# Sun Times - Crawford on the block



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bull22.html


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

*Has Modrowski Got Some New Peeps?*

It sure seems like the Sun-Times' Roman Modrowski has locked into a new source of information this season. His articles have evolved from being speculative by nature to a much more "investigative" reporting style. And he's targeted Jamal Crawford's status with the Bulls through much of the preseason.

Here's a few exerpts from his previous articles:

The moment Bill Cartwright established leadership as the defining quality of his starting point guard, competition for the position ceased to exist. Because while Jamal Crawford might be able to match or beat Jay Williams in any statistical category, when it comes to intangibles, especially leadership, perception becomes reality. And the perception is Williams' strength is leadership.

Crawford is frustrated, and he has told at least one confidant he believes Cartwright is favoring Williams. But if Crawford's frustration already is erupting, it's not likely to go away, especially if the Bulls start losing. Crawford's agent, Aaron Goodwin, said he won't have a problem if his client is beaten out by Williams, but he said if the job simply were handed to Williams, Goodwin would consider asking Krause to trade Crawford. 

According to one player, Crawford has displayed this kind of frustration throughout camp as he has split time and starts with Williams. 

So today we see Roman step up and indicate by referencing his sources, that Krause is actively attempting to trade Crawford:

One general manager, speaking on the condition of anonymity, was less diplomatic. He said Krause has been hot and cold about moving Jamal Crawford in the past, but the current status is Krause definitely wants to trade the third-year point guard. 

A team source said the Bulls are looking for frontcourt help, but the pickings are slim. Players such as Minnesota's Marc Jackson is available, but Krause may seek more in return for Crawford, who was drafted No. 7 by Cleveland and traded to the Bulls with cash for No. 6 pick Chris Mihm. 

I'd have to say that Modrowski appears to have done his homework on this issue and chances are Krause is indeed trying to broker the best deal he can for the Bulls. Now Modrowski indicates that Krause is seeking to improve the frontline. But any deal he consumates involving Crawford had better include the acquisition of a competent backup PG as part of the package or through an ancillary transaction. I can't see us going to war with Rick Brunson as Jay's backup. And though Rose can certainly fill in at the point he's a much greater asset to the Bulls as a SG or SF.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

i think you are prolly right about crawford and trading him for frontcourt help makes sense but we would need a decent backup PG unless mason is going to be back sooner than we think-but then again he is a rookie too- i wonder if crawfords value is really high enough to trade him for a backup C and PG-wouldnt fizer or someone need to be added-or maybe jac and bags would work i dont know-any ideas?


----------



## jacoby1us (Oct 18, 2002)

*TRADES*

EARLIER THIS WEEK I MADE A VERY UNTRUE STATEMENT ABOUT THE NEED TO TRADE CRAWFORD, I BELIEVE THE BULLS SHOULD KEEP THEIR YOUNG CORE OF J WILL, AND CRAWFORD, B/C THIS IS JUST THEIR FIRST YEAR TOGETHER, THEY JUST NEED TO ADJUST TO THE SITUATION AND LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE WHICH IS WINNING AT THIS POINT! SO THEY NEED TO ACCEPT THEIR ROLES AND FULFILL THEIR CONTRACTS AND HELP THIS FALLING FRANCHISE. I REALLY DO BELIEVE THIS IS THE BULLS YEAR TO GET SOME ATTENTION AND POSSIBLY CRASH INTO THE POST SEASON WITH SOME GOOD LEADERSHIP AND TEAM PLAY THEY HAVE THE TALENT AND POTENTIAL, IT IS JUST UP TO THEM TO STAY FOCUSED AND POSITIVE!!!! 
THIS IS THE WINNING LINEUP:
C- CURRY 6'11' 
PF- MARSHALL 6'9''
SF- ROSE 6'8''
SG- CRAWFORD 6'6''
PG- WILLIAMS 6'2''

KEY SUBS:
PF/C-CHANDLER 7'0'' 
SF/SG-ROBINSON 6'8''
SF/PF- FIZER 6'8''
PF- BAXTER 6'9'' * THIS GUY IS A TRUE HUSTLER AND HE 
DESERVES TO PLAY MORE THAN ANYONE!
PG/SG/SF-HASSELL 6'5''
PG/SG- MASON * WHENEVER HE GETS BACK, WE WILL BE A FORCE!

