<div class="quote_poster">Quoting SP23:</div><div class="quote_post">Did anybody even want Chandler... why did we pay him so much.</div> The hope he would develop to be better, but he struggled most of last year, especially in the beginning.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting SP23:</div><div class="quote_post">Most people wouldn't agree though. They do the same things, but Wallace does it much better than Chandler. BKS basically explained it earlier. Wallace is stronger than Chandler. He doesn't foul when he tries to block shots like Chandler. And does score more than Chandler... not much though.</div> He scores like 2 more points than Chandler in 10 minutes. Wallace's offense is atrocious. Plain and simple. If you saw him in the playoffs, he looked especially terrible. Wallace is better on defense, but not by a signifficant margin. Not for 52 million dollars right after you signed Chandler to a 60-million deal just a season ago. That's 112 million on two players who are very similar in what they do. Not to mention they still have to think about Hinrich, Deng, and Gordon very soon. I don't think the move is as "great" as people think.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">He scores like 2 more points than Chandler in 10 minutes. Wallace's offense is atrocious. Plain and simple. If you saw him in the playoffs, he looked especially terrible. Wallace is better on defense, but not by a signifficant margin. Not for 52 million dollars right after you signed Chandler to a 60-million deal just a season ago. That's 112 million on two players who are very similar in what they do. Not to mention they still have to think about Hinrich, Deng, and Gordon very soon. I don't think the move is as "great" as people think.</div> We are more than likely trading Chandler now so we are saving 8 million dollars and getting a better player. Hmm, wonder if the Knicks are interested lol. Chandler for Rose’s expiring contract? With Isiah Thomas anything is possible.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Best Kept Secret:</div><div class="quote_post">We are more than likely trading Chandler now so we are saving 8 million dollars and getting a better player. Hmm, wonder if the Knicks are interested lol. Chandler for Rose?s expiring contract? With isiah Thomas anything is possible.</div> That wouldn't really be a bad move for the Knicks, but it will be difficult to move him with his mediocre season. But who knows if the Bulls can get a deal that's expiring before Hinrich's contract is up? Isn't he expiring this year? Wallace seems like a piece to take the Bulls to another level: second round, or maybe even Conference Finals, but 52 million for a temporary fix doesn't seem smart when there core is expiring soon.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">He scores like 2 more points than Chandler in 10 minutes. Wallace's offense is atrocious. Plain and simple. If you saw him in the playoffs, he looked especially terrible. Wallace is better on defense, but not by a signifficant margin. Not for 52 million dollars right after you signed Chandler to a 60-million deal just a season ago. That's 112 million on two players who are very similar in what they do. Not to mention they still have to think about Hinrich, Deng, and Gordon very soon. I don't think the move is as "great" as people think.</div> Yeah, forgot about the minutes. I know Ben Wallace is horrible at offense. But, most people think because we signed Wallace, Chandler's going to be traded.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting SP23:</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah, forgot about the minutes. I know Ben Wallace is horrible at offense. But, most people think because we signed Wallace, Chandler's going to be traded.</div> Isn't he? Seems like the logical thing to do. Wouldn't make much sense to keep him.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">That wouldn't really be a bad move for the Knicks, but it will be difficult to move him with his mediocre season. But who knows if the Bulls can get a deal that's expiring before Hinrich's contract is up? Isn't he expiring this year? Wallace seems like a piece to take the Bulls to another level: second round, or maybe even Conference Finals, but 52 million for a temporary fix doesn't seem smart when there core is expiring soon.</div> Hinrich?s contract is up in 2007. The Bulls and him have already been in extensive contract negotiations for a while. Gordon, and Deng?s aren?t up until after the 08 or 09 season I think. So we still got some time. Dealing Chandler should not be as hard as you think. Although, his huge deal makes him some what unattractive. There is always that one GM out there who thinks a change a scenery will make a player perform up to his potential. For Curry it was Isiah, and we all know how that turned out. For Chandler it might be NO who have already been rumored to be interested in him.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting NaKz:</div><div class="quote_post">Isn't he? Seems like the logical thing to do. Wouldn't make much sense to keep him.</div> I know.. I wasn't complaining we shouldn't.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Best Kept Secret:</div><div class="quote_post">We are more than likely trading Chandler now so we are saving 8 million dollars and getting a better player. Hmm, wonder if the Knicks are interested lol. Chandler for Rose’s expiring contract? With isiah Thomas anything is possible.</div> Good point about trading Chandler for an expiring contract. Didn't think of that. It almost seems like the Bulls are remaking themselves using the Pistons as a model. No big stars, just solid defensive-minded players -- Hinrich, Duhon, Wallace, and Tyrus Thomas are an excellent core. Ben Gordon can play the "Rip Hamilton" role.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Best Kept Secret:</div><div class="quote_post">Hinrich?s contract is up in 2007. The Bulls and him have already been in extensive contract negotiations for a while. Gordon, and Deng?s aren?t up until after the 08 or 09 season I think. So we still got some time. Dealing Chandler should not be as hard as you think. Although, his huge deal makes him some what unattractive. There is always that one GM out there who thinks a change a scenery will make a player perform up to his potential. For Curry it was Isiah, and we all know how that turned out. For Chandler it might be NO who have already been rumored to be interested in him.</div> Yeah, for Deng and Gordon. In 07/08 it's a team option. Then in 08/09 there's a qualifying offer (is that the players option? or the team?)
