# Bulls vs Raptors - 10/21 (TV: Fox Sports Chicago) Official thread for the game



## C-UNIT & DA_P.I.P (Oct 12, 2003)

*Official- (3,3)BULLS AT (4,1)Raptors Tuesday, Oct. 21*

TV FSCHI. 

This will not even be close because there are alot of Bulls players with something to prove and improve. Should be a good game because Toronto is trying to win every game with VC playing big minutes evry nite.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

Is Jalen gonna play in this game?

:whoknows:


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bulls4Life</b>!
> Is Jalen gonna play in this game?
> 
> :whoknows:


I dont think so, his thumb is still recovering.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Toronto is 4-1. Washington, Detroit, Minny and Dener are their 4 wins. 

They are shooting 41% as a team and give up 41%. They are being out rebounded by 1.5 boards a game. They get over 10 steals a game, so we need to take care of the ball. They get just under 5 blks a game. 18.2 t/o a game while their opp, average over 22. 83.2 pts a game *opp. 78.2*

Carter 17.4 pts a game shooting 40%
Murray 13.6 shooting 34%
*Bosh 12.2 pts a game in less than 30 minutes and 7.80 boards* Is he the real deal?


Bulls 3-3

Bulls shoot 44% opp. 39% 41 boards a game(more than Toronto) give up 44.3. 9.5 steals but opp get 9.3. 7.5 blks a game. We average 31 fouls a game. 6 more than the raptors do. 94 pts a game to 93.3 from opp. 

Crawford 18.5 6.8 assists, 36%
Curry 16.6 pts a game. 5.2 rebounds in 25 minutes of play 52%
Chandler 11.3 6.7 boards, 4.67 blks. 53%
Baxter 10 *63%* 6.8 rebounds. 


This is a road game. Big test IMO. Toronto is not scoring so far but they are not giving up many points either. they give up 16 pts less a game than the bulls score.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

Jamal 16 assists.
Eddy 30 points

Bulls 105
Toronto 92



BTW, ERob says he's ready to play in tonight's game!


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> Curry 16.6 pts a game. 5.2 rebounds in 25 minutes of play 52%


That's about 25 pts/9 reb a game if he plays 40min/game!!


Eddy's gonna have a GREAT year!

:clap:


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bulls4Life</b>!
> Jamal 16 assists.
> Eddy 30 points
> 
> ...



uhh i doubt you'll score that much points on us with our defence.. good luck on that.


----------



## Maestro (May 28, 2002)

Does anyone know exactly who will be in uniform and playing tonight?


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Maestro</b>!
> Does anyone know exactly who will be in uniform and playing tonight?


I guess we will know in 20 minutes or so.


----------



## Maestro (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> I guess we will know in 20 minutes or so.


muchas gracias truebluefan:yes:


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

anyone watching the game? No audio on the internet and it looks like the score boards are not ready to cooperate. :upset:


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

I'm watching. Bulls up 11-10 with 8:31 left in the first. Nice shooting so far. Scottie made an incredible oop-pass to Currry from just inside halfcourt, but Eddy coulnd't finish.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Eddy has 2 fouls in first 5 mins. One was offensive, and in all fairness, a flop by the defender. Eddy already on the bench. Fizer and Yell taking over big-man duties. Gill Pip and Craw (who all started) on the floor as well.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

7:18 left in first quarter, Raptors 14, Bulls 11. 

Curry 6 pts and two fouls. Raptors shooting 86%.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Pippen has three assists already. 

Gill five points.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Pippen five assists. Man that sounds good.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

did Baxter get hurt? Never mind. I see the two fouls.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Curry, Fizer and Baxter have played a total of eight minutes between all three of them.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

33-28 raptors. Bulls shoot, 53%, Raptors, 81% 

bulls 8 rebounds 6 are offensive. 8 t/o! too many. 

Gill 9
Curry 6

Raptors, 

Carter 13, 2 rebounds 4 assists 1 steal. 
Davis 8. 

Raptors will cool down. Down by 5 on the road to a team shooting 81% is not all that bad. Could be worse.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Robinson in the game and 45 seconds later he gets a foul.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

you guys are lucky these are televised. No MJ means not Wizards preseason games


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

TOR - M. Peterson steals the ball from R. Mason Jr
CHI - R. Mason Jr steals the ball from M. Peterson
TOR - C. Bosh steals the ball from L. Johnson
CHI - L. Johnson steals the ball from R. Brunson

all within 11 seconds time.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Bulls up 41-40. Hard game to keep track of. Awful second quarter for both teams. Bosh has 5 off. Rebounds this quarter! But he is 0-6 with those rebounds.


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

this is one of the worst officiated games of all time. they called a foul on baxter where he didnt even touch anybody. alot of soft calls.

And im wondering if they over inflated that ball because its bouncing all over the place tonight.

I really can sense that gill and pippen are gonna be good for us on the defensive end all year. THey are giving bosh a tough time when he tries to hold onto the ball


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Halftime - tied at 50.

Am I right in thinking that JC just had 2 points the whole half? Maybe those Cartwright comments and the benching had an effect.


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

crawford didnt get the ball much in the first half. took 3 shots made 1. The two that he missed were to beat the clock though, he has 3 assists and when he has gotten the ball he has looked to pass first.

Pippen had a great first half. i think he had 9 points, 5 assists in the first quarter alone and shot the ball well. stripped several balls on defense.

curry started out pretty good but the refs called some ticky tak calls on him and pretty much every other low post player on the bulls. He showed good form on his 2 free throws that both went down for a swish. if he can get to the line and make his free throws this year then he will be nearly unstoppable.


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> Halftime - tied at 50.
> 
> Am I right in thinking that JC just had 2 points the whole half? Maybe those Cartwright comments and the benching had an effect.


I think it did. Crawford is a little hesitant. He needs to find his spots, but he has to open it up a little.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Halftime, 50-50 tie

Bulls, 53% shooting. 4-7 in threes. 18 rebounds. 14 t/o. 5 steals, five blocks. 

Gill 13, Pippen 9. 
Crawford 1-3. 2 pts 3 assists. Pippen 5 assists. 

Raptors cooled down to 53%. 20 rebounds, 10 offensive. 13 t/o

Carter 15, Davis 10


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

woah, i didnt realize gill had 13. hes looked good out there. i think i wont mind if he gets quite a bit of minutes this year. the guy is in excellent condition and can still play.


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

*First half thoughts*

-look what Cartwrong has reduced Jamal to (totally psyched out), not utilizing his strengths - he can still be a point guard and score points Bill and Pax (it's just u don't want to pay him for 19 and 7, you would prefer 12 and 7)
-we have too many players who want to shoot and need playing time
-Marcus is playing and shooting way too much for someone who is 80% and recovering from a major injury
-someone tell Donyell he is not a 2 guard
-Pip is more effective off the ball as a defender than on (strips the ball from other people- not his own man)
-Bosh might become a beast
-the Raptors could not miss a shot in the first quarter, especially VC - he was ridiculous
-imagine this team with Jalen and Tyson- once again, not enough minutes for all these guys- but still we are only tied at half with a bad Toronto team
-why can't we stop Milt Palacio and the jump-shooting Jerome Williams
-Gill was a solid pick-up


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Of course I can't tell anything, but looking at the box and play by play, I'd think:

* Pip looks to be in good shape- 9 points and 5 assists to start things off.

* Whoever we've got out there is putting a hurting on Chris Bosh, who's otherwise looked solid so far

* Curry's not being as productive as they need him to be. 6 poings, 0 boards, 3 fouls, 3 TOs in 7 minutes?? 

