It would be foolish to let Ben Gordon go
by Looney_Bucky on Mar 6, 2009 9:52 PM CST
103 comments
Ben Gordon is a prolific scorer. With Pooh he has become even better. It was a mistake (one of the many by Paxson) to sign Deng to a long term contract instead of Gordon.
There are not that many Ben Gordon's out there. We must resign him. It seems like he wants out, but if we give him an offer that overwhelms him, he might decide to come back. We have the money to sign him. It will not be a bad investment. I don't ever remember Gordon getting injured. He always show up to play (at least offensively). Giving him a big long term contract would be a good, safe investment.
FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.
0 recs |
103 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I hope to god they can get something done.
A player like BG is hard to find. He’s gotta be that player every team hates to see when he rises up for a shot. That one three he took was like a perfect rainbow. You know he’s feeling it when he put the monocle to his eye.
Pool and a pond... Pond be good for you.
by SoulEater7 on Mar 6, 2009 10:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think it is past the point of
if Gordon is good or not. I don’t think the Bulls have enough money at this stage of the game. The money has been dealt out already. They are going to have to live with their purchases now unless something amazing happens.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 6, 2009 10:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Like trading Hinrich and draft picks for non-guaranteed contracts?
They are going to have to live with their purchases now unless something amazing happens.
Maybe we can (but probably not)?
by Granny Waiters on Mar 6, 2009 11:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you see Pax able to pull that rabbit out?
And in a climate where other teams don’t want to take on money and the cap shrinking next year? That is a long shot. And they act like they don’t want to get rid of Hinrich without Gordon signed. It will be extremely hard. And Jerry doesn’t even like Gordon. It would be hard if it was a guy he liked at this point.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 6, 2009 11:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I could see Paxson with a Rabbit.
In a cage…in his office, with a carrot.
Pool and a pond... Pond be good for you.
by SoulEater7 on Mar 6, 2009 11:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I was considering your "amazing" qualification when I wrote that.
Unfortunately, the Bulls will likely start 2009-2010 with the redundant Hinrich on the roster, but no Gordon. :(
Maybe we can (but probably not)?
by Granny Waiters on Mar 7, 2009 12:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would just like to continue to point out.
There is no hard cap in the NBA and the Bulls have made like $500 million in profit over the past 10 years. The luxury tax is not a hard barrier, and definitely not a barrier that should stop a team that has made as much money as ours from re-signing a guy this important to the team. Taking the money hit for one year to keep your best player is a longterm investment you have to do.
We’re done with free agency imo, so we will have the player we get from trading expiring contracts after this season. Then we get some cap relief from when some of the 2010 contracts expire.
Although I think a Hinrich or Deng trade may be on the way this summer that paves the way for Gordon to be re-signed.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 7, 2009 2:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It really depends on how much Paxson wants BG and how well he can sell that to JR.
If Pax says we offer BG nearly the same as Deng got, or I resign, what does JR do?
Maybe we can (but probably not)?
by Granny Waiters on Mar 7, 2009 2:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Bulls aren't going to offer BG $80 million like they did Deng.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 7, 2009 2:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
With the deferred portion of the contract and Deng now likely to miss incentives,
the real payout in 2009 dollars should be around $68-69M. So to match, the Bulls would need to offer BG $11.5M/year for 6 years.
Maybe we can (but probably not)?
by Granny Waiters on Mar 7, 2009 8:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How is Deng going to miss incentives?
They are all team incentives, and Rose/Gordon/Salmons seem bent on pulling Deng’s sorriness to his incentives.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 7, 2009 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
how do you even know this?
"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"
by Jaina on Mar 7, 2009 1:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
was his contract worth a potential $80m with bonuses?
I’ve been thinking it was for $70m, straight up.
by smash! on Mar 7, 2009 7:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
72 million without any incentives
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 7, 2009 8:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would like to point out.
The reason the Bulls have made so much money is by avoiding the luxury tax, which is a dollar for dollar tax on the contract.
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 7, 2009 8:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not to mention
losing out on receiving the other teams’ taxes
by torch on Mar 7, 2009 9:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The reason they made so much money is Jordan.
