I hope Tyrus and Larry figure out they hate each other before this season ends. Worst thing for both men is if Thomas has a strong few months and signs there, because they would inevitable murder each other.
The whole future #1 is crazy. Bobcats pick this year goes to Minnesota, except it's lottery protected, and the Bobcats are still trying to get out of the lottery for the first time. That pick can keep rolling over thru 2014, where it won't be lottery protected. And since the NBA has a rule against trading #1 picks in back to back years, the Bulls can't get their pick until 2012, and maybe as late as 2016.
What I was hearing locally is that by dumping Salmons and Thomas both for expiring contracts, they should be in a position to offer two free-agent max deals this offseason. (At least in theory, I doubt Reinsdorf wants to get in a position where he later has to pay Rose and Noah and get into the Luxury Tax stratosphere.)
My question, for anyone who wants to take a shot, is how often has a big-time free agent actually moved without a trade being involved? (Garnett to the Celtics?) IIRC, the NBA has a cagey rule that allows the current team to offer a premium over what anyone else can pay. Which leads to free agent "sign and trade" deals, rather than star-level players moving without compensation.
So for the Bulls (and the Knickerbockers, who have done much the same here) - why do you think James, Bosh or Wade are going to take less money to join either club? I don't see where either team would have anything to offer in a cap 'n trade scenario. I suppose there's the marketing opportunities for Lebron, anyway.
Finally, wouldn't the Bulls have an edge over the Knicks in recruiting with a rising star, and the more attractive building blocks?
Hard to argue with the Bucks pick. At the start of the season there was such hope. Jennings would take the next step. Bogut would be back as good as ever. Salmons would stay at 09/10 levels. Gooden and Maggette would enhance the team.