The Curry question

By Steve Kerr, Yahoo! Sports
November 30, 2005

The late-summer trade of Eddy Curry from the Chicago Bulls to the New York Knicks figured to leave an indelible mark on each franchise for years to come.

The Bulls were reluctant to move the budding low-post force, but they were backed into a corner due to Curry's questionable heart condition and refusal to take a DNA test to provide insight on his long-term health. The Knicks, meanwhile, were desperate to get their hands on the talented Curry, who figured to be the team's starting center for the next 10 years, health permitting. When New York's doctors cleared Curry, Knicks president Isiah Thomas jumped in and made the trade.

A month into the season, the Bulls have made a point of moving forward without Curry, while the Knicks have been busy trying to incorporate the big man into their offense with a host of other newcomers.

Chicago began the season at 3-5 but has since won four games in a row – the first three on the road. The Bulls are looking more and more like the tough, defensive-minded team that made the playoffs last season, although they miss Curry's inside presence and are entirely too dependent on their perimeter game for scoring. That said, Scott Skiles' team defends like crazy, plays as hard as any team in the league and executes extremely well down the stretch.

When general manager John Paxson hired Skiles two years ago, he told me how impressed he was by Skiles' basketball mind. Watching this Bulls team, I can see why. Chicago runs some innovative sets that free up Ben Gordon and Kirk Hinrich for open jumpers, and the Bulls run them so well that they're tough to defend.

Still, without Curry, one has to wonder if the lack of an inside game will catch up to Chicago. Gordon and Hinrich are the team's two leading scorers, and both shoot under 41 percent from the field. As a team, the Bulls shoot 42.8 percent, but they win games by playing rugged defense, keeping their opponents' field-goal percentage way down and executing flawlessly late in games.

But over time, Chicago will have to find a replacement for Curry who can come in and score down low. The Bulls will have some salary-cap room next summer, at which point Paxson can address the team's inside shortcomings. In the meantime, Chicago will have to continue to do what it's doing: outhustle and outplay its opponents.

For the Knicks, Curry has been solid, averaging 12.6 points and 6.5 boards in about 24 minutes a game. His conditioning has been poor because of his summer layoff while he sorted out his health issues, and he's currently listed as day-to-day with a strained left calf, which has forced him to miss the last three games.

But the big question for New York is whether or not Curry is even the franchise's center of the future.

Rookie Channing Frye has played exceptionally well and has even better numbers than Curry. Frye, who's averaging 13.7 points and 5.9 rebounds a game, has scored 20 plus points four times this season. For a rookie to impress Larry Brown – much less actually play for him – says a lot about Frye's development.

Frye is different from Curry. He's more of a perimeter shooter, but he's also big and strong enough to be a shot blocker and defender for the Knicks for a long time. Perhaps the two can play together down the road, but as of right now, it appears that the Knicks have two pretty good centers. And that's two more than most teams have.


Steve Kerr is Yahoo! Sports' NBA analyst

And to think this whole time I thought Frye was playing PF for our beloved Knicks?

yea... only time Frye has played C is with those small 3 guard line ups and thats been rare.

Good to see Kerr give Curry props and not spew some crap about what a disaster its been. This TEAM is in win now mode, but the Curry aquisition was made both for now and the future, I would say the future being paramount