|
On June 18 2009 16:01 Xeris wrote:
Ben Gordon would be an amazing 6th man.... I don't know why you guys think they should dump him. If they can get a fair contract for him, he would be great
Problem will be signing Ben Gordon for the price of a 6th man. With the way the NBA salary cap is structured and the state of the economy right now, only the Knicks, Blazers and maybe a couple more teams are willing to go way over the cap and pay the obscene luxury tax.
I totally agree with you that Ben Gordon would make an amazing 6th man, kinda like Jason Terry. But both those guys do not have the size and defensive abilities to be a starting 2 on a championship caliber team. If you can sign Ben Gordon for the price of a 6th man, that is definitely a good move. But if you give him the big bucks that it will likely take to sign him, then you will not have the resources to get the pieces that you need to put together a championship team.
Going back to my earlier post about trevor ariza, if I were the GM of most NBA teams, I would rather sign ariza for the same amount of money than ben gordon. Sounds ridiculous, but ariza has the potential to upgrade his offense and become a championship team quality starter while Ben Gordon will forever be limited defensively due to his size. Only a team like cleveland that is already solid defensively and a championship contending team that lacks some offensive firepower would benefit from signing a Ben Gordon to an expensive contract.
Everything is relative and guys like Ben Gordon are almost always overvalued. Getting him for a fair contract therefore is virtually impossible.
|
Braavos36402 Posts
I don't think that's crazy at all, if Ariza plays like he did in these playoffs he's far more valuable than Ben Gordon, who plays no defense and needs a lot of shots. There aren't many guys who are as tall as Ariza, can play D like that, and can shoot 40%+ from 3
|
I agree with many things mentioned already. But picking Ariza or Gordon depends entirely on what other players are on that team. Ariza played his role almost perfectly. But he plays in a system that allows him to focus on his defense and get open looks in the offense. You also have to take into consideration the fact that he plays with a playmaker like Kobe Bryant and a force down low in Pau Gasol alongside other pieces on that Laker team.
Ben Gordon on the other hand has more pressure on his shoulders and also has to create his own shot. Sure, his defense isn't as good as Ariza's. And he's undersized. I don't disagree. But if Ariza and Gordon were to switch places, I highly doubt Ariza would experience the same success he had this postseason if he were to play on the Bulls and their current roster. That doesn't mean that Gordon would flourish in LA.
Or switching Ariza with Prince and having Ariza play in detroit. To the person who would take Ariza over Prince. I'm curious but why? I'm not trying to HATE on Ariza. He played great throughout the postseason. But choosing a player for a team has more to it than just individual performance.
|
By the way, I'm not a fan of Gordon at all as a starter. I think he's completely overrated and a waste of money. 
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
Gordon = Nick van Exel + streaky jumper - court vision
|
Not at all. They play totally different roles:
1) Van Exel was a PG - he was like a pre-Marbury/Francis generation "scoring" PG (who also was able to dish out quite a few assists)
2) Gordon is a SG and his entire role is to come in the game and shoot 15 shots and score 20-25 points.
|
United States4471 Posts
Gordon is more like a poor man's Ray Allen.
|
On June 20 2009 01:50 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
Gordon is more like a poor man's Ray Allen.
LOL
Man, that Chicago and Celtics series was pretty epic between those two UConn shooters.
|
|
|
I liked Van Exel
|
On June 20 2009 01:50 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
Gordon is more like a poor man's Ray Allen.
that's not really true... I would say gordon is closer to Jason Terry in the way that he can be a solid 3 point shooter but he's more of a PG/SG hybrid than a catch and shoot guy like Ray
|
United States4471 Posts
On June 20 2009 07:35 bdams19 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2009 01:50 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
Gordon is more like a poor man's Ray Allen. that's not really true... I would say gordon is closer to Jason Terry in the way that he can be a solid 3 point shooter but he's more of a PG/SG hybrid than a catch and shoot guy like Ray
I'd agree except that Terry has some PG-ish skills that Gordon doesn't. I think even Ray has more PG skills than Gordon actually, as he's a better playmaker (in my opinion).
While you're right in that Gordon and Terry are not as good at catching and shooting as Ray, they can knock down spot up jumpers about as well as anyone in the league. I don't see a significant difference really.
Another possible comparison for Gordon is that he's a much shorter, quicker Redd.
|
Chinese investors from the cavs wanna try and get yao ming, wouldnt it be fuckin awesome if yao and lebron played together?
|
they probably wouldn't play much together because chances are Yao will miss another 50 games. =P
|
Dude needs to drink more milk
|
On June 17 2009 01:51 ProwL wrote:
Lakers for 09-10 Champions once again kthx. ;]
more like cavs, they're hungry
|
On June 20 2009 14:16 BalliSLife wrote:
Chinese investors from the cavs wanna try and get yao ming, wouldnt it be fuckin awesome if yao and lebron played together?
they're thinking about getting shaq (cavs) shaq is way better than yao.
and like with kobe/shaq, 3 championships, shaq can help lebron get his first
|
I'll be really surprised if Shaq can still put up 19/10 next year.
|
On June 21 2009 02:07 Tehinf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2009 01:51 ProwL wrote:
Lakers for 09-10 Champions once again kthx. ;] more like cavs, they're hungry
I hate that term, "they're hungry".
|
cavs have been hungry
and failed
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
