Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Who is going to reap the benefits of this deal in the future, the Bulls or the Clippers?? Brand at the moment is puting up 18 points, 11 rebounds , 2 blocks ,2 assists, league leaders in double doubles, 52% field goal percentage, etc. Can Chandler emulate these numbers and production in the future??? What if he does not become as good as Brand?? Chandler is taller, quicker, more athletic but does that mean that he will be a better player?? What was the real reason for this trade?? I mean wouldn't a Brand,Curry and Rose combo be a team of the future, anyway. I am just saying that it takes alot to give off a player who puts up 20 and 10 in his first 2 years in the league. The Clippers had no hesitation in dealing for Brand as they felt that perhaps Chandler could be a better player than Brand or just as good, but they wanted Brand now and he was the key in improving the Clippers this year.

But what if Chandler never becomes the guy we all expect him to be, while Brand continues to put up great numbers and all-star games for the Clippers. Why do teams trade a proven guy who produces night in and night out, for another player who might not be as good but has the potential to be. In the future I expect Chandler to be a great player, but like I said he will do awfully well to emulate the feats of Brand currently, who is doing it night in and night out, in the West against the better power forwards of the game.

Did the Bulls think that Brand was as good as he was going to get, and had no improvement left?? If so there are not that many guys putting up 18 points, 11 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 blocks putting up greater than 50% field goal percentage anyway.Why trade a guy who is a proven commodity at only 23 years old, for a guy that will do well just to be as good, it just does not make sense to me. Like I said can anyone here really see Chandler putting up greater numbers than Brand does in the future?? Or is it the intangibles that Chandler gives, such as his height, wingspan, length and possible perimiter play that the Bulls thought was the difference between Brand and Chandler?

Of course you cannot think about the two of them now, as Chandler has just had one year in the league, but further down the track, will he be better than Brand??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,433 Posts
I think Krause had the right idea

Yes, on paper it looks ridiculous to give up a guy like Elton Brand for any unproven rookie (let alone a high schooler), BUT if you think about it there was some very sound logic behind it.

First, you just have to accept that Krause truly believed in Tyson and his potential. He did not see this as a risk, at least looking at the long term potential. While Brand's numbers have been excellent, I think we can see very clearly from Tyson's production in Year 1 that similar numbers are very attainable. Tyson looks like he'll be around 18-22 ppg, 10-12 rpg, 50% FG, 3-4 bpg.

Another factor to consider in the trade was that it was pulled AFTER the Bulls knew they had gotten Curry at #4. A Curry/Brand frontcourt, while looking good on paper, would not maximize frontcourt potential. Basically, they'd have two deep-post players who would be bound to step on each other's toes offensively. They also lack athleticism to a certain extent. With Chandler paired up with Curry, they complement each other much better in terms of inside/outside and athleticism.

Finally, the main factor that makes this trade a smart one, is that it considered the overall potential of the team to become championship calibre. The potential for Tyson and Eddy to become a legitimate "twin tower" force in the league is very appealing. The only other legitimate combos (Duncan/Robinson & Sampson/Akeem) went to the finals. And lastly, Krause knew that by commiting to the youth movement for another year would ensure the Bulls a high draft pick and a shot at JWill or another top guard (wagner?). Turns out he was right.

So now we have two great young big men who look like they will be big time players, and dominant PG, and some great surrounding characters as well. I'd say that we are in good position to create a dynasty, and while we'd still have playoff potential with Brand, I'm just not convinced we'd ever be an elite team in the league.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
342 Posts
Simply put, size wins championships. And right now, the title goes through Shaq (and maybe Duncan after he retires). Isn't a fully developed Curry and Chandler much more appealing than throwing Curry/Brand combo at Shaq? Could cause major problems, if Shaq is around to see Curry and Chandler play to their full potential (If they EVER play to their full potential). And let us not forget, having Brand would probably have put us out of a position to draft Jay Williams and whoever else we might end up with until the time is right. Brand for Chandler, risky business? Yes, but a risk worth taking if you want to be a serious contender.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
70,380 Posts
I think Krause made the right move, but you have to wonder what if...

Jamal Crawford
Trenton Hassell
Jalen Rose
Elton Brand
Eddy Curry

There would be enough talent and upside on that team to see wins now and look forward to the future, but like I said.... it's just What If.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,975 Posts
I think Krause was scared that Brand would play out his contract and leave. Brand was a known commodity - a Karl Malone type player if he only improves a little. And Brand would want to play for a winner, which Krause could not build in time (if ever ;-)


What the trade did was buy Krause some time - chandler's contract runs 2 years after Brand's would have run out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,909 Posts
Krause was building a different sort of team. He was getting his inside banger in Curry, so that is why Chandler was taken.

