<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">As for Chandler, his name came up in trade talks with Houston that were centered on Dikembe Mutombo. Those appear to have cooled for now. What to do with Mutombo? Mutombo's agent, David Falk, has made it clear he doesn't want his client playing for the Bulls. But Paxson won't give the center away, and Houston keeps trying to include unwanted salary-cap filler in trade talks for shooting guard Eric Piatkowski.</div> Link(Registration Required) It seems that we had actually tried to land both Chandler and Mutombo. Although this doesn't seem likely to happen now, it could still leave us to imagine what a team with three shot-blockers, two of them young and with potential to be super-good, could have done. Who do you think the Rockets offered for Chandler?
This may not be a popular choice, but I'd give up Mo Taylor for Chandler. Taylor's a good scorer off the bench, but personally I wasn't too impressed with him overall last year. I think Chandler can develop into a good offensive player (particularly under Ewing) and he's already a much better defensive player. Chandler can also back up both Howard and Yao, and he's a better rebounder. He provides more flexibility. Think Paxon would bite on that trade deal?
I wouldn't mind Taylor for Chandler. After all, Chandler is only 21 years old, and on his rookie contract. He has already developed into a great shot-blocker and good low post scorer. Compared to Eddy Curry, I feel that Chandler has a better chance of becoming a great NBA player in the future. Chandler is quick for his height of 7-1, can score easily down low, and his rebounding and shotblocking are very refined for his age. Giving up Taylor's contract I don't mind, and if someone with as much potential as Chandler was really avaliable, I'd even give up Howard. A Yao/Chandler frontcourt would be scary.
I agree. Chandler would be a pretty good compliment to Yao as long as he can develop a decent jumpshot to prevent constant double-teams on Yao. His defense is pretty good and he can score without the ball, which is good on a team with 2 top scorers already. Even if he doesn't develop into a top NBA player, he's still be a great addition - As long as he doesn't force the Rockets to sign him to a big contract. He can backup Yao or play alongside him and he can run up and down the floor when the Rox need a more uptempo game. Dunno who the Bulls want in return tho... Still kinda risky tho, as Chandler's been injured an awful lot in his short career.
From what I heard it was, Adrian Griffin, Pike, and either Howard or Taylor. Howard has been seen working out with Eddie Curry in Chicago, but that's probably becuase they are friends or whatever. Taylor for Deke and Chandler would be great for us, we'd have great big man defense, and a real versatile guy that can play C or PF. Chandler already has a good jumpshot, and a nice hook shot too. He's not as streaky as Mo T, and has a better inside game. Whenever Yao gets double-teamed, it would be a great asset to have Chandler to get the ball.
There is absolutely no way Paxson takes Maurice Taylor for Tyson Chandler. Tyson has worked VERY hard over the offseason, and frankly, none of your tradeable assets are worth Tyson. We had an out-of-shape version of Mo Taylor in Marcus Fizer, so obviously Paxson doesnt want that type of player. But for Mutumbo, you have plenty to give up for him, he has less trade value, Pike would great, packaged with fillers like Adrian Griffin and Mike Wilks. I like the trade as a Bulls fan, what do Rockets fan think of it? <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">can score easily down low</div> No, Chandler can't score easily down low, thats actually one of his weeknesses. But for the other aspects of his game you described, your basically correct.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">No, Chandler can't score easily down low, thats actually one of his weeknesses. But for the other aspects of his game you described, your basically correct. </div> Hehe.. my bad. Thanks for the correction. I would assume Rockets fans like this trade, it helps us with blocking, rebounding, offense production (I'm not saying Chandler will outscore Taylor/Howard -- he will take less shots though), but I dont see how the Bulls considered this trade. They wouldve got a fat contract, older players (excluding the Rox getting Deke), not to mention 2 injured previously injured players. From what it looks like, this trade, or any trade, wont go down. Theyve already said the talks cooled down... Lets hope they heat back up. We really cant give anything the Bulls want... they got guards, and CD loves Howard, they turned down some other trade, but I see Mo as trade bait.
