[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

I bet the Bulls wish they had Eddy Curry back
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 4 of 4 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
11/25/2007  8:10 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by Anji:

The player I would make a serious run at is Memphis Grizzlies big man Pau Gasol, a player the Bulls were interested in last season. The Grizzlies aren't shopping him right now, but they probably can be persuaded to make a deal because the team is losing, fans aren't filling the FedEx Forum and Gasol is owed a lot of money in the next four years.

I still wouldn't trade Deng, the player the Grizzlies wanted last season, but I'd make it clear that anyone else -- including Hinrich and Gordon -- could be had in the right deal.

If the Grizzlies don't bite, I'd turn my attention to Indiana Pacers forward Jermaine O'Neal. The Pacers might not want to make a major deal with a Central Division rival, but I'm sure they'd pull the trigger if the Bulls made an offer they couldn't refuse.

If neither of those scenarios worked out, I'd contact the struggling New York Knicks about reacquiring Eddy Curry.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/jackson/665865,CST-SPT-jax25.article
Those are all attempted quick fixes. They have a lot of good, 2 way young players. If they continue to struggle like this, they should just look to draft a good big man. Oh and get a new GM. (Also, I think any Gasol trade would have to involve Deng.)

Ok, sure Isiah made poor decisions that have harmed the team. I'm not saying he didn't, but there were plenty of experts that thought adding Eddy at the time, and a few other pieces could have turned the team into a winner, especially after they hired Larry, from what I recall. In the end the idea was that a strong post player is and has always been hard to come by, especially someone with his size. As some have suggested here, Paxton may have never really wanted to lose Eddy but given the circumstances he was presented with he had to based on where he was coming from.

Eddy helped them reach the playoffs that season, let's not forget. The Bulls had better pieces to compliment his game, still underdeveloped, than we do now, so that's perhaps the big problem with Isiah since that move in that he hasn't added pieces that fit with Curry. Larry, I think was part of the way to do it with his rep as a defensive minded coach, but clearly the situation that panned out was a MAJOR setback to the team's future, whoever one thinks is most at fault. Curry has also not done all we would like him to do, and that makes him a lightning rod for criticism. If we had Ty Thomas some of y'all would be on the same soap box ranting about how we missed out on Aldridge, Roy, etc.

Again, hindsight is 20/20 and while there were those who had reservations about the Curry trade, it wasn't a consensus, by any means. Was it more than Isiah should have given up? Sure, but you almost always have to give to get, Eddy was very young still, and Isiah/the Knicks were more desperate so it showed. Whether we would be better off is not so clear either, and that's a significant problem with the "it was an awful deal" argument that keeps getting used, since just because Paxton "messed up" with the picks doesn't mean no one else would, even Isiah.

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-25-2007 8:13 PM]

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-25-2007 8:14 PM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
AUTOADVERT
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
11/25/2007  8:12 PM
in order to make a Zach/Curry duo work, u need to bring in a shotblocking bigman to come off the bench along w/a stud perimeter scorer who draws doubleteams & can dish off penetration... we don't have the assets to do it w/o dealing Curry, D Lee & likely a couple 1st round picks, which means there's really no realistic way to make a Curry/Zach duo net us any real positive results.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
11/25/2007  8:14 PM
Posted by PresIke:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by Anji:

The player I would make a serious run at is Memphis Grizzlies big man Pau Gasol, a player the Bulls were interested in last season. The Grizzlies aren't shopping him right now, but they probably can be persuaded to make a deal because the team is losing, fans aren't filling the FedEx Forum and Gasol is owed a lot of money in the next four years.

I still wouldn't trade Deng, the player the Grizzlies wanted last season, but I'd make it clear that anyone else -- including Hinrich and Gordon -- could be had in the right deal.

If the Grizzlies don't bite, I'd turn my attention to Indiana Pacers forward Jermaine O'Neal. The Pacers might not want to make a major deal with a Central Division rival, but I'm sure they'd pull the trigger if the Bulls made an offer they couldn't refuse.