They kept selling the place out with crap teams even after he retired just because people wanted to go to where he used to play.
by BoxingHideout on Mar 7, 2009 1:52 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
yes, that and the fact that they also avoided lux tax.
yay, you both win.
by smash! on Mar 7, 2009 7:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, post this after his 34pt performance
I didn’t see any pro-Gordon posts during the four previous games when he averaged 14ppg on 35% shooting. I like Gordon, but this is a bit impulsive, don’t ya think?
by YaoPau on Mar 6, 2009 11:41 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Name me a fanshot without an eye towards recent play [besides Scotter's].
I mean, I agree, but still.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
by Prevenge on Mar 6, 2009 11:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You could say that about anyone on our team.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 7, 2009 12:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody is posting fanshots about anyone else though
"Whenever Kirk/Ben are in together. Kirk turns into a crappy player, because he tries to freeze Gordon out of the offense." - Andrew7
by gobulls1124 on Mar 7, 2009 1:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
thats the worst logic.
It ill be hard to find a replacement for his scoring. If you think the Bulls will be better next season without BG you haven’t been watching the games. Not only that BG and Rose are pretty good together. PAY HIM.
Pool and a pond... Pond be good for you.
by SoulEater7 on Mar 7, 2009 3:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thabo
He had a couple good games and suddenly POW. People think we shouldn’t have traded him. After a couple of good games.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 7, 2009 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thabo is good player and he shouldn't have been traded
Unfortunately he was the “odd man out.”
"Whenever Kirk/Ben are in together. Kirk turns into a crappy player, because he tries to freeze Gordon out of the offense." - Andrew7
by gobulls1124 on Mar 7, 2009 4:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd take him over Deng right now if the money wasn't an issue.
Pool and a pond... Pond be good for you.
by SoulEater7 on Mar 7, 2009 7:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Pay the man
Ben has been the most consistent Bull since his rookie year. He has improved every year and only slightly regressed last year until Deng and Hinrich who both totally fell off. And his D has improved to good enough.
No reason why he shouldn’t be making more than Deng and Hinrich. I know he will have some games with 3 TOs and a couple selfish shots.
But I honestly see more pluses than minuses, plus in the NBA you gotta have shooters. Who else can shoot like Ben on this team, absolutely no one. He’s not even as streaky as he used to be.
by C Smoove on Mar 7, 2009 1:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
We probably don't even have to pay him more than Deng.
I think there is a chance the Thunder/Detroit could spend that much money on him, but I don’t think it’s the most likely thing in the world. If we just give him something respectable, like $60 million over 6 (which is a very fair deal).
I think it would be good to make Gordon’s contract flat as well. Just $10 million every year, no raises. That way you don’t worry about the tail end of the contract getting too big.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 7, 2009 2:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Except...
he turned down 5 years, $55M so I’m not so sure he’d take what is in essence a 1 year, $5mil deal.
by CubFan81 on Mar 7, 2009 2:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He turned down $50 million, 5 years. Deng is the one who turned that down (actually $57.5 million).
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 7, 2009 2:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You're
right. It was 5/$50M the first time and then 6/$58 this past off-season. Either way…I’m finding it harder and harder to see where he comes close to getting something like that this year.
by CubFan81 on Mar 7, 2009 3:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In another thread...
Andrew said he thought Gordon would sign for the MLE with the Knicks…now he thinks the Bulls should offer $60M. That is a pretty big difference.
Gordon turned down that kind of money twice from the Bulls…I don’t think he would swallow his pride such that he signs with the Bulls for less…but I could be wrong
" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem
is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger
by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 7, 2009 8:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We didn't offer him $58 over 6.
If we did, Gordon might have signed. That’s probably part of the reason why Gordon felt disrespected. The Bulls made such a stink about how they can’t go over the luxury tax, and then they didn’t even offer him the full almount they had under the luxury tax.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 7, 2009 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I really wish
the “Just pay him already” mindset would go away. He was offered something at market value and HE TURNED IT DOWN!! Take for example:
Player A: 25 years old, 41.8% FG, 86.8% FT, 2.2 3ptm, 24.1 Pts, 3.5 Reb, 2.6 Ast, 1.1 Stl, .2 Blks, and 2.8 TOs
Player B: 25 years old, 45.2% FG, 86.2% FT, 2 3ptm, 20.3 Pts, 3.5 Reb, 3.5 Ast, .8 Stl, .3 Blks, 2.6 TOs.
