# Rumor: Chandler for PJ Brown swap?



## FanOfAll8472

Has anyone heard about this? Hornets fans are buzzing (no pun intended) about this rumor and possibly picking up Chandler to add athleticism to their frontcourt. Granted, the only real written hint at this rumor is found in this Mike McGraw article (link), but Hornets fans seem to be buzzing about this potential Chandler + Malik Allen for PJ Brown and possibly JR Smith swap. Some Hornets fans believe to have their "sources", while others are already penciling Chandler into their lineup.

Regardless, this rumor seems to make a lot of sense (ha, not many of those that make sense turn out true) - the Hornets get yet another athletic big who fits their system, while PJ Brown (whether or not he wants out) goes to a playoff team that could use his rebounding and defense badly.


----------



## BG7

I saw this, but I think it was just some fan with some trade idea. It was Chandler and change for PJ and JR Smith.

Now I like this trade, PJ gives us a legit first option, you do know that he got a 3rd place MVP vote a year ago.


----------



## BullSoxChicagosFinest

I think I read this rumor on this board first but I would do this in a second. And you're going to throw in JR Smith too? Nice. I haven't seen him play alot but he's out of high school a few years ago, so he could turn into being solid. PJ's 10+ PPG are more than any of our big men came close to last year (even edges out Songaila). 

How are the player's salaries like?


----------



## MikeDC

That rumor sucks ***. Like I said, if we're going to sign Ben Wallace, we ought not do it at the expense of younger guys. And moving Tyson for an over the hill guy with an expiring deal is just that.

If we could turn Tyson into something young, good and complementary to Ben (Nene) or just young and cheaper (Przybilla), that'd be different, but PJ Brown? No.


----------



## The Krakken

MikeDC said:


> That rumor sucks ***. Like I said, if we're going to sign Ben Wallace, we ought not do it at the expense of younger guys. And moving Tyson for an over the hill guy with an expiring deal is just that.
> 
> If we could turn Tyson into something young, good and complementary to Ben (Nene) or just young and cheaper (Przybilla), that'd be different, but PJ Brown? No.


^

There's quite a bit of ownage in this post.


----------



## SALO

You do not want J.R. Smith here. He would be the newest E-Rob / Tim Thomas. Thinks he's a lot better than he really is.


----------



## BullSoxChicagosFinest

MikeDC said:


> If we could turn Tyson into something young, good


Good luck with that


----------



## FanOfAll8472

MikeDC said:


> That rumor sucks ***. Like I said, if we're going to sign Ben Wallace, we ought not do it at the expense of younger guys. And moving Tyson for an over the hill guy with an expiring deal is just that.
> 
> If we could turn Tyson into something young, good and complementary to Ben (Nene) or just young and cheaper (Przybilla), that'd be different, but PJ Brown? No.


What if we don't sign Ben Wallace? PJ Brown would bring playoff experience, veteran leadership, solid rebounding and defense and a mentor for Tyrus Thomas. He can play center and guard all the top post big men of the other team. He's even better with an athletic player next to him, such as Tyrus Thomas or a FA signee like Drew Gooden. Brown isn't an offensive liability (which Wallace is), although not an excellent offensive player either. He can hit a 15' jumper and crash the offensive glass; in essence, not only is he a good fit with Tyrus Thomas, he's a good fit with practically any big man, from Nazr Mohammed to Andres Nocioni. I agree with you, that if we sign Ben Wallace, moving Tyson for Brown would be a bad idea, but if Wallace isn't signed, this isn't a bad trade.



> You do not want J.R. Smith here. He would be the newest E-Rob / Tim Thomas. Thinks he's a lot better than he really is.


Very true, he and Skiles would clash.


----------



## mr.ankle20

I would take any big man over tyson .Everybodys knows his game is not going to improve next year


----------



## MikeDC

FanOfAll8472 said:


> What if we don't sign Ben Wallace? PJ Brown would bring playoff experience, veteran leadership, solid rebounding and defense and a mentor for Tyrus Thomas. He can play center and guard all the top post big men of the other team. He's even better with an athletic player next to him, such as Tyrus Thomas or a FA signee like Drew Gooden. Brown isn't an offensive liability (which Wallace is), although not an excellent offensive player either. He can hit a 15' jumper and crash the offensive glass; in essence, not only is he a good fit with Tyrus Thomas, he's a good fit with practically any big man, from Nazr Mohammed to Andres Nocioni. I agree with you, that if we sign Ben Wallace, moving Tyson for Brown would be a bad idea, but if Wallace isn't signed, this isn't a bad trade.


I guess, but it seems like a pretty short term move. Given the fact that we basicaly use or lose our cap space, wouldn't we be better off with two young players than two old players? If nothing else, it gives us a tradable player in the future. We sign Brown and a couple years down the road we just don't have that.

I mean, Brown is a nice player, I really like what he brings. But there are plenty of ways to bring in a mentor for Thomas and veteran leadership without trading away a young player.


----------



## The ROY

mr.ankle20 said:


> I would take any big man over tyson .Everybodys knows his game is not going to improve next year


yeah, but PJ BROWN?!!?


----------



## BG7

The ROY said:


> yeah, but PJ BROWN?!!?


He was an MVP candidate 2 years ago.


----------



## NOSA

If HornetsReport is the site you got that from the people saying it are VERY credible. They knew about the Peja signing and that wasn't being talked about anywhere else. If it gets done or not who knows, but it isn't BS.


----------



## The ROY

I heard it also involved one of their 1st round picks and possibly another filler from our team (duhon, sweets etc.)


----------



## garnett

Wow this is a horrible, horrible trade. Would Brown even be re-signed? And we lose Chandler? The worst part is that people actually like it.


----------



## SALO

Ok, I'm getting worried now...

Hornets insider says deal could be done by Sunday 

He also broke the news about their interest in Peja. I never knew of any interest between Peja & New Orleans until espn reported the signing. 

If it's straight up Chander/Allen for Brown/Smith, then we get hosed. I don't care if it allows us to sign Ben Wallace... we still get hosed in that trade. 

We better be getting Hilton Armstrong, or a future 1st rounder. That would make it more tolerable. But knowing Pax, he'll probably throw in one of our future 2nd rounders instead! 

If we get J.R. Smith, I'd expect him to be traded immediately. The Spurs tried to trade for him at last season's deadline, but the league nixed the deal at the last minute. Said they didn't get it finalized in time. I hope we could send him to the Spurs for the rights to Scola.


----------



## cima

wtf is wrong with you people? i can't believe people would even consider this. PJ freaking Brown for tyson chandler? you do realize if we sign ben wallace and keep tyson chandler that no one is going to want to play against us, right?


----------



## Diable

I'm sure the Bulls would only do this to rid themselves of CHandler's contract...Only I don't think that the Hornets currently have enough capspace to do the deal as it is described here.Not sure,but I think this would increase their payroll by 7 or 8 million while the Peja deal only leaves them with around 5 million in capspace.

In actual fact the Hornets are probably interested in trading PJ Brown somewhere they wouldn't have to take salary back so that they could gain some cap flexibility to resign Rasual Butler and Speedy Claxton.


----------



## BG7

Yeah, I was sarcastic about liking the trade, I was just mocking that mvp vote brown got. Tyson's gonna come back good next year. I doubt there is a ton of talk between the Bulls and Hornets to finallize this deal, I'd think they're in full on Ben Wallace mode. Are we getting a verbal agreement by Ben Wallace anytime soon?


----------



## The ROY

This dude definintely has sources.

Said the deal could be finalized by sunday, depending on if we get Wallace.

I expect some more changes to be made if this does go through.

C Wallace
F Thomas / Brown
F Deng / Nocioni / Viktor K.
G Gordon / Sefolosha / Smith
G Hinrich / Duhon


----------



## BG7

I just got off prayer with Jesus, and he told me that Ben Wallace is going to sign with Chicago for 4 years 70 million.


----------



## BullSoxChicagosFinest

Interesting, that Hornets forum also says another team is interested in Tyson (why the asking price went up). The guy updating the news sounds like he knows what he's talking about, but I can't say that for the rest of the posters:



> I would love to get Duhon in this deal!!!! if we could get chandler,Duhon,and Gordon we would be set!!! offer next years #1 and we may be able to get all 3 of them.


 :laugh:


----------



## T.Shock

Interesting scenario here. I'm guessing this trade is entirely dependent on if we sign Big Ben or not. If we do, I could see Pax pulling this. PJ is a solid starting 4 man and would be a good fit alongside Ben although giving up on Tyson this early would be a problem for me. It would also allow us a good deal of room in the future to re-sign Kirk, Ben, Luol, and Noc.


----------



## draft tyrus

if it really were to include JR Smith, he would be out of here in a heartbeat. there's no way he would last a day with Skiles. Then again San Antonio hotly pursued him at the deadline.

concerning Sloth's post, IMO PJ is not a "true #1 option". But it would be nice to unload Chandler's contract.


----------



## The ROY

If we get one of those draft picks they just picked up, I'm all for it.


----------



## T.Shock

The ROY said:


> This dude definintely has sources.
> 
> Said the deal could be finalized by sunday, depending on if we get Wallace.
> 
> I expect some more changes to be made if this does go through.
> 
> C Wallace
> F Thomas / Brown
> F Deng / Nocioni / Viktor K.
> G Gordon / Sefolosha / Smith
> G Hinrich / Duhon


With that lineup I'd like to see Songalia re-signed. He would add something completely different than the other three post guys. With PJ's ability to man the 5 we would be able to give Big Ben a break and bring out Songalia or Tyrus to add some offensive scoring to the frontcourt. Also against a smaller team we could start Noc at the 4 and go to work.


----------



## BG7

This just in, maybe if we offer a future first rounder, we might be able to get Chris Paul, Cedric Simmons, AND Hilton Armstrong........


----------



## The ROY

If we did get Ben and move Tyson, can't we still afford another BIG?


----------



## BG7

The ROY said:


> If we did get Ben and move Tyson, can't we still afford another BIG?


Maybe, if there was anyone worthwhile in this class outside of Ben.


----------



## The ROY

sloth said:


> Maybe, if there was anyone worthwhile in this class outside of Ben.


They may not be worthwhile but putting Nene or Wilcox next to Ben would be a good thing. Hell even adding Butler or Mohammed would give us more help on the frontline.


----------



## remlover

draft tyrus said:


> if it really were to include JR Smith, he would be out of here in a heartbeat. there's no way he would last a day with Skiles. Then again San Antonio hotly pursued him at the deadline.
> 
> concerning Sloth's post, IMO PJ is not a "true #1 option". But it would be nice to unload Chandler's contract.


No doubt. JR Smith would be used as some type of future swap. We know the Spurs were interested, why not JR Smith for Luis Scola?

It will be interesting if this deal takes place. As stated by other posters it sure seems like this guy knows what he is talking about. I can't imagine Pax bringing in a guy that is 37 to put alongside our future center who will be 32 by the time the season starts.


----------



## bulls

you guys ARE NUTTS if you dont like this deal.if this trade goes down (I THINK ITS A LOCK) then JR Smith is'nt GOING ANYWHERE..pax knows what JR is and can become.this kid isnt JUNK like many of his haters around here want you to beleave.he is a star in the makin that got on the coachs bad side..I LOVE THIS DEAL and this explanes why MA was signed so quickly.PJ brown WILL BE OUR STARTIN PF untill we can trade his contract and BIG BEN will be our startin C..

THANK YOU PAX,it took ya alittle bit,but you FINALY got some players on this team i wanted you to..


----------



## Salvaged Ship

When are people going to stop thinking about Chandler's "potential" and look at what he really does. 

If we do sign Walllace, he is our starting C. That is a given. You drafted Thomas to get to the starting 4 position at some point. That leaves you with Chandler, A 10 MILLION A YEAR BENCH PLAYER. Signing Wallace basically guarantees Chandler is a bench player for the Bulls. If you sign Wallace and can get a good vet who will have an expiring contract in the near future, do it! Then you have future money to re-sign our core players, possibly get other free agents or flexability for trades. We are not going to be hurt by his loss with our roster. He spends most of the time on the bench with foul trouble.

People think Chandler is going to improve all of a sudden becuase he is "working out"? We hear this every year, then he shows up to camp as the same old toothpick with no game. Then you hear how he is working into shape, and he will need a good summer the following year to really develop. like a broken record. The guy has very little game. He will always be a tease because of his height and hops. In reality, if we sign Wallace there is little time for him to play and still get Thomas meaningful minutes. Brown would be ideal, as he could fill the role Antonio Davis did.


----------



## draft tyrus

all I know is PJ could have an effect on Tyrus like AD had on Tyson: he's a very physical player that can protect our young forward's rear end. Tyson collapsed when AD wasn't there to do the dirty work anymore.


----------



## The ROY

I do like the Gordon/Sefolosha/Hinrich/Smith backcourt but there's not enough minutes for all those cats.


----------



## T.Shock

The ROY said:


> I do like the Gordon/Sefolosha/Hinrich/Smith backcourt but there's not enough minutes for all those cats.


Don't forget The Du as well.


----------



## bulls

NM


----------



## SALO

bulls said:


> you guys ARE NUTTS if you dont like this deal.if this trade goes down (I THINK ITS A LOCK) then JR Smith is'nt GOING ANYWHERE..pax knows what JR is and can become.this kid isnt JUNK like many of his haters around here want you to beleave.he is a star in the makin that got on the coachs bad side..I LOVE THIS DEAL and this explanes why MA was signed so quickly.PJ brown WILL BE OUR STARTIN PF untill we can trade his contract and BIG BEN will be our startin C..
> 
> THANK YOU PAX,it took ya alittle bit,but you FINALY got some players on this team i wanted you to..


J.R. Smith for his career... 

FG: 39% 3P: 31%

That is bad. He'll never be a "future star" with his poor attitude & work ethic either.


----------



## bulls

SALO said:


> J.R. Smith for his career...
> 
> FG: 39% 3P: 31%
> 
> That is bad. He'll never be a "future star" with his poor attitude & work ethic either.


wait and see bro..it was just because of where he played,the coach,new to the league ect..things will change once he gets here..


----------



## SALO

remlover said:


> No doubt. JR Smith would be used as some type of future swap. We know the Spurs were interested, why not JR Smith for Luis Scola?
> 
> It will be interesting if this deal takes place. As stated by other posters it sure seems like this guy knows what he is talking about. I can't imagine Pax bringing in a guy that is 37 to put alongside our future center who will be 32 by the time the season starts.


Definitely agree about trading J.R. someplace else. 

It's also interesting that people are willing to trade a 23-year-old Tyson for a 37-year-old P.J. Brown. Yet others are not willing to sign Ben Wallace, a guy who is 6 years younger than Brown and coming off a Defensive Player of the Year season? :krazy:


----------



## BullSoxChicagosFinest

Salvaged Ship said:


> People think Chandler is going to improve all of a sudden becuase he is "working out"? We hear this every year, then he shows up to camp as the same old toothpick with no game. Then you hear how he is working into shape, and he will need a good summer the following year to really develop. like a broken record. The guy has very little game. He will always be a tease because of his height and hops. In reality, if we sign Wallace there is little time for him to play and still get Thomas meaningful minutes. Brown would be ideal, as he could fill the role Antonio Davis did.


I mean come on, 5 damn years in the league and not 1 offensive move? His future is on the bench, and he's only effective off the bench. I agree, people don't mind spending that money for what he is? I think it's called 'Igotpaiditis'. Is he even better than Darius Miles? Plus how soon until his back acts up again?


----------



## TripleDouble

I really hope this is not just JR being cheap and making the money available to Wallace contingent on getting rid of Chandler ASAP. 

This would be a horrible trade talent wise.


----------



## unBULLievable

Looks like we are freeing more capspace in case Wallace doesn't come in order to go to plan B.


----------



## SALO

TripleDouble said:


> I really hope this is not just JR being cheap and making the money available to Wallace contingent on getting rid of Chandler ASAP.
> 
> This would be a horrible trade talent wise.


I think that's exactly what is happening here.  

Reinsdorf is willing to overpay for Wallace as long as Chandler gets shipped out.


----------



## unBULLievable

SALO said:


> I think that's exactly what is happening here.
> 
> Reinsdorf is willing to overpay for Wallace as long as Chandler gets shipped out.



What are you talking about?Tyson becomes redundant. He has been here 5 years and hasn't shown anything special. His contract was a mistake that could not be avoided.


----------



## OziBull

I for one would love the idea of PJ for tyson trade if we do sign wallace.
PJ would be an ideal role model for Tyrus who will eventually start.
Getting rid of Tyson contract for PJ expiring one is brilliant.
Its a new generation of bulls coming through, the plans have changed in the organisation of what the bulls will build around.
JR Smith is a bonus. 
Tyrus , Ben , Kirk, Deng, Noc are bulls for a very long time i hope


----------



## DaBabyBullz

That trade would completely blow. PJ is going to be 37 during the next season. Anyone bother even looking at that? (I just read part of the first page of posts...too late to read them all..must sleep) JR is only 20, but he's only 6'6" and we got Sef, so we don't need a big guard anymore. Add to that, he's already missed 31 games in his first 2 seasons as an 18 and 19 year old. That a bad sign? 39% shooter isn't real great for a 6'6" shooting guard either. Granted he is young, and I haven't seen him play much, so anyone who's seen him play extensively got any idea on his potential? 

As far as I'm concerned, with PJ being so old, it'd be a Chandler for JR trade, the rest is just junk-filler. I would much rather have a 7'1" shot blocker than a 6'6" guard who is hurt and doesn't play much. But again I don't know why JR hasn't seen much playing time or production...injuries, does he just suck, did he piss the coach off, what?

I'll go on record right now that if this trade happens I'll be extremely pissed off, and Pax will be knocked down HUGE in my book. I don't give a damn who we get in FA. No one we could get in FA is worth trading away Chandler for JUNK! I think some people were right that IF it happens, it's just to free up space to sign some FA.


----------



## SALO

unBULLievable said:


> What are you talking about?Tyson becomes redundant. He has been here 5 years and hasn't shown anything special. His contract was a mistake that could not be avoided.


He's getting shipped out for an expiring contract (if this trade happens, which I think is very possible).

I know getting P.J. would be great for the youngsters, but it's basically one year and out for him. Money would be the driving force behind this deal, IMO. It would make it easier for us to re-sign the rest of our core when their contracts are up for extensions.


----------



## DaBabyBullz

SALO said:


> He's getting shipped out for an expiring contract (if this trade happens, which I think is very possible).
> 
> I know getting P.J. would be great for the youngsters, but it's basically one year and out for him. Money would be the driving force behind this deal, IMO. It would make it easier for us to re-sign the rest of our core when their contracts are up for extensions.


The problem I have with that is talent. When and where are we going to be able to replace Chandler's rebounding and shot blocking? He does have a pretty decent FG%, and I think people are too down on him over last year when they forced him to play out of position. You just wait and see (IF we're able to) how good he and Ben are down on the post defending the paint. We could have a wicked team defensively, and if you have 2 of the better rebounders in the league in Chandler and Wallace the O rebounds would make up for some of their lack of scoring. I am a firm believer in staying young unless the guys are stars and already on your team, and not going backwards in the talent department. I would say give Chandler this year to prove himself at PF, and by next year if he's no better then trade him if Tyrus is ready to replace him. If he plays good, see if Tyrus can play the SF. Imagine Ben, Tyson and Tyrus all out there as regular starters. (I know it's dreaming a bit, but you know how it is)


----------



## OziBull

If this is the only way to get Ben Wallace then unfortunatly im up for it.
I see your points and agree wit a few of them Dabullz but the fact is if we do want Ben Wallace a proven player who has won a championship and could really lead the bulls further into the playoffs, Trading tyson will be the way to do it for an expiring contract like PJ, you get two guys with Wallace and PJ who can be great role models for our young players, which is another need for our team, it opens up the chance for Tyrus to really get more gametime and go under the wing of wallace and PJ mentally and skill wise. We also have Sweetney down low and even could sign Drew Gooden also.
Bottom line is if we want Wallace, Tyson will be shipped


----------



## DaBabyBullz

OziBull said:


> If this is the only way to get Ben Wallace then unfortunatly im up for it.
> I see your points and agree wit a few of them Dabullz but the fact is if we do want Ben Wallace a proven player who has won a championship and could really lead the bulls further into the playoffs, Trading tyson will be the way to do it for an expiring contract like PJ, you get two guys with Wallace and PJ who can be great role models for our young players, which is another need for our team, it opens up the chance for Tyrus to really get more gametime and go under the wing of wallace and PJ mentally and skill wise. We also have Sweetney down low and even could sign Drew Gooden also.
> Bottom line is if we want Wallace, Tyson will be shipped


I don't see why it'd be a necessity to do so THIS season though. We have quite a bit of cap room, and as far as I'm concerned, Wallace is the only guy we'd need to pick up. We don't need 2. Chandler is 23, Wallace is 31. Wallace will cost more. Yes Wallace is better, but he's going to be worse in a few years, whereas Chandler playing the PF will still be improving (hopefully lol). I'd rather get Pryz and keep Chandler if I had to choose between Wallace and no Chandler or Pryz AND Chandler together.


----------



## BealeFarange

The worst that can happen with Tyson is that he doesn't play much better than he did last year and he's an overpaid bench player. I imagine it would take some incredibly poor play (or a major injury) to totally erase Tyson's trade value for next year. That's why I'm more for keeping Tyson and giving him one more shot...anyone who doesn't think he was important to the Bulls in the second half of the season wasn't watching the same team I was. Also, he really didn't have any help down there on the offensive side of things...not even from our perimeter guys who rarely drove or gave him decent tip-in opportunities. Khryapa, Tyrus, Nocioni, and a healthier Deng should cover up his weaknesses a little more down there as will, of course, any free agent we sign. 

Trading for Brown, to me, is hoping the Knicks drop a great pick to us and/or there's someone we really want in free agency next year. We certainly wouldn't be making the trade with extending him in mind, right? I don't know who's available, but why not keep Tyson for this season and then trade him towards the trading deadline if it's clear things with him aren't going to work out? We'll have a better idea of the draft pick we'll be getting next year around then as well as a clearer picture of the free agency crop. And, like I said, I still think Tyson will have a lot of value then barring disaster...


----------



## DaBabyBullz

BealeFarange said:


> The worst that can happen with Tyson is that he doesn't play much better than he did last year and he's an overpaid bench player. I imagine it would take some incredibly poor play (or a major injury) to totally erase Tyson's trade value for next year. That's why I'm more for keeping Tyson and giving him one more shot...anyone who doesn't think he was important to the Bulls in the second half of the season wasn't watching the same team I was. Also, he really didn't have any help down there on the offensive side of things...not even from our perimeter guys who rarely drove or gave him decent tip-in opportunities. Khryapa, Tyrus, Nocioni, and a healthier Deng should cover up his weaknesses a little more down there as will, of course, any free agent we sign.
> 
> Trading for Brown, to me, is hoping the Knicks drop a great pick to us and/or there's someone we really want in free agency next year. We certainly wouldn't be making the trade with extending him in mind, right? I don't know who's available, but why not keep Tyson for this season and then trade him towards the trading deadline if it's clear things with him aren't going to work out? We'll have a better idea of the draft pick we'll be getting next year around then as well as a clearer picture of the free agency crop. And, like I said, I still think Tyson will have a lot of value then barring disaster...


Very good post, basically exactly what I think. If anything, his value will go UP this year if we get Wallace or another good BIG down there next to him so he can play PF. If he has a good year, his trade value will sky rocket, and if they still wanna get rid of him, then Tyrus might be ready to take his place at PF. If we just get Big Ben and keep all of our other players, it's pretty much a great off season IMO. If we trade away guys just to save cap space, it's far from great.


----------



## DaBullz

Three seasons ago, before Tyson dove into the stands and hurt his back, we had a poll in this forum and Chandler was voted our best and most valuable player. Ahead of Hinrich. Ahead of Crawford. Ahead of Curry. 

Two seasons ago, Chandler came off the bench in Q4 for us and was a huge factor in us getting 47 wins. I remember at least 4 times he blocked a shot late in the game that sealed the victory. The difference between 47 and 43 wins. Or worse.

How quickly people forget.

You can't teach height, and you can't teach the kind of athleticism that Chandler has.


----------



## DaBabyBullz

DaBullz said:


> Three seasons ago, before Tyson dove into the stands and hurt his back, we had a poll in this forum and Chandler was voted our best and most valuable player. Ahead of Hinrich. Ahead of Crawford. Ahead of Curry.
> 
> Two seasons ago, Chandler came off the bench in Q4 for us and was a huge factor in us getting 47 wins. I remember at least 4 times he blocked a shot late in the game that sealed the victory. The difference between 47 and 43 wins. Or worse.
> 
> How quickly people forget.
> 
> You can't teach height, and you can't teach the kind of athleticism that Chandler has.


Again I agree 100%. You can't look at a young player's down season and say he sucks, when prior to that he looked really good for several seasons. I stated in another post that it'd be different trading him if we knew we'd be able to get a quality big to replace him (a YOUNG ATHLETIC ONE), but it's so hard to find them that it'd just be dumb to trade him. I don't believe that we can really rely on NY to suck it up again to the extent that we get the #2 pick again, and have a shot at Oden or another quality big next year in the draft. Not wise to wager the future of the franchise on a gamble like that.


----------



## 08bryant24

FanOfAll8472 said:


> Has anyone heard about this? Hornets fans are buzzing (no pun intended) about this rumor and possibly picking up Chandler to add athleticism to their frontcourt. Granted, the only real written hint at this rumor is found in this Mike McGraw article (link), but Hornets fans seem to be buzzing about this potential Chandler + Malik Allen for PJ Brown and possibly JR Smith swap. Some Hornets fans believe to have their "sources", while others are already penciling Chandler into their lineup.
> 
> Regardless, this rumor seems to make a lot of sense (ha, not many of those that make sense turn out true) - the Hornets get yet another athletic big who fits their system, while PJ Brown (whether or not he wants out) goes to a playoff team that could use his rebounding and defense badly.


_removed the link._


----------



## different_13

um, yeah, that link's porn..

As relaxing (or not) as that may be in this stressful time, perhaps not the best thing?


anyway, this trade - it's awful.
It doesn't make the team that much better either, i think.
It also makes the team shorter (both height and length wise). PJ might be a better man defender, but he's not shotblocker. Yes, he can mentor the young'uns - but so can Wallace!

If tyson going is the only way to get Ben.. I'm not sure what i'd rather see the Bulls do (as stupid as that sounds).
At least get up to the trade deadline - if Ben and Tyson don't work out, THEN do the trade. And JR Smith needs to get the hell out of Chicago, he doesn't fit there. Send him to San Antonio, get some Horry! (or someone!)

Horrible trade.
'sides - Hornets want athleticism in the frontcourt? hello, Cedric Simmons and Hilton Armstrong?! And they'd be forcing Chandler to play out of postion, next to a mediocre defender (David West).


----------



## SausageKingofChicago

If we land Wallace I'd trade Chandler in a 3 way involving the Hornets and Nuggets 

We deal Chandler and Allen and receive Brown and Nene 

Hornets deal Brown and Macijauskas and receive Chandler 

Nuggets deal Nene and receive Allen and Macijauskas

Our 5 man big rotation would be Nene , Wallace , Brown , Thomas and Songaila ( resigned )


----------



## different_13

.. Yeah, Denver will really give up Nene for Malik Allen and Arvydas Macijauskas..

Chandler for Nene, ok, but Malik Allen?!

Dammit Pax, just keep Chandler for a few months n see how it goes!


----------



## The ROY

different_13 said:


> .. Yeah, Denver will really give up Nene for Malik Allen and Arvydas Macijauskas..
> 
> Chandler for Nene, ok, but Malik Allen?!


lol


----------



## The ROY

I'm sure P.J. being in the last year of his contract has everything to do with this trade. Hinrich & Noc are top priorities next season & I'm sure pax will do everything to keep them.

Like I said, if we can land P.J., one of their 1st rounders & J.R.? I'm all for it.

We could make another trade with all the assets we'd STILL have & become a true contender THIS year. P.J's contract will have a ton of value come trade deadline time.


----------



## kulaz3000

The ROY said:


> I'm sure P.J. being in the last year of his contract has everything to do with this trade. Hinrich & Noc are top priorities next season & I'm sure pax will do everything to keep them.
> 
> Like I said, if we can land P.J., one of their 1st rounders & J.R.? I'm all for it.
> 
> We could make another trade with all the assets we'd STILL have & become a true contender THIS year.


do you think after all the signing of free agents, paxson will move onto extending Hinrichs contract?
i hope its done this off season like the carmelo, bosh and james. he deserves a extention in his contract more than anyone else. and also do it this off season just incase he blows up this year and asks for a max. i think extend him for 5 years at 8 per.


----------



## giusd

I am sorry but I like PJ Brown but he is 37 years old. The days in the nba where you trade some veteran with a couple of year left for a young player or draft pick are long over. Paxson will not trade Chandler for a 37 year old. This would be a joke even if sam smith suggested it.

david


----------



## ChiBulls2315

Ok, I'm getting scared ****less this deal is going to happen. The guy on that site said last night "I'm hearing that the Chandler/Allen for JR/PJ deal could go down on Sunday." It looks like he predicted the Peja signing before anyone mentioned the Hornets going after him. Not good. 

I hope to God he is just getting some bad info. I don't care if Tyson ends up w/ a career average of under 5ppg. We know he can get us 10 boards a game and provides a defensive presence. Even w/ the possible addition of Ben Wallace, this is clearly a cost cutting move and not something we should be doing after signing arguably the top free agent on the market. These guys are 13 years apart in age. PJ is ok, but he is one and done. JR Smith is an interesting piece, but at the same time he didn't even speak to his coach for a large part of last season and needs to grow up. I'm all for giving him a second chance, that's not the problem. He just isn't enough to make me want to do this deal. Not even close. The Hornets were ready to ship him off last February for a 34 year Brent Barry straight up. His value is at an all time low itself. And I thought we just got our big guard in the draft? This just adds another player into the mix that needs minutes when it's going to be tight enough at those spots as is. 

I don't see something great coming along for Chandler this offseason, but I'm willing to go into the season w/ him and Ben and deal with it later vs. doing this. ****, let's finalize the long rumored Troy Murphy and his ugly contract to the Bulls deal before even picking up the phone to listen to this. Please Pax no.


----------



## jbulls

On paper this sounds terrible. I like PJ Brown fine, but he's 36 years old. I'm not a fan of JR Smith at all, I doubt Paxson is either. Unless there's a wrinkle we haven't heard about yet this gets a big fat pass from me.


----------



## step

We have a mole amongst us.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

I would do this in a Barry Maron approved heartbeat.

We shed Tyson's albatross contract, pick up a legit center on a one year deal to tread water and get our center of the future in next year's draft, or in a consolidation trade.

We would still have to add one more tall guy for next season, so we don't end up with the same depleted front court problems as last season.


----------



## TripleDouble

DaBullz said:


> Three seasons ago, before Tyson dove into the stands and hurt his back, we had a poll in this forum and Chandler was voted our best and most valuable player. Ahead of Hinrich. Ahead of Crawford. Ahead of Curry.
> 
> Two seasons ago, Chandler came off the bench in Q4 for us and was a huge factor in us getting 47 wins. I remember at least 4 times he blocked a shot late in the game that sealed the victory. The difference between 47 and 43 wins. Or worse.
> 
> How quickly people forget.
> 
> You can't teach height, and you can't teach the kind of athleticism that Chandler has.


Exactly.


----------



## madox

Chandler for an expiring? Sign me up. 

Don forget that Brown's contract could be valuable at the trade deadline.


----------



## kukoc4ever

DaBullz said:


> Three seasons ago, before Tyson dove into the stands and hurt his back, we had a poll in this forum and Chandler was voted our best and most valuable player. Ahead of Hinrich. Ahead of Crawford. Ahead of Curry.
> 
> Two seasons ago, Chandler came off the bench in Q4 for us and was a huge factor in us getting 47 wins. I remember at least 4 times he blocked a shot late in the game that sealed the victory. The difference between 47 and 43 wins. Or worse.
> 
> How quickly people forget.
> 
> You can't teach height, and you can't teach the kind of athleticism that Chandler has.



This is the truth.

Chandler is another player where people talk about p.p.p.potential... whereas I want to keep him for his p.p.p.p.production that we've all seen. He was one of the top 3 players on our team during our winning season.

He's one of the best rebounders in the league.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2006/jh_ALL_REB.htm

Gets a higher % of available rebounds than Wallace even. 

Chandler in 2004-2005 was as effective for the Bulls as Ben Wallace was for the Pistons last season. And, Ben Wallace is on the decline.

I'd be really leery of signing Wallace if Uncle Jerry forces us to dump Chandler for an aging veteran. 

I think I'd be more comfortable going forward with Chandler/Przy/KnneKnee than with Wallace and PJ.... especially when you extend the timeframe out to 3 years.

Adding PJ and Wallace will not make us a title contender next season... that's the only reason I could see for making such a short-term move.


----------



## theanimal23

Questions for you all: How long is PJ's contract? Will it come off the books in a year? How much salary does he make? And, if this trade occurs, will we have any capspace left to get another big? I assume not enough for Nene/Wilcox. But I hope enough for Butler too.

With that said...

Good Bye Tyson! Pax it's time to get the biggest POS out of town. I'm sorry, but it's been 5 years in the league? And he has done what? Gotten himself a long rich contract b/c he is tall. Man, I wish I was a tall guy too. Unfortunately I'm not, and I'm gonna have to work for whatever I will earn. 

I think Tyson will have some success in NOK b/c of Chris Paul. If they run and push the ball up the court, Tyson will be of some use. But that is not our system. I don't think we have the environment to groom big men, unless they got their own motor. From the talk, Tyrus has this. Lets hope he actually does something unlike Tyson.

I wonder what the other parts of the deal are. I am sick of Tyson, and want him out of here. I will totally take this:

Wallace/Butler
Brown/T2
Noce/Deng
Gordon/Thabo
Hinrich/Gordon

With Brown being replaced by next year's NYK pick or any FA money/trade we make. 

I'm probably in the minority, but let me know when to send Tyson a new housewarming gift.


----------



## step

PJ Brown has a $9M expiring contract, Chandler is earning a minimum of $9,335,974 next year.

Just do it.


----------



## TripleDouble

step said:


> PJ Brown has a $9M expiring contract, Chandler is earning a minimum of $9,335,974 next year.
> 
> Just do it.


Because...?


----------



## kukoc4ever

Gotta love the Bulls org.

They get your hopes up with going after Ben Wallace one day.

The next day you find out its only going to happen if we dump Chandler for an expiring contract.


----------



## Rodman

I would do that trade only if we get Simmons too, that way at least we get some talent back. PJ has been one of my fav players a few years back, but as a lot of you said already, he's OLD. 

Capologists: Does this deal give us enough capspace to go after a top FA next year?


----------



## step

> Because...?


Because Tyson is a lump of ****e!

I didn't feel it was necessary rehashing my opinion considering I did suggest a similar idea way back, and probably so did several others.


----------



## theanimal23

step said:


> PJ Brown has a $9M expiring contract, Chandler is earning a minimum of $9,335,974 next year.
> 
> Just do it.


Ditto. Do it Pax, Do it.

Tyson may have success in his future, but I just don't see it happening in Chicago. And I won't be surprised, if within 2 years, Tyrus shows Tyson and his 2 inch biceps what it means to be a man inside the paint.

Get the kid out of there. Tyson is working out 2 hrs/day this summer. Hmm, I wonder how different it is from his past workouts. Repeat these steps: Catch ball off backboard. Go up for 2 hand dunk. Start flexing your biceps and hit yourself in the chest. Act like you are all macho, then go kick a player. 

If we need defense, we might as well get the best (Wallace), and ship Tyson out and get a guy with decent defense and who can at least score 10-12 pts/game.


----------



## kukoc4ever

Paxson is trying to increase our size by trading our tallest player, best rebounder and shot blocker for a geezer?


----------



## kulaz3000

Rodman said:


> I would do that trade only if we get Simmons too, that way at least we get some talent back. PJ has been one of my fav players a few years back, but as a lot of you said already, he's OLD.
> 
> Capologists: Does this deal give us enough capspace to go after a top FA next year?


yes i agree. i hate to lose chandler for a player who mind is you was once a good player but is no longer. if brown was even 30 id potentially do the still but still reluctantly. but to trade chandler for brown for finacial reason, thats just disgraceful. but like you said above. instead of j.r smith who seems to be heading towards the j.r rider path of loads of potential but doesn't have the head to put it together i would rather one of their rookie bigs in hilton armstrong or cerdric simmons. hell even both... then id do the trade.


----------



## The ROY

Tyrus is what Chandler was SUPPOSED to be..

Having Wallace...makes Tyson expendable...Plus he had to leave, he's part of Jerry's kids


----------



## yodurk

Can't say I like this trade. 

I'm totally prepared to trade the underachieving Chandler, but there has got to be something better than this. Our best move, IMO, would be to hang on to Chandler until a consolidation opportunity comes along. His large salary not only makes a good cap filler, but his youth, size, and athleticism from the PF/C position makes him a positive asset. If PJ Brown were 33 yrs old and still had a few years left on his deal, then I'd be more inclined. As it stands, we can't be expecting much out of him at this age. And Chandler is not such a bad player where he should simply get dumped. Maybe there's another asset being thrown our way to sweeten the deal but let me point out that JR Smith does not fit the Skaxson mold. I really have a hard time seeing this go through.


----------



## mizenkay

kukoc4ever said:


> Paxson is trying to increase our size by trading our tallest player, best rebounder and shot blocker for a geezer?



thank you. i hate this trade. 

*hate it.*


----------



## BG7

Tyson's had one off year, i wouldn't write him off. But we should only make this trade if he refuses to take a DNA test.


----------



## Dornado

Amazing how some of you can declare a guys career over at the age of 23. 

PJ Brown is not good. This trade is not good. The grass is not always greener.


----------



## Diable

It's damned near retarded to think that you get Cedric Simmons back in this deal.He's probably going to be as good Tyson CHandler and he's going to cost you about the same over four years as Chandler will next year.At any rate this deal isn't very likely.The Hornets want to move Brown to get rid of his salary and they can't be stupid enough to trade a productive 9M/year player with one year on his deal for a nonproductive 10M/yr player with a long term deal.Hate to break it to you guys,but at 36 Brown is still as good a player as Chandler and he earned the right to be overpaid.Chandler got it because he might become a good player still.


----------



## narek

Someday Chandler may be traded, but I don't think it'll be for an expiring contract. Pax hasn't given up on the kid.


----------



## madox

Actually even though I'm really really down on Chandler, I'm starting to think the best thing to do is just keep him. If the trade is Smith+Brown for Chandler+Allen I say no. Replace J.R. Smith with Cedric Simmons and I say yes.


----------



## The ROY

narek said:


> Someday Chandler may be traded, but I don't think it'll be for an expiring contract. Pax hasn't given up on the kid.


Personally, I think the opposite..

Trading him for an expiring contract gives him the money to resign hinrich and noc next year..

I also think they've given up on him..


----------



## theanimal23

I don't see his career getting significantly better. Sure, maybe better than last year. But I don't approve of paying $10-$11 million dollars for a guy who loses PT to the likes of the scrubs we had in our frontcourt. Talk about bang for your buck. Say what you want, but Chandler was invisible for half a year. Will he bounce back, I dunno? For a guy whose job is to just rebound and block 2 shots a game, I don't know how you lose confidence? I imagine that you gotta suck mentally (which is a huge part of the game), and be an extremely a crappy player if you can't layup the ball, rebound at a high rate (he was MIA till Feb or something) while being 7'1" tall and jumping pretty high. I'd love to see this kid play in the old times where guys like Dennis and Charles would can his a$$ even though they were half a foot shorter.

You heard it here, Tyrus will be playing better and starting in front of Tyson (if we can get a center) at the PF spot by XMas of his T2's second year. I would not be surprised to see it happen by the end of this season.

Seriously, ask yourself guys. $10 million dollars for a guy to come off the bench and rebound? To only rebound? 

After watching Eddy, Tyson, JC, etc come in and play for us... if a player does not show evident signs of improvement by his 3rd year (few exceptions of 4th year [JO]), then he isn't going anywhere.


----------



## laso

NO WAY!!! Chandler has been a huge disappointment last year, but he's 23 athletic, can run, and still has those outings where he changes the game defensively. Two years ago, he was consistently key down the clutch. I'm willing to give him a chance and see how he comes back after the summer where he has claimed he will bust his rear end more than he ever has.

Besides, why would we trade him for a player who's about to break apart. How did you guys like bringing Pippen in the end of his career? How about Charles Oakley? How did that experience pan out?


----------



## narek

The ROY said:


> Personally, I think the opposite..
> 
> Trading him for an expiring contract gives him the money to resign hinrich and noc next year..
> 
> I also think they've given up on him..


They're not going to have any problem signing Hinrich and Noc next year. They're not in a spot yet where they have to worry about the cap in resigning their own players. That'll happen, but it's not happening quite so fast to trade a 23 year old for a 37 year old.


----------



## theanimal23

The Pippen, Oakley signings meant nothing. We sucked then, and it would have done nothing to win an extra 3 games.


----------



## Dornado

Diable said:


> It's damned near retarded to think that you get Cedric Simmons back in this deal.He's probably going to be as good Tyson CHandler and he's going to cost you about the same over four years as Chandler will next year.At any rate this deal isn't very likely.The Hornets want to move Brown to get rid of his salary and they can't be stupid enough to trade a productive 9M/year player with one year on his deal for a nonproductive 10M/yr player with a long term deal.Hate to break it to you guys,but at 36 Brown is still as good a player as Chandler and he earned the right to be overpaid.Chandler got it because he might become a good player still.



So 9.3 ppg 7.2 reb and .67 blks in 31 minutes per game is productive....

but 5.23 ppg 9.0 reb and 1.23 blks in 26 minutes is unproductive?

May I ask where the line is drawn?

Plus one guy is 7-1 and 23 years old....


----------



## yodurk

theanimal23 said:


> Seriously, ask yourself guys. $10 million dollars for a guy to come off the bench and rebound? To only rebound?
> 
> After watching Eddy, Tyson, JC, etc come in and play for us... if a player does not show evident signs of improvement by his 3rd year (few exceptions of 4th year [JO]), then he isn't going anywhere.


I don't think that's the issue though. I doubt anyone here _wants_ to have a $10M backup whose only skill is rebounding and defending; the vast majority are in agreement about that. The more significant question is this: Is there likely to be a better trade opportunity for Chandler than this one? Dumping Chandler for a 1-year lease on an aging PJ Brown is practically nothing as far as I'm concerned. And that's not getting any value for what I think is still a pretty valuable asset (there are probably a dozen teams that would love to have Chandler on their roster). Like I said before, I'm all for trading Chandler but he's best used in a consolidation package for a positional upgrade and this most certainly is not that.