IF YOU LOOK AT THE BULLS ROSTER IT ACTUALLY HAS A LOT OF VERSATILE PLAYERS ON IT. THE COACH IS JUST GONNA HAVE TO FIGURE WHEN AND WHERE TO USE THEM! I SEE THEM WINNING 45 GAMES WITH A GOOD ROTATION, JUST LIKE COLLEGE. THE BULLS HAVE THE ENERGY AND POTENTIAL IT IS TIME TO TRANSFER THAT INTO WINS. SORRY JERRY BUT WE ARE TIRED OF THE EXPERIMENTING OF CRAWFORD TO THE POINT POSTION, IT IS TIME TO MAKE THE FANS HAPPY, BEFORE WE END UP LIKE THE WARRIORS AND END UP TRADING OUR EXPERIMENT, REMEMBER LARRY HUGHES? SO FOR CHRIST SAKE TAKE US OUT OF OUR MISERY AND STOP THE EXPERIMENTS AND THE REBULIDING PROCESS B/C THE TIME IS NOW! IF YOU WANNA TRADE SOMEONE TRADE PEOPLE THAT YOU WILL NEVER BE A FACTOR IN THIS LEAGUE, BAGLORIC????, BRUNSON, BLOUNT WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY, WHAT DOES KRAUSE BE THINKING ABOUT? WE NEED SOME REAL FRONTCOURT HELP, WE COULD HAVE PICKED UP KEON CLARK WHILE HE WAS AVAILABLE, BUT NO WE ARE ALWAYS LISTENING TO THE CRITICS AND THE NEGATIVES THAT IS WHY WE WILL NEVER IMPROVE! UNLESS WE THINK FOR OURSELVES AND GO ON STATS, AND FACTS. NO HARM INTENDED JUST FED UP WITH THE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS. 
::rbanana:




[Arrrrrgggghhh! Big Cap Attack! I be Hyp-no-tyzed! TB#1]


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

in a perfect world you might be right but unfortunately that isnt the case- crawford doesnt seem to want to be a SG, he insists on being a point which i too think is his best position-plus for defensive reason rose and hassell should get the minutes at SG with marshall and erob playing the SF-now if there are injuries then you adjust but that is the best way for our wing rotation to go- it works because marsall will play at PF as well- as for PG we need someone content with playing 16 minutes or so backing up williams-crawford doesnt seem to be the man for the job


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

FINALLY!

Holiday! Celebrate!


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> in a perfect world you might be right but unfortunately that isnt the case- *crawford doesnt seem to want to be a SG*, he insists on being a point which i too think is his best position-plus for defensive reason rose and hassell should get the minutes at SG with marshall and erob playing the SF-now if there are injuries then you adjust but that is the best way for our wing rotation to go- it works because marsall will play at PF as well- as for PG we need someone content with playing 16 minutes or so backing up williams-crawford doesnt seem to be the man for the job


Jamal wants to play, he has made that clear several times. BC is the one who would rather not have him play at the two spot. Last night, Crawford played very well on defense, and that is why he was in there down the stretch. That being said, J-Will is better at getting the ball up the floor and initiating the offense. I would like to keep Jamal, but if he is traded, it will probably be better for all parties involved because there is no doubt he can start for someone in this league.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Yeah, Crawford matched up pretty darn favorably with Igor radjovik, he really didn't take as much advantage of it as I would have liked. If the Bulls DO trade Crawford, I like the Miller/Armstrong for Fizer/Craw deal as well as anything out there. I also wouldn't mind Wally Szcerbiak who a lot of posters are oppossed to.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

So... Crawford and EROB (2 of this boards favorite whipping boys) play a HUGE part in winning a game last night (sure, it's pre-season, but winning is a contagious).... and today Crawford is on the block?

Hmm... Sometimes I think "GM speaking on condition of anonymity" translates roughly to "I'm on a deadline and I need a controversial story"....


Seriously though, I've said it a million times and I'll say it again. Both Crawford and Williams can get plenty of minutes this year (about 30). Right now is NOT the time to trade either of them. This is pretty much a dead issue, I doubt either is going anywhere. But next offseason, it may be revisited....


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

The article brought up Marc Jackson. Our defense in the first half last night made marc look like an all star. But he has a low post game. Given the guards and sfs we have he would be a good fit on this team. He runs the floor pretty well. But want there an article last year where JK considered Marc as dead weight? Or was that myballshurt who said that?