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting SP23:</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah, for Deng and Gordon. In 07/08 it's a team option. Then in 08/09 there's a qualifying offer (is that the players option? or the team?)</div> The qualifying offer just means that they are restricted free agents...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">Wallace is better on defense, but not by a signifficant margin. </div> *pauses to catch breath* .....
Imagine the damage this team could do in the playoffs. I can't wait to watch NBA basketball next season!
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Best Kept Secret:</div><div class="quote_post">The qualifying offer just means that they are restricted free agents...</div> Oh, ok... Didn't know what that was.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post"> It almost seems like the Bulls are remaking themselves using the Pistons as a model. No big stars, just solid defensive-minded players -- Hinrich, Duhon, Wallace, and Tyrus Thomas are an excellent core. Ben Gordon can play the "Rip Hamilton" role.</div> I was thinking that as well. However i think Paxson wants to make the bulls faster and a bit more perimeter orientated to suit the way the game is changing.
i dont think ben will be the same player he was in without chauncey, sheed, rip, and tayshaun... i bet ben will regret ever leaving dertoit
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting olskoolFunktitude:</div><div class="quote_post"> *pauses to catch breath* ..... </div> So, Wallace is so much better on defense than Chandler they need to give him 52 million. I don't know how much Chandler you have seen, but I've followed him closely the past few seasons and his defense isn't leaps and bounds behind Wallace, especially for the money they signed him to. Please, when you catch your breath again, explain yourself.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">So, Wallace is so much better on defense than Chandler they need to give him 52 million. I don't know how much Chandler you have seen, but I've followed him closely the past few seasons and his defense isn't leaps and bounds behind Wallace, especially for the money they signed him to. </div> Wallace will make 52million these next 4 years Chandler will make 52-54 million the next 5 years If you think of it that way its kinda like we pay the same amount for less time and what we get is a DPOY and an All-star. Chandler is ridiculously foul prone. I'm sure you're aware of that. Fouling is an indication of a poor defensive player. Hes not strong enough so he has to foul. He bites on fakes and tries to block too much leaving him out of position. Thus if a foul isnt commited an easy bucket is scored. These are signs of a poor defensive player. Chandller is a rebounding beast, the guy gets 10 boards in 20mins. But he can only play 20mins thats the problem. While i would not say Ben's D is leaps and bounds better than Chandler, i will say its worth paying virtually the same total amount. And also worth paying around 4 mil a year more for. Lets not forgot Ben was the anchor of the pistons team. They struggled without him during the brawl aftermath.
I don't understand how anyone can say that this is a bad thing for Chicago to do. Everyone in this forum, the analysts, and announcers ect. have always said that we're a great team lacking a true center and what does Chicago do? they get a 4 time DPOY to play Center for them. Bulls are making it to the Conference finals in 07.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting NaKz:</div><div class="quote_post">Wallace will make 52million these next 4 years Chandler will make 52-54 million the next 5 years If you think of it that way its kinda like we pay the same amount for less time and what we get is a DPOY and an All-star. Chandler is ridiculously foul prone. I'm sure you're aware of that. Fouling is an indication of a poor defensive player. Hes not strong enough so he has to foul. He bites on fakes and tries to block too much leaving him out of position. Thus if a foul isnt commited an easy bucket is scored. These are signs of a poor defensive player. Chandller is a rebounding beast, the guy gets 10 boards in 20mins. But he can only play 20mins thats the problem. While i would not say Ben's D is leaps and bounds better than Chandler, i will say its worth paying virtually the same total amount. And also worth paying around 4 mil a year more for. Lets not forgot Ben was the anchor of the pistons team. They struggled without him during the brawl aftermath.</div> Chandler isn't as good as Wallace. I'm not arguing that. However, he is very similar to Wallace in the things he does. I know the Bulls are looking to trade him, however he's not traded yet, so we have to include him into the Bulls' future plans. His contract is also pretty big, so that does limit the amount of teams interested and increases the amount of compensation the Bulls will have to take in return. Had Chandler not been on the team with a 60 million dollar contract, the move would be great, but with both of them on the team now it's just an average one. Who can the Bulls get for Chandler who won't restrict their financial plans down the road?
