??? ??????
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 2, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,435
- Liked Posts:
- 4
- Location:
- Columbia, MO
J-Mart
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 289
- Liked Posts:
- 1
You go KC Johnson, fix those drones. Nice to know someone in the media is actually watching the Bulls.
??? ??????
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 2, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,435
- Liked Posts:
- 4
- Location:
- Columbia, MO
J-Mart wrote:
Just wait until someone drags up the article of K.C. Johnson accusing Ben Gordon of pouting over failed contract negotiations and milking a jammed big right toe....
Just wait until someone drags up the article of K.C. Johnson accusing Ben Gordon of pouting over failed contract negotiations and milking a jammed big right toe....
Gene
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 28, 2009
- Posts:
- 164
- Liked Posts:
- 0
- Location:
- Bradley, IL
Ben is just a super consistent basketball player. It will be hard to find another SG to go next to Rose that scores 21 PPG and plays 82 games per season. Hopefully we figure out a way to keep him.
Fred
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 982
- Liked Posts:
- 7
I also saw that KC had a note about Ben being our leading scorer for 4 straight seasons. He's really come around. He's our one shining light in the community of drones who cover this team.
dougthonus
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 13, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,665
- Liked Posts:
- 9
I think Gordon definitely could have played in preseason if he wanted to, but there was no great purpose in it.
I would bet his refusal to play in preseason and the emergence of Rose is a good portion of why the Bulls opted not to pick up his contract when Gordon blew the deadline and changed his mind.
I would bet if Gordon had played more in that preseason that they would have picked up the option, but his whole refusal to play and managements questions about him really being hurt probably left that slight amount of negative taste in their mouths to push them over the edge.
I would bet his refusal to play in preseason and the emergence of Rose is a good portion of why the Bulls opted not to pick up his contract when Gordon blew the deadline and changed his mind.
I would bet if Gordon had played more in that preseason that they would have picked up the option, but his whole refusal to play and managements questions about him really being hurt probably left that slight amount of negative taste in their mouths to push them over the edge.
cool007
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 688
- Liked Posts:
- 2
- Location:
- Mundelein
If that is the case, screw this management.
You have to look at the history of a player. He has been one of the most durable player last 4+ years and is THE MOST Durable player we have so far. He also goes to the free throw line the most of any Bulls player last few years and does take pounding as a lot of times they don't even make calls.
I have been saying this all along but a player like him is NOT EASY to find. He is durable, one of the BEST PURE shooters all around at a 2 guard and he never complains (he has been jerked the most in and out of lineup) yet, he gets all the blame in the world.
1 word comes to mind "UNDER-APPRECIATED".
Give the guy money and send out other guys.
IMO, You have 3 players set for sure for next year (Rose/Gordon/Salmons) now depending on what package we can put together, we can keep 1 of Tyrus/Noah and ship out Deng. I rather keep Hinrich but too much for a backup guard.
You have to look at the history of a player. He has been one of the most durable player last 4+ years and is THE MOST Durable player we have so far. He also goes to the free throw line the most of any Bulls player last few years and does take pounding as a lot of times they don't even make calls.
I have been saying this all along but a player like him is NOT EASY to find. He is durable, one of the BEST PURE shooters all around at a 2 guard and he never complains (he has been jerked the most in and out of lineup) yet, he gets all the blame in the world.
1 word comes to mind "UNDER-APPRECIATED".
Give the guy money and send out other guys.
IMO, You have 3 players set for sure for next year (Rose/Gordon/Salmons) now depending on what package we can put together, we can keep 1 of Tyrus/Noah and ship out Deng. I rather keep Hinrich but too much for a backup guard.
dougthonus
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 13, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,665
- Liked Posts:
- 9
cool007 wrote:
I don't think it's that simple. Prior to this year, Gordon had basically one really good year in his career 06/07. In 04/05 he had a very memorable year due to the clutch shots, but his overall performance was extraordinarily shaky as he was usually an absolute train wreck early in games.
In 05/06, his overall performance was more steady, but his clutchness disappeared.
In 06/07 he had an outstanding year.
In 07/08 he had played quite a bit worse than 06/07, but still had a decent year.
Deng's years are basically in the exact same pattern.
