Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: MB33 Feb 1 2008, 02:13 PM

The Grizzlies have traded Pau Gasol to the Lakers for Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton and first-round draft picks in 2008 and 2010.

I think we could have made a better offer but pax is not the type of gm to pull the trigger!

Posted by: cars Feb 1 2008, 02:20 PM

Now we can take both Gasol and Kobe off of the moves to make....

Are there really any left?

Posted by: b-riann Feb 1 2008, 02:47 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3226203

now kobe wont opt out after the year, and now we wont get gasol. the grizz/lakers just killed our chances at either guy this year or next year

Posted by: Wanne Feb 1 2008, 02:47 PM

Good. I was never really in favor of Gasol anyway. Funny how low the Griz went for Gasol.

Who's left...good question. I see Pax making a play for Arenas in the off-season...and at least inquiring about DWade. Then hopefully bringing Brand back. All very doubtful though...but like you said...what's left out there. Maybe trying to pry away one of the Suns in the offseason....but wouldn't hold my breath on that one either.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 1 2008, 03:05 PM

That's pretty bogus, and I'm more than a bit annoyed. That seems to tell me that Noah or Tyrus, a couple of future picks (spiff, even this year's pick, that's got to have more value and we'll probably get another decent but not stellar player anyways) and a bunch of financial filler (Duhon/Khryapa/Brown sign and trade) would have gotten it done. It looks like when everyone got healthy you could have a lineup of Hinrich/Gordon/Deng/Wallace or Smith/Gasol and still have the other veteran big, Nocioni, Thabo, and either Noah or Tyrus coming off the bench. spiff man...

The only excuse I can think of is the Bulls/Brown/Memphis not being able to agree on a large enough 1 year deal in a sign and trade, and that seems like it'd be pretty minor.

Posted by: steve9347 Feb 1 2008, 03:30 PM

Chances of Kobe were already dead.

It's maddening that Pax didn't beat that deal. He should be run out of town at this point.

Posted by: MB33 Feb 1 2008, 03:59 PM

LA killed 2 birds with 1 stone they took gasol and now we wont have a shot at kobe or even a pitch because they are legit contenders with
fish
kobe
gasol
bynum
odom

and a bench that is pretty solid.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 04:00 PM

Is it possible that after a year and a half and half a year of bashing and not playing Tyrus and Noah, respectively, that other teams just don't want them any more?

Posted by: MB33 Feb 1 2008, 04:07 PM

This is more of a GM thing to even not be in contention of a trade is ludacris!No one in the bulls is untouchable we do not have a star and most of our guys are outside shooters including deng who is afraid to attack the rim.Noah though is looking decent,tyrus needs to play more so he can learn the ropes.If we were to rebuild AGAIN i would keep tyrus,noah,sefolosha.Deng needs a superstar next to him to get him to the next level.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 04:20 PM

I'm starting to think the exact same thing about this offseason...and I'm especially interested in what we might be able to get by packaging say, Gordon, the #10 pick or so, and maybe someone like Hinrich/Nocioni for salary reasons.

If this season stays true to form, then by my count, if we resign Gordon and Deng, we'll have 7 recent high draft picks on this roster, plus Smith, plus Wallace. (Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, Thabo, Tyrus, Noah, this year's pick). There's simply no way to divy up the minutes any more...we have to try to turn 2-3 of these guys into a higher level player. We have to move some depth in exchange for talent.

Posted by: MB33 Feb 1 2008, 04:29 PM

Definitely true we need to package a couple of those guys with picks if we dont make a move before the trading deadline.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 04:31 PM

The Grizzlies are also sending Stromile Swift to the Nets for Jason Collins.

Posted by: MB33 Feb 1 2008, 04:35 PM

I actually think if kidd stays which i doubt he will help stromile swift be a better player!

Posted by: DutheDoduhon21 Feb 1 2008, 04:35 PM

wow the grizz are busy. i would like to see the bulls make some moves. im glad the lakers traded for gasol, i didnt like the idea of gasol on the bulls.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 04:43 PM

I didn't either...but it's not like the Lakers gave up much here. At some point, when we've missed out on big guy after big guy moving, while meanwhile the young guys that we'd presumably move in a deal like that languish on the bench splitting 20 minutes a game, it's time for an explanation.

