[Ron Cey]

Being a sports fan is a diversion from mundane "real life" and as such should be fun. Because our rants on this board have no effect on the Bulls organization there is really no reason to hold some kind of sacrosanct opinion of "truth". Ultimately, this is all just a distraction from our lives and therefore it is not irrational for a fan to maximize their enjoyment by being optimistic. If people really want to make a statement, stop buying tickets and boycott Bulls sponsors. Consistently raining on other peoples parade accomplishes nothing except making the "rainer" feel better about themselves because they've exposed what they percieve to be other peoples naiveté.

I enjoy my optimism.

 

[Pippenatorade]

Leaving the discussion about provocation/baiting aside and focusing on Tyson, here are a couple thoughts.

There was a center here the last few seasons who isn't here anymore who suffered under a perceived double standard relating to his effort, improvement, etc. Tyson doesn't seem to be scrutinized on the same level despite a dramatic bottoming-out of his play for most of this season. I think that's a fair point, though maybe sometimes overstated or understated by various people, including perhaps myself. I think there are some factors at play there that have been worked to death over the preceding months and years and I won't go back there.

I think Rhyder was on to something when he said that this year's Bulls team is in a different, more difficult position than last year's was as far as the roster makeup. Last year, that departed center had to come out and provide something in order to stay on the floor because if he didn't, we had Tyson waiting on the bench to provide energy, AD providing steady effort on both ends, and a surprisingly effective OFella. So if he didn't get us rolling offensively or provide good two-way effort or both, that individual saw his minutes slashed at least for that game if not longer. This year, even in his pathetically inept form, Tyson was our only chance to have something worthwhile on our frontline. AD is gone, the lad who used to be here is also gone, and Othella apparently has been replaced by Dickie Simpkins minus the rebounding this season - and now Songaila is even on the shelf. If we don't play Tyson, our whole lineup will be 6'9" or shorter and poor on the glass and interior help defense. We don't have a freaking choice. Sink or swim with Tyson. So, I think almost all of us were incredibly frustrated with Tyson for the first half of the season, but were also resigned to the fact that he's on a huge deal now, we have no frontcourt, and we have to just grit our teeth and hope that he'd remember how to play. He's had spurts, but even now he's not doing what a lot of us thought he'd be doing.

So, it's a different dynamic. We're basically forced to stay in Tyson's corner at the moment. If he continues to be a total clod, we're stuck with him and his deal. If he plays at least well enough to prove he has a pulse, he's providing something to the team and resurrecting his trade value for down the road. If he gets back to last year's form and builds on it, we have something worth keeping. But just saying "You suck, Tyson, take a seat for a few months and we hate you" just isn't a viable option right now. That could change in the offseason, we'll have to wait and see. He better put in the work and come back ready to bust some heads, though.

As to my first bolding, thank you, that's all I was saying.

As to my second bolding, what about Kirk? This team has to be a lot more difficult for him since he has no one to throw the ball to inside AND he's had to switch positions mid-season, and yet I can count on him to show the improvement in one season that I haven't seen from Tyson in five. When I see guys like Kirk, Noce, Deng and Skiles performing despite the adversity it makes me even more ticked at Tyson. I'm not saying you didn't already rip Tyson, you did. I'm just saying, you know?

Finally, I can appreciate your stance in the last paragraph. I think if I didn't prod the Tyson issue a bit, I would not be gaining the understanding that I have gained due to some of Tyson's supporters educating me on their opinion. I do not claim here that I am starting a discussion which has not been previously had, only that I am hearing things myself, that I have not heard previously. I honestly did not know that there was a large segment who supported him because, (some variation of this) at this point "we're stuck with him" and if he goes in the tank, we're really screwed. It's refreshing to know that for the more rational, it's THAT, and not a complete double-standard.

 

[Pippenatorade]

http://www.vistamagonline.com/articles/page.php?tp=1&p=1&id=1&s=ectomorph

I agree, but if you really read about ectomorph's you'll see that it's prevailing theory that even the hardest of gainers can put on 4 pounds of muscle per year if they get everything they can out of the weight room. If Tyson did that, he'd be 255, not 245 (if that's his current weight). This was also the plight of Harvey Grant, Shawn Bradley, etc. Eddy was an endomorph where as someone like Amare is a mesomorph. I simply can't believe thought that Tyson couldn't put on more than ten pounds in 5 years. There are "supplements" that fall just short of being anabolic that can put ten pounds on a guy in one offseason. Hell, just HGH, which is not illegal and is completely safe, can do that.

