PDA

View Full Version : Baby Bulls On the Block? (Mavs Mentioned)


XERXES
01-20-2004, 11:14 AM
Running the Bulls out of town
By Chad Ford
NBA Insider
Send an Email to Chad Ford Monday, January 19
Updated: January 20
9:38 AM ET


I'm giving up on the Chicago Bulls.

Remember when Jerry Krause resigned, claiming he left the once proud Bulls in "fine shape?"

Stupid me, I believed him.

There was a time I was convinced Jamal Crawford was going to be a star. I thought Eddy Curry would join Shaquille O'Neal and Yao Ming as one of the elite centers in the NBA. I felt Tyson Chandler would be Curry's perfect partner in crime. While Curry racked up 25 points a night, the long, athletic Chandler would grab 12 to 15 rebounds, block three shots and become a defensive force in the middle, meshing perfectly with Curry.

I was sure the Bulls had the juice to make a playoff run this year. When the team stumbled out of the gate, I thought the hiring of Scott Skiles and the trade that sent Jalen Rose and Donyell Marshall packing would fix things. Blue-collar guys like Antonio Davis and Jerome Williams would give the Bulls the grit (and rebounding) they sorely lacked.

I've moved on.

The 12-29 Bulls aren't going anywhere. They'll be lucky to repeat the 30-52 season they had last year. New GM John Paxson's preseason motto of "no excuses" is a farce. The only thing there is no excuse for is the team itself. It's awful.

Crawford and Curry on the Block?
That's why, according to several GMs who've talked to Paxson recently, he's seriously contemplating blowing the Bulls apart -- again. Over the weekend word began to leak (courtesy of the Chicago Sun-Times) that, for the 10th time this season, the Bulls were talking about trading Crawford.

Jamal Crawford
Shooting Guard
Chicago Bulls
Profile


2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
39 16.9 3.3 5.6 .390 .851



That's the beginning, not the end. Several other GMs told Insider on Monday that Curry and Chandler are also available. They won't come cheap, but for the first time ever, the untouchable tag has been lifted as Paxson searches for something, anything, that can rekindle the passion and pride of the Bulls.

If what these GMs claim is true (Bulls sources aren't talking), then the NBA trade market has been turned upside down a month before the Feb. 19 trade deadline. No one is claiming Curry or Chandler will be traded in the next month. But the fact they're available speaks volumes about the conclusions Paxson is coming to with this team.

Crawford has the makings of a star, but I don't see it happening in Chicago. He's been burned too many times and, in the process, burned too many bridges of his own. Crawford is an incredibly talented and insecure young man who's never had a definitive role in three-plus seasons in the league. On the right team, in the right offense, he could be a dominant combo guard. In Chicago he's little more than an enigma.

Curry has the body and the offensive skills that most NBA big men lack. But his lack of motivation both on and off the court has him looking more and more like Jerome James by the day. He doesn't rebound, doesn't play defense, doesn't even make the effort sometimes. His conditioning will always be an issue, as will his maturity. Playing in his hometown can't help. The distractions have always been overwhelming. A change of scenery could be the wake-up call that finally gets him focused on what he gets paid to do -- play basketball.

Eddy Curry
Center
Chicago Bulls
Profile


2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
34 12.8 6.1 0.8 .492 .709



Chandler? Who knows. He's 7-foot-2 and an amazing athlete. He's also a hard worker who's done everything the Bulls have asked him to do. However, he's a 21-year-old kid with a back problem. No one likes the sound of that.

The Baby Bulls know nothing but losing. They never learned what it takes to win. Throwing them in the deep end without a veteran supporting cast to show them the ropes was Krause's biggest mistake. Now it's coming back to bite the Bulls in the butt.

What does that leave? Rookie point guard Kirk Hinrich looks like a keeper. Skiles loves him, because he's everything Crawford and Curry aren't -- a tough, smart determined player who gives maximum effort every night.

