Big Ben Heading To Bulls

Source: ESPN
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">
The biggest free-agent prize of the NBA offseason appears to be off the market. Ben Wallace has informed the Pistons that he will sign with the Bulls, Insider Chad Ford reports. The deal is believed to be $52 million for four years.</div>

 

now hopefully we can trade for tyson chandler

 

mmm decisions decisions, trade Murphy to the Bulls for Chandler? or do a sign a trade with the hawks for Harrington who is an unrestricted free agent for Murphy? if you add those possible trades to the Fisher to Utah for Giricek rumor then the Warriors will definitly have a brand new look that if anything at all will shake things up. I rather have the Warriors make the trade with the Hawks for Harrington. He will definitly be an improvement over Dunleavy.

 

No question -- Harrington averaged 18.6 ppg and 6.9 rpg last year. He's a scoring stud. He's big too -- I thought he played more of the 4, back to the basket, but I guess he can play the 3 too. Either way, OMG put him with JRich, Baron, Beans, and Ike, and that would be a fun group to watch!

Yeah, I agree the Warriors have to be thinking about the SF position. Magette and Harrington are both great candidates, especially if it means only giving up something like Murphy and Pietrus. That to me is a no-brainer.

Oh, and the Fisher for Giricek and filler thing? WTF is Utah thinking?

 

I also think this was a poor move on Chicago's part to announce this before they moved Chandler. Maybe it was leaked, but I would have expected them to negotiate a tight deal for Chandler beforegetting an all-star center. Now, teams know that Chicago is looking to dump Chandler and will be more stingy with their offers. I could have seen Mullin pulling the trigger on Murphy for Chandler, not that I would have necessarily agreed. But now? He'll probably offer Fisher for Chandler or something. And Chicago will have to consider it.

 

Ok, I need some help. What on earth is the facination with Harrington or Chandler?

Harrington is a scoring forward with no go to move and no track record of making his team any better. His PER last year was 16.08, the year before it was 14.32. By way of comparison Dunleavy was 12.51 last year and 14.52 the year before (and 15.02 the year before).

Until last year, when he shot 35% from 3 at 2.5 attempts per game, Harrington had never taken nor made many 3's. He doesn't have a reputation as a very good defender, and the Warriors would have to sign him to at least as big a contract as they signed Murphy to, but it'd be a year longer. So how, exactly, is he a good fit for the Warriors? You can argue that he's marginally better than Dunleavy right now, but there is absolutely no evidence that Harrington is ever going to be better than he is now.

As for Chandler, his contract is nearly identical to Murphy's, so there won't be any cap relief with a trade. His game is nearly identical to Biedrins, except his defense is further along and he doesn't have the offensive game. He's very inconsistent and his back problems are certainly a cause for concern.

What do either of these guys offer the team other than a change of pace? To me, that's not enough of a reason to mess up any chemistry the team does have.

 

I've got no clue, Harrington would be a poor fit as a starter IMO as a SF/PF tweener that could hurt one end or the other and Chandler is basically a Biedrins body type and a Foyle clone in terms of game. We need either a guy that is ready to go in the pivot or a prototype swing player. We tried the Jamison SF/PF selfish tweener thing and that was just horrible and we couldn't defend or move the ball that way.

While I don't believe in staying the course with this roster, we definitely need to look at getting guys ready to play now and have a more fundamentally sound game. I'd take Luol Deng if the Bulls would part with him. He doesn't need to be that athletic, but he just has to perform and play bigger than his size.

For center... I'd take anybody not named Araujo or Foyle or Dampier or anybody else that is packing a large contract for such an incomplete game and lack of heart (if one lack's the footwork at least develop the shot that PF's are supposed to have).

 

We can't stay with the status quo again this year and Chandler might have been an option before we drafted POB. Harrington might just be marginal better than Dunleavy but he definitly has more assertiveness than Dunleavy. Harrington is more of a athletic SF than Dunleavy. And he can be counted as a reliable scoring option wether it be a 2nd or 3rd. Sometimes it takes a trade that might not be the obvious one to put a spark in a team. Heck if we are going to keep Dunleavy we might as well give him some competition and see if he has any true fire in his heart if not at least we will have an upgrade over Dunleavy at SF.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">Ok, I need some help... You can argue that he's marginally better than Dunleavy right now, but there is absolutely no evidence that Harrington is ever going to be better than he is now.</div>

Heh -- yeah Walker, you do need some help j/k

I don't know if you're referring to me with your last post since you didn't quote me, but I'd like to go ahead and clear it up: I for one am not expressing, nor have I ever expressed, a "fascination" with either Harrington or Chandler, so maybe you're referring to someone else.

