# Chandler on Skiles: "Not a good person"



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> http://newsok.com/article/3020453/
> 
> 
> 
> ...


OK -Chandler should have been more discrete. It will be interesting to see if Pax or Skiles blast back. They shouldn't. Two wrongs don't make a right.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

> ''Right before we made the move, I read something Tyson said about apprehension of whether he was going to be traded,'' Skiles said. ''I sent him a long e-mail [telling him] to hang in there and whatever happens, happens, and it will all work out whatever way it goes. Because at the time, I didn't know for sure if we were going to [trade him]. And I never heard back from him


http://www.suntimes.com/sports/basketball/bulls/279927,CST-SPT-bull02.article

E-mail ???? Skiles has no people skills


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Chandler is playing well enough right now that he's got a lot of capital. He might was well talk. I don't blame him and might very well do the same thing myself.

However, I put very little stock in what players who had a bad year and got traded or not re-signed have to say about their former coaches. If a quality player leaves on his own or is traded because he's valuable (i.e. had Deng been traded for Gasol), and then proceeds to blast his coach, then you might have something worth paying attention to.

I will say to johnston797 though that you appear to have been right in your prediction that Chandler's double digit scoring would become a trend. I don't watch the Hornets, so I don't know how it is that he's scoring or if his actual skills have improved, but he most definitely is putting the lotion in the basket. 

As a big Tyson Chandler fan, I'm glad. I look forward to seeing him play in the UC tonight.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Man, Chandler's having almost as hard a time of moving on as John Paxson did with Eddy Curry!

But I am glad to see that there's one other Bulls fan/staffperson (Pete Myers) who acknowledges Chandler's contribution to the now long-forgotten 2004-2005 squad.



> After a slow start offensively in the season's first two months, Chandler has recorded 10 straight double-doubles and leads the team with 23.
> 
> He has scored in double digits in 21 of 28 games since the start of January and recently put together a streak of 15 straight games with 12 rebounds or more. Only two NBA players, Wallace and Dennis Rodman, have accomplished such a feat in the past 10 seasons.


Can't believe Duncan or Garnett or Dwight Howard haven't had a 15+ game streak with 12 or more boards.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Chandler is playing for Byron Scott and he has the nerve to call Skiles "not a good person" ???

I'm not saying Chandler is wrong about Skiles, but it isn't like he is playing for a better person now. Although he is playing for someone that gives him more playing time


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> If a quality player leaves on his own or is traded because he's valuable (i.e. had Deng been traded for Gasol), and then proceeds to blast his coach, then you might have something worth paying attention to.


Were Jason Kidd's comments about Skiles worth paying attention to? He's clearly valuable, and he was traded for an off-the-court issue, nothing he did on the court.

Just curious.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

i'm glad chandler is doing well in the hinterlands. wished he could have done that in chicago. but no matter how you feel you don't say stuff like that to the press. not ever. 

scott skiles isn't a good person? no. idi amin isn't a good person. hilter isn't a good person. 

i hope chandler has a horrendous game tonight and fouls out in the third quarter.

what an entitled sounding me first not team first *******.

JMO, of course!


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

Obviously, Chandler is not a good kid.


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

Well, it seems to me that Skiles approach works with some and doesn't with others. If Phil Jackson had stuck around for the rebuilding we might have gotten more from the big 2. But IT IS IN THE PAST NOW.

All three are now enjoying some success. Life goes on.


deleted


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Ty was my favorite Bulls player for five years. He's currently my favorite non-Bulls player. I also believe that Skiles use of Chandler was far from optimal. That said, I side with Skiles in this feud. Chandler has lost credibility by critisizing Skiles so openly in the press. He comes across as bitter, sensitive, defensive, and sometimes even a little bit crazy.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

spongyfungy said:


> http://www.suntimes.com/sports/basketball/bulls/279927,CST-SPT-bull02.article
> 
> E-mail ???? Skiles has no people skills


The funny thing is Skiles just doesn't get it at all. He says he communicated to Chandler more than any other Bull. And this important message was via email? Yikes...


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

johnston797 said:


> The funny thing is Skiles just doesn't get it at all. He says he communicated to Chandler more than any other Bull. And this important message was via email? Yikes...


I don't know that we can judge w/o knowing all the circumstance. Maybe Chandler wasn't picking up the phone, for example.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Ty was my favorite Bulls player for five years. He's currently my favorite non-Bulls player. I also believe that Skiles use of Chandler was far from optimal. That said, I side with Skiles in this feud. Chandler has lost credibility by critisizing Skiles so openly in the press. He comes across as bitter, sensitive, defensive, and sometimes even a little bit crazy.


I'm still firmly siding with Chandler. It's pretty clear that Scott's approach is 1000x better for Chandler. The results are very clear. With that said, he went too far here. But Chandler's numerous comments on Bulls have all been fine with the exception of this one article.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Soulful Sides said:


> I don't know that we can judge w/o knowing all the circumstance. Maybe Chandler wasn't picking up the phone, for example.


Maybe Skiles is too bad a communicator to get his point accross. Again.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> Were Jason Kidd's comments about Skiles worth paying attention to? He's clearly valuable, and he was traded for an off-the-court issue, nothing he did on the court.
> 
> Just curious.


Jason Kidd was from an earlier time. My guess is that most coaches are more likely to be overly critical of guards than big men, since point guards are entrusted with running the team's offense. The tendency is probably worse for Skiles, who was a guard himself, and a strick disiplinarian. On the other hand, big men like Chandler and Curry have been praised and babied from the dawn of adulthood must have egos that are easily bruised by even the smallest criticism. 

In Skiles defense, Antonio Davis, Al Harrington, JYD, Griffin, Pike and other veteran players had nothing negative to say about Skiles after they left the team, and they could have without much repercussion. Curry's negative comments have been mostly confined to self-serving complaints about not having been coached properly as an explanation for his shortcomings. Chandler's complaints fall pretty much into the same category.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

McBulls said:


> Curry's negative comments have been mostly confined to self-serving complaints about not having been coached properly as an explanation for his shortcomings. Chandler's complaints fall pretty much into the same category.


Don't Chandler comments fall into the category of explaining why his play is so much improved over last year?


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

I just hope Skiles can learn from his mistakes. He's still fairly young for a coach and it's possible he's not set in his ways, yet. It appears that he's given Tyrus and Ben Wallace a lot of leeway offensively this season, for example. I think that's great news. 

The thing about Skiles sending that email is that this message board knew about the trade before July 13th because of that Hornets insider. And the Hornets insider, who had correctly predicted/leaked every other Hornets move over the summer, said the deal had been done for days.



> ''Right before we made the move, I read something Tyson said about apprehension of whether he was going to be traded,'' Skiles said. ''I sent him a long e-mail [telling him] to hang in there and whatever happens, happens, and it will all work out whatever way it goes. Because at the time, I didn't know for sure if we were going to [trade him]. And I never heard back from him


So this comment doesn't ring exactly true for me. It's nice that he sent him an email, though. 

