Official 2008-2009 NBA Thread

[nitetrain8601]

 

Rose has the ball at all times, Gordon not so much. The shot per touch ratio for these two would show just how much more often Gordon shoots it per touch, not to mention Rose is shooting at a higher percentage than Gordon is this year. The reason the Gordon is a ballhog issue is being brought up is HE IS a ballhog. Now, the Bulls need him to shoot and need him to score so it's not horrible that he's a ballhog, but facts are facts and people have brought this issue up since the day he put a Bulls uniform on. The reasons people don't like Ben Gordon are obvious:

 

1. He shoots a lot (that's not my problem with him, but whatever)

2. He's a 6'2 shooting guard (that's a problem, even if you don't agree)

3. He shoots a low percentage for a guy with a scoring reputation (43 percent in his career)

4. He doesn't play defense, care about defense, or even try on defense

 

This post shows me you do not watch much basketball. Gordon's defense is a non-issue. Skiles has said he's vastly better since his rookie year and is above average and that was before he left/was fired. Ben's an even better defender this year and he has great technique. The fact that he's 6'2 does not mean a thing. He's by far the best SG on the team and by far a top 2 player on this team and it's not even close. He's a SG. No one said he was a super duper star. He's an All-Star maybe, but no one called him Kobe. And by the way, his PER before the last 2 games was ridiculous on the season. I believe he had a PER of 24 which IIRC was better than Rose this season. And I'm pretty sure his PER is still at around Rose's level or near it. So Gordon's not only an efficient shooter, he's an efficient offensive player.

 

Gordon's PER on the season is 19.51 including the last two games. Rose on the season has a per of 18.18.

Edited November 21, 2008 by nitetrain8601

[rangercal]

anyone who does not want Gordon back for the right price, does not know basketball.

[Steve9347]

anyone who does not want Gordon back for the right price, does not know basketball.

The key is "for the right price", because some might argue that price is about 7-8 mill per, not the 11-12 per he's going to want.

 

If he were 6-6, I'd give him a max deal. However, a 6-2 guard who gives no effort on the defensive end and can lose you as many games as he wins you... I can't give him the money he thinks he deserves.

[rangercal]

The key is "for the right price", because some might argue that price is about 7-8 mill per, not the 11-12 per he's going to want.

 

If he were 6-6, I'd give him a max deal. However, a 6-2 guard who gives no effort on the defensive end and can lose you as many games as he wins you... I can't give him the money he thinks he deserves.

 

well, yeah. I'm pointing out anyone wanting him gone with no good reason has no clue about the state of basketball. Losing Gordon for nothing in return is not a step in the right direction.

[Steve9347]

well, yeah. I'm pointing out anyone wanting him gone with no good reason has no clue about the state of basketball. Losing Gordon for nothing in return is not a step in the right direction.

I agree with that... Paxson really screwed this one up by letting it get to the point that Ben Gordon has next to no trade value, and will probably walk at the end of the year.

 

He had a nice run initially fixing the funk left by Krause (although, giving Tyson away was so incredibly stupid I want to kill someone everytime I see him block another shot)... and it seems that though it seemed like a good thing at the time, the move of Eddy Curry for two Knicks picks has become a wash (although, we're not stuck with that contract) because Pax gave away LaMarcus Aldridge, who is exactly what this franchise has been looking for...

 

Think if we had Aldridge and Hawes instead of Tyrus and Noah?

 

I find it funny. All we want is a low-post scorer, so we deal the proven low-post prospect for a high-upside guy (something Pax never did before), and it backfired.

 

Now we're stuck with Kirk, Deng, Tyrus all performing well under where they were expected to be at this point, and a guy in Gordon who's forced to be the #1 scoring option when he normally should be #3.

Edited November 21, 2008 by Steve9347

[Steve9347]

Report: Harrington to NY in three-team deal?

 

Al Harrington is rumored to have been traded to the Knicks on Friday, although details are still unclear.

