# Garcia: No deals on horizon for Bulls



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

no direct quote from pax, however.





> "Now we make our run," Chandler said Tuesday after a two-hour Bulls practice at the Berto Center.
> 
> Refreshed from the All-Star break, Chandler and his teammates sounded confident about making a run at the playoffs in the season's final 30 games.
> 
> ...






http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...1bulls,1,6511347.story?coll=cs-home-headlines


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I like that Gordon doesn't want to leave. His comments are directed that way. None of this "I'm a professional, I'll play for anyone" stuff... he's too young for that.

Here's to him sustaining it through the rest of the season.

:cheers:


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Pro-Active.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

I hear Lawrence Funderburke is fit and tan and ready to solve the Bulls' big man problems.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> I hear Lawrence Funderburke is fit and tan and ready to solve the Bulls' big man problems.


The trading season is a wash.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Talk about letting the hot air out of our balloon:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_y...LYF?slug=nba-rumors022106&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

*One less Outlaw in Portland?:* Injured power forward Nene Hilario could wind up in Portland. According to the _Oregonian_, the Portland Trail Blazers have discussed a deal that would send Travis Outlaw and Joel Przybilla to the Denver Nuggets in exchange for Nene, who had his season cut short by a knee injury on opening night. 

*You can still call A.H. a Hawk*: For now, anyway. Forward Al Harrington is enjoying a career year. It also happens to be a contract year, which in Atlanta means team execs are crunching numbers. 

The Atlanta Hawks have several young forwards, and they may opt to build around Josh Smith, Josh Childress and Marvin Williams rather than pay the $45 million to $50 million it will take to sign Harrington. According to the _Atlanta Journal-Constitution_, the Hawks may deal Harrington to a contender in hopes of acquiring inside help or a veteran point guard.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)




----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> The trading season is a wash.


:laugh:


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> *One less Outlaw in Portland?:* Injured power forward Nene Hilario could wind up in Portland. According to the _Oregonian_, the Portland Trail Blazers have discussed a deal that would send Travis Outlaw and Joel Przybilla to the Denver Nuggets in exchange for Nene, who had


that really makes a ton of sense for potland, it would really not be good for us though. 

Portland should really make a push at trading either Joel or Theodore


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

We have absolutely no idea or indication whatsoever what is, or was, on the table for Paxson. We have absolutely no idea or indication whatsoever what Paxson has, or did have, on the table for other GMs.

But we should most definitely take this opportunity to blast our GM for not making hypothetical moves about which we have no evidence of their existence. 

Notwithstanding, the admittedly unverified, reports that the Bulls were just getting a bunch of low ball offers.

Good stuff. Steve Francis is available, evidently. Paxson should be trading for him. "Speed trading."


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Hustle said:


> that really makes a ton of sense for *potland*, it would really not be good for us though.


I don't know if this was a typo. But if it was, its the funniest damn typo I've ever seen.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> We have absolutely no idea or indication whatsoever what is, or was, on the table for Paxson. We have absolutely no idea or indication whatsoever what Paxson has, or did have, on the table for other GMs.
> 
> But we should most definitely take this opportunity to blast our GM for not making hypothetical moves about which we have no evidence of their existence.
> 
> ...


Everything is available for the right price.

Pryzbilla for Nene basically takes two of our mediocre but best choices for using Cap Space out of play, it would seem. <-- That is the price of inaction.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

More options are being taken out of the equation. It's not a good sign.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


>


I have to give you props on this one, classy pic.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

DaBullz said:


> Everything is available for the right price.
> 
> Pryzbilla for Nene basically takes two of our mediocre but best choices for using Cap Space out of play, it would seem. <-- That is the price of inaction.


I don't see how such a trade changes our prospects of obtaining either player as a free agent. They will still be UFA next summer and we will still have a chance to bid for their services. 

If anything Pryzbilla should be even more available, since his love of Portland is apparently not reciprocated.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Hey pax -

Call Cleveland.

Drew Gooden is likely to be moved if the Cavs can help themselves for THIS SEASON.

Hint: They need a PG who can hit an occaisional 3 pt shot (DUHON)

Hint #2: Larry Hughes is out for the season.

Hint #3: We're not winning 47 games this season - you can lose with the core or you can lose without 'em, but nothing is going to change without change itself.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AvCiUfh.rDAdTJ0avFSoZK.8vLYF?slug=cnnsi-narrowingtheiro&prov=cnnsi&type=lgns

Cleveland: Drew Gooden will be moved only if doing so will clearly improve the Cavaliers this season. After their second-half collapse last year, they can't afford to do anything that could put their playoff status at risk.

Atlanta: Al Harrington is having a terrific year, and the Hawks have made a habit of moving free-agent veterans (Rasheed Wallace, Antoine Walker) each of the past two years. But Harrington's price may be too high: Last month the Hawks refused to send him to Denver for Nen? and two No. 1 picks.

(Looks like Al is going to stay a Hawk, and be re-signed)

Chicago: The Bulls are likely to retain Tim Thomas' $14 million salary through the deadline in order to reap the salary-cap relief his expiring deal will offer this summer. In the meantime, don't be surprised if they pursue other options this week.

(Funderburke is waiting by his phone!)


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

McBulls said:


> I don't see how such a trade changes our prospects of obtaining either player as a free agent. They will still be UFA next summer and we will still have a chance to bid for their services.
> 
> If anything Pryzbilla should be even more available, since his love of Portland is apparently not reciprocated.


Seems to me that both teams would re-sign their newly acquired bigs.

Otherwise the trade makes no sense.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

DaBullz said:


> Everything is available for the right price.
> 
> Pryzbilla for Nene basically takes two of our mediocre but best choices for using Cap Space out of play, it would seem. <-- That is the price of inaction.


It's a trade of someone who has developed chronic tendinitis for someone who is recovering from knee surgery. Great trade.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Yeah, come on, Pax, make a deal already.

Who cares if you get ripped off?


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> (Looks like Al is going to stay a Hawk, and be re-signed)


I don't know, many reports have it that the Hawks are unlikely to fork out the 45-50M required to resign him, especially when they have Smith and Williams to boot.

Unless we magically do a trade in the offseason, we could almost walk out of this offseason with nothing to show for it.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

> Everything is available for the right price.


This is rank speculation. Nothing more. Not to mention that the "right price" for the other team might be the "wrong price" for what's good for the Chicago Bulls.



> Pryzbilla for Nene basically takes two of our mediocre but best choices for using Cap Space out of play, it would seem. <-- That is the price of inaction.


First, you are using rumors. Maybe wait until the trade deadline passes.

Second, I noticed something about this Pryz/Nene rumor. Its a center-for-center swap. The Bulls don't have any centers to trade.

Its entirely likely - just as likely as your allegation of "inaction" anyway - that Paxson has been burning up the phone to Denver with trade offers for Nene and they've said "We need a center in return and you don't have one where the salaries work" (Chandler).

I've come to expect this, but it still disappoints me every time I see rank speculation substituted for actual analysis in a way to jump the gun and pile on the GM. 

Simple fact is none of us have the first damn idea what's going on. We don't even have media reports this week.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Safeguard those assets, Gollum. So juicy sweet.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> We don't even have media reports this week.


The KneeKnee/Pryzbilla trade is reported by the Oregonian. By definition a media report.

Gooden being available is reported by SI. By definition a media report.

I don't think this is mere speculation. It also doesn't mean the deals ultimately go down.

Where there's smoke there's fire, though - the players named are likely available.

AND that includes Gordon, from the FIRST POST in this thread, which is a MEDIA REPORT.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*yawn*



...


