PDA

View Full Version : Ben Gordon



ndfan23
01-16-2009, 01:58 AM
I wanted to know what you guys think Ben Gordon value is around the league. The Bulls would be asking for defensive center with some low post game

DODGERS&LAKERS
01-16-2009, 02:04 AM
He is untradable. He has a no trade clause for this year. He will veto any trade they throw at him. He will lose his bird rights and not make as much money as he wants to if he accepts a trade. Bulls are stuck with him.

As for the player.... I dont like him. Shoots too much, plays no d, and thinks he should be making way more than he is worth. Thrives when he is playing against the other teams bench players, but is not as productive when he has to face starters. Is too short to play the two guard spot. Puts to much pressure on the point guard to guard the other teams bigger guard. You need to have a point guard who is at least 6'4 to play alongside Gordon.

IndyRealist
01-16-2009, 02:09 AM
The old NBA adage is that you never trade your big for a small. You can't teach size. He's probably worth a MLE player around $6M or so. Someone who's going to give you either 13ish ppg, or 10ish rebounds and a block or two, but not both offense and defense.

Everyone thinks Gordon is going to ask for too much money, he can walk after this season, and he doesn't really play defense. You're not going to get a low post scorer who plays defense well. You -are- going to get shortchanged talentwise, but the Bulls are the ones that need to move Gordon, the other team doesn't need to make a trade at all.

I'd go with a defensive C, and a late first round draft pick, for Gordon. With his contract situation he's just not worth more than that. Any team can just wait until the offseason and sign him away from the Bulls for nothing.

ndfan23
01-16-2009, 02:11 AM
So do you guys think a Dalembert for Gordon + filler is fair?

PaleHose
01-16-2009, 02:15 AM
As for the player.... I dont like him. Shoots too much, plays no d, and thinks he should be making way more than he is worth. Thrives when he is playing against the other teams bench players, but is not as productive when he has to face starters. Is too short to play the two guard spot. Puts to much pressure on the point guard to guard the other teams bigger guard. You need to have a point guard who is at least 6'4 to play alongside Gordon.

Ha! Looks like the book is out on Ben Gordon. From a Chicago fan perspective, the return of Kirk Hinrich and overall emergence of Derrick Rose has left the Bulls with a glutton of guards. If you add in the fact that the Bulls just beat the Cavaliers with very little contribution coming from Gordon, then that results in the creation of threads like this one...

KG2TB
01-16-2009, 02:23 AM
BG is just not good for this team. Kirk and Rose compliment each other perfectly. Kirk's weaknesses are Rose's strengths, and Rose's strengths are Kirk's weaknesses. Kirk is like a coach out on the floor and knows how to defer to Rose. BG makes horrible basketball decisions and tries to do too much at times. He's one of the best shooters in the league, but unless he's comfortable just being a spot up shooter and play a role much like BJ Armstrong did for us back in the day, then he needs to go. I don't see him taking on that kind of role for us. At least BJ played respectable defense and was more about the team than himself.

That being said, we really can't trade him. No trade clause + him being an UFA this off-season = near impossible to trade unless a team is just desperate for him which I don't really see. Our best hope is to maybe sign and trade him this off-season if the team that wants him is over the cap. It's possible. I don't want BG on this team because frankly, our offense runs much smoother when he's not out there...not to mention our defense.

DODGERS&LAKERS
01-16-2009, 02:27 AM
Ha! Looks like the book is out on Ben Gordon. From a Chicago fan perspective, the return of Kirk Hinrich and overall emergence of Derrick Rose has left the Bulls with a glutton of guards. If you add in the fact that the Bulls just beat the Cavaliers with very little contribution coming from Gordon, then that results in the creation of threads like this one...

