# Eddy Curry



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I saw on the other board that Reinsdorf(!) said yesterday that Eddy could be in better shape.

And I read in the Trib today that one reason we want Mutombo is to "practice" against Eddy.

Without going into the details of either situation, I think it's worth pointing out that we've already tried (and failed) on multiple occasions (Oakley, Pippen, Hersey Hawkins, BJ, AD) to bring in over the hill vets who would, seemingly by the osmosis of being around our kids, teach them "the right way to play".

Hell, wasn't one of the many alternative rationales for the Rose-AD trade that AD would give our kids a veteran big man who could show them the ropes and show them how to be pros?

Without saying that we need to cut bait on Curry, don't the Bulls have to, at some point look at the situation and say "he is what he is" and rather than spending time, money, valuable cap space, bringing in yet another in the endless stream of guys who know a lot but can't do a lot anymore?

At this point, it just seems like we ought to have learned our lesson there. Sure, having a guy like Deke is a nice resource, but how much nicer is it than having AD? And it's not taken advantage of by Curry, what's the point? 

I can't believe that is a notion that Paxson would put any credence in at this point. At least, if he has any sense, he shouldn't.

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

Perhaps they might even try an alternative approach- bring in a guy who's going to make Eddy compete by providing a real alternative to his minutes. If he wants to be out on the court, and wants to play, then make him beat somebody out.

Philosophically, it's pretty clear to me that handing roles to players has gotten us nowhere. And truly, whether we like to say there's no "entitlement minutes" or not, that's what we're doing when all we have backing up Eddy and Tyson is Mutombo and AD, and all we're having behind Ben and Kirk is Duhon and Anderson, we're pre-defining roles.

In a competitive environment, roles aren't pre-defined, they're won. What we've done is set up players in roles, with only token competition from a guy who's there "to teach them". I know players don't like to have to fight for roles, but I think it's necessary.

And I also think that a good manager can play that hand the right way if he tries. But what you have to do is talk up the more experienced guy as much as possible. Re-assure him he's the starter and make the newcomer fight his way into the lineup. When that really does happen, it's ok, because, by virtue of being in the lineup, the more veteran guy has real value and can be traded.

Doing what we've (repeatedly) done is putting the cart before the horse. By giving jobs to kids who weren't ready, we've created expectations. By trading away guys that can play for "mentors" we don't have any insurance and we don't have any trade value left.

That's one reason I'm pretty adament about wanting Jamal back. If we talk him up as the starter, and make Ben kick and claw his way into the lineup, it's a workable situation. Ben won't get on the court unless he absolutely deserves to, and when he does, the respect he gets will absolutely be earned. Crawford will remain as a tradeable asset (unless he takes the QO, in which case he's at least made Ben earn his minutes). 

On the other hand, if we hand a job to Ben that he's not necessarily ready for, we're facing a tougher player to deal with if circumstances change (just as we are with Jamal, Eddy, and Tyson). I know Ben's a good attitude guy, but even good attitude guys don't like to be given a starting job and then lose it. They don't like their expectations changed. And they don't like losing. Starting him off slow is the right way to handle things.

Further, even though it will be an "expectations" battle with our big kids (since they already see themselves as starters), if there was a way to get a guy in here that could really put one of them on the bench, I think it would be a healthy move in the long run. 

If, say, we could get ahold of SAR and Derek Anderson in a Crawford sign and trade (Anderson offsetting some of the bad contracts we'd have to send back), I'd be more than happy to install them as starters and make our kids fight to unseat them.


----------



## andras (Mar 19, 2003)

very, VERY good post IMO. I agree 100%. I like the guys we drafted but I'd be so much better for them to fight for them spots!!


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

I'll go one step further.

It's just a hunch on my part and I have no basis in fact for this statement. But I believe the Bulls may be getting closer every day to pulling the plug on Eddy Curry. Particularly if Chandler's back proves to be healthy, I believe the Bulls would be perfectly content to slide Tyson over to 5 and be done with Curry. It would not surprise me in the least if Curry's name surfaced in trade rumors around the trading deadline and the Bulls made an attempt to see what they might get in return for him. He is still unique enough of a player and is seen as having enough upside that potential suitors would be lined up around the block to talk to Pax about him.

You heard it here first.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> I'll go one step further.
> 
> It's just a hunch on my part and I have no basis in fact for this statement. But I believe the Bulls may be getting closer every day to pulling the plug on Eddy Curry. Particularly if Chandler's back proves to be healthy, I believe the Bulls would be perfectly content to slide Tyson over to 5 and be done with Curry. It would not surprise me in the least if Curry's name surfaced in trade rumors around the trading deadline and the Bulls made an attempt to see what they might get in return for him. He is still unique enough of a player and is seen as having enough upside that potential suitors would be lined up around the block to talk to Pax about him.
> ...


You may very well be right. It is quite possible Curry and/or Chandler doesn't survive the entirety of next season. Even if Curry plays only a little better than last season.. there is sure to be plenty of teams interested.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> I'll go one step further.
> 
> It's just a hunch on my part and I have no basis in fact for this statement. But I believe the Bulls may be getting closer every day to pulling the plug on Eddy Curry. Particularly if Chandler's back proves to be healthy, I believe the Bulls would be perfectly content to slide Tyson over to 5 and be done with Curry. It would not surprise me in the least if Curry's name surfaced in trade rumors around the trading deadline and the Bulls made an attempt to see what they might get in return for him. He is still unique enough of a player and is seen as having enough upside that potential suitors would be lined up around the block to talk to Pax about him.
> ...


On draft night, I suggested that we might trade Hinrich and Curry. What would those guys bring us back in trade?

My assumption was that Chandler would play the 5, Gordon would start at PG, and Crawford at SG.

