Chicago Bulls Thread

[Gedas]

Do you think believe anyone on the roster right now could realistically ever become the star player they need?

D. Songaila
At least in the WC I hope.

[maes]

i don't like the 'detroit pistons' comparison because none of the current bulls are near the level of players that the pistons are. besides, detroit has 3 all stars on that team lol

I agree w/ air, other than Tayshaun, Dumars handpicked these guys from other teams after seeing what they can do in the NBA. More importantly, he had a concrete philosophy about what kind of players he wanted and not surprisingly, Detroit plays well together.

I'm not sure if KG would want to come to Chicago...they're not exactly on the cusp of winning it all. But even if Chi doesn't get KG, they could probably facilitate a KG trade to a winning team with their large cap space and they have assets a rebuilding team would want: young players w/ potential & valuable draft picks.

[Andrew]

Bulls aren't that young. Hinrich and Nocioni are 25, Chandler is a veteran and it will be third year for Gordon and Deng. They are ready to start winning now, if only they get suitable parts.

Gordon is 23, Deng is 21, Chandler is 23, Duhon is 23...there's only three players over the age of 30 on the whole team and only one of them (Othella Harrington) has been in the rotation fairly regularly. And he still only played 11 minutes per game. I fail to see how it isn't a young team.

Yes, they have a few years behind them, they're not all fresh out of high school, but considering most players are usually in their prime between the ages of 25 and 33 and more than a couple of key players aren't even 25 yet (an average age of 26.4, or 24.4 discounting the players over 30), have an average of 4.7 (so let's say 5) years experience in the league or 2.9 (let's say 3) years experience discounting the three players over 30...I'd say it's fair enough to still call them a young team.

They are probably ready to start winning with a couple more pieces and they are experienced, but it's not as if there isn't any room for growth and improvement amongst the core players they already have in place.

[air gordon]

Do you think believe anyone on the roster right now could realistically ever become the star player they need?

nope not at this point. maybe if the Bulls get a player that is a scoring threat in the post will be the magic dust that will turn one of them into a superstar

4... Cool

my mistake

I agree w/ air, other than Tayshaun, Dumars handpicked these guys from other teams after seeing what they can do in the NBA. More importantly, he had a concrete philosophy about what kind of players he wanted and not surprisingly, Detroit plays well together.

i think Paxson also has a philosophy- bring players that "play the right way"- supposedly players with good worth ethics (chandler?), work hard in practice, and have good attitudes. Apparently included in that philosophy is that Paxson isn't shy to get rid of you if you don't fit in his scheme- Eddie Robinson, Jalen Rose, Jamal Crawford

Difference between Dumars and Paxson is that Paxson hasn't made a risky move yet and I'm not sure if he'll ever make one

I'm not sure if KG would want to come to Chicago...they're not exactly on the cusp of winning it all. But even if Chi doesn't get KG, they could probably facilitate a KG trade to a winning team with their large cap space and they have assets a rebuilding team would want: young players w/ potential & valuable draft picks.

yeh this is all hypothetical talk. in all likelyhood, KG would want to go to a "contender" yet every team will say that they have legit shot at him lol

[air gordon]

figured i'd grave dig this one...

so what do you guys think the Bulls should do with picks #2 and #16??

i'd like them to draft Aldridge. if he's not available, then Thomas. Please, Paxson- stay away from that Bargani guy!

I'd give up the #2 pick & 16 to get the #1 pick...

i'm going to admit that i won't be that thrilled if the Bulls end up with Tyrus Thomas. but i believe if Aldridge is off the board and Paxson can't find a deal feasible to trade up and get him, I don't think Paxson drafts Thomas. He doesn't fit the mold of his past draft picks- they all came from a big college program, were ready to contribute right away, low "risk"

Thomas has little college experience and despite his upside, he has bust potential. I think Paxson will make a trade for a proven (not college but NBA) player. Or perhaps he trades down and drafts Brandon Roy or Ronnie Brewer.

