PDA

View Full Version : Aldridge: Two of his sources say Al for Chi's #7 and Chandler



Hicks
06-23-2004, 11:10 PM
Ding ding ding ding ding :laugh:

Unclebuck
06-23-2004, 11:12 PM
I would do that so fast. That would be agreat trade.

AL for Luke Jackson and Chandler.

That is a no brainer

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:12 PM
I like it. I've never been a big Tyson Chandler fan, but judging by the Bulls' trading history, he'd be an all-star with us in a couple years.

Unclebuck
06-23-2004, 11:12 PM
I would do that so fast. That would be agreat trade.

AL for Luke Jackson and Chandler.

That is a no brainer

zxc
06-23-2004, 11:13 PM
Yeah that sounds really good for us. Hope that happens.

Ragnar
06-23-2004, 11:14 PM
So is this the news?

arkman40
06-23-2004, 11:14 PM
Anyone know what Chandler's health status is? I know he was gimpy as hell last season. It was his back wasn't it?

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:14 PM
I would do that so fast. That would be agreat trade.

AL for Luke Jackson and Chandler.

That is a no brainer

Yup. If you want to look at it this way, it's #7 and a #2 pick for Al.

Tyson's not really a 5, but we may be able to fill both our "holes" with this deal, Reggie's heir/shooter off the bench and a mobile backup big man.

Cactus Jax
06-23-2004, 11:14 PM
As much as I HATED the Cleveland proposal, I LOVE this potential deal.

Isn't Chandler a restricted free agent? If so this deal would have to wait for a little bit.

Kstat
06-23-2004, 11:15 PM
Chandler is bender at 7 feet without an outside shot. However, he is an outstanding rebounder.

add jackson to the deal, and I like it for indiana. the talent is equal, but indiana is exchanging it for areas that they need.

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:16 PM
As much as I HATED the Cleveland proposal, I LOVE this potential deal.

Isn't Chandler a restricted free agent? If so this deal would have to wait for a little bit.

He's signed for this year at $4.8 mil, with a qualifying offer [I think that makes him a restricted FA] next year.

Unclebuck
06-23-2004, 11:16 PM
I can't believe the Bulls would do that.

I suggested a couple of weeks ago I would trade AL for Chandler straight up.

Yes Chandler injured his back diving out of bounds for a rebound. He is a superb shot blocker. No one has questioned his attitude or work ethic. No he is not a great low post offensive player but that is OK

ChicagoJ
06-23-2004, 11:18 PM
It fills needs.

But we're still talking about Tyson's Chicken here... the guy that could Bender a run for money in terms of ... uh ... toughness.

Is Tyson's Chicken the 35-game-per-season big man that you want from the Bulls? At least he's cheap relative to AD.

Kstat
06-23-2004, 11:18 PM
I can't believe the Bulls would do that.

I suggested a couple of weeks ago I would trade AL for Chandler straight up.

Yes Chandler injured his back diving out of bounds for a rebound. He is a superb shot blocker. No one has questioned his attitude or work ethic. No he is not a great low post offensive player but that is OK

my issue with his defense, quite frankly, is that he is stupid. his BBall IQ is next to nothing. He has all the tools to become theo ratliff on defense, he just has no idea how to use them.

arkman40
06-23-2004, 11:18 PM
How does he compare to Brad Miller? :laugh:

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:19 PM
I can't believe the Bulls would do that. ....

They traded Elton Brand [#1 pick in '99] for the #2 pick in '01. It honestly wouldn't surprise me. :unimpressed:

But I love it, for us. :dance:

Obviously, this is nothing official, but I knew there was something brewing when the Bulls stole #7. Or allegedly will.

Cactus Jax
06-23-2004, 11:20 PM
I can't believe the Bulls would do that.

I suggested a couple of weeks ago I would trade AL for Chandler straight up.

Yes Chandler injured his back diving out of bounds for a rebound. He is a superb shot blocker. No one has questioned his attitude or work ethic. No he is not a great low post offensive player but that is OK

I think the Bulls really want Harrington but felt giving up the #3 pick was too much. Maybe the #29 pick might be added as well.

Hicks
06-23-2004, 11:20 PM
If he can just be the 3rd man in the 3 man big man rotation with Jeff and JO, all he needs to do it rebound, block shots if he can, and D up as best he can. If that's all we ask him to do, that's plenty.

Combine that with getting Jackson, and I'm there.

Steveman
06-23-2004, 11:20 PM
It's an ok deal, but we are looking at another two - three years for Jackson to mature into "the" Reggie replacement. I still think we should trade for an established first tier SG that can help us win the title right away is what we need ... we went to the ECF for crying out loud, we don't need a project now!

MSA2CF
06-23-2004, 11:21 PM
I don't love it; it isn't official yet anyway.

If I were the GM, I "yabba dabba don't" do this trade.

