I haven't been watching the Hornets too much, but Tyson Chandler's been putting up some ridiculous numbers lately. Seems like all of a sudden his offense has got a whole lot better (he's leading the NBA in shooting percentage now). And his rebounding number has just been outstanding all season (No.2 only to KG in the NBA). After underachieving for years in Chicago, has Chandler finally figured it out? Can anyone who watches NO enlighten me on that? 20 and 19 tonight. 12 straight double double's.
I haven't seen much of him this year either, but anyone with even slight intuition knew this guy was gonna be solid. He was always a great rebounder. I never understood why Chicago traded him away, I guess it was to save money? But no question about it NOK got a steal. I remember wanting him so badly but having to settle for Swift...
On the very bottom, his averages from the past 10 games: http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tyson_chandler/season_splits.html And check out the rebounds for every game since end of January http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tyson_chandler/game_by_game_stats.html (video if it works for you http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia/nba/teams/hornets/tyson_rebounding_jan07.asx) Tyson Chandler simply has excellent length and excellent leaping ability to go wit it. Just a matter of him maturing into his thin body and getting more serious about the game.
They didn't even save money. They traded him so they could sign a more expensive and less productive Ben Wallace. Just an awful move by Chicago.
The Bulls definately screwed the pooch on this one. On the flip side, the future looks very very bright for the Hornets...wherever they play.
I don't blame the Bulls for giving up on Chandler because I was also out of patience. Chandler recently came out and said he had a big problem with Scott Skiles. Maybe that explains it. He just needed a change of scenery. Let's see how far the Bulls go before saying they made a mistake.
Chandler had a lot of weight on his shoulders in Chicago. Him and Curry being the "baby bulls" the foundation of the post Jordan era. That, plus some injuries, plus him butting heads with Skiles really turned things sour. Chandler looks happy these days. And he has that great pogo-stick type jump that really makes him a good rebounder/shot blocker. The Bulls traded Chandler away in essence for Ben Wallace. Chandler is young and will be rebounding for years and years. Wallace is old and is already in decline. The ONLY thing Wallce brings to the table now is just his muscle, which he can use against the likes of Shaq. But other than that, BAD move by the Bulls to make the trade. The only saving grace for the Bulls right now is they believe they replaced Chandler's type game with their draft pick in Tyrus Thomas. Time will tell.
he always had problems getting into foul trouble here in Chicago... looks like he finally figured it out.
i think in chicago he was always concerned with trying to be a true post-up guy and putting up consistent offensive numbers and thats just not who he is. he doenst have a lot of great moves with his back to the basket. what he does have is a ton of athleticism, and he is finally just going with the flow and using that to his advantage. i watch a lot of the hornet games, and almost all of his buckets come off of rebounds or alley-oops from chris paul.
Chandler and Tyrus Thomas are two completely different players. Even the skinny Chandler makes Thomas look puny on the court. Chandler's defense, rebounding and mediocre offense make him a very good player if he plays hard. On the other hand, if Thomas doesn't develop an offensive game, he will be a bust. Chandler is a C. Thomas is a SF.
Completely different players? I beg to differ. They are the exact same type of players except Chandler is 7'1" and Thomas is 6'9". Chander clearly has an edge in his production because of his time in the league, but Thomas is a PF in the new age of NBA PFs. He is long and quick and a shot blocker. He may never be as good as Chandler, but they are the same player. What would make them "different" is if either had a legit "post up game".
Chandler has no O-game except that he does a very good job chasing garbage and rolling for dunks. If he maintains that type of O he is effective. He has always been able to rebound, but never able to avoid foul trouble.
Im on the "they are different players" bandwagon. Thomas is quicker and more athletic, and could play SF. He is a better defender who could potentially guard the opposing teams PF-SG (like T. Price). The potential to become a decent shooter also exists. He also has a mean first step, if he could dribble better it would be scary. Chandler has a knack for rebounding, and is an incredible offensive rebounder, with much more potential to have an effective back to the basket post game. Needs to focus on the fundamental aspects of post play and defense whereas Thomas has so much speed, length, and hops that he can play more loose on both sides. Like an insane linebacker. Thomas has the ability to make quick cuts and evade the defender with off the ball moves, he would thrive in Phoenix where he couldn't shoot but would instead be given the ball on cuts and alley oops. In theory...
Thomas actually reminds me of Kenny "Sky" Walker. Which isnt exactly a good thing either... Oh, and at least Swift actually started at LSU! Thomas was coming off the bench during his final college days.
I freaked out when I saw Tyson Chandler's numbers earlier this season. I think many teams may have edged away from him earlier in his career due to his back (?) problems. Or at least I thought he had back issues. Seven footers with back problems are probably not a good investment. I guess either he's over those problems or at least over them for now...
The biggest thing is that this run&fun suits him so much more than Skiles' halfcourt uber-deliberate one did. Chandler thrives off of offensive putbacks (4.4 O-boards a game, easily the highest in the league [oddly, he averages 8.8 pts along with those 4.4 offensive rebounds, hmmmmm) and high screen dives. He makes me think of what Cato could have been had he cared at all. Don't get too excited about the 20 points he rang up - that's the first time he's scored above the teens all season. He scored 16+ only five times before that. I worry about Thomas - a lot of "I'm already good enough" vibes coming off of him. That's what's really hurt the league in the past 8 years - young guys in the draft thinking they're already great and are coach killing prima donnas from day 1. See: Miles, Darius Evan
Just my opinion, but this stuff about Tyrus Thomas playing full time PF is Kool Aid. His dunks and putbacks are nice to watch, but his only chance to make it in the NBA is as a SF and he needs to improve his skills big time. All Chandler has to do is play hard and he will get plenty of rebounds and garbage baskets. If he improves his skills, great, but he doesn't need skills to be effective. Tyrus Thomas is the shortest 6'9 player in history. 6'6/6'7 is more like it.
Hayes is 6'6" and doesnt have nearly the leaping skills Thomas has. Thomas probably is more of a SF. But these are the days of the "combo-forward" (ala combo-guard).