Brad to Chicago?

[Bballkingsrock]

Brad Miller to Chicago is fine, but I do not want Nocioni. He is turning 29 in November, long contract, and not a great fit player for the Kings. Now if we are trading Brad Miller, Salmons, and some other things for Deng and Noah, that would be a great trade because of how young Deng and NOah are. Get Deng Petrie!

 

[bajaden]

If we can get Noah, it would be a huge steal. I would even do Hawes for Noah straight up, but Miller for Noah is even better.

However, messageboard deals are never reliable no matter how reliable the source supposedly is.

Couldn't disagree more. I'll go along with both on the same team, but if I have to choose between them, I'll take Hawes. However I don't want this discussion to go in that direction.

 

[Kingster]

If Noah is in the trade, DO IT! If not, I'm not interested. If there is a glimmer of reality behind this proposal, I'm beginning to think that finally Petrie is in the "go young, go athletic mode." That is a very good sign. It may finally mean that he's through with the mediocre vet-youngin mix. Noah can play, he's very athletic for his size, passes very well, even on the move, still can't shoot very well, but he's still young. If Petrie gets Noah, he has his cake (Hawes) and he eats it too (Noah).

 

[Dime Dropper]

I'm not interested in moving a 6' 11" guy with shot blocking, rebounding and passing capability to the three. It seems like a waste to me.

I'm pretty much with you. He's a natural PF, why would you want him at SF? Sure, he may be able to play their at spurts, but I find it funny that now that we have a full-sized, mobile PF people are talking about putting him at SF.

 

[bajaden]

Me too.

I've said this on a few different threads, but Noah is soooo underrated on this board. His per minute averages last year were great for a rookie. He actually outdid the more ballyhooed Horford when it came to Hollinger's PER ratings. On 82games.com he rated as the Bulls' most valuable player who played a signigicant amount of minutes.

Really of Hawes, Thompson, and Noah, I think Noah is not only the best player right now, but the best prospect...and that's to take nothing away of JT and SH who I really like....but theoretically, I think they could chop up 96 minutes between them really nicely and be really versatile, productive front line.

There's no chance that we get Noah and a pick IMO. But if our main piece is BMiller, and we get back Noah, that is an OUTSTANDING trade.

I don't know about Hollinger's ratings, but I wouldn't trade you Horford for two Noah's. I watched them both play in college, and whenever possible last year. Horford is far more skilled than Noah. He only played 5 more minutes a game than Noah last year and just missed averaging a double double for the year.

I'm not against trading for him, but lets not make him out to be more than he is.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Don't like Nocioni and I don't like his conract.

 

[VF21]

I'm not interested in moving a 6' 11" guy with shot blocking, rebounding and passing capability to the three. It seems like a waste to me.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I know, not a problem ), but hasn't Kevin Garnett been listed as a SF for a good part of his career?

 

[Dime Dropper]

Correct me if I'm wrong (I know, not a problem ), but hasn't Kevin Garnett been listed as a SF for a good part of his career?

If he has, I wasn't aware of it. I've always thought of him as a PF and always seen him listed as a PF. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

 

[NME]

Miller for Nocioni/Noah doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Everything so far has indicated that we're trying to clear contracts for 2010: The Year We Make Capspace. Miller's expiring that summer, while Nocioni goes two years beyond that and will be somewhere between $8.5 and $9.5M on the cap. If we were to clear Salmons, that would lessen Nocioni's hit, but keep in mind that we're not the only team looking for cap space for the FA period to end all FA periods, so he's not exactly the most movable piece.

I don't think Nocioni's signed to a bargain contract by any means, and he's a complementary piece rather than a star. Noah doesn't impress me. So I don't see why we do this and potentially sacrifice signing a big-name free agent in 2010. Reliable source? Or guy who just started a web page and wants to increase traffic? I've got my guess.

Nocioni actually has a decreasing contract that goes like this the next four years:

$8,000,000 $7,500,000 $6,850,000 $6,650,000

So, it isn't quite so bad as it will be under $7 million in the "cap space" years.

And, as you mention, everyone and their grandmother is trying to clear space for 2010, when in reality the vast majority of those attractive names will resign with their original teams, many of them before the summer even hits. It's good to have flexibility in your future salary structure, but true cap space can be overrated. You still have to be fortunate to actually pull off a marquee acquisition. A lot of teams have parted out their rosters and end up twiddling their thumbs and eventually refill that space by retaining their own and/or adding middling talent. If you have an opportunity to add a talented young piece, while still retaining reasonable future cap flexibility, it may be worth sacrificing some of that room.