J-Wont
06-23-2004, 11:21 PM
Tyson Chandler had acne when he first came in to the league but now his face is clear. I wonder what he used?

tora tora
06-23-2004, 11:27 PM
Anyone know what Chandler's health status is? I know he was gimpy as hell last season. It was his back wasn't it?

Who knows but he only played 35 games last season...

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:27 PM
It's an ok deal, but we are looking at another two - three years for Jackson to mature into "the" Reggie replacement. I still think we should trade for an established first tier SG that can help us win the title right away is what we need ... we went to the ECF for crying out loud, we don't need a project now!

I'd like to get somebody with experience too, but Luke would have at least one year of internship before Reggie is gone, and he and Freddie together would make a heck of a combo at the 2.

And you're right that we're one or two steps away from the Finals, maybe even a title, but a project is less harmful than dismantling the team to get Tmac.... *twitch*.... or Pierce or some other first tier 2.

Doug in CO
06-23-2004, 11:28 PM
I think Tyson Chandler is a bad idea - but Larry likes white guys and while Chandler is black - he is light skinned

Suaveness
06-23-2004, 11:28 PM
I really like this deal. Gives us a SG and C in a single blow.

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:29 PM
Tyson Chandler had acne when he first came in to the league but now his face is clear. I wonder what he used?

I have no idea.... I guess I don't pay close enough attention to the Bulls rookies' pimples. :blush:

It does seem like very, very few NBAers have bad skin though. Not sure what that means. Must be the gatorade. :whoknows:

MSA2CF
06-23-2004, 11:29 PM
I think Tyson Chandler is a bad idea - but Larry likes white guys and while Chandler is black - he is light skinned

A joke? :neutral:

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:31 PM
I really like this deal. Gives us a SG and C in a single blow.

Yep, and both young guys who can grow into their roles. Kinda like Freddie Jones. Or maybe they'll be thrust into the rotation, like Jermaine or Tinsley. Either way, I like it too.

I'd rather have young guys who are going to get better than old guys who are going to get worse. i.e. Brent Barry, Erick Dampier.

Natston
06-23-2004, 11:32 PM
I starting to like the trade rumor... :)

Doug in CO
06-23-2004, 11:33 PM
Yes - a joke - my issue with Chaandler is he is skinny as hell and not that good = and his instincts are lousy

Chicago is ready to give up on him - does that tell you anything?

Unclebuck
06-23-2004, 11:33 PM
I am shocked by the lukewarm response this possible trade is receiving. Pacers can throw in their two picks in this year's draft, fine with me.

What is the best Bulls forum around, anyone know. Like to se what their fans think about this.

Kstat
06-23-2004, 11:34 PM
I am shocked by the lukewarm response this possible trade is receiving. Pacers can throw in their two picks in this year's draft, fine with me.

What is the best Bulls forum around, anyone know. Like to se what their fans think about this.

their realgm and basketballboards.net boards are equally packed.

MSA2CF
06-23-2004, 11:34 PM
Yes - a joke - my issue with Chaandler is he is skinny as hell and not that good = and hiss insstincts are lousy

Chicago is ready to give up on him - does thaat tell you anything?

Chicago has made a lot of stupid moves before. It's hard to tell from one to one what's going to come of them.

Doug
06-23-2004, 11:34 PM
Chicago is ready to give up on him - does thaat tell you anything?

Yep. That he'll be an All-star for us in two years. :-)

Seriously, I do this trade in a heartbeat. And I don't much care for Chandler.

Natston
06-23-2004, 11:35 PM
Yes - a joke - my issue with Chaandler is he is skinny as hell and not that good = and hiss insstincts are lousy

Chicago is ready to give up on him - does thaat tell you anything?

Well Portland damn near gave away JO (sorry Peck)...

zxc
06-23-2004, 11:35 PM
I am shocked by the lukewarm response this possible trade is receiving. Pacers can throw in their two picks in this year's draft, fine with me.

What is the best Bulls forum around, anyone know. Like to se what their fans think about this.

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=6003671571de09cdd389d382400acf92&threadid=102594&forumid=27

Seems moderatley active.. they don't sound too enthused about it.

Suaveness
06-23-2004, 11:35 PM
Chicago is ready to give up on him - does thaat tell you anything?

Yep. That he'll be an All-star for us in two years. :-)

Seriously, I do this trade in a heartbeat. And I don't much care for Chandler.


Hahaha...well they gave up on Artest...

Arcadian
06-23-2004, 11:36 PM
I can't believe that Chicago would do that. Chandler playing by JO would be a much player than he looks now. And we get a lottery pick?

Maybe we should hold out for Cleveland's 10th pick?

Doug in CO
06-23-2004, 11:36 PM
That is hitting Peck below the belt

I would prefer washed up Antonio Davis to Chandler

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:36 PM
....
Chicago is ready to give up on him - does that tell you anything?

