# Crawford: ' It's the same thing every year'



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> "Maybe they did it to protect themselves in case they lose me in free agency," Crawford said from Seattle, where he watched the Bulls select Connecticut guard Ben Gordon with the third pick of the draft. "I'm cool with it. It's the same thing every year, so I wasn't surprised."
> --
> "I'm open to anything, but my first choice is Chicago," Crawford said. "Ben, Kirk and I can exist together. I like Ben's game. I liked him in college."
> 
> ...


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...lsbits,1,4352133.story?coll=cs-home-headlines


----------



## comptons (May 30, 2002)

Good statements by JC...

JC and Ben could give opposing guards nightmares... It really would be nice if they could get the opportunity to prove it


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

If Crawford did come back(and you know 1) he won't and 2) paxson won't bring him back) one of Pax's boys will be sitting on the bench. Crawford has kind of gotten used to forcing the golden children to the bench.

I honestly though don't see a huge diffrence between Gordon and Crawford's game right now, except that Crawford is farther along in his development, and taller.

Deng was a decent pickup though. Pax did about as well as you could with this draft considering the bulls needs and the situation. I'm not certain giving up a future 1st rounder was really worth it, but hey...whatever.


----------



## lorgg (Dec 8, 2003)

Pax will match
Crawford WILL Stay!


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Poor Jamal...

boo hoo, boo hoo


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Pax will sign Crawford, but keeping him is the real question.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

I honestly hope he comes back, plays team ball, and team defense.


----------



## Reciprocity Failure (Jun 10, 2004)

JC's comments were "the right thing to say" kind of comments. They may or may not be honest or truthful. 
If Pax truely wants to acquire "assests" he has to resign JC, even if its a 1yr QO or for a trade after BYC status. A 23 win team cannot afford let its leading scorer walk for nothing if is truely wants to improve...even if Pax & Skiles don't like his game. Even after this draft, the Bulls are still a few years away from any real respectability, so the Bulls can afford to live w/ JC's pros and cons if JC can stand to play for the Bulls. For this team to continue to move in a possitive direction, we cannot afford to loose Crawford or what his value will bring back in return.


----------



## chefboyarg (Apr 14, 2004)

i think gordon has a much better in between game then JC and is a beast while jamal is.. well jamal

good to hear jamal taking the hits in stride... at least publicly


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> I honestly though don't see a huge diffrence between Gordon and Crawford's game right now, except that Crawford is farther along in his development, and taller.


Money. 

I think Crawford gives you everything Gordon will. Gordon is stronger, but Crawford is taller. Other than that, they both have very similar games.


----------



## uracornball (Nov 13, 2002)

*Ben Gordon*

Ben Gordon will be our best guard. I have been saying this since every once in a while since the Jay Williams days. I dont see any reason to believe that Gordon will not be coming off the bench by the all star game. I still feel that he is a better g than Hinrich and Crawford. I dont think that it makes sense to trade them until it is seen how well they play together. This is definitely a good thing for our team because it gives us chances to experiment with different things. Do you think this lineup could really run up and down and create matchup problems.

Hinrich
Gordon
Crawford
Deng
Chandler


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Poor Jamal...
> 
> boo hoo, boo hoo





> Gordon joins a young Bulls backcourt that includes Kirk Hinrich, Chicago's first round draft selection last year. Hinrich was one of the few bright spots on last season's team, averaging 12 points and nearly seven assists.
> 
> "(Gordon) will be very difficult to guard one-on-one. And we feel that he will be a good compliment to Kirk Hinrich," Paxson said. "The fact that they can both handle the ball, get to the lane, create for other people -- it's going to be a very solid backcourt."
> 
> ...


Seems fairly obvious to everyone else that the new backcourt is Hinrich and Gordon. No mention of Jamal by Pax.

Sportsline


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


barring Gordon's motorcycle ride mishaps


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Paxson did mention earlier on ESPN that he liked his guard rotation of Hinrich, Gordon and Crawford. So I wouldnt count out re-signing Jamal just yet.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

how about a sign and trade of JC to NOh for JR Smith?


----------



## hoops (Jan 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bulls</b>!
> how about a sign and trade of JC to NOh for JR Smith?


great! that would be suicidal on our part. :no:


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> I honestly though don't see a huge diffrence between Gordon and Crawford's game right now, except that Crawford is farther along in his development, and taller.