If neither of those scenarios worked out, I'd contact the struggling New York Knicks about reacquiring Eddy Curry.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/jackson/665865,CST-SPT-jax25.article
Those are all attempted quick fixes. They have a lot of good, 2 way young players. If they continue to struggle like this, they should just look to draft a good big man. Oh and get a new GM. (Also, I think any Gasol trade would have to involve Deng.)

Ok, sure Isiah made poor decisions that have harmed the team. I'm not saying he didn't, but there were plenty of experts that thought adding Eddy at the time, and a few other pieces could have turned the team into a winner, especially after they hired Larry, from what I recall. In the end the idea was that a strong post player is and has always been hard to come by, especially someone with his size. As some have suggested here, Paxton may have never really wanted to lose Eddy but given the circumstances he was presented with he had to based on where he was coming from.

Eddy helped them reach the playoffs that season, let's not forget. The Bulls had better pieces to compliment his game, still underdeveloped, than we do now, so that's perhaps the big problem with Isiah since that move in that he hasn't added pieces that fit with Curry. Larry, I think was part of the way to do it with his rep as a defensive minded coach, but clearly the situation that panned out was a MAJOR setback to the team's future, whoever one thinks is most at fault. Curry has also not done all we would like him to do, and that makes him a lightning rod for criticism. If we had Ty Thomas some of y'all would be on the same soap box ranting about how we missed out on Aldridge, Roy, etc.

Again, hindsight is 20/20 and while there were those who had reservations about the Curry trade, it wasn't a certainty that this was the case. Was it more than Isiah should have given up? Sure, but you almost always have to give to get, Eddy was very young still, and Isiah/the Knicks were more desperate so it showed. Whether we would be better off is not so clear either, and that's a significant problem with the "it was an awful deal" argument that keeps getting used, since just because Paxton "messed up" with the picks doesn't mean no one else would, even Isiah.

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-25-2007 8:13 PM]

i thought the Curry trade was a good move because it addressed a huge need on this team at the time, which was low post scoring... it's the fact that Isiah didn't have a plan to get the other pieces this team needed to really take advantage of Curry's skillset that bugs the crap outta me.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/25/2007  8:40 PM
It's pretty clear that even in their current times of desperation, Bulls' fans actually DON'T want Eddy back
http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=733079
Bulls fans: If you could undo one recent decision, which would it be:
Letting Ty Chandler go 24%
The Eddy Curry trade 8%
Trading Aldridge for Ty Thomas 37%
Signing Ben Wallace 18%
Other 10%
Total Votes : 37
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
11/25/2007  9:05 PM
Posted by TMS:

in order to make a Zach/Curry duo work, u need to bring in a shotblocking bigman to come off the bench along w/a stud perimeter scorer who draws doubleteams & can dish off penetration... we don't have the assets to do it w/o dealing Curry, D Lee & likely a couple 1st round picks, which means there's really no realistic way to make a Curry/Zach duo net us any real positive results.

There's always something that can be done. We have a young stud at SF on tap in Chandler IMO. Getting a SG isn't necessarily going to be that hard to find. I don't even think we need anything special to give in a trade to get one. Just having Chan, Balk and Jared out there will add some shotblocking. Not that we couldn't use a shotblocker, but in lieu of getting one, we'd get a bit of shotblocking help from those guys.

I wouldn't trade any of our key players just to find a SG or Shotblocker. It's not necessary.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
11/25/2007  9:10 PM
Posted by nixluva:
Posted by TMS:

in order to make a Zach/Curry duo work, u need to bring in a shotblocking bigman to come off the bench along w/a stud perimeter scorer who draws doubleteams & can dish off penetration... we don't have the assets to do it w/o dealing Curry, D Lee & likely a couple 1st round picks, which means there's really no realistic way to make a Curry/Zach duo net us any real positive results.

There's always something that can be done. We have a young stud at SF on tap in Chandler IMO. Getting a SG isn't necessarily going to be that hard to find. I don't even think we need anything special to give in a trade to get one. Just having Chan, Balk and Jared out there will add some shotblocking. Not that we couldn't use a shotblocker, but in lieu of getting one, we'd get a bit of shotblocking help from those guys.

