# Sweetney's weight



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> No what I said was that he certainly talks alot less about Sweetneys weight then he did about Currys. That should have been clear. And I think it was clearly pointed out that he mentioned Sweets weight basically once. Erronieous or not, that was the point and it was clearly stated. So your point is sort of erroneous. And the certain element claim was made about Iverson, I am 100% sure of it.


My theory on Sweetney's weight is that the was given a long rope- longer than any other Bulls player has had on Skiles' watch because they wanted to show some immediate return from the trade.

I think if Sweetney was a no name guy with a non-guaranteed deal who showed up looking like he would have been asked to leave (like Gary Trent) or Skiles would have his fat *** planted firmly and perhaps permanently on the bench till he got in shape (like Fizer or Frank Williams).


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> My theory on Sweetney's weight is that the was given a long rope- longer than any other Bulls player has had on Skiles' watch because they wanted to show some immediate return from the trade.
> 
> I think if Sweetney was a no name guy with a non-guaranteed deal who showed up looking like he would have been asked to leave (like Gary Trent) or Skiles would have his fat *** planted firmly and perhaps permanently on the bench till he got in shape (like Fizer or Frank Williams).


I think that's a pretty solid theory.

And it's been exactly three months since "Sweets" joined the Bulls. If there's a shred of evidence to suggest that he's lost even a single ounce of fat, I'd like to see it.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

There may be an element of truth to that, but I think the main reason Sweetney is in there is we don't have anyone else with size to put in there in his place.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> There may be an element of truth to that, but I think the main reason Sweetney is in there is we don't have anyone else with size to put in there in his place.


OFella and Songalia? Both about the same height or taller, both in infinitely better physical condition.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> OFella and Songalia? Both about the same height or taller, both in infinitely better physical condition.


Hey, I'd like to see O getting some more burn. He deserves more than 10 minutes per game. Between Sweetney and Songiala the minutes per game isn't that huge a difference -- 22 for Sweets, 19 for Songiala.

But the point is, we don't have a lot of big bodies, and Sweetney, while out of shape, is the one guy who has the beef to throw around right now. For good or bad, he has 30 pounds on Songiala and Harrington.

Sweetney is giving us 10 and 6. Songiala is giving us 8 and 3, in a couple less minutes. Harrington is giving us 5 and 2 1/2 in about half of Sweetney's minutes.

Its not like talking his 22 minutes and playing Songiala for 30 minutes per game and OFella for 21 minutes is going to turn the team around.

I think they are playing him because we need all the help we can get in the front court, and his bulk does sometimes help.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

I think the issue with Sweets, besides the lard, is that he really is just the worst defensive player in the NBA. ****, I would rather have Jamal Crawford guarding a big guy then this guy. He doesnt move his feet, he doesnt know about positioning and has no lift or appears to have no desire. Yes, his post game isnt bad on offense. Yes, his rebounding is passable (but not really much better then Curry, yet, when will Skiles say, Sweetney needs to jump, to rebound?). But the only thing this guy has a desire for his Whoppers. Curry played with more fire and we all accused him of being lazy. Sweets needs to go. What I will say about Mr Element himself is that atleast he gave Sweets a DNP-CD while I was away. But I would like to hear him rant about Sweets some in the press. Geez, he cries about everyone else (minus Duhon). heck, even Kirk who actually puts forth effort gets called out for "panicking". What the **** is that?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> My theory on Sweetney's weight is that the was given a long rope- longer than any other Bulls player has had on Skiles' watch because they wanted to show some immediate return from the trade.
> 
> I think if Sweetney was a no name guy with a non-guaranteed deal who showed up looking like he would have been asked to leave (like Gary Trent) or Skiles would have his fat *** planted firmly and perhaps permanently on the bench till he got in shape (like Fizer or Frank Williams).


Its so dissapointing to hear that Sweets has not gotten it together.Hes a good kid,supposedly hard working,but when i saw him play against the Knicks I was shocked that his body still was FAT.All summer long the Knick fans were wondering if this was the year Sweets would show up in shapw.When he opted not to play in summer league we assumed he was conditioning..Little did we know he was joining Jerome James at KFC all summer long


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

I think that for the issues people had with Curry, they should be throwing Sweets off of a mountain, but they aren't. Because he is "Pax's guy" he gets the benefit of the doubt despite being WAY fatter than Curry and a worse defender. The guy is 80% fat Fizer (when he showed up for camp weighing 285) and 20% Curry. Think about this. What would a young Will Perdue do to this guy? That's usually the litmus test.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> I think the issue with Sweets, besides the lard, is that he really is just the worst defensive player in the NBA. ****, I would rather have Jamal Crawford guarding a big guy then this guy. He doesnt move his feet, he doesnt know about positioning and has no lift or appears to have no desire. Yes, his post game isnt bad on offense. Yes, his rebounding is passable (but not really much better then Curry, yet, when will Skiles say, Sweetney needs to jump, to rebound?). But the only thing this guy has a desire for his Whoppers. Curry played with more fire and we all accused him of being lazy. Sweets needs to go. What I will say about Mr Element himself is that atleast he gave Sweets a DNP-CD while I was away. But I would like to hear him rant about Sweets some in the press. Geez, he cries about everyone else (minus Duhon). heck, even Kirk who actually puts forth effort gets called out for "panicking". What the **** is that?


Actually Sweetney is a significantly better rebounder than Curry. Curry has averaged 7.5 rebounds per 35 for his career and Sweetney has average 10 per 35 minutes. For comparisons sake, that's about the same as the difference between J. Oneal and Al Harrington this season.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

TripleDouble said:


> Actually Sweetney is a significantly better rebounder than Curry. Curry has averaged 7.5 rebounds per 35 for his career and Sweetney has average 10 per 35 minutes. For comparisons sake, that's about the same as the difference between J. Oneal and Al Harrington this season.


Curry is far better than Sweetney. It's like having a lineup full of contact hitters and one power hitter and then trading your one power hitter for another contact hitter and then saying "well he hits for contact better." How about this one. AD is a better rebounder than Sweetney qualitatively.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> Curry is far better than Sweetney.


You are changing the argument.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> Actually Sweetney is a significantly better rebounder than Curry. Curry has averaged 7.5 rebounds per 35 for his career and Sweetney has average 10 per 35 minutes. For comparisons sake, that's about the same as the difference between J. Oneal and Al Harrington this season.


but this year it's about even. sweetney's 22 min and 6.1 boards. curry's at 25min and 6.8 boards. is this evidence that curry has improved his rebounding? can he be considered a good rebounder now that he is on par with Sweets?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> I think that for the issues people had with Curry, they should be throwing Sweets off of a mountain, but they aren't. Because he is "Pax's guy" he gets the benefit of the doubt despite being WAY fatter than Curry and a worse defender. The guy is 80% fat Fizer (when he showed up for camp weighing 285) and 20% Curry. Think about this. What would a young Will Perdue do to this guy? That's usually the litmus test.



Pippenatorade, Freaking Bingo mate. Its because he is Paxs guy that we dont hear too much about him. 

Bring Back TIMMY


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

TripleDouble said:


> You are changing the argument.


