Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 59 of 117 FirstFirst ... 949575859606169109 ... LastLast
Results 871 to 885 of 1752
  1. #871
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,638
    Quote Originally Posted by dabears34ft View Post
    There are multiple reasons to move him.

    A) So we don't overpay him
    B) So we get an asset for him rather than losing him for nothing
    C) Because he's inconsistent
    D) Because he's limited on Defense
    E) It's pretty obvious we struggled more without Lauri than without WCJ, and cheap longer control of WCJ.


    Give me your reasons why we shouldn't trade him?
    A) I don't understand why it matters if we pay him or not. Who in Free agency are we getting with that money? Whatever his next contract is it will still be moveable.

    B) He will get matched or you can involve him in a sign in trade. I'm sorry but you aren't getting a 1st from OKC. They have alot of cap so there wouldn't be an incentive for them to do so. You may get a 1st out of a contending team but a 25th pick is what though? Re-sign him and move him later on. If Kat becomes available next trade deadline, Lauri looks more enticing then a late first.

    C) Which hasn't been true so far this year.

    D) Again so is Coby, Zach, and Wendell.........

    E) Wendell is up for an extension the following off season so it will be the exact same situation.

    Again im not tied to anyone on this team. Everyone can be traded if the price is right. Pwill would be my only untouchable. I wouldn't look to trade Zach but if something good came up then bye.

    Also if it a choice between Lauri and Wendell, it's Lauri all the way. I can fill out a roster to hide Lauri's defense, Especially if Coby isn't in the line-up with him.

    A team of Lonzo/Zach/Pwill/Lauri/Turner would get the job done defensively while actually having a rim protector behind Zach and Lauri to hide them.

  2. #872
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Lynwood , IL
    Posts
    51,684
    Lauri has a lot to prove to be worth his asking . If heís not staying under the bulls wants then Iíll be out on him. If the bulls trade for Lonzo thatís two RFA on the roster and theyíll have to pick one of the other and extend LAVINE who is having an amazing year. Keeping LAVINE has now taken the main spot rather than moving him and starting over unless you get some type of crazy offer.

  3. #873
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Stunner View Post
    Lauri has a lot to prove to be worth his asking . If heís not staying under the bulls wants then Iíll be out on him. If the bulls trade for Lonzo thatís two RFA on the roster and theyíll have to pick one of the other and extend LAVINE who is having an amazing year. Keeping LAVINE has now taken the main spot rather than moving him and starting over unless you get some type of crazy offer.
    Again, Even if we had Lonzo and Lauri, Who are you using our available cap on? There aren't any good free agents. So if Lauri gets a 4 year 90mil and Lonzo gets a 4 year 70 mil or less, what's stopping you from matching them? They are still young so they will always be moveable.

  4. #874
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Lynwood , IL
    Posts
    51,684
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownbullsBG7 View Post
    Again, Even if we had Lonzo and Lauri, Who are you using our available cap on? There aren't any good free agents. So if Lauri gets a 4 year 90mil and Lonzo gets a 4 year 70 mil or less, what's stopping you from matching them? They are still young so they will always be moveable.
    I rather use the cap on other players that will fit in the system than spend it on an inconsistent big thatís hurt time to time . They have no ties to Lauri and feel they will do whatís best for the roster . Iím giving my feelings on these so called core pieces itís common sense they will always be moveable , but if AK doesnít want Lauri then he doesnít want Lauri there is no rule I have over pay for a player just because somebody else does just because I might not have options out there to spend money . If Lauri still shows to be inconsistent what makes you think they want to tie up with that? These players are in the position of not being paid at the moment for a reason .

  5. #875
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Mishawaka, IN
    Posts
    9,767
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownbullsBG7 View Post
    A) I don't understand why it matters if we pay him or not. Who in Free agency are we getting with that money? Whatever his next contract is it will still be moveable.

    B) He will get matched or you can involve him in a sign in trade. I'm sorry but you aren't getting a 1st from OKC. They have alot of cap so there wouldn't be an incentive for them to do so. You may get a 1st out of a contending team but a 25th pick is what though? Re-sign him and move him later on. If Kat becomes available next trade deadline, Lauri looks more enticing then a late first.

    C) Which hasn't been true so far this year.

    D) Again so is Coby, Zach, and Wendell.........