At this point, management figured that Deng had the same general markers on him as Gordon but was three years younger and had legit size for his position, and he seemed like a guy who would fit in perfectly with Rose, so they bet on Deng offered Gordon what they had left and moved on.
That thought process isn't unreasonable to me. Now this year brings that into doubt, because now Gordon has had a second outstanding year while Deng has had perhaps the worst year of his career and looks injury prone. However, I'm not sure it's fair to blame management for not predicting that Gordon would have the best year of his career and Deng would have the worst when prior to that point their levels of play were similar and Deng seemed like the better fit next to Rose because of his size and off the ball ability.
Now that this thought process has been blown up, we'll see how management puts itself back on a path. The problem is that with the economic collapse, they can no longer move Deng most likely. So they're not in a position where they can easily do anything with Gordon. I think they would definitely swap out the two if possible, but quite simply, it probably isn't possible.
I don't think it's that simple. Prior to this year, Gordon had basically one really good year in his career 06/07. In 04/05 he had a very memorable year due to the clutch shots, but his overall performance was extraordinarily shaky as he was usually an absolute train wreck early in games.
In 05/06, his overall performance was more steady, but his clutchness disappeared.
In 06/07 he had an outstanding year.
In 07/08 he had played quite a bit worse than 06/07, but still had a decent year.
Deng's years are basically in the exact same pattern.
At this point, management figured that Deng had the same general markers on him as Gordon but was three years younger and had legit size for his position, and he seemed like a guy who would fit in perfectly with Rose, so they bet on Deng offered Gordon what they had left and moved on.
That thought process isn't unreasonable to me. Now this year brings that into doubt, because now Gordon has had a second outstanding year while Deng has had perhaps the worst year of his career and looks injury prone. However, I'm not sure it's fair to blame management for not predicting that Gordon would have the best year of his career and Deng would have the worst when prior to that point their levels of play were similar and Deng seemed like the better fit next to Rose because of his size and off the ball ability.
Now that this thought process has been blown up, we'll see how management puts itself back on a path. The problem is that with the economic collapse, they can no longer move Deng most likely. So they're not in a position where they can easily do anything with Gordon. I think they would definitely swap out the two if possible, but quite simply, it probably isn't possible.
dougthonus
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 13, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,665
- Liked Posts:
- 9
As for my thoughts that preseason effected their decision on Gordon, I agree it wouldn't necessarily have been a good thought. I'm only speculating anyway.
However, you have a situation where the Bulls have an offer out to Gordon for a long time.
Gordon let's the offer expire.
Gordon changes his mind a day later.
Nothing has really changed in the Bulls financial situation over that day, so if they wanted him a day earlier, they should still want him now. They reportedly think about it real hard are conflicted about it and decide no.
All I can speculate on is that the most recent events that happened put a bad taste in their mouth, and that would be Gordon missing preseason and Gordon letting the deadline pass. My guess is they just felt like "enough with this guy he's not reasonable, we don't want to deal with him for the next 6 years".
I'm obviously just making that up, but it just seems to make the most sense. It was a poor decision to let their emotions get in the way, but they had to have let them get in the way, because there was no tangible economic change in the day between the offer expiring and Gordon saying he changed his mind. It's not like the Bulls had to leave the offer on the table until that day and were hoping he'd say no. They could have pulled it at any time.
Therefore, I think there was something personal going on there when they changed their minds.
However, you have a situation where the Bulls have an offer out to Gordon for a long time.
Gordon let's the offer expire.
Gordon changes his mind a day later.
Nothing has really changed in the Bulls financial situation over that day, so if they wanted him a day earlier, they should still want him now. They reportedly think about it real hard are conflicted about it and decide no.
All I can speculate on is that the most recent events that happened put a bad taste in their mouth, and that would be Gordon missing preseason and Gordon letting the deadline pass. My guess is they just felt like "enough with this guy he's not reasonable, we don't want to deal with him for the next 6 years".
I'm obviously just making that up, but it just seems to make the most sense. It was a poor decision to let their emotions get in the way, but they had to have let them get in the way, because there was no tangible economic change in the day between the offer expiring and Gordon saying he changed his mind. It's not like the Bulls had to leave the offer on the table until that day and were hoping he'd say no. They could have pulled it at any time.