How am I changing my argument. Tell me what you thought my initial argument was and where I ventured off the beaten path.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Unfortunately even if Sweetney weren't fat, he'd still be a very mediocre athlete without much speed, hops, or aggression. For all of Sweetpies girth, his game is as soft as a marshmellow.

He's has nice post moves, but the majority are fades away, soft hooks, et cetera. I think I've only seen him dunk one ball all season. 

What a total piece of crap. Did the Bulls exercise their option on this tub of lard?


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

ztect said:


> Unfortunately even if Sweetney weren't fat, he'd still be a very mediocre athlete without much speed, hops, or aggression. For all of Sweetpies girth, his game is as soft as a marshmellow.
> 
> He's has nice post moves, but the majority are fades away, soft hooks, et cetera. I think I've only seen him dunk one ball all season.
> 
> What a total piece of crap. Did the Bulls exercise their option on this tub of lard?


Bingo. I knew it was only a matter of time before someone successfully executed the "even if" argument. Brilliant.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

ztect said:


> Unfortunately even if Sweetney weren't fat, he'd still be a very mediocre athlete without much speed, hops, or aggression. For all of Sweetpies girth, his game is as soft as a marshmellow.
> 
> He's has nice post moves, but the majority are fades away, soft hooks, et cetera. I think I've only seen him dunk one ball all season.
> 
> What a total piece of crap. Did the Bulls exercise their option on this tub of lard?


Yep.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

ztect said:


> Unfortunately even if Sweetney weren't fat, he'd still be a very mediocre athlete without much speed, hops, or aggression. For all of Sweetpies girth, his game is as soft as a marshmellow.
> 
> He's has nice post moves, but the majority are fades away, soft hooks, et cetera. I think I've only seen him dunk one ball all season.
> 
> What a total piece of crap. Did the Bulls exercise their option on this tub of lard?



Ztect has consistently delivered solid posts like this for years.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Ztect has consistently delivered solid posts like this for years.


IMO just you calling it solid is solid.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

I saw Sweetney dunk 3 times in a game in a national TV game this december. 

Everyone is making the mistake of comparing Sweetney to Curry. Just because one replaced the other does not mean that the two players ought to be compared. If they were comparable players, NY would not have given the Bulls all those picks.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> IMO just you calling it solid is solid.


get a room :biggrin:


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

Don't forget that we gave up Davis too... who is slightly better than Tim "not here" Thomas. I think Davis is better than Sweetney. Is one lotto pick in a weak draft and a pick swap better than Curry?


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> Don't forget that we gave up Davis too... who is slightly better than Tim "not here" Thomas. I think Davis is better than Sweetney. Is one lotto pick in a weak draft and a pick swap better than Curry?


It's not fair to compare 1 (or maybe 2 if he resigned) years of AD to 2 + years of Sweetney. However I do think that Paxson really screwed the pooch by including his two centers in a trade that brought back no centers.

Also, its not only the draft picks vs. Curry. Its the draft picks plus their salary differential compared with Curry.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

TripleDouble said:


> It's not fair to compare 1 (or maybe 2 if he resigned) years of AD to 2 + years of Sweetney. However I do think that Paxson really screwed the pooch by including his two centers in a trade that brought back no centers.
> 
> Also, its not only the draft picks vs. Curry. Its the draft picks plus their salary differential compared with Curry.


Well I guess that assumes me being in favor of the money that Chandler got, which could have gone to Curry. Then there's the fact that Chandler wasn't asked to get an offer elsewhere to justify the Bulls signing him like Curry and Duhon were. This constant maze-building where Paxson is never at fault is really tiresome. He's not Jerry West. He's not even Joe Dumars. He hasn't proven anything to justify always getting the benefit of the doubt.

Oh and *then there's the fact that we could have just kept Curry on the qualifying offer. But all Pax fans know that that would have led to 100% chance of him either dying or leaving us with nothing, right?*


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Try a simple mind experiment: 

Imagine the Bulls had kept Curry with his current contract -- healthy and all. 
Then imagine AD got hurt and was unable to play this season. 

The Bulls most likely would still be mediocre; and they might be just good enough to avoid the lottery. But they would be stuck with a center who couldn't play defense or rebound. Chandler would still be Chandler. No extra draft picks. No Sweetney. Not enough cap space to sign more than one free agent next summer.

Now imagine that the following year Curry has a recurrance of his heart condition and decides to retire.

The only regrettable part of the trade was that we lost a year of AD's services. The good news is that we can have him back next year if he has anything left to contribute.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

Maybe I'm nuts but I think Sweetney actually does look a bit trimmer.

Also, Skiles has mentioned a couple times that Sweetney needs to get in shape. He might have been a little more diplomatic about it than he typically is, but it's been addressed. Perhaps we can keep analysis of Sweetney's play seperate from the evil PaxSkilesDorf conspiracy to justify the Curry deal?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

McBulls said:


> Try a simple mind experiment:
> 
> Imagine the Bulls had kept Curry with his current contract -- healthy and all.
> Then imagine AD got hurt and was unable to play this season.
> ...


Not true. He plays sufficient man defense, which is exactly what we don't have now. I'd love to be stuck with a guy who's ok at putting his 7' 280lb body on someone, create space, and let Chandler roam and collect boards.



> Chandler would still be Chandler.


Yes! But he's freed to play the role he's good at playing!



> No extra draft picks.


Only 1 extra meaningful pick. The second rounders aren't much of a deal. The meaningful pick, maybe, will replace one of the guys we lost. Hardly a net advantage.



> No Sweetney.


Good. He's damn near useless given the makeup of the rest of this team.



> Not enough cap space to sign more than one free agent next summer.


We won't anyway... we've already got too many players that command minutes. The logical thing is probably going to be to make a sign and trade or uneven salary trade that matches things out. We'd have the flexibility to do that in any case (plus more discretion in who to trade for since we don't have such a gaping hole to fill).



> Now imagine that the following year Curry has a recurrance of his heart condition and decides to retire.


Imagine the entire team disappears into the Bermuda triangle. Curry was cleared by a zillion doctors. There's no more reason to think he'll retire than Chandler will retire due to one of his numerous medical issues. In any case, then his salary comes off the books in a year and we keep moving forward.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

McBulls said:


> Try a simple mind experiment:
> 
> Imagine the Bulls had kept Curry with his current contract -- healthy and all.
> Then imagine AD got hurt and was unable to play this season.
> ...


No I don't have to imagine that at all. Convenient for Pax fans to say "imagine AD had gotten hurt." Ok, imagine Paxson signs Luol Deng and he becomes Grant Hill.

Had we made Chandler get an offer for us to match we could have signed him for about 3 million less per year, keeping Curry on the Q.O. we still could have had the capspace we will have now, after the year, if he decided to go elsewhere.

Last year shows you my evidence of what we would have been this year had we just not tried to fix what wasn't broken. But Pax fans refuse to admit under any circumstances that anything is his fault. If something good happens, it's because he's John Mother F-in Paxson and he's just that good, if something bad happens, it either isn't that bad because "AD could have gotten hurt" or it's due to circumstances being so unforeseeable that no one in Pax's shoes could have made the right decision.