----------



## theanimal23

Diable said:


> It's damned near retarded to think that you get Cedric Simmons back in this deal.He's probably going to be as good Tyson CHandler and he's going to cost you about the same over four years as Chandler will next year.At any rate this deal isn't very likely.The Hornets want to move Brown to get rid of his salary and they can't be stupid enough to trade a productive 9M/year player with one year on his deal for a nonproductive 10M/yr player with a long term deal.Hate to break it to you guys,but at 36 Brown is still as good a player as Chandler and he earned the right to be overpaid.*Chandler got it because he might become a good player still*.


Correction, Chandler got it b/c he is tall and we had no one else over 6'9". Chandler is also good at faking the jib. "Yeah I've been *cough* working out all summer. I've added a *cough* jumpshot. I can *cough* catch the ball."


----------



## theanimal23

yodurk said:


> I don't think that's the issue though. I doubt anyone here _wants_ to have a $10M backup whose only skill is rebounding and defending; the vast majority are in agreement about that. The more significant question is this: Is there likely to be a better trade opportunity for Chandler than this one? Dumping Chandler for a 1-year lease on an aging PJ Brown is practically nothing as far as I'm concerned. And that's not getting any value for what I think is still a pretty valuable asset (there are probably a dozen teams that would love to have Chandler on their roster). Like I said before, I'm all for trading Chandler but he's best used in a consolidation package for a positional upgrade and this most certainly is not that.


If you are implying (correct me if I'm wrong), that we can trade Chandler for a more valueable player... then I don't see that happening. Any other team will want one piece of our core (maybe 2) + Chandler. No team is going to be enticed for Chandler alone for a proven Vet. We are not trading a Dwight Howard for a KG. 

The way I see it, with our true core (not including Tyson) we will be damn good. We don't need to overpay for this guy now, if we can trade him and add a quality veteran (future trade using PJ or signing) that can play above average D, and provide us with 10ppg. At least this guy will somewhat earn his salary.


----------



## The ROY

Only thing you're missing with Tyson is size..

Wallace & Thomas are beasts on the blocks and boards....So you're not really losing anything besides a bad contract...


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

He's not unproductive, but Chandler is not an effective center, we have plenty of tweener forwards and F/C's. and he has a huge, long term contract.

If we can get free of that contract, replace him with a stopgap, and concentrate on getting our center of the future in place in the next year, I think that is a reasonable way to go.

Now if I had reasonable expecations of actually landing GO with the #1 pick next year I would stand pat with Ty as a 4 to support Greg and an aging but effective Ben W. while Thomas develops.

Getting Brown for a year doesn't make us worse...I think he is basically a wash for Tyson.

But getting rid of that boondoggle of a contract gives us more f...f...f...flexibility toward improving that 5 spot long term. We can't bank on getting Oden in 2007. Not with the new dawning of the prophet Isiah in NY. (J/K, but we can;t rely on them being _that bad_ again. You almost can't be that bad on purpose, not twice in a row).


----------



## charlietyra

yodurk said:


> I don't think that's the issue though. I doubt anyone here _wants_ to have a $10M backup whose only skill is rebounding and defending; the vast majority are in agreement about that. The more significant question is this: Is there likely to be a better trade opportunity for Chandler than this one? Dumping Chandler for a 1-year lease on an aging PJ Brown is practically nothing as far as I'm concerned. And that's not getting any value for what I think is still a pretty valuable asset (there are probably a dozen teams that would love to have Chandler on their roster). Like I said before, I'm all for trading Chandler but he's best used in a consolidation package for a positional upgrade and this most certainly is not that.



I seriously doubt "a dozen teams...would love to have Chandler." When he was a restricted FA last year I don't recall any team expressing any interest. And this was before he had such a crappy season. Chandler is an overpaid zero in my book. Always will be. It sounds like the Brown deal would be the best opportunity to dump his tuchus. If there is a better deal for him out there let's take it.

Unless you have not figured it out by now I CAN'T STAND THE GUY!


----------



## schorsch554

News from the Hornets expert:

Speedy wants more $4-5 mil; Bobby would be in the $2-3 mil range. The Bulls deal could be done by today--PJ+JR for Tyson Chandler and Malik Allen. There is, however, another team pursuing PJ and that could complicate matters. While initillally this wasn't being discussed, word has it that Duhon could now be involved in the trade.

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34768

edit: In the "update-thread" he said, that there is another team going after Tyson. So I guess he meant Tyson, while typing "another team pursuing PJ"...


----------



## The ROY

Couldn't we still afford someone like Nazr or Jackie Butler?

C Wallace / Mohammed or Butler
F Brown / Thomas

Personally, I'd be happy going into next year with that frontline. I'm sure you could get Butler for half the MLE or possibly less.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

schorsch554 said:


> News from the Hornets expert:
> 
> Speedy wants more $4-5 mil; Bobby would be in the $2-3 mil range. The Bulls deal could be done by today--PJ+JR for Tyson Chandler and Malik Allen. There is, however, another team pursuing PJ and that could complicate matters. While initillally this wasn't being discussed, word has it that Duhon could now be involved in the trade.
> 
> http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34768


Welcome to our board and thanks for the update from your world.


----------



## Frankensteiner

I won't be at all dissappointed with this trade if the Wallace deal actually goes down. Chandler can't be counted on to be anything more than a backup, and because he's making $10+ M, his contract is awful for a backup. With Big Ben, Tyson becomes pretty redundant.

Plus, not having to read the "Tyson just needs a big buddy to be successful" excuses would make me happy.


----------



## The ROY

Dude said he wished duhon was involved...there was no mention of him actually being part of the deal..


----------



## theanimal23

Few points: 

Not trying to attack any poster. Just a few things I think about Tyson and his game. These are opinions I've had about him for a while, and mentioned very briefly here and there in the past.


1. We won't get a better deal for Tyson. Hell Washington got lucky getting Caron for Kwame. I don't even think we'll get that. People are realizing what POS those HS guys were from 2001. Sure Diop made a name for himself in the playoffs, but his role was to stand there. He didn't have to do lick. 

2. There no centers if you are looking for a guy of the size of Shaq and Yao. But, seriously, back in the day, even in the early 90s for most of us. Centers were not so huge. They were Tyson's size. Hakeem, David, etc. Sure, they were strong, UNLIKE Tyson. But they were of his height and not large (not Eddy/Shaq esqe). The fact of the matter is, it is an excuse to say Tyson needs a center. I'm sorry, but this isn't like football where you have a nickelback come in and covers the slot guy or the 3rd WR. This is basketball, where if you expect to play a lot of minutes, you should be able to play. On the offensive end, defensive end, and whatever other requirements. It's a freakin excuse to say, I need another big man to play next to me, so I can come from top and block it. Oh, wait, TimeOut, we need to put Tyson in the game to come in for a weakside block since JoelP is playing center now for Sweets. 

I'm sorry if this seems cynical, but unlike some sports, basketball requires you to do it all on the court. Certain players can do certain things better, thus they are role players and you use them for matchups. But, these players do not warrant $10mil/yr contracts and then give off excuses saying you lack confidence, etc. You might as well go Vin Baker on me, and just say you don't give a damn about basketball versus walking the walk and improving.


----------



## mizenkay

_so is this possibly the reason we re-upped malik so quickly._

wow. if this goes down, pax has some serious 'splainin to do.

i mean the OP in the ben wallace thread said pax might be trying to trade TC to the western conf. you know he wouldn't give him to division rival detroit.

and do we think the Scott Skiles School of Intense Jib will work for JR Smith? i mean the kid has talent, but somehow i just don't see it. EDIT: BUT if it were to work, it could be a genius move.

and as much as i kindof sometimes slag off duhon, i hope he's not included in the deal.


EDIT: i'm a little late to this thread. would this go down ONLY IF WE _DON'T GET_ WALLACE?


----------



## jbulls

mizenkay said:


> _so is this possibly the reason we re-upped malik so quickly._
> 
> wow. if this goes down, pax has some serious 'splainin to do.
> 
> i mean the OP in the ben wallace thread said pax might be trying to trade TC to the western conf. you know he wouldn't give him to division rival detroit.
> 
> and do we think the Scott Skiles School of Intense Jib will work for JR Smith? i mean the kid has talent, but somehow i just don't see it.
> 
> and as much as i kindof sometimes slag off duhon, i hope he's not included in the deal.


It better not be.


----------



## theanimal23

I can see JR being traded elsewhere. Possibly SA like he was rumored to be at the trade deadline. I think JR is very talented. But who knows what you will get with him. You might as well take the chances on him than getting a guy you will waive ASAP.

Edit: I personally like Malik a lot. He has a sweet J and comes cheap. One of my favorite role players.


----------



## Frankensteiner

yodurk said:


> I don't think that's the issue though. I doubt anyone here _wants_ to have a $10M backup whose only skill is rebounding and defending; the vast majority are in agreement about that. The more significant question is this: Is there likely to be a better trade opportunity for Chandler than this one? Dumping Chandler for a 1-year lease on an aging PJ Brown is practically nothing as far as I'm concerned. And that's not getting any value for what I think is still a pretty valuable asset (there are probably a dozen teams that would love to have Chandler on their roster). Like I said before, I'm all for trading Chandler but he's best used in a consolidation package for a positional upgrade and this most certainly is not that.


I think there's some misconception as to the value of an underachieving, one-dimensional player with a horrible contract. I mean, if I'm running a team that isn't from New York, there's no way I would even want to discuss taking on that contract. If Tyson plays like he did 2 seasons ago, he's worth his money, but banking on that is a pretty big gamble.


----------



## mizenkay

in that thread in the hornets forum some dude did say that he was excited to get "a proven big man" or something like that, in chandler.


welllll...then again.....


----------



## The ROY

Smith/Sefolosha make our backcourt alot bigger & 2x more talented n athletic

or you could send JR & Viktor K. to the spurs for the rights to Scola

C Wallace / Scola
F Brown / Thomas
F Deng / Nocioni
G Gordon / Sefolosha
G Hinrich / Duhon


----------



## jbulls

The only way I like this, is if:

1. We sign Wallace to a four year deal somehow.

2. One of NO's two 1st rounders this year is involved.

3. JR Smith is immediately sent packing for something of value.

Even then I'm going to have to wrap my head around it. Seems like this is the direction things are headed though...


----------



## theanimal23

Not to go off in a tangent... But who knows. Maybe Pax will then pull another blockbuster trade. We would have a crowded backcourt, maybe one of them go, along with PJ, and a 'piece' of the core for a big name player. Just throwing it out there. I rather keep our guys. But that could happen along with the signing of Wallace. If so, we'd be instant title contenders.


----------



## The ROY

One thing I noticed is, on draftexpress, the bulls summer team didn't take not one undrafted player...they don't even have the line-up for us availible but they showed all the undrafted players who got placement...

Maybe there are a FEW things going down.


----------



## yodurk

Frankensteiner said:


> I think there's some misconception as to the value of an underachieving, one-dimensional player with a horrible contract. I mean, if I'm running a team that isn't from New York, there's no way I would even want to discuss taking on that contract. If Tyson plays like he did 2 seasons ago, he's worth his money, but banking on that is a pretty big gamble.


I may have overstated my opinion of Chandler's value. I'm not saying we can trade him for a stud or anything, but I think if we make him part of a joint package deal then he adds positive value in a trade. You don't think a team like New Jersey would love to add Tyson to their frontcourt? There are some teams that lack any sort of rebounding/defensive threat whatsoever. And to get this from a young athletic 7-footer is worth $8-9M per season for some GM's. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## The ROY

Wallace is the rich man's version of Chandler...

There's no point in having both...especially when Thomas has the same rebounding and blocking instincts...


----------



## theanimal23

yodurk said:


> I may have overstated my opinion of Chandler's value. I'm not saying we can trade him for a stud or anything, but I think if we make him part of a joint package deal then he adds positive value in a trade. You don't think a team like New Jersey would love to add Tyson to their frontcourt? There are some teams that lack any sort of rebounding/defensive threat whatsoever. And to get this from a young athletic 7-footer is worth $8-9M per season for some GM's. That's all I'm saying.


I understand where you are coming from now. I think, Tyson would be better suited for teams like that. But I also think no team will give us anything we would find enticing in return. We would want a guy like RJeff, but no one would give him up for Tyson. The best we will get is a situation like this. 

Otherwise we are asking to trade one scrub with a lousy contract for another.


----------



## theanimal23

The ROY said:


> Wallace is the rich man's version of Chandler...
> 
> There's no point in having both...especially when Thomas has the same rebounding and blocking instincts...


I can see it now. Tyrus will be so fierce in practice, he will make Tyson go home and cry to his wife.


----------



## The ROY

theanimal23 said:


> I can see it now. Tyrus will be so fierce in practice, he will make Tyson go home and cry to his wife.


and kid


----------



## Frankensteiner

theanimal23 said:


> Not to go off in a tangent... But who knows. Maybe Pax will then pull another blockbuster trade. We would have a crowded backcourt, maybe one of them go, along with PJ, and a 'piece' of the core for a big name player. Just throwing it out there. I rather keep our guys. But that could happen along with the signing of Wallace. If so, we'd be instant title contenders.


That's not a bad point. I would think PJ Brown's expiring contract would be much easier salary filler than Chandler's contract.


----------



## madox

The ROY said:


> Smith/Sefolosha make our backcourt alot bigger & 2x more talentedn athletic
> 
> or you could send JR & Viktor K. to the spurs for the rights to Scola
> 
> C Wallace / Scola
> F Brown / Thomas
> F Deng / Nocioni
> G Gordon / Sefolosha
> G Hinrich / Duhon


I like it. Scola really impressed me on Team Argentina. And we'd have still have Sweetney for some depth. 

Paxson should just try to involve S.A. as a third party in the trade if they're willing.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

theanimal23 said:


> I can see it now. Tyrus will be so fierce in practice, he will make Tyson go home and cry to his wife.


And somehow it won't be as compelling an EA Sports commercial as Adam Morrison's was...


----------



## Dornado

Frankensteiner said:


> I think there's some misconception as to the value of an underachieving, one-dimensional player with a horrible contract. I mean, if I'm running a team that isn't from New York, there's no way I would even want to discuss taking on that contract. If Tyson plays like he did 2 seasons ago, he's worth his money, but banking on that is a pretty big gamble.



Defense... rebounding....

Sounds like two dimensions to me.


----------



## such sweet thunder

Just to add my two cents (not that anyone should care), I don't think Tyson's contract is outlandish given his current production and his possibility for growth. But Ben Wallace will make him somewhat redundant -- always a bad thing from a basketball stand point. 

I would be in favor of trading Chandler for P.J. Brown if they threw in Hilton Armstrong. I've been a big fan of Armstrong for a while now, and a twelfth pick and an expiring contract seems like adequate value.


----------



## The ROY

Realtalk..

We shoudln't even pay this any mind until it hits a RELIABLE source...

Its' been mentioned NOWHERE else besides a message board...


----------



## Ron Cey

I don't have a problem with this deal if we sign Wallace. In fact, if we sign Wallace, its a great deal. 

Wallace and Brown are a tremendous upgrade over what we had last year. We get out from under Tyson's long term deal. 

Importantly, I think, is the we get mentors like Brown and Wallace for Tyrus Thomas. I don't think that can be overstated.

But if we do this deal with no Wallace deal, I don't like it at all.


----------



## airety

"You should never trade big for small, and never trade young for old."

The Tao of Basketball


----------



## MikeDC

Ron Cey said:


> I don't have a problem with this deal if we sign Wallace. In fact, if we sign Wallace, its a great deal.
> 
> Wallace and Brown are a tremendous upgrade over what we had last year. We get out from under Tyson's long term deal.
> 
> Importantly, I think, is the we get mentors like Brown and Wallace for Tyrus Thomas. I don't think that can be overstated.
> 
> But if we do this deal with no Wallace deal, I don't like it at all.


Why is it a better deal with Wallace? Assuming we sign Wallace, we go from having 1 young guy and 1 old guy to two old guys. How is that better for a young team?

Granted Chandler and Wallace aren't a good fit together, but airety is right on target with this one. If we can't convert Chandler into a guy who's a bit younger and more long term than PJ Brown, we need to hang on to him.

If we want a "mentor", it seems to me we could pretty easily sign AD as a practice player or even as a dedicated player development coach at a fraction of the expense. If not AD, I hear Charles Oakley is available too. :clown:


----------



## Swan

My take on it is it might be a little different than is being reported. Our front office has generally been pretty good, and it seems premature that TC would be dumped for strictly cap reasons. I think Pax wants at least one veteran big guy leader. Wallace is #1 choice, and if he comes, would make a PJ aquisition redunant. However, if wallace doesn't come, a swap for PJ makes sense, but not with chandler. More like PJ for Malik Allen straight up. (with maybe a piece like sweetney or JR thrown in).

Why for us? We get PJ's leadership, a cap hit of around 6 mill leaves us with enough space to get a Pryzbilla or Nazr.

Why for Hornets? They get an extra 6 mill in space, can now resign claxton and butler comfortably.

Let's think a minute. Why would the Hornets want Chandler when they just got two rookies who do the same thing?


----------



## T.Shock

airety said:


> "You should never trade big for small, and never trade young for old."
> 
> The Tao of Basketball


I think the former is becoming more and more obsolete. Gone is the days of McHale, Walton, Kareem, Ewing, Shaq, Hakeem, David Robinson. The game is becoming quicker and with the new defensive rules, big men aren't as effective as they used to be.


----------



## Electric Slim

OT: Peja just signed with the Hornets


----------



## Ron Cey

> Why is it a better deal with Wallace? Assuming we sign Wallace, we go from having 1 young guy and 1 old guy to two old guys. How is that better for a young team?


Because Wallace gives us what Chandler does, only 10x better. "1 young guy" vs. "2 old guys" is a bit of an oversimplification, don't you think.

Brown and Wallace are both more productive than Chandler, regardless of their ages. And they fit together better. Brown can actually reliably hit a jump shot. 



> Granted Chandler and Wallace aren't a good fit together, but airety is right on target with this one. If we can't convert Chandler into a guy who's a bit younger and more long term than PJ Brown, we need to hang on to him.


I don't have a problem keeping Tyson. I just think its a fine trade. And we do have a "younger" Chandler now. Tyrus Thomas. I've believed, and continue to believe, that he'll be a power forward. 



> If we want a "mentor", it seems to me we could pretty easily sign AD as a practice player or even as a dedicated player development coach at a fraction of the expense. If not AD, I hear Charles Oakley is available too. :clown:


AD can't play. Brown is still very productive - more productive than Chandler - and he'd get respect from Tyrus Thomas on and off the court. Brown is also from Louisianna, just like Thomas.

To me, this is a trade for several reasons: (a) get rid of Tyson's contract; (b) get more veteran experience and leadership; (c) get more productive in the interior; and (d) get a mentor for Thomas. Don't underestimate the importance of the last one in Paxson's mind. I think Paxson thinks he's got something truly real special with Thomas. 

Plus I think the JR Smith thing is a good risk. If he can be straightened out, he's a legit talent. If not, no loss.

I like it. But only if Wallace is signed.


----------



## bulls

This all seems like a catch 22..the TC deal wont go down unless ben is signed,and it looks like we wont sign ben unless the TC deal goes down..also whats up with HR sayin this deal is happenin today?i thought no1 in the nba worked on sundays?

also i find it very funny the ppl that are saying "TC is only 24,give him more time as he will come around because he's only 24" are the sameones saying "if we get JR,trade him anywhere for useless junk".
why do you all beleave that TC at 24 can turn the courner EVEN tho he's been in the nba 5-6 years now and been given chances after chances to prove himself,yet JR cant even tho he is younger and hasnt been given nearly the chances TC has?and dont say that SG is one of our strength POS,as the rook hasnt even played a NBA game yet and it looks like PAX is more then willing to ship BEN and Duhon out of town..


----------



## kukoc4ever

The season after next, what combo will be better?

PJ Brown and Ben Wallace or Tyson Chandler, Przy and Nene.

Will the Bulls win the NBA Championship next season if they land Ben Wallace and PJ Brown?


----------



## WookiesOnRitalin

Why is this deal great?

We are renting PJ Brown for one year who is 37 who is RAPIDLY on the decline. More so than Ben Wallace. He's not that much of a better prospect than Tyson. He also has no garuntees of resigning or staying healthy. 

So basically, you trade Tyson Chandler for nothing. Notta. Zilch. Basically you have two aging big men with no protection what so ever when their skills decline. No, two old guys is NOT an oversimplification when you trade a 23 year old 7 footer with room to grow for a 6-9 PF who is 37 is on the verge of retirement. 

If you trade Chandler, you must get some value for him. Otherwise, this is just a mere contract dump. 

If that is the case, then don't sign me up. Unless we get some serious pick out of this, it's worthless. Absolutely worthless.


----------



## bulls

kukoc4ever said:


> The season after next, what combo will be better?
> 
> PJ Brown and Ben Wallace or Tyson Chandler, Przy and Nene.
> 
> Will the Bulls win the NBA Championship next season if they land Ben Wallace and PJ Brown.


1st off we never could of had NENE and another top FA big becuase we only have 17esh in cap space,and each would want around 10 each atleast..and 2nd im go with the old farts of BEN/PJ because TC couldnt even get off the bench on a bulls team that had SF's starting at PF,for cryin out loud Luke Schenscher beat out TC,NENE "COULD" be Done as we dont know how that knee will hold up and Joel well is a white TC..


----------



## SALO

They're saying the deal was agreed to PRIOR to the draft. This makes a lot of sense when you consider...

1) After the Bulls acquired Tyrus Thomas, the ESPN crew were all giving Paxson his props. Then, out of nowhere, Greg Anthony says "Don't be surprised to see Tyson Chandler moved soon." He probably had word of a deal in place. 

2) We picked up the option on Malik Allen so quickly. 

I don't see why we need to include Malik for J.R. anyway. J.R. has negative trade value, IMO. Allen is a bargain at $1.8M. The deal works without them. I'd rather have a future pick instead of Smith, or I'd expand the deal to include Armstrong or Simmons. J.R. Smith makes zero sense, especially with his poor jib.


----------



## different_13

Heh, wonder what the Hornets post offence is gonna be like with Chandler, Simmons and Hilton Armstrong (all likely to be Tysonesque on offence..)

Thank god for David West (betche thought noone would ever say that!)


Still don't think this deal is the best solution long term for the bulls - if they advance to the conference finals with wallace and chandler, surely the owner should be willing to pay?


----------



## The ROY

SALO said:


> They're saying the deal was agreed to PRIOR to the draft. This makes a lot of sense when you consider...
> 
> 1) After the Bulls acquired Tyrus Thomas, the ESPN crew were all giving Paxson his props. Then, out of nowhere, Greg Anthony says "Don't be surprised to see Tyson Chandler moved soon." He probably had word of a deal in place.
> 
> 2) We picked up the option on Malik Allen so quickly.
> .


Chad Ford said the same thing


----------



## bulls

WookiesOnRitalin said:


> Why is this deal great?
> 
> We are renting PJ Brown for one year who is 37 who is RAPIDLY on the decline. More so than Ben Wallace. He's not that much of a better prospect than Tyson. He also has no garuntees of resigning or staying healthy.
> 
> So basically, you trade Tyson Chandler for nothing. Notta. Zilch. Basically you have two aging big men with no protection what so ever when their skills decline. No, two old guys is NOT an oversimplification when you trade a 23 year old 7 footer with room to grow for a 6-9 PF who is 37 is on the verge of retirement.
> 
> *If you trade Chandler, you must get some value for him*. Otherwise, this is just a mere contract dump.
> 
> If that is the case, then don't sign me up. Unless we get some serious pick out of this, it's worthless. Absolutely worthless.


you know what,PAX would LOVE to get some of what you call "VALUE" for TC,but in order to do that he will need another GM to VALUE TC and you know what?NONE of them do,why's that? BECAUSE HE HAS REGRESSED not IMPROVED get that thur your thick head.we are paying TC 10mil to come off the bench and give us 8 boards,10 TO's and 6 fouls,now thats using your money wisely huh?

PJ isnt going to take us home,but he will be that AD on the floor and also at the trade deadline,and by havin JR here you know no matter what Little Ben will have a good backup out there with size on the cheap.JR very well could become a starter on this team and turn into a star,dont buy into all of the haters CRAP around here PPL THE KID HAS MAD GAME...


----------



## different_13

yeah he does, but he has a bad attitude and personality (or at least has so far).

And if he doesn't get along with Byron Scott, why would he get along with Scott Skiles?

He'd also reduce playing time for Gordon, Deng and Thabo.

Valuable trade piece maybe, but of no other real use to the Bulls (with the current roster).

N Yeah, PJ Brown can play the AD role.. it just seems like Tyson would fit better.

And does anyone want a frontcourt rotations consisting of the following heights:
6'8; 6'8, 6'8, 6'9, 6'7 (Nocioni will fill in at PF i imagine)

other dudes - Ben Wallce, Tyrus Thomas, Mike Sweetney, PJ Brown.

That's not a tall froncourt. Lengthy maybe (well, Wallce and Thomas are for sure), but short heightwise.


----------



## bulls

different_13 said:


> yeah he does, but he has a bad attitude and personality (or at least has so far).
> 
> And if he doesn't get along with Byron Scott, why would he get along with Scott Skiles?
> 
> He'd also reduce playing time for Gordon, Deng and Thabo.
> 
> Valuable trade piece maybe, but of no other real use to the Bulls (with the current roster).
> 
> N Yeah, PJ Brown can play the AD role.. it just seems like Tyson would fit better.
> 
> And does anyone want a frontcourt rotations consisting of the following heights:
> 6'8; 6'8, 6'8, 6'9, 6'7 (Nocioni will fill in at PF i imagine)
> 
> other dudes - Ben Wallce, Tyrus Thomas, Mike Sweetney, PJ Brown.
> 
> That's not a tall froncourt. Lengthy maybe (well, Wallce and Thomas are for sure), but short heightwise.


PJ is 6-11 239.where are you getting that he's 6-9?


----------



## theanimal23

For me personally, it is value that we are getting an expiring contract for Tyson. His value is not going to get higher. Unless Tyson magically becomes a DPOY candidate. And I don't see that happening with his foul trouble.


----------



## TripleDouble

kukoc4ever said:


> The season after next, what combo will be better?
> 
> PJ Brown and Ben Wallace or Tyson Chandler, Przy and Nene.
> 
> Will the Bulls win the NBA Championship next season if they land Ben Wallace and PJ Brown?


Damn. I think this may be the only issue we've ever seen eye to eye on. I'm with you on this 100%.


----------



## theanimal23

I don't think we'll be able to add both Pryz and Nene. 

I don't think Pax will target both. Plus, I think we will end up having a logjam at the PF/C positions. Tyrus is our future at PF. We are buying time till he reaches the stage to hold the position. Our center will either be Ben Wallace for the next 3 years or Pryz/Nene (whoever we get). This player will start for 2-3 years until their contract runs out, they are a bench player, or traded away for our NYK/Bulls pick next year. 

This goes back to the role, is Tyson your 11 million dollar bench player who is scared to play C, so he needs to play PF? What I'm getting at is: I doubt Pax looks at Chandler as the guy who will man the middle for us the next 5 years. He knows he had to sign Tyson to an outrageous deal last year since he could not afford to lose two 7-footers. I say, if you don't get Wallace, go for Wilcox/Nene. 

Paxson is buying time for Tyson, until he can find a reasonable deal that is an expiring contract + an asset, or till he can find another big man who can take Tyson's spot/role and then get rid of him.


----------



## WookiesOnRitalin

bulls said:


> you know what,PAX would LOVE to get some of what you call "VALUE" for TC,but in order to do that he will need another GM to VALUE TC and you know what?NONE of them do,why's that? BECAUSE HE HAS REGRESSED not IMPROVED get that thur your thick head.we are paying TC 10mil to come off the bench and give us 8 boards,10 TO's and 6 fouls,now thats using your money wisely huh?
> 
> PJ isnt going to take us home,but he will be that AD on the floor and also at the trade deadline,and by havin JR here you know no matter what Little Ben will have a good backup out there with size on the cheap.JR very well could become a starter on this team and turn into a star,dont buy into all of the haters CRAP around here PPL THE KID HAS MAD GAME...


You know, exaggeration does not really get your point across that well nor does it impress anyone of your intelligence. 10 TOs? Even you can admit that was stupid to say. 

Counterpoint:

If Chandler's value is sooooooooo low then why move him at all? Why not let him have a chance to buff up his value before dumping him? It is not like Tyson is an invalid. He can play at a higher level now than PJ Brown. So why trade for a lesser player (point) only to have him for one year (point) with no garuntees of his health (point) or that his skills have not continued their decline from last year (point). 

Frankly, there is no real reason to do this other than the fact that management DESPISES Tyson Chandler. Maybe he gives Paxson gas. I don't know? 

It just doesn't add up. The guy deserves redemption and I say lets give it to him for one more year. If he doesn't improve then you can trade him for a bag of peanuts and some chewing gum for all I care. I'm just saying there is value to Tyson and the fact that you get NO value in return in this deal makes the least bit of sense. 

Does Chandler deserve another chance and ultimately his last chance?


----------



## SausageKingofChicago

ChiBulls2315 said:


> Ok, I'm getting scared ****less this deal is going to happen. The guy on that site said last night "I'm hearing that the Chandler/Allen for JR/PJ deal could go down on Sunday." It looks like he predicted the Peja signing before anyone mentioned the Hornets going after him. Not good.
> 
> I hope to God he is just getting some bad info. I don't care if Tyson ends up w/ a career average of under 5ppg. We know he can get us 10 boards a game and provides a defensive presence. Even w/ the possible addition of Ben Wallace, this is clearly a cost cutting move and not something we should be doing after signing arguably the top free agent on the market. These guys are 13 years apart in age. PJ is ok, but he is one and done. JR Smith is an interesting piece, but at the same time he didn't even speak to his coach for a large part of last season and needs to grow up. I'm all for giving him a second chance, that's not the problem. He just isn't enough to make me want to do this deal. Not even close. The Hornets were ready to ship him off last February for a 34 year Brent Barry straight up. His value is at an all time low itself. And I thought we just got our big guard in the draft? This just adds another player into the mix that needs minutes when it's going to be tight enough at those spots as is.
> 
> I don't see something great coming along for Chandler this offseason, but I'm willing to go into the season w/ him and Ben and deal with it later vs. doing this. ****, let's finalize the long rumored Troy Murphy and his ugly contract to the Bulls deal before even picking up the phone to listen to this. Please Pax no.



As I mentioned earlier in the thread look for the Denver Nuggets to get involved with Malik Allen and JR Smith going to Denver for Nene in a sign and trade 

I had Macijauskas for JR ..but JR is obviously the piece they would move 

Brown and Nene would come to Chicago 

Chandler would move to The Hornets and fill the Chris Andersen energy role ( without the drugs ) 

For those that are looking at nominal swap value for Nene ? Forget it 

Denver is paying Miller , Anthony ( next year ) Camby and has the unloadable contract of Kenyon Martin . 

They can't afford to hang on to Nene even though they would like to 

Rather than lose him for nothing they have needs to address at shooting guard 

With the money that they otherwise would have spent on Nene ( say marginally over the MLE at $6M to starve off potential MLE suitors ) if they could :

1. Get the hands on a shooting guard prospect like JR Smith 
2. Add a vet minimum shooter ( maybe even Eric Piatowski makes some sense here )
3. Have a vet big like Malik Allen for hire for 1 year 
4 And have cash left over to resign Francisco Elson to boot 

You might find they're pretty interested ..particularly in not overpaying for a guy coming off major kneee surgery and where you already have big health question marks over the other two key principals in your frontline ( Camby and Martin ) 

Beyond Camby, Nene and Martin ..you have Najera on an oversized contract but who can play minutes , Linus Kleizas still on his rookie contract and deserving of minutes and Elson who did a creditable job last year with Nene going down 

They have depth upfront but health issues for the top 3 principals and financial issues in team payroll 

Nene will be moved in a sign and trade - not necessarily to the Bulls but they have always liked him and I expect they will pursue him 

With Tyrus Thomas on board and with PJ Brown and JR Smith available ..its a very plausible and rational trade for all teams

If Ben Wallace firms up in the next few days I reckon you could see something like this go down


----------



## 7RINGS?

If I were the Bulls I would do this trade in a milla-second!!! If I were the Hornet I wouldn't.However J.R. is troublesome to the team but Chandler is no walk in the park eaither.


----------



## Bullsky

I just got done talking to a Hornets fan on another board and he said if JR Smith goes to the Bulls, he will now be a bulls fan. He said that JR is a nice shooter that lacks in the defense department. He doubts Smith will be troublesome to the Bulls. He thinks Byron Scott is just a bad seed who picks fights with many players (Jason Kidd). Also, Scott is in the doghouse with N.O. fans because he said he wanted to stay in Oklahoma City.


----------



## different_13

you know, I've no idea where I got it from PJ Brown is 6'9..
..how bizarre.

6'11's a lot better.

But I still prefer Chandler - n you can always do the trade at the deadline maybe.
I dunno why, just not a fan of this trade.
Just think you need a tall shotblocker as well as an athletic one.

If Pax managed to get something decent in exchange for Smith, i'd be much more comfortable obviously, but that we could only analyse it with retrospect (if this trade even happens at all)


----------



## Frankensteiner

No1Hornet update:

Very interesting how much attention we are receiving here on HR. There are definitely a lot of people lurking on our forum from other teams that we are rumored to be involved with. I want to make it clear that that PJ+JR for Tyson Chandler and Malik Allen trade is about to happen. I have no confirmation yet on this trade but for all you Bulls fans, when this trade goes through, you should get ready for Ben Wallace! Scott Skiles knows what he's doing over there and don't be surprised if PJ is dealt again to a team like the Pistons.

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34774

Interesting.


----------



## paxman

this rumor makes me very giddy. 

if this rumor were true, i am led to believe that ben wallace is :makeadeal with us.
wallace can't be with tyson on the court at the same time b/c our front court offense would die, if we sign wallace we would need to get rid of tyson to free up money to sign kirk and noc. pj brown's contract is an expiring one. sounds like all these hint towards ben wallace. no way do you dump tyson if you don't know ben is coming "hithah"

as far as i see it, we're trading one mr. Potential for another mr. Potential. (jr smith, chandler), and freeing up room to sign wallace/kirk/noc/etc.


would be sad to see tyson leave. still believe he will improve. but really, by how much? it's been 5 years. time to do the "look-both-ways-before-you-cross" dance: :banana:


----------



## The ROY

Like I said before..

Until this pops up somewhere legit, it's hogwash


----------



## BG7

Why not trade Thabo for Diaw then?

PG-Kirk Hinrich/Chris Duhon
SG-Ben Gordon/JR Smith
SF-Andres Nocioni/Luol Deng
PF-Boris Diaw/Michael Sweetney
C- Ben Wallace/PJ Brown


----------



## paxman

now, if this is actually a 3 team trade with us giving up tyson and malik and gettin ben wallace thru sign and trade and jr smith (pistons getting pj brown) --- 

WE WOULD BE 10 MILLION UNDER THE CAP! you know what this means. gooden/wilcox/nene. one of this cats is coming over. a little bit of that paint scoring.

i'm gonna do a "hey-shots-are-coming-from-the-book-depository-AND-the-grassy-knoll!" dance: :banana:


----------



## The ROY

sloth said:


> Why not trade Thabo for Diaw then?
> 
> PG-Kirk Hinrich/Chris Duhon
> SG-Ben Gordon/JR Smith
> SF-Andres Nocioni/Luol Deng
> PF-Boris Diaw/Michael Sweetney
> C- Ben Wallace/PJ Brown


maybe cuz it has no chance in hell of happening


----------



## SpartanBull

paxman said:


> this rumor makes me very giddy.
> 
> if this rumor were true, i am led to believe that ben wallace is :makeadeal with us.
> *wallace can't be with tyson on the court at the same time b/c our front court offense would die,* if we sign wallace we would need to get rid of tyson to free up money to sign kirk and noc. pj brown's contract is an expiring one. sounds like all these hint towards ben wallace. no way do you dump tyson if you don't know ben is coming "hithah"
> 
> as far as i see it, we're trading one mr. Potential for another mr. Potential. (jr smith, chandler), and freeing up room to sign wallace/kirk/noc/etc.
> 
> 
> would be sad to see tyson leave. still believe he will improve. but really, by how much? it's been 5 years. time to do the "look-both-ways-before-you-cross" dance: :banana:


I can't contest the bolded part. It's true. Having Wallace and Tyson out on the floor, we wouldn't be able to score any points in the paint.....

...but neither would our opponent!!!!!


----------



## such sweet thunder

The ROY said:


> Like I said before..
> 
> Until this pops up somewhere legit, it's hogwash


 This feels like it has "legs" to me. The quick signing of Malic Allen. The mention on the Draft Day broadcast. These guys from the Hornets board seem like they know what they're talking abotu. Also, just the fact that Pax and Skiles were in Detroit today. Reinsdorf makes it a habbit of being careful with his money around players who are on the down-side of their careers. The Bulls would be making an unusually play strong -- outside of the Reinsdorf modus operandi -- if they weren't looking in to Tyson being shipped. 

I'll bet the question the teams are waiting on is whether Ben is willing to sign with the Bulls.


----------



## The ROY

such sweet thunder said:


> This feels like it has "legs" to me. The quick signing of Malic Allen. The mention on the Draft Day broadcast. These guys from the Hornets board seem like they know what they're talking abotu. Also, just the fact that Pax and Skiles were in Detroit today. Reinsdorf makes it a habbit of being careful with his money around players who are on the down-side of their careers. The Bulls would be making an unusually play strong -- outside of the Reinsdorf modus operandi -- if they weren't looking in to Tyson being shipped.
> 
> I'll bet the question the teams are waiting on is whether Ben is willing to sign with the Bulls.


I'm not saying that there isn't ANY truth too it. But all we've heard is some rumors from message board posters.

Of all the other rumored deals and completed deals we've heard this weekend, why NO mention of this?


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> Because Wallace gives us what Chandler does, only 10x better. "1 young guy" vs. "2 old guys" is a bit of an oversimplification, don't you think.
> 
> Brown and Wallace are both more productive than Chandler, regardless of their ages. And they fit together better. Brown can actually reliably hit a jump shot.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a problem keeping Tyson. I just think its a fine trade. And we do have a "younger" Chandler now. Tyrus Thomas. I've believed, and continue to believe, that he'll be a power forward.
> 
> 
> 
> AD can't play. Brown is still very productive - more productive than Chandler - and he'd get respect from Tyrus Thomas on and off the court. Brown is also from Louisianna, just like Thomas.
> 
> To me, this is a trade for several reasons: (a) get rid of Tyson's contract; (b) get more veteran experience and leadership; (c) get more productive in the interior; and (d) get a mentor for Thomas. Don't underestimate the importance of the last one in Paxson's mind. I think Paxson thinks he's got something truly real special with Thomas.
> 
> Plus I think the JR Smith thing is a good risk. If he can be straightened out, he's a legit talent. If not, no loss.
> 
> I like it. But only if Wallace is signed.



RonCey, I think is a seriously glass half-full post, and not a very accurate one either...

1) Brown 37. Wallace is 31. Chandler is 23. At this point Wallace is better than the other two, with zero growth potential. Chandler is the second best, and he could get a ton better - he's certainly farther ahead than Ben Wallace at 23. Chandler is the best rebounder in basketball. PJ Brown isn't as good as Tyson, and he's 14 years older.

2) Tyrus Thomas isn't the same player as Tyson, despite what Chandler's detractors would have you believe. Thomas will be fantastic, but he won't play a lick of 5. You can't just plug him into Tyson's spot.

3) JR Smith is a good risk?!? You're drinking the PaxSkiles juice here. Objectively I can't see any reason why JR Smith is a good risk. He's rotted on the bench for a squad with no shooting guard, and does none of the things that Skiles traditionally requires in a player. He has no fire. He can't play D. His handles stink. It's fun and nice that he was a McDonalds All-American, but his ceiling is Ron Mercer. He's a malcontent who'll be the 4th guard here, and won't be happy about it. Pass, pass, pass, pass, pass!


----------



## paxman

paxman said:


> now, if this is actually a 3 team trade with us giving up tyson and malik and gettin ben wallace thru sign and trade and jr smith (pistons getting pj brown)...gooden/nene/wilcox



that's right, i'm quoting and responding to myself.

let's assume it's gooden (great rebounding, post scoring ability that has been under utilized)

hinrich-duhon-gordon-seafosh
gordon-hinrich-seafosh-JR
noc-deng-tyrus-JR-krapapapa
gooden-noc-tyrus-krapapapa
BigBenWallace-gooden-tyrus


so, this would leave us still needing a center. and by center i mean not-schensher. and also there would be very talented players with little playing time, as we have built a lot of good assets which could really burst with next years' knicks pick. a consolidating trade could solve that


----------



## Bulls_Bulls_Bulls!

paxman said:


> this rumor makes me very giddy.
> 
> if this rumor were true, i am led to believe that ben wallace is :makeadeal with us.
> wallace can't be with tyson on the court at the same time b/c our front court offense would die, if we sign wallace we would need to get rid of tyson to free up money to sign kirk and noc. pj brown's contract is an expiring one. sounds like all these hint towards ben wallace. no way do you dump tyson if you don't know ben is coming "hithah"
> 
> as far as i see it, we're trading one mr. Potential for another mr. Potential. (jr smith, chandler), and freeing up room to sign wallace/kirk/noc/etc.
> 
> 
> would be sad to see tyson leave. still believe he will improve. but really, by how much? it's been 5 years. time to do the "look-both-ways-before-you-cross" dance: :banana:


Ok, let's clarify something: we're not "freeing up $"--if this goes through, this is a salary dump by a cheapskate owner--we have the Bird rights to our players and can resign them about and beyond the MLE, et al. We don't need to "free up" $ to resign Kirk, Ben, Deng AND Andres.

After years and years of pocketing mega profits due to gullible fans, the NBA agreement relating to redistribution of income due to being under the luxury tax, etc., now that we're aproaching a team that is worth a damn, we'd better not be pinchng pennies, that's for sure. Looks like we're going to be winners on the court--Reinsdork: open up the checkbook, for pete's sake! Winners can skirt the luxury tax, and, less we forget, we are a major market team!

That said, if we can swap out Tyson for Nene via a three-way and sign Wallace, I'd be the 1st to sign up and jump aboard that ship!

If it's a salary dump, Tyson for PJ, see above referenced comments..