Posted by: Wanne Feb 1 2008, 04:46 PM

For who though...that's the $25,000 question. Who out there is a difference maker. Like I stated earlier I think with how the Wiz have played without Arenas they'll entertain offers for him. And quite honestly...the Heat are in rebuilding mode and depending on his health (and I've heard it's much worse than most people know) I think the Heat would entertain offers for Wade. Just what else is out there that would make a difference with this team? And another thing...is it worth giving up this years pick (and the Bulls should get a pretty decent one)...in what will be a VERY deep draft?!? Just don't see any difference makers out there right now worth giving up the pick (and a large package) to.

Posted by: MB33 Feb 1 2008, 04:46 PM

Gasol trade is a steal compare to what they got.We wouldnt have to give up any of our potential guys to get him if you really think about it.Give them an expiring contract a couple of throw ins and a draft pick.Pax needs to go!

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise Feb 1 2008, 05:18 PM

Lol I hate John Paxson, nuff said.

Posted by: eddog2 Feb 1 2008, 05:26 PM

What's next? Are the Lakers going to trade for Kidd and the Bulls act as a 3rd party to get the deal done? That's the only way this situation gets worse and the only way we get more screwed by Paxson's decisions or lack thereof.

I miss Tyson. But he's never coming back. If Paxson leaves the Bulls I won't be able to say the same thing about him.

Posted by: DutheDoduhon21 Feb 1 2008, 06:21 PM

i miss tyson too that was the worst move ever, but the way he is playing w/ the hornets we wont ever see him again. pax really needs to go he hasnt done anything right.

Posted by: sport1016 Feb 1 2008, 06:35 PM

the TRUTH is that Gasol is exactly 0-8 in playoff games.

the TRUTH is that Gasol's teams were of a similar make up with quality role players (Miller, Stoudmire, battier) but no other star

the TRUTH is that Paxson made a better offer for KG than the Celtics did.

but...

the TRUTH is that Paxson could have EASILY beat the Lakers offer without gutting our team.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 06:41 PM

But the question we need to ask Pax is...were the Grizzlies willing to take our offer for him even if we made a better offer? I.e. what were they asking for?

Posted by: Jeckle2000 Feb 1 2008, 06:44 PM

In my opinion this is the best thing that could of happened to the Bulls. Prevents John from bringing someone in who would never be a fit here and sure as hell wouldn't help us win anything. This is a happy day for me.

Posted by: steve9347 Feb 1 2008, 06:53 PM

My prediction. (OK it's actually Edwin's)

The Lakers are going to trade Lamar Odom in a deal for Jason Kidd. Lakers have always wanted him, he's always wanted them.

It's going to happen.

C Bynum
PF Gasol
SF Walton
SG Bryant
PG Kidd

It's going to happen.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 06:54 PM

While he might not have been a good fit here...giving up basically nothing for a guy who could give you 20/10 is usually a pretty good move, which is why the Lakers made it. I think the problem most people are having is that if the Lakers could get him for nothing other than cap relief pretty much, why in the world couldn't we give them cap relief and one player to make it happen?

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 1 2008, 08:04 PM

I'm choosing to avoid the whole Gasol thing because it just pisses me off, so I'll argue this...

How exactly is this a VERY deep draft? How many real impact players do you see in this draft? Maybe 5? Can the Bulls get an actual impact player if they end up around 8? I don't really see it, and that means it doesn't qualify as a really deep draft in my book. True, you've got a couple of wildcards with Arthur and Speights that are currently projected to go latter than they normally would, but it's also still quite early and not everyone is going to come out.

Plus as Balta and/or I have said a few times, as is we have virtually zero playing time for that younger regardless of position.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 08:59 PM

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-30-6/The-Memphis-Side-of-the-Story.html has an interview with things from the Memphis side. See if you buy it.

Posted by: Wanne Feb 1 2008, 09:18 PM

Well goodie for you and Balta. So for your condescending tone (which is pretty much a regular) here's some names for ya...

And with some one and dones from D1 in no order:

Beasley
Mayo
Rose
Gordon (who's a big wuss)
Maybe Love
Maybe Bayless
Maybe Donte Green
DeAndre Jordan
Darren Collison

And that doesn't include the Eurotrash that usually gets in the top 10 somewhere. Are these guys instant impact...maybe a handful...but it's a valuable pick and I'd still probably rather have anybody in the top ten instead of trading it for some lazyass eurodude who doesn't play defense worth a spiff. Whoopee...gasol scores 20/10 on a LAST PLACE TEAM!!!