Therefore, I think there was something personal going on there when they changed their minds.
cool007
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 688
- Liked Posts:
- 2
- Location:
- Mundelein
Well, what's done, is done. I just hope management doesn't make the same mistake again and I really hope BG is back even if we had to pay Tax THIS year. It's just 1 year IMO.
If it was a player like Tim Thomas/Hughes/Duhon/Gray etc, you don't think twice and let them go somewhere else but player like Gordon, don't grow on trees.
Also, didn't JR said, he doesn't mind paying for a winner? Aren't we a winning team? Aren't we going to the playoffs (meaning more money for JR), so IMO, he should be able to afford BG for this coming year even with the tax.
besides, Jerome James contract is covered by insurance right? So we will be saving money there (JR's pocket).
If it was a player like Tim Thomas/Hughes/Duhon/Gray etc, you don't think twice and let them go somewhere else but player like Gordon, don't grow on trees.
Also, didn't JR said, he doesn't mind paying for a winner? Aren't we a winning team? Aren't we going to the playoffs (meaning more money for JR), so IMO, he should be able to afford BG for this coming year even with the tax.
besides, Jerome James contract is covered by insurance right? So we will be saving money there (JR's pocket).
Fred
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 982
- Liked Posts:
- 7
dougthonus wrote:
Fred
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 982
- Liked Posts:
- 7
dougthonus wrote:
The Bulls first preseason game was on 10.9.08. The Bulls pulled the contract off the table before that, and he signed the one-year tender on September 30th or October 1st. When did training camp start? Are you faulting him for not practicing when he hadn't yet signed a contract?
Practicing with the team when you don't have a contract in place is either a violation of the collective bargaining agreement or one of the dumbest possible things a player can do. Tyson Chandler did absolutely nothing for an entire summer and fall in 2005, but that didn't prevent the Bulls to make him a very rich man at the end of September 2005. This was basically the exact same situation. At least Gordon was working out and keeping in shape.
There is no excuse for what the Bulls did. It will go down as one of the dumbest moves in the history of the organization when he walks this summer.
The Bulls first preseason game was on 10.9.08. The Bulls pulled the contract off the table before that, and he signed the one-year tender on September 30th or October 1st. When did training camp start? Are you faulting him for not practicing when he hadn't yet signed a contract?
Practicing with the team when you don't have a contract in place is either a violation of the collective bargaining agreement or one of the dumbest possible things a player can do. Tyson Chandler did absolutely nothing for an entire summer and fall in 2005, but that didn't prevent the Bulls to make him a very rich man at the end of September 2005. This was basically the exact same situation. At least Gordon was working out and keeping in shape.
There is no excuse for what the Bulls did. It will go down as one of the dumbest moves in the history of the organization when he walks this summer.
Morten Jensen
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 237
- Liked Posts:
- 0
People tend to forget how close Ben was to getting that ROY back then. My Jordan he was brilliant late in games. He manufactored shots that were just crazy, and they went down with consistency.
As for the contract talks..
If Ben Gordon rejects a fair deal due to the bad taste in his mouth last year, then I won't blame the Bulls, but I'll understand why Gordon declined. If the Bulls low-ball him, or doesn't even show any sign of wanting to keep him, then I blame the Bulls and, like Fred, call it one hell of a screw-up. You'd be left with the two worst players of your previous three-headed monster which is downright stupid.
As for the contract talks..
If Ben Gordon rejects a fair deal due to the bad taste in his mouth last year, then I won't blame the Bulls, but I'll understand why Gordon declined. If the Bulls low-ball him, or doesn't even show any sign of wanting to keep him, then I blame the Bulls and, like Fred, call it one hell of a screw-up. You'd be left with the two worst players of your previous three-headed monster which is downright stupid.
Fred
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 982
- Liked Posts:
- 7
Morten Jensen wrote:
http://www.82games.com/clutchplayers.htm
That says it all. Number 2 that year, behind Kobe. A 4th quarter performer is infinitely more valuable than a guy who plays well in the beginning of games, then chokes at the end. The defense ramps up at the end of games. AND HE DID THIS WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF FOUL CALLS. It was an absolutely incredible year.
http://www.82games.com/clutchplayers.htm
That says it all. Number 2 that year, behind Kobe. A 4th quarter performer is infinitely more valuable than a guy who plays well in the beginning of games, then chokes at the end. The defense ramps up at the end of games. AND HE DID THIS WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF FOUL CALLS. It was an absolutely incredible year.
