Bulls should trade Deng

[Moranis]

t I think this trade with Boston makes some sense for both teams: Deng and Hamilton for Pierce and Sullinger. 

I'd pass.

Deng is a good player but he doesn't have the ability to put the team on his back and carry them offensively for a game like PP can (although not as frequently as he once did).  No interest whatsoever in the ghost of Rip Hamilton.  I'd rather ride out PP's last year and keep Sully.

The trade was about getting Deng who is 27 and the same age as Rondo.  Rondo, Bradley, Deng, Green is a pretty solid young base from the guard/wing positions.  Still need that monster big man, but that is at least a pretty solid team.

[Fafnir]

Why get Deng if you have Green, or vice/versa?

[Evantime34]

Why get Deng if you have Green, or vice/versa?

To collect assets

 I also think you could play them together, defensively Deng is just as versatile as Pierce if not more. Green and Pierce saw a ton of court time together this year why not Green and Deng?

[Moranis]

Why not just move Butler to the 2 spot and keep Deng at the 3?

Bingo.

Deng's shooting/offense is sorely missed this series. Butler is a long way from replacing Deng there, I think.

Butler has been a better shooter than Deng this season. Butler 47/38/80%  to Deng's 43/32/81%.   Butler has dramatically improved his outside shooting from his rookie year, trending upward in all zones.  The only shooting zone where Deng is better is the mid-range, and that shot is falling out of favor with NBA teams.

If I'm the Bulls, I keep both and try to move Boozer.

They can't get anything of value for Boozer.  They can for Deng.  They also don't have a Jimmy Butler type player that could fill in for Boozer.

Swapping Boozer for Gibson is less of a drop off than Deng for Butler

No it isn't.  Not even close.  Butler has been very good this post season while Gibson has barely played.  The drop off between Butler and Deng is much much closer than the drop off between Boozer and Gibson.  Not even close.

I significantly disagree with your evaluation.  Gibson average the most playing time this year than since his rookie season and was his usual productive self.  Additionally the bulls just resigned him to a pretty serious contract extension. 

Boozer is by far the more disposable player of the two.

And yet Jimmy Butler played more minutes during hte season, was equally as productive, and hasn't disappeared in the playoffs.  The Bulls would move Gibson before they moved Butler, which tells you all you need to know.  Butler is far more valuable than Gibson, which makes Deng more disposable than Boozer and that doesn't even account for the fact they could get far more for Deng than they could for Boozer.  I can't believe anyone would even debate that.

Butler has played more because Deng hasnt been playing...  I think its pretty obivous that a guy like Gibson who has been consistently productive and has been rewarded with a long term deal is the more valued asset by the organization than a rookie being forced into action due to their star playing being injured/ill.

I find your evaluation of the situation puzzling to say the least

Game 1 against Nets - Deng 38 minutes, Butler 39 minutes, Boozer 45 minutes, Gibson 23 minutes

Game 2 against Nets - Deng 42 minutes, Butler 30 minutes, Boozer 42 minutes, Gibson 11 minutes

The rest of the series pretty much the same.  Butler is better than Gibson and it isn't close.  Chicago knows this very well, I just can't figure out why you don't.

Game 1 against Nets

Butler 39 Minutes, 13 points, 3 rbs -18 +/-
Gibson 22 Minutes, 9 Points, 7 rbs 0 +/-

minutes played are not the most meaningful metric for value

Edit: sorry that was snarky

And Boozer was -18, Deng was -16, and even Noah was -4.  I suppose all those people are less valuable than Gibson as well.

And odd you didn't mention game 2.  I wonder why that was.  I mean it couldn't be that in his 11 minutes Gibson was a -6, while Butler in his 30 was a +6.  Maybe +/- isn't the best way to measure.

[Fafnir]

Why get Deng if you have Green, or vice/versa?

To collect assets

 I also think you could play them together, defensively Deng is just as versatile as Pierce if not more. Green and Pierce saw a ton of court time together this year why not Green and Deng?

