Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Drone

[Shakes]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Dpauley23 wrote:

How the hell would you spread out 144 minutes to Deng, Salmons, Rose, Hinrich, and Gordon

There are more than 144 if you play Deng some minutes at power forward. I mean seriously, he's a better option there than Tim Thomas.

 

[Dpauley23]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

How can you say that for sure? If we acquire Amare or Bosh your going to throw them out there for 36 minutes

 

[Shakes]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

If we get Bosh or Amare some of our players are gone in the deal.

 

[Fred]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

clonetrooper264 wrote:

The fact that BG gets some unfair treatment from the media does not give you the right to trash Hinrich in the same way. If anything you should point out each's flaws equally and give praise to each. Gordon is not a basketball god, neither is Hinrich, but both are important. If the Bulls can somehow sign Gordon and keep Hinrich as well I would be ecstatic. Gordon's superb shooting + Hinrich's defense = a backcourt to be reckoned with when Rose isn't on the floor. I just wish people (aka drones) could see that instead of saying that one sucks and the other is amazing.

I was responding to the article. The drone chose to bash Ben and praise Kirk. He basically said that Kirk needed the ball instead of Ben in crunch time. I pointed out several facts, namely Kirk's failings in "clutch" time, and Ben's record of success. (www.82games.com) How is that trashing Kirk by pointing out facts? Several prominent members of this site deny the existence of drones...the purpose of this thread was to point out one writing in one of the 2 major Chicago papers. I'm not bashing Kirk...I'm just pointing out the idiocy of O'Donnell's point.

I am certain that Mr. O'Donnell is one of the many people who I speak/email/listen to who feel that Kirk is the better choice than Ben. Kirk is a fine NBA player. He is an excellent defender. He is solid fundamentally. He's just not in the same class as Ben Gordon, and most importantly, Ben is a better fit with Rose. I was hoping this playoff series would finally make that apparent to all. And yet, it hasn't for a guy like O'Donnell.

Reinsdorf has forced us into the choice of Gordon or Hinrich. If there was any other possible way to keep Ben, I'd want Kirk here. I'd rather get rid of Deng than Kirk, but Deng's untradeable. I don't see any other way.

 

[wjb1492]

I guess I'm going to have to quit giving Fred crap, because it seems I'm turning into him. The more he goes on and on about how marvelous Ben is and how Kirk sucks (which he does, in spite of the occasional disclaimer that he doesn't really hate Kirk), the more I find myself focusing on Ben's flaws and feeling an almost inescapable impulse to shout about what Kirk does well. And that's just sad, because I'm sure Fred's intent is to persuade others that Ben really is a special player. Funnily enough, that's exactly how I felt previously - and now it's almost an effort to remember that I really like Ben, and I shouldn't take out my feelings against his occasional rabid fans on the player himself.

And I guess that means on my side of the universe, I = Fred, Kirk = Ben, and Fred = drone.

 

[Fred]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Heck, maybe there is a way that I'm not seeing. How could we keep Ben and Kirk? Anyone?

 

[st. park]

I thought this was interesting..

I post on another message board and a thread went up earlier today asking which player would you rather keep: Gordon or Hinrich. Since this is a music-oriented, Chicago message board, I think it represents the wide spectrum of Bulls fans. Some are casual followers of the NBA, while others consider themselves to be hardcore fans. The results shocked me; so far, it's 16-3 in favor of Gordon. Maybe the average Chicago fan isn't so much in favor Hinrich after all... It's certainly more lop-sided than I thought it'd be.

But I do agree with Fred that Chicago media is particularly harsh on Gordon for whatever reason and I have no problems with him pointing stuff out that's ridiculous (like this Sun-Times article).

 

[Shakes]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Personally I think who you keep comes down to moneyball, not their ability as players. We've got to be thinking of whoever is kept is a trade asset at this point, and unless Gordon's demands come down I feel a bit more confident in Kirk's declining contract with only 3 more years to run having value around the league.

Also when trading Kirk's versatility probably helps his value, there are more teams he can fit into than Gordon. I think you have to look at it from the other team's GM point of view, do they take a risk on integrating someone who is used to being the #1 option into their team? It doesn't really matter what we think, they've got to be thinking "oh crap, if this backfires and he goes into an Iverson style sulk about his role it's my job on the line, I can't even appeal to the fans with cap space like with AI".

I'm not saying Kirk is a better player or even a better fit for this team, but I think that it's a good chance he's a better trading piece for building the team we want to have when Rose hopefully becomes a star.

