# Zeke still wants Eddy?!?



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Such a move would make center Eddy Curry even more expendable. Indications are the New York Knicks still may want to take Curry, a restricted free agent, off the Bulls' hands
> According to published reports, the Knicks continue to monitor the Curry situation closely in hopes they may be able to acquire him before the start of their preseason camp.
> 
> While the Knicks recently addressed their need for a big man with the addition of free agent Jerome James, the 7-foot-1, 272-pound James is more of a banger than a scorer. As an established low-post threat, Curry might be an ideal complement for James in the middle.
> ...


http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dssports/pro/272sd3.htm


----------



## Aesop (Jun 1, 2003)

I don't see any way a S&T could be worked out. The Knicks have little to offer the Bulls. Even if they would consider trading one of their young players, matching salaries would be difficult.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

No substance here just as I suspected. Do we really want to give Larry Brown a team of Marbury/Crawford/Richardson/James/Curry, thats just asking for trouble, Larry could make a 50 win team out of that. If we are getting rid of Eddy, trade him West, that way we won't have the constant frustration of him knocking us out of the playoffs annually.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Personally I think the Knicks have *Nothing * to offer us for Eddy. They are loaded with terrible contracts and players that don't really help their teams (Stephan , Q , Jamal...) . Even Brown will have a tough time making them a good team , though I'm sure being the best (or one of) in the buisness he'll defenitely make them better than last year.

As Aesop posted , it would be very hard to match salaries even if they offer their young players. and we don't need the headache of having 2 RFA's in Ariza and Sweets(in 2 years) next year , when the FA market is weak anyway and guys will be overpaid.

And this is from a fan that thinks Eddy should be traded - But as Sloth said many times , this is not the right time to trade him. I think we should've done it at previous midseason (Baron , Vince were had for close to nothing) but since it did not happen we should wait till next season when he ain't a BYC status player (even if he's unrestricted after playing out the QO it is very likely it will take a S&T to get him). NY also owns a 2006 SA 1st rounder but not their own if they're not lottery (jazz) so picks ain't much of an option as well.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

actually, there is some substance here. Isiah loves Curry. I can confirm that. Last year they had no one who could help us and managed to get their guy anyway. NY has a ton of money, they dont worry about lux tax and are just crazy enough to give Curry a contract with no insurance. Yes, they are just crazy enough to even guarantee it. The problem is that they wasted their MLE. But if they didnt, would the Bulls match a front loaded 25M for 5 year deal. Say the Knicks give 20 up front for the first 2 years and and 5 over the last 3? That would hurt the Bulls in FA next summer. Would Pax match it? I dont think so. So Isiah kind of blew it. But we thought he didnt have anything to offer for Craw last year and got his man. He has Tim Thomas, Afernee Hardaway, Ariza, Sweetney (who I wouldnt bite on) and some draft picks to work with this year. It would appear he could make something happen.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

bullet said:


> Personally I think the Knicks have *Nothing * to offer us for Eddy. They are loaded with terrible contracts and players that don't really help their teams (Stephan , Q , Jamal...) . Even Brown will have a tough time making them a good team , though I'm sure being the best (or one of) in the buisness he'll defenitely make them better than last year.
> 
> As Aesop posted , it would be very hard to match salaries even if they offer their young players. and we don't need the headache of having 2 RFA's in Ariza and Sweets(in 2 years) next year , when the FA market is weak anyway and guys will be overpaid.
> 
> And this is from a fan that thinks Eddy should be traded - But as Sloth said many times , this is not the right time to trade him. I think we should've done it at previous midseason (Baron , Vince were had for close to nothing) but since it did not happen we should wait till next season when he ain't a BYC status player (even if he's unrestricted after playing out the QO it is very likely it will take a S&T to get him). NY also owns a 2006 SA 1st rounder but not their own if they're not lottery (jazz) so picks ain't much of an option as well.


I would say there is some truth here. However, I would add that Ariza turns me on more then 99% of the FAs in next years class. That kid is going to be frickin special.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

We must sign Eddy to a nice contract this offseason, simple as that. Then at the trade deadline, we might get into the star swap with Eddy, maybe not. We might be able to just trade Antonio Davis for a star, and I think Paxson has this in mind, its pretty evident with the stacking of the frontcourt so they can take the loss of Davis. We can get an allstar caliber 2/3, maybe Shawn Marion even if Suns fall. Then we can sign Al Harrington and be on our way for the offseason. One star player moves for near nothing every trade deadline, and we have a max expiring contract to offer!


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

More than likely, Curry will not be traded. As rlucas says they have already used the MLE. 

Thomas may want him, but not as bad as he wanted James.


----------



## nybullsfan (Aug 12, 2005)

If we have to trade Curry to the knicks i would want sweetney,ariza, and maybe a draft pick. I would want Sweetney not becuz I like him but at worst he can become a 14/7 player with a nice touch. Ariza has the potential to become not just a good defender but a athletic one, and thats what pax likes. it was one game where he was just killing us bulls fans remeber that. while brown can most likely turn that team to a 50 winner but can he change there personalitys. can he change Curry to play with desire, can he change crawford for jacking up shots, can he change richardson for jacking up three pointers, and can he change marbury from losing and at times being selfish. also it gives us frontline options such as chandler,sweetney,harrington,davis,songaila, or allen. while i am not in favor of trading curry (the knicks need more than just sweetney and ariza) we just cant let him walk.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

As I said on another thread, why do we need to get rid of Curry at all? He has a skill that is in absolute demand in the NBA. Its a skill that the majority of NBA champs have had to win titles. And as soon as we deal him or lose him we will be looking to replace that skill. Heck, the reason we got knocked out of the playoffs is because Currys skill was missing from the attack. Instead of focusing on how great that skill is we focus on the weaknesses of his game. Sure he has them, but there is little to no appreciation for the strengths. Lets remember that the Lakers won titles with Kareem who wasnt a strong rebounder or defender at the end of his career. I wonder if Laker fans hated him so much back then?

Curry has a peculiar situation but why not do a short term deal, say 3 years, one year guaranteed at something like 24 mil. Curry would have to sign a waiver since insurance wont cover him for atleast a year. Thats fair to the Bulls and fair to Curry. Curry gets his money as long as he can play and the Bulls get protection in case he cant. I cant see why there is such an impasse from Currys side? He ought to just to do that deal, and Pax ought to offer it. But I cant help thinking that if Curry were one of Paxs picks that this wouldnt be an issue. Just my opinion.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> actually, there is some substance here. Isiah loves Curry. I can confirm that. Last year they had no one who could help us and managed to get their guy anyway. NY has a ton of money, they dont worry about lux tax and are just crazy enough to give Curry a contract with no insurance. Yes, they are just crazy enough to even guarantee it. The problem is that they wasted their MLE. *But if they didnt, would the Bulls match a front loaded 25M for 5 year deal. Say the Knicks give 20 up front for the first 2 years and and 5 over the last 3?* That would hurt the Bulls in FA next summer. Would Pax match it? I dont think so. So Isiah kind of blew it. But we thought he didnt have anything to offer for Craw last year and got his man. He has Tim Thomas, Afernee Hardaway, Ariza, Sweetney (who I wouldnt bite on) and some draft picks to work with this year. It would appear he could make something happen.


Don't worry, even if Zeke still had his MLE, that contract can't be done.

A salary bonus doesn't allow the Knicks to pay Eddy more than $5 million, the salary plus bonus has to fit into the $5 million MLE.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#60

Teams are allowed to offer the players they sign a bonus worth as much as 25% of the total compensation, and may do so whether or not the team is over the cap. If a player has a signing bonus, that bonus is averaged among the guaranteed years of the contract (not including any option years) and added to the team salary during those years. This can create a problem if the player is signed to an exception or to the maximum salary. For instance, if the Mid-Level exception is $5 million, then a team could sign a player to a five-year contract with 10% rasises, as follows:


Year
Salary

1
$5,000,000

2
$5,500,000

3
$6,000,000

4
$6,500,000

5
$7,000,000

Total
$30,000,000


The maximum (25%) signing bonus is $7,500,000, It must be allocated in equal proportion to each season of the contract ($1,500,000 per season, assuming no option years). This means that in order to fit the first-year salary plus the portion of the signing bonus allocated to the first season within the $5 million exception, the first-year salary must be reduced:

Year
Base salary
Portion of signing bonus
Total

1
$3,846,154
$1,153,846
$5,000,000

2
$4,230,769
$1,153,846
$5,384,616

3
$4,615,385
$1,153,846
$5,769,231

4
$5,000,000
$1,153,846
$6,153,846

5
$5,384,616
$1,153,846
$6,538,462

Total
$23,076,924

$28,846,155


Note that in order to fit the first-year amount (salary plus bonus) within the $5 million exception, the first year salary had to be reduced to $3,846,154 (20/26ths of the amount of the exception). This also has the effect of reducing the total contract by $1,153,845, which is the repurcussion of giving the player money up-front.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

bullet said:


> Personally I think the Knicks have *Nothing * to offer us for Eddy. They are loaded with terrible contracts and players that don't really help their teams (Stephan , Q , Jamal...) . Even Brown will have a tough time making them a good team , though I'm sure being the best (or one of) in the buisness he'll defenitely make them better than last year.
> 
> As Aesop posted , it would be very hard to match salaries even if they offer their young players. *and we don't need the headache of having 2 RFA's in Ariza and Sweets(in 2 years) next year , when the FA market is weak anyway and guys will be overpaid*.
> 
> And this is from a fan that thinks Eddy should be traded - But as Sloth said many times , this is not the right time to trade him. I think we should've done it at previous midseason (Baron , Vince were had for close to nothing) but since it did not happen we should wait till next season when he ain't a BYC status player (even if he's unrestricted after playing out the QO it is very likely it will take a S&T to get him). NY also owns a 2006 SA 1st rounder but not their own if they're not lottery (jazz) so picks ain't much of an option as well.


Sweets is NOT a RFA next summer, there is a team option on him for the 2006-2007 season. It is only for $2.7 million, which is a bargain if Sweets can give us some low-post scoring.

And Ariza will be restricted, but since he will only have 2 years in the league the most any team will be able to offer him is the MLE, and we will have Early Bird Rights and could match any offer up to the MLE.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

woe! Jabbar had 10 straight years of double diget rebounding! True towards the end of his career he dropped down to 4-6 rebounds a game but damn, ths didnt happen until after 15 years in the league. He had three straight years @ 16 a game. Year 2, 3 and 4. In his prime he averaged 3-4 blocks 4 or 5 assists, and to mention Kareem and Eddy in the same thread to defend Eddy? You do not have an arguement, imo. Eddys; career high was over 6 rebounds and barely over 1 block and not even 1 assist a game! He is going into year 5. 

To use this arguement that Kareem dropped at the end of his career is like saying after 20 years in the league, Eddy would be lucky to get 1 rebound a game.

