Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CHAP!

[houheffna]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

My point is if they were unable to trade Hamilton, he would still be starting over Gordon.

 

[Dpauley23]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Kush77 wrote:

Dpauley23 wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

houheffna wrote:

The guy eat, sleeps, & breathes basketball. Having an injury for the first time in his career is YES, unfortunate. Doesn't matter if he's making $12mill or $12,000, he wants to play & play at a top level. He's always been that way. I just don't get why someone would be happy about a player injury & his drop in production because of it. I think it's stupid. I hate KG & the Celtics, but I wasn't doing cartwheels when KG got a knee injury last year because it's always an unfortunate situation when an athlete can't compete in the sport they truly love.

I don't give a fat baby's d--- if he actually eats a damn basketball every day! His drop in production has nothing to do with his injury, his drop in production is because he is playing behind a better player, which is what I was telling people in preseason. Hamilton is playing good basketball right now and Gordon can't get off the bench, and most of the time when he does, he sucks...point blank. If you want to feel sorry for anyone, feel sorry for Pistons fans who watch Dumars trade away an allstar player for Charlie V and St. Ben of UConn, who combined aren't worth what Billups is worth...

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If Billups stayed on the Pistons they'd still be nowhere. They lost in the ECF with him for 3 straight years. The trade for Iverson was to shake things up and it needed to be done because that Pistons core was finished as far as winning championships.

Gordon was a good signing, Charlie V isn't because Charlie V has done nothing in his career to justify making that kind of money. Gordon has been productive on winning Bulls teams.

He's having a bad shooting year, and if you think that has nothing to do with his injuries than your crazy. Early in the season, before the injuries he was putting up his typical numbers. since the injuries, not so much.

And looking at the numbers Rip Hamilton is averaging 3 more ppg on 4 and 1/2 more shots per game and with 6 more minutes played per game.

In this, Ben Gordon's worst FG shooting season, he's still shooting better than Rip from the field and will always shooter better from 3 than Rip, even in his sleep.

It's funny that fans are overreacting to his down numbers. Similar to how Bulls fans overreacted when his numbers went down in the 07/08 year. "Oh what a fool for not accepting that 5-year 50 million dollar deal" well he came back the next year and put up his usual numbers. I would expect him to do the same since he's only 26 and I highly doubt his career has started it's decline yet.

Signing Gordon for 12 million was not good signing. Now if you got Gordon for 10 million then thats good signing, but in no way should you be paying Gordon near max money when he's number 3 option. He's one dimensional, which he is damn well good at, but that was bad move. As for the Pistons having to trade Billups I disagree. Who would you rather have Billups at 25 million or Ben+Charlie for 105 million. I rather have Billups

Ben Gordon got what he's worth. Ben Gordon is getting 58 mil over 5 years, an average of 11.6 million. Monta Ellis, a similar player, gets 11 million a year from Golden State. Ben Gordon got what he's worth.

I suppose if the question is - was he worth 58 million to the Pistons, then I would agree with you that he isn't considering they already had Hamilton and Stuckey.

But let's stop lumping him in with Charlie V. Charlie V has done nothing in his career to warrant the contract he got. Has CV ever even played in a playoff game in his career? Has he ever been the #1 option on a team?

Who would I rather have, Chauncey at 25 or BG/CV at 105? Well that wasn't the option Joe Dumars had. It wasn't give up Chauncey to get BG/CV. It was trade Chauncey to shake up a team that lost in the ECF 3 straight years. Then you could say Dumars misspent the cap space. I personally thought Dumars should have sat on the cap space this year then Detroit could have been a player in 2010 free agency. But I guess that money burnt a hole in Dumars' pocket.

You don't pay a one demionsal player 12 million even if he's damn good at it. As for Monta that's horrible example because plain and simple the guy is way overrated. Puts up tons of shots to put up his points. He's horrible also horrible efficency wise. Put it this way if Gordon got the same contract,but added another year which is basically Deng's contract. Would you say that's good contract. If you say that it is that's beyond crazy. You would be paying him to be your number 1 or 2 option when he's really should be the 3rd.

