# JC comments after Hornets game



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

"It's bittersweet. I'm glad we won, but to me it's disrespect to single out us two out of five (starters)," Crawford said. *"I think the writing's on the wall for me, obviously."*

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=231108003


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

One word: wow.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

*Re: Re: JC comments after Hornets game*



> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> One word: wow.


Me too. Wow. I could say more but what good would it do? Can't wait to see what happens next. Hang on everybody, the bulls season is promosing to be a hell of a roller-coaster ride.


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> "It's bittersweet. I'm glad we won, but to me it's disrespect to single out us two out of five (starters)," Crawford said. *"I think the writing's on the wall for me, obviously."*
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=231108003


Good for him. He said pretty much what I was saying in my post game analysis. I also agree that the writing is on the wall for JC. Short of Cartright getting fired, Crawford is gone. And so am I. I've been a Bulls fan since I was 2 years. I supported them through many year of heartache and disappointment. I backed them on their decision to let the dynasty fall apart, trying to see the great good in the long run. I've back them through 4-5 years of obismal records, knowing that with the right nucleus of young talent, complemented by veteran leadership and role players, they would one day be competitive again. But enough is enough. Sooner or later, you have to call as it is and not support the team that doesn't do what it needs to, to make itself better. So if Crawford goes so do I. I will do something that I never imagined possible, I will no longer be a Bulls fan and I will sell or burn all of my Bulls paraphanailia. But if Cartright goes and the Bulls resign JC, I will be the biggest Bulls fan on the planet. Some say that is not a true fan .... I say it is ... if I didn't care, I would simply go along accepting mediocrity or worse.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

Dammit Craw, I don't blame you for that, but cmon a change was needed, and I'd say he proved tonight that he deserves to start.

Maybe he could be saying that if he didn't start Next game, but not now.

Bittersweet?? You WON.
Friggin selfish.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Well, he's proving all his critics right.

"*The team* won, and that's all that's important."

...should have been his answer.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Re: JC comments after Hornets game*



> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> So if Crawford goes so do I. I will do something that I never imagined possible, I will no longer be a Bulls fan and I will sell or burn all of my Bulls paraphanailia. But if Cartright goes and the Bulls resign JC, I will be the biggest Bulls fan on the planet.


>Shrug<

So you're a Jamal fan, and not a Bulls fan. Why'd you take so long to "come out of the closet"?


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Rose was none too happy as well...

"I was shocked ... I felt like I deserved better," Rose said. "I shouldn't have to go through that. This isn't my first or second year in the league."


Though I'm of the opinion that JC needed to be sent a message,
Hinrich certainly is not ready to be promoted based on ability.

Hinrich almost singlehandily lost the Bulls the game.
There are many aspects I like about about Hinrich game,
but he has a ways to go yet, and to jettison JC for him 
would to me be a bit foollhardy.

JC just has to leave his playground game on the playground,
and play within the structure of the offense.

While Rose has to be allowed to be the go to guy, by the
coaching staff becuase the kids just aren't as capable yet
and teams need a go to guy.

Cartwright has to also communicate better with his players
in private, not through the media, not symbolically through demotions.


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: JC comments after Hornets game*



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


Sorry to disappoint ya. But I am a Bulls fan and a Crawford. I've been a Bulls fan for 30 years, Crawford has only been a Bull for 4. So by my math, I am definitely a Bulls fan. My willingness to give up on the Bulls is based on principal, not on a player. I'd do the same thing if they were mistreating or wanted to trade Curry or Chandler too. What's right is right and whats wrong is wrong. I'm not going to make excuses or blindly support an inept and incompetent franchise. I'll let Cub, White Sox, and Bear fans do that.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Michael, you stayed with the bulls throughout all of the turmoil but your going to leave the bulls if JC gets traded? We win a game tonight with JC off of the bench and you're leaving??? When the team was broken up, you stayed. When we traded Brand for Chandler you stayed. You have been with us all of the way, then one player might get moved and your quitting. 

I am a bulls fan first and formost. Its something I cannot explain. You stick with the teams through all of the changes and turmoil now matter what because of your love for that team. I am a St.Louis Cardinal Fan. I have stuck with them since the day I was born. I never have quit on that team because of questionable decisions or trades I did not like. I have a 90 year old uncle who has been a Cubs fan from day 1, despite the many moves they have made down through the years, he has stuck with them, despite all of the losing and despite the fact that 98 % of my family are Cardinal fans. Its a feeling I don't have to explain to anyone who gets it. We have seen many new bandwagon join us because of their love for a player, first and foremost, but I do believe that this is the first time I have seen anyone who has been a longterm bulls fan leave over 1 player. Your leaving won't change anything in the bulls organization. Won't change the fact that Crawford might or might not get traded. It just means you won't have a team to cheer for anymore. You will have one player though! good luck following him if he leaves. after his career is over, then what? Just wondering. 

I do hope you have enjoyed your years as bulls fan up until now. I know I have. I look forward to enjoying many more of them, with or without Jamel.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: JC comments after Hornets game*



> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Sorry to disappoint ya. But I am a Bulls fan and a Crawford. I've been a Bulls fan for 30 years, Crawford has only been a Bull for 4. So by my math, I am definitely a Bulls fan. My willingness to give up on the Bulls is based on principal, not on a player. I'd do the same thing if they were mistreating or wanted to trade Curry or Chandler too. What's right is right and whats wrong is wrong. I'm not going to make excuses or blindly support an inept and incompetent franchise. I'll let Cub, White Sox, and Bear fans do that.


But your prinicpal won't change anything. Why the stand now and not when Brand was traded?


----------



## DOGMAN (Jun 10, 2003)

*STINKIN' BUM*

YOU ARE A STINKIN' BUM FOR MAKING THAT COMMENT. WHO GIVES A FLYIN' CRAP IF JC'S UPSET THAT HE DIDN'T START IN A BULLS WIN! ALL I CARE ABOUT IS WINNING...YAH HERE ME WINNING! AND I COULD GIVE A CRAP ABOUT WHO STARTS AND WHO DOESN'T, JUST AS LONG AS THE BULLS WIN...YA GOT IT?:upset:

Dogman, no caps please. And not one is a stinken bum. Disagree if you must, but do not name call, this is against policy. 

*Harassment occurs when a member insults, attacks, and/or denigrates another member at any time. For instance, the use of terms such as "idiot," "moron," "stupid," and like terms constitutes harassment. Harassment not only includes individuals but also can apply to insults against teams, players, and groups of BasketballBoards.net members. Repeated critical and sharply negative posts toward a team forum, team forum members, and/or a team's fan base as a whole can also constitute harassment. truebluefan*


----------



## South Stunna (Feb 25, 2003)

*Re: STINKIN' BUM*



> Originally posted by <b>DOGMAN</b>!
> YOU ARE A STINKIN' BUM FOR MAKING THAT COMMENT. WHO GIVES A FLYIN' CRAP IF JC'S UPSET THAT HE DIDN'T START IN A BULLS WIN! ALL I CARE ABOUT IS WINNING...YAH HERE ME WINNING! AND I COULD GIVE A CRAP ABOUT WHO STARTS AND WHO DOESN'T, JUST AS LONG AS THE BULLS WIN...YA GOT IT?:upset:


You make a good point *ahem*, yet only debauched by not hitting your caps lock.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

Craw Is Gone..


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

*Attitude adjustment*

I’ve been as big a Jamal fan/supporter that you will find. He needs an attitude tweaking. I didn’t mind Jalen and Jamal getting benched tonight. They both responded to it well. We do need a bit more energy to start the game and Jamal and Jalen have not been getting after it from the get-go.

Jamal should just suck it up and play harder… but he does not seem to want to do that. He’d rather pout a little bit. He has so much talent… now he has to get his head right.

If the Bulls let him go, I’ll be extremely disappointed. Just look at his line for tonight. 4-9 shooting, 5-5 from the line, 3 rebounds, 6 assists, 2 TO, 3 steals and a game saving block in a mere 28 minutes of work. That’s awesome. Hinrich will be lucky to have a game like that in the next 2 years with this team. But, its up to Jamal to want it as well. The Bulls showed tonight that they are a little unhappy with him. Let’s hope he responds to it by kicking butt on the court.


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

I'm extremely dissapointed in Jamal and Rose. BC makes a move to shake stuff up, a move that is in all likelyhood temporary, and these two guys complain. After the move seems to have the desired effect, which is to light a fire under these two, especially Jalen.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>hps</b>!
> I'm extremely dissapointed in Jamal and Rose. BC makes a move to shake stuff up, a move that is in all likelyhood temporary, and these two guys complain. After the move seems to have the desired effect, which is to light a fire under these two, especially Jalen.


Dissapointed, but not surprised, right?


----------



## jdg (Jun 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>hps</b>!
> I'm extremely dissapointed in Jamal and Rose. BC makes a move to shake stuff up, a move that is in all likelyhood temporary, and these two guys complain. After the move seems to have the desired effect, which is to light a fire under these two, especially Jalen.


Maybe point was to get them to complain? Notice how they stepped up their games AND complained. Now, if they had both sucked it up, then I wouldn't have been impressed with complaining. But the coach shouldn't care if his players complain about him, as long as they play their best, which is what happened tonight.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

About ****ing time Crawford said something. I agree with him. I agree with Rose. I hope he can move on and continue his career somewhere else. Preferably in a sonic jersey.

The Bulls were the first team I ever knew growing up. Michael Jordan was my favorite player back when people were saying he couldn't win and were all about Magic and Larry. And considering I was born in 82, I've been a bulls fan all my basketball life. But I, like, MichaelOFAZ will move on once they finally get rid of Crawford. It's a combination of how much I like Crawford and how much I hate Hinrich. And just the general direction of this franchise of the last couple of years. I used to be a die-hard Sonics fan back in the Kemp days, and when they traded Kemp it took me up until this year to start to watch them again with anything but hatred. And if they can get Crawford, they would instantly become my favorite team. So maybe sometime down the line everyone will cycle out and I can come back to being a bulls fan.