I do not hate Eddy. I think we could use him. But I will bring out points he needs to work on as well.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

truebluefan said:


> woe! Jabbar had 10 straight years of double diget rebounding! True towards the end of his career he dropped down to 4-6 rebounds a game but damn, ths didnt happen until after 15 years in the league. He had three straight years @ 16 a game. Year 2, 3 and 4. In his prime he averaged 3-4 blocks 4 or 5 assists, and to mention Kareem and Eddy in the same thread to defend Eddy? You do not have an arguement, imo. Eddys; career high was over 6 rebounds and barely over 1 block and not even 1 assist a game! He is going into year 5.
> 
> To use this arguement that Kareem dropped at the end of his career is like saying after 20 years in the league, Eddy would be lucky to get 1 rebound a game.
> 
> I do not hate Eddy. I think we could use him. But I will bring out points he needs to work on as well.



The Lakers won titles with Kareem not much of a rebounder or defender. Thats the point of my comment. Am I wrong in saying that? I dont think so


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

rlucas4257 said:


> actually, there is some substance here. Isiah loves Curry. I can confirm that. Last year they had no one who could help us and managed to get their guy anyway. NY has a ton of money, they dont worry about lux tax and are just crazy enough to give Curry a contract with no insurance. Yes, they are just crazy enough to even guarantee it. The problem is that they wasted their MLE. But if they didnt, would the Bulls match a front loaded 25M for 5 year deal. Say the Knicks give 20 up front for the first 2 years and and 5 over the last 3? That would hurt the Bulls in FA next summer. Would Pax match it? I dont think so. So Isiah kind of blew it. But we thought he didnt have anything to offer for Craw last year and got his man. He has Tim Thomas, Afernee Hardaway, Ariza, Sweetney (who I wouldnt bite on) and some draft picks to work with this year. It would appear he could make something happen.


I really like Ariza too , so he'd have to be included. Picks - They cannot trade their own first rounder since Jazz got their pick lottery protected till 2010. The only pick they have other than that is SA next years pick , which ain't worth much (as long as Duncan is healthy it won't be higher than 25th). Personally , I'd like nothing to do with Penny or Tim Thomas , they are not good characters to get with the direction Pax is trying to go at.

and about matching NY next year - don't forget that will only happen if Eddy shows he can play a full nba season. If he does that , not only NY will be crazy enough to take him with no Insurance , and if he plays out , he'll be looking for more than the MLE. so even with NY (or any other team looking for a Center) they might need a S&T for Eddy. On the other hand - if he shows further problems with his health not even NY will take that risk. If Zeke had waited till now and not signed mediocre James , he'd be able to cause us problems with a full mle offer to Eddy , but since he did'nt , he'll have to wait and see along with all the rest of the league if Eddy can still play - after that , imo it will be too late for him. The cavs signed Z with no knee (or ankle) insurance , simpley since he showed the league he can still withstand a full season. Curry might be the same case category.

also - Ariza and Sweets ain't enough to match salaries , even tough Eddys salary only counts as half as a BYC , for anything more tha 5 mil. and as I said before , I would not add TT/Penny for AD to make this work , just ain't worth it. Only if NY could add at least 2 1st rounders (and 1 other than SA's) , which they can't as far as I know , I'd consider. Let NY keep their contracts and Zeke try to fool some other team...


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

bullsville said:


> Sweets is NOT a RFA next summer, there is a team option on him for the 2006-2007 season. It is only for $2.7 million, which is a bargain if Sweets can give us some low-post scoring.
> 
> And Ariza will be restricted, but since he will only have 2 years in the league the most any team will be able to offer him is the MLE, and we will have Early Bird Rights and could match any offer up to the MLE.


Correct - and I also wrote it down that he's restricted in 2 years (not in a very clear way I guess :biggrin: 

And wow - Ariza won't be able to get more than mle (is this from new CBA rules??) , that sounds good , but still NY will have to do better.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> The Lakers won titles with Kareem not much of a rebounder or defender. Thats the point of my comment. Am I wrong in saying that? I dont think so


No you are not wrong in saying that but that came years after wear and tear on his body. Eddy is in year 5, not 20. 

I do agree with your comments about what we may have done with Eddy playing in the playoffs. He would have demanded a double team. Results may have been different. Same is true with a healthy Deng. Could have been a second round exit instead of a first.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

The Lakers did win Championships with wornout Kareem , but he was only the 2nd to 3rd reason for that after Magic and Worthy. 

If we only had Magic..... :biggrin:

As I see it - ther is only *one thing* Eddy does well - post scoring. Even very well. and even that Kareem is one of the very few players that did it better even when he was 37. IMO - not in the same sentence , paragraph , page or Book. There is no comparison between the two in any way. Hell , even Shaq would have a hard time when you put him next to Kareem.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

bullet said:


> The Lakers did win Championships with wornout Kareem , but he was only the 2nd to 3rd reason for that after Magic and Worthy.
> 
> If we only had Magic..... :biggrin:
> 
> As I see it - ther is only *one thing* Eddy does well - post scoring. Even very well. and even that Kareem is one of the very few players that did it better even when he was 37. IMO - not in the same sentence , paragraph , page or Book. There is no comparison between the two in any way. Hell , even Shaq would have a hard time when you put him next to Kareem.


Does anyone read the posts? Seriously?

What I said was Kareem was neither a strong rebounder or defender at the end of his career and they were able to with him as a legit FIRST OPTION on OFFENSE. Curry is neither a strong rebounder and defender but he can put points on the board, shoot a high % and get opposing front lines into foul trouble, like Kareem did, AS A FIRST OPTION. Do we have Magic or Worthy? No. And its up to Pax to find that player. But in all honesty, the second you trade Curry away youll be looking for a post player to replace him. How many are there? 4 or 5. How many are available? Maybe 1 in 2 years. So why get rid of Curry?


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

truebluefan said:


> No you are not wrong in saying that but that came years after wear and tear on his body. Eddy is in year 5, not 20.
> 
> I do agree with your comments about what we may have done with Eddy playing in the playoffs. He would have demanded a double team. Results may have been different. Same is true with a healthy Deng. Could have been a second round exit instead of a first.



Again, Im not comparing a 22 year old Eddy Curry to a 22 year old Kareem (or Lew Alcindor) now am I? Re-read the original sentence. At the end of Kareems stay the Lakers remained a championship team even though the guy couldnt rebound, defend or for that matter move. But they had his inside presence on offense and that was vital to their success. Curry provides inside offense. How many do? The answer is very little. You can get by with Currys weaknesses by covering up for them in other areas, like the Lakers did. But very few win championships without having what Curry brings to the table. Thats simply a fact. Outside of the 6 peat Bulls and Detroit basically every team in the history of the NBA had a front line NBA post option who had a high % as an option. Thats simply a fact.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

bullet said:


> Correct - and I also wrote it down that he's restricted in 2 years (not in a very clear way I guess :biggrin:
> 
> And wow - Ariza won't be able to get more than mle (is this from new CBA rules??) , that sounds good , but still NY will have to do better.


OK, I thought you meant that Sweets was restricted *next* summer, but he wasn't- the Knicks had a team option, and if they didn't exercise it he would have become unrestricted. According to hoopshype.com they already picked up the option for his 4th season (2006-2007).

And yes, we could match any offer for Ariza due to the "Arenas rule" in the new CBA. 

I'm not saying I would trade Eddy for Sweets and Ariza, but it's certainly not a bad deal financially. We'd have Sweets locked up next summer for $2.7 million, and we'd have Ariza in the perfect spot for the team. If he "blows up" next season, he'll have great trade value for a sign and trade since even if he becomes LeBron he can only get the MLE next summer. And if not, we can keep him for possibly a low price since we'll have the room to match any offer.


HOWEVER, there is no way to make a Sweets and Ariza for Curry deal work unless Eddy is willing to sign for ~$3.5 million for next season, I don't see any way that happens. Even if Zeke guaranteed it uninsured for 6 years, that's only $27 million over 6 years, there is no way in hell Eddy does that.



BUT IF Isiah would give up Sweets and Frye for Curry, Eddy could make up to $5.44975 million next season, or $41 million over 6 years. That might be too much guaranteed money for Eddy to turn down, and it's at least more than the QO for this season.

Does Zeke want Eddy that bad? He doesn't seem to like Sweets all that much, and it's not his money (hell, he just gave almost that much to Jerome James). 

At least Pax would be getting back two young big men on rookie deals. Depending on Eddy's health (as always), that might be a pretty good deal for the Bulls.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Again, Im not comparing a 22 year old Eddy Curry to a 22 year old Kareem (or Lew Alcindor) now am I? Re-read the original sentence. At the end of Kareems stay the Lakers remained a championship team even though the guy couldnt rebound, defend or for that matter move. But they had his inside presence on offense and that was vital to their success. Curry provides inside offense. How many do? The answer is very little. You can get by with Currys weaknesses by covering up for them in other areas, like the Lakers did. But very few win championships without having what Curry brings to the table. Thats simply a fact. *Outside of the 6 peat Bulls and Detroit basically every team in the history of the NBA had a front line NBA post option who had a high % as an option. Thats simply a fact*.


I agree with your sentiment that Eddy could be as effective as "old Kareem", but that's still a big unknown. When Lew was Eddy's age, he was already an outstanding passer, putting up 4.5 to 5 assists every year. Lew (and Kareem) was a very smart player, I don't see Eddy ever being the post threat that Kareem was. Because while post scoring is certainly necessary, you can't run your offense through that post scorer unless he is an outstanding passer.

As for the bolded part, I would say that Detroit had a front line scoring option, if Aguirre and Dantley at SF count as the front line. 

But IMHO, the Spurs are the perfect example of the "new, more Europeanized NBA" I have been talking about for a couple of years. They have a great low-post threat in Tim Duncan, but when I watched the Finals I saw him spending a lot of time at the high post. In fact, for the entire post-season, over half of Duncan's shots were jumpers.

The Spurs put the ball in Parker's or Manu's hands and let them create off the dribble, the new rules emphasis last season to cut out perimeter hand-checking especially made this the way to play Championship basketball. When your big man can spread the floor and your PF can drill the 3, the Spurs were pretty damned hard to beat. Almost like a lot of European ball.

And FWIW, Duncan only hit ~31% of his jumpers in the playoffs, but his threat and the ability to spread the defense opened things up for Parker and Manu to drive and score or dish for wide-open 3's. 

I truly believe this is the way to build a team in the current NBA, and IMHO Pax seems to be trying to put together just such a team.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

rlucas4257 said:


> Does anyone read the posts? Seriously?
> 
> What I said was Kareem was neither a strong rebounder or defender at the end of his career and they were able to with him as a legit FIRST OPTION on OFFENSE. Curry is neither a strong rebounder and defender but he can put points on the board, shoot a high % and get opposing front lines into foul trouble, like Kareem did, AS A FIRST OPTION. Do we have Magic or Worthy? No. And its up to Pax to find that player. But in all honesty, the second you trade Curry away youll be looking for a post player to replace him. How many are there? 4 or 5. How many are available? Maybe 1 in 2 years. So why get rid of Curry?


Sorry - got u on Kareem.

But it does not change the fact that I think Eddy just harms the team so much more than he helps it.

and we both know Pax can be looking for 300 years , and still not necessarily find a Magic type of player. and if he does , we surely won't be talking about Eddy...