??? ??????
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 2, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,435
- Liked Posts:
- 4
- Location:
- Columbia, MO
Fred wrote:
I agree with this. Rookie Year, Gordon was miles ahead of Deng, and the main catalyst for the Bulls resurgence. In 05-06, Deng was an afterthought. The trio that led us into the playoffs was Hinrich-Gordon-Nocioni. In 06-07, when Deng actually stepped up and put together a good year, Gordon was better, putting up the best year by any Bull post-Jordan. In 07-08, Gordon was averaging 20.2 PPG on the season before the Hughes trade, at which point his minutes got slashed, culminating in a 22 MPG April! Gordon had a TS% that was good, Deng's wasn't very acceptable. Gordon, again, clearly better. In 08-09, Deng has been a joke (I don't think anyone will argue with this), while Gordon has been great, putting up the second best season by a Bull since Jordan.
There was not a point in their careers where Deng was better than Gordon imo. I agreed with the signing of Luol Deng, but always thought Ben Gordon should have been the first priority, because he is so much better. I wanted them both signed, but if it came down to one or the other, Gordon was the guy getting the contract, if I was the GM.
I think what Gordon is doing was entirely predictable. Here is what I wrote about Gordon on October 12th, before the season.
I agree with this. Rookie Year, Gordon was miles ahead of Deng, and the main catalyst for the Bulls resurgence. In 05-06, Deng was an afterthought. The trio that led us into the playoffs was Hinrich-Gordon-Nocioni. In 06-07, when Deng actually stepped up and put together a good year, Gordon was better, putting up the best year by any Bull post-Jordan. In 07-08, Gordon was averaging 20.2 PPG on the season before the Hughes trade, at which point his minutes got slashed, culminating in a 22 MPG April! Gordon had a TS% that was good, Deng's wasn't very acceptable. Gordon, again, clearly better. In 08-09, Deng has been a joke (I don't think anyone will argue with this), while Gordon has been great, putting up the second best season by a Bull since Jordan.
There was not a point in their careers where Deng was better than Gordon imo. I agreed with the signing of Luol Deng, but always thought Ben Gordon should have been the first priority, because he is so much better. I wanted them both signed, but if it came down to one or the other, Gordon was the guy getting the contract, if I was the GM.
I think what Gordon is doing was entirely predictable. Here is what I wrote about Gordon on October 12th, before the season.
cool007
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 688
- Liked Posts:
- 2
- Location:
- Mundelein
Completely Agree with Both of you P03 and Fred.
I actually couldn't have said better myself.
IMO, before this year, Hinrich/Deng were VERY HIGHLY regarded players over Gordon and pretty much everyone Coaching staff (whoever we had), Media, front office and a lot of fans. All were really high on Deng and Hinrich and Gordon was just (has been) under-appreciated - it's not even funny.
Even in that down year (07-08), he was STILL balling and still averaged about 20 a game with good efficiency. While Hinrich and Deng were far worse and had so many more bad games.
But still BG got the worse of it with NO CONTRACT while both Hinrich and Deng got SUPER Rich.
This is why I hope Bulls make up for it and pay the man - even if we had to trade Deng and/or Hinrich.
I actually couldn't have said better myself.
IMO, before this year, Hinrich/Deng were VERY HIGHLY regarded players over Gordon and pretty much everyone Coaching staff (whoever we had), Media, front office and a lot of fans. All were really high on Deng and Hinrich and Gordon was just (has been) under-appreciated - it's not even funny.
Even in that down year (07-08), he was STILL balling and still averaged about 20 a game with good efficiency. While Hinrich and Deng were far worse and had so many more bad games.
But still BG got the worse of it with NO CONTRACT while both Hinrich and Deng got SUPER Rich.
This is why I hope Bulls make up for it and pay the man - even if we had to trade Deng and/or Hinrich.
Kush77
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 15, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,096
- Liked Posts:
- 150
I saw this today and I remember when the silly idea that he was sitting out in retaliation was being talked about. Just moronic.