* I'm starting to like the idea of a more veteran big man. Much like the last couple of years, our young guys all got into serious foul trouble in short order. Baxter, Fizer, Curry, and Chandler could all be problematic in this regard. 

* No Trent tonight? Have they already made their decision?

* ERob is in the house.

* How's Vince and AD look? If those guys are healthy, I don't see why that team couldn't make the playoffs.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

When will the refs give Curry a break? They called 2 horrendous offensive fouls on him :upset:. This is happening a little too often now - curry picking up early OFFENSIVE fouls.

Our veterans(Pip, Marshall and Gill) kept us in the game. Especially Gill and Scottie, great first half for em'.

VC pretty much did whatever he wanted to against our perimeter defenders.

Thanks to Pip, Our offensive execution was pretty good(ignore the to's) with little Offensive options on the court. Crawford was pass first every min. on the court. The bulls r clearly mis-using his talent though. The man can score and still play within the offense......our staff is too dumb to realize that.

Overall, a pretty solid first half. Now lookin' fwd to see Curry play well in the 2nd.


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

*Re: First half thoughts*



> Originally posted by <b>Bulls42</b>!
> -look what Cartwrong has reduced Jamal to (totally psyched out), not utilizing his strengths - he can still be a point guard and score points Bill and Pax (it's just u don't want to pay him for 19 and 7, you would prefer 12 and 7)
> -we have too many players who want to shoot and need playing time
> -Marcus is playing and shooting way too much for someone who is 80% and recovering from a major injury
> ...


Toronto isn't that bad though. Vince is back, he makes a huge difference.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Would people trade Tyson Chandler for Chris Bosh?


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Of course I can't tell anything, but looking at the box and play by play, I'd think:
> 
> * Pip looks to be in good shape- 9 points and 5 assists to start things off.
> ...


I was going to ask the same thing about hassell. You think he is traded? Or going to be cut loose? Mason Jr. has out played him, that is for sure.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Would people trade Tyson Chandler for Chris Bosh?


No


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

I bet Pippen doesn't play in the second half. 

E-rob has two blocks.


----------



## 7thwatch (Jul 18, 2002)

Curry gets a rebound


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Would people trade Tyson Chandler for Chris Bosh?


Honestly, Bosh has impressed me. He looks damn good. However, I think I would keep Chandler just because his game goes well with Curry. Bosh looks to have a pretty advanced game. He may end up being better than Chandler, but not more valuble with Curry.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Bulls up 56-54. Gills has 14. the 13 they had down for the first half must have been wrong. It was suppose to be 12.


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

curry 6 for 6 from the line, all of em swishes


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

-Curry didn't leave the ground for the rebound, BUT he has learned how to shoot free throws over the offseason
-Pippen playing big minutes (starts the second half)
-Hassell is gone- he serves no role
-WE NEED To WORk ON SWITCHINg ON D


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

16 t/o! :no:


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

we got that pressure deffense man.. we a turnover machine.


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 16 t/o! :no:


weve gone through stretches tonight where we werent in any rhythm at all and its been sloppy


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

I agree, I think Hassell is gone. Linton brings alot to the game. I think a team can survive a player with no defense, but having no offense makes it 4 on 5


----------



## 7thwatch (Jul 18, 2002)

Pippen and Gill are doing exactly what we need them to do. If they keep playing this well we will have a really good team once we get to full strength. Gill has been a nice suprise for me . . . I knew he was good on D but I didn't know he could shoot too.

Curry appears to be getting rolling now. He's shooting ft's really well. His fouls . . . 2 are offensive . . . from what I heard the calls were offensive not the play . . . hopefully the refs will start giving him some respect down there. If he can establish a physical style of play now it will help in for the rest of his career (see Shaq. He dismembers people and they don't call fouls).

Crawford is conforming . . . I could stand to see him shoot more than this, but we'll see what he ends up with at the end of the game.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

E-Rob in for Pippen. 

Bosh is back in


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Pip even at his old age is fun to watch on D. God I miss that guy in a Bulls uni!!


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Carter having a very nice game so far. 21 pts, 8 assists, 4 rebounds 3 blks and 1 steal. 

He has done everything but sell popcorn during the timeouts.


----------



## Maestro (May 28, 2002)

Mr. Diesel, ahem superdave, your avatar is fantastic:laugh:


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Gill with a nice steal, takes it to a fast break and behind the back pass to Crawford for a huge dunk. Sweet!

Another ticky-tack offensive foul for Curry just posting up.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Maestro</b>!
> Mr. Diesel, ahem superdave, your avatar is fantastic:laugh:


http://espn.go.com/page2/s/looking/index.html

I was laughing for an hour at work today!!


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

I like how Jamal has looked on D tonight. Funny how a couple good wing defenders in Pip/Gill can really shore up the defense.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

end of three, 72-70 Bulls. Remember, the Raptors were giving up only 78 pts a game in their 5 preseason games. Bulls have 72 right now. 

Gill 18, Curry 12, Crawford, Pippen 9.
pipp and Jamal have 6 assists EACH. 

Bulls 51%, Toronto, 53%


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> I like how Jamal has looked on D tonight. Funny how a couple good wing defenders in Pip/Gill can really shore up the defense.


I agree, Their offense looks great, their defense is going to make this team though. Pipen and Gill will be a big part of that


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

E-rob for TWWWOOOOOOOO. LOL


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

God, the 4th offensive foul on Eddy! This is ridiculous. Talk about no respect. He's not even posting up 1/2 as hard as Shaq does all the time. Every time the defender flops, they call a foul.


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

all tied up at 80.


----------



## darlets (Jul 31, 2002)

While it's annoying to hear about curry's offensive fouls, I'd be a lot more concerned if he had all of them on the defensive end.

The ref's will start showing him more and more respect the longer his in the league. 

And the refs will let them play alot more in the regular season.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

D not looking good here, I just turned it on for the first time, saw them get burned about 3 times.
:no:


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Eddy just turned on A.Davis and dunked. Sweet.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Wow. Curry faces up, beats his man off the dribble, and throws it down two-handed. It was a great move. I'm must more used to seeing Eddy work with his back to the basket.

90-89 Bulls w/ 1:50 left.


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

bosh gets the dunk 91-90 raps with 31 seconds left.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

They foul Eddy with 8 seconds left, after a nice defensive stop yielding a turnover (steal by Fizer). Eddy hits both. 10/10 for the game from the line. Bulls up 94-91.


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

That was a really great game to watch!!  The bulls are a whole different team!!! They are going to suprise many people! Eddy Curry, Fizer and Gill were incredible! I was mostly impressed by Curry! He has really improved his game! Pippen was a great leader and played well!  We will definitely make the playoff's this year, and perhaps even go farther!!! GO BULLS BABY!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Jamal-- 9 pts, 9 dimes, 1 big hug from BC after the game.

Eddy-- the only thing stopping him was the offensive fouls (*cough *cough) not unlike a young Shaq... has he been practicing free throws too?!

Kendall-- still has lots of gas in the tank!!


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

two road wins! 4-3. 

Fizer and Curry came up big at the end of the game. 

We had just two t/o in the 4th quarter! We were out rebounded, but we had 14 steals!!! Gill 4 Fizer 3. 

Bulls shot 79% from foul line! That is more like it!!


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

Great game!

Curry was getting used by the refs but towards the end made smart plays in the post to avoid the O foul and still score.

JC passed up some open shots, maybe BC played a little bit with his head. He had a good game but should shoot when he's open

Pippen and Gill were great pickups and we really help perimeter D.

