# Players Like Brand Are A Dime A Dozen!



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bull251.html 


*More and more, Baxter is looking like the second coming of Elton Brand, whom the Bulls picked No. 1 in the 1999 draft and who averaged at least 20 points and 10 rebounds his first two seasons. Then he was traded to the Los Angeles Clippers and became an All-Star. Baxter plants his big body hard, solid and deep in the paint to consistently post up for easy inside baskets. Plus, that baby hook and running bank shots are valuable weapons. * 

Although we took Chandler at #2, the trade was really Brand for Curry because the Clips were committed to taking Curry at #2. (And I'll bet that now they wish they had!) Krause knew he was giving up a fan favorite in Brand but thank God he envisioned the Bulls future of Chandler & Curry anchoring a championship squad. Now the rest of the league covets those two while the free agent Brand garnered modest interest from only a few teams. Because players like Brand are a dime a dozen! The Bulls have 3:

Lonny Baxter
Marcus Fizer
Mario Austin


Since the trade look at how many Brand-like players have entered the league compared to how many Curry-like or Chandler-like players have entered the league. NO question, the Elton Brand trade was Krause's greatest trade of all time! He gave us two young 7-footers in the post when most teams are struggling to find one good 7-footer!
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Anybody still think trading Brand was a bad move?:krazy:



Much thanx to the Clippers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

Knowing what I know today, I would do Brand-for-Chandler 100 times out of 100.:yes:


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

if players like brand are a dime a dozen 

please pick up about 5 20-10 players who were all-stars last year and send them directly to the berto center 

i'll mail you the nickel 

thanks in advance


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Let's see...
Chadler:
up-an-comping player.
Loads of *potential*.
Poor offensive moves other than the dunk.
Good defensive player, although soft.

Brand:
Proven player: a 20-10 kind of PF
An All-Star.
Good on offense (career 49,5FG%) and defense (career 1,92bpg; last year- *2,54bpg*.
Still young.

Hmmmm.

One thing would be indisputed, IMO: players like Brand are NOT a dime a dozen! :no: 
How many PF in the NBA have his skills and stats? Not many, for sure.


----------



## Jason The Terryble (Jul 22, 2003)

Wow. Comparing Elton Brand, 20 11 2, to guys like Lonny Baxter and Mario Austin is rediculous. Elton Brand is an All-Star abd avery good/borderline great player. Baxter and Austin are 2nd round scrubs who might not be in the league 2 years from now. I would say its like comparing Tyson Chandler to Keith Closs, but so far Keith Closs has had the better career.
I can understand why you would be high on Eddy Curry, he's a big young center with a lot of potential, but so far Tyson Chandler looks sad and pathetic. Just looks like an uncoordinated unskilled bum who made it to the NBA simply because he was tall. He reminds me of a new born dear, long skinny weak legs, struggling to walk. Sounds like Keith Closs again.
*Tyson Chandler = Poor Mans Keith Closs   *


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

keith closs does not equal tyson chandler that is the wildest most insane thing this board has seen since ....the initial topic of this thread 

in truth the bulls did really get what they needed out of the chandler -brand trade and imo will have the better player inside of 2 years which will make them the winners of that trade 

keith closs is a bum maybe not literally but then again ...no one seen him in a while and on a talent basis he is not even close to chandler


----------



## Aesop (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> keith closs does not equal tyson chandler that is the wildest most insane thing this board has seen since ....the initial topic of this thread


:rofl:


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

Wow, I expected some good analysis when I opened this, but it was just some ridiculous theory comparing a guy who has played like 30 minutes of NBA burn to a kid who has been among the best since coming to the L.

Great.

To this day, I still wouldn't have done the deal.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> Wow, I expected some good analysis when I opened this, but it was just some ridiculous theory comparing a guy who has played like 30 minutes of NBA burn to a kid who has been among the best since coming to the L.
> 
> Great.
> ...


To this day, I wouldn't have made the trade. When you get the #1 pick in the draft and he puts up 20/10, you definately have a keeper. Somehow Krause made the judgements that Brand would never be an MJ/Kobe/Shaq/Duncan type of megastar/leader, adn that it was somehow worth rolling the dice by trading him to get one of those type of stars.

If he wanted one of those type of stars, he should have drafted Steve Francis in the first place. Hence my avatar.

An observation:

Curry + Chandler <B>combined</B> last season barely did better than Brand all by himself, statistically.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Somehow Krause made the judgements that Brand would never be an MJ/Kobe/Shaq/Duncan type of megastar/leader, adn that it was somehow worth rolling the dice by trading him to get one of those type of stars.
> 
> If he wanted one of those type of stars, he should have drafted Steve Francis in the first place. Hence my avatar.


Steve Francis is a great fantasy league player, but I just am not sold on him being the type of star that carries his team into or through the playoffs.

In my opinion, his supporting cast was much better than Tracy McGrady's, better than Kevin Garnett's, and even a hair better than Tim Duncan's.

Yet, with worse supporting casts, those players were able to lead their teams into the playoffs (and Duncan to a championship), but Francis was not able to get his team into the playoffs.

Maybe Tomjanovich was a horrible coach, but if Francis can't get a team with a Ming/Cato combination at center (the best combination in the league after Shaq and whoever we want to call his back-up), a solid second scorer in Mobley, a solid role playing wing defender in Posey, and serviceable power forwards in Taylor and Griffen, then I just wonder how good he is.

We'll see this year with Van Gundy at the helm. Maybe it was all poor coaching, but I am a bit skeptical.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Can we really say if the trade was worth it or not, for at least another year?

Those of you who are proclaiming the lack of productivity from Chandler and Curry vs. Brand's productivity today, well fine. If you thought that the trade's purpose was to inject instantaneous productivity, then you are sadly mistaken.

I think that if the trade was, as initially stated, Brand for Curry, then it was a worthy trade. But the pick was Chandler, not Curry, so I'll have to assume that it was possible to draft Curry with our pick, as we did.

A frontcourt of Brand and Curry would be pretty dominant in the East. I think that as far as player styles go, Chandler and Curry are far better complements, but you can't argue with having a 20-10 guy in Brand who plays like he's 7-feet and a dominant post center in Curry. If anything, this resembles a Duncan/D-Robb frontcourt more than Chandler and Curry do.

But I like the idea of having one main post player on the floor at a time. Fizer's value comes in that the 2nd unit has that kind of post presence, even if Chandler or Marshall or Blount or Bags is clogging up the center. Having Brand, whose bread-and-butter is down low (although he is capable of a Webber-like J from about 16 ft), and Curry, whose DESTINY is to be in the paint, is more redundant.

AND YET still effective, simply because of the talent involved.

Would we be a better team, more playoff bound and more ready for the Finals if we had Brand instead of Chandler? Perhaps.

But does the thought of Tyson Chandler panning out to be something incredibly special help me cope and hope, considering that it's taken this long for Curry to develop anyhow? Yes.

Timing is everything. Some of the moves we've made have been really irregardless of timing (Mercer's contract, E-Rob's contract, drafting Kirk Hinrich), but other moves have been extremely sensible (Curry and Chandler following Crawford by one year, the trade for Jalen Rose, etc.).

One thing is for sure: Brand-like players are NOT a dime a dozen. We traded away star QUALITY to receive potential superstar QUALITY... don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Maybe players LIKE Brand are a dime a dozen, meaning that players SIMILAR to Brand's playing style are rampant. This is because, simply, Brand is the perfect prototypical power forward, excepting his height which is negated by his ridiculous wing span.

