# Bulls acquire rights to Harrington?



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

*Bulls acquire rights to Harrington*

I was listening to ESPN radio today and they said that the Bulls have acquired the rights to Al Harrington for Pippen and something else (that I didn't catch). If that is the case, that is a great pick up for the Bulls.

Please confirm.


----------



## Nater (Jul 10, 2002)

Wow! 

I'm on the train, so no access to radio here...


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Can trading between teams even start yet?

Anyways, I think it would be Pip/#3 pick for Harrington


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lakota_Blazer</b>!
> Can trading between teams even start yet?
> 
> Anyways, I think it would be Pip/#3 pick for Harrington


Trading can be done now by teams out of the playoffs is my understanding. That deal you list certainly sounds like what it could be.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Nater</b>!
> Wow!
> 
> I'm on the train, so no access to radio here...


You get wireless on the train?


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

:sigh:


----------



## Nater (Jul 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> You get wireless on the train?


Via my cell phone, baby.  (Sprint PCS Vision)


----------



## Nater (Jul 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pay Ton</b>!
> :sigh:


I'll have the same reaction if we just traded our 1st round pick.

If it's something like Pippen + Jeffries, then that's another story...


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Nater</b>!
> 
> 
> I'll have the same reaction if we just traded our 1st round pick.
> ...



So Indiana would trade a young up and coming player for a scrub and a player soon to retire? Harrington would cost Chicago the #3 pick


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Nater</b>!
> 
> 
> I'll have the same reaction if we just traded our 1st round pick.
> ...


Think about it. Would they really trade Harrington for Pippen and Chris Jeffries? Hell no. (If they did, we robbed them). And since Pippen and Harrington's salaries are really close, the only thing I can think of it being is Pip and the pick for Harrington. If that is true, John Paxson better leave the country ASAP because if I find him, he's not going to get out alive. :upset:

For the record, I don't believe this would have happened and the one guy to hear about it on the boards is someone not in Chicago. One of us locals would have certainly heard/saw something. MichaelOFAZ, is it possible what you heard was something like this:
"There is a rumor that Chciago may acquire the rights to Al Harrington for Pippen and something else."???


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

#3 and Pippen

for 

#29 and Harrington

that one seems the most likely trade. I havent heard anything about it yet, and havent seen anything about it.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Nater</b>!
> 
> 
> I'll have the same reaction if we just traded our 1st round pick.
> ...


I would hope, but I doubt it. If it's not for the #3 pick, I'd be shocked.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>wadecaroneddie</b>!
> #3 and Pippen
> 
> for
> ...


That's a better deal, but I still am not that high on it for the Bulls.


----------



## Pure Scorer (Jul 20, 2002)

future first + pippen for harrington? 

doesn't make much sense to me if im the pacers, but makes a lot of sense for the bulls.

if its #3 and pippen for harrington... too much..harrington doesnt warrant a #3 pick.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Isn't Harrington a natural 4? .

...does this mean Chandler could be on the move?


----------



## Nater (Jul 10, 2002)

I never claimed that Pippen + Jeffries would be good for the Pacers. 

I just cling to a small bit of faith in Paxson (maybe I'm a sucker), so I'm hoping he wouldn't let the #3 pick go in a deal for Harrington.


----------



## Pure Scorer (Jul 20, 2002)

harrington and curry in the post as the 4/5 combo would be terrible on defense. thats the kind of post combo that gets eaten up by guys like othella harrington.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

I don't think Paxson knows the meaning of immediate help. I just don't see how Harrington will help our team as a unit win games. I really hope this isn't true. Especially giving our pick to the Pacers? Already one of the youngest teams in the league who just got eliminated from the ECF? I could understand a WC team, but why Indiana? We couldn't have found anything better?


