"You can figure out why it was done...

W_HAMILTON · Post #1 » by **W_HAMILTON** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 8:52 am

...it's not about the players."

-- Larry Brown, on the Okafor/Chandler trade.

Fred Williamson · Post #2 » by **Fred Williamson** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 9:13 am

Of course it was a financial move. We all know it. Move on.

W_HAMILTON · Post #3 » by **W_HAMILTON** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 12:02 pm

I wouldn't say that, considering what several people said after the trade.

Several said that this was a Larry Brown type of move, because they believed that Brown didn't like Okafor's <insert something here>, and that Chandler would be more of a Larry Brown type of player. Everyone knew the financial implications, but some also implied that it WAS also about the players.

It sounds like even Larry Brown doesn't believe that.

thruthefire · Post #4 » by **thruthefire** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 1:17 pm

Hey, Okafor can't run the pick and roll. :roll:

Bassman · Post #5 » by **Bassman** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 1:23 pm

I think Brown views Chandler with potential for improvement on certain things that he's mentioned in previous statements (better defensive range, ability to run, pick & roll, etc) but also is waiting to see if he can hold his own relative to Mek's strengths (rebounding, interior D, shot blocking). LB knows the biggest reason for the trade was the contract. But I don't take that as some giagantic diss of Chandler. I doubt LB threw chairs against the wall when they discussed this deal, trying to stop it.

The evidence will be before all of us soon. We'll see how this works out. But I'm optomistic that the swap will ultimately help us advance as a team. The stats at the 5 may not be gaudy but we could be a better team for the move.

thruthefire · Post #6 » by **thruthefire** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 3:43 pm

Uh oh, now it's hit RealGM: http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wireta ... ing_money/

CatNation · Post #7 » by **CatNation** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 3:51 pm

either way we sure don't seem to be missing Okafor. Nazr is better than him!

in 1 preason game

Post #8 » by **BigSlam** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 4:10 pm

Could have been worse.

We could have ended up with Samual Dalembert.

Post #9 » by **fatlever** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 4:50 pm

strange comments by LB today. even if thats how he felt, no need to say something like that to the media before chandler plays a single game. LB can be a giant baby when he doesnt get everything he wants.

i still feel good about this trade regardless.

spectre_ · Post #10 » by **spectre_** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 5:02 pm

BigSlam wrote:Could have been worse.

We could have ended up with Samual Dalembert.

I think Bonnell just caught him in one of those moods. In previous articles LB has pointed out a few things he thinks TC can do that Mek wasn't so strong at...and he doesn't strike me as the type to just spew the company line.

Battery · Post #11 » by **Battery** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 5:25 pm

Larry Brown is smarter than you and you and you and you.

No better way to cover your own ass, you know... in case things don't work out.

Post #12 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 6:51 pm

Awesome!

Post #13 » by **fatlever** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 7:08 pm

good point battery. so if the trade works out, LB can say, see i told you we need to go in a different direction. and if the trade doesnt work out he can say, see i told you the front office didnt give me the players i need. typical LB. he really is a but of a nutjob sometimes.

ohara · Post #14 » by **ohara** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 7:10 pm

From my perspective, it just was not very smart to say it. It cannot do any good to Chandler's confidence to hear something like that from LB. Wont do good to foster a good relationship when you indicate that the trade which brought the player here was not really about the player, but rather the finances. I thought LB was smarter than that, but I think the statement was something he should not have made on the record.

thruthefire · Post #15 » by **thruthefire** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 7:12 pm

Why isn't anyone ILBITing?

spectre_ · Post #16 » by **spectre_** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 7:27 pm

thruthefire wrote:Why isn't anyone ILBITing?

But if it wasn't a basketball decision can't we assume it went against LB's wishes? Meaning...it wasn't in LB's hands?

ILBIT! :wink:

On a serious note, I think Battery & Fats might be onto something. He wouldn't be the first to take both sides until the situation plays out.

ohara · Post #17 » by **ohara** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 7:44 pm

That is true, Spectre. But if you're Tyson Chandler, is that something you really wanted to hear? Does it help your confidence? Dont think so.

spectre_ · Post #18 » by **spectre_** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 8:10 pm

ohara wrote:That is true, Spectre. But if you're Tyson Chandler, is that something you really wanted to hear? Does it help your confidence? Dont think so.

I hope TC isn't so fragile that a comment like that would bust his confidence. From his comments and demeaner he seems pretty darn pleased to be in Charlotte.

Post #19 » by **Paydro70** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 9:56 pm

The attitude displayed by some in this thread is what irritates me when others try to make sense of team chemistry. So Okafor being too quiet is a major impediment to our team's development, but Larry Brown saying he didn't want a player isn't?

I'm not saying chemistry doesn't exist, just that none of us know how it actually works and what serves to motivate and what serves to anger or humiliate.

So... ILBIT?

therebirth · Post #20 » by **therebirth** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 10:03 pm

fatlever wrote:strange comments by LB today. even if thats how he felt, no need to say something like that to the media before chandler plays a single game. LB can be a giant baby when he doesnt get everything he wants.

i still feel good about this trade regardless.

Larry Brown strikes again. He is throwing management under the bus. This is why he never lasts anywhere. People accept this kind of behavior when you winning, when you are not, not so much