More Gasol chatter
I tried posting this under the Tyrus diary and was told to move it, so...
I'd like to get back to Pau Gasol rumors/scenarios. According to McGraw's article in the Daily Herald, Pax is not backing down from publicly stating his desire to make the team better.
From the article...
Paxson pointed out that the Indiana Pacers seemed to jell quickly, winning six of nine games since making an eight-player trade with Golden State last month. Then again, the Pacers have played just two road games with the new lineup."Here's what I think it boils down to in a lot of ways: All of our guys, they're high-quality players," Paxson said. "They don't fall into the category of the superstar, though. They're not Kobe (Bryant). They're not (Dwyane) Wade. They're not LeBron (James), Carmelo (Anthony). Those are the guys that are basically untouchables in the league.
"So, you know what you have and you know that they're terrific players. But you're also looking for that guy that maybe is a franchise-type guy."
Paxson gave the impression that while he has high regard for the Bulls players, none of them are off limits right now.
"I'm real comfortable with the group we have in terms of how they play the game and how they approach it, all those things," he said. "And I put a high value on that. It always goes back to if there's a deal to be made that makes you better, you certainly have to take a hard look at it."
FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.
0 recs |
246 comments
Comments
Untouchables
The idea of "untouchable" players is sometimes glossed over or over-simplified. There are several degrees between some guy who's killing the team and has to be traded and someone who's the public face of the franchise and could never be traded. Even Shaq was traded by the Lakers, so you can't really say anyone is untouchable.
But the thing is, there are some guys who aren't surefire hall-of-famers in their primes, but who it would still make little sense to trade. This is often due to combinations of contract status, age, popularity, team chemistry, etc. So Hinrich (not the best guard in the league, but one of the better ones, plus just re-signed, plus brings a lot to the table as far as energy and chemistry) and Wallace (just signed a huge contract that most other teams wouldn't want, plus there's no way Pax would trade his one marquee FA signing) aren't going anywhere.
Statements like the one above from Pax are usually aimed at trying to throw off another GM, trying to create rumors that could cause another team to panic, etc. I wouldn't read too much into this, but it's an interesting article anyway.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 7, 2007 2:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Shaq was traded
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
reading phil jackson's book
after typing thaat I realize what a duh statement it was...but whatever
by milesgmsu on Feb 7, 2007 9:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 7, 2007 3:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
IMO, Pau Gasol is not the type of franchise player
He isn't a Kobe, a Wade, a LeBron, or a Dirk.
I wish we could get a guy with that sort of talent, I would trade the whole roster for a player like LeBron, but honestly I don't see any who are available. Unfortunately, the Bulls will have to win a championship through solid team play ala the 03 Pistons. The only way we'll land a superstar in the near future is if we luck into one via the Knicks pick, which seems highly unlikely.
This is actually one of my few criticisms of the league. Unless you have a superstar, it is very hard to win championships. And obtaining superstars is usually a product of luck . A team has to have a bad season, win the lottery, and get a low draft pick IN THE RIGHT YEAR. As the Bulls found out last year, having the number two pick doesn't mean much in a thin draft. Now, if that pick had occurred in 03, we'd have something. It's as much about luck as anything.
by 1958ChiTown on Feb 7, 2007 3:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Also, I assume this will be posed at some point,
"Grizzlies president Jerry West probably knows exactly what he wants in exchange for Pau Gasol. He also knows that the longer he waits, the better chance he will have of getting what he wants. It looks to me like West is trying to sweat out the Bulls. He would love to get Luol Deng and then maybe one of the Bulls' other starters -- Ben Gordon, Andres Nocioni or Kirk Hinrich -- plus P.J. Brown's expiring contract."
Screw trading Luol AND another starter for Pau. I wouldn't even trade Luol for him.
by 1958ChiTown on Feb 7, 2007 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
laughable.
by Scott 9 on Feb 7, 2007 3:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think they
by cubbybear on Feb 7, 2007 8:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
pretty sure that is just posturing
by bullshooter on Feb 7, 2007 3:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know anymore
At the same time my feelings are the same about the current players save for Duhon... It's obviously a hard trigger to pull. Since there is so much to gain and so much to lose. We'd never know until this is all over. I like for Gasol on the Bulls. Sometimes, I feel for One of the key "players" is good. That is only sometimes though. I'm torn.
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 4:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm in favor of any move
by Scott 9 on Feb 7, 2007 4:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
quit the hate
that being said, i realize du will probably have to go in order to get gasol (in which case, I value the team above all else)
by milesgmsu on Feb 7, 2007 9:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hate's such a strng word...
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 9:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Clown
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Whatever you say, hoss
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 5:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's impossible to put into words
by bullshooter on Feb 7, 2007 5:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
WOA!!!
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 5:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 5:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I live in a highrise
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 5:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Trader
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure thing, Kevin.
