http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/dwyane-wade-leaving-the-heat-to-join-his-hometown-bulls-things-to-know/

About time we got someone. Shame it wasn't 5 years ago.

Free agent Dwyane Wade agrees to a two-year, $47.5M deal with the Chicago Bulls.

^ Now you know why Pat wasn't willing to pony up. That deal is madness.

I agree with Rachel Nichols, Miami should have coughed up the extra cash if anything because Wade has been underpaid while trying to win championships, he took cuts for the team.

Wade to the Bulls is different to a former MVP joining another MVP on a 73-9 team.

In respect to comment directing to mine in the Durant thread...The criticism isn't on Durant, I mean look he's probably going to cop some slack for "joining the team he couldn't beat" but at the end of the day he can go where he likes. The criticism is on the system for allowing super teams to exist, not on the players.

Free movement among quality players isn't really a thing for a reason in the NBA - that's why we have a lottery/draft and various restrictions like (albeit not entirely prohibitive) salary cap "preventing" people going wherever the hell they like - because the aim is for a competitive league. There is a line between Wade to the Bulls, Carmelo to NYK etc. and Durant & Curry joining forces as a super team. The system needs to be able to deal with that.

I know there has been a nod to previous "super teams" in the past however:

1. The salary cap was introduced in 1984/85 - the Celtics super teams were in the 60's and 70's. Since the salary cap era they've only won it in 86 and 08.

The Lakers were the 50's and cut through a bit in the 80's (85,87,88 were in the salary cap era).

Given that a combined 10 between the Celtics & Lakers in the salary cap era out of their combined 33 championships - they haven't really had "super teams" in this era. They've had successful talented teams, but they haven't had the huge advantages which made them the only teams winning prior to the salary cap era.

For as good as they were in those early era's, a league with one, two or three teams competitive over the course of 30 years doesn't cut it. It's crap. The NBA now is a 29ish city league, not a 3 city league.

2. Bulls with Jordan weren't a "super team" in the sense of stars signing together, Durant & Curry today would be like Magic & Jordan joining together, not Jordan and Pippen.

3. Lakers 00's with Shaq and Kobe is closer to this concept, although Lakers weren't that great prior to Shaq joining, while Warriors were record setters. If Shaq had stayed, maybe they might have won 6 championships and criticism could be drawn to the system for allowing it to occur.

Anyway, there's starting to be a new precedent set in the NBA where stars are happy to join together to get rings - I don't criticise the stars for doing it, but the NBA needs to find a way to ensure the system doesn't become anti-competitive when superpower players align and create a huge disparity in the league. We'll never have perfect parity or all teams competitive - and that reality is accepted, but we need a good level of competitiveness.

Wade to the Bulls is nothing like Durant to the Warriors.

Wade to Bulls is nothing like KD to the Warriors, I agree.
But... Wade leaving Miami is close to as big of a shock as KD leaving OKC, it just doesn't have the same effect on the league. IMO

The Bulls & the nicks will fight it out for the East this year. It's 2011 right....

that or 1993