ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (fathom @ May 18, 2012 -> 10:39 AM) I feel like Sullinger is going to be a massive bust. If Sean May couldn't make it, I don't know how Sullinger will. I also think the idea of Thomas Robinson being the 2nd pick in the draft is crazy. May could actually score in the league before he started gaining weight like crazy. I feel like people know Sullinger's limitations so it'd be hard to really call him a "bust". Drummond and Jones don't have the same athletic limitations that he does, so the failure is a bit more spectacular. As for Robinson, he's not exactly a consensus #2 (two of the three boards I generally check have him at #4) and he'd hardly be the most ridiculous top-5 pick we've ever seen.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ May 18, 2012 -> 10:23 AM) I feel like he's going to be the biggest bust in the draft (well, him or Drummond). I would lean Pery Jones. Drummond is at least big and athletic so he should stick in the league even with no real offensive development. Jones seems to be a SG trapped in a PF's body, so he strikes me as another Marvin Williams (props to Steve for the easy comparison instead of me writing 3 paragraphs to get the same point across).

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ May 17, 2012 -> 12:30 PM) 5 of their 6 losses were @ Nebraska, @ Stanford, Oregon, @ USC & to the RG3 show. (@ OSU was bad) I'm not saying they are Rose Bowl bound, but it's not the 0-12 teams from a few years ago. And ASU lost to Illinois last year, how good could they be? Come on, even Northwestern won @ Nebraska. They gave up a s***-ton of points in basically every game. They need drastic improvement there to be anything more than entertaining. If nothing else, Price makes them somewhat dangerous I guess. And yeah, ASU didn't play nearly as well as their talent suggested. That's why they have a new coach.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ May 17, 2012 -> 11:40 AM) You need to read up on your Pac-10. Washington is a good football team now under Sarkisian and are definitely better than ASU Meh, I'll believe it when I see it with Washington. Even with Price and a legit running game, they weren't great last year. Admittedly ASU wasn't any better record wise, though they underachieved to their talent level.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 16, 2012 -> 04:18 PM) Yeah, let's play this game, comparing Illinois to NW in the non-conference. I'm not sure if you're ready for this. From alioneye.com: Illinois hasn’t played a non-conference opponent with a below .500 record since Syracuse in 2007. Northwestern hasn’t played a non-conference FBS opponent with an at-or-above-.500 record since Nevada in 2007. Here’s the lists: So if you include our other non-conference games in 2007 (11-1 Missouri and 2-10 Syracuse) and theirs (6-6 Nevada), here’s the cumulative totals for the regular season records of the last 15 Illinois and Northwestern non-conference FBS opponents: Illinois Fighting Illini: 123-57 (.683) Northwestern Purple People: 47-133 (.261) NU has had some brutal schedules in the past, but it's patently obvious that their upcoming ones are a lot tougher. Let's not pretend Illinois is out playing juggernauts every year either. South Dakota State is not a legitimate opponent, and despite the 10-3 record I'm pretty sure Arkansas State isn't scaring anyone. If they played the 4-8 Boston College team that NU faced on a neutral field, BC is the favorite. Like most teams, the Illini play one BCS-level opponent, a couple of cupcakes, and maybe a decent non-power league team. The problem is that instead of a good Missouri team or a respectable ASU team, they have a home-and-home with Washington on the upcoming schedules.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 16, 2012 -> 02:41 PM) Best part: Coaches like Northwestern's Pat Fitzgerald and Purdue's Danny Hope oppose the increase from six to seven wins, but they're in the minority. ************** With NW's garbage non conference schedule year after year after year, this comes as no surprise. If NW could play 6 s***ty non conference games to be eligible, they would. NU's upcoming out of conference slates: 2012- Syracuse, Vanderbilt, Boston College, and South Dakota 2013- Cal, Syracuse, Vanderbilt, and Maine 2014- Cal, Vanderbilt, Western Illinois and Notre Dame 2015- Cal, Ball State, Army and Duke I don't see a whole lot of Charleston Southern's or Louisiana Tech's in there.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 16, 2012 -> 11:09 AM) Even if he can play then, the universal answer is that he won't be himself for a long time after that. This season is a waste. Write it off. You saw what this team looked like without Rose and Noah. They will be without Rose and Deng for at least half of the season. You're not just tanking one season with that approach; you're tanking at least three while you rebuild your roster. All because Rose MAY not be back before the playoffs and Deng MAY miss a couple of months.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 16, 2012 -> 10:59 AM) They aren't going to be a title contender next year. The may not even be a playoff team. By the time Rose gets back you have other pieces to put into place. The reality is that the lack of a second star on this team is probably not going to allow them to win a title with this group. This is the one real chance they may have to move some pieces around and get a chance to obtain that star. It depends on when Rose gets back, which is something none of us know. What are you going to do if he's ready in January and you already nuked the roster to MAYBE get someone useful in the draft, sit him? Tanking doesn't guarantee getting a second star either. If you end up with another Tyrus Thomas, you just gave up a handful of pieces from a contender for nothing and you waste Rose's prime.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 16, 2012 -> 10:49 AM) Of all of the teams in Chicago, the Bulls are one that can go through a rebuild and the stadium will still be full. They won't miss a dollar. I wish taking drastic action were a consideration in this case. You are already looking a mediocre year at best. With the pieces you have on the horizon in the Charlotte pick, plus the Mirotic kid, and looking at what next year is going to be without Rose and Deng for quite a while, why wouldn't you? Because they have a championship-caliber team when Rose is healthy? Because they went 18-9 without Rose and would have to totally gut that roster to be a bottom-5 team? Because if Rose is back and 90% by the playoffs they have the potential to beat anyone? Because they probably won't see the Charlotte pick until 2016, and if they do it will be below the 12th pick? Because Mirotic is far from a lock to be the next Dirk? Pick one. It's not like it's easy to build a title contender, especially when you don't have the cap space to just sign free agents.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 15, 2012 -> 08:21 PM) Now add in a single rookie, every rookie contract is $1 million or more. Or we sell those picks off for the future, and leave a weaker roster. Te reason the bulls built a deep bench is that Boozers $15 mil a year non max deal left them another $5 mil to play with. Thats what the Bulls wouldn't have to play with after 2014, and that's after 2 down years and whatever draft pick te bulls got after losing next year. It's doable but I'm still concerned that it jut doesn't give you a path back to the top unless you win the lottery in there or have someone hand you a star. Did you even look at my post? I added in another $8 mil for assorted cheap contracts or guys on rookie deals. You can easily fit Rose, Noah, Gibson, a sizeable contract (let's say at least $10 mil since I said "easily") and a few assorted rookie contract/cheap guys unless someone goes stupid-high on Gibson. To keep it simple: Rose + Noah is somewhere in the low 30's. The cap was $58 this year. That leaves an awful lot of room for other contracts.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 15, 2012 -> 08:04 PM) It's going to take a major increase in the cap for the Bulls to be able to offer a major deal after 2014 if the have more than Noah and Rose. Not really. Rose and Noah is about 30 (don't have the exact #), let's call Gibson $7 mil for argument's sake. Let's say they have $8 mil with the rest of the roster and picks to make it a round number. The cap this year was $58 mil. That leaves them $13 mil to play with. I would call that a "major deal". Edit- if you want to be technical about it and say a max deal, they can still get there considering I think the first year of a new max is $15 point something mil.