And I agree with mizenkay that Chandler's comments are probably too much. Probably, because nobody knows exactly what happened.


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

Chandler obviously still has some growing up to do. Skiles' may be a (rhymes with wick) but Chandler comes off like a spoiled brat who needs the snot wiped from his nose.

That said, I wish we still had him given that we were not able to use PJ's contract to bolster our front line. However, I shudder to imagine the histrionics coming from Chandler were he to be relegated to role player status.


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

rwj333 said:


> I just hope Skiles can learn from his mistakes. He's still fairly young for a coach and it's possible he's not set in his ways, yet.


I wouldn't bank on it. What you see is what you get with him. For better or worse.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

badfish said:


> Chandler obviously still has some growing up to do. Skiles' may be a (rhymes with wick) but Chandler comes off like a spoiled brat who needs the snot wiped from his nose.
> 
> That said, I wish we still had him given that we were not able to use PJ's contract to bolster our front line. However, I shudder to imagine the histrionics coming from Chandler were he to be relegated to role player status.


Skiles always used him as a role player anyway. I'm sure he would have *****ed and moaned some, but I'm also sure that he wouldn't have fallen behind Tyrus Thomas, Malik Allen, and Michael Sweetney on the depth chart. There still would have been 22-24 minutes a night for him (his high as a Bull was 27.4 in 2003-2004).


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

McBulls said:


> In Skiles defense, Antonio Davis, Al Harrington, JYD, Griffin, Pike and other veteran players had nothing negative to say about Skiles after they left the team, and they could have without much repercussion. Curry's negative comments have been mostly confined to self-serving complaints about not having been coached properly as an explanation for his shortcomings. Chandler's complaints fall pretty much into the same category.



exactly.

reading this from chandler today, i think he's still as immature as ever. chandler's using his bad relationship with skiles as a crutch. he didn't play well his last season in chicago cause he sat on his lazy *** all summer before signing his deal, came into camp woefully out of shape and that, for skiles, was probably the beginning of the end. one can pile on skiles for his coaching ways all you like, but for me that's more difficult than ever given the winning record this year.

i remember reading something from chandler a few months ago where he slagged off the bulls as a "guard oriented" team *duh* and slagged off on kirk (vis a vis chris paul) saying he wasn't as good *again, duh*. 

didn't your mama ever tell you if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. 

you know what chandler? shut the **** up and sack up you skinny assed punk. 

i cannot wait for tonight. hope the bulls blow them away.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

not going to judge solely on Chandler's comment about Skiles. But, Pax needs to do something about this. I mean Scott Skiles tough approach works on some players like Deng, Gordon, Hinrich, but he also cost us Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler. Now we can't expect all players to be like Deng or Hinrich. And as a fan I don't want our team to just consist of Deng and Hinrich types or maybe I should say "yes sir" type. We need to have some type of diversity personality-wise not just skill-wise. That's one of the reason why despite Big Ben's age and contract, I'm willing to give it a chance. Same goes with Tyrus Thomas. Both players bring different personality to this team. Now, Skiles don't seem to be able to handle players like Tyson and Curry who are talented but has different personality than the "yes sir" type. If he's incapable of mixing different type of personalities and make it work, this quest for championship ring will be a very long one. We might never reach it if Pax always has to find players that fits with Skiles. We can't wait for the right talent to come and waste the talents that we have. We gotta work with what we have and optimize it. We've been wasting good talents in Curry and Chandler. I really don't want to see Tyrus Thomas one day leave this team and become a monster somewhere else. Pax needs to start thinking about this. Sometime I feel like Pax is building a team around Skiles instead of the core. I really hope I'm wrong.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

I'd like to see Chandler and TT go head-to-head tonight. TT, kick TC's butt if you can.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

mizenkay said:


> exactly.
> 
> reading this from chandler today, i think he's still as immature as ever. chandler's using his bad relationship with skiles as a crutch. he didn't play well his last season in chicago cause he sat on his lazy *** all summer before signing his deal, came into camp woefully out of shape and that, for skiles, was probably the beginning of the end. one can pile on skiles for his coaching ways all you like, but for me that's more difficult than ever given the winning record this year.


Chandler had a great stretch mid-last year and then was awful at the end of the year. So the out of shape thing doesn't really hold up as the entire problem. Chandler worked hard on his game again last summer. Is he stating that as well and not getting quoted on it? Don't know. I do know that any controvsial quotes will be published.

And of course, having a coach that suggests he actually takes some shots and gives him instruction doesn't hurt either.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

RSP83 said:


> not going to judge solely on Chandler's comment about Skiles. But, Pax needs to do something about this. I mean Scott Skiles tough approach works on some players like Deng, Gordon, Hinrich, but he also cost us Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler. Now we can't expect all players to be like Deng or Hinrich. And as a fan I don't want our team to just consist of Deng and Hinrich types or maybe I should say "yes sir" type. We need to have some type of diversity personality-wise not just skill-wise. That's one of the reason why despite Big Ben's age and contract, I'm willing to give it a chance. Same goes with Tyrus Thomas. Both players bring different personality to this team. Now, Skiles don't seem to be able to handle players like Tyson and Curry who are talented but has different personality than the "yes sir" type. If he's incapable of mixing different type of personalities and make it work, this quest for championship ring will be a very long one. We might never reach it if Pax always has to find players that fits with Skiles. We can't wait for the right talent to come and waste the talents that we have. We gotta work with what we have and optimize it. We've been wasting good talents in Curry and Chandler. I really don't want to see Tyrus Thomas one day leave this team and become a monster somewhere else. Pax needs to start thinking about this. Sometime I feel like Pax is building a team around Skiles instead of the core. I really hope I'm wrong.


If a player who is making couples of million bucks on NBA can't take tough love from his coach, do you really want that kind of player on your team?

I don't.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

lgtwins said:


> If a player who is making couples of million bucks on NBA can't take tough love from his coach, do you really want that kind of player on your team?
> 
> I don't.


Exhibit A: Larry the overrated clown Brown

There are lots of players that he has problems with that I'd take on my favorite team.

Don't confuse tough love with being a good coach


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

johnston797 said:


> Chandler had a great stretch mid-last year and then was awful at the end of the year. So the out of shape thing doesn't really hold up as the entire problem. Chandler worked hard on his game again last summer. Is he stating that as well and not getting quoted on it? Don't know. I do know that any controvsial quotes will be published.
> 
> And of course, having a coach that suggests he actually takes some shots and gives him instruction doesn't hurt either.
> [edit]


Problem I have with complaints from Curry or Chandler is that I've never heard that either expressed their own ownership for their poor performances on the court. It's always comebody else's fault with these two guys. And that's BS.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

mizenkay said:


> exactly.
> 
> reading this from chandler today, i think he's still as immature as ever. chandler's using his bad relationship with skiles as a crutch. he didn't play well his last season in chicago cause he sat on his lazy *** all summer before signing his deal, came into camp woefully out of shape and that, for skiles, was probably the beginning of the end. one can pile on skiles for his coaching ways all you like, but for me that's more difficult than ever given the winning record this year.
> 
> ...


