Does it stink having to watch all the Bulls' games for your job when the team is like it is now? --Staszak, Tinley Park, Ill.
No. This may be difficult to believe, but I love watching the Bulls now as much as I did when they were winning championships. I don't enjoy the quality of play as much or the lack of fundamentals. But I do love that game, and I do love the stories behind the game. One of the great advantages of having a job like I have is knowing what goes on behind the scenes and not just the stories or where players go and what they do. I know when there might be issues between players and I will watch to see how they react to one another or what they do. Or don't, like refuse to pass because they might be mad at someone. Basketball is like life, except with more cars. The players have a great talent none of us have. But otherwise they are the same with bad moods, bad days, spouses and kids driving them nuts and petty disputes at the office. Though that's a small part of my enjoyment of the games.
I stay up late every night watching the last NBA games on satellite and will watch Clippers-Timberwolves to the conclusion. What, that's worse than Dancing with the Stars or American Idol? They all make fools of themselves on some level. I know just about all the players, at least by reputation and ability. So I watch to see what they will do at important times, which is the measure of anyone at their job. Will they make a big shot or play or shy away and not want the ball or pressure? I like to watch what teams are doing, the matchups and which coach is taking advantage. There's a story in every NBA game and every game is a chapter in a season-long book.
I never much root for a team and don't usually care who wins. The only time I really did was the 1991 Bulls, whom I traveled with for several years in the era before charter travel and I knew them well. I felt a part of that team like a family and rooted for them when they had that chance and was truly happy for them. I think I even hugged Jerry Krause in the postgame locker room in L.A. And I didn't regret it.
So it doesn't much matter to me that the Bulls' record is so bad this season. I enjoy watching the response and the story within that. There's always dozens of things that happen in every NBA game I look for and enjoy, and it's no different with these Bulls.
As many of you know by now, I am leaving the Tribune. I need to set the record straight. I am not retiring, just moving on to work elsewhere, though that's not certain where as yet. I've had a great run at the Tribune and while it looks like maybe the best job ever, it has been. I'm grateful for the Tribune to have given me the opportunity to have the job I always wanted. I was among a rare few who can look forward every day to work. When kids ask about professions, I always say to find something you love doing and look forward to and have passion for, and if you can find that, you'll be a success. That's the secret. Of course, I was hoping for Major League baseball player first, but this has been second. But a close second.
I've gotten a wonderful response from readers, and that's one of the things I'll miss most. And what I've discovered over the years is how in tune so many readers are. Sure, there's the occasional suggestion of a Kobe for Chris Duhon trade, but the majority of emails I get are reasoned, knowledgeable and especially passionate. Some are angry and some are accusatory and some say I'm an idiot. So like I haven't heard that at home or in the locker room. I actually enjoy the debate, which is why I try to come up with different ideas and ways of looking at things. What's the fun in sports if everyone agrees?
The fun is when you don't. Sports is never having to say your sorry when you're wrong. Or ever believing you are wrong. So I will miss the debate and conversation with the readers.
With all the recent news of a rift between Mark Cuban and Avery Johnson, is there any chance the Bulls would look to him as a coaching possibility? --Steven Schnakenberg, Waymart, Pa.
I doubt it, and I doubt Avery is going anywhere. I believe he has three years left on his contract, it's not like there are great candidates out there, as I believe the Bulls will find out, and do you think Cuban isn't yelling at everyone? I heard when Avery first signed his deal he was uncertain about working for Cuban, but it wasn't like anyone else was offering him big money and a good team. My guess is if they happen to miss the playoffs, which is possible with Drik Nowitzki hurt now, or go out in the first round, they'll look to see what they can get by moving Nowitzki. There has been speculation about this after the playoff meltdown last spring and Dirk's so called lack of toughness and teams being able to defend him better in the playoffs with smaller players. I believe everything could be on the table for the Mavs this summer with a poor finish.
I think the Bulls should trade Drew Gooden, Ben Gordon(sign-trade), and Andres Nocioni for Jermaine O'Neal. --Steve, Chicago
You mean the diva who rarely plays? Who rarely practices. Who has two seasons left on his contract at more than $21 million a season. Who has become mostly a jump shooter on offense when he has played, which has been 33 games this season after missing 13 last year, 31 the year before and 38 the year before that. Yeah, that should work.
