July 1

[Bullsman24]

Ok so it's July 1, first day of FA. Do you:

A) come to lebron at midnight since he is the best player in the league

B) go to Chris bosh at midnight because he is the best fit and most likely to leave

C) go to dwyane Wade at midnight and try to play the hometown card

the risk is that if lebron is interested and you don't come to him immediately, he would lose interest since he's nor your first priority. Same with both of the others.

I go to lebron because he is just the best player out here. You have to take he chance that youndont get him because he's that much better than anyone else.
What do you do?

 

[RC_Skinny22]

D) Send a guy to each one.

This is the offseason you have to land a big FA. You have to try anything that´s possiBULL.

 

[Kush77]

This offseason, I think gonna be pretty complicated. I don't see any guy signing right at midnight or the next day.

Since there are a handful of teams that can spend FAs will probably take the time to explore their options. I don't see it being like a Ben Wallace situation where Det wasn't gonna pay and the Bulls made the best offer.

Plus the whole S&T aspect off it. The Bulls should have time to talk to all three guys before something happens.

I still think LBJ stays in Cleveland, but if the Cavs crash and burn in this series, other teams chances got better. If the Cavs lose I can actually see him leaving as before I couldn't.

 

[Diddy1122]

When the Cavs lose, & I say when because it's GOING to happen if Mike Brown insists on playing Shaq & Big Z alot in this series, LBJ WILL leave. I can't say it's guaranteed because what in life is, but I'd give the odds to 99.5% that he leaves.

I've never thought Mike Brown was that good of a coach & what he has done in this series is just proving my point. The Cavs were 21-4 without Shaq in the lineup. Let me say that again, 21-4! Shaq has averaged 23mpg in this series while Hickson, you know the guy who the Cavs wouldn't include in a trade because he was so valuable is averaging a measley 11mpg. It's no coincidence that this team play's better when Shaq is not on the floor. He is slowing the game down to a pace that Boston is thriving in. The Cavs are at their best when using their superior speed & athleticism to out run & gun opponents. It's already worked mutiple times against Boston this year! What Brown has done in this series goes beyond comprehension & has his team sitting on the brink of elimination yet again after posting the best record in the NBA.

Clearly Lebron is frustrated. Whether it's at himself, his teammates, his coach, it's hard to say but the stupidity that Brown is displaying is not helping matters & may just write not only his own ticket out of town but Lebron's as well. And when that happens, Gar should send the entire Luvabulls squad on a private jet to pick up Lebron & deliver him to the Berto Center to sign on the dotted line.

 

[cool007]

It's definitely going to be LeBron.

Remember when Bulls went to Kobe even when we weren't a playoff team and even when we weren't even under the cap and even when we almost had 0.0% chance.

Now, we are a playoff team. We have a buddying star and a near all-star center, we have money to spend and under the cap, and we have a lot greater chance.

I see why not go after the best player in the game today?

I also Genuinely think LeBron actually wants to come to Chicago.

 

[Shakes]

I'd go to LeBron even if I knew it meant I had no chance at getting Bosh or Wade. LeBron is the best player in the league, and the gap between him and the next guy is huge. He's good enough that he's worth going all in for.

 

[Diddy1122]

cool007 wrote:

I also Genuinely think LeBron actually wants to come to Chicago.

Well that was the case in my NBA 2k10 offseason. :laugh: I signed him to a 5yr/$96mill contract with the 5th year being a player option. Hopefully the world of sports fantasy & sports reality will merge together on July 1.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Bullseye wrote:

D) Send a guy to each one.

This is the offseason you have to land a big FA. You have to try anything that´s possiBULL.

I'll take option D as well. You go after each one and go after each one hard.

 

[Kush77]

The Cavs could still win this series.

LeBron can easily come out and play like he did in Game 3 when the Cavs blew out the C's.

But if the Cavs blow it they can blame themselves. They should have got Stoudemire when they had the chance. That would have been a more attractive piece to stay and play with than Antwan Jamison.

They also should have got Shaq the year before at the deadline with Wally Z's expiring, but they stood pat. Cavs management can blame themselves. They were in postion to make this team even better, but they didn't. Now it can cost them dearly.

 

[Frank Breakfast Styleham]

I would not go after LeBron because I cannot see any scenario in which he comes to Chicago. He's not going to the Clippers (don't know why people say that - he's NOT going to the Clippers lol).

If he leaves Cleveland there are only 3 teams he could go to:

1. Miami - This is most likely. If Riley promises to coach, Wade is back and if that happens, Miami has the money to get Wade and James. I can see this happening. If he could play with Dwyane Wade and be coached by Pat Riley why on earth would he stay in Cleveland after his point guard just quit on the team?

2. New York - The money and locations there but it would be worse than Cleveland - one true superstar when you surround him with a bunch of overhyped, overpraised, over-rated scrubs. But if they could dump some contracts and bring him and some other guys in it might just happen. Players seem to love playing for Coach D'Antoni.

3. LA Lakers - This is unlikely because they would have to dump a LOT of salary (they'd have to trade Gasol and maybe even Odom) and LeBron would STILL have to take an astronimical paycut but he might be so sick of losing he might be willing to join forces with Kobe and win the next 3 titles there. It's more likely than him coming to the Bulls.

But you know what? If the right strings were pulled I can even see LeBron going to Oklahoma City to play with Kevin Durant. It would take quite a sacrifice on OKC's part but if LeBron was willing to do a sign and trade it's not out of the realm of question to see him going to Oklahoma for Westbrook, Jeff Green, Krstic, and maybe a slew of first rounders and cash.

Should be interesting.

 

[houheffna]

By the way, for those who whined all season about letting go of Ben Gordon and trading John Salmons, this was why. No, the Bulls may not get James. But they are now in the conversation. If they’d have kept either Gordon or Salmons they wouldn’t be. And how could they justify that?-Sam Smith

Been saying this all year...ALL DAMN YEAR! Thanks Sam, glad somebody understands...

 

[J-Mart]

houheffna wrote:

By the way, for those who whined all season about letting go of Ben Gordon and trading John Salmons, this was why. No, the Bulls may not get James. But they are now in the conversation. If they’d have kept either Gordon or Salmons they wouldn’t be. And how could they justify that?-Sam Smith

Been saying this all year...ALL DAMN YEAR! Thanks Sam, glad somebody understands...

Nobody with a brain disagrees. The Gordon situation was always a matter of them being able to dump Hinrich and choosing not to. I remember Paxson explicitly implying right after the Salmons/Miller trade that Kirk could have been dumped for expirings, but that they felt he had better value than that. Not trying to start a BG thing, frankly I don't want to talk about it either. But acting like everyone wanted Gordon over the cap space is just not true.

And the Salmons thing, all I have to say is meh. I would have rather them traded Hinrich but I believe that ship sailed over a year ago and they needed to guarantee the cap space. Obviously that was more important than Salmons.

 

[houheffna]

Nobody with a brain disagrees. The Gordon situation was always a matter of them being able to dump Hinrich and choosing not to. I remember Paxson explicitly implying right after the Salmons/Miller trade that Kirk could have been dumped for expirings, but that they felt he had better value than that. Not trying to start a BG thing, frankly I don't want to talk about it either. But acting like everyone wanted Gordon over the cap space is just not true.

And the Salmons thing, all I have to say is meh. I would have rather them traded Hinrich but I believe that ship sailed over a year ago and they needed to guarantee the cap space. Obviously that was more important than Salmons.

Lebron is more important than Gordon,Hinrich and Salmons...combined. Lebron doesn't need Hinrich or Gordon here to win a championship. Salmons either, none of them are that important. Lebron and Rose together means that entering into a new contract paying an excessive amount of money for a player that would be 3rd or 4th scorer would have been very, very stupid.

 

[J-Mart]

houheffna wrote:

Nobody with a brain disagrees. The Gordon situation was always a matter of them being able to dump Hinrich and choosing not to. I remember Paxson explicitly implying right after the Salmons/Miller trade that Kirk could have been dumped for expirings, but that they felt he had better value than that. Not trying to start a BG thing, frankly I don't want to talk about it either. But acting like everyone wanted Gordon over the cap space is just not true.