Oh , and still about old Kareem , as Bullsville noted , there is a big difference between giving 4 asts as Center , or passing it to opponent as Eddy does , thats the team player and BB IQ stuff , u gotta address it with Eddy , since he's so bad at it , thats where he hurts us , along with many other things.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

You cant compare rebounds per game when KAJ played and todays game. PF's were not has big and it was a much different and faster game. Centers often averaged greater than 15 rebounds per game. KAJ was never anything but an average rebounder and defensive center. what he was was unstoppable on offensive.

And this Zeke wants Curry is the same bs you read from the NY press all the time. Zeke wants player X for a salary 1/2 of want anyone else can pay. But everyone just wants to play in NY. what a joke. Same thing every year. Zeke has put his team in the worst salary cap position in the NBA. They have average players all getting huge contracts.

Curry going to NY what a joke. Mayge curry will take the MLE or maybe he will just play for free. I hear that Curry is in debt bit time. He wants any contact he can get and as big a signing bonus as possible to pay off his debt.

david


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Curry and Sweets are more equal than everyone currently thinks

I'm sure Dan Rosenbaum could shed some statistical light on this

But basically..

Eddy averaged 15 and 6 in 29 minutes and Sweets averaged 8.5 and 6 in 19 minutes 

When you have a look at shots per minute last season and see that Eddy was taking one every 2.40 minutes approximately and Sweets was at one every 3.30....AND given that they both were practically identical in FG% and FT%..then with the same minutes Sweets could , in theory , gives us the same point production as Eddy Curry but greater rebounding output.. IF he was given consistency in handling 

Forget about thinking Zeke would toss in draft picks and Ariza too..its actually in the Bulls favour on a one on one basis IMO..statistically ..and then more so when you take into account the long term health and effectivess and prudence in investment when it comes to Eddy Curry


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Abe, the only problem is that Eddy can't be traded for Sweets straight-up, and even Sweets and Ariza doesn't work. Unless Eddy wants to take far less than the QO, or Zeke is willing to part with Frye and Sweets or Sweets and Robinson and Lee (to get Eddy to a 1st-year salary over the QO), there is just no deal to be made.

And thanks for telling the world about my Lamond Murray jersey...


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

bullsville said:


> Abe, the only problem is that Eddy can't be traded for Sweets straight-up, and even Sweets and Ariza doesn't work. Unless Eddy wants to take far less than the QO, or Zeke is willing to part with Frye and Sweets or Sweets and Robinson and Lee (to get Eddy to a 1st-year salary over the QO), there is just no deal to be made.
> 
> And thanks for telling the world about my Lamond Murray jersey...


:lol:

I was hoping you'd get a laugh about the Lamond Murray quip

B.Ville, I am aware of the ish's dealing Eddy to New York with Sweets as the other principal...which is why I am an advocate of a trade I proposed a couple of days ago that rounds out with AD and Penny 

At the end of the season when AD and Penny are both off the books ..its basically Eddy for Sweets straight up ..which I think ( for reasons mentioned ) is more in favour of the Bulls

People view Sweets on a surface level with predefined ( and inaccurate IMO ) observations about him just because he's a chunk. 

Reality is most wouldn't know 

And for those that moan about Penny's jib .. I would stick with him as I do think he could be handy in our back court rotation for 1 season ..but if it was an issue .. cut him

I mean if we have Tyson, Sweets, Songaila, Allen and Harrington ..how much is AD going to contributing anyway????

So what's the big deal to use him in leveragng some return for Eddy Curry that I believe ( and stats support on this one ) may actually work out in the Bulls favour ( on a one for one production comparative - and in the context immediate salary cap planning for next season )

If your not really going to play him that much why keep him around . Just because your paying him ? We could probably use Penny in the backcourt more for 1 year..but if you didn't want him for BS jib issues.. then cut him because your hardly going to be using AD a bunch anyway

I mean how cool would it be to pull this off and then go hard for Nene and Jared Jeffries next season ( at reasonable cost )to put on the front line as reserves with Songaila with Chandler and Sweets as your principals

We'd still have a boat load of cap room even with a swing guard / ball handling shooter type in Welsch to add to a backcourt rotation of Hinrich, Gordon, Duhon and Basden

And here's the best bit.. we'd still have a bunch of money the following summer to pay whatever it takes to bring Josh Howard to town

*

Chandler
Sweetney
Deng
Gordon
Hinrich

bench

Nene
Jeffries
Nocioni
Howard
Duhon

Songaila
Basden
Welsch

*

Talk about an embarrasment of riches

And to me .. that's a team that could possibly compete for championships within 2 to 3 seasons


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> As I said on another thread, why do we need to get rid of Curry at all? He has a skill that is in absolute demand in the NBA. .


Because you could legitimately argue that Sweetney is a player with similar skill and is a more effective player . Plus you will save an extra $5M in extra cap room next summer 

Pretty compelling reasons for me


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> :lol:
> 
> I was hoping you'd get a laugh about the Lamond Murray quip
> 
> ...



Very well said I think people are overlooking Pennys value somewhat .I doubt Skiles would hav a problem acquiring penny for one season and Penny seems to respect Skiles and has known him a long time.



> Off the court, he's a very cool guy, great to be around, really nice," says Knicks guard Penny Hardaway, who played with Skiles (in Orlando) and was coached by Skiles (in Phoenix). "But, on the floor, he wants you to do your job like a professional."


The only thing I dont like is how no one wants to take back any salary because were savings money to spend next year but on who exactly.Im thinking if we have to move Curry and can get back 2 players with value and a pick then we should do it but we will still need some tradeable salary outside of our core players past next year.

With the new CBA players who leave their teams as fa's can only get 5 years and those who sign with current teams can get 6 years so in the future you would have to think that good players will be pushing hard for S & T as opposed to just outright signing so having a player in the 5-7 million dollar range on our roster who is young and a part of our rotation to combine with a possible core player will be important .

Thats why I would consider Q.Sweets,draft pick for Curry,Pike this gives us quite a few pieces to play with next summer in trades for a superstar if one becomes available.

Duhon
Gordon
Nocioni
Sweetney
Q
knicks pick 
our own pick


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Because you could legitimately argue that Sweetney is a player with similar skill and is a more effective player . Plus you will save an extra $5M in extra cap room next summer
> 
> Pretty compelling reasons for me


If Sweetney could do what Curry does, dont you think NY, a team who desperately needs inside punch, would play Sweetney more then 19 minutes a game? Sure, NY is not well run, maybe not well coached but they are complete imbeciles. Sweetney hasnt done much in his 2 years there and he is on a team who really needs what you claim he can bring to the table. I mean, Lenny Wilkens would have played him dont you think?


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> If Sweetney could do what Curry does, dont you think NY, a team who desperately needs inside punch, would play Sweetney more then 19 minutes a game? Sure, NY is not well run, maybe not well coached but they are complete imbeciles. Sweetney hasnt done much in his 2 years there and he is on a team who really needs what you claim he can bring to the table. I mean, Lenny Wilkens would have played him dont you think?


They'd play Sweetney 40 a night if they could, but foul trouble and conditioning (obviously those are related to some extent) made it an impossibility.

Sweetney averaged an appalling 7.1 PF/48 last season, and unlike most young players, I don't see him improving on that anytime soon. If he's asked to check a 4 or 5 with even a rudimentary offensive game, it's going to be ugly, and it just gets worse once he's run up and down the court a few times and starts huffing and puffing.

Sweetney is one of those guys whose prospects as a pro player were hurt, not helped, by staying in college. He was fairly well-developed from an offensive standpoint very early on, and Georgetown never asked him to learn how to play a lick of defense. In fact, the exact opposite happened -- he was so central to their chances of winning that all of their defensive schemes insulated Sweetney and relieved him of the task of guarding people. He'd just hang back, board, and try to block a shot here or there.

Sweetney would be a very, very poor substitute for Curry. I imagine after about a week's worth of practices, he'd be near the bottom of Skiles's rotation and would probably get less floor time than he did in NY, not more.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> They'd play Sweetney 40 a night if they could, but foul trouble and conditioning (obviously those are related to some extent) made it an impossibility.
> 
> Sweetney averaged an appalling 7.1 PF/48 last season, and unlike most young players, I don't see him improving on that anytime soon. If he's asked to check a 4 or 5 with even a rudimentary offensive game, it's going to be ugly, and it just gets worse once he's run up and down the court a few times and starts huffing and puffing.
> 
> ...


Good observations and duly noted 

And I don't deny your comments as to his defensive capacities

I will point out however that Eddy Curry as a 2nd year player played exactly the same number of minutes as Sweetney as a 2nd year player ( 19.4mpg ) and fouled at a rate of 6.93 per 48 compared to Sweetney at 7.1

Not an earth shattering difference now is it ?

Curry has always had concerns as to his conditioning . This is not debateable. Its fact . His court time has suffered because of it up until last season when Skiles whipped him into shape. Again not debateable. Fact. He has always been a sieve on the defensive end . Not debateaable. Fact

My very simple point was that they are very similar players in a lot of respects with regard to their conditioning and production comparison. No one can deny that because the data speaks for itself

You assertion that he would be hammered by Skiles and not see court time..could well be the case. At first. But who is to say that with that tough love and the application and with the fundamental skill that is there (notwithstanding his shortcomings ..the same short comings that Eddy Curry has ) that he could not with the right conditioning give us the post presence that Eddy Curry does now ?

Look if we keep Eddy , great. 

I'm a pragmatist.

And once he signs for the QO..we f'd . Colour him gone. Can't deal him on the QO and he'll likely walk with another season under his belt which will likely address the risk issue for insurance and teams alike . 

I suspect that deep down given your previous commentary on the matter you may believe that this is a likely outcome

If one accepts that it would be prudent to deal him given this risk of losing him for f__k all.. in the current circumstances who exactly are you all kidding yourselves he is going to fetch for us as a principal in a sign and trade deal

It gets back to DaBullz's post about who is worthy to be a Bull using our assets of players and cap space , and the inference therein , where we have a rose coloured ( and probably inaccurate ) view of our player's worth at any given moment in time

Curry has been in shape for half a seasson in a 4 year career 

Remember how he came into camp in poor condition last year and by Christmas/early New Year picked up his conditioning and turned it around 

Why not Sweetney?

I admit he has no excuse as a pro but when your in a losing culture like New York where there are 2017 power forwards on the roster , you get inconsistent minutes and when you do you have guards like Marbury and Crawford ensuring that you as a 53% FG converter get 1 touch every 3.38 minutes while they shoot sub 40% .... leading to your starting Center (Thomas) punching out your starting point guard..for a lameduck coach in Wilkens .... amidst this hurly burly that Thomas creates....

I can understand it but I don't make an excuse for his lack of condition

But this is so fixable in the right environment if you think the player has worth,skill and is a contributor

I don't know how anyone argue with good faith in the argument that Sweetney does not have skills and where the data suggests a greater producer than Curry

As fans , are we not all a bit "too close" to Eddy and the promise that we have been waiting for him to bring to see the truth ?