 

[Diddy1122]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Fred wrote:
I was responding to the article. The drone chose to bash Ben and praise Kirk. He basically said that Kirk needed the ball instead of Ben in crunch time. I pointed out several facts, namely Kirk's failings in "clutch" time, and Ben's record of success. (www.82games.com) How is that trashing Kirk by pointing out facts? Several prominent members of this site deny the existence of drones...the purpose of this thread was to point out one writing in one of the 2 major Chicago papers. I'm not bashing Kirk...I'm just pointing out the idiocy of O'Donnell's point.

I am certain that Mr. O'Donnell is one of the many people who I speak/email/listen to who feel that Kirk is the better choice than Ben. Kirk is a fine NBA player. He is an excellent defender. He is solid fundamentally. He's just not in the same class as Ben Gordon, and most importantly, Ben is a better fit with Rose. I was hoping this playoff series would finally make that apparent to all. And yet, it hasn't for a guy like O'Donnell.

Reinsdorf has forced us into the choice of Gordon or Hinrich. If there was any other possible way to keep Ben, I'd want Kirk here. I'd rather get rid of Deng than Kirk, but Deng's untradeable. I don't see any other way.[/quote]

 

[Diddy1122]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

I wrote this two weeks ago on a different thread on here and I think it still stands true:

This organization has made Hinrich the poster boy since day 1 of the 03-04 draft. And why not? He was perfect for it. A midwestern boy who grew up wanting to play for the Bulls and gets his wish. And makes the All-Rookie First Team and becomes the lone bright spot of a season that saw Eddy Curry regress, Chandler fight back issues missing 30 games, a change of head coach, the trading of Jalen Rose and Donyell Marshall for Antonio Davis and Jerome Williams, and a shift in team strategy that produced a 23-59 record, 2nd worst in the NBA and 5th worst in Team History.

Since that season, Kirk has been praised for his grittiness, defense, hard work, and professionalism. He's in almost every advertisement on TV for the Bulls. He even got an Adidas spot in a commercial, as well as a Chevy commercial. For whatever reason, and it's not Kirk's fault, Ben is just not as marketable. Maybe he needs a new agent. Cuz honestly the last commercial I remeber with BG was on the radio and it was for pizza puffs. And was pretty good, so maybe someone should get this guy a close-up already.

 

[??? ??????]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Dpauley23 wrote:

How the hell would you spread out 144 minutes to Deng, Salmons, Rose, Hinrich, and Gordon

Trade Salmons to clear some money for Gordon to slide under the luxury tax. Salmons is old anyhow. I loved him when he first got here, but he has turned into Larry Hughes somewhat as of late. And it doesn't seem to have all too much to do with the injury, just his style. He'll hold the ball after receiving the pass, and take a contested jumper instead of the wide open jumper. The Celtics scouted how he drives to the basket, and once you do that, it's not all too hard to stop, as it's not a very athletic drive.

 

[engies]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Kush77 wrote:

Fred wrote:
4. Kirk Hinrich, Bulls: The ultimate veteran energizer....Should have been more of a factor in the money moments if Ben Gordon hadn't made up his one-track mind that the Bulls would live or die by his decisions with the basketball.

This has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read in my entire life.

Who is Jim O'Donnell anyway? I'm not trying to be a smartass. Is he new?

But I would love for him to elaborate on these "money moments" that BG is depriving Hinrich of. When has Kirk Hinrich ever come up huge in the clutch?

The only "money moment" that I can think of with Hinrich is him hitting the 3-pointer late in the game as the shot clock ran down in Game 4 vs Miami in the 2006 first round. Outside of that, the occasional 30 point game against a bad Indiana team isn't a "money moment."

And Fred is right to call these people out. We don't have to ignore it. We are capable of multi-tasking. We can talk Bulls and call out the drones at the same time.

Thatks for finding this Fred because I sure as hell wouldn't of found it.

Full heartedly agree

While I do think that perhaps Fred harps on pointing out Kirks negatives a bit too much, I can also see why he does. Its because Ben gets criticized for things Kirk would never get criticized for. Its the truth.

& I think if we harped on these drones early enough it would make a difference. Unfortunately its too late and regardless of what we do, they are probably set in there ways and have forever tainted Ben Gordon as a selfish, money hungry, turnover prone, poor defending 6th man who can only score, & could be part of the reason Ben decides to leave (if he does end up leaving)

I love it that Fred calls them out regardless. Keep it up. Just try and cut back on bagging Kirk, who is a good player in his own right.

 

[dougthonus]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Fred wrote:

Heck, maybe there is a way that I'm not seeing. How could we keep Ben and Kirk? Anyone?

I don't think we can move Kirk to keep Ben either.