Minus those two, our lineup looks pretty good:
Crawford/Gordon/Duhon/Pargo at guard
Deng/AD/JYD/ERob at forward
Chandler/AD at C

So assume that teams really like Hinrich and still like Curry's size and potential. What do we want in return?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> I'll go one step further.
> 
> It's just a hunch on my part and I have no basis in fact for this statement. But I believe the Bulls may be getting closer every day to pulling the plug on Eddy Curry. Particularly if Chandler's back proves to be healthy, I believe the Bulls would be perfectly content to slide Tyson over to 5 and be done with Curry. It would not surprise me in the least if Curry's name surfaced in trade rumors around the trading deadline and the Bulls made an attempt to see what they might get in return for him. He is still unique enough of a player and is seen as having enough upside that potential suitors would be lined up around the block to talk to Pax about him.
> ...


Agreed, except I don't see any logic in waiting. If this is the case, we'll get better value this summer than by exposing his poor play over the first part of the season. 

I mean, if we make that decision about him as a player, it's because we don't expect he's going to be tangibly better this season, and we think he could even end up on the bench in the course of the season. That will drive his value down. If they decide he's not gonna have the right 'tude, the time to get what you can for him is now.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Agreed, except I don't see any logic in waiting.


1. In spite of his apparent lack of effort this off-season, I still expect Curry to be better than he was last season.

2. I think the Bulls would want to battle test Chandler to make sure he's OK before trading Curry. Maybe they are already sure-- if so, then I agree there's less reason to wait.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

This is somewhat off-topic, but I'm surprised nobody's mentioned this blurb from that Trib article:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...sbits,1,7104649.story?coll=cs-bulls-headlines



> The Bulls value Mutombo as a mentor for Eddy Curry, *whose off-season work continues to lag*.


If this is true, I definitely would not put it past Pax to shop Eddy sometime this season. He's trying to build a team of guys with good work ethics and attitude and it's clear he's willing to sacrifice talent to accomplish that goal. He may say Eddy's part of the future here, but I'm confident that could easily change in the (straight face here) "blink of an eye." :grinning:


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Yep, according to the other board, KC was on Chicago radio saying similar things about Curry not working hard in the last week, too.

Kudos to Kneepad. I think he has his finger on the pulse.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> I saw on the other board that Reinsdorf(!) said yesterday that Eddy could be in better shape.
> 
> And I read in the Trib today that one reason we want Mutombo is to "practice" against Eddy.
> ...


Theres a reason why they are paid to build teams and theres a reason why we're not.

The pros know what their doing...and besides: We could easily look at the likes of Fizer and Jwill and say "Nah...the draft is an evil thing. We've been there. Why put any credence into that notion?"

Or "Gosh...look at Bagaric and Tarlac...Nocioni? No way..."

The vets and the pros do things the way they because it's worked before..

All said: Mutombo will have a better effect on Eddy and his game than Moochie ever will.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Why will Mutumbo help Eddy practice any better than AD does?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Why will Mutumbo help Eddy practice any better than AD does?


Wrong question.

Will Mutombo be a better practice partner than Moochie is the correct one....


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> 
> 1. In spite of his apparent lack of effort this off-season, I still expect Curry to be better than he was last season.
> 
> 2. I think the Bulls would want to battle test Chandler to make sure he's OK before trading Curry. Maybe they are already sure-- if so, then I agree there's less reason to wait.


These are good points to be sure. I guess with respect to 1, I think that being better probably isn't enough. More or less, you tend to get better deals in the summer, which other teams can imagine that Curry might bust out vs. them knowing for sure that he won't. 

With respect to 2, I see it the other way. The way I see it, if they decide that Curry's gonna be a bum no matter what, I think they have to trade him anyway, and if Chandler fails, he fails. 

I mean, if you think Curry's a bum, keeping him as insurance to Chandler doesn't constitute much insurance. If they trade him now, however, then you probably get someone back who does constitute insurance.

But, if you wait, expose Curry's flaws, and then Chandler gets hurt, you can't rely on Curry to bring back anything in trade that replaces Chandler.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Wrong question.
> ...


It is a better question. Frankly, I bet Mutumbo would play some significant minutes for us, and contribute.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> These are good points to be sure. I guess with respect to 1, I think that being better probably isn't enough. More or less, you tend to get better deals in the summer, which other teams can imagine that Curry might bust out vs. them knowing for sure that he won't.
> 
> With respect to 2, I see it the other way. The way I see it, if they decide that Curry's gonna be a bum no matter what, I think they have to trade him anyway, and if Chandler fails, he fails.


Good points, Mike.

Now that I think about it some more, the type of deals that happen around the trade deadline tend to be more for veteran players that are traded to teams looking to make a playoff push. Curry is still more of a project player.

I gotta say I didn't expect this reaction to my initial post in this tread. Where are the Curry supporters?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

This kind of touches on another point- one of my biggest criticisms of Pax to this point is Ithat he's seemed to make a couple of moves in expectation of "staying the course" but then reversed course.

For example, bringing in Pippen, although it turned out to not be a great move at all, made some sense over bringing in Posey or Ira Newble if the long term plan was to hang on to Jalen Rose. But it seems to me that all along there was probably a desire to dump Rose. Obviously it become more urgent when we got crushed coming out of the gates last year, but it's not like there weren't a lot of rumblings that we'd like to move him.

If you want to move him, then sure, wait for the right deal, but don't make moves that rely on him being here. On the periphery there has to be some compromise, of course, but when it comes to big moves like trading the guy who was your franchise player (Rose) or who you expect to be (Curry), I think you need to do what Brian Boitano would do (he'd make a plan and he'd follow through!).

