# It's Official!!! PJ Brown/JR Smith traded for Tyson Chandler



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

Just announced on Score 670!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:clap:


----------



## LuolDeng (Feb 22, 2004)

*Re: PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2510218


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

yep I confirm I just heard this.


Chandler for PJ Brown and JR Smith

DONE DEAL


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

The 3 C's are dead. Its the end of an era.


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

Any word if Paxson intends to keep JR Smith?


----------



## paxman (Apr 24, 2006)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

this deal:

uke: 




getting wallace+tyrus+thabo:


:djparty:


either way, beer me!


----------



## RedBull80 (Jul 3, 2006)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

Terrible, just freaking ubelievably freaking HORRID this is W.R.O.N.G

This CANCELS OUT the Wallace signing, that's it. Where is the progress? Swapping talent? Please...

Paxon BETTER (thats right), BETTER make another trade to bring a bonafied scorer here.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

*Re: PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



KHinrich12 said:


> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2510218





> Brown, furthermore, is regarded as one of the best locker-room influences in the league and, along with Wallace, would provide legitimate size ... as well as the veteran know-how lacking in Chicago since the breakup of Michael Jordan's Bulls after their sixth and final championship in 1998.
> 
> Smith has at least three players ahead of him in Chicago's swing rotation -- Andres Nocioni, Ben Gordon and Luol Deng -- but the 20-year-old has attracted significant trade interest since falling out of Scott's rotation halfway through the season. Smith, then, figures to be a valuable trade chip for the Bulls if he can't crack coach Scott Skiles' rotation, although league rules would preclude Chicago from dealing him until 90 days after this trade is officially consummated.


Pax is stuck on STUPID!


:cheers:


----------



## 7RINGS? (Sep 28, 2004)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

YES AND IT COUNTS!!!! "Marv Albert"


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



paxman said:


> this deal:
> 
> uke:


I think this leads to another deal, IMHO, and another change of underwear for me!

:laugh:


Maybe I'll just wear adult diapers this season!

:clown:


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

I dont' know whether to laugh or cry.

Its officially John Paxson's team now. No remnants from the Krause era.


----------



## paxman (Apr 24, 2006)

folks, bookmark that hornets report site.
they have two posters who know everything about the hornets organization.
pj, peja, bobby jackson - they got the scoop on each left field move almost 
a week before anybody did.

now, to find 29 more sites like that....


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

In Pax I Trust. I absolutely love it! Whoo! Got a good vet player, and a player, with a big ***IF***, has his head on straight, can be a great one.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

PG - Hinrich, Duhon
SG - Gordon, Swiss guy, JR Smith
SF - Deng, Nocioni, Khryapa
PF - Brown, Thomas, Sweets
C - Wallace, Allen

More or less correct, but damn... lots of pieces for Skiles to work with. That's a deep team.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

Absolutely ******* disgusting...


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I'm really hoping this change is good for JR Smith. He has the talent to be special.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Fire Pax.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

I'm going to the Taste of Chicago.


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Our guards turnovers should go down by about 3/game with no more Chandler fumbles.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

Chandler was as frustrating as they come, but I stilled like him and will miss him. Good luck to him with the Hornets.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> I'm really hoping this change is good for JR Smith. He has the talent to be special.


I am willing to bet a decent sum of money that JR Smith will either not be on our roster come November or will sit on the Injured List the entire season. I have a feeling Pax/Skiles have no interest in the fellow and he's just filler.


----------



## RedBull80 (Jul 3, 2006)

I swear, some of you people have such low standards its disgusting. We lost TC for freaking nothing. This is what I call failure. Eddy Curry and TC we lost for absolute crap. 2nd and 3rd overall picks? pffff TC was supposed to be used to bring in a superstar, not old trash and mcdonalds jersey wearing dunk contestants...


----------



## paxman (Apr 24, 2006)

kukoc4ever said:


> Fire (jim) Pax.


----------



## anorexorcist (Aug 3, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> Fire Pax.


Uh, didn't you say that when we traded Curry to the Knicks, too?

And even though I wasn't here for it, can you tell me if that's what you said when we dumped Jamal?

Sheesh.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



RedBull80 said:


> Terrible, just freaking ubelievably freaking HORRID this is W.R.O.N.G
> 
> This CANCELS OUT the Wallace signing, that's it. Where is the progress? Swapping talent? Please...
> 
> Paxon BETTER (thats right), BETTER make another trade to bring a bonafied scorer here.


We're on a roller-coaster ride right now!!!!!!!!!! We have NEVER experienced this much activity in one off-season and we have NO WAY of predicting what's gonna happen next, and I'M LOVIN' IT!!!!

:greatjob:

We're not gonna be able to judge any of this until we get to the All-Star break because Pax is like a mad scientist right now!!!

I used to look at how Portland & Phoenix & any team that Pat Riley is a part of and be jealous/suspicious/angry at how they always seemed to be able to make deals REGARDLESS of their salary cap situation but we always had to make the small deals, if any at all. Plus I've stated that playing it safe is for cowards, so I'm really loving this off-season so far because we are rollin' the dice" BIG TIME. This is like being on a winning streak in a casino or something!

I so psyched right now it's crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


So I'm willing to wait until the dust settles before I if all of this is good or bad.


I'm just happy that we're "rollin' the dice" baby!!!!



:djparty: :cheers:










"Come on baby, Daddy needs a new pair of titles!"


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



jnrjr79 said:


> Chandler was as frustrating as they come, but I stilled like him and will miss him. Good luck to him with the Hornets.


Hopefully for him the trade is a kick in the ***. Hard work and confidence and he can be a good player.


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

RedBull80 said:


> Eddy Curry and TC we lost for absolute crap...


LOL


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

PC Load Letter said:


> I am willing to bet a decent sum of money that JR Smith will either not be on our roster come November or will sit on the Injured List the entire season. I have a feeling Pax/Skiles have no interest in the fellow and he's just filler.


He wasn't needed for filler .

Brown and Chandler worked straight up 

I just think its a case that the Hornets just really didn't want him and his supposed crazed parents


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

PC Load Letter said:


> I am willing to bet a decent sum of money that JR Smith will either not be on our roster come November or will sit on the Injured List the entire season. I have a feeling Pax/Skiles have no interest in the fellow and he's just filler.


I would be stunned if a guy who makes hand signals after he scores will ever play for Skiles.

Maybe they can change his tune. Actually, its going to have to come from Smith... Skiles isn't going to coddle this weirdo.

The undersized jib team just got more undersized.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

anorexorcist said:


> Uh, didn't you say that when we traded Curry to the Knicks, too?
> 
> And even though I wasn't here for it, can you tell me if that's what you said when we dumped Jamal?
> 
> Sheesh.



Fire Pax.

Pray for the lotto and TT.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

So we kept Malik Allen? If we didn't, then its a solid trade. Now we just need to sign Antonio Davis, we need to take him on a ride for the championship too. No need for Songaila if you have Allen.

---------
Big Men
---------
Ben Wallace
PJ Brown
Michael Sweetney
Malik Allen
Tyrus Thomas
Antonio Davis
Luke Schenscher
-----------
Forwards
-----------
Andres Nocioni
Luol Deng
Viktar Khryapa
------------
Guards
------------
Kirk Hinrich
Chris Duhon
Ben Gordon
Thabo Sefolosha
JR Smith


----------



## 7RINGS? (Sep 28, 2004)

RedBull80 said:


> I swear, some of you people have such low standards its disgusting. We lost TC for freaking nothing. This is what I call failure. Eddy Curry and TC we lost for absolute crap. 2nd and 3rd overall picks? pffff TC was supposed to be used to bring in a superstar, not old trash and mcdonalds jersey wearing dunk contestants...


accually Tyson was nothing.Both of these guys are more productive then Tyson put um together or not!!! Don't worry these guys are just bargaining chips for LeBron James anyways!!!!


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

*Chandler to CHA*

just saw it on ESPN News...

EDIT: seems ESPN News is thinking a few years back, as they mean the hornets after all. chandler for brown and smith. my bad, I thought it was something new. they'll realize their mistake sooner or later...


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Chandler to CHA*

...New Orleans?


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

Wow. I'm a little bummed myself, but that's just the Florida humidity getting to me. Seriously, I'm down with this deal. It's not my most favorite scenario, but I believe Pax knows what he's doing. 

I think PJ Brown will fit better with this team in the short run. We now have two rugged veteran leaders that will command huge respect from the youngsters and the officials. Can't complain about that.

Sad to see Chandler and his knack for Unintentional Comedy go bye-bye.


----------



## RedBull80 (Jul 3, 2006)

7RINGS? said:


> accually Tyson was nothing.Both of these guys are more productive then Tyson put um together or not!!! Don't worry these guys are just bargaining chips for LeBron James anyways!!!!


Bargaining chip? I'd rather have a 6'3 7th grade Center than piece of trash geriatric PJ Brown. Pax is garbage till he proves us wrong. Lateral moves does NOTHING for the future of the Bulls. TC is a Ben Wallace type anyways and he has a much higher ceiling than Ben. To lose him for absolute DUNG, is admitting failure. I have watched Elton Brand, Jamal Crawford, Jason Williams, Eddy Curry, Ron Artest, Brad Miller and now Tyson Chandler leave FOR NOTHINGGGGG

Pax, die. You and your unprofessional *** highering your crappy brother on top of that? I hate you John WACKxon

Craig Hodges, Trent Tucker, Steve Kerr >>> John WACKxon's lame sissy 3pt shooting ***. YOU SUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKkkk


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> I would be stunned if a guy who makes hand signals after he scores will ever play for Skiles.
> 
> Maybe they can change his tune. Actually, its going to have to come from Smith... Skiles isn't going to coddle this weirdo.
> 
> The undersized jib team just got more undersized.


Disagree. PJ is actually bigger than Tyson through the body and even still at 37 is a far better defender than Tyson IMO . Maybe even for the following season too

Much better man on man defender and much better interior defender 

Not as tall , granted , but Tyson really had no real impact last year and didn't play nowhere near as many minutes as he could have / should have in what was a chronically undersized team

Its not a popular move but it is a better basketball move in my opinion that will reap bigger dividends in the short term , and structurally , sees us in better shape for the long term 

Ben and PJ are keeping the seat warm for Tyrus and big man to be named later from next year's draft - for the latter two guys to grab the mantle in 2 to 3 years . They will then be supported by Ben in the twilight of his contract and some MLE free agency help for the 4th / 5th big roles

I support the move given that Tyson has given us two good half seasons in 5 years . Time to move on

It enables us to retain Kirk , Noc , Deng and Ben ..yes Ben. 

If Pax dicks Ben around I will join the chorus of calling for his head 

Why ?

Because Ben has been a consistent performer..a lot more than we can say about Curry, Chandler and Crawford - none of whom after 5 and 6 seasons respectively have still got it together and not progressing beyond overpaid bit part players 

C'Ya


----------



## popeye12 (Nov 11, 2002)

I dont know how people think that we got robbed in this trade. Tyson Chandler has really done nothing during this tenure with the bulls. He gets in foul trouble every game, cannot score, cannot catch, and is getting paid 10 mil a year for all that. Sure he is athletic, somewhat, but I for one do not mind that he is not a bull anymore. I have seen enough offensive fouls on picks and dropped balls and although i'm not fond of him as a basketball player, he is truly a nice guy and I wish him the best in Charlotte.

Now for the players the bulls got in return. A solid veteran in PJ Brown, WHO has better numbers than Chandler by the way, and Smith (verdict on him by me is still undecided). We added even more depth to a team that is already crazy deep.

Hinrich, Duhon
Gordon, Thabo, Smith
Deng, Smith, Nocioni (not sure if he starts at PF)
Nocioni, Thomas, Sweetney, Allen
Wallace, Brown

This is a tough team, I would however like to sign A Davis for another big body but this is top notch.

In PAX I trust.

For those saying that we traded Curry away for nothing, WHAT DID HE DO IN NEW YORK? NOTHING and we got Tyrus Thomas and next years 1st round pick!
CRAWFORD: WE LOST NOTHING - sure he hit some game winners for those great Knicks, but how many did he miss before that.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

I'm pretty ambivalent on the trade. I think PJ Brown is a better fit with Wallace and I think in the short term (this season) PJ is the better of the two players. We're renting Brown for the year, that much is obvious. JR Smith is an interesting talent. I'm not sure what can be done with him, but he's got some serious talent - it's just that it seems as if he's not the hardest worker in the bunch. Getting him is a no-risk move. There's always the possibility that a change of scenery will put his head back on straight. If not, he's stays on the inactive list.

Losing Chandler kinda sucks but it's not like this guy was some multi-faceted uber-talented all-star. He's Ben Wallace lite and he was going to be relegated to a subordinate role this year; which wouldn't have sat too well with him. It's a good trade for him though. He'll get to be the Hornets' Ben Wallace and I think he'll do fine. He get's to go to another city where he'll say all the right things but yet never really put it together. I wish him the best.

From a talent standpoint, for this upcomming season, I think the trade is a wash. JR Smith is the wildcard here. If he blossoms - it would be a great trade because it'll restore his trade value and Pax has another chip to bring to the table in a deadline deal. If he fizzles, we've really traded chandler for a one-year rental.

