# The bottomline when it comes to Crawford



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

> On Jamal not getting back in the game:
> “As I look at it, everybody has got to bring something to the table every night. You want scorers to score, shooters to shoot, shot blockers to block shots, and so on. That is the way I look at everybody. If a guy is not making his shot but playing a good game I tend to leave people out there. I am looking for consistency, effort and reliability. For example, Jerome Williams brings the same thing almost every night. You can analyze his game, strengths and weaknesses, but I know every night what I am going to get from him. That is where we need to go with most of our guys. I know what I am going to get from Kirk Hinrich every night. He is a rookie who has played 30 games. That is the example we are trying to set, to get that consistency. We are not getting that across the board.”



Just bring it Jamal! Kirk gets it after only 30 games in the league. Why don't you?


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

Jamal is growing up. Even Jordan had to grow up and learn to play team ball before the championship years. Hinrich, i love this kid, grew up the son of a coach, played 4 years at Kansas, is well seasoned...he should have it down. 

Jamal had Cartwright and Rose to look to. He'll get it.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

I'm not sure what game Skiles was watching last night. Sure, Crawford's shot wasn't dropping and he went a horrid 2-11 from the field but he DID look to set up his teamates and delivered 6 assists, primarily in the paint. He also had like 3 rebounds and 2 steals in limited minutes. And his defensive effort was pretty good. He certainly was a whole lot better than Brunson. I think Skiles is trying to send a message to Jamal that is basically "Focus when your shootinga and make every shot count". Which may be a good message for him. I don't know how appropriate it was though since he WAS taking good shots (except for maybe 2) and he was playing unselfish ball. Even Dore made a comment that all of his shots were close to going "in & out" sort of shots. I think Skiles was also trying to send a message to the Bulls bench that "Hey, you guys are as good as what Phx is putting out on the floor so I expect you to go out there and outplay those guys!"

One thing I did notice was that the Phx run that cut into the Bulls lead came with Crawford on the bench (for a rest before the shutout) and Hinrich in running the point.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

The mostly apathetic crowd was wondering why Crawford wasn't getting any burn in the 4th either. Brunson has got to be the slowest player in the NBA. I cringe everytime he passes the rock or shoots it.

This being said, though Jamal wasn't hitting his shots, he wasn't driving the lane much either. Maybe that was why he wasn't getting late minutes.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

*"A win is a win is a win," Skiles said. "But I really feel like missed shots are taking the wind out of our sails defensively. And that can't happen. We have to be mentally stronger."

"Maybe I oversimplify it, but everybody has to bring something to the table every game, whatever it is," Skiles said. "That's the expectation I have. Even if a guy is not making his shot but I feel like he's playing well defensively, I tend to leave people out there. I'm looking for consistency of effort and reliability in people."*

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...lsgamer,1,680966.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

I'm not so sure this lovefest between Skiles and Crawford is going to last much longer. 

Skiles has given Crawford the freedom to shoot and shoot often with two caveats: Take good shots and bring a consistently high degree of effort on defense whether your shots are going in or not. Based on last night's benching in the face of potentially losing a game to a depleated Suns team, it sure looks like Crawford isn't keeping up his end of the deal.

And when you combine JC's benching with Skiles' post game remarks enumerated in this thread its pretty clear that from Skiles' point of view, Crawford still isn't getting it. The question starts to become one of how much longer is Skiles willing to work with Crawford before he asks him to take a seat next to Marcus Sr. Don't think that's a possibility? Well, it was a _reality_ last night. And I don't doubt that Skiles has all the moxie he needs to banish Crawford to the end of the bench for a longer stretch if that's what he thinks its going to take.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> The mostly apathetic crowd was wondering why Crawford wasn't getting any burn in the 4th either. Brunson has got to be the slowest player in the NBA. I cringe everytime he passes the rock or shoots it.
> 
> This being said, though Jamal wasn't hitting his shots, he wasn't driving the lane much either. Maybe that was why he wasn't getting late minutes.


Maybe so but it almost cost the Bulls the W too! Still, if Skiles had a message to get across I hope Jamal heard it loud and clear and responds.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> *"A win is a win is a win," Skiles said. "But I really feel like missed shots are taking the wind out of our sails defensively. And that can't happen. We have to be mentally stronger."
> 
> "Maybe I oversimplify it, but everybody has to bring something to the table every game, whatever it is," Skiles said. "That's the expectation I have. Even if a guy is not making his shot but I feel like he's playing well defensively, I tend to leave people out there. I'm looking for consistency of effort and reliability in people."*
> ...


IMO thats what it would take for the Bulls to lose at an even greater rate.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> IMO thats what it would take for the Bulls to lose at an even greater rate.


could be, but short term. If this is the case with Jamal and Skiles is getting through to him, what better way to get his attention than take something away that Jamal understands? There has to be something there that we are not seeing with Jamal. BC benched him and now skiles. Floyd kept him in his doghouse.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> Maybe so but it almost cost the Bulls the W too! Still, if Skiles had a message to get across I hope Jamal heard it loud and clear and responds.


I'll be at the game tomorrow night, so it will be interesting to see the Bulls up close and personal....


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> could be, but short term. If this is the case with Jamal and Skiles is getting through to him, what better way to get his attention than take something away that Jamal understands? There has to be something there that we are not seeing with Jamal. BC benched him and now skiles. Floyd kept him in his doghouse.


Excellent point! There is a consistent pattern here. And in case Crawford hasn't figured it out, of the three coaches he's played for, its Skiles who is giving him his very best opportunity to succeed. How many players are given carte blanche to shoot by their coach? Crawford couldn't ask for more from any coach. But still, with all this freedom and encouragement, Crawford has still found himself benched on a number of occasions by the most supportive coach he's ever had.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> Excellent point! There is a consistent pattern here. And in case Crawford hasn't figured it out, of the three coaches he's played for, its Skiles who is giving him his very best opportunity to succeed. How many players are given carte blanche to shoot by their coach? Crawford couldn't ask for more from any coach. But still, with all this freedom and encouragement, Crawford has still found himself benched on a number of occasions by the most supportive coach he's ever had.


And we have seen Crawford's game blossom into a more complete game with the exception of his shooting. Crawford, by all accounts, is saying and doing all of the right things. ANd typically when the Bulls win JC is a BIG part of it, unlike last night. Maybe something is going on with Jamal and all of these coaches, I don't know, but I certainly haven't heard of anything.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lorgg</b>!
> Jamal is growing up. Even Jordan had to grow up and learn to play team ball before the championship years. Hinrich, i love this kid, grew up the son of a coach, played 4 years at Kansas, is well seasoned...he should have it down.
> 
> Jamal had Cartwright and Rose to look to. He'll get it.