 

[Kush77]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Dpauley23 wrote:

You don't pay a one demionsal player 12 million even if he's damn good at it. As for Monta that's horrible example because plain and simple the guy is way overrated. Puts up tons of shots to put up his points. He's horrible also horrible efficency wise. Put it this way if Gordon got the same contract,but added another year which is basically Deng's contract. Would you say that's good contract. If you say that it is that's beyond crazy. You would be paying him to be your number 1 or 2 option when he's really should be the 3rd.

Players than can score in this league get paid. Bottom line. Big men, even mediocre ones, get paid in this league. Bottom line.

Ben Gordon got what he's worth in this league. and average of 11.6 million. We keep saying 12 million. It isn't 12 million. It's an average of 11.6. This year he's making 10 million and the last year of the deal he'll make 13.2. But it's an average off 11.6 million.

you might think Ellis is overrated but the fact of the matter is he's a similar player to Gordon (production wise) and his deal helped set the market for scoring guards. I think Ben Gordon is better than Monta Ellis, thus I feel Ben Gordon's contract is what he's worth.

Now if you want to say that it was a bad deal for Detroit, then I would agree because they already had Hamilton/Stuckey.

 

[Bullsman24]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Church of Kush! Telling it like it is!

 

[Bullsman24]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

houheffna wrote:

"And Ben walketh on water at will, he shooteth flawlessly at the basket, never missing, always working to perfect his game. And then Ben attaineth flawless basketball skills unlike any other shooting guard in history...and Ben saith 'Fucketh Kobe and Jordan, and fucketh defense, for I am flawless'"

Amen...

lol damn I literally laughed out loud!

 

[houheffna]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Ben Gordon got what he's worth. Ben Gordon is getting 58 mil over 5 years, an average of 11.6 million. Monta Ellis, a similar player, gets 11 million a year from Golden State. Ben Gordon got what he's worth.

I suppose if the question is - was he worth 58 million to the Pistons, then I would agree with you that he isn't considering they already had Hamilton and Stuckey.

But let's stop lumping him in with Charlie V. Charlie V has done nothing in his career to warrant the contract he got. Has CV ever even played in a playoff game in his career? Has he ever been the #1 option on a team?

Who would I rather have, Chauncey at 25 or BG/CV at 105? Well that wasn't the option Joe Dumars had. It wasn't give up Chauncey to get BG/CV. It was trade Chauncey to shake up a team that lost in the ECF 3 straight years. Then you could say Dumars misspent the cap space. I personally thought Dumars should have sat on the cap space this year then Detroit could have been a player in 2010 free agency. But I guess that money burnt a hole in Dumars' pocket.

Charlie V didn't get number one option money. Ellis and Gordon are not similar...different levels of athleticism, different types of games...not similar...

 

[Dpauley23]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Kush77 wrote:

Dpauley23 wrote:

You don't pay a one demionsal player 12 million even if he's damn good at it. As for Monta that's horrible example because plain and simple the guy is way overrated. Puts up tons of shots to put up his points. He's horrible also horrible efficency wise. Put it this way if Gordon got the same contract,but added another year which is basically Deng's contract. Would you say that's good contract. If you say that it is that's beyond crazy. You would be paying him to be your number 1 or 2 option when he's really should be the 3rd.

Players than can score in this league get paid. Bottom line. Big men, even mediocre ones, get paid in this league. Bottom line.

Ben Gordon got what he's worth in this league. and average of 11.6 million. We keep saying 12 million. It isn't 12 million. It's an average of 11.6. This year he's making 10 million and the last year of the deal he'll make 13.2. But it's an average off 11.6 million.

you might think Ellis is overrated but the fact of the matter is he's a similar player to Gordon (production wise) and his deal helped set the market for scoring guards. I think Ben Gordon is better than Monta Ellis, thus I feel Ben Gordon's contract is what he's worth.

Now if you want to say that it was a bad deal for Detroit, then I would agree because they already had Hamilton/Stuckey.

