If the Bulls get AI, is Hinrich Available?

[Boob-No-More]

Supposedly, the Bulls and Pistons are investigating a sign and trade involving Ben Gordon for Detroit free agent Allen Iverson. Speculation has been that if the Bulls lose Gordon, Hinrich would no longer be available. But, if the Bulls land AI, does that mean Hinrich is back on the market?

Perhaps, Chicago would be interested in a trade of Travis Outlaw and Steve Blake for Hinrich. It works under the CBA. And Blake and Iverson played well together in Denver.

So, if the Bulls get AI, does it help the Blazers land Hinrich?

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

And, would Blazer fans be happy with what essentially amounts to replacing Outlaw and Blake with Hedo and Hinrich? We get a play making 6'10" veteran, play-off tested small forward and a better defending PG who is capable of running the offense, or playing off the ball.

How much of an upgrade is a starting five of Oden, Aldridge, Hedo, Roy and Hinrich over last year's starting five of Przybilla, Aldridge, Batum, Roy and Blake? We would certainly add a lot of play-off experience to the roster. Hinrich has played very well in the play-offs over the course of his career and Hedo just helped the Magic reach the finals.

I personally think this would be an overall upgrade of our roster. Not so much during the regular season, but definitely in the play-offs when it really matters. Hedo is a much more versatile player than Outlaw with an infinitely higher basketball IQ, and while Hinrich and Blake appear to have very similar stats, Hinrich is definitely a better defender. I also think Hedo's passing and Hinrich defense will help improve Oden's play - Hedo feeding him the ball on the pick and roll, and if Hinrich can help prevent guards easily penetrating the lane, hopefully Oden will be in foul trouble less often.

Unless we add a back-up power forward, that leaves us with a 2nd unit of Przybilla, Pendergraph, Batum, Rudy and Bayless. Our front court defense would be great, but we'd need to rely on Rudy and Bayless for scoring. Of course, Nate rarely plays the entire second unit together. So, one of Roy, Aldridge or Hedo would probably be on the court with the second unit most of the time. So, that would give us more scoring punch while the other starters are resting.

BNM

 

[Nikolokolus]

If the Bulls get AI, then yes I think Hinrich definitely becomes more available. It's hard for me to imagine Iverson accepting a backup role, and even harder for me to envision the Bulls paying 9.5 million a year for a third guard.

I'd be thrilled to see a consolidation move with only Blake and Outlaw being moved to get a definite upgrade at the point guard spot defensively although it would be a fairly lateral move offensively. The only problem I have is that it sounds like KP intends to keep Blake; there's been nothing concrete, but if you read between the lines when he starts talking about "the core" of Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Pryzbilla and Blake you start to get the feeling that he's keeping Blake and intending to groom Bayless for the starting rotation sooner rather than later.

 

[GrandpaBlaze]

And, would Blazer fans be happy with what essentially amounts to replacing Outlaw and Blake with Hedo and Hinrich? We get a play making 6'10" veteran, play-off tested small forward and a better defending PG who is capable of running the offense, or playing off the ball.

I'd be happy. Although not a huge upgrade over Blake, I definitely think Hinrich is an improvement and having a Hedo/Batum SF is incredibly better than a Batum/Outlaw SF.

I'd be pretty happy with such a group.

Gramps...

 

[LittleAlex]

If the Bulls get AI, then yes I think Hinrich definitely becomes more available. It's hard for me to imagine Iverson accepting a backup role, and even harder for me to envision the Bulls paying 9.5 million a year for a third guard.

I'd be thrilled to see a consolidation move with only Blake and Outlaw being moved to get a definite upgrade at the point guard spot defensively although it would be a fairly lateral move offensively. The only problem I have is that it sounds like KP intends to keep Blake; there's been nothing concrete, but if you read between the lines when he starts talking about "the core" of Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Pryzbilla and Blake you start to get the feeling that he's keeping Blake and intending to groom Bayless for the starting rotation sooner rather than later.

If Blake is on the team, he will start.

Nate trusts him and that's all there is to it.

I honestly don't think it matters how well Bayless appears to play in limited minutes.

 

[Chutney]

I don't think they sign Iverson unless he accepts a backup role. It's not like he has a lot of leverage in negotiations anymore. There's almost no interest in him.

