# Jordan Trades Rip for Jerry Stackhouse



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

http://espn.go.com/nba/news/2002/0911/1430627.html

I can't wait to hear the spin on this one. Ouch.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

Best trade MJ has illegally ever made.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

What spin?

Read the thread on the NBA board.

What I know for sure is that this makes the Wizards a better team.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Songcycle</b>!
> Best trade MJ has illegally ever made.


Illegally?

-Petey


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

MJ is not allowed to talk to other GMs. I guess the insinuation is that MJ called up Dumars to make this deal.

What is legal is MJ advising the Wizards front office on personnel moves.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

i like the trade for washington. Add what they did in Russell, Hughes and the young picks. Put all of this together and add to it what they have already and MJ. They should be playoff bound. I didn't say that last year.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> MJ is not allowed to talk to other GMs. I guess the insinuation is that MJ called up Dumars to make this deal.
> 
> What is legal is MJ advising the Wizards front office on personnel moves.


Gms ask players all the time about their opinions. No different here.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

Just talked to my buddy from Dertoit who told me Stachouse crapped out in the playoffs. Now it makes sense.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

> Just talked to my buddy from Dertoit who told me Stachouse crapped out in the playoffs. Now it makes sense.


Well, they won't have to worry about that anymore because the Pistons won't make the playoffs.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

You just learned Stackhouse didn't come through in the playoffs last year?

The guy gave it his shot. He was the reason they got there. He subordinated his game for the team and averaged some decent numbers. It didn't happen for him in the playoffs last year, hopefully he can gain some knowledge playing with MJ this season and contiue his team oriented game.

Reuniting Laettner, Stackhouse, and Collins. Kind of funny if you ask me.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Well damn 

I got to give the Wiz props here 

Excellent trade for the Wiz 

Stack is one of the best value for money players in the league 

Should defray part of the free agency costs this summer

Strong move . I really like it for the Wiz 

I am extraordinarily surprised the Pistons did the deal - still Billups and Rip should make for an interesting back court backed up by Chucky and Jon Barry

Still , Stack was the heart of the team - the guy that made it all happen . 

I think Chauncey has more moxy than Rip to make it happen - Rip seems to be a bit too passive in his on court persona

Anyway , and again , good move for the Wizzer


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Kudos to MJ, Unseld, or whoever is steering the boat in Washington.

A nice mix of the present: Russell, Stack, Hughes, and MJ 

with..

the future: Haywood, Kwame, Jeffries, Grizzard, Dixon. 

This has the makings of a playoff team. If Haywood shows some improvement from a nice rookie season, look out. They need Kwame to make an appearance this season as well.


VD


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

I think Rip and Chauncey can put up numbers similar to what Rip and Alexander did for the Wizards. I think Carlisile will make them better defensively. My greatest criticism of Chauncey was him being a full-time ball handler and I think Rip takes some pressure off

One thing I really like is that Stack can play in the post. The Wizards needed a post option in case Kwame and Etan can't get it done. If they can Stack also has the ability to hit the three. Along with MJ the Wizards have two guys that can go inside/out. Though MJ was abysmal in 3pt shooting last year, he still has mid-range game.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> 
> Reuniting Laettner Stackhouse, and Collins. Kind of funny if you ask me.


Yeah L8 and Stack get to reprise their roles in "Kiss of the Spiderwoman meets the NBA"

:laugh:


----------



## local_sportsfan (Jul 24, 2002)

I love this trade because we gave up very little. No picks, no extra young players, and we got rid of of dead weight (and capcrap) in Hubert Davis. This trade is similar to the Jalen Rose trade, except we gave up WAY less than you guys did. I guess Jordan is still a bad GM right?


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> My greatest criticism of Chauncey was him being a full-time ball handler and I think Rip takes some pressure off


Conversely , Stack takes pressure off Larry Hughes and he has a greater capacity to make Larry better than what Rip did IMO just due to the fact that he is more experienced


----------



## LoaKhoet (Aug 20, 2002)

Man!! An awesome trade for MJ. Rip will never be as good as Stack!!!!


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

I think I read somewhere that Jordan was playing with Stackhouse, and I don't think that he did anything wrong, I think that like truebluefan said, most stars get asked what they think...

-Petey


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Wonder when MJ will trade for Sheed?


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

I'd like to post my opinion here, but I might get deleted as I did without a clue of what I did wrong earlier.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Hmm with Kwame as a centerpiece of a Sheed deal?

Unless it inclued Laettner and Jahidi, I do not think the Wizards have enough salary to pull it off. They can't trade Laettner now that the mighty triumverate of Stack, Laet, and Collins is back together.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Songcycle</b>!
> I'd like to post my opinion here, but I might get deleted as I did without a clue of what I did wrong earlier.


Songcycle,

My recommendation as a moderator is to PM the admin who edited you rather than carry out your agenda on the forums.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> What spin?
> 
> Read the thread on the NBA board.
> ...


Quit genuflecting before MJ for a second and ask yourself why a division-winning team fell all over themselves to unload their best player. I know you'll rationalize by saying Detroit didn't want to pay Stackhouse top dollar; well, if that's the case, what are the Wiz going to do next year? You've said in response to the Sam Smith article on ESPN that Jordan doesn't intend to chase marquee free agents, remember? This deal wasn't to clear cap room.

My argument all along has been that Jordan's basically kidnapped the Wizards and bent them to fit his own mammoth ego as a player, not a GM. Your contention has been that Jordan's making the Wizards younger and more defensive-minded while keeping them cap flexible. 

This deal fits my scenario a lot better than yours--or, as the AP puts it, "In essence, the Wizards traded the future for the present as Michael Jordan prepares for one last shot at another NBA title." 

Stackhouse is on his absolute best night an indifferent defender. He is older than Hamilton. He will cost more for the Wizards to re-sign than they would have had to pay to re-sign Hamilton. 

It's a classic future for present trade, plain and simple.


----------



## Brian. (Jul 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LoaKhoet</b>!
> Man!! An awesome trade for MJ. Rip will never be as good as Stack!!!!


First realize the reason the pistons did this trade was because stack was going to opt out and demand the max. Would you give the max to a guy that is one of the most overrated players in the league and he proved that in the playoffs shooting 3-18 against the celts in game 5 (elimination game) and he shot in impressive 32% for the entire playoffs. So the pistons could pay stack, trade stack or let him go. The pistons did great. They got a younger player with more upside. BTW it won't take much for rip to be better than stack.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ScottMay</b>!
> 
> This deal fits my scenario a lot better than yours--or, as the AP puts it, "In essence, the Wizards traded the future for the present as Michael Jordan prepares for one last shot at another NBA title."


Unbelievably, the line I quoted above was expunged in a revised article issued by the AP at 9:55 (the original came out at 8:12). The lead of the story was reworked somewhat but the presumable equivalent in the revise is: "By getting Stackhouse, Jordan managed to combine building for the future with his desire to go out as winner."

Well, half of the rewrite is true.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

ScottMay,

Read the sportsline article about it.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/nba/story/5704780

Read the quote by Carlisle about the trade:

"He showed me last year he's more about winning than anything," Carlisle told SportsLine.com Wednesday. "There are just other things." 

Does it sound like Carlisle wanted to trade him? Rip has more upisde than Stack if you want to gauge upside from improvement over where they are now maybe. But Rip's upside is not going to top out at where Stack is now.

Stack's indifference on D is still better than Rip. I have already explained how this helps the Wizards cap situation. The long and short of it is, Rip would have counted $8M against the cap until he signed a new deal or accepted the qualifying offer. If he accepted the qualifying offer he was an unrestricted FA the next year. What would be his incentive to sign a low end deal early in the FA signing period next year? None. Worst case scenario was Rip preventing the Wizards from obtaining a FA and then settling for the qualifying offer, and then leaving the next year. If Stack opts out, the Wizards have the cap space to make a max signing and with JC Navarro coming in and Hughes' ability to play SG, along with Grizzard, they aren't desparate to replace Stack. If Stack works things out, he could be worth a significant amount of money.

There is no spin. This is how it is.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>local_sportsfan</b>!
> I love this trade because we gave up very little. No picks, no extra young players, and we got rid of of dead weight (and capcrap) in Hubert Davis. This trade is similar to the Jalen Rose trade, except we gave up WAY less than you guys did. I guess Jordan is still a bad GM right?