I loved watching Pippen back in red and black

Mason Jr. should be the backup PG until Hinrich actually shows something and is healthy

Hassell is cut, oh the memories 

and Fizer is back


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

A sweet victory, my fellow Bullsters. Eddy 10-10 from the line is unbelievable! Way to go, Eddy! The other Eddie also coming up big in his first action. That was a great stuff on Bosh! Jamal clearly played differently tonight and we got a win. Superdave, that was a HUGE hug from BC; great to see the love! Any word on why Trent didn't play? Could it be that Lint has secured his spot!? Please say it's so! Great defensive intensity tonight from Gill, as usuall, but also from the rest of the guys, which was fun to watch. Props to The Fize for a big-time shot! Bulls a chance to go 5-3 in a preseason full of injuries to key players. That would be fantastic! Watch out!


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> look what Cartwrong has reduced Jamal to (totally psyched out), not utilizing his strengths - he can still be a point guard and score points Bill and Pax (it's just u don't want to pay him for 19 and 7, you would prefer 12 and 7)




Interesting to say the least


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

This is a positive sign seeing the way we played tonight. We have 2 of our main starters out of the game, hinrich didnt play but I feel like the whole team is showing they can compete. Our team Defense has improved tremendously, if we can keep it up all year this will be a very good season.

This is the best play I have seen out of ERob. The announcer made a comment that Erob was a pure shooter and I got confused because last year i would grind my teethe when he shot the ball but he shot the ball very well tonight.

Crawford did a good job at running the offense although I think that the comments cartwright has made kind of got Crawford out of his game and made him passive. Id rather see him try to go to the hole and pass off the dribble if he cant get a good shot instead of passing it before looking at the options he has. Jamal will figure out a good balance though.

I really dont know how fizer and marshall will both play on this team. fizer had good game which lead to marshall not doing much and i have a feeling that when marshall has a good game that means fizer wont do much. I was impressed with how fizer and curry played together, and i was pleasantly surprised to see fizer and marshall in the game at the same time. one em them has to get traded though because its overkill right now.

It looks like baby shaq is developing something shaq daddy never developed and thats a free throw stroke. I always thought Eddy and Tyson both had the potential to be good free throw shooters, eddy always had good form on the shot he just has always shot em a little flat but he had perfect arch on his throws tonight and all 10 of em hit nothing but the bottom of the net.

Its lovely seeing pippen back in a bulls uni


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

Gulp, feels like the Bulls championship teams in that half the players can sit out due to injuries and we can still field a competitive team. 

Note, I'm obviously not saying that we could win like the championship teams.


----------



## 7thwatch (Jul 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ScottVdub</b>!
> 
> 
> This is the best play I have seen out of ERob. The announcer made a comment that Erob was a pure shooter and I got confused because last year i would grind my teethe when he shot the ball but he shot the ball very well tonight.


Thats good to hear. Did he play well enough to avoid being on IR the whole year


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Exciting.

Yet inconsistent.

That's the flavor for the season, boys and girls.

But there will be more nights like this, and if we string enough of them together, we might see the playoffs.

Here's hoping for a lot more "tough losses", not "moral victories" necessarily, but losses where it was clear that the Bulls got outplayed, not that the Bulls beat themselves.

< I raise my Diet Coke in toast to my laptop. The librarian gives me a strange look. >

Losing to a hot NJ team or even a hot Orlando team is different than losing to a cold Denver team or a sad Milwaukee team.

Anyway. I wish I could have watched tonight, but Crawford definitely took it to heart. I wonder if he feels like he's ready to sacrifice his game for the sake of the team.

Sometimes in life, you have to cramp your style, for the sake of the team. The win is what's important.

Amazing how linked Crawford and Curry are. I hope Tyson isn't feeling left out of the mix... but somehow, I think his return is going give the Bulls a huge edge rather than be detrimental.

If I had cable I'd order League Pass. If I had a TV, that is.

And if I weren't in law school.

Shoot.


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
> 
> 
> If I had cable I'd order League Pass. If I had a TV, that is.
> ...


You're in law school but you havent studied the laws that say any bulls fan without a cable tv and league pass is comitting a federal offense.


----------



## darlets (Jul 31, 2002)

Props to curry for working on his FT.

He was in the top players from FT per minute last year. I can't see that changing. 

"Hack a Curry"? Be my guest.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

And NO ONE has PM'd me to join the Eddy Curry club? You all are sad!


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

*Marshall*

Looked extremely out of sink tonight. He shot a couple from just inside the arc.
Curry: amazing work on the free throws. STILL DOESN'T PUT HIS RUMP ON ANYONE TO BOX OUT- STILL DOESN'T JUMP!! TO GET REBOUNDS. C'mon kid


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Nokio8423</b>!
> It wont surprise me to seee JC leave next year.. This guy has special talant to be as good as a steve francis or baron davis yet were tryna turn him into Mark Jackson:upset: . o well somebody out there thats not a fool like BC will take him on and turn him into a star


Nokio, Jamal is my favorite player. The Bulls are my favorite team. Correction---they are my only team. Jamal can be a great player. Is it more important for him to be a star or a componant in a team that can win the NBA championship? I think he is special too. To special to waste with vain goals of stats when he has the talent to bring a young team from the bottom to the elite. Basketball is a team sport. Jamal is diverse in his game, that is why he can be so good.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

lol-BC scared JC down to 5 shots and it's not even out of the preseason yet. Way to crack the whip.


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> lol-BC scared JC down to 5 shots and it's not even out of the preseason yet. Way to crack the whip.


Somehow I don't think Jamal was scared into less shots. I think it was mentioned to shoot less, and Jamal did his best to control the offense as suggested by his coach. A medium between extremes will be found. Jamal is going to shoot more than last game and shoot less (if not hitting) than the previous games.


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Nokio8423</b>!
> It wont surprise me to seee JC leave next year.. This guy has special talant to be as good as a steve francis or baron davis yet were tryna turn him into Mark Jackson:upset: . o well somebody out there thats not a fool like BC will take him on and turn him into a star


Couldn't have said it better. But if the Bulls lose Craw, I will blame both Cartright and Paxson. As awful as Cartright is, the ultimate call is Paxson's. He should have let Bill go when he had a chance to pick up someone liek Van Gundy or Carlisle.


----------



## Maestro (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
> Exciting.
> 
> Yet inconsistent.
> ...


A quality post Showtyme. Kudos to you for being such an obviously strong fan:yes: :clap:


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Nokio8423</b>!
> It wont surprise me to seee JC leave next year.. This guy has special talant to be as good as a steve francis or baron davis yet were tryna turn him into Mark Jackson:upset: . o well somebody out there thats not a fool like BC will take him on and turn him into a star


I think they are trying to mold Crawford into a player that they think will maximize the Bulls wins.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>hps</b>!
> 
> 
> I think they are trying to mold Crawford into a player that they think will maximize the Bulls wins.


And at the end of the day....THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS AT ALL!!


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

Way to go, Crawdad!!! Poppa is pleased!!!

Jamal Crawford contributed nine points and nine assists on just nine shots, pleasing Cartwright. "Jamal did a great job organizing us," Cartwright said.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...1bulls,1,7917461.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

JC did it Cartwright's way tonight, and you can't argue with the results. The Bulls won, and on the road, to boot. 

Look, we all know there will be nights when Jamal is called upon to score. As our post game continues to improve, the Bulls will see more zones than man to man defenses. And that's when JC will step up and make them pay. But as long as we're facing man defenses, Crawford needs to focus on penetration and ball distribution. Every game's going to be different. And once Jamal recognizes that, the team will start to win a lot of games.

Again, hats off to Crawford for doing things his coach's way.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> Way to go, Crawdad!!! Poppa is pleased!!!


