Thanks for the love on my post, yo...I'm going to comment on the Chandler/Curry/JR Smith situation mostly because the rest is so debatable that it could go on for days. Before he became the GM, John Paxson was the radio guy for the Bulls. This was back when the Bulls were horrendous. Night in and night out he would rail on the players for not being professional, sloppy play, being immature, etc. One of his greatest pieces of motivation was Eddy Curry...Fast forward to when he became the GM and there was, as they say, 'a new sheriff in town'. Out go the headbands and out go the players who didn't give full out maximum effort (see: Robinson, Eddie; Curry, Eddy, etc.). To make a long story short he traded Curry and Chandler because they weren't developing into the players the Bulls had originally envisioned them to be. Curry wouldn't play defense (still doesn't) and Chandler was horrendous on the offensive end and even worse at staying out of foul trouble. JR Smith was traded because he wasn't a player who gave maximum effort during practice, which is when Skiles does most of his coaching apparently. With the young team they have now they are trying (if they haven't already) to instill a foundation of hard work and gritty play. Play where sometimes a lack of athleticism and talent can be made up for. Big Ben was brought along to be a positive veteran presence, provide D and rebounding in the middle (while staying out of foul trouble) and to stay out of the way on offenese. (Essentially Tyson Chandler's role, but Tyson couldn't do it). Whether they make it to the Eastern Conference Finals or not will really depend on who they play since they struggle mightily with 'long, athletic' teams.

That's some insightful analysis. Thanks for sharing. I'm not sure how much I'm into the Skiles/Paxson "Our way or the highway" method. Yes, they have built a good foundation. But they had a good foundation two years ago that was doing just as well (37-26 with Curry).

They've given away some talented young players; they didn't wait for them to blossum - all because they weren't "hustling" enough. I respect that. But JR Smith was really solid in Denver this season. Tyson Chandler had a great second half, and Eddy Curry has Knick fans excited (if no one else, apparently).

Well, to be fair, we all know they didn't give Curry away... not a day goes by we don't hear what a bad trade it was.

What happens if Tyrus Thomas doesn't get with the Skiles/Paxson program? Does he get traded, too? Is that why Ben Gordon was forever (up until January) bouncing back and forth from starter to sixth man, even though he's the most talented offensive player on the team?

I like the talent they have put together. Paxson has had more recent draft success than almost every GM, including Isiah. Skiles is an excellent teacher, but being a good teacher doesn't automatically make you a championship coach. It remains to be seen how far they will take this team.

Like it or not, they have reinvented their team, but they are still essentially in the same spot they were in 04-05 with Curry. That's not a bad spot, we all want the Knicks to get to that spot, where they can compete for home field advantage in a first round series and be a real threat to win the Eastern Conference; but it doesn't seem like, for all their wheeling and dealing, that they are making the moves to get to the next level, to get past the elite teams.

Maybe they will, and prove me wrong. But I really think they should have gone after Gasol. That would have been the move, like the Mets going after Zito. Because they might need that low paint presence in the playoffs.

I agree with you 100% that they should have gone after Gasol. They should go after Garnett after the season...they don't have a low post scoring threat to offset their perimeter game. Because of that...no one in their right mind expects the Bulls to make the NBA Finals this season.

The reason Gordon was up and down off the bench was because 1)he's turnover prone, 2) he's prone to mental lapses and 3)the Bulls needed scoring off the bench. I don't think initially they thought he would be the explosive (at times) scorer that he is now, but he is what he is.

When Paxson took over he said he was going to try to emulate the Detroit/Joe Dumars brand of building a team around team defense and team play. While Detroit has some players that took off and became very good players (Billups, Rip, Prince), the Bulls are still waiting for Deng and Gordon to 'take off'. It will probably happen next year (Cubs fans?). (It's hard to write here and remember what I wrote because the text box is small)

Yes, if Tyrus doesn't play/practice hard, he will be traded. That's why he sat for so long this season. You can go back and read all the quotes from Skiles about how Tyrus is talented but he doesn't know how to play at an NBA level yet during practice and all that stuff. We all knew JR Smith would never even make it to his practice gear in Chicago based on his past. That's also why the Bulls don't go after certain players like Zach Randolph, Chris Webber, etc very hard.