----------



## The ROY

MIZ!

email Mcgraw and see if there's any truth to this if you can


----------



## paxman

Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! said:


> Ok, let's clarify something: we're not "freeing up $"--if this goes through, this is a salary dump by a cheapskate owner--we have the Bird rights to our players and can resign them about and beyond the MLE, et al. We don't need to "free up" $ to resign Kirk, Ben, Deng AND Andres.
> 
> After years and years of pocketing mega profits due to gullible fans, the NBA agreement relating to redistribution of income due to being under the luxury tax, etc., now that we're aproaching a team that is worth a damn, we'd better not be pinchng pennies, that's for sure. Looks like we're going to be winners on the court--Reinsdork: open up the checkbook, for pete's sake! Winners can skirt the luxury tax, and, less we forget, we are a major market team!
> 
> That said, if we can swap out Tyson for Nene via a three-way and sign Wallace, I'd be the 1st to sign up and jump aboard that ship!
> 
> If it's a salary dump, Tyson for PJ, see above referenced comments..



denver trading nene, getting a 10 mill a year tyson? i don't think that would happen. only way we get nene and ben wallace is if detroit does a sign and trade of ben wallace, realizing they would lose him for nothing, and we get under the cap again.

keeping tyson to have him play 15 minutes a game (can't have him and wallace on the same court), while getting 10 million doesn't make sense to me. you're paying tyson and wallace a combined 24 million a year, then you can't keep kirk and noc and deng and ben.

anyway, it's not a salary dump if we manage to sign gooden/wilcox/nene as a result of it. and, of course, you already said that you would like that.

of course, this all is but a rumor. 
but if it happens, again, i must do the "good-lord-I-am-surrounded-by-hot-chicks!" dance :banana:


----------



## giusd

Yo i spoke with chicken little, we are good friends, and heard the sky is falling. Helpppp, the sky is falling. And any minute we are trading a best and only big man who can play center for a player who will retire next year. Help the ozone is going to fall any minute. helpppp ozone everywhere.

Come on this is a joke. This super secert rumor that only a couple of posters know about but no one else. But i hear chicken little has better info than Chad Ford.

david


----------



## mizenkay

The ROY said:


> MIZ!
> 
> email Mcgraw and see if there's any truth to this if you can



_so_ far ahead of you. will let you know... :smilewink


so this idea of the "swap" being part of a S&T for wallace changes the landscape of the trade for me .and i hate losing chandler, but if the faith of management has been lost, it's been lost. maybe they're not liking what they're hearing out of LA in terms of the early off season progress?


_the mind reels._ 

we could end up with the scott skiles wet dream of the all-defensive minded team. 

and what if, just what if, skiles could get thru to JR Smith? (assuming the bulls keep him)...the kid has real talent. and he's young enough...can he be remodeled? can he be JIBBED UP?


----------



## kukoc4ever

Sadly, this type of trade makes more sense to me as a Bulls fan than the Bulls using all the Cap Space for long term deals and resigning Hinrich, Gordon, Deng and Noc and paying the luxury tax. Sigh.

Signing a high profile player like Ben Wallace while dumping "dat bum" Chandler... it won't bother most fans.


----------



## The ROY

mizenkay said:


> _so_ far ahead of you. will let you know... :smilewink
> 
> 
> so this idea of the "swap" being part of a S&T for wallace changes the landscape of the trade for me .and i hate losing chandler, but if the faith of management has been lost, it's been lost. maybe they're not liking what they're hearing out of LA in terms of the early off season progress?
> 
> 
> _the mind reels._
> 
> we could end up with the scott skiles wet dream of the all-defensive minded team.
> 
> and what if, just what if, skiles could get thru to JR Smith? (assuming the bulls keep him)...the kid has real talent. and he's young enough...can he be remodeled? can he be JIBBED UP?


If Sheed Wallace can be jibbed up...I think J.R. could, who's not half the problem Rahseed WAS


----------



## different_13

as for that center ye'd be needing - i'm thinking Jackie Butler - big n cheap.


I'm very confused about this deal now, does it keep changing or what?

Are the bulls getting Brown, Smith and Wallace ; Brown and Wallace ; Wallace and Smith?

Has anyone besides that Hornets board even mentioned this? (they got the Peja thing right though)


----------



## mizenkay

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34780


For all of you that like "Official Sources"...ABC 26 Sports Just Reported..

the Bobby Jackson signing and Bulls trade (*"waiting for the Bulls to pull the trigger"*)....I don't know how to link ABC 26 video on this forum but I know someone does. Hope this helps confirm everything I've posted recently. I know there was no doubt from Hornets fans but the many Bulls lurkers can feel more comfortable now that a major New Orleans news station has reported it.


----------



## LIBlue

We all agree this team needs interior help.

Regarding Chandler's down year versus the previous year, Chandler was playing out of position. He is a Power Forward who specialiizes in help defense and rebounding. He is NOT a prototypical Center, which is where he was forced to play last year. Hopefully, we will get some help this year allowing Chandler to play more at the 4.

Second, who are the bigs on this roster? All information listed below is from NBA.com.

Center 
*F/C Tyson Chandler * (24 years old; 7-1, 235; 5.3 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 1.0 apg, *+12.85 * efficiency)
*F/C Othella Harrington * (32 years old; 6-9, 235; 4.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 0.5 apg, +4.38 efficiency)
*C Luke Schenscher * (24 years old; 7-1, 265; 1.8 ppg, 1.5 rpg, 0.4 apg, +2.60 efficiency)

Power Forward
*F Malik Allen * (28 years old; 6-10, 255; 4.9 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.4 apg, +5.20 efficiency)
*F Andres Nocioni * (27 years old; 6-7, 225; 13.0 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 1.4 apg, *+14.22 * efficiency) - he is somewhat out of position as a PF.
*F Darius Songolia - Free Agent * (28 years old; 6-8, 240; 9.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 1.4 apg, +9.55 efficiency)
*F Micheal Sweetney * (24 years old; 6-8, 270; 8.1 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 0.9 apg, +9.20 efficiency)
*F - Tyrus Thomas* (20 year old rookie who many believe may be better suited for a 3/4 combo like Marion)

So, if we do the Hornet trade, we are now:

Center
*C PJ Brown * (37 years old; 6-11, 235, 9.0 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.2 apg, *+13.03 * efficency)
*F/C Othella Harrington * (32 years old; 6-9, 235; 4.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 0.5 apg, +4.38 efficiency)
*C Luke Schenscher * (24 years old; 7-1, 265; 1.8 ppg, 1.5 rpg, 0.4 apg, +2.60 efficiency)

U]Power Forward[/U]
*F Andres Nocioni * (27 years old; 6-7, 225; 13.0 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 1.4 apg, *+14.22 * efficiency) - he is somewhat out of position as a PF.
*F Darius Songolia - Free Agent * (28 years old; 6-8, 240; 9.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 1.4 apg, +9.55 efficiency)
*F Micheal Sweetney * (24 years old; 6-8, 270; 8.1 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 0.9 apg, +9.20 efficiency)
*F - Tyrus Thomas* (20 year old rookie who many believe may be better suited for a 3/4 combo like Marion)

That is scary. PJ Brown is a one year stop gap, leaving absolutely nobody at the center position in 2007/08. Plus, Chandler and Brown have extremely similar Efficiency Ratings [+12.85 Chandler versus 13.03 for Brown]. Songolia is currently a free agent, and is unlikely to return. Sweetney is in the final year of his contract, and is unlikey to be resigned after this year. So, that leaves us with a base of Harrington, Schenscher, Nocioni, and Tyrus Thomas heading into 2007/08.

Now, if *Ben Wallace * signs (32 years old; 6-9, 240, 7.3 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 1.9 apg, *+18.49 * efficiency), we have improved the Center position for the future, but still appear weak at the PF position. We would depend on two 3/4 combos for interior defense, scoring, and rebounding.

For me, I would not do the trade. PJ Brown is an old stop gap who does not provide the interior scoring we all condemn Chandler for not having. Wallace could be signed regardless of Chandler/Brown.

Option # 1
C - Ben Wallace
PF/C - Tyson Chandler
PF/C- Othella Harrington
PF - Malik Allen
PF - Michael Sweetney
SF/PF - Andreas Nocioni
SF/PF? - Tyrus Thomas

Option # 2
C - Joel Przybilla or Nene
PF/C - Tyson Chandler
PF/C- Othella Harrington
PF - Malik Allen
PF - Michael Sweetney
SF/PF - Andreas Nocioni
SF/PF? - Tyrus Thomas

Option # 3
C - PJ Brown
PF/C- Othella Harrington
PF - Michael Sweetney
PF - ??????
SF/PF - Andreas Nocioni
SF/PF? - Tyrus Thomas

Boy, I realize Chandler is expensive, but he IS a valuable asset to this team.


----------



## The ROY

kukoc4ever said:


> Sadly, this type of trade makes more sense to me as a Bulls fan than the Bulls using all the Cap Space for long term deals and resigning Hinrich, Gordon, Deng and Noc and paying the luxury tax. Sigh.
> 
> Signing a high profile player like Ben Wallace while dumping "dat bum" Chandler... it won't bother most fans.


Yep, I'd rather have Wallace.

7.3 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 2.0 apg & 2.2 bpg last season.


----------



## such sweet thunder

Heres an update. Apparently is been picked up by the local New Orleans news.

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34780

No1Hornet 

For all of you that like "Official Sources"...ABC 26 Sports Just Reported 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the Bobby Jackson signing and Bulls trade ("waiting for the Bulls to pull the trigger")....I don't know how to link ABC 26 video on this forum but I know someone does. Hope this helps confirm everything I've posted recently. I know there was no doubt from Hornets fans but the many Bulls lurkers can feel more comfortable now that a major New Orleans news station has reported it.


----------



## kukoc4ever

LIBlue said:


> Boy, I realize Chandler is expensive, but he IS a valuable asset to this team.


Yup.

The only reason its Wallace/Chandler either-or is b/c the Bulls are being cheap.

Ugh.


----------



## kukoc4ever

The ROY said:


> Yep, I'd rather have Wallace.
> 
> 7.3 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 2.0 apg & 2.2 bpg last season.



I'd rather have both.

No reason we can't.


----------



## The ROY

kukoc4ever said:


> I'd rather have both.
> 
> No reason we can't.


What's the point of having the poor man's version of wallace too? Tyrus does what Chandler does also.

After Wallace, I don't think we're done dealing.


----------



## mizenkay

> Wallace could be signed regardless of Chandler/Brown.


but maybe not, *LIBlue*, maybe they have to appease dumars somehow and this is part of it...it's all a big domino game at this point. the way i'm reading into all of this is that tyson was going to be traded all along ( :sad: ), preferrably to a western team (hornets _check_) and that ben wallace _really doesn't_ want to be in flips system anymore, loyalty schmoyalty. plus, this hornets board got the peja deal right...

if the hornets are waiting for the bulls to pull the trigger i bet the bulls are waiting for ben wallace to give his intent to sign with the bulls.

EDIT: and yes, k4e the bulls *better not* be done dealing. :yes:


----------



## ChiBulls2315

mizenkay said:


> http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34780
> 
> 
> For all of you that like "Official Sources"...ABC 26 Sports Just Reported..
> 
> the Bobby Jackson signing and Bulls trade (*"waiting for the Bulls to pull the trigger"*)....I don't know how to link ABC 26 video on this forum but I know someone does. Hope this helps confirm everything I've posted recently. I know there was no doubt from Hornets fans but the many Bulls lurkers can feel more comfortable now that a major New Orleans news station has reported it.




No no no no no no no no no


----------



## kukoc4ever

The ROY said:


> What's the point of having the poor man's version of wallace too? Tyrus does what Chandler does also.
> 
> After Wallace, I don't think we're done dealing.


Tyrus has never played an NBA game.

We have no idea what he can do.

What's the point of just giving away a valuable player? 

Oh right, Chandler is a bum.

I hope we're not done dealing.


----------



## paxman

kukoc4ever said:


> I'd rather have both.
> 
> No reason we can't.



ok. what it's not about the bulls being cheap? 
what if it's about having wallace/gooden? would you rather have wallace/tyson?

of course, that's only if there's a s&t involving the pistons getting someone.


----------



## different_13

xept the owner's looking to be cheap, now that you're finally winning..


Appease Dumars? Ben's Unrestricted, sod Dumars!

This only goes through if Ben comes over - if he doesn't, it doesn't.

Don't like Smith, so the Bulls better NOT be done dealing!

Smith to Toronto! for a pick!


----------



## The ROY

kukoc4ever said:


> Tyrus has never played an NBA game.
> 
> We have no idea what he can do.
> 
> What's the point of just giving away a valuable player?
> 
> Oh right, Chandler is a bum.
> 
> I hope we're not done dealing.


Wallace >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chandler

I don't think anybody doubts Thomas will be better than Chandler. Whether he played in the NBA yet or not, he's already 5x the offensive player Chandler is.


----------



## fl_flash

after plodding thru this thread, is the deal a three team deal?

Detroit gets PJ Brown
Detriot signs and trades Ben Wallace

Chicago gets Ben Wallace
Chicago gets JR Smith
Chicago trades Tyson Chandler
Chicago trades Malik Allen

Hornets get Tyson Chandler
Hornets get Malik Allen
Hornets trade PJ Brown
Hornets trade JR Smith

I'd do it in a heart beat. Follow that up with trying to move JR Smith to San Antonio for the rights to either Scola or Mahinmi.


----------



## such sweet thunder

mizenkay said:


> but maybe not, *LIBlue*, maybe they have to appease dumars somehow and this is part of it...it's all a big domino game at this point. the way i'm reading into all of this is that tyson was going to be traded all along ( :sad: ), preferrably to a western team (hornets _check_) and that ben wallace _really doesn't_ want to be in flips system anymore, loyalty schmoyalty. plus, this hornets board got the peja deal right...
> 
> if the hornets are waiting for the bulls to pull the trigger i bet the bulls are waiting for ben wallace to give his intent to sign with the bulls.
> 
> EDIT: and yes, k4e the bulls *better not* be done dealing. :yes:


 The advantage of completing the transaction in a sign trade v. outright signing is that the Bulls can still grab more free agents. If the Bulls send Tyson to New Orleans, Detroit gets Brown, and the Bulls get Wallace then the Bulls still have all of their cap room to go after Nene, Pryz, or whomever. For the most part, the players available through free agency are more likely to be 'valuable' to this team than PJ Brown.


----------



## ChiBulls2315

If we still have capspace in a 3 team deal (ie PJ going to Detroit) I am ok w/ it b/c we can probably land Wilcox, Nene, or Harrington yet. But it don't sound like that's going to be it.


----------



## kukoc4ever

paxman said:


> what if it's about having wallace/gooden? would you rather have wallace/tyson?
> 
> of course, that's only if there's a s&t involving the pistons getting someone.



We'll see how it plays out. Could be OK. We'll see. If we preserve Cap Space and get Wallace... and use Cap Space on 2 of NeNe/Gooden/Przy/Wilcox ... not a total screw job. Just Przy? Hmmm... no thanks.


----------



## mizenkay

such sweet thunder said:


> The advantage of completing the transaction in a sign trade v. outright signing is that the Bulls can still grab more free agents. If the Bulls send Tyson to New Orleans, Detroit gets Brown, and the Bulls get Wallace then the Bulls still have all of their cap room to go after Nene, Pryz, or whomever. For the most part, the players available through free agency are more likely to be 'valuable' to this team than PJ Brown.


exactly!

can i get a

IN PAX WE TRUST!!


----------



## such sweet thunder

IN PAX I TRUST! :banana:


----------



## ChiBulls2315

IN PAX I TRUST!!

:cheers:


----------



## The ROY

Bottom line,

Pax is trying to win now. If this works out how I think it will, we'll be a top 3 team in the east next year.


----------



## different_13

If you get to keep capspace, and therefore sign a Wilcox/Gooden, then i'm all for it. Wallace and one of those two would be an immense upgrade over Chandler.

But not if you've no room to sign someone else - Even with Brown expiring next year, signing Wallace would eat the rest of the cap. (the original trade)

No trust yet, but i'll give ye a "i'm surrounded by hot chicks dance" :banana: 
(whoever coined that phrase is getting rep!)


----------



## LIBlue

Okay, if it is a three-way trade of:

Chicago receiving: Ben Wallace and JR Smith
Detroit receiving: PJ Brown
New Orleans receiving: Tyson Chandler and Malik Allen

Who plays PF for the Bulls this year? Tyrus Thomas/Sweetney and Nocioni?

Is there a Free Agency option at PF? Does Al Harrington or Gooden become a target? Are either Al Harrington or Gooden a better player than Chandler?

What do you all think.


----------



## mizenkay

_nba sources say the deal is on the table..._

http://www.nola.com/abc26/video/?/abc26/video/content.ssf/0702spx5


----------



## BG7

I'd rather have PJ Brown than any other big man in this free agency.

Then sign Antonio Davis. We'd have a tough frontline. Maybe Skiles saw that Tyrus is going to be a rookie of the year type?

PG-Kirk Hinrich/Chris Duhon
SG-Ben Gordon/Thabo/JR Smith
Sf-Andres Nocioni/Luol Deng
PF-PJ Brown/Tyrus Thoams
C- Ben Wallace/Antonio Davis

I like the idea of trading JR Smith for Scola too, I heard that SA was trying to dump him.


----------



## The ROY

sloth said:


> I'd rather have PJ Brown than any other big man in this free agency.
> 
> Then sign Antonio Davis. We'd have a tough frontline. Maybe Skiles saw that Tyrus is going to be a rookie of the year type?
> 
> PG-Kirk Hinrich/Chris Duhon
> SG-Ben Gordon/Thabo/JR Smith
> Sf-Andres Nocioni/Luol Deng
> PF-PJ Brown/Tyrus Thoams
> C- Ben Wallace/Antonio Davis
> 
> I like the idea of trading JR Smith for Scola too, I heard that SA was trying to dump him.


we don't need antonio's old a** here, i'd prefer a young big like Butler personally


----------



## different_13

If it IS a 3-way deal, you don't lose much cap, and should still be able to sign Gooden, Wilcox, Przybilia or Harrington (preferably not Harrington, not another tweener!) and/or Butler.

If Pax manages to sign Wilcox or Gooden, excellent deal.
If not, I'd rather have kept Chandler (and just signed Wallace)


----------



## paxman

mizenkay said:


> but maybe not, *LIBlue*, maybe they have to appease dumars somehow and this is part of it...it's all a big domino game at this point. the way i'm reading into all of this is that tyson was going to be traded all along ( :sad: ), preferrably to a western team (hornets _check_) and that ben wallace _really doesn't_ want to be in flips system anymore, loyalty schmoyalty. plus, this hornets board got the peja deal right...
> 
> if the hornets are waiting for the bulls to pull the trigger i bet the bulls are waiting for ben wallace to give his intent to sign with the bulls.
> 
> EDIT: and yes, k4e the bulls *better not* be done dealing. :yes:



i thought it was "shmoyalty."


----------



## BG7

The ROY said:


> we don't need antonio's old a** here, i'd prefer a young big like Butler personally


How much does Butler go for, the LLE? Antonio's just a minimum guy anyhow.


----------



## The ROY

sloth said:


> How much does Butler go for, the LLE? Antonio's just a minimum guy anyhow.


I'm sure we could get Butler for little to nothing...less than half the MLE i'd assume...maybe i'm wrong though..


----------



## Hustle

different_13 said:


> If it IS a 3-way deal, you don't lose much cap, and should still be able to sign Gooden, Wilcox, Przybilia or Harrington (preferably not Harrington, not another tweener!) and/or Butler.
> 
> *If Pax manages to sign Wilcox or Gooden, excellent deal.
> If not, I'd rather have kept Chandler (and just signed Wallace*)


me too, Allen was quality depth as well


----------



## The ROY

C Wallace / Butler
F Wilcox / Thomas
F Deng / Nocioni / Khyrapa
G Gordon / Sefolosha / Smith
G Hinrich / Duhon

my goodness!


----------



## Babble-On

If trading Chandler means getting Gooden or Wilcox, I guess I can live with it. If it just means saving some money and not bringing in additional pieces, thgen I'll be pissed. As garbage as Chandler was in 05-06, and for all his many faults, he is a big help when he comes to play.


----------



## paxman

kukoc4ever said:


> We'll see how it plays out. Could be OK. We'll see. If we preserve Cap Space and get Wallace... and use Cap Space on 2 of NeNe/Gooden/Przy/Wilcox ... not a total screw job. Just Przy? Hmmm... no thanks.



agreed.
it would have to be a player that hast shown post moves. wallace/pryz is horrible. worse than wallace/chandler.

the thing with wilcox is that he didn't have much opportunity to have the offense go through him, with maggette and especially brand and all those high lottery picks that clippers shuffled. and once he was traded to seattle he's shown great offense. of course the cynic would say "contract year" and that is valid. 

but either way - if after getting we dump chandler to free room under the cap (by having detroit get someone) to get any free agent who can score in the paint, i like this deal. and those are lots of ifs.


----------



## BG7

This trade isn't that bad.

Ben Wallace
PJ Brown
Jackie Butler
Antonio Davis
Luke Schenscher
Tyrus Thomas

Thats a very solid frontcourt, you have a good mix of high energy guys that are athletic, DPOY, tough guys, a big stiff!


----------



## kulaz3000

sloth said:


> This trade isn't that bad.
> 
> Ben Wallace
> PJ Brown
> Jackie Butler
> Antonio Davis
> Luke Schenscher
> Tyrus Thomas
> 
> Thats a very solid frontcourt, you have a good mix of high energy guys that are athletic, DPOY, tough guys, a big stiff!


thats still quite a mighty short team. and everyone has to get off A.D's case, he was the centerpiece to bulls getting back to the play offs two years ago, he deserves more respect.


----------



## kulaz3000

thing that irks me the most if this trade does go down is why J.R smith is in the trade? why not one of their big rookies?


----------



## such sweet thunder

kulaz3000 said:


> thing that irks me the most if this trade does go down is why J.R smith is in the trade? why not one of their big rookies?


 The trade hasn't gone down yet. I assume if J.R. Smith is included hes going to Detroit. Armstrong would look good on our front line next season.

Edit: perhaps this is the reason Armstrong went higher than expected?


----------



## The ROY

kulaz3000 said:


> thats still quite a mighty short team. and everyone has to get off A.D's case, he was the centerpiece to bulls getting back to the play offs two years ago, he deserves more respect.


He was hardly the centerpiece...but he was a great vet to have around a bunch of kids that didn't know much....


----------



## paxman

kulaz3000 said:


> thing that irks me the most if this trade does go down is why J.R smith is in the trade? why not one of their big rookies?


maybe he's part of the package that goes to detroit and we do get armstrong or simmons. i mean, chandler/armstrong/simmons seems redundant to me. maybe pj brown ends up in detroit in this case.

asset building?

another trade in the works? (scola)

skiles being brave enough to take on a "yout" who has great talent for the sg spot and make a man out of him?


----------



## The ROY

paxman said:


> asset building?
> 
> another trade in the works? (scola)
> 
> skiles being brave enough to take on a "yout" who has great talent for the sg spot and make a man out of him?


I think they're definintely building assets to make another move also.


----------



## kulaz3000

such sweet thunder said:


> The trade hasn't gone down yet. I assume if J.R. Smith is included hes going to Detroit. Armstrong would look good on our front line next season.


getting either Armstrong or Simmons would definitly soften the blow a little. i really hate this trade, and it will perplex me if it goes through. we just needed to "add" peices to a team that has gelled and is comfortable with each other, we don't need to totally reshuffle our frontline..


----------



## Hustle

kulaz3000 said:


> thing that irks me the most if this trade does go down is why J.R smith is in the trade? why not one of their big rookies?


Maybe the leak if it's indeed true got it wrong. I just don't see Pax going after Smith unless he had yet another trade in mind.


----------



## The ROY

kulaz3000 said:


> getting either Armstrong or Simmons would definitly soften the blow a little. i really hate this trade, and it will perplex me if it goes through. we just needed to "add" peices to a team that has gelled and is comfortable with each other, we don't need to totally reshuffle our frontline..


Maybe the Bulls haven't pulled the trigger because they're trying to get one of those big's instead.


----------



## BG7

Maybe the Hornet fans are fluffing it and its David West!

I'm not in favor of the proposed deal, but I wouldn't have any hard feelings if it did go down.


----------



## The ROY

J.R. Smith, Viktor Khyrapa & Chris Duhon would all be some very nice tradeable assets.


----------



## kulaz3000

The ROY said:


> Maybe the Bulls haven't pulled the trigger because they're trying to get one of those big's instead.


this whole trade talk is making me edgy. im secretly hoping Wallce just damn well decides to resign with Detriot. so we can go to signing wilcox and forget this hoopla with NO.


----------



## The ROY

kulaz3000 said:


> this whole trade talk is making me edgy. im secretly hoping Wallce just damn well decides to resign with Detriot. so we can go to signing wilcox and forget this hoopla with NO.


Personally, I'd rather have Benny Wallace. The majority of us were all tired of Chandler & since he GREATLY underachieved last year and in the playoffs, this move wasn't hard to see coming.

I told the board after the draft that I felt a trade brewing lol.


----------



## BG7

The ROY said:


> J.R. Smith, Viktor Khyrapa & Chris Duhon would all be some very nice tradeable assets.


I wonder what we could get for

PJ Brown (expiring contract)
JR Smith (star potential young player)
Chris Duhon (starting quality point guard)
Unprotected 2007 Pick w/ pick swap (Greg Oden lottery ticket)


----------



## The ROY

sloth said:


> I wonder what we could get for
> 
> PJ Brown (expiring contract)
> JR Smith (star potential young player)
> Chris Duhon (starting quality point guard)
> Unprotected 2007 Pick w/ pick swap (Greg Oden lottery ticket)


I wouldn't involve that pick in the picture. But those other three could nab you SOMETHING, especially with P.J.'s contract coming off the books PLUS a nice young backcourt in Duhon & Smith.


----------



## The Krakken

sloth said:


> I wonder what we could get for
> 
> PJ Brown (expiring contract)
> JR Smith (star potential young player)
> Chris Duhon (starting quality point guard)
> Unprotected 2007 Pick w/ pick swap (Greg Oden lottery ticket)


That pick is off limits, unless it brings a superstar in. And to get that, you'd likely have to include Ben, Deng, or Hinrich, or any combination of two of them PLUS the pick.


----------



## paxman

kulaz3000 said:


> this whole trade talk is making me edgy. im secretly hoping Wallce just damn well decides to resign with Det*riot*. so we can go to signing wilcox and forget this hoopla with NO.




:clap:

funny typo.
in the words of the late great phil hartman: "kudos. and kudos again"


----------



## LIBlue

This is how I am currently reading the trade. We are, in essense, trading Tyson Chandler and Malik Allen even up for Ben Wallace. By doing this trade, we maintain our cap flexibility this year, allowing us to go after another interior player (i.e., Wilcox, Nene, Gooden, etc.)

If this trade is NOT guaranteeing Ben Wallace and cap space this year, then I do not like the trade.


----------



## The ROY

The only options we'll have left are Wilcox, Harrington, Mohammed & Pryzbilla


----------



## Bullsky

The ROY said:


> The only options we'll have left are Wilcox, Harrington, Mohammed & Pryzbilla


And if we have Wallace, I think we can get the best that group has to offer with a nice price for the Bulls.


----------



## Hustle

Bullsky said:


> And if we have Wallace, I think we can get the best that group has to offer with a nice price for the Bulls.


So Wilcox? because thats who we need. Mo and Pryz are not better than Tyson, and Harrington well you know the knocks.


----------



## paxman

LIBlue said:


> This is how I am currently reading the trade. We are, in essense, trading Tyson Chandler and Malik Allen even up for Ben Wallace. By doing this trade, we maintain our cap flexibility this year, allowing us to go after another interior player (i.e., Wilcox, Nene, Gooden, etc.)
> 
> If this trade is NOT guaranteeing Ben Wallace and cap space this year, then I do not like the trade.



here's a problem i'm not sure has been alluded.

would dumars, mr. "I am a super awesome gm," really take back players who's money value is upwards of 10 million? who? (grammar? whom? whoms?! no, definitely not 'whoms' but i like it. kinda like 'youse'. "youse guys must be whack to disrespect travolta like that." ok, sorry about the tangent)


----------



## Dornado

I feel like I'm in Bizarro world with all of these people clamoring over PJ Brown at the expense of Tyson Chandler.

Guess what.... Tyson Chandler is going to be better than PJ Brown. I wouldn't be surprised if he was better NEXT SEASON. End of story. Tyson is one of the top five rebounders in this league.. he injects more energy in our lineup, protects the basket better, and keeps possesions alive with offensive rebounds...

People keep saying 'oh, well maybe we can get Nene or Joel Pryzbilla...' in free agency... guess what... Tyson is better than them too. And he's young. 

This trade would make our team older and less athletic... it would be a defensive downgrade... we are talking about PJ Brown here..... PJ BROWN... not Kevin Garnett, not Jermaine O'Neal...


----------



## paxman

The ROY said:


> The only options we'll have left are Wilcox, Harrington, Mohammed & Pryzbilla



and gooden. the cavs want to promote side show bob into the starting pf position.

if they don't want to lose gooden for nothing, maybe we can arrange a sign and trade of gooden for a punch to the balls


----------



## The ROY

Bullsky said:


> And if we have Wallace, I think we can get the best that group has to offer with a nice price for the Bulls.


Good thing is, Wilcox averaged 14 ppg & 9 rpg when he was traded to Seattle. Wallace is already a better scorer than Chandler, so is Tyrus.

I'd say, we upgraded our frontline well enough to contend.


----------



## jbulls

Dornado said:


> I feel like I'm in Bizarro world with all of these people clamoring over PJ Brown at the expense of Tyson Chandler.
> 
> Guess what.... next year Tyson Chandler is going to be better than PJ Brown. I wouldn't be surprised if he was better NEXT SEASON. End of story. Tyson is one of the top five rebounders in this league.. he injects more energy in our lineup, protects the basket better, and keeps possesions alive with offensive rebounds...
> 
> People keep saying 'oh, well maybe we can get Nene or Joel Pryzbilla...' in free agency... guess what... Tyson is better than them too. And he's young.
> 
> This trade would make our team older and less athletic... it would be a defensive downgrade... we are talking about PJ Brown here..... PJ BROWN... not Kevin Garnett, not Jermaine O'Neal...


Preaching to the choir. If this is the deal on the table, Pax better have a bunch of other stuff lined up. As I see it, it's a salary dump - PJ Brown is 36 and JR Smith can't play.


----------



## mizenkay

dornado...the current speculation is that PJ BROWN will get shipped to detroit. possibly even JR Smith too...

so essentially do a sign and trade with detroit for wallace, leaving room to go after wilcox, pryz or gooden (now that nene is off the table).

cause if we don't end up with ben wallace and trade away chandler for this geezer, then i am right there with you!!

can i get a red banana!?

:rbanana:


----------



## The ROY

Dornado said:


> I feel like I'm in Bizarro world with all of these people clamoring over PJ Brown at the expense of Tyson Chandler.
> 
> Guess what.... Tyson Chandler is going to be better than PJ Brown. I wouldn't be surprised if he was better NEXT SEASON. End of story. Tyson is one of the top five rebounders in this league.. he injects more energy in our lineup, protects the basket better, and keeps possesions alive with offensive rebounds...
> 
> People keep saying 'oh, well maybe we can get Nene or Joel Pryzbilla...' in free agency... guess what... Tyson is better than them too. And he's young.
> 
> This trade would make our team older and less athletic... it would be a defensive downgrade... we are talking about PJ Brown here..... PJ BROWN... not Kevin Garnett, not Jermaine O'Neal...


you're not getting it, the trade isn't about adding P.J. Brown

Nobody on this board wants P.J. over Chandler.


----------



## paxman

Dornado said:


> I feel like I'm in Bizarro world with all of these people clamoring over PJ Brown at the expense of Tyson Chandler.
> 
> Guess what.... Tyson Chandler is going to be better than PJ Brown. I wouldn't be surprised if he was better NEXT SEASON. End of story. Tyson is one of the top five rebounders in this league.. he injects more energy in our lineup, protects the basket better, and keeps possesions alive with offensive rebounds...
> 
> People keep saying 'oh, well maybe we can get Nene or Joel Pryzbilla...' in free agency... guess what... Tyson is better than them too. And he's young.
> 
> This trade would make our team older and less athletic... it would be a defensive downgrade... we are talking about PJ Brown here..... PJ BROWN... not Kevin Garnett, not Jermaine O'Neal...


tyson better than gooden or wilcox? perhaps, but wallace/chandler is redundant. we need someone who won't play mother-goose/hot-potato with the ball when he gets it down low. seriously when someone passes the ball to tyson, tyson has this look on his face, as if saying "what the hell? don't you know who I am? do i look like i would know what to do with that thing?"


----------



## The ROY

paxman said:


> tyson better than gooden or wilcox? perhaps, but wallace/chandler is redundant. we need someone who won't play mother-goose/hot-potato with the ball when he gets it down low. seriously when he someone passes the ball to tyson, tyson has this look on his face, as if saying "what the hell? don't you know who I am? do i look like i would know what to do with that thing?"


exactly

even randy livingston pointed it out and chuckled about it during Tyrus's workouts.


----------



## Dornado

paxman said:


> tyson better than gooden or wilcox? perhaps, but wallace/chandler is redundant. we need someone who won't play mother-goose/hot-potato with the ball when he gets it down low. seriously when he someone passes the ball to tyson, tyson has this look on his face, as if saying "what the hell? don't you know who I am? do i look like i would know what to do with that thing?"



I guess if it means Ben Wallace + Gooden/Wilcox it would be better (than oldass PJ Brown)... 


But isn't Tyson going to be better than Ben Wallace in two or three years anyway?

Certainly his ceiling is higher than Drew Gooden's (though reuniting Gooden with Hinrich might be nice)..

Why can't we just keep Chandler and go all out for Gooden or Wilcox....


----------



## kulaz3000

The ROY said:


> exactly
> 
> even randy livingston pointed it out and chuckled about it during Tyrus's workouts.


regardless of all the talk about chandler. i would have liked to have seen atleast one season of how chandler and wallace would have played together along with all our other pieces. i just don't like the fact that without tyson our front court would have made a total change over. espically since we've made the play offs the last two season with pretty much the same group, im in fear that such a drastic change may offset the chemistry they have built together. thats my biggest gripe.

adding to what we have is one thing. to totally overturn our frontline is another. im a little weary.


----------



## The ROY

Chandler isn't gonna improve his game much more than he already has.

He doesn't have a LICK of offensive talent & has no idea, after 5 seasons, of what to do with a B-Ball when he catches it (IF he catches it).


----------



## Dornado

The ROY said:


> Chandler isn't gonna improve his game much more than he already has.
> 
> He doesn't have a LICK of offensive talent & has no idea, after 5 seasons, of what to do with a B-Ball when he catches it (IF he catches it).



and Ben Wallace doesn't have a LICK of offensive talent at age 32...


----------



## The ROY

Dornado said:


> and Ben Wallace doesn't have a LICK of offensive talent at age 32...


Ben Wallace CAN hit a jumper

Ben Wallace CAN lay-up a ball

Ben Wallace also can catch a ball

3 things Tyson seems to have no CLUE how to do.


----------



## charlietyra

My guess is that if we wind up with Ben, Pryz is no longer in the mix. #1- The Bulls are not going to spend $8-9 million for a backup center and #2- Pryz doesn't want to be a backup.

Wilcox or Harrington doesn't make a lot of sense as those minutes at the 4 position will probably go to Noce and TT. Plus Wilcox and Harrington don't bring anything extra to what we already have at that position.

That leaves Mohammed who has been a career back-up 5. He comes back to Chicago to be with his pals and gets the big payday. Probably can get him for $25 million for 4 years. 

I know we are just speculating at this point but am I going in the right direction?


----------



## paxman

Dornado said:


> I guess if it means Ben Wallace + Gooden/Wilcox it would be better (than oldass PJ Brown)...
> 
> 
> But isn't Tyson going to be better than Ben Wallace in two or three years anyway?
> 
> Certainly his ceiling is higher than Drew Gooden's (though reuniting Gooden with Hinrich might be nice)..
> 
> Why can't we just keep Chandler and go all out for Gooden or Wilcox....


hypothetically, i'll give you that chandler is better than wallace in 3 years. i'd still do this if we end up with wilcox and wallace. i want to win now. that is the only reason to have ben wallace on this team. is it enough to contend? it is if the rest of our players show improvement. 

you might say then, if we're getting ben wallace to try to contend now, then why draft tyrus? to which i would say "hey, voice in my head, I have no idea"

anyway, if wallace is like rodman, he won't break down that much. especially if we give him more rest than detroit gave him.


----------



## jbulls

The ROY said:


> Ben Wallace CAN hit a jumper
> 
> Ben Wallace CAN lay-up a ball
> 
> Ben Wallace also can catch a ball
> 
> 3 things Tyson seems to have no CLUE how to do.


Wishful thinking. Time for a good old fashioned calling out. ROY, do research before you post. Wallace is better at lay-ups and jumpers than Tyson? Let's see what the numbers say...

Ben Wallace is abysmal offensively. He benefits by the fact that he plays with a bunch of guys who need attention, but he can't create for himself and he's a terrible post player. The idea that he can stick a jumper is just flat wrong. Wallace shot 22% on jumpers last year. Read it again. Twenty. Two. Per. Cent. He's an awful shooter. Chandler shot 31% on jumpers. A lot better. I didn't know there was a player in the league that Chandler shot jumpers a lot better than. Turns out there is - Ben Wallace.

Alright, we've dealt with jumpers. Let's go to close shots that aren't dunks - lay ups, in other words. Last year Ben Wallace shot 40% on layups. Tyson Chandler shot 50%. For the mathematically challenged scoring at home, thats ten percent better.

What did we learn today?

TYSON CHANDLER SHOOTS 9 PERCENT BETTER ON JUMPERS THAN BEN WALLACE

TYSON CHANDLER SHOOTS 10 PERCENT BETTER ON LAYUPS THAN BEN WALLACE

also (just for the heck of it)

TYSON CHANDLER SHOOTS 9 PERCENT BETTER FROM THE FREE THROW LINE THAN BEN WALLACE

and

TYSON CHANDLER IS 8 YEARS YOUNGER THAN BEN WALLACE


----------



## paxman

with hinrich and duhon's great lob passing, i say wallace improves offensively.

wallace can catch a pass and slam it in much better than tyson.


----------



## The ROY

no matter how much mumbo jumbo u just typed

Wallace > Chandler


----------



## kukoc4ever

jbulls said:


> TYSON CHANDLER IS 8 YEARS YOUNGER THAN BEN WALLACE



This is exactly what I was just thinking.

Chandler is so much younger than Wallace is now. Wow. In EIGHT YEARS, Chandler will be as old as Ben Wallace. EIGHT YEARS.

And, he's already a better rebounder than Wallace is.

In three years, there is no doubt, barring injury, that Chandler will be a better player than Wallace, IMO.

Like I said in an earlier thread.... Chandler of two seasons ago was as effective as Wallace was for the Pistons last season.

Chandler vs. Wallace should not even be a debate though, since this trade would be a Cap Space independent transaction. Its not an either/or. 

There is nothing legit stopping the Bulls from just offering Wallace as much as they can and signing him. Do we really buy the Wallace loyalty to the Pistons story? I don’t.


----------



## kulaz3000

mumbo jumbo? thats old school. i like it!

well my only problem with Wallace is his age and height. He relies on his athletic ability, and that has already started to depreciate recently. because of his height he has to rely on his athletic ability that much more than other bigs, so once it starts going down further all he'll be good for is boxing out for the other players to board for him. which is wear chandler comes in, who is tall, and he'll always remain tall no matter what, a legit 7 footer with athletic ability which is damn near rare in the leauge today. he can board and block shots probably just as well as an old wallace can just because of his height alone. but put those two together, they can cover up their weaknesses of old age and plan low basketball IQ. you know they are just going to go block shots or go for rebounds, so when wallace is boxing out the oppositions best rebounders, chandler is open to get the board, whilst when chandler goes for an absurd block, wallace can cover his *** at the basket.


----------



## The ROY

*tries to figure out how Tyson is a better rebounder than Ben*


----------



## jbulls

The ROY said:


> no matter how much mumbo jumbo u just typed
> 
> Wallace > Chandler


Good stuff ROY!

The mumbo jumbo you typed was:

a) Wallace is a better jump shooter than Tyson

and

b) Wallace converts more lay ups than Tyson

Here are some facts, guy. Wallace is a 22% jump shooter, and a 40% layup shooter. He stinks at both. Let's have an intellegent debate and not invent facts. Thanks.


----------



## The ROY

jbulls said:


> Good stuff ROY!
> 
> The mumbo jumbo you typed was:
> 
> a) Wallace is a better jump shooter than Tyson
> 
> and
> 
> b) Wallace converts more lay ups than Tyson
> 
> Here are some facts, guy. Wallace is a 22% jump shooter, and a 40% layup shooter. He stinks at both. Let's have an intellegent debate and not invent facts. Thanks.


stats and percentages don't mean everything

i fail to realize how tyson's a better jump shooter when i didn't see him MAKE one all season


----------



## rwj333

kukoc4ever said:


> This is exactly what I was just thinking.
> 
> Chandler is so much younger than Wallace is now. Wow. In EIGHT YEARS, Chandler will be as old as Ben Wallace. EIGHT YEARS.
> 
> And, he's already a better rebounder than Wallace is.
> 
> In three years, there is no doubt, barring injury, that Chandler will be a better player than Wallace, IMO.
> 
> Like I said in an earlier thread.... Chandler of two seasons ago was as effective as Wallace was for the Pistons last season.
> 
> Chandler vs. Wallace should not even be a debate though, since this trade would be a Cap Space independent transaction. Its not an either/or.
> 
> There is nothing legit stopping the Bulls from just offering Wallace as much as they can and signing him. Do we really buy the Wallace loyalty to the Pistons story? I don’t.


Completely otm. I'm truly shocked that so many people are fine with, essentially, trading Chandler for Wallace.


----------



## kukoc4ever

The ROY said:


> *tries to figure out how Tyson is a better rebounder than Ben*



http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2006/jh_ALL_REB.htm


----------



## jbulls

The ROY said:


> stats and percentages don't mean everything
> 
> i fail to realize how tyson's a better jump shooter when i didn't see him MAKE one all season


Tyson's a bad jump shooter. Nobody's arguing that. But Wallace is worse. By a margin of 10% - as a free shooter, as a jump shooter, and on lay ups. I am perfectly willing to listen to arguments that Wallace is a bigger body, a better man defender, etc. The fact is, he's an awful offensive player and the numbers bear it out. I'm not going to argue comprehensive stats from the '05-'06 season vs. "what you've seen". If you want to make a case for Wallace you're going to have to do it using reason, not assumptions that can be proven completely wrong with a quick visit to a stat website.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

kukoc4ever said:


> In three years, there is no doubt, barring injury, that Chandler will be a better player than Wallace, IMO


Book it.