As far as Chandler, there was a time when I was in favor of going after him, but that wasn't fascination. It was a desire to get a defensive-minded big man. What I've said about Chandler in this thread should make my position clear: he's lost some of his trade value simply because other GMs know Chicago will be trying to dump him. Now, a Fisher+filler for Chandler trade is somewhat plausible, IMO, and I'd do a deal like that.

As far as Harrington, this is probably one of the only times I've ever typed his name. I've never been fascinated with that guy, but I'm not sure why you've chosen to immediately hold up Dunleavy's stats against his. If you honestly think that he's only marginally better than Dunleavy, well that's fine but personally I don't understand it. He scores almost twice as much per game, grabs 2 more rebounds per game, and unlike Dunleavy most of his major numbers have gone up every year the last 3 years. His scoring went from 12.2 to 13.3 to 17.5 to 18.6. That's a pretty solid progression over a substantial amount of time. He doesn't get any blocks, which is odd for a big man, but his assists have gone up from 1.5 to 1.7 to 3.2 to 3.1 -- so he's double that number. His rebounds went from 6.2 to 6.4 to 7.0 to 6.9 - so he added a little less than a rebound per game to his production over that span.


Not only is his production superior to MDJ, IMO, but his solid progression as a scorer gives me ample evidence to suggest he's capable of further improvement. Afterall, he's shown consistent improvement, more or less, every year since 02-03. Further, the PER you cite seems to contradict your "marginal" comparison between the two players:

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">Harrington is a scoring forward with no go to move and no track record of making his team any better. His PER last year was 16.08, the year before it was 14.32. By way of comparison Dunleavy was 12.51 last year and 14.52 the year before</div>

So Dunleavy's number went down about 2 whole points, and Harrington went up by over a point and a half. Not trying to pick a fight here, but doesn't this mean Dunleavy regressed while Harriongton showed signs of significant improvement?

 

I don't like Dunleavy, but not enough to consider Harrington as a replacement. We'll find that he is as overrated as Murphy is and the ball never moves.

That is one thing I do appreciate Dunleavy for. Bball smarts. And he showed flashes of being awesome in '03 when he had inside presence and somewhat of a shot.

I think '05 was just an off year and he should be putting up numbers similar to '03 or '04. Consistency will be a lingering question... I just think he's too much of a role player rather than the guy we should get, which is more of a Joe Johnson type player. Great scorer, good defender, good passer, can be a great secondary option offensive guy. It's just too bad we didn't get a chance at him before he got traded from the Celtics.

Chandler... he hustles, is athletic... I'll pass considering our glut of big men and the fact he's way overrated.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">I think '05 was just an off year and he should be putting up numbers similar to '03 or '04.</div>

I hope so. I am rooting for Dunleavy to bust out, and I want to make it clear that I apprecaite the "intangibles" of floor spacing, movement without the ball, and passing that he brings. He's also a pretty intelligent defender in some areas of the defensive game.

But getting a solid scoring big man like Harrington or Magette to play the SF, I think this should be the #1 priority for GS. If Dunleavy busts out this year and averages 15-16 ppg on 43+% FG, then I'll be proud of him. I just think Harrington would be an instant upgrade, and unlike Pierce he isn't commanding a franchise salary. I mean, he scores almost 5 more points than Murphy and gets paid the same. That's not bad, eh?


**** Again, this is not fascination with Al Harrington. I am merely humoring the possibility. Thank you ****

 

I haven't watched Al Harrington's role with Atlanta, but I do remember him as a pacer. I'd imagine Harrington's role on the Hawks as the same... Good vet presence, but he's one of those scoring guys that's too weak for power forward, too slow for small forward. I'm not sure but I think Ike could kick his ass strength wise. Then again it's too early to tell. Harrington could be good off the bench, but starter it would be awkward fit.

I'd stay the course with Dunleavy before addressing the big man issue at C. When the big man issue is taken care of then Dunleavy is next. If we're really nitpicking, then I'd have to say the free throw shooting of our backcourt needs to greatly improve. If those numbers don't go up to at least an average of 75%, things need to change eventually. When a high volume scorer can't connect at the line, his name better be Shaq or Tim Duncan and it better not be a backcourt player.

Too many damned things. I'm just never satisfied with the Warriors because I look at all the other teams who are successful and they do the things that we're not doing... A backcourt should be able to play defense, shoot, handle the ball, pass it well. The center and power forward should be physical players that play big. It's just all been designed wrong... but we can't help what we get through the draft. We've drafted great... it's just the other parts to being a GM never happened except for that one Baron Davis move. The guy I think makes everyone better, can't shoot free throws or shoot very well. Ugg.... I guess that's why he was offered to us for so little, despite him being young.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AlleyOop:</div><div class="quote_post">I hope so. I am rooting for Dunleavy to bust out, and I want to make it clear that I apprecaite the "intangibles" of floor spacing, movement without the ball, and passing that he brings. He's also a pretty intelligent defender in some areas of the defensive game.