Huh? I don't remember the Bulls giving up a fan-proclaimed franchise player to get Jalen Rose, just a very good center irrelevant to their long-term plans and a tremendous defensive swing player with some very, very loose wingnuts. From what I've heard from Washington fans the last couple of years, some of whom used his visage as their avatar, Hamilton was an absolute key to the Wizards' future, a stone-cold offensive assassin (who Jordan would mold into a defensive stalwart), the best midrange scorer in the league, and all in all a rising superstar with limitless potential.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

When was Rip proclaimed a franchise player by Wiz fans? I think the overwhelming evidence suggests the large majority felt he was not worth the max, hence WizardsKev's article about him.

He does have the best mid-range shot in the game, but I am not going to tell you he was better than Stackhouse, or that he even had the potential to be better than Stackhouse.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> 
> 
> Songcycle,
> ...


Saying you are a homer, which means you defend your home team at all costs is not inappropriate and very accurate. It is not a dirty word or a personal insult. This is not an agenda, do not color it that way, it is an honest opinion. Your giving in once mildly out of a hundred times is meaningless. If anything, an other post I made to you was a much greater candidate for editing than the one that got deleted and the resulting administrative statement made it seem like I insulted your heriitage and then some which was not the case. In a sense you defending the Wiz at all costs majes you a good fan, but on the Bulls board, that should make you open game, I did not chase you or even look at the Wiz board. If I get kicked out of here for sticking to my guns for something as silly as this, then too bad. I am very disappointed.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Songcycle</b>!
> 
> 
> Saying you are a homer, which means you defend your home team at all costs is not inappropriate and very accurate. It is not a dirty word or a personal insult.


It's intended as a putdown. If it isn't, please understand that it's commonly seen as a putdown in the context you used it. You're smart enough to know this without anyone having to explain it to you.



> In a sense you defending the Wiz at all costs majes you a good fan, but on the Bulls board, that should make you open game,


In a nutshell, this is why you have been repeatedly warned to stop the personal attacks since you arrived here. No poster here is "open game".



> If I get kicked out of here for sticking to my guns for something as silly as this, then too bad. I am very disappointed.


Songcycle,

Please do not let your personal anger disrupt this board for others. There is NO NEED whatsoever for you to move this argument into this thread. Or anywhere else, other than PM, as was pointed out to you a couple times. If you have any other comments, please address them that way, and not by carrying your grudge into still more threads.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> ScottMay,
> 
> Read the sportsline article about it.
> ...


Rick Carlisle isn't Kenyon Martin, for crying out loud. Coaches and GMs are smarter than that, which is why they rarely, if ever, rip a former player after a deal. This quote is evidence of nothing.



> Rip has more upisde than Stack if you want to gauge upside from improvement over where they are now maybe. But Rip's upside is not going to top out at where Stack is now.


I wish I'd had the foresight to pose this issue to you a week ago. I'm sure we would have gotten a completely different answer.

Rip has the potential to be a far more consistent scorer and caretaker of the ball. Even the generous, caring, and all-about-winning Detroit version of Jerry Stackhouse took a higher volume of absurdly forced shots than any player in the league not named Iverson. Admittedly, he can get to the line with the best of them and he has learned to somewhat competently pass out of a double team. The problem for Washington is that Stack is a much worse off-the-ball player than Hamilton. All of his action comes off the dribble, and in Detroit he had the ball in his hands constantly. 



> Stack's indifference on D is still better than Rip. I have already explained how this helps the Wizards cap situation. The long and short of it is, Rip would have counted $8M against the cap until he signed a new deal or accepted the qualifying offer. If he accepted the qualifying offer he was an unrestricted FA the next year. What would be his incentive to sign a low end deal early in the FA signing period next year? None. Worst case scenario was Rip preventing the Wizards from obtaining a FA and then settling for the qualifying offer, and then leaving the next year. If Stack opts out, the Wizards have the cap space to make a max signing and with JC Navarro coming in and Hughes' ability to play SG, along with Grizzard, they aren't desparate to replace Stack. If Stack works things out, he could be worth a significant amount of money.
> 
> There is no spin. This is how it is.


Given the current cap climate, Stack is going to snatch up that option quicker than you can say "mid-level exception." 

Old spin: Cap room? We don't need cap room. Getting a max player was never, ever part of Jordan's plan; I mean, are you kidding me? this team is rebuilding with youth and attitude.

New spin: we just traded my favorite player to clear cap space for a max free agent. We can replace my favorite player with two second-round long-shots or a guy whose basketball cluelessness is exceeded only by Memphis Jason Williams's. Winning and joy ensues. This is how it is.

And to think you have the nerve to call people "homers."


----------



## BullsNews (Jun 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Songcycle</b>!
> 
> 
> Saying you are a homer, which means you defend your home team at all costs is not inappropriate and very accurate. It is not a dirty word or a personal insult. This is not an agenda, do not color it that way, it is an honest opinion. Your giving in once mildly out of a hundred times is meaningless. If anything, an other post I made to you was a much greater candidate for editing than the one that got deleted and the resulting administrative statement made it seem like I insulted your heriitage and then some which was not the case. In a sense you defending the Wiz at all costs majes you a good fan, but on the Bulls board, that should make you open game, I did not chase you or even look at the Wiz board. If I get kicked out of here for sticking to my guns for something as silly as this, then too bad. I am very disappointed.


Very well put, Songcycle. If all you did was call BCH a "homer", how exactly is that any worse than BCH saying on many, many occasions that Bulls fans are "sipping Kool-Aid" or are "ignoring reality" or "are buying Krause's bill of goods"?

But the big question is, how exactly did MJ get Dumars to do this trade? I've narrowed it down to three possibilities:

1- He had a gun at Joe's head

2- He had a knive at Joe's throat

3- He has naked pictures of Joe's wife

Hell, if the Pistons wanted to give up Stack for Ron Mercer Jr, why didn't he call the Bulls last January- we could have given him the *original* Mercer! Hoiberg could have replaced Davis and Hassell could have replaced Simmons in the trade.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ScottMay</b>!
> 
> 
> Rick Carlisle isn't Kenyon Martin, for crying out loud. Coaches and GMs are smarter than that, which is why they rarely, if ever, rip a former player after a deal. This quote is evidence of nothing.
> ...


Even if Stack grabs the option then fine, he is a bargain at $6.5M. I don't think the Wizards would land a max player anyway, even if Stack leaves, but the will have cap room, and if you look at their roster, they have players to play SG if Stack and MJ are gone. I expect the Wizards to resign Stackhouse to be honest for a deal less than the Max.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Heck of a trade.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Songcycle</b>!
> Just talked to my buddy from Dertoit who told me Stachouse crapped out in the playoffs. Now it makes sense.


That's an understatement. Stackhouse's scoring average went from 21.4 during the regular season to 17.6 in the playoffs. Similarly his shooting percentage dropped from 40% to 32% and his assists fell off from 5.3 during the year to a playoff average of 4.3 per game. According to people I've spoken to, Dumars has been looking for someone to take Stackhouse off his hands for two years. And lets not forget that this will be Stack's third team in eight seasons. 

No doubt that MJeff was the decision maker for the Wizards on this deal. And everybody seems to be tossing kudo's in his direction. But how about giving Joe Dumars a little credit as well. Afterall his team did finish first in the Central Division last season with a 50-32 record after compiling a 32-50 record in '00-'01. I don't think there's anyway Dumars would allow himself to get ripped (no pun intended) in this deal. I think we may find out that in the long run the Pistons made themselves an even better team than last year.


----------



## local_sportsfan (Jul 24, 2002)

Man you guys love to argue. this trade was pretty much a no brainer for the wiz...

Rip is younger, but he's only 3 years younger. Rip might become a better scorer (with a big emphasis on might), but I doubt it, given he can't even create his own shot. Rip is about as one-dimensional as you can get.

Who would you rather give big bucks to: Rip or Stack?


----------



## local_sportsfan (Jul 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DickieHurtz</b>!
> 
> 
> Afterall his team did finish first in the Central Division last season with a 50-32 record after compiling a 32-50 record in '00-'01.


The Pistons became an elite team because Stackhouse sacrificed his stats and became a team oriented player. Ask any piston fan, and they'll tell you thats the biggest reason they improved.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>local_sportsfan</b>!
> Man you guys love to argue. this trade was pretty much a no brainer for the wiz...
> 
> Rip is younger, but he's only 3 years younger. Rip might become a better scorer (with a big emphasis on might), but I doubt it, given he can't even create his own shot. Rip is about as one-dimensional as you can get.
> ...


Good point.

The difference w/ the blingbling being that Rip is a FA in '03 and Stack is a FA in '05.

Stackhouse is clearly the better player. A good trade for the Wiz.



VD


----------



## Salvaged Ship (Jul 10, 2002)

If that trade is official, and ESPN headlines said "likely", not completed, then I would have to say that Dumars is an utter moron. You spend many years not getting to the playoffs and then Stackhouse and Wallace lead you to a 50 win season, division title, and second round of the playoffs. Not bad considering how lousy the pistons were the previous year. Then you get rid of your main guy for Rip Hamilton and garbage? Rip Hamilton is so overated it isn't even funny. He is a toothpick with a head.

Even if you think Stackhouse is going demand max money after the season you don't give him away. This trade stunk for Detroit. 

Well MJ, looks like you toasted Dumars once again! Just like the old days on the court.


----------



## robg (Jul 19, 2002)

I can't believe almost everyone believes that Jordan got the better half of this deal.
Yes, Stackhouse is a better scorer, but he is in his 8th year and at the peak of his career. Rip is in his 3rd year and on his way up. Jerry only averaged a few more points than Rip, although Jerry can score 40 on a any given night, Rip probably cant. Neither can play defense. I believe Rip had better averages: FG%, 3pt %, turnovers, and I believe rebounds. You might have to double check on the latter stat. 
My point is the wizards MIGHT make the 1st round of the playoffs, but thats it! So why trade a up & coming player for a veteran who MIGHT get you into the playoffs? 
So lets see there is hughes: he can't play the point and really never lived up to his potential (glad Krause never got him), Russell: role player and on the downside of his career, than there's Jordan and Stack: Stack is good for about another 3 to 4 fours and Jordan is just playing for his ego, cause he shoud quit and let someone else get the experience (see courtney alexander). 
What is he going to do w/ K. Brown and the guy from Indiana? Who will get the playing time? 
The wizards should be putting a team together for the NBA championship instead of the 1st round of the playoffs.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robg</b>!
> I can't believe almost everyone believes that Jordan got the better half of this deal.


You are in the minority my friend.



> Yes, Stackhouse is a better scorer, but he is in his 8th year and at the peak of his career. Rip is in his 3rd year and on his way up. Jerry only averaged a few more points than Rip, although Jerry can score 40 on a any given night, Rip probably cant.


Stackhouse is 28 years old. Hamilton is 24 and 'on his way up'? How so? Is he suddenly going to develop an all-around offensive game and put 20 lbs of muscle on based on his unlimited potential? Puh-lease.



> Neither can play defense.


Agreed. But Stack is the better defender.



> I believe Rip had better averages: FG%, 3pt %, turnovers, and I believe rebounds. You might have to double check on the latter stat.


Rip had better percentages, not averages. Stackhouse however, was #1 in the NBA in FreeThrows per 48 minutes. Hard to argue against that stat my friend. Plus he put up 5apg last season.



> My point is the wizards MIGHT make the 1st round of the playoffs, but thats it! So why trade a up & coming player for a veteran who MIGHT get you into the playoffs?
> So lets see there is hughes: he can't play the point and really never lived up to his potential (glad Krause never got him), Russell: role player and on the downside of his career, than there's Jordan and Stack: Stack is good for about another 3 to 4 fours and Jordan is just playing for his ego, cause he shoud quit and let someone else get the experience (see courtney alexander).
> What is he going to do w/ K. Brown and the guy from Indiana? Who will get the playing time?
> The wizards should be putting a team together for the NBA championship instead of the 1st round of the playoffs.


Troubling. Look at the Wizards roster. They now have a nice mix of young talent and veterans that will compete right away. Sure they could have waited for the likes of Kwame, Jeffries, Grizzard and Haywood to contribute.. but now they don't HAVE to. Considering it takes about 3 seasons to correctly judge young talent anyways... this makes sense of the Wiz. With Russell locked up for 2 more seasons, Stack 3, and MJ for at least one more season... the timing works out right.


VD


----------



## local_sportsfan (Jul 24, 2002)

fyi Stack is 27. He turns 28 in november, near the beginning of the season.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> It's intended as a putdown. If it isn't, please understand that it's commonly seen as a putdown in the context you used it. You're smart enough to know this without anyone having to explain it to you.
> ...


This is ridiculous.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BullsNews</b>!
> 
> 
> Very well put, Songcycle. If all you did was call BCH a "homer", how exactly is that any worse than BCH saying on many, many occasions that Bulls fans are "sipping Kool-Aid" or are "ignoring reality" or "are buying Krause's bill of goods"?
> ...


Yes Bullsnews, I was deleted for calling BCH a homer and told if he did it to me he would be deleted too. This is according to trueblue's pm.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

i think the real question here is how will mj get stack to share the rock with hughes and vice versa?








this trade works for the present, but i dont know what mj is planning for the future of the team because it aint stackhouse. overall, it was a good deal because stack is a bargain at his salary


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Johnny_B,

Aldridge dives into the fray here:

http://espn.go.com/nba/columns/aldridge_david/1430681.html

I think he might be laying on the expectations a little too much.

Wilbon has a more realistic view in my opinion on Plan B possibilities:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6181-2002Sep12.html


----------



## BullsNews (Jun 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Songcycle</b>!
> 
> 
> Yes Bullsnews, I was deleted for calling BCH a homer and told if he did it to me he would be deleted too. This is according to trueblue's pm.


Damn, that's pathetic. I guess we should go back and look up all the things that BCH has called Bulls' posters that he WASN'T deleted for.

Sounds like total BS to me.

bullsnews., You show me where he has called anyone a name here? Do i do you this way on your site?


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BullsNews</b>!
> 
> 
> Damn, that's pathetic. I guess we should go back and look up all the things that BCH has called Bulls' posters that he WASN'T deleted for.
> ...


He is a supporting member and I am not. I am going to start posting at www.bullsnews.com and hope I have some company. Then again for all the spamming these guys did at other sites, I wonder if they will delete my reference to www.bullsnews.com

Are you really suggesting that the repeated conflicts you have been having recently are the result of mods favoring supporting members over you? Do you really suggest that we hold something against you for not joining as a supporting member? That's not true and I think you know that. Whether anybody has put up their $10 doesn't make a bit of difference to me, and I doubt it affects any of the other mods. We don't get paid, you know. We just want to avoid profanities, stop any and all personal attacks and keep things focused on talking sports. The cheap shots about spamming by "these guys" and DARING admin to delete the link to your friends' board (which I know admin has allowed Bullsnews to post in the past, BTW) is exactly the off-topic taunting garbage that we're trying to avoid here. That is all. Period. Let's put aside the grudges and the persecution complexes, folks. We're here to have fun, and noone's, you know, out to getcha. The season is coming up and it's gonna be a fun one. Can't we all be friends and talk hoops? TB#1


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

We re-opened this thread to talk more about this big trade.

This trade will greatly impact these teams and the Eastern Conference. 

No personal attacks, just diverse opinions.

For the record.......My name is Robert and I am a Chicago Bulls HOMER. :grinning: 

Now, let's get back to this trade.....


I think this is all the evidence we need to know that MJ is coming back. Can't blame him or the organization for trading for the now. Still, Stack is young and has shown much more team development. Would love to have Stackhouse for the next 6 years.

Rip is nice player and I'd like to have him on the Bulls. Detroit and Washington have really changed up their rosters this summer.



Imagine if Jordan had taken Brand in the trade.....Wow.

Thinks are getting exciting and heated.......Still a month away from the real battles.


----------



## Songcycle (May 29, 2002)

Outstanding post Chifanica, As a fellow homer, I'll bet MJ really wishes he had Brand also. I really wonder if we had the first pick, if we would have taken Chandler and not not Brown. I tend to think we would have gotten the same players. MJ got greedy and wanted Crawford too and he blew it. That is one team that is not properly building if the future is where they they think they are going.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I'm interested in hearing about what Rip and Stack are worth as far as their respective teams and what future salaries they may pull in... there was some talk of that earlier... I wonder how they are valued to their new teams and in the market in general...

FJ? Come do this, bro.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

I'm too scared to Show T 

:shy:


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> Hmm with Kwame as a centerpiece of a Sheed deal?
> 
> Unless it inclued Laettner and Jahidi, I do not think the Wizards have enough salary to pull it off. They can't trade Laettner now that the mighty triumverate of Stack, Laet, and Collins is back together.