In fairness, this may be what's going on with Ben and Jamal. One way of reading things is that Pax has made a decision on Jamal and is moving on. I don't agree with that move (for the many reasons I've stated), but I do at least agree with the general concept of making a direction and going there (however, if they really wanted this, they shouldn't be debating between making a long-term offer and trying to clear salary- make a path and stick to it).

I think with Curry we kind of see this. They need to not agonize over the decision for months... if they conclude that they only hope Eddy will get it together, rather than think he will, they need to plan accordingly (e.g., figure out how to get another young center in, and figure out how there team is going to work). For example, if they decide they can't count on Eddy, it may well mean keeping Jamal is more important, since you could potentially run a decent perimeter based attack with him and Gordon.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Not to over simply this, but Pax has not yet decided on Curry. He knows he needs to decide by the trade deadline. 

I think a Curry deal is just as likely at the trading deadline as right now. Either way, the best I can see us doing is a SAR type player or another rookie contract guy that is not terribly appealing (Murphy, Jrich, Wilcox, Tskillivich - SP). Maybe we pick up a 1st or swap contracts to our advantage.

Gooden got traded twice. The first mid-season deal yielded a better haul than the summer deal.

Miles got traded twice. The first summer deal yielded a better haul than the mid-season deal.

With guys on rookie contracts, it seems the sooner you move them, the better shape you are in. 

Any trade of Curry will be at a discount b/c we know him best and he is worth as much to us as anyone if he reaches his potential. So if we are dealing him, there most be something wrong and he is not worth full value.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> I gotta say I didn't expect this reaction to my initial post in this tread. Where are the Curry supporters?


Don't know, but I've thrown this out there before and will do so now. Does Houston do Curry and Chandler for Yao? Because I pull the trigger on that in a second.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> I saw on the other board that Reinsdorf(!) said yesterday that Eddy could be in better shape.
> 
> And I read in the Trib today that one reason we want Mutombo is to "practice" against Eddy.
> ...


The "teach the kids" rationale was never the "teach Eddy" rationale. Maybe one day you'll stop trying to lynch him on here. Did he turne you down for an autograph? "Teach the kids" had as much to do with Tyson and Jamal IF NOT MORE especially in the extremely RAW Tyson's case as it ever did with Eddy. 

In fact of all the guys who were brought in to "teach the kids" only one was a center.....at least two (Oakley, Marshall) actually play TYSON's position.

Maybe we just have to accept Tyson for what he is. Of course at least Eddy stays on the court for more games without getting hurt, so do we even really KNOW what Tyson is?


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Did i miss something. From all the news i have read says that curry is thinner and in better shape than last year. No dis-respect to KC but before we say anything about what shape curry is or is no in i would like to hear more than just KC who is, IMHO, not that relaible.

david


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Why will Mutumbo help Eddy practice any better than AD does?



I think Paxson's thinking is that Mutumbo can teach Eddy how to be the kind of defender Pax/Skiles want him to be. Pax and Skiles have said all along that they aren't worried about Eddy's scoring, but they are worried about his defense. And that is their main focus with him. Bringing in a past DPOY would be a guy they would love to have around him I assume.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> I'll go one step further.
> 
> It's just a hunch on my part and I have no basis in fact for this statement. But I believe the Bulls may be getting closer every day to pulling the plug on Eddy Curry. Particularly if Chandler's back proves to be healthy, I believe the Bulls would be perfectly content to slide Tyson over to 5 and be done with Curry. It would not surprise me in the least if Curry's name surfaced in trade rumors around the trading deadline and the Bulls made an attempt to see what they might get in return for him. He is still unique enough of a player and is seen as having enough upside that potential suitors would be lined up around the block to talk to Pax about him.
> ...


LOL very credible. Hey guys.....just a hunch, and I have no proof whatsoever, but I think a leprechaun will be running around the united center opening night passing out gold coins.

Tyson at the five?? LMAO his geriatric @ss couldn't stay on the court playing the FOUR. 

I love this. -No need for name calling, indirectly or not. - 

Have a link, or something to substantiate your opinion.....


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>giusd</b>!
> Did i miss something. From all the news i have read says that curry is thinner and in better shape than last year. No dis-respect to KC but before we say anything about what shape curry is or is no in i would like to hear more than just KC who is, IMHO, not that relaible.


Conditioning is part of the equation. And you're right-- reports are that Curry has lost weight and is in better shape than last year. That should be a given, given the abysmal shape Curry was in at the start of last year.

To me, there's another part of the equation, though. _Skills._ Has he developed a left hand? A counter-move to the jump hook? How to get and maintain position in the post? How to get in position for rebounds? How to maintain defensive position in the post?

This has to grate on Paxson. He was around when Michael, Scottie, Horace, B.J., etc. all developed new skills and honed existing skills during off-seasons leading up to and through 3 NBA championships. To not see the same level of dedication and effort in his young center has to be terribly frustrating.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> LOL very credible. Hey guys.....just a hunch, and I have no proof whatsoever, but I think a leprechaun will be running around the united center opening night passing out gold coins.
> ...


F.Y.I. geriatric means old...an adjective noone should use to describe Chandler.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> F.Y.I. geriatric means old...an adjective noone should use to describe Chandler.


Yes exactly.....Tyson's spine last year was about as healthy as an 80 year old man. I knew what the word meant.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>sp00k</b>!
> 
> 
> Don't know, but I've thrown this out there before and will do so now. Does Houston do Curry and Chandler for Yao? Because I pull the trigger on that in a second.


This would be really dumb for Houston, no?

Why trade Yao for one unmotivated and one injury prone player?


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> LOL very credible. Hey guys.....just a hunch, and I have no proof whatsoever, but I think a leprechaun will be running around the united center opening night passing out gold coins.
> 
> Tyson at the five?? LMAO his geriatric @ss couldn't stay on the court playing the FOUR.
> ...


Jeez, rough crowd.