No it's bad contract. Sure guys get money, but when has it ever turn it out well for those guys. Gordon is not 12 million dollar plain and simple. I mean even Fred will admit that he's not 12 million dollar player. He's worth about 10 million.

 

[Diddy1122]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Dpauley23 wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Dpauley23 wrote:

You don't pay a one demionsal player 12 million even if he's damn good at it. As for Monta that's horrible example because plain and simple the guy is way overrated. Puts up tons of shots to put up his points. He's horrible also horrible efficency wise. Put it this way if Gordon got the same contract,but added another year which is basically Deng's contract. Would you say that's good contract. If you say that it is that's beyond crazy. You would be paying him to be your number 1 or 2 option when he's really should be the 3rd.

Players than can score in this league get paid. Bottom line. Big men, even mediocre ones, get paid in this league. Bottom line.

Ben Gordon got what he's worth in this league. and average of 11.6 million. We keep saying 12 million. It isn't 12 million. It's an average of 11.6. This year he's making 10 million and the last year of the deal he'll make 13.2. But it's an average off 11.6 million.

you might think Ellis is overrated but the fact of the matter is he's a similar player to Gordon (production wise) and his deal helped set the market for scoring guards. I think Ben Gordon is better than Monta Ellis, thus I feel Ben Gordon's contract is what he's worth.

Now if you want to say that it was a bad deal for Detroit, then I would agree because they already had Hamilton/Stuckey.

No it's bad contract. Sure guys get money, but when has it ever turn it out well for those guys. Gordon is not 12 million dollar plain and simple. I mean even Fred will admit that he's not 12 million dollar player. He's worth about 10 million.

Eh, what's another $2million in today's economy, right?

I wouldn't say it's a bad signing because of the money. He got his market value even if it was overestimated. Kush is right. Scorers get paid in this league. Hell even worthless popsicle sticks like Chandler & Dalembert get paid in this league. Signing a good scorer like BG is not a bad thing but given the circumstances on the Detroit Pistons, already having a starting 2 guard signed to big money for the next 3 seasons who refused to come off the bench, it was definitely not a good signing at all & another example of how Dumars has been crap as a GM the last 3-4 seasons. Only way it would've been good is if Dumars was able to dump Rip on some team. But that didn't happen & he's basically relegated his once top tier team to the scrapheap of the league for years to come.

 

[Fred]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Shakes wrote:

I'm sure the plan wasn't to suck. I'm just saying that if we have the sort of off-season results Detroit has had, then people (rightly) would be calling for heads to roll.

3 of the 4 top players for the Pistons have missed a combined 78 games:

Hamilton 27 games
Gordon 19
T. Prince 32

Rose, Deng, Brad Miller, and Taj have played in every game. Noah has missed 8 games, and Hinrich only 7. We've had one significant injury, to Tyrus. This team has been remarkably healthy.

After 56 games, we have 8 more wins than the Pistons. If you reverse the injury situation, would we have a better record than the Pistons? Maybe.

We're better than the Pistons when both teams are at full strength. However, I believe the Pistons aren't as far away as you think once they can deal one of their guards for some frontcourt help. This year, They won't make the Playoffs for this first time since the 2001 season. But I have a lot more faith in the ability of Joe Dumars than I do in the group calling the shots for the Chicago Bulls.

 

[Shakes]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Fred, I'm not even talking about the Piston's record as such, as I'm talking about the fact they're paying 20 million a year to two guys who they aren't even starting. That's spectacularly bad management any way you look at it.

The Bulls have around the same money this off-season the Pistons did. If we spend it and don't get a starter out of the deal I will be livid. I really don't understand why everyone is OK with Dumars doing it just because he made a nice trade for Rasheed 6 years ago.

 

[Dpauley23]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Fred wrote:

Shakes wrote:

I'm sure the plan wasn't to suck. I'm just saying that if we have the sort of off-season results Detroit has had, then people (rightly) would be calling for heads to roll.

