Bulls want to trade up for Henderson or Johnson

Ralphb07 · Post #141 » by **Ralphb07** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:35 pm

How in the hell did this thread turn into a Ben Gordon debate?

People got way OT in this thread

Luke NOT Luc · Post #142 » by **Luke NOT Luc** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:36 pm

Ralphb07 wrote:How in the hell did this thread turn into a Ben Gordon debate?

People got way OT in this thread

Because people think if you remove Gordon and insert Henderson there's no drop-off

Post #143 » by **Ben** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:39 pm

Luke NOT Luc wrote:
Ralphb07 wrote:How in the hell did this thread turn into a Ben Gordon debate?

People got way OT in this thread

Because people think if you remove Gordon and insert Henderson there's no drop-off

Luke's being facetious, for anyone just joining.

Let's all try to be civil and not to bait each other, everyone (me included).

Luke NOT Luc · Post #144 » by **Luke NOT Luc** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:40 pm

Ben B. wrote:
Luke NOT Luc wrote:
Ralphb07 wrote:How in the hell did this thread turn into a Ben Gordon debate?

People got way OT in this thread

Because people think if you remove Gordon and insert Henderson there's no drop-off

Luke's being facetious, for anyone just joining.

Let's all try to be civil and not to bait each other, everyone (me included).

Ben, I just wanted to thank you for calling me "Luke" instead of "Luc" because I think my name confuses people

Edit:
Even with the all capital NOT

theanimal23 · Post #145 » by **theanimal23** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:42 pm

The ROY wrote:smokescreen....

mullens is the guy.....

athletic c's are scarce

What is your draft board like?

You know, being that no player will be more than a rotational guy, I have Mullens tabbed as #1 on my board. Its worth the risk. If there were players who had as much potential or were more offensively polished, I'd be down for taking them. James Johnson is as close as there is to fitting that bill. But unless the Bulls feel confident with him at PF and he is willing to play PF moving forward, I'm not so sure how much I want him.

Don't get me wrong, I think I'd be okay with any of the following: Henderson, Blair, Johnson, Clark, and Mullens. But Mullens potential has me too intrigued. And with the weakness of this draft, it's worth taking a flier on that kind of talent.

My Board:
1. Mullens
2a. Johnson
2b. Blair
3. Clark
4. Henderson

On a side note, unless you think T9 is wrong, I don't see this being a smokescreen. I think the Mullens vs Blair workout today is to solidify their decision for if they cannot move up.

Ralphb07 · Post #146 » by **Ralphb07** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:43 pm

Ben B. wrote:
Luke NOT Luc wrote:
Ralphb07 wrote:How in the hell did this thread turn into a Ben Gordon debate?

People got way OT in this thread

Because people think if you remove Gordon and insert Henderson there's no drop-off

Luke's being facetious, for anyone just joining.

Let's all try to be civil and not to bait each other, everyone (me included).

I came back on to talk about Johnson since I hardly talk about him :lol:

and it's all Gordon

I don't think Henderson means no Gordon guys and it means probably Gordon if we 're taking a 6'5 defender when we have a 6'4 defender in Kirk

ScottyKCMO · Post #147 » by **ScottyKCMO** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:45 pm

Luke NOT Luc wrote:
ScottyKCMO wrote:
boogydown wrote:It will make me sick if we land Henderson. He is not going to resolve our problems in anyway.

Blake Griffin probably couldn't even fix all our problems. We need somebody who is going to come in and contribute. I do think Henderson would help our backcourt defense, and give us more flexibility with our roster going forward. I like James Johnson too, but I think we'd have a log jam at the SF spot, unless we traded Deng or Salmons. I just don't see Johnson being a PF in the NBA. I could be wrong. I kinda see him as a poor man's Beasley....and I think Beasley is better suited to be a SF than a PF.

So I've heard you rip everyone's ideas and critique every player brought up without any specific ideas as to who or what YOU think would be good for this team. It's easy to come online and trash everyone's opinions and every player, but at least provide some suggestions or alternatives

Whoa man....chill out. I'm pretty sure if you go back and read through this thread, you'll see what I'm susggesting. I've written some pretty detailed posts and everyone has proceeded to rip on me for that. In summary...
(A) Don't re-sign Gordon, unless it's for $6 or $7 mil per year (which won't happen)
(B) Drafting Henderson or Williams would be my preference
(c) I also like James Johnson, but think we would probably have to trade Deng in order for him to get minutes. Salmons would then have to play SG, with Hinrich backing up.
(d) The draft is weak, as we all know. Nobody we draft will make us contenders next year.
(e) I would like to see us trade Deng and Tyrus for Amare or Bosh (preferably Amare)
(f) I would like to have cap room (by not re-signing Gordon) so that we can go after a wing player in 2010 (Wade, Joe Johnson, etc)

RyGuy24 · Post #148 » by **RyGuy24** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:48 pm

Johnson maybe to Toronto at 9?