Sure, flipping Pierce for Deng is a win asset wise. But then you need to setup a second trade for it to work.

Deng is more limited than Pierce offensively and Pierce/Green are already an ill fit from a team offense standpoint.

[Rondo2287]

Why not just move Butler to the 2 spot and keep Deng at the 3?

Bingo.

Deng's shooting/offense is sorely missed this series. Butler is a long way from replacing Deng there, I think.

Butler has been a better shooter than Deng this season. Butler 47/38/80%  to Deng's 43/32/81%.   Butler has dramatically improved his outside shooting from his rookie year, trending upward in all zones.  The only shooting zone where Deng is better is the mid-range, and that shot is falling out of favor with NBA teams.

If I'm the Bulls, I keep both and try to move Boozer.

They can't get anything of value for Boozer.  They can for Deng.  They also don't have a Jimmy Butler type player that could fill in for Boozer.

Swapping Boozer for Gibson is less of a drop off than Deng for Butler

No it isn't.  Not even close.  Butler has been very good this post season while Gibson has barely played.  The drop off between Butler and Deng is much much closer than the drop off between Boozer and Gibson.  Not even close.

I significantly disagree with your evaluation.  Gibson average the most playing time this year than since his rookie season and was his usual productive self.  Additionally the bulls just resigned him to a pretty serious contract extension. 

Boozer is by far the more disposable player of the two.

And yet Jimmy Butler played more minutes during hte season, was equally as productive, and hasn't disappeared in the playoffs.  The Bulls would move Gibson before they moved Butler, which tells you all you need to know.  Butler is far more valuable than Gibson, which makes Deng more disposable than Boozer and that doesn't even account for the fact they could get far more for Deng than they could for Boozer.  I can't believe anyone would even debate that.

Butler has played more because Deng hasnt been playing...  I think its pretty obivous that a guy like Gibson who has been consistently productive and has been rewarded with a long term deal is the more valued asset by the organization than a rookie being forced into action due to their star playing being injured/ill.

I find your evaluation of the situation puzzling to say the least

Game 1 against Nets - Deng 38 minutes, Butler 39 minutes, Boozer 45 minutes, Gibson 23 minutes

Game 2 against Nets - Deng 42 minutes, Butler 30 minutes, Boozer 42 minutes, Gibson 11 minutes

The rest of the series pretty much the same.  Butler is better than Gibson and it isn't close.  Chicago knows this very well, I just can't figure out why you don't.

Game 1 against Nets

Butler 39 Minutes, 13 points, 3 rbs -18 +/-
Gibson 22 Minutes, 9 Points, 7 rbs 0 +/-

minutes played are not the most meaningful metric for value

Edit: sorry that was snarky

And Boozer was -18, Deng was -16, and even Noah was -4.  I suppose all those people are less valuable than Gibson as well.

And odd you didn't mention game 2.  I wonder why that was.  I mean it couldn't be that in his 11 minutes Gibson was a -6, while Butler in his 30 was a +6.  Maybe +/- isn't the best way to measure.

I didnt mention game two because I didnt look at it.  Game 1 was all that was necessary to debunk the minute argument you were making.

[Moranis]

Why not just move Butler to the 2 spot and keep Deng at the 3?

Bingo.

Deng's shooting/offense is sorely missed this series. Butler is a long way from replacing Deng there, I think.

Butler has been a better shooter than Deng this season. Butler 47/38/80%  to Deng's 43/32/81%.   Butler has dramatically improved his outside shooting from his rookie year, trending upward in all zones.  The only shooting zone where Deng is better is the mid-range, and that shot is falling out of favor with NBA teams.

If I'm the Bulls, I keep both and try to move Boozer.

They can't get anything of value for Boozer.  They can for Deng.  They also don't have a Jimmy Butler type player that could fill in for Boozer.

