# Value of Marshall and Rose



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Today's Toronto Sun says its roughly Malik Allen and slumping 33-yr old Eddie Jones.

Jones, like Rose, has another 2 years after this one at the Max.

Well, unlike VC, Rose's value looks to be about the same around the league as last year.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Marshall/Rose have been healthy all season. Alston and Bosh playing well. Carter missed 4 games (before being traded).

8-17

Rose will become the #1 option in TOR now. Hello lottery pick.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Add to that the fact Rose has 1 year less to his contract and Yell is expiring - their value is supposed to be higher now...


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Marshall has not been "healthy all season", just so's you know. :greatjob:


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> Marshall has not been "healthy all season", just so's you know. :greatjob:


You are correct Shammy, my bad.

I just think its strange how people long for the days of Jalen Rose around here. Let it go.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

i wonder how the raptors would be going forward with antonio davis and JYD in place of Jalen and Marshall?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> i wonder how the raptors would be going forward with antonio davis and JYD in place of Jalen and Marshall?


Hard to say actually since Alston and Bosh are their best players. And oh yeah some guy named Vince, whom they traded away.

Going forward, do you think TOR or CHI is in a better position to win long term? Just curious.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Hard to say actually since Alston and Bosh are their best players. And oh yeah some guy named Vince, whom they traded away.
> ...


At first pass, I think the Raptors are in better shape. They very well may have 3 decent 1st round picks this year, Bosh, Alston, Mo Pete and a solid veteran core in Rose, Marshall, Williams 1, Williams 2, and Zo. I don’t think the Raptors, as they stand right now, get their asses handed to them every night. Competitive ball is an OK environment to develop young players, IMO.

Seems like Miami is really interested in trading for Jalen Rose, in order to help them win a title in the next 2 years..... so he may be shipped out of there for Jones. I've heard Zo and Rose for Jones and ???? ... this trade does not look like enough to get them far enough under the cap to make deals... but i'm no cap-ol-o-gist and i don't know what the # will be for next year.

If the Bulls lose the towers for pike and othella like players... then the Raptors are in much better shape. I'm not optimistic on any big name FAs choosing to play for Skiles and Pax.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

the rumor is

Jones
Malik Allen
Dorrell Wright
Wesley Person

for

Rose
Marshall

also ive heard the heat most likely will give cash to the raptors for them to use to buy out Zo, and then Zo as a fa.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> i wonder how the raptors would be going forward with antonio davis and JYD in place of Jalen and Marshall?


One year closer to having an expiring max contract for a non-max performer coming off their books.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>transplant</b>!
> 
> 
> One year closer to having an expiring max contract for a non-max performer coming off their books.


true... but soul-crushing blowouts have a price as well... espeically when you are trying to develop young players.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> true... but soul-crushing blowouts have a price as well... espeically when you are trying to develop young players.


Yeah, those soul-crushing blowouts are a *****. Thank God we don't have to worry about those anymore.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> true... but soul-crushing blowouts have a price as well... espeically when you are trying to develop young players.


But if the last 10 games are any indication, the Bulls have passed through the period of "soul-crushing blowouts" with their souls intact. This group, even in the midst of those blowouts, seemed to be more resilient than past groups. At this point, some credit has to be given to Paxson and Skiles for implementing a plan that seems to have largely worked. I argued for keeping Crawford to save the young Bulls from the "soul-crushing blowouts," but they appear to have survived them without Crawford and now are playing good ball.

For the most part, I would have to argue right now that Paxson and Skiles were right and I was wrong. It was not the first time, nor will it be the last time. But throughout (except with the Corie Blount situation), I have tried to be tempered in my criticism; even in the darkest days it was possible to imagine how their plan might work. Now I am not saying the Bulls are out of the woods yet, but there have been preciously few periods (outside of the tail end of seasons) where the Bulls have played as well as they have over these last 10 games. Credit should be given where credit is due. Good job Paxson and Skiles.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

QUESTION :

Why exactly is TORONTO trying to trading DONYELL MARSHALL?


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>transplant</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah, those soul-crushing blowouts are a *****. Thank God we don't have to worry about those anymore.


I would like to apologize to the moderators and any others offended by my coarse language. I didn't realize that you couldn't use the "female dog" word.

It won't happen again.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>transplant</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah, those soul-crushing blowouts are a *****. Thank God we don't have to worry about those anymore.


Yeah... but since the development of the towers has been stunted so... it really puts Paxson in a bind. 

He still does not really know what he has... and decision time is quickly approaching.

I think Toronto made an OK trade, given the circumstances.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The ROY</b>!
> QUESTION :
> 
> Why exactly is TORONTO trying to trading DONYELL MARSHALL?


I don't know that they are. Then again, the Bulls weren't trying to trade Marshall either. 

When healthy, he's easily worth his $4.5MM, so that makes him attractive. Even if a team doesn't like him, the fact that he's on the last year of his contract also makes him a nice trading asset, particularly if you're trying to package him with an overpaid player (like Rose).


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dan Rosenbaum</b>!
> 
> But if the last 10 games are any indication, the Bulls have passed through the period of "soul-crushing blowouts" with their souls intact. This group, even in the midst of those blowouts, seemed to be more resilient than past groups. At this point, some credit has to be given to Paxson and Skiles for implementing a plan that seems to have largely worked. I argued for keeping Crawford to save the young Bulls from the "soul-crushing blowouts," but they appear to have survived them without Crawford and now are playing good ball.
> 
> For the most part, I would have to argue right now that Paxson and Skiles were right and I was wrong. It was not the first time, nor will it be the last time. But throughout (except with the Corie Blount situation), I have tried to be tempered in my criticism; even in the darkest days it was possible to imagine how their plan might work. Now I am not saying the Bulls are out of the woods yet, but there have been preciously few periods (outside of the tail end of seasons) where the Bulls have played as well as they have over these last 10 games. Credit should be given where credit is due. Good job Paxson and Skiles.