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

Hmm.... Fizer for Marc Jackson? Hmmm... Doens't sound too bad.

Though from what I saw last night, we may not need a backup center.... It seemed as though Donyell was playing that position at times...

Still, Marc was lights out before Golden State screwed him over. Maybe a change of scenery would do him good. He is still fairly young. Over the summer I heard rumors of a S&T of Best for him. That would have been quite a perfect deal, IMO....


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Call me crazy but i thought bargaric did on last night. Seven minutes, 4 rebounds 3 points no t/o!!


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

Marc Jackson would seemingly be a nice addition to the frontline - the type of guy that can play just about 20 minutes a night. He puts up some good rebounding and blocked shot numbers and I'm assuming that because he played under John Chaney the man can play defenser. However, I'd take him for Fizer - not Crawford. A Crawofrd deal to the T-Wolves ought to be for Wally.

I know people love to hate Wally, but his shooting would be welcomed. I think a reliable outside shooter is the major component lacking from our offense. It would pay major dividends to the developing big men, plus Wally would be a prime beneficiary of JWill's penetration. Obviously it would take a few players to get Wally - maybe Craw, Fize and Erob - but that's just fine with me. And BTW, "Wally No-D" is a misnomer. He may not be the quickest guy in the world, but he greatly outperformed his opposition last season. Some guy posted a game-by-game analysis which demonstrated Wally's overall success at outscoring his opponents (He held them to a 15 ppg average) so I think his bad rap for defense is somewhat unfair.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

Seems like things aren't going too well in Minnesota as far as the PG position is concerned:

_McHale said he continues talk to the agent for Rod Strickland, who is available. But from there, the free-agent talent pool tails off to names like Doug Overton, Vonteego Cummings, and Robert Pack.

"At a certain point, you're saying, 'Are those guys better than the ones you've got? Are those guys going to give you more?' '' McHale said. "I will say one thing: Everybody who's available now, there's usually a reason they're available now.''_

http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/sports/4345242.htm

BTW, classy guy, that Kevin McHale. Was it really necessary for him to bodyslam the players who are still free agents? Even though he may be right, that kind of BS statement was unnecessary.

Krause has always been a patient guy. You think there's a chance he's letting McHale and Saunders stew in their own juices before he pulls the trigger on a deal that sends Crawford to the Wolves? It was his patience that ultimately forced the Pacers to swallow Mercer's contract if they really wanted to trade Rose for Artest and Miller. Maybe he's waiting for McHale to finally admit that Hudson isn't the answer at PG...that, as he likes to put it, "there's a reason" the PG thin Orlando Magic let him go. 

McHale and Saunders are morons for the way they've built this team. They've got Kevin Garnett, arguably one of the top five players in the league, being paid an incredible $25.2 million this season. That's a major financial investment! And aside from Wally Szczerbiak, who's asking for more money than the Wolves want to spend, they've surrounded Garnett with the most mediocre group of players I've seen since the Bulls' '98/'99 roster. I'd compare the way this Wolves team has been constructed with building a $25 million dollar mansion next to Cabrini-Green.

Maybe it's time for those two dimwits to stop riding Garnett's coattails and start to provide him with a decent supporting cast. Or do they still believe that their fan base is dumb enough to continue to be satisfied with a fringe playoff team?

Acquiring Crawford would be the most positive addition the Wolves have made to their roster since the day they drafted Wally way back on 6/30/99. Krause knows that and he's willing to wait until "Dumb & Dumber" gives him what he wants.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

It does look like that Crawford will be moved before the season begins. What helps him is the fact that he is almost even with Williams in stats so far. Both are playing about the same. But Crawfords height will help him. 

As far as minny goes, they are rumored to be signing strickland. So who knows what is really going on.


----------



## JoeF (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> Hmm.... Fizer for Marc Jackson? Hmmm... Doens't sound too bad.
> 
> Though from what I saw last night, we may not need a backup center.... It seemed as though Donyell was playing that position at times...


