Who was the better #7? BG or Toni?

[clonetrooper264]

Who do you think was the better player to wear #7 for the Bulls? Toni Kukoc or Ben Gordon? Both players played 5-7 years with our franchise and had a meaningful impact, who would you say was better?

Personally I think it is Kukoc by a slim margin, simply because he was so key in that last threepeat, while Gordon has yet to leave the 2nd round. Granted this may only be because Toni had by far (like a universe of distance) the better team. Still BG is our all time leader in 3pts made after only 5 years. Also Toni's time after the Bulls is quite underwhelming.

So hard to choose...

 

[houheffna]

Kukoc is my pick. He was a better player and could do more on the floor offensively. He was just as clutch as anyone not named Jordan and had to put up with Phil constantly berating him.

 

[??? ??????]

Definitely Ben Gordon. Plug Gordon in for Kukoc in the second threepeat, and they don't miss a beat.

Kukoc was nothing more than a great role player. When Kukoc was asked to be the number one option on the Bulls, his scoring efficiency was terrible, while Gordon was able to score more than Toni, on a good scoring efficiency as the number one scorer on the team. (And the Gordon led teams made the playoffs 4 out of 5 years, while the Kukoc led Bulls teams were some of the worst teams in the last decade. He had Artest, Hoiberg, and Brand in his last year with the Bulls and they won 17 games for the entire season. Looks like we had 10 or 11 wins when Toni was traded that year. Ben with Brand/Artest wouldn't have only 10/11 wins at the trade deadline.

I think when Ben Gordon retires they should retire the #7. But not just for Ben Gordon. Do it right, and retire the jersey for both Gordon/Kukoc at the same time.

 

[Riker]

To have a forum dedicated strictly to Chicago Bulls, strictly to that one team...



One would think people on that forum will know their shit. Apparently - that's not the case here.



I love Ben Gordon and he does shoot 3's better than Kukoc but...to say that if you replaced Toni with BG in the 90s and have the same result...


You people lack some serious knowledge.



Toni was a mere role player? LMFAO.......this is amazing. I actually wont even bother to prove otherwise, theres nothing that can get across the thick skull, but what shocks/irritates me is the fact how ignorant you are.


And you will continue to spread that venom of ignorance around.



Disgraceful. You don't know what Toni did in his career, how he played and what he meant to Chicago.


You obviously don't. And that's pretty bad for someone who registers on Bulls-only forum.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

I think you can´t really compare these two players. They played on different positions and had different roles in their team. Ben Gordon was the top scorer what Michael Jordan has been in Kukoc´s team. And don´t forget that beside Jordan there was Scottie Pippen, too. So Kucoc was in a team with 2 superstar players. Has Ben Gordon ever been in a team like that? NO! He was the best player in his team for years.

So in my opinion you can´t compare these two players.

 

[houheffna]

I think when Ben Gordon retires they should retire the #7. But not just for Ben Gordon. Do it right, and retire the jersey for both Gordon/Kukoc at the same time.

Okay man, that is just crazy. Neither one deserves their number retired. You act like Gordon had a Gale Sayers like career or something. Give me a damn break. Neither were great players for this franchise. Neither made an allstar team, neither was all league, they were both best 6th mans. Kukoc was a legitimate NBA starter who played behind one of the great SF ever.

Either player were good players, neither was great. Stop the madness.

One of the things I like about the Bulls is that they don't just retire a bunch of numbers. You truely have to be great and achieve to get your number retired. You have to be great at SOMETHING at least. So that eliminates Kukoc and Gordon.

 

[vhans5219]

Definitely Toni

 

[??? ??????]

houheffna wrote:

I think when Ben Gordon retires they should retire the #7. But not just for Ben Gordon. Do it right, and retire the jersey for both Gordon/Kukoc at the same time.

Okay man, that is just crazy. Neither one deserves their number retired. You act like Gordon had a Gale Sayers like career or something. Give me a damn break. Neither were great players for this franchise. Neither made an allstar team, neither was all league, they were both best 6th mans. Kukoc was a legitimate NBA starter who played behind one of the great SF ever.

Either player were good players, neither was great. Stop the madness.

One of the things I like about the Bulls is that they don't just retire a bunch of numbers. You truely have to be great and achieve to get your number retired. You have to be great at SOMETHING at least. So that eliminates Kukoc and Gordon.

"You have to be great at SOMETHING at least"

I'll go tell Ben Gordon, who just got done setting the NBA record for most threes in the first five years of an NBA career that he's not great at something.