But until then, everytime Crawford comes back to Chicago and lights the bulls up for 30 and 12 and leads a superior team to the win, I'll be one happy camper.

I'm not the type to let someone piss in my cereal and tell me it's honey. That's what the Bulls franchise has been doing since they blew up the team after the last championship. And I draw the line once they get rid of Crawford.

If you think it's Crawford who needs an attitude adjustment, you're wrong. He's been quitely saying all the right things and putting up with this stuff for his entire career. The kid has a great attitude. And he will be a dream for any franchise smart enough to get him right now.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Here's a quote from Cartwright after the game. I LOVE IT.

"One individual is not more important than this team," Cartwright said. "We have to do whatever we have to do as coaches to win basketball games. It's not personal against anybody. Someone has to sacrifice some shots."


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Anyone read Baron Davis' quote, where he said we weren't a playoff team? Reality check, huh. I wonder what gave us away? You think it was the rookie point guard or Eddie "Future Bobcat" Robinson as a starter?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> Anyone read Baron Davis' quote, where he said we weren't a playoff team? Reality check, huh. I wonder what gave us away? You think it was the rookie point guard or Eddie "Future Bobcat" Robinson as a starter?


You mean he's not comparing Curry and Chandler to Parrish and McHale? *gasp*


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> You mean he's not comparing Curry and Chandler to Parrish and McHale? *gasp*


I guess not.

I love David Wesley's one line in that recap: "I was fouled."

No explanation. No anything. Just "I was fouled". You would think he would have something more articulate for the press after the game. But nope. For some reason that just made me laugh.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> and how much I hate Hinrich.


He's a rookie. He's played 2 games.

What did he do to you?


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

A rather shocking quote from JC. But I don't see any realistic possibilities in the near future, he will remain a Bull this year, BC wants to see how Crawford will pan out as an offensive threat.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Here's a quote from Cartwright after the game. I LOVE IT.
> 
> "One individual is not more important than this team," Cartwright said.


I gotta work that into the sig. 



> Someone has to sacrifice some shots."


Thats a direct comment on Jamals (and maybe Roses) games prior to tonight.

    

I didn't believe it until now...but he might be a goner.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> He's a rookie. He's played 2 games.
> ...


4 years of playing for Kansas, and having him constantly hyped didn't endear him to me.

I really just don't like Kansas players. I tolerate Paul Pierce because he's a little diffrent from normal kansas products, which tend to be players like Raef Lafrentz, Scott Pollard, and Collison...and Ostertag. ugh. Jauqe Vaughn. So on and So forth.

Kansas has consistently been the most overrated college basketball program of the last 15 years. Every year they are top 5, and every year they bow out early in the tournement. Bunch of overhyped chokers.

And Hinrich is the prototypical Kansas player.


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

These players have such big ego's and will never accept a certain role in order for the team to win!  I am very disappointed with Jamal's statements, and shocked at Rose since he should know better!


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

lol. Crawford's shot ended up on sportscenter's top 10 plays. And in the clip you have Bill Cartwright yelling at crawford after he made the shot...AFTER HE MADE THE SHOT!? Just give him a pat on the back Bill. How far does he need to tear this kid apart?

I don't think I saw BC get upset even once at Hinrich's turnovers. Like the double dribble that he had. BC's expression didn't even change.


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

I wouldn't have liked to start on the bench either but damn, sometimes you have to make sacrifices. We're trying out different things with the team.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

> Anyone read Baron Davis' quote, where he said we weren't a playoff team? Reality check, huh. I wonder what gave us away? You think it was the rookie point guard or Eddie "Future Bobcat" Robinson as a starter?


I think it was PJ Brown with this quote: "This is just a bitter loss," Brown said. "Our defense was horrible. They had a lot of open shots. It was just a mental letdown. You've got to beat teams like that. The Bulls -- I know it's early in the season, but all indications are that they won't be in the playoffs. Those are teams you have to take care of."

I absolutely love this comment "Yeah, definitely, I'm shocked," Crawford said. "It can't be just one reason why we're losing. It has to be a combination of things. It's not like I go out there thinking of leading the team in scoring." :no: :laugh:


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> lol. Crawford's shot ended up on sportscenter's top 10 plays. And in the clip you have Bill Cartwright yelling at crawford after he made the shot...AFTER HE MADE THE SHOT!? Just give him a pat on the back Bill. How far does he need to tear this kid apart?
> 
> I don't think I saw BC get upset even once at Hinrich's turnovers. Like the double dribble that he had. BC's expression didn't even change.


LOL. That's hilarious. They hardly pay the coach any attention though. I really don't blame them sometime.

I think BC is giving KH a little more leeway because he's a rookie and is expected to make mistakes here and there.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

So is Pax going to move him and Jalen? And what should we be looking for?

What about a trailblazer? I'm sure most of their team is on the block, besides Randolph and Woods.

We could get a bonzi wells and maybe a Jeff Mcginnis?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>spongyfungy</b>!
> 
> I absolutely love this comment "Yeah, definitely, I'm shocked," Crawford said. "It can't be just one reason why we're losing. It has to be a combination of things. It's not like I go out there thinking of leading the team in scoring." :no: :laugh:


where'd you get this quote?

It's hilarious.


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

I'm hoping something can be worked out. Jalen is such a good player. I think Rueben Patterson is on the block for the Blazers, this guy is just what the Bulls need. :yes: A tough player who does all the dirty work, all the little great things and brings in loads of energy off the bench.


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: JC comments after Hornets game*



> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> But your prinicpal won't change anything. Why the stand now and not when Brand was traded?


Because I believe that trading Brand was the right thing to do at the time. Brand wasn't enough to carry and team and he wasn't staying when his contract was up. So, I figured why not get something in return for him.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>spongyfungy</b>!
> "It can't be just one reason why we're losing. It has to be a combination of things. It's not like I go out there thinking of leading the team in scoring." :no: :laugh:


Shows what type of player JC is. Maybe he just needs to settle down. Maybe he just needs to go to a winning team where he can know his role.


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

You'd think after Steve Frances' comments that JC would learn to shut up and play. I don't care if JC averages 30 points a game. Despite what some here think, Jamal to me seems to care only about padding his stats. Case in point, observe what Jamal does with the ball everytime he leads a fast break. Although he can easily make a pass to the player underneath the basket, 90% of the time he'll just take it himself even with an opposing player in his face. Yes, he does make a great pass once in a while, but what good is that if more often than not he fails to initiate the offense and just tries to score on his own? This simply stagnates our entire team and contributes to the lethargic way of play that has characterized our blowout losses. Moreover, I've observed countless times where Jamal will have the ball for the last few seconds of a quarter, and instead of driving the lane and dishing off, he dribbles to just inside the 3 point arch and jacks one up. This isn't team ball. This is pure selfishness. 

Now compare Jamal to Hinrich. I'm not saying that Hinrich is good, and I don't really know if Hinrich will ever end up as a decent player, but at least he tries to get his players involved. It is crystal clear everytime he brings the ball up that he's looking to pass first. I'm not sure that you can say the same about Jamal. 

Frankly, I think it would be great if we got rid of Jamal. He could be the next TMac for another team for all I care. I want players on the Bulls who play team ball and who, above all else, prize winning over feeding their egos.


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> About ****ing time Crawford said something. I agree with him. I agree with Rose. I hope he can move on and continue his career somewhere else. Preferably in a sonic jersey.
> 
> The Bulls were the first team I ever knew growing up. Michael Jordan was my favorite player back when people were saying he couldn't win and were all about Magic and Larry. And considering I was born in 82, I've been a bulls fan all my basketball life. But I, like, MichaelOFAZ will move on once they finally get rid of Crawford. It's a combination of how much I like Crawford and how much I hate Hinrich. And just the general direction of this franchise of the last couple of years. I used to be a die-hard Sonics fan back in the Kemp days, and when they traded Kemp it took me up until this year to start to watch them again with anything but hatred. And if they can get Crawford, they would instantly become my favorite team. So maybe sometime down the line everyone will cycle out and I can come back to being a bulls fan.
> ...


:clap: :clap: Perfectly stated and I am with you.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Laid-Backness06</b>!
> You'd think after Steve Frances' comments that JC would learn to shut up and play. I don't care if JC averages 30 points a game. Despite what some here think, Jamal to me seems to care only about padding his stats. Case in point, observe what Jamal does with the ball everytime he leads a fast break. Although he can easily make a pass to the player underneath the basket, 90% of the time he'll just take it himself even with an opposing player in his face. Yes, he does make a great pass once in a while, but what good is that if more often than not he fails to initiate the offense and just tries to score on his own? This simply stagnates our entire team and contributes to the lethargic way of play that has characterized our blowout losses. Moreover, I've observed countless times where Jamal will have the ball for the last few seconds of a quarter, and instead of driving the lane and dishing off, he dribbles to just inside the 3 point arch and jacks one up. This isn't team ball. This is pure selfishness.
> 
> Now compare Jamal to Hinrich. I'm not saying that Hinrich is good, and I don't really know if Hinrich will ever end up as a decent player, but at least he tries to get his players involved. It is crystal clear everytime he brings the ball up that he's looking to pass first. I'm not sure that you can say the same about Jamal.
> ...


Always gald to have another articulate voice aboard... don't be a stranger.


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

Great post, Laid back. I completely agree. 