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 09:46 PM

A lot of those guys would be useful, but the issue we're harping on is...they're not that useful if they're #3 in the guard rotation behind Gordon and Sef and getting 5-10 minutes a game for their first 2 years.

I'm indifferent on Gasol. I don't think he'd be the answer to our problems. But the one thing I can say without a doubt is not going to work is standing pat, resigning Deng and Gordon to big contracts, drafting high again, and watching as Thabo, Noah, TT, and whoever we take with that top 10 pick wind up struggling for 10 minutes a game. At some point, we either have to move our vets to clear room for the kids, or we have to pair up a couple of the kids together and use them to acquire someone of even more value. The middle road we're on now is a sure fire path to failure. That's why all I want right now is an answer from Pax as to what he was actually offering.

By the time next season starts, Pax will have no choice but to make some sort of deal. Simply standing pat with this group and trying a new coach won't do it, there's too much potential value buried on the bench hardly playing.

Maybe we'll get insanely lucky and someone like the Mavs or Suns will decide that their window may be closing soon and they need an extra big man to play defense against Gasol and Bynum now that the Lakers have that potential pairing come playoff time.

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise Feb 1 2008, 10:01 PM

hahahaha, that part made me lol!!

Posted by: Wanne Feb 1 2008, 10:12 PM

I understand that balta and completely agree. My point was giving up a couple of guys like Gordon and Tyrus PLUS the #1 pick would have been NUTS!!! Way too much value in that pick right now to give up for a guy like Gasol IMO.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 1 2008, 10:30 PM

For Gasol, on that I'd agree also, I wouldn't want to give up those 3 parts for Gasol, especially if we're looking at another pick around 7-10.

The problem I think a lot of people are having, which is understandable, is that the offer you just wrote down (Add in PJ Brown for the cap reasons) is a ton more than what the Grizzlies received in this deal. You could easily argue that Tyrus + our pick + PJ brown is more than the Lakers gave up, because Tyrus is a much higher pick than Crittendon and should clearly wind up a better player, same for Marc Gasol, and our pick this year would still likely be a lottery pick or close to it even with Gasol.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 1 2008, 10:49 PM

Yeah, because everything is Gasol's fault. It has nothing to do with them having PG play that was even worse than Hinrich most of the year, or no one inside that can play any defense (on the Bulls you'd still have Noah or Thomas long term and Smith and Wallace next to him for now, which is far better than Darko and nothing even as much as we gripe), or anyone off the bench that can do anything except for Navarro's shooting and Lowry basically playing like Thabo when Conley was healthy. He also basically carried a couple of brutal Memphis teams to the playoffs that had no business being there, and he gets critcized for not winning any just like Garnett did before their generally mis-managed team got him any help. No one said anything about giving up Gordon to get him either, the Lakers got him for Crittendon, cap space, and a couple of picks that will wind up in the 20's. Tyrus and a couple of future picks can easily match that.

The Bulls have been DESPERATELY needing a big man for several years now, and we could have had a pretty good one for next to nothing. Can you really tell me with a straight face that a lineup of Hinrich/Gordon/Deng/Wallace or Smith/Gasol with Nocioni, Noah/Tyrus, Thabo and the other veteran big off the bench isn't considerably better than Memphis (especially in the East), or quite a bit better than we have now? We'd be replacing a bench player averaging about 7 and 5 with a guy that produces around twice that and actually can draw some attention away from our perimeter players. He's not exactly old either, that core could stick around for a while. It may not be championship caliber without another tweak or two, but it's a hell of a lot better than sticking with what we have hoping we can build from within.

As for the draft, the first 4 would have value to us if we cleared some playing time for them, the rest not as much. Jordan is likely at least 2 years away. Love doesn't have the length or athleticism you look for in a big guy, so odds are good he'd be worse than Noah and/or Tyrus. Green would never play unless we dealt Deng, and even then he's just as jumper-happy as anyone else on our roster. Bayliss can score, but do we really need another Gordon-type player if he's not a mega-impact player like Eric Gordon or Mayo? Then you got Collison who'd just be a backup PG for us. Unless we get really lucky or REALLY suck the rest of the year we'll end up adding another decent but not stellar guy like we've been doing since 2001 that we don't have any room for and be basically the same mediocre team next year.

