Who was the better #7? BG or Toni?

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

Well guys, show me where Kukoc got destroyed over and over again stat wise. No coach sits there and lets that happen. But even the best, like Pippen got their asses handed to them from time to time. Because Pippen excelled defensively, there were no other options beside him. Show me where Magic, bad defender that he was, got hammered constantly. Didn't happen. Neither Rose or Gordon have the footwork at this time to keep opposing guards in front of them. And the Kobes and Roys of the world would chew Gordon up and spit him out in a playoff series, because he can do nothing to impede them from doing what they want to do offensively. You can only hope for bad shooting nights. As I said last night on the podcast, shooters have bad nights, but by no means does a bad shooting night by Joe Johnson mean that Gordon consistently stopped Joe Johnson, not at all.

Although it's become quite clear that you judge players in what they theoretically could do on a basketball court based on their skills and size, rather than on the results they produce on the court.

This isn't theory, I SAW the guy play, every game in his career as a Bull or 90% of them. How is a guy who uses a recently generated stat to decide who the best players are, going to talk to me about theory? When I ask if BG is better than Hedo, Vince Carter, Joe Johnson, Lamar Odom, you use a theorem to prove your case. So you should be the last to criticize someone else's evaluation...Mr. True Shooting Percentage.

Roy
11/19 20 pts 2 ast 7/13
1/12 11pts 3 asts 3/13
Roy's seasona avg 22.6 5.1 apg .48fg%

Kobe
11/18 21 pts 6 ast 9/18
3/21 28pts 7 ast 10/25
Kobe's season avg 26.8ppg 4.9 apg .455fg%

How did Kobe and Roy beat him up? Both clearly preformed below their season averages on poorer efficency? Its not just coincidence that out of 4 meetings, that only once Kobe scored 1 pt over his season avg and all were held under their regular season fg%. Again, who lit up BG? You just named the two best sgs and they preformed under their season average. If BG is that bad of a defender, he must have gotten lit up. SG's really didn't go off on the bulls, PG's and SF's and bigs did. Bron averaged over 40ppg against us. BG was by far our most consistent player on both sides of the court this year.

 

[houheffna]

That is it, cannot talk about that anymore. It is what it is. K.C. Johnson says the man plays "no defense". I agree to a degree with that evaluation. That is it as far as I am concerned.

BG was by far our most consistent player on both sides of the court this year.

I agree, since consistency is not resistant to positive or negative results, you can consistently be good,great,suck,etc....sure. He was the most consistent, I guess...

 

[clonetrooper264]

Technically speaking, playing no defense is equivalent of not even bothering to challenge shots or fight through screens and the like. Ben fights through screens and challenges shots. That's technically playing defense. Now he's not great and either of them, but he's not absolutely horrible like he was his rookie year. He's an average defender at best, no one's saying he became Kirk Hinrich or something Most nights Ben Gordon's defense is enough to keep the opposing SG from scoring well over his season average. I'd consider that average defense, which means he must be playing defense

Honestly if he played 0 defense, Kobe and Roy and Ray Allen would average 40+ points against us for the whole season like say...LeBron did on Luol. Give credit where credit is due, he at least tries on defense.

 

[houheffna]

Playing no defense means you suck at it, whether its lack of trying or lack of effectiveness. If you play no defense or you play sucky defense....you are ineffective. And if you want to call huggin' a screener like he just came home from a tour of duty in Iraq, "fighting through a screen"....okay!

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

Playing no defense means you suck at it, whether its lack of trying or lack of effectiveness. If you play no defense or you play sucky defense....you are ineffective. And if you want to call huggin' a screener like he just came home from a tour of duty in Iraq, "fighting through a screen"....okay!

If his defense is soooooo bad, who lit him up. In a league full of at least 4 coachs per team, someone would have figured out (besides you) that his D is that bad and exploited it. Who exploited BG? WHo lit him up? Obviously with such a bad defender, at the postion with that has so many talented and taller scorers, someone would have done it? Back up your nonsense or stop spewing the classic anti BG propaganda.

 

[clonetrooper264]

houheffna wrote:

Playing no defense means you suck at it, whether its lack of trying or lack of effectiveness. If you play no defense or you play sucky defense....you are ineffective. And if you want to call huggin' a screener like he just came home from a tour of duty in Iraq, "fighting through a screen"....okay!

So sucky defense equates to what, then?

 

[houheffna]

Back up your nonsense or stop spewing the classic anti BG propaganda.

Don't need to spew propoganda about other teams players. What's next, you are going to call me a drone? I think you are more of a propogandist than I am sir.

Sucky defense is what both starting backcourt players had a problem with. The ability to keep the opposing guard with the ball in front of the defender was a consistent problem last season. At both positions. As bad as Rose played, Gordon was not good at keeping opposing SGs in front of him either.