 

Three possible scenarios exist, with the Knicks sending either Jamal Crawford or Malik Rose to the Warriors in the first two. The third and newest option, reported by Newsday, has the Clippers and Warriors sending Harrington, Tim Thomas and Cuttino Mobley to the Knicks, with Crawford, Zach Randolph and Mardy Collins being moved between the Clips and Warriors. This would clear cap space for the Knicks and give Harrington a starting job with Randolph out of the way. Stay tuned as details emerge throughout the day.

[DBAHO]

I'm surprised the Knicks would ship out Randolph to be honest, considering how good he's actually been in D'Antoni's system thus far.

 

Still, I think he's got 3 years left on his deal, and Harrington's got 2, which could be the major factor.

 

Trying to free up that cap space in 2010.

 

I think it'll be straight up for Rose (with the Knicks maybe throwing in something else)?

[ZoomSlowik]

This post shows me you do not watch much basketball. Gordon's defense is a non-issue. Skiles has said he's vastly better since his rookie year and is above average and that was before he left/was fired. Ben's an even better defender this year and he has great technique. The fact that he's 6'2 does not mean a thing. He's by far the best SG on the team and by far a top 2 player on this team and it's not even close. He's a SG. No one said he was a super duper star. He's an All-Star maybe, but no one called him Kobe. And by the way, his PER before the last 2 games was ridiculous on the season. I believe he had a PER of 24 which IIRC was better than Rose this season. And I'm pretty sure his PER is still at around Rose's level or near it. So Gordon's not only an efficient shooter, he's an efficient offensive player.

 

Gordon's PER on the season is 19.51 including the last two games. Rose on the season has a per of 18.18.

 

Just saying Gordon actually plays defense doesn't make it so. Gordon is a suspect defender because of his lack of size/length, especially on shooting guards (The Skiles thing you reference was against PG's, which doesn't always happen given the matchups and forces another suspect defender onto the 2-guard if it does. Consider that the guy that said that did virtually everything he could to not start Gordon and limit his minutes.), any scout will tell you that and the stats will back that up. The Bulls' defense was 8 and a half points better per 100 posessions on defense when he was off the court last season, and even with his offensive prowess the offense was only .8 points better when he was on the floor. Granted that figure is better so far this season, but it's a small sample size (his preciptitous drop in PER the last two games shows how small) and the stats have gone down hill since he was inserted into the starting lineup. There's no doubt that he had been playing well before the last two and that he's clearly at worst our second best scorer, but he's also highly streaky as the last two games have shown and like the rest of the team can be replaced with a little effort with someone that isn't quite as explosive but is more well-rounded and have a similar impact. If he were reasonable with his contract of course bring him back, but the last thing the Bulls need is another decent but not great player getting 10 mil+ a year, that seriously backfired with Hinrich and Deng isn't exactly off to a good start on that either despite having a higher PER than Gordon in each of the last 3 seasons.

 

I'm also curious as to how the fact that Gordon's PER in a 12 game sample (which is also a fair amount over his career totals) is higher than that of Rose is relevant. Comparing an above average player in his 5th season to a barely 20 year old rookie playing a position where even the best young players typically struggle quite a bit isn't exactly even.

Edited November 21, 2008 by ZoomSlowik

[Steve9347]

Just saying Gordon actually plays defense doesn't make it so. Gordon is a suspect defender because of his lack of size/length, especially on shooting guards (the Skiles thing you reference was against PG's, which rarely happens given the matchups), any scout will tell you that and the stats will back that up. The Bulls' defense was 8 and a half points better per 100 posessions on defense when he was off the court last season, and even with his offensive prowess the offense was only .8 points better when he was on the floor. Granted that figure is better so far this season, but it's a small sample size (his preciptitous drop in PER the last two games shows how small) and the stats have gone down hill since he was inserted into the starting lineup. There's no doubt that he had been playing well before the last two and that he's clearly at worst our second best scorer, but he's also highly streaky as the last two games have shown and like the rest of the team can be replaced with a little effort with someone that isn't quite as explosive but is more well-rounded and have a similar impact. If he were reasonable with his contract of course bring him back, but the last thing the Bulls need is another decent but not great player getting 10 mil+ a year, that seriously backfired with Hinrich and Deng isn't exactly off to a good start on that either.