Would you take Sheed if he was on offer ?

Hayward
Sheed
Jeffries
Stackhouse
Hughes 

Interesting starting 5


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

If they get him, they will have too many shooters, and not enough guys playing D.

-Petey


----------



## shroombal (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> 
> 
> Would you take Sheed if he was on offer ?
> ...



I thought Bryon Russell was our SF??!?!? HEHE... So I'm probably right...


----------



## shroombal (Jul 17, 2002)

I think... this could turn out to be another bad move by the wiz...

We did so many trades to try to win now, but they never ended up the way they were supposed too...

when we needed a center, we trade ben wallace(the best defender), for Ike Austin(can't even make it onto the grizzlies team), and webber for mitch richmond(who's now a bench player for the lakers).

Now those are trades for young players not at their prime for guyz who are at or past their prime. This latest stack trade... we might regret it. We'll just have to see how things play out.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>local_sportsfan</b>!
> 
> 
> The Pistons became an elite team because Stackhouse sacrificed his stats and became a team oriented player. Ask any piston fan, and they'll tell you thats the biggest reason they improved.


Oh really?

Are you sure their improvement wasn't actually tied to the addition of Jon Barry (24mpg, 9ppg, 49%FG Pct., 47% 3Pt. FG Pct.), Zeljko Rebraca (16mpg, 7ppg, 4rpg, 51%FG Pct.), and Cliff Robinson (36mpg, 15ppg)?

Or maybe it had something to do with the fact that this was Corliss Williamson's (22mpg, 14ppg, 51%FG Pct.) first full season with the Pistons. Didn't he win some kind of award last year...oh yeah, the 6th Man Award, wasn't it?

Or could the Pistons' successful season been tied to Ben Wallace's performance as Defensive Player of the Year in only his second season in Detroit?

All these players were Joe Dumars additions. While Stackhouse may have altered his game, to claim his adjustments were the biggest reasons for the Pistons' division championship is completely wrong.

And I almost forgot. I think Dumars also had something to do with making Rick Carlisle the Pistons' head coach. Alot of people give Carlisle credit for introducing defense to the Pistons for the first time since the days of Isiah Thomas, Dennis Rodman and the rest of their championship crew.

And while we're at it, if Jerry Stackhouse really was the biggest reason for the Pistons' resurgence, why on earth would Dumars have traded him? Think about that for a moment. Could there be reasons the public simply isn't aware of? Despite what you or anyone else may think, we fans don't always know everything about what goes on within an organization. There have to be some very good reasons for a team coming off its most successful season in years to trade its most high profile player. And accusing Dumars of being incompetent isn't one of them.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>local_sportsfan</b>!
> 
> 
> The Pistons became an elite team because Stackhouse sacrificed his stats and became a team oriented player. Ask any piston fan, and they'll tell you thats the biggest reason they improved.


i've never heard the two words pistons and elite in the same sentance all of last year, and ben wallace was their MVP, not stat-house


----------



## HJHJR (May 30, 2002)

*Brick City*

Get a load of these shooting percentages from last season:

*Player: FG%, Three Point FG%*
Hughes: 42%, 19%
Stackhouse: 39%, 29%
Russell: 38%, 34%
Jordan: 42%, 19%
Brown: 39%, 0%

Anybody think the Wizards are going to see a lot of zone defenses this season? And while we're thinking about the composition of this Wizards ballclub, can anybody name their number one low post threat on offense? Actually, is there anyone on the entire roster who will deserve to be double teamed on a regular basis this year, either in the post or out on the perimeter?
:no:


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

HJ,

Not really anything new, moving Rip for Stackhouse doesn't change that. They both shot similar percentages from 2pt and Stack has in the past shot .351 from 3pt. The Wizards are thankfully, good rebounders. MJ will get doubled in the post, as will stack, but it would be tough to envision who is going to be shooting.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

C'mon guys.

Let's not base our arguments solely on percentages, if that were the case a starting backcourt of Steve Smith and Eric Piatkowski would dominate. I'm joking of course.

Stack was #1 in the NBA in FT/48 minutes. That shows me something. His game, from what I've seen, is aggressive and has many facets that Rip lacks. He had almost 5apg last season (which is quite good), and gives the Wiz a nice post up game and slash to the basket which Rip doesn't have. Can Rip eventually do such things? Maybe. But the Wiz didn't want to wait and find out, especially in lieu of him asking for major dollars. Rip is a one-dimensional player, and a good one at that.

VD


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Brick City*



> Originally posted by <b>HJHJR</b>!
> Get a load of these shooting percentages from last season:
> 
> *Player: FG%, Three Point FG%*
> ...


i wouldnt be suprised if the wizards starting frontcourt averaged 10 boards a game each


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

People have been arguing the Rip/Stack trade, but it really should be the Rip+Hubert/Stack trade. As HJHJR just pointed out, the percentages from the floor and especially from 3pt range are horrendous... Rip shot a reasonably solid 38.1% (although he took less than 1 per game), and Hubert shot for 45% and is known to be a 3-point specialist...

Davis' veteran presence really helped this team, IMO, especially in those 17 games he started for the Wiz last year. He played almost as strong an impact role as Rip did...

And Jon Barry will get backup mins at the point, I think, or even some time at SF (he's a little undersized but makes up for any deficiency with energy). 

Consider: Billups is also a strong 3P threat.. 39.4% and he almost took 4 of them per game. 

Consider: Cliff Robinson has been known to drain a few threes in his lifetime...he shot 37.8% last year, and took more than 3 per game.

Consider: Ben Wallace ranked #2 in offensive rebounds last year, with 4 per game. He knows his role on offense: easy layups/dunks, crash O-glass, set picks, etc. Crashing O-glass will be a scary thought for defenders...

Consider, a hypothetical game when Detroit lags the Nets, 69-52 as they enter the fourth quarter. Then, consider this lineup:

Billups/Hubert/Rip/Wallace/Robinson

Jon Barry spelling one of the three wings if they get into foul trouble..

If Rip and Billups step up their defense, we'll see this lineup come in and shoot the lights out of their opposing teams. Big defensive guys inside, like Mutumbo or Shaq won't be able to do anything, especially with Cliff stepping out to pop threes. All it takes is for one guy to go inside, penetrate-and-kick and then swing, swing, swing to the open man.

The Wizards, on the other hand, need to depend on some strong offensive rebounding, and they have to do some SERIOUS player adjustment. The team that Jordan is building has a lot of selfish players. Stack can pass but he still needs the ball in his hands. Hughes can pass but he'd rather shoot. Russell is just a shooter... Jordan can pass but you KNOW he's going to want to shoot too, especially in the heat of the game. 

All these guys are great offensive players, but all of them just shoot, and so for Hughes and Jordan especially, if the Wizards want to be successful, these guys will have to take a hit in their scoring averages... a BIG hit. Hughes should aim for 15 ppg, 6 apg, 5 rbs... no more than that. Jordan, similarly, should aim for 25 mpg, about 16 ppg, 5 apg, and 5 rbs. 

Let Stack be the offensive focus, since he's already showing to be the most mature as far as understanding how not to play selfishly. Russell becomes the new three-point specialist and defensive guru...

If that happens, and the attitudes begin to mesh, as well as Brown/Thomas/Haywood's play all begin to do some physical damage in the low post on both ends... then maybe, we'll see a good team emerge.

Scary thought: a lot of the younger kids on the team might take after the older kids. Juan Dixon also needed a lot of shots in the college game, and was a little trigger happy in the summer leagues. Jared Jeffries also thrives as a player with a lot of ball touches... with these guys, it's easier to mold them into the players that they want, because they are younger and don't have a set NBA game yet.

Summary:

Detroit is a DANGEROUS 3 point team now.

The Wizards are equipped to go far and do much, but they have a lot of changes to make to the styles of the players... as it stands today, it will not be a pretty season.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

You are calling Dixon and Jeffries selfish already? Extremely amusing. 

I have already indicated where Rip shoots no better than Stack from 2pt range, where he takes the vast majority of his shots. His mid-range game is great, but he is not stretching the defense. Jon Barry and Hubert Davis on the floor might work for a short stretch.

Asking Rip to play defense is the same thing that has been asked of him from day one. He is killer from the mid though. When he start to roll it is great fun to watch.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

Does this trade strike anyone else as a rather odd trade?