The Miz is fiesty this Friday afternoon.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> Exhibit A: Larry the overrated clown Brown
> 
> There are lots of players that he has problems with that I'd take on my favorite team.
> 
> Don't confuse tough love with being a good coach


I din't.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

mizenkay said:


> exactly.
> 
> reading this from chandler today, i think he's still as immature as ever. chandler's using his bad relationship with skiles as a crutch. he didn't play well his last season in chicago cause he sat on his lazy *** all summer before signing his deal, came into camp woefully out of shape and that, for skiles, was probably the beginning of the end. one can pile on skiles for his coaching ways all you like, but for me that's more difficult than ever given the winning record this year.
> 
> ...


We've also heard talk that Skiles has let Ben Wallace get away with things that he would have yelled at Chandler about. (I can't find the article.) I can see Skiles becoming frustrated by the way 05-06 turned out. I can see Skiles being hardest on Chandler because he was the Bulls' highest-paid player and biggest disappointment. Verbal abuse sucks.

I absolutely want the Bulls win, but I wouldn't mind seeing Chandler have a nice game. I think Skiles could use a lasting reminder on how to treat talent-- even talent that is overpaid and underachieving and mentally weak.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

RSP83 said:


> not going to judge solely on Chandler's comment about Skiles. But, Pax needs to do something about this. I mean Scott Skiles tough approach works on some players like Deng, Gordon, Hinrich, but he also cost us Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler. Now we can't expect all players to be like Deng or Hinrich. And as a fan I don't want our team to just consist of Deng and Hinrich types or maybe I should say "yes sir" type. We need to have some type of diversity personality-wise not just skill-wise. That's one of the reason why despite Big Ben's age and contract, I'm willing to give it a chance. Same goes with Tyrus Thomas. Both players bring different personality to this team. Now, Skiles don't seem to be able to handle players like Tyson and Curry who are talented but has different personality than the "yes sir" type. If he's incapable of mixing different type of personalities and make it work, this quest for championship ring will be a very long one. We might never reach it if Pax always has to find players that fits with Skiles. We can't wait for the right talent to come and waste the talents that we have. We gotta work with what we have and optimize it. We've been wasting good talents in Curry and Chandler. I really don't want to see Tyrus Thomas one day leave this team and become a monster somewhere else. Pax needs to start thinking about this. Sometime I feel like Pax is building a team around Skiles instead of the core. I really hope I'm wrong.


One quick correction.

The one and only reason that Eddy Curry is not longer a Bulls is John Paxson. Eddy would have been re-signed had it not been for Paxson's fear about his heart condition. He played incredibly well his final season with the Bulls, on what was their most balanced team since the championship years. I don't think Skiles should be roped in to his departure.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

This is the kind of pre-game newspaper/press hoopla that frequently goes on. I wouldn't be surprised if Skiles doesn't put the article up in the locker room. Unless there's merit to it.

I could also see Skiles wanting to suit up and throw a well-timed elbow, if you know what I mean.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

I think Skile still can kick TC's butt if you know what I mean. No contest.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

such sweet thunder said:


> One quick correction.
> 
> The one and only reason that Eddy Curry is not longer a Bulls is John Paxson. Eddy would have been re-signed had it not been for Paxson's fear about his heart condition. He played incredibly well his final season with the Bulls, on what was their most balanced team since the championship years. I don't think Skiles should be roped in to his departure.


You're correct, but if you remember Sam Smith's article from a few months ago, supposedly Skiles was vehemently against resigning Curry. He felt he had done his job by rehabilitating Curry's game and wanted him traded, clashing with management over it. Then the heart thing happened.


> This is the kind of pre-game newspaper/press hoopla that frequently goes on. I wouldn't be surprised if Skiles doesn't put the article up in the locker room. Unless there's merit to it.
> 
> I could also see Skiles wanting to suit up and throw a well-timed elbow, if you know what I mean.


He's not insulting the Bulls, though. He's insulting Skiles.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

rwj333 said:


> You're correct, but if you remember Sam Smith's article from a few months ago, supposedly Skiles was vehemently against resigning Curry. He felt he had done his job by rehabilitating Curry's game and wanted him traded, clashing with management over it. Then the heart thing happened.
> 
> 
> He's not insulting the Bulls, though. He's insulting Skiles.


Dunno for sure about the first part.

Totally agree with the second part. Thing is, would the team rally to his defense if he did post in the locker room?


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

DaBullz said:


> Totally agree with the second part. Thing is, would the team rally to his defense if he did post in the locker room?


If they value not being in the doghouse they would


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

Yawn yawn yawn.

The maturity problems mentioned by the scout in the article in the other thread appear to have reared their head.


----------



## SPIN DOCTOR (Oct 31, 2002)

Where in this article does Tyson take any personal responsibility for his lack of production last year after signing a huge contract? While it is nice that he has made a comeback of sorts this season, how was Skiles responsible for his poor performance individually?

This seems to be uneven journalism.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

rwj333 said:


> You're correct, but if you remember Sam Smith's article from a few months ago, supposedly Skiles was vehemently against resigning Curry. He felt he had done his job by rehabilitating Curry's game and wanted him traded, clashing with management over it. Then the heart thing happened.


With Sam Smith's venture on to the internet, he has lost all credibility in my eyes. He looks to me to be just baiting, and trying to get himself back in the lime-light. Smith was one of the NBA and Chicago's preeminent journalists when MJ and Scottie were kings. I can't imagine that the last eight years have been kind for his career. Since that time he's seen the emergence of Mariotti on ESPN, to add insult to injury. 

Hence Smith going after Thomas, and directly listing names in his web-articles. I'm not saying there isn't truth in what he wrote about Thomas, but I do very much question the Curry rumor.

At the end of the day, Curry was just too damn good to let go; regardless of any personality clashes. Curry wanted to stay, and that would have been enough to keep here. When the stories of Curry's heart problems first broke, Paxson confirmed that Eddy Curry would be a Bull in following seasons. And with the way Paxson got emotional on his departure . . . I just find the reports that Pax had ulterior motives somewhat revisionist. 

