# "Official" - Crawford has asked to be traded [from 11/2002]



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

*"Official" - Crawford has asked to be traded*

Crawford said he recently requested a trade through his agent, to no avail.

"They won't trade me," Crawford said. "They said that I was an important part of the future here."

More likely, general manager Jerry Krause has yet to receive an offer he can't refuse at this point.

Crawford and Fizer have been the subjects of much speculation in the last year, and the odds are that one or both will be moved before the trade deadline.

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dssports/pro/172sd3.htm

Seems more like a Bulls thread to me, but I'll leave a redirect  MikeDC


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

*Re: "Official" - Crawford has asked to be traded*



> Originally posted by <b>SALO</b>!
> Crawford said he recently requested a trade through his agent, to no avail.
> 
> "They won't trade me," Crawford said. "They said that I was an important part of the future here."
> ...



Sorry I didn't mean for this to be an "official thread" sort of post, just wanted to let you all know that it can now be confirmed that JC has asked for a trade.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

No prob, man!

I'm just trying to keep things neat and orderly


----------



## LoaKhoet (Aug 20, 2002)

Not only Crawford, a few other Bulls are probably asking to be traded. ERob, Fizer, and Crawford. Deep inside, them 3 want to be traded.


----------



## Tri_N (Aug 19, 2002)

Just wondering... Where does JC think he will actually get any minutes? Get real, JC. Nobody wants you and this attitude will only put you in a worse situation. I guess he doesn't want to improve his game....


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

He would find minutes with the Wizards next season more than likely because of his relationship with MJ.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

what about larry hughes? would jamal be getting any more PT behind larry that he is already getting behind jay?


----------



## Killuminati (Jul 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> He would find minutes with the Wizards next season more than likely because of his relationship with MJ.


That would be a good choice. Washington needs a PG anyways, right now they got Hughes there who most definitely is not a PG.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> what about larry hughes? would jamal be getting any more PT behind larry that he is already getting behind jay?


I was speaking of next season. Not sure if Stack returns and if he doesn't, Hughes slides to off guard. Hughes has played well as has Lue though so I have no idea.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

i think the prime candidates for jamal's services are Denver, Cleveland?, miami, detroit?, lakers, memphis?, utah,toronto, new york, washington and minnesota 

kareem rush for jamal?
chris jeffries for jamal?
james posey for jamal and future pick?
jamal and future pick for battier?
jamal for tyshaun prince and 2nd rounder?
jamal for deshawn stevenson?


the reason krause is so hesitant to trade jamal for anything less then all stars and maybe kneepad could back me up here, is becuase jamal already has 2+ years of expirience with the triangle, and he isnt about to just throw away that knowledge for someone who will take years to learn the system themselves


----------



## fredsmooth21 (Nov 16, 2002)

I wish they would trade the guy. J-Dub is the future of this team not crappy JC.


----------



## LoaKhoet (Aug 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> i think the prime candidates for jamal's services are Denver, Cleveland?, miami, detroit?, lakers, memphis?, utah,toronto, new york, washington and minnesota
> 
> kareem rush for jamal?
> ...


Not bad deals for us!! I would take any of those deals. But, believe it or not, i think those players are out of our reach.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Teams that need a pg "for the future" *prospect*:

Miami
Boston
Cleveland
Denver
Minnesota (Strickland short term solution)
Seattle (two old guards, one disgruntled)
Orlando
Wiz
Detroit (Billups isn't the answer)
Lakers
========================
Teams that may make changes based on inability
of existing PG to play within coach's system

Memphis
===============================
Teams that have small SG's, that could be complemented
by a tall PG

Atlanta (JC may the 3 yr older rook look silly)
Philadelphia (Snow- history of nagging injuries)
=========================
Team with mediocre established guards
and suspect prospects:

New York
============================
Team with old pg's and suspect prospects:

Utah
======================

Remember Craw's just 22, so picking him up is equivalent
to drafting a college senior


So that's about 15 teams IMO that Craw could find more minutes on


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LoaKhoet</b>!
> 
> 
> Not bad deals for us!! I would take any of those deals. But, believe it or not, i think those players are out of our reach.



Kareem Rush hasn't done anything...pass

chris jeffries for jamal?...Toronto needs to add a pick,
but what will Jeffries contribute soon? Probably not much.
jeffries would just be more content on the bench

james posey for jamal and future pick?

Posey actually has done something in the league,
and you seem to think he's of less value than Jefffries or Rush
who haven't done anything.

Where do all these 3's play? 
Bulls clearly need another big body before another 3.

jamal and future pick for battier?

Battier has peaked already.....pass..plus his minutes are down.
Battier simply isn't athletic enough

jamal for tyshaun prince and 2nd rounder?
Prince hasn't done anything

jamal for deshawn stevenson?

A medium size two doesn't do much for the Bulls
===========================

If the Bulls are going to try to get a supersized 2 (TMac , Pierce size), than a player worth looking into who is buried behind Pierce is Kedric Brown.


If mason comes back and has defensive skills as well as combo guard ones, a Craw for Brown+ top 20 protected pick trade would work for me.

Though don't see Craw going anywhere esp. not until the deadline


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Kareem Rush hasn't done anything...pass


 its not about what he has done, its about what he will do 



> chris jeffries for jamal?...Toronto needs to add a pick,
> but what will Jeffries contribute soon? Probably not much.
> jeffries would just be more content on the bench


 defensive minded swingman is what we need 



> james posey for jamal and future pick?
> 
> Posey actually has done something in the league,
> and you seem to think he's of less value than Jefffries or Rush
> who haven't done anything.


posey for jamal and future pick is more then what we'd give up for jeffries or rush, so i dont see how that shows anyone thinking he's of less value then those two rookies 



> Where do all these 3's play?
> Bulls clearly need another big body before another 3.


the bulls lead the league in rebounding, we need perimiter D to stop the michael redds of the league from lighting us up 



> jamal and future pick for battier?
> 
> Battier has peaked already.....pass..plus his minutes are down.
> Battier simply isn't athletic enough


we dont need future stars or superfreaks, we needs solid contributors, you cant possibly ask for more then battier if all we'r giving up is jamal 



> jamal for tyshaun prince and 2nd rounder?
> Prince hasn't done anything


its not about what he has done, its about what he will do 



> jamal for deshawn stevenson?
> 
> A medium size two doesn't do much for the Bulls


not really high on stevenson myself 
===========================



> If the Bulls are going to try to get a supersized 2 (TMac , Pierce size), than a player worth looking into who is buried behind Pierce is Kedric Brown.


he hasnt done anything, why would you want him? 



> If mason comes back and has defensive skills as well as combo guard ones, a Craw for Brown+ top 20 protected pick trade would work for me.
> 
> Though don't see Craw going anywhere esp. not until the deadline


 agreed


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Battier would be an excellent pickup for the Bulls.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

battier losing min. daily on the grizz

the grizzlies aren't even as good as the bulls so how much time do you think he'll get on the bulls

plus the bulls would need a point guard if they traded JC not another 2-3 swingman of which they have a glut already.

this isn't fantasy b-ball the players have to fit in somewhere.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I'd be overjoyed to get Battier for Crawford. 

