Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticBalla32 @ Jul 14 2007, 06:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><ul>[*]Trading both Chauncey Billups and Joe Johnson halfway through their rookie seasons.[*]Promising Gilbert Arenas with one of our 3 first round picks, breaking those promises, and taking Kedrick Brown and Joe Forte instead.[*]Taking Jerome Moiso in the lottery.[*]Trading Antoine Walker twice, and getting practically nothing in return each time.[*]Giving Doc Rivers an extension.[*]18 game losing streak, last season.[*]R.I.P. Red.[/list]</div>Come on man, I can do so much better than that.#1. The death of Len Bias. It completely changed the course of Celtic and NBA History. #2. The death of Reggie Lewis#3. The 1997 Draft Lottery#4. The 2007 Draft Lottery#5. Trading for Vin Baker
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history We can all agree the celtics have gone to hell since Bird retired.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history -19 game loosing streak, and pretty much Mcgrady's last season as a whole was pretty much the Magic's worst moments in history.-Letting Armstrong and Jacque Vaughn walk, and putting Tyronn Lue into his place. Which set us up for that 21 win season, in Mcgrady's final season.-Signing Juwan Howard for so much, when he was the same type player as Drew Gooden, which again set us up for that 21 win season.-Trading Cuttino Mobley for Doug Christie, which gave us no outside shooting for a while.-Shaq leaving in free agency, really set us back, and haven't done anything worth while since, although this season we have a chance to be alot better.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PrimeTime @ Jul 14 2007, 07:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Trading Scottie Pippen to the Rockets. period. It set us back for nearly a decade, even if jordan retired, if we hadnt tried to ''rebuild'' poorly at that, we could have made the playoffs at least well until 2000 and by then we could have had some new talent. Another bad deal was trading artest, Krause was the worst gm ever. Michael Jordan is the only reason he looked like he knew what he was doing but oh well, it worked out well now that we're a team on the brink of contension.edit: I typoed blazers but I meant rockets.</div>It wasn't only Michael Jordan that made Krause look good, he made some fantastic moves early in his career as the GM. Look at the 87 draft, where he traded Olden Polyneice for Scottie Pippen, a great move for someone who was as much a reason for that Bulls team being so great, as Michael Jordan was. In that same draft, he found Horace Grant who was a major contributor in the first three championship runs. Then there was the trade of Oakley for Bill Cartwright that turned out to be a beautiful move, as Cartwright turned out to be the only center in the league at that time that could actually somewhat control Patrick Ewing. He did a great job of playing defense on him, and was another solid contributor to the Bulls teams that won the first set of titles. He also traded for, drafted or signed Rodman, Kukoc, and Harper who were big parts of the second run of three peats. So it wasn't only Jordan that made Krause look good, he had some good signings, trades and draft picks in his time as the Chicago general manager, during the Jordan and Pippen times. His attitude during that time though, and big ego caused the players to hate him, so after all of those guys left, no big time free agents would go there because of the way he treated those two and Phil Jackson, and his drafting and moves after that was questionable. It wasn't only Michael Jordan that made Krause look like a good general manager.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Jul 16 2007, 09:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>-19 game loosing streak, and pretty much Mcgrady's last season as a whole was pretty much the Magic's worst moments in history.-Letting Armstrong and Jacque Vaughn walk, and putting Tyronn Lue into his place. Which set us up for that 21 win season, in Mcgrady's final season.-Signing Juwan Howard for so much, when he was the same type player as Drew Gooden, which again set us up for that 21 win season.-Trading Cuttino Mobley for Doug Christie, which gave us no outside shooting for a while.