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 5:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
aww thanks kevin
by milesgmsu on Feb 7, 2007 9:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 5:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LeBron and Nash
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 5:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ask
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I was trying to ignore this stupid colloquy
Trader=Chris44=Kevin
by GWKD on Feb 7, 2007 5:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Gee, I had no clue
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 5:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
No way
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Right on.
From my (and thus hopefully the Bulls) perspective, Gasol is not a superstar. He is a better than average player, much like Hinrich, Deng, and Gordon. Hinrich is a great all around PG, Gordon is a shooter, Deng is a slasher. Wallace is a defensive menace. With Gasol, the pieces fit. Without any of those five though, we have another hole to fill. I don't think back-ups on our roster can adequately fill any of those roles.
The only way the Bulls improve substantially is if they don't give up any of these cogs and only give up future prospects/draft picks/Nocioni.
If we have to give up one, I wouldn't mind losing Deng, but getting Hakim Warrick back.
Of course, West doesn't work for the Bulls, so he probably won't agree with me.
by Repeat Threepeat on Feb 7, 2007 5:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Now
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Goostafer
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:53 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 6:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the real reason
feel free to be Kevin44 or something else if you want to have your 'name' back. the actual username though is unrecoverable from what I can tell.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 7, 2007 6:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Relax hommie
It's just a question?
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 5:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Hey
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 5:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Nope, just a shower
And you've obviously never been to Chicago or else you'd know the air isn't the least bit fresh.
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 6:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like someone has...
by boerwinkle on Feb 8, 2007 7:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is getting out of hand...
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 6:01 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Does
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 6:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
WARNING BLOGABULL READERS
I only hope that my personal suffering in reading this thread can help by warning others.
by GWKD on Feb 7, 2007 6:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Danger averted
by GWKD on Feb 7, 2007 6:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
All
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 6:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Seriously dude...
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 6:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Sure thing, Kevin
I guess it's tough to be creative when you're fourteen.
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 6:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Our Buddy Trader's gone
And probably colossus too if he never learns to just ignore the guy and not pick fights.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 7, 2007 6:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
matt
by chris44 on Feb 7, 2007 6:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
yeah well your fun is a pain in my ass
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 7, 2007 6:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Can't we all just get along?
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 7:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Does TT's troubles impact a possible trade?
by chgobr on Feb 7, 2007 7:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
yeah,
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 7, 2007 7:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's my
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 8:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why not just
by cubbybear on Feb 7, 2007 8:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Please no
by Repeat Threepeat on Feb 7, 2007 8:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
Has Carter ever played on a contender? The raptors had that one year where they played a pretty good series against the 76ers in the playoffs ... I think that was as far as he's ever gotten. Keep in mind, the last 2 years he's played with a pretty good PG and a decent SF and still not gotten much done.
I'd rather have Gasol, and I'm not even that big a Gasol fan.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 9:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather trade Hinrich than Deng.
by cubbybear on Feb 7, 2007 8:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad...
by Scott 9 on Feb 7, 2007 8:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Is anybody watching the Memphis game?
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 8:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I just turned it on
by chgobr on Feb 7, 2007 8:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Surprisingly
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 8:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes he did..
Too bad he had 9TOs... but he played his ass off.
He's been playing so good the last few games that other than him asking for a trade, I don't know why West would get rid of him. Matt is right.
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 10:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Matt; for the love of all things holy
Can you limit diary creation on gasol, limit comments by certain people in a given time, or take some unprecedented popular soveirngty approving tyrannical role (i've been reading alot of Hobbes lately, so you can see the influence)? Please....
I promise I will spell and grammar check every post from now on......please?
by milesgmsu on Feb 7, 2007 9:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
i posted this a few hours late...
by milesgmsu on Feb 7, 2007 9:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 9:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Excuse me?
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 9:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh Crap
by Goostafer on Feb 7, 2007 9:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, it's him
by ChrisRobin on Feb 7, 2007 11:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
it was
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 7, 2007 11:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's cool Matt
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 7:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
These numbers work:
L O S T is back....
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 9:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of LOST...
by ChrisRobin on Feb 7, 2007 11:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i wouldnt have a problemw with that trade
by milesgmsu on Feb 8, 2007 4:47 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well....
Actually, we could easily go after Lewis this summer. He made it sound like he's going to opt out and go somewhere else. He probably would have been traded if not for his wrist injury.
by Colossus on Feb 7, 2007 10:03 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
the Sonics
I think Lewis is still playing under his original contract, which means the Sonics (under the CBA) have the right to offer him more money than anyone else, if I understand correctly. He would really have to want to leave.
As far as that trade proposed above ... the Sonics suck right now. Why would we want to trade our whole team for theirs? But I do like Lewis and think he'd make a good addition by himself.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 9:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Lewis got extended a year or two ago
by tyger1147 on Feb 8, 2007 10:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He can opt out after this season
by Colossus on Feb 8, 2007 2:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OK
If the Bulls don't make any moves this year, and Lewis is available by trade this summer, I'd be in favor of going after him. But he can't really play the 4, so we'd still have the same hole in the line-up.