    E) Wendell is up for an extension the following off season so it will be the exact same situation.

    Again im not tied to anyone on this team. Everyone can be traded if the price is right. Pwill would be my only untouchable. I wouldn't look to trade Zach but if something good came up then bye.

    Also if it a choice between Lauri and Wendell, it's Lauri all the way. I can fill out a roster to hide Lauri's defense, Especially if Coby isn't in the line-up with him.

    A team of Lonzo/Zach/Pwill/Lauri/Turner would get the job done defensively while actually having a rim protector behind Zach and Lauri to hide them.
    If you can get an additional 1st from someone, I'd be more than happy drafting Kispert and starting Kispert and Williams at the 3/4 over Pat and Lauri. It's not like Lauri plays his size. That replaces Lauri with a player that does what Lauri does better than Lauri, for 5 years on a rookie deal. If our FO doesn't see him as a future asset on a contender, why wouldn't you try to grab an asset for him? I don't even hate Lauri. I think he could be good. But at the same time, he gets hurt every year. He's soft. He can't defend for ****. I'd value a good rookie with years of control over him honestly.

  6. #876
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Stunner View Post
    I rather use the cap on other players that will fit in the system than spend it on an inconsistent big thatís hurt time to time . They have no ties to Lauri and feel they will do whatís best for the roster . Iím giving my feelings on these so called core pieces itís common sense they will always be moveable , but if AK doesnít want Lauri then he doesnít want Lauri there is no rule I have over pay for a player just because somebody else does just because I might not have options out there to spend money . If Lauri still shows to be inconsistent what makes you think they want to tie up with that? These players are in the position of not being paid at the moment for a reason .
    Again, Who is out there that is a free agent that will fit better. This Free agent class isn't good. It's why teams like Miami, Toronto, Denver, etc. always seem to have good teams. They don't let people walk for undervalue and they don't trade them to trade them. Resign them and when the better fit comes around then get rid of him.

    Example if you want to move Lauri and say Thad to Detroit for Grant than sure you get your better fit....

    Quote Originally Posted by dabears34ft View Post
    If you can get an additional 1st from someone, I'd be more than happy drafting Kispert and starting Kispert and Williams at the 3/4 over Pat and Lauri. It's not like Lauri plays his size. That replaces Lauri with a player that does what Lauri does better than Lauri, for 5 years on a rookie deal. If our FO doesn't see him as a future asset on a contender, why wouldn't you try to grab an asset for him? I don't even hate Lauri. I think he could be good. But at the same time, he gets hurt every year. He's soft. He can't defend for ****. I'd value a good rookie with years of control over him honestly.
    You are HOPING a rookie translates. We have seen very efficient college players come to the nba and look terrible. Not to Mention you are HOPING that he would be there, and you are HOPING that they would be interested in him.

  7. #877
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Mishawaka, IN
    Posts
    9,767
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownbullsBG7 View Post
    Again, Who is out there that is a free agent that will fit better. This Free agent class isn't good. It's why teams like Miami, Toronto, Denver, etc. always seem to have good teams. They don't let people walk for undervalue and they don't trade them to trade them. Resign them and when the better fit comes around then get rid of him.

    Example if you want to move Lauri and say Thad to Detroit for Grant than sure you get your better fit....



    You are HOPING a rookie translates. We have seen very efficient college players come to the nba and look terrible. Not to Mention you are HOPING that he would be there, and you are HOPING that they would be interested in him.
    He's just the player I'd want with an additional pick. It doesn't have to be him. You are missing the point.

  8. #878
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,638
    Quote Originally Posted by dabears34ft View Post
    He's just the player I'd want with an additional pick. It doesn't have to be him. You are missing the point.
    No, the point is you are hoping a late 1st will give you what Lauri does or even close. Who cares if he is cost controlled if it ends up being Hutch, Jerian Grant, Cam Payne, Doug McDermott, Justin Patton, Seraphin, Snell, Teague, Carney, etc......

  9. #879
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Mishawaka, IN
    Posts
    9,767
    Speaking of Trades, the Knicks got Derrick Rose for a box of Crayola Crayons and a pencil sharpener.

