Jerry Reinsdorf on Ben Gordon

[houheffna]

Let me beat a dead horse one more time. No one is coming down the road like Ben Gordon. The combination of skills he brought to the table are rare. I'm 35, and he's clearly the best 3-point shooter I've ever seen in a Bulls uniform, even better than Hodges. Craig Hodges had Jordan and Pippen to set him up, and a decent post player in Cartwright. For 4 years, Ben had little on the offensive end to attract attention. Gordon is a nightmare to guard, because you have to guard him so damn far out. Just think about your playing career or any pickup game: The quick guys with 3-point range take the life out of you.

There's a good chance we won't see these 3 facts said about 1 player again:
Lead the team in scoring for 4 straight years
Lead the team in 3 pointers for 4 straight years
Shot over 40% from the 3-point line in every year of his career here

It's just a fact. Most scorers aren't killers from the 3-point line...even a shooter/scorer like Michael Redd hasn't hit 40% from the 3-point line in the past 6 years. Dirk has only hit 40% twice, Joe Johnson once. Kevin Durant and Granger are the only guys who can approach Ben in terms of range, and neither can boast of 5 years over 40% from long distance.

And this fact keeps hitting me in the face: In this history of Bulls, only 5 guys have scored 20+ for a Bulls team that was .500 or better. Only five:

Love, Walker, Jordan, Pippen, Gordon. Gordon did it twice.

He's way better than a "decent" player. And I really hate to say this, but by this time next year, you're going to be inclined to agree with me.

My mother told me to never say never, never is a long time. You know, I don't remember Sacramento going in an uproar over Peja. Better scorer than Gordon. I will say the Bulls will never see another Jordan, although I contend to a lesser degree the Lakers have a version of him. The Bulls may never see another Pippen, but Gordon? I don't feel that way. Never sat and watched Ben Gordon wide eyed and said "we will never see another mofo like this in my lifetime!" Did with Jordan, Lebron has done that for me, but not Gordon.

Furthermore, what is important is the players you named, Dirk, Joe, Redd, Durant, Granger, ALL are better players than Ben Gordon. That is what I care about. I would take any of them over BG right now (maybe not Redd, depends on what day you ask me). 40% is nice but I would take an allstar who shoots 35% from 3pt That is not a rare feat. Jerry Krause had a 3pt shooter tree in his backyard.

Also, I noticed that Joe Johnson's last year in the D'Antoni system he shot 48% from 3pt. VDN runs a variation of that system....

 

[pinkizdead]

houheffna wrote:

Also, I noticed that Joe Johnson's last year in the D'Antoni system he shot 48% from 3pt. VDN runs a variation of that system....

waite vinny has a system?

 

[pinkizdead]

??? ?????? wrote:

Dpauley23 wrote:

I just think that Paxson wanted to keep Chandler and not sign Wallace. As many local and even national reporter have pointed out it was Reinsdorf move were Paxson had to take the heat. Also if Paxson wanted Chandler so bad at the deadline he could of easily gotten him for Noah and Gooden

Would New Orleans trade him to us? Yes. Would Reinsdorf let us trade for him? Probably no.

i'd rather take noah over chandler. they're the same player. noah just needs to work out more. if his body fills in, i'd rather have noah. noah is on a better contract too.

 

[pinkizdead]

Fred wrote:

houheffna wrote:

We lost a decent player, and decent players should come down the road soon.

Let me beat a dead horse one more time. No one is coming down the road like Ben Gordon. The combination of skills he brought to the table are rare. I'm 35, and he's clearly the best 3-point shooter I've ever seen in a Bulls uniform, even better than Hodges. Craig Hodges had Jordan and Pippen to set him up, and a decent post player in Cartwright. For 4 years, Ben had little on the offensive end to attract attention. Gordon is a nightmare to guard, because you have to guard him so damn far out. Just think about your playing career or any pickup game: The quick guys with 3-point range take the life out of you.

