OT: For the LaMarcus Aldridge naysayers

[DanTown8587]

1) Cant believe this hasn't been locked yet
2) I wished we had LA at the time of the draft, and I bet that ultimately costs Paxson his job, once Reinsdorf sees the UC empty for the playoffs, goes to Paxson and says "why didnt we make the playoffs?"
3) All things pass over time, just like when the Bulls once traded a 20-10 guy for a rookie. This too, TT v LA shall pass.

[kulaz3000]

Just because they could both make a jump shot, were both big men and both played for the Blazers dont make LaMarcus's and Rasheed's game comparable.

LaMarcus still doesn't have as solid post game as Rasheed's. LaMarcus is nowhere near the same defensive players as Rasheed.
LaMarcus was the pure athlete that Rasheed was when they were the same age.
LaMarcus still doesn't have the touch that Rasheed has all over the court, from the post, the the mid-range to the 3 point range.

Rasheed is a phonemonal player, in many regards of his game. The only downfall which happens to be his biggest downfall is his mental motivation from game to game. He is also extremely selfless to a fault. If he ever had a killer instinct to lead, and dominate games he could and destory alot of players and would be by now one of the top power forwards to ever play the game.

Rasheed is one of the most under-rated players, but thats because of his own doing and unwillingness to be the number one guy on a team.

[Bullsville]

-= original quote snipped =-



Time will tell... I just don't want to come across as trolling here. I saw this article and now am watching Portland vs. Miami.

Time will tell... but right now I am wanting to trade TT and someone else for Pau Gasol.

Too late- what the hell do you care?

But to answer your crap about the Aldridge "naysayers", if you actually read this board, you would know that his "naysayers" here only "naysay" because WE need a low-post scorer, and Aldridge isn't that. At least not according to the article you posted.

said McMillan, who wants Aldridge to develop a back-to-the-basket game as the foundation to his game

Even his coach admits that Aldridge doesn't have a low-post game, which is what we have been saying on this board for two years.

Now, just go the #### away, thank you. Or at least know what the #### you are talking about, thank you.

Nah, forget that. Just go the #### away.

[kyrv]

-= original quote snipped =-



Too late- what the hell do you care?

But to answer your crap about the Aldridge "naysayers", if you actually read this board, you would know that his "naysayers" here only "naysay" because WE need a low-post scorer, and Aldridge isn't that. At least not according to the article you posted.

said McMillan, who wants Aldridge to develop a back-to-the-basket game as the foundation to his game

Even his coach admits that Aldridge doesn't have a low-post game, which is what we have been saying on this board for two years.

Now, just go the #### away, thank you. Or at least know what the #### you are talking about, thank you.

Nah, forget that. Just go the #### away.

Me love you long time.

Also agree with Jeremy and Bulls6, and our man BenB. (the *good* Ben this year - well two if we count Benny the Steer).

Portland is my favorite non-Bulls team to watch. Someone mentioned Joe Smith is very similiar to Aldridge and I would say this year, wow, they are eerily similiar in their games. This coming from someone who doesn't like to play the bad comparison game. But basically, this year we have Tyrus *and* what Aldridge would have given us IIIIIFFFFFFF he could have gotten to play. He's not a vet, so, our soon-to-be-former-interim-coach might have to say...no way jose.

[Polynice4Pippen]

I really wonder if people actually saw Rasheed Wallace play in college or if they just know 21st Century Sheed. Either way, Rasheed Wallace, Derrick Coleman and Chris Webber are the 3 most flat out talented PF's I've ever seen in the NBA. Yes, more talented than Garnett, more talented than Duncan, and yes, more talented than Aldridge. With that being said, LaMarcus is clearly a future all-star. And Tyrus is a future DPOY once he escapes from Chicago. When he plays, he impacts the game. That can't be denied by anyone who watches the games or even just checks out his numbers. He's gonna be even better than Tyson is now. Sad but true.

[NLK]

all i can say is he just blocked the living soul out of Daqauen Cook just a few moments ago on a fade away.

[Jo Jo English]

I really wonder if people actually saw Rasheed Wallace play in college or if they just know 21st Century Sheed. Either way, Rasheed Wallace, Derrick Coleman and Chris Webber are the 3 most flat out talented PF's I've ever seen in the NBA.

I was so very close to adding a post comparing Rasheed Wallace to Derrick Coleman, regarding how each of them were maybe as talented as any other power forwards to play the game (in my lifetime), but neither had the killer instinct to go along with their skills. I ultimately didn't post it because I didn't want it to be interpreted as comparing the strengths and weaknesses in their games.

I completely agree with you - Rasheed could have been as good as he wanted to be.

[babythug23]

Forget LA the way Roy is playin we should of took him.But you never know how ppl will turn out i doubt LA would do anything here thanks to bulls big man problems(coachs)

[nitetrain8603]

-= original quote snipped =-



Gordon won't work there......he wants his shots...Roy will want his shots.....Aldridge wants his shots...... too many scorers. Who's going to get 20+ points to be an all-star

Eh, I don't know if I agree with that. All care about winning equally. Gordon wants to get paid and wants to start IMHO. I don't think he would care all that much if he got to jack up shots as much as he wants. I think Gordon would work really really well there because Roy's a pretty good ballhandler and they would be a perfect ying-yang combination.

