LeBron called Rose after loss

[houheffna]

the day lebron comes here, i will be the biggest reinsdorf fan(houfan), and i will start hating gordon.

lol...I don't hate Gordon man...just thinks his little clan of supporters severely overrate him...

 

[houheffna]

Shoulda phrased that better. Just saying the dude was voted Chicago's sexiest athlete in SI I think he could find better tail than Lebron's hideous momma.

Naw,Naw,Naw...you don't have to make excuses man, nothing wrong with the rainbow love, to each his own...lol

 

[??? ??????]

I think if Gordon is healthy next year, he will bounce back and have a good year. But if we land Lebron, no one should ever complain about letting Ben Gordon walk ever again.

 

[TheStig]

??? ?????? wrote:

I think if Gordon is healthy next year, he will bounce back and have a good year. But if we land Lebron, no one should ever complain about letting Ben Gordon walk ever again.

If BG bounces back big like I think he will and Kirk continues to be subpar, I will forever complain. It was one or the other and I strongly think we traded the wrong one.

 

[houheffna]

If BG bounces back big like I think he will and Kirk continues to be subpar, I will forever complain. It was one or the other and I strongly think we traded the wrong one.

You will FOREVER complain? About Gordon? I'm sorry, is he the basketball equivalent of Lou Brock or something? That was something to complain about...picking Hinrich over Gordon was like picking the electric chair over the gas chamber...either way you are dead...

 

[Shakes]

TheStig wrote:

If BG bounces back big like I think he will and Kirk continues to be subpar, I will forever complain. It was one or the other and I strongly think we traded the wrong one.

But you're basing your complaints on a false premise here. It wasn't one or the other, it was at most two of Deng, Gordon and Hinrich. Given Kirk was already under contract I think the decision came down to Deng or Gordon, not Hinrich or Gordon. Especially if we get LeBron, if we were going to keep two then Kirk & Ben make the most sense.

 

[TheStig]

Shakes wrote:

TheStig wrote:

If BG bounces back big like I think he will and Kirk continues to be subpar, I will forever complain. It was one or the other and I strongly think we traded the wrong one.

But you're basing your complaints on a false premise here. It wasn't one or the other, it was at most two of Deng, Gordon and Hinrich. Given Kirk was already under contract I think the decision came down to Deng or Gordon, not Hinrich or Gordon. Especially if we get LeBron, if we were going to keep two then Kirk & Ben make the most sense.

How is it a false premise? We had plenty of opportunities to trade Kirk for an expiring but chose to keep him. Deng plays another position and is pretty untradable imo. You are also assuming we land which is a bit of a long shot at this point despite the hype.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

If BG bounces back big like I think he will and Kirk continues to be subpar, I will forever complain. It was one or the other and I strongly think we traded the wrong one.

You will FOREVER complain? About Gordon? I'm sorry, is he the basketball equivalent of Lou Brock or something? That was something to complain about...picking Hinrich over Gordon was like picking the electric chair over the gas chamber...either way you are dead...

Yeah, I see Kirk as a 5th starter or combo guard off the bench. When BG gets healthy and comes back next year, I see him having a career somewhere between Redd and Allen.

 

[houheffna]

Yeah, I see Kirk as a 5th starter or combo guard off the bench. When BG gets healthy and comes back next year, I see him having a career somewhere between Redd and Allen.

You "see" him having a career somewhere between Redd and Allen...you must be blind...lol

Redd and Allen were both franchise players. I just don't see that happening with BG. He is not a legit starter. Those guys are bigger guards who have sniffed the all-star game in their career. And because of his size, he is more of a liability defensively, especially in the post. Now...even if it does, you will be the ONLY fan griping about BG if the Bulls get Lebron and Bosh.