Just a quick cut and paste:

Ranks #11 in the NBA in Field-Goal Percentage(0.502) 
Ranks #4 in the NBA in Blocks Per Game(2.55) 
Ranks #12 in the NBA in Minutes Per Game(39.6) 
Ranks #2 in the NBA in Offensive Rebounds(283.0) 
Ranks #1 in the NBA in Offensive Rebounds Per Game(4.6) 
Ranks #14 in the NBA in Total Rebounds(703.0) 
Ranks #9 in the NBA in Blocks(158.0) 
Ranks #5 in the NBA in Double-doubles(44.0) 
Ranks #8 in the NBA in Triple-doubles(1.0) 
Ranks #4 in the NBA in Offensive Rebounds Per 48 Minutes(5.5) 
Ranks #14 in the NBA in Rebounds Per 48 Minutes(13.8) 
Ranks #12 in the NBA in Blocks Per 48 Minutes(3.09) 
Ranks #8 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking(24.42) 
Ranks #10 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking Per 48 Minutes(29.61) 

Other than "Total Rebounds" and "Rebounds per 48 Minutes", there aren't even a dozen players in the ENTIRE NBA that are better than Brand. In categories like BLOCKS PER GAME (4th), OFFENSIVE REBOUNDS PER GAME (1st), FIELD-GOAL PERCENTAGE (11th)... 

(By the way, he would have ranked 4th overall in rebounds per game with 11.3 rpg, but for some reason he's not ranked. I think it's cuz he didn't play enough games.)

All this while standing a mighty 6 foot 8. Makes you wonder if, quite honestly, Brand would be a better player than even Tim Duncan if he had Tim Duncan's physique.

There's Lawrence Funderburke, Clarence Weatherspoon, Malik Rose, Tony Massenburg, Brian Grant, Carlos Boozer, etc. If you want to say that they have styles that are like Brand, then fine. But you don't see them being at the top of the league in anything like Brand is.

Face it. He's elite. We have to place similarly high expectations on Chandler to justify the trade, or at least see a chemistry benefit that we need to complement Curry.

But he's not a dime a dozen. I can see Lonny fitting into that group of very hard working PF's, almost like a Carlos Boozer. A guy that can come in and clean up on the boards, work hard with offensive rebounding, set hard picks, and just be a workhorse in the paint. But it's a different tier of players when you start saying that Baxter can be as GOOD as Brand, if he wanted to.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Steve Francis is a great fantasy league player, but I just am not sold on him being the type of star that carries his team into or through the playoffs.
> ...


This is the same knock that we heard about MJ until he won his first championship.

I don't wonder how good Francis is. It's really easy to look at any one team that hasn't won the championship and say "their players can't win the big ones" because only two teams have won the big ones in the past 5 years. It doesn't make the rest of the megastar players and less megastars, IMO.

Consider Malone/Stockton. Never won the big ones, but they might have if the Bulls weren't just a hair better. Those two in their prime were so good that finding just one guy better was incredibly tough.

If the Bulls had taken Francis, they'd still have finished in the lotto for at least one season, probably 2-3, and we'd still have had a chance to draft some solid players to go along with him.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Steve Francis is a great fantasy league player, but I just am not sold on him being the type of star that carries his team into or through the playoffs.
> ...


Steve Francis, in my opinion, has the tools to be the best point guard in the entire league. Better than Kidd, better than anyone, except maybe LeBron (which is a caveat to everything these days, eh?).

Was the fault with the coaching? Maybe. That's a good way to point it. Maybe it was with Francis' inability to mesh with teammates. Maybe it was his health problems, having headaches, etc. But with his quickness, his amazing handles, his sharp shooting, his passing vision... the guy could be the best point guard in the entire league. As far as raw talent, he's everything that Marbury is except with even better handles. 

As far as having a better supporting cast than the Spurs or the Lakers, I'd have to disagree, simply because of chemistry. While Yao is going to instantaneously provide tremendous advantage to the Rockets, I'd view him like you might view Shaq while he was in Orlando. He could certainly dominate other centers, when his game was there, but that tremendous advantage is not yet consistent, and that consistency is largely contingent on his maturity as an individual basketball player.

I think that the Rockets are going to make a hard push for the playoffs this year. The signing of Eric Piatkowski seems marginal, but it gives them that Glen Rice dimension that they've wanted for so long, yet could never have. And if Eddie Griffin develops like he ought to (remember, he JUST turned 21), then the defensive capability of the team may rank with the very best in the league. With Van Gundy at the helm, you can guarantee that they will 1) push the ball, utilizing Francis and Mobley to the maximum, and 2) defend really hard, suitable for Francis, Griffin, and Yao.

I don't know if Van Gundy will fix everything, but I see either Houston or GS making the 8th spot in the playoffs and surprising a lot of people. 

1. SA (they did enough to stay on top)
2. Lakers (they did a heck of a lot, but Kobe's situation is going to cause minor setbacks)
3. Minnesota (GREAT offseason, going from KG/Wally show to solid at every position)
4. Kings (they are still who they are, now starring Brad Miller)
5. Portland (look for Travis Outlaw, Qyntel Woods, and Zach Randolph to surprise everyone)
6. Phoenix (Amare, Marion, Starbury, and if JJ can get some consistency... a stacked lineup)
7. Dallas (they aren't having a particularly good offseason, while everyone else is)
8. Houston / GS (probably Houston, although Claxton may be enough to keep the Warriors on the up and up)


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

*Just want to say 3 things.....*

1. The Clippers were going to take Curry and Krause was afraid the Grizzlies would take Chandler but he knew they didn't want Curry so he took Chandler at #2, the Grizz took Gasol at #3 and Curry fell to #4. That's why I say the trade was really Curry for Brand because LAC would have taken Curry.

2. Krause didn't take Francis because of his 3 transfers in 3 years of college and the circumstances surrounding those transfers. Francis was angry with Krause but he has himself and his past behavior to blame. At the time you had the "Mr. Clean Cut Dukie" (Brand) vs the "Space Cadet" (Odom) vs Franchise and his history not sticking around long enough to make history. Krause didn't want to take a player with the 1st pick in the draft that might embarass the organization later on. With Odom he was right! With Francis, maybe he was wrong. BTW, isn't it interesting that Maryland won it all the year AFTER Francis left.

3. When I say "players like Brand" I mean players who are 6-7 or 6-8, who hustle, play smart, bang down low to get tough rebounds and find creative ways to score over players who have a height advantage over them. The fact that Brand goes for "20 and 10" is IRRELEVANT to my argument. I'm saying that, in the last 25 years, no player in that category has lead their team to a championship regardless of their numbers!

Not Charles Barkley. :nonono:
Not Bernard King. :nonono:
Not Buck Williams. :nonono:

Is Elton Brand any better than those 3! :whoknows: BTW, Brand is "Buck Williams Part 2" IMO. Buck had a fantastic career of racking up "20 and 10" but with very few playoff appearances and absolutely no solid chance to win it all in any of those appearances. Krause was smart enough to see that also which is why he made the trade. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, everyone was only focusing on "20 and 10" and the Krause bashing began full throttle. Bottom line is would you rather hit the floor with 2 athletically gifted 7-footers or a 6-8 guy with long arms!  I liked the trade then and I would do it again! :yes:



Brand will NEVER lead a team to a title! His best bet is to become a ROLE PLAYER on a great team like Karl Malone just did. :laugh:

:soapbox:


----------



## dmilesai (Jul 19, 2002)

It may have been a good trade if you look at it Curry-for-Brand, because the Bulls really needed a center. But please, stop downplaying how great Brand really is. Probably not a top 10 player, but he has a huge impact on the games he plays in. The top offensive rebounder in the NBA. Has polished post moves, a decent jumper, and is a great 1-on-1 shot blocker, possibly the best in the league.


----------



## TJ (Jul 23, 2002)

Which team do you think will do better this year, the Clippers or the Bulls? I think the Bulls. If you look at this, then the Bulls are better off with Chandler and Curry then with Brand and either Chandler/Curry. Chandler and Curry will be better and are much bigger that a Brand/Curry or Brand/Chandler lineup. And without the trade, we may have been without either. The Clippers could have taken Curry and the Grizzles could have taken Chandler. We would have had to take either Shane Battier or Pau Gasol. That is not so bad but the Grizz have not been so great the last 2 years either.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Just one question...