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

DaBullz said:


> The KneeKnee/Pryzbilla trade is reported by the Oregonian. By definition a media report.
> 
> Gooden being available is reported by SI. By definition a media report.


About the Bulls, I mean. Of course there's media reports all over America during trade deadline week. 

There are no media reports suggesting what the Bulls are being offered or what they are offering. We have had numerous reports that Paxson has been fielding offers - lowball offers - and discussing trades. But we have absolutely no reports suggesting what Paxson may be "passing up".

The difference between what happens in threads like this, and what should happen, is you guys put up pictures of phones and allege that Paxson is "inactive" with absolutely no evidence to support it.

You don't see me in here writing "Paxson's probably falling asleep at his desk he's working so hard trying to get a trade done, but the offers he's getting just don't make sense." I don't say that because I can't support it. 

But, I know how it is. I like posting here enough, and I like the vast majority of all of you guys' posts enough, that I accept this as part of the process. I just feel the need to point out the intellectual fraudulence of it out every once in awhile in the pathetic hope that sometime it will stop.


----------



## Zeb (Oct 16, 2005)

Wouldn't it be great to be a Knicks fan where there's a trade every week! :banana:


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> About the Bulls, I mean. Of course there's media reports all over America during trade deadline week.
> 
> There are no media reports suggesting what the Bulls are being offered or what they are offering. We have had numerous reports that Paxson has been fielding offers - lowball offers - and discussing trades. But we have absolutely no reports suggesting what Paxson may be "passing up".
> 
> ...


The guy was able to trade away Jalen Rose and his horrendous contract and along with his so-called baggage, Jamal Crawford with his overpriced contract, Eddy Curry with his life threatening heart condition and big contract... I'm not rehashing the plus/minus of those deals, just pointing out that when he has his heart set on making a deal, he gets it done. We CAN look at the track record.

The pure speculation here is that Pax is falling asleep at his desk, or that any trade offers he's received don't make sense. But making deals that don't make sense has been his MO - there's that track record thing again.

If I were in Pax's shoes, I'd be looking at the rosters of the teams in the league and identifying the players I'd want to use Cap Space on. "Available" or not. And I'd go after 'em.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> The guy was able to trade away Jalen Rose and his horrendous contract and along with his so-called baggage, Jamal Crawford with his overpriced contract, Eddy Curry with his life threatening heart condition and big contract... I'm not rehashing the plus/minus of those deals, just pointing out that when he has his heart set on making a deal, he gets it done. We CAN look at the track record.
> 
> The pure speculation here is that Pax is falling asleep at his desk, or that any trade offers he's received don't make sense. But making deals that don't make sense has been his MO - there's that track record thing again.


And I suppose Luol Deng was delivered to us by a stork?


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

> The guy was able to trade away Jalen Rose and his horrendous contract and along with his so-called baggage, Jamal Crawford with his overpriced contract, Eddy Curry with his life threatening heart condition and big contract... I'm not rehashing the plus/minus of those deals, just pointing out that when he has his heart set on making a deal, he gets it done. We CAN look at the track record.


Those trades were made because he WANTED TO GET RID of those players (for various and differing reasons). There is difference between completing the sale when you are the seller, and completing a purchase as the hopeful buyer of something not for sale.



> The pure speculation here is that Pax is falling asleep at his desk, or that any trade offers he's received don't make sense. But making deals that don't make sense has been his MO - there's that track record thing again.


I'm not speculating that. I specifically said I don't say that because it IS speculation. I think you misread what I wrote. I admit to having absolutely no idea what Paxson is or isn't doing. That is, indeed, my whole point. 



> If I were in Pax's shoes, I'd be looking at the rosters of the teams in the league and identifying the players I'd want to use Cap Space on. "Available" or not. And I'd go after 'em.


And I suppose that, other than the fact that no trade has in fact been completed, that you have evidence beyond rank speculation that this is a strategy Paxson is refusing to employ.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> And I suppose Luol Deng was delivered to us by a stork?


Well, that pick DID sort of fall out of the sky, didn't it?

Phoenix was desperately clearing Cap Space to sign Kobe / Q / the sun / the stars / the moon. They wanted absolutely no part of their #1 pick and its salary. So Bryan Colangelo shopped it around, and IIRC he settled on the Bulls instead of the Celtics and one other team (whose name escapes me) because he thought the Bulls would be awful in 2004-2005 and the Suns would get a lottery pick out of it.

Or am I remembering it wrong?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Well, that pick DID sort of fall out of the sky, didn't it?
> 
> Phoenix was desperately clearing Cap Space to sign Kobe / Q / the sun / the stars / the moon. They wanted absolutely no part of their #1 pick and its salary. So Bryan Colangelo shopped it around, and IIRC he settled on the Bulls instead of the Celtics and one other team (whose name escapes me) because he thought the Bulls would be awful in 2004-2005 and the Suns would get a lottery pick out of it.
> 
> Or am I remembering it wrong?


If Denver made that trade before this season, they'd be looking at a potential lotto pick.

EDIT: In Pax's favor, he's drafted well... the same could be said for Isaiah Thomas, too, though.

Signing Nocioni was pretty good, too. But his other signings have been questionable at best: Sonaila, Funderburke, Linton Johnson, Ronald Dupree, et al.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

The article says the Bulls are not trading Gordon. The headline implies no trade period but no text within the article supports that.

And why are people taking a newspaper story as gospel? What is the accuracy of these type of stories?


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Well, that pick DID sort of fall out of the sky, didn't it?
> 
> Phoenix was desperately clearing Cap Space to sign Kobe / Q / the sun / the stars / the moon. They wanted absolutely no part of their #1 pick and its salary. So Bryan Colangelo shopped it around, and IIRC he settled on the Bulls instead of the Celtics and one other team (whose name escapes me) because he thought the Bulls would be awful in 2004-2005 and the Suns would get a lottery pick out of it.
> 
> Or am I remembering it wrong?


Why are you so sympathetic to the extenuating circumastances when Paxson makes a good trade?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> The article says the Bulls are not trading Gordon. The headline implies no trade period but no text within the article supports that.
> 
> And why are people taking a newspaper story as gospel? What is the accuracy of these type of stories?


I read it differently, apparently:



> With the league's trade deadline looming at 2 p.m. Thursday, several Bulls players were asked about possible trades, most notably Gordon.
> 
> *But as of Tuesday night, general manager John Paxson had no deal in the works involving Gordon, a source said.*
> 
> Gordon said he is not worried about trade speculation. He also said he hopes his recent scoring surge makes it too difficult for Paxson to trade him. He has scored 30 points or more four times this month, and his timing couldn't be better.


Someone's speculating about a Gordon deal, and to his face. The bolded part implies to me that Paxson has told other teams that Gordon might be available.



> *"Hopefully what it will do is make me more valuable to the team so I won't be traded," Gordon said. "It never hurts to play well."*
> 
> Unless a team is willing to part with a bona fide star in the 11th hour, which is highly unlikely, Gordon appears safe.


Seems to me that the reporter is saying what Pax wants for Gordon.

On top of all this, there's the circumstances. It could be "read" that Gordon has been starting to showcase him for a trade.

I'll go one further and suggest that Paxson wouldn't want to pay any of these guys for a sub .500 record (except for Hinrich), especially a short SG who might put up the numbers to deserve a big paycheck but who's not (yet?) good enough to carry the team to victories.