That is one of the 2 things he was bad at defensively. Gordon also cannot make the adjustments needed for a player his height to defend taller, bigger players. That is what I talked about in the past as far as players like Joe Dumars and Alvin Robertson, who were about the same height as Gordon, had the ability to adjust past any physical inadequacies. He is not skillful on the defensive side of the ball at all. Some players his size who are not good on the ball defenders then adjust by playing passing lanes and creating turnovers. He is not good at that either.

If he is average defensively, why do they sub him out? Answer that? It makes no sense to sub him out and possibly have an offensive possesion happen and they don't have their best clutch player in the game. Even Del Negro did it and he was out of timeouts! And who would they sub in? A player that is the same size as Gordon who can ball up defensively. I think that says all that needs to be said.

I don't have to propogate anything about decent players who are no longer on the team, makes no sense. I am done with the Gordon stuff. I think Kukoc is better, I think Gordon and Kukoc are both weak defensively. That is how I feel.

 

[engies]

Just accept the fact that no matter how right you are, you cant change hou's mind. he's been head strong with his argument no matter how many times he was proven wrong. I almost want to betray chicago and see Ben Gordon kill us every time we meet just to shove it in Hou's face

Not personal but just sick of the nonsensical debate here

 

[RC_Skinny22]

But this is what this forum is all about. Imagine all guys in here would have the same opinion. Boring as hell huh?

Hou is a guy who trusts his eyes more than stats. Not too bad cause there are a lot of plays in a game you can´t find in a scorebox.

And I still say you can´t compare these two guys.

 

[??? ??????]

engies wrote:

Just accept the fact that no matter how right you are, you cant change hou's mind. he's been head strong with his argument no matter how many times he was proven wrong. I almost want to betray chicago and see Ben Gordon kill us every time we meet just to shove it in Hou's face

Not personal but just sick of the nonsensical debate here

The worst part is that he is messing up the entire Gordon stinks at defense argument.

What Gordon does well defensively, is staying in front of his man and contesting shots. What Gordon does poorly is chasing around his man in motion and off screens.

If hou wants to go find a few games where Gordon got torched repeatedly because of his man driving to the basket, he can go ahead.

The burden of showing proof for his claims is on him.

 

[houheffna]

Just accept the fact that no matter how right you are, you cant change hou's mind. he's been head strong with his argument no matter how many times he was proven wrong. I almost want to betray chicago and see Ben Gordon kill us every time we meet just to shove it in Hou's face

Not personal but just sick of the nonsensical debate here

You would have to prove smarter guys than me wrong with that argument....That said, Gordon should be a good fantasy league player, the fantasy league is filling up with owners, get in while you still can...go to the Fantasy League thread started by me and join the league. We should have a lot of fun....

 

[Newskoolbulls]

Tuff.

Kukoc was part of a dynasty while BG was part of our resurgence.

 

[TheStig]

houheffna wrote:

Back up your nonsense or stop spewing the classic anti BG propaganda.

Don't need to spew propoganda about other teams players. What's next, you are going to call me a drone? I think you are more of a propogandist than I am sir.

Sucky defense is what both starting backcourt players had a problem with. The ability to keep the opposing guard with the ball in front of the defender was a consistent problem last season. At both positions. As bad as Rose played, Gordon was not good at keeping opposing SGs in front of him either.

That is one of the 2 things he was bad at defensively. Gordon also cannot make the adjustments needed for a player his height to defend taller, bigger players. That is what I talked about in the past as far as players like Joe Dumars and Alvin Robertson, who were about the same height as Gordon, had the ability to adjust past any physical inadequacies. He is not skillful on the defensive side of the ball at all. Some players his size who are not good on the ball defenders then adjust by playing passing lanes and creating turnovers. He is not good at that either.

If he is average defensively, why do they sub him out? Answer that? It makes no sense to sub him out and possibly have an offensive possesion happen and they don't have their best clutch player in the game. Even Del Negro did it and he was out of timeouts! And who would they sub in? A player that is the same size as Gordon who can ball up defensively. I think that says all that needs to be said.

I don't have to propogate anything about decent players who are no longer on the team, makes no sense. I am done with the Gordon stuff. I think Kukoc is better, I think Gordon and Kukoc are both weak defensively. That is how I feel.

If you are referring to the playoffs, it was because BG injured his hamstring. For most of the regular season BG was closing out games. But for the third time, if BG is so bad defensively you must be able to point to at least 20-30 games that BG got lit up. The proof is in the results. You even said that Roy and Bryant would destroy him and it turns out he held them below their season averages. The point is if he is so bad defensively and played 36mpg for the whole year, you should be able to find games he got killed. Espically when Kirk was out in the beginning of the year. But it didn't happen did it? We got killed at every other position defensively except SG, where BG didn't shut down people but he didn't give up huge games either. So the proof is in the results. BG was our most consistent player on both sides of the court. No one is saying he should be on the all defensive team but he is not a liability either. And if you do think BG is a defensive liability, you should be all over rose since he got absolutely destroyed defensively.

 

[??? ??????]

Ben Gordon also played some defense by offense, as it took quite a bit of effort to chase around Gordon on defense for the opposing team.