Talk about being an apologist...


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> I'm not sure what game Skiles was watching last night. Sure, Crawford's shot wasn't dropping and he went a horrid 2-11 from the field but he DID look to set up his teamates and delivered 6 assists, primarily in the paint. He also had like 3 rebounds and 2 steals in limited minutes. And his defensive effort was pretty good. He certainly was a whole lot better than Brunson. I think Skiles is trying to send a message to Jamal that is basically "Focus when your shootinga and make every shot count". Which may be a good message for him. I don't know how appropriate it was though since he WAS taking good shots (except for maybe 2) and he was playing unselfish ball. Even Dore made a comment that all of his shots were close to going "in & out" sort of shots. I think Skiles was also trying to send a message to the Bulls bench that "Hey, you guys are as good as what Phx is putting out on the floor so I expect you to go out there and outplay those guys!"
> 
> One thing I did notice was that the Phx run that cut into the Bulls lead came with Crawford on the bench (for a rest before the shutout) and Hinrich in running the point.


The shots he was taking last night might have been good shots at the start of the game but when he's missing them all night, they turn into bad shots. Jamal needs to use his frickin skills to get to the hole MUCH more than he does. The guy can get by pretty much any defender whenever he wants, yet he settles for jumpers. He can get jumpers ANYTIME. When they're not falling, he needs to give a little more effort and continuously drive to the hole until they figure out a way to stop it. And not being able to attack the zone shouldn't be an excuse. Geez, listening to him after the game, it's like he's never played against a zone before.

Jamal's my guy but I'm getting real frustrated with him when he's not taking full advantage of his skills. As Jamal goes, so goes our team. This is probably the first time all season we've won a game where he's played so poorly. Actually, Jama's inconsistency pretty much mirrors our team's inconsistency. He's good one or two games, then ice cold for a few. We win two games in a row, then lose three or four in a row. Right now, Jamal is the key because we have nobody else to count on to put up points. That's why everyone focuses more on his off-nights. Until we get some scoring help for him, I think we'll continue to see the inconsistency.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> And we have seen Crawford's game blossom into a more complete game with the exception of his shooting.


That's like saying Saddam was a really complete head of state except for the way he treated the population...


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> That's like saying Saddam was a really complete head of state except for the way he treated the population...


Your right, all Jamal should worry about from here on out is his shooting! :grinning:


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Just bring it Jamal! Kirk gets it after only 30 games in the league. Why don't you?


I dont understand that at all. All I know for sure about Kirk on a nightl basis is that he is going to pass up on many open looks- One night he will have 20 then the next night he'll have 5


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Jamal's shooting pct since the trade:

Milwaukee- 12-23 52%, 4-7 in threes. 57% W

Sixers 8-20 40% 3-9 in threes 33% L

New Orleans 11-23 48% 2-5 in threes. 40% L

San Antonio 11-26 42% 2-7 in threes 29% L

Milwaukee 4-12 33% 1-2 in threes 50% L

Indiana 7-17 41% 3-7 in threes 43% W

Orlando 5-17 29.4% 1-12 in threes 8.3% W

Detroit 7-23 30.4% 2-13 in threes. 15.4% L

Cleveland 7-27 25.9% 2-12 in threes 16.66% L

Utah 5-13 38.5% 0-2 in threes. L

New Jersey 2-14 14.3% 0-4 in threes L

Cleveland 12-20 60% 4-8 in threes. 50% W

Washington 16-27 59.3% 5-7 in threes. 71.4% W

Miami 3-16 18.75% 1-8 in threes. 12.5% L

Minnesota 5-18 27.77% 1-6 in threes, 16.66% L

New York 52.38% 11-21 4-10 in threes 40% W

Boston 6-17 35.29% 1-8 in threes 12.5% L

Phoenix 2-11 18.18% 1-8 in trees 12.5% (most of this was in first half) W

Before last nights game, Jamal was shooting 39.5 % since the trade and 28.5% in threes. 

That is a cause for concern when your main scorer shoots more 12% in threes than 40%! It is a concern when he shoots as many 18% games as he does 60% games!! And it is really a concern when Jamal does not take it to the hoop. He settles for jumpers.

Jamal is not going to get it on his own. I hope Skiles keeps sending him a message!!


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> On Jamal not getting back in the game:
> 
> As I look at it, everybody has got to bring something to the table every night. You want scorers to score, shooters to shoot, shot blockers to block shots, and so on. That is the way I look at everybody. If a guy is not making his shot but playing a good game I tend to leave people out there. I am looking for consistency, effort and reliability. For example, Jerome Williams brings the same thing almost every night. You can analyze his game, strengths and weaknesses, but I know every night what I am going to get from him. That is where we need to go with most of our guys. I know what I am going to get from Kirk Hinrich every night. He is a rookie who has played 30 games. That is the example we are trying to set, to get that consistency. We are not getting that across the board.”



I think what skiles is saying is fairly obvious .We cant afford to have jamal only have 2pts at halftime .We need his points no matter what its fine that he he will pass to the open man but why look to keep setting up these other scrubs for shots.He is the teams best scorer we expect you to score no matter what .

He needs to take his job as a scorer more seriously the shots Jamal are missing are shots he normally makes but he still needs to find ways to generate points even when he is missing those .

He knows JYd is gonna hustle and hit the boards hard and play efense 

He knows Kirk is gonna hustle and play defense 

Jamal is expected to score he needs to understand this it seems he starts to revert back to his comfort level of being a pg and looking pass first as if we have other scoring options.He needs to understand that his not scoring hurts the team when he gets 23+ pts we almost always win he cannot afford to take games off and just pass .


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Yep, Jamal must have been driving Ms. Daisy last night, because he certainly wasn't driving the lane.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

> I dont understand that at all. All I know for sure about Kirk on a nightl basis is that he is going to pass up on many open looks- One night he will have 20 then the next night he'll have 5


Skiles is the one who said Kirk brings it every night. I will take his word over yours.






> I know what I am going to get from Kirk Hinrich every night. He is a rookie who has played 30 games. That is the example we are trying to set, to get that consistency. We are not getting that across the board.”


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> Jamal's shooting pct since the trade:
> 
> Milwaukee- 12-23 52%, 4-7 in threes. 57% W
> ...


Notice that Jamal's best games have all come when he is playing the majority of his minutes AT THE POINT. It's only when he has started playing extended minutes off of the ball that he has struggled.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Jamal needs to have the ball in his hands...

If Skiles can't see that, well I don't know what to say...