Those are only the per game averages and don’t take into account anything more advanced.
by CubFan81 on Mar 7, 2009 2:37 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Simply...
Ben is pissed. This last summer he had to play second fiddle to Luol “Franchise Money” Deng. He is waiting for the day he can walk away with his middle finger in the air. Fortunately nobody has the money to pay BG so he might find his way back to Chicago for cheap. BUT, since Salmons is proving he can score, BG is seeming like less of a necessity. And what it comes down too is that Chicago is going nowhere with a Rose-Gordon-Deng nucleus. They need a big splash in 2010 (Amare/Bosh) to be a contender. Signing Gordon would make this difficult considering how much money he is going to want. Let him go, wait till 2010.
by oakdale on Mar 7, 2009 4:17 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Do you have inside information to this effect,
or are you just speculating?
Ben is pissed.
Maybe we can (but probably not)?
by Granny Waiters on Mar 7, 2009 5:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is the part I dont understand
Instead of offering Deng more money then Gordon twice 57.5 mil -50 mil and 71 mil-58 mil y couldn’t we offer them the same deals this summer 6-63. Deng has never done anything to prove he should have gotten a raise after he regressed and pouted last season. I would have traded him for RLEC in a heartbeat. He is not a 1, 2 or 3 option because he cannot create his own shot yet tries to go one on one constantly.
by Blacknight23 on Mar 7, 2009 7:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely. Pax made a real effort to pay both Deng and BG. I think Ben will sign here, but for less than he would have gotten in previous negotiations.
by jmogs on Mar 7, 2009 11:47 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That is the crux of the issue.....right there.
by Bart71 on Mar 7, 2009 5:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
KC seems to think $8mil/year
Seems high for a guy with his deficiencies who really should be the best 6th man in the league. Not a dig on BG. Think about Detlef Schrempf back in the day. Better than a lot of starters in the league and getting nearly starter minutes—-but far more valuable coming off the bench. Not sure we can pay $8 mil for that—-but I’d like to see them try. More importantly, not sure that BG would accept the lesser role…but he won’t have a choice but accept the lesser money.
by jmogs on Mar 8, 2009 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sixth man would be easier to swallow if
they had an equal or at least close to equal guy playing ahead of him as the starting SG. Historically the Bulls have put inferior players in front of him when he hasn’t started (Thabo, Hughes, Duhon, Hinrich) and no guy with any self worth would enjoy that, especially when we are not having a winning season and your 6th man role is a joke for joke team. There are good teams in the league that have very good players as 6th men, but the Bulls are not a very good team and don’t have the depth at the SG position to do that. Especially when Deng is playing poorly and injured all the time and Salmons has to be our SF and seems to be a godsend for us in that.
I really hate to hear the announcers be amazed at our bench outscoring our starters as they often did in the beginning of the season with Gordon and Tyrus and often Noah coming off the bench for the likes of Thabo, Gooden, and Gray whose defense did not offset their offensive faults. Starting a bunch of no-names is annoying. There is the point where your best players must be your starters instead of waiting for your real starters to be coming off the bench. Get a guy better than Gordon to be your SG and then have Gordon as the 6th man. Otherwise it won’t work. No one wants to be the best 6th man ever on a losing team playing behind an inferior player. It only works on winning teams behind good players.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 8, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ben Gordon has screwed himself
He may be shocked by how little other teams offer him. The salary cap should shrink and teams are waiting for 2010. It is very unlikely Gordon is going to get a offer anywhere near what the Bulls offered last year. Gordon may only get the MLE. That said I believe Portland and Toronto love Deng. Portland will be under the salary cap next year. In July, if we reach an agreement with Gordon, we trade Deng for Batam and Travis Outlaw. I believe that gets us under the cap enough to sign Gordon. Gordon has put himself into a bad position being a free agent in one of the worst economic years. If we can get ourselves under the cap, being confronted with shocking bad offers from other teams will make the Bulls offer, which I assume will be less than what was offered last year, very attractive.
by chgobr on Mar 7, 2009 9:13 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I tend to agree but it won't make playing for the Bulls any more attractive
by Sports2 on Mar 7, 2009 9:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We offer him one dollar more than the competition he is a Bull
He is starting for us, is getting huge minutes and Paxson wants to sign him. I think Gordon is happy here.
by chgobr on Mar 7, 2009 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree
Pool and a pond... Pond be good for you.
by SoulEater7 on Mar 7, 2009 3:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Pax wanted to sign him...