I'll just let the losing streak continue to strengthen my case. Sweetney is fat and sucks.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> Not true. He plays sufficient man defense, which is exactly what we don't have now. I'd love to be stuck with a guy who's ok at putting his 7' 280lb body on someone, create space, and let Chandler roam and collect boards.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Congrats. You "get it."


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

jbulls said:


> Maybe I'm nuts but I think Sweetney actually does look a bit trimmer.
> 
> Also, Skiles has mentioned a couple times that Sweetney needs to get in shape. He might have been a little more diplomatic about it than he typically is, but it's been addressed. Perhaps we can keep analysis of Sweetney's play seperate from the evil PaxSkilesDorf conspiracy to justify the Curry deal?


It's not so much a conspiracy... just an observation that Sweetney seemed to get a very prolonged look despite his fattiness, which is something the Bulls have totally whacked guys for in the past.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> I saw Sweetney dunk 3 times in a game in a national TV game this december.


Sorry, dunking his cookies in his milk doesn't count


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

McBulls said:


> Try a simple mind experiment:
> 
> Imagine the Bulls had kept Curry with his current contract -- healthy and all.
> Then imagine AD got hurt and was unable to play this season.
> ...


I don't know that your doomsday scenario would have much chance of actually happening in the real world.

I mean, imagine for a second that the Bulls worked with Eddy, not against him, once free agency started. Imagine that they decided to follow the advice that all of the doctors gave them but one, and came to the conclusion that Eddy's health didn't represent any out-of-the-ordinary risk. Imagine they re-sign Eddy early on -- to a contract that still allows the team to pursue something close to a max free agent the following summer -- and he's back practicing with the team in July.

Then imagine that Tyson Chandler doesn't have to spend three months swinging in the wind while Currygate plays itself out. Imagine he doesn't totally let himself go to pot for fear of an injury. Imagine he's back at the Berto in July working with the rest of the gang.

Imagine that all the other Bulls are spared seeing one of their favorite teammates go through a very ugly public pissing match with the organization. They're fired up to get Eddy and Tyson and Luol everyone back at practice, eager to show the world that they would have crushed the Wizards and given the Heat all it wanted and then some if Eddy and Luol were healthy.

Imagine that Paxson still adds Basden and Songalia to strengthen the bench. Imagine that AD isn't quite the player he was last year, but that he's still an inside presence and a hugely stabilizing force in the locker room and team huddle. Imagine a training camp and preseason that are spent fine-tuning and building on last year, not starting things from scratch. Imagine a solid season, an improvement on last year, and another dip of the toes in the playoff waters.

I don't know . . . that all doesn't seem too far-fetched to me. If you're going to argue that last year's team wasn't championship-bound anytime soon, you're probably right. But it was a hell of a lot better off than we are now, and it wouldn't have been an inflexible, set-in-stone situation at all. 

Maybe we can get Ben Wallace to leave a championship contender for a team that plays sub .400 ball. Maybe whatever two draft picks we end up with will be major talents ready to contribute right away. Maybe Pax will get an in-season opportunity for a trade that puts us on a much higher level than we ever would have reached with last year's team.

Maybe.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> It's not so much a conspiracy... just an observation that Sweetney seemed to get a very prolonged look despite his fattiness, which is something the Bulls have totally whacked guys for in the past.


I'll defend the "conspiracy" angle. There was an awful lot of hype about Sweetney coming from the media shills -- how great of a worker he is, how Skiles's medieval practices would have him down to a barbed-wire-and scrap-metal 230 by Thanksgiving, yadda yadda yadda. 

Some of that is just the normal irrational exuberance that comes with getting a brand-new toy on Christmas morning, but hell, all any one of these guys had to do was Google "Michael Sweetney training camp promises" and they'd find that the previous two Septembers, Mike had shown up for Knicks camps swearing he was hooked on Jenny Craig, sleeping on a burlap mat in a 45-degree room and not deep-frying his rice cakes anymore.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> I'll defend the "conspiracy" angle. There was an awful lot of hype about Sweetney coming from the media shills -- how great of a worker he is, how Skiles's medieval practices would have him down to a barbed-wire-and scrap-metal 230 by Thanksgiving, yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Some of that is just the normal irrational exuberance that comes with getting a brand-new toy on Christmas morning, but hell, all any one of these guys had to do was Google "Michael Sweetney training camp promises" and they'd find that the previous two Septembers, Mike had shown up for Knicks camps swearing he was hooked on Jenny Craig, sleeping on a burlap mat in a 45-degree room and not deep-frying his rice cakes anymore.


Not sure I'm totally following this argument.

It's a given that Paxson was blowing smoke up the collective *** of the Chicago media after getting Sweetney - that's what GM's do after they make trades. Would you have rather had a frank assesment of Sweetney's work ethic/weight issues from Paxson immediately post-trade? GM's gush over their new acquisitions. It's a given.

The fact is that Skiles has addressed Sweetney's weight publically and that Sweets just logged a DNP-CD a couple days ago. I'm not happy about how Sweets has played lately either but I don't see him getting treated any differently than any other Bull. I'm sure there will be an avalanche of "What about Eddy Curry?" responses but let's remember that a) Eddy Curry had been here 4 years, if Sweets lasts 4 years here I bet you'll be able to fill a book with comments about his weight from the coach and GM and b) Eddy Curry has the capacity to be great. Mike Sweetney has the capacity to be pretty good. Of course people are going to be tougher on Eddy.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

jbulls said:


> Not sure I'm totally following this argument.
> 
> It's a given that Paxson was blowing smoke up the collective *** of the Chicago media after getting Sweetney - that's what GM's do after they make trades. Would you have rather had a frank assesment of Sweetney's work ethic/weight issues from Paxson immediately post-trade? GM's gush over their new acquisitions. It's a given.
> 
> The fact is that Skiles has addressed Sweetney's weight publically and that Sweets just logged a DNP-CD a couple days ago. I'm not happy about how Sweets has played lately either but I don't see him getting treated any differently than any other Bull. I'm sure there will be an avalanche of "What about Eddy Curry?" responses but let's remember that a) Eddy Curry had been here 4 years, if Sweets lasts 4 years here I bet you'll be able to fill a book with comments about his weight from the coach and GM and b) Eddy Curry has the capacity to be great. Mike Sweetney has the capacity to be pretty good. Of course people are going to be tougher on Eddy.


Skiles said more bad things about Eddy Curry in his first week on the job then he has about Sweetney in 3 months. How do you explain that? I mean, I believe Skiles first comment about Curry came BEFORE he even met Eddy Curry, saying something about getting certain people into shape.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

McBulls said:


> Try a simple mind experiment:
> 
> Imagine the Bulls had kept Curry with his current contract -- healthy and all.
> Then imagine AD got hurt and was unable to play this season.
> ...


I would rather have a mediocre center who cant rebound or play D, but draws a double team consistently and can finish at the basket then an undersized 4 who cant rebound or play D and is so out of shape that I worry about how his HEART is doing


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Skiles said more bad things about Eddy Curry in his first week on the job then he has about Sweetney in 3 months. How do you explain that? I mean, I believe Skiles first comment about Curry came BEFORE he even met Eddy Curry, saying something about getting certain people into shape.



Skiles said all the NY guys needed to get into shape immediately following the Curry trade.

