# Blount speaks the truth about why he was waived



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Hmmm, I wonder how people are going to spin this?

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...smain,1,4089977.story?coll=cs-bulls-headlines


----------



## blinkofaneye (Mar 3, 2004)

I am glad this is coming out. Maybe people will see what is really going on between our GM and coach. Blount made some great points. "conrol freak".. I think that is an understatement for Skiles. How do you think this looks to free agents contemplating where to go. Chicago? I don't think so.
If Pax did not know the rule, it is even worse than if he just plain screwed Blount. It shows his incompetence as a GM. 

Interesting...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Well let's see what all the Pax and Skiles apologists have to say for this bull****...

<strike>Too many people here want to lick these guys asses </strike>( Vulgar) :nonono: instead of point fingers at these guys as to why we are what we are, and Corie Blount, is just an example of that.

I don't give a damn what anyone here has to say about this because none of us are in the locker room, none of us have personal ties to this franchise...

When something like this happens and a principle person comes out and speaks, that's all I need to hear.

We're supposed to be excited about the future?

What the hell for?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

I'm not buying this B.S. for 2 seconds...

Pax didn't know the date...

How many years was Pax in the league?

He knew that date, his whole office of people that worked for him didn't know it either?

I mean a lot of guys, Rod Strickland, were being released so they could catch on with playoff teams, that's just a respect thing, this didn't show any respect at all for Corie Blount, and I know guys around the league hear this **** and it doesn't make them want to sign with us.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> I'm not buying this B.S. for 2 seconds...
> 
> Pax didn't know the date...
> ...


hey, we arent allowed to criticize Pax or Skiles. So who is left? The blame has to be at either the feet of Matt Lloyd or Gar Forman. Who the hell names their kid Gar?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

No spin -- just the griping of a disgruntled, third string, ex-player who is approaching the end of his career.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> No spin -- just the griping of a disgruntled, third string, ex-player who is approaching the end of his career.


Please respond when you want to get at the truth of this issue and cut the B.S....

Everyone who has left Chicago has not had anything good to say about it, so everyone's disgruntled or we're just a sorry, unprofessional franchise?


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

Pretty much agree with everything he said abt Skiles being a control freak, getting personal with the players and putting NBDL scrubs over Ws. To top it off, screwing Blount's future like that. A classless move.

Face it, Skiles = JERK.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Please respond when you want to get at the truth of this issue and cut the B.S....
> ...


Oh...I don't doubt the org could stand to make some improvements...but Corie is being HIGHLY unprofessional himself. That blunts everything he says.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh...I don't doubt the org could stand to make some improvements...but Corie is being HIGHLY unprofessional himself. That blunts everything he says.


Hmmm, how is Corie being unprofessional? By telling the truth? He got a raw deal, and he isnt saying anything that isnt true


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> 
> Hmmm, how is Corie being unprofessional?





> *
> "Scott's a control freak. *


I don 't remember Pax or Skiles scooping to such a level.

" Why was Corie cut? Well, he was a marginal NBA talent at best and we needed a roster spot. "


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:no: :no: :no: 

here is one of the most professional and respected players in this franchise over the last 3 or 4 years. He was screwed, plain and simple. And he is saying, rather intelligently i might add, what happened. And it isnt a pretty picture. And there is no evidence to point that he is not telling the truth


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

GB, we needed a roster spot for Paul Shirley?

Go in the bathroom, look in the mirror and tell yourself that until you honestly believe it...


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SPMJ</b>!
> Pretty much agree with everything he said abt Skiles being a control freak, getting personal with the players and putting NBDL scrubs over Ws.
> 
> Face it, Skiles = JERK.


scrubs over winners? lol. look around, we've won 19 games. 

skiles as control freak is the picture corie paints. i'm sure he feels tons better after venting his spleen like that. he hasn't exactly been lighting things up in toronto. and the raptors aren't likely to make the playoffs anyway, so that's a moot point. and from all that we've read, it sounds like some of the kiddies _needed_ a little controling, imo. so skiles threatens to bench eddy and well looky there, eddy steps up tonight and has a great game. 

but hey, it's not business, it's personal. please. 

the oversight of not knowing the deadline, however is cause for alarm but it ain't the end of the world. i know there are some here that call for Pax's head on a stick on an almost daily basis. but it ain't gonna happen over this one. sorry.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Again I ask, who names their kid Gar?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Theres no need to believe either side over the other---just pre-concieved bias.


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

although CB may be speaking the truth (at least according to him), he and Skiles have a history together that was unpleasant while both were in Phoenix. i can't believe that hasn't colored some of this for Blount.

and at the end of the day, _who gives a sh!t if he feels like he got a raw deal?_

certainly it wasn't all his fault, but the team won 18 games with him on the roster. _everyone's_ job should be in jeopardy in that kind of situation.

we've changed the coach. we've changed the GM. that really only leaves one element left to change...the players. rlucas, you're telling GB to get a mirror? tell it to the freaking zombie players on this team.

or, in Blount's case, _not_ on it any more.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thunderspirit</b>!
> although CB may be speaking the truth (at least according to him), he and Skiles have a history together that was unpleasant while both were in Phoenix. i can't believe that hasn't colored some of this for Blount.
> 
> and at the end of the day, _who gives a sh!t if he feels like he got a raw deal?_
> ...


Hmmm for the record, I never told GB to look in the mirror. What is clear is that Blount pointed out that the new culture, one backed by positive reinforcement, isnt welcomed with this franchise. That isnt a recipe for success. I find nothing in his statement that technically is wrong


----------



## thunderspirit (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> Hmmm for the record, I never told GB to look in the mirror.


whoops, you're correct. that line should have been directed at arenas. my bad.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

This isn't directed at anyone, but are the same people here who welcomed the tougher approach of Skiles in contrast to BC softer, more positive approach now saying Skiles is too tough?