3 of the 4 top players for the Pistons have missed a combined 78 games:

Hamilton 27 games
Gordon 19
T. Prince 32

Rose, Deng, Brad Miller, and Taj have played in every game. Noah has missed 8 games, and Hinrich only 7. We've had one significant injury, to Tyrus. This team has been remarkably healthy.

After 56 games, we have 8 more wins than the Pistons. If you reverse the injury situation, would we have a better record than the Pistons? Maybe.

We're better than the Pistons when both teams are at full strength. However, I believe the Pistons aren't as far away as you think once they can deal one of their guards for some frontcourt help. This year, They won't make the Playoffs for this first time since the 2001 season. But I have a lot more faith in the ability of Joe Dumars than I do in the group calling the shots for the Chicago Bulls.

Taj has been hurt basically the whole year, Derrick was hurt for good month, and both Noah+Deng have been hurt for about 2 months.

 

[Kush77]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

houheffna wrote:

Ben Gordon got what he's worth. Ben Gordon is getting 58 mil over 5 years, an average of 11.6 million. Monta Ellis, a similar player, gets 11 million a year from Golden State. Ben Gordon got what he's worth.

I suppose if the question is - was he worth 58 million to the Pistons, then I would agree with you that he isn't considering they already had Hamilton and Stuckey.

But let's stop lumping him in with Charlie V. Charlie V has done nothing in his career to warrant the contract he got. Has CV ever even played in a playoff game in his career? Has he ever been the #1 option on a team?

Who would I rather have, Chauncey at 25 or BG/CV at 105? Well that wasn't the option Joe Dumars had. It wasn't give up Chauncey to get BG/CV. It was trade Chauncey to shake up a team that lost in the ECF 3 straight years. Then you could say Dumars misspent the cap space. I personally thought Dumars should have sat on the cap space this year then Detroit could have been a player in 2010 free agency. But I guess that money burnt a hole in Dumars' pocket.

Charlie V didn't get number one option money. Ellis and Gordon are not similar...different levels of athleticism, different types of games...not similar...

They are similar, they are both undersized high-scoring guards.

BG is a better shooter, Ellis is more explosive. But they both score and got similar contracts.

11.6 or 12 million isn't #1 option money. Have you guys not seen NBA contracts over the last 10 years? Regardless of whether you think they are bad deals or not. It's the market.

So I guess Andris Beindris is getting almost #1 option money? Brad Miller is getting #1 option money.

Is Antwan Jamison a #1 option? He's getting paid that way. Chauncey Billups isn't a #1 option but he gets paid that way. Luol Deng, Troy Murphy, Tyson Chandler. There's a ton of guys in the NBA that make between 10-13 million and they're not #1 options by any means. My God Larry Hughes, remember him.

 

[Dpauley23]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Kush77 wrote:

houheffna wrote:

Ben Gordon got what he's worth. Ben Gordon is getting 58 mil over 5 years, an average of 11.6 million. Monta Ellis, a similar player, gets 11 million a year from Golden State. Ben Gordon got what he's worth.

I suppose if the question is - was he worth 58 million to the Pistons, then I would agree with you that he isn't considering they already had Hamilton and Stuckey.

But let's stop lumping him in with Charlie V. Charlie V has done nothing in his career to warrant the contract he got. Has CV ever even played in a playoff game in his career? Has he ever been the #1 option on a team?

Who would I rather have, Chauncey at 25 or BG/CV at 105? Well that wasn't the option Joe Dumars had. It wasn't give up Chauncey to get BG/CV. It was trade Chauncey to shake up a team that lost in the ECF 3 straight years. Then you could say Dumars misspent the cap space. I personally thought Dumars should have sat on the cap space this year then Detroit could have been a player in 2010 free agency. But I guess that money burnt a hole in Dumars' pocket.

Charlie V didn't get number one option money. Ellis and Gordon are not similar...different levels of athleticism, different types of games...not similar...

They are similar, they are both undersized high-scoring guards.

BG is a better shooter, Ellis is more explosive. But they both score and got similar contracts.

