# Tyrus vs. Aldridge: The 06-07 Bulls and Going Forward



## LuCane (Dec 9, 2002)

Firstly, it's important to note that I fully realize it's too early to make a conclusive statement regarding anything to do with this selection. Most of all, we knew that Tyrus was a relatively (read: very) raw product that would take some time to develop. Essentially, this is a narrower version of the win now vs. win later vs. win-now-while-trying-to-win-later arguments.

Anyway, currently watching Aldridge and Roy run the pick and roll against the vaunted Spurs' D got me thinking about what Aldridge's impact on this year's team would be vs. Thomas. I've watched a good deal of the Trail Blazers this year because I'm a big Brandon Roy fan, and it's important to note that Aldridge has a great deal of problems consistently staying out of foul trouble himself. Nevertheless, it's intriguing to see him man up Tim Duncan with _some _success. His length is obvious, and he runs the floor well for a big. Most impressively, you can see that Aldridge has the ability to step out and hit the 16-18 foot jumper. [As I wrote this, Aldridge may have busted Barry's nose.]

In short, do we project further into the playoffs this season with Aldridge over Thomas? After giving it some thought, I think the answer - if there is one - is a bit more tricky than I originally expected.

*Not to threadjack myself, but Roy really might have been the perfect backcourt mate for Gordon - which is to say, could Hinrich/Brown have gotten us back a Jermaine O'neal/Gasol? But, I digress...


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

A. Thomas wasn't drafted to be a huge contributer this season. I suspect Aldridge would have been a bit more helpful this year simply because of the Bulls lack of length and because of their lack of bigs who can score. However, the difference between Aldridge and Thomas this season in terms of impact on the Bulls advancing far in the playoffs is not significant, IMO. In other words, the Bulls would not be a legit title contender with Aldridge this season so I don't think it should be a real consideration in comparing the two players in terms of best fit for the Bulls.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Aldridge now and later.


----------



## LuCane (Dec 9, 2002)

*B. I like Roy a lot but the Bulls would be in even bigger do do up front if they drafted a guard with their high pick.*

I don't at all care to make this thread about Roy, but you must have missed the second half of the sentence about Roy if you think using Hinrich/Brown (once Roy is matched with Gordon/Duhon in a backcourt) to get Gasol or O'Neil leaves us in "even bigger do do."


----------



## LuCane (Dec 9, 2002)

> However, the difference between Aldridge and Thomas this season in terms of impact on the Bulls advancing far in the playoffs is not significant, IMO.


FWIW, I think I agree with this, if it means that Aldridge isn't necessarily as big of an impact player on this year's Bulls team as one might initially think.

This year, and long term, the difference will be whether or not Tyrus can control himself enough and develop a consistent 16-18 foot jumpshot, as seen in [much slower speed] Summer League games.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Since Kirk is a GUARD, not a PG or SG, and Roy is also a GUARD, who do you guys think will be the better player?

We have seen Kirk's steady level of play for years. Do you think Roy could be as good? What about on defense? 

I love Tyrus, but Brandon Roy is a stud. I don't know if Kirk would have gotten us JO or Gasol, but I think it'd be a good package to start if KG were available.

So Kirk vs Roy? In regards to Tyrus and LMA, I think Tyrus will be the better player IF he puts the effort on developing on offense. I'm already convinced defensively that he will be a star one day.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

LuCane said:


> *B. I like Roy a lot but the Bulls would be in even bigger do do up front if they drafted a guard with their high pick.*
> 
> I don't at all care to make this thread about Roy, but you must have missed the second half of the sentence about Roy if you think using Hinrich/Brown (once Roy is matched with Gordon/Duhon in a backcourt) to get Gasol or O'Neil leaves us in "even bigger do do."


Oops. Will edit accordingly. I'm not sure, however, that Hinrich + Brown + pick would land either of those two players though. Certainly that outcome could not be counted on on draft day.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Tyrus seems to be the better pick, with a MUCH MUCH MUCH higher ceiling. I think you can compare these 2 to an analogy I heard on ESPN or NFL N today in regards to Brady Quinn vs Jamarcus Russell. Aldridge has the higher floor, but Tyrus has the higher ceiling. (The one about Quinn and Russell had Quinn with the higher floor, and Russell with the higher ceiling...though I don't think Russell holds a candle to Quinn personally)


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Aldridge has been the better player so far this season so I suppose if you got to choose one for a playoff series you probably take him. That said, the margin isn't enormous. The one big difference is that Aldridge seems to be able to take care of the ball while Tyrus' propensity to turn the ball over really hurts his value right now. 

For me Tyrus is a no brainer in the long run. He's more athletic and the holes in his game (turnovers and fouls) usually improve rapidly with young players. You mentioned that Aldridge had a good 15-18 footer and ironically this is the reason I ultimately soured on Aldride shorly before the draft and have since favored Tyrus instead. The Bulls are a jump shooting team with the need for a back to the basket player so a power forward who scores most of his points off of jumpers is not a great fit for this team even though Skiles does love his pick and pop.


----------



## bullybullz (Jan 28, 2007)

Can we please stop this discussion!! There has been TOOOOOOOOO MANY of these. It's over with!! Live with it!! I personally might've went after Roy or trade the pick along with Du and Malik for Sean May or something to that nature.

NEXT!!!


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

bullybullz said:


> Can we please stop this discussion!! There has been TOOOOOOOOO MANY of these. It's over with!! Live with it!! I personally might've went after Roy or trade the pick along with Du and Malik for Sean May or something to that nature.
> 
> NEXT!!!


Aldridge is a slightly better version of Channing Frye. No D, no rebounding big man who can shoot the 18 footer.

Tyrus is a better rebounder, better defender, better shot-blocker, better steals, better assists. Tyrus can his the 18 footer, but nothing a little practice won't cure.

Over the last 5 games (which includes Aldridge's 30 point effort):

Aldridge averging 13 ppg on 11.4 shots per game, 1.2 blocks, 0.4 steals, 6.2 boards in 23.6 minutes.

TT averging 8 ppg on 3.8 shots per game, 1.6 blocks, 0.8 steals, 4.8 boards in 17.3 minutes.

Per 40 minutes a night thats:
Aldridge 22 ppg, 19 shots per game, 2.0 blocks, 0.7 steals, 10.6 boards.
TT 18.5 ppg, 9 shots per game, 3.6 blocks, 1.8 steals, 10.7 boards.

We have players who take alot of shots already in Deng and Gordon. TT gets most of his points on rebounds, hussle plays and the fast break. I can argue that is way more valuable than a Malik Allen jump shooter who hoists up a boatload of shots like Aldridge does.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

LuCane said:


> This year, and long term, the difference will be whether or not Tyrus can control himself enough *and develop a consistent 16-18 foot jumpshot*, as seen in [much slower speed] Summer League games.


A perimeter jumpshot is probably the least important thing for Tyrus Thomas to develop, in my opinion. That isn't what is going to make him better than Aldridge.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

lougehrig said:


> Aldridge is a slightly better version of Channing Frye. No D, no rebounding big man who can shoot the 18 footer.
> 
> Tyrus is a better rebounder, better defender, better shot-blocker, better steals, better assists. Tyrus can his the 18 footer, but nothing a little practice won't cure.
> 
> ...


I'll admit I haven't seen any Portland games outside of games vs. the Bulls, but Aldridge was one of the better collegiate big man defenders. I really don't see how he could have turned into a no D, no rebounding version of Channing Frye. Even looking at your per 40 minute stats, how can you say he is "no rebounding."

The stats do not seem to indicate that Aldridge is a bad defender either:

Defense: Points per 100 Possessions
On Court 109.3 
Off Court 111.2

Effective FG% Allowed
On Court 50.9%
Off Court 50.7%

Defensive Rebounding %
On Court 72.7%
Off Court 70.2%

Total Rebounding %
On Court 52.7%
Off Court 50.7%

http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR12D.HTM


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> Aldridge has been the better player so far this season so I suppose if you got to choose one for a playoff series you probably take him. That said, the margin isn't enormous. The one big difference is that Aldridge seems to be able to take care of the ball while Tyrus' propensity to turn the ball over really hurts his value right now.
> 
> For me Tyrus is a no brainer in the long run. He's more athletic and the holes in his game (turnovers and fouls) usually improve rapidly with young players. You mentioned that Aldridge had a good 15-18 footer and ironically this is the reason I ultimately soured on Aldride shorly before the draft and have since favored Tyrus instead. The Bulls are a jump shooting team with the need for a back to the basket player so a power forward who scores most of his points off of jumpers is not a great fit for this team even though Skiles does love his pick and pop.





RonCey said:


> A perimeter jumpshot is probably the least important thing for Tyrus Thomas to develop, in my opinion. That isn't what is going to make him better than Aldridge.


These two posts touched on something that I've always felt about Tyrus as well. 

I tend to think that, for players who don't need them that much, developing a jumpshot is pretty overrated. Meaning, if you have the ability to consistently create much higher percentage shots for yourself in other ways, a jumpshot is pretty unneccessary, and maybe even counter productive if you start to use it too often. Shaq, Amare, and an in-his-prime Shawn Kemp didn't really need jump shots one iota, and I'm not sure that having one would've detracted from their offensive efficacy since it would have diverted their efforts from more fruitful offensive endeavors, (ie, dunking the hell out of the ball).

