Hate to see this kid go.

I kind of hope that the Bulls do protect Fizer, if only so that they can get something in return for him.
Marcus Fizer scored 30 points, grabbed 20 rebounds and blocked a couple of shots in the loss
Expansion plan: The Bulls are hoping the expansion Charlotte Bobcats will take one of their bad contract players--Robinson, Williams or Antonio Davis. Expect the Bulls to throw in the maximum $3 million to make it appealing. The Bobcats are said to be leaning toward Chris Jefferies if they select a Bulls player, because he is young and athletic, with a small contract, and that is the type of player they are targeting. Jefferies' Fresno State teammate, Harvey's Melvin Ely, would love to be in Charlotte. He rarely plays for the Clippers
Andrew wrote:Should they still pursue sign-and-trade deals then, difficult as they may be?
fgrep15 wrote:You know you're inconsistent when you score 50 one day, then score 14 points on 5-17 shooting the next day
The Crawford Inconsistency line: (From March 19)
5 points
25 points
9 points
34 points
10 points
11 points
8 points
27 points
24 points
4 points
14 points
8 points
50 points
14 points
crawford4MIP4real wrote:right now, there are a handful of teams that have the cap to get crawford. the bulls have the right to match. the big question is how high is paxson willing to go? how much do you think crawford deserves??
Paxson will consider various sign-and-trade scenarios, but if none materialize and Crawford is offered more than $6 million, the Bulls may let him walk.
Andrew wrote:crawford4MIP4real wrote:right now, there are a handful of teams that have the cap to get crawford. the bulls have the right to match. the big question is how high is paxson willing to go? how much do you think crawford deserves??
This article suggests $6 million might be the limit before the Bulls let him walk.Paxson will consider various sign-and-trade scenarios, but if none materialize and Crawford is offered more than $6 million, the Bulls may let him walk.
And even though what's done is done, here's an article on what could have been. Even though I agree that a little patience wouldn't have gone astray, I don't think Paxson should have too much patience with the current talent pool. It's a matter of deciding when to stop waiting for Curry to come to play every night, and seeing whether Chandler can remain healthy from now on - a difficult situation where Pax cannot afford to wait too long, yet cannot afford to be too hasty either.
fgrep15 wrote:Actually I'm a Crawford fan too so im not bitter, he just dissapoints me
crawford4MIP4real wrote:andrew- how much do YOU think crawford deserves? how long do you think paxson should wait on this current pool of talent? what do you think the bulls offseason plan should be?
Andrew wrote: I would say $6-8 million. Based on other players and their contracts, I wouldn't go higher than that.
Andrew wrote: Depending on how Crawford pans out (assuming the Bulls will keep him), he should have a contract that still allows him to be traded if the situation won't work out. Take Allan Houston for example. It's almost impossible for the Knicks to move him, and plenty of deals that they might be interested in aren't even worth discussing because they'd never work out under the cap.
Andrew wrote: So I don't think the Bulls should overpay Crawford with some obscene amount of money. At the same time, they have to wave enough green for him to remain interested.
Andrew wrote: If no one's interested and Crawford wants to remain in Chicago, I say give him one more year as well. But by all means, they should explore trade possibilities this offseason.
Andrew wrote: I'd like Pax to wait at least one more season when it comes to Curry and Chandler. Both need a full year of consistent minutes and a fair opportunity to fulfil their potential. But if Curry isn't going to get motivated from Day 1 and Chandler's health is a problem, then it's time to scrap the problem. If it's truly a lost cause, next year's trade deadline at the latest. But I think one more year should suffice.
Andrew wrote:Hinrich should be kept out of trade talk. I suppose if the Wolves were foolish enough to offer KG, perhaps they should reconsider. But that isn't at all likely, so I feel the Bulls should hold onto Hinrich.
crawford4MIP4real wrote:hehe.. so are you saying that the bulls should stick with the current cast and not pursue trades? if not, then who do you think the bulls should target? what about free agent signings and draft picks? what do you think the bulls should do with those?
crawford4MIP4real wrote:i don't think a player of crawford's stature would come any close to the ridiculous salary houston has. it's not the amount of salary that concerns me, it's the CBA- if the bulls were to sign and trade him, the bulls cannot add multiple players to the deal... they could only trade crawford, but they would be allowed to receive multiple players back in the return.
crawford4MIP4real wrote:i'm not sure what you mean here. crawford's a restricted agent. in all likelihood paxson will let other teams throw offers at him/see what the market is on him and then determine if he will match or not.
crawford4MIP4real wrote:do you mean one more year as in giving him a qualifying offer making him an unrestricted agent heading into the next offseason a la olowokandi? if this is what you're implying, i think it would be a terrible idea to put the team and crawford in that situation. pax said in the beginning of the year that instead of giving him a contract extension, crawford had to prove himself first then he would give him the nice contract. he can't go ahead and say that again for next year.
crawford4MIP4real wrote:perhaps i'm the only one crazy enough to consider trading hinrich. in fact i don't see how anyone is untradeable on a 59 loss team. i would trade hinrich in a hearbeat if a bona stud SF came back in return. trading hinrich would land a much better player then trading crawford would
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests