I am very nervous. Who am I?

I am very nervous. Who am I?

Post by Thomas Cheu » Sat, 11 Mar 1995 17:50:05


Quote:



>>I'm Pete Myers.  Or Ron Harper.  That's who the hell I am.

>>If MJ should come back, what's going to happen at the two guard spot for
>>the Bulls?  Clearly, it seems that Ron Harper would be the odd man out,
>>but the Bulls sank a hell of a lot of money into him.  Myers remains the
>>best defensive pure two guard on the Bulls, until MJ proves it
>>otherwise.  Still, this is the very guy who became the example cited
>I would hope that Harper would be the odd man out.  I was very happy that
>the Bulls picked him up (though I didn't know he was getting a
>mega-salary), but it is very clear that the Bull's triangle offense is
>not compatible with Harper's style.  

Agreed.  The Bulls will certainly stay in the triangle offense for the
rest of the season.  If MJ is really to stay, next year should be
revolutionary, considering the possibility of Pippen leaving and bringing
in some young picks.  In any event, until the Bulls get a stronger
interior presence in a PF and some more athletic folks, the triangle will
stick for a while.  

Quote:
>>So what happens now?  Do the Bulls hang on to Myers and drop a big white
>>stiff, carrying an excess of guards?  Will Reinsdorf bite the proverbial
>>bullet and waive Ron Harper, eating the salary?  Will it be one of the
>>other guards, like a Steve Kerr?  Or does Myer get dropped?
>They should not drop Kerr.  As much of a defensive liability as he is, he
>is basically like a Paxson, a great spot-up shooter who knows where to go
>at the right time.  If it were up to me, I'd chuck Harper.  I'd also get
>rid of Longley.  The guy will never get into shape, it seems.  He is just
>so pitifully slow.  7'2" centers should not get swatted as much as he
>does.  It's quite painful to watch.  Perdue's not bad, and Wennington's
>one of those "fundamentally sound" (ie slow but has nice form...) players.  

Yes, I agree with you 100% there.  Kerr indeed reminds me of a Paxson,
although with even more range, and I also think he has somewhat more
ability to work without a screen or being left alone on a double team.  
He's proven that he can get shots off himself without always needing
help.  I felt that Paxson was more solid from the mid-range, but Kerr
would flourish doubly if MJ were to consistently draw the double or
triple.  It should be noted that Phil Jackson was saying that he likes
having Michael practicing with the team because everyone tends to step up
the effort, responding to his leadership, even though MJ's shooting touch
is way off right now.  

Luc Longley.  What a disaster.  When will GMs figure out that the
"irresistible height" misnomer will blow up in one's face when you either
lack athleticism or outright skill.  Where was Longley drafted?  
Relatively high.  I think of guys like Stanley Roberts, Luc Longley,
Shawn Bradley, and I just wince.  The only Big Stiff that has worked out
lately has been Rik Smits.  And the major problem with Longley is his idea
of defense is standing still and flailing one's arms.  Perdue's a keeper
for his effort, even though I don't like him that much.  Wennington, I
think, becomes valuable particularly because of his mid-range shooting
ability.  He can become a valuable asset in the playoffs if his mid-range
shooting draws *** opposing centers out of the lane, allowing
penetrators like MJ and Pippen to go to work.  I think of him as one of
the better jumpshooting centers, though not a Ewing of course.

--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Cheung '95          Represent Harvard's opinions?   Copyright 1995

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am thinking of aurochs and angels, the secret of durable pigments, prophetic
sonnets, the refuge of art.  And this is the only immortality you and I may
share, my***ta."         -Vladimir Nabokov

 
 
 

I am very nervous. Who am I?

Post by John Econopou » Sun, 12 Mar 1995 02:00:37


Quote:
> otherwise.  Still, this is the very guy who became the example cited
> along with the proverb, "Don't bring in a promising young player against
> a superstar that will destroy his confidence in practice."  Not too long
> ago, some people thought that Myers was unsalvageable, after his early
> years with the Bulls shellacked his self-confidence.

I don't think Myers is a guy who fits that proverb.  He's not that young,
and when he came to the Bulls he was already a journeyman who had played
with a number of teams, including my Knicks around 6+ years ago, so he
wasn't that promising (although personally I liked him).  The proverb was
created with some other young SG actually drafted by the bulls in mind, I
forget who.