Why do you think the Clippers would have taken Curry?
The already had a center (Olowokandi), would they choose another center with a top pick?

Sure Olowokandi sucks and the Clippers gave up on him this year, but at the time they had lots of hope in the guy.
Would they really choose another center (Curry) who was just getting out of highschool and was very much umproven?


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> Just one question...
> 
> Why do you think the Clippers would have taken Curry?
> ...


well this is the same clippers team that drafted chris wilcox and melvin ely as lottery picks when they're best player already played the same position, the clips do alot of weird stuff.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> if players like brand are a dime a dozen
> 
> please pick up about 5 20-10 players who were all-stars last year and send them directly to the berto center
> ...


I'll mail 5 quarters for 5 guys like that to play on the Nets.

Brand is seriously one of the best PF and he absolutely rocks Chandler. Funny that the Clippers after all these years pick to spend money and it's spent on whom? Oh Brand...

-Petey


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

Any BuLLs fan that thinks Baxter is the 2nd coming of EB is way off. ObviousLy there is some jeaLousy. Brand is a great pLayer.


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

*"Players Like Brand Are A Dime A Dozen!"*

_Right._

Brand is such a good offensive rebounder, though, that he can score a dozen times even if from his point guard he only gets one dime.

That is the only sense I can make of your statement.

Baxter, Brand, and Austin have two things in common:

6'8

265


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

EB is good! 

i think TC is gonna be better!

baxter with brands Mnts might not be that far behind!


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> originally posted by *DaBulllz*
> To this day, I wouldn't have made the trade. When you get the #1 pick in the draft and he puts up 20/10, you definately have a keeper. Somehow Krause made the judgements that Brand would never be an MJ/Kobe/Shaq/Duncan type of megastar/leader, adn that it was somehow worth rolling the dice by trading him to get one of those type of stars.
> 
> If he wanted one of those type of stars, he should have drafted Steve Francis in the first place. Hence my avatar.
> ...


I am not under the impression that 20 and 10 guys are a dime a dozen or anything, but I still would do that trade 100 times out of 100 if it was offered me today. Brand is obviously better statistically, but the value of a shotblocking presence like Chandler simply does not show up in the stats. Check out KingofKings'  "True Value of Shotblockers" thread for more discussion on the subject. A player like that completely changes the outlook of the game and influences the decsisions of opossing players. At 7'2 with a combination of height, speed, timing and athleticism, Chandler is a rare player even if he does not have a lot of offensive skill. I have used Dikembe Mutumbo as a comparison for Chandler several times- he is a perfect example of a guy who, though he never averaged more than 13.8 ppg in any year other than his rookie season, was undoubtedly a more valuable player than Brand in his prime.

It would be an injustice to write off Brand as a "dime a dozen" player, without a doubt. But at the same time, it is much easier to find a hard working, 6'8-6'10 PF who can score and rebound than a 7'2 defensive intimidator.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

And for the record, there is no way Baxter will ever be worthy of mention in the same sentence as Brand. Fizer too, for that matter.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

When people talk about Elton and his numbers, I immediately think of 2 other players who put up ~20/10 every year, yet never seem to have an impact on the bottom line: Wins & Losses.

Derrick Coleman & Shareef Abdur-Rahim

Coleman averaged 20.3ppg & 10.0rpg over a 9 year span to start his NBA career.

Reef put up 20.7ppg & 8.3rpg in his first 7 years in the NBA.

Brain Grant, Tom Gugliotta & Juwan Howard have put up ~16/8 for a good portion of thier careers. (Not a very far cry from EB's 18/10)

But I wouldn't list any of these guys as cornerstones or franchise players.

I was always of the opinion that Brand, while a soild guy, was never a good pick. He was clearly a safe pick, a GREAT #2/#3 guy on a good team. A Rodman or a HoGrant if you will. Clearly, Jerry's plan was to get his #1 in Free agency (TMac). When this didn't work out he traded away Elton, who will never be a franchise player, for the chance to get Curry, who may very well be that #1 guy. I think JK did pretty well for having to adjust rebuilding plans on the fly. If he had known he would end up that povotal summer with just Ron Mercer, I would bet big bucks that Stevie Franchise, a #1 type guy, would have been the Bulls pick at #1.

Now, all this being said, guys like Elton ARE NOT A dime a dozen. However, there are a great many players who, IMO, have a far greater impact on the game. They may not get as many boards or points, but thier impact on Wins & Losses is much higher.


----------



## Krazy!!! (Jul 10, 2002)

Lonny Baxter=Clarence Weatherspoon.

Although I respect Baxter's work ethics....I'm not about to compare him to Brand...at least not yet.

Although in fairness....Brand was baptised by fire in his rookie year with the Bulls (where he quickly established himself as a borderline premier PF), whereas Baxter was sittin' fairly DEEP in the bench backin' up Chandler and Fizer...and I used to get upset when some Bulls fans would criticize Baxter's game last year....when he wasn't given a whole lot of minutes the same way that Brand and (to a slightly lesser extent) Fizer got in their rookie year.


----------



## Krazy!!! (Jul 10, 2002)

I think that this season will be Lonny Baxter's coming out party.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

I can't believe how some fans just refuse to state the obvious - Clippers got the better end of the deal. Chandler can become a great player, but will he ever approach the 20/10 numbers that Brand is putting up now? It pains me to say this, but Chandler simply is not capable of putting up those points. Every game that goes on, it looks like he'll develop into a Wallace/Dikembe type. Not bad, but Brand was already blocking shots and forcing opponents to rethink coming into the paint. Tyson Chandler was DEFINITELY going number 2 to the Clippers. If anyone remembers that draft, it was pretty much set in stone come draft day that it was Brown, Chandler, Gasol, then Curry. In fact, that draft was relatively set until at least Cleveland's pick, where they got Diop.

Anyway you look at it, whether it was Brand/Chandler (highly unlikely), Brand/Curry, or Brand/Gasol, those combinations would far surpass our combination of Curry/Chandler. Our reasoning for getting rid of Brand revolved heavily around our lack of confidence of being able to resign him after his rookie deal. However, seeing how free agency has taken a turn in the favor of owners recently there is no doubt in my mind that we could have locked him up longterm without having to go through the hoops that the Clippers did. Just my $.02.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

Unbelievable. Elton Brand is a top ten player in the league. What he does down low few can do. Mario Austin? Lonny Baxter? Tyson Chandler? Who are they? Brand will snap Chandler's skinny *** ten times out of ten. Brand is a pimp.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

C'mon guys. Once I saw that Lacy Banks was writing the article, I stopped reading.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Steve Francis is a great fantasy league player, but I just am not sold on him being the type of star that carries his team into or through the playoffs.
> ...


Your comments on Franchise are reasonable although I think that is only part of Houston's problem

I see big capacity for conflict ahead with Franchise and maybe moreso Mobely with JVG who will insist Ming is the primary offensive feature. 

Discount Cato offensively. He has possibly the worst hands / touch of any bigman legit 2nd Center in the league ( next to Calvin Booth ) 

At the end of the day I love Houston's talent but I question the composition of their team 

It starts with Ming and Francis and works back from there 

IMO , as they go forward they need a meathead on the blocks at strong forward who is a cleaner * Cato for Knight and Harrington * would have come to close to working which may have put a * Griffin + Mobely for Harpring + Stevenson and future protected 1st round pick * deal on the table 

This leaves Piatowski as the role shooter at the 2 guard - an unselfish team player and also allows a Norris/Francis back court to play some with Franchise playing some Marbury/Iverson type role if he could alternate between playing 2 different roles.