[Andrew]

I saw nbadraft.net have the Bulls picking Bargani second overall, I'm not too enthused about the idea either. He doesn't sound like an awful player but considering they need more muscle inside a player that is described as lacking in strength (physically and mentally) as well as being somewhat of a subpar defender. Alridge really does sound like the best option.

They've also got Redick falling to 16th which would leave him on the board for the Bulls. I don't follow NCAA ball that closely so I'm hardly an expert but the fact his name seems to have come up a bit gives me the impression he's not a bad prospect at 16th. He'd a little more size to the backcourt (not all that much though) and he can shoot so he might be a nice fit...or suitable trade bait. But as I said, I don't follow the NCAA very closely so I could just be buying into hype.

I see what you mean about Thomas. He doesn't sound bad but I'm not sure where he'd fit into the frontcourt. Do you think trading the second pick might be a better option?

[Fenix]

I don't see what is this fuss about Bargnani about. He has all characteristics of a typical Euro bust - suspect frame, not particulary long (I could be wrong, though. It's a hard to evaluate length of underdeveloped Euros), can't play in the post with NBA competition, overal tweener... Sure he has a similar skillset as Dirk, but Nowitzki is stronger and had a better frame to work with. Could I be wrong and he'll be able to man the 4 spot? Sure, but we have seen to many players in his mold to take that risk. I love his heart and his athleticism, but I would stay away from this guy. However, I have a feeling that there's a decent chance that Bulls will pick him.

Tyrus Thomas I would take. If the Bulls can somehow replace Tyson with a more skilled presence at C (Chandler for PJ Brown, anyone?), he would replace his shot blocking and rebounding right away and he is already more skilled on offense. His size probably isn't a problem (I expect him to measure out at 6'10, 6'11 with shoes), he has the right frame and work ethic to add more bulk, if he hasn't already since the season ended. He also brings hustle, decent basketball IQ and heart, which is something Paxson really respects.

[J@3]

I'd say Bargnani is actually better suited to playing SF. Sure he's 7 feet tall, but he's got a good handle for a guy his size, he can put the ball on the floor, he's athletic and while he would probably be an awful defender at PF, at SF he would actually cause alot of match-up problems on both ends of the court.

From the videos I've seen he looks fairly long, when you compare him to another 3 point shooting big in the NBA (Raef Lafrentz for instance) physically Bargnani looks much much longer. For the Bulls I don't think he'd be much of a risk, they're in a fortunate position where they don't really need a star player, just someone else who can contribute.

[Fenix]

It's practicallly impossible to evaluate length of European players because of their slight build. I also thought Adriskevicius and Aleksandrov are long, but they have very short wingspans. Bargnani is a decent shot blocker (at least in European competition), so that could tell you that he has a decent wingspan, or he could only be compensating that with instincts and above average athleticism. That won't work in the NBA.

And I against playing 7 footers at SF. How many players do we have that can actually play that position full time? Dirk became succesfull when he made a transition to PF and we have a bunch of Euros that failed to do that. It's simple, no 7 footer on this side of a young KG is quick enough to defend smaller players and smaller, quicker players CAN defend perimeter oriented 7'+ guys. Dirk still has quite a bit of troubles with Bowen. Will Bargnani ever have enough strength to take his man to the post? That's the real question.

[J@3]

Rashard Lewis is 6'11, Peja Stojakovic is 6'10, Vladimir Radmanovic is 6'11... maybe with the exception of Radmanovic they've all worked out well.

[The X]

the Bulls should take Aldridge if he's available....if not, then they should trade down or out....simple as that....other option is Adam Morrison, who would fit in nicely with the steely Bulls....although I can't see them doing that....who knows, they could take a flyer on Rudy Gay & hope he is more Scottie Pippen than Tim Thomas....

to Andrew, J.J. Redick has potential to have a Jeff Hornacek-like career, which would be a great pickup at 16 if he's there (although I have him going in the late lottery to the Magic)....Redick would fit in with the Bulls as he's got toughness, he will be one of the top 4 or 5 shooters in the NBA, & so on....although I think the Bulls would be better served with a guy like Ronnie Brewer at 16 (if available), Redick would still make a nice pick....and for all those doubters, he not the next Trajan Langdon....you have to remember that Langdon was just a shooter & didn't have 1/5th of the heart of Redick....Langdon wasn't as developed on the offensive end....