Who made out on the deal? We won know for another 7-10 years when both have hung it up. Everyone knows how much of an Elton Brand fan I am too... Man, I miss his play.

Not to change the subject, but if you could pick your PF from anyone in history, who would it be? and why?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
I watched the tape of the Bulls-Grizzlies summer league several times, and Chandler has a tremendous effect defensively, with his athleticism, height, and natural defensive instincts.

Chandler may never be the smooth offensive player Brand is, but Tyson will always be able to shoot over almost anyone. I also believe Chandler will be very close to equaling Brand's rebounding numbers.

Tyson absolutely shut down Gooden, who'd been having a good RMR. He stopped people from driving, altered lots of shots, and just made it harder for the Grizzlies to score when he was on the court.

One thing to think about when looking at the Brand-Chandler trade is the reprecussions of having Chandler instead of Brand on the 2001-2002 season and how it would've affected our chances to draft Jay Williams.

In addition, the numbers that Artest and especially Miller put up would likely have gone down some with Brand taking some of the shots away. Would Artest and Miller have been able to be packaged for Rose? Maybe the Bulls wouldn't have wanted to.

Barring the Rose trade, we would've had last season -

PG - Greg Anthony, Kevin Ollie, (JC injured most of season)
SG - Ron Mercer, Trenton Hassell
SF - Ron Artest, Fred Hoiberg, (EROB injured most of season)
PF - Elton Brand, Marcus Fizer
CT - Brad Miller, Eddy Curry

Would this lineup have been alot better then 21 wins last year?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
My understanding is that MJ wanted both Brand and Crawford for the #1 pick.

I also seem to remember a Krause quote saying they got two of their top three highest ranked players on their draft board. With all the sudden hype regarding Kwame Brown leading up to the draft, Kwame was generally regarded as the top high-schooler.

I wouldn't be suprised if Krause had him rated #1 last year. I also wouldn't be suprised if he had him rated behind both Tyson and Eddy. If anything, Krause has shown he does his homework, and is a pretty good judge of talent. Especially in the 2nd round the last two years, with Trenton Hassell, Roger Mason Jr. (defended well in RMR), and Lonny 'I may be better then Fizer' Baxter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,076 Posts
I believe the Clippers got the better end of the deal.

In an unprecedented move, Jerry K traded a known commodity for unproven potential. Even the most ardent JK supporters and Bulls' optimists liked the deal, based on potential alone. But more importantly, here is what it signified:

1. The Bulls had failed at their first attempt to rebuild the dynasty. Building around Brand w/ high draft picks and signing two 'full boat' free agents came crashing down. Instead, the future of the Bulls rested on two highly touted HSers.

2. The Bulls believed Elton wouldn't improve greatly, that his game had 'matured', and that likely he wouldn't re-sign in 2 seasons. While the second point is debatable since Elton was pretty loyal, the first is totally false. Last season Elton showed a better faceup game, improved on running the floor, and became a good leader just as he was w/ the Bulls. He also slimmed down, gained muscle and was an All-Star in the forward heavy West.

The trade actually worked out okay for the Bulls. REason being, Artest got to showcase his talents last season, and coupled w/ Mercer and Miller (our two FAs signed) we got Jalen Rose in return. So in essence, we traded our two FA signees and Artest for Jalen Rose (a worthy full boat player). NIce.

I love Elton and its sad he's not still in a Bulls uni. But that's the past, and we move on.

Go Bulls.
VD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,919 Posts
This is the type of move that i thimk will really benefit both teams, but i think ultimately it will be better for the Bulls, even if Chandler never equals Brand's numbers. Chandler is a totally different type of talent than Brand or Curry, guys who need the ball fed to them in the post to score and play a classic post-up game. If Krause had kept Brand, there might not be enough shots to go around in a few years with him, Curry, Rose, Jay, Jamal, and Fizer. Chandler, on the other hand, has shown the makings of a good mid-range shot, but mostly gets his points off of put-back dunks and alley-oops- he's like a 7'2 garbage man with a shot. Since he doesn't play that typical post-up game, he doesn't need the ball fed to him as much, as he can get his points off of shots he creates for himself by rebounding the other players's misses. I really believe that his biggest impact will be on the defensive end though. He has got every ability to be the type of game changing defender/rebounder that this game has never seen before, something of a Ben Wallace/Dikembe Mutumbo hybrid. He's got to put on some weight, but that will happen in time. When all is said and done, i think he is a much better fit for this team than Brand and will take this team farther than Brand would have. The other thing that I think Jerry saw in him was the work-ethic and leadership qualities. I hear that he's got Curry, Hassell, and a few other young guys at the gym every day, working hard. Not to say that Elton doesn't have those qualities also, but he may have been a bit more reluctant to share them with someone who's 5 years younger than him and in competition with him for touches in the low post. I think JK is a genius for making this trade.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Great analysis by posters on this thread. Kudos.