There's a good chance we won't see these 3 facts said about 1 player again:
Lead the team in scoring for 4 straight years
Lead the team in 3 pointers for 4 straight years
Shot over 40% from the 3-point line in every year of his career here

It's just a fact. Most scorers aren't killers from the 3-point line...even a shooter/scorer like Michael Redd hasn't hit 40% from the 3-point line in the past 6 years. Dirk has only hit 40% twice, Joe Johnson once. Kevin Durant and Granger are the only guys who can approach Ben in terms of range, and neither can boast of 5 years over 40% from long distance.

And this fact keeps hitting me in the face: In this history of Bulls, only 5 guys have scored 20+ for a Bulls team that was .500 or better. Only five:

Love, Walker, Jordan, Pippen, Gordon. Gordon did it twice.

He's way better than a "decent" player. And I really hate to say this, but by this time next year, you'll agree with me.

guess who leads the bulls in 3-pointers.
it's not either, pippen or hinrich.

 

[theCHI_Life84]

i thought i saw a post here that read peja stojakovic was a better scorer than gordon. can someone please confirm this and if the original poster could please explain himself... i about lost my lunch when i read that.

 

[Fred]

houheffna wrote:

My mother told me to never say never, never is a long time. You know, I don't remember Sacramento going in an uproar over Peja. Better scorer than Gordon.

In the first 5 years of Peja's career, he averaged 16.2 points per game. He broke the 20 PPG barrier twice. In the first 5 years of Ben's career, he's averaged 18.5, breaking the 20 PPG barrier twice. Peja hit over .40 from the 3 point line twice in his first 5 years. Ben's done it every year. Nice try.

But Peja made 14 million last year, and he's due for 15 million next year. So thanks for adding more ammo to my argument that scorers get paid, even lesser ones like Predrag “Peja” Stojakovi?.

durable: Able to perform or compete over a long period, as by avoiding or overcoming injuries.

Ben has it. Peja doesn't. Skills mean nothing without it.

 

[houheffna]

Over 40%, just under 40%, around 40%, next to 40%, doesn't matter. I never said Peja deserved that kind of money either. But at his best, he was a better scorer than Gordon. Peja had more offensive weapons on his teams in his first years also. He was definitely not the first option, but in his prime, he was a hell of a shooter/scorer.

And Peja made the all star team in his 4th year.

 

[theCHI_Life84]

peja had chris webber getting all the attention down low, and mike bibby, another deadly shooter, that defenses had to respect all the way out to the 3 line. its no wonder he was open all the time.

bg was the number 1 scoring option with the bulls. he was the focus of the defense and the main man to draw double teams. peja cannot and will not shoot when facing a double team, because 1) he is incapable and couldnt do it if he tried, and 2) he had competent teammates that excel offensively. bg had only a rookie point guard to defer the scoring load to. as a pure scorer, there is no way peja is better than gordon. if gordon got the same looks peja got, just imagine what his numbers would be. peja just happened to be a better fit with sactown back then, as the 3rd option on offense.

 

[mlewinth]

houheffna wrote:

Over 40%, just under 40%, around 40%, next to 40%, doesn't matter. I never said Peja deserved that kind of money either. But at his best, he was a better scorer than Gordon. Peja had more offensive weapons on his teams in his first years also. He was definitely not the first option, but in his prime, he was a hell of a shooter/scorer.

And Peja made the all star team in his 4th year.

Oh then by your logic I guess Kobe's better then Jordan....avg around 35ppg, under 35ppg, over/under 10 of 35ppg...whatever, its the same.

The point here is clear. Houheffna is an idiot and he can't argue a point for shit!

 

[Fred]

houheffna wrote:

Over 40%, just under 40%, around 40%, next to 40%, doesn't matter. I never said Peja deserved that kind of money either. But at his best, he was a better scorer than Gordon. Peja had more offensive weapons on his teams in his first years also. He was definitely not the first option, but in his prime, he was a hell of a shooter/scorer.

And Peja made the all star team in his 4th year.