I can't possibly respond to this if you aren't going to use quotes and have concrete examples. I'm not saying Skiles wasn't tough on Curry. And I'm not saying I agree with how Skiles handles players all the time - because I don't. I wish we still had Eddy, I've said that time and again on this board.

My point is that I do not believe that Paxson and Skiles are any softer with Sweetney than they are with most of the other players on the team. I didn't like the deal and I still don't (unless we really do get a top 3 pick) but the idea that Sweets is PaxSkiles' golden boy and that they're treating him differently to justify the Curry move is, in my opinion, not at all accurate.

The thing that bothers me most about the posting on this board is when individual players get scapegoated and become representative of a larger thing that individual posters here have an issue with. We've seen it happen with Curry, and unfairly so. It's happened with Hinrich. Let's not have it happen with Sweetney. This isn't Star Wars. There's no good. There's no evil. No blue and red lightsabers. Let's stop talking conspiracies and start talking basketball.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

jbulls said:


> Skiles said all the NY guys needed to get into shape immediately following the Curry trade.
> 
> I can't possibly respond to this if you aren't going to use quotes and have concrete examples. I'm not saying Skiles wasn't tough on Curry. And I'm not saying I agree with how Skiles handles players all the time - because I don't. I wish we still had Eddy, I've said that time and again on this board.
> 
> ...



You dont think Curry was scapegoated. I mean, only 2 weeks ago Skiles took a shot, albeit without mentioning names but being fairly obvious about it, at Currys inability to stop Shaq, without taking into account that Curry actually had some success in his career against Shaq. Sure sounds like Curry was being scapegoated to me. Whats Curry done? Been relatively quiet while Skiles and Pax have gone out of their way to talk about him. And outside of the DNP-CD, which was absolutely the right thing to do, they clearly have been more positive in their media discussions about Sweets then they were about Curry. Quote, innuendo, rumor, erroneous reporting, whatever you want to call it, its a fact. There isnt enough time in the year to go and look at every Skiles and Pax comment regarding about Curry, but you could probably find any criticism of Sweets in about an hour if you so desired.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> You dont think Curry was scapegoated. I mean, only 2 weeks ago Skiles took a shot, albeit without mentioning names but being fairly obvious about it, at Currys inability to stop Shaq, without taking into account that Curry actually had some success in his career against Shaq. Sure sounds like Curry was being scapegoated to me. Whats Curry done? Been relatively quiet while Skiles and Pax have gone out of their way to talk about him. And outside of the DNP-CD, which was absolutely the right thing to do, they clearly have been more positive in their media discussions about Sweets then they were about Curry. Quote, innuendo, rumor, erroneous reporting, whatever you want to call it, its a fact. There isnt enough time in the year to go and look at every Skiles and Pax comment regarding about Curry, but you could probably find any criticism of Sweets in about an hour if you so desired.


1. If you don't have enough time to provide any kind of quotes, that's cool. But if you're going to present an argument some kind of factual information would be nice - particuarly if you're alluding to specific quotes and not providing the text or the context.

2. I think Skiles was too tough on Curry. I also think Skiles has been on a bunch of other guys - Tyson Chandler, Ben Gordon and (lately) Kirk Hinrich spring to mind.

3. Here are some facts. Paxson acquired three players from New York in the Eddy Curry deal. He cut Jermaine Jackson. He sent Tim Thomas home. Michael Sweetney just got a DNP-CD. I'm sorry Sweetney hasn't recieved the verbal flogging in the press that you feel he so richly deserves in light of Curry's treatment - but these moves (regardless of whether you agree with them from a basketball standpoint) do not smack of a team trying hard to justify a trade. So I'm not buying the conspiracy theory.

4. Yes, Michael Sweetney is fat. I don't buy that he gets coddled by Paxson and Skiles.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Skiles said more bad things about Eddy Curry in his first week on the job then he has about Sweetney in 3 months. How do you explain that? I mean, I believe Skiles first comment about Curry came BEFORE he even met Eddy Curry, saying something about getting certain people into shape.


Cartwright was ripping Curry and Chandler his first week on the job. Floyd was ripping them the day after they were drafted. It may not have been "Eddy sucks" but it was more like "well I don't know what we can expect with what I've just been given to work with. 

Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler showed up here dealing with the hatred of what had happened the previous 3 years from day one. Their biggest sin, literally, even though nobody would say it, was that they were drafted by a morbidly obese homely midget. I remember the Score having a full rip fest about what a joke the new "recruiting class" was the day after Curry and Chandler were acquired.

Michael Sweetney's honeymoon never should have lasted this long, but if Curry had to deal with it he does too. He's a fat ****ing waste. I'm so sick of the double standards. Curry was crucified for showing up in the fall of 2003 weighing 315 lbs., but Fizer showed up that same camp weighing 285 lbs. (at about 6'6"-6'8") depending on who you believe. And Fizer has never carried the per height muscle of Curry. He was taken with the same 4th round draft pick and yet his obesity barely warranted a paragraph, while everyone was acting as if Eddy Curry was Rae Carruth. If you get ripped to the ends of the earth for being fat then it doesn't matter if you're the "next Shaq" (a label Eddy Curry never asked for) "the next Karl Malone" or the "next next Karl Malone" (Fizer was once thought to be the next Karl Malone by some morons and IMO Sweetney is the next Fizer). Sweetney is a good 20 lbs. fatter for the weight his height warrants than Eddy Curry ever was. At 6'8" you should weigh no more than 245 lbs. if not less.

IMO if you are doing the trade comparison you now take Tim Thomas out of the assets the Bulls acquired since Pax did that and it looks like this:

Bulls v. Knicks
Antonio Davis >> Michael Sweetney
Curry >> A lotto pick in a crappy draft, a pick swap (with a team that will have Larry Brown in his second year as coach), second rounders

*But the troubling thing is the lack of due diligence by Paxson. Paxson not acquiring a center, a legit center, before this trade, and including Davis thinking very naively that all along Davis was gonna run right back to Chicago is tantamount to buying a 150-unit apartment building without ever inspecting the neighborhood or the structure. Complete lack of planning and it's turned into a huge manure pie*


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> I would rather have a mediocre center who cant rebound or play D, but draws a double team consistently and can finish at the basket then an undersized 4 who cant rebound or play D and is so out of shape that I worry about how his HEART is doing


Makes sense, especially when the rest of the team did a fine job of picking up his slack and making sure that *as a team (and isn't that really all that matters) we rebounded and defended excellently.*


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

jbulls said:


> 1. If you don't have enough time to provide any kind of quotes, that's cool. But if you're going to present an argument some kind of factual information would be nice - particuarly if you're alluding to specific quotes and not providing the text or the context.
> 
> 2. I think Skiles was too tough on Curry. I also think Skiles has been on a bunch of other guys - Tyson Chandler, Ben Gordon and (lately) Kirk Hinrich spring to mind.
> 
> ...


You don't buy anything that also requires you to buy the fact that maybe Skiles and Paxson aren't as good as their fans think they are and maybe they do make mistakes.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

Pippenatorade said:


> You don't buy anything that also requires you to buy the fact that maybe Skiles and Paxson aren't as good as their fans think they are and maybe they do make mistakes.