…why did he make trades that make it nearly impossible to sign him?
None of these things are inconsistent with the following. The Bulls don’t want to re-sign Gordon, but they want to appear that they gave him a “fair shake”, and certainly don’t want to appear to be douches who bench their best player in the midst of a playoff run. And they’ll also make more money if they get in the playoffs.
by Sports2 on Mar 7, 2009 5:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Pax wanted to trade Hinrich to Minn., but they asked for too much in return.
Maybe we can (but probably not)?
by Granny Waiters on Mar 8, 2009 8:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
trade deng
I’d rather see Salmons at the 3 and have a Rose-Gordon-Salmons line up. If Portland still has a boner for Deng then let’s trade him for some expiring contracts and clear room for 2010.
by patagonia on Mar 7, 2009 11:06 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
i was thinking that myself
keeping up with the “what have you done for me lately” mentality….hinrich rose and gordon seem more productive playing together, plus we have salmons for two yearss, who can opt out in 2010 i believe. We trade deng who still has a lot of upside and is still a good player (i still think he is better than salmons) and that allows us to keep gordon and hinrich (both sides win!!!) Hinrich keeps playing the role he has been playing lately and hte minutes (really 20 min isnt that bad when he is actually hitting his shots and not turning the ball over) salmons is cheaper than deng, and though i think his defense isnt as good as dengs, his offense might be more consistant sense he can get his own shot off, and is much more controlled on offense (doesnt force bad shots, if he doesnt have something he passes out). plus its more 2010 friendly…
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
by piccolomair on Mar 7, 2009 12:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The "Deng has upside" train left two years ago!
He is untradeable with his contract. Deng is not better than Salmons. Hilarious!!! Deng is not a leader, Deng is soft in so many ways. Not going hard to the basket and shying away from any sort of contact is one example! Come on! You’re 6’9" and you want no part of the paint! He should be dunking in traffic………..instead we have a 6’9" player who would rather lay it up. Deng sucks!
Hinrich + Gordon + Deng + Paxson + Del Negro = FAIL
by Johnny"B"ull on Mar 7, 2009 2:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, Deng is NOT a good defender!
Jumping around and loooking active is not good defense my friend!
Hinrich + Gordon + Deng + Paxson + Del Negro = FAIL
by Johnny"B"ull on Mar 7, 2009 2:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
....intresting
Deng is a better defender than salmons, its something thats clearly noticeable in the last two games. Not knocking salmons defense, he is a pretty good defender himself, but deng definetly is alot more physical on defense. Weve had guards beat us, and weve had bigs beat us, but aside from lebron, i cant think of many 3s that have beaten us.
Deng still does have alot of upside, i know deng plays like he is 29 or something, but i think he is only 23 atm. He can work on his shot and still develop his range. He can still put on more muscle (although if i were him i wouldnt put on upper body muscle, i would put on some lower body muscle for explosiveness).
The biggest problem with deng i think is the system. Salmons is working for this team because he is the type who can go one on one, can create his own shot. Luol cannot. Luol needs screens and enough time to get a good look. He cant take a guy off the dribble. So unless we get a new coach who is a good xs and os guy, luol is at a loss within this system. I dont think salmons is the better player, i think salmons on this team, the way it is now, is the better fit.
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!
by piccolomair on Mar 7, 2009 6:16 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Yep, that's exactlly what I think as well.
The only thing I’m slightly concerned with is Deng’s general injury proneness and whether he can actually handle getting bigger and playing more physically. Hell, it’s a question whether he can handle playing how he’s playing now.
by Sports2 on Mar 7, 2009 6:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Deng can play like his is 29 for 6 more years. Woo! :)
A side question for anyone. What specific skill has Deng added to his game since entering the league? We always talk about him adding a 3 point shot. Post moves. Playing more aggressive in the 4th quarters… Yes, he is still young, but what has he been doing with his time? He is finishing up his fifth year and has been riding that “but he is still young” thing every single one of them. How long can he ride that considering his injuries and preoccupation with international play in the summer. It is becoming hard to see how he will find time getting better as he doesn’t seem to have spent time on it yet.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 7, 2009 6:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm pretty sure he didn't move that well without the ball or hit a jumpshot with any consistency
His TS% was a horrid .496 as a rookie before reaching its peak at .560 in 2007. Became a better defender.