Even if Battier has peaked, the question is whether Crawford ever becomes as good as him. Yeah, Battier's numbers are down, but so are Crawford's. Does that mean that Crawford has peaked too?

Of course not.

The reality is that a hot shot rookie has come in and taken some of the role that each player undertook last year. That doesn't mean that either of them are any _worse_ than they were before, or that they're not going to get better.

Battier would fit as the Bulls 3 perfectly. He's a good ball handler, a very good defender, and a good three point shooter. He would allow us to actually implement our off-season plan of playing Rose at SG while still giving us the lift of using Marshall as the sixth man.


----------



## BamaBull (Jun 24, 2002)

*I would support this trade 100%!!!*

I wanted the Bulls to draft battier when he came out...I think you hit it right on mike...he is a GOOD all around player....JK..just say yes.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> I'd be overjoyed to get Battier for Crawford.
> 
> Even if Battier has peaked, the question is whether Crawford ever becomes as good as him. Yeah, Battier's numbers are down, but so are Crawford's. Does that mean that Crawford has peaked too?
> ...



Battier couldn't play with Rose for the same reason ERob can't play with Rose, that being neither Battier or ERob can switch off and guard Jay Williams' speedy little man like Hassel can and Hoiberg tries to do.

With Rose in the line-up as the 2/3, the other 3/2 has to be quick enough to switch and guard Cassel, Kidd, Jason Will and all the other point guards that the Bulls don't even try to match JWill up against any more.

I'm really excited about JWill on offense, his fearlessness and agression while pushing the ball, but his matador defense really creates a lot of player substitution problems. Either opposing
PG's shoot over, or run past JWill. 

Contrary to reports, Rose and JWill can play pretty well together on offense... both get a number of touches and share the ball. The real compatibility problem is on defense. If JWill is on the court, a defensive 2 has to be on the court to switch off against the quick 1. Rose isn't this player. Another more 3 than 2 (Jeffries, Battier, et cera) won't get Rose's minutes and also isn't a hassel type player. Thus defensively the Bulls are weak at the 1 and 3, or actually the 2,and 3 since hassel is switching.

In lieu of some of this resoning, their actually is some logic to a Spree/Rose trade, since this puts a better pure 2 on the floor w/
some defense skills, opening up minutes for a real 3. Then a Craw for Posey, or Battier trade may make some sense. Though Rose brings other aspects to the game on the O end, so as was the case with last years trade, d was sacrificed for 'o'


Esp. since Artest was an exception to the 2/3 rule becuase he could actually guard 1's as well. 

If he is as advertized, Mason may fit the hassel decription, so I'm eager to see his game.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> its not about what he has done, its about what he will do


can't the same be said about JC, Fizer or ERob???? 



> defensive minded swingman is what we need


Still won't be able to guard JWill's man for him....so he'll
only play if the Bulls are willing to sit down jalen 



> posey for jamal and future pick is more then what we'd give up for jeffries or rush, so i dont see how that shows anyone thinking he's of less value then those two rookies


The trade proposed as I read it was the other way around ie. Craw for Posey and a pick



> the bulls lead the league in rebounding, we need perimiter D to stop the michael redds of the league from lighting us up


What do you expect when your 2 guard is running around trying to guard the other teams pg who is either shooting over or running by the man who is suppose to be defending him.

Hopefully Mason can actually play defense as well as the PG spot.



> we dont need future stars or superfreaks, we needs solid contributors, you cant possibly ask for more then battier if all we'r giving up is jamal


Battier on a good team would be riding the bench.....wait, Battier on a 0-10 team is riding the bench. The guy is the type of Dukie that JWill isn't. 



> its not about what he has done, its about what he will do


can't the same be said about JC, Fizer or ERob???? 



> not really high on stevenson myself
> ===========================
> 
> 
> he hasnt done anything, why would you want him?


 Now let me quote.......

"...its not about what he has done, its about what he will do..."

Actually K. brown was tearing up the summer leagues. The guy's a beast, but he plays behind Paul Pierce- arguably the best player in the league.

Now Brown's situation may be somewhat analogous to a certain player stuck behind VC in Toronto to whom your idiom when applied actually made some sense..



> agreed


Unfrotunately, boston was willing to deal J.johnson becuase of K. brown, so they might not give him away so readily.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> The reality is that a hot shot rookie has come in and taken some of the role that each player undertook last year. That doesn't mean that either of them are any _worse_ than they were before, or that they're not going to get better.
> .


For battier, which "hot" rookie?

He got beat out by Goricik at the 2, and Gooden at the 3.

Plus Gooden really even isn't a 3


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

I like the Battier for Crawford deal alot... Battier losing minutes isn't because he has peaked, it's because they have Marcus Fizer Jr. in Drew Gooden. That guy cannot pass the ball, period. Not to mention Sidney Lowe being that expert rotation guy...

I also think he'd be a perfect compliment to Jalen because he plays hard nosed D and doesn't mind doing it. He can always take on the tougher D responsiblity and give Jalen more breathing room.

How about this deal?

F Eddie Robinson, G Jamal Crawford and a future pick (2nd rounder?) to Memphis for F/G Shane Battier and F/C Lorenzen Wright. It works with the CBA I'm pretty sure.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> I like the Battier for Crawford deal alot... Battier losing minutes isn't because he has peaked, it's because they have Marcus Fizer Jr. in Drew Gooden. That guy cannot pass the ball, period. Not to mention Sidney Lowe being that expert rotation guy...
> 
> I also think he'd be a perfect compliment to Jalen because he plays hard nosed D and doesn't mind doing it. He can always take on the tougher D responsiblity and give Jalen more breathing room.
> ...


i think memphis would prefer brevin knight replace wright in the deal seeing how jamal would come in as the 2nd point guard at first


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> 
> 
> For battier, which "hot" rookie?
> ...


Gooden's playing the 3. And yeah, he is a hot shot. He's playing above pretty much everyone's expectations.

Giricik actually looks pretty damn good too. Wouldn't you say a rook that can step in and drop 30 points is a hot shot?

In any case, he's getting time and opportunities that were Battier's last year, just as JWill is getting time and opportunities that were Crawford's last year.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Shane Battier > Trent Hassell

A Crawford-Battier swap works under the CBA. I would do that trade in a heartbeat. Reason being:

1) Battier is a team player - unfortunately for him, his running mate this year Drew Gooden is a black hole.... ask anyone who follows the Grizz, his offensive numbers are down for that reason

2) Battier is a good defender - think a bigger more physical Trent Hassell

3) Battier can do more things offensively than Hassell
(maybe a move to the bench will spark a decent jumper from Trent)

4) Dukie-reunion w/ Jay Williams

Jay-Jalen-Shane-Tyson-Eddy
Trent-Donyell-Eddie-Blount-Bax



VD


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> Shane Battier > Trent Hassell
> 
> A Crawford-Battier swap works under the CBA. I would do that trade in a heartbeat. Reason being:
> ...


I like Battier for all those reasons, plus he's a 2nd year player who can grow with the other young guys on the Bulls. Plus, though you didn't say it explicitly, he is the kind of versatile player that fits in the triangle well.

