# Noah vs Hawes - Round 1



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

Fight!

http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/prospects_impress_at_workout_no_1.html



> Noah and Taylor teamed up against Hawes and Neal in a game of 2v2, with Wolves general manager Jim Stack running the show
> 
> On the first possession, Taylor provided the entry pass for a flashing Noah, who gave Hawes a terrific up-and-under move for a bucket. However, Neal countered with a nice look to Hawes, who finished underneath, and then dished back out to the Towson guard for a three to win it.
> 
> ...


some Q+A with Randy Whitmann too 


> Q: On whether or not Hawes has received too much criticism for his lack of agility:
> Wittman: Absolutely. He's got great feet and hands, and like I said, it's just a matter of his body maturing as he continues to get older. He's going to be a good player in our league.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

> Q: On Noah's size and skills:
> Wittman: He's a guy that has great size, and along with that size, (he has) athletic ability. He's a freak a little bit in that nature in terms of what he can be. He could be one of the great runners in our league up and down the floor, and he has the ability to guard any position. They had a lot of switching and pick-and-rolls at Florida where he was put on the point guard, and he has the ability to move with his feet and rebound and defend. Those intangibles are things that coaches love, and you'd love to have a player that's capable of doing all those things while playing multiple positions. Those are the things that make your team better.


noah sounds like a good defensive center to pair up with thomas for the future. 
having bigs that can guard the perimeter (without fouling) is crucial.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

You know what you will get with Noah. Great defender, rebounder, and finisher at the rim. All great things to have. I would not mind having Noah *if* he can develop a consistant J from the outside. Why? We run SEVERAL plays off the pick n' roll with Kirk and Wallace where the ball ends up in Wallace's hands 15 feet away from the rim. But he is looking to hand the ball off. Now if Noah can hit that with PJ consistancy, then we got ourselves a very nice defender who will keep defenses honest. I'm not looking for Noah to score. I'm looking for Tyrus to develop into that. But there is no doubt Skiles & Co. will love Noah's defensive abilities and heart.

I like Hawes more than Noah. But a few things have to happen for Hawes to be the pick over Noah with no doubt. One, his athletic ability. That interview makes it seem like it should be no issue. I don't think it will be a big issue. How ready is his post-offense today in the NBA. We know he is skilled, but can he do it today against the Vets. Defensively -- Will he become a ferocious rebounder after he gains weight? Can he play solid man to man D? Can he rotate? I don't expect him to be Noah like, but if he can be a guy who is far from a liability, then I think he is the pick. He does not need to be Duncan-esque, but please don't be Curry-esque.

Good Luck Pax.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

If Noah could hit a jumpshot, he'd be a great fit next to Ben Wallace. He'd fill in very nicely in the Clifford Robinson/Rasheed Wallace role, provided he added about 10 lbs.


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

Noah. Sounds like Tyson Chandler. No offensive game who runs well, but maybe with more intangibles and less physical ability. With Wallace down low, a better compliment would not be another intangibles player if we want to win now. Maybe down the road to complement Tyrus, but not now.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

I still have to go with Hawes. Noah may be a better player, but he doesn't fit the scoring that Chiacgo could use up-front.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Bulls42 said:


> Noah. Sounds like Tyson Chandler. No offensive game who runs well, but maybe with more intangibles and less physical ability.


Well, the article did say Noah performed an up-and-under move. Which is something Tyson Chandler couldn't do to save his child's life. 

I'm completely torn on the Yi, Noah, Hawes thing. I can see the merit and problems with all 3. I guess I'm leaning for Hawes, but I'm leaning less and less that way every day. 

This is the first time in a long time that I don't really have a strong preference for any specific 1 or 2 players.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

The key thing here is that we don't need to find a compliment to BENEDICT. We need to find a guy to compliment TYRUS. Wallace isn't worth considering in terms of rookies, cause he'll be gone in a few years, when the rookie is finally playing at top lvl. Tyrus is long term. If we were comparing veterans, then yes, they should compliment Benedict rather than Tyrus. BUT, we're evaluating rookies, so they should compliment guys who are going to be here in the long run, so that'd be Tyrus, Thabo, Kirk, and probably Luol and Lil Ben. Hawes fits into those guys the best. Noah and Tyrus don't fit well together IMO. We should have at least one guy who can contribute in the post on O.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

