# Pierce to Bulls???



## RealFan (Jun 12, 2002)

A very good inside source from the other board has mentioned that Paxson and Ainge are working on a trade which would bring Pierce to Chicago. We'd give up some combo of Chandler, the pick and filler. 

This guy posted some stuff a couple of years ago which was 100% accurate (about the Rose trade).


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

GROSS!


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

what other board? link?

I hope that at the very least we get some combo of Chandler and Crawford or Chandler and Hinrich.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> GROSS!


Take TC out of it and i say thats just what we need.

i think its gross to keep pickin high in the loto hopin for the next MJ and only getting junk.


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bulls</b>!
> 
> 
> Take TC out of it and i say thats just what we need.
> ...


Yeah filler and the #3 pick for Paul Pierce.  

get a grip, Arenas was right, sometimes people on this board post the most ridiculous ideas.


----------



## RealFan (Jun 12, 2002)

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=246564&sid=5b79f84cc51eb42ea76c6903f8323e9d

I can vouch that this guy has been accurate and ahead of the curve in previous dealings.


----------



## BullFan16 (Jun 2, 2003)

i like it.....y am i the only 1....im sick of waiting wir tys to break out....last year he was supposed too....wud he do get injured soo tired of this.....if we want to win....pierce is a guy who can do it


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PatBateman</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah filler and the #3 pick for Paul Pierce.
> ...


lol...

Pat's right...

Filler and 3 won't get it done....

The source of this rumor is legit though, but he didn't post any kind of specifics, so not's let speculate, unless you want to speculate that 3 and filler won't be enough, then you'd be right.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

I remember tech, he was the guy who broke the Rose trade early and has an inside source, if he is reporting this then this rumor has SERIOUS legs guys.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> lol...
> ...


He also said Chandler is part of the deal.


----------



## WhoDaBest23 (Apr 16, 2003)

Very interesting... I wouldn't mind seeing Pierce in a Bulls uniform.


----------



## RealFan (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> I remember tech, he was the guy who broke the Rose trade early and has an inside source, if he is reporting this then this rumor has SERIOUS legs guys.



That's why I posted it here. I believe Tech - he was right about the Rose trade and one other transaction which I can't remember.

Oh wait - I think it was the Brand/Chandler trade, but I might be wrong. In each case, he was a couple of days ahead of the deal being publicly announced.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

I'm on the fence for this deal.

Pierce for Chandler and the #3 plus filler is probably a terrific deal for both teams. 

Bulls give up, essentially, a #2 (chandler) and a #3 for a proven quantity. And he's proven to be one heck of a good player. We'd be a lot better next season than Boston was last, IMO. Boston has some nice players, no doubt, but we'd be adding Pierce to Curry, Hinrich, Crawford (hopefully), and servicable vets AD and JYD. Pierce does exactly what we need, which is play D, share the ball, and provide a wing who'll go to the hole and draw lots of fouls.

On the other hand, can we draft a guy who'll quickly turn out as good as Pierce? Seems like it happens often enough.

So the question is "build it" or "grow it."

If we drafted Gordon and he turned out to be as good as I think he's going to be, is the incremental difference between him and Pierce enough to justify dealing Chandler and the filler? I'm not so sure.

Though I love Pierce as a player.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Tyson, ERob, and 3 should work....


----------



## DontBeCows (Apr 22, 2003)

So I guess that we'll let Boston wait to see whether Tyson Chandler can turn out to be "one of the best players in the league" (per Krause). 

Seriously Pierce would be great for the Bulls. He's a legit all-star and top 15 player in this league. It seems that Bulls haven't had one of those for an eternity.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Glad to see tech post again. He used to browse here a lot but never posted. He quit both sites at the same time. 

Well we talked about Pierce at length for a long time. If it is chandler, #3 and E-rob we have to do it. Gives us a closer. A real go to guy. 

Also would change who our second round picks may have been! 

Tech, if you're browsing, feel free to post.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DontBeCows</b>!
> So I guess that we'll let Boston wait to see whether Tyson Chandler can turn out to be "one of the best players in the league" (per Krause).
> 
> Seriously Pierce would be great for the Bulls. He's a legit all-star and top 15 player in this league. It seems that Bulls haven't had one of those for an eternity.


If we're getting the Pierce from last year...

:no:


----------



## Bullwhip (Feb 26, 2003)

Sign me up. I think Pierce would be incredible. I believe this rumor does have legs considering the source on the RealGM board. I really hope it happens.
It's the best trade for the 3 pick I've heard.


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

First off, I'm not at all a fan of trading Chandler or our pick, which if used right should be able to get a very good player.

Having said that, my initial reaction is that I'd trade both for Pierce.

Pierce has never had a legitimate inside offensive threat to play with like he would with Curry. 

IMO Crawford would fit in very nicely with this lineup. Jamal wouldn't have to be the first option, but when he gets his hot hand he can carry the offense.

Hinrich also would seem to fit in well, he can just bring the ball up, play good defense, shoot some open threes, and distribute the ball to Pierce/Curry/Jamal.

And we'd still have JYD at power forward and Antonio Davis at C/PF to provide some depth up front until we can get some younger players at those positions. This also opens the door for Mario Austin to make the team and earn some minutes.

PG - Hinrich
SG - Crawford
SF - Pierce
PF - AD/JYD
CT - Curry/AD

That looks like a pretty well-balanced starting lineup with a ton of offensive firepower along with some good defensive players.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

If we do this, I'd scratch any plans of signing Macas and try to get a PF like Swift for the MLE....


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

FYI

Pierce was 5th in the NBA in scoring last season.

Of the top 5 scorers:

Only Kobe shot more free throws/game
Only Garnett had more rebounds/game
Only TMac had more assists/game
Only Kobe had more steals/game

But

He was the worst of the 5 FG%
Only Garnett was worse at 3PT FG%
Only Kobe played less min/game


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

The good thing about this deal is according to one of our posters Chandler has Zero trade value....oh wait.  j/k

Trade hasn't happened yet. But I had to say that. :laugh:


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

I'd be all over this deal if we could grab one of Boston's late first rounders as well, but that would probably kill the deal on their end. As it is (Tyson, #3, salary filler for Pierce), I'd still do it, but I do think it could end up being similar to the Rose trade, ie instant gratification at the expense of younger, still-improving studs. Tyson could still become tremendous, and #3 picks tend to become real players most of the time. 

I think Pierce would fit in very nicely here, though. Kirk and Jamal (if retained) take the pressure of being a bigtime ballhandler and facilitator off of Pierce, allowing him to concentrate on scoring from the wing. And having a legit post presence in Curry (we hope) should open things up more. It could certainly be a much better situation for him than Boston was last year.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> If we do this, I'd scratch any plans of signing Macas and try to get a PF like Swift for the MLE....


good call. even with Pierce, we could use more outside marksmanship, but we'd need athleticism and defense up front and Swift fills that bill, maybe even more than Chandler.

Swift could command more money, or take the MLE from a better team, but we should at least try.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> The good thing about this deal is according to one of our posters Chandler has Zero trade value....oh wait.  j/k
> 
> Trade hasn't happened yet. But I had to say that. :laugh:


Let's not get it twisted...

Ainge is doing this to get Gordon.

And I'm sure in their new up and down system Tyson would flourish if he stays healthy.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

You are not going to be as happy with Pierce as you think you are.
I don't see any better players on your team then the Celtics had last year and we made the playoffs by luck. Pierce didn't play defense and he was a real jerk to his teammates.

I don't see this trade happening really but we will see. Tyson Chandler hads been a favorite of mine for years but he hasn't lived up to anything yet.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> You are not going to be as happy with Pierce as you think you are.
> I don't see any better players on your team then the Celtics had last year and we made the playoffs by luck. Pierce didn't play defense and he was a real jerk to his teammates.
> 
> I don't see this trade happening really but we will see. Tyson Chandler hads been a favorite of mine for years but he hasn't lived up to anything yet.


Remember, he who laughs last, thinks slowest.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> 
> 
> good call. even with Pierce, we could use more outside marksmanship, but we'd need athleticism and defense up front and Swift fills that bill, maybe even more than Chandler.
> ...


We could offer Swift a starting job...

AD and JYD should be backups...