-Shaq leaving in free agency, really set us back, and haven't done anything worth while since, although this season we have a chance to be alot better.It wasn't only Michael Jordan that made Krause look good, he made some fantastic moves early in his career as the GM. Look at the 87 draft, where he traded Olden Polyneice for Scottie Pippen, a great move for someone who was as much a reason for that Bulls team being so great, as Michael Jordan was. In that same draft, he found Horace Grant who was a major contributor in the first three championship runs. Then there was the trade of Oakley for Bill Cartwright that turned out to be a beautiful move, as Cartwright turned out to be the only center in the league at that time that could actually somewhat control Patrick Ewing. He did a great job of playing defense on him, and was another solid contributor to the Bulls teams that won the first set of titles. He also traded for, drafted or signed Rodman, Kukoc, and Harper who were big parts of the second run of three peats. So it wasn't only Jordan that made Krause look good, he had some good signings, trades and draft picks in his time as the Chicago general manager, during the Jordan and Pippen times. His attitude during that time though, and big ego caused the players to hate him, so after all of those guys left, no big time free agents would go there because of the way he treated those two and Phil Jackson, and his drafting and moves after that was questionable. It wasn't only Michael Jordan that made Krause look like a good general manager.</div>Krause got lucky in trading for Pippen and luck struck twice in horace grant, but how can you say the oakley deal was good for cartright? Oakley at the time had only played 2-3 seasons and shown he was the team muscle, and went on to be the ben wallace of the 90s with better offense. Again his free agency pickups came mainly due to the fact that everyone wanted to play with michael jordan.The only real guy I'd give him credit for is Kukoc who he went after personally. By selecting the greatest player ever he basically made his career and no one at the time could have predicted what pippen and grant would have become.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PrimeTime @ Jul 16 2007, 09:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Krause got lucky in trading for Pippen and luck struck twice in horace grant, but how can you say the oakley deal was good for cartright? Oakley at the time had only played 2-3 seasons and shown he was the team muscle, and went on to be the ben wallace of the 90s with better offense. Again his free agency pickups came mainly due to the fact that everyone wanted to play with michael jordan.The only real guy I'd give him credit for is Kukoc who he went after personally. By selecting the greatest player ever he basically made his career and no one at the time could have predicted what pippen and grant would have become.</div>Krause did good scouting, and his scouts did good scouting that's why he was good in drafting Pippen and Horace Grant. Scouting those two is what made getting those two, look so good. And the fact that they was able to trade with the Sonics for Pippen on draft day, giving away Polyneice who didn't do to much with his career. That was a beautiful trade, and one only a smart GM would have been able to see working out. As for that "no one could have predicted that Pippen and Grant would have become" that makes no since at all. There have been plenty of players that turned out good, and no one predicted it. So that is pretty much a mute point, and really retarded to say.As for the Oakley and Cartwright trade, it was more than a good trade. Oakley while being a good player, did not have the size to play the center position at that time. He would have never been able to play the defense on centers like Ewing, that Cartwright was able to play. With Horace Grant there, Oakley really wasn't needed, as Horace Grant could get in and play just as rough and physical as Oakley could, and play maybe even better man to man defense as well as Horace Grant was a better power forward on the offensive end of things. That Oakley trade ended up being the right thing to do, and allowed them to get a true center to play things, instead of playing a power forward at center. How can someone be so blind, and not say it was a good deal, when Cartwright was such a major contributor for three straight title teams?As for the everyone wanting to play with Jordan, it takes a smart GM to know how to exploit that, and sign the players needed around him. There are plenty of players that would probably like to play around Lebron James, and the Cavaliers GM hasn't been able to put another star quality player around him, or get quality roleplayers to go around him. As I said, a smart GM knows how to use that star player to get quality players to go around him, a bad GM wouldn't know how to and he would have been left with no one to help him and definately not 6 championships.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Jul 16 2007, 09:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Krause did good scouting, and his players did good scouting that's why he was good in drafting Pippen and Horace Grant. As for that "no one could have predicted that Pippen and Grant would have become" that makes no since at all. That's what half of the NBA draft is, luck at how they will turn out in the future. There have been plenty of players that turned out good, and no one predicted it. So that is pretty much a mute point, and really retarded to say.As for the Oakley and Cartwright trade, it was more than a good trade. Oakley while being a good player, did not have the size to play the center position at that time. He would have never been able to play the defense on centers like Ewing, that Cartwright was able to play. With Horace Grant there, Oakley really wasn't needed, as Horace Grant could get in and play just as rough and physical as Oakley could, and play maybe even better man to man defense as well as Horace Grant was a better power forward on the offensive end of things. That Oakley trade ended up being the right thing to do, and allowed them to get a true center to play things, instead of playing a power forward at center. How can someone be so blind, and not say it was a good deal, when Cartwright was such a major contributor for three straight title teams?As for the everyone wanting to play with Jordan, it takes a smart GM to know how to exploit that, and sign the players needed around him. There are plenty of players that would probably like to play around Lebron James, and the Cavaliers GM hasn't been able to put another star quality player around him, or get quality roleplayers to go around him. As I said, a smart GM knows how to use that star player to get quality players to go around him, a bad GM wouldn't know how to and he would have been left with no one to help him and definately not 6 championships.</div>I never said he was a bad scouter, that was probably his strength as even in the post-jordan era he drafted some good guys(Jalen Rose,Crawford,Artest,etc.)But at the same time you cant use Pippen and Grant as why he was a great gm, that was just one draft where he got extremely lucky.As far as the cartwright trade went not only did Oakley put up similar offensive numbers to him with the Knicks, but he was a much better low post defender and was invaluable even as a young player for us against the pistons. I cant see how you say that the oakley deal benefited us when Oakley went on to be a much better player then either Grant or Cartwright. Charles Oakley in the 3 years after the trade averaged 13 ppg, cartwright averaged 12. Not only that but Oakley was a better rebounder then Grant ever was, and a much better defender in the low post and his grind it out style of muscle play helped jordan more then anyone on the bulls at the time. It was never a good deal, if we had kept Oakley we would have still won those 3 titles. Short-term it didnt even benefit us all that much.We could have had Oakley his entire career instead of cartwright for his last 6 seasons.Lebrons case is much different then that of which michael jordan had. Jordan at the time when everyone wanted to come play had already won 3 championships and just come back into the game. Whereas Lebron hasnt done much yet.Maybe bad was a strong word for krause career-wise but in the post-jordan era that definately fit him well.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PrimeTime @ Jul 16 2007, 10:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I never said he was a bad scouter, that was probably his strength as even in the post-jordan era he drafted some good guys(Jalen Rose,Crawford,Artest,etc.)But at the same time you cant use Pippen and Grant as why he was a great gm, that was just one draft where he got extremely lucky.</div>Actually you can, he had the good scouting, and ability to see players like Pippen and Grant, which is part of being a good GM. The draft is where GM's make themselves, and this one draft he was able to pluck a star, and a solid roleplayer for three championship teams. Even farther into the drafts, he was responsible for the drafting of BJ Armstrong in 1989, a very valuabe part of their first set of championships. Toni Kukoc was a great draft pick that he was responsible for. Like you just said, Crawford, Artest, Elton Brand, he has had some very good draft picks over the years, and made some very sound moves at drafting. Being able to draft well, and spot good talent, once again, is part of what makes a good GM. So he was good in that area. However, you did put Jalen Rose as his daft, and he didn't draft Jalen Rose at all. Jalen Rose was drafted in 1993 by the Denver Nuggets after being part of that amazing team at Michigan.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>As far as the cartwright trade went not only did Oakley put up similar offensive numbers to him with the Knicks, but he was a much better low post defender and was invaluable even as a young player for us against the pistons. I cant see how you say that the oakley deal benefited us when Oakley went on to be a much better player then either Grant or Cartwright. Charles Oakley in the 3 years after the trade averaged 13 ppg, cartwright averaged 12. Not only that but Oakley was a better rebounder then Grant ever was, and a much better defender in the low post and his grind it out style of muscle play helped jordan more then anyone on the bulls at the time. It was never a good deal, if we had kept Oakley we would have still won those 3 titles. Short-term it didnt even benefit us all that much.We could have had Oakley his entire career instead of cartwright for his last 6 seasons.