The more I think about it, the more I'm troubled by drafting Tyrus last year. I like the kid, he's exciting and has talent, but we now have too many guys who are basically going to be most effective at the 3. With Deng solidly ensconsed in the position, we're stuck with playing Tyrus or Noc pretty much out of position (I don't think Tyrus will ever really be a PF at 6'8", especially with the 6'9" Wallace at the 5).
I don't think Aldridge was that great, but at least he'd have filled a need.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 10:10 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Height has nothing to do with it
-
Lewis is a great all around player, but I believe the need is a Post player to complement the backcourt. So, no, Lewis would not be right. And I doubt he's even in Paxon's sights. If he is, Im sure he'll do good tho, as the Bulls like to run, if the style of play changes, he'd be good. Considering Ben Wallace is still part of the team, I doubt the style will change much.
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 10:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, Marion is awesome at the 4
This all changes if you think Tyrus can play the 4. Personally, I really don't. It might not be (entirely) due to his height, but I think he'd be best (irrespective of team/roster) by losing 15 lbs. and playing the 3. I'm not saying I'm an expert, but I do watch a lot of basketball and I've seen Tyrus play several times. I don't think he'll ever be a good PF.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 2:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Losing 15lbs???
by Jesse07 on Feb 8, 2007 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
well, he can do 2 things at once
Losing weight and developing an outside game. I'm sure Tyrus can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Again, I'm not saying he should do this. I'm saying that, if you DON'T consider the team he plays for or the roster, but were to just look at Tyrus from an objective, "what kind of player should he be?" standpoint, I personally think he'd be better at the 3 than the 4. Given that, I'd tell him to lose a little weight. just my opinion.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand & partially agree
I just don't understand why we would want him lighter? There are players who try and bulk up and lose there explosiveness a couple years into the league. This is not the case with Tyrus.
If he gains some more stregnth without losing his explosiveness, the extra size & stregnth will only help him when he is matched up with stronger small forwards like Lebron or Artest.
by Jesse07 on Feb 8, 2007 2:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
that's one of the dumbest things I've heard
by bullshooter on Feb 8, 2007 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
asdf
I'm not confusing him with Sweetney, he probably weighs at least 225 now, and he could stand to get a little quicker IF he's going to play the 3.
AGAIN - I'm NOT saying Tyrus should lose weight. I'm saying that, IF I were to look at him irrespective of the fact that he plays for the Bulls and they already have too many SFs, I'd say he's better suited to the 3 than the 4. Given that scenario, I'd want him to get quicker, which usually involves losing weight.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
good points
At any rate, he's not going to listen to us, and I guess at age 20 or whatever it's likely he'll only get bigger as he ages.
Again, I like the kid, and I always root for him. I just think he's better suited for the 3(in my opinion, which doesn't count for anything).
Given that, he might not have been the best pick last year. Bulls already had Deng at the 3, and Noc, a natural 3 who's already stuck at the 4.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 2:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nocioni like Tyrus
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 3:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
the Bulls definitely would
be better suited with Tyrus at the power forward, because that's where they need him.
But I think, as a player, he's more naturally suited to the small forward. It was only in that context that I would want him to get lighter and quicker.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't
He looks like a 3 cause he plays like a maniac! I think he'll develop and be a good fit for the team in the long run, if they decide to keep him. If not, he's good trade bait for a real 4. I think him maybe gaining some weight wwould actually be better. So he can pound it out sith bigger 4s.
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 2:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
huh?
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 2:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, that actually makes sense
If you watch Tyrus play, he's a little too high energy for PF. He has the strength and the post skills of a PF but the height and energy of a 3.
As far as his losing weight - that obviously is all premised on my opinion that he's better suited to play the 3. If he's convinced (or Skiles and Pax are convinced) that he belongs at PF, then that doesn't come into play.
My point wasn't to say that Tyrus is fat - he obviously isn't. My point was that, if he's a natural 3 (as I think, and I know I'm not in charge of anything) they drafted a guy at a position of little need.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 3:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 3:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How...
by EdNealy on Feb 8, 2007 3:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"Do you have the crazy?"
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 3:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That is a crazy ass movie...
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 3:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Too High Energy?
by Jesse07 on Feb 8, 2007 3:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't mind being picked on
and I respect your opinion. The high-energy comment referred to whether he was better suited to the 3 or the 4.
Do I like the fact that he plays with heart and energy? Sure. What I meant was that, if you were to look at Tyrus from college clips, or workout clips, or whatever, and say "where do I see this guy playing in the NBA?" you'd have certain things that indicate he'd be better at the 4, and certain things that indicate he'd be better at the 3 (including his energy).