ABSOLUTELY NOT. I watched Marshall quite a bit over the last couple of years. He is a decent SF, can play some at PF but he can't be a backup center. He couldn't handle the physical pounding that guarding opposing centers would entail. In fact I am not sure he could endure the physical pounding of a season of 30 MPG at the PF spot. He needs to play primarily SF with some minutes at PF when the matchups are favorable (i.e. soft perimeter oriented PF). He is talented, a good post player on offensive end and a good rebounder but he is injury prone. He has averaged playing in 65 games per year. Only three times in his 8 year career has he exceeded 65 games.
Here are the numbers
94-95 - 72 games
95-96 - 62 games
96-97 - 61 games
97-98 - 73 games
98-99 - 48 games
99-00 - 64 games
00-01 - 81 games
01-02 - 58 Games


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

The East is QUITE different my friend. Yes, I agree he could NOT take the physical pounding assosiated with being a starting Center in either conferance. But Being a non-traditional "5" in the east... Yes, I can see him logging a fair share of minutes. Cliff Robinson, a player with a similar game (NOT exact, similar) went from being a SF out west to a STARTING Center in the East. I'm not even presuming he could make a jump anything like that. 

Yes, Donyell's natural position is SF/PF. But I don't think it's too much of a strech to see him logging time against Cliff Robinson, Vin Baker, Tony Battie, Nate Huffman, Horace Grant, Theo Ratliff, Anthony Mason, Aaron Williams, Kurt Thomas, Tyrone Hill, etc, etc, etc..... In other words; Undersize Backup PFs, PFs playing out of position at Center, and times when both teams go small (lining up a PG, 3 Swingmen, and a PF).... Don't be suprised to see Donyell at the non-traditional "5" position for a few minutes a game, depending on matchups. I saw Fizer and Chandler play that role at times last year... and Donyell is FAR more suited to play it this year.


----------



## RATF (Oct 22, 2002)

I agree with Tyson as SF. Just 'cause your 7' doesn't mean you can play center! We really need a backup C. Eddy's gonna be awesome and Dali, well is Dali. Doens't anybody remember the three headed monster of old? And none of them were as good as Eddy.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

They were all better defenders than Curry, and that was their role.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> They were all better defenders than Curry, and that was their role.


That's VERY debatable. Wennington was a 7'1" jumpshooter, not a defender. 49-year old (gross exageration) James Edwards? 87-year old (GROSSER exageration) Robert Parish. Those guys were like Stone Figures on D!!! Curry is already a better defender then all 3 of those guys!

Luc vs. Curry on Defense? mmm.... honestly... I'd take Longley right now. But I'll prolly switch in about 3 months, because IMO, Curry's learning curve is VERY good...

On the Bulls Championship teams, the man role of centers on O: BE around the paint for a kick-out/quick pass underneath. And on D: Clog the lane, and get any rebounds that come within a foot of you. Not very tough stuff, lol.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

Jim, you're forgetting that defensive standout Will Perdue.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

I am not saying they were great defenders. Merely better than Curry. Wennington, Longley, Parish, Edwards, Perdue, etc. 

have you seriously watched tape on Curry? I swear the guy zones out into his own little world when he doesn't have the ball in his hands.

Curry could certainly be better in the future, but he is not right now..


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

they were better defenders. Sally, B Williams, Parrish, wennington. I will agree. Even Perdue an play decent defense.


----------



## BamaBull (Jun 24, 2002)

*Trust me....*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> Jamal wants to play, he has made that clear several times. BC is the one who would rather not have him play at the two spot. Last night, Crawford played very well on defense, and that is why he was in there down the stretch. That being said, J-Will is better at getting the ball up the floor and initiating the offense. I would like to keep Jamal, but if he is traded, it will probably be better for all parties involved because there is no doubt he can start for someone in this league.


Jamal was in there for two reasons and neither of them are because he is right for the job. Sore groin on williams is one, and for OTHERS to see him play is the other. Like someone else posted, we need someone who COULD step in and play PG BUT, in the meantime would be content with backup minutes. 

I expect any and EVERY day to hear or see where JC has been traded. The offense just does not "click" with him running it. Now, He MIGHT even get the start tonight, but, that will be for the SAME two reasons!!! LOL:rbanana: :grinning:


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Trust me....*



> Originally posted by <b>BamaBull</b>!
> 
> 
> Jamal was in there for two reasons and neither of them are because he is right for the job. Sore groin on williams is one, and for OTHERS to see him play is the other. Like someone else posted, we need someone who COULD step in and play PG BUT, in the meantime would be content with backup minutes.
> ...