It tells me that he's gonna be damn good, that's what it tells me. Most of the trades the Bulls make don't exactly make them look like geniuses. :D

MSA2CF
06-23-2004, 11:36 PM
Rumors, rumors, rumors...

Doug in CO
06-23-2004, 11:37 PM
They did not give up on Artest - they got value for him in Jalen Rose - who was a staar at that point in time

Steveman
06-23-2004, 11:37 PM
It's an ok deal, but we are looking at another two - three years for Jackson to mature into "the" Reggie replacement. I still think we should trade for an established first tier SG that can help us win the title right away is what we need ... we went to the ECF for crying out loud, we don't need a project now!

And you're right that we're one or two steps away from the Finals, maybe even a title, but a project is less harmful than dismantling the team to get Tmac.... *twitch*.... or Pierce or some other first tier 2.

It really all depends on what they do with Artest. If management is hell bent on letting him go, then this is a huge mistake.

Young
06-23-2004, 11:38 PM
I am shocked by the lukewarm response this possible trade is receiving. Pacers can throw in their two picks in this year's draft, fine with me.

What is the best Bulls forum around, anyone know. Like to se what their fans think about this.

I don't know if this is the best fourm but here are some comments:

Web Page Name (http://mb3.theinsiders.com/fchicagobullsfrm1.showMessage?topicID=918.topic)Fa nhome.com

I also found this very intersting:

Web Page Name (http://mb3.theinsiders.com/fchicagobullsfrm1.showMessage?topicID=908.topic)Fa nhome.com

ChicagoJ
06-23-2004, 11:38 PM
You guys keep pointing to Jerry Krause's trades.

Paxson doesn't have the same track record. He was able to dump Jalen's contract onto Toronto AND make the Bulls slightly less horrible in his only move.



[hr]

For an 82-game season:

Foster >>>> Chandalier

Hicks
06-23-2004, 11:39 PM
Chicago is ready to give up on him - does that tell you anything?

Chicago has traded away Brand, Artest, and Miller. It tells me a lot :laugh:

Natston
06-23-2004, 11:39 PM
That is hitting Peck below the belt

I would prefer washed up Antonio Davis to Chandler

Chandler = upside
Tony = declining player + bad contract

Snickers
06-23-2004, 11:41 PM
After reading the Bulls fans general response to this, I'm starting to wonder how realistic it is.... :(

Natston
06-23-2004, 11:42 PM
After reading the Bulls fans general response to this, I'm starting to wonder how realistic it is.... :(

Ask yourself WWTD? What would Tracy do? Keep up the hope... ;)

zxc
06-23-2004, 11:43 PM
You guys keep pointing to Jerry Krause's trades.

Paxson doesn't have the same track record. He was able to dump Jalen's contract onto Toronto AND make the Bulls slightly less horrible in his only move.



That made them better? Didn't seem like a very good deal to me. Now instead of Rose and Marshall who actually somewhat produced they are stuck with big contracts in Davis and Williams who both suck.

zxc
06-23-2004, 11:44 PM
After reading the Bulls fans general response to this, I'm starting to wonder how realistic it is.... :(

Yeah I don't think it is, but I think they have been reading into other rumours a bit too much. Hard to understand how fans of teams who struggle to win 30 games every year overvalue their players so much. They talk about how they could get Paul Pierce for the #3 + Chandler.. now that seems unrealistic.

Unclebuck
06-23-2004, 11:46 PM
Bulls fans are laughing at this. Saying it is not possible.

Here is a link that suggests the Pacers end up with Eisley and the 7th pick for AL. That seems more realistic

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=247416&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60


Holy Crap

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?sl...ov=ap&type=lgns

Boston general manager Danny Ainge said he had 14 different trades under consideration depending on how teams use their lottery picks, and the Chicago Bulls were known to be offering Tyson Chandler to a number of teams.

Ainge denied a report that the Celtics were considering swapping Paul Pierce for Chandler and the No. 3 pick in the draft, while Dallas owner Mark Cuban labeled ``false'' a reported offer of Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki for O'Neal.

That's Chandler and #3 for Pierce, which is still a tough deal to consider. Chandler and #7 for Harrington is a HUGE step down.






ABull wrote:
It's funny how everyone was so upset at the first rumor of Chandler for Harrington and now it's Chandler/#7 for Harrington, which is absolutely horrible IMO.... so I can't imagine what the people who thought the first trade was horrible think.

Wow Paxson went from hero to chump in about 1 hr in the rumor mill.


yup how you go from "GM of the year" someone said after we got the #7 pick to "fire campaign"

Last edited by TrueBullFan on Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:27 am; edited 1 time in total

Back to top


p_s
Scout



Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 160

Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:27 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The reason he would go from champ to chump is because it is an idiot move. I like Harrington and I don't think he is worth top -10 pick, let alone a top 10 pick and a player. Plus, we would get burned on Luke Jackson, who is going to be a player nest year.