Sweet. I'll be down with 9 point and 9 assists if it gets you guys to turn those frowns upside down with regards to JC. And when we make the playoffs, and Crawford is looking for his extension next year, I hope you guys don't bring up his stats(well he didn't get arenas stats so why should he get arenas money--it's because we know he could put up arenas numbers if he wanted to, but BC doesn't want him to).

Good to hear BC finally say something positive about Crawford. Maybe he realizes it's time to rebuild the kids psyche now. Just in time for the season to start, no?


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

The scheme works! It really does. Consider this: 

Though it's only exhibition games, Toronto is embracing O'Neill's hard-nosed style of defense first. Entering Tuesday's action, the Raptors were allowing 78.2 points per game, best in the league.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...sbrite,1,2245769.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

How many points did we score doing it the coach's way? Did someone say 94???

Oh, and here's another interesting tidbit. The Bulls totalled 27 assists to Toronto's 19. The Bulls converted 35 baskets and 27 of them came off of assists. That's team ball.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Kinda helps when you have Scottie Pippen on the floor with Crawford instead of Roger Mason or Trent Hassell, ya know.

Didn't scottie also have 9 assists? That's more than half the assists coming from just JC and Scottie. It will be interesting to see how this all levels out once the season starts and Jalen is back in the fold.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> Sweet. I'll be down with 9 point and 9 assists if it gets you guys to turn those frowns upside down with regards to JC. And when we make the playoffs, and Crawford is looking for his extension next year, I hope you guys don't bring up his stats(well he didn't get arenas stats so why should he get arenas money--it's because we know he could put up arenas numbers if he wanted to, but BC doesn't want him to).


This is basically what's wrong with the NBA .

I think there are fans that would rather see lofty individual production so their pop hero can get their max rather than see the TEAM win some friggin games and go far 

When Kidd got paid by Phoenix he wasn't producing big point production if memory serves. Didn't need to . It was clear he was integral to pulling the team together and that he was the rarest if rare players in this league.. a player that actually and undeniably made other people better

If Jamal takes care of business and Eddy and Marcus go off and Jalen goes off and he actually manages to get something out of ERob , and , if he takes his opportunities where appropriate which results in a well balanced orchestrated attack - which culminates in a 40+ win season that sees us going into the playoffs and being competitive ... then the "business" of the business that needs to be done will take care of itself irrespective of all literal and narrow minded pidgeon holing of preferred production


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> This is basically what's wrong with the NBA .
> ...


I also think it's a product of Fantasy basketball leagues (fantasy leagues period). No one knew the stats off the top of their heads. Know, their are fantasy geeks (myself included) who know the stats from players around the league. Good or bad, it's an evolution of things the same way Sportscenter glorified dunking instead of jump shots.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

FJ, you were close to what I was saying. But not really. My quote had more to deal with Crawford being rewarded for helping the team rather than himself, in an age where it's the guy(arenas) who puts himself above the team in a contract year that more often than not gets rewarded. My worry is at the end of the day, Crawford could put up 12 and 8 and be the floor general to a bulls team that gets to the playoffs, and then some other team offers him a big contract(because there are people out there like Carlisle who see that he can be a franchise player) and then Bulls fans and Paxson look at a 12 and 8 player and decide he isn't worth it even though he helped the team win. So long as Pax is geniune in his comments about winning being the most important thing this year, there won't be a problem. But the people on this board have me paranoid that at the end of the year we'll just let him walk and take our chances with Hinrich, no matter what Crawford does(sometimes I do wonder if he can do no right--which is why BC's reaction to Crawford tonight is very promising).


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Fut

Relax bud

I reckon its a lay down mesare that if we win with Jamal taking on greater responsibility for the team , as opposed to just himself , that he will have proven himself and that Pax will show him the money 

Pax has never been anything than genuine and fair minded. I think he's for real ( as far as GM's go ) 

Fact is no one will have any money to offer Jamal next year with the exception of :

Utah
Denver
San Antonio 
The Clippers 
Golden State ( if Van Exel opts out which could be likely )

Its good that Rick Carlisle and Kevin O"Neil like our players but the reality is is that there are only a couple of teams that can realistically afford them without complicated sign and trade paths which we are under no obligation to honor 

Praise is nice but at the end of the day talk is cheap and it won't make a difference as to the liklihood of Crawford , Chandler and Curry being anything other than Bulls... if the Bulls so choose

He is not going to a loser like Utah for the same reason - they could however be used as a stalking horse to drive his price up much the same as what they did with JT and the Hawks 

Denver - Not with Dre on board

The Clippers need a point badly but the notoriously thrifty ways won't see them as a price setter for his services

Golden State - possible but doubtful - Crawford, Richardson, Dunleavy and Murphy is a great young 4 but then again so is Curry,Chandler, Fizer and Crawford - Chi wins here

The only serious threat I see are San Antonio but then again they will have to resign Hedo and Manu but they will have $12M to play with - which is probably what it will cost them to sign both .. unless they cut Hedo adrfit and try and get Craw for between $6M to $7M

Rasho
Duncan
Ginobli
Crawford
Parker

doesn't sound bad except for depth I would expect them to keep Manu at the 2 and Hedo at the 3 with Bowen and Rose and Anthony Carter their key reserves 

Throw in a couple of vet minimuns and a 1st rounder/2nd rounder and their roster is done.. so I don't see them making a play for Crawford

If there is any threat its Golden State then the Clippers but I would feel confident of being able to best them in a bid and for the fact that our team has much better vets and upside with its young nucleus

I don't think Jamal is going anywhere . His market is likely in a $6M to $7M range depending on how he performs this year which is likely around 6 years for $50M


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

Arenas' contract is real, that's for sure. But I also think its an aberration. All the talk this summer was how Denver had made him a top free agent priority. So who did they sign when the smoke cleared?

Washington was facing an enormous PR dilemma. Its top drawing card had been summarily dismissed and the Wiz needed to make a big splash in the free agent market to minimize fan runoff. Arenas fit the bill. But you may have also noticed that there weren't too many suitors for his services even though "point guards" are supposed to be in demand.

Numbers aren't everything, as FJ points out with his Kidd analogy. Real basketball people like Paxson know value isn't based on numbers alone. If JC fulfills the organization's expectations and continues to endear himself to his teamates as a facilitator and catalyst to victory, there's no way he won't be rewarded by the organization.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

It will be interesting to see how Rose is treated when he gets back. As Steve Kerr mentioned, if Crawford can be accused of shooting too many low percentage shots outside of the offensive scheme, so can Rose. But Rose is not a free agent anytime in the near future, while Crawford is.

The problem with the Bulls and Crawford is that with Crawford being a free agent next summer, both sides have incentives for Crawford playing in a way this year that differs from the way that would maximize his long-term value to the Bulls.

Regardless of what the Bulls organization says, Crawford's next contract likely will be determined mostly by what other teams in the market next summer (or the summer after that) are willing to pay. Crawford obviously has an incentive to put up big stats in order to increase the value of these outside offers. But the Bulls have exactly the opposite incentive. If they can successfully turn him into a 9 point, 9 assist guy for this season, then the value of his outside offers will be low, and they will be able to sign him to a cheaper long-term contract. Also, with Pippen around and Rose still in his prime, they don't need him to be a high scorer this year like they will later in his career when Rose's skills decline and Pippen is gone.

So after he signs a relatively cheap contract offer next summer and Rose's skills start to decline, they can ask him to be more like the player Crawford is trying to be right now - a 20 and 7 guy.

This is why watching how the Bulls treat Rose is key. Rose also is a good passer who can score. If the Bulls are not insistent that Rose change his game in ways similar to Crawford, then it will really look fishy that their handling of Crawford is not being influenced by his contract status. If we see lots of public quotes by Cartwright, Paxson, Pippen, and others coaxing Rose to be less of a scorer and more of a defender/distributor, then we can be more confident that Crawford's treatment is not being influenced by his contract status.

