Sam's Old Mailbag, Luol, and 2 Bad Moves

[Woodz]

TheStig wrote:

houheffna wrote:

You are of course ommitting a key point from my statement. I said, "In 5 years, the following 2 assertions will be widely regarded as true". We'll see where we're at in 5 years. Gordon's pretty good now, and he's just entering his prime. No one will remember John Koncak in 5 years.

No one will consider this move a bad move in 5 years, its a smart, business move on the Bulls part. If he signs at $10 mil a year, they can keep Salmons at the position for half the price and then give him an extension for maybe 20-30% less money and less years.

And if the Bulls get Dwayne Wade, who will regret Ben Gordon being gone?

In 5yrs Salmons will be out of the league and Wade will still be in Miami. Meanwhile the bulls will be in the desperate postion the cavs are trying to acquire anyone actually decent to play with Rose so he doesn't leave us in FA. BG is a very good scorer in this league and last time I checked the game was still decided off who can put the ball in the hoop more and not who is on a better value contract. You can get rid of BG and pray to sign wade or you can keep BG and still hope to sign a max fa.

Completely agree.

People also forget that wade needs the ball in his hands in order to be effective. Having him and rose is a little redundant. Keeping gordon and getting a bosh/amare to go with would put this team in a much better position to win a title than a rose/wade/tyrus core.

 

[houheffna]

In 5yrs Salmons will be out of the league and Wade will still be in Miami. Meanwhile the bulls will be in the desperate postion the cavs are trying to acquire anyone actually decent to play with Rose so he doesn't leave us in FA. BG is a very good scorer in this league and last time I checked the game was still decided off who can put the ball in the hoop more and not who is on a better value contract. You can get rid of BG and pray to sign wade or you can keep BG and still hope to sign a max fa.

I just don't see how keeping a SG who plays 47 feet at 11 mil a season helps you win a championship, makes no sense to me at that price. You need defense, defense, defense. You cannot win with a midget backcourt that does not play defense. Sliding Salmons over to Gordon's position is not a bad move at all. The point is Salmons is a comparable player to Gordon at a cheaper price. So spending $11 mil on Gordon is unnecessary. As far as Wade, they will make an attempt to get him I am sure. Don't think he is coming here either, but hey...right now I would be happy with Salmons/Rose with either Gordon or Hinrich coming off the bench. But by no means do I think we will see this as one of the worst moves in franchise history, that is way overboard. In five years or fifty years.

 

[Woodz]

houheffna wrote:

I just don't see how keeping a SG who plays 47 feet at 11 mil a season helps you win a championship, makes no sense to me at that price. You need defense, defense, defense. You cannot win with a midget backcourt that does not play defense. Sliding Salmons over to Gordon's position is not a bad move at all. The point is Salmons is a comparable player to Gordon at a cheaper price. So spending $11 mil on Gordon is unnecessary. As far as Wade, they will make an attempt to get him I am sure. Don't think he is coming here either, but hey...right now I would be happy with Salmons/Rose with either Gordon or Hinrich coming off the bench. But by no means do I think we will see this as one of the worst moves in franchise history, that is way overboard. In five years or fifty years.

I agree that not signing Ben wouldnt be one of the worst moves that the bulls have made.

I don't buy this Gordon sucks at defense argument. Take a look at Opp PER (http://www.82games.com/0809/0809CHI5.HTM)
and we are holding opposing SGs to the league average. It is also tied for our best defensive postion. And we have the best PER differential, by far, at SG. Just because Salmons is taller doesnt make him a better defender, he is also significantly slower than Ben. Plus what do you do when he opts out after next year? Pay him the $9mm+ he will be looking for, as a 31 year old? No thank you, id rather pay Ben.

 

[houheffna]

Salmons is a better defender period. If Gordon was a good defender, they wouldn't make defensive substitutions...

I don't give a fat baby's di*k about stats! People who watch the games (Like KC Johnson who yesterday said Ben plays NO defense...) know what is going on. Why is it that when I tell the truth, I then get inundated with stats? Don't know what Salmons will want til we ask him. Hinrich is slower than Gordon too, but he is a much better defender. Rose is the quickest guy on the team, yet he struggled defensively. So I don't get the point behind that.

You would rather pay Ben $11 mil, you might be able to sign Salmons for cheaper, quite a bit cheaper. And Salmons plays 94 feet.

 

[st. park]

houheffna wrote:

Salmons is a better defender period. If Gordon was a good defender, they wouldn't make defensive substitutions...

I don't give a fat baby's di*k about stats! People who watch the games (Like KC Johnson who yesterday said Ben plays NO defense...) know what is going on. Why is it that when I tell the truth, I then get inundated with stats? Don't know what Salmons will want til we ask him. Hinrich is slower than Gordon too, but he is a much better defender. Rose is the quickest guy on the team, yet he struggled defensively. So I don't get the point behind that.

You would rather pay Ben $11 mil, you might be able to sign Salmons for cheaper, quite a bit cheaper. And Salmons plays 94 feet.

The point is that Gordon is a better defender than many people give him credit for. Statistics is especially important in judging defense (where subjective judgment rules) because stats provide at least some objective analysis about a player's true affect on the defensive end of the game.

Fact is, Woodz has said more in that one post than your hundreds of generic, re-stated fluff, devoid of anything specific about Gordon's game. Your criticism of Gordon doesn't go beyond the fact that he's short.

 

[Bullsman24]

when has VDN EVER put in salmons in as a defensive sub??? the only people we can do that with are hinrich and noah. that's it. not salmons ever.

 

[Diddy1122]

houheffna wrote:

Salmons is a better defender period. If Gordon was a good defender, they wouldn't make defensive substitutions...

