Dick Allen

So Payne will come in, be the first guy off the bench for a couple of games, then not play for a week, then someone will get hurt and he will,start....and we wonder why all the bench guys suck.

How does this trade help the Bulls now or in the future?

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 01:35 PM) They should have traded Taj Gibson last year. That's the problem. You're probably right, but the GM thought Pau was a huge part of their future. Reality doesn't exist in the Bulls office.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 01:21 PM) Geeze...if we trade Taj and don't get Sabonis back I'll be dissapointed. That said, I'd have preferred a 1st round pick for Taj (and would think we could have gotten an unprotected 1st from a contender). We do need to make moves so I'll at least give the Bulls credit for making moves (if that counts for anything) and getting multiple pieces back. So is it Doug and Taj for Payne / Robertson + someone else (presumably Sabonis). If it's Sabonis, great. If not, it's a train wreck.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 01:18 PM) I don't know much about Robertson..but how does a guy who shoots below 25% from 3 point range take over 2.6 threes per game. That is atrocious. That said, it is Doug, and Payne at least has some athleticism. I can't really fault the deal, but I have zero faith in the Bulls player development team maximizing the value of these guys. The Bulls are going to corner the market on players who can't shoot. This trade doesn't help them short term or long term.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 01:10 PM) Sorry but Payne is not good. He was good player at a mid major. Plus he has a stupid haircut and face Agree. At least McBuckets can shoot sometimes.

Here was Goodwills trade deadline article last year. http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-bulls/ga...hing-made-sense Just swap out a couple of names and he could use the same one this year.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 09:10 AM) You don't have Jimmy as the asset that he is now once that finally happens though. That's the part nobody talks about. Jimmy is 28 and has played heavy minutes. He's also going to need a massive extension in a couple of seasons. The plan I proposed may not work. I've said that. Adding pieces around Jimmy to be a "playoff team" is stupid though and offends me as a sports fan. There are legit arguments both ways. Chances are, nothing is going to work. There are probably close to 20 NBA teams that haven't won a title in the last 30 seasons. GarPax have a great piece in Jimmy but really little else, and don't seem to have the acumen, creativity or balls necessary to get what they need.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 08:45 AM) It's probably going to take a 1st to acquire him. He's not a fit for the modern NBA. It's another guy that doesn't fit the system of the coach you have. He's a terrible defensive player and is unathletic. He can score but he's such a defensive liability that he doesn't really fit what most teams are trying to do. I want them to trade Butler for a nice deal from the Celtics because it's the only thing that makes sense if they truly care about winning titles (which they don't). As a sports fan, I think the point of this whole thing is winning championships. Could they cobble together some pieces around their star and win 50 games? Yes, probably. They can't be a legit contender doing it though which I've stated. Butler is on a cheap deal but they can't add enough around him to compete for championships. And then in 2.5 years he will get a massive deal. They can't add around him fast enough to make it worth it. Trading Jimmy resets the potential championship window. The rookies probably wouldn't be as good as Butler but they are cheaper and offer hope ideally. I understand if you don't trust Paxson and Forman to complete this process but I believe that relying on them to complete the rebuild is still a better option than patching 45 wins teams together and wasting Butler's prime without cashing in that asset. You may disagree but if you do your standard isn't winning championships. I actually like that he isn't a modern fit. He gets into the correct situation, and as you pointed out, Hoiberg may not be ideal for him, someone should be able to figure out how to either have him score at will on the post or make teams counter with a big lug to defend him and that could hurt the opposing offense. I wouldn't mind the Bulls trading a 1st rounder for him as long as they protected the s*** out of it.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 08:34 AM) Truth, but a rookie like Domantas Sabonis would be intriguing to discuss. Taj would certainly boost their frontcourt where they are currently cycling guys like Sabonis, Jerami Grant, etc. With Kanter coming back, a frontcourt rotation of Adams, Kanter, Gibson, Roberson with Westbrook and Oladipo could give them a fighter's chance to go 6 games in the 1st round. If Sabonis is available for Taj, it has to be made.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 08:22 AM) Marc Stein @ESPNSteinLine 3m3 minutes ago Taj Gibson, Doug McDermott and especially Nikola Mirotic ... Chicago Bulls all in play today on Deadline Day according to league sources. Marc Stein ESPNSteinLine 24m24 minutes ago The Thunder are frequently good for a Deadline Day surprise and league sources say Chicago's Taj Gibson has emerged as an OKC trade target. The earliest 1st round pick the Thunder could trade is in 2022.

The conference did change a bit 3 years ago but in their last 150 conference games in the Big East, DePaul is 21-129. I wonder if their new arena will do anything for them.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 07:34 AM) I'm a big fan of Giolito so that's probably why we differ. I truly hope you are right.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 07:26 AM) Why don't you understand the Eaton trade? They got a very good return for a speed player in his late 20's. Eaton would have been on the next good Sox team but his prime would be no longer most likely. Eaton was my favorite player on the team even though it seems that he was a giant pain in the ass. That trade had to get made to push this rebuild forward. Because he has 5 years left on a cheap deal. He is a real little guy, I think his speed will be with him for the duration of the contract. I am not so thrilled with the return.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 23, 2017 -> 06:40 AM) I'm not defending Reinsdorf here, I've called him out many times for his various flaws including the ones you described above. But I'm not going to criticize a guy for having a hard time accepting a strategy that might result in him never seeing an above .500 team again in his life. Ultimately he did the right thing for the broader fanbase and not just himself. Again, there are plenty of things to criticize Reinsdorf about, but his feelings on going through a rebuild isn't one of them IMO. This. And what would one expect Hahn to say? The fact is JR either had to Illitch it (which resulted in zero titles in Detroit) or do some sort of rebuild. I really thought he may Illitch it at one point. I get the Sale trade, but I still don't understand the Eaton trade. I think that one will bite the White Sox.