[Fenix]

Radmanovic is 6'10 (he's listed at both 6'9 and 6'10, so I firmly believe the latter is his height with shoes, same with Stojakovic) and I doubt Lewis is even 6'9 without shoes (listed at 6'10). Plus, Radmanovic rarely plays SF. And I don't believe any of them is know for their defense. Now take a guy two inches taller than them, put him on the court and watch him get beaten off the dribble on every single play. Toni Kukoc is a couple of centimetres smaller than Bargnani (207 (6'9 1/2) as opposed to 209 (6'10 1/2)) and was one of the most European players in his prime, but he still couldn't guard SFs because of his relative lack of quickness of PFs because of the lack of strength. That's is why he was more suited for coming off the bench as a 6'11 offensive jugernaut with his scoring and ballhandling abilities. Looking at the current Bulls' roster state - do they really need a guy who can't score from the PF position or defend in the post? How soon is he able to contribute? Looking at his underdeveloped body, not very soon. At least Thomas will give you rebounding and shotblocking right away, and you can throw 10 points or so without even running plays for him.

The X - Bulls already have a undersized SG who can't defend shit in Ben Gordon. Why would they want another one?

BTW, Paxson supposedly said on a radio show how they want to move Hinrich back to PG (that probably means both on offense and defense).

[J@3]

Do you honestly think Thomas would score 10ppg without them running plays for him? Andrew Bogut averaged 9 and he's far far advanced as an offensive player in comparison to Thomas, and on a team with less offensive options.

As far as your heights go, for one you seem to be guesstimating alot of them, and two you're kidding yourself if you think an inch or so makes THAT much difference. I think you're completely missing the point with Bargnani's game, you seem hell bent on him being a post up player. A perimeter player at 7 feet tall who can shoot as well as him and drive to the hole is a commodity, no matter how you spin it or downplay his defending.

Your Kukoc comparison is flawed. Even though he struggled with his D he still became a successful player, and with a team like the current Bulls why on Earth would Bargnani HAVE to start? Who says he can't come off the bench for 15-20 minutes in his first season? He's not going to let the opposing PF/SF score 20 on him in 20 minutes, he wouldn't exactly be a liability.. at least no more than 50% of guys in the league. Dirk struggled with his D throughout his career, and up until the last 2 seasons continued to do so. I don't think anyone would skip over him if that draft was held again.

Looking at the current Bulls' roster state - do they really need a guy who can't score from the PF position or defend in the post? How soon is he able to contribute?

This is the whole point, he doesn't HAVE to contribute on this team straight away. They didn't get the #2 pick because of their record, I hope you're aware of this.

By the sounds of things, your argument is that Bargnani shouldn't be drafted at all, because hell, he can't defend PF's, he can't defend SF's, he can't play SF because the other SF's can all guard him, he can't play PF because he's not strong enough to play in the post.

[Fenix]

Thomas has a lot more tools to score on garbage points than Bogut. That and you can throw lobs at him every time he gets open, much like you can for Marion.

I like Bargnani A LOT and Nowitzki is (currently ) my favourite active player. With that said and with the informations I have, he could be just too much of a risk to be taken this high. Is a 7 foot Sasha Vujacic a first/second overall pick material? Sure, the prize is huge, but the same is with the downside. Is he the best player available (NO, that's Roy)? The one with the most upside (YES, he shares that award with Gay and Thomas? Does he fill a current need (NO)? Does he fits into the direction Paxson and Skiles are going - defense, heart (D NO, heart YES)? A lot of thing surrounding him stay unaswered. For some (psychical predispositions) we we'll know at the predraft camp, for some we'll just have to wait until he plays his first NBA game. His first step and athleticism are superb for someone his height, but how good his frame is? Will he be able to go inside occassionaly or is he limited in that area? Will he be strong enough to be able to defend the post? How are his post skills? From the games I've seen, he's pretty good (jump hook especially) in that area, but how good?