I've had mix emotions about this Bulls team all season long. But after Saturday's loss to Indiana I just felt sad. There are so many problems with this team. Where do you even begin to fix it - the coaching, the players, the front office? In addition, this team is so undeserving of a playoff spot, I think it would actually create longer term problems for them if they get the eighth seed in the incredibly weak Eastern conference. --Kevin O'Neil, North Aurora
As I said, I don't see that. Management is not fooled this time. I'm not saying they were fooled last year because I didn't hear or see anyone predict anything like this. There's going to be a major re-evaluation and I believe a very different team for next season, though as I've been saying all along and believe, they still have some decent pieces and with some more commitment and getting some players in the right position, meaning fewer of these undersized players by position so they get hurt in matchups, I see them back in the mix in the middle of the East next season. Though, yes, that's hardly elite status. But it's back to being a start and winning in the 40s again.
I was at Saturday's game. It's bad enough that Boylan ever has Gordon and Hughes on the court at the same time. How can he keep them on the court in the fourth quarter, with a lead, when neither plays defense or passes? --B. Miller, Chicago
Yes, Gordon and Hughes are a bad mix, which is why one will be gone before next season. Management wants to see some of these guys playing together and there are just too many shooting guards on the team. So you do get caught up with some bad matchups, but that's the price of a team that's made major changes. Look, from where the season started it's a new coach, almost a half dozen different players and little resemblance to any system they had previously.
Is it me or is Jim Boylan really the problem with this team? Way too many fourth quarter collapses, which in my opinion that's comes down to coaching. --Dennis, Minneapolis, Minn.
He's part of the problem, obviously. Yes, when a team loses leads like that in the fourth quarter so often the coach has to share some blame. Some. The NBA is a players' game and it's the players. Look, it's not like Boylan isn't playing the same guys who got that lead. He is. But when they start jacking up bad shots and not dropping back on defense and throwing the ball all over the place, what's he supposed to do, look for JamesOn Curry? He's putting his best players out there and if they can't gather themselves and hold a lead, it's unfair to point to just the coach. We give coaches too much blame and credit.
How about Pat Riley in Miami? He'll be voted into the Hall of Fame this year. Until he left recently to scout, the Heat even with Dwyane Wade playing, and he's better than anyone on the Bulls, failed to compete on any level. Players get the long contracts and big money. When it doesn't work, they can't point fingers at the coach.
Now that the Bulls are clearly in full melt-down, I was horrified to read that Rick Carlisle, master of a controlled tempo and half-court offense, is considered a front-runner for the Bulls' coaching job??!! --Pete, Chicago
I would be very, very, very surprised if Carlisle is the coach. I saw this mention somewhere about his being the "front runner," and that I know is not true. I'm sure he's on their list because he interviewed well in 1998 when the Bulls went with Tim Floyd and Reinsdorf did like him. But Reinsdorf has been true to this one: He'll let the general manager decide, and I don't see Paxson and Carlisle fitting that well. I see Carlisle demanding a lot of money and being a slow-down coach, which is a style I don't see fitting the talent they have. They do want a coach who thinks defense and Carlisle has proven he can win in the Central Division, but I'd consider him a longshot for now. I would like to see someone who is more creative offensively while also tending to defensive principles, perhaps with someone like a John Bach type as an assistant to run the defense.
I don't understand why the media continues to bring up the insubordination of Bulls players (Duhon, Noah, Thomas, and now Nocioni) as if they've all committed unforgivable crimes. I mean really, what athlete hasn't missed a practice or two in his lifetime? Or lost his cool in the heat of battle? These players are just reacting to one of the most disappointing seasons in Chicago history. Isn't that what we want them to do? Would we rather they shut up and act indifferent? I know columnists have to write about something but these are such non-stories. --Chris, Los Angeles
I don't think there has been a lot of columnizing on this, at least from the basketball people. Mostly the incidents have been reported, and when a coach or a team fines or suspends a player, it's the job of the media to tell you. Yes, there's some media hand wringing as a symptom of larger issues, and you can make the case that when there's more than one incident it's perhaps a sign of more than usual frustration. It seems to be in the instance of these Bulls. There is a way to express discontent and cursing out your coaches in front of 20,000 people clearly isn't the way, nor is blowing off team functions and responsibilities. Actually, I don't see where this has been held against the players for the most part, perhaps except for Duhon. After the incidents, they've generally gone back in the rotation, so perhaps they've done everyone a favor by exposing some issues the fans might normally not have seen.