----------



## WXHOOPS (Jan 15, 2004)

Yes and a very good point to be made. Indiana needs a good defensive minded C to take some of the pressure off of JO. I don't see the Bulls giving up the #3 for this trade. However, I think something more realistic would be Chandler & Pippen for Harrington. That would make much more sense.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>WXHOOPS</b>!
> Yes and a very good point to be made. Indiana needs a good defensive minded C to take some of the pressure off of JO. I don't see the Bulls giving up the #3 for this trade. However, I think something more realistic would be Chandler & Pippen for Harrington. That would make much more sense.


I don't think that works under the cap. I may be wrong.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Maybe this is a sign that Paxson likes both Okafur and Howard and believes that one of the two will fall to him, and he may think of Al Harrington as their small forward.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Scottie Pippen, Tyson Chandler and Chris Jefferies forJeff Foster and Al Harrington

that makes sense


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> Scottie Pippen, Tyson Chandler and Chris Jefferies forJeff Foster and Al Harrington
> 
> that makes sense


Not so much for Indiana


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> Scottie Pippen, Tyson Chandler and Chris Jefferies for Jeff Foster and Al Harrington
> 
> that makes sense


Umm, no thank you. Foster is better than those 3 bulls (maybe, maybe tied with Chandler), and Harrington is even better than Foster.


----------



## Kramer (Jul 5, 2002)

I just talked to my source in the Bulls organization and he said this trade did NOT happen. Of course, my source is Da Bull and he was stoned off his ***, but seriously... 

All logic tells me this did not go down and we're getting upset for nothing. Either that or denial has set in.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Just for now, I added a question mark to the thread title. Until we get confirmation, we don't want to confuse people.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> Maybe this is a sign that Paxson likes both Okafur and Howard and believes that one of the two will fall to him, and he may think of Al Jefferson as their small forward.


Why? Did he not trade the #3 pick? What have you heard?



> Scottie Pippen, Tyson Chandler and Chris Jefferies forJeff Foster and Al Harrington


Is this your opinion or is this what they said?


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> Umm, no thank you. Foster is better than those 3 bulls (maybe, maybe tied with Chandler), and Harrington is even better than Foster.


I'd much rather have a healthy Chandler than Foster but trading Harrington and getting back a filler that will retire and a good defender and that does not do much else is what makes me cringe. Donnie's too smart for that also, if he's trading, he's gonna make sure he rapes the hell of that team. Even the Bender-AD trade turned out somewhat good for us. I just pray to god that Donnie doesn't take another project like Bender or Primoz and instead takes Devin Harris.


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

MichaelOFAZ is basghetti!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





 j/k of course... or am I :uhoh:


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

Damnit, my heart was racing reading through this thead hoping we didn't give up Tyson, #3 whatever. 

I hope you're right this isn't true!!!


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBulls2315</b>!
> Damnit, my heart was racing reading through this thead hoping we didn't give up Tyson, #3 whatever.
> 
> I hope you're right this isn't true!!!


chill, the only stuff we heard officialy is Harrington and and Pippen all the other names are just people throwing out ideas.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I don't see anything about this on any website.

I think at this point it must be speculation.

Thank god.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> 
> 
> chill, the only stuff we heard officialy is Harrington and and Pippen all the other names are just people throwing out ideas.


I don't even think that's official, as of right now.



> Thank god.


:yes:


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Isnt Pippen and some 2nd rounder good enough for Harrington cuz Pippen will just retire and give the Pacers some cap space most likely, i cant see a team trading for pippen as a center piece thinking he will actually try to play.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

Ok, so far, Tyson has worked out tons and appears to be the exact type of player management wants. 

And just yesterday the Tribune said we weren't interested in trading the 3rd for Harrington. 

Future first? That's hard to believe considering the Pacers would probably want immediate help to get them to the Finals next year.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> I don't see anything about this on any website.
> 
> I think at this point it must be speculation.
> ...


My findings as well. Not on ESPN, Yahoo!, NBA.COM, or any other site.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

*Something to consider...*

Is anybody else asking themselves why Indiana seems so eager to move Harrington, a solid scorer and superb defender? It has nothing to do with them thinking lowly of Harrington, it's that they are ready to debut Jon Bender for the rest of the league, and they can't do that with Harrington ahead of him in pecking order.