I think there is huge difference between Gordon and Crawford's game as of now. And that is Crawford's 4 years in pro. To me, Jamal is a shooter and all-or-nothing 3 point jump shooter at that. (I even say nothing more... ). Gordon is a scorer and there is a difference between shooter and scorer. One drastic example, when shooter got cold, there is not much for him to contribute (especially for Jamal, when he is cold, he is non-existent on the floor). Scorer will have his number whether his jumper is going in or not.

If I have to choose only one between these two for Bulls guard, I will choose Gordon any day without any hesitation. And that is when Gordon has yet to play a single as Bulls. That says a volume, right?


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>spongyfungy</b>!
> 
> 
> barring Gordon's motorcycle ride mishaps


You KNOW no motorcycle joke is allowed on this fourm, right?


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I get tried of the JC whinning all the time about how we draft a guard every year. I understand he is a gentle young man and his feelings are easly hurt. No one likes critisisms all the time and he does get a lot. But he needs to step it up.

The bulls had only two guards last year and JC and KH were playing like 45 minutes per game. No wonder we did so bad in the 4th quarter our guards were gased. There are plenty of minutes for three guards. Thomas, Dumars, and vinnie johnson come to mind.

JC should suck it up, work his butt off, and kick some assss it he will be fine. If he sulks and dogs it he will be traded after his BYC year ends next year.

david


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lgtwins</b>!
> 
> 
> You KNOW no motorcycle joke is allowed on this fourm, right?


So it would be inappropriate to suggest that Crawford welcomed Gordon to the team with a gift - a new motorcycle!


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> So it would be inappropriate to suggest that Crawford welcomed Gordon to the team with a gift - a new motorcycle!


Inappropriate, but very, very necessary! :laugh:


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lgtwins</b>!
> 
> I think there is huge difference between Gordon and Crawford's game as of now. And that is Crawford's 4 years in pro. To me, Jamal is a shooter and all-or-nothing 3 point jump shooter at that. (I even say nothing more... ). Gordon is a scorer and there is a difference between shooter and scorer. One drastic example, when shooter got cold, there is not much for him to contribute (especially for Jamal, when he is cold, he is non-existent on the floor). Scorer will have his number whether his jumper is going in or not.
> 
> If I have to choose only one between these two for Bulls guard, I will choose Gordon any day without any hesitation. And that is when Gordon has yet to play a single as Bulls. That says a volume, right?


First off Jamal averaged 5 apg which puts him in the top 20 IN THE LEAGUE in assists so to say hes a one dimensional jumpshooter is not accurate at all.

When his shot is off who could he give the ball too ? who could he make plays for ? AD ?JYd ? these guys had trouble finishing layups Curry spent more time on the bench than in games that left Kirk and Jamal basically playing catch with each other in hopes one of them got hot. 

Jamal is by far the superior passer and ball handler and what we know for fact is that jamal is 17 ppg and 5 apg what we know about Gordon is that he was great at Uconn.

What we need to realize is that for the Bulls to be a good team next year they need all 17ppg and 5 apg from jamal and need Gordon to bring at least 12ppg 3apg and 3rpg in his rookie campaign for us to have any shot at even 30 wins .Pax realizes this which is why he keeps saying hes keeping all 3 guards.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> 
> First off Jamal averaged 5 apg which puts him in the top 20 IN THE LEAGUE in assists so to say hes a one dimensional jumpshooter is not accurate at all.
> ...


:yes: :yes:


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

If Gordon is allowed to play the same of time on the floor as JC, Gordon will easily pass 17ppg and 5 assists mark at his rookie season. Easy...

In the end here is what I see if we indeed keep Jamal, by the Christmas time Gordon and Kirk will be our starting two guard and Jamal will come off the bench. Of course Jamal and all his campers will be bitter, hence it will translate into the eventual demise of Jamal.

I am only stating this based the assumption that Jamal's shot selection and defense will be pretty much same as last season. If he drastically improve on both area, there will be no reason for him to worry about losing starting job. As you can imagine, I think the chance of that HUGE improvement is slim considering it took him 4 years from worst defensive guard to just about average defensive guard.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lgtwins</b>!
> If Gordon is allowed to play the same of time on the floor as JC, Gordon will easily pass 17ppg and 5 assists mark at his rookie season. Easy...
> 
> In the end here is what I see if we indeed keep Jamal, by the Christmas time Gordon and Kirk will be our starting two guard and Jamal will come off the bench. Of course Jamal and all his campers will be bitter, hence it will translate into the eventual demise of Jamal.
> ...


