4 Trade Scenarios that could work...

[RamiTheBullsFan]

ariza is a much better defender than artest. are you kidding?

artest is a relic of his former self. he bring absolutely nothing on the offensive end, so you dont have to waste much energy there. On the defensive end he brings as much as a plus 30 defender that's lost a step, weighs 240lbs can bring.

did i mention ariza is longer and more athletic?

Artest brings a higher shooting percentage on the offensive end. And he has proved that he can be a streaky 3-point shooter when it counts. And Artest can play in the low-post. Ariza is more of a finese/open-court scorer, and didn't fit in the triangle very well.

And Artest is by far the better defender. There isn't even an argument here. You make it seem like Artest has no knees left.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

melo has complete control over where he goes. if he doesn't sign the extension, no one will sign him. you're delusional if you believe otherwise.

otherwise the best you could do for melo is the egregious contracts of arenas and brand.

Regardless of who the Bulls offer for Melo, he will sign with Chicago given the opportunity. Because the Bulls aren't going to give up Rose or Boozer. He knows he would be playing on a Playoff team with a new huge contract before the new CBA comes out.

He would love to play with the Bulls, and has them on his wish list. If DEN trades him to CHI, he would sign an extension. No doubt about that.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

No, I didn't. In going through the Bulls' payroll for the next 4 years, I assumed Noah agreed to a flat $10 million per salary, which completely under-shoots everything we've heard about what Noah has been offered and what he wants. The improbability of the Bulls signing Noah to a deal that would put the org in a better spot financially (we're talking $5-7 million per, here, as that is what it would take) is so high that it is totally erroneous for you to say or imply that it is even possible for things to turn out in your favor. This team is screwed in two years anyway when they have to pay Rose, but without Deng and Noah (and, yes, even with a max extension for Melo), they are closer to the cap by a huge margin than if they kept Noah and Deng. You grasping at straws is really getting funny.

Sure, it is less about the fact that the Bulls would be screwed $-wise if they kept Deng and Noah.

It is more about that the Bulls would be screwed $-wise, AND would solidify themselves as below the Heat for the next several seasons if they make the trade for 'Melo - because of the extension. There is not going to be any center available to make us competitive.

Now if DEN was offering Chicago the draft picks in that deal, I would need to reconsider my stance.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Also, who is to say that Melo would agree to the extension with NJ if that original trade gets ressurrected?

If Melo says 'f you' to that trade... DEN would need to scramble and find a better offer.

 

[Lefty]

Sure, it is less about the fact that the Bulls would be screwed $-wise if they kept Deng and Noah.

It is more about that the Bulls would be screwed $-wise, AND would solidify themselves as below the Heat for the next several seasons if they make the trade for 'Melo - because of the extension. There is not going to be any center available to make us competitive.

Now if DEN was offering Chicago the draft picks in that deal, I would need to reconsider my stance.

I've lost track of how many times you have necessitated the repetition of this mantra: rebounding is not as important as scoring, and because of that rebounding and defense are a whole lot easier to find in the NBA. Saying without equivocation that there "will not be a center available...." is just stupid, and really belays your position as a Bulls homer. You're not drinking the Kool-Aid, your mainlining it. Good lord.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Lefty, I'm not talking about the redundant and never ending opinion-based "scoring>rebounding" debate.

The Bulls aren't going to beat Miami in the near future if they give up Noah. Your buddy FirstTimer was already laughing at the Bulls' depth at C compared to Miami.

 

[Lefty]

Lefty, I'm not talking about the redundant and never ending opinion-based "scoring>rebounding" debate.

Again, how many times do you need to be told (shown, actually) that this is fact. This is not opinionated, this is fact. The sooner you accept this the sooner you start to sound less like a hopelessly entrenched homer. Like...I can't even fathom how you can still refer to that notion as "opinion". It just boggles my mind that someone can be that willfully ignorant of things that show them to be wrong.