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> Notice that Jamal's best games have all come when he is playing the majority of his minutes AT THE POINT. It's only when he has started playing extended minutes off of the ball that he has struggled.


sounds similar to something i've been saying for 2 weeks now ...but who listens to me i have no credibility on this board


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

Jamal is such a freaking enigma... I agree with Ace that his best games come when he plays alot of the 1 because he can't move without the ball to save his life... But at the same time, his best games have always been with Kirk or JWill on the court too. Now, I don't think many will mistake those 2 for SGs, so what's the deal? Does havign another PG allow defenses to not focus quite as much on Jamal? Is the fact that another ball handler is helping Jamal that much more? I can't seem to figure it out....


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> Notice that Jamal's best games have all come when he is playing the majority of his minutes AT THE POINT. It's only when he has started playing extended minutes off of the ball that he has struggled.


Then we need to move him.

We already have a PG.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Then we need to move him.
> ...


Actually we already HAD a pg when we GOT that pg. I do agree though that it is looking more and more likely that one of the two will have to be moved. Jamal isn't ready to play the 2. He may add some muscle during the offseason and be able to play there next season but I wouldn't bank on it. At this point I think Skiles needs to play Hinrich almost exlcusively off of the ball and see if that works. If that doesn't work then I think maybe they should go back to starting Jamal at the point and using Kirk to kind of split time at the point.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> Jamal needs to have the ball in his hands...
> 
> If Skiles can't see that, well I don't know what to say...


I know, it is SO obvious. I think Jamal is more of a pg than a lot of people are willing to acknowledge. The funny thing is that I actually think better things happen with Jamal running the point! I acknowledge Kirks talent and admit that he is more of a fundamental type pg than Jamal, but all I see is what I see.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

NO,NO,NO Kirk is our PG for now and for the future. Anyone not wearing Crawford colored glasses can see that. Like GB said either JC learns to play the 2 or he is outta here. Kirk needs to be playing 36 minutes+ at the PG spot. Either Jamal or someone else should play the big minutes at SG.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually we already HAD a pg when we GOT that pg.
> ...


I think that KH makes more of the time he spends on the floor--to the teams benefit and his own development--than JC.

Thats why he gets the burn. After 3 or 4 seasons, he'll be far and away furthur along than Jamal is now after his 3 or 4 seasons in the league.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

C'mon now. Are we still arguing PG/SG with these two?

My biggest beef with Jamal is that he doesn't consistently drive the lane. Fans have said it, Skiles has said it.. heck even MJ called him the other day and said it. JC didn't do that much at all last night, hence he was benched b/c his outside shot wasn't falling either.

I want Jamal to stay, but he needs to greatly improve his slashing to become a consistent scorer in the NBA. Right now, its too streaky for my liking.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

I think it SHOULD be very difficult for the Bulls to decide between Kirk and Jamal. Kirk will be a damn fine player and so will Jamal. Still, Jamal IMO has quite a bit more value than Jamal to this team. He does a better job of feeding the ball down low and when playing STRICTLY the point can be even more productive than Kirk. Also Crawford isreally good friends with Curry and seems to have all the right "superstar" friends, not that that means much. Kirk is by far a better man defender and is a scrappy hustle sort of player.

In any case, if they have to decide between the two it will be a tough call.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> I think it SHOULD be very difficult for the Bulls to decide between Kirk and Jamal. Kirk will be a damn fine player and so will Jamal. Still, Jamal IMO has quite a bit more value than Jamal to this team. He does a better job of feeding the ball down low and when playing STRICTLY the point can be even more productive than Kirk. Also Crawford isreally good friends with Curry and seems to have all the right "superstar" friends, not that that means much. Kirk is by far a better man defender and is a scrappy hustle sort of player.
> 
> In any case, if they have to decide between the two it will be a tough call.


Ace, I hope we never come to that point. In fact, they play well together and are supportive of each other on the court... so why can't we keep both? That's another thing I noticed yesterday, it was that Jamal is a pretty vocal guy right now and he seems to get along w/ Kirk pretty well. Also, Jamal took the benching surprisingly well and stayed interested in the game. I think he respects Skiles 10x more than he did Cartwright.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Ace, I hope we never come to that point. In fact, they play well together and are supportive of each other on the court... so why can't we keep both? That's another thing I noticed yesterday, it was that Jamal is a pretty vocal guy right now and he seems to get along w/ Kirk pretty well. Also, Jamal took the benching surprisingly well and stayed interested in the game. I think he respects Skiles 10x more than he did Cartwright.



Thats the problem thuough, they DON'T play well together. Well, I guess they play alright together. Still, it seems to me, right now, that the only way you are going to maximize the results you get from Jamal is to play him AT THE POINT. Which is also the position that Hinrich excels at. They COULD, as I suggested, try playing Hinrich primarily off of the ball and see if that works but if it doesn't...one of these guys will have to go (assuming Jamal doesn't suddenly get better off the ball). They are supportive of each other on the court and your right, Jamal IS getting very vocal and becoming more of a leader, he was like that in the NY game and it was very noticable. And Jamal has ALWAYS stayed interested in the game to the best of my knowledge whether he is on the bench or not. Crawford definitley respects Skiles a lot more but that still doesn't mean he is going to be able to play the 2 consistently. 

The thing is both of these guys are pg's. What can we do with 2 starting caliber pg's?


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

**see Cleveland with Mark Price and Kevin Johnson


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> Thats the problem thuough, they DON'T play well together. Well, I guess they play alright together. Still, it seems to me, right now, that the only way you are going to maximize the results you get from Jamal is to play him AT THE POINT. Which is also the position that Hinrich excels at. They COULD, as I suggested, try playing Hinrich primarily off of the ball and see if that works but if it doesn't...one of these guys will have to go (assuming Jamal doesn't suddenly get better off the ball). They are supportive of each other on the court and your right, Jamal IS getting very vocal and becoming more of a leader, he was like that in the NY game and it was very noticable. And Jamal has ALWAYS stayed interested in the game to the best of my knowledge whether he is on the bench or not. Crawford definitley respects Skiles a lot more but that still doesn't mean he is going to be able to play the 2 consistently.
> 
> The thing is both of these guys are pg's. What can we do with 2 starting caliber pg's?


Ace, how can you say that they don't play well together? Are you kidding me? Seriously man... prove your point because I'm not following your logic. Is it solely the fact that 'Jamal is a PG, period' that is permeating your reasoning?


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

GB hit it. If Crawford can't make his game work without taking Hinrich out of what Kirk does best, the bottom line on Crawford is that he'll be moved. 

We can argue whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, but for Skiles and Paxson, it's become clear that Hinrich is a no doubt about it keeper.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Ace, how can you say that they don't play well together? Are you kidding me? Seriously man... prove your point because I'm not following your logic. Is it solely the fact that 'Jamal is a PG, period' that is permeating your reasoning?