I fully expect the Bulls to do the easiest thing possible: keep as much of the team together as possible until after 2013/2014. At that point, Deng's contract expires and they can easily amnesty Boozer if they haven't already. Pretty much everyone else is on a short-term contract that they can easily let expire. That would leave them with Rose, Noah, Gibson unless someone makes him a stupid offer, and a bunch of cap space. Hopefully they can pick up one solid late-round pick in that stretch, then they'll probably get Charlotte's pick in 2016 (it's top-12 protected before that). If things go well between now and then (which I doubt), they can keep Deng and/or Boozer.

QUOTE (Brian @ May 15, 2012 -> 07:21 PM) Draft Jabari Parker in 2 years The Bulls are going to get the top pick in the 2014 draft after a year with a healthy Rose?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 06:57 PM) Without Deng, Boozer, Noah, and Rose for most of 2012-2013, the Bulls are looking at top 5. Have you seen some of these teams? There's a reason the Bulls were still good without Rose. This also isn't exactly 2003 or 2008 where there are ton of good options. You also have to replace an entire team with that approach, not just one guy.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 15, 2012 -> 04:55 PM) Maybe a freshman 2 comes out of nowhere like Gary Harris? It's highly possible, it's EXTREMELY early. That said, this seems to be considered to be a weak class by most, especially in the backcourt.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2012 -> 05:34 PM) You replace Boozer with the kid from Europe in 2014, or with the high draft pick. It's asking an awful lot for a rookie/second year big man to be a starter and #2/#3 scorer. Usually the ones that are that good right away go in the top-5, and in a better draft than the one we're looking at. Even without Rose, some of these teams are REALLY bad so they might not get that high in the draft without some luck.