Bulls' best 5 players lineup:

JWill, Rose, Curry, Battier, Marshall

Quite a 5-some.

I suspect the Bulls would play Marshall at the 5 a lot and you'd see:

JWill, Hassell, Marshall, Battier, Rose

(Small ball with 3 guards)

I suspect Battier would get 35 minutes per game for the Bulls for a long time to come.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> I like Battier for all those reasons, plus he's a 2nd year player who can grow with the other young guys on the Bulls. Plus, though you didn't say it explicitly, he is the kind of versatile player that fits in the triangle well.
> ...


Good point.

The Bulls took a long look at Battier in 2001, but it was frowned upon at the #4 pick b/c a frontcourt of Brand-Battier was deemed 'not athletic enough'. Fine. Enter Tyson Chandler. Enter Eddy Curry. Battier would do what Hassell currently does with the Bulls.... yet a whole lot better!

The trade might leave the Bulls thin at backup PG, but Jalen has (for a couple games) ran the point. I don't see this as a huge issue especially since Jay hasn't gotten into much foul trouble, which is kinda impressive for a rook.

Jerry K and Jerry W... pick up the phone!



Vd


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> 
> 
> Good point.
> ...


I don't think the Bulls would be that weak at the point at all. Rose is actually a point guard in the Magic mold (he played PG for Denver in his youth, and some for Indiana). Hassell had a 9 assist night, indicating he'd be an adequate backup. And there's always Hoiberg.

I am not sure they need a true point guard (on offense) anyway. Battier might have the ability to be Pippen-light on offense for a few minutes per game while JWIll rests.

The guy who'd lose minutes would be Baxter, though he'd probably get plenty if Curry or Chandler get in foul trouble.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> 
> Battier couldn't play with Rose for the same reason ERob can't play with Rose, that being neither Battier or ERob can switch off and guard Jay Williams' speedy little man like Hassel can and Hoiberg tries to do.
> 
> ...


It sounds here like you're giving up on JWill as a defender after 10 games in the NBA. To date, he's not been good, I agree. But he was a good defender in college and will IMO will end up being a good defender in the pros too. He's a hard worker and he's got a nose for the ball, which in the long run will win out. So far, he's free lanced too much and hasn't fought through screens very well, but those things are all very correctable. The only knock I see is that he can be shot over by bigger guys, but against the vast majority of PGs in the league, that's not a problem.

I'd much rather have a guy like Battier who's maybe not quick enough to defend the fastest, strongest 1s, but can be a lock down guy against most 2s and 3s. That's what we're lacking now, and in the long run it's a bigger problem that we face most every night (as opposed to the relatively infrequent nights we play against 6'4" hyperathletic PGs).

So, I only see a very isolated problem, and one that will be mitigated by the fact that JWill will himself improve quite a bit as a defender.



> Contrary to reports, Rose and JWill can play pretty well together on offense... both get a number of touches and share the ball. The real compatibility problem is on defense. If JWill is on the court, a defensive 2 has to be on the court to switch off against the quick 1.


I agree that this is the case right now, but in the long run, as JWill's D improves, he'll be able to stick with quick 1s better. Speed isn't the issue, it's just experience.



> If he is as advertized, Mason may fit the hassel decription, so I'm eager to see his game.


I do see your point to some extent, in that Mason (who I'd be more than happy to trade Crawford for too) might be more likely to be able to keep up with a guy like Kidd or Davis when there is a switch, but I just see this as the exception rather than the rule. Most of the time, JWill is going to be on the opponent's PG no matter what because the opposing PG will be the smallest guy and JWill will be the quickest guy.

I mean, if we really think that Hassell or a Hassell equivalent will ALWAYS be playing the bigger opposing 1s, that means that on those occasions, JWill will be matched against opposing 2s, which is at least as much, and perhaps more of a mismatch. Instead of giving up 3 inches to a guy like Kidd, he'd be giving up 5 inches to Kittles or 6 inches to Courtney Alexander.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

For what its worth, i never watched the memphis game. But i listened to paxson give his comments. He had a lot of good things things to say about Jays defense in the game last night. I wish now i had wrote down the quotes!! But on one occasion he mentioned the way he defended Jason Williams. Something about cutting him off. 

But it was more than one time he praised Jay. I never watched the game so i can't say if paxson was right or not, but he saw something in Jays defense last night worth talking about.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> It sounds here like you're giving up on JWill as a defender after 10 games in the NBA. To date, he's not been good, I agree. But he was a good defender in college and will IMO will end up being a good defender in the pros too. He's a hard worker and he's got a nose for the ball, which in the long run will win out. So far, he's free lanced too much and hasn't fought through screens very well, but those things are all very correctable. The only knock I see is that he can be shot over by bigger guys, but against the vast majority of PGs in the league, that's not a problem.


Yeah.

Jay Williams will be fine on defense in this league. He's already a great help defender (1.5 steals per game) and has shown the quickness to stay w/ good PGs laterally, though he has been inconsistent.

He's been playing many quality guards (some All-Stars) for the first time. I think it would be wise to give it at least until midseason to see how this kid adjusts.


VD


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> 
> 
> i think memphis would prefer brevin knight replace wright in the deal seeing how jamal would come in as the 2nd point guard at first


Lorenzen makes more than Brevin Knight, so obviously the deal wouldn't work.


----------



## MyBallsStillHurt (May 30, 2002)

Picking up Shane Battier would be dynamite - unfortunately, I seriously doubt that Jerry West, who is considered by many to be the NBA's resident genius, would be willing to part with such a solid player for such a serious head case who pouts at the drop of a hat. 

It's a nice fantasy, but I just can't see this deal happening.:heart:


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MyBallsStillHurt</b>!
> Picking up Shane Battier would be dynamite - unfortunately, I seriously doubt that Jerry West, who is considered by many to be the NBA's resident genius, would be willing to part with such a solid player for such a serious head case who pouts at the drop of a hat.
> 
> It's a nice fantasy, but I just can't see this deal happening.:heart:


Yeah, the Bulls would probably have to throw in Fizer and a draft pick.

It'd be worth it, in a big way, for the Bulls, though.

I'm not sure that Memphis really needs another guard tho.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> It sounds here like you're giving up on JWill as a defender after 10 games in the NBA. To date, he's not been good, I agree. But he was a good defender in college and will IMO will end up being a good defender in the pros too. ..


Jay Will wasn't a good defender in college .He never was a good defender in college. Particualrly any time he went up against a quality quick guard he had problems especially against players like Troy bell.

Duhon was the shut down defender.

Now JWill is going up nightly against players much bbetter than Troy bell, and he's getting schooled. hassel has been guarding his men. Battier can't guard these players. In the few switches where Battier picked up JWill, jay Will went right by him. Battier just isn't quick enough to guard 1's. hassel is quicker and right now, can and is making up for JWill's gross deficiencies. 

There are two ways you'd work a battier into the line-up.
One way is sitting Rose, the other way is sitting JWill.
Resulting line-ups would be:

Hassel,
Rose,
Battier
Curry
Chandler

or

JWill
Hassel
Battier
Curry 
Chandler

Rose can't guard 1's either, so even if he plays the PG
in the top line-up, Hassel switches to guard the PG.

