Bulls want Bayless

[Tortimer]

I don't want anyone from the Bulls except Hinrich if we get him cheap enough or Rose. I wouldn't touch Deng, Noah and any of their other scrubs. Most are over paid and getting worse ever year.

 

[TheFreshPrince]

surpise surpise JP and all his fans are over valuing there own players again! Bayless has no future here with roy running the show and he he NOT a point guard

right? lol

 

[LittleAlex]

I won't "consistently" do anything. Each case is different, and it depends on how good the proven player is and what the upside of the unproven one is. If you were Chicago last off-season, would you have traded Derrick Rose for David Lee? One was proven, one wasn't.

You are talking about a Rookie. In that case, you really haven't the slightest idea one way or the other. Bayless is not a rookie. He is a player we are hoping can develop the skill set Portland needs.

Further, there was a great deal of evidence in college that Rose would be a good NBA player. The same cannot be said about Bayless unfortunately.

Also, I don't really like Lee all that much. I think he has proven he can get numbers on a crappy team. He has also proven he can't guard a mailbox. In this case I believe the chances for Rose to be good are high enough and his ceiling is far enough above Lee that I wouldn't make that move.

If you replaced Lee with an All Star power forward things might be different.

I'd be pretty favourable to that deal. I value Fernandez less than Bayless and I value Deng more than Noah.
Of course, Rudy is the more proven player, Bayless isn't. So even you won't "consistently" take proven over potential.

Hinrich and Deng are more proven then Rudy, so I still would be.

 

[LittleAlex]

Fuck no I don't even want Noah if they gave him to us free. Bayless is going to be a star in the NBA if he is ever given the chance. Noah is lucky to be playing in the NBA. Bayless will be a star for us or someone else if we make the mistake and trade him.

I hope you are right about Bayless, since he isn't going to be traded anytime soon. At the very least we know few players will try harder to be successful the Bayless.

As for Noah, you are flat out wrong. He is a very good NBA player, and will only get better. He may never make an All Star team, but he is going to get a big paycheck when he becomes a free agent.

 

[Minstrel]

You are talking about a Rookie. In that case, you really haven't the slightest idea one way or the other. Bayless is not a rookie. He is a player we are hoping can develop the skill set Portland needs.

Bayless is pretty similar to a rookie. He doesn't have rookie status, but he barely played last season.

Further, there was a great deal of evidence in college that Rose would be a good NBA player. The same cannot be said about Bayless unfortunately.

You mean he didn't play enough years? Because he certainly showed a lot of talent in his one college season. If it's a sample size issue you're talking about, then that's a worthwhile point though I think he's shown enough to validate him as a high-level prospect, even if not a Rose-level prospect.

If you replaced Lee with an All Star power forward things might be different.

But neither Hinrich nor Noah are All Star level, so why would I use an All Star in my example? My point is that it silly to always take proven over potential. If the "proven" is proven okay-a-hood and the "potential" is star-level, that would be an awful decision.

Hinrich and Deng are more proven then Rudy, so I still would be.

You're misunderstanding me. Preferring to give up Rudy instead of Bayless is picking potential over proven.

 

[Reep]

Did you guys see this in the ESPN article:

Other Blazers mentioned for possible inclusion in a Boozer deal include Travis Outlaw, Steve Blake and Martell Webster.

I would say no to Bayless going in, but I can't imagine KP would have as much a problem with the other three. If Chicago is stuck on Bayless it isn't happening. But, if they would take one of the others . . .

 

[LittleAlex]

You're misunderstanding me. Preferring to give up Rudy instead of Bayless is picking potential over proven.

It isn't so simple. Bayless has potential to fill a real need for the team. Namely starting point guard. Rudy, on the other hand, will always be the backup to Roy (baring KP completely fucking the pooch this summer). So Rudy's value to the team is not as high as Bayless. Simple as that.

 

[Reep]

It isn't so simple. Bayless has potential to fill a real need for the team. Namely starting point guard. Rudy, on the other hand, will always be the backup to Roy (baring KP completely fucking the pooch this summer). So Rudy's value to the team is not as high as Bayless. Simple as that.

Wouldn't it be nice if Rudy could convert to PG?

He has the vision, but the handle and defense are probably never going to be there.

I also love Rudy, but wonder if it makes sense to keep him if you are not going play Brandon at the 3. At some point you have to decide who you can keep and who you can't, and get as much value as you can from those you can't.

 

[Minstrel]

It isn't so simple.

Yes, that was MY point. It's not so simple as "proven vs. potential." Need, perceived amount of upside, ability of other player, etc, complicate the decision. Thus my disagreeing with dealing Bayless for Noah "because Noah is more proven." It's not so simple.

