Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: eddog2 May 10 2007, 11:19 PM

Here's how Kirk stacks up against other PG in the league.

7 games of the playoffs,

Kirk Hinrich

37.8% FG, 10.57 PPG, 5.85 APG, 9-28 from 3 (32%), 6 stls (.85 stls) (The only thing he's done well is shoot free throws. But he can't even draw fouls effectively. He's gone to the line 11 times in 7 games. That's just stupid. Quit being a girl and get some contact down low.)


Baron Davis

26.3 PPG, 54% FG, 43.5% 3pt, 6.0 APG, 2.0 SPG (51 free throw attempts)


Deron Williams

18.0 PPG, 44.9% FG, 25.8% 3pt, 9.0 APG, 1.22 SPG, (37 free throw attempts)

Steve Nash

18.7 PPG, 46.1% FG, 45% 3pt, 13.4 APG, (29 free thows)


It's just rediculous that the most important player on our team gets outplayed this bad by the premiere PG's in the league. I don't mind the scoring but the other stuff he is/isn't doing is hurting our team.

Either Kirk needs to go or we need to find a PG and move him to SG. I prefer that he just go in some package with Nocioni and then we draft Mike Conley. However, maybe we just need to trade Kirk & Gordon b/c Mike Conley/Gordon would be a even smaller backcourt.

We need a true playmaker or a PG that makes plays for others. Right now we have neither and that's why we can't get over the hump. So I say make some bold moves now or we are going to be in this situation for several years. Unless we get the number 1 or 2 pick and we get a playmaker, we are going to have to rely on hitting jumpers to win. And without a PG to create open jumpers at will it will be hard to win titles. I pray for the number 1 or 2 pick but if not Kirk has to go.

No only will he be very overpaid next year, but he hasn't really shown any improvement in his game other than hitting the 3 at a better clip. His assits haven't gotten better, I would argue that his defense hasn't really improved. Nothing about his game other than his shooting % showed improvement. At least with Gordon and Deng you could see the improvement. He's turning 26. I really don't see him becoming a premiere PG. So trade him will his value and contract are relatively high and start this thing over before you waste 3 more years off Wallace and Deng.

Posted by: rangercal May 10 2007, 11:31 PM

Keep this core:
Wallace C
Deng SF
Tyrus PF
Thabo SG
Lottery Pick


see what you can get for a Gordon/Hinrich and Nocioni Deal.

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII May 10 2007, 11:38 PM

holy overeaction batman

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 10 2007, 11:39 PM

God, could we come up with some higher standards? Maybe we should trade Gordon because he isn't Kobe or Wade, or trade Deng because he isn't Lebron or McGrady. Geez, even Davis sucked until like the last two months, what with the constant injuries, poor shooting percentages, and all around Marbury-like numbers without wins.

No, Kirk is not a top 5 PG, but he's not totally awful either. Just be glad we don't have Derek Fisher or Speedy Claxton as our starting PG.

Conley MIGHT be better in the long run, but it's unlikely he'll be that great as a rookie. He's got nice vision and quickness, but he's pretty undersized and his jumper leaves a lot to be desired. He's going to either need to bulk up a fair amount to take the pounding in the lane or have Iverson-like toughness. Plus playing with Oden tends to help your cause a little...

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII May 10 2007, 11:42 PM

This team just needs a solid post player to take the pressure off the guards...

Posted by: ChWRoCk2 May 10 2007, 11:47 PM

<----------------------------





or Hawes.

I actually think we could use some taller guard that can man up kinda like Corey Brewer.
- Of course if we took him which is unlikely you could assume someone is traded from our many guards we have.
- I just love this kid, outstanding on pressuring defender and improving on offense.

I kinda hope with our 3 second round draft picks that we use them to somehow trade up to round one to get a post player towards the end of round one, how we go about doing this Im not sure but there seems to be numerous options of post players in this draft that can score.

Posted by: eddog2 May 10 2007, 11:50 PM

We don't need a solid post player, we need a great post player. There is a difference. An all-star quality post player will maybe put them over the hump but just an average post player isn't going to change things much in the windy city.

As for Kirk, I don't want an average PG. You need an average PG when you have Kobe or Wade. You need a star PG when your team is built with a bunch of complementary scorers and up and coming talent. I've said it since Kirk was a rookie and I'll continue to say it until he proves otherwise, the guy is not a real PG. He's a SG much like Gordon who is not tall enough or good enough (although Gordon is good enough to score) to be a great scorer in the league. His passing leaves a lot to be desired. His playmaking leaves even more to be desired.