Of course, all this improvement stopped 2 years ago, so now we’re kind of fucked with Deng if he doesn’t get out of this rut. It’s not going to happen this year, so it’s 2 seasons down the drain in a young and promising career. He’s now being slowly phased out of the offense, and for a guy that they rarely run any plays for, it’s a very bad idea.
It’s tough to make excuses for the 72 million dollar man, but there’s not even a passing attempt at an offensive gameplan this year, there hasn’t been one since October. That being said, Deng is a buffoon for not being able to integrate himself in the new, Rose-centric world. Gordon, Tyrus, and Noah have all taken their new roles and done well. Even Brad Miller figured out in 2 games how to play with Derrick Rose. I still believe it’s extremely rare to see a guy like Deng just fall off the face of the Earth after such a promising start to his career. He’ll likely have a bigger role in the offense if Gordon leaves this summer, since he’s probably the only other guy who moves without the ball as well as Ben.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 7, 2009 7:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Too small.....
Gordon – 6’1" Rose – 6’3" Salmons – 6’6" is way too small. I want a Rose/Salmons backcourt. Don’t sign the GREAT Gordon (LOL)!
Hinrich + Gordon + Deng + Paxson + Del Negro = FAIL
by Johnny"B"ull on Mar 7, 2009 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
lol,
our best player this year sucks!
11111.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
by Prevenge on Mar 8, 2009 6:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Anthony is digruntled in Denver
how about Deng and somebody for Melo. That was difficult to say because I’ve never been a Carmelo fan.
by hlac on Mar 7, 2009 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ben Gordon is NOT a prolific scorer
Jordan was a prolific scorer! Ben Gordon > 20pts. per game while shooting 45% on a BAD team! Yawn. I don’t need an undersized shooting guard who is an awful defender + is a horrible ball handler. John Salmons is a much needed upgrade.
Hinrich + Gordon + Deng + Paxson + Del Negro = FAIL
by Johnny"B"ull on Mar 7, 2009 2:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
He's not Dwyane Wade, but he's still damn good.
When you can get 20+ poitns on 57+ TS%, you just don’t throw that away. That’s a valuable commodity.
To be a championship NBA team, you need two things. Efficient scorers all around, with at least two guys who can do that efficient scoring in significant volume, and then good interior defense.
Right now, in terms of efficient scorers, the Bulls have Ben Gordon, John Salmons, Joakim Noah, Kirk Hinrich, and Brad Miller.
That’s only five guys, and two of them were recently acquired. We are getting there more and more in terms of efficient scoring, and will probably make a big leap there when Rose makes the usual sophomore jump next year, but our interior defense is still the one thing holding us back. Noah/Tyrus are improving, but they still aren’t all that great.
Just because we bring in one scorer who can score in volume with efficiency, doesn’t mean we should get rid of the one we already have. We need to be building here, not interchanging parts.
Out of our main eight guys we have three inefficient scorers right now, Tyrus Thomas, Luol Deng, and Derrick Rose. Deng/Thomas may never get it on that end. Rose is fine probably. Kevin Durant and Lebron James especially couldn’t score with any kind of efficiency their rookie years. If he makes the sophomore jump, he will be good.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 7, 2009 2:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tyrus has been an efficient scorer for the last 3 months. His TS% has been around 54%
since 12/1, I believe. So you can probably cross him off the inefficient scorers list. That leaves just Deng and Rose (who should, obviously, get better with time).
Vinny discovers frontcourt by accident. Someone re-smash Gooden’s groin!
- your friendly BullsBlogger
by fundamentallysound on Mar 8, 2009 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you guys are out of your minds.
His TS is 54% on something like 9.5 shots a game.
If you look at forwards who shoot that much or more, that’s hardly spectacular.
I mean, look, I’m not trying to just slag on him, but I look at him as scoring efficiently within the context of not being a big scoring option. What happens if he gets another 5 shots a game?