According to quality sources John Calipari is interested in coaching the Bulls next year. With his new offense do you think he would be a good candidate? I could see him developing Tyrus' and Thabo's games. --Charles Armstrong, Harbor Springs, Mich.
According to sources who may or may not know, I am interested in coaching the Bulls. Calipari may be, but I strongly doubt the Bulls would consider him after the Tim Floyd fiasco. I was trying to let bygones be bygones and picked USC in my NCAA pool to go a few rounds completely ignoring my rule of never picking a Tim Floyd team in a game that mattered. Shame on me. It's been made clear all over the NBA that college coaches are not prepared to coach in the NBA. They don't know the players and the game is different and the Bulls don't have time to break in a coach.
What are your thoughts on the potential coaches out there for the Bulls? I really like Jeff Van Gundy, if for nothing else, his hilarious comments as a broadcaster. --Kevin, New Orleans
I wasn't much of a fan of Jeff's as a coach because of that walk-it-up, get-back-fast game like Carlisle's. Unless you were winning 60 games, I felt it was awful for fans to endure. But, yes, Jeff is terrific on TV. I knew he was a genuinely funny guy, though like Doug Collins his personality changes when he is working in coaching. Doug is one of the most generous, warm, helpful people I've met in basketball...until he is coaching. I think he understands that now. Jeff is the guy who named Phil Jackson "Big Chief Triangle." That's good stuff. He's hilarious and knowledgeable on TV. When he coaches he seems to grow morose and irresolute. When he does return to coaching, I think he will demand a huge payday and longterm deal, and I don't think he's ready to do that quite yet. I'd guess he doesn't toss his hairpiece into the ring for another year or two.
Do you suppose Phil Jackson enjoys coaching this Lakers team better than he did the Bulls? And how do you think these Lakers would match up against those championship Bulls teams? It appears that the Lakers are deeper and more athletic with more options offensively. Or am I just an real idiot and it's a laughable notion? --Joe Roznowski, Syracuse, N.Y.
Idiot and laughable. I'd pick that one. No, Kobe is terrific and really Jordanesque. This Lakers team, assuming Bynum plays, has size up front and more talent there than the Bulls. But they're a weak defensive team with too many limited perimeter players. I believe that Bulls team would virtually shut down this Lakers team, though the comparison is truly unfair as this Lakers' team has yet to win a division title. I think Phil loves coaching this team, though it's clearly a different time in his life as when he went home to four kids and snow on his driveway. This time he goes home to the Pacific Ocean and his owner's daughter girlfriend. I think he loved both lives for what each was at the time. Lucky guy.
Aren't all of the Bulls' woes because Paxson drafted too many one dimensional guards and big men who lack the skill to finish around the basket? -- Jack Taylor, Plymouth, Ind.
Well, not all, though a veteran basketball guy who has tutored me for years always has said you pick players who have an NBA position. Otherwise you are victim to too many mismatches and have to invent defenses. The Bulls have picked too many tweeners, like Nocioni, Thomas, Gordon, Hinrich. They seemed to be able to compensate with their effort and energy, though perhaps we should have seen it couldn't last forever. Yes, I missed it as well.
It seems like you need at least two all-star types to be a serious playoff team with a at least chance at the championship. Do you agree that the Bulls now stand at zero? How likely is it that we can trade some of the supporting cast for a possible all-star or two? --Kenn, Chicago
Yes. We all thought Deng was the guy this season, and I'm guessing by his negotiations he thought so as well. He has a chance. But now it would be difficult to project anyone on the roster as an All Star. Not that the Bulls had any when they won 49 games last season and swept Wade and the Heat. Yes, you need those guys to win championships. The Bulls never said they were a championship contender. They knew they didn't have that guy and never hid it. They always said they needed a player like that. Now they've taken a step back, but you don't need that kind of player to get to 45 or 48 wins in the East, which is the immediate goal now. I won't answer the last part because you should know: You don't get All Stars for supporting pieces. You have to hope to draft well enough to get players like that.
I'm a huge Skiles fan but I find hard to believe he is often mentioned as one of the top candidates for coaching jobs that open up when he carries the disciplinarian reputation, a possible concern to NBA GM's wanting their teams to be attractive to prospective free agents. --Joe C., Oak Lawn, Ill.
