Zach for Ben Wallace?

[god shammgod]

Have you been watching Ben play this year? He's not the same level player he was two years ago. Even though he's somewhat better defensively that what we have, his overall play on both sides of the ball isn't really a measurable upgrade.

yeah he's not as good as he once was. but he's averaging a little under 9 rebounds and 2 blocks a game. that's 2 more blocks then anyone else on this team. do you really prefer watching zach & curry play together.

[DuckIII]

In looking to free up a log jam with regarding to your interior scorers, why the hell would you be looking to move Randolph instead of Curry?

[god shammgod]

In looking to free up a log jam with regarding to your interior scorers, why the hell would you be looking to move Randolph instead of Curry?

i think at this stage in his career wallace would play better at powerforward then center. the curry/wallace pairing makes more sense to me.

[voice of reason]

Big Ben seems to be playing with a little more desire now that Skiles is gone.

[RHODEY]

I think we give up waymore talent in the trade. Zach is young and in his prime. As a primary focus in the front court you can bet on him giving you 20 and 10. You wanna tell me the Bulls couldnt use that all because ihs contract just a year longer than Ben's? Chicago doesn't have a "Curry " in their front court that would be stifled by Zach. They have shooters that would benefit from Zachs inside game immensely, we dont.

Now what does Ben do for us? Well for one I think Eddy could go back to being near dominant offensively. He helps us from a team defensive aspect mainly. Now Curry, it's true he's no savior but guess what? As long as Zach is here his value will be very low. If we want to move him for something we have to get his value up. The Curry with the 10+ 20 point games and 8+ bounds will get you a whole lot more than this incarnation. Getting Ben could be the key to that. ALso Ben coming off the books or as trade bait in 2 years would be nice for a rebuild.

[BrooklynBocker]

-= original quote snipped =-



yeah he's not as good as he once was. but he's averaging a little under 9 rebounds and 2 blocks a game. that's 2 more blocks then anyone else on this team. do you really prefer watching zach & curry play together.

Not particularly but that doesn't mean we should make another lateral move, or grab another aging star in the mist of their great decline.

Let's go the stats route:

Wallace: 4 ppg, 8.7 rpg, +13 EFF
Zach: 17 ppg, 9 rpg, +17.5 EFF

There is nothing Wallace has done this season to be an overall upgrade from Zach, so why trade Zach away for him? Does it really improve our cap situation? I know I'm going against the grain here but w/out some major postive to the team, I just don't think it's worth it, unless of course the claim is that having Wallace at the 4 will somehow tighten our defense by 13 ppg - at which case, it'd then be a true lateral move.

[Slamm Goodbody]

Zach to Cavs for Drew Gooden and Donyell Marshall.

Two shorter contracts for Zach that end with Marbury.

Give Gooden 30 mins a game and he'd be a happy camper than can hit the boards.

I do this deal in a heartbeat. I didn't want Zach's long contract here to begin with. It looked like he was proving me wrong the beginning of the year (I even ate a little crow for that) but it's obvious he's got a bad attitude and that rubs off on the team.

[god shammgod]

-= original quote snipped =-


Does it really improve our cap situation?

wallace has a shorter deal then zach. even if it's a lateral move, it sheds a year of salary.

[BrooklynBocker]

-= original quote snipped =-



wallace has a shorter deal then zach. even if it's a lateral move, it sheds a year of salary.

Losing a year overall from Zach's deal would be the only real measurable improvement but is that worth a trade? We're not gaining any cap flexibility that could improve the team!

[god shammgod]

-= original quote snipped =-



Losing a year overall from Zach's deal would be the only real measurable improvement but is that worth a trade? We're not gaining any cap flexibility that could improve the team!

do you really think could trade zach for expiring contracts ? then how are you going to obtain cap flexibility.

no matter what zach's stats are he seems to me to have a negative effect on the team. defense is a problem, you'd have to admit that wallace is an upgrade on defense somewhat. i'd think you'd also increase curry's effectiveness on offense by getting rid of zach. and if it doesn't work out, does this make us any worse ? at least he expires a year early.

[Cliff Levingston]

I think we give up waymore talent in the trade. Zach is young and in his prime. As a primary focus in the front court you can bet on him giving you 20 and 10.

Stats aren't the objective of the game; wins are. Name one playoff team that Zach put up 20 and 10 (or even close to it) as part of. Portland traded him for garbage and is doing MUCH better than they did with Zach. There's other factors there too but there's a reason they just wanted him off the team.

You wanna tell me the Bulls couldnt use that all because ihs contract just a year longer than Ben's? Chicago doesn't have a "Curry " in their front court that would be stifled by Zach. They have shooters that would benefit from Zachs inside game immensely, we dont.

Yep. For one, our defensive system which relies heavily upon the bigs being able to rotate to help would fall apart cause Zach can't do that. And how would our shooters really benefit from Zach's blackish, holish low post game?

Now what does Ben do for us? Well for one I think Eddy could go back to being near dominant offensively. He helps us from a team defensive aspect mainly. Now Curry, it's true he's no savior but guess what? As long as Zach is here his value will be very low. If we want to move him for something we have to get his value up. The Curry with the 10+ 20 point games and 8+ bounds will get you a whole lot more than this incarnation. Getting Ben could be the key to that.

Nonsense. Ben Wallace's presence would only hurt Eddy's offensive game. Right now, the key to stopping Curry is doubling him and making him pass out of it cause it often leads to turnovers. With Ben Wallace as a complete offensive liability outside of 5 feet from the basket, it only makes it easier for the opposition to double Curry.

Big Ben would without a doubt help defensively (if he decides to play) just by virtue of adding a good defensive player/shot blocker to the front court, but he won't grab any more rebounds than Randolph would.

All of the above highlights the reason why Cliff Levingston said the Bulls wouldn't do it: money. Right now, both Randolph and Wallace are guys you ideally don't want on your team as major parts making the big bucks, so might as well stick with the guy who has the shorter contract (and less remaining per year) in order to get him off your team sooner than later.

[RHODEY]

Stats aren't the objective of the game; wins are. Name one playoff team that Zach put up 20 and 10 (or even close to it) as part of. Portland traded him for garbage and is doing MUCH better than they did with Zach. There's other factors there too but there's a reason they just wanted him off the team.

Lame argument because it does not take into account several factors, a major one being, who did he play with? Did he have shooters on the team like Ben Gordon? Did he have a small forward the caliber of Deng? Now I admit Zach has some selfish tendencies BUT he has had games were he did pass. Still I

[moocow007]

For the record, teams doubled and tripled Curry last year and essentially dared guys like Channing Frye to beat them. In fact one of the most frustrating things last year for many of us was Frye not being able to step up to the task. I don't know how many wide open shots and open lanes to the basket that he either flubbed or failed to take advantge of. So, yes, the comments about a guy like Wallace not being a good pairing with Curry really holds little water since Frye was pretty much a none factor last season which resulted in Curry being gang banged (for lack of a better phrase) more than he ever has AND yet having his best offensive season of his career. What a guy like Wallace theorectically would do is to take the brunt of the defensive chores and, as a result, take a lot of the attention/heat/focus off of Curry to have to tow the line on the defensive end which inevitably will help his confidence and allow him to do what he does best.

[Cliff Levingston]

Lame argument because it does not take into account several factors, a major one being, who did he play with? Did he have shooters on the team like Ben Gordon? Did he have a small forward the caliber of Deng? Now I admit Zach has some selfish tendencies BUT he has had games were he did pass. Still I

[mjhp911]

In looking to free up a log jam with regarding to your interior scorers, why the hell would you be looking to move Randolph instead of Curry?

Thank you.

Stats aren't the objective of the game; wins are. Name one playoff team that Zach put up 20 and 10 (or even close to it) as part of. Portland traded him for garbage and is doing MUCH better than they did with Zach. There's other factors there too but there's a reason they just wanted him off the team.

The same can be said of Curry. Z-Bo will remain aggressive, no matter what. Curry's genitals shrivel up in his panties when a better scoring option is on the floor, then he becomes useless. Z-Bo will at least still rebound and make an attempt at defense.

[Fury]

-= original quote snipped =-
Stats aren't the objective of the game; wins are. Name one playoff team that Zach put up 20 and 10 (or even close to it) as part of. Portland traded him for garbage and is doing MUCH better than they did with Zach. There's other factors there too but there's a reason they just wanted him off the team.

Game 4 of the 2003 Western Conference Quarter Finals he had a 25 and 15 game.

Game 5, he had a 22 and 9 game.

Game 6, he had a 21 and 10 game.

In Game 7 he had a 14 and 10 game.

They went 3-1 that series when he started.

[cmaff051]

Lame argument because it does not take into account several factors, a major one being, who did he play with? Did he have shooters on the team like Ben Gordon? Did he have a small forward the caliber of Deng? Now I admit Zach has some selfish tendencies BUT he has had games were he did pass. Still I

[KOA]

I understand if Chicago does not want Randolph. The trade could be reworked to benefit all the parties involved:

NY trades: Zach Randolph
NY receives: Ben Wallace, First round pick via LA (lottery protected)

LA trades: Kwame Brown (expiring), Vladamir Radmanovic (3 years), First round pick (lottery protected)

Chicago trades: Ben Wallace (2 years)
Chicago receives: Kwame Brown (expiring), Vladamir Radmanovic (3 years)

LA gets Zach and gets rid of Vlade for the price of an expiring and a first round pick. Chicago saves A LOT of money by getting rid of Wallace, especially in the short term. Vlade has an extra year on his contract than Wallace but he will only be making 6.5 mill in that year (Wallace is owed 30+ mill in the next 2 years). NY gets a defensive presence and a first round pick.

[moocow007]

I understand if Chicago does not want Randolph. The trade could be reworked to benefit all the parties involved:

NY trades: Zach Randolph
NY receives: Ben Wallace, First round pick via LA (lottery protected)

LA trades: Kwame Brown (expiring), Vladamir Radmanovic (3 years), First round pick (lottery protected)

Chicago trades: Ben Wallace (2 years)
Chicago receives: Kwame Brown (expiring), Vladamir Radmanovic (3 years)

LA gets Zach and gets rid of Vlade for the price of an expiring and a first round pick. Chicago saves A LOT of money by getting rid of Wallace, especially in the short term. Vlade has an extra year on his contract than Wallace but he will only be making 6.5 mill in that year (Wallace is owed 30+ mill in the next 2 years). NY gets a defensive presence and a first round pick.

I'd do it from NY's POV but can't see why the Bulls would trade Wallace for Brown and Radmanovic. Brown is no real upgrade in the post offensively over Wallace and the last thing they need is another perimeter offensive player.

[KOA]

I'd do it from NY's POV but can't see why the Bulls would trade Wallace for Brown and Radmanovic. Brown is no real upgrade in the post offensively over Wallace and the last thing they need is another perimeter offensive player.

It's more of a salary dump for Chicago. Gordon and Deng need to be re-signed in the offseason and I am sure they would love to have Brown's 9 million expiring contract to make negotiations easier.

I think the Bulls need to keep their core intact, regroup, and then make a move to get a big man that can score. They do not want to do anything drastic which them may regret; the Bulls have been playing much better recently and should definitely have a shot at the playoffs.

Wallace really hasn't made a difference for their team and considering they have 2 defensive up and coming big men on their bench (Noah and Thomas), I don't think they will miss him very much. It's much more important to lock up Gordan and Deng long term. It wouldn't be much of an issue if they didn't have a cheap owner. The Bulls have one of the highest attendance ratings, yet they refuse to spend the cash to improve their team and keep their core intact.