When Chandler gets his DPOY in 3 years we will bump this and give full glory.


----------



## The ROY

jbulls said:


> Tyson's a bad jump shooter. Nobody's arguing that. But Wallace is worse. By a margin of 10% - as a free shooter, as a jump shooter, and on lay ups. I am perfectly willing to listen to arguments that Wallace is a bigger body, a better man defender, etc. The fact is, he's an awful offensive player and the numbers bear it out. I'm not going to argue comprehensive stats from the '05-'06 season vs. "what you've seen". If you want to make a case for Wallace you're going to have to do it using reason, not assumptions that can be proven completely wrong with a quick visit to a stat website.


You're not arguing with me PERIOD. Cause I could seriously CARE less.

I don't need to "stat dig" to prove anything LOL

Wallace > Chandler


----------



## jbulls

kukoc4ever said:


> http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2006/jh_ALL_REB.htm


K4E, let's get real here. Let's go old school. These are stats. A bunch of new age hooey. Garbage. Let's go on our gut. Not the comprehensive statistical evidence which indicates that Tyson Chandler is a better jump shooter, lay up shooter, free throw shooter and rebounder than Ben Wallace. That's a bunch of garbage.


----------



## The Krakken

Dornado said:


> I feel like I'm in Bizarro world with all of these people clamoring over PJ Brown at the expense of Tyson Chandler.
> 
> Guess what.... Tyson Chandler is going to be better than PJ Brown. I wouldn't be surprised if he was better NEXT SEASON. End of story. Tyson is one of the top five rebounders in this league.. he injects more energy in our lineup, protects the basket better, and keeps possesions alive with offensive rebounds...
> 
> People keep saying 'oh, well maybe we can get Nene or Joel Pryzbilla...' in free agency... guess what... Tyson is better than them too. And he's young.
> 
> This trade would make our team older and less athletic... it would be a defensive downgrade... we are talking about PJ Brown here..... PJ BROWN... not Kevin Garnett, not Jermaine O'Neal...


Great post.


----------



## jbulls

The ROY said:


> You're not arguing with me PERIOD. Cause I could seriously CARE less.
> 
> I don't need to "stat dig" to prove anything LOL
> 
> Wallace > Chandler


Yes you do, you do need to do more than type in caps and derisvely "LOL" at other posters to win an argument. This isn't 5th grade, and it's not the schoolyard.


----------



## kulaz3000

jbulls said:


> Tyson's a bad jump shooter. Nobody's arguing that. But Wallace is worse. By a margin of 10% - as a free shooter, as a jump shooter, and on lay ups. I am perfectly willing to listen to arguments that Wallace is a bigger body, a better man defender, etc. The fact is, he's an awful offensive player and the numbers bear it out. I'm not going to argue comprehensive stats from the '05-'06 season vs. "what you've seen". If you want to make a case for Wallace you're going to have to do it using reason, not assumptions that can be proven completely wrong with a quick visit to a stat website.


lets also not forget, and this by no means is to devalue him as a talented basketball player. but he has undoubtly regressed recently, and also he has been playing around veterans which makes any player on the court better. having veteran players who are smarter and more experienced helps your game and at times covers up your weaknesses which he has had on a very veteran and excellent team in detriot. whereas chandler on the flipside is on an extremely young team but still does what he does without the experience around him, and to further my arguement he played much better two years ago when he did have that experience beside him in A.D. 

that is why id rather have both wallace and chandler side by side for ATLEAST one year, and see how it pans out. because once we get wallace we'll be stuck with him barring retirement or injury, because he'll be near impossible to trade. whereas with chandler he'll be an asset no matter what. why? because his a legit 7 footer with good athletic ability. bigs are ALWAYS on demand in the nba, espically legit 7 footers with above average mobility and athletic skills. we don't need to give chandler up just yet...


----------



## The ROY

jbulls said:


> Yes you do, you do need to do more than type in caps and derisvely "LOL" at other posters to win an argument. This isn't 5th grade, and it's not the schoolyard.


you seem to think this is an ARGUEMENT..when the reality is, it's not that big of a deal...

I can "LOL" in caps all I want..is it breaking an e-law or something?

MOVE ON my friend..nobody is trying to argue with you...calm yourself


----------



## OziBull

Height: 6-9 Weight: 240 
2005-06 Statistics 
PPG 7.3 
RPG 11.3 
APG 1.9 
SPG 1.78 
BPG 2.21 
FG% .510 
FT% .416 
3P% .000 
MPG 35.2 









Height: 7-1 Weight: 235 
2005-06 Statistics 
PPG 5.3 
RPG 9.0 
APG 1.0 
SPG .52 
BPG 1.32 
FG% .565 
FT% .503 
3P% .000 
MPG 26.8 









Height: 6-11 Weight: 239 
2005-06 Statistics 
PPG 9.0 
RPG 7.3 
APG 1.2 
SPG .61 
BPG .67 
FG% .461 
FT% .827 
3P% .000 
MPG 31.7 

Ok i think it comes down to not knowing what Pax has in mind
Positives
*We sign Wallace and do the PJ Swap due to the fact i dont like the idea of having Tyson and Ben Wallace contracts and getting PJ expiring one would free up room next year and preety much eliminate the fact that all of us cringed throughout the season at the fact that Pax paid Tyson so much for so little production and wondered if he would be a bench player for his whole career.

*Also having PJ and Wallace together along side of our young bigs in Tyrus and Sweetney would be great role models for them, yes both are undersized and we would need a big man also added but if i remember correctley Pax had big plans for Sweetney to do with the bulls.

Maybe Tyson will never blossom till in another environment, hard to take as a bulls fan but it might be the truth. Does he like it here? Does he like skiles? Does Skiles like Tyson?

*Negatives-
We are giving up height, height is what we need!! And Chandler was our only 'Big' man on the side and if we trade him for wallace he is a 6 foot 9 Centre! And to tell you the truth i thought Tyrus being the height he is, is the athletic defensive prospect and also the possibility of an offensive threat along side a 'Big" man like Tyson. I thought Tyrus and Tyson would be a great Duo.

Hard to make a decision here, and ill researve my judgement in the trade after the season has been completed cause faith in pax i have.


----------



## Ron Cey

> RonCey, I think is a seriously glass half-full post, and not a very accurate one either...


If you say so. But there is nothing inaccurate at all. 



> 1) Brown 37. Wallace is 31. Chandler is 23. At this point Wallace is better than the other two, with zero growth potential. Chandler is the second best, and he could get a ton better - he's certainly farther ahead than Ben Wallace at 23. Chandler is the best rebounder in basketball. *PJ Brown isn't as good as Tyson, and he's 14 years older.*


Right now, PJ Brown is better than Chandler. And he's a far, far better fit with Ben Wallace than Chandler is. 

Granted, PJ Brown is old. But I look at this move as Paxson thinking that in a season or two, Thomas will easily eclipse where Chandler is. PJ is a stop gap to team with Wallace until Thomas can do it. And he's a better stop gap than Chandler.

Like I said, unless Wallace is coming, I don't like this deal. But I do like it if Wallace is in the fold.



> 2) Tyrus Thomas isn't the same player as Tyson, despite what Chandler's detractors would have you believe. Thomas will be fantastic, but he won't play a lick of 5. You can't just plug him into Tyson's spot.


If we get Ben Wallace, he plays 5 and Tyson plays the 4. That is where the Thomas/Tyson comparison comes from - as power forwards. 



> 3) JR Smith is a good risk?!? You're drinking the PaxSkiles juice here. Objectively I can't see any reason why JR Smith is a good risk. He's rotted on the bench for a squad with no shooting guard, and does none of the things that Skiles traditionally requires in a player. He has no fire. He can't play D. His handles stink. It's fun and nice that he was a McDonalds All-American, but his ceiling is Ron Mercer. He's a malcontent who'll be the 4th guard here, and won't be happy about it. Pass, pass, pass, pass, pass!


JR Smith is a good risk because he is immensely talented and he's a big guard. And if he comes in acting like a little *****, we can just dump is less than $2 million dollar contract. There is no downside to including Smith. He either changes his ways, and we get to put his talent to good use or he stays a malcontent and we dump him. 

And you must be locked in on his draft scouting report. His skill level improved when he was playing. Its just that his attitude soured and he hit the bench. For time he was viewed as the future shooting guard for that team. And that was based on promising NBA production. But then he and Scott had it out and it was never repaired. If he's "that guy" then you just dump his no commitment contract. 

Assume this move happens and we get Wallace. Assume its not to trade PJ for Wallace. PJ and Wallace are a better short term frontcourt to Chandler/Wallace. And frankly, I don't even think its close. This isn't strictly a PJ vs. Tyson head to head comparison. One must consider whose skill set matches up better with Ben Wallace. Its PJ Brown. 

Then, a year or two down the road, Thomas moves in after being mentored by two consumate, defensive minded veteran pros. 

You can call that "drinking the juice" all you like, which frankly pisses me off, by that is my analysis and that is what I believe. I'm not making this up after the fact. I'm looking at two potential deals before they happen and deciding that I like it.


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> If you say so. But there is nothing inaccurate at all.
> 
> 
> 
> Right now, PJ Brown is better than Chandler. And he's a far, far better fit with Ben Wallace than Chandler is.
> 
> Granted, PJ Brown is old. But I look at this move as Paxson thinking that in a season or two, Thomas will easily eclipse where Chandler is. PJ is a stop gap to team with Wallace until Thomas can do it. And he's a better stop gap than Chandler.
> 
> Like I said, unless Wallace is coming, I don't like this deal. But I do like it if Wallace is in the fold.
> 
> 
> 
> If we get Ben Wallace, he plays 5 and Tyson plays the 4. That is where the Thomas/Tyson comparison comes from - as power forwards.
> 
> 
> 
> JR Smith is a good risk because he is immensely talented and he's a big guard. And if he comes in acting like a little *****, we can just dump is less than $2 million dollar contract. There is no downside to including Smith. He either changes his ways, and we get to put his talent to good use or he stays a malcontent and we dump him.
> 
> And you must be locked in on his draft scouting report. His skill level improved when he was playing. Its just that his attitude soured and he hit the bench. For time he was viewed as the future shooting guard for that team. And that was based on promising NBA production. But then he and Scott had it out and it was never repaired. If he's "that guy" then you just dump his no commitment contract.
> 
> Assume this move happens and we get Wallace. Assume its not to trade PJ for Wallace. PJ and Wallace are a better short term frontcourt to Chandler/Wallace. And frankly, I don't even think its close. Then, a year or two down the road, Thomas moves in after being mentored by two consumate, defensive minded veteran pros.
> 
> You can call that "drinking the juice" all you like, which frankly pisses me off, by that is my analysis and that is what I believe. I'm not making this up after the fact. I'm looking at two potential deals before they happen and deciding that I like it.


PJ Brown is absolutely a better fit with Wallace than Chandler is. Pretty much anyone is. As you probably know I've been dead set against signing Wallace with Chandler on the roster.

I'm also not sure than Brown is better than Chandler. Brown is competent offensively, but he's not the rebounder Tyson is and he's not the defender. He's also certain to get worse at age 36. Tyson is a pretty good bet to get better.

I am absolutely not locked in on JR Smith's scouting report. JR Smith's scouting report was positive! His performance in the league has indicated no growth. He regressed in nearly every single statistical category in his second season, and I'm not ready to blame Byron Scott for that. Athletic talent is fun, but not when you can't dribble, and you don't defend.

Given that I don't like Smith, I am not okay with dealing Chandler for one year of an okay old big guy whose deal expires after a season.


----------



## Frankensteiner

I'm curious why the board didn't petition league voters to award Tyson Chandler the Defensive Player of the Year award last year. He deserved it, appearantly.

Tyson Chandler better than Ben Wallace? Yeah, ok, just remember that next time Tyson's stat line reads: 5 min, 0 reb, 0 pts, 0 blk, 5 pf.


----------



## jbulls

Frankensteiner said:


> I'm curious why the board didn't petition league voters to award Tyson Chandler the Defensive Player of the Year award last year. He deserved it, appearantly.
> 
> Tyson Chandler better than Ben Wallace? Yeah, ok, just remember that next time Tyson's stat line reads: 5 min, 0 reb, 0 pts, 0 blk, 5 pf.


Has a single poster in this thread argued that Chandler is a better defender than Wallace? I certainly haven't.


----------



## Frankensteiner

I heard the Lakers turned down Kwame Brown for Tim Duncan. 

Overheard in Mitch Kupchak's office: "KWAME BROWN IS 6 YEARS YOUNGER!"


----------



## Dornado

Frankensteiner said:


> I'm curious why the board didn't petition league voters to award Tyson Chandler the Defensive Player of the Year award last year. He deserved it, appearantly.
> 
> Tyson Chandler better than Ben Wallace? Yeah, ok, just remember that next time Tyson's stat line reads: 5 min, 0 reb, 0 pts, 0 blk, 5 pf.



Nobody said he was a better defender than Ben Wallace. Certainly not today. Next.


----------



## jbulls

Frankensteiner said:


> I heard the Lakers turned down Kwame Brown for Tim Duncan.
> 
> Overheard in Mitch Kupchak's office: "KWAME BROWN IS 6 YEARS YOUNGER!"


Gold star for relevance.


----------



## Ron Cey

> PJ Brown is absolutely a better fit with Wallace than Chandler is. Pretty much anyone is. As *you probably know I've been dead set against signing Wallace with Chandler on the roster*.


Actually, I didn't know that. I haven't been following that thread very closely. Suffice it to say, I support signing Wallace. But since you don't, I can totally understand your stance on the PJ Brown thing. 



> I'm also not sure than Brown is better than Chandler. Brown is competent offensively, but he's not the rebounder Tyson is and he's not the defender. He's also certain to get worse at age 36. Tyson is a pretty good bet to get better.


I would have thought Tyson would have gotten better last year too, but he regressed. I don't think that will continue, mind you, but its a consideration. 

But for this season, and perhaps next, I think PJ - assuming the acquisition of Wallace - is a better fit than Chandler. And if we are getting Wallace, then we are trying to maximize his window. We are trying win now. Brown is better suited to that purpose than Chandler is. 



> I am absolutely not locked in on JR Smith's scouting report. JR Smith's scouting report was positive! His performance in the league has indicated no growth. He regressed in nearly every single statistical category in his second season, and I'm not ready to blame Byron Scott for that. Athletic talent is fun, but not when you can't dribble, and you don't defend.
> 
> Given that I don't like Smith, I am not okay with dealing Chandler for one year of an okay old big guy whose deal expires after a season.


Smith is just potential gravy, to me. He's a crapshoot. You gotta understand where I'm coming from. If we sign Wallace, we are shooting for the conference championship next season. Brown, to my mind, is a better fit with Wallace to accomplish that goal than Chandler is. I mean, isn't contention the point of building?


----------



## Frankensteiner

jbulls said:


> Gold star for relevance.


Kwame Brown is to Tim Duncan what Chandler is to Ben Wallace.


----------



## OziBull

Frankensteiner said:


> I'm curious why the board didn't petition league voters to award Tyson Chandler the Defensive Player of the Year award last year. He deserved it, appearantly.
> 
> Tyson Chandler better than Ben Wallace? Yeah, ok, just remember that next time Tyson's stat line reads: 5 min, 0 reb, 0 pts, 0 blk, 5 pf.


I dont think anyone has stated that Wallace is a better defensive player
The trade involved and the possibility of Ben Wallace being signed i think has nothing to do with the idea of Tyson being a better defensive player than Wallace, its the other reasons some people still dont see why this trade might go down.


----------



## LIBlue

Frankensteiner said:


> I heard the Lakers turned down Kwame Brown for Tim Duncan.
> 
> Overheard in Mitch Kupchak's office: "KWAME BROWN IS 6 YEARS YOUNGER!"


Did you just equate a 37 year old PJ Brown to Tim Duncan? Irealize it is sarcasm, but please ....

If the deal is Ben Wallace/PJ Brown/JR Smith versus Ben Wallace/Tyson Chandler/Malik Allen, then I would say that Chandler/Allen is better than Brown/Smith.


----------



## giusd

I have still not read a single story that the bulls are trading chandler for pj brown. Not one.

chicken little and the sky is falling.

david :banana: :banana: :banana:


----------



## paxman

Frankensteiner said:


> Kwame Brown is to Tim Duncan what Chandler is to Ben Wallace.


"gold star for relevance" is to "duncan is 100 times the player wallace is, while kwame-chandler is a wash"


----------



## Frankensteiner

Dornado said:


> Nobody said he was a better defender than Ben Wallace. Certainly not today. Next.


Then what's the debate? Why have both Chandler and Wallace on the team when they're two completely redundant players? Wallace is better than Chandler, so if he's signed, we should pair him with a more complimentary player.


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> Actually, I didn't know that. I haven't been following that thread very closely. Suffice it to say, I support signing Wallace. But since you don't, I can totally understand your stance on the PJ Brown thing.
> 
> 
> 
> I would have thought Tyson would have gotten better last year too, but he regressed. I don't think that will continue, mind you, but its a consideration.
> 
> But for this season, and perhaps next, I think PJ - assuming the acquisition of Wallace - is a better fit than Chandler. And if we are getting Wallace, then we are trying to maximize his window. We are trying win now. Brown is better suited to that purpose than Chandler is.
> 
> 
> 
> Smith is just potential gravy, to me. He's a crapshoot. You gotta understand where I'm coming from. If we sign Wallace, we are shooting for the conference championship next season. Brown, to my mind, is a better with Wallace to fit to accomplish that goal than Chandler is. I mean, isn't contention the point of building?


I haven't posted all that much in this thread before today. But in every other Wallace thread I've been against his signing - because it was assumed Tyson would be sticking around.

Signing a 32 year old Ben Wallace and a 37 year old PJ Brown (the ages they will be during the playoffs next season) assumes that our title window is the next two seasons. Given the respective ages of our nucleus that strikes me as a foolish assumption - and not one worth giving up Tyson Chandler for. A 34 year old Wallace and 39 year old Brown aren't going to be anybody's championship frontline. If you believe there's a good shot of us hoisting the championship trophy with those two over the next two years, I guess they're worth signing. Personally, I don't think that shot is all that great.


----------



## paxman

giusd said:


> I have still not read a single story that the bulls are trading chandler for pj brown. Not one.
> 
> chicken little and the sky is falling.
> 
> david :banana: :banana: :banana:


that's b/c they're not. they're trading him and malik for ben wallace and maybe jr smith. and here:

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34780


----------



## jbulls

paxman said:


> that's b/c they're not. they're trading him and malik for ben wallace and maybe jr smith. and here:
> 
> http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34780


This may or may not prove to be true, but is the "Hornet's Report" message board all we have to go on?


----------



## LIBlue

Frankensteiner said:


> Then what's the debate? Why have both Chandler and Wallace on the team when they're two completely redundant players? Wallace is better than Chandler, so if he's signed, we should pair him with a more complimentary player.


I think many would agree with the logic. However, is a 37 year old 9.0 ppg player really more complimentary to the offensively-challenged Ben Wallace. PJ Brown does not really bring much to the table unless it is financially driven, or helps you procure Ben Wallace.


----------



## BG7

jbulls said:


> I haven't posted all that much in this thread before today. But in every other Wallace thread I've been against his signing - because it was assumed Tyson would be sticking around.
> 
> Signing a 32 year old Ben Wallace and a 37 year old PJ Brown (the ages they will be during the playoffs next season) assumes that our title window is the next two seasons. Given the respective ages of our nucleus that strikes me as a foolish assumption - and not one worth giving up Tyson Chandler for. A 34 year old Wallace and 39 year old Brown aren't going to be anybody's championship frontline. If you believe there's a good shot of us hoisting the championship trophy with those two over the next two years, I guess they're worth signing. Personally, I don't think that shot is all that great.


Our title window isn't 2 years. Its like 10 years. Gordon and Deng and Tyrus are going to be improving big time from here, and Nocioni and Hinrich are going to be more polished and consistence. We'll have another young player, we'll have opportunities to sign people for the MLE. It makes us better short term, but we could easily be a better team than this coming year 5 years from now, our young guys are going to get better. Thabo's gonna get better, forgot him before. We are set good.


----------



## paxman

jbulls said:


> This may or may not prove to be true, but is the "Hornet's Report" message board all we have to go on?



http://www.nola.com/abc26/video/?/abc26/video/content.ssf/0702spx5


----------



## Dornado

Frankensteiner said:


> Then what's the debate? Why have both Chandler and Wallace on the team when they're two completely redundant players? Wallace is better than Chandler, so if he's signed, we should pair him with a more complimentary player.


What a terrible thing it would be to have two great interior defenders on the same team. Especially when one of them is a 24 year old seven footer and the other is likely to be done in three or four years...


----------



## Showtyme

jbulls said:


> I haven't posted all that much in this thread before today. But in every other Wallace thread I've been against his signing - because it was assumed Tyson would be sticking around.
> 
> Signing a 32 year old Ben Wallace and a 37 year old PJ Brown (the ages they will be during the playoffs next season) assumes that our title window is the next two seasons. Given the respective ages of our nucleus that strikes me as a foolish assumption - and not one worth giving up Tyson Chandler for. A 34 year old Wallace and 39 year old Brown aren't going to be anybody's championship frontline. If you believe there's a good shot of us hoisting the championship trophy with those two over the next two years, I guess they're worth signing. Personally, I don't think that shot is all that great.


Of course, if we have an inside track on Greg Oden (I mean, Isaiah is COACHING the team now and they drafted Renaldo Balkman, revealing to Gotham that the team can actually get WORSE... the pick flip might end up really good for us), and we have Tyrus Thomas, then two years to be super-competitive while bringing along a young talent or two... I don't think that we'll be in big trouble. Wallace will stay good for three years, Tyrus will just be getting good by then, and next year's draft has a FEW good bigs. Oden, Yi Jianlian, Joakim Noah, Roy Hibbert, even Josh McRoberts could allow us to go two really big forwards up front.

Tyrus Thomas could become LIKE Ben Wallace, if he's really as blue-collar as they say he is, and so... I don't know that it would be so bad to have two vets in front of two youngsters. 

The only thing is that I think Tyson Chandler could still be better than most of the draft prospects outside of Oden and the like.


----------



## Ron Cey

> I haven't posted all that much in this thread before today. But in every other Wallace thread I've been against his signing - because it was assumed Tyson would be sticking around.


I just can't agree with that logic. You don't pass up Ben Wallace because you have Chandler. The addition of Wallace makes us conference championship contenders next year. With or without Chandler. I know you aren't alone in rejecting that, but its something I'll just never understand. The point is to contend. 



> Signing a 32 year old Ben Wallace and a 37 year old PJ Brown (the ages they will be during the playoffs next season) *assumes that our title window is the next two seasons.*


No it doesn't. It assumes that Tyrus Thomas won't dramatically contribute during that two years, and that PJ Brown will. Then as Thomas comes along, that window - while working with Wallace - stays open. Essentially, in my opinion, the Brown deal opens that window wider, sooner.



> Given the respective ages of our nucleus that strikes me as a foolish assumption - and not one worth giving up Tyson Chandler for.


I like Tyson. I'm not giddy to trade him. But like Curry before him, he is the least significant and most easily expendable of our core youth. 



> 34 year old Wallace and 39 year old Brown aren't going to be anybody's championship frontline.


Brown will be gone by then. A 34 year old Wallace, a 21 year old Tyrus Thomas, and two more offseason's worth of additional free agent acquisition/trades very well could be. 



> If you believe there's a good shot of us hoisting the championship trophy with those two over the next two years, I guess they're worth signing. Personally, I don't think that shot is all that great.


I don't know if its a "good shot". But I certainly think its a "better shot" and thats all I care about.


----------



## paxman

LIBlue said:


> I think many would agree with the logic. However, is a 37 year old 9.0 ppg player really more complimentary to the offensively-challenged Ben Wallace. PJ Brown does not really bring much to the table unless it is financially driven, or helps you procure Ben Wallace.


no. wilcox or gooden are more complimentary to wallace. 

if you sign wallace and keep tyson. you have almost zero cap space left. and chandler gets very few minutes.

this move is to dump chandler, then have about 10 million under the cap. (depending on the malik, jr, etc stuff)


i think there's no disagreement, that if we're actually trading chandler for pj brown, that :curse:


----------



## jbulls

Showtyme said:


> Of course, if we have an inside track on Greg Oden (I mean, Isaiah is COACHING the team now and they drafted Renaldo Balkman, revealing to Gotham that the team can actually get WORSE... the pick flip might end up really good for us), and we have Tyrus Thomas, then two years to be super-competitive while bringing along a young talent or two... I don't think that we'll be in big trouble. Wallace will stay good for three years, Tyrus will just be getting good by then, and next year's draft has a FEW good bigs. Oden, Yi Jianlian, Joakim Noah, Roy Hibbert, even Josh McRoberts could allow us to go two really big forwards up front.
> 
> Tyrus Thomas could become LIKE Ben Wallace, if he's really as blue-collar as they say he is, and so... I don't know that it would be so bad to have two vets in front of two youngsters.
> 
> The only thing is that I think Tyson Chandler could still be better than most of the draft prospects outside of Oden and the like.


Assuming we have the inside track on Oden is foolish. Even if Isaiah coaches the Knicks to the worst record in basketball (and I don't think he will, I think they'll win 35 or so) we'll be less than 50/50 to land Oden. Our basketball decisions cannot assume we're going to draft Oden. If we get him, it's Christmas because we probably won't, no matter how bad the Knicks are.

Please folks, no more Durant and Oden talk. It's nowhere close to a sure thing.


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> I just can't agree with that logic. You don't pass up Ben Wallace because you have Chandler. The addition of Wallace makes us conference championship contenders next year. With or without Chandler. I know you aren't alone in rejecting that, but its something I'll just never understand. The point is to contend.
> 
> 
> 
> No it doesn't. It assumes that Tyrus Thomas won't dramatically contribute during that two years, and that PJ Brown will. Then as Thomas comes along, that window - while working with Wallace - stays open. Essentially, in my opinion, the Brown deal opens that window wider, sooner.
> 
> 
> 
> I like Tyson. I'm not giddy to trade him. But like Curry before him, he is the least significant and most easily expendable of our core youth.
> 
> 
> 
> Brown will be gone by then. A 34 year old Wallace, a 21 year old Tyrus Thomas, and two more offseason's worth of additional free agent acquisition/trades very well could be.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if its a "good shot". But I certainly think its a "better shot" and thats all I care about.


Still not buying it. I am not interested in trading Tyson Chandler for a 36 year old power forward and a shooting guard I think stinks. If we like Ben Wallace so much we can sign him without doing this and either keep Tyson or get a better deal. I think this trade isn't very good.


----------



## LIBlue

paxman said:


> no. wilcox or gooden are more complimentary to wallace.
> 
> if you sign wallace and keep tyson. you have almost zero cap space left. and chandler get very few minutes.
> 
> this move is to dump chandler, then have about 10 million under the cap. (depending on the malik, jr, etc stuff)
> 
> 
> i think there's no disagreement, that if we're actually trading chandler for pj brown, that :curse:


If you do a trade to GET Ben Wallace, then you have the cap space. If you sign Ben Wallace as a free agent, and do the Brown/Smith and Chandler/Allen trade, then you have no real difference in cap impact this year.


----------



## Frankensteiner

LIBlue said:


> I think many would agree with the logic. However, is a 37 year old 9.0 ppg player really more complimentary to the offensively-challenged Ben Wallace. PJ Brown does not really bring much to the table unless it is financially driven, or helps you procure Ben Wallace.


PJ Brown is more complimentary to Ben Wallace, imo. But let us also assume some other possibilities about the trade:

a) as you have said, obtaining PJ Brown is financially driven, meaning we couldn't sign Ben Wallace without dumping Chandler's contract for an expiring one. If this is the case, it would give me a negative view of Bulls ownership, however, from a basketball standpoint, I would much rather have Ben Wallace as my starting center than Tyson Chandler. We have no guarantees Chandler ever becomes as good as Wallace. Not now, and not even 3 years from now.

b) we're not done dealing after this move. If Brown is moved to the Pistons, and we sign another young PF (Wilcox, Gooden, etc.), this would also be preferable to having Chandler on the squad with Wallace.


----------



## Ron Cey

jbulls said:


> Still not buying it. I am not interested in trading Tyson Chandler for a 36 year old power forward and a shooting guard I think stinks. If we like Ben Wallace so much we can sign him without doing this and either keep Tyson or get a better deal. I think this trade isn't very good.


My entire argument is based on the premise that the Chandler/Brown trade is to keep Brown to team with Wallace. 

If its different than that, and its Detroit saying that they want an expiring contract for the sign and trade - i.e., they don't want Chandler and *the Bulls need to get Brown to get Wallace* - then I go into a brand new stratosphere of support for this deal.

I'm sorry, Tyson Chandler cannot, under any circumstances, be a hinderence to signing Ben Wallace. 

As the ROY so bluntly says: Wallace > Chandler. And he couldn't be more right.


----------



## paxman

LIBlue said:


> If you do a trade to GET Ben Wallace, then you have the cap space. If you sign Ben Wallace as a free agent, and do the Brown/Smith and Chandler/Allen trade, then you have no real difference in cap impact this year.


again, most or all of the people liking this trade, do so b/c the PISTONS end up getting pj brown.

otherwise, yeah i'm with you.

but this is what we're talking about:

chicago trades: tyson, malik
chicago recieves: ben wallace

hornets trade: jr smith, pj brown
hornets recieves: tyson chandler

detroit trades: ben wallace
detroit recieves: pj brown

now, it's not clear where jr smith and malik end up. i would guess they both end up in detroit.


----------



## Frankensteiner

Ron Cey said:


> I'm sorry, Tyson Chandler cannot, under any circumstances, be a hinderence to signing Ben Wallace.
> 
> As the ROY so bluntly says: Wallace > Chandler. And he couldn't be more right.


Exactly.


----------



## Ron Cey

Frankensteiner said:


> PJ Brown is more complimentary to Ben Wallace, imo. But let us also assume some other possibilities about the trade:
> 
> a) as you have said, obtaining PJ Brown is financially driven, meaning we couldn't sign Ben Wallace without dumping Chandler's contract for an expiring one. If this is the case, it would give me a negative view of Bulls ownership, however, from a basketball standpoint, I would much rather have Ben Wallace as my starting center than Tyson Chandler. We have no guarantees Chandler ever becomes as good as Wallace. Not now, and not even 3 years from now.
> 
> b) we're not done dealing after this move. If Brown is moved to the Pistons, and we sign another young PF (Wilcox, Gooden, etc.), this would also be preferable to having Chandler on the squad with Wallace.


I'm glad I'm not alone in all this. From every conceivable angle, I like it. If we were talking about a Chandler for Brown deal in the abstract - i.e., Ben Wallace isn't a consideration - then I would absolutely hate the deal. 

But we aren't talking about it in the abstract.


----------



## DaBabyBullz

Dornado said:


> What a terrible thing it would be to have two great interior defenders on the same team. Especially when one of them is a 24 year old seven footer and the other is likely to be done in three or four years...


 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## paxman

ok, let's be clear on something.

TYSON for PJ BROWN, only makes one happy, b/c it's a sign that ben wallace is coming to chicago, which right now isn't a given at all.

but from a "did we get F'd in the A?" standpoint? yes. yes we did. there shouldn't be any debate about that


i think the debate should be about if it's a 3 team trade, with us clearing cap room.


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> My entire argument is based on the premise that the Chandler/Brown trade is to keep Brown to team with Wallace.
> 
> If its different than that, and its Detroit saying that they want an expiring contract for the sign and trade - i.e., they don't want Chandler and *the Bulls need to get Brown to get Wallace* - then I go into a brand new stratosphere of support for this deal.
> 
> I'm sorry, Tyson Chandler cannot, under any circumstances, be a hinderence to signing Ben Wallace.
> 
> As the ROY so bluntly says: Wallace > Chandler. And he couldn't be more right.


That's a false premise, plain and simple. We have the cap space to offer Wallace whatever we want WITH Chandler on the roster. If the deal stinks, and I think it does, there's no reason to take it.


----------



## kulaz3000

jbulls said:


> That's a false premise, plain and simple. We have the cap space to offer Wallace whatever we want WITH Chandler on the roster. If the deal stinks, and I think it does, there's no reason to take it.


i agree. i want someone to either squash or confirm this rumour. this is giving me heart failures..


----------



## Ron Cey

jbulls said:


> That's a false premise, plain and simple. We have the cap space to offer Wallace whatever we want WITH Chandler on the roster. If the deal stinks, and I think it does, there's no reason to take it.


Not if Wallace, due to feelings of loyalty and conflict, won't leave unless its via a sign and trade. Which, under the circumstances and considering Wallace's history and the type of guy he is, is a significant possibility. 

It most certainly is not a false premise. Indeed, if this deal is setting up a sign and trade I think its pretty obvious that not only is it not false, but its not even a premise. Its simply what is happening.


----------



## paxman

Ron Cey said:


> Not if Wallace, due to feelings of loyalty and conflict, won't leave unless its via a sign and trade. Which, under the circumstances and considering Wallace's history and the type of guy he is, is a significant possibility.
> 
> It most certainly is not a false premise. Indeed, if this deal is setting up a sign and trade I think its pretty obvious that not only is it not false, but its not even a premise. Its simply what is happening.



this is a...well false premise actually, started by marlen "I'm not KC Johnson" garcia.
no way does wallace demand that his new team lose a player or 2 b/c of loyalty. it's senseless.
his feelings towards his team is that he put them back on the map, been highly underpaid for the past 4 years, and they're not giving him the reggie miller "thanks for what you've done for us" treatment.

his history? it involves a lot of whinning about flip saunders. and it also involves the detroit mellee, fwiw


and also - according to that premise, exactly who does detroit get back? either tyson, or pj brown, that's who. in both cases we get a ton of cash freed up to get wilcox or gooden.


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> Not if Wallace, due to feelings of loyalty and conflict, won't leave unless its via a sign and trade. Which, under the circumstances and considering Wallace's history and the type of guy he is, is a significant possibility.
> 
> It most certainly is not a false premise. Indeed, if this deal is setting up a sign and trade I think its pretty obvious that not only is it not false, but its not even a premise. Its simply what is happening.


Ron, with all due respect, BS. The Pistons have offered Ben Wallace 12 million dollars a season. We're 17 million dollars under the cap. If we want him we can get him (via a larger contract OR more money a year OR both) without giving our division rivals a parting gift. We don't have to part with Tyson Chandler. We just don't.


----------



## Bullsky

Does anyone else think if we match Detroits offer, that they will agree to the trade so that they get something in return? I think they'd rather lose Wallace but get something than have the Bulls take him outright.


----------



## The Krakken

jbulls said:


> Ron, with all due respect, BS. The Pistons have offered Ben Wallace 12 million dollars a season. We're 17 million dollars under the cap. If we want him we can get him (via a larger contract OR more money a year OR both) without giving our division rivals a parting gift. We don't have to part with Tyson Chandler. We just don't.


And we shouldn't. Unless we get something close to equal value in return.


----------



## kulaz3000

jbulls said:


> Ron, with all due respect, BS. The Pistons have offered Ben Wallace 12 million dollars a season. We're 17 million dollars under the cap. If we want him we can get him (via a larger contract OR more money a year OR both) without giving our division rivals a parting gift. We don't have to part with Tyson Chandler. We just don't.


As said earlier, if Nash can leave and be signed straight up without compensation to the Mavs. Why can't we do the same with Wallace? Is Nash not a stand up guy? This is business, screw the Pistons. 

If this trade goes down, the finger has to be pointed at Jerry Reinsdorf.


----------



## paxman

jbulls said:


> Ron, with all due respect, BS. The Pistons have offered Ben Wallace 12 million dollars a season. We're 17 million dollars under the cap. If we want him we can get him (via a larger contract OR more money a year OR both) without giving our division rivals a parting gift. We don't have to part with Tyson Chandler. We just don't.



woaw, that would be great. a wallace for tyson straight up? sign me up.

would you rather have a front court of wallace/chandler, or wallace/wilcox or gooden?


----------



## The Krakken

jbulls said:


> Ron, with all due respect, BS. The Pistons have offered Ben Wallace 12 million dollars a season. We're 17 million dollars under the cap. If we want him we can get him (via a larger contract OR more money a year OR both) without giving our division rivals a parting gift. We don't have to part with Tyson Chandler. We just don't.



Also consider this: Will ben Wallace in 3 years be worth more to us than either Gordon or Deng. Cause if we keep him AND chandler, then one or both of Gordon and Deng WONT be staying.


----------



## OziBull

The Krakken said:


> Also consider this: Will ben Wallace in 3 years be worth more to us than either Gordon or Deng. Cause if we keep him AND chandler, then one or both of Gordon and Deng WONT be staying.


Thankyou! Exactly how i feel about the whole situation
:cheers:


----------



## jbulls

The Krakken said:


> Also consider this: Will ben Wallace in 3 years be worth more to us than either Gordon or Deng. Cause if we keep him AND chandler, then one or both of Gordon and Deng WONT be staying.


Who the heck knows? But the idea that in 2006, our big cap space year, we're raffling off valuable parts to sign one player is beyond idiotic.

We're 17 million dollars under the cap!

We can do whatever the heck we want and we don't have trade anybody. That's the whole point of capspace. Jeez.


----------



## paxman

Bullsky said:


> Does anyone else think if we match Detroits offer, that they will agree to the trade so that they get something in return? I think they'd rather lose Wallace but get something than have the Bulls take him outright.


well, depending who they get. i'm not sure they want tyson for 10 million a year.


----------



## kulaz3000

jbulls said:


> Who the heck knows? But the idea that in 2006, our big cap space year, we're raffling off valuable parts to sign one player is beyond idiotic.
> 
> We're 17 million dollars under the cap!
> 
> We can do whatever the heck we want and we don't have trade anybody. That's the whole point of capspace. Jeez.


Jerry Riensdorf.


----------



## paxman

jbulls said:


> Who the heck knows? But the idea that in 2006, our big cap space year, we're raffling off valuable parts to sign one player is beyond idiotic.
> 
> We're 17 million dollars under the cap!
> 
> We can do whatever the heck we want and we don't have trade anybody. That's the whole point of capspace. Jeez.



not true. if we sign wallace, and keep tyson, we cannot also get wilcox or gooden.


----------



## The Krakken

OziBull said:


> Thankyou! Exactly how i feel about the whole situation
> :cheers:


Which is why after careful consideration, I'd have to reluctantly decline a WALLACE/Chandler frontcourt. And I'm not sold on the idea that Wallace is the better long term solution.

We want to contend for YEARS....not just be in the finals once, like the sixers a few years ago, the pacers a year later, the nets and so on and so on.......


----------



## Ron Cey

paxman said:


> this is a...well false premise actually, started by marlen "I'm not KC Johnson" garcia.
> no way does wallace demand that his new team lose a player or 2 b/c of loyalty. it's senseless.
> his feelings towards his team is that he put them back on the map, been highly underpaid for the past 4 years, and they're not giving him the reggie miller "thanks for what you've done for us" treatment.
> 
> his history? it involves a lot of whinning about flip saunders. and it also involves the detroit mellee, fwiw
> 
> 
> and also - according to that premise, exactly who does detroit get back? either tyson, or pj brown, that's who. in both cases we get a ton of cash freed up to get wilcox or gooden.


Okay. Then lets say he wants the sign and trade because it maximizes his contract. There has to be some reason, doesn't there?

If there isn't a Wallace-originating reason, then why the hell would anyone do it? Wallace has to be the source - either due to conflict or greed. 

The alternative is that the Bulls are doing it to free up more capspace. Which would be wonderful. I'm still not seeing any downside.


----------



## kulaz3000

paxman said:


> not true. if we sign wallace, and keep tyson, we cannot also get wilcox or gooden.


If we sign Wallace, we don't need Wilcox or Gooden.


----------



## The Krakken

jbulls said:


> Who the heck knows? But the idea that in 2006, our big cap space year, we're raffling off valuable parts to sign one player is beyond idiotic.
> 
> We're 17 million dollars under the cap!
> 
> We can do whatever the heck we want and we don't have trade anybody. That's the whole point of capspace. Jeez.


Listen man. I agree with you. All I'm saying is that all sides of this argument should be considered carefully.


----------



## bulls

to everyone Knockin JR check this out 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CumeGVCEftE&search=jr smith

tell me that he doesnt look like a young Kobe,tell me this kid doesnt have game,tell me this kid is junk and should be toss aside like a used rag..


----------



## Ron Cey

jbulls said:


> Ron, with all due respect, BS. The Pistons have offered Ben Wallace 12 million dollars a season. We're 17 million dollars under the cap. If we want him we can get him (via a larger contract OR more money a year OR both) without giving our division rivals a parting gift. *We don't have to part with Tyson Chandler. We just don't.*


If its to get PJ Brown to trade to Detroit, then evidently we did. And Wallace holds all the cards. So he will have had to be the source. I responded in greater detail to Paxman if you want to see the rest of my thoughts.


----------



## jbulls

paxman said:


> not true. if we sign wallace, and keep tyson, we cannot also get wilcox or gooden.


Given our core, we have money for one long term big this summer. Not two. We've got to re-sign Noc, Deng, Ben and Kirk. Tyson's already playing for big money. That's 5 guys without the FA signings. No team in the association (outside of NY) has even 5 guys playing for more than 8 million per.


----------



## Bullsky

kulaz3000 said:


> If we sign Wallace, we don't need Wilcox or Gooden.


Uh, yes we do. If we have Tyson and Wallace as our post players, then I'd be worried. We need someone who can score. If Ben could be our defensive post, then a player like Gooden or Harrington could be our offensive post player. Plus, Wallace is a nice way to persuade someone to come here. I dont know if Gooden will leave Cleveland for Chicago unless we have someone like Wallace.


----------



## jbulls

The Krakken said:


> Listen man. I agree with you. All I'm saying is that all sides of this argument should be considered carefully.


I know, I was furthering the point you set out...


----------



## OziBull

The Krakken said:


> Which is why after careful consideration, I'd have to reluctantly decline a WALLACE/Chandler frontcourt. And I'm not sold on the idea that Wallace is the better long term solution.
> 
> We want to contend for YEARS....not just be in the finals once, like the sixers a few years ago, the pacers a year later, the nets and so on and so on.......


Agree again mate!
Pax has stated on a number of times that he wants to build around the core of
Kirk, Ben , Deng and Noce
Having a frontcourt of Wallace and Chandler will not let that happen! Simple!