Look, all this just points to the fact that the coaching wasn't the problem, and it's the players out there. This is where Paxson, Krause and the players are at fault.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

Also, for Paxson to not know when the deadline was is incompetent. I think that was more embarrassing to the Bulls than actually cutting Blount.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>thunderspirit</b>!
> 
> we've changed the coach. we've changed the GM. that really only leaves one element left to change...the players. rlucas, you're telling GB to get a mirror? tell it to the freaking zombie players on this team.
> 
> or, in Blount's case, _not_ on it any more.


- You know, these arguments about the players not showing up and being immature tend to center around the argument "because it's about time to change them, these players have had their time to improve. It's about TIME we change them now that we have changed our General Manager and Coach." Looking at things like that is a bias in itself because it speaks as if time is a coach in itself for these guys. In other words, time = Larry Brown, therefore, the guys should have already learned and they have failed. Not to mention that that point of view also tends to excuse whatever is newer.

- You guys blaming the players also tend to talk about these guys' characteristics as if they have been permanent characteristics in them. No one is a born zombie. I believe this team just has the ability to create them. For example, look at Brad Miller. He admitted to succumbing to the dreary atmosphere of Chicago and finally escaping it with the move to Indiana then Sacramento. Now he's an all-star. . .in the West !

-The argument about Corey being cut because he's just a marginal talent is. . .I don't get it really. Cutting him because he's a marginal talent is not the point at all. While it probably won't affect some free agent from signing here if the money's here, it just shows how crappy of an employer this team is to the fans. I don't understand how you guys call the cutting of Corie as not a big deal while on the other hand conjuring up conflagration about E-Rob calling and Eddy on the cell phone.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

So the legendary future Hall of Famer, Corie Blount, takes his shots at Skiles...after being released! Stop the presses!

How does this compare with all the uncensored verbal garbage AI threw in Larry Brown's direction over the years? Undoubtably, Brown will survive Iversons diatribes. And my guess is we won't have to keep sharp objects away from either Skiles or Paxson no matter what Blount has to say.

Corie Freakin' Blount... :laugh:


----------



## zeus9800 (Feb 12, 2004)

Well, that's no way to treat any player, veteran or not.


But Blount's never been a good player, and I'm surprised anybody actually wanted him in the first place, even a team as hard up for frontcourt guys as Toronto.


----------



## L.O.B (Jun 13, 2002)

hmmm a coach that is a control freak, is that a bad thing?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> hmmm a coach that is a control freak, is that a bad thing?


It very rarely succeeds. There is Bill Parcells in Football, Sir Alex Ferguson in soccer and recently, thats about it. Guys who can deal with egos will ultimately succeed over guys who a my way or the highway approach. Riley, for instance, used to be the ultimate players coach in LA, same with Phil. Phil continued liberal policies in LA and has continued to succeed. Riley on the other hand went to unilateralistic approaches in both NY and Miami and never had the same type of success. Joe Torre with the Yankees is rumored to give his team alot of freedom. There are plenty of more examples.

Regardless, and not one person can deny this, someone screwed up. And I dont care if its Rick Brunson or Corie Blount or Michael Jordan, someone did this guy wrong. and what Corie said has alot of truth to it. and in the end of the day, his argument is that we wont get better until we rid ourselves of this negative reinforcement approach hopped on the youngsters by the 3 previous coaches, but rather start giving them positive reinforcement. Corie got canned cause he was giving these kids that type of reinforcement. and that is plain sad


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

Quick question, rlucas: Why did you title this thread *"Blount speaks the truth about why he was waived "*?

The article is titled: _"Blount vents ire on Skiles."_ In fact, the only reference to truth in the article regarding Blount's remarks were: "That's absolutely false (the release being a personal matter)," Paxson said. "It was an oversight when I was in Europe. Scott and I hadn't talked about who to let go. Then Corie and I had a healthy discussion. He knows that if we had won more games, I wouldn't have done it. I've tried to be honest with players and agents. This disappoints me." _Minimally_, the truth is in dispute on this issue...but not in your mind, of course. 

I think someone's personal bias is showing..._again_.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> Quick question, rlucas: Why did you title this thread *"Blount speaks the truth about why he was waived "*?
> 
> The article is titled: _"Blount vents ire on Skiles."_ In fact, the only reference to truth in the article regarding Blount's remarks were: "That's absolutely false (the release being a personal matter)," Paxson said. "It was an oversight when I was in Europe. Scott and I hadn't talked about who to let go. Then Corie and I had a healthy discussion. He knows that if we had won more games, I wouldn't have done it. I've tried to be honest with players and agents. This disappoints me." _Minimally_, the truth is in dispute on this issue...but not in your mind, of course.
> ...


again, someone screwed up. Take your choice.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

The sad thing is we cut Corie for Paul Shirley which I think is just a cover...

No one here really believes we needed a open roster spot to give Shirley a chance, that's just ridiculous...

They went after Corie and did him wrong...

I'm not going to now or ever buy the oversight BS...

You have a GM who was a player and a broadcaster, and would be familiar with the common practice of some role playing vets being released in time so they could catch on with playoff teams.

Even if you want to assume Pax forgot, so did EVERYONE else?

If Corie had any idea he was going to be cut, don't you think he would have said well hey could you please just do it before the cutoff time so I could get on with a playoff team?

Anyone who wants to use the oversight bull**** or ehh no one wanted Corie anyway is not seeing the point and is trying to cover the **** with newspaper.

Regardless, it still thinks...

Like RL said someone screwed up, and what does Corie gain anyway with coming out with this story?