----------



## Zeb (Oct 16, 2005)

This forum couldn't be a better example of the glass-is-half-full/glass-is-half-empty viewpoints. :laugh:


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> If Denver made that trade before this season, they'd be looking at a potential lotto pick.
> 
> EDIT: In Pax's favor, he's drafted well... the same could be said for Isaiah Thomas, too, though.
> 
> Signing Nocioni was pretty good, too. But his other signings have been questionable at best: Sonaila, Funderburke, Linton Johnson, Ronald Dupree, et al.


How have his signings been questionable?

There were more than a handful fo people calling for Paxson's head when he chose not to re-sign both Linton, Dupree, and Austin at the time. Funderburke was necessary after Deng and Curry went down-there may have been a couple of candidates that made a bit more sense, but what if they did not want to play for the Bulls? We don't really know.

I think that the Songaila signing was excellent. Who else were we going to sign at his contract value that has his production? He did poorly in a starting role, although we can't really fault Skiles for trying him there as he was our best performer in the preseason. He just got in a bit over his head. He needs to improve his defense before being regular NBA starting material, and that's only if you pair him with a good rebounding Center to cover up his deficiencies a bit in that area.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

I think its perfectly reasonable to feel that Paxson is content to stand pat, based on the media reports we have and the interviews we have to listen to. He’ll listen to offers, and if one knocks his socks off he may move on it, but he seems happy to keep his young, cheap, more liquid assets and keep his options open. Liquidity, flexibility and options open are the key for Paxson, IMO. 

We’ve seen in the past with the Marshall/Rose trade that if Paxson wants to get a trade done, he can get one done in a hurry. Its not like he does not know how to pick up the phone.


We'll see how it plays out. I'm not a fan of waiting until the last minute and having to make a deal based on desperation, but we may be heading down that road again.

In the end, all that matters is the W-L record, playoff success, division titles, conference titles and NBA titles. If Paxson feels that standing pat is the best move, then there is not much we can do other than complain!


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Why are you so sympathetic to the extenuating circumastances when Paxson makes a good trade?


Oh, brother.

I know that individual posters who share an opposing viewpoint sometimes get conflated into one giant bogeyman -- I'm guilty of it myself.

But you're off-base on this one. I've given Paxson credit where it's due with respect to trades. I've acknowledged that short of outright cutting him, he had no choice but to trade Jalen Rose, even if it meant throwing in Marshall. I've even said that if you look past the decision to trade Curry, Paxson did pretty good in that deal as well. So let's not ascribe a pattern of behavior to me that doesn't really exist.

If you can argue that the Deng pick didn't fall in Paxson's lap, do so.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> How have his signings been questionable?
> 
> People were upset with Paxson not re-signing both Linton and Dupree at the time. Funderburke was necessary after Deng and Curry went down. There may have been a couple of candidates that made a bit more sense, but what if they did not want to play for the Bulls. We don't really know.
> 
> I think that the Songaila signing was excellent, his stint as a starter aside. Can't really fault him (or Skiles) though as he was our best performer in the preseason. He just got in a bit over his head. He needs to improve his defense before being a regular NBA starting material, and that's only if you pair him with a good rebounding Center to cover up his deficiencies a bit in that area.


Sorry, but this is just insane.

Linton and Dupree are 15th men in the NBA at best. They were horrible on a horrible 23 win team.

Songaila is my least favorite bull. He puts up good numbers, but he's so unathletic he drags the rest of the team's play down with him.

I'm OK with Songaila on the team as the 2nd big man off the bench. But I also think if he were really good that Sacto would have wanted to keep him.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> I think its perfectly reasonable to feel that Paxson is content to stand pat, based on the media reports we have and the interviews we have to listen to. He’ll listen to offers, and if one knocks his socks off he may move on it, but he seems happy to keep his young, cheap, more liquid assets and keep his options open. Liquidity, flexibility and options open are the key for Paxson, IMO.
> 
> We’ve seen in the past with the Marshall/Rose trade that if Paxson wants to get a trade done, he can get one done in a hurry. Its not like he does not know how to pick up the phone.
> 
> ...



Would you rather a guy let it be known that he does not need to make a trade or would you rather that he release information all over the press about how desperate he is to make a deal? Which stratagy do you think would put him in better position to get a good deal?


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

Oh look. A thread bashing Pax for things he hasn't said or done and yet things are being attributed to him to which there is absolutely no basis for them. What are the odds of this happening?

Hey Penguin, I applaud your attempt at trying to instill even the slightest bit of integrity to this thread, but you had to know it was a lost cause before you even began. Wait till after 3pm tomorrow and watch the vultures descend. It is somewhat comforting to know that there are such constants in life. Death. Taxes. Folks who'll villify a person whether he/she does something or doesn't do something regardless of knowledge or facts. It's kinda like a warm blanket. 

Carry on!


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Well, that pick DID sort of fall out of the sky, didn't it?
> 
> Phoenix was desperately clearing Cap Space to sign Kobe / Q / the sun / the stars / the moon. They wanted absolutely no part of their #1 pick and its salary. So Bryan Colangelo shopped it around, and IIRC he settled on the Bulls instead of the Celtics and one other team (whose name escapes me) because he thought the Bulls would be awful in 2004-2005 and the Suns would get a lottery pick out of it.
> 
> Or am I remembering it wrong?


Proactive.

If Paxson was sipping lattes with Skiles talking about their former NBA days while the phone was collecting cob webs, I doubt the Bulls would have been involved in that deal.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> Would you rather a guy let it be known that he does not need to make a trade or would you rather that he release information all over the press about how desperate he is to make a deal? Which stratagy do you think would put him in better position to get a good deal?



Certainly you don't want to lay all your cards on the table.

But, I'm of the opinion that Paxson does not really want to make a deal and is content to stand pat, so it does not really matter.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Oh, brother.
> 
> I know that individual posters who share an opposing viewpoint get conflated into one giant bogeyman sometimes -- I'm guilty of it myself.
> 
> ...


You need to give Paxson credit for making this deal, Scott. Whether the trade was initiated by him or Collangelo, whatever, he made a good trade, didn't he? It must have taken a little bit of vision to see that the Bulls needed a shot in the arm right away as opposed to a year down the line in a different draft class. Does it really matter how easy it is to make the right decision? 

But I should have worded my last post differently. You have given Paxson credit with regards to other trades. I just think you're not giving him any credit in this situation, and you should. The franchise is in better shape because he accepted this trade.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

Ron Cey said:


> We have absolutely no idea or indication whatsoever what is, or was, on the table for Paxson. We have absolutely no idea or indication whatsoever what Paxson has, or did have, on the table for other GMs.
> 
> But we should most definitely take this opportunity to blast our GM for not making hypothetical moves about which we have no evidence of their existence.
> 
> ...


Paxson criticsm based on speculation and rumor is par for the course. 

Maybe I'll give credit to Paxson for drafting Wade or Carmelo because, afterall, there was speculation of trading up. Granted, the Bulls don't have either player, yet I'm tempted to chalk that one up as a great job by Pax.

As this trade deadline approaches, I'm personally waiting for the Deng-for-Peja trade that was mentioned a few months ago. It's undeniable, as it was explained to me, that Paxson has to have interest in Stojakovic.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

i have to laugh at the revisionist stuff going on around the deng pick/trade. 

i was still pretty new here and broke the story on the board after seeing it on espn. 

it was one big praise the almighty pax thread - cause he done good.

excitement ruled the night. would he draft iggy or deng? didn't matter cause we got another pick and pax was a "genius" for making the deal. 

doesn't matter how he did it. he did it. and credit, like DMD said, is due.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Certainly you don't want to lay all your cards on the table.
> 
> But, I'm of the opinion that Paxson does not really want to make a deal and is content to stand pat, so it does not really matter.