Some general managers do have that concern and Skiles, like Larry Brown, doesn't get considered for all jobs. But what Skiles has demonstrated is with the issues he brings he knows the game, has a plan and a philosophy and will fix your mess. Take a look at all the new "hot" coaches who came in this year and what they did. Skiles will get another job despite the issues he's had because he can make a difference, and few guys can in the NBA. Skiles will make your team better, and in the short run that's everyone's goal. Like with Larry Brown, you just cannot fall victim to shaping the team around him because only he can coach the kind of teams he wants, much like Brown. The Bulls fell victim to that as have many teams with Brown because you are getting better and it's exhilarating. But in the end, they'll coach who they have and do a good job.
With the Bulls most likely drafting in the 9-12 range, should they draft for need or star power? --Ron, DeKalb, Ill.
I think this is clearly a best-player available time, as, I feel, all drafts should be. I think teams make the mistake too often of trying to fit a player because of position need. I know you don't want to be drafting two guards if you have Michael Jordan. But I always fall back to getting the best player, and good players will find their way onto the court, even technically out of position. Perhaps other than Deng at three because he seems natural if not perfect for that spot, there's not a position the Bulls have now where there is a player who cannot be replaced. This year will be best player available, though I wouldn't be surprised to see the pick traded in a larger package as the Bulls need players and not more projects.
Ideal summer for Bulls: Get Andrew Bogut from Milwaukee ($11m a season offer). Senator Kohl won't have deep enough pockets to resign him. Bogut can rebound, defend and score. He can be your starting center for the next 10 years. Next, get a real point guard (Kyle Lowry please). Finally, get rid of all these combo guards (Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich (although I do like him). Wish list starting five for next year: Bogut, Gooden, Deng, Sefolosha, Lowry. That is still probably not a championship caliber starting 5 but it will be an improvement. --Louis, Sydney, Australia
I guess you know more about Milwaukee's finances than I do, but thus far, the Bucks have never not spent. They paid every free agent and player. Their problem is they've overpaid. Bogut is one of their few players they have who fits his position and is productive. He's not going anywhere. Lowry would be in play and while he is more a true point guard than Hinrich, I, frankly, don't see him as an improvement given the other things Hinrich can do on defense and shooting, which will be better when the team is more stable.
Do the Bulls have anything the Miami Heat might want, so they can do a sign-and-trade to bring Shawn Marion to Chicago? --Chris Feldman, Dubuque, Iowa
I believe the Heat would love to have Hinrich and Nocioni. Though I don't think I'd want Marion. He needs to play off a great point guard to have success in an open-court system. He doesn't create for himself. He's a worker and a hustler, but wants at least $17 million and has a tough agent to deal with and is another undersized player for his position. I don't see the Bulls having any interest.
Joakim Noah suspended two games for yelling at Ron Adams, Tyrus Thomas and Chris Duhon suspended for missing practice, and Nocioni only gets fined for throwing a towel and publicly yelling at the head coach during a game? Coaches and management stress about team unity yet it appears that they don't treat the players equally. Like the headband issue involving Ben Wallace, it's just another move by Bulls management that screams hypocrisy. --Jorge, Tinley Park, Ill.
I've gotten a few queries like this and I think the undertone is a concern about racist treatment. I don't see that to be the case and never have experienced anything like that or heard anything like that around the Bulls. This is what I think has happened. When Boylan took over he realized Skiles' big issue was a disconnect with the players. So he tried to get the players on his side and perhaps have more leverage to get the job fulltime next season. So he bent over backward to appease the players. Thus when the incident occurred with Noah he allowed the players too much latitude. Part of the reason the players acted the way they did is Noah had been an issue for months. He was routinely late to team functions, like shootarounds, and declined to do the rookie things like carrying bags. He's got this arrogant streak in him and seemed to feel such things were beneath him. It was becoming tough on team bonding and another reason this group has had difficulty meshing. So they came down harder.
Boylan since then has reverted more to his natural instincts and thus the tougher treatment with Duhon and Thomas, who have had previous similar issues. Nocioni hadn't, and being removed after fewer than three minutes with his family in attendance was a bit of a shock and perhaps not the right way to handle it by Boylan. So I think the team chose to take it a bit easier on Nocioni, sort of like a first offender in the court system, which is only fair and the right way to proceed. Plus, you still want to win games and can't keep sitting down your players for these reasons.