I don't know how many of you realize this, but Bender averaged 7.0 ppg in just 12.9 mpg. Think on that one for a minute. Also, his shooting percentages are very good from the field, 3 pt and FT line. This kid can play, and like Jermaine O'Neal once did, all this kid needs is a window of opportunity.

My guess is that they are angling for Livingston at #3, looking for a future lineup of:
C - Foster
PF - O'Neal
SF - Artest
SG - Bender
PG - Livingston

If they get that lineup, good luck to the rest of the Eastern Conference. Better yet, good luck matching up with the tallest backcourt ever.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BabyBlueSlugga7</b>!
> Isnt Pippen and some 2nd rounder good enough for Harrington cuz Pippen will just retire and give the Pacers some cap space most likely, i cant see a team trading for pippen as a center piece thinking he will actually try to play.


Yeah, cap space sounds great. But, I think you need it more than we do. How about if you trade us Kirk Hinrich and Eddy Curry for Reggie Miller and a 2nd rounder. That would give you a ton of cap space!


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> How about if you trade us Kirk Hinrich and Eddy Curry for Reggie Miller and a 2nd rounder. That would give you a ton of cap space!


Exactly what i was gonna respond with. It's stupid to think that an EC Finals team would trade away their 6th man, arguably the best in the league, and 3rd best player, for cap space and a 2nd rounder and think that's 'good enough'. FYI, we're not you. (Thank God) No offense, you guys have already had your glory years, but it's our turn now:grinning: We can just say that we're switching places as we basically sucked until about 1998 while you guys were winning rings.


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

It's pretty crap, no? Why would you guys want Harrington? It seems like the only motivation would be to avoid drafting a rookie, and if you're going to hot potato the 3rd pick surely you could get something that fills a need.


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Bulls acquire rights to Harrington*



> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> I was listening to ESPN radio today and they said that the Bulls have acquired the rights to Al Harrington for Pippen and something else (that I didn't catch). If that is the case, that is a great pick up for the Bulls.
> 
> Please confirm.


way to follow up on your bs post. Funny there is no mention of this anywhere on the web. :upset: :upset:


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

*Re: Re: Bulls acquire rights to Harrington*



> Originally posted by <b>PatBateman</b>!
> 
> 
> way to follow up on your bs post. Funny there is no mention of this anywhere on the web. :upset: :upset:


I said that's what I heard on the radio ... whether it's true or not is another story. What I thought I heard was the "Pacers and the Bulls have a agreement in principle to send Al Harrington to the Bulls for Pippen and something else (that's the part that I didn't catch). I assume that it is the Bulls 1st round pick, but I am not sure.

If it is true, I think it's a stroke of genius. Harrington is underpaid at 11 mil for the next two years. Pippen's gauranteed contract is an albatross. This year's draft is one or two men deep and the #2 guy is another high school project. By getting Harrington the Bulls get one of the leagues best 6th men who could come in a start for the Bulls immediately. If some how the Bulls could get rid of Antono Davis or ERob, they'd have some cap room to sign Crawford and perhaps a defensive stopper.


----------



## WhoDaBest23 (Apr 16, 2003)

*Re: Something to consider...*



> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> Is anybody else asking themselves why Indiana seems so eager to move Harrington, a solid scorer and superb defender? It has nothing to do with them thinking lowly of Harrington, it's that they are ready to debut Jon Bender for the rest of the league, and they can't do that with Harrington ahead of him in pecking order.
> 
> I don't know how many of you realize this, but Bender averaged 7.0 ppg in just 12.9 mpg. Think on that one for a minute. Also, his shooting percentages are very good from the field, 3 pt and FT line. This kid can play, and like Jermaine O'Neal once did, all this kid needs is a window of opportunity.
> ...


That would be an absolutely sick lineup for Indy! Hope it doesn't happen though...