Kirk-JC-Pierce-Swift-Curry


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

My best is that Crawford is gone if Pierce comes...

PG - Hinrich
SG - Pierce
SF - Eric Williams
PF - JYD
C - Curry

The only thing is we might have to bring back Dupree or Lint to fill out the bench with AD. This team is built to run a Pax/Skiles type of game. Hard-nosed on the defensive end. Our bench is still a concern though, but if Curry and Hinrich show up we'd be a playoff team next year.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Tech9Ne has a source that is about as close to core of the Bulls organization as you can get. I used to talk to him all the time. Id say I have gotten 15 bit of info from,14 of which he was right. The only time he has ever been wrong was last draft when he said Hayes was the pick. Outside of that, this guy has been dead on


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Chicago trades: SF Chris Jefferies (4.0 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 0.3 apg in 9.3 minutes) 
PF Tyson Chandler (6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 22.4 minutes) 
SF Eddie Robinson (6.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 20.1 minutes) 
Chicago receives: SG Paul Pierce (22.9 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 38.7 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +6.1 ppg, -4.6 rpg, and +3.0 apg. 

Boston trades: SG Paul Pierce (22.9 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 38.7 minutes) 
Boston receives: SF Chris Jefferies (4.0 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 0.3 apg in 21 games) 
PF Tyson Chandler (6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 35 games) 
SF Eddie Robinson (6.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 51 games) 
Change in team outlook: -6.1 ppg, +4.6 rpg, and -3.0 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## Electric Slim (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> Tech9Ne has a source that is about as close to core of the Bulls organization as you can get. I used to talk to him all the time. Id say I have gotten 15 bit of info from,14 of which he was right. The only time he has ever been wrong was last draft when he said Hayes was the pick. Outside of that, this guy has been dead on


And with the recent interest for Hayes and the #5 from Washington, there may have been some truth to the alleged interest last year.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>T.Shock</b>!
> My best is that Crawford is gone if Pierce comes...
> 
> PG - Hinrich
> ...


So you let a talent like JC walk so you can bring in Eric Williams?

It makes more sense to resign JC and sign a guy like Swift to play at 4.

You want to give major minutes/roles to Eric Williams AND JYD?

Nah...I'll aim, fire and pass, pass, pass....


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Electric Slim</b>!
> 
> 
> And with the recent interest for Hayes and the #5 from Washington, there may have been some truth to the alleged interest last year.


Good point.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> You are not going to be as happy with Pierce as you think you are.
> I don't see any better players on your team then the Celtics had last year and we made the playoffs by luck. Pierce didn't play defense and he was a real jerk to his teammates.
> 
> I don't see this trade happening really but we will see. Tyson Chandler hads been a favorite of mine for years but he hasn't lived up to anything yet.


Kirk is more of a real PG than anything the Celtics used there last years, including Banks so far. Pierce, IMO, would benefit from a steady distributor (and hopefully shooter) at the PG spot. Curry, though still maddeningly inconsistent, is a real post presence, something Pierce has NEVER had other than when Walker forgot to shoot a three and went down there on occasion. 

obviously we're not better than Boston overall as our record indicates, but my point was that the pieces we do have seem like they would fit around Pierce better than his team last year. It's purely speculation.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> Chicago trades: SF Chris Jefferies (4.0 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 0.3 apg in 9.3 minutes)
> PF Tyson Chandler (6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 22.4 minutes)
> SF Eddie Robinson (6.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 20.1 minutes)
> ...


maybe if we give them Jeffries too, we can keep the #3 :laugh:


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Anyone thinking how JC's game might flourish if he doesn't have to do it all?

And with a guy like Pierce on the floor you can let both handle it and play off the ball and neither has to be latched to a PG/SG role.

Sometimes you can let Pierce handle it and both play off the ball...

This can work, but Skiles has to come up with some kind of scheme, that crap last year isn't going to cut it.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I tend to think Pierce is worth the #3 pick, but I'm not sure he's worth the #3 pick plus Tyson. 

And isn't he more an SG? I guess if I'm making such a trade, I'd want a guy who's more of an ideal fit, although he's pretty good.

We're also trading two "assets" for one.

I wonder who the cap filler is. If we're getting rid of any of ERob/JYD/Davis, then it's probably worth it.

Yeah, if one of those guys is going, then maybe it's worth thinking about.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Is pierce really going to benefit from a PG who dribbles the ball until the shot clock is nearly run out?


----------



## jollyoscars (Jul 5, 2003)

i would LOVE for the bulls to do a deal like this.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Is pierce really going to benefit from a PG who dribbles the ball until the shot clock is nearly run out?


haha, which guard? hmmm, both of them!

Lets be honest here. #3, Chandler and Erob is perfectly fair for Pierce. We should be lucky to acquire a nearly top 10 player in the league without dealing Curry or Hinrich. Its a steal. And if Pax pulls it off, Dabullz, yes, YOULL HAVE TO TAKE ME OFF THE FIRE PAX CLUB. Itll be a great deal. But another KU guy? Im not sure if I can take anymore of that Jayhawk alumni craze


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

I have seen only a little of Kirk and have been impressed with what he did as a rookie but to say the Celtics didn't have a PG last year isn't really true. When Chucky came he played the part decently enough and 2 years ago we had Kenny Anderson who also did a good job.

Do you have a leader on your team? Is Scotty Pippen staying? If someone like Pippen is on the floor Pierce will probably do pretty well for you but if he is going to be the best player on your team. Then it won't work out. Just like last year for the Celtics. A lot of the credit for the playoffs goes to Vin Baker being there the first half of the year.





> Kirk is more of a real PG than anything the Celtics used there last years, including Banks so far. Pierce, IMO, would benefit from a steady distributor (and hopefully shooter) at the PG spot. Curry, though still maddeningly inconsistent, is a real post presence, something Pierce has NEVER had other than when Walker forgot to shoot a three and went down there on occasion.
> 
> obviously we're not better than Boston overall as our record indicates, but my point was that the pieces we do have seem like they would fit around Pierce better than his team last year. It's purely speculation.




I have been watching Pierce for years. Last year he showed his true colors and insulting me doesn't prove you are correct.
It just shows your immaturity.

I have been calling Pierce overrrated for years. I have stated many times that he can't do anything till the forth quarter. This all was hidden when Walker was in town but it showed up last year as soon as Pierce had no one to do all the work for him so he could score in the fourth and take all the credit.
How many members of the Chicago Bulls team are going to be willing to do all the work and get none of the credit? I don't think many.

Just wait, You will have your honeymoon period where he will do really well and then he will revert to being the ball hog he has always been.




> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> Remember, he who laughs last, thinks slowest.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> 
> 
> maybe if we give them Jeffries too, we can keep the #3 :laugh:


Jefferies is just in there to even the salaries out, i just put the players in there the #3 pick would still go there.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Just curious, but if this trade is in the works, would anyone else consider a clean sweep and offer Curry and Hinrich for TMac?

I mean damn, if they're going to trade him for Francis and Mobley, you'd think they'd consider trading him for Curry and Hinrich.

We'd want to use the MLE on a C/PF... maybe we could get Mark Blount?

1- Crawford
2- Pierce
3- TMac
4- Davis, JYD
5- Blount

Idle speculation, but seriously... if you're the magic, would you prefer Francis/Mobley/Cato or Curry/Hinrich?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> 
> haha, which guard? hmmm, both of them!
> ...


The real problem with this deal is that Pierce will be run out of town like Rose was. Pierce is just 2 years younger than Rose was when we got him. He shot virtually the same number of FGA/game as Rose did two seasons ago, shot the same FG%, was far worse from 3. How long before we hear the "he jacks up too many bad shots" chorus once again?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> I have seen only a little of Kirk and have been impressed with what he did as a rookie but to say the Celtics didn't have a PG last year isn't really true. When Chucky came he played the part decently enough and 2 years ago we had Kenny Anderson who also did a good job.
> 
> Do you have a leader on your team? Is Scotty Pippen staying? If someone like Pippen is on the floor Pierce will probably do pretty well for you but if he is going to be the best player on your team. Then it won't work out. Just like last year for the Celtics. A lot of the credit for the playoffs goes to Vin Baker being there the first half of the year.
> ...


No sense of humor? Darn!