The last 10 games have been encouraging.

But, the paper still says 6-15 next to Chicago Bulls. 23-24 wins @ this rate. But... the way the team is playing... I'll give Pax some props on bringing in some productive young players. He didn't blow the lottery picks. The mood of the club seems improved. I hope this good run continues.

Its been a long 6 years of watching young teams struggle. The "soul-crushing" complaint does not only apply to Pax... but to Kruase as well.

I won't give Pax real props until I see what he does with Curry/Chandler. If the team is still playing well, and that situation is resolved satisfactorily, I'll be asking to leave the "Fire Pax" club.

... and I still think he should have received more for Crawford.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> The last 10 games have been encouraging.
> ...


Nice post.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> i wonder how the raptors would be going forward with antonio davis and JYD in place of Jalen and Marshall?


Probably about the same rate that they're doing now. Which isn't encouraging for Raptors fans. Bulls are on the verge of overtaking the Raptors in the win-loss column, and they've already overtaken them on the power rankings.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>yodurk</b>!
> 
> 
> Probably about the same rate that they're doing now. Which isn't encouraging for Raptors fans. Bulls are on the verge of overtaking the Raptors in the win-loss column, and they've already overtaken them on the power rankings.


Yah... and I think the Raptors get blown out without those guys going forward.

I wonder how long it will take for the raptors to be good again.

Alston
Bosh
Rose
Marshall
mo pete
eric williams
ZO
a williams
l murray
m palacio

3 1st round picks, 1 to 2 lottery picks
MLE

doubtful it takes them too long to be in the playoffs again. IMO.

you ready to give curry the MAX? :uhoh: chandler? :uhoh: 
big decisions need to be made in the next 2 months.

somebody better tell the intern to update the power rankings.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> Yah... and I think the Raptors get blown out without those guys going forward.
> ...


That team is horrible. If you are inferring that they are in better shape then the Bulls in the near future, well that is laughable at this point.

If we extend Curry and Chandler to let's say 10M a year contracts, we'll still be in a better cap situation that TOR. Its that bad there.

Marshall will be leaving after this season, so the Raps will have 2 mid 1st rounders (does Rafael Araujo have a brother?) and the MLE to work with. Oh wait, every other team in the NBA that is over the cap has that too. I'm not sure there are many players in a rush to put down roots in TOR, much less with Mitchell at the helm.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> The last 10 games have been encouraging.
> ...


I don't think the "at this rate" stuff is valid right now. If you actually think we'll end up with 23-24 wins, you're entitled to your opinion, but I beg to disagree. The Bulls are clearly not playing at the rate they started. They were 0-9 and at that rate they would have had 0 wins. The Bulls have won their last 3 in a row. At that rate they won't lose again for the last of the year. Which do you want to believe? Neither, I hope. I believe this is a changed team. They're not world-beaters for sure, but I think they can be competitve right now with most teams in the league, and that's a good feeling.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I am really going out on a limb now but the bulls win 30 games and finish 9th in the east. Deng gets a second wind and gordon keeps improving. The C's show matuity and pax signs they both to around 6 to 7 million a year this summer. I just wish we could find a starting SG with size, who plays nasty D. I can hope.

david


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> That team is horrible. If you are inferring that they are in better shape then the Bulls in the near future, well that is laughable at this point.
> ...


Right, but the cap situation, in terms of being able to attract NBA talent via free agency, is all but useless in both cases, IMO. Players are probably not going to choose to play in either place. I'll admit I don't know the Toronto ownership's philosophies about going over the salary cap into luxury land... but I sure do know the Bulls.

10 mil a year each for Chandler and Curry? We'll see if Uncle Jerry signs off on that. Even I'm hesitant to do such a thing... and I'm a fan of the towers. I'm glad you're so confident that the towers situation will be resolved satisfactorily. You must have some inside info or something.

SO.... assuming that they resign the towers.... here's my thoughts.

Skip To My Lou is a solid PG prospect. That matches up with Hinrich pretty well.

Bosh is a talented young big man... that matches up with either one of our towers.

The Raptors have an advantage over the Bulls in terms of veteran players. Rose, Marshall, E Williams, L Murray, ZO >>>>> AD, Pike, Othella, Griffin. No contest on this one really.

Mo Pete... He's OK. He's > Chapu @ this stage of their careers.

Let's say that the Bulls probably won't have a top 3 pick this season. I think that's fair. So no draft pick for the Bulls.

We're left with a tower, Deng and Gordon on the Bulls side... and 2 probable lottery picks and a late pick for the Raptors. The Philly pick is a ?, but the #s say that they would be more probable to get that pick at this point than any other pick.

So... They have the 6th and 10th pick in the draft. Can they turn those into 2 deng/iggy/bierdens types... or a luke jackson type. Its a ?, no doubt. Gordon is not a lock to be a star @ this point either... hes on-again, off-again at this point. If the 2004 draft if reheld today... Gordon does not go #3, IMO. The Raptors have a chance to match Deng/Gordon with these 2 lotto picks. The Bulls are in better shape though.... due to the uncertainty on the Raptors side.

Raptors grab a project with the Nuggets pick. Can they get a Josh Smith type? 

The Bulls still have a tower unmatched... and the much-ballyhooed cap space. We'll see about the cap space. Color me skeptical.

TEAM 1
Alston, Bosh, 2 lotto picks, Mo Pete, Rose, Marshall (if they are willing, TOR has the best chance to resign him), E Williams, ZO, L Murray, late 1st, MLE, A Williams.

TEAM 2
Hinrich, Deng, Gordon, Curry, Chandler, Chapu, MLE, cap space (for 1 potential star).

If its "laughable" that TEAM 1 ends up better than TEAM 2.... well... as a Bulls fan I wish it was as clear to me as it is for you.

ASSUMPTIONS.