With Curry, Paxson got into that whole DNA Testing situation where it was a 'my way or the highway' deal. Curry, or the NBA Union, wouldn't let it happen so he had to go. Paxson would rather let someone go than have them make him look bad in public (Eddie Robinson, Tim Thomas, JR Smith, headband-gate).

What this does is make the Bulls a tough nosed team that is fun to watch because they play hard....but they have to play that hard because they have a small margin of error.

I think they are further along than when they had Curry because their bench is deeper, they are more athletic and they play hard 100% of the time. When Curry was in the lineup it always seemed there was a huge lag on the defensive end and it pissed off the rest of the team that he couldn't protect the basket and rebound. They absolutely miss his offense though, no doubt about that. I think if Curry would have submitted to the DNA test then Paxson would have signed him and just lived with the defense and picked up a defense oriented power forward other than Tyson Chandler (who Skiles hated), because they wouldn't have given Chandler that huge deal after giving Curry one.

I'm sorry, but I'm not even a Bulls fan, and I still had to comment on your idiocy. And since the lack of intelligence from your post is from your first last to the last, this one's going to be a while.

First off, the quote that the Bulls can't even "score 100," is a little skewed. If you like to make fun of them not scoring 100, why don't you also comment on the fact that the Pistons didn't score 100 either? In fact, in the past 14 games, only 3 others have scored more than 100: 2 in overtime, and one with Dallas, where they joined the hundred club also(and to say that they kept it tight by 2 points is a little laughable). Detroit was having a rough time with them also, they weren't even freaking leading until the fourth quarter. The statement that they "kept it tight" is ridiculous. How were they keeping it tight by losing? Anyways, I digress.

Secondly, lets fast forward to the DYNASTY talk. Right, dynasty with Eddy Curry who's always overweight, and Chandler who hasn't developed one go-to move in 5+ years in the NBA. How is Curry honestly THAT much better? Of course he's going to improve a little bit in his numbers: it's called experience. What, what makes him so good that would make you guys think that the Bulls would be so much better off? Is it his career-high turnover rate this year? His FT% declining, or his FG% increasing because he's only taking more shots? Wow, his rebounds are up. He's the 2nd biggest guy in the freaking NBA, they better be up. And whoever said that the Bulls are in the Wallace era? ???

And Gasol, are you freaking kidding me? How about this: the Bulls try to get both Gasol and Garnett. Even better: lets bring Russell out of retirement and put him in a Red&white jersey. Gasol is a lag on defense. He'd cost alot, and Memphis were asking for a 2 combo of Hinrich/Deng/Gordon. Even with his post presence, the Bulls would have a hole in the 1 and 2 slots. What would be the use of that?

It's easy to make the accusations that you guys have made of this team, but how about you guys try and research some numbers and wait until some moves pan out until making claims? Tyrus Thomas is a machine on D, and he's shown promise of having some posts moves and a nice little jumper. And, well, Luol Deng is on the team. Thabo Sefolosha has shown promise when he plays the 3 and isn't preoccupied playing the 2. Just looking at Hinrich and Gordons' numbers, the majority of their stats are up this year. And there's the pick that they get from the Knicks, which can range from the 5-8.

Fine, I'm actually a Cavaliers fan(I really like Hughes), but I'm more of a basketball fan. To not respect what the Bulls have done in the past few years is downright wrong.

Please learn more about basketball.

Thanks for your comments, Bill.

Here's the basic issue I have with your Curry attack. What is the Bulls most pressing need? Even a Bulls fan would have to admit that they lack a low-post presence, right? Isn't that what Curry was? The traded him, and have yet to make up for him.

I don't understand how your FG% increases because you take more shots. That makes no sense.