Oh God. Read the post, guy. While you're at it go back and read a bunch of my posts. I've been tough on Skiles for his handling of players and his rotations. I've criticized Paxson for the Curry trade, his slow moving negotiations, and his faliure to get us a decent 4/5 with some toughness. My faliure to buy into a conspiracy theory about their treatment of Mike Sweetney doesn't make me a Kool Aid drinker.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

jbulls said:


> Oh God. Read the post, guy. While you're at it go back and read a bunch of my posts. I've been tough on Skiles for his handling of players and his rotations. I've criticized Paxson for the Curry trade, his slow moving negotiations, and his faliure to get us a decent 4/5 with some toughness. My faliure to buy into a conspiracy theory about their treatment of Mike Sweetney doesn't make me a Kool Aid drinker.


Fair enough. At least you have the nads to stick around during a losing streak unlike half of Pax's fandom. I seem to remember a certain Tyson Chandler fanatic that's been nowhere to be seen as the losing streak has gone on and Tyson has gotten worse.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> Fair enough. At least you have the nads to stick around during a losing streak unlike half of Pax's fandom. I seem to remember a certain Tyson Chandler fanatic that's been nowhere to be seen as the losing streak has gone on and Tyson has gotten worse.



Jbulls has been critical of Pax and Skiles. I think he has missed the boat on the double standard but he has been critical where its due. Fans need to see the good and bad. Its isnt all rain one day and sun the next. Most days are cloudy or partly sunny if you know what I mean? The club doesnt look so good now but it isnt as bad as the board makes it out to be. But the club was never as good as we thought they were last year. What happened however was that Skiles and Pax bought a little into their press beyond what I think was acceptable. Skiles acted like he was Phil Jackson in the negotiations and eventually got what he wanted. Only problem is that he is NO phil jackson. Pax then thought he knew more then most DOCTORS by applying the pressure to Curry that he did. He then certainly didnt take the time and effort to give the Bulls fair value for this season. He only dealt with NY when other teams were rumored to be interested. At the end of the day, when the Bulls go on a 5 game winning streak, and believe me, they will, the homers will be back. Currently the whiners are around. But good even keel posting is what we all should strive for. Guys like Mize, May, Ztect, TB and DC, et al are real good examples of staying even keel under any circumstance. I will say however, that for myself, even though I feel that Pax dealt Skiles a bad hand for this season (yes, I sort of put more blame on Pax) that I am getting my socks off on Skiles taking a drubbing. I actually think he is a good coach. But he carries himself, in public, as such a pint size jerk that I hope they get rid of him. It was a mistake to toss his salad the way Pax and JR did. My father met him at the Bulls Charity Dinner last year and said he was a real ******* there too. Frankly, too some degree, all this losing to me might mean more long term success. And I am sure that success will come after Skiles has gone on to coach Orlando, which I will bet will be his next stop, sometime before his current deal with Chicago ends. And that day cant come far enough. But what I will say is that the words people are accusing me of putting in Skiles mouths are things that he did say. And it doesnt take a rocket scientist to see the double standard he employs. And now we see it with Sweetney. We have seen Kirk on both sides of it. Duhon is the golden boy now etc etc.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Pippenatorade said:


> No I don't have to imagine that at all. Convenient for Pax fans to say "imagine AD had gotten hurt." Ok, imagine Paxson signs Luol Deng and he becomes Grant Hill.
> 
> Had we made Chandler get an offer for us to match we could have signed him for about 3 million less per year, keeping Curry on the Q.O. we still could have had the capspace we will have now, after the year, if he decided to go elsewhere.
> 
> ...


The idea that Chandler could have been signed for 3M less per year is truely a pipe dream. If other teams had thought the Bull wouldn't match they would have made offers comparable to Dalenberts.

Sweetny just had a bad game. But overall he has played reasonably well. He's one of our best rebounders and probably has the best inside game of any current Bull. He probably would feel better and move a bit faster if he lost weight. I know I would. But as is, he is a good young power forward who will probably get better as he learns how to position himself better and avoid unnecessary fouls. Sweetney will be in this league for a long time even if he remains overweight.

The losing streak will stop when Skiles decides to quit trying to have small guards routinely defend players who are half a foot or more taller than they are one-on-one. Obviously neither the referees nor opposing coaches are buying the idea that this can be done without fouling.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

McBulls said:


> The idea that Chandler could have been signed for 3M less per year is truely a pipe dream. If other teams had thought the Bull wouldn't match they would have made offers comparable to Dalenberts.
> 
> Sweetny just had a bad game. But overall he has played reasonably well. He's one of our best rebounders and probably has the best inside game of any current Bull. He probably would feel better and move a bit faster if he lost weight. I know I would. But as is, he is a good young power forward who will probably get better as he learns how to position himself better and avoid unnecessary fouls. Sweetney will be in this league for a long time even if he remains overweight.
> 
> The losing streak will stop when Skiles decides to quit trying to have small guards routinely defend players who are half a foot or more taller than they are one-on-one. Obviously neither the referees nor opposing coaches are buying the idea that this can be done without fouling.


The idea that Chandler warrants more than 5 million a year without players like Curry and AD to put a body on someone so he can go fly-swatting is laughable. And no, nobody who is going to be as good at putting a body on the other teams post scorer or initiating offense in the post as Davis/Curry within the next 2 years is in this draft. 

Had Chandler been forced to go out and get an offer he could have been had for significantly less. Take the Q.O.? With his back, I doubt it. And honestly, Chandler on the Q.O. looks like a dream come true compared to him on the contract he has now.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

Pippenatorade said:


> Fair enough. At least you have the nads to stick around during a losing streak unlike half of Pax's fandom. I seem to remember a certain Tyson Chandler fanatic that's been nowhere to be seen as the losing streak has gone on and Tyson has gotten worse.


I don't think it requires "nads" for me stick around during this losing streak. I'm a Bulls fan, I enjoy posting here, I'm certainly not enjoying this losing streak but I can't see why it would deter me from giving opinions on my favorite basketball team.

Seems to me that it would be best for you to stick to discussing basketball and stop offering your unsolicited opinions on the merits of individual posters. I certainly never said anything disparaging about you, and I expect the same courtesy in return. Your quasi-apology for lumping me into a group I don't belong to ("fair enough") would carry a little more weight if you didn't immediately follow it with a swipe at another poster. I know things are getting a bit contentious around here lately, losing will do that, but it's something of a surprise to get bashed by another poster - particualrly given that it's a poster whose posts I've never responded to or commented on. But hey, whatever floats your boat. Stay classy San Diego.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

jbulls said:


> I don't think it requires "nads" for me stick around during this losing streak. I'm a Bulls fan, I enjoy posting here, I'm certainly not enjoying this losing streak but I can't see why it would deter me from giving opinions on my favorite basketball team.
> 
> Seems to me that it would be best for you to stick to discussing basketball and stop offering your unsolicited opinions on the merits of individual posters. I certainly never said anything disparaging about you, and I expect the same courtesy in return. Your quasi-apology for lumping me into a group I don't belong to ("fair enough") would carry a little more weight if you didn't immediately follow it with a swipe at another poster. I know things are getting a bit contentious around here lately, losing will do that, but it's something of a surprise to get bashed by another poster - particualrly given that it's a poster whose posts I've never responded to or commented on. But hey, whatever floats your boat. Stay classy San Diego.


