Kirk to the lakers?

[fola]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/feat...nes&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


Anyone have the insider so we can read the article?

 

[Jamfan]

The Lakers board on RealGM links to an article from PoopsWorld so I doubt it's anything.

 

[fola]

thats what I thought to, but according to the espn guy, 'it has legs'

 

[RC_Skinny22]

This topic comes up from time to time since 2008.

 

[Bullsman24]

i've heard for just expirings

 

[clonetrooper264]

bullsman24 wrote:

i've heard for just expirings

I doubt most would complain about that anyway.

 

[fola]

clonetrooper264 wrote:

bullsman24 wrote:

i've heard for just expirings

I doubt most would complain about that anyway.

Complain?!?! I'd throw a fracking party!!

 

[Shakes]

I wouldn't trade Kirk for expirings right now. Back when it looked like we should tank, then sure. But we've seen what a difference having a full rotation makes for this team. If trading Kirk risks us missing the playoffs, then it's simply not worth it, especially since with Salmons looking like opting out whether we have Kirk's salary this offseason probably makes zero difference to the team.

 

[fola]

Shakes wrote:

If trading Kirk risks us missing the playoffs, then it's simply not worth it, especially since with Salmons looking like opting out whether we have Kirk's salary this offseason probably makes zero difference to the team.

Maybe, but is it really worth the risk? I'd wholeheartedly say no. Also, I'd say that the biggest differences between the bulls of last month and now is the fact the we're shooting much better and the fact that our coach has decided to stop 'coaching'.

 

[houheffna]

I wouldn't trade Kirk for expirings right now. Back when it looked like we should tank, then sure. But we've seen what a difference having a full rotation makes for this team. If trading Kirk risks us missing the playoffs, then it's simply not worth it, especially since with Salmons looking like opting out whether we have Kirk's salary this offseason probably makes zero difference to the team.

I disagree...if losing Kirk clears the way for this team to be better in the future...trade him...quick! Lets face it...nobody wants their team out of the playoffs, but i would trade Kirk if his money can be spent elsewhere on better talent. I would have no problem with the Bulls trading Kirk. It might cause some problems but I would be fine with letting him go.

 

[mlewinth]

Agreed. I read the article. The Lakers need perimeter D and they apparently think Kirk can fill the void. Now, personally I think all rumors are B.S. Now I still read them , however I think they are garbage. If true, though, I can see how that move would make sense for the Lakers. If you are a team not vying for a free agent this summer, Kirk brings some solid D and can be a good role player.

With regards to trading him....Do it at all costs. This season is not about now. If we can trade Hinrich and Salmons for expiring contracts, even if the players we get bring no value to our team, do it now if you get expiring contracts. I think we have proven a point, that Noah, Rose and Deng are the future of this franchise. It's not secret what we are trying to do and if we took a nose dive, for cap space, I think it wouldnt hurt our standing with free agents.

 

[Shakes]

houheffna wrote:

I wouldn't trade Kirk for expirings right now. Back when it looked like we should tank, then sure. But we've seen what a difference having a full rotation makes for this team. If trading Kirk risks us missing the playoffs, then it's simply not worth it, especially since with Salmons looking like opting out whether we have Kirk's salary this offseason probably makes zero difference to the team.

I disagree...if losing Kirk clears the way for this team to be better in the future...trade him...quick! Lets face it...nobody wants their team out of the playoffs, but i would trade Kirk if his money can be spent elsewhere on better talent. I would have no problem with the Bulls trading Kirk. It might cause some problems but I would be fine with letting him go.

The way for the team to be better in the future is to get a 2010 free agent. The way to get a 2010 free agent is to make the playoffs with the best seed possible and then win as many playoff games as possible. Kirk helps us in that goal more than expiring contracts who wouldn't play. Trading Kirk for expirings is counter-productive to making the team better. It'd be a pure money saving move for JR, and I thought Bulls fans hated those?

 

[fola]

Shakes

Trading Kirk for expirings is counter-productive to making the team better. It'd be a pure money saving move for JR, and I thought Bulls fans hated those?

thats the thing, i'm not sure thats true anymore. I think rose has shown enough to the league that no one will care how we finish the season. Especially if the (or one of the) player(s) we're targeting play his (kirks) position.