Hey LB26,

I clearly stated it was pure conjecture on my part... not sure why you got your panties all in a bunch.

For what it's worth... here's some quotes taken from a recent thread you started-- got any links to substantiate any of the parts in bold? Just wondering...



> Enter Luol Deng and Andres Nocioni. No Nocioni is not noted for having a great outside shot. *YES he WILL shoot higher than 40% from the field.*
> 
> Look folks.....a small forward has to be able to do something on this team. Catch the ball when nobody is guarding you and be able to make something happen ALL ALONE to a large enough degree that they have to stay with you. *Deng and Nocioni will do that.*
> 
> ...


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> Why trade Yao for one unmotivated and one injury prone player?


The answer is because the unmotivated player might one day become motivated and the "injury prone" player-- who really has had just one injury-- may recover fully. And if that happens, you might have two very effective big men vs. one.

That's a lot of "ifs", though, and is the reason there's no way Houston does it.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> 
> Jeez, rough crowd.
> 
> ...


Pretty funny.....except.......mine was what i feel a player has the talent to do on the court from what ive seen of each player. I mean I have at the very least SOMETHING to go on.

YOU however made remarks on what you feel Paxson will do. And from what? Have you been in Paxson's office? Do you have a secret transmitter that allows you to listen to Pax's phone calls. 

See the difference?

And saying a player can shoot 40% is nowhere near saying a player who couldn't hold up AT ALL at PF will just jump in and be an every day center.

*Also don't note that there was unanimous agreement with my post in that thread and that no one challenged any opinion of mine there*. 

You act like a SMALL FORWARD being able to shoot 40% is a BOLD prediction. Hell 42% should be our MINIMUM expectation.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> This would be really dumb for Houston, no?
> ...


That's kinda what I thought, but I think there are some that would say we were getting robbed in such a deal.

Just for kicks though, Houston can get two big men to pair up with TMac. Heck, I would throw in JC also so they have a four of TMac, JC, Eddy, and Tyson. We get back Yao, filler, and maybe Nachbar/future first. Houston has much better balance while we have a center that won't be questioned for his lack of conditioning or heart. Yao in the paint makes it easier to play Gordon and Kirk at PG1 and PG2.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

As big of Curry fan as I am, it's really not that far fetched. We all know the type of attitude Pax is trying to build here. If Eddy is going to continue to be out of shape and not care about basketball, he's going to be shipped out. That's all he was saying.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> Pretty funny.....except.......mine was what i feel a player has the talent to do on the court from what ive seen of each player. I mean I have at the very least SOMETHING to go on.
> ...


Not really



> *Also don't note that there was unanimous agreement with my post in that thread and that no one challenged any opinion of mine there*.


Silence != Assent


----------



## RipDirty (Jun 17, 2002)

Why is everyone so quick to put this franchises future in the very small hands Tyson Chandler? All we've heard about Tyson he finally lost the hitch in his jumper. Has he puy ANY moves in his game? How much better can we expect him to be if he goes the whole summer without contact? He's not even allowed to play in pick up games. If Pax or Skiles said Eddy wasn't putting in the work this is understandable. Why should anyone believe K.C. Johnson? If anyone watched Pax's interview at the RMR. He told everyone he wasn't going to watch Eddy and Tyson turn into great players playing for other teams. So EC is not going anywhere. How about trying to find a sucker to take AD and his contract off the books...


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBulls2315</b>!
> As big of Curry fan as I am, it's really not that far fetched. We all know the type of attitude Pax is trying to build here. If Eddy is going to continue to be out of shape and not care about basketball, he's going to be shipped out. That's all he was saying.


No actually that's not what he was saying. Eddy has made MARKED improvements working two-a-days with Skiles during the season, getting in the best shape of his life this summer, and being in the berto......basically doing what he's SUPPOSED to do. And we have kneepad saying that he STILL feels Eddy blah blah blah. So no.....it's not true that he was saying if Eddy continues to not care etc. Maybe that would have been a good point in December, but that point lacks the evidence now. When Pax himself says he is pleased with Eddy's shape and conditioning a statement like that has no merit.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> Not really


Well that has more to do with your lack of vision than anything else. The point was very fluently and logically laid out. If you can't really see the difference....then it's probably because you're so blinded by your rabid hate for Eddy Curry that you don't see logic at this point.



> Silence != Assent


Wow so there was no approval in that thread. Gee I must be misreading all of the "I agrees." Not patting myself on the back unprovoked, but if someone chooses to bring it up I'll defend it.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> No actually that's not what he was saying. Eddy has made MARKED improvements working two-a-days with Skiles during the season, getting in the best shape of his life this summer, and being in the berto......basically doing what he's SUPPOSED to do. And we have kneepad saying that he STILL feels Eddy blah blah blah. So no.....it's not true that he was saying if Eddy continues to not care etc. Maybe that would have been a good point in December, but that point lacks the evidence now. When Pax himself says he is pleased with Eddy's shape and conditioning a statement like that has no merit.


Exactly....look, KC doesn't like Eddy Curry for whatever reason. I don't know if it's the fact that Brad Miller was shipped out cause of Eddy or Eddy made KC feel like the Dan Bernsteinesque DORK he is in the locker room, but KC has it in for Eddy as much as Sam Smith ever had it in for Krause.

But hey....that's MikeDC for you. Don't listen to Pax himself when you can listen to what KC says.


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RipDirty</b>!
> If anyone watched Pax's interview at the RMR. He told everyone he wasn't going to watch Eddy and Tyson turn into great players playing for other teams. So EC is not going anywhere.


This is completely true. In a very candid interview during one of the Bulls' RMR games, Pax basically said that he feels like waiting on Chandler and Curry to develop into good players (b/c he's convinced that they will eventually). Pax did mention that the two youngsters have to get it in gear and start to show up in games (he specifically mentioned them being game deciding forces as a goal). 