[SensiBull]

4. Hard work. When he learned while watching the NBA draft last June that the Blazers had traded power forward Zach Randolph to the Knicks to clear the starting spot for him, [/color]

Wait a minute. So, he was watching the draft when they made that decision?

Wow, that's amazing faith in a young player. Everybody knows you don't do that. You work the wire for some tired old vets to inhibit his development first, and then you wait until he perfects everything in practice before you start giving him playing time.

What do they think this is? Las Vegas? Too risky.

[JeffJordan]

-= original quote snipped =-



So if the Bulls hadn't been interested in Viktor and had therefore just drafted Tyrus at 2, you wouldn't be talking about LA nonstop? I somehow doubt that. In reality, Aldridge has no more to do with the Bulls than any other (good) player they passed on in the draft in the last decade. I mention that Aldridge isn't on the Bulls because unlike most posters on this board who obsess over the team you seem to obsess only over a player on Portland and the Bull he was "traded" for.

Also, I think the title of your thread demonstrates your insane bias on this issue. I don't think I've ever seen an Aldridge "naysayer" on this board, at least not recently. I'm as critical of him as anyone and I've repeatedly acknowledged that he's a good player. I merely argue with people such as yourself who claim that Aldridge is successful in the low post, draws double teams, and excels (or will excel) where he doesn't (namely, rebounding). Basically, you consider people like me naysayers because we point out that Aldridge does have some flaws in his game and thus isn't an All-Star or superstar caliber player (right now). The fact that you take offense to that shows ignorance about Aldridge's game, a serious lack of objectivity, or both.

There is NO insane bias here. Sure I would have probably started this thread had there not been a trade of TT for LMA but we DID trade LMA. If we had drafted TT we still would have passed on LMA-- he isn't perfect but he is looking really good.

Bottom line is that I am not obsessed. If this topic bothers you so much, just don't respond. I am going to end this here because there is no reason for this thread to be locked up with a bunch of meaningless bickering. Thomas is a huge disapointment to me and other Bulls fans, deal with it.

[JeremyB0001]

There is NO insane bias here. Sure I would have probably started this thread had there not been a trade of TT for LMA but we DID trade LMA. If we had drafted TT we still would have passed on LMA-- he isn't perfect but he is looking really good.

Bottom line is that I am not obsessed. If this topic bothers you so much, just don't respond. I am going to end this here because there is no reason for this thread to be locked up with a bunch of meaningless bickering. Thomas is a huge disapointment to me and other Bulls fans, deal with it.

But do you understand that the only reason the Bulls drafted and traded LA is that Pax wanted to acquire Viktor? The fact that the Bulls drafted LA so they could acquire Viktor seems like a terrible reason to constantly discuss LA when you claim you wouldn't otherwise be doing so.

If you're not biased, then my question is who are the LA naysayers to whom you refer to in the subject heading?

Tyrus is a huge frustration to most Bulls fans because he doesn't play. Your stance - that he's a horrific bust - is not shared by most Bulls fans. Don't worry, I can deal with the fact that a few Bulls fans have extreme, questionable opinions.

[Tommy Udo 6]

-= original quote snipped =-



There is NO insane bias here. Sure I would have probably started this thread had there not been a trade of TT for LMA but we DID trade LMA. If we had drafted TT we still would have passed on LMA-- he isn't perfect but he is looking really good.

Bottom line is that I am not obsessed. If this topic bothers you so much, just don't respond. I am going to end this here because there is no reason for this thread to be locked up with a bunch of meaningless bickering. Thomas is a huge disapointment to me and other Bulls fans, deal with it.

Jeff, you are the most LA obsessed poster on all of Real GM. Of course, you probably cant see it.

Almost every post you have made either concerns LA or TT

TT is obviously a huge disappointment for you. I think most of the reason is because you are so obsessed with LA. Heck, Tim Duncan would be a disappointment for someone with your LA obsession.

That's Ok that you feel so attached to LA - but people do get tired of you mentioning it again & again & again & again. As Ben called it: "beating a dead horse again.

Please try to understand - LA will NEVER be a Bull. please deal with it.

[Spykes]

-= original quote snipped =-



Gordon won't work there......he wants his shots...Roy will want his shots.....Aldridge wants his shots...... too many scorers. Who's going to get 20+ points to be an all-star

You must not watch Blazer basketball or know much about Roy. He could care less about "getting his shots". He wants the W and would be just as happy being a facilitator as he is a scorer. BG would work great in Portland.

As for Aldridge, I'm kinda surprised some of you guys still talk about him..... What's done is done. Move on.

[DuckIII]

Time will tell... I just don't want to come across as trolling here.

Too late. There are dozens of LMA threads where you can post this article.