Crawford Drops 50 on Raptors

http://www.nba.com/games/20040411/CHITOR/boxscore.html

Hate to see this kid go.

Damn, and baby shaq had 25 and 12.

I think Chi-town will get a good player for crawford.

My team has been beating by the Bulls four times this season and I still can't figure out why they keep on losing (The Bulls, that is). They have a deadly back court and a powerful front line, key ingredients for success, now with the impending departure of Jamal Crawford (who Isiah Thomas loves and is willing to recruit), it doesn't look like they want to be heading in the right direction. You guys need to keep this guy.

seems like vince carter is seething because davis said he isnt a leader. antonio also said vince doesnt believe in weights and stuff, but he should so that he's more durable for toronto. vince even threw the ball at davis's back. tsk, tsk, tsk. given toronto and vince's past performance i tend to agree with davis.

Seems every time I start leaning towards saying "Trade Crawford", he goes out gives the Bulls an incredible performance. Thinking back to the topic we had a while ago, "Who will score 50 this season?", I don't think Crawford was mentioned once. I certainly wouldn't have picked it.

I agree with RuffRyder. Even if Chicago doesn't hold on to Crawford, they should be able to get a good player in return.

Nice stat line for Curry, but you know what I'm going to say. It would be nice if those skills were utilised much earlier in the season, and much more frequently.

50 points from a Bulls player hasnt been seen by fans of Chi-town since MJ did it against Washington back in 1997....

Crawford scored 14 against the Magic, but another Bull who is also rumoured to be leaving town had a fine game. Marcus Fizer scored 30 points, grabbed 20 rebounds and blocked a couple of shots in the loss.

Boxscores

I predict: that if bulls don't protect Marcus Fizer, Charlotte will pick him up and he'll develop into the next Charles Barkley. it's just the Bulls' luck.

I kind of hope that the Bulls do protect Fizer, if only so that they can get something in return for him.

what a great game for crawford... i'm happy for him. that performance puts in him some elite company in bulls history

I kind of hope that the Bulls do protect Fizer, if only so that they can get something in return for him.

fizer & jefferies are being showcased as they will be used as trade bait this offseason.

Marcus Fizer scored 30 points, grabbed 20 rebounds and blocked a couple of shots in the loss

really? i couldn't stand to watch the game any longer after the 1st half

btw- a sign and trade crawford deal would be a difficult one because of his restricted free agent status & the cba

Should they still pursue sign-and-trade deals then, difficult as they may be?

Bulls not inclined to reach for stars

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

Should they still pursue sign-and-trade deals then, difficult as they may be?

i would hope that paxson keeps this option open.

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??

in recent offseason FA signing frenzies, there is always at least one team that will overpay a player in attempts to land him. i think crawford's recent 50pter just increased that number or at the least perked the interest from those teams with the available cap

i don't think paxson would let 2 top 10 picks walk for nothing

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

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

hehe i detect a little bitterness coming from a fan of that team that JC recently dropped the half hondo on...

true-crawford is inconsistent as they come.

however, the teams that will be chasing him will consider how he will fit in their own system, playing his natural position with real nba talent...

i just wanted to put it out here before the critics jump all over him that crawford has been forced to be the #1 option on offense at a position that isn't his natural one, on a team with no consistent lost post presence.

given these obstacles, i think crawford's done a respectable job in his 1st year as a full time starter, albeit at a position not his natural one. if anything, he has shown he's versatile enough to handle some minutes at SG on whatever team he will be on next year

Actually I'm a Crawford fan too so im not bitter, he just dissapoints me

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.

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.

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?

i say if the lottery balls bounce the bulls way, putting them in position to draft okafor, you can bank on one of those twin.. err i mean 2 tall guys who jumped from high school to pros will be put in the open market to land a SF. say something involving tyson for rashard lewis

Actually I'm a Crawford fan too so im not bitter, he just dissapoints me

lol what hasn't been disappointing about the bulls this year? maybe the year frodo had and the 50 and 42 spot by crawford

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?

I would say $6-8 million. Based on other players and their contracts, I wouldn't go higher than that. 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.

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. So I'll say $6-8 million if they want to keep him. If they're definitely going to sign-and-trade, they could heap a little more on that amount. But if he's going to remain a Bull, I say try to keep him for a "cheap" $6-8 mil.

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.

In the mean time, they should probably entertain offers for Crawford as his stock has surely risen and a sign-and-trade is preferable to letting a player walk. 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.

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.

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?

I would say $6-8 million. Based on other players and their contracts, I wouldn't go higher than that.

i'm somewhat in agreement. i would give crawford the full MLE, something similar to the contract maggette got last year.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

i agree . though i am more inclined to just give up on one then both

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.

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.

as i see it, if they put crawford back at his natural position- PG, combine his natural talent and athleticisim with skiles' coaching, he would become twice the player hinrich could ever be

but that's just me...

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?

I think they should stick with some players. I think Hinrich, Curry and Chandler should definitely be kept. As I said in my previous post I believe Curry and Chandler should be given one final year before a decision is made on whether they should remain Bulls, and I believe Hinrich has showed enough promise since becoming a starter and earning consistent minutes for him to stick around.

If Pax has any hopes of going after Kobe this offseason, he should forget it. It's not worth clearing the cap space to go after a player who hasn't shown any interest in coming to town. But I doubt Pax plans to go after Kobe, so there's really no need to worry about that. I don't actually have a list of upcoming free agents that the Bulls should pursue, but I'm thinking players with a few years experience who aren't still projects and could be quality role players. I'd have to research the upcoming free agent crop to throw some names out there.

I haven't really been keeping up with the potential draftees. Assuming the Bulls get a top three pick - I believe they can't pick any lower than sixth if they don't get top three, since the Bobcats will be picking fourth - is there anyone worth picking, especially if they get the third pick? The only names I've heard - Okafor and Howard - seem to be destined to go one and two.

If it's worthwhile picking up someone with a lottery pick, I suppose it wouldn't hurt. Otherwise, perhaps it might get that small forward as part of a trade.

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.

Good point. I suppose a contract worth $6-8 million would satisfy most sign and trade scenarios we could conjure up.

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.

My bad. I suppose I should say the Bulls shouldn't be too stingy if they need to go slightly over $6-8 million to match any offers. Depending on the rest of their rosters and any other transactions they can make, going as high as $9 million might not be such a bad idea when it comes to matching offers.

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.

I meant re-signing him to a shorter deal (say, 2-4 years) and trading him if he's not working out down the road. But you're right, a similar situation to Olowokandi last year would be a terrible idea.

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

I'm inclined to agree, if an offer the Bulls cannot refuse came along then shipping Hinrich should definitely be an option. And you're right, none of the current Bulls could or should be declared completely untradeable. I'm just greedy; I don't want the Bulls to be too hasty giving up on players just because a so-so deal comes along.

skiles said that either curry or crawford or both will be gone next year....... nevertheless it'll be an interesting offseason.

skiles said that either curry or crawford or both will be gone next year....... nevertheless it'll be an interesting offseason.

Where did you hear this?

david albridge