From that perspective, If I were going to aim to get someone more shots and someone else less, I’d be going to Gordon, Miller, Noah, Kirk and Salmons before I’d be going to Tyrus more.
Which is to say, it’s nice to see the improvement, but he’s improved to the point where he’s decent at the level he’s being given. I don’t think it means he’d necessarily step up if he were given more of a “scoring role”.
by Sports2 on Mar 9, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He just said that he wasn't inefficient,
not that he was spectacularly efficient.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
by Prevenge on Mar 9, 2009 6:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you are not a prolific scorer. your johnny bull****
Derrick Rose got Freakin Skillz. When are we going to add a 7th championship?
by broseleay301 on Mar 7, 2009 5:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
::admin swoops in::
just to point out, if I saw this before it had a few-dozen comments, I would’ve deleted it. There are already quite a few Ben Gordon threads and this post didn’t exactly show things in a new an interesting way.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 7, 2009 2:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
the people want it.
Pool and a pond... Pond be good for you.
by SoulEater7 on Mar 7, 2009 3:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no they don't
because there are two mindsets:
1.) Gordon was offered 10mil/5yrs and he turned it down. That’s quite a fair offer for a 1-dimensional player and if he doesn’t want it, see ya later.
and
2.) OMG BG scores 20 points a game! He’s the best player on the team! Our offense is shit without him! GIVE THE MAN HIS MONEY!
Nobody’s opinion is going to change on this subject, so we don’t need another Ben Gordon thread.
"Whenever Kirk/Ben are in together. Kirk turns into a crappy player, because he tries to freeze Gordon out of the offense." - Andrew7
by gobulls1124 on Mar 7, 2009 7:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
63 comments.....make that 64.
It’s just a good debate, if he does leave I dread facing him.
Pool and a pond... Pond be good for you.
by SoulEater7 on Mar 7, 2009 7:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's not a good debate
Debate means people value other opinions. When it comes to Gordon, everyone just spouts their cliche remarks and that’s that. Normal discussion goes on just fine with Tyrus, Noah, etc. With BG, there’s a pretty clear line drawn between Bulls fans.
Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.
by Ozzie Montana on Mar 7, 2009 8:19 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Plus one for truthery.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
by Prevenge on Mar 8, 2009 6:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
sure
my point is it’s being held in several other spots. So this is mostly repetition at this point
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 8, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what's the problem?
Can you only support so many fanposts or something? I’m not sure why one person would want to end a conversation that other people are having because one person finds the topic repetitive.
by robinhood on Mar 8, 2009 7:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe
redundant was the more accurate word. The conversation can continue…as the original conversation.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 8, 2009 9:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
20 pts on 45% is actually pretty damn good for a starting SG, not great but well above average. Salmons is not an upgrade, he’s taller and only a little better on D. He can’t rain threes like Ben does. Ben has numerous faults, mainly his size and penchants for dribbling off his leg. But when he’s on, he is a top 5 shooter.
In the NBA you need shooters. The Bulls only really have one. Salmons can fill in ok but he’s no true replacement.
by C Smoove on Mar 7, 2009 3:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
People still forget that a sign-and-trade gets a player an extra year of ridiculous money.
If you have only Deng making big money, a sign-and-trade means the Bulls would replace a good player (Thomas) with a great one while still having two holes at SG and SF. If they sign Gordon, they let the other team choose which of the two they want and the Bulls are left with one less hole to fill.
I’ve been (mostly) consistent in that the biggest reason for the Bulls to have re-signed Gordon last year was that they will need his contract to do any sign-and-trades. Even if his contract became “overpaid” by $3 or $4 million, in 2010, they would have only had 3 years left on a deal for a 20per36 scorer. And if the Bulls had re-signed Gordon and said sign-and-trade team wanted Deng instead, then the Bulls would have at least had some consistency for five years with Rose, and I feel very confident that Gordon would be playing “less selfishly” this season, knowing he has security and he’s the starter to go with Rose.
The Bulls should have gambled and offered 5years/$55-$60 million, signed Deng to his contract and traded away Hinrich for Outlaw, Blake and blah blah blah. Worry about getting under the Tax during the season.