On the balance, I say he's a better natural 3. Obviously, the Bulls can't play him there.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Instead of repeating yourself,
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 3:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OK
I didn't mean to repeat myself, I've just been responding to the responses as they come.
In general, SFs are smaller (hence the name), shorter, and quicker than PFs. PFs specialize in posting up, getting rebounds, and generally playing in the paint. SFs can also work out of the post, but also play facing the basket, and are required to run and pass a little more.
In my mind, Tyrus is better suited to the 3 because: he's only 6'8" (shorter than almost all 4s in the league), he has a quick enough step to play either back-to-the-basket OR facing-the-basket, and doesn't do that well at drawing double-teams, in part because he can't or won't hold onto the ball long enough for the double-team to come.
He doesn't need to gain strength to play anywhere, he needs to gain strength ONLY if he's going to play at the 4. If he were to play at the 3 (where I theoreticallly said he'd be better, although not with the current roster) gaining quickness would be better than gaining strength.
Plenty of SFs under 210 pounds.
Andre Iguodala (207)
Dorell Wright (205)
Josh Childress (210)
Marquis Daniels (200)
Even the afore-mentioned Rashard Lewis is only 215.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There's a correllation between height and weight
by bullshooter on Feb 8, 2007 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
His development path
IS similar to Deng's - which is exactly why I'm saying he's naturally better suited to play the 3.
Tyrus is a little undersized to play the 4. I think he'd do well at the 3 (on most teams); but if he were to do that, I'd say he would have to get quicker. Losing weight could help him do that.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 4:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No it wouldn't
by bullshooter on Feb 8, 2007 4:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If he
would have to lose a LOT of muscle, then clearly that wouldn't be smart. I've seen him play a lot, in person and on TV, and I think 225 (or even higher) is his ideal weight at PF.
Which is where he has to play, given the current make-up of this team.
But in a different situation, I think he'd thrive at the 3, in which case I do think he could lose a few pounds to run with the Childress/Iguodala types.
Trading a little strength for quickness would be a good move in that case. I'm not saying he's fat.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 5:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you don't work out much, do you...
by bullshooter on Feb 8, 2007 5:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I actually worked as a personal trainer for 3 year
Quickness is based on fast-twitch muscle, which isn't that heavy. Compared to most guys in the street, Tyrus is both very quick and very strong. But in the world of professional sports, most people who want to get quicker are told to lose weight, especially in the form of slow-twitch muscle. Most who want to get stronger (at the possible expense of quickness) are told to gain weight, especially in the form of slow-twitch muscle.
Muscle controls quickness, but pretty much every athlete who wants to get quicker ends up losing a few lbs. Because they shed heavy slow twitch muscle and keep (possibly even gain) fast-twitch muscle.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 5:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
that's my point
by bullshooter on Feb 8, 2007 5:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If he shed
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 5:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
this might be
all that ebing said, after about 10 posts with weight and hieght my eyes started to bleed and i went BACK to reading adam smith...thanks guys
by milesgmsu on Feb 9, 2007 2:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I still don't understand your argument.
The quickness that you want to achieve with Tyrus won't be achieved thrugh losing weight, if he loses more weight, he'd be like T.Prince... So, Lets see some numbers since you brought up some players who are the size u'd like Tyrus to be. Oh and of all those AI2 is the only one doing something in this league interms of performance...
-
Tyrus Thomas
235Lbs - 6-9
-
PFs:
S.Marion
228Lbs - 6-7
-
E.Brand
254Lbs - 6-8
-
A.Jamison
235Lbs - 6-9
-
C.Boozer
258Lbs - 6-9
-
I could do this all day... These guys are established above average PFs in the NBA. All around the same "proportions" as T2. And If im correct, Ty has a longer wingspan than all these guys which would make him a force as a PF. He can't shoot well enough to be a 3. He needs to put on 15Pounds if you ask me.
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 5:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tyrus is only 6'8"
Look at the best PFs in the league:
Garnett - 6'11"
Dirk - 7'0"
Jermaine O - 6'11"
Duncan - 6'11"
'Sheed - 6'11"
And, yes, Marion is also awesome at 6'7" If you think Tyrus can become a Marion type, then, yes, maybe he's better suited at PF in your mind. I personally don't see that, and think he's going to have trouble at the 4.
That's my opinion. That's also what pretty much every analyst said after the draft last year.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 5:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
these days
by bullshooter on Feb 8, 2007 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
not a single one of those guys
Garnett - starts next to Mark Blount (7 feet)
Dirk - starts next to Dampier (6'11"), or sometimes Diop (7 feet)
JO - starts next to Troy Murphy (6'11)
Duncan - starts next to Elson (7 feet)
Wallace - starts next to Nazr Muhammed (6'11") or Webber (6'10").