And you base that opinion on information Paxso chooses to release. You don't know what Paxson is willing or not willing to do. Neither do I. But the difference is that I don't draw a conclussion from fluff Paxson release to the press.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> If Denver made that trade before this season, they'd be looking at a potential lotto pick.
> 
> EDIT: In Pax's favor, he's drafted well... the same could be said for Isaiah Thomas, too, though.
> 
> Signing Nocioni was pretty good, too. But his other signings have been questionable at best: Sonaila, Funderburke, Linton Johnson, Ronald Dupree, et al.



I don't think one can characterize the Songaila signing as questionable.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> You need to give Paxson credit for making this deal, Scott. Whether the trade was initiated by him or Collangelo, whatever, he made a good trade, didn't he? It must have taken a little bit of vision to see that the Bulls needed a shot in the arm right away as opposed to a year down the line in a different draft class. Does it really matter how easy it is to make the right decision?
> 
> But I should have worded my last post differently. You have given Paxson credit with regards to other trades. I just think you're not giving him any credit in this situation, and you should. The franchise is in better shape because he accepted this trade.


I'm not not giving Paxson credit. I'll give him credit for picking up the phone and dealing with a GM who was caught between a rock and a hard place. I'll give him credit for selecting a player whose become my favorite Bull and the one who I feel has the best two-way potential of anyone on the roster. I'll give him credit for convincing the Chairman to cough up an extra $3 million in cash.

I won't give him credit for "vision" -- after a 23-win season where Ron Dupree and LJIII were our go-to small forwards, we needed talent everywhere. And I won't give him credit for working hard to make the Phoenix deal happen -- it was Phoenix that shopped the pick and it was a no-brainer for us. Again, there were other teams anxious to make the deal, but Phoenix chose us because they felt our short-term prospects were dimmest.

Selecting Deng was a great move. But the opportunity to select Deng did, in fact, basically fall out of the sky.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> As this trade deadline approaches, I'm personally waiting for the Deng-for-Peja trade that was mentioned a few months ago. It's undeniable, as it was explained to me, that Paxson has to have interest in Stojakovic.


I guess you didn't see this?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2304942

Another GM beat Paxson to the punch.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

Hanley was talking about the lack of news here on trades this morning - he thinks the less said here, the more likely somethings going down. He also said the New York press has all the rumors because they're trying to one up each other. 

He's also of the opinion waiting to this summer makes sense.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> Sorry, but this is just insane.
> 
> Linton and Dupree are 15th men in the NBA at best. They were horrible on a horrible 23 win team.
> 
> ...


I'm with you on your assessment of Linton and Dupree overall. In their defense, they were signed as 14th/15th men not as a FA who was going to turn the franchise around (Mercer/ERob). How can you knock a GM who signed a 14th/15th man to that role? The point is that they weren't expected to make a difference, so how is that a knock on Pax? I like that he rolled the dice and tried to find a diamond in the rough instead of signing some washed up Vet during the rebuilding process. That would be like calling for Paxson's head because Pargo or Malik Allen aren't Arenas and Brad Miller.

Paxson keeps finding all these diamonds in the rough type of guys. Guys not in the NBA that probably should be on some team. He finally scored big with the Duhon selection.

I think Songaila is terrific off the bench, and could eventually blossom into a starter if he improves. He doesn't make much sense to start on our team, but his skills are definately an asset to us offensively in our pick and roll scheme.

As far as your unathletic comment, there are plenty of productive not-very-athletic guys. Duncan, Yao, Brad Miller, Jamison, and Okur all come to mind off the top of my head.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

ScottMay said:


> I'm not not giving Paxson credit. I'll give him credit for picking up the phone and dealing with a GM who was caught between a rock and a hard place. I'll give him credit for selecting a player whose become my favorite Bull and the one who I feel has the best two-way potential of anyone on the roster. I'll give him credit for convincing the Chairman to cough up an extra $3 million in cash.
> 
> I won't give him credit for "vision" -- after a 23-win season where Ron Dupree and LJIII were our go-to small forwards, we needed talent everywhere. And I won't give him credit for working hard to make the Phoenix deal happen -- it was Phoenix that shopped the pick and it was a no-brainer for us. Again, there were other teams anxious to make the deal, but Phoenix chose us because they felt our short-term prospects were dimmest.
> 
> Selecting Deng was a great move. But the opportunity to select Deng did, in fact, basically fall out of the sky.



Oh, tiddlywinks.

If Phoenix was so desperate to get rid of this pick, then how come 20 other teams didn't get it rather than the Bulls? Oh, because the Bulls were going to be the worst team ev-ah the next year and Phoenix thought they'd get a number 1 pick. So when something good happens, it's only because we're so, so miserably bad, which is of course Paxson's fault.

This is remarkably tedious.

Say it's true that Phoenix wanted to trade with us, because they thought we'd be the worst team, and therefore their pick would be best. Shouldn't Paxson get some credit for confounding those expectations? Sheesh. If it's true that Phoenix thought we would be bad, Paxson thought we'd be good, and we were in fact good, then Pax deserves props.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> I guess you didn't see this?
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2304942
> 
> Another GM beat Paxson to the punch.


I wonder if the Pacers would trade Peja for Deng? What do you think?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> And you base that opinion on information Paxso chooses to release. You don't know what Paxson is willing or not willing to do. Neither do I. But the difference is that I don't draw a conclussion from fluff Paxson release to the press.



I disagree.

Based on nearly his 3 years on the job, reading nearly every press story and listening to nearly every interview, I think I have a reasonable take on the Paxson way.

We'll see what happens. My money is on standing pat. Do you disagree?

The whole "its impossible to form an informed opinion because you are not actually John Paxson and you don't know what really going on in his head" take is crap, IMO.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> I'm with you on your assessment of Linton and Dupree overall. In their defense, they were signed as 14th/15th men not as a FA who was going to turn the franchise around (Mercer/ERob). How can you knock a GM who signed a 14th/15th man to that role? The point is that they weren't expected to make a difference, so how is that a knock on Pax? I like that he rolled the dice and tried to find a diamond in the rough instead of signing some washed up Vet during the rebuilding process. That would be like calling for Paxson's head because Pargo or Malik Allen aren't Arenas and Brad Miller.
> 
> Paxson keeps finding all these diamonds in the rough type of guys. Guys not in the NBA that probably should be on some team. He finally scored big with the Duhon selection.
> 
> ...


LJII and Dupree combined for 40 minutes a game for the 2nd half of that 23 win season.

Let's just say I am not a fan of Songaila. And your list of "unathletic" players is ridiculous.

Duncan may be the best player in the NBA over the past bunch of seasons. Songaila ... is pretty much one of the worst players.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> I wonder if the Pacers would trade Peja for Deng? What do you think?


I'd rather Granger.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> I'm not not giving Paxson credit. I'll give him credit for picking up the phone and dealing with a GM who was caught between a rock and a hard place. I'll give him credit for selecting a player whose become my favorite Bull and the one who I feel has the best two-way potential of anyone on the roster. I'll give him credit for convincing the Chairman to cough up an extra $3 million in cash.
> 
> I won't give him credit for "vision" -- after a 23-win season where Ron Dupree and LJIII were our go-to small forwards, we needed talent everywhere. And I won't give him credit for working hard to make the Phoenix deal happen -- it was Phoenix that shopped the pick and it was a no-brainer for us. Again, there were other teams anxious to make the deal, but Phoenix chose us because they felt our short-term prospects were dimmest.
> 
> Selecting Deng was a great move. But the opportunity to select Deng did, in fact, basically fall out of the sky.