I would love to trade him and get Conley. Maybe even package him and Gordon or Nocioni (or all 3) for Al Jefferson, Rajon Rondo, & Ratliffs expiring contract. Would Ainge go for that? Rondo is not a great shooter but he's a better passer and he's only going to get better. Not to mention he can drive to the basket with ease. He's super quick and gets steals in bunches by playing the passing lanes.

Posted by: ChWRoCk2 May 11 2007, 12:01 AM

Conley would be a great pick I must admit.

Beyond Al Jefferson/Rondo which I just dont see why Celtics would move him (Jefferson in general) since he is one of their younger center pieces, I know the Knicks are trying to get rid of Channing Frye/Nate Robinson.

Both contracts are pricy but Frye is 6'11" still young and fills the need of a post player who can score. Robinson I cant say I pay all that much attention, we all know he can dunk, I know he was great at Washington. Knicks might even consult us since we have been trade partners with them in the past.

All of this banks on if we dump some contracts (Malik, PJ?, Victor who doesnt even play, etc)

Just another option.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 11 2007, 12:04 AM

Kirk is not an "average PG". "Average" point guards don't average 16 and 6 every year. He's not a superstar dynamo but he's more than capable of being a starting point guard on a contender.

Not a chance we get Jefferson, they'd want A LOT if they were going to trade him. 22 year old double-double post guys that still haven't hit free agency just don't get traded very often.

Conley is not "the savior", we're not suddenly going to be a 60-win team if we draft him. He MIGHT be there in 2 years, of course by then some of our core could price themselves onto another roster.

Posted by: eddog2 May 11 2007, 12:16 AM

I'll pass on both. Especially Nate. Frye is decent but he just really didn't impress me much this year. In his first season his stock was through the roof. Too bad Zeek didn't trade him then.

As for Jefferson, your probably right (but I doubt he's untouchable). If they get Oden or Durant they might want to think about starting over and trying to win titles sooner. I know Ainge loves Durant so that's probably who he's taking if he has a chance. If he gets Durant, you'd have to assume he'd want to move Pierce but with that contract that's not likely. Probably the only way to move Pierce is to throw Jefferson in a deal.

Wally is also a player who is making too much on their team but who is not likely to be worth much in a trade. Ratliff's expiring contract is big and if he ever plays again could be a nice addition to the Bulls. If not he comes off the book in the year the Bulls need relief the most (to sign Deng and Gordon if he's still around).




Kirk in my mind has already priced himself onto another roster b/c he doesn't have the game to make $11 million. Gordon shouldn't make that much and if he does then he should be gone as well. We have to keep Deng and we likely can't trade Wallace so it will be hard to keep everyone.

As for Conley, you underestimate what he's going to do in the league. He's going to set the league on fire if not his first year then his second year like Deron or for sure in his 3rd. Either way, he's going to be way better than Kirk in the long run and for me that is enough to start making bold changes. However, if we get him I think both Kirk and Gordon have to go b/c if a Kirk/Gordon backcourt is too small Gordon/Conley will make them look like giants. We need to trade Kirk/BG to get a great SG or a great PF. That means T-mac or KG or someone like Al Jefferson/& and expiring contract. .

Conley threw up better numbers as a freshman then Williams did. He shot 52%. His outside shot isn't there but he's a pass first PG and a damn good one at that. 6.1 assists to only 2.2 turnovers. 2.2 steals per game. All as a freshman. Those are some rediculous stats. What did Kirk average? Kirk had a better sophmore season then he did Junior or Senior in terms of distributing the ball. His soph year he averaged 6.9 assits, his junior year 5.02 and his senior year 3.5. Did they realize something then that the Bulls haven't. That he's not a real PG and he should be playing SG?

Get the trade done Paxson. We'll still have Thabo at SG/PG and Duhon at PG. With a year of work in the offseason, Thabo should be much improved. We might need to add a good 3 point shooter off the bench but I'm sure we could find one if we look hard enough.

And for the record "60 win teams" don't mean anything unless you get it done when it matters. Just ask the Mavs.