The way I see it, it's a trade of 2 very similar 1-sided players. Both players play little D, rebound about 4 a game, assist about 3-4 times a game. Stackhouse drives and takes too many ill-advised shots, but does get to the line. RIP takes too many ill-advised jumpers, but does make them at a fairly good clip.

So.... How does this trade make EITHER team significantly BETTER?
As far as i can see, it really doesn't. What it does is give the Wiz another vet player, and makes the Pistons younger & more exciting. But overall impact on Wins & Losses? I'm thinking maybe a game or 2. Which way? That I couldn't tell you.

And Aldrige's suggestion that this is a good financial move is rather laughable. 
His stance seems to be that the Wiz are somehow saving money. How is this again? Neither Stack nor RIP will make the max next year. Chances of both making 6-7.7mil are pretty soild. With the state of the CBA, I honestly can't see them making much more. 

And if this is a salary dump for a one year rental of Stack as Aldrige suggests.... how is that a good move, trading your best young player for a very similar player and then keeping him just a year?


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> Does this trade strike anyone else as a rather odd trade? ... How does this trade make EITHER team significantly BETTER?


I figure MJ liking and wanting a N. Carolina guy factored into the equation. It has in the past with him.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

At first glance, I agree that this seems a rather odd trade. Both of the principles seem to have similar contracts and they're both fairly young....

I guess what I see is that Rip is a better shooter and pure scorer than Stack, but probably not as good in every other dimension. 

Looking at the Wiz and the fact that they're moving to a more triangle-like offense that puts the ball in different players hands, it makes sense to get a guy who's a pretty good all-around player. His strong ball-handling skills will ease the load on Hughes and Juan, who are both kind of combo guards and eventually Jared Jeffries, who's going to be kind of a point forward. Rip couldn't do that. On the downside, I'm concerned that the Wiz have lots of guys who aren't known as great outside shooters. They could use someone with a nice pure stroke. Maybe Dixon will fill that role?

Detroit, on the other hand, had an absolutely horrible time scoring in the playoffs. Rip provides them with a more consistent mid-range scorer to compliment their host of outside shooters. If I were a Piston's fan, I'd be somewhat concerned that Chauncy Billups is somewhat of a combo guard himself, and hence, may need some help that Rip won't be able to give as far as handling the ball. Also, Rip's so skinny he's had a really hard time holding up by the end of the season, and I wonder how well he'll fit in the physical style of play that Rick Carlile(sp?) ran last year. Maybe they'll change it though...


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> Does this trade strike anyone else as a rather odd trade?
> 
> The way I see it, it's a trade of 2 very similar 1-sided players. Both players play little D, rebound about 4 a game, assist about 3-4 times a game. Stackhouse drives and takes too many ill-advised shots, but does get to the line. RIP takes too many ill-advised jumpers, but does make them at a fairly good clip.


I don't see Stack and Rip as similar players.

Last season they had roughly similar lines: 20ppg, 3-4 rebs, fg%, etc. But the comparision stops there my friend. When I watch these two players play, it goes beyond a statistical comparison. Rip is a better version of Ron Mercer, and Stack is a poor-man's Kobe. There, I said it.

Rip is a jumpshooter and a good one at that. Its hard to argue against his scoring effectiveness while watching him last season.

Stack is the better athlete and can simply do more things on the court. He slashes more, dishes off more assists, and gets to the free throw line. Plus he's got a post-up game to boot which I have yet to see from Rip. They're completely different players. Of course Stack has his set of mental issues, but he's a two-time All-Star and many of these issues stem from not meeting fans' expectations given his large amount of pure talent. He showed last season (for the most part) that he could be a team player and actually took 6000 less shooting attempts that the year before (when he averaged 30 ppg).

Maybe Aldridge was right in saying Stack would be a one-year find for the Wiz, with little or no chance of him re-signing. But the deal is done, and it is a great one for the Wiz. He is a better player than Rip Hamilton. Payce.


VD


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

One argument that has been going through this thread is that Stackhouse points production is overrated because of his low FG%, while others point out his relatively high number of free throws.

Here is a formula that takes into account regular field goal percentage, three pointers, and free throws.

NC's Adjusted Field Goal Percentage = (PTS/2)/(FGA + 0.475*FTA)

I multiplied FTA by slightly less than 0.5, because some free throw attempts are extra free throws after a made basket or the third free throw from a foul in act of shooting a three pointer.)

Here are the points per 48 and adjusted field goal percentage of some of the players we have been discussing. (I also give their rank in adjusted field goal percentage among the 199 players who averaged 20 or more minutes per game in 50 or more games last year.)

Jerry Stackhouse 51.1% (112) 29.1 PTS48
Richard Hamilton 50.6% (128) 27.5 PTS48
Larry Hughes 48.0% (167) 21.0 PTS48
Michael Jordan 46.4% (189) 31.5 PTS48
Kwame Brown 44.5% (NR) 15.1 PTS48

None of these guys are efficient scorers. Note, however, that Detroit had higher percentage scoring options last year than did Washington, so if anything I would expect Stackhouse's adjusted field goal percentage to fall some and Hamilton's to rise some. On the other hand, I would expect Hamiliton's points per 48 minutes to fall some and Stackhouse's to rise some.

Here are some other players you might find interesting.

Brad Miller 56.4% (24) 21.9 PTS48
Rashard Lewis 56.0% (29) 22.2 PTS48
Donyell Marshall 55.9% (31) 23.6 PTS48
Jalen Rose 52.4% (89) 25.8 PTS48
Travis Best 50.7% (127) 16.0 PTS48
Kevin Ollie 50.1% (135) 12.9 PTS48
Trent Hassell 49.9% (138) 14.6 PTS48
Ron Artest 49.6% (146) 21.3 PTS48
Marcus Fizer 47.7% (169) 22.9 PTS48
Michael Olowokandi 45.4% (194) 16.5 PTS48 (He sure ain't no Brad Miller!)
Jamal Tinsley 44.3% (195) 14.8 PTS48
Ron Mercer 43.7% (196) 20.6 PTS48 
Charles Oakley 39.1% (199) 7.5 PTS48 (Ouch!!)

(By the way, I found a file on the internet (http://www.rmi.net/~doug) with all of the stats for all of the players last season and many previous seasons. Using a statistical program I have, I can now calculate statistics and rankings like those above in a fraction of the time it takes me to type out a post like this. Generating the above statistics took me no more than 10 seconds.)


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Good find NC.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Thats a nice site NC thanks

As for the low shooting pct. Thats true, but i can see stackhouse and mj both fouling out a lot of players this season!! Both will spend time at the line!! When you play the wiz. expect it!


----------



## BullsAttitude (Jun 11, 2002)

Everybody's saying it bad for both teams but a player like stackhouse with Jordan's influence can help stackhouse if the wizards make the playoffs. But a player like rip helps the piston's shooting percentage along with billups something detroit had problems with last year. This trade is good for both teams.


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

> Local Sportsfan
> 
> love this trade because we gave up very little. No picks, no extra young players, and we got rid of of dead weight (and capcrap) in Hubert Davis. *This trade is similar to the Jalen Rose trade, except we gave up WAY less than you guys did. I guess Jordan is still a bad GM right?*





> Local Sportsfan
> 
> *Man you guys love to argue. *this trade was pretty much a no brainer for the wiz...
> 
> ...


Don't bait people into an argument then act incredulous when people argue. What does the Jalen Rose trade have to do with this? Unless all this time that you've been defending Hamilton as a future star you were actually just "sipping the blue kool-aid." 

This is a good trade for the Wizards, IMO. I never understand why play-off teams make major changes in the post-season. Especially to get less experience.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Lizzy</b>!
> Don't bait people into an argument then act incredulous when people argue.


Thank you for saying what I was wanting to say. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out who the troublemakers are around here (moderators take note).



> Originally posted by <b>Lizzy</b>!
> I never understand why play-off teams make major changes in the post-season. Especially to get less experience.


I think in this case it may be because Dumars realizes the Pistons, although improved from previous year, were still no where near championship level. Instead of standing pat and being happy "making the playoffs", he chose to shake things up.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> 
> I think in this case it may be because Dumars realizes the Pistons, although improved from previous year, were still no where near championship level. Instead of standing pat and being happy "making the playoffs", he chose to shake things up.


Agreed.

Though I don't see how adding Chauncey Billups and trading for Rip Hamilton really benefits them short term or long term. But hey its Dumars who kicks the tires and lights the fires, so I'm just an outsider giving my deuce coppers. Hey.