 

[Pippenatorade]

Difference is the effort thats put into being incompetent. Tyson always tries, it's just that it doesn't always get bang for his 'buck'.

Tyson doesn't always try. He did nothing all summer. I seem to remember someone dropping 30 lbs. the summer before last and still being ripped nonstop. Tyson does it and it's not that he decided to be lazy. The media plays it off like it happened TO him. Like he was the victim of an "inactive summer." Tyson always makes faces and swats his arms. I don't get into "effort." I'm a results guy. IT works like this:

Here is your timeline:

If I don't see marked improvement from point A, to point B, to point C, and you have talent, you aren't trying hard enough, regardless of your personality or whether you say all the right things.

Like take Ben for example. He supposedly was Mr. Workout this summer, and yet I see more improvement in Kirk's game than Ben's. One is talking the talk and one is walking the walk. "You-know-who" improved more in his first five years than Tyson. That's pretty sad.

 

[Pippenatorade]

Guys have bad games. I don't attribute a bad game to a guy sucking. Gordon has had some very bad games recently during this crucial stretch as well.

Like I said, Tyson rebounded very well from his atrocious start but now he is in a state of regression. I hope he turns it around again. Tyson has had "big games" in "big games" in the past. In 6 career playoff games he's averaged 12 points, 10 boards and over 2 blocks per game.

I don't believe he's pulling some soft hearted disappearing act. I think he just had a couple of bad games. I'm not happy about it by any means, but I don't think it means he "sucks". I remain pleased with the signing.

I don't know Ron. Having a bad game is fine. With the exception of Kirk and Skiles, I don't know who hasn't had maybe 20 subpar games this season. But when you disappear for 37 games, and then after you make your 12-18 game reappearance, you disappear again for the "two biggest games of the year" (according to many here), that to me, is a trend. And I'm more apt to give Ben a free pass because he is asked to be our offensive leader when he just isn't good enough to be that all alone without someone like Big E (heck even Nazr) to take some of the heat off. AND he didn't take the summer off. In Tyson's 6 career playoff games he was also a turnstyle for Michael Ruffin, Brenda Haywood, Jared Jeffries, Etan Thomas and anyone else who wanted to drive to the rim and poke.

I don't think he's worth the money and I also don't think he's pulled a disappearing act. I just think that I'm sick of hearing about effort and I want results. People don't talk about how hard Kirk is trying anymore because it's pretty easy to see that he's just DOING it out there. And again, it's pretty said to me when Kirk, a player of the four-years of college variety who was thought to have the "low ceiling" label, has shown more improvement in two offseasons than Tyson (a supposed talent guy, a prep-to-pro guy) has shown in four offseasons.

All that said Ron, I do respect your stance and enjoy reading it.

Who is "our"? If by "our" you include yourself then feel free to answer your own question.

As to me, I don't like Tyson Chandler. I think he's a hot-head prone to idiotic outbursts who, at times, lets his temper affect team success. I suspect if I really knew him, I wouldn't care for him at all. I do, however, think he will prove worthy of his contract and I approve of resigning him. I do think he cares and I do think he will rebound from his bizarre year with a far better season next year.

I "like" one player on the Bulls and that is Luol Deng. He's the only guy I have a somewhat irrational soft spot for. Luckily for me, he justifies my irrational fandom with quality play.

Luol certainly does do just that. Thanks Ron, I'm always happy to be witness to your opinion. I got the answer from you that I am looking for.

 

[ViciousFlogging]

Finally, I can appreciate your stance in the last paragraph. I think if I didn't attempt an attack on Tyson, I would not be getting to this level with his supporters. I honestly did not know that there was a large segment who supported him because, (some variation of this) at this point "we're stuck with him" and if he goes in the tank, we're really screwed. It's refreshing to know that for the more rational, it's THAT, and not a complete double-standard.