I wouldn't trade any of our key players just to find a SG or Shotblocker. It's not necessary.

so basically u feel that our roster is pretty much set w/all the tools we need to succeed & all we need to do is play Wilson Chandler, Balkman & Jared more minutes alongside Eddy & Zach? so who gets put on the bench so u can run those 3 SF's on the floor more during games while still focusing the offense through Zach & Eddy? Marbury? Jamal? D Lee? Q? what low post defenders do we have on this team other than Malik? are you also planning on running him out there for 20 mpg & expecting positive results?
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
martin
Posts: 81052
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
11/25/2007  9:19 PM
Posted by nixluva:

I think that Zach and Curry will eventually be a dynamite duo. We're not seeing the best of either guy with the guards we have right now. I like what we have in Zach, Curry, Lee, Balk, Jared and from what i've seen Chandler. They're not our problem and I think we're far superior to Chi in those areas. The guards tho is the only thing that holds us back IMO. We got good value in both deals for Curry and Zach and you can win with those guys if you have good guards that complement them.

Zach and Curry can be a dynamite duo at one end of the court, but not both. It will get you into the playoffs but not much else. Is that your standard for liking 2 frontcourt starting dudes on the team?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
11/25/2007  9:28 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by PresIke:

I like Zach, but it is worth wondering if we can really be successful with a PF/C lineup that doesn't defend well or block shots. I think Zach has shown he can be a better help defender, and his rebounding helps, but those other areas are a problem. One wonders if we had guards who were strong defensively if we could survive more with a Zach-Eddy frontcourt.

let's put it this way, eddy is shooting 60% from the field from down low.

instead of going after jeffries with the MLE in 2006, what if we signed anthony parker? or we used the MLE on mo pete this summer?
instead of going after zach, let's say we traded for jrich...and then signed someone like brian skinner or made a deal for kenny thomas...

this team would've been so much better...and those moves are totally realistic. but no, we have to go trade for zach b/c oh my gosh, he's a 20/10 player.


yea. I agree, the thing with eddy, is that he is an efficient offensive player, and dominant once he catches the ball 10 feet and in... The Knicks IMO could have used guys like Mo pete(who also defends) and hell even a kenny thomas at PF would have made sense. These guys would have easily understood their roles, and have a history of fufilling such roles...
The zach randolph deal was another one of Isiahs star phuchs!( as nalod would put it). He could sell the 20/10 bs, but a lot of fans noticed that zach stats didn't translate to wins in portland and wondered how that would change here..

The question for me is what would the Knicks have gotten out of Francis/Frye that would have been better than Randolph? No one was taking Francis, so who could we have gotten for Frye? Isiah missed the boat at the beginning of Frye's first year. He definitely was too tangled and distracted with LB but he was at all the home games peeking out of the tunnel or whatever. He should have noticed Frye and traded him when his value was high and/or listened to LB about what he was suggesting and seeing in practice.

Now, you still can get high value for Randolph in a trade. Low post, scoring PF's are still a minimum in this league, but the hard part is that Isiah needs to pump his value while playing him next to Curry. Difficult.

francis was a huge mistake. The knicks would have been better off, cutting francis and packaging frye with someone like nate or morris and seeing what you could get for that.... Biendrins? wilcox? who knows..
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
11/25/2007  9:58 PM
Posted by tkf:
The knicks would have been better off, cutting francis and packaging frye with someone like nate or morris and seeing what you could get for that.... Biendrins? wilcox? who knows..

exactly... we would still have had some options to pursue (no way we coulda got Biedrins or Wilcox for just Frye & Nate tho, u'd have had to throw in D Lee)... u need to address the team balance, not go after guys because they're talented w/o any regard to how they fit w/the rest of the team you already have in place or how it effects our longterm flexibility to make other deals.

Brad Miller, Sam Dalembert, Andris Biedrins... these are guys that the Knicks need to be looking to acquire at this point... guys that can play off the ball & still be productive & fill a need while not being the focal point of an offense... we already have a low post scoring option that we we're trying to run the offense through in Curry... Zach really doesn't add anything to this team that we didn't already have... we can also try trading Curry to get 1 of those guys i mentioned too... i'd be all for that also.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
newyorknewyork
Posts: 30380
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
11/25/2007  10:48 PM
Aldridge would have been the better choice over Ty Thomas in Chi because with players like Ben Wallace or even if they kept Tyson Chandler, Aldridge brought something that Ty Thomas didn't which was a big man that can put the ball in the basket.