> -- The final drill of the day featured the two guards taking on the two bigs 1v1. Essentially, Taylor or Neal would start with the ball at half court with the bigs waiting in the lane. If the bigs got a stop and secured the rebound, it was a point for them, and if the guards scored, they likewise got a point. Taylor struggled to find the hole in this particular drill, and both Noah and Hawes showed strong defensive presence in the lane to emerge with a 5-3 victory. While Hawes is just 19, he has terrific feet and hands, and has all of the skills you look for in a big man. It might take a year or two, but just like Noah, it's hard not to think he'll be a good pro. Finally, don't sleep on Neal just because you haven't heard of him. He has some serious game.


I still rank them 
#1. Noah
#2. Hawes.

I just hope the draft order does not go...
#7. Noah
#8. Hawes
#9. ???
...unless Wright or Horford slip of course. If this were the scenerio, I guess I'd be hoping for Thornton and a S&T of Noc for a big or Green. Perhaps even Nick Young. I hope Atlanta or Milwaukee take Conley, although I personally don't think either team should do it.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> Well, the article did say Noah performed an up-and-under move. Which is something Tyson Chandler couldn't do to save his child's life.
> 
> I'm completely torn on the Yi, Noah, Hawes thing. I can see the merit and problems with all 3. I guess I'm leaning for Hawes, but I'm leaning less and less that way every day.
> 
> This is the first time in a long time that I don't really have a strong preference for any specific 1 or 2 players.


The good news is that one of these players will likely be on the board if there's any interest in perimeter players/wings with the picks in front of us. Unless Paxson has another plan to reshuffle the roster this summer and obtain us more height and post scoring, I am thinking one of these three is holding up a Bulls jersey on the 28th.


----------



## JPTurbo (Jan 8, 2006)

Ron Cey said:


> This is the first time in a long time that I don't really have a strong preference for any specific 1 or 2 players.



It's always harder when you're picking lower and do not know who will be available.


I think Noah will be a good player but if he had the ability to hit the jumper or even some post up moves he would be a top 3 lock. 

Hawes seems like the best fit for us right now. He could come off the bench and help out the scoring problem. Yi is always interesting, but the more and more I see of him he just seems like a 7 foot small forward. It would be interesting to see a center try to guard him, but many would he get abused in the post. 

Barring any huge trades, I'd say Hawes and Yi are the most obvious choices.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> Well, the article did say Noah performed an up-and-under move. Which is something Tyson Chandler couldn't do to save his child's life.
> 
> I'm completely torn on the Yi, Noah, Hawes thing. I can see the merit and problems with all 3. I guess I'm leaning for Hawes, but I'm leaning less and less that way every day.
> 
> *This is the first time in a long time that I don't really have a strong preference for any specific 1 or 2 players.*


This isn't really directed at you, Penguin, but reminded me of a somewhat unformed thought that's been rattling around inside my head for a while now.

I sort of understand the whole draft fever thing...it's kinda like Christmas where we get to add a bright new shiny toy to our Bulls toybox. What I've never gotten is how so many can have such strong opinions on who a team should take.

The one thing fans have a pretty good handle on is what our favorite team needs. We watch a lot of our team's games, so this ain't that difficult. Of course, since it's so easy to identify the needs, it's not all that useful either. 

Then we get down to the quality of the players who meet the team's needs. Most of us have seen a lot of a few players, a little of a lot of players and nothing but highlight reels and written reports on many others. I'm afraid that many of us tend to favor those we've seen a lot of, in part because, well, they've seen a lot of them.

Then come the combine measurements. These are very interesting. Durant tests out as a very mediocre athlete and no one cares...sure fire superstar. But for other players, like Hawes (who most of us haven't seen much of), his combine exercises are of critical importance in forming these strongly held opinions on who the Bulls should draft. 

Then there's a player like Yi. He skipped the combine, mostly played against Chinese competition (described by one poster as "a bunch of 6-foot big men"...they looked a lot taller to me and some of them weren't bad athletes). Since most of us don't really know squat about Yi (heck, we don't even know how old he is), most dismiss him as a legitimate pick. It may just be my imagination, but it seems that Yi's stock dropped significantly after the measurements came out. What we don't know scares us, but doesn't faze us when it comes to forming enthusiastic opinions.

