Fred, this is an article for you to go to war on!

[engies]

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/slezak/1648995,CST-SPT-carol02.article

Has Ben: Time was up for one-dimensional star
Comments

July 2, 2009
BY CAROL SLEZAK cslezak@suntimes.com

Ben Gordon is moving to Detroit, and you just know he's going to explode for 40 points the next time the Bulls play the Pistons. And when he does, many angry Bulls fans will complain that he never should have been allowed to leave. How could John Paxson and Gar Forman let that happen? Natural born shooters are a rare commodity in today's NBA, and when you're lucky enough to have a guy who can shoot like Gordon, you must keep him.

Not so fast, folks. There is another side to this debate. In truth, Gordon was often a liability for the Bulls. He has never had any interest in playing defense, his ballhandling skills are non-existent and he's too small to be a bona fide NBA shooting guard. When he was hot, he could carry the Bulls. When he wasn't hot, he could be a burden.


more at the link.

I'm too angry to read the rest. I'm sure she really knows her basketball!

 

[Kush77]

I saw that this morning too and I just shook my head. Carlo Slezak is awful, so I expect no less. Typical drone talking points.

 

[houheffna]

I saw that this morning too and I just shook my head. Carlo Slezak is awful, so I expect no less. Typical drone talking points.

Well, exactly what do you disagree with, someone in the comments section called him worthless. Wow. But what other dimensions of the game is Gordon good at, in your opinion?

 

[??? ??????]

houheffna wrote:

I saw that this morning too and I just shook my head. Carlo Slezak is awful, so I expect no less. Typical drone talking points.

Well, exactly what do you disagree with, someone in the comments section called him worthless. Wow. But what other dimensions of the game is Gordon good at, in your opinion?

Good: Three point shooting, midrange shooting, free throw shooting, taking his man off the dribble, staying in front of his man, contesting shots.

Average: Rebounding, passing, finishing at the basket.

Poor: Fighting through screens and chasing his man around on defense.

 

[engies]

??? ?????? wrote:

houheffna wrote:

I saw that this morning too and I just shook my head. Carlo Slezak is awful, so I expect no less. Typical drone talking points.

Well, exactly what do you disagree with, someone in the comments section called him worthless. Wow. But what other dimensions of the game is Gordon good at, in your opinion?

Good: Three point shooting, midrange shooting, free throw shooting, taking his man off the dribble, staying in front of his man, contesting shots.

Average: Rebounding, passing, finishing at the basket.

Poor: Fighting through screens and chasing his man around on defense.

On the last 2 I'd say average on that.

 

[Kush77]

houheffna wrote:

I saw that this morning too and I just shook my head. Carlo Slezak is awful, so I expect no less. Typical drone talking points.

Well, exactly what do you disagree with, someone in the comments section called him worthless. Wow. But what other dimensions of the game is Gordon good at, in your opinion?

I disagree with the statement that he doesn't care about defense. A statement you made too.

how can people make that statement? How do you know that he in fact doesn't care about defense?

Has skiles or Vinny ever said that Gordon doesn't care about defense. He can be bad, but to say he doesn't care is a character shot.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

Gordon played defense with more heart than for example Rose. I know Ben is a smaller player but for his size he did all he was able to do. I can´t remember plays where I was screaming he should play better D.

Many guys here say Salmons is a much better defender. Yeah and he gave Pierce the same shot 3 times in a row in the 4th? I mean in that game we lost because of a game wining shot by Pierce.

I think Ben was ok.

 

[AirP]

What's wrong with that? When hot he can carry the Bulls, no doubt, but when he's off he helped dig holes for the team to try to crawl out of. For as many times as he got double teamed, he sure didn't take advantage of it and pass out for teammates to have a 4 on 3 opportunity much.

Don't make Gordon out to be more then he was... a great 3pt shooter, a maker of bad shots, a taker of bad shots, a guy who would rather take a bad shot then give a teammate a better shot and of course although short for his position, played decent defense.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

When it comes to the last shot I would prefer Ben taking a shot over two guys than Miller shooting wide open. I´m takling about the last shot of a game. If he took too many wild shots during the game is an other topic.

 

[houheffna]

I disagree with the statement that he doesn't care about defense. A statement you made too.

how can people make that statement? How do you know that he in fact doesn't care about defense?

Has skiles or Vinny ever said that Gordon doesn't care about defense. He can be bad, but to say he doesn't care is a character shot.

First of all, he could not keep a man in front of him defensively, that was a glaring weakness in his game, If he could keep a man in front of him, he would be pretty good on defense.

