# Poll: TyTy or Chandler?



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=16868



> Dan, Brooklyn: How good could Tyrus Thomas be? An even more freakish Shawn Marion?
> 
> J.A. Adande: (5:44 PM ET ) Tyrus Thomas would be great if he actually had a set of basketball skills to go with all of that talent. But he doesn't, so he'll be Tyson Chandleresque


Would you take now and later: Thomas or Chandler?


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Chandler or Brown?


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Okay I took Tyrus today and tomorrow.

You can look at Chandler during his best years, down years, or both, but I think Tyrus is close to or at a level that Tyson already is.

I'll give Chandler the edge in size (height and weight), experience, and rebounding. I'm not too sure if Tyrus will be the rebounder that Chandler is. 

But, offensively I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to Tyrus. As a rookie, his FTA rate was insane. He is our best player in terms of getting to the charity stripe. He finds holes on defense to receive the easy pass for the dunk. He has shown signs of a hook and jumper, albeit extremely inconsistant. Chandler has yet to develop a consistant hook, and I will knock any 7 footer for that. I'm sorry but the game is easy for the tall guys and you should be able to contribute offensively outside of dunking. 

Defensively, I'll take Tyrus over Chandler. Fouls were an issue for both players, but we need to see if Thomas can put those away in the past. But I see Tyrus having more discipline defensively.

Thomas has spoken highly of his summer routine. Talk is cheap. I won't be fooled a third time after hoping on Eddy and Tyson reaching their potential.

For those reasons, I think it can be close today, and I think Thomas will eat his soul in the future.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Why is a forward being compared to a center?


----------



## fuzznuts (May 23, 2006)

I take Chandler now and later (as long as we are able to "reset" his head, because he simply couldn't function mentally under Skiles' demanding coaching style)

My choice is based on Chandler's superior D, rebounding, and height imho.

It's no knock on TT, he's definitely the superior athlete, more potential on offense, with tons of hustle.. but I was always a fan of Chandler. Chandler's foul problems was just aggressiveness on the defensive end, and I'd take that any day. No PF/C should play soft.


----------



## Snake (Jun 10, 2007)

This season is close but I went with TT because of his superior offense. Just look at the difference at the rate they get to the line. The only real thing Tyson would bring to the team over Tyrus is rebounding and I think we'll do fine in that aspect as is.

As for later I think TT will be superior to Tyson in every aspect of the game except for rebounding and even there he won't be far behind.

Tyrus now, Tyrus later


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> Why is a forward being compared to a center?


Aren't you one of the guys who kept saying TC was struggling because he was playing out of his natural position (4) when he was playing C after Curry left? 

If you are not of them, then my apology. But I recall whole lot of BS about him being 4, not C back then.

BTW, I vote TT now and TT later.


----------



## Headfake98 (Dec 10, 2006)

How can you go TT now? Chandler is a good starter quality player, got like 11 or 12 rebounds a game last year and at one point late in the season was leading the NBA in field goal percentage. Tyrus rebounds worse and scores less effectively and also is a sophmore who will probably only play limited minutes. Because he isn't as good yet.

Chandler now. TT Later.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

I agree with what pretty much everyone else has said. I was about to go with Tyson for this season because he was a good bit better than Tyrus last season and will therefore probably be the better player next season although. However, I changed my mind when I checked the numbers and discovered that Tyrus scores at a rate 50% greater than Tyson. Front court players who can score are just too important to this team to ignore that.

Adande's comment annoys me. Just because Tyrus is athletic and doesn't have a very polished offensive game, people who haven't watched him play much have started to say he lacks skills, which is ridiculous. Two of the better aspects of Tyrus' game are how well he handles the ball and steals the ball as a big man. Both of those qualities are usually considered the result of skills more than athleticism. Also, there are plenty of players who can reach higher into the air than Tyrus (Tyson for one) but don't block shots nearly as well as he does, so the amount of skill involved there shouldn't be dismissed. Finally, any comparison to Tyson - whether intentionally or not - implies that Tyrus won't be a factor on offense and after the valuable offensive contributions he made as a 20 year old rookie, that's absurd.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Headfake98 said:


> How can you go TT now? Chandler is a good starter quality player, got like 11 or 12 rebounds a game last year and at one point late in the season was leading the NBA in field goal percentage. Tyrus rebounds worse and scores less effectively and also is a sophmore who will probably only play limited minutes. Because he isn't as good yet.
> 
> Chandler now. TT Later.


Tyson scored more efficiently that just about everyone in the NBA last season but you wouldn't say he's a better scorer than Kobe. The volume of scoring is important and Tyrus scores quite a bit more than Tyson without being inefficient.


----------



## Snake (Jun 10, 2007)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Also, there are plenty of players who can reach higher into the air than Tyrus (Tyson for one) but don't block shots nearly as well as he does, so the amount of skill involved there shouldn't be dismissed.


There was a thing on TV a while back where they were talking about shot blocking and there was a little interview in there with I think Okafor (might have been Zo, can't remember for sure) in which he said that the most important aspect of shot blocking is timing and that you don't need to be particularly athletic to be a good shot blocker.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

Snake said:


> There was a thing on TV a while back where they were talking about shot blocking and there was a little interview in there with I think Okafor (might have been Zo, can't remember for sure) in which he said that the most important aspect of shot blocking is timing and that you don't need to be particularly athletic to be a good shot blocker.


it should be noted that Tyrus and Tyson have the same wingspan. 
Reachwise Tyson has 2" on Tyrus.
But I'm willing to bet that Tyson can't match Tyrus 34" standing vertical or 39.5" running vertical.