 

[Denny Crane]

Bayless is an SG. Maybe a combo guard at best.

If the Bulls want him, it's only because he was a 11th pick (basically mid first rounder) who doesn't make a lot ($2M) and who plays a position the Bulls lost depth at and would be losing talent at both guard positions by making this deal (Gordon left for nothing, big downgrade to Blake).

The Bulls are shopping Thomas, not Noah. I doubt they want to part with their starting C. I don't see them trading for Boozer only to play him at C because there is nobody else.

Hinrich has been a starting G in this league until last season. His injury set him back and the Bulls didn't change their lineup when get came back. He's good enough that the Bulls played him a lot at SF in 3 guard rotations just to get him out there.

He's a stud on defense, on the ball.

Frankly, Blake may be the better pure pass-first PG, but you're getting an upgrade at everything else.

 

[Tortimer]

I hope you are right about Bayless, since he isn't going to be traded anytime soon. At the very least we know few players will try harder to be successful the Bayless.

As for Noah, you are flat out wrong. He is a very good NBA player, and will only get better. He may never make an All Star team, but he is going to get a big paycheck when he becomes a free agent.

I don't think Noah will get much of a contract. I'm sure somebody will offer him something look Frye is going to get a decent offer even. I watched Noah many times even summer league and am not impressed at all.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Bayless has a ton of talent and a freak athlete.

Other fan bases were calling Jermaine O'Neal garbage his last year in Portland because he was young player we brought along slowly, thus, the not-so-compelling stat line.

Hinrich is barely an upgrade. Not enough to give up a prospect like Bayless, that's for damn sure.

 

[Reep]

Bayless is an SG. Maybe a combo guard at best.

If the Bulls want him, it's only because he was a 11th pick (basically mid first rounder) who doesn't make a lot ($2M) and who plays a position the Bulls lost depth at and would be losing talent at both guard positions by making this deal (Gordon left for nothing, big downgrade to Blake).

The Bulls are shopping Thomas, not Noah. I doubt they want to part with their starting C. I don't see them trading for Boozer only to play him at C because there is nobody else.

Hinrich has been a starting G in this league until last season. His injury set him back and the Bulls didn't change their lineup when get came back. He's good enough that the Bulls played him a lot at SF in 3 guard rotations just to get him out there.

He's a stud on defense, on the ball.

Frankly, Blake may be the better pure pass-first PG, but you're getting an upgrade at everything else.

This is a complicated transaction because Portland is being asked to pay value (Bayless) going to Utah (Thomas).
This might be one of those transactions that doesn't work because you can't get the right balance between the three teams. Blake and Outlaw aren't enough (I guess), and Bayless is too much. There isn't much in between.

 

[Denny Crane]

This is a complicated transaction because Portland is being asked to pay value (Bayless) going to Utah (Thomas).
This might be one of those transactions that doesn't work because you can't get the right balance between the three teams. Blake and Outlaw aren't enough (I guess), and Bayless is too much. There isn't much in between.

You'd be giving up cap space and Bayless for Hinrich. If it were just a talent proposition, Portland is a HUGE winner in that deal.

Hinrich is quite proven and quite good. Bayless isn't.

EDIT:
Frankly I'm inclined to believe the Bulls are not talking this kind of deal at all. Giving up Hinrich means a guard rotation of Rose, Pargo and... Aaron Gray? Taking back even Bayless' salary along with the $12M isn't feasible (125% rule). Thomas would have to be included from the Bulls POV because $12M in and $9M out puts the Bulls $3M more over the LT threshold (S2 has them $800K over as-is, but they can cut a guy or two from the end of the bench to get under.

With Thomas going out in the deal, the Bulls net would be -$3M, barely enough to absorb Bayless' salary.

So from that POV, it makes sense.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Bayless is unproven but has a lot of potential.

We've been burned by this once and this deal is EXACTLY like this trade:

Bayless didn't do much in his rookie year because the plan was to bring him along slowly.

Kirk Hinrich is barely an upgrade. There is no getting around that. He's nothing special and definitely not a player to put us over the top.

 

[Sinobas]

A blazer fan on realgm supposedly has a friend that saw Steve Blake at PDX waiting for a flight to Chicago. And Casey said "someone interesting" was arriving from Charlotte, but don't know what became of that.

 

[Reep]

You'd be giving up cap space and Bayless for Hinrich. If it were just a talent proposition, Portland is a HUGE winner in that deal.

Hinrich is quite proven and quite good. Bayless isn't.