1.) Paxson does not screw up the towers situation.
2.) Toronto does not continue to blow up their team by trading their still-capable vets for crap.
3.) Toronto gets the Philly pick this season.
4.) Toronto resigns Marshall. Who is going to offer him more than the MLE? Why wouldn't Toronto pay more?
5.) Philly stays where they are at standings wise and gets their most probable pick.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>giusd</b>!
> The C's show matuity and pax signs they both to around 6 to 7 million a year this summer.
> david


I honestly don't believe Curry will be "had" for 6 or 7 million, Tyson maybe, but not Eddy.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> TEAM 1
> Alston, Bosh, 2 lotto picks, Mo Pete, Rose, Marshall (if they are willing, TOR has the best chance to resign him), E Williams, ZO, L Murray, late 1st, MLE, A Williams.
> ...



==========
Now, Zo will never play for the Raptors.

And, Marshall is almost assuredly gone too as Raptors will not resign him with Bosh, A. Williams, Rose, Mo Pete and E. Williams all signed for next year and beyond.

It looks like you are looking 2 years out: So E. Williams and A. Williams should be removed too. They will be 34 and 36 year old FAs.

You said:

Bosh, Alston and Mo Pete = One tower, Kirk and Chapu. 

So in 2 years that leaves:

Raptors: more-broken down Rose + 4 draft picks

(By the way, Raps also owe a 1st round pick to Cleveland. Must be Toronto's. No option. No due date. Top-13 protected through 2008. Unprotected in 2009.)

Bulls: one tower, Deng, Gordon, 1 draft pick + cap space

So it's an easy call to me: 1 tower, Deng and Gordon, cap space are better than a net 3 1st rounders and Rose.

And yes this assumes Pax re-signs the towers or gets equal value back in trade.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yah...i just read that Zo is out.

1.) It should not be a lock that the Raptors don't bring Marshall back, if they have the option. I'd be pretty pissed as a Raptors fan if they did that... but... if you think that assumption is a lock, then it swings things towards the Bulls.

2.) At present, the Raptors have better veteran talent than the Bulls.


If you ignore the veteran advantage, which you did other than Rose, than yes, the raptors are better off since the draft picks are unknown and tower, deng and gordon are known.

But... the veteran advantage is real.... and should not be ignored.

The other advantage that the Raptors have is a GM who can make a good trade. Paxson has not shown this skill yet.

The Raptors could have dumped the sulking Carter for veteran trash and called it "addition by subtraction".... Paxson style. But... he managed to put his team in a pretty good position to get respectable again in a hurry.

I don't think it will be a multi-year rebuilding process in Toronto….if they hang on to the vets and resign Marshall. I have not seen anything that indicates it’s a lock that they won’t resign Marshall if they have the oppertunity.

Let’s hope Krause’s towers can lead our Bulls to the promised land.

Right now, today, the Raptors have an OK team. 
I think they are better today than they were a week ago…. And better off for the future. Nice job by the Raptors.

EDIT: I would not be shocked if the Bulls end up better off. I just don't think its "laughable" scenario that then Raptors end up better off.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

When do you start counting the Bulls players as vets?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> When do you start counting the Bulls players as vets?



don't know.... but good question.
yah, the towers have been in the league for 4 years.... but i clearly would not use that word to describe them.

out of our young guys... hinrich would be the closest thing we'll have.

once they start playing like vets would be my answer. consistent, steady confidence and predictable production.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> once they start playing like vets would be my answer. consistent, steady confidence and predictable production.



At what point do you see Jalen becoming a vet then?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBulls2315</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> At what point do you see Jalen becoming a vet then?




Jalen's production is predictable over the course of a several games. You may not like it... but you know his game. He knows his game as well. 

Not every player, in any sport, gives a similar performance from game to game. I'm not sure if that's good or bad.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

*sticks head in*

http://www.82games.com/rolandratings0405.htm

*skips away*


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> *sticks head in*
> 
> http://www.82games.com/rolandratings0405.htm
> ...


wow... the nets must have been *idiots* to trade for vince carter.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Almost as stupid as anyone who trades for Jalen. :greatjob:


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> Almost as stupid as anyone who trades for Jalen. :greatjob:


funny.

so you think the nets were stupid for trading for vince carter?

really?

wow.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

I think the Nets haven't got a clue what they are doing.



They decided not to build around Kenyon Martin, but to build around Richard Jefferson. They trade Martin for picks, and sign Jefferson for way too much. 

:| number 1. 




They then set about cutting all possible salary, by freeing themselves of Lucious Harris for cheap, gifting away Kerry Kittles for nothing, padding out their roster with incredibly cheap tat, and by trying to encourage Mourning to quit. 

:| number 2. 




They then seemingly change their mind on the cost cutting by bottling trading Jason Kidd and his monstrously big contract when anumber of options were available to them, and cement themselves in contractual hell for a while by taking on the deal of Vince Carter. This leaves them with an exciting and high quality starters at the 1/2/3 positions, but with absolutely nothing up front, and no chance of winning anything. 

:| 3, you're out. 






And I think you're doing a fine job of changing the subject when it suits ya.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My point was that +/- alone does not tell the whole story, IMO. Carter is on that list too... does that make him a negative? We'll see in New Jersey. Change the dynamics and those +/- values can change. 

Meanwhile... Jalen Rose, Donyell Marshall, Mo Pete and Lamond Murray.... the veteran core of the Raptors.... lead them to a much needed victory over Jason Kidd, RJeff and the Nets today.

Call me crazy... but I'm not convinced that the Raptors are going to be a horrible team after this trade.

As for the Nets... Kidd, Carter and Reff seem like a pretty solid core. I don't remember all the drama behind them dumping Martin. Kittles...ick… he was hurt anyway it seems. 

At the start of the year the Nets were the armpit of the NBA. That was good enough to beat the Bulls opening night, but you get my drift.

