# Brent Barry is available / Pax is interested / Barry's Age [Mergefest]



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

*OK .. Brent Barry is available ( apparently ) so..... why not..*

Deal Fizer to the Clips 

Blount, Gill and Brunson to the Supes ( all expiring ) and Ely/ Jaric go to Seattle 

Seattle deals Brent Barry and Antonio Daniels- both of whom can handle both guard spots 

We basically turn Fizer, Blount , Gill and Brunson into Brent Barry and Antonio Daniels 

And if a trade is to be done with Crawford .. deal him for the Turk 

*

Curry
Chandler
Turkoglu
Barry
Hinrich

bench

Davis
Jerome Williams
Robinson
Dupree
Daniels

Jeffries
Scrub

*


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Seattle still has Jaric and the promising Luke Ridnour to man the point and have Ray Allen and Flip at the scoring guard and Rashard and Frahm at the 3 with Ely and Rad at the 4 ( Cya Reggie ) plus their vast collections of boobs manning the Center spot 

BTW .. I think Ridnour will be a star .. the sleeper of his class


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

*Re: OK .. Brent Barry is available ( apparently ) so..... why not..*



> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> Deal Fizer to the Clips
> 
> Blount, Gill and Brunson to the Supes ( all expiring ) and Ely/ Jaric go to Seattle
> ...


I don't think they would give us Daniels and Barry. If we could get Barry for the guys you mentioned, I'd go for it.

Wouldn't trade Crawford for Turk.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Jaric = Daniels .. or maybe with some more upside ( younger etc ) with a slightly cheaper contract 

Ely is a gimme developer at the 4 and 5 .. hey anything beats Reggie Evans as a fill in and Vlad imitating a PF 

Barry is out of favour so it seems and Seattle seems resigned to lose him fo zip 

I think Ridnour is of TJ Ford speed and quality with minutes but perhaps with better individual scoring capacity . There's also more flamboyance and moxie to his foxy annoyance 

Almost a bit of White Cocoa about him .. I really like the boy

I think I'll adopt him the lil wil of a wisp


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> We basically turn Fizer, Blount , Gill and Brunson into Brent Barry and Antonio Daniels


Sign me up.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Do people just forget the way Brent Barry badmouthed the Bulls when he left last time? Thats a burnt bridge...period. The Bulls would have no interest in trading for Barry and Barry would have less than zero interest in returning to the Bulls. Give it a rest already!


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Brent Barry is a good dancer. We need one of those.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> Do people just forget the way Brent Barry badmouthed the Bulls when he left last time? Thats a burnt bridge...period. The Bulls would have no interest in trading for Barry and Barry would have less than zero interest in returning to the Bulls. Give it a rest already!


Yeah, but the Bulls deserved a good bad-mouthing.

Come to think of it, they still do, although the guys he bad-mouthed the first time around are, I think, all gone.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Coincidentally, Hoopshype today said they Celtics were offering Chris Mills, whose only merit is that insurance is paying 80% of his salary.

Yuck.

Surely they'd prefer someone like Fizer who could actually have a future with them.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Yeah and Scottie never bad mouth the Bulls either


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Yeah and Scottie never bad mouth the Bulls either


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Yeah and Scottie never bad mouth the Bulls either


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Coincidentally, Hoopshype today said they Celtics were offering Chris Mills, whose only merit is that insurance is paying 80% of his salary.
> 
> Yuck.
> ...


Plus you would think Fizer could help them, unlike Mills. He gets going down low, opens up things for their shooters.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Here's why not*

SEATTLE -- Seattle SuperSonics guard Brent Barry will have surgery on a broken finger and is expected to miss up to six weeks. 

Actually, probably not. If this is right, he won't be back in action until Mid-March at the earliest. We'd be renting him for a month as well as, I guess, getting his Bird rights to give us a shot at re-signing him. 

I'd still be willing to do that deal, I think, but I'd want a secondary deal like the one I posted about Toronto to give us some short-term help too.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

I wouldnt mind this deal for Seattle


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

who cares if his finger is broken and he misses 6 weeks 

its about acquiring him as a mid term piece for the next say 3 - 4 years


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

FJ, you the man as always  Fresh off the press...

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...lsbits,1,7764600.story?coll=cs-home-headlines


> The Bulls have contacted Seattle to gauge its interest in players for a trade for guard Brent Barry, a league source said. Barry, who played 37 games for the Bulls in 1998-99, will be a free agent after this season. He is seeking a four-year, $23 million deal this summer, which the Bulls could meet by offering a multiyear deal starting at the midlevel exception. The usual suspects of Jamal Crawford and Marcus Fizer make the trade work, although Seattle has cooled on Crawford, and the Bulls would want more in return.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> FJ, you the man as always  Fresh off the press...
> 
> http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...lsbits,1,7764600.story?coll=cs-home-headlines


lol...

Kid drops 31 on them, including an ESPY play of the year candidate, and they cool off on him?

Funny, I heard the same thing from Isiah after Jamal had a big game in that win in New York...

I think trade talk for JC will cool down because they should know it's going to take more than a bag of fortune cookies to get him.


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

What about something like

Crawford
ERob
Fizer

for

Barry
Antonio Daniels
Radmanovic

or

Barry
Flip Murray
Radmanovic
draft pick

This is if Paxson determines Jamal isn't the SG of the future. And he did say recently in the Daily Herald that the Bulls need SF and SG this summer.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

*Tribuneaxson after Brent Barry*

The Bulls have contacted Seattle to gauge its interest in players for a trade for guard Brent Barry, a league source said. Barry, who played 37 games for the Bulls in 1998-99, will be a free agent after this season. He is seeking a four-year, $23 million deal this summer, which the Bulls could meet by offering a multiyear deal starting at the midlevel exception. The usual suspects of Jamal Crawford and Marcus Fizer make the trade work, although Seattle has cooled on Crawford, and the Bulls would want more in return. …

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/cs-040204bullsbits,1,7764600.story?coll=cs-bulls-headlines 


I don't think Pax is going to trade JC....

What kind of deal do you see here??

Fizer&Blount for Barry???Or maybe do we take on one of their bad contracts and send Erob too..Sth like Fizer,Erob,Blount for Barry and Calvin Booth...which by the way works on the trade checker


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

*Re: Tribuneaxson after Brent Barry*



> Originally posted by <b>unBULLievable</b>!
> I don't think Pax is going to trade JC....


I'd like to see JC in a Bulls uniform for a long time...

We can get Barry without giving up JC...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Let me add that I want ERob to stay too...


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

sure..ERob is good but he can't dribble inside the lane for crying out loud:upset:


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

wait. if he's a free agent, and the Bulls what him that bad, why don't they just sign him at the end of the season? I'm an idiot when it comes to contract details and the CBA.

surely they don't think he's going to help now? He broke his finger and will be out almost 2 months.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

I think AD would probably be the obvious candidate here. Although his contract is big, it gives them some much needed size.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

I don't see either team being able to match up something for Barry.

If Paxson did include Crawford for Barry - Fire him immediately.