For what it's worth, as I see it, Krause failed on his first attempt at rebuilding the dynasty when the collective bargaining agreement changed limiting what free agents could be paid and effectively giving the player's current team all the advantages. Plan A was to get a Duncan, Grant Hill or Tracy McGrady by outbidding everyone and then building around that superstar. To this end, Krause had bankrolled an unprecedented amount of cap space.

Unfortunately, he ended up like the man with a fat wallet who finds himself stranded on a desert island...a lot of money, but nothing worthwhile to spend it on.

As RetroDreams points out, it's way too early to pick a winner on this trade. As others have said, getting Curry led to the trade for a more complementary player in Chandler. In fact, because of the differences in their games, both the Bulls and the Clips could end up winners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,076 Posts
Originally posted by <b>transplant</b>!
Great analysis by posters on this thread. Kudos.

For what it's worth, as I see it, Krause failed on his first attempt at rebuilding the dynasty when the collective bargaining agreement changed limiting what free agents could be paid and effectively giving the player's current team all the advantages. Plan A was to get a Duncan, Grant Hill or Tracy McGrady by outbidding everyone and then building around that superstar. To this end, Krause had bankrolled an unprecedented amount of cap space.

Unfortunately, he ended up like the man with a fat wallet who finds himself stranded on a desert island...a lot of money, but nothing worthwhile to spend it on.

As RetroDreams points out, it's way too early to pick a winner on this trade. As others have said, getting Curry led to the trade for a more complementary player in Chandler. In fact, because of the differences in their games, both the Bulls and the Clips could end up winners.
Good post, Transplant.

Jerry K did not fail because of the collective bargaining agreement. He failed because of 1) his perceptions FA would just follow the money and 2) whether deserved or not big name FAs didn't want to come to Chicago in a rebuilding mode. In addition, Jerry K had a pisspoor reputation amongst NBA stars b/c of past handlings with MJ, Pip, Phil, breaking up the dynasty,etc. Whether he should actually get the blame for that is debatable, but the PERCEPTION amongst players was such.

The scariest thing about that time was the not the fact that we missed out on T-Mac, Duncan or Hill. It was the fact that we pursued some HORRIBLE second tier free agents and were willing to throw money at them. These include: Eddie Jones, Glen Rice, Tim Thomas, and Austin Croshere. OMG imagine if Glen Rice and Tim Thomas had taken our money. Sick.

You're right... its too early to tell who got the better of the trade. But this much can be said.. after year 1, advantage Clips.

VD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,909 Posts
Ok, no one has answered my question and it is either because you all didn't read it or think I'm baiting you, which I am, so I'll ask again.

If you could pick a PF to build your team around, anyone from the entire history of the L, who would it be? and why?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,590 Posts
Retro: I have to say Tim Duncan
-----------------------------------------

I definitely think the Clippers got the better end of the deal. I'm not saying Chandler won't be good, but better than Elton Brand, a proven All-Star? If the Bulls still had Brand, I would be scared silly of them....Curry, Brand, Rose, Crawford, JWill looks like a good team.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,919 Posts
I definitely think the Clippers got the better end of the deal. I'm not saying Chandler won't be good, but better than Elton Brand, a proven All-Star? If the Bulls still had Brand, I would be scared silly of them....Curry, Brand, Rose, Crawford, JWill looks like a good team.....
See my post above.....I really don't think whether or not Chandler is better than Brand, it just matters if Chandler is better for this team than Brand because of the type of player he is. Numbers aren't everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,433 Posts
one more thing about Chandler

I know it's hard to consider this a totally legitimate point because it's unrelated to winning, but it was definitely a factor nonetheless. Trading for Chandler gave the Bulls instant marketing credibility! It was something they sorely lacked in the post-Jordan years, and while Brand is a fine player, he wasn't exciting and the Bulls were seriously on the cusp of losing or alienating their fans.