Now they will be one of the more exciting teams in the league. Will this translate to wins? Time will tell. I know I’m interested in the New Jersey Nets again.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> Yah...i just read that Zo is out.
> ...


I'll bet you a c-note Marshall doesn't resign in TOR. If this team has any chance at being anything... why doesn't Zo want to play for them?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> I'll bet you a c-note Marshall doesn't resign in TOR. If this team has any chance at being anything... why doesn't Zo want to play for them?


I don't think ZO wants to fight through that troublesome kidney situation and his injuries for an average team.

The fact he's playing NBA basketball again is remarkable... and shows how big a heart that guy has.

I would bet that he didn't fight through that horrible illness in order to play for a team in rebuilding mode.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> Yah...i just read that Zo is out.
> ...


They have some decent players in Rose, Marshall, Bosh, and Alston. Rose can't carry a team anymore, and doesn't play good defense. Marshall and Bosh play the same position; Marshall is better but Bosh starts for development purposes. It's not guaranteed at all that they resign Marshall this year-- why would they? To just miss out on the playoffs for like the 4th straight year? Oh yeah, they have a GM that took Rafael Araujo over Andre Iguodala in last year's draft :dead: . Yeah, great move there. I doubt they make the playoffs this year. The rest of their veteran "talent" is pretty mediocre. 

Also, Rose is taking up a huge amount of cap space, so it's doubtful that they get under the cap for the next 3 years. As for the lottery picks, it's my strong understanding that the picks will probably end up in the mid to late teens, where role players, not stars, are taken. So it's not as if that will help them out too much.

In sum, they're in the worst possible situation for an NBA franchise: not good enough to make the playoffs (or at best an 8th seed), yet very little young talent waiting in the wings (Bosh), and a horrible cap situation. You need talent to win in the NBA; they have grinders. They have no way to get talent because they have no cap space and draft choices always take a couple years to develop. I see at least 2 more years of losing for them, maybe more. The Vince trade was decent, but they still have a long way to go. 

Their situation sucks. I don't see how you can be so optimistic here. At the present, you couldn't find a single NBA fan to take their roster over ours.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> If we extend Curry and Chandler to let's say 10M a year contracts, we'll still be in a better cap situation that TOR. Its that bad there...





> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 10 mil a year each for Chandler and Curry? We'll see if Uncle Jerry signs off on that. Even I'm hesitant to do such a thing... and I'm a fan of the towers. I'm glad you're so confident that the towers situation will be resolved satisfactorily. You must have some inside info or something.


http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/col_mcgraw.asp?intID=38341103

<b>Even if the Bulls end up paying Curry and Chandler $10 million each next season - there's a good chance they'll cost less - the team will still be close to $10 million below the salary cap in 2006. </b>Curry has finally tasted some NBA success and should be motivated to keep doing things the right way. The Bulls, meanwhile, have spent the past two weeks feasting on opponents who can't match up inside. 

The Bulls officially have no excuse for not re-signing Eddy and Tyson. :grinning:


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

toronto had a 17 game stretch that was Bullesque. They won 2 games out of the 17. That is with and without Carter. With that winning record, one would think they had some former Bulls players playing for them! 

Oh wait.... 

To say Rose can't carry a team is an understatement. We saw that here. 

I do admit however, having Jalen on this team did help Curry in the sense that teams keyed on Jalen when it came to defense. 

If the Raptors trade Rose to Miami for Jones, that would be a good trade for them. At least Jones will bring a little D along with similar offensive numbers. 

As for Marshall? I too predict that he will not resign with the Raptors. He will try and hook up with a veteran team. Next season the Raptors will be going young with their draft picks. 

I do like E Williams and also like A Williams. How times have changed! Just a couple of years ago, if someone were to mention a trade like this involving Carter they would have been laughed off of any messageboard on the internet. 

Who got the better of the deal? I don't know. NJ missed Martin. So what do they do? Trade off more up front players! Makes since to me. :no:


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rwj333</b>!
> Their situation sucks. I don't see how you can be so optimistic here. At the present, you couldn't find a single NBA fan to take their roster over ours.


I don't think I'm being overly optimistic.

THIS YEAR:
Solid vets in Rose, Marshall, Eric Williams, Mo Pete, Lamond Murray, Alston
Good young player in Bosh

NEXT YEAR:
Why not resign Marshall? Who out there is going to offer him more than the MLE? Why wouldn't Toronto match or exceed that by a little? (if I’m missing some cap rule, please correct me)
They have their own lotto pick. As it stands right now its most probable spot is #6.
They have Philly's if its not top 8 I believe. Right now Philly's most probable spot is #10.
They get Denver's pick if its not top 3 I believe. Right now Denver's most probable spot is around #20.

That gives them Bosh, 1 #6 pick, a late lotto pick and a #20. The vets are coming back. Sorry, I think that's an OK team. Pretty good job of rebuilding quick. 

Yah... talent wins. With Alston, Bosh, a #6 and a #10 surrounded by a solid veteran core it seems like they may have it.

Rose does not have to carry that team. No one really does. Its just a group of solid players.

There are assumptions being made... but they seem reasonable.
Assuming Marshall resigns and they get Philly's pick is no worse than assuming Pax does not botch the towers situation.

The Raptors have been kinda crappy this year (better than the bulls though).... but the dark cloud of the VC situation has lifted and they just added Eric Williams and Aaron Williams (who I too like).... Marshall is back... I think the Raptors are better off going forward this year.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sure Reinsdorf's attitude will be changed by this Daily Herald article.  

I agree... there is no excuse for not resigning them. Does not mean its gonna go down that way.

This has been an interesting discussion, IMO. We'll just have to see how the season plays out.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think I'm being overly optimistic.
> ...


'Assuming Marshall resigns....'

Again, I'll bet you a c-note that he doesn't. You haven't backed up your argument with anything other than personal opinion. Things being the same this offseason, TOR will be at/near the luxury tax, will be paying Eric Williams and Aaron Williams ~7.5M next season (who serve essentially the same function as Marshall for the team), and will only be able to offer the MLE to Marshall.