----------



## giusd

Hornet's Report is also reporting that we are trading Ben Gordon for a NO asst coach. KH is going to NO for cash and next year chicken little will be signed as a free agent. Sure he is short and well a chicken but he has great hops and jiibb (what ever that is?).

By selling kirk for cash we open up free cap space for not only chicken little and one or two other players like daffy duck who we all know as a great jump shot but plays bad D.

bugs is also thinking about coming out of retirement for the third time and sure he has maybe lost a step or two but we need someone to take ben and KH place since they are all going to NO. How do i know this. A real news paper? Chad frod, espn insider noooo the world famous, double secret double agent who posts on Hornet's Report. Who by the way also knows where the WMD are.

david


----------



## paxman

kulaz3000 said:


> If we sign Wallace, we don't need Wilcox or Gooden.


we do if we want post scoring.


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> If its to get PJ Brown to trade to Detroit, then evidently we did. And Wallace holds all the cards. So he will have had to be the source. I responded in greater detail to Paxman if you want to see the rest of my thoughts.


Read the Paxman post. In no way can sign and trading maximize Ben Wallace's contract, we can pay him just as much as they can. That's not a factor.


----------



## kulaz3000

giusd said:


> Hornet's Report is also reporting that we are trading Ben Gordon for a NO asst coach. KH is going to NO for cash and next year chicken little will be signed as a free agent. Sure he is short and well a chicken but he has great hops and jiibb (what ever that is?).
> 
> By selling kirk for cash we open up free cap space for not only chicken little and one or two other players like daffy duck who we all know as a great jump shot but plays bad D.
> 
> bugs is also thinking about coming out of retirement for the third time and sure he has maybe lost a step or two but we need someone to take ben and KH place since they are all going to NO. How do i know this. A real news paper? Chad frod, espn insider noooo the world famous, double secret double agent who posts on Hornet's Report. Who by the way also knows where the WMD are.
> 
> david


...................


----------



## Ron Cey

jbulls said:


> We can do whatever the heck we want and we don't have trade anybody. That's the whole point of capspace. Jeez.


No we can't. We can't offer Ben as much as Detroit can. Sign and trades of unrestricted free agents happen for this reason all the time.


----------



## Ron Cey

jbulls said:


> Read the Paxman post. In no way can sign and trading maximize Ben Wallace's contract, we can pay him just as much as they can. That's not a factor.


If he wrote that, he's wrong. The CBA is specifically set up to weigh in favor of the team having the player. It is structured to deter a player leaving his team. 

But I'll check his post. If he's right, I'll retract this.


----------



## paxman

jbulls said:


> Given our core, we have money for one long term big this summer. Not two. We've got to re-sign Noc, Deng, Ben and Kirk. Tyson's already playing for big money. That's 5 guys without the FA signings. No team in the association (outside of NY) has even 5 guys playing for more than 8 million per.


right. we get ONE fa in wallace. then, basically dump chandler for wilcox or gooden.


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> No we can't. We can't offer Ben as much as Detroit can. Sign and trades of unrestricted free agents happen for this reason all the time.


S&T's of unrestricted FA's happen because of the luxury tax. All reports are that Detroit's ceiling on Wallace is around 12 million dollars. We're 17 million under the cap. If we really want Wallace we don't have to S&T.


----------



## The Krakken

jbulls said:


> I know, I was furthering the point you set out...


Cool. So to be clear then. Its either SIGN BEN outright without trading ANYONE. Or don't sign him at all.

:cheers:


----------



## The Krakken

OziBull said:


> Agree again mate!
> Pax has stated on a number of times that he wants to build around the core of
> Kirk, Ben , Deng and Noce
> Having a frontcourt of Wallace and Chandler will not let that happen! Simple!


reputation forthcoming.


----------



## kulaz3000

paxman said:


> we do if we want post scoring.


With the amount of lenght and activity we would have with Wallace and Chandler in the paint, they could probably be good enough for around 15-20 points amoungst them together just purely on stick backs and lobs. 

If we don't get points production for them certain nights, you sure know that the oppositions post players won't get much points scored against our two either. So in essence it would even out.

Im not an idiot, i know we need post scoring. But we've been waiting for this capspace, to "add" not "replace" a player. We can always trade Chandler later if it doesn't work out. His a legit 7 footer, they are always valued and demanded in the leauge, just look at Dampier. Im sure we could dump him off to Cuban anytime in the future if it doesn't pan out or for an expiring contract.


----------



## Ron Cey

jbulls said:


> S&T's of unrestricted FA's happen because of the luxury tax. All reports are that Detroit's ceiling on Wallace is around 12 million dollars. We're 17 million under the cap. If we really want Wallace we don't have to S&T.


That is a self-imposed ceiling. It is not the ceiling for what Wallace can get out of us via a sign and trade.


----------



## The Krakken

jbulls said:


> S&T's of unrestricted FA's happen because of the luxury tax. All reports are that Detroit's ceiling on Wallace is around 12 million dollars. We're 17 million under the cap. If we really want Wallace we don't have to S&T.


To be fair, Detroit doesn't have a ceiling on Wallace if they are willing to go into luxury tax territory to get him.


----------



## kulaz3000

Ron Cey said:


> No we can't. We can't offer Ben as much as Detroit can. Sign and trades of unrestricted free agents happen for this reason all the time.


Yes, thats true. But the reason why Wallace is considering the Bulls is not only because we're probably the only legit team with capspace but because Pistons arn't willing to pay him after a certain point and he obviously would want more.


----------



## paxman

Ron Cey said:


> That is a self-imposed ceiling. It is not the ceiling for what Wallace can get out of us via a sign and trade.


ok, if wallace demands SIX years, which only could happen thru a sign and trade, then yeah, i have a problem with this.


----------



## The Krakken

kulaz3000 said:


> Yes, thats true. But the reason why Wallace is considering the Bulls is not only because we're probably the only legit team with capspace but because Pistons arn't willing to pay him after a certain point and he obviously would want more.


Agreed again. This is a good debate. :biggrin:


----------



## jbulls

Ron Cey said:


> That is a self-imposed ceiling. It is not the ceiling for what Wallace can get out of us via a sign and trade.


A ceiling is a ceiling. All reports indicate that Detroit's ceiling is 5 million dollars short of our cap space (which is also a self imposed ceiling, btw). Sorry, I'm not willing to kick his ex-boys and division rivals PJ Brown (at the expense of Tyson Chandler) to complete the signing. Especially given that, according to media reports, we're the only other serious suitor.


----------



## paxman

giusd said:


> Hornet's Report is also reporting that we are trading Ben Gordon for a NO asst coach. KH is going to NO for cash and next year chicken little will be signed as a free agent. Sure he is short and well a chicken but he has great hops and jiibb (what ever that is?).
> 
> By selling kirk for cash we open up free cap space for not only chicken little and one or two other players like daffy duck who we all know as a great jump shot but plays bad D.
> 
> bugs is also thinking about coming out of retirement for the third time and sure he has maybe lost a step or two but we need someone to take ben and KH place since they are all going to NO. How do i know this. A real news paper? Chad frod, espn insider noooo the world famous, double secret double agent who posts on Hornet's Report. Who by the way also knows where the WMD are.
> 
> david


go back to page 13 on THIS VERY THREAD, check out miz's second post on that page. this is legit.


----------



## fl_flash

Ron Cey said:


> If he wrote that, he's wrong. The CBA is specifically set up to weigh in favor of the team having the player. It is structured to deter a player leaving his team.
> 
> But I'll check his post. If he's right, I'll retract this.


You're right. The Pistons can offer more. More years (6 vs.5) and larger raises.

I'm sure the holdup here is that Wallace is trying to get all that he can out of this. I wouldn't go much over 4 years and $60 mil for Wallace. If Wallace or the Pistons are trying to get more in a S&T, then screw em. If there's any truth to this, I'm pretty sure things will get ironed out within the day.

Chandler with Wallace is simply a bad combination. You really couldn't have them out on the floor together for any length of time. It's like playing 3 on 5. Also, at the end of the game, teams could just hack a Ben-Ty to their hearts content. So then you're talking about having a guy making $11 mil a year (Chandler) as a bench player. It's just not gonna work. Better to move him to a situation that is better for him and replace that salary (player) with someone who can be on the floor with Wallace and help this team out. If we keep PJ, he's still a better fit with Wallace - in the short term and if PJ's going to Detroit, we'd still have ample cap room to get a guy whose skillset meshes better with Wallace.


----------



## giusd

I have not read a thing that suggests that this is legit. Some post. Every year Sam Smith makes up pages and pages of trades and they NEVER happen. Period.

david


----------



## paxman

giusd said:


> I have not read a thing that suggests that this is legit. Some post. Every year Sam Smith makes up pages and pages of trades and they NEVER happen. Period.
> 
> david



hornet's report also broke the stojakovich story way before anyone did. it must be fun to feel clever.


----------



## Ron Cey

jbulls said:


> A ceiling is a ceiling. All reports indicate that Detroit's ceiling is 5 million dollars short of our cap space (which is also a self imposed ceiling, btw). *Sorry, I'm not willing to kick his ex-boys and division rivals PJ Brown (at the expense of Tyson Chandler) to complete the signing.*


I am.


----------



## The ROY

Doesn't matter if we're willing, we're not the Gm and Owner


----------



## Ron Cey

fl_flash said:


> You're right. The Pistons can offer more. More years (6 vs.5) and larger raises.
> 
> I'm sure the holdup here is that Wallace is trying to get all that he can out of this. I wouldn't go much over 4 years and $60 mil for Wallace. If Wallace or the Pistons are trying to get more in a S&T, then screw em. If there's any truth to this, I'm pretty sure things will get ironed out within the day.
> 
> Chandler with Wallace is simply a bad combination. You really couldn't have them out on the floor together for any length of time. It's like playing 3 on 5. Also, at the end of the game, teams could just hack a Ben-Ty to their hearts content. So then you're talking about having a guy making $11 mil a year (Chandler) as a bench player. *It's just not gonna work. Better to move him to a situation that is better for him and replace that salary (player) with someone who can be on the floor with Wallace and help this team out. If we keep PJ, he's still a better fit with Wallace - in the short term and if PJ's going to Detroit, we'd still have ample cap room to get a guy whose skillset meshes better with Wallace.*


Yes. Precisely what I've been getting at, but you've boiled it down better than I did. This is how I look at it.


----------



## kulaz3000

The ROY said:


> Doesn't matter if we're willing, we're not the Gm and Owner


Thats a boring response ROY. Whats the point of this whole board then, if we can't speculate a little. Let us play a little...


----------



## The ROY

kulaz3000 said:


> Thats a boring response ROY. Whats the point of this whole board then, if we can't speculate a little. Let us play a little...


he said "I'm not willing"..

really isn't up to US..

it's not a biggie, it's just real talk

we as fans, just deal

SEND CHANDLER's TRASH *** somewhere else


----------



## The Krakken

The ROY said:


> he said "I'm not willing"..
> 
> really isn't up to US..
> 
> it's not a biggie, it's just real talk
> 
> we as fans, just deal
> 
> SEND CHANDLER's TRASH *** somewhere else


Oh my word......:laugh:


----------



## kulaz3000

The ROY said:


> he said "I'm not willing"..
> 
> really isn't up to US..
> 
> it's not a biggie, it's just real talk
> 
> we as fans, just deal
> 
> SEND CHANDLER's TRASH *** somewhere else


haha.. fair enough. 

SOMEONE CONFIRM THIS DAMN RUMOUR/TRADE. Im getting fustrated...


----------



## jbulls

The Krakken said:


> Oh my word......:laugh:


Seriously. It's incredible how fast things go from "LOL!" to "hey, we're just fans"...


----------



## The Krakken

jbulls said:


> Seriously. It's incredible how fast things go from "LOL!" to "hey, we're just fans"...


I like both of you guys.

I'm not touching that one. :angel:


----------



## bulls

giusd said:


> Hornet's Report is also reporting that we are trading Ben Gordon for a NO asst coach. KH is going to NO for cash and next year chicken little will be signed as a free agent. Sure he is short and well a chicken but he has great hops and jiibb (what ever that is?).
> 
> By selling kirk for cash we open up free cap space for not only chicken little and one or two other players like daffy duck who we all know as a great jump shot but plays bad D.
> 
> bugs is also thinking about coming out of retirement for the third time and sure he has maybe lost a step or two but we need someone to take ben and KH place since they are all going to NO. How do i know this. A real news paper? Chad frod, espn insider noooo the world famous, double secret double agent who posts on Hornet's Report. Who by the way also knows where the WMD are.
> 
> david



how dumb.are you in the 4th or 5th grades?


----------



## paxman

bulls said:


> how dumb.are you in the 4th or 5th grades?


he's just trying to feel big.


----------



## The ROY

jbulls said:


> Seriously. It's incredible how fast things go from "LOL!" to "hey, we're just fans"...


ugh..ok?

LOL!!!!!!! hey jbulls, we're just fans


----------



## jbulls

The ROY said:


> ugh..ok?
> 
> LOL!!!!!!! hey jbulls, we're just fans


Well, sure. Next time lead off with that instead of finishing with it.


----------



## The Krakken

bulls said:


> how dumb.are you in the 4th or 5th grades?


Actually, I believe he has his M.D. Be careful how you insult someone's intelligence. It just isn't a pretty way to debate. They might be far smarter than you can comprehend.


----------



## giusd

Yo Bulls,

No i am not in 4th or 5th grade but i was many year ago before i did my PhD at the University of Chicago and finished medical school at Loyola but it is nice that you show so much interest in my education. Maybe you might tell you what you think your accompishments are to speak to me that way. Are you still living in mon's basement? Dude anytime you want to put up are places in society and status as a function of accomplishments just let me know.

And try to get that foot out of your mouth.

david


----------



## Da Grinch

I'm sorry this bean counter mentality ...it bothers me.

there is no good reason that the bulls cant have both tyson and wallace and look for a post scorer in next year's supposedly big man rich draft....the bulls are surely rich enough ....the bulls should be making choices because they have too much talent and then they can trade whoever doesn't fit.

PJ at 37 cant even play big minutes all that much or at least shouldn't be counted on for it, is there some sort of law saying the bulls cant have an abundance of talent .

ben wallace should not be forcing out tyson chandler , he should be forcing out Luke schensher.


----------



## The Krakken

LOL. I just looked up GiusD's background.

http://ccr.cancer.gov/staff/staff.asp?profileid=5563

Lets put a stop to the silly questioning of one's intelligence. Having completed only about half of the education listed on that page, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that if that page is accurate, the he is easily among the most intelligent individuals here.

It's difficult to obtain a BS in biochemistry (which I did), much less get your M.D. (which I'm working on), so I think the man deserves a little respect.. Lets just leave people's education level out of this.


----------



## paxman

The Krakken said:


> Actually, I believe he has his M.D. Be careful how you insult someone's intelligence. It just isn't a pretty way to debate. They might be far smarter than you can comprehend.


belittling people with repetitive chicken little comments is really smart. far more than i can comprehend.


----------



## The Krakken

Then simply ignore it, OR get some thicker skin. If his comments really bother you that much, then simply do what I did to another poster. Ignore them. It won't hurt anyone.


----------



## Babble-On

Going for a frontcourt of Wallace and Brown is a shortsighted move. 

Unless one or more or the players on the perimeter step up their games to a crazy extent, the team won't make compete for a title with such an offensively anemic pf-c combo coupled with a group of streaky jump shooters. And these two not exactly young guys with only a fat, and two undersized tweeners, one an undersized rookie as the only help off the bench for them.

Then you consider the fact that Brown is 37 and you realize that in 07-08', Brown might very well be gone, leaving the team with nobody taller than six foot nine and nothing more than the MLE(and the Knicks pick :biggrin: ) to strengthen the team's frontcourt depth. So ultimately, the only benefit that the trade would have for the team would be for the owners' pocketbooks, as the Bulls won't have been freed up to add or keep any players they otherwise wouldn't have been able to had they not traded Chandler.

Now, if the move results in a signing of Gooden or Wilcox then I can understand the move. Otherwise it sucks unless JR Smith fulfills his supposed star potential.


----------



## BG7

How about JR Smith for Stromile Swift?


----------



## paxman

The Krakken said:


> Then simply ignore it, OR get some thicker skin. If his comments really bother you that much, then simply do what I did to another poster. Ignore them. It won't hurt anyone.


agreed. 

so, the guy that called him a 4th grader, if it bothers you so much, just ignore him. it won't hurt you.

:biggrin: 



by the way, i'd love to join your group


----------



## The Krakken

paxman said:


> agreed.
> 
> so, the guy that called him a 4th grader, if it bothers you so much, just ignore him. it won't hurt you.


It doesn't bother me at all. I just am trying to keep this thread from deteriorating into another personal war......like some of the threads I've been involved in lately (even though I didn't get personal).

Just passing on some wisdom from recent experiences I guess. You guys are free to conduct yourselves however you see fit.

Edit. Consider yourself added.


----------



## TripleDouble

It's amazing how many people are basing their opinions on this comparison on past accomplishments. You don't trade for history, unless of course you are a poorly run franchise like the Mets of past years who aquired player after player on the downsides of their career, hoping that that player would somehow be immune from time.

Investing significant assets on players on the downsides of their careers is foolish for a team on which every other good player is not yet in their prime. I have not yet seen a plausable arguement to the contrary. It's just people repeating over and over "DPOY," and "Chandler sucks."


----------



## FanOfAll8472

This isn't a popular thought, but what about Ben Wallace and Tyson Chandler in the front court? It would take really good X's and O's for that to work, but Tyson could continue the pick and roll while Ben is in the high post and feeds backdoor cutters. Tyson's problem last year, according to some people including myself, was the lack of an ox next to him who gave him space to move around. He was forced to guard guys stronger and bulkier than he was, and thus, picked up cheap fouls. Having a Ben Wallace type, despite the duplicity in some skills, would make Tyson Chandler a better interior defender.

Add a player like Al Harrington and we could have a variety of scoring, defending, and rebounding lineups in the frontcourt.


----------



## paxman

The Krakken said:


> Consider yourself added.


sweet :banana: 

no knee-jerk thinking, yet no blind love. my kind of club.


----------



## mizenkay

hey enough with the insults already. 

you guys are missing the big picture.

well some of you. flash, as usual, nail on the head. ron, you too. 



:clap:

oh and _i like chandler_ and it does make me sad that the bulls are giving up on him, but let's call a spade a spade. if nba sources are saying a deal is on the table and it was on TV then i believe it's real. and it's part of a bigger deal.



i say, pax....swing batta, batta...swing batta.

ben wallace DPOY >>>> tyson chandler right now. 

that's what this is about. at least that's what i think it's about. 

PJ Brown and JR Smith...just machinations. just trying to get the deal done.

but if pax doesn't get indication soon from wallace...he needs to scrap this idea. it only works if we get wallace.


----------



## paxman

TripleDouble said:


> Investing significant assets on players on the downsides of their careers is foolish for a team on which every other good player is not yet in their prime. I have not yet seen a plausable arguement to the contrary. It's just people repeating over and over "DPOY," and "Chandler sucks."


ok, here are mine:

i consider wallace's game to be somewhat similar to rodman's. somewhat. rodman was in his mid to late thirties when he played for us. 

wallace takes great care of his body.

detroit drained their starters. wallace will be more rejuvinated here, with more rest.

kirk and duhon will find more easy buckets for wallace than detroit did. buckets that chandler couldn't make what with his clumsy hands.


----------



## kulaz3000

sloth said:


> How about JR Smith for Stromile Swift?


If we lose Chandler, i want a big player. His not a big player.

Houston pretty much sacrafised Rudy Gay and Swift to Memphis for Battier purely because they wanted to get rid of Stromile Swift. That doesn't say much for Stromile as a player...

As for J.R Smith, i've always liked his talent. But that boy is going to take a while to get it, and i don't see Skiles wanting to coddle the kid.


----------



## narek

I just finished watching WGNs 20 minute Sunday Sport show. The Bulls news was video from Thabo and Tryus's introduction to the Chicago PRess. The only thing on Wallace was that that the Bulls visited with him yesterday. Nothing, nothing, nothing at all on this trade. A search of google has nothing either except that the 76ers want to talk about a S and T involving Wallace.

Tomorrow, possibly answers.


----------



## Ron Cey

TripleDouble said:


> It's amazing how many people are basing their opinions on this comparison on past accomplishments.


Is May of 2006 "history"? Because thats the last time Ben Wallace won the Defensive Player of the Year award. 

This guy is 31. He played 35 minutes a game last year. Thats just as many as Hinrich. 

Some of you are writing about him like he shared a nursery with Antonio Davis.


----------



## Ron Cey

Da Grinch said:


> PJ at 37 cant even play big minutes all that much or at least shouldn't be counted on for it, is there some sort of law saying the bulls cant have an abundance of talent .


He played like 7 minutes per game more than Chandler last year.


----------



## SALO

jbulls said:


> Ron, with all due respect, BS. The Pistons have offered Ben Wallace 12 million dollars a season. We're 17 million dollars under the cap. If we want him we can get him (via a larger contract OR more money a year OR both) without giving our division rivals a parting gift. *We don't have to part with Tyson Chandler. We just don't.*


Unfortunately, I feel like this is where Reinsdorf comes in to play.


----------



## DaBullz

I have no problem, really, in adding Wallace to the team. He's a VERY special player on the defensive end. He's going to affect opponents' entire offenses, not just guard one player.

That is an entirely separate issue from trading Chandler...

PJ Brown is just an awful pickup for us. If he was going to play Othella's role, and he didn't cost us so much (Chandler), it'd be a different story.

I don't see how any Pax supporter can spin this idea as anything other than a penny pinching move. I don't care to watch our GM hoard and count his pennies. Especially if he's trying to load up for a real chance to contend in the next year or two.

We're surely better off trying to get as much quality play out of Chandler as we can. Late in the game when you need a stop, it's going to be sick having him and Wallace both out there. I don't think there's ANYONE in the league I'd rather see out there than Chandler and Wallace.

As for Wallace...

He's definately getting up in years, and he sure looked like a tired old man after playing 35 minutes per game by the time playoffs came around. He's going to look MORE tired and more old in a Bulls' uniform real quick.

Another factor regarding Wallace is that he's clearly unhappy in Detroit. He doesn't get along with the coach. This leads me to two observations: 1) Good luck getting along with Skiles, and 2) Detroit might be willing to let the malcontent go without trying _that_ hard to keep him. They've done their part in making him a good offer; it surely is up to Ben to leave if he wants to. The dissatisfaction with the coach speaks to jib, one way or another. So does his 'fro


giusd - wow, I knew you were a highly educated fellow, though your posts are most cryptic. I would never hold that against you, though (never have).


----------



## rwj333

I supported the Eddy Curry trade. I supported the Jamal Crawford trade. 

But this deal is just ridiculous ****ing bull****. I know this has been discussed to death. However, Chandler has too much value, despite his horrible season, to be used as a salary dump + a player who was almost traded for Brent Barry (a Barry for JR Smith deal was sent in to the league office 5 minutes after the trade dealine and not allowed). I wouldn't be satisfied with this deal unless we signed Wallace and another player - Gooden or Wilcox - using the money freed up by Chandler. 

It still has yet to be explained why we need to trade Chandler to sign Wallace. Wallace is unrestricted. We are willing to spend more money than the Pistons. Neither team wants to sign Wallace to a 6 year deal-- Because of the 36-and-over CBA rule, the salary from the sixth year would be averaged out over the first five in regards to salary cap status. There has been no speculation by reporters, and Ben has given no indication that he has loyalty to the Pistons and wants to give them something in return for leaving. Is PJ Brown really so essential that the Pistons need him back in a sign and trade? The *only* reason this move would happen is to cut salary. 

This is like signing Joe Johnson for 70 million and giving up 2 first rounders and Boris Diaw. This is the kind of move that bad teams make. I refuse to believe that Paxson would make such a horrible trade. 

I know I'm not throwing anything new or special out there, but I just needed to express my feelings on this.


----------



## TripleDouble

Ron Cey said:


> Is May of 2006 "history"? Because thats the last time Ben Wallace won the Defensive Player of the Year award.
> 
> This guy is 31. He played 35 minutes a game last year. Thats just as many as Hinrich.
> 
> Some of you are writing about him like he shared a nursery with Antonio Davis.


He looked bad against Miami. His numbers have been down for several seasons. Pistons fans say they see a decline in his game. That seems like evidence that his game is slipping, despite his winning the award. 

Perhaps I should reframe my arguement in the context of this thread. I'm somewhat ok with Wallace being signed straight up to a four year deal. However I hate moving Chandler for garbage as an part of such a deal. In short, I think the Bulls will have a better shot of winning championships 3-10 years from now with Chandler than they will have for the next two or three seasons with Wallace.


----------



## kulaz3000

DaBullz said:


> Another factor regarding Wallace is that he's clearly unhappy in Detroit. He doesn't get along with the coach. This leads me to two observations: 1) Good luck getting along with Skiles


The reason why people speculate that Wallace didn't get along with Flip was because he was the first offensively orintated coach he played for. So in essence i don't see him having a problem with Skiles he demanding style because his a defensive coach himself which Wallace likes.


----------



## Ron Cey

You guys are out there, man. I'm tickled so many of you feel so strongly about Tyson's worth. I wonder where all that was during the season when everyone seemed to be trashing him. 

Now he's such a valuable rising talent that if trading him is what is required to get Ben Wallace, then the price is too high. 

Several of you keep harping on how we don't need to trade Chandler to get Wallace. But if we trade Chandler to the Hornets for Brown, and then trade Brown for Wallace - as is the reported speculation - then obviously it was a requirement. A requirement set by Wallace. If there is an alternative explanation, I'm all ears.

And it wouldn't be a salary dump. It would get us more capspace for this summer. 

And if we simply make the Chandler/Brown trade as a corollary to the Wallace signing, then I'm fine with that too. Brown is a better short term fit with Wallace than Chandler is. This facilitates an immediate run for the Conference Finals. 

I have nothing more to add.


----------



## paxman

DaBullz said:


> I have no problem, really, in adding Wallace to the team. He's a VERY special player on the defensive end. He's going to affect opponents' entire offenses, not just guard one player.
> 
> That is an entirely separate issue from trading Chandler...
> 
> PJ Brown is just an awful pickup for us. If he was going to play Othella's role, and he didn't cost us so much (Chandler), it'd be a different story.
> 
> I don't see how any Pax supporter can spin this idea as anything other than a penny pinching move. I don't care to watch our GM hoard and count his pennies. Especially if he's trying to load up for a real chance to contend in the next year or two.


the "pax supporters" have "spun" it, as a 3 team trade. actually, that's exactly how it was reported on tv. in this trade, we do not end up with pj. we end up with wallace, and free up cap to get gooden or wilcox. which doesn't work as a penny pinching theory, considering we might have to pay them chandler money. essentially dumping chandler for wilcox or gooden.

clearly, if the trade is tyson for pj brown, well that's just foul...


----------



## rwj333

Ron Cey said:


> You guys are out there, man. I'm tickled so many of you feel so strongly about Tyson's worth. I wonder where all that was during the season when everyone seemed to be trashing him.


I didn't really post that much during the season, I mostly lurk. But I felt that the Chandler-bashing, led by pippenatorade, really got out of hand.



> Now he's such a valuable rising talent that if trading him is what is required to get Ben Wallace, then the price is too high.
> 
> Several of you keep harping on how we don't need to trade Chandler to get Wallace. But if we trade Chandler to the Hornets for Brown, and then trade Brown for Wallace - as is the reported speculation - then obviously it was a requirement. A requirement set by Wallace. If there is an alternative explanation, I'm all ears.


Or maybe Reinsdorf/Paxson doesn't want to sign another large contract without cutting salary, since we have so many guys to resign. This explanation is equally plausible. PJ Brown is 36 and has one more year left. He's holding up the deal on the Pistons' end?



> And it wouldn't be a salary dump. It would get us more capspace for this summer.
> 
> And if we simply make the Chandler/Brown trade as a corollary to the Wallace signing, then I'm fine with that too. Brown is a better short term fit with Wallace than Chandler is. This facilitates an immediate run for the Conference Finals.
> 
> I have nothing more to add.


Like I said, I would be satisfied with dumping Chandler if we also signed Wilcox. But I doubt that happens.


----------



## BG7

Eh, this trades not happening, were not getting Ben Wallace with our candy *** offers.


----------



## kulaz3000

paxman said:


> the "pax supporters" have "spun" it, as a 3 team trade. actually, that's exactly how it was reported on tv. in this trade, we do not end up with pj. we end up with wallace, and free up cap to get gooden or wilcox. which doesn't work as a penny pinching theory, considering we might have to pay them chandler money. essentially dumping chandler for wilcox or gooden.
> 
> clearly, if the trade is tyson for pj brown, well that's just foul...


a flagarant foul.


----------



## MikeDC

Ron Cey said:


> That is a self-imposed ceiling. It is not the ceiling for what Wallace can get out of us via a sign and trade.


He can only get out of us what the Pistons are actually willing to offer him. What the hell reason do we have to offer him $17M if the Pistons are only willing to offer him $12M?

Do you consider it a possibility that the Pistons might be willing to facilitate such a deal to screw an over-eager and over-reaching division rival?

Do you consider the possibility that the Pistons management, which has actually built a championship team, might be sensible in imposing a ceiling on themselves? Perhaps they saw they shouldn't give the farm to a guy they essentially had to bench in the 4th quarter of a conference championship game.

Perhaps they aren't suffering from that cardinal sin in your signature.



Ron Cey said:


> No it doesn't. It assumes that Tyrus Thomas won't dramatically contribute during that two years, and that PJ Brown will. Then as Thomas comes along, that window - while working with Wallace - stays open. Essentially, in my opinion, the Brown deal opens that window wider, sooner.


OK, but this seems to sum things up pretty nicely. You're saying, if I understand things correctly, that we won't really be full scale into our "window of opportunity" for couple years, until Tyrus really starts getting it.

When Tyrus really starts getting it, however, PJ will be gone and Ben will be declining even more steeply than he is now. Where does the help for Tyrus come?

From Wallace. But quite possibly, Tyson will be better than Ben in two years. And the combination of Ben/Tyson/Tyrus will certainly be better than Ben/PJ/Tyrus in two years. Put simply, if our window really opens up in a couple years, we're a hell of a lot better with in two years with Ben/Tyson/Tyrus than Ben/PJ/Tyrus.

The goal isn't a one and done team in the conference finals, that then slips back into mediocrity as its aging bigs decay and its younger ones don't get enough help. The long haul move might be to bring in help with Ben now, but keep around Tyson for the long run.

And it's pretty silly to say we can't find another move out there to bring in another big. Even with a Detroit beating Wallace deal, we'd still have several things (Duhon, Sweetney, future picks, cap space) left to acquire a more complimentary big. Or try and trade Tyson for a more complementary but younger guy. There are lots of other avenues available than a wasting a valuable young asset on a mediocre over the hill codger.


----------



## Ron Cey

> He can only get out of us what the Pistons are actually willing to offer him. What the hell reason do we have to offer him $17M if the Pistons are only willing to offer him $12M?


Because, to Ben Wallace, 1 Pistons' dollar has greater value than 1 Bulls' dollar.



> Do you consider it a possibility that the Pistons might be willing to facilitate such a deal to screw an over-eager and over-reaching division rival?


If its not Wallace demanding that the deal take place in sign and trade form, then we don't have to agree to it. The source MUST be Wallace. If its the Pistons, and Ben is like "Hey, I'll just sign outright" then we'd clearly ignore it. 



> Do you consider the possibility that the Pistons management, which has actually built a championship team, might be sensible in imposing a ceiling on themselves? Perhaps they saw they shouldn't give the farm to a guy they essentially had to bench in the 4th quarter of a conference championship game.


I think thats exactly what they are doing. I don't think there is any other rational explanation. But that doesn't mean that he isn't a more critical addition to a completely different team with completely different players, in a completely different situation. 

And for all the wonderful Dumars has done (I love him), he's done some damn stupid things too. So I'm not intimidated into submission by his apparent analysis of the situation. 



> Perhaps they aren't suffering from that cardinal sin in your signature.


Perhaps they think their championship days are over. Perhaps they are cheap. Perhaps they think that with the friction between Flip and Ben, and 4 other starters who are good offensive players, that they can go a different direction and cater to Flip's offensive tendencies and get back to the Finals without Ben. 

I don't know what they think. What I know is that Wallace makes us immediate, and legitimate, contenders to compete for the conference championship. That is, to me at least, the point of existence for a basketball team. 



> OK, but this seems to sum things up pretty nicely. You're saying, if I understand things correctly, that we won't really be full scale into our "window of opportunity" for couple years, until Tyrus really starts getting it.


You don't understand it correctly. We open the window wider, quicker, with PJ playing along side Wallace than we do with Chandler along side Wallace. Then as Thomas matures, we add more through free agency, the draft, and trades, the window stays open. 



> When Tyrus really starts getting it, however, PJ will be gone and Ben will be declining even more steeply than he is now. Where does the help for Tyrus come?


First, I think Ben has two very strong seasons left in him, and then two more starter quality years after that. He's 31. I don't understand the desire to paint him as a 37 year old vet. 

So in the latter 2 years, Thomas is contributing - as is the other bigs we've acquired to improve on our situation during that time. The roster won't be stagnant. And you know I think a consolidation trade is inevitable. 



> From Wallace. But quite possibly, Tyson will be better than Ben in two years.


As hopeful as I am for Chandler, you simply can't look at a regressing player like that when the DPOY is staring you in the face. 



> And the combination of Ben/Tyson/Tyrus will certainly be better than Ben/PJ/Tyrus in two years.


I'd agree with the exception that this assumes the frontcourt moves begin and end this summer. They don't. 



> Put simply, if our window really opens up in a couple years, we're a hell of a lot better with in two years with Ben/Tyson/Tyrus than Ben/PJ/Tyrus.


That assumes a lot. It assumes Tyson stops regressing. It assumes the Bulls make no more moves. 


> The goal isn't a one and done team in the conference finals, that then slips back into mediocrity as its aging bigs decay and its younger ones don't get enough help.


That is not the picture I paint. 



> The long haul move might be to bring in help with Ben now, but keep around Tyson for the long run.


Thats an option. I'm not going to cry about it if we have Ben and Tyson. I just can see the logic in both interpretations of the PJ Brown trade - though as reported that trade is a 3 team deal sending Brown to the Pistons, not keeping him. 



> And it's pretty silly to say we can't find another move out there to bring in another big. Even with a Detroit beating Wallace deal, we'd still have several things (Duhon, Sweetney, future picks, cap space) left to acquire a more complimentary big. Or try and trade Tyson for a more complementary but younger guy. There are lots of other avenues available than a wasting a valuable young asset on a mediocre over the hill codger.


I think thats a fair point. I'm just commenting on the reports and how I see them.


----------



## theanimal23

I've been gone most of the day, and 16 pgs or so have been added. What the hell happened? Did a deal go down? I see Nene resigned. Please, if anything happened, repeat  the details


----------



## OziBull

theanimal23 said:


> I've been gone most of the day, and 16 pgs or so have been added. What the hell happened? Did a deal go down? I see Nene resigned. Please, if anything happened, repeat  the details


Nene got resigned
and no trades yet
Just alot of talk and debate about what to do!
It's been a good thread some very good points on both sides


----------



## theanimal23

Are we (us fans) just speculating on any trades? Or is there an official report of something close going down, and the wrinkles need to be ironed out before becoming official?


----------



## o.iatlhawksfan

DON'T DO THIS TRADE, I live here in New orleans, and I can tell you that P.J is a old bum. He at times played lazy, he couldn't keep up with a more athletic player, and he is extremly streaky at times he has a streak of 2.0 points a game, then one game he at best burst out for maybe 20 pts at best.


----------



## theanimal23

Few things first:

I quickly read the 15 or so pages I missed.

We can afford to keep both Tyson and Wallace. But, now I feel I'm anti-Tyson. I want him out of here, unless he drastically improves. And unfortunately, I don't see that happening. 

I'll take a Wallace, Brown, and a stud like JR Smith. If this kid has his head on straight, he will be damn good. Look what he did his rookie year out of HS. The kid attacks the rim and isn't afraid to finish. 

I wonder what the details of the trade is. Nene is resigned. I wish we would have gotten him. I guess Denver proved us wrong with the whole paying $10 mil+ for 4-5 players.


----------



## mr.ankle20

so what happens if ben wallace does not sign with the bulls ? Is the trade off I hope not


----------



## spongyfungy

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/luqnHI9heVM"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/luqnHI9heVM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>


----------



## Electric Slim

:eek8:


----------



## draft tyrus

PJ Brown: worst lower-to-upper-lip ratio of all time, by the way.


----------



## BG7

Ben Wallace is actually more clutch than Ben Gordon. We should sign him!


----------



## BG7

82games.com says his fair salary based on their formula is 14.5 million.


----------



## MikeDC

Ron Cey said:


> Because, to Ben Wallace, 1 Pistons' dollar has greater value than 1 Bulls' dollar.


Yes, but that still doesn't mean the Bulls should take a "give him whatever he asks for" approach. The answer is you understand how much more value a Pistons dollar has. 



> If its not Wallace demanding that the deal take place in sign and trade form, then we don't have to agree to it. The source MUST be Wallace. If its the Pistons, and Ben is like "Hey, I'll just sign outright" then we'd clearly ignore it.


Not necessarily. There are any number of plausible reasons to conduct a sign and trade regardless of what Wallace thinks. If the Bulls were to make an immediate move to bring in a Gooden or Przybilla type guy, for example (a younger asset who would better complement Wallace).

Even if it's Ben wanting to "give something back to the Pistons", there is obviously some point where that can be ignored too. Loyalty is nice, but when push comes to shove, a Wallace threat to simply go back to the Pistons isn't credible. 

In fact, it doesn't make a lick of sense. First, it requires that Ben show some amazing amount of loyalty to a team that is telling him they don't even have enough loyalty to him to match the Bulls offer. That's not loyalty, that's battered wife syndrome. Second, where should Ben's loyalty's lie? They damn well ought to lie with the Bulls, since he's coming there and they're making the best monetary offer. Forcing them to make an acillary deal they neither want nor have to make (and which will hurt them on the court in the long run), just to suit his old team... that's some seriously backward loyalty. Third, to be a credible threat, that'd mean he'd have to actually be willing to give up significant money (looks like about $5M) to go back and play for a coach he doesn't appear to like, and who doesn't appreciate him. I tend to think money rules in most situations, but hating your boss and having a crummy work environment has some obvious value in and of itself.

That last point is also true about negotiations in general. Scientifically, they have an endogenous nature... in common speak, they take on a life of their own. Now that everyone's been negotiating and it's clear the Bulls are offering more, it's likely Wallace has a different set of emotions and a different set of loyalties than what he had a few days ago.



> I think thats exactly what they are doing. I don't think there is any other rational explanation. But that doesn't mean that he isn't a more critical addition to a completely different team with completely different players, in a completely different situation.
> 
> And for all the wonderful Dumars has done (I love him), he's done some damn stupid things too. So I'm not intimidated into submission by his apparent analysis of the situation.
> 
> Perhaps they think their championship days are over. Perhaps they are cheap. Perhaps they think that with the friction between Flip and Ben, and 4 other starters who are good offensive players, that they can go a different direction and cater to Flip's offensive tendencies and get back to the Finals without Ben.


It shouldnt intimidate one into submission, but it doesn't strike me as all that smart to simply throw up one's hands, say "I don't know", and then go out and offer the kitchen sink to a guy that's being snubbed but what's widely regarded as one of the better organizations in the NBA. Dumars' analysis isn't irrelevant to our situation, even though our situation is different. 



> I don't know what they think. What I know is that Wallace makes us immediate, and legitimate, contenders to compete for the conference championship. That is, to me at least, the point of existence for a basketball team.


Most everything you say about how Ben could help us is true of how he could help them. So understanding why they are willing to give him up is important.

Why do you know that?
Suppose the Bulls did a sign and trade of Wallace for Chandler back to the Pistons. Would Billups/Rip/Prince/Sheed/Chandler, assuming Chandler had any kind of rebound from last season at all, not compete for the conference championships?

Suppose the Bulls keep Chandler, he plays like he did the year before last, and we add two other competent bigs. Say Gooden and Przybilla, just for kicks (at $8M and $6M, they'd add up to the $14M I've seen bandied about that we should offer Wallace. We'd seem to be at least a threat to go to the conference championship, and three years down the road when Tyrus is hopefully a star, we've got a lot of pieces for a consolidation trade.



> You don't understand it correctly. We open the window wider, quicker, with PJ playing along side Wallace than we do with Chandler along side Wallace. Then as Thomas matures, we add more through free agency, the draft, and trades, the window stays open.


But we could always keep Chandler and add more through free agency (we're not going to be under the cap in any case), the draft, and trades. The additions down the road you talk about can occur with or without Chandler on the roster. So it's pretty clear we're better off with Chandler plus those additions than we are with just those additions.



> First, I think Ben has two very strong seasons left in him, and then two more starter quality years after that. He's 31. I don't understand the desire to paint him as a 37 year old vet.
> 
> So in the latter 2 years, Thomas is contributing - as is the other bigs we've acquired to improve on our situation during that time. The roster won't be stagnant. And you know I think a consolidation trade is inevitable.


The roster won't be stagnant with Chandler on it either. It'll just be one less hole to we need to fill down the road.



> Thats an option. I'm not going to cry about it if we have Ben and Tyson. I just can see the logic in both interpretations of the PJ Brown trade - though as reported that trade is a 3 team deal sending Brown to the Pistons, not keeping him.


Well, supposing the net of the trade is Wallace for Chandler for us, and we then keep significant cap space to land a guy with size and scoring ability (assuming we actually do it), that's a different thing. There we're actually recirculating Chandler back into immediate cap space. We need to use it immediately (and with Nene off the market, it's unclear who we go after), but it's something. Tyson becomes traded for cap space, which is then used for a player. We keep the overall "stock" of assets the same.

Moving Tyson for PJ Brown, who plays for a year or two then retires, effectively vanishes the asset, since we won't net any cap space from it. And trading PJ for a draft pick doesn't seem likely, since if we traded him to keep him, we'd want to... well... keep him. The only way we'd get something out of him is via a consolidation trade, but it doesn't look like that's much more likely with Brown as filler than Chandler. Maybe a little bit, but it's very hard to say. Some teams would probably prefer Brown, an expiring deal, but some would prefer Chandler, a young big guy. So the net effect is we lose some of our accumulated stock of player, much like we lost something when JWill crashed his bike. 

