are you telling me that ben gordon is not a better basketball player than derek fisher, the man who started at pg, the most important position on the court, for the world champion los angeles lakers???
the point you guys are missing is role. ben gordon's perfect role is to be a 6th man on a title team, this is true. however if he's the best shooting guard you have. you gotta start your best players.
I'd take Derek Fisher's defense and passing way before Gordon's. If we are talking about D-Fish in his prime, I would take him over Ben Gordon too.
I'm not Gordon was a sucky NBA player. He could fill in some valuable minutes, and could score in bunches in the 4th quarter if he happened to be feeling it that particular night; but that was far from every night.
lineup that wins a title:
PG: Derrick Rose
SG: Ben Gordon
SF: Luol Deng
PF: LeBron James
C: Joakim Noah
that team wins a title. ben gordon is in the starting lineup
There are tons of problems with a team with that line-up. First off, their backcourt defense is very weak. Gordon is a very undersized 2-man and Rose simply hasn't shown that kind of dedication on the defensive end yet. The best guards in the NBA still have their way with Rose. He's playing well on D so far in the FIBA Championships, but that isn't against nearly the caliber of players he defends on a night-in night-out basis in the NBA season.
LeBron James defending your 4-man is far from ideal either. He lives to gamble and where he is best suited to give you steals and blocks is on the weak side while defending an outside shooter/perimeter player. If James had to defend a 4 every night, he would be far from the same offensive player he was before.
Another problem with that line-up is offense. You have 3 pretty ball-dominant players and no low-post threat. Rose, Gordon, and LeBron all want the ball in their hands. LeBron absolutely needs it in his... Rose plays pretty lack-luster off-the-ball too. And this team has absolutely no dependable low/high-post/back-to-basket scorer either.
You can't claim this team would beat the Kobe-Gasol-Bynum-and Co. Lakers... or the Boston Celtics with all that size, defense, and flat-out scoring ability. Hell, the Lakers would be a better rebounding team than the Bulls too... I don't even know if that team could beat Orlando.
what does it even mean that he's not good enough to start on a contender?
you know, taj gibson isn't a player that could start on a championship team. let's let him go. in fact let's get rid of brewer too.
of course that's an idiotic idea. if you have a 20 ppg scorer that you get for below market value, you'd be a moron not to do it.
as well, what does that even mean? that he can't be the best player on a championship team or that the laws of the universe will not allow him to be in the starting lineup and win a title?
if ben gordon is the best player for the job, you can't start larry freaking hughes in front of him so he can come off the bench.
i'm sorry my posts are so incoherent. it's late.
Again, I never said Gordon was a bad player. But he lacks defense and is undersized at the 2 position. I might start Larry Hughes over BG simply because BG is more ball-dominant and is typically tons more effective playing with the 2nd unit, for an NBA team, as opposed to playing with a typical 1st unit. Sure, BG>Hughes, but that isn't the point. The point is that Gordon is far from the most efficient scorer, so you need to throw him out there against weaker defensive line-ups.
I think If Taj Gibson was playing next to Dwight Howard, he could start on a Championship team. I don't think that's the same concept for Gordon, because he really wants to be an iso. type of player. And there are so many guards that do that better than him. He's not a very good passer at all. He simply isn't big enough or athletic enough to be an effective defender either. I'd even take Ronnie Brewer over Gordon in my starting line-up. Again, BG is a lot more talented. But Brewer is a lot better of a perimeter defender and tons more athletic too. And Brewer allows Rose to be the decision-maker. BG wasn't a very good playmaker or decision-maker at all. Sometimes he would straight-up chuck up shots.
By the way, there are a LOT of guys in the NBA who are capable of scoring 20 points, if you give them the right amount of minutes. Gordon is far from one of the best scorers in the NBA. Hell, his own teammate, Rodney Stuckey, is about as good of a scorer as he is.
Gordon demanded too much money. He would have been good for $6M/year at 20-or-less minutes per game. But he wanted $9M from the Bulls to start, and is making like $11M with Detroit now. And he definitely would have deterred other free-agents from signing with the Bulls. They wouldn't've had a chance in hellllll of getting James, Wade, or Joe Johnson if Gordon was still in town. And he would have been insulted when he minutes would have gotten almost cut in-half.
Instead of mourning BG's loss, we should be loling at the Pistons for absolutely screwing themselves by overpaying him and Villanueva, 2 years ago.
It's not that he's a terrible player. But he is a far from a perfect player- who is very inconsistent. Plus, he just demanded too much minute-wise and money-wise from Chicago (this isn't baseball, where we can have as big of a pay-roll as we want).
I was relieved when the Bulls let him go. Hell, I cheered.