</div>You don't seem to understand that one of the other biggest threats to the Bulls at that time was the Knicks, who was lead by Patrick Ewing. Oakley couldn't play good defense on Ewing, and he couldn't make Ewing work as hard for his shots, because of him being a few inches shorter. Trading for Cartwright gave them a longer frame, and a bigger person to put onto Ewing and Laimbeer, and all of these guys. Had you kept Oakley, he would have been eaten up time and time again by Patrick Ewing, and Laimbeer and these other centers of that time. They had someone that was able to take Oakley's spot in the starting lineup, which was Horace Grant. He was a tough defensive player, and tough man to man defender at the power forward position. By getting rid of him, it left both of those spots covered and good, instead of just one. It also gave them two starting low post scorers capable of scoring double figures in the game, instead of just Oakley. That was a trade that worked out well, and ended up being a very good trade for the Bulls. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Lebrons case is much different then that of which michael jordan had. Jordan at the time when everyone wanted to come play had already won 3 championships and just come back into the game. Whereas Lebron hasnt done much yet.Maybe bad was a strong word for krause career-wise but in the post-jordan era that definately fit him well.</div>Lebron's isn't much different, he's a star player, that everyone can see is good and people want to play with. He should be more than enough to lure players to the Cavaliers, but that GM isn't good enough to get players to come there to play around him. With Lebron being such a good passer, it should be easy to get players to come there, as he is a better passer than Jordan was. So that should be enough for them to know they will get their shots with Lebron on the court, but yet they still are not able to get a good group of players around him. If you don't like that one however, I'm sure there are alot of players that wouldn't have minded playing with Kobe Bryant, as he had won three rings, and was a major contributor in that three peat. He had a load of potential, and the Lakers GM hasn't been able to get a good team around him once Shaq left. He has a skill set alot like Jordan later in his career when Jordan was much more refined, with the same type of athleticism as Jordan had. That's because he isn't a good gm, and doesn't know how to use his cap right, and can't figure out how to trade or sign players that would go around Kobe well. Krause however was able to go out in free agency and trades and drafts and bring in players that fit well around Michael Jordan. He was responsible for Pippen, Grant, Cartwright, BJ Armstrong, Dennis Rodman, Luc Longley, Steve Kerr, John Paxson, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, and all of those good players that was around Jordan to make that team so great. He knew how to use Jordan as a selling point, he knew which players were good to trade for, and which players would help out the team the best. So I can't see how you can say that he wasn't a good GM during the Jordan years.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Jul 16 2007, 10:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Actually you can, he had the good scouting, and ability to see players like Pippen and Grant, which is part of being a good GM. The draft is where GM's make themselves, and this one draft he was able to pluck a star, and a solid roleplayer for three championship teams. Even farther into the drafts, he was responsible for the drafting of BJ Armstrong in 1989, a very valuabe part of their first set of championships. Toni Kukoc was a great draft pick that he was responsible for. Like you just said, Crawford, Artest, Elton Brand, he has had some very good draft picks over the years, and made some very sound moves at drafting. Being able to draft well, and spot good talent, once again, is part of what makes a good GM. So he was good in that area. However, you did put Jalen Rose as his daft, and he didn't draft Jalen Rose at all. Jalen Rose was drafted in 1993 by the Denver Nuggets after being part of that amazing team at Michigan.You don't seem to understand that one of the other biggest threats to the Bulls at that time was the Knicks, who was lead by Patrick Ewing. Oakley couldn't play good defense on Ewing, and he couldn't make Ewing work as hard for his shots, because of him being a few inches shorter. Trading for Cartwright gave them a longer frame, and a bigger person to put onto Ewing and Laimbeer, and all of these guys. Had you kept Oakley, he would have been eaten up time and time again by Patrick Ewing, and Laimbeer and these other centers of that time. They had someone that was able to take Oakley's spot in the starting lineup, which was Horace Grant. He was a tough defensive player, and tough man to man defender at the power forward position. By getting rid of him, it left both of those