I can't claim to speak for others on the board, so I'm not sure that my reading of the situation applies to anybody but myself. I was just trying to put down in a post the way that I understand why Tyson, perhaps, hasn't gotten the guff that he should have coming to him this season.

I'm about to leave work, so I can't go into further depth, but I'll just say that you're right on about how Kirk especially has persevered and Tyson hasn't. It's probably because Tyson sat on his rear all summer mostly, but who knows. It is very disappointing. To be honest, if I had to place the lion's share of blame on any one person for why we're not making the playoffs, it'd be Tyson, then Pax for not fortifying the frontcourt post-trade.

OK, I've sat in the cube LONG ENOUGH! :cheers:

 

[Pippenatorade]

Several times over a season is expected as everyone has their bad days, but when it's over 1/3, how can it not be.

:biggrin:

 

[johnston797]

Gee, people wish that Chandler had worked harder last summer and got off to a better start and hold him accountable. How enlightening!

I don't think he's worth the money and I also don't think he's pulled a disappearing act. I just think that I'm sick of hearing about effort and I want results.

For all of your posts, where do you really stand? I can't really tell.

Is this guy a complete bust that should be traded for an expiring contract?

Is Curry going to be a better player 2 years, 5 years and 10 years from now?

Is Chandler likely never to improve?

Put it down in words that we can measure it in the future, hoss.

 

[Pippenatorade]

....

 

[Showtyme]

I can't claim to speak for others on the board, so I'm not sure that my reading of the situation applies to anybody but myself. I was just trying to put down in a post the way that I understand why Tyson, perhaps, hasn't gotten the guff that he should have coming to him this season.

I'm about to leave work, so I can't go into further depth, but I'll just say that you're right on about how Kirk especially has persevered and Tyson hasn't. It's probably because Tyson sat on his rear all summer mostly, but who knows. It is very disappointing. To be honest, if I had to place the lion's share of blame on any one person for why we're not making the playoffs, it'd be Tyson, then Pax for not fortifying the frontcourt post-trade.

OK, I've sat in the cube LONG ENOUGH! :cheers:

I'd put more on Pax simply because Tyson wasn't SUPPOSED to be that good, in my opinion. I remember when Pax was saying stuff like "Oh, it would be terrific if we could get 15 ppg from Tyson... we'd really like him to step up offensively". TOTALLY unsubstantiated.

To be fair, I actually think Chandler has okay, if awkward, form on his jumper. But it sadly looks sort of like Shaq shooting from the free throw line... Shaq has also developed his own okay but awkward free throw style. But Chandler keeps his elbow tucked, has the 90 degree angle that is a tougher but more consistent release, and follows through. He just shouldn't be taking those shots at all, though.

I think Pax's comments at the beginning of the season really boosted Chandler, in addition with getting a big contract, that made him think that he actually could be that type of player. If we, as fans, also had that expectation, then yes, I think it WAS primarily his fault. But I never had that type of expectation outside of fantasy.

Here's another way to put it: if Chandler hustled more to focus on offensive rebounding to get easy putbacks, setting screens and working off the ball, and sprinting in transition, he'd definitely have around 8.5-9 ppg. Because that's basically what he was doing prior to this season, and that's how much he was scoring.

As for his fouls, it's been often noted that an increase in personal fouls results often from poor conditioning. If you can't keep up with your guy because you're just not as fit, as strong, or as quick, then what else can you do but leap and hack recklessly? Chandler also is a "gambler" defensively, always going for the block.

And to be honest, how bad is that? It reflects badly on Tyson and racks him up with a ton of fouls, which isn't good, but we also have one of the lowest opponents FG% in the league. Knowing that a guy is there to either come up with a big block or send you to the line will make you hesitate if you're a guard that is thinking of driving into the paint.

What he needs is simply to develop as a player, to be a better defender while using more intelligence on the floor, and combine that with better conditioning. On offense, we shouldn't be expecting much more than 8 ppg from a guy like that, and be very happy if he's doing his job on defense.