They need to start timing vertical jumps, Tyrus covers so much ground so fast.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Snake said:


> There was a thing on TV a while back where they were talking about shot blocking and there was a little interview in there with I think Okafor (might have been Zo, can't remember for sure) in which he said that the most important aspect of shot blocking is timing and that you don't need to be particularly athletic to be a good shot blocker.


Also you want to keep the ball in play for your team to start a fast break with it, or at the least keep posession. I haven't see the NO version of Tyson, but he always intended to bat it out of the gym. I know certain blocks can't be kept in play or you make a statement. But, Tyrus has a lot of blocks that are batted to a teammate or he ends up with the ball.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

RoRo said:


> it should be noted that Tyrus and Tyson have the same wingspan.
> Reachwise Tyson has 2" on Tyrus.
> But I'm willing to bet that Tyson can't match Tyrus 34" standing vertical or 39.5" running vertical.
> 
> They need to start timing vertical jumps, Tyrus covers so much ground so fast.


If you see the block, block, alley-oop sequence vs MIA, he recovered quickly for when Walker through up his shot. It seemed Walker had beat him by a step and would have gotten a clean look. But that didn't happen.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> If you see the block, block, alley-oop sequence vs MIA, he recovered quickly for when Walker through up his shot. It seemed Walker had beat him by a step and would have gotten a clean look. But that didn't happen.


lol i was just watching that 

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/u3OtKHGNotY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/u3OtKHGNotY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

i think about tyrus this way, he has the length of an athletic 7 footer with the mobility of a 6'6" guard.
anyways, i added it up and if you took reach + vertical Tyrus gets up a tad more than Oden. 
So he's got to be up there with Chandler and other athletic 7 footers.

now granted 7 footers have the benefit of a constant hieght/reach advantage, but i'm willing to sacrifice some of that for the area Tyrus can cover in AND out of the paint. 
That speed allows Tyrus to pull more ninja-like moves and frankly it's freaking fun to watch.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

RoRo said:


> .


This is probably tied with the Butler dunk as my favorite Tyrus sequence. This is just up there because it happened in the playoffs, with back to back dunks and the Heat realized their butts were getting whooped. I love it when Barry goes 'this guy goes after all of them'. 

The best part of this clip: Where did Antoine Walker go after getting blocked? Oh yeah, he doesn't play D!


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

> Also, there are plenty of players who can reach higher into the air than Tyrus


If you are going off of a jump, I would suspect there are almost no players in the NBA who can get their hand as high as Tyrus, and I very much doubt that Tyson is one of them since Tyrus is only 2 inches shy on standing reach and I would guess jumps more than 2 inches higher than Tyson.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

dougthonus said:


> If you are going off of a jump, I would suspect there are almost no players in the NBA who can get their hand as high as Tyrus, and I very much doubt that Tyson is one of them since Tyrus is only 2 inches shy on standing reach and I would guess jumps more than 2 inches higher than Tyson.


I'm not sure how long JSmooth's arms are, but he might be up there. I would think KG could be up there, at least when he was younger. Maybe D12. He's deceptively freakishly athletic.

I think Tyrus has few peers, but as RoRo said, damn he has some *quick *ups.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

dougthonus said:


> If you are going off of a jump, I would suspect there are almost no players in the NBA who can get their hand as high as Tyrus, and I very much doubt that Tyson is one of them since Tyrus is only 2 inches shy on standing reach and I would guess jumps more than 2 inches higher than Tyson.


I guess I stand corrected. I didn't realize Tyrus' standing reach is that close to Tyson's. I'll change my example to Dwight Howard.


----------



## fuzznuts (May 23, 2006)

RoRo said:


> lol i was just watching that
> 
> <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/u3OtKHGNotY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/u3OtKHGNotY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
> 
> ...


alright, you've gotten me to change my mind. TT's athletic capabilities and wingspan would make up for his lack of height.

i'm going to take TT now and later, instead my original Chandler now and later.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

lgtwins said:


> Aren't you one of the guys who kept saying TC was struggling because he was playing out of his natural position (4) when he was playing C after Curry left?
> 
> If you are not of them, then my apology. But I recall whole lot of BS about him being 4, not C back then.
> 
> BTW, I vote TT now and TT later.


Tyson's problem was he had no legit NBA caliber big men around him...Nocioni was our best other big man...and he's not a big man.

Chandler would have done much better next to Wallace, Tyrus, Smith, Noah, Gray.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

Mebarak said:


> Tyson's problem was he had no legit NBA caliber big men around him...Nocioni was our best other big man...and he's not a big man.
> 
> <b>Chandler would have done much better next to Wallace, Tyrus, Smith, Noah, Gray.</b>


Why in the world do we need TC if we have Wallace, Tyrus, Smith, Noah and Gray?


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

lgtwins said:


> Why in the world do we need TC if we have Wallace, Tyrus, Smith, Noah and Gray?


Because he was better than all of them last year?

I think we could use him.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

RoRo said:


> to watch.


There is a Tyrus Thomas Mix on Youtube (I don't remember which one), but it again shows his recovery time. It was vs NO @ Chicago where he went for the pumpfake @ the FT Line/Elbow. I don't remember who was shooting it. He went for the pump fake, the offensive player then dribbled in one step and went up for the J. Tyrus jumps from behind him and swats away the ball as the shot is being released.