If he were signed, I doubt Hinrich would be available. He'd be there to replace Ben Gordon's skillset and that's it.

 

[Nikolokolus]

If Blake is on the team, he will start.

Nate trusts him and that's all there is to it.

I honestly don't think it matters how well Bayless appears to play in limited minutes.

I think it's also possible Nate and KP have different ideas. To be clear I'm not advocating one player over another, I'm just taking my best stab at guessing what KP's plans are.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I think it's also possible Nate and KP have different ideas. To be clear I'm not advocating one player over another, I'm just taking my best stab at guessing what KP's plans are.

I think you are 100% correct.

 

[mook]

I'd be reasonably happy with our offseason if we replaced Outlaw/Blake with Hedo/Hinrich. Pretty hard to argue that isn't a significant upgrade.

I had higher hopes. Clearly my dreams of adding Artest aren't going to happen. Ariza isn't coming here. Not sure if Marion will even be available for trade. Childress seems to be in Atlanta limbo. Kidd and Sessions probably re-sign with their respective teams. Miller isn't as desirable if you add a playmaker like Hedo.

You look down the list of what's available, and Hedo/Hinrich isn't so bad. It's not the home run you'd like to see given our unique salary circumstances, but it's a solid base hit.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I'd be reasonably happy with our offseason if we replaced Outlaw/Blake with Hedo/Hinrich. Pretty hard to argue that isn't a significant upgrade.

I had higher hopes. Clearly my dreams of adding Artest aren't going to happen. Ariza isn't coming here. Not sure if Marion will even be available for trade. Childress seems to be in Atlanta limbo. Kidd and Sessions probably re-sign with their respective teams. Miller isn't as desirable if you add a playmaker like Hedo.

You look down the list of what's available, and Hedo/Hinrich isn't so bad. It's not the home run you'd like to see given our unique salary circumstances, but it's a solid base hit.

I would be ecstatic.

 

[Denny Crane]

The Bulls are $1M under the LT threshold and have refused to go over it. There's no way AI becomes a Bull for any more than $1M, and S&T doesn't fit that equation.

 

[Boob-No-More]

The Bulls are $1M under the LT threshold and have refused to go over it. There's no way AI becomes a Bull for any more than $1M, and S&T doesn't fit that equation.

It would not have to be a straight-up 1-for-1 swap. With Detroit so far under they cap, Gordon's salary could be much higher than AI's, plus they could absorb a bad contract or two from Chicago (or take another player they like). Chicago has several big expiring contracts that could be sent to the Pistons. This would help keep Chicago under the LT threshold, and since the contracts would expire, could help Detroit have more cap space next summer. Or, Detroit could do a 2:1 swap and get another player they want. Given Detroit's cap flexibility, there are a lot of scenarios that could work and keep the Bulls under the LT threshold.

BNM

 

[axs88]

I seriously doubt they are interested in AI, although I actually think them losing Gordon does not make a Hinrich deal less likely. I just looked at their roster and they only have about 26m committed for 2010-11, to these main players:

Rose
Salmons (1 yr)
Deng
Thomas (QO, so his cap hold would eat into their cap space)
Noah

+Hinrich, about 9m.

With Chicago being a big market and Rose a franchise PG, one would have to think they could be a major player in 2010 if they want to. Getting rid of Hinrich for Outlaw's and Blake's 1 yr contract, they would have an additional 9m in cap room to play with, and they would be able to offer 2 max contracts and then some.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

With Chicago being a big market and Rose a franchise PG, one would have to think they could be a major player in 2010 if they want to. Getting rid of Hinrich for Outlaw's and Blake's 1 yr contract, they would have an additional 9m in cap room to play with, and they would be able to offer 2 max contracts and then some.

That makes sense to me. I remember reading a while back that the (already pretty much certain) loss of Gordon wouldn't make a Hinrich deal less likely. However, they might want to wait until the trade deadline to see if better offers present. And Portland too might want to see if Blake flourishes in his new spot up shooter role (Hedo being the de facto PG).

 

[Natebishop3]

I would love to see a Blake/Outlaw trade for Hinrich. I think it would partially eliminate our logjam at small forward, and it would upgrade our starting point guard. Win/Win.