I'm just not seeing this as the end of the world as some are making it out to be.


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

i think, i have to rename the club now, into th "PAX shouldn't have traded Tyson Chandler" club


----------



## Philomath (Jan 3, 2003)

We traded Chandler for Ben Wallace, PJ Brown and JR Smith (and their respective contracts.) 

Pax couldn't get Ben Wallace without trading Chandler. Evaluate it as one roster move, because they are linked like Jimmy Deans.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

badfish said:


> I believe Pax knows what he's doing.



Me too. Even if Jerry is forcing his hand with budgetary demands, I think Pax is smart enough to work around them for the good of the team.

I'm just a (impassioned) observer.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

RedBull80 said:


> Bargaining chip? I'd rather have a 6'3 7th grade Center than piece of trash geriatric PJ Brown. Pax is garbage till he proves us wrong. Lateral moves does NOTHING for the future of the Bulls. TC is a Ben Wallace type anyways and he has a much higher ceiling than Ben. To lose him for absolute DUNG, is admitting failure. I have watched Elton Brand, Jamal Crawford, Jason Williams, Eddy Curry, Ron Artest, Brad Miller and now Tyson Chandler leave FOR NOTHINGGGGG
> 
> Pax, die. You and your unprofessional *** highering your crappy brother on top of that? I hate you John WACKxon
> 
> Craig Hodges, Trent Tucker, Steve Kerr >>> John WACKxon's lame sissy 3pt shooting ***. YOU SUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKkkk


wow. take a deep breath! yikes!

personally, i think back to back playoff appearances and the re-establishment of a winning culture in a very short time is hardly "garbage". but that could just be me!


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

*Re: PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



Frankensteiner said:


> Hopefully for him the trade is a kick in the ***. Hard work and confidence and he can be a good player.


See..its the hard work thing that lets him down

He's a cruiser who takes the piss and talks big but plays small ( and ddon't give me the half a season of peek a boo the gimp played the year before last ) 

Always has . Always will 

Its the nature of the beast 

We slayed the beast 

Good thing


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

HornetsReport.com insiders...

Cedric Simmons
Peja
Bobby Jackson
Tyson

:allhail:


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Philomath said:


> We traded Chandler for Ben Wallace, PJ Brown and JR Smith.
> 
> Pax couldn't get Ben Wallace without trading Chandler. Evaluate it as one roster move, because they are linked like Jimmy Deans.


Uh-oh...


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Wow...imagine Duhon running the break with a second unit of:

Tyrus, Deng, Thabo, JR Smith. 

Insane.

Meanwhile our starters: Ben, PJ, Noc, Ben, Kirk are relaxin' on the bench watching the highlights.

We have so many players now. It's crazy.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Disagree. PJ is actually bigger than Tyson through the body and even still at 37 is a far better defender than Tyson IMO . Maybe even for the following season too
> 
> Much better man on man defender and much better interior defender
> 
> ...


Wow . . . it's like the Bulls might as well strike 2004-2005 from the record. It never happened, apparently.

If Tyson's not that great a team defender, then why for the last two years have the Bulls yielded at least 2 percentage points lower FG% with him on the court vs. off?

I guess Chandler might not be the body-on-body low-post defender that Brown is, but isn't that supposed to be Wallace's job anyway? And if you think Tyrus Thomas is going to be a stout interior defender of bigger and strong 4s and 5s, you're nuts.

This is a straight-up salary dump and an atrocious short-term and long-term basketball decision. I'll give the Chairman credit for one thing -- no one, and I mean no one, is better at shedding salary than he is.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> This is a straight-up salary dump and an atrocious short-term and long-term basketball decision.



I still think we'll have a good team next season. I will enjoy watching it. You will too.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

One thing I'll say. I think Tyson is better suited for NO than here. He won't be in a big media outlet, and their team is not where our team is at, at this moment. So, they won't need more out of him than we would. For his sake, I hope he can catch Chris Paul's passes. I wonder how long before Hilton/Cedric start before him? He had trouble beating out Sweets and Othella here. 

Tyson, at least the weather is kinda LA like at NO, unlike at CHI.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

SALO said:


> HornetsReport.com insiders...
> 
> Cedric Simmons
> Peja
> ...


To be fair, everyone and their grandma knew that the Horets were taking Simmons.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Disposition of Krause's post dynasty draft picks 1998-2002

Krause Draftees 1998-2002 Legacy on 2006-7 Bulls
Jay Williams
Roger Mason 
Lonny Baxter 
Eddy Curry -> Sweetney, Tyrus Thomas, Khryapa
Trenton Hassel
Sean Lampley
Marcus Fizer
Jamal Crawford 
Dalibor Bagaric
AJ Guyton
Jake Voskuhl
Khalid El-Amin
Elton Brand (Tyson Chandler) -> PJ Brown, Smith
Ron Artest
Michael Ruffin
Lari Ketner
Corey Benjamin
Shammond Williams
Macel Baston

So all of Krause's trades, free agents and draftees add up to a massive series of losing records and

Sweetney, Tyrus Thomas, Khryapa, PJ Brown, and Smith on this year's team.

In two years, all but one or two of those players will probably be gone without much in compensation.

What a legacy. Thanks for the memories Crumbs, you should have quit sooner. Players don't make losing traditions. Organizations, and those who lead them do.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Disagree. PJ is actually bigger than Tyson through the body and even still at 37 is a far better defender than Tyson IMO .


Perhaps man. Not vertical presence. 




> Not as tall , granted , but Tyson really had no real impact last year and didn't play nowhere near as many minutes as he could have / should have in what was a chronically undersized team


Agreed Chandler didn't have a good year last year, especially at the start. The Bulls didn't start playing well though until Chandler started producing.




> Its not a popular move but it is a better basketball move in my opinion that will reap bigger dividends in the short term , and structurally , sees us in better shape for the long term


Only if Jerry isn't willing to pay the tax, which it seems like he isn't.



> Ben and PJ are keeping the seat warm for Tyrus and big man to be named later from next year's draft - for the latter two guys to grab the mantle in 2 to 3 years . They will then be supported by Ben in the twilight of his contract and some MLE free agency help for the 4th / 5th big roles


Let's pray the Knicks don't get their act together. We're going to be starved for big men if the Knicks are close to .500. I hope TT isn't a flop and can play the 4. He sure as hell won't be playing the 5.



> I support the move given that Tyson has given us two good half seasons in 5 years . Time to move on


High school player. Has to be taken into account when using the 5 years. 



> It enables us to retain Kirk , Noc , Deng and Ben ..yes Ben.


Could have done that with or without tyson.





> If Pax dicks Ben around I will join the chorus of calling for his head
> 
> Why ?
> 
> ...



Consistent? Not his rookie year. On the bench in game six. Could not hold onto his starting job.

Not last year either. Benched.


That being said, I don't think Gordon should be dumped for Jim Jackson.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

SALO said:


> HornetsReport.com insiders...
> 
> Cedric Simmons
> Peja
> ...



I agree SALO.

Many Many Thanks to you Insiders for giving us the 411. We really appreciate it. This goes out from all us Bulls fans here. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: You guys make Basketball Forums more enjoyable . Giving us solid info to discuss!


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Philomath said:


> We traded Chandler for Ben Wallace, PJ Brown and JR Smith (and their respective contracts.)



Wrong.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> Wow . . . it's like the Bulls might as well strike 2004-2005 from the record. It never happened, apparently.
> 
> If Tyson's not that great a team defender, then why for the last two years have the Bulls yielded at least 2 percentage points lower FG% with him on the court vs. off?
> 
> ...


Hey I'm not saying 2004/2005 never happened 

But hey thanks for the memories of the 30 or so games out of 60 that you showed up Tyson ( you can't include the first 20 of that season for obvious reasons ) 

And I never said he wasn't a great team defender . I would downgrade that to "good" however and maybe a more measured " effective".

However he is a shytehouse man on man defender in the post against quality line ups. Or to be more measured again "non effective"

I also never said Tyrus Thomas will be the stout interior defender that you infer I hold him (in hope) out to be 

I'll just say let's see how this 19 year old's body matures in 2 or 3 seasons behind horses like Ben Wallace and PJ Brown 

Even with Allen and Sweetney in the fold there is no reason to rush this guy this year even though he will see minutes 

A structural pecking order / progression plan in being built here ( at least in my view ) and I'm liking it


----------



## YearofDaBulls (Oct 20, 2004)

Why is everybody getting upset? I didn't want to see Tyson go but at the same time was he really that good? He will never be able to have any kind of offense, his hands are small so he will always be turnover prone. Sure, he played D, rebounded, and blocked but Wallace will do that for us too. Who wasn't getting sick of Chandler and his pathetic offense and personal fouls? I for one am intrigued by JR Smith. It will be interesting to see how this one pans out but I wouldn't be surprised to see another trade go down. I also forgot to mention that Chandler had an expensive and long contract that now will come off the books.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

WAAAA-MBULANCE

Here it comes!


----------



## UMfan83 (Jan 15, 2003)

Good luck Tyson, I've never liked someone who I hate as much as Tyson if that makes sense.

Like I said drunk the other night, Tyson was the heart of this team. And watching him jump up and down celebrating big Bulls wins in 04-05 is my lasting memory of the Bulls being "back"

It's too bad you sucked last year, because you are really likable.


Wallace, Brown, Smith, Thomas, Thabo >>>> Pike, Pargo, Harrington, Songaila, Chandler

We rule


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

RedBull80 said:


> Bargaining chip? I'd rather have a 6'3 7th grade Center than piece of trash geriatric PJ Brown. Pax is garbage till he proves us wrong. Lateral moves does NOTHING for the future of the Bulls. TC is a Ben Wallace type anyways and he has a much higher ceiling than Ben. To lose him for absolute DUNG, is admitting failure. I have watched Elton Brand, Jamal Crawford, Jason Williams, Eddy Curry, Ron Artest, Brad Miller and now Tyson Chandler leave FOR NOTHINGGGGG
> 
> Pax, die. You and your unprofessional *** highering your crappy brother on top of that? I hate you John WACKxon
> 
> Craig Hodges, Trent Tucker, Steve Kerr >>> John WACKxon's lame sissy 3pt shooting ***. YOU SUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKkkk


I'm getting mixed signals here.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> Perhaps man. Not vertical presence.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Got to go for the time being but would like to discuss these points with you later K4e

later man


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

RedBull80 said:


> Craig Hodges, Trent Tucker, Steve Kerr >>> John WACKxon's lame sissy 3pt shooting ***.


:nonono:

Paxson
Kerr
Hodges
Tucker

in that order!!


Pax was the second most clutch player in the Jordan era!!!!!!


----------



## BULLSWON (Jul 5, 2006)

This is just beautiful BULLS have the chance to go to the finals once and again without MJ I cant wait till season starts


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

I've been a Paxson supporter throughout his time here. This move, if it is not a precursor to a bigger, better move, is by far the worst move Paxson has made. 

Of course, if it is true that Jerry R. dictated that salary be dumped, then the situation is complicated. Still, I think Paxson deserves blame. I prefer fifteen or more combined years of Chandler, Wilcox and Butler to six or so years from Wallace, Brown and Smith. By the time Gordon, Thomas and Deng are in their primes, Wallace and Brown will be way past theirs.


----------



## UMfan83 (Jan 15, 2003)

Should we sticky the Chandler update thread now or should we just let it keep getting bumped next to Curry and Crawfords?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Just like Jamal and Eddy...I hope Tyson thrives in his new environment.


----------



## BeZerker2008 (Jun 29, 2006)

I have mixed emotions about the trade. I really liked how he gave his all in many games and wanted to improve, maybe had he didn't rest the summer for his contract year and worked and improved himself he would've been much better and possibly (I repeat possibly) still be a bull. 5 years...It took 5 years to give tyson a chance to show what he can do and really didn't take advantage of the situation. Bringing in pj and to a lesser extent smith makes sense financially and even to ease TT, but the bulls are left with just one 7 footer in Luke Schenscher (if he is still with the team and barring any other trades). That's mostly what I will miss out of Tyson, his size, and his energy he brought to the game. If we can still sign maybe wilcox or AD or somehow get a productive low post scorer without touching our core players than this would be a great off season.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

GB said:


> Just like Jamal and Eddy...I hope Tyson thrives in his new environment.


 :clap: 

(This being said, if Chandler can't find a clue with CP3 then well.... )


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)




----------



## Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! (Jun 10, 2003)

All I gotta say, is: I just joined Scott May's "Sell the damn club, Jerry" club at the right time.

I'm thinking, the chances of tetting something decent for Tyson: zero.

This is what happens when the overarching peragative is: AT NO TIME IS THE CLUB ALLOWED TO EVEN REMOTELY APPROACH THE LUXURY TAX. 

Big market, well-supported team, small-minded owner.


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

Deja vu all over again. 

After losing Crawford, I felt rotten and really thought Pax had screwed up the franchise. Well, that team proved me wrong.

After losing Curry, I felt rotten and really thought Pax had screwed up a good thing. Well, last year's team proved me wrong. Kinda.