Why am I not inclined to believe him?

I'm going to take his word before I let a bunch of people on a board spin this **** in their Pax-Skiles apologetic favor...

I'm past the point where I'm going to kiss ***, if anything of mine is going near their asses it's my foot.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Pax said that they wanted an open roster spot to allow for some tryouts, and he and Skiles would talk about it when he got back from Europe. And through a pure oversight, he didn't realise he didn't get back until after the deadline. Now if you look, Corie doubts this story, but can't factually refute it. So until someone proves to me otherwise, I'm buying it.


Course, it was still a bloody silly thing to do......


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

Ah, the old anti-management one-two punch pops up in midseason form once again. Arenas, rlucas, either the two of you are a professional wrestling tag team or you're roommates...which is it? Or is there a third option??? :grinning:


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> Ah, the old anti-management one-two punch pops up in midseason form once again. Arenas, rlucas, either the two of you are a professional wrestling tag team or you're roommates...which is it? Or is there a third option??? :grinning:


Who is avoiding the topic Blizzy? Your an intelligent guy, I respect your stuff, but I need it to be explained to me how this wasnt a screwup. I mean, isnt a double message being sent to the fans, people like you, and my dad, who pay these guys salaries? They say they want to win, they want professionalism, they want effort, then they cut probably the most professional, the most liked, and one of the more effective players we have had this year for Paul Shirley, AFTER the playoff deadline. How is that not a screwup? its easy to say preconcieved this and that and paint arenas and i into a corner (there are others, read the boards), but explain it to me? I respect your ability to talk ball. So talk ball. No spin required (I knew the spin would be shots at Arenas, myself or anyone else who questions the great duo)


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> So the legendary future Hall of Famer, Corie Blount, takes his shots at Skiles...after being released! Stop the presses!
> 
> How does this compare with all the uncensored verbal garbage AI threw in Larry Brown's direction over the years? Undoubtably, Brown will survive Iversons diatribes. And my guess is we won't have to keep sharp objects away from either Skiles or Paxson no matter what Blount has to say.
> ...


Besides the sheer incompetence involved in reportedly missing this deadline, it is precisely this cavalier attitude towards hard-working, good-locker-room-influence veteran role players that is the most bothersome aspect of this Corie Blount fiasco.

Maybe guys like Blount, Hassell, Hoiberg, and Brunson didn't work very hard at their games and thus are not the good influences we assume they are. But suppose they do work pretty hard at their games. If so, we are asking our young players to become more like Blount, Hassell, Hoiberg, and Brunson - albeit with more talent and hopefully better results. When we cut them (in particular the way we cut Blount), what does this say about our sincerity when ask the young guys to work hard at their games or when we ask them to do the little things that help us win? Blount, Hassell, Hoiberg, and Brunson may not have been the most talented guys but they did those things and look where it got them. This treatment of these players makes Paxson and Skiles look two-faced, and I don't see how that is going to help turn our young guys into the players they need to become.

It also sounds like Blount and Brunson may have been released because they had been playing a "good cop" role in the locker room. Skiles and Paxson more than fulfill the "bad cop" role, so it would seem that influences like Blount and Brunson served an important role. In their absence, it will be very hard to get the young players to see "browbeating" as being something more than "Skiles/Pax doesn't like me." And that easily could devolve into a situation where our young players quit listening to Skiles. And no one wins if that happens.

And I have never called for the removal of Skiles and Paxson nor do I have anything against them. They are boyhood heroes of mine with Paxson playing at my boyhood favorite college and Skiles being a local product. So, if anything, I suspect that my biases lean in their favor. Others, like rlucas and MikeDC have been more in the direction of calling for them to be fired, but I have not joined this chorus. It would seem that in this case, the best strategy for even the most ardent Paxson/Skiles supporter would be to admit that they screwed this up and move on. There is no shame in that. Sometimes the best defense is a tiny little concession.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Lets talk about Preconcieved here for a second while I am at it. Blizzy, you claim to either be a Bulls insider or know of someone within the Bulls organization. While I havent seen any direct calls (victor on realgm was the best) from you that have panned out, its my inclination to believe you, though few do. But I do cause you write intelligently and in such a manner that leads me to believe you might know something. I doubt you would take the time out of your day to dupe the board. Having said that, lets assume for a second that your Matt Lloyd, for argument sakes. Would you ever say a bad thing about the Skiles or Pax? No is the answer cause they pay your bills. and in the day, your personal attachment to these people clearly would cloud your judgement. Thats preconcieved in my opinion. Now take a regular joe fan who pays for tickets and sees what they see. Put yourself in their shoes, or in someone like mine who was wasted their time seeing this crap this year. The point is, its clear a double standard or talk existed. Preconcieved or not, its quite clear. and an even uglier truth, MIGHT, have come from Corie Blount. I dont see anyone coming to Skiles defense on Cories comments. Interestingly, the most supportive Bull of Skiles has been JC, who I am sure is saying all the right things to get his contract sorted out. Even AD thinks the system is off, based on his comments after the Cleveland game. So I am not seeing any inhouse support. Now assuming Skiles is Phil jackson part 2, and I hope he proves me wrong, I really do, then isnt pax guilty of screwing up? He sent a good guy down the river on an "oversight". Isnt that screwing up. We have had 2 examples of this exact thing over the last 6 years. Brian Williams in 98 and John Starks in 01. So he had to know there was a deadline. SOMEONE in the organization had to know that. My inclination is to believe what Corie said. Either that or no one is paying attention to the rules. Even Dan has said these guys dont come across as organized and put together as other organizations do, and he has dealt with them. So I respect your inability to show anything but biased support for Pax or Skiles. But knowing that you might have some personal ties to the organization, excuse me if I dont put much stock in your opinions on this. I fully respect your insight on anything else. But clearly, due to your connections, its hard to have an unbiased opinion. But know that I do respect you and your thoughts on the game.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

hmmm. no coverage of this important news story in either the sun-times or from mike mcgraw at the daily herald. makes me think that corie blount sought out kc and just went to town with the venting session. and kc just ate it up...licking his chops. sometimes i think kc has a bit of an agenda. 