But getting a solid scoring big man like Harrington or Magette to play the SF, I think this should be the #1 priority for GS. If Dunleavy busts out this year and averages 15-16 ppg on 43+% FG, then I'll be proud of him. I just think Harrington would be an instant upgrade, and unlike Pierce he isn't commanding a franchise salary. I mean, he scores almost 5 more points than Murphy and gets paid the same. That's not bad, eh?


**** Again, this is not fascination with Al Harrington. I am merely humoring the possibility. Thank you ****</div>
What about one of the young small forwards that could be perceived as nba-ready? Chicago has got to have tons by now. If Memphis wants Pietrus, would Mike Miller interest anyone? I know Miller has some softness to his game, but he can do pretty much most of the things that Dunleavy does, only he's more athletic, better shoot overall, and he's seen the playoffs. I'm a Mike Miller fan, although I've heard Voodoo Child in the Grizz forums bash him to no end. I guess he's never seen Dunleavy and his famous passivity.

Then again, I've seen Mike Miller act as dumb as Fisher when it comes to shot selection. The guy will keep on shooting something dumb rather than attack the basket.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">If we're really nitpicking, then I'd have to say the free throw shooting of our backcourt needs to greatly improve. If those numbers don't go up to at least an average of 75%, things need to change eventually.</div>

I agree. It baffles me that a guy like Le Red Baron -- whose bread and butter is slicing up the lane and being strong enough to finsih with contact in the paint -- hasn't made freethrow % his number 1 priority. If he shot even an extra 10% per game, that'd be almost a whole point per game on his scoring average. That's what Ike did in college: listened to his coach who told him "big fella, you're going to get hammered your whole career, practice your freethrows. I love when Ike gets an and-1 in the paint, because you know it's an automatic 3.

I wonder though if it's too late to instill that hard-work attitude in Baron. JRich has it, but he still struggles from the line. They should be working witha coach after every practice, because frankly it's embarrassing.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">If Memphis wants Pietrus, would Mike Miller interest anyone? </div>

Now, actually on this one I'd say he's only marginally better - if at all -- and to stay the course with Dun Dun. I wouldn't mind the tandem of Pietrus and Dunleavy if one of those guys would step up and be consistent -- but if we can get a legit, heavy-duty scoring option at that position like Magette or Harrington or Peja or Artest or (i.e. 16+ ppg) then I think we've got to dseriously consider it.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AlleyOop:</div><div class="quote_post">I agree. It baffles me that a guy like Le Red Baron -- whose bread and butter is slicing up the lane and being strong enough to finsih with contact in the paint -- hasn't made freethrow % his number 1 priority. If he shot even an extra 10% per game, that'd be almost a whole point per game on his scoring average. That's what Ike did in college: listened to his coach who told him "big fella, you're going to get hammered your whole career, practice your freethrows. I love when Ike gets an and-1 in the paint, because you know it's an automatic 3.

I wonder though if it's too late to instill that hard-work attitude in Baron. JRich has it, but he still struggles from the line. They should be working witha coach after every practice, because frankly it's embarrassing.</div>

Yeah... but I guess we're beggars and we can't be choosy. I just hate how both point guard and shooting guard are high scoring and they don't do any of it from the line. Talk about wasted opportunities. As an intended high scoring team, I see this as an absolute failure from our backcourt and also Mullin because look at the crap he built around them. Being a GM must be hard, but the direction has to start somewhere and I don't think we had much direction before drafting players in '04 and '05. In '04 I remember Mullin focussing on a Murphy, Jrich, Dunleavy core. I would have subtracted the other two around Jrich. But then again, I'm not the GM nor do I pretend to be a guy who could be a good one if given the chance. I do have a vision of what this team should be like and how its designed.

 

I gotta stick up for Harrington. He's no star but a starter, Dunleavy isn't a starter. Harrington isn't marginally better, he is flat out better. Harrington is one of the many guys Dunleavy couldn't guard if his life depended on it. Harrington has his warts but there is no way that guy isn't a CLEAR upgrade to Dunleavy. Harrington is what he is, a scoring tweener that can finish inside, has a decent jumper, his defense comes and goes and has a history of consistency. Dunleavy is what he is...a 6th man.

 

I dont want to see chandler or harrington here....

I would rather see the Boozer for Murphy/fisher

or the Snow/Gooden for Fisher/murphy

trades revisited


how about fisher - pietrus- and murph

for zach randolph - outlaw and blake?