This gives the Rox

*

Ming
Harrington ( Taylor / Griffin ) 
Harpring ( Posey )
Piatowski ( Mobley ) 
Francis
* players in brackets previously manning the spots

*

with a bench of :

Knight
Taylor
Rice
Nachbar
Stevenson
Norris

I think that side has got a better chance of going to the playoffs than the likely starting line up of :

*

Ming
Griffin
Rice
Mobely
Francis

*

Having said all of that if we had of taken Francis I wonder how a team of :

*

Miller
Chandler
Artest
Mercer
Francis

with a bench of :

Voshkul 
Fizer
Marshall
Butler ( taken instead of Williams ) 
Crawford

*

Would have fared in the East

And adding a few 2nd rounders like Trent ,Roger and Lonny that's a team that could have been put on the floor for $50M this season with Marshall and Mercer's salary accommodating extensions to Crawford, Fizer and Chandler when they come due with no fear of L Tax if it exists into the future ( which is a different issue ) 

To me that's a 2nd round team right now with the capacity for future growth to conference contenders and hence championship contenders with Chandler, Crawford, Butler and Fizer where your primary growth is going to come from behind Francis, Marshall, Miller , Artest and Mercer who are going to help you get to that point in the East.

So...... 

I'm still glad that Brand convereted into Curry however (effectively) given that Chandler was going to be there at 4 IMO as I think the question is would you trade Curry for Francis and not should we have taken Francis instead of Brand


----------



## Salvaged Ship (Jul 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Krazy!!!</b>!
> I think that this season will be Lonny Baxter's coming out party.


Why, is he gay?


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

*My bad.....*

I should have named this thread "6-8 power forwards are a dime a dozen".


:banghead:


Or even better *"What good is 20 and 10 if it never elevates your team beyond mediocrity"* 


:whoknows:


Brand, like Barkley, will not come close to winning a title unless he goes to a star-studded team like when Barkley went to Phoenix and made it to the Finals. Or if the rest of the Clippers become STARS, not just good because Brand has not elevated any of his teams to a higher level than they would have been without him. Remember how everyone was hype when Brand went to LAC. How adding Brand was the final piece to an already talented team. How he was going to stabilize the team and how they would be playoff contenders. Well LAC went nowhere! And what has Brand done beside secure his 20 and 10 while the losses just keep piling up. His greatest success was with Duke, a star studded team in the college ranks. He's a great piece to have but not your #1 or #2 guy. If he's that high in the team's pecking order that team will not be good enough to win it all. He'll get his 20 and 10 and his team will lose. Instead of his personal stats, how about his career won-loss record. Pull that one out why don't cha!



And I remember the media predicting Chandler to LAC, but Q & Magette were lobbying for Curry. I also remember their coach at the time(whose name escapes me) saying they were set to take Curry (though I'll admit he may have said that to pressure Krause into making the deal). But if the Bulls can take umpteen power forwards in a row, I guess I could fathom LAC taking Curry even though they had Olowakantbe (who wasn't exactly setting the world on fire at that time). :nonono:


BTW, Brand's glaring weakness, his "achilles heel" so to speak, is the one thing that separates him from true legendary status. The one thing that keeps him from being the kind of player that can "elevate" his team to greater "heights".

His lack of significant jumping ability!

Today's game is played ABOVE THE RIM! 

Brand is a great ground attack but sometimes you need an air strike!

:laugh:


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

Do any of you guys think that elton brand would be better suited and more effective for a role like we had with horace grant? I mean Grant was one of the best PF's in the east but do u think that if we would have built a team around him we would have been successful? I think thats whats wrong with the clips, they have alot of guys that are good pieces to the puzzle and would fit in well with a structured system but arent the type of guys to carry a team. Maggette might have the potential to be that guy but hes not there right now.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RoddneyThaRippa</b>!
> Unbelievable. Elton Brand is a top ten player in the league.


Elton Brand is most certainly *not* a top-10 player in the league. Top-10 power forward, quite likely.

Neither is he "dime a dozen." He's a very good player, and a tremendous second scorer on a championship team, but not a franchise player on a championship team.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> Knowing what I know today, I would do Brand-for-Chandler 100 times out of 100.:yes:


You are trippng. Elton Brand is way better than Tyson or Eddie Curry. I'm not hating b/c I am a Bulls fan. I'm not stupid either. Some people are too one-sided to realize the real from what they hope to be real.


----------



## Spartacus Triumvirate (Jan 30, 2003)

Ever approach those 20/10 numbers? :laugh: Brand is likely as good as he is gonna get. He's a star player and any team would be glad to have him. However, Chandler's presence is destined to go beyond what Brand's could have if we kept him. Chandler will help alter the course of a game. IMO he'll always be a serviceable double digit scorer on offense but he'll be an impact player defensively. The additions of Pippen and Bach should make this guy a defensive player of the year candidate in a few years. If he isn't, then I've completely misjudged him. Brand make people think about coming into the paint? Hardly. Sorry, I watched many Clipper games last year and I didn't see fear in anybodies eyes coming down the Clipper lane. Its not all just about bpg. Chandler will alter shots that Brand couldn't even think about altering. Chandler's already moving into double digit rebounding per game. Sure Brands numbers are better. He played 2 years of college and 4 years of NBA ball. He was an immediate starter getting big minutes for the Bulls (37/39). He was a #1 pick. Does anybody in his right mind think his numbers shouldn't be better at this point? We're comparing him to a kid coming out of high school who in his second year just got over 20mpg (19/24). Brand is 4 years ahead of Chandler in terms of competitive ball. This is pretty comical. Did anyone think Chandler was going to exceed Brand at this point? Talk about out of touch with reality. Brand played on a more talented team the last two years as well. Lets see the comparisons as the Bulls grow up. After this year, I think it will be more and more obvious that the Bulls are on their way to winning this trade. But don't expect its all gonna happen this year. It should in the next few though.

Don't forget, Chandler started to put it together before Curry or Crawford. I'd like to think ending his season early will make the fire in his belly even greater. Its also not in the Bulls plan to get Chandler 20ppg. Chandlers job is to be efficient offensively. Rose, Curry and Crawford will all be scoring options ahead of Tyson. So you think its a realistic expectation to think the teams 4th option should get 20ppg?

As a sidebar, I really liked the logic presented earlier in the thread which made it sound like Brand really had to be a great player if Sterling finally opened up his pocketbook. Since when did we start believing in ANY decisions Sterling makes? I'll take a pass on using Sterling's logic to determine ANYTHING.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Spartacus Triumvirate</b>!
> Ever approach those 20/10 numbers? :laugh: Brand is likely as good as he is gonna get. He's a star player and any team would be glad to have him. However, Chandler's presence is destined to go beyond what Brand's could have if we kept him. Chandler will help alter the course of a game. IMO he'll always be a serviceable double digit scorer on offense but he'll be an impact player defensively. The additions of Pippen and Bach should make this guy a defensive player of the year candidate in a few years. If he isn't, then I've completely misjudged him. Brand make people think about coming into the paint? Hardly. Sorry, I watched many Clipper games last year and I didn't see fear in anybodies eyes coming down the Clipper lane. Its not all just about bpg. Chandler will alter shots that Brand couldn't even think about altering. Chandler's already moving into double digit rebounding per game. Sure Brands numbers are better. He played 2 years of college and 4 years of NBA ball. He was an immediate starter getting big minutes for the Bulls (37/39). He was a #1 pick. Does anybody in his right mind think his numbers shouldn't be better at this point? We're comparing him to a kid coming out of high school who in his second year just got over 20mpg (19/24). Brand is 4 years ahead of Chandler in terms of competitive ball. This is pretty comical. Did anyone think Chandler was going to exceed Brand at this point? Talk about out of touch with reality. Brand played on a more talented team the last two years as well. Lets see the comparisons as the Bulls grow up. After this year, I think it will be more and more obvious that the Bulls are on their way to winning this trade. But don't expect its all gonna happen this year. It should in the next few though.
> 
> Don't forget, Chandler started to put it together before Curry or Crawford. I'd like to think ending his season early will make the fire in his belly even greater. Its also not in the Bulls plan to get Chandler 20ppg. Chandlers job is to be efficient offensively. Rose, Curry and Crawford will all be scoring options ahead of Tyson. So you think its a realistic expectation to think the teams 4th option should get 20ppg?
> ...