Neither does your whole entire second paragraph - are you talking about the Knicks holding their opponents to under 100? Because that came off as a compliment to the Knicks defense, which doesn't fit in with anything discussed to this point. You have to make sense if you want me to be able to reply to your comments (assuming you want me to take you serious)....

As for the price for Gasol, we don't know for sure whether that's what it would have taken. I agree they shouldn't have traded Hinrich and Gordon, or two of the three. But giving up Deng plus the #1 pick? That wouldn't have gotten the deal done? I think it might have.

And that might have made the Bulls a legit threat to make it to the Finals. As they are composed now, they are not. And I don't know if they are going to improve until they acquire a low-post presence, whether Garnett, Gasol or someone else.

Oh, and Chandler "hasn't developed one go-to move in 5+ years"? Yeah, and neither has BEN WALLACE! And Tyson Chandler is a legit defensive player of the year candidate this year; he's also cheaper and younger than Wallace, and getting better, not worse, every year. So why are the Bulls better off without him?!?

And just to finish my thoughts on Gasol/Garnett: If they acquire those guys in the offseason, for something they could have offered in February, then isn't that a waste of the second half of this season? Why wait until the offseason, when the Eastern Conference is ripe for the taking now?

That's why I kept referring to the present passing them by. Next year the Bulls might be better, but so might the Raptors (a legit team to be recon with for the next few years, at least); the Cavs (if LeBron gets one decent weapon, isn't that game over for the rest of the league?); or some team that makes some big moves (like the Raptors did), like I think the Bobcats or Magic might be positioned to.

A little disclaimer: Sorry if my post came off a little rotten, it was inappropriate to call you an idiot, or for you to learn more basketball. Whatever you should post, I shouldn't say that. So hey, sorry.

Back to the subject at hand:

The Bulls' most pressing need is someone who can get points in the paint. That, in essence, is true. But I don't think that it could be a player of Eddy Currys' stature. I think about this for a couple reasons: 1) He doesn't keep in shape. I think you would agree with me here with the speculation that if he were 15 pounds lighter and worked out a little more to get some quickness in his feet, he would be a force. The Bulls, if I'm not mistaken, fame themselves into being a hard-nosed, "gritty" team. It doesn't seem to me that Curry could have been part of that given his style of play.

And my comment about 100 was in response to your comment: "He[Skiles] can't even get his team to score 100 against a sorry ass bunch of c-level players." I took that as, the Bulls coach can't get them to 100 because THEY(Bulls) aren't a good basketball team, not because of the Knicks' defense. I don't see how you could commend their defense when they lost by 25+ points, but, I guess we'll agree to disagree.

And, again, from the rumors that I heard(and we all that they're NEVER wrong), they were asking for the 2-combo as the base trade. Still, I wouldn't have let the Bulls trade Deng. They covet him like he's the Second Coming, and rightfully so. That guy's good.

And the Wallace-Chandler comparison: how about, last year in the playoffs, Wallace doesn't get 2 fouls in :30 seconds of play on the court, and have to subsequently leave for the whole quarter? As much as I hate to say the word, Wallace seems to have more "intangibles" than what Chandler does. Allow me to explain, somewhat: I went to the Feb. 22nd game when they came to play the Cavs, and Varejao was being guarded by Wallace. Ben was great that night. He was playing very physical defense, making the guards second-guess passing the ball to him, playing well of screens and causing double teams... he was all over. There unfortunately isn't an accurate statistic yet to show a truthful scale of defense, but if there was, I would think that Wallace would be atop of that list. He bothers people, pests them for the whole game. And also with Chandler, I remembering hearing on a couple sports shows that he and Skiles didn't get along that well. Oh, and the J.R. Smith trade is something I didn't find that odd. He would've stunted the growth of Gordon, kind of like how Iverson is doing to him right now. And he wears a headband. We all know what happens to people who wear headbands.