Would it be wise for TOR to resign him to the MLE, putting themselves over the LT threshold, and have him steal minutes from Bosh, the two Williamses and draft picks? I don't think so.

You are free to think the Raps are in a better situation than the Bulls. The Marshall re-signing thing just boggles my mind.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> Yah... talent wins. With Alston, Bosh, a #6 and a #10 surrounded by a solid veteran core it seems like they may have it.


#6 this year was Josh Childress

#10 was Luke Jackson.

Given their Ownership track record, their GM's track record, the problem in getting FAs to Canada, and their lack of cap space, I can't think of a team in a worse position.

Although GSW may give them a run for the money.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> #6 this year was Josh Childress
> ...


At this point they have about 55M in guaranteed money next season and 50M the year thereafter. This is not including 3 first rounders who need to be signed.

Marshall and Bonner are both likely to depart elsewhere this offseason.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> #6 this year was Josh Childress
> ...


That's lame. 

#7 was Deng, #9 was Iggy and #11 was Biedrins.

Lotsa cocky Bulls fans around here.

I guess I didn't get my serving of kool-aid.

I'll check back here Wednesday night around 11PM and see what the mood is like.

THE RAPTORS HAVE A BETTER RECORD THAN THE BULLS!

As for track records... do you really want to compare these teams over the last few years?


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> toronto had a 17 game stretch that was Bullesque. They won 2 games out of the 17. That is with and without Carter. With that winning record, one would think they had some former Bulls players playing for them!
> 
> Oh wait....
> ...












Chief Trueblue speakum BIG truth.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> That's lame.
> ...


Guess who picked #8?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> THE RAPTORS HAVE A BETTER RECORD THAN THE BULLS!


Not for long.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> THE RAPTORS HAVE A BETTER RECORD THAN THE BULLS!


Actually, in the standings, they're even. The raps are two up in the win column and two down in the loss column.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually, in the standings, they're even. The raps are two up in the win column and two down in the loss column.


wow... great point.... i was not clear enough what i meant by "better record."  

THE RAPTORS HAVE A BETTER WINNING PERCENTAGE THAN THE BULLS!

better?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Not for long.



Care to pick the date this happens?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Guess who picked #8?


another great point!


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> Care to pick the date this happens?


It will happen in an even shorter period of time than since the time you were crowing about the 3-0 & UNDEFEATED RAPTORS.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> another great point!


so you're trying to say that two mid-lottery draft picks are certain to play key roles in keeping an otherwise mediocre-to-bad team afloat? 

you're basically saying that adding 2 mid-lottery draft picks to a currently pretty bad Raptor team that may or may not have Marshall next year will make them good. Looking at who was picked there this year is a perfectly good way to poke holes in that theory.


----------



## -James- (Apr 27, 2004)

i think mo is being greatly undervalued in this thread. i see him as a younger, way more athletic eddie jones, with explosiveness and an ability to finish at the rim. he may be streaky, but his long-range shot is usually on point and he gets to the free throw line a lot. that also fails to mention his exceptional (sp?) perimeter defence which is probably highly underrated. in the right situation he will flourish. the reason he hasnt put up big numbers the last two season is because he is usually inconsistant but if he can get more stability in his play, he can probably lead the raptors until bosh and skip are ready.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> 'Assuming Marshall resigns....'
> ...



Just for the record, I never said that the Raptors WOULD resign Marshall. I was asking why they wouldn't. Your version of what could happen may be what goes down. We'll see. It makes sense... but its just your personal opinion as well. 

I don't feel strongly one way or the other about this... you asked me who's better off... i said "at first pass" the raptors are better off... but after thinking about it more i said that i would not be surprised if the bulls end up better.

Its a toss up, IMO.

I think the Raptors did a good job with that trade, given the situation they were in.

As for comparing the two teams... I don't think the current Bulls are head and shoulders above the Raptors right now...if at all. Both teams have been pretty brutal so far this year. The Bulls have improved over the last two weeks... and I think the Raptors will be a better team by replacing the sulking, indifferent Carter with Eric Williams and Aaron Williams.

The cap space is meaningless IMO.... at least when it comes to free agents. 

It all comes down to the towers on the Bulls end of the equation. 
Can Chandler stay healthy? Does Curry want to win? Will Uncle Jerry pony up the necessary cash? Can Paxson get a better return on his trades than he did with Rose, Marshall and Crawford?

I'm glad the Bulls are playing better... but there is still much up in the air.

It would not shock me if the Raptors are a better team than the Bulls in 2 years.... but most of that hinges on how the towers situation is resolved.


----------



## djsmokyc (Jan 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> 'Assuming Marshall resigns....'
> ...


The Raptors will have full Bird rights on Marshall, since he hasn't changed teams due to free agency in the last three seasons. They would be able to re-sign him up to the maximum. However, he is unrestricted and would be able to sign anywhere he wants.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> 
> 
> so you're trying to say that two mid-lottery draft picks are certain to play key roles in keeping an otherwise mediocre-to-bad team afloat?
> ...


Right.. but looking who was drafted at #7 and #11 does not. Take a look at the last few drafts and who is available *AROUND* #6 and #10. Those are some good players. Deng, Iggy and Biedrens. Hinrich, Pietrus and Ridnour. Nene, Amare and Caron. Jamal, Joe Johnson and RJeff. Yes, there are some stiffs as well… but that’s the nature of draft picks.

I think the Raptors are in a good position to start rebuilding without being an embarrassment. 

We'll see what happens. Currently they have a better winning percentage than the bulls. I think that Eric Williams, Donyell Marshall, Jalen Rose and Alston are average to above average NBA basketball players and that Bosh is a promising young big man. Do you disagree with this?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>djsmokyc</b>!
> 
> 
> The Raptors will have full Bird rights on Marshall, since he hasn't changed teams due to free agency in the last three seasons. They would be able to re-sign him up to the maximum. However, he is unrestricted and would be able to sign anywhere he wants.