In the second line-up you get hassel switching to pick up the 1
supporting on the 2, with Battier getting the 3 or 2 and supporting on the other.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> For what its worth, i never watched the memphis game. But i listened to paxson give his comments. He had a lot of good things things to say about Jays defense in the game last night. I wish now i had wrote down the quotes!! But on one occasion he mentioned the way he defended Jason Williams. Something about cutting him off.
> 
> But it was more than one time he praised Jay. I never watched the game so i can't say if paxson was right or not, but he saw something in Jays defense last night worth talking about.


Conversely, Hubie Brown was telling jason that he could take jay any time he wanted, and Jason was which led memphis to within 4.....then BC switched hassel on Jason to cool him down.

If Paxson believes cutting off a player is chasing him down the lane after he's blown right by you, then cutting off has new meaning.

Also the pull up 3's right over the shorter PG, leads to a lot of uncontested looks.

Interesting too is that on d hassel matched up more against Cassel, and Kidd. Watching Cassel post up on Jay will when Milwaukee was able to get this mismatch, was all Milwaukee.

Bu then again, it just hasn't been the All Stars schooling JWill, Delk, hunter, AWill et cetera have all put up big numbers. JWill hasn't stopped anyone.


----------



## local_sportsfan (Jul 24, 2002)

Krause would be retarted not to trade Crawdaddy for Battier. The Bulls need some stability, defense, and shooting....battier brings all of that to the table.

I actually wanted the Wiz to pick him up.


----------



## Maestro (May 28, 2002)

*last time I checked....*

we had plenty o' people at the 3. So this deal would be contigent on moving either Rose, Marshell or ERobs salary(my choice would be ERob). Otherwise,it points to the fact that Jamal, simply does not have sizeable TRADE VALUE as of this time. Let us let our team grow for now. These things will shake themselves out.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> 
> 
> Lorenzen makes more than Brevin Knight, so obviously the deal wouldn't work.



no, not obvious at all

Chicago trades: PG Jamal Crawford (4.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 2.9 apg in 18.3 minutes) 
SF Eddie Robinson (4.5 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 14.9 minutes) 
Chicago receives: SG Shane Battier (6.6 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 1.1 apg in 27.5 minutes) 
PG Brevin Knight (4.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.0 apg in 16.0 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: +1.9 ppg, +2.4 rpg, and +1.8 apg. 

Memphis trades: SG Shane Battier (6.6 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 1.1 apg in 27.5 minutes) 
PG Brevin Knight (4.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.0 apg in 16.0 minutes) 
Memphis receives: PG Jamal Crawford (4.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 2.9 apg in 9 games) 
SF Eddie Robinson (4.5 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 10 games) 
Change in team outlook: -1.9 ppg, -2.4 rpg, and -1.8 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED

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


----------



## Salvaged Ship (Jul 10, 2002)

Crawford wants to be traded because he isn't starting and not geting enough minutes, despite not earning any of the minutes he desires.

So tell me, what team would he start on? I don't see any. Maybe Denver. Most teams he will get even less minutes than he is getting here.

I wish we would get rid of him, Fizer, and Robinson. Bust, bust, and 31 million dollar bust. You see what you want to build around now, and these guys are not part of it. We need a good back up center, a good veteran back up point, and a defensive small forward. If we could fill those voids and get rid of these 3 at the same time it would go along way. 

You have to make choices on your key players then get other players who accept roles. Not only do these 3 not accept roles, they think they are better than they are and cannot fill those roles. Let someone else deal with Crawford's tentativeness and moaning, Fizer's air balls, no rebs, and no D, and Robinson's 31 million dollar toe problem and little game.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>sinkingship</b>!
> Crawford wants to be traded because he isn't starting and not geting enough minutes, despite not earning any of the minutes he desires.
> 
> So tell me, what team would he start on? I don't see any. Maybe Denver. Most teams he will get even less minutes than he is getting here.
> ...


You were probably one of the same people at this time last year making similar statements about Ron Artest. You probably decided Kwame was a"bust" too.

Jamal can start for Orlando, Denver, Cleveland, Miami and probably a few other teams. 

He's only 22. Just becuase Jay's better at attacking the rim and breaking down opponent's defense, doesn't mean you have to completely diss Craw, cause Craw still has skills.

Though it's interesting how point guards when they leave the Bulls and the tirangle all of the sudden become better players....with the most recent example being Kevin Ollie.
Heck, Jay didn't "break out" until he didn't have to run the triangle.

Fizer will be a Darvin Ham level player. A bust for a 4 pick, but someone who will always have a place in the league.

ERob just needs time to play, and he can't play in a system where Rose and JWill are on the court becuase in that line-up no one in the backcourt can play any defense....and no one can switch and cover for JWill's defensive ineptness


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Well, I think the core point that we still disagree on Ztect, is that you seem to think JWill won't improve to an acceptable level as a defender. I simply disagree.

If he doesn't, however, who is he supposed to guard when Trent, or Trent's replacement is keeping up with opposing PGs? Aside from the occasional switch off and isolated matchups I can see against smaller SGs, JWill still matches up better against most PGs than against SGs.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

A few comments on different notes in the thread:

*Regarding Battier and the Grizzlies*
I admit I don't follow Memphis more than Internet articles and stats. But here's what I see...

Giricek has mad 3-pt range (10/22), which Battier hasn't showed much of this year (1/14). That in itself gets Gordan lots of PT. 37-year-old Steve Kerr still gets 17 mpg, and he's a completely one-dimensional player at this point.

Gooden is a black hole only if you consider that he takes about 1.5 more shot attempts per game more than Battier did last year and scores 1.4 points more per game. Gooden is more of a monster rebounder than Battier... it seems like Gooden is capable of 15+ boards on any given night, which one can't say of Battier.

Finally, according to NBA.com stats, Battier has had 7 starts in 10 games, Gooden has had 7, and Giricek has had 5. Battier averages 27+ mpg, while Gordan averages 24 and Gooden gets 30.

Seems like a very fair rotation to me. The only thing is that Battier isn't as central a part of their offense anymore, which is okay since Gooden can score in the post and the mid-range better, and Giricek can score from long-range better. Battier still leads the team in steals.

*Regarding Jay's defense*
I like to see what he's capable of, so we can know if there's hope or if there's none. In the games I watched, Jay did a good job defending Sam Cassell on most of the possessions he was assigned to him, and suffered at the Celtics guards only because they were shooting the lights out (Hassell wasn't super-effective against them either). Jay is not a lock-down defender (yet), and he certainly did get burned in college a few times, but his defense is still above average for his position, and he's shown flashes of good D. 

Also, I've always promoted Jay's greatest strength as a basketball player being in his intelligence. Defense is a skill that weighs heavily on how smart you are, more than mobility or athleticism (which certainly play some part but not as much).

So Jay's D can improve.