You can tell I'm not very happy about the Bulls right now.

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise Feb 1 2008, 11:00 PM

Honestly though, now with Gasol gone, who is even up to get traded (That we would want)? Certainly not Vince Carter or Jason Kidd.. I guess we are going to have to drag out this season and hopefully tank our way to a top 5 pick which will NEVER happen cuz there are some teams that are already miles behind us that will have those spots already handled.. Our realistic spot will be 10-15 which would suck hardcore. We need a superstar!

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 1 2008, 11:09 PM

That is a problem, there's no one else that's really going to help right now, at least not for a team that's still pretty young. It's hard to say who's going to be pissed at their team or visa-versa going into the off-season, but I would guess the best would be Kidd (if he doesn't get traded now), Artest or Bibby if they're still there, Jermaine O'Neal, Kirilenko, Marion in Phoenix (or arguably maybe Stoudemire, but less likely). I suppose there's an outside chance Michael Redd can go, but I kinda doubt that, same with T-Mac. Brand would be nice, but we'd have to clear a shitload of cap space for that, or workout a big sign and trade involving convincing them to take Wallace. Okafor could fit that too, or Smith/Childress from Atlanta.

There aren't a whole lot of really appealing options, and most of them would cost A LOT more as well. I'm just amazed that last year we'd have had to give up Deng and probably two of Gordon/Tyrus/Nocioni/Noah (pick at the time), and yet we don't pull the trigger when ONE of those young bigs and some picks would do it.

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise Feb 2 2008, 10:21 AM

Chicago Tribune -
According to Chicago Tribune columnist Sam Smith, Cleveland and Portland both had offers in with the Memphis Grizzlies in an effort to land 7-footer Pau Gasol, who was traded Friday to the Lakers.

According to Smith, the Lakers initially were offering Kwame Brown and Vladimir Radmanovic; the Cavaliers supposedly were offering Drew Gooden and Larry Hughes; and the Trail Blazers were believed to be offering Raef LaFrentz and Travis Outlaw.

The Grizzlies were chasing expiring contracts, however, which posed the problem.

Smith also writes that Chicago, the team who has been linked with Gasol for over a year, were dangling Andres Nocioni and Tyrus Thomas while the Grizzlies wanted Joakim Noah and Thabo Sefolosha.

While there was no official offer on the table, Smith writes that Memphis insiders believe that Chicago would have accepted the deal because none of their core were included, and the Bulls would have taken back a contract like that of Brian Cardinal.

Posted by: steve9347 Feb 2 2008, 11:33 AM

wtf? How did Pax not make that happen?

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise Feb 2 2008, 11:57 AM

Here is another interesting tidbit that pisses me off even more..

Can Jerry Reinsdorf please sell his share of the team? He obviously doesn't care about them as long as the United Center is selling out. It makes it extremely tough to be a competitor when you have a god damn owner that refuses to pay the lux tax. Go AWAY you douche!

Posted by: SoxFan1 Feb 2 2008, 03:25 PM

This isn't XBox 360. Reinsdorf is dealing with real money here. HIS money. I'm just saying...

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise Feb 2 2008, 03:35 PM

You have to be willing to spend alot of money nowadays to compete year in and year out and its obvious Reinsdorf doesn't want to do it. Funny how Boston, New York, and Los Angeles are willing to pay the Lux, but Chicago isn't..

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 2 2008, 06:45 PM

As a fan I'd really like to see the Bulls fork over whatever money is necessary, especially since the Bulls have sold out damn near every game since Michael's rookie year and they've had a lot of really low payroll years since Michael retired. I can understand the business side though, especially since he also owns the Sox. Their payroll has ballooned to previously unseen levels over the last few years, I believe they'll go into this season with a payroll around $115 mil. Combine that with the $65 mil or so ALREADY committed to the Bulls, and add a whole mess of money to get Gasol on top of it, and that's a lot to swallow, even if revenues for both teams are pretty high of late.