The swipe was more at the posters that aren't here now. All the grandiose claims about how Tyson was a center, and we wouldn't miss Curry, and blah blah blah. So I apologize. I had you wrong from the getgo. I apologize. Please do not longer address me as a poster and let's venture back on topic. I hope that is real enough for you.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

Pippenatorade said:


> The swipe was more at the posters that aren't here now. All the grandiose claims about how Tyson was a center, and we wouldn't miss Curry, and blah blah blah. So I apologize. I had you wrong from the getgo. I apologize. Please do not longer address me as a poster and let's venture back on topic. I hope that is real enough for you.


Works for me. Go Bulls.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

jbulls said:


> 2. I think Skiles was too tough on Curry. I also think Skiles has been on a bunch of other guys - Tyson Chandler, Ben Gordon and (lately) Kirk Hinrich spring to mind.
> 
> 4. Yes, Michael Sweetney is fat. I don't buy that he gets coddled by Paxson and Skiles.


jbulls, the juxtaposition of 2 and 4 is what gets me wondering. The couple of quotes I saw regarding Sweetney were there, yes, but they were fairly mild. Other guys step out of line and get an anvil dropped on them. Not just the guys you name - conditioning issues were at least part (by appearances a pretty big one) of the reason guys like Fizer and Frank Williams never even got the chance Sweetney did with Skiles.

So why does Sweetney get a pass?

Maybe it's not a trade reason.... maybe it's just that Skiles likes him and doesn't like those other guys. Just has you pointed out Skiles has been on some guys, he's been on the jocks of a couple of other guys. He's practically going Dick Vermeil on us about Nocioni. 

When was the last time he said anything bad about Duhon- who's recent shot selection, general decision-making, and occasionally subtley disagreeing (with Skiles) press clippings may well get anyone else sent to the bench.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Has anyone considered the possibility that Skiles is nicer to Sweetney because he's been reading message boards for four years that tell him what a meanie he was to Eddy and how he destroyed the poor kid's psyche by suggesting he jump to get a rebound?

Maybe Scott is just taking the pearls of wisdom to heart.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> The swipe was more at the posters that aren't here now. All the grandiose claims about how Tyson was a center, and we wouldn't miss Curry, and blah blah blah. So I apologize. I had you wrong from the getgo. I apologize. Please do not longer address me as a poster and let's venture back on topic. I hope that is real enough for you.


"Swipe" isn't necessary at all, now is it?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Has anyone considered the possibility that Skiles is nicer to Sweetney because he's been reading message boards for four years that tell him what a meanie he was to Eddy and how he destroyed the poor kid's psyche by suggesting he jump to get a rebound?
> 
> Maybe Scott is just taking the pearls of wisdom to heart.


HAHA mate, do you really think that Skiles would take any advice from us? He doesnt seem like a guy who has a real open mind.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

jbulls said:


> Works for me. Go Bulls.


Go Bulls!


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

DaBullz said:


> "Swipe" isn't necessary at all, now is it?


You're right.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Skiles said more bad things about Eddy Curry in his first week on the job then he has about Sweetney in 3 months.



Again, I'm gonna have to say you're wrong on this one. Skiles did say that Eddy was not in good shape, but he totally deflected the blame from Eddy onto Cartwright and the rest of the previous regime. All that "its because nobody really was there to show him the right way" stuff. Which I really kinda think was less than classy because I felt like he really threw Mr. Bill under the bus.

I also think you'd hear a lot more about Sweetney's weight if the media focused on the guy as much they did Eddy. Anytime Eddy was sat down for any amount of time, or had one of his stretches where he was a nonfactor, the media was sure to ask Skiles about it.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Does the darn fat [email protected] start the game with 2 fouls?

Sure seems like it, or at least Sweetpie seems to pick up two right after the tip-off


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> jbulls, the juxtaposition of 2 and 4 is what gets me wondering. The couple of quotes I saw regarding Sweetney were there, yes, but they were fairly mild. Other guys step out of line and get an anvil dropped on them. Not just the guys you name - conditioning issues were at least part (by appearances a pretty big one) of the reason guys like Fizer and Frank Williams never even got the chance Sweetney did with Skiles.
> 
> So why does Sweetney get a pass?
> 
> ...


I'm not sure Sweetney gets a pass. He's not getting ripped, but he's not getting a pass. He is getting called out. Not in an overt way, but in a way nonetheless. As far as Fizer and Frank Williams - they were awful. Williams in particular. And Fizer is a guy who does one thing (score) and he doesn't do it well enough to get minutes on an NBA team even approaching good. Neither of those guys are in the league. I'm GLAD Sweetney gets more rope than Fizer and Frank Williams because they aren't NBA players. Sweetney is certainly an NBA player and potentially a productive one.

I have posted time and again criticizing Skiles for his treatment of players. I think he's too tough direct with the press and too tough on them in public. I think that was especially the case with Curry. If you juxtapose Curry's treatment with most Bulls you're going to find a discrepancy. My qualm was with the idea that Sweetney is treated better than he should be by PaxSkiles because of his place in the Curry deal. I don't think he is - I think he gets called out like most players. Certainly Duhon and Noc are at the teacher's pets, and guys like Eddy and now Tyson have the dunce cap. I consider Sweetney to be somewhere in the middle - along with most of the team, that's all. I just don't want to see him scapegoated because of his place in the Curry deal. I wish we had Eddy too...


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Sweetney's worthless *** needs to be on the IR or whatever they're calling it this year. It's early and I haven't had my espresso but he might even be worse than Chandler.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

jbulls said:


> I'm not sure Sweetney gets a pass. He's not getting ripped, but he's not getting a pass. He is getting called out. Not in an overt way, but in a way nonetheless. As far as Fizer and Frank Williams - they were awful. Williams in particular. And Fizer is a guy who does one thing (score) and he doesn't do it well enough to get minutes on an NBA team even approaching good. Neither of those guys are in the league. I'm GLAD Sweetney gets more rope than Fizer and Frank Williams because they aren't NBA players. Sweetney is certainly an NBA player and potentially a productive one.


Maybe Fizer at the end when he was fat and his knee was busted up, but I'd take the pre-knee injury 02-03 Fizer over Sweetney. He was being mentioned as a 6th man of the year candidate. Truely everything unraveled quickly for him, but it seemed to be going ok when he got hurt.

Sweetney, on the other hand, needs to get his **** together if he wants to stay in the league. A couple years down the pike, if he doesn't get in shape, who's going to want him?



> I have posted time and again criticizing Skiles for his treatment of players. I think he's too tough direct with the press and too tough on them in public. I think that was especially the case with Curry. If you juxtapose Curry's treatment with most Bulls you're going to find a discrepancy. My qualm was with the idea that Sweetney is treated better than he should be by PaxSkiles because of his place in the Curry deal. I don't think he is - I think he gets called out like most players. Certainly Duhon and Noc are at the teacher's pets, and guys like Eddy and now Tyson have the dunce cap. I consider Sweetney to be somewhere in the middle - along with most of the team, that's all. I just don't want to see him scapegoated because of his place in the Curry deal. I wish we had Eddy too...