As far as something you want put down on paper... I think Tyson will always be a poor man's Marcus Camby, NEVER approaching the defensive prowess of the ridiculous Ben Wallace and Dennis Rodman comparisons. The question is "how poor"...? Right now I'd say very poor, but it's kinda up to Tyson. I can't feel sorry for the guy because he is TONS less raw on offense than SCOTTIE PIPPEN was. Pippen of only two years of playing time at Central Arkansas despite being 23 years old. And Scottie would have been a hall of famer with only average defense based on his offense alone. So it's up to Tyson. Any time he wants he can show the improvement. One offseason like the ones Pip used to put himself through and Tyson wouldn't be needing the GM to hold his hand and tell the world that "we don't ask him to be an offensive player."

Maybe you're the expert on Pippen since you named yourself after him, but I absolutely do not believe this. I remember how he was in that playoff year, the first time MJ had gone to the playoffs, and he looked like a smooth offensive player. Tyson looks like he wouldn't get 11 ppg in college. It's a pretty bold statement. I know Pip was a nut in the offseason, and it depends on your definition of "raw", but I think Pip had a lot more talent and potential offensively than Tyson did. Having two years in the college game, even at Central Arkansas, is a lot more than having NONE.

 

[Pippenatorade]

Maybe you're the expert on Pippen since you named yourself after him, but I absolutely do not believe this. I remember how he was in that playoff year, the first time MJ had gone to the playoffs, and he looked like a smooth offensive player. Tyson looks like he wouldn't get 11 ppg in college. It's a pretty bold statement. I know Pip was a nut in the offseason, and it depends on your definition of "raw", but I think Pip had a lot more talent and potential offensively than Tyson did. Having two years in the college game, even at Central Arkansas, is a lot more than having NONE.

First, MJ went to the playoffs three times before Scottie Pippen joined him on the Bulls.

Second, I did watch him his rookie year, and let me just say that I think that his smoothness is an easy assumption for people to make NOW, after the fact. But the fact is, he was terrible on offense. Think a SF version of Pops Mensah-Bonsu but with even more position-specific athleticism. Scottie was a high flier whose game was as unrefined as games get.

The story isn't just told by the fact that Pippen played only two years at Central Arkansas. They weren't his first two years. They were his third and fourth year on campus. Scottie was only 6'1" his freshman year and student-manager of the FOOTBALL team. He had zero offers be it D-I or D-IV coming out of high school. So you're talking about a guy who all the sudden, in college, while not even playing basketball grows to around 6'8" with a wingspan in excess of 7' and guard quickness.

He had no fundamentals and little basketball instincts. On the other hand he was built like the prototypical do-it-all SF with Jordanesque athleticism (if not hang time) and the hunger to be everything he could be. If you go back to draft day he is called "Scott Pippen" during the draft and people don't really have much to say about him.

The story of Scottie Pippen as an offensive player comes from his grueling work with Michael Jordan. Jordan literally took his UNC drills and put Scottie through them day after day before practice and after. They worked together rigorously in the offseason, Scottie being treated to a hall of fame career because Michael admired Scottie's ability to meet his every step in terms of how crazy the workouts got. Call it luck that MJ saw enough in him to make him his personal pet project. His right hand man. The "only guy I can talk to"... lol. But Scottie decided to meet him half way. So yes, Pip oozed with talent and potential as a rookie, but he was RAW. BUT at the same time, like Dean Smith said of Jordan at UNC... "he took to the drills that were there to make him better, and then he had the ability to get better."

I'll put it this way. From my own OPINION as far as watching Pip as a rookie and then only 3 years later in 90-91, if Tyson made an improvement of that kind in three years, he'd be a better offensive player than Rasheed Wallace, cause he has that kinda talent.

 

[ViciousFlogging]

I'd put more on Pax simply because Tyson wasn't SUPPOSED to be that good, in my opinion. I remember when Pax was saying stuff like "Oh, it would be terrific if we could get 15 ppg from Tyson... we'd really like him to step up offensively". TOTALLY unsubstantiated.

