Bulls should keep Mike Dunleavy

Bulls should keep Mike Dunleavy

With the latest Kirk Hinrich injury, the odds of trading him are almost certainly toast. The injury was severe enough that he didn't travel with the team, and the Bulls went out and signed PG Mike James. That leaves relatively few assets the Bulls could move in a trade.

The one guy many Bulls fans argue about keeping vs trading is Mike Dunleavy.

Dunleavy's owed a very modest salary next season at just a shade over three million. He's proven to be a very good player. This should make him awfully attractive to a team looking to put together the final piece on a championship run.

If the Bulls can get a first rounder that has a chance with some quality in this draft, then I'll go ahead and let Dunleavy go, but it's unlikely a team is willing to give up a decent first rounder (I'm not talking bottom 25 here, but something in the 15-25 range) for him.

The thing is, Chicago's going to hope to retool and compete immediately next season, and they're going to have a difficult time finding all the role players to fill out the team. The odds of Chicago getting a player as good as Dunleavy next season for three million? Near zero. Especially with the uncertainty surrounding Derrick Rose and Chicago's real ability to compete next season.

While a few players have been willing to sign with Chicago for less money based on the idea of competing for a championship, that discount will likely come to an end with three straight post-seasons with Derrick Rose on the bench.

Chicago will have plenty to prove next year to the rest of the NBA, and while I still think it's viewed as a plus destination rather than a minus one, it's not going to be on the top four or five lists of prospective free agents. Beyond that, if the Bulls go ahead and amnesty Boozer to pursue a cap space plan and trade Dunleavy, they'll have around 15 million to fill out the whole team.

Enough of that Money goes to Mirotic that the Bulls won't have enough left to pursue anyone but role players.

It's not much money given that you'll need to fill out 7 roster spots.

In short, without any marquee free agents worth pursuing [or enough cash to pursue them anyway], the Bulls will end up stuck using this money on role players, and Dunleavy already fills that spot better than most guys, with a skill no one else on the roster has, and a cheap contract.

So if the value is great, trade Mike Dunleavy, but moving him to open up cap room? Not the right move.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    Trade for 15-20 sounds like a good idea, but chances are we get our own in the same area. Will we develop two rookies next season ? I don't see that. Might even be more if Cha and/or Sac kicks in. In that scenario, Dunleavys experience will be more important than another rookie. Because of that I say we need more to trade him. Not that anyone should give more to get him...

  • I think you only trade Dunleavy for a lottery pick. Why trade him for pick #20 if that guy ends up maybe being as good as Dunleavy 3 years down the line? Guys that come out of college are so young now and there is considerable risk that they do not pan out. Dunleavy is worth so much more when you have a 3-year window with Rose. And, $3 mil/year!

    Dunleavy knows that he could be traded. If the Bulls retain him in good faith and he's able to resign on the cheap for bench scoring after next year, great. I can see that happening.

    If Rose goes down again next year, you dump Dunleavy to a playoff contender for a 1st.

  • Every year there is somebody from the bench who the bulls just won't be able to live without next year. And every year by about January, it becomes clear the bulls FO went out and replaced the previous guy with somebody else who the bulls should really not trade or has to resign...

  • In reply to bullshooter:

    Good observation. Still, the Bulls may need more than one guy in the Dunleavy mold, so it won't hurt to keep him. I suppose it depends on how high a pick he could bring and what the scouts see on the board for that pick.

    The Bulls messed up with the Rip and Kirk FA signings. First, neither played as well because of their age. Second, both were repeatedly out with injuries. The FO could have done substantially better, and it will need to in the future. Cheaper and shorter mistakes than Boozer and Wallace, however. Too much of thhis garbage kills championship hopes.

  • I agree that pick #20 (theoretically) may not be as good as Dunleavy but I would make that deal anyway. IMO the goal is to obtain tradeable assets to improve the team. For example, you can trade two (or more) first rounders to move up in the draft and get the player that your scouts have identified as substantially improving your team. I think the Jazz did that last year and many other teams have done before. If the Bulls could put a draft day package together that would net a Jabari class player in return, then the loss of Dunleavy in retrospect would be minor.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    I agree that is what they should be looking to do.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    There is no way to get Jabari Parker without throwing in a ton of picks and probably Mirotic. Bulls may not even have a lottery pick. You probably won't be able to move up that much without giving up significant assets. Nobody will be trading out of the top 5 or 6 of this draft. Nobody wants Sactown's heavily protected first that could be a 2nd in 3 years. Nobody wants Charlotte's protected pick either - if it means giving up on elite talent now.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    Maybe they can move from pick #20 to pick #16 by throwing in other picks or a guy like Dunleavy? Maybe you get Jabari Bird on Cal around that range and he could be the steal of the draft.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    The Jazz traded 2 picks, one in the teens and one in the 20's for the 9th pick to take Trey Burke. Your not getting into the top 5 with 2 picks in the teens or 20's. But in general, I like the idea of stockpiling assests. Of course, draft picks often go from being an asset to being a bust once you use them.