You have to believe that even if Aldridge was soft that Ben Wallace and all the scrapy players that they have on that team would be able to cover for him while he filled the need for an offensive big man.

Me personally I think we would have drafted either Ty Thomas, Aldridge or Rudy Gay. I doubt it would have been Roy since I don't see Isiah using his #2 pick as a backup to Crawford or putting Crawford on the bench since he traded for him and gave him that 7yr contract to be his stud SG. I could picture him going after Aldridge and putting him next to Frye to have 2 skilled 6'11 big men. Or Gay since we all know he loves atheltic wing players.
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
11/25/2007  10:54 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:

It's pretty clear that even in their current times of desperation, Bulls' fans actually DON'T want Eddy back
http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=733079
Bulls fans: If you could undo one recent decision, which would it be:
Letting Ty Chandler go 24%
The Eddy Curry trade 8%
Trading Aldridge for Ty Thomas 37%
Signing Ben Wallace 18%
Other 10%
Total Votes : 37

That's faulty logic, man, and also a sample of 37 fans on RealGM is not necessarily an indication of what most fans think. If we surveyed this site versus the ex-NY Times site we would probably get differing views based on readership, although there is an indication that there are more fans here that have wanted to see this current team win, than some might have suspected based on who talks the most and loudest versus data martin and Andrew have shared.

Anyway, that poll doesn't mean they don't want him back, that means it isn't the move they as fans regret the team did most. The question of who would you rather have now, Eddy or Noah and Thomas might be better, but at the same time it isn't about the fans' view on past moves, it's about the Bulls needs as a team. You think that the Bulls would honestly not want him on their team right now?

Problem is even the Curry trade has another component missing in that we got Antonio Davis who turned into Jalen Rose and Renaldo Balkman. Would Isiah have been able to move Tim Thomas instead? Perhaps, but Davis' record at T-Dot had to play some part in the deal, where as Tim Thomas might have whined and ruined the deal. Point is Isiah traded a piece of the deal for a lower pick who may turn out to be as good, or better than the two drafted in the lottery. We haven't won as a result, which I can't argue against, but the Bulls overall roster is and was simply better. They were already a winning playoff team when they made the deal and we were not, and have other holes that have not been addressed. I know you loathe Curry as much as I think you loathe Bush, but would you consider the idea that Eddy with a better mesh of players might be worth keeping?

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-25-2007 10:55 PM]

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-25-2007 10:55 PM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/26/2007  7:22 AM
So they want him back but it's not even among the top FIVE decisions of the past 1 1/2 years they'd like to undo? I suppose that's possible but it suggests any desire they do have to have him back is pretty weak. (Actually, some posters even said the Curry trade was the only one of the poll options that they didn't regret.) "Other" even got more votes than the Curry trade!

And you really think there's a difference in the voting between the 41 fans on realgm and fans who don't post on realgm--WHY? In other words, what factors distinguish the two (posters and non-posters) that would lead you to predict a difference in attitudes toward these recent decisions?

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 11-26-2007 07:37 AM]
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/26/2007  7:41 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:

So they want him back but it's not even among the top FIVE decisions of the past 1 1/2 years they'd like to undo? I suppose that's possible but it suggests any desire they do have to have him back is pretty weak. (Actually, some posters even said the Curry trade was the only one of the poll options that they didn't regret.) "Other" even got more votes than the Curry trade!

And you really think there's a difference in the voting between the 41 fans on realgm and fans who don't post on realgm--WHY? In other words, what factors distinguish the two (posters and non-posters) that would lead you to predict a difference in attitudes toward these recent decisions?