I am comfortable in the belief that Sweetney will ever get any meaningful votes for DPOY ..but then neither will Eddy Curry

Like Curry however , if he is flanked by Chandler and Deng/Nocioni and backed up by Nene and Jeffries upfront .. and with Duhon and Hinrich in the backcourt .. and hopefully throw a Josh Howard in there with a preserved cap room the summer after this ..and I think it would be no different needing to do the same for Eddy Curry


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> If Sweetney could do what Curry does, dont you think NY, a team who desperately needs inside punch, would play Sweetney more then 19 minutes a game?


The issue that ScottMay brought up is part of the reason but not the dominant reason IMO . Its a very correctable problem



> Sure, NY is not well run, maybe not well coached but they are complete imbeciles. I mean, Lenny Wilkens would have played him dont you think?


In a word no. Wilkens was a softcock lameduck who wilted to the lunatics running the asylum. You have Marbury and Crawford in the backcourt and their obstinance to being coached and with all the other chemistry issues ..when the writing is on the wall do you think Lamduck Lenny was going to give a square root about Mike Sweetney?

And in this environment do you think Sweetney was going to care

Its called a vicious cycle

BTW I though 19.6mpg was still a respectable amount of playing time but I could be wrond on that 

Mickael Pietrus played 20mpg last season as a 2nd year player

I wonder why a team giving up 46% FG% and in real need of perimeter defense only played him 20mpg... why didn't Coach play him more ?

No need to answer that one ..its rhetorical. And I have no desire to see this thread morph into another cyber shrine that you build for Mickael Pietrus

Just making a point about consistency in argument goes a long way toward someone choosing to spend the time in being bothered to have a serious discussion with another person


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> The issue that ScottMay brought up is part of the reason but not the dominant reason IMO . Its a very correctable problem
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Pietrus would be a perfect fit for the Bulls. He is bound to be a very good NBA player with his natural athletic ability and defensive prowess........

But seriously Sweets is so far from having the potential of Curry its not even funny. Sweets is a POWER FORWARD with about the same skills as Eddy who is a CENTER. Let's name the centers around the league better than Curry then the power forwards better than Sweets..........

If we trade Curry it had better be because of his health issues otherwise this thread just makes me sick. Antonio won't play in NY or any where but Chicago, which really shouldn't be a big deal though saying is how we would be getting raped in this proposed trade. Saving some more money for next year makes this a little more reasonable, but I personally just have no love for Sweets or any other athlete that is well..... not really an athlete he's just big.


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Good observations and duly noted
> 
> And I don't deny your comments as to his defensive capacities
> 
> ...


I will point out Eddy didn't go to college and how many years did Sweets go?


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Hustle said:


> I will point out Eddy didn't go to college and how many years did Sweets go?


And that's precisely why Sweetney rebounds the ball as much as Eddy in 10 minutes less per game and out assists him in the same amount of time too..is a better free throw shooter and hence a more effective producer of points, draws more fouls etc etc

Eddy ain't cubic zirconia...but he ain't the diamond either 

Anyway..I can't reason with anyone that choose to flat out ignore the facts of output when their argument is wrapped up in style and hope

Hey I love the P word as much as anyone..so long as it has R-O-D-U-C-T-I-O-N following that first letter .

The other P word ( O-T-E-N-T-I-A-L ) should not be discounted but should always rank 2nd to the cold hard facts


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Hustle said:


> But seriously Sweets is so far from having the potential of Curry its not even funny. Sweets is a POWER FORWARD with about the same skills as Eddy who is a CENTER. Let's name the centers around the league better than Curry then the power forwards better than Sweets..........


Well I look at it a bit more simplistically and tend not to get caught up in cockeyed labelling

I look at the fact that they are both *post players * with bulk that shoot the same ratio of shots inside to out at pretty well the same EFG% and also at the same clip of shots after 20 seconds on the clock..again at the same clip

I then correlate shots per minute on an equal platform and Sweetney is the more productive player on points contributed , rebounds and passing , free throw % etc 

And we produced these reasonably same offensive stats and better stats in other categories ( except for the rate he fouled as was fairly raised by ScottMay - which is a correctable conditioning issue ) on an abortion of an team like the Knicks

Eddy produced less with supposedly better conditioning on a jib 'o riffic team like the Bulls and was more dependent on others to do the one thing he is supposedly best at ( which is getting the ball in the hoop )

Eddy scored 73% of his points on an assisted basis . Mike was less dependent at 57%

Doesn't it actually at least bear the possibility of thinking that with a commitment made to him as a THE featured post player if he commits to conditioning in Club Jib..and was equally conditioned , that , given the same opportunities on the floor as Eddy Curry last year , that he could give us 18 and 9 in a smidge over 30 minutes per contest?

If Eddy could give us that we would be proclaiming him an AllStar

When you are comparing production like with production like ..I don't understand the double standard.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Good observations and duly noted
> 
> And I don't deny your comments as to his defensive capacities
> 
> ...


I still see significant differences between the two in terms of conditioning, defense, and offense.

Conditioning-wise, I beg to differ that last year was the first time Eddy was ever in shape. It was the first time he was in shape at the BEGINNING of a season, yes. But Eddy has been playing himself into shape DURING the season since his rookie year. Don't you recall how frustrating it'd be to see a sleek Curry ripping down boards and scoring at will in April and wondering why he couldn't play that way in October?

Sweets, on the other hand, has not slimmed down at any point during his first two seasons, so there are serious doubts in my mind that he'll be able to shed the goo under any circumstances. 

Defensively, Curry was much better than a sieve last year. He still suffers from mental lapses, but he has the physical tools -- quick feet, good reach, good leap -- to effectively guard other teams' centers and play pretty solid team defense. The reason I said I don't see Sweetney's foul rate improving dramatically is that his lateral quickness is so awful. Even when Curry is at his fattest, you can still see how well his feet move. On the other hand, even if Sweets gets to a ripped 250 pounds, he'll probably have exceptionally slow feet.

Offensively, there is no question Sweetney's a much more refined player. But it all comes back to the physical package. Curry may not have the full arsenal of post moves, but how many guys in the NBA can be triple-teamed and end up dunking the ball? Sweetney is (again) painfully slow, painfully deliberate, and painfully earthbound. Whatever the eFG% says, I simply can't imagine a opposing coach's pregame chalk-talk ever involving the words, "Now, what in the world are we going to do to stop Michael Sweetney." 

Curry, on the other hand, will put up 15 points in 5 minutes if you don't double-team him. There just aren't a hell of a lot of post players in the league who can do that. We shouldn't let Eddy's deficiencies in almost every other area let us lose sight of that.

I'm pragmatic, too, and if I had to choose between losing Curry for nothing and getting back a player like Sweetney, I'd obviously pick Sweetney. But I wouldn't pretend that it wouldn't be a big step backward for the Bulls, or that Sweetney would be very hard-pressed to move ahead of Othella Harrington and Darius Songaila in Skiles's rotation.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> The issue that ScottMay brought up is part of the reason but not the dominant reason IMO . Its a very correctable problem
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You bring up something totally off topic and then dont ask for a response?

Dont be a ***** weiner

Who plays in front of MP2? Richardson, a top level 2 guard

Who plays in front of Sweetney? Anyone know the answer? Maurice Taylor? Tim Thomas? I dont and I follow the NBA very closely. 

Theres your answer. 

And I wouldnt trade Curry for MP2 either.

Oh and by the way, if Sweetney didnt care, why would you want him? Talk about a serious lack of intelligence.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

What were Sweetney stats in the wins and losses. Can anyone show that. I eyeballed it and it looked like some of his bigger games were put in efforts where his team was getting obliterated. Though i did notice a nice win over Indiana when he had 20. So its inconclusive but it does appear that there might be a fair amount of his damage done in games that the Knicks werent even in.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> You bring up something totally off topic and then dont ask for a response?
> 
> Dont be a ***** weiner
> 
> ...


Oooohhh

Touchy Touchy

The Peitrus issue is a seperate issue entirely . You obviously bristle at the point to highlight your inconsistency in parallel arguments as to player with , as to , why they aren't worth much because they only play 20 mpg

You say New York had need for someone of Sweetney's services and couldn't get on the floor more with you inferring a paltry amount of playing time at 19.6 minutes per

Yet in the way you make the argument so as to discredit player worth because they only play 19.6 minutes per game I give you a parallel argument of a 2nd year player playing the same amount of minutes where the team he is on has a genuine need for his skills 

You don't think that Richardson and Pietrus could play on the wings .. y'know at the same time .. and Mike Dunleavy could sit his arse for Pietrus ?

I mean there is a reason the Warriors allow 46% game in game out. I don't see Richardson as a strong defender nor do I see Dunleavy as one.

There is need and he could easily play more than the "gee don't you think if they need him they could play him more than 19.6 mpg " argument you tried to levy against Sweetney 

I used the example because I think your narrow minded and you don't debate with an objective mind and in good faith . 

In fact you get very bratish when someone challenges you in a debate .

If you are not interested in maintaining civility in the discussion your not worth my while in talking to

C'ya


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Man. Once again, its time for the Bulls board to gather 'round the campfire and sing Kumbaya.


_Kumbaya, my Lord, Kumbaya..._










Candid shot of rlucas at the bbb campout


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Sausage King/Machinehead in full Kumbaya mode


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> I still see significant differences between the two in terms of conditioning, defense, and offense.
> 
> Conditioning-wise, I beg to differ that last year was the first time Eddy was ever in shape. It was the first time he was in shape at the BEGINNING of a season, yes. But Eddy has been playing himself into shape DURING the season since his rookie year. Don't you recall how frustrating it'd be to see a sleek Curry ripping down boards and scoring at will in April and wondering why he couldn't play that way in October?


Scott we will agree to disagree on this one 

Even though Curry shed some weight in a hurry ( I suspect pills ) his conditioning was still pretty questionable up until the New Year and why he was sat a bunch and came in and out of games like a yo yo

Additionally I only recall 15 games or so at the end of this 2nd season when it was the Spring of Eddy and Jamal and there was much love 

I recall he was pretty sludgy finishing off his 3rd campaign 



> Sweets, on the other hand, has not slimmed down at any point during his first two seasons, so there are serious doubts in my mind that he'll be able to shed the goo under any circumstances.


Fair enough for a subjective opinion .. but no proof either way



> Defensively, Curry was much better than a sieve last year.


Agree. He did improve



> He still suffers from mental lapses


Agree. I question his basketball IQ and feel for the game



> but he has the physical tools -- quick feet, good reach, good leap -- to effectively guard other teams' centers and play pretty solid team defense.


Somewhat agree.

Its possible but he hasn't really done it notwithstanding some small incremental improvements . He still sits a lot in the 4th 



> The reason I said I don't see Sweetney's foul rate improving dramatically is that his lateral quickness is so awful.


Remember when Elton was here and everyone felt he was pudgy and a bit too slow 

Then he went out West got off the Chi deep dish and ended up being quite lithe. Even turned into a shotblocker of soughts with those ape arms of his 



> Even when Curry is at his fattest, you can still see how well his feet move.


Someone's innate ability to move their feet has to do with weight secondarily . I mean you either have footwork or you don't .. You dance or you don't dance 



> On the other hand, even if Sweets gets to a ripped 250 pounds, he'll probably have exceptionally slow feet.