Thanks for finding this out. VD's analysis seemed fishy to me as well.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> Right.. but looking who was drafted at #7 and #11 does not. Take a look at the last few drafts and who is available *AROUND* #6 and #10. Those are some good players. Deng, Iggy and Biedrens. Hinrich, Pietrus and Ridnour. Nene, Amare and Caron. Jamal, Joe Johnson and RJeff. Yes, there are some stiffs as well… but that’s the nature of draft picks.
> ...


I think, if Paxson had made the same deal as the Raptors did, a certain throng on this board would decry it is "talent for grinders" or "traded a young star away for (almost) NOTHING". Sound familiar? It should. In related, I think the Williamses are veteran, somewhat more talented versions of the grinders Pax brought in last season in his much-maligned attempt to change the atmosphere. They might make the Raptors a more hard-working and consistent team, but not really a better one. I think Rose sucks. I have since 2002. I wish we hadn't had to trade Marshall to get rid of him, but I don't think Marshall is the difference between being good and being bad. I don't think their veteran core is much better than ours, and we have a LOT more young talent at this stage. Bosh is the only one on that team I'd like to have, and maybe Alston.

Betting on a couple draft picks to raise a team up is risky these days. We had #4 and #7 a few years back. A whole lot of good it did us. We drafted the #2 and #4 the next year (and gave up Brand of course) and only this year are those guys coming to play every night, finger crossed. We had #3 and #7 this year and perhaps we got it right this time. Toronto COULD make good picks and turn things around, but recent history suggests it's not too likely. More likely they get one good player and one project or bust, IMO.

Funny, Toronto found itself in a similar position to us this year and have done similar things to rectify the problem. The team didn't play hard, its star was selfish and petulent, the team didn't respond to its coach. What did they do? Trade away the star for less talent and better attitude, and add a pick for a chance to add youth the next offseason. Why does that sound so freaking familiar? And why do you praise it when another team does it, but constantly criticize the GM of the team you claim to root for?


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>djsmokyc</b>!
> 
> 
> The Raptors will have full Bird rights on Marshall, since he hasn't changed teams due to free agency in the last three seasons. They would be able to re-sign him up to the maximum. *However, he is unrestricted and would be able to sign anywhere he wants. *


This is the key sentence, k4e. We know that Toronto can resign him, but Marshall doesn't have to take their offer unless it's for much more than he can get elsewhere. And I really doubt TO will dedicate all that much long-term cash to him with Rose's contract around their necks and Bosh's extension on the horizon.

Given TO's current play, I think Marshall might choose to go to a team with more of a chance at winning, but he did sign with the Bulls last time, so you never know.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> 
> 
> I think, if Paxson had made the same deal as the Raptors did, a certain throng on this board would decry it is "talent for grinders" or "traded a young star away for (almost) NOTHING".


I think Eric Williams is a pretty damn good basketball player... and the potential #10 pick in the draft along with the #20 is a nice deal.

That's so much better than Pike, Othella, Trabanski and FWILL its not even funny. Come on. Granted, Carter commands more in a trade than Jamal did this off-season (this might be slightly different now). 



> Betting on a couple draft picks to raise a team up is risky these days. We had #4 and #7 a few years back. A whole lot of good it did us. We drafted the #2 and #4 the next year (and gave up Brand of course) and only this year are those guys coming to play every night, finger crossed. We had #3 and #7 this year and perhaps we got it right this time. Toronto COULD make good picks and turn things around, but recent history suggests it's not too likely. More likely they get one good player and one project or bust, IMO.


Yeah, that could happen. They decided they wanted to ditch the indifferent Carter and got some assets in return. MUCH different than how Pax handled Rose and Crawford.



> Funny, Toronto found itself in a similar position to us this year and have done similar things to rectify the problem. The team didn't play hard, its star was selfish and petulent, the team didn't respond to its coach. What did they do? Trade away the star for less talent and better attitude, and add a pick for a chance to add youth the next offseason. Why does that sound so freaking familiar? And why do you praise it when another team does it, but constantly criticize the GM of the team you claim to root for?


The ways they rectified the problems were not similar at all. Toronto got Eric Williams, a lottery pick and another 1st round pick. Paxson got NOTHING.

Completely, completely different, IMO.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> 
> 
> This is the key sentence, k4e. We know that Toronto can resign him, but Marshall doesn't have to take their offer unless it's for much more than he can get elsewhere. And I really doubt TO will dedicate all that much long-term cash to him with Rose's contract around their necks and Bosh's extension on the horizon.
> ...


Assumptions need to be made left and right here.... we'll see what happens.

At least it seems the Raptors can resign him if they want to pay more than the MLE. If they want to or if Marshall wants to play there remains to be seen. I don't really care to tell you the truth! 

In order for the Bulls to be even close.... Paxson can't botch the towers situation.

It would not surprise me if the Bulls end up better off. It could happen. I think the Raptors did a good job exiting a bad situation.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> I think Eric Williams is a pretty damn good basketball player... and the potential #10 pick in the draft along with the #20 is a nice deal.


He's a decent glue guy to have around. Plays defense, occasionally hits an open shot. A SF version of AD, except younger. I like the guy, but he's not all that good. The picks they got back are a function of Carter's value being much, much higher than Rose or Crawford's were when we had to deal them. Even when he's injured and pouting, Carter puts people in the seats and occasionally plays like a superstar.



> That's so much better than Pike, Othella, Trabanski and FWILL its not even funny. Come on. Granted, Carter commands more in a trade than Jamal did this off-season (this might be slightly different now).


