Bulls Beat #251 - Hinrich/Thibs talk

Bulls Beat #251 - Hinrich/Thibs talk

I discuss Kirk Hinrich's role on the Bulls, Thibodeau's contract extension, and the powers of the NBA this season

Bulls Beat #251 - Hinrich/Thibs talk

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Kirk: Even if he was injured so looked worse than he is, he's still a somewhat less than 4 million dollar player. I think in his last year with the Bulls he was worth about 3 million, and surely that's his absolute ceiling of what we can expect 3 years later.

    Playoffs: I think starting to look at ways the Bulls can avoid Miami until the ECF is looking just a tad far ahead.

    Love or Aldridge: I can understand the comments in relation to Aldridge, but damn, Kevin Love is a legit superstar. I'm not sure it'd make the Bulls outright favourites, but if you don't think replacing Boozer with Love would put a healthy Bulls right there with the Heat/Lakers/Thunder you're under-rating him (or over-rating Boozer).

    Thibs: He's a good coach. However if the Bulls are going to be cheap in any area, the coach is the one I'd most excuse them. If the choice is paying Thibs a few million more than the average coach or spending that money on luxury tax, I'd choose the tax (will the Bulls choose neither though?) Despite all Thibs' credit for the defense in Boston it remained strong when he left, there's no reason to think the Bulls couldn't maintain it under a new coach too.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    Kevin Love's roots are in Los Angeles. He went to UCLA. When his Timberwolves contract expires, should be right around the time Nash and Bryant hang it up. Much better chance Love ends up with Lakers, as opposed to Bulls.

  • In reply to RichG:

    Even if his roots WEREN'T in LA, let's just go on the presumption that Love would pick LAL over CHI, because historically, LAL has proven over and over they can get the star player and the Bulls can't.

    Short of Love pulling a Dwight (to BKN, then LAL) or Melo (to NYK) and publicly stating he only wants to go to CHI, I think it's safe to say the Bulls won't be getting him.

    So if that's the case, who's the next 'star' the Bulls will be going after? So forget about waiting for 5 years before we can get a star player...it'll take us 5 years just to FIND OUT who's the next star player that's unhappy that we can all put our eggs in a basket for...and then probably fail, again.

  • In reply to RichG:

    I'm not claiming the Bulls will get him, merely disputing the idea that a swap of Boozer for Love wouldn't make the Bulls contenders.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    The thing is though, if you keep looking for any excuse you can find to go cheap (''maybe these cheaper players can produce about as much as the more expensive ones we let go'', ''maybe our team can remain about as good defensively/overall with a cheaper coach'', etc.), you're taking risks. Sure, maybe a few of those will work out, but you have to be careful not to make that way of doing things a habit, because you're playing with fire. Eventually, one (or more) of those risks will come back to bite you. I'm not advocating never taking risks, but there's a difference between a talent risk and a financial risk.

    Sometimes you just need to play it safe and keep going with what you KNOW works, rather than go with what ''maybe'',
    ''could'', ''might'' work, just to save some money.

    (I'm not trying to imply that you think it's right to do things this way, btw, I'm just commenting on the idea of replacing pieces (players, coaches, whatever) with cheaper alternatives, just because there's reason(s) to think it MIGHT work.)

  • I'm not endorsing going cheap, just saying that if the Bulls are going to go cheap I'd be less upset about going cheap on the coach than on the players.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    ^ Sorry I wasn't more clear, I know you weren't endorsing it. I was just commenting on the idea itself.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    Love replacing Boozer wouldn't turn us into favorites... His game is basically that of a rich mans boozer. He is a jump shooter just like everyone knocks boozer for not being a post scorer. He rebounds and plays minimal defense. He is a great stretch four but we don't have the post scorer to get the max benefit from a superb stretch four. He would make us better but not like the addition of a Dwight Howard would have.

    Plus coming here he wouldn't be putting up 22 and 15 it would be more like 18-19 and 10-11 as we have (or had) a superior rebounding team. Boozer or Taj's numbers wouldn't be far off that. Just not as much of a game changer at a position of strength.

  • In reply to Chad:

    If you had a guy like Love, you would need a defensive Center like Noah who can help him with the defense.

  • In reply to Chad:

    Kevin Love is a top 10 player. Boozer is what, bottom half of the top 100? That's a pretty big upgrade. He's not as good as Dwight Howard? Well hell, other than LeBron James nobody is. If you think the only way this team can compete is get a top 2 player, well then you should be blowing the whole thing up - Rose included - and tanking until the next future top 2 player comes out in the draft.

    Poor man's, pfft. So they play a kind of similar game means that one player being far better at that sort of game means nothing? To put it in reverse, Jeremy Lin is just a poor man's Derrick Rose, so if the Bulls swapped Rose for Lin it wouldn't make much difference. Sounds ridiculous when you put it the other way doesn't it?

    As far as his per game numbers dropping, great. He lost a lot of efficiency last year when he was asked to score more. I'd be very happy with the ~20PPG on ~60TS% Kevin Love from 2010-11.