This is what scares me about Paxson. The unknown. Does he dislike Crawford's game that much that he would take nothing back again? He just said he wouldn't do another lesser talent in return trade. Does he see Barry as better than a grinder? I hope not.

Unless this is for spare parts - I.E. - Fizer, JYD, Etc.... this deal is of no value to us at all.

So far the rumored deals bring us back very little -

Dooling and Ely
A busted up Brent Barry

That'll help......NOT


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

OK, so which of the players you are trading Crawford for is going to be the guy to bring the Bulls up a notch?

Answer - None.

Murray is worse at D and Jacking bad shots than Crawford will ever be.
Radman is nice, but I feel it's a wash.
Barry is a FA after this season so we get to hear him rip the organization for a month then leave - Iguess that's worth something, just not Crawford.

So we trade Crawford and E-Rob for Murray and Radman.....Well, I've seen worse but not convinced we'd be all that much better. Especially since Murray would be on the bench and in Skiles' dog house all the time.

Including the First rnd pick....

I just don't see it.

Atleast when people where mentioning Q, Jaric and Ely i saw them filling big parts. 

I just can't wait for the deadline to pass. 

FWIW - If I were Crawford I'd stick it to Chicago and leave. I'd tell my buddies C & C the deal and wish them the best when they decide to leave after being bashed all next season as the only remaining players to blame.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Barry can be got with the MLE, and he's probably worth it. A $16 mil over three years contract could probably nab him, with a team option in the fourth year to keep him for five (paying out about $5.5 and 6 mil over those last two years... he'll still be very effective around 36, because of his shooting and defensive savvy).

I think if all we do is add him and our lottery pick, and release Jeffries, and if our youngsters work out hard at Berto along with improving their basketball IQ with the assistant coaches and with Skiles, we'll be in good enough shape to see if we can't blow this team up before next year's AS break. I think a lineup of Hinrich/Crawford/Barry/Chandler/Curry with AD, JYD, Luol Deng, Dupree, and Brunson backing them up (maybe pick up Duhon in the 2nd round and let him replace Brunson?), we've got a good enough team. We continue to be patient and hope that they are STILL GETTING BETTER, but if they aren't, we can deal them before the AS-break.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

*Menage A Trois - 3 way*

Seattle needs help at the PF spot 

We send Fizer to LA ...

Dooling, Ely , and Blount to Seattle 

Ely fits in at the PF / C rotation for Seattle now so they don't have to rely on Reggie Evans playing big minutes at the 4 .. and they have vet Blount to sub him/ rotate with him 

Blount gets cut loose over the summer , Collison comes back and Ely subs/rotates at the PF with Collison - PF problem solved for Seattle

Dooling they take a flyer on ... although they have Ridnour and Daniels handling the point capably .. maybe they pit Dooling and Flip against each other to back up Jesus and see who wins out .. its not a commitment to Dooling past this summer anyway..

And then there's Richie Frahm in the mix as well

We could swap ERob for Booth who would make a sound back up for us .. nice defensive player with size but with James and Potapenko expiring soon .. I think they thin themselves out too much upfront .... although conceivably if they think Ely would develop they could play him at Center and have a front line of 

*
Ely
Collison
Lewis
*

but I still say that they would prefer to keep Cal as a reserve and have Vlad back up both forward spots hence .. no ERob

They will keep Frahm or Flip .. I say Frahm as someone is more likely to rip into Flip and lure him away with more dough and Frahm backs up Jesus

AD only has 1 more year left and as Ridnour develops the point guard spot is his .. do they make a qualifying offer to Dooling over the summer with the view as using him as a combo guard when AD is up for free agency to protect against possibly losing him in another year or so...

Maybe

All in all , I would say that Ely and Dooling are more intriguing prospects to Seattle than what they are for us .. who need perimeter players and preferably perimeter players that can shoot with range .. hence Brent Barry .. the added bonus of which with Barry is that he can handle and get his own shot and dish the rock

Yeah OK so he's out for 6 weeks ...

But at least we would have already brought who we want next summer forward now for two guys ( in Fizer and Blount ) that won't be Bulls next year anyhow 

We would have Barry's bird rights and he's looking to get paid at 32 years of age on a contract that will take him through to retirement - 4 years for $23M is what he is chasing 

Why compete for him in the free agency market when we can have him now and give him assurances that we want to pay him that money come the summer 

If a guy is smart and going into his last contract and chasing money he is not going to be a clown and talk trash and generally act like anything other than a pro and crap in his own nest 

If a deal is lined up for Jamal by deadline .. maybe we send Brunson and a 2nd round pick to Seattle and Dooling comes to us and fills the spot on trial until Barry can play 

So...

*

Fizer to LA 

Barry and Dooling to Chicago

Ely, Blount , Simmons and Brunson to Seattle ( the last two get waived as Seattle can't open roster spots or Sesay and Evans get waived ..whatever ) .. but its basically Ely and expiring contracts 

*

Clips clear room

Seattle gets a PF/C prospect with a vet who can help them in teh PF spot now and rationalise their back court by dealing a guy who can't play for the next 2 months and then who is going to fly the Supes Coup in the summer

Chicago brings its summer shopping forward and gets a short term replacement in Dooling that frees up other trades for Jamal by the deadline... or if there is no trade for Jamal he stays till the summer and maybe beyond that and we have a guard rotation of Hinrich , Crawford, Dooling and Gill with Barry stashe on the IL


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

If Pax trades for Barry, he obviously will have found out behind the scenes if Barry is agreeable to resigning. The main guys Barry had a problem with, the GM and coach, are gone.

Murray is just an offensive option, not the main SG. That's why I included the draft pick in that scenario. If no draft pick, then Antonio Daniels is a more polished though less talented combo guard then Crawford. However, he's better defensively, especially at SG.

Radmanovic can fill the long-distance scoring void at SF that we lost with Marshall. He's versatile, also able to play PF.

Anyway, I'm just suggesting these based on some of Paxson's comments. He doesn't feel that Crawford is an ideal fit for the Bulls at SG. Just the other day in the Daily Herald he commented that the Bulls need small forwards AND shooting guards.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>hps</b>!
> What about something like
> 
> Crawford
> ...


I really like this but its basically Crawford and ERob for Vlad and AD and I think the Supes are slightly on the wrong end of the poke 

Fizer and Barry are a wash as neither will be with their teams next year and they may want to keep AD short term ( and he has a short term contract ) until Ridnour matures and is ready to take the reins

Its Ridnour and Allen.. that's their 1 / 2 spots long term .. I don't know whether they would want to commit big money to Jamal to bacl these 2 up notwithstanding his skills and abilities 

I mean do you want to pay a guy $6M to $7M to back up your 1 and 2 spots for guys that will be playing 35 + a night ? ( and yes Ridnour will .. he will be that good ) 

A guy - a vet pro like AD is a more rational and balanced choice 

But I would like to get him though - I was just thinking about it from Seattle's perspective

If that deal was on offer .. I would jump on it


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> Let me add that I want ERob to stay too...