Posted by: scatterbrain May 11 2007, 04:30 AM

Now I am not saying that anyone on our team is irreplaceable, but I figured I'd make your statements a little more logical. I took Kirk this year and compared him with who I thought would be your top choice out of the current all-stars you compared him with (in the same year of their career). Did the same with Ben. Reason he wasn't compared with Kobe or Lebron I am assuming are obvious.

Kirk Hinrich
year 4:
80 80 35.5 .448 .415 .835 0.4 3.0 3.4 6.3 1.2 0.3 2.39 3.40 16.6
Steve Nash
year 4:
56 27 27.4 .477 .403 .882 0.6 1.6 2.2 4.9 0.7 0.0 1.82 2.20 8.6
Now... he switched teams after 2 years. So to be very nice here is Nash after 4 years with Dallas and 6 total:
82 82 34.6 .483 .455 .887 0.6 2.5 3.1 7.7 0.6 0.0 2.79 2.00 17.9


Ben Gordon
year 3:
82 51 33.0 .455 .413 .864 0.4 2.7 3.1 3.6 0.8 0.2 3.04 3.10 21.4
Tracy McGrady
year 3:
79 34 31.2 .451 .277 .707 2.4 4.0 6.3 3.3 1.1 1.9 2.03 2.50 15.4

Stats are not the only thing to consider, but they definitely aren't unimportant. I make wrong decisions all the time in general , but I'd be happy with those guys. Stars have to start somewhere. I wouldn't die if we got rid of either (regardless of my avatar and sig, lol), but I think we can continue to develop them if Paxson and company choose that route and contend for titles. As for turnovers... 2.39 and 3.04 (respectively) isn't exactly awful. One would assume our staff, playing time with each other (which in my mind includes not breaking up the young core of the team), and general experience would bring those averages down some. They are kids in the biggest sport situation of their life and choked a little (or quite a bit) against the team in the east. I'm going back to bed for an hour or two... it's Friday!

Posted by: scareybullsfan May 11 2007, 06:00 AM

Wrong.


Wrong, wrong, wrong.


Wrong.


Wow, you are so wrong.


Wrong.

Let me guess, you're going to tell me to get that spiff out of here? Where did you even come up with that moronic euphemism.

Wrong.

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise May 11 2007, 07:29 AM

I like your idea if only there was some way we could lose kirk and draft Mike Conley. Dude is quicker than hell. He doesn't get rattled even as a freshmen yet but I think he could step in right away and help out an NBA team. We could use Kirk to get a bigman in a package deal maybe.

Posted by: eddog2 May 11 2007, 08:36 AM

Why don't you post an opinion of why I'm wrong instead of this bullshit post. I love when people try and say your wrong but don't have anything good to say to back it up. Let me guess! You love George Bush for that same reason.

Take your 28 posts and come up with something better. Something that takes a little more thought. I'm being realistic. The Bulls need changes. If they don't have a star they need a better PG to create shots. It's that simple. You can try and avoid it and disagree with the players I think will improve the Bulls but don't post BS like this.

Posted by: Balta1701-B May 11 2007, 09:51 AM

If Mr. Conley falls to our pick, this type of talk would make sense. First of all, I seriously doubt that even in this draft, he's going to fall to # 8 or #9. There are just too many teams that need a point guard, and he's going to be the #1 point guard on everyone's board, which means we'd be dealing something to move up and get him.

The nice thing about dealing Mr. Hinrich is that because of his salary, we'd have to get a $10 million a year guy back for him. While there are a lot of guys making $10 mil a year who don't deserve it, there are some who do, and hopefully that'd be what we'd wind up with.

That said, Mr. Hinrich is far from the most overpaid player in the league, and is far from a bad starting point guard to have. He's not the #1 in the league offensively, but he may well be the #1 or #2 point guard in the league defensively (I think it probably comes down to him or Chauncey).

No matter how disappointing this series is...this is not a time to panic. 49 wins, best since the dynasty years. 2nd round of the playoffs. And that's with a 37 year old power forward, a 19 year old power forward behind him, a 21 year old talented SF, and a 23 year old tiny shooting guard. This team is only going to get better.

Posted by: patman1868 May 11 2007, 09:58 AM

I dont see why the bulls would trade Hinrich when Gordon is a much better person to offload. When Gordon does not score he is basically useless on the floor. He does not play any defense at all, and does not make real good choices with the ball, and he forces a lot bad shots. Gordon would also probably draw more interests from teams than Hinrich. I would try to package maybe like Gordon/ Nocioni and possibly the first rounder and see what the can get.