He's not going to be all lax this year, but I agree (from what he pretty clearly stated at the RMR) that there's no way at all that either guy gets traded any time soon. It would have to be after another disappointing season. Pax's rationale was that he sees no reason to start over at this point. For now, his plan is to ride out the twin towers plan.


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly....look, KC doesn't like Eddy Curry for whatever reason. I don't know if it's the fact that Brad Miller was shipped out cause of Eddy or Eddy made KC feel like the Dan Bernsteinesque DORK he is in the locker room, but KC has it in for Eddy as much as JK ever had it in for Krause.
> ...


Just out of curiosity, are you agreeing with yourself here? You quoted your previous post and then added "exactly" as if you agree. Honestly, just curious.


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

You know, so many times I've wanted to be critical of the young bigs, started typing a post, but then second guessed it in fear of the foaming types and perhaps raining on the parade. But there's too many good points in this thread.

I competely agree about the need for competition within the team, especially with the young bigs it seems. It gives them motivation to improve all aspects of their game. It also makes it so you have easily movable assets, like mentioned earlier. 

In one scenario, you have everything working out -- you have the young gun eventually overtaking the established player, and then you can move the established player for value (Rasheed/Zebo, and I'd include Redd/Allen if that wasn't such a bad trade for GP). In another scenario, you have the established player keeping the starting spot, but the prospect maintains it's mystique and is still attractive to many because they want to see what the guy could do as a starter (Gasol/Swift, O'Neal/Artest/Harrington, Richardson/Pietrus).

I've always thought that the Bulls would do well with an established PF (or perhaps center, although this would be a tougher player to find), and having Chandler and Curry earning that starting center spot, and/or overtaking the established PF. And I'm not talking about a piece of roadkill like AD, but an actual youngish guy with some game like SAR or Swift.

As for the other notion brought up in this thread, suggesting that Curry or Chandler could be shopped this season, I would think that Pax and crew are listening no matter what they say. Earlier this year JVG was seemingly waxing romantic about Franchise's playoff effort and attitude change. Alot of people were surprised and/or thought that this was a genuine about-face for JVG. Then, Francis gets traded anyways. The reason I bring this up is as a reminder that you need to take the whole "He's our guy of the future" stuff with a grain of salt. They could very well be advertising; making their product look good in an attempt to hide the doubts that they most assuredly have. 

And if that's the case, it's worked so far. Even outside of Bulls fandom, Curry and Chandler are already assumed to have become greats -- it's like Nostrodamus said they were going to be All-stars, and that's that. It appears no one really wants to dwell on their performance as of now, or their lacking impact on their team's record.

However, I don't think this will last forever. I think that their hype will jump the shark (peak) rather soon. There's a very good possibility that their value may be at it's highest right now and will only get worse as seasons go by and the imaginations of people come back down to earth. If Pax and crew have signifcant doubts at this point, it would probably be in their best interest to shop them sooner than later.


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MongolianDeathCloud</b>!
> You know, so many times I've wanted to be critical of the young bigs, started typing a post, but then second guessed it in fear of the foaming types and perhaps raining on the parade. But there's too many good points in this thread.
> 
> I competely agree about the need for competition within the team, especially with the young bigs it seems. It gives them motivation to improve all aspects of their game. It also makes it so you have easily movable assets, like mentioned earlier.
> ...


Nice post. I thikn you're right that Pax's comments in favor of Curry and Chandler aren't necessarily set in stone.

I will say, however, that his interview at the RMR was really candid. It was as if, and of course this is just my take, that Pax was being far more open about the issue than he normally would be. It wasn't like K.C. Johnson was interviewing him and Pax had to spout the normal company line.

It was more like a conversation between the Jazz broascaster guy (Hot Rod something I think) and Pax. Honestly. This is just my opinion, but I really think that Pax gave his honest plan knowing that his words wouldn't really be quoted anywhere.

Maybe I'm way off, but I got this sense seeing the interview during the game. Anyone else see this on NBATV? Do you agree at all?


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>onetenthlag</b>!
> 
> 
> Just out of curiosity, are you agreeing with yourself here? You quoted your previous post and then added "exactly" as if you agree. Honestly, just curious.


LOL was supposed to be quoting Rip's post


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> LOL was supposed to be quoting Rip's post


That's pretty funny. I thought maybe you were just backing yourself up, which is cool too.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MongolianDeathCloud</b>!
> You know, so many times I've wanted to be critical of the young bigs, started typing a post, but then second guessed it in fear of the foaming types and perhaps raining on the parade. But there's too many good points in this thread.
> 
> I competely agree about the need for competition within the team, especially with the young bigs it seems. It gives them motivation to improve all aspects of their game. It also makes it so you have easily movable assets, like mentioned earlier.
> ...


LOL @ "Then Francis got traded"

FOR TRACY MCGRADY

Yeah are we packaging Eddy, AD and Jamal for Duncan.....if so I'm all for it. If not 

FALSE ANALOGY

We aren't trading Eddy.....no matter how much YOU THINK he doesn't deserve the hype KC.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>onetenthlag</b>!
> I will say, however, that his interview at the RMR was really candid. It was as if, and of course this is just my take, that Pax was being far more open about the issue than he normally would be. It wasn't like K.C. Johnson was interviewing him and Pax had to spout the normal company line.
> 
> It was more like a conversation between the Jazz broascaster guy (Hot Rod something I think) and Pax. Honestly. This is just my opinion, but I really think that Pax gave his honest plan knowing that his words wouldn't really be quoted anywhere.


If that's what he thought, then he's a damn fool.