Swapping Boozer for Gibson is less of a drop off than Deng for Butler

No it isn't.  Not even close.  Butler has been very good this post season while Gibson has barely played.  The drop off between Butler and Deng is much much closer than the drop off between Boozer and Gibson.  Not even close.

I significantly disagree with your evaluation.  Gibson average the most playing time this year than since his rookie season and was his usual productive self.  Additionally the bulls just resigned him to a pretty serious contract extension. 

Boozer is by far the more disposable player of the two.

And yet Jimmy Butler played more minutes during hte season, was equally as productive, and hasn't disappeared in the playoffs.  The Bulls would move Gibson before they moved Butler, which tells you all you need to know.  Butler is far more valuable than Gibson, which makes Deng more disposable than Boozer and that doesn't even account for the fact they could get far more for Deng than they could for Boozer.  I can't believe anyone would even debate that.

Butler has played more because Deng hasnt been playing...  I think its pretty obivous that a guy like Gibson who has been consistently productive and has been rewarded with a long term deal is the more valued asset by the organization than a rookie being forced into action due to their star playing being injured/ill.

I find your evaluation of the situation puzzling to say the least

Game 1 against Nets - Deng 38 minutes, Butler 39 minutes, Boozer 45 minutes, Gibson 23 minutes

Game 2 against Nets - Deng 42 minutes, Butler 30 minutes, Boozer 42 minutes, Gibson 11 minutes

The rest of the series pretty much the same.  Butler is better than Gibson and it isn't close.  Chicago knows this very well, I just can't figure out why you don't.

Game 1 against Nets

Butler 39 Minutes, 13 points, 3 rbs -18 +/-
Gibson 22 Minutes, 9 Points, 7 rbs 0 +/-

minutes played are not the most meaningful metric for value

Edit: sorry that was snarky

And Boozer was -18, Deng was -16, and even Noah was -4.  I suppose all those people are less valuable than Gibson as well.

And odd you didn't mention game 2.  I wonder why that was.  I mean it couldn't be that in his 11 minutes Gibson was a -6, while Butler in his 30 was a +6.  Maybe +/- isn't the best way to measure.

I didnt mention game two because I didnt look at it.  Game 1 was all that was necessary to debunk the minute argument you were making.

Minutes played is absolutely the gauge of the value of a player.  Thibs started Butler out of position to get him on the floor and played Boozer more minutes in the playoffs than he did in the regular season which cuts out Gibson's value. 

Butler is far more valuable than Gibson is.  It isn't close and it isn't debatable.

[Rondo2287]

Why not just move Butler to the 2 spot and keep Deng at the 3?

Bingo.

Deng's shooting/offense is sorely missed this series. Butler is a long way from replacing Deng there, I think.

Butler has been a better shooter than Deng this season. Butler 47/38/80%  to Deng's 43/32/81%.   Butler has dramatically improved his outside shooting from his rookie year, trending upward in all zones.  The only shooting zone where Deng is better is the mid-range, and that shot is falling out of favor with NBA teams.

If I'm the Bulls, I keep both and try to move Boozer.

They can't get anything of value for Boozer.  They can for Deng.  They also don't have a Jimmy Butler type player that could fill in for Boozer.

Swapping Boozer for Gibson is less of a drop off than Deng for Butler

No it isn't.  Not even close.  Butler has been very good this post season while Gibson has barely played.  The drop off between Butler and Deng is much much closer than the drop off between Boozer and Gibson.  Not even close.

I significantly disagree with your evaluation.  Gibson average the most playing time this year than since his rookie season and was his usual productive self.  Additionally the bulls just resigned him to a pretty serious contract extension. 

Boozer is by far the more disposable player of the two.

And yet Jimmy Butler played more minutes during hte season, was equally as productive, and hasn't disappeared in the playoffs.  The Bulls would move Gibson before they moved Butler, which tells you all you need to know.  Butler is far more valuable than Gibson, which makes Deng more disposable than Boozer and that doesn't even account for the fact they could get far more for Deng than they could for Boozer.  I can't believe anyone would even debate that.