----------



## jollyoscars (Jul 5, 2003)

what i also really like about it is we would be getting rid of 2 bad salaries in the deal:

Chicago trades: SF Chris Jefferies	(4.0 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 0.3 apg in 9.3 minutes) 
_	PF Tyson Chandler	(6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 22.4 minutes) 
_	PF Jerome Williams	(6.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 24.1 minutes) 
Chicago receives: SG Paul Pierce	(22.9 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 38.7 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +6.6 ppg, -9.6 rpg, and +3.0 apg.
Boston trades: SG Paul Pierce	(22.9 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 38.7 minutes) 
Boston receives: SF Chris Jefferies	(4.0 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 0.3 apg in 21 games) 
_	PF Tyson Chandler	(6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 35 games) 
_	PF Jerome Williams	(6.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 68 games) 
Change in team outlook: -6.6 ppg, +9.6 rpg, and -3.0 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

Like others have been saying, TC, Erob and the 3 is a reasonable offer for Pierce.

However, i think the Celts will try to unload LaFrentz on us (i think he has 4 or 5 yrs left on a big deal).


----------



## charlietyra (Dec 1, 2002)

Relatively speaking I thought Pierce did not have as good a year last year as the two previous years notwithstanding what his stats may have been. Ainge trading Walker hurt his game as he was the sole focus of everyone's defense. 

Having said that, I would certainly do the #3 and Chandler deal. Pierce is a proven commodity and will win games for the Bulls. However, if the rest of the Bulls underperform I can see Pierce dogging it as he did during stretches last year. 

The reason I see Ainge agreeing to this deal is that he is probably the only GM in the league as dumb as Paxson. This would be a good deal for the Bulls. For some reason I think there may be something to this rumor.


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

I like the Swift idea, he'd be a good option as our starting PF, and that would give us needed depth up front with AD and JYD.

As far as Eric Williams, I don't mind going after him, but I'd rather have Jamal and Pierce as our SG/SF combo. If we end up trading EROB as part of the Pierce deal, Eric Williams wouldn't be a bad guy to have come off the bench at SF, and would allow JYD to play his best position at PF.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> The real problem with this deal is that Pierce will be run out of town like Rose was. Pierce is just 2 years younger than Rose was when we got him. He shot virtually the same number of FGA/game as Rose did two seasons ago, shot the same FG%, was far worse from 3. How long before we hear the "he jacks up too many bad shots" chorus once again?


But Pierce is a proven to be a better player in the playoffs. 2 years ago, he was arguably the best player in the playoffs. He gets to the the line, finishes at the bucket and can score in bunches.

Somone mentioned LaFrentz. Hell no. Not because of him, or his contract. We dont need the onslaught of KU guys coming here telling us how great Pierce, Hinrich and LaFrentz are 24/7. 

At the end of the day, Pierce would be the Bulls best player, though some people would ridiculously say Kirk is. But this club only goes as far as Eddy Curry takes us. Guess where Curry is now? On a cruise and I am sure a plate of Doughnuts isnt far away.


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

I think arenas is right on with his suggestion of Swift with the MLE. I like Chandler more than most, but I think that Swift could turn into a similar player - maybe slightly less potential but you never know.

The Bulls would do this trade in a heartbeat if the rumor is true. Getting a player like Paul Pierce (even if he's not perfect as people have pointed out) and not losing Hinrich or Curry is a falt out steal for Paxson.

I don't know much about Boston, but I seem to remember that Pierce was very willing to play a team game under O'Brien. Isn't O'Brien a similar coach to Skiles (i.e. tough, defensive pressure, etc.)? Maybe Pierce would return to his previous form in Chicago. Even if he doesn't, I would still so this trade.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Man, I'm freaking saying... TMac AND Pierce are within reach. 

Be bold and try to do something big. One of these guys, by himself, might make us better, but it's not going to change our fortunes all that much. Cashing in every chip we've got, however, and getting both of these guys would put us on the map.

If we're going to make a move, isn't that the kind of move to make?

Otherwise, like DaBullz pointed out, we've got Jalen Rose part II.

We cash in all our chips and we've got, potentially, MJ and Pip part two. We're instantly contenders simply because we've got the best pair of wings in the Eastern Conference and no team can hope to stop both of them at once. We also become an attractive enough destination that we can fill in our other holes.

Be bold, don't be half-assed!


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Man, I'm freaking saying... TMac AND Pierce are within reach.
> 
> Be bold and try to do something big. One of these guys, by himself, might make us better, but it's not going to change our fortunes all that much. Cashing in every chip we've got, however, and getting both of these guys would put us on the map.
> ...


hmmmm, i agree. With the NBA turning over a new leaf this offseason, only the bold and brave will survive some of the turnover.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> 
> But Pierce is a proven to be a better player in the playoffs. 2 years ago, he was arguably the best player in the playoffs. He gets to the the line, finishes at the bucket and can score in bunches.
> ...


Rose scored 40 points in the ECF in 2000. I'd call that clutch. He was also cluth in the earlier series.

I agree Pierce would be the Bulls best player.

I also don't take a boston fan's view of Pierce's attitude lightly..


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> 
> haha, which guard? hmmm, both of them!
> ...


I'm a Mizzou guy, but I'll gladly take Pierce along with Hinrich(who made an absolutely brutal shot against the Tigers last year.)

My allegience to the Bulls overrides my Mizzou loyalties, though if we trade Chandler I wouldn't mind taking a chance on Arthur Johnson with our first second round pick.


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Man, I'm freaking saying... TMac AND Pierce are within reach.
> 
> Be bold and try to do something big. One of these guys, by himself, might make us better, but it's not going to change our fortunes all that much. Cashing in every chip we've got, however, and getting both of these guys would put us on the map.


Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the Magic would trade McGrady for Hinrich and Curry + filler. The other deals they're looking at all bring back an established star (Francis, Marion, etc.).

I think the Bulls would have to toss in a future #1 pick - which I would definitely do though.

I agree with your theory of going for it all no matter what it takes.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

No he wasn't a team player two years ago. Things were hidden because he had other players there willing to be his personal ball boy.
If Pierce is going to be the leader on the Bulls then I am telling you now, it won't work. He isn't a leader. Not on or off the court.

There was an article in the Globe the other day that the Bulls fans might be interested in. It lays credance to this rumor (even though it doesn't mention it specifically)
Let me find a link.



> Originally posted by <b>onetenthlag</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't know much about Boston, but I seem to remember that Pierce was very willing to play a team game under O'Brien. Isn't O'Brien a similar coach to Skiles (i.e. tough, defensive pressure, etc.)? Maybe Pierce would return to his previous form in Chicago. Even if he doesn't, I would still so this trade.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

This trade only works if we keep Crawford.

Hinrich, Crawford, Pierce, ???, Curry - 1 hole to fill

If we let Crawford walk

Hinrich ??? Piece, ???, Curry- 2 holes to fill.

If Fizer isnt taken by the Cats he could finally have his 4 spot with the team.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

I think rlucas hit the nail on the head with his comment about Eddy Curry. Pierce is a great player, best player on their team, a playoff team by the way playing with less that adequate talent around him. However, if Curry shows up in shape and ready to ball, I mean really ready, then we become legit. Teams can't focus on Paul as much with Curry putting up 18 and something inside (I realize the something number of rebounds presents a problem). And for arenas I was not saying that I personally would get rid of JC, just that Pax prolly would. Macas would take Crawford's spot and I'm confident we could land E-Will if Pierce was in town. 

Mike as much as I'd love to have T-Mac and Pierce in town it just won't happen. We don't have enough to get it done. 

Francis > Hinrich
Mobley = Curry
Cato > Anything else we got

Maybe if we threw in 2 firsts unprotected then they'd consider it, but we better hope Pierce and T-Mac would be enough cause that is all we'd have.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Here is the article, Please remember when Ainge says he won't trade someone that means he is trying too.
http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2004/06/22/and_just_where_does_pierce_fit/


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>T.Shock</b>!
> And for arenas I was not saying that I personally would get rid of JC, just that Pax prolly would. Macas would take Crawford's spot and I'm confident we could land E-Will if Pierce was in town.


If Pax wants to make the playoffs he better not lot JC walk with Pierce coming in....

Anyone here would honestly say they would rather have...