Posted by: scareybullsfan May 11 2007, 10:19 AM

Wow.

You try to insult me about liking George Bush, then take a shot at me because I only have 28 posts. I really don't have to tell you why you're wrong when you're trying to win arguements that way. But I will anyway...

Conley is an unproven commodity. I agree that he will probably become a very good point guard, but he's shorter then Hinrich and we don't know for sure how well he really will do. I would wager that he will not contribute a lot next year at least. Heck, Jay Williams was supposed to be a phenom and he had a very mediocre first year. The Bulls are taking a step back next year if they were to replace Hinrich.

You're not even looking at the problem. It's quite obvious that the Bulls need a big man that can draw double teams. Trading Hinrich is not going to bring in that type of guy. If you're trading away anything more then Hinrich then you are completely revamping the team which a 49 win team should not be doing (especially one so young).

To me, trading Hinrich and drafting Conley is making a move just to make a move. It doesn't make any sense and actually puts the Bulls in a hole for next year.

If they can't find a way to aquire the big man they need, then they have to chose from three options.

1. Draft and develop a young post player. There's plenty of them in this draft and the Bulls should be able to secure at least one.
2. Wait on Kevin Garnett. You know if the Bulls clear some cap space, Kevin Garnett will be salivating to join a team of such talented parimeter players in his previous home town.
3. Both 1. and 2.

I know you want instant gratification, but grow up and think about what's best for the team. Conley will not even provide that instant gratification. Plugging the little holes rather then the big gaping holes is not what's best for this team.

Posted by: eddog2 May 11 2007, 10:34 AM

Now that's the type of post you should have come with the first time.

I know drafting Conley might set us back a year but I really don't think this team is going to win a title in the next couple of seasons the way it is currently constructed. Kirk is going to be making too much. Unless we get a #1, 2 pick we're not going to get the all-star or post player (if not top 3) we are looking for unless Yi really does drop and proves to be worth it.

A big man that demands a double is a pretty great big man. I don't think there are many of those in this draft. Oden for sure but who else is a for sure big man that is going to require a double team and create more open looks for his team?

I like Conley and he's going to be a stud unless he gets hurt like Jay Wil! Conley really knows how to control tempo and find the open man. Plus he proved in the tourney that he can drive and create his own offense. He's only going to get better. The problem I have with Kirk is I really don't see him getting better. He's been with the team for 4 years and I haven't seen much improvement w/ the exception of his shooting %. I know Conley's shorter and that's why I think Gordon would need to go as well. Everyone already agrees that Gordon doesn't play defense so why not make Thabo our SG and trade Kirk and Gordon for something big. Again, you only trade the 2 if you can bring in all-star talent. Maybe Amare, Jefferson or Tmac. Something like that. I'm not talking about having a fire sale for second round picks and some scrubs.

There comes a point when a young team reaches its potential. The Bulls aren't there yet but it's obvious that Deng is your best young talent. Gordon's good and is improving as well but Deng is probably the piece that you need to build around. Deng's game is better suited to having a PF and a great PG that can score and create more open looks for him. Kirk's not a great PG that's all I'm saying. If we really want to keep Kirk we need to find a true PG and switch Kirk to SG and move Gordon to the bench or to another team.

Posted by: Balta1701-B May 11 2007, 10:36 AM

I really don't see any possible way that the Bulls can get Kevin Garnett as a Free Agent. KG's opt-out is after the 2007-2008 season. In other words, we'd need cap space next year, and we simply won't have that. Deng and Gordon would have to be RFA's who were unsigned and the cap would have to go up a lot for that to happen.