It's become clearer to me also, that Mal is all about padding his stats. Mal's a little selfish. The kid has lots to learn. :yes:


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Here's a quote from Cartwright after the game. I LOVE IT.
> 
> "One individual is not more important than this team," Cartwright said. "We have to do whatever we have to do as coaches to win basketball games. It's not personal against anybody. Someone has to sacrifice some shots."


That is total BS and he know is. Cartright has no business coaching in the NBA ... None.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Am I mistaken or did the Bulls win? And didn't they beat a damn good team too? Rose says he's not a first or second year player, but he sure did play like one until he came off the bench. And as far as Crawford is concerned, he showed why he won't be getting big bucks from the Bulls crying like a baby after his team won a big game.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Laid-Backness06</b>!
> You'd think after Steve Frances' comments that JC would learn to shut up and play. I don't care if JC averages 30 points a game. Despite what some here think, Jamal to me seems to care only about padding his stats. Case in point, observe what Jamal does with the ball everytime he leads a fast break. Although he can easily make a pass to the player underneath the basket, 90% of the time he'll just take it himself even with an opposing player in his face. Yes, he does make a great pass once in a while, but what good is that if more often than not he fails to initiate the offense and just tries to score on his own? This simply stagnates our entire team and contributes to the lethargic way of play that has characterized our blowout losses. Moreover, I've observed countless times where Jamal will have the ball for the last few seconds of a quarter, and instead of driving the lane and dishing off, he dribbles to just inside the 3 point arch and jacks one up. This isn't team ball. This is pure selfishness.
> 
> Now compare Jamal to Hinrich. I'm not saying that Hinrich is good, and I don't really know if Hinrich will ever end up as a decent player, but at least he tries to get his players involved. It is crystal clear everytime he brings the ball up that he's looking to pass first. I'm not sure that you can say the same about Jamal.
> ...


First of all you dont now what angle he sees when hes on the floor because the Tv doesnt give you his angle or the proper depth perception :no: 

Secondly how many times does this need to be explained I thought people watch enough Nba games to know and recognize a clearout when they see it .

The play is designed for a pass if he gets doubled othet than that its him taking his man and creating the best shot he can for himself.

Its nothing selfish about it if it was dont you think the would just call the play for someone else .


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

Last thing I'll say on this topic. Cartright better be careful of what he wishes for. Rose has a lot of respect for JC's game and an obvious disrespect for Cartright. Rose's salary is hard to dump and Curry and Crawford share the same agent. From what I understand Craw and Eddy are pretty good friend too. There is power in numbers and if the three of them unite, then Cartright will be gone.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

Michael I understand your sentiments,

I still haven't forgiven the Bulls for trading Artest. We could argue about the value of the trade till the cows come home, but I thiink in the end my issue was loyalty. 

I loved the way Ron Ron fought and left his heart on the floor. He seems to attack on both ends of the court and is in my opinion the most fun player to watch in the league. So many players get passive when they play D. While I still support the Bulls, I sometimes feel like a sycophant. We fans have been abused by managment for years...


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rohawk24</b>!
> Rose says he's not a first or second year player, but he sure did play like one until he came of the bench.


Exactly! This sure lighted a fire under his @!! too since he finished with a big game. If guys play ***** they will be benched regardless of how long they've been in the damn league. This is great message being sent to their oversized heads.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> 
> 
> That is total BS and he know is.


Tell us why his quote is...that.


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> 
> First of all you dont now what angle he sees when hes on the floor because the Tv doesnt give you his angle or the proper depth perception :no:
> ...


First, nice to meet you guys/gals.

Perhaps Jamal cannot see the other player(s) on a fast break, but when I see 3 Bulls players vs 1 opposing player, I don't believe Jamal has to take the layup every single time. He will take the shot with a guy right up in his face every time regardless of the players on the wing. 

I've seen countless NBA games, and I played nothing but basketball when I was younger. You're right, in an isolation play, Jamal must try to create the best shot available, but that doesn't mean that he has to take that shot. All he does is run out the clock, do that fancy dribble of his that gets him nowhere, and then jacks one up. Instead, he should run down the clock, drive to the basket, and either shoot a short jumper/layup or pass off to another man if the defense collapses on him. 

Jamal is a selfish player, and it was selfish for him to make those comments. If he felt slighted, he should have brought it up privately with BC. 

By the way, I think BC should go too.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Athlon33.6</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly! This sure lighted a fire under his @!! too since he finished with a big game. If guys play $h!!!y they will be benched regardless of how long they've been in the damn league. This is great message being sent to their oversized heads.


Rightttttttt so what about curry and his non-existent play in 4 of the 7 games hes been the worst Bulls starter so far .So this lighting the fire thing you enjoy it only counts for certain bulls ot all right .


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Athlon33.6</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly! This sure lighted a fire under his @!! too since he finished with a big game. If guys play $h!!!y they will be benched regardless of how long they've been in the damn league. This is great message being sent to their oversized heads.


Most teams do not bench their best player just because he has a few bad games and the team doesn't win. You think Doc Rivers is contemplating benching Tracy Mcgrady anytime soon? Rose is our Tracy Mcgrady this season. The benching was the first of Rose's career as a bull. You think you can just shrug that off as BC sending a message? Cartwright is playing with fire. Jalen can be a huge team cancer if he wants to be. Why do you think he's not still with Indiana?

And CCCP I agree with you about Artest. His intensity is a joy to watch. It's hard to really tell if trading Miller and Artest for Rose was really the best move if BC is just going to alienate Rose right now anyhow.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Laid-Backness06</b>!
> 
> 
> First, nice to meet you guys/gals.
> ...


Bc doenst seem o to do things privately in fact Bc doesnt seem to communicate with Jamal at all .Its kinda hard to effectively get what you want communiated to the team when you basically have no relationship with your starting pg .

In isloation plays the play is ran because your are the best option they dont want him kicking to Erob in a corner its setup that way so a team cant double effectively.It has nothing to do with selfishness I love how so many can pass judgements on players without having played with them.

Hes selfish because he doesnt say things you would like and doesnt pass the ball when YOU think he should pass.Just because a player doesnt play the way you would like doesnt make him selfish.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Rightttttttt so what about curry and his non-existent play in 4 of the 7 games hes been the worst Bulls starter so far .So this lighting the fire thing you enjoy it only counts for certain bulls ot all right .


Benching guys doesn't have the same effect on every single individual player. Curry is a real young, unproven player who needs the support from his coach. Crawford and Rose are veterans who have been around, and their egos were part of why they rode the pine at the start of the game.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rohawk24</b>!
> 
> 
> Benching guys doesn't have the same effect on every single individual player. Curry is a real young, unproven player who needs the support from his coach. Crawford and Rose are veterans who have been around, and their egos were part of why they rode the pine at the start of the game.


Bc stated that the starting unit wasnt providing energy and if thats the case Rose and Craw shouldnt have been the only sitting .All he did was place blame on 2 guys when its clearly not all their fault while excusing Currys horrible play.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Laid-Backness06</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Jamal is a selfish player, and it was selfish for him to make those comments. If he felt slighted, he should have brought it up privately with BC.


BC does not have the track record of someone who is open to his players. That was JWill's big thing last year, that he never felt like BC's door was open for him, so it ended up being public.

It's obvious by Rose and Crawford's comments that BC didn't explain this very well to either of them.

They were probably our best starters out of our starters except for Chandler, and yet they were the ones who got benched.

Kendall Gill has been playing like ****, same with Curry, same with Marshall. And yet Crawford and Rose are the only ones that get benched? Yeah something's not right.

And I agree about Cartwright needing to worry about doing this. Because Rose and Crawford and Curry is a very powerful axis to go against in this team. Of course those 3 together would be awesome trade bait.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

People are forgetting that the Bulls won! The Bulls won the game. Why are people upset with the fact that Rose and Crawford were benched? Don't you people want results? Would you rather win 40 games and make the playoffs with Rose and Crawford coming off the bench, or be lottery bound again with Rose and Crawford starting and playing 40 minutes a game? Seems to me like there is an obvious choice. It is all about winning from the fan's standpoint isn't it? So why are people worrying about how Crawford and Rose were treated if the Bulls won the game? I wouldn't say the Bulls have been competitive over the last five years, so I would be happy with any kind of win regardless of who is starting, who isn't starting, and who's feelings are being hurt. A win is a win, and if the Bulls could win with Crawford and Rose starting on the bench, wouldn't you want that?


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

Last year, people were critical of BC for letting Rose have a free reign, taking shots basically whenever he wanted. Now he gets benched and some of you are complaining.

I will say this. BC's communication skills are not good.

I think Crawford will be gone by the deadline. Rose is basically impossible to move. He'll be here a bit longer.

Both him and Rose are WRONG for saying what they did. As much as BC is at fault as they are, just like J-Will last year, you don't air dirty laundry in the media.

BC has said if you are not performing, he will put in someone who will. That's what he did. Curry had his minutes cut, but wasn't taking out of the starting lineup.


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> 
> Bc doenst seem o to do things privately in fact Bc doesnt seem to communicate with Jamal at all .Its kinda hard to effectively get what you want communiated to the team when you basically have no relationship with your starting pg .
> ...


"If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you?" BC hasn't always kept his mouth shut, but that doesn't relieve Jamal of that duty. On the other hand, you're right. BC doesn't seem to have much of a relationship with his players, and I wish he did. However, that doesn't mean Jamal can't go seek him out.

When Rose, Curry, and Marshall are out there, I don't believe that Jamal automatically becomes the best option. Furthermore, I'm not talking about a situation where BC draws out a play for Jamal to shoot. If that were the case, then I'd understand because that's what the team wants him to do. I'm talking about situations right at the end of a quarter where no timeout has been taken, and the Bulls go for one last shot. Jamal will run out the clock, dribble just inside the 3 point arc, and fire away. He doesn't make a concerted effort to free himself of his man or drive the lane for a layup or assist. 