Every single one of these teams has 2 guys starting that are 6'11" or taller. That's the protoypical height for PF, or at least 6'10"
Can a player be shorter than that and still a good PF? Of course. I just said that I think Tyrus would not be at his best there, and would be better at the 3.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 5:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have a suggestion...
by tyger1147 on Feb 8, 2007 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What I don't get...
I think that'd be cool. I know it's tough to admit it, but NO ONE seems to want to these days.
by tyger1147 on Feb 8, 2007 5:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't have trouble
admitting I'm wrong if I thought I was. See the above post - the best PFs are mostly over 6'10" tall.
As far as your question, there are many good SFs in the league who fit the bill.
Rashard Lewis is 6'9", 215
Stephen Jackson is 6'8", 218
Gerald Wallace is 6'7", 220
Josh Howard is 6'7", 210
I also recall at least 2 commentators saying Tyrus would be better at the 3 after this year's draft. I'll try to find a link when I get home tonight.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 5:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok
-
Tyrus is prob 6'8" and a half. He's listed as 6'9"
Unless you've measured him yourself, I'd rather go with his NBA listing:
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tyrus_thomas/index.html
-
He might be lighter than I said before. On Yahoo he's at 235 - NBA 215...
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 5:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
see the above post
Every single one of those guys starts next to a taller (or same height) guy.
6'8" and a half is short for a PF. It's not impossible to compete at that position, but that's a better height for SF.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 5:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ok fine...
He is not 6'8". He is 19yrs old. and prob grow an inch or two. And gain 15 more pounds.
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tyrus is 20 years old
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 6:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
and a more recent one
http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/659/tyrus_thomas/
So, maybe he's 6'8" and a half. Better suited to the 3 than the 4, in my opinion. I see you disagree, and I understand that ... we'll have to see where he ends up playing (both team-wise and position-wise) before anyone is proven right or wrong.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry...
As listed in Bulls Website. His emplyer. I think they are more accurate.
http://www.nba.com/bulls/roster/
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 10:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OK, I was wrong. He's 20
-
Shouldn't you be looking at the profile given by the League he plays for instead of a News Source? Also, by reading thru the link you posted, it still says he's a Forward from LSU... hmmm.. sounds outdated to me except for his age. Which is probably meant to be changed automatically as the time changes. And, if you read his scouting report, it says there in plain Black and white what we have been saying all along and I quote:
Positives: Big-time athlete who is getting compared to another LSU alum, Stromile Swift. Flies up and down the floor. Excellent rebounder and shot blocker. Unlike Swift, seems to have excellent intensity and has a better feel for the game. Nice touch on his mid-range jumper. Teams may try to transition him into a Shawn Marion-type small forward in the pros.
Negatives: Needs to add more muscle. Still thin to play the four in the pros and doesn't have the perimeter skills to move to the three. Doesn't possess much in the way of post moves at the moment.
-
Obviously, Vertical Leap and Wing-Span make up for his "lack of size" as it so does for Marion and Josh Smith. There is no-one in the league who plays more out of position than those two and still able to do it successfully. Granted, Smith doesn't play the PF position, but guards around the post as a PF does.
-
I understand that you stand by what you believe, and I believe I've given enough information to try and prove you wrong.
But from here-on.. I agree to disagree,
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 10:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
fair enough
We'll see what happens with him.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 10:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
david lee
by Sambossanova on Feb 8, 2007 6:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How's this for a source -
one Tyrus Thomas:
"Thomas said after the workout that he sees himself more as a three than a four in the pros.
'I really wasn't allowed to play the three at LSU so people don't understand that I've been either a guard or a small forward my whole life," Thomas explained. "This is the first year I've ever really played the four. I think I'll always be more comfortable on the perimeter.' "
http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=113506
Any thoughts?
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 9:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
please stop
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 9:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
well
I think, all things being equal, he's better suited for the 3. If you've decided you don't want to argue otherwise, just stop responding. No one has a gun to your head.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 10:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yeesh
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 10:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
again ...
I didn't say he should lose weight. I said IF he was on a different team, with different needs, he'd be better at the 3. In that case, yes, I think losing a few pounds would make him better.
As far as your last statement, "as if position matters that much in basketball" - I don't even know where to begin with that. Why don't we put Duhon in at the 4? Then, when he gets knocked over, you can say "yeah, he needs to spend more time in the weight room with Wallace."
Good stuff.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 10:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
within reasonable boundaries
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 11:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would think...
by tyger1147 on Feb 8, 2007 11:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
obviously a better player
is more productive than a crappier player - that's not a scoop.
The point was, given the 5 positions on every NBA team, I think Tyrus is naturally better suited to the 3. Some people agree with you that he isn't. Tyrus agrees with me that he is. So, you can believe what you want. I'll take him at his word.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 11:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I remember Alfonso Soriano...
Players think they should play a lot of places. Means nothing.
by tyger1147 on Feb 8, 2007 11:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
if playing SS
required a baseball player to be a certain height, and Soriano was smaller than almost every other SS in the league, then the comparison would be appropriate. But in Tyrus' case, his height AND his natural inclination both lead to SF.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 11:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The funny thing is...