But my beef with him comes from the fact that he didn't even come close to matching LAST SEASON'S performance until a few weeks ago. We're 2.5 games out of the playoffs right now, and we've lost a multitude of close games and blown what seems like dozens of 2nd half leads. Last season, Tyson got the key block or board that sealed victories and started playing at a somewhat consistent level at the same time the rest of the team found its stride. This season, he didn't start doing ANY of those things until pretty recently. I'm not that upset about his lack of scoring (though providing 8-10ppg would be helpful), but we paid this guy a boatload to alter games on defense and clear the glass. He wasn't doing much of that for far too long. I'm sure the loss of AD and Curry and forcing him into the fulltime center spot had effects on him, but the bottom line is what it is.

I'm not disappointed because he isn't putting up 15/12/3 or something great like that. It's that until February he was putting up something anemic like 5/7/1 and 5pfs waaaay too often. And even now he relapses into that mode more than I'd like.

 

[Da Grinch]

First, MJ went to the playoffs three times before Scottie Pippen joined him on the Bulls.

Second, I did watch him his rookie year, and let me just say that I think that his smoothness is an easy assumption for people to make NOW, after the fact. But the fact is, he was terrible on offense. Think a SF version of Pops Mensah-Bonsu but with even more position-specific athleticism. Scottie was a high flier whose game was as unrefined as games get.

The story isn't just told by the fact that Pippen played only two years at Central Arkansas. They weren't his first two years. They were his third and fourth year on campus. Scottie was only 6'1" his freshman year and student-manager of the FOOTBALL team. He had zero offers be it D-I or D-IV coming out of high school. So you're talking about a guy who all the sudden, in college, while not even playing basketball grows to around 6'8" with a wingspan in excess of 7' and guard quickness.

He had no fundamentals and little basketball instincts. On the other hand he was built like the prototypical do-it-all SF with Jordanesque athleticism (if not hang time) and the hunger to be everything he could be. If you go back to draft day he is called "Scott Pippen" during the draft and people don't really have much to say about him.

The story of Scottie Pippen as an offensive player comes from his grueling work with Michael Jordan. Jordan literally took his UNC drills and put Scottie through them day after day before practice and after. They worked together rigorously in the offseason, Scottie being treated to a hall of fame career because Michael admired Scottie's ability to meet his every step in terms of how crazy the workouts got. Call it luck that MJ saw enough in him to make him his personal pet project. His right hand man. The "only guy I can talk to"... lol. But Scottie decided to meet him half way. So yes, Pip oozed with talent and potential as a rookie, but he was RAW. BUT at the same time, like Dean Smith said of Jordan at UNC... "he took to the drills that were there to make him better, and then he had the ability to get better."

I'll put it this way. From my own OPINION as far as watching Pip as a rookie and then only 3 years later in 90-91, if Tyson made an improvement of that kind in three years, he'd be a better offensive player than Rasheed Wallace, cause he has that kinda talent.

truthfully i cant see why people feel the need to give tyson a pass for his lack of offense.

as a rook he avg. 6.1 points in 19.6 minutes ...and this is straight out of HS.

this year he is avg. 5.3 points in 26.7 minutes thats in his 5th season

if you know who or anyone else had regressed in important facet of their game to the point tyson is on offense they would be teared anew one on this board everyday ...so since i dont see this i can only assume he was given a free pass of sorts .

since i dont see any new post moves or even a willingness to try to improve on offense i have a problem with tyson's production on the offensive end.

 

[jbulls]

Obviously the stat upon which this thread is based is pretty awful.

I'm of the opinion that if Chandler had gone to college he'd be a much better offensive player than he currently is. Tyson's hands are awful and he's not fluid around the basket, but he runs the floor like a deer and has a decent handle and good court sense for a big man. If he'd gone to school for a few years I think he would've been able to develop more of an offensive game. It seemed like he was starting to do that his second year in the league - 9.2 points in 24 minutes per game. His back injury in year three seemed to retard that process, and we've moved away from involving him in the offense. But coming out of high school he did have some skills. He had a pretty good face up game for a big guy. The problem is that in the NBA you don't get to face up a bunch when you're 7'1'' unless you're Dirk Nowitski or Kevin Garnett - and he isn't and was never going to be. His post game never developed, which isn't that surprising given his hands.