Kirk-Macas-Pierce-JYD-Curry

over

Kirk-JC-Pierce-Swift-Curry 

?

As much talk about Curry, JC's game would flourish as well by bringing in a guy like Pierce because he wouldn't be depended upon to carry the offensive load.

As far as Swift goes, I'm not guaranteeing we get him, but if you get Pierce, I wouldn't even call Macas anymore, you just lost Tyson so you need to fill that hole with a 4.

I'm not comfortable giving AD or JYD a major role or minutes, both guys coming off the bench would signify that this team got a lot better.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>onetenthlag</b>!
> 
> 
> Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the Magic would trade McGrady for Hinrich and Curry + filler. The other deals they're looking at all bring back an established star (Francis, Marion, etc.).
> ...


To quote Herman Edwards, "*YOU PLAY THE GAME TO WIN!*" 

But here's another thing. Curry and Hinrich are good and on rookie contracts. Francis, Mobley, and Cato are expensive with pretty long-term deals.

Curry, Hinrich, Pippen, Jeffries, Shirley, Pargo (the last four all have non-guaranteed or expiring contracts) for TMac

If the Magic do this trade, and then they can buy Grant Hill out and have him come off the books (he hasn't played in two years and the CBA rules will have him come off the books for next summer... insurance will pay most of it), then the Magic have a fantastic set of young talent to build around... Curry, Okafor, Gooden, Hinrich and a very good cap situation that will let them attract FAs.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Thanks, lastlaugh.

From your article:

"Paul's a star. He's a perennial All-Star player. I don't classify that as a superstar. I think a superstar is a franchise player that year in and year out has all the characteristics to carry a championship team."

This is my thinking. Can we get an all-star player in the draft? Quite possibly. Can that all-star have those attributes ascribed to Pierce? That is, an all-star who's darn good, but not good enough to carry a championship team?

If the answer is yes, we can draft a guy like that, then we can have/keep Chandler and be better off.

This is why I said I was on the fence.

Peace!


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> To quote Herman Edwards, "*YOU PLAY THE GAME TO WIN!*"
> ...


People scoffed at your idea to trade for Sheed last season, too.

There's a LOT of merit in your idea here.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>T.Shock</b>!
> Mike as much as I'd love to have T-Mac and Pierce in town it just won't happen. We don't have enough to get it done.
> 
> Francis > Hinrich
> ...


I don't want to drag the thread too much off on a tangent (although I think trying to get both these guys and making something happen is a more logical move than just getting one... which would leave us in mediocrity), but...

1. Francis is pitching a fit about playing in Orlando, and I'm not sure he's the kind of player they want if they don't want TMac anyway.

2. 30 of 30 GMs would trade Mobley to get Curry. Mobley is nothing special at all... go check out how guys on the Rockets board have been trying to dump him for the last year. Curry may be nothing special too, but he's a 7' 300lb nothing special, and that makes him special.

3. Cato is moody, prone to being out of shape, and has a downright ugly contract that ensures the Magic wouldn't get any FAs of note this summer (they'd have good FA options if they traded with the Bulls however).

I understand why the Magic might go the other way... the attraction of an "established" guy is strong, I guess, but a forward thinking approach that looks at the cap implications makes the Bulls deal even better.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

DC,

How about trying to trade for Francis instead of TMac? It'd probably cost us a LOT less, and he'd certainly bring a LOT at SG (if we play Pierce at SF).

-- DB


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

You can't have too much talent. Regardless of position or whatever. Trading for Pierce and T-Mac give us the 2nd best wing combo possibly in the last 25 years behind Jordan and Pippen. If we re-sign Crawford we could throw JYD and AD at the 4 and 5 and still win games if....IF 

Paul Pierce realizes he is the #2 option. Is Pierce capable of that task? Most Celts fans would say no he isn't.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> DC,
> 
> How about trying to trade for Francis instead of TMac? It'd probably cost us a LOT less, and he'd certainly bring a LOT at SG (if we play Pierce at SF).
> ...


Umm... I dunno... I used to be a big fan of Francis, but I'm not that hot on him next year. This guy had the proverbial Golden Goose to play with in Yao and would rather be taking shots. That kinda scares me. I mean, TMac and Pierce didn't have good seasons, obviously, but they both seem to be guys who _want_ to play with other stars. 

And then there's the size thing with Francis. Do we really want a 6'3 SG and a 6'6 SF? It can work, of course, but I'd rather go for the guys who *both* ideal size and ideal ability.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> Umm... I dunno... I used to be a big fan of Francis, but I'm not that hot on him next year. This guy had the proverbial Golden Goose to play with in Yao and would rather be taking shots. That kinda scares me. I mean, TMac and Pierce didn't have good seasons, obviously, but they both seem to be guys who _want_ to play with other stars.
> ...


Pierce was fine last season. We know that Francis is a stud player. 

What does their height matter? They're both tough inside if they need to be.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Do we really want a 6'3 SG and a 6'6 SF? It can work, of course, but I'd rather go for the guys who *both* ideal size and ideal ability.


Both are all-stars.

Yes.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> Pierce was fine last season.


That's debateable....


----------



## SKiP (Jan 28, 2004)

I don't think you could get T-Mac now because the deal with Houston is practically done. The only way it doesn't go through is if Juwan Howard is picked in the expansion draft and I don't think the Bobcats will pick him.

Now if Francis doesn't want to play for the Magic, I could see them trading him to a team like Chicago. Its too late to trade for McGrady. Getting Francis is more realistic than getting McGrady.


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

it would be fun to experience the line up of jamal/pp/t-mac and 2 hustle guys like jyd and AD in the middle. i like MikeDC's thinking but if t-mac agrees to sign an extension with us, and i dont see that happening.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

I've been saying it for awhile on chats.

Francis=Crawford

Jamal Crawford 17.3 pts 5.1 ast
Steve Francis 19.2 pts 7.6 ast

Are the Bulls really in need of that extra 1.9 points and 2.5 assist only in a whining attitude with migraines that is 27 years old then a young developing, HUNGRY in a 24 year old body with no health problems. Ill take Crawford over Francis any day.


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

I don't think I'd trade Curry in a package for Francis, so what else would we have to offer the Magic? Hinrich + future #1?

Francis just seems like the last guy in the NBA that Paxson/Skiles would want.

The only way I see the Bulls adding him is if it doesn't cost them Curry. Long shot at best IMO.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>onetenthlag</b>!
> I don't think I'd trade Curry in a package for Francis, so what else would we have to offer the Magic? Hinrich + future #1?
> 
> Francis just seems like the last guy in the NBA that Paxson/Skiles would want.
> ...


Clearly it'd be Hinrich-plus. Supposedly Van Gundy has a woody for Hinrich and misplayed Francis.

It'd be interesting if the Bulls re-sign Crawford and played him at PG:

PG Crawford
SG Francis
SF Pierce
PF AD
C Curry


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>onetenthlag</b>!
> I don't think I'd trade Curry in a package for Francis, so what else would we have to offer the Magic? Hinrich + future #1?
> 
> Francis just seems like the last guy in the NBA that Paxson/Skiles would want.
> ...


That's probably the biggest point I see. And while it doesn't matter to other guys, I really like the idea of having such a big, athletic, and flexible perimeter. 6'8" McGrady, 6'6" Pierce, and 6'6" Crawford is about as imposing a lineup you can get. And yeah, size does matter, at least a bit. In that lineup, we've almost ALWAYS got a size advantage and a major one at at least one position.


----------



## onetenthlag (Jul 29, 2003)

Just to compare the T-Mac and Francis ideas...

FRANCIS =

PG Crawford
SG Francis
SF Pierce
PF AD (Swift)
C Curry

TMAC =

PG Crawford
SG TMac
SF Pierce
PF JYD
C Davis (Blount)

To be honest, as much as the second lineup looks great (especially if the Bulls could add Mark Blount), I'm torn. The TMac lineup leaves the team really weak up front IMO. But there's no point in going half-a**ed either.

I have a pretty high opinion of Curry though, so I might go with the Francis lineup.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

I'll agree with Arenas on several points here.

The trade would probably be:

#3
Chandler
ERob

for

Paul Pierce


However, I'd much prefer this trade:

#3
#32
Chandler
ERob

for

Paul Pierce
#25

We'll be able to grab Donta Smith or perhaps a really talented player that drops to us at #25. If this trade goes down, Paxson should figure out how to grab one of Boston's late first round picks. Do they really want four first rounders anyway? Probably not, but assets are assets.