"Freaks" like Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady have drawn quite a bit of ire for becoming too reliant on their jumpshots after putting in considerable amount of work into developing one.

I'm not saying that I don't want Tyrus to develop a jumpshot, just that Tyrus turning into an automatic 18 foot pick n' pop kind of guy isn't really going to be the most effective way to capitalize his physical talents, and I'd rather see him learn to use his athleticism to create easy baskets for himself around the rim than develop a good jump shot.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

rosenthall said:


> These two posts touched on something that I've always felt about Tyrus as well.
> 
> I tend to think that, for players who don't need them that much, developing a jumpshot is pretty overrated. Meaning, if you have the ability to consistently create much higher percentage shots for yourself in other ways, a jumpshot is pretty unneccessary, and maybe even counter productive if you start to use it too often. Shaq, Amare, and an in-his-prime Shawn Kemp didn't really need jump shots one iota, and I'm not sure that having one would've detracted from their offensive efficacy since it would have diverted their efforts from more fruitful offensive endeavors, (ie, dunking the hell out of the ball)


Right. I think you want one that's not downright pathetic so teams don't sag way off you the way they do with Tyson but once you've got that you're set if you can score inside.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

lougehrig said:


> Over the last 5 games (which includes Aldridge's 30 point effort):
> 
> Aldridge averging 13 ppg on 11.4 shots per game, 1.2 blocks, 0.4 steals, 6.2 boards in 23.6 minutes.
> 
> ...


That's fascinating though I think I prefer the full season per 40 minute states better since it gives us a better sample size:

Tyrus
14.4 points, 7.2 FTA, 10.8 rebounds, 1.9 steals, 3.7 blocks, 4.5 turnovers, 7.5 PF, .503 TS%

Aldridge
15.3 points, 3.4 FTA, 8.3 rebounds, .4 steals, 2.0 blocks, 1.3 turnovers, 5.9 PF, .526 TS%

Aldridge is a better player right now because he's a moderately better scorer and he doesn't have the same turnover and foul woes that Tyrus does. As I said before, I don't expect him to maintain such a huge edge in those areas moving forwards, just because I don't see Tyrus being by far the most turnover and foul prone player in the league for his entire career. Tyrus kills Aldridge in everything else. The fact that he's getting to the line twice as often is striking and Aldridge's Curryesque rebounding is more pronounced when you look at his season stats.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

What's funny is that I feel almost exactly the same about the Aldridge/TT dilemma as I did on draft day. Namely, as others have said, LA would help us more today, but TT has more of a chance to be special. A month or two ago, I was a little uneasy about whether TT had the goods I thought he did, but he's put those fears to rest for the moment. He has a lot of work to do, but he has an uncanny knack for shotblocking and has shown bits and pieces of other things I think he can work on. I still like Aldridge and think he'll be solid for a long time, but I don't think he'll ever be so good that we'll be bashing our heads against the wall wishing we had him.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I agree that a jumpshot is not what's going to make Tyrus Thomas the man. But while I think it shouldn't foster too much attention in his offseason training, I think the ability to shoot jumpers is something that should supplement his game, especially as he gets older. Every good player in the league has at least a somewhat reliable J, and Tyrus has shown that he's not completely stiff when taking jumpers (they tend to be back-iron long jumpers, but he gets nice elevation on his J and has a somewhat fluid stroke).

I don't think "back-to-the-basket" is what we need either. I think Tyrus should style himself to be a power player in the sense of a power dribble, a drop-step, etc. These are post moves but they don't always begin Charles Barkley style, with big booty space-makers or Dream Shakes or anything like that. I think of Amare's game, which involves putting the ball on the floor, and I think Tyrus should emulate that. It's extremely effective, especially on a jump shooting team that spreads the floor to begin with.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

ViciousFlogging said:


> What's funny is that I feel almost exactly the same about the Aldridge/TT dilemma as I did on draft day. Namely, as others have said, LA would help us more today, but TT has more of a chance to be special. A month or two ago, I was a little uneasy about whether TT had the goods I thought he did, but he's put those fears to rest for the moment. He has a lot of work to do, but he has an uncanny knack for shotblocking and has shown bits and pieces of other things I think he can work on. I still like Aldridge and think he'll be solid for a long time, but I don't think he'll ever be so good that we'll be bashing our heads against the wall wishing we had him.


This is exactly how I feel, except for the part about liking Aldridge. 

Rest assured, Paxson brothers -- even if LaMarcus goes on to become a 15-time All-Star and first-ballot Hall of Famer, I will never second-guess your decision to take TT instead. TT's upside is at least a galaxy removed from Aldridge's, imo.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Showtyme said:


> I agree that a jumpshot is not what's going to make Tyrus Thomas the man. But while I think it shouldn't foster too much attention in his offseason training, I think the ability to shoot jumpers is something that should supplement his game, especially as he gets older. Every good player in the league has at least a somewhat reliable J, and Tyrus has shown that he's not completely stiff when taking jumpers (they tend to be back-iron long jumpers, but he gets nice elevation on his J and has a somewhat fluid stroke).
> 
> I don't think "back-to-the-basket" is what we need either. I think Tyrus should style himself to be a power player in the sense of a power dribble, a drop-step, etc. These are post moves but they don't always begin Charles Barkley style, with big booty space-makers or Dream Shakes or anything like that. I think of Amare's game, which involves putting the ball on the floor, and I think Tyrus should emulate that. It's extremely effective, especially on a jump shooting team that spreads the floor to begin with.


This is what I envision for him also. He definintely has the ablity to be an Amare-lite type.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> This is exactly how I feel, except for the part about liking Aldridge.
> 
> Rest assured, Paxson brothers -- even if LaMarcus goes on to become a 15-time All-Star and first-ballot Hall of Famer, I will never second-guess your decision to take TT instead. TT's upside is at least a galaxy removed from Aldridge's, imo.


I'd still rather have Aldridge.


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

For a team that has so many players people covet Portland isn't really that good are they?

Per 40 Minutes:
Tyrus leads in the following categories (notice that all of these margins are fairly large for the category):
FTA: 7.08 to 3.4
REB: 10.62 to 8.4
AST: 1.77 to .6
STL: 2.12 to .4
Blk: 3.89 to 2

Aldridge leads in the following categories:
TO: 1.4 to 4.60 (meaning Tyrus has more)
PF: 5.8 to 7.43 (meaning Tyrus has more
PTS: 15.4 to 14.51
FGA: 13.2 to 10.97

So Aldridge scores less than 1 point more on about 2 more shots per game. He makes fewer mistakes (fouls, tos), but is worse in every other statistical category. Most of which by a pretty significantly large amount.

If you work under the assumption that Tyrus's PFs and TOs are part of his being a raw project and will likely naturally reduce, then he's basically better in all other phases of the game than Aldridge. If you want to say his scoring is only coming off garbage points, then let me just say that if he can score at a similar rate per minute as Aldridge while not using up as many possessions then that's even better of us rather than worse because it won't stagnate our offense as much. 

As a side note, per minute in college, Tyrus scored more points as well as also still having significant leads in every other category I mentioned, so I don't think the fact that Tyrus can score on a similar level per minute as Aldridge is necessarily some anomaly of limited playing time this year. People look at Aldridge as a scorer because he has a better jumper while Tyrus is more of a scorer based on his athleticism.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Haven't seen much of Roy as a pro and I wasn't that high on him in the draft...I was a Roy guy. 

In looking at the comparative stats, I have to consider the nature of the two teams. The Blazers are in development mode big-time. Few but the most optimistic gave them a prayer to make the playoffs. The Bulls are in win now mode...make mistakes and you get to go back to the bench and watch a while longer. TT plays in a much more pressurized situation, but if he stays with it (and it looks like he is), it will benefit him in the long run.


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

Anyway, I wanted Aldridge on draft day, and I do think he'd help us more right now. Long term I'm not sure. Tyrus has a ways to go despite his ability to fill up the box better in per minute situations, he needs to be able to control his mistakes to ever play significant minutes in the NBA. We should have known that going into this. I'm not sure how much better he'll get at these challenges in front of him, but if he does improve then he projects out as a better player IMO. If not, then he obviously still has a high bust quotient.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

dougthonus said:


> For a team that has so many players people covet Portland isn't really that good are they?
> 
> Per 40 Minutes:
> Tyrus leads in the following categories (notice that all of these margins are fairly large for the category):
> ...


If Tyrus can put up 3.5 blocks, 2.0 steals and 10.5 boards per game, I don't care how many points he scores nor how many Aldridge scores, that would put him far ahead. Those are Kirilenko / Marion type of numbers.

Right now (only 53 games into his career as a 20 year old):

Tyrus is 2nd in the NBA in blocks per 48 with 4.49
Tyrus is 14th in the NBA in steals per 48 with 2.32 (tied with Thabo)
Tyrus is 33rd in the NBA in boards per 48 with 12.9

That's pretty damn good for a "project" player who is only averaging 11 minutes a night. 

The kid has a special skill set that is very, very rare in the NBA. And he is a legit 6'9" with freakishly long arms and can jump through the roof making him a PF unlike Kirilenko and Marion. And he has the makings of a good offensive game on top of all of that.