You put it perfectly, he has the mobility of a SF with the body of a PF. Its interesting because I rarely saw him get pushed around on either end of the floor at 215lbs. His height was never an issue either.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Another play --- It was at Detroit, either Game 2 or Game 5. Tyrus ran from half court and ended up jumping right in front of the hoop to block Prince's floater at its peak. The Pistons were on a fast break at that moment too.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

dougthonus said:


> If you are going off of a jump, I would suspect there are almost no players in the NBA who can get their hand as high as Tyrus, and I very much doubt that Tyson is one of them since Tyrus is only 2 inches shy on standing reach and I would guess jumps more than 2 inches higher than Tyson.


Tyson got measured at a younger age (2 years younger?) than Tyrus and clearly grew since then. I have never seen anyone in the NBA be higher than Tyson's reach on a bound so I think this is far from clear.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

The poll is missing *BOTH*


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

I went with Chandler now and Ty later. Lets look at this thing honestly, Tyson was outrebounding Duncan most of last season and he obviously is a pretty solid defensivee player, plus his offense actually was working last season too. Tyrus, while being crazy atheletic and certainly having a great deal of potential, is NOT as valuable as Chandler is today. A lot of people seem to only want to give credence to the one bad season Chandler had with us for some reason. I think Tyrus could be better in the long run, thats the hope at least, so I had to vote Chandler now and Tyrus later. IMO, the vote HAS to be that or Chandler now and Chandler later, otherwise its a homer move...


ACE


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

I wouldn't dismiss K4E's brief comment out of hand. I'd take Chandler because he is a C, and those are a rare commodity.

Ben Wallace's true position is PF. Detroit won the championship with Okur and Eldon Campbell combining for 36 minutes a game at C. Detroit drafted Milicik with the hope he'd pan out for the and fill the Okur/Campbell spot.

In my estimation, Thomas is what Chandler was at the same age, just shorter and not a guy who's going to play C for us. That is, a high energy guy with little offensive skill, who everyone raves about the athleticism, shot blocking, and scoring off of putbacks and FTs.

It will be interesting to see what happens when it his contract needs to be renewed.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

ace20004u said:


> I went with Chandler now and Ty later. Lets look at this thing honestly, Tyson was outrebounding Duncan most of last season and he obviously is a pretty solid defensivee player, plus his offense actually was working last season too. Tyrus, while being crazy atheletic and certainly having a great deal of potential, is NOT as valuable as Chandler is today. A lot of people seem to only want to give credence to the one bad season Chandler had with us for some reason. I think Tyrus could be better in the long run, thats the hope at least, so I had to vote Chandler now and Tyrus later. IMO, the vote HAS to be that or Chandler now and Chandler later, otherwise its a homer move...
> 
> 
> ACE


You make some great points, but its hard to know how good Tyson would be as a Chicago Bull. We saw him take that chip on his shoulder and improve as a Hornet. Will he come back more improved or will he slack off again? Has he matured and become a player with a better work-ethic finally?

Even when he was a Bull, I tolerated some of his deficiencies on offense as I did with Eddy on defense. Only because of how they were suppose to be the ying to the yang. But, for any 7' footer to have no offensive skills outside of alley-oops, put-back dunks, etc is downright embarrasing and sad. I wouldn't say Dwight Howard is skilled offensively, but he plays to his strengths and finds himself in position to score at a higher clip.

With Tyson, I didn't see the intelligence that should come when you play in the league for 5-6 years. Defensively, he'd rather make the highlight block into the stands than keep it in play. He was plagued with foul trouble after being become a 'vet.' He has improved in New Orleans, and I'll admit that I have barely seen him there. But I cannot see him making a huge turnaround. We always knew he was a good rebounder. But what else has he done? 

You could make the case that you would want him as Center but I remember reading on both boards that people claimed Tyson had a bad year because he lost his the big bodies around him. That was just an inexcusable reason. What 7' footer needs another big body near him so he can play effectively. This relates to Sloth's points too. Thats just a poor excuse. Fact is, he played PF while in Chicago and now Center in NO. He might have played some center his final year here.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

i went tyrus now and later.
reasons for tyrus now has nothing to do between the two players.

we have Ben Wallace for now, noah for tomorrow (as far as center goes).
as long as Shaq is still running around, I'd rather have Wallace.

while it's true, Tyson is the best pure rebounder out of that lot, there's more to defense than rebounding.
Seeing that Ben Wallace was the second finishing center for dpoy and on the second all-defense team, i think he still has plenty of game left (aside from watching him of course lol).


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> You make some great points, but its hard to know how good Tyson would be as a Chicago Bull. We saw him take that chip on his shoulder and improve as a Hornet. Will he come back more improved or will he slack off again? Has he matured and become a player with a better work-ethic finally?
> 
> Even when he was a Bull, I tolerated some of his deficiencies on offense as I did with Eddy on defense. Only because of how they were suppose to be the ying to the yang. But, for any 7' footer to have no offensive skills outside of alley-oops, put-back dunks, etc is downright embarrasing and sad. I wouldn't say Dwight Howard is skilled offensively, but he plays to his strengths and finds himself in position to score at a higher clip.
> 
> ...