And what exactly are you basing your miss cleosims on ? :laugh: 

So now Gordon is gonna average 18 ppg and over 6 apg in his rookie campaign :uhoh: 

Jamals shot selection was a direct result of us not having ANY options outside of himself,kirk ,Curry.Whenever another scorer stepped up we clicked when Pargo was on Crawford had some of his best assists games .

I just dont understand why they cant play together .Why is it every year someone comes with their own agendas at the cost of the success of the Bulls ?


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lgtwins</b>!
> If Gordon is allowed to play the same of time on the floor as JC, Gordon will easily pass 17ppg and 5 assists mark at his rookie season. Easy...
> 
> In the end here is what I see if we indeed keep Jamal, by the Christmas time Gordon and Kirk will be our starting two guard and Jamal will come off the bench. Of course Jamal and all his campers will be bitter, hence it will translate into the eventual demise of Jamal.
> ...



This is the same :hurl: that Jay Williams' fan claimed the day after. Don't make me dislike Gordon after only one. Fortunately, I happen to like Gordon, not enough to pass Iggy, but I think he will be a player.

I point out the crap that is thrown around cause so far Gordon has (nor any other draft pick) has done squat against NBA competition. Give me all the College stats you want and for one or two who came in and succeeded cause of their college game, I'll give 5 Khalid El Amin's, Stcy King's, and Jimmy King's.

Bottom line is I am hoping this means we run a three guard rotation which will put constant pressure on the other teams D. Right now, our best hope is that force other teams to play D and wear them down for Curry to put in 10-14 in the fourth quarter.....Ooops, I forgot Curry doesn't play in the Fourth.

And David, come on man. Would you be happy if we brought in another guy to challenge your job every year? the NBA is about competition and that's all Crawford said - Hey, I expect it. I'm gonna be challenged. I can play with Gordon and Hinrich. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Bottom line is we have the chance to have one of the best young 3 man backourts in the NBA in a very long time. We may have to trade one someday, but let's run with it. When's the last time we had real assets that every team would love to have?

Oh - and don't be blasting anyone on the team about assists. Chandler can't catch a pass, Davis and JYD can't hit the backboard from farther than 5 feet and E-Rob brings rain with every shot. Not exactly an offensively talented team.

This year, we should finally have the offensive "production" to look at passing.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

you know, I am not a Jamal fan. But I dont dislike him either. But whats interesting is that they drafted Jay and he beat Jay out. They drafted Kirk, and was still the teams best player, statistically and now they draft Gordon to push him out the front door, and it wouldnt shock me if the other guard ends up the guy who might not fit in. Jamal is entering his prime. Can he stop the wild play? Thats the only thing holding him back from a top player. But there also is no sign that that will happen


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lgtwins</b>!
> If Gordon is allowed to play the same of time on the floor as JC, Gordon will easily pass 17ppg and 5 assists mark at his rookie season. Easy...
> 
> In the end here is what I see if we indeed keep Jamal, by the Christmas time Gordon and Kirk will be our starting two guard and Jamal will come off the bench. Of course Jamal and all his campers will be bitter, hence it will translate into the eventual demise of Jamal.
> ...



:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Its like*

bulls mangement is a battered woman and JC is the abuser , They say they love him and his skills, but not the way he acts (in this case on a basketball court) and though the bulls are constantly trying to move on without him , they cant seem to get rid of him , not because no one else will take him or that he has no where else to go but because no one better has come along to replace him so the bulls are still somewhat reluctant to part ways.

so much drama .

but for some reason likening paxson to a battered girl puts a smile on my face.

Note: no person was hurt or injured during the making of this post.


----------



## Kramer (Jul 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lgtwins</b>!
> If Gordon is allowed to play the same of time on the floor as JC, Gordon will easily pass 17ppg and 5 assists mark at his rookie season. Easy...


I don't think this is totally out of the question, although we have a tendency to over-predict what ANY of the Bulls players will average. 

I will go on record as saying that I think *Gordon has the potential to be the best Bulls player since the dynasty.* Curry has the most potential, but hasn't yet shown the heart. Jamal has potential, but he is the scarecrow to Curry's tinman. JWill had it all, but threw it away. Gordon can be a perennial all-star. :yes:


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> you know, I am not a Jamal fan. But I dont dislike him either. But whats interesting is that they drafted Jay and he beat Jay out. They drafted Kirk, and was still the teams best player, statistically and now they draft Gordon to push him out the front door, and it wouldnt shock me if the other guard ends up the guy who might not fit in. Jamal is entering his prime. Can he stop the wild play? Thats the only thing holding him back from a top player. But there also is no sign that that will happen



I don't know. There was no sign that Jason Williams (memphis) was ever going to settle down either, but he did, and look at him now.