ERob has teased us before. He has games like this then there is an injury, or he's in the doghouse, or he starts stinking it up. It's going to take a lot more than a couple of decent for me to jump on the 'keep ERob bandwagon'.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I am very shocked by the Bulls attempting to trade for him before the 19th. I mean yeah I figured we might try to sign him this summer(as will a lot of teams) but why trade for him now? He will not even be able to play for a good little while from what I understand, like 2 months. This is strange.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

One possibility is for the Celtics to offer injured forward Chris Mills (for Barry), who makes $6.6 million and whose contract expires after this season. Because Mills will not play this season, insurance would pick up 80 percent of his salary, which means the Sonics would actually make money on the deal.

Also, team sources say, *if the Sonics are going to lose Barry, they would prefer to get an asset in return.* For that reason, there is a good chance they will try to trade him if they cannot agree to terms of a contract extension before the trade deadline.

http://www.tribnet.com/sports/story/4700880p-4651983c.html

Whether anything develops appears to hinge on the Sonics' chances to re-sign Barry. The story suggests that Seattle may be looking for a commitment from him prior to 2/19. What Pax seems to be doing, just as Boston seems to have done, is lay the groundwork for a trade by the deadline. Paxson has had Brent Barry on his short list of desireable players for quite a while. The fact that he's interested in trading for an injured player who becomes a free agent this summer should give you an indication how much he wants Barry.

The Celtics are offering Mills. Other than cap relief this summer, Mills has had no impact on Boston at all. If it came down to who's offering more for Barry...the Celts or the Bulls...it sounds like the Bulls are prepared to outbid the C's. Another interesting aspect of trading for Barry that's mentioned in the article is that his new team would retain his *Bird Rights* allowing them to exceed the MLE amount in order to re-sign him. If Pax is truly willing to trade assets to get Barry, that means he's very likely willing to offer Barry a pretty decent contract extension.

Clearly Brent Barry would make the Bulls a better ballclub. He's athletic (former Slam Dunk Champ), he shoots an extremely high percentage from the perimeter (50%/44% this season), he's an excellent passer, consistently leads his team in steals, and he's got a boatload of court savy.

_*IF*_ Paxson is offering Crawford as part of a package to acquire Barry, that should tell you something about his summertime intentions. Given a choice of signing Barry as a free agent or resigning Crawford to an extension, it appears as though he'll pursue Barry first. And if resigning Crawford is not a top priority for Pax, if JC is seen as more of a fall back, contingency plan should Paxson be unable to upgrade the position, Crawford may need to start preparing for a long summer of negotiations with other teams. And that, in fact, may have something to do with why he fired his second agent in less than a year.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> I am very shocked by the Bulls attempting to trade for him before the 19th. I mean yeah I figured we might try to sign him this summer(as will a lot of teams) but why trade for him now? He will not even be able to play for a good little while from what I understand, like 2 months. This is strange.


If we trade for Barry, we can re-sign him and then sign someone else with the MLE. That is why we may want him before the season ends.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> If we trade for Barry, we can sign him and sign someone else with the MLE. That is why we may want him before the season ends.


Excellent point! And because the Bulls would retain Barry's Bird Rights, that should say something about the Bulls willingness to spend money. They seem prepared to offer Barry a deal that exceeds the MLE and then would still add a player with the MLE. That's a lotta dough!


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

good read CBlizzy.

when pax is making comments on how he wants to upgrade the SG and SF this would be a move in the right direction.

I wouldnt want to give up JC for barry for obvious reasons w/o getting something more in return.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> Excellent point! And because the Bulls would retain Barry's Bird Rights, that should say something about the Bulls willingness to spend money. They seem prepared to offer Barry a deal that exceeds the MLE and then would still add a player with the MLE. That's a lotta dough!


The Bulls paid Michael Jordan $30+ million, so the point has never been that the Bulls won't pay their players. I just felt like they had a paranoia about the luxury tax that wasn't justified given the low probability of it being in effect after this season. But the conventional wisdom on the luxury tax has changed. I just wish they would have seen this coming last summer.

I personally think that Barry would be a great fit on this team, but if it is at the expense of Crawford, I suspect this is more of a robbing Peter to pay Paul kind of thing.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

Nothing more than pure speculation here, but a deal for Barry could be tied in some way to the rumored trade of Fizer to the Clippers for Dooling and Ely or Simmons. Are the Bulls prepared to offer Seattle a package that includes Crawford for Barry and lets say Frahm while at the same time adding Dooling and Ely or Simmons?

At least something along those lines would provide the Bulls with enough perimeter players to live through (though not very well) the loss of Crawford and the rehab of Barry.

Or could Paxson simply be creating a competitive bidding market for Crawford before the trade deadline? In other words, if the Clips think there's a strong chance JC could be headed for Seattle, do they agree to expand the deal to Crawford and Fizer for Richardson, Jaric and Ely? 

Lots of games are being played right now between teams. There's two weeks left before the trade deadline. Anything can happen.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

C Blizzy did I read what you said right? You really think that Paxson might be trying to trade for Barry now so that this summer he will have his bird rights and can offer him MORE than the MLE(which is all most teams will be able to). Then add someone else with the MLE. IF this is the case then number one WOW isnt Barry like 33 and number two if they are preparing to do this then including Crawford in a a Barry deal makes sense.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Barry makes no sense for the Bulls. He burned his bridges with the Bulls during his last stint here. Sure, the regime has changed but the team hasn't. Quite simply, screw Brent Barry. And if Paxson is willing to give up Crawford just to bring back JC..well..he's a lot dumber than I thought.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Is it just me?*

The idea of getting a 33yr. old guard basically for a 23 yr old guard when the 23 yr old avg. 17 and the 33 yr old gets 10 a game just so that the GM can give the 33 yr. old more than the MLE when the 33 year old isn't even noted for defense is seemingly weak and not well thought out


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Barry badmouthed our team. I don't want the Bulls to have anything to do with the punk. I don't care if that was the old coach & GM, it was still the Bulls! Forget Barry Pax, he's a waste of everyone else's oxygen!


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> Do people just forget the way Brent Barry badmouthed the Bulls when he left last time? Thats a burnt bridge...period. The Bulls would have no interest in trading for Barry and Barry would have less than zero interest in returning to the Bulls. Give it a rest already!


And Scottie did the same thing to JK and JR.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

*Re: Menage A Trois - 3 way*



> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> Seattle needs help at the PF spot
> 
> We send Fizer to LA ...
> ...


I like your reasoning on this. We are obviously going nowhere. Broken finger or not, it is all good.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> And Scottie did the same thing to JK and JR.




I think thats different. Scottie IS a Bull, he won 6 championships with us. When he says something insulting about the orginization he is just being "candid". When Brent Barry says something bad about the orginization he is just being an assclown.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

*How old is he?*

http://www.tribnet.com/sports/story/4697415p-4648633c.html 


According to this article where it talks about Seattle maybe trading Brent Barry because they can not come to terms on a contract extension(Seattle wants to offer a 2yr deal, Barry wants a 4yr deal) it says he is 31 and wants a 4 yr deal that runs until he is 35. Now NBA.com says his birthday is 12/31/71 which puts him 32, then I read somewhere in one of the Brent Barry threads that he was 33, so exactly how old is he?