blount speaks his version of the story about why he was waived is more like it. two sides to every coin.

this oversight by management is embarrasing and i am guessing won't happen again any time soon. but is it malicious, willful, mean and petty...and pre-meditated? from pax's comments, it seems no.

it is just another case of airing soiled laundry in a season where there is not much else meaningful to talk about.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> 
> Who is avoiding the topic Blizzy? Your an intelligent guy, I respect your stuff, but I need it to be explained to me how this wasnt a screwup. I mean, isnt a double message being sent to the fans, people like you, and my dad, who pay these guys salaries? They say they want to win, they want professionalism, they want effort, then they cut probably the most professional, the most liked, and one of the more effective players we have had this year for Paul Shirley, AFTER the playoff deadline. How is that not a screwup? its easy to say preconcieved this and that and paint arenas and i into a corner (there are others, read the boards), but explain it to me? I respect your ability to talk ball. So talk ball. No spin required (I knew the spin would be shots at Arenas, myself or anyone else who questions the great duo)


One at a time now (I'm a slow reader).

Paxson said. "It was an oversight when I was in Europe."  Can we agree with Paxson that he screwed up? He's even admitted it publicly, as you can see. So I don't understand why this mistake needs to be raised over and over again. 

If its a matter of whether the Bulls intentionally tried to stick it to Blount...lets be reasonable, ok? Why would management try to stick it to Corie Blount? If they had it in for Blount, don't you think there were better ways to mess with him? I mean, he was always a part of Skiles' rotation, wasn't he? Even when he'd return from an injury he was always and immediately re-inserted into the rotation, right? Skiles has demonstrated all year long that he views PT as the thing players value most and he's used it as a reward, incentive and a consequence, agreed? If he was really going to stick it to Blount I'm guessing he'd have dropped him from the rotation and let him stew at the end of the bench through the end of the season. That never happened.

So to assume that Skiles spent any energy at all on thinking of ways to stick it to Blount is a major stretch. That's my take anyway.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mizenkay</b>!
> sometimes i think kc has a bit of an agenda.
> 
> blount speaks his version of the story about why he was waived is more like it. two sides to every coin.



KC is developing an edge, and I like it. As a fan, a beat writer is the closest connection we have with this team. His displeasure speaks volumes. 

There is two sides to every coin but, it's not like KC gave Blount and open platform and didn't allow Pax a response. Both sides are represented.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dan Rosenbaum</b>!
> It would seem that in this case, the best strategy for even the most ardent Paxson/Skiles supporter would be to admit that they screwed this up and move on. There is no shame in that. Sometimes the best defense is a tiny little concession.


This response is not intended to be taken as an admission that I'm a JP/SS supporter or apologist in any way. If anything its my belief that they need to be given some time to turn around a five year mess. So I'm primarily going to object to calls for their head on that basis. As I mentioned on another thread, Vandeweghe is in his third season. His first year the Nugs were 27-55. His second season they were 17-65. Now in his third season the team is moving in the right direction. Why should Paxson be dumped with barely 10 months on the job? Vandeweghe is a good example of how a little bit of patience can pay dividends. Remember, the Nugs were actually _10 games worse_ than the season before under KV. If anything, I'm an advocate of patience, thats all. 

Now, never once have I tried to convince anyone that what Paxson did was anything less than a mistake. Yes he screwed up. But even he admitted as much from the beginning. So why does this continue to be a major issue? Can we move on?


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yes, both sides are represented in the published article, it's just the thread title that is a little biased if you know what i mean. that's what i was referring to.

i prefer the writing of mike mcgraw - he's just less hysterical about it all.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> Ah, the old anti-management one-two punch pops up in midseason form once again. Arenas, rlucas, either the two of you are a professional wrestling tag team or you're roommates...which is it? Or is there a third option??? :grinning:


I'm the third option.

It is clear you have some attachment to Skiles and/or Paxson. That is fine.

I don't.

The Bulls got up to beat the Raps last night just because Rose/Marshall and other ex-teammates were their opponents. The Raps desperately needed the win against the worst team in basketball, and threw their best at us.

So we can win when our opponents try to beat us.

So our coach is horrible at motivating the team for the rest of the games, and apparently didn't movitvate the team to win even last night (Jalen Rose did).

Fire them both. I do not believe in what I've seen from either of them so far. Certainly not enough to believe they're going to turn things around given two to four more years. May as well get the real cavalry in here NOW.

As for Venderweghe, by the time the Nugz were winning just 17 games, they'd cleared a ton of cap space through Venderweghe's moves. You could see an actual plan, understand it, and see that it's being impllemented and working.

I see no such plan from Paxson. I see players regressing under the coach. I see our best players on other rosters. I see our payroll stuck with big contracts on the uber-talented JYD. 

Man, I thought we were a minor league team when we were just developing so many potential players. We've really become a minor league team under Paxson with real minor league (CBA) players. That's the vision I see from him.

No thanks.