After that the cupboard is pretty bare. Davis is past his prime and overpaid. He's the last piece of a championship team, not a cog in a rebuilding one. Williams is a bundle of energy, but his lack of offense and his offensive contract (four more years at $7 million per) make him a liability. Eddie Robinson's career ended the minute he signed his huge deal with the Bulls. Marcus Fizer has never fit in a Bulls uniform. Scottie Pippen is literally on his last leg.

In other words, if Paxson decides it's time to move Crawford and Curry, he essentially is committed to gutting the team for the fourth time since Michael Jordan left town. As awful as that sounds, does he have another choice?

Tyson Chandler
Power Forward
Chicago Bulls
Profile


2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
10 13.0 10.3 1.0 .494 .787



Crawford hits restricted free agency this summer, and all signs point to him looking for a new home. If he gets a big offer, the Bulls aren't going to match and will lose him for nothing.

Skiles sounds pretty convinced Curry isn't going to make dramatic improvements anytime soon. Read what the coach had to say about his center-of-the-future on Monday.

"So far, I think we know what we've got [in Curry]," Skiles told the Sun-Times. "We've got a very skilled big man who struggles with his conditioning and has been part of Bulls teams that have racked up huge amounts of losses.

"It is what it is. That's not just a knock at Eddy. As I've said before, that's everybody who's been part of that. I don't know that there's a big mystery about it all of a sudden, about what Eddy is or anybody else."

While Skiles claims he hasn't given up on Curry, from the sound of things, Curry's going to have to get an offseason lobotomy before he gets out of Skiles' doghouse.

"This is not an indictment about Eddy, as if to say this is the end of the road for him or this is what he is [for the rest of his career]," Skiles said. "It's just what he's done so far. He's got a lot of skill and has a lot to learn."

Chandler? The Bulls should be more patient and wait the back thing out. His value is severely diminished anyway, and his upside, because of his attitude, is still worthy of an extended look.

Let's Make a Deal
For Skiles to begin turning around the Bulls in a timely fashion, he'll need two things. One, a team willing to take some bad contracts along with Curry and Crawford. Two, a young proven star around whom to begin building the team.

That shouldn't be as hard as it seems. With so many teams in dire need of a legitimate center, plenty of GMs will be willing to take a chance on Curry. If there's a feeding frenzy for Rasheed Wallace right now, I can only imagine what teams will do for a chance to rehabilitate Curry. To a lesser extent, the same holds true for Crawford. Point guards with that size don't come along every day. While Crawford isn't the "pure" point some teams covet, he has more talent than half of the point guards starting in the league.

Who could the Bulls get in return?

For starters, write off the Knicks. Their interest in Crawford has been well publicized the past few days, but an offer of Shandon Anderson and Frank Williams for Crawford and Robinson is exactly the type of offer the Bulls shouldn't be entertaining.

Also write off teams that have been in the cellar the past few seasons. The Bulls need winners, not other talented phenoms (like Shareef Abdur-Rahim) who've never tasted the playoffs.

Let's start in my favorite spot, Seattle. Would the Sonics consider Ray Allen, Vladimir Radmanovic and Jerome James for Crawford, Curry, Fizer, Robinson and Jerome Williams? The move would give the Bulls a legit all-star who knows how to win, a young forward who can play the three and the four, and James, another underachieving center who, luckily, has only one year left on his deal.

The Bulls also would rid themselves of two bad contracts in return. Why would the Sonics do it? Their two biggest needs are at the point and in the middle. A Crawford-Ronald Murray-Luke Ridnour backcourt would be very explosive, and Curry would give them the low-post offense they've been searching for. The lack of defense would drive Nate McMillian crazy, but it isn't like Allen, Radmanovic or James are all-star defenders either.

The Mavericks would do probably anything to get their hands on Crawford and Curry. They've coveted them in the past and desperately need Curry's ability to score in the paint. We know Mark Cuban isn't shy about taking on bad contracts and likely would agree to take Robinson, Williams and Davis off the Bulls' hands to get Crawford and Curry.