After losing Chandler, I'm just miffed. Pax signed this kid and watched him turn in a really solid second half of the season last year. Chandler's jib is solid and he has the heart of a champion. Do I think Pax screwed this up? No, I don't...I've learned to trust John Paxson. I am sad, however, to see Chandler replaced...I almost feel we're cheating by trading his potential for Wallace's "sure thing" and the cap space. I'm not going to cry as in years past about the final Baby Bull, but I am saddened...

Truly the end of an era. Hopefully the Big Ben era is as..._fun_.










So long, Tyson. :sigh:


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

LMAO at this stupid trade....


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

Horrible ****ty trade. Don't blame Pax though this is a clear budget balancing move. Its Reinsdorf's fault. This move does nothing towards making this team a champion. Period. 

:nonono:  :dead:

I hope Sweets is working out, cause we're gonna need him.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

****ing ****ty *** trade.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

I have a feeling Big Ben is going to to have some of his diva moments as he's pissed to be playing alongside the no help he gets from Malik Allen and Michael Sweetney after PJ Brown runs out of gas and or physically breaks down.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

For my sanity I need to think that there is another trade to come. Can PJ and JR be traded before 90 days have expired?


----------



## nybullsfan (Aug 12, 2005)

man i dont know about this one but the move had to be made i do believe this trade will come back to haunt us at some point. with that said whats done is done we now have enough money to sign deng, gordon, hinrich etc


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I have yet to read an article regarding FA that said we would be losers in this deal. Going from two articles at CNNSI, to the ESPN report that indicated Chandler would be out, to the snippet from Hollingers article. Time will tell if they are right. But, at this moment, I'm happy Tyson is out, and I'm hoping the guys paid to be analysts are correct.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

This is a below-average move, IMO, but hardly something to get so worked up about. If we made this trade without obtaining Wallace, then I'd be more upset about it. As it stands though, we're poised for a really solid season.

Seriously folks, are you more upset with this trade basketball-wise, or because you think Uncle Jerry is "dumping salary"? Just because Reinsdorf is doing this for financial reasons doesn't mean it's the wrong move. I think Chandler did need to be traded...not sure if this was the best one available but I think "horrible" is going a bit far.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

Well you get **** in return when trading ****ty players.

I hope JR Smith can be a contributor though. I like his skill set for the type of role play he can play on this team. Plus it wouldn't hurt to have a real athletic guy who can wake up the dull UC crowd every now and then w/ some exciting plays. A noisy crowd helps.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

I honestly don't think this is as bad as people are making it out to be. I wish Tyson was staying, but PJ Brown is a much better fit next to Ben Wallace than Tyson is. Brown allows Wallace to be the top notch help defender that he is, instead of manning up the best offensive post player. Furthermore, PJ Brown brings the ability to knock down a 15' elbow jumper and hit his free throws. He's far more offensive able than Chandler is. And there's the obvious intangibles of vocal leadership that Brown brings, something Wallace doesn't (he's more of a lead by example). Finally, PJ Brown gives the Bulls cap flexibility for the future, to re-sign one of the four core players. If Tyson were to stay, I honestly don't believe the Bulls would be able to sign all 4 to large contracts, and one of them, likely Deng would have to go. Bulls fans would probably be irate yet again. I am for Chandler staying, but I do see the many pluses to this trade.


----------



## max6216 (Nov 27, 2002)

i really don't have a problem with this trade.as big as a chandler fan as i was he was a turn over waiting to happen whenever a pass was going his way and couldn't stay out of foul trouble. i think brown is gonna give the team just as much production as chandler would have and even add scoring at the PF position.besides it's just for 1 yr and then if things go our way the team might just draft a PF out of a deep talent pool or sign one as a FA.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

SPMJ said:


> Well you get **** in return when trading ****ty players.
> 
> I hope JR Smith can be a contributor though. I like his skill set for the type of role play he can play on this team. Plus it wouldn't hurt to have a real athletic guy who can wake up the dull UC crowd every now and then w/ some exciting plays. A noisy crowd helps.


Corey Benjiman also had real athletic ability, woke up the crowd with nice dunks "occasionally" but so what? NBA is about putting it all together, and the way it looks this kid has a long long way to go mentally to adjust to a grown mans game. He is the protypical "sports center" generation that only wants to be on highlights, doesn't care much for anything else.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

kulaz3000 said:


> Corey Benjiman also had real athletic ability, woke up the crowd with nice dunks "occasionally" but so what? NBA is about putting it all together, and the way it looks this kid has a long long way to go mentally to adjust to a grown mans game.


Corey Benjamin was playing for 15-win teams. JR is going to be part of a playoff team. BIG difference. And I never said JR was the completely package or anything. Whatever skills he does have for now(athletic ability + the 3 ball) can be pretty useful for 15 mins. off the bench as long as he can clean up his act a bit. He can't be worse than Pargo&Pike who've sadly played in some pretty important game situations the last couple of years. If JR can run the court and be able to finish transition opportunities w/ some efficiency(something nobody on this team can do at an acceptable level), play some D(under Skiles he will) and hit some jump shots, then he can be quite an asset to have on our team. "Exciting Plays" can also go a long way in energizing ur teammates and pumping up the crowd. WE and the UC crowd can use a player like JR.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Does JR have 1 or 2 years left on his rookie contract?


----------



## BullSoxChicagosFinest (Oct 22, 2005)

TripleDouble said:


> For my sanity I need to think that there is another trade to come. Can PJ and JR be traded before 90 days have expired?


I don't have any inside info, but I would probably bet on this. I don't see JR Smith fitting with this team


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

They better be on the phone with Ely or Butler's or Elson's agents.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Babble-On said:


> They better be on the phone with Ely or Butler's or Elson's agents.


----------



## PowerWoofer (Jan 5, 2006)

Well, I haven't read everything, but for what I've read, it's crazy how people hate the move. Now, believe me, I loved Chandler as a person, and wanted him to stay, but the guy was a walking turnover, and couldn't do nothing on the offensive end of the court. PJ can actually score, and is A.D.-like, in the fact that he will be a leader on the court, as well as in the locker room. Not every team has leadership like that. Plus he will strengthen our frontcourt for next season, at least. We will have people to back up our guys if they get into fights. Think back to AD getting it on with Brendan Haywood in the Washington fight after Larry Hughes pushed Hinrich. If we can get that back, I'd love that. Plus I don't think anyone would be wise to pick a fight with Big Ben.

See, in the span of two days we just removed an inconsistant player with another one, who actually has a title alongside him, and can provide consistent defensive output, unlike Chandler. Plus we get some muscle in an otherwise weak frontcourt from last season. Now Sweets and Tyrus will have role models to guide them as they mature in the league. We are set for the next 5 years, at the very least.

If Paxson doesn't get Executive of the Year this upcoming season, it will be a damn shame, because the guy took this team from the trenches, and took it apart, then rebuilt it in his vision. The last peace of the Krause era is finally going to leave, and we have a chance to contend for the title after having the 2nd overall pick in the draft, with another pick next year (hopefully in the lottery). Paxson is like a god. He's done something not too many rookie GM's have done. EVER! I may have knocked on the guy this past season, but it was because of moves and trades he didn't make. Moves like the ones he just made this week. Now I am confident the guy will take this team to the next level, whether or not some of you don't like it.

Chandler's finally gone, and I wish him well in NO/OK, but as far as he goes as a basketball player, we just got rid of a cancer on the court. Good riddence.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


>



Yeah, I doubt it too. there's no indication there's any other moves to come.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

I will miss Tyson as I have Curry and Chandler, but if this team contends, I will be happy.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

BenDengGo...put me on your new club again.


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

PowerWoofer said:


> Plus I don't think anyone would be wise to pick a fight with Big Ben.


One reason I've never been a big Ben Wallace fan is the time he almost got in that fight with Ron Artest, but Artest backed down. Wallace kept coming at him and coming at him and coming at him...until the brawl in the Palace broke out. I always sort of blamed that on Ben to a certain extent.

Not to hijak the thread or anything...


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Well I guess I just have two things now that it's a done deal. First of all, anyone praising the salary implications of the deal must be a Bulls shareholder, because the financial implications have zero positive effects for the fans. Secondly, anyone who thinks a 23 year old freak athlete is incapable of improving is not being reasonable.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

I haae no doubt this is inconsequential in terms of the Bulls' record next season.

I already have a stomach ache anticipating the _ad nauseum_ "but if we only had Tyyyyyyyyyyyysoooooon" bleating with every hiccup that comes up in the season.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> *Tyson Chandler said he knew his days as a Bull were numbered as soon as Ben Wallace agreed to join the Bulls.
> 
> "It was just a matter of when and where," Chandler said early Wednesday evening when he was reached by phone in California.*
> 
> ...



http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...5bulls,1,1788161.story?coll=cs-home-headlines


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

The Krakken said:


> BenDengGo...put me on your new club again.


ok, i just changed the club name.


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Secondly, anyone who thinks a 23 year old freak athlete is incapable of improving is not being reasonable.


Is the same true of a 20 year-old freak athlete? Let's not write off J.R. Smith just yet...this trade is a bust for the FANS if he doesn't at least come through a little bit.

I'm glad the move to California led me to get NBA League Pass, though, because now I can watch Tyson in New Orleans and still root for Big Ben and the Bulls to win the East!


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I haae no doubt this is inconsequential in terms of the Bulls' record next season.
> 
> I already have a stomach ache anticipating the _ad nauseum_ "but if we only had Tyyyyyyyyyyyysoooooon" bleating with every hiccup that comes up in the season.


I get one thinking about the possibility of Malik Allen and or Michael sweetney once again being counted on as major contributors.

I don't have a problem with not having Tyson, so much as I have a problem with penciling Brown into the starting lineup. PJ is gonna be 37 and whether or not people want to believe, theres going to be a point at which his game takes a sharp decline, or his body can't handle the NBa grind anymore, or a combo of the two. 

It seems like we're going into the season with no backup plan if this is the year PJ breaks down. All to save Reinsdorf money.


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

pmac34 said:


> thats a bigass list
> 
> edit: hey i can say bigass!
> 
> bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass bigass


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

I wanna be in the club.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

This trade is hard to swallow, but ultimately, I think I'll be able to sleep at night over it.

If anything, it's consistent with the previous actions of the men behind the trade.

Jerry Reinsdorf is willing to spend money, but he requires a certain amount of proof before he does it, and it'll always have to be backed by a strong sense of rationalism, and if it isn't, something will be done about it.

Pax and Skiles are serious about putting in work, and their beliefs about how players need to approach the game if they're going to play for the Bulls. 5 years of untapped potential isn't going to cut it, and neither will an offseason of doing absolutely nothing while the rest of the teams core were doing 2 a days at the Berto. 

As for the actual basketball side of it, I don't really mind it too much. PJ Brown won't set the world on fire, but he's not garbage. He's probably been a better player than Chandler every single year he's been in the league (except maybe with the exceptin of 04-05), and he's about as consistent as they come, and he's more of a center than Chandler is, IMO. I actually think it improves us next year, since he'll be able to provide more of what we lack, and we might have the best interior D of any team in the league next year between PJ and Ben. 

And even though I think the term is really cliched, P n B really should be able to provide a steady veteran influence on the team. 

I'll be anything if curious to see how the Bulls perform next year, since it truly is built in the PaxSkiles image.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Someone should start a 'Tyson Chandler Sucks' club for the rest of us . 

I understand where a lot of you are disappointed. That we could have replaced Tyson by a guy who is young and can also contribute. Maybe like Wilcox. Maybe Pax will string another deal. 

If not, I think a lot of you guys will be happy with the results of the upcoming season.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Babble-On said:


> I get one thinking about the possibility of Malik Allen and or Michael sweetney once again being counted on as major contributors.
> 
> I don't have a problem with not having Tyson, so much as I have a problem with penciling Brown into the starting lineup. PJ is gonna be 37 and whether or not people want to believe, theres going to be a point at which his game takes a sharp decline, or his body can't handle the NBa grind anymore, or a combo of the two.
> 
> It seems like we're going into the season with no backup plan if this is the year PJ breaks down. All to save Reinsdorf money.


This sums up my feelings exactly. We have put all our eggs in one basket, when it was not even remotely close to necessary.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> Someone should start a 'Tyson Chandler Sucks' club for the rest of us .
> 
> I understand where a lot of you are disappointed. That we could have replaced Tyson by a guy who is young and can also contribute. Maybe like Wilcox. Maybe Pax will string another deal.
> 
> If not, I think a lot of you guys will be happy with the results of the upcoming season.


And what about the season after that (after he gets rid of Ben Gordon)?

And the season after that?

And the season after that? :curse:


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

Babble-On said:


> I have a feeling Big Ben is going to to have some of his diva moments as he's pissed to be playing alongside the no help he gets from Malik Allen and Michael Sweetney after PJ Brown runs out of gas and or physically breaks down.


You might be right but did you really expect Wallace to play any minutes alongside Chandler? Those two couldn't be in the same line-up for more than 2 minutes (and only when we're ahead).