Add it all up, and the only way it makes sense is if the Bulls are unloading Chandler now to make room for someone else they're going to bring in, in addition to Ben. Of course that's a risk... they better actually be able to deliver on that... they run the risk of trading Chandler and not being able to close a deal, thus wasting their cap space.

I'd also point out that if the deal being offered to Ben is 4/$53M, that's $12M to start going by the CBA rules, giving us up to $5.7M left in cap space (with the MLE only around $5M), so even without trading away Chandler, we could still make a credible offer to Przybilla that Portland couldn't match, then worry about trading Chandler later. Or if we did a sign and trade of Ben involving Chandler, we could potentially bring have (i'm estimating here) something like $14M left. That'd probably be enough to net us Przybilla ($6M-$7M) and Gooden ($7-8M).

That, and nothing else, should be the logic to moving Chandler for Cap space. Bringing in those guys would put length (both), beef (Joel), and a younger, cheaper substitute (Joe) behind Wallace, and be good pieces going forward.

Bringing in PJ Brown by himself, at the cost of Chandler (and when there are other options likely available for bringing in similar complementary bigs), just doesn't make any sense. Not for the Bulls, beyond and immediate and fleeting chance to maybe make the final four at the expense of the long run, and certainly not to placate Ben Wallace.


----------



## Da Grinch

Ron Cey said:


> He played like 7 minutes per game more than Chandler last year.



something that wont ever happen again ...and since this deal isn't made in the past , i look at next year as a 24 year old tyson vs. a 37 yr. old PJ.

its no contest next summer people will be wondering whatever possessed Pax to trade tyson for a guy they likely wont retain even if they wanted to , 

tyson for all his flaws is a difference maker , when he plays well the bulls were very hard to beat ....PJ while being very solid simply isn't and he isn't likely to start being a difference maker 3 years shy of the big 4...Oh.


----------



## Machinehead

My only condition in dealing Chandler was that it was a 3 way that brought Nene here as part of a S and T 

With this now not possible I am not interested in dealing Chandler at all. Not for Wilcox, Gooden etc with PJ going to these destinations and aforementioned players coming to Chicago 

Tyson stays


----------



## different_13

for whoever said JR's a stud that takes it hard to the hole (ooh er) - a large part of why he was benched was because he STOPPED doing that, and started just chucking up shots (which is why his % are so feeble) - at least, that's how I understood it.

Gooden would be excellent, but don't think he'll leave. Though he would have a larger role in CHicago, not much larger..


----------



## narek

The New Orleans paper, the Times-Picayune, has no mention this morning of a possible trade involving Brown - they've just said Brown has been involved in some trade talk but have this from Scott:



> Last week, Scott said they have received trade offers for Brown. But Scott said Brown is likely to begin the season as the starting center, however, his playing time will be reduced to 15 to 20 minutes a game from the 31.7 minutes he averaged last season. Scott wants Brown to be a mentor for first-round draft picks Hilton Armstrong and Cedric Simmons, who can play center and power forward.
> 
> "I haven't talked much to anybody in the front office, but I like the two draft picks because we definitely need size," Brown said. "I'm all about what's best for the team, and I wouldn't have a problem helping those two guys."


http://www.nola.com/sports/t-p/index.ssf?/base/sports-24/1151906499103650.xml&coll=1&thispage=2

Except for Garcia, it looks like all the Chicago Bulls beat writers took a long weekend.


----------



## MikeDC

Just to follow up my earlier post, I slept on it, and another way to look at the PJ/Tyson deal is that, it gives us slightly more cap space. However, the more I looked at that, the less it made sense.

If we were to sign Ben starting at $12M, we'd have $5.7M left. I speculated earlier that this would be enough to get Przybilla, since it's a bit over the MLE, but it's only a bit over the MLE (so maybe not enough) and there's no wiggle room if we have to pay Wallace more to get him. Suppose we have to pay Wallace $13M to start in order to bring him in. That'd leave less than the MLE left.

By trading Allen $1.7? + Tyson 9.2? = $10.9M for Brown $8 + Smith $1.1 = 9.1. We save $1.8M, so we can make an offer of $6.5M to another free agent. Thus, one way to look at it is we end up with

Ben, PJ, Przybilla, JR Smith
instead of just
Ben, Tyson

And again, that looks like a rational approach...

... until you realize there are other options available. For example, Sweetney is set to make $2.7M. At the very worst, I'd imagine we could trade him + $2.7M in cash considerations to a team under the cap. From their perspective, it would be a no-risk move... they're getting a big guy for free. If he doesn't work out, it's no problem. I recall that Atlanta and te Bulls talked a bit about im last year, and they could always use anoter big guy. So could the Bobcats or Raptors.

Point is, by doing that, the Bulls could keep Tyson and clear more space than they could by trading him. By trading Sweetney, they could hope to be at around $7.4M in cap space, which could be enough to land Harrington (though another 6'9" next to Wallace and with the addition of Tyrus seems damn strange) or Gooden. That'd enable the Bulls to field something like

Ben/Tyson/Gooden in their frontcourt next year and beyond, with Thomas and the Knicks pick providing opportunities to move one of those guys later as our young assets improve.


----------



## The ROY

Still NO mention of this rumor...


----------



## Good Hope

The ROY said:


> Still NO mention of this rumor...


Check out the news report in SpongyFungy's post. Cites league officials.


----------



## Ron Cey

> Yes, but that still doesn't mean the Bulls should take a "give him whatever he asks for" approach. The answer is you understand how much more value a Pistons dollar has.


By all reports, that isn't what the Bulls did. So I don't really understand what you mean. But even if they did, I'd support it. To understand my position, you must first understand that I think you offer him whatever it takes over 4 years to get him. That may be an extreme position, but it is my position. 



> Not necessarily. There are any number of plausible reasons to conduct a sign and trade regardless of what Wallace thinks. If the Bulls were to make an immediate move to bring in a Gooden or Przybilla type guy, for example (a younger asset who would better complement Wallace).


So another alternative explanation is that the Bulls could run out of capspace before the signing and be forced into doing a sign and trade? Okay. Downside?



> Even if it's Ben wanting to "give something back to the Pistons", there is obviously some point where that can be ignored too. Loyalty is nice, but when push comes to shove, a Wallace threat to simply go back to the Pistons isn't credible.


I absolutely do not agree with that. I think, to some people, things are far more complicated than that. I can see Ben Wallace being one of those guys. This is a team that has battled and prevailed over odds heavily stacked against them. A player who made his mark, in part, because this team gave him a chance. A team that, by all reports, is very close knit. 

It may or may not be true, but my understanding of the Grant Hill trade was that he cooperated with the sign and trade scenario, not because of dollars, but because of guilt. It can happen. 



> In fact, it doesn't make a lick of sense. First, it requires that Ben show some amazing amount of loyalty to a team that is telling him they don't even have enough loyalty to him to match the Bulls offer. That's not loyalty, that's battered wife syndrome. Second, where should Ben's loyalty's lie? They damn well ought to lie with the Bulls, since he's coming there and they're making the best monetary offer. Forcing them to make an acillary deal they neither want nor have to make (and which will hurt them on the court in the long run), just to suit his old team... that's some seriously backward loyalty. Third, to be a credible threat, that'd mean he'd have to actually be willing to give up significant money (looks like about $5M) to go back and play for a coach he doesn't appear to like, and who doesn't appreciate him. I tend to think money rules in most situations, but hating your boss and having a crummy work environment has some obvious value in and of itself.


See above. The only other plausible scenario is that the Bulls are choosing to do it in a sign and trade to free up more capspace to spend this summer. Again, thats a good move. There are only two explanations: (1) Wallace is forcing it; (2) the Bulls are doing it to get capspace. The first is excusalbe, the second is strategic. I don't see the problem.



> That last point is also true about negotiations in general. Scientifically, they have an endogenous nature... in common speak, they take on a life of their own. Now that everyone's been negotiating and it's clear the Bulls are offering more, it's likely Wallace has a different set of emotions and a different set of loyalties than what he had a few days ago.


That is not capable of ascertainment by you or me. 



> It shouldnt intimidate one into submission, but it doesn't strike me as all that smart to simply throw up one's hands, say "I don't know", and then go out and offer the kitchen sink to a guy that's being snubbed but what's widely regarded as one of the better organizations in the NBA. Dumars' analysis isn't irrelevant to our situation, even though our situation is different.


The fact that he's willing to offer him $12 million per over 4 years is enough to show that they value him. The rest means nothing to me. We aren't the Pistons. We have a completely different roster with different needs. We are trying to rise up to contention. Sometimes that requires a drastic move and even an overpayment.

As a group, we fans were more or less willing to overpay for both Chandler and Curry last summer. But now we are afraid to do it for Ben Wallace? For lack of a better term, "whatever".



> Most everything you say about how Ben could help us is true of how he could help them. So understanding why they are willing to give him up is important.


They are willing to give him a lot. But even so, I don't consider it important in the least. I bet Phoenix is glad they were willing to ignore Cuban's reservations in signing an aging point guard.



> Why do you know that?
> Suppose the Bulls did a sign and trade of Wallace for Chandler back to the Pistons. Would Billups/Rip/Prince/Sheed/Chandler, assuming Chandler had any kind of rebound from last season at all, not compete for the conference championships?


Sure. But they'd be better with Wallace. Because Wallace is better than Chandler. The math is pretty simple. 



> Suppose the Bulls keep Chandler, he plays like he did the year before last, and we add two other competent bigs. Say Gooden and Przybilla, just for kicks (at $8M and $6M, they'd add up to the $14M I've seen bandied about that we should offer Wallace. We'd seem to be at least a threat to go to the conference championship, and three years down the road when Tyrus is hopefully a star, we've got a lot of pieces for a consolidation trade.


I'd rather have Wallace. 



> But we could always keep Chandler and add more through free agency (we're not going to be under the cap in any case), the draft, and trades. The additions down the road you talk about can occur with or without Chandler on the roster. *So it's pretty clear we're better off with Chandler plus those additions than we are with just those additions.*


No. PJ Brown, in the short term, is better to team with Wallace. 



> The roster won't be stagnant with Chandler on it either. It'll just be one less hole to we need to fill down the road.


How many players, exactly, to you expect the Bulls to pay huge contracts to? How many players do you think they can afford to have in the rotation? Plus, all of this is based on hypothetical improvement by Chandler, whose mose recent history is regression. 



> Well, supposing the net of the trade is Wallace for Chandler for us, and we then keep significant cap space to land a guy with size and scoring ability (assuming we actually do it), that's a different thing. There we're actually recirculating Chandler back into immediate cap space. We need to use it immediately (and with Nene off the market, it's unclear who we go after), but it's something. Tyson becomes traded for cap space, which is then used for a player. We keep the overall "stock" of assets the same.


That is what is being reported. 



> Moving Tyson for PJ Brown, who plays for a year or two then retires, effectively vanishes the asset, since we won't net any cap space from it. And trading PJ for a draft pick doesn't seem likely, since if we traded him to keep him, we'd want to... well... keep him. The only way we'd get something out of him is via a consolidation trade, but it doesn't look like that's much more likely with Brown as filler than Chandler. Maybe a little bit, but it's very hard to say. Some teams would probably prefer Brown, an expiring deal, but some would prefer Chandler, a young big guy. So the net effect is we lose some of our accumulated stock of player, much like we lost something when JWill crashed his bike.


Sort of. But we do get a stronger short term run at the finals with Thomas taking over to play alongside Wallace thereafter. 



> Add it all up, and the only way it makes sense is if the Bulls are unloading Chandler now to make room for someone else they're going to bring in, in addition to Ben. Of course that's a risk... they better actually be able to deliver on that... they run the risk of trading Chandler and not being able to close a deal, thus wasting their cap space.


I agree that that makes more sense. But I'm fine with doing that deal to keep Brown, for the reasons I've stated several times, so long as Wallace is coming to town.



> I'd also point out that if the deal being offered to Ben is 4/$53M, that's $12M to start going by the CBA rules, giving us up to $5.7M left in cap space (with the MLE only around $5M), so even without trading away Chandler, we could still make a credible offer to Przybilla that Portland couldn't match, then worry about trading Chandler later. Or if we did a sign and trade of Ben involving Chandler, we could potentially bring have (i'm estimating here) something like $14M left. That'd probably be enough to net us Przybilla ($6M-$7M) and Gooden ($7-8M).
> 
> That, and nothing else, should be the logic to moving Chandler for Cap space. Bringing in those guys would put length (both), beef (Joel), and a younger, cheaper substitute (Joe) behind Wallace, and be good pieces going forward.
> 
> Bringing in PJ Brown by himself, at the cost of Chandler (and when there are other options likely available for bringing in similar complementary bigs), just doesn't make any sense. Not for the Bulls, beyond and immediate and fleeting chance to maybe make the final four at the expense of the long run, and certainly not to placate Ben Wallace.


If you sign Wallace, I don't think dealing Chandler sacrifices anything for the long run. If we get Wallace, I frankly don't care what happens to Chandler. To me, he'd no longer be part of the core. If we can't sign Wallace, then by all means I want to keep Tyson.


----------



## different_13

What's up with Ben saying Chicago hadn't made a clear offer saturday?
(apologies if it's been said above, haven't got enough time to read through atm)

This whole thing seems to be taking quite a damn long time..
Anyone got cold feet yet?

Damn free agency period.


----------



## Mr. T

If this comes down to Chandler for Wallace in a S&T I say no thanks. I see Chandler owning us in the paint for the next 5-10 years while Ben settles into his AD role. I'd give Detroit nothing (unless its Sweetney, Duhon, etc.) and if thats too much guilt for Ben to burden, then he can accept their lesser offer. 

Four million bucks (at this point) is still four million bucks. If thats not reason enough when coupled with the attractiveness of our roster then so be it.

Call it kool-aid or whatever, but I still think Chandler will be huge this year.


----------



## The ROY

I seriously doubt Pax & Skiles WANT Tyson for the next 5-10 years.

We think Tyson will be huge every year, it's time to throw in the towel.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

different_13 said:


> What's up with Ben saying Chicago hadn't made a clear offer saturday?
> (apologies if it's been said above, haven't got enough time to read through atm)
> 
> This whole thing seems to be taking quite a damn long time..
> Anyone got cold feet yet?
> 
> Damn free agency period.


They couldn't even start talking until the 1st and it is now the morning of the 3rd.

No...no cold feet.


----------



## Ron Cey

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> They couldn't even start talking until the 1st and it is now the morning of the 3rd.
> 
> No...no cold feet.


Yep. This could literally take another week or more. Nobody can even sign anything until July 12th.


----------



## theanimal23

The ROY said:


> I seriously doubt Pax & Skiles WANT Tyson for the next 5-10 years.
> 
> We think Tyson will be huge every year, it's time to throw in the towel.


I completely agree. The guy is all talk and show and no play. He'll get one block, act like he is the biggest bad a$$ out there on the court. Yet he can't manage to stay on the court b/c of his ticky tacky fouls. The guy has shown nothing. Sure, I wish he can prove me wrong. But I've accepted it, if he will groom into a good player, it is not here. 

If we don't trade Chandler soon, his value is going to drop lower and lower. We'll be hoping to move him in a Mark Blount - Wally S. type of deal. And, I don't to do that.


----------



## El Chapu

Since there is talk about a 3-way deal, I would like to throw my own deals within this possibility:

Chandler to NO for PJ Brown and JR Smith
Ben Wallace to CHI for PJ Brown (plus something else)
JR Smith to SAS for Luis Scola

So basically, we replace Chandler with Ben Wallace plus Scola. JR Smith was a Spurs' target last february.


----------



## ace20004u

I like JR Smith a whole lot, when this kid matures and finds the right team he is gonna be a legit player. That being said, I think we should KEEP Tyson. He would be the perfect player, along with Thomas, to mento under Wallace and according to reports Tyson is already at the Berto working out so he is taking the offseason seriously, plus we could always trade him at a later date, after pairing with Wallace (of course presuming we get him) makes him look better statistically for a while.


----------



## Da Grinch

so basically this is a chandler for ben wallace, PJ (for a year) and JR smith (as an asset)

to that i say no thanks 

the last i checked ben wallace was a declining player.

his rebounding has declined for 3 straight years .

his scoring is at its lowest point since carlisle was coach, ditto blocks, shot the same % from the line as kirk hinrich shot from the field (.418) .

it seems like a lot to pay for someone who projects to avg about 10 and a half boards next year , seeing as he declined from 12.2 to 11.3 last season ....and thats a drop of 4.1 since his high water mark 4 years ago.

dont get me wrong ben is still a good player , but he probably not going to be able to match his overall productiveness of last season and unlikely to make this deal a good one for the bulls.


----------



## Mr. T

The ROY said:


> We think Tyson will be huge every year, it's time to throw in the towel.


I'm a year away on that assessment. If he's not the guy building on the '04-05 season then by all means deal him. 

KneeKnee got 6/60 and he hadn't even seen much of the court the last year and a half. I think we've got too much invested in Chandler to dump him at his current value. I'll take my chances and hold just a little longer.

If Chandler is traded for Marion or Odom as a more offensive-minded complementary piece to Ben Wallace I'd probably be ok with it.


----------



## DaBullz

Machinehead said:


> My only condition in dealing Chandler was that it was a 3 way that brought Nene here as part of a S and T
> 
> With this now not possible I am not interested in dealing Chandler at all. Not for Wilcox, Gooden etc with PJ going to these destinations and aforementioned players coming to Chicago
> 
> Tyson stays


See attached image.

:allhail:


----------



## dsouljah9

Da Grinch said:


> so basically this is a chandler for ben wallace, PJ (for a year) and JR smith (as an asset)
> 
> to that i say no thanks
> 
> the last i checked ben wallace was a declining player.
> 
> his rebounding has declined for 3 straight years .
> 
> his scoring is at its lowest point since carlisle was coach, ditto blocks, shot the same % from the line as kirk hinrich shot from the field (.418) .
> 
> it seems like a lot to pay for someone who projects to avg about 10 and a half boards next year , seeing as he declined from 12.2 to 11.3 last season ....and thats a drop of 4.1 since his high water mark 4 years ago.
> 
> dont get me wrong ben is still a good player , but he probably not going to be able to match his overall productiveness of last season and unlikely to make this deal a good one for the bulls.



_:::crawls out from under rock:::_ 

Over the past three seasons, the Pistons have played more games(playoffs included) than any other team in the NBA as they have been to the finals twice and made it to the conference championship the third year. With their lack of bench depth, the starters have had to play more minutes as a result. Playing that amount of basketball is bound to catch up with you. If Wallace signs with the Bulls, he won't log as much PT because our team is deeper than Detroit's.

Secondly, we <i>have</i> to use the cap space this year or we lose it. So either way, we end up in luxury tax land. When you have the chance to add a guy like Ben Wallace, you take your chances. This is a weak free agent class, and we got the cap space for a reason. 

See you guys in October!!!

_:::crawls back under rock:::</i>_


----------



## BG7

Why not package Hinrich and Chandler and some change for a true good bigman.

Then sign Mike James.



> Toronto Sun - Mike James called the interest he has received from other teams "surreal."
> 
> "I'm just tired of being treated like a cheap prostitute," James said when asked what kind of money he was looking for. "It's not about money. I just want a home."


----------



## DaBullz

dsouljah9 said:


> _:::crawls out from under rock:::_
> 
> Over the past three seasons, the Pistons have played more games(playoffs included) than any other team in the NBA as they have been to the finals twice and made it to the conference championship the third year. With their lack of bench depth, the starters have had to play more minutes as a result. Playing that amount of basketball is bound to catch up with you. If Wallace signs with the Bulls, he won't log as much PT because our team is deeper than Detroit's.
> 
> Secondly, we _have_ to use the cap space this year or we lose it. So either way, we end up in luxury tax land. When you have the chance to add a guy like Ben Wallace, you take your chances. This is a weak free agent class, and we got the cap space for a reason.
> 
> See you guys in October!!!
> 
> _:::crawls back under rock:::_


We don't end up in luxury tax land if we don't spend our cap space.

We'd have $20M in salary raises for Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, and Nocioni before we hit the cap, and there's a bit of breathing room between the cap and luxury tax limit. 

Even if we did go into luxury tax levels of salary, it's better to be $1 over and pay $3 (or whatever) because of the tax than to go $20M over and pay $60M because of the tax.


----------



## step

> seeing as he declined from 12.2 to 11.3 last season ....and thats a drop of 4.1 since his high water mark 4 years ago.


So you're expecting him to keep producing the same numbers with less playing time.


----------



## BG7

> Thanks for the info. I'm still trying to check things out today. Tyson would be a good move for the Hornets, since they have very few salary commitments even with signing Peja and Bobby Jackson, but I can't imagine why the Pistons would want to take P.J. Brown for Wallace.
> 
> I suppose if the Bulls trade Tyson, they could try to sign two free agents to take his place, but that's a risky move.
> 
> Thanks for writing,
> Mike McGraw


<br>


----------



## mizenkay

> _My initial thought is I could see the Pistons taking Tyson for Wallace, but P.J. Brown makes no sense.
> 
> I'm not sure the Hornets would even want to take on Tyson's salary after overpaying for Peja and Bobby Jackson.
> 
> I guess the one benefit for the Bulls with trading Tyson is they could try to sign two free agents to take his place, but that's a risky move.
> 
> I'll try to be here for you, Miz
> 
> Mike_


well thanks, but...

_huh?_ (good move or not based on overpaying for peja and jackson, miz confused)

anyway. right now i am really thinking this PJ Brown move is independent of the Wallace deal. the only place that it's been linked is that hornets message board.

so...

pax wants to dump chandler either way. even if he doesn't get ben wallace. 

and i really think this ship has sailed.


----------



## The ROY

Doesn't even seem like our own reporters have heard about the deal with new orleans


----------



## Da Grinch

step said:


> So you're expecting him to keep producing the same numbers with less playing time.


the thing is in less minutes he is producing less ...but he's just doing less out there , if prorated his minutes they would match it , he plays 4 less minutes ...and gets 4 less boards from his best mark

last year he played .9 minutes less than the previous year and grabbed .9 boards less...and 2.4 points less , while also to a smaller degree avg. less blocks as well, .17

points .207
reb. .321
blocks .063
fg .510
ft .416
total eff. .525 per min.
the previous year .530
4 years ago .580 in what is considered his best year


tyson last year avg 

pts .197
reb .336
bl..049
fg.565
ft.503
total eff. .479 per min.
the previous year .570 in what is considered his best year.

wallace is still a good player in fact a very good player but if its a choice of either/or i'd choose tyson....although i think it absolutely shouldn't be, the bulls should keep both... 

ben wallace is a declining player and unless he can bring a title like shaq he probably is not worth sending out tyson in a side deal.


----------



## OziBull

sloth said:


> Why not package Hinrich and Chandler and some change for a true good bigman.
> 
> Then sign Mike James.


 :raised_ey 
Mike James would defintley be a skiles kind of guys hey? lol


----------



## BG7

OziBull said:


> :raised_ey
> Mike James would defintley be a skiles kind of guys hey? lol


Well to be honest, I just wanted to post that quote without starting a new thread.


----------



## draft tyrus

Da Grinch said:


> the thing is in less minutes he is producing less ...but he's just doing less out there , if prorated his minutes they would match it , he plays 4 less minutes ...and gets 4 less boards from his best mark
> 
> last year he played .9 minutes less than the previous year and grabbed .9 boards less...and 2.4 points less , while also to a smaller degree avg. less blocks as well, .17
> 
> points .207
> reb. .321
> blocks .063
> fg .510
> ft .416
> total eff. .525 per min.
> the previous year .530
> 4 years ago .580 in what is considered his best year
> 
> 
> tyson last year avg
> 
> pts .197
> reb .336
> bl..049
> fg.565
> ft.503
> total eff. .479 per min.
> the previous year .570 in what is considered his best year.
> 
> wallace is still a good player in fact a very good player but if its a choice of either/or i'd choose tyson....although i think it absolutely shouldn't be, the bulls should keep both...
> 
> *ben wallace is a declining player* and unless he can bring a title like shaq he probably is not worth sending out tyson in a side deal.


why does everybody say this? he just won defensive player of the year!


----------



## unBULLievable

The ROY said:


> Doesn't even seem like our own reporters have heard about the deal with new orleans


it seems mcGraw just got out of bed


----------



## OziBull

Fair enough sloth, i understand mate,

But yeah i wouldnt want Mike James on this side even if he came with KG,
No need for him, he is a shoot first kind of player, his attitude is not great, like his personality changes like the wind from nice guy AD to bad boy artest.
Never in a million years James will play for the bulls


----------



## draft tyrus

ha, since when is AD a "nice guy"? isn't he the one that held Haywood's legs open so Eddy could smash his nuts off in a preseason game two years ago? he's a total badass... respectable, definitely... I never thought of him as a "nice guy." I guess in an elder-statesman kind of way. That's not to say he's a bad guy, I always thought he was a good dude, but he's not the kind of guy you would use as the polar opposite of Artest.


----------



## theanimal23

I've been on a raid against Tyson for a bit. But I am optimistic that he can take it another level on D under the guidance of Ben Wallace. I rather see Tyson gone, but I can give him another chance if we keep him. I just hope he doesn't start the season on empty like last year.


----------



## Frankensteiner

An update from the Hornets insider following the Ben Wallace signing:

A couple of developments:

1) JR Smith isn't wanted by many teams, including the Bulls (that's not to say that he wont still be packaged in the deal)
2) In light of some recent developments, we don't need or want Malik Allen (once again don't take it off the board because the original trade involving PJ+JR for Chandler and Allen was agreed to)
3) Bottom line: The Bulls want PJ and the Hornets want Chandler
4) There is absolutely no truth to the ridiculous rumor of us trading Peja to the Hawks or having any sort of sign and trade involving Speedy--we lost Speedy without compensation
5) Arvydas Macijauskas will be traded and could be involved in the Bulls trade, possibly instead of JR. If not, he could be packaged with some of our other expiring contracts of veteran players to a team that wants cap relief. 
6) As of now and as far as I can see it, Desmond Mason is OFF the trading block and will be penciled in as our starting Small Forward...the only way this changes is if we pick up a solid SF from the AM or JR trade
7) Back to the Bulls trade, as I said a couple days back, I was very confident that once Ben Wallace was signed, our Bulls trade would go through (at the very least invovling the two principle players--PJ and Tyson). I stand by my words.
8) If for some reason PJ is not involved in that trade, don't expect him to leave. I also want to add that PJ and Byron are very close and that PJ must approve of the trade before he is shipped out. I don't foresee any problems there.
9) John Paxson has talked to a few teams regarding Tyson Chandler and he does have some other teams vying for his services as well. Most importantly, however, is that Paxson feels PJ is exactly the PF and classy veteran they need to groom Tyrus Thomas and go far into the playoffs. I think PJ is still there best bet. 
10) I expect the Bulls trade to happen by tomorrow at the latest but most likely tonight. 
11) I want to add that once this trade is done, we're pretty much finished with our moves from what I can tell. In other words, we might sign a couple of backup players but we will have spent most, if not all of our cash after these trades and signings go through. 
12) I'm going to be heading off to another teams forum, working some magic there and trying to let them in on whats going on. There's still numerous big time trades and free agent signings that are on the verge of happening around the NBA. Enjoy yourselves, we've had a tremendous offseason.  

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34834


----------



## RealFan

Latest update - Hornet insider sticking by a Chandler/PJ Brown trade in principal as early as tonight.


http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34834

EDIT: Sorry, I posted this moments after the poster above me.


----------



## L.O.B

If we could jettison Tyson's long term deal and come away w/ PJ Brown and Arvydas Macijauskas, I would be a happy camper


----------



## SausageKingofChicago

If we deal Tyson for PJ Brown we better be getting their draft pick next year as well ( maybe top 7 - top half of the lottery protected )

We got no need for anyone else 

I think it would just be a cap clearing move for another late lottery / mid first round pick


----------



## kulaz3000

SausageKingofChicago said:


> If we deal Tyson for PJ Brown we better be getting their draft pick next year as well ( maybe top 7 - top half of the lottery protected )
> 
> We got no need for anyone else
> 
> I think it would just be a cap clearing move for another late lottery / mid first round pick


We need some height. If we do that trade, i definitly don't want j.r smith i would want one of their rookie bigs they recently drafted.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago

kulaz3000 said:


> We need some height. If we do that trade, i definitly don't want j.r smith i would want one of their rookie bigs they recently drafted.


We'd be getting height back with PJ and who also gives Ben a vet front court mate


----------



## epic

looks like this hornets insider is indeed legit.

chandler's gone. as SausageKing said, i hope there's a pick involved. i kind of doubt it though.


----------



## BG7

I wish we could get Simmons or Armstrong out of the deal, but I doubt it. Macijauskas is better than JR Smith, wasn't Paxson flirting with signing him a few years ago? That trade would make sense. I'm glad they don't want Malik Allen, I liked him.

Guards:

Kirk Hinrich
Chris Duhon
Thabo Sefolosha
Ben Gordon
Arvydas Macas

Forwards:

Luol Deng
Andres Nocioni
Viktar Khryapa

Big's:

Tyrus Thomas
PJ Brown
Ben Wallace
Michael Sweetney
Malik Allen
Luke Schenscher
Antonio Davis or Othella Harrington

Not bad.


----------



## ballafromthenorth

I don't know if there are any stipulations that would prevent the deal from occurring later into the season, but why not wait and see how Chandler and Wallace play together before shipping him off for the expiring contract.. If Chandler plays better, I don't see why his value wouldn't increase as well.. Maybe warranting a better player who's contract is expiring as well (don't know of any off hand). If Chandler and Wallace seem to make things work, maybe we wouldn't feel obliged to trade Chander at all..


----------



## El Chapu

I love the Big Ben move, but this move would leave me a sour taste in my mouth. Dont like it at all.


----------



## kulaz3000

SausageKingofChicago said:


> We'd be getting height back with PJ and who also gives Ben a vet front court mate


Thats height for ONE year?

After that one season, and he retires then what? We're left with a tone of 6'8 front court players. Plus the way that 7 footers are valued that would mean we'd have to trade some of our core to get a 7 footer by trade in the future, as centers always cost an arm and a leg to get back. 

We also need to stop relying on knicks to stuff up, to get a young center next year. Plus even if we do get a young decent big next year, bigs always take a few years to develop, and we would be takinga step back. We should just keep Chandler and then work it from there..


----------



## SausageKingofChicago

kulaz3000 said:


> Thats height for ONE year?
> 
> After that one season, and he retires then what?


That's why I said I would consider the deal if it was PJ and the Hornets 1st round pick next year (maybe top 5 or top 7 protected )

We would have a likely lottery pick in the back half of next year's lottery - the draft of big men 

It would be nice to have two mid to late lottery picks in next year's draft and rent PJ for a year


----------



## El Chapu

SausageKingofChicago said:


> That's why I said I would consider the deal if it was PJ and the Hornets 1st round pick next year (maybe top 5 or top 7 protected )
> 
> We would have a likely lottery pick in the back half of next year's lottery - the draft of big men
> 
> It would be nice to have two mid to late lottery picks in next year's draft and rent PJ for a year


That protection would be almost meaningless since the Hornets are a playoffs team unless Paul pulls a Jay Williams or something of that sort. It would be a mid first rounder. Its also important to note that we shouldnt count Ben Wallace for close to 40 minutes per night, and Tyson could do his part. 
Macijauskas would be basically our improved Pike, with some penetration and finishing. But nothing to get overly excited.


----------



## smARTmouf

I'ma finally go on record and say....I DO NOT want PJ Brown on this damn squad.


----------



## FanOfAll8472

smARTmouf said:


> I'ma finally go on record and say....I DO NOT want PJ Brown on this damn squad.


 Why not? I'm not really for this trade, but PJ Brown brings many things - 15' elbow jumper, veteran savvy, extremely consistent play, fundamentals, very good man to man defense (which will allow Ben Wallace to roam), and leadership. A lot of his assets cannot be measured by stats. He would be a great, albeit possibly very short term fit next to Ben Wallace.


----------



## smARTmouf

FanOfAll8472 said:


> Why not? I'm not really for this trade, but PJ Brown brings many things - 15' elbow jumper, veteran savvy, extremely consistent play, fundamentals, very good man to man defense (which will allow Ben Wallace to roam), and leadership. A lot of his assets cannot be measured by stats. He would be a great, albeit possibly very short term fit next to Ben Wallace.



I feel like a domestically abused spouse who won't leave the relationship because she feels her husband will change.

I feel the same about Tyson Chandler.

I can't silence the echoes of former teammates raving about his range and skill...

It begs the question...WHAT HAPPENED?...What if he figures it out...What if?

I think Ben would be an excellent mentor for both the Ty's...PJ is tough...But done.


----------



## TripleDouble

Why dilly daddle around now with Chandler for PJ Brown moves, hoping that an unproven player like Wilcox will be the answer.

The Bulls are obviously going for it now so they should trade Chandler and Noc or Deng for a legit post player (preferably not an ancient one). 

Ideas?


----------



## theanimal23

At least we won't be paying a scrub starter money for the next 5 years. I rather see Chandler traded if there was a guarantee that Boozer wouldn't be hurt 5 out of 7 days a week or for Al Harrington. But I'll take this deal.

*Does anyone know how much cap money we will have next offseason with PJ's deal coming off the books?*


----------



## The ROY

TripleDouble said:


> Why dilly daddle around now with Chandler for PJ Brown moves, hoping that an unproven player like Wilcox will be the answer.
> 
> The Bulls are obviously going for it now so they should trade Chandler and Noc or Deng for a legit post player (preferably not an ancient one).
> 
> Ideas?


I'd have to agree...I'd move Deng, Chandler & Duhon for a LEGIT option at PF. Jermaine O'Neal?

C Wallace
F O'Neal / Thomas
F Nocioni / Khyrapa
G Gordon / Sefolosha
G Hinrich


----------



## SausageKingofChicago

El Chapu said:


> That protection would be almost meaningless since the Hornets are a playoffs team unless Paul pulls a Jay Williams or something of that sort. It would be a mid first rounder. Its also important to note that we shouldnt count Ben Wallace for close to 40 minutes per night, and Tyson could do his part.
> Macijauskas would be basically our improved Pike, with some penetration and finishing. But nothing to get overly excited.



Spurs , Dallas , Clippers , Sacramento , Lakers , Memphis 

That's 6 teams that I would put ahead of the Hornets who basically would have to be relying on two young big rooks 

Notwithstanding Paul's stellar rookie campaign they are hardly a lock for the playoffs ..particularly if David West was a flash in the pan and they would have lost two key vets in Brown and Claxton

Peja ?

Bah


----------



## SausageKingofChicago

TripleDouble said:


> Why dilly daddle around now with Chandler for PJ Brown moves, hoping that an unproven player like Wilcox will be the answer.
> 
> The Bulls are obviously going for it now so they should trade Chandler and Noc or Deng for a legit post player (preferably not an ancient one).
> 
> Ideas?


Brad Miller


----------



## theanimal23

The ROY said:


> I'd have to agree...I'd move Deng, Chandler & Duhon for a LEGIT option at PF. Jermaine O'Neal?
> 
> C Wallace
> F O'Neal / Thomas
> F Nocioni / Khyrapa
> G Gordon / Sefolosha
> G Hinrich


I'd absolutely would love to do that deal too. Plus having the MLE on a team like that, vets would want to come to us. We would have a very deep and balanced team still. 

I wonder if Tyson for Boozer rumor has any legs? Or if we can do a S&T for Al Harrington with Tyson being the main guy. But it looks that this NOK deal is all but done. And honestly, I'll take that too. I don't see anything more from Tyson. I loved how we used to hear the talk that he used to work hard each summer, blah blah blah. Little did we all realize, that NEITHER Eddy or Tyson did anything. Both fo them were useless. Paxson, here's to you :cheers: , to ending the Krause Era completely. Here's to the new Era in Chicago: In Pax We Trust.


----------



## The ROY

theanimal23 said:


> I'd absolutely would love to do that deal too. Plus having the MLE on a team like that, vets would want to come to us. We would have a very deep and balanced team still.
> 
> I wonder if Tyson for Boozer rumor has any legs? Or if we can do a S&T for Al Harrington with Tyson being the main guy. But it looks that this NOK deal is all but done. And honestly, I'll take that too. I don't see anything more from Tyson. I loved how we used to hear the talk that he used to work hard each summer, blah blah blah. Little did we all realize, that NEITHER Eddy or Tyson did anything. Both fo them were useless. Paxson, here's to you :cheers: , to ending the Krause Era completely. Here's to the new Era in Chicago: In Pax We Trust.


Yeah, I'd like Boozer at PF but it's still hard to think it could happen since the Boozer/Jim Paxson fiasco.

Harrington would be a nice option but he'd take too many minutes from T2 and he's short.

HONESTLY? I think Paxson believes Tyrus will contribute more than we think next year.

and yes, I'm INCREDIBLY happy the Krause era is over.


----------



## TripleDouble

What about Okur?


----------



## The ROY

TripleDouble said:


> What about Okur?


Don't think they'd give up Okur. I'd love to have him though.


----------



## El Chapu

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Spurs , Dallas , Clippers , Sacramento , Lakers , Memphis
> 
> That's 6 teams that I would put ahead of the Hornets who basically would have to be relying on two young big rooks
> 
> Notwithstanding Paul's stellar rookie campaign they are hardly a lock for the playoffs ..particularly if David West was a flash in the pan and they would have lost two key vets in Brown and Claxton
> 
> Peja ?
> 
> Bah


I think they are a Playoffs team, and even if they are a borderline team, they wont fall to the first 5 spots in the lottery. So I would have no problems if they want to add that kind of protection, I dont see it as a relevant thing.


----------



## theanimal23

The ROY said:


> HONESTLY? I think Paxson believes Tyrus will contribute more than we think next year.


I agree with you. I think Paxson is a good talent evaluator. He said that he did real well scouting last year's rookies. 

I am in the minority, and you might be with me. But I'm extremely happy that Tyson is out of here. Part of me feels that if it were any other player, they would benefit highly under the guidance of a DPOY. But Tyson is all talk. If you can't add a single offensive move in 5 years, or manage to stay on the court. Then, I don't think you are capable of improving. I am not a believer that a bench player should be paid as much as him. Unless you are a 6th man in the role of Noce/Gordon, where your impact is huge.

I agree, the Boozer deal won't be done for that reason. I figure Al Harrington be real good value for Tyson, but that isn't happening. I've always been a fan of PJ Brown. I think this will be great. If Pax could somehow fleece NOK into giving us Hilton/Cedric, then we made out like the biggest bandits. But I cannot see them being as dumb as Isiah. 

Anyone have any idea of how much capspace we have for this offseason? Could we add a guy like Butler? And, how much money do we have next year?


----------



## FanOfAll8472

The ROY said:


> I'd have to agree...I'd move Deng, Chandler & Duhon for a LEGIT option at PF. Jermaine O'Neal?
> 
> C Wallace
> F O'Neal / Thomas
> F Nocioni / Khyrapa
> G Gordon / Sefolosha
> G Hinrich


Pipe dream. I would like to see this happen, but it won't. The Pacers drafted Granger last year and Shawne Williams, James White (via trade) this year. They have Stephen Jackson, Fred Jones (RFA, but little noise about him as a FA) as well. They don't need another wing player, especially not another 3. They would suffer badly from this trade and lack offensive production, other than Stephen Jackson jacking 3s.


----------



## theanimal23

I think ESPN said we used 13.5 million of 16.7 million of our cap for this year. We got 3.2 left. We could add Sweets 2.7 million. I'd love to use the rest of our money and try to get Butler from NYK.


----------



## The ROY

FanOfAll8472 said:


> Pipe dream. I would like to see this happen, but it won't. The Pacers drafted Granger last year and Shawne Williams, James White (via trade) this year. They have Stephen Jackson, Fred Jones (RFA, but little noise about him as a FA) as well. They don't need another wing player, especially not another 3. They would suffer badly from this trade and lack offensive production, other than Stephen Jackson jacking 3s.


lol

it was just something i threw out there...we know it's not gonna happen..


----------



## The ROY

theanimal23 said:


> I agree with you. I think Paxson is a good talent evaluator. He said that he did real well scouting last year's rookies.
> 
> I am in the minority, and you might be with me. But I'm extremely happy that Tyson is out of here. Part of me feels that if it were any other player, they would benefit highly under the guidance of a DPOY. But Tyson is all talk. If you can't add a single offensive move in 5 years, or manage to stay on the court. Then, I don't think you are capable of improving. I am not a believer that a bench player should be paid as much as him. Unless you are a 6th man in the role of Noce/Gordon, where your impact is huge.
> 
> I agree, the Boozer deal won't be done for that reason. I figure Al Harrington be real good value for Tyson, but that isn't happening. I've always been a fan of PJ Brown. I think this will be great. If Pax could somehow fleece NOK into giving us Hilton/Cedric, then we made out like the biggest bandits. But I cannot see them being as dumb as Isiah.
> 
> Anyone have any idea of how much capspace we have for this offseason? Could we add a guy like Butler? And, how much money do we have next year?


Man, I wanna move Tyson BADLY too. Watching him last year pained me deeply LOL

We've got an all-star & a dpoy. He will be BOTH of those things next year, again.

I don't wanna do this P.J. Brown deal but hopefully it's for the better.


----------



## theanimal23

At least with this swap, Big Ben can wear #3, and rightfully so.


----------



## nybullsfan

what if we cant get pj brown? i think if we cant get brown we should trade for ratliff and change ainge loves high school prospects or prospects with high potential chandler is both we can maybe get ratliff and one of allen or gohmes for the record ratliff is only signed for two more seasons its not that bad and can still give us blocks


----------



## Aurelino

You know who would be perfect for the Bulls? Nenad Krstic. He can play in the post and hit the open shot. Unfortunately, the Nets aren't going to give him up. Especially to an EC rival.


----------



## superdave

If this trade is indeed going through (tomorrow) as some have speculated, I would hope that Pax has another move lined up to add some depth at the 4 or 5. PJ would be a stop gap for a season, but I'd like another big just in case Thomas isn't ready for the big show full-time in a couple years. With some young spare parts... Sweets, Khryapa, JRS, and possibly Duhon I would think that could net us something of value IMO.

What a day.


----------



## draft tyrus

sorry double post


----------



## draft tyrus

I still don't understand why everyone's so pissed about this trade.

We clear a horrible contract in exchange for an expiring one so we have room to re-sign our core in a few years.

Tyson did nothing. He barely could play 10 minutes a game without getting into foul trouble and now all of a sudden everyone thinks he's so great? I don't get it.

Plus, we get an athletic guard that can take guys 1 on 1 and cut to the hoop in JR Smith, with loads of potential; if Skiles can't whip him into shape, then he'll be used to acquire pieces.

what's so bad about that?


