Sports radio on Ben Gordon

[charity stripe]

I know we have talked about this before, but it still pisses me off when ignorant fools like Dan Bernstein state how Ben Gordon leaving will improve the team, that Gordon is a horrible defender, can't win a championship with him, blah blah blah. Stupid stupid stupid!
And then you have callers agreeing with him talking about him as if he is a cancerous growth that must be gotten rid of. The media continues to brainwash the casual fans into becomes haters of the teams best player.

Fred, where are you, call them up tomorrow and knock these fools out.

 

[Newskoolbulls]

charity stripe wrote:

I know we have talked about this before, but it still pisses me off when ignorant fools like Dan Bernstein state how Ben Gordon leaving will improve the team, that Gordon is a horrible defender, can't win a championship with him, blah blah blah. Stupid stupid stupid!
And then you have callers agreeing with him talking about him as if he is a cancerous growth that must be gotten rid of. The media continues to brainwash the casual fans into becomes haters of the teams best player.

Fred, where are you, call them up tomorrow and knock these fools out.

BG is not a bad defender, he isnt the greatest but to say he is bad is ignorant. Also fans who think he is a cancer must be insane, what one issue in five years and it wasnt a big issue (late to a team flight).

 

[??? ??????]

Newskoolbulls wrote:

charity stripe wrote:

I know we have talked about this before, but it still pisses me off when ignorant fools like Dan Bernstein state how Ben Gordon leaving will improve the team, that Gordon is a horrible defender, can't win a championship with him, blah blah blah. Stupid stupid stupid!
And then you have callers agreeing with him talking about him as if he is a cancerous growth that must be gotten rid of. The media continues to brainwash the casual fans into becomes haters of the teams best player.

Fred, where are you, call them up tomorrow and knock these fools out.

BG is not a bad defender, he isnt the greatest but to say he is bad is ignorant. Also fans who think he is a cancer must be insane, what one issue in five years and it wasnt a big issue (late to a team flight).

Ben Gordon? He's definitely a cancer. The guy ate peanut butter and jelly en masse in the locker room, and also had impure thoughts about what it would be like to wear a headband during a game.

 

[clonetrooper264]

??? ?????? wrote:

Newskoolbulls wrote:

charity stripe wrote:

I know we have talked about this before, but it still pisses me off when ignorant fools like Dan Bernstein state how Ben Gordon leaving will improve the team, that Gordon is a horrible defender, can't win a championship with him, blah blah blah. Stupid stupid stupid!
And then you have callers agreeing with him talking about him as if he is a cancerous growth that must be gotten rid of. The media continues to brainwash the casual fans into becomes haters of the teams best player.

Fred, where are you, call them up tomorrow and knock these fools out.

BG is not a bad defender, he isnt the greatest but to say he is bad is ignorant. Also fans who think he is a cancer must be insane, what one issue in five years and it wasnt a big issue (late to a team flight).

Ben Gordon? He's definitely a cancer. The guy ate peanut butter and jelly en masse in the locker room, and also had impure thoughts about what it would be like to wear a headband during a game.

He did what? OMG we need him off this team right now. BANISH BEN GORDON! :silly:

 

[charity stripe]

Steve Rosenbloom was Bernstein's partner today, he was staying some Special person stuff on Gordon. He said Gordon is a negative impact on a team, and you can't use stats to quantify this. He also said he routinely escorts his man to the lane, and that the Bulls had to climb out of deficits in 4th quarters because of Gordon's bad defense.

LMAO, what a f'n joke.

 

[wjb1492]

??? ?????? wrote:

Newskoolbulls wrote:

charity stripe wrote:

I know we have talked about this before, but it still pisses me off when ignorant fools like Dan Bernstein state how Ben Gordon leaving will improve the team, that Gordon is a horrible defender, can't win a championship with him, blah blah blah. Stupid stupid stupid!
And then you have callers agreeing with him talking about him as if he is a cancerous growth that must be gotten rid of. The media continues to brainwash the casual fans into becomes haters of the teams best player.

Fred, where are you, call them up tomorrow and knock these fools out.

BG is not a bad defender, he isnt the greatest but to say he is bad is ignorant. Also fans who think he is a cancer must be insane, what one issue in five years and it wasnt a big issue (late to a team flight).

Ben Gordon? He's definitely a cancer. The guy ate peanut butter and jelly en masse in the locker room, and also had impure thoughts about what it would be like to wear a headband during a game.

And did you read him trashing his teammates in ESPN the Mag? Going on about how none of them know how to dress...

 

[dougthonus]

You listen to the score?

I'm so sorry. Does your radio have a dial? A button? A CD Player? I mean you have to be able to fix this somehow.

 

[Dpauley23]

He was probably listening because Sam Smith was on

 

[houheffna]

Sam Smith advocated keeping BG, although he talked about Gordon's lack of ballhandling ability and his defense not being up to par. And Smith said that Bulls have an idea for a larger backcourt that offers more defensively. Smith also said that the team will stress defense more and in that situation, Salmons would be better at the position than Ben. Salmons is a decent player, not great, but decent, but then the guy he is replacing is not great either. Salmons is a better player all around. My dream was Gordon backing Salmons and Rose (a little bit). Smith also said that Salmons is better at SF than SG but there is a big roadblock at SF.

