# Crawfords Last Stand???



## LoyalBull (Jun 12, 2002)

http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bull061.html

Many are speculating that THIS is the game where Crawford will be forced to put up or shut up. THIS is the game where he either shows the goods... or is relegated to the bench until a deal can be had.

Tonight he will start (and get heavy PT) against the ultimate point guard (John Stockton).

This is the exact reason that Crawford was drafted in the first place. TO exploit his size and range over shorter points. We shall see how he does.

One thing that bothers me is the blame of "unpreparedness" that he used about being outplayed by Smush Parker vs. Cleveland.

He says he wasn't "prepared" to play 40 min.

That doesn't sit well with me. First you don't play well becuase you don't get PT, then when you do you aren't prepared???

Better show something Jamal... or it will only give further reason for splinters and heavier min for Jwill when his ankle heals!


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

Kind of a double edged sword, eh?

He blames being unprepared as why he didn't play well but wonders why he doesn't get to play.

Jamal, you have a lot of growing up to do. You are still not a professional. A professional's job doesn't end when the game is over. That is when they are getting "prepared" for the next game... looking a film, studying the other team's players.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

I think Cartwright is taking the approach of "Less excuses, more results." 

I like it. Shut your mouth, Jamal, and play basketball.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Nice thoughts loyalbull. JC gets paid millions and he wasn't prepared to play 40 minutes? That should tell us something right there. If he wants playing time and is not ready for it, then why all the head to head confrontations he has had?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

As many of you know, I am no big fan of Crawford. But I agree that this may be Jamal's best chance to showcase his NBA game. With Mason Jr. on the horizon and the February trade deadline approaching... its time for Jamal to put up or shut up.



VD


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Do the Bulls move Lonny, Bags, or Blount to the IR to activate Mason Jr. or Brunson before tonight's game?


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I hope I hope I hope

I hope that Crawford explodes tonight. 16 points, 5 assists, 4 boards. I don't expect to see any steals, though, unless Crawford matches up with Carlos Arroyo, because John Stockton and Mark Jackson are masterful PG's that have a combined 12.3 assists vs. 4.06 TO's, a 3.03 A/TO ratio. 

Nevertheless. Another reason is because I accidentally started Jamal over Cuttino Mobley this week, because I forgot to change him in my lineup. Yikes.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>LoyalBull</b>!
> http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bull061.html


This article is a bit inaccurate.

Jamal matched up against Dajuan most of the game,
Parker only played 11 minutes towards the end of the game
when Jamal had already been out on the floor quite some time..

Jamal shut Dajuan down.

Jamal didn't shoot well, but aside from the 7 to 3 minute mark in the 4th quarter, he didn't play that bad at all.

He did what was asked of him..i.e distribute the ball picking up 7 assists. There was that one great pass to TC that didn't get converted as well (TC got the ft's).

What I would have liked to see more of though was dribble drive penetration with a kick-out for a shooter. He didn't do this much at all. This is what Jay does well.

Regardless, only at the end of the 4th quarter, where fatigue set in did his play get sloppy due to the pressure...with 3 to's . Though right after he was subbed for, the Bulls turned it over right again on their end of the court.

Now as for being prepared, IMO a lot of that is being mentally prepared. After playing a certain amount of minutes each night at specific times, getting out of that routine can leave one not mentally prepared.

Now JC will go into the game after practicing with the starting unit for a couple days, so hopefully his game will show both the actuall and mental preparation one would expect of a player at his level.

Hopefully, though JC doesn't press, and stays within the flow while directing the offense.

So here's his opportunity....IMO he'll make the most of it.....
Though we shall all have to just wait and see.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i think Jc will do very well tonight as do most pg's against the jazz who with grizz and usually the bulls (jwill is good at a lot of things but defense is not one of them) are the poorests defenders at that position in the league .

i overall think how crawford does good or bad will be meaningless is we cant get the post players to play well against a jazz team whose interior defense is very good


----------



## HJHJR (May 30, 2002)

From 11/9 through 12/4, a 12 game period, Marcus Fizer recorded 8 DNP's. In fact, during that stretch he saw a total of 39 minutes of action. Somehow, someway, Marcus was very prepared when opportunity finally knocked at his door. I think everyone would agree with that.

Cartwright views the situation this way: ''You have an opportunity to play, so here it is,'' Cartwright said. ''So we'll see what happens." I don't think Bill is buying into Jamal's implication that being asked to play 40 minutes Saturday caught him offguard and less than totally prepared.

Whether Crawford starts or not, he'll probably see extended minutes again. After everything he's said about PT this season, he's now been presented with a _golden opportunity_ to back up his claims. I hope he delivers. But as for excuses if he doesn't perform any better than Saturday...well, there just aren't any.

If Fizer can remain ready to contribute after sitting for nearly a month, then there's no reason in the world why Crawford shouldn't have been prepared to make the most of his opportunity as well. It's just my opinion, but it all seems to boil down to how you conduct yourself as a professional. You're being paid a huge some of money to do something you love. When opportunity knocks, you'd better be ready to deliver.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

no disrespect 

but there is a huge difference in the way opportunities were brought upon crawford and fizer 

fizer has not played more that 17 minutes in any game following a dnp of which his longest streak of dnp's is 4 

Jc went from not playing due to injury to his usual 10 min spurts in the 1st and 2nd halves to 40 consecutive min. in which he really only played badly down the strectch in which he had 4 to's in his last 10 min. 

as opposed to 3 to's in his first 30 (which is not particuarly good either but in the scope of thing was playing pretty well) 

so to parallel them in anyway other than to say they are getting time is unfair to both of them


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> no disrespect
> 
> but there is a huge difference in the way opportunities were brought upon crawford and fizer
> ...


good point


----------



## Johnjo (Jun 4, 2002)

yea i just hope he doesnt totally flop and ruin any value that he might still have.

btw, what is this the new fanhome? not in a bad way. nice to see you here LB.


----------



## HJHJR (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> no disrespect
> 
> but there is a huge difference in the way opportunities were brought upon crawford and fizer
> ...


None taken. I guess I did a pretty lousy job of trying to say that it takes a highly dedicated professional to be ready for whatever might happen. Fizer could have looked extremely rusty...but he didn't. His shooting percentage could have been way off...but it was actually better than at anytime during the year. I don't know how he kept his edge during those 12 games, but when the bell finally rang he was more ready than at any other time during the season.

Crawford's what, 22 years old? And unbeknownst to many, Williams has been nursing a hip flexor injury since last summer. While Williams is a tough kid, the potential of his hip flaring up should have been enough for Crawford to do whatever it took to stay ready. I'm sorry to disagree with you, but it doesn't seem logical that a 22 year old man would condition himself for 18 to 20 minutes a game while publicly stating that he feels he deserves more court time. If he wants that starting job so badly he should have approached his conditioning program as though he was a starter all along.

That being said, Saturday was just one game. And no one should be judged after one game. He could have been physically prepared to play 48 minutes and just happened to have an off night. However, let me respond to your statement about the majority of Crawford's turnovers ocurring during his last 10 minutes of playing time, implying fatigue may have been the key factor. I was at the game and I saw Cleveland turn up the heat defensively in the 4th quarter in a last ditch effort to get back into the game. The pressure defense, in my opinion, is what caused the turnovers. As the Sun-Times article stated:

And he (Crawford) better be prepared for pressure because Jazz coach Jerry Sloan is likely to borrow the strategy the Cavs used to overcome a 20-point deficit. The Cavaliers took the lead in the fourth quarter by forcing seven of the Bulls' 19 turnovers in the quarter.