 

[upinsmoke]

Noah might serve as a good backup to Thompson one day. As for Nocioni I would pass on him but he would serve as decent trade.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Nocioni actually has a decreasing contract that goes like this the next four years:

$8,000,000 $7,500,000 $6,850,000 $6,650,000

So, it isn't quite so bad as it will be under $7 million in the "cap space" years.

Where did you find that info? Patricia Bender's site only has the total value and the HoopsHype info is incomplete for Nocioni. I'll admit that's a few million better than I thought, and basically a wash with Salmons' contract during the 2010 offseason.

And, as you mention, everyone and their grandmother is trying to clear space for 2010, when in reality the vast majority of those attractive names will resign with their original teams, many of them before the summer even hits. It's good to have flexibility in your future salary structure, but true cap space can be overrated. You still have to be fortunate to actually pull off a marquee acquisition. A lot of teams have parted out their rosters and end up twiddling their thumbs and eventually refill that space by retaining their own and/or adding middling talent. If you have an opportunity to add a talented young piece, while still retaining reasonable future cap flexibility, it may be worth sacrificing some of that room.

You're right on that, but I'm not convinced that Nocioni, who will turn 29 early in the season, is really the talented young piece that is worth scuttling a chance, be it an off-off chance, at the top guys in 2010. If we can find a way to get rid of Salmons then I'm not opposed. At least this trade would open up time for Hawes/Thompson/(Noah?) in the rotation.

 

[NME]

Where did you find that info? Patricia Bender's site only has the total value and the HoopsHype info is incomplete for Nocioni. I'll admit that's a few million better than I thought, and basically a wash with Salmons' contract during the 2010 offseason.



You're right on that, but I'm not convinced that Nocioni, who will turn 29 early in the season, is really the talented young piece that is worth scuttling a chance, be it an off-off chance, at the top guys in 2010. If we can find a way to get rid of Salmons then I'm not opposed. At least this trade would open up time for Hawes/Thompson/(Noah?) in the rotation.

I can’t exactly vouch for the accuracy of this site specifically, but the salary progression matches what I’ve read in numerous places about the declining contracts given to Nocioni and Hinrich.

http://www.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/bulls.jsp

You're right on that, but I'm not convinced that Nocioni, who will turn 29 early in the season, is really the talented young piece that is worth scuttling a chance, be it an off-off chance, at the top guys in 2010.

No, not him definitely, I meant that acquiring Noah as a long-term piece could be worth swallowing Nocioni’s contract.

Even if you want to roll the dice on the unlikely theft of a franchise player, there’s only so much effective cap space that’s of use. I don’t know exactly where we project versus the cap in 2010 right now, but say if we’re talking the difference between having $20 million and $13 million, you only need enough space swallow Year One of a Max deal.

 

[Kingsguy881]

Correct me if I'm wrong (I know, not a problem ), but hasn't Kevin Garnett been listed as a SF for a good part of his career?

KG has always been listed as "F", not with any designation on whether he is "PF" or "SF".

 

[VF21]

I'm not sure that's at all correct. Having played Virtual GM for several years on Yahoo, I'm almost positive Garnett was listed as a small forward. Unfortunately, I cannot go back and double-check.

 

[ntn9107]

Yes... KG started as a SF then later on moved to the PF position.

Tom Gugliotta was their PF before.....

 

[Bricklayer]

In his early years KG was largely a SF who swung to PF -- very very skinny, and they let Googs and then Joe Smith play alongside him as the PFs. But he swung between the two positions pretty freely until maybe 4-5 years ago when he really became a full time PF.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Where did you find that info? Patricia Bender's site only has the total value and the HoopsHype info is incomplete for Nocioni.

No offense, but if it ever comes down to a he-said/he-said between NME and anybody when it comes to player contracts, I'm taking NME's word for it.

 

[captain bill]

Miller for Nocioni/Noah doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Everything so far has indicated that we're trying to clear contracts for 2010: The Year We Make Capspace. Miller's expiring that summer, while Nocioni goes two years beyond that and will be somewhere between $8.5 and $9.5M on the cap. If we were to clear Salmons, that would lessen Nocioni's hit, but keep in mind that we're not the only team looking for cap space for the FA period to end all FA periods, so he's not exactly the most movable piece.

I don't think Nocioni's signed to a bargain contract by any means, and he's a complementary piece rather than a star. Noah doesn't impress me. So I don't see why we do this and potentially sacrifice signing a big-name free agent in 2010. Reliable source? Or guy who just started a web page and wants to increase traffic? I've got my guess.

Saving money for 2010 is foolish considering that most big time players get locked up by their original teams with extensions rather than leaving in FA, and when they do, it tends to be to big market teams or cities that the players view as attractive destinations. It is a very long shot that we would sign any big names, while you are basically advocating letting our talent and trade pieces leave for nothing save a pipe dream.