Back to top


sonny
Scout



Joined: 16 Nov 2002
Posts: 208

Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:27 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

this can't be true i remember pax saying that the #3 would be too much for harrington there's no way he would give up the #7 and chandler for him
i hope not

Back to top


Cochise
Assistant GM



Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1998
Location: Chicago
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:27 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL Relax.

The Bulls thought Al wasn't worth the #3 now he's worth Tyson and the #7? Please.

I'll tell you what this is -- it's Indiana trying to steal from us like when they first thought up the Al for #3 trade. BS.

Now I could see us trading #7 for Al. But that's all.

Back to top


MGB8
Real GM



Joined: 20 Jul 2001
Posts: 4231
Location: Philly
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:28 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forget firing Paxson if he makes this trade...LYNCH HIM, firing is too kind.

To pull a BRILLIANT move in getting the no 7 from Phoenix, to trading away TYSON, who's just as good a defender as harrington - in fact, he's much better in terms of impact...AND THE 7>???!!

String him up.

Back to top


Bulls_Fan
Assistant GM



Joined: 20 Oct 2002
Posts: 1784

Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:28 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ABull wrote:
It's funny how everyone was so upset at the first rumor of Chandler for Harrington and now it's Chandler/#7 for Harrington, which is absolutely horrible IMO.... so I can't imagine what the people who thought the first trade was horrible think.

Wow Paxson went from hero to chump in about 1 hr in the rumor mill.


lmao ABull.

Pax pulls of a great OFFICIAL trade and eveyrone praises him, but the second a RUMOR is heard the fans call Pax a moron for that.

If Pax makes the trade, call him an idiot, but wait until the deal is made before tar and feathering him.

Back to top


p_s
Scout



Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 160

Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:28 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We might as well become the Pacers NBDL minor league team if a trade like this happens

Last edited by p_s on Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:30 am; edited 1 time in total

Back to top


chitownsports4ever
Global Moderator



Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 7233
Location: southside of chicago
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:29 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

t-kou wrote:
If this goes through, Moderators please delete every post I have made congratulating Pax.

This deal would be sickening..disgusting.



I dont believe it though..surely not...

Tyson > Harrington




I know I just got up off the floor when Aldridge said that I spilled my drink and almost passed out .

jackson and erob or jyd for harrington !!! yes

jackson and tyson for harrington !! thats insane !!

Back to top


Bulls_Fan
Assistant GM



Joined: 20 Oct 2002
Posts: 1784

Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:30 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If Bird puts the price of Harrington @ #7 and Tyson, Pax will simple keep the pick and draft the BPA. Pax is no retard, contrary to popular opinion here lol

Back to top


Funkman7
Coach



Joined: 07 Feb 2002
Posts: 536
Location: Chicago
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:34 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Awful trade. I see Harrington as a tweener. Overpowers 3's and outquick's 4's. Do I really want Donyell Marshall vs. Tyson Chandler?

Back to top


t-kou
Assistant GM



Joined: 03 Apr 2002
Posts: 1626

Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:35 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guys what a day this has been.



Pax has been the hero and the villan... one thing im happy about this is hes trying to make us better for next season.... trade #7 and E-Rob for Al Harrington and im happy, anything else and were screwed. Maybe trade #7 and Tyson for Ron, but not for AL!

Im confident after stealing the #7 from Pheonix, hes not dumb enough to just through it away along with a stud for a role player

Back to top


ChandFan
Coach



Joined: 29 Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Location: Hunkered down outside the United Center, crying
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 3:36 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

But seriously, I think the Chandler and pick idea is coming from the Pacers side. No way Chandler, who is the defensive minded player Paxson WANTS, goes for Harrington. Now Chandler for Artest, that, uh, still no.

ChicagoJ
06-23-2004, 11:50 PM
You guys keep pointing to Jerry Krause's trades.

Paxson doesn't have the same track record. He was able to dump Jalen's contract onto Toronto AND make the Bulls slightly less horrible in his only move.



That made them better? Didn't seem like a very good deal to me. Now instead of Rose and Marshall who actually somewhat produced they are stuck with big contracts in Davis and Williams who both suck.

Short term/ On the court.

Not talking about contracts.

Hicks
06-23-2004, 11:51 PM
For an 82-game season:

Foster >>>> Chandalier

I wouldn't despute that. But I envision Chandler as our backup PF, with JO playing C when Jeff sits-- just like this season.

Only this time we get a rebounder/shotblocker instead of Al, and we have Jackson at 2 guard.

I really like this deal.

zxc
06-23-2004, 11:52 PM
Don't think it helped short term either though. They were even worse after the trade it seemed to me. Though of course they beat us the game right after the trade =\

Natston
06-23-2004, 11:52 PM
For an 82-game season:

Foster >>>> Chandalier

I wouldn't despute that. But I envision Chandler as our backup PF, with JO playing C when Jeff sits-- just like this season.