It DOES matter. The best team in the league shoots it at 40%. The worst team shoots it at 32%. So 8 % points is all that separates the best and the worst when it comes to 3-point shooting. 40% is GREAT. 32% SUCKS. Gordon would make the best team even better in this important stat. Here's how the teams ranked:

1 Boston 0.4
2 Cleveland 0.39
3 San Antonio 0.39
4 Portland 0.38
5 Phoenix 0.38
6 Chicago 0.38
7 Orlando 0.38
8 Indiana 0.38
9 New Jersey 0.38
10 Houston 0.38
11 Golden State 0.37
12 Toronto 0.37
13 Denver 0.37
14 Sacramento 0.37
15 Charlotte 0.37
16 Atlanta 0.37
17 New Orleans 0.36
18 Milwaukee 0.36
19 LA Lakers 0.36
20 New York 0.36
21 Memphis 0.36
22 Miami 0.36
23 LA Clippers 0.35
24 Minnesota 0.35
25 Dallas 0.35
26 Detroit 0.35
27 Utah 0.35
28 Oklahoma City 0.35
29 Washington 0.33
30 Philadelphia 0.32

 

[houheffna]

Oh then by your logic I guess Kobe's better then Jordan....avg around 35ppg, under 35ppg, over/under 10 of 35ppg...whatever, its the same.

The point here is clear. Houheffna is an idiot and he can't argue a point for shit!

I think its sad for a person to overly exaggerate someone's opinion and then call them an idiot. You are probably proud of yourself after that. But I guess everybody needs attention. You like to use a lot of expletives and insults. Maybe you should have done that to Reinsdorf when you met him. Probably would have gotten your ass kicked by a 70 year old man at your sister's graduation. So you are worth nothing more than being laughed at far as I am concerned....

It DOES matter. The best team in the league shoots it at 40%. The worst team shoots it at 32%. So 8 % points is all that separates the best and the worst when it comes to 3-point shooting. 40% is GREAT. 32% SUCKS. Gordon would make the best team even better in this important stat. Here's how the teams ranked:

1 Boston 0.4
2 Cleveland 0.39
3 San Antonio 0.39
4 Portland 0.38
5 Phoenix 0.38
6 Chicago 0.38
7 Orlando 0.38
8 Indiana 0.38
9 New Jersey 0.38
10 Houston 0.38
11 Golden State 0.37
12 Toronto 0.37
13 Denver 0.37
14 Sacramento 0.37
15 Charlotte 0.37
16 Atlanta 0.37
17 New Orleans 0.36
18 Milwaukee 0.36
19 LA Lakers 0.36
20 New York 0.36
21 Memphis 0.36
22 Miami 0.36
23 LA Clippers 0.35
24 Minnesota 0.35
25 Dallas 0.35
26 Detroit 0.35
27 Utah 0.35
28 Oklahoma City 0.35
29 Washington 0.33
30 Philadelphia 0.32

My point was that if a player shoots 38% from 3pt, he is not necessarily a worst scorer than the guy shooting 40% from 3pt. I went through this with the Carmelo/Gordon argument I had with another poster. He said that Gordon was a better scorer last year. I contend Gordon has never been a better scorer than Melo, and no stats could condemn that statement.

The Lakers had not one player that shot over 40% during the regular season going into the playoffs, the one they had, they traded. Yet they had 3pt threats surrounding Kobe. Kobe is a good 3pt shooter, he shoots 35% from the arc. That is not close to 40% but its close enough that you don't leave him open at the 3pt line or call him a bad shooter from long range. Peja always shot around that mark and was a very dangerous long range threat, the fact that he shot poorly his rookie season and shot 38% two of his first 5 seasons adds little weight to the argument. Just like using TS% is not always the deciding factor as to who the best scorer is. That was the point I was making...

 

[Shakes]

TheStig wrote:

Then they are even dumber, if they never wanted BG they should have traded him for an assest. Instead they let him walk for nothing. But the bottom line is, why wouldn't you want a hard working, young, leading scorer off a playoff team. I think that thinking needs to be examined much more, because we obviously let a good player walk and we didn't have anyone else at his postion to take his minutes, thats why the coach started him and played him big minutes. What BG does on the court can't just be excused or dismissed by he is a greedy midget line of thinking because he certainly didn't play small last year and he was willing to accept a lesser offer from us last year.