Tyson has HAD pretty good seasons considering he came straight out of high school. The learning curve is usually steepest for big men coming out of HS. I think, if you expected Tyson to be an offensive player then you were probably dissappointed. I always expected him to be a rebounder and a defender who gets some put back dunks and not much else offensively. He had some solid seasons with the Bulls and got better basically every season. He never dominated and his last season with us was his worst, I understand due to nagging injuries and a busy offseason that didn't include a lot of working out. I don't think Tyson is lazy, I think he just had a bad offseason and year with us, he had too much to do and not all of it was basketball related. Look at his career stats:

Career Season Averages 
Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG 
01-02 CHI 71 31 19.6 0.497 0.000 0.604 1.6 3.2 4.8 0.8 0.4 1.3 1.39 2.50 6.1 
02-03 CHI 75 68 24.4 0.531 0.000 0.608 2.3 4.6 6.9 1.0 0.5 1.4 1.80 2.90 9.2 
03-04 CHI 35 8 22.3 0.424 0.000 0.669 2.3 5.4 7.7 0.7 0.5 1.2 1.09 2.50 6.1 
04-05 CHI 80 10 27.4 0.494 0.000 0.673 3.3 6.4 9.7 0.8 0.9 1.8 1.48 3.40 8.0 
05-06 CHI 79 50 26.8 0.565 0.000 0.503 3.4 5.7 9.0 1.0 0.5 1.3 1.56 3.80 5.3 
06-07 NOK 73 73 34.6 0.624 0.000 0.527 4.4 8.0 12.4 0.9 0.5 1.8 1.73 3.30 9.5 
Career -- 413 240 26.2 0.536 0.000 0.602 2.9 5.6 8.5 0.9 0.6 1.4 1.55 3.10 7.5 



Everything has basically gone up every year and thats what you want to see out of a young developing player. He had a career best last year at 9.5ppg, 12.4rpg, 1.8bpg, and shot .624 from the field, those are all career bests for him. Plus his defense continued to improve. Tyson is a 7'er but he is a skinny 7'er, he needs a "big body" guy who can push and shove people out of the paint, or else he will be the one gettin shoved out of the paint. It has more to do with his weight than his heigth.

Now lets look at Tyrus stats:

Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG 
06-07 CHI 10 0 12.2 0.390 0.000 0.633 1.2 2.2 3.4 0.6 1.0 0.5 1.50 2.30 5.1 
Career -- 10 0 12.2 0.390 0.000 0.633 1.2 2.2 3.4 0.6 1.0 0.5 1.50 2.30 5.1 


So, comparing their rookie seasons, in 7.4 more minutes per game Tyson averaged 1ppg more, 1.4rpg more, over 10% better fg% and .08 more bpg than Tyrus. And Chandler came straight out of HS. I don't think anyone can rightly claim Tyrus is better now.

ACE


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I've been talking to dabullz too much, I think, because I've been growing more and more concerned that Tyrus isn't coming along like I thought he was gonna.

My big concern with him is just that he hasn't seemed as skilled as I thought he was coming out of LSU. I saw a lot of stuff... passes, shooting, dribbling the ball, that he just hasn't been able to do against faster and smarter opponents. Plus there's the whole skinniniess issue.

He's looking more like a Josh Smith than a Shawn Kemp at this point as far as upside, and the mid-range I think as far as his development seems more like a Chris Wilcox, although with somewhat better D.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

MikeDC said:


> I've been talking to dabullz too much, I think, because I've been growing more and more concerned that Tyrus isn't coming along like I thought he was gonna.
> 
> My big concern with him is just that he hasn't seemed as skilled as I thought he was coming out of LSU. I saw a lot of stuff... passes, shooting, dribbling the ball, that he just hasn't been able to do against faster and smarter opponents. Plus there's the whole skinniniess issue.
> 
> He's looking more like a Josh Smith than a Shawn Kemp at this point as far as upside, and the mid-range I think as far as his development seems more like a Chris Wilcox, although with somewhat better D.


If that happens, Pax should have kept Aldridge. Because I would not want to waste a #2 pick on anything outside of a complete player (in the long run). I can be fine with Tyrus providing 15/10 with DPOY like defense. But if he can't come close to their offensively and is another Tyson or Big Ben, we made the wrong choice IMO.


----------



## Swan (Jun 27, 2005)

MikeDC said:


> I've been talking to dabullz too much, I think, because I've been growing more and more concerned that Tyrus isn't coming along like I thought he was gonna.
> 
> My big concern with him is just that he hasn't seemed as skilled as I thought he was coming out of LSU. I saw a lot of stuff... passes, shooting, dribbling the ball, that he just hasn't been able to do against faster and smarter opponents. Plus there's the whole skinniniess issue.
> 
> He's looking more like a Josh Smith than a Shawn Kemp at this point as far as upside, and the mid-range I think as far as his development seems more like a Chris Wilcox, although with somewhat better D.


I'd say he has more than "somewhat better D" than Wilcox, considering Wilcox has never had strong defensive +/- ratios or been known at all for anything on that end of the floor. Granted, he's played for Sonics teams where nobody wanted to defend, but based on Tyrus's small sample size from last year, I'd say he's better than that.

I'd say it's too soon to say what Tyrus will become. Let's see him get minutes this year and see how he does, then visit this at the end of the year. I picked Tyrus over Chandler because I don't feel Chandler has the mentality to deliver the goods in pressure situations. He does best when the pressure is off. Byron Scott held his hand through the whole season to get him to his production last year, but what happens when you get to the playoffs and need to raise your game to that next level? Forget Chandler, what's done is done.

And for everybody that loves Aldridge over Tyrus (and their are some legit reasons) keep in mind so far in his basketball career Aldridge has had a broken hip, shoulder surgery, abnormal heart rhythmns and now heel pain that is keeping him out of the JV national team squad, and injuries don't tend to lessen in frequency as you get older. Both Roy and Aldridge, while talented, have injury histories normally associated with much older players.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Swan said:


> I'd say it's too soon to say what Tyrus will become. Let's see him get minutes this year and see how he does, then visit this at the end of the year.