When is the last time the Bulls made a good trade?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 03:42 PM) I agree. Unfortunately now we know - Gar and Michael Reinsdorf are happy with simply treading water and making money. According to Forbes, the Bulls have made $750 million in profit since the 2001/2002 season,

GarPax needs to s*** or get off the pot. Doing nothing is unacceptable. If they are under the illusion they are contenders, they need to strengthen their roster. If they realize they don't have enough, they need to start selling parts. If they do nothing, it is confirmation they are either all about the Benjamins, or totally inept at evaluating their players or both.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 01:20 PM) There have been far more than 2 wild pitches on IBB attempts in the last 45 years. The swings on IBB attempts are rare (Gary Sanchez hit a sac fly on one this year, too), sure, but not wild pitches. Not many though. What if the rule had always been put up 4 fingers and the batter goes to first base? I bet a lot of us would think it would be really dumb to change it to make the pitcher actually throw balls.

Avi's weight isn't much of a deal to me. Unless he shows he is a long term piece, it really doesn't matter. If he does show he should be kept, it does become an issue because he can't keep the weight off, and getting older and having his metabolism slow could mean massive weight gain as he approaches 30. That would probably make him a DH only, although he probably is a DH only anyway.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 12:58 PM) People actually complain about the length of football games a lot, and especially the excessive commercial breaks. College football gets this even more, the recent NCAA championship ended after midnight east coast time. And they have tried things to speed it up a bit. Running out of bounds doesn't stop the clock until the next snap anymore. Besides the commitment to a 3 1/2 hour football game is at most once a week. Baseball, it could be every night. If the pace of play is fine, long games are fine. If the pace of play is what is making the game long, it is troubling and it can be fixed. This is a small part of the solution. Once they limit mound visits and make hitters stay in the box and put a pitch clock in, it will be more noticeable. They did a great job with broken bats a few years ago. That used to be a fiasco, now they have to have their #2 bat ready to go if they need a replacement. It has saved a lot of down time. That is what they are trying to eliminate. I suspect the union will be fine with some other changes. The guy on 2nd in extra innings, never. But the mound visits, staying in the box, staying on the mound, making a pitch in a certain amount of time will make the game even better in the long run, and players will adapt pretty quickly.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 10:06 AM) So AD also gets a pass because he's made of glass? Hard to blame losing on guys not playing. If Cousins was so freaking great, they would win more than 28 games a year. You were popping off about rheir upside a couple of days ago. Now they will have perhaps 2 lottery picks this draft, and will most likely be one of the favorites to land the top pick for years to come. Maybe the next Michael or LeBron guys that can win more than 30 games with nothingelse will be available then. Think of the upside.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 09:37 AM) The Pelicans have had one season better than 34 wins since Anthony Davis was drafted. I think you're looking at Cousins being the reason for the Kings being bad instead of looking at the rest of the roster. Since drafting Anthony Davis, the Pelicans have gone 159-226 (41.3%). If you remove the two outlier seasons, it goes down to 39.3%. Does anyone blame that all on AD, or does he get a free pass? He's had a much better cast around him the last three years than Cousins has ever had as well. Cousins gets some technicals so he gets a bad rap. If you isolate every stud who's been stuck on a bad team and blame them, then I guess that's just how you're going to be. He has also missed time and it has not been 6 and a half ears of 30 wins being better than normal. They weren't going to win with him. That doesn't excuse the paltry return. But it was time for him to go. Locking into him for 5 or 6 more years at 40 million per would not have made them a contender. The only thing that will is getting g incredibly lucky. His bad rep is far more than technicals. And it didn't just start with losing with the Kings. He had issues prior to being drafted

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 09:16 AM) Closer to selecting 1st so they can hope to wind up with someone half as good as DeMarcus Cousins? Seems hard to believe they can improve upon the 157 games under .500 they have been since drafting Cousins. But I will go with it is possible. I think they were shortchanged in the trade, they should have received more, but the reality was he had to go. They weren't going to win with him, and they will suck worse without him, but they aren't even mediocre with him, so it really isn't that huge of a deal.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 22, 2017 -> 07:42 AM) You mean like the time they got Demarcus Cousins? You can't expect any better. Cousins is a coach killer, he isn't Lebron or MJ. He is in his 7th year. Last years 33 wins were the most with him on the team.maybe he won't be a problem in NO, but that would be bucking the trend since high school. They were horrible with him. They will be more horrible without him, but may be better in 6 or 7 years without him, and paying him $240 million wouldn't have made the situation any better. All that said, they weren't going to suddenly be good. And as long as they have the same decision makers, they either need to be incredibly lucky with no brainer selections or they will just suck anyway. What GM says he had a better offer a couple of days earlier but settled for this one? What owner thinks you can run an NBA team like an 8th grade girls team and get the same results? GarPax has been bad, and deserve to go, but it could be worse. They could be Vlade Divac. The Bulls lost a coin flip with the Lakers once so they wound up with David Greenwood instead of Magic. That sucked, but if they won that flip, they never would have had Michael. Maybe something similar happens here. Cousins is a good player, but he has his issues. Maybe they will become awful enough to get the next guy who really transcends the game. It wasn't like Boogie was going to lead them to the promised land.