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Like I said earlier, would you rather hit the floor with 2 athletically gifted 7 footers :bsmile: or a 6-8 guy with long arms? :nonono:


I'm still waiting for an answer to that and Brand's career won-loss record as a pro!

:wait:


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

*is elton a great player?*

Here are the questions that I could never answer about Elton Brand when thinking about his potential to be a superstar.

What is it about Elton that makes you think he is more like a Karl Malone and less like a Loy Vaught or Otis Thorpe?

Why do his pro teams always fail? Why can't his 20/10 win ballgames?

My inability to answer the first one and my inability to come up with a soothing answer to the second batch leads me to believe that it was a good move to let him go.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

*Re: My bad.....*



> Originally posted by <b>Bulls4Life</b>!
> 
> His lack of significant jumping ability!
> 
> ...


NEWSFLASH... Elton can throw it down with the best of 'em. He was throwin it down crazy the last month or two of the season. I think its cause he's cut up and lost some excess weight.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: Re: My bad.....*



> Originally posted by <b>THE'clip'SHOW</b>!
> 
> 
> NEWSFLASH... Elton can throw it down with the best of 'em. He was throwin it down crazy the last month or two of the season. I think its cause he's cut up and lost some excess weight.


By the way, Clip show, congrats on signing Brand and Maggette. I think you can really build a team around those two. At least Brand has at least one really good player to run with for years.

Do you think you'll match Odom if he signs with an offer sheet over $60 million?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Man oh man. I didn't want to get pulled into this argument, but I guess I just did.

<b>My thoughts, mostly in defense, of Sir Elton Brand:</b>
1) People need to get over the fact he's 'only' 6'8". Err okay. He has a 7'6" wingspan and had the same standing reach as 7 footer Evan Eschmeyer from the same draft class. Plus as Jerry Krause loved to say, he has some of the biggest hands he's ever seen on an NBA player. Oh wait, was he talking about Elton's mom?!  Either way, his huge hands enable him to do things on offense that Tyson would only dream of.

2) People need to get over the fact that 'he'll never improve'. Bologna baby. He <i>improved</i> after he left the Bulls. He dropped 15-20lbs of fat, put on some muscle, and greatly improved his defensive game. EBrand may not be the help defender Tyson is, but he is a great lateral/straight-up defender.

3) People need to get over the fact that 'he would never have been able to play alongside Eddy Curry... they would be operating in the same space...' Hmm... none of us have ever had a chance to see it?! Eddy C still does not have a traditional back-to-the-basket post game. Heck, we don't even know if he can pass out of double teams. He doesn't D up too well or clear the boards. Don't you think Brand's 10 boards and 2.5 blocks a game would help? Also, Brand averaged 2.5 assists a game and shot over 50% last season. Nice!

4) People, in general, need to lighten up a bit on non-Bulls players. Hey we're all fans and we love our players. But I think we are waaayyyy too quick to put down players on others teams, while also ignoring some clear faults with our youngs. Obviously we have youth, potential, and athleticism going for us. That argument has been sucked dry on these boards. But a time is soon coming (*cough *cough this year) when more will be expected from our youngs, the 'more' being a playoff birth in the East.


----------



## Richie Rich (May 23, 2003)

The BuLLS fans are too stuck on their pLayers, sorry to say. Brand is a better taLent then ChandLer. It's as simpLe as that. And whoever said Look @ his career W-L record, Look @ ChandLer's and EC's, itz not too good either.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>CeLtZ in 04</b>!
> The BuLLS fans are too stuck on their pLayers, sorry to say. Brand is a better taLent then ChandLer. It's as simpLe as that. And whoever said Look @ his career W-L record, Look @ ChandLer's and EC's, itz not too good either.



GeE, MoSt FaNs ArE sTuCk On ThEiR PlAyeRs BeC. ItS tHeIr TeAm.

ItS nOtHiNg NeW. iS bRaNd BeTtEr ThAn ChAnDlEr? YeS.

bUt ThAt DoEsN't MeAn It WiLl AlWaYs Be ThAt WaY eItHeR.

BrAnD wIlL aLwAyS hAvE tHe BeTtEr OfFeNsIvE #'s.........

tHaT's FiNe............BeC. wE aReN't ReLyInG oN ChAnDlEr tO bE oUr LeAdInG sCoReR.

We ArE rElYiNg On HiM tO bE oUr DeFeNsIvE lEaDeR.........wHiCh ChAnDlEr HaS a GoOd ChAnCe Of SuRpAsSiNg BrAnD iN.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> You are trippng. Elton Brand is way better than Tyson or Eddie Curry. I'm not hating b/c I am a Bulls fan. I'm not stupid either. Some people are too one-sided to realize the real from what they hope to be real.


Of course Brand is better *now*, but when you're a young team making a deal you typically do so with the long-term in mind. I think that in the long run Chandler will be a more valuable player for this team, even if he is not as good of a stats guy.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Elton Brand is most certainly *not* a top-10 player in the league. Top-10 power forward, quite likely.
> ...


He is a top ten player in the league because quality big men are at a premium in the league. Good shooting guards and small forwards are a lot easier to come by then quality big men. Brand is a force in the middle.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> He is a top ten player in the league because quality big men are at a premium in the league. Good shooting guards and small forwards are a lot easier to come by then quality big men. Brand is a force in the middle.


Correction: _Centers_ are at a premium. 6'8-6'10 PFs are rather plentiful.

Brand is not a top 10 player, no way. As of right now, I would take any of the following players over Brand:
-KG
-Duncan
-Shaq
-Pierce
-Kobe
-TMac
-Dirk
-Jermaine O'Neal
-Webber
-Iverson
-Walker
-Nash
-Kidd
-Marbury
-Francis
-Marion
-Ray Allen
If you're talking about the long run as opposed to just this coming season, a good case could be made for guys like Yao, Curry and Stoudamire as well, based on potential alone.

Brand currently has similar value to guys like Stojakovic, Payton, Abdur-Rahim and Sheed (who only falls to Brand's level because of off-court issues).


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

FYI,

Brand is ranked #8 among all players by nba.com's Efficiency rating.

Brand was #4 among all players at the one thing that people value most about Chandler's game: BLOCKS PER GAME.

How about blocks per 48 minutes? Brand ranked #12, Chandler #19.

How about offensive rebounds? Really useful on a team with 4x 39%-ish wing shooters. Brand ranked #1 in the NBA in OREB/game.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> 
> Correction: _Centers_ are at a premium. 6'8-6'10 PFs are rather plentiful.
> 
> ...


Quality BIG MEN are at a premium. You can't put emphasis on position. Brand is a force down low, period. Who cares if he shows up in the stat column as a center, power forward, guard, whatever. He's a force downlow. Walker, Nash, Marion, Marbury, Allen, and Francis are not better than Brand. Maybe I should clarify myself about what I mean when I say he's a top ten player. I'm basing that on his value. He's young, he doesn't have injury problems, he's got good character, he's a hard worker, he's produced year after year, and he puts up big numbers as a low post player. I'm talking more about value than numbers. Sure, Franchise puts up huge numbers but his team hasn't gone anywhere. The same can be said for Brand but the Clippers organization is in disarray. I'll correct my original statement and say Brand is a top 15 player in the league. But don't put him in the same class as Abdur-Rahim, Peja, and Rasheed. They don't produce like he does.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

So far, I'd say Shareef is a pretty apt comparison


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> How about blocks per 48 minutes? Brand ranked #12, Chandler #19.