I love the idea of going after Swift with the whole MLE. The only problem is that I think West will match to keep his asset. Maybe if we offered six years West wouldn't match, but he probably would anyway.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Please define the word "Fine"?
Pierce was anything but fine last year.
He harassed and belittled his teammates, he hogged the ball,
He refused to come into the huddle in the middle of a playoff game because he couldn't get his own way. He cared only about getting his points, he blamed everyone else on the team because he wasn't doing his job. He shot a horrible % and nearly lead the league in turnovers because he wouldn't pass the ball and instead choose to dribble the ball into 5 other guys.
I could go on.

I don't blame just Pierce for his behavior. Danny Ainge basically told him that he was the only guy who could save the franchise from what evil Antoine Walker had done to it the last 7 years and Pierce bought it hook, line and sinker. Too bad Ainge and Pierce were wrong.




> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> Pierce was fine last season. We know that Francis is a stud player.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

My point is it probably doesn't take as much for us to get Francis as it would TMac.

The Francis lineup gives you 3 guys who can score 50 on any night and another who can put up over 20 regularly on just a few shots.

Two seasons ago, playing SG, Francis went to the line a TON, so you'd have two guys who could take it to the hoop, an inside presence, and a guy with a pretty good 3pt shot. A pretty good balance.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

All I can say that guys that are being traded or rumored to be traded are being do so for a reason.


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> Please define the word "Fine"?
> Pierce was anything but fine last year.
> He harassed and belittled his teammates, he hogged the ball,
> ...


As a Celtics fan, I agree with a good amount said here and would not be crushed if we traded Paul Pierce, but I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather try and get Harrington + Artest which definitely doable


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> Please define the word "Fine"?
> Pierce was anything but fine last year.
> He harassed and belittled his teammates, he hogged the ball,
> ...


You say the Celtics made the playoffs because of Vin Baker? Well, he was gone, the Celtics were OUT of the playoffs and then made a run to get in. Musta been Jiri Welsh who led your team to the playoffs... Right?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> All I can say that guys that are being traded or rumored to be traded are being do so for a reason.


The top 4 players on Detroit's team were all traded. There were reasons for those trades at the time, too.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> All I can say that guys that are being traded or rumored to be traded are being do so for a reason.


Many need nothing more than a change of scenery.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Goodness...

We hear one Pierce rumor, and now let the fantasy, T-Mac, Francis and Pierce lineups begin.

Get serious.

This isn't NBA Live or ESPN NBA and trade override is not turned on.


----------



## MiSTa iBN (Jun 16, 2002)

I wish we could re-sign Marcus Fizer, I don't care what anybody says, I want someone who can score at the 4 position, to go with Paul Pierce and Eddy Curry.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

F Lonny Baxter* Washington 
G J.R. Bremer* Golden State 
C Primoz Brezec Indiana 
G Maurice Carter* New Orleans 
C Predrag Drobnjak L.A. Clippers 
F Desmond Ferguson* Portland 
F Marcus Fizer* Chicago 
G Richie Frahm* Seattle 
F Brandon Hunter Boston 
F Jason Kapono Cleveland 
F-C Zaza Pachulia Orlando 
F Aleksandar Pavlovic Utah 
F Jamal Sampson L.A. Lakers 
G Tamar Slay* New Jersey 
F Theron Smith Memphis 
G Jeff Trepagnier* Denver 
F Gerald Wallace Sacramento 
C Jahidi White Phoenix 
C Loren Woods* Miami 


Fizer is an unrestricted free agents as he was taken by the bobcats.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> My point is it probably doesn't take as much for us to get Francis as it would TMac.
> 
> The Francis lineup gives you 3 guys who can score 50 on any night and another who can put up over 20 regularly on just a few shots.
> ...


I dunno... if we could really get him without giving up Curry. But I guess in my heart of hearts, I think Curry and Francis are both good but the kind of megastar that wins championships. TMac, on the other hand, is a top 5 in the NBA talent, and those are the guys who win championships most of the time. Pierce is maybe top 20. Francis and is maybe a tiny notch below him. Curry... is pretty far down the list in my book.


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PatBateman</b>!
> 
> 
> As a Celtics fan, I agree with a good amount said here and would not be crushed if we traded Paul Pierce, but I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather try and get Harrington + Artest which definitely doable


no its definitely NOT doable, no way pp will get u artest
+harrington.


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

Hmmm, I don't really like it. You're giving up great potential at #3 and Tyson for instant gratification, something that often seems to workout poorly. 

With Pierce, you give away the reins to the team and settle on something good but not great. Pierce kind of falls into that odd tier of players with the Jalen Rose types, players who are certainly talented but I'd rather not have on my team for various reasons, some obvious and some just feelings.

Basically, you have to look at Boston -- why are they trading Pierce? Is there a reason why they essentially seem willing to blow-up their team? And do you want to step in their shoes?


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> The real problem with this deal is that Pierce will be run out of town like Rose was. Pierce is just 2 years younger than Rose was when we got him. He shot virtually the same number of FGA/game as Rose did two seasons ago, shot the same FG%, was far worse from 3. How long before we hear the "he jacks up too many bad shots" chorus once again?


I doubt that. But if he plays the way Jalen played last seaosn, he might.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> Goodness...
> 
> We hear one Pierce rumor, and now let the fantasy, T-Mac, Francis and Pierce lineups begin.
> ...


goodness GRACIOUS! i agree.

BTW - ESPN news reporting that T-Mac to Houston _could be done as early as tomorrow._ 

Francis to Orlando - and then rumor has it will then turn around and trade him to Seattle for Ray Allen - or possibly the Wizards for Gilbert Arenas. No mention of the Bulls in any of these scenarios, sorry fantasy dudes.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Francis is rumored not to like Orlando. There was an headline I posted in todays news on the homepage that insinuated that some of the players involved in the trade coming to Orlando that Orlando might not be their final destination

Arenas, count me in with the idea to sign Swift if we trade Chandler. Sounds good to me.


----------



## JPBulls (Aug 15, 2003)

It´s a lot of fun when a few months ago a lot of posters were in favor to trade Curry for Pierce, some even said that would be necessary Hinrich and Curry... Now that a rumour appears with a really good trade for us everybody thinks it´s a bad one...

What Line-up would you choose??

Atkins
Welsh
Pierce
Baker - some scrubs that I cant even remember/ McCarty??
Blount

or

Hinrich
Jamal
Pierce
AD- MLE
Curry

And the first team made the playoffs, in a really bad way but did. If this deal doesn´t occur it will be because of the Celtics, c´mon wasn´t Chandler just a scrub with bad Back, no hands, and no offensive game a few weeks ago...

We need to stop be against everything that ar rumored to occur hear...

If someone propose a trade of Curry+ just bad filler for Shaq some will say you neve trade young for old...

This trade appears to be GREAT for the Bulls...


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JPBulls</b>!
> It´s a lot of fun when a few months ago a lot of posters were in favor to trade Curry for Pierce, some even said that would be necessary Hinrich and Curry... Now that a rumour appears with a really good trade for us everybody thinks it´s a bad one...
> 
> What Line-up would you choose??
> ...


It is great for the bulls should it happen the way it is mentioned. We shall see.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

DMD is absolulately right. If we trade our pick to bos we need to get one of their first round picks back in return. They have three picks. By guess is the 24th and then we could use a 2 2nd rounders to try to move up and get someone who falls to fill a SF need.

david


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>giusd</b>!
> DMD is absolulately right. If we trade our pick to bos we need to get one of their first round picks back in return. They have three picks. By guess is the 24th and then we could use a 2 2nd rounders to try to move up and get someone who falls to fill a SF need.
> 
> david


are you nuts!! No way Boston should have to give back one of its firsts. I'll give you the second rounder, looks like it did a lot for Brandon Hunter(steal of the century for Cats :upset: :upset: )


----------



## Half-Life (Jan 1, 2003)

We NEED a guy like Pierce...someone who can play acceptable defense and has heart...heart is missing in some of the Bulls` players I know. The thing about Pierce is that he can explode anytime...especially in the fourth quarter and that`s what the Bulls need...a goto guy.