Pax wanted to keep Curry. Paxson's stance on Curry was sincere, though you can obviously question the logic behind it. I have to assume Skiles wanted to keep Curry: he was his best player and a consistent threat at the beginning of games. Smith's self-serving comments three years after the fact don't persuade me otherwise.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

such sweet thunder said:


> With Sam Smith's venture on to the internet, he has lost all credibility in my eyes. He looks to me to be just baiting, and trying to get himself back in the lime-light. Smith was one of the NBA and Chicago's preeminent journalists when MJ and Scottie were kings. I can't imagine that the last eight years have been kind for his career. Since that time he's seen the emergence of Mariotti on ESPN, to add insult to injury.
> 
> Hence Smith going after Thomas, and directly listing names in his web-articles. I'm not saying there isn't truth in what he wrote about Thomas, but I do very much question the Curry rumor.
> 
> ...


Are you using a general "you" ? I have never questioned Paxson's motives over Curry. 

I don't think Curry was our best player. Skiles is a defensive-oriented coach and favors defensive players who get the most out of their talent (Duhon). Skiles once sarcastically told Eddy to jump to get rebounds. Eddy was not a good interior defender or rebounder. Given those facts, I don't think it's a stretch to say that Skiles wasn't a fan of Curry's game and thought he could win without him.

Though you're right, Smith's attack on Thomas and half-hearted makeup article a day later give me pause.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I've got lots of thoughts as I read this.

1. It's a pretty big sign of being spoiled by Chandler. He's already a walking indictment against Skiles why open his mouth?

2. It's pretty interesting that Pargo came out and said anything even remotely detailed the way he did. I think most guys in that situation would avoid it like a hot potato. That makes me think there's some legitimacy there. Couple it with the report earlier in the year about a couple of current Bulls players complaining about how Skiles let Wallace off the hook and slammed Chandler for stuff, and I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that Skiles' handling of Chandler was probably not very impressive.

3.


badfish said:


> That said, I wish we still had him given that we were not able to use PJ's contract to bolster our front line. However, I shudder to imagine the histrionics coming from Chandler were he to be relegated to role player status.


He was used as a role player for most of his time here under Skiles, and did it without public complaint. I agree he shouldn't be opening his yap, but still. I also have the sense that if Chandler were still on board, the Bulls would have been quite a bit less tolerant of Wallace's early season petulance and mid-season lackadaisicalness. And of course, heading into the playoffs, we're caught between the rock of keeping him well rested and the hard place of fighting for playoff position. Chandler would come in pretty handy in all of those cases.

4. Tyson did go out of his way to say good things about everyone else. I wonder if he planned to do the right thing but just couldn't bring himself to do it when it came to Skiles. He's certainly doing fine with the Hornets too. * So if Tyson is bitter, it's because he never wanted to leave, and he wanted to be a Chicago Bull.* Well, as a fan of the team I have a pretty hard time complaining about that.


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

Lets make a list:

Kidd
Tyson
Pargo


Does Curry belong? I didn't think there was much venom in what he said...


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

To MikeDC and ScottMay. I understand that Chandler didn't play tons of minutes and that he was a psuedo-role player. Perhaps role player was the wrong choice of words. However, I doubt Tyson ever saw himself as such, even when he was coming off the bench. The Ben Wallace signing would have made it abundantly clear.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

such sweet thunder said:


> I have to assume Skiles wanted to keep Curry: he was his best player and a consistent threat at the beginning of games. Smith's self-serving comments three years after the fact don't persuade me otherwise.


Ok, I agree, Pax is the one that wanted to keep Curry. Since he's the boss. Everybody just follows. And my post earlier didn't say anything about Skiles want Curry out of Chicago. Or even Chandler. I don't think Skiles was the one who ask Pax to trade Curry and Chandler. Maybe Skiles actually likes those two. But that is not my point. My point is Skiles DO NOT know how to coach these guys. That's what I'm worried. Skiles don't know how to coach the anti-"yes sir" type. He approaches everybody the same way, tough love. It might work with some players, but it certainly didn't work for Chandler (and maybe Curry). Skiles don't have any method other than "Tough love, put him in the doghouse". I don't think Skiles hate players. He didn't hate Chandler or Curry (I'm certain). My speculation would be Skiles believe that in order to get the best out of a player is by constantly challenging him. Again, this might work for some players, but it's definitely not universal. I agree to whoever said "Skiles has poor people skills". Players might be paid millions of dollars to play a game, but they're still people.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> Were Jason Kidd's comments about Skiles worth paying attention to? He's clearly valuable, and he was traded for an off-the-court issue, nothing he did on the court.
> 
> Just curious.


No, they aren't. I almost pre-emptively addressed this assuming someone would ask the question.

Jason Kidd is a coach killer. The only reason he likes Lawrence Frank is because Frank has no juice and its Kidd's team.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Tyson is immature and this certainly shows that. Still, I don't doubt that Skiles was callous towards him. I felt both that Tyson never did his duty in the offseason, especially in his contract year, but also that the Bulls never trusted him and let him develoop (read: Skiles's fault) sufficiently, either. 

On both ends of this thing there were screwups. What's to be sure is that it ended up biting the Bulls in the butt, giving Chandler a huge payday, and benefitting the Hornets. It sucks.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

MikeDC said:


> 2. It's pretty interesting that Pargo came out and said anything even remotely detailed the way he did. I think most guys in that situation would avoid it like a hot potato. That makes me think there's some legitimacy there. Couple it with the report earlier in the year about a couple of current Bulls players complaining about how Skiles let Wallace off the hook and slammed Chandler for stuff, and I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that Skiles' handling of Chandler was probably not very impressive.


This reminds me a lot of Billups' comment on how Darko was treated by Larry Brown.

From these two comments by Pargo and Billups. My take is that Skiles and Brown are two similar type of coach. That can be both good and bad. Larry Brown while a lot of people hate him, I stil have respect for his knowledge of the game. And I think Skiles is the same way, he seems to have a good knowledge of the game. But the thing I really don't like about these two guys are they're idealist. They're so stubborn sometime they drive people nuts. Brown is a bit better in this department because he's been around way longer than Skiles, so Brown probably figured out he needs to sacrifice a little of his idealism to be successfull. He was able to work with Allen Iverson. Skiles seem to be better than Brown in developing young talent. But that's only if that young player fits with him.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

MikeDC said:


> 2. It's pretty interesting that Pargo came out and said anything even remotely detailed the way he did. I think most guys in that situation would avoid it like a hot potato. That makes me think there's some legitimacy there. Couple it with the report earlier in the year about a couple of current Bulls players complaining about how Skiles let Wallace off the hook and slammed Chandler for stuff, and I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that Skiles' handling of Chandler was probably not very impressive.


Perhaps though what Pargo actually said wasn't particularly incriminating. 

I woudln't necessarily use the word "complained" about the players comments regarding Wallace v. Chandler. K.C.'s didn't report the tone of that conversation as critical or controversial. It might have been in a response to a question or even someone defending Skiles against the accusation that he hadn't given Wallace the special treatment that a superstar deserves.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

I give no validity to Jannero Pargo. I caught him fake-talking on his cell phone at White Palace Grill when he was with the Bulls. That showed no class in my book.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

johnston797 said:


> I'm still firmly siding with Chandler. It's pretty clear that Scott's approach is 1000x better for Chandler. The results are very clear. With that said, he went too far here. But Chandler's numerous comments on Bulls have all been fine with the exception of this one article.