Your the best writer here but a double negative? Talk about falling out of the sky!! 

By the way, I agree with you on just about everything you have written here. Let me add, does Pax think "outside the box"? Occasionally, maybe. But champs are leaders, not followers. They do original things. Say what we want about Krause, but he was original. Pax really doesnt have an original bone in his body.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> I wonder if the Pacers would trade Peja for Deng? What do you think?


NO.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> I disagree.
> 
> Based on nearly his 3 years on the job, reading nearly every press story and listening to nearly every interview, I think I have a reasonable take on the Paxson way.
> 
> ...


So your opinion of Paxson would be changed if he "took a chance" and dealt Gordon, Deng and Tim Thomas to Goldan State for Baron Davis, Foyle and Fisher? Are you looking for him to just make a splash for the splashes sake? 

Perhaps the Knicks would be for fun for you right now?


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

jnrjr79 said:


> I don't think one can characterize the Songaila signing as questionable.


I'm not sure how one can characterize any of those signings as questionable. Linton, Dupree, and Funderburke were signed to league minimum deals to fill up roster spots.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> Pax really doesnt have an original bone in his body.


How long have you known the man?


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

DaBullz said:


> NO.


Haha. Sure.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Paxson thought we'd be good, and we were in fact good, then Pax deserves props.


The organization marketing campaign was "Through Thick and Thin" last season.

The season before, Paxson issued a playoff guarantee. No guarantee before last season.

I’m not going on a quote hunt, but I think its safe to say that Paxson was pleasantly surprised by being the 3 rd best team in the east last year.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> So your opinion of Paxson would be changed if he "took a chance" and dealt Gordon, Deng and Tim Thomas to Goldan State for Baron Davis, Foyle and Fisher? Are you looking for him to just make a splash for the splashes sake?


I'm not interested in Paxson making a foolish deal. I'd like PP on this team if available and would not mind acquiring Gooden if it increases our chances of making sure he's a Bull next season.

I think both you and I agree that Paxson has no problem doing nothing this trading deadline. 




> Perhaps the Knicks would be for fun for you right now?


No, that team is a complete mess. But, IT and Paxson have virtually identical winning percentages as GMs of their current clubs.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> How long have you known the man?


TD, give me a break. Where as Pax been daring, original, cutting edge, outside of the box? Where has he taken a chance? He has taken a very conservative approach to building the bulls, but unfortunately champs are made by leaders, proactive approaches rather then by conservative ones.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> I disagree.
> 
> Based on nearly his 3 years on the job, reading nearly every press story and listening to nearly every interview, I think I have a reasonable take on the Paxson way.
> 
> We'll see what happens. My money is on standing pat. Do you disagree?


But you are already working under the assumption that making a trade is beneficial to standing pat, even without any knowledge of what is and isn't available to the Bulls in trade.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> Haha. Sure.


Indy with Peja:
Jan 31 lost to Wizards 84-79
Feb 1 defeated Lakers 106-79
Feb 4 defeated Pistons 93-85
Feb 8 defeated Blazers 101-69
Feb 10 defeated Warriors 107-95
Feb 12 lost to Spurs 92-88
Feb 15 defeated Bucks 88-77
Feb 21 defeated Hornets 97-75

(They had a 5 game losing streak before he first suited up)


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> I disagree.
> 
> Based on nearly his 3 years on the job


Paxson inherited a historically bad team and in the two seasons following offseasons he's been the GM he's got a winning record. That, to me, is a tremendous achievement. Combining that history with the present youth of the team and the future assets (cap room, draft picks, young cheap players) really leads me to question the thinking that could make anyone to think that Paxson is doing a bad job.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> I'm not not giving Paxson credit. I'll give him credit for picking up the phone and dealing with a GM who was caught between a rock and a hard place. I'll give him credit for selecting a player whose become my favorite Bull and the one who I feel has the best two-way potential of anyone on the roster. I'll give him credit for convincing the Chairman to cough up an extra $3 million in cash.
> 
> I won't give him credit for "vision" -- after a 23-win season where Ron Dupree and LJIII were our go-to small forwards, we needed talent everywhere. And I won't give him credit for working hard to make the Phoenix deal happen -- it was Phoenix that shopped the pick and it was a no-brainer for us. Again, there were other teams anxious to make the deal, but Phoenix chose us because they felt our short-term prospects were dimmest.
> 
> Selecting Deng was a great move. But the opportunity to select Deng did, in fact, basically fall out of the sky.


We'll basically agree to disagree then, because I'm going to give Paxson credit for both the deal and the draft selection. 

And in the short term, I am willing to criticise Paxson for the Curry deal for the same reason: the effect, not the circumstances. We have taken a hit in record. However, this is not my final evaluation on this matter. I want to see what Paxson does with the pick and the cap space. So far the pick is higher than expected, but that too could turn around if Isaiah actually makes a good deal at the deadline. 

But this is part of what makes the trading deadline so much fun. And, as an aside, I love how you don't know if your team has made a trade even right after the deadline. I remember how shocked I was when the Payton/Allen deal came to public knowledge about a half hour after what was thought to have been a boring deadline.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> TD, give me a break. Where as Pax been daring, original, cutting edge, outside of the box? Where has he taken a chance? He has taken a very conservative approach to building the bulls, but unfortunately champs are made by leaders, proactive approaches rather then by conservative ones.


How have the Spurs or Pistons been "daring, original, cutting edge, outside the box?"


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> Songaila ... is pretty much one of the worst players.


wow. just, wow.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> Indy with Peja:
> Jan 31 lost to Wizards 84-79
> Feb 1 defeated Lakers 106-79
> Feb 4 defeated Pistons 93-85
> ...


Yep. This is not good! For two reasons. One, we want Indy to lose, and at one time it looked like we might be able to leapfrog them and steal their playoff spot. Two, Indy will probably grab Peja this offseason. That's one more asset off the table for us this summer, and even if he wasn't the best fit for us, it's a shame he's in our division now.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Yep. This is not good! For two reasons. One, we want Indy to lose, and at one time it looked like we might be able to leapfrog them and steal their playoff spot. Two, Indy will probably grab Peja this offseason. That's one more asset off the table for us this summer, and even if he wasn't the best fit for us, it's a shame he's in our division now.


That was without Jermaine O'Neal, too.

I do like Deng, but I don't think anyone would like to see the Bulls' record over that same period (3 wins).


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

DaBullz said:


> Indy with Peja:
> Jan 31 lost to Wizards 84-79
> Feb 1 defeated Lakers 106-79
> Feb 4 defeated Pistons 93-85
> ...


I wonder if the Pacers will be willing to shell out a brand new multi-year contract for Peja when it comes time to pay up in the off-season. 

For a team that is cost conscious, getting a good, young player on a rookie contract seems like a no-brainer.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> Paxson inherited a historically bad team and in the two seasons following offseasons he's been the GM he's got a winning record.


Paxson inherited a team that was on an upswng from the previous season, enough of one that he issued a playoff guarantee. The Bulls are currently a losing team and Paxson is a losing GM career wise.




> That, to me, is a tremendous achievement. Combining that history with the present youth of the team and the future assets (cap room, draft picks, young cheap players) really lead me to question the thinking that could lead anyone to think that Paxson is doing a bad job.


Three years on the job and we are a losing team. Over a 2 2/3 season span the Bulls have been a losing team.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

ViciousFlogging said:


> wow. just, wow.


