Better Scorer: Noc or Deng?

[bullzman23]

The Bulls don't need a serviceable player. They have too may serviceable players.

If we traded Deng we would have a massive downgrade at the SF position. Nocioni can not fill in there effectively. His scoring is decent (though streaky), but his defense is just awful. He blows up the teams entire defensive scheme by his flying around out of position.

I meant that a servicable player at SF is fine if we're getting a stud big man for Deng.

[dougthonus]

I meant that a servicable player at SF is fine if we're getting a stud big man for Deng.

Which team is giving us a stud big man for Deng?

[bullzman23]

I meant that a servicable player at SF is fine if we're getting a stud big man for Deng.

Which team is giving us a stud big man for Deng?

I wasn't coming up with a trade, I was speaking in hypotheticals.

That being said, I personally think Deng's value in a trade is probably better than his value as a second option.

[dougthonus]

I wasn't coming up with a trade, I was speaking in hypotheticals.

That being said, I personally think Deng's value in a trade is probably better than his value as a second option.

I don't think we could get a stud big man for Deng. If we could it would help us. If we could get a true stud anything for Deng it would help us.

Part of our problem is that we have too many good players and too few great players, so that it's hard to individually create a big upgrade at any position because you are only upgrading over an already good player.

Anyway, I think it makes sense for the Bulls to trade multiple good pieces for a better piece, but that's hard to do.

[JCrossover#1]

Nocioni takes easier shots? Thats not true whatsoever, at least not in my eyes.
Deng is Mr. Baseline open jumpshot and scores a tons on fastbreaks.
Nocioni is often criticized for taking "bad" shots (if they are bad, they should be a lot "tougher" to score) and also attempts a lot more 3s than Deng, who rarely takes one. So by logic, further from the basket means a tougher shot.
I have no doubts that Nocioni can put better stats than Deng if given the same minutes, that doesnt translate in better play.
IMO we will see the best Nocioni version once he gets a starting job in the NBA, without competing with someone of Deng's caliber every night. Unless Pax trades Deng for some big SG or scoring PF/C, it wont happen in Chicago.

[bullzman23]

I wasn't coming up with a trade, I was speaking in hypotheticals.

That being said, I personally think Deng's value in a trade is probably better than his value as a second option.

I don't think we could get a stud big man for Deng. If we could it would help us. If we could get a true stud anything for Deng it would help us.

Part of our problem is that we have too many good players and too few great players, so that it's hard to individually create a big upgrade at any position because you are only upgrading over an already good player.

Anyway, I think it makes sense for the Bulls to trade multiple good pieces for a better piece, but that's hard to do.

Gasol is one guy I think we could eventually get for Deng, though I'm not a huge fan.

I'm sort of wondering about Okafor. MJ seems doesn't seem to care much for his cap's future, is probably easily impressed by washed up vets, and probably is itching to make a change with their struggles. They've yet to win a road game in the West, and have 25/38 games left on the road. I can only imagine them getting desperate at the deadline. I wonder if Deng, Wallace, Noah, and perhaps Duhon or Sefolosha could bring back Okafor, Richardson, and Harrington?

That being said, in the past it appeared as if Deng had enough value to bring back a guy like Paul Pierce in a trade. Most posters hated that trade, but I never understood why. It'd be a huge upgrade in talent. It was also reported that we at one time considered trading Deng for Richard Jefferson. I wasn't a fan of that trade, but in retrospect I wish we did it, and I still sort of think that the Nets would do it.

I'm okay with trading Deng because I think it's quite easy filling the SF-SG positions simply by using the MLE. That being said, if a scoring F-G soon becomes available I'd be all over that too.

[Rerisen]

You have initially started an argument, is Deng that much better a scorer while specifically saying to ignore everything else. You have no changed the argument to be is Nocioni able to fill in for Deng.

Not at all. I made both points in my initial post. First, that I wonder about Noc being the better or equal scorer. Second, about what kind of impact that would make on losing Deng. The Bulls are in a position to where losing offense would hurt far more than losing defense (which is what losing Deng for Noc would be, mostly a defensive loss).

However, if Tyrus and Noah develop, then I think that the drop off between Deng and Nocioni is larger than the drop off between Tyrus/Noah and a big man we could get from Deng.

I made the point that if indeed Tyrus and Noah do develop Noc will have no reasonable minutes left at PF, making him overpaid for simply backing up the SF for 10 minutes a game.

Also, the description of Noc as simply a chucker that many make is pretty much the very worst of Noc. No different than calling Deng simply a mid range jump shooter. Noc has actually shown more post ability than Deng. And probably more ability to drive at the basket off the dribble, though Deng is better slashing without the ball.

Of course, I agree that the Bulls do not need another serviceable player. That was part of the entire point of the post. That Deng has value to possibly get you much more than that. It is actually a player like Noc or even Hinrich that is most likely to simply return yet another roleplayer, of which this team is already filled with, and has not really produced a elite team nor the prospects for a elite team.

Once and if the Bulls give Gordon 50 million and Deng 60 million, that is pretty much our team, built around 2 non-all stars for the next 5-10 years. I think that your LeBron alternative scenario was essentially saying the same thing, without mentioning it directly.