C-Curry
Pf- Davis??
Sf- Pierce
Sg- Crawford
Pg- Heinrich

We should AT LEAST make SOME noise with this team...


----------



## SKiP (Jan 28, 2004)

This could be a very good Celtics team.

Boston Celtiics
PG - Banks / Atkins
SG - Davis / Welsch 
SF - Deng(#3) / McCarty
PF - Humphries(#15) / LaFrentz
C - Chandler /Harrison(#24) / Swift(#25)


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Let's be real greedy and go for Ricky Davis AND Pierce.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

Now, this is a bombshell for the Bulls of this were to happen! I mean, WOW!!! 

But, I hope that Pax would at least get a pick out of the deal. I can't imagine Boston holding on to <b>four</b> first rounders. And, if they <i>do</i> make this trade, then Boston is <i>really</i> in the rebuilding stage. I don't know this guy that is breaking this, so I wouldn't speculate whwther or not this trade has legs or not. But, this way some of you guys talk, this might happen.

And I agree with Arenas, if we do this trade, then I'm for signing Swift. Memphis him on the block anyway.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>PatBateman</b>!
> what other board? link?
> 
> I hope that at the very least we get some combo of Chandler and Crawford or Chandler and Hinrich.


WRONG. If you get Chandler you aren't even sniffing Curry or Hinrich. The reason you guys are headed down, besides Ainge sucking, is that you are just another team with an elite guard and no big man. If we gave you Curry....wouldn't we be the same thing?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> WRONG. If you get Chandler you aren't even sniffing Curry or Hinrich. The reason you guys are headed down, besides Ainge sucking, is that you are just another team with an elite guard and no big man. If we gave you Curry....wouldn't we be the same thing?


I think that's overvaluing our players....

You're talking about top 15 player...

Chandler's coming off his worst year, Curry's history is showing up in January, not even one of the top 2 C's in the East, and given the same role a few rookies, Barbosa, Ridnour, etc. could have put up the same numbers on a team that won 23 games.

I wish we could look at things objectively, go to game threads how many times did we bash Chandler because of his bad hands, broke *** jumper, going for every pump fake, etc.

How many times did we bash Curry for his fat *** not being able to play more then 25 mins without being dead...

But as soon as trade comes up, you guys defend to them death and treat them like superstars, when they haven't done S H I T.

NEWSFLASH.

Pierce is an all-star, olympian, top 15 NBA player AND talent, and most importantly, A WINNER...

We don't have ANY of that.

And what we did have, "POTENTIAL"....

Is starting to FFFFFADE because its been years and our guys still haven't done anything.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I think that's overvaluing our players....
> ...


NEWSFLASH.....Boston has Pierce and they're in the "mediocrity trap"....which is worse than where we are.

You know that trap where you're too good to get a high pick, but never good enough to contend?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> NEWSFLASH.....Boston has Pierce and they're in the "mediocrity trap"....which is worse than where we are.


You seriously believe right now today we are better than Boston?


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I think that's overvaluing our players....
> ...



THANK YOU ARENAS!!! Best post of yours ever, 5 stars!!!!

go ahead Bulls fans, overvalue your stock!! :laugh: 

If Ainge didn't ask for Chandler and Hinrich, he should be tarred and feathered. Forget the #3, I want Kirk and Tyson for PP.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

I like this trade 

Pierce and Welsch and #25 

for 

Chandler, #3 , Pippen and Jeffries and #32 and #39 ( Pip and Jeff for salary cap relief and #32 and #39 for non gteed contracts ) 

We take Donta Smith at #25 

We swap ERob for Ollie and Battie 

Target Macijauskas and Chris Andersen at the MLE 

*

Curry
Battie
Pierce
Welsch
Hinrich

bench

Davis
Andersen
D.Smith
Macijauskas
Ollie 

*

Boston

*

LaFrentz
Chandler
Deng
R.Davis
Banks

bench

Mihm 
Perkins
J.Jones
#32
#39

*


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> I like this trade
> 
> Pierce and Welsch and #25
> ...


Wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, get this man a white coat with no sleeves, please somebody do it now


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> You seriously believe right now today we are better than Boston?


Better no, better off yes. Because Boston will have to come to down to where we are before they go up.


----------



## LB26matrixns (May 6, 2004)

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


Well that's fine......#3 and Hinrich are certainly interchangeable as far as I'm concerned. Worse comes to worse we could always take Devin Harris or Ben Gordon. Yeah that's fine. I didn't know that that is what you meant. Thanks for specifying. Wouldn't you agree that a deal that gave you like Chandler, Curry and the #3 would leave us with too little to compete even with Paul? Not competing sucks, but it sucks worse when you're locked into a big long salary like Pierce...agreed?


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RealFan</b>!
> A very good inside source from the other board has mentioned that Paxson and Ainge are working on a trade which would bring Pierce to Chicago. We'd give up some combo of Chandler, the pick and filler.
> 
> This guy posted some stuff a couple of years ago which was 100% accurate (about the Rose trade).


In a NY minute. Pierce is a bonafide all-star and Chandler is one put-back dunk away from having back spasms for the rest of his career. If Ainge wants to clean house that badly ...send Pierce over our way we'll take. Paul is like Jason from Friday the 13th ... You can stab him 15 times and he'll still come back to kill you. As long as the "filler" doesn't include JC in a sign-and-trade, I am all over this trade. To make the contracts match .... it'll have to be some pretty healthy filler (God willing it's AD)


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

*Re: Re: Pierce to Bulls???*

I would make that trade in less than a second. Trade Chandler, #3, and filler to get Paul Pierce.

Pierce is a all-star, a scorer, and best of all... he's a shooting guard who gets to the line.

You put him in a backcourt with Hinrich and give him a big man in Curry- he will excel. Period.

His team may be stuck in mediocrity and he may have lost some competitive fire, but can you really blame him?

He's been with one team his entire career and brought them(with some help from Walker) from a non playoff team to the eastern conference championship. And then they go through another offseason where management does not sign a quality PG or C. And then Ainge trades Walker for crap.

If traded to the Bulls, Pierce would have the change of scenery he desperatley needs, an excellent young point guard and a young center. It'd be the perfect trade for the Bulls.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Great , I've been pushing strongly to get PP the hole season and exploit Ainge's craziness , and when the rumour starts floating , I'm asleep....(well it is half past 7 in Israel)

I'd do it with my eyes closed falling down from the empire state building(still up right??) and my hand tied to my ankles while doing It.

Pierce is a franchise , top 10 player (mainly because of crunchtime) and he's a hell of a piece to get when u r building a team.

I tell u if Pax pulls this one I'd vote him for Mayor (can't rally vote from here but I'll send my blessing)


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

I agree with remolver Cets will probably want to unload Raef on us , and I'd still swallow with a smile...

Chicago trades: PF Antonio Davis (8.8 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 1.7 apg in 32.1 minutes) 
PF Tyson Chandler (6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 22.4 minutes) 
SF Chris Jefferies (4.0 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 0.3 apg in 9.3 minutes)
3rd pick 
Chicago receives: SG Paul Pierce (22.9 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 38.7 minutes) 
C Raef LaFrentz (7.8 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 1.4 apg in 19.3 minutes)
25th pick 
Change in team outlook: +11.8 ppg, -6.3 rpg, and +3.8 apg. 

Boston trades: SG Paul Pierce (22.9 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 38.7 minutes) 
C Raef LaFrentz (7.8 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 1.4 apg in 19.3 minutes) 
25th pick
Boston receives: PF Antonio Davis (8.8 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 1.7 apg in 80 games) 
PF Tyson Chandler (6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 35 games) 
SF Chris Jefferies (4.0 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 0.3 apg in 21 games) 
3rd pick 
Change in team outlook: -11.8 ppg, +6.3 rpg, and -3.8 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED

Saying that Raef is the kind of inside player that can give Eddy some opperating room , but they'll be the softest pair of big men in the league.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

No thanks for me on the hole Francis Issue - I don't want a guy that does not like playing on monday nights or whenever he has a period.
I'd keep Kirk and Curry.

I'd do Jyd and Pip and future 1st for him but not more..