By the way the ONLY player in the league who is top 15 in steals AND blocks is Ben Wallace. Not bad for an off season.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

It's kind of a downer to have to mention this, but players who rely heavily on their leaping ability to succeed in the NBA tend to have short, sometimes spectacular, careers. I cringe every other time Tyrus Thomas leaps to the sky in traffic, wondering how and where he'll come down. He's one ankle/knee injury from being a very ordinary player. The same is somewhat true for any NBA player, but TT's game is heavily dependent on his quickness and jumping ability. Every time he jumps 3 feet in the air in traffic he exposes himself to an injury which he may not be able to recover from. Most other players do not have the natural ability to expose themselves to the same risk.

Tyrus Thomas is a unusually physically gifted athlete. Let's hope he develops his game rapidly, because I have a feeling that his tenure in the NBA is likely to be short.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

McBulls said:


> It's kind of a downer to have to mention this, but players who rely heavily on their leaping ability to succeed in the NBA tend to have short, sometimes spectacular, careers. I cringe every other time Tyrus Thomas leaps to the sky in traffic, wondering how and where he'll come down. He's one ankle/knee injury from being a very ordinary player. The same is somewhat true for any NBA player, but TT's game is heavily dependent on his quickness and jumping ability. Every time he jumps 3 feet in the air in traffic he exposes himself to an injury which he may not be able to recover from. Most other players do not have the natural ability to expose themselves to the same risk.
> 
> Tyrus Thomas is a unusually physically gifted athlete. Let's hope he develops his game rapidly, because I have a feeling that his tenure in the NBA is likely to be short.


His quickness is just as important if not more important than his pure vertical leap. That goes for his quick jump ability, blocking, steals etc. That's is alot more difficult to damage with a bad knee or twisted ankle.

As far as bust potential, what seperates Stro Swift, Marcus Haislip, Kwame Brown from the likes of Amare Stoudemire or Keving Garnett? They are all super gifted atheletes. However, the first group had little or no desire to be great players. 

If you ask me, Tyrus is looking more like a Stoudemire and Garnett in the desire column at this point.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

McBulls said:


> It's kind of a downer to have to mention this, but players who rely heavily on their leaping ability to succeed in the NBA tend to have short, sometimes spectacular, careers. I cringe every other time Tyrus Thomas leaps to the sky in traffic, wondering how and where he'll come down. He's one ankle/knee injury from being a very ordinary player. The same is somewhat true for any NBA player, but TT's game is heavily dependent on his quickness and jumping ability. Every time he jumps 3 feet in the air in traffic he exposes himself to an injury which he may not be able to recover from. Most other players do not have the natural ability to expose themselves to the same risk.
> 
> Tyrus Thomas is a unusually physically gifted athlete. Let's hope he develops his game rapidly, because I have a feeling that his tenure in the NBA is likely to be short.


That's a very sobering thought and another way in which the KMart comparison might be accurate.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

dougthonus said:


> Anyway, I wanted Aldridge on draft day, and I do think he'd help us more right now. Long term I'm not sure. Tyrus has a ways to go despite his ability to fill up the box better in per minute situations, he needs to be able to control his mistakes to ever play significant minutes in the NBA. We should have known that going into this. I'm not sure how much better he'll get at these challenges in front of him, but if he does improve then he projects out as a better player IMO. If not, then he obviously still has a high bust quotient.


I no doubt sound like a broken record at this point but I'll again point out that I can't name a tantalizing, high upside player who has been consistently kept off the floor because of foul trouble over a period of years. The best example I can think of is Chandler but he's up to 35 MPG this season. The turnovers seem more likely to remain a problem in the long run but it's hard for me to think of anyone who's been in the league a few years who does such a poor job of taking care of the ball. The league leaders in turnovers are players like Melo and Iverson who have the ball a lot. Tyrus' per 40 figure would rank first in the league in turnovers per game and he doesn't handle the ball that often. I find it hard to believe that any NBA player can continue to make such terrible passes over the course of a career in the league.


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

About 1/3rd of his turnovers are from offensive fouls and "other" while about 1/3rd are from ball handling and 1/3rd are from bad passes.


----------



## LuCane (Dec 9, 2002)

*I agree that a jumpshot is not what's going to make Tyrus Thomas the man. But while I think it shouldn't foster too much attention in his offseason training, I think the ability to shoot jumpers is something that should supplement his game, especially as he gets older. Every good player in the league has at least a somewhat reliable J,*

That was precisely my point. I never said that what was going to make him a better player than Aldridge was his ability to knock down the open J, but I did mean to express that for Tyrus - of relatively minimal girth - to be an effective offensive player in the near future, he's going to have to be able to hit a 16 foot jumpshot. This will open up his game against opposing 4s in various ways - namely, his ability to, like in the Summer League games, beat his man off the dribble and spin or drop step into the lane. His ability to develop a reliable 16 foot J would also open up the pick and roll game for him, and allow him to get easier baskets in the lane (when he's not sticking the J).


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I was also looking at Aldridge rather than Tyrus, because this team really IS built to win right now, and Aldridge is a fundamentally solid player that can play man defense that doesn't show up in the stats. Very few big men can play one-on-one defense against other good big men, not any more. I watched Chandler get completely lit up by Carlos Boozer, who is an All-Star but probably not in the top 5 at his position, and I realized, it takes a pretty amazing talent to let a big man defend one-on-one. The advantage is to the offense in that situation, which is why I think we're taking Ben Wallace for granted (they felt comfortable leaving him to guard YAO one-on-one, and although it was tough for him, he probably did as good a job as anyone can do, holding Yao to 20 points on 7-of-19 FG, more than 5 points less than his season average).

Aldridge shows the ability to guard the big PF's and C's in this league. Tyrus shows the ability to be a Tyson Chandler type defender, a weak-side shot blocker that can probably have the lateral quickness to keep up with some of the more agile PF's, like Shawn Marion and Al Harrington.

We need that TRUE interior defense, because while Big Ben remains effective (and I expect him to stay effective, especially in the postseason, for the next few seasons), we could really use a young PF/C that can give us the luxury of defending the elite bigs one-on-one.

Aldridge has better ability to catch the ball inside the paint, also, and softer hands around the hoop. Tyrus's post game is more spins and leaps than it is a soft touch and a drop-step.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

I think Tyrus's ceiling is something like 18 ppg, 10 rpg, 2 apg, 2 spg & 2 bpg.

He's displayed some very good passing, epecially in the pre-season.

He may be one of the best shot-blockers in all of the NBA and he only averages 11 mpg.

His rebounding will only get better, he's not consistent but he's displayed a fantastic rebounding abilty at times, almost young 'dennis Rodman' like.

He swats alot of balls loose playing man-to-man in the post and is probably better even on the perimeter playing the three when it comes to his stealing ability.

He'll add a consistent 12-15 mid-range jumper, he's developing a spinning base-line hook & he'll get more lobs when his teammates believe in his abilities more. 19 pts shouldn't be very hard to come by, especially since he gets to the free-throw line at a high rate.

He's raw, but he has a TON of ability. With the right coaching and training, he could be a dominant force in the NBA. My prediction : A more defensive-minded Kenyon Martin, not as strong but smarter.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

Showtyme said:


> I was also looking at Aldridge rather than Tyrus, because this team really IS built to win right now, and Aldridge is a fundamentally solid player that can play man defense that doesn't show up in the stats. Very few big men can play one-on-one defense against other good big men, not any more. I watched Chandler get completely lit up by Carlos Boozer, who is an All-Star but probably not in the top 5 at his position, and I realized, it takes a pretty amazing talent to let a big man defend one-on-one. The advantage is to the offense in that situation, which is why I think we're taking Ben Wallace for granted (they felt comfortable leaving him to guard YAO one-on-one, and although it was tough for him, he probably did as good a job as anyone can do, holding Yao to 20 points on 7-of-19 FG, more than 5 points less than his season average).
> 
> Aldridge shows the ability to guard the big PF's and C's in this league. Tyrus shows the ability to be a Tyson Chandler type defender, a weak-side shot blocker that can probably have the lateral quickness to keep up with some of the more agile PF's, like Shawn Marion and Al Harrington.
> 
> ...


Wallace did well against Yao, who is a finesse player, but he got destroyed by an older Shaq last night. Ben doesn't do well against bulkier, physical guys. Chandler does not, too. 

I love Tyrus' upside, but the Bulls are in a huge pickle and desperately need a quality tall front court player. I think you have to judge the draft pick partly on how well Tyrus turns out vs. Aldridge, and partly on how well Paxson fills the hole in our frontcourt. 

I would rather have a PF/C rotation of Aldridge/Wallace/Deng than Tyrus/Wallace/Brezec. I think.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Last 4 :

14pts, 6rebs, 2stls & 1blk (17 min vs the warriors)

10 pts, 7 rebs, 3 blks, 2 stls (24 min vs the hornets)

7pts, 7 rebs, 2asts, 1 blk (24 min vs the bucks)

8pts, 7 rebs, 2stls (21 min vs the heat)

Our rook is emerging, and faster than Thabo it seems.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

6pts, 3rebs, 2stls & 2blks vs. the magic (15 mins of play)

We have a PLAYER on our hands ladies and gentlemen. I think Paxson was right AGAIN.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

The ROY said:


> 6pts, 3rebs, 2stls & 2blks vs. the magic (15 mins of play)
> 
> We have a PLAYER on our hands ladies and gentlemen. I think Paxson was right AGAIN.


rwj333's point is still valid. The Bulls need a legitimate big man. Don't see Tyrus guarding Shaq any time in the future -- or Dwight Howard for that matter.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

McBulls said:


> rwj333's point is still valid. The Bulls need a legitimate big man. Don't see Tyrus guarding Shaq any time in the future -- or Dwight Howard for that matter.