That doesn't make me any less pissed that they didn't do it though. Hell, if I knew it'd cost us Gasol I would have been a lot more upset about the deals to Dye, Linebrink, and Dotel. For those that don't follow the Sox, that's over $20 mil to a decent but not stellar OF'er that's starting to get old and two middle relievers. Yeah, having those guys helps the Sox, but having Gasol would help the Bulls a hell of a lot more.

Posted by: Chicago Bulls Franchise Feb 2 2008, 06:57 PM

Which is why I wish Reinsdorf should just stick with Baseball. He's already said he'd trade in any of the Bulls championships for just one world series championship with the Sox. Please leave and let somebody else take over so we don't have to deal with this anymore! I almost feel like Reinsdorf is somewhat using Paxson as his puppet; controlling all his moves, but we'll never know..

Posted by: Jeckle2000 Feb 3 2008, 10:04 AM

Please all of you people are bitching about a guy who wouldn't of done spiff here. We'd all be bitching about how much he sucked in a year. Because he was the farthest thing from a fit here possible... We are damn lucky this didn't happen.

Posted by: MB33 Feb 3 2008, 06:04 PM

well we could have had this guy for nothing and he would at least have a shot of filling some of our needs.

Posted by: TeaLeafReaderII Feb 4 2008, 09:33 AM

This no move is the difference between contending for the next couple years and rebuilding. Sure its a risk, but it is one that has the potential to pay off big. A tall guy who can score in the paint changes his team. Just look at the nights where PJ Brown forgets that his knees are held together by tooth picks and string. Gordon and Deng get more open looks that they can convert at a pretty good clip. Kirk gets more space to create offense, and pressure is removed from Wallace/Noah so they can focus on what they do best.

As soon as pitchers and catcher report, the Bulls become irrelevant. It didn't have to be this way.

Posted by: steve9347 Feb 4 2008, 10:15 AM

Pau Gasol doesn't fit with a team severely lacking inside scoring?

Posted by: steve9347 Feb 4 2008, 11:28 AM

I'm done with Reinsdorf as Bulls chairman. Had he approved the Tyrus/Noc deal (as rumored before and confirmed in http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=127347&src=150 article) the Bulls lineup looks much better, but it would have also allowed Pax the opportunity to move Wallace to the Lakers who were holding out for Gasol.

C Noah (assuming the Wallace deal below)
PF Gasol
SF Deng
SG Gordon
PG Hinrich

Had they done that it would have blocked the Lakers from Gasol as well, thus forcing them to take Wallace for cap relief at season’s end (with the rumored Kwame+ return). We’d have been very good this year and with the available cash from the Wallace deal by letting kwame go the Bulls would have been lined up to get that final piece in the offseason and match up with Orlando and Boston for best in the East.

It could have been rather easy if only Reinsdorf had been willing to do what owners in major markets that sell-out all the time are expected to do.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 4 2008, 12:11 PM

Let's put it this way. If I had to pick between the Lakers and the Bulls as to which team Gasol would fit in with better...I'd go with the Lakers, because of a couple guys. Specifically, Bryant and Bynum. Gasol doesn't have to be either the big, tough, powerful guy that controls the lane or the go to guy on the Lakers, because they have both of those jobs already filled. Gasol can get his because teams will have to focus on guys like Bryant, Bynum, etc. The Lakers have guys who compliment what Gasol does well.

The Bulls on the other hand, while they're missing inside scoring, don't seem to have guys who could take the pressure off of Gasol, especially this year, where our outside shooters have fallen apart. Last year might have been different, but right now the Bulls would basically be relying on Gasol to be their key guy, which I don't think he's ready to be. Wallace's dropoff has made it where the Bulls don't seem to control the lane at all until their bench players come in, and the collapse of our outside shooters has made it so that the kind of game we wanted to see them play might not work. Doesn't help to have Gasol if you feed him in the post, he passes out to Gordon/Noc, and those guys shoot like 35% from the field.

He'd have helped us. But he's more valuable to the Lakers. Does that make sense?