Brand played 39.6 mpg last season.
Chandler played 24.4 mpg last season.
Not exactly fair to compare their block numbers, is it?



> Brand was #4 among all players at the one thing that people value most about Chandler's game: BLOCKS PER GAME.


I think you are looking at shotblocking all wrong. It's not necessarily the actual numbers that matter so much as it is the presence of a shotblocker that matters. Brand is an excellent help defender and gets a lot of blocks that way, but he is not, nor can he ever be what you would call a "shotblocking presence" simply because he is 6'8 with respectable but unspectacular athletic ability. The greatest value of a 7'2 shotblocking presence that can move like Chandler is the fact that he causes opponents to shy away from attacking the basket. Brand, in addition to being a very good scorer and a great rebounder, is an good man defender and and a good position shotblocker. But the fact of the matter is that he will never be able to completely alter a game on the defensive end like, for example, Dikembe Mutumbo did in his prime- he just does not have to ability to get to as many shots as Mutumbo did. Chandler does.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

Shareef doesn't do anything compared to Brand on the boards and on the defensive end. That's a ****ty comparision.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> Quality BIG MEN are at a premium. You can't put emphasis on position. Brand is a force down low, period. Who cares if he shows up in the stat column as a center, power forward, guard, whatever. He's a force downlow.


No, it makes a *huge* difference what position he plays, or more specifically, how he scores his points. Does anyone doubt that 30 ppg from Shaq is more valuable than 30 ppg from Allen Iverson?




> Walker, Nash, Marion, Marbury, Allen, and Francis are not better than Brand.


Call this a matter of opinion, but I would absolutely take any of those players over Brand.




> But don't put him in the same class as Abdur-Rahim, Peja, and Rasheed. They don't produce like he does.


Well let's see.....
Shareef Abdur-Rahim
PPG 19.9 
RPG 8.4 
APG 3.0 
SPG 1.07 
BPG .47 
FG% .478 
FT% .841 
3P% .350 
MPG 38.1 

Elton Brand 
PPG 18.5 
RPG 11.3 
APG 2.5 
SPG 1.15 
BPG 2.55 
FG% .502 
FT% .685 
3P% .000 
MPG 39.6 

Rasheed Wallace 
PPG 18.1
RPG 7.4 
APG 2.1 
SPG .95 
BPG 1.04 
FG% .471 
FT% .735 
3P% .358 
MPG 36.3 

Those seem pretty comparable to me- if not for Rasheed's off-court problems, I would put him above Elton for his ability to hit from both the outside and the inside, and for the fact that he puts up numbers on an actual *good* team. As far as Peja, when Elton ever wins half as many games as Peja won with the Kings last season, then talk about Elton as a better player. Peja contributes to a winning effort, Elton puts up nice stats on a bad team. Fair or unfair, that's the truth.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> 
> No, it makes a *huge* difference what position he plays, or more specifically, how he scores his points. Does anyone doubt that 30 ppg from Shaq is more valuable than 30 ppg from Allen Iverson?
> 
> ...


Brand is a DEFENSIVE PRESENCE on the inside. Shareef and Rasheed aren't. There's a big difference. Also Rasheed and to a point Shareef spend a lot of their time on the perimeter. Brand has the ability to knock down the jumper but plays on the inside. These are unfair comparisions. Also, how are you gonna compare Peja and Elton? First of all, they play two COMPLETELY different styles. Second of all, they are on two COMPLETELY different teams. Pat frickin' Riley wanted to pay Brand the max. That should tell you something.


----------



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

> Originally posted by <b>RoddneyThaRippa</b>!
> 
> 
> Pat frickin' Riley wanted to pay Brand the max. That should tell you something.


RTR
I would probably leave that out of your arguement. Riley might be a good coach but his job as GM has gotten Miami into the mess they're currently in. The fact that Riles offered Juwan Howard all that dough also tarnishes his credibility as a gm.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RoddneyThaRippa</b>!
> 
> 
> Brand is a DEFENSIVE PRESENCE on the inside. Shareef and Rasheed aren't. There's a big difference. Also Rasheed and to a point Shareef spend a lot of their time on the perimeter. Brand has the ability to knock down the jumper but plays on the inside. These are unfair comparisions. Also, how are you gonna compare Peja and Elton? First of all, they play two COMPLETELY different styles. Second of all, they are on two COMPLETELY different teams. Pat frickin' Riley wanted to pay Brand the max. That should tell you something.


L.O.B shot the first cannon. But let me just add that in addition to giving Juwan Howard *$100+ Million Dollars*, he gave *MAX contracts* to Brian "Another short PF" Grant and Eddie "Freaking" Jones.

If you want to say that Riles offer puts Brand in a class with Howard, Grant and Jones, I am down with that.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> L.O.B shot the first cannon. But let me just add that in addition to giving Juwan Howard *$100+ Million Dollars*, he gave *MAX contracts* to Brian "Another short PF" Grant and Eddie "Freaking" Jones.
> ...


Well, you're right about that but my other points still stand. If that's the only weakness you can find in it that's fine by me.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> 
> No, it makes a *huge* difference what position he plays, or more specifically, how he scores his points. Does anyone doubt that 30 ppg from Shaq is more valuable than 30 ppg from Allen Iverson?
> 
> ...


The ONLY way these other guys come close to Brand at filling out the stat sheet is PPG, and Min/Gm. 

And... I was comparing Brand to CHandler PER 48 MINUTES, so you can try again on the "chandler didn't play as much" theory.


----------



## Spartacus Triumvirate (Jan 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RoddneyThaRippa</b>!
> 
> Brand is a DEFENSIVE PRESENCE on the inside. Shareef and Rasheed aren't.


Rasheed is a good defender. He's no less a presence than Brand. If your capitalization is trying to say Brand is a BEN WALLACE type defensive presence I can only ---> :laugh: at the suggestion.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> 
> 
> RTR
> I would probably leave that out of your arguement. Riley might be a good coach but his job as GM has gotten Miami into the mess they're currently in. The fact that Riles offered Juwan Howard all that dough also tarnishes his credibility as a gm.


Right... he also maxed out brian grant of all people


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RoddneyThaRippa</b>!
> 
> Brand is a DEFENSIVE PRESENCE on the inside. Shareef and Rasheed aren't. There's a big difference.


Are you joking? Wallace is one of the best defensive big men in the league. He's played the elite big men straight up and with excellent results.

The Clippers never have Brand play elite big men straight up, they always double to help him, including against Wallace. The Blazers never double down on Brand.

Which is the *major* difference between Brand's and Wallace's deceptively similar numbers. Wallace puts up the numbers while commanding double-teams, opening up other people.

Brand rarely demands a double-team.



> Pat frickin' Riley wanted to pay Brand the max. That should tell you something.


Yes, Pat Riley has proven to be a *brilliant* GM. Even before Mourning succumbed to sickness, he never built a team that could even win the East. Have you seen Brian Grant's contract? Riley wanted to give him that much, and that's one of the terrible contracts in the game. He overpaid Eddie Jones, too.

Pat Riley is a great coach, but anyone who makes him their team's GM deserves what they get.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

wow, this thread has gotten interesting. a little off topic, but Riley can't completely be blamed for his signings. If people go back and remember the timeframe of all those signings, large contracts were "in". it was a player's market and teams were forced to give large contracts. His Howard signing came during the summer when Howard was one of, if not the most coveted free agents. Fortunately for Riles, the contract was ruled void due to some under the table agreement with Mourning and the Bullets retained Howard, where he quickly failed to realize his potential.