 

[axs88]

That makes sense to me. I remember reading a while back that the (already pretty much certain) loss of Gordon wouldn't make a Hinrich deal less likely. However, they might want to wait until the trade deadline to see if better offers present. And Portland too might want to see if Blake flourishes in his new spot up shooter role (Hedo being the de facto PG).

Yes, that's true. Although given that KP is reluctant to tinker with the team at the deadline I'd rather he'd get a defensive upgrade in the summer. Hinrich can stick the 3 just as good as Blake, can get to the line slightly better, is a major upgrade defensively and now we don't even have to worry about his salary eating up our space.

If the Bulls would do it, I hope KP doesn't stick to Blake just because he's his guy (having brought him back).

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I heard that the teams had agreed on a trade that would've sent Hinrich to Portland at the trade deadline, but Pritchard backed out. Is this right? If so, what exactly was that deal? Would Chicago revisit it? Or was that a Paxson deal and now Gar Forman (or whomever) is in charge?

 

[Masbee]

Supposedly, the Bulls and Pistons are investigating a sign and trade involving Ben Gordon for Detroit free agent Allen Iverson. Speculation has been that if the Bulls lose Gordon, Hinrich would no longer be available. But, if the Bulls land AI, does that mean Hinrich is back on the market?

Perhaps, Chicago would be interested in a trade of Travis Outlaw and Steve Blake for Hinrich. It works under the CBA. And Blake and Iverson played well together in Denver.

So, if the Bulls get AI, does it help the Blazers land Hinrich?

BNM

I don't know, but I hope so.

I have been on board a Blake & Outlaw for Hinrich trade for some time.

 

[axs88]

I heard that the teams had agreed on a trade that would've sent Hinrich to Portland at the trade deadline, but Pritchard backed out. Is this right? If so, what exactly was that deal? Would Chicago revisit it? Or was that a Paxson deal and now Gar Forman (or whomever) is in charge?

RLEC+Blake for Hinrich+filler, probably? Maybe KP wanted Deng included, but then Chi asked for Batum... or he just thought upgrading from Blake to Hinrich is not worth giving up our cap space (Hedo). I remember Paxson's announcement was before the deadline, but he said he would do the deadline, and I think it was him who pulled off their deadline deals.

 

[alex42083]

Chicago would just be stupid to get Iverson.. why wouldn't they try to keep Gordon then?

 

[Minstrel]

Getting Hinrich for Blake/Outlaw would be a great follow-up move. Even though neither player is an impact player themselves, I'd actually be very happy with an off-season comprised of (essentially) a Blake/Outlaw for Hinrich/Turkoglu swap. I think it strengthens the team very nicely while preserving the core. In other words, it makes the team better right away without shortening the window at all.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Chicago would just be stupid to get Iverson.. why wouldn't they try to keep Gordon then?

About $50M difference.

 

[Denny Crane]

It would not have to be a straight-up 1-for-1 swap. With Detroit so far under they cap, Gordon's salary could be much higher than AI's, plus they could absorb a bad contract or two from Chicago (or take another player they like). Chicago has several big expiring contracts that could be sent to the Pistons. This would help keep Chicago under the LT threshold, and since the contracts would expire, could help Detroit have more cap space next summer. Or, Detroit could do a 2:1 swap and get another player they want. Given Detroit's cap flexibility, there are a lot of scenarios that could work and keep the Bulls under the LT threshold.

BNM

The Bulls have $1M in LT space.

I don't see any way Iverson plays for $1M, no matter what Detroits flexibility is. I don't see the Bulls paying the LT ever, and I don't see them tossing away 2010 cap space (which they have $25M or so) on the 34 year old Iverson, who looks washed up or at least seriously declining.

The Bulls didn't seem willing to pay the LT and lose some of that cap space on their leading scorer the past four seasons. It looks like they deliberately maneuvered themselves into a position to force themselves to not be able to resign Gordon, and they made that decision last summer when they rescinded a ~$10M/season offer to him.

Further, I don't see the Bulls doing Gordon a favor by using their Bird rights or any other rights to sign him to a longer deal for more money.

In a perfect world, the Bulls get Detroit to take Hinrich off their hands for a future draft pick, to free up space to resign Gordon, but I think that boat has sailed.

 

[Denny Crane]

And given the Bulls guard situation, without Gordon, they basically have a 3 G rotation of Rose/Salmons/Hinrich, with Hinrich potentially going to see 40 MPG.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

In a perfect world, the Bulls get Detroit to take Hinrich off their hands for a future draft pick, to free up space to resign Gordon, but I think that boat has sailed.

