View Full Version : Would you swap Gordons with the Bulls?

08-16-2008, 07:51 AM
If rumors of Ben's last day as a bull are true then wouldnt it make sense for both teams to swap players. Bulls dont want to overpay to retain his services with Hughes and their abundance of guards on board but would have no problem paying a much smaller amount to Eric for several years who in due time be the player they need to help them win in the years down the stretch, similar to what Ben was his rookie year. Teams love having assets like that.

On Clippers side it gives us a bonafide shooter to pair with Baron and the Clippers are one of the few teams best suited to mask his defensive deficiencies. It would definitely cost Eric and Mobley, would BG be worth the gamble or would you rather retain your players and try to make a splash in 2010?

08-16-2008, 11:21 AM
This would be a bad move Ben and Eric are the same player. It would be better for us to keep Mobely and Gordon if that what we are going to get for him. Eric in the long run will be better then Ben. With the team we can afford to let him progress here. I don't see Ben getting any better then what he is now, that not a bad thing. But I see Eric being a better all around player.

08-16-2008, 11:48 AM
i would do that trade. this is the whole unproven vs proven nba player thing.
who knows if eric will be good. ben is really good though.

08-16-2008, 02:07 PM
I'm open to acquiring Ben Gordon with the Clips, but Dick said something that made me think twice...

Ben is at the age and time in his career where nothing short of a five year deal is wanted. Also Ben is maybe not all you think he is. He has lead his team in scoring but that has been on a perennial low scoring team. Also if you look at Bulls stat sheets over the last three years the scoring is pretty well spread around. He leads a low scoring team in scoring, but not by much. Also I think the days of Dunleavy letting sloppy defense on the court is over. Ben's good but not great... if the Clips spend 10+ mil a year for a 2 guard he should be great.

08-16-2008, 02:49 PM
they wouldn't do that trade anyway

08-16-2008, 04:05 PM
I don't think Chronz' scenario is a possibility. The bulls are loaded with guards. The most likely way we'd land Eric Gordon is through a sign-and-trade. We'd probably be giving up Camby and/or god forbid, Thornton. I don't think it's worth it to get Ben if we have to give up Thornton or Eric or Kaman.

08-16-2008, 04:14 PM
The Bulls would do this in a second. For the very reason we shouldn't do it. Yes Ben Gordan is proven on the NBA level but Eric Gordon can be a better version of the same thing for much cheaper. I don't think the Gordon swap is worth giving up 2010 cap room.

08-16-2008, 07:16 PM
If Bulls are already loaded with guards and thus willing to trade ben gordon for salary and other reasons, then why would the Bulls take TWO guards in return for only letting ONE go?

and if Ben wants longer years with more $ it will hinder our 2010 chances anyhow. is ben gordon as good as a player we will ever get in 2010? then yes. but an undersized shooter with no D really considered a superstar in NBA?

08-16-2008, 08:35 PM
We would be better off keeping Mobley and Eric. I think if Eric started this year he would prove he is a better scorer than Ben. Wouldn't give them up for this player, we could get something better if we were going to trade these players.

dick butane
08-20-2008, 01:58 AM
No. Our Gordon is like a prom date, cheap and full of hope.

Paris Hilton
08-20-2008, 02:08 AM
No. Our Gordon is like a prom date, cheap and full of hope.

I never heard that one before.

thats Hott~