He didn't put in as much work on defense as he did on offense. Not even close. If he cared, he would have been better at it.

 

[Kush77]

AirP wrote:

What's wrong with that? When hot he can carry the Bulls, no doubt, but when he's off he helped dig holes for the team to try to crawl out of. For as many times as he got double teamed, he sure didn't take advantage of it and pass out for teammates to have a 4 on 3 opportunity much.

Don't make Gordon out to be more then he was... a great 3pt shooter, a maker of bad shots, a taker of bad shots, a guy who would rather take a bad shot then give a teammate a better shot and of course although short for his position, played decent defense.

I don't think anyone is making Gordon out to be more than he is. He was the best player on the team over the last 5 years. and the Bulls let him walk for nothing while having paid guys like Hinrich, Nocioni and Deng.

But the Bulls should be better next year right? At least 45 wins because Gordon is no longer holding them back. So this team should win no less than 45 games.

 

[AirP]

Kush77 wrote:

AirP wrote:

What's wrong with that? When hot he can carry the Bulls, no doubt, but when he's off he helped dig holes for the team to try to crawl out of. For as many times as he got double teamed, he sure didn't take advantage of it and pass out for teammates to have a 4 on 3 opportunity much.

Don't make Gordon out to be more then he was... a great 3pt shooter, a maker of bad shots, a taker of bad shots, a guy who would rather take a bad shot then give a teammate a better shot and of course although short for his position, played decent defense.

I don't think anyone is making Gordon out to be more than he is. He was the best player on the team over the last 5 years. and the Bulls let him walk for nothing while having paid guys like Hinrich, Nocioni and Deng.

But the Bulls should be better next year right? At least 45 wins because Gordon is no longer holding them back. So this team should win no less than 45 games.

Did Gordon walk for nothing? Yes and No... if we weren't going to be under the SALARY cap yes... we let him walk for nothing but in all actuality we let him walk to give us the ability to make some huge moves where we can take back a bunch of salary if needed or outright sign someone.

By the way... on last second possessions... I will ALWAYS prefer a triple threat player like Rose over an outside shooter like Gordon. The difference between Gordon being a clutch player from the get go of his career compared to Rose... Gordon's shots came from creating space and hitting an open jumper, Rose's comes from attacking the basket and as a rookie they don't give rookies respect on contact and with that, making Rose's ability to be a good clutch scorer lower then it will be in the future.

If Gordon accepts being a 6th man in Detroit... I wish we would have signed him here for that money... but me thinks that's what's being said till they can move Rip and his contract so there's no "bad blood" in the meantime.

 

[Kush77]

AirP wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

AirP wrote:

What's wrong with that? When hot he can carry the Bulls, no doubt, but when he's off he helped dig holes for the team to try to crawl out of. For as many times as he got double teamed, he sure didn't take advantage of it and pass out for teammates to have a 4 on 3 opportunity much.

Don't make Gordon out to be more then he was... a great 3pt shooter, a maker of bad shots, a taker of bad shots, a guy who would rather take a bad shot then give a teammate a better shot and of course although short for his position, played decent defense.

I don't think anyone is making Gordon out to be more than he is. He was the best player on the team over the last 5 years. and the Bulls let him walk for nothing while having paid guys like Hinrich, Nocioni and Deng.

But the Bulls should be better next year right? At least 45 wins because Gordon is no longer holding them back. So this team should win no less than 45 games.

Did Gordon walk for nothing? Yes and No... if we weren't going to be under the SALARY cap yes... we let him walk for nothing but in all actuality we let him walk to give us the ability to make some huge moves where we can take back a bunch of salary if needed or outright sign someone.

By the way... on last second possessions... I will ALWAYS prefer a triple threat player like Rose over an outside shooter like Gordon. The difference between Gordon being a clutch player from the get go of his career compared to Rose... Gordon's shots came from creating space and hitting an open jumper, Rose's comes from attacking the basket and as a rookie they don't give rookies respect on contact and with that, making Rose's ability to be a good clutch scorer lower then it will be in the future.

If Gordon accepts being a 6th man in Detroit... I wish we would have signed him here for that money... but me thinks that's what's being said till they can move Rip and his contract so there's no "bad blood" in the meantime.

I agree with you about Rose.

But it's not about Rose vs. Gordon. I think we should have them both.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

AirP wrote:
we let him walk for nothing but in all actuality we let him walk to give us the ability to make some huge moves where we can take back a bunch of salary if needed or outright sign someone.