Yeah, Rose and Hinrich are studs. Thebo is a very good back up. Just does not get a lot of burn. Hughes and his fat contract along with Gordon are more burdens than they are helpful. Let those guys come off the books and go after a big man and the Bulls are back in business

Draco
01-16-2009, 02:34 AM
Yeah, Rose and Hinrich are studs. Thebo is a very good back up. Just does not get a lot of burn. Hughes and his fat contract along with Gordon are more burdens than they are helpful. Let those guys come off the books and go after a big man and the Bulls are back in business

I've never agreed with most on PSD and usually that's served my prediction making very well.. If Gordon decides to sign with the Bull's. Kirk will be gone. That's pretty much what Paxson has indicated.

DODGERS&LAKERS
01-16-2009, 02:36 AM
I've never agreed with most on PSD and usually that's served my prediction making very well.. If Gordon decides to sign with the Bull's. Kirk will be gone. That's pretty much what Paxson has indicated.

You would rather have Gordon over Hinrich?

KG2TB
01-16-2009, 02:38 AM
Yeah, Rose and Hinrich are studs. Thebo is a very good back up. Just does not get a lot of burn. Hughes and his fat contract along with Gordon are more burdens than they are helpful. Let those guys come off the books and go after a big man and the Bulls are back in business

Well said. I really like that 3 guard rotation except I wish Thabo could hit the 3 ball with more consistency. If we let BG and Gooden walk that's around 15 million coming off the books. We could make a play for Boozer but we would have a lot of competition in that department. Miami especially. But if we DID acquire him we would then have a FAT expiring contract in Hughes which we could put any type of package together including Tyrus, Noc, Noah, and picks to go after a center. The future is still bright for us.

ndfan23
01-16-2009, 02:46 AM
I think that have 3 piece together in Rose, Deng, and Tyrus. They even have a nice bench in Noah, Shefelosha, and Nocini. They need another shooter to come off the bench and maybe Kirk can be that starter at the 2. You need to get a good quality center though

IndyRealist
01-16-2009, 02:46 AM
I've never agreed with most on PSD and usually that's served my prediction making very well.. If Gordon decides to sign with the Bull's. Kirk will be gone. That's pretty much what Paxson has indicated.

Assuming Ben signs, Kirk has 3yrs $27M left on his contract after this year. That's a lot of money to move when every other team in the league knows you're trying to dump it. I like Hinrich's game, but he's not THAT good. The Bulls would be taking back bad contracts in return. Kirk plays well with Rose, I'd think it'd be simpler to keep him and let Gordon walk. But I'm not a Bulls fan, so....

Draco
01-16-2009, 02:47 AM
You would rather have Gordon over Hinrich?

I'd rather have Gordon's scoring than Hinrich as backup PG.

Havoc Wreaker
01-16-2009, 02:51 AM
BG is just not good for this team. Kirk and Rose compliment each other perfectly. Kirk's weaknesses are Rose's strengths, and Rose's strengths are Kirk's weaknesses. Kirk is like a coach out on the floor and knows how to defer to Rose. BG makes horrible basketball decisions and tries to do too much at times. He's one of the best shooters in the league, but unless he's comfortable just being a spot up shooter and play a role much like BJ Armstrong did for us back in the day, then he needs to go. I don't see him taking on that kind of role for us. At least BJ played respectable defense and was more about the team than himself.

That being said, we really can't trade him. No trade clause + him being an UFA this off-season = near impossible to trade unless a team is just desperate for him which I don't really see. Our best hope is to maybe sign and trade him this off-season if the team that wants him is over the cap. It's possible. I don't want BG on this team because frankly, our offense runs much smoother when he's not out there...not to mention our defense.

:cool:

IndyRealist
01-16-2009, 02:53 AM
I think that have 3 piece together in Rose, Deng, and Tyrus. They even have a nice bench in Noah, Shefelosha, and Nocini. They need another shooter to come off the bench and maybe Kirk can be that starter at the 2. You need to get a good quality center though

I think every team's after a good, quality center....How many of them are there really in the 30 team league? Six? Seven?