Really? I thought what he said here was out of line but what really blew my mind was what he said before the last time the teams met:



> About the only member of the Bulls that Chandler did not catch up with Friday was coach Scott Skiles. Chandler, as he left town, said he had ''no relationship'' with Skiles when he was with Bulls. Skiles countered at the time that he had talked more to Chandler than any other player he had coached.
> 
> Chandler said he was surprised that Skiles shot back publically when he heard Chandler's comments.
> 
> ...


http://www.suntimes.com/sports/basketball/bulls/157616,CST-SPT-bullnt02.article

The comments about Skiles "lashing back" are just bizarre. Tyson somehow thinks that if someone asks him a question in an interview then he has complete immunity for his response and no one should take offense or respond. He then responds to Skiles compliments with sarcasm. I think he comes off quite badly.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

superdave said:


> I give no validity to Jannero Pargo. I caught him fake-talking on his cell phone at White Palace Grill when he was with the Bulls. That showed no class in my book.


Were you trying to take his order?


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I love Tyson Chandler and he was my favorite Bulls player for the entirety of his career... but NOTHING constructive can come from calling someone out in the press... there's just no point.

If Chandler is ready to step his game up to an All-Star level, which I think he is, then its time for him to step up in the off-court class department... not saying that he isn't right, but if you're really the man, and you really want to be the man.... you don't worry about past coaches and petty squabbles... you focus on the great year you are having and what you can do moving forward. I wish him luck on both counts.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Ron Cey said:


> No, they aren't. I almost pre-emptively addressed this assuming someone would ask the question.
> 
> Jason Kidd is a coach killer. The only reason he likes Lawrence Frank is because Frank has no juice and its Kidd's team.


:lol: :rotf: :laugh: :rofl:

You are completely incorrect about the Nets situation.

Kidd didn't kill Byron Scott, the entire Nets team revolted against him because he was incompetent and did nothing. As it was, Thorn Byron was brought back against the wishes of the players.

Frank has plenty of juice as Thorn loves him and the owner loves him. Frank has even spent his free time tutoring the owner about basketball.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

I guess I'm failing to see the humor.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

johnston797 said:


> OK -Chandler should have been more discrete. It will be interesting to see if Pax or Skiles blast back. They shouldn't. Two wrongs don't make a right.


Who cares if Skiles is a nice person or not. I don't. As a Bulls fan I only care about him developing team chemistry and winning games. 

Just look at Tony Dungy. He is the first coach in a long time to win a Superbowl who wasn't a yeller and a screamer.

Remember nice guys finish last. Do you think the best performers in the business world are the nicest guys? I don't see players like Hinrich, Gordon, Deng complaining that Skiles isn't a nice guy. Why would Hinrich re-up with us if Skiles wasn't nice?

Chandler is a baby. Can't wait up Tyrus roofs him tonight. Wallace is going to eat him alive.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> The comments about Skiles "lashing back" are just bizarre. Tyson somehow thinks that if someone asks him a question in an interview then he has complete immunity for his response and no one should take offense or respond. He then responds to Skiles compliments with sarcasm. I think he comes off quite badly.


I see two guys in this situation.

One of them is a guy who probably coasted through high school knowing he was going to the NBA on his height alone. Shocking he's not mature.

The other is... an NBA head coach.

Neither look that mature to me.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I'm with Chandler all the way on this. I have absolutely no trouble believing that Skiles is a ****. Look at what Skiles does to Ben Gordon, did to Chandler, etc. He's pompous and ridiculous half the time.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

DaBabyBullz said:


> I'm with Chandler all the way on this. I have absolutely no trouble believing that Skiles is a ****. Look at what Skiles does to Ben Gordon, did to Chandler, etc. He's pompous and ridiculous half the time.


Look at what he did to Luol Deng.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Were you trying to take his order?


Zing. EDIT - Easy on the bait, please. Send me your resume, I know this great comedy club in Pasadena that might give you some mic time.

Yaaah the fake talking story is completely true, I always thought Pargo was shmoe for that. But since he's bashing The Regime, it must be believed 100%.


----------



## bre9 (Jan 8, 2006)

Harsh words by Chandler


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

superdave said:


> I caught him fake-talking on his cell phone at White Palace Grill when he was with the Bulls.


:lol:


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> Were you trying to take his order?


:lol: 
:clap: 
:lol:


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

DaBullz said:


> Neither look that mature to me.



Just win baby. All three are doing that (well, EC is on his way).

So this story has a happy ending. Lets move on, shall we?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Soulful Sides said:


> Just win baby. All three are doing that (well, EC is on his way).
> 
> So this story has a happy ending. Lets move on, shall we?


Well, we're here to talk, right? If people are interested in Chandler's development, especially on a day when we're paying him, that seems kosher to me.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

superdave said:


> Zing. EDIT - Easy on the bait, please. Send me your resume, I know this great comedy club in Pasadena that might give you some mic time.
> 
> Yaaah the fake talking story is completely true, I always thought Pargo was shmoe for that. But since he's bashing The Regime, it must be believed 100%.


I was not questioning the veracity of your story, nor am I putting all that much stock in Pargo's "testimony." What I wrote with respect to your run-in with the worst set of teeth in the NBA was purely for laffs.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> I see two guys in this situation.
> 
> One of them is a guy who probably coasted through high school knowing he was going to the NBA on his height alone. Shocking he's not mature.
> 
> ...


I must have missed something. What did Skiles say that was immature/inflammatory?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

transplant said:


> I must have missed something. What did Skiles say that was immature/inflammatory?


How about "anything at all"  Saying nothing is the "high road" no?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

superdave said:


> Zing. EDIT - Easy on the bait, please. Send me your resume, I know this great comedy club in Pasadena that might give you some mic time.
> 
> Yaaah the fake talking story is completely true, I always thought Pargo was shmoe for that. But since he's bashing The Regime, it must be believed 100%.


It was funny, but unfortunately at your expense. Take it for what it's worth?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

lougehrig said:


> Who cares if Skiles is a nice person or not. I don't. As a Bulls fan I only care about him developing team chemistry and winning games.
> 
> Just look at Tony Dungy. He is the first coach in a long time to win a Superbowl who wasn't a yeller and a screamer.
> 
> ...


This issue isn't whether Skiles is a nice guy and kisses babies. It's whether he gets the most out of the resources that Paxson gives him. He failed miserably with Chandler. Maybe this was necessary to get the most out of other players. I highly doubt it. In fact, it's not clear to me that he is getting the most out of lots of guys on our roster. Which is a HUGE problem.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> How about "anything at all"  Saying nothing is the "high road" no?