Maybe I'm biased because I would always play pg for organized basketball, but pgs are supposed to look to pass before shooting. Pgs have to get others involved. Without some kind of movement, your teammates will just stand around. I don't think Jamal is really effective as a pg because he defeats the whole purpose of the pg, and it doesn't help when he's belligerent to changing his game in a way that would benefit his team more than 20 points/game.


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
> Last year, people were critical of BC for letting Rose have a free reign, taking shots basically whenever he wanted. Now he gets benched and some of you are complaining.
> 
> I will say this. BC's communication skills are not good.
> ...


Agreed.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

The bulls won't win in the long term with Rose and Crawford on the bench. That's why you worry about it. Unhappy players lead to mutinies and rocky ships and trade demands. That's why you worry about. If you honestly think we're going to come out and shoot 60 percent every game, and that Rose is going to continue to play well coming off the bench for Cartwright and that Crawford's play won't nosedive if he's supplanted by Hinrich, much like it nosedived when JWill took his spot--then you're deluded by the short term win. When all is said and done, yes we got a win, but BC may have sacraficed too much in the long term to achieve this short term goal. This team won't win if Crawford and Rose start sulking.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Laid-Backness06</b>!
> 
> 
> Maybe I'm biased because I would always play pg for organized basketball, but pgs are supposed to look to pass before shooting. Pgs have to get others involved. Without some kind of movement, your teammates will just stand around. I don't think Jamal is really effective as a pg because he defeats the whole purpose of the pg, and it doesn't help when he's belligerent to changing his game in a way that would benefit his team more than 20 points/game.


That kind of point guard has been dying a slow death in the NBA for quite some time now. You can put on one hand the amount of PGs who do that in the league today.

Guys like Marbury, The Baron, Tony Parker, Gary Payton, Steve Francis--for the most part household names, yet they have all been shoot first PG's for most of their careers. Not saying Jamal is as good as all of them yet, but he hasn't even played one entire season as a starting PG in this league. he keeps getting benched, while whatever new guy gets to play through his mistakes.


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

Well, I doubt that BC will keep this lineup for that long so I don't think there's really a big risk of a mutiny. I completely agree that we need JC and JR to win (well, at leat JR), but people are forgetting that Rose has been in a funk for a while, and JC, despite his impressive shooting, has failed to energize his teammates. Curry has been pretty awful too, but I'd rather see him out there than Blount. What's wrong with a coach trying to mix things up? Before this game, the Bulls had suffered 4 blowouts. 

I don't think BC did this out of spite. Simply put, JC had been ineffective as a pg, and JR had shot horribly for the first 6 games. Curry stayed in because...well...Blount sucks.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> This team won't win if Crawford and Rose start sulking.


They shouldn't sulk. They're grown men. 

I'm sure it won't be a permanent move.

Not the fact Hinrich started, but that he played so much while playing so badly suggests, as Jamal says, that the writing is on the wall.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
> 
> 
> They shouldn't sulk. They're grown men.


The proffesional athlete never grows up. (and is thus prone to sulking).


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> That kind of point guard has been dying a slow death in the NBA for quite some time now. You can put on one hand the amount of PGs who do that in the league today.
> ...


Marbury and Davis both average 7.8 assists per game. Payton averages 8.5. I think they strike a better balance between shooting and passing than Crawford who averages 5.0. I wouldn't use Francis as a positive example because as good as he is, his team hasn't done anything, and even he has been criticized for not utilizing their big man. 

Hinrich shouldn't have been out there later though. His confidence was shot, and I'm not sure why BC kept him in. That was odd. 

Ok, I'm off to bed. Nice chatting with you guys.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> That kind of point guard has been dying a slow death in the NBA for quite some time now. You can put on one hand the amount of PGs who do that in the league today.
> ...


Begin rant.

I hate when people talk about scoring point guards as if they were a new occurence. Mark Price, Isiah Thomas, Magic, Tim Hardaway: these all-star pgs all used scoring as a significant option. Even Stockton, the guy you would probably use as a quintisential pass first player, toed 20 points for a number of seasons.

Going back farther the trend doesn't change. Jerry West, Oscar Robertson: the best point guards have always put the ball in the hoop. The more I watch classic-sports the more I disagree when people talk about yesteryear like it has no relavence to today's NBA. The more things change the more the stay the same.

When I look at the offenses people are running this season, no one is reinventing the wheel. The Princeton offense that every one seems to be incorporating, triple-post, motion in Golden State, Up-screens, its the same crap people have been running for the last fifty years.

In fact if you want to see an up and down/open court 2000's type game check out ball from the 60's. They way those guys pushed the ball is a playground ballers dream. 

The only thing that I have seen changing is Defense: Closer guarding, more inclined to body up, more elaborate schemes. But even D, sans rule changes, has been relatively consistent over the last 10 + years. Point guards have always scored, players have always ran the open court.

End Rant.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

couple newish things:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bull091.html



> Cartwright said he will probably go with the same starting lineup when the Bulls host Denver on Monday.





> The moves did come as a surprise to the players. Before the game, Eddy Curry and Crawford, who are close friends, walked past reporters, and Curry said: ''Here's your starting point guard.''


i wonder how much of a game time decision this was for the coaching staff. because if they had this idea hatched earlier it might've taken some of the sting off being benched if jalen and jamal were told before tip-off. or maybe bc just wanted to piss them off and stoke the fire a bit.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

As the guy in charge, there are going to be times when you just get tired of talking, lecturing, negotiating, persuading, etc. And after a particularly dissappointing and frustrating experience like the Sixer game, maybe thats when the guy in charge decides to reduce everything to its base element...ergo the "my way or the highway" demonstration.

Folks, a guy who can clearly see that his future as a head coach is on the line is going to pull out all the stops. And he's not going to worry about bruised egos. Cartright knew that if the team continued to play sub .500 ball his days as the Bulls head man were numbered. Hell, in all likelyhood they still are. So why shouldn't he go down without a fight.

You can interpret Cartwright's moves anyway you want: a reward to players who work hard in practice or a message perhaps to those that don't...a tactical hunch that Hinrich would accept the challenge of facing Davis and that Robinson would be highly motivated to play well against his former team, or a reminder to the entire squad that no one individual is more important than team success?

Whatever Cartwright's motivations were, this much was clear: with the exception of Tyson Chandler the performance of the team's regulars so far has been generally lethargic and uninspired. If you were the head coach, would you stand still while your team was losing home games by more than 25 points? I doubt it. This was in fact, an act of desperation on Cartwright's part. He's using every arrow in his quiver. Its probably not going to turn things around though over the long haul. Cartwright is a dead man walking career-wise. Rose and Crawford needed to see things from the big perspective. They should have kept their mouthes shut because in all likelyhood the moves were temporary. Cartwright's leaving no stone unturned in terms of trying to save his job, that's all. It won't work, but you can't blame him for trying.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

As Dabullz says, just win

Who cares who starts. Who cares who scores. Just do what you have to do.

If BC had lost the players, he may have lost two more.

The issue with Crawford is not that BC doesn't like the way he plays, Paxson doesn't, which is more important.

It doesn't matter whether BC is coach or not, if Paxson doesn't like the way JC plays, he'll be traded at some point.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> lol. Crawford's shot ended up on sportscenter's top 10 plays. And in the clip you have Bill Cartwright yelling at crawford after he made the shot...AFTER HE MADE THE SHOT!? Just give him a pat on the back Bill. How far does he need to tear this kid apart?
> 
> I don't think I saw BC get upset even once at Hinrich's turnovers. Like the double dribble that he had. BC's expression didn't even change.


Are you 100% sure it was about the shot?? Be careful, it could have been over missed defensive play or something similar. To assume it was over the shot is just wrong. Someone had to shoot the ball when he did it. 

Hirich played his second game and is not 100%, Jamel is in year #4. You expect more things from a 3 year veteran than you do for a rookie, in his second game. Now if these things continue then then Kirk will deserve the same treatment


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> So is Pax going to move him and Jalen? And what should we be looking for?
> 
> What about a trailblazer? I'm sure most of their team is on the block, besides Randolph and Woods.
> ...


Where does it say Rose and Jamal will be moved. JC was upset and saie the writing is on the wall for him, thats all. 

I find it interesting that he never brought up, why he benched. I am sure BC told them both why. More offense for the second team? Work on certain parts of their game, because they were going to be moved and why? JC wouldn't let us know. All he said, after a win a big win was, a personal statement about him and him only. 

Look guys, I like Jamal as much as the rest of you, but when BC benches him, we don't really know why without wbing there. We can speculate all we want to but if we believe our own speculations, then this could lead us down the wrong path.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jdg</b>!
> 
> 
> Maybe point was to get them to complain? Notice how they stepped up their games AND complained. Now, if they had both sucked it up, then I wouldn't have been impressed with complaining. But the coach shouldn't care if his players complain about him, as long as they play their best, which is what happened tonight.


Right! that is why I was surprised! We won! Yet there were personal rumblings. For JC, he is playing for a contract. That may be a gripe for him. But just playing for a contract and not wins, could hurt this club. Wouldn't it look better if he was part of a playoff team instead of inflated stats on a 30 win team??


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> 
> 
> That is total BS and he know is. Cartright has no business coaching in the NBA ... None.


So because us fans think he should go then players are to ingnore any and everything he says? Fans too? BC is the head coach. Until he is no longer head coach, he is suppose to be respected.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MichaelOFAZ</b>!
> Last thing I'll say on this topic. Cartright better be careful of what he wishes for. Rose has a lot of respect for JC's game and an obvious disrespect for Cartright. Rose's salary is hard to dump and Curry and Crawford share the same agent. From what I understand Craw and Eddy are pretty good friend too. There is power in numbers and if the three of them unite, then Cartright will be gone.


