NBA Free Agency/Offseason

[Soul]

I think Ben Wallace is overrated. This signing has to be followed with a Tyson Chandler departure, otherwise we have three forwards who can post awesome lines like this. 5 points, 12 rebounds, 1 assist, 3 blocks. If we rely too much on perimeter scoring we could be in trouble. The only guy who really gets to the rack is Gordon. I am not nearly as excited about this signing as the rest of you. I think we are going to regret this signing in two or three years when this team is supposed to be really hitting his stride. And if we knew we had this move in our pocket, why take Thomas instead of Brandon Roy?

 

Yes, it will be terrible to lose all the scoring we were getting from Chandler.

 

I never said it would be terrible to lose Chandler. In fact, I think its necessary in light of this signing. I am saying I think we overpaid for him. I just want to know where the scoring around the rim is going to come from. Purely perimeter teams rarely go far in the playoffs.

 

Well yeah, hence my comment. Bulls aren't going to keep Wallace and Chandler. They're going to take the big upgrade in Wallace and use Tyson to grab a different type of player. Although, I might like to see Chandler with Big Ben as a mentor for a season.

 

As for Wallace's age, he's 32. That gives him roughly 3-4 years of solid play left. Pretty much perfect, and it matches what we signed him for.

 

This is akin to the Dennis Rodman signing in the mid '90s. Except without the attitude problems. Wallace will dominate the middle. We will have plenty of scoring from elsewhere (already do IMO---I didn't see a "scoring deficiency" from the Bulls last year at all, and we weren't getting any points from Chandler that's for sure). Deal Chandler and we'll have plenty of flexibility for the future. Plus we've got a top 5 pick in next year's draft, even if we make the finals.

 

This is brilliant.

Edited July 4, 2006 by Soul

[soccer10k]

It's not that Wallace isn't a great post player, it's that he's just awful on the offensive end. It's pretty much 4 v 5 as long as you don't leave him completely alone near the basket.

Don't forget his awesome free throw shooting.

Yeah, and his rebounding and defense too.

 

Obviously the Bulls didn't sign him for the hope that he would put up 20-25 ppg. I'm just pointing out that the guy has a couple big time weaknesses.

[1908]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overrall value than say, Ilgauskas.

[Soul]

It's not that Wallace isn't a great post player, it's that he's just awful on the offensive end. It's pretty much 4 v 5 as long as you don't leave him completely alone near the basket.

Don't forget his awesome free throw shooting.

Yeah, and his rebounding and defense too.

 

Obviously the Bulls didn't sign him for the hope that he would put up 20-25 ppg. I'm just pointing out that the guy has a couple big time weaknesses.

 

*shrugs*

 

Worked pretty good for the Pistons on that Championship run. I didn't see anyone complaining about Ben's scoring back then.

[soccer10k]

It's not that Wallace isn't a great post player, it's that he's just awful on the offensive end. It's pretty much 4 v 5 as long as you don't leave him completely alone near the basket.

Don't forget his awesome free throw shooting.

Yeah, and his rebounding and defense too.

 

Obviously the Bulls didn't sign him for the hope that he would put up 20-25 ppg. I'm just pointing out that the guy has a couple big time weaknesses.

 

*shrugs*

 

Worked pretty good for the Pistons on that Championship run. I didn't see anyone complaining about Ben's scoring back then.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a good sign for the Bulls. I think it will definately help the Bulls. But I'm not sure it's going to put them over the top and I don't think it's as big of a move as some people might think. But like I said, it will help the Bulls.

[Andy]

Fact is, Bulls were a 7 seed in the East and nearly took down the eventual champs with Chandler and Sweets as their main big men. Now, they have Wallace (which weakens Detroit as well) and even if he has weaknesses, he is ten times the player Chandler is. Then when you factor in the possibility of getting PJ for Chandler, you have a frontcourt of Nocioni/Deng/Wallace/PJ/Sweets/Allen, whichever 3 you want to throw out there. It lowers the PT for a guy (Sweets) who is much better when played in quick spurts, gives Noc, Allen and Deng a guy in the middle who can attract some attention and open their shooting up more, and he improves the defense in a huge way. This won't singlehandedly put the Bulls as the East favorites, but it goes a much longer way than you'd normally expect due simply to the complete ineptitude of the Bulls' 4 and 5 in many games last year.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overall value than say, Ilgauskas.

 

I'd say that's highly debatable.