As for Garnett/Gasol: whoever said they would acquire them during the offseason? That'd be a stupid move, whoever brought up this idea? If any scenario is brought up, I would expect the transgression of Garnett opting out after next year, and signing with a team. That's what I think the Bulls are waiting on, if they are waiting for him.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see Curry to have been the X-factor in their playoff run. I think there is way too much emphasis being played on the post presence. Did you not see the last game when they played the Pistons? The "run-and-gun" attitude they had early on put the nail in the coffin for Detroit. Although I do think that a player that can score efficiently in the paint is the most pertinent aspect the Bulls need, I don't believe it's the ONLY thing that they need improvement.

Yo Bill, no worries... no hard feelings.

On Curry: If you agree that the Bulls most pressing need is to get someone who can get points in the paint, then Curry is the best in the league at that. He's number one at points in the paint. It seems like it was a good fit.

I agree Curry doesn't get into shape, and that bothers me, too. But he does have a lot of quickness in his feet, on the offensive end. Believe me, I've seen him play all season. He's not slow, not with the feet.

I agree with you that the 2-combo is too much to trade, at least for Gasol. Garnett, maybe (see below).

Jack Cobra brought up the foul trouble situation with Chandler, too. It seems to be a big reason why he was traded. I agree that Wallace is less likely to get into foul trouble, but is that really a good enough reason to pay more money for an older, aging version of the same? I think that they gave up too quickly on Chandler, and what you said about him not getting along with Skiles is a big reason why he got shipped out.

Not getting along with Skiles, not getting with the program (the JR Smith excuse) seems to have lead to a lot of talented young players who hadn't hit their peak getting shipped out. That's not a good sign to me, no matter how well the Bulls might seem to be doing now. That's very early 80's George Steinbrenner sounding. Hope for the Bulls fans' sake that "Chandler for Wallace" is not the new "Buhner for Phelps"!

No seriously: JR Smith would have allowed the Bulls to part with Gordon, right? The Bulls could have Hinrich, JR Smith, Gasol, Thomas, and Wallace as their starting five right now, plus Nocioni, Duhon and the Knick's #1. That's not better? It probably is talent-wise, but not Skiles, play hard and gritty-wise, right? See why I don't like that way of running a team?

The acquiring Gasol/Garnett in the offseason line came from some Bulls fans responses to my comments at FreeDarko. They basically said that the Bulls are "biding their time" until they get Garnett in the offseason, which strikes me as bad planning. Go for it now, why push it off to the offseason?

I think only the playoffs will determine whether the Bulls can really win without a post presence. Personally, I don't think so, but they might prove me wrong in the playoffs. Then all you Bulls fans are welcomed to come back here and tell me how stupid I was. But for now I'll say it: you aren't making it to the NBA Finals.

Well, I am a Bulls fan, and I have to poke a few holes in your whole Eddy Curry 'worship'.

Eddy Curry has more total turnovers this season than Steve Nash or Allen Iverson. Sure, he's played a few more games than AI, but, still....Would that really help this young Bulls team, to throw it into the paint to the guy who's 2nd in the NBA in turnovers AND averages less than 1 assist per game? C'mon. Part of the need for a low-post scorer is to have a guy who draws defenders and then kicks it back out to Kirk and Gordo and Deng for open jumpers - and this is not Eddy Curry.

From what I've seen of Tyrus Thomas lately (crazy monster facial dunks in the paint), he has the potential to have more points and fewer turnovers in the paint. Against Cleveland and Detroit, Tyrus was the best big man on the court, better than either Wallace, Webber, Ilgauskas, Varajeo, etc. In fact, while LeBron was probably the best player on the court in the Cavs-Bulls game, Tyrus had the greatest effect on the game.

And why don't we talk about hustling on the defensive end, which is what John Paxson and Scott Skiles are all about?? This season, Eddy Curry has 39 blocks and 32 steals in 2718 minutes. Tyrus Thomas has 76 blocks and 45 steals in 926 minutes.