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byposition?pos=PG,SG,G,GF,SF,PF,F,FC,C

Search for Songaila. He's way down on the page.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> But you are already working under the assumption that making a trade is beneficial to standing pat


No I'm not.

If Paxson traded Hinrich and Gordon for Tyrone Lue and Tony Delk, I think that would be a poor move.


If Gooden or PP are available, I'd expect Paxson to go after them all out.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

DaBullz said:


> Duncan may be the best player in the NBA over the past bunch of seasons. *Songaila ... is pretty much one of the worst players.*


Hold on a second. Do you actually believe that or are you just getting caught up in the moment of an intense thread?

You think Darius Songaila is one of the worst players in the NBA? 

On the hallowed "40 minute" stat he's more or less averaging 18/8/3 while shooting .494 from the field (for a high post player) and .817 from the line.


----------



## Zeb (Oct 16, 2005)

DaBullz said:


> http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byposition?pos=PG,SG,G,GF,SF,PF,F,FC,C
> 
> Search for Songaila. He's way down on the page.


Nice argument. :laugh:


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> Paxson inherited a team that was on an upswng from the previous season, enough of one that he issued a playoff guarantee. The Bulls are currently a losing team and Paxson is a losing GM career wise.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You can't possibly contend that Paxson is responsible for the record of the Bulls during the first half season or so he had the team. Do you?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> How have the Spurs or Pistons been "daring, original, cutting edge, outside the box?"


Do you actually need me to answer this?

Detroit, went for a guy that no one thought anyone could get along with, Rasheed Wallace. Would Pax do that? They drafted Darko before Carmello, didnt work, but would Pax do that? Traded away an allstar in Stackhouse for Hamilton, traded away Grant Hill for a no name in Ben Wallace, handed a 40 million contract to a career journeyman by the name of Chauncey Billups

San Antonio, drafted a guy that was so highly thought of that TNT didnt even have a video of him, Tony Parker. Drafted and basically created the trend of keeping guys overseas in Manu Ginobili. And their list goes on and on. Each of these teams have been willing to take chances, sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesnt, but they take chances. Their have been very little conservative behavior on eithers part. Heck, even Antonio McDyess of Detroit was considered chancey because of his injury. Now I ask, which of these above mentioned moves would Pax have done? Seriously?


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

mizenkay said:


> i have to laugh at the revisionist stuff going on around the deng pick/trade.
> 
> i was still pretty new here and broke the story on the board after seeing it on espn.
> 
> ...


Can you be more specific about what the "revisionist stuff" is?

No one's disputing that it wasn't a great pickup.

I guess people are disputing whether or not the Suns were trying to deal the #7 to anyone who would take it, which is staggering to me (and very revisionist).


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> No I'm not.
> 
> If Paxson traded Hinrich and Gordon for Tyrone Lue and Tony Delk, I think that would be a poor move.
> 
> ...


I still don't know if I'd go for a restricted free agent like Gooden all out -- unless he's Paxson's #1 guy to sign in the offseason with cap room. Even so, that cap hold would preclude us from investigating trading for star players from teams looking to dump salary (the "rumored" Jermaine O'Neal for Hinrich/Knicks pick) is an example of this type of deal that I mean). So unless we really, really like Gooden, I'd wait.

Pierce, that's another story. I still hope Paxson is knocking.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

ScottMay said:


> Can you be more specific about what the "revisionist stuff" is?
> 
> No one's disputing that it wasn't a great pickup.
> 
> I guess people are disputing whether or not the Suns were trying to deal the #7 to anyone who would take it, which is staggering to me (and very revisionist).



i'm just not going to characterize it as having "fallen out of the sky", that's all.

when the deal went down, nobody questioned HOW it happened.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> You can't possibly contend that Paxson is responsible for the record of the Bulls during the first half season or so he had the team. Do you?


When he stamped a playoff guarantee on that group, yah, he became responsible for their success, if his word/judgement is worth a damn.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

How quickly, exactly, would a good GM be able to rebuild a team to championship contention after 6 years of losing?


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> I guess people are disputing whether or not the Suns were trying to deal the #7 to anyone who would take it, which is staggering to me (and very revisionist).


I'm with you Scott. Your description of events is correct and it does mitigate against the "genius" of that trade.

But it was still check in the "good trade" column for Paxson, which I know you aren't disputing.

And this was part of the point when I responded to DaBullz' citing the Rose trade earlier as evidence that Paxson can simply make a trade if he wants to. When you are TRYING to get rid of something, its easy to find a taker.

When you are trying to pry something away from someone, its far more difficult.

Anyway, I think I'm done with this thread. Lets just try to make an effort and keep the posts intellectually honest, people. Please. It makes the board so much better.

There is still plenty to debate and discuss in the land of reality without the need for these trips to into the imaginary.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> I still don't know if I'd go for a restricted free agent like Gooden all out -- unless he's Paxson's #1 guy to sign in the offseason with cap room. Even so, that cap hold would preclude us from investigating trading for star players from teams looking to dump salary (the "rumored" Jermaine O'Neal for Hinrich/Knicks pick) is an example of this type of deal that I mean). So unless we really, really like Gooden, I'd wait.
> 
> Pierce, that's another story. I still hope Paxson is knocking.


I hope "stay flexible" pays off. I have my doubts. We'll see what happens.

I'd rather have Gooden right now, and have a much better chance on locking him up for the future, since that's the guy I think would be the best fit here from the available free agents.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> How quickly, exactly, would a good GM be able to rebuild a team to championship contention after 6 years of losing?


Are we contending for a championship right now?


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byposition?pos=PG,SG,G,GF,SF,PF,F,FC,C
> 
> Search for Songaila. He's way down on the page.


two spots below Micheal Finley, ahead of Andrew Bogut, Chris Duhon, Gary Payton, Raef Lafrentz (who you've repeatedly said would be a great addition to the team), Alonzo Mourning, James Posey, Antonio McDyess...

one of the worst players in the NBA? Really?


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> If Gooden or PP are available, I'd expect Paxson to go after them all out.


See, you qualify your statement with an "if" here, accepting the possibility that these players are not on the trading block. You didn't show the same discretion while posting a picture of Paxson's phone or when being critical of Paxson standing pat.

But even assuming these players are available, how do you know Paxson has the ability to acquire them with the assets from our roster? You don't. But based on your interpretations and assumptions of rumors, Paxson is a failure (or values flexibility/coward/has no vision/whatever) unless he actually acquires one of the players you seem to think is available.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> When he stamped a playoff guarantee on that group, yah, he became responsible for their success, if his word/judgement is worth a damn.


Once again, you have no idea what Paxson's motives where. Perhaps he was just trying to indicate to the team that he had faith in their ability. Are you telling me that a leader never twists the truth in order to have what he or she thinks will be a positive impact on performance? Are you saying that good coaches never psychologically pump up a player with words that may not be 100% accurate?

Honestly, I think you have an unrealistically high standard for a GM if you expect him to right a ship in half a season after that ship has been unseaworthy for 6 seasons.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> When he stamped a playoff guarantee on that group, yah, he became responsible for their success, if his word/judgement is worth a damn.


 :laugh:


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> When he stamped a playoff guarantee on that group, yah, he became responsible for their success, if his word/judgement is worth a damn.


Well, I'm of the belief that we ARE going to make the playoffs.

But somehow, something tells me that even if we did make the playoffs, you won't be satisfied, and that we'll hear something about getting a cruddy 8th seed just to get demolished by Detroit in the 1st round.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

Showtyme said:


> Well, I'm of the belief that we ARE going to make the playoffs.
> 
> But somehow, something tells me that even if we did make the playoffs, you won't be satisfied, and that we'll hear something about getting a cruddy 8th seed just to get demolished by Detroit in the 1st round.