Nocioni is a good complementary piece who can do a little bit of everything- clutch scorer and good second or third option, solid defense, and great hustle. Watching the Bulls in the playoffs he struck me as a very good player, and if we trade Artest he would be a great stopgap at the 3, if not a starter, considering that he wouldn't need to carry the bulk of the scoring and would be a good second banana to Martin who should rightfully be the focus of the offense.

Noah is a solid player who would solidify our 3 man frontcourt for the next decade. He may not be great at any one thing, but he is good at a lot of things and would bring fantastic energy off the bench at the 4 or 5. It was mentioned earlier that he could bring a similar role as Pollard on the prime Webb/Divac Kings and I agree with that, he is a valuable asset.

I would be willing to trade Brad plus a second or lottery protected first for Nocioni and Noah, two players of very high caliber who are also team players, something we should be looking for in most of the assets we pick up, since this team looks like it will be built around Martin/Thompson/Hawes; we should be adding complementary players who can mesh with the talent we already have rather than trying to break the bank or holding out for one great player. There is a solid foundation of talent here already, these are two players who could really help to build on that.

As for the drugs and attitude...have people on this board forgotten that we would be trading away our own center who has already been suspended for the same drugs as Noah? Tit for tat, attitude on this trade is a wash, maybe it even favors Noah since Noah has shown more competitive drive and will to win in college than Brad has shown his whole career.

 

[hammystyle]

I don't know about Hollinger's ratings, but I wouldn't trade you Horford for two Noah's. I watched them both play in college, and whenever possible last year. Horford is far more skilled than Noah. He only played 5 more minutes a game than Noah last year and just missed averaging a double double for the year.

I'm not against trading for him, but lets not make him out to be more than he is.

1) Horford averaged 10.6 more minutes per game. 20.7 vs 31.3
2) Horford's Per/40 12.9 P 12.4 R 2.0 A 1.2 B .94 S
Noah's Per/40 12.7p 10.9R 2.2 A 1.66B 1.77S

I've seen them play too many many times, Horford is definitely the better prospect, but right now there's not a world of difference. Horford's got much more offensive potential whereas Noah is a slightly better defender and passer.

My point was only that people wwere acting like Noah had a bad rookie year, when in fact he was actually really good. If the Bulls had (pulled their H out of their A and) played him 31.3 minutes per game, Noah would have had really impressive nightly numbers.

 

[captain bill]

In his early years KG was largely a SF who swung to PF -- very very skinny, and they let Googs and then Joe Smith play alongside him as the PFs. But he swung between the two positions pretty freely until maybe 4-5 years ago when he really became a full time PF.

It should be noted that his greatest success came as a full time PF focusing on the things he does best, not having to worry about playing out of position to cover his team's deficiencies. If we want to utilize JT's versatility it would make sense to just play him as a "point forward," ie, keep him at PF but keep a series of plays on which the offense is run through him to utilize his court vision and PG skills, would it not? Putting him out of position and running out 3 bigs on the court would just get us killed against smaller line ups.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

No offense, but if it ever comes down to a he-said/he-said between NME and anybody when it comes to player contracts, I'm taking NME's word for it.

It was NEVER intended to be confrontational. I just couldn't find the info so I asked NME where he got it in case he knew of a good site that I didn't. Turns out he did - I'm going to bookmark the ShamSports site.

 

[est.1999]

would you guys do artest/miller and a first for deng/Noah??

 

[beb0p]

I highly doubt Chicago is trading Noah. From the Bulls' perspective, Nocioni is not going to make or break that team. So it make sense to dangle him plus a scrub plus a draft pick (likely not a high pick anyway) for that missing piece that can get them to the playoff.

But asking for Noah changes the whole dynamics. He's the Bulls' future C/PF. If another teams asks for Spencer Hawes in exchange for some 30 yr old vet, I think we'd collectively say, pee off!

So if he is the hang-up then this deal is as good as dead.

Now, if the Bulls are willing to take KT in exchange for Drew Gooden, then I'm intrigued.

 

[captain bill]

I highly doubt Chicago is trading Noah. From the Bulls' perspective, Nocioni is not going to make or break that team. So it make sense to dangle him plus a scrub plus a draft pick (likely not a high pick anyway) for that missing piece that can get them to the playoff.

But asking for Noah changes the whole dynamics. He's the Bulls' future C/PF. If another teams asks for Spencer Hawes in exchange for some 30 yr old vet, I think we'd collectively say, pee off!

So if he is the hang-up then this deal is as good as dead.

Now, if the Bulls are willing to take KT in exchange for Drew Gooden, then I'm intrigued.