Oh c'mon. You're more realistic than that. The last quote I heard from Skiles was in response to the inevitable question about how well Chandler's been doing with his new team. Did you want Skiles to say, "No comment."? As I recall, Skiles said that Chandler was always very productive when he could stay on the court (avoid foul trouble) and that, clearly, Chandler's has figured out what it takes to stay on the court.

Nothing particularly immature about that. Skiles earliest comments were defensive (something to the effect that he communicated more with Chandler than any other player). No reason not to believe Skiles on that, but either it wasn't enough or it wasn't effective communication.

I'm still looking for Skiles' immaturity. Again, I'm not saying it didn't happen. I just may have missed it.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

transplant said:


> Oh c'mon. You're more realistic than that. The last quote I heard from Skiles was in response to the inevitable question about how well Chandler's been doing with his new team. Did you want Skiles to say, "No comment."? As I recall, Skiles said that Chandler was always very productive when he could stay on the court (avoid foul trouble) and that, clearly, Chandler's has figured out what it takes to stay on the court.
> 
> Nothing particularly immature about that. Skiles earliest comments were defensive (something to the effect that he communicated more with Chandler than any other player). No reason not to believe Skiles on that, but either it wasn't enough or it wasn't effective communication.
> 
> I'm still looking for Skiles' immaturity. Again, I'm not saying it didn't happen. I just may have missed it.


"I'm happy to see him doing so well. I look forward to our teams facing each other on the court tonight."

vs.

'Right before we made the move, I read something Tyson said about apprehension of whether he was going to be traded,'' Skiles said. ''I sent him a long e-mail [telling him] to hang in there and whatever happens, happens, and it will all work out whatever way it goes. Because at the time, I didn't know for sure if we were going to [trade him]. And I never heard back from him"

vs.

Talking about his production _this_ season, as if he's belittling what he did last year.

The first is the high road. the 2nd is defensive. the third is immature ("stooping to chandler's level").


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> "I'm happy to see him doing so well. I look forward to our teams facing each other on the court tonight."
> 
> vs.
> 
> ...


Uh, but Chandler DIDN'T play well last year...and Skiles showed the good sense/maturity not to say so. Sorry, but IMHO you are reaching...big time.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

At this point, unless the Bulls hit a home run via trade (without trading Deng I guess) or lotto or TT, none of this **** really matters anymore. We're not going to win the NBA title with this group. At least not anytime soon.

Chandler vs Skiles?

Who cares. 

We all know Skiles can be a ***** and we know that Chandler is sensitive. If Paxson was interested in developing Chandler, Skiles was probably the wrong guy for the job. The "right way" drill sergeant **** was more important. Paxson made his ideological choice. And we're at where we're at.

Chandler is the #2 rebounder in the NBA and one of the best centers in the league. Same with Curry (one of the best centers in the league). And the Bulls are starved for a big man and will likely be even more so in the future.

But we have Scott Skiles dammit. Ya-hoo.

His head kind of looks like the top of the O'Brien trophy. I guess that's something.


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> Paxson made his ideological choice.


Why do you call it ideological? It is a very ugly word...it reminds me of dictators who hew to one mindset no matter who or what it or they hurt to get it...



Do you think that the "right way" was the only and overriding concern of Paxson when he hired Skiles? 

Does Skiles have any other redeeming merit as a coach?

Do you believe our team is functioning in spite of Skiles, instead of because of him or his contributions?


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> At this point, unless the Bulls hit a home run via trade (without trading Deng I guess) or lotto or TT, none of this **** really matters anymore. *We're not going to win the NBA title with this group.*
> 
> Chandler vs Skiles?
> 
> ...


Most likely not, but it _is_ possible. I believe we can do it, but that our chances are not high enough for me to bet on it (if I were a gamblin' man).

Outside of that, I haven't got nearly that much negativity about our Bulls, but everyone's entitled to their own opinion (of course).


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> :lol: :rotf: :laugh: :rofl:
> 
> You are completely incorrect about the Nets situation.
> 
> ...



maybe its just me , but a coach is paid to have a successful team , the nets went to the finals twice in scot's last 2 seasons and under frank they have been far less sucessful...Scott is showing he is a pretty decent coach with N.O. and he had sucess with the nets ....moreso than the guy who replaced him despite having in all probability a better roster.

scott seems pretty competent to me.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnO9Jyz82Ps


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

I cant say I really care if skiles is a good person , thats not what he's paid to be , it would be nice but it really doesn't matter .

he is paid to make the most of his basketball team....for this season he is not up to expectations , with wallace , the internal improvement this team was supposed to be a 50+ win team...they are underperforming , that is on him.

i have expressed much frustration with his inability to develop curry and chandler...especially tyson.

to me this article didn't change my opinion at all of how he was handled.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

transplant said:


> Uh, but Chandler DIDN'T play well last year...and Skiles showed the good sense/maturity not to say so. Sorry, but IMHO you are reaching...big time.


Quoting from article in this thread:



> About the only member of the Bulls that Chandler did not catch up with Friday was coach Scott Skiles. Chandler, as he left town, said he had ''no relationship'' with Skiles when he was with Bulls. *Skiles countered at the time that he had talked more to Chandler than any other player he had coached.*


Sounds defensive to me. Or sarcastic



> * Chandler said he was surprised that Skiles shot back publically* when he heard Chandler's comments.


Why shoot back at all if the truth is on your side? Everyone can see it.



> ''Yeah, because I'm not the type of person to take any shots at anybody,'' Chandler said. ''I was just telling the truth in interviews. People were asking me, 'Did we have a close relationship?' and, 'Did we communicate?' And we didn't, that's the honest truth.


Chandler should keep his trap shut, too. My $.02



> ''Did I dislike the person? I try not to dislike anyone. To me, it was kind of twisted. Because I felt like in every interview, I said, 'I loved the organization. They treated me well all the time I was there.' The only thing I did say is that we had communication issues and that's the truth. *So I didn't feel like [Skiles] needed to lash back'*


It is in the way Chandler perceives it. Did Skiles lash back? Seems so. To me, certainly.



> Told Skiles was complimentary about his production this season, Chandler sounded sarcastic: ''Isn't that nice. Tell him I appreciate it.''


Chandler took it as an insult. As sarcasm, Responded with sarcasm.

In any case, it's a man child and the head coach of a professional team in a pissing match. They both come across as looking pretty small to me.

Rosie and Donald Trump all over again. Which one's Rosie?


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

One thing is for sure: Chandler goes to NO and provides them with everything he couldn't provide in Chicago. That mainly reflects on the coach. 