As far as this season, I don't really get what's happened. I'm inclined to agree with Miz that Tyson is a little fragile upstairs. 48% from the line this season? He'd shot 67% the last two years. That has to be mental. I think he got scared of going to the line early in the season and stopped going up strong because of it. Another factor that may have come into play is that one thing Tyson has shown flashes of being able to do is stick a 15 foot jumper. With Curry and Davis he got to do this a couple times a game, playing next to Songaila or Allen he doesn't - they're obviously superior options in that regard. I thought 12/10/2 was a very reasonable expectation coming off of last year and it hasn't happened. I still think it's a reasonable expectation if he works hard but with every year that passes it becomes less and less likely.

 

[Pippenatorade]

truthfully i cant see why people feel the need to give tyson a pass for his lack of offense.

as a rook he avg. 6.1 points in 19.6 minutes ...and this is straight out of HS.

this year he is avg. 5.3 points in 26.7 minutes thats in his 5th season

if you know who or anyone else had regressed in important facet of their game to the point tyson is on offense they would be teared anew one on this board everyday ...so since i dont see this i can only assume he was given a free pass of sorts .

since i dont see any new post moves or even a willingness to try to improve on offense i have a problem with tyson's production on the offensive end.

:banana:

Your post sounds like someone evaluating Tyson from the "no excuses" perspective. To me, no excuses didn't walk out the door with Eddy Curry. No excuses means no excuses means no excuses. Period.

 

[Showtyme]

First, MJ went to the playoffs three times before Scottie Pippen joined him on the Bulls.

Second, I did watch him his rookie year, and let me just say that I think that his smoothness is an easy assumption for people to make NOW, after the fact. But the fact is, he was terrible on offense. Think a SF version of Pops Mensah-Bonsu but with even more position-specific athleticism. Scottie was a high flier whose game was as unrefined as games get.

The story isn't just told by the fact that Pippen played only two years at Central Arkansas. They weren't his first two years. They were his third and fourth year on campus. Scottie was only 6'1" his freshman year and student-manager of the FOOTBALL team. He had zero offers be it D-I or D-IV coming out of high school. So you're talking about a guy who all the sudden, in college, while not even playing basketball grows to around 6'8" with a wingspan in excess of 7' and guard quickness.

He had no fundamentals and little basketball instincts. On the other hand he was built like the prototypical do-it-all SF with Jordanesque athleticism (if not hang time) and the hunger to be everything he could be. If you go back to draft day he is called "Scott Pippen" during the draft and people don't really have much to say about him.

The story of Scottie Pippen as an offensive player comes from his grueling work with Michael Jordan. Jordan literally took his UNC drills and put Scottie through them day after day before practice and after. They worked together rigorously in the offseason, Scottie being treated to a hall of fame career because Michael admired Scottie's ability to meet his every step in terms of how crazy the workouts got. Call it luck that MJ saw enough in him to make him his personal pet project. His right hand man. The "only guy I can talk to"... lol. But Scottie decided to meet him half way. So yes, Pip oozed with talent and potential as a rookie, but he was RAW. BUT at the same time, like Dean Smith said of Jordan at UNC... "he took to the drills that were there to make him better, and then he had the ability to get better."

I'll put it this way. From my own OPINION as far as watching Pip as a rookie and then only 3 years later in 90-91, if Tyson made an improvement of that kind in three years, he'd be a better offensive player than Rasheed Wallace, cause he has that kinda talent.

Solid post. Sorry about my mistake; it was the first time MJ got out of the first round in the playoffs.

I just think that no matter how crazy you work, even under MJ's insane and above-all-others training life, there's some degree of offensive talent that MUST be natural. Pippen WAS raw, but either through his genius in learning or because of his hidden offensive talent, he became much smoother by his second year in the league. I think of Andre Iguodala, an athletic, raw, high-flying scorer mostly known for his defense. Unfortunately, Iggy didn't train with the same type of vigor (apparently), although he did improve.

I think what amazes me the most, what seems the boldest about your assertions, are that you think Tyson Chandler has that "it" that Scottie Pippen had to learn (or discover) offensive talent. I still cringe sometimes when I see Tyson hold the ball, and I ALWAYS cringe when I see him put it on the floor. Pippen may have been crazy raw, but that doesn't mean anyone that raw can become a dominant offensive player.