Vince, even injured, had more value than Crawford (or Rose). Isiah was the only one willing to offer more than the MLE that we know of, or willing to negotiate a sign and trade. And scoff at the vets we got all you want, but Pike and Othella are passable role players. Not quite as good, but not that much different than the Williamses in my opinion. The picks are nice, I agree. I'm sure Pax would have tried to get them included in his deals if he was dealing players with more trade value (or trading with a team other than NYK, who has already traded away their future).



> Yeah, that could happen. They decided they wanted to ditch the indifferent Carter and got some assets in return. MUCH different than how Pax handled Rose and Crawford.


Carter was indifferent. Rose was a malcontent. Rose cared more about starting the game than winning it. Carter didn't seem to care much about anything. The Bulls brought in less-talented players who would work harder by getting rid of him. How is that ANY different than what Toronto did with Carter, other than the fact that Carter's market value was higher than Jalen's, so they could get more back (ie the pick)? As far as Crawford, Pax didn't want to commit long-term money to him and dealt him for flexibility and a couple serviceable bench players. I wish we could have gotten more for him or signed him for a reasonable deal, but I'm not worried that losing Crawford will haunt this team for all eternity or anything. Gordon's already starting to fill his void.



> The ways they rectified the problems were not similar at all. Toronto got Eric Williams, a lottery pick and another 1st round pick. Paxson got NOTHING.
> 
> Completely, completely different, IMO.


if you really don't see ANY similarities, I guess we're just going in circles. Carter was a more valuable asset than Rose, so they got more in return for him. Otherwise the move that they made is very similar in its intent to the one Pax made with Rose. The difference is that no one wanted Rose (or wants him now). Carter had value even as damaged goods.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> 
> 
> He's a decent glue guy to have around. Plays defense, occasionally hits an open shot. A SF version of AD, except younger. I like the guy, but he's not all that good. The picks they got back are a function of Carter's value being much, much higher than Rose or Crawford's were when we had to deal them.



And a big question is why were Rose's and Crawford's values so low?

Read the newspapers today and you hear Rose for Eddie Jones b/c the Heat think he's the man they need to put them over the top.

Jamal for VC was bandied about before the Nets deal.

Paxson did a bad job getting rid of those guys.... everyone in the league knew the Bulls wanted to dump them quick and were willing to do it for nothing... and surprise, surprise... that's what happened.

AD, Pike, Othella.... these guys are NBA scrap heap type players. They are OK... but you don't need to trade for guys like this.

We'll see what VC has left in the tank. Jamal's stock is rising very fast... and many people saw this coming. 




> The picks are nice, I agree. I'm sure Pax would have tried to get them included in his deals if he was dealing players with more trade value (or trading with a team other than NYK, who has already traded away their future).


Pax went from guaranteeing playoffs to trying to blow up the team in a month. I honestly don't think he really knew *what* he was doing..... which I guess is to be expected from a rookie GM.




> Carter was indifferent. Rose was a malcontent. Rose cared more about starting the game than winning it. Carter didn't seem to care much about anything. The Bulls brought in less-talented players who would work harder by getting rid of him. How is that ANY different than what Toronto did with Carter, other than the fact that Carter's market value was higher than Jalen's, so they could get more back (ie the pick)? As far as Crawford, Pax didn't want to commit long-term money to him and dealt him for flexibility and a couple serviceable bench players. I wish we could have gotten more for him or signed him for a reasonable deal, but I'm not worried that losing Crawford will haunt this team for all eternity or anything. Gordon's already starting to fill his void.


Gordon will be good... but he's a typical rookie at this point. Flashes of brilliance and then he completely disappears. I would have liked to have both Jamal and Gordon... but oh well.

Carter's value was higher... yah... but like I said... I think the Bulls are partly to blame for lowering the values of the players they wanted to deal. This was my main criticism of how the Bulls were handling Curry this season. Skiles and Pax ripping the hell out of him in public and benching him all the time.... who the heck is going to want to give up much in a trade for that? Everyone in the league knows that they don't think much of him. Part of me thinks the Bulls just wised up and are getting him involved and praising him in order to prime up his trade value... which is the smart move IMO if they know they don't want to pay him the money. This is the same thing they should have done with Jalen and Jamal.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>djsmokyc</b>!
> 
> 
> The Raptors will have full Bird rights on Marshall, since he hasn't changed teams due to free agency in the last three seasons. They would be able to re-sign him up to the maximum. However, he is unrestricted and would be able to sign anywhere he wants.


Hmm... that's strange. Donyell signed a 3 year deal at the MLE with the Bulls in the summer of '02. He was traded over 1 year afterward to the Raptors. Please excuse my math, but that's not three full seasons with Toronto.

bingo bango

Does the Bird rights kick in after 3 full years on a team? Or does trading w/in the contract disqualify it?

And more importantly... why would Marshall re-sign in Toronto? kukoc's explanation is super fishy to me


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Hmm... that's strange. Donyell signed a 3 year deal at the MLE with the Bulls in the summer of '02. He was traded over 1 year afterward to the Raptors. Please excuse my math, but that's not three full seasons with Toronto.
> ...


haha nice 

but... the quote was...



> he hasn't changed teams due to free agency in the last three seasons.


"changed teams due to free agency" != "changed teams due to trade", right?

I'll let you all sort this out... I'm heading to the UC.

PEACE!

( i spent way too much time today thinking about donyell marshall and the toronto freaking raptors)


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Rose's value was low because he showed himself to be a self-centered chucker who didn't play defense. His injury didn't help either of course. Crawford had some value, but not at a price substantially above the MLE. Pax decided he didn't want to commit that kind of money to Jamal and got what he could. I'm OK with that decision, you're not. I think that's established.

Eddie Jones? have you seen him play lately? Dude has lost about 3 steps and can't hit a shot anymore. Sorry, but I don't think that means Jalen has positive value. Jalen might fit the Heat better because his ballhandling can free up Wade a little bit to score off the ball. But the Heat's defense is already average and Jalen will make that worse.