I have this funny feeling in my gut that Jamal will be a late bloomer like williams....and later, an excellent point man....like williams...and yet....on another team....like williams.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> you know, I am not a Jamal fan. But I dont dislike him either. But whats interesting is that they drafted Jay and he beat Jay out. They drafted Kirk, and was still the teams best player, statistically and now they draft Gordon to push him out the front door, and it wouldnt shock me if the other guard ends up the guy who might not fit in. Jamal is entering his prime. Can he stop the wild play? Thats the only thing holding him back from a top player. But there also is no sign that that will happen


You've cut through all the hyperbole to articulate the essence of the Jamal argument. Jamal is his own worst enemy. When Jamal begins to play within the system then and only then will he really shine.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

*Re: Its like*



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> bulls mangement is a battered woman and JC is the abuser , They say they love him and his skills, but not the way he acts (in this case on a basketball court) and though the bulls are constantly trying to move on without him , they cant seem to get rid of him , not because no one else will take him or that he has no where else to go but because no one better has come along to replace him so the bulls are still somewhat reluctant to part ways.
> 
> so much drama .
> ...


Not sure I agree with your analogy Grinch. If the Bulls could have gotten a trade they were satisfied with I'm guessing JC would have been dealt some time ago.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Yo chifaninca,

And David, come on man. Would you be happy if we brought in another guy to challenge your job every year? Are you serious, JC doesn't know what it is really like. I get evaluated every year and if i am not getting it done they take funding away for my lab. Every 3 years 10 big shots evalulate my research and if it is not considered competitive i get the ax.

Seriously man, and i am no different than most of us on this board and if we are not getting it done we are unemployeed. And yes business bring in people every year and if they are doing better they get promotered and others don't.

Only JC gets like 4 million a year. At 4 million dollars a year yes i expect that every year JC (and the rest of them) should justify there work. What is this the USSR.

david


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> you know, I am not a Jamal fan. But I dont dislike him either. But whats interesting is that they drafted Jay and he beat Jay out. They drafted Kirk, and was still the teams best player, statistically and now they draft Gordon to push him out the front door, and it wouldnt shock me if the other guard ends up the guy who might not fit in. Jamal is entering his prime. Can he stop the wild play? Thats the only thing holding him back from a top player. But there also is no sign that that will happen


I'm not sure how you arrive at Jamal being the best player on the bulls - statistically. I believe he only led the team in scoring. He certainly should have given that he took 478 more shots than the next closest bull (curry) (JC 1,318 att. vs. EC 840 att.). Given those extra 478 shots, he scored a grand total of 313 more points than Curry. Hinrich had more assists. JC shot a pretty lousy percentage as did Hinrich.

Jamal is a good player but I wouldn't say he was the best player on the team, statistically or otherwise.


----------



## Dionysus2k (Jun 24, 2004)

I sincerely believe the Bulls like Jamal alot and want to keep him around, with Gordan and Kirk. Jamal and Kirk will start, with each getting about 35 minutes a night, leaving roughly 26 minutes for the rookie to back up both of them. Sounds to me like the Bulls will have a fantastic back court rotation. Dunhon can pick up some garbage time minutes, if he even makes the team.


----------



## TheLastTruePG (Mar 25, 2003)

I dont understand.. What do you guys want from Jamal?? I mean he was left the burden to be the scorer when Jalen Was traded.. Of course he's going to lead the team in FG attempts.. You can't find one guy in the league who was the No.1 scorer for his team and didnt lead his team in FGA.. 

Jamal is still young.. Yet he's Reaching his prime?? Came someone please tell me at what age is a player considered to be "in his prime" ...


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm not sure how you arrive at Jamal being the best player on the bulls - statistically. I believe he only led the team in scoring. He certainly should have given that he took 478 more shots than the next closest bull (curry) (JC 1,318 att. vs. EC 840 att.). Given those extra 478 shots, he scored a grand total of 313 more points than Curry. Hinrich had more assists. JC shot a pretty lousy percentage as did Hinrich.
> ...