So far, I think the public comments about Rose's role are consistent with him being asked to change his game some, but it will be interesting if powers-that-be are as insistent on him changing as they are with Crawford.

And remember my premise here that in long-term when Rose's skills decline and Pippen is retired, the Bulls will need at least one credible outside threat and at that time the Bulls will need Crawford to score around 18-20 points a game. I think Crawford is trying to jump start this process and become that player right now (before the Bulls need him to be that player).

There is a tendency for many of us to see the Bulls organization as having only the best interests of all of their players at heart, while the Crawford fans tend to see the Bulls organization as out to get Crawford. I fall more in the former camp, but the truth probably lies somewhere in between.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> The problem with the Bulls and Crawford is that with Crawford being a free agent next summer, both sides have incentives for Crawford playing in a way this year that differs from the way that would maximize his long-term value to the Bulls.
> 
> Regardless of what the Bulls organization says, Crawford's next contract likely will be determined mostly by what other teams in the market next summer (or the summer after that) are willing to pay. Crawford obviously has an incentive to put up big stats in order to increase the value of these outside offers. But the Bulls have exactly the opposite incentive. If they can successfully turn him into a 9 point, 9 assist guy for this season, then the value of his outside offers will be low, and they will be able to sign him to a cheaper long-term contract.


I absolutely disagree. Do you really think GM's across the league are all closet fantasy leaguers who base value on individual numbers first and foremost? It doesn't matter what kind of numbers Jamal generates this year. What matters is the role he plays in the organization's return to prominence this season. Did Scottie Pippen's recent stats justify paying a 38 year old over $10 million for two years? If stats determined real value then there are a lot of very qualified fantasy ballers out there that would be eminently qualified to run an NBA team...and I bet they'd take the job for much less money than teams are paying their current GM's right now. Basing almost everything on statistcal analysis is simply one dimensional thinking.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> I absolutely disagree. Do you really think GM's across the league are all closet fantasy leaguers who base value on individual numbers first and foremost? It doesn't matter what kind of numbers Jamal generates this year. What matters is the role he plays in the organization's return to prominence this season. Did Scottie Pippen's recent stats justify paying a 38 year old over $10 million for two years? If stats determined real value then there are a lot of very qualified fantasy ballers out there that would be eminently qualified to run an NBA team...and I bet they'd take the job for much less money than teams are paying their current GM's right now. Basing almost everything on statistcal analysis is simply one dimensional thinking.


Geez, I had to re-read my post a couple of times to get a clue where this was coming from. I was not arguing that stats completely determine a player's worth, but it seems that you are almost making the counter-argument that stats play no role. Surely the truth is somewhere in the middle.

GMs certainly make decisions, but they have to sell their decisions to owners and fans, so it would not be surprising if easily observable characteristics, such as statistics, might have more influence on contract negotiations than they rightfully should. You yourself point this out in arguing why Arenas was signed to such a large contract with Washington.

(And the Clippers reportedly made a similar offer for Arenas, so the Arenas contract may not be such an aberration. The supposed story is that the offers were close enough that he flipped a coin ten times - heads for the Clippers and tails for the Wizards. It came up heads something like 8 times and being someone who goes against the grain, he then chose the Wizards.)

All I was trying to do is point out that the Bulls and Crawford may not have exactly the same incentives. I am not quite sure why that led to you ripping on fantasy ballers.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

I selected with the 1st pick of Round 5 in the Kentucky Fried Basketball Association league I'm in. I hope he does well this year. Haha


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> The Clippers need a point badly but the notoriously thrifty ways won't see them as a price setter for his services


how soon they forget the clips offered gilbert 60 mil


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> It will be interesting to see how Rose is treated when he gets back. As Steve Kerr mentioned, if Crawford can be accused of shooting too many low percentage shots outside of the offensive scheme, so can Rose. But Rose is not a free agent anytime in the near future, while Crawford is.
> 
> The problem with the Bulls and Crawford is that with Crawford being a free agent next summer, both sides have incentives for Crawford playing in a way this year that differs from the way that would maximize his long-term value to the Bulls.
> ...


I think this is a very good analysis, but I would also be very cautious with the conclusion that the Bulls have the idea of driving down Jamal's price as a goal in mind. I don't think looking at Rose is going to give us a good idea one way or the other. Simply treating him and Rose differently this year, IMO, wouldn't be a very good indicator that they're trying to drive down Jamal's price. To make that assumption, you'd basically have to conclude that Jamal and Jalen are equally effective scorers, and I don't think Jamal's in his league. Rose is still gonna be the best player on the team in all likelihood, and the clutch guy. 

I'm not saying that there isn't some truth in what you're saying, I just think that it would be very hard for me to seperate what's truth and what isn't from the criteria you're putting forth. I think the case is a VERY strong one that winning games and to some extent "minimizing" Jamal's scoring stats are directly related. So I don't see how you could see management harping on him as indicative of one motive or the other. I see your point about Jalen, but I think his veteran status and proven ability puts him in pretty much a different situation.

As far as the long-term situation, I agree 100%. Jamal will have to take on more of a scoring role (or be replaced with someone else who can). I'd say that the ideal situation for him is to go for a shorter contract next year a la what Jason Terry did. Given the current situation, I doubt he'll get big money as a FA on the market, and its possible a long term deal (from the Bulls or anyone) after this year would lock him in to a value lower than what he'd get if he just took say, a three year deal.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> 
> 
> I absolutely disagree. Do you really think GM's across the league are all closet fantasy leaguers who base value on individual numbers first and foremost? It doesn't matter what kind of numbers Jamal generates this year. What matters is the role he plays in the organization's return to prominence this season. Did Scottie Pippen's recent stats justify paying a 38 year old over $10 million for two years? If stats determined real value then there are a lot of very qualified fantasy ballers out there that would be eminently qualified to run an NBA team...and I bet they'd take the job for much less money than teams are paying their current GM's right now. Basing almost everything on statistcal analysis is simply one dimensional thinking.


It only takes one GM with money to screw things up 

There's a couple ways to look at it. Arenas got big money after putting up big stats on a bad team. So have Brand, Odom, SAR, Terry etc. Some of those guys might be worth their numbers, but I don't think they all are. And regardless of truth, I think there is a feeling out there among players that you need stats to make money. And that perception to some extent will dictate reality. 

NC is right on on that front. Jamal's not gonna get a $60M contract by averaging 6 points a game. He's got an incentive to "play for numbers", because although you're right that they don't tell the whole story, they do tell some of the story.

The question really boils down to how compatible playing for numbers is with winning. If it's very compatible and management is complaining about Jamal, we're in trouble. And if it's very incompatible and Jamal is complaining about his lack of numbers, we're also in trouble.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> I think this is a very good analysis, but I would also be very cautious with the conclusion that the Bulls have the idea of driving down Jamal's price as a goal in mind. I don't think looking at Rose is going to give us a good idea one way or the other. Simply treating him and Rose differently this year, IMO, wouldn't be a very good indicator that they're trying to drive down Jamal's price. To make that assumption, you'd basically have to conclude that Jamal and Jalen are equally effective scorers, and I don't think Jamal's in his league. Rose is still gonna be the best player on the team in all likelihood, and the clutch guy.
> 
> I'm not saying that there isn't some truth in what you're saying, I just think that it would be very hard for me to seperate what's truth and what isn't from the criteria you're putting forth. I think the case is a VERY strong one that winning games and to some extent "minimizing" Jamal's scoring stats are directly related. So I don't see how you could see management harping on him as indicative of one motive or the other. I see your point about Jalen, but I think his veteran status and proven ability puts him in pretty much a different situation.
> ...


I like your analysis even better than mine. Thanks!

I agree that it seems unlikely that the Bulls would be "driving down Jamal's price," but I think it might be better to think of them as avoiding having his price becoming artificially inflated due to good statistical production, especially when they have other more proven options for that production (e.g. Rose).

I agree that it would be highly unlikely to see the Bulls turn Rose into a 10 FGA per game player, and there are limits on what we can learn from the Bulls' treatment of Rose in regards to Crawford. But, unlike last year, the Bulls clearly can pull Rose from games if he starts taking ill-advised shots. Given the tough love approach they are taking with Crawford, it will be interesting to see whether they leave on the kid gloves in their treatment of Rose.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> how soon they forget the clips offered gilbert 60 mil


Read what I said

"Price Setter"

Infers : leading the market

If I am not mistaken they jumped into the market late and were only offering what else was on offer 

Who knows why Gilbert chose Pops Pollin's show over Silver (plated) Sterling ?

Maybe radical , wild , unpredictable Gil wanted to be in the East where his team might see the playoffs in the next few years .. something that the Clippers likely won't likely achieve with how the West is stacked

Maybe the chip fell nicely on his left shoulder to balance the chip he wears on his right and he decided to go with the Wizzer because they showed him love before The Clippers who were making a panic move ( but a move they needed ) to make because they knew they were losing Odom

Maybe with Odom retained and a core of Brand, Odom Maggette and Arenas... with Q as 6th and Center by committee.. the Clips may have actually had a chance to see the light of day in the playoffs .. but with no Odom ( who would be killer with Arenas in their games suit each other I think ) maybe the Clips just weren't special enough if the money was similar and no matter how much money you get paid .. if you are an unrestricted free agent you have to really think twice about the Clippers if you want to be a winner and not just a gun for hire given their past record

All Maybes.......

The Clips let their most talented player go..... because of money 

They let Miller go .. because of money. But in this case maybe the were right to because he never really seemed to click

They let Kandi go..... got down to money squabbles and then he signed for less than where he thought his market was 12 months previous just so he could get the hell out ( which is what Odom wanted too - just to get the hell out )

As overrated as what I think Kandi is they should have made efforts to mend the bridge and outbid Minnesota . Show him some love. In a Center deprived league the guy can still defend adequately and be a 10 10 guy in the middle.

Let Maggette and Miller go if they did not want to pay everyone and had to draw the line somewhere... resigned Brand and Odom , promoted Q , and resigned Pike .. then signed Arenas


Kandi
Brand
Odom
Richardson
Arenas

Kaman
Wilcox
Jaric
Pike
Dooling

doesn't sound too bad to me 

But they piss players off over money which clouds the right basketball decisions being made .. so in a situation where you have parity in price can you blame Gil for not having faith in Clippers ownership to commit to a winner that will actually see him competing in the post season

At least the Wiz have some upside and an outside chanec of making it the playoffs in the East


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Look...

The bottom line is The Bulls aren't trying to intimidate Jamal into lesser physical production just so they can screw him on a deal

Any suggestion of that motivation .. as in primary or secondary in form is just total crap

*I believe the issue is whether his style of game can be better integrated into what THE TEAM is trying to achieve which is winning some friggin games*

Yes... if Jamal becomes a 9 and 9'ner there may possibly be some ancillary side effect which effects his market

But then again all the more reason for Utah, The Clippers or Golden State ( the only teams that will be able to sign him outright ) to whisper in his ear that he Da Man , Dat Dare shot heaven here in LA.... Dat U 2 gooooooooooodda playa 2B held back by them foolz that don't unnnnnerstaaaaaaaaaaaannnddd.... yada yada yada 

And then show him the money 

And then for us to pay him 

Game Over

Thank you linesmen. Thank you ball boys

If the Bulls were all about screwing their players because of the bottom line .. Jay Williams would be terminated already and who knows he still may well be but I think they will honour his contract this year for the purpose of leaving him open to the expansion draft and if he is not taken then see how he comes back ... we are then under no option if he doesn't make it back in some semblance of playing form to not pick up his option after the 3rd year

Produce what your team wants. Win. Go well into the playoffs and be competitive.Solicit offers from stalking horses ( Golden Shower and the ShizClipz ) Take it to Poppa Reinsdorf and tell him you'd like to be paid. End of Story.

All of this before you negotiate Eddy and Tyson's extensions next Septenber/October.

There is a real cause - effect practicality here

You figure it out .


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

I also think we're too hung up about what he actually produces in a linear pidgeon holing 

If he racks up 9 and 9 we all sit around with might applause because that's old school blueprint. Yes. Quite. Good Show. Jolly good.

And if he racks up 25 and 6 ... Old School of Crusty Fart High will not be happy because he's nopt playing to a model and the New School of Tupac High will believe their playa is misunderstood and villified because no one appreciates his obvious individual talents

Who gives a rats ?

He can still put up the latter numbers some nights and we will win and I'm fine with that so long as he is not his own private idaho and the rest of the offense is engaged and is going off. No problem with that whatsoever

If he puts up the former numbers and we still lose .. then the heat is of because we feel that Jamal did his job. Yet we still lose . Did his guy drop 30 on him which might have been a contributing factor ?

This is why literal pidgeon holding based on "numbers" alone doesn't hold weight with the great 

Ben Wallace was locked in on a cheap contract before he went off and blossomed as a player but is there anyone in the market right now that would not pony up max dollars for Wallace ? How many points does he score again ?

My point is is that if Jamal averages 8-9 assists this season he will likely be a league leader in the top 5 . So what if he only "averages" 10 ppg 

There will be some nights where he goes for 30 which will be enough peek a boo for some piss poor desperado team to get moist and gooey and show him the money

This peak a boo act that I refer to ... combined with an 8 - 9 assist per game average ( league top 5 ) .. combined with "We love you man and your been held back you have all you want in the land of milk and honey routine" will be enough IMO to determine his fair market value

And let's not forget "Fair Markket Value" needs more than bidder to be determined. Go to the market.. get your price set if you can't agree right up off the bat , and then , if its warranted.... the Bulls will pay it


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> I also think we're too hung up about what he actually produces in a linear pidgeon holing
> 
> If he racks up 9 and 9 we all sit around with might applause because that's old school blueprint. Yes. Quite. Good Show. Jolly good.
> ...


I think the problem for Crawford is that as a ball-distributing point guard with few scoring responsibilities, he has the potential to be slightly above average. As scoring point guard who chalks up lots of assists, he has the potential to be quite good.

This year the Bulls would prefer the former, while in the future I think they will want more of the latter.

And I suspect that you are right that the glimpses of his skills in the latter role will be enough to generate generous offers. But given that Crawford's skills may translate into him becoming a good but not great ball-distributing PG, it is not unreasonable that he might have some misgivings about playing a role for which his skills may not be best suited. In particular in a contract year. For a young guy about to sign what probably will be the biggest contract of his life, doing so really takes quite a leap of faith that the Bulls organization will reward him for the risks he is taking - both if it works out and doesn't quite work out.

If I was in the Bulls organization, I would try to sell him on the argument that if folks begin to see him as a player who can generate stats but not wins, his market may be even worse than it would be as a 9 point, 9 assist guy who occasionally shows glimpses of being a 20 point, 7 assist guy. But it is reasonable that this argument may not be fully persuasive to Crawford.

And again, I really don't think the Bulls are out to get Crawford. But they see the money thrown at guys like Arenas, Terry, Francis, Hamilton, Maggette, Marbury, etc. And that probably has a way of making them a bit more receptive to the view that what they _really_ need out of the PG position is a ball-distributing PG.

I think the Bulls and Crawford see eye-to-eye on the best case scenario. They both want to see Crawford playing a major role in a hugely successful season.

It is how their interests differ in the worst case scenarios that is the heart of any conflict. If the Bulls make a mistake, they would prefer it be one where they held Crawford's scoring down too much and they sign him to a reasonable contract next summer and later turn him into a high-assist SG once Hinrich is ready to play major minutes.

Crawford would prefer a worst case scenario where he shoots more than is optimal but leaves himself lots of suitors next summer. The Bulls are guarding against the former worst case scenario and Crawford is trying to guard against the latter.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

That's all fine and I agree to a point but I will quarantine the points and repond individually



> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> I think the problem for Crawford is that as a ball-distributing point guard with few scoring responsibilities, he has the potential to be slightly above average. As scoring point guard who chalks up lots of assists, he has the potential to be quite good.
> ...


Yeah that's not unreasonable about what they may want from him now and what they may want from him down the track 

I don't think it fits as neatly ( linearly ) into Jalen's tail off in productive scoring capacity such that in 3 years when Jalen doesn't do it to the same level all of a sudden Jamal becomes that 22 and 6 guy who should be commanding max money but is locked in to 3 years in an undermarket deal

This is an impossible thing for Jamal and his agent to contemplate unless they want to go for less security and go short term and renegotiate - viz Shard and JT 

Of course he could go long term and be that player from the get go for the next 6 years but good luck doing it in San Francisco ( Warriors ) or Los Angeles ( Clippers ) with no dominant big men at the Center or productive vets around you to lighten the load

Dare I mention Utah ?

And that's about it 



> And I suspect that you are right that the glimpses of his skills in the latter role will be enough to generate generous offers.


Which if we win and he proves he can direct an offense will surely get matched so long as it is in the $55M to $60M range - Miller to Arenas range . Bottom line is regardless of what happens and how much moneythe penny dreadfuls have no one is paying him more than Dre or Gil - because we know what they were offering them this summer.. so we'll match it if we're a winner and he is a part of the reason why 



> But given that Crawford's skills may translate into him becoming a good but not great ball-distributing PG, it is not unreasonable that he might have some misgivings about playing a role for which his skills may not be best suited.


This will be a test that the Bulls want him to pass .... whether he can subrogate himself for the benefit of the team if that subrogation creates order , disclipine and winning basketball.. to think about what is needed at any given point and making the right choices which are about the benfit of team rather than teh benefit of self. 



> In particular in a contract year. For a young guy about to sign what probably will be the biggest contract of his life, doing so really takes quite a leap of faith that the Bulls organization will reward him for the risks he is taking - both if it works out and doesn't quite work out.
> 
> If I was in the Bulls organization, I would try to sell him on the argument that if folks begin to see him as a player who can generate stats but not wins, his market may be even worse than it would be as a 9 point, 9 assist guy who occasionally shows glimpses of being a 20 point, 7 assist guy. But it is reasonable that this argument may not be fully persuasive to Crawford.


If its not persuasive enough just point him to last year's Clippers and then go and get him to talk to Dre and Kandi and get their perspectives from the cap casualty ward .

Or maybe a chat to JT and Shard who were forced to go short and forego security

Or maybe to Steve Jackson who found it hard to deal with the pressure and went to pieces and played erratically. It cost him 

Focus on self and likely you will lose either in tenure of deal on offer or in dollars .. or both

Forget about whereith my portion under the Sun and where's my quong and just get out there secure in the knowledge that your team wants you and is prepared to invest in you if you win games and get what playing on a winning basketball team is all about

And all that shat will take care of itself.. will still get money in line with contemporaries and will play with a well structured side of developing dominating big men that can only enhance opportunities for guards... and productive vets 



> And again, I really don't think the Bulls are out to get Crawford. But they see the money thrown at guys like Arenas, Terry, Francis, Hamilton, Maggette, Marbury, etc. And that probably has a way of making them a bit more receptive to the view that what they _really_ need out of the PG position is a ball-distributing PG.


But I don't think this has anything to do with what these guys get paid as some subconscious motivation of dampening Jamal so they can hold his value down

This is what this infers and I think that has zero to do with it .

I think they _ really _ need players that will sacrifice for the betterment of the common good and this typically starts at the point guard position. This type of example setting in disclipine is a large component of what leadership should be about



> I think the Bulls and Crawford see eye-to-eye on the best case scenario. They both want to see Crawford playing a major role in a hugely successful season.


Absolutely



> It is how their interests differ in the worst case scenarios that is the heart of any conflict.


This is where communication, management and trust is key and it is all about staying focused on Crawford playing a major role in a successful season for everybody... but it doesn't have to be about scoring 20ppg which we don't need him to do night in and night out . There are other measurable and intangibe markets of success for this team and for Jamal personally



> If the Bulls make a mistake, they would prefer it be one where they held Crawford's scoring down too much and they sign him to a reasonable contract next summer and later turn him into a high-assist SG once Hinrich is ready to play major minutes.


Ultimately this won't be a mistake .. but there is still an inference there that they "hold his scoring down too much to sign him to a reasonable contract"

The Bulls will not be operating in a vacuum ... Jamal will have his suitors regardless of what happens with his actual production .. they know that.. so the suggestion that they hold him back and sign him to a reasonable offer on the theory that this will dampen his maret elsewhere such that crap offers will be elicited and they can get him long fly on the sly... well its just conspiracy theory bunk

If that was the modus operandi ... its a pretty short term game which becomes a zero sum game when he takes the qualifying offer plays a year and then goes to UFA in 2005 because he knows he got dicked over... 2005 being a year where there are a greater number of bidders on the market which opens it up and also forces the Bulls to consider sign and trade options rather than risk losing him for zip. 



> Crawford would prefer a worst case scenario where he shoots more than is optimal but leaves himself lots of suitors next summer.


See Kandi, Dre, short timers JT and Shard... it doesn't necessarily follow



> The Bulls are guarding against the former worst case scenario and Crawford is trying to guard against the latter.


I thought the Bulls were trading to guard against the latter for everybody's sake and Jamal ( in your view ) was trying to guard against the bridle being forced in his gob in being a 9 and 9'ner ( the former ) because he want get his Quong ( this word borrowed from Rod Tidwell -Jerry Maguire )


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

FJ, I have already spent too much time posting today, so I don't have time for a complete response, which is sad because there are a lot of great points in your analysis.

But at the end when I talk about "mistakes," I mean suppose that the Bulls put Crawford into a ball-distributing role that actually reduces their number of wins relative to having him in a role where he has more scoring responsibility. And suppose this is a completely honest mistake in that they thought that by having Crawford play this way, they were giving themselves the best chance to win, but they happened to be wrong.

The point that I am trying to make is that the Bulls would prefer this scenario to a "mistake" where they gave Crawford too much scoring responsibility. If they err in the scoring direction, it might lead to Crawford showing more glimpses of being a great player than would a "mistake" in the ball-distribution direction.

[Note that I am assuming that these "mistakes" in either direction are reducing the number of wins for the Bulls (otherwise, they wouldn't be "mistakes"), so this is not a tradeoff between wins and Crawford's future contract. At least not directly.]

No one knows the exact role that would maximize the value of Crawford to the Bulls this year, but the point is that "mistakes" in the direction of ball-distribution probably reduce the value of Crawford's outside offers more than "mistakes" in the direction of scoring responsibility. And I think that might play a bit of a role in the way Crawford is being treated.