Probably ? 

What do you base this on ?

If its a gut feel ..subjective opinion.. then no wuckin furries . I dig . 

I disagree .. but I dig .

The reason I disagree is because I believe his footwork in the post is above average and would probably improve some if he conditioned up 

To support ths belief I again point out that he is far less dependent in being assisted to advantage than Curry ( 73% v 57% ) which for me confirms , Sweets has to work harder and rely on himself more to convert at the same rate as what Curry 

I'm sorry Scott, in this case I don't think its good enough t say "I don't care what the EFG% says"

If your opinion is in contravention to what this supports in an alternate belief.. then so be it.



> Offensively, there is no question Sweetney's a much more refined player. But it all comes back to the physical package. Curry may not have the full arsenal of post moves, but how many guys in the NBA can be triple-teamed and end up dunking the ball?


Seems to me that most of the angst historically has been that Eddy softcocks his approach with poofy layups when he could easily be serving up facials 

This says a lot about Lambert's make up 

That and getting bollocked by his woman to blow off an offer to get to a baby shower 

That and the whisper that Mama's apron strings extend all the way into the Berto Center 

Like Crash says to Meat in Bull Durham 

_

"C'mon Meat show me that million dollar arm cuz I already know about that 5 cent head of yours" _



> Sweetney is (again) painfully slow, painfully deliberate, and painfully earthbound. Whatever the eFG% says, I simply can't imagine a opposing coach's pregame chalk-talk ever involving the words, "Now, what in the world are we going to do to stop Michael Sweetney."


Now here is where I get confused 

You say he's a more refined player than Eddy and then this ?

I agree he's not an above the rim type and probably never will be but is there not even a suggestion of hyperbole here Scott ?

If you are stating that Sweetney has no athleticism , then whilst their games were completely different.. neither did Bill Laimbeer . 

What I am saying is it is not a prerequisite to be a very good and effective NBA player 



> I'm pragmatic, too, and if I had to choose between losing Curry for nothing and getting back a player like Sweetney, I'd obviously pick Sweetney.


This is at the root of where I was always at because I do believe we will lose Curry for nothing



> But I wouldn't pretend that it wouldn't be a big step backward for the Bulls


I'm not pretending at all .

Just presenting the facts

Unfortunately a lot of people ignore those and prefer assessment built on a platform of paegentry 



> Sweetney would be very hard-pressed to move ahead of Othella Harrington and Darius Songaila in Skiles's rotation.


Agree. 

At first 

In fact if we sign him I do think that Songaila should start if he proves our best passing big man who can play the pick and roll 

But once Sweetney's conditioning picks up I do think we need a legit post /power player and flanked by Chandler and Deng I think it would work well


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Machinehead said:


> Scott we will agree to disagree on this one
> 
> Even though Curry shed some weight in a hurry ( I suspect pills ) his conditioning was still pretty questionable up until the New Year and why he was sat a bunch and came in and out of games like a yo yo
> 
> ...


Just a couple more thoughts:

--I'm not sure what Sweetney's lower percentage of assisted baskets proves. In fact, it might prove my point better than yours. He probably scores a higher percentage of his points off offensive rebounds than Curry does, and he also scores a lot of baskets after an interminable series of head fakes and baby steps for which no assist is credited.

--The Brand analogy is a huge stretch. Brand got a little bit better physically and a little bit better as a player, but he was still a 20-10 guy for the Bulls and overall the improvement was incremental, not dramatic. (and he was still a lousy crunchtime guy). Sweetney needs to lose a quarter of his current mass. Slightly different issue.

--The Laimbeer comparison is also a little off. I'm not saying at all that one has to be an elite athlete to succeed, but Sweetney is at the bottom of the athletic curve, and his skills aren't THAT exceptional. And while I'm not Jack LaLanne, I don't see how the fact that Sweetney has packed pounds ON in March and April can be construed as anything but discouraging.

It's fine to agree to disagree. I have nothing against the guy, but I'll be pretty surprised if he plays in the league past his rookie deal, and I won't be consoled in the slightest if he's Paxdorf's idea of a Curry replacement.


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> And that's precisely why Sweetney rebounds the ball as much as Eddy in 10 minutes less per game and out assists him in the same amount of time too..is a better free throw shooter and hence a more effective producer of points, draws more fouls etc etc
> 
> Eddy ain't cubic zirconia...but he ain't the diamond either
> 
> ...


How did I flat out ignore the facts of output? I acknowlegdged that they both have the same skill sets but you are missing something very important. Stats do not and will never reflect a players worth it does not matter how much you dig. They play for different teams. Unfortunatly when talking about these two you have to mention potential because of their bad work ethics.

Thanks for the style comment though. :biggrin: 



> Well I look at it a bit more simplistically and tend not to get caught up in cockeyed labelling
> 
> I look at the fact that they are both post players with bulk that shoot the same ratio of shots inside to out at pretty well the same EFG% and also at the same clip of shots after 20 seconds on the clock..again at the same clip
> 
> ...


What makes you think Sweets could play 10 for minutes a game with the same effectiveness, or play equally as well on a much better team. On assisted based points, Eddy is more effective at getting inside positioning and he plays in more of a system offensivily(should change with Brown), besides that I really have no idea what that stat means, my guess is that Shaq is a lot closer to Eddy than Sweets in that category.



> Doesn't it actually at least bear the possibility of thinking that with a commitment made to him as a THE featured post player if he commits to conditioning in Club Jib..and was equally conditioned , that , given the same opportunities on the floor as Eddy Curry last year , that he could give us 18 and 9 in a smidge over 30 minutes per contest?
> 
> If Eddy could give us that we would be proclaiming him an AllStar
> 
> When you are comparing production like with production like ..I don't understand the double standard.


The double standard is my cockeyed labelling in my mind. I just have a hard time being convinced trading Sweets for Eddy makes us a better team on either side of the floor especially defensivily even though Eddy is not known for d and doesn't jump for defensive boards. Eddy certainly has his share of flaws but his ability to finish at the basket is beaten or matched by very few and Sweets is not one of them despite whatever numbers you throw out there. 

Is Sweets + the additional cap space we would gain better than Curry? I don't know, maybe, but we are already looking like we are going to be extremely deep next year (even this year) and in my opinion it is time to start going for quality over quanity. So much is dependant on Curry's health that trading Eddy for anything slightly above garbage could be worth doing but thats for Pax to decide, I have faith in Pax and hope for Curry.

Oh lord Kumbaya.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Hustle said:


> How did I flat out ignore the facts of output? I acknowlegdged that they both have the same skill sets but you are missing something very important. Stats do not and will never reflect a players worth it does not matter how much you dig. They play for different teams. Unfortunatly when talking about these two you have to mention potential because of their bad work ethics.
> 
> Thanks for the style comment though. :biggrin:
> 
> ...



Shalom !


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

In case anyone needs a refresher:


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Can't argue with this . . .


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Why waste words when a picture will do?


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Just a couple more thoughts:
> 
> --I'm not sure what Sweetney's lower percentage of assisted baskets proves. In fact, it might prove my point better than yours. He probably scores a higher percentage of his points off offensive rebounds than Curry does, and he also scores a lot of baskets after an interminable series of head fakes and baby steps for which no assist is credited.
> 
> ...


Paxdorf..



Very good 

Hey I wasn't comparing him straight up with Brand or Laimbeer 

In Brand's case he lost 15 to 20 pounds and all of a sudden seemed quicker with bigger ups

I agree Sweetney likes Planet Earth but so did Bill Laimbeer and he was an effective NBA player but that's where the comparison ( which wasn't a comparison to begin with ) starts and stops

We have no way of proving this but if Sweetney played on the Bulls teams that Brand did , my bet is he would have given you close to the same numbers if not the same numbers - assuming he played a similar amount of minutes and his conditioning was up a rung or three than what it is in New York 

I mean Ron F'n Mercer put up 19 ppg as #2 behind Elton for crissakes .


The point is someone always has to score on a bad team 

And based on what he does right now .. with an extra 10 minutes a game pro rates out to 17.5 and 8.2 

It is not implausible that with conditioning he could maintain that and increase it some to around 18 and 9 in 32mpg 

But I can't keep saying the same things and people either want to accept something totally plausible based on an opinion supported by available statistical data or they don't 

The one wildcard in the set of variables is "if he was able to be conditioned"

But isn't this a recurring problem we've always had with Eddy 

Anyway .. I've made my points and said what I wanted to say so I graciously bow out of this debate


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Can't argue with this . . .



Mrs May ?


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> Why waste words when a picture will do?



They say a picture is worth a thousand words 

but I'm struggling to think of one pertaining to the relevance of this one 

I'm out 


Pyace !


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Found via a Google Image search for "stout defense":


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

All I need to know about Sweetney is that the Knicks decided they needed to add Malik Rose and Mo Taylor at the trade deadline last year.

He's shown squat in two seasons and he's surely been given the opportunity.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Machinehead said:


> Oooohhh
> 
> Touchy Touchy
> 
> ...



Are machinehead and wiener the same person? And if so why allow that?

your argument is oversimplistic. Pietrus didnt play for the first month due to a severe shoulder seperation that required surgery (A fact you 100% ignore). He got worked into the lineup over time, costing him about 5 mpg for the season. Second, his minutes went up when GS was rolling over everyone at the end of the season as did his stats (12ppg on 50%+ shooting), another fact you ignore. Could he have played more? Sure. I think he could have played more then Dunleavy, but Duns game improved dramatically at the end of last year (another fact you ignore). Why didnt he play more then Jason? Look at the frickin stat sheet. Richardson was the only go to guy they had for half the season. And he is a good defender (watch a GS game now and then). There was no minutes in GS for Pietrus because of their depth, their strength on the wings and their team needs. And as for your 46% FG argument, if you would watch a GS game now and then, at the beginning of the year PGs would go crazy on GS. Is that MP2s fault? Heck, MP2 was hurt for the first 3 weeks. Second, after Baron came they played a high octane game. Even their defense didnt improve much after Davis came but their offense was Phoenix like unstoppable. Its not a function of perimeter D, as you so inaccurately quoted. Its a function of the way they play, which is wide open fast break basketball. And even then, who is the only player from 2 years ago draft class to get a vote for ALL NBA DEFENSE? Michael Sweetney, hahah? No, it was MP2. Some coaches recognize his strength on that league wide. Do your homework before engaging in debate. Look at GSs bench

Zarko- heck of a player -played alot of 3- would rather have then Sweetney
Biedrins - going to be a heck of a player
Fisher - 3 rings and a favorite of Montgomery, played some 2 with Baron
Pietrus-

That goes with a starting lineup
Baron- allstar
Richardson - near allstar
Dunleavy - look at Feb stats on
Foyle - adequate
Murphy - only player in the top 10 in 3pt and rebounding

Now tell me where the minutes are going to come from? And even then, he will play, he will contribute and he will be a better player then Sweetney. 

Now that the point is proven, and your a little more informed, can you actually answer the question, exactly who does Sweetney have to beat out for minutes in NY? Mo Taylor? Tim Thomas (who I think is a great guy but not much of a 4)? Malik Rose?