Look at the wins. When the Bulls won, its cause he led them to a win. When they lost, he struggled. He scored alot more points then anyone else cause he is the only guy who can create his own shot. And while he was doing that, he still had time to dish some assists. He was the best player on the Bulls

Yet, he still has no clue how to play in a system. Some of that is his fault. SOme of that is having the Bulls try to run him out of town since he has gotten here. Its not a good marriage. But if he is here, he will start over gordon and hinrich. He has continually beaten back competition since he has been here


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm not sure how you arrive at Jamal being the best player on the bulls


Because it was easy to watch the games and see that was fact.

Pretty simple.

Sit down, and watch the games.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Because it was easy to watch the games and see that was fact.
> ...


For the most part you had to watch before the fourth quarter or you might not see him though.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TheLastTruePG</b>!
> I dont understand.. What do you guys want from Jamal?? I mean he was left the burden to be the scorer when Jalen Was traded.. Of course he's going to lead the team in FG attempts.. You can't find one guy in the league who was the No.1 scorer for his team and didnt lead his team in FGA..
> 
> Jamal is still young.. Yet he's Reaching his prime?? Came someone please tell me at what age is a player considered to be "in his prime" ...


It's ok...no need to defend JC and his game.

He has faults in his game but I don't think it's really that close in regards to who the best player on the team is.

Talking to some of these guys about JC is like talking to a plant about IBS....

It's pointless.

Once JC leaves...

Curry will take all the blame for not being a franchise center (if he isn't)...

Gordon and Deng will get murdered here if they struggle.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Just for discussion and imo, why is that are best player was benched around ten times last year. I mean that is like 15% of all games. Now like most of us i would love to see JC get it together and play great next year. I also think he puts too much pressure on himself and would play much better if he did not have to be the number 1 scoring option. And i have little doubt he will be starting at SG in November.

But JC would play a lot better if he was not the best player on our team and he was more a complementary player than a star.

david


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Because it was easy to watch the games and see that was fact.
> ...


Fact? I think you have a most difficult time discerning fact from opinion. It is your _opinion_ that Jamal was the best player on the team. It was the Bulls organizations' opinion that Hinrich was the best player on the team. There seems to be some discrepency there. A fact is something that is indisputable. I think it's been quite well established that there is more than a little division just on this message board as to whom the best player was on the bulls last season.

In the future, how about you actually try to add something to a conversation rather than being so condescending. Learn the difference between fact and opinion and I'll be happy to debate with you but when you come across as thinking your opinion is fact, you lose what little credibility you have.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> 
> 
> For the most part you had to watch before the fourth quarter or you might not see him though.


That made no sense to me.

Go back to the game threads, I don't know how many times guys were like, why is JC still out?

I honestly believe at some points last year we were trying to prove points instead of lose games.

On a team with limited offensive options, when you're losing and can't score, you bench your best offensive player.

Sometimes it might have been deserved, but I remember there were a lot of times guys not just myself were like what the hell is going on?

I think it was Artest who in one game said he was glad they took JC out because he could have gotten us going, and they really needed that game or something like that.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> 
> 
> Fact? I think you have a most difficult time discerning fact from opinion. It is your _opinion_ that Jamal was the best player on the team. It was the Bulls organizations' opinion that Hinrich was the best player on the team. There seems to be some discrepency there. A fact is something that is indisputable. I think it's been quite well established that there is more than a little division just on this message board as to whom the best player was on the bulls last season.
> ...


Flash I watched the games...

So ok, yes that is my opinion.

What the Bulls organization thinks, who gives a crap.

Our coach went to the media constantly to feed to the public we had 1 player who was God and couldn't do anything wrong, yet everyone else didn't want to work and sucked.

Bull****, again I watched the games.

We can go up and down the line as to what f ups the organization has made so whatever they say as far as I'm concerned I'm more apt to believe the opposite.

As far as credibility here, I don't talk crap and run or whatever, I have no problem debating.

Little credibility is making up multiple screennames to make points to support agendas...

Saying what I say that may be the opposite of what you think is fact or consider a good opinion is not.

Learn the difference between that, THEN we can talk.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Ever heard of it is better to make good will than bad will arenas? I think we would all be more accepting of your opinions if you could be just a little more polite.

Thinks like i agree to disagree or i see your point but i think this.

   

david


----------



## synthdogg (Jul 14, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No mention of Jamal quoted at least. Here are some that did get quoted...

