read carefully...
i understand that ben wallace was an improvement...i'm just not sure he's worth the cash, in terms of production. you're right i didn't watch many bulls games, so chandler may be worse than his stats advertise.
i'm just not sure you can justify ben wallaces 16 million a year contract in terms of the production he provides...as opposed to chandler's 9 million a year....oh well..i really don't care and don't want to get into a flame war. maybe big ben is what the bulls need....i sure hope so...they're playing him enough.
9 Million a year? I guess you haven't looked at Chandler's contract... it keeps going up each year by nearly 1 1/2 mil to just under 13 million a year.
Over the next 4 years... Chicago upgraded Tyson Chandler with Ben Wallace by using about 3 million more of their cap... that's it. Both are overpaid... I'm not denying that... but if it's not hurting Chicago at all(and it's not since Wallace's contract is frontloaded)... why not do it?
Dennis Rodman is about the only person I really can compare Wallace to.. since both kept their body's in incredible shape and have the same type of game... at age 36 Rodman was giving the Bulls 36 minutes a night and pulling down 15 rebounds a night... toss in his defense... he was HIGHLY effective at that age. There's no reason to think someone who keeps their body in that good of shape and runs basicly off of desire instead of just skill can't be very effective at a later age.
BTW... PJ Brown had a very solid year for a big man and he was.. 36....