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

Arn Tellem is Brent Barry's agent...which happens to be Jamal's ex-agent


Things are getting interesting and complicated..

The sonics are loaded at the guard positions so Jamal doesn't make sense for them .

Daniels
Allen
Murray
Ridnour
Frahm


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

32 years ,37 days old :grinning:


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Is it just me?*



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> The idea of getting a 33yr. old guard basically for a 23 yr old guard when the 23 yr old avg. 17 and the 33 yr old gets 10 a game just so that the GM can give the 33 yr. old more than the MLE when the 33 year old isn't even noted for defense is seemingly weak and not well thought out


It would be an absolutely horrendous trade.

If we bring in Barry, it should be as the 3rd guard to rotate with Jamal and Kirk and to occasionally go small and play the three of them.

Doing anything else (trading Jamal) would be so foolish it hurts. And from all accounts, there's no reason to do such a thing. The only other offer they're getting if freaking Chris Mills? OK, so the Celtics offer Chris Mills and we offer Jamal Crawford? Don't get me started because I refuse to believe Paxson is that stupid until I see it happen. At this point it's all speculation.

It's much more realistic to think the trade would be Fizer+Blount for Barry. I would look into seeing what else we can do though... if we could pry away Radmanovic, Murray, or Frahm by taking on a guy like Calvin Booth or Jerome James, then we damn well ought to do it too.

Further, I don't see at all how the Sonics have room for Jamal.

1- Daniels, Barry, Ridnour
2- Allen, Murray, Frahm

Yep, that's like six guys they've got there in a rotation that's usually only about 4 deep. Trading 1 away ang getting 1 back seems kind of foolish.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: How old is he?*



> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> http://www.tribnet.com/sports/story/4697415p-4648633c.html
> 
> 
> According to this article where it talks about Seattle maybe trading Brent Barry because they can not come to terms on a contract extension(Seattle wants to offer a 2yr deal, Barry wants a 4yr deal) it says he is 31 and wants a 4 yr deal that runs until he is 35. Now NBA.com says his birthday is 12/31/71 which puts him 32, then I read somewhere in one of the Brent Barry threads that he was 33, so exactly how old is he?


my mistake he is in fact 32 ...does the fact that he is 11 months younger than i previosly stated change much?


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

It is speculation that JC would be involved in a deal guy...lets not overreact guys. And for someone who didnt like getting Radmo, murray, Barry for fizer and jamal are you crazy? that would be a great trade for us, but the sonics arent high and wouldnt do that.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

What the Sonics lack is an inside scorer

James
Booth
Potapenko can't score at all

A scoring machine PF like Marcus would be beneficial for them


Fizer or Mills?????


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>remlover</b>!
> It is speculation that JC would be involved in a deal guy...lets not overreact guys. And for someone who didnt like getting Radmo, murray, Barry for fizer and jamal are you crazy? that would be a great trade for us, but the sonics arent high and wouldnt do that.


radman is a 4 , a poor rebounding 4 at that he would never play ahead of tyson and davis or jyd in the skiles defensive regime . Murray is currently the sonics 5th best guard also getting little time (23 minutes in 2 games this month and this is with barry being hurt) and barry is barry , in that trade the bulls get nothing we need which is an athlete at the 3 or a better player than crawford


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> radman is a 4 , a poor rebounding 4 at that he would never play ahead of tyson and davis or jyd in the skiles defensive regime . Murray is currently the sonics 5th best guard also getting little time (23 minutes in 2 games this month and this is with barry being hurt) and barry is barry , in that trade the bulls get nothing we need which is an athlete at the 3 or a better player than crawford


Obviously if JC is in this trade, then that's bad. But if its Fizer and our scrubs, it is something we need. We need to get as much talent as possible whatever way possible. Kirk, JC and Barry is a nice 3 guard rotation.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> radman is a 4 , a poor rebounding 4 at that he would never play ahead of tyson and davis or jyd in the skiles defensive regime . Murray is currently the sonics 5th best guard also getting little time (23 minutes in 2 games this month and this is with barry being hurt) and barry is barry , in that trade the bulls get nothing we need which is an athlete at the 3 or a better player than crawford


Whoa, whoa. You are in the minority if you believe Vlad is a 4. I think he's absolutely a 3, with ball skills and 3 point range. He is actually a very similar player to Rashard Lewis, and that's the problem with the Sonics having both of them.

By the way, this is the trade that Chad Ford suggests in Insider. It's not a terrible trade because all four players we get back would be good. Still, I say "say no to crack." I'd rather have Jamal than Barry long term. I'm impressed with Jamal's recent improvements. He's becoming a smarter player, and I want somebody better and younger than Brent Barry to break up our backcourt. As for Curry, nah, you gotta keep the guy unless we're getting a star back, and even then...

Chicago trades: PF Jerome Williams (7.0 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 26.5 minutes) 
C Eddy Curry (13.0 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 0.8 apg in 27.6 minutes) 
SG Jamal Crawford (17.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.8 minutes) 
Chicago receives: PF Vladimir Radmanovic (12.6 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 2.1 apg in 32.1 minutes) 
PG Ronald Murray (13.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 2.5 apg in 26.6 minutes) 
C Jerome James (4.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 0.6 apg in 14.2 minutes) 
SG Brent Barry (10.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.5 apg in 30.8 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +4.7 ppg, -2.5 rpg, and +3.3 apg. 

Seattle trades: PF Vladimir Radmanovic (12.6 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 2.1 apg in 32.1 minutes) 
PG Ronald Murray (13.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 2.5 apg in 26.6 minutes) 
C Jerome James (4.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 0.6 apg in 14.2 minutes) 
SG Brent Barry (10.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.5 apg in 30.8 minutes) 
Seattle receives: PF Jerome Williams (7.0 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 48 games) 
C Eddy Curry (13.0 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 0.8 apg in 42 games) 
SG Jamal Crawford (17.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 5.5 apg in 47 games) 
Change in team outlook: -4.7 ppg, +2.5 rpg, and -3.3 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED

Due to Chicago and Seattle being over the cap, the 15% trade rule is invoked. Chicago and Seattle had to be no more than 115% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.


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


You have been assigned Trade ID number 1469650


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>remlover</b>!
> It is speculation that JC would be involved in a deal guy...lets not overreact guys. And for someone who didnt like getting Radmo, murray, Barry for fizer and jamal are you crazy? that would be a great trade for us, but the sonics arent high and wouldnt do that.


I agree 100%. It does appear all speculation to me.

However, if we were able to pull a deal that brought in Flip and Rad for Jamal... that'd have to be seriously considered.

Flip is Jamal except he's maybe slightly behind in development... but he's under contract for cheap next year. He might have more offensive firepower though.

Rad is a pure stroking 3 that could be a big help.