But yeah, I hope the Pippen and #3 pick for Harrington hasn't fell through. I mean Harrington is a real nice talent, but I was looking forward to the Bulls picking at #3. I think it's a bit too much for Harrington. The Bulls would be on the short end of this deal IMO.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

If Paxson traded the 3rd pick for Harrington he is making a terrible mistake.

Harrington is a PF 6'9 254 pounds.While he gets older he'll get more weight.

That's a PF to me.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

I just don't see how the #3 pick could be involved. 

First off, we're not done looking at our prospects. I mean next week we have alll the big boys coming into one workout. I don't think we'd deal for Harrington without even seeing these guys play this out. 

Secondly, I think it's pretty apparent the Pacers are willing to do this deal. There are 2 weeks left until the draft. Everybody is not done showing their full hand yet. Doing this deal now means you're possibly passing up a better deal in the coming weeks. At least let yourself see what is all out there. I mean Paxson probably has said maybe to this deal and said let me see how things go. Does anyone think the Pacers have a better deal than this on the table RIGHT NOW that they can surely tell themselves that that deal would be better than this one? I don't think so. And for those who think Harrington is definately worth the 3rd pick, the Pacers might be waiting it out themselves to see what's available.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

If the #3 pick isnt involved, then neither is Harrington, point blank. Unless its a completely different deal that involves Chandler, Curry or Hinrich.

I'm not sure if I'm liking this trade, it basically comes down to Harrington or Deng/Iggy? Sure thing vs. Gamble but a ton of potential. Elton Brand vs. Tyson Chandler? Who knows.


----------



## Thorgal (Feb 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> If the #3 pick isnt involved, then neither is Harrington, point blank. Unless its a completely different deal that involves Chandler, Curry or Hinrich.
> 
> I'm not sure if I'm liking this trade, it basically comes down to Harrington or Deng/Iggy? Sure thing vs. Gamble but a ton of potential. Elton Brand vs. Tyson Chandler? Who knows.


C'mon... 

Baby Al is no Elton Brand

and Deng/ Iggy is years ahead of 18 years old Tyson in terms of NBA readiness


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Thorgal</b>!
> C'mon...
> 
> Baby Al is no Elton Brand
> ...


Harrington definitely is no Brand, Brand is much more established and still only one year older. 

But I'm not so sure Deng, Howard, etc arent in the same boat as Chandler, Curry, and Brown. At the time, those last three seemed like amazing prospects but struggled when they got into the league. 

I'm just a little skeptical. I feel like the media hypes every draft the same way regardless of how different they are in terms of talent. So we are left to figure out if Deng is the next Grant Hill or the next Keith Van Horn. Its really very difficult to judge how good these guys will be until you actually see their whole skillset put to action against NBA competition.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Just an FYI, and I might be wrong, I had to go all the way back to Terry Cummings being traded from LA to Milwaukee in the early 80s to find a trade that happened during the playoffs. I believe the deadline exists until the end of the finals. Could something be agreed in principle? I suppose so but it hasnt happened in 20 years


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

*Re: Bulls acquire rights to Harrington*



> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> I was listening to ESPN radio today and they said that the Bulls have acquired the rights to Al Harrington for Pippen and something else (that I didn't catch). If that is the case, that is a great pick up for the Bulls.
> 
> Please confirm.


Can I ask a question? How do you acquire a player's "rights" if he's already under contract? You either acquire the player or you don't. Sounds like somebody enjoys pulling wings off of flies and decided to take torture to a new level.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> Just an FYI, and I might be wrong, I had to go all the way back to Terry Cummings being traded from LA to Milwaukee in the early 80s to find a trade that happened during the playoffs. I believe the deadline exists until the end of the finals. Could something be agreed in principle? I suppose so but it hasnt happened in 20 years


There are numerous trades agreed to in principal before the draft. In fact, a number of trades "contingent" on this or that may already be in place. Its a common practice. The Bulls, in fact, had a trade in place prior to last year's draft that was squashed when Williams had his bike accident.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> 
> 
> There are numerous trades agreed to in principal before the draft. In fact, a number of trades "contingent" on this or that may already be in place. Its a common practice. The Bulls, in fact, had a trade in place prior to last year's draft that was squashed when Williams had his bike accident.