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/bulls.asp?intID=38163138

I think Jamal's future with the Bulls is squarely on the soulders of the rest of the league and where they place his market value this summer. If the offers don't get outrageous, he'll remain a Bull.

On the other hand...I've lost count of how many times I've been wrong....


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

One serious question to Arenas.

First of all I am not trying to bash you or anything. but i have noticed though your oh-so-many posts that you have absolutely none to say good about a Bulls Player (except of course Jamal Crawford) and especially Bulls organization. No matter they (i.e., Bulls organization) did, you always come up with all the reasons why they screwed up and all.

Nothing but negative vibes regarding Bulls regardless of your declaration for this franchise.

Are you sure?

Are you really a Bulls fan?

Then, why?

Really why?

From all the posts of yours, what I perceive is this: 

You want Bulls to fail.
You want Bulls to fail to prove your point.
You want all the other players to fail (Kirk last year, and now Gordon) but Jamal.
You want all the other players to fail to prove that Jamal is our best player.

Contrary to what you will respond to this, the above mention things are what I get from reading your numerous posts.

Why don't you concentrate your energy and time on your beloved Clippers instead? Especially they now have your man in Livingston. I guess a lot of people got tired of your antics here. Just my thought.

But again, seriously why all negative vibes?


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Flash I watched the games...
> ...


First off, I actually like Crawford. I hope to God that he stays a Bull because the guy has immense talent. Secondly, thank you for at least acknowledging your opinion of Jamal. That works for me. I watched the games also and what I saw from Jamal was an extremely raw player who far too often went away from the team concept. He could be a world-beater one night and then for the next three games you're left scratching your head because he would make really poor decisions. Last season was probably the first time he got instruction on how to really play the game. It showed. By the end of the season, he was a much more under control player. He still made bad decisions but he made far fewer of them. He's an asset to this team and if Pax is serious about building assets, he's got one in his hand and he needs to keep him.

Regarding the rest of your post - I don't have multiple screen names. I guess your referring to Bas80 on that one. You're entitled to your opinion. When you come across as that being undisputable fact and using terms like "sit down and watch the games" - that's condescending. All I ask is that you treat folks with respect. Much as you value your opinions, so do others and they don't have to agree. If I come out and say that Kornel David was the greatest ever to play the game and that's a fact, you're more than welcome to ridicule me. That's a pretty ridiculous statement. The difference between Crawford and Hinrich is not so easily discernable. They both have their strengths and weeknesses. It's perfectly fine for some to like one player and others to like the other. There is no need for belittling comments because it truly is not clear who is the superior player. 

Other than that - carry on solider!


----------



## charlietyra (Dec 1, 2002)

My good sense says that I should stay out of this rhubarb between Arenas and some of you guys. However, I have post-draft depression and my judgment is not what it should be.

I have been lurking and participating on this board for quite some time and have seen some real jackasses come and go. In my opinion, Arenas just speaks his mind. Perhaps the fact/opinion line is stepped over a bit but quite frankly most of us do this. I really don't understand the level of hostility some of Arenas' posts bring out in some of you. I do not get that same reaction. Maybe I just don't get it or I have not been involved in a clash of opinions with him. 

Give the guy a break. If you want to bash me for this go ahead.


----------



## chefboyarg (Apr 14, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>charlietyra</b>!
> My good sense says that I should stay out of this rhubarb between Arenas and some of you guys. However, I have post-draft depression and my judgment is not what it should be.
> 
> I have been lurking and participating on this board for quite some time and have seen some real jackasses come and go. In my opinion, Arenas just speaks his mind. Perhaps the fact/opinion line is stepped over a bit but quite frankly most of us do this. I really don't understand the level of hostility some of Arenas' posts bring out in some of you. I do not get that same reaction. Maybe I just don't get it or I have not been involved in a clash of opinions with him.
> ...


AGREED!. count me in


----------



## ogbullzfan (Mar 9, 2004)

I like the idea of a 3 guard rotation. Especially, if Crawford can go back to being a part time point guard. A backcourt of Crawford and Gordon is pretty athletic. Thoughts?!


----------



## k^2 (Jun 11, 2002)

Jamal would be an idiot to stay with the bulls. He's too talented to sit on the bench for a last place team with managment thats obsessed with overankings kids because of their schools success. Hinrich will be good and so will Gordon but the bulls gave up on Jamal a long time ago and it's time he went to a team that uses his assests.


----------