Good to see KC talk so glowingly about Ben now.
Good to see KC talk so glowingly about Ben now.
charity stripe
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 30, 2009
- Posts:
- 364
- Liked Posts:
- 1
I think both Doug and Fred/Morten are right. Gordon was certainly clutch as hell in his rookie season, but I remember Skiles, even after BG's 4th quarter heroics, would criticize him by saying he needs to 'bring it' the entire game, and not just the 4th quarter.
Also, remember the first month or so of his rookie season, he was playing some awful basketball. It was still obviously a very good rookie season, but I could see why some think it was also a shaky one.
And Fred, he's not walking this summer. He will sign will the Bulls.
Also, remember the first month or so of his rookie season, he was playing some awful basketball. It was still obviously a very good rookie season, but I could see why some think it was also a shaky one.
And Fred, he's not walking this summer. He will sign will the Bulls.
Bullsman24
Mr Metta World Peace
- Joined:
- May 10, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,403
- Liked Posts:
- 51
haha, i love how in your article, you say gordon was boylan'd
i think john paxson REALLY wants to bring gordon back, but reinsdorf is being himself.
i actually see gordon coming back next year. he's not a selfish guy, as shown by all his teammates loving him, and i think pax loves him too
he's an efficient scorer, hard to come by in this league. i mean for god's sake, he shot 3-14 a couple of weeks ago and got 18 points, and still won the game for the bulls. which of course brings me to how clutch he is. ben gordon has hit virtually every play that we have needed him to hit at the end of games.
fred mentioned that 82 games article, and he's even a more clutch player now. he just goes crazy from three, and even in games where he hasn't hit the winning shot (which idk if there even have been any) he scored pretty much every point in the fourth.
if derrick rose had given those shots that he's taken to bg7, we would probably have more like 48-50 games, and been way up there. if derrick rose doesn't develop that clutchness, ben gordon would be the absolutely perfect choice to be next to rose, cuz gordon could be the clutch player.
if gordon was 2-3 inches taller, he'd be an all-star and every fan in the nba would love him. he just gets a bad rap cuz he's considered short, although he's really not that short. gordon would be considered a no-lose. i think he'd probably be considered a less athletic vince carter, and be loved the same way.
i think john paxson REALLY wants to bring gordon back, but reinsdorf is being himself.
i actually see gordon coming back next year. he's not a selfish guy, as shown by all his teammates loving him, and i think pax loves him too
he's an efficient scorer, hard to come by in this league. i mean for god's sake, he shot 3-14 a couple of weeks ago and got 18 points, and still won the game for the bulls. which of course brings me to how clutch he is. ben gordon has hit virtually every play that we have needed him to hit at the end of games.
fred mentioned that 82 games article, and he's even a more clutch player now. he just goes crazy from three, and even in games where he hasn't hit the winning shot (which idk if there even have been any) he scored pretty much every point in the fourth.
if derrick rose had given those shots that he's taken to bg7, we would probably have more like 48-50 games, and been way up there. if derrick rose doesn't develop that clutchness, ben gordon would be the absolutely perfect choice to be next to rose, cuz gordon could be the clutch player.
if gordon was 2-3 inches taller, he'd be an all-star and every fan in the nba would love him. he just gets a bad rap cuz he's considered short, although he's really not that short. gordon would be considered a no-lose. i think he'd probably be considered a less athletic vince carter, and be loved the same way.
??? ??????
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 2, 2009
- Posts:
- 2,435
- Liked Posts:
- 4
- Location:
- Columbia, MO
bullsman24, I agree with most of what you said, but Ben Gordon actually is really short. However, he does make up for it with long arms and great strength. He is short, but that isn't really all that important because of his other features.
The only problem Ben has, is that he can't really shoot over the 6'6" shooting guards like say, John Salmons does. John Salmons, with a defender on him, will often just measure up a shot, because he can see over the player. Ben can't really do that, unless a point guard's on him, and that's really the only thing where I think Ben's height actually affects him.
The only problem Ben has, is that he can't really shoot over the 6'6" shooting guards like say, John Salmons does. John Salmons, with a defender on him, will often just measure up a shot, because he can see over the player. Ben can't really do that, unless a point guard's on him, and that's really the only thing where I think Ben's height actually affects him.
