Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
"Meow."
Joined
·
5,595 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was underwhelmed... the much anticipated "big" lineup just looked ungainly.

Ty was doing a fair job hanging on to Radmonovic on D, but this assignment completely took him out of the picture on the glass. I also fail to see the point in playing TC away from the post on offense and out of a position where he is able to manufacture points through his hustle. It's not like either TC's or AD's jump shot is consistent to play him away from the hoop. For all the hype, I would much rather see Davis sitting the bench and one of our more traditionally players manning the 3. This was only the first time Skiles tried the "big lineup" but place me in camp skeptical...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Yet another example of why this team is messed up... no 3 that can create for himself or hit a three. Tyson at the 3 isn't goint to help us.

Because we have no three that can help us, we're forced to play Jamal solely at the 2 because there's no one else on the wings that can even remotely scare anyone.

Any because of that, Kirk gets no rest at the 1 (ideally, we'd have a couple of good wings and we could use Jamal as what he is- a combo guard, starting at the but also the primary backup as the 1). But because we have such a shortage at the wing, we

1) Over use Jamal at the 2 and exaccerbate his defensive weakness

2) Over use and run down Kirk at the 1, resulting him being tangibly less effective than he would be if he was being rationed properly. And oh yeah, it looks like he's hurt now.

And of course, because Pax totally mis-calculated what his young players were capable of (thinking it was more than it actually is), our over the hill players have also started to break down from over use. Davis is hobbled, Gill is out. Why? Because they were being asked to do more than was realistic.

Just as the saying is that a good player can make everyone else better, the absense of a good player can make everyone else worse than they really are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
Ty was doing a fair job hanging on to Radmonovic on D, but this assignment completely took him out of the picture on the glass
Exactly

Which is why all of this Tyson at the 3 and guarding the perimeter or playing from the perimeter on offense is just so stupid its beyong comprehension

The guy is our best rebounder and needs to be in position to clean the glass and he's a hustler / garbage man inside with some semblance of a post game .. even though he has shown no outside capacity

Nuff said

But your initial points were right on
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,750 Posts
Re: Re: First Impression of the Ty/Curry/AD Lineup?

Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
Which is why all of this Tyson at the 3 and guarding the perimeter or playing from the perimeter on offense is just so stupid its beyong comprehension

The guy is our best rebounder and needs to be in position to clean the glass and he's a hustler / garbage man inside with some semblance of a post game .. even though he has shown no outside capacity

Nuff said
Good points. Makes you wonder why they would even try him at SF, since he has absolutely no future at that position. It may have been a good match up to see how effective it could be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
Excellent points by everyone. The master plan, as stated by Pax on NBC's Sports Show Sunday night was to have Davis and Williams back up Curry and Chandler at the power positions. The Chandler.Curry/Davis frontline was more a product of necessity than design. And lets not forget that Chandler is probably weeks away from rounding back into top form.

The team has been devastated at each perimeter position. Gill and Pippen are non-factors. Brunson has no business backing up both guard slots. He's a 10mpg guy at best, and then only as a pg. Linton Johnson, Ronald Dupree...well there's a reason these guys went undrafted. Neither one has any business wearing an NBA uniform. Hindsight suggests that the Bulls would have been much better off retaining the services of Hassell and Hoiberg. But based on the two former Bulls 02/03 performances, replacing them with Gill and Pippen seemed like upgrades at the time. Face it, both Trent and Fred are enjoying success in Minnesota in large part because they're surrounded by all-star calibur players. And that has allowed them to function superbly as ancillary parts instead of key components.

The problem is, how does Paxson acquire the perimeter talent this team needs without sacrificing a core player? He's seems to be in a position of having to rob Peter to pay Paul. To get something of value means he's going to have to give up something of equal or greater value in return. How much value does a Marcus Fizer have, really? You can't really trade Curry or Chandler, two 21 year old players who represent the bulk of whatever pure talent exists on this roster. Hinrich and Crawford would both seem to be players that would draw alot of interest from other clubs. But there you go again with the old Peter/Paul dilemma.

Crawford seems the most likely Bulls asset to be made available primarily because of his contract status. But does trading him provide any support for Hinrich who's beginning to show the effects from his style of play and overuse?

Jay Williams' roster spot might prove to be very helpful in the short term since Chicago needs to do more than just swap player for player.

No matter how you look at it, Paxson is truly behind the 8-ball right now. To get you have to give. Chicago has very little to give at this time. During the summer you can expect that first round pick to become a valuable trading asset. You can also expect Paxson to load up on Jon Barry, Earl Boykins, etc types through free agency to provide some quality depth. Unfortunately there don't seem to be any quick fixes out there. And that's the biggest reason why Pax has no choice but to stick with Curry and Chandler and hope they become the kind of players they were projected to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,750 Posts
Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
Excellent points by everyone. The master plan, as stated by Pax on NBC's Sports Show Sunday night was to have Davis and Williams back up Curry and Chandler at the power positions. The Chandler.Curry/Davis frontline was more a product of necessity than design. And lets not forget that Chandler is probably weeks away from rounding back into top form.