And the Salmons thing, all I have to say is meh. I would have rather them traded Hinrich but I believe that ship sailed over a year ago and they needed to guarantee the cap space. Obviously that was more important than Salmons.

Lebron is more important than Gordon,Hinrich and Salmons...combined. Lebron doesn't need Hinrich or Gordon here to win a championship. Salmons either, none of them are that important. Lebron and Rose together means that entering into a new contract paying an excessive amount of money for a player that would be 3rd or 4th scorer would have been very, very stupid.

You are twisting what I said. Just because two years ago you had a maybe one percent chance of landing Lebron does not mean you completely ignore every other basketball decision and label it as unimportant. Having that third or fourth scorer is actually extremely important. Actually because Cleveland, Miami and Toronto are lacking those pieces are the exact reason we are in this hopeful situation right now.

Anyways this wasn't meant to turn into an argument. I overall agreed with you until you completely twisted what I said. My point was that claiming "everyone" was saying we should have thrown away 2010 free agency for Gordon and Salmons is wrong. Going of memory I think 95% of everyone here is and has always have been in favor of opening the cap space for free agency. Where the disagreements came was what players were given priority to stay over other players.

 

[houheffna]

I didn't twist anything anyone said, I just stated the facts...as I have stated them for months now...bickering over mediocre players mean nothing...my point is they can all go, ALL OF THEM. They are not needed for a championship if the Bulls get Lebron...

 

[Kush77]

houheffna wrote:

By the way, for those who whined all season about letting go of Ben Gordon and trading John Salmons, this was why. No, the Bulls may not get James. But they are now in the conversation. If they’d have kept either Gordon or Salmons they wouldn’t be. And how could they justify that?-Sam Smith

Been saying this all year...ALL DAMN YEAR! Thanks Sam, glad somebody understands...

I'm sorry is just being "in the conversation" worth something??? If the Bulls don't get James then who cares about being "in the conversation?" They were in the conversation for Kobe, Garnett and Gasol.

I was reading the other posts and Hou - I don't know why you make a point of LBJ being more important that Hinrich or Gordon or Salmons. Who on here has actually said that? No one? So I'm not sure why you say that?. It's like your arguing against statements that were never made.

But what I think you mean is - you are willing to let guys like Gordon or Salmons walk just for that opportunity for James. For you just having the chance is worth it. And that's where we disagree on that subject. For me I don't believe in planning for FA a year or two in advance. Because you might whiff.

If the Bulls get James, like I said in another thread, I'll give management huge props for gambling and winning. That's includes JR.
I just wouldn't have made that gamble. Mainly because I though LBJ was staying put 100%. But I also didn't see them losing to the C's who turned back the clock to 2008. So it's a risk the Bulls took and it could pay off big.

Obviously this is something that is 20/20. We can sit here and say - great move clearing cap room because we got LBJ. But what if we get no one? Then was it still worth it? I would say no. Hou, you might say yes. That's where we disagree. I don't take any consolation in just being "in the conversation."

I hope to buy a Chicgao Bulls 2010-2011 NBA Champions shirt. Not a 2010 "Hey we were in the conversation, Chris Broussard talks about us on ESPN" shirt.

Chris Bosh would be nice too. When I say whiff, I mean getting no one. Similar to 2000. I hope it doesn't happen.

 

[houheffna]

I'm sorry is just being "in the conversation" worth something??? If the Bulls don't get James then who cares about being "in the conversation?" They were in the conversation for Kobe, Garnett and Gasol.

I was reading the other posts and Hou - I don't know why you make a point of LBJ being more important that Hinrich or Gordon or Salmons. Who on here has actually said that? No one? So I'm not sure why you say that?. It's like your arguing against statements that were never made.

But what I think you mean is - you are willing to let guys like Gordon or Salmons walk just for that opportunity for James. For you just having the chance is worth it. And that's where we disagree on that subject. For me I don't believe in planning for FA a year or two in advance. Because you might whiff.

If the Bulls get James, like I said in another thread, I'll give management huge props for gambling and winning. That's includes JR.
I just wouldn't have made that gamble. Mainly because I though LBJ was staying put 100%. But I also didn't see them losing to the C's who turned back the clock to 2008. So it's a risk the Bulls took and it could pay off big.