In the article is says these rumors have cooled down greatly and there is no way Chandler will be traded for what imo is second rate talent in return. No offense, but Pike is on dementional, Griffen injury prone, and howard old, and Taylor has to many questions in his game. We gave up Brand to get Chandler Iwould not trade him for anything less than a all star. We will hopefully resign him next season or do a sign and trade for a super star no second rate talent for Chandler imo.
An article posted few days ago says that Mutumbo lost his birth certificate from his mother country, prompting some people to question his age. One of the New Jersey Nets official was convinced that Mutumbo was already 42 y/o when he played with them. If this is true, by now he's already 44 y/o. I wonder why the trade talks between the Bulls and the Rockets took time. The only thing that we can benefit if this trade goes through is Mutumbo's expiring contract which will give us space in the salary cap for the following season. I also read rumors that the Detroit Pistons plans to release Elden Campbell because they already had 15 guaranteed conracts. Would the Rockets consider him? He's a decent player with experience who can defend as well as provide some scoring options. I just hope the Rockets still have ample of money to sign him.
Griffin, Pike and our trade exception might've been enough to land Chandler...Paxson is obviously interested in saving cap room and gaining expiring contracts...Chandler leaving would open up minutes for Deng...however, I think that Taylor had to have been mentioned...
It would have been great to trade Eric Piatkowski, Mo Taylor, and perhaps Adrian Griffin for Deke and Chandler. However, Chandler does need some work on his game and we must keep in mind that he is injury prone. Mutumbo cannot play that many minutes so he is not that reliable if he becomes tired. However, the Bulls definitely would not just trade Chandler for second rate bench players unless we include Mo Taylor or Juwan Howard (something we should not be doing). In short, this trade won't be going down.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Pure Skillz:</div><div class="quote_post">In the article is says these rumors have cooled down greatly and there is no way Chandler will be traded for what imo is second rate talent in return. No offense, but Pike is on dementional, Griffen injury prone, and howard old, and Taylor has to many questions in his game. We gave up Brand to get Chandler Iwould not trade him for anything less than a all star. We will hopefully resign him next season or do a sign and trade for a super star no second rate talent for Chandler imo.</div> Second-rate talent? Lemme ask you a question, is Chandler a first-rate talent? His career average so far is a mere 7 points, while Taylor's is 13. Sure, I'd give Chandler the edge in potential, but if you compare Taylor's first three seasons to Chandler's, I'd name Taylor as the more productive one. In his rookie season, Taylor averaged 11 points per game in bench duty, while Chandler's career-high so far is only 9 points per game. What makes you so sure that Chandler won't be a Taylor-like player for the rest of his career?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trip:</div><div class="quote_post">Second-rate talent? Lemme ask you a question, is Chandler a first-rate talent? His career average so far is a mere 7 points, while Taylor's is 13. Sure, I'd give Chandler the edge in potential, but if you compare Taylor's first three seasons to Chandler's, I'd name Taylor as the more productive one. In his rookie season, Taylor averaged 11 points per game in bench duty, while Chandler's career-high so far is only 9 points per game. What makes you so sure that Chandler won't be a Taylor-like player for the rest of his career?</div> Chandler is first rate talent. It's talent, not what he's done. He's potentially a much better player than Taylor. I'm not saying he's definitely gonna be a superstar, but he's still more talented than Taylor. Talent isn't production. I'd still never trade Chandler for Taylor, because of his upside, and we'd be getting ripped off terribly in that deal. And why compare Taylor's first 3 seasons with Tysons? Tyson never went to college, so he had to develop in the NBA, he wasn't physically built yet. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Griffin, Pike and our trade exception might've been enough to land Chandler...Paxson is obviously interested in saving cap room and gaining expiring contracts...Chandler leaving would open up minutes for Deng...however, I think that Taylor had to have been mentioned...</div> Even if Paxson is trying to open up caproom, He's not gonna trade Chandler for it when he already cleared up 16 million dollars. Chandler has been working hard all offseason, so he isnt gonna simply trade Chandler for money. Chandler may end up being our franchise player, so we arent gonna take Juwan Howard, Taylor, Griffin, and Piatowski for it.