The problem is, the Mavs won't be offering guys that would interest the Bulls. A trade of Crawford, Curry, Robinson, Williams and Davis for Michael Finley, Josh Howard and Antawn Jamison works under the cap. But would the Bulls be willing to swallow both of those long-term contracts in return? A team of Hinrich, Finley, Howard, Jamison and Chandler would be better than what the Bulls have now, but it's not a championship team. And such a move would kill Paxson's flexibility to make trades down the road.

Smaller deals are more feasible.

The Pacers continue to claim Al Harrington isn't available, but Harrington and Fred Jones for Crawford and Jerome Williams would make some sense for both teams, if the Pacers were prepared to sign Crawford to a long-term deal.

A straight up Crawford-for-Jason Richardson deal also makes some sense for both teams. The Warriors are trying to move Nick Van Exel, and Crawford would be a nice fit in his place, especially if rookie Mickael Pietrus is ready to begin playing big minutes in Golden State.

The Nets could use Kenyon Martin as bait to make a run at Curry. A Martin-for-Curry-and-Marcus Fizer trade works under the cap.

The possibilities (and that's all they are right now) are endless. The question is, does Paxson have the vision or the courage to make one of them happen?

Around the League

Rasheed Wallace
Small Forward
Portland Trail Blazers
Profile


2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
35 17.0 6.6 2.7 .426 .732



Have the Blazers closed the door to a Rasheed Wallace trade? It depends on who you ask. As my colleague Marc Stein reported this weekend, the folks in Dallas claim they were told by Blazers' owner Paul Allen that 'Sheed was off the block. Several other GMs, who have talked to the Blazers about Wallace since the Don Nelson-John Nash meeting on Saturday, claim Wallace is still in play, but that the price remains unreasonably high for a guy who won't commit to re-signing with anyone this off-season.
A report in the N.Y. Post that the Blazers are holding out for Antoine Walker makes no sense. The report reasons that the Blazers don't want to take on Antawn Jamison's long-term contract but would be interested in Walker's because he can opt out at the end of the season. The problem is that a player with a long-term contract like Eduardo Najera, Tony Delk or Tariq Abdul Wahad would also have to be included to make the numbers work. If the Blazers are just trying to clear cap, aren't they better off clearing $17 million off Wallace's contract than $13.5 million off Walker's and still being stuck with Najera, Delk or Abdul Wahad?

Sources claim the Blazers are holding out hope the Hawks come through with an offer. But with the sale of the team on hold yet again (the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported today that it might not be finalized until February) who knows when the Hawks will be ready to make a deal?

seelenjaeger
01-20-2004, 11:47 AM
I donīt want Curry, I want Chandler.

The usual plan:

trades: SF Antawn Jamison (15.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.0 apg in 30.2 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 28.6 minutes)
PF Marcus Fizer (6.1 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 13.7 minutes)
PG Jay Williams

Chicago trades: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 28.6 minutes)
PF Marcus Fizer (6.1 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 13.7 minutes)
PG Jay Williams
SG Jamal Crawford (16.8 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 5.5 apg in 35.1 minutes)
Chicago receives: SG Ray Allen (23.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 5.3 apg in 13 games) + Seattle First rounder


Seattle trades: SG Ray Allen (23.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 5.3 apg in 35.1 minutes) + First rounder
Seattle receives: SF Antawn Jamison (15.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.0 apg in 40 games)
SG Jamal Crawford (16.8 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 5.5 apg in 38 games)


TRADE ACCEPTED

or maybe

Dallas trades: SF Antawn Jamison (15.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.0 apg in 30.2 minutes) + money and 2006 first
Dallas receives: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 28.6 minutes)
PG Jay Williams
C Eddy Curry (12.9 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 0.8 apg in 27.3 minutes)


Seattle trades: SG Ray Allen (23.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 5.3 apg in 35.1 minutes)
Seattle receives: SF Antawn Jamison (15.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.0 apg in 40 games)
PF Marcus Fizer (6.1 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 23 games)


Chicago trades: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 28.6 minutes)
PF Marcus Fizer (6.1 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 13.7 minutes)
PG Jay Williams
C Eddy Curry (12.9 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 0.8 apg in 27.3 minutes)
Chicago receives: SG Ray Allen (23.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 5.3 apg in 13 games) + DAL Money and Pick

TRADE ACCEPTED

Well, no one does those trades Iīm afraid.

sike
01-20-2004, 12:01 PM
I really do like Chandler(over Curry anyway), he seems to be a fine up and commer...good numbers on a bad team...it would be interesting to see he and Howard grow together..... (does Waker want to go home?)