  • Agree completely with all that was said about Thibs. Even if they did get a new coach, as soon as he had success he would want more money, so just pay Thibs. Thank you for giving Hinrich a chance to play before kicking him out the door. I think there is a real chance he plays well. As for the Finals, I'm going against the grain a bit and picking the Lakers and Celtics. I know most everyone will disagree, but I think the Celtics have the depth to play the Heat. A lot will depend on the status of Green though. I just want to say one more thing. I don't need the Bulls to be thought of as the favorites. As long as they are close they will have a shot. There are many times that the favorite going into the season is not the team standing at the end. A few guys that could be available soon that could really improve the team at SG are Gary Neal, Derozen, and Henderson. They may not be super stars, but they would be quality players to put next to Rose. Of those guys I think I like Neal the best.

  • In reply to PaBullfan:

    For those looking for a Gibson trade, how about to the Spurs for Gary Neal and Blair? Blair seems out of their rotation but could play a PF/C role for the Bulls. Neal, SG of the future.

  • In reply to PaBullfan:

    First, I like both Neal and Blair, but Neal at 6'4 is an undersized SG...which is why SAS lists and plays him at PG....a position we just drafted for (Teague). Now if you indeed think he can be our SG of the future, I think that would be a bit too optimistic.

    I view him as a Jodie Meeks/Keyon Dooling type player who comes off the bench and can light it up.

    The Spurs have been actively trying to trade Blair, and has been out of their rotation for a while now. Maybe the Spurs know Blair's non-ACLs will be an issue soon, or maybe because he's an UNRESTRICTED FA next year, some team will 'poison pill' his final year (although not to the $15mil that Asik and Lin got).

    Taj is the better player in this deal, so the Bulls would be losing. But would SAS even do that deal knowing Taj is a RFA who's up for a big payraise? And wouldn't the Bulls want something extra with Blair and Neal, in which case, wouldn't the Spurs back out?

  • I think most posters would agree with Doug on two points: 1) The Bulls chances of being healthy as a team this year are slim and none which means most likely they will stink. 2) There is nothing on the horizon in the forseeable future which will make the Bulls championship contenders.

    As for Thibs, everybody was bagging on him at the end of that Philly debacle. You can point to injuries and personnel, but the way the Bulls offense struggled in the previous playoffs against the Pacers etc. with all their players having career low numbers particularly in field goal percentage, despite the homerism, in some sense, the jury is out on Thibs.

    I will say you bring Tom Thibodeau to the Lakers right now, and I think their odds of knocking off the Heat go way, way up. Yes, give him some multiple all-star offensive talent and his defensive genius can win you a championship. He stymied Kobe and should have won two titles with Boston but for SuperFish and Perkins going down in Game 7. If Tom were smart enough(capable) of toning it down during the off time of D-Rose when winning and losing is not fully in your control, he would not burn out players and wear out his welcome. Though I doubt he is capable of this.

    By some miracle if the Bulls did draft(or land, ha, ha) a second offensive force/all star, Thibs does what few coaches can do which is give you a coach that can lead you to a championship. Yes despite what I feel are serious limitations in player relationships and team in game psyche/confidence(developing players etc by being willing to lose at times for growth), his defensive genius is so great along with his comittment to winning, that a championship would be possible.

    Yet we know that second star arriving in Chicago would be a miracle. Plus second and third wheels like Jo and Lu have proved suspect due to injury and other factors Jo certainly despite his numbers was being acknowledged as a star impact player on the rise, but for 'whatever' reason has faded from that conversation. I agree though, due to the chance he gives you with his defensive genius you pay to hold on to Thibs $6 Mil a year should do it with bonuses for second round playoffs if that's possible.

    The only question really: does a cheapskate owner and compliant eunich at times disingenuous boob front office personnel really deserve star players or a Thibs aka championship capable winning coach? Answer: once again going on the cheap haggling with Thibs - suggests not worthy!! To the detriment of Bulls fans. League Pass and don't buy any U.C. tickets, show some balls, make a stand. Regardless of corporate and yuppie souless enabling clunks.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    By the way I want to make it clear I don't include Doug in the yuppi and corporate enablers who mindlessly go to Bulls games because post Jordan essentially 'it's the thing to do.' Anybody who enjoys seeing lovable losers and really finds enjoyment in his team no matter what is exempt in my book. Though I think that kind of fan at least in the NBA and outside of Chicago is a rare breed. I've been to many Bulls games, and IMO many of those 'fans' are just there for the experience(?) Their real knowledge of the team and passion for winning I find basically lame.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    "There is nothing on the horizon in the forseeable future which will make the Bulls championship contenders."

    I'd agree if you're talking playing fair and trying our best this year.

    However the NBA system gives an out to scoundrels: tanking. I think tanking hard enough to get a top 3 pick this year would give them a reasonable chance. Of course the player drafted would have to work out (which certainly isn't a given), but if they did then I think in a couple of years the Bulls would be contenders.

    Alternatively, with that pick, the Bobcat's pick and the rights to Mirotic you'd have a pretty damn good package to use in a trade.

    Operation panzer is the only way forward. Ridiculous? Maybe, but we have Doug talking about how he's dreaming the Bulls can avoid Miami until the conference finals then maybe beat them and the Lakers (yes, in fairness he calls it unlikely), which is far more ridiculous than any tanking plan.

Leave a comment