On the other hand, a trade for Garnett is still a possibility. The problem though is that the Bulls need something to match salaries. The one nice thing the Bulls may be able to use is the contract of say, a Kirk Hinrich. If the Bulls wanted to go after any big-salary guy, like a Garnett, Gasol, etc., right now, they would have to include either Hinrich or Wallace in order to match the salaries. Either that, or a sign-and-trade with another of our guys. In that case, drafting a Conley would make sense, if he fell. I still don't see Conley lasting until our pick though.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 11 2007, 10:37 AM

I really don't think I am, I watched OSU play about as much as any team in the league. Does he have the potential to be a very PG? Sure. But he's not as good as guys like Chris Paul or Deron Williams when they were coming out. His jumper isn't even close to where those two were, and I wasn't as impressed with his passing as those guys either. He looks like more of a Tony Parker style PG than an assist-machine like some of these other guys, his biggest strength was his scoring ability on the drive (which as I mentioned will be tougher to do in the NBA). Like most point guards (Nash and Billups are just a few), he'll likely need some time, especially coming in after only one college season. Having Greg Oden catching your lobs tends to make your distributing easier, as well as several capable spot up shooters. I also find it quite funny that you're gushing over those assist/turnover ratios when that's almost EXACTLY what Kirk does IN THE NBA.

The assists dropped because the makeup of the Kanas roster changed dramatically, it has nothing to do with Kirk's abilities. Early in his career they were a loaded team, they had Gooden and Collison up front and Jeff Bochee as the other guard to handle more of the scoring load. Later in his career there Kirk and Collison were the only good scorers and the other starters were Aaron Miles (more defense/distributing guard that couldn't score much), Michael Lee (another defensive guy), and a still developing Waybe Simien (who also got hurt in 2003 and missed most of the year, forcing them to play more scrub-like players). He couldn't afford to be a pass-first guard with that roster, otherwise they'd have scored about 40 points per game.

Posted by: eddog2 May 11 2007, 10:42 AM

I wasn't excited about the assist to turnover ratio I just was proving a point that even though he is only a freshman he already knows how to take care of the ball and distribute. He jumper needs a lot of improvement but he still shot 51% from the field. I'll take that until his jumper comes around.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 11 2007, 10:43 AM

No, they still need a big man regardless. You can put Steve Nash at the point and they still won't have a title, as the Two-Time MVP has proven several times on good rosters in Dallas and Phoenix.

An elite PG helps, but is not a pre-requisite. Here's a fun little experiment: What do the following players have in common: Steve Nash, Jason Kidd, Baron Davis, Deron Williams, Chris Paul, John Stockton?

It's a rather simple answer: they have ZERO rings between them (It's a little unfair to include Williams and Paul, but they're not even close to winning one, so tough luck.). Billups and Parker are the only even remotely close to elite point guards that have one in the last 15 years or so, and they had the two Wallaces and Duncan on their teams.

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII May 11 2007, 12:21 PM

Um are you watching the western playoffs... Willilams is about as close to winning one as anyone.

Posted by: Sanitarium May 11 2007, 02:18 PM

I would actually be in favor of getting rid of Duhon... doubt anyone wants him though.

Posted by: soxfan3530 May 11 2007, 02:57 PM

Im not in favor of panicking and blowing this thing up. Having said that......a Gordon and Noc trade for Pau Gasol and then a draft pick of Mike Conley would be hard to pass up:

PG/SG Mike Conley
SG Kirk Hinrich
SF Loul Deng
PF Pau Gasol
C Ben Wallace

Bench:
Thabo Sefolosha
Tyrus Thomas
Chris Duhon
etc. etc.

That is pretty nice but I still like our current team. They are only going to get better.

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise May 11 2007, 03:54 PM

I'll take Tony Parkerish over Kirk Hinrich

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 11 2007, 10:47 PM

Utah has a very slim chance of getting by the winner of the Suns/Spurs series, and then there's probably Detroit to deal with in the Finals, who looks about as good as anyone. Plus most of those solid teams out west aren't going to get much worse.

In order to have a real shot, they need to figure out what to do with their quartet of frontcourt players (Boozer/Okur/Kirilenko/Millsap). Probably one of them needs to go, and they need to add a scoring wing that can hit the three. Kirilenko probably makes the most sense.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 11 2007, 10:58 PM

I don't really see a POSSIBLE Tony Parker in 2 years as all that big an upgrade, especially since I used that as more of a style comparison. I don't see Conley being quite that effective a scorer, he doesn't seem to want to force the issue enough. He'll likely be better in the passing lanes and be a bit more effective as a passer, but I don't expect 18+ points per game with that insane field goal percentage in his future (more like 12, or maybe 16 if the percentage drops a bit).

