Kirk to be traded

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

If you are talking championships, Rose and Gordon are not a championship backcourt, unless we get a Shaq/Duncan type young frontcourt to build around...that is near impossible.

Gordon is a defensive liability, period. You need a wing player who can guard people.

When has BG shown to be a defensive liability this season? The problem is not our backcourt, they are top 5 in the league. The problem isn't with our SF, they are average. The problem is our front court, Noah and Thomas are liabilities offensively and defensively. Plug BG as the starting sg into any of the conference finals teams and they become better except for LA.

 

[houheffna]

Top 5 in the league? Are you serious? The opposing backcourt they played against in the playoffs were a better backcourt....

That is like the BG is a top 5 SG argument....I don't get it.

 

[houheffna]

Plug BG as the starting sg into any of the conference finals teams and they become better except for LA.

Denver don't need him, they already got J.R. Smith, who is a better player.

Orlando don't need him, they already got the scorers, with Kobe coming up, BG is NOT on their wish list. Plus they might get Jameer Nelson back, who is a better basketball player than BG.

Cleveland had two guards who were inconsistent in the playoffs, I don't think Cleveland beats Orlando because BG is on the team. BG is not the answer to their problems.

If the Bulls have a top 5 backcourt, which one of their players is top 5 at his position right now?

 

[J-Mart]

He is not saying they need him, just that they are better with Gordon, which is a valid argument IMO. JR Smith better than Gordon? Are you serious? If you don't like inconsistancy you should not like JR Smith.

 

[houheffna]

Serious as a heart attack. J.R. showed in the last series that he can play defense and run the offense even when his shot does not go down. It even surprised Van Gundy and Mark Jackson.

And just because he makes a team better does not make him a legitimate starting SG on a championship contender. He is a sixth man.

 

[J-Mart]

Your making the mistake of judging a guy based on one playoff series. Lets look at how he performs next season and see if he keeps it up. If I was betting I would say he wouldn't keep it up.

So are you saying if you replace Gordon with JR Smith, Pietris (sp?), West/Williams that those teams are no longer contenders?

 

[fola]

AirP wrote:

I get it, he "gets his". Now if he'd just "get his" in the flow of the offense and slow down on taking some quick shots I'd be a much bigger Gordon supporter, size doesn't matter if he can score and play solid defense.

wether or not he 'gets his' is among the least of my concerns. As a scorer, he's among the best in the league. But more than that, imo, we need someone that can hit big shots other than our eventual #1 or #2 guys (again imo) if we're ever going to get anywhere. Why wouldnt you want a 3rd option that teams would have to consider doubling at some point (even if you exclude the 11 or so games you mentioned)? Our major defensive issues stemmed from or Bigs, not BG. As far as when he shoots. There are a lot of factors that go into it. He is and has been our best player since he got here. But paramount to that is the fact that how our offense is structured, whenever anyone scores (for the most part) its during a 'my turn' phase. He just happens to score a lot. Maybe having a real (or a seasoned vdn) coach/offense will change that.

 

[Woodz]

houheffna wrote:

If the Bulls have a top 5 backcourt, which one of their players is top 5 at his position right now?

They don't need either to be in the top 5 in order to be a top 5 backcourt. Using that logic if the top 5 PGs are on different teams than the top 5 SGs, then you would have 10 teams boasting top 5 "backcourts".

 

[Woodz]

houheffna wrote:

Serious as a heart attack. J.R. showed in the last series that he can play defense and run the offense even when his shot does not go down. It even surprised Van Gundy and Mark Jackson.

And just because he makes a team better does not make him a legitimate starting SG on a championship contender. He is a sixth man.

The Magic are in the finals. Thus it would be hard to argue they are not "contenders". Their SG is Courtney Lee. So, you think that Courtney Lee is better than BG & JR?

 

[houheffna]

If Gordon played with the Magic, Howard would pick him up and throw him out of the building. Lee plays really good defense and has some size, and that is what the coaches favor from wing positions especially when you have all-star caliber players at PG,SF,PF,and C. I don't understand how it is an insult to say that with his type of game, and his BEING UNDERSIZED, and a DEFENSIVE LIABILITY, that he would be better off the bench. It happens all the time. Since he is best at instant offense, he should come off the bench. A taller player with more size should start ahead of him, that is what they should be looking for and that is why they will trade either Hinrich or let Gordon go, you have three guards 6'3" and under (if that) soaking all of the minutes in the backcourt.