So, in summary - Eddy Curry is a big, lazy ball-hog who sucks the basketball into the paint where it never appears to the rest of the team again. Sure, he's got a good FG% - well, he should! He should also average more than 7 rebounds a game and have more than 53 double-doubles in 348 career starts. He's a turnover-prone big man who doesn't pass out of the paint, doesn't rebound well for his size, and doesn't get any blocks or steals. And he's going to be the savior of this young, growing ballclub? Whatever.

And to say that the Bulls aren't better off than they were with Curry is just hogwash. This is the best record for a non-Jordan Bulls team since 1994, and only the 2nd-best non-MJ year in the past 34 years. They're on target to get the 2nd seed in the East, and they've proven they can beat Detroit, Miami, and Cleveland. Meanwhile - they're still young! Cleveland is the team that should be dominating this season. Why isn't LeBron winning the East? He's as old as the Bulls elder statesman (of the young guns), Kirk Hinrich. There was never a perception in Chicago that Paxson was going to build a dynasty with Curry and Chandler. He's done a fantastic job of putting together a top-tier playoff team from scratch.

Now - let's get to the point of your post. You think the Bulls are classless? Do you realize the Knicks don't deserve to park the Bulls' cars in this respect? The Knicks don't even deserve to pick up the Bulls garbage, even though Paxson has let them (Crawford and Curry).

Because, at the end of the day, the casual basketball fan will see the Knicks complaining about the Bulls running up the score in a game in which the Bulls scored 98 points!! And that's downright laughable and totally pathetic. 98 points is 'running up the score' in the NBA? :) How bad does your team have to be for it to appear that 98 points is running up the score? The New York Knicks are a High School team - because that's the ONLY place where 98 points is 'running up the score'.

Oh, and a few more points:

One topic that is rarely discussed of the 'classless' Bulls is the offer on the table if Eddy Curry failed the DNA test: $20 million over the next 40 years. If Eddy had failed the test, his career would've been over, and the Bulls would've paid him $500K per year for 40 years. It's true - you can look it up! That's classless??

And no Bulls fan, nor Paxson, Skiles, nor Reinsdorf truly expect the Bulls to make the Finals this year, let alone win. Everyone wants to see PROGRESS. They're still a bunch of young studs. Big Ben Wallace has done a great job of providing stability and not getting in foul trouble like Chandler. Big Ben was acquired to help the Bulls win IN THE PLAYOFFS, and you're grading the team gelling together after 70 regular-season games.

Detroit and Cleveland SHOULD be head-and-shoulders above the Bulls at this point due to their 'Stars' and 'Experience' - but they're not. Cleveland is a one-trick pony, Detroit is old and in their own way. The Bulls are the best up-and-coming team in the East, and thanks to yet another high pick from the Knicks, they'll be a force in the East for 5-10 years. Word up.

Larry, where is the Eddy Curry worship you are referring to? I said he's "number one in points in the paint". That's a fact. I said he has quick feet. Yeah, he does. I didn't realize that clearly meant that I am worshipping at the Temple of Curry. Thank you for pointing that out to me, Larry. Clearly you worship Skiles.

I'm glad Tyrus Thomas is working out for you, but you are talking about potential again. And the future ("the next 5-10 years"). Guess what? Everyone is looking forward to the next 5-10 years, even Knick fans. Ask Cavs fans if they are optimistic about the 5-10 years with LeBron. Or the Raptors, with Bosh and Bargnini. Point is you could be chasing the future for a long time....

I said the Bulls aren't significantly better off than they were with Curry/Chandler. They are not. They were on their way to a 50-win season in 04-05, and fell just short at 47 wins. This year the Bulls will probably win 50. That's not significantly better. The second seed? That could just as easily be a fifth seed. And this year's Eastern Conference is weaker than 04-05, statistically. So, no, they are not significantly better than they were. They might be in better shape for the future, but as currently constituted they are in a similar postition to 04-05 version, even if their team attitude is different (defense and hustle oriented).

I understand you want to see "progress" - that's what all sports fans want from their team. That's the same criteria I use to evaluate the Knicks. We'll see how much progress the Bulls have made when the playoffs start.