 

[TheStig]

Redd is a franchise player to a perineal lottery team and is probably the worst max player in the league now. BG has led his team to the playoffs more already in half the seasons. And just cause the guy is taller doesn't make him a better defender, he and Hedo are probably the worst defenders in the league. If you think BG's defense is worse than Redd's we have nothing more to talk about because there is no reasoning with that level of insanity. I agree Allen is better but that why I said between. The guy is a definite starter in this league and will continue to be the best 3 pt scorer throughout his contract with Allen getting very old and Redd being another knee injury away from being washed up.

 

[houheffna]

How many times do I have to say it...Gordon led nobody nowhere. They didn't build the team around him and he wasn't the leader. That needs to go on the b.s. list with "Gordon was the only one who was constantly double-teamed". What is insane is possibly getting Lebron and Bosh, which makes you instant...instant championship contenders, and you would still gripe about a player who is not even an allstar, who after getting his money had the worst season of his career...that is certifiably insane bruh. Over the course of their careers, I would put Redd ahead of Gordon...no doubt about that. Redd was a dream teamer, and an allstar. I don't see Gordon ever getting to that level, if he does, I will admit I am wrong no problem, if he doesn't, you will probably blame his coach...

 

[clonetrooper264]

I think it's funny how in college Redd was known for slashing and defense. :lol:

 

[Shakes]

TheStig wrote:

How is it a false premise? We had plenty of opportunities to trade Kirk for an expiring but chose to keep him. Deng plays another position and is pretty untradable imo. You are also assuming we land which is a bit of a long shot at this point despite the hype.

LeBron/Wade/Bosh signed extensions in 2006, Deng in 2008. He was certainly not untradable until that point. Once we signed Deng to an extension dumping Kirk was neither here nor there because we still wouldn't have 2x max space.

And why not assume we land LeBron, if we don't land LeBron we're probably not winning anything no matter who we kept. Wade isn't moving, Bosh is probably going to NY with LeBron if LeBron doesn't come here, and all the other FAs aren't good enough.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

How many times do I have to say it...Gordon led nobody nowhere. They didn't build the team around him and he wasn't the leader. That needs to go on the b.s. list with "Gordon was the only one who was constantly double-teamed". What is insane is possibly getting Lebron and Bosh, which makes you instant...instant championship contenders, and you would still gripe about a player who is not even an allstar, who after getting his money had the worst season of his career...that is certifiably insane bruh. Over the course of their careers, I would put Redd ahead of Gordon...no doubt about that. Redd was a dream teamer, and an allstar. I don't see Gordon ever getting to that level, if he does, I will admit I am wrong no problem, if he doesn't, you will probably blame his coach...

he was injured most of the year. Ofcourse his worst year would be the only year he got injured. The guy still put up a higher per than a healthy Kirk while he was on a bum wheel. Thats why I complain, for all the feistyness it means jack. I am looking at it at comparison at SG going forward. BG is a better starting SG than kirk, point blank. I am not going into this debate again. But I will always feel shafted as long as Kirk is on this team. I felt BG gave us more bang for the buck. If the only way you can justify that is with landing two of the top 10 players in the league, I think that shows a lot. The chances of landing both bosh and Bron are 1 in a million. So many things have to fall into place its not even funny,.

 

[TheStig]

Shakes wrote:

TheStig wrote:

How is it a false premise? We had plenty of opportunities to trade Kirk for an expiring but chose to keep him. Deng plays another position and is pretty untradable imo. You are also assuming we land which is a bit of a long shot at this point despite the hype.

LeBron/Wade/Bosh signed extensions in 2006, Deng in 2008. He was certainly not untradable until that point. Once we signed Deng to an extension dumping Kirk was neither here nor there because we still wouldn't have 2x max space.

And why not assume we land LeBron, if we don't land LeBron we're probably not winning anything no matter who we kept. Wade isn't moving, Bosh is probably going to NY with LeBron if LeBron doesn't come here, and all the other FAs aren't good enough.

Ofcourse he wasn't untradable under his rookie deal. Thats when he had the most value. But I thought it was a bad deal from day 1 and still think its a bad deal. The worst part of it is that it inflates the cap. The bulls are saving 1.5-2 mill a year by defering his salary while it counts against the cap and limits us.