If Tyson worked at his game night and day, like a madman, shooting 1000 jumpers and running dribbling drills and putting on serious muscle in his legs and upper body and practicing a drop step or spin in the post over and over again... I just don't know if even then he'd be ready to offensively contribute more than a clean-up guy for any NBA team.

Bill Self, when he was still at Illinois, once noted that the way offensive skills develop are by learning "moves". He emphasized with all of his players that having a move and knowing how to use it, just one single move, is of critical importance. You can't just be a creative player with the ball, or hope that your turnaround jumper will go in. You have to have a move, know when you can use it, and know how the weaknesses of that move can be compensated by a timely skip pass or a shift in position.

Tyson needs just ONE move like that, and I'll be happy. Not that nasty awkward running hook; something else. Just one move.

 

[Pippenatorade]

Solid post. Sorry about my mistake; it was the first time MJ got out of the first round in the playoffs.

I just think that no matter how crazy you work, even under MJ's insane and above-all-others training life, there's some degree of offensive talent that MUST be natural. Pippen WAS raw, but either through his genius in learning or because of his hidden offensive talent, he became much smoother by his second year in the league. I think of Andre Iguodala, an athletic, raw, high-flying scorer mostly known for his defense. Unfortunately, Iggy didn't train with the same type of vigor (apparently), although he did improve.

I think what amazes me the most, what seems the boldest about your assertions, are that you think Tyson Chandler has that "it" that Scottie Pippen had to learn (or discover) offensive talent. I still cringe sometimes when I see Tyson hold the ball, and I ALWAYS cringe when I see him put it on the floor. Pippen may have been crazy raw, but that doesn't mean anyone that raw can become a dominant offensive player.

If Tyson worked at his game night and day, like a madman, shooting 1000 jumpers and running dribbling drills and putting on serious muscle in his legs and upper body and practicing a drop step or spin in the post over and over again... I just don't know if even then he'd be ready to offensively contribute more than a clean-up guy for any NBA team.

Bill Self, when he was still at Illinois, once noted that the way offensive skills develop are by learning "moves". He emphasized with all of his players that having a move and knowing how to use it, just one single move, is of critical importance. You can't just be a creative player with the ball, or hope that your turnaround jumper will go in. You have to have a move, know when you can use it, and know how the weaknesses of that move can be compensated by a timely skip pass or a shift in position.

Tyson needs just ONE move like that, and I'll be happy. Not that nasty awkward running hook; something else. Just one move.

We have mostly agreement here. Remember when I say Scottie was raw, he was still a point forward. Raw for a SF is probably still pretty gifted for a center. Scottie had the talent, maybe moreso than anyone we've ever seen, but it was something that had to be cultivated from the basement to the penthouse so to speak.

Tyson Chandler is not Donnell Harvey or someone like that. I just refuse to believe that he HAS to be THIS bad on offense. And frankly, I don't believe he is good enough at ANYTHING he does for a coach and GM to say "we don't ask him to play offense." What the frig is that? Phil Jackson never even conceided that about the worm, who despite being the NCAAs leading scorer, had a dreadfully one-sided game by his time in Chicago.

I'd use Anthony Mason as a reference point. I watched Mase during his early years in New York and IMO Tyson couldn't be worse than THAT. The guys motion was about as ugly and mechanical as Rosie O'Donell being... Rosie O'Donell. You get the point. IMO if Mase can do it, anyone can learn to be at least a decent contributor on offense with Tyson's talent.

 

[truebluefan]

There was a center here the last few seasons who isn't here anymore who suffered under a perceived double standard relating to his effort, improvement, etc. Tyson doesn't seem to be scrutinized on the same level despite a dramatic bottoming-out of his play for most of this season. I think that's a fair point, though maybe sometimes overstated or understated by various people, including perhaps myself. I think there are some factors at play there that have been worked to death over the preceding months and years and I won't go back there.