But situations that your describe is true of any NBA team. ANY of them. Some teams have players with the same agent. All an agent has to do is rally the troops, then it becomes a team of indiviuals and not team players. So a coach needs to be careful not to coach the way he wants to because players will leave? That doesn't make sense. 

I am not out to get you by the way. I just have the opposite view view, thats all. A player should never dictate the way a coach should coach. A coach should never be afraid to make team decisions based on fear of agents. He is not a coach if he does. 

Pippen: Top fifty of all time. What did Scottie say to his coming off the bench? 

Jury is out on Jamal and his offense. He scored 7 in a win over Atlanta and had 29 against Orlando. Last night he had 14.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

A coach has a right tom change anyline up. When fans threaten to quit and or players players do the same, then thats wrong, especially after a win. If it had been a loss then this could carry some merit. 

Good points all the way through the thread. We are 3-4 instead of 2-5. We should be glad that the bulls won. We should be upset that Davis and Brown say they should beat a team "like the bulls" but instead, we are upset because JC is pouting. We are upset because Rose spoke out after a win. 

What is more important to these players??? What is more important to us?


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> A coach has a right tom change anyline up. When fans threaten to quit and or players players do the same, then thats wrong, especially after a win. If it had been a loss then this could carry some merit.
> 
> Good points all the way through the thread. We are 3-4 instead of 2-5. We should be glad that the bulls won. We should be upset that Davis and Brown say they should beat a team "like the bulls" but instead, we are upset because JC is pouting. We are upset because Rose spoke out after a win.
> ...


You want to know what's more important to us? W's come first, naturally. But after that, here's what I care about more than any other Bulls related issue:

*Bulls forward Tyson Chandler underwent an MRI on Saturday morning in Chicago, and the test showed there was no new injury resulting from Chandler's fall into the crowd Friday night at the United Center.

A member of the Bulls training staff said Chandler's sore lower back was feeling better Saturday, and his status is considered day-to-day.

Chandler said he hopes to play Monday, when the Bulls host the Denver Nuggets.*

http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bsep09.html


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Mixed feelings.

I like Jamals game. And I like his swagger. But he has always stricken me as someone who is more me first then the team. For instance, his constant insistence that he is a PG and nothing else is pure selfishness on his part. He has always been a combo guard who is far closer to Michael Redd then to Bob Cousy. Last year with Jwill, he should have acknowledged it and changed his body to battle it. Instead he sulked. Which he does alot of. He probably will go

However, there is no way that he should have been made the scapegoat. He is leading the club in pts and assts and inspite a little too much one on one, he is doing what the staff asks of him. I can see his being upset on this one. He isnt being used like he was last year when he was looking like an Allstar and then blamed for when things arent going right. Perhaps they ought to go back to the sets he ran last year. Maybe the front office shouldnt draft a PG every year to try and run this kid out of town. The fact is, he is partly to blame for the run but shouldnt have to sit in favor of Kirk. Kirk did alot of things well yesterday, but his PG skills are downright awful. What kirk did well is what you would look for in a 2 guard, not a pg. his outfront game was very bad. and kirk shouldnt start on monday against the nugz. If Jamal lost his job to Scottie Pippen, that would be one thing. but to lose his job to a kid who looked totally lost out there is a sign of total disrespect. 

One last thought. When as an organization are we going to stop being a feeder system for the rest of the NBA. Look at Brand, Miller, Artest and possibly soon Fizer and Crawford. What we do is develop young talent, and then as soon as they have found their game, we find a reason to not like them anymore and deal them away. JC should be the fulltime starter, and another "pg" shouldnt have been drafted. a vet backup should have been brought in, but not taking one at #7. Thats Paxs fault. and i expect Pax to continue the trend of dealing away our young talent right before they break out. I can see JC and Fizer starring somewhere else while we get nothing in return.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

Well, one thing is for sure... We're finding out who is firmly entrenched in the "crawford camp" and who isn't!

One thing that hasn't been mentioned during this whole thread was who was on the floor at the END of the game. Rose and Crawford. When the game was on the line and we had to have stops or make a key basket, the coach had enough confidence in Rose and Crawford to have them on the court during crunch time. Also, they can't be complaining about minutes as each of them played about 3 fewer minutes than their season averages.

I know starting is an honor in this league but I know I've read quotes from Crawford last season during the whole J-Will controversy that stated that he didn't care about starting as long as he was on the floor to finish the game. (I know Marshall has said the same). 

I'm disappointed in both players comments (but not surprised). We won on the road, against the best team in the east so far and against a hated former coach. What more could you ask for? You want to start? Then prove that it means something to you. For the first 6 games, both Rose and Crawford have somewhat sleepwalked through the games. If this is what it takes to wake them up, the so be it.

In Crawfords case, I think Cartwright is trying whatever he can to reach this kid. Jamal Crawford is an immensley talented player. Cartwright knows and sees this. Crawfords problem is that he doesn't quite get the team concept. Bill Cartwright would like nothing better than for Jamal Crawford to evolve into the player he knows he can be. Crawford's success is somewhat directly related to Cartwrights continued employment. I certainly hope Crawford comes around to embrace the team concept. Much like Jordan did after a few seasons. He can be such a special player if he'd just change his game and channel his skills in the direction that benefits the team as opposed to himself.

I'm guessing it can't be Chicago Bulls basketball without a PG controversy. It looks like we have our 2003-04 edition.

Let the games begin!


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

again, if Jamal Crawford would sit in honor of Scottie Pippen, ill buy it. But Kirk Hinrich? thats a huge reach by Bill Cartwright. Midway through the 4th, the Hinrich factor was -8, meaning the Bulls were down by 8 when Hinrich played with about 5 minutes in the 4th. after that i lost track. And the Bulls were still down after one. So it wasnt like that first unit got the job done. If Pippen starts at the 1 on Monday, im fine with it. But if Kirk starts on monday in favor of JC, then we have a problem. cause kirk hasnt earned it.


----------



## FireCartwrightNow (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> Crawford's success is somewhat directly related to Cartwrights continued employment.


Crawford will continue to get screwed as long as Cartwright is the coach. Paxson needs to fire his boy or they both will get canned.


Camp Crawford


----------



## L.O.B (Jun 13, 2002)

Even Budweiser's Leon is more of a team player than these 2 overpaid prima donnas. Boo freeking hoo Jalen and Jamal...

Jamal and Jalen got benched because "their" team the two supposed stars play for, got their *** kicked by 20 + points in 4 games in their first 6. If not mistaken both Jalen and Jamal started for that 2-4 start. 

I am in awe of Jamal's skills as a basketball player but he doesn't come across as player that gets it. I am hoping one day that he realizes that leading a team requires alot more than a sweet cross over and a nice stroke from the outside. Talking about "we" instead of "me" after the biggest win in 5 years would be a nice start.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

In an odd sort of way, these comments by Crawford and Rose (some people seem to be forgetting that Rose made comments just as inflammatory as Crawford's) probably are a good sign. I think a lot of us had started to question whether this team had the talent to ever be that good. Well, with what happened last night - us winning without Chandler, Fizer, and Pippen and having 25 turnovers (9 by our starting point guard) and still beating a very good team on the road - tells us a lot about how talent is not the issue with our blowout losses this year.

Instead these comments and the inspired play last night tell us that this is a team in turmoil. It sounds like there are a lot of bad feelings running around on this team and THIS is the THE reason we have been so bad at times this year. Rose, Crawford, and perhaps even Curry appear to be at odds with Cartwright, and things appear to be getting personal. But it might be better that things got brought to a boiling point last night and that Rose and Crawford made the comments that they did. Perhaps this will clear the air some.

If Cartwright sticks around, I hope that over time he develops a more nuanced approach with his players. Different players react better to different kinds of stimuli, and the tough-love approach probably does not make sense for every player. I suspect that with a different approach, he may very well have been able to get Crawford to play the way he wants him to do without all of the acrimony that has developed out of this tough-love approach. Also, I wonder if Cartwright is able to keep enough distance so that he does not take things too personally when the tough-love approach doesn't work very well.

But with Cartwright inserting Marshall into the starting lineup at SF in Orlando and benching Crawford and Rose in New Orleans (but still playing them a lot of minutes and in crunch time), I like the moves he has made. Perhaps these moves are out of desperation, as Kismet suggests, but regardless I like them. I just hope the Bulls have a good cop to go along with Cartwright's bad cop attitude. They really need a good cop to step in and do his magic.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> That kind of point guard has been dying a slow death in the NBA for quite some time now. You can put on one hand the amount of PGs who do that in the league today.
> ...


No doubt. Some people around here think that an NBA PG should get 12 assists a game and 8 points. Its not that way anymore. Did you see Baron Davis last night? That dude is awesome. Steve Francis? Allen Iverson? (look at his assist numbers this season, he's a PG again). Crawford can be that kind of player. He's that good.

Paxson likes the old school type PG. That's his prerogative. But, if Jamal leaves due to this crap, then we are losing one of our most, if not our most, talented player for nothing. He'll be coming back and burning this team for years to come.

Who led the team in assists last night in 28 minutes? Jamal. Who leads the Bulls in assists this season? Jamal. Scoring? Jamal. He's averaging .5 blocks and 1.4 steals. He's shooting 45% from 3.

His defense needs work and he makes a bad decision every now and then. The turnovers are a little high this year.... no doubt. He should keep his mouth shut after the game and play hard nosed D.

But, you have to remember that he's 23 years old and playing consistent major minutes for the first time.