What Sweetney is is a 6'8" 275 4 without exceptional athletic ability or apparently stamina. Why on Gods Green Earth are you trying to persuade people to take on that? Scott is 100% right, I doubt he would make the Bulls rotation. Heck, he barely could make the Knicks rotation and they were extremely weak in the area that he is supposed to help, inside.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Are machinehead and wiener the same person? And if so why allow that?
> 
> your argument is oversimplistic. Pietrus didnt play for the first month due to a severe shoulder seperation that required surgery (A fact you 100% ignore). He got worked into the lineup over time, costing him about 5 mpg for the season. Second, his minutes went up when GS was rolling over everyone at the end of the season as did his stats (12ppg on 50%+ shooting), another fact you ignore. Could he have played more? Sure. I think he could have played more then Dunleavy, but Duns game improved dramatically at the end of last year (another fact you ignore). Why didnt he play more then Jason? Look at the frickin stat sheet. Richardson was the only go to guy they had for half the season. And he is a good defender (watch a GS game now and then). There was no minutes in GS for Pietrus because of their depth, their strength on the wings and their team needs. And as for your 46% FG argument, if you would watch a GS game now and then, at the beginning of the year PGs would go crazy on GS. Is that MP2s fault? Heck, MP2 was hurt for the first 3 weeks. Second, after Baron came they played a high octane game. Even their defense didnt improve much after Davis came but their offense was Phoenix like unstoppable. Its not a function of perimeter D, as you so inaccurately quoted. Its a function of the way they play, which is wide open fast break basketball. And even then, who is the only player from 2 years ago draft class to get a vote for ALL NBA DEFENSE? Michael Sweetney, hahah? No, it was MP2. Some coaches recognize his strength on that league wide. Do your homework before engaging in debate. Look at GSs bench
> 
> ...


You still here ?

Haven't you got someone else to bore ?

A Geckoesque zillion dollar hedge fund to run ?

The next Euro wet dream to spank n fawn over ( Marty..Petro etc al ) in your scouting wannabe ways

Insider flunkies to pretend to hang around with 

Every conceivable basketball game played in the history of being with every single player to ever pull on a pair of boots to recount and regale ?

Free the world of injustice ?

In short don't talk to me . Your a F'wit and I've always thought so


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

In any case, here are some things I'm certain about:

1. Our team certainly played quite a bit better in games Curry played.

2. To reiterate the "Rick Brunson fallacy", you can't simply project a players' points/production upwards or downwards based on playing more/less minutes or onto a new team.

3. Unless there's something more that isn't being revealed about Curry's ticker, Pax would be a fool to trade him away if he agreed to a 6 year $41M deal.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> You still here ?


And yet, he's right on the money and you're wrong as rain. :uhoh: 
Which, I guess, is reason enough for a tantrum in some parts.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> You still here ?
> 
> Haven't you got someone else to bore ?
> 
> ...


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> In any case, here are some things I'm certain about:
> 
> 1. Our team certainly played quite a bit better in games Curry played.


Actually.. 82 games data shows that in the net of it all we did better when Curry was out of the game 

I agree to a point that when big Ed had his head right at the start of a game and fired off a bollocking first quarter we generally won those games

May not have got a rebound and come out colder than an Eskimo's cods ..

He showed some improvments for sure last season but he was still woefully inconsistent 



> 2. To reiterate the "Rick Brunson fallacy", you can't simply project a players' points/production upwards or downwards based on playing more/less minutes or onto a new team.


Its only a projection based on data . It ain't set in stone until the proof is in the pudding 

Rick gets no love just because its kewl to piss on him from a great height 

Had a nice year on the Clips last year and went early in free agency on an OK deal .but yeah he has no upside , limited athletically , has a face like a bulldog chewing a wasp ,ugly hair has a vertical of minus 5 inches etc 

Yeah he ain't sexy and will never win any paegentry awards which must mean that he's completely useless as a player . Of course 





> 3. Unless there's something more that isn't being revealed about Curry's ticker, Pax would be a fool to trade him away if he agreed to a 6 year $41M deal.


And so whether he gets cleared for medical insurance or not is not an issue for you..just damn the torpedoes aboard the SS ScottMay ?

It would be lunacy in the extreme to mortgage any future position of advantage due to one player ..who .. has not really done dick in 4 years except the one season ( last ) which was patchy at best and the odd April Warrior flash at the end of Year 2 

Failing insurance .. Curry is a QO player ..which means he's most likely gone at the end of the season when his risk propositon for Insurance may open him up again to the broader market.. and we'll have lost all leverage for retention at that point

Another wasted draft pick gone for nix 

Too many unanswered questions as to his health and as to his true impact as a player despite the gushy ooh's and aah's most sane people are pretty tired of after 4 years

Act and get something . 

Don't act and wave bye bye with one hand and your cods in the other

That's pretty well the way it will go unless an Insurance deal can be worked out 

But even if an Insurance deal can be worked out ..I am wagering that the bulls secretly hope one can't ... Ed takes the QO and flips em the birs next season 

The Cap Space is a bigger priority than one individual player that could conceiveably tie up $6.5M a year for what ? 6 years you want to give him ?

I betcha London to a brick that Mgt thinks that possible opp cost is way too high to take the punt


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

One really shouldn't judge Sweets on what the Knicks do.

Here is a team that in the last year has given away servicable centers in Nazr (starter for World Champs), Deke (significant back-up on top-10 team in NBA) and Othella (significant role player on #3 team in East).

Two of them he dumped, plain and simple, for the honor of paying JC and eating JYD's contract. He sent out Nazr for Malik Rose's monster deal and the last pick of the first round? 

All so he could pay Jerome James more money than all of the 3 players he gave away?

I've barely seen Sweets play, but don't hold that against him, he's in The Big Laughable. That's not his fault.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> And yet, he's right on the money and you're wrong as rain. :uhoh:
> Which, I guess, is reason enough for a tantrum in some parts.


You'll have to explain to me how rain is wrong ..particularly for those who have a rural sympathy/background


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> You still here ?
> 
> Haven't you got someone else to bore ?
> 
> ...



i haven't been following this big debate (people, hello? there is a Cat 4 HURRICANE on live TV for pete's sake!) but i have to say to you just chill out with the personal stuff. please. whether you agree or disagree or whatever. there is a feature called "ignore" for a reason that you can choose, rather than post stuff like this. 

that's it. back to CNN.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

bullsville said:


> One really shouldn't judge Sweets on what the Knicks do.
> 
> Here is a team that in the last year has given away servicable centers in Nazr (starter for World Champs), Deke (significant back-up on top-10 team in NBA) and Othella (significant role player on #3 team in East).
> 
> ...



PT isnt Isiahs call though Ville. It was Lenny Wilkens call and then Herb Williams call. Both guys are trying to win basketball games, know their personnel and know infinetely more about what happens in practice more then us. The fact that Sweetney cant beat out other small PFs, like Taylor, the 3 trying to be a 4 Tim Thomas and sometimes Malik Rose is a cause of concern. Nazr and OH did well in other surroundings, but are we really going to deal a center with huge upside for a player with the same faults who might be 3rd string in Chicago, and at a position that appears to be a strong one for us, especially with Songaila on the way in? No, it just doesnt make sense for us, especially since this guys more out of shape then Curry ever was.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I was in town and saw the bulls knicks game (the one where curry's last second layup won the game) and watched sweets play and play against curry. Curry was kicking his butt. He is way overweigth, slow, plays under the rim weak D, ect. Sweets is a career backup at best and curry is a 10 year starter at center. My guess is (over the next 5 years) 16-17pts per game on 13 shots with a FG% of 52% or so. And he gets a good number of FT per FGs. I am sure Zeke would trade sweets for curry but pax has a solid bb eye and no way does he do somehing so dumb.

david


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

bullsville said:


> One really shouldn't judge Sweets on what the Knicks do.
> 
> Here is a team that in the last year has given away servicable centers in Nazr (starter for World Champs), Deke (significant back-up on top-10 team in NBA) and Othella (significant role player on #3 team in East).
> 
> ...


I'm not sure what impact those player personnel decisions have on Sweetney's inability to stay on the floor due to foul trouble. Unless you're suggesting that if the Knicks still had Mutombo, Mohammed, and Harrington, Sweetney would hardly ever play -- I agree with that.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Actually.. 82 games data shows that in the net of it all we did better when Curry was out of the game


82 games data doesn't show wins and losses in games he actually played. It's nice data, but unless you interpret it well it really can lead you to some silly conclusions. It also showed that on net we did better when Kirk was out of the game, and in previous years when Tyson was out of the game.

It's a tool, and you all need to quit reverently and vaccuously citing it like its the word of god. Somewhere Roland Beech is rolling his eyes at how people use the stats he developed.



> Its only a projection based on data . It ain't set in stone until the proof is in the pudding


Yesterday I got handed $2.37 in change at the drive through. Someone just handed me $2.37 in like 10 seconds!

That's $20476.80 a day I project to make! I can retire!!!



> And so whether he gets cleared for medical insurance or not is not an issue for you..just damn the torpedoes aboard the SS ScottMay ?


Whether he gets insured or not doesn't affect his cap number. In fact, signing him to a 6 year 40 million dollar deal is less risky than a 3 year 30 from a cap perspective, since, whether he plays or not, his cap value is gonna be lower next year. He'd come off the cap after one year of not playing in any case.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> 82 games data doesn't show wins and losses in games he actually played. It's nice data, but unless you interpret it well it really can lead you to some silly conclusions. It also showed that on net we did better when Kirk was out of the game, and in previous years when Tyson was out of the game.
> 
> It's a tool, and you all need to quit reverently and vaccuously citing it like its the word of god. Somewhere Roland Beech is rolling his eyes at how people use the stats he developed.


I agree 

I have had vigorous debates with guys like Rosenbaum when I've been on the other side of the fence and I have always stated ( and I won't revert now ) that stats only back up an opinion of a gut feel / insight that you have with how you read something in what you see 

I have never believed you start at that base and make the argument fit the data 

I think you have your belief and try and support it with data that is rational and makes sense 

Of course everyone's basis of qualitative rationality in drawing conclusions supported by quants differ .. and hence debate

You know its funny ..last year at the start of the season on these boards there was talk of a Curry for Sweetney trade when Big Ed came out of the blocks slow and there was talk that one of the two twin towers was going to be moved ( it may have been Kismet that proposed and I am not entirely sure ) and it at worst it was met with mild indifference 

Funny what a difference a year makes when there are just as bigger question marks over Eddy Curry as to Mike Sweetney when they produce the same offensive output and Sweetney isn't going to albatross us with salary ballast that prevents optimum opportunity in free agency 







> Yesterday I got handed $2.37 in change at the drive through. Someone just handed me $2.37 in like 10 seconds!
> 
> That's $20476.80 a day I project to make! I can retire!!!


Ah. I see now 

Nice one





> Whether he gets insured or not doesn't affect his cap number. In fact, signing him to a 6 year 40 million dollar deal is less risky than a 3 year 30 from a cap perspective, since, whether he plays or not, his cap value is gonna be lower next year. He'd come off the cap after one year of not playing in any case.


yeah ?