The same thing could have easily been said of Tyson Chandler. When it comes to the Bulls, don't expect reason or logic to be mitigating factors in whether or not they do a trade. They will trade any player if they think it could help in the immediate future (ie, a better chance of winning the next game on the schedule) and don't seem to have much patience in building over the long term or any interest in a stable roster.

 

[bajaden]

Correct me if I'm wrong (I know, not a problem ), but hasn't Kevin Garnett been listed as a SF for a good part of his career?

Yeah, when he first came into the league. Garnett is sort of a rare bird, in that he has SF skills, runs the floor well, but is good rebounder and post player. Hey, that sounds kind of familiar.

 

[bajaden]

Nocioni actually has a decreasing contract that goes like this the next four years:

$8,000,000 $7,500,000 $6,850,000 $6,650,000

So, it isn't quite so bad as it will be under $7 million in the "cap space" years.

And, as you mention, everyone and their grandmother is trying to clear space for 2010, when in reality the vast majority of those attractive names will resign with their original teams, many of them before the summer even hits. It's good to have flexibility in your future salary structure, but true cap space can be overrated. You still have to be fortunate to actually pull off a marquee acquisition. A lot of teams have parted out their rosters and end up twiddling their thumbs and eventually refill that space by retaining their own and/or adding middling talent. If you have an opportunity to add a talented young piece, while still retaining reasonable future cap flexibility, it may be worth sacrificing some of that room.

One thing that needs to be remembered, is that cap space doesn't just help you in signing free agents. It can also help you in a trade. It enable's you to trade a player of lesser salary for one of greater salary, because you have the cap space to absorb it. A perfect example is Camby to the Clips for a second round pick..

 

[bajaden]

I can’t exactly vouch for the accuracy of this site specifically, but the salary progression matches what I’ve read in numerous places about the declining contracts given to Nocioni and Hinrich.

http://www.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/bulls.jsp




No, not him definitely, I meant that acquiring Noah as a long-term piece could be worth swallowing Nocioni’s contract.

Even if you want to roll the dice on the unlikely theft of a franchise player, there’s only so much effective cap space that’s of use. I don’t know exactly where we project versus the cap in 2010 right now, but say if we’re talking the difference between having $20 million and $13 million, you only need enough space swallow Year One of a Max deal.

Hoopsworld salary page agrees with what you've posted.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=9193

 

[bajaden]

1) Horford averaged 10.6 more minutes per game. 20.7 vs 31.3
2) Horford's Per/40 12.9 P 12.4 R 2.0 A 1.2 B .94 S
Noah's Per/40 12.7p 10.9R 2.2 A 1.66B 1.77S

I've seen them play too many many times, Horford is definitely the better prospect, but right now there's not a world of difference. Horford's got much more offensive potential whereas Noah is a slightly better defender and passer.

My point was only that people wwere acting like Noah had a bad rookie year, when in fact he was actually really good. If the Bulls had (pulled their H out of their A and) played him 31.3 minutes per game, Noah would have had really impressive nightly numbers.

First of all, my bad. I went back and looked at last years stats and saw 25.38 instead of 2,538. Just shows I need to slow down. However, I still like Horford over Noah. That said, I would love to have Noah on the team. I think you would have a very good three man rotation and all three would get serious minutes. Sheldon could shine their shoes and carry their suit cases for them. Just kidding, just kidding.

 

[bajaden]

I highly doubt Chicago is trading Noah. From the Bulls' perspective, Nocioni is not going to make or break that team. So it make sense to dangle him plus a scrub plus a draft pick (likely not a high pick anyway) for that missing piece that can get them to the playoff.

But asking for Noah changes the whole dynamics. He's the Bulls' future C/PF. If another teams asks for Spencer Hawes in exchange for some 30 yr old vet, I think we'd collectively say, pee off!

So if he is the hang-up then this deal is as good as dead.

Now, if the Bulls are willing to take KT in exchange for Drew Gooden, then I'm intrigued.

You could be right, but remember, this is the team that traded away Elton Brand, because they thought, when he averaged 20/10, that was as good as he was going to get.

 

[NME]

One thing that needs to be remembered, is that cap space doesn't just help you in signing free agents. It can also help you in a trade. It enable's you to trade a player of lesser salary for one of greater salary, because you have the cap space to absorb it. A perfect example is Camby to the Clips for a second round pick..

Sure, there are plenty of good reasons to create cap space. I'm just making the point that there can be a balance, and there can be some valid reasons for giving up some of that future space when you can acquire something of value. What you end up getting with that of that space may or may not be more valuable than some of the opportunities you passed up by going for maximum possible cap space at all costs.