If I'm Paxson, I'd try to get Bargnani to a workout and see those things myself. If he looks like he has a frame good enough to carry more pounds and Thomas looks like another athletic freak with no skill foundation and ton of potential int the workouts , I'd take him, but I'd take him as a PF in the Nowitzki mold. Bulls have Nocioni and Deng, both SFs who could fit very well into the same frontcourt with Bargnani. But he's more of a star or bust pick than Thomas is. TT will always be at least decent due to his heart and athletism. Take Bargnani - what if he can't gain more weight and his shot doesn't come to USA with him? You get a 7 foot slasher who can't defend jack.

[J@3]

Alot of the things you're mentioning are things that will develop over time... his frame will undoubtedly carry more weight, according to DraftExpress he's still growing vertically... his D will get better if he works at it... I have more faith in him than someone like Tskitisvilli. Like you said though, we won't really know until he plays his first game in the NBA.

Edit: Actually to add to that, he did play against the Raptors in that pre-season game. He had 13 points and 2 blocks in 20 minutes as a 19 year old.

[air gordon]

Andrew: i agree with X- they don't need another undersized SG so please, no to Reddick. Paxson did indeed recently in an interview say he wants Hinrich to return to PG

i'm not so sure about what i think they should do with 2nd pick. i know i was a little harsh on Thomas on my initial post but i'll wait and see how he does in his workouts/interviews and draft camp measurements.

I don't even know who they should pick at #16. The team needs a Big SG but i don't know much time this guy would get considering on the amount of young guys on the team

Vank: i agree with you about Bargani. so far Paxson has stayed away from international players and has shown preference to college players from big programs. He had the opportunity to draft Pietrus a few years back but he didn't even go and scout him (lol).

assuming Thomas gets drated by the Bulls, i think he could reach close to double figures in scoring. and that's assuming he gets big minutes and can avoid foul trouble. Thomas would benefit playing in the Bulls offense- 5th highest pace in the league and lots of pick and rolls. If Tyson 'gumped' his way to 9.2ppg in his 2nd year in 24mpg and almost 10ppg in the playoffs last year, I believe Thomas can match that. And he has better awareness, hands, coordination, and is more fluid with the ball then Chandler

Jae: It's irrelevant how the Bulls got the pick. they are going to use that 2nd pick to address a need, not treat it like it was a free ticket to a WNBA game. the team needs badly a post player that will operate in the post and could use a big SG. Bargani fits neither of those criteria

[J@3]

Jae: It's irrelevant how the Bulls got the pick. they are going to use that 2nd pick to address a need, not treat it like it was a free ticket to a WNBA game.

*crickets*

the team needs badly a post player that will operate in the post

... which isn't Tyrus Thomas. Offensively at least. Either way, hopefully the Bulls do draft him and he turns into Stromile Swift v2... I don't like these free ride picks.

[air gordon]

it's not meant to be funny. the bulls aren't like the pistons- they don't have the luxury of drafting whoever.

are we talking about the same Tyrus Thomas? i'm pretty sure the Tyrus Thomas i saw play in the ncaa tourney was at or around the basket most of the time on defense and scored most of his points in the paint.

how about put some explanation/reasoning behind your one liners?

[J@3]

My one liners expanded, you should've read the edited version. It won't really matter what I say, you'll just ask for more explanation on all of it. ""The?" What do you mean by "the", explain please because I would like to know exactly why you're saying "the"". Well you're not quite that bad, but not far off.

I don't see why on Earth you'd want Thomas on a team that's already good defensively but lacks offensive firepower up front.