 

[Fred]

Absolutely fantastic topic Clonetrooper. We need to debate this on the next podcast. These 2 were 2 of my top 5 all-time favorite Bulls. Toni had no faults on the offensive end. He could do it all...great passer, great 3-point shooter, great post player. The Bulls never utilized him enough in the post. Obviously, Jordan played quite a bit in the post in his second go-around, and he was unstoppable, so I guess that's the reason why. Toni never gets enough credit in the dynasty conversation. Pippen only played half the season in the final year, and without Toni's clutch performance in Game 7 against the Pacers, we don't go to the Finals in 1998. Here's a great game to watch to get an idea how good he was:

Bulls vs. Lakers 1997
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58S0gmfYSg0

But the common thread for both of these guys: They were both incredibly clutch. They wanted the ball when the game was on the line, and they performed time and time again. The reason Jackson asked Kukoc to shoot the last shot in 94 against the Knicks in Game 3 was because he hit about 6 last second shots during that season to win games. And he came through again while Pippen sat out the 1.8.

 

[jsain360]

Fred wrote:

Absolutely fantastic topic Clonetrooper. We need to debate this on the next podcast. These 2 were 2 of my top 5 all-time favorite Bulls. Toni had no faults on the offensive end. He could do it all...great passer, great 3-point shooter, great post player. The Bulls never utilized him enough in the post. Obviously, Jordan played quite a bit in the post in his second go-around, and he was unstoppable, so I guess that's the reason why. Toni never gets enough credit in the dynasty conversation. Pippen only played half the season in the final year, and without Toni's clutch performance in Game 7 against the Pacers, we don't go to the Finals in 1998. Here's a great game to watch to get an idea how good he was:

Bulls vs. Lakers 1997
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58S0gmfYSg0

But the common thread for both of these guys: They were both incredibly clutch. They wanted the ball when the game was on the line, and they performed time and time again. The reason Jackson asked Kukoc to shoot the last shot in 94 against the Knicks in Game 3 was because he hit about 6 last second shots during that season to win games. And he came through again while Pippen sat out the 1.8.

That '97 game against the Lakers was one of the games I remembered the most

 

[mlewinth]

Riker wrote:

To have a forum dedicated strictly to Chicago Bulls, strictly to that one team...



One would think people on that forum will know their shit. Apparently - that's not the case here.



I love Ben Gordon and he does shoot 3's better than Kukoc but...to say that if you replaced Toni with BG in the 90s and have the same result...


You people lack some serious knowledge.



Toni was a mere role player? LMFAO.......this is amazing. I actually wont even bother to prove otherwise, theres nothing that can get across the thick skull, but what shocks/irritates me is the fact how ignorant you are.


And you will continue to spread that venom of ignorance around.



Disgraceful. You don't know what Toni did in his career, how he played and what he meant to Chicago.


You obviously don't. And that's pretty bad for someone who registers on Bulls-only forum.

Riker, is there any reason to be such an assmucher...really? I mean you name yourself after a charecter on Star Trek and all of a sudden you think your captian cool?!?!?!?!? Do yourself a favor and go boldly where you have never gone before....a females bedroom! COME ON! Look at Toni's stat's you ignorant, pompus SOB and tell me he wasn't anything more than a great role player.

http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=KUKOCTO01

Other then maybe 98-00 (2 years) where Kucok ave 18-19 ppg, Kukoc got relativly similar minutes for the majority of his NBA career and he avg roughly 13 ppg. He was not better then a phenominal role player in any other statistical catagory. Also, other then on the Chicago Bulls where he was our sixth man (besides when MJ was gone), Toni, NEVER avg more than 11.6 PPG IN ANY SEASON (im not counting his brief stint in ATL because he only played 17 games). Toni's career avgs were 11.6 PPG, 33% from 3, 3.7 APG, and 4.2 RPG. He was a phenominal role player and very deserving of his sixth man of the year Trophy!

BG WAS THE BETTER #7, he was a much bigger IMPACT player. He changes games, on a much more consistant basis than Toni ever did.

 

[mlewinth]

Riker wrote:

To have a forum dedicated strictly to Chicago Bulls, strictly to that one team...



One would think people on that forum will know their shit. Apparently - that's not the case here.



I love Ben Gordon and he does shoot 3's better than Kukoc but...to say that if you replaced Toni with BG in the 90s and have the same result...


You people lack some serious knowledge.



Toni was a mere role player? LMFAO.......this is amazing. I actually wont even bother to prove otherwise, theres nothing that can get across the thick skull, but what shocks/irritates me is the fact how ignorant you are.


And you will continue to spread that venom of ignorance around.



Disgraceful. You don't know what Toni did in his career, how he played and what he meant to Chicago.


You obviously don't. And that's pretty bad for someone who registers on Bulls-only forum.

Wait, sorry, one more thing. Are you this biased and angry because you are from Croatia!?!?! If you feel this strongly, PLEASE PLEASE be on our next Chicago Bullseye and let's discuss this topic. I promise, we can throw off the gloves and have a friendly discussion. If your interested, e-mail me at mlewinth@yahoo.com, with your phone number. We plan to do a cast Sunday. I would love to have a segment where Fred and I can talk to you.