Don't let the door hit you in the fanny on the way out, Pax.
Same for you, Skiles.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> Lets talk about Preconcieved here for a second while I am at it. Blizzy, you claim to either be a Bulls insider or know of someone within the Bulls organization. While I havent seen any direct calls (victor on realgm was the best) from you that have panned out, its my inclination to believe you, though few do. But I do cause you write intelligently and in such a manner that leads me to believe you might know something. I doubt you would take the time out of your day to dupe the board. Having said that, lets assume for a second that your Matt Lloyd, for argument sakes. Would you ever say a bad thing about the Skiles or Pax? No is the answer cause they pay your bills. and in the day, your personal attachment to these people clearly would cloud your judgement. Thats preconcieved in my opinion. Now take a regular joe fan who pays for tickets and sees what they see. Put yourself in their shoes, or in someone like mine who was wasted their time seeing this crap this year. The point is, its clear a double standard or talk existed. Preconcieved or not, its quite clear. and an even uglier truth, MIGHT, have come from Corie Blount. I dont see anyone coming to Skiles defense on Cories comments. Interestingly, the most supportive Bull of Skiles has been JC, who I am sure is saying all the right things to get his contract sorted out. Even AD thinks the system is off, based on his comments after the Cleveland game. So I am not seeing any inhouse support. Now assuming Skiles is Phil jackson part 2, and I hope he proves me wrong, I really do, then isnt pax guilty of screwing up? He sent a good guy down the river on an "oversight". Isnt that screwing up. We have had 2 examples of this exact thing over the last 6 years. Brian Williams in 98 and John Starks in 01. So he had to know there was a deadline. SOMEONE in the organization had to know that. My inclination is to believe what Corie said. Either that or no one is paying attention to the rules. Even Dan has said these guys dont come across as organized and put together as other organizations do, and he has dealt with them. So I respect your inability to show anything but biased support for Pax or Skiles. But knowing that you might have some personal ties to the organization, excuse me if I dont put much stock in your opinions on this. I fully respect your insight on anything else. But clearly, due to your connections, its hard to have an unbiased opinion. But know that I do respect you and your thoughts on the game.


Who I am or who I might know is no one's business on this board. I will say this much though. This is at least the second time you've tried to implicate Matt Lloyd as an information provider to this board. The other time I can recall is when you suggested that truebluefan's informational source was the same Matt Lloyd. 

First of all, in my case you're dead wrong. Secondly, you play a very dangerous game by mentioning any organization's employees by name as a potential source of inside information, speculation or otherwise. You're messing with that person's future, especially when your remarks have ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS IN FACT. With all due respect I'd like to strongly suggest that you think twice about implicating specific individuals as leaks. Its unfair to them because they obviously can't defend themselves.

You can view me in whatever light you choose to. But before you pidgeonhole me as attached at the hip to the Bulls organization, don't discount the possibility that I just might be closer to members of the media than some disloyal organization "insider." Keep an open mind, rlucas. On a message board, you just never know, do you???


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> Who I am or who I might know is no one's business on this board. I will say this much though. This is at least the second time you've tried to implicate Matt Lloyd as an information provider to this board. The other time I can recall is when you suggested that truebluefan's informational source was the same Matt Lloyd.
> ...


freaking relax man. i said, for 'arguments sake, say your matt lloyd' to show how someone attached to the organization couldnt have an open mind in regards to their boss or co-horts. please read the post again. Second of all, its common knowledge that Mr. Lloyd spends time not only here but on realgm as well. lastly, you have strongly implicated that you have ties to the Bulls organization, which, as previously proven, would cloud your judgement. Again, re-read the post before crying wolf, tell me where I say anything that could get Matt Lloyd or anyone in the Bulls organization into trouble? I just love how people read something and then spout off on some unrelated subject cause the matter at hand is not something they want to dive into!


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm the third option.
> ...


again, its a message board. People are entitled to their opinions. Its easy whenever Skiles and Paxs names come up to say well Arenas and Rlucas just hate them and are closed minded but then dont read, in particular posts I have wrtiten. Right now, there is so little to be positive about. but I applauded some of Skiles efforts in a game at MSG earlier this year, a game in which I sat within earshot of Skiles and could literally hear the conversations. As for Pax, I have given him his props for drafting Kirk. But outside of that, its been a disaster. Others have noticed all of these mistakes as well. But its always easy to just say its Arenas and Rlucas. So its nice that you have showed up to show its not just 2 people. But that it is a growing perception that our team doesnt only have players who are not that good, which is fairly obvious, but is run in a certain way that isnt very good as well. Blizzy has some personal connection to situation that keeps him from being critical of the staff, but its ok for him to bash players and Krause. I dont know, or care, what it is, but its there. Otherwise, Id say he is still one of the best posters we have. But again, I dont much stock into a guy who has some personal ties to the club, INSIDER or NOT.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

We need to stray away from blasting each other in posts. We are all in this together. I make the same mistake myself sometimes when I get into a heated discussion with someone. Paxson makes mistakes, and the players make mistakes. Paxson does some things good, the players do some things good.All should be held accountable. Paxson should not have signed Pippen. Props for drafting Kirk. Props for finding Linton Johnson. We all can say that he is a hidden gem. Probably should be nothing more than a 8-9 man but still he plays the game hard. He was right in trading Rose but more than likely should have been more patient and he might have gotten a better deal. Taking back JYD in that deal more than likely was the wrong thing to do. We can do the same things with all players. Some things they did well, some they didn't. Lets just all agree that we are all Bulls fans and in this together.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Let me say that I can understand the ire of posters towards Skiles and Paxson. I really can. I felt bad for Blount when he was waived. Not so much the fact that he was waived but the idea that cannot play in the playoffs should Toronto make it there. Pax admitted it was a mistake. 