I thought the offer to Curry from the organization was classy. But I also understood Curry not wanting to be forced to take a career-ending test, especially when he thinks he's healthy. He could still potentially die at any point, I guess. But if he makes it through his career without any problems, than he definitely made the right choice.

Being classy in that situation, however, does not mean you were classy in other situations. Marbury give out shoes to kids. Does that mean he's always classy, Larry? Your argument is irrelevant.

Nothing you said in your diatribe about the Knicks parking cars or whatever refutes anything I have written. You guys crack me up. Keep worship at the Temple Of Skiles, Larry.

So you don't buy my arguments, but you haven't posited any good logic of your own for your argument. Pray tell, why exactly are the Bulls 'classless'?

By 'running up the score' with bench players and rookies, scoring the unheard-of amount of 98 points? I don't think 98 points have been scored in a game so far this year! I don't think any team has won by more than 30 points this year!

Here's a statistic for you: The Bulls are 14th in the NBA in scoring, averaging 98.75. The Knicks are next at 15th, scoring an average of 97.61. Your contention is that the Bulls were running up the score - by scoring their (and the Knicks') season average?? Hah. You're funny. Not.

Nothing you have said has indicated in any way that the Bulls are classless. You have illustrated that the Knicks, Steve Francis, and Knicks fans who complain about the Bulls are amateur and classless. Period.

You expect the Bulls to give up and walk away? That would be expecting the Bulls to play like the Knicks. You're upset at the Bulls because they don't SUCK as much as the Knicks? The Bulls weren't running up the score, but they were preventing the Knicks from scoring. Do you a Pat Riley Knicks team that won 98-69 would be ashamed at their performance? The Bulls were professionals, and the Knicks were crying little children who needed their diaper changed. I remember many beat-downs of the Bulls after MJ retired, and I don't remember ONE time that the Bulls complained about a team running up the score when they sucked so bad.

The Knicks are disrespecting New York, the NBA, and the long history of their Franchise for their inability to score 70 points against bench-players and rookies. The Knicks are classless for fielding a high-school team for their fans and trying to pass it off as professional NBA basketball.

That's my point. What's yours, again?

Sorry I'm joining this conversation late. This is my first time on the site, and I couldn't resist.

Let me start with the original post. Somehow, and I am struggling to figure this one out, the Bulls were compared to the 2006 Mets. So if the Mets had traded for Zito, then the Bulls would win the championship? Sorry, but that was just a really strange and off beat segway you made.

But seriously, you made a couple of attempts to show that the Bulls lack confidence. I've watched around 95% of the games this year (I LIVE for this team), and I have to ask you. what team is so much more confident? Miami and Detroit, right? Well, don't they have championship rings? I mean, have you ever heard of a ring-less team being referred to as confident? Are the Suns confident? Will they be called that when they're behind 3-2 against the Spurs or Mavs? How many analysts will question their confidence? Uh, all of them. So I don't buy that argument. Until you win it all, there is going to be doubt. So I can't see what Scott Skiles has to do with that.

Speaking of Skiles, I sense that many people in Knick-land hate this guy. I'm really surprised by this. After suffering through Larry Brown's half-hearted effort, and now Zeke the Snake Oil Salesman (aka the Dusty Baker of basketball), I don't quite understand why you would make Skiles the target of your anger. The guy forces his players to be accountable for their actions. He has a strong personality. In the 4 years he's been in Chicago, his teams have played DRAMATICALLY better in the second half of the season EVERY YEAR. His young players: Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, Sef, Tyrus - have all shown dramatic improvement every year - real improvement in basketball IQ and ability. I would expect fans who have suffered so much at the hands of terrible coaching recently to wish for a guy like Skiles to come in and starting kicking some tail. And as far as Skiles' reputation as a tyrant, well, maybe that's just a little overblown. Jason Kidd has been the driving force behind that claim for years. How many NBA titles does he have again? I know one thing: Kidd has fewer championships than he has domestic violence arrests. (had to go there, but only cuz Skiles won't respond every time Kidd calls him a backstabber). And that's what it's all about. Many of our favorite NBA players are nothing but babies that need constant coddling (see Steve Francis) and when a guy comes in with a strong personality and says you're going to give me 100% effort or sit on the bench, they can't handle it. If Skiles coached the Knicks with a free hand I'm not sure he'd like enough guys to put 5 on the court (oh that would be fun, wouldn't it? would steve francis just fall apart and start crying? would jerome james throw himself off a building?).