----------



## rwj333

Couldn't Paxson at least get Hilton Armstrong or David West or Cedric Simmons out of this, too? JR Smith is absolute trash. His value is so high that he was almost traded for Brent Barry (the trade was sent in too late).


----------



## superdave

A couple Hornets insiders on HornetsReport.com are reporting....



> 'I'm hearing it's JR/PJ/Mache for Chandler/Allen. Could be a little more involved. Maybe another team and other players as JR and Allen aren't really good fits for the Bulls and Hornets respectively.
> 
> I've been expecting this to happen since Saturday, but it looks like today may finally be the day.'


These guys called Peja's signing way before the media did and were the earliest on the PJ Brown for Chandler swap.


----------



## HAWK23

who is Mache?


----------



## superdave

HAWK23 said:


> who is Mache?


Macijauskas

Lithuanian sharpshooter for '03 gold medal team who for some reason got ZERO burn under Scott.


----------



## HAWK23

superdave said:


> Macijauskas
> 
> Lithuanian sharpshooter for '03 gold medal team who for some reason got ZERO burn under Scott.


that's what I assumed... sounds like an intreresting deal to me... we need a 3pt specialist


----------



## TripleDouble

superdave said:


> A couple Hornets insiders on HornetsReport.com are reporting....
> 
> 
> 
> These guys called Peja's signing way before the media did and were the earliest on the PJ Brown for Chandler swap.


They've also said the deal was going down "today" for the past several days.


----------



## Damian Necronamous

Man, Chicago and New Orleans will be stacked.

CHICAGO
PG: Kirk Hinrich...Chris Duhon
SG: Ben Gordon...Thabo Sefolosha...J.R. Smith
SF: Andres Nocioni...Luol Deng
PF: Tyrus Thomas...Michael Sweetney...Darius Songaila
C: Ben Wallace...P.J. Brown

NEW ORLEANS
PG: Chris Paul...Bobby Jackson
SG: Desmond Mason...Kirk Snyder...Arvydas Macijauskas
SF: Peja Stojakovic
PF: David West...Cedric Simmons...Malik Allen
C: Tyson Chandler...Hilton Armstrong...Marc Jackson


----------



## kukoc4ever

New Orleans will be a helluva team.

Wow.


----------



## SALO

kukoc4ever said:


> New Orleans will be a helluva team.
> 
> Wow.


Take it from a Kings fan who's followed them throughout the years. Peja & Bobby Jackson are damaged goods. I loved them during the glory years, but signing those two, for that kind of money, was a mistake. Wait and see. 

I'm still holding out hope we somehow get Hilton Armstrong in this deal. He's gonna be good. I was surprised at the order of the NO's draft picks. I thought it was Simmons who was the projected lottery pick, with Hilton going in the later teens. I'm crossing my fingers they made that pick for us. :gopray:


----------



## ScottVdub

I really don't like this trade at all.


----------



## Future

Should be interesting seein ole stone hands fumble Paul's passes.


----------



## mw2889

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CumeGVCEftE&search=JR smith

He's got game, I fell in love after I went to a game against the hornets a couple months ago. I always projected him to be a great scorer one day because 10 ppg out of high school is very rare. He reminds me so much of Ricky Davis.


----------



## ChiBulls2315

One of the guy's on Hornet's report just said Arvydas Macijauskas is now in the rumored deal.




> The trade as it now stands: PJ/JR/AM to CHI for TC/MA. I suppose it could change, but that is what we are hearing.


Remember he was rumored w/ us last year? He hardly played at all last year though. 


If he's in, that means we are not going to have the 5.2 or whatever in capspace left.


----------



## paxman

honestly, as much as this trade bugs me, the malik allen inclusion bugs me even more.

i'd almost prefer malik allen to a 37 year old pj brown...


----------



## kukoc4ever

paxman said:


> honestly, as much as this trade bugs me, the malik allen inclusion bugs me even more.
> 
> i'd almost prefer malik allen to a 37 year old pj brown...


Bothers me as well.

I don't think PJ is much of an upgrade over Malik, not the one we saw at the end of last season.


----------



## SALO

Hornets insider is now saying the deal will be announced as soon as today. 

Tyson + Malik for PJ, JR, and AM. 

:curse: 

Deal works without Malik. Giving him away for a couple of guards we'll never use (JR/AM) makes no sense. 

I suspect on top of all that, we'll probably end up giving away a future 2nd round pick as well. Pax is handing those future 2nd rounders out like candy.


----------



## jbulls

Damian Necronamous said:


> Man, Chicago and New Orleans will be stacked.
> 
> CHICAGO
> PG: Kirk Hinrich...Chris Duhon
> SG: Ben Gordon...Thabo Sefolosha...J.R. Smith
> SF: Andres Nocioni...Luol Deng
> PF: Tyrus Thomas...Michael Sweetney...Darius Songaila
> C: Ben Wallace...P.J. Brown
> 
> NEW ORLEANS
> PG: Chris Paul...Bobby Jackson
> SG: Desmond Mason...Kirk Snyder...Arvydas Macijauskas
> SF: Peja Stojakovic
> PF: David West...Cedric Simmons...Malik Allen
> C: Tyson Chandler...Hilton Armstrong...Marc Jackson


I don't see why we can't get Simmons or Armstrong in this deal. Chandler, Simmons and Armstrong on the same roster? Three athletic young bigs without a trace of scoring ability. Doesn't Chandler make one of their rookies redundant?


----------



## The Krakken

I have a better Idea. Chandler for Eddy Curry and their #1 outright.

That way we get 2 #1's next year, and we get our offensive big man back.


----------



## paxman

The Krakken said:


> I have a better Idea. Chandler for Eddy Curry and their #1 outright.
> 
> That way we get 2 #1's next year, and we get our offensive big man back.



yeah but our pick is gonna be #30 in the draft :biggrin:


----------



## The Krakken

Which we might need to move up and grab one of the top 3 picks. I think too many people are counting on NY being the worst team in the league next season. They WILL be better than this year. It isn't like they have ZERO talent.


----------



## Diable

jbulls said:


> I don't see why we can't get Simmons or Armstrong in this deal. Chandler, Simmons and Armstrong on the same roster? Three athletic young bigs without a trace of scoring ability. Doesn't Chandler make one of their rookies redundant?


Simmons and Armstrong make this trade idiotic.They can each do more than Chandler does for a fraction of the costs.This trade is retarded enough for the Hornets as it is being rumoured.

You guys know good and damned well that Chandler is an overpaid bum so quit acting like he's the second coming of Horace Grant.


----------



## FanOfAll8472

_*The PJ+JR for Tyson trade was agreed to today*
I do NOT think it will be reported tonight. From what I understand, the Timberwolves deal is OFF the table. Not going to happen Bulls fans. I do not know anything else about the trade ie. is AM and/or Malik Allen involved. Don't expect it to be on ESPN until tomorrow. Have a great Fourth of July!_
http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34889

Take it FWIW. This guy has been on top of everything so far - the Peja signing a few days before it hit the press, Bobby Jackson, and this rumor (days before it was on the New Orleans TV station).


----------



## jbulls

Diable said:


> Simmons and Armstrong make this trade idiotic.They can each do more than Chandler does for a fraction of the costs.This trade is retarded enough for the Hornets as it is being rumoured.
> 
> You guys know good and damned well that Chandler is an overpaid bum so quit acting like he's the second coming of Horace Grant.


No they can't.

Simmons and Armstrong are extremely raw bigs who may or may not totally bust out - NBA GM's picked them behind a guy who averaged 3 and 4 for a team in Belgium last year. For all of his flaws Tyson Chandler had the best rebound rate in the NBA last season. Neither Simmons nor Armstrong is likely to do that. And neither will have the same defensive impact.


----------



## Ron Cey

FanOfAll8472 said:


> _I do NOT think it will be reported tonight. From what I understand, the Timberwolves deal is OFF the table. Not going to happen Bulls fans. I do not know anything else about the trade ie. is AM and/or Malik Allen involved. Don't expect it to be on ESPN until tomorrow. Have a great Fourth of July!_
> http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34889
> 
> Take it FWIW. This guy has been on top of everything so far - the Peja signing a few days before it hit the press, Bobby Jackson, and this rumor (days before it was on the New Orleans TV station).


You left out the title of the report, which is that the PJ and JR for TC deal was finalized today.


----------



## FanOfAll8472

Ron Cey said:


> You left out the title of the report, which is that the PJ and JR for TC deal was finalized today.


 Whoops, thanks. Added.


----------



## madox

If it wasn't a 3-way trade does that mean we're keeping J.R. Smith? Because I don't think we can trade him right away.


----------



## Diable

jbulls said:


> No they can't.
> 
> Simmons and Armstrong are extremely raw bigs who may or may not totally bust out - NBA GM's picked them behind a guy who averaged 3 and 4 for a team in Belgium last year. For all of his flaws Tyson Chandler had the best rebound rate in the NBA last season. Neither Simmons nor Armstrong is likely to do that. And neither will have the same defensive impact.


Chandler is second in the league in turnover rate too.He doesn't do jack**** for the money he earns and he can't even average 27 minutes per game for a team with no big men.Marc Jackson is a better option for the Hornets than Tyson Chandler.Chandler has a 12.3 PER...the league average is 16 for christ's sake.The guy is a bum and stop trying to tell me he isn't


----------



## jbulls

Diable said:


> Chandler is second in the league in turnover rate too.He doesn't do jack**** for the money he earns and he can't even average 27 minutes per game for a team with no big men.Marc Jackson is a better option for the Hornets than Tyson Chandler.Chandler has a 12.3 PER...the league average is 16 for christ's sake.The guy is a bum and stop trying to tell me he isn't


Please produce a link to the TO rate stat.

Chandler averaged 1.5 TO's, and 1 assist in 26 MPG last year. Those numbers are fine for a big.


----------



## Diable

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2006/jh_ALL_TOR.htm


----------



## jbulls

Diable said:


> http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2006/jh_ALL_TOR.htm


Fair enough. Didn't realize you were referencing the Hollinger stat, as opposed to traditional turnover rate. This supports what we all know (Chandler's a pretty lousy offensive player) but it doesn't change the fact that he's an excellent rebounder and defender, 7 feet tall and 23.


----------



## paxman

bad news...

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34889

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showthread.php?t=34886


these guys have been right on the money with everything hornets.
and there's been quite a few hornets moves.

looks like a done deal folks.
and as for the garnett hopefulls, well this certainly puts a big fat dent on that.
unless minnesota prefers pj's cap relief to chandler's huge contract and potential turnaround.

meh.


----------



## ChiBulls2315

**** that


----------



## BG7

We better be getting their 2007 draft pick baby! Unprotected! Hopefully they miss the playoffs again, 2 tickets for Greg Oden baby!


----------



## paxman

ChiBulls2315 said:


> **** that


stars that is right!
*sigh*

there is a theory that the twolves would rather have some cap relief rather than take
a risk on chandler's sizable contract and p..p..potential. 
my last hopes are pinning on that, remote as they are...oh what the hell, where's the beer? :cheers:


----------



## kukoc4ever

Bull**** move. Utter crap.

A dark cloud on what should have been a good day.

I guess this **** is the price you have to pay if you choose to be a Bulls fan.


Well, maybe we can trade the expiring deal of Tim Thoma... I mean PJ Brown for something during the season. Yah right, like that's gonna happen.

Maybe a couple east teams will be hammered by injuries or TT is really, really good right away.


----------



## BG7

I heard this puts us back up to about 5.5 million in capspace, put on the jersey again kukoc!


----------



## rwj333

sloth said:


> I heard this puts us back up to about 5.5 million in capspace, put on the jersey again kukoc!


Maybe we can sign Pryzbilla or Mohammed!


----------



## ChiBulls2315

kukoc4ever said:


> Bull**** move. Utter crap.
> 
> A dark cloud on what should have been a good day.
> 
> I guess this **** is the price you have to pay if you choose to be a Bulls fan.
> 
> 
> Well, maybe we can trade the expiring deal of Tim Thoma... I mean PJ Brown for something during the season. Yah right, like that's gonna happen.
> 
> Maybe a couple east teams will be hammered by injuries or TT is really, really good.



kukoc, I don't agree w/ a lot of what you write, but I am with you. A dark cloud on what should be a good day. Again, **** this.


----------



## paxman

rwj333 said:


> Maybe we can sign Pryzbilla or Mohammed!


yeah yeah very funny


----------



## kukoc4ever

ChiBulls2315 said:


> kukoc, I don't agree w/ a lot of what you write, but I am with you.


Has it become board policy to write this when someone agrees with me.


----------



## doomraisin

If only John Paxson were as smart as you guys.


----------



## remlover

kukoc4ever said:


> Bull**** move. Utter crap.
> 
> A dark cloud on what should have been a good day.
> 
> I guess this **** is the price you have to pay if you choose to be a Bulls fan.
> 
> 
> Well, maybe we can trade the expiring deal of Tim Thoma... I mean PJ Brown for something during the season. Yah right, like that's gonna happen.
> 
> Maybe a couple east teams will be hammered by injuries or TT is really, really good right away.


Wahhhhh, we saved ourselves a boatload of money. Wahhhhh we got ourselves more veteran experience. Wahhhhh Jerry's Kids are finally out of here.


----------



## doomraisin

remlover said:


> Wahhhhh, we saved ourselves a boatload of money. Wahhhhh we got ourselves more veteran experience. Wahhhhh Jerry's Kids are finally out of here.


Someone needs to call a wahh-mbulance.


----------



## paxman

remlover said:


> Wahhhhh, we saved ourselves a boatload of money. Wahhhhh we got ourselves more veteran experience. Wahhhhh Jerry's Kids are finally out of here.


great reasons to like this trade.

1. we saved money
2. krause's pick is gone.
3. a 37 year old, BUT A VETERAN!!!

ah huh


----------



## remlover

I'm glad this trade has finally gone through...or will go through. We can use the extra money to sign another Big plus have another Vet front court player. 

I am absolutely done with Tyson's potential and his promises to work hard. 

Come December when we are rolling people will again be eating crow for going against Paxson's decision.


----------



## kukoc4ever

remlover said:


> Wahhhhh, we saved ourselves a boatload of money. Wahhhhh Jerry's Kids are finally
> out of here.


And here I thought the Bulls were trying to win a NBA Championship.


----------



## paxman

remlover said:


> We can use the extra money to sign another Big .


oh yeah? which big, the one that just signed with detroit or the one that just resigned with portland or the 2 restricted ones that will laugh at our remaining 5.5 million dollars?


----------



## BG7

remlover said:


> I'm glad this trade has finally gone through...or will go through. We can use the extra money to sign another Big plus have another Vet front court player.
> 
> I am absolutely done with Tyson's potential and his promises to work hard.
> 
> Come December when we are rolling people will again be eating crow for going against Paxson's decision.


What if we do good, but Tyson puts up 17 and 14 next year?


----------



## unBULLievable

kukoc4ever said:


> And here I thought the Bulls were trying to win a NBA Championship.


With Tyson?

:rotf: 

you crack me up ...all you little whiners...


----------



## paxman

the point is that, again barring the kg theory on this, we could get so much more out of a trade with tyson.

but yeah, nice argument with the "you're whiners" and the rolling smileys, unbullievable

his point had to do with remlover's arguments for the trade.


----------



## narek

I don't think this is a salary dump. I think it's a Tyson dump. Dumping him for someone who can help them during the year, and gives them money to sign someone else now.

It's clear, despite the words of Pax and Skiles praising Tyson this off season, they've decided to get what they can for him and move on. Tyson may very well thrive in New Orleans, but he might never have thrived here after last season. 

But I'll wait and see how the team plays before I judge the whole trade.


----------



## ChiBulls2315

kukoc4ever said:


> Has it become board policy to write this when someone agrees with me.



lol I know. That was lame. 

I honestly don't believe this. Why do we have to do this TODAY? Can't we at least wait a couple weeks? NO is done spending all their money. This isn't going to hold them up. Maybe someone else will change their mind. New Orleans has no reason to change their minds on this deal though. **** **** ****. Chandler is probably not going to turn into an allstar but I would bet on him being as good as he was in 04-05 next year and beyond. And we trade that for basically nothing. PJ Brown is one and done and JR Smith would be lucky to ever will the Bulls uni. This is ridiculous.


----------



## remlover

kukoc4ever said:


> And here I thought the Bulls were trying to win a NBA Championship.


Excuse me while i laugh. 

Your ideal Bulls team still consists of players named Jamal, Jalen, and Eddy Curry.


----------



## kukoc4ever

ChiBulls2315 said:


> Why do we have to do this TODAY? Can't we at least wait a couple weeks?


IMO, its to include it in the news cycle of the Ben Wallace signing and somehow link the two transactions where there is no link.

Its a crap move.




> This is ridiculous.


Yup. Uncle Jerry at his finest.


----------



## ChiBulls2315

kukoc4ever said:


> Yup. Uncle Jerry at his finest.



So do you think this is all him or both? Honestly, even though I think Pax views Tyson a step below all of "his players", this does not look like something he would do. I mean a 37 year old, even with good jib and a SG who is everything he dislikes in a player? I think he was probably told if they gave Ben that money, salary had to be cut w/ Ty or w/ a future player. He obviously made his decision.


----------



## kukoc4ever

remlover said:


> Excuse me while i laugh.


Do you consider this trade a step forward?

How far do you see this Bulls team going in the playoffs next season?


----------



## paxman

well, whatever, i don't think this taints the wallace move.
that was a pure golden move by pax and i love it. you can't win 'em all. 

i definitely think we'll be better next year than we were the past 2. beer! :cheers:


----------



## The ROY

> The PJ+JR for Tyson trade was agreed to today
> I do NOT think it will be reported tonight. From what I understand, the Timberwolves deal is OFF the table. Not going to happen Bulls fans. I do not know anything else about the trade ie. is AM and/or Malik Allen involved. Don't expect it to be on ESPN until tomorrow. Have a great Fourth of July!


The guy who confirmed the rumor on hornets nest just reported this.

Tyson's gone ya'll


----------



## kukoc4ever

ChiBulls2315 said:


> So do you think this is all him or both? Honestly, even though I think Pax views Tyson a step below all of "his players", this does not look like something he would do. I mean a 37 year old, even with good jib and a SG who is everything he dislikes in a player? I think he was probably told if they gave Ben that money, salary had to be cut w/ Ty or w/ a future player. He obviously made his decision.



Pax has to agree to it, yah. It was Paxson's call at the end.

The strings attached to using Cap Space reeks of Uncle Jerry though.

Oh well. Another trade where we are giving up more then we are getting. Except this time its pure salary dump... no Cap Space sugarplum to gaze off at in the distance.

Let's hope the Bulls can get it done in the next couple years before Wallace starts showing his age more.

We still have the lotto picks as well. The team will be better next year.


----------



## paxman

The ROY said:
 

> The guy who confirmed the rumor on hornets nest just reported this.
> 
> Tyson's gone ya'll


yeah we know, the link for that has been posted.


----------



## BG7

DaBullz, fire up the Fire Paxson Club!


----------



## unBULLievable

sloth said:


> DaBullz, fire up the Fire Paxson Club!


FIRE PAXSON!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## The Krakken

kukoc4ever said:


> We still have the lotto picks as well. The team will be better next year.


I wonder how people are gonna feel if the Knicks are picking around #12-13 next year as opposed to top 5......


----------



## paxman

The Krakken said:


> I wonder how people are gonna feel if the Knicks are picking around #12-13 next year as opposed to top 5......


well that would suck, not as much for getting a lower pick, but for the knicks
being better next year. the knicks are best enjoyable when you click on
the nypost's website and find hilarious headlines and pictures about 
how silly isiah is or nate robinson beating up on 7 footers


----------



## BG7

Fire Paxson!


----------



## ScottMay

remlover said:


> Wahhhhh, we saved ourselves a boatload of money.


When are "we" getting "our" rebate checks?



> Wahhhhh we got ourselves more veteran experience.


:laugh:

P.J. Brown blows. Plain and simple.



> Wahhhhh Jerry's Kids are finally out of here.


Who even cares about this sort of stuff? Isn't the goal to win championships?

We're farther away from that now than we were before trading Tyson Chandler. For P.J. Brown. And a wingnut.


----------



## OziBull

I know people arnt happy about this trade but i am one that thinks it is the right trade to do.
Get an expiring contract in PJ and who also can produce good numbers still and but most of all again we are getting a player who is known as one of the best locker room players in the league, he really will give our youngsters and again Tyrus a good stepping stone in to the NBA.

Again this proves to me Tyrus is the new generation future of this club. The last two moves in my mind have been majoritly done because Pax believes Tyrus in a big way, and he has surrounded him with bigs to help him with the right frame of mind to go about being a successful NBA player.

Also getting JR not sure what Pax has in mind for him, if we didnt draft Thabo and knowing how highly Pax and skiles thinks of Thabo i would of praised the fact we got a player like JR. Although he is another guy with the word potential he clearly could be a good player for us if he knuckles his head down.

I like it and again i thank you Pax although i may be one of only a few who do so.
Doing a great job and i am very very excited about the upcoming season.


----------



## mr.ankle20

The Krakken said:


> I wonder how people are gonna feel if the Knicks are picking around #12-13 next year as opposed to top 5......


I bet you one of those people who predicted that the knicks would make the playoffs last year :rofl:


----------



## McBulls

Sign me up for the Jerry Reinsdorf, Please Sell the Bulls" Club!


----------



## GB

doomraisin said:


> Someone needs to call a wahh-mbulance.


 :laugh: 

Ignore the (am I allowed to call them haters?) people who are griping. They complained at other stuff Paxson has done and everything turned out ok.


----------



## OziBull

To add to dump his salery was the right move for the long run.

People have to stop believing Chandler was going to magically do what Jermaine Oneal did with this 4-5 year turnaround miricale. It rarely happens, and there are only a few exceptions.
Even after Jermaines success individually he hasnt brought a championship to Indiana yet.
I would of been mad if i saw constant improvment or some improvement year after year from chandler but i didnt simple!


----------



## The ROY

After all of this, I still would have been happier with Ronnie Brewer. 

C Wallace
F Brown / Thomas / Sweetney
F Deng / Nocioni / Khyrapa
G Gordon / Sefolosha / Smith
G Hinrich / Duhon

We have the assets though.


----------



## GB

kukoc4ever said:


> IMO, its to include it in the news cycle of the Ben Wallace signing and somehow link the two transactions where there is no link.


Explain more please. I'd think that the link would be getting someone who could complement Big Ben.


----------



## The Krakken

mr.ankle20 said:


> I bet you one of those people who predicted that the knicks would make the playoffs last year :rofl:


I'll take that bet. 1000 dollars.

Start hunting for my posts where I said that.....and get back to me when you find them.


----------



## BG7

Tyrus Thomas better be ready to rock baby. I'm talking 15 and 10, rookie of the year, 6th man of the year, this kid better be GOOD.


----------



## paxman

GB said:


> Explain more please. I'd think that the link would be getting someone who could complement Big Ben.


i think what he means, is that by trading tyson right after acquiring ben, fans will be 
convinced that the only way to get ben was to dump tyson. either b/c they are 
redundant or b/c of money.


----------



## The Krakken

McBulls said:


> Sign me up for the Jerry Reinsdorf, Please Sell the Bulls" Club!


And Add me for a third time. Yes, I'm serious. :curse:


----------



## paxman

The Krakken said:


> And Add me for a third time. Yes, I'm serious. :curse:


well i'd wait first, this deal still might include a third team.


----------



## pmac34

The Krakken said:


> I have a better Idea. Chandler for Eddy Curry and their #1 outright.
> 
> That way we get 2 #1's next year, and we get our offensive big man back.


chi already has the right to switch picks with NY next year


----------



## The Krakken

pmac34 said:


> chi already has the right to switch picks with NY next year


We may need their pick IN ADDITION TO OUR OWN, next year to move up and get a big man, since we just traded our only long term height away.....


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle

sloth said:


> Tyrus Thomas better be ready to rock baby. I'm talking 15 and 10, rookie of the year, 6th man of the year, this kid better be GOOD.


If he stinks, the funny thing is the Paxiles people will find a way to allocate the blame to him, and we are probably going to end up defending him.


----------



## unBULLievable

PAxson read this thread. He is browsing right now this forum and he is going to call the deal off!


----------



## paxman

*LEFT FIELD!!!!*

http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=538787

could this be bogus? what, the great espn radio BS-ing?! 
could the garnett thing be revived? 
could a different gm have contacted pax and offered more than a decrepid 37 year old for tyson?
could it be that lee harvey oswald was just a patsy?


----------



## BG7

*Lets give a hand for Left Field!*


----------



## remlover

I posted this in the Fire Paxson thread, but it pertains to this thread so i'll repost it.
--------------------
Does anyone feel that Pax actually thinks Brown can help us? YOu guys act like Brown will walk in and assume the wardrobe of EROB. There is a reason the Bulls want him. 

The reason the Bulls want to dump Chandler now instead of waiting until the middle of the season is Chandler doesn't fit on this ballclub with player like Wallace and Tyrus Thomas. 

With teh view of some of you posters the Bulls would end up coming out of the gates slow as Chandler and Wallace are mirror images of each other. 

I swear its like you guys are playing checkers *thinking one move ahead*, while Paxson is playing Chess and seeing the whole board and planning 6 moves in advance.

Watch Paxson make this trade and get Brown & JR Smith and use the extra cap space to re-sign Darius Songalia.


----------



## remlover

Let's compare lineups. 

Roster A
Wallace/PJ Brown/Sweetney
PJ Brown/Darius/Tyrus Thomas
Nocioni/Deng
Ben/Thabo/JR Smith
Kirk/Duhon

With that lineup we have the perfect combo of youth/experience/defense with a nice scoring punch with PJ and Darius on the roster. 

You add the fact that JR Smith is a tradable asset. Remember the Spurs had a deal in place to trade Brent Barry for Smith but it wasnt in time by the deadline.

Roster B
Wallace/Tyson
Tyson/Tryus Thomas/Sweetney
Nocioni/Deng
Ben/Thabo
Kirk/Duhon

Sure looks like Roster B is lacking some scoring punch and is not that balanced.

SO if the Bulls re-sign Songalia (who they stated they want to if they can afford it) with the added money of the trade then i think its an absolute coup!


----------



## MikeDC

paxman said:


> *LEFT FIELD!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=538787
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> could this be bogus? what, the great espn radio BS-ing?!
> could the garnett thing be revived?
> could a different gm have contacted pax and offered more than a decrepid 37 year old for tyson?
> could it be that lee harvey oswald was just a patsy?


Please let this be true.


----------



## DaBullz

MikeDC said:


> Please let this be true.


Six pages of "please let this be true" on the other board.

16 pages of "a washed up 37 year old has-been is better than Chandler because I love Paxson more than the bulls" over here.


----------



## remlover

DaBullz said:


> Six pages of "please let this be true" on the other board.
> 
> 16 pages of "a washed up 37 year old has-been is better than Chandler because I love Paxson more than the bulls" over here.


And dozens upon dozens posts from the Usual Suspects critiquing Paxson's decisions.


----------



## DaBullz

remlover said:


> And dozens upon dozens posts from the Usual Suspects critiquing Paxson's decisions.


Just not universally approving them for no good reason.

Seems like we're all pretty happy with the Wallace signing, eh? The one move doesn't make his blunders into successes.


----------



## madox

ibtl


----------



## ScottMay

MikeDC said:


> Please let this be true.


I took one for the team and read the entire post -- the "report" seems completely made-up. The person won't fess up as to which ESPN radio outlet he heard it on, and other posters who've been listening to ESPN Chicago for the past four hours have only heard that the deal is about to be consummated.


----------



## paxman

ScottMay said:


> I took one for the team and read the entire post -- the "report" seems completely made-up. The person won't fess up as to which ESPN radio outlet he heard it on, and other posters who've been listening to ESPN Chicago for the past four hours have only heard that the deal is about to be consummated.


yeah, sorry. i thought it was legit b/c he named espn as the source, and when i posted
the link to that guy's post there were yet any responses to it.


----------



## remlover

DaBullz said:


> Just not universally approving them for no good reason.
> 
> Seems like we're all pretty happy with the Wallace signing, eh? The one move doesn't make his blunders into successes.


How about this, I believe this trade will be a rousing success! I also think come middle of this season when the trade is paying dividends your crowd who "just not universally approving them for good reason" will again have to eat crow as Paxson made another wise decision. 

When this trade turns out to be Tyson&Filler for PJ Brown (filler) & cap space that can be used to sign a FA...maybe Jackie Butler, maybe re-sign Songalia. Then you get to see Paxson's big picture.


----------



## paxman

remlover said:


> How about this, I believe this trade will be a rousing success! I also think come middle of this season when the trade is paying dividends your crowd who "just not universally approving them for good reason" will again have to eat crow as Paxson made another wise decision.
> 
> When this trade turns out to be Tyson&Filler for PJ Brown (filler) & cap space that can be used to sign a FA...maybe Jackie Butler, maybe re-sign Songalia. Then you get to see Paxson's big picture.


yaaaaaay! songaila or butler! the big picture is kicking in :clap:


----------



## DaBullz

remlover said:


> How about this, I believe this trade will be a rousing success! I also think come middle of this season when the trade is paying dividends your crowd who "just not universally approving them for good reason" will again have to eat crow as Paxson made another wise decision.
> 
> When this trade turns out to be Tyson&Filler for PJ Brown (filler) & cap space that can be used to sign a FA...maybe Jackie Butler, maybe re-sign Songalia. Then you get to see Paxson's big picture.


egads

the best thing about this past draft was we got more athletic.

Trading chandler for an old man who's no longer athletic is the antithesis of this.

God I hope we don't see Songaila in a Bulls uniform ever again. He sucks. That's with 20-20 hindsight and having seen him play for the bulls all last season. Again, the antithesis of getting more athletic.


----------



## GB

paxman said:


> fans will be
> convinced that the only way to get ben was to dump tyson. either b/c they are
> redundant or b/c of money.


Why would he care about that?


----------



## paxman

GB said:


> Why would he care about that?


don't :rocket: the messenger, i was just explaining what i thought k4e meant 
when someone asked :biggrin:


----------



## ScottMay

paxman said:


> yaaaaaay! songaila or butler! the big picture is kicking in :clap:


Quick, someone pick a new venue for the championship rally -- Petrillo Bandshell is a giant outdoor goose and seagull ****house.


----------



## theanimal23

madox said:


> ibtl


What does this mean?


----------



## remlover

DaBullz said:


> egads
> 
> the best thing about this past draft was we got more athletic.
> 
> Trading chandler for an old man who's no longer athletic is the antithesis of this.
> 
> God I hope we don't see Songaila in a Bulls uniform ever again. He sucks. That's with 20-20 hindsight and having seen him play for the bulls all last season. Again, the antithesis of getting more athletic.


I guess with your vision the Bulls will have problems scoring the basketball, then your club can talk about how Paxson screwed this team over by not addressing its needs.

So basically it is a win-win situation. You can complain about Paxson.

I believe the Bulls couldnt trade Tyson for a player you wouldn't rip to shreds (provided he isnt a superstar).


----------



## paxman

remlover said:


> I guess with your vision the Bulls will have problems scoring the basketball, then your club can talk about how Paxson screwed this team over by not addressing its needs.
> 
> So basically it is a win-win situation. You can complain about Paxson.
> 
> I believe the Bulls couldnt trade Tyson for a player you wouldn't rip to shreds (provided he isnt a superstar).


boy you seem very sensitive to any criticism of pax.
i love pax, but not blindly.
i love his ben wallace move, i hate the pj brown move (barring any unseen developments)
i love his kirk hinrich selection, i hate the contract he gave tyson.

it IS possible to be great AND have flaws at the same time.


----------



## rwj333

remlover said:


> I guess with your vision the Bulls will have problems scoring the basketball, then your club can talk about how Paxson screwed this team over by not addressing its needs.
> 
> So basically it is a win-win situation. You can complain about Paxson.
> 
> I believe the Bulls couldnt trade Tyson for a player you wouldn't rip to shreds (provided he isnt a superstar).


Wrong. Hell, at this point, my expectations are so low that I would be satisfied with this trade if Hilton Armstrong was added. The 12th pick in a weak draft. Then, at least, we would receive one player that might stick with us for more than one year, and thus the deal wouldn't be a complete and total loss.


----------



## madox

theanimal23 said:


> What does this mean?


in before the lock.

I was just kidding because I could sense a battle brewing.


----------



## paxman

madox said:


> in before the lock.
> 
> I was just kidding because I could sense a battle brewing.



IBTLMFAO


----------



## theanimal23

I just don't understand how Tyson is not a disappointment to people. 


At least with PJ, we got his expiring contract, plus Sweetney's, and some trade bait: JR Smith. We could pull another good move at the trade deadline next year.


----------



## ScottMay

rwj333 said:


> Wrong. Hell, at this point, my expectations are so low that I would be satisfied with this trade if Hilton Armstrong was added. The 12th pick in a weak draft. Then, at least, we would receive one player that might stick with us for more than one year, and thus the deal wouldn't be a complete and total loss.


You cannot put a price on the 300-day honeymoon P.J. Brown and Tyrus Thomas will have together. P.J. will teach Tyrus how to speak English, how to eat non-Creole/Cajun cuisine, and how to live on this strange planet we call Earth. Louisiana is just *that* different from the rest of the country.


----------



## paxman

theanimal23 said:


> I just don't understand how Tyson is not a disappointment to people.
> 
> 
> At least with PJ, we got his expiring contract, plus Sweetney's, and some trade bait: JR Smith. We could pull another good move at the trade deadline next year.


there's no doubt tyson is a HUGE dissappointment. it's just that we could 
get more for him, if not now then there's a higher chance than not that his value
rises if we wait a little bit.

as for pj's expiring contract - we have zero room under the cap room next year.
extending kirk and noc plus the generally rising contracts of everyone will diminish any cap room


----------



## Babble-On

This is why I said before that letting Tyson go along with Eddy *would have been better*, because the guy is so flawed that you really can't count on him to be play a starter's minutes because of his flaws. Maybe if he had been dumped, the Bulls could've signed someone useful to go along with Ben instead of dumping him for a guy who at best is useful for a one year rental. 

I'm excited about Big Ben, but I'm not excited at the prospect of Brown either being out of gas or breaking down, thus leading to Sweets playing big minutes being a necessity, or having Noch play the 4 full time, or forcing Tyrus into the fire prematurely.


----------



## theanimal23

paxman said:


> there's no doubt tyson is a HUGE dissappointment. it's just that we could
> get more for him, if not now then there's a higher chance than not that his value
> rises if we wait a little bit.
> 
> as for pj's expiring contract - we have zero room under the cap room next year.
> extending kirk and noc plus the generally rising contracts of everyone will diminish any cap room


Honestly, we only hear rumors of Tyson for Troy Murphy. We are lucky we are hearing about PJ Brown, and not Troy Murphy. No other team would give up their PF for Chandler. Chances are, they are better. The only ones that would be available are nutcases like Zach Randolph. 

It does not matter if we will have no cap room next year. We got 12 million in expiring contracts, and a few assets (JR Smith + Duhon) to use at the trade deadline. If there is a decent big man available (i.e. Boozer or someone) we have a legit shot at getting him. I don't think Pax/JR would disapprove. There is a difference in talent and production between Tyson Chandler and guys at the level of Boozer. Unfortunately, we may never get him since he is injured year round, and he stabbed Pax's brother in the back.


----------



## The ROY

Tyrus wasn't afraid last year at LSU.

I recall us STARTING Deng after his freshman year.

Some posters on this board make it sound like he's straight out of high school.


----------



## theanimal23

Babble-On said:


> This is why I said before that letting Tyson go along with Eddy, because the guy is so flawed that you really can't count on him to be play a starter's minutes because of his flaws. Maybe if he had been dumped, the Bulls could've signed someone useful to go along with Ben instead of dumping him for a guy who at best is useful for a one year rental.
> 
> I'm excited about Big Ben, but I'm not excited at the prospect of Brown either being out of gas or breaking down, thus leading to Sweets playing big minutes being a necessity, or having Noch play the 4 full time, or forcing Tyrus into the fire prematurely.


Eddy and Ben Wallace looks a lot better than Chandler and Wallace. But that is another thing of the past. Whats done is done. I hope to wake up tomorrow, and see a headline: Tyson got KO'ed out of Chicago.


----------



## paxman

theanimal23 said:


> Honestly, we only hear rumors of Tyson for Troy Murphy. We are lucky we are hearing about PJ Brown, and not Troy Murphy. No other team would give up their PF for Chandler. Chances are, they are better. The only ones that would be available are nutcases like Zach Randolph.
> 
> It does not matter if we will have no cap room next year. We got 12 million in expiring contracts, and a few assets (JR Smith + Duhon) to use at the trade deadline. If there is a decent big man available (i.e. Boozer or someone) we have a legit shot at getting him. I don't think Pax/JR would disapprove. There is a difference in talent and production between Tyson Chandler and guys at the level of Boozer. Unfortunately, we may never get him since he is injured year round, and he stabbed Pax's brother in the back.


i agree we (internet posters) haven't heard much.
i disagree that pj for chandler is an even trade. i think it's skewed heavily in NO's favor.
and there IS in b/w of pj brown and boozer. don't have to go from one extreme to the end.
if you can't find something better for tyson now, why the rush? the isiah's and ainge's of the 
world teach you that there's opportunities can arise. 

that should be the motto of us against this trade. since pj brown is a big downgrade
in value: why the rush?


----------



## Babble-On

The ROY said:


> *Some posters on this board make it sound like he's straight out of high school.*


Well, it was Pax who said that drafting Tyrus was somewhat like drafting a high school player.

I'm out. Hopefully, we'll be hearing tomorrow that this trade ain't goin down, and we're actually keeping Chandler or that Pax sqeezed one NOK's draft picks, or that they're trading him for someone who we actually can count on to contribute beyond a single year.


----------



## paxman

Babble-On said:


> Well, it was Pax who said that drafting Tyrus was somewhat like drafting a high school player.


:smile:



Bulls GM John Paxson said:


> "It's a lot like drafting a high school player. We feel his potential is better than anyone else's in this draft. We think given a couple of years under our system, this kid's going to blossom."


----------



## theanimal23

Another Update: Deal Not Dead 



> Malik Allen is also NOT involved in the trade. If this deal doesn't happen, it isnt me or my source that called it wrong. If that happens, I'll explain that at a later date. I HAVE FULL CONFIDENCE that this has ALREADY been agreed to and that certain officials from either or both the Hornets and Bulls don't want to report it to the media yet, just in case some ridiculous offer is made for one of the principles involved in the trade. Let me make it clear, this trade cannot officially happen until July 12. Thus, neither the Hornets and Brower nor the Bulls and Paxson are in any rush to confirm this trade merely because fans and message boards "Want to know right now." Unless you hear a spokesperson from either the Bulls or Hornets say that this deal is dead, DO NOT TRUST ANY FOOL IN THE MEDIA


Thanks to all the inside sources of the Hornets. You make us basketball fans enjoy talking about our team.

I'm very happy Malik is not part of the deal. I like what he provides, especially at his cost. He can hit that J.


----------



## superdave

The latest from the HornetsReport.com insider:

http://hornetsreport.com/HRForums/showpost.php?p=384302&postcount=1

*edit* the animal beat me to it!


----------



## paxman

> If this deal doesn't happen, it isnt me or my source that called it wrong. If that happens, I'll explain that at a later date.


sounds to me like somebody has the case of the backpedalitiis
vee shall see

either way, like theanimal23, i'm very relieved to hear malik is out of the discussions.
i like the insurance he gives us. had a couple of good moves in the playoffs


----------



## superdave

paxman said:


> sounds to me like somebody has the case of the backtrackitiis
> vee shall see


Agreed.


----------



## paxman

---


----------



## DaBullz

paxman said:


> boy you seem very sensitive to any criticism of pax.
> i love pax, but not blindly.
> i love his ben wallace move, i hate the pj brown move (barring any unseen developments)
> i love his kirk hinrich selection, i hate the contract he gave tyson.
> 
> it IS possible to not be great AND have flaws at the same time.


Well put.


----------



## paxman

DaBullz said:


> Well put.


oops, i meant "it is possible to be great, yet flawed"...well you get the point


----------



## SALO

Whether the trade happens or not, those guys at HornetsReport are incredible. I bookmarked that site because their insiders are legit. 

The only other person who even came close to them in terms of accuracy was a dude named TechN9NE (sp?) aka Victor from RealGM. That guy had the inside scoop on several Bulls deals days before they happened. I think he got in trouble for giving away so much info. He hasn't posted in a long time.


----------



## TripleDouble

SALO said:


> Whether the trade happens or not, those guys at HornetsReport are incredible. I bookmarked that site because their insiders are legit.
> The only other person who even came close to them in terms of accuracy was a dude named TechN9NE (sp?) aka Victor from RealGM. That guy had the inside scoop on several Bulls deals days before they happened. I think he got in trouble for giving away so much info. He hasn't posted in a long time.


If the trade doesn't happen, why would you think they are legit?


----------



## SALO

TripleDouble said:


> If the trade doesn't happen, why would you think they are legit?


Are you serious? 

Cedric Simmons, Peja, Bobby Jackson. All those moves were predicted well ahead of time. Explore some of the other threads on that board. They're batting 1.000 so far. 

If the final trade happens to be... Tyson straight up for PJ and JR

I'm not gonna rag on them for originally saying Malik Allen was part of the deal. Who cares?


----------



## paxman

SALO said:


> Are you serious?
> 
> Cedric Simmons, Peja, Bobby Jackson. All those moves were predicted well ahead of time. Explore some of the other threads on that board. They're batting 1.000 so far.
> 
> If the final trade happens to be... Tyson straight up for PJ and JR
> 
> I'm not gonna rag on them for originally saying Malik Allen was part of the deal. Who cares?


what really opened my eyes was the peja thing. 
when they reported that i totally "pfffft"'d b/c everyone 'knew' peja 
was a lock to re-sign with the pacers and that rumor came out of no where,
only to be found true about 3 days later.


----------



## TripleDouble

SALO said:


> Are you serious?
> 
> Cedric Simmons, Peja, Bobby Jackson. All those moves were predicted well ahead of time. Explore some of the other threads on that board. They're batting 1.000 so far.
> 
> If the final trade happens to be... Tyson straight up for PJ and JR
> 
> I'm not gonna rag on them for originally saying Malik Allen was part of the deal. Who cares?


They've also been claiming the Chandler deal was finalized for several days.