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

Pj Brown will retire.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

The Krakken said:


> And what about the season after that (after he gets rid of Ben Gordon)?
> 
> And the season after that?
> 
> And the season after that? :curse:


He isn't trading Ben Gordon unless there is 1. A better SG available than BG or 2. Skiles and him are ready to rip each others heads off or 3. a blockbuster deal. I don't think he is that stupid.

There is a reason Tyson got traded, other than the lux tax. I don't know how many people don't see this. Do you think anyone would give up a player, even for luxury tax issues, if he PRODUCED? Or if he made improvements each year, making you think he can justify his contract somewhat? Pax and Skiles have seen this kid's work ethic the past few years and know where he is headed. Unless he wakes up tomorrow and magically realizes that he needs to work hard to do well, it's not going to happen. Face it, the kid got his pay check. He doesn't need anything else in life. 

Apparently this deal has been in the works for a while. Some think, possibly since the draft. It has been out in the public for two days? There is a reason why Pax prolly did not get better offers for Tyson. No one is going to give up a stud PF or any good player for Tyson. Tyson is worth a bag of chips. We got a good deal out of it. And, if we waited any longer, it would could only be worse. Possibly Tyson only for Troy Murphy?


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Well I guess I just have two things now that it's a done deal. First of all, anyone praising the salary implications of the deal must be a Bulls shareholder, because the financial implications have zero positive effects for the fans. *Secondly, anyone who thinks a 23 year old freak athlete is incapable of improving is not being reasonable.*


Certainly. The problem is getting that 23 year old freak athlete to actually want to improve. It don't happen by osmosis!


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

JR Smith is inconsistent. Hes played terrible at times barely scoring in games.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

BealeFarange said:


> Is the same true of a 20 year-old freak athlete? Let's not write off J.R. Smith just yet...this trade is a bust for the FANS if he doesn't at least come through a little bit.
> 
> I'm glad the move to California led me to get NBA League Pass, though, because now I can watch Tyson in New Orleans and still root for Big Ben and the Bulls to win the East!


Fair enough. I agree that Smith is a considerable asset. You have to admit though that the rumors about his work ethic are not promising when combined with Skiles' coaching. More importantly though, how many minutes can possibly be available in the backcourt with Duhon, Gordon, Hinrich, and Sefolosha? A 7'1 player fills a far bigger need on this team even with Wallace and Thomas on board.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

fl_flash said:


> Certainly. The problem is getting that 23 year old freak athlete to actually want to improve. It don't happen by osmosis!


I suppose Chandler left the door open for people to question his work ethic after last offseason. That said, I think it is ludicrous to insinuate that Tyson is completely indifferent about his career. I have yet to hear anyone raise valid questions about his dedication in any other offseason and his mannerisms on the court and interviews make it clear he is passionate about the game. To suggest that unlike most every other player he will not continue to put on muscle and learn the game better as he reaches his mid twenties does not make a whole lot of sense even if his work ethic does leave something to be desired.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I suppose Chandler left the door open for people to question his work ethic after last offseason. That said, I think it is ludicrous to insinuate that Tyson is completely indifferent about his career. I have yet to hear anyone raise valid questions about his dedication in any other offseason and his mannerisms on the court and interviews make it clear he is passionate about the game. To suggest that unlike most every other player he will not continue to put on muscle and learn the game better as he reaches his mid twenties does not make a whole lot of sense even if his work ethic does leave something to be desired.


I think people finally realized he is all talk. Where has Tyson improved in his game? Has he added a single offensive move? Can he catch the ball? Can he hit a J? Sure he may be rebounding more. But at 7'1", being young and able to jump, it's not hard to do that. I dunno why Eddy could never rebound (another story). The kid is all bark and no bite. He acts like he is the $hit on the court with a block here and there. 

Adding muscle? How much has he added over the past? You read reports every year saying he added 15 lbs of muscle. We all could realize the difference in Kobe, 2 seasons ago when he gained 15 lbs of muscle. He actually has the work ethic to be the best. Tyson does not. If he did, he would not have been traded as he would be a much more complete and valuable player today.


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Well I guess I just have two things now that it's a done deal.  First of all, anyone praising the salary implications of the deal must be a Bulls shareholder, because the financial implications have zero positive effects for the fans.


NO

If this trade indicates a trade-off between Reinsdorf willing to spend on Wallace instead of Chandler, then that is a positive basketball outcome. Same again, if trading for PJ Brown's veteran experience and expiring contract enables the remainder of the core to stick around in the future. If you were the GM and the owner said "You can offer Ben Wallace 60 million... but only if you trade Chandler afterwards," and you declined, I would enter the club to fire you.

If Paxson had to make a choice, directed by his employer, I can't see how anyone can say he made the wrong one.

Playing devil's advocate for Reinsdorf, it's easy for you guys to say "keep Tyson", you don't have to pay 10 million a year for a serial underperformer. It would be bad business not to cut losses.


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

I'm generally uncomfortable with the notion that Chandler didn't "produce" last season. He had a rough start, sure, and his offensive game is horrible...but he wound up nearly averaging double-digit rebounds, he rarely tested his limits by forcing shots, and he played INCREDIBLE help defense in the paint WITHOUT the benefit of another big body anywhere near the basket to help him out. You want STATISTICAL results? Fine: I give you 42%, the field goal percentage of Bulls opponents last year when Chicago led the league AGAIN in defense.

Again, I'm not saying Tyson was Ben's equal...I just think interior defense was NOT our biggest off-season concern.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

If Tyrus develops quickly, like our rookies a couple of years ago, we got some trade bait. The expiring contracts of PJ, Sweets, Malik, and 'talent' in JR.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

BealeFarange said:


> I'm generally uncomfortable with the notion that Chandler didn't "produce" last season. He had a rough start, sure, and his offensive game is horrible...but he wound up nearly averaging double-digit rebounds, he rarely tested his limits by forcing shots, and he played INCREDIBLE help defense in the paint WITHOUT the benefit of another big body anywhere near the basket to help him out. You want STATISTICAL results? Fine: I give you 42%, the field goal percentage of Bulls opponents last year when Chicago led the league AGAIN in defense.
> 
> Again, I'm not saying Tyson was Ben's equal...I just think interior defense was NOT our biggest off-season concern.


 :clap:


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Babble-On said:


> Yeah, I doubt it too. there's no indication there's any other moves to come.


Other than the few articles today indicating there may be more moves to come.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

Frankensteiner said:


> You might be right but did you really expect Wallace to play any minutes alongside Chandler? Those two couldn't be in the same line-up for more than 2 minutes (and only when we're ahead).


If we survived having *anybody* on the floor with Schensherr, *anybody* on the floor with Othella the way he often played, *anybody* on the floor with Sweetney during the times when he couldn't make a layup, much less hit a jumpshot, and really was only effective at picking up dumb fouls, *anybody* with Chandler the way he played at times, well I think we could survive putting Wallace and Chandler out there together for short stretches.

We had lineups in 05-06 where our four and five position could literally provide nothing to the team. Couldn't knock down shots from the pick and pop, couldn't rebound, couldn't finish inside, couldn't set a pick. Wallace and Chandler could at least rebound the **** outta the ball and blocked some shots out there with each other.

If Brown can't bring it, well, theres gonna be a problem.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

Ron Cey said:


> Other than the few articles today indicating there may be more moves to come.


Link? I only saw stuff about possible alternatives to this trade, or in previous days about signing the already signed Muhammed or Pryzbilla.

Also, salary dumps aren't indicative of a willingness to add additional salary.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

theanimal23 said:


> I think people finally realized he is all talk. Where has Tyson improved in his game? Has he added a single offensive move? Can he catch the ball? Can he hit a J? Sure he may be rebounding more. But at 7'1", being young and able to jump, it's not hard to do that. I dunno why Eddy could never rebound (another story). The kid is all bark and no bite. He acts like he is the $hit on the court with a block here and there.
> 
> Adding muscle? How much has he added over the past? You read reports every year saying he added 15 lbs of muscle. We all could realize the difference in Kobe, 2 seasons ago when he gained 15 lbs of muscle. He actually has the work ethic to be the best. Tyson does not. If he did, he would not have been traded as he would be a much more complete and valuable player today.


He set career highs in blocks, rebounds, and steals the season before last. It might not have been as much improvement as you wanted or in the areas you want it but to claim his game has been completely stagnant throughout his career is a huge overstatement. Chandler was listed at 210 when he was drafted and is currently listed as 235 so it would seem that he has put on some muscle. It is pretty much a matter of fact that athletes tend to peak physically and skill wise in their mid to late twenties. It is not guaranteed but the odds are certainly in Tyson's favor and I am not sure people realize how much improved Ty's numbers would be with a mild increase in performance and an uptick in minutes. The guy did average 11.75 rebounds per 35 minutes last season. Everyone is dissapointed that Tyson did not perform better for the Bulls but I think this post is a perfect example of how dissapointment over Chandler's failure to live up to expectations seems to be clouding people's view of the positives Chandler can offer at this point in his career.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Greg Ostertag! said:


> Playing devil's advocate for Reinsdorf, it's easy for you guys to say "keep Tyson", you don't have to pay 10 million a year for a serial underperformer. It would be bad business not to cut losses.


So Chandler went from being worthy of the $10 million-a-year contract that Reinsdorf greenlighted to a "serial underperformer" worth getting rid of no matter the basketball cost all in the span of 11 months?


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

I know this has been discussed for days, but I never truly thought it would happen. I'm shocked and saddened, and I think Tyson is going to prove everyone wrong.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Greg Ostertag! said:


> NO
> 
> If this trade indicates a trade-off between Reinsdorf willing to spend on Wallace instead of Chandler, then that is a positive basketball outcome. Same again, if trading for PJ Brown's veteran experience and expiring contract enables the remainder of the core to stick around in the future. If you were the GM and the owner said "You can offer Ben Wallace 60 million... but only if you trade Chandler afterwards," and you declined, I would enter the club to fire you.
> 
> ...


Sure. I never intended to blame Pax for following his boss' orders. Why should we as fans be pleased that something less than the best possible product is being placed on the court to save the owner money though? Why should we be forced to respect Reinsdorf for practicing smart business? I don't think the team is in danger of losing money any time soon.


----------



## mw2889 (Dec 15, 2005)

I hope we can keep JR, maybe a change of enviroment will do him good. And for people that bring up his shooting percentage, need I bring up Kirks?


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

JeremyB0001 said:


> He set career highs in blocks, rebounds, and steals the season before last. It might not have been as much improvement as you wanted or in the areas you want it but to claim his game has been completely stagnant throughout his career is a huge overstatement. Chandler was listed at 210 when he was drafted and is currently listed as 235 so it would seem that he has put on some muscle. It is pretty much a matter of fact that athletes tend to peak physically and skill wise in their mid to late twenties. It is not guaranteed but the odds are certainly in Tyson's favor and I am not sure people realize how much improved Ty's numbers would be with a mild increase in performance and an uptick in minutes. The guy did average 11.75 rebounds per 35 minutes last season. Everyone is dissapointed that Tyson did not perform better for the Bulls but I think this post is a perfect example of how dissapointment over Chandler's failure to live up to expectations seems to be clouding people's view of the positives Chandler can offer at this point in his career.


I don't buy the arguments though that he needs to hide behind a 'big' brute center. I do not know if you support that idea or not. But, It just seems foolish to say that about any 7'1" player. Not every center is 270lbs+ in the NBA. Most aren't. 

The positives he can offer this very day will be outweighted heavily by the positives Ben Wallace can offer today. Tyson serves no purpose for today.

He has improved his game, yet none of these improvements are major. We now we get a guy who can actually set picks and let alone catch the ball and hit the J. Before, Tyson would serve the pick and then serve no purpose in our offense. PJ can play disciplined and solid defense. Sure he may not throw up the 'stats' of 2 blks per game or hit his chest like Tyson. But he does play solid defense. 

I don't think anyone wants to wait till he gets to be in his mid to late 20s. We would have to wait 8 years or so for this kid to arrive and fulfill any potential left in him since we got him on draft day. This isn't a CD that we are waiting upon for 10 years with interest. 

Sure he has improved, but at a slow rate. The improvements in my point of view are small. No professional comes in each offseason saying he gained strength, but needing a big guy to be his body guard. You should have gone to college if you were scared of real men. Not adding one offensive move, or the ability to hit a FT or one-handed dunk is horrible. There is absolutely no excuse for that. 

With that said, in your eyes, Tyson may have been a good player who has shown promise and will show even more. In my eyes, he is a huge bust, an absolute disaster. I hated the day I heard the Elton-Tyson trade announced. I was unable to sleep that night. Tonight, I will be sleeping in comfort. 

Whatever has happened, lets hope it was the best decision and the best for the team, today and for tomorrow.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> I don't buy the arguments though that he needs to hide behind a 'big' brute center. I do not know if you support that idea or not. But, It just seems foolish to say that about any 7'1" player. Not every center is 270lbs+ in the NBA. Most aren't.
> 
> The positives he can offer this very day will be outweighted heavily by the positives Ben Wallace can offer today. Tyson serves no purpose for today.
> 
> ...