Only this time we get a rebounder/shotblocker instead of Al, and we have Jackson at 2 guard.

I really like this deal.

And Al gets to move back in with Tony, it's a win-win situation for both sides... :devil:

Suaveness
06-23-2004, 11:53 PM
For an 82-game season:

Foster >>>> Chandalier

I wouldn't despute that. But I envision Chandler as our backup PF, with JO playing C when Jeff sits-- just like this season.

Only this time we get a rebounder/shotblocker instead of Al, and we have Jackson at 2 guard.

I really like this deal.

And Al gets to move back in with Tony, it's a win-win situation for both sides... :devil:

:laugh:

MSA2CF
06-23-2004, 11:54 PM
And this is just tonight. In the morning, you guys will all have "rumored" yourselves out. Save some for the pre-draft workouts tomorrow afternoon guys. ;)

ChicagoJ
06-23-2004, 11:55 PM
Don't think it helped short term either though. They were even worse after the trade it seemed to me. Though of course they beat us the game right after the trade =\

From where I commute from, everyone thought they were better.

:whoknows:

Steveman
06-23-2004, 11:57 PM
I say again, IF management has plans on letting Artest go, then this is a horrible deal. We don't need a project if Ron is gone, we need an established and experienced first tier two guard if we expect to get back to the ECF and beyond.

Suaveness
06-23-2004, 11:59 PM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

Snickers
06-24-2004, 12:00 AM
And this is just tonight. In the morning, you guys will all have "rumored" yourselves out. Save some for the pre-draft workouts tomorrow afternoon guys. ;)

Tmacking right, I'm "rumoured out!" Tracy and the Tmac all over. :shakehead:

MSA2CF
06-24-2004, 12:00 AM
What if Jackson is picked before 7?

He'll be the newest member on a losing team for a few years.

Natston
06-24-2004, 12:00 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

Maybe they want someone else to pick Jackson so we can get the guy we want... :idea:

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:01 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

Maybe they want someone else to pick Jackson so we can get the guy we want... :idea:


But what IF we want Jackson?

Snickers
06-24-2004, 12:02 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

Since the deal can't be made officially till July 15th [I think], we won't sign on the dotted line until it's all sorted out the way we want it.

Hicks
06-24-2004, 12:02 AM
I can't see Jackson going at 3. that's too high.

Snickers
06-24-2004, 12:02 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

Maybe they want someone else to pick Jackson so we can get the guy we want... :idea:

:hmm:

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:03 AM
I can't see Jackson going at 3. that's too high.

What if 4-6 takes him?

Natston
06-24-2004, 12:03 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

Maybe they want someone else to pick Jackson so we can get the guy we want... :idea:


But what IF we want Jackson?

We're ****ed

Snickers
06-24-2004, 12:03 AM
I can't see Jackson going at 3. that's too high.

What if 4-6 takes him?

Then we won't trade Al for #7. Assuming Luke is the guy we want, that is.

Unclebuck
06-24-2004, 12:04 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

The trade would be contingent upon Jackson being available at #7

But in this trade I would do the trade as is right now and if Luke is not there, I'll take someone else

Natston
06-24-2004, 12:06 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

The trade would be contingent upon Jackson being available at #7

But in this trade I would do the trade as is right now and if Luke is not there, I'll take someone else

I would do the same.

Slick Pinkham
06-24-2004, 12:11 AM
I love this trade.

I liked the Cleveland one too, but Chandler fills a need better than Wagner, with equal star potential.

Before his injury, he had some BIG rebounding games. Very active on D and on the boards.

Let's hope this goes through, and also that his recovery from back problems is better than Scot Pollard's was.

Will Galen
06-24-2004, 12:11 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

The trade would be contingent upon Jackson being available at #7

But in this trade I would do the trade as is right now and if Luke is not there, I'll take someone else

That's a good point Buck. The fact that we haven't already did the trade probably means that there is more to this than we are hearing.

Hoop
06-24-2004, 12:12 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

The trade would be contingent upon Jackson being available at #7

But in this trade I would do the trade as is right now and if Luke is not there, I'll take someone else

I would do the same.

Ed Zackery :unimpressed:

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:14 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

The trade would be contingent upon Jackson being available at #7

But in this trade I would do the trade as is right now and if Luke is not there, I'll take someone else


That makes sense. So then we probably wouldn't do this until number 6 is done.

Natston
06-24-2004, 12:15 AM
Ok...quick question. While everyone is thrilled about this...well most.

What if Jackson is picked before 7?

Like if Chicago takes him at 3? They like him apparently.

Atlanta might?

The trade would be contingent upon Jackson being available at #7

But in this trade I would do the trade as is right now and if Luke is not there, I'll take someone else

I would do the same.