As far as Brand vs Chandler goes, thus far the only plus that Chandler has is he has "potential". Nevermind the fact that history is filled with players that never realized their potential. Many claim that Brand has already realized his. That's great then because he's a 20/10 All Star PF in the West. All year long he has faced the likes of Duncan, Webber, Malone, Wallace, Garnett, Stoudemire, etc. and still put up better numbers than when he was in the East. 

One of the Clips mods mentioned that the talk of Brand and Curry unable to coexist as rubbish. I could not agree more. Apparently Brand clogs the paint, although he has a nice 10-15 footer while Chandler opens up the paint because he can't hit the side of a barn from 5 feet out???? I understand we want to see Chandler sucdeed, but come on - let's call a spade a spade. Brand is a better player than Chandler now, and it's very questionable that Chandler will ever approach the status of player that Brand is.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> The ONLY way these other guys come close to Brand at filling out the stat sheet is PPG, and Min/Gm.


Shareef averages less rpg, bpg and shoots a lower %, but he averages more ppg, apg, and is a significantly better FT shooter. I'd say they're pretty comparable- Elton probably gets a slight edge, but not much more than that.
As for Rasheed, remember that he is playing for a talent-laden veteran team that has a lot of other guys capable of scoring and pulling down rebounds. He contributes to a winning effort whereas Elton is putting up stats on a poor team. I'm not saying that the Clippers' crappiness is Elton's fault, but it is definiately worth mentioning in this debate.



> And... I was comparing Brand to CHandler PER 48 MINUTES, so you can try again on the "chandler didn't play as much" theory.


Ok, point taken. But consider this- Chandler is 20, while Brand is 24 and has had the benefit of instruction from the finest college basketball program in the nation. He knows how to play defense, whereas Chandler still gets lost on rotations. Even still, Chandler gets alot of blocks because he is tall, athletic and mobile enough to make up for his mistakes. Imagine what his bpg is going to look like once he learns how to play fundamentally sound team defense.

Barring any career-threatening injuries or other extenuating circumstances, I'd be willing to bet that Chandler is either first or second in the league in bpg by the time he's Elton's age.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> One of the Clips mods mentioned that the talk of Brand and Curry unable to coexist as rubbish. I could not agree more. Apparently Brand clogs the paint, although he has a nice 10-15 footer while Chandler opens up the paint because he can't hit the side of a barn from 5 feet out???? I understand we want to see Chandler sucdeed, but come on - let's call a spade a spade. Brand is a better player than Chandler now, and it's very questionable that Chandler will ever approach the status of player that Brand is.


It's not that Brand and Curry _couldn't have_ coexisted, it's more like Chandler and Curry complement each other better. It's about who's skil set is best for the team, not who puts up better stats. Elton and Curry could certainly have played together, but they are guys that bring roughly the same thing to the floor offensively- both need post feeds to get their points, and they would undoubtedly have taken shots away from each other had they ended up playing together. Chandler mostly scores his point in transition or off of putbacks, so he leaves more post touches per game for Curry while providing a defensive presence that Brand never could have. Not that Brand isn't a good defender- he's almost certainly a better overall defender than Tyson at this point. But do not underestimate the effect on opposing players when they see two athletic, mobile 7-footers in the lane, especially when one of them is the most athletic 7'2 player since Ralph Sampson (in his good years). It totally changes the outlook of the game- guys are so much more limited in their options offensively. 

Anyone remember back to the days when Brand was a Bull? Remember the "layup lines" that the local media used to shake their heads at in disgust? I swear that the Bulls must have given up more layups than any team in the history of the game during those two seasons- imagine how much worse that would have been with Curry next to Brand. Not that it was or would have been Elton's fault- you can't blame a guy for being 6'8. Chandler's mere presence on the court, to a large degree, helps to cover up Curry's defensive lapses. The difference between the Bulls' D with Chandler on the floor and without him are like night and day.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

Pat Riley is overblown and OVERRATED!


He's the "Mike Ditka Of The NBA"!

:yes:

Does anyone remember how GOOD teams played the Bulls when Bland was here? 

They would put a tall guy on Elton and totally frustrate him!!!! I remember Dikembe Mutombo shutting Elton down. I even remember HORACE GRANT shutting Elton down. He always had trouble with guys 6-10 and up with long arms that could D him straight up!!!!



Now Elton will get his points over the course of a season, that's been proven!!!!

But when a team needs to shut him down all they have to do is put a player like TC on him and he's done!

And the combo of TC and EC even gave Shaq fits!!! And this is from 2 snotty nose kids only 2 years removed from their SENIOR PROM!!!!!! It's been 7 years since Elton's senior prom. Give Tyson and Eddy this coming season to FINALLY get more prominent roles and after that this argument will be MOOT!!! 

BTW, everyone here is UNDERRATING Tyson's offensive ability!!!!!!!! Coming out of high school this kid was WELL KNOWN for having a sweet shooting stroke and incredible touch for a 7 footer. He even talked about playing small forward and floating around on the perimeter like Nowitzki plays(This is not an attempt to compare TC to Dirk so PLEASE) 
The problem was he couldn't dribble. On top of that, Tim Floyd and now Cartwright demanded that he play down low on offense.

So he was forced to play a style of basketball that he had previously shied away from because of his shooting ability. To his credit he is beginning to excel in the low post with jump hooks and a couple of back-to-the-basket moves. Whenever he gets his little pet moves down pat we will be comparing him to KG, not Bland!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:swammi: :wait: :yes: 

Now, would anyone here take Bland over KG?

:devil:


----------



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

> Originally posted by <b>Bulls4Life</b>!
> Pat Riley is overblown and OVERRATED!
> 
> 
> ...


Don't be messin with DA Coach


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>sp00k</b>!Many claim that Brand has already realized his. That's great then because he's a 20/10 All Star PF in the West.


Actually - he is a one-time All-Star and a replacement at that. He also has not scored 20 for 2 years. 



> Originally posted by <b>sp00k</b>
> Brand is a better player than Chandler now, and it's very questionable that Chandler will ever approach the status of player that Brand is.


Yea, the same arguements were made in 2001 when Brand was 20\10 and Chandler had never played a game.

And, the same arguements were made in 2002 when Brand was 18\11 and Chandler was 6\4.

And, the same arguements were made in 2003 when Brand was 18\11 and Chandler was 9\7.

In 03\04, Chandler will probably be close to 13\9 this year. I'm sure some stat guys will still pick Brand.

Chandler is probably still 1.5 years away from ending this argument.

Here is one anti-Brand argument that has never changed, despite Brand's great stats, his teams have never even wiffed the playoffs.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

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


Both of these statments aren't true, the second more so than the first. Did you see Elton destroy Webber and others last year? 

Brand is doubled more than not. I dont know the last time you saw him play. He is such a beast down low two guys are always trying to shut him down when he has the ball, or on the boards.

Also many people might now be aware.. but Elton's face up jumper is DRAMATICALLY improving.. Towards the end of last year it was looking great. I think you will actually see him average around 21 points this year.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

*Players Like Brand Are Called the Bottom of the Top 50*

Elton stinks.

But first a sermon Boys scouts style.

A great leader is someone who makes the team a team and makes the other guys look good. A leader makes his/her impact felt. Thirdly, the leader earns his (and her ) stripes and bails the team out when its on the ropes.

Elton is just someone whom two loser teams have called upon to be their leader, when as a leader, he has merely filled in as a rebounder/scorer/stat guy rather than actually making impact as a rebounder/scorer/stat guy and making the team a team and its surrounding players better. He's got the label of leader, and he's failed to live up to that label. He's just. . .there. Somehow, he left his team behind on his streak to the some barely great numbers. The dude arguably had the best young talent around him for 2 years, got a little close to the playoffs, but has since completely fallen out, and likely to be kept fallen out with this steroid injection into the West. 

Elton stinks. As a leader.