Shaq, Al Jefferson, Beidrins, Bogut, Yao, Howard. Maybe Brad Miller. Maybe Tyson Chandler. How many teams are going to be willing to trade one of those players for Gordon?

KG2TB
01-16-2009, 02:55 AM
:cool:

??

That's a fact.

DODGERS&LAKERS
01-16-2009, 02:56 AM
I'd rather have Gordon's scoring than Hinrich as backup PG.

But Hinrich can be a good shooting guard. He can guard both guard spots and hits the 3. Gordon starting, puts too much pressure on Rose to play the opposing teams bigger shooting guard. You definitely dont want Rose getting into foul trouble trying to cover up for Gordons lack of hight and defense. Ben can hit a three also, but is too much of a liability IMO to be starting at the 2 guard spot.

Plus, having 2 play makers that can set up other players can only help the teams passing. Ben is kind of a black hole.

Now this can all change if Gordon signs for a reasonable contract. Then it might be beneficial to sign him and trade Hinrich. But from what I have read, Gordon is not looking to take a pay cut.

KG2TB
01-16-2009, 03:00 AM
I'd rather have Gordon's scoring than Hinrich as backup PG.

Kirk wouldn't just be a backup PG even making him more valuable. What do you consider more valuable...a player that plays two positions above average who can score, distribute, be a leader, make good decisions, play defense, and isn't selfish or...

A player who plays one position that only scores? BG's cons out weigh his pros. When he's not scoring, he's not helping the team. What's worse than that is sometimes even when he does score he's hurting the team because he disrupts the flow of the game and commits foolish turnovers trying to do too much...

It's a no brainer IMO. Kirk has way more value and his contract declines. An average of 8-9 million per year is a steal for a player to come off the bench that plays two positions who is a leader on your team. Gordon can't lead a fat man to cake.

LAcowBOMBER
01-16-2009, 03:16 AM
??

That's a fact.

You said the same thing. You should ave said that Rose's weaknesses are Hinrich's strengths

Draco
01-16-2009, 03:19 AM
But Hinrich can be a good shooting guard. He can guard both guard spots and hits the 3. Gordon starting, puts too much pressure on Rose to play the opposing teams bigger shooting guard.

Hinrich can be a good SG but he can't score as well as Gordon and that's primarily what you want out of your SG. Hinrichs defense and versatility is nice but I'll go with the specialist. I'm assuming that either Thabo plays a larger role in the future or Paxson finds another lengthy, long term, starting SG. That's speculation but it's primarily based on what Paxson has indicated recently and in the last 3 years: That having drafted Rose, Hinrich is the logical choice to move. And that BG and Deng were in the Bull's long term plan.



You definitely dont want Rose getting into foul trouble trying to cover up for Gordons lack of hight and defense. Ben can hit a three also, but is too much of a liability IMO to be starting at the 2 guard spot.

The Bull's need Rose and Thabo to mature. Once they do, these issues about defense and playmaking go away.



Plus, having 2 play makers that can set up other players can only help the teams passing. Ben is kind of a black hole.


Had Gordon signed last summer maybe the Bull's could have signed Duhon to a cheap short term contract. Still, (on this Bull's team) backup PG is not a bigger priority IMO, compared with the need to have a scorer who's capable of putting up big numbers and creating his own shot.



Now this can all change if Gordon signs for a reasonable contract. Then it might be beneficial to sign him and trade Hinrich. But from what I have read, Gordon is not looking to take a pay cut.

From what I read Gordon said he'd still consider signing with the Bull's.

KG2TB
01-16-2009, 03:29 AM
You said the same thing. You should ave said that Rose's weaknesses are Hinrich's strengths

People get extremely technical with words on these boards. It's the same difference. The point is easily understood regardless. Man...a bunch of future lawyers on here

:puke:

BowDown
01-16-2009, 03:52 AM
If Gordon was 5 inches taller, we wouldn't be having a discussion on who's the better SG. Gordon is the very definition of a ShootingGuard...that's all he does.