Obviously this is something that is 20/20. We can sit here and say - great move clearing cap room because we got LBJ. But what if we get no one? Then was it still worth it? I would say no. Hou, you might say yes. That's where we disagree. I don't take any consolation in just being "in the conversation."

I hope to buy a Chicgao Bulls 2010-2011 NBA Champions shirt. Not a 2010 "Hey we were in the conversation, Chris Broussard talks about us on ESPN" shirt.

Chris Bosh would be nice too. When I say whiff, I mean getting no one. Similar to 2000. I hope it doesn't happen.

Ok, let me get this straight...you are actually sitting there contemplating whether clearing capspace to go after 2 or 3 of the best players in the sport was worth it, because Gordon and Salmons are not here...Rev. Kush, you have officially lost your damn mind man...and probably half your congregation...don't preach that b.s. this Sunday. There won't be much in the offering tray...lol. Even the most loyal Gordon followers will put a boot to his ass to talk to Lebron, just to shake hands with Lebron is worth getting rid of Gordon's mediocre ass, and Salmons? He sucked half the season! You gotta be kidding me...

Dude, turn in all of your Bulls memorabilia, give up your podcast, I am exiling you to Detroit, you are better off as a Pistons fan...this was absolutely ridiculous! Oh my goodness....lawd have mercy! The boy don' went crazy, we gotta commit you to a sports home for crazy folk...wow.

 

[J-Mart]

I have to agree with Hou here. If we signed Gordon and didn't dump any contracts, we would have been stuck in mediocrity. Do you really think a lineup with Rose, Gordon, Deng, Noah, Hinrich, Salmons, Gibson and maybe Tyrus would compete for a title next year? let alone ever? I personally don't think so and really at that point your only way to improve the team is through getting a draft pick, free agency or a lopsided trade.

That team is good enough where they will make the playoffs every year, so no pick. Free agency wouldn't have been a factor, so the only thing you can really hope for is a trade. Personally I think FA is the best option, especially in a year where there are a TON of stars that happen to be free agents and is arguably one of the strongest FA classes. We have two good young players in Noah and Rose with a big market to stroke the egos of all the stars that are coming out. Its the easiest and quickest way to make a title contender without tanking and rebuilding, to me it was the best option. We also managed to do all this with only losing Gordon (Which didn't even have to happen). Salmons is aging and wasn't doing anything for us and Tyrus has been mediocre at best.

 

[Kush77]

Never said I wanted Ben Gordon over LeBron.

Not sure where that came from or how you got that from my post.

I said I don't consider being "in the conversation" as some sort of prize.

Maybe that makes you happy, I WANT Lebron, not just talking about it.

That was my point.

I don want my team making plans a year, 2 years in advance just to be in the conversation.

Hou, you posted a quote from Sam Smith that said if the Bulls don't get James at least they were in the conversation.

That's not the goal, the goal it TO GET LEBRON. not just be in the conversation.

That is my point.

Not the Ben Gordon stuff you brought up.

 

[Kush77]

J-Mart wrote:

I have to agree with Hou here. If we signed Gordon and didn't dump any contracts, we would have been stuck in mediocrity. Do you really think a lineup with Rose, Gordon, Deng, Noah, Hinrich, Salmons, Gibson and maybe Tyrus would compete for a title next year? let alone ever? I personally don't think so and really at that point your only way to improve the team is through getting a draft pick, free agency or a lopsided trade.

That team is good enough where they will make the playoffs every year, so no pick. Free agency wouldn't have been a factor, so the only thing you can really hope for is a trade. Personally I think FA is the best option, especially in a year where there are a TON of stars that happen to be free agents and is arguably one of the strongest FA classes. We have two good young players in Noah and Rose with a big market to stroke the egos of all the stars that are coming out. Its the easiest and quickest way to make a title contender without tanking and rebuilding, to me it was the best option. We also managed to do all this with only losing Gordon (Which didn't even have to happen). Salmons is aging and wasn't doing anything for us and Tyrus has been mediocre at best.

I agree with Hou too.

Hou is disagreeing with an argument I didn't even make.

I think that's happened before....hmmmmmm......