  10. #880
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,879
    Quote Originally Posted by dabears34ft View Post
    Speaking of Trades, the Knicks got Derrick Rose for a box of Crayola Crayons and a pencil sharpener.
    We definitely couldíve gotten D Rose for Sato or Hutch


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #881
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Depaul
    Posts
    2,636
    Quote Originally Posted by fanatic View Post
    We definitely couldíve gotten D Rose for Sato or Hutch


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I read the Pistons worked with Rose to send him to a place he wanted to go. They weren't really auctioning him off. Wanted to be back with Thibs, New York appeal, and starter minutes.
    Sounds like the Pistons did Rose a solid and took what they could get from the destination he wanted to go to.

  12. #882
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,879
    Quote Originally Posted by ds637 View Post
    I read the Pistons worked with Rose to send him to a place he wanted to go. They weren't really auctioning him off. Wanted to be back with Thibs, New York appeal, and starter minutes.
    Sounds like the Pistons did Rose a solid and took what they could get from the destination he wanted to go to.
    Wow! Thatís awesome. D rose is beloved around the league. Great for him. I Love to see my Simeon alumni doing well.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #883
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Mishawaka, IN
    Posts
    9,767
    Quote Originally Posted by fanatic View Post
    Wow! Thatís awesome. D rose is beloved around the league. Great for him. I Love to see my Simeon alumni doing well.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yeah heís a stand up guy. I hated how our fans turned on him like he could control his injuries. The bad fans not all. I woulda took him back here and started him all day!

  14. #884
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Mishawaka, IN
    Posts
    9,767
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownbullsBG7 View Post
    No, the point is you are hoping a late 1st will give you what Lauri does or even close. Who cares if he is cost controlled if it ends up being Hutch, Jerian Grant, Cam Payne, Doug McDermott, Justin Patton, Seraphin, Snell, Teague, Carney, etc......
    I'd be looking at the Warriors pick from the Wolves in a trade. The way to pry that from them is to give them veteran depth, a young player in Lauri, and to relieve them of Wiggins contract. Like you said, there isn't much left to sign, so nothing wrong paying someone the money right now. Wiggins doesn't really fit with the Warriors.

    Lauri/Thad/Sato/Temple for Wiggins/Pascal/Looney/Wolves 1st works

    They can pair Green with Lauri and Thad with Wiseman. They wouldn't need Pascal or Looney with that depth. Temple could start at SG with Wiggins gone, and Sato would give them a veteran bench PG which they lack. They get better. We get young assets. It works for both teams. In the short term, we probably lose more games with all our vets gone. That improves our pick this year, with that Wolves pick holding value in 2022 if it doesn't clear the protections this year.

    Curry/Temple/Oubre/Green/Lauri
    Sato/Lee/Bazemore/Thad/Wiseman

    Adding Thad and Sato to their bench, and a shooter like Lauri to their starting lineup would take a lot of pressure off of Curry. They also wouldn't be at the mercy of Wiseman's foul trouble with that big man depth.

  15. #885
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,638
    Quote Originally Posted by dabears34ft View Post
    I'd be looking at the Warriors pick from the Wolves in a trade. The way to pry that from them is to give them veteran depth, a young player in Lauri, and to relieve them of Wiggins contract. Like you said, there isn't much left to sign, so nothing wrong paying someone the money right now. Wiggins doesn't really fit with the Warriors.

    Lauri/Thad/Sato/Temple for Wiggins/Pascal/Looney/Wolves 1st works

    They can pair Green with Lauri and Thad with Wiseman. They wouldn't need Pascal or Looney with that depth. Temple could start at SG with Wiggins gone, and Sato would give them a veteran bench PG which they lack. They get better. We get young assets. It works for both teams. In the short term, we probably lose more games with all our vets gone. That improves our pick this year, with that Wolves pick holding value in 2022 if it doesn't clear the protections this year.

    Curry/Temple/Oubre/Green/Lauri
    Sato/Lee/Bazemore/Thad/Wiseman

    Adding Thad and Sato to their bench, and a shooter like Lauri to their starting lineup would take a lot of pressure off of Curry. They also wouldn't be at the mercy of Wiseman's foul trouble with that big man depth.
    Why would the Warriors do that? I'm sure they can package that pick with other things and get a actual star player.

    Let's just say they do it though, What message are you sending to Lavine? You think he stays when you are trading talent for picks and not pieces to help him as he is entering his prime?

Posting Permissions

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