It was the best decision for today. It was the worst decision for tomorrow, and no amount of spin is going to change that.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

If Tyson does not develop into a better player than he is this very day, then I think it was a great decision for today and tomorrow. We lost a bench player who will always be a role player, unless he takes the initative to be great.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> If Tyson does not develop into a better player than he is this very day, then I think it was a great decision for today and tomorrow. We lost a bench player who will always be a role player, unless he takes the initative to be great.


I hope you are right. I just don't think you are.


----------



## OziBull (Nov 7, 2004)

I think it was the right move, i said wat i thought in the lead up thread to this trade so i wont repeat myself
Other than im happy with the trade.
IN PAX I TRUST


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

theanimal23 said:


> I don't buy the arguments though that he needs to hide behind a 'big' brute center. I do not know if you support that idea or not. But, It just seems foolish to say that about any 7'1" player. Not every center is 270lbs+ in the NBA. Most aren't.
> 
> The positives he can offer this very day will be outweighted heavily by the positives Ben Wallace can offer today. Tyson serves no purpose for today.
> 
> ...


Not all centers are 270 but most are considerably bigger than 235. Also it's not all about size. Tyson has always had to guard the opposing team's best offensive big man, Wallace would allow him to roam more which should improve his blocked shot totals. I advocated keeping Chandler alongside Wallace so I would not say that anything Wallace provides "outweighs" which Chandler brings because it was not necessarily an either/or proposition. Ty would not be worthless simply because Wallace is on the team. If you buy into that line of reasoning, Wallace is not all that valuable since the Bulls are already great and defense and need help scoring. You can not have too many big men, strong defenders, or terrific rebounders. 

Tyson is 23 so he will be 25 in two years which would have to be considered his mid twenties. Steady improvement is an important way to get better. If Ty continues to improve slightly every year as you mentioned he will probably be average 14 RPG in a couple seasons. Again I am seeing a lot of frustration with Chandler's inability to become what scouts expected of him. You seem offended on a personal level that he hasn't improved more but that does not mean the man is entirely worthless.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

You will be missed.... Tyson 'Season Before Last' Chandler


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

RedBull80 said:


> Bargaining chip? I'd rather have a 6'3 7th grade Center than piece of trash geriatric PJ Brown. Pax is garbage till he proves us wrong. Lateral moves does NOTHING for the future of the Bulls. TC is a Ben Wallace type anyways and he has a much higher ceiling than Ben. To lose him for absolute DUNG, is admitting failure. I have watched Elton Brand, Jamal Crawford, Jason Williams, Eddy Curry, Ron Artest, Brad Miller and now Tyson Chandler leave FOR NOTHINGGGGG
> 
> Pax, die. You and your unprofessional *** highering your crappy brother on top of that? I hate you John WACKxon
> 
> Craig Hodges, Trent Tucker, Steve Kerr >>> John WACKxon's lame sissy 3pt shooting ***. YOU SUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKkkk


lrearn howe two spelll.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I will miss TC and was always a big fan. But he has small hands and will always be a very poor offensive player, will never develop and kind of signiture scoring move, and is still not really committed to his profession. But big men mature late and i hope he will.

This is the end of what was perhaps the greatest number of missteps by a GM in the nba. Jerry Kause traded away three allstars (artest, miller, and Brand) for JRose and TC. He also signed Robinson (who i hear could still be a star in the right place, dud), and Ron Mercer.

One last thing. Pax gets a lot of heat for signing Scotty Pippen but IMHO it was a pay back to Scotty for him being underpaid by pax and i bet that helped us sign Wallance. Paxson has restored the the team and washed away the smell that was jerry kause.

david


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

lorgg said:


> lrearn howe two spelll.


kukoc4ever, when posting under his own name, can spell just fine.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Finally! I've defended Chandler a whole lot this season and gave him a decent postseason grade (based on his fourth quarter defense), but I'm pretty happy for the trade. He's had many chances to actually develop his skills, but what I've seen is still raw talent and underutilized athleticism. The most athletic 7-footer in the NBA should not be struggling with his game after five seasons. The guy should have already been averaging 15 rebounds a game, but he's not -- what makes Tyson Chandler much different from Dwight Howard athletic talent-wise? The truth is that Tyson either doesn't have the mental capacity to get better, or he hasn't been playing under the right coaches. Still, Cartwright was a center and was hired mostly to mentor Curry and Chandler.

PJ Brown will provide Antonio Davis-like veteran leadership along with Ben Wallace, and Tyrus Thomas is sitting pretty as Tyson's heir. In my opinion, I think Tyson is still as raw as Tyrus is, so we will probably see T2 doing many of the things Tyson had done; heck, he may actually be able to handle passes!

Now that the second half of the Towers is gone, my screen name is pretty much defunct.


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

This gives the Bulls good positioning for another trade and next year's FA. While not losing, but gaining production for this year. The Bulls are reminding me of Miami last off season. How many years of playoff exp did they add this week? That's 164 games to 12. Look at the age of the Heat and the Lakers the year before them.

Playoff Experience:

G GS MIN FGM-A 3PM-A FTM-A OFF DEF TOT AST STL BLK TO PF PTS 
Wallace 93 93 39.5 .471 .000 .416 4.1 9.2 13.3 1.5 1.85 2.31 1.25 2.60 8.5 

PJ 71 68 32.6 .424 .000 .741 3.2 5.2 8.4 1.1 .76 1.00 1.08 3.40 8.5 

VS

Curry 0

Chandler 12 0 23.0 .500 .000 .625 3.1 4.0 7.1 .9 .25 1.25 1.17 4.70 6.8 


Bulls are much better off. The Bulls have 2 new and improved A.D.'s now.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> So Chandler went from being worthy of the $10 million-a-year contract that Reinsdorf greenlighted to a "serial underperformer" worth getting rid of no matter the basketball cost all in the span of 11 months?


I prefer to look at it in a different context 

Tyson was the big winner in Currygate 

Paxson was compelled to keep one of the twin towers last offseason 

I do think he wanted to retain him ( Tyson ) and would have kept him had we not upgraded and obtained Ben Wallace ..but with them believing in what they have got in Tyrus ( to be proven ) and knowing what they have with Ben ....I think it was a financial decision to cut bait when we had the chance to 

And why not ?

I mean Mark Cuban can let Steve Nash and Michael Finley go ( two of his big 3 ) and no one bats an eye lid and goes hunting for 'tight fisted Cubes' 

I do believe that you have to make basketball decisions and financial decisions but I do believe the decision making process in considering both of these factors are in themselves not mutually exclusive 

And there have been decisions that were too clearly financially motivated after the 2nd 3 peat when we were in the wilderness for 6 or 7 years ( even though they were prepared to spend money in 2000 but we were spurned ) - and it was atrocious . Clearly lining the pockets with a piss poor product on the floor 

Upgrading Chandler to acquire Wallace , and even the aquistion of Brown now , tells me that the organisation thinks that with our existing base - that we can make some noise and possibly be legit in the East sooner than we may think 

If they are of that view ( and I do trust that basketball related decisions are getting equal consideration with financial decisions - as they should ) then if they believed that dealing Chandler was going to prejudice them in where they think they're at - why would they deal him ?

I would suggest its because they don't consider him to be a _ consistent _ enough factor

Can he have an impact on a game here and there ?

Yes - both good and bad - the bad when he lost a couple for us last year with absolute boneheaded plays ( Remember the Portland loss ? ) But yeah when he is mentally attuned ( holding breath ) he can be a closer 

But can he do it consistently ?

Nup.

The organisation spent $5M more per to upgrade the role for a guy who can do that job consistently 

He was redundant and they didn't want to pay an extra $54M - what's not to get ?

Dallas comes within a bees dick of winning it all with two guys at the same spot as Steve Nash ( Terry and Harris ) that probably upped what Dallas were looking for a bit more ( speed in penetration - even though Nash's passing game makes up his lesser foot speed - hey the ball always beats the man but that's another story ) and for $2M to $3M a season less at the same spot 

They got deeper and cheaper and increased the need wants 

Isn't that Mark Cuban an A Hole ? 

We got deeper and cheaper and increased our needs too which is greater interior defense whilst still not sacrificing the verticall menace with what we got in Wallace and Thomas 

But Paxdorf is an A Hole too I guess 

Hey I have been critical of the organisation where its warranted - I honestly don't think now is one of those times as the prudence of the business case AND the basketball case , in my opinion , has been served 

All the palaba about Tyson this and Tyson that and boo hoo is an overreaction for an extremely limited player than just wasn't worth $10M and didn't really grow into his contract last season 

But the strong emotive response from a certain segment of the fanbase typifies the youth is beauty / surface assessment of right and wrong in moves of this kind 

We'll win 50 games next year be a 2nd round team and maybe even make a push for the Eastern Conference final round 

And I'll dance a jig and not bemoan that fact that Tyson Chandler is no longer a Bull


----------



## 7thwatch (Jul 18, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



RedBull80 said:


> Terrible, just freaking ubelievably freaking HORRID this is W.R.O.N.G
> 
> This CANCELS OUT the Wallace signing, that's it. Where is the progress? Swapping talent? Please...
> 
> Paxon BETTER (thats right), BETTER make another trade to bring a bonafied scorer here.


Where is the progress? A starting frontcourt of Wallace/Brown is a hell of a lot better than any combination of Chandler/Sweets/Malik Allen we threw out there last season.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



7thwatch said:


> Where is the progress? A starting frontcourt of Wallace/Brown is a hell of a lot better than any combination of Chandler/Sweets/Malik Allen we threw out there last season.


This team was not built to win next season and next season only.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> I prefer to look at it in a different context...


What a great post. You make valid points. It was a good read.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Again I ask the question...why are folks so seriously upset with this trade? 

Because you think we're worse off as a basketball team? Or because you don't agree with Jerry Reinsdorf's principles of "dumping salary"? 

I get the impression it's the latter from some of your comments. All I care about is putting a good basketball product on the floor. We're set to accomplish that. That's why I can swallow this trade.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



TripleDouble said:


> This team was not built to win next season and next season only.


The Bulls still have Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, and Nocioni; they currently have top project/prospect Tyrus Thomas. They will have about $10 million in capspace next season to extend Hinrich, whose numbers barring a Steve Nash-like season will surely not demand a huge contract. They have the possibility of landing another lottery pick next season. The team is built to win for a long time.

So much hate for Tyson this season, yet so much love now that he's gone. Are many of us (not including me) mad because Tyson is gone, or because the Bulls got so "little" in return?


----------



## 7thwatch (Jul 18, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



TripleDouble said:


> This team was not built to win next season and next season only.


True true, thats the beauty of it. We should be a very good basketball team for a long time. These trades have given us an actual NBA frontcourt, something we were missing last year. Wallace has at least 2 more peak years in him imo and should still be an impact player after that even if he is not as dominant as he is now (although obviously there is no magic crystal ball that will allow us to know for sure). Sure we lose PJ Brown after this year . . . he is servicable but not in any way unreplacable. Nothing to get your panties in a bunch about. Next year Tyrus will probably be more ready to contribute, we will have a high lottery pick from the knicks unless some miracle occurs over in New York, and we will be able to resign Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, and Nocioni when the time comes. The present AND the future are very bright for us. We even get to take a risk free look at a young talent like Smith in the process. I am a fan of the chandler trade because i don't think that Chandler and Wallace are compatible as players on the same team. IMO i don't see how they could both be on the floor for long stretches of time, they would absoloutely kill the offense. Its not very smart to have 10 million per year tied up in a player who can't play effectively with the star of your team, so pax turned chandler into a very tradeable expiring contract (which could be turned into something very nice around the trade deadline, for example) who can help us win games this year if we do end up keeping him for the full year. If we do keep him, it gives us more flexibility in the future to resign our players or perhaps as a result Jerry will allow us us to use our MLE in a future year to bring in a more compatible player. 

Thats my take on it. If you think that Chandler and Wallace would have made a winning duo in the frontcourt i could definitely see why you would not be a fan of this trade. I just don't see happening, and as a result i favor this trade.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

I don't get what the big deal here is with dumping Chandler and his overpriced contract now. You have a better defender and rebounder in Wallace now who for his offensive ineptitude atleast can catch the ball.

In addition you draft a guy in Thomas who while shorter then Chandler has essentially the same wingspan, does the same things Chandler does, but has a better offensive game. Thomas actually has a decent jumpshot.

PJ Brown, Wallace, Thomas is a solid rotation (tremendous in terms of defense). In the end I think the Bulls figured that between Thomas and Chandler: Chandlers potential was a almost Camby like while Thomas was Amare like


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

There was NO NEED for Chandler after we drafted Tyrus & signed Ben.

please understand this lol

Mark Giangreco "the bulls trade tyson's huge salary and finally get rid of a MAJOR bust"

LMAO!


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

The ROY said:


> There was NO NEED for Chandler after we drafted Tyrus & signed Ben.
> 
> please understand this lol


You don't think the team needs a backup power forward center? You're cool with having Mike Sweetney and Mailk Allen as your depth at those positions? You're cool with depending on a 37 year old?


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

yodurk said:


> Again I ask the question...why are folks so seriously upset with this trade?
> 
> Because you think we're worse off as a basketball team? Or because you don't agree with Jerry Reinsdorf's principles of "dumping salary"?
> 
> I get the impression it's the latter from some of your comments. All I care about is putting a good basketball product on the floor. We're set to accomplish that. That's why I can swallow this trade.