  • at this point, I doubt that any team gives up a 1st, teams are just looking to get good assets for dirt cheap from the bulls. Keeping Dunleavy for a Rose run next year makes sense......hopefully we don't have Brandon Roy part II on our hands but that is the gamble the Bulls have to make since getting a player of his caliber is difficult.

    I would like to know the strategy the Bulls are thinking about, do they get a combo guard free agent or maybe draft one or do they draft a badly needed backup center. There's so many ways the Bulls can play it this offseason. I would love for the Bulls to get stephenson but dude is ballin and I wouldn't be surprised if some team gave him the near max just like Houston gave Asik boat loads of money because of his success on a good team. They probably almost have to bring DJ Augustin back but teams like Utah will probably try to go after him. The Bulls have so many needs and so little space thanks to the rose rule which screwed up the cap situation for the Bulls but there are bargain deals out there, think Nate Robinson and other good scorers on the cheap.

  • Doug have you latest trade rumor Kirk hinrich for Harrison Barnes? Would be a steal for bulls....keep piling assets. http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/535513/20140122/nba-trade-news-kirk-hinrich-harrison-barnes.htm#.UuAciX9OKSM

  • In reply to bullzfan:

    If that was offered its a no brainer.

  • In reply to bullzfan:

    Unless Barnes just choked coach Sprewell to death, that is the most ludicrous trade ever. But if it isn't I'm all over it, heck I'd do that one for Dunleavy too, maybe even both guys.

  • From Hoopshype.com / Twitter:
    Jason Lloyd: Deng this a.m. on possibility of returning to CHI next season: "Maybe they'll offer me 3yrs, $30 million. That might be an option to take." Twitter @JasonLloydABJ

    I had a feeling Deng would consider coming back to the Bulls in the summer at 3 yrs/$30M!
    Smart to get under the tax and get some draft pics for a little over a 1/2 year rental of Deng when we aren't contending! :-)

  • In reply to smiley:

    I think he may have said that with sarcasm

  • In reply to bullzfan:

    Ya think? That was the most blatant sarcasm even posted on Twitter.

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    Well kc Johnson and a Cavs reporter says it was...lol kc Johnson took it a step further and said deng will not resign with bulls. makes no sense to take it after turning the offer down.

  • I still feel that the Bull's and Deng already have a deal in place and all of this that's going on now with the team is a very skilled and intelligent way of getting Anthony here to help Deng and Rose.
    Who are these Bulls fans who are crazy about draft picks --as if these picks are guaranteed in heaven--let's not talk about trading Dunleavy. When the Bulls trade Hinrich, Boozer, draft picks, and I hope Mirotic to New York--we will need Dunleavy for spacing and as a valid 3 point specialist. And what's all this talk about trading Boozer and Gibson for Anthony--no way because New York is in the same position as Chicago was last month and they will be glad to get as much as Chicago will give them--to make sure they get something in return for Anthony. Oh, and if all of this goes like I think it might --the Bulls need to offer Bynam a deal and just use him during the playoffs--moving Noah over to power forward.

  • The biggest issue that I have with Dunleavy is that much like Korver, I think that he does/or will disappear in big games against good defensive teams, like Indy or Miami, thus mitigating his actual value other than improving your regular season record.

    Thus while he is a better player now than a draft pick in the 15-20 range, he is what he is, and that isn't likely enough to make a difference in the playoffs. Tough call, but I'd probably take the draft pick.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Logical. This trade may depend on the scouts for the Bulls. Who and what can they ID as a value pick in the 13 to 20 range? If there are several, they may want to trade for another pick. Or, as several have mentioned, trade 2 picks in the teens for a #9 or so.

    However, they can always trade Dunleavy in the off season as part of a S&T deal to pick up a FA they have targeted.

    Meanwhile, if by some miracle Rose comes back in April, the Bulls might make a bit of noise in the postseason.

  • You've got to know your window.

    Hard to see the Bulls as contenders in 2015, so they need to build for further out, hence I'd take the draft pick. If Dunleavy was signed for 2 or more seasons then maybe it would be debatable, but given he will be turning 35 in the 2015-16 season, I'd still be inclined to take the pick in that case.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Shakes:

    True , but if you do, I would take a future pick. Maybe trade him to move up I the draft. I don't see Thibs play multiple rookies next year. Mirotic, our own makes two. If we get Sac and Cha we might have six rookies in three years. A couple of them won't get the chance to play.

  • In reply to Mattias:

    Correct.

  • In reply to Mattias:

    Just because you get picks doesn't mean you have to bring in rookies with them. They're assets. You can flip them for a higher pick, a pick in a later year, a player, a Euro guy you don't expect to come over right away, whatever.

    But get that pick now, because if you do want to move up, a pick is useful to any team and counts as zero salary on draft day, Dunleavy is only useful to a select number of teams and requires salary matching. So the pick is a better asset for the Bulls purposes.

Leave a comment