NBA Rumors: Loss of Key Outside Shooters Would Put Bulls in Precarious Spot
K.C. Johnson of the Chicago Tribune reported on Thursday:
The Bulls have until July 10 to announce whether they will pick up team options on Kyle Korver, Ronnie Brewer and C.J. Watson. None are expected to return, although Korver remains a slight possibility even though his option is the most expensive at $5 million.
If the Bulls can't hold on to Korver, they lose a player who shot 43 percent from beyond the arc last season. On top of that, Watson was not only a productive backup point guard for the Bulls, he shot 39 percent from downtown in 2011-2012. That could leave the Bulls with just one dangerous outside shooter when all is said and done: Luol Deng.
There is also John Lucas III, but he's an unrestricted free agent this offseason and may prove to be too expensive for Chicago.
According to Johnson, there is talk that the Bulls may go after Kirk Hinrich to ease the burden—who shot 34 percent from three-point range for the Atlanta Hawks last season. But there is also talk that the Bulls won't offer the full mid-level exception to Hinrich, which may see him go to another team instead.
Should the Bulls be worried about their outside shooting for 2012-2013?
There was also Kentucky sharpshooter Doron Lamb—who went No. 42 overall to the Milwaukee Bucks. Even Memphis guard Will Barton could have been an option, given he improved his outside shooting exponentially in his sophomore campaign with the Tigers.
But, in the end, the Bulls decided to go with Kentucky point guard Marquis Teague at No. 29 overall—taking who many considered to be the best player available and finding a fill-in for Derrick Rose, who is expected to miss next season after suffering a torn ACL in the playoffs.
After years of trying to find a suitable sharpshooter in the backcourt to complement Rose, the reality is, the Bulls could actually be worse off in that regard next season.
Follow me on Twitter. We can talk about the NBA together.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?