Well, Tyrus shouldn't be guarding Shaq or Dwight anyway.

If Tyrus puts on the needed weight, he'll be just fine playing the PF position.


----------



## Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! (Jun 10, 2003)

McBulls said:


> rwj333's point is still valid. The Bulls need a legitimate big man. Don't see Tyrus guarding Shaq any time in the future -- or Dwight Howard for that matter.


Ah, didn't we just pay someone about 60 million big ones to exactly that?? If not, then why exactly did we shell out the 60 mil?? For an oustanding 20 foot jumpshot??


----------



## dougthonus (Jul 18, 2006)

> Don't see Tyrus guarding Shaq any time in the future -- or Dwight Howard for that matter.


Do you see LaMarcus Aldridge really doing that?

In the end, we'll likely be able to determine who the better player is, and that's the guy we'll have wanted to take. The rest of the theories about fit will go out the window once one player establishes themselves as the better guy. 

Would rather have Andrew Bogut right now than Chris Paul or Deron Williams even if your team needed a center?


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! said:


> Ah, didn't we just pay someone about 60 million big ones to exactly that?? If not, then why exactly did we shell out the 60 mil?? For an oustanding 20 foot jumpshot??


The way I see it, Tyrus Thomas is Ben Wallace's substitute and eventual replacement in a few years. He has a little better offensive game, but you can only pray that he will play defense as well as Ben Wallace.

The optomistic projection of his production is 12 ppg, 12 rb, 2 assists, 2 steals and 3 blocks -- if he can find a way to stay out of foul trouble and keep from getting hurt. Those are roughly Ben Wallace numbers.

Both players work best with a tall big man beside them. The Bulls need to get one or two of those.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Tyrus has offensive potential..he'll definintely be better than a 12 ppg scorer. Hell, he can get that right now playing 25 min per game with little to no plays ran for him.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

The ROY said:


> Tyrus has offensive potential..he'll definintely be better than a 12 ppg scorer. Hell, he can get that right now playing 25 min per game with little to no plays ran for him.


So I did a comparison of TT and Aldridge since they have been playing expanded minutes. I took the last 28 games for Aldridge where he has averaged 22 minutes per game and the last 5 games for TT where he has averages 20 minutes per game.


Aldridge: 28 G, 22 min, 3.8-7.7 FG, 1.3-1.9 FT, 8.9 PPG
Tyrus: 5 G, 20 min, 3.0-4.4 FG, 3.0-4.0 FT, 9.0 PPG 

Aldridge: 0.2 spg, 1.3 bpg, 2.2 orb, 3.8 drb, 6.0 rpg, 0.3 apg
Tyrus: 1.6 spg, 1.4 bpg, 1.8 orb, 4.2 drb, 6.0 rpg, 0.6 apg

They run pick and roll for Aldridge alot in Portland. He takes alot of shots. Tyrus is alot more efficient getting garbage points and hanging around the basket, drawing fouls, etc. This type of game is a perfect fit playing alot Gordon and Deng who needs shots and will command more shots.

Defensively, TT and Aldridge have the same standing reach, despite Aldridge being 1-2" taller. Tyrus is obviously much quicker. I see TT being a premier interior and help defender in this league not too long from now.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

lougehrig said:


> So I did a comparison of TT and Aldridge since they have been playing expanded minutes. I took the last 28 games for Aldridge where he has averaged 22 minutes per game and the last 5 games for TT where he has averages 20 minutes per game.
> 
> 
> Aldridge: 28 G, 22 min, 3.8-7.7 FG, 1.3-1.9 FT, 8.9 PPG
> ...


interesting. aldridge is a couple inches taller, so all the associations of being tall go to him. 
he's taller so he must be a strong inside presecnce.
though 230 lbs for a 6'11" guy isn't that much of an edge over tyrus at 6'8" and 217.

alrdidge is taller so he must have a better inside game.

even though 63% of aldridge's shots are outside jump shots. 
tyrus meanwhile takes 69% of his shots in the inside.
it's encouraging to see that tyrus can match aldrige's offensive numbers with nearly 1/2 of the shot attempts.
http://www.82games.com/0607/06CHI10A.HTM
http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR12A.HTM

and tyrus' speed advantage is not mearsurable in any stat. 
but could aldridge double team dwight howard then run out on hedo at the 3pt line?
or pick up hedo at the half court line and force him to pass?

orlando, imo, tried to run small ball to either get dwight 1 on 1 with wallace (with no big man to help wallace).
or to get their shooters open shots in the double teaming of howard.
but tyrus' speed was the difference in negating that.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

The ROY said:


> I think Tyrus's ceiling is something like 18 ppg, 10 rpg, 2 apg, 2 spg & 2 bpg.
> 
> He may be one of the best shot-blockers in all of the NBA and he only averages 11 mpg.


I think you're right about his shot blocking but it should give him considerably more than 2 blocks per game. He's average 3.5 per 40 minutes right now.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> He's average 3.5 per 40 minutes right now.


He may be racking up the blocks now, but he's also racking up the fouls even quicker. In order to fix the latter he won't be able to be so gun-ho on the defensive end when in comes to it, so the numbers will drop, but hopefully not by much.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

step said:


> He may be racking up the blocks now, but he's also racking up the fouls even quicker. In order to fix the latter he won't be able to be so gun-ho on the defensive end when in comes to it, so the numbers will drop, but hopefully not by much.


If you notice he rarely fouls trying to make a block. That's what so great about him. He does foul out on the floor reaching and moving around picks though.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Showtyme said:


> I agree that a jumpshot is not what's going to make Tyrus Thomas the man. But while I think it shouldn't foster too much attention in his offseason training, I think the ability to shoot jumpers is something that should supplement his game, especially as he gets older. Every good player in the league has at least a somewhat reliable J, and Tyrus has shown that he's not completely stiff when taking jumpers (they tend to be back-iron long jumpers, but he gets nice elevation on his J and has a somewhat fluid stroke).
> 
> I don't think "back-to-the-basket" is what we need either. I think Tyrus should style himself to be a power player in the sense of a power dribble, a drop-step, etc. These are post moves but they don't always begin Charles Barkley style, with big booty space-makers or Dream Shakes or anything like that. I think of Amare's game, which involves putting the ball on the floor, and I think Tyrus should emulate that. It's extremely effective, especially on a jump shooting team that spreads the floor to begin with.


Spot on

I am one of Tyrus's biggest advocates and have talked him up to the hilt

I have compared his rebounding and shotblocking skills to having a chance to reach into Bill Russellville territory and the only reason I say that because I haven't seen someone of his timing _ and vision _ for a long time . I have watched him relentlessly in College last year ( games over and over ) and have watched his season closely to date .

His defensive instincts in being able to see a play as its coming - combined with his quicks and athleticism makes him scary good when he polishes up and adds a bit of strength at this level. 

But what I have always said about him is he actually has capacity to control the ball on the shotblock - either is being able to control it or having presence of mind to tap out to an open teammate to get out on the break 

Offensively , its important he adds a jump hook which should be effective with those long arms , and given his agility and quickness he can beat bigger guys with a quick drop step if he can develop one . I don't want to see him as a butt em down banger - that's not his game. Catch , move , jump hook or drop step , crash the glass and follow and haul *** down court .

He will get a lot of his points on feeds and the Bulls already strong passing game which will see him score plenty of points inside without us having to slow it down into Pau Gasol preferred half court game 

While he has shown some glimpses of being able to make the pass on the break and looking fluid in doing so ..he is still a bit careless which I think is a rookie thing. Amare Stoudamire in his rookie season was a better handler and a guy who could thread a pass . Thomas is not there yet but I see capacity there - as to whether he develops accordingly who knows

But Showtyme - your analysis of Tyrus in the paint is exactly what I think. To play in the post you don't need to slow the game down - if your quick and athletic and don't have the body to bang and grind you can still be very effective with a couple of go to moves . And the quick go to moves I think would suit him best are the jump hook with those long arms of his and a quick drop step 

As to the question of either he or Aldridge ....give me the Virus any day of the week and twice on Sundays 

He's got a chance of being special and I think he contributes in this playoff series probably just as much ( if not more ) than Aldridge would

Forget about Aldridge's height..its immaterial . Its their length and reach which is important and The Virus beats him here anyway . Combine this with his better quicks and instincts and chippy mindset and these are the reasons why he always was/is the better pick


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

McBulls said:


> rwj333's point is still valid. The Bulls need a legitimate big man. Don't see Tyrus guarding Shaq any time in the future -- or Dwight Howard for that matter.


I agree we need bulk and size 

But that steal he pulled on Dwight Howard the other night where he got in front of him and picked him was awesome

But Dwight Howard is huge and I agree that need size in the rotation to handle these types of guys in spurts


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Anybody notice LSU this year? Didn't make it to the big dance, mediocre record and barely went un-noticed all season.