He was playing good defense.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

I do not expect JC to get traded until the Trade deadline. I think Krause is not going to put all his PG eggs in one basket before the season starts.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> I am not saying they were great defenders. Merely better than Curry. Wennington, Longley, Parish, Edwards, Perdue, etc.
> 
> have you seriously watched tape on Curry? I swear the guy zones out into his own little world when he doesn't have the ball in his hands.
> ...


Again, your entitled to your opinion. But seeing as how I've watched every Bulls game for the better part of 18 years... I think yeah, I've seen a game or two... lol.

Is Curry perfect on D? oh heavens no. Better then 45 year old stiffs? guys afraid of contact? Hell Yeah.

Does Curry have work to do? Yes. Avoiding ticky-tack fouls (which I attribute a little to poor/biased refs). His help defense is not superb, but his instincts are. I would take him, right now, over any backup Center (sans the late Brian Williams) in ANY of the championship years.


----------



## BamaBull (Jun 24, 2002)

*Maybe...maybe not...*



> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> I do not expect JC to get traded until the Trade deadline. I think Krause is not going to put all his PG eggs in one basket before the season starts.


I have seen these trade scenarios floating around with he and fizer involved that could bring us another backup pg and a pf. maybe? I just cannot see this going on with crawford and williams till the deadline...something is gonna pop before then....i think.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> Avoiding ticky-tack fouls (which I attribute a little to poor/biased refs). His help defense is not superb, but his instincts are. I would take him, right now, over any backup Center (sans the late Brian Williams) in ANY of the championship years.


I start to question any argument that takes into account some sort of conspiracy theory. I am not questioning you would rather have him than many of the guys I listed, but if you had to have a defensive center for one play, with the game on the line, I would pick every single one of them over Curry right now. That is just the way it is.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RATF</b>!
> I agree with Tyson as SF. Just 'cause your 7' doesn't mean you can play center! We really need a backup C. Eddy's gonna be awesome and Dali, well is Dali. Doens't anybody remember the three headed monster of old? And none of them were as good as Eddy.


Ugh. Can you name any other small forward that is basically affraid to dribble, who certainly won't dribble facing anyone? Ty has the athleticism to be a small forward, just not the skills.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Chandler is the furthest thing from a SF. Possibly he could defend the position, if the opposing wing were someone slow, like Kukoc or Lamond Murray. Chandler might be fast, but he's not quick enough to keep up with a quick first step from Michael Finley, Tracy McGrady, even Joe Johnson or Mo Pete.

And offensively, he doesn't have the consistent range, or at least he hasn't shown it off very often. Most of his points haven't even been from his own offense... just cleaning up around the rim.

As stated, he doesn't enjoy the dribble.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Not to beat a dead horse but....


Tyson at the 3 is Jonathan Bender.

He's got the skills and saavy to be a great 4 oneday.





VD


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> 
> I start to question any argument that takes into account some sort of conspiracy theory.


Question all you want, but I think your not watching very much NBA if you think that established vet players don't get more calls then 19 year old rookies.... 
Conspiracy theory? No. Double-Standard? Yes.



> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> 
> I am not questioning you would rather have him than many of the guys I listed, but if you had to have a defensive center for one play, with the game on the line, I would pick every single one of them over Curry right now. That is just the way it is.


Such is your right to disagree. I can't belive you'd honestly take some of the Bulls championship 3rd stringers over Curry... but hey, that's your opinion.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Has Modrowski Got Some New Peeps?*



> Originally posted by <b>DickieHurtz</b>!
> The moment Bill Cartwright established leadership as the defining quality of his starting point guard, competition for the position ceased to exist. Because while Jamal Crawford might be able to match or beat Jay Williams in any statistical category, when it comes to intangibles, especially leadership, perception becomes reality. And the perception is Williams' strength is leadership.



I doubt Cartwright has changed what he wants in his PG in one years time. 

Crawford is the starting PG by default this year (for all he did last season, the Bulls were still ready to move him in the off-season)

Crawford future on this team is at another position.


----------



## robert60446 (Nov 11, 2002)

*Re: Re: Has Modrowski Got Some New Peeps?*



> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> I doubt Cartwright has changed what he wants in his PG in one years time.
> 
> Crawford is the starting PG by default this year (for all he did last season, the Bulls were still ready to move him in the off-season)
> ...