Seriously, any on-the-record interview has to be taken with a grain of salt. In addition to DeathCloud's excellent example of JVG and Steve Francis, I distinctly recall Jerry West "candidly" saying he felt they had gotten the best player in the draft in Drew Gooden. A few months later he's traded for Mike Miller???

GM's are always "on" (at least they'd better be).


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> LOL @ "Then Francis got traded"
> ...


Well, that's kind of my point -- I don't think Eddy Curry should be traded for a bag of cheetos. If Pax and crew were coming out and saying that they are not as confident anymore in Curry and Chandler, they might just have to settle for a bag of cheetos.

If JVG had gone to the press and just canned on Francis, perhaps their odds of getting McGrady would have declined? That's the point I was trying to make -- that it can be possible for people to act like they are content with their guys, when in reality they are not and don't want it to be completely obvious. And I think the analagy works, so nyah.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>onetenthlag</b>!
> 
> 
> Nice post. I thikn you're right that Pax's comments in favor of Curry and Chandler aren't necessarily set in stone.
> ...


it was a candid chat - i saw and heard it too. and it was telling.

basically said that "if these young guys are going to come into the league early and accept all the millions then they have to step up and accept the responsibility that comes with it"

also he clearly praised the players that "love to play and love to work on their games"


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

I saw the interview. Pax also said Curry and Chandler were still the difference makers in next season but said it's their 4th year and he needs to see them positively impact the games.

I don't think Chandler or Curry are a lock to remain Bulls and be RFAs next summer.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

Well, one of the questioins I didn't see brought up is -

Why are we getting rid of Crawford to create "financial assistance" for max contract everyone assumes will be given to Curry and CHandler? This is what ticks me off. We won't receive anything in return for Crawford.....got nothing for Jay Williams....nothing for Fizer or Bagaric........

And Curry will be on a rookie contract.....Why is this such a great trade again? Ohhh, cause Crawford won't pout. Sounds like Curry and CHandler will plenty of nothing waiting around for their max contract offers.

Thank God Football season is almost here.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

I wish Eddy knew how much of a beast he is. His physical attributes are amazing. Wingspan, standing reach, height, weight, quickness, hands, touch. He is truly a gifted ballplayer, but he does have some things to work on. 

He needs to get better at passing out of the post, because with his talent, he'll see a ton of double teams. He also needs to learn to establish better position in the post more consistently. Eddy is not as bad of a defender as hes made out to be, or atleast he wasnt at the end of last season. I think we will see improvements in that category, as well as shotblocking. Rebounding is obviously his biggest weakness as a big man. Its a mystery too, because he truly should be one of the top 5 rebounders in the league based on his abilities. 

If we dont see a big improvement in those things, as well as his conditioning next season, I think it may be time to move on without Curry. 

Personally, I will be looking for solid defense/rebounding over anything else, along with passing and establishing position. If he did those things at a much higher level, I'd be very happy. As far as numbers go, I think he should put up anywhere from 18-22 points and 8-10 rebounds. 

It'll also be fun to watch him play against Shaq 4 times a year.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>MongolianDeathCloud</b>!
> That's the point I was trying to make -- that it can be possible for people to act like they are content with their guys, when in reality they are not and don't want it to be completely obvious. And I think the analagy works, so nyah.


WRONG. Even if you are ELATED with Steve Francis, Cuttino Mobley and Kelvin Cato you STILL trade those three players for Tracy McGrady. I don't care HOW HAPPY you are with those three players.....you trade them for Tmac so it is absolutely a false analogy.

And BTW please......I'm sure MikeDC and KC would trade Eddy and others for a lot less than Tim Duncan.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> I wish Eddy knew how much of a beast he is. His physical attributes are amazing. Wingspan, standing reach, height, weight, quickness, hands, touch. He is truly a gifted ballplayer, but he does have some things to work on.
> 
> He needs to get better at passing out of the post, because with his talent, he'll see a ton of double teams. He also needs to learn to establish better position in the post more consistently. Eddy is not as bad of a defender as hes made out to be, or atleast he wasnt at the end of last season. I think we will see improvements in that category, as well as shotblocking. Rebounding is obviously his biggest weakness as a big man. Its a mystery too, because he truly should be one of the top 5 rebounders in the league based on his abilities.
> ...


So we couldn't score last year.....getting rid of Eddy and his HIGH PERCENTAGE scoring ability is going to make us what? A team that can't score at all? You'll never get equal value if you move Eddy Curry. Skiles even said on draft night on the Score that he LAUGHS at the low ball offers Pax gets from other GMs. 

Eddy's biggest need is experience. Leave him out there and let him develop instinct. When you didn't start playing hoops until you were 15 years old you need to develop instinct. Right now Eddy is thinking too much and reacting too little.


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> Eddy's biggest need is experience.


BUZZ! wrong answer, i'm sorry. thanks for playing, though; we've got these lovely parting gifts for you.

Eddy's biggest need is a heart transplant. until he gets that -- and this is one poster who's convinced he never will at this point -- he's the poor man's love child of Benoit Benjamin and Darryl Dawkins.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>chifaninca</b>!
> Well, one of the questioins I didn't see brought up is -
> 
> Why are we getting rid of Crawford to create "financial assistance" for max contract everyone assumes will be given to Curry and CHandler? This is what ticks me off. We won't receive anything in return for Crawford.....got nothing for Jay Williams....nothing for Fizer or Bagaric........
> ...


Thats a very valid question IMO. Paxson didn't field a question like this at all during the RMR interview, nor did he mention Crawford if memory serves, he did however say that "Hinrich and Gordon should form an amazing backcourt for years to come" whicn made me roll my eyes and wonder if he really knows what the hell he is doing or not.


