MikeDC's Blog

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Rating 0
 | Category: Bulls
entry Apr 9 2008, 11:11 AM
I'm sure this will go over well here, but when I was thinking about the Bulls today, it occurred to me that our major problems seemed to start with resigning Nocioni and our solutions probably start with getting rid of him.

If they'd simply let Noc go to Memphis, or better yet, managed to get a future pick, they would have:

1. Made finances less of an issue when it comes to re-signing Ben and Lou, and thus, even if they hadn't signed extensions, there wouldn't be quite the same context there is now (arguing about a rapidly diminishing fund pool when Noc is sitting there with more than he deserves).

Our current players aren't morons. I think they saw the bad decisions of the past couple years themselves, saw the implications for themselves, and became distracted. At this point, you've got a situation that's feeding on itself. Everyone looks around and wonders if they're going to be here or even what their role is. That's understandable, but at the same time it has to be distracting, even for players that are pros who work hard.

And resigning Nocioni was a big part of that. We paid him way too much and that's figured into everyone else's expectations of what they're worth(if "Noc is worth that much, I must be worth even more") and what's available to go around (everyone knows there's less).

2. Moving him would have forced us to sink or swim with Thabo and Tyrus. The prevailing sentiment, I think, is that they would have gotten their feet under them quite a bit earlier, and we might have pulled out of our early season funk. Obviously no sure thing, but still...

3. It would have left enough luxury tax maneuvering room to consider something like the Gasol trade. In short, more flexibility.

In short, if we'd simply let Noc walk, or (better yet) managed something like wrangling a conditional pick or young player on a cheap contract (like Kyle Lowry) from Memphis when they wanted Noc, we'd likely be in a better position with respect to this past disaster of a season.

Likewise, I think our solutions for the future begin with getting Nocioni off the books.

Consider our overpaid guys. Nocioni, Hinrich and Hughes all, to some extent, are pretty obviously overpaid. While I "like" him better than Hughes out of these guys, Nocioni is clearly the most expendable. If he goes then you've cleared up the problem of Thabo and Tyrus' playing time to a large degree. We'd be left with

1- Hinrich, Gordon
2- Hughes, Gordon, Thabo
3- Deng, Thabo
4- Gooden, Tyrus
5- Noah Gooden

Which is a somewhat workable looking rotation. What's more important is that Noc and Kirk's contracts are a lot longer than Hughes'. We're in a position to simply wait Hughes out. Even if we re-sign Gordon and Deng, we'll be under the cap by a pretty significant amount in 2010 if we can move Kirk or Noc. Thus, why expend an asset (like a draft pick) to move Hughes off the books? If we're going to use a draft pick to move someone, it ought to be Nocioni or Hinrich.

Now, would it be better to move Nocioni or Hinrich? Well, look again at the rotation. While Kirk has been downright awful this year, the truth of the matter is he's still the best PG material we've got. In fact, he's the only PG material we've got. Move him and we're looking at Gordon, Thabo, Hughes, and a rookie? That's not good. Plus you've still got the frontcourt logjam issue.

So bottom line is Nocioni should be the top priority to be traded. He's a higher priority than Hughes because his contract is longer and thus screws up the potential for cap space, and he's a higher priority than Hinrich because he's simply much more replaceable.

Trackback URL

Trackbacks for this entry

There are no Trackbacks for this entry

« Next Oldest · MikeDC's Blog · Next Newest »

Comments

post Apr 9 2008, 12:25 PM
Comment #1


Member
****

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 1,748
Joined: 24-May 07
From: Indianapolis, IN
Member No.: 4



More on Noc, I think he's slightly more tradable than Wallace was or than Hughes would be, but the amount of value you get coming back is still not very good.

For example, I think we'd have to include the pick in order to move Hughes for a shorter contract. I think there are a fair number of teams that might take Noc without requiring the pick and still give us a return I'd find acceptable.

Of course, that's because I'm willing to not take very much in return. I'd be pretty willing, in fact, to take most any player that had only two years left on his deal and wasn't a complete ass clown. The "return" on the trade would be the cap room in a summer with a lot of kick ass free agents.

For example, I think any of the following might meet that requirement:
* To Miami for Mark Blount or Udonis Haslem (giving us an upgrade over Aaron Gray as the 4th big)
* To Minnesota for Antoine Walker (NG after this year)
* To Seattle for Earl Watson (a real PG, although not an especially good one).
* To Indiana for Marquis Daniels or Jeff Foster and Filler (I'm sure the Pacers would do this with Daniels, since he's not got a very good image here in town and isn't a very good player, although this is the only one I'm not sure I'd do. Daniels just adds to the 2/3 logjam and puts Thabo further down the bench).
* To New York for Malik Rose, who's an expiring contract. God knows the Knicks could use someone like Noc, and Rose, while not good, is a pro's pro and and a beefy guy who could fill in the depth chart up front.


--------------------
* De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum
* My blog
* NBA Salary Blog
Go to the top of the page
post Apr 9 2008, 03:16 PM
Comment #2


It's not even loaded!
****

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 6,272
Joined: 24-May 07
From: Area 51 (Vegas, baby!)
Member No.: 3



I don't see how having Brother Abe and several guys about the equivalent of Etan Thomas is a logjam in the front court. If anything, the pressure would be to play Nocioni for his offensive game at the expense of one of two defensive minded guys who've been on the court at the same time.

We clearly have a logjam in the back court with at least 3 NBA starter types (Gordon, Hinrich, Hughes) plus Duhon and Thabo.