The Bulls think too much in a vacuum, no long-term vision, no long-term plan. Eight or nine months later and it looks like they finally have one. And now they’ll have greater trouble executing it and be a little worse in the interim.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
by tyger1147 on Mar 8, 2009 2:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Let me ask you and everyone here that thinks that Gordon should only be a 6th man...
Why does a guy who has consistently showed he can score 20+ pts a game in this league, have to be typecast into a position? Gordon is quickly becoming the Doug Flutie of the NBA. Nevermind what he does on the court, we don’t feel comfortable seeing a guy at his height do it so it must be wrong. Did Reggie Miller play any defense? Ray Allen? How about Michael Redd or Gilbert Arenas? Because that’s how good of a scorer Gordon is. It’s this type of thinking by fans and management that make it OK for the Bulls to give Deng 71mil and give Kirk all that money. Nevermind what they are doing on the court, they just happen fit the criteria at their positions so it must be the right thing to do. Gordon has been the most consistent player on this team all year and their most clutch player since he was drafted. He’s only missed the playoffs once in his career as a pro. He’s rarely hurt, he’s professional, and he’s improved every year he’s been in the league. Last game he had 34pts, 7 assist, and 4 steals. While Rose also had a great game. So it’s proven that they play well together. He’s done all of this without a contract too by the way. So what else does he need to do to prove that he’s a starter in this league?
by Dils on Mar 8, 2009 6:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Please don't put Gordon in the same sentence as Reggie Miller and Ray Allen
"Whenever Kirk/Ben are in together. Kirk turns into a crappy player, because he tries to freeze Gordon out of the offense." - Andrew7
by gobulls1124 on Mar 8, 2009 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's currently a better three point shooter than either at this point in their careers.
He’s actually on the verge of becoming the best three point shooter ever. He’s just 23 three pointers away from breaking the record for most three pointers by a player in their first 5 years in the NBA.
The best part is, that out of all of the guys in the top 100, only 2 guys have a higher percentage, and they both made less than half of what Gordon has made.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 8, 2009 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Go take a look at Reggie Miller career stats and compare them to BG's
You may be suprised. Besides the point I’m trying to make is that BG’s biggest issue in this town and the reason he didn’t get his money but Hinrich and Deng did is perception. If Gordon was 6’6 and played the EXACT same way, would people be clamoring for him to be a 6th man? No, you’d be comparing him to Michael Redd or Arenas, guys who don’t get slammed because of their defensive liabilities. Heck even Brandon Roy doesn’t play defense but gets praised for what he does well. There are people here who think you can just slide Salmons over to the 2-guard spot and everything will be fine. Why is that? Because he’s taller? His defense is better but he isn’t Ron Artest out there. By the way, how many points did Richard Jefferson light him up for again? Point is Ben Gordon is more comparable to Reggie Miller than the guy eveyone wants to compare him to… Vinnie Johnson. Check the stats. VJ never averaged more than 16pts in a season. Those are facts. So again why is it that BG is being typecast as a 6th man when his numbers are just as good, if not better as a starter?
by Dils on Mar 8, 2009 7:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't "typecast" him as a 6th man
So don’t spit your rambling bullshit on me
"Whenever Kirk/Ben are in together. Kirk turns into a crappy player, because he tries to freeze Gordon out of the offense." - Andrew7
by gobulls1124 on Mar 8, 2009 9:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh relax with all the extras. I'm just making a point
by Dils on Mar 8, 2009 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just ignore "gobulls1124"
he’s been known around these parts to be among those on the “I hate Gordon” list
http://awsomepeoplesearch.com/
by NormVanBeer on Mar 9, 2009 9:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Ben Gordon. I think he's a great shooter and should be starting in this league.
What I DON’T like are the BG fanatics who will travel across the universe in search of reasons to pay him more than 10 million dollars. The bias around here is so strong that if any player comes in BG’s way, they will be instantly dismissed. I don’t know if Ben gave you guys a high five at a game before or you he gave you an autograph, but the dick riding fan club is the only thing I don’t like about BG7.
"Whenever Kirk/Ben are in together. Kirk turns into a crappy player, because he tries to freeze Gordon out of the offense." - Andrew7
by gobulls1124 on Mar 9, 2009 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 9, 2009 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think anyone cares what we pay BG
As long as it is enough to keep him around.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 10, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Umm... really?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
by tyger1147 on Mar 12, 2009 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does he dribble off his leg cuz he is short?