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/bulls.asp?id=140493



> The Bulls stuck with the successful starting lineup used on Friday in Milwaukee, but third-year center Michael Sweetney is hardly playing starter’s minutes.
> 
> He left the Bucks game after picking up 2 fouls in the first 1:15. On Saturday against Memphis, Sweetney got his second foul with 7:44 left in the first quarter.
> 
> ...



http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...lsbits,1,2779267.story?coll=cs-home-headlines




> Michael Sweetney continues to test coach Scott Skiles' patience.
> 
> Like he has on so many occasions this season, Sweetney started against the Grizzlies on Saturday night but because of foul trouble he didn't stay in the game for long.
> 
> ...


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> Maybe Fizer at the end when he was fat and his knee was busted up, but I'd take the pre-knee injury 02-03 Fizer over Sweetney. He was being mentioned as a 6th man of the year candidate. Truely everything unraveled quickly for him, but it seemed to be going ok when he got hurt.
> 
> Sweetney, on the other hand, needs to get his **** together if he wants to stay in the league. A couple years down the pike, if he doesn't get in shape, who's going to want him?


You're right - Fizer's game took a nosedive post torn ACL.

Sweets has been awful the past couple of weeks but I still think he can be a pretty good NBA player. I won't say "will" be a good NBA player, but the potential is there. He's averaging something like 11 and 6 in 22 minutes, so it's not like he's Dalibor Bagaric. I'm not defending his play of late, I just think turning him into a pariah isn't totall fair. If we'd signed Sweets to Songaila's deal as a FA, and gotten Darius in the Eddy trade I can't help but think everyone would be piling on Songaila right now.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

jbulls said:


> I just don't want to see him scapegoated because of his place in the Curry deal. I wish we had Eddy too...


Even if the starting center for New York didn't exist, Michael Sweetney would still be fat, useless, mediocre and not to be considered of any consequence as a trade acquisition. Better? lol


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> I do. I want everyone blamed for that stupid move. If being fat wasn't ok with Curry (and he was never within 20 lbs. of being as fat as Crisco Sweetney) then it isn't ok now. If people were screaming and red in the face and acting like Eddy killed someone for showing up fat 2.5 years ago, then it's not ok now period. If it's true for one guy it's true for another and so on. I'm not saying that you disagree with any of this. I want Sweetney blamed, Paxson, and everyone who Eddy-haters held up as the guys that were gonna "show everyone that Eddy had little if anything to do with our season last year." Again, I'm not saying you were saying that, but many did. Before Eddy's heart problem many were saying that "82games.com shows we'd be BETTER without Eddy Curry" and that we'd basically be better if we traded him for a sack of chips. So yes.... everyone now bears the brunt of those predictions.
> 
> Sweetney is on scapegoat notice. He has his ticket and he's about to board the plane.


The facade is starting to crack Pippenatorade. 

Directing everything back to a rant about Eddy is not the way to go.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> The facade is starting to crack Pippenatorade.
> 
> Directing everything back to a rant about Eddy is not the way to go.


Point taken.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Skiles has to be given credit for finally stating the obvious. Maybe he actually reads the boards. The timing was curious. With Skiles rather strong comments and the DNP-CD I will be retiring that he was rather easy on one guy and not the other. But it sure took him a while (3 months) to act up. I mean, he had problems with Curry, BEFORE, he met him.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Thanks!


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> Thanks!


Just so you know Mike, I have murky memories of your stances on a lot of issues a year-1.5 years ago and you've done a great job of re-interpolating based on what you've learned and you've been one of the few on any board who could simply say the words "I was wrong." Major kudos. I'd liken it to me giving up on Jamal Crawford about 2 years ago. 

As far as Sweetney goes, I think he need accountability and am violently opposed to him being held up as some kind of asset we got in the trade (an asset of any value that is). However I think he can be groomed to be a nice 2 mill per year eventual successor to the role Othella filled for us last year.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

Mikedc said:


> The facade is starting to crack Pippenatorade.
> 
> Directing everything back to a rant about Eddy is not the way to go.


It was clear to me the first couple of posts that this is Matrix reborn...again.

I guess Mods are (again) going to let him post until he says something stupid...again


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> As far as Sweetney goes, I think he need accountability and am violently opposed to him being held up as some kind of asset we got in the trade (an asset of any value that is). However I think he can be groomed to be a nice 2 mill per year eventual successor to the role Othella filled for us last year.


Thanks, that's all I'm saying. I'm of the opinion that the guy sucks ***, but all I'm willing to say is that if he gets it together I'll be happy to say I was wrong.

--------------

That being said, getting back to jbulls' comments, I don't think *I* would be all over Songaila. Certainly he didn't start out too well, but I've been calling for him to get more minutes lately. He's actually, in an odd way, this year's closer counterpart to Eddy. He's obviously a barely adequate rebounder and defender, but he's been our best big on offense (though, he does it in a totally different way than Eddy, by shooting off the picks and crafty slashes to the hoop, and nice passing). The really interesting thing is that although he's not a very great defender or rebounder our defense and rebounding appear better when he's in the game.

Back to Sweetney, my thoughts on him are that if he gets in shape he's a very good NBA player. If he doesn't get in shape he'll be playing for the minimum (or close to it) after his rookie contract just like Tractor Traylor, Ollie Miller and yes, Marcus Fizer.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> Thanks, that's all I'm saying. I'm of the opinion that the guy sucks ***, but all I'm willing to say is that if he gets it together I'll be happy to say I was wrong.
> 
> --------------
> 
> ...



Mike you raise a very interesting discussion that I think I have something interesting to add to. Take a look at the mix of our frontcourt last year. It was full of incomplete players who complemented each other. This relates to why I think Songaila is best sent packing this summer.

2004-05 Frontcourt:

Offensive player #1: *Eddy Curry* - 7'0" 285, battering ram who could space the floor by drawing doubles and extra attention close to the basket, terrible rebounder, average defender, good man defender against other big centers and specifically back to the basket players, bad team defender, bad passer, didn't always pass terribly like some think, but didn't throw the type of ball that let to smooth catch-and-shoot motions. The perfect player to use in the strategy of "we'll put all our eggs in this basket early, get all the offense we can get out of this guy early, force the opponent into a certain defensive mindset early, and then we'll go to a defensive lineup that runs the opposition ragged (after they've just been used to a halfcourt grind it out game) and we'll have a fresh Ben Gordon running amock. Great at wearing down frontcourt players and causing foul problems.

Defensive player #1: *Antonio Davis* - 6'9" 235, nice little jumper, not a turnaround scorer or a scorer off the dribble. Knew all the veteran tricks of the trade. If ever a player would make Bill Russell, Elvin Hayes, and Dennis Rodman all proud it was Antonio Davis. Tough. Ultra defender in any situation. Could defend high and defend low, defend the faceup or the post move. Expert at finding a body immediately after the shot went up. Great at positioning for a rebound, even better at getting it. A leader by example. Didn't come here to "teach the kids" and run his mouth like Oakley and Rose. Just did it. Instilled toughness, the old Pacers winning mentality, and fear in the opponent. Opponents knew that they didn't want to get too physical and end up in a streetfight with AD. For all the talk about toughness with guys like Hinrich, or grittiness and guys like Buechler and Levingston, nobody was all the things that Bulls fans profess to want more than Antonio Davis. Knowing what most GMs know now just about any of them would probably have drafted Davis out of UTEP in the first round and kept him for 15 years. 