You are 100% right! For me Crawford is a shooting guard! Nothing more and nothing less…


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Has Modrowski Got Some New Peeps?*



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


and yet he's more solidly at pg than ever 

its not by default with pippen at pg the blazers had a 65% winning pct. 

and though it took a while the truth did come out on jay's leadership abilities,which is not to say he cant develop them but he obviously doesn't have them at an acceptable level now

Crawford is the pg because he is the best option there


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

:laugh: Man, we should have a way to post a warning when a year-old thread gets bumped.

My eyes just about popped out of my head when I saw this thread title! OH NO! NOT AGAIN!


One of two things will happen: JCraw will grow into the point guard BC expects or he will play the 2.

As of right now, for this season at least, I'd prefer the former.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Wow, you guys brought this post back from the dead


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Because SOMEONE is on a "Trade Crawford, Hinrich Is The Best Thing Since Sliced Bread" trip.

Seriously, I'm bouncing from thread to thread (I even merged two that were way too similar), responding to old comments with old answers. Jamal MAY be traded this season, but I think the motivation for that would be because they don't feel they can pay him, and they don't want him to walk for nothing. They WANT to pay him; Paxson tried some form of contract negotiation earlier this month. They talk him down a lot, so that he won't attract all sorts of attention. But the bottom line is, he's the best NBA point guard we have, and the best point guard we've ever had since B.J. Armstrong (yes, better than Best, El-Amin, Guyton, Randy Brown, Brent Barry, Hawkins, whoever else you want to label a point guard). The only contention I'd throw in there is Jay Williams, but that's because I'm blatantly biased towards Jay's game, and the fact is, Crawford outplayed him too, never relinquishing the starting spot once he had it.

It sounds to me like they DON'T want to trade Crawford, and that they took the best available talent in Hinrich. Cartwright wouldn't be saying things like "he needs to step up and be an orchestrator" if he didn't think Crawford could do it, or if he didn't already go over it with Jamal. Working on a player's game is not dissatisfaction to the point where you can't have the guy on the team. Crawford's chemistry with Eddy Curry is already excellent, and as much as Hinrich might be able to play with the Twin Toddlers, he can't possibly have developed better chemistry with them than Crawford already has.

And nowhere have I seen that Crawford CAN'T be a good distributor if he doesn't want to be. He had four double-doubles in the month of March, and averaged 6.6 apg over 22 games in March and April, posting a 9 -13 record. I think Cartwright and Paxson might have watched those losses in those last few months and noticed that we happened to lose when Crawford took a lot of shots (actually, only when Jamal MISSED a lot of shots). They might also have noticed that when Crawford gets 6 or less assists, the team was 2 - 9 in that stretch; when he got 7 or more assists, the team was 7 - 4.

He CAN do it. They WANT him to do it. The team plays WELL when he does it. Why not just say, Jamal, think about passing more and shooting less? Why does that imply that his job is in jeopardy, or that they are dissatisfied with his play, or that he's on the block?

And as far as leadership goes, it's not sensible that they want Hinrich to be the true floor leader. That's dangerously close to the mistake when Jay was given too much responsibility to handle, a mistake that Paul Silas is trying his darnest to ward off in Cleveland by not throwing everything on the shoulders of Lebron James. The Bulls have Pippen and Rose to be the leaders, both on and off the floor. They need an "orchestrator" more than a leader, and Cartwright feels like Crawford is on his way to becoming that.

Let's please get over this.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
> Because SOMEONE is on a "Trade Crawford, Hinrich Is The Best Thing Since Sliced Bread" trip.


Who, where? Seriously--if you're talking about me you haven't read my posts carefully or you're doing so through rose colored glasses.




> Jamal MAY be traded this season, but I think the motivation for that would be because they don't feel they can pay him, and they don't want him to walk for nothing. They WANT to pay him; Paxson tried some form of contract negotiation earlier this month. They talk him down a lot, so that he won't attract all sorts of attention. But the bottom line is, he's the best NBA point guard we have, and the best point guard we've ever had since B.J. Armstrong (yes, better than Best, El-Amin, Guyton, Randy Brown, Brent Barry, Hawkins, whoever else you want to label a point guard).


Then why are Cartwright and Paxson practically panting over KH's pure PG skills and leadership--the direction of the franchise with him in it, and more?

Why haven't we heard ANYTHING remotely CELEBRATORY about JC?



> They WANT him to do it.