They play alright together. The point that I am trying (desperately) to get across is that Jamal NEEDS to play the pg to be effective. You want him to distribute the ball and score on high percentage shots? He needs to play the point. Practically ALL of his bad nights have been nights where he hasn't played pg over 50% of the game and in most cases markedly less. Practially all of Jamal's good nights have come when he has been allowed to play the point A LOT. Thus far, Hinrich ALSO appears to be most effective playing the point. Unless Skiles wants to put the ball in Crawford's hands and let Hinrich play primarily off of the ball then Crawford isn't going to produce at the rate he needs to for the Bulls to be successful. I think that the Bulls have to maximize the potential and abilities of all of their players if they are going to succeed and it is tough to do that when you have two key players who both play the same spot.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>transplant</b>!
> GB hit it. If Crawford can't make his game work without taking Hinrich out of what Kirk does best, the bottom line on Crawford is that he'll be moved.
> 
> We can argue whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, but for Skiles and Paxson, it's become clear that Hinrich is a no doubt about it keeper.


your premise may be likely but it is far from a forgone conclusion I think.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> I think he respects Skiles 10x more than he did Cartwright.


Chicago is one of the top 5 or 6 NBA cities to play in...and his rookie contract clock is ticket.

Just playing the contrarian, but there's got to be some self interest at work there too.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>transplant</b>!
> GB hit it. If Crawford can't make his game work without taking Hinrich out of what Kirk does best, the bottom line on Crawford is that he'll be moved.
> 
> We can argue whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, but for Skiles and Paxson, it's become clear that Hinrich is a no doubt about it keeper.


Thank you---even if Hinrich were slightly worse than Jamal, or had a lower ceiling, neither of which I believe he does--he's simply more valuable to a team without a superstar because he *can* get the job done and for for le$$. He's on his rookie contract.

In a league where rookies can make their mark on the PG position (Tinsley, Parker, Hinrich) Jamal simply hasn't excelled after 4 years. He's dazzling on occasion, but how much time do you give a project when you have two other projects on the team and someone solid at his position?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> They play alright together. The point that I am trying (desperately) to get across is that Jamal NEEDS to play the pg to be effective. You want him to distribute the ball and score on high percentage shots? He needs to play the point. Practically ALL of his bad nights have been nights where he hasn't played pg over 50% of the game and in most cases markedly less. Practially all of Jamal's good nights have come when he has been allowed to play the point A LOT. Thus far, Hinrich ALSO appears to be most effective playing the point. Unless Skiles wants to put the ball in Crawford's hands and let Hinrich play primarily off of the ball then Crawford isn't going to produce at the rate he needs to for the Bulls to be successful. I think that the Bulls have to maximize the potential and abilities of all of their players if they are going to succeed and it is tough to do that when you have two key players who both play the same spot.


Man oh man Ace, I think we're watching two different games.

To me, Jamal's good games come when he's taking shots within the flow of the offense, when he seems interested on defense, when he gets some easy looks in the paint early, when he effectively moves with or without the ball, when he gets some easy transition points, and yes... like other streaky shooters... when he gets hot after hitting a couple buckets in a row.

To me, that's independent of whether he's playing PG or shooting guard at the moment. Why? Because he's not a natural 'set' shooter like Hinrich is. Jamal shoots 70% of the time off the dribble and many times off balance too. He can create his own shot almost any time he has the ball in his hands. The effectiveness of those shots have more to do with shot selection and rhythm than position played.

For the record, I think Jamal and Kirk play very well together. They are two different styles of guards.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Thank you---even if Hinrich were slightly worse than Jamal, or had a lower ceiling, neither of which I believe he does--he's simply more valuable to a team without a superstar because he *can* get the job done and for for le$$. He's on his rookie contract.
> ...


Well said GB. In my mind there is zero doubt that Kirk is our PG of the future. Jamal will either have to learn to play the 2 or he will be moved. Jamal continues to be interesting because he has such obvious talent, however, this game is 90% mental and Jamal doesn't seem to be up to par with Kirk right now, and I question if ever.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Man oh man Ace, I think we're watching two different games.
> ...


I don't know, maybe we are watching different games. When I see Jamal handling the pg duties I see him very interested in the game. I see him distribute the ball and make things happen and I see a player that shoots the ball with confidence. When I see Jamal off the ball I see a guy who cuts a lot and typically misses the shot when he gets set up.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> your premise may be likely but it is far from a forgone conclusion I think.


Ace, if there's one thing that's certain, it's that nothing's certain. However, Crawford's going to need to play well and consistently with Hinrich on the floor because, barring injury, Skiles is going to have Hinrich on the floor a lot.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>transplant</b>!
> 
> 
> Ace, if there's one thing that's certain, it's that nothing's certain. However, Crawford's going to need to play well and consistently with Hinrich on the floor because, barring injury, Skiles is going to have Hinrich on the floor a lot.


And my feeling from what we have seen so far is that the only way Jamal will be able to do that is if he is primarily the point and Hinrich is playing off of the ball. Something Skiles doesn't seem to have a lot of interest in doing, so, you are quite possibly right that Jamal might be dealt.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> Something Skiles doesn't seem to have a lot of interest in doing, so, you are quite possibly right that Jamal might be dealt.


Do you think that thats because he gets more from KH at that spot than he does JC?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> I don't know, maybe we are watching different games. When I see Jamal handling the pg duties I see him very interested in the game. I see him distribute the ball and make things happen and I see a player that shoots the ball with confidence. When I see Jamal off the ball I see a guy who cuts a lot and typically misses the shot when he gets set up.


Ace, Crawford is going to get his shots regardless of what position he plays. He is an off-the-dribble and rhythm shooter. Last night, Crawford initiated the offense almost every time down the court when paired with Hinrich in the game. In fact I believe Crawford had like 6 dimes to 0 or 1 for Hinrich at half. Hinrich played almost the entire game off the ball, even when Brunson came in for Crawford.

I can't blame Crawford's shooting woes on whether he plays PG or not. Last night he played a lot of point, but it didn't help his shooting now did it? Again, I'm gonna sound like a broken record here, but Crawford's success as a rhythm shooter has more to do with shot selection than position he plays.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Thank you---even if Hinrich were slightly worse than Jamal, or had a lower ceiling, neither of which I believe he does--he's simply more valuable to a team without a superstar because he *can* get the job done and for for le$$. He's on his rookie contract.
> ...


Well buddy. Of our 3 projects, Jamal is really the only one who has shown the capability to be a superstar. So you give him all the time you can afford.

I also fail to see how Hinrich is more valuable than Crawford. We go as Crawford goes(last night we finally won one with Crawford playing bad...but considering who we were playing that's not all that suprising.), not as Hinrich goes. Hinrich is also inconsistent on offense. He has yet to develop a consistent outside shot. He doesn't look for his own shot with any consistency. How many times have you seen Hinrich bricking wide open 20 footers?