----------



## SALO

J.R. Smith's agent says deal likely done by Friday 



> The Hornets are in serious trade discussions that would involve sending veteran forward P.J. Brown and shooting guard J.R. Smith to the Chicago Bulls in exchange for center Tyson Chandler, two league sources confirmed Tuesday afternoon.
> 
> The Hornets have been in talks with the Bulls for the past week, and it's up to the Bulls to accept the deal or explore other trade offers for Chandler, a source said.
> 
> *Smith's father, Earl, said he spoke with his son's agent, Arn Tellem, on Tuesday morning and was told the trade likely will happen before Friday. *
> 
> "It would be a fine move that I think is great," Earl Smith said by telephone Tuesday. "It would give J.R. a chance to redeem himself, and I think he would fit in perfect with those guys. They have a chance to contend in the East."


No Malik Allen... :clap: 

No Hilton Armstrong... :upset:

Horrible.


----------



## madox

SALO said:


> J.R. Smith's agent says deal likely done by Friday
> 
> 
> 
> No Malik Allen... :clap:
> 
> No Hilton Armstrong... :upset:
> 
> Horrible.



Hilton Armstrong is going to be a much better player than Chandler. There's no way that in a 3-player trade (Hilton, PJ, Tyson) the Bulls get the 2 best players, the 2 cheapest players, the 2 shortest contracts, and the only salary dump.


----------



## MikeDC

Well, I'm certainly glad most of the reports seem to indicate we're hesitating on this deal. We damn well should be.


----------



## theanimal23

MikeDC said:


> Well, I'm certainly glad most of the reports seem to indicate we're hesitating on this deal. We damn well should be.


Reports now say it is done, and just waiting to be announced. Chances are, especially if Pax initiated the talks, that he will not back out. Hornets Nest Forum says it will be announced by Friday.

I'm just anxious for it to be announced. I like the deal. I wish it was for a better player than PJ (i.e. Boozer, Al Harrington, etc), but I'm very content with it. I see him as a huge upgrade over Tyson, albeit for a year only. If we do not package a few expiring contracts at the trade deadline for assets, I see us being able to resign PJ for 1-2 more years at a cheap deal. 

I think it gives Tyson a chance to rejuvenate himself, and have a chance for success. He won't be in the spotlight anymore (Big Market). He can just run the floor. Unfortunately for Paul, Chandler can't catch any of his passes or be able to convert. 

Tyson was not going to successful. Whatever chance he has to be decent was going to happen in another city. I believe his value would have gone down here, getting lesser 'stats' playing with Wallace. And, I don't think it would have been long for Tyrus to surpass Tyson.


----------



## different_13

is that hornets site just www.hornetsreport.com?

Chandler would have been better defensively for the Bulls this year, with a dominant defender next to him. But, he didn't fit in the offence, and with a young PF behind him, combined with his contract, I spose there was little chance of him staying (after the Ben signing).

Let's hope Brown can do well. One of the positives of his age is he can play fewer minutes, which should help the development of Ty (and possibly Sweetney, especially in contract year).

His expiring should be useful at the deadline too (especially if Sweetney puts up good numbers, they could be packaged - perhaps with JR Smith).

Where do y'all see Smith playing? In front of Theba Sefolosha? (basically, 4th or 5th guard, or even 6th if Pargo resigns..)

Or just not playing at all, and being sent packing as soon as a decent deal is found. If he does get traded for Scola's contract (seems a fairly common idea), that would make Sweets redundant next year maybe?

For New Orleans - Tyson's not a center, but won't be able to play PF with West, Simmons and Armstrong already there (and Bass too).
Won't be able to convert many of Paul's passes either, which is a shame, cos he can finish with power when he gets the chance.
Still, another shotblocker can't hurt em!
Nice young core too - Paul, Tyson, Simmons, Armstrong, Snyder, West.


----------



## Ron Cey

MikeDC said:


> Well, I'm certainly glad most of the reports seem to indicate we're hesitating on this deal. We damn well should be.


At the very least they indicate that the Bulls considered various, nondescript, options other than this one.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

Its odd that in all the analysis of the Bulls' offseason I've read this week in the papers, SI, ESPN, etc., the talk is about the Bulls suddenly being contenders with the signing of Big Ben.

The Chandler for Brown trade gets mentioned somewhere near the bottom, without much comment, and certainly not with any hint of criticism or worry that it affects the Bulls' sudden annointment of contender status.

It is almost as if the world of sports journalism is in agreement that the trade is no big whoop.


----------



## Swan

To me, this delay represents Paxson is looking for a third team to immediately take J.R. An extremely bold move would be to negotiate a S&T with Seattle for Chris Wilox while retaining P.J. Brown.

Seattle is strapped for cash and in a tough situation with their city. They may be looking to keep costs down, so (maybe) a J.R., Khyrapa, Sweetney and/or malik + cash and maybe a future (2008?) first for their trouble for a resigned Wilox At chandler money would entice them. We could probably just squeeze it in with our remaining cap room. So in essence, we would be dealing chandler for a more offensive/ less defensive version of himself and picking up a great frontcourt backup (P.J.) in the process.

I think Wilcox could work for us. Seattle, where he thrived, is similar to us in that the offense is dictated from the outside in, not inside out like the Clippers. He could give us those easy frontcourt buckets (nearly 70% of his shots were close in), and playing with Ben should improve his defense.

Capwise, with P.J's expiring we would be okay to resign noc and Hinrich next year, with the day of reckoning coming the year after. We also want to carry some "cap fat" into next offseason: if the T-Wolves fall off he could be part of the salary to match for KG.


----------



## TripleDouble

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Its odd that in all the analysis of the Bulls' offseason I've read this week in the papers, SI, ESPN, etc., the talk is about the Bulls suddenly being contenders with the signing of Big Ben.
> 
> The Chandler for Brown trade gets mentioned somewhere near the bottom, without much comment, and certainly not with any hint of criticism or worry that it affects the Bulls' sudden annointment of contender status.
> 
> It is almost as if the world of sports journalism is in agreement that the trade is no big whoop.


Phew!


----------



## epic

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> It is almost as if the world of sports journalism is in agreement that the trade is no big whoop.


the beauty of objectivity!


----------



## Good Hope

Swan said:


> To me, this delay represents Paxson is looking for a third team to immediately take J.R. An extremely bold move would be to negotiate a S&T with Seattle for Chris Wilox while retaining P.J. Brown.
> 
> Seattle is strapped for cash and in a tough situation with their city. They may be looking to keep costs down, so (maybe) a J.R., Khyrapa, Sweetney and/or malik + cash and maybe a future (2008?) first for their trouble for a resigned Wilox At chandler money would entice them. We could probably just squeeze it in with our remaining cap room. So in essence, we would be dealing chandler for a more offensive/ less defensive version of himself and picking up a great frontcourt backup (P.J.) in the process.
> 
> I think Wilcox could work for us. Seattle, where he thrived, is similar to us in that the offense is dictated from the outside in, not inside out like the Clippers. He could give us those easy frontcourt buckets (nearly 70% of his shots were close in), and playing with Ben should improve his defense.
> 
> Capwise, with P.J's expiring we would be okay to resign noc and Hinrich next year, with the day of reckoning coming the year after. We also want to carry some "cap fat" into next offseason: if the T-Wolves fall off he could be part of the salary to match for KG.


I don't know if Jackson from the suntimes  has any real sources, but your thoughts align with his (and I think they represent the right direction to go in. Much better than giving up Deng for Odom, for example). And TB#1, add Jackson to the list of those who don't see getting rid of TC as a problem:



> After landing his top free-agent target, Paxson is far from done revamping his roster. Rumors are circulating that the Bulls are close to a deal that would send Tyson Chandler to the New Orleans/ Oklahoma City Hornets for veteran big man P.J. Brown and guard J.R. Smith.
> 
> Trading Chandler makes a lot of sense because Wallace assumes much of his role. Because both players are limited on offense and are awful free-throw shooters, it would be difficult to play them together for long stretches.
> 
> Brown, who will be 37 in October, averaged nine points and 7.3 rebounds for the Hornets last season and shot 82.7 percent from the line. His 6-11 frame would provide some much-needed size for the frontcourt, and he is better-suited to play alongside Wallace than Chandler.
> 
> Smith, who turns 21 in September, is a tall (6-6), athletic shooting guard who averaged 7.7 points in 18.1 minutes last season.
> 
> The Wallace signing eats up a significant portion of the roughly $16 million of salary-cap room the Bulls had, but Paxson isn't done pursuing free agents.
> 
> The most likely targets are forwards Chris Wilcox of the Seattle SuperSonics and Jared Jeffries of the Washington Wizards, both restricted free agents. It's doubtful the Bulls have enough money to sign either player outright, so look for Paxson to try to swing a sign-and-trade. It's believed Wilcox is the Bulls' first choice.


----------



## Frankensteiner

Although I've read several complaints about the Bulls not wanting to win a championship, I have yet to hear anyone actually explain how not having Tyson Chandler's 15 backup minutes per game prevents us from doing that.


----------



## kukoc4ever

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Its odd that in all the analysis of the Bulls' offseason I've read this week in the papers, SI, ESPN, etc., the talk is about the Bulls suddenly being contenders with the signing of Big Ben.


I agree. The expectations have been raised.

We follow the Bulls much closer than most national reporters though, I would say.

Do you think the Bulls are contenders to win the NBA Championship right now?

I'm on the fence. I think we'll be a good team. I don't think what we have right now will win an NBA Championship though, which is what a contender means to me.

Should be a fun season. I'd like to see a consolidation trade for an above average 4, and I do think Duhon, Deng, Chandler would be a tempting package for other teams, but whatever. Perhaps we can deal Tim Thoma… I mean PJ Brown and his exp contract…. Which could have value and Paxson can exploit.

Three steps forward, two steps back. Still moved forward. This off-season, even with the disgusting salary dump of Chandler, has still been a net positive. Although, with the #2 pick in the draft and tons of Cap Space, it would be hard not to get better.


----------



## GB

kukoc4ever said:


> Do you think the Bulls are contenders to win the NBA Championship right now?


They are not on paper...but then again, neither of the teams in the last two seasons were as good on paper before the season started as they became during the season.


----------



## kukoc4ever

GB said:


> They are not on paper...



Yah... when we look at the paper.

But, the national media seems to think we're contenders now.

One would think that spending all that money on an established player you've been making moves for 3 years to acquire would have a considerable impact.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

kukoc4ever said:


> .
> Three steps forward, two steps back. Still moved forward. This off-season, even with the disgusting salary dump of Chandler, has still been a net positive. Although, with the #2 pick in the draft and tons of Cap Space, it would be hard not to get better.


Not even a half step back, IMO. I still believe the net effect of Chandler for Brown is a wash, and we will end up with a significant upgrade from either this time next year.


----------



## Vintage

I almost feel dirty for agreeing with K4E on the issue of Chandler.


----------



## Ron Cey

> Brown, who will be 37 in October, averaged nine points and 7.3 rebounds for the Hornets last season and shot 82.7 percent from the line. His 6-11 frame would provide some much-needed size for the frontcourt, and he is better-suited to play alongside Wallace than Chandler.


Evidently, local writer Jackson doesn't view the trade purely as a salary dump either.

And for what its worth, I do think we are legitimate contenders now. Increasingly so if the Chandler/Brown trade goes through. Increasingly so further if another sign and trade comes down the pike in the coming weeks. 

On paper. On the court. Whatever. I look at the Bulls' roster and I see them as being one of the 6 or so teams in the league that legitimately have a shot at winning their conference title.


----------



## ace20004u

Chandler is basically Ben Wallace in pf form. Trading him for cap relief after adding Wallace is 2 steps forward and one step back. PJ Brown is old and slow as molasses which will kill our running game, Chandler is still young enough to become very special and already puts up #'s comparable to Wallace. This move amounts to one thing...saving money.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

Oh, and I don't consider it "odd" that the sports writers are calling us contenders. 

I find it odd that the sports writers are calling us contenders despite knowing that we are likely trading Chandler for Brown.

None of these guys seem to be seeing that "two steps back" analysis that is fueling this thread (which is substituting for the Eddy Curry Update Thread this season, apparently).


----------



## DaBullz

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Not even a half step back, IMO. I still believe the net effect of Chandler for Brown is a wash, and we will end up with a significant upgrade from either this time next year.


In what sense is it a wash?

Neither is particularly good at offense, while Chandler is a better rebounder, and shot blocker. Plus he's going to be in the league for the next decade instead of just one season.

Chandler isn't horrible. Brown _is_.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

ace20004u said:


> This move amounts to one thing...saving money.


Disagree.


----------



## kukoc4ever

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Not even a half step back, IMO. I still believe the net effect of Chandler for Brown is a wash, and we will end up with a significant upgrade from either this time next year.


Chandler was as effective two seasons ago as Wallace was last year for the Pistons.

Last season, Wallace clearly had the edge over last year's Chandler.

Depends what Chandler shows up this season for the Hornets. I think that Wallace v. Chandler will be a net positive.... but if the Chandler from two seasons ago is the guy playing for the Hornets, it won't be considerable. And in two years Chandler will blow Wallace away. But, if the Chandler from last season shows up, Wallace will be a much larger net positive next season.


----------



## Good Hope

Ron Cey said:


> Evidently, local writer Jackson doesn't view the trade purely as a salary dump either.


Yah, but Couch does



> P.J. Brown isn't the solution
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone seems to think the Bulls are going to get old man P.J. Brown, who will be the Bulls' starting power forward at 6-11, for Chandler. Brown is one of those good locker-room guys. He's adequate and gives experience and height, but not enough offense. The beauty of Brown is that he has just one year left on his contract, meaning the Bulls can let him go after one season, and then Paxson would be free to spend the money he had committed to Chandler.
> 
> But that would mean one year off the clock.
> 
> I'd like to know if there's a way to dump, I mean trade, Chandler as part of a deal with Atlanta for a sign-and-trade that would send Al Harrington to Chicago. Maybe that would mean including Tyrus Thomas, the prospect they just picked up in the first round of the draft. How can the Bulls fit an aging Wallace and a project like Thomas into the same plan?


----------



## kukoc4ever

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> None of these guys seem to be seeing that "two steps back" analysis that is fueling this thread (which is substituting for the Eddy Curry Update Thread this season, apparently).


OK, are the reporters idiots this week or not? I can't keep it straight.


-------------


Listen, this is an obvious salary dump. If everyone can't agree to that, then this place is worse than the house and senate.


----------



## epic

can Pax trade PJ's expiring contract + whatever for Wilcox in a S&T as soon as this Chandler deal is finalised or would all three teams have to be involved from the outset?

if we could land Wilcox through trading Chandler, in some way, then this deal suddenly becomes great.


----------



## Vintage

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Disagree.


How?

Essentially, Brown is a one year rental. Do you think we'll bring back a 37 soon to be 38 year old PF/C next season?

If we were contenders this season, this trade might actually make sense.

But until Hinrich, Nocioni, Deng, Gordon, Thabo, Thomas hit their prime, I doubt we will be. Or at least make more significant strides, Brown will be loooooong gone.

Thats 2 years away. Wallace will still be with the team; Brown gone. Chandler can eventually replace Wallace as the team hits its peak.

Brown can't.

One year rental. How is it not a salary dump?


----------



## Vintage

epic said:


> can Pax trade PJ's expiring contract + whatever for Wilcox in a S&T as soon as this Chandler deal is finalised or would all three teams have to be involved from the outset?
> 
> if we could land Wilcox through trading Chandler, in some way, then this deal suddenly becomes great.



Agreed. That's the only way this "dump" of Chandler will turn out positive for us, in the long haul and the short term.


----------



## ace20004u

Vintage said:


> How?
> 
> Essentially, Brown is a one year rental. Do you think we'll bring back a 37 soon to be 38 year old PF/C next season?
> 
> If we were contenders this season, this trade might actually make sense.
> 
> But until Hinrich, Nocioni, Deng, Gordon, Thabo, Thomas hit their prime, I doubt we will be. Or at least make more significant strides, Brown will be loooooong gone.
> 
> Thats 2 years away. Wallace will still be with the team; Brown gone. Chandler can eventually replace Wallace as the team hits its peak.
> 
> Brown can't.
> 
> One year rental. How is it not a salary dump?


Thats my response as well. We aren't trading Chandler to somehow make moves for yuor pet player, insert name (Wilcox, Gooden, etc) here, we are trading Chandler to get PJ Browns expiring contract.


----------



## Ron Cey

kukoc4ever said:


> OK, are the reporters idiots this week or not? I can't keep it straight.
> 
> 
> -------------
> 
> 
> *Listen, this is an obvious salary dump. If everyone can't agree to that, then this place is worse than the house and senate.*


K4E, I don't dispute in the least that the dumping of Chandler's contract is a significant factor in this deal. I just don't consider it the only factor. 

The portion of it that is a salary dump doesn't bother me in the least. 

I'm not one of those fans that expects my team to throw fiscal responsibility out the window. I don't think its reasonable at all unless you root for the Knicks. I expect my team to wisely pay for a winner and contend. That, to me, is precisely what the Bulls have been building toward, and now are achieving, under Reinsdorf/Paxson/Skiles.


----------



## kukoc4ever

Ron Cey said:


> K4E, I don't dispute in the least that the dumping of Chandler's contract is a significant factor in this deal. I just don't consider it the only factor.
> 
> The portion of it that is a salary dump doesn't bother me in the least.


Supposedly Paxson had multiple offers for Chandler and is choosing the one he likes best. I agree, PJ Brown is an OK player. I hope he stays healthy.

Its a bad trade. There is some good. There is more bad. Net bad.




> I'm not one of those fans that expects my team to throw fiscal responsibility out the window. I don't think its reasonable at all unless you root for the Knicks. I expect my team to wisely pay for a winner and contend. That, to me, is precisely what the Bulls have been building toward, and now are achieving, under Reinsdorf/Paxson/Skiles.


I don't expect that either.

There is little harm to keeping Chandler on the roster this season though. No tax implications. Same salary paid. They just want Chandler off the books. Nothing more. 

If Chandler is the Chandler from the start of last season on the Hornets, then this was a pretty good move... I would not want to be stuck with that contract for how he performed last year to start the season. But, as you remember, once Chandler starting playing well, the Bulls started winning. He's a difference maker. Teams want difference makers and are willing to trade for them, especially for a package (say, Duhon, Deng and Chandler). Then we could have a legit 4 instead of creaky PJ or Sweets. Maybe not... you're right... I don't know what's on the table... but Duhon, Deng, Chandler or Duhon, Chandler, TT could really land you something and propel us to contender status this year. 

There is little downside risk to keeping chandler this season... unless you think he's going to be a stiff. Otherwise, its good to get rid of him. 



Take the best offer available to get Chandler off the books… and do it as close to the Ben Wallace signing as possible. That's what this deal was.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

Vintage said:


> How?
> 
> Essentially, Brown is a one year rental. Do you think we'll bring back a 37 soon to be 38 year old PF/C next season?
> 
> If we were contenders this season, this trade might actually make sense.
> 
> But until Hinrich, Nocioni, Deng, Gordon, Thabo, Thomas hit their prime, I doubt we will be. Or at least make more significant strides, Brown will be loooooong gone.
> 
> Thats 2 years away. Wallace will still be with the team; Brown gone. Chandler can eventually replace Wallace as the team hits its peak.
> 
> Brown can't.
> 
> One year rental. How is it not a salary dump?


I didn't disagree that it there is a very favorable salary savings by getting rid of Tyson's ill-conceived boondoggle of a contract.

I disagree that it is ONLY a "salary dump."


----------



## jbulls

Is Greg Couch seriously advocating sending Tyson Chandler and Tyrus Thomas to the Hawks for Al Harrington? That would be a horrendous trade. We'd have to sign Harrington long term, we wouldn't save much more than a million a year, and we'd be losing Tyrus Thomas. This is worse than the New Orleans deal, IMO.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

kukoc4ever said:


> OK, are the reporters idiots this week or not? I can't keep it straight.


As always, it depends on whether you agree with them or disagree.

I merely point out that for all the handwringing going on here, it is odd that there doesn't seem to be many sports writers out there interested in, or critical of the trade. They talk about our signing Ben, call us contenders and then mention in passing that Chandler is probably gone.

EDIT:

I do see the Couch piece quoted above. He'd rather have someone other than Brown.


----------



## narek

Hanley said Pax, Skiles and company were at the Berto Center yesterday discussing what to do with Chandler. So they haven't made up their minds what to do. Hanley also said that there are people surprised there's a market for Chandler.

So as far as Hanley (on the Score right now) knows, no decision yet. Also, Hanley just mentioned that Tyson's working in California and not at the Berto Center (where just about everyone else is) isn't a thing in his favor.


----------



## kukoc4ever

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I disagree that it is ONLY a "salary dump."


Its the best salary dump available.

The reason this trade was made was to get rid of Chandler.


EDIT: I hope Hanley is right. Its a loyalty/honesty thing. As fans, we've invested in Cap Space for 3 years. Now, its only utilized when another asset is dumped. Shell Game.


----------



## ace20004u

narek said:


> Hanley said Pax, Skiles and company were at the Berto Center yesterday discussing what to do with Chandler. So they haven't made up their minds what to do. Hanley also said that there are people surprised there's a market for Chandler.
> 
> So as far as Hanley (on the Score right now) knows, no decision yet. Also, Hanley just mentioned that Tyson's working in California and not at the Berto Center (where just about everyone else is) isn't a thing in his favor.


I just read an article where Chandler was interviewed and said his plans are to be at the Berto August 1st to begin working out. I'm glad to hear that Pax & Skiles are still on the fence, hopefully they decide to hold onto Chandler for a while. And why wouldn't a 7foot pf who puts up Ben Wallace like #'s and is still young have a market? Color me confused.


----------



## Frankensteiner

ace20004u said:


> Chandler is basically Ben Wallace in pf form.


...which is why you don't really need 2 of them on the same team.



> already puts up #'s comparable to Wallace.


...more like put up #'s comparable to Wallace in one season out of five, which was also coincidentally his contract year.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

DaBullz said:


> In what sense is it a wash?


OK I lost a long response to this, and I will try to recreate.

Brown isn't an offensive juggernaut, but he is good for 9 ppg, compared to Chandler's 5.

You give up 2 boards and a block with Brown, but that isn't so much of a concern to me, playing next to Ben.

Brown shoots free throws in the mid-.800's, compared to Tyson's .500. That could be huge at the end of games. Having 2 big men out there that can't hit the side of a barn from the charity stripe could easily cost us games.

Brown is old. Tyson is young. Hopefully, PJ can drag his body up and down the court. He was able to do it 31 minutes per game last year. We're counting on one more year of gaas.

Brown isn't prone to foul trouble. Chandler is.

Brown is able to be Big Daddy Louisiana for Tyrus. Chandler could show Thomas some nifty cheat codes on NBA2K6.

Overall, I see what we lose with Tyson and what we gain with Brown and I see or less a wash, with much of what we lose in Chandler softened by the addition of Big Ben.

Hey, if the deal doesn't go down, then Welcome Back Tyson. Go get 'em,Tiger.

I'm just not all that freaked out if he ends up gone and we end up with Smith and Brown.


----------



## Frankensteiner

Ron Cey said:


> K4E, I don't dispute in the least that the dumping of Chandler's contract is a significant factor in this deal. I just don't consider it the only factor.
> 
> The portion of it that is a salary dump doesn't bother me in the least.
> 
> I'm not one of those fans that expects my team to throw fiscal responsibility out the window. I don't think its reasonable at all unless you root for the Knicks. I expect my team to wisely pay for a winner and contend. That, to me, is precisely what the Bulls have been building toward, and now are achieving, under Reinsdorf/Paxson/Skiles.


Salary dumps are only bad moves when they have a negative impact on the court. This trade is a net positive, if anything, and does not at all hinder our chances at becoming a championship team.


----------



## theanimal23

If people say Tyson put up numbers just as good as Wallace, then, could you explain why he has not received any defense awards (NBA D-Teams, or DPOY consideration)? Just curious why Ben Wallace would, and Tyson wouldn't? Maybe b/c Ben Wallace can stay on the court and provide more of an impact? Maybe b/c he is a more disciplined and significantly better defender?

I don't think any one would suggest they are equals. Thats like the one thread recently saying how this year's Bulls are as good or better than the 72 win team.


----------



## kulaz3000

jbulls said:


> Is Greg Couch seriously advocating sending Tyson Chandler and Tyrus Thomas to the Hawks for Al Harrington? That would be a horrendous trade. We'd have to sign Harrington long term, we wouldn't save much more than a million a year, and we'd be losing Tyrus Thomas. This is worse than the New Orleans deal, IMO.


Forget about Al Harrington already. We trade Chandler for Harrington we'll end up being a bunch of 6'8 players team. We'll get squash by bigger and taller teams, espically teams such as Orlando..

Secondly, i hate this trade because it is to save money, and NOT to save cap. We are not doing this to save cap..i repeat NOT TO SAVE CAP!! We'll extend hinrich this summer for roughly 7-9 mil per. Then thats going to replace Browns expired contract next year. So techincally its cancels each other out. PLUS, we have 3 extensions to work on the following summer with Gordon, Deng and Noc. This deal is purely because Riensdorf doesn't want to go over the cap for a non championship team. Potentially yes. But it hasn't delievered yet, and untill we get one or get close to one, i don't see him wanting to go over... thats why this move will get done if it gets done.

But for crying out loud, we need some length. Yes yes, we need post scoring, and the whole Wallace and Chandler don't score much. But we still need height! We rid of Chandler, we have Wallace 6'8, Thomas 6'8, Noc 6'7, Sweetney 6'8. WHAT?!! People are going to wait for NY to stuff up again to get Oden? Give me a break, fat chance. Other than Oden, hardly any rookie centres every make an immediate impact, takes atleast 2-3 years so we'll have to patient AGAIN for him to get accoustomed to the leauge. OR YOU WANT TO TRADE FOR A 7 footer? Then we'll have to most definitly give up one of our core as BIGS even if they are less talented then smalls, they are valued double as much so we're going to have to give up one or two of our good players for a probable mediocore centre.

Reinsdorf, stop being cheap. Keep Chandler atleast for half the season, see how the teams goes. THEN consider trading him if things don't gell... if this trade happens for Brown for a one year lease, this will be one helluva tragic move. Yes, his Browns got height, but he'll only be here for one year, second his slow, prehistoric. We're meant to be a fast active defensive team..

Can't we live off Chandler and Wallaces 15-20 pts on offensive put backs and lobs? Thats more than enough offense from them. The rest of the players can step up!!

GIVE CHANDLER ONE MORE YEAR!


----------



## ace20004u

theanimal23 said:


> If people say Tyson put up numbers just as good as Wallace, then, could you explain why he has not received any defense awards (NBA D-Teams, or DPOY consideration)? Just curious why Ben Wallace would, and Tyson wouldn't? Maybe b/c Ben Wallace can stay on the court and provide more of an impact? Maybe b/c he is a more disciplined and significantly better defender?
> 
> I don't think any one would suggest they are equals. Thats like the one thread recently saying how this year's Bulls are as good or better than the 72 win team.


They aren't equals but they are close enough that at Tysons young age you shouldn't make Tyson a salary dump casualty.


----------



## kukoc4ever

theanimal23 said:


> I=Just curious why Ben Wallace would, and Tyson wouldn't? Maybe b/c Ben Wallace can stay on the court and provide more of an impact? Maybe b/c he is a more disciplined and significantly better defender?


There have been many good articles written about the problems with post season awards. I would not pay a lot of attention to that.

A large part of it has to do with the success of the Detroit Pistons. Put Wallace on the Hornets for the last 3 years and he's not winning those awards, IMO.

That being said, he's a great presence in the middle and certainly an upgrade over the Chandler of last year.


----------



## jbulls

theanimal23 said:


> If people say Tyson put up numbers just as good as Wallace, then, could you explain why he has not received any defense awards (NBA D-Teams, or DPOY consideration)? Just curious why Ben Wallace would, and Tyson wouldn't? Maybe b/c Ben Wallace can stay on the court and provide more of an impact? Maybe b/c he is a more disciplined and significantly better defender?
> 
> I don't think any one would suggest they are equals. Thats like the one thread recently saying how this year's Bulls are as good or better than the 72 win team.


The DPOY award is based largely on reputation and intangibles. A 22 year old playing on an upstart team just isn't going to get many votes. Wallace is also better defensively. Still, Chandler deserved more than he got from the voters in 04-05. Alonzo Mourning didn't get a DPOY until he was 29. Mutumbo was 31. Rodman was 28. Wallace was 28.

The youngest player to get the award anytime in the last 20 years or so was (I think) Ron Artest at 25. Thanks to his antics and cotroversial behavior Artest was able to establish a "defensive reputation" earlier than most. He's also a truly exceptional defender.


----------



## theanimal23

ace20004u said:


> They aren't equals but they are close enough that at Tysons young age you shouldn't make Tyson a salary dump casualty.


At this point (things could change), I don't see Tyson being consider for DPOY in his career. He just isn't disciplined or hard working. Ozibulls posted a video about Ben Wallace, the last video describes his work ethic. Tyson doesn't have that. And unless he develops that, he will never be an outstanding player. He won't reach the levels of Zo, Mutombo, Wallace, Hakeem, etc.

The kid doesn't work to improve his game. If he had any sense of intelligence, he would at least watch film and become a more disciplined defender. He's a bust, and it'll stay that way until he puts in the time and effort to be a true professional. There is no excuse for a kid who has been in the league for years to have an horrible start like that. No one was asking him to be Willie Green and play in a pickup game. Just to stay conditioned. You can run on a treadmill, hire a trainer and chef, and shoot hoops in your own backyard. I dunno how you can come in and not last more than 20 min on the court at the beginning of the season. 

In terms of the him being a salary dump. We are lucky to even have that. At this rate, the kid won't get off the bench. The kid could not start for most of the year, and for goodness sake, we had Malik Allen, an horrible Othella (compared to the 47 win team version), freakin Mike Sweetney, and LUKE! Not that all of those guys started, but if you could not land significant minutes on a team with those guys, thats saying something. And, there is no reason why a 7 footer needs to hide behind another big body. This isn't a linebacker needing a big NT. Centers don't always need the bulk. Few have had that in the history of the game.


----------



## kulaz3000

ace20004u said:


> They aren't equals but they are close enough that at Tysons young age you shouldn't make Tyson a salary dump casualty.


By the time it comes to Big Bens 3rd-4th year, Tyson and Tyrus should have stepped into the starting Center and Power Forward spots. I really hope Tyrus becomes the next Wallace with scoring. Plus you never know he could be like Deng and grow an inch or two... which will make him more of a pf.

I really hate Reinsdorf if they trade Chandler. Though its obvious that Paxson is Reinsdorf b*tch since his the owner, but Paxson should do a better job of convincing him that by the time Wallce career winds down that Chandler and Tyrus will be ready. Tyson has to just score roughly around 10 pts and he'll be fine. Because you know his good for around 10 boards and 2 blocks. Plus his a tall 7 footer who alters a tone of shots...

(sigh)

Thats enough about me of keep Chandler, im just couting down the days till his traded. Absolute travesty..


----------



## GB

Ron Cey said:


> I see them as being one of the 6 or so teams in the league that legitimately have a shot at winning their conference title.


I think we are conference contenders...I just do not know yet that we are good enough to be the league best.


----------



## kulaz3000

jbulls said:


> The DPOY award is based largely on reputation and intangibles. A 22 year old playing on an upstart team just isn't going to get many votes. Wallace is also better defensively. Still, Chandler deserved more than he got from the voters in 04-05. Alonzo Mourning didn't get a DPOY until he was 29. Mutumbo was 31. Rodman was 28. Wallace was 28.
> 
> The youngest player to get the award anytime in the last 20 years or so was (I think) Ron Artest at 25. Thanks to his antics and cotroversial behavior Artest was able to establish a "defensive reputation" earlier than most. He's also a truly exceptional defender.


Its a little like how Hinrich doesn't get defensive team recognistion either. Why? because he doesn't get the stats such as steals to prove it to the thick headed people who vote. Why doesn't he get steals? because his a great ON THE BALL defender and not a gambler that swipes and takes chances like Larry Hughes, whom i don't think is a great defender but not a bad one, he just seems better than he is because he gets steals because he gambles so much, a little like gerald wallace, a bad on the ball defender, but seems better than he is because he gambles on the defensive end and roams around the court leaving his own man to get blocks, again, not a bad defender but not as great as his stats seem. Voters get sucked in by stats just like many other fans, who don't get to see particular players on a constant basis like Hinrich. His an awesome on the ball defender, hardly ever jumps on pump fakes, is always glued to his apponents, and always defends the oppositions best scorers, no matter if they are taller or stronger, THEN his also asked to be the general and score. 

Hopefully with more attention to the bulls with Wallace people will recognize Hinrichs game more this year, espically his great defense.


----------



## GB

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Brown is able to be Big Daddy Louisiana for Tyrus. Chandler could show Thomas some nifty cheat codes on NBA2K6.


That would make a great sig...but in the current atmosphere, nahhh...


----------



## GB

You know...its not as if this argument is germane to the Bulls production on the court. It's about the future and about potential.

I don't think we'd move Tyson if we didn't have Tyrus on the roster to develop. Chandler, like it or not, is still more potential than production. He's had a chance in Chicago, and it may be that a change of scenery is needed. We've got another pogo stick who might actually develop some offense...


----------



## rwj333

narek said:


> Hanley said Pax, Skiles and company were at the Berto Center yesterday discussing what to do with Chandler. So they haven't made up their minds what to do. Hanley also said that there are people surprised there's a market for Chandler.
> 
> So as far as Hanley (on the Score right now) knows, no decision yet. Also, Hanley just mentioned that Tyson's working in California and not at the Berto Center (where just about everyone else is) isn't a thing in his favor.


That's a really, really, really interesting factor that everybody has kind of overlooked. Mike McGraw mentioned in his article that Paxson wasn't going to sign Wallace as recently as 2-4 weeks ago.

What changed Paxson's mind? Is Tyson not working hard enough?


----------



## kukoc4ever

GB said:


> I don't think we'd move Tyson if we didn't have Tyrus on the roster to develop. Chandler, like it or not, is still more potential than production. He's had a chance in Chicago, and it may be that a change of scenery is needed. We've got another pogo stick who might actually develop some offense...


Stock em deep and sell em cheap.


----------



## GB

kukoc4ever said:


> Stock em deep and sell em cheap.


Just win baby.

Winning is the best deo.

Winning creates chemistry.


----------



## paxman

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Its odd that in all the analysis of the Bulls' offseason I've read this week in the papers, SI, ESPN, etc., the talk is about the Bulls suddenly being contenders with the signing of Big Ben.
> 
> The Chandler for Brown trade gets mentioned somewhere near the bottom, without much comment, and certainly not with any hint of criticism or worry that it affects the Bulls' sudden annointment of contender status.
> 
> It is almost as if the world of sports journalism is in agreement that the trade is no big whoop.


that trade is on the frontpage of the nba section of espn.com


----------



## paxman

> Listen, this is an obvious salary dump. If everyone can't agree to that, then this place is worse than the house and senate.


it can't get any simpler.

once upon of time: ben got a huge contract. ben and tyson have similar games. 
tyson's contract is large. pj is 37. pj has one year left on his contract. the end.

what isn't clear about that? 


however, i'd say that the value of acquiring ben wallace is much bigger than the loss
of value of dumping tyson.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

paxman said:


> that trade is on the frontpage of espn.com


There is an Insider story about the potential trade. Can someone summarize it?


----------



## theanimal23

So what if it is a salary dump. If Tyson produced or showed his dedication to improve, we wouldn't be looking to ship him out for an expiring contract.

It seems like more people are sad that Tyson is leaving with than the arrival of Ben Wallace. I just don't get it. It's not like we are getting rid of our lone defensive presence.


----------



## GB

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> There is an Insider story about the potential trade. Can someone summarize it?


Nothing new.

Smiths father was told (by Tellem) that the trade will likely take place by C.O.B. on Friday.


----------



## paxman

GB said:


> You know...its not as if this argument is germane to the Bulls production on the court. It's about the future and about potential.
> 
> I don't think we'd move Tyson if we didn't have Tyrus on the roster to develop. Chandler, like it or not, is still more potential than production. He's had a chance in Chicago, and it may be that a change of scenery is needed. We've got another pogo stick who might actually develop some offense...


ridding of tyson is not the issue. dumping him for nothing we would have a year for now is.
better wait until feb to try to use him in a consolidating trade.


----------



## paxman

theanimal23 said:


> So what if it is a salary dump. If Tyson produced or showed his dedication to improve, we wouldn't be looking to ship him out for an expiring contract.


agreed that trading tyson is a result of his bad play, but that doesn't justify this lopsided trade.



> It seems like more people are sad that Tyson is leaving with than the arrival of Ben Wallace. I just don't get it. It's not like we are getting rid of our lone defensive presence.


i disagree here. you're in the tyson-pj thread here, of course we would talk about ben wallace less
here. i for one am much happier about this off season than angry.


----------



## SALO

narek said:


> Hanley said Pax, Skiles and company were at the Berto Center yesterday discussing what to do with Chandler. So they haven't made up their minds what to do. Hanley also said that there are people surprised there's a market for Chandler.
> 
> So as far as Hanley (on the Score right now) knows, no decision yet. Also, Hanley just mentioned that Tyson's working in California and not at the Berto Center (where just about everyone else is) isn't a thing in his favor.


He should fly to Chicago right now and flex his biceps all over the Berto Center. Show em the results of working out twice a day in LA all these months. :laugh: 

Seriously though, I agree him not being in Chicago working out with all the other guys isn't helping his cause right now.


----------



## Silvio Dante

Frankensteiner said:


> Salary dumps are only bad moves when they have a negative impact on the court. This trade is a net positive, if anything, and does not at all hinder our chances at becoming a championship team.


ABSOLUTELY! Well, said Frankensteiner!

Tyson's had five years (1, 2, 3, 4 & 5) to show what he can do. Over that time span, he morphed into a monster during the '05 1st Round Playoff series vs. Washington, and then wilted away last season. Losing Tyson from the lineup is not that big a deal. We're adding a quality professional and another kid with unbelievable skills and athleticism in JR Smith. Can Smith's attitude be turned? Maybe, maybe not ... but we'll soon find out. I've been told the only thing holding up an announcment is the crossing of the t's and dotting of the i's. As soon as that is completed, the trade will be announced.


----------



## The ROY

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> There is an Insider story about the potential trade. Can someone summarize it?


It's the same old stuff, nothing different than what we've already heard


----------



## Bulls96

I got a strong suspicion that trade with Hornets was geared toward getting an expired contract and ….SG, to fill a possible gap in case if Minnesota will agree exchange KG for Ben Gordon, Deng and PJ Brown. 

Now, if MT refused to trade their main asset, I don’t thing Pax will do it with Hornets…we don’t need JR Smith, if Gordon stays or unless Hornets will come up with better option.


----------



## The ROY

I just can't wait til this trade is over so we can see what the next move will be.

Paxson did say he wanted to bring in a vet guard to ease thabo's transition...but I'd hardly call Smith a vet...he is athletic as hell though.


----------



## paxman

The ROY said:


> I just can't wait til this trade is over so we can see what the next move will be.



*AMEN*


----------



## Bulls96

The ROY said:


> I just can't wait til this trade is over so we can see what the next move will be.
> 
> Paxson did say he wanted to bring in a vet guard to ease thabo's transition...but I'd hardly call Smith a vet...he is athletic as hell though.


Yep…this is another indication that Pax was preparing for the BG departure.


----------



## theanimal23

Ok, there was a thread saying Pax was on ESPN radio indicating that Tyson is staying put. I was posting a reply, but somehow it won't go through. maybe the thread got deleted?

Here is what I was going to say:



TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> They'll owe a new apology for every monster, All-Star/MVP-type performance Tyson turns in this year.
> 
> 
> **thumps chest and roars**


I am one of those posters that wants Tyson out. But if he remains here, I hope his gameplay makes me eat my words. That would be the best for the team. But, we'll see what happens. At this rate, he isn't going to be an all-star that he claims he will be this upcoming season.

Time will tell. Maybe Chandler's production goes up. Maybe his value goes down even more. But, this isn't changing my current position on Chandler. I'm disappointed that the Krause Era did not come to an end. I know we preach defense. But you also need some offense. I would love to find a post player with average defense (given that we got Ben) than have Tyson around. Given that, I know a lot of posters believe that we should trade Tyson for a more valuable piece, not PJ Brown. I think PJ is one hell of a role player, and will be more solid for us than Tyson. Granted it may be for a year. Again, he is trade bait at the deadline, and if luxury tax is the true reasoning behind the trade, I rather lose Tyson than the rest of the real 'core'. 

Pax, this is a big mistake, *if Tyson cannot elevate his game. *If he does play amazing, then I was wrong, and the Bulls will be very successful. 

Another Note: Most articles (CNNSI) think the Tyson trade is good. But their opinions count as much as ours (nothing).


----------



## LuolDeng

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2510218


----------



## ScottMay

KHinrich12 said:


> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2510218


Good god . . . it's official.


----------



## Ron Cey

ScottMay said:


> Good [edit] . . . it's official.


 :biggrin:


----------



## paxman

Ron Cey said:


> :biggrin:



:laugh:


----------



## theanimal23

You guys beat me to it!

Hell Yes! Tyson is outta here! :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: 

Ding Dong, the Krause Era just Ended! :cheers:

Who else is happy about this trade, like me? 

Man. I don't care if PJ is around for a year. We lose a highly paid backup who cannot/does not improve his game. He's had numerous chances. The downside for Tyson, it'll be hard to find as many direct flights to LA from NO than Chi. At least the weather is warmer there.


----------



## ScottMay

Nice dump.


----------



## rwj333

Paxson's first significant, bad move, imo. Hopefully he doesn't make any more.


----------



## kukoc4ever

Awful, awful move.

The Bulls became worse off today.


----------



## theanimal23

His first bad move was resigning Tyson to that horrible contract.


----------



## remlover

theanimal23 said:


> You guys beat me to it!
> 
> Hell Yes! Tyson is outta here! :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
> 
> Ding Dong, the Krause Era just Ended! :cheers:
> 
> Who else is happy about this trade, like me?
> 
> Man. I don't care if PJ is around for a year. We lose a highly paid backup who cannot/does not improve his game. He's had numerous chances. The downside for Tyson, it'll be hard to find as many direct flights to LA from NO than Chi. At least the weather is warmer there.


I'm with you theanimal. I'm all for this trade.

We did not regret the Jamal trade. We do not regret the Curry trade and we will definitely not regret this move.


----------



## GB

kukoc4ever said:


> The Bulls became worse off today.


We'll win < 42 games?


----------



## mizenkay

now that it's official we can continue the disgust/praise fest in that thread.


----------



## mizenkay

i locked this, then thought that's not a good idea.

it was suggested that i merge this into the official signing thread...for continuity purposes. but i think it's better to have a new thread.


----------