Maybe. If it were Bayless for Hinrich even (no extra salary) I think it would already be done. But, $8M of cap space is very valuable these days. There is no way to remove that from the value. The other unknown is how Bayless will improve this summer. He is on the early part of his learning/growth curve. I think there is a greater than 50% chance that Bayless will eventually be better than Hinrich is right now. But, when that happens no one can know.

Like I said above. Bayless for Hinrich = Maybe. Bayless + $8M cap space for Hinrich = too much.

Would Hinrich be worth Turkoglu + Bayless? or how about B. Gordon + Bayless?

 

[ehizzy3]

A blazer fan on realgm supposedly has a friend that saw Steve Blake at PDX waiting for a flight to Chicago. And Casey said "someone interesting" was arriving from Charlotte, but don't know what became of that.

lol the fuck

 

[Denny Crane]

Maybe. If it were Bayless for Hinrich even (no extra salary) I think it would already be done. But, $8M of cap space is very valuable these days. There is no way to remove that from the value. The other unknown is how Bayless will improve this summer. He is on the early part of his learning/growth curve. I think there is a greater than 50% chance that Bayless will eventually be better than Hinrich is right now. But, when that happens no one can know.

Like I said above. Bayless for Hinrich = Maybe. Bayless + $8M cap space for Hinrich = too much.

Would Hinrich be worth Turkoglu + Bayless? or how about B. Gordon + Bayless?

Can $8M in cap space hit a 3 pointer and defend Aaron Brooks?

 

[RoyToy]

"Bulls want Bayless"

The Bulls can keep dreaming.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Hinrich can't guard Brooks.

When you factor in Hinrich is a slightly better version of Blake at twice the price, the Bulls asking for Bayless is an insult.

 

[MikeDC]

Explain to me why Bayless is a great prospect or has great value to the Blazers. For that matter, I don't see how he has much value to the Bulls. I guess I wouldn't turn him down simply based on the fact that he's a "young prospect" at a relatively cheap price, but I really don't see him as a good fit for the Bulls. I don't see him as that good of a fit for the Blazers either.

By any objective measure, yes he was generally awful as a rookie. He had like an 8 PER. He shot the ball at Duhonesque levels and turned it over and fouled at a high rate.

It’s one thing to say he’s got potential. He certainly does. But his performance as a rookie was poor and makes me doubt how he'll get it done.

Saying he didn’t get any minutes is a bit of a cop out too. He’s not a high schooler. He played at freaking Arizona. And didn’t light the world on fire there either, by the way.

There are plenty of guys who have come into the league and hit the ground running at similar or younger ages.

Nor do I really see him as an ideal Gordon replacement. Just because he looks physically similar to Gordon (with much shorter wingspan) doesn’t mean he plays much at all like him. I think the Monta Ellis comparison is a lot more valid, but Ellis put up better numbers in similarly limited minutes almost across the board. Another guy who seems similar in terms of style of play would be Earl Boykins, who’s probably a guy who started off really crummy looking and got a lot better.

But at the end of the day, is that really the sort of guy we need to add?

He looks largely like a playground player to me. He’s got a lot of skills, but I don’t know that they wonderfully translate to the NBA in general or playing with Derrick Rose in particular.

Specifically (and this is from watching him)
1. He’s not a good defender and he’s got little T-Rex arms. His defensive potential is largely against ones, not twos.
2. He’s not a good straight up shooter who will space the floor, which is something we will absolutely need from our two guard playing next to Derrick.
3. He’s pretty out of control looking. I realize Portland likes to walk it up, but how does running two 6’1" guys who can’t shoot work for us in Chicago?

 

[STOMP]

I"m done here lol, you guys are overvaluing your guys sooooo much.

Hahaha, not the same at all. Portland gives up cap space, for a legit pg. Bulls give up tyrus thomas (a young guy who HAS proven he can play sometimes, and still has plenty potential) and Hinrich (a legit starting pg as well as a combo guard, good shooter and defender, all around great player). The bulls are making a legit trade, while you guys are making away with hinrich for some cap space, and they want you to throw in a iffy young guy and that is a problem? sorry, i just don't get it. i would love for the twolves to get a legit sg for cap space and hell, i'd give up flynn for a legit sg and cap space haha.

this isn't going anywhere though, you think all your guys are studs, even though they don't play. If they don't play, they lose their value. pretty simple concept.

right? lol

but you said you were done here and lol'd at us... should we believe anything you say?

STOMP

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

He's 6'2" w/o shoes
6'3" with, btw.

Why we want to keep him?