Well why even play the game then? I also don't think Bron is a lock in NY. Bosh is far from a lock in NY and guys like Stat would make us a top 4 team in the east thats missing a piece. If we added Stat or another pf on that tier we are easily a 50 win team.

 

[Shakes]

TheStig wrote:

When BG gets healthy and comes back next year, I see him having a career somewhere between Redd and Allen.

That's a pretty big call, both those guys have been top 10 in PPG 4 times in their career. I think he'll be closer to Rip Hamilton (minus the undeserved all-star games from being on a good team) than those guys.

 

[Diddy1122]

Good God, how much more does everyone have to debate this BG crap? Look I like the guy I think he's a fine player but he's a Piston. Move the hell on already.

 

[houheffna]

he was injured most of the year. Ofcourse his worst year would be the only year he got injured. The guy still put up a higher per than a healthy Kirk while he was on a bum wheel. Thats why I complain, for all the feistyness it means jack. I am looking at it at comparison at SG going forward. BG is a better starting SG than kirk, point blank. I am not going into this debate again. But I will always feel shafted as long as Kirk is on this team. I felt BG gave us more bang for the buck. If the only way you can justify that is with landing two of the top 10 players in the league, I think that shows a lot. The chances of landing both bosh and Bron are 1 in a million. So many things have to fall into place its not even funny,.

you are whining man...I am staging an intervention...lol...stop whining over insignificant players dude...sad...unless your name is Stig Gordon.

That said, you put the cape on and became Captain Spreadsheet again, and you used PER to make your point.

So you mean, present times I take it? 34 year old Allen and creaky kneed Redd? Because at their best, Gordon is not there, according to your stats.

Gordon's career high is 18.2...that's aiiiiiiiight...

Redd averaged a 19.8 PER
Allen averaged a 19.4 PER and well over 20 without the Boston Years...his PER from age 23-31 was 18.9 - 22.9.

Gordon's PER average? 16...
good luck with that

 

[TheStig]

Shakes wrote:

TheStig wrote:

When BG gets healthy and comes back next year, I see him having a career somewhere between Redd and Allen.

That's a pretty big call, both those guys have been top 10 in PPG 4 times in their career. I think he'll be closer to Rip Hamilton (minus the undeserved all-star games from being on a good team) than those guys.

Redd put up a lot of empty points on bad teams. I can easily see BG doing that next year till Detroit puts together some sort of team and trades Rip.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

he was injured most of the year. Ofcourse his worst year would be the only year he got injured. The guy still put up a higher per than a healthy Kirk while he was on a bum wheel. Thats why I complain, for all the feistyness it means jack. I am looking at it at comparison at SG going forward. BG is a better starting SG than kirk, point blank. I am not going into this debate again. But I will always feel shafted as long as Kirk is on this team. I felt BG gave us more bang for the buck. If the only way you can justify that is with landing two of the top 10 players in the league, I think that shows a lot. The chances of landing both bosh and Bron are 1 in a million. So many things have to fall into place its not even funny,.

you are whining man...I am staging an intervention...lol...stop whining over insignificant players dude...sad...unless your name is Stig Gordon.

That said, you put the cape on and became Captain Spreadsheet again, and you used PER to make your point.

So you mean, present times I take it? 34 year old Allen and creaky kneed Redd? Because at their best, Gordon is not there, according to your stats.

Gordon's career high is 18.2...that's aiiiiiiiight...

Redd averaged a 19.8 PER
Allen averaged a 19.4 PER and well over 20 without the Boston Years...his PER from age 23-31 was 18.9 - 22.9.

Gordon's PER average? 16...
good luck with that

I was going off their first 5 years in the league. BG scored the most points out of the tree and shot the best 3pt fg%. They have higher pers and Allen is clearly the better player but I don't think its unobtainable for BG to be as good as Redd. Redd may have had higher volume scoring years but his defense was one of the worst in the league.