I tend to side with C Blizzy on this arguement; however as I have already said, I understand the thinking of the people who want the heads of both Paxson and Skiles. They have made mistakes. But then I tend to look at the whole picture. There is more wrong with the team than Paxson and Skiles. There were problems with them before either one of them got here and appearently the problems are still here now that both have positions in the bulls organization. I am willing to give these two a chance. Some of the same players have been here through three coaches and now 2 General managers. There seems to be more wrong with the players than there is paxson and skiles, wouldn't you think? And I say this, not in defense of the two but to focus on the what seems to be, (at least to me anyway) the real problem with the team and that is the players who have been with us for 3 and 4 years. 

Many people wanted Floyd gone. Including me. He went and what happened? The team did improve under BC. Yet all along I read over and over again that BC was not the right coach for the team. His rotations were puzzling. Many posters wanted him gone. The team that BC had to win 30 games was not ready to play this year. Not at all. I fail to see how this was Paxsons fault, even though many people said it is the GM's responsibility to see to it that they are ready. I disagree. Part of that statement may be true, but Fans and GM's should expect a degree of professionalism from the players themselves. From Rose, all the way to Williams almost killing himself, we did not see that at all from players. 

Again, there is more wrong with this team than just Paxson and Skiles. To say other wise is missing the real focal point of the whole thing! Even though I do agree with some of the jabs taken at both Skiles and Paxson. But what we need now is stable management. We need the coach and GM to time to try and right the wrongs in this organization. These two may not be the right ones, but I fail to see how people can call for their heads in just 10 months time as a GM and only 3 and a half months time as a coach! 

Look at Jerry West and Brown. They did not turn the ship around in ten months time! Next year at this time, should the team still be the worse team in the league, then I may be persauded to join the group that want both guys gone. But for now, I am willing to give them the chance to right many of the wrongs.

And as a side note. Matt Lloyd is not my source. C Blizzy is right. It would be dangereous to him to have anyone accuse him of that because how can he argue for his case? He can't. Matt and I did talk, LAST YEAR. But I never, ever used him as my source. We talked because of some interviews I wanted lined up. That is all. But every since he changed jobs we talked only one time since then. That was last April or May. So, Matt Lloyd is not my source. 

Let me say I will not tell who my source is. I have more than one. And I am told many things that never reach the board. I only tell something when the people want something told, for instance the trade that was announced at realgm was not true, so one of my sources asked me to post it. I even made sure the wording was acceptable before I posted it.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IntheBlinkofaDeng</b>!
> We need to stray away from blasting each other in posts. We are all in this together. I make the same mistake myself sometimes when I get into a heated discussion with someone. Paxson makes mistakes, and the players make mistakes. Paxson does some things good, the players do some things good.All should be held accountable. Paxson should not have signed Pippen. Props for drafting Kirk. Props for finding Linton Johnson. We all can say that he is a hidden gem. Probably should be nothing more than a 8-9 man but still he plays the game hard. He was right in trading Rose but more than likely should have been more patient and he might have gotten a better deal. Taking back JYD in that deal more than likely was the wrong thing to do. We can do the same things with all players. Some things they did well, some they didn't. Lets just all agree that we are all Bulls fans and in this together.


true, but I just think its important that we honestly read posts before pasting someone. 

I mean, in judgement of Pax, this is what I have come too. Call it preconcieved or not

Good
1) drafting Kirk Hinrich
2) Getting Jwill something and making us look like we care

Bad
1) signing Pippen out of personal loyalty and guaranteeing it without insurance
2) dumping Blount after the playoff deadline and completely contradicting himself in the process. He wants professional players with good attitudes and then screws the most professional player with out best attitude
3) Trading Rose and Marshall and then having the audacity to call it a move for cap purposes when AD and JYD save us about 2 million. So we got about half the talent back to save 2 million and will have JYD for 3 years longer then we would have had Rose? DC and Dan showed how inept this is. dont need to explain more
4) His comments about HS players show a complete lack of an open mind. And opens himself up to criticism if he takes one. I for one think he might have to, but others will point this out. To say HS kids dont know how to work hard is just dumb. The fact is, OUR HS KIDS DONT KNOW HOW TO WORK HARD. There is a big difference between Lebron and Amare and what our kids do. Dont pigeon hole Smith and Howard
5) Sending BJ and Myers half way across the world to watch a kid he had no intention of drafting 4 days before the draft
6) Dumping vets etc for shots at NBDL players. again, Linton has been ok at best, but does he really make any other roster in the NBA?
7) very little done, from what I hear, on beefing up the international scouting services
8) Laying so much blame at Currys and Crawfords feet that even he felt the need to apologize and talk to the players agents
9) Firing BC after the worst stretch of the season
10) Not even interviewing any other candidates for head coach of our team. In fact, Skiles was never interviewed, they just started negotiatiing with him from the get go. But I guess when you get the job without competition, that is the culture we want to have?
11) serious leaks within the organization that almost cost the club the Rose deal in the first place
12) pooh poohing Jwill during his comeback. Saying Jwill hadnt seen their doctors and would probably never play again when in fact, Jwill had seen their doctors and that doctor said Jwill would be back. There was some egg on the face there

Maybes
1) Skiles, I dont like him, but he needs a minimum of one camp to
see if he is the long term answer or not 
2) Gill-yawn
3) Brunson Yawn, waived
4) Gar Forman, who knows


Now I dont know what else to say. Feel free to add to the list


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Sigh, I'm going to just keep this hard hat on...

I love getting blasted...

Personal attacks seem to come when people don't really want to argue the point at hand.

I'm just looking at facts...

Even if in this Blount case there was a honest oversight, well oversights lose people their jobs.

If you have a job to do and you forget something important that has to do with that job or whatever the case might be, you'll have to answer for it.

If Paxson doesn't know a little thing like this, what makes you believe he knows a big thing like building a championship team?

Tell you one thing, cutting vets after the deadline won't help him at all.

