Our best players...

Boy... Almost 1/2 way through the season and we don't look so good as a team. But some players are looking pretty good! IMO here is our best line up.

SG - HASSELL - A rookie but effective. Good game sence, high percentage shooter, can take his man off the dribble. Huge upside. not enough PT!

SG - MERCER - Now I know I already picked a SG. I am hoping all the hype about Crawford will pan out eventually since we have no PG worth putting on this list. Anthony is solid but we can't build on him.

SF - ARTEST - Loved him last year... Love him this year! What D and newly developed O. Unorthodox but really effective. IMO UN-TRADABLE.

PF - CHANDLER - Now he needs a lot of work, but now that he has some idea what to do when he gets into the game he is showing signs of why we drafted him. Swats a lot of shots, he is quick and athletic, decent J but no moves around the hoop. Has shown a little turn around a couple of times that seems to work. When he gets into some of those summer leagues you will see a real player develope for next year.

C - CURRY - Again, he needs a lot of work but I still see the investment in him paying off... Even if he just takes a rebounding course over the summer, that body alongside of Chandle will make it really hard for offensive players to drive the lane and he is big enough to defend most centers. Moreover, we have no one else. Miller really stinks (he is hot headed, and has no real game. Only gets numbers by default) Balgaric really stinks and we have no one else big enough

Now I know what you are saying.... Who brings the ball up. Chandler & Curry look lost out there. You simply can't play all those rookies... The mistakes alone would burry the team. And, you would be right! But, that is only a factor if you care if you win or loose.

This season is a write off. Key injuries to Crawford and Robinson crippled an already shakey team and they aren't coming back any time soon. Why waste 20 minutes per game PT and game experience on Hoiberg and Ollie? I say TRIAL BY FIRE! The faster the rookies learn the game the faster we win. I don't think it would take so long if they would treat each game like a scrimmage in practice. When someone makes a mistake, simply blow the whistle, take them out, teach them and put them back into the game. That's how you learn...

Am I alone here?

I find it hard to see how Chandler and Curry are going to be like Garnett , Kobe and TMac because they are already 19 turning 20 in February and May this year. Garnett, Kobe and Mcgrady were all drafted when they were only 17 years old. That gets them 4 years of NBA experience by the time they're 21. In the same toke Curry and Chandler will only have 1 and a half years expereince when they are 21.

So if our guys develop they way their suppoused to they will be starters getting 20 and 10 in 3 or 4 years time when they're 23 years old. Guys coming out of college can get those numbers when they're the same age. Why did we draft them if we could have got the same numbers and not have 2 guys filling roster space for 4 years?

The thing I most want to see is when Chandler passes Brand in career points and rebounds. The way things look now, it doesn't look like happening.

I think that almost everyone in the Bulls' organization would agree: the earlier they develop the better it will be. The problem is that it's not a given thing that giving them PT even if they're not worth it will speed up their devolpment. I found this quote by JVG: 'You just don’t give these kids something,' Knicks’ coach Jeff Van Gundy said. 'They have to earn the respect of their coaches and teammates on the practice floor first. You can’t just hand it to them now, because once you had them something, it’s very hard to take it back. If you’ve earned it, you know you belong.'

(month/day/year) actually chandler and curry were some months younger than garnett, when drafted, and some months older than McGrady and Bryant. BTW the big difference is in the experience they had (almost none), more than in the age. For instance, Chandler is supposed to be tall, superathletic, well coordinated considering his size. Once having polished his game and bulked up (and maybe grown a bit) he could become something special. Of course we don't know now if he will, but those are things you can get working hard, his physical abilities don't. We have only to wait and if it will work.

my 2 cents below...

I agree Hassell has looked very good. He seems to be one of the few players who has a feel for the game and knows what he is doing. I wouldn't say he has Huge upside. He can be a solid contributor to a good team. I'd like to see him get more minutes.

I see Mercer as a good spot up shooter, but not much else. Doesn't have a good handle, doesn't pass well, play good defense or have a good feel for the game. But the worse part of his game may be he can not finish a drive worth a Damn. I'd like to see him move on and give his PT to Hassell and Artest.