I'd dump Cartwright in a second to keep Jamal. There are dozens of crappy coaches out there. There are not many players in the world like Jamal Crawford.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Rose and jc have one thing in common. NO matter how bad they have been or are playing they never take any responsiiblity on themselfs. WE are scapegoats. Whey have both played awful. EVerytime rose makes a bad play he either looks at the offical or the sky. Same with JC. He plays perhaps the worse D of any PG in the game but he just does not care. He does not show up at camp with chandler and curry. Some players never have that something that is the difference between winning and losing. It is something insdie a player and has nothing to do with skill.

This is true for both rose and JC. It is all me and f the team. You can say anything you want, the bulls would trade rose in a second to get him out and JC, well why did th bulls draft PG the last two years. JC will spend his whole career talking about how he is a PG instead of working on being what could be one of the best sg in the NBA. But he does not care, he is an immature, selfish litte crybaby who think he knows better than everyone else. Wow, 22 years old and he knows everything. Lets see he had two carelss TO last night in the last 4 minutes. Why, he cares mostly about how he looks.

david


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>giusd</b>!
> Rose and jc have one thing in common. NO matter how bad they have been or are playing they never take any responsiiblity on themselfs. WE are scapegoats. Whey have both played awful. EVerytime rose makes a bad play he either looks at the offical or the sky. Same with JC. He plays perhaps the worse D of any PG in the game but he just does not care. He does not show up at camp with chandler and curry. Some players never have that something that is the difference between winning and losing. It is something insdie a player and has nothing to do with skill.
> 
> This is true for both rose and JC. It is all me and f the team. You can say anything you want, the bulls would trade rose in a second to get him out and JC, well why did th bulls draft PG the last two years. JC will spend his whole career talking about how he is a PG instead of working on being what could be one of the best sg in the NBA. But he does not care, he is an immature, selfish litte crybaby who think he knows better than everyone else. Wow, 22 years old and he knows everything. Lets see he had two carelss TO last night in the last 4 minutes. Why, he cares mostly about how he looks.
> ...


There is a ****load of truth in your questioning of why he doesnt want to be a 2 guard. i mentioned that earlier


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>giusd</b>!
> Rose and jc have one thing in common. NO matter how bad they have been or are playing they never take any responsiiblity on themselfs. WE are scapegoats. Whey have both played awful. EVerytime rose makes a bad play he either looks at the offical or the sky. Same with JC. He plays perhaps the worse D of any PG in the game but he just does not care. He does not show up at camp with chandler and curry. Some players never have that something that is the difference between winning and losing. It is something insdie a player and has nothing to do with skill.
> 
> This is true for both rose and JC. It is all me and f the team. You can say anything you want, the bulls would trade rose in a second to get him out and JC, well why did th bulls draft PG the last two years. JC will spend his whole career talking about how he is a PG instead of working on being what could be one of the best sg in the NBA. But he does not care, he is an immature, selfish litte crybaby who think he knows better than everyone else. Wow, 22 years old and he knows everything. Lets see he had two carelss TO last night in the last 4 minutes. Why, he cares mostly about how he looks.
> ...


crawford
4-9 shooting, 5-5 from the line, 6 assists, 2 turnovers, 3 steals and a game saving block.

rose
10-15 shooting, 10-12 from the line, 5 rebounds, 2 assists a steal and a block (also 3 TOs as a negative)

we don't beat the leading team in the east on the road without these two guys.

and you want to trade them for who? who can we get that will help this team win more? we're 1 win against the nuggets away from the playoffs... and we have not even played that well yet.


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> So because us fans think he should go then players are to ingnore any and everything he says? Fans too? BC is the head coach. Until he is no longer head coach, he is suppose to be respected.


Stupid logic. So dumb it's not worthy of a response.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

let me see if I get this straight ...Jamal Crawford says "its bitterweet, I'm glad we won..."and then finishes on why its bittersweet and it gets 6 pages of crawford is selfish posts 

if you take crawford at his word he believes it signifies the beginning of the end for him as a bull and he's not happy about it and thats why its bittersweet 

its not that hard to decipher any kid with a 4th grade education could do it

i mostly took the quote as something similar to what eddy curry said last year around dec.(they are close friends its very possible they think the same on many things) and he took his benching personal and definitely thought that he needed to move on because the situation was too tough ( i wonder if anyone remembers this) there was also the thing with curry saying "here is your starting pg" i read on this thread to make me think that curry and crawford share the same cartwright is doing these things out of personal reasons vein (by the same token crawford in speaking of the benching was not just speaking of himself but also of rose)

what i dont get is why any quote from crawfordd gets such twisted scrutiny,where people look as hard as they can to make it negative to the point that is all they can see

robinson played ok but not near rose's level so i doubt the switch continues at that spot either

from my veiwpoint hinrich starting was a disaster he didn't play well at all and is no where ready to be a starter in the near future so i'm kind of doubting it stays like this plus cartwright says it was for a better start ...when hinrich left the game in the 1st quarter the bulls were down by 3 ,when he came back they were up by 5 so if this game is an indication in cartwright's searh for the reason the bulls as of late have been getting off to bad starts...scratch rose and JC off the list


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fl_flash</b>!
> One thing that hasn't been mentioned during this whole thread was who was on the floor at the END of the game. Rose and Crawford. When the game was on the line and we had to have stops or make a key basket, the coach had enough confidence in Rose and Crawford to have them on the court during crunch time. Also, they can't be complaining about minutes as each of them played about 3 fewer minutes than their season averages.
> 
> I know starting is an honor in this league but I know I've read quotes from Crawford last season during the whole J-Will controversy that stated that he didn't care about starting as long as he was on the floor to finish the game. (I know Marshall has said the same).
> ...


Great post. Crawford and Rose still played significant and made major contributions. They are still very important members of the team.

For those who question starting Hinrich. I didn't agree with it. We threw the kid into the wolves. Just coming back after a virus, it would have been tough. It wasn't done to reward him. It's obvious it was done to sent a message to Jamal that:

Even though you're the starting PG, you don't own the position. If you don't play the way we want, you won't play.


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

I really don't know what Jamal Crawford needs to do to make that joke of a coach happy. Jamal is going to be a very special player in this league, but I'm afraid it won't be as a Bull if BC is still coach. It just seems that Cartwright is trying to blame Crawford for so many problems.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> I really don't know what Jamal Crawford needs to do to make that joke of a coach happy. Jamal is going to be a very special player in this league, but I'm afraid it won't be as a Bull if BC is still coach. It just seems that Cartwright is trying to blame Crawford for so many problems.


I'm sure if JC played the way BC wanted, he wouldn't have a problem. This is the second time Crawford has made comments after games (incidently both after wins). While I don't agree with what Crawford is doing, it suggests that either: 

BC doesn't communicate well with his players. JC hasn't taken it up with him, or feels he can't do that.

Crawford refuses to play the way BC wants him too.

Crawford thinks the team revolves around him.

Want do you think Pippen is thinking right now? He probably thought he would get away from all this stuff after facing it in Portland.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
> Crawford refuses to play the way BC wants him too.


Cartwright is a moron.



> Crawford thinks the team revolves around him.


What makes you think this? Him leading the team in assists? Him saying he was happy the team won last night?

What's wrong with being upset after being benched?

Do you really want players on the Bulls that are happy to be benched? We have one that is indifferent.... his name is EROB.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

I suggested Crawford thinks the team revolves around him. Doesn't mean I think it.

Simply, all BC is asking JC to do is to play within the flow of the offense, and try create for others. If he can't do it, or feels someone else can do it better, than he has said he will play them.



> What's wrong with being upset after being benched?


Nothing. They should be angry. Just don't go to the media. J-Will did the wrong thing last year when he did. JC and Rose were wrong to do it this season.

Also, I think BC is wrong to go through the media to talk to players. Do it face to face. However, we don't know all the information. Maybe he has and the players aren't listening? We can all make judgments but we don't know all the information.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Paxson's name hasn't been brought up much in this thread, but all must remember that he has seemed as dubious as Cartwright when it comes to Jamal. Crawford fans should realize that removing BC from his coaching duties would not necessarily free Crawford.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> Paxson's name hasn't been brought up much in this thread, but all must remember that he has seemed as dubious as Cartwright when it comes to Jamal. Crawford fans should realize that removing BC from his coaching duties would not necessarily free Crawford.


Agreed. It's even more important.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Benny the Bull</b>!
> 
> 
> Agreed. It's even more important.


Yup. If Jamal's going to go, its going to be Pax's call. He does not like him... no doubt. Maybe another 9 TO game by Potter will change his mind.


----------



## Chi_Lunatic (Aug 20, 2002)

ok baron...you don't think we'll be in the playoffs? watch we get the 8th seed and them dudes still first....the hornets never really been a threat to the bulls...that would be a GOOD series


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

if the bulls trade crawford or let him walk i will be very disapointed in this franchise for awhile. Ill be even more critical of cartwright then I am now. And me and I bet alot of people will put paxson under a microscope and give him very little room for error as our gm. I really don't want to see this become a Bob Whitsitte incident with the blazers. Jamal can ball, we need to play a style of game that our best point guard can play because its the point guards responsibility to set everything up and get a tempo going. It really pisses me off that we have a guy as talented as Jamal and we are going to let him go. I remain a fan but sometimes this team is hard to watch because of what our organization does at times.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

Oh good lord just unecessary bickering. People right now the Bulls are walking a tight rope. This season can turn around and head in the direction of a playoff berth or it can crash and burn and we could be looking at lottery land again. The anti-Cartwright sentiment has got to go. The absent-minded immediately blame the coach when things aren't going well. If Cartwright was blowing close games like Grady Little I'd understand, but he isn't suiting up and getting blown out every other night. The players play...it's Cartwright's job to decide who plays. Last night he played certain guys and we won. Rose and Crawford may be pissed, but they need to understand BC's motivation. Rose certainly looked like he got the message. The problem is you have four types of players in any situation. 

a.guys who think they're better than they actually are and complain and cry about everything

b.guys who are good and know it

c.guys who keep their mouth shut, work hard, and do all the dirty things

d.guys who are soft

Right now the Bulls starting 5 has two a types, two d types, and 1 c type. Rose or Crawford has to go. Look at the Mavs. They had too many scorers and they HAD good chemistry. Cuban set this team back a couple of years. Just cause you have the most talented five doesn't mean ur the better team...see Argentina vs United States Of America. If I'm Pax I find a deal where we send Crawford and Fizer for a starting wing and a veteran point. If we can get that you have to make the deal.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

crawford's as good as gone...:sigh:


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> crawford
> ...