Quote:
> One question, for the technicians:  how does the salary cap work on
> this?  If the Bulls need to fit in MJ's big salary, then perhaps Harper
> is indeed the right person to drop.

If they drop Harper, they get half his salary towards the cap.  No idea
if they need to do this for MJ.

Quote:
> The other thing I thought of--will the Nets be able to pluck whoever gets
> waived to shore up their two guard spot, which is still wide open?  I
> think the Nets would be quick to jump to get Myers, who can contribute
> points and is a defensive sparkplug.  Harper might be too unquantifiable,
> over-rated, defensively weak, and a problem attitude, plus expensive.

Everything else yes, but not expensive.  They could pay him the league minimum
if chicago waives him, chicago would still be responsible for his
salary.

 
 
 

I am very nervous. Who am I?

Post by Joseph Albe » Sun, 12 Mar 1995 04:46:02


Quote:

>The other thing I thought of--will the Nets be able to pluck whoever gets
>waived to shore up their two guard spot, which is still wide open?  I
>think the Nets would be quick to jump to get Myers, who can contribute
>points and is a defensive sparkplug.  Harper might be too unquantifiable,
>over-rated, defensively weak, and a problem attitude, plus expensive.

When a player is waived, the teams have the option of taking him off
of waivers, and I think the teams get to exercise the option or
pass in a particular order that is either the previous year's draft
order, or a similar order based on current standings.  if a team
takes a player off of waivers, they have to pick up the full salary.
if all teams pass, the player "clears" waivers, and becomes a free agent
who can sign with any team.  that team can pay the player the minimal
$150K salary, and the team that waived them has to make up the rest
of their contract.  no team will take harper off of waivers at his
salary, and once cleared, the Bulls would pay big bucks for him to play
on another team.  currently, the Spurs are paying Doc Rivers $150K,
and the Knicks pick up the rest. dumb move by the knicks to waive Doc.

perhaps the bulls will waive Kerr also-- the rationale being that
his performance/salary ratio is good enough that a team would take
him off of waivers, to keep another team from getting him, so
the bulls wouldn't have to pay a nickel of his salary-- the other
team takes over the contract.

given that Jordan was playing baseball for $850/month, I don't
think salary is his primary concern at the present.  i expect
a cheap contract for the rest of this year to fit under the
cap, then a real contract in the off-season.

it seems clear that the baseball strike, and the need for minors
being replacement players having put Jordan in the middle of the
strike was the primary reason for him*** up the cletes.

J. Albert


 
 
 

I am very nervous. Who am I?

Post by Jazzy » Mon, 13 Mar 1995 12:12:28

Quote:

>I'm Pete Myers.  Or Ron Harper.  That's who the hell I am.
>If MJ should come back, what's going to happen at the two guard spot for
>the Bulls?  Clearly, it seems that Ron Harper would be the odd man out,
>but the Bulls sank a hell of a lot of money into him.
>So what happens now?  Do the Bulls hang on to Myers and drop a big white
>stiff, carrying an excess of guards?  Will Reinsdorf bite the proverbial
>bullet and waive Ron Harper, eating the salary?  Will it be one of the
>other guards, like a Steve Kerr?  Or does Myer get dropped?

        I'd say Myers would be kept.  With Jordan coming back rusty (how
        rusty is a good question), he's going to need practice against
        tough defense to get all things in working order.  Who's the Bulls'
        best defender at off guard?  None other than Pete Myers.  In his
        first stint, Jordan beat up on Myers in practice.  This time around,
        it'd bring back good memories.

Quote:
>But will Myers still have a confidence problem, if he's
>playing ahead of/with/behind Jordan again?  Will he be looking over his
>shoulder, simply biding time until MJ cracks the starting lineup (which
>should take about... oh... one game)?

        Myers should be able to take it well.  After all, he wasn't resigned
        in the beginning of the year, and even when he came back, it was
        Harper who was starting and Myers was getting little time.  Pete
        knows he's no superstar, and will succumb to the bench with probably
        no problem.

        As for Harper -- the Bulls have had a high paid guy warming the
        bench before -- recall Dennis Hopson?  Ron could certainly fill
        that sort of role.

        Jazzy J

--
Jazzy J  v4.0  "'95" (Netcom)                  |  (O):(913) 676-8962
Systems Engineer / Seaboard Corporation        |  (H):(913) 381-3173