KG2TB
01-16-2009, 03:59 AM
If Gordon was 5 inches taller, we wouldn't be having a discussion on who's the better SG. Gordon is the very definition of a ShootingGuard...that's all he does.

If BG was 5 inches taller he'd basically be Vince Carter without the explosiveness. Another player I wouldn't want on this team because he can't carry a team and get them to that next level. 5 inches doesn't solve BG's poor decision making and selfishness

BowDown
01-16-2009, 04:06 AM
I agree about his poor decision-making but I don't mind his selfishness. In fact, I'd rather he just stand no closer than 18 feet from the basket and just spot up and shoot just about every pass he gets.

If we had any type of low post game, and as soon as Rose becomes as good as he can be, Gordon just shooting is fine with me. All we need is a center and Gordon is not going to be an issue.

PG Rose - distributer and driver into the lane
SG Gordon - spot up shooter
SF Deng - slasher and all around inside-outside game
PF Thomas - defensive specialist
C ??? - Low-post, back to the basket scorer

Now if we get that C and everyone plays like that, we have a team.

Highlight
01-16-2009, 04:26 AM
Agreed.

The Bulls are need to trade for a traditional Center at this point. They are very undersized and only have one big that is an offensive threat and that's Drew Gooden.

I think Tyrus Thomas is worth keeping. He still has a lot of potential and I've noticed, when he gets the time, he puts up numbers. Statistically he can be amazing. Obviously it's still going to take some time for his game to really mature, but I think he's worth it.

Regardless, they need to package one of 2 of their players and get a big. One of those players being Larry Hughes who has a very large contract.

Anyways, Kaman would be a nice fit, but not sure if that will happen. It's tough finding good bigs today.

Honestly there aren't many bigs that are even on the block. The ones I can think of are:

Kaman (Camby might be the one on the block...)
Dalembert (Not even sure if he is, but he might be with Elton coming back)
Brad Miller

Those are the only big names I can think of.

KG2TB
01-16-2009, 04:34 AM
I agree about his poor decision-making but I don't mind his selfishness. In fact, I'd rather he just stand no closer than 18 feet from the basket and just spot up and shoot every pass he gets.

If we had any time of low post game, and as soon as Rose becomes as good as he can be, Gordon just shooting is fine with me. All we need is a center and Gordon is not going to be an issue.

PG Rose - distributer and driver into the lane
SG Gordon - spot up shooter
SF Deng - slasher and all around inside-outside game
PF Thomas - defensive specialist
C ??? - Low-post, back to the basket scorer

Now if we get that C and everyone plays like that, we have a team.

If Gordon would limit himself to STRICTLY being a spot up shooter than yeah...I'm fine with it. Although being too trigger happy and taking bad shots at times can still be in the same boat as making bad decisions. However...if he didn't ever handle the ball and try to create for himself than I would be more than content with him coming off the bench. It's just not realistic.

JayW_1023
01-16-2009, 05:49 AM
Before he got injured Delonte West tore Gordon up every time down the floor yesterday. That was Adam Morrison-style matador defense. Horrible.

Deng
01-16-2009, 07:32 AM
Gordon's scoring is overvalued by some. A team offence and ball movement are much more effective than one guy shooting jumpers.. even if he is incredibly good at it. Its no coincidence the Bulls look like a completely different team with Hinrich and Deng back.. the ball moves, we play defence and we just beat the best defence in the league with Gordon not contributing. Rose and Hinrich are perfect together, also look at teams like Utah and the Hornets.. they dont have gunning SGs alongside their star PGs.. it just doesnt work. With Gordon out his scoring is made up and then some by great D and everyone getting more (and better) shots.

quade36
01-16-2009, 09:33 AM
Gordon provides absolutely no defense. He is always guarding the worst offensive scorer on the team. One dimensional players may score points but they won't help a TEAM.

td0tsfinest
01-16-2009, 10:09 AM
So do you guys think a Dalembert for Gordon + filler is fair?