And lately his man has been torching him. Looks like he is starting to hit the rookie wall. James on the Celtics was draining shots in his face the other night. And then you had Barbosa in the Phoenix game...

I don't know maybe I'm crazy, but I'm certain that you can't build a team around Hinrich. He is a complimentary player through and through. I don't see him becoming a guy who can average the 25-28ppg that we need from somewhere on our roster.


----------



## blkwdw13 (Jun 12, 2002)

I think if Jamal doesn't get it soon that's he is going to be dealt because of everything that GB has said about Kirk I believe is true and the fact that Kirk might demand less money when contract time comes around.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> Well buddy. Of our 3 projects, Jamal is really the only one who has shown the capability to be a superstar.


Well wake me, shake me from a coma and tell me what season I missed.



> I'm certain that you can't build a team around Hinrich. He is a complimentary player through and through. I don't see him becoming a guy who can average the 25-28ppg that we need from somewhere on our roster.


I agree. Thats what Curry is for.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>blkwdw13</b>!
> I think if Jamal doesn't get it soon that's he is going to be dealt because of everything that GB has said about Kirk I believe is true and the fact that Kirk might demand less money when contract time comes around.


He might get the max.  The point is --- it's not a concern for another 4 or 5 years.

And we already know what he's going to "bring every night" for those next 4 or 5 years.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Ace, Crawford is going to get his shots regardless of what position he plays. He is an off-the-dribble and rhythm shooter. Last night, Crawford initiated the offense almost every time down the court when paired with Hinrich in the game. In fact I believe Crawford had like 6 dimes to 0 or 1 for Hinrich at half. Hinrich played almost the entire game off the ball, even when Brunson came in for Crawford.
> ...


There is no doubt that he will get his shots regardless. Still, Crawford seems a lot more involved in the game when he plays on the ball. ANd I don't think Crawford "initiated the offense every time down the court". During the first half Hinrich played point even moreso than Crawford did. Brunson did play pg more than Hinrich when he was in for some strange reason. I guess we will just have to wait and see how it plays out. I'm gonna say right now though that I think Crawford has got to play with the ball in his hands most of the time if he is going to be effective. Maybe your right and he will start nailing his shots from the offguard spot, so far I haven't seen that happening much.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Do you think that thats because he gets more from KH at that spot than he does JC?


No. History doesn't refelct that. I think that it is because he has two good guards that he wants to keep on the floor as much as possible and Crawford has more of a build and more of a shooters mentality and thus appears more equiped to play the 2.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

I will try to make it simple:

It is doesn’t matter how good Jamal is , with regard of his PPG , APG, SPG, etc.

The problem with Jamal is, he is focusing too much on his own play and not seeing a “big picture” of the game’s flow. He is not orchestrates well the coach strategy on the floor and in the mean time do not accepting to be a role player coming from the bench. 

He got enough skills to be a great PG, but has not enough intelligence and toughness to be one and he is not physically strong to play SG. 

So, it is very sad not just only for him but also for the team and fans to see that we are going nowhere with Jamal, at least at the present team’s structure.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bulls96</b>!
> I will try to make it simple:
> 
> It is doesn’t matter how good Jamal is , with regard of his PPG , APG, SPG, etc.
> ...


Now see, I don't understand this at all. I've seen Jamal play the point plenty of times and he is GOOD at initiating the offense and finding the open man. He seems to have very good instincts for delivering the ball. I've seen a lot of posts like this claimimng Jamal plays "out of the flow" but I simply don't understand. When Jamal plays the point he IS the flow. And he does a great job of distributing and seeing the "big picture". It is when you take him off of the ball that his game suffers.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> Now see, I don't understand this at all. I've seen Jamal play the point plenty of times and he is GOOD at initiating the offense and finding the open man. He seems to have very good instincts for delivering the ball. I've seen a lot of posts like this claimimng Jamal plays "out of the flow" but I simply don't understand. When Jamal plays the point he IS the flow. And he does a great job of distributing and seeing the "big picture". It is when you take him off of the ball that his game suffers.


I understand it. Jamal has good passing skills, but Kirk makes more passes in general, consistently working the ball around the floor and looking for a ***** in the defense's armor. This doesn't always lead to gaudy assists numbers, but I think it leads to more easy baskets overall. I find that in general Kirk benefits the offense more than Jamal by contributing purposeful motion to the proceedings. This can also happen when Kirk and Jamal is in the game, no matter who takes the ball down the court. But in general I feel that the key to the flow is Kirk.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> I understand it. Jamal has good passing skills, but Kirk makes more passes in general, consistently working the ball around the floor and looking for a ***** in the defense's armor. This doesn't always lead to gaudy assists numbers, but I think it leads to more easy baskets overall. I find that in general Kirk benefits the offense more than Jamal by contributing purposeful motion to the proceedings. This can also happen when Kirk and Jamal is in the game, no matter who takes the ball down the court. But in general I feel that the key to the flow is Kirk.


Ok, I understand the way you feel now. You think Kirk does a better job of working the ball around. And I think you probably would be right in that regard. Jamal has a habit of holding onto the ball and looking for a guy to get open and then slinging the pass in to him when he does. That sort of delivery doesn't much account for moving the ball around. Although Jamal will often see nothing is going and then swing the ball around. Good point though.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

It would be so nice to see JC in a Clippers uniform....


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> It would be so nice to see JC in a Clippers uniform....


I would be willing to bet that you could put Jamal on about 20 other teams in the league and he would be a better player than he is on the Bulls.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

furturesix(spelling? sorry),

Last time i checked hinrich and JC had almost identical shooting percentages (both 39.9% and 35 from 3). Both are right around 40% FG's and mid 30's from 3's. In addition, if you look at there last 5 games hinrich stat's are better.

JC 14 pts, 32.5% FG's, 20% from 3, 7.6 assts, 3.66 TO, and 2.7 FT.

KH 16pts, 41.3% FG's, 38% from 3, 5.3 assts, 2.6 TO, and 2.6 FT.

The difference is hinrich is a rookie and will no doubt get better. In addiition, KH jump shoot form is extremely good while JC has a lillte hitch in his shoot which is why i think his shoot suffers when he is tried. Which is why IMO i think he is struggling, i just think taking over the scoring load and all the minutes and the extended practices are just waring him down. I think JC and many other players on the team were not in their best shape and are gases from the ware and tear.

I make no who is better just there is very little difference in these two players stat's expect JC has taken more shoots.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> I would be willing to bet that you could put Jamal on about 20 other teams in the league and he would be a better player than he is on the Bulls.


agreed.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

I thought DMD made a pretty good point about KH.