Both. For the present it could be a wash(though I have severe doubts about that), or an upgrade, but the team is definitely worse off in the near future, seeing as how Chandler>nothing, which is what PJ will have become.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Babble-On said:


> You don't think the team needs a backup power forward center? You're cool with having Mike Sweetney and Mailk Allen as your depth at those positions? You're cool with depending on a 37 year old?


um..

we have tyrus

we have ben

just grabbed a big body in p.j and pax is still going after another big

i'm pretty happy


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

The ROY said:


> um..
> 
> we have tyrus
> 
> ...


We'll see if he gets another big. I haven't heard of any interest in the remaining free agent bigs. I hope he does. I just don't see any indication of it.

I also hope all of you people who are so sure PJ is gonna be able to hold it down this year are right. I also hope Tyrus is going to be pushed into the fire too soon. 

I've pretty much said all I have to on this topic, so I'm withdrawing so as not to become a broken record.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

You make it sound like we've lost HINRICH or GORDON...

Chandler just got replaced with the guy he was TRYING to be.....a 4 time allstar & dpoy

and for about 50 mill cheaper, we got a kid out of college that does the same things and more...

You should be relieved...we all should


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Again I ask the question...why are folks so seriously upset with this trade?
> 
> Because you think we're worse off as a basketball team? Or because you don't agree with Jerry Reinsdorf's principles of "dumping salary"?
> 
> I get the impression it's the latter from some of your comments. All I care about is putting a good basketball product on the floor. We're set to accomplish that. That's why I can swallow this trade.


I've always liked Chandler. I think his value is at an absolute low right now, so I think we could have gotten more, later. I don't think there was any harm in waiting it out. In fact, I would rather wait another couple months and hypothetically be forced to also give up Duhon or Khryapa in a salary dump. But I'm definitely in the minority on that one. I guess it's hard for me to give up on a player. 

I also think we'll be a worse team next season without him. I have a low opinion of 37 year-old PJ Brown, and as good as Ben Wallace is, he's still only 6'7. Sweetney is 6'8. Tyrus Thomas is 6'9. Nocioni is 6'7. That kind of front line really, really scares me. I think we're going to struggle to defend post players and slashers, despite having great help defense from Ben. I think Tyson could have helped us with that. 

Unrelated: As good as Ben Wallace is, the Pistons only won the championship when Rasheed Wallace came aboard. Rasheed defended the larger post players and let Ben roam. Rasheed could also score and hide Ben's offensive deficiencies. I'm worried that Ben might suffer in the same way Tyson did after losing AD and Curry (if you subscribe to that school of thought).


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

rwj333 said:


> I've always liked Chandler. I think his value is at an absolute low right now, so I think we could have gotten more, later. I don't think there was any harm in waiting it out. In fact, I would rather wait another couple months and hypothetically be forced to also give up Duhon or Khryapa in a salary dump. But I'm definitely in the minority on that one. I guess it's hard for me to give up on a player.
> 
> I also think we'll be a worse team next season without him. I have a low opinion of 37 year-old PJ Brown, and as good as Ben Wallace is, he's still only 6'7. Sweetney is 6'8. Tyrus Thomas is 6'9. Nocioni is 6'7. That kind of front line really, really scares me. I think we're going to struggle to defend post players and slashers, despite having great help defense from Ben. I think Tyson could have helped us with that.
> 
> Unrelated: As good as Ben Wallace is, the Pistons only won the championship when Rasheed Wallace came aboard. Rasheed defended the larger post players and let Ben roam. Rasheed could also score and hide Ben's offensive deficiencies. I'm worried that Ben might suffer in the same way Tyson did after losing AD and Curry (if you subscribe to that school of thought).


LOL

wow

Every media outlet is talking about how great chicago will be next year, we've lost tyson but gained 6 very good players...and we're gonna be WORSE?

you can't be serious


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

The ROY said:


> LOL
> 
> wow
> 
> ...


I think next year's team is going to better than last year's team.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

rwj333 said:


> I think next year's team is going to better than last year's team.


um..

that was already a given


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

The ROY said:


> You make it sound like we've lost HINRICH or GORDON...
> 
> Chandler just got replaced with the guy he was TRYING to be.....a 4 time allstar & dpoy
> 
> ...


Nah, I don't think its anything like losing Hinrich or Gordon. I just think we're looking to lack depth upfront. I'm worried about PJ not being up to starting. I have doubts about Tyrus being able to step in right away, and even when he is, the hole of backup 4/5 will still need to be filled, and we had a guy who I think is made for that role, and he's gone for nothing after the season. I don't see anything to be relieved about with this move. Saving Reinsdorf $50M really does nothing for me.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

The ROY said:


> You make it sound like we've lost HINRICH or GORDON...
> 
> Chandler just got replaced with the guy he was TRYING to be.....a 4 time allstar & dpoy
> 
> ...


Why do people keep saying things like this? Last time I checked we traded Chandler for Brown and Smith, not for Wallace. Any tradeoff between Wallace and Chandler is the result of Reinsdorf refusing to pay the luxury tax for a contending team, something he implied he would do during the 20 win season years.


----------



## Reciprocity Failure (Jun 10, 2004)

This trade is a gamble.

Management sees the potential of Tyrus Thomas.

They are gambling that in one season's time Thomas will be able to produce what Chandler has in the past. 


PJ and Big Ben will be able to mentor young Tyrus far better than Chandler. 

I also have to assume that management believes that in time, TT will be able to do what Tyson did defensively and far exceed him offensively. 

I can only hope potential is realized this time around.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Tyrus >> Tyson

He hasn't played 1 game yet, and it's not even a debate


----------



## YearofDaBulls (Oct 20, 2004)

rwj333 said:


> I've always liked Chandler. I think his value is at an absolute low right now, so I think we could have gotten more, later. I don't think there was any harm in waiting it out. In fact, I would rather wait another couple months and hypothetically be forced to also give up Duhon or Khryapa in a salary dump. But I'm definitely in the minority on that one. I guess it's hard for me to give up on a player.
> 
> I also think we'll be a worse team next season without him. I have a low opinion of 37 year-old PJ Brown, and as good as Ben Wallace is, he's still only 6'7. Sweetney is 6'8. Tyrus Thomas is 6'9. Nocioni is 6'7. That kind of front line really, really scares me. I think we're going to struggle to defend post players and slashers, despite having great help defense from Ben. I think Tyson could have helped us with that.
> 
> Unrelated: As good as Ben Wallace is, the Pistons only won the championship when Rasheed Wallace came aboard. Rasheed defended the larger post players and let Ben roam. Rasheed could also score and hide Ben's offensive deficiencies. I'm worried that Ben might suffer in the same way Tyson did after losing AD and Curry (if you subscribe to that school of thought).


Is Wallace really only 6'7? If so, it only solidifies the Tyrus Thomas pick for me.


----------



## draft tyrus (Jun 29, 2006)

YearofDaBulls said:


> Is Wallace really only 6'7? If so, it only solidifies the Tyrus Thomas pick for me.


who cares how big Wallace is? he's already a proven interior defender and has a huge wingspan. some people get too caught up in measurables.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

YearofDaBulls said:


> Is Wallace really only 6'7? If so, it only solidifies the Tyrus Thomas pick for me.


He's listed at 6'9, but his teammates have always said that he's closer to 6'7. I'm not too concerned about his height-- it's the collective lack of height on our frontline that frightens me.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Again I ask the question...why are folks so seriously upset with this trade?


How many times does it have to be typed?

Yes, for this season, its not that big a deal, W/L wise. Shortsighted way to look at it though, unless you really think this year is THE YEAR. PJ Brown's game is a better fit with these Bulls to play alongside Wallace, if he can stay healthy and contribute at his advanced age. Tyson Chandler is somewhat redundant on these Bulls, given the signing of Ben Wallace. The Bulls will be a better team next season, given the added draft picks, players and maturation of the core. But, unless next season is the season we make our title run, PJ Brown does not really matter in the grand scheme of things. He's a Songo or a Basden.... a guy being trumped up now since Paxson just signed him... and will be easily discarded and replaced next season... while saying "ya he really wasn't that good. no big loss."

Three things bother me.

1.) For three seasons now, we've been making moves to build Cap Space for this off-season. I was under the impression that this space was going to be used to ADD a player to the roster, not to SWAP a player. Bait and switch. Shell game. Whatever you want to call it, its rotten. Now, the term used was always "financial flexibility"..... which is accurate... it gave Paxson the flexibility to go after a guy he wanted, not a guy he "kinda had" to sign. I now see that I was wrong to assume that the Bulls were looking to ADD, not SWAP, a key player with Cap Space. 

2.) There was no urgency. PJ Brown is not that good. Malik Allen would have been able to fill his role adequately. If we're banking on PJ Brown this season, that's a sad state of affairs. We didn't need to dump Chandler this season to avoid the tax. The better move, IMO, was to keep him, get him back into the form he was in the two seasons previously (pre back injury three seasons ago) and maximize his value. Worst case, you have one of the top five rebounders in the league and our only 7 footer that plays like one coming off the bench for 20. Or, use him in a package to land a real player, one that could help us contend this season. We had a shot for this year, if the right trade was made, and I think that Duhon, Deng/TT, Chandler could have landed you a real quality guy.


3.) We sold low. This guy was our leading rebounder and shot blocker on our only winning team since MJ. I know that bothers people for some reason (krause hate?), but its true. He was damn effective and one of the main reasons we were the third best team in the east. The first few months of last season were a joke w/ Chandler... once he straigtened out he was more effective, and the Bulls started playing better. Remember the Indiana game @ Indy? It was like flipping a switch. This guy will continue to be a solid NBA player for the next decade, and we just dumped him for vapor. We could have got more. If not, I’d rather have his services off the bench and play Malik in PJ’s role. Given what I saw from Malik to close out the end of last year, and PJs advanced age, I don’t think there would be much dropoff. Then do the salary dump next year. Now, given what I heard from Chandler during his SCORE interview, it seems that this wasn't the best place for him, given his relationship with Skiles. Perhaps we would have continued to regress under Skiles. He'll be a solid player for New Orleans. I dislike losing solid players for vapor, especially when there was no financial reason for the move to be made now.

We had a chance to be a real contender this year to win the NBA Championship… not just “in the thick of things,” if the right deal was made. "Hey, we played that good team really tough. They knew they were in a fight." That chance just became less likely. The Wallace signing was great. This trade sucked.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

Stock 'em deep, sell them cheap.

"The Right Way."


----------



## Salvaged Ship (Jul 10, 2002)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



TripleDouble said:


> This team was not built to win next season and next season only.


And because TYSON FRIGGIN CHANDLER was traded we are now only built to win next season only? Him of the 5 pts per game? Man, You would think Jordan just got traded. I fail to see this massive impact the human pogo stick had. You telling me Brown/Nocioni/Tyrus can't fill the BIG gaping hole we now have without Tyson? 

Yeah, terrible. We are doomed.....


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

*Re: It.s Official!!!!!!!!!!! PJ Brown deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

Of course we are doomed. We just lost 6 fouls per game.


----------



## epic (Mar 16, 2004)

you don't pay 10m a year for a backup centre. Jerry isn't being cheap, he's being realistic. unloading that bloated contract is a great move for this club.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

epic said:


> you don't pay 10m a year for a backup centre.


What about for an over the hill PF?

What about for a guy that was a key guy on one of the top 4 teams in the league that sits at home?

This season and last season.

It will be nice to FINALLY have a team where the highest paid guys actually lead the team in statistical categories.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

You raise caring about stuff no fan should worry about to an art form.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> What about for an over the hill PF?
> 
> What about for a guy that was a key guy on one of the top 4 teams in the league that sits at home?
> 
> ...


Tim Thomas was going to have his points all right, but the Bulls would have been much, much worse.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

> Hornets keep making moves
> 
> The Ben Wallace contract officially signals the end of the Tyson Chandler era in Chicago. After signing a ridiculous 6-year, $60 million contract last off-season, Chandler appears headed to the New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets in exchange for J.R. Smith and P.J. Brown (J.R. Rider, B.J. Armstrong, and J.J. Redick were unavailable for comment). Smith played his way into Bryon Scott's doghouse last season, but the kid has loads of talent. If he can fit in with the Bulls' system, he could definitely turn into an asset at the 2-spot. He has great size for the position, a good three-point stroke and big-time athleticism. His work ethic is questionable, but perhaps the Bulls' scrappiness and hustle will rub off on Smith. Brown is widely considered one of the NBA's "good guys" and has spent most of his career on the chronically underrated list. He possesses legit size, rebounding skills, and a few sneaky post moves. If you're a Tyrus Thomas fan, you have to feel pretty good about him learning the ins and outs of NBA post play from Wallace and Brown. Even better, Brown's $8 million salary comes off the books after this season, giving the Bulls enough cap space to chase yet another high-profile free agent in 2007.
> 
> As for the Hornets, I fail to grasp the logic behind this move. Why would a franchise draft Hilton Armstrong and Cedric Simmons, then seek out Tyson Chandler and the five years and $50 million left on his deal? All three players are lean, athletically gifted shotblockers with almost no post moves to speak of. Unless playing alongside Chris Paul turns Chandler into a 17 points per game scorer, this move is curious to say the least. Everybody knows Smith was on the way out, but the Hornets will miss Brown's locker-room presence and his expiring salary.


http://nbadraft.net/2006playermovement001.asp


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TwinkieTowers said:


> Tim Thomas was going to have his points all right, but the Bulls would have been much, much worse.