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 11-26-2007 07:37 AM]
Also, you can logically deduce that these voters don't regret the Curry trade. If they did, they'd have voted to undo the Curry trade rather than to undo one follow-up to the Curry trade (which couldn't have happened without the trade): the Aldridge/Ty Thomas swap.
TheGame
Posts: 26658
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
11/26/2007  9:23 AM
I agree with BRIGGS. Curry is a unique talent. He is also improving on defense and rebounds. His numbers are not much different, but I have seen him fight for rebounds and get key rebounds more this year than any other year. Having a guy who cannot be guarded one-on-one is the key for any above-average team. Our problem is that we don't have the perimeter defense or shooting to maximize Curry's potential. We need to make upgrades at the 1, 2, and 3 spot.
Trust the Process
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
11/26/2007  11:04 AM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by tkf:
The knicks would have been better off, cutting francis and packaging frye with someone like nate or morris and seeing what you could get for that.... Biendrins? wilcox? who knows..

exactly... we would still have had some options to pursue (no way we coulda got Biedrins or Wilcox for just Frye & Nate tho, u'd have had to throw in D Lee)... u need to address the team balance, not go after guys because they're talented w/o any regard to how they fit w/the rest of the team you already have in place or how it effects our longterm flexibility to make other deals.

Brad Miller, Sam Dalembert, Andris Biedrins... these are guys that the Knicks need to be looking to acquire at this point... guys that can play off the ball & still be productive & fill a need while not being the focal point of an offense... we already have a low post scoring option that we we're trying to run the offense through in Curry... Zach really doesn't add anything to this team that we didn't already have... we can also try trading Curry to get 1 of those guys i mentioned too... i'd be all for that also.

I agree, but I was using frye and nate as a starting point, or frye and morris. The key as you said, is putting good pieces, that fit. Getting zach was stupid, and I see it more even now. A guy like binedrins would have been ideal, he would rebound, block shots, and would not be looking to take shots, unless they were in the framework of the offense. right now zach is just jacking up shots, and other than his rebounding(which wasn't a weakness of this team anyway) he does nothing else...

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
NYKBocker
Posts: 38599
Alba Posts: 474
Joined: 1/14/2003
Member: #377
USA
11/26/2007  11:11 AM
Knicks need a lights out shooter at the 2. We need to get Wally here and trade either Crawford or Dinglebury to make it work. Worry about defense later since you are not getting it from Curry or ZBo anyways, might as well overdose on halfcourt offense and have Wally launch 3s to open up Curry and ZBo underneath.

Also, watching ZBo and Curry together, I actually this can work because ZBo likes to work on the high post and Curry can just plant himself down low.
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
11/26/2007  11:18 AM
I think you choose Curry or Randolph. Randolph does one other thing really well (rebound). Curry is bigger and has the potential to do much better. I think he has more trade value.

But then again,I still wish we had a big man coach in here. I'm not talking about an Aguirre who works on guys post moves but can't teach a lick of defense.
NYKBocker
Posts: 38599
Alba Posts: 474
Joined: 1/14/2003
Member: #377
USA
11/26/2007  11:22 AM
Posted by VDesai:

I think you choose Curry or Randolph. Randolph does one other thing really well (rebound). Curry is bigger and has the potential to do much better. I think he has more trade value.

But then again,I still wish we had a big man coach in here. I'm not talking about an Aguirre who works on guys post moves but can't teach a lick of defense.

The first move in getting a big man coach here is by firing Popcorn man. Then hire JVG as HC with Action Jackson as asst. Hire Greg Anthony as GM and then hire Patrick as one of the asst coaches next year when his contract is up in ORL. Keep Herb and fire everyone else from Zeke's club.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
11/26/2007  4:07 PM
Posted by NYKBocker:

Knicks need a lights out shooter at the 2. We need to get Wally here and trade either Crawford or Dinglebury to make it work. Worry about defense later since you are not getting it from Curry or ZBo anyways, might as well overdose on halfcourt offense and have Wally launch 3s to open up Curry and ZBo underneath.

Also, watching ZBo and Curry together, I actually this can work because ZBo likes to work on the high post and Curry can just plant himself down low.

everytime Curry plants himself down low & Zach gets the ball, he ends up committing either a 3 second or offensive foul... it just will not work IMO... what is the last NBA team that had any longterm success with 2 low post no defense playing scorers that needed to dominate the ball? i can't think of any.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Page 4 of 4 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4 
« Reply To Topic
I bet the Bulls wish they had Eddy Curry back
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy