RealGM

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:09 pm**

Two lazy, not smart players who have underperformed for their respective teams.

TT has crazy athleticism, a bad work ethic and a bad attitude.

Kind of sounds like CV except CV has not had run ins with the coaching staff.

Can TT play the small forward spot?

That would be the selling point for me. If he could play the 3 spot, I might be intrigued enough to pull the trigger.

I can't get a straight up swap to work in the checker, not sure what else would need to be added to make a trade work.

Whats the feeling here?

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:11 pm**

Yup. Both have major motivational issues but I'll take the one who has at least shown defensive ability. On this team, that would give him much more value than Villanueva will ever have in my opinion.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:12 pm**

That would be a huge HELL NO!

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:15 pm**

They are one in the same...pointless IMO

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:22 pm**

I said no. As nwy said, there is no reason for the Bucks or Bulls (more so Bulls) to do this trade. TT has some post game, which is where the Bulls are hurting majorly. But moreso, CV is not a post player/PF and would do nothing for the Bulls except put up more perimeter/long shots that they do not need or want.

For the Bucks, we don't need a player like TT who isn't interested in playing the game. If he comes here and devotes time to playing, learning, I think he could be a great spot for the 3, atleast a backup for the 3 or 4 as well, but I highly, highly highly doubt he would devote time, so thus no.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:23 pm**

I voted no. Seriously what has TT ever done to make you think he has potential to become a good player? He had a nice NCAA tournament run, jumped high during testing and had all the nice measurables, but his play on the court has shown me nothing whatsoever to think he could become a good player. His defense is overrated IMO too. Seriously my prediction is TT will end up like Tim Thomas with different games of course. I totally believe he will always be the guy people look at and say he has potential to be really good but he will never live up to it. CV on the other hand has shown real flashes of potential and is much more consistent than TT even though CV has no consistancy. That just shows you how inconsistant TT is. CV is the better player now and probably always will be. Neither will probably ever be that good but they are what they are.

That being said, TT would be a better fit for the Bucks but I just hate trading the better player for the worst player, and in this case I think CV is quite a bit better than TT. Thats my opinion anyway.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:32 pm**

TT also has one more year on his rookie deal, so you have an extra year before he's eligible for free agency.

82games doesn't have TT playing at all as a 3 last year or this year; I don't think he has the shooting or ball-handling to be effective offensively there, but he's such an athletic freak that you would think he could defend both the 3 and 4.

Both CV and TT are buy-low types right now. FWIW, here's the Hollinger scouting report:

Consider this: As a 20-year-old rookie, Thomas had the fourth-best rate of blocks per minute in the NBA, and the best among power forwards. The three guys ahead of him were bigger, veteran centers (Marcus Camby, Alonzo Mourning, and Joel Przybilla).

Now here's the other half of the equation: Thomas also had the second-best rate of steals per minute at his position. Only Charlotte's Gerald Wallace was ahead of him; Thomas was the top-ranked player 6-9 or taller, and the only one to crack the top 25 overall. Once he plays more extended minutes and these skills become more apparent in his per-game averages, his ability as a defensive disruptor should get a lot more notice.

In the meantime, Thomas will have to learn to control his offensive impulses. As you might expect from a player this young (especially one as cocky as Thomas), he tried to do a lot of things he couldn't. Thomas tried 26 long 2-point jumpers and made only three of them; on non-layup 2-pointers, Thomas' 24.3-percent mark was the third-worst in the league. That might not be a problem except those shots comprised a quarter of his field-goal attempts.

I'd do it just because I'm bored with CV. I think he might be overrating his chances of becoming a starter elsewhere, but I can understand if he wants out. TT might not be thrilled playing behind Yi but if he could get some minutes at the 3 + if an Yi/TT 4/5 combo could get a couple minutes a game you could potentially make it work. I think there's an inherent risk in a guy like TT, but the dude has serious gifts.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:35 pm**

CV has more offense. TT has more ??s. TT is supposed to be a great defender, but i've never seen it happen. TT reminds me of many other big men who arrive to the NBA early, get their first big paycheck, and the do nothing after draft night, but keep staying in the NBA because some stupid coach believes he can be the one to motivate him to become a star. TT is the same as Kwame brown and worse than Curry. if jackson can't motivate kwame brown, no-one can.

What did the Hornets give up for Chandler? At least he is starting to reach the expectations placed on him.

i'm kind of tired of projects that show zero signs of improvement or effort.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:38 pm**

I'd view this as a no-risk move. If Thomas didn't pan out, you haven't lost anything because Villanueva hasn't been very good and isn't part of this team's future in the starting lineup. Plus, there's no financial risk.

I'm not keen on bringing in another lazy player but again, this team badly needs defense so if I were to gamble on a player with motivational issues I'd gamble on the one who has defensive potential.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:39 pm**

I think Tyrus Thomas might do well on a contending team with strong veteran leadership where he could grow into a role. That being said, we don't have that right now and the last thing we need is poison at practice or in the locker room. The Bucks are showing signs. I still say the trade we need to make happen is Redd for Iguodala and move onward and upward from there. CV has issues, but it also seems like he is a character guy in progress who may still blossome.
I have to remind myself sometimes of just how young he is - Thomas as well. They are barely out of high school......

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:41 pm**

flying piranha wrote:I still say the trade we need to make happen is Redd for Iguodala

The Sixers traded Iverson because they wanted to build around Iguodala. I don't think they'd be willing to scrap that plan less than a year later.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:45 pm**

You're likely right Europa. We would have to make it very attractive to them. They aren't going anywhere with what they have right now. I would be willing to work anyone into the package except for Yi and Bogut at this point. Is there another 3 out there that brings what Iguodala does to the table? I just don't know, but I'm really ready for a change.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:49 pm**

I would do this deal in one second, and all of us should agree unless there is a bigger deal we might do this season.

Sure, both have motivational issues, but Thomas is a much better defender and generally has the tenacity that is horribly needed here. Even if CV is motivated he's a crappy fit here, but if Thomas cares remotely about playing time (and there's no reason to think he wouldn't) he'd fill some huge holes for our team.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:51 pm**

every time i see somebody mention how young the kid is , I'm reminded of how young the kids who are succeeding are.

lebron james is ancient. he just turned 23 on the day he got hsi speeding ticket.

how old is howard ? or durant? melo? is KG 30 yet?

for every young prospect who needs 3-5 years to develop, there is an NBA star who is two years younger and producing and staring at his position. You could build an all star team of players 23 and under.

I fully expect players like beasley, Rose, Gordon and mayo all to have an impact in the NBA next year and all of them will be under 20.

using the age card no longer works for me. it's just an excuse for a player who doesn't know the fundementals of basketball.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:01 pm**

MajorDad wrote:using the age card no longer works for me. it's just an excuse for a player who doesn't know the fundementals of basketball.

You keep bringing up reasons that seem to largely ignore the parameters of the trade itself. No one is suggesting we trade a proven player for Thomas. CV has shown much more offensive potential but he's going to be a poor defender for the rest of time. TT is a better rebounder, shot-blocker, and energy player.

CV knows he's not part of the long term plan here and wants out. I can understand that. Nobody's asking Thomas to become a superstar if we give up CV for him. I think a change of scenery could do both players some good.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:05 pm**

I wouldn't say that they don't know the fundamentals of basketball, they just may not understand the fundamentals of where they fit in the realm of players that are more talented than they are. The people mentioned by Major Dad are rarified studs - of which our team has two possible ones - Bogut if he keeps playing the way he is and Yi. Look how much better Bogut is three years in.
The precocious nature of some of the younger stars maybe blinds us to the fact that it is ok for a player to take a few years to develop into their role and potential It is not the norm to be an all start at 19 years of age. It wasn't that long ago when most rookies were 22

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:56 pm**

I would take TT for CV in a heartbeat.

Thomas has much more upside. He is younger and less experienced. Given time, I expect that he will be a much better player than Villanueva.

Thomas is still learning the game. He has a very long way to go. But he is already comparable to CV in most respects.

I will continue to root for CV to become a stud for the Bucks, but his defensive problems are hard to ignore.

oLd sKool

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:59 pm**

I would do this for sure.

Thomas would be a great help to the bucks defense.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:15 pm**

A non-motivated good character guy good at offense but bad at defense.

For..

A non-motivated bad character guy bad at offense but good at defense.

I'd do it just because we really need defense, but damnit I wouldn't have to be excited about it.

Posted: **Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:17 pm**

This thread should point out how the stock of players who are not consistent top-50 players will ebb and flow drastically.

Back in October a number of you were willing to trade not only CV (who before the season held more potential and value) and our #1 pick for TT.

Now even though CV hasn't done much, TT appears to be maybe an even worse producer. And maybe have a worse work ethic and attitude if you believe Skiles.

I'd make the trade just on the principle of more defense and a change of scenery......but if you think CV's bad, at least he can show up with 15/9 about every third game. TT hasn't shown an ability to do anything so far in 100+ games.

RealGM

Would you swap CV for Tyrus Thomas?

Would you swap CV for Tyrus Thomas?