No shyte ?

Gee wiz

You miss the point 

If he gets signed to an Insurance deal he gets inked and we get encumbered with risk that prevents us from filling out the roster better and more productively

One season and he's off ?

That's one season that eats space that could make a difference


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

giusd said:


> My guess is (over the next 5 years) 16-17pts per game on 13 shots with a FG% of 52% or so.
> david


way to put yourself out there when he already does that

abe


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Funny what a difference a year makes when there are just as bigger question marks over Eddy Curry as to Mike Sweetney when they produce the same offensive output and Sweetney isn't going to albatross us with salary ballast that prevents optimum opportunity in free agency


Opportunity to do what, exactly, in free agency? Unless the league starts letting us play with six guys on the floor, we'll be using FA to either conduct a trade (in which case we already have all the flexibility we need- a dead Curry wouldn't hurt and a good Curry would help), or to get a center (in which case we'll be overpaying someone else and not getting a guy who's as good as Curry).

Second, Sweetney simply isn't as productive as Curry, except as a theoretical exercise. Curry played 30mpg for a good team, and got his stats against double teams and defenses keying on him. Sweetney couldn't get off the bench and got his production, largely, against other backups or in garbage time.



SausageKingofChicago said:


> You miss the point
> 
> If he gets signed to an Insurance deal he gets inked and we get encumbered with risk that prevents us from filling out the roster better and more productively
> 
> ...


There's risk in everything. As far as I can tell, and I've tried to learn as much as I can, the risk of Curry's heart shortening his career isn't very high. If some new evidence comes out suggesting otherwise, I might change my mind, but as far as I understand it he's been cleared by several prominant experts, at least one of which has a record showing he'll tell a guy he can't play if he thinks he can't play.

Second, there's an absolutely huge risk that we don't get as productive a player with the money we'd free up. It's not like signing big name FAs outright from other teams has worked out well in the past for us or anyone else. And if it comes to a sign and trade, well then we're better off having more ammo to trade away, so we're better off with Eddy. And if we're talking about straight up trades, we'll get more by signing Eddy to a longer deal and letting him show the league his heart really isn't an issue.

It really comes down to buy low and sell high. We're gonna get Curry for as little as he can be gotten buy buying him. If we try to sell him, we're going to get as little as we possibly could. And while there's risk in hanging on to him, that doesn't change the fact that we don't have a lot to gain by letting him walk or making an ugly trade.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Why don't we trade Eddy for the Spurs 2nd round pick (Last pick in the draft).

Has Curry's value dropped that low? Why would Pax and Skiles keep him around since their regime started if he was never in their future plans? I am opposed to trading Eddy, since I feel his weaknesses can be hidden from our great Team D and great rebounding. Yes, it bothers me that he is average on D, and a horrible rebounder. However, we have waited long enough, and his offensive impact (ability to get double teamed, and possibly one of the best scoring centers) cannot be ignored.

Now, I see Sweetney replacing Reiner's role on the bench. If he plays, the guy will never average more than 10pts/7-8rbs. And those 10 pts will come in a JYD type of way. I rather have Pargo here to replace Eddy's scoring than Sweetney. 

I like Al Harrington, however with a whole season in Atlanta, the guy didn't prove much. I was not expecting the Hawks to win much, but individually he wasn't that great. He was steady, but definitely not worth trading an inside prescense for a tweener. We have a shot at signing Al next offseason.

IF WE HAVE TO trade Eddy, send him to NYK for EXPIRING CONTRACTS (TT and Penny). But I still would hate this. I don't like anyone in next year's FA class to sign to a Max. The great FA's are RFAs and we have no chance of ever getting them (Yao or Amare).

Eddy might not prosper in NY, but send him to a team that can develop players, and we will regret greatly for drafting a talented 7 footer who we waited 4 years to develop, and only to find him a key cog in another team's championship run.

I'm not making this a Eddy vs Tyson thread, as I am an avid supporter that these two are the difference between us ever Winning It All in the near future vs making the 1st or 2nd round of the playoffs and never advancing.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> Opportunity to do what, exactly, in free agency? Unless the league starts letting us play with six guys on the floor, we'll be using FA to either conduct a trade (in which case we already have all the flexibility we need- a dead Curry wouldn't hurt and a good Curry would help), or to get a center (in which case we'll be overpaying someone else and not getting a guy who's as good as Curry).


 I would not mind adding Nene and Jared Jeffries and I don't think we will have to pay a ridiculous sum of money but we can pay an appropriate amount of money to bring them to town

I would also like to add Jiri Welsch next summer who I think would be available at a good price

I would like to preserve room for the summer after for Josh Howard

And then whatever money is left over after that ( around $8M ) would be available for Hinrich, Deng and Gordon's ultimate extensions 

Yes I would rather a frontline of Chandler , Sweetney , Nene ,Jeffries and Songaila than Curry, Chandler , Wilcox ( when we have to settle for him over Nene because he committed too much for Curry ) and Songaila



> Second, Sweetney simply isn't as productive as Curry, except as a theoretical exercise. Curry played 30mpg for a good team, and got his stats against double teams and defenses keying on him. Sweetney couldn't get off the bench and got his production, largely, against other backups or in garbage time.


Not true

His main minutes were played with the Knick front liners . As has been raised he has a fouling problem that kept him on the benches for longer stretches than otherwisw would have been the case if his conditioning was up and he didn't commit so many tired / lazy fouls

But when he was on he was mainly producing as a first teamer ... and he actually was more productive than Ed in rebounds pulled down and assists thrown . That's not fuzzy connective logic .. that's fact m'friend 





> It really comes down to buy low and sell high.


Can't buy or sell when you don't own the stock no more and you have nothing to buy or sell with


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

I'd say be done with it! Sign Eddy to a six year, $90mil deal and send him to the Knicks for Ariza, Hardaway and hopefully a first and then giggle your *** off.

My biggest fear with Curry isn't so much about his heart (the organ) it's about his heart (desire). I'd be extremely wary about committing big guaranteed dollars to a guy who really hasn't shown the slightest desire to be the best, or even decent. Maybe I'm envisioning a more toned-down version of E-Rob. I just don't know if I'd give a guy more than the QO when I have very little assurance that he's going to really work at excelling in his game.

As for Sweetney - eh. Apples to Apples I'd rather have Curry. The only guy on the entire NY roster that even remotely interests me is Ariza. If you're going to do a deal where Curry goes to NY - at least get Ariza and an expiring contract. Might as well saddle Zeke with as large a possible committment in exchage - right?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> I would not mind adding Nene and Jared Jeffries and I don't think we will have to pay a ridiculous sum of money but we can pay an appropriate amount of money to bring them to town


Why should be expect this? They'll be RFAs. It's pretty much a given that we'll either have to a) Significantly overpay or b) not get them.

That's a super high risk plan. Especially when we still have just as good a shot at one of those guys with Curry.



> Not true
> 
> His main minutes were played with the Knick front liners . As has been raised he has a fouling problem that kept him on the benches for longer stretches than otherwisw would have been the case if his conditioning was up and he didn't commit so many tired / lazy fouls
> 
> But when he was on he was mainly producing as a first teamer ... and he actually was more productive than Ed in rebounds pulled down and assists thrown . That's not fuzzy connective logic .. that's fact m'friend


It is, however, based on some pretty hefty contingencies, which were, for the most part, not met. And still, saying he scores at the same rate is simply much different from saying he could do anything in the same minutes (which he can't stay on the court to get).

Think we'll have to agree to disagree on that. A year ago Sweetney was a much less known commodity. He had the chance and he squandered it. Curry isn't the baby Shaq of people's inflated expectations, but he's a better player to have around by a significant margin.



> Can't buy or sell when you don't own the stock no more and you have nothing to buy or sell with


That's why we need to keep Curry


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> Why should be expect this? They'll be RFAs. It's pretty much a given that we'll either have to a) Significantly overpay or b) not get them.
> 
> That's a super high risk plan. Especially when we still have just as good a shot at one of those guys with Curry.
> 
> ...



exactly

And I dont know how we can claim Sweetney was producing with front liners when he got 28 starts and put up a vast amount of his stats for last year in what looked to be unwinnable games for the Knicks.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

Its getting to be decision time one way or the other .How is this current situation improving the Bulls ?There was talk of continuity and improvment from within but how does that happen when the two guys who we need to continue to improve the most are not having anything to do with the team besides occasional phone conversations ?Its a little over 5 weeks until training camp and things are not looking good for us improving on last year and we could be looking at another aweful start because I dont believe we are at the point yet where our players can step onto the floor and just turn it on.The fact that the team worked hard together most of last summer to me was very important in the type of year we had this year Im not seeing that .I see several players working hard but not together .Lets bring this thing to an end one way or another and move on .

I caught a little of Paxs interview Friday on CSN and his comments were 

*on Curry*: 

Said conditioning was a priority for Eddy because although he was working out he wasnt playing in pickup games because he didnt want to risk injury which sounded a lot like he says hes working out but unless we can monitor it ourselves they wont trust it in a contract year 

*Chandler*:

said he understood that Chandler was 22 and still had upside but he was trying to get him to see that hes not achieved star status yet of a lot of player which sounded like your not a star yet Tyson you dont deserve the max


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

I just checked comcast site and they a snippet from the interview up 

http://chicago.comcastsportsnet.com/multimedia.asp

its the one from the 26th


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

I think we should keep Curry for different reasons.

Trading him now just ain't worth it , we will not get the right price for 2 reasons:
1. he is a byc status player.
2. Teams are not sure about his health situation and therefor little interest
3. NY is defenitely not the team to deal with - they hav'nt got the goods.

If Eddy plays out this season , there will be much more interest , and we can perform a S&T for a good player thats not on the fa market. after this season , with the cap room we'd have , we'll have all the cards in our hands. It's just not the right time or situation to trade Eddy , even though I'm sure sooner or later we must trade him , but again , it must be at the right time to get the highest worth. If he cannot continue , we'd just have more cap room. It will be a loss of talent , but personally I think we'd do better without him on the longrun...