Corie Blount is no all-star, but those are the kind of guys the fill little holes on championship teams.

Also there's more demand in this league for a Corie Blount than there is a Linton Johnson.

If it weren't for us, he'd still be in Rockford...let's go another level and I'll say a guy like Lee Nailon has done more in Cleveland in his 2 10 day contracts or Jason Collier in Atlanta than Linton has his entire time with the Bulls.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> One at a time now (I'm a slow reader).
> ...


I think the same way you do about this matter.


----------



## Illstate2 (Nov 11, 2003)

All things being relative, I don't see how this story is overblown considering there have been huge multipage threads over Chandler's "wardrobe malfunction" and Curry's cell phone story.

Why should Pax get any slack? Its unfortunate that we have undeveloped players on our roster, but players learning on the job is a fact of life in today's NBA. However, GMs learning on the job isn't. When a guy is given the GM position, he's gotta be ready to handle all aspects of the job. So if this really was a result of incompetence on Pax's part, it is a big thing in my opinion.

This isn't the image you want to present to potential free agents. All the goodwill that was created by being rid of Krause and bringing Pippen back has been erased, and the Blount incident is one of the contributory factors.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> Again I ask, who names their kid Gar?


:whoknows: maybe this is the most cogent question of all

I have to say that Corie has always hated Skiles, recent kiss and makeup notwithstanding. Other players who don't get in Skiles kitchen may not so much. I expect E-Gone to cry much the same tune. 
Corie has played well this season...so Hmmmmmmm WTF?

However, you can't dismiss Blount's comments about Skiles out of hand. But mostly i think he's probably angry about getting cut after the deadline.

A lot of these guys want to be left to their own devices about preparation, approach, what have you.......and have failed the team. In that sense, Skiles is doing the right things.
Like Lary Brown and some other guys, they need "their players" Guys they can work "their approach" with........perhaps many, if not most of the Bulls are not compatable. I think Kirk likes Skiles. He has said so. The Bulls are going to have to find the right players, perhaps, as Skiles isn't one of those coaches who can "bend" to the players if they are soft or untidy(not that Corie is soft and untidy). He has to get the right team to coach perhaps.

again, Corie has played well...........interesting. Apparently, Skiles worked for HIM

I will say that i would rather have players that Skiles likes, than not, on my team if i owned one.

Suspiciously, this sounds like Sour grapes, and a guy with a legitimate beef about the deadline. Nothing worth drawing conclusions from. I know that won't stop most of you from believing what you want to believe.....
:laugh:


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>fleetwood macbull</b>!
> 
> :whoknows: maybe this is the most cogent question of all
> 
> ...


It shouldnt matter whether hes "your " guy or not all that matters is winning games .We are 6 years into this BS the goal should be to win games and anyone without this notion in mind and deed shoould be let go .Who the hell really wants to wait another 6 years as we search the nbdl for Skiles guys ?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>fleetwood macbull</b>!
> A lot of these guys want to be left to their own devices about preparation, approach, what have you.......and have failed the team. In that sense, Skiles is doing the right things.
> Like Lary Brown and some other guys, they need "their players" Guys they can work "their approach" with........perhaps many, if not most of the Bulls are not compatable. I think Kirk likes Skiles. He has said so. The Bulls are going to have to find the right players, perhaps, as Skiles isn't one of those coaches who can "bend" to the players if they are soft or untidy(not that Corie is soft and untidy). He has to get the right team to coach perhaps.


1. Skiles isn't Larry Brown, Skiles isn't even Chris Ford...

2. Who are the right players? This guy has coached Penny, Kidd, Marion, etc. and couldn't win, so I'm supposed to believe he can get it done with this bunch?

I believe everything Corie says because really why does he have to lie? He's on the Raptors, he'll be there next year as well probably, it's whatever...

Does everyone who leaves Chicago have sour grapes?

Nah, I'm not buying that one even with someone else's money...

Maybe it's time to believe there is some validity to what they're saying because Blount isn't the only one who's had words about this franchise. 

People post but avoid the questions or remarks made..

1. If this was really a oversight and Paxson didn't know about the date, that's incompetence, what makes me believe he can build a championship team when he doesn't have the knowledge of a simple date?

2. Paxson AND his entire staff, including B.J. didn't know? Skiles didn't know?

There's 3 former players in this mix and none of them knew about this date?

3. Why doesn't ERob play? Because he doesn't want to live in the gym? Has there ever been a report on him missing a practice, being late for a practice?

It wasn't anything on court because fact is ERob produces on the court...

He's one of the few talents we have on this team, like it or not...

4. Fizer has been in the doghouse since jump...why? He had a couple good games then didn't play for a long time, what reporter said Fizer works as hard as any Bull, so what's the issue there?

You may think those guys are bums, but Linton, Shirley, and Dupree can sit in the gym all night and they still won't be half the talents of those 2 players.

Go get Skiles players? 

PLEASE...

Skiles needs to take what he has and get the best out of all of it...

That's what makes a good coach...

As it is he's ran everyone except Kirk into the ground at some point, and this my way or the highway bull**** is comical...

This guy isn't Phil Jackson, Larry Brown, Dean Smith, Roy Williams or anyone else that these guys would actually marvel at...

Let's get to the issues at hand, no one says agree or disagree or whatever, think what you want to think, but tackle the issues instead of dodging them with either personal attacks or just throwing newspaper over the **** when you know there are issues with this franchise from top to bottom, and someone has to be held accountable.

It can't all be Jamal's fault...


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> 
> It shouldnt matter whether hes "your " guy or not all that matters is winning games .We are 6 years into this BS the goal should be to win games and anyone without this notion in mind and deed shoould be let go .Who the hell really wants to wait another 6 years as we search the nbdl for Skiles guys ?