 

[USCChiFan]

Miami's center depth is comprised of other the hill, declining players who are trying to get a ring. I don't see that as much of a positive.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Again, how many times do you need to be told (shown, actually) that this is fact. This is not opinionated, this is fact. The sooner you accept this the sooner you start sound less like a hopelessly entrenched homer. Like...I can't even fathom how you can still refer to that notion as "opinion". It just boggles my mind that someone can be that willfully ignorant of things that show them to be wrong.

You pretend (A) I am discussing rebounding-vs-scoring right now. and (B) that all Noah brings to the table is exceptional rebounding.

You offer nothing to the discussion. You refuse to acknowledge that the Bulls would be screwed financially regardless of what they do. And the reason they are MORE screwed (as a team) if they make the deal you want is because they would be completely giving up on winning a championship in the near future.

How the hell can the Bulls become a title contender when they give up draft picks, Noah, and Deng for 'Melo?

Let me answer that for you- they CANT.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

If Melo says screw the NJ deal and won't sign an extension (if it gets re-hashed), DEN is screwed unless they take whatever deal the Bulls will offer them.

 

[Lefty]

You pretend (A) I am discussing rebounding-vs-scoring right now. and (B) that all Noah brings to the table is exceptional rebounding.

It's pertinent to the discussion at hand. It shows exactly why the Bulls would be a better team with Melo, even if they gave up Noah to do it! Better scoring = more winning, it's that simple! You're ignoring more than half the fucking equation, and acting like you've actually proven something.

You offer nothing to the discussion.

Yeah, except for, you know, facts that show your arguments to be painfully stupid.

You refuse to acknowledge that the Bulls would be screwed financially regardless of what they do.

Hmmmmm......

This team is screwed in two years anyway when they have to pay Rose, but without Deng and Noah (and, yes, even with a max extension for Melo), they are closer to the cap by a huge margin than if they kept Noah and Deng.

Naaaah, I probably just made that up or something.

And you know what the difference is between a team with Melo (less Deng and Noah) than without? The former wins more games and is overall a better team! You know why? Because they can score more!

And the reason they are MORE screwed (as a team) if they make the deal you want is because they would be completely giving up on winning a championship in the near future.

Right, because getting a top-10 player in the NBA for an overpaid forward and a center with one good season and questionable feet (who also happens to have ludicrous contract demands), is totally waiving the white flag, and decidedly not getting a lot better in an area that is proven to have more to do with winning in the NBA than anything else. Totally.

How the hell can the Bulls become a title contender when they give up draft picks, Noah, and Deng for 'Melo?

Umm....because they will increase their scoring output by a good margin over what they would have had had they not gone after Melo, and scoring has been proven to be way more valuable than anything else when it comes to winning? Yeah, I'll go with that.

Let me answer that for you- they CANT.

Yeah, let's just throw those facts n' shit out the window. **** Melo, he'd be holding this team back.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

They make that trade- no championship.

You offer no facts to prove the contrary.

You offer marginal stats about rebounding in broad field and claim those make it "fact" that the Bulls could still become a title contender. You hilariously do so even when you apply none of the stats you offer to the Bulls' would-be roster and roster at hand. Nor do you use those stats to make assertions about the teams the Bulls would be, and will be, facing.

And why, again, am I supposed to take you seriously?

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

And I looooooooooove how you completely voided this:

You pretend (A) I am discussing rebounding-vs-scoring right now. and (B) that all Noah brings to the table is exceptional rebounding.

from one of my quotes.

Way to go, Bill O'Reilly.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Apparently you didn't void that out... I guess I was too busy not caring to read thoroughly through what you have to say anymore. Oops. I guess I just assumed you did because you ignored my point.

 

[Scoot26]

So more scoring = more wins? Does more scoring = championships? Why hasnt the #1 team in scoring won a championship in more than 13 years? (It was the 96-97 Bulls..tied with the Jazz in scoring that year).