Yeah, it's likely Jamal was tired. But Old Man Rose played 44 minutes while suffering from the flu. And it was Rose who carried the Bulls to a win with his court savy down the stretch.

I'm sorry, fellas. I know a lot of you really like Crawford. I'd like nothing better than to see him reach his considerable potential. But the fact is, opportunity knocked and he didn't respond. Maybe he'll redeem himself against the Jazz and their two ancient point guards. Afterall, he did say: ''I don't have any prediction, except that I'll be a lot better.'' I promise you that.'' I sure hope he's right.


----------



## LoyalBull (Jun 12, 2002)

*Not the new spot*



> Originally posted by <b>Johnjo</b>!
> yea i just hope he doesnt totally flop and ruin any value that he might still have.
> 
> btw, what is this the new fanhome? not in a bad way. nice to see you here LB.


I just like posting both places...

Plus, lots of different bulls perspectives over here.

Good to see you john... should come over and visit sometime!


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*HJHJR*

I agree with you 100% that a player should be ready under normal circumstances but like I said the comparisons between Fizer & Crawford are unfair for the following reasons 

Fizer has never played as exstensivly as crawford pro career in his 40 min. emergency run

JC played for 40 consecutive min. while i doubt at any point in Fizer's career he played more than 20 and especially doubt with all the power forward depth the bulls have this season he has played more than 15 min. in a row

what Fizer did was truly remarkable it is not typical from out of the rotation to the level he is currently at, It diminishes his accomplishment to expect it to by duplicated by anyone 

most players gain weight when not given time Fizer lost weight and got sharper as a player at the same time if that were easy every player that is overweight I assume would do it 

also Jc was injured just 2 games prior dont know for sure but i assume he was kept out of practice around that time so i would assume his wind would be affected especially when the other team knows you are the only true player at your position and presses and traps you 

i haven't seen the game tonight (i usually get it the next day on fox) but from what i read Jc did ok ad fizer did excellent 

Jc played 37 min and by all accounts was ready as he should be


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recaps/20030106/uthchi.html

Rookie guard Jay Williams sat out for the Bulls with a sprained left ankle and was replaced in the starting lineup by Jamal Crawford, who has complained about playing time this season. Crawford scored nine of his 12 points in the decisive third quarter, playing 37 minutes.

"Jamal did a good job," Bulls coach Bill Cartwright said. "He handled himself well, he handled the pressure well and he was on Stockton, so I thought he did a good job."


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

*After turning the ball over with an offensive foul with 9:43 left in the fourth quarter Monday, Bulls guard Jamal Crawford looked over his shoulder at coach Bill Cartwright.

In the past, Crawford might have seen Cartwright sending in Jay Williams to replace Crawford. But Williams was in street clothes as he sat out the game with a sprained left ankle.

Crawford was left to play through his mistakes, and he did well enough to lead the Bulls (13-21) to a 113-98 victory.*--Sun Times.

Might Bill Cartwright and the Bulls have made an important discovery last night? Could it be that _both_ Williams and Crawford play better when neither is looking over their shoulder after having made a mistake?

In other words, is it possible that the competition that has been intentionally created between the two young players actually hurt their performances instead of helped them? 

I think its a very real possibility. Jamal played outstanding ball last year after coming back from his knee injury. Until last night he hasn't come close to duplicating last seasons performances. What's the common denomonater here?

If its a case of either player, or both players for that matter, not responding positively to strong competition for minutes, then I think that a trade may be in order, for the benefit of the team _and_ the two players as well.

For me it makes perfect sense. Where else do you see two players with their futures ahead of them competing for minutes at the same position? Just about everyone else stocks their roster with players who understand their roles as either starters or supporting cast. Competition may create a healthy environment in amateur athletics, but I'm not so sure it applies the same way in the pros.

Of course, there's one other solution besides a trade: pair both of them in the backcourt as your starting guard tandem. There's just one potential problem that I see with this solution. Listen to what Rose had to say about last night's game:

"With Jay out, I was more of a ballhandler, which gave me an opportunity to settle into my shots as opposed to waiting for someone to create them for me," Rose said.

If Rose is still adjusting to sharing the ball with Jay, I'm afraid of what might result if another player who prefers to have the ball in his hands (Crawford) is added to the starting lineup. Right now, Hassell doesn't demand the ball on offense at all. Things would be much different distribution-wise if Jamal replaced Trent. Maybe that's why Hassell has retained his starting job...he doesn't compete with Williams and Rose for the ball. If this is true, then we've still got a problem, because Jamal is clearly a better all around player than Trent, and as such he should be getting the minutes Trent is. That takes us full circle, back to a trade being the most viable solution to this dilema. This is like opening your tool box and finding out that your socket set may have 12 pieces, but they're all one of two sizes. Nice job, Jerry.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Rose looked more comfortable playing with jamal, since jamal deferred a lot of the ball handling responsibility to Rose.

At times with Jamal and Rose, the Bulls pretty much seems to be playing a 2 pg offense where either one brought the ball up and set the offense up from the top of the key.

All in all, whether or not it's becuase JC knows the triangle better, the ball movement was much better tonight that it had been in most recent games.


BC also handle the minute distribution better, but w/o a 2nd PG, shifting Rose to PG keeps him in the game for a lot of minutes. (all 48 to be exact). That may be fine when there isn't a game the next night, but on either end of a back to back, even Rose will get worned down with that much run time.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*Jamal as professional*



> ''I watched more film, because I knew I'd be getting more playing time,'' Crawford said. ''I didn't care what my numbers were, as long as we won.''


A quote from the suntimes, which is a little bit damning of JC, and supports the claim of some who say that JC has not been acting as a professional. Clearly, he hasn't been preparing the way he should for the games. This is a symptom of our young team. (see discussion in the "we suck" thread.) Hopefully, he learns like Fizer that the more you prepare, the better you'll do, the more you'll play.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

What's the big deal with that quote? Obviously, a back-up will prepare more when they know that they will get the start. Just look at a back-up QB in the NFL, for example. Yeah, they know they playbook and such, but they always play better when they have time to prepare and know that they are going to play more.

I think you are reading too much into his words.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> What's the big deal with that quote? Obviously, a back-up will prepare more when they know that they will get the start. Just look at a back-up QB in the NFL, for example. Yeah, they know they playbook and such, but they always play better when they have time to prepare and know that they are going to play more.
> 
> I think you are reading too much into his words.


Maybe, if he is content on being a backup. But if he, as he has consistently, complains that he is better than a back-up and deserves more minutes, then he probably should have been ready to back up his words with results. That has been everyone's gripe about him, and I think this quote tells us that those gripes were justified. He wanted to convince people with words that he should get the start, instead of preparing in such a way as to convince people with his performance. I'm thankful that he adjusted. I'm hopeful that he learns something from this even when goes back to being a back-up. This is something that everyone is learning as long as they have a hope of being the best at what they do.