Last year I declared Brandon Roy as "my guy." I had seen him play a little and I felt that he'd fill the big guard need. Roy won the ROY award, so I guess I should feel vindicated. Actually, I've concluded that I'm an idiot. Had the Bulls drafted Roy with the second (or 4th) pick, yeah, they'd have a nice SG who would have shared time in the Bulls guard rotation (and he wouldn't have won the ROY award), but with their second pick in the first round, looking for someone with size/athleticism, they'd have been choosing from among the likes of Cedric Simmons, Shawne Williams and something called Oleksiy Pecherov. Instead they picked up Tyrus and Thabo...uh, MUCH better plan.

I admit my ignorance. Paxson and his people know a lot more about what they're doing than I do. I will have no strong opinion on who they should draft. Paxson has said MANY times that the team needs more size, so he already knows the bottom line of my "in depth analysis" of the team's key need.

Go ahead Pax...move up, move down, trade out, whatever. In the end, it's about winning. Do what ya gotta.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

transplant said:


> Then come the combine measurements. These are very interesting. Durant tests out as a very mediocre athlete and no one cares...sure fire superstar. But for other players, like Hawes (who most of us haven't seen much of), his combine exercises are of critical importance in forming these strongly held opinions on who the Bulls should draft.


Good post. :clap: 

I especially found this catch interesting.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Not sure if anyone saw the draft express article about the uselessness of combine results, but if not I'd recommend reading. VERY good article. They just talk about the lack of correlation (not statistically based, more observational) between combine results and NBA success. Some of the top NBA athletes that we know really didn't test that well in the combine, while some bums really did.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

yodurk said:


> Not sure if anyone saw the draft express article about the uselessness of combine results, but if not I'd recommend reading. VERY good article. They just talk about the lack of correlation (not statistically based, more observational) between combine results and NBA success. Some of the top NBA athletes that we know really didn't test that well in the combine, while some bums really did.


It is a very good article. It puts a lot of the combine stuff into perspective from a recent history standpoint. 

http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=2096

Enjoy. Its worth the read.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> It is a very good article. It puts a lot of the combine stuff into perspective from a recent history standpoint.
> 
> http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=2096
> 
> Enjoy. Its worth the read.


As you might expect given my previous post, I enjoyed the article immensely. Thanks.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> Well, the article did say Noah performed an up-and-under move. Which is something Tyson Chandler couldn't do to save his child's life.


Have you seen TC play 2 on 2?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Personally, I score a lot more with a wider selection of moves in 2 x 2 vs. 5 x 5.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

transplant said:


> Last year I declared Brandon Roy as "my guy." I had seen him play a little and I felt that he'd fill the big guard need. Roy won the ROY award, so I guess I should feel vindicated. Actually, I've concluded that I'm an idiot. Had the Bulls drafted Roy with the second (or 4th) pick, yeah, they'd have a nice SG who would have shared time in the Bulls guard rotation (and he wouldn't have won the ROY award), but with their second pick in the first round, looking for someone with size/athleticism, they'd have been choosing from among the likes of Cedric Simmons, Shawne Williams and something called Oleksiy Pecherov. Instead they picked up Tyrus and Thabo...uh, MUCH better plan.


That paragraph there got me to thinking about other former ROY's. Mike Miller is the one in particular that came to mind. #5 pick in the draft, ROY, later on 6th man of the year. He's from a town not too far from here, so I have followed his career a bit. He's a good player, but nothing real special that will make or break your team (unless it's close and he could push you over the edge I suppose). Roy was taken later than Miller, in a weak draft (that's what was said at the time anyway), but he was fairly polished and did well on a poor team, just like Miller did as a rookie. I agree that you gotta look at needs and not just look at how a guy you liked did as a rookie. 

As for the other part, I've said the exact same thing on here before: Tyrus/Thabo is a much better combination than Roy/random big. Looking at it in hindsight, and seeing where we'll be picking this year and who should be available, Aldridge would be easier to find a compliment to than Tyrus will be. I still prefer Tyrus, but Aldridge and about any PF in the draft would be a nice combo. Tyrus, on the other hand, really only matches up ideally with Hawes as far as I'm concerned. 

This year, we could do the same thing as people wanted us to do last year: draft Nick Young to be our bigger, stud SG that can do more than shoot jumpers. BUT, in the end, it should and probably will come down to Spencer Hawes if he's there and he'll be the best pick because it'll round out our team more than anyone else in the draft not named Greg Oden. 