spots covered and good, instead of just one. It also gave them two starting low post scorers capable of scoring double figures in the game, instead of just Oakley. That was a trade that worked out well, and ended up being a very good trade for the Bulls. Lebron's isn't much different, he's a star player, that everyone can see is good and people want to play with. He should be more than enough to lure players to the Cavaliers, but that GM isn't good enough to get players to come there to play around him. With Lebron being such a good passer, it should be easy to get players to come there, as he is a better passer than Jordan was. So that should be enough for them to know they will get their shots with Lebron on the court, but yet they still are not able to get a good group of players around him. If you don't like that one however, I'm sure there are alot of players that wouldn't have minded playing with Kobe Bryant, as he had won three rings, and was a major contributor in that three peat. He had a load of potential, and the Lakers GM hasn't been able to get a good team around him once Shaq left. He has a skill set alot like Jordan later in his career when Jordan was much more refined, with the same type of athleticism as Jordan had. That's because he isn't a good gm, and doesn't know how to use his cap right, and can't figure out how to trade or sign players that would go around Kobe well. Krause however was able to go out in free agency and trades and drafts and bring in players that fit well around Michael Jordan. He was responsible for Pippen, Grant, Cartwright, BJ Armstrong, Dennis Rodman, Luc Longley, Steve Kerr, John Paxson, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, and all of those good players that was around Jordan to make that team so great. He knew how to use Jordan as a selling point, he knew which players were good to trade for, and which players would help out the team the best. So I can't see how you can say that he wasn't a good GM during the Jordan years.</div>I was refering to Krause in the post jordan era as my whole original point was about trading Pippen and leading to MJs early retirement. In my eyes that really tarnished his career and set us back nearly a decade. I never said he was a bad scouter, and I stand by Oakley being just as good a fit if not better in the longterm then cartwright. I very much remember him being the only guy on the bulls willing to trade elbows with laimbeer and by the time we traded him he had yet to develop into the player he became in NY. He Would have been just as good as cart-wright even lacking size he made up for it in strength and raw athletcism. Throughout the 90s he showed he could guard many centers and pfs very effieciently so I dont get your point. He even played Laimbeer and Rodman well as a young player in the NBA.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PrimeTime @ Jul 16 2007, 10:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was refering to Krause in the post jordan era as my whole original point was about trading Pippen and leading to MJs early retirement. In my eyes that really tarnished his career and set us back nearly a decade. I never said he was a bad scouter, and I stand by Oakley being just as good a fit if not better in the longterm then cartwright. I very much remember him being the only guy on the bulls willing to trade elbows with laimbeer and by the time we traded him he had yet to develop into the player he became in NY. He Would have been just as good as cart-wright even lacking size he made up for it in strength and raw athletcism. Throughout the 90s he showed he could guard many centers and pfs very effieciently so I dont get your point. He even played Laimbeer and Rodman well as a young player in the NBA.</div>He wasn't the one guarding many centers in his career, when they faced the bigger and longer centers, it was always Ewing that played defense on them. There is a certain point where length will make up for the other guys power and strength, because you will be able to get shots off over them still without having to worry to much. That is why Cartwright was more valuable than Oakley was, because he was able to guard the longer centers, as well as the big and tough centers. With Oakley there, that would have left them having two starters of Oakley and a center() which would have taken away from Horace Grant, and the center would have been dominated by Ewing, and these other guys. The low post wouldn't have put up 23-24 points per game together like Grant and Cartwright did to start out. Thats alot that would have been changed, and their low post attack would not have been near as lethal as what it was.