Tyrus had a much bigger effect for that team than most would like to think.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Hollinger thinks that both players have a chance to be the best in the draft class:



> Ben, NYC: Which rookie do you think will have the best career (barring injury) and do you see any being high impact players come play-off time?
> 
> SportsNation John Hollinger: Best career will be Bargnani, Aldridge or Thomas. Too early to make a call on which one does best. As far as this year's postseason, Bargnani will have an impact for as long as the Raps last, but that might only be one round.


http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=14966


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

Both have big nights tonight

Thomas: 23 pts, 9 rebs, 1 blks, 9-14 shooting.
Aldridge: 24 pts, 17 rebs, 4 blks, 11-17 shooting (1 minute left in the game)

Not being a homer, but I've watched both games tonight and Thomas had a greater impact on the game compare to Aldridge. Thomas is just consistently more active on both ends. Aldridge didn't attack the rim hard enough.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

RSP83 said:


> Both have big nights tonight
> 
> Thomas: 23 pts, 9 rebs, 1 blks, 9-14 shooting.
> Aldridge: 24 pts, 17 rebs, 4 blks, 11-17 shooting (1 minute left in the game)
> ...



So Aldridge takes 3 more shots, has more offensive rebounds that Thomas has total rebounds, has 3 more blocks, 1 more assist and 4 less turnovers.....and you say Thomas is more active???? 


Nope, ni sign of homerism here.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> So Aldridge takes 3 more shots, has more offensive rebounds that Thomas has total rebounds, has 3 more blocks, 1 more assist and 4 less turnovers.....and you say Thomas is more active????
> 
> 
> Nope, ni sign of homerism here.


If those numbers showed that Aldridge is that good you guys would've won the game.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> So Aldridge takes 3 more shots, has more offensive rebounds that Thomas has total rebounds, has 3 more blocks, 1 more assist and 4 less turnovers.....and you say Thomas is more active????
> 
> Nope, ni sign of homerism here.


Good night for Aldridge. Just curious, did you see the Bulls game tonight?

At least 6 of Tyrus' baskets were energy elevating dunks which was very important to the Bulls victory.

Good to see both players play before claiming homerism.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> So Aldridge takes 3 more shots, has more offensive rebounds that Thomas has total rebounds, has 3 more blocks, 1 more assist and 4 less turnovers.....and you say Thomas is more active????
> 
> 
> Nope, ni sign of homerism here.


C'mon now, Tyrus is MUCH more active than LM, this season and last season in the NCAA.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

First point. The Blazers and Bulls are at a different stage. The Blazers are still getting to where they need to go. Because of that Aldridge's play doesn't effect wins and losses as much as Thomas' does.

Yes I saw the game. Thomas is certainly more electrifying than Aldridge, but there is a difference between active and electric.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

If activity doesn't equal production, than what good is it? Junk Yard Dog was more active than Duncan...


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

TripleDouble said:


> If activity doesn't equal production, than what good is it? Junk Yard Dog was more active than Duncan...


Tyrus = great fit for Bulls. Active defender, high energy just like the rest of our players. We are a defensive team first and foremost.

Aldridge = great fit for Blazers.

Therefore, moot point.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> If activity doesn't equal production, than what good is it? Junk Yard Dog was more active than Duncan...


But JYD is far less talented than Tyrus. I think players have more chance to suceed when they're more active. Look at lazy players with all-world talent like Darius Miles and Tim Thomas.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

RSP83 said:


> But JYD is far less talented than Tyrus. I think players have more chance to suceed when they're more active. Look at lazy players with all-world talent like Darius Miles and Tim Thomas.


I'm a big Tyrus fan but I'm just saying that "active" just seems a little vague.


----------



## RagingBulls316 (Feb 15, 2004)

Tyrus this year reminds me alot of Nocioni's rookie year, even though they are going to be completely different players. They both struggle in the same area. 

Nocioni during his rookie year would always be way to aggressive on a fast break and either turn the ball over or draw a offensive foul like Tyrus does now. Also Nocioni struggled with his shot, and with offseason work greatly improved it. If Thomas can make the same improvements Nocioni did between his rookie and sophmore season, he is going to be a very improved player.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

I'm surprised Aldridge managed to pull down 17. He's still only averaging 8.8 per 40 (to 10.8 for Tyrus) and his previous high was 11. I've yet to see Aldridge play but based on Tyrus' large edge in blocks, steals, and rebounds per 40 I'll go ahead and say that he's the more active of the two players.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

RagingBulls316 said:


> Tyrus this year reminds me alot of Nocioni's rookie year, even though they are going to be completely different players. They both struggle in the same area.
> 
> Nocioni during his rookie year would always be way to aggressive on a fast break and either turn the ball over or draw a offensive foul like Tyrus does now. Also Nocioni struggled with his shot, and with offseason work greatly improved it. If Thomas can make the same improvements Nocioni did between his rookie and sophmore season, he is going to be a very improved player.


Yeah but Nocioni actually HAD an offensive game, he just made alot of mistakes. Tyrus has little to NO offensive game.


----------



## Deng101 (Jan 13, 2005)

The ROY said:


> Yeah but Nocioni actually HAD an offensive game, he just made alot of mistakes. Tyrus has little to NO offensive game.


Tyrus actually has shown he can hit that mid range jumper and has shown post moves, not 2 mention the above the rim skills helps a bunch too. Nocioni knew the game more and was 24-25 his rookie year being the biggest difference. Tyrus will never be a 3 point shooter like Nocioni can be but he looks like he will become a very good offensive player in the future.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Deng101 said:


> Tyrus actually has shown he can hit that mid range jumper and has shown post moves, not 2 mention the above the rim skills helps a bunch too. Nocioni knew the game more and was 24-25 his rookie year being the biggest difference. Tyrus will never be a 3 point shooter like Nocioni can be but he looks like he will become a very good offensive player in the future.


http://www.82games.com/0607/06CHI10A.HTM

Tyrus has an eFG% of 17.7% on his jumpers. I really do not think that is a sign he "can" hit the mid range jumper. I certainly expect him to improve on that, even if he doesn't work on it due to playing more within himself and in confidence with what he is doing out there. That said, he has a lot of work to do to become even average at hitting jumpers.

His eFG% of 34.2% on his "close" shots. He definately has flaunted some moves, but his touch around the basket isn't a whole lot better than his jumper. I expect this aspect of his game to develop more rapidly than his midrange game. He also has used some moves to get dunks, so this eFG% is probably a little underweighted.

The only area where Tyrus is really an asset on offense is his ability to play above the rim, which generates a lot of fouls. If he can get that FT% up above 70%, then he can be a force in the future in this aspect of his game.


----------



## Deng101 (Jan 13, 2005)

You cant just look at stats and get the whole picture, especially with rookies.... The fact is TT has shown he has a decent mid range jumper and can score at times in the post. And yes we all know his above the rim ability.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Deng101 said:


> You cant just look at stats and get the whole picture, especially with rookies.... The fact is TT has shown he has a decent mid range jumper and can score at times in the post. And yes we all know his above the rim ability.


Explain how he has a decent mid range jumper, yet he only converts 18% of his opportunities over the course of the season?
When has he shown he has a decent midrange jumper--Summer League and the two he made in a row against Boston? He is really, really bad at midrange jumpers right now. I think he has surpassed Ben Wallace bad, but not by a whole lot. The first half of the season, I was surprised every time he hit a jumper (which was not very often).

I think FT% is often a good indicator of how well a player will hit open shots from 12-18 feet. Tyrus has not shown to be a good FT shooter either, although he did hit them at about a 65% clip in college.

I don't expect him to shoot 18% on his jumpers next season. I think a lot of that is nerves and not knowing the system. I also don't expect him to start knocking down wide open jumpers with regularity (as I would classify a decent midrange shooter). He'll have a lot of work to do to get to that level.

In the next couple of years, I think that time would be better spent working on FTs, strength, and operating in the post.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Rhyder said:


> Explain how he has a decent mid range jumper, yet he only converts 18% of his opportunities over the course of the season?
> When has he shown he has a decent midrange jumper--Summer League and the two he made in a row against Boston? He is really, really bad at midrange jumpers right now. I think he has surpassed Ben Wallace bad, but not by a whole lot. The first half of the season, I was surprised every time he hit a jumper (which was not very often).
> 
> I think FT% is often a good indicator of how well a player will hit open shots from 12-18 feet. Tyrus has not shown to be a good FT shooter either, although he did hit them at about a 65% clip in college.
> ...


This post is based on extreme exaggerations. He is a 20 year old rookie with 1 year of college and 1/2 year of NBA experience. You can't predict if he can or cannot hit jumpers or free throws. 

You look as his form and he has the ability to be a consistent outside shooter. Somebody like Ben Wallace, Shaq, Curry, Chandler never showed the ability to hit anything outside 5 feet. Tyrus is far superior to these players. He is a rookie that's why he is only shooting 18% on jumpers. 

Look at Karl Malone when he entered the league. He couldn't hit the side of a barn. However, the jumper would be the key to his game for most of his career. Was KG a premiere jumpshooter when he entered the league? How about Jermaine O'Neal? Or did they all work on their games to develop this.

He doesn't need to convince you that he is all-star quality at this point and that he can make 50% of his jump shots. You have to look at his form, touch, ability which are all there. 