The same reason why Chicago wants him - He's only 20, He has a lot of talent and elite athletic ability with a knack for scoring. We didn't get to see his skill set this season because McMillan and the staff plan to bring him along slowly.

And why is Kirk worth this much? His value went up because Chicago lost Ben so the Blazers must pay? The guy averaged 10/3 in the regular season and 12/2 in the playoffs. No thanks. We'll keep the guy who's 8 years younger with a lot more room to grow.

Meh, move along.

 

[Reep]

Can $8M in cap space hit a 3 pointer and defend Aaron Brooks?

Oh, now you are asking for it.

Game 1 against Houston:

Brooks: 18 pts (2nd on team)
Hinrich: 10 pts; 0/0 3pt

Game 2 against Houston:

Brooks: 8 pts
Hinrich: 7 pts 1/3 3pt

Hard to tell if Hinrich really did that much. 3 pt shooting wasn't great. Defense (if he guarded Brooks) was soft in one game, decent in the other.

Let's remember though that Brooks and Houston are likely a non-factor, at least for next year.

 

[Tortimer]

Explain to me why Bayless is a great prospect or has great value to the Blazers. For that matter, I don't see how he has much value to the Bulls. I guess I wouldn't turn him down simply based on the fact that he's a "young prospect" at a relatively cheap price, but I really don't see him as a good fit for the Bulls. I don't see him as that good of a fit for the Blazers either.

By any objective measure, yes he was generally awful as a rookie. He had like an 8 PER. He shot the ball at Duhonesque levels and turned it over and fouled at a high rate.

It’s one thing to say he’s got potential. He certainly does. But his performance as a rookie was poor and makes me doubt how he'll get it done.

Saying he didn’t get any minutes is a bit of a cop out too. He’s not a high schooler. He played at freaking Arizona. And didn’t light the world on fire there either, by the way.

There are plenty of guys who have come into the league and hit the ground running at similar or younger ages.

Nor do I really see him as an ideal Gordon replacement. Just because he looks physically similar to Gordon (with much shorter wingspan) doesn’t mean he plays much at all like him. I think the Monta Ellis comparison is a lot more valid, but Ellis put up better numbers in similarly limited minutes almost across the board. Another guy who seems similar in terms of style of play would be Earl Boykins, who’s probably a guy who started off really crummy looking and got a lot better.

But at the end of the day, is that really the sort of guy we need to add?

He looks largely like a playground player to me. He’s got a lot of skills, but I don’t know that they wonderfully translate to the NBA in general or playing with Derrick Rose in particular.

Specifically (and this is from watching him)
1. He’s not a good defender and he’s got little T-Rex arms. His defensive potential is largely against ones, not twos.
2. He’s not a good straight up shooter who will space the floor, which is something we will absolutely need from our two guard playing next to Derrick.
3. He’s pretty out of control looking. I realize Portland likes to walk it up, but how does running two 6’1" guys who can’t shoot work for us in Chicago?

You haven't watched Bayless much from your comments. When Bayless did get PT (Blake injured) he perform really well. He is a very good defender but you might be right that he can't guard a lot of 2's only 1's. Ok if your right why the hell do the Bulls want him? Outside of Rose I think he is the best PG prospect in last years draft. Bayless didn't shoot very well last year but in college was a great shooter. I watched almost all his college games and I think it is the Blazer staff trying to change his shot mechanic's and his confidence was shot with not getting enough PT. Bayless is going to be a star if he gets PT with the Blazers or another team. Plus your are really wrong with Roy having a lot of PG skills Bayless is the perfect fit next to him IMO. That is why KP wouldn't trade him unless we got something that blew him away.

 

[andalusian]

I would love to have Hinrich on this roster. But, if Bayless is the price and we do not get Deng in the trade - I would not touch it.

 

[Denny Crane]

Oh, now you are asking for it.

Game 1 against Houston:

Brooks: 18 pts (2nd on team)
Hinrich: 10 pts; 0/0 3pt

Game 2 against Houston:

Brooks: 8 pts
Hinrich: 7 pts 1/3 3pt

Hard to tell if Hinrich really did that much. 3 pt shooting wasn't great. Defense (if he guarded Brooks) was soft in one game, decent in the other.

Let's remember though that Brooks and Houston are likely a non-factor, at least for next year.

First game, Hinrich was back for 2 weeks from a 30 game injury. Second game was 6 weeks after.

Coincidentally or not, the Bulls went 24-20 after his return, and were 13-18 during the time he was injured.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

So they went from below average to the epitome of mediocrity?

Sweet.

 

[Denny Crane]

So they went from below average to the epitome of mediocrity?

Sweet.

Looks like at least a 10 win swing over 82 games to me.