What are the chances that the Bulls hire Larry Bird as head coach? As it stands Larry is on the hot seat with the Pacers, and I thought he was a great coach for the Pacers when Reggie Miller played. If he gets fired any chance the bulls hire him? --Jon DeClerc, Lubbock, Texas
It looks like with Donnie Walsh leaving, he stays and will run the team, though that's still not fully clear. Larry never saw himself as a coach and never really wanted to, but did it in the best interests of the franchise. And though he's no technical genius, I thought his leadership was major in turning around that team. I don't see him coaching anywhere.
You've mentioned that Gooden will be a nice trade piece, but I don't see them trading him now. It appears they are giving him the 4 spot and I can see them extending him after they make some trades. --Devo, Aurora, Ill.
He's played well enough to earn it for now, though his reputation and history has been to play for a while and then disappear. He's played here like he'd like to move past that, and he's played well. But the Bulls will need to make major changes and if they can get a player who'll make a major difference, he will be a good trade piece because of a reasonable salary, a short contract and good playing ability. But it won't hinder them to keep him.
Wondered what you thought about Shaq as I read your comments on Weber and Coleman's lack of drive and desire. Given his natural size and ability he accomplished all that he did with great coaches and a great superstar with him in Kobe and Wade. But my bone to pick with people's argument about Shaq is that IF he had the drive and desire that the great ones have, he WOULD have been the greatest center ever, even greater than your fav big Wilt, and Russell. IF. That's why I am not satisfied with Shaq. It's like you said about LeBron; you hold them to a higher standard, not as something against them, but because you know they can be better, do better, achieve so much more. So am I being too hard on evaluating Shaq. Not that he's a disappointment, but he's not the best he could have been, not ranked higher than Wilt, Russell, Kareem. Where would you rank him? --Lazyk, Cary, N.C.
You make my case well and perhaps it is unfair. Who are we to say what someone else could be, but it's what we do. It is part of the fun of sports. It's been clear for many years Shaq would spend much of the regular season getting in shape for the post season. When the Lakers were winning titles, he'd then put up historic numbers. I will say this about Shaq and it's something I've long admired: I've never seen anyone, ever fouled as much and hit so regularly not only without getting calls but with nary a complaint. Especially someone so strong who could do damage. He does seem to understand his strength and its potential. It's hard to compare anyone to Russell because of the wins and Wilt because of the numbers and Kareem because of the longevity. Shaq is now behind them. Perhaps he could have been in the middle of that conversation if he had Kobe's desire, but only a few ever have. Shaq has had a great career and will go down to me in the second 20 in NBA history, which is pretty darn good.
Do you think the Rockets would trade Yao or McGrady in the off-season, especially if an early playoff exit ousts them? And if so, do the Bulls have enough to get either? --Sean Coughlin, Schaumburg, Ill.
When the Rockets were here just before Christmas I wrote about that because McGrady was in a funk and open to a trade and they were equally open given his back condition. Yes, with the 22-game win streak you'd think that's over, but, also yes, they could be out in the fist round in the wild West. I think McGrady's status will always be in question given his back issues and until he does make a playoff run. I'd guess given Yao being out this season, they'd like to take a good look at both together for a full season, if that can ever happen with Yao seeming to break down as well.
Why is everyone assuming that the addition of Larry Hughes means that Ben Gordon will be traded in the offseason? I've been disappointed in Gordon this year, but he's younger than Hughes, better than Hughes, and will be making less money than Hughes. I know Gordon wants a big contract, but nobody's going to give him $13 million a year, which is what Hughes is making. --Dan, Chicago
Well, the Cavs have spent almost two seasons trying to trade him. They made the investment to help persuade LeBron to reup, though he did for only three years. It's why they had to overpay. Hughes came thinking he'd be a tandem with James, but there is no such thing. As a result, I think it's going to be virtually impossible to deal Hughes, and if you have to pay Gordon and then I'd assume Deng, that's your team, and I think Bulls management has seen enough of this group together. The Bulls didn't necessarily want Hughes, but it was the cost of getting rid of Ben Wallace and I do think given his age as Hughes gets closer to the end of his contract he will have more trade appeal than Wallace, perhaps by next trading deadline in February 2009.