Yes, because they want to go the playoffs this season. :laugh: Again, why haven't we heard ANYTHING remotely CELEBRATORY about JC's PG skills?

What Cartwright told us is what HE DOESN'T need JC to do, and he phrased it with an IF. He didn't say "Jamal is going to be concentrating on...and we're confident he can do it" He said IF!




> And as far as leadership goes, it's not sensible that they want Hinrich to be the true floor leader.


See...just like I said: You're ignoring the big picture. What did Pax say about the future of the organization? That future isn't here now, with him as a rookie.

Broaden your view.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Just as it was Jay's job to lose so too now is to Jamal's job to lose 

Win games, make others better and contribute when you have to but in deference to others 

This is what shackled Jay and which may shackle Jamal now that he has his first legitimate chance as the man. Because the thing he and Jay have in common is that they are uber talented in their own individual right and whilst they can throw assists and give the impression that they are doing as Coach wants , it is not natural in who they are as ball players to do so

Its like art. Try getting Carl Appel ( violent, chaotic, New York new school influenced, impressionist stylist ) to paint the linear, austere and disiplined preciseness of the realists from the 19th Century ( Rembrandt etc ) He could probably do it but he would be going against the grain .

Its about discipline and that discipline leading to winning games . Jamal is not past the post in proving anything .... yet. Change that - he has proven he has flash and he has some silky moves and he appears to have matured in how he handles himself off the court 

But his final acid test that he most prove is whether he can lead a winning team from the point where his focus will be to get Eddy going first then Tyson as the dual number one offensive option , Jalen second as the number two defensive option and probably Marcus Fizer as the number 3 defensive option when he comes in for Eddy or Tyson

Is Jamal ready to be number 3 or a number 4 offensive option on this team or is something driving him to prove to the rest of the league and the doubters that he was always a 20ppg scorer who could also throw for 6 assists per game

Don't get me wrong .. Jamal should take his offense when its there but unless Eddy and Marcus are both getting flat out dominated and Jalen and Donyell can't make it work .. there is no reason for Jamal's shake and bake penetration game UNLESS it is to create opportunity FIRST for the big guys inside who can't get it going ... and sure he has to take options for himself occasionally to keep the defense guessing 

Outside of this with two of the most dominant developing bigmen in the league ,a veteran outside/inside scorer like Jalen Rose and one of the most efficient versatile scorers in the league in Donyell Marshall, Jamal's offensive output SHOULD largely be about CREATING and INITIATING first and being ready for when the ball rotates back outside when everyone collapses on Eddy and Marcus and its a matter of pick your poison as to whether you mark up on the Rose and Crawford as your shooters from deep

Jamal can shoot that's for sure but I also wonder whether he's a bit like Jay in that he's a rhytym shooter and nneeds to get into a groove to be effective

It is all of these questions and the fulfillment of this role .. that incidentally Bill Cartwright has been quite unambigious about in what he wants from his guards.. that will determine how ideal of a fit Jamal is with these Bulls long term 

I'm not saying he won't I'm just saying its now all up to him - No Excuses. He knows what they want 

But I will say this ... don't be surprised if Kirk Hinrich proves himself more of a fit if Jamal can't cross that mental bridge that he needs to cross to be that player that is required. And if that happens ..... and Jay Williams is back next summer with no trade value .. but proves that he can play in SL and training camp .... how's this for a scenario .........................

1. Jamal signs deal over summer with Bulls
2. Eddy Curry signs max extension next summer in training camp
3. Jay comes back and proves he has game through the season 
4.Bulls make it the playoffs this year and next but can't move past 1st round or get poleaxed in the 2nd round
5. Jamal,Jay and Kirk - Oak and Horace where he with the most trade value ) Jamal is used to finally get out stud at 3 ( Pip would have just recently retired ) if notwithstanding his contributions, Kirk is still seen as the better fit ( and this is not a foregone conclusion this will have to play out but it IS my HUNCH ) 
6. Jamal may then be used for a Paul Pierce type which could be THE final piece

All hypothetical I know and farfetched and which will threaten and send Jamal fans into a spin with plenty of boo hoo .. but I think our guard positions are far from set in stone long term 

Jamal has the chance this season to change that .. but he has not done it yet and so therefore it is not a foregone conclusion 

Camp Crawford...... you may fire


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> Its like art. Try getting Carl Appel ( violent, chaotic, New York new school influenced, impressionist stylist ) to paint the linear, austere and disiplined preciseness of the realists from the 19th Century ( Rembrandt etc ) He could probably do it but he would be going against the grain .