Yeah, just like the Suns were. He's a cancer.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

We're winners. Thats all anyone should care about.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

GB said:


> We're winners.


Winners of what?

Divisions?
Conferences?
Leagues?
Playoff Series?


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Winners of what?
> 
> Divisions?
> Conferences?
> ...


You didn't hear?

We won next year's NBA Championship.

See. Apparently, the addition of Wallace and the subtraction of Chandler was what we were missing from advancing in the playoffs and winning another ring.

I guess someone forget to tell you.

Anyway, its time for the celebration.

Gotta run,
Vintage


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Winners...?


Yes.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Yeah, just like the Suns were. He's a cancer.


Except that the Suns also had Steve Nash and Shawn Marion, two established star players and veteran leaders, and Tim Thomas was a role player. I didn't see the Bulls having any veteran leaders, and Tim Thomas sure wasn't going to be just a role player on the young Bulls. No thanks. His influence would have hurt the Bulls in the long run.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TwinkieTowers said:


> His influence would have hurt the Bulls in the long run.


Does dumping Chandler for PJ Brown instead of exploring other offers, worst case dumping him next off-season help the Bulls in the long-run?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> instead of exploring other offers


Do we know this wasn't done?

Link please.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

GB said:


> Do we know this wasn't done?
> 
> Link please.





kukoc4ever said:


> instead of exploring other offers, worst case dumping him next off-season


Clearly implies keeping Chandler over the course of the season, or until a better deal is found.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

GB said:


> Yes.



Winners of what?


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Does dumping Chandler for PJ Brown instead of exploring other offers, worst case dumping him next off-season help the Bulls in the long-run?


Yes. The Bulls now can develop Tyrus Thomas with actual playing time, and the PJ Brown's $8 million will come in handy next season for the big free agent class of 2007.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Winners of what?



2 games against the Miami Heat in round one.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Clearly implies keeping Chandler over the course of the season, or until a better deal is found.


Ahh. You the fan are substituting your judgement for that of the professional.

Got it.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Winners of what?


At basketball--in season and offseason.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

GB said:


> Ahh. You the fan are substituting your judgement for that of the professional.
> 
> Got it.


"In Pax We Trust"


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

GB said:


> At basketball--in season and offseason.


Chicago Grizzlies


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> "In Pax We Trust"



Little reason not to.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

Vintage said:


> 2 games against the Miami Heat


What is the most number of games that any team won against the Heat in the playoffs?

Easy money Alex.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Jesus. I hate this trade as much as the next guy but it seems that we're at a point of zero marginal returns in this arguement.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Chicago Grizzlies


Unlike the Grizzlies, the Bulls have actually won games in the playoffs.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

GB said:


> Little reason not to.


We've yet to win a playoff series, division, conference.

We've yet to matter.

Grizzles.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> We've yet to win a playoff series, division, conference.
> 
> We've yet to matter.
> 
> Grizzles.


And keeping Chandler (and his salary) would help change that?


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

The Truth said:


> And keeping Chandler (and his salary) would help change that?



I personally think it would do more to aid our cause than PJ Brown...


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

The Truth said:


> And keeping Chandler (and his salary) would help change that?


Keep Chandler for this season.

Explore better trades.

Land stud 4 with Duhon, Chandler, Deng/TT/Pick package.

Contend for NBA Title.

If not, salary dump next season.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> I personally think it would do more to aid our cause than PJ Brown...


But you have to wait and see what the Bulls do with the money once PJs contract is off the books.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> We've yet to win a playoff series, division, conference.
> 
> We've yet to matter.
> 
> Grizzles.


Th Bulls seem to have mattered to the Heat, who beat the Mavericks, who swept the Grizzlies.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> We've yet to matter.


I guess one could look at it that way. But then you'd question the sanity of anyone spending big bucks for season tickets for a team that consistently doesn't matter.

I prefer the positives. Where have we come from? What have we done... what do we have the potential to do?

Ahh. It's awesome.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TwinkieTowers said:


> Th Bulls seem to have mattered to the Heat, who beat the Mavericks, who swept the Grizzlies.


And Pau Gasol was in a AT&T commercial with Kevin Bacon. I've played this game.


----------



## Swan (Jun 27, 2005)

What I'm wondering is where would this better Tyson deal have been found? It's not like Tyson was going to get the PT to inhance his stock, and with his numbers down I don't see teams falling over themselves to pick him up. As a GM, you only have so much faith (and minutes) to go around, and I'd rather see what we have in Thomas.

If wallace plays 33 minutes a game this season, that would have left at best 15 for tyson without him. In order to get the same minutes as last year, that would mean a full quarter of Ben and Ty playing together. Did we want to put that stress on the backcourt? Factor in the minutes that Tyrus is going to get, and you're going even longer with an offensively suspect offense.

Let's not sleep on P.J. either. He is solid, and IMO better for our team than tyson right now. Who would you rather go to war with with the game on the line? I think he brings a lot to the table.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Keep Chandler for this season.
> 
> Explore better trades.


Are you sure that that situation was tenable?

There may be some things that you the outsider don't know about the team. True?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

GB said:


> What have we done... what do we have the potential to do?


What have we done?

Divisions?
Conferences?
Playoff series?

Potential?

How many years until we make the Finals?


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Keep Chandler for this season.
> 
> Explore better trades.
> 
> ...


But the problem is that next year you may not find ANY takers for Tyson's salary.

If Tyson were to play for the Bulls next season and fail to show improvement his playing time would decline significantly, and you'd probably be looking at much worse trade scenarios next season.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> Keep Chandler for this season.
> 
> Explore better trades.
> 
> ...



A point yodurk was making earlier is that we may be better suited to pursue a consolidation trade with the expiring contract of PJ Brown than with Chandler and the years left on his large deal. I think this may be true, but it depends on what the team you're trading with is looking before. If they want cap relief along with some young talent, PJ Brown's deal could be an attractive part of the package along with Deng, Duhon, Tyrus, or whatever the other chips are.

It is a gamble, however, because I'd imagine some teams would be interested in cap relief, while others would be interested in taking a gamble on a young player who may yet turn into a rebounding, shot-blocking beast.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> What have we done?



We've become winners baby. A 180 from the Krause days.

Life is good.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

The Truth said:


> But you have to wait and see what the Bulls do with the money once PJs contract is off the books.



No I don't. They are using the money to pay Hinrich, Nocioni and whomever else, do you really think they dumped Chandlers salary to go out and get another expensive player? Lets be realistic here.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> No I don't. They are using the money to pay Hinrich, Nocioni and whomever else, do you really think they dumped Chandlers salary to go out and get another expensive player? Lets be realistic here.


If so...

Hinrich Nocioni > Chandler


Anyone would make that trade.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

GB said:


> If so...
> 
> Hinrich Nocioni > Chandler
> 
> ...



Uhhh..yeah but they didn't HAVE to make a trade to pay Hinrich & Nocioni they could have just opened up the pursestrings a little and went into lux tax area like most of the other profitable teams in the NBA. WHy are you worried about saving the Bulls owners money over fielding a great team?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> Uhhh..yeah but they didn't HAVE to make a trade to pay Hinrich & Nocioni they could have just opened up the pursestrings a little and went into lux tax area like most of the other profitable teams in the NBA. WHy are you worried about saving the Bulls owners money over fielding a great team?


I'm not. But I understand that is a business first of all, and that Reinsdorf has a responsibility to the other owners. He didn't kill our ability to contend...so its not really worth the fuss.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> No I don't. They are using the money to pay Hinrich, Nocioni and whomever else, do you really think they dumped Chandlers salary to go out and get another expensive player? Lets be realistic here.



Of course not. 

The exp deal for consolidation trade is a pipe dream, just like trading Tim Thomas was last year.

And to tell you the truth, trading Tyson and some other good players for a stud and resigning Gordon, Hinrich, Deng and Noc is a pipe dream as well. They are not going to pay the tax.

Stock em deep and sell em cheap.

Once TT matures in 3 years... we're really going to make some noise! YAH!!!!! GO BULLS!!!!! Everything can change in the blink of an eye!!! Larger than Life!!!! You Gotta Be There!!! Look out NBA... if you lock horns with the red and black in the playoffs you might end up like the Miami Heat!!!!


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> What have we done?
> 
> Divisions?
> Conferences?
> ...


LOL. Is it impossible to be optimistic about a young team that's made the playoffs for 2 seasons, added a 4-time DPOY in the offseason, all while adding 2 lottery picks to the roster?

k4e, you play the role of contrarian quite well but at the end of the day I hope you find some enjoyment with this team and where it is heading.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

GB said:


> I'm not. But I understand that is a business first of all, and that Reinsdorf has a responsibility to the other owners. He didn't kill our ability to contend...so its not really worth the fuss.



Of course it is a business but that doesn't mean you can always run it on the cheap, remember the old saying, "It takes money to make money"? Sometimes you have to bite the bullet and pay. I think he didn't kill our chances of contending, they are actually better with Wallace than without, but I think we would have been even more serious contenders with Wallace AND Chandler on board. Now watch us get real close to winning something only to be one 7' rebounding, shot changing player away from doing it.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Once TT matures in 3 years... we're really going to make some noise!


It might start next season.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> What have we done?
> 
> Divisions?
> Conferences?
> ...


Let's look at Finals appearances and records since 1990...

Chicago Bulls(6)(6-0)
Los Angeles Lakers(5)(3-2)
San Antonio Spurs(3)(3-0)
Houston Rockets(2)(2-0)
Detroit Pistons(2)(1-1)
New Jersey Nets(2)(0-2)
New York Knicks(2)(0-2)
Utah Jazz(2)(0-2)
Miami Heat(1)(1-0)
Dallas Mavericks(1)(1-0)
Philadelphia 76ers(1)(0-1)
Indiana Pacers(1)(0-1)
Seattle Sonics(1)(0-1)
Orlando Magic(1)(0-1)
Phoenix Suns(1)(0-1)
Portland Trail Blazers(1)(0-1)

16 teams in 16 years have made the finals. Just over half the league. 9 of those 16 have made one finals appearance. The 9 that made more than 1 were...

Jordan's Bulls
Magic + Shaq & Kobe's Lakers
Duncan's Spurs
Hakeem's Rockets
the Pistons
Kidd's Nets
two seperate Knick teams
Stockton + Malone's Jazz teams

What this proves is that without one of the best players in the history of the game (minus those Knicks teams, Kidd's Nets, and the Pistons who are importantly a recent example) it's hard to make a Finals and even harder to win a Finals. You seem to want a run of 6 NBA Championships in 8 years. Don't be spoiled. Enjoy a team that is going to make the playoffs, maybe make the Finals, probably not and keep building in the hope that one of the guys will be able to lead us there.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

superdave said:


> where it is heading.


Where is it heading?

How long will it take to get there?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

superdave said:


> k4e, you play the role of contrarian quite well but at the end of the day I hope you find some enjoyment with this team and where it is heading.


I hope he views life more positively than how he views his pasttime.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Where is it heading?
> 
> How long will it take to get there?


No predictions here. Just another season of enjoying my team amidst flaky Laker fans in the Land of Botox.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> Of course it is a business but that doesn't mean you can always run it on the cheap, remember the old saying, "It takes money to make money"? Sometimes you have to bite the bullet and pay.


And he will. The owners trust him to make the judgement calls like this one...in his judgement it is too early.

So far he and Pax have hit gold...why stop trusting them now?


----------



## DengNabbit (Feb 23, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> Once TT matures in 3 years... we're really going to make some noise! YAH!!!!! GO BULLS!!!!! Everything can change in the blink of an eye!!! Larger than Life!!!! You Gotta Be There!!! Look out NBA... if you lock horns with the red and black in the playoffs you might end up like the Miami Heat!!!!


you sure seem to want a lot.

you know, rebuilding can go a lot worse than it has here. we've gotten out of it and have one of the most impressive rosters in our conference.

ask Boston about how long rebuilding can take. it may seem like forever since Jordan was winning titles here, but really our turnaround, to get back to this point, has been quicker here than most.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

DengNabbit said:


> you sure seem to want a lot.


Your attention more than anything. 



> you know, rebuilding can go a lot worse than it has here. we've gotten out of it and have one of the most impressive rosters in our conference.
> 
> ask Boston about how long rebuilding can take. it may seem like forever since Jordan was winning titles here, but really our turnaround, to get back to this point, has been quicker here than most.


All hail John Paxson. 