But not during the finals. And if so, it has never been announced. Again, you have to back to the Marquis Johnson, Terry Cummings trade in the early 80s to find a trade announced during the playoffs. While I dont know this for a fact, I believe the trade deadline extends until after the last game of the finals has been played. After that, it opens up again. But again, I went back nearly 20 years and havent found one case outside of the one I mentioned


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> 
> But not during the finals. And if so, it has never been announced. Again, you have to back to the Marquis Johnson, Terry Cummings trade in the early 80s to find a trade announced during the playoffs. While I dont know this for a fact, I believe the trade deadline extends until after the last game of the finals has been played. After that, it opens up again. But again, I went back nearly 20 years and havent found one case outside of the one I mentioned


Coincidentally I had a conversation with an NBA guy about this very subject less than a week ago. While he couldn't say with absolute certainty, he told me he believed trades could be executed during the playoffs as long as it didn't involve playoff teams. But that was just conversation.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> 
> 
> Coincidentally I had a conversation with an NBA guy about this very subject less than a week ago. While he couldn't say with absolute certainty, he told me he believed trades could be executed during the playoffs as long as it didn't involve playoff teams. But that was just conversation.


Hmmm, that is interesting. The obvious follow up to that would be why has it been 20 years since one has been done? Also, if there was a Williams deal in place, why wasnt that announced, if there is no lockup on trading (in fact, I believe Jwills accident happened after the finals ended last year, leading me to believe the lockup might even go beyond the finals)? Its an interesting question. Thats why I dont believe that a Harrington deal is done or been announced, because simply, it happens so infrequently, that I would think there would be some rule preventing it. But it is interesting and I hope someone can dig up that rule.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#84

*84. When can't a player be traded? Can players be given "no-trade" clauses in their contracts?* 
A "no-trade" clause can be negotiated into an individual contract if the player has been in the NBA for at least eight seasons, and has played for the team with which he is signing for at least four seasons. They don't have to be the immediately prior four seasons -- for example, Horace Grant got a no-trade clause from Orlando when he signed with them in 2001. He had played for Orlando for four seasons, but had played for Seattle and Los Angeles in the interim. Very few players actually have one of these no-trade provisions. Otherwise, individually negotiated contracts may not contain no-trade clauses. The no-trade clause prevents the team from making a trade involving the player without the player's consent. 

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances: 

For two months after receiving the player in trade, if the player is being traded in combination with other players. However, the team is free to trade the player by himself (not packaged with other players) immediately. This two-month restriction applies only to teams over the salary cap. (Also see question number 71 for a special case where players can be traded together in less than two months.)

When the trading deadline has passed. Teams are free to make trades again *once their season has ended*, but cannot trade players whose contracts are ending or could end due to an option.

For three months or until December 15th of that season (whichever is later) after signing a contract as a free agent or draft rookie. (Note: This does not apply to players who sign contract extensions or who renegotiate their existing contracts. These players may be traded immediately.)

When the player is playing under a one-year contract and will have Larry Bird or Early Bird rights at the end of the contract. Note: This includes first round draft picks following their fourth (option) season, who accept their team's qualifying offer for their fifth season.

For one year after exercising the right of first refusal to keep a restricted free agent (however, the player can consent to a trade to any team except the team that tried to sign him).

After claiming a player on waivers, for 30 days if the player was claimed during a season, or until the first day of the next season if the player was claimed during the offseason.


A team cannot reacquire a player they traded away during that season (a season being July 1 - June 30) unless the player has been waived.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Maybe this helps.