This line for both players is well above their season production, and their intensity on the court was as well. If they did not get set on the bench, we could have expected the same low energy 20+ point blow-out that we've gotten 4 times already this season.

These two are a pair of the weakest minded players I've ever rooted for, and I'm about ready to stop rooting for them. Am I a fan of BC so far? Less and less. Does this mean that I have to side with J & J on this issue? Absolutely not. Why does it have to come down to Big Bill sitting them for the first couple of minutes of the game (make no mistake, they played starters minutes) for them to come out with the desire to win that should exist every night?

I don't even care about the post-game comments. They are unimportant blather to the media. Talk is cheap. Tomorrow we'll be reading about how they "respect and admire" BC. They'll do that because he does what they want. This whole episode is an extreme demonstration of exactly how much some of the players disrespect their coach. "I'll show him for benching me, look at me light up the Hornets". Where the hell is this intensity the rest of their respective careers? That's the disrespectful part.

*Yes*, BC has to stop airing his dirty underwear on my television screen. *Yes*, BC has been very inconsistant with his substitutions and discipline patterns. *Yes*, BC has apparently lost the respect of this team and should probably be replaced. But all of you who are whining about BC's tactics also need to realize that if the "star" players were playing to their own over-hyped potential, BC wouldn't have to employ these tactics, inconsistant or otherwise. BC has become the school teacher handing out detentions. "Why did I get a detention for chewing gum when Eddy didn't?", says Jamal. *WHY THE HELL ARE YOU CHEWING GUM IN THE FIRST PLACE?!?!* If Jalen and Jamal had been playing like they played last night all season, we wouldn't even have this thread.

In fact, we wouldn't have had half of the threads on this board. We also wouldn't have had Jay or Kirk. We'd have had a guy who plays as well as he thinks he does and whom management would be tripping over themselves to re-sign.

I revert to my mantra from last season for both Jamal and Jalen.

*Shut up and play ball!*

Last night was not the night on which any decisions will be based. Last night was a picture for us into what these guys have been thinking all along. Did last night cause them to rebel against Big Bill? No. Too late. Last night showed just how much disrespect they've had for him all along.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

I really enjoyed reading that thread!

I been with Bulls, for 14 years, and videotaped almost every their game since 1990.

I was upset many time when we had lost a good player or did not draft/trade one, when it was an opportunity to do that. But it could not turn me away from the team, because of that. We have lost Grant, Pipen, Kukos, Artest, Brand, MJ and it was hard to accept that, but many of us did. And now we are talking again about Jamal ‘s comments and possibility of loosing him, so what ! What did Jamal “bring on the table” for the team in compare with above-mentioned names? 

He is a talented guy and has a lot of potential, like many others NBA players. I sincerely wish for him to find the team where he can utilize all his potentials, but we need a team production and we need it now.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> This line for both players is well above their season production, and their intensity on the court was as well. If they did not get set on the bench, we could have expected the same low energy 20+ point blow-out that we've gotten 4 times already this season.
> ...


I agree with you. I think the benching was a good idea. But, I don't think we should get rid of Rose and Crawford. Rose is a frustrating player to root for and will never lead a team to a title. He gives a solid 85-90% every night out. Which kind of sucks. But... he's effective at what he does.

The problem I see is that Crawford is starting to act like Rose. Two Roses with the ball all the time could be trouble. I wish we could transfer Chandler's brain into all the players on the team. Oh well.

Just don't trade Crawford to keep Cartwright. That would be a bad call. Let's hope they can all get it together. Sometimes it takes a little time for young players to “get it.” Crawford has until the end of the season in my book.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree with you. I think the benching was a good idea. But, I don't think we should get rid of Rose and Crawford. Rose is a frustrating player to root for and will never lead a team to a title. He gives a solid 85-90% every night out. Which kind of sucks. But... he's effective at what he does.
> ...


Nicely stated. I think my book goes something like that, too. Also, judging from the the state of his contract negotiations, Pax is reading our book.

I hope he turns it around and grows a little mentally tougher. I think he's got all the skills in the world, but he's too soft to win.


----------



## Mongoose (Jun 24, 2003)

Good post, Wynn. I have little sympathy for Jamal and Jalen, as well. They've got great skills, and I want them to do well, but please. Were they doing well before they were benched? Rose, hell no, and Crawford, a sub-40% shooting percentage and taking the most shots on the team weren't making the coach happy. Were they in the game at the end? Yes. Did they play a lot? Both played roughly 30 minutes. Did they do well? Sure they did. Did the Bulls win? Yes, they did, and on the road, to boot. So why all the *****ing and moaning about disrespect? Fine, get mad, throw in a couple more great games, and maybe you'll actually show that you _deserve_ to be starters after the last couple of blowouts.


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>T.Shock</b>!
> The players play...it's Cartwright's job to decide who plays. Last night he played certain guys and we won. Rose and Crawford may be pissed, but they need to understand BC's motivation. Rose certainly looked like he got the message. The problem is you have four types of players in any situation.



Well said, T.Shock! By the way if Rose and Mal weren't benched I doubt we would of won the game. :no:


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rlucas4257</b>!
> again, if Jamal Crawford would sit in honor of Scottie Pippen, ill buy it. But Kirk Hinrich? thats a huge reach by Bill Cartwright. Midway through the 4th, the Hinrich factor was -8, meaning the Bulls were down by 8 when Hinrich played with about 5 minutes in the 4th. after that i lost track. And the Bulls were still down after one. So it wasnt like that first unit got the job done. If Pippen starts at the 1 on Monday, im fine with it. But if Kirk starts on monday in favor of JC, then we have a problem. cause kirk hasnt earned it.


How about it doesn't matter who starts as long as the team WINS.


The word Bulls Fan doesn't apply to a lot of people any more.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> How about it doesn't matter who starts as long as the team WINS.
> ...


You mean all of the fair weather fans that aren't here anymore?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Here is who you guys should hate:



> Paxson recently said he gave Cartwright the green light to sit any player he felt wasn't producing.


If Tyson hadn't been hurt, Eddy probably would have gotten it too.


Why all this controvesy. The TEAM won.

How would Tyson have responded if it had been him?


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> How would Tyson have responded if it had been him?


In all honestly, I believe Tyson would of have understood the benching and shrugged it off. This guy is a true team player. :yes:


----------



## Mr. Bill (Nov 26, 2002)

Did anyone else notice that after crawford hit that half court shot at the end of the first quarter, BC met him on his way back to the bench and talked to him for about 30 seconds? It didn't look to me like he was happy that crawford hit the shot at all. Actually it looked like he was criticizing jamal for something. Crartwright is such a jerk to JC. I mean for god's sake, he just hit a half court shot, let him be happy about it for 10 seconds. He was probably telling him that he'd rather crawford pass the ball in that situation.

I have to say I agree with Crawford on this one. He's been completely mistreated by this organization. He's clearly earned the starting spot and he is our most qualified PG. I thought BC believed in "earning your minutes." What in the hell has Hinrich done to earn a starting spot! 

It's almost better that he pulled Rose too, so that it looks like he was just trying to be "crazy" and shake things up. If he had just singled out JC I think his reaction would have been even worse.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Bill</b>!
> It's almost better that he pulled Rose too, so that it looks like he was just trying to be "crazy" and shake things up. If he had just singled out JC I think his reaction would have been even worse.


Good point.


----------



## Athlon33.6 (Jul 31, 2003)

I remember that also, Mr. Bill. That was so hilarious. LOL, yeah he probably wanted Crawford to pass the ball.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

The benching worked. Jalen played the best game of the season.
I have no idea what he is complaining about b/c he's plained sucked so far this year. For all the accolades we've given Jalen Rose for being a 'consummate professional'... this is garbage. You're the highest paid Bull Jalen and a max player, play like it. Yesterday he did.

Jamal is another story. I'm not sure if the 'writing is on the wall' just because he lost a starting spot for one game. In fact, I'm growing tired of all this controversy surrounding Jamal. Is there a more loved and more hated player in Chicago sports? Maybe Sammy Sosa... but Jamal would be a close second.

I'm not a huge fan of Jamal, but the kid has talent and I'd like him to remain a Bull. He is a shoot first PG... but not in the same class as Baron, Francis, PArker, Arenas. Why? Those young studs all penetrate and finish. Crawford doesn't. And no, I don't expect him to magically experience some epiphany and somehow become a drive/dish/finisher... especially in year 4. He plays the game like there's a dome around 10 ft from the basket that he has to work around. Sheesh.

Crawford and Rose, just shut up and play. Win some games, heck win a bunch of games and don't air your agenda to the media.


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

This team has no chemistry, and the bickering doesn't help. I'll have a smile on my face the day Pax replaces BC and trades both JC and JR.