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 4 2008, 01:05 PM

While I don't necessarily disagree with that Balta, our perimeter players would have it a lot easier if teams have to actually respect one of our post players on offense. It's kind of hard to consistently get open/decent shots on the perimeter (unless you're a true elite talent obviously) when the most dangerous offensive player in the post is Joe Smith, and the rest have virtually no range/posting ability at all. Gordon and/or Deng basically have to force the issue every time right now (when they're both playing obviously), which hurts their efficiency. Right now you can cover every post player on the Bulls with one guy and they generally won't hurt you a whole lot if you leave them an open jumper, that's not the case anymore with Gasol on the roster. You have another guy that can get/create an open shot and converts at a pretty high percentage, which spreads out the burden a lot more. The offensive efficiency would DRASTICALLY increase because they'd often have 4 legit offensive threats to worry about (yeah, I'm counting Hinrich, even though he's having a bad year and can struggle) and they'd finally have an inside presence to balance their attack a bit. Not too many teams can say that.

Is it a perfect team? No, since you still don't have a sure-fire go-to guy or a top-20 type player (though Pau is 25th in PER even with the lowest total of his career thus far, that slow start really hurt his rating). However, you've got three well above average scoring options and Hinrich would be one of the better 4th options in the league. You'd have a setup that is arguably on par with Detroit the last few years once they develop some chemistry (and obviously when/if Noah develops into more of a stopper).

They'd be pretty well set to be a top-4 team in the East for several years and have a much better chance of beating the top-3 than they do now, especially down the road with the key players on Boston and Detroit starting to creep towards their mid-30's. Yes, I know the Gasol trade takes the Lakers from a competitive team with no real shot to win it to legit contender, but Gasol could easily take the Bulls from mid-lottery to darkhorse contender (especially in the East), which would be quite a boost as well.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 4 2008, 05:34 PM

So, http://www.suntimes.com/sports/basketball/bulls/775781,heisley020408.article has been going around all day. It sure makes it sound like the key problem was that the Bulls didn't want to pay the Luxury tax and the Lakers would have. The Grizz's owner also seems to suggest they wanted either Gordon or Deng from us (demanding a starter).

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 4 2008, 07:40 PM

Considering they didn't get any of the Lakers' 8 best players, I don't really think that was anywhere near as big a factor as the luxury tax/expiring contract issues.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 4 2008, 08:03 PM

Which, while I'll give Pax a break...pisses me off. A lot.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 5 2008, 11:48 AM

Thehttp://www.suntimes.com/sports/basketball/bulls/776668,CST-SPT-bullnt05.articlecomes out and says a bunch of things again:

Why is it that we keep winding up in the "We offered a better deal a year ago" spot on all these trades? What else can we do other than offer a better deal? Teams keep turning down deals from us and then taking worse deals down the road. Does that make sense for either side?

Posted by: steve9347 Feb 5 2008, 02:27 PM

Yeah, I don't really know what to say to that. GMs are allowed to wait a bit longer if they want, and had Pax wanted the deal he could have made that offer again and it would have been taken.

Fact is he rightfully did not want to deal Noah.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Feb 5 2008, 09:13 PM

Thought I'd throw this link into the discussion:

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=Gasol-080205

Basically it sounds like Memphis' GM shouldn't really have a job, as he included numerous realistic deals with other teams that would have been at worst on par and likely better. It also lists numerous suggestions of poor judgement/attempts to get the best deal, including making the trade too early, not returning some phone calls, and drastically reducing the asking price less than two weeks before the deal.

Posted by: eddog2 Feb 5 2008, 09:43 PM

We can assume all we want. We can assume Paxson offered Gordon or Nocioni or something else for Gasol but we'll never know for sure. One week they are having talks then another Paxson says the teams really haven't talked. Maybe they were using the Bulls all along to try and increase the value. Had the Bulls offered Gordon and another good piece or Nocioni/Tyrus then I bet Memphis would have jumped all over it. But I don't think the Bulls ever did that. Paxson has a love for his young boys. They are cheap (for the time being) and that's what makes Jerry happy. The Bulls and management won't learn or be forced to act until the house isn't being sold out each day. Honestly, I don't see that happening so I'm praying the Bulls get lucky in the draft. Otherwise we might not have a star for some time to come.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 5 2008, 10:22 PM

I think there's 1 thing that I feel safe in saying with some confidence, not just assuming...based on not only my own eyes, but the reports out of those other GM's, I think it's safe to say that the Grizzlies did not get the best package they could have gotten for Gasol if they had shopped around at all.

Posted by: Balta1701-B Feb 8 2008, 09:37 PM

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/basketball/nba/02/08/popovich.grizzlies/index.html