The argument against keeping BG to come off the bench is that you don't have enough ball handlers, especially if you lose Hinrich. It would be nice if this team had a point forward type player but there isn't one.

We know how Bernstein and Rosenbloom feel. "Short term loss, long term gain" if they lose BG. I tend to agree with that assessment. I would rather not think that the team will suffer long term from losing a decent player. Great player, sure, decent player...no.

 

[Bullsman24]

ok, look. ben gordon can be a first option or a 1b option. and he's the perfect secondary option.

when has john salmons ever been the first option on a team? last year in sacramento he was the second/third option on the worst team in the league. then he thrived as the third/fourth option on a team. BG's best years, and most efficient, were as the #1 option.

 

[houheffna]

If Ben Gordon is the first option on your team, you are not going to win a championship. Point Blank.

Otherwise I don't understand your point, who asked Salmons to be the first option?

Salmons is a suitable replacement for Gordon, it makes no sense to crap on whoever is slated to take over Gordon's spot. Salmons is a decent player, as is Gordon. You want to say that Salmons is a bad player? Be my guest, you would be wrong though.

 

[Bullsman24]

d-rose needs someone to be able to take over games and be the first option when he's off. salmons can't do that. gordon can. that's like being a 1a/1b option, at least next year.

salmon's is a good player, but nowhere near the player gordon is. there's nothing that salmons brings that gordon doesn't have that isn't size. salmons isn't defensively better, that's a myth. he's just bigger. gordon is stronger. that helps.

 

[SBB1316]

If Gordon is the 3rd option, then you've got a championship caliber offense. If the Bulls can somehow acquire one of the top power forwards by 2010 and keep Gordon for a reasonable price, they can contend for a long time. Of those power forwards, it looks like Stoudemire will be the easiest to obtain, but he also comes with the most baggage.
edit: Salmons chased around Paul Pierce for 7 games on an injured groin, I won't question his toughness or defense. I don't think that he will be around after 2010.

 

[charity stripe]

dougthonus wrote:

You listen to the score?

I'm so sorry. Does your radio have a dial? A button? A CD Player? I mean you have to be able to fix this somehow.

I normally don't, I was in the middle of a long drive and was flipping around.

Even if I didn't listen to it, they are still brainwashing the fan base.

 

[Bullsman24]

i know, i'm sorta starting to group gordon-defense haters with salmons lovers, and forget that they are both great players. my bad to salmons

 

[houheffna]

salmon's is a good player, but nowhere near the player gordon is. there's nothing that salmons brings that gordon doesn't have that isn't size. salmons isn't defensively better, that's a myth. he's just bigger. gordon is stronger. that helps.

The gulf between Gordon and Salmons is not as wide as you say. Salmons is a better defensive player, rebounder, and penetrates to the basket. Again, they didn't make defensive substitutions concerning Salmons like they did with Gordon. When it comes to man on man defense, Gordon is a liability, who told you Gordon was stronger? Salmons hustles as much defensively as he does offensively. In game 6 of that Boston series, when Rose needed someone to take over, who did it?

 

[Bullsman24]

well the gordon defensive substitution was because he had a torn hamstring, i'd take him out in that situation too. usually rose should be taken out on D for hinrich because rose is a FAR worse defensive player than gordon. but people overlook that because he's derrick rose. they both bring mostly only scoring, but people don't value gordon. they're statistically very similar. rose gets more assists than gordon because he handles the ball more. other than that they bring close to the same thing right now, although rose will bring more next year. i know potential counts, but why shouldn't it for tyrus? he's only 2 years older than rose. also, gordon can penetrate too. salmons also takes that midrange jumpshot, he doesn't really get to the rim like gordon.

do you know who else hustled on D, noche. and he wasn't a good defensive player at all. just because you try hard doesn't mean you're better. before the hamstring injury, ray allen was playing like crap. once gordon couldn't play D and run with allen, allen exploded on offense. obviously gordon's defense was at least doing some good. but everyone blames it on a bad game. well you know what, a lotta players have had bad games against ben gordon, just not as heralded.

gordon is 3 inches shorter than salmons and only 7 lbs lighter, gordon has more muscle.

 

[charity stripe]

houheffna wrote:

penetrates to the basket.quote]

Gordon gets to the ft line more than Salmons, despite Salmons being more of an iso player and despite him being 5 inches taller.

 

[Bullsman24]

he's listed only 3 inches taller btw

 

[houheffna]

I don't understand what you are watching. Noch hustled defensively, Gordon does not, point blank. Having a starting undersized SG who doesn't care about defense is going to be very costly. Salmons can guard more than one position, and he can guard those positions well. Why are you underestimating Salmons? Rose was bad defensively, but he is a better ball handler than Gordon and he is a true PG, Gordon is not. I

I think you are going to have to get over it if BG signs elsewhere. I wish BG could have used some of his mutated juggernaut strength to hold his position defensively.

I know one thing is a fact, you guys can knock the sports radio guys all you want, but if BG was as good as some of you think he is....they would have noticed that, believe me. After all, I am sure Chicago basketball fans know greatness when they see it. Nobody on this forum is THAT much smarter than anybody else...

So BG didn't hustle on defense because of a pulled hamstring?

OKAY!!!