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>sp00k</b>!
> 
> 
> Don't know, but I've thrown this out there before and will do so now. Does Houston do Curry and Chandler for Yao? Because I pull the trigger on that in a second.


if i were Houston, i would trade yao for chandler/curry. if houston can squeeze out kirk from the bulls, then they aer going to be a championshp contender for a long long time.

kirk
T-mac
anyone
chandler
curry

we all know chandler/kirk are excellent defensive players, and t-mac is a superstar, the key here is curry. i think if he plays fo JVG, a no non-sense coach, hes finally goig to flourish. with kirk/chandler the ultimate role players. houston with the new version of kobe/shaq will go a LONG WAY. 

ok the point of the post was, the bulls need a coach like JVG, pat riley type. scott skiles doesnt command respect like those coachs.
jerry sloan would be great fit too.


----------



## synthdogg (Jul 14, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sith</b>!
> 
> 
> if i were Houston, i would trade yao for chandler/curry. if houston can squeeze out kirk from the bulls, then they aer going to be a championshp contender for a long long time.
> ...


Couldn't the Bulls just trade everyone else for T-mac, and make that their starting lineup?
:grinning:


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>synthdogg</b>!
> 
> 
> Couldn't the Bulls just trade everyone else for T-mac, and make that their starting lineup?
> :grinning:


yeah i really wanted the bulls to go after t-mac, but too bad he doesnt wanna be here. we could trade away anyone except curyr/kirk, and it would be like 10x better team than what we have now

kirk
t-mac
erob
Ad
Curry


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>thunderspirit</b>!
> 
> BUZZ! wrong answer, i'm sorry. thanks for playing, though; we've got these lovely parting gifts for you.
> 
> Eddy's biggest need is a heart transplant. until he gets that -- and this is one poster who's convinced he never will at this point -- he's the poor man's love child of Benoit Benjamin and Darryl Dawkins.


Actually no you are wrong. Eddy doesn't look like he has heart because he has to think instead of react, due to the fact that he didn't play until he was 15 years old at all. He ends up looking like he doesn't have the desire to get to a spot defensively or rebounding, when in fact it's that he is having to think about what to do, and if you have to think in this league, instead of merely act on instinct (which players who've been playing since they were 5 instead of 15 have)....you're dead.

But thanks for being arrogant. Yes we get it. You want to kill Eddy.....good for you. Eddy was far from the main reason for our troubles the last 3 years.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Sith</b>!
> 
> 
> if i were Houston, i would trade yao for chandler/curry. if houston can squeeze out kirk from the bulls, then they aer going to be a championshp contender for a long long time.
> ...


Any argument of "well if Eddy want to Coach X, then he'd flourish" is more of an indictment of the Bulls organization than Eddy Curry.


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> But thanks for being arrogant. Yes we get it. You want to kill Eddy.....good for you. Eddy was far from the main reason for our troubles the last 3 years.


somehow i knew my post would bring a rise out of you. 

i must have missed something here...i was voicing my opinion, which is for what i thought message boards were used.  if that's being arrogant, then we're all guilty, _including_ you.

and thanks for being all over Eddy's jock; i'm sure he appreciates a lamprey like you being there. 

let me be clear here: *Eddy's development -- or lack thereof -- is precisely the main reason for our troubles over the last three years.*

i don't want to kill him, as you so eloquently put it. i've long wanted him to become the player his talent says he can be. if EC had become the player his talent says he can be, we'd be done debating the relative merits of EC versus TC. (yeah, i know you've already made up your mind -- i'm referring to the members of the board who _haven't_ yet attached their lips to Eddy's keister.) 

i want him to care about playing the game. if EC showed any desire to play the game when 1) the ball's not in his hands and 2) there's not a guy named Shaquille in town, we wouldn't be arguing about JC's 40% shooting "touch." hell, if EC gave a rat's *** in a rolling donut about doing anything on the court, this team wouldn't still be trying to determine whether he's a building block or just a mass of potential that'll never be realized. :whoknows:

he's the Tin Man.
he's Joe Barry Carroll without the rebounding acumen.
he's everything people were afraid Michael Olowikandi might turn out to be.
he's a less productive player than Brad Miller and Erick Dampier...and if _that's_ not an indictment, i don't know what is. :sigh: 

potential means squat if you have no interest in developing it. the Bulls have tried three coaches (okay, working with Tim Floyd is a mulligan) and no one's gotten through to Eddy yet. :banghead:

three years is enough time to expect to see signs of life from anyone. i'm still looking for EC to show me a pulse. :wait:


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>thunderspirit</b>!
> and thanks for being all over Eddy's jock; i'm sure he appreciates a lamprey like you being there.


LOL why because I don't want him hung.....is that why im on his jock?



> let me be clear here: *Eddy's development -- or lack thereof -- is precisely the main reason for our troubles over the last three years.*


LOL pick one and argue that that person had less to do with last seasons failures than Eddy Curry:

Bill Cartwright
Tyson Chandler (back)
Jay Williams
Jalen Rose
Eddie Robinson
Jamal Crawford

My problem with people like you is.....most people in this town have it *** backwards. You're only allowed to blame someone with talent. If they have talent and just have a rough go at it.....they're to be hung. But assume that they have mediocre talent and still suck.....then it's ok, because they played to their talent level. Nevermind that they still suck worse than Eddy could if he just purposely TRIED to suck. If they have mediocre talent it's ok.....because we're Chicago. Nevermind that in Philadelphia or New York.....guys with mediocre talent who don't produce are run off the face of the earth. In Chicago......it's ok, because we want loveable losers. 

We want to trade Eddy for a guy with 1/10th the talent, if said guy can make really mean faces. Because we want to feel like we can make really mean faces even if we're mediocre. 



> i don't want to kill him, as you so eloquently put it. i've long wanted him to become the player his talent says he can be. if EC had become the player his talent says he can be, we'd be done debating the relative merits of EC versus TC. (yeah, i know you've already made up your mind -- i'm referring to the members of the board who _haven't_ yet attached their lips to Eddy's keister.)