I believe that Lee did what they wanted done, played good defense. Guess where Gordon and J.R. would be at the beginning of those games....on the bench. It is something that Charles Barkley talked about right after the Bulls/Celtics series was over. Gordon is better coming off the bench...period.

Plus, the better player off the bench has come off of the bench many times over the past 50 years, it is about the role a player plays...

 

[pinkizdead]

Bullseye wrote:

I don´t see Salmons over Gordon as a SG. Im my eyes Ben ist the best SG we can get next season.

The question is: Is Salmons a better SF than Deng? But the key is to get a player like Stoudemire. I don´t want to see a new SG because I think we won´t get a good one. And playing with a rookie SG? No thanks. I think the Bulls have a very good chance to get Amare. But what will be the price?

The Bulls could also start like this:

PG: Rose
SG: Gordon
SF: Salmons
PF: Deng
C: Stoudemire

What do you think?

It is about Gordon staying or not when you make your decision to trade Kirk or not. I would love to have the captain sitting on the bench next season again. I always say it: Think about Rose having an injury. Then what?

deng is too injury prone to be a pf. he doesnt really have post up moves either.

 

[clonetrooper264]

pinkizdead wrote:

Bullseye wrote:

I don´t see Salmons over Gordon as a SG. Im my eyes Ben ist the best SG we can get next season.

The question is: Is Salmons a better SF than Deng? But the key is to get a player like Stoudemire. I don´t want to see a new SG because I think we won´t get a good one. And playing with a rookie SG? No thanks. I think the Bulls have a very good chance to get Amare. But what will be the price?

The Bulls could also start like this:

PG: Rose
SG: Gordon
SF: Salmons
PF: Deng
C: Stoudemire

What do you think?

It is about Gordon staying or not when you make your decision to trade Kirk or not. I would love to have the captain sitting on the bench next season again. I always say it: Think about Rose having an injury. Then what?

deng is too injury prone to be a pf. he doesnt really have post up moves either.

Well at one point the Bulls asked him to learn some post moves. He could probably learn some more, especially if someone like Amare was there to maybe teach him some. While he is definitely not the quickest SF out there, he might be faster than most PFs so he could maybe rely on that. With all the small ball that the Bulls play anyway that lineup might show up regardless. Or you can just stick Salmons or Deng on the bench and start Noah. Either way, Luol will probably get injured again so we won't have to worry about him for that time period.

 

[J-Mart]

houheffna wrote:

If Gordon played with the Magic, Howard would pick him up and throw him out of the building. Lee plays really good defense and has some size, and that is what the coaches favor from wing positions especially when you have all-star caliber players at PG,SF,PF,and C. I don't understand how it is an insult to say that with his type of game, and his BEING UNDERSIZED, and a DEFENSIVE LIABILITY, that he would be better off the bench. It happens all the time. Since he is best at instant offense, he should come off the bench. A taller player with more size should start ahead of him, that is what they should be looking for and that is why they will trade either Hinrich or let Gordon go, you have three guards 6'3" and under (if that) soaking all of the minutes in the backcourt.

I believe that Lee did what they wanted done, played good defense. Guess where Gordon and J.R. would be at the beginning of those games....on the bench. It is something that Charles Barkley talked about right after the Bulls/Celtics series was over. Gordon is better coming off the bench...period.

Plus, the better player off the bench has come off of the bench many times over the past 50 years, it is about the role a player plays...

IMO, you start your best player at each position. Gordon is our best SG. When we get someone better than Gordon I will have no problems with him coming off the bench. Until that day comes he will start as long as he stays with the team.

But wait Barkley said he is a bench player so it must be true

 

[Simeon2UC]

I just found out from a source that Pax went over to Turkey to contrast Asik and Mullens. If Asik isn't 100%, Paxson will eventually look at Mullens to fill his vacancy.

 

[jsain360]

Kirk Hinrich could land us more value than expiring contracts, its reports he could land in Minnesota for the 6th pick, which you could package w/ Tyrus Thomas and the 26th or 16th for an Amare or Bosh, I think both will be on the block, because the Suns and Raptors are going nowhere and need as many picks as possible

 

[jsain360]

He was a post player a Duke, he is not strong enough to be a post up 4, The Bulls really don't run a lot of post plays for anybody, I would've like to have seen Rose post up more

 

[houheffna]

IMO, you start your best player at each position. Gordon is our best SG. When we get someone better than Gordon I will have no problems with him coming off the bench. Until that day comes he will start as long as he stays with the team.