----------



## PatBateman (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Bulls acquire rights to Harrington*



> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I said that's what I heard on the radio ... whether it's true or not is another story. What I thought I heard was the "Pacers and the Bulls have a agreement in principle to send Al Harrington to the Bulls for Pippen and something else (that's the part that I didn't catch). I assume that it is the Bulls 1st round pick, but I am not sure.
> ...


sorry. I'm just going crazy here waiting for some trades to happen before the draft! I trust your report but not ESPN radio.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

If Pippen was involved then the trade didn't happen. We can't trade one of our unprotected players for the expansion draft.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

Hey, rlucas, I think I found a recent deal. Its a minor one, but it was a trade and it was announced prior to the end of the playoffs.

On 6/14/01 the Chicago Bulls acquired Charlotte's 2001 second round pick (45th overall) in exchange for the draft rights to Roberto Duenas.

The Finals ended on 6/15/01 when the Lakers beat Philadelphia 108-96.

So it looks like trades can occur during the playoffs between teams whose seasons have ended.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#84
> 
> *84. When can't a player be traded? Can players be given "no-trade" clauses in their contracts?*
> ...


This does help Kismet. Its interesting. I just guess I cant figure out why the flood gates dont open more often. But very interesting and I stand corrected


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

I think the commish doesn't want any trades to be announced during the playoffs so it doesn't take away from what the teams in the postseason are doing... that's why they don't announce them...


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> This does help Kismet. Its interesting. I just guess I cant figure out why the flood gates dont open more often. But very interesting and I stand corrected


I've wondered about this myself. I guess it could be a combination of things:
1) Teams want to wait until they see how the draft shakes out
2) Teams are busy looking at prospects and drawing up their draft boards and therefore don't have the time to do serious negotiations about other players.

1 seems more likely than 2, but there is still a decent amount of paperwork and negotiation and positioning that goes into trades.

This season there's also the added issue of the expansion draft. My understanding was that yesterday was the deadline for teams to submit their protected lists, so I imagine that, if they were allowed before (I've see no reason they wouldn't have been), trades can't be done now until the expansion draft, since it might mess up the list Charlotte has to choose from.

However, what really surprises me is why we haven't seen trades by teams that are poised to lose something valuable for nothing.

I mean, if you were the Clippers, wouldn't you prefer a 2nd rounder for Melvin Ely than losing him for nothing? Or the Cavs with Jason Kapono. The Magic, apparently, are leaving Reece Gaines unprotected and he was a mid 1st rounder just last year. Why wouldn't they get at least something for him?


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

so is this true or not?has anyone heard anything else about this?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

If it's true, I expect the "Fire Paxson" club to double overnight when it's announced.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Harrington is a nice player. But of all the guys on Indiana we should be targeting, i think it should be Jonathan Bender personally. Harrington is a very good player. And probably would be the Bulls best player right away. However, on a team with absolutely no shooters, his game might be rendered useless. defenses will collapse on him and Curry and dare Jamal (if he is still here) and Kirk to shoot all day. That shouldnt scare too many people.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> Harrington is a nice player. But of all the guys on Indiana we should be targeting, i think it should be Jonathan Bender personally. Harrington is a very good player. And probably would be the Bulls best player right away. However, on a team with absolutely no shooters, his game might be rendered useless. defenses will collapse on him and Curry and dare Jamal (if he is still here) and Kirk to shoot all day. That shouldnt scare too many people.


agreed. I think Al is easily a better player than Bender at this stage and might remain so, but Bender can hit the outside jumper and has decent moves putting the ball on the floor from outside for a guy his size. We'd need his range and threat to penetrate more than we need Al's mid-range and post game. Al is a much better defender, though, and he can even step out and guard perimeter guys when need be. 

I wonder what Bender's going price in trade would be right now. I know the Pacers still like him, but he's been there what, 5 years, and he still doesn't have a big role? If they move Harrington as they've said they'll consider, he could take those minutes and help spread the floor for JO.