However, I'm not at all sure why the Sonics would do this. Crawford would still end up as the backup to Ray Allen. Having those two in addition to Ridnour and Daniels is pretty much overkill. They'd be better off hanging on to Flip since he'll cost them less while sitting behind Allen.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I might do JC and Fizer for Barry/Murray/Frahm. Seattle would then start JC at PG and let Daniels and Ridnour have backup guard minutes.


----------



## evalam23 (Feb 2, 2004)

There is one thing about Barry and that he is a very good shooter, Pax likes him because if they double Curry Barry shoots over 44% from 3pt land , and if you look at his career stats, he shot over 40% from 3pt land his whole career, and is a career 46% shooter. That would make teams a little less likely to do that, and if we can get him by trading Fizer, blount. Than do it, but if we give up crawford for Barry, I would not like it. 
If the bulls do trade Crawford than Pax has really given up on him.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

It's all specluation right now; I don't think Crawford gets traded without the Bulls getting soemone of equal value, which is why trade talks with the Clippers cooled off. They wanted JC in the propsed Fizer for Ely and Jaric; the Bulls said only if they added Q in the deal. And the article does state: <i>"Seattle has cooled on Crawford and the Bulls would look for much more in return</i>. I'm so-so on Barry.

A Fizer/ Blount for Barry/ Murray is a trade that I would do.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dsouljah9</b>!
> It's all specluation right now; I don't think Crawford gets traded without the Bulls getting soemone of equal value, which is why trade talks with the Clippers cooled off. They wanted JC in the propsed Fizer for Ely and Jaric; the Bulls said only if they added Q in the deal. And the article does state: <i>"Seattle has cooled on Crawford and the Bulls would look for much more in return</i>. I'm so-so on Barry.
> 
> A Fizer/ Blount for Barry/ Murray is a trade that I would do.


While I'd certainly love to have both of them, I don't see why the Sonics would throw him in just for the hell of it.


----------



## realbullsfaninLA (Jan 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> Nothing more than pure speculation here, but a deal for Barry could be tied in some way to the rumored trade of Fizer to the Clippers for Dooling and Ely or Simmons. Are the Bulls prepared to offer Seattle a package that includes Crawford for Barry and lets say Frahm while at the same time adding Dooling and Ely or Simmons?
> 
> At least something along those lines would provide the Bulls with enough perimeter players to live through (though not very well) the loss of Crawford and the rehab of Barry.
> ...


 This is an EXCELLENT post CBlizzy.Pax is a very bright guy.I can totally see the logic in him getting Crawford's name out there to gauge interest.Pax can leak hypothetical trades for Crawford to the media,then have other teams call him offering more than the proposed trade he had no intention of making in the first place.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Not sure if I like it, but I could definetely see Pax trade away Craw to get Barry. 

The 3-way ideas in this thread are creative and probably would be needed to get this done.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Very good point realbullsfaninla. A lot of negotiating tactics at work here. My guess is there is some deal out there that Paxson really wants but is trying to convince a team to do it and give him what he wants. Using other teams as bait could help his situation. What is the mysterious trade he wants? Who knows but suggesting it might be the Clips is a very possible scenario.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> Very good point realbullsfaninla. A lot of negotiating tactics at work here. My guess is there is some deal out there that Paxson really wants but is trying to convince a team to do it and give him what he wants. Using other teams as bait could help his situation. What is the mysterious trade he wants? Who knows but suggesting it might be the Clips is a very possible scenario.


If it's the Clipps I really hope he gets Jaric.
Realistacally speaking though what other players are on the market????

The Sonics seem like a perfect trading partner..

They have a plethora of guards and we are loaded with big men

and lets not forget Tommy Smith


----------



## realbullsfaninLA (Jan 8, 2003)

I'm hoping this is the case.There seems to be this unjustified fear of what Pax "might" do.I don't understand where this paranoia comes from.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>realbullsfaninLA</b>!
> This is an EXCELLENT post CBlizzy.Pax is a very bright guy.I can totally see the logic in him getting Crawford's name out there to gauge interest.Pax can leak hypothetical trades for Crawford to the media,then have other teams call him offering more than the proposed trade he had no intention of making in the first place.


This doesn't make much sense to me.

It's already out there earlier in the week that the Celts offered Chris Mills for Barry.

So, in an effort to drive up Crawford's value, Pax implies (I don't think he has done so, but I'm trying to follow this line of thought) that we're offering Fizer and Crawford for Barry and filler?

All this seems to be saying to me is that Paxson thinks Crawford has value comparable to Chris Mills (a guy who's not going to play ball the rest of the year) or Brent Barry (a guy who's not going to miss at least another month and a half of game time).

Not exactly driving up the value in my book. If he wanted to drive up his value, he'd be talking about Rashard Lewis and Flip Murray and those guys. No bidding war is going to erupt over someone you're comparing with Chris Mills.

In terms of real production, the truth of the matter is that Crawford is pretty equal to Rashard Lewis. Lewis is, just like Crawford, a potentially overpowering but inconsistent offensive player who's more accurately described as consistently bad than inconsistently good at defense. He's also a soft-spoken kid who's been criticized for not having a killer instinct.

Personally, I'd like to have Lewis quite a bit, just the way I like having Crawford quite a bit. But truth be told, I don't see how Crawford helps the Sonics at all, since they've got a lot of guys who are already very similar to him.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

Lots of speculation but one thing I havent heard mentioned is why would a team give up a equal value for a RFA this summer.If he doesnt want to stay he then takes the qualifying offer and becomes a UFA the year after.


I dont see a team giving up Q who wants stay a Clipp for this or seattle gambling its only tradeable assets right now like a Lewis ,Radmon,or even Allen at the hopes of a guy whos coming from one of the worst losing teams is gonna be so happy to go home even if its a losing team .

I just see Crawford if hes not a Bull looking foir a winning team over being closer to home and the gamble is one of these teams would be trading for a guy with no agent in place to even gauge his interest in staying before dealing with him .


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

the Tribune is just guessing that the Bulls could've offered JC and Fizer cause they've been on the block.But Paxson's intentions aren't clear yet..concerning Jamal.

Don't worry ..if Jamal is to be included in a deal you can bet that Pax will get Radman or Flip Murray...

i just think that it's reasonable for the Sonics to prefer a young prospect in Fizer..who is a scorer in the basket sth the Sonics DONT HAVE

It's all up to Barry&the sonics managment...The Sonics recently(according to Forbes) were estimated to have lost $4 million since last year..I don't think that they'll tie up Barry for 23$ million bucks IMO.

They could try Fizer..and heck Marcus could start for them right away...It will also help their game ..since Seattle likes to shoot plenty of 3 pointers


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>unBULLievable</b>!
> the Tribune is just guessing that the Bulls could've offered JC and Fizer .But Paxson's intentions aren't clear yet..concerning Jamal.
> Maybe he has changed his mind ..i don't know..his recent interview has me mixed up
> 
> ...