My point isn't to rag on JC. I like him as a player. But I think that this quote points to what has been a certain immaturity in JC's approach to the game. And I think that this immaturity is the underlying problem for most of the complaining people on the Bulls. Fizer seems to have solved it, Tyson and JC are making progress. The Bulls are going to be as inconsistent as they have been until they really understand that preparation is the key to winning each and every game. If they do figure it out, I think that this team can make it to the playoffs in this year.


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> Rose looked more comfortable playing with jamal, since jamal deferred a lot of the ball handling responsibility to Rose.
> 
> At times with Jamal and Rose, the Bulls pretty much seems to be playing a 2 pg offense where either one brought the ball up and set the offense up from the top of the key.
> ...


I don't see why a similar scenario can't work with Jay and Jalen. In fact - when the Bulls were winning titles they had three guys that played best witht he ball in their hands. Harper, Pippen and Jordan. Pippen is obviously at his best when he controls the offense which is clear with his starting pg job over Portland's incumbant pg's. If the Bulls are going to continue to run the triangle - those three guys are best suited. In any given possesion the other team won't know which one is going to start the offense and which is going to move w/o the ball for the open shot. In LA - Kobe, Fisher and Fox all share pg duty as well.

I can envision that if the Bulls played N'awlins and a man-to-man defense that this line-up would be tough. On one possession Jalen handles the ball and Mashburn has to defend at the top with Baron and The Keebler Elf chasing around Craw and Jay. Next possesion Jamal brings it up and get the ball to Rose in the post who jacks it out to Jay at the wing. Back to Rose. Then Jay. I'd pay to watch that.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Lizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't see why a similar scenario can't work with Jay and Jalen. In fact - when the Bulls were winning titles they had three guys that played best witht he ball in their hands. Harper, Pippen and Jordan. Pippen is obviously at his best when he controls the offense which is clear with his starting pg job over Portland's incumbant pg's. If the Bulls are going to continue to run the triangle - those three guys are best suited. In any given possesion the other team won't know which one is going to start the offense and which is going to move w/o the ball for the open shot. In LA - Kobe, Fisher and Fox all share pg duty as well.
> ...


Nice post. I've been trying to imagine how the three of them could make it work. Of course, the biggest obstacle to this being realized is the egos involved. Also, I guess some people have some concerns about the vulnerability of this grouping, defensively. Jamal's growth as a defender helps, but the other two are also weak defensively, to say the least.


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Good Hope</b>!
> 
> 
> Nice post. I've been trying to imagine how the three of them could make it work. Of course, the biggest obstacle to this being realized is the egos involved. Also, I guess some people have some concerns about the vulnerability of this grouping, defensively. Jamal's growth as a defender helps, but the other two are also weak defensively, to say the least.


Couldn't we press more swapping Jay Jamal Jalen in and out when they need a breather for Mason (when he's healthy) Hassell and ERob. Maybe we should be picking up the tempo more on defense when on the road with a press could surprise a couple of teams.


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

Defensively would be a bit on the disgusting side but it seems that this team, when they put in the effort like the last two games, isn't horrible on the defensive end. Including Jalen who you throw on the worst shooter on the opposing wing. They can also play more zone and try and press with the guards like mentioned above.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> What's the big deal with that quote? Obviously, a back-up will prepare more when they know that they will get the start. Just look at a back-up QB in the NFL, for example. Yeah, they know they playbook and such, but they always play better when they have time to prepare and know that they are going to play more.
> 
> I think you are reading too much into his words.


Hey, KC, any thoughts on Crawford's latest bout with foot in mouth disease?

"Not to knock anybody, but I think we have great ball movement when I'm out there," Crawford said. 

Not to knock anybody? Who's he kidding? That's a direct slap at Williams, the guy he claims he's so tight with. Will Crawford ever learn to let his game do the talking for him?


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Crawford is an azzhalf - he's not even formed enough to be an azzhole


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DickieHurtz</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, KC, any thoughts on Crawford's latest bout with foot in mouth disease?
> ...


why does it have to be directed at jay? jay is clearly a good passer. how do we know it wasnt directed towards hassel? or maybe it wasnt meant to knock ANYone, maybe he just said what he said, which is that the ball moves better when he's on the floor.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> 
> 
> why does it have to be directed at jay? jay is clearly a good passer. how do we know it wasnt directed towards hassel? or maybe it wasnt meant to knock ANYone, maybe he just said what he said, which is that the ball moves better when he's on the floor.


uhhh

who's primarily responsible for ball movement ? 

The point guard

Yeah I am sure he was talking about Rick Brunson


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> 
> 
> uhhh
> ...


maybe he was talking about himself, maybe he meant what he said in that the ball moves around better when he's on the floor. now if you want to call that a bash on Jay, thats more of a personal issue. Jamal said what he said, nothing more nothing less.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Maybe he was talking about himself

And whose his direct competition again ?

if he thinks it - fine but his lack of disclipline is what is holding him back

He is mentally weak for not being able to deal with stuff


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

"Not to knock anybody, but I think we have great ball movement when I'm out there," Crawford said.  


now where Exactly does jamal attack Jay? he says we have great ball movement when he's out there, what more do you read into that that i dont see?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Two games ago, with Jamal at the point, ball movement was terrible. Against Cleveland, Jamal dribbled and dribbled and dribbled the ball and the team stood around. He often started our offense from near half court with not much time on the shot clock left.

Ball movement was awesome yesterday. And Jamal's turnovers were way down.

Whatever he was trying to say, he prefaced it in a way that he made it clear he wasn't intending to be critical of anyone.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

Jay is going to return as the starter when he is ready no matter how Jamal plays. I feel bad for him because any success he has is going to put more pressure on the already tight situation because he is going to feel he deserves it more. Jay going down with an injury could be the catalyst to a trade of Craw.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> "Not to knock anybody, but I think we have great ball movement when I'm out there," Crawford said.
> 
> 
> now where Exactly does jamal attack Jay? he says we have great ball movement when he's out there, what more do you read into that that i dont see?


As Louis Armstrong once said :

_If you can't hear the beat I can't explain it to you _


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> Jay is going to return as the starter when he is ready no matter how Jamal plays. I feel bad for him because any success he has is going to put more pressure on the already tight situation because he is going to feel he deserves it more. Jay going down with an injury could be the catalyst to a trade of Craw.


Very insightful observation. It could also be a catalyst to putting Craw in at the 2 spot, but I think we all realize how unlikely that is.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Crawford in the 2 spot may be a good guy buddy cop story waiting to be told but IMO it is an unmitigated disaster waiting to happen

Jalen is showing signs of diviseness in spreading misinformation about how our offense operates and his role within it because he is jazzed about a dynamic that he does not know how to deal with in Jay . Submissive ( to him ) , and the more controllable Jamdrop is more his cup of Tea

But with illdisciplined and immature Jamdrop inserted into the 2 spot creating extra competition for the ball to be the on court equal of Jay - its Chemistry 101 with Bob Whitsett

Jamdrop has proven time and time over he is more about Jamdrop than what he is about the team 

It took Maverick the courage and the disclipline to say :

_ I am not leaving my wingman _

When he was covering Iceman's butt to grow as a person and as a pilot 

Maybe Bill should hire out TopGun and have Jamdrop over for Pizza and a sleepover


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

What utter nonsense this "dynamic" thing between Jalen and Jay is.