*Regarding trading Crawford*
It's hard to turn a player down when he requests a trade, but as the article stated, Krause probably hasn't seen anything he's wanted to fall in love with. I wouldn't give up Crawford for too much less than a Gerald Wallace-style player. (Wallace is probably too much in the league's eyes, but he is also stuck behind three good SF/SG types that need lots of minutes: Peja, Hedo, Christie).


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

Wow, I had no idea Brevin Knight made that much money. I'd do this deal as well since he is pretty much an ending contract and we'd be out from under the Eddie Robinson deal, however, I don't think West would do this one.

The reason I added Wright was because his deal offsets Robinson in length and monies, both with 3 years left. 



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


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Well, I think the core point that we still disagree on Ztect, is that you seem to think JWill won't improve to an acceptable level as a defender. I simply disagree.
> 
> If he doesn't, however, who is he supposed to guard when Trent, or Trent's replacement is keeping up with opposing PGs? Aside from the occasional switch off and isolated matchups I can see against smaller SGs, JWill still matches up better against most PGs than against SGs.



I didn't write that JWill may not develop into a passable defender.
He has had some good defensive moments- albeit few and far between- that suggest he has potential not only to be a passable defender, but a good one with some obvious limitations (specifically his size- taller guards easily shoot over him) and some obvious strengths that help to ameliorate these limitations (specifically his speed). 

However, I disagree that JWill - to date- has ever been a good defender. He simply hasn't. Against top talent in college, he didn't
do well. Now the talent level is much higher than what he couldn't handle in college. 

Thus, JWill has no history of ever being a good defender, hopefully he will be, so the points he scores, he doesn't give away. W/o a history, aside from the few moments of good d (that have typically occurred as a pressure defender) there are- to date- no assurances that he'll not continue to be a liability.

Now as for switches, JWill really doesn't match up well against anyone on d right now. In stature he, of course, matches up better against 1's. But speedy 1's have been blowing by him, while bigger 1's have been shooting over him, and posting up on him at will. But since the PG sets the tempo, having Hassel on the PG to get the ball out of the pg's hands makes distribution more difficult for the oppsoing team. Against Nj and the Bucks, there wasn't the "occassional" switch. Hassel guarded kidd, and Cassel on most of the trips down court. 

Of course, you noted the obvious conudrum, if hassel switches, who guards the 2, since Jay is even less suited to guard the 2. 

From what I've seen Rose than helps out on the 2, and Chandler or Marshall helps on the 3. 

So thus far the team on d, to keep Jay in the game for what he brings offensively, makes a lot of adjustments and switches to make up for Jay's defensive ineptness.

Rose though can't guard the 1, so hassel has to get big minutes.
Hoiberg can't guard the one either, but he tries reall hard to do so.

If Hassel isn't on the court, than this jerryrigged support d really falls to shambles. If ERob, Rose and JWill were on the court, than
no one can help Jay with the opposing 1. Thus Jay or Rose are adversely effecting ERob's ability to get minutes. Jay and Rose, without a defensive 2 or 2/3 that can cover PG's simply aren't defensively a compatible tandem. Battier is a defensive 2, 2/3, but battier simply isn't quick enough to guard 1's.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> If Hassel isn't on the court, than this jerryrigged support d really falls to shambles. If ERob, Rose and JWill were on the court, than
> no one can help Jay with the opposing 1. Thus Jay or Rose are adversely effecting ERob's ability to get minutes. Jay and Rose, without a defensive 2 or 2/3 that can cover PG's simply aren't defensively a compatible tandem. Battier is a defensive 2, 2/3, but battier simply isn't quick enough to guard 1's.


This may be the case of analysis paralysis. I do agree that eRob, JWill and Rose may well be incompatible on the court. But I think it is more that all 3 are below average defensively at the moment than none of the 3 can disrupt a good PG.

I fail to see how we could lose trading some of our non-non-core players for a guy like Battier that is Hassel-like in that he is a smart, good defensive player. We are clearly lacking in these types. He would be an upgrade if he only takes Fred and eRob's minutes.


----------



## BamaBull (Jun 24, 2002)

*who had a better triple double that game..?*



> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> This may be the case of analysis paralysis. I do agree that eRob, JWill and Rose may well be incompatible on the court. But I think it is more that all 3 are below average defensively at the moment than none of the 3 can disrupt a good PG.
> ...


Jay Williams, or Jason Kidd? my point is, Jay did and it would appear on paper and on the court, THAT DAY, jay did better against jason than jason did against Jay. ya think?


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> This may be the case of analysis paralysis. I do agree that eRob, JWill and Rose may well be incompatible on the court. But I think it is more that all 3 are below average defensively at the moment than none of the 3 can disrupt a good PG.
> ...


Same problem though occurs with Battier, JWill and Rose becuase non of the 3 can disrupt a good pg. battier would be better at defending the large 2's and most 3, but there would be no one like Hassel on the floor to do the defensive switch to support JWill.
Battier simply is way TOOoooooo slow to cover super quick players.


So battier would be facing a similiar situation to ERob, and be on the bench. He ultimately would be a "non-non-core"player as well. 

One of the few 2/3's who could probably work in this situation is Artest, since he can guard 1's. But Artest is the exception rather than the rule.



01-02 MEM 

78g 78s 39.7min .429fg .373(3) .700(ft) 2.30 3.10 5.40(rb) 2.8 1.55 1.04 1.99 2.80 -14.4 (ppg)

02-03 MEM 

10g 7s 27.5mpg .371fg .071(3) .867 1.20 2.90 4.10 1.1 1.80 .60 1.30 2.60- 6.6 ppg

It's also interesting looking at Bat's stats, his time is down 25%, but his scoring is down over 50%. He's lost his range (1 for 14)

Never have thought much of him and am glad the Bulls didn't draft him. Like most Dukies w. the exception of g.hill and most likely jwill, his best yr will be his first one in the league


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> Battier simply is way TOOoooooo slow to cover super quick players.
> 
> So battier would be facing a similiar situation to ERob, and be on the bench.
> ...


OK, your opinion is noted.

My opinion is that Battier will get out of his shooting slump, could EASILY play both eRob's minutes and Hoiberg's minutes - that 25 mins/game, and would be a very solid contributor in an 8-man rotation. 

If we can pick him up for some combo of eRob, Craw and Fizer, sign me up!


----------



## BamaBull (Jun 24, 2002)

*I agree 100% Johnston...*



> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> OK, your opinion is noted.
> ...


I am DOWN with that deal!:grinning:


----------



## Cyanobacteria (Jun 25, 2002)

*traded? probably; now? maybe not*

Damon Stoudamire and Kenny Anderson are being shopped hard. This may put a damper on teams coming after Craw. The only way I see a team coming after Craw (right now) instead of these 2 guys is if they're tapped out/L. tax challenged or are looking to get much younger (read: tanking) or it might take both. Any team with aspirations for this year may be trying for Damon or Kenny instead. Closer to the deadline or next offseason there might be more suitors, but maybe he's worth even less then.

I like the Battier idea a lot but also don't see it happening. 

I say there's no reason to baby JWill, D him up against the opposing point and make him a better defender in the long run. He's got the quicks, the hands, & the brains for it and the mentality to handle it. I believe he'll make strides on D this year as well as those we've already seen on O. The whole team needs to get better on D, throw them to the wolves. The raw material is there, it's coaching and effort from here on in IMO.