Getting Chandler alongside Curry gave them a certain degree of fanfare by having the "baby twin towers" and real excitement about the future. And Tyson Chandler is a marketing dream as far as the NBA is concerned. He is exciting and athletic, he plays with a lot of emotion, he has a cool name, and the ladies dig him (if you don't believe it, check out Tyson's website... teenage girls literally fight over him, it's funny). You might not believe me now, but expect Tyson to be one of the top 5 endorsers in the league within 3 years. Plus, now that the Bulls have the highly marketable JWill, they are once again a fun team to root for, even if they lose for awhile. So from a money standpoint, the Chandler trade was definitely a good one.

BUT, for the record, the argument that Brand NEEDED to be traded because he wanted to go to a winner is a stupid one. Brand is loyal, loves Chicago, and ultimately had responsibility for MAKING the Bulls a contender. Plus, as you can see from this offseason, it's VERY difficult for teams to make space for high-priced FAs and Brand would've been competing with a great crop of guys like Francis, Miller, Odom, Davis, Wally, Marion, etc. so it is unlikely he would've been able to leave very easily.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,076 Posts
Re: one more thing about Chandler

Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
I know it's hard to consider this a totally legitimate point because it's unrelated to winning, but it was definitely a factor nonetheless. Trading for Chandler gave the Bulls instant marketing credibility!
Instant marketing credibility? How does this translate into wins and losses?

It was something they sorely lacked in the post-Jordan years, and while Brand is a fine player, he wasn't exciting and the Bulls were seriously on the cusp of losing or alienating their fans.
Hmm.... the Bulls are still losing and alienating their fans. This was a Tyson Chandler for Elton Brand trade, it should be judged as such.. and not on the basis of how you think the Bulls are suddenly more exciting. If that was the case let's start E-Rob, bring Corey Benjamin back and maybe sign Mugsby Bogues and Yinka Dare.

Getting Chandler alongside Curry gave them a certain degree of fanfare by having the "baby twin towers" and real excitement about the future. And Tyson Chandler is a marketing dream as far as the NBA is concerned. He is exciting and athletic, he plays with a lot of emotion, he has a cool name, and the ladies dig him (if you don't believe it, check out Tyson's website... teenage girls literally fight over him, it's funny). You might not believe me now, but expect Tyson to be one of the top 5 endorsers in the league within 3 years.
Krause bought himself some more time with the trade. Period. HSers take 3-5 years before solid contribution and sometimes more to play at an All-STar level.

Plus, now that the Bulls have the highly marketable JWill, they are once again a fun team to root for, even if they lose for awhile. So from a money standpoint, the Chandler trade was definitely a good one.
Generally, losing lots of games (even in an exciting manner) means less fans and less money. Though this is not always the case (see Chicago cubs) I don't see how this trade was good or brought more money to the Bulls.

BUT, for the record, the argument that Brand NEEDED to be traded because he wanted to go to a winner is a stupid one. Brand is loyal, loves Chicago, and ultimately had responsibility for MAKING the Bulls a contender. Plus, as you can see from this offseason, it's VERY difficult for teams to make space for high-priced FAs and Brand would've been competing with a great crop of guys like Francis, Miller, Odom, Davis, Wally, Marion, etc. so it is unlikely he would've been able to leave very easily.
Agreed. Brand wanted to stay and we would have had first dibs to keep him here.


I don't mean to punk you on every point you made dude but... I think the trade should be judged on WINS/LOSSES and performance. Excitement and marketability don't mean a hell of a lot in the long run. Brand is an All-Star, appointed leader of the young Clips, and his team is headed to the playoffs next season. Until TC can match the All-Star status and his team makes the playoffs.. then this argument can take flight.

VD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
510 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!


Good post, Transplant.

Jerry K did not fail because of the collective bargaining agreement. He failed because of 1) his perceptions FA would just follow the money and 2) whether deserved or not big name FAs didn't want to come to Chicago in a rebuilding mode. In addition, Jerry K had a pisspoor reputation amongst NBA stars b/c of past handlings with MJ, Pip, Phil, breaking up the dynasty,etc. Whether he should actually get the blame for that is debatable, but the PERCEPTION amongst players was such.