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic. ... 2&t=916658

Luke NOT Luc · Post #149 » by **Luke NOT Luc** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:48 pm

ScottyKCMO wrote:
Luke NOT Luc wrote:
So I've heard you rip everyone's ideas and critique every player brought up without any specific ideas as to who or what YOU think would be good for this team. It's easy to come online and trash everyone's opinions and every player, but at least provide some suggestions or alternatives

Whoa man....chill out. I'm pretty sure if you go back and read through this thread, you'll see what I'm susggesting. I've written some pretty detailed posts and everyone has proceeded to rip on me for that. In summary...
(A) Don't re-sign Gordon, unless it's for $6 or $7 mil per year (which won't happen)
(B) Drafting Henderson or Williams would be my preference
(c) I also like James Johnson, but think we would probably have to trade Deng in order for him to get minutes. Salmons would then have to play SG, with Hinrich backing up.
(d) The draft is weak, as we all know. Nobody we draft will make us contenders next year.
(e) I would like to see us trade Deng and Tyrus for Amare or Bosh (preferably Amare)
(f) I would like to have cap room (by not re-signing Gordon) so that we can go after a wing player in 2010 (Wade, Joe Johnson, etc)

I would like to trade for Amare, sign Wade and pay Noah and Rose too but that's not gonna fly according to league rules

jax98 · Post #150 » by **jax98** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:49 pm

RyGuy24 wrote:Johnson maybe to Toronto at 9?

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=916658

Bollocks.

This is only a good thing if we end up with Blair.

Ralphb07 · Post #151 » by **Ralphb07** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:55 pm

RyGuy24 wrote:Johnson maybe to Toronto at 9?

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=916658

I've been telling people Johnson will be good.... Hopefully they don't take him

Ralphb07 · Post #152 » by **Ralphb07** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:57 pm

Morten Jensen wrote:
RyGuy24 wrote:Johnson maybe to Toronto at 9?

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=916658

Bollocks.

This is only a good thing if we end up with Blair.

If they take Johnson at 9 and Indy take Blair at 13 like some people thinks, it's not going to shape up goof for us

jax98 · Post #153 » by **jax98** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:01 pm

Ralphb07 wrote:If they take Johnson at 9 and Indy take Blair at 13 like some people thinks, it's not going to shape up goof for us

If we end up with number 11, we should be okay.

But assuming we stay at 16th, and that happens.

Yeah, I'd be pretty pissed.

Post #154 » by **Ben** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:03 pm

Eh, I think we could still get Mullens if all of that goes down. And while Blair's my #1 and I do like Johnson, that wouldn't be the worst scenario in the world.

Or, Brandon Jennings or Ty Lawson or another good PG prospect should be available, and we could package one of them with Tyrus and others in an Amare deal.

Post #155 » by **BrooklynBulls** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:04 pm

Ralphb07 wrote:
If they take Johnson at 9 and Indy take Blair at 13 like some people thinks, it's not going to shape up goof for us

Yeah, I'm not liking that thought either.

theanimal23 · Post #156 » by **theanimal23** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:04 pm

Someone would drop if Johnson goes at 9, Blair at 13, Clark at 14, and Mullens at 15

Post #157 » by **BrooklynBulls** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:05 pm

Ben B. wrote:Eh, I think we could still get Mullens if all of that goes down. And while Blair's my #1 and I do like Johnson, that wouldn't be the worst scenario in the world.

The more I try to find comparisons for a guy like Mullens, and the more I read about him, the less I am interested. There's 16 prospects I prefer to Mullens, I'm sure of it.

sdeezy · Post #158 » by **sdeezy** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:11 pm

Morten Jensen wrote:
Ralphb07 wrote:If they take Johnson at 9 and Indy take Blair at 13 like some people thinks, it's not going to shape up goof for us

If we end up with number 11, we should be okay.

But assuming we stay at 16th, and that happens.

Yeah, I'd be pretty pissed.

This was a scenario i didnt envision..i didnt think Johnson would get enough recognition to not be available at 16.. According to the Toronto boards and some NJ papers, he really impressed in their workouts and apparently tore it up in Utah earlier this week. Johnson to the Raps is all of a sudden a legit possibility.

DaBulls82 · Post #159 » by **DaBulls82** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:13 pm

I'm fine with grabbing Henderson as long as we aren't planning to make him our full time 2. That would be a huge letdown.

Post #160 » by **AshyLarrysDiaper** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:18 pm

theanimal23 wrote:Someone would drop if Johnson goes at 9, Blair at 13, Clark at 14, and Mullens at 15

If Johnson goes 9, I think it'll either be Henderson or Williams who falls to us.

Dig:

9. Toronto . Johnson
10. Mil - Jrue Holiday
11. NJ - Derozan. This is now the swing spot. Derozan's got too much value for them to pass on, regardless of fit, and now they pull the pick-trade off the table
12. Charlotte - Williams or Henderson
13. Indiana - Dejuan Blair
14. PHX - Earl Clark
15. Detroit - Mullens
16. BULLS - Williams or Henderson

If we stay where we are, I could very easily see us taking whoever Charlotte doesn't want.