Scott Skiles is a terrible coach. Demands to much out of young guys, benches them for not meeting up to HIS standards. He has to learn to accept a players abilities for what they are. He can't go changing everyone. He needs to adapt to his players moreso then his players need to him.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> "I'm happy to see him doing so well. I look forward to our teams facing each other on the court tonight."
> 
> vs.
> 
> ...


I think that's hard to say out of context ie without knowing what question Skiles was responding to. If it was "What was your relationship like with Tyson towards the end of his time here?" your suggested response would be quite evasive.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> Why shoot back at all if the truth is on your side? Everyone can see it.


Well if we're going to judge whether or not Skiles shot back at Tyson in the media we should probably go by actual quotes, not Ty's characterization of what Skiles did. Personally I wouldn't characterize "I talked to Tyson more than any other player in my coaching career" as "lashing out."



DaBullz said:


> Chandler took it as an insult. As sarcasm, Responded with sarcasm.


I don't really think there's any indication of that whatsoever. Why would Tyson interpret K.C., Hanley, or some other beat writer informing him that Skiles had praised his play as sarcasm? The only reason I can think of is if the beat writer described Skiles' comments that way in which case that fact would almost certainly be included in the article, no?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I think that's hard to say out of context ie without knowing what question Skiles was responding to. If it was "What was your relationship like with Tyson towards the end of his time here?" your suggested response would be quite evasive.


You know what? It really doesn't matter. Skiles can talk trash all he wants, and he does that plenty. Not just in the press, but I've seen opposing players say Skiles says stuff to them while they're in the game.

Jordan talked trash, too. Rodman was quite famous for getting under the skin of opposing players. Nocioni's good at it these days, and after last game, Arenas complained about some dirty play by our guys. Going back 2 years ago, there was a big dustup in the press between Jamison and Nocioni.

Pax has been fined. PJax was fined, too. It's not just true for players.

People say stuff that's taken out of context all the time.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I don't really think there's any indication of that whatsoever. Why would Tyson interpret K.C., Hanley, or some other beat writer informing him that Skiles had praised his play as sarcasm? The only reason I can think of is if the beat writer described Skiles' comments that way in which case that fact would almost certainly be included in the article, no?


I have a friend that deals in memorabilia. Sports and music and movies and that kind of stuff. So he gets invited to a party at George Harrison's (former Beatle, RIP) house. Someone came up to Harrison and said "I loved your work with the Beatles." Harrison got quite upset and rudely walked away from the guy. Why? he hadn't been a Beatle in 25 years, and he had a body of work outside the Beatles that was pretty good in its own right.

So Skiles "complimented" Chandler's play THIS YEAR. That's a back-handed compliment.

But like I said, it's gamesmanship and it's up to Chandler to step up and help his team win in spite of it.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I miss TC and wish he was still with the bulls but come on does anyone remember how he signed a 60 million dollar contract and then played awful all year. The silly fouls. The numerous TO because he constantly brings the ball down before going up to shot and would get the ball stripped. The missed FTs. He cant breath. And on and on and on. 

The reason TC is not in chicago is because TC played bad and didnt to anything in the off season and after telling Paxson and skiles after he got his new contract how committed he would be he did the same nothing in the off season and played like s****tt again last year.

Instead of going after Skiles he should apoligize to the bulls and the bulls fans for the low quility of play.

david


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*-Skiles countered at the time that he had talked more to Chandler than any other player he had coached*

Well duh... yelling "Catch the ball you stupid mother****er!" every 5 minutes or so is bound to add up to a lot of talking over the course of 3 years.


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

King Joseus said:


> I haven't got nearly that much negativity about our Bulls


Me either. In fact, I'd bet that its pretty rare.

Man it was good to see Tyson tonight. And he almost got an electric dunk in there at the end.


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

Jizzy said:


> One thing is for sure: Chandler goes to NO and provides them with everything he couldn't provide in Chicago. That mainly reflects on the coach.
> 
> Scott Skiles is a terrible coach. Demands to much out of young guys, benches them for not meeting up to HIS standards. He has to learn to accept a players abilities for what they are. He can't go changing everyone. He needs to adapt to his players moreso then his players need to him.


It isn't that black and white. For example...positives for Skiles are Luol and Gordon and the teams record despite all it's supposed deficiencies.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Da Grinch said:


> maybe its just me , but a coach is paid to have a successful team , the nets went to the finals twice in scot's last 2 seasons and under frank they have been far less sucessful...Scott is showing he is a pretty decent coach with N.O. and he had sucess with the nets ....moreso than the guy who replaced him despite having in all probability a better roster.
> 
> scott seems pretty competent to me.


That's a pretty shallow look at things. Lets examine deeper.

Scott only looks decent in NO because Paul is that good. Remember, the Hornets won 18 games Scott's first season with them and veterans wanted off the team.

The vast majority of Scott's success with the Nets was due to Eddie Jordan and the other assistant. Scott never broke down film, nor did he stay after hours to game plan and prepare. 

Scott has only gone as far as Kidd and Paul have carried him.

As for the Nets under Frank, the season he took over the Nets took the Pistons to 7 games, which the Pacers and Lakers did not, with Kidd playing on a knee that needed microfracture surgery. The season after that the roster got turned inside out for the much worse until the Vince trade. Kidd missed the first month and half recovering from surgery and then RJ went down for the rest of the regular season shortly after the Vince trade. Getting that team into the playoffs was a huge accomplishment. Last season the Nets made the second round of the playoffs.

As for your comment about the roster, the Nets roster last season or this season is not better than the Nets teams that went to the finals. Hell Scott was so bad he couldn't figure out how to use Mutombo leading the Nets to commit a huge mistake and buy him out of his contract.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

Chandler took back the the comment about Skiles being a bad person today. He said his words were twisted and did not come out right. 

Tyson also mentioned that the day he got traded, Skiles gave him a call (not an e-mail I guess) that he should keep his head up and that better things are in store for him. KC asked if he is dissapointed that he hasn't spoken with Skiles after he left the Bulls. He said no.


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

spongyfungy said:


> Chandler took back the the comment about Skiles being a bad person today.


Living (playing) well is the sweetest revenge, and thats how Ty will have his. The kid is starting to grow up.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...sgamer,1,1640991.story?coll=chi-sportstop-hed



TRIB said:


> And Chandler's return, which brought smiles and hugs from former teammates and building personnel before the game and boos from the sellout crowd during it, only heightened those feelings—no matter what he said publicly.
> 
> "I have nothing against Scott Skiles," Chandler said. "Sometimes my words get twisted up. When I left there, I tried to take the high road and say how much of a good coach I thought he was. It's unfortunate [we] didn't get along."
> 
> ...


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Gotta give Tyson credit.

He looks and plays like a man on the court. Now he's sounding like one off the court as well.

Let's hope Paxson and Skiles do not make the same tragic errors they made with the Twin Towers with Tyrus. The fact that Tyrus is "Pax's guy" and that there isn't any big $$$ decision that needs to be made for several years might prevent this from happening again. I hope so. Too bad Tyrus can't play center, as good as it looks like he'll turn out with proper development.