No. The reason BG is a 6th man is because his game has been deficient in key areas up until now. Yup, he’s the best scorer on the team at the moment. But he has been a subpar defender and ballhandler. To his credit, he has clearly worked on those things and has improved. His most important improvement has been scoring consistency—-a couple seasons ago he would have followed that stellar 34/7/4 line with 9 points…
For the record, I like him a lot and would like to see him stay. But not at $10mil. He has improved and I hope that he will develop into the starting SG that you see him as—-it is hard not to root for a guy with his great attitude. Unfortunately, I just don’t see him there right now and would rather see Salmons starting at the 2 (though admittedly, this is without much of a body of work to judge from).
by jmogs on Mar 8, 2009 10:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Gordon as 6th man gift never stops giving
Gordon, you’re not a starter so we can’t pay you. Even if, at the end of the day, you’re better than the guy who starts.
And guy who starts, don’t you expect to be paid like a starter, because even though you start… see… here’s the thing. You’re not really an actual starter because the guy who comes off the bench is better than you. So don’t expect a starter’s salary.
by Sports2 on Mar 9, 2009 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Chicago is going nowhere with a Rose-Gordon-Deng nucleus. They need a big splash in 2010 (Amare/Bosh) to be a contender. Signing Gordon would make this difficult considering how much money he is going to want. Let him go, wait till 2010.
I am BG fan but this is a compelling argument. The Bulls need to get that second impact player. I would like to keep Gordon, but if he gets in the way of that he must go. Don’t repeat for a 3rd time the mistakes of the Deng & Noc contracts.
by boobie trap on Mar 8, 2009 8:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I am not a big BG fan
but your point is exactly my point. I couldn’t agree more. Now the question is: how does BG fit and how much is he worth. And the same for Deng…and Kirk, etc. It gets complicated in a hurry. Last year I said several times “In Pax we trust,” but that rings hollow now. Given the contracts the Bulls have now that might be all we have left.
by hlac on Mar 8, 2009 8:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
use him in a sign-and-trade. Whoa!
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
by tyger1147 on Mar 8, 2009 9:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he could be a good 3rd piece.
The bar was set wrong with Deng and Hinrich, but as long as we are talking about pieces your third guy could be Ben at 60 mil which is around third piece money. Superstar/Rose/Gordon/Tyrus 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th pieces.
Gordon probably would be fine with being paid for his role on the team as a 3rd piece if the two guys in front of him were actually BETTER than he is. As it is Deng and Hinrich are not better than he is this year or by career. Rose is or will be in a year or two and if we land a free agent he would be too. The team hierarchy would make so much more sense if we had the basics right. We could have our best players out on the floor, our best players as captains, and our best players getting rewarded accordingly. Part of that is the organizations mistake. I am not sure if they even realize how bad it is. If I were them I’d be asking Deng to spend his summers getting better for the Bulls instead of playing with a bunch of scrubs on the British team. If we are stuck with him they need to get everything out of him that they can considering what we’ll be missing out on because of his contract. If you are worried about paying Gordon and risking getting a free agent I don’t really see how sticking Rose/Deng/Hinrich/Tyrus moves us ahead of the pack either.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 8, 2009 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, Gordon's on the British team now too :)
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 8, 2009 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His to-do list for the summer is shorter than Deng's.
And he doesn’t have bad foot, leg, back, hand… :)
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Mar 8, 2009 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need another big star, while keeping Gordon to compete.
Rose isn’t ever going to be a tier one superstar like Lebron and Dwight Howard.
That’s why we got all those expiring contracts, so we can swing a trade for our third core piece. Rose/Gordon/Bigman.
Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.
by Andrew7 on Mar 8, 2009 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
BG keeps impressing
43 points tonight against the Heat. How much more does he need to score to show us that he is worth resigning at any contract worth around what Deng’s was?
by Looney_Bucky on Mar 9, 2009 10:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Why not just blow up the team
go all out… get dwade next year… you know he wants to play in chicago… get a coach that will implement the triangle, and build around wade….
d’antoni wasn’t a good choice at coach… i need a coach that will get his team to play defense.
by darealting on Mar 12, 2009 4:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Blog a Bull
Related FanShots on Blog a Bull
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