11.6 or 12 million isn't #1 option money. Have you guys not seen NBA contracts over the last 10 years? Regardless of whether you think they are bad deals or not. It's the market.

So I guess Andris Beindris is getting almost #1 option money? Brad Miller is getting #1 option money.

Is Antwan Jamison a #1 option? He's getting paid that way. Chauncey Billups isn't a #1 option but he gets paid that way. Luol Deng, Troy Murphy, Tyson Chandler. There's a ton of guys in the NBA that make between 10-13 million and they're not #1 options by any means. My God Larry Hughes, remember him.

No one is saying that people don't get overpaid in the league. What I'm saying is you don't good franchises give Gordon 11.6 a year. BTW Bierdins makes a flat 9 million his whole contract

 

[houheffna]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

They are similar, they are both undersized high-scoring guards.

BG is a better shooter, Ellis is more explosive. But they both score and got similar contracts.

11.6 or 12 million isn't #1 option money. Have you guys not seen NBA contracts over the last 10 years? Regardless of whether you think they are bad deals or not. It's the market.

So I guess Andris Beindris is getting almost #1 option money? Brad Miller is getting #1 option money.

Is Antwan Jamison a #1 option? He's getting paid that way. Chauncey Billups isn't a #1 option but he gets paid that way. Luol Deng, Troy Murphy, Tyson Chandler. There's a ton of guys in the NBA that make between 10-13 million and they're not #1 options by any means. My God Larry Hughes, remember him.

First, if you only look at height than fine...but if you look at their games on the floor...they are not alike...one of them can do more offensively, more athletic, can handle the ball better, pass better...better floor game...better basketball player.

My point about this number 1 option stuff is that you pointed out that Charlie V has never been the number one option...I said he is not paid like one either so I don't know what that has to do with his contract.

 

[Dpauley23]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

houheffna wrote:

They are similar, they are both undersized high-scoring guards.

BG is a better shooter, Ellis is more explosive. But they both score and got similar contracts.

11.6 or 12 million isn't #1 option money. Have you guys not seen NBA contracts over the last 10 years? Regardless of whether you think they are bad deals or not. It's the market.

So I guess Andris Beindris is getting almost #1 option money? Brad Miller is getting #1 option money.

Is Antwan Jamison a #1 option? He's getting paid that way. Chauncey Billups isn't a #1 option but he gets paid that way. Luol Deng, Troy Murphy, Tyson Chandler. There's a ton of guys in the NBA that make between 10-13 million and they're not #1 options by any means. My God Larry Hughes, remember him.

First, if you only look at height than fine...but if you look at their games on the floor...they are not alike...one of them can do more offensively, more athletic, can handle the ball better, pass better...better floor game...better basketball player.

My point about this number 1 option stuff is that you pointed out that Charlie V has never been the number one option...I said he is not paid like one either so I don't know what that has to do with his contract.

Wait are you saying that Ellis is better than Gordon?

 

[houheffna]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Wait are you saying that Ellis is better than Gordon?

YES! Is there any doubt?

 

[Kush77]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

houheffna wrote:

They are similar, they are both undersized high-scoring guards.

BG is a better shooter, Ellis is more explosive. But they both score and got similar contracts.

11.6 or 12 million isn't #1 option money. Have you guys not seen NBA contracts over the last 10 years? Regardless of whether you think they are bad deals or not. It's the market.

So I guess Andris Beindris is getting almost #1 option money? Brad Miller is getting #1 option money.

Is Antwan Jamison a #1 option? He's getting paid that way. Chauncey Billups isn't a #1 option but he gets paid that way. Luol Deng, Troy Murphy, Tyson Chandler. There's a ton of guys in the NBA that make between 10-13 million and they're not #1 options by any means. My God Larry Hughes, remember him.

First, if you only look at height than fine...but if you look at their games on the floor...they are not alike...one of them can do more offensively, more athletic, can handle the ball better, pass better...better floor game...better basketball player.

