Chandler for Okafor
- Thread starter Double-K
- Start date
SacKings7
Starter
He's way better than both combined on defense, but both of them trump him on offense. Add to the fact that he has a bad back, I'm not sure I'd trade either for Okafor right now, never mind both of them.
Last edited:
A
AriesMar27
Guest
i dont get it either but even i wouldnt trade both of them for okafor... i agree that i dont see either player becoming a star but i wouldnt trade both of them for a injury prone player. we lack depth as it is.... but i wouldve been down for trading either one/thomas/beno for okafor and nazr.... though thats now impossible since he is now going to the hornets.
we dont need okafor for his offense. if he can put up 10 points off of put backs we would be fine.
beb0p
Starter
Charlotte and NO are in "win now" mode. The trade makes sense as both team got what they wanted.
We are NOT in a "win now" mode and we don't have any big man to offer to a "win now" team. So no, there is no way we could have landed Chandler or Okafor, even if you throw in JT or Hawes. The Bobcats and Hornets are not going to wait 2-3 years for JT/Hawes to develop.
We are NOT in a "win now" mode and we don't have any big man to offer to a "win now" team. So no, there is no way we could have landed Chandler or Okafor, even if you throw in JT or Hawes. The Bobcats and Hornets are not going to wait 2-3 years for JT/Hawes to develop.
Agreed. I don't really see this move as a referendum on Petrie's ability/inability to get something done. I don't think we can really get or use either of those two, and I don't think we could put together as simple or attractive as the swap that Charlotte and NO just made. This might even be one of those deals where the two sides didn't even shop around to get a better offer, because it just worked so easily. I don't think Geoff could have swooped in and put together a better offer to get either of those two guys, and, as an aside, I wouldn't have wanted him to. I don't think either guy is going to make us considerably better, even if we didn't have to give up one or two of our guys. Maybe we get to 40 wins, but that's not good enough, and the cap situation would hurt us for the next two or three years.
stevetaebo
Bench
Just an awful trade for CHA. Basically a economic move by trading 5 years left contract for a 2 years one. CHA fan must be pissed right now.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
I'd call a 13 point 10 rebound per game at his best, undersized C in Okafor pretty average. I'd be surprised if Jason couldn't average that in time with the consistent minutes Okafor plays. It's not like Okafor is some legit 20 and 10 player, he's not.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Then why did Chandler almost get move for expirings at last deadline? They clearly went for lower tax payments now and talent since expiring money clearly wasn't there.
Arby's Roast Beef
Starter
I lost interest in Okafor's game after two or three seasons (I've never even considered him as that shotblocking option for us). Just sort of leveled off, albeit into a highly consistent 15-10-1.5 sort of player. Just not worth his escalating $10-14mil contract, for the next five years, no less.
A lot of my intrigue stemmed from his great shotblocking skills in college, and really his standing reach and wingspan alone should make him get more than the 1.5-1.8 he always seems to be hovering around. But he's a smart guy, and seems to be alternating between blocking some shots and playing good positional defense (he does have the strength), so overall he's a solid all-around defender, despite mediocre mobility and athleticism. Just wish he was blocking 2+ shots per game given how he was blocking 4+ shots per game in his three years at UConn.
Nonetheless still a very good defender who can do the switcheroo of bodying up, contesting shots or straight up blocking them, and combines that with high efficiency scoring and spectacular rebounding. Prototypical big man stuff tailor made for playoff teams, just not the star that some might expect with being the #2 pick, and perhaps not deserving of that sort of contract.