Don´t you need a good player to trade for making a huge move? I think we let him gone for nothing. We should have got at least a Draft pick. But nothing is not enough.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

I agree with Kush. The combination of Rose and Gordon was very good. Rose is so good at driving while Gordon is a great outside shooter AND good at driving. I don´t know if Salmons or Hinrich can shoot that good next season. And they booth have to show that they can drive, too.

Gordon was a guy who was dangerous for the defense all the time. And neither Salmons nor Hinrich are that dangerous.

 

[engies]

AirP wrote:

What's wrong with that? When hot he can carry the Bulls, no doubt, but when he's off he helped dig holes for the team to try to crawl out of. For as many times as he got double teamed, he sure didn't take advantage of it and pass out for teammates to have a 4 on 3 opportunity much.

Don't make Gordon out to be more then he was... a great 3pt shooter, a maker of bad shots, a taker of bad shots, a guy who would rather take a bad shot then give a teammate a better shot and of course although short for his position, played decent defense.

Someone obviously missed out on BG's pass to a wide open Miller in Game 6 to put us in a position to win that Game

I can think of many time that Ben has made the pass rather than shoot. There were some times were he took bad shots, but when the person shooting is Ben Gordon, I can forgive that. Just as if other great shooters did, as they have done, including the best player of all time

And who hasnt had off games? Including Jordan again. There were probably games Jordan lost for us, or that perhaps others won for us instead. EVERY PLAYER, even the best of all time, will have those games

 

[engies]

Kush77 wrote:

houheffna wrote:

I saw that this morning too and I just shook my head. Carlo Slezak is awful, so I expect no less. Typical drone talking points.

Well, exactly what do you disagree with, someone in the comments section called him worthless. Wow. But what other dimensions of the game is Gordon good at, in your opinion?

I disagree with the statement that he doesn't care about defense. A statement you made too.

how can people make that statement? How do you know that he in fact doesn't care about defense?

Has skiles or Vinny ever said that Gordon doesn't care about defense. He can be bad, but to say he doesn't care is a character shot.

If there was a karma function I would +1 for that. I would like to see Hou explain how Skiles told him when they had lunch the other day

 

[AirP]

Bullseye wrote:

AirP wrote:
we let him walk for nothing but in all actuality we let him walk to give us the ability to make some huge moves where we can take back a bunch of salary if needed or outright sign someone.

Don´t you need a good player to trade for making a huge move? I think we let him gone for nothing. We should have got at least a Draft pick. But nothing is not enough.

We have some solid young players but it seems that in the NBA now-at-days dumping salaries is the big thing. Had we had the cap space we would have gotten Gasol for cheap or even Marcus Camby and who knows what players might become available in the next year or 2.

Was Gordon a quality asset, YES. But we have a huge opportunity in the next year to absorb some longer contracts or bigger contracts to get the right pieces around Rose.

If we wouldn't have had cap space next season I think this team would have made moves to keep Gordon because we really wouldn't have been in a position to get a better quality player... but the reality is that we are in a position to do just that.

 

[AirP]

engies wrote:

AirP wrote:

What's wrong with that? When hot he can carry the Bulls, no doubt, but when he's off he helped dig holes for the team to try to crawl out of. For as many times as he got double teamed, he sure didn't take advantage of it and pass out for teammates to have a 4 on 3 opportunity much.

Don't make Gordon out to be more then he was... a great 3pt shooter, a maker of bad shots, a taker of bad shots, a guy who would rather take a bad shot then give a teammate a better shot and of course although short for his position, played decent defense.

Someone obviously missed out on BG's pass to a wide open Miller in Game 6 to put us in a position to win that Game

I can think of many time that Ben has made the pass rather than shoot. There were some times were he took bad shots, but when the person shooting is Ben Gordon, I can forgive that. Just as if other great shooters did, as they have done, including the best player of all time

And who hasnt had off games? Including Jordan again. There were probably games Jordan lost for us, or that perhaps others won for us instead. EVERY PLAYER, even the best of all time, will have those games

Wow... an instance here and there. BTW... Gordon had around 25 terrible games this last year, not one here and there, about every 3rd game. Not to mention him shooting around 39% for the playoffs while not getting many assists or rebounds.

This team has had 2 guys who wouldn't pass to an open man for an easier shot... the worst being Nocioni, Gordon was the 2nd guy... I don't care how good of a shot they are(unless they're an elite player who's good enough to carry a team almost every night) but that type of play has effects on their teammates and how much they're going to run or hustle.

 

[charity stripe]

AirP wrote:

Gordon had around 25 terrible games this last year, not one here and there, about every 3rd game.

Post the 25 terrible games he had.