OK, what is the deal with Tyrus Thomas? Is he not working hard enough? Is he not listening? Although I don't think he is getting much teaching. Paxson stated the trade was to open minutes up for the young bigs, Tyrus and Noah. Yet, Boylan, who in my eyes, is not playing them so he can maybe make the playoffs and pad his resume for another possible head coaching position. I don't want to see another Tyson situation, giving up on a player too early and not getting much in return. --Matt Scheidler, Huntington, W.V.
I did think as well a big part of the reason for the Wallace deal was to get a full look at Thomas with big minutes in a regular rotation. It didn't happen, and once the Bulls made the trade Boylan did see in a pro like Gooden a chance to make the playoffs and perhaps get the job. Plus, Tyrus really has seemed to check out. He dribbles around on the perimeter and hoists up shots like he knows it doesn't matter what he does because he's not playing. I believe it will end in his moving on after this season.
The most disappointing team in the Australian Football League in the 2006 season was the Geelong Cats. They were young, were coming off two impressive seasons (deep in the finals, or as you would say, the playoffs) and were a big tip to win it all (a bit like this years Bulls). But a few injuries and distractions derailed them in 2006 and they failed to make the finals. They didn't make many changes or even fire the coach. In 2007 they won it all in record fashion. While it is hard to see this Bulls team as a championship group, I can't see how the last two seasons were a mirage and that they are as talentless and lazy as some want to paint them. Couldn't it just be a bad year? Are major changes really needed before they could be a respectible team in 2008-09? --Peter Johnson, Perth, Western Australia
It's interesting you mention this because I also had the Geelong Cats for 50 wins in 2006. It is a bad year, and they are basically the same players, which is why I've never advocated blowing it up and starting over. But much has changed. Skiles was the leader of the team, and he's gone. The players had their run together and need to be shaken up a bit. It is time for some new faces, which won't be easy. That's what people are overlooking. In down years your players are undervalued and teams will not be offering much. Plus, Gordon would have to approve a deal in a sign and trade and he'll be base year, which makes any deal difficult. But it is time for a change, if not complete liposuction.
Does Bulls' management, in increasing their ticket prices and using the cost of other team's prices to justify the move, realize that they are without a single 'watchable' player on their roster, by which I mean, there isn't a single player on the team worth the price of admission alone? Of all the teams cited, the Knicks are the only other high-cost team without any marketable players but at least you can boo Isiah Thomas for 48 minutes and feel good about it. If the Bulls want to compare their prices to that of other teams, I think they should also look at the talent. Bargain-bin talent should come at bargain bin prices. Where's the fans' rebate? --Jeff Saiger, Chicago
Sorry, it doesn't work that way. I'm hardly advocating it, but if you don't want to go you don't have to. Sports teams are not civic enterprises; the Bulls bought their own arena. As the players always say they learn, it's a business. Jerry Krause was fired not after all the losses, but when attendance began to plummet. Yes, teams do pay attention to that, and that's long been the message fans can send. I always laugh at Cubs fans moaning about how the team won't spend (they have) because they go to games. OK, don't go. The Bulls have spent and when they were winning had the league's highest payroll. They are trying. They offered their players generous extensions and paid more than anyone would come close to offering to make sure to get the best free agent on the market, Ben Wallace. The decision didn't work out. They made Skiles among the best-paid coaches. It would be one thing if they went on the cheap and put the money in their pockets. They haven't done that. They just didn't perform, and it's been for one season. It seems they deserve a chance to get it right.
Any chance the bulls make a play for Elton Brand in the offseason? I know he left on awful terms under Krause, so I wouldn't be surprised if Brand would turn down an offer. What about Gilbert Arenas? --Dan W., Seattle
Arenas strikes me as more of a possibility. I get kidded about all my trade proposals but I always make sure to look at it for both sides. While I see why the Bulls would want Brand, why, exactly, would Brand want to join this group of players? He'll be 30 next season and likely looking to go somewhere he'll have a chance to make a deep playoff run, which he never has. Not having played all season, he needs to play next season to show teams he's OK and then I believe he leaves as a free agent. But the Bulls won't be under the cap enough by then to pay him, which several teams, including Miami, should be.
Arenas is intriguing because, yes, he's been injured as well, but he says he will opt out. The Wizards have had one of the most remarkable seasons with huge injuries. They play much better defense now without Arenas and move the ball, two things Arenas doesn't do well. I can see them doing a sign and trade and if the Bulls were interested, I think they'd have enough pieces to make it interesting for Washington. For now, the Wizards say they'll resign Arenas, but I'm not convinced.Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times