The problem is when should they have traded him?

After his first two years he wasn't that good, so didn't have much value. After year three we were coming off a good year and people thought we were a legit chance to win the East, so it would have been a huge call to trade him then. And after year four and five, the fact he was out of contract made it a sign and trade situation which are always difficult to get value from.

I agree that in an ideal world it'd have been better to get some value for him, but in practice I think that would have been really difficult.

 

[theCHI_Life84]

i agree that melo is a better scorer than bg, no question about that. but to say that peja is a better scorer, you have to take into consideration the way these players were handled by defenses around the league. peja does not command double teams, because first of all he is never the primary scorer, and second, he cannot shoot off the dribble or create his own shot the way bg can. bg and peja were in two different situations, the kings team in peja's prime was a much better team than the bulls right now. they had a bonafide beastly superstar in cwebb, they had a pretty good point guard in mike bibby, a seasoned vet in vlade and i think they may have had doug christie in those years but i could be mistaken. defenses were stretched thin facing a lineup like this.

that simply is not the case when facing the bulls. before rose, the team was a bunch of jump shooters (for the most part, they still are). it wasnt hard to come up with defensive scheme to foil the bulls - double team gordon, make everyone else attempt and miss their mid-range shots. bg was the focus of the defense every night. if peja was double teamed as often as bg was, he wouldnt be half the player he appears to you today.

 

[houheffna]

i agree that melo is a better scorer than bg, no question about that. but to say that peja is a better scorer, you have to take into consideration the way these players were handled by defenses around the league. peja does not command double teams, because first of all he is never the primary scorer, and second, he cannot shoot off the dribble or create his own shot the way bg can. bg and peja were in two different situations, the kings team in peja's prime was a much better team than the bulls right now. they had a bonafide beastly superstar in cwebb, they had a pretty good point guard in mike bibby, a seasoned vet in vlade and i think they may have had doug christie in those years but i could be mistaken. defenses were stretched thin facing a lineup like this.

that simply is not the case when facing the bulls. before rose, the team was a bunch of jump shooters (for the most part, they still are). it wasnt hard to come up with defensive scheme to foil the bulls - double team gordon, make everyone else attempt and miss their mid-range shots. bg was the focus of the defense every night. if peja was double teamed as often as bg was, he wouldnt be half the player he appears to you today.

You are right about shot creation. Gordon is much better, the only time I see Peja dribble is to move a couple of inches against a defender to create a shot. However, you don't score 20pts a game just standing patiently at the 3pt line. He had other ways to score.

Towards the tail end of those good Kings teams, Peja led the team in scoring. He was a threat that got a lot of notice. But I have never seen him dribble the ball five feet. I have seen him go on unstoppable runs though, many times.

 

[TheStig]

Shakes wrote:

TheStig wrote:

Then they are even dumber, if they never wanted BG they should have traded him for an assest. Instead they let him walk for nothing. But the bottom line is, why wouldn't you want a hard working, young, leading scorer off a playoff team. I think that thinking needs to be examined much more, because we obviously let a good player walk and we didn't have anyone else at his postion to take his minutes, thats why the coach started him and played him big minutes. What BG does on the court can't just be excused or dismissed by he is a greedy midget line of thinking because he certainly didn't play small last year and he was willing to accept a lesser offer from us last year.

The problem is when should they have traded him?

After his first two years he wasn't that good, so didn't have much value. After year three we were coming off a good year and people thought we were a legit chance to win the East, so it would have been a huge call to trade him then. And after year four and five, the fact he was out of contract made it a sign and trade situation which are always difficult to get value from.

I agree that in an ideal world it'd have been better to get some value for him, but in practice I think that would have been really difficult.