Too bad it'd be tough to trade Hinrich for a well-rounded big guy - the saying is "never trade big for small," right? I mean, it'd be really fine to get a guy who would start and play big minutes because he's better than anyone else. A double-double guy would be a step up from guys who might get a double-double on occaision.

Hinrich is not much of a PG, though he's truly a guy you don't mind handling the ball so much, I guess. 6 APG for a guy with the ball in his hands so much is unimpressive - Kobe's done better as not the PG and with worse teammates, if you think about it.

We can probably make do just fine without a true PG. We just need to identify the right guy to handle the ball most of the time who can make good decisions once he gets the ball.

I don't mind, at all, the idea of trading Nocioni, too. The main concern would be who'd play if Deng can't, but between Hughes (3 guards) and Thabo (comfortable at actually playing SF), we should handle it. Noc does have a rare (for this team) ability to slash to the hoop as well as score from 3pt range - the rest of our guys are either/or types.

This team is one year removed from 49 wins. There was a lot of turmoil, sure, that led to the bad season. Settle things down, add a good coach, and we're likely to get back into the playoffs. The really big issue is what we do to advance in the playoffs and be an actual contender.

In my judgment, the first thing we need is a capable coach. Maybe Boylan would have fared better given an off-season and summer camp and a known stable of players (e.g. not players traded to the team mid-season), but I'm dubious.

If we're unable to trade for a top tier player, we're going to have to refocus on the jib thing and get that overachieving edge back from the individuals on the team.

We're also getting a lotto pick, and we can see some more depth added from that. Hopefully we pick an Aldridge type (someone who fits our needs to a "T") and we don't trade him for a project. I'd be looking at the bigs position once more, though a capable 3 or 2/3 type player might also be a good fit.



--------------------
NBA Rotisserie is HERE



You hear the one about the fella who died, went to the pearly gates? St. Peter lets him in. Sees a guy in a suit making a closing argument. Says 'Who's that?' St. Peter says, 'Oh, that's God. Thinks he's Denny Crane.


When you say my name, say it like you really mean it!
Go to the top of the page
post Apr 10 2008, 10:36 PM
Comment #3


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: 9-April 08
Member No.: 20,512



I have to disagree with a lot of this. First of all, the only problem with Noc is the way he is played by the coaches. New coaches could potentially solve that problem. His contract doesn't prevent the bulls from signing both Deng and Gordon to deals in the $8-11 range, which is what they are worth. Second, Hinrich isn't overpaid and he doesn't have the ball that much. Sure he brings the ball up most of the time, but he passes and never gets the ball back. Go look at his numbers both his usuage and minutes are down over 10% versus last year. And it's hard to get assists when guys aren't hitting shots. He certainly hasn't played as well this year either, but I wouldn't say he's one of the bigger problems right now.

The first guy I'd look to move would be Deng to get more athletic. Deng has a nice game, but it's the kind of savy game you'd expect from a 30 something guy on the decline, not a 22 year old. Move him to get a better, more athletic wing, or play Thabo at the 3.
Go to the top of the page
post Apr 11 2008, 01:17 PM
Comment #4


Member
****

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 1,748
Joined: 24-May 07
From: Indianapolis, IN
Member No.: 4



I don't know what happened to Deng, but I still think he's better than he's shown this year andd can be had for a reasonable price.

Like Gordon, the problem would be that the reasonable price is probably less than what he was already offered and turned down. That's going to require swallowing some pride to get him to resign with the Bulls... it'll probably be easier to do if he goes somewhere else.


--------------------
* De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum
* My blog
* NBA Salary Blog
Go to the top of the page
post Apr 12 2008, 10:48 AM
Comment #5


It's not even loaded!
****

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 6,272
Joined: 24-May 07
From: Area 51 (Vegas, baby!)
Member No.: 3



Wasn't Deng the star of the British FIBA team last summer? He's had that taste of being THE man, plus he might have the Hinrich syndrome - play summer ball, lose your legs mid-season.

There may not be a good enough value proposition for Deng or Gordon to accept anything but the QO.


--------------------
NBA Rotisserie is HERE



You hear the one about the fella who died, went to the pearly gates? St. Peter lets him in. Sees a guy in a suit making a closing argument. Says 'Who's that?' St. Peter says, 'Oh, that's God. Thinks he's Denny Crane.


When you say my name, say it like you really mean it!
Go to the top of the page
post Apr 12 2008, 10:56 AM
Comment #6


It's not even loaded!
****

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 6,272
Joined: 24-May 07
From: Area 51 (Vegas, baby!)
Member No.: 3



QUOTE (Denny Crane)
Too bad it'd be tough to trade Hinrich for a well-rounded big guy - the saying is "never trade big for small," right? I mean, it'd be really fine to get a guy who would start and play big minutes because he's better than anyone else. A double-double guy would be a step up from guys who might get a double-double on occasion.


Kane Country Chronicle reports a rumor of Hinrich to the Clippers for Elton Brand.


--------------------
NBA Rotisserie is HERE



You hear the one about the fella who died, went to the pearly gates? St. Peter lets him in. Sees a guy in a suit making a closing argument. Says 'Who's that?' St. Peter says, 'Oh, that's God. Thinks he's Denny Crane.


When you say my name, say it like you really mean it!
Go to the top of the page

 
« Next Oldest · MikeDC's Blog · Next Newest »
 

1 user(s) viewing
1 guest(s)
0 member(s)
0 anonymous member(s)