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

*Re: traded? probably; now? maybe not*

If ever there was a time to pry Kedrick Brown from the Celtics, now would be good ! 

Boston Celtics forward Kedrick Brown is expected to be sidelined another four weeks because of an injury to the big toe on his right foot. 

He had almost recovered from a sprained ankle that kept him out of the first 10 games. But Brown was injured Friday when he stepped on a teammate's toe during a shootaround. 

"The longer that you're out, the more difficult it is for you to get acclimated," the coach said after practice Monday. "Even when you're healthy, it might take you two-to-three weeks to where you're in game condition." 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...8,0,3993254.story?coll=sns-ap-basketball-news


Brown's trade value should go down just a little bit with this latest injury. I know some of you might be thinking we don't need another "ERob" with this guy's newest toe injury, but he has looked awesome in the few times I've seen him play. 

He has done nothing in this league except play well in the summer league, and he has "upside" due to his athleticism. Crawford's claim to fame was his summer games with MJ and other NBA players, and his upside lies in his ability to be a big point guard. Both haven't really shown much in real games. 


Bulls need a defensive 2/3 , Celtics could use another point guard. If the Celtic scouts liked Crawford coming out of the draft, maybe they would think a change of scenery would do him good and he would do better in Boston. In essence we would be trading one project with upside for another, but we'd be helping each other out since the Celts have Pierce already at the 3, and we have Jay at the point.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Salo, see this from page 1



> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> If the Bulls are going to try to get a supersized 2 (TMac , Pierce size), than a player worth looking into who is buried behind Pierce is Kedric Brown.
> 
> 
> ...


I like Kedric too.

A healthy Mason may give the Bulls a nice 1/2 combo who
can back up and play alongside jWill, becuase mason 
supposedly can play 'd'. 

Mason would give the Bulls a 2 who could support jay on 'd'

Kedric would give the Bulls a really atheltic big 2 to
match up against the star big 2's


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> Salo, see this from page 1
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah, Mason would step right in and take Crawford's spot. I expect he would be an upgrade. And to tide things over until Mason comes back, we could easily sign someone like Greg Anthony who's looking for a job anyway. This way we won't have to throw in our secret weapon Rick Brunson just yet...


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Kid Ked's not going anywhere

Last year they dealt Joe Johnson because they wanted to have a crack at it and they made it through to the Eastern Conference

In the offseason they let Rogers and Stickland go as a sign they were not going to make a full on assault this year evn though they will make the playoffs and do OK

As they are not going for it , they are not trading away a player who is clearly part of their future and their succession plan for a player at a position that is going to require the ball more than Ked will to be effective.

The ball spends a lot of time in Walker and Pierce's hands. 

They need a defensive guard which is why Erick Strickland was so good for them . Kenny played good D for them last year too and was the ideal 3rd scoring option behind them - Jamal could play that role I guess ....


Anyway the Celts don't need another playmaker .. they need a finisher and that's why Ked's for them.

If they want a point they will pick someone up in the draft but it will likely be someone like Jeryl Sasser or John Salmons who is a bigger guard with some promise as a defender without being a classic point like Tinsley who they passed over twice.

The only way I could see Ked being had is for a young promising bigman but any young big who is worth his salt is not going in a big for small type of trade unless the Celts want to take a chance on a roughie like Diop

But with Ricky and Dejuan why the Cavs would entertain this is beyond me


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

*Craw in Frisco ?*

Jiri Welsh is a guy who interests me 

But I think his future in Frisco is pretty heavily tied to Mike Dunleavy 

If Dunleavy can ever develop into a true point forward then I can't see Arenas in the fold . I would see Welsh and JRich as a killer backcourt combo to complement Mike Jr with Twan playing PF and Troy Murph backing Twan and Damp at PF/C

Crawford could work with someone like a Dunleavy creating in a pivot as well + he may give them more enhanced options in being able combo as well as a trad point role if Mike Jr did not work out or was injured and needed another creator in a more conventional sense

* Craw a Cav *

Another scenario that intrigues is Craw and Fize for Bimbo, Jumaine Jones and Chris Mihm


----------



## BamaBull (Jun 24, 2002)

*Huh?*



> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> *Craw in Frisco ?*
> 
> Jiri Welsh is a guy who interests me
> ...


Arenas? Gilbert? Have U seen this kid play??? Dunleavy will be gone before they get rid of arenas....just my take.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

*Re: Huh?*



> Originally posted by <b>BamaBull</b>!
> 
> 
> Arenas? Gilbert? Have U seen this kid play??? Dunleavy will be gone before they get rid of arenas....just my take.


Numbers are not everything + he's a shortazz

Dunleavy can potentially add a ton more to a sucessful side than what Arenas can and you need long lanky shooters that can defend - say hello to Jiri Welsh

Dunleavy + Welsh in what they may be able to do far outweighs Arenas on his own accord.

You don't think Frisco craved for Jay?

Do you think it was accidental that they went to Plan B which was Dunleavy adn then busted their hump to acquire Welsh to complement JRich on the wings with Dunleavy initiating the offense from the pivot forward ? 

Jeff McInnis put up some nice numbers last year too.

I would be very surprised if Arenas is a Warrior in the next 2 years as his contract comes due for renegotiation in this time.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> 
> * Craw a Cav *
> 
> Another scenario that intrigues is Craw and Fize for Bimbo, Jumaine Jones and Chris Mihm


Doing a 2 for 3 trade doesn't help. Bulls need to consolidate,
that is not add another player who will want minutes that are
already allocated.

Besides, Mihms is as soft as advertized...not worth bothering with.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

*Re: Re: traded? probably; now? maybe not*



> Originally posted by <b>SALO</b>!
> If ever there was a time to pry Kedrick Brown from the Celtics, now would be good !
> 
> Boston Celtics forward Kedrick Brown is expected to be sidelined another four weeks because of an injury to the big toe on his right foot.
> ...


I couldn't agree more. The Summer league games I saw Brown in he was absolutely dominant. He looked like the second coming of Paul Pierce IMO. If the Bulls could get him for any combination of E-Rob, Fizer, Craw they would be well served to do it. 

Also, Cleveland could likely use a young pg since they are trying to get in the youth movement & the Lebron sweepstakes too. I wonder if there would be any way to deal some players for Ricky Davis who has had some problems with management lately? He looks like a pretty darn good youngster too.


----------



## Potatoe (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> 
> 
> You were probably one of the same people at this time last year making similar statements about Ron Artest. You probably decided Kwame was a"bust" too.
> ...




Says he who just declared that Battier had peaked......


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> 
> * Craw a Cav *
> 
> Another scenario that intrigues is Craw and Fize for Bimbo, Jumaine Jones and Chris Mihm


Mmmm

Well I had it half right 

Just needed to sub Miles for JJ and add ERob and Yogi


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

> I couldn't agree more. The Summer league games I saw Brown in he was absolutely dominant. He looked like the second coming of Paul Pierce IMO. If the Bulls could get him for any combination of E-Rob, Fizer, Craw they would be well served to do it.