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>unBULLievable</b>!
> the Tribune is just guessing that the Bulls could've offered JC and Fizer cause they've been on the block.But Paxson's intentions aren't clear yet..concerning Jamal.
> 
> Don't worry ..if Jamal is to be included in a deal you can bet that Pax will get Radman or Flip Murray...


That's all fine and good, but I haven't seen Flip's or Vlad's or even Rashard's name in reference to us in the papers. Only Barry, who I'd honestly rather not have as compared to either of the other three.


----------



## realbullsfaninLA (Jan 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> This doesn't make much sense to me.
> ...


 Mike,my point to seeing the logic in that game plan is this.... If a team hears of a proposed trade with lesser players,then they start to call Pax with better offers than the one that was mentioned.

Think of it as an auction mentality.You start bids low to gauge initial interest.Then let teams drive up the value for you.Another advantage to this is that it gives Pax an insight as to what other teams will be willing to offer JC this summer.


----------



## Wild Wild West (Jun 30, 2003)

I have been one of the many pushing for the Bulls to pursue B. Barry as a FA, hoping they could could get him with the MLE, and for the purpose of being a very good fit as swing backup guard to Hinrich and Crawford. 

There are several key points here! It now appears he would accept the MLE plus annual increases, but wants four years. That is a little long but signing him as a FA is far more attractive in my opinion than most of these trades. Why? because in my scenario we give up nothing and wind up backing up two positions with a player who at this stage is probably a little above average as a starter, but as a big ballhandler and outside shooter could be one of the league's best sixth men, and get 25-30 minutes as a good match with either Hinrich or Crawford and be able to back up both.

At his age he may recognise and accept a slightly reduced role. Notice I said slightly. The odds of signing him to be a 15 minute a game backup at just one position are slim. We could offer him close to starter minutes. 

My interest in him, however, was not to be the answer at SG for the next four years. He probably will show some significant slippage and by the end of that contract would most likely not be an asset as a starter, but could very well still be an above average backup.

In essence I am also saying I haven't given up on Crawford yet, although i now believe his upside if he achieves it, is only a little above average at best. Still a young talent who at least should achieve middle of the pack status is not something to unload for an older player.

The Bulls are still rebuilding. I still think they should be planning around 4 young long term pieces in Hinrich, Crawford, Curry, and Chandler. Adding veterans to the mix can help, but is better served at the backups or the 5th position SF. 

I realize Barry may not want to be here long term under those circumstances, but he might if he realizes what a good fit it could be. If they trade for him they need at least verbal indications that they can sign him. The one interesting aspect I do find in the trade proposals is the ability to retain his Bird rights, enabling us to potentially sign him and another MLE, but not if it involves Crawford.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I think that Paxson wants to try and acquire Barry in a trade without using JC. Then this summer see if he can negotiate a 4 year deal with Barry. If he can then Paxson lets Crawford walk. If he can't and Barry wants to leave then he has Crawford in his back pocket. If he signs Barry, uses the MLE on a vet SG/SF ala Eric Williams and acquires a young stud SF either by drafting one(Deng?) or trading the pick for one(Battier?) then all of a sudden we are in awful good shape for now and for future.


----------



## Mr. Bill (Nov 26, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> I think that Paxson wants to try and acquire Barry in a trade without using JC. Then this summer see if he can negotiate a 4 year deal with Barry. If he can then Paxson lets Crawford walk. If he can't and Barry wants to leave then he has Crawford in his back pocket. If he signs Barry, uses the MLE on a vet SG/SF ala Eric Williams and acquires a young stud SF either by drafting one(Deng?) or trading the pick for one(Battier?) then all of a sudden we are in awful good shape for now and for future.


I don't think we should let jamal walk under any circumstances. If we decide to go in another direction we should still sign and trade him or just resign him and trade him down the line. It never makes sense to let talent like that leave for nothing.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Here's what I would offer:*

And I'm sure people won't like it at all, but the trade that makes the most sense doesn't involve Barry or Jamal.

The Bulls trade:
Chandler, Fizer, Jeffries
The Sonics trade:
Lewis, Murray, Evans

This trade makes imminently more sense for both sides.

For the Sonics, they are playing Radmanovic out of position at the 4. He could be as good as Lewis is at the 3, but he's overmatched where his is now. 

In the backcourt, Barry is on the shelf for the next month and a half, but they can keep on trucking despite losing Murray because they've got Allen, Daniels, Ridnour, and Frahm. However, they're a very young team, and Barry is a team captain. The smart thing for them to do is keep him and let one of the others go. When Brent comes back from his injury, Frahm goes back on the bench. Barry is also big enough to get some run at the three, and deft enough to play the 1, so they can make things work with him. Because they're smaller however, they can't say that for their other guards. Thus, keeping Barry and trading Flip would balance them out while still letting them keep the best of their flexibility. 

Chandler gives them the difference-making front court player they've been looking for. Couple him with Fizer and Collison (returning next year) and they've got a very balanced, very athletic young team.

1- Daniels, Ridnour (Barry)
2- Allen, Barry, Frahm
3- Radmanovic, (Barry), Sesay, Jeffries
4- Chandler, Fizer, Collison
5- James, Booth, Potapenko

For the Bulls, it's apparent to me that Chandler very well might be the most expendable of our guys. Although he's potentially very good at the 4, this is also ADs best spot, Blount's best spot, and JYD's best spot. It's also a very big-man heavy draft coming up and we'll have a shot at guys like Okafor. Thus, Tyson is the guy we can most afford to lose.

And what we get back would help us tremendously. Lewis is already a near star and Murray could be a star (and he's signed for another year on the cheap). We'd fill out our starting lineup with a guy who can be an offensive force and fill in our backcourt with a guy who can back up both Jamal and Kirk.

1- Kirk, (Jamal), (Flip), Brunson
2- Jamal, Flip, Gill
3- Lewis, ERob, Pip, Dupree
4- AD, JYD, Evans
5- Curry, Blount


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

That is a lopsided trade; Chandler just returned from injury; Fizer doesn't play and Jeffries is just another spot on the IR.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Unfortunately, Barry isn't a player who's a difference maker. I don't see why trading for him is going to make us a better team, in the W/L columns.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> And I'm sure people won't like it at all, but the trade that makes the most sense doesn't involve Barry or Jamal.
> 
> The Bulls trade:
> ...





> Originally posted by <b>dsouljah9</b>!
> That is a lopsided trade; Chandler just returned from injury; Fizer doesn't play and Jeffries is just another spot on the IR.


dsoul, I disagree (except the Jeffries part, but thats presumably just salary trade filler).

Chandler and Fizer would both have an immediate impact on the hurting Sonics front court and if Chandler has learned a lesson about strength and conditioning, he could anchor that front line for the next 10 years. Don't turn your nose up at an athletic, energetic 21 year old 7 footer so quickly.

This is actually a very fair, balanced trade proposal for both teams. I still favor keeping the 3 C's intact, but I can't deny the possibilities in Mike's proposal.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dsouljah9</b>!
> That is a lopsided trade; Chandler just returned from injury; Fizer doesn't play and Jeffries is just another spot on the IR.