I don't understand why philly would trade Sammy D. You guys could probably get Diop and a filler for Gordon.

cubulls
01-16-2009, 11:21 AM
Before he got injured Delonte West tore Gordon up every time down the floor yesterday. That was Adam Morrison-style matador defense. Horrible.

Exactly. Gordon's offensive contributions don't mean **** if he is giving it up on the other end. No chance in hell Delonte West would score on Kirk like that.

Draco
01-16-2009, 11:32 AM
West is 3 inches taller than Gordon and there's no way of finding out how Kirk would have done against him in that game. From what I've heard, West had been playing well coming into yesterdays game and probably with a lot of condifence.. he was on a Cav's team that only lost 6 games.

Draco
01-16-2009, 11:34 AM
Gordon's scoring is overvalued by some. A team offence and ball movement are much more effective than one guy shooting jumpers.. even if he is incredibly good at it. Its no coincidence the Bulls look like a completely different team with Hinrich and Deng back.. the ball moves, we play defence and we just beat the best defence in the league with Gordon not contributing. Rose and Hinrich are perfect together, also look at teams like Utah and the Hornets.. they dont have gunning SGs alongside their star PGs.. it just doesnt work. With Gordon out his scoring is made up and then some by great D and everyone getting more (and better) shots.

If anything, Hinrich is overvalued by most. Afterall the majority of the season thus far has been played by Gordon on an undermanned Bull's team rather than Hinrich who played 8 games on a fully manned team.

FOBolous
01-16-2009, 11:37 AM
So do you guys think a Dalembert for Gordon + filler is fair?

no...horrible trade. i would trade diop + some fillers for Gordon :p

JordansBulls
01-16-2009, 12:04 PM
He is untradable. He has a no trade clause for this year. He will veto any trade they throw at him. He will lose his bird rights and not make as much money as he wants to if he accepts a trade. Bulls are stuck with him.

As for the player.... I dont like him. Shoots too much, plays no d, and thinks he should be making way more than he is worth. Thrives when he is playing against the other teams bench players, but is not as productive when he has to face starters. Is too short to play the two guard spot. Puts to much pressure on the point guard to guard the other teams bigger guard. You need to have a point guard who is at least 6'4 to play alongside Gordon.

:nod:

And a guard that plays good Defense. Gordon is no better than a 6th man in this league unless he has a Magic Johnson or Penny Hardaway playing PG because they have the height in the backcourt.

Draco
01-16-2009, 12:17 PM
Shoots too much, plays no d, and thinks he should be making way more than he is worth. Thrives when he is playing against the other teams bench players, but is not as productive when he has to face starters.

He shoots when he has to.. which is better than I've seen from Hinrich at times which is holding on to the ball until 5 seconds on the clock and passing to the nearest open man for a jump shot; Tyrus Thomas. BG thrives when he gets open shots and struggles when the team needs him to force a shot... that's the case when he's playing against starters or bench players. Although any player is more effective playing against the oppossing bench.

Gibby23
01-16-2009, 12:22 PM
He shoots when he has to.. which is better than I've seen from Hinrich at times which is holding on to the ball until 5 seconds on the clock and passing to the nearest open man for a jump shot; Tyrus Thomas. BG thrives when he gets open shots and struggles when the team needs him to force a shot... that's the case when he's playing against starters or bench players. Although any player is more effective playing against the oppossing bench.

That can be said about every player in the NBA.

Draco
01-16-2009, 12:23 PM
That can be said about every player in the NBA.

More so about BG.. he's primarily a scorer.

Havoc Wreaker
01-16-2009, 01:11 PM
People get extremely technical with words on these boards. It's the same difference. The point is easily understood regardless. Man...a bunch of future lawyers on here

:puke:

That's what I wanted to do, but I just got tired of studying half-way through my BA :p

I was just messing with you :p