Agreed.

Even if Paxson is a phenominal drafter, it is going to take a long, long time, if he can only add one piece a year.

What Krause left him was far from perfect, but it had more trade value than our current roster.

So, yea, I am a little concerned about how the ole Skiles and Pax show is going to play out.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> 1. Skiles isn't Larry Brown, Skiles isn't even Chris Ford...
> ...


"first" #1 
Skiles isn't Larry Brown. Right. He's Scott Skiles. Larry Brown changes the rosters or gets the rosters changed into what he thinks he needs to win. Thats nothing new (why are YOU avoiding MY point?)

"first" #2
Skiles didn't win? Now i know you are busted. He did win

You say "i believe Corie, because really why wopuld he lie?" Easy. Players do it all the time. He may not even be lying, just seeing it his way, which could be stupid. Or bitter. He never like Skiles. He just got cut mercilously. It could be personal...as if this never occured to you (maybe not ) Again, why are YOU avoiding MY point?

"second" #1 what about Pax's gaff? Good question. I don't know. I'm watching Pax too

"second #2 again, see Good question

#3 Why doesn't E-Rob play? he's a bad example to the kids who are the future. We don't want guys who just show up and punch in. We wanted champions i thought. If you are pining for E-Rob, you just don't get what being a winner is all about in the NBA.

.......I'll just point you in the diresction of all the great players, talented or not, who win championships. From the Kobe's, who get on the floor to work on their shots 2 hours B4 the hgame starts, to the Larry Birds, Michael Jordans and Magic Johnsons, who wouldn't DARE allow another to outwork them, or kill themselves competeing for who outworks who.
To the unskilled workers who have no talent, who bust there asses to get an extra ounce of performance from themselves

E-Rob? a guy who gets only a slight fraction of his true ability from himself because he phones it it? THATS who you want showing these guys? THATS how you want Eddy Curry to act like?
.......OMFG, you don't understand


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

arenas, 

you might be better off just cheering for *"YOUR Clippers"* at this point cause Skiles and Pax aren't likely to be going anywhere anytime soon. 
and since you said you're not watching the Bulls for the rest of the season, why should we put up with your constant negativity? 

I agree with Fleet. This is sour grapes and it's being overblown and we all need to move on.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dan Rosenbaum</b>!
> Edited by Dan Rosenbaum


you and blizzy really need to relax and do some homework. I have never said Lloyd was a leak and outside of one or 2 jokes about him being the most lucky guy on earth, he rarely comes up. He has a job that most of us would want, ace especially. From what someone said, he went from an asst, in the office to a scout on Paxs revival. I again, have never said he was a leak. But when you see Pax at a game, look to his right, guess who that guy is? Its Lloyd. But if it makes you feel better, Ill start picking on my boy, Gar. The point is, no one on the Bulls is going to care what I, or Blizzy, or Arenas or whoever thinks. Its clear that they dont. I doubt Matt Lloyd much cares either. 

Now, to other issue at hand. There is a leak in the Bulls organization. There are in almost every organization. And I have never said it was Matt Lloyd and have never insinuated it was. And leaks arent always a bad thing. In fact, there are alot of GMs who become unidentified sources about thier trades and leak them to the press to get a response before doing them. They know what they are doing

Now, I do put alot of stock into what you say. You clearly know your stuff. And you have had more contact with the front office then 99.9% of us, so when you say something, it garners respect. Dont let that deter you. Your entitled to your opinion. And I listen intently cause of the respect that you have garnered. But my advice is to not worry about stepping on toes. if the Bulls, or whoever, arent that professional in your opinion, then you ought to voice it. I certainly appreciated your comments.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> you and blizzy really need to relax and do some homework. I have never said Lloyd was a leak and outside of one or 2 jokes about him being the most lucky guy on earth, he rarely comes up.


Main Entry: *in·sin·u·ate* 
Pronunciation: in-'sin-y&-"wAt
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -at·ed; -at·ing
Etymology: Latin insinuatus, past participle of insinuare, from in- + sinuare to bend, curve, from sinus curve
transitive senses
1 a : to introduce (as an idea) gradually or in a subtle, indirect, or covert way <insinuate doubts into a trusting mind> b : to impart or communicate with artful or oblique reference
2 : to introduce (as oneself) by stealthy, smooth, or artful means
intransitive senses

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=insinuate&x=18&y=18

How's that for doing homework? I'm done on this subject, but I think (hope) you get my point.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I always assumed RLucas' Matt Lloyd references were a running joke. I still don't really know what he does or who he is, or really care all that much about him.

I think Blizzy and Dan are the only ones that are really taking it all that seriously, which is because you both are actually close to things, I guess?

It should be significant that I think this is the first time I've ever talked about Matt Lloyd. And it was not because of anything RLucas directly said, but by you guys bringing it up.

I think you're giving it more credence by making a big deal out of it. But that's just my read on it as someone who never really thought about Matt Lloyd more than this moment right now.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I'm locking this thread temporarily until I can figure out exactly what everyone's trying to say.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> I always assumed RLucas' Matt Lloyd references were a running joke. I still don't really know what he does or who he is, or really care all that much about him.
> 
> I think Blizzy and Dan are the only ones that are really taking it all that seriously, which is because you both are actually close to things, I guess?


Maybe, or maybe because they just have a clue about the fact that, regardless of the actual *truth* at hand here, word of leaks, naming names, and making insinuations about who knows who and what's really going on is information that could cost people their jobs.

That's not cool at all.

Personally, I don't want to know that bad. I'd rather keep some level of uncertainty about this stuff, because if there actually are any "insiders" around, they'll certainly be turned off by this stuff.


----------