LOL, come on and think a bit more long term. Obviously you give him a week or two back to show that he's healthy again, but it's not like Chandler had a career ending injury or anything.

By that logic would Vince Carter be worthless in trade because he just came back from an injury (or a whole series of them in Vince's case)?

Or, if Vince was being traded to would you say "no, we really don't want Vince Carter but you making us take on Chris Jeffries is a real deal-breaker". That'd be pretty unlikely.

The deal is Chandler for Lewis and Murray. The rest of the guys (on both sides) are just filler.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Seattle link, some mention of Barry:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/thiel/159424_thie05.html



> The broken bone was a setback to him and the Sonics, who have no eagerness to move Barry, but have even less desire to see him walk away this summer for nothing. They could still get something for the free agent in a sign-and-trade agreement, but the Sonics would be largely out of control of that situation.
> 
> At the moment, the Sonics are in control, but with a lopsided roster that backcourt heavy. Daniels' emergence, coupled with the potential of youngsters Flip Murray, Luke Ridnour and Richie Frahm, mean Barry is expendable, despite his temporary incapacity.
> 
> Daniels is also four years younger than Barry, and much lighter financially -- he's in the first of a three-year contract that costs the Sonics $2.2 million each season. Barry is said to want a four-year deal, while the Sonics aren't interested in going beyond two.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Thanks SD I see no reason why Seattle won't do a Fizer/Blount for Barry/Frahm trade. This makes more sense for us too. Frahm gives us backup minutes while Barry is still rehabing and then we he gets back we have a nice foursome at guard.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> Thanks SD I see no reason why Seattle won't do a Fizer/Blount for Barry/Frahm trade. This makes more sense for us too. Frahm gives us backup minutes while Barry is still rehabing and then we he gets back we have a nice foursome at guard.


Works for me.

Sonics get a low post scoring threat in Fizer and a banger in Blount. Bulls get outside shooting, a potential 'bridge' player in Barry and minutes to see what Frahm can do. Sign me up.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I had to throw Frahm in there for my personal bias. I really like his game and think he can be a heck of a player.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> Whoa, whoa. You are in the minority if you believe Vlad is a 4. I think he's absolutely a 3, with ball skills and 3 point range. He is actually a very similar player to Rashard Lewis, and that's the problem with the Sonics having both of them.
> ...


you say Vlad is a 3 i say 4 because thats what he plays even when lewis is on the bench, radman plays the 4 

in game he is more of a 3 and a half in the sense he rebounds and shoots like a 3 but he has the body and quickness of a 4 and since its alot easier to get stronger as you get older I'm standing by the statement he is a 4 and will continue to be one in the future


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> you say Vlad is a 3 i say 4 because thats what he plays even when lewis is on the bench, radman plays the 4
> 
> in game he is more of a 3 and a half in the sense he rebounds and shoots like a 3 but he has the body and quickness of a 4 and since its alot easier to get stronger as you get older I'm standing by the statement he is a 4 and will continue to be one in the future


Radman's natural position is the 3. Most of his attributes are those of a SF...ball handling, perimeter shooting, running the floor, driving to the hoop. He doesn't have the skills of a typical 4, like low post moves, strong rebounding, shot blocking..etc. He is a decent post defender (he covers the finesse guys better than the bruisers). Basically, i'd say he's a natural 3 who has the versatility to play the 4 if needed.


----------



## Swishy K (Feb 26, 2003)

As a Sonics fan I think thst Tyson Chandler would be the best fit for Seattle, but I'm not sure Seattle would part with Lewis. But Radmanovic would be a very nice addition to the Bulls as well as Murray and Barry. If Seattle threw in next years first round pick I wonder if there's a fair package for them to aquire Chandler without having to give up Lewis. After all, you guys could very well have a shot at either Okafor or Howard for power forward, allowing Radmanovic to play the three. I do think that if Seattle had a chance to get Curry, there would have to be a third team somehow involved so they could move at least one or two of their current centers. 

I guess the biggest drawback with the names of young yet unproven prospects with much future potential is that no Gm wants to look like an idiot a couple years down the road for giving up on a star too early. But on the other hand if that player doesn't turn out the way they thought then they look back on the player or players they could have had. I guess that's the dilema they roll around in their heads. But in this case I think because both teams have an abundance of young players with future potential they can move young potential for young potential if certain positions seem to make sense.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> LOL, come on and think a bit more long term. Obviously you give him a week or two back to show that he's healthy again, but it's not like Chandler had a career ending injury or anything.
> ...


Come on Mike, that trade doesn't benefit the Sonics at all. They give up their best player in Lewis and two half-way decent players in Murray and Evans for Fizer, Chandler and Jeffries and that's a good trade for the Sonics? It leaves them with only one primary scorer in Ray Allen.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Scinos</b>!
> 
> 
> Radman's natural position is the 3. Most of his attributes are those of a SF...ball handling, perimeter shooting, running the floor, driving to the hoop. He doesn't have the skills of a typical 4, like low post moves, strong rebounding, shot blocking..etc. He is a decent post defender (he covers the finesse guys better than the bruisers). Basically, i'd say he's a natural 3 who has the versatility to play the 4 if needed.


there are alot of perimeter 4's in the league pat garrity comes to mind as a 4 with the game of a 3 ...the biggest determiner of where you play is what you defend and its all theory that vlad is a better defender at the 3 because he almost never does it and has a body that will assuredly lend itself to guarding 4s better in the future


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Here's what I would offer:*



> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> For the Bulls, it's apparent to me that Chandler very well might be the most expendable of our guys. Although he's potentially very good at the 4, this is also ADs best spot, *Blount's best spot*, and JYD's best spot. It's also a very big-man heavy draft coming up and we'll have a shot at guys like Okafor. Thus, Tyson is the guy we can most afford to lose.


Lewis is maybe the one guy in the league that might be available that I would consider trading Chandler or Curry for.

But... Just to nitpick, let's not try to justify any trades by how it effects Corrie Blount's playing time. please.......


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> there are alot of perimeter 4's in the league pat garrity comes to mind as a 4 with the game of a 3 ...the biggest determiner of where you play is what you defend and its all theory that vlad is a better defender at the 3 because he almost never does it and has a body that will assuredly lend itself to guarding 4s better in the future


great post! I am far from sold on Radman as a starter at the 3. If he is so good, Seatle should keep him and trade Lewis for a big man.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Re: Here's what I would offer:*



> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Lewis is maybe the one guy in the league that might be available that I would consider trading Chandler or Curry for.
> ...


Fair point.



> Originally posted by <b>dsouljah9</b>!
> 
> Come on Mike, that trade doesn't benefit the Sonics at all. They give up their best player in Lewis and two half-way decent players in Murray and Evans for Fizer, Chandler and Jeffries and that's a good trade for the Sonics? It leaves them with only one primary scorer in Ray Allen.


No way is Lewis their best player- Allen is pretty much head and shoulders above him.