----------



## jollyoscars (Jul 5, 2003)

i hate pax if he does this. trade jyd instead of pip!!!! pip's contract only has a year left and jyd's has 4!!!! come on pax use your damn head.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jollyoscars</b>!
> i hate pax if he does this. trade jyd instead of pip!!!! pip's contract only has a year left and jyd's has 4!!!! come on pax use your damn head.


This is a good point. I mean we can learn something from RC Buford and Joe Dumars. Let the bad contracts expire and try to trade the ones down the road. this club needs flexibility in the worst kind of way. Trading Pip makes very little sense to me at this point. Just let his contract run out and concentrate on Erob and JYD and AD if at all possible.


----------



## jollyoscars (Jul 5, 2003)

how about: jyd, jeffries, pip, #3 for bender, harrington, #29


----------



## jollyoscars (Jul 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> This is a good point. I mean we can learn something from RC Buford and Joe Dumars. Let the bad contracts expire and try to trade the ones down the road. this club needs flexibility in the worst kind of way. Trading Pip makes very little sense to me at this point. Just let his contract run out and concentrate on Erob and JYD and AD if at all possible.


thank you, getting rid of jyd is #2 on my to-do list. behind getting a young sf or sg


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jollyoscars</b>!
> how about: jyd, jeffries, pip, #3 for bender, harrington, #29


not enough for Bender... Indiana would probably want Chandler instead of JYD... even then they may decline


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> 
> This does help Kismet. Its interesting. I just guess I cant figure out why the flood gates dont open more often. But very interesting and I stand corrected


Because everyone is waiting for the draft to shake down and the free agency season shortly thereafter 

Premature trading could diminish future or better opportunity .. and if there is nothing that occurs .. then the in principle deals still happen 

On JWill ..

What would have been the benefit of the Bulls announcing the trade that never was ?

In doing this it would have just destroyed your assets because everyone around the league would know they were being shipped.. everyone did probably know which is why Pax still wanted to deal the principals anyway to get "the right type" of guys that he eventually got 

Look at the players that were traded ( Rose and Marshall ) ... and add Crawford and a pick swap .. and then look at the players Boston got rid of (Walker, Battie , Williams - Mike James) 

Battie and Williams are exactly the blue collar types that John Paxson would regard.. Jim Paxson certainly did 

We do the trade first and Ricky Davis and Chris Mihm would probably still be Cavs or at least somewhere else 

I mean if you were Boston would you rather have :

1.Marshall, Rose , Crawford, Robinson and #7 ( from last year's draft ) 


or 

2. LaFrentz, Ricky Davis ,Jumaine Jones, Mihm , Welsch 

for 

Walker, Battie , E.Williams and #16 + #20 from last year's draft ?


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

.


----------



## Bulls4Ever (May 6, 2003)

Maybe it's Chandler+Jefferies+Pippen for Harrington+29th pick!


----------



## jreywind (May 30, 2003)

I'd say this is definately a premature post. I've been searching everywhere for info on this, but it isn't to be found. I think this trade has merit, but we wouldn't hear about it until a little later if this is legit.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

Al Harrington is an interesting case. He is a good scorer who can get to the line and he plays physical defense. Such qualities, one would assume, would lead to him helping his team when he is on the floor.

But the fact of the matter is that Indiana plays better when he is on the bench than when he is on the floor and that rings true regardless of how one adjusts for his teammates, his opponents, clutch play, garbage play, etc. For some reason he just doesn't seem to help his team win.

I think part of the reason is that he appears to be a very poor passer who generates very few assists. Time and time again players who score from the post but are not good passers show up in my player ratings as hurting their teams, guys like Al Harrington, Eddy Curry, and Amare Stoudamire. Even players like Jermaine O'Neal and Zach Randolph, while not bad players in my system, show up as less effective than in other systems that add up their statistical contributions.

I think the reason these players hurt their teams is that they cannot make teams pay for double teaming them. They also probably ending up passing out of the post to guys who aren't open who have to launch desperation shot clock heaves. These things may not always show up in their own stats, but they result in these types of players hurting their teams.


----------