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Jul 16 2007, 11:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He wasn't the one guarding many centers in his career, when they faced the bigger and longer centers, it was always Ewing that played defense on them. There is a certain point where length will make up for the other guys power and strength, because you will be able to get shots off over them still without having to worry to much. That is why Cartwright was more valuable than Oakley was, because he was able to guard the longer centers, as well as the big and tough centers. With Oakley there, that would have left them having two starters of Oakley and a center() which would have taken away from Horace Grant, and the center would have been dominated by Ewing, and these other guys. The low post wouldn't have put up 23-24 points per game together like Grant and Cartwright did to start out. Thats alot that would have been changed, and their low post attack would not have been near as lethal as what it was.</div>What do you mean? I recall Oakley playing guys like Barkley,Alonzo,Scrempf,Campbell,Laimbeer,Rodman,smits,dale davis,antonio davis,etc. very well.All cartrights defense came from his infamous elbow unlike Oakley. Oakley defended centers. + Oakley scored more points then cartwright.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PrimeTime @ Jul 16 2007, 11:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What do you mean? I recall Oakley playing guys like Barkley,Alonzo,Scrempf,Campbell,Laimbeer,Rodman,smits,dale davis,antonio davis,etc. very well.</div>Guys like Barkley, Scrempf, Rodman and them are not the long type players that Patrick Ewing, and these guys was. Sure they were tall and long compared to your average person, but not as long and tall like centers. Rodman wasn't even an offensive threat, so guarding him really didn't prove anything, it just showed he played defense on someone his height. As for during those games, he spent much more time playing Rodman on defense, than Laimbeer. Laimbeer spent a long time being guarded by Corzine when they played, which didn't work out to well for the Bulls. As for Alonzo, he wasn't that tall of a center, he was a shorter center if you would remember. He definately wasn't as tall as Ewing, or any of those centers that the Bulls had to face alot on their way to the finals, that Cartwright's length would have bothered more.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>All cartrights defense came from his infamous elbow unlike Oakley. Oakley defended centers. + Oakley scored more points then cartwright.</div>Oakley, once again did not defend centers. Your retarded to think he would have been able to play defense on Ewing, and it goes to show how much you actually watched basketball from that time frame. Up through the mid 90's, he was never guarding the big long players like that, because he wasn't long enough to guard them and cause alot of problems. Sure he could guard the smaller power forward type players like Barkley, Malone and thoes guys better than Cartwright could, but they had someone that could guard them in the same way as Oakley could, which was Horace Grant. They really didn't need Oakley, they needed Cartwright more.Once again, when you look at the fact that with Oakley, they would only have him scoring double digits. Without him, and with Cartwright, they had both Cartwright and Horace Grant scoring double digits, which lead to a combined more points coming from the post, than they would score when Oakley was there. There is a team aspect to trades, not just a "which player was the more talented of the two." The team aspect, made having Cartwright more valuable, than having Oakley.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history Oakley was typically a pf but my point was he did guard centers from time to time and efficiently. He may not have went toe to toe with Hakeem,Ewing, or Shaq but he was still a very valuable post defender moreso then cartright was. Just because Cartright was 2 inches bigger doesn't change the fact that he wasnt as fluent a defender/rebounder/ or scorer then Oakley was. If anything we should have kept oakley and traded Grant for cartwright. Oakley was the best player the bulls drafted in the 80s other than Pip and MJ. Even with oakley we still would have had two guys getting near 12-15 ppg each season+ Oakley was more versatile. We could have easily gotten another big body other then cartwright but oakley was a rare player. Note: Luc Longley.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history -the infamous 1969 coin toss-drafts in the past 4 years-trading Jason Kidd for Stephon Marbury-the body check-JJ's orbital fracture-Raja's calf injury-signing Pat Burke