Rose played in Indiana with Mark Jackson, Travis Best, and Jamal Tinsley. And with Reggie Miller. Submissive? I don't think that's an issue.

Not only did his numbers improve playing with those guys, he's having his best season, IMO, with JWill at the point.

The only negative dynamic there might be is JWill's inexperience at PG and in the NBA.

When JWill pushes the ball, the team plays great. When he walks it up court, and thus dominates the ball, they don't look so good.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

Jalen Spreading Misinformation? thats a stretch, im sure you know more about why he plays better with jamal then with jay moreso then he himself, ya know.. the outsider aussie always knows right? those boxscores dont tell the whole story.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> Jalen Spreading Misinformation? thats a stretch, im sure you know more about why he plays better with jamal then with jay moreso then he himself, ya know.. the outsider aussie always knows right? those boxscores dont tell the whole story.


Dunno about knowing right 

Just an opinion/perspective that you seem indignant about in the root of its audacity

And me being Australian has two tenths of sweet F. all to do with anything Bravman unless you foolishly equate the extent of my perceived geographic removal to the extent of my outsideness. Anyway who cares your clumsy inference was exactly that - a clumsy inference and is not really relevant - suffice to say that I have probably seen more Bulls games than you this season 

An outsider ?

Surely


But no more than you and any other poster on this board

A box score reader ?

Hardly

Oh and by the way ..... Coach Cartwright came out and rejected Jalen's half azzed suggestion as well - and this came out subsequent to my posts in the Official Misinformation thread. Go check the Trib if you are interested


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> "Not to knock anybody, but I think we have great ball movement when I'm out there," Crawford said.
> 
> 
> now where Exactly does jamal attack Jay? he says we have great ball movement when he's out there, what more do you read into that that i dont see?


"Not to be an A-hole, but....." is always followed by being an A-Hole.

"Not to be negative, but....." is always followed by a negative.

"Not to go against my principles, but......" is always followed by poor ethics.

"Not to knock anybody, but...." is always, *ALWAYS*, followed by a put-down.

This is the english language. If you pretend not to understand it's nuance, power to you. Don't try to sell that argument to those of us who use the language every day.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Wynn , as always your rationale shines through

Money.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> Jalen Spreading Misinformation? thats a stretch, im sure you know more about why he plays better with jamal then with jay moreso then he himself, ya know.. the outsider aussie always knows right? those boxscores dont tell the whole story.


Low blow, pal. When you have to resort to attacking the messenger instead of the message, it reflects poorly on your position.

I believe F. Jersey was referring to this quote:

"With Jay out, I was more of a ballhandler, which gave me an opportunity to settle into my shots as opposed to waiting for someone to create them for me," Rose said.

Rose has made it clear, even in previous seasons, that of all the positions on the court, his personal preference would be to play the point. Simply put, he likes to have the ball in his hands. Williams' injury has presented Rose with an opportunity to log minutes at the point when Crawford needs a rest. When Williams is healthy and he and Crawford share the point, Rose has no opportunity to run the offense the way he would if he was the floor general.

Ok, so now we understand how much Rose likes to have the ball in his hands. Unfortunately for him, unless he's playing the point, he's going to have to share the ball with someone else. Sharing it with Williams or Crawford is one thing...but sharing it with Williams and Crawford at the same time might turn out to be a disaster. 

Hassell and Hoiberg don't demand the ball. That probably makes them better compliments to a Williams/Rose or Crawford/Rose combo than having Williams, Crawford and Rose all on the floor at the same time...not enough balls to go around in that scenario.

What's the solution? From my perspective one way to solve the problem would be to obtain a SF who would allow Rose to slide up to the SG slot. Then you could utilize a three guard rotation comprised of Crawford, Rose, and Williams, with no more than two of those three players on the court at the same time. The other solution is to trade Crawford, give Robinson more minutes at SF, and allow Rose to log a few minutes at the point each game (trading Williams or Rose isn't going to happen).

Certainly those aren't the only two alternatives. But when you get down to it, Williams' and Rose's need to control the ball make it unlikely we'll see a third ball handler, Crawford, inserted at the SG position while the other two are on the court.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

If you have to preface with a qualification you are immediately adopting an apoligist's position for the controversy you may expect to court.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> "Not to be an A-hole, but....." is always followed by being an A-Hole.
> ...


...post of the month...oh, hell, how 'bout post of the year!!!


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

In fact its a double thumbs up


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

Ball movement throughout the entire preseason was better with jamal in the game.

It didn't surprise me that after JC again practised with the 1st squad that ball movment improved again with JC back in.

Rose and Jamal are just more compatible players than Rose and JWill. This is not a knock on anyone's play, but JWill has never been suited for the triangle. JWill is best suited in a pick and roll , pg dominates the ball and establishes the tempo type game.

Rose is best suited as a point forward. Jamal can run to a corner and be a spot up shooter when Jalen runs the offense. JWill typically has to create his shot off of a dribble. If the Bulls had a more dynamic and creative 2 who could drive and dish like the Jordan of old, than the Bulls would have an ideal triangle roster

On the other end of the court, Jamal also could have noted that not only was ball movement better, but the defense was much better as well. To me this difference was much more significant

On the issue, everyone's little precious JWill deserves to be knocked. JWill is simply a liability on the defensive end of the court. Though JWill's quick himself, he always has had problems staying in front of other quick players like TBall in college, and most recently parker and Lue in the NBA. On defensive switches, JWill is also always caught in mismatches where he's giving up anywhere from 5 to 10 inches on guys.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> On the other end of the court, Jamal also could have noted that not only was ball movement better, but the defense was much better as well. To me this difference was much more significant
> 
> On the issue, everyone's little precious JWill deserves to be knocked. JWill is simply a liability on the defensive end of the court. Though JWill's quick himself, he always has had problems staying in front of other quick players like TBall in college, and most recently parker and Lue in the NBA. On defensive switches, JWill is also always caught in mismatches where he's giving up anywhere from 5 to 10 inches on guys.










:rofl: 

I guess for some people, size still really does matter! Unfortunately it doesn't seem to have held back the careers of players like Steve Nash, John Stockton, Stephon Marbury, Andre Miller, Tony Parker, Allen Iverson, etc., all players either the same height or shorter than JWill. Ztect, your predjudices _for_ and _against_ certain players are really beginning to show.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

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


Dickie, your statement is quite ironic, since your opinions are so blatantly biased.

Allen Iverson always was a great defender.
Same with Stockton. Andre Miller and Marbury have two inches on Jay plus major reach advantages. Haven't studied Parker enough to know whther or not he's a good defender or not.

But Jay simply has never been a good defender. he has problems guarding players his own size let alone larger ones. His short wing span only compounds the problem.

Though to give Jay some credit, he has gotten better..esp. at staying in front of his man....So now he's only awful.

Prejudice has nothing to do with my observations


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*Crawford's next to last stand?*

Quote from today's suntimes

Rookie point guard Jay Williams hopes to play after practicing on his sprained left ankle.

"It was sore when I cut, but it was a lot better than it was the day before,'' said Williams, who sat out the Bulls' 113-98 victory over the Utah Jazz on Monday. "I should be all right.''

Jamal Crawford, who played well against the Jazz, practiced with the first team and will be ready for any situation.