Very solid player who can play several positions. I like his jump shot and he has a way of finishing at the hoop, even though it looks strange. Great defense, will mix it up and is just plain tough. Needs to be pair with a scoring force(not Mercer though). Maybe Robinson or Crawford(Dreaming) will be that guy????

I like your report in Chandler, but have not seen the decent J yet. I kind of like what I've seen of him. He is VERY RAW offensively, he looks lost if it isn't a transition play. Very good athlete, and plays aggressively on defense. I have not seen any kind of offensive skills, but he looks like he could develop with MORE PLAYING TIME.

I have not seen a lot of positive signs in Curry, but he needs to be on the court! He looks a little shorter than his listed measurements.

FIZER: I'm not as down on Fizer as most everyone else in this group. He seems to lack the feel for the game that you'd think NBA players would have. He doesn't always know what is a good shot and what is a bad shot, but has shown some ability. He will take it to the hole with power on occasion, but not enough. I see him as a guy who can come off the bench and score for you. He may be the only guy who can get his own shot off when the offense bogs down.

GUYTON: I'm not convinced he'll be an NBA player, but I am convinced the guys playing a head of him will NOT be NBA players for good teams. He doesn't seem to have a good handle, but can shoot the ball. Give him some regular minutes and see what he has before we cut him.

The Bulls year is over already, why play guys like Oakley, Hoiberg and Ollie. Get the guys that will be a part of the future out on the court.

LOL. The best line-up includes Eddie Curry ahead of Brad Miller? Miller's been by far the best player on the Bull's this year. Numbers by default? What the hell does that mean? He can shoot, score in the post, he's aggressive and if the refs would actually give him a break he would score even more. LOL.

Jan Gundy is not stupid! He / You have a point. Maybe I am just anxious to see these kids develop and frustrated when I tune in to see what we spent those high draft picks on and I see them rack up a whole 10 minutes between them. I still think they could play a little more... They as good as the other options and clearly have more potential.

Brad! is that you?!?!?

I will give you the numbers. I will give you the fact that he is the closest thing to a center we have. But let me explain numbers by default...

1. WE ARE A TERRIBLE OFFENSIVE TEAM!!!!! If we had any real offensive threats on the floor he would not get near as many shots.

2. THE PLAYERS THAT GET THE PT ARE SMALL AND POOR REBOUNDERS!!!!! (Save Grandpa Oak)

I may be off, but when I watch a Bulls game, on most plays they will pass it around trying to play basketball, then dump it in to Miller who forces a shot, rebounds his miss, forces another shot, rebounds his miss and finally taps it in. That takes a certain amount of skill, but a young Patrick Ewing he is not!

Yeah, he gets hacked! A LOT! But I find him clumbsy around the hoop.

That being said, I like his potential. I like his aggressiveness. But I like Curry's potential better.

Read the title of your thread again. It would seem to indicated the best players on the Bulls today, not in the future. Curry and Chandler are arguably the 2 worst players on the Bulls today while Miller has been the best.

Where is all of the real Chicago bulls fans at? Are most of us still living in Chicago or have decided to jump the boat and sail along with Phil to L.A or suddenly have become Wizard fans. I'm very sad to say that Jordan and Pippen, are no longer Chicago Bulls. So therefore, we must move on toward the future. This team has to proove, they could win without Jordan/Pippen.This team could use an excellent coach in Clem Haskins or the guy that use to coach for the Georgetown Hoyas.

if cartwright were to just throw the youngsters in, you can count on oakley being $50,000 poorer many times over......

and i don't think mercer should be included in your 'Our Best Players' list.....he scores less now than when brand was around (considering crawford, e-rob and artest were on the IL for some parts of the season), his already pretty low shooting pct is down for this season and despite this fact he still has the cheek to take as many shots as he does.....and he hardly gets to the line too.....(at least stackhouse does.....)

frankly, krause should just trade him, give him away or something (though there may be no takers at all) and start both artest and e-rob (when he's ready)....and talking about artest, his post-injury shooting has been surprising.....must be the reconstructed finger =)