----------



## Soulful Sides (Oct 10, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> Gotta give Tyson credit.
> 
> He looks and plays like a man on the court. Now he's sounding like one off the court as well.
> 
> Let's hope Paxson and Skiles do not make the same tragic errors they made with the Twin Towers with Tyrus. The fact that Tyrus is "Pax's guy" and that there isn't any big $$$ decision that needs to be made for several years might prevent this from happening again. I hope so. Too bad Tyrus can't play center, as good as it looks like he'll turn out with proper development.


Do you find it impossible to believe we can prosper without Tyson Chandler?

Most do not.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

spongyfungy said:


> Chandler took back the the comment about Skiles being a bad person today. *He said his words were twisted and did not come out right.*


What a unique retraction. :biggrin:


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> Gotta give Tyson credit.
> 
> He looks and plays like a man on the court. Now he's sounding like one off the court as well.
> 
> Let's hope Paxson and Skiles do not make the same tragic errors they made with the Twin Towers with Tyrus. The fact that Tyrus is "Pax's guy" and that there isn't any big $$$ decision that needs to be made for several years might prevent this from happening again. I hope so. Too bad Tyrus can't play center, as good as it looks like he'll turn out with proper development.


Trading Chandler was an enormous mistake. You'll get no argument from me. 

You have season tickets, right? Did you go to last night's game?

If so, were the people around you booing (I know you weren't booing him)? And if so, did you hear anyone say *why* they were booing?

That made no sense to me, and I thought it was pretty classless. 

You boo players on your own team who suck. Or you boo players that demand to be traded (Gasol) or leave via free agency (Wallace). I saw no reason for Tyson to get boos and still can't think of a good reason. 

Because he said he didn't get along with Skiles? Who gives a ****? That isn't worth booing a player over. 

I was disappointed with that. Chandler is a nice guy. He didn't deserve that.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Ron Cey said:


> Trading Chandler was an enormous mistake. You'll get no argument from me.
> 
> You have season tickets, right? Did you go to last night's game?
> 
> ...


I was at the game last night, and most people around me were booing. A few (including me) appauded, but they were definitely drowned out. I didn't ask why. Usually when an ex-player comes to town the papers write feel-good pieces and the player talks about how much he misses his teamates, the fans & Chicago. This time was different. Chandler had a rotten year last year by all accounts and decided to blame it on Skiles in the papers yesterday. This apparently did not endear him with the fans. There's really no other explanation.

BTW nobody booed Janero Pargo. In fact there were a few cheers.


----------



## bullybullz (Jan 28, 2007)

Ron Cey said:


> Trading Chandler was an enormous mistake. You'll get no argument from me.
> 
> You have season tickets, right? Did you go to last night's game?
> 
> ...


Whatever. When you don't work out during the summer, you deserve every boo you can get.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

bullybullz said:


> Whatever. When you don't work out during the summer, you deserve every boo you can get.


Then boo Chandler that season when he's a Bull and its adversely impacting the team. 

I was very disappointed in the fan reaction to Chandler last night. I don't recall Eddy Curry getting booed like that. I consider the Bulls fan base to be pretty classy. Unlike, for example, the Pistons fan base. Last night we didn't appear classy to me.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

I think McBulls summed up pretty well why people booed TC.


----------



## laso (Jul 24, 2002)

Trading Chandler for nothing was a big mistake. Pax jumped the gun too quickly after a tough season and we got nothing in return. If anything, even if we didn't want to keep him, had we had him, he could've been a good commodity in a trade. Not sure if the Grizz would've gone for Tyson and Noc for Gasol since they were interested in cap space, but he definitely would've been a greater asset than PJ.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

lgtwins said:


> I think McBulls summed up pretty well why people booed TC.


Yep, I suspect that's the reason. I guess my point is that it isn't a good reason.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> Trading Chandler was an enormous mistake. You'll get no argument from me.
> 
> You have season tickets, right? Did you go to last night's game?
> 
> ...


Yah, I was at the game.

People don't like Chandler. 

Its the expectations game as far as I'm concerned. Krause traded Brand for Chandler. He drafts Curry and Chandler and the Bulls slap them right on the front of the pocket schedules. Initial disappointment. When are these guys going to perform? Why can't the millionaire, undeveloped high school players win for us? Jeez, Krause is stupid. These millionaire, lazy, NBA players should be better, if they just worked harder. 

Krause gets fired. Johnny Pax comes in and hardlines the team. Hinrich, Skiles, hard work, grit and loose ball divin' become the focus. Initial success the season after Paxson blows up the team, even though Curry and Chandler are 2 of the essential reasons the Bulls won that year.

I heard a lot of "Why didn't you do that when you were here!!!!" last night. People forget he was one of the 3 main reasons, IMO, the Bulls won during their #3 in the East season. Expectations are raised going into last year, coming off the 47 year season. Chandler starts slow and clashed with Skiles. Bad season. Another disappointment. 


Chandler and Curry are associated with Krause, and Krause was booed when the Bulls were winning titles! Even more so when the Bulls were struggling. 

I'll write more later... gotta go...


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

so tyson takes back "he's a bad person" (which according to the sun-times was the DIRECT QUOTE) and he really meant to say "good"? oh, okayyy! thanks for clearing that up tyson!

so maybe he will learn something about _not saying anything_ if you can't say anything nice. i know, i'm a bit old fashioned that way. 

i thought when tyson missed that dunk at the end of the game right in front of the bulls bench that a little bit of karma bit him in the ***. i was laughing pretty hard at that.


:bananallama:


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Fair analysis, K4E. But I don't recall Curry ever getting that treatment.


----------



## L.O.B (Jun 13, 2002)

I gotta laugh at Skiles getting ripped by Tyson compared to what Ozzie Guillen does to ex- Sox that take shots at the old orginization. Could you imagine the response Ozzie would have to Chandler's comments? BTW Guillen is one crazy and classless mo fo.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Yeah, I'd guess that Chandler gets more boos than Curry because Chandler played like crap the year before he got traded, whereas Curry was pretty good. 

I haven't read this whole thread, but I think I have to put blame on both Tyson and Skiles for TC not working out on the Bulls. As I'm watching Chandler play this year, I see that he's just catching the ball at a much higher rate. So many balls were bouncing off of his hands last year. Tyson is just clearly a more comfortable basketball player this year. Skiles is pretty clearly not the kind of coach that values the technique of making his players comfortable for the sake of their performance. If he was, we might have seen Chandler playing great ball in a red uniform this year.

However, the blame also has to come down the man himself for laying a big egg last year. He looked awful for most of the year.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

One reason to boo would be when Tyson decided to not workout at all until he got a big deal and then at the end of the season he said he'd workout harder than he ever has before.


----------