 

[Fred]

Goddamn it Mark, Toni is no freaking role player. I agree with most of Riker is saying, and I'll ***** slap you with argument upon argument as to why Toni never got the credit he deserved in the next cast. I've always said that Hinrich is the most overrated Bull in history....the most underrated, without a doubt, is Toni Kukoc.

 

[houheffna]

"You have to be great at SOMETHING at least"

I'll go tell Ben Gordon, who just got done setting the NBA record for most threes in the first five years of an NBA career that he's not great at something.

Yeah do that, and go tell Steve Kerr and Craig Hodges that they can come get their numbers retired too because they could hit three pointers....great.

That is a dumb ass reason to retire a dude's number. Seriously.

 

[cool007]

This is Gordon for me.

I loved Kukoc back then and he was very versatile player. He had a big advantage as a PF as he could dribble and penetrate, finish, and pass the ball to open shooters (Kerr/Buechler) but he was very inconsistent and didn't carry a team like Gordon has done.

Gordon is also a better impact player than Kukoc.

 

[jsain360]

houheffna wrote:

"You have to be great at SOMETHING at least"

I'll go tell Ben Gordon, who just got done setting the NBA record for most threes in the first five years of an NBA career that he's not great at something.

Yeah do that, and go tell Steve Kerr and Craig Hodges that they can come get their numbers retired too because they could hit three pointers....great.

That is a dumb ass reason to retire a dude's number. Seriously.

They could hit the three better than Gordon, but Gordon was the better player of the 3, but this is a pointless debate, Toni had a better skill set than Gordon, Gordon is the better scorer, both are bad defenders, but overall Tony was a better player, a guy at 6'10" who could shoot, handle the rock, pass, and score, he was a unique talent for the Bulls and the X-factor in the 2nd 3-peat.

 

[Hawkfanwillie07]

Im going with Gordon on this one. Toni was a great player for a clutch shot, but BG could take over an entire game with his shooting, which puts him ahead in my book. Toni, although he didn't have a lot of chances being the role player that he was, didn't seem like he was the kind of player that could take over an entire game. I would love to hear Funk's opinion on this. haha

 

[mlewinth]

Hawkfanwillie07 wrote:

Im going with Gordon on this one. Toni was a great player for a clutch shot, but BG could take over an entire game with his shooting, which puts him ahead in my book. Toni, although he didn't have a lot of chances being the role player that he was, didn't seem like he was the kind of player that could take over an entire game. I would love to hear Funk's opinion on this. haha

The fact that were able to have this debate, yet management let him go for nothing is just pathetic. P A T H E T I C!

 

[collisrost]

There's no doubt if you replaced Toni with Gordon on those championship Bulls that Gordon would take Ron Harper's starting spot. He'd really open up the court for Michael and Scottie or if teams continued to throw two guys at them they'd find him for a three. He'd have a ridiculously high 3-point percentage. But at a much lower volume. He'd be a very good role player I suppose.

But the truth is that those teams needed a good front court player more than another good backcourt player. So Toni was more valuable to them. If they wanted someone to spread the floor they could use the much cheaper Steve Kerr.

I'm not saying Kukoc was better, but showing that it's all about being in the right place at the right time when it comes to being considered a good player. A great player like Scottie would be great whatever the circumstances, whereas a very good one makes his reputation based on the circumstances he finds himself in.

 

[houheffna]

There's no doubt if you replaced Toni with Gordon on those championship Bulls that Gordon would take Ron Harper's starting spot. He'd really open up the court for Michael and Scottie or if teams continued to throw two guys at them they'd find him for a three. He'd have a ridiculously high 3-point percentage. But at a much lower volume. He'd be a very good role player I suppose.

But the truth is that those teams needed a good front court player more than another good backcourt player. So Toni was more valuable to them. If they wanted someone to spread the floor they could use the much cheaper Steve Kerr.

I'm not saying Kukoc was better, but showing that it's all about being in the right place at the right time when it comes to being considered a good player. A great player like Scottie would be great whatever the circumstances, whereas a very good one makes his reputation based on the circumstances he finds himself in.

There is serious doubt that Gordon would have started on those teams. Harper was a far superior defensive player who's only job was to make sure Jordan didn't have to expend a lot of energy defensively. Pippen and Jordan didn't need any help spacing the floor, if they did, they would have started Steve Kerr. If I am not mistaken, Kerr shot 52% from 3pt, 52%! It is stated though that Jordan loved Kerr because Kerr played hard, spirited basketball on both sides of the court to the best of his ability. I think Gordon would have had to do the same thing. However, Krause didn't draft SGs high in the draft too often during the Jordan years because Jordan would destroy them in practice and turn them into vegetables according to Sam Smith. So I doubt seriously whether because of Jordan or incompetence that Krause would have drafted Gordon if Gordon was a high draft pick anyway.