Butler has played more because Deng hasnt been playing...  I think its pretty obivous that a guy like Gibson who has been consistently productive and has been rewarded with a long term deal is the more valued asset by the organization than a rookie being forced into action due to their star playing being injured/ill.

I find your evaluation of the situation puzzling to say the least

Game 1 against Nets - Deng 38 minutes, Butler 39 minutes, Boozer 45 minutes, Gibson 23 minutes

Game 2 against Nets - Deng 42 minutes, Butler 30 minutes, Boozer 42 minutes, Gibson 11 minutes

The rest of the series pretty much the same.  Butler is better than Gibson and it isn't close.  Chicago knows this very well, I just can't figure out why you don't.

Game 1 against Nets

Butler 39 Minutes, 13 points, 3 rbs -18 +/-
Gibson 22 Minutes, 9 Points, 7 rbs 0 +/-

minutes played are not the most meaningful metric for value

Edit: sorry that was snarky

And Boozer was -18, Deng was -16, and even Noah was -4.  I suppose all those people are less valuable than Gibson as well.

And odd you didn't mention game 2.  I wonder why that was.  I mean it couldn't be that in his 11 minutes Gibson was a -6, while Butler in his 30 was a +6.  Maybe +/- isn't the best way to measure.

I didnt mention game two because I didnt look at it.  Game 1 was all that was necessary to debunk the minute argument you were making.

Minutes played is absolutely the gauge of the value of a player.  Thibs started Butler out of position to get him on the floor and played Boozer more minutes in the playoffs than he did in the regular season which cuts out Gibson's value. 

Butler is far more valuable than Gibson is.  It isn't close and it isn't debatable.

I think you need to look past minutes played and analyze the context of the numbers.  Stats are mostly meaningless without context.  Butler's starting at SG is more a refletion of who else they have at that position than it is an assessment of his value compared to Gibson.   

Danny Green is playing more minutes than Tiago Splitter but Splitter is clearly more valuable to the team now and going forward.  He just happens to play behind Duncan. 

[Moranis]

Why not just move Butler to the 2 spot and keep Deng at the 3?

Bingo.

Deng's shooting/offense is sorely missed this series. Butler is a long way from replacing Deng there, I think.

Butler has been a better shooter than Deng this season. Butler 47/38/80%  to Deng's 43/32/81%.   Butler has dramatically improved his outside shooting from his rookie year, trending upward in all zones.  The only shooting zone where Deng is better is the mid-range, and that shot is falling out of favor with NBA teams.

If I'm the Bulls, I keep both and try to move Boozer.

They can't get anything of value for Boozer.  They can for Deng.  They also don't have a Jimmy Butler type player that could fill in for Boozer.

Swapping Boozer for Gibson is less of a drop off than Deng for Butler

No it isn't.  Not even close.  Butler has been very good this post season while Gibson has barely played.  The drop off between Butler and Deng is much much closer than the drop off between Boozer and Gibson.  Not even close.

I significantly disagree with your evaluation.  Gibson average the most playing time this year than since his rookie season and was his usual productive self.  Additionally the bulls just resigned him to a pretty serious contract extension. 

Boozer is by far the more disposable player of the two.

And yet Jimmy Butler played more minutes during hte season, was equally as productive, and hasn't disappeared in the playoffs.  The Bulls would move Gibson before they moved Butler, which tells you all you need to know.  Butler is far more valuable than Gibson, which makes Deng more disposable than Boozer and that doesn't even account for the fact they could get far more for Deng than they could for Boozer.  I can't believe anyone would even debate that.

Butler has played more because Deng hasnt been playing...  I think its pretty obivous that a guy like Gibson who has been consistently productive and has been rewarded with a long term deal is the more valued asset by the organization than a rookie being forced into action due to their star playing being injured/ill.