That's one of the things I'm basing my concern about. I look at what they've done and think two things.
1. They don't feel, deep in their bones, sure enough about Ty's development to pass on a guy like Smith.
2. Ty will have to really have to be spectacular to get lots of minutes because there's gonna be a whole lot of competition. I know the Bulls are quite high on Noah, and I read various accounts that suggested they effectively promised Joe Smith the starting job. Noc will come back healthy and is probably going to get some burn himself. Wallace is going to get 30 mpg at the minimum.



> injury histories normally associated with much older players.


Agree with what you wrote, but didn't Tyrus just have some sort of knee tendonitis thing that limited him in the summer league? THAT is an older player injury, isn't it?


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

MikeDC said:


> Agree with what you wrote, but didn't Tyrus just have some sort of knee tendonitis thing that limited him in the summer league? THAT is an older player injury, isn't it?


tendonitis is pretty common for players, and not just old guys either.
pretty much anyone that runs and jumps alot can develop it. 

rest and rehab is probably the best way to treat it, so there's no need to push it during summer league.
you'll often see a player miss a couple games during the regular season to give it rest.
and so long as there aren't any tears, there shouldn't be any concern.

I've heard Channing Frye is making the most out of LMA's abscence and is making his case for a starting spot. That should be interesting, Bulls and Blazers will be sending Isiah alot of thank you cards.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Swan said:


> I'd say it's too soon to say what Tyrus will become. *Let's see him get minutes this year and see how he does*, then visit this at the end of the year. I picked Tyrus over Chandler because I don't feel Chandler has the mentality to deliver the goods in pressure situations. He does best when the pressure is off. Byron Scott held his hand through the whole season to get him to his production last year, but what happens when you get to the playoffs and need to raise your game to that next level? Forget Chandler, what's done is done.
> 
> And for everybody that loves Aldridge over Tyrus (and their are some legit reasons) keep in mind so far in his basketball career Aldridge has had a broken hip, shoulder surgery, abnormal heart rhythmns and now heel pain that is keeping him out of the JV national team squad, and injuries don't tend to lessen in frequency as you get older. Both Roy and Aldridge, while talented, have injury histories normally associated with much older players.


It's very hard to compare a player who has only played about a 1000 minutes in the NBA to an established veteran.

The only thing that is sure is that Tyrus Thomas will be better this season than he was last season, if only because he will get more minutes because he gets fewer rookie fouls. With Smith in front of him it's unlikely that he'll get as much playing time as Chandler. So Chandler is likely to be more productive for at least one more year.

How would the comparison look if Chandler were a Bull and Tyrus was with NO? My guess is that Chandler would get fewer minutes (probably no more than TT will get), and that TT would get much more playing time and mature much faster.

Who do you prefer playing for the Bulls? Easy, we have Noah, Wallace and Gray at center and we have Nocioni and Smith at PF. We don't need another 7 footer as much as we need a mobile power forward who can defend the perimeter as well as the lane.

TT is the better fit with present personnel this year and in the future.


----------



## girllovesthegame (Nov 3, 2005)

Swan said:


> I'd say he has more than "somewhat better D" than Wilcox, considering Wilcox has never had strong defensive +/- ratios or been known at all for anything on that end of the floor. Granted, he's played for Sonics teams where nobody wanted to defend, but based on Tyrus's small sample size from last year, I'd say he's better than that.
> 
> I'd say it's too soon to say what Tyrus will become. Let's see him get minutes this year and see how he does, then visit this at the end of the year. I picked Tyrus over Chandler because I don't feel Chandler has the mentality to deliver the goods in pressure situations. He does best when the pressure is off. Byron Scott held his hand through the whole season to get him to his production last year, but what happens when you get to the playoffs and need to raise your game to that next level? Forget Chandler, what's done is done.
> 
> .


LOL! I'm sorry but of all the things I've heard about and seen from Scott, I've not known him to be a coach that holds players hands. He did give Chandler a bit more confidence in his offense though. He even went as far as handing out fines to Chandler whenever he received the ball and immediately kicked it back out when he had the opportunity to score.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

McBulls said:


> How would the comparison look if Chandler were a Bull and Tyrus was with NO? My guess is that Chandler would get fewer minutes (probably no more than TT will get), and that TT would get much more playing time and mature much faster.


Thomas with Paul would do more damage than Tyson remaining here.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

girllovesthegame said:


> LOL! I'm sorry but of all the things I've heard about and seen from Scott, I've not known him to be a coach that holds players hands. He did give Chandler a bit more confidence in his offense though. He even went as far as handing out fines to Chandler whenever he received the ball and immediately kicked it back out when he had the opportunity to score.


I'm sure the Players Union approved of fines in those cases


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

I've got questions....

So who holds Chandler's hand on Team USA? Why didn't Tyrus get invited to the scrimmage team at least if he is already better than Chandler?


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

johnston797 said:


> So who holds Chandler's hand on Team USA?


I'm sure he's pals with Andrew Bynum. Probably has him underspeed dial


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

johnston797 said:


> I've got questions....
> 
> So who holds Chandler's hand on Team USA? Why didn't Tyrus get invited to the scrimmage team at least if he is already better than Chandler?


I see this poll more as "who do you want on the bulls"
A couple other folks mentioned having Wallace and Noah makes it much easier to pick Tyrus for now and later. I agree with that.

Hopefully Chandler sends Camby a thank you letter for refusing his team USA invite. 
Now Tyson has all the evidence of greatness he needs. 
He can unveil that jump hook some other year...