The scariest thing about that time was the not the fact that we missed out on T-Mac, Duncan or Hill. It was the fact that we pursued some HORRIBLE second tier free agents and were willing to throw money at them. These include: Eddie Jones, Glen Rice, Tim Thomas, and Austin Croshere. OMG imagine if Glen Rice and Tim Thomas had taken our money. Sick.

You're right... its too early to tell who got the better of the trade. But this much can be said.. after year 1, advantage Clips.

VD
I don't see how anyone could have thought Chandler, fresh out of HS, would outplay Brand in year one. This deal was done for a one year shot?
Curry and Brand play in the same space and could not have coexisted well. Curry is significantly larger and that means a lot in the NBA. I don't have a bad word to say about Brand, he is an outstanding player and was extremely pleased to see him make the all star team. The Bulls could have kept him for at least 3 more years and I do not think his leaving at some point was at all a factor in the trade, not with having services for a minimum of 3 additional years.
Chandler has shown amazing potential so I am not unhappy here. Chandler looks like he will be a very special player and patience is the key here.
Vin Diesel, I strongly disagree with your perceptions about Krause period. If an unlimited ability to write checks was involved, the highest bidder would usually win. That is the way it is in sports.
Eddie Jones is a terrific player and should not be lumped with Tim Thomas and Glenn Rice. His D is serious stuff. Glenn Rice would not have gotten a long term contract from the Bulls and the book is still out on Tim Thomas, he is young, very talented and without Robinson will have the opportunity to show what he is made of. I seriously question whether we made a major offer to Croshere.
I give you credit for saying the facts are debatable about the reality of the breakup, but the truth is that MJ was actively lobbying against the Bulls and actually helped get Eddie Jones some endorsement money and lobbied him to take a pass on the Bulls.
If and when a true history is written, MJ will come out as a bitter, vindicative jerk who was totally in charge of his own fate and was more responsible then any other individual for the Bulls not having a shot at another ring, which they may have been very unable to achieve as age was catching to them big time.
MJ has also shown he is an incompetent General Manager and this will easily be shown over time. I doubt the league would have let anybody but MJ be in the situation he sits as the conflict of interest between player, GM, part owner of the Wiz enters into the bounds of serious conflict of interest and the spirit of NBA rules.
Look at what Dallas got for Howard and look at what Washington received.
In the meantime and this goes to all out there, the idea that a first rebuilding plan will come out okay and you will automatically get everyone you need without a hitch to build a championship with no mistakes is ludicrous.
First you have to be very lucky to be in the position in the first place to get that kind of franchise player and he has to pan out big time. Second, no matter how smart you are, you can't take a bunch of pieces and automatically assume they will fit exactly right into a puzzle that never existed until you tried. Third, injuries and the fact that there are 28 other teams, the mjority of whom would like to win a championship someday also come into play. Fourth, the rules do change and they change big time. NCBullsFan has come out with a thread about the effect of the luxury tax which looks like it hit the nail right on the head. I am still absorbing it, but given the stock market and the economy right now, new factors will come to light this summer that would have been unanticipated two years ago.
Not just anybody can win a championship and not just any GM is capable of doing so. Krause can, has and just maybe will. MJ does not have a prayer of ever getting there. Greatness as a player does not translate into front office success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,076 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Songcycle</b>!