Defensive player #2: *Tyson Chandler* - 7'1" 235, as good of a help defender as you're going to find in the NBA, and while not a position rebounder, great at just going up and grabbing the ball. When he has players with size and/or toughness to put a body on the other teams main offensive threat he can be a terror blocking shots. As a help defender he's David Robinson. As a "grab" rebounder he's Dennis Rodman. As a man defender he's Otis Thorpe and as a position rebounder he's Anthony Bonner. Can have all of his weaknesses nullified by coming off the bench against a frontcourt tired out by having to guard a 285 lb. man and then try to score on a physical player like Antonio Davis, and then being able to flyswat while Curry/Davis types put a body on someone. If someone is putting a body on the other teams offensive post threat and boxing people out Tyson can often look like an all star. When he has to do the dirty work in terms of being a man defender and gaining position downlow he can make you wonder why the hell you paid the guy. Athleticism and a threat to run the floor. Worked best, like Eddy, when paired with Antonio Davis. Davis and Chandler made up a stifling frontcourt together defensively and on the offensive board. AD cleaned up with the body work, Tyson jumped around like house of pain.

Offensive player #2: *Othella Harrington* - 6'9" 235, not very athletic, not really special in any way. Can be a good second option in the frontcourt, and even show flashes of carrying the house offensively. Has a nice inside outside game offensively, very versatile. Isn't going to wow you in any area as a post player, but doesn't struggle with much either. Is at least effective at everything. Not the kind of big who can carry you in a starting role in any capacity throughout an 82 game season, but can be a nice second punch offensively in the frontcourt.

Now, here's the problem. We now have no one who reminds us of offensive player #1, or defensive player #1. We still have defensive player #2, but he's now surrounded byHarrington of course and then Allen, Sweetney and Songaila. The problem with Allen Sweetney and Songaila is that all 3 of them remind me more of Harrington than they do of Chandler, Davis or Curry. Tyson Chandler can't be the Tyson Chandler he was last year with 4 Othella Harrington types surrounding him. If Sweetney can develop into the role Harrington filled last year, he needs to do it, then we can move Allen, Songaila and Harrington over the next two years and get another offensive #1 and defensive #1 (like say Aldridge this summer and Magloire next summer). 

I also give props to Skiles for moving Hinrich back to PG. IMO when I see this teams future as any kind of championship contender I see the roster this way:

C - Hole, Sweetney
PF - Hole, Chandler
SF - Deng, Nocioni
SG - Hole, Gordon
PG - Hinrich, Duhon

Last year's team, which I believe would have inevitably contended if left together was like this in terms of champion potential:

C - Curry, Harrington
PF - Davis, Chandler
SF - Deng, Nocioni
SG - Hole, Gordon
PG - Hinrich, Duhon

With of course the two frontcourt positions being as interchangeable as any in the league. I put Harrington behind Curry because I viewed Center as our offensive position and the 4 as our defensive position. 

So basically how does this relate back to Sweetney? I view him as a chance to become a better version of 2004-05 Othella so that we can move Othella, Allen and Songaila for better frontcourt players over the next two offseasons. If he can do that, I will consider him the second best asset in the trade after the lotto pick.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> Thanks, that's all I'm saying. I'm of the opinion that the guy sucks ***, but all I'm willing to say is that if he gets it together I'll be happy to say I was wrong.
> 
> --------------
> 
> ...


Songaila is incredibly slow and unathletic. I think opponents are just sagging off the guy with the knee brace these days.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Pippenatorade said:


> Mike you raise a very interesting discussion that I think I have something interesting to add to. Take a look at the mix of our frontcourt last year. It was full of incomplete players who complemented each other. This relates to why I think Songaila is best sent packing this summer.
> 
> < snip >
> 
> So basically how does this relate back to Sweetney? I view him as a chance to become a better version of 2004-05 Othella so that we can move Othella, Allen and Songaila for better frontcourt players over the next two offseasons. If he can do that, I will consider him the second best asset in the trade after the lotto pick.


I think that's pretty on the money provided Sweetney can get himself in a modicrum of basketball shape. Sweetney in shape is much better than Harrington but you're right, would play the same role. Unfortunately, I think there's no given that Sweetney gets in shape and an out of shape Sweetney isn't as good as Harrington.

Songaila is a still a nice guy to have though because he provides a different look than anyone else. Basically he's a situational guy who can come in and pass and shoot. Nice things to have for a big playing next to Curry or even in an up tempo game next to Chandler. He's not a post guy at all, but he's a nice change of pace. Maybe when we don't have the bread and butter guys, he's a luxury though.

As far as the future, I'd be just as willing, maybe more, to trade Sweetney than Harrington. Sweetney has both higher upside and downside. Harrington is perfectly adequate for the role he plays (and will continue to be for the next 6 years or so, probably), and some team might bet on Sweetney's upside and give us more return for him. By the trading deadline it'll be obvious to the Bulls anyway (or should be) whether he'll ever get his act together. If he looks like he will, then keep him, if not, give him to someone who thinks he might.


----------



## Pippenatorade (Dec 29, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> I think that's pretty on the money provided Sweetney can get himself in a modicrum of basketball shape. Sweetney in shape is much better than Harrington but you're right, would play the same role. Unfortunately, I think there's no given that Sweetney gets in shape and an out of shape Sweetney isn't as good as Harrington.
> 
> Songaila is a still a nice guy to have though because he provides a different look than anyone else. Basically he's a situational guy who can come in and pass and shoot. Nice things to have for a big playing next to Curry or even in an up tempo game next to Chandler. He's not a post guy at all, but he's a nice change of pace. Maybe when we don't have the bread and butter guys, he's a luxury though.
> 
> As far as the future, I'd be just as willing, maybe more, to trade Sweetney than Harrington. Sweetney has both higher upside and downside. Harrington is perfectly adequate for the role he plays (and will continue to be for the next 6 years or so, probably), and some team might bet on Sweetney's upside and give us more return for him. By the trading deadline it'll be obvious to the Bulls anyway (or should be) whether he'll ever get his act together. If he looks like he will, then keep him, if not, give him to someone who thinks he might.


I don't disagree I think you just expanded on my reasoning. I described what Sweetney could be, I never said he'd do it lol. In the end I agree, I think we end up trading Sweetney and keeping Othella in that offensive #2 role.

As far as Songaila, you're also correct. He's not really a post guy so I don't count him in our post rotation. I think if we keep him he'd be the offensive #3/wildcard post player. Like a Kukoc almost. A guy who, when you don't have an answer and you need a spark, you can maybe look to him to create a mismatch. I think if we keep him it's because we decide to go with 5 players in our post rotation. He also gives you a third SF in very occasional situations or if Noce were to be hurt. So that I think it ends up looking like this:

Offense: Hole, Sweetney/Harrington, Songaila
Defense: Hole, Chandler

And I think Allen is out regardles. That's how I see it shaking out


----------