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PrimeTime @ Jul 16 2007, 11:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Oakley was typically a pf but my point was he did guard centers from time to time and efficiently. He may not have went toe to toe with Hakeem,Ewing, or Shaq but he was still a very valuable post defender moreso then cartright was. Just because Cartright was 2 inches bigger doesn't change the fact that he wasnt as fluent a defender/rebounder/ or scorer then Oakley was. If anything we should have kept oakley and traded Grant for cartwright. Oakley was the best player the bulls drafted in the 80s other than Pip and MJ. Even with oakley we still would have had two guys getting near 12-15 ppg each season+ Oakley was more versatile. We could have easily gotten another big body other then cartwright but oakley was a rare player. Note: Luc Longley.</div>They needed someone that could somewhat deal with the length of the Hakeem's, Ewing's, and Robinson's in the world. Like you said, Oakley couldn't have done that, so there was no since in having him and Grant there, while having no one that could play defense on those guys. Cartwright was able to deal with that, and make those guys work harder for their baskets when they played. Whether you know it or not, that is a valuable part to defense, having someone that can make the other teams longer players work hard for their points like that. They didn't trade Grant, because at that time he wasn't as big of a name as Oakley was, so he wasn't as tradeable as Oakley was. That's why they didn't trade Horace Grant for Bill Cartwright, the Knicks wasn't going to go for that trade at that time. They needed a center then, and the best one out there on the trade market was Bill Cartwright that fit in with the team well. With Oakley and without Cartwright, Horace Grant would not have go to play as much, because Will Purdue would have had to play more taking time from Grant, which would have lead to less points from the paint, and a much worse center playing those guys than Cartwright. With Cartwright, they got more points scored from the paint between Cartwright and Grant, than they got with Oakley on the team, as well as two people able to guard the good centers, and the tough power forwards in the league. From a team standpoint that was a very good trade for the Bulls.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Living_Legend33 @ Jul 16 2007, 08:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Come on man, I can do so much better than that.#1. The death of Len Bias. It completely changed the course of Celtic and NBA History. #2. The death of Reggie Lewis#3. The 1997 Draft Lottery#4. The 2007 Draft Lottery#5. Trading for Vin Baker</div>Or we could just say 1987-present, and call it a day.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 14 2007, 06:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Solid topic manI'll name some for the Raps....1. Rafael Araujo2. Vince Carter turning into a whining vagina3. Post-Vince days4. Our defense in the post Vince days5. T-Mac and Billups leaving just when they were about to enter their primes6. The fact that we've NEVER had a good 2nd option besides when Vince was still around with Chris.7. Rob Babcock, and everything that this man decided to do8. Jalen Rose's contract9. Bosh's injury late last season when our games were unwatchable even for the most die hard Raptor fans. You guys will know what Im talking about with that one.10. uhh....gotta get 10 here.....Vince Carter for the Williams', Joey Graham and Zo, who refused to play hereEdit: How could I forget the Nets beating the Raptors in the playoffs? A playoff loss is bad enough....but to the nets? omg I was pissed after that. I really wanted to show up Vince Carter one last time.</div>also signing Alston to that nasty contract. and then I think it was richard peddie that guy that owns raps and leafs? who hired babcock or something and then made VC all pissed cause he wouldnt listen to how he wanted Julius Erving and then wanted the front office to be fired and etc..
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticBalla32 @ Jul 14 2007, 06:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><ul>[*]Trading both Chauncey Billups and Joe Johnson halfway through their rookie seasons.[*]Promising Gilbert Arenas with one of our 3 first round picks, breaking those promises, and taking Kedrick Brown and Joe Forte instead.[*]Taking Jerome Moiso in the lottery.[*]Trading Antoine Walker twice, and getting practically nothing in return each time.[*]Giving Doc Rivers an extension.[*]18 game losing streak, last season.[*]R.I.P. Red.[/list]</div>you missed the big 2.Len Bias dying 2 days after the draft, ruining the future of the franchise for 10+ seasonsReggie Lewis collapsing in a game and finally collapsing and dying in a pick up game when he was a top 5 SG/SF in the league.thus piling on the Len Bias passing and really destroying all hope for the 90'sHorrible and tragic was the lost of Reggie.Silly and unnecessary was the passing of Len.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history to add to the already horrid celtics list, the pitino era as a whole sucked.
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history 1)Being swept in all 3 playoff series2)The 2000 NBA Draft3)Hubie Brown Retiring4)Pau Gasol going down with injury5)Shane Battier being traded(although with our direction now, I like the move, but it was sad seeing him go)
Re: Worst moments in your franchise's history Oh yeah, I forgot to add. When Rudy T. got the lights knocked outta him by Kermit Washington.