You still likely wouldn't have the true pass-first point guard that is going to rack up 8+ assists regularly, and Parker would look a lot less sexy (on the court I mean, I don't swing that way ) if he was playing on a team that didn't have Duncan. The improved shooting percentage would definitely be nice (assuming Conley can keep it up in the pros, no guarantee there), but I don't see the differential in the win column being more than a handful of games. In the grand scheme of things I don't really see that being worth setting the team back a couple of years. I wouldn't be aversed to drafting him if the good big men are gone, but we'd need to groom him for a few years before turning over the reigns.

Posted by: Balta1701-B May 13 2007, 12:00 AM

I think there would probably be some serious demand for Mr. Duhon if he could stay healthy and he was put on the market. He's not going to net you a top of the NBA player, but I would say his name has come up in trade discussions for years for a reason; he doesn't have to be a great point guard to be a major asset to some teams. Just cut down on their turnovers and play good defense.

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII May 13 2007, 09:59 AM

better just cancel the playoffs and crown the spurs then, :roll

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 13 2007, 03:16 PM

Um, that's not exactly what I said.

Posted by: SoxFan1 May 13 2007, 04:28 PM

I think we should definitely trade Kirk following today's abysmal performance.

Posted by: chilord May 13 2007, 04:34 PM

LOL. Come on now, let's just celebrate a win and keep 'em above the belt.

One game at a time.

Posted by: SoxFan1 May 13 2007, 04:42 PM

I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII May 13 2007, 05:01 PM

As long as we are serving up crow. Now that Skiles has decided Tyrus is a solid crunch time option... is he still f-ucking overrated?

I'd say he is rated about right.

Posted by: Bullseye May 13 2007, 10:07 PM

What type of player do you think we could get from Lottery pick, Nocioni, and Duhon (or another backup/role player)?

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise May 13 2007, 10:17 PM

Jermaine Oneal at best, not that I'd want him.

Posted by: SoxFan1 May 13 2007, 10:20 PM

That's a long shot. JO for 2 bench players and a late lottery pick? That would be a steal for Pax and if that was on the table, he'd be an idiot to pass.

Posted by: eddog2 May 13 2007, 10:26 PM

I admit he played good today (although he did nothing in the 4th to help the cause). However, consistency is what separates the boys from the men the stars from the average Joe.

Kirk has the skill in him to be good at times but why can't he do it every game? He made great decisions in the first 3 quarters but I'm not going to say he played excellent all game long. Either way, I hope he plays this well the rest of the series and the rest of his career (if he's on the Bulls).

When Kirk plays like this for 4 or 5 straight games you let me know. I'll be waiting a couple of years for the call!

Posted by: RME JICO May 14 2007, 06:46 AM

Hinrich might not be good on the offensive end, but he makes up for it on the defensive end.

I would trade Gordon or Noc before trading Hinrich. Gordon can't guard anyone and shooting 39% is not too good either.

The Bulls are still a year or two away from dominating the league, but it is only a matter of time. They have a solid young core, and there will be some extra money available with PJ Brown's contract expiring.

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII May 14 2007, 06:59 PM

Then exactly what did you mean when you said deron williams isn't close to winning a championship?

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 14 2007, 08:01 PM

I basically said that there are 3 teams left that all look better than Utah, and that they'd have to beat 2 of them unless Detroit chokes. I never even said that I thought for sure the Spurs would get by the Suns (though I do think that will happen).

Posted by: eddog2 May 15 2007, 03:19 PM

I think the Suns are going to win that series. I also wouldn't be surprised if the Warriors come back to win their series. I know they have their backs against the wall but I think they can pull it out. They should have won the first 2 games.

Posted by: Sense-A May 15 2007, 08:37 PM

threads like this are stupid. You're talking about trading away out best player. He played on the USA olympic team for f-ing sakes. Our playoff drive isn't even over. its 3 games to 2 now. Next game is at the united center thursday night. One win at home and its tied 3-3. I didn't hear any fat lady sing. If you were general manager of this team we'd be sh*te. leave it up to paxson and skiles

Real Bulls fans don't just ship young talented players off because we're down one game in a playoff series! We're a playoff contender! not some slum bum team. We just swept the defending champions that we nearly beat last year! The management knows what they are doing as far as trades so why don't you just be a fan because thats the only thing you could be good at. Yet you aren't even so good of a fan to so easily turn your back on our best players.

Posted by: SoxFan1 May 15 2007, 09:03 PM

Please post more.