----------



## Laid-Backness06 (Nov 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> I'm not a huge fan of Jamal, but the kid has talent and I'd like him to remain a Bull. He is a shoot first PG... but not in the same class as Baron, Francis, PArker, Arenas. Why? Those young studs all penetrate and finish. Crawford doesn't. And no, I don't expect him to magically experience some epiphany and somehow become a drive/dish/finisher... especially in year 4. He plays the game like there's a dome around 10 ft from the basket that he has to work around. Sheesh.


Right on.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Athlon33.6</b>!
> 
> 
> In all honestly, I believe Tyson would of have understood the benching and shrugged it off. This guy is a true team player. :yes:


has tyson ever been benched before?

if it happens then we'll know


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Athlon33.6</b>!
> 
> 
> In all honestly, I believe Tyson would of have understood the benching and shrugged it off. This guy is a true team player. :yes:


Exactly my point.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> This line for both players is well above their season production, and their intensity on the court was as well.


As I'm slowly wading through this thread...(thanks to all the cats who quoted me while I was asleep back on page 4. I might get back to you and respond if I remember)...but I wanted to point out that a lot of people are saying BC's benching had a profound effect on Crawford and Rose's play--Rose, yes. Crawford no. Crawford's line tonight is pretty much par the course for what he does every night. Except for two games ago againts Orlando when he had a marvelous game of 29/8/6. But yeah, he's totally to blame for our misfortunes


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

All I can say is it's one thing to be a lightning rod for controversy for a _winning team._ But when your individual trials and tribulations become a public focal point year after year for a team that hasn't posted a winning record in five years, something needs to change. The subject of Jamal Crawford and his individual successes and failures have become priority #1 on this board for the past two seasons. Some might even say his performances have taken presidence over the team's won/loss record for a number of posters on this board.

I'm at the point where for me it no longer matters if he's the second coming or not. I want to see the Bulls return to their winning ways and I really don't care who's on the court when it happens. God bless Jamal. But at this point I wish they'd ship his sorry a$$ somewhere else so we can all refocus on what matters most in here: getting to the damn playoffs and one day winning another championship. I don't care how good he is or he becomes. JC is not and never will be the linchpin to Chicago's basketball success. If he had that kind of greatness within him we'd have seen it by now. Enough is enough. Please Mr. Paxson, for the psychological well being of all Bulls fans, trade Crawford somewhere, anywhere, and lets move forward.


----------



## Crawscrew (Jul 15, 2002)

I know this may be a shock to some people, but I think the reason BC is so tough on Jamal, is because he knows Jamal can be better than what he is now. You never see a coach ride a 12th man on the team hard, he always rides the top players the hardest...with that said, I think there needs to be more communication between the two. If you bench a player, tell them why, don't just say figure it out yourself...Jamal shouldn't have said what he said, even if he is right (which he was), you don't criticize the team, ever, especially after a win. I think hinrich should start, but so should Jamal and Jalen. Jamal is a natural 2-guard (he came into the draft as a 2-guard with some point skills). Put him at the two where his passing goes from poor (at the 1) to great (at the 2) =see Allen Iverson.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Gawd.. 1 day later and I still can't believe what was said.

Jalen - this guy is the consummate professional, everyone and their mother has given this guy props for <b>NOT</b> speaking out the last 1.5 years on a sucky Bulls team.. he looses his starting job for a night and CRIES TO THE MEDIA? Jalen, you played your best game of the year and the best game in a long while.. hmmm.... maybe just maybe the benching lit a fire under your *ss?! You're making max dollars so sorry I'm not shedding any tears for you bro

Jamal - talk about a sensitive kid, I thought he'd put his ways behind him but I'm not sure anymore... I have no idea how 'the writing is on the wall', its obvious BC was just trying to send a message to his players, especially the starting unit w/ Jalen and Jamal. And I think the message was sent, mainly 'you are not more important than the team'. How was it received? 'If I'm not starting then they must be wanting to trade me'. Sheesh.

Question for everyone, Jamal has had feuds with coaches on every level. A physical fight w/ an assistant coach at UMich, Tim Floyd's doghouse (Floyd can actually coach everyone, look at the Princeton offense he's running in NO), and now repeated run-ins with Bill Cartwright. After a while, shouldn't the players shoulder some of the blame?!


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> Question for everyone, Jamal has had feuds with coaches on every level. A physical fight w/ an assistant coach at UMich, Tim Floyd's doghouse (Floyd can actually coach everyone, look at the Princeton offense he's running in NO), and now repeated run-ins with Bill Cartwright. After a while, shouldn't the players shoulder some of the blame?!


I don't know if I'd go so far as to say Tim Floyd can actually coach. The hornets have the most talent of any team in the east. And yet they still lost to the bulls. He's winning right now because Baron Davis is playing out of his mind.

What exactly is the blame that Crawford should be shouldering? That he's been leading the team in scoring and assists and his teamates have played like uninspired ****s? How is that his fault? The only real problem with Crawfords game right now, for a 3rd year player who has never had the confidence of the organization behind him, is his defense. Which he played pretty good defense last night. And we have plenty of players who are just as guilty as crawford of poor defense.

Why should Crawford be taking all of the blame for our losses? So far he's been benched twice and Rose once. Why is it Crawford's fault that his teammates didn't come into this season ready to play? While they were all sitting out the preseason taking things at their own pace, Crawford was out there playing in preseason.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't know if I'd go so far as to say Tim Floyd can actually coach. The hornets have the most talent of any team in the east. And yet they still lost to the bulls. He's winning right now because Baron Davis is playing out of his mind.
> ...


Homie get your facts straight.

A coach is only as good as his players. The offensive scheme he has setup has really opened up the game for Baron Davis. My god, they beat the LA LAkers the night before, and handed them the first lost of the season. And yes, they did lose to the Bulls last night, it happens.

Crawford is in his 4th season in the league, not third. The problem isn't only 'defense' though he played well last night. Its leadership from your PG, involving other teammates, actually driving the lane to keep the opponents off balance, finishing around the hoop, etc.

I'm not putting the sole blame on a poor start on Crawford. But I am putting blame on Crawford for being a whiner who seems to have a 'me-first' tendancy that has disrupted teams and coaches on every level he has played. Do the research bud, there's plenty of history with Jamal's run-ins with coaches.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

superdave,

Good post !!!


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Homie get your facts straight.


You mind straightening me out on what exactly you mean? I said 3rd year instead of 4th year. That's the only fact that we're dealing with. Everything else is pretty subjective.

Don't overvalue that win over the lakers too much. The lakers were coming off a double-ot win over the spurs from the night before. And I don't think the lakers are as good as people think they are right now.

I haven't seen enough of the Hornets to say for sure that Floyd is a good coach. Lets wait and see how they deal with adversity.

The problem with Crawford that you state, isn't a problem with Crawford. It's with a coach that doesn't know how to construct the best system for his players to flourish. Jamal involves his teammates, he leads the team in assists, if his teammates just hit their open shots that he gets them, then he'd have 10 assists per game.

And where's this plenty of info on Crawford's run-ins with coaches? You only listed one incident where Crawford went at a coach. The other two were coaches going at him. Since there's plenty of this info out there, why don't you supply some of it?


----------



## Agent911 (Jul 11, 2002)

Great job on this thread y'all.

My own thoughts and favorite points borrowed from y'all:

1. Jalen and Jamal whining about being disrespected is pathetic. The path to winning is aggressiveness, focus, and hard work. Only Tyson has shown that this season. No one else's play has been worthy of respect.

2. Bill and Crawford just don't speak the same language. They are Mars and Venus in terms of their inability to communicate and comprehend each other. I think that it is more Bill's responsibility to become bilingual or find a translator, but he keeps trying to SPEAK SLOWER AND LOUDER SO CRAWFORD CAN UNDERSTAND HIM. This does nothing but anger everyone involved.

3. I liked what I saw from Hinrich yesterday in terms of style: he was wonderfully aggressive on both ends of the floor. On D, good help and recovery. Did you see him close out on 3-pt shooters? Beautiful. On offense, he was creating and exploiting cracks in the defense. He ran interesting angles and displayed a sense of purpose. The speed and intensity with which he played had a lot to do with the win.

Regarding the turnovers: I saw 25% lack of experience with teammates, 25% great D by NO, 25% stupid rookie, and 25% plain old turnovers. I am very confident that he can outgrow 50% of that. Yes, I would expect 4 TOs from an aggressive point against the likes of NO. 

The Hornets' press has two aims: steal the ball and/or drain the shot clock. Aggressive Kirk got creamed by door number 1, and tenative Craw got away with choosing door number 2 because of outstanding shooting by Rose & Marshall. 

4. I think the solution to the problems of Jamal, Bill, and the Bulls is simply: play Jamal as the 2. The initiator is Pip, Rose, or Kirk. Focus on Jamal's strengths instead of carping on his weaknesses. He does not create or exploit cracks in the defense, but he sure can shoot. Let him.

Peace.


----------



## Bullsmaniac (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Agent911</b>!
> Great job on this thread y'all.
> 
> My own thoughts and favorite points borrowed from y'all:
> ...



APPLAUD!!!! APPLAUD!!! I agree on ALL points!!!! very well done!


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> You mind straightening me out on what exactly you mean? I said 3rd year instead of 4th year. That's the only fact that we're dealing with. Everything else is pretty subjective.
> 
> ...


Here ya go smart guy:

http://www.pub.umich.edu/daily/2000/may/05-08-2000/news/13.html
http://www.freep.com/sports/umich/um18_20000118.htm
http://espn.go.com/ncb/news/2000/0204/335876.html
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/basketball/craw01.shtml


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

Well JC's comment of leading the team in scoring came from 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...gamer,1,2778121.story?coll=cs-bulls-headlines

near the bottom.


----------