There isn't a Tim Duncan in the next draft, and it doesn't look very deep either. Nerlens Noel and Shabazz Mohammed are certainly interesting. After that, you have a couple of guys that may be better in college than the pros (Zeller and McAdoo) and a bunch of other freshmen that are probably more potential than production (mainly looking at Isaiah Austin, Alex Poythress and Steven Adams with that one).

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 15, 2012 -> 10:51 AM) Well, his boards were down more per game, so I guess that annoyed me. However, he's still not near a superstar. He's down barely a rebound per game, and that's in fewer minutes. Talk about nitpicking. While he's definitely not on the top tier, saying he's "not near" a superstar is ridiculous. There probably aren't 5 big men in the league that are definitively better than him, and this is still only his second year in the league.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 15, 2012 -> 09:47 AM) His stats show regression despite playing with the best distributor in the NBA. His game says he really can't score with anyone between him and the basket, and his shooting is horrendous. Blake Griffin is not even close to an NBA superstar. His stats are nearly identical in everything except FG% (better) and FT% (worse). His usage rate is down, which would happen when you go from Baron Davis/Mo Williams to Chris Paul at the point, and his minutes are also down slightly. Those same flaws apply to 90% of the big men in the league. Very few of them average/averaged 22-11 in their first two seasons.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 11, 2012 -> 11:19 AM) I think Zoom has said that amnestying Boozer does basically nothing as theyd still be over cap and thus only able to sign MLE anyways. If he didnt say that, sorry Zoom! Essentially, yes. For next season they're WAY over the cap. It'd make no sense to cut Boozer loose. For 2013/2014 they could conceivably have SOME space if they let everyone but Rose, Deng and Noah go, but that would include Gibson as a restricted FA which wouldn't be smart. 2014/2015 could be interesting since Deng's contract would be up, Boozer would be in his last year if not amnestied yet, and nearly everyone else is on a short-term deal. That'd be your next real chance to have a major roster shakeup, though Gibson is a huge wildcard there and you'd have to let both Deng and Boozer go.

QUOTE (kev211 @ May 11, 2012 -> 03:43 AM) Sorry, I don't care how biased this sounds, but if the Bulls play with a healthy Rose, Deng, Hamilton, Noah which they didn't do ONCE this entire season they are the best team in the NBA by far and would have ran away with the title. Anyone who disagrees I really do not care, we just had the best record in the NBA with not one game this entire season fully healthy, and would have ran away with the title. The only team who would have posed a challenge is the thunder since Miami isn't really that good as I stated in January(don't feel like finding that post but I said it) It just sucks knowing what SHOULD have been The regular season means jack s***. Cleveland was the #1 seed twice, do you see anyone giving Lebron a break because of that? There's a big difference between steam-rolling the Clevelands and Detroits of the league and occasionally beating someone good and winning several 7-game series against other playoff teams. The Bulls are well equipped to win in the regular season because they play hard almost every night and have depth. In the playoffs, everyone plays hard and nearly every team has guys that can make plays. It's a totally different animal, which is why the banged up Bulls didn't prevail like they did for much of the regular season.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 5, 2012 -> 09:44 PM) Why HH doesn't have Westbrook's extension I don't know. If you count that, they're going to be right up against the Luxury Tax if they want to extend Harden without losing the rest of their roster. Yeah, that's my only gripe, a lot of the extensions from this year aren't totally updated.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 5, 2012 -> 09:23 PM) Anybody know James Harden's contract status? KD and Westbrook are locked up for a while. It's going to be unfair if they can get this guy under control long-term. Best site I know of for contracts (Hoops Hype) One more year on his rookie deal, then a restricted FA with a qualifying offer starting at $7.6 mil.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:21 PM) Wait. What? The Bulls were seriously on their last legs after 97-98. They were NOT going to win 3 or 4 more titles. I have to agree with this. 98-99 I could see since the east was trash and the Spurs didn't have much in the backcourt. The next 3 years though they would have had to beat the Lakers. Shaq would have obliterated them and I can't see Jordan and Scottie negating that into their mid-30's.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 1, 2012 -> 09:28 PM) Oh, and I've just learned Tyson Chandler has won DPOY. Yes, I was wrong about the Knicks overall. But I had solid reasoning for thinking they could be elite. Tyson was one of them. If Carmelo doesn't shoot 38% for nearly 40 games, and if Amare doesn't have easily the worst year of his career, I could've very well been right. And if Linsanity hadn't happened, they'd be in the lottery. It works both ways, especially since we saw last year that Melo/Amare don't seem to work well together.