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII May 15 2007, 09:04 PM

2 down.... 2 to go

Posted by: madisonsmadhouse May 16 2007, 11:55 AM

The irony is without Kirk Hinrich, the rest of the Bulls are making tee times today.

Posted by: Sense-A May 16 2007, 07:09 PM

amen

Posted by: eddog2 May 16 2007, 10:59 PM

I'm not going to start questioning who the real fans are (b/c I'm probably the most die hard type fan out there) but I will challenge this post. Our best players are Gordon, Deng and Wallace. In a couple of years it will likely be Deng, Gordon, and Tyrus. Kirk is good but he's not our best player. He's more like 3rd. Anyway, I never said he doesn't have any game. I said he's never going to be a dominate star PG. He might make an all-star team or two. Just b/c he's on the olympic team doesn't mean spiff to me. Did we win in the olympics with him? He only made the team b/c they wanted a good 3 point shooting PG/SG and a character guy. Otherwise they would have taken someone else with more skill. Kirk is good but he's not $11 million good and he's not a franchise starting PG that's going to be a game changer every night. Or at least he hasn't shown that yet. He's had basically the same impact for 4 straight years.

Believe me, I want the guy to succeed and be a star (especially with that new contract) but I can't wait my whole life and I don't think he ever will be on that level. Maybe I'm wrong and I very well could be but that's just my opinion. He's definately not a star yet and I don't care what anyone says who believes otherwise.

Gordon and Deng have both shown more improvement on a year to year basis than Kirk has and both are younger than Kirk. The Bulls don't have a dominate post player and they don't have a dominate go to guy that demands the double team. That's why I think Kirk needs to be traded. However, if they can get that guy somehow in the draft, via trade, or free agency this summer then I think we can win championships with just a very solid PG b/c we'll have that missing link. But the guy they get has to be a beast down low or a legit superstar type player. That's been the whole basis of my suggesting he be traded. I want the Bulls to win while Wallace is still on the team so that means 3 years probably more like the next 2 b/c his skills will continue to diminish.

And as for sweeping the defending champions, we didn't do it with much help from your boy Kirk. It was Deng and Gordon that carried that series. Even Thabo played better D than Kirk on Wade. But anyway, that's just one series and even I don't make decision based on one series. I've felt this way about Kirk after watching his game for the past few years. I didn't just make up my mind after one game.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik May 17 2007, 10:45 AM

While I agree that Kirk isn't our best player, I also think that he needs to stay unless you could get a KG type player that makes you a top contender, and those deals are going to be really hard for them to pull of now with PJ's contract off the books. Most of those type of guys make $16 mil+, so you'd still need a lot more money added (plus for those type guys they'd still probably demand Tyrus)...

Posted by: allbullz May 17 2007, 08:52 PM

I agree with the original poster, Hinrich needs to go. Problem is the rest of the league sees the same thing in him as we do: hard working complimentary player who's not quick, can't create his own shot, is streaky with his shot, can't guard physical guards and simply isn't worth much unless Tyrus or Sefolosha come with him.

Meantime, you can't trade Gordon away either. While he is too short to guard anybody, he excels at providing instant offense off the bench and can be an excellent option in the 4th Q when paired with a low post scorer who can draw a double team.

Posted by: scareybullsfan May 17 2007, 09:07 PM

No offense or anything, but you know nothing.

Posted by: scatterbrain May 17 2007, 09:08 PM

Now, I'll admit that I am totally biased considering that Kansas is my college team period. However, I just think we have other things to fix first. Primarily our low post game (a post-up scorer). If we have an opportunity to get a top-notch point guard I'd be all for it personally, but I wouldn't understand going after a Connelly or another small guard in the first round.

Posted by: eddog2 May 17 2007, 09:23 PM

I hope you know that guy b/c that's the same type of spiff that people said I should stay away from. You don't need to criticize someone's post or views on a specific issue. Believe what you want but don't say someone knows nothing.

Posted by: RME JICO May 17 2007, 09:37 PM

Hinrich is fine. He guards the other teams best guard all game and still had his 3rd straight double double. He is not one of the team's main scorers. That is Gordon and Deng. He does what he is asked to do. Gordon is a lot like Crawford - great pure shooter, but very little defense. Hinrich is not our problem. The problem is we don't have a true center, and no low post scorer. Hopefully we can solve both of those in the draft.