NO made a decent offer with picks and young players the year before last and we had a chance to dump him if we hated him that much. We have had chances to s&t him and rebuffed them. Its almost like JR made it personal to screw with him.

 

[??? ??????]

TheStig wrote:

Shakes wrote:

TheStig wrote:

Then they are even dumber, if they never wanted BG they should have traded him for an assest. Instead they let him walk for nothing. But the bottom line is, why wouldn't you want a hard working, young, leading scorer off a playoff team. I think that thinking needs to be examined much more, because we obviously let a good player walk and we didn't have anyone else at his postion to take his minutes, thats why the coach started him and played him big minutes. What BG does on the court can't just be excused or dismissed by he is a greedy midget line of thinking because he certainly didn't play small last year and he was willing to accept a lesser offer from us last year.

The problem is when should they have traded him?

After his first two years he wasn't that good, so didn't have much value. After year three we were coming off a good year and people thought we were a legit chance to win the East, so it would have been a huge call to trade him then. And after year four and five, the fact he was out of contract made it a sign and trade situation which are always difficult to get value from.

I agree that in an ideal world it'd have been better to get some value for him, but in practice I think that would have been really difficult.

NO made a decent offer with picks and young players the year before last and we had a chance to dump him if we hated him that much. We have had chances to s&t him and rebuffed them. Its almost like JR made it personal to screw with him.

Heisely would have dealt Gasol for Gordon a few years ago. Boston was offering Paul Pierce and Indiana was offering Jermaine O'neal on draft night. As recent as this past summer, Miami was willing to give Shawn Marion, while taking back Andres Nocioni or Larry Hughes' contract.

We had plenty of chances to trade Gordon for good return, and never did.

 

[theCHI_Life84]

houheffna wrote:

Towards the tail end of those good Kings teams, Peja led the team in scoring. He was a threat that got a lot of notice. But I have never seen him dribble the ball five feet. I have seen him go on unstoppable runs though, many times.

yea, youre damn right about that. he had a major drop-off this year, but i also remember with the kings when it seemed like he would never miss. ridiculous.

 

[Shakes]

I can't recall ever hearing anything concrete about a PP trade, O'Neal is a pile of crap at this stage of his career, Miami apparently never reached an agreement with Ben on a salary, and besides, a rental of Marion for a year given our team last year probably isn't better than a rental of Gordon.

Gasol would have been great but the reports are conflicted on that one. Some have us being able to land him for as little as Noc + expirings, others insist they wanted Deng + picks. Frankly I think we'll never know what was actually on the table with that one.

 

[??? ??????]

Shakes wrote:

I can't recall ever hearing anything concrete about a PP trade, O'Neal is a pile of crap at this stage of his career, Miami apparently never reached an agreement with Ben on a salary, and besides, a rental of Marion for a year given our team last year probably isn't better than a rental of Gordon.

Gasol would have been great but the reports are conflicted on that one. Some have us being able to land him for as little as Noc + expirings, others insist they wanted Deng + picks. Frankly I think we'll never know what was actually on the table with that one.

Heisley was pissed because the Bulls wouldn't give up Hinrich, Gordon, or Deng in a trade, and only offered Nocioni the first year, or something around PJ Brown's expiring. The second year the Bulls were offering Nocioni, Thomas, and Noah, and the Grizzlies wanted to do something around PJ Brown.

And the thing about Miami balking at Gordon's contract demands is bull crap. It came from an employee of the Bulls.

Miami didn't go on a recruiting trip to Miami with Riley, Arison, and Wade for no reason. Dwyane Wade wasn't publicly telepathing to Gordon to take the qualifying offer for no reason.

Simply put, if the economic crisis didn't happen, Ben would be a member of the Heat.

 

[Shakes]

Well even if they came to an agreement, I still think a rental of Marion for a year hardly qualifies as a good return.

Anyway I think up until we drafted Rose we intended to keep Ben (which would be why the stories were always about wanting to keep the Kirk/Ben/Luol core together). As soon as we got the number one pick the writing was always on the wall for both Ben & Kirk.