I find your evaluation of the situation puzzling to say the least

Game 1 against Nets - Deng 38 minutes, Butler 39 minutes, Boozer 45 minutes, Gibson 23 minutes

Game 2 against Nets - Deng 42 minutes, Butler 30 minutes, Boozer 42 minutes, Gibson 11 minutes

The rest of the series pretty much the same.  Butler is better than Gibson and it isn't close.  Chicago knows this very well, I just can't figure out why you don't.

Game 1 against Nets

Butler 39 Minutes, 13 points, 3 rbs -18 +/-
Gibson 22 Minutes, 9 Points, 7 rbs 0 +/-

minutes played are not the most meaningful metric for value

Edit: sorry that was snarky

And Boozer was -18, Deng was -16, and even Noah was -4.  I suppose all those people are less valuable than Gibson as well.

And odd you didn't mention game 2.  I wonder why that was.  I mean it couldn't be that in his 11 minutes Gibson was a -6, while Butler in his 30 was a +6.  Maybe +/- isn't the best way to measure.

I didnt mention game two because I didnt look at it.  Game 1 was all that was necessary to debunk the minute argument you were making.

Minutes played is absolutely the gauge of the value of a player.  Thibs started Butler out of position to get him on the floor and played Boozer more minutes in the playoffs than he did in the regular season which cuts out Gibson's value. 

Butler is far more valuable than Gibson is.  It isn't close and it isn't debatable.

I think you need to look past minutes played and analyze the context of the numbers.  Stats are mostly meaningless without context.  Butler's starting at SG is more a refletion of who else they have at that position than it is an assessment of his value compared to Gibson.   

Danny Green is playing more minutes than Tiago Splitter but Splitter is clearly more valuable to the team now and going forward.  He just happens to play behind Duncan.

Gibson's minutes have gotten less in the playoffs.  You don't reduce the minutes of your better players in the post season, you increase them.  Especially when Boozer, Noah, and Nazr combined are playing about the same amount of minutes in both the playoffs as the regular season.  That means Gibson is losing his minutes to wings like Butler and Belinelli.  That is all you need to know.  The Bulls are short handed and in the playoffs, and yet Thibs is cutting back on Gibson's minutes not extending them.  Gibson is not anywhere near as valuable as Butler is both this year and going forward.  That is clearly apparent by their usage in the playoffs.

[Rondo2287]

Why not just move Butler to the 2 spot and keep Deng at the 3?

Bingo.

Deng's shooting/offense is sorely missed this series. Butler is a long way from replacing Deng there, I think.

Butler has been a better shooter than Deng this season. Butler 47/38/80%  to Deng's 43/32/81%.   Butler has dramatically improved his outside shooting from his rookie year, trending upward in all zones.  The only shooting zone where Deng is better is the mid-range, and that shot is falling out of favor with NBA teams.

If I'm the Bulls, I keep both and try to move Boozer.

They can't get anything of value for Boozer.  They can for Deng.  They also don't have a Jimmy Butler type player that could fill in for Boozer.

Swapping Boozer for Gibson is less of a drop off than Deng for Butler

No it isn't.  Not even close.  Butler has been very good this post season while Gibson has barely played.  The drop off between Butler and Deng is much much closer than the drop off between Boozer and Gibson.  Not even close.

I significantly disagree with your evaluation.  Gibson average the most playing time this year than since his rookie season and was his usual productive self.  Additionally the bulls just resigned him to a pretty serious contract extension. 

Boozer is by far the more disposable player of the two.

And yet Jimmy Butler played more minutes during hte season, was equally as productive, and hasn't disappeared in the playoffs.  The Bulls would move Gibson before they moved Butler, which tells you all you need to know.  Butler is far more valuable than Gibson, which makes Deng more disposable than Boozer and that doesn't even account for the fact they could get far more for Deng than they could for Boozer.  I can't believe anyone would even debate that.

Butler has played more because Deng hasnt been playing...  I think its pretty obivous that a guy like Gibson who has been consistently productive and has been rewarded with a long term deal is the more valued asset by the organization than a rookie being forced into action due to their star playing being injured/ill.