My point about this number 1 option stuff is that you pointed out that Charlie V has never been the number one option...I said he is not paid like one either so I don't know what that has to do with his contract.

I'm not looking at only height. They are both undersized scoring guards. and like I said, Gordon is a better shooter and Ellis is more explosive (meaning more athletic). I don't agree he's a better basketball player. If Ben gordon played 41.5 min and took 22 shots a game he's put up the exact same, if not better, numbers than Ellis.

Charlie V doesn't deserve the contract he gets. The reason Charlie V is a factor is because people seem to lump BG and Charlie V together as one big massive mistake. No, Charlie V is a far bigger mistake than BG. We know what Ben Gordon can do. As much as you like to downplay it. Charlie V has done nothing special in his career and I would say he deserves nothing more than a mid-level contract. Even that might be overpaying him.

People seem to be so shocked at what Ben Gordon makes. Go on hoopshype and scroll through all the team salaries in the NBA. Almost every team has a guy making between 10-13 million. And most of them aren't number 1 guys.

You said BG is getting #1 option money. I disagree that a contract that averages 11.6 million is #1 money in the NBA right now and in the past decade. That could very well change after the next CBA.

 

[Kush77]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

houheffna wrote:

Wait are you saying that Ellis is better than Gordon?

YES! Is there any doubt?

Yes, very much so.

I know you love to hate Gordon because we have given him sainthood. But Ellis is playing 41.5 min and taking 22 shots per game. Give Gordon those minutes and shots and he easily matches those numbers.

 

[Shakes]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

If you really want to see how random salary is: go and look at guards in the 15-19 PER range last year. Given Gordon had a 17 PER, they're roughly the guys who are about the same level of player (I'm not saying PER is perfect, but it's a good starting point for this sort of comparison). You see some guys on the max, and others on barely more than the minimum.

You can't just say "Oh well this guy got X, so play other guy should also get X". It depends so much on which teams have money, what they need, who the GMs are, and how the player is perceived (it's unfair, but ask random NBA fans about Ben Gordon and I bet "chucker", "no defense" and "one dimensional" are in the top 5 terms used to describe him).

My argument about Gordon all along has been that there is no objective player value. Really you're overpaid or underpaid based on whether other teams would take on your contract. Right now Detroit would have a hell of a time trading Gordon, so he's clearly overpaid. You can say he deserves the money all you like, but heck, the guy who cleaned the toilets at Enron deserved more money than the CEO, but the world doesn't work like that.

 

[Kush77]

Re:Kirk Hinrich- the Bulls ALL-TIME THREE POINT CH

Shakes wrote:

If you really want to see how random salary is: go and look at guards in the 15-19 PER range last year. Given Gordon had a 17 PER, they're roughly the guys who are about the same level of player (I'm not saying PER is perfect, but it's a good starting point for this sort of comparison). You see some guys on the max, and others on barely more than the minimum.

You can't just say "Oh well this guy got X, so play other guy should also get X". It depends so much on which teams have money, what they need, who the GMs are, and how the player is perceived (it's unfair, but ask random NBA fans about Ben Gordon and I bet "chucker", "no defense" and "one dimensional" are in the top 5 terms used to describe him).

My argument about Gordon all along has been that there is no objective player value. Really you're overpaid or underpaid based on whether other teams would take on your contract. Right now Detroit would have a hell of a time trading Gordon, so he's clearly overpaid. You can say he deserves the money all you like, but heck, the guy who cleaned the toilets at Enron deserved more money than the CEO, but the world doesn't work like that.

Well I would guess a lot of the guys at the low end of the salary haven't put in the years yet. They might still be on rookie contracts. I'm sure Derrick Rose's PER was similar but he's obviously on a rookie contract.

My point is a lot of guys on this board just seem to have their socks knocked off by the fact that a player like Ben Gordon got 58 million dollars. My point is look at all the guys over the past decade that have gotten similar, and bigger contracts, who were worse players.

I'll use Luol Deng for example. I wasn't surprised by the money Deng got at all. Because looking at player contracts over the years, I expected Deng to get around what he got.