Ed Zackery :unimpressed:

:wtf:

pacerwaala
06-24-2004, 12:17 AM
Chandler's game, physique and the way he moves around are very similar to those of Tim Duncan - as wild as that might sound. I really like this deal; we just got to trust Larry about Luke

Kstat
06-24-2004, 12:18 AM
Chandler's game, physique and the way he moves around are very similar to those of Tim Duncan - as wild as that might sound. I really like this deal; we just got to trust Larry about Luke

Except Duncan has an IQ above that of your average 6th-grader, and he can shoot the ball..... :unimpressed:

Roaming Gnome
06-24-2004, 12:20 AM
I'll be suprised if this happens with us getting Chandler! But, love the deal if it does happen.

Hoop
06-24-2004, 12:26 AM
Chandler's game, physique and the way he moves around are very similar to those of Tim Duncan - as wild as that might sound. I really like this deal; we just got to trust Larry about Luke

Except Duncan has an IQ above that of your average 6th-grader, and he can shoot the ball..... :unimpressed:

Stop it Kstat, I'm losing my chub. :laugh:

ChicagoJ
06-24-2004, 12:28 AM
Chandler's game, physique and the way he moves around are very similar to those of Tim Duncan - as wild as that might sound. I really like this deal; we just got to trust Larry about Luke

Except Duncan has an IQ above that of your average 6th-grader, and he can shoot the ball..... :unimpressed:

Stop it Kstat, I'm losing my chub. :laugh:

:rolleyes:

Kegboy can help you out in the other David Aldridge thread.

Kstat
06-24-2004, 12:30 AM
I'd love to see chandler vs Bender in a game of Jeopardy. Trebek would have a stroke.

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:30 AM
I'd love to see chandler vs Bender in a game of Jeopardy. Trebek would have a stroke.


Hell, he'd probably just die.

kerosene
06-24-2004, 12:31 AM
This trade would solve the SF problem seeing as how either Bender or Chandler is likely to be injured at any given time allowing the other all the backup minutes.

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:31 AM
This trade would solve the SF problem seeing as how either Bender or Chandler is likely to be injured at any given time allowing the other all the backup minutes.

Unless they are BOTH injured :o

pacerwaala
06-24-2004, 12:35 AM
Chandler's game, physique and the way he moves around are very similar to those of Tim Duncan - as wild as that might sound. I really like this deal; we just got to trust Larry about Luke

Except Duncan has an IQ above that of your average 6th-grader, and he can shoot the ball..... :unimpressed:

He will come around once he leaves the Bulls

Kstat
06-24-2004, 12:36 AM
I'd love to see chandler vs Bender in a game of Jeopardy. Trebek would have a stroke.


Hell, he'd probably just die.

Alex: "the country just north of Mexico"

Tyson: which way is north?

Bender: "Wait, I know this! *reaches for buzzer* OUCH my achilles!"

Snickers
06-24-2004, 12:37 AM
I'd love to see chandler vs Bender in a game of Jeopardy. Trebek would have a stroke.


Hell, he'd probably just die.

Alex: "the country just north of Mexico"

Tyson: which way is north?

Bender: "Wait, I know this! *reaches for buzzer* OUCH my achilles!"

:spitout:

:laugh: :laugh:

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:46 AM
I'd love to see chandler vs Bender in a game of Jeopardy. Trebek would have a stroke.


Hell, he'd probably just die.

Alex: "the country just north of Mexico"

Tyson: which way is north?

Bender: "Wait, I know this! *reaches for buzzer* OUCH my achilles!"


Tyson: "oh no, let me help you there! *reaches for bender* OUCH my groin!"

Snickers
06-24-2004, 12:48 AM
I'd love to see chandler vs Bender in a game of Jeopardy. Trebek would have a stroke.


Hell, he'd probably just die.

Alex: "the country just north of Mexico"

Tyson: which way is north?

Bender: "Wait, I know this! *reaches for buzzer* OUCH my achilles!"


Tyson: "oh no, let me help you there! *reaches for bender* OUCH my groin!"

Somewhere, Derrick McKey is proud. :blush:

Kegboy
06-24-2004, 12:49 AM
I'd love to see chandler vs Bender in a game of Jeopardy. Trebek would have a stroke.

Trebek: "Welcome back to Basketball Jeopardy. Tonight we have in the studio NBA players Al Harrington, Jonathan Bender, and Tyson Chandler. Alright Al, since you scored 40 points in a game once, you get to pick first."

Al: "I'll take In the Post for $100, Alex."

Trebek: "This is what you do when a second defender doubles you in the post, leaving the shooting guard wide o..."<BOONNK>"Uh, yes Al."

Al: "What is, continue to dribble the ball while waiting for a third man to come down to guard me. Then, drive into the lane, stop and throw the ball up."