For the record, I like what I see out of Nick Young, so wouldn't mind taking him a bit, but they'd better have a good contingency plan lined up to move Gordon or someone for a real center if they don't draft one (Hawes is the only one in the draft IMO that would be worth the #9 and might be available).


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

Any word on round 2 today in Chicago please feel free to post.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Hawes Interview

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/hawes_070607.html



> Bulls.com: The knock on you is that you’re not as athletic as teams would like you to be. What’s your response to that?
> Hawes: “I think as I get older my body will start to fill out and I’ll get better athletically. But if you look at the testing [from Orlando’s NBA Pre-Draft Camp], I’m right up there with everyone else. I may not be ahead of them, but I’m close. I look at some of the most effective post scorers that the game has seen and not all of them are the best athletes or the best leapers. But they had the best fundamentals and they knew how to get everything done.”
> 
> Bulls.com: Is bulking up a priority of yours this summer?
> Hawes: “It is. *I’m already up to 245 or 250 pounds*, and I’ve been in the weightroom every day trying to get that up.”


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Hawes is my man @ 9. I like the kid's demeanor and skillset. Unless Pax feels Yi is clearly the best prospect, and I assume Horford is out of reach, then we MUST get Hawes.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

blah, animal23 is too fast for me 

i like the attidude too, embracing the workouts and playing against anyone. that's the mentality pax/skiles appreciates.


----------



## Samael (Sep 1, 2005)

Spencer Hawes = Chris Mihm
Joakim Noah = Jared Jeffries

:lol:


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Samael said:


> Spencer Hawes = Chris Mihm


Except for being 7-foot white guys, there's really not much similarity. Mihm's dominance in college was very much around his strength and ability to control the low-post (I've said the same things about Bogut, too). Hawes' game is all about finesse. Unless you're just a physical marvel, usually the finesse game translates better to the NBA. That's why some of the Euro centers like Divac and Ilgauskas have had solid NBA careers.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Samael said:


> Spencer Hawes = Chris Mihm
> Joakim Noah = Jared Jeffries
> 
> :lol:


Is the little laughing guy to indicate self-deprecation at the shallow and essentially useless nature of the words that precede it?


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/

Have a vid of Hawes vs Noah (and other guys)

It should be on the front page. I do not know how to get a direct link to it.

Hawes is only in the last 15 secs while the two 2nd round prospects took up half the video at least.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

Gee. The T-Wolves have multimedia snippets of their workouts on their website.... Must be nice.

Paging Adam Fluck. Paging Adam Fluck. Please bring the Bulls website into the current century.

Thank you,

Bulls fans everywhere (or at least here in Orlando!)


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Recap of the video:

Noah backed down on Hawes, did an up and under and scored on Hawes. It was probably the same move talked about on the TWolves website a day or two ago. Noah caught the ball near the elbow and made the J. Its uglier than Marion's shot. 

Hawes was in a few clips vs the 2nd rounders (both guards). These guards went one on one vs Hawes and scored on him by driving past him or pulling up mid-range. Hawes backed down Noah and scored on a Hook. I didn't quite see how he made his footwork possible (seemed like awkward positioning) but hey thats what he can do. Second play, caught it near the FT line and swished the J. Nice looking form.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Except for being 7-foot white guys, there's really not much similarity. Mihm's dominance in college was very much around his strength and ability to control the low-post (I've said the same things about Bogut, too). Hawes' game is all about finesse.


I think this is true to an extent. I don't think Mihm's post game was as evolved as Hawes's is, even after spending 2 (or 3?) years at Texas. He shot a fair amount of college 3s and scored inside based mostly on being big and coordinated. But he was definitely strong and a sneaky-good athlete (still is, actually). I still think if Mihm just had a better motor he could have been a really good NBA player. That and some injury issues. Hawes is at least billed as having the kind of motor Skaxson looks for in draftees.



> Unless you're just a physical marvel, usually the finesse game translates better to the NBA. That's why some of the Euro centers like Divac and Ilgauskas have had solid NBA careers.