So - what do you think of our Blake + Outlaw for Hinrich suggestion? Not only do Blake and Outlaw's contracts expire in the Summer of '10, they aren't even fully guaranteed for THIS season. But I thought Gar Forman (is that his name?) was saying you're not trading Hinrich?

 

[Denny Crane]

So - what do you think of our Blake + Outlaw for Hinrich suggestion? Not only do Blake and Outlaw's contracts expire in the Summer of '10, they aren't even fully guaranteed for THIS season. But I thought Gar Forman (is that his name?) was saying you're not trading Hinrich?

Seriously, I think that Paxson has had a man crush on Hinrich since day 1. He can play both G positions, and I don't think that Blake replaces that. The Bulls would have to keep Blake at least for a season, and they'd probably keep Outlaw for insurance as well.

From the Bulls' perspective, it's the reverse of consolidation. They're trading the best player in the deal for two lesser players.

What the Bulls really need is a PF/C type who can give them easy baskets in the post, and a long term SG to pair with Rose. Hinrich is 29 and Salmons is 30.

Speaking of reverse consolidation... How would you take it if the Bulls offered Deng and Hinrich for Roy?

In Deng you get your starting SF for a decade (he's 23). In Hinrich you get your PG. You'd play Rudy at SG. From the perspective you are getting 2 guys who hugely upgrade your two weakest positions, it's a "better" deal than Blake & Outlaw for Hinrich, IMO.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Seriously, I think that Paxson has had a man crush on Hinrich since day 1. He can play both G positions, and I don't think that Blake replaces that. The Bulls would have to keep Blake at least for a season, and they'd probably keep Outlaw for insurance as well.

But didn't Paxson agree to trade Hinrich only to have Pritchard back out?

And you're forgetting: this is SUMMER OF 2010! BEST FA BONANZA EVER! That's where you get your star players.

From the Bulls' perspective, it's the reverse of consolidation. They're trading the best player in the deal for two lesser players.

But again, you're only looking at it from a talent perspective. The Bulls obviously don't care to overpay for talent, or they'd've kept Gordon. They already overpaid for Hinrich and he plays the same position as Derrick Rose. Blake gives you a backup PAID like a backup (who has actually played decently alongside Allen Iverson, so he has guarded 2Gs - he's about the same size as Hinrich) plus a good scoring wing. Both dirt cheap! With expiring contracts!

What the Bulls really need is a PF/C type who can give them easy baskets in the post, and a long term SG to pair with Rose. Hinrich is 29 and Salmons is 30.

You think you're going to get that for Hinrich? Man's paid $10M and doesn't start at PG for his own team.

Speaking of reverse consolidation... How would you take it if the Bulls offered Deng and Hinrich for Roy?

Hey! Let's keep it civil, shall we?

 

[Denny Crane]

Ha.

Goose and gander. Walk a mile in the other guy's shoes. And all that. I hope you see how your offers come across to the other team...

If the Bulls could have traded Kirk for RLEC, they'd have $25M in cap space for the 2010 FA class AND the cap space to have resigned Gordon. From that perspective, it made sense at that time. As it is now, they have $25M in cap space and the cap space to retain Hinrich (2nd best outcome, but it could be worse).

 

[Rastapopoulos]

If the Bulls could have traded Kirk for RLEC, they'd have $25M in cap space for the 2010 FA class AND the cap space to have resigned Gordon.

Huh? You do know that you don't need cap space to re-sign your own free agents, right? You do understand that the Bulls could perfectly well have paid Gordon as much as he wanted and more - but just chose not to? I hope your happiness doesn't depend on believing that Bulls' brass nobly tried to retain Gordon but were just hamstrung. They didn't want him, plain and simple.

 

[axs88]

Huh? You do know that you don't need cap space to re-sign your own free agents, right? You do understand that the Bulls could perfectly well have paid Gordon as much as he wanted and more - but just chose not to? I hope your happiness doesn't depend on believing that Bulls' brass nobly tried to retain Gordon but were just hamstrung. They didn't want him, plain and simple.

I bet he knows... he probably meant that they'll have "luxury tax space" --fortunately a rather unfamiliar concept for us.