ACE wants Crawford traded! Wonders never cease!


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

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


:laugh: 

Dug deep for this one didn't ya? Yeah, I could have understood the Bulls dealing Craw for Kedrick Brown at the time this post was made. I still think Kedrick has the potential to be a dominant player in the NBA. But right now I think I would have to say that this probably wouldn't be the best deal for the Bulls!


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Damn, some of us have been mining the archives lately.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

I just wanted to call out ACE a little. :laugh: ACE what you do you think about a package to Boston with JC for Pierce. I for one would even include Chandler. What ya think?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Right now it looks like there's a buyer's market for Kedrick Brown. Maybe we could get him for cheap?


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

I gotta talk to Retro or BCH about a "Warning: Ancient Thread Bumped" hack.

These things give me a heart attack!


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> I just wanted to call out ACE a little. :laugh: ACE what you do you think about a package to Boston with JC for Pierce. I for one would even include Chandler. What ya think?


I would definitley be against that deal if it included Chandler and JC both. I supposse a JC & Fizer for Pierce deal might make some sense although I don't know if I would exactly be for it since I like JC so much. 


Mike, if the Bulls can get Kedrick Brown on the cheap they should definitley do it. I thought his value was going up in Boston? He seemed to play a much larger role when the Bulls played them last.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

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


And btw, this wasn't so much that I WANTED JC traded, this thread was saying that he has ASKED to be traded. And, if that were true, what we could and should trade him for.


----------



## Mongoose (Jun 24, 2003)

Oy, there's gotta be a statute of limitations for posting to seriously old threads...


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

I think its funny personally. I do wonder how insane this board would go if JC was traded. It would be crazy, something like 200 posts in a half an hour or something. His cult like following is really surprising for such a tweener guard. This guys are a dime a dozen but yet people follow JC like he is Kobe or something.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TomBoerwinkle#1</b>!
> These things give me a heart attack!


You and me both.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> This guys are a dime a dozen but yet people follow JC like he is Kobe or something.


Can you name a dozen players with Crawford's combination of flash, shooting, size,athleticism and passing ability?


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

All guards I would take over JC:

(in no order)

Kidd
Lebron
Iverson
Arenas
Billups
Davis
Nash
Miller
Francis
J.Williams
Marbury
Bibby
Payton
Parker
Van Exel
Murray


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> All guards I would take over JC:
> 
> (in no order)
> ...


I would take JC over 75% of those guys.


----------



## Happyface (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> All guards I would take over JC:
> 
> (in no order)
> ...



Take Flip Murray, Van Exel, Parker, Bibby, Jas Williams, Andre Miller out. I wouldnt trade any of them for Jamal straight up. Even some of the best guards in the league you listed would be a tough decision. Why? Because they've already peaked, in fact most of the players you listed have already peaked. So your getting someone you know who has reached their ceiling but still are very good players or some of the best right now. Jamals still very young and has the potential to be as good as any of them, if not better. You dont trade for the now especially when the other players who are developing arent ready yet either. I mean why trade for someone who has already reached their ceiling, only to come into a situation with others who arent ready yet? I think the Bulls would be stupid to trade their future for the now like some impatient people here constantly suggest, because they arent ready now to do anything. All your doing is sacrificing the future for immediate mediocrity if that. Lets not kid ourselves, even with Kidd for Jamal this team isnt going to come close to winning a NBA championship, let alone make it to the playoffs consistently.

You forgot to include Heinrich btw :laugh:


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> All guards I would take over JC:
> 
> (in no order)
> ...


Anyways, I think you severly undervalue Jamal because you think he is a threat to your boy Kirk. By all accounts the two get along just fine and this new arrangement is working well. Why knock it? Just so your boy can be the starting pg in his freaking rookie season? In another post you said he has earned it. It seems to me he has had a few good games and a few bad games and hasn't really "earned" anything. If anyone has earned the spot it would have to be JC. Still, the arrangement as it is is alright for both players.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

ACE I just don't think he is a PG. And it is not because of him being a threat to Kirk. IMO Kirk has already proven he is a better PG. JC is a quasi PG/SG type. This team needs a real SG/SF who can score like he does and defend the wing positions. Therein lies the problem our true wing players are only Gill and ERob plus LJ and Jeffries. We need a HUGE upgrade there and JC has the most value and makes the most sense to move because of Kirk.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> ACE I just don't think he is a PG. And it is not because of him being a threat to Kirk. IMO Kirk has already proven he is a better PG. JC is a quasi PG/SG type. This team needs a real SG/SF who can score like he does and defend the wing positions. Therein lies the problem our true wing players are only Gill and ERob plus LJ and Jeffries. We need a HUGE upgrade there and JC has the most value and makes the most sense to move because of Kirk.


Well, you can call Jamal whatever you like I guess. I see him as a combo guard capable of playing EITHER the 1 or the 2 but more adept at playing the 1 at this point in his career. NEXT season, after Jamal adds some more muscle, moving Jamal to SG full time and making Hinrich the PG full time might make more sense. Still, whatever you think of Jamal as pg, he is leading the Bulls in assists per game and has the best t/o ast ratio of any Bulls pg. 
And he is only going to continue distancing himself IMO.

I agree that we really need a good solid wing to play the three. But I don't want to get rid of something we already have thats good in one place to get something good in another. Even if Kirk DOES make JC a little more expendable in that regard. But even if we package up JC and Fizer for instance and get back (just for arguments sake) Paul Pierce. Who would we play at the 2? Pierce? Gill? who would we play at the 3? Pierce I would imagine but that leaves us with a gaping hole at the 2. The roster is not balanced. I don't think we are going to balance it, while keeping things in the Bulls favor, by trading Jamal at this point OR by starting Hinrich.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Marbury, Baron and Lebron are the only guys I'd deal straight up for JC at this point. Some of the guys I'd think about it, but Iverson/Kidd/Payton/Van Exel are starting or have started to go downhill in their career. 

but put it this way, JC is the best 23 year old or under guard in the league.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> All guards I would take over JC:
> 
> (in no order)
> ...


Too bad I didn't ask you who you would take over Crawford. I was asking for a list of 10-12 players that are like him, since you said guys LIKE him are a dime a dozen, where I think his combination of skills is actually kind of closer to the 3 or 4 tops that have game like him. Tony Parker is a smaller PG version of Crawford. Larry Hughes is a slower, stronger, worse shooting version. Flip Murray has a game sort of like Crawford's. And that's it. And of those guys Crawford is the best. By a fairly hefty margin.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

> I agree that we really need a good solid wing to play the three. But I don't want to get rid of something we already have thats good in one place to get something good in another. Even if Kirk DOES make JC a little more expendable in that regard. But even if we package up JC and Fizer for instance and get back (just for arguments sake) Paul Pierce. Who would we play at the 2? Pierce? Gill? who would we play at the 3? Pierce I would imagine but that leaves us with a gaping hole at the 2. The roster is not balanced. I don't think we are going to balance it, while keeping things in the Bulls favor, by trading Jamal at this point OR by starting Hinrich.