He has a more instinctive feel for the offense in general--whereas JC may be better at finishing the offense because of his explosion, length and reach.

We can probably chalk up KH's ability to 4 years in the college ranks, versus not a lot of consistent time for JC in the pros.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> I thought DMD made a pretty good point about KH.
> 
> He has a more instinctive feel for the offense in general--whereas JC may be better at finishing the offense because of his explosion, length and reach.
> ...


Yep, :yes:


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Thank you---even if Hinrich were slightly worse than Jamal, or had a lower ceiling, neither of which I believe he does--he's simply more valuable to a team without a superstar because he *can* get the job done and for for le$$. He's on his rookie contract.
> ...


Well said.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Man oh man Ace, I think we're watching two different games.
> ...


Well said, part 2. Some damn fine analysis in this thread from transplant, superdave, GB, etc.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> I understand it. Jamal has good passing skills, but Kirk makes more passes in general, consistently working the ball around the floor and looking for a ***** in the defense's armor. This doesn't always lead to gaudy assists numbers, but I think it leads to more easy baskets overall. I find that in general Kirk benefits the offense more than Jamal by contributing purposeful motion to the proceedings. This can also happen when Kirk and Jamal is in the game, no matter who takes the ball down the court. But in general I feel that the key to the flow is Kirk.


Another fine post.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>giusd</b>!
> furturesix(spelling? sorry),
> 
> The difference is hinrich is a rookie and will no doubt get better. .


So are you saying that Crawford who is 23 cant get any better while Kirk who is 23 can and will ?being a rookie doesnt mean you automatially get better ask jamal Tinsley who was tossing up double digit assist games left and right his rookie year and what about Battier who although has remained solid since his rookie year is virtually the same player he was his rookie year.

Both Kirk and Jamal are good guards with different styles of play and because of this they compliment each other well.You take away one for a long period of time and the other one would struggle because of the way they compliment each other .


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> being a rookie doesnt mean you automatially get better ask jamal Tinsley who was tossing up double digit assist games left and right his rookie year and what about Battier who although has remained solid since his rookie year is virtually the same player he was his rookie year.


Tinsley got fat, though.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> 
> So are you saying that Crawford who is 23 cant get any better while Kirk who is 23 can and will


It's a tough league. KH is making physical mistakes but is on top of it mentally. Physical mistakes can be corrected with time and effort---which no one doubts he'll put the effort into correcting.

Jamal is making _mental_ mistakes, but is mostly on top of it physically. Thats so scary because he's been around the league *for 4 years*. Even if he's not on the court, there are still things you can pick up if you're simply a student of the game. Kobe was calling MJ for tips his second year in. He was calling and talking to coaches about the game during the summer---trying to get smarter. And mental mistakes are tough to correct in a kid coming in from the draft---and almost impossible after 5 or 6 years. 

Now I'm thinking Jamal might be moved simply to break he and Eddy up. They were shown on Real Sports last night shopping for Retro jerseys in Philly. Jamal did all the talking---and Eddy seemed so much like a follower. Quiet, mute, not much to say--just nod in agreement to what Jamal said. Can't tell much from a tv interview in a store of course--but that was the impression...


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> It's a tough league. KH is making physical mistakes but is on top of it mentally. Physical mistakes can be corrected with time and effort---which no one doubts he'll put the effort into correcting.
> ...


Im sure Jamal is waiting to get out of Chicago because lets face it any grass is greener than here . 

I think Jamal is a student of the game but what game are the Bulls really teaching .New coach ,New position,new players and in 20 games if he doesnt get hes hopeless ??The problem is jamal is a pg trying to adjust to playing sg on a team in which he is the only real scoring option after a summer of being told by the same organization we want you to be less of a scorer and more of a passer .


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Now I'm thinking Jamal might be moved simply to break he and Eddy up. They were shown on Real Sports last night shopping for Retro jerseys in Philly. Jamal did all the talking---and Eddy seemed so much like a follower. Quiet, mute, not much to say--just nod in agreement to what Jamal said. Can't tell much from a tv interview in a store of course--but that was the impression...


I think in general if you see a big man and a point guard together the point guard is going to be the doing the talking.

Who do you think does the talking when GP is with Shaq? Magic with Kareem? The point guard is usually the leader of the team. Not the center. Because the point guard sets up the offense, tells people what to do...that's his job.

You're just really fishing for things to get on Jamal now. You're saying Jamal should be traded because you saw an interview where Jamal talked more than Eddy? That's....well that's about par the course for your posts regarding our backcourt.:laugh:


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

No, what i was saying is KH is a rookie and there is a maturation process where all rookies naturally get better just due to learning how to play in the NBA against better, faster, bigger players for 82 games in a season. It has nothing to due with overall improvement over one's career. In terms of improvement over their careers i have no idea how much each will improve and both have time to do so. And by the way it seems to be lost on us that JC and KH were freshman in college the same year.

But since you raised this issue it brings up my favorate pev's. We constantly talk on this and other broads about upside, which i can't stand. For example, Kwame Brown had all this upside. Whatever, I think upside should be based on more than just physical skills and should include desire and work ethic. Jerome Williams is a typical example, he just works so hard. Jordan was a much better player as he got older not just because of his physical skill but also because he worked so hard at his game and keep added new things each year to improve.

david


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> You're just really fishing for things to get on Jamal now. You're saying Jamal should be traded because you saw an interview where Jamal talked more than Eddy? That's....well that's about par the course for your posts regarding our backcourt.:laugh:


On the other hand, you were convinced Kirk Hinrich would be a bust due in large part to the college he attended.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> You're just really fishing for things to get on Jamal now.


...and he ignored the rest of my argument and even what I said about the interview.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> ...and he ignored the rest of my argument and even what I said about the interview.


There's nothing else to your arguement. 

You basically say the slow white guy is smarter than the athletic black guy. When Kirk makes a mistake it's a physical problem. But when Jamal makes one it's a mental one.

Is not being able to handle the ball properly a physical or mental mistake?

All you need to know about Jamal vs. Kirk:
Kirk's stats:
PPG 10.3 
RPG 2.9 
APG 5.4 
SPG 1.14 
BPG .31 
FG% .399 
FT% .733 
3P% .359 
MPG 32.5 

Jamal's
PPG 17.0 
RPG 3.3 
APG 5.7 
SPG 1.66 
BPG .34 
FG% .398 
FT% .842 
3P% .313 
MPG 35.0 

Add to this that Kirk turns the ball over more, and what you can see is that two players at the same age with one putting up better numbers across the board in spite of playing inconsistent and being jerked on and off the bench like a yo-yo...