LRB
01-20-2004, 12:42 PM
Chicago trades: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 28.6 minutes)
PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 1.5 apg in 33.2 minutes)
Chicago receives: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 13.7 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -3.1 ppg, -6.8 rpg, and +3.3 apg.

Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 13.7 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 10 games)
PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 1.5 apg in 39 games)
Change in team outlook: +3.1 ppg, +6.8 rpg, and -3.3 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

We throw in max cash and a draft pick.


This only happens if Chicago really wants to move Chandler and probably not even then. But Walker would be coming home and would bring some nice skills for the Bulls. Walkers contract is shorter than Davis contract and would leave them free sooner to go the FA market if they didn't like Walker or could resign him to a much smaller contract which is a possibility.

From the Mavs point of view, I'd want Chandler over Curry but I'd still probably do it for Curry. I much rather trade Walker than Jamison because I believe Jamison is a much better fit than Walker with the Mavs. I also think that Walker is more valuable to the Bulls.

Jamisonite
01-20-2004, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by: LRB
Chicago trades: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 28.6 minutes)
PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 1.5 apg in 33.2 minutes)
Chicago receives: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 13.7 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -3.1 ppg, -6.8 rpg, and +3.3 apg.

Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 13.7 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 10 games)
PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 1.5 apg in 39 games)
Change in team outlook: +3.1 ppg, +6.8 rpg, and -3.3 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

We throw in max cash and a draft pick.


This only happens if Chicago really wants to move Chandler and probably not even then. But Walker would be coming home and would bring some nice skills for the Bulls. Walkers contract is shorter than Davis contract and would leave them free sooner to go the FA market if they didn't like Walker or could resign him to a much smaller contract which is a possibility.

From the Mavs point of view, I'd want Chandler over Curry but I'd still probably do it for Curry. I much rather trade Walker than Jamison because I believe Jamison is a much better fit than Walker with the Mavs. I also think that Walker is more valuable to the Bulls.

Id do it w/o the draft pick...we seem to be giving away too many of those.

sike
01-20-2004, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by: LRB
Chicago trades: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 28.6 minutes)
PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 1.5 apg in 33.2 minutes)
Chicago receives: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 13.7 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -3.1 ppg, -6.8 rpg, and +3.3 apg.

Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 13.7 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Tyson Chandler (13.0 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 10 games)
PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 1.5 apg in 39 games)
Change in team outlook: +3.1 ppg, +6.8 rpg, and -3.3 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

We throw in max cash and a draft pick.


This only happens if Chicago really wants to move Chandler and probably not even then. But Walker would be coming home and would bring some nice skills for the Bulls. Walkers contract is shorter than Davis contract and would leave them free sooner to go the FA market if they didn't like Walker or could resign him to a much smaller contract which is a possibility.

From the Mavs point of view, I'd want Chandler over Curry but I'd still probably do it for Curry. I much rather trade Walker than Jamison because I believe Jamison is a much better fit than Walker with the Mavs. I also think that Walker is more valuable to the Bulls.


screw the pick.....it would be a second rounder anyway right? I do that deal in a second!!!! now where did I put Donnie's cell number.....

ddh33
01-20-2004, 12:59 PM
If this team is serious about winning now, then they won't make a lot of these deals. Sure, Chandler, Curry, and Crawford may develop into stars who consistently win in this league. But if they were that close, Chicago wouldn't be putting them on the block.

I wouldn't mind having one of these kids, but I wouldn't give up our whole team to get them. Maybe one of the Big Five and some role players, but there's no reason to turn the Dallas Mavericks into the Dallas Baby-Bulls.

madape
01-20-2004, 01:03 PM
The only thing that scares me about Chandler is his back. Lingering back injuries always shorten the careers of big men. The fact that Chandler has missed so much time already because of his back is very concerning. He could be out of the league before you know it.