 

[houheffna]

The way for the team to be better in the future is to get a 2010 free agent. The way to get a 2010 free agent is to make the playoffs with the best seed possible and then win as many playoff games as possible. Kirk helps us in that goal more than expiring contracts who wouldn't play. Trading Kirk for expirings is counter-productive to making the team better. It'd be a pure money saving move for JR, and I thought Bulls fans hated those?

If you look at this conference for one, losing Kirk does not mean that the Bulls are worse than the teams behind them for a playoff spot. Most likely they are knocked out of the first round with or without Hinrich. I don't think its a pure money saving move...I believe its a chance to make the team better down the road.

 

[Diddy1122]

fola wrote:

Shakes wrote:

If trading Kirk risks us missing the playoffs, then it's simply not worth it, especially since with Salmons looking like opting out whether we have Kirk's salary this offseason probably makes zero difference to the team.

Maybe, but is it really worth the risk? I'd wholeheartedly say no. Also, I'd say that the biggest differences between the bulls of last month and now is the fact the we're shooting much better and the fact that our coach has decided to stop 'coaching'.

The biggest difference between the Bulls of last month & this month is 2 words: Derrick Rose. His ascension to all-star level play night in & night out has taken this team to another level. This team rises & falls with Rose & right now Rose is on an incredible rise. Let's hope it continues.

As for Kirk & Salmons, if the right trade comes along for either you pull the trigger. Since acquiring Brown, I feel Salmons is the more likely of the 2 to be traded because Brown can replace most of his production. Kirk I don't feel is as easy to replace because 1) he is a team captain (even though most people feel that's an arbitrary point), 2) he has provided a nice balance to the starting lineup, & 3) he's the only other PG on the team other than Rose.

 

[Dpauley23]

Diddy I gotta agree with you here. Im all for keeping Kirk as the way he's been playing he's shown that he could be the starting 2 with Rose for good couple of years. Plus if keeping Hinrich keeps us from going after Joe Johnson I'm all for that

 

[Diddy1122]

Dpauley23 wrote:

Diddy I gotta agree with you here. Im all for keeping Kirk as the way he's been playing he's shown that he could be the starting 2 with Rose for good couple of years. Plus if keeping Hinrich keeps us from going after Joe Johnson I'm all for that

I'm hoping & praying that by some miracle we land Bosh & some how con Heisley into a sign & trade of Rudy *** w/ Luol Deng. I would definitely jizz in my pants after that. hmy:

 

[Shakes]

Given Pargo is absolute garbage, I wouldn't feel safe even from the Knicks if he was back in the regular rotation.

That said, I'm more concerned with looking up than down. We've set ourselves up so that we have a real shot to pass both the Raptors and the Heat. That would be huge in getting Bosh or Wade ... here we'd be with max cap space and a team that's already better than their current team. Every little psychological advantage helps.

I also don't see why if Hinrich can be dumped for an expiring with 2.5 years we can't dump him next offseason with 2 years or next deadline with 1.5. The only difference would be having more than more than max capspace this summer. That isn't a huge win really ... this offseason with so many teams having cap space guys are going to be overpaid. Chances are if we free up Hinrich's 9 million we'd end up overpaying someone as much or more than he's being overpaid, but on a longer contract.

 

[pinkizdead]

he helps handle the ball. he takes some pressure off of rose to generate shots for others. if rose ever learns to play off ball, the duo might be deadly. it might allow derrick to what he does best, score.

also his d on nash was pretty good. kirk is streaky as hell, but when he's hitting his shots, he's a decent value to this team. If we can get something in return, or if we can get significantly under the cap, it might we worth it to ditch kirk.,

 

[fola]

Diddy1122 wrote

The biggest difference between the Bulls of last month & this month is 2 words: Derrick Rose. His ascension to all-star level play night in & night out has taken this team to another level. This team rises & falls with Rose & right now Rose is on an incredible rise. Let's hope it continues.

That's what I was alluding. Remember how earlier in the season Rose had to look back at vdn every other play to get the 'call'? Now, they're basically going for long stretches withing running any plays. Save for the 'get the hell out of derricks way' play we all love so much.