You're a trainer, tell me how someone gets below 3-4% body fat. Pleeeeeeze. Wait, 3-4% is isn't healthy by any standards. In fact, the only people ever really that skinny or body builders in competition.
Most athletes who are absolutely ripped (the leanest there is) are about 5-6% body fat. So, working backwards, that puts TT's body fat currently at 9%. That is soooo not true.
Finally, you're a former personal trainer. I'm really curious to know, how does someone go about losing slow-twitch muscle fibers but not fast-twitch? If you can answer this question, I will call you god forever. If not, you're an idiot that needs to shut up.
by tyger1147 on Feb 8, 2007 11:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hahahaha!!!!
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 11:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't expect
you to call me a god, because most people who understand biology can understand the process.
But, the way to drop heavy muscle and pounds while increasing quickness is to stop (or reduce) free-weight training, reduce caloric intake, and increase plyometric training, which relies on rapid/explosive muscle movements, especially with gradually increasing resistance. This is what boxers do to increase their punching power, while not putting on pounds or even increasing their strength (as the term is commonly understood). Most boxers couldn't lift much weight compared to how hard they can punch,and they don't weigh much compared to how much power they generate.
I don't understand where the anger is coming from, but that's your problem. I think you might be confusing me with someone else you have a long-standing gurdge against. If you've gotten this angry over a discussion about Tyrus' weight, that'sjust sad.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 11:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hmmm....
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 11:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
sounds good
If one has the discipline, you can definitely lose weight and gain quickness, even if you're already in good shape. It requires a lot of dedication, both as far as diet and as far as training.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 11:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
but
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 11:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no, that's the whole point
I think he'd do better to move the the 3, and drop a few pounds, on a DIFFERENT team. Clearly the Bulls aren't going to have him do so when they already have a log-jam at the 3.
The bet should take effect IF tyrus gets traded.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 11:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow!
So I'll do the same.
First off, you're wrong about slow-twitch being for 'strength'. Fast-twitch and slow-twitch muscle fibers BOTH PRODUCE THE SAME AMOUNT OF STRENGTH. However, slow-twitch muscles don't fire as rapidly (hence, the name), but they also don't fatigue as easy. While a fast-twitch muscle may fire rapidly, it quickly tires out.
Second, most people have a 50/50 balance of types of twitch muscles, or something very close. It's genetically determined. As far ash changing them, I don't know how you know, because studies are just being shown that you can change from fast-twitch to slow... but currently theren't enough to show whether you can do the opposite.
Third, you are right in general: if a person loses weight, they will be quicker. But it has nothing to do with muscles. It's about the weight.
Fourth, a person doesn't HAVE to lose weight to get quicker. Football players, through the first five years of their professional careers, will get quicker while adding 5-10 pounds. (this is similar to your point about boxers: they can get "stronger" while staying the same weight. Force = Mass x Speed, right? So, Mass stays the same, you increase Speed, you get a higher Force, right?)
All of this is pretty much moot, because fifth, nothing to do with muscle, but more with position differences: Sweetney is 6'8", 270 (listed). Deng is listed at 6'9", 220. Should they change weights and change positions? No. Why not? Because their games are VASTLY different.
The same is with Thomas. He can't shoot. At all. Hell, now he can't even dunk. All he can do is rebound and block shots. That's not good for a three. What would make Thomas a good 3 is if he can develop a shot and some handles. If you want to say, "Thomas should do that, or could do that with another team." Fine.
Look, there's a reason LeBron James is 6'8", 240 lbs and a small forward. And it has nothing to do with how skinny he is or how quick he is. What it has to do with the fact that he can shoot, he has incredible ability to drive to the basket under control while being aware of the whole court. The ability to create.
Thomas, for whatever team he plays for, will not ever be under 220 lbs. Whether he develops into a SF or PF has nothing to do with losing weight. It will have EVERYTHING to do with whether he can do the things a three does or not.
by tyger1147 on Feb 9, 2007 12:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'VE BEEN WAITNING FOR YOU MAN..
by Goostafer on Feb 9, 2007 12:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the last 2 sentences
And I think he can do the things a 3 has to do. And so does he. Some people don't think he can, and therefore they don't see him becoming a successful 3. That's all just speculation until he grows up, or at least becomes a starter.
Studies haven't really shown that you can switch from fast-twitch to slow or vice versa ... some studies claim that, but it's really not conclusive either way. What I'm talking about is not converting muscle from type to type, but LOSING the muscle that does nothing to make one quicker and gaining (or at least retaining) the muscle that does. And it can be done, and is done all the time.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 9, 2007 12:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's been real, guys
I know you don't agree with me on Tyrus but sometimes a rousing discussion is good for the health ... it angries up the blood.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 9, 2007 12:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There's another thread about what Tyrus thinks
by bullshooter on Feb 9, 2007 12:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tyrus
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 4:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he doesn't have to be a finesse guy,
I'm not saying he's a guard. And he wouldn't get knocked around on drives if he was playing against SFs instead of PFs.