Trebek: "Incorrect. Anyone else."...<BOONNK>"Yes, Jonathan."

JB: "Well, since I never try and post anyone up, stand at the three point line on the weak-side looking disinterested because I know my teammates will never swing the ball around to me."

Trebek: "Oh, I'm sorry, your response wasn't in the form of a question. Tyson, would you like to give it a try."

Tyson: "Um, well, what is, call a time out, then go to my coach and whine that my back hurts and we're already losing by 50, so will he please let me sit."

Trebek: "Jesus, you idiots. Pass the Ball. PASS THE FREAKIN' BALL!!! That's it, we're not doing this again until Stern gets that age limit in place. Morons."

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:51 AM
:laugh:

Kstat
06-24-2004, 12:52 AM
:rotflmao: :rotflmao:

Snickers
06-24-2004, 12:56 AM
:laugh: :laugh:

JOneal7
06-24-2004, 12:58 AM
Forget Luke Friggin Jackson...SEBASTIAN TELFAIR! : - D!
The second coming of marbury :)!

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 12:58 AM
Holy **** that is HILARIOUS :laugh:

bulletproof
06-24-2004, 01:02 AM
Maybe they want someone else to pick Jackson so we can get the guy we want... :idea:

Yep.

Natston
06-24-2004, 01:08 AM
AL: I'll take The Rapists for 3.7 million dollars.
Trebek: That's therapists and there's no dollar amount that big.

Snickers
06-24-2004, 01:19 AM
I dunno where all this about Tyson being stupid is coming from....

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/4118/tynstein1.gif

kerosene
06-24-2004, 01:50 AM
Seriously, I pull the trigger on this deal in a heartbeat and I'm not a huge Chandler fan given his injury history.

kerosene
06-24-2004, 02:22 AM
Boston general manager Danny Ainge said he had 14 different trades under consideration depending on how teams use their lottery picks, and the Chicago Bulls were known to be offering Tyson Chandler to a number of teams.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/basketball/nba/specials/draft/2004/06/23/bc.bkn.nbadraft.ap/index.html

Peck
06-24-2004, 02:30 AM
Ok, since everybody else gets a chance to shoot of wild trade ideas here's mine.

Al to Chicago for Tyson & the # 7 Pick.

Ron, Jon, Jeff & the # 7 pick to Orlando for T-mac.

Lineup

C- Tyson Chandler
Pf- Jermaine O'Neal
Sf- T-Mac
Sg- Reggie Miller
Pg- Jamaal Tinsely

We would still need backcourt help though, unless Fredy is ready.

Cactus Jax
06-24-2004, 02:35 AM
Ok, since everybody else gets a chance to shoot of wild trade ideas here's mine.

Al to Chicago for Tyson & the # 7 Pick.

Ron, Jon, Jeff & the # 7 pick to Orlando for T-mac.

Lineup

C- Tyson Chandler
Pf- Jermaine O'Neal
Sf- T-Mac
Sg- Reggie Miller
Pg- Jamaal Tinsely

We would still need backcourt help though, unless Fredy is ready.

What about sending Tyson to the Magic? I don't think it's smart at all to place Tyson all by himself as a starting center.

kerosene
06-24-2004, 02:40 AM
I see where you're going with this Peck and I do like it (though we know we're not lucky enough for this to happen :cry: ). Chandler plays high post and let's JO work the low block on offense but gives great weakside help and good man to man (on smaller post players) on defense. Only problem is with man to man against teams with real strong post games when there's just not enough beef there. How many teams have that these days?

Our bench would be makeshift but if those guys (with the execption of Reggie) get around 35 minutes a night I think I could force myself to live with that.

Hoop
06-24-2004, 02:41 AM
Ok, since everybody else gets a chance to shoot of wild trade ideas here's mine.

Al to Chicago for Tyson & the # 7 Pick.

Ron, Jon, Jeff & the # 7 pick to Orlando for T-mac.

Lineup

C- Tyson Chandler
Pf- Jermaine O'Neal
Sf- T-Mac
Sg- Reggie Miller
Pg- Jamaal Tinsely

We would still need backcourt help though, unless Fredy is ready.

If we got Howard I could maybe go for this. Howard would be a good insurance policy for injury prone Chandler. Pollard might even become usefull with that lineup.

Peck
06-24-2004, 02:44 AM
I see where you're going with this Peck and I do like it (though we know we're not lucky enough for this to happen :cry: ). Chandler plays high post and let's JO work the low block on offense but gives great weakside help and good man to man (on smaller post players) on defense. Only problem is with man to man against teams with real strong post games when there's just not enough beef there. How many teams have that these days?

Our bench would be makeshift but if those guys (with the execption of Reggie) get around 35 minutes a night I think I could force myself to live with that.

I know a lot of people on here don't like to hear this but I'll say it again.