You mean sort of how he referred derisively to our playoff appearance last summer because we lost in 6 games while missing 2 starters? :angel:


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

ViciousFlogging said:


> one of the worst players in the NBA? Really?


Obviously not.

However, if we take a step back from "Pax Sux" / "Pax Rulz", is it fair to say that on a team lacking in inside presence, Songaila's been underwhelming as a power forward?

I love having a PF who seemingly hits every single open J he takes. But his defensive rebounding and (especially) shot-blocking numbers are an embarrassment, he's not a great one-on-one defender, and he offers very little inside presence on the offensive end beyond the occasional put-back.

If he turns down his player option, I hope we amicably part ways. He's not worth more than 2 or 2.5 million a year.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> Do you actually need me to answer this?
> 
> Detroit, went for a guy that no one thought anyone could get along with, Rasheed Wallace. Would Pax do that? They drafted Darko before Carmello, didnt work, but would Pax do that? Traded away an allstar in Stackhouse for Hamilton, traded away Grant Hill for a no name in Ben Wallace, handed a 40 million contract to a career journeyman by the name of Chauncey Billups


I've explained before that I don't think the Rasheed Wallace trade was a great risk at all. Darko had no effect on the Pistons becoming a winning team, so regardless of your view of that pick, it's pointless to bring up in discussion of how winning teams must be cutting edge. Stackhouse was traded because he didn't get along with Carlisle, IIRC, but maybe I'm wrong on that. Wallace was acquired in a sign & trade deal. Grant Hill was going to Orlando regardless, so Dumars got the best talent he could get. I'm sure he'd rather have kept Hill instead of Wallace at the time. Billups was a starter in Minnesota, Detroit needed a starter at point guard, so they signed him to a MLE contract. Seems like standard operating procedure there. Don't get me wrong, though, with the exception of the Darko pick, these were all great moves by Dumars with great talent evaluation involved. I just don't think they were outside the box or cutting edge moves as you would classify them. 



> San Antonio, drafted a guy that was so highly thought of that TNT didnt even have a video of him, Tony Parker. Drafted and basically created the trend of keeping guys overseas in Manu Ginobili.


So basically the Spurs got lucky with Duncan, then drafted well and signed an Argentinian. Seems like things Paxson is doing only minus the getting lucky on Tim Duncan part. And Manu was never drafted by the Spurs, he was signed as a free agent, much like Noc.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Any good gm talks about playoffs. I have yet to see any gm put together a team and say, " wait until next year." 

We are 2 games out of the playoffs. Not exactly an impossible task. Season goes on for two more months.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

ScottMay said:


> Obviously not.
> 
> However, if we take a step back from "Pax Sux" / "Pax Rulz", is it fair to say that on a team lacking in inside presence, Songaila's been underwhelming as a power forward?


He's been overwhelming considering how much we're paying him. Underwhelming as a starting PF? Sure. As the first big off the bench? Not in my opinion. I am hardly saying he's the biggest steal of the century here (PAX RULZ!!), but he's played well for us and was a solid signing, especially at the price. 

I just couldn't let it stand when he was deemed one of the worst players in the NBA. Seemed like an 
"agenda" comment on its face.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

truebluefan said:


> Any good gm talks about playoffs. I have yet to see any gm put together a team and say, " wait until next year."
> 
> We are 2 games out of the playoffs. Not exactly an impossible task. Season goes on for two more months.



Well one GM did and lost his job, Babcock of Toronto basically said no playoffs this year.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> If he turns down his player option, I hope we amicably part ways. He's not worth more than 2 or 2.5 million a year.


Judging players' worth based on contract (or lottery position, as you've mentioned with Aldridge) is a method of evaluation that wasn't extended to some players we seemed to have lost to New York.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> I've explained before that I don't think the Rasheed Wallace trade was a great risk at all. Darko had no effect on the Pistons becoming a winning team, so regardless of your view of that pick, it's pointless to bring up in discussion of how winning teams must be cutting edge. Stackhouse was traded because he didn't get along with Carlisle, IIRC, but maybe I'm wrong on that. Wallace was acquired in a sign & trade deal. Grant Hill was going to Orlando regardless, so Dumars got the best talent he could get. I'm sure he'd rather have kept Hill instead of Wallace at the time. Billups was a starter in Minnesota, Detroit needed a starter at point guard, so they signed him to a MLE contract. Seems like standard operating procedure there. Don't get me wrong, though, with the exception of the Darko pick, these were all great moves by Dumars with great talent evaluation involved. I just don't think they were outside the box or cutting edge moves as you would classify them.
> 
> 
> 
> So basically the Spurs got lucky with Duncan, then drafted well and signed an Argentinian. Seems like things Paxson is doing only minus the getting lucky on Tim Duncan part. And Manu was never drafted by the Spurs, he was signed as a free agent, much like Noc.



Manu was drafted, last pick in the draft. And then San Antonio basically created the leaving a guy over there for a few years until they are ready. Some people think Krause did that with Kukoc, maybe he did, but Kukoc didnt want to come. San Antonio did it again this past draft with Mahinmi. 

And again I ask, would Pax trade for a guy like Rasheed Wallace? Honestly, please answer this.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> Well one GM did and lost his job, Babcock of Toronto basically said no playoffs this year.


No wonder he is gone. I should have said any _good _gm. ;-)


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> If he turns down his player option, I hope we amicably part ways. He's not worth more than 2 or 2.5 million a year.


I think Darius might be worth a little more than that, ScottMay. However, if he opts out, and we want to resign him, we better not do it until the end of the summer.

Songalia produces, in under 22 minutes a game:

9.4 points
4 rebounds

on:

49% shooting
40% from 3 (and one 3 pointer that sent us to OT in a game we won)
82% from the free throw line

Songaila is not a good defensive player, I'll give you that. I will again remind everyone that he's taller than listed. He was measured at 6' 9.5" with shoes before his draft. So he's not even as undersized as he is billed as.

Songaila is not a starting quality player on most teams. But I'm happy we have some kind of decent offensive player as a big this year. Sweetney looked like he could be that guy, especially with Darius' slow start, but over the course of the season, Darius has been the more productive player. 

I have not really understood the vitriol Songaila has received from some this year, especially considering his salary.

edit: I should add that Songaila had better not be our long term answer at PF. I do like him off our bench though, and I wish we could have him and not Sweetney based on what I've seen thus far this season. 

Also, ScottMay, your Songaila analysis does not qualify as virtriol IMO. I was not referring to you.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> And again I ask, would Pax trade for a guy like Rasheed Wallace? Honestly, please answer this.


That's a tough one, cases can be made for and against, but I think when it comes down to it, if it improves the team I think he would.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

i like Songailia. Picking him up was a good move, can not be denied, argued.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

step said:


> That's a tough one, cases can be made for and against, but I think when it comes down to it, if it improves the team I think he would.



im 90% certain he wouldnt. He boxed himself into a box with all this right way crap. Rasheed isnt a right way type, but he is a winner. He eliminated about 80% of the NBA with that right way mantra.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> And again I ask, would Pax trade for a guy like Rasheed Wallace? Honestly, please answer this.


If he had a 50 win team with clearly defined leadership, a Hall of Fame coach, and the player acquired was on an expiring contract (like Wallace was when traded to Detroit), I think he'd make that deal.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

rlucas4257 said:


> im 90% certain he wouldnt. He boxed himself into a box with all this right way crap. Rasheed isnt a right way type, but he is a winner. He eliminated about 80% of the NBA with that right way mantra.