I think we could move Kirk for an expiring. I think we could have moved Kirk at the deadline, but I don't think we could move Kirk for pure cap space.

It's like I said at the trade deadline, the Bulls opted not to keep Gordon this summer unless they pay the tax with their moves. You can argue that they should have moved Kirk/Deng at the deadline which apparently they could have moved them both to Portland, but then we probably wouldn't be in the playoffs right now, and this season would have a much worse feel to it.

We can hope something works out in the summer, but it won't.

Even if you want to make the case that Kirk should be moved, which I think many people would, as I've said, and countless people have said to you, it's your attitude that anyone who likes Hinrich is a complete imbecilic moron who should be taken out back and shot that bothers everyone.

It's a 7th grade mentality in arguing to start name calling as a way to beat down your opponent rather than to argue against their points. You do both, but there's no need to do the first part, it makes no one look bad except you as been evidenced by the great multitude of people who have pointed it out to you, who like you, and who want you to stop making yourself look bad.

 

[dougthonus]

Re:Jim O'Donnell....Sun-Times writer.....Proud Dro

Trade Salmons to clear some money for Gordon to slide under the luxury tax. Salmons is old anyhow. I loved him when he first got here, but he has turned into Larry Hughes somewhat as of late. And it doesn't seem to have all too much to do with the injury, just his style. He'll hold the ball after receiving the pass, and take a contested jumper instead of the wide open jumper. The Celtics scouted how he drives to the basket, and once you do that, it's not all too hard to stop, as it's not a very athletic drive.

I wonder if you could trade Salmons for cap space. He's a value contract, but he's a short term value contract, because he might be gone next year on an opt out, and even if not, he's probably not someone you want to hang onto for a real long time because of his age.

You might be able to trade him for Eric Dampier to Dallas or for non guaranteed deals at Portland since those teams will be looking more to win now and would like Salmons even if it's a short term deal.

The problem is most teams with cap space probably aren't looking to bring in a John Salmons type.

 

[Basghetti80]

I would be curious to see if you could ship Salmons to Dallas for Stackhouse(unguaranteed) and Dallas 09 or 10 1st rd pick. Dallas gets a SG to pair with Howard at SF, Chicago can save cash by cutting Stackhouse in order to sign Gordon. With the extra pick now Chicago would be in even better trade position to make a run at Bosh or Amare.

 

[dougthonus]

Basghetti80 wrote:

I would be curious to see if you could ship Salmons to Dallas for Stackhouse(unguaranteed) and Dallas 09 or 10 1st rd pick. Dallas gets a SG to pair with Howard at SF, Chicago can save cash by cutting Stackhouse in order to sign Gordon. With the extra pick now Chicago would be in even better trade position to make a run at Bosh or Amare.

I don't think you can ship out Salmons on draft day for stackhouse.

What if you do, then Gordon says "screw you guys". Now you don't have Salmons or Gordon. You can only do this move if it's done at the same time you can agree to terms with Gordon otherwise there is too much risk involved.

 

[Basghetti80]

Yeah you are right I had a brain lapse. Yeah if you get Gordon signed then move Salmons to Dallas for Stack(who you then cut) and a 2010 1st rd pick. Do you think Dallas would do something like that?

 

[dougthonus]

I'm not sure if we could get the draft pick. I think they may have restrictions on trading it due to the Jason Kidd trade (or that it may already be gone as part of the Kidd trade. I forget what picks they lost. I think it was a 2008 and 2010, which means they couldn't trade a pick until 2012.

We might be able to pick up a 2nd rounder.

 

[Basghetti80]

I could deal with that. Bottomline is if you can get Gordon signed and make a trade for Bosh or Amare then we can afford to lose Salmons.

Rose,Hinrich
Gordon
Deng
Bosh
Noah,Miller

For next year at least you would have a lot of minimum salary guys to fill out roster. Then the next year when Miller is gone you replace him with Asik and can spend some to give yourself more depth.

 

[??? ??????]

Basghetti80 wrote:

I could deal with that. Bottomline is if you can get Gordon signed and make a trade for Bosh or Amare then we can afford to lose Salmons.

Rose,Hinrich
Gordon
Deng
Bosh
Noah,Miller

For next year at least you would have a lot of minimum salary guys to fill out roster. Then the next year when Miller is gone you replace him with Asik and can spend some to give yourself more depth.

Especially since Ron Artest, Shawn Marion, and Lamar Odom should all be available for the MLE, so if we don't feel adequate with Deng, or trade him in a Bosh trade, then we can shore up the small forward position with one of those guys. Artest would obviously be the best.