I've considered Chandler (back when he was younger, he's now 26) to be a shotblocking option for us, but again, interest has waned. He has terrible offensive instincts, has poor hands and clearly is a worse scorer than Okafor, and his shotblocking (surprising as that might be) has really dropped significantly from his early Chicago days, a concern given that he doesn't have the weight to handle burly bigs. I still think he's living off some of the potential that might come with being an athletic 7'1" player who can run the floor, because his own elite NBA level skill is rebounding. Nonetheless, I wouldn't have minded taking him--it's really sort of like the Samuel Dalembert effect we've talked about in the other thread---if we were able to sack KT/Beno and take the remaining 2 yrs of the contract, we would have ourselves an eventual expiring that would have greater value the following year, and would give us a rebounder/semi-shotblocker for the time being. So it's contract first, then considering talent level/fit.
A lot of my intrigue stemmed from his great shotblocking skills in college, and really his standing reach and wingspan alone should make him get more than the 1.5-1.8 he always seems to be hovering around. But he's a smart guy, and seems to be alternating between blocking some shots and playing good positional defense (he does have the strength), so overall he's a solid all-around defender, despite mediocre mobility and athleticism. Just wish he was blocking 2+ shots per game given how he was blocking 4+ shots per game in his three years at UConn.
Nonetheless still a very good defender who can do the switcheroo of bodying up, contesting shots or straight up blocking them, and combines that with high efficiency scoring and spectacular rebounding. Prototypical big man stuff tailor made for playoff teams, just not the star that some might expect with being the #2 pick, and perhaps not deserving of that sort of contract.
I've considered Chandler (back when he was younger, he's now 26) to be a shotblocking option for us, but again, interest has waned. He has terrible offensive instincts, has poor hands and clearly is a worse scorer than Okafor, and his shotblocking (surprising as that might be) has really dropped significantly from his early Chicago days, a concern given that he doesn't have the weight to handle burly bigs. I still think he's living off some of the potential that might come with being an athletic 7'1" player who can run the floor, because his own elite NBA level skill is rebounding. Nonetheless, I wouldn't have minded taking him--it's really sort of like the Samuel Dalembert effect we've talked about in the other thread---if we were able to sack KT/Beno and take the remaining 2 yrs of the contract, we would have ourselves an eventual expiring that would have greater value the following year, and would give us a rebounder/semi-shotblocker for the time being. So it's contract first, then considering talent level/fit.
Last edited:
AleksandarN
Starter
Chandler deal last year was due to the fear of his injuries. The Hornets wanted to trade Chandler for fear of his condition getting worse and the reason why the deal fell through aswell because The thunder realized after the medical that his condition will get worse. What I wonder is what the Bobcats are thinking. This does not improve their team at all and actually makes then worse offensively and even defensively. Jordan sucks as a GM almost worst than Isiah in my books.
beb0p
Starter
Like AleksandarN said - fear of Chandler's health issue. And also the Hornets had high hope for Chris Wilcox, who was going to replace Chandler.
beb0p
Starter
Thanks VF21, and good point. It does seem like every trade involving a good player is a black mark on GP. As if we even had a chance. Next time somebody said, "We could have traded for (so and so)!!" I'm going to reply,"Sure, just like you could have married Adriana Lima, right?"
Jerryaki
Starter
well if marko jaric had a shot, then so do i!!!!!!
Words right out of my mouth...
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Oh c'mon now. Then why didn't they go out and sign Wilcox this offseason. He could have been had for cheap! I wasn't saying the reason Chandler didn't get moved or did get moved had anything to do with health, but he was just simply available and I think the Kings could have been in on that if they had wanted to.
jalfa
Starter
Well, if the Bobcats stay put with the team they have now, woh's going to do the scoring for them. I mean, I know that Okafor was no imposing offensive presense, but replacing him with Chandler will only hurt them more. This is going to be quite interesting, imho, wonder where they're headed now.
kennadog
Dog On It!
And I still ask, what would NO have wanted from our team more than Okafor? I'm just not convinced I would have given up either JT or Hawes who have potential and are cheap for a guy with a bad back and a long, expensive contract. Just as we're finally getting to the end of a PF albatross contract.
Similar threads
- NBC Sports Bay Area & California
- Off the Court