The fact that he gets knocked around on drives and fails to get the best rebounding position augments the point that he should be playing at the 3.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 4:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
he's 19
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 8, 2007 5:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think TT could play the three...
and had an outside shot with great handles and passing ability.
by tyger1147 on Feb 8, 2007 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
6'9" 200?
Thomas is 20 years old and is effectively (as much as we hate to admit), a three year vaunted "project", although I love the prospects. Unlike Chandler, who came back each summer with more tatoos, but no more weight, Thomas should be able to "bulk-up" to 240 or so over the next few years (see Kenyon Martin). With his wing-span and jumping, he'll be fine at the 4.
by EdNealy on Feb 8, 2007 3:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No way he's 200
He was listed at 220 at the beginning of the year, and he's gotten heavier, if anything.
See my above comment - given the current situation, Tyrus pretty much has to play PF. There's no where else to put him. But I personally think he'd be better suited at the 3 (but for the fact that we're already set there).
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 3:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
NO!
by EdNealy on Feb 8, 2007 3:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I see
I misunderstood that. Probably nearer 210, which isn't that out of line with a lot of SFs in the league.
As is stands now, the Bulls really have no option but to play him as PF. But if he were on a different team with more holes, I'd say he's better suited to the 3.
by Bayern Munich on Feb 8, 2007 3:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Eureka
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=99~2175~3032~996&teams=29~29~29~4
One young stud. Two expiring contracts. Two draft picks.
One unrealistic fantasy?
by preverbal on Feb 8, 2007 12:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
boy..
by Scott 9 on Feb 8, 2007 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course..
by Scott 9 on Feb 8, 2007 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
oh Gasol
I do agree Gasol could help the Bull's trade effort if he acted more disgruntle. If Gasol really wants to come to Chicago and win, maybe he can get a real bad attitude for a couple of weeks to help grease the trade wheels.
Only 2 more weeks of this maddness.
by Jesse07 on Feb 8, 2007 1:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Did anyone see that Eddy Curry has stated that he
Maybe we can trade some players back to NY for that post presence we need. :)
by 1958ChiTown on Feb 8, 2007 2:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I saw that
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 3:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
O-k
get on with it man.. you're not wanted here.
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 5:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You can have him
by Colossus on Feb 8, 2007 5:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Come on
He'd do it.
by Colossus on Feb 8, 2007 5:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ok
by Goostafer on Feb 8, 2007 5:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
My post above was satire.
I don't think anyone seriously wants Curry back.
Ease up on the caps there.
by 1958ChiTown on Feb 8, 2007 5:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Um, OK.
by 1958ChiTown on Feb 8, 2007 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hah
Thats funny. Your funny! welcome :)
Id prefer a center who rebounds and defends...plus Tyrus, cap space and next years pick
by rquinsee on Feb 8, 2007 6:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
3-way satisfaction
We're taking a lot on in salary in this deal, but it'll satisfy all the teams needs.
It hurts with Noc being injured, but the Clips are having problems with Maggette. They need another inside guy (Only hope that they think Sweets is the solution.)
Positives: Maggette's salary is manageable and he can play the 2 to replace BG.
It should get Thabo more minutes also.
The Grizz get their younsters and cap relief. They don't need a draft pick with that package. I through in Warrick for cap purposes.
The Bulls may have to throw in another 2nd rounder to LA, but maybe not since LA is probably close to wanting Maggette out.
New rotation:
Kirk/Du
Maggette/Thabo
Deng/Khryapa
Gasol/Warrick
Wallace/Allen
Go head, grill me now...
by kingj41 on Feb 9, 2007 12:21 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don't mind it...
No one will look at this, but I've been thinking it and just wanted to put it out there.
Deng is the guy to trade over Gordon. If the Bulls trade BG, what's the guard rotation? Hinrich, Duhon, Griffin, Thabo? As much as i love Thabo, he hasn't had enough minutes for me to feel comfortable enough that a) he'll perform or b) Skiles will use him.
OTOH, if you trade away Deng, you have Noc and Khryapa that could possibly play the 3 now (and if you get someone for the three). PLUS, I think one of the best 3's with immediate dividends will fall in the draft-Florida State's Al Thornton He's a 23-year-old senior who is agressive and plays with high energy. While I don't think he would be even close to Deng's point output potential, I think putting him with Wallace, Hinrich, Gordon and Gasol, he'd be perfect. He'd be able to contribue right away. Had he been in last year's draft, I think he might have gone Top 5. But this one's sooooo deep and loaded with big men and other 3/4's, I think he'd be a huge value pick.