VD


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> 
> deuce coppers.
> 
> VD


"Deuce coppers?" Whoah. Now that's some fancy slang you're tossin' in there!:laugh:


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TomBoerwinkle#1</b>!
> 
> "Deuce coppers?" Whoah. Now that's some fancy slang you're tossin' in there!:laugh:


Haha.

I'm just sick of saying 'my two cents' or 'my $.02' or a similar derivative. So I apologize if I crossed you up temporarily.. but gotta try something new, right?

Hmm... seems like there has been TOO MUCH HATIN' on this board lately. I know I've been guilty of this before too but... we gotta understand that not everyone is going to agree w/ our respective opinions here. Hence, the very motive behind creating a 'post' or 'thread'. Man.. disgreement is good, but vitriol is bad.

No struggle, no progress folks.



VD


----------



## shroombal (Jul 17, 2002)

Stack's an FA? Cuz i don't see him listed as one...

This trade is great for the Wiz...

Hughes/Stack/Russell/Brown/Haywood 

over

Alexander/Hamilton/Nesby(MJ injured)/Laettner/White

Stack is slightly better than Rip, cuz he's more athletic and about 30 pounds bigger. Plus stack scored more, rebounded more, and dished the ball more. I think stack is still in his prime, and has about 3 more years left of great production in him...


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

I think Jordan got his "Jordan" in Stackhouse. Stack plays a lot more like Jordan than anyone the Wiz had. If the Wiz is going to play more triangle, you've got to have someone who can create his own shot when the 24-second clock is running down. Other than Jordan, they didn't have that kind of player (Hamilton is excellent coming off a screen, but not one-on-one).

Net, if Jordan wants to build a team in his own likeness, he needs a "Jordan stand-in." Good choice.

Other than that, I'll let the Pistons and Wiz boards decide who did the fleecing, since it really doesn't affect the Bulls directly.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't see Stack and Rip as similar players.
> ...


Vinny, I totally hear ya for the most part, they are different players entirely. I was just saying thier bottom line, affect on wins & losses is slight, and they have some similar weeknesses (No D, ill-advised shots, little rebounding/assists/blocks/steals). 

Rips a better shooter, Stack a better slasher. I think both teams got what they needed. Saying Jerry is better because he can slashes is like saying Darius Miles is better then Reggie Miller cause he can slash... Only issue I have is your comparison. I was thinking Stack compares more closely to a rich-mans Rons Mercer (ha), and Rip more to Allan Houston. I NEVER thought I'd see anyone compare Rip to Mercer though, lol! But hey, player comparisons are usually pretty worthless anyways... 

I think this is a rare trade that benifits both teams, maybe giving them each 3-5 more wins. But something about it still strikes me as odd. 2 pretty big names... yet I'm in serious doubt it really helps EITHER team THAT much.... Just my opinion....


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> On the downside, I'm concerned that the Wiz have lots of guys who aren't known as great outside shooters.


That's why I think Chris Whitney is more valuable than a lot of people give him credit for 

I expect him to start with Stack - balances the backcourt better IMO

And Jeffries will be starting over Russell by the all star break

I question Russ's wheels and his capacity to play to a high level - may as well blood the rook with good minutes - but again this will depend on how Kwame comes on - you don't want two greenhorns in your forward line

I'm still waiting for an answer to the question as to when MJ may trade for Sheed

Will he make a play for him with Kwame as the centerpiece - Jahidi and draft picks would have to go along as part of the ride I guess

And what about Montross, Joe Forte ?


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

I really like this deal for both teams... I honestly think it is a even deal down the board. I think the Wiz will benefit the quickest from it, but if Rip keeps improving, I think he could provide LT growth for the Pistons.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Jordan and Collins rebuilt their team faster than Krause did...and even if the 'cornerstone' kids don't work out, theres still something of a foundation to build on. Don't know that we can say that of the Bulls.

They'll sweep the season series...barring injury.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>gettinbranded</b>!
> Jordan and Collins rebuilt their team faster than Krause did...and even if the 'cornerstone' kids don't work out, theres still something of a foundation to build on. Don't know that we can say that of the Bulls.
> 
> They'll sweep the season series...barring injury.


They sure did. This offseason has been a good one for the Wizards. Thats for sure


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>gettinbranded</b>!
> Jordan and Collins rebuilt their team faster than Krause did...and even if the 'cornerstone' kids don't work out, theres still something of a foundation to build on. Don't know that we can say that of the Bulls.
> 
> They'll sweep the season series...barring injury.



I'm sorry... Since when did re-building since 1977 after one trophy beat rebuilding since 1997 with 6 trophies....?

Seems one team has 20 years of rebuilding on the other team.


Don't start a fight you can't win. :angel:


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>gettinbranded</b>!
> Jordan and Collins rebuilt their team faster than Krause did...and even if the 'cornerstone' kids don't work out, theres still something of a foundation to build on. Don't know that we can say that of the Bulls.
> 
> They'll sweep the season series...barring injury.


How so?

Just my question to you is that it looks like the Wizards and Bulls are still using the same blueprint to me.

- We've both drafted really young in 2001 (HS players)
- We've both drafted for experience in 2002 (Players with college experience, and NCAA Tourney title experience)
- We've both traded some of our young talent to bring in an established superstar (Brand for Rose, Rip for Stack)
- We've both not overspent on FAs, signing good 2nd and 3rd options and both have consequentially stole players away from an old nemesis (Utah)
- We've both installed a coach with either ties personally or to the organization (Collins to MJ, Cart to the Bulls)

You know, if I weren't so dumb as other people have said on here, I'd think Jordan did learn a thing or two from good ole boy Krause. You know, they always say you badmouth the people you respect, admire or fear most.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

indeed retro

imitation ( even if it is accompanied by mockery ) is the sincerest form of flattery - oscar wilde


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Does that mean Varda is our Bagaric?


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> 
> 
> How so?
> ...


Let me quickly disagree here.

-Jordan went first and took Kwame. How could he be copying?
-Jordan addressed needs just as Krause did. Coincidence on the winner part.
-Washington traded one young guy, the Bulls traded several. The Wizards actually gain caproom ad flexibility for 2003 as well. I am not sure how Brand is traded for Rose.
-Not spedning cash is a common theme and MJ was on that kick from his first day. He has slashed a $52M payroll while making the team uch more competitve.
-Again, MJ put the Coach in first. 

It may seem like they are following similar paths but it is clearly one before the other in a few cases, and the other is Krause.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> 
> 
> It may seem like they are following similar paths but it is clearly one before the other in a few cases, and the other is Krause.


You don't have to be second to be the one copied BCH. People have known JK's plan even before he largely put it in place.

That said...questionable or not, Hughes, Russell, and especially Stack are hoopers.

Donyell Marshell is, but Corey Blount isn't. John Crotty (the first agent Krause contacted according to the Sunt-Times---why not gamble on Strickland??) isn't. Krauses mindset mystifies me.

If we can trade BRAND for Chandler, surely we could have traded CHANDLER for Stackhouse. That would give us two high scoring vets and probably get us into the playoffs. Ok...maybe thats a stretch, but I sure hate to see all these vets cross the country and we're never, ever players.

Why not Keon Clark?

I guess it's putting faith in your kids, but it's also probably another sub-500 team. I'm tired of watching development. I want to watch wins.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> Does that mean Varda is our Bagaric?


Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Varda is kept on your squad. Also don't be surprised to see MJ keep his hand in the foreign talent pool either.

As for your disagreement, you have your right. It doesn't matter who came first or what... the fact is both organizations are building from the same mold. Can't you not argue and just be happy with that?


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Hey I just wanted to get my disagreement out there. Usually if I don't say anythign right off the bat, It is assumed I agree. This is probably my fault because I usually have something to say about anything.

One key difference I can see however, is that the Wizards will have max-type cap space next year.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Good article on cap considerations here.

http://wizards.realgm.com/showarticle.php?artid=113


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

*The Bulls vs. the Wiz*

As is typical, this discussion has somewhat evolved into a Bulls vs. Wiz debate.

Here is the breakdown on the two teams, in my opinion.