[Sweep The Leg Johnny]

 

Obviously the Bulls didn't sign him for the hope that he would put up 20-25 ppg. I'm just pointing out that the guy has a couple big time weaknesses.

 

Um, what big man doesn't have holes in their game? Very talented Big Men are a rarity, then trying to find one with an offensive and defensive game is almost near impossible. Big Ben is a game changer on the defensive end, and that addresses a huge need for the Bulls. Yes, he doesn't provide the post offense the Bulls are desiring, but the offseason is young and if reports are correct, Chandler will be shipped soon for that additional help.

[Andy]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overall value than say, Ilgauskas.

 

I'd say that's highly debatable.

I wouldn't. Z isn't nearly as important to Cleveland as he was, say, two years ago.

[1908]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overall value than say, Ilgauskas.

 

I'd say that's highly debatable.

I'm not surprised.

[Mark_R]

Ben's durability over the last 5 years has been really good. His MPG has been very strong. I think Pax and Skiles have some plans to get him at least some touches close to the basket. I like the fact that he has averaged around 2 FOULS PER GAME in that time frame which means his endurance will most likely dictate when he will come out of games, unlike Chandler who still has yet to learn how to use a normal screen or not to use two forearms on the back, but he's so weak, he has no choice.

 

Great signing.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overall value than say, Ilgauskas.

 

I'd say that's highly debatable.

I'm not surprised.

 

It's a loaded question anyway considering who you used, if I disagree with you I come off as a homer. Replace Z with Kaman, Gasol, or Diaw and the point remains. Wallace is awful at the offensive end, is the contract he got worth it for someone who is such a liability for half the time on the floor?

[anemic offense]

SC just said 60 mil 4 yrs

 

If that's the case I'm not so sure I like this deal. 15 mil a year for a player on the wrong side of thirty who isn't even a superstar. It also would put a kabosh to any other FA maneuverings the team may have been pursuing.

 

The team is definately better because of the deal, but I really think it signals the end of Tyson's tenure with the Bulls. This makes me a little leary because I got the feeling he may win the NBA's most improved player award.

[soccer10k]

 

Obviously the Bulls didn't sign him for the hope that he would put up 20-25 ppg. I'm just pointing out that the guy has a couple big time weaknesses.

 

Um, what big man doesn't have holes in their game? Very talented Big Men are a rarity, then trying to find one with an offensive and defensive game is almost near impossible. Big Ben is a game changer on the defensive end, and that addresses a huge need for the Bulls. Yes, he doesn't provide the post offense the Bulls are desiring, but the offseason is young and if reports are correct, Chandler will be shipped soon for that additional help.

 

Having a guy that's never scored more than 10 ppg in a season (last year at 7.3) and has never shot better than 50% from the free throw line (last year at 41.6%) is a big time weakness.

[Mark_R]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overall value than say, Ilgauskas.

 

I'd say that's highly debatable.

I'm not surprised.

 

It's a loaded question anyway considering who you used, if I disagree with you I come off as a homer. Replace Z with Kaman, Gasol, or Diaw and the point remains. Wallace is awful at the offensive end, is the contract he got worth it for someone who is such a liability for half the time on the floor?

 

He wasn't bad in Detroit, IIRC, even being offensively challenged. Yeah, he had a rough time at the free throw line, so what. Put him around good offensive players (on a related note, I'm hoping this is a precursor to a trade for Garnett, which means that Reinsdorf has grown a huge set and sucked it up to pay the luxury tax for a few years, because this team is built to win NOW) and he'll be a tremendous force where you need him to be.

[USSoccer]

It's not that Wallace isn't a great post player, it's that he's just awful on the offensive end. It's pretty much 4 v 5 as long as you don't leave him completely alone near the basket.

Don't forget his awesome free throw shooting.

Yeah, and his rebounding and defense too.

 

Is it at all a concern of yours that Wallace wanted an offense to run through him?

[Mark_R]

 

Obviously the Bulls didn't sign him for the hope that he would put up 20-25 ppg. I'm just pointing out that the guy has a couple big time weaknesses.

 

Um, what big man doesn't have holes in their game? Very talented Big Men are a rarity, then trying to find one with an offensive and defensive game is almost near impossible. Big Ben is a game changer on the defensive end, and that addresses a huge need for the Bulls. Yes, he doesn't provide the post offense the Bulls are desiring, but the offseason is young and if reports are correct, Chandler will be shipped soon for that additional help.

 

Having a guy that's never scored more than 10 ppg in a season (last year at 7.3) and has never shot better than 50% from the free throw line (last year at 41.6%) is a big time weakness.