Yeah, I think Hawes's game is what it needs to be, based on his physical attributes. His talents aren't simply predicated on being huge and bullying everyone, and I find that to be a good thing. He's not Howard or Oden, who can be awesome based mostly on just that.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

ViciousFlogging said:


> Yeah, I think Hawes's game is what it needs to be, based on his physical attributes. His talents aren't simply predicated on being huge and bullying everyone, and I find that to be a good thing. He's not Howard or Oden, who can be awesome based mostly on just that.


Considering he himself said that he wasn't at the weight that he liked to be all season last year in college, and that he was getting pushed off positions often, yet he still had a stella season it shows that he can still make moves to score against bigger and stronger players. But with the extra lifting that he has obviously done, it will only better his inside game and add to his jump shooting also.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

> Hawes, 19, has admitted a need to get stronger, but he was able to bench press 185 pounds nine times at the predraft camp. In comparison, Luol Deng did 5 reps before the 2004 draft and *Dwight Howard did 8*, according to an archive at DraftExpress.com.


can't believe Howard only did 8, but i guess he was only 18 or 19 at the time.
and the draft express archive actually has him down for 7. 

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/story.asp?id=320976


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

I didn't see this anywhere else. Here's an excerpt of an interview from Hawes at bulls.com. There's a bit more if you click the link.

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/hawes_070607.html



> Bulls.com: How did you feel your workout went?
> Spencer Hawes: “It was good. It’s a lot of fun going against big name players and I think today went well.”
> 
> Bulls.com: What other teams have you worked out for thus far?
> ...


----------



## Samael (Sep 1, 2005)

Ron Cey said:


> Is the little laughing guy to indicate self-deprecation at the shallow and essentially useless nature of the words that precede it?


A poster trying to justify his knowledge of basketball by using fancy words but can't quite pull it off.:lol:


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Samael said:


> A poster trying to justify his knowledge of basketball by using fancy words but can't quite pull it off.:lol:


Simply stating "Spencer Hawes = Chris Mihm" is some 5-star analysis right there.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

KC has the story:



> "If you're ducking, teams see that," Noah said. "You don't want to be somebody who is ducking players. I think that's kind of corny, kind of lame. Eventually in the game of basketball, there's no lying when you step between those lines. Bring your game and not your name. I'm from New York. That's how we do it."
> 
> Noah's comment came in response to a general question, not one about Yi. But such brashness is part of the package with the 22-year-old two-time NCAA titlist, who also brings energy and an inconsistent jumper.
> 
> ...


Brash Noah shows his game to Bulls

Noah sure would do one thing - liven up the post-game quotes.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Interview does not say much about the workout. But one thing you either love or hate about Noah -- his attitude and demeanor. Thats one thing I will immediately accept for the benefit of this team if we draft him. We will get a vocal leader and one who will speak his mind. I think we lack that in our lockerroom. We got great guys but one who will say whenever whatever. 

Interesting to note Noah hung out with the LSU boys last night. I like Richards as a second round pick -- big body and he has that mean attidue. 

I think Noah will be going to Minny, but I wonder what Pax thinks of Hawes. If he isn't a fan of Hawes, I want Pax to offer Thabo and two future 1sts to move up in this draft. If its the price we have to pay for the talent he wants (Yi/Horford), then this is the time to do it. This opportunity will not come again. Thabos will come and go, but Big Men who can score won't. This is if he does not think Hawes fits the bill. If Pax cannot move up and feels Hawes isn't worth it, then he won't pick him regardless. I think Hawes will provide a Tyrus-like impact *on offense *with minutes here and there. But it will take him a few years too to be effective.


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

Loved the part about Noah, Tyrus, and Big Baby all hanging out together. Noah & Big Baby are colorful characters, they're always having fun and I think the media would love them. Maybe Tyrus would open up more with those guys around. I get the feeling Tyrus is a jokester but he just doesn't show it much. He also might need a new best friend on the team since it's iffy whether PJ returns. 

Pax did a good job pairing Noah and Hawes with bruisers like Davis and Richard. See how they handle the rough stuff.


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> I think Noah will be going to Minny, but I wonder what Pax thinks of Hawes. If he isn't a fan of Hawes, I want Pax to offer Thabo and two future 1sts to move up in this draft. If its the price we have to pay for the talent he wants (Yi/Horford), then this is the time to do it.


PASS. You're moving four assets for just one, and the one you're getting may not even be better than the guy picked at 9. 