I don't see how anyone could have thought Chandler, fresh out of HS, would outplay Brand in year one. This deal was done for a one year shot.
Curry and Brand play in the same space and could not have coexisted well. Curry is significantly larger and that means a lot in the NBA. I don't have a bad word to say about Brand, he is an outstanding player and was extremely pleased to see him make the all star team. The Bulls could have kept him for at least 3 more years and I do not think his leaving at some point was at all a factor in the trade, not with having services for a minimum of 3 additional years.
Chandler has shown amazing potential so I am not unhappy here. Chandler looks like he will be a very special player and patience is the key here.
Vin Diesel, I strongly disagree with your perceptions about Krause period. If an unlimited ability to write checks was involved, the highest bidder would usually win. That is the way it is in sports.
Eddie Jones is a terrific player and should not be lumped with Tim Thomas and Glenn Rice. His D is serious stuff. Glenn Rice would not have gotten a long term contract from the Bulls and the book is still out on Tim Thomas, he is young, very talented and without Robinson will have the opportunity to show what he is made of. I seriously question whether we made a major offer to Croshere.
I give you credit for saying the facts are debatable about the reality of the breakup, but the truth is that MJ was actively lobbying against the Bulls and actually helped get Eddie Jones some endorsement money and lobbied him to take a pass on the Bulls.
If and when a true history is written, MJ will come out as a bitter, vindicative jerk who was totally in charge of his own fate and was more responsible then any other individual for the Bulls not having a shot at another ring, which they may have been very unable to achieve as age was catching to them big time.
MJ has also shown he is an incompetent General Manager and this will easily be shown over time. I doubt the league would have let anybody but MJ be in the situation he sits as the conflict of interest between player, GM, part owner of the Wiz enters into the bounds of serious conflict of interest and the spirit of NBA rules.
Look at what Dallas got for Howard and look at what Washington received.
In the meantime and this goes to all out there, the idea that a first rebuilding plan will come out okay and you will automatically get everyone you need without a hitch to build a championship with no mistakes is ludicrous.
First you have to be very lucky to be in the position in the first place to get that kind of franchise player and he has to pan out big time. Second, no matter how smart you are, you can't take a bunch of pieces and automatically assume they will fit exactly right into a puzzle that never existed until you tried. Third, injuries and the fact that there are 28 other teams, the mjority of whom would like to win a championship someday also come into play. Fourth, the rules do change and they change big time. NCBullsFan has come out with a thread about the effect of the luxury tax which looks like it hit the nail right on the head. I am still absorbing it, but given the stock market and the economy right now, new factors will come to light this summer that would have been unanticipated two years ago.
Not just anybody can win a championship and not just any GM is capable of doing so. Krause can, has and just maybe will. MJ does not have a prayer of ever getting there. Greatness as a player does not translate into front office success.
Good post, Songcycle.

Lots to digest and address but... here's a few additional points that comes to mind:
1. Totally agree that Curry and Brand would have to share the same space. Ideally, and this is something I campaigned for on another board, we could have taken J-Rich at #4, signed a center (a la A.Davis) and kept a blossoming Artest and Crawford on board. But this could never happen b/c 1) we had some swing men already signed in Mercer (ugh) and E-Rob (yikes) 2) JK seems to get the best big man available (see past 10 years of drafts) and 3) A.Davis negotiations were messed up and an offer was taken off the table last minute. Curry would have been given time to ride the pine a bit and learn under Brand. But that's the past, and JK rolled the dice w/ two HS kids.
2. I don't want to look at what 'could' have been w/ JK's dealings: Eddie, T-Mac, Duncan, etc. Let's look at what did happen from Krause's two full boat signings: Ron Mercer and Brad Miller. A year later, Eddie Robinson. I give credit to JK for the Rose trade, especially since the Bulls needed a star player to bring back some credibility. But JK deserves blame for proudly proclaming he would sign 2 full boat FAs and netting two role players.
3. I agree that there is more out there about Jordan than people don't 'want' to hear. Jordan and JK had a bad relationship from the start, and in NO way do I agree with his criticism of JK based on his weight or age, etc. But this being said, JK does deserve blame (in whatever degree) for breaking up the BUlls' dynasty.
4. I don't want to get into another JK v. MJ discussion or debate =) been there, tried that. I do respect your opinion on the matter, and I will try to reexamine my opinion of the matter.
5. Getting back to the trade itself... patience is the key, as you say. At the same time I feel like Bulls' fans are looking at all the wrong factors with this trade. Excitement, dunks, marketability, etc don't really mean a whole heap. Sure in 3-4 years TC might become an All-Star. Brand is already one, is 23 years old, and his game is IMPROVING. Any BS that Elton can't improve is bologna. He did last season, and he should continue to improve (as TC does) for the next 3-4 seasons. At some point, potential needs to translate into production and wins... and until then this argument will be hard to judge.

There are obviously other factors to this argument, which I don't plan on getting into. But what's done is done... and TC is an exciting player with 'potential'. Here's hoping he does get to the level of play that everyone here so confidently thinks he will achieve.

VD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
510 Posts
Good post Vin Diesel. I strongly agree with you that excitement and marketability should be no factors in acquisitions. Flash does not equal wins and that is what we want.
Brand will be getting better. Funny how so many ripped him apart when he was the Bulls and sang his praises when we traded him. Bull hatred is out there and will be for a long time. The same way people hate the Yankees. We won and we won a lot and non Bulls fans remember that and hold it against us. We were Goliath and that isn't going to make us popular.
We agree that the bottom line is going to be wins and this should start translating some this year and move more significantly next year.
We may have the best two center prospects or big men in Curry and Chandler since Tim Duncan and before him Shaq. That is the key to our future success.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top