 

I'm also curious as to how the fact that Gordon's PER in a 12 game sample (which is also a fair amount over his career totals) is higher than that of Rose is relevant. Comparing an above average player in his 5th season to a barely 20 year old rookie playing a position where even the best young players typically struggle quite a bit isn't exactly even.

Damn you, Zoom, for bringing reality to the thread.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

They need to start looking long-term into building a championship-caliber team around Rose. (And I have no faith in the organization being able to do so, particularly with how atrocious of a GM pax is.)

 

Is gordon a piece? I'd say no, and that's before even taking into account the money he wants...

[whitesoxfan101]

This post shows me you do not watch much basketball. Gordon's defense is a non-issue. Skiles has said he's vastly better since his rookie year and is above average and that was before he left/was fired. Ben's an even better defender this year and he has great technique. The fact that he's 6'2 does not mean a thing. He's by far the best SG on the team and by far a top 2 player on this team and it's not even close. He's a SG. No one said he was a super duper star. He's an All-Star maybe, but no one called him Kobe. And by the way, his PER before the last 2 games was ridiculous on the season. I believe he had a PER of 24 which IIRC was better than Rose this season. And I'm pretty sure his PER is still at around Rose's level or near it. So Gordon's not only an efficient shooter, he's an efficient offensive player.

 

Gordon's PER on the season is 19.51 including the last two games. Rose on the season has a per of 18.18.

 

There are so many things inaccurate in this post that it would take me quite a while to address them. However I will say there are a LOT of GM's who agree with you on Ben Gordon, which is why he will be badly overpaid this offseason and spend the next 5 years driving a different fanbase and coach crazy. I don't realistically see a way you can win a championship with Ben Gordon as your starting 2 guard with as important as that position is, but if it ever happens, I'll admit I was wrong. He's not a bad player, but he's just very overvalued by a lot of people.

Edited November 21, 2008 by whitesoxfan101

[ZoomSlowik]

When did Isaiah Thomas become the GM of the Warriors? They now have 4 guards/small forwards that derive most of their value from scoring and none of them are particularly good ball-handlers. That backcourt looks like a disaster waiting to happen.

[DBAHO]

That's the way Don Nelson likes it.

 

Jack it up guards who can push the pace.

 

Definitely like the trade from the Knicks perspective though, but for their sake, hopefully it won't hinder Chandler's development.

 

If they pulled off the Thomas and Mobley for Randolph deal also, they'd have 2 more expiring contracts for the 2010 off-season, Mobley would play at SG, Thomas off the bench jacking up 3's, and Lee at C.

 

Donnie Walsh doing a very nice job so far (besides the Gallinardi pick, but still that's way too early to tell).

[Chisoxfn]

 

Rose has the ball at all times, Gordon not so much. The shot per touch ratio for these two would show just how much more often Gordon shoots it per touch, not to mention Rose is shooting at a higher percentage than Gordon is this year. The reason the Gordon is a ballhog issue is being brought up is HE IS a ballhog. Now, the Bulls need him to shoot and need him to score so it's not horrible that he's a ballhog, but facts are facts and people have brought this issue up since the day he put a Bulls uniform on. The reasons people don't like Ben Gordon are obvious:

 

1. He shoots a lot (that's not my problem with him, but whatever)

2. He's a 6'2 shooting guard (that's a problem, even if you don't agree)

3. He shoots a low percentage for a guy with a scoring reputation (43 percent in his career)

4. He doesn't play defense, care about defense, or even try on defense

In his defense, he's also the only scorer on the court. Gordon would be a tremendous asset in a sixth man role. In his current role on the current team, not so much, but without him, we'd probably have the worse offense of all time.

