is(we wont for bosh but would for wade or lebron i'm guessing)

MSG34
07-26-2009, 05:32 PM
I think he means Chicago has a better supporting cast to offer b/c they have Derek Rose.

Kyben36
07-26-2009, 05:38 PM
I would rather see us take our chances on Tyrus, and if he doesnt work out, 2010. THere are going to be plenty of player on Lees level next year. Scola is a FA, I dont know if they will resign him or not, I would take Haslem who will probably be a FA over Lee, and of course, Bosh, Amare, and Boozer are better than Lee. I think Tyrus will have a better year than Lee, Lees stats are padded with the NY system. HE isnt that good of a player.

JordansBulls
07-26-2009, 05:40 PM
I would take Lee for a 1 year deal only.

JVene
07-26-2009, 05:42 PM
Im pretty sure Lebron knows that if he teamed up with Wade they would be unstoppable. Lebron won over 60 games by himself. Clevland is about a 28 win team without him. Miami would become a dynasty and this i am afraid of. I can only hope Lebron has some kind of love for the only real city in the world and takes the knicks to a dynasty.

abe_froman
07-26-2009, 05:45 PM
I would rather see us take our chances on Tyrus, and if he doesnt work out, 2010.
but part of it is for 2010,to look more attractive to f.a.'s.yes chicago can offer money,but so can everyone else.so it really comes down to is looking like they are just a "lebron", a "wade" away from a dynasty

JVene
07-26-2009, 05:45 PM
I would take Lee for a 1 year deal only.

If by some miracle lee signed a one year deal with you, we would match it in a second even if it was for 15 mil. THats exactly what we want him to do. We want him on a one year deal. And you guys are over the cap so you got no chance at that.

Kyben36
07-26-2009, 05:48 PM
but part of it is for 2010,to look more attractive to f.a.'s.yes chicago can offer money,but so can everyone else.so it really comes down to is looking like they are just a "lebron", a "wade" away from a dynasty

Right now, Chicago has enough Cap space to sign 1 player, and as knicks fans said, they will not sign and trade him on a 1 year deal, so 2010 would no longer be an option for the bulls. We would be stuck with an average PF and an average suporting cast around rose, and we want more than that.

Draco
07-26-2009, 05:49 PM
If by some miracle lee signed a one year deal with you, we would match it in a second even if it was for 15 mil. THats exactly what we want him to do. We want him on a one year deal. And you guys are over the cap so you got no chance at that.

The Bulls aren't over the cap.

Kyben36
07-26-2009, 05:49 PM
If by some miracle lee signed a one year deal with you, we would match it in a second even if it was for 15 mil. THats exactly what we want him to do. We want him on a one year deal. And you guys are over the cap so you got no chance at that.

We may be over cap, but thats not our issue, our GM is a cheap *** and wont go into luxury tax.

MSG34
07-26-2009, 05:52 PM
I can't even envision what the deal would be b/c I don't think it makes sense. Bulls fans can you?

Draco
07-26-2009, 05:53 PM
The cap is around $57 mil.. the Bulls salary commitments are at around $47 mil. They're not over tha cap.

Tulanehockey
07-26-2009, 05:54 PM
Wade is a FA next year, so how is Miami more attractive than Chicago?

abe_froman
07-26-2009, 05:55 PM
We may be over cap, but thats not our issue, our GM is a cheap *** and wont go into luxury tax.

wrong on 2 counts.1.they arent over lux threshold(which i think your meaning)and 2.it has nothing to do with the gm,it has to do with the owner

and note to another issue,they have enough for max+lower,not just one max

as for me personally,i dont care.i have no want for lee,i just dont

JVene
07-26-2009, 06:10 PM
Wade is a FA next year, so how is Miami more attractive than Chicago?

You dont think Wade and Lebron have talked about this and next summer you dont think they might make a plan together if its in both of their best interests.