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

thats just great , I wake up and left to speculate alone (since everybody's in US going to sleep)

If this deal goes down I wouldn't go for TMac or Franchise 

How about trade Lazy for Crazy - basis of the deal is Curry for Artest

Kirk
PP
Artest

and JC to be 6th

Artest has a great contract of which most goes to the Shrink

But aquiring PP and Artest means we have 3-5 years paying 18-22 mil for both of those top players , less than 2 max by far .


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Good morning bullet I need to be in bed and I will be soon. 

Francis wants to go to a playoff team. He doesn't want to play for orlando. realgm has a link for the article on wiretap. 

Imagine that! Francis not wanting to play for a team!! Where have I heard that before? Deja vu!


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> Good morning bullet I need to be in bed and I will be soon.
> 
> Francis wants to go to a playoff team. He doesn't want to play for orlando. realgm has a link for the article on wiretap.
> ...


Well,thanks TBF for the Administration giving me a BEEP 

I prefer a headcase like Artest on a spoilt br*** like Francis


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

i'd do this trade as is, though i'd like it more if it was slightly expanded...

P. Pierce ($12.584688 M)
M. Stewart ($4.8 M)
J. Jones ($1.6875 M)
#25 pick ($0.7516 M)
-------------------------------
total: $18.136288 M

for

E. Robinson ($6.76754 M)
J. Williams ($5.6 M)
T. Chandler ($4.801102 M)
#3 pick ($2.7986 M)
#32 pick ($0)
-------------------------------
total: $19.967242 M

...but then maybe i'm just being greedy.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

how about 

Tyson Chandler,AD,Erob,Pip,#3,next yr's 1st

for

Paul Pierce,ricky davis,Raef LaFrentz and one of this yr's 1st rd picks


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DontBeCows</b>!
> So I guess that we'll let Boston wait to see whether Tyson Chandler can turn out to be "one of the best players in the league" (per Krause).
> 
> Seriously Pierce would be great for the Bulls. He's a legit all-star and top 15 player in this league. It seems that Bulls haven't had one of those for an eternity.


Pierce IS great! I agree.


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I think that's overvaluing our players....
> ...




ROCK ON!:upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset: :upset:


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>LB26matrixns</b>!
> 
> 
> NEWSFLASH.....Boston has Pierce and they're in the "mediocrity trap"....which is worse than where we are.
> ...


THIS JUST IN........

The Bulls need exactly what Pierce is.


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lorgg</b>!
> 
> 
> THIS JUST IN........
> ...


<----------SPELL ROCKFORD RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> It has been well documented that big-name players such as Dallas' Michael Finley and Boston's Paul Pierce can be had for the right price. But the Bulls, who have had discussions about both players, aren't close to trading for them.
> 
> If the Bulls keep their pick, management is having internal discussions about the merits of Connecticut guard Ben Gordon, Duke forward Luol Deng, Stanford forward Josh Childress and Arizona guard Andre Iguodala.


KC Johnson

KC Johnson on the Bulls Draft Options


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thunderspirit</b>!
> i'd do this trade as is, though i'd like it more if it was slightly expanded...
> 
> P. Pierce ($12.584688 M)
> ...


Where should I sign sign?

ERob gone in a deal that we get PP - Sounds to me as fictionary as Snow White - but I cross my fingers Pax gets it done right , I think it's our turn to be on the "right" side of a trade.

The late pick we might get cause what will Danny do with 3,15,24,25 I'm sure it won't be to hard , but as much as they want Yogi out , they won't take ERob imo.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bulls</b>!
> 
> Tyson Chandler,AD,Erob,Pip,#3,next yr's 1st


Can't trade consecutive first round picks.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Highly interest stuff folks.

There are some serious names being bantered about these days, the likes of which surpass any draft in recent memory. We're talking all-NBA players folks!! Shaq, Kobe, McGrady, Artest, Pierce, Francis... it seems only Duncan and KG are safe (though some cholo said the Bulls are getting KG the other day.. lol)

Any way you shake it, if the Bulls come out with Pierce and still have Hinrich and Curry on the roster... it is a great deal for us.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> Any way you shake it, if the Bulls come out with Pierce and still have Hinrich and Curry on the roster... it is a great deal for us.


Exactly.
Alot of people don't want to give up on Chandler because he may explode and be great, but you have to give up something in a trade. Its stupid to wait for a trade where we're going to completely fleece someone, not going to happen. I hope Chandler does turn into a great player, whether we trade him or not, but the truth is we'd be getting an already proven good player in return, and keeping our 2 main pieces in Curry and Hinrich. 
And it's not like Pierce is too old yet either, he's turning what, 27, in the fall? I'd be really apprehensive if he was like 30 or something, but at 27 he's got alot of good years left.

Alot of people mentioned that it may turn out like our experience with Rose, but you need someone to score, and there's no player thats completely perfect, sure they'll take some bad shots sometimes. I'll defend Rose any chance I get, but he did take maybe a few (thats all you'll get out of me ) bad shots.
But Pierce has already been an All-Star how many times?
Maybe its for the best that he had a worse year then his standards last year, same with Chandler, making them expendable to their respective teams.

That being said, I don't know if the deal goes down as stated because I still think Boston wouldn't do it, but hopefully Ainge feels different.

Its just tough to believe we could net Pierce for Chandler after there were talks of Chandler for players like Troy Murphy, etc

Either way, its more exciting to hear this sort of stuff even if it never happens then watch Paul Shirley embarrass himself.
:grinning:


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

*fuel to the fire*

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2004/06/22/and_just_where_does_pierce_fit/



> <b>Ainge envisions "a team of 8-10 good players who can overcome a superstar" </b>where does that leave Pierce, a three-time All-Star undoubtedly with ambitions of joining the league's elite?
> 
> I don't think Paul is a leader, but what I would hope Paul could give us and our organization are different ways to lead," said Ainge. "The greatest effectiveness he can have as a leader is by working harder than anybody else in our organization. And he does a pretty good job of that, of playing hard and playing hurt and giving good effort.
> 
> ...


Some very telling quotes here by Ainge. I believe he's looking to follow the Dumars-esque 8-10 good players on team philosophy. And he ain't giving much love to Pierce either....


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

A Boston fan says they are hearing the deal as...

ERob, AD, TC, and 3

For

PP, Lafrentz, Jones

Ainge has plans with those draft picks, that's been pretty well documented, if he adds 3 to what he's already got and walks away from this draft with Livingston/Gordon, Humphries, Wright, Swift, I'd give him exec of the year right now.

Damn they'd be young....


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> A Boston fan says they are hearing the deal as...
> 
> ERob, AD, TC, and 3
> ...


Hmmm... adding LaFrentz scares me. Does he contribute anything next season other than his albatross contract? (note: we are losing eRob and AD's contract in the deal)


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I read somewhere the other day that LaFrentz was still walking with a limp after his surgery.

As much as I'd LOVE to be rid of AD and ERob for a healthy LaFrentz, I'd be pretty bummed to have an unhealthy one.

Still, he blocks shots and would create space around Curry in a nice way. On the downside, we'd have the worst rebounding set of big men in the entire league.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

LaFrentz has always been quite effective both for Dallas and even for Boston in limited minutes last year. If he will be fully recovered, I think he could be an even better player to pair with Curry than Chandler. He and Pierce would help spread the floor and keep double teams off of Chandler. He also has been a better shotblocker than Chandler. But I don't know anything about his injury situation.

It is too bad it would be so hard to attach Crawford for Atkins plus a couple of those first rounders to the deal. But we would have to wait too long to make that happen.

And Arenas, I wouldn't be so quick to hand any hardware to Ainge. I would think as a fan of the Clips and the Bulls, you more than anyone would realize the dangers in banking everything on potential.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

This is getting too good to be true, we get rid of AD's salary and get back a decent player like Lafrentz, awesome! Lafrentz could come right in and be the 4 we need, he can shoot deep from the perimeter so he can open things up for Curry and he still has enough size to snag some rebounds and help out defensively. 