*Elite potential: Guys with a small but non-trivial chance of being Hall of Famers*
Bulls: Curry, Chandler, JWill
Wiz: Brown

*Good potential: Guys with the potential to be stars in the NBA in the future*
Bulls: Crawford
Wiz: Jeffries, Haywood, Hughes

*Some potential: Guys with the potential to be really good players in the NBA in the future*
Bulls: Fizer, Robinson, Hassell
Wiz: Thomas, Dixon, White

*Stars or near-stars in their prime*
Bulls: Rose, Marshall
Wiz: Stackhouse

*Stars past their prime*
Wiz: Jordan

*Veteran role players*
Bulls: Blount, Hoiberg
Wiz: Russell, Laettner, Whitney

Looking at this, the Wiz are going to much better than the Bulls this year, because their stars and veteran role players are much better than their counterparts on the Bulls.

However, next year the Wiz are likely to lose all of their veteran stars, since Jordan likely will retire and Stackhouse probably will be let go because he is not worth the max. In the meantime, the Bulls probably will add a veteran big guy (J Howard, E Campbell, PJ Brown), so I suspect that the combination of Rose, Marshall, and say Howard will do more for the Bulls than whoever the Wiz are able to add through free agency.

But who is better in 2003-2004 is not that important in the big picutre, since neither the Wiz or Bulls is going to make much noise in the near future.

The main reason that I like the Bulls chances better is because they have a much better chance of having one of their young guys turn into a superstar than does the Wiz. They simply have more guys in the "Elite Potential" group. The Wiz do have more players in the next tier down, but championship teams need Hall of Famers and the Bulls' roster is more likely to have one or more of them. Also, the Bulls are much more likely to have a good draft pick in 2003, giving them another better chance of landing a future superstar.

I guess that I also like the role that Rose will play for the Bulls now and in the future - leader of the team and coach on the floor. Jordan plays that role for the Wiz now, but given his role in the organization, I suspect that it is hard for players to let their guard down around MJ. Rose simply is able to serve as a buffer between the young guys and the coaching staff/front office in a way that MJ can't because of his role in the organization. More importantly, it is unclear who will serve this role in the future for the Wiz. Stackhouse is a nice player, but I don't see him in that role.

One final point. Chandler and JWill have both exhibited some leadership qualities that bode well for the Bulls' future. Who among the young Wiz players has shown that kind of leadership, outside of perhaps Dixon, who may or may not develop into a good enough NBA player to be a true leader of a team?


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

I think I'll weigh in here in regards to Stack and his salary cap ramifications. I don't necessarily see where it's such a done deal that he's going to opt out of his contract at the end of the season. I need look no further than Bonzi Wells and Rashard Lewis to see that just because a player (and his agent) believe he's a max-player doesn't mean the system thinks he is.

2003 is going to have a rather deep free agent class. When compared to some of the big fish out there (J. O'neil, Duncan, Kidd, etc) Stack is a second tier talent. He's a damn fine player, but he's not necessarily a franchise-type player. So, when the few teams that have the space to outright sign a max-type free agent start to make their calls, I seriously doubt Stacks phone is going to be ringing. He's going to be getting the calls later in the offseason when the full boat FA's have made their decisions and GM's start looking to fill holes. He may not get any offers better than what his current contract is at. As a matter of fact, once those max free agents are grabbed up, it's going to be a lot of the same next year as this - not a lot of love and definatly not a lot of money to go around. He may be looking at a mid-level exception deal for a year or two. That's a pretty serious pay-cut.

MJ is taking a pretty decent gamble here. In essence, he wants stack to opt out so his salary can come off the Wizards books, which the Wiz would promptly renouce his rights and would make the Wiz serious players in next summers free-agent bonanza. I'm not so sure that Stack is going to opt out and declare for Free Agency. If so, it appears as if the Wizards will be under the cap, but not enough so to outright sign a max-type FA.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Nice thoughts NC i agree with most of it. I like what washington has done for the short run. They also, despite getting rid of alexander and Hamilton have some young people for the future. Jeffries, Dixon, Thomas, Haywood and Brown. That team will not be all that bad. And the pay roll will be decent with that team for a while anyway. As for Stackhouse, he could be let go, then he might not be. See what has happened to everyones salary this season? Not much there. He might and washington might resign him for less than he wanted at Detroit and as BCH alluded to they have near max money for nest year to sign a very good FA. Then if and when MJ steps down, the team will go from there. Anyway thats a much better team with potential than they had three years ago. Add hughes in all of this also. 

As for us? I like what we have done. We are not better than Washington. Washington could be 6th to 8th seed in the east this year. They won't go much further because of not enough fire power in the front court, imo. We will not make the playoffs. But we will be much improved. And as for Howard? I believe that is who we will go after next year. And i too like the leadership abililites of jay and Chandler. rings well for the future. 

I always thought that the rivalry of the future was going to be LAC and us. I change my mind. I think a natural rivalry will be us and washington. Two young teams on the rise(im talking after MJ retires) with a good blend of veterans on both clubs, should have many memorable games!!

Add to this the ongoing rivalry of JK vs MJ. Its a natural!!


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Fizer + Howard = Bad Idea.

I assume the plan is to have Howard as a bench player. Unless he is starting at the PF spot that would be your plan. I also assume Chicago is going to sign him for the MLE? That may be a cold hard truth that he won't get more, but why would he go to Chicago to sign for the MLE to be at best a 6th or 7th man?

I know Howard's game as well as anyone who foloowed him Washington for just about every game can. You do not want him.

NC, in your analysis you say that Chicao is going to pick up vets that will counter anyone the Wizrds may get. Even if the Wizards keep stack, they will have the same money the Bulls have, if Stack doesn't opt out they will have more money than the Bulls, and if he does opt out they will have a lot more money. You also did not mention Grizzard or Juan Carlos Navarro in your analysis. Grizzard is a talent and JC Navarro showed some skills in the WCs.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

forgot about grizzard

When i said we get howard thats with the idea that fizer is somehow traded.


----------



## WizardsKev (Jun 4, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> I think I'll weigh in here in regards to Stack and his salary cap ramifications. I don't necessarily see where it's such a done deal that he's going to opt out of his contract at the end of the season. I need look no further than Bonzi Wells and Rashard Lewis to see that just because a player (and his agent) believe he's a max-player doesn't mean the system thinks he is.
> 
> 2003 is going to have a rather deep free agent class. When compared to some of the big fish out there (J. O'neil, Duncan, Kidd, etc) Stack is a second tier talent. He's a damn fine player, but he's not necessarily a franchise-type player. So, when the few teams that have the space to outright sign a max-type free agent start to make their calls, I seriously doubt Stacks phone is going to be ringing. He's going to be getting the calls later in the offseason when the full boat FA's have made their decisions and GM's start looking to fill holes. He may not get any offers better than what his current contract is at. As a matter of fact, once those max free agents are grabbed up, it's going to be a lot of the same next year as this - not a lot of love and definatly not a lot of money to go around. He may be looking at a mid-level exception deal for a year or two. That's a pretty serious pay-cut.
> ...


If Stack opts out, and the Wizards renounce him and everyone else (including declining team options), they'd be $15.9 million under the cap -- even if the cap doesn't grow. That's more than enough for a max salary player of any experience level. They could also pick up the $2.2 million option on Etan Thomas and still have nearly $13.7 million in cap room to sign their draft pick and pursue free agents. Either way, if they renounce Stackhouse, they'll have enough money to offer the max to any free agent.


----------



## RealFan (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>WizardsKev</b>!
> 
> 
> If Stack opts out, and the Wizards renounce him and everyone else (including declining team options), they'd be $15.9 million under the cap -- even if the cap doesn't grow. That's more than enough for a max salary player of any experience level. They could also pick up the $2.2 million option on Etan Thomas and still have nearly $13.7 million in cap room to sign their draft pick and pursue free agents. Either way, if they renounce Stackhouse, they'll have enough money to offer the max to any free agent.


But what if Stack doesn't opt out?


----------



## Potatoe (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RealFan</b>!
> 
> 
> But what if Stack doesn't opt out?




Then they have Stack at a bargin basement price and still have 6-9 million in cap space.


----------



## WizardsKev (Jun 4, 2002)

Correct Potatoe, except that the Wiz would have Stack at a bargain price, and they'd have _$8.9 to $11.1 million_ in cap space.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

Lets be honest here... Stack is at the point in his career where he is looking for his "future financial stability" package like Webber kept mentioning this offseason.

You actually think he isn't going to opt out?


----------



## WizardsKev (Jun 4, 2002)

I expect him to opt out. I was just answering a question.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> Lets be honest here... Stack is at the point in his career where he is looking for his "future financial stability" package like Webber kept mentioning this offseason.
> 
> You actually think he isn't going to opt out?