I don't give a fat baby's di*k about stats! People who watch the games (Like KC Johnson who yesterday said Ben plays NO defense...) know what is going on. Why is it that when I tell the truth, I then get inundated with stats? Don't know what Salmons will want til we ask him. Hinrich is slower than Gordon too, but he is a much better defender. Rose is the quickest guy on the team, yet he struggled defensively. So I don't get the point behind that.

You would rather pay Ben $11 mil, you might be able to sign Salmons for cheaper, quite a bit cheaper. And Salmons plays 94 feet.

Arguing with you over BG is becoming completely redundant. I agree about your issue with stats because I hate it when people use stats as a crutch for their argument. Stats are a good reference, but not all of basketball can be broken down into numbers. But it's clear to me, and countless others, that FRONTCOURT defense is the problem. Which is why the Bulls need a big who can grab defensive rebounds. We get killed on offensive boards on a nightly basis because neither Noah or Thomas are good defensive rebounders. Miller is the only one. Shore up the frontcourt D & I think we'll win alot of those closer games.

And if you're going to bash BG, fine, but saying he plays NO defense is a ridiculous statement that has been proven wrong time & again. It may not be almighty Hinrich D, but he is an average defender who just relies on his strength a bit too much. If BG improves his footwork, he could be a very solid defender. And Rose is the WORST defender on this team, but I rarely ever here anyone talk about that, especially in the media. I love the kid but his lack of D hurt us a helluva lot more than BG's ever did.

I think I said on another thread how Salmons will be looking for around $9mill, like BG accepted last yr but Reinsdork pulled the offer. Difference being Salmons will be 31 going into the deal & BG would've only been 25.

Also you claiming your side of a highly debated argument as the "truth" is a precarious way to try & prove your point.

 

[Dpauley23]

I think we have to stop crying about this defense. It's obvisious none of the players looked good on defense because we went the Phoenix route where you switch everything and it somehow makes you average team defense. As for rebounding Noah was stud at getting rebounds in the playoffs and if he can add 15 more pounds of muscle this offseason he will be stud. What we need is our power foward to average 9 rebounds instead of 6 rebounds.

 

[houheffna]

If BG improves his footwork, he could be a very solid defender. And Rose is the WORST defender on this team, but I rarely ever here anyone talk about that, especially in the media. I love the kid but his lack of D hurt us a helluva lot more than BG's ever did.

Gordon's game is pretty much defined now. He is who he is, minor alterations may happen, he can score, I just want him to come off the bench shooting and have someone else start. That is all, Gordon's defense is bought up because he is a free agent, and again, the Bulls beat writer said he played NO defense as in nada, zip...you cannot have two guards starting that don't play defense, so based on that argument, guess which one stays and which one goes?

 

[Diddy1122]

houheffna wrote:

If BG improves his footwork, he could be a very solid defender. And Rose is the WORST defender on this team, but I rarely ever here anyone talk about that, especially in the media. I love the kid but his lack of D hurt us a helluva lot more than BG's ever did.

Gordon's game is pretty much defined now. He is who he is, minor alterations may happen, he can score, I just want him to come off the bench shooting and have someone else start. That is all, Gordon's defense is bought up because he is a free agent, and again, the Bulls beat writer said he played NO defense as in nada, zip...you cannot have two guards starting that don't play defense, so based on that argument, guess which one stays and which one goes?

KC also was not a BG fan for years until the past 2 seasons. I didn't see his appearance on CTL, since the show stinks for the most part, so I'll have to take your word that he said that, but I highly doubt he said he plays NO defense. No one ever plays NO defense, that's just stupid. It may not be great D but you still have to play it or else it's 4 on 5 every time which it isn't when BG is out there. Dpauley had a great point. The Bulls D in general was only average due to all the switching they were doing. That was by design & it was horrible. We need a new defensive scheme in general not just a taller 2.

I can understand you wanting BG to come off the bench, which is fine, I thought that way at first too. But I think it was Kush who said it best, you don't bring your best player off the bench. It would be different if he was the 2nd or 3rd, but he's the best player.

But I think it's time I retire my BG defense & as you say it, agree to disagree. It's not gonna matter much anyway since he'll be on Detroit dropping 40 on us the next time we play them.

 

[houheffna]

They may keep him, I will not be heartbroken if they do, if he is a Bull, he is a Bull, I will root for him on both sides of the court. I just see him differently than others.


He can drop 80 on the Bulls, as long as the Bulls win...

 

[Bullsman24]

houheffna wrote:

If BG improves his footwork, he could be a very solid defender. And Rose is the WORST defender on this team, but I rarely ever here anyone talk about that, especially in the media. I love the kid but his lack of D hurt us a helluva lot more than BG's ever did.

Gordon's game is pretty much defined now. He is who he is, minor alterations may happen, he can score, I just want him to come off the bench shooting and have someone else start. That is all, Gordon's defense is bought up because he is a free agent, and again, the Bulls beat writer said he played NO defense as in nada, zip...you cannot have two guards starting that don't play defense, so based on that argument, guess which one stays and which one goes?

BG's footwork is pretty great, he's a pretty good defender against SGs. and exactly, no one gets on rose for his defense, if gordon had NO difference in his game but was an inch and a half taller, people would say he's the second coming of ray allen, because really he is just a shorter ray allen. tons about their games are the same, only gordon might be a touch less from three but a little more from everywhere else and can create his own shot better.

like kush oft says, why put an offensive stud off the bench, you need to score at the beginning of the game too you know.

the bull's reporter is watching the same game that we are, we can see that our reporter isn't completely correct in this assumption.