Look it was all fun and stuff when we started talking about Kirk like he was an equal in the backcourt. But the make-believe needs to stop. Kirk is not on Jamal's level. Especially now that Jamal has upped his defensive intensity.

Kirks a solid rookie who tries hard. But he makes mistakes, plenty of them. And when I watch them play, it is clear to me that Jamal is the only one of the two that has superstar potential. Kirk has possible all-star written on him. But that's it.

And what's up with addressing me in the third person? Don't make me go Iverson on you. You've got something to say...feel free to address it to me. We're all friends here.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

those #'s arent fair as JC has had 4yrs in the nba now lets do the rookie #'s bro


Kirk's stats:
PPG 10.3 
RPG 2.9 
APG 5.4 
SPG 1.14 
BPG .31 
FG% .399 
FT% .733 
3P% .359 
MPG 32.5 

JC's stats 
PPG 4.6
RPG 1.5
APG 2.3
SPG .70
BPG .23
FG% .352
FT% .794
3PT% .350
MPG 17.2

looks far diff now dont it bro???


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Jamal:

In *three* NBA seasons with the Bulls, has appeared in *164 games*, making 45 starts and averaging *8.3 ppg and 3.2 apg*, shooting *.408 from the floor and .367 from three-point range*.

KH:

In *32 games:*

*PPG 10.3*
RPG 2.9
*APG 5.4*
SPG 1.14
BPG .31
*FG% .399*
FT% .733
*3P% .359* 

I wonder what he'll think of those apples, er bananas?

:rbanana:


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Bulls tried to steal my thunder.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

> Jamal is the only one of the two that has superstar potential



LMFAO OMG about the only potential JC has is to walk on this team this yr or the next WAKE UP and get out of fantasy land...

"O JC is scoreing 17ppg OMG he has to be the next jordan",but you didnt even stop and think for a min that if we were givein old *** Toni Kukoc all those mpg and all the shots JC gets he would most likely get 20+ppg so does that mean you want him?

JC is a loser flat out he cant even a carry a ice cream cone much less this team so WTF have him as our # 1 any longer then we have to???

and i say the samething to curry,pull your dam paints up and get to work or get to walking....

NOW you all see why they called them the BABY BULLS,Daddy(skiles) needs to crack some heads.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

It's hard to figure out which of your hate-crazed responses to respond to first...

I'll say that I am justified in comparing Kirk and JC's numbers...because right now...THEY ARE THE SAME AGE.

And at the same age Jamal is playing better than Kirk.

Call me back in a few years when Kirk has a game where he scores over 30 in a bulls win.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

ok then TMAC and JC are the same age,now what???

NEXT!!!!!


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> Jamal:
> 
> In *three NBA seasons* with the Bulls, has appeared in 164 games, *making 45 starts*, and averaging 8.3 ppg and 3.2 apg shooting. 408 from the floor and .367 from three-point range.


I hope that helps you see things a little better.(And just to help you out, there are 82 games in an NBA season.)

Interesting that Kirk has actually started more games for Kansas over the last 3 years than Jamal has started for the Bulls in his entire career with the Bulls.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

for real get off the stats trip bc thats the only place JC is any good at.i say buy low sell high and JC's value is not getting any higher bro's...

and why you just keep tryin to make yourself look better Kansas dont count as NBA ball.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bulls</b>!
> ok then TMAC and JC are the same age,now what???
> 
> NEXT!!!!!


ok then T-Mac and Kirk are the same age, NOW WHAT???

ok then Lebron James and Melo Anthony are both younger than Kirk, NOW WHAT???

What game are you playing and can I have some?:laugh:


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

and whats your point?and really you just shot your own self in the foot bro as both of those guys are younger then JC aswell LMFAO...


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bulls</b>!
> LOL you gots nothing to say now LOL.but i got nothing but love for ya..
> 
> but for real get off the stats trip bc thats the only place JC is any good at.i say buy low sell high and JC's value is not getting any higher bro's...


Ok. Not using stats, Jamal is the better passer, better ball handler, and when he has it going, the better scorer. He also is better at getting steals because his arms are longer than Kirk's.

Yeah I've got nothing to say. But it's a lot of nothing. And there's no one I'd rather say nothing to more than my good buddy GB.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

The "bottomline" when it comes to crawford and hinrich?


They play on the SAME TEAM.

am i missing something here  

I want them BOTH to do well.

don't you?


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

This board gets so tiresome sometimes with these childish posts. People are more concerned about their favorite players, than they are about the success of the Bulls as a whole. 


Opinions change from day to day. Silly comments made by people who probably dont even watch games. It gets tired folks.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

we still on this JC crap?

your right he is all of those things,but the fact is HE HAS 4YRS inthe NBA, KH has 32games.now you want to talk about UPSIDE i think KH qualifys as dat...

KH is not my fav player by no means i hated it when we drafted him..my fav is artest and has been since he was at st johns...


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bulls</b>!
> and whats your point?and really you just shot your own self in the foot bro as both of those guys are younger then JC aswell LMFAO...


The point is that I was never comparing T-Mac to Jamal at 23. Yeah, obviously he's better than Jamal right now.

Just like Jamal is obviously better than Kirk right now.

Age is important because both Kirk and Jamal have the same amount of basketball left to play in their careers barring injury. So regardless of what they did to get where they are, they are at the same point in their basketball playing lives. Both are 23 year old basketball players. And Jamal is the better 23 year old basketball player.

I don't see the point in comparing Kirk's numbers at 23 to Jamal's numbers when he was 19 and sitting on Tim Floyd's bench.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

goodness i give up on this boy ever seeing the light..you are ridein JC's nutts so hard your going to get bow leged bro...

LMFAO  sorry bro


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mizenkay</b>!
> The "bottomline" when it comes to crawford and hinrich?
> 
> 
> ...


No you haven't missed anything. That is the bottomline. Which is why I've said that Kirk is my second favorite player after Jamal. I like them both in the backcourt. But there are some people who are of the opinion that the backcourt isn't big enough for the two of them to coexist...or just that they'd prefer to see Jamal move on at any cost.

Does it make sense to you that after a WIN we have another 6 page thread about Crawford? People would rather tear down Jamal than talk about a Bulls win around here. It does get tiresome. I stick up for him because he is one of my favorite players to watch in the league. And I would like for him to continue to realize his potential under Skiles on my favorite team. You don't see me proposing trade Hinrich threads. We need both of these guys. And we need both of them to up their play.


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> This board gets so tiresome sometimes with these childish posts. People are more concerned about their favorite players, than they are about the success of the Bulls as a whole.
> 
> 
> Opinions change from day to day. Silly comments made by people who probably dont even watch games. It gets tired folks.


It sure does. Why are we comparing Kirk and Jamal for if they play on the same team and aren't battling for a position? 