Anyway, like I said, I don't expect anyone to care, but I've thought about this and while I consider Deng the best player the Bulls have, I also think he's more easily replacable than Gordon. I could be wrong, though; I often am.
by tyger1147 on Feb 9, 2007 12:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
unacceptable
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 9, 2007 1:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Off the track
by chgobr on Feb 9, 2007 1:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks for the kind words
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 9, 2007 1:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
quit trying to suck up
and on another note (im on dial up and lost the original post) that trade is fantastic, but as hollinger has a habit of saying "the trade has to work for all invovled....not just your team"....bulls rape two of the better gm's in the league...logo and elgin...with broomsticks and squirrels in that deal
by milesgmsu on Feb 9, 2007 2:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Um...
If the Bulls are going to lose one, you can't just think of who is better. You have to think about the short-term and long-term replacements.
You said "nearly as bad" which to means it's better for the short-term (seriously, who's the outside threat if the Bulls trade Gordon away?). For the short-term, Noc/Krappy/Griffin for Deng is better than Sefo/Du/Griffin for Gordon.
Second, for a long-term, there are four options: develop in-house, trade, draft and free agent. Sefo might be able to do it, but we just don't know-he's the key. A free agent that can replace Gordon will (obviously) cost a lot of money: ie, Vince Carter.
A trade for Ray Allen or Paul Pierce or another impact 2 is going to cost picks and parts that after trading for Gasol, the Bulls wouldn't have.
There aren't many "instant impact" guys for the 2 spot in the draft. There are good ones that might mature, but it's not deep there. Definitely none that would be certain to be better than Sefolosha. There is, IMO, one at the three in Al Thornton. Like I said, the guy will be 24 next December.
In the perfect situation, he could be an immediate impact. I think with two big scorers (Gasol and Gordon) and two or three or above-average assist guys (Gasol and Hinrich), I think he'd be perfect.
Personally, I'd rather not lose either one. I'm just, as everyone, speaking hypotheticals here. I just think it's funny (I'm bored and avoiding working-gimme a break) that you said you would rather have Sefo/Du replace Gordon than Noc/Khryapa replacing Deng.
by tyger1147 on Feb 9, 2007 2:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
uh....no i didn't
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 9, 2007 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I know you didn't.
So... I just assumed, since you were responding to my post (instead of ignoring it like I assumed everyone would in a long, old "Gasol diary"), and you didn't like Noc/Krappy over Deng, that it would have to be the other.
by tyger1147 on Feb 9, 2007 4:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
lets make this clearer
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 9, 2007 4:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay...
by tyger1147 on Feb 10, 2007 12:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Gordon
by bullshooter on Feb 10, 2007 12:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
coming out of self-appointed disgust ban
by Paxson Jackson on Feb 10, 2007 2:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon potential
by chgobr on Feb 9, 2007 2:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I like that deal
THAT would be a scenario where I'd be ok with giving up Gordon. Just replacing him with Duhon/Sefo does enough damage where Gasol wouldn't help enough.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 9, 2007 12:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I figured the
It could actually be split into two seperate deals, I just put it all on one trade to see all the players trading places.
Plus we have a couple of 2nd rounders that I think have value in this draft.
by kingj41 on Feb 9, 2007 1:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Give them a 2008 first round pick
by Colossus on Feb 9, 2007 1:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It kills me - - -
by chgobr on Feb 9, 2007 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How has TT Been a disappointment?!
I'd understand if he was a starter as Duhon is/was/will be... again, but he's not.
by Goostafer on Feb 9, 2007 1:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks ---
by chgobr on Feb 9, 2007 2:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He rolled his
by sue369 on Feb 9, 2007 2:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Good but...
by Jesse07 on Feb 9, 2007 2:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
True...
You do lose the 3, but you no longer have to rely on it for a score. Free throws are much easier and having a low post threat offers more basket-cuts from your wings.
by kingj41 on Feb 9, 2007 2:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
this is a fantastic trade
by bullshooter on Feb 9, 2007 4:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hmmm
by Goostafer on Feb 9, 2007 6:01 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
He wears a headband
by Colossus on Feb 9, 2007 6:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And
by Goostafer on Feb 9, 2007 7:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
TRADE FOR GASOL TRADE FPR GASOL
by Dr0ne420 on Feb 9, 2007 10:30 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm ready,
by chris44 on Feb 10, 2007 9:36 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Definitely
Oh you mean the Bulls?
by bullshooter on Feb 10, 2007 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm flattered
by Colossus on Feb 10, 2007 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
BOOHOO
by BOOHOO on Feb 11, 2007 11:30 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
DAMN THAT GUY IS CRAZY
by BOOHOO on Feb 11, 2007 11:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
WHERE YOU AT MATTY HAVENT KICKED OFF YET
by BOOHOO on Feb 11, 2007 11:40 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
IP Addresses
by Rick S on Feb 12, 2007 7:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

by 