I hate how people (not just you) are so willing to include Thabo as a 'throw-in' in potential deals. If we dump him in a move up we're simply creating another hole in the backcourt. Thabo was a freaking lottery pick a year ago. Pax traded up to secure him. If he's as good as Pax thinks he is, we'll start to see it next season. It takes these international players some time to adjust, not only to a new league but also to living in a new country. I expected Thabo to have a so-so rookie year because of this. However, I was VERY impressed with him towards the end of the regular season and into the playoffs. He didn't seem fazed at all. In fact, there were times when he seemed a lot more calm and in control than a lot of our 'vets.'


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I don't like the idea of trading up in this draft (unless it's for someone we're convinced is star material). The way I see it, the talent pool is fairly lateral from picks 3 thru 10. Honestly, the prospects projected in that area could go in almost any order. Horford might be the only exception, as I think he goes top 5-6; and while Horford gives us the post scoring and tough attitude to fit in here, he's also not a center. Just a bit short for what we need.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

SALO said:


> PASS. You're moving four assets for just one, and the one you're getting may not even be better than the guy picked at 9.
> 
> I hate how people (not just you) are so willing to include Thabo as a 'throw-in' in potential deals. If we dump him in a move up we're simply creating another hole in the backcourt. Thabo was a freaking lottery pick a year ago. Pax traded up to secure him. If he's as good as Pax thinks he is, we'll start to see it next season. It takes these international players some time to adjust, not only to a new league but also to living in a new country. I expected Thabo to have a so-so rookie year because of this. However, I was VERY impressed with him towards the end of the regular season and into the playoffs. He didn't seem fazed at all. In fact, there were times when he seemed a lot more calm and in control than a lot of our 'vets.'


I saw Thabo lacking confidence almost the entire year. Something I did not expect a 'Euro Vet' to have issues with. I think he will be better next year if he actually has confidence in his play making abilities. But, yes, in my view a Post Scorer >>>>> Thabo. Ask me anyday of the week which one I would rather have and I will go with post-scorer. The two future 1sts don't mean much to me as they will be late picks. If the Bulls are willing to spend the MLE we can get a guy like Pietrus to fill for Thabo if Pax is definitely sure the solution to our problems is a guy like Al Horford.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

SALO said:


> *I hate how people (not just you) are so willing to include Thabo as a 'throw-in' in potential deals.* If we dump him in a move up we're simply creating another hole in the backcourt. Thabo was a freaking lottery pick a year ago. Pax traded up to secure him. If he's as good as Pax thinks he is, we'll start to see it next season. It takes these international players some time to adjust, not only to a new league but also to living in a new country. I expected Thabo to have a so-so rookie year because of this. However, I was VERY impressed with him towards the end of the regular season and into the playoffs. He didn't seem fazed at all. In fact, there were times when he seemed a lot more calm and in control than a lot of our 'vets.'


No kidding. 

I'm in the camp that Thabo is legit. I need another 18 months or so to so willingly throw him in as a piece for mediocre trades. Would I include him in a deal for Gasol? Sure. But his name is being tossed around like he's Chris Duhon or an expiring contract or something.

I think Thabo is going to be a significant NBA contributor.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> No kidding.
> 
> I'm in the camp that Thabo is legit. I need another 18 months or so to so willingly throw him in as a piece for mediocre trades. Would I include him in a deal for Gasol? Sure. But his name is being tossed around like he's Chris Duhon or an expiring contract or something.
> 
> I think Thabo is going to be a significant NBA contributor.


Shocking, but I agree with you.

You're higher on Thabo than I am, but I think now is the worst time to trade him. You had to be watching closely to see the development. He has a good basketball IQ. Reports are that he works hard. He has size, length, athleticism, ball skills, etc. He could still be everything they drafted him for...a big guard who, offensively, can handle the point for Gordon or the SG position for Hinrich while taking the defensive assignment on the opponent's big guard.

Paxson's dilemma is that he wants to win now, but has a couple players who still need to develop (Thomas and Sefolosha). Giving up on them now holds the potential of sacrificing both win now and win later.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

RoRo said:


> can't believe Howard only did 8, but i guess he was only 18 or 19 at the time.
> and the draft express archive actually has him down for 7.
> 
> http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/story.asp?id=320976


Emeka Okafor did it 22 times. Strong man Emeka is.


----------