Ok for arguements sake as you put a JC/ERob/Fizer for Pierce+filler( Jumaine Jones works) deal would be an amzaing deal for us and we would be stupid to turn it down IMO. That trade on top of trading Mason for Brunson and we would be set even without Chandler for a little while.


Hinrich 33 Brunson 15
Gill 26 Pierce 22 
Pierce 18 Jones 15 Williams 15
Davis 35 Williams 13
Curry 33 Blount 15


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Yeah, but the Celts are not going to trade Pierce. They're going to make moves to get some better players around Pierce.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

The Clippers need urgently a PG
Raps need some PF/C
Bulls need some SF

Lamond Murray and Brunson - Bulls?
Crawford and Eddie Robinson to Clippers?
Ely and Dooling to Raptors?


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> I would take JC over 75% of those guys.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Zuca</b>!
> The Clippers need urgently a PG
> Raps need some PF/C
> Bulls need some SF
> ...


Bulls get severely ripped in this trade. Lamond Murray isnt the answer to anything.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Some of you don't understand.

We need a SF WITH Jamal. Not INSTEAD of Jamal. The idea is to get a second perimeter scorer. Not exchange one for the other.

Understand?

Now continue.

And right now, there aren't many players you could trade Crawford for that I'd take. We've got a special player on our hands. And he's young. He's the first of the 3 C's to start living up to his potential.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

Crawford has improved but he still has a LONG way to go. I for one don't think they will wait. All he has proven is that he can light up a scoreboard. It takes more than that to win a basketball game.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> Crawford has improved but he still has a LONG way to go. I for one don't think they will wait. All he has proven is that he can light up a scoreboard. It takes more than that to win a basketball game.


Not if the rest of your team is even semi-competant.

If we didn't have such sizeable holes at every other position on the floor, we wouldn't need Crawford to be an all-star level decision maker, defender, point-guard, shooting guard, rebounder, shotblocker, ect. ect. On a lot of teams, having a guy who can average 27ppg in today's NBA would be enough to get you to the playoffs. And be a contender to go to the finals out east.

I think once we get to the point where we don't have to start guys like Kendall Gill and Linton Johnson--and to the point where it's possible to actually put Eddy Curry on the bench when he's not doing anything productive out on the court...well when we get to that point we'll have a top level team.

Until then it'll be Crawford and his trust sidekick Kirk Hinrich...and 3 other guys.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

Oh I agree some holes need to be filled but to say JC does not have a lot to work on just is not true. Especially if they are going to make him a fulltime starting SG.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> Oh I agree some holes need to be filled but to say JC does not have a lot to work on just is not true. Especially if they are going to make him a fulltime starting SG.


if JC is going to be a fulltime SG, he does NOT have a lot to work on. Hes pretty much there. If hes going to be a Kobe type player to Curry being the Shaq type player, then he has a ways to go. 

BTW I'm not saying Crawford/Curry will or wont be as good as Shaq/Kobe so dont jump on me. I was just making the comparison of the 2nd franchise player on the team.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

Bull, if JC is our starting SG we will be eaten alive. You can bet on that.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

why is that?


----------



## Happyface (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> Crawford has improved but he still has a LONG way to go. I for one don't think they will wait. All he has proven is that he can light up a scoreboard. It takes more than that to win a basketball game.



I dont know what you think you can get out there for Jamal, or what some of you think a SG is supposed to do that Jamal doesnt, but i think alot of you might find out trading for another SG isnt going to make all the problems go away. In fact, it'll only make it worse. Then you'll be complaining about the guy you just traded for, *****ing that hes inconsistant and cant carry the offense or is worse than Jamal. Seems alot of you talk about other players on other teams like their perfect, but thats because you hear and see the highlights without ever seeing their bad games. From Antoine Walker on down the line, they all have problems which will probably end up being excasterbated in Chicago if they tried to take over Jamal's role. Antoine has tons of talent around him in Dallas, you really think he'll be that good in Chicago? He'll go back to being the Boston Antoine that Ainge said was bad for the organization, even worse because he wont have Pierce, and will try and have to do everything alone. The grass always looks greener on the other side, but rarely is, especially in terms of Chicago fans looking at already peaked stars to trade for one thats up and coming.

You'd have to be retarded to trade Jamal right now considering his upside, and anyone you could even get for him now wouldnt be much better than Jamals been playing lately. You can name all star after all star, none of them would be doing a much better job than Jamal has done, and many of them would have you *****ing about them more than Jamal. Theres just no pleasing some of you~:no:


----------



## Happyface (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> Bull, if JC is our starting SG we will be eaten alive. You can bet on that.



So who do you propose they trade for that is going to be so much better than Jamal? I wanna hear names, names of players that are realistically acquirable in a trade for Jamal right now, that you think will do a better job.

Personally, i think you should worry more about Heinrichs consistency. Hes only played 2-3 good games and about that many if not more bad ones. If he doesnt show he can be consistent, then i think the Bulls need to look elsewhere for their PG of the future, or just move Jamal back. Nothing wrong with PG's that can score, look at Cassell. However there is definitely something wrong with PG's that cant, especially if teams end up double or triple teaming Jamal where he has to pass it out for others to score :uhoh: Heinrich definitely hasnt proven himself as the PG of the future in my eyes, only in the eyes of the overeactors that cant use his back spasms as an excuse every game :sour:


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> Not if the rest of your team is even semi-competant.
> ...


And Curry.

I agree with your last two posts 100%.

The reason we're losing is that the entire hopes of the team was placed on Eddy's shoulders. Both Krause and Paxson drank of the "Eddy's ready to dominate now" kool-aid, and all their moves reflected it. Curry is supposed to be the man who is getting the kind of PPG that Crawford is. If he were, Crawford could shoot all he wanted or do nothing but pass, and we'd win ballgames.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> Bull, if JC is our starting SG we will be eaten alive. You can bet on that.


Rip Hamilton is flanked by Tayshaun Prince and Chauncey Billups .. both pretty decent perimeter (and help) defenders... and then he has Ben Wallace upfront 

We have AD upfront and Eddie Robinson rotating with JYD on one wing with Kirk on the other flank

Whilst Jamal can improve on his defense I don't see his playing the 2 long term as his true position is an issue.. particularly when you take into account his 7' wingspan

I don't think Jamal loses his effectiveness as a 2 just because of a nominal consideration ( IE that he is 6'5 and most quality bigger 2's are 6'7 ) 

If he can improve his strength in the next 12 months and fight through screens better ... he may never be all NBA Defense .. but he will be OK 

I truly believe that the key to Jamal's effectiveness is having a quality defender on the wing with him , a hustler on the other wing ... and a big man to know when to play help and step out and cut off the lane (if he trusts the wing forward to cover his back for the cutters) 

Hinrich is a big key to this team in a lot of ways.... and I think the biggest beneficiaries of Kirk's development will be Jamal and Eddie Robinson 

I like Jamal in a certain way as a player but there is no way I want him as our point guard where he is responsible for the offensive sets .. happy for him to do his thing that are set up for him by someone else or for him to create for himself ( or for others ) but just because he is a good passer does not make him a point guard

Just like just because Jalen was a nice passer didn't make him a point guard either


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> And Curry.
> ...


I agree


----------