"I think I showed I can play,'' Crawford said. "I'm not worried about it either way. I still think I can be a starter, no question about it. I'm aware that he might start. I don't have a problem with that.''

The stat Crawford takes the most pride in is the Bulls' 5-2 record with him as a starter.

"Not to knock anybody, but I think we have great ball movement when I'm out there,'' he said. "We had five guys in double figures [Monday]. I thought we moved the ball well as a team. That's important for us.''

Cartwright was noncommittal about who would start, but he did say Williams looked stiff during practice.
 

Looks like Crawford will get one more shot, at least. The Bulls looked good against Utah with JC in as starter, immature or not, and BC knows it. I think he lets JC start again. In the long run, I'm not sure what will come of it. I can't imagine the Bulls letting JWill sit. They need his penetration. But the team looked smooth with JC in, and really, Jalen controlling the ball. And the defense was better with JC in. Of course, it was one game. If JC is the head case we (we as in we, not the Bulls) think he is, then he won't be able to sustain it. But what if he isn't. What if the team really does look better, consistently? Then what do we (the Bulls) do?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

I'm confused.

Jamal says there's better ball movement w/ him out there. Ummm okay.

Jalen likes playing with Jamal b/c he (Jalen) gets most of the primary touches, thereby playing point forward.

Jamal somehow is attributing this success to himself? Kid, you had 5 assists and 12 points. Jalen had 7 assists. Marcus Fizer shot 10-14 for 28 points.

5 guys in double figures? You must be kidding me. This happens pretty often.

There is more to this than just Jay v. Jamal here.....

<b>Jalen averages 5.5 assists in our wins and 3.5 assists in our losses this year. </b>




VD


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> I'm confused.
> 
> Jamal says there's better ball movement w/ him out there. Ummm okay.
> ...


Excellent observation, *Vin!*

I, too, have noticed that we win or lose based on Jalen's assists, not his points. I just hope our three "Js" don't turn into Dallas' three "Js" (Jamal Mashburn, Jimmy Jackson, and Jason Kidd)(do I remember this right?) and decide they can't play together for personal reasons rather than professional ones.

Seems like way to much talking and finger-pointing. Just play ball.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> Excellent observation, *Vin!*
> ...


To be honest, nobody was even including Jamal in the equation, except for a few die hards. It's reasonable to worry about the dynamic that might prevent three ball-handlers from being on the court together, but that is a chemistry issue, which is better, at least IMO, than a talent issue. It's true that we (the Bulls) should foresee problems, but we should also appreciate it when what seemed to be a problem (Fizer's bull-headedness, JC's inability to play D, strength and willingness to penetrate) is getting resolved. Not being able to write off JC's talent makes things more complicated, but just as we have seen that patience paid off in Fizer's case, and is paying off in JC's case, we might want to be a little more patient to see how the dynamic of these three ball-handlers can be resolved. I like BC's approach in general. He has communicated pretty well what is important and what isn't, and guys are starting to get it. Once it is established that he really can count on JC to contribute to the team, I look for BC to begin working on a scheme that can allow the contributions from the three J's to mesh and make the team better. 

People have problems adjusting. Everyone does. Sometimes, they just refuse to do it, or can't. Then they have to be moved. But let's slow down and see what develops. This is really a new situation, brought on because for the first time, we could see that Jamal brings some value to the team and might be able to bring it consistently. I am willing to trust BC to see how each of the J's abilities can contribute to team success, and then communicate those ideas to the players. It's going to take time. To be honest, it would take time for the team to adjust even if Eddie Jones were brought in. And the fruit of waiting on the J's to mesh might even be better than bringing in the Jones, who knows?


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Good Hope</b>!
> 
> 
> To be honest, nobody was even including Jamal in the equation, except for a few die hards. It's reasonable to worry about the dynamic that might prevent three ball-handlers from being on the court together, but that is a chemistry issue, which is better, at least IMO, than a talent issue. It's true that we (the Bulls) should foresee problems, but we should also appreciate it when what seemed to be a problem (Fizer's bull-headedness, JC's inability to play D, strength and willingness to penetrate) is getting resolved. Not being able to write off JC's talent makes things more complicated, but just as we have seen that patience paid off in Fizer's case, and is paying off in JC's case, we might want to be a little more patient to see how the dynamic of these three ball-handlers can be resolved. I like BC's approach in general. He has communicated pretty well what is important and what isn't, and guys are starting to get it. Once it is established that he really can count on JC to contribute to the team, I look for BC to begin working on a scheme that can allow the contributions from the three J's to mesh and make the team better.
> ...


Ding Ding Ding!!! 

Light the Lamp!

He Shoots, * He Scccccccccccccccccccccooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*

:clap: :rbanana: :wbanana: :clap: :rbanana: :wbanana: :clap:


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> "Not to be an A-hole, but....." is always followed by being an A-Hole.
> ...


There really is no universal rule in this case, its a matter personal perception. Jamal was simply _'propping' himself up_ rather then putting anyone down.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> Dunno about knowing right
> ...



Point taken, those damned Louis Armstrong quotes always get the best of me


----------



## HJHJR (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> Excellent observation, *Vin!*
> ...


In truth, the Bulls are 6-2 this season when Jalen (40mpg) tallies 6 or more assists. John Paxson pointed this out during a recent postgame show.

Looking at Crawford (19mpg) the Bulls are 5-9 when he dishes out 4 assists or more and 3-2 when he bumps the total up to 5 or more.

When Williams (30mpg) produces 5 or more assists, the Bulls are 10-9. When his assist total increases to 6 or more, the Bulls improve their record to an impressive 9-3.

If we look at assists _only_ as a barometer for determining the Bulls success, clearly Williams' performance has the biggest impact on wins and losses. The degree of Rose's willingness to share the ball also seems to significantly contribute to Chicago's chances of winning ballgames.

Crawford's observation, however, that the team enjoys great ball movement when he's out there, while possibly true, simply doesn't translate into a winning Bulls record as these numbers indicate.

Minimally, one might conclude that based solely on ball distribution, Crawford's performance has had little or no effect on turning the Bulls into a winning ballclub. And for those who may argue that Jamal gets the least amount of playing time of the three, thats why I set his impact threshold at 4 assists instead of 5 or higher. Don't forget that regardless of playing time, it was Crawford who made the observation that he has a significant impact on ball movement. The bottom line is that unless "great ball movement" as he puts it translates into victories, its really nothing more than comparing the sizzle to the steak.


----------



## willieblack (Jun 5, 2002)

4 assists or more...as long as Craw continues to defend the way he has been lately I don't think his desire to get more court time is unreasonable. Hell...just playing defense, with little or no effort to do anything else seems to get Tent all the time he wants and then some.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HJHJR</b>!
> 
> 
> In truth, the Bulls are 6-2 this season when Jalen (40mpg) tallies 6 or more assists. John Paxson pointed this out during a recent postgame show.
> ...


Does Jamal have a tendency to overstate his case? Yes. Is that why BC hasn't been inclined to trust Jamal with the team, especially compared with Mr. Smooth, JWill? Yes, I think so. Should Jamal just shut up and work on making his contributions to the team consistently positive? Probably. 