Tyson, on the other hand, does not stink so much.

The guy seems to make impact: defense, rebounding, a little bit of scoring all towards an improved, but dwaddling 30-win finish. Generally, when he had a good game, the team had a good game. He makes the team work and makes his presence felt: an impact. However ! However, two things that can stop him on this road to leadership and superstardom. One, he has not bailed the team out when it's been on the ropes yet. Two, when will he ever reach his full potential ? Hopefully with all that early impact-making of his, he can eventually bail us out on the ropes and max out his potential, and we could officially certify him as one of our cornerstones to a dynasty. 

Tyson, on the other hand, does not stink so much. As a superstar role player.

However, Elton, if second banana-ed, and downgraded to Tyson's role as a Rodman/Ben Wallace-ish player for the team earning his stripes and trying to become a leader rather than having it handed to him, would be better than Tyson at this point. A superstar role player. That's the only way I see that Elton can not stink more than Tyson. :no:


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> 
> Of course Brand is better *now*, but when you're a young team making a deal you typically do so with the long-term in mind. I think that in the long run Chandler will be a more valuable player for this team, even if he is not as good of a stats guy.


Elton Brand is yound as well.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> Elton Brand is yound as well.


That's not the point- the point is that by the time Tyson matures, we will be a better fit and help this team more than Elton would have , IMO.


----------



## Im The One (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Are you joking? Wallace is one of the best defensive big men in the league. He's played the elite big men straight up and with excellent results.
> ...


Players like Brand are a dime a dozen? LOL. Well........ players like Wallace buy dimes by the dozen. I'll take Brand anyday

I just started posting again, and I havent had time to read through the thread, but best believe i'll be back


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> 
> 
> Don't be messin with DA Coach


Da Coach Sucks!!!!

:upset: 


He's the Pat Riley of NFL coaches!!!


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Im The One</b>!
> 
> Players like Brand are a dime a dozen? LOL.


I never said that. Don't let that stop you, though...



> Well........ players like Wallace buy dimes by the dozen. I'll take Brand anyday


Sure you would. The Clippers would, too. That's why the Clippers are the Clippers...everyone's lovable loser.



> I just started posting again, and I havent had time to read through the thread, but best believe i'll be back


Best learn how to read posts before you dash off responses. You clearly were unable to read my post, since you thought I said players like Brand are a dime a dozen.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TJ</b>!
> Which team do you think will do better this year, the Clippers or the Bulls? I think the Bulls. If you look at this, then the Bulls are better off with Chandler and Curry then with Brand and either Chandler/Curry. Chandler and Curry will be better and are much bigger that a Brand/Curry or Brand/Chandler lineup. And without the trade, we may have been without either. The Clippers could have taken Curry and the Grizzles could have taken Chandler. We would have had to take either Shane Battier or Pau Gasol. That is not so bad but the Grizz have not been so great the last 2 years either.


Hullo, back from another church trip to Mexico. God is good.

Interesting. What if we had Pau Gasol and Elton Brand instead of Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry?

PAU GASOL and ELTON BRAND?!

Wait a second here.

Pau Gasol is 19 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 1.8 bpg, shooting 51% from the floor while taking the most shots on the entire team. Tack on 2.8 apg. He's fairly tough inside, can shoot jumpers, run the court, and if he lands his footing, he has a nasty slow-motion tomahawk-like dunk. He's fairly effective in the post, with more Hakeem in him than Shaq, but with all the questions about his size and strength, if you want him to be a center, then he's among the top 6 most effective ones in the league. (Shaq, Ming, Ilgauskas, Zo (still), Divac).

In a lot of ways, Gasol is everything people want Tyson to be, and he's STILL GETTING BETTER.

Elton Brand is Elton Brand. In a lot of ways, he's very much what Eddy Curry may become, except a superior rebounder (as of now) and defender (probably forever). He's a super hard worker, has the ridiculous combination of strength and agility in the paint, and can hit his J from 15 feet or more.

He was 18.5 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 2.55 bpg (!!!), 1.15 STEALS per game, 2.5 apg, and was 50% from the field while taking the 2nd most shots of anyone on the team. 

A combination of players is never just the sum of their stats, but... one has to wonder. Brand and Gasol, with Fizer and some plodding center to use for fouling Shaq... that's as good a frontcourt as you might ask for in the league. As good as Webber and Divac (Miller?). Better than O'Neal and Miller was (now Pollard or Jeff Foster). Better than K-Mart and Mutombo. Potentially better than Shaq and whatever scrub PF they put next to him. Only Duncan and D-Robb stand significantly higher than a Brand-Gasol frontcourt, IMO. 

Wow. Interesting how we try to figure out what we traded Brand for. Did we trade him for Curry? Did we trade him for Chandler? In reality it was the combination. The questions, thus, are looming: could Brand and Curry work together? What about Brand and Chandler?

But what did we REALLY trade? Brand and Gasol for Chandler and Curry. Gasol turned 23 last month, and Brand turned 24 earlier this year. 

Crawford, Marshall, Rose, Fizer... with Brand and Gasol? Now Pippen? Guys like Baxter, Hassell, Mason off the bench?

AND Pippen?

With Crawford as the contingent agent, it's not a reach to say that they might have been the Eastern Conference champs this year with that kind of roster. They would have gone to face the Spurs in the Finals, and lost, but... they would have been there, and they would have been there NOW.

That all having been said, I'm still happier with Chandler and Curry simply because-

1) they ARE developing, quite steadily. No one in the NBA would ever call either player a "bust", or even heading towards "bust"-dom.
2) they are younger, although only by about three years. What this means is that, hoping that Chandler and Curry are signed to extensions, they will be making their strike in about three or four years. At that time, Tim Duncan will be 31, and beginning to see hints of decline in his game. Shaquille O'Neal will be far from the unstoppable force he is now, at the age of 34 or 35 and with two bad feet. 
3) quite simply, even with guys like Sofoklis, Diop, and James Lang, there is no big man like Eddy Curry in the league. 

Brand and Gasol would make the Bulls a contender for the champs, and even possibly win it all for a year if they got lucky. But I don't want a team that might get lucky in the Finals... I want a team that can DOMINATE and be feared, i.e. the Lakers of today.

Errr... back to the topic. Brand is a solid player, exceptionally so, and he isn't a dime a dozen.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

> What if we had Pau Gasol and Elton Brand instead of Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry?


hmmmmm, I'm not sure this would have happened. We had the 4th pick, Grizzlies 3rd, Clippers 2nd. Clippers pick Curry, Grizzlies get Gasol-- We get Chandler and Brand. Because the Clippers wanted Curry, I don't know if the Grizzlies would have rather had Chandler or Gasol... but I'm guessing Gasol was the pick.

Then again, we did choose Chandler first, so maybe Memphis wanted Chandler but not Curry.

Besides, Gasol is overrated. Yes, he's 7 feet but, he's not that good defensively and quite soft. Stromile Swift plays center when they are both on the floor; Gasol can't play it.

But anyways, I think it was basically Brand for Curry and I'm good with that.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Brand is just the second coming of Shareef Adbul Rahim (or possibly the third coming of Antonio McDeyess?). He will always put up the good numbers, but he'll never lead a team to much of a winning record. Krause saw that when even a complimentary player like Ron Mercer didn't help the team much, despite both Brand and Mercer averaging 20+ points per game.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TwinkieTowers</b>!
> Brand is just the second coming of Shareef Adbul Rahim (or possibly the third coming of Antonio McDeyess?). He will always put up the good numbers, but he'll never lead a team to much of a winning record. Krause saw that when even a complimentary player like Ron Mercer didn't help the team much, despite both Brand and Mercer averaging 20+ points per game.


Good observation!:greatjob:


Elton Brand is the answer to the question 
*"What If A. C. Green had been a go to guy?"* 

:laugh:


----------