The team has been devastated at each perimeter position. Gill and Pippen are non-factors. Brunson has no business backing up both guard slots. He's a 10mpg guy at best, and then only as a pg. Linton Johnson, Ronald Dupree...well there's a reason these guys went undrafted. Neither one has any business wearing an NBA uniform. Hindsight suggests that the Bulls would have been much better off retaining the services of Hassell and Hoiberg. But based on the two former Bulls 02/03 performances, replacing them with Gill and Pippen seemed like upgrades at the time. Face it, both Trent and Fred are enjoying success in Minnesota in large part because they're surrounded by all-star calibur players. And that has allowed them to function superbly as ancillary parts instead of key components.

The problem is, how does Paxson acquire the perimeter talent this team needs without sacrificing a core player? He's seems to be in a position of having to rob Peter to pay Paul. To get something of value means he's going to have to give up something of equal or greater value in return. How much value does a Marcus Fizer have, really? You can't really trade Curry or Chandler, two 21 year old players who represent the bulk of whatever pure talent exists on this roster. Hinrich and Crawford would both seem to be players that would draw alot of interest from other clubs. But there you go again with the old Peter/Paul dilemma.

Crawford seems the most likely Bulls asset to be made available primarily because of his contract status. But does trading him provide any support for Hinrich who's beginning to show the effects from his style of play and overuse?

Jay Williams' roster spot might prove to be very helpful in the short term since Chicago needs to do more than just swap player for player.

No matter how you look at it, Paxson is truly behind the 8-ball right now. To get you have to give. Chicago has very little to give at this time. During the summer you can expect that first round pick to become a valuable trading asset. You can also expect Paxson to load up on Jon Barry, Earl Boykins, etc types through free agency to provide some quality depth. Unfortunately there don't seem to be any quick fixes out there. And that's the biggest reason why Pax has no choice but to stick with Curry and Chandler and hope they become the kind of players they were projected to be.
Nice post C Blizzy. Chandler playing the perimeter is probably stop gap because of the injures we have.

The problem is the players we have apart from Hinrich and the 3 C's don't have great value because of their talent, age and contracts. So the only way I see Paxson being able to deal these guys is to take back guys who have longer contracts, if we want to improve our talent surrounding the 3 C's and Hinrich (for example, AD for Brian Grant). Being over the cap, he has the MLE as well. Or he goes the other way, and tries to clear salary by using one of the 3 C's or Hinrich (likely Crawford based on his contract situation) to dump salary. Even if you have cap space, how many quality players would want to join a rebuilding team? That's the dilemma.

One way or another, Paxson simple has to get more talent. This is where trading JC doesn't help in that regard since even if we were able to package him with ERob and get an expiring contract, we won't be under the cap anyway. We would still only have the MLE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,975 Posts
It continues to amaze me how ineffective Tyson is 5 feet outside the paint. I remember reading about how he was a PG in 8th grade/freshman year, yet he looks lost with the ball.

And defensively, Tyson seemed to lack speed keeping up with Vlad Rad. His hustle got him a few boards, but with Eddy's poor rebounding, you can't really get away with Tyson outside.

Overall, big lineup doesn't get much love here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
Originally posted by <b>sp00k</b>!
It continues to amaze me how ineffective Tyson is 5 feet outside the paint. I remember reading about how he was a PG in 8th grade/freshman year, yet he looks lost with the ball.

And defensively, Tyson seemed to lack speed keeping up with Vlad Rad. His hustle got him a few boards, but with Eddy's poor rebounding, you can't really get away with Tyson outside.

Overall, big lineup doesn't get much love here.
How about cuttin' the guy just a little slack until he rounds into some kind of game shape?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,909 Posts
Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!


How about cuttin' the guy just a little slack until he rounds into some kind of game shape?
Why?

The same people who jumped Eddy Curry all season, whereas Tyson has been off for several months and could have been doing low impact cardio to keep his cardio system in tip top shape.

Why make excuses for one and give the other a reprieve?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!


Why?

The same people who jumped Eddy Curry all season, whereas Tyson has been off for several months and could have been doing low impact cardio to keep his cardio system in tip top shape.

Why make excuses for one and give the other a reprieve?
That's really lame. And you know better than that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,975 Posts
Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!


How about cuttin' the guy just a little slack until he rounds into some kind of game shape?
????

I fail to see where I "ripped" into him. I made an observation about his foot speed outside the paint and noted how for being a former PG, his outside skills are lacking.
 

·
"Meow."
Joined
·
5,595 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Come on folks...lets play nice.

In the end I'm still pissed at Krause. Should any of us knowing his drafting habits, be surprised that we have no wing tallent? Likewise, Paxson has done little to remedy the situation: I am still ecstatic that we shipped Rose's ***, but I'm sure there were was some type of Posey/Mo Pete/ D Miles type player available. Why acquire more power players???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Originally posted by <b>C.C.C.P</b>!
Come on folks...lets play nice.

In the end I'm still pissed at Krause. Should any of us knowing his drafting habits, be surprised that we have no wing tallent? Likewise, Paxson has done little to remedy the situation: I am still ecstatic that we shipped Rose's ***, but I'm sure there were was some type of Posey/Mo Pete/ D Miles type player available. Why acquire more power players???
Speaking of Mo Pete, isn't it time for another trade with the Raptors?

We could send them back JYD Jeffries and they could give us Murray and Mo Pete :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Originally posted by <b>sp00k</b>!


????

I fail to see where I "ripped" into him. I made an observation about his foot speed outside the paint and noted how for being a former PG, his outside skills are lacking.
You didn't rip him, and what you said was accurate.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top