Posted by: SoxFan1 May 17 2007, 09:40 PM

I have an idea. We trade Tyrus Thomas and Viktor Khryapa for Lamarcus Aldridge...1st team, All-NBA Rookie Lamarcus Aldridge.

Posted by: eddog2 May 17 2007, 09:42 PM

Why so he can miss the playoffs with a heart problem?

Posted by: SoxFan1 May 17 2007, 09:53 PM

He missed the season as a precaution. The syndrome he is mostly asymptomatic and the possibility of sudden cardiac death are less than a tenth of a percent.

Posted by: scareybullsfan May 18 2007, 06:58 AM

Sorry.

When I see someone who says that Hinrich is:

-not quick(how many double teams did he split off of screens last night?)
-can't create his own shot(how many point guards are there that DO create their own shot? point guards are supposed to create shots for OTHERS)
-and can't guard physical guards(umm... he guards the likes of LeBron, Billups, and Wade with success and was picked for the US Olympic team because of his ability to defend)

I calls them like I sees them. He then proceeded to say that Gordon was only a force when he has a low post scorer... but he's never had a low post scorer in the NBA, right? Saying that Hinrich and Gordon are untradable is just a riciculous statement.

It was no offense intended, but they guy made a post with zero basketball knowledge included.

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise May 18 2007, 10:47 AM

Im still on the trade Kirk and or Ben bandwagon. We could probably get a quality big for either of the two. If Tyrus had a point guard who could pass the ball like Conley, he would excel. Kirk is a shoot first point guard which doesn't mesh well with a player like Tyrus.

As for Gordon, he is the definition of inconsistent which is why he most likely will be the one gone this offseason for a bigger 2 or hopefully a 4.

Posted by: AirScott May 18 2007, 12:30 PM

I'm on board with trading Ben Gordon, simply because of Hinrich's defensive ability. think, move Deng to play SG, Tyrus Thomas at SF, Pau Gasol (Kevin Garnett? - I wish) at PF and Ben Wallace at C...recipe for success or no? Kirk can distribute, contrary to your opinion, so he'd mesh fine with Ty Thomas.

Posted by: Butterbean10 May 18 2007, 03:17 PM

Kirk....it's hard for me to explain my opinion on this, but he seems like he's a newspaper reading, believe in the hype type player. And the writers in Chicago LOVE Captain Kirk. If he plays a good game, you better believe he will dang near single handedly blow the next one trying to do too much. During that 12-1 Piston run last nigth, his signature run and gun / fouls was all over that. And he has done it more times than I care to think of his whole career. Kirk is an average player with better than average defensive skills who happens to be on a team that thrives on defense. I really wouldn't mind keeping him, but not as a PG. And I do believe one of the two (Gordon) has to go. Either one would be fine with me; make room for Tabo who could be better than both of them with about 100 extra shots a practice...

Posted by: SoxFan1 May 18 2007, 06:55 PM

This Tyrus talk is making my brain hurt. Trade Kirk and/or Ben so we can pick a rookie guard who might make Tyrus play better?

Posted by: eddog2 May 19 2007, 12:42 AM

Damn, it's nice to see that people agree and I don't have to convince them of what I've been saying.

Anyway, if Gordon goes hopefully it will be for a very good big man. We could then either draft Conley and have a Conley/Hinrich backcourt or draft Brewer and have a Brewer/Hinrich/Sefolosha backcourt. That would be one great defensive rotation. Anyway, I really don't want to see Gordon go b/c he's improved so much each year. I really think we are a big man away from having his game explode to a new level. The same can be said of Deng. Either that or a real PG could help in that area. I've always said that I think Kirk should be a SG.

There are options there for the Bulls if they do decide to trade Gordon and keep Hinrich. Imagine getting a pass first PG that passes to a shoot first PG that knows how to pass (somewhat). That could throw a lot of defenses off balance if Kirk actually makes the extra pass. Only problem with trading Gordon is you trade away your only dominate scorer and then do you have trouble scoring? I can't say I want to rely on Kirk to bring home the W's in the 4th quarter. Hopefully, the PF we get can take care of that.

Posted by: Bullseye May 19 2007, 12:45 AM

I say keep the core + lottery pick, and get another decent veteran big via free agency or trade.

Posted by: Sanitarium May 19 2007, 09:50 AM

Trading Gordon would put all the scoring pressure onto Deng next season, yikes.