So, are you equating Jerry Stackhouse's value with Chris Webber? Why is it when folks talk about the FA class of 2003, Jerry Stackhouse isn't prominently mentioned? What's going to happen to the man when he opts out of his deal, the teams with the ability to sign a max free agent go with other, better options and then he's left looking at mid-level exceptions or resigning with the Wizards for whatever he can get - quite possibly less than the $7 or $7.5 mil he's guaranteed to make next year? I just don't think this is as much a done deal as everyone is making it out to be.

Who's going to want to sign Jerry Stackhouse to a 6 or 7 year deal at even anything close to $10 mil/yr? Nobody. Rashard Lewis and Bonzi Wells can't seem to get that kind of money and I'd equate those two as fairly equal to Stack. And if Lewis and Wells opt for one-year deal this year, guess what, you can add them to the expanding 2003 free agent pool also, which only dilutes Stacks bargaining power as a FA.

These times, they are a-changin'.


----------



## BullsNews (Jun 7, 2002)

I think that some of you are forgetting that many of the marquee free agents (TD and J O'Neal quickly pop to mind) are likely to resign with their current teams. Not to mention the Eddie Jones' and Glen Rice's of the world who will force a sign-and-trade to a team without cap room.

In the summer of 2000- the last time several teams had signigicant cap room- Ron freakin' Mercer got $7 mil... I'm quite certain that a 2-time all-star like Stack will get just as much somewhere...

And does anyone truly believe that any big-time star is going to sign with a Wiz team that "stars" Kwame Brown, Larry Hughes, Jared Jeffries and Brendan Haywood?


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

Maybe I'm missing something here... I just don't see Jerry Stackhouse getting anything significantly over what he's making currently on the FA market in 2003. So what if Duncan resigns with the Spurs and O'Niel with the Pacers? That takes the Spurs and Pacers out of the picture to sign Stack. Who is out there who is going to pay Jerry Stackhouse over, say, $8 mil/season for 6 or more years?

This isn't the same FA climate of two or three years ago when the Bulls signed Mercer. There was no luxury tax and no threat of one. Look at the trends. Teams are reluctant to enter into long-term deals on players simply because they don't know what the future holds in terms of dollars and the cap. Ending contracts are all the rage. Why is that? Eddie Jones doesn't have the leverage that he had in the past to force a sign and trade because the Heat know damn good and well that there will only be a handful of teams that will even have a shot at signing him outright. Jones used the Bulls to force that sign and trade to Miami because he could have gone to the Bulls free and clear. I just don't see the same environment in 2003. Couple that with the fact that there are quite a few good players who will be available and it all looks like there just isn't enough cash to satisfy the egos that these players have. Stack may very well be a casulity of this newer economic climate.

I'm not saying he won't opt out and I'm also not saying he won't get what he thinks he deserves. I just don't believe for a minute it is as much of a rubber stamp as people are making it out to be.

You know what would be a hoot tho, is if FA's used the Wizards cap space to leverage sign and trades to teams they'd rather play for much like what Jones did with the Bulls.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> Fizer + Howard = Bad Idea.
> 
> I assume the plan is to have Howard as a bench player. Unless he is starting at the PF spot that would be your plan. I also assume Chicago is going to sign him for the MLE? That may be a cold hard truth that he won't get more, but why would he go to Chicago to sign for the MLE to be at best a 6th or 7th man?
> ...


I would have thought Howard is off the menu with the acquisition of Yell


----------



## Potatoe (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> 
> 
> So, are you equating Jerry Stackhouse's value with Chris Webber? Why is it when folks talk about the FA class of 2003, Jerry Stackhouse isn't prominently mentioned? What's going to happen to the man when he opts out of his deal, the teams with the ability to sign a max free agent go with other, better options and then he's left looking at mid-level exceptions or resigning with the Wizards for whatever he can get - quite possibly less than the $7 or $7.5 mil he's guaranteed to make next year? I just don't think this is as much a done deal as everyone is making it out to be.
> ...




Well if that's the case then this move is even better than I thought it was.

If there is no demand for Stack then the Wizz can sign him for 6-9 mil and still have 7-10 mil in cap space.

Wow


----------



## BullsNews (Jun 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> Maybe I'm missing something here... I just don't see Jerry Stackhouse getting anything significantly over what he's making currently on the FA market in 2003. So what if Duncan resigns with the Spurs and O'Niel with the Pacers? That takes the Spurs and Pacers out of the picture to sign Stack. Who is out there who is going to pay Jerry Stackhouse over, say, $8 mil/season for 6 or more years?


The Pacers aren't in the running anyway, they'd have to renounce half their players to get under the cap. And I'm too lazy to look up the salary figures now, but it's my understanding that the Spurs will be able to re-up TD for the max and still have enough room for a max FA.



> This isn't the same FA climate of two or three years ago when the Bulls signed Mercer. There was no luxury tax and no threat of one.


True- but any team with enough cap room to sign a max FA isn't going to be in luxury tax danger. This summer, the difference between the cap and the LT threshold is about $10 mil, so a team with cap space could sign a max FA next summer and still be $10 mil below the LT figure. In fact, if a team has enough cap room to sign a max FA- which would put them at the cap after signing the player- they COULDN'T get their team salary high enough to pay the LT.



> Look at the trends. Teams are reluctant to enter into long-term deals on players simply because they don't know what the future holds in terms of dollars and the cap. Ending contracts are all the rage. Why is that? *Eddie Jones doesn't have the leverage that he had in the past to force a sign and trade because the Heat know damn good and well that there will only be a handful of teams that will even have a shot at signing him outright. Jones used the Bulls to force that sign and trade to Miami because he could have gone to the Bulls free and clear. I just don't see the same environment in 2003.* Couple that with the fact that there are quite a few good players who will be available and it all looks like there just isn't enough cash to satisfy the egos that these players have. Stack may very well be a casulity of this newer economic climate.


In 2000, there were only a handful of teams with enough cap room to sign a player outright- but a few teams was all it took for Tim Thomas, Eddie Jones, Glen Rice, etc to get the contract they wanted and/or a trade to the team they wanted to go to.



> You know what would be a hoot tho, is if FA's used the Wizards cap space to leverage sign and trades to teams they'd rather play for much like what Jones did with the Bulls.


That would be quite comical, and not surprising at all. :rbanana:


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

fl_flash: you actually think someone isn't going to pay Stack? C'mon... get real.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

*More Light Is Shed*

Apparently Stack's postseason flameout resonated more deeply than we thought. An excerpt from Peter May's column in today's Boston Globe:

"Well, now Stackhouse is an ex-Piston, dealt to Washington for Rip Hamilton. Not many tears are being shed in Detroit. In fact, after the Celtics series, several Pistons gathered for a party and one of the themes was how Stackhouse had completely choked against Boston. Dumars said he has not taken much heat for the deal, and added that Carlisle is just as thrilled with it as he is."

More at http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/258/sports/Playing_field_is_leveled+.shtml


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: More Light Is Shed*



> Originally posted by <b>ScottMay</b>!
> Apparently Stack's postseason flameout resonated more deeply than we thought. An excerpt from Peter May's column in today's Boston Globe:
> 
> "Well, now Stackhouse is an ex-Piston, dealt to Washington for Rip Hamilton. Not many tears are being shed in Detroit. In fact, after the Celtics series, several Pistons gathered for a party and one of the themes was how Stackhouse had completely choked against Boston. Dumars said he has not taken much heat for the deal, and added that Carlisle is just as thrilled with it as he is."
> ...


Expos facto, NBA franchises will begin to leak out whatever grievances they have against an established player that they just traded away. Happens all the time. Take it with a grain of salt.

I'm not sure if this is truly how the mgmt. and fans viewed Stack anyways. If you know anything about Detroit, loyalty is not worn on anyones' sleave but rather its always 'what have you done for me lately'. Eh.


VD


----------



## BullsNews (Jun 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: More Light Is Shed*



> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> 
> 
> Expos facto, NBA franchises will begin to leak out whatever grievances they have against an established player that they just traded away. Happens all the time. Take it with a grain of salt.
> ...


You make a good point, Vin, but I'm inclined to believe that there is some truth to what Dumars said... Seriously, there has to be some reason that he traded Stack- a 2-time all-star- for Ron Mercer Jr. At least the consensus opinion seems to be that MJ raped Joe D on this trade, why else would Joe do this trade? I don't believe it was because Stack had one bad playoff season, that seems a bit rash.


----------