[ZoomSlowik]

In his defense, he's also the only scorer on the court. Gordon would be a tremendous asset in a sixth man role. In his current role on the current team, not so much, but without him, we'd probably have the worse offense of all time.

 

Even without Gordon we'd be at worst a push with the Thunder.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Donnie Walsh doing a very nice job so far

 

FIRE PAX

[ChWRoCk2]

knicks apparently just traded randolph to clips for thomas and mobley

[rangercal]

Davis

Kaman

Randolph

Thornton

Camby

 

 

Looks good. But, somehow I suspect they will manage to win only 30 games. They are still the Clippers.

[ZoomSlowik]

I would think a trade of either Camby or Kaman is next, otherwise that's going to be a pain to split their minutes. Too bad the Bulls don't have a whole lot of bargaining chips anymore, Kaman would be a great fit.

[Steve9347]

I really need him to start producing. I picked him on my fantasy team only because he was involved in my team name, "ChrisKaman His Pants".

Did you and AJ have a conference or something? That's his team name in our league.

[whitesoxfan101]

Davis

Kaman

Randolph

Thornton

Camby

 

 

Looks good. But, somehow I suspect they will manage to win only 30 games. They are still the Clippers.

 

I really like Thornton, but beyond that, all that group really is in my opinion is veteran, expensive, and going nowhere in the west. That has perrenial 7 seed, 1 and done in the west written all over it. Now obviously, that would be a HUGE improvement for the Clippers, but it's all about the summer of 2010 in the NBA if you are a team not near a title, and they have no shot now to get anybody at that time.

[Balta1701]

I would think a trade of either Camby or Kaman is next, otherwise that's going to be a pain to split their minutes. Too bad the Bulls don't have a whole lot of bargaining chips anymore, Kaman would be a great fit.

The Bulls have a ton of bargaining chips, the Clippers just don't want/need them. 2 large expiring contracts, multiple young guys, couple of trade-able veterans with contracts that actually decrease with time. But unless they're willing to go to the total rebuild and shoot for a 2010 expiring contract, they won't take it.

[nitetrain8601]

Damn you, Zoom, for bringing reality to the thread.

 

And damn me for bringing you out of your fantasies you want to call reality. The Bulls' Opponents PER against SG is 11.9 which is 2nd lowest on the team. Between 2nd and 3rd there is a decent gap of 1.6 and between Gordon and our bigs, 21.1 and 23.1 for PF & C respectively. Which shows the true story on how our season is. Gordon has been disrupting opposing team's SG's while Deng does a decent job and our big men are atrocious and any big men facing the Bulls is going to have a field day. I was surprised to see Rose have an opposing PER of 11.4, which indicates a huge improvement from where he was about 2 weeks ago.

 

So yeah, the whole Gordon is terrible defensively and doesn't deserve a large contract because he's 6'2 and not 6'7 has no credibility. Give me a 6'2 basketball player over a 6'7 bum (Hughes anyone?)

[Balta1701]

So yeah, the whole Gordon is terrible defensively and doesn't deserve a large contract because he's 6'2 and not 6'7 has no credibility. Give me a 6'2 basketball player over a 6'7 bum (Hughes anyone?)

Look, if your argument is going to be that we should be giving minutes to me over Larry Hughes...I doubt you'll get much disagreement on that.

[nitetrain8601]

There are so many things inaccurate in this post that it would take me quite a while to address them. However I will say there are a LOT of GM's who agree with you on Ben Gordon, which is why he will be badly overpaid this offseason and spend the next 5 years driving a different fanbase and coach crazy. I don't realistically see a way you can win a championship with Ben Gordon as your starting 2 guard with as important as that position is, but if it ever happens, I'll admit I was wrong. He's not a bad player, but he's just very overvalued by a lot of people.

 

I backed up my statements with facts. You guys could talk baseball, but as far as basketball, just wow. I even gave you stats which are equivalents to OPS+'s for basketball and such and you choose to ignore them. You have said nothing other than LULZ, OMGZ BEN GORDON IZ SO SHORT HES THE SUX0RZ!!1!