Chisoxfn

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 05:20 PM) Rays & Angels are discussing James Shields for Peter Bourjos & Hank Conger That would be a really nice move for the Angels. Conger and Bourjos are both expandable, all things considering.

That was great hustle by Rios. Last year, he'd have sulked and still been out.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 05:14 PM) Snodgress picking up where he left off in Low-A. Guy is dominating right now with 7 K to 1 BB and 3 hits through 5 IP. He's got a great arm.

I might be overconfident, but if it is for a few games, I'm fine with Flowers. I still think he can be a league average starting catcher. Defensively he's made great strides and offensively he doesn't exactly have the type of low maintenance swing bench players need.

Sore ribs or a strained oblique?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 02:59 PM) Do we know who is on the hook for Myers' $3 million buyout? I would imagine we're only getting $1 million from the Astros is the reason we didn't surrender any top talent. Unless I'm mistaken, the option (and the related buyout) aren't even in play unless he finishes X number of games. And barring some sort of significant injury or Reed going straight to crap, Myers isn't going to get enough opportunities to trigger the option. Thus, the Sox aren't on the hook for anything.

Ouch. This can be pretty lingering issues. So I guess this is why he wasn't playing. I wonder when it happened. He looked alright whacking that double yesterday. Maybe he's got a bruise from when he was HBP yesterday?

QUOTE (danman31 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 02:08 PM) So my question is, if we trade Walker and Mitchell is anyone going to miss these players? They're far from sure things to even make the Majors at all. Walker has made some pretty strong strides this year. To me it comes down to what there value is. The potential upside is there. I'd be irritated if the Sox traded a guy like them for Myers.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 01:51 PM) I think his expectations are crazy. I think somewhere in the 4.50 to 5.00 era is much more realistic. Not bad for back of the rotation stuff, but if he can net us a #1 or #2, he should go. Remember last year people were saying they wouldn't trade Phil Humber when we were still in it. But if Q is hot this year, replacing him with Greinke may not be a major upgrade. Next year they have nothing to show for him. If it is a marginal potential upgrade (compared to the production the squad has had in the current year) and the downside (e.g., Q turns into a solid innings eater with a 4 to 4.25 ERA) is major. You lose a cost controlled quality starter for a marginal upgrade. Clearly stuff wise they are on different levels and I know who I'd take with a game on the line in the postseason, however, its hard to argue the results thus far this year. And given all you have with Greinke is this year, I just can't rationalize moving Q for him.

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 12:04 PM) Why is Harper a prick again? What meaningful evidence is there to suggest that he's not a good person? I haven't seen anything. He's been nothing but a pro. He plays hard and seems to be a good guy and as a whole seems to be well grounded. Dude plays the game right thus far. And he sure has a massive ceiling.

Hopefully we get encouraging news of his session today and even more encouraging news the day after (e.g., pain free).

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 11:54 AM) FWIW, if they do want to acquire Greinke, I'd much rather it be using Floyd and then someone like Mitchell as opposed to using Viciedo/Quintana. Completely agree. I can't fathom (pun intended) losing two cost controlled guys like Viciedo and Q for a couple months of Greinke (especially when you get no picks to show for it). The potential for disaster is excessive.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 11:28 AM) The speculation was that the Lopez/Humphries contracts would help them out because Orlando could dump a bunch of their bad contracts in the trade with those two (Richardson, Davis, maybe Nelson or Turkoglu). Kris Kardashian is only on a 2-year deal, so he basically gives them two years of surprisingly solid production while they tank then he's off the payroll. The bigger question is whether the Magic wait till then. There best bet is to trade him now, when a team that acquires him can still get the rights to make a larger max offer then anyone else. That ends if he signs after the season starts (he will lose out on being able to sign that 5th year when he hits FA). Its why I still think the Bulls should go crazy for him. For those that think the Bulls should go into a full rebuild mode, well then the Bulls have nothing to lose by going all in on Dwight, hoping he stays. If he doesn't, you have cleared cap space to get him. If he does, you are in business, and as Deron proved, it is hard for an NBA player to turn down that extra year of guarantee money (and I'd reckon one coming off a back injury would think that extra year to be awfully important).

Floyd is one of the better pieces of trade bait out there. That option is pretty solid and affordable for what he is. I hate giving up too much for Zack. He's going to be gone at the end of the year (as I highly doubt the Sox would sign him) and you end up turning an asset like Floyd (+ other good prospects) into a rental.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 11:13 AM) I thought they still could, but they'd have to wait until January. But even then, i'd be pretty hard. It depends on whether the Magic want him at that contract. He can be traded in January.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 11:10 AM) Not if they get Dwight. They can't get Dwight anymore. They don't have the assets. All of those plans ended when they inked Lopez.

Sam Smith's take on things: http://blogs.bulls.com/2012/07/bulls-will-...-offer-to-asik/

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 10:53 AM) Yet, all three of those teams made major moves to overhaul their teams in the offseason. Strange how that works Dallas completely whiffed on there plan A. They've made a series of small, under the radar moves. However, as a whole, let me know of any expert that is going to call the Mavs a title contender. The Lakers made a great move in getting Nash, but long-term it doesn't help them. They needed a guy to put him over the top short-term and went with it. The Bulls weren't in the position to make that type of move. Boston is not a title contender either. They are the epitome of a team that refuses to give up (and they should be rebuilding) and they got duped on last years deep run (thanks to Rose going down; they barely even got past Philly).

QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 10:38 AM) I really don't think LA or Dallas or Boston was better than us at any point the last 2 years. Having watched those teams a lot, the Bulls were as good, if not better, then each of those teams the past 2 years.

QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 10:30 AM) Bottom line: everything I hear is 2014 2014, be patient wait 2 years, Rose coming back, etc. 3 of our 4 primary offseason acquisitions (Nazr Mohammed, Vlad Radmanovic, & Kirk Hinrich) merely fit with this plan because they will all assuredly be gone by then. That doesn't strike me as a POSITIVE offseason, which is all I asserted from the beginning. Doesn't seem ridiculous to question the direction that was executed this offseason. Doesn't mean the entire next 5 years are wasted, not everything could have been solved this summer regardless. But none of these acquisitions are even relevant to the long-term plan. Completely understand where you are coming from. I think despite having a more long-term plan, I believe you still have to make decisions for the current rosters.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 10:29 AM) I are frustrate. Fine. The Bulls are great. Yay, I'm super happy. No one said you had to be happy. You can disagree. Nothing about your post had anything to do with the discussion. I don't get how hard it is to see that. Its the exact type of crap that derails threads. Not to mention, you don't have to sell your fandom to anyone. We all know, without any doubt, that you are a diehard fan of the Bulls.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 10:13 AM) Who they drafted is a credit to the organization. Heck with Noah, most of Soxtalk wanted them to take Spencer Hawes, and hated the Noah pick. People also wanted Igodala picked instead of Lu. As for the Rose part, that is spot on correct. Beating 50 to 1 odds is nothing but luck. And at the time, it was pretty 50/50 on who the 1st pick should be. In fact, early on, most everyone thought Beasley was a consensus #1. Bulls might have lucked into the pick, but they also made the right basketball decision and took Rose.

QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 10:09 AM) Despite insinuations to the contrary I have nowhere suggested that: -we needed to trade for a star THIS summer -the Bulls aren't good at drafting -the Bulls front office didn't put together a contender the last 2 years -Derrick Rose's injury didn't destroy us -being patient with the roster in light of Rose's injury is a bad idea I'm simply saying that to go out and add mostly aging veterans and mostly guys who have literally ZERO chance of being a part of your core when Rose comes back simply doesn't jive with the overall plan the Bulls have pushed. Going into this season the only two guys who even have a chance of becoming a part of our core are Teague and Butler, both of which were draft picks. Getting younger on the bench than we did would have made a helluva lot more sense if the plan really was to just be patient until Rose comes back. Bellinelli and Hinrich aren't exactly again veterans. Hinrich is older, however, I won't be surprised if he's still in the league 4 years from now. Bellinari is 26 or so. He's in his prime years and should be for at least 4-5 years. Radmonovich, yes, he's and old decaying player who isn't very good (hits some threes and thats about it). However, signing him was what it was. The Bulls are still trying to sign Malcom Thomas. Isn't he the definition of the type of player you are talking about? I just don't see what the Bulls missed out on. If anything they have 2 guys in Hinrich and Bell who can be solid bench players from 3-6 years (depending on whether it is Bell or Hinrich). That falls pretty nicely with that 2013 or 2014 window. And you might say, well, Bell signed a one year deal. Sure he did, but the Bulls will be able to sign him for more years if they want to (or he can be signed as part of a S&T and thus used as an asset later on). Heck, he might even have value to another contender and can be cut in a deadline move. Look, you are proposing going out and signing crappy 2nd round picks. That doesn't seem like too good of a strategy. Putting good young players with piece of garbage young players could actually hinder and have a negative impact on the young players growth. Additionally, the Bulls still have to make money and want to put as solid of a team forward. They have every intent of making the playoffs and I think part of that is they want the perception to be a playoff team without Rose, so that when they got Rose back and are looking for a 2nd star, said 2nd star will be pretty giddy about the Bulls chances, knowing they were a playoff team without its best player (and are trying to bring in X to be the 2nd star), which would probably make them immediate title contenders again.

QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 09:51 AM) Thibs is willing to give rookies some minutes if they show that they aren't a detriment to the team out there. He didn't give many minutes to James Johnson. Teague, at this point, I'm afraid he'll be a detriment to the team. He can't run an offense, he can't shoot, he can't defend well and from what I saw he had trouble finishing at the rim in summer league. He's just not a good NBA player right now. Giving him minutes would be a mistake, unless the plan is to tank. To be frank, it would hinder the development of other players. Plus, having vets like Hinrich and Bell makes the team better and you can still potentially use those guys as assets in S&T's and other deals in the future (or keep them since you'd retain bird rights). And both of those guys have value on a contending team. Additionally, having more quality players helps with development as practices are more intense and they have better role models to learn what the NBA is like). These are all very important qualities and part of this is why good organizations stay good and lousy organizations that consistently have top picks stay bad (guys never learn how to be successful in the NBA).

QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Jul 24, 2012 -> 09:49 AM) I'm not talking about the guys who were already on the team, I'm speaking to the additions of THIS offseason. I didn't see marquee young talent just laying around. What do you expect, the team to be the most talented in the history of the league and every off-season being able to acquire great young talent. It doesn't happen. It takes a lot of work and the Bulls have hit on low picks better then most teams. They've hit with Thabo (whose a damn solid player for the Thunder), Asik, Taj, Butler (if he turns into even a solid bench player, thats a hit given where we picked him). Then there is Mirotic who looks like a hell of a pick at this point (still the jury is out). You can't ignore that track-record. And even this year, Bell isn't exactly old. Butler is taking steps forward and as a whole the key players on the team are on the right side of 30.