Yes in the end more points than the other team wins the game..But defense wins championships.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

So more scoring = more wins? Does more scoring = championships? Why hasnt the #1 team in scoring won a championship in more than 13 years? (It was the 96-97 Bulls..tied with the Jazz in scoring that year).

Yes in the end more points than the other team wins the game..But defense wins championships.

And that Bulls' team was arguably the best defensive team in NBA history.

But apparently Lefty has all the answers:

Better scoring = more winning, it's that simple!

 

[Scoot26]

And that Bulls' team was arguably the best defensive team in NBA history.

Statistically speaking..the 95-96 team is better as that team was ranked #1 in defensive rating, while the 96-97 team is 4th. Of course any Bulls fan will tell you the 95-96 team was the best team ever. The 96-97 team obviously isnt far behind.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Statistically speaking..the 95-96 team is better as that team was ranked #1 in defensive rating, while the 96-97 team is 4th. Of course any Bulls fan will tell you the 95-96 team was the best team ever. The 96-97 team obviously isnt far behind.

Yep, Rodman was suspended for a while in 1996-97. Longley and Kukoc (I think) were hurt too. They had to sign Brian Williams (aka- Bison Dele) to help cut their losses. But when healthy, you are right, they were certainly about the same team.

 

[Lefty]

You offer no facts to prove the contrary.

Ok, I've done a little research. What follows are scatter plots of different team statistics from the NBA Playoffs from 2005-present plotted as x-values with respect to that team's winning percentage in the playoffs for that individual year. The idea here is simple: the higher your W% in the playoffs, the deeper into the playoffs you go, so let's find out what, if anything, correlates with playoff success, and to what degree. There are 96 cases in the data set, which represents the last 6 runs of the NBA Playoffs. Under each graph I will include the respective R-squared and correlation coefficient numbers (number not approaching zero indicates some form of linear relationship, number above 0.5 indicates solid linear relationship, and the same holds for negative values).

Now, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking "a team can go 16-12 (.571 W%) and still win the NBA Championship, so winning percentage isn't the best way to gauge playoff success." Don't worry, I checked: Not once in the last 6 playoff runs has the Champion's W% dropped below .600, and neither has the W% of the NBA Championship losing team, save for one team, the Magic two years ago. If Playoff Success Points were readily available for use, I would have used them, but W% has shown itself to be good enough for our purposes. So here we go:

Defensive Rebound Percentage (percentage of available rebounds the team on defense was able to wrangle in):

Correlation: 0.116, R-Squared: 0.013

Offensive Rebound Percentage:

Correlation: 0.136, R-Squared: 0.018

Defensive Rating:

Correlation: -0.587, R-Squared: 0.344

Offensive Rating:

Correlation: 0.509, R-Squared: 0.260

What to take from all this? A clear win for defense, right? Actually, the negative correlation that accompanied team defense indicates that teams that do well on defense don't tend to fare too well in the playoffs. This makes sense when you think about it, because unlike the regular season, there are very few (if any) "bad" teams in the playoffs that you can keep from scoring baskets regularly. The better teams will still be able to put points on you, and if you can't return fire when you have the ball (like, say, with a defensive center that was 21st among centers in scoring and an oft-injured forward that struggles to put up consistent numbers on-par with his salary), you aren't going to win many games.

Overall, the team ability that most lends itself to playoff success is offense, and thus, scoring.

So then, since scoring has the most to do with playoff success (outside of luck and other factors outside teams' control), and the Bulls would undoubtedly be a better scoring team with Carmelo Anthony sans-Deng and Noah, the Bulls would be better primed to win more playoff games and thus, more likely to win an NBA Championship than without him.

And why, again, am I supposed to take you seriously?

Because you're wrong, and I'm the one proving you wrong.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

I hate to be the one to tell you this...

but you didn't prove that the Bulls could be better than Miami if they made that trade.

Miami would be better on offense, defense, and rebounding.

But (most importantly to you) the Heat would still be better on offense.

Therefore your own logic fails you in your argument that the Bulls should make that trade.