Remember 20 years old. Less than 100 games college and pro experience.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

lougehrig said:


> This post is based on extreme exaggerations. He is a 20 year old rookie with 1 year of college and 1/2 year of NBA experience. You can't predict if he can or cannot hit jumpers or free throws.
> 
> You look as his form and he has the ability to be a consistent outside shooter. Somebody like Ben Wallace, Shaq, Curry, Chandler never showed the ability to hit anything outside 5 feet. Tyrus is far superior to these players. He is a rookie that's why he is only shooting 18% on jumpers.
> 
> ...


Tyrus fan or not, this post is pretty on point. He's just a kid and is barely scratching the surface of his potential.

I remember Paxson once saying they 'almost' view Tyrus as a kid coming out of h.s., they viewed him as being that raw of a player.

Anybody remember Josh Smith as a rookie? He did NOTHING but get blocks and dunks, no jumper to speak of. Now? he can shoot to about as far out as 18 feet.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Here is another point to make. Aldridge is a jumpshooting big man. 60% of shots are ALREADY jumpshots and he a rookie. Don't expect that percentage to get any less as he ages. Expect it to go up. 

Doug Collins made this point on TNT last week. Once a player starts playing further out on the floor and making jumpshots it is impossible to get them to play in the paint. As players age, it is easier for them to take jumpers than to bang down low.

On the other hand, Tyrus has 69% of his shot attempts inside. That is invaluable. We have enough jumpshooters (Deng, Gordon, Hinrich, Noc), why do we need more? Aldridge is headed toward Rasheed Wallace's 80% jumpers or Channing Frye's 79%. Tyrus actually posts down low everytime down the floor.

Show me one example of a big player who plays more down low as they age and takes less jumpers. There isn't any. 60% jumpers as a rookie is simply too much for our team.


----------



## the-asdf-man (Jun 29, 2006)

lougehrig said:


> Show me one example of a big player who plays more down low as they age and takes less jumpers. There isn't any. 60% jumpers as a rookie is simply too much for our team.



Luol Deng


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

lougehrig said:


> This post is based on extreme exaggerations. He is a 20 year old rookie with 1 year of college and 1/2 year of NBA experience. You can't predict if he can or cannot hit jumpers or free throws.
> 
> You look as his form and he has the ability to be a consistent outside shooter. Somebody like Ben Wallace, Shaq, Curry, Chandler never showed the ability to hit anything outside 5 feet. Tyrus is far superior to these players. He is a rookie that's why he is only shooting 18% on jumpers.
> 
> ...


In what sense am I exaggerating?

I also am not trying to predict whether he will be good at hitting jumpers four years from now. My point is that he does not have a decent jumper now, and Tyrus is going to have a lot of work ahead of him to make it decent. He has pretty good form, but his touch is pretty poor. He has more of a line drive arc, but does have the benefit of releasing it from such a high point. I don't think he will ever rattle a lot of shots home, or hit many that hit off the front of the rim and drop in. It's pretty much swish or knick the back iron or it's out.

Tyrus does have better form than say a Chandler or Wallace, so I don't think he'll ever be close to as bad as they are as shooters. However, I wouldn't say his jumper is decent. P.J. is a decent midrange shooter, and I say this despite hiim shooting really poorly for us most of this season.

Aldridge and Rudy Gay are decent midrange shooters.
O'Bryant and Thomas are not there, but could be eventually
Simmons and Sene are not there, and doubtfully will ever be there

If I were in charge of Tyrus, I'd have him work on adding weight/muscle in the offseason and working on trying to operate in the low post, not go out and take 400-600 jumpers from 12-18 feet. This should help him from getting banged around on offense and defense, and would help him significantly on the defensive glass.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

I USED to think Tyrus truely was a J.Smith/Kirilenko type of SF but he's not at all. He's actually a Ben Wallace (defense and activity) & Kenyon Martin (energy & lob/3-10 foot shooting offense) type of PF.

Out of the Troy Outlaw/Stromile Swift/Hakim Warrick hybrid of forwards, I think Tyrus will be the overall best when it's all said and done.


----------



## nanokooshball (Jan 22, 2005)

After watching Amaare Stoudemire last night against the Mavericks, I want Tyrus Thomas just to watch videos of Amaare all day long....

Look at what the extra 30-40 lbs of rock solid muscle can do for your game. Have that BULLDOG mentality on offense that you're gonna rip other player's heads off as you goto the rim for a power dunk. Seriously, Tyrus can do what Amaare does, but he first needs to build up that muscle pronto.... man if Tyrus can get 30lbs this summer (and work that 12-18 footer).... I'll be :worthy: :worthy: :worthy: :worthy:


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

The ROY said:


> I USED to think Tyrus truely was a J.Smith/Kirilenko type of SF but he's not at all. He's actually a Ben Wallace (defense and activity) & Kenyon Martin (energy & lob/3-10 foot shooting offense) type of PF.
> 
> Out of the Troy Outlaw/Stromile Swift/Hakim Warrick hybrid of forwards, I think Tyrus will be the overall best when it's all said and done.


That's how I always thought of him.

This is also why I preferred Aldridge. We need more offensive weapons, and the guy can bang down low. Like Tyrus, he needs to add a lot of strength and some extra bulk would not hurt either. Aldridge is a better shooter, screener, man defender, and defensive rebounder, has size and frame to put on some more weight. Tyrus is a better at getting to the rim, passer, ball handler, help defense, perimeter defense, and offensive rebounder.

I liked both players as NBA prospects. I just thought Aldridge was a much better fit for what we needed.

Aldridge posted a lot in college and had some good moves down on the low block when the guards could get him the ball. I've only seen the one Portland game vs. the Bulls where he played, so I don't really have a good sense on how Portland is trying to use him.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

the-asdf-man said:


> Luol Deng


Perimeter player. Modern SF are perimeter players. I mean perimeters players like Sam Cassell and Mark Jackson developed nice post games later in their career. Big players develop jumpshots and move further out on the floor, a la Rasheed Wallace.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Rhyder said:


> That's how I always thought of him.
> 
> This is also why I preferred Aldridge. We need more offensive weapons, and the guy can bang down low. Like Tyrus, he needs to add a lot of strength and some extra bulk would not hurt either. Aldridge is a better shooter, screener, man defender, and defensive rebounder, has size and frame to put on some more weight. Tyrus is a better at getting to the rim, passer, ball handler, help defense, perimeter defense, and offensive rebounder.
> 
> ...


I actually likened him to a defensive-minded Kenyon Martin. I mean, I figured he could go either way at first, the hybrid SF (J. Smith, Marion, Kirilenko) or the tweener atheletic PF (Martin, Warrick). Some people see him possibly having an 'Amare-lite' type of game when it's all said and done, I dunno if I can see that. One thing is for sure, the wing is definintely not his position.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Rhyder said:


> In what sense am I exaggerating?
> 
> If I were in charge of Tyrus, I'd have him work on adding weight/muscle in the offseason and working on trying to operate in the low post, not go out and take 400-600 jumpers from 12-18 feet. This should help him from getting banged around on offense and defense, and would help him significantly on the defensive glass.


Exaggerating in the sense of time. You make it sound like he isn't doing these things right now. If you were Tyrus you would put weight / muscle on him and work on his 12-18 foot jumpers. He has played 50+ games in the NBA. Here is are the adjustments he has to make in that time.

1. Being away from home / living my himself
2. Having to travel night in and night out
3. Managing millions of dollars
4. Paying bills and rent etc...etc...
5. Learning basic NBA plays and skills

I almost guarantee you he taking alot jumpers from 12-18 feet on a daily basis. I almost guarantee you is he lifting and eating to build muscle on a daily basis. 

The way the kid has improved since the beginning of the year I guarantee you he is maximizing his time working on his entire game (cardio, muscle, mental, skills).

Show me some evidence he isn't working on these things and we might have something to talk about. It takes time to develop an NBA body and an NBA game. Since Skiles and company managed Gordon and Deng's development, I have no doubt Tyrus will be as strong, quick, hungry and intelligent as he possibly can be.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

Rhyder said:


> Aldridge posted a lot in college and had some good moves down on the low block when the guards could get him the ball. I've only seen the one Portland game vs. the Bulls where he played, so I don't really have a good sense on how Portland is trying to use him.


I won't weigh in with an opinion on Thomas vs Aldridge as I've barely watched any Bulls games, and the few that I have seen haven't involved much of Thomas so I don't have a good feel for his game. However, I can give some Aldridge insight as I've seen almost every game of his since going Pro.

With regards to activity, I feel that he is very active. He's constantly getting his hand on the ball, though frequently it ends up in someone elses hands (lately he's been doing better at this as his rebounds the last few games have gone up drastically). 

For his offense, he's been taking primarily jump shots due to the way McMillan uses him. He spends probably 90% of his minutes in the game with either Zach Randolph or Jamaal Magloire. Magloire has not outside game, so Aldridge has to stay out to give him room. Zach actually can shoot outside, but is much more effective inside so again Aldridge mostly stays out of his way. The last couple games we've finally seen some inside plays called for Aldridge so hopefully we'll see more of his post game.

As to what little of his post game we've seen, he's got a great jump hook (I'm curious the percentage he hits, seems to always go in, though he doesn't use it as much as I would like). He also has a decent turnaround (and really tough to block with his high release), though it seems less effective then the jump hook from what I've seen. He rarely takes it directly at the hole himself, though is good at cutting to the hole and receiving a pass.