Austin Croshere does as well if not better than Jeff Foster on man to man coverage of strong post players. A combo of Chandler & Croshere & let's not forget J.O. can guard the post as well, is not a step down from Foster, O'Neal & Croshere.

IMO, it's a step up.

Anthem
06-24-2004, 03:16 AM
Austin Croshere does as well if not better than Jeff Foster on man to man coverage of strong post players. A combo of Chandler & Croshere & let's not forget J.O. can guard the post as well, is not a step down from Foster, O'Neal & Croshere.

But Peck, we're trading Croshere to Boston for Blount and Chucky!

Peck
06-24-2004, 07:12 AM
Well, if that's the case then Blount can guard the post.

Doug in CO
06-24-2004, 08:43 AM
Blount is a FA - any chance we can get him with the mid level exemption?

Unclebuck
06-24-2004, 09:00 AM
I know a lot of people on here don't like to hear this but I'll say it again.

Austin Croshere does as well if not better than Jeff Foster on man to man coverage of strong post players. A combo of Chandler & Croshere & let's not forget J.O. can guard the post as well, is not a step down from Foster, O'Neal & Croshere.

IMO, it's a step up.


Peck, please list those strong post players Cro does as well if not better guarding.

Doug
06-24-2004, 12:01 PM
This year, Jeff has improved at guarding power players. Austin has gotten slightly worse since he shed some muscle. I'd call it about a draw right now. Maybe an edge to Jeff.

Last year, though, I agree with Peck 100%.

Roy Munson
06-24-2004, 12:10 PM
I really like this deal. Gives us a SG and C in a single blow.

I wouldn't get too excited about Chandler. Didn't Chicago just hate him last year? I read where he was reported to be lazy and not too interesting in getting better. It seems like Chicago is just trying to get rid of him.

That said, this would be a good trade for the Pacers, but I also think it would mean that Ron Artest might be bye-bye, because despite what everyone keeps speculating....JACKSON is a 3, and not a 2.

This trade does not really alter the 2 situation, other than making it possible for Artest to play more 2. But as I said earlier, I think that possibility does not excite LB.

Zesty
06-24-2004, 12:41 PM
I wouldn't get too excited about Chandler. Didn't Chicago just hate him last year? I read where he was reported to be lazy and not too interesting in getting better. It seems like Chicago is just trying to get rid of him.

I thought that was Eddy Curry.

ChicagoJ
06-24-2004, 12:42 PM
I wouldn't get too excited about Chandler. Didn't Chicago just hate him last year? I read where he was reported to be lazy and not too interesting in getting better. It seems like Chicago is just trying to get rid of him.

I thought that was Eddy Curry.

They are still willing to wait a little longer on Curry because he's got some upside potential - even though his work habits are worse than Chandalier.

Unclebuck
06-24-2004, 12:47 PM
This trade has zero chance of happening.

We have a better chance of trading Pollard for Shaq

PHC Fan
06-24-2004, 02:18 PM
If he can just be the 3rd man in the 3 man big man rotation with Jeff and JO, all he needs to do it rebound, block shots if he can, and D up as best he can. If that's all we ask him to do, that's plenty.

Combine that with getting Jackson, and I'm there. Another 7 footer without meat on his body? Our team could look like a Slim-Fast commercial.

Suaveness
06-24-2004, 02:56 PM
I really like this deal. Gives us a SG and C in a single blow.

I wouldn't get too excited about Chandler. Didn't Chicago just hate him last year? I read where he was reported to be lazy and not too interesting in getting better. It seems like Chicago is just trying to get rid of him.

That said, this would be a good trade for the Pacers, but I also think it would mean that Ron Artest might be bye-bye, because despite what everyone keeps speculating....JACKSON is a 3, and not a 2.

This trade does not really alter the 2 situation, other than making it possible for Artest to play more 2. But as I said earlier, I think that possibility does not excite LB.

Jackson is a COLLEGE 3...he is an NBA 2. 6'7" is a on the short side of being SF. Good SG size.

Kstat
06-24-2004, 03:00 PM
I really like this deal. Gives us a SG and C in a single blow.

I wouldn't get too excited about Chandler. Didn't Chicago just hate him last year? I read where he was reported to be lazy and not too interesting in getting better. It seems like Chicago is just trying to get rid of him.

That said, this would be a good trade for the Pacers, but I also think it would mean that Ron Artest might be bye-bye, because despite what everyone keeps speculating....JACKSON is a 3, and not a 2.

This trade does not really alter the 2 situation, other than making it possible for Artest to play more 2. But as I said earlier, I think that possibility does not excite LB.

Jackson is a COLLEGE 3...he is an NBA 2. 6'7" is a on the short side of being SF. Good SG size.

Luke Jackson is too slow to be an NBA 2. If he's going to succeed it will be at the SF spot, which menas hes going to have to put on weight.