Moving on. The John Paxson bashing is even more perplexing. When did JR Smith become an All Star? Did I miss that? That guy couldn't guard his shadow. He's a ball hog, and has the basketball IQ of Nate Robinson. (And really, is there a worse basketball player than Nate? Maybe Sassy Telfair? I don't know. Nate is an abomination. Does he even realize it's a 5 on 5 game?) Would I, as a Bulls fan, want JR Smith getting significant minutes on this team over Hinrich, Gordon, or Deng? I'm sorry but that's an easy HECK NO! People who think JR Smith is good player, probably also think the Denver Nuggets have a shot at the title. Unfortunately, that's called ESPN-itis. Defense is half the game of basketball, but something that's easily overlooked.

Later,
Dave

Larry, your reading skills are subpar. Let me help you:

"Pray tell, why exactly are the Bulls 'classless'?"

Um, I think I stated why I thought they were classless in my post. In fact, here it is: "yes they lack class (undisputed, don't argue) for throwing oops and chucking threes..." at the end of a game they are winning by 30 points.

Um, my argument has nothing to do with the amount of points the Bulls scored (98), or who was in the game. My argument was that they were chucking three pointers, trying alley-oops, and shooting shots with plenty of time left on the shot clock at the end of a blowout, when every other team in the league, in that situation, would kill clock. Simple. Still following me?

You expect the Bulls to give up and walk away?
You are absolutely right, Larry. It would be giving up and waving a white flag if the Bulls killed clock up by 30 points with less than three minutes to go. Thank goodness these Bulls are so courageous! I would have surrendered like a frog-eating Frenchman, but those Bulls are some heroic mo-fos, yo! Someone should do a war pic about them. Win an Oscar on some "Letters from United Center" sh*t.

That would be expecting the Bulls to play like the Knicks.
And every other team in the NBA. And most NCAA D-I, D-II, and probably D-III teams. And most high school teams. But I believe I have played in rec leagues where some teams continue to pile up points even when professional courtesy dictates they should be killing clock. Skiles must have done an internship at the Y. It's so much fun to learn at the Y-M-C-A, Scott.

You're upset at the Bulls because they don't SUCK as much as the Knicks? Yes, Larry. The fact that the Bulls don't suck as much as the Knicks greatly troubles me. It keeps me up at night, and there is an uneasy feeling in the pit of my stomach because of it. Dear Basketball God, why can't the Bulls just suck as much as the Knicks? It's all I want in life, because as a Knicks fan I don't want my team to do well, I only want the Bulls to suck, too. Sorry, Larry, you might have me confused with Boston Red Sox fans, who oddly, you and your ilk remind me of.

The Bulls weren't running up the score, but they were preventing the Knicks from scoring.
That's a novel strategy for prevention of points - let's shoot quickly, instead of using the entire shot clock, so that the other team won't be able to score! Larry, please tell me some more great methods to prevent the Knicks from scoring? What about having the Bulls turn the ball over to the Knicks every time they get; that sounds like an equally good way to prevent the Knicks from scoring!

If your prevention technique was in my wallet that night I was drunk and hooked up with your mother I would probably have all types of STDs right now.

Dave, I'll go easy on you: You start by explaining that you don't even understand the simplest analogy I've ever made, short of "it's like two plus two", which probably confuses you as much. Therefore whatever comes next is probably not worth my time to read. So thanks for commenting, I'm sure it was an insightful first-hand look into the mind of raving, institutionalized f*ckstain with internet access.