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

bullsville said:


> One really shouldn't judge Sweets on what the Knicks do.
> 
> Here is a team that in the last year has given away servicable centers in Nazr (starter for World Champs), Deke (significant back-up on top-10 team in NBA) and Othella (significant role player on #3 team in East).
> 
> ...


 exactly. wanting Malik Rose and Mo Taylor vs. needing them are different things. Especially if you're Isiah.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

bullet said:


> Personally I think the Knicks have *Nothing * to offer us for Eddy. They are loaded with terrible contracts and players that don't really help their teams (Stephan , Q , Jamal...) . Even Brown will have a tough time making them a good team , though I'm sure being the best (or one of) in the buisness he'll defenitely make them better than last year.
> 
> As Aesop posted , it would be very hard to match salaries even if they offer their young players. and we don't need the headache of having 2 RFA's in Ariza and Sweets(in 2 years) next year , when the FA market is weak anyway and guys will be overpaid.
> 
> And this is from a fan that thinks Eddy should be traded - But as Sloth said many times , this is not the right time to trade him. I think we should've done it at previous midseason (Baron , Vince were had for close to nothing) but since it did not happen we should wait till next season when he ain't a BYC status player (even if he's unrestricted after playing out the QO it is very likely it will take a S&T to get him). NY also owns a 2006 SA 1st rounder but not their own if they're not lottery (jazz) so picks ain't much of an option as well.


while i would personally prefer the bulls are able to resolve the situation and keep eddy , but i disagree a deal is unworkable.

the knicks seem to working under the assumption allan houston will retire at training camp , if that happens the knicks get a trade exception to replace him, or get another talent.

the exception would be the MLE or half of houston's salary (i forget which), add a pick or someone like david lee and it would be fair.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> while i would personally prefer the bulls are able to resolve the situation and keep eddy , but i disagree a deal is unworkable.
> 
> the knicks seem to working under the assumption allan houston will retire at training camp , if that happens the knicks get a trade exception to replace him, or get another talent.
> 
> the exception would be the MLE or half of houston's salary (i forget which), add a pick or someone like david lee and it would be fair.


what do you mean - Sweets , Ariza , Lee and a pick??? If so , Zeke won't do it.

as far as I know - the Rookies that were just signed cannot be traded for 3 months (I'm not sure if from signing day or season starts). The only pick they can trade is SA 1st rounder (a low one at 2006 unless Tim is injured) , they're pick is tied up in a deal - Jazz own the Knicks 1st rounder lottery protected till 2010 - so I don't think they can trade it if it's in lottery land and they get to keep it (likely imo). yeah , I'd do it , but it ain't possible...


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

bullet said:


> what do you mean - Sweets , Ariza , Lee and a pick??? If so , Zeke won't do it.
> 
> as far as I know - the Rookies that were just signed cannot be traded for 3 months (I'm not sure if from signing day or season starts). The only pick they can trade is SA 1st rounder (a low one at 2006 unless Tim is injured) , they're pick is tied up in a deal - Jazz own the Knicks 1st rounder lottery protected till 2010 - so I don't think they can trade it if it's in lottery land and they get to keep it (likely imo). yeah , I'd do it , but it ain't possible...



you are right about lee , that rule slipped my mind , but i was mostly thinking along the lines of a young player and the exception...i wasn't thinking anywhere near 3 young players and a pick, its possible eddy isn'y worth that in any scenerio , and certainly not in his situation now..

lets say jackie butler and the exception, the main prize would be the exception anyway and not the player


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

bullet said:


> what do you mean - Sweets , Ariza , Lee and a pick??? If so , Zeke won't do it.
> 
> *as far as I know - the Rookies that were just signed cannot be traded for 3 months (I'm not sure if from signing day or season starts). * The only pick they can trade is SA 1st rounder (a low one at 2006 unless Tim is injured) , they're pick is tied up in a deal - Jazz own the Knicks 1st rounder lottery protected till 2010 - so I don't think they can trade it if it's in lottery land and they get to keep it (likely imo). yeah , I'd do it , but it ain't possible...


I couldve sworn that they changed that in the new cba and also shortened the time between when a player can be traded again from 3 months to 2 months.Ive been looking for the article but cant recall where I saw it yet .


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Draft picks can now be traded after 30 days, I believe.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> Why should be expect this? They'll be RFAs. It's pretty much a given that we'll either have to a) Significantly overpay or b) not get them.


True. We should not expect it 

As of right now the only teams that will be able to go hard for the free agents pool next summer are :

Atlanta
New Orleans 
Charlotte
Denver
Chicago

I think its fairly safe to say that Charlotte won't be a big risk player in free agency for awhile yet

I think its also safe to say that if we didn't have Eddy Curry we could pretty well guarantee Nene a starting spot ..maybe Atlanta and New Orleans would as well but if your Nene what basketball situation would you rather be in right now ?

I therefore think its reasonable that given Chicago's situation right now it would be the franchise of choice for free agents out of those franchises that have available cap room for those types of players we have a demonstrated need for next summer 

Yes we will face some stiff competition from Denver but I don't think they will give up the farm to sign him 

Here's my reasons:

They have big long term investments in Camby and Martin and cheaper back ups in Elson and Najera and an intriguing power forward prospect in Linas Kleiza who may surprise

Given that they also have a max contract likely coming up for Anthony and healthy money also committed for Andre Miller.. I think they will be looking to spend their money on a top flight wing player to complement Miller and Anthony and it really would not make a lot of sense for them to pay say $8M starting for Nene

At the moment I think that's his market and we could have him for that 

Plan B is Chris Wilcox ..not for the same amount of money ..maybe $7M and overpay by (IMO) 10% - which is not earth shattering but a margin that makes sure others piss off and that he can grow into that contract

Then there is Jared Jeffries

He's a role player right now and I can't see anyone paying more than the MLE for him.. The Wiz may pay marginally more to ward off MLE suitors but if we signed him at $6.6M starting.. around 10% - 15% over what he's probably worth then I think we stand a strong chance 

With max contracts in Jamison and Arenas and long term cost in Hayward and Thomas ..and with the need to also shell out the bucks for Caron Butler next summer ( who I do think its more important they retain over JJ ) then I think that JJ at mid $6's can be had. Given his defensive versatility I think he's worth it

Its taking your chances but I like those odds 

So for that and with the ability to have Sweetney for a 1 year at $2.5M ..given the greater risk IMO that you have in Eddy Curry tied up in something stupid then hey why not ?





> It is, however, based on some pretty hefty contingencies, which were, for the most part, not met. And still, saying he scores at the same rate is simply much different from saying he could do anything in the same minutes (which he can't stay on the court to get).


I went back and had a look at his games where he played greater than 28 minutes per ( the same as Eddy Curry )

There was 10 games for 6 wins and 4 losses ( Is 12% of the available number of games to be played an acceptable random pool to judge where he played bigger minutes? ) 

In those games he produced an average of 16 and 8 at an average of around 31.5mpg

Now I'm not saying that stats tell us everything to magically weave and therefore there shall it be proclaimation ...the only consistent queries I have been asking of people are :

*Is is reasonable to expect that in a better environment ,and being better managed with an insistence to conditioning that kept him on the floor for say 30mpg that he could give you this productive output ; given ; his production in minutes that he has proven he can give in a more poorly structured team and with his own conditioning issues *

I think based on these *facts - not interpretation * that this is fair and reasonable to take a view on ...and that's allowing for no upside in better team , structure and better conditioning 

This is where my subjective gut feel kicks in... I think he's an 18 and 9 player with everything aligned properly for him ..but I can't prove that

I would be prepared to take a punt on that however and play the percentages in free agency next year which I believe are in our favor rather than ( IMO ) more blindly run the risk of Eddy Curry which ( again IMO ):

1. You have far less control once he goes QO

2. Or if he doesn't go QO and you pay up with no insurance ..as an owner you imprudently end up costing yourself millions that you didn't have to and if there is a health issue that prevents him from playing and he is forced to retire... you have ballast there that could have been used for someone more productive and you have the foregone opportunity cost

Its simple

No Insurance .. its the QO and then No Ed





> Think we'll have to agree to disagree on that. A year ago Sweetney was a much less known commodity. He had the chance and he squandered it. Curry isn't the baby Shaq of people's inflated expectations, but he's a better player to have around by a significant margin.


Yeah we will agree to disagree on this but I would be interested to know how you arrive at your reasoning in what constitutes "a significant margin " when all the data points elsewhere. 

I'm flat out not convinced that Curry is a better player full stop..let alone by a significant margin . I think your flat out wrong on this and like a lot of folk just keep debating for the sake of defending a position when data, logic and reason point elsewhere

But that's OK..I would be happier if we let sleeping dogs lie on this - I'm comfortable that I have been more fully able to log the logic to the argument


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

What is also bothering me about Curry is that it appears he is way out of shape/condition 

Even if we comes back for the QO.. don't expect him to be playing a bunch straight away 

Its like when Brad Miller had no love years ago and his agent advised him not to work out in case he injured himself and hurt his market 

Same deal for Curry.. his agent doesn't want him running around and risking further ish's with his heart

Yup..it will be the same ole same ole for Eddy Curry in how he starts his seasons.. don't expect him to be seeing much productive output from him until Christmas/New Year ..when he will have to start singing for his supper in his upcoming UFA 

Expect him to force it..and lose effectiveness ( See the Kandi QO case study ) which has a negative impact on team chemistry


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Same deal for Curry.. his agent doesn't want him running around and risking further ish's with his heart


Maybe they don't want him to screw up a knee ala Willie Green.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> What is also bothering me about Curry is that it appears he is way out of shape/condition


You've seen him?



> Even if we comes back for the QO.. don't expect him to be playing a bunch straight away
> 
> Its like when Brad Miller had no love years ago and his agent advised him not to work out in case he injured himself and hurt his market


Except apparently Brad spent the summer fishing and drinking beer. Curry's working out at Hoops 6 days a week by all accounts.

He's just not playing games.

Huge difference.

Same deal for Curry.. his agent doesn't want him running around and risking further ish's with his heart.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Mikedc said:


> You've seen him?


Ahh yeeeaaahhhh

At the baby shower.. I blew off the Destiny's Child gig too 

They are so 6 hours ago..

I couldn't be bothered looking for the links on something so spurious notwithstanding Mike McGraws comments ..but as always with Eddy there seem to be conflicting reports with his conditioning ..and even last summer when he was supposedly a porker and came into camp in shape he wasn't match fit and we didn't see anything useful from him until late December/January if I recall





> Except apparently Brad spent the summer fishing and drinking beer.


And he has Noooooooo love because everyone thought he was a slow pudgy git who had no business playing NBA basketball . There was ish's with his lack of hops , lateral quickness etc etc etc etc etc

I was basically the only one that was an advocate way back when ( maybe Truebluefan remembers ?) to a poster the whole board thought he was a joke and there were even rumours of Jerzy dealing him at the end of his first season for Erick Strickland straight up ( when Strick was a Knick ) or Travis Best. I think we even had Michael Ruffin starting over him for a patch due to Brad's lack of conditioning

Even still when was showing signs of real statistical production ..everyone just blew it off as yeah he's a scrub on a bad team and someone has to stuff stats...

Of course we acquired Jalen Rose and the rest is history

I didn't want to make this a Brad Miller retrospective per se ..but for me ..I see a semi -similar situation with Mike Sweetney, where , with commitment from a strong franchise and a commitment from the man himself to condition up .. I think he has some genuine upside given that pure post players just don't really exist in spades around the league

Would I trade a mentally tuned no possible health issues and no real risk of wasted cap space Eddy Curry for Mike Sweetney ?

No

In the circumstances ?

I wouldn't think twice

And the notion of sign and trade is on the agenda according to Chi's best beat writer ( McGraw... see his comments in the McGraw answers thread ) but he says there is nothing imminent and despite Pax's public comments that he intends bringing Eddy back

Pax was also saying "the right things" re Jamal last summer too

Like it or not ..its there as a possibility if anything pops up..which its not right now

It at least illustrates that Management is far from convinced about our Ed

And its not just the concern over his physical well being..as m'man flash says in this thread he's worried about Curry's "heart" as it pertains to mental strength and desire

Word.


----------