Was Jamal a positive factor in the Jazz win? Yes. Did he show an improved defense and an ability to spark the fast break off that defense that helped break the game open? Yes. Was that just one game? Yes. But, we'll get a chance to see what he can do again tonight, if the MyBulls emails are correct. I'm going to wait and see whether Jamal can make a consistently positive contribution to the team. Then I'll worry about whether his immaturity is going to be a source of trouble in the future.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Good Hope</b>!
> 
> 
> Does Jamal have a tendency to overstate his case? Yes. Is that why BC hasn't been inclined to trust Jamal with the team, especially compared with Mr. Smooth, JWill? Yes, I think so. Should Jamal just shut up and work on making his contributions to the team consistently positive? Probably.
> ...


*Good Hope!*

You've made a couple of great posts urging moderation in our (Bulls fans) rush to trade Jamal. I agree. I hope my posts against his attitude have not been seen as wanting him traded. I really do think the kid has great basketball potential. I also think, though, that it's his own attitude that prohibits his development.

Since coming to the Bulls, Crawford has had a tendency to blame his difficulties on everybody but himself. He has gone against his boss's wishes in playing hoops at home (he was too injured to play in the summer leagues last summer, but he was well enough to run the floor -- and blow his season -- with MJ at "Whoops, the Gym"). Now it's him getting into arguments with Big Bill about PT. Now it's his constant lobbying with the press about how he should be starting over Jay. Used to be the same things with Floyd. Used to be the same issues with playing time over Khalid, or AJ.

He's got this attitude that he's being singled out and persecuted for no good reason. This is ridiculous. Why would the Bulls go out of their way to alienate the kid? Simple.... he's not producing, and they have to get someone who will. Hassell's minutes are there for the taking. Hoiberg's minutes are there for the taking. So were AJ's, Ollie's, and Best's. Heck, Fizer was looking at being buried behind Marshall, Chandler, and Baxter. He's started playing well enough where Big Bill has to move some people around to make minutes for Marcus.

What did Marcus do? He shut his mouth and started playing ball.

What should Jamal do? Shut his mouth and start playing ball.

If he can play, Big Bill will find the minutes.


----------



## HJHJR (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Good Hope</b>!
> 
> 
> Does Jamal have a tendency to overstate his case? Yes. Is that why BC hasn't been inclined to trust Jamal with the team, especially compared with Mr. Smooth, JWill? Yes, I think so. Should Jamal just shut up and work on making his contributions to the team consistently positive? Probably.
> ...


I probably should have used a Cartwrightism and referred to Crawford's remarks as "a bag of shells." LOL.

However, and I know I'm in the minority on this one, I hope Jamal plays the game of his life tonight, and Eddy too. Why? ...because I'm all in favor of seeing Sam Smith's most recent trade proposal become a reality: Crawford and Curry for Brown (and throw in Lue for good measure). You see, I like the way Brown's blood simmered when he thought Chandler had shown him disrespect. And I like the results even more. I think that as teamates Tyson and Kwame would feed off of each other in a very positive way. Currently, Chandler seems to take his inspiration from Stoudemire's performances and his partnership with Eddy doesn't seem to be impacting either of our young pups one way or another. I can visualize Tyson and Kwame becoming an even more athletic version of Duncan and Robinson one day. And without rehashing old news, while I think that Eddy still has a brilliant future ahead of him in the league, I'm beginning to have serious doubts that he'll realize his full potential in Chicago.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> *Good Hope!*
> ...


:clap: :clap: :clap: Great post Wynn. Completely agree.

Whoops the Gym? That's classic!




VD


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> *Good Hope!*
> ...


Wynn and VD,

I have no problem with having a problem with JC's problem of creating problems by speaking before producing. And you're right, this is not a new thing. 

What is new, however, is the inkling we got from the last game that his talk isn't JUST talk. I'm excited about the prospect that JC might actually live up to some of what has been said about him. I'm not trying to make him out to be a savior, or a superstar. But jeez, the kid has been a mystery to us from the time he came here. Now, for the first time, I see evidence that he really has been working on his defense and other problem areas of his game. That tells me that JC, for all his talk, was also listening. That tells me that there is hope for him as a player, and even a team player (read, coachable), at that. That is what got my attention from the last game. And, I think, it got BC's attention. I want to see if he can do it again. I think BC does, too.

The odds are pretty good that he's gonna let his mouth get ahead of his game again. That's the kind of kid he is. But, for right now, I just want to see if its even worth paying attention to what he says. 

As far as trading him goes, I don't think that we are as desperate as we were when we traded Artest and Miller for Rose. Maybe, we can afford to let JC grow up a little more, and establish his value a little more clearly, before letting him go in a trade.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

JC for "all his talk" is probably one of the most soft spoken even somewhat shy kids you'll probably ever meet.

Obviously everything JC says now is held under a microscope because of the PG competition.

Are TC, EC , and JC immature? Of course they are, all three are very young, very wealthy, and in the public's eye.

So was TMac is Toronto who wanted more minutes and didn't want to play in his cousin's shadow.

Geeze, I'd actually be more upset if any of the young bulls were content and didn't want more run time.

Older role players who know their roles are the only players who should be content with with spot minutes.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ztect</b>!
> JC for "all his talk" is probably one of the most soft spoken even somewhat shy kids you'll probably ever meet.
> 
> Obviously everything JC says now is held under a microscope because of the PG competition.
> ...


Or, to remember a darker time, think of how Floyd complained when Oakley first spoke up, saying that his teams had always stayed away from dissension until then. 

Strife and dissension are not always bad, especially for a young team that's trying to find itself in a big, bad world. Let Jamal talk. Let Jalen talk. Let JWill talk. But let the game and how each player contributes to the team's success talk the most. 

If Jalen says that he is better when he controlls the ball, and produces 31 points and 7 assists each time, then he has the right to say it, because its true. Jamal is saying that ball movement is better and point distribution is better when he is in the game. Somebody mentioned that it was his defense that was most noticeable. It would have been more hopeful if he had talked about that. It might have showed that he really did understand what BC wants from him. Anyway, if he is able to produce the results in terms of team victories, then let him talk. HJHJR pointed out that Jay's success in distributing the ball (and others' success in getting open and hitting shots, I might add) is one of the clearest keys for Bulls wins. He can talk about that if he wants, 'cause its true. 

Really, JC, like Fizer, was just about out of time. Now, he is giving us some hope. He can contribute to making this a great team, if he determines to prepare himself to do what the coach wants him to do. Here's hoping he does so.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Good points, both *Z!* and *GH!*

I'm not for a trade, just a muzzle. You're right, though, it seems he has been listening. And maybe this "tough love" by Cartwright has put a chip on JC's shoulder that is helping him find the NBA player inside which might otherwise have gone the way of Corey Benjamin.

This team is only now showing glimpses of what it can be. Without a trade. I'm for holding our hand. At least until closer to the trade deadline when the picture may be clearer.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Ztect:
> 
> Rose and Jamal are just more compatible players than Rose and JWill. This is not a knock on anyone's play, but JWill has never been suited for the triangle. JWill is best suited in a pick and roll , pg dominates the ball and establishes the tempo type game.


In college, JWill played off the ball quite a bit with Dunleavy and Duhon. I believe you even described him as a "SG" at some point.