The bottomline for Crawford is consistency with his jumpshot and getting to the damn line more often. That's my biggest and only problem with him. When his shot isn't falling, take it to the hole.

His stats are amazing

17ppg, 6apg, 3rpg, 2spg, 2 3PM 

Those are great numbers but he only averages 2 FTA per game. He needs to improve that number since he's the primary scorer on the team. 

In comparison... 

Pierce and McGrady average 7 FTA a game. Iverson averages 10 FTA per game.

As for mostly perimeter shooters who are still primary scorers on their team...

Redd - 4.5 FTA per game
Houston- 4 FTA per game
Allen- 4.5 FTA per game 

And Jamal certainly has the ability to penetrate and get to the basket. There are very few who can keep JC in check one on one if he chooses to drive to the basket. He needs to get into the mindset and sacrifice his body for the team. Maybe that will require him to bulk up a little, but he needs to go to the basket more and get to the line. 

Jamal isn't the biggest problem on the team. He's far from it. He's constantly scrutinized while there's a lazy bum called Eddy Curry who is the future of this franchise. :uhoh: and the other future of this team Tyson Chandler who is always injured. Crawford is 1/3 of the plan but he needs help for the other 2 C's.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

i can understand that and im with ya bro.i would love to keep JC if and any if the dood would 1,play team ball 2.pull in 20ppg,6apg night in and night out not once a week.thats the whole point of me not likein JC.the boy is overrated in my eyes becouse of this,and it kills me to see ppl downin everyone else on the team that works a hell of alot harder just bc JC is their fav or bc he has better handles,but all in all wtf is he doing any better then KH?

but i dont think the guy is going to get any better then he is now,i mean how can you bulid around someone that your not even for sure will show up to play at any given night???


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Well said, futuristxen. I think this thread should die already.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> Interesting that Kirk has actually started more games for Kansas over the last 3 years than Jamal has started for the Bulls in his entire career with the Bulls.


Jamal would have been KH's sub at Kansas. Might as well get paid...


:laugh:


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> Ok. Not using stats, Jamal is the better passer, better ball handler, and when he has it going, the better scorer. He also is better at getting steals because his arms are longer than Kirk's.


Yeah, but riding pine is his specialty. Coaches recognized it from day one.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

how can i tell who rated me?

Thanks for the 5 stars


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

I remember when certain posters on this board actually added something to a discussion instead of instegating and making snide remarks.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah, but riding pine is his specialty. Coaches recognized it from day one.


Doesn't changed the fact that 2 PG's have been drafted while he's been on the team and beaten both of them out for the job.


----------



## tasurim (Nov 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> I know, it is SO obvious. I think Jamal is more of a pg than a lot of people are willing to acknowledge. The funny thing is that I actually think better things happen with Jamal running the point! I acknowledge Kirks talent and admit that he is more of a fundamental type pg than Jamal, but all I see is what I see.



I understand that the respect you have for Jamal and for the number of Jamal vs. Jay, Jamal vs. Kirk, Jamal vs anyone who deters him from playing his brand of basketball, I think this complete refusal to acknowledge that he is not currently doing things to help the team is ludicrous.

If he struggles playing the point you claim that Jamal should just be given time to adjust to such a responsibility or be moved to the "2" spot. On the other hand if he has trouble with playing shooting guard he needs time to learn to "catch and shoot" philosophy or be moved back to the one. 

I am not trying to cause any trouble but this kind of argumentation is somewhat flawed. To me, you would only be happy when you see this entire team revolve around Jamal Crawford such as the McGradyesque Magic, or just simply wait the next five to ten years until he gets it. 

Also leaving Crawford in when he hasn't shown the ability to help put teams away by getting to the line. He still remains no better than Larry Hughes (with Hughes getting to the line more frequently). While he is able to make some extremely difficult shots (some of his fallaways/floaters that go in leave me saying WTF?) I am really starting to lose patience with him.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

> I am really starting to lose patience with him.


and we have yet another one that has seen the light  :laugh:


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

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


This has nothing to do with who I like best on the team. This has to do with what role people are most effective in and I simply have come to the conclusion that Jamal is more productive as a pg with the ball in his hamds. Yes, I do think this team right now should revolve around Jamal and Curry. Why? Because they are our best chances for success! I DID think that Jamal needed time to adjust to the off guard spot. Now I believe that he isn't gonna get much better (this season) playing the 2 and should be moved BACK to the point. It really isn't that hard a concept to understand IMO. And Jamal IS currently doing things to help this team, last game he had 6 assists, 3rebounds, 2 steals and played solid defense! And that was in limited minutes. Sure, he hasn't been shooting well. Thats part of the reason I want him to play more minutes on the ball, he seems to shoot better as a handler. Jamal defeinitley has some weaknesses in his game. He needs to continue to improve on defense, he needs to take the ball to the rack more, draw more fouls and not settle for jumpers. Yes, those are things he needs to work on and I am not oblivious to them. And the fact that his progress is slow tries my patience too. But the fact is that he simply is still a young developing player. Jamal didn't have four years at KS to refine his game (or even Michigan for that matter). Sure, it is hiw own fault for declaring early but the Bulls drafted a skinny kid with little experience playing organized ball who was heavy on potential. He has faced TONS of adversity in his NBA career, a great deal of it given to him by the orginization he plays for! I truly can't believe any team would draft Jamal and expect within 2-3 years to have a finished product.


----------



## Chicago N VA (Oct 31, 2003)

Again it's the Bull Vs. Bull thread.

I will make just quick points...... not interested in KH vs. JC argument.

The reason the Bulls as we all know is that they shoot there way to losses.. they get on hot streaks where everone is hitting there shots a moment later mostly everyone goes cold, but what do the Bulls do.....

They continually shoot from the perimeter, no one is attacking the basket.. those that try to attack the basket on the Bulls, shouldn't be!

We jump out to big leads, and we lose them.. because the Bulls shoot there way out of Ball games..

I like JC's game.. but he needs to add some meat on that frame.. and attack the basket.. stop hoisting up floaters and only hanging out at the 3 point line.

I like KH's tenacity in trying to attack the basket, but he's too small I have seen KH make some basket when he drives.. but I also have seen him get his ball swatted on many occassions trying to take in the paint! HE MUST GET BETTER AT HITTING HIS FREETHROWS! If they are going to send to the line.. he least hit them consistently.

Gill is probably our player as far as drawing contact, but a lot of times he drives with his head down.. not looking to set anyone else up... 

Ok.. I got to get back to work..

Bottomline.. when our jumpers are not falling.. WE NEED to attack the basket.. No way Fizer, JYD, AD and Blount should be consistently shooting Jumpers outside the paint!!!


----------