His potential might make it worth the risk. I love his game.

LRB
01-20-2004, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by: ddh33
If this team is serious about winning now, then they won't make a lot of these deals. Sure, Chandler, Curry, and Crawford may develop into stars who consistently win in this league. But if they were that close, Chicago wouldn't be putting them on the block.

I wouldn't mind having one of these kids, but I wouldn't give up our whole team to get them. Maybe one of the Big Five and some role players, but there's no reason to turn the Dallas Mavericks into the Dallas Baby-Bulls.

ddh33 with the realtively low salary of the Baby-Bulls it would be hard to give up more than one of the Big 5 outside of Nash. And there's noway I see us trading Nash.

sike
01-20-2004, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by: madape
The only thing that scares me about Chandler is his back. Lingering back injuries always shorten the careers of big men. The fact that Chandler has missed so much time already because of his back is very concerning. He could be out of the league before you know it.

His potential might make it worth the risk. I love his game.


good post, I concur. The upside of his game is worth the risk....


Maybe one of the Big Five and some role players
this is all that has been considered, no one wants to trade the whole thing away....

but there's no reason to turn the Dallas Mavericks into the Dallas Baby-Bulls.
true...obvious, blatently obvious, blatently obvious and not even a consideration, but true! i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

ddh33
01-20-2004, 01:14 PM
LRB,

My main problem was with Chad Ford's trade where we give up Finley, Jamison, and Howard for half the Bulls team. There's no way I would do that.

I might trade one of our Big Five for one of their kids and some really solid role players, but I wouldn't overpay for unproven, possibly unmotivated, young talent.

Edit: By the way, I would do the Walker, Najera for Davis, Chandler deal. That's the kind of deal that would interest me. Simple and sweet.

LRB
01-20-2004, 01:19 PM
ddh33 I wouldn't do that trade either. In fact I'd be very hesitant to move Howard at all.

MightyToine
01-20-2004, 02:17 PM
Have the Blazers closed the door to a Rasheed Wallace trade? It depends on who you ask. As my colleague Marc Stein reported this weekend, the folks in Dallas claim they were told by Blazers' owner Paul Allen that 'Sheed was off the block. Several other GMs, who have talked to the Blazers about Wallace since the Don Nelson-John Nash meeting on Saturday, claim Wallace is still in play, but that the price remains unreasonably high for a guy who won't commit to re-signing with anyone this off-season.
A report in the N.Y. Post that the Blazers are holding out for Antoine Walker makes no sense. The report reasons that the Blazers don't want to take on Antawn Jamison's long-term contract but would be interested in Walker's because he can opt out at the end of the season. The problem is that a player with a long-term contract like Eduardo Najera, Tony Delk or Tariq Abdul Wahad would also have to be included to make the numbers work. If the Blazers are just trying to clear cap, aren't they better off clearing $17 million off Wallace's contract than $13.5 million off Walker's and still being stuck with Najera, Delk or Abdul Wahad?


Couldn't agree more. All the Blazers would be doing is exchanging Big-Salary for Big-Salary even with Walker. Oh and It's the NY POST that's reporting this so guess what?



Exactly.

dalmations202
01-20-2004, 02:41 PM
Chad Ford is a definate Chicago homer, and an idiot: Do you think Cuban would trade Finley, Jamison, and Howard ---- for the entire Bulls team...I don't see 5 players on the Bulls team that make the Mavericks team......

Now if Chicago were offering:

Chicago trades: PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 33.1 minutes)
C Eddy Curry (12.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 0.8 apg in 27.3 minutes)
Chicago receives: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +0.4 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and +3.8 apg.

Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (16.1 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.4 apg in 38.2 minutes)
PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Antonio Davis (9.5 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.6 apg in 40 games)
C Eddy Curry (12.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 0.8 apg in 34 games)
Change in team outlook: -0.4 ppg, +4.0 rpg, and -3.8 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

I think Dallas would have to at least consider this one:
I think Cuban would want Walker to give his blessing before making this trade though, and I think it might be a good trade for both parties.
Dallas would lose one of the big 5, but get some interior big men. Both a Vet and a Young one.
Chicago would get a scorer - who would be coming home, and be their #1 or #2 - , and a shooter. They would be free of AD contract, and get rid of EC (if they have given up on him).

I don't think this will happen, but if it is available, I think both parties should at least examine it.

MikeB
01-20-2004, 02:45 PM
That one is not too bad...I think I would still hold on to Employee #8.

dalmations202
01-20-2004, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by: MikeB
That one is not too bad...I think I would still hold on to Employee #8.

I probably would keep #8 as well, but I definately would have to consider trading small for Big......

Chicago JK
01-20-2004, 03:31 PM
I have been in favor of no big trades yet, but either of Chicago's bigs would interest me. I don't see a match with Chicago though. I don't think we have what they would want. Either Chicago big has a lot of questions but I think they would be worth the gamble. Curry has showed some flashes. His weight could be a problem in the future, but I think he has to get out of Chicago. He grew up in the city and I think he would be best to grow up away from all his homies. Curry has very good feet, a good body and a nice touch. There is no reason why he can't develop into a upper tier center. Work ethic seems to be a concern though.

Chandler is further advance of the two due to his superior pure athletic ability. Something always struck me about Chandler though. I just have a feeling he will underachieve. With that being said, I would be all over him. He is a legit 7'1 who could cause a whole lot of trouble on the defensive end of the court. I don't know if he will ever have a go to offensive move. His build is similar to KG but he lacks the offensive skills KG has. If he can stay healthy and dedicates himself to the gym than he too will be very good.

I would trade AJ and Howard for either one plus Crawford and a bad salary. I really like both Howard and AJ but that would be one of the moves that I would hold my breath and gamble on.

Paxson is an idiot if he trades either big. If I was GM I would make sure if they flop that it would be on my watch. Heck they were Krause picks, so you can always pile on him. The potential is too great to throw overboard either of these two. Chicago has Heinrich who is a nice player. They will have another high pick this year. Let these kids learn to play with eachother and cross your fingers that the lightbulbs come on.

Poindexter Einstein
01-20-2004, 04:02 PM
For either of Chicago's bigs, I keep Dirk, Nash, and Howard. Anything else is fair game - but I dont give up TWO major pieces (major pieces are Finley, Jamison, Walker).

My offer would be: they could have their choice of any of the 3, plus anything else on the roster, and make the salaries match. Would take back SOME junk salary. I would NOT put all of my eggs in this basket, if I couldnt get the deal for a reasonable price.

My guess: they would want more.

My take: the Mavs will be able to get a decent big this summer in FA, for the MLE, without giving away any major piece. So any deal needs to improve on THAT scenario. I think Ostertag or Chris Andersen or Rebraca will be the frontrunners, with maybe Divacs or KThomas as outside shots. All will very likelyl be MLE priced or less.

sike
01-20-2004, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by: Poindexter Einstein
For either of Chicago's bigs, I keep Dirk, Nash, and Howard. Anything else is fair game - but I dont give up TWO major pieces (major pieces are Finley, Jamison, Walker).

My offer would be: they could have their choice of any of the 3, plus anything else on the roster, and make the salaries match. Would take back SOME junk salary. I would NOT put all of my eggs in this basket, if I couldnt get the deal for a reasonable price.

My guess: they would want more.

My take: the Mavs will be able to get a decent big this summer in FA, for the MLE, without giving away any major piece. So any deal needs to improve on THAT scenario. I think Ostertag or Chris Andersen or Rebraca will be the frontrunners, with maybe Divacs or KThomas as outside shots. All will very likelyl be MLE priced or less.

I have not seen much from the bulls this year, but I do like Chandler......no way I offer up much for Curry...I dont trust his game....

plus I would wait until the off season before just offering any team their choice of players....remember, they are the desperate ones...you dont have to bend over backwards for them.....