Why now, are you saying that JWill has never been suited to an offense that doesn't ask for the PG to dominate the ball (like the triangle)? He seemed well suited to one at Duke. He dominated the ball to some extent, but it was also distributed through other players at Duke. 

If he was suited to share the ball with Dunleavy and Duhon, why isn't he suited to sharing it with Rose?

Also, what in particular made Crawford more compatible with Rose? Just the fact that Rose brought the ball upcourt and distributed more often? Does Crawford move better without the ball than JWill? I agree that JWill may not know the triangle as well as Crawford, and hence may not do the right things without the ball but that isn't so much what you seem to be saying... which is that JWill simply isn't suited to play in an offense where he shares the ball with others.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> Good points, both *Z!* and *GH!*
> 
> I'm not for a trade, just a muzzle. You're right, though, it seems he has been listening. And maybe this "tough love" by Cartwright has put a chip on JC's shoulder that is helping him find the NBA player inside which might otherwise have gone the way of Corey Benjamin.
> ...


BC obviously had a hand in the Rose for Artest trade. And he clearly did it because he couldn't trust Artest to lead the team. I think he knows he can trust JWill to work with him, and eventually produce. Hence, BC's "blind" support of JWill. I think he trusts Jalen pretty much, although he doesn't seem to be blind to Jalen's weaknesses. I don't think he trusted JC at all. Wasn't it BC who was coach in the summer league when JC had his first blowup? But if JC really did respond and change his game to fit BC's vision, it's the first sign of positive communication between the two. I really think that it is BC's call. If he believes that 
1) JC can adapt and fit himself into the system BC is putting into place, ala Fizer
2) JC's skills are enough to meet the Bulls' need at SG or just combo G, 
then I think JC will stick around. Else, he may well be gone in another blockbuster come February. Of course, it all depends on who is really available, and whether JK is amenable. But I really do think that it depends on BC and JC coming to an understanding about what is needed.


----------



## ztect (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> In college, JWill played off the ball quite a bit with Dunleavy and Duhon. I believe you even described him as a "SG" at some point.


Yes JWill in college was a "SPG" a shooting point guard, though one without much of a midrange game. If JWill didn't have the PG skills, though, he be on the end of a long line of great undersized college SG's whose game didn't translate to the league.

Short SG's who do make it in the league create a lot of player roster problems (Terry, Iverson, Wagner). Getting suitable backcourt partners always seems to be problematic with such players. 



> Why now, are you saying that JWill has never been suited to an offense that doesn't ask for the PG to dominate the ball (like the triangle)? He seemed well suited to one at Duke. He dominated the ball to some extent, but it was also distributed through other players at Duke.
> 
> If he was suited to share the ball with Dunleavy and Duhon, why isn't he suited to sharing it with Rose?


Nothing new "now", I've always said he wasn't best suited for the triangle. Even in college with Duhon, and Dunleavy, JWill was the one who established the tempo by setting up the offense. During his junior year though, Jay was also the 1st scoring option. Duhon wasn't much of a scorer, and Dunleavy was more of a spot up shooter at Duke. Dunleavy is a good ball handler (since he had a late growh spurt), but by no means was Dunleavy an aspring point forward since he wasn't and isn't a distrbutor like Rose. Many of Dunleavy's shots were created off of jay's dribble drive penetration on kick outs. Most of Rose's shots are created off of the dribble on drives or clear-outs.



> Also, what in particular made Crawford more compatible with Rose? Just the fact that Rose brought the ball upcourt and distributed more often? Does Crawford move better without the ball than JWill? I agree that JWill may not know the triangle as well as Crawford, and hence may not do the right things without the ball but that isn't so much what you seem to be saying... which is that JWill simply isn't suited to play in an offense where he shares the ball with others.


Crawford is more deferential to Rose, and can get his shot off easier than jWill. JWill needs space or to create space to get his shot off. JWill still also has to develop his midrange game. With some of his 3's finally falling, Jay's pts mainly come from the arc or at the rim.

Jay best asset in addition to his penetreation though is his ability to set tempo, with the ball in another player's hands, tempo is out of his control. Thus a movement oriented passing scheme with the ball not in his hands doesn't maximize jay's talents.

This is not to say that Jay can't play in the triangle, but IMO and that of many other's I've read, the triangle doesn't best suit his talents.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*For those who saw the game last night*

Any thoughts on Crawford's performance? 

I know we can't compare him with JWill because of JWill's ankle, but I just want a sense of where Jamal is, performance-wise, and how the team works with him in there.

From the Suntimes

Jay Williams started at point guard after missing the previous game with a sprained left ankle, but he wasn't very effective as he shot 0-for-5 with five assists and one turnover in 21 minutes.

Jamal Crawford turned in a strong game off the bench with 15 points, three assists and no turnovers in 27 minutes.

''I'm not upset coming off the bench,'' Crawford said. ''I've accepted my role.''
 

From the Trib

 Williams tried to play on his sprained left ankle, but the injury clearly gave him problems as he missed all five of his shots in 21 minutes. He did have five assists.

"I couldn't do anything," said Williams, who exited for good with 3:27 left in the third.

Crawford had 15 points and three assists in 21 minutes.

"I've proven I can play," he said. "If they need me, I'm here."


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: For those who saw the game last night*



> Originally posted by <b>Good Hope</b>!
> Any thoughts on Crawford's performance?
> 
> I know we can't compare him with JWill because of JWill's ankle, but I just want a sense of where Jamal is, performance-wise, and how the team works with him in there.


Hey Good HOpe!

I liked what Jamal did last night. Its funny b/c Jamal, the still very young player that he is, intermixes moments of great play followed by moments of well... not-so great play. I remember one instance he took the ball strong to the rack and got fouled by Oak in the 4th Q (he missed the dunk, but it was nice to see that type of play)... and the very next play down Jamal forces a shot w/in the first 5 seconds past half court. On another occasion, Jamal scores to get the Bulls w/in one point in the last minute of play... then thereafter bites on a Larry Hughes ball fake (note to Jamal: if Larry is going to take a 17 footer, let him brick it).

As I was watching the game last night, I couldn't help but think to myself... Jamal is a SG in this league. Can he play the point? Yeah. But the more and more I see this kid, the more I think he can play the 2 in the NBA. In fact, more than a few times Jalen was initiating the offense in the 4th and Jamal was on the wing anyways. Its nice to see Jamal playing well.

Go Jamal.


VD


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: Re: For those who saw the game last night*



> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> As I was watching the game last night, I couldn't help but think to myself... Jamal is a SG in this league. Can he play the point? Yeah. But the more and more I see this kid, the more I think he can play the 2 in the NBA. In fact, more than a few times Jalen was initiating the offense in the 4th and Jamal was on the wing anyways. Its nice to see Jamal playing well.
> 
> Go Jamal.
> ...


Hey VD!

Thanks. I haven't seen too many games, but I've felt the same way about Jamal, at least, whenever he's playing well. The Cleveland game may have been an aberration, but the team looked terrible with him setting up the offense. But I like how he moves without the ball, and he shows a pretty good ability to shoot after getting the pass on the move. It's pretty clear though that the key for him to get the minutes is going to be his effort and focus on defense. (Unless he finds a way to keep JWill's ankle hurt ) 

On a side note, I wonder if JC's improvement on defense hasn't spurred Hassell's revival on offense? Maybe he senses he might start losing some time if JC keeps it up?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: For those who saw the game last night*



> Originally posted by <b>Good Hope</b>!
> 
> On a side note, I wonder if JC's improvement on defense hasn't spurred Hassell's revival on offense? Maybe he senses he might start losing some time if JC keeps it up?