I think Rhyder was on to something when he said that this year's Bulls team is in a different, more difficult position than last year's was as far as the roster makeup. Last year, that departed center had to come out and provide something in order to stay on the floor because if he didn't, we had Tyson waiting on the bench to provide energy, AD providing steady effort on both ends, and a surprisingly effective OFella. So if he didn't get us rolling offensively or provide good two-way effort or both, that individual saw his minutes slashed at least for that game if not longer. This year, even in his pathetically inept form, Tyson was our only chance to have something worthwhile on our frontline. AD is gone, the lad who used to be here is also gone, and Othella apparently has been replaced by Dickie Simpkins minus the rebounding this season - and now Songaila is even on the shelf. If we don't play Tyson, our whole lineup will be 6'9" or shorter and poor on the glass and interior help defense. We don't have a freaking choice. Sink or swim with Tyson. So, I think almost all of us were incredibly frustrated with Tyson for the first half of the season, but were also resigned to the fact that he's on a huge deal now, we have no frontcourt, and we have to just grit our teeth and hope that he'd remember how to play. He's had spurts, but even now he's not doing what a lot of us thought he'd be doing.

So, it's a different dynamic. We're basically forced to stay in Tyson's corner at the moment. If he continues to be a total clod, we're stuck with him and his deal. If he plays at least well enough to prove he has a pulse, he's providing something to the team and resurrecting his trade value for down the road. If he gets back to last year's form and builds on it, we have something worth keeping. But just saying "You suck, Tyson, take a seat for a few months and we hate you" just isn't a viable option right now. That could change in the offseason, we'll have to wait and see. He better put in the work and come back ready to bust some heads, though.

Chandler transitioned to a tough position. He used to dominate 6-9 PF's, now he's forced to muscle around with 7-footers (who may or may not be skilled, but play a lot more physical in general). It's not as easy to block shots or corral rebounds when you're being played and jostled by a hulking Jerome James, Dan Gadzuric, etc. That's not even looking at the Tim Duncans, Shaqs, Dwight Howards, etc.

Last year was a contract year. When guys are playing for a contract, you almost universally see a dip in their stats the next year.

I'm not making excuses, but who ever said Tyson was supposed to be such an incredible player in the first place? He had an offseason of NO conditioning almost at all.

I agree with both posters and while I agree, its not excuses. Criticism is deserved. Tyson is to blame. He plays better when he pushes someone else or has someone behind him pushing him. He has neither this year. And he is playing against stronger players. Again, not an excuse, just an observation.

He had a stretch of games where he seemd like he finally got in a groove. Yet he never sustained it.

Every avenue of his game needs to be addressed next summer.

Pax needs to get players in here that will push Chandler for playing time.

 

[Pippenatorade]

I agree with both posters and while I agree, its not excuses. Criticism is deserved. Tyson is to blame. He plays better when he pushes someone else or has someone behind him pushing him. He has neither this year. And he is playing against stronger players. Again, not an excuse, just an observation.

He had a stretch of games where he seemd like he finally got in a groove. Yet he never sustained it.

Every avenue of his game needs to be addressed next summer.

Pax needs to get players in here that will push Chandler for playing time.

This to me is a very fair, very desirable stance. I'm not exactly looking for people to say "I hate Tyson." But for someone to not be able to AT LEAST come to this level of scrutiny of the young man is unfathomable to me. Good post.

 

[Ron Cey]

This to me is a very fair, very desirable stance. I'm not exactly looking for people to say "I hate Tyson." But for someone to not be able to AT LEAST come to this level of scrutiny of the young man is unfathomable to me. Good post.

Come on. This has gotten ridiculous. Tyson Chandler has been criticized up and down all season long and virtually every single poster on this board has acknowledged his poor play.

Who are you even talking about? Maybe one poster that you have beef with, but thats it.

Fans don't seem to criticize Tyson as loudly or as obnoxiously as they did Eddy Curry. I agree with you. So what? He still gets criticized. You just don't care for the more polite manner in which it happens.

I have repeatedly seen Tyson Chandler's poor play pegged as a primary, if not the primary, on-court reason for the Bulls under-achievement this season. And not just recently. For months. Indeed, I share in that opinion.

This is just silly. No offense intended here, but I have no idea what point you are trying to make anymore. Its as if you declared that boiled liver tastes bad and when everyone agrees with the obviousness of your statement you respond as though you've finally drawn out a long known, but reluctantly uttered, truth.

These are not sub rosa opinions. We've talked about it all season.