But wait Barkley said he is a bench player so it must be true

Kevin McHale, Clifford Robinson, Manu Ginobili, Leandro Barbosa, Ricky Pierce, what do they all have in common????

Two things,

1. Better players than BG
2. They came off the bench behind players who were not as good, period. If McHale can do it, Gordon can do it....

 

[BullsBuddy]

jsain360 wrote:

Kirk Hinrich could land us more value than expiring contracts, its reports he could land in Minnesota for the 6th pick, which you could package w/ Tyrus Thomas and the 26th or 16th for an Amare or Bosh, I think both will be on the block, because the Suns and Raptors are going nowhere and need as many picks as possible

if we get him for the 6th pick i would be ecstatic! i think we could land amare or bosh if we package all of our picks and tryus or noah. not sure how that would put us with the salary cap, though

 

[houheffna]

But wait Barkley said he is a bench player so it must be true

Barkley is paid to give his opinion, and it is an educated one and I think should be respected, I disagree with him on many things but he was right about the Bulls in the playoffs.

1. That Celtics series was a lot of BAD BASKETBALL.
2. Gordon should come off the bench.

Sense I am basically alone on this issue (at least on this forum), I cite references. Excuse me for not pulling some asinine opinion out of my ass, I actually give my analysis of what I watch, and it happens to jive with a lot of experts who are paid to watch and give their earnest opinion.

People on this forum dislike Stacey King and Neil Funk for the same reasons, their criticisms of BG. I think they are absolutely right in their assessments. It is not meanspirited, it is just a matter of a player not always doing what is best for the team. And since he has an abnormal ability to score, he should come off the bench. Like J.R. Smith is, for a better defensive player. So why wouldn't we start Salmons over Gordon?

 

[jsain360]

AirP wrote:

Woodz wrote:

AirP wrote:

Guess I'm in that 20% actual fans that's pretty indifferent with Ben Gordon. I want him back as a 6th man, ready to move forward without him.

Gordon's a great shooter but he has too many games "off" to allow him to free lance as much as he does in the Bulls offense as a starter. I can't remember the actual percentages I posted last month but... as a team it's tough to be consistant when one of your main options isn't consistant... he's a 25ppg guy part of the time, at nearly the same rate he's a 12 ppg guy, this isn't throttled by weather or not the team needs his scoring, it's throttled by weather he's on or off that particular evening.

He's a GREAT wildcard coming off the bench. But building an offense, it's got to be fustrating as hell to have such a question mark to one of your top scorers.

Ray Allen is pretty streaky, but the Celtics won a championship last year. If Gordon is our main option then we will be in trouble. But getting rid of him doesn't help the team get any farther in the playoffs. He would be a GREAT 3rd option if we can land a stud in the 2010 class. I also believe that simply having him on the team would help recruit one of the studs. If you are bosh/amare, do you want to play on a team devoid of 3pt shooters that can space the floor.

Obviously price is an issue, and i do not want him back for $12mill+ a year. But if we can get him around the $9mill range, i think you have to pull the trigger.

Ben Gordon doesn't seem like he's mentally(at this point in his career) has the ability to be a 3rd option for any decent length of time. He's still out there trying to prove himself and be as good as he thinks he can be, down the road he'll accept his role of hitting open jumpers and then creating his shot near the end of the shot clocks. I'd rather retain him, move him to 6th man and when he's in the game he can be the #1 option without disrupting the starting 5.

I just don't see the downside(of the current roster) of running with...
Starting 5: Rose, Salmons, Deng, Tyrus and Noah
Bench: Gordon, Miller, Hinrich
This is with Gordon having the green light the entire time in the game, he's an efficient high volume shooter, if he's off that night you stick with your starters a couple minutes more, if he's on you can rest your starters a few more minutes.

Gordon still gets his minutes, he's got a green light basically the whole time out there, the only difference, he's not taking shots away from the starters and he's coming off the bench.

Once he's signed, as long as there's no verbal agreements, we can utilize him anyway we need too. By the way, why throw numbers on his contract, let the market dictate his contract, if there's no money out there you can low ball him and if he doesn't like it he can take lesser money from someone else(which I very well doubt he'll do). He played hard ball last year wanting big money and lost, why reward him now when nobody else can or will give him big cash?

I like Ben, I'm not one of his biggest supporters, but I can get with this