(just wait and see the explosion of anger if he wins Executive of the Year)


----------



## DengNabbit (Feb 23, 2005)

GB said:


> So far he and Pax have hit gold...why stop trusting them now?



exactly. if the last two years have not built your trust in Pax then you likely suffer from one of these two situations:

1) your favorite player(s) got traded/let go and you cannot bounce back from this; 4th grade style

2) you are happy to complain, in general


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

DengNabbit said:


> exactly. if the last two years have not built your trust in Pax then you likely suffer from one of these two situations:
> 
> 1) your favorite player(s) got traded/let go and you cannot bounce back from this; 4th grade style
> 
> 2) you are happy to complain, in general



:greatjob:


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

GB said:


> And he will. The owners trust him to make the judgement calls like this one...in his judgement it is too early.
> 
> So far he and Pax have hit gold...why stop trusting them now?


I do trust Pax for the most part, I don't neccessarily trust that the ownership will pay, if not now when? It seemed a perfect time to me. But, maybe there are other concerns about Tyson and Pax is on the money. I know if Chandler goes to NO and is averaging 10/12 with 2 or 3 blocks a game I will be pissed.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

I hope we can go for another one and done this year!

Hey, it is kind of a dynasty!

Gooooooooooooooooo Buuuuuuuulllssssssssssssssss!


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> I don't neccessarily trust that the ownership will pay, if not now when? It seemed a perfect time to me.


When we are perrenial contenders...very shortly.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

GB said:


> When we are perrenial contenders...very shortly.


I kind of thought that the draft and signing of Wallace, sans the Chandler trade, MADE us perrenial contenders, then the Chandler trade turned us into contenders this year and possibly the next.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> I kind of thought that the draft and signing of Wallace, sans the Chandler trade, MADE us perrenial contenders, then the Chandler trade turned us into contenders this year and possibly the next.


Once it is is borne out in reality...


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

GB said:


> Once it is is borne out in reality...



And if we can't quite get there because we were too cheap along the way?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> And if we can't quite get there because we were too cheap along the way?


He won't pay. 

Virtually no one outside of this board is viewing this as a catastrophic loss for the Bulls, btw.


----------



## Future (Jul 24, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> Of course it is a business but that doesn't mean you can always run it on the cheap, remember the old saying, "It takes money to make money"? Sometimes you have to bite the bullet and pay. I think he didn't kill our chances of contending, they are actually better with Wallace than without, but I think we would have been even more serious contenders with Wallace AND Chandler on board. Now watch us get real close to winning something only to be one 7' rebounding, shot changing player away from doing it.


It's a business, but you also have to spend money wisely. I'm curious, where would you have seen Chandler playing this upcoming season.

I posted this in another thread. I don't think Wallace and Chandler would have started next to each other. I compare this to the Shaq/Zo situation. We all know that those two starting next to each other looked great on paper, but Riley never started them next to each other. Chandler would have come in to back up Ben Wallace.... and paying that much money for a backup is smart?

The Bulls found a cheaper alternative that can defend and hit that 15 ft jumper. The Bulls got a veteran presence in PJ Brown that can actually start next to Ben Wallace or he can come in at backup Ben Wallace at C with Mike Sweetney/Malik Allen starting at PF.


----------



## DengNabbit (Feb 23, 2005)

ace20004u said:


> And if we can't quite get there because we were too cheap along the way?



you'll have to explain how we're being cheap. we just replaced one no-offense PF who makes $10 mil per, and replaced him with a better no-offense PF who makes $15 mil per.


good businesses upgrade their inputs and pay higher buck for them, as the old ones wear out. or once the old ones fully prove they cant catch passes.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Future said:


> It's a business, but you also have to spend money wisely. I'm curious, where would you have seen Chandler playing this upcoming season.
> 
> I posted this in another thread. I don't think Wallace and Chandler would have started next to each other. I compare this to the Shaq/Zo situation. We all know that those two starting next to each other looked great on paper, but Riley never started them next to each other. Chandler would have come in to back up Ben Wallace.... and paying that much money for a backup is smart?
> 
> The Bulls found a cheaper alternative that can defend and hit that 15 ft jumper. The Bulls got a veteran presence in PJ Brown that can actually start next to Ben Wallace or he can come in at backup Ben Wallace at C with Mike Sweetney/Malik Allen starting at PF.



I think Wallace and Chandler would have been fine together. Thats not to say that they would always be in the game at the same time but Chandler could have easily gotten his 30+ mpg backing up Wallace and whomever starts at the 4 (Thomas?). Brown is a rent a player and I don't like the idea of giving up a promising young prospect with the atheltic gifts that Chandler possesses to add a rent a player for a year.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> I think Wallace and Chandler would have been fine together. Thats not to say that they would always be in the game at the same time but Chandler could have easily gotten his 30+ mpg backing up Wallace and whomever starts at the 4 (Thomas?). Brown is a rent a player and I don't like the idea of giving up a promising young prospect with the atheltic gifts that Chandler possesses to add a rent a player for a year.


Agreed....unless we are making a run at the championship.

However, with our roster, I think its unlikely (barring a trade for Garnett). So it begs the question, why did we trade Chandler for essentially nothing? 

The way it stands we'll be lucky to be a 1-4 seed and get to the 2nd round of the playoffs. JMO.


----------



## DengNabbit (Feb 23, 2005)

ace20004u said:


> I think Wallace and Chandler would have been fine together. Thats not to say that they would always be in the game at the same time but Chandler could have easily gotten his 30+ mpg backing up Wallace and whomever starts at the 4 (Thomas?).



Chandler wasnt able to stay on the court for 30 min per game even when he didnt have another all-defense guy next to him.


Skiles would always play Chandler alongside Allen or Sweetney or Harrington, mainly because he didnt want to have a 3 on 5 deal on offense (which i suppose it would have been were Chandler and Schenscher to be on the floor at the same time)

so almost any time Wallace and Tyson would be on the court together, the Bulls would have trouble getting into their offense, be increasingly susceptible to double teams.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

DengNabbit said:


> Chandler wasnt able to stay on the court for 30 min per game even when he didnt have another all-defense guy next to him.
> 
> 
> Skiles would always play Chandler alongside Allen or Sweetney or Harrington, mainly because he didnt want to have a 3 on 5 deal on offense (which i suppose it would have been were Chandler and Schenscher to be on the floor at the same time)
> ...



I think Chandler averaged over 30mpg didn't he? CLose to it at least. My point was that we wouldn't HAVE to have Tyson & Wallace on the floor at the same time to let them both play and be effective. And even if we did have them on the court at the same time, sure, we would be playing 3 on 5 offensively to a point but who would be able to score on us inside? Who would be able to beat Wallace & Chandler both to the rebounds?


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Vintage said:


> Agreed....unless we are making a run at the championship.
> 
> However, with our roster, I think its unlikely (barring a trade for Garnett). So it begs the question, why did we trade Chandler for essentially nothing?
> 
> The way it stands we'll be lucky to be a 1-4 seed and get to the 2nd round of the playoffs. JMO.



I actually expect us to make the ECF and possibly more, even without Chandler. However if we had kept Chandler we might be able to go to the ECF on a regular basis instead of just one or two years.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> I think Chandler averaged over 30mpg didn't he? CLose to it at least.


Career average of 24.4 mpg, with a high season average of a bit over 27 minutes, in the Halcyon days of 2004-5.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

This all comes back to whether Tyrus Thomas will make a significant, Tyson Chandler-like contribution to the team next season. If that is the case, Chandler will be but a faded memory (aside from the inevitable "Official Tyson Chandler Update Thread").


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> I actually expect us to make the ECF and possibly more, even without Chandler. However if we had kept Chandler we might be able to go to the ECF on a regular basis instead of just one or two years.



I must have saw a different team than you did last year.

I saw a team fight hard against a team that didn't look like it was trying very hard in games 1-4, managing to split with them. And then that team played like it should have, and crushed us back to back.

I didn't see an ECF worthy team last year. Adding Ben Wallace inside makes our defense better. I am not doubting that. But I do not see him transforming us from a barely made the playoffs into a Title Contender. He just isn't that much of an impact IMO. In addition, he didn't play well in the Miami series. Sign of age? 

Unless Gordon becomes the star we drafted him to be, Noc plays like he did in the playoffs, Kirk shoots better, and Deng develops....

We are not an ECF team. Though, the aforementioned isn't out of the realm of possibility either.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Vintage said:


> I must have saw a different team than you did last year.
> 
> I saw a team fight hard against a team that didn't look like it was trying very hard in games 1-4, managing to split with them. And then that team played like it should have, and crushed us back to back.
> 
> ...



I think we actually gave Miami more fits than any other team in the playoffs. Even Wade said it was hardest to score against us. And we accomplished all of that with only Chandler as an inside presence (and he isn't a pivot man IMO). Adding Wallace gives us a defensive anchor. Not only did we add Wallace but we added the freakish atheleticism of Tyrus Thomas, Sefolosha, and JR Smith. We also have an inside player who can score a little and lead in PJ Brown. I liked our chances at competing better without the Chandler trade but we made some significant moves. I expect that Tyrus Thomas, Sefolosha & JR Smith are going to give this team more than many are counting on. I think it's ECF or bust for us. And even when Miami did "wake up" they didn't exactly steamroll us.


----------



## Future (Jul 24, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> I think Chandler averaged over 30mpg didn't he?



Malik Allen and Mike Sweetney played more minutes then him in the playoffs.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Future said:


> Malik Allen and Mike Sweetney played more minutes then him in the playoffs.



yeah, amazing how playing a 7'1" 230lbs guy against Shaq would cause said guy to foul so much isn't it?


----------



## Future (Jul 24, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> yeah, amazing how playing a 7'1" 230lbs guy against Shaq would cause said guy to foul so much isn't it?


His career average is 24.4 MPG. He not only gets into foul trouble against Shaq, but many other players around the league. He has a tendency to just stand in the lane with his two arms raised up, and people drag fouls onto him. 

Don't get me wrong, I love Chandler. I loved his intensity, but it isn't needed at his salary and with the amount of minutes he plays, now that we have Ben Wallace.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> yeah, amazing how playing a 7'1" 230lbs guy against Shaq would cause said guy to foul so much isn't it?


Yeah...Tyson was never foul prone, except for when he played Shaq...


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Tyson does foul, he is an interior player, that happens. He didn't have nearly as much trouble staying on the court though until he was moved to the center spot which he is NOT strong enough to play big minutes at.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> ''There never was an understanding there [by Skiles],'' Chandler told WSCR-AM (670). "Never communication. ... It was like there were walls put up there I couldn't break through. That's just the way it was..


No big surprise there. Chandler had very nice things to say about Pax. Look for this to be seen as a terrible trade for the Bulls and Chandler to be better than Wallace the season after next.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

ace20004u said:


> Tyson does foul, he is an interior player, that happens. He didn't have nearly as much trouble staying on the court though until he was moved to the center spot which he is NOT strong enough to play big minutes at.


Oddly enough, the creaky, old PJ Brown, a decent interior defender, managed to log 31 minutes per game last season, a full 4 minutes more than young stud Tyson's career best season.

In his 13 year career, he has logged fewer than Tyon's best minutes mark only once, his rookie season, where he played 24+.


----------



## lister333 (May 6, 2003)

johnston797 said:


> No big surprise there. Chandler had very nice things to say about Pax. Look for this to be seen as a terrible trade for the Bulls and Chandler to be better than Wallace the season after next.


No way baby!! Chandler is too inconsistant. He will never be the type of player with several good games on a row.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Oddly enough, the creaky, old PJ Brown, a decent interior defender, managed to log 31 minutes per game last season, a full 4 minutes more than young stud Tyson's career best season.
> 
> In his 13 year career, he has logged fewer than Tyon's best minutes mark only once, his rookie season, where he played 24+.


PJ Brown was not in the league when he was 19-23. Brown's best years were from 28 to 35. But you probably knew that.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

johnston797 said:


> PJ Brown was not in the league when he was 19-23. Brown's best years were from 28 to 35. But you probably knew that.


No, he went to college and learn how to play basketball there. Without pay.

I knew that too.


In any event, Brown's rookie year minutes are equal to Chandler's career average, and Brown has only dipped below 30 minutes per game average in 2 years of his 13.

Because he stays out of foul trouble.

Tyson doesn't and never has. Not even in the good year.


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

Heh, we all have our opinions, so I might as well throw mine in.

Chandler should not have been traded. Like someone else said, trading Chandler for Smith, who are solely being based on what they *could* be, and P.J Brown doesn't seem to make too much sense to me. Maybe someone can explain to me why gaining a few extra million off of Brown's expiring contract gave Paxson enough interest to do this trade? 

If I remember correctly, everyone says that good big men are harder to come by than guards in the NBA. So, why trade away a big man for a guard who have the same amount of potential of reaching success in the league while we already have our backcourt solidified?

In any case, I'll miss Chandler, and I hope he succeeds in NO. It's tough to watch someone you had such high hopes for be let off the hook early. Big Ben may've been able to have a profound effect on Chandler, but now we'll never know.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

This thread is flat-out hilarious.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

ScottMay said:


> This thread is flat-out hilarious.


Funny like a kick in the crotch.


----------



## SamTheMan67 (Jan 4, 2004)

Tyson chandler - chris paul = Cedric simmons


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

SamTheMan67 said:


> Tyson chandler - chris paul = Cedric simmons


:no:


----------