I think the Bulls should make a run at Etan Thomas instead of Swift. Thomas is a more defensive minded player and works really hard...he would be a nice fit. It's looking to me like this deal is serious and could very well get done. A Chicago paper even reported the rumor this morning so it officially has media coverage, lets just hope Pax pulls it off.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dan Rosenbaum</b>!
> LaFrentz has always been quite effective both for Dallas and even for Boston in limited minutes last year. If he will be fully recovered, I think he could be an even better player to pair with Curry than Chandler. He and Pierce would help spread the floor and keep double teams off of Chandler. He also has been a better shotblocker than Chandler. But I don't know anything about his injury situation.
> 
> It is too bad it would be so hard to attach Crawford for Atkins plus a couple of those first rounders to the deal. But we would have to wait too long to make that happen.
> ...


Very suprising appearance by Mr. Rosenbaum! If Raef is still only at 50 percent then Pax can't logically deal contributors albeit overpriced contributors like E-Rob and AD for somebody who won't play for the next 4 years. However, I would like the #25 to be included in the deal. 

Paul Pierce
Raef LaFrentz
Jumaine Jones
#25

for

#3
Tyson Chandler
Antonio Davis
Eddie Robinson

Oh and arenas just likes causing trouble.


----------



## Nater (Jul 10, 2002)

*Re: Re: Pierce to Bulls???*



> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> 
> In a NY minute. Pierce is a bonafide all-star and Chandler is one put-back dunk away from having back spasms for the rest of his career. If Ainge wants to clean house that badly ...send Pierce over our way we'll take. *Paul is like Jason from Friday the 13th ... You can stab him 15 times and he'll still come back to kill you.* As long as the "filler" doesn't include JC in a sign-and-trade, I am all over this trade. To make the contracts match .... it'll have to be some pretty healthy filler (God willing it's AD)


I'm guessing that this ironic reference was unintentional...

=============

Regarding the variation that includes Lafrentz... wouldn't there be a way we could get out from under his salary if he didn't play for a certain amount of time?


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> Can't trade consecutive first round picks.


ok but if we did that trade tomorrow then it woudnt be 2 picks in a row.the way i understand dat is if your in mid season you cant trade 2 yr's in a row but during or after tomorrow draft then this yrs wont count as 2 in a row may be wrong tho.


----------



## epic (Mar 16, 2004)

i like the trade for both teams, as long as the c's take livingston.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

The C's lost Hunter in the expansion draft and will lose Blount to free agency. They need a couple bigs in the worst way.


----------



## Chi_Lunatic (Aug 20, 2002)

we need to make that PIERCE trade happen then get STEPHEN JACKSON for the MLE at SMALL FORWARD

C-CURRY
PF-
SF-STEPHEN
SG-PIERCE
PG-HINRICH


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>HAWK23</b>!
> 
> 
> <----------SPELL ROCKFORD RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!



All u got? Your game is Veak!


----------



## Chi_Lunatic (Aug 20, 2002)

question, are the bulls still interested in STEPHEN JACKSON. and all we have to offer is the MLE right?


----------



## SKiP (Jan 28, 2004)

The Bulls aren't interested in Stephen Jackson anymore because the team needs to sign a power forward with the MLE to replace Tyson Chandler. Jamal Crawford should be resigned to play SG with Paul Pierce at SF.

Chicago should offer Stromile Swift the MLE first. If Memphis matches it, then Etan Thomas should be signed. This guy is a good defender and rebounder. He reminds me of a younger Brian Grant with a better contract, which is a good thing.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Chi_Lunatic</b>!
> question, are the bulls still interested in STEPHEN JACKSON. and all we have to offer is the MLE right?


I think wer'e interested - but he's going back to SA.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> I read somewhere the other day that LaFrentz was still walking with a limp after his surgery.
> 
> As much as I'd LOVE to be rid of AD and ERob for a healthy LaFrentz, I'd be pretty bummed to have an unhealthy one.
> ...


http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?threadid=101375&forumid=34


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

We made the playoffs because of the way Vin Baker played the first half of the season. With out those wins they would not have made the playoffs.
The Celtics went through their honeymoon period winning like 11 of 14 (after the Chucky trade)and then lost the next 6 out of 7. (aprox) 
They lost to Atlanta twice in that time, Miami twice, and a few other teams. I am trying to forget this season so the counts are a bit off by not by much.
The team you describe as making the playoffs only made the playoffs because McGinnis got hurt in Cleveland and AI got hurt and stayed out in Philadelphia.
Pierce didn't lead the team anywhere. If anyone lead the team to the playoffs it was Mark Blount the last month of the regular season.



> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> You say the Celtics made the playoffs because of Vin Baker? Well, he was gone, the Celtics were OUT of the playoffs and then made a run to get in. Musta been Jiri Welsh who led your team to the playoffs... Right?


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

*TMac , Marion , Pierce , Francis and Arenas*

I've been saying right from the get go that Francis will wind up in Washington which will see Arenas + heading to Orlando 

McGrady to Phoenix makes more sense than McGrady to the Rox .. for the Magic at least 

Magic draft Okafor and one of Gordon/Livingston/Harris to pair with Marion. Nice .

But if the Magic don't deal with Houston then I like a Marion and #7 for Pierce , #15 and #25 ( Boston keeps #24 ) 

I've also been saying from the get go that if Jackson is our guy then Pax's most likely trading partner is his brother for the #10 pick .

It would make sense to get someone back at a needs position who we know and can play in the style that Pax wants ( Ollie ) in addition to acquiring a replacement at the PF position .. if we can move JYD in a picl swap with Washington

Again ..

#3 and JYD for #5 and Laetner ( expiring contract ) 

#5, #39 and ERob for #10 .. Pavlovic , Ollie and Battie 

Its not sexy .. but we shed salary to position ourselves next year with a further $11M off our payroll to resign Curry and Chandler .. replace players we are not using with players we will ( who play the "right" way ) and we get two wings .. Jackson and Pavlovic 

*

Curry
Chandler
Jackson
Pavlovic
Hinrich

bench

Davis
Battie
E.Williams ( MLE ) 
Macijauskas ( MLE ) 
Ollie

D.Smith
Pargo

Pippen
Jeffries
Laetner

*

Its a simple series of steps that should be achievable and make us a more balanced side without compromising our young core 

I would acquire Pierce .. but frankly .. I don't like the impacts it has on our cost structure and from a talent/upside point of view .. when Tyson Chandler is one of the league leading rebounders and shotblockers in 2 seasons .. we will be lookig to slit our wrists

Which, Pat , is why I would want Pierce and Welsch for Chandler and #3 

And if it weren't possible .. then don't deal


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Can Pavlovic be included in a trade with other players?


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

if LaFrentz is healthy, he is a nice player and i agree with the posters who say his game is better suited for Curry's game than Chandlers is. He shoots threes and can hit the jumper! Will open it up for Curry. 

Question is, is he healty? 

There are some FA out there at pf that can help us. T Hill being one of them if people are afraid of our rebounding. 

Austin averaged over 22 pts a game and over 10 rebounds in the WBA. I know the WBA is not the nba but he could be good for 5, 6 rebounds a night. Together with lafrentz, that should help ease some of the loss of rebounding. Shot blocking by lafrentz is helpful.


----------



## Kramer (Jul 5, 2002)

LaFrentz, Pierce, Hinrich on the same Bulls roster???

Bullhawk would be having a seizure!


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Before this love affair with LaFrentz continues why don't you guys read the article about how he is still hurting even after basically sitting out the season to get rest.

He might be helpful, but not from IL.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> But there are two problems with that scenario: The Celtics, if Ainge is to be believed, are disinclined to deal Pierce. And, you have to wonder, what exactly could Pierce fetch? There was talk between the Celtics and the Bulls prior to the draft, with Pierce's name in the chatter. But what the Celtics wanted would have left Chicago with a starting five led by Jannero Pargo, Linton Johnson III and Paul Shirley. End of discussion.


July 8, 2004 - Peter May


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

*Pierce Not Going to 'Chi' Town*

In fact, it seems this speculation has been put to rest

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2004/07/07/ainge_pierce_here_to_stay/


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

*Re: Pierce Not Going to 'Chi' Town*



> Originally posted by <b>Richie Rich</b>!
> In fact, it seems this speculation has been put to rest
> 
> http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2004/07/07/ainge_pierce_here_to_stay/


Well yeah, we knew that. This thread was just bumped up today if you look at the dates. And I think it was more to shed light on what the Bulls needed to give up cause a lot here seemed to think that Chandler and scrubs would be good enough for Paul.


----------