This may very well be the case GH.

Hassell has been shooting better as of late, which is something this team needs. But Hassell shot a wide open 3 ball last night (Bulls down 1, ~2 minutes to go) that.. I kid you not.... was probably 5 feet from hitting rim. That could have been a game breaker. Eh.



VD


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

Vin,

Two guard in future for sure, but I have no problem with Kevin playing Jamal at the point. More than any skills, jamal is lacking an understanding of how to help his team. By playing him at pg, Kevin forces JC to address these issues every minute he plays. Not the easiest path to take, but perhaps the most effective.

Bad decisions aside, Jamal really played well last night. He had a couple of strong drives and his shot selection, though bad, is definitely improving. Clearly his best game in a Bulls uni.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

I watched the game again last night and Jamal got burnt twice by Hughes in the waning minutes of the game.

The first time was Hughes blowing by him and missing the easy reverse layup. Crawford did well by blowing by Hughes ont he hesitation dribble the next play, something that does not happen to Hughes very often.

The second one was the Jamal bite on the pump fake by Hughes that sealed it.

In the fourth quarter Crawford forced a couple of jumpers in crunch time. 

I would hope he has had better games than this.


----------



## willieblack (Jun 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> I watched the game again last night and Jamal got burnt twice by Hughes in the waning minutes of the game.
> 
> The first time was Hughes blowing by him and missing the easy reverse layup. Crawford did well by blowing by Hughes ont he hesitation dribble the next play, something that does not happen to Hughes very often.
> ...


And I would hope that he continues to show improvement, like he did in certain situations last night. Progress...it's a concept that works for me, for now.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BCH</b>!
> I watched the game again last night and Jamal got burnt twice by Hughes in the waning minutes of the game.
> 
> The first time was Hughes blowing by him and missing the easy reverse layup. Crawford did well by blowing by Hughes ont he hesitation dribble the next play, something that does not happen to Hughes very often.
> ...


I can't remember one, sadly enough...


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
> 
> 
> I can't remember one, sadly enough...


C'mon, think! There has to be one! 

Like Willieblack said, we're just glad to be seeing signs of an NBA Basketball player coming to life in JC. He still has a long way to go, but like BC said, the mistakes are becoming correctable, not fundamental issues like thinking one is "the future" and being pissed off about not getting proper respect. BCH's eagle-eye may not have been so kind to Larry Hughes if fixed on him last year, I guess.


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

*Give credit where it is due!*

Jamal does seem to be trying! Finally! That drive to the hoop where he was fouled by Oakley was what we have needed from Jamal all along. Plus he made an effort at defense. I think Jamal is learning and should continue to improve. While I watched Hughes school him a few times my biggest concern was how Jamal fights through screens. He gets run around them and looses his man. 

Like Fizer, Jamal has taken a while to hear Cartwrights message. Maybe Fizer's effort and performance has made its mark with Jamal. I really like Cartwright's approach. Jamal plays smart and plays defense, Cartwright will find minutes for him.

As far the all of the problems with Jalen, Jamal and Jay, I think that is a bit overstated. The players need to adjust to each other and learn how to win as a team. Everyone on that team can improve. It took Scottie, Mike and Horace a while to figure it out, but eventually they did.


----------



## DickieHurtz (May 28, 2002)

Just speculation on my part, but this might be one reason why Crawford doesn't get as much PT as he'd like:

*"I don't like the fact that sometimes during the course of a game, we just abandon attacking the basket," Cartwright said after practice Thursday. "We start games well, looking inside and penetrating. Then we go away from it. We have to be persistent in our pursuit to get to the basket and put the other team back on its heels."

Never did the Bulls get away from the mentality more than in the fourth quarter of Wednesday night's loss, their 15th straight on the road.

Through three quarters, Donyell Marshall hit 10-of-15 shots, Marcus Fizer consistently posted Christian Laettner and Eddy Curry reintroduced himself to the rotation with 10 points on 4-of-5 shooting.

In the fourth, Marshall didn't attempt a shot and the Bulls scored only eight of their 25 points in the paint. "We were trying to get it inside," Cartwright said. "We have plays to get the ball inside. We just didn't do a good job executing them."*

Now, I'm not suggesting it's all Crawford's fault. I think Rose has to shoulder some of the blame as well. In fact, both Crawford _and_ Rose have a tendency at times to rely on the perimeter shot much too early in an offensive set.

I think that as Crawford increases his upper body strength (its a real shame he didn't do so over the summer) he'll attack the basket even more than he has. And that's what Cartwright wants...an aggessive inside attack that draws the defense in and frees our perimeter shooters for open shots. If he's not traded, I sure hope Jamal decides to plant his butt inside Berto this summer and add the muscle he should have acquired last year.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Time to take stock of JC's emergence as a player, once again. I didn't see the game last night. JC put in good minutes, had a decent, not great, shooting percentage, and had some good assists, rebounds and TO numbers. Also, both starting guards for Milwaukee shot pretty poorly and didn't get much going. Seems like most of the damage was done by Mason on the inside?

Anyway, would anyone care to comment on how JC did? In particular, what was his defense like? 

Given the explosion of trade JWill posts eek: ), I should probably mention that I cannot see JC starting on this team long term, except as shooting guard. JWill should be our point guard, he is not a failure  , he has the ability and drive to make this team unstoppable, as he matures and develops. Nor will he be traded except for the chance to get Lebron James  

I am interested in JC's progress because, after Fizer's recent renewal, his progress tells me that the TEAM is slowly getting the message from BC about how the team should play and what each player needs to do to make the team successful. The fact that it is the older kids who are first getting it makes sense, at least to me. If JC is getting it, there is hope for the younger kids, too. And that is the hope we Bulls fans are living on, these days. Right? If BC can help these two youngsters pull themselves together and contribute to team success, then maybe we can trust him in working with the younger guys. I like what I see so far. No miracles from JC yet, but good steady progress and a willingness to listen and to bend. A good example for the kids, like Fizer before him. 



> "I don't like the fact that sometimes during the course of a game, we just abandon attacking the basket," Cartwright said after practice Thursday. "We start games well, looking inside and penetrating. Then we go away from it. We have to be persistent in our pursuit to get to the basket and put the other team back on its heels."


Regarding the operation of the offense, how about JC's performance relating to this issue? Thanks!


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*Wow*

My how things have changed in a week? Not really, but to read the papers, JC suddenly has become the bomb, and JWill a spoiled mommy's boy. Yeesh. 

I liked Coach Karl's comment about the two, saying that there seems to be a healthy competition between the two. I'll take that, and forget all the bunk about either one being a superstar and the other a wash out. They both have a long way to go before they can help make the Bulls consistent winners.

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm so happy that JC is starting to produce and put some meat behind some of his words. Mostly I'm happy that JC has seemingly come around to accept BC's challenge and produce in a way that helps the Bulls. I hope he doesn't get caught up in this crap the reporters are trying to foment, and just keeps his eye on the prize.


----------