 

So is every other overpaid big man in this FA crop. Why spend a few million dollars less for a far inferior play?

[1908]

It's not that Wallace isn't a great post player, it's that he's just awful on the offensive end. It's pretty much 4 v 5 as long as you don't leave him completely alone near the basket.

Don't forget his awesome free throw shooting.

Yeah, and his rebounding and defense too.

 

Is it at all a concern of yours that Wallace wanted an offense to run through him?

Nope.

[Brian]

Fact is, Bulls were a 7 seed in the East and nearly took down the eventual champs with Chandler and Sweets as their main big men. Now, they have Wallace (which weakens Detroit as well) and even if he has weaknesses, he is ten times the player Chandler is. Then when you factor in the possibility of getting PJ for Chandler, you have a frontcourt of Nocioni/Deng/Wallace/PJ/Sweets/Allen, whichever 3 you want to throw out there. It lowers the PT for a guy (Sweets) who is much better when played in quick spurts, gives Noc, Allen and Deng a guy in the middle who can attract some attention and open their shooting up more, and he improves the defense in a huge way. This won't singlehandedly put the Bulls as the East favorites, but it goes a much longer way than you'd normally expect due simply to the complete ineptitude of the Bulls' 4 and 5 in many games last year.

 

Had to quote that because it hit it right on the head.

 

 

And you have to respect da fro.

[soccer10k]

 

Obviously the Bulls didn't sign him for the hope that he would put up 20-25 ppg. I'm just pointing out that the guy has a couple big time weaknesses.

 

Um, what big man doesn't have holes in their game? Very talented Big Men are a rarity, then trying to find one with an offensive and defensive game is almost near impossible. Big Ben is a game changer on the defensive end, and that addresses a huge need for the Bulls. Yes, he doesn't provide the post offense the Bulls are desiring, but the offseason is young and if reports are correct, Chandler will be shipped soon for that additional help.

 

Having a guy that's never scored more than 10 ppg in a season (last year at 7.3) and has never shot better than 50% from the free throw line (last year at 41.6%) is a big time weakness.

 

So is every other overpaid big man in this FA crop. Why spend a few million dollars less for a far inferior play?

 

I realize that centers are overpaid. And I'm not trying to say that Ben Wallace wasn't worth the money. I'm just saying that Ben Wallace isn't the savior that he's being built up to be. Is he a good player? Yes. But is he a superstar? No. That's my main point.

[1908]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overall value than say, Ilgauskas.

 

I'd say that's highly debatable.

I'm not surprised.

 

It's a loaded question anyway considering who you used, if I disagree with you I come off as a homer. Replace Z with Kaman, Gasol, or Diaw and the point remains. Wallace is awful at the offensive end, is the contract he got worth it for someone who is such a liability for half the time on the floor?

You think Chris Kaman provides more overall value than Ben Wallace? If that doesn't prove my point that you're significantly undervaluing Ben, I don't know what will. Seriously.

[srbin84]

Finally the Bulls got a good big man, and it couldn't be a better player at a better time. He's a perfect fit for the Bulls. Unquestionably the best defensive team in the NBA now with Wallace plus our two picks. I've enjoyed watching this Bulls team come together. It's been a very LONG road, but I think we're ready to start competing for titles again.

[Mark_R]

Well yeah, no one is trying to say Wallace is worthless and shouldn't be in the league.

No, but some are significantly downplaying his value. He's no Tim Duncan, but he provides more overall value than say, Ilgauskas.

 

I'd say that's highly debatable.

I'm not surprised.

 

It's a loaded question anyway considering who you used, if I disagree with you I come off as a homer. Replace Z with Kaman, Gasol, or Diaw and the point remains. Wallace is awful at the offensive end, is the contract he got worth it for someone who is such a liability for half the time on the floor?

You think Chris Kaman provides more overall value than Ben Wallace? If that doesn't prove my point that you're significantly undervaluing Ben, I don't know what will. Seriously.

 

I'm more appalled at the notion of Diaw as anything other than a systematic swing man who's a string bean.

[Wilson A2000]

So the Bulls only have 2 million in cap room left? That means no Al Harrington unless they backload his contract. And I hear that Chandler is probably going to be traded? Who wants that contract.

[Mark_R]

So the Bulls only have 2 million in cap room left? That means no Al Harrington unless they backload his contract. And I hear that Chandler is probably going to be traded? Who wants that contract.

 

I would love to see Jerry take the luxury tax like a man and get Kevin Garnett.