----------



## girllovesthegame (Nov 3, 2005)

RoRo said:


> I see this poll more as "who do you want on the bulls"
> A couple other folks mentioned having Wallace and Noah makes it much easier to pick Tyrus for now and later. I agree with that.
> 
> *Hopefully Chandler sends Camby a thank you letter for refusing his team USA invite.*
> ...


But weren't they invited to Team USA at the same time? It's not like Tyson was invited _because_ Camby declined. Yeah, maybe if Camby would've accepted, he may have indeed gotten the roster spot instead of Tyson but we won't know that for certain now since Camby did decline. And it's not even certain that Tyson will make the final roster.


----------



## girllovesthegame (Nov 3, 2005)

theanimal23 said:


> I'm sure the Players Union approved of fines in those cases


Yeah, I'm pretty sure they approved. :laugh: 

It was a very small amount. Maybe like $10 or something. He just did it to make him aware of what he was doing. Actually I don't know if he only did it in training camp or in the actual season.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> I wouldn't dismiss K4E's brief comment out of hand. I'd take Chandler because he is a C, and those are a rare commodity.
> 
> Ben Wallace's true position is PF. Detroit won the championship with Okur and Eldon Campbell combining for 36 minutes a game at C. Detroit drafted Milicik with the hope he'd pan out for the and fill the Okur/Campbell spot.


I vehemently took the opposite stance a year ago, so I guess I've changed my mind: you couldn't play Tyson and Wallace together for long stretches because you'd be playing three on five on offense. If Wallace needs to be paired with a good scorer who's a true center, signing him was a horrific move.



DaBullz said:


> In my estimation, Thomas is what Chandler was at the same age, just shorter and not a guy who's going to play C for us. That is, a high energy guy with little offensive skill, who everyone raves about the athleticism, shot blocking, and scoring off of putbacks and FTs.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens when it his contract needs to be renewed.


Certainly there are similarities in their games but I think it's important to note that last year, as a 20 year old rookie, Tyrus generated steals and blocks at a rate greater than Tyson has at any point in his career. You're correct that the two players were similar offensively at age 20 but Tyson's offense has severely regressed since and I don't see any reason to expect Tyrus to do the same. Like most players, his offense will likely improve, making him a much, much better offensive player than Tyson.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

girllovesthegame said:


> But weren't they invited to Team USA at the same time? It's not like Tyson was invited _because_ Camby declined. Yeah, maybe if Camby would've accepted, he may have indeed gotten the roster spot instead of Tyson but we won't know that for certain now since Camby did decline. And it's not even certain that Tyson will make the final roster.


hmm you could be right, the order was close as i recall. 
it all happened the same week so the invites likely went out at the same time and i just read the camby refusal first.

personally i think camby would've been the short-term guy (this summer and 08) and team usa would keep chandler around for the future.


----------



## girllovesthegame (Nov 3, 2005)

RoRo said:


> hmm you could be right, the order was close as i recall.
> it all happened the same week so the invites likely went out at the same time and i just read the camby refusal first.
> 
> personally i think camby would've been the short-term guy (this summer and 08) and team usa would keep chandler around for the future.


Yeah it was probably close. I first found out about both Camby and Tyson's invite in the same article. Tyson had already given his committment but Camby hadn't accepted yet but he hadn't declined yet either. 

http://www.denverpost.com/nuggets/ci_5896819


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

ace20004u said:


> So, comparing their rookie seasons, in 7.4 more minutes per game Tyson averaged 1ppg more, 1.4rpg more, over 10% better fg% and .08 more bpg than Tyrus. And Chandler came straight out of HS. I don't think anyone can rightly claim Tyrus is better now.


I'm not entirely sure what your point is here. If you compare their numbers on a per minute basis then Tyrus was better than Tyson when both players were rookies, better than Tyson when both players were 20, and worse than Tyson last season. I think you can make a case for Tyrus being more valuable to the Bulls than Tyson next season because he scores better and figures to close some of that gap between them.



MikeDC said:


> My big concern with him is just that he hasn't seemed as skilled as I thought he was coming out of LSU. I saw a lot of stuff... passes, shooting, dribbling the ball, that he just hasn't been able to do against faster and smarter opponents. Plus there's the whole skinniniess issue.
> 
> He's looking more like a Josh Smith than a Shawn Kemp at this point as far as upside, and the mid-range I think as far as his development seems more like a Chris Wilcox, although with somewhat better D.


If you combine Wilcox's offense with Ben Wallace's defense, you're probably looking at a perennial All-Star.

I don't really think any problems Tyrus had passing and dribbling are the result of poor passing and dribbling skills, they've been the result of poor awareness and decision making on the court. The only problem I've seen with his ball handling is that he's prone to drawing charges when he runs the break because he waits too long to pass the ball and crashes into his defender. I think the problem there is simply not realizing where the defender is and that he needs to pass the ball slightly sooner. If he had problems with his dribbling, I'd expect to see the ball stolen from him off the dribble often and I have very few recollections of that. Everything leads me to continue to believe that he's an exceptional ball handler for a big man.

As far as passing, I'm not sure I'd consider bad passes being stolen to be an indication of bad passing skills. Again, it seems like poor awareness of where defenders are on the court and poor basketball IQ in realizing what passes can be picked off easily. I think Tyrus has good passing skills or at least the potential to be a good passer because of the few amazing passes he made last season and the many amazing passes he made in the summer league this year. I think those flashes of passing ability at a young age clearly differentiate him from someone like Curry who can't pass to save his life. 

Obviously, Tyrus' jumper has not been very successful but I think there's at least a little bit of room for optimism when you consider his comfort level shooting it and his fluid stroke. It's not like with Tyson where he had awful mechanics and was extremely uncomfortable shooting.

I think that the problems Tyrus' had last season with court awareness and basketball IQ are the types of struggles you'd expect from a raw player. I also think they're the types of problems that are more correctable - all rookies have difficulty adapting to the quickness and intensity of the NBA game - than simply lacking offensive skills. Obviously there are plenty of areas where Tyrus needs to improve but I see absolutely no reason to be overly concerned about a raw 20 year old who played as an average NBA player (14.8 PER) as a rookie. None of us expected him to set the league on fire and win ROY, right?


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

girllovesthegame said:


> Yeah it was probably close. I first found out about both Camby and Tyson's invite in the same article. Tyson had already given his committment but Camby hadn't accepted yet but he hadn't declined yet either.
> 
> http://www.denverpost.com/nuggets/ci_5896819


thanks for link, that clears it up.


----------



## girllovesthegame (Nov 3, 2005)

RoRo said:


> thanks for link, that clears it up.


:wink: You're welcome.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

johnston797 said:


> I've got questions....
> 
> So who holds Chandler's hand on Team USA? Why didn't Tyrus get invited to the scrimmage team at least if he is already better than Chandler?


Are these sincere questions?

Obviously, Chandler has mounds more experience and savvy than Tyrus does. He's made a 'name' for himself with what he does. 

Tyson hasn't yet.


Edit: Upon furthur review, this is a dumb question. They play different positions. If Team USA is looking for a defender only, they couldn't go wrong with either one. If forced to choose, Tysons veteran savvy and experience gives him the edge.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> Ben Wallace's true position is PF.


Based on what, his size? I don't think so. He's just a shortish center, the same as Duncan is a tall PF.

Its all about role and talent.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> If you compare their numbers on a per minute basis then Tyrus was better than Tyson when both players were rookies, *better than Tyson when both players were 20*, and worse than Tyson last season.


Actually, Chandler had the better PER as a 20 year old. 15.8 to 14.8. Chandler also played a lot more mins. 24 per game vs 13.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chandty01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thomaty01.html


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

johnston797 said:


> Actually, Chandler had the better PER as a 20 year old. 15.8 to 14.8. Chandler also played a lot more mins. 24 per game vs 13.
> 
> http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chandty01.html
> http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thomaty01.html


I stand corrected, though I don't think minutes are a reflection of ability to contribute, especially in the context of the two teams they were on. Man, Tyson looked like he was headed for stardom after that season. I'm constantly amazed by the way that he stagnated/regressed the next few seasons.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

Tyson is a better player right now. He may continue to be, but I am pretty high on Tyrus eventually being better all-around, if not as a rebounder. There aren't many better rebounders than Tyson.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

johnston797 said:


> Actually, Chandler had the better PER


Can't answer this question with stats.


----------



## Mr.Montross (Sep 24, 2005)

The next 2 or 3 years should provide the answer.


----------



## Snake (Jun 10, 2007)

johnston797 said:


> Actually, Chandler had the better PER as a 20 year old. 15.8 to 14.8. Chandler also played a lot more mins. 24 per game vs 13.
> 
> http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chandty01.html
> http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thomaty01.html


It's a lot easier for a rookie to get minutes on a 30 win team than it is on a 49 win team.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Snake said:


> It's a lot easier for a rookie to get minutes on a 30 win team than it is on a 49 win team.


PER is a rate, so it's minutes independent.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

Yes, but it's easier to perform to a higher standard in 30 minutes than it is in 10. You need to get into a rhythm, etc, is the arguement I think he's making.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Yeah but doing a "if so and so played 40 minutes he would have had better stats" is pretty misleading. For all we know one player may get tired while another doesn't. And Tyrus should have a better rookie season than Chandler, I'm not convinced that the stats actually do bear that out but Chandler came in straight out of HS, Tyrus has college experience and theoretically should be more ready to perform as a rook.

I still don't see any way someone can argue that Tyrus is better now, thats just complete Homerism IMO. Chandler was one of the league leaders in rebounds last season and he is playing on team USA for a reason and no..its not related to who he knows.

ACE


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

ace20004u said:


> I still don't see any way someone can argue that Tyrus is better now, thats just complete Homerism IMO. Chandler was one of the league leaders in rebounds last season and he is playing on team USA for a reason and no..its not related to who he knows.


It's just an issue of fit and how much you think Tyrus will improve in his second season. I conceded that I think Tyson will be the more valuable player next year in a vacuum but the Bulls need offense in the front court and he doesn't provide that.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> It's just an issue of fit and how much you think Tyrus will improve in his second season. I conceded that I think Tyson will be the more valuable player next year in a vacuum but the Bulls need offense in the front court and he doesn't provide that.


and the context of having Ben Wallace now and Noah in the wings.

I didn't take it as a isolated comparison, but in the context of who you would add to the bulls (agree with your main point).


----------



## Snake (Jun 10, 2007)

ace20004u said:


> Yeah but doing a "if so and so played 40 minutes he would have had better stats" is pretty misleading. For all we know one player may get tired while another doesn't. And Tyrus should have a better rookie season than Chandler, I'm not convinced that the stats actually do bear that out but Chandler came in straight out of HS, Tyrus has college experience and theoretically should be more ready to perform as a rook.
> 
> I still don't see any way someone can argue that Tyrus is better now, thats just complete Homerism IMO. Chandler was one of the league leaders in rebounds last season and he is playing on team USA for a reason and no..its not related to who he knows.
> 
> ACE


If comparing them in a vaccum there's no doubt Chandler will be the better player this coming season. It shouldn't surprise anyone that a former no.2 pick going into his seventh season will be better than a second year player.

However I would still pick Tyrus for this team this coming season. It was pretty clear that the offense in our frontcourt is what was lacking and Chandler provides 0 offense. Yeah he had 10 ppg but come on was all dunks, has has no actual offensive game and Tyrus clearly outscored him per 40. With Wallace, Noah, Smith and Tyrus on board we shouldn't have any rebounding problems which is the strongest part of Chandler's game.


----------



## someone (Jul 17, 2007)

I got a question about this whole Chandler thing, could it of been possible to have Tyrus and Chandler instead of Tyrus and Big Ben? Or did we trade Chandler for the Tyrus pick? Cause if the two choices are Chandler and Big Ben I think I would take Chandler because of age and height.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

liekomgj4ck said:


> I got a question about this whole Chandler thing, could it of been possible to have Tyrus and Chandler instead of Tyrus and Big Ben? Or did we trade Chandler for the Tyrus pick? Cause if the two choices are Chandler and Big Ben I think I would take Chandler because of age and height.


Actually, you could have had Big Ben, Chandler and TT.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> Actually, you could have had Big Ben, Chandler and TT.


damn, and who wouldn't want that!!


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Yeah, we had Tyson Chandler, Ben Wallace, and Ty Thomas all under contract at one point. Then some idiot broke up that.


----------



## someone (Jul 17, 2007)

Mebarak said:


> Yeah, we had Tyson Chandler, Ben Wallace, and Ty Thomas all under contract at one point. Then some idiot broke up that.


www.firejohnpaxon.com!!! 

:lol: jk


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

As a Blazer fan here I'd take Chandler every day of the week. His rebounding, defense, and efficiency are some of the best for the whole NBA last year. He has already arrived, there is no waiting and no question marks about it. Chandler might make the 12 man USA roster, Tyrus was passed up on the select team in favor of Channing Frye and Jason Kapono.

Is it possible Tyrus will better him? I suppose theres a chance, but theres a chance Mary and Loyd hook up from dumb and dumber. 

Tyrus will never be the rebounder or versatile big man defender that Chandler is. He is still a very nice prospect, but very unproven and at this point an overall question mark with a semi-limited offensive ceiling.


----------



## someone (Jul 17, 2007)

I would have to choose the "keep both Tyrus and Chandler" option


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Draco said:


> As a Blazer fan here I'd take Chandler every day of the week. His rebounding, defense, and efficiency are some of the best for the whole NBA last year. He has already arrived, there is no waiting and no question marks about it. Chandler might make the 12 man USA roster, Tyrus was passed up on the select team in favor of Channing Frye and Jason Kapono.


I don't think that's very meaningful. It's not as though Tyson is in the conversation for the 12 best American players in the NBA and you won't find too many GMs who would take Kapono or Frye over Tyrus.



Draco said:


> Is it possible Tyrus will better him? I suppose theres a chance, but theres a chance Mary and Loyd hook up from dumb and dumber.


I don't think it would be remotely surprising for a 21 year old who posted a 14.8 PER last season to someday surpass a nearly 25 year old who posted a PER of 17 last season.



Draco said:


> Tyrus will never be the rebounder or versatile big man defender that Chandler is. He is still a very nice prospect, but very unproven and at this point an overall question mark with a semi-limited offensive ceiling.


And Tyson will never be the scorer or shot blocker that Tyrus is. They're different players. Again, I agree that Tyson is probably the better player next season in a vacuum but believe that Tyrus' skill set is a better fit for the Bulls.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

I went with Thomas now and Thomas later.

I know we've been through this over and over, but once we signed Wallace, Chandler became a backup and this wouldn't have been good for Chandler or the Bulls. Forgetting the salary implications, you have to assume that Chandler has no emotions and no ego in order to make this work.

Once we signed Wallace, we had to let the bird that is Tyson Chandler go and let him try and fly free. He flew magnificently in NOK last season and figures to continue to do well there. Chandler needed to be traded and it was the best thing that could have happened to him. The Bulls are better off too, though this is harder to see. In order to see it, you have to put yourself in the mind of a young, somewhat immature and somewhat disgruntled stud athlete who sees himself as an NBA starter, and maybe even an NBA star, who is told that he's going to be a backup for at least the next 4 years...years that he saw himself establishing his NBA credentials.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

No chance Wallace could keep Chandler from starting for 4 years. I'm not sure about 2.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

johnston797 said:


> No chance Wallace could keep Chandler from starting for 4 years. I'm not sure about 2.


I believe Skiles would keep Wallace as the starter, decline or no. He's a vet and starting him and Chandler wouldn't be something Skiles would do. Chandler'd be a bench energy guy until the starting spot opened up upon Wallace's departure...


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

King Joseus said:


> I believe Skiles would keep Wallace as the starter, decline or no. He's a vet and starting him and Chandler wouldn't be something Skiles would do. Chandler'd be a bench energy guy until the starting spot opened up upon Wallace's departure...


well, it's not just you or skiles, plenty of coaches would.

http://www.nba.com/news/alldefensive_070430.html



> The voting panel consisted of the NBA’s 30 head coaches, who were asked to select NBA All-Defensive First and Second Teams by position.
> 
> 2006-07 NBA ALL-DEFENSIVE FIRST TEAM
> Forward Bruce Bowen
> ...


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

2006-07 ain't 2007-2008 and it sure ain't 2009-2010.


----------