His most effective jump shot seems to be the top of the key jumper. 

Defensively I've been even happier. Early on he got a lot of fouls (but then, most rookies do), but as of late has gotten much more under control Does a good job of using his length to bother people's shots. However, he can get pushed around by stronger players (which is most at this point, though he is apparently constantly in the weightroom so that should hopefully change). His speed and length allows him to come out of nowhere for blocked shots.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Deng101 said:


> You cant just look at stats and get the whole picture, especially with rookies.... *The fact is TT has shown he has a decent mid range jumper* and can score at times in the post.


How has he shown that he has a decent mid range jumper? He has a TERRIBLE mid range jumper. This absolutely can be proven statistically and has been proven by Rhyder. 

Has he shown enough form and coordination to make one think he CAN develope a decent mid randge jumper in the future? Yes. But right now his jumper sucks eggs.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

how has Aldridge proved that he is the low post banger we needed?

He shoots the majority of his shots from the outside.
He shoots less free throws than Tyrus.

I don't think either guy has the strength to be consistent low post threats.
So they resort to what their good at.
Tyrus going above the rim and to the free throw line.
Aldridge going to his nice mid-range/outside shot.

Both can go on to develop more balance to their offense, but at the moment i'd go with Tyrus because we're already outside oriented.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

RoRo said:


> how has Aldridge proved that he is the low post banger we needed?
> 
> He shoots the majority of his shots from the outside.
> He shoots less free throws than Tyrus.
> ...


Can't agree more. Both are nice talent. I realize now that it's not who's better, but who fits our team better. I've been choosing Tyrus over Aldridge because I looked at it from a Bulls fan perspective. And Tyrus is a closer solution to our problem than Aldridge. I think both will be among the best of their draft class.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

lougehrig said:


> Exaggerating in the sense of time. You make it sound like he isn't doing these things right now. If you were Tyrus you would put weight / muscle on him and work on his 12-18 foot jumpers. He has played 50+ games in the NBA. Here is are the adjustments he has to make in that time.
> 
> 1. Being away from home / living my himself
> 2. Having to travel night in and night out
> ...


Deng said he had a decent midrange shot. I said he didn't, and thought that 18% FG% on jumpers might be enough proof to indicate his midrange shot was not "decent." I never said anything about how he could not or would not in the future, or that he will never improve on his 18% eFG% on jumpers. I said the opposite, so I'm not quite sure what you are trying to argue with me.

Is it because I said I preferred Aldridge to Tyrus in last year's draft? I still do, but that doesn't mean I'm not a fan of Tyrus. I like the kid, and was a big LSU fan last season.

A decent shooter, when left wide open might miss long or short, but probably will very rarely miss left or right. Tyrus has been missing wide open jumpers all over the rim (with a few air balls) all season. He does seem to know when he is going to miss, and follows his shot which is a very positive thing.

I think most of his improvement this season has been because of the mental aspect. He was a very heady player at LSU (especially defensively). That hasn't transitioned well to the pros, although he seems to be getting some of that back.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Rhyder said:


> *He does seem to know when he is going to miss*, and follows his shot which is a very positive thing.


I also seem to know when he is going to miss his mid range jumper. It happens when he shoots a mid range jumper.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Rhyder said:


> I think most of his improvement this season has been because of the mental aspect. He was a very heady player at LSU (especially defensively). That hasn't transitioned well to the pros, although he seems to be getting some of that back.


-3rd in the NBA in blocks per 48 minutes only behind Camby and Mourning (1st among power forwards)

-13th in the NBA in steals per 48 minutes (1st among power forwards and only PF or C in the top 25)

-33rd in the NBA in rebounds per 48 minutes

Not bad for a 20 year old rookie with less than 100 games of experience.

I guess that's not transitioning well to the NBA (especially defensively).


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

RoRo said:


> how has Aldridge proved that he is the low post banger we needed?
> 
> He shoots the majority of his shots from the outside.
> He shoots less free throws than Tyrus.
> ...


How many bigs come into the game with a NBA ready body, especially with so many of them declaring early.?

Like Tyrus, Aldridge came into the league without a lot of strength (relative to other bigs as a NBA rookie). Aldridge showed a wide variety of moves with pretty good footwork in the post at Texas. Give both players a few years to develop their body and strength and Aldridge should be the better low post player. I obviously don't know either of them personally, but Aldridge is also supposed to be an extremely hard worker.

The thing that I liked Aldridge for us this year was for man defense and in the pick and roll. Even with Chandler, we didn't have a guy capable of holding off opposing bangers. We're seeing the same need with Wallace. He'd get post opportunities as well. Instead, we have seen the ball thrown into the post to PJ and Tyrus way too frequently and without a lot of success. I'm not trying to point out flaws, just the touches that Alridge could have gotten within the flow of the offense.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

lougehrig said:


> -3rd in the NBA in blocks per 48 minutes only behind Camby and Mourning (1st among power forwards)
> 
> -13th in the NBA in steals per 48 minutes (1st among power forwards and only PF or C in the top 25)
> 
> ...


I don't really understand you guys. Rhyder is not being critical of Thomas, yet many of you are responding as though the proposition is that TT isn't working on his game and can't improve. That isn't at all what Rhyder has been writing here. 

He specifically said that TT is getting his heady defensive play back. Being able to block some shots, standing alone, doesn't make one a heady defensive player. Moreover, Thomas commits *9 fouls per 48 minutes.* His consistent foul trouble is indicative of how much he still needs to learn about playing consistent, intelligent NBA defense. 

No one is trying to rain on Thomas' parade here. Rhyder is proveably on point with what he's been writing.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Ron Cey said:


> I don't really understand you guys. Rhyder is not being critical of Thomas, yet many of you are responding as though the proposition is that TT isn't working on his game and can't improve. That isn't at all what Rhyder has been writing here.
> 
> He specifically said that TT is getting his heady defensive play back. Being able to block some shots, standing alone, doesn't make one a heady defensive player. Moreover, Thomas commits *9 fouls per 48 minutes.* His consistent foul trouble is indicative of how much he still needs to learn about playing consistent, intelligent NBA defense.
> 
> No one is trying to rain on Thomas' parade here. Rhyder is proveably on point with what he's been writing.


I don't think Rhyder is ripping Tyrus, but he is implying that Tyrus has huge holes in his game that need fixing right away. Especially compared to Aldridge who is playing more minutes and producing very well lately. 

I think some of us are simply saying that Tyrus is alot closer to being a very solid NBA player very soon and still has star potential. And that Tyrus is a much better fit for our teach and our needs at the PF position.

Tyrus is weak defensively. Tyrus makes too many mental mistakes. Tyrus has a weak jumper. Aldridge has a great jumper. Aldridge is a low post banger. Aldridge is maturing quickly. Classic posters on here where other teams players are built up and our own Bulls players are torn down.

After all this thread is about Tyrus v. Aldridge. It's important to show the difference in the players and who is a better fit for our team.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Rhyder said:


> This is also why I preferred Aldridge. We need more offensive weapons, and the guy can bang down low. Like Tyrus, he needs to add a lot of strength and some extra bulk would not hurt either. Aldridge is a better shooter, screener, man defender, and defensive rebounder, has size and frame to put on some more weight. Tyrus is a better at getting to the rim, passer, ball handler, help defense, perimeter defense, and offensive rebounder.
> 
> I liked both players as NBA prospects. I just thought Aldridge was a much better fit for what we needed.
> 
> Aldridge posted a lot in college and had some good moves down on the low block when the guards could get him the ball. I've only seen the one Portland game vs. the Bulls where he played, so I don't really have a good sense on how Portland is trying to use him.


I haven't seen Aldridge much but the talk around draft time was that he was a "sweet shooter" and if he had a post game, he would need to add strength before he could utilize it at all in the NBA. This seems to have been proven true by the fact that 60% of his shots are jumpers (compared to 31% for Tyrus). It seems pretty clear that his game is facing the basket right now so I don't see why he's more likely to develop a good post game than Tyrus who is scoring in the paint much more than Aldridge so far.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

lougehrig said:


> I don't think Rhyder is ripping Tyrus, but he is implying that Tyrus has huge holes in his game that need fixing right away. Especially compared to Aldridge who is playing more minutes and producing very well lately.
> 
> I think some of us are simply saying that Tyrus is alot closer to being a very solid NBA player very soon and still has star potential. And that Tyrus is a much better fit for our teach and our needs at the PF position.
> 
> ...


All Rhyder said is that in the short term, i.e. this season, Aldridge is the better fit. He said that down the road this might no longer be the case as Tyrus develops his game.

And, I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone being objective would look at Aldridge's current skillset and think he wouldn't be a good short term fit next to Ben Wallace. 

I don't know who will be the better player in the long run. I tend to lean towards Thomas. But for this season and this season alone, Aldridge would balance out this Bulls roster better than Thomas does, and I don't see how it can be objectively argued to the contrary. 

And I think that is all Rhyder is saying.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Ron Cey said:


> And, I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone being objective would look at Aldridge's current skillset and think he wouldn't be a good short term fit next to Ben Wallace.
> 
> I don't know who will be the better player in the long run. I tend to lean towards Thomas. But for this season and this season alone, Aldridge would balance out this Bulls roster better than Thomas does, and I don't see how it can be objectively argued to the contrary.