Of course, this assumes that Crawford's highest value as an NBA player (in general and not just for the Bulls) is in a role with a significant scoring responsibility rather than primarily as a ball-distributing point guard. This may or may not be true.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by<b>NCBullsFan</b>!The problem with the Bulls and Crawford is that with Crawford being a free agent next summer, both sides have incentives for Crawford playing in a way this year that differs from the way that would maximize his long-term value to the Bulls.
> 
> Regardless of what the Bulls organization says, Crawford's next contract likely will be determined mostly by what other teams in the market next summer (or the summer after that) are willing to pay. Crawford obviously has an incentive to put up big stats in order to increase the value of these outside offers. But the Bulls have exactly the opposite incentive. If they can successfully turn him into a 9 point, 9 assist guy for this season, then the value of his outside offers will be low, and they will be able to sign him to a cheaper long-term contract.





> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> I absolutely disagree. Do you really think GM's across the league are all closet fantasy leaguers who base value on individual numbers first and foremost? It doesn't matter what kind of numbers Jamal generates this year. What matters is the role he plays in the organization's return to prominence this season. Did Scottie Pippen's recent stats justify paying a 38 year old over $10 million for two years? If stats determined real value then there are a lot of very qualified fantasy ballers out there that would be eminently qualified to run an NBA team...and I bet they'd take the job for much less money than teams are paying their current GM's right now. Basing almost everything on statistcal analysis is simply one dimensional thinking.


*From John Paxson:*"I'm going to be in the position the next year or so to make a financial decision for this organization that will impact them directly. I've let them know it doesn't matter if they average 25 a game if we win 30 again. It's going to have to make a difference in terms of wins and losses. Our expectations today are to be a playoff basketball team." 

http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/content/sports/daily/1026paxson.html

I rest my case.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Kismet, respectfully I still don't think you've got a case to rest on.

The fact that Paxson's saying he's going to pay for winning and losing still doesn't mean that Crawford has no incentive to pad his stats.

First, you can be damn sure that if the Bulls win and Jamal averages 15 and 8, he'll command more money than if the Bulls when and he averages 6 and 8.

Second, around the league, regardless of the Bulls record, he will to some extent be measured based on the numbers he puts up. Other GMs will shy away from paying him big money if the Bulls are total losers... of course. No one is saying that. But that's not the only factor working. Suppose the Bulls do win... will Jamal get better offers if he has better or worse stats? Better, of course. Now, suppose the Bulls lose a lot. Still, will Jamal get better offers with better or worse stats? Better of course.

Point is, win or lose, Jamal has every incentive to try to maximize his numbers.

The question is the extent to which Jamal maximizing his numbers affects winning. I don't know whether he'd be paid more on a winning team where he averages 10 and 7 or on a losing team where he averaged 18 and 8. But it seems to me no one else does either, so it's fair to think either way.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Here's a list of players with great stats. Which of these do you think are worth max dollars?

Jalen Rose
Allan Houston
Antawn Jamison
Glenn Robinson
Shareef Abdur-Rahim
Sam Cassell
Peja Stojakovic
Wally Szczerbiak
Matt Harpring
Keith Van Horn
Jason Richardson
Ron Artest
(and quite a few more)


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Here's a list of players with great stats. Which of these do you think are worth max dollars?
> 
> Jalen Rose
> ...


Just like there are lots of players with great stats who are not worth max dollars, there are lots of players who start and play meaningful roles on highly successful teams who are not paid (and are not worth) max dollars. And there are lots of players on non-championship contending teams who are worth high salaries, including some who are worth max salaries.

Neither great stats nor winning are necessary or sufficient conditions for getting a high salary. Both are important, and anyone who argues otherwise is just trying to be ornery. It may more fun to argue that the world is black and white, but the real arguments are about the subtle shades of gray in between.

That said, judging from Paxson's public statements, he appears to placing greater emphasis on winning than the typical GM (in his discussions of contract negotiations). After watching the Clippers impode last year with players playing for their future contracts, it is hard to argue with this approach.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> After watching the Clippers impode last year with players playing for their future contracts, it is hard to argue with this approach.


That's an interesting case, since it appears that:

1) Players did "play for stats" 

and 

2) It worked. Brand and Odom got huge fists full of dollars. Miller and Maggette got moderate fists full. Kandi didn't, but he hardly played and stank when he did. 

Would Pax have given out those kinds of contracts to players on a non-winning team? Probably not.

Of course, the flip side of that is that a couple of those guys were probably worth their contracts... maybe, I dunno.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I hate to do this because it makes me come off as a little obsessed...

but Jamaal Tinsley is the great example of a 9/8 guy that no one is going to pay any attention to when he gets out.

His assists were down last year because he had some problems with his shot and in general, but not down a ton... 7.8/7.5 are basically still his style of numbers.

Jamaal Tinsley was ranked 7th in the NBA his rookie year in assists, with the likes of Dre Miller, Kidd, Glove, the Baby Blue Baron, Stockton, and Starbury.

Even though his stats were down to 7.5 apg this year, he actually ranked higher (6th) in the assist scoreboard.

Is he even as good as Dre Miller?

Don't get me wrong; I actually think Tinsley is going to be quite a decent player. He plays pretty gritty defense for his size, and his turnovers are down a lot last year (2.63... that's hot considering the other guys at the top of the list). 

But he's a liability on offense. He passes up shots, real good open looks, and forces someone else to take a less good shot but if Harrington or Reggie or Croshere makes an open jumper you can rack up another dime in the Tinsley collection.

He's not going to get a max contract, or even an Arenas/Miller contract. He's the 9/9 type of guy that we're all thinking about. His team has been in the playoffs and his performance in the playoffs has been fairly solid (in 11 playoff gp, 6.3 ppg, 5.8 apg, 1.8 to, shooting an unusually high 52% FG and 57% from the arc and an unusually low 56% from the stripe).

Crawford is not that kind of player, by nature, and it doesn't MATTER if he relegates to a 9 pt/8 apg kind of guy to help the team win. As FJ points out, that might do wonders to his value. As NC points out, it might lessen his contract value.

I think it'll have no bearing, closer along the lines of Kismet's argument. Stats do matter but come on... GM's know what the guy is capable of. Even if he averages 9 points a night, he'll undoubtedly get those four or five games in the season when he's a different player, shooting the lights out. Games like the 33 and 8 he got in a late season win against Indy (4-8-03). Or the exact same stats (33 and 8) he got in the season closer against Philly (4-15-03).

He's capable of it, and GM's will see it. Tinsley isn't capable of it.

That's the bottom line... GM's have eyes and when they pay for talent, I'd say they are more on the speculative fan's side in dishing out cash than they are on the conservative earn-your-pay kind of guys (General Manager DaBullz in the hizouse).

Just look around the league and look at some of the biggest contracts, and I'd say that actually the GM's that rely on the stats do worse off than the ones that take a risk on potential. Heck, we paid Eddie Robinson lots of cash to basically do nothing so far. But Detroit is paying Ben Wallace, an unspectacular 5/8/1.6 bpg kind of guy, what seemed to be way too much money at the time, and got the best defensive player in the league.

Of course guys like KG and Shaq arguably deserve what they get paid, while guys like Jonathan Bender and Joe Smith certainly don't earn their keep.

But for the most part, I think GM's are pretty distanced from a lot of what we're talking about. It's not like Chicago is the intellectual hub of the universe, and apart from the Windy City there lies no cerebral activity.

Ooooooh, we're so sneaky... we can fool the whole world...

No way. If it was a guy like Larry Brown coaching and a guy like Jerry West evaluating the talent, maybe we COULD fool the whole world. But we've got first-timers at GM and coaching spots; how they treat their players probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on how others will view the talent.


----------