Hey, I paid that guy $7.50/hr to paint my house.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> Just as it was Jay's job to lose so too now is to Jamal's job to lose
> 
> Win games, make others better and contribute when you have to but in deference to others
> ...


Outstanding.


----------



## willieblack (Jun 5, 2002)

Cartwright can imply all he wants, that Jamal is less of a fit/talent than he actually is...but until Bill demonstrates that he can coach an nba game from the bench I wouldn't allow this questioning of Jamal to lower my expectations of what I expect from Bill's *** this season as head coach. And I have my eye on Paxson too. Demonstrate to Bulls fans that you can do your job properly before you start up this Jamal bullsh*t again because from where I sit, while not perfect Jamal appears a lot more capable of doing his job on the floor than his head coach from the bench. Just an opinion.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>willieblack</b>!
> Cartwright can imply all he wants, that Jamal is less of a fit/talent than he actually is...but until Bill demonstrates that he can coach an nba game from the bench I wouldn't allow this questioning of Jamal to lower my expectations of what I expect from Bill's *** this season as head coach. And I have my eye on Paxson too. Demonstrate to Bulls fans that you can do your job properly before you start up this Jamal bullsh*t again because from where I sit, while not perfect Jamal appears a lot more capable of doing his job on the floor than his head coach from the bench. Just an opinion.



someone dare question the coach?  


:clap:


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

> while not perfect Jamal appears a lot more capable of doing his job on the floor than his head coach from the bench. Just an opinion.



And IMO that is exactly what is wrong with some of the young talent in the NBA now. They think they know more than anyone else. Be realistic majority of them (including JC) are looking out for number one. I will take the knowledge and experience of BC and Pax over this streetballer Crawford anytime.


----------



## willieblack (Jun 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> And IMO that is exactly what is wrong with some of the young talent in the NBA now. They think they know more than anyone else. Be realistic majority of them (including JC) are looking out for number one. I will take the knowledge and experience of BC and Pax over this streetballer Crawford anytime.


O.K. if you say so.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Be realistic majority of them (including JC) are looking out for number one. I will take the knowledge and experience of BC and Pax over this streetballer Crawford anytime.



and il take the opinion of someone named willieblack over a guy who just became a 'bulls fan' after his boy was drafted by them


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Has Modrowski Got Some New Peeps?*



> Originally posted by <b>robert60446</b>!
> 
> 
> You are 100% right! For me Crawford is a shooting guard! Nothing more and nothing less…


So I guess all those assists he gets are just luck? The guy is LEADING the NBA during the preseason in assists, does that just mean noting to you?


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> And IMO that is exactly what is wrong with some of the young talent in the NBA now. They think they know more than anyone else. Be realistic majority of them (including JC) are looking out for number one. I will take the knowledge and experience of BC and Pax over this streetballer Crawford anytime.


Stephon Marbury is a street baller too. J. O'neal, Ron Artest, Mick Dunleavy.... come on man...


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> Stephon Marbury is a street baller too. J. O'neal, Ron Artest, Mick Dunleavy.... come on man...


hehe.. i forgot Mike Jr. played at Rucker Park this summer. kind of blows the stigma assiciated with street ballers out the water eh?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> Stephon Marbury is a street baller too. J. O'neal, Ron Artest, Mick Dunleavy.... come on man...


Au contrair...Steph has really learned to run an NBA offense. He does a great job getting his teammates involved.

You wonder if the Bulls wouldn't do better with a coach who designed a system around the talents on the roster that way...


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Au contrair...Steph has really learned to run an NBA offense. He does a great job getting his teammates involved.
> ...


your point is well taken. Still, Jamal doesn't seem to have any trouble distributing the ball...


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> your point is well taken. Still, Jamal doesn't seem to have any trouble distributing the ball...


Well--it's now how we see it, but how Pax and C'Wright see it. I think they disagree with the folks on this here board...


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Well--it's now how we see it, but how Pax and C'Wright see it. I think they disagree with the folks on this here board...


I agree! They do disagree with the folks on this board that think Jamal can't be the Bulls pg!


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Who knows whats best for the team?


----------



## C-UNIT & DA_P.I.P (Oct 12, 2003)

What the heck


----------