In any case, the point is that Chandler is 7'1, 235 and super athletic PF who can pull down 20 boards in a game. If over the next couple of weeks he shows he's over his injury and he puts up a couple games like the ones he had before getting hurt (13 points, 22 boards, 4 blocks or 14 points and 17 boards), a guy like Lewis is the absolute minimum I would give him away for.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

If Chandler can be <i>that</i> good, why trade him for a guy that you think isn't the best player on his team? Lewis is a second scoring option on the Sonics; Allen can't carry the load all by himself. There's no way the Soincs trade three pretty good players for a player that just came off the IR; another coming off recent knee surgery and another that doesn't even see the floor.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dsouljah9</b>!
> If Chandler can be<i>that</i> good, why trade him for a guy that you think isn't the best player on his team?


Just because he's that good doesn't mean he's the best player on our team or that he'd be the best player on their team.

Chandler can be very good, but I don't see him as the best player now or in the future on our team.

Likewise, Lewis can be very good, but I don't see him as the best player now or in the future on their team.



> Lewis is a second scoring option on the Sonics; Allen can't carry the load all by himself. There's no way the Soincs trade three pretty good players for a player that just came off the IR; another coming off recent knee surgery and aonther that doesn't even see the floor.


Allen doesn't have to carry the load himself. Tyson doesn't have a pretty offensive game, but he generates points. Radmanovic is good and will be even better playing in his natural position. They'll still have Antonio Daniels, Brent Barry, and Ridnour, all of whom look quite capable of putting points on the board.

Regarding the other guys, you still don't seem to get they they are cap filler. I could throw your name in there and it really wouldn't affect the terms of the trade. It's just a matter of including guys to make the trade work under the rules. 

If the Sonics and Bulls would agree to Chandler for Murray and Lewis, they aren't going to turn down Chandler and Fizer for Murray and Lewis. That's pretty much just common sense.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

They aren't trading Lewis, so the point's moot.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dsouljah9</b>!
> They aren't trading Lewis, so the point's moot.


Don't be so sure of this. They have another very similar, lower salary player in Vlad Radmanovic. It's hard to find two guys on a team whose game is more similar. Vlad is a little less athletic but certainly more aggressive and with a better handle. They both are 6' 10" SF shooters who play about average defense.

I've always thought that a trade that the Chandler/Shard trade was the most reasonable in terms Ty having great potential and Shard being a near star but clearly not a top 20 player. Shard would fill a huge void for us as our distance shooter and primary scorer. Chandler would not take shots away from Allen and Radmanovic, but would flourish as a rebounder and a huge 4 who could run the floor with their fast moving team.

I'm not sure Seattle or Pax see it the same way.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

Radmanovich is a sixth and is effective coming off the bench. I don't think that he would be able to score on a consistent basis. And, if they trade Lewis, that leaves them with no depth at the three spot.

Face it the only way we could possibly get Lewis would be to give up Crawford and Chandler.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

DMiles, whatchya think about this?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2001851946_sonicsreport06.html



> McMillan declined to comment on recent speculation that the Sonics are listening to trade offers for Barry, Vladimir Radmanovic and one of their three high-priced centers — Vitaly Potapenko, Calvin Booth and Jerome James.
> 
> "Any of them could be moved," McMillan said of every team member. "Some will feel more pressure than others and some will be totally shocked like Mase (Desmond Mason) was."


Sounds to me like they're pretty certain to make a move.

It also sounds to me like they're willing to part with Radmanovic if someone will take one of their overpaid guys off their hands.

The only deal we could swing that works for them in that respect is ERob (2 years left on deal) for Booth (3 years left). But if that would get us Radmanovic, I'd be more than willing to do it.

Barry
Booth
Radmanovic

for

Fizer
ERob
Blount

The Sonics get two frontcourt players and unload a bad contract for a less bad contract (ERob). ERob has been playing well of late and will be an upgrade for them at the backup 3 spot.

Seattle's probably still giving up too much in this trade. I wouldn't do it if *I* were them, but it's the closest I can come to it making sense for them and us both. Obviously we aren't going to trade away more than this (Chandler or Crawford, for example) to get back a worse contract, a 31 year old shooter with a messed up hand and a guy who while young and good, isn't as good as Crawford.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> DMiles, whatchya think about this?
> 
> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2001851946_sonicsreport06.html
> ...


See, I don't think we give up nearly enough to make this trade even. I feel like it's hard to do a good trade to Seattle without Ty and Shard swapping unis.

By the way, I prefer Jamal to Flip right now, but I still think Flip has the potential to be a quality starting 2 guard in this league. We should keep him in mind if we have any talks with Seattle.

Of all the players discussed (except the overpriced centers), I have the least interest in Barry.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Frahm from Gonzaga has had a nice 'under the rader' rookie season.
He can shoot as well as anyone in the league,and plays good old hard nosed man to man D.if we adress sonics he should also be on our list!


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

I wonder if adding a future 1st rounder (protected) would make Seattle any more interested in that trade. We're giving up spare parts for starter/6th man material, so it's too good for us as it stands, by a long shot, but adding an early-to-mid 1st rounder in the next 2-3 years might make it palatable. 

Having a 3-guard rotation of Jamal, Kirk and Barry, and a reliable SF in Radman, without giving up a core piece, makes me drool. The overpriced center would even be of some value to us.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Ya Mike i think we'd have to add some pick to that.
Maybe Jamal for Flip can help make the deal work,and I still think wer'e on the good side of the trade.

If we Get Booth we'll have to trade A.D,maybe also with a future protected pick for Eddie Jones


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dsouljah9</b>!
> If Chandler can be<i>that</i> good, why trade him for a guy that you think isn't the best player on his team? Lewis is a second scoring option on the Sonics; Allen can't carry the load all by himself. There's no way the Soincs trade three pretty good players for a player that just came off the IR; another coming off recent knee surgery and aonther that doesn't even see the floor.


Exactly, Bulls fans constantly trash players, but then talk them up to try and rob another team of one of their good players.

I've said it before, there isn't one team in the league that is going to help the Bulls get better by blessing them with one of their upcoming players for guys we want to get rid of.

Fizer has hardly any trade value because every GM in the league is thinking, this guy isn't even in the rotation in one of the worst teams in the league, how can he possibly help us?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bullet</b>!
> Ya Mike i think we'd have to add some pick to that.
> Maybe Jamal for Flip can help make the deal work,and I still think wer'e on the good side of the trade.
> 
> If we Get Booth we'll have to trade A.D,maybe also with a future protected pick for Eddie Jones


I think it's comical that Jamal gets the wrath that he gets from Bulls fans, and yet these same Bulls fans want to trade for Ronald Murray who has a similar game, except he's shorter, less explosion, and same caliber type defense.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> Barry badmouthed our team. I don't want the Bulls to have anything to do with the punk. I don't care if that was the old coach & GM, it was still the Bulls! Forget Barry Pax, he's a waste of everyone else's oxygen!


theres a difference btwn badmouthing, and telling the truth.
Nobody is wrong for telling the truth IMO.


----------