This constant insulting is not warranted. I mean if you want to continually insinuate that I'm kissing Eddy's *** or blowing Eddy and the mods don't delete it then fine. Hey it's allowed right? The fact that it is allowed is very Realgm.comish. 

But we'll do this......you name the time and place and we'll see how big your mouth is then. Guys like you have a way of shutting their mouth when there's no authority figure for them to run to. Time and place and we'll put the gloves on and get in the ring. If you've got the balls your mouth says you have......this challenge should not be a problem and should be more than welcome. 



> i want him to care about playing the game. if EC showed any desire to play the game when 1) the ball's not in his hands and 2) there's not a guy named Shaquille in town, we wouldn't be arguing about JC's 40% shooting "touch." hell, if EC gave a rat's *** in a rolling donut about doing anything on the court, this team wouldn't still be trying to determine whether he's a building block or just a mass of potential that'll never be realized. :whoknows:
> 
> he's the Tin Man.
> he's Joe Barry Carroll without the rebounding acumen.
> ...


You think all this stuff.....

BUT 

*Name me one Center not named Yao Ming or Shaq to put up better numbers in the NBA season in which they started the season at 20 years old.* 

You can't do it. Yeah we get it......you hate Eddy Curry. I hate guys like you. I hate the guy you want to replace Eddy Curry. I hate the Bulls team you've magically dreamed up in your head. 

You call Eddy Michael Olowokandi......but let's compare them......

Eddy Curry 2003-04 started the season at 20 years old
14.7 PPG 6.2 RPG 1.18 BPG 49.6% FG

Michael Olowokandi 2000-01 started the season at age 25
8.9 PPG 6.4 RPG 1.32 BPG 43.1% FG

No he's not Olowkandi......in fact at five years younger he was far better. Let the kid finish his 22 year old season before you judge him. Oh but wait.....NBA GMs across the league are DYING for Paxson to be stupid enough to judge him the way you do. Then they can rip us off for him and he'll become twice the player Brad Miller is elsewhere.

Easy for you to talk about Tyson......but Tyson plays a boys position relative to center. And even then his spine holds up like a paper clip. 

BTW Eddy's numbers last year were better than Brad Miller at age 24.


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

matrix, i'm not sure how this degenerated into a pissing contest.

you voiced an opinion with which i disagreed. that's what message boards are for.

what do you mean, people like me? you hate people like me? in the first place, you don't know anything about me. you know a few opinions i have of Eddy Curry. for that you want to get into a boxing ring? whatever.

look, i pointed out in my posts that EC can do no wrong in your mind. JMSO, it's no different than the Jamal Crawford Is the Second Coming [tm] Fan Club that frequents the board -- the only difference is that you feel that way about EC instead of about JC. so the people who feel that way about JC are foolish, but the people who feel that way about EC are on the money? how do you figure that one out? neither one has led us to a damn thing except more lottery dates in Secaucus, New Jersey.

all i'm saying is that blind, slavish devotion is blind, slavish devotion, whether it's to Jamal or Eddy or Kirk Hinrich or whomever. in common vernacular, blinid, slavish devotion can be referred to as being on someone's jock, or kissing their rear. and if i've accused you of anything, that's it. nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>thunderspirit</b>!
> matrix, i'm not sure how this degenerated into a pissing contest.





> and thanks for being all over Eddy's jock





> yeah, i know you've already made up your mind -- i'm referring to the members of the board who haven't yet attached their lips to Eddy's keister.)


Comments like these are how it became a pissing war, and both are against the terms of service of most ANY message board. Comments about me having my lips on Eddy's *** are supposed to be taken how?



> you voiced an opinion with which i disagreed. that's what message boards are for.
> 
> what do you mean, people like me? you hate people like me? in the first place, you don't know anything about me. you know a few opinions i have of Eddy Curry. for that you want to get into a boxing ring? whatever.


No......for your comments that insinuated I have my mouth planted on Eddy's ***.



> look, i pointed out in my posts that EC can do no wrong in your mind. JMSO, it's no different than the Jamal Crawford Is the Second Coming [tm] Fan Club that frequents the board -- the only difference is that you feel that way about EC instead of about JC. so the people who feel that way about JC are foolish, but the people who feel that way about EC are on the money? how do you figure that one out? neither one has led us to a damn thing except more lottery dates in Secaucus, New Jersey.


LOL Jamal is 24.....Eddy is 21. If Eddy is still suffering the same mistakes at 24, if he's shooting 80% lower FGs (see Jamal's FG% in 02 I think), then by all means.....your criticism will be warranted. The difference between me and Jamal jockers is......there's really nothing special about Jamal. How many times do you see 300 pounders with Eddy's athleticism and touch around the basket? Once a decade? How many times do you see an athletic combo guard that shoots 38% and plays no defense? That's not so rare. 



> all i'm saying is that blind, slavish devotion is blind, slavish devotion, whether it's to Jamal or Eddy or Kirk Hinrich or whomever. in common vernacular, blinid, slavish devotion can be referred to as being on someone's jock, or kissing their rear. and if i've accused you of anything, that's it. nothing more, nothing less.


I'll admit Eddy's fault. I've said before that he didn't work hard enough LAST summer. Now most people have chosen to completely ignore media reports that Eddy worked with Skiles an hour before practice/shootaround and an hour after EVERY day after Scott got to town. Even game days. In my mind THAT combined with Eddy being praised so heavily by Paxson has shown me that last summer was an abberation. 

Eddy needs to work on his rebounding. Eddy needs to block more shots. Eddy needs to work on positioning on both ends of the floor. I know Eddy has faults and things he needs to work on......I just don't think he should be run out of town. That's what I'm against.


----------