I find your evaluation of the situation puzzling to say the least

Game 1 against Nets - Deng 38 minutes, Butler 39 minutes, Boozer 45 minutes, Gibson 23 minutes

Game 2 against Nets - Deng 42 minutes, Butler 30 minutes, Boozer 42 minutes, Gibson 11 minutes

The rest of the series pretty much the same.  Butler is better than Gibson and it isn't close.  Chicago knows this very well, I just can't figure out why you don't.

Game 1 against Nets

Butler 39 Minutes, 13 points, 3 rbs -18 +/-
Gibson 22 Minutes, 9 Points, 7 rbs 0 +/-

minutes played are not the most meaningful metric for value

Edit: sorry that was snarky

And Boozer was -18, Deng was -16, and even Noah was -4.  I suppose all those people are less valuable than Gibson as well.

And odd you didn't mention game 2.  I wonder why that was.  I mean it couldn't be that in his 11 minutes Gibson was a -6, while Butler in his 30 was a +6.  Maybe +/- isn't the best way to measure.

I didnt mention game two because I didnt look at it.  Game 1 was all that was necessary to debunk the minute argument you were making.

Minutes played is absolutely the gauge of the value of a player.  Thibs started Butler out of position to get him on the floor and played Boozer more minutes in the playoffs than he did in the regular season which cuts out Gibson's value. 

Butler is far more valuable than Gibson is.  It isn't close and it isn't debatable.

I think you need to look past minutes played and analyze the context of the numbers.  Stats are mostly meaningless without context.  Butler's starting at SG is more a refletion of who else they have at that position than it is an assessment of his value compared to Gibson.   

Danny Green is playing more minutes than Tiago Splitter but Splitter is clearly more valuable to the team now and going forward.  He just happens to play behind Duncan.

Gibson's minutes have gotten less in the playoffs.  You don't reduce the minutes of your better players in the post season, you increase them.  Especially when Boozer, Noah, and Nazr combined are playing about the same amount of minutes in both the playoffs as the regular season.  That means Gibson is losing his minutes to wings like Butler and Belinelli.  That is all you need to know.  The Bulls are short handed and in the playoffs, and yet Thibs is cutting back on Gibson's minutes not extending them.  Gibson is not anywhere near as valuable as Butler is both this year and going forward.  That is clearly apparent by their usage in the playoffs.

Agree to disagree.  Minutes played as a measure of value just isnt logical in my opinion, especially when comparing players at different positions. 

[snively]

Why get Deng if you have Green, or vice/versa?

To collect assets

 I also think you could play them together, defensively Deng is just as versatile as Pierce if not more. Green and Pierce saw a ton of court time together this year why not Green and Deng?

Sure, flipping Pierce for Deng is a win asset wise. But then you need to setup a second trade for it to work.

Deng is more limited than Pierce offensively and Pierce/Green are already an ill fit from a team offense standpoint.

Yep - I'm not eager to institutionalize the two big SFs line-up, especially when neither player is much of shot creator.

[Donoghus]

Why get Deng if you have Green, or vice/versa?

You don't because it make it makes very little sense from a personal standpoint.

Too much overlap there and it makes things worse offensively.

[Moranis]

Why get Deng if you have Green, or vice/versa?

To collect assets

 I also think you could play them together, defensively Deng is just as versatile as Pierce if not more. Green and Pierce saw a ton of court time together this year why not Green and Deng?

Sure, flipping Pierce for Deng is a win asset wise. But then you need to setup a second trade for it to work.

Deng is more limited than Pierce offensively and Pierce/Green are already an ill fit from a team offense standpoint.

Yep - I'm not eager to institutionalize the two big SFs line-up, especially when neither player is much of shot creator.

But look at all of the "PF's" in the east.  I mean Lebron, Melo, etc. are all playing big minutes at PF.  You are thus going to have 2 SF's in most of the time a lot, so why wouldn't you get the better asset that is much younger.