I think it's going to far to say it can't be objectively argued. The Bulls have a lot of jump shooting PFs (Noc, Allen, P.J.), I'm not sure that a moderately better, taller version is a great fit on this team.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I think it's going to far to say it can't be objectively argued. The Bulls have a lot of jump shooting PFs (Noc, Allen, P.J.), I'm not sure that a moderately better, taller version is a great fit on this team.


A player who can play a true center, is a better rebounder and more consistent scorer.

Frankly, I don't know how any one objectively could say that Aldridge won't be better in the future, as well as right now. I mean, Thomas may end up being better, but looking at it objectively, that would be a surprise.

It's time to face the facts: Pax may have screwed the pooch by chasing after potential.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I think it's going to far to say it can't be objectively argued. The Bulls have a lot of jump shooting PFs (Noc, Allen, P.J.), I'm not sure that a moderately better, taller version is a great fit on this team.


I realize Aldridge shoots 60% jumpers like PJ, but he shoots them better. Moreover, of the 40% of inside shots they both take, PJ shoots his at .392 efg% and Aldridge at *.651*. That is a HUGE difference.

(Allen shoots a whopping 78% of his shots as jumpers - and also makes a lower percentage than Aldreidge.)

Not to mention LA's mobility, quickness and jumping ability when compared to Allen and Brown. Or the extra half foot of height, and lord knows how much higher reach, he has than Nocioni. 

I don't know if Aldridge is a "great fit" for the Bulls. I certainly didn't say he is. But he's a better fit, in the short term, than Thomas is. And I really don't think its very close.

Long term outlook? I'm liking the Thomas selection. This spring? I'd rather have Aldridge.


----------



## Swan (Jun 27, 2005)

One aspect of the Tyrus v Aldridge that hasn't really been discussed yet is their attitudes. 

Aldridge is by all accounts a really nice guy, teammate, etc. There are questions about Tyrus's approach to the press, trusting people, etc. 

And for this team, Tyrus is imo the way better choice in this department. Why? We've already got 4,5 young guys who are great basketball players but introverted by nature. Aldridge would fit right in with Gordon, Deng, and Hinrich in this department, but I'd be wary of that. Homogeneity kills.

Tyrus plays with an edge, a little anger even, but not for show. Whereas Chandler used to yell alot, I think it was a way to cover his inner lack of confidence. Mostly sizzle, little steak. Tyrus, on the other hand, often nonchalantly throws down breakaway dunks, shies away from obvious, presented spotlights (no huge charisma in the dunk contest) but gets crazy on some nasty throwdown/blocks upon which his emotions runneth over.

Taking it back to draft night, with Ben Wallace no given, and Aldridge and Tyrus grading out pretty close on your board, relative attitudes could've played a role in making your choice. But more to the point, ignoring everything else, Paxson chose the prospect with the game-changing, possible DPOY defensive ability over the taller very good defender. For a team that's standing for defense, that choice made sense tome then and still does now.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

Ron Cey said:


> I realize Aldridge shoots 60% jumpers like PJ, but he shoots them better. Moreover, of the 40% of inside shots they both take, PJ shoots his at .392 efg% and Aldridge at *.651*. That is a HUGE difference.
> 
> (Allen shoots a whopping 78% of his shots as jumpers - and also makes a lower percentage than Aldreidge.)
> 
> ...


I was referring mostly to Noc. I think Allen and Brown are pretty terrible so I'd agree that Aldridge is much better than them. Aldridge's rebound rate is 13.9 to 12.2 for Noc and he's not known for his defense so, aside from his average shot blocking, I'm not really sure how the height gives him a huge edge over Noc or makes him a much different player.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

such sweet thunder said:


> A player who can play a true center, is a better rebounder and more consistent scorer.
> 
> Frankly, I don't know how any one objectively could say that Aldridge won't be better in the future, as well as right now. I mean, Thomas may end up being better, but looking at it objectively, that would be a surprise.
> 
> It's time to face the facts: Pax may have screwed the pooch by chasing after potential.


I don't think your post is even remotely accurate. Aldridge is a thin 6-10 at best so he's projected as a PF at this point. Tyrus averages something like 10.8 rebounds per 40 to Aldridge's 8.8 so there's little to no evidence to suggest Aldrige is the better rebounder. Finally, Aldridge scores 15.6 with a 52.7 TS% to 15.1 on a 51.3 TS% for Tyrus, meaning that his scoring edge is slight.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> It's time to face the facts: Pax may have screwed the pooch by chasing after potential.


that's *hardly* a fact; the only thing i'm certain of is that there'd be a thread bashing paxson had aldridge been a bull getting miniscule minutes and tyrus blew up in his rookie season getting unchallenged minutes on the trailblazers.

HOWEVER, i kind of see the debate for aldridge AT THIS TIME. i do believe though thomas will prove to be the superior player because of his nature combined with his god given and still developing abilities.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

I was an Aldridge avocate at draft time, so it would be easy to say I told you so.

But PJ called TT a "monster" who will be hard not to start come playoffs... Gotta like that. 

If this kid can develop a MJ-like turnaround jumper in the post, leaping back 2' and up 2' and turning 180° in midair before his release -- well there's the low post game everyone's been crying for. TT has the athleticism to do it. No knock on Aldridge, but he ain't ever gonna do that. Then there's the alley-oop that the Bulls seem to have been practicing...


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

such sweet thunder said:


> A player who can play a true center, is a better rebounder and more consistent scorer.
> 
> Frankly, I don't know how any one objectively could say that Aldridge won't be better in the future, as well as right now. I mean, Thomas may end up being better, but looking at it objectively, that would be a surprise.
> 
> It's time to face the facts: Pax may have screwed the pooch by chasing after potential.


objectively speaking, they're both projects. imo


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Ron Cey said:


> And, I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone being objective would look at Aldridge's current skillset and think he wouldn't be a good short term fit next to Ben Wallace.


I can argue that. Aldridge shoots jumpshots. We have TOO many jumpshooters aleady (Gordon, Deng, Noc, Hinrich). We have enough guys who we feed the ball to already. We don't need more players who needs plays run for them.

A comparison to PJ Brown was made. We don't need a PJ clone shooting 15 times a night from the free throw line. That would only take shots away from efficient scorers like Deng and Gordon and Hinrich.

Tyrus is a better fit because he doesn't need plays run for him to score and the majority of his baskets are not jumpers. If you notice the floor on our offensive end is pretty crowded from 12-24 feet. That's where Aldridge plays.

Typically hustle points (fast break, offensive rebound put backs, steals, etc.) are all what I consider "extra possession points" meaning they don't require an extra offensive play to be run. Tyrus adds alot of hustle points.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I don't think your post is even remotely accurate. Aldridge is a thin 6-10 at best so he's projected as a PF at this point. Tyrus averages something like 10.8 rebounds per 40 to Aldridge's 8.8 so there's little to no evidence to suggest Aldrige is the better rebounder. Finally, Aldridge scores 15.6 with a 52.7 TS% to 15.1 on a 51.3 TS% for Tyrus, meaning that his scoring edge is slight.


Aldridge put up 16 p on 8-10, 10 r, and 3 b last night.

That puts him at 15 p, 10 r, 2.2 b on 60% shooting over the last five. 

The Bulls could use those number now. And if Thomas is ever a consistent 15, 10 and 2 on solid shooting, I'll be more than happy.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I don't think your post is even remotely accurate. Aldridge is a thin 6-10 at best so he's projected as a PF at this point. Tyrus averages something like 10.8 rebounds per 40 to Aldridge's 8.8 so there's little to no evidence to suggest Aldrige is the better rebounder. Finally, Aldridge scores 15.6 with a 52.7 TS% to 15.1 on a 51.3 TS% for Tyrus, meaning that his scoring edge is slight.



Actually LaMarcus has grown. He is now a legit 6'11" in his socks, which puts him as a 7 footer. He has also put on 20 pound of muscle so far this season. With consistant playing time (20 minutes plus) Aldridge has great numbers. Don't take this as a "I hate Thomas" post because that's not true. Aldridge and he are two different players that look like they will both be very good. One more thing to keep in mind is that Aldridge ALWAYS guards the opposing teams best 4-5 because Randolph is so bad on defense. In fact since he has started it has allowed Portland to stop double teaming players like Duncan and Nowitzki. Both players have said how well he plays defense. Aldridge also plays next to one of the premiere rebounders in the NBA in Zach Randolph. While he doesn't get a lot of rebounds, the man he is guarding doesn't either.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

such sweet thunder said:


> Aldridge put up 16 p on 8-10, 10 r, and 3 b last night.
> 
> That puts him at 15 p, 10 r, 2.2 b on 60% shooting over the last five.
> 
> The Bulls could use those number now. And if Thomas is ever a consistent 15, 10 and 2 on solid shooting, I'll be more than happy.



3 straight double doubles. 

24/17...4 blocks
14/10...3 blocks
16/10...3 blocks


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

such sweet thunder said:


> Aldridge put up 16 p on 8-10, 10 r, and 3 b last night.
> 
> That puts him at 15 p, 10 r, 2.2 b on 60% shooting over the last five.
> 
> The Bulls could use those number now. And if Thomas is ever a consistent 15, 10 and 2 on solid shooting, I'll be more than happy.


I don't understand what's so relevant about his past five games (especially when we're 4-1 in our last five).


----------