[Silas]

exactly, thats what tyrus thomas does, he blocks shots, he could end up being another tyson chandler.

[air gordon]

so who are you now, matt, mr pistons fan who makes all these claims with no backup? i expect better from you, Jae. you're not some idiot- you make good posts in the nba section. all this because we don't agree on something?

stromile swift v2? lol you're just jealous your team couldn't rip off Isiah

silas:

chandler- great run and jump player. for some odd reason, he's nowhere near as agile whe he has the ball- almost robotic like. has a hard time catching the ball on offense despite being able to snag rebounds from other players

initial reports on thomas is that he has excellent athleticism, great hands, and is more fluid with the ball. when you run a pick and roll with him, you can actually expect him to roll, look for the pass, catch the ball, then finish. something Chandler has yet to fully grasp

[J@3]

so who are you now, matt, mr pistons fan who makes all these claims with no backup? i expect better from you, Jae. you're not some idiot- you make good posts in the nba section. all this because we don't agree on something?

Yeah I know, my bad, I should at least wake up properly before I come on here and I'm still waiting on that Devean George for Frye + Curry trade.

[Andrew]

Andrew: i agree with X- they don't need another undersized SG so please, no to Reddick. Paxson did indeed recently in an interview say he wants Hinrich to return to PG

i'm not so sure about what i think they should do with 2nd pick. i know i was a little harsh on Thomas on my initial post but i'll wait and see how he does in his workouts/interviews and draft camp measurements.

I don't even know who they should pick at #16. The team needs a Big SG but i don't know much time this guy would get considering on the amount of young guys on the team.

I guess I was led to believe despite the fact he's a bit undersized to play the two guard in the NBA he could bring something else to the table to make up for it. If that's not the case then fair enough, look elsewhere. I've got no ideas otherwise, seems the appealing swingmen will be gone by the time #16 rolls around.

As far as the #2 is concerned, is there anyone else (maybe even a dark horse player) they could select that high?

[Fenix]

I will back out of the argument who should the Bulls pick, but I will defend Thomas, who some of you drastically underestimate. His jumpshot is very solid (at least out to 12'-15') and he has very nice ballhandling skills to go with - he is more than capable of handling the ball on a fast break if that is needed. I think that alone is more than Tyson Chandler ever showed on a non-HS level of play, but he is also very smart at getting open for lobs, which is in combination with his surreal athleticism a dangerous offensive weapon and something Tyson also lacks. Add good hands into that mix and you already have a player who is more skilled on offense than Amare at the same age (Amare was still in HS at this point of his career). So what does separate the two? Strength, for one. Not only that Amare was 10 pounds heavier at the same age (240), but he also posesses superior 'natural' strength which Thomas lacks and cannot use it as a weapon when attacking the basket. But I do believe he has just as good of a motor and work ethic and that he'll compensate for his relative lack of strength with his length and vertical, both of which are probably better than Amare's. Is he a can't-miss pick? Of course not, but he's no Stromile either. He is a much more fluid, coordinated athlete, he has more skills than Stromile had coming to the NBA and has a motor and instincts that could make him a combination of Mcdyess (they were/both skinny coming to the NBA - Mcdyess: 6'9 1/2, 230, Thomas: 6'9, 229) and Ben Wallace. He doesn't have Aldridge's turnaround shot or his post moves (which are quite overrated, IMO), but he showed on many occassions (watch the regional finals in Atlanta and you'll see what I mean) how superior Thomas is in the mental part of the game.

[-Young Buck-]

I just wanted to point out that on my local news channel they were talking to Paxon and he said he would rather trade the pick for a proven player. He didnt want to throw a rookie into the team he already has. So what do you think he could do with that pick? What are some of the names out there he could possibly get? I assume they would look for a low post scorer, a power forward or center. They already have talent at PG,SG, and SF. They could possibly trade #2 pick to the Bucks for Magloire, or maybe even Zach Randolph. What do you guys think..?