Larry Brown, coach of the Pistons, invented the "right way." But please, go on making more outlandish statements.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

on that 23 win team, per 40 minutes:

Lonny Baxter
16.3 PPG
9.5 RPG
.551 FG%

Marcus Fizer
19.5 PPG
10.9 RPG


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Re: the assumption the Pax only will get a "right way" player. How could Gordon coming out of college be considered a right way player? He was a poor defender, careless and sloppy at times and had an issue with domestic violence. And he was Paxson's highest draft pick. 

I think Paxson single-minded persuit of the mythical right way player is very overstated by his critics.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

this has absolutely nothing to do with this thread


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> Judging players' worth based on contract (or lottery position, as you've mentioned with Aldridge) is a method of evaluation that wasn't extended to some players we seemed to have lost to New York.


I wouldn't confuse disdain for the 2006 FA class with disdain for Cap Space.

If we were making a run at Amare, LeBron, Wade, Bosh, etc., I'd have a much different opinion of the financial flexibility gained in those trades.

But I'd much rather have Eddy Curry for six years @ $60 million than LaMarcus Aldridge and Joel Przybilla for five years @ $50 million.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> But I'd much rather have Eddy Curry for six years @ $60 million than LaMarcus Aldridge and Joel Przybilla for five years @ $50 million.


My point was that if Darius Songaila isn't worth more than $2.5 million annually, there is no way in the world Eddy Curry is worth $60 M over a 6 year period.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

I would rather have Lamarcus Aldridge than Eddy Curry, but I agree with ScottMay about the free agent class this summer. I could care less about Pryzbilla, Harrington, or Nazr Mohammed. The only person I could see really helping our team is Drew Gooden.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

unBULLievable said:


> this has absolutely nothing to do with this thread


right on


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> My point was that if Darius Songaila isn't worth more than $2.5 million annually, there is no way in the world Eddy Curry is worth $60 M over a 6 year period.


Songaila vs. Curry is such an apples-and-oranges comparison that it doesn't warrant further discussion. Argue all you want that Curry is overpaid, but don't use my observation that I wouldn't pay more than 2.5 million to a 28-year-old jump-shooting power forward who doesn't block shots, doesn't get to the line, doesn't score inside, doesn't guard anyone, and doesn't defensive rebound as support for your cause.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> Songaila vs. Curry is such an apples-and-oranges comparison that it doesn't warrant further discussion. Argue all you want that Curry is overpaid, but don't use my observation that I wouldn't pay more than 2.5 million to a 28-year-old jump-shooting power forward who doesn't block shots, doesn't get to the line, doesn't score inside, doesn't guard anyone, and doesn't defensive rebound as support for your cause.


Well, some of those deficiencies apply to Curry, as well...although he is gets paid a lot more.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Songaila vs. Curry is such an apples-and-oranges comparison that it doesn't warrant further discussion. Argue all you want that Curry is overpaid, but don't use my observation that I wouldn't pay more than 2.5 million to a 28-year-old jump-shooting power forward who doesn't block shots, doesn't get to the line, doesn't score inside, doesn't guard anyone, and doesn't defensive rebound as support for your cause.


As opposed to a 7ft. center who can't seem to get more than six boards a game. Is foul prone. A turnover machine. A horrendous shot blocker - especially given his size. Is wholly incapable of recognizing a double-team and making a club pay for doubling down. Disappears for long stretches during games. Etc. etc. etc.

I'd also hazzard a guess that if you went with your numbers and compared both players (Curry at $10 mil and Songaila at $2.5 mil) that their production per million $ might not be what you want it to be.

But why let your argument get in the way of your argument.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> Songaila vs. Curry is such an apples-and-oranges comparison that it doesn't warrant further discussion.


Is that because you wouldn't have an argument?

Curry and Songaila are different players for sure, but if we're going to evaluate keeping a player based on salary (and wheter or not a player is overpaid) for one player, why wouldn't we do that for every other player?

Similarly, in regards to LaMarcus Aldridge, if you question his selection based on the relative value or position of the draft pick, why not question the Curry signing based on the relative value of his contract?


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> Is that because you wouldn't have an argument?


No, I think there's an excellent argument. I think we all know what's on the dance card; I was hoping to spare everyone another go-round.



> Curry and Songaila are different players for sure, but if we're going to evaluate keeping a player based on salary (and wheter or not a player is overpaid) for one player, why wouldn't we do that for every other player?
> 
> Similarly, in regards to LaMarcus Aldridge, if you question his selection based on the relative value or position of the draft pick, why not question the Curry signing based on the relative value of his contract?


I'm not sure why you keeping returning to the theoretical. My opinion of the opportunity cost of Curry's contract is based largely on the poor caliber of available free agents. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put that.

I don't understand your question about Aldridge. Some years "Driving Miss Daisy" wins Best Picture; others it's "On the Waterfront." The Knicks' pick doesn't have the value it would most years, but there's not much we can do about that.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

ScottMay said:


> I'm not sure why you keeping returning to the theoretical. My opinion of the opportunity cost of Curry's contract is based largely on the poor caliber of available free agents. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put that.


So why are you so against paying Songo more than $2.5M? And if you answer that the available free agents are better than Darius, just note the Bulls would still have a large amount of cap space even if they gave Songaila something in the neighborhood of a $4M salary. I'm assuming you think Darius isn't worth more than $2.5 M based predominantly on his talent as a player, right?



> I don't understand your question about Aldridge. Some years "Driving Miss Daisy" wins Best Picture; others it's "On the Waterfront." The Knicks' pick doesn't have the value it would most years, but there's not much we can do about that.


Point is, if Aldridge can put up 14/6, of which there seems to be little doubt, then why is he a questionable selection at the top of a draft while dishing out $60M to another 14/6 player isn't?

And please don't try to play this off as a Curry discussion. This is about your discrepancy of evaluation of past and future team moves.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Frankensteiner said:


> I'm assuming you think Darius isn't woth more than $2.5 M based predominantly on his talent as a player, right?


Based on his talent as a player relative to his position, based on his talent as a player relative to our team's needs, and based on the chance that he can improve significantly (this is close to 0% imo). 



> Point is, if Aldridge can put up 14/6, of which there seems to be little doubt,


Whoa, whoa, whoa. I think there's CONSIDERABLE doubt that a guy like Aldridge can come in and put up those kinds of numbers on a winning team. If I didn't have those doubts, I'd be clamoring for us to draft him.



> And please don't try to play this off as a Curry discussion. This is about your discrepancy of evaluation of past and future team moves.


See above -- no discrepancy. I do not now nor have I ever seen a single player on the horizon who can neatly replace the things that Curry did for us playing the second-most mpg on a 47-win team.


----------



## Zeb (Oct 16, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> See above -- no discrepancy. I do not now nor have I ever seen a single player on the horizon who can neatly replace the things that Curry did for us playing the second-most mpg on a 47-win team.


There's a K4E quote if I ever saw one.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Zeb said:


> There's a K4E quote if I ever saw one.


We're the same person. 

Oh, and I hate white players.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

Zeb said:


> There's a K4E quote if I ever saw one.


ha. I agree with ScottMay to a point, though. Players as gifted at scoring in the low post as Curry are not easy to find. My hope is that with the draft pick we acquired in that trade along with the added cap space, we find a player or players who, though they may not be as much of a low post bull as Curry offensively, more than make up for him in other ways such as defense and rebounding while at least providing some of the interior offense we lost. The jury will be out on that until we see what the pick and free agency bring in.


----------