Actually, Dave, I want to apology to you. You didn't do anything to warrant the nasty response I gave you. I think I just got fed up with the stupidity of the comments by Larry that I took it out on you. Your comments did not deserve to be disrespected by me. I'm sorry. I would like to delete my response to you and try again, if you allow me to.

To respond to your comments: I cited the Mavs as a team that showed confidence when they played the Knicks. They haven't won any rings (and probably won't, unfortunately), but they still have that confidence. And I think the Suns do, too. Especially against inferior competition. In fact, the Suns, even when they are losing to "better" teams, like the Spurs not too long ago (since the Suns have a better record I felt obliged to put quotes around "better") the Suns seem to give off this confident feeling that they would just go on one of their patented runs at some point and get a big lead. The run never really materialized, but they had that confidence. Sort of like Gilbert Arenas at the end of a game. He ain't won a ring, but he has an air of confidence.

I don't know if many people in Knick-land really care that much about Skiles, but I was put off by his comments. First he tried to imply that the Knicks were out of line for accusing him of running up the score, did his usual deadpan crap ("I've heard the Knicks are up and coming..."), and was just generally a sarcastic prick. So maybe it's just me. If other Knicks fans feel that way about Skiles, it may just be because he seems to possess some of Larry Brown's worst traits. That's my theory, anyway.

Oh, and in general people dislike him because of his crass comments, like how he thought "no player from a sub .500 team should be an All-Star". Yeah, I know winning is the goal, but I think you can be a good (or even a great player) and still be on a sucky team, Scott. Comments like that contribute greatly to why people don't like him.

I agree that JR Smith is not an All-Star, but neither is Ben Gordon, yet. And there are some very knowledgeable people who believe that the Nuggets can make some noise come playoff time (maybe not a championship, but maybe pull off an upset in the first round). I don't know if I am one of them yet, I have to see how the seeding stack up first.

Once again, sorry for my earlier response.

No worries dude.

One last thing I want to point out. You mention that the Bulls won't make it to the Finals. I totally agree, but that doesn't bother me at all. Deng is only 21, Tyrus is 20, Ben is 23, and Kirk is 26 (geezer!) Not many die hard Bulls fans had any aspirations of going to the Finals just to get our faces kicked in by the West rep. And even with Gasol, we would get monkey stomped. It just feels really good after Jerry "Crumbs" Krause to have a franchise making positive strides with a real sense of direction. I hope he's having fun scouting extended spring training games for Steinbrenner. Maybe he can keep a seat warm for Isiah.

Hah!

The Bulls kicked the Bobcats asses, and then they kicked the Wizards asses, and, guess what?

The Bobcats and Wizards didn't throw a hissy fit and need their diapers changed after getting their lunch money stolen by the Bulls bench.

That's because the Bobcats and Wizards are true professionals, not snake-oil salesmen like Isiah Thomas and Steve Francis.

John Paxson was the definition of 'Class' in dealing with both Jay Williams and Eddy Curry. He's been forthright in his dealings around the NBA and the New York Knicks franchise is probably the only one in the NBA that has a negative opinion of John Paxson.

Thanks for the pick. With any luck, in a few weeks I'll be thanking you for Greg Oden or Kevin Durant; at least Horford or Hibbert or Brewer.

Enjoy the bottom, whenever it is your team truly scrapes it.

Larry, please remember that the Knicks starters beat the Bulls 103-92 back in December. But you're right, the Bulls are so much better than a Knick team that was missing 4/5th of their starting lineup.

Enjoy the pick. Hopefully the Bulls will get themselves that low-post presence they need if they want to take it to the next level. Hopefully it won't be too late, with Ben Wallace on his last legs and one headband away from strangling Skiles....

I believe that peak oil is true and that we are now past the point of peak oil. I understand many of the current events have to do with this senerio and it won't be long before the main stream media and population wake up and understand what is going on. For me and my family, we are preparing for the next era.