whoa... Chandler is NOT first-rate talent... First-rate talent is Yao Ming, Tracy McGrady, etc.. Chandler is more athletic than he is talented. He has size and is a good defender - that's why he's an asset. It's unlikely Paxson will clear cap room only to take on Mo Taylor's big contract. It's possible that he wants to pick up a young player in return however, such as Boki and a couple draft picks along with Pike and maybe Griffin - but I don't see how that would benefit Paxson. I think he'll probably hold onto Chandler, hope he has a big year and either keep him or trade him while his value is higher. If one of the two will go, it will probably be Eddy Curry.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Obiecent:</div><div class="quote_post">It's talent, not what he's done. He's potentially a much better player than Taylor.</div>Is potential your synonym for talent? My definition of talent is the skill that a player has. For example, I think that Karl Malone is more talented than Chandler, but he might not have the potential that Chandler does. Taylor, right now, has more talent than Chandler IMO.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trip:</div><div class="quote_post">Is potential your synonym for talent? My definition of talent is the skill that a player has. For example, I think that Karl Malone is more talented than Chandler, but he might not have the potential that Chandler does. Taylor, right now, has more talent than Chandler IMO.</div> Talent is capability. He is capable to become 1st rate talent. He has not accomplished that yet. Production isn't the same as talent. Who is more capable of being first rate talent, Chandler or Taylor? Who is more capable to be an all-star?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting ObieCent:</div><div class="quote_post">Talent is capability. He is capable to become 1st rate talent. He has not accomplished that yet. Production isn't the same as talent. Who is more capable of being first rate talent, Chandler or Taylor? Who is more capable to be an all-star?</div> However, what you're meaning by talent right now is still going to come up to potential. In you words, you are implying that capability is the skill that one possesses to be a great player. I don't think that's wrong, but what it is is still potential. Talent is the current ability that a player has, but not the probability of them becoming able to use it. If I were to judge on who will have a better chance of making the All-Star Game next season, I'd still go with Taylor. Based on the past three years, it does seem hard to go against the odds.
Ok, i'm going to interject my opinion on the Taylor-Chandler little debate going on. As far as the definition of "talent" goes, i think i'd be leaning more toward what Trip has been saying. I think talent on the basketball court is being able to play at a high level night in and night out. But chandler has different talent also, he's talented in the sense that he has a great work ethic and will become a talent on the court. Right now he has potential to be a great talent on the court. Mo isn't going to be traded for Chandler because chandler has the potential and works to fulfill it. Meaning that he has a much greater chance than someone like Darius Miles to fulfill his potential. And Tyson's full potential is greater than Mo's. Also Mo is like 28 right now, and chandler is going to be 22 in october or something. That's quite and age difference. Mo is in his prime age, chandler isnt' even close. I'd say Chandler is capable of being or potentially a great talent. But chandler will never be traded for Mo taylor, and i will knock on wood on that one. I can only hope that wouldn't happent to the bulls.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trip:</div><div class="quote_post">However, what you're meaning by talent right now is still going to come up to potential. In you words, you are implying that capability is the skill that one possesses to be a great player. I don't think that's wrong, but what it is is still potential. Talent is the current ability that a player has, but not the probability of them becoming able to use it. If I were to judge on who will have a better chance of making the All-Star Game next season, I'd still go with Taylor. Based on the past three years, it does seem hard to go against the odds.</div> The phrase "a man of many talents" means "a man of many skills." A person with potential but without skills is not talented. Such players are sometime said to be "raw talents" (that is, they have physical abilities which could allow him to be great once they pick up more significant skills). As of now, I'd say that Mo Taylor is more talented on the offensive end than Chandler -- no question. I'm not sure if I'd say that Chandler is skilled in any way at this point in his career (I haven't been following his games closely enough), but I do think he has physical abilities which allow him to be effective now, and possibly great in the future if he does pick up the right skills.