> Jamal for VC was bandied about before the Nets deal.


eh. It didn't happen, though. Crawford has helped his value so far this year. No doubt. But his RFA status, poor fg% and being on a poor team, plus the complications of BYC, made it hard to trade him this summer.



> Paxson did a bad job getting rid of those guys.... everyone in the league knew the Bulls wanted to dump them quick and were willing to do it for nothing... and surprise, surprise... that's what happened.
> 
> AD, Pike, Othella.... these guys are NBA scrap heap type players. They are OK... but you don't need to trade for guys like this.
> 
> We'll see what VC has left in the tank. Jamal's stock is rising very fast... and many people saw this coming.


I can't argue that Pax and Skiles have been particularly suave with the media because they haven't. But they didn't have a marketable star on their roster to trade, and what Pax got back in his trades reflects that. Toronto made a similar trade, but was able to get more back.

I don't think Jamal's stock is rising THAT fast. He's almost the same player as last year, surrounded by a better cast. He's helped shoot the Knicks to some wins AND losses. One difference is that the Knicks can absord some of his 4-17 shooting nights and stay in games. The Bulls couldn't.





> Pax went from guaranteeing playoffs to trying to blow up the team in a month. I honestly don't think he really knew *what* he was doing..... which I guess is to be expected from a rookie GM.


Pax misjudged how hard his players would work over the offseason and how professional they were. When it became utterly clear that the team had no fortitude, he made some big moves. Maybe he panicked, but that team was a total disgrace on so many nights that I don't blame him. No fight, no hustle, no semblence of order, no plan. In all the dark days of the rebuilding era, I've never been as disgusted with the Bulls as I was in the beginning of last year, because they had the talent to win games, but absolutely no heart. Any GM with any pride would have been embarrassed by the way that team played on most nights. Sure, they might have eventually gotten it together and improved, but the WAY that they were losing (quitting, losing by 20+ to bad teams) was a big-time red flag. The WAY that this team was losing didn't scare or disgust me nearly as much. they were frustrated and looked lost at many times, but they still played hard. Now it's coming around.



> Gordon will be good... but he's a typical rookie at this point. Flashes of brilliance and then he completely disappears. I would have liked to have both Jamal and Gordon... but oh well.


that description sounds incredibly familiar.  Gordon's in year 1 and has improved tremendously in a short time span. We'll see how he does.



> Carter's value was higher... yah... but like I said... I think the Bulls are partly to blame for lowering the values of the players they wanted to deal. This was my main criticism of how the Bulls were handling Curry this season. Skiles and Pax ripping the hell out of him in public and benching him all the time.... who the heck is going to want to give up much in a trade for that? Everyone in the league knows that they don't think much of him. Part of me thinks the Bulls just wised up and are getting him involved and praising him in order to prime up his trade value... which is the smart move IMO if they know they don't want to pay him the money. This is the same thing they should have done with Jalen and Jamal.


Maybe the org does share in some blame, but the players are who they are. The league knows all about Jalen. His play, contract, and attitude damaged his stock, not Bulls management. As far as Crawford, I don't remember management ever panning him too severely to the media as his free agency began, but I could be wrong. 

OK, gotta get some more work done before I go home. Cheers.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> ( i spent way too much time today thinking about donyell marshall and the toronto freaking raptors)


LOL :laugh: 

I was thinking the exact same thing. I used some of my (albeit limited) brain power analyzing the Toronto Raptors. Ugh.

Go Bulls!!!


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Jalen has been playing quite well over the last couple weeks.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/2636/gamelog

and... the raptors are playing some pretty solid ball this month.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/teams/tor/schedule

Rose's fg% is going to pass 45% soon. He's getting his old game back now that he's not the lone focal point.

Let's give this ex-Bull some love.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> Let's give this ex-Bull some love.


He is shooting better but his assists and A/TO ratio have really dropped.

I can think of better ways to spend $39M over the next 2.5 years.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> He is shooting better but his assists and A/TO ratio have really dropped.
> ...


That's not much love. 

He's playing well... as are the Raptors... yes?

His TOs are down from his career average this season... its just his assists are down as well. Seems like a role issue.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> Jalen has been playing quite well over the last couple weeks.
> 
> http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/2636/gamelog
> ...


you may STILL be spending too much time today thinking about Donyell Marshall, Jalen Rose, and the Toronto freaking Raptors! :grinning:


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fleetwood macbull</b>!
> 
> you may STILL be spending too much time today thinking about Donyell Marshall, Jalen Rose, and the Toronto freaking Raptors! :grinning:


He's playing well, yes?


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

yes, better than he ever did with us, and was patently untenable for this particular Bulls team


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fleetwood macbull</b>!
> yes, better than he ever did with us, and was patently untenable for this particular Bulls team


His only stint of prolonged "bad" play was with the Bulls... and we was not even that bad with us... just could not score efficiently... which was true about nearly all of our guards post-Jordan. 

Anyway... this is what I expected out of Rose AND Crawford this season... Jamal seems to be still playing kinda OC... or maybe he just can't shoot.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> His only stint of prolonged "bad" play was with the Bulls...


I remember feeling like I had just been kicked in the nuts when I heard about the Artest for Rose trade. I was posting at worldcrossing back then and most of us were pretty disappointed (at least, that's how I remember it). To his credit, Rose seemed to attack his role as mentor to the young and feeder of the post. He actually turned my opinion of him around for a period. I was reminded of that when I read an old post of mine over at realgm the other day. I am back full circle, now, and can't imagine ever being a fan of Rose as a basketball player again.

His effort just seems to be non-existent. Sure he'll score when it's easy to score, but don't ever expect the guy to exert effort for more than a five minute stretch of play, or when he's trying to "stick it to" his old team, etc.

I think I should also finish this post by acknowledging what a great citizen Rose is outside of the gym. There's no denying his efforts in the community and his general giving attitude. Even though I don't like him as a ball player, I have become a fan of him as a citizen. He deserves any credit he gets on that account.


----------

