Am I wrong?

[Basghetti80]

This is in regards to Hinrich. Most assume that if we are able to sign Gordon then Hinrich is moved in an effort to stay under the luxury tax. The most oft- mentioned deal is to Portland for Blake and Outlaw. In this case Outlaw is probably cut and it is essentially Hinrich for Blake. So tell me...I am wrong for not wanting to do that deal even if it means we let Gordon walk for nothing? I realize that Hinrich is a backup guard with a healthy contract but he is very valuable player I think and moving him for Blake essentially makes no sense to me. Hinrich is obviously not the offensive player Gordon is but he is a very solid defender at all 3 perimeter positions, brings leadership, and fits nicely with Rose and Salmons in a 3 guard lineup. His contract runs out when we will have to pay Rose so the contract is timely as well as declining. It is a tough call but if I am moving Hinrich I want more value back. Am I wrong?

 

[gocubs526]

Well I think we could probably get a first round pick too. So we would be dumping salary to keep Ben Gordan, get a serviceable back up with a good contract, and receive a pick to sweeten a deal for low post presence.

 

[??? ??????]

From his radio interview, it sounds like Gordon wants the Bulls to bring back everyone from last years team. The guy wants to win. I don't think he's going to be all that happy if we re-sign him, and then promptly ship out key players. There is no reason why a big market team can't afford to have a luxury like Hinrich. Not many teams in the league can have an explosive starting front court of Rose and Gordon, and then have Kirk Hinrich, who is an overall solid player and good defender coming off the bench.

At this point, it just seems hard moving either Hinrich or Gordon. They've both responded after the down year. Hinrich's been here sixth, Gordon's been here five. I don't want either of them to leave. Our backcourt should be set for the next 10 years, and both guys should retire Bulls.

 

[TheStig]

It really doesn't have to be Sophie's choice like everyone is making it out. We can accomplish everything fairly easily. We need to resign BG and ship Tim Thomas or Jerome James and one of our picks to OKC or Memphis to get under the LT. That way we can keep everyone and its not like both the picks were going to get PT anyway. OKC has done this same type of move before with Kurt Thomas and Phoenix.

 

[J-Mart]

Basghetti80 wrote:

So tell me...I am wrong for not wanting to do that deal even if it means we let Gordon walk for nothing?

IMO yes. I would rather trade Kirk for a back up, salary relief and a pick than give up Gordon and get nothing in return.

I would love to keep both and we could. Reality is that we won't because we have a cheap owner who won't go over the tax. It sucks and honestly I won't blink twice when JR croaks. Is it wrong for me to feel that way?

 

[step]

Reality is that we won't because we have a cheap owner who won't go over the tax. It sucks and honestly I won't blink twice when JR croaks.

When will people realize it does not end with Reinsdorf.

 

[dougthonus]

Basghetti80 wrote:

This is in regards to Hinrich. Most assume that if we are able to sign Gordon then Hinrich is moved in an effort to stay under the luxury tax. The most oft- mentioned deal is to Portland for Blake and Outlaw. In this case Outlaw is probably cut and it is essentially Hinrich for Blake. So tell me...I am wrong for not wanting to do that deal even if it means we let Gordon walk for nothing? I realize that Hinrich is a backup guard with a healthy contract but he is very valuable player I think and moving him for Blake essentially makes no sense to me. Hinrich is obviously not the offensive player Gordon is but he is a very solid defender at all 3 perimeter positions, brings leadership, and fits nicely with Rose and Salmons in a 3 guard lineup. His contract runs out when we will have to pay Rose so the contract is timely as well as declining. It is a tough call but if I am moving Hinrich I want more value back. Am I wrong?

It depends, if you think Ben Gordon is better than Kirk Hinrich, then yes, you are wrong. You are better off moving Hinrich for nothing and keeping Gordon.

If you think Kirk Hinrich is better than Gordon, then you're not wrong.

As it stands, I don't think the Blazers would make this trade anyway.

 

[dougthonus]

TheStig wrote:

It really doesn't have to be Sophie's choice like everyone is making it out. We can accomplish everything fairly easily. We need to resign BG and ship Tim Thomas or Jerome James and one of our picks to OKC or Memphis to get under the LT. That way we can keep everyone and its not like both the picks were going to get PT anyway. OKC has done this same type of move before with Kurt Thomas and Phoenix.

If you move James and your picks, you can free up salary room for Gordon, but you just eliminated any chance you had at all of trading for a star player. Of course, you could say those odds are so long anyway, that we might as well keep Gordon.

 

[TheStig]

dougthonus wrote:

TheStig wrote:

It really doesn't have to be Sophie's choice like everyone is making it out. We can accomplish everything fairly easily. We need to resign BG and ship Tim Thomas or Jerome James and one of our picks to OKC or Memphis to get under the LT. That way we can keep everyone and its not like both the picks were going to get PT anyway. OKC has done this same type of move before with Kurt Thomas and Phoenix.

If you move James and your picks, you can free up salary room for Gordon, but you just eliminated any chance you had at all of trading for a star player. Of course, you could say those odds are so long anyway, that we might as well keep Gordon.

Well you only do this after you see how the Amare/Bosh extension talks go and even after that you still have Miller and Thomas expiring deals, one of the picks(it won't take both) and future picks to deal. The deal will either happen in the summer when we still have all the assets or at the deadline when we still have most of them. We aren't really loosing much leverage.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Depends on how you look at it. If Gordon > Hinrich then yes. If Hinrich > Gordon then no. If Hinrich = Gordon then imo no. Of course there is always the option to keep both which I prefer, but that's up to management. I think the better thing to do for a salary dump is to dump the players who never play anyway: Tim Thomas, Roberson, Jerome James, maybe even Gray and Linton. But maybe I'm being too optimistic.