<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dtay @ Jun 30 2008, 12:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I agree on trading Kirk, as you said, too much for a backup, not good enough to start at the 2. The only issue I have with BG is that 6th man is a perfect role for him. But he seems intent on being a starter. I think it just puts us under too much pressure to have him as a starting 2 long term. He can't play 2 down the other end. That puts us under a lot of pressure defensively because there are a lot of good 2's in the league. Also he can't pay the 1 on the offensive end, he is pretty much only a 1 dimensional scorer. I don't think such a kind of player is worth $10M+ annually. I'd give it to him in a heartbeat if he was a 7 footer though. The Tmac idea is intriguing, but would be extremely difficult if not impossible to pull off, even with TMac's stock dropping in the last couple of years...</div> You know, I went and looked at the numbers a while back and it looks to me that Ben's most always played better as a starter when there was a difference to see at all. As to whether the Bulls are better with Gordon coming off the bench, I think it depends on his teammates. A lot of his deficiencies are covered up (just like any guard's) by having a really good set of defensive guys in the frontcourt. When he was playing with motivated Ben Wallace, PJ, AD, and Tyson he, and our other guards, looked like much better defenders than they actually are. I think that's a problem for Kirk as well. Last year they always looked like garbage because no one had any fear of Wallace or Joe Smith or Tyrus or Noah. With age and experience Tyrus and Noah might get there but they were just too young. Moving forward, having someone up front that actually scared people wouldn't be a bad thing either.
I have to agree that Kirk does a lot of things all-around, but if you take Gordon off the team, you lose the only guy we've had who frequently (enough) scored 10+ points in a quarter, particularly Q4s. That in itself makes him a rare player in this league. As for PG, 82games.com has him at a 19.7 PER in 11% of the team's minutes at PG, which is an impressive figure. Not that PER is the be-all/end-all, it's a good starting point for discussing why Ben Gordon can or can't play PG. C'mon, though. Everyone fears Brother Abraham!
My only problem with Gordon is that he has a streaky jumpshot and is a bad defender. But he is still trade bait because of his shooting ability.
Mike you raise a great point. Having good defensive bigs makes a huge difference to your defense. Just looking at Boston you can see the difference it makes, even PP and Allen were doing great jobs on Kobe in the finals with KG watching their back. Too bad its hard to get menacing bigs these days. Therefore unless like you said, get teammates to cover his deficiencies, then it might be better to sign and trade him. We will struggle in the short term but depending on what we can get in the mean time we could be better in the next couple of years. Especially if we can grab one a big FA in 2010.
Between Ben and Kirk I would prefer to keep Ben Gordon on the roster, just because I feel he is more of a pure scorer then Kirk and would be a better fit at shooting guard. Also by now having a big point guard, with the acquisition of D-Rose we no longer have to worry about running an undersized back court. However, 10 million a year for Gordon I don't know at this point.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 30 2008, 09:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If we did trade Kirk, then maybe it'd be a good idea to re-sign Duhon?</div> Thabo, Hughes, Curry, Gordon, and Rose Although, it can be argued that if Hinrich is traded the only pure point left of the roster is Rose, with five guards already under contract I can't see us resigning Duhon and having half the minimum of an NBA roster comprised of guards. For the record though, I do love Duhon as a floor leader, but its time we see what we got in Thabo so I don't think Pax will bring him back.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Blur @ Jun 30 2008, 09:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 30 2008, 09:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If we did trade Kirk, then maybe it'd be a good idea to re-sign Duhon?</div> Thabo, Hughes, Curry, Gordon, and Rose Although, it can be argued that if Hinrich is traded the only pure point left of the roster is Rose, with five guards already under contract I can't see us resigning Duhon and having half the minimum of an NBA roster comprised of guards. For the record though, I do love Duhon as a floor leader, but its time we see what we got in Thabo so I don't think Pax will bring him back. </div> Duhon instead of Curry. Thabo and Hughes can handle the ball OK, but aren't PG material. Thabo's handling ability makes him a SF/SG instead of just a SF... I actually liked what I saw of Gordon at PG last season, but he's not a pure PG (yet) by any stretch. He's the kind of PG that gets rid of the ball early in the clock and someone else gets the assist on the basket.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Blur @ Jun 30 2008, 10:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Between Ben and Kirk I would prefer to keep Ben Gordon on the roster, just because I feel he is more of a pure scorer then Kirk and would be a better fit at shooting guard. Also by now having a big point guard, with the acquisition of D-Rose we no longer have to worry about running an undersized back court. However, 10 million a year for Gordon I don't know at this point.</div> Rose isn't a big point guard. His height was always overstated. At the pre-draft camp, he measured out at 6'1.5" w/out socks. Kirk is an inch taller than him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Rose isn't a big point guard. His height was always overstated. At the pre-draft camp, he measured out at 6'1.5" w/out socks. Kirk is an inch taller than him.</div> About 3/4" shorter in shoes, but Rose has a longer reach and wingspan by a couple of inches. Head to head, Rose is a smidge shorter, but his arms let him play taller than Kirk.
Yeah, I posted before about how he seems to get shorter and shorter every time they measured him I think 6'2" or 6'3" is probably right, depending on shoes off/on.
According to the official pre-draft measurements he was 6' 1.5" w/o shoes. If you look at all the numbers available, he comes out pretty favorably compared to the other recent top PG prospects: Player Ht Wt Ws Re Vert Bench Agil Sprint Rose 6' 1.5 196 6' 8 8' 2.5 40 10 11.69 3.05 Paul 5' 11.75 178 6' 4.25 7' 9 38 10 11.09 3.22 D. Will 6' 1.75 202 6' 6.25 8' 2 35 15 10.83 3.25 Conley 5' 11.75 175 6' 5.75 7' 10.5 40.5 13 11.63 3.09 Duhon 6' 193 6' 6.5 8' 2 35 7 10.45 3.14 Gordon 6'1 192 6' 8.5 8' 3 37.5 12 11.28 3.19 Hinrich 6' 2.75 186 6' 6 8' 2.5" 33.5 10 10.98 3.1 Ford 5' 11 162 5' 11.5" 7' 9.5" 39.5 11.45 3.2 Wade 6' 3.75 212 6' 10.75 8' 6 35 9 10.56 3.08 Rose is at the uppper end of the list in terms of pretty much everything except his lane agility score. My guess is that there he simply tested poorly... it seems unlikely to me that he was very good at everything else but somehow dreadfully stiff.
So where does the scoring come from if we let Gordon go? More importantly, what's the purpose of these draft picks if we don't pay them when they pan out? Isn't the idea to build, not spin our wheels. Rose, Gordon, Deng is a young trio to build around.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ Jul 2 2008, 10:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>So where does the scoring come from if we let Gordon go? More importantly, what's the purpose of these draft picks if we don't pay them when they pan out? Isn't the idea to build, not spin our wheels. Rose, Gordon, Deng is a young trio to build around.</div> Funny thing is I was thinking about this very thing yesterday and was formulating a post about it. When Pax dealt Crawford and Curry, we asked "where's the scoring going to come from?" The team is going to score 75-80 PPG probably no matter what, even with all NBDL guys, so there will be some scoring... When Crawford left, we added Gordon, Deng, and Nocioni to the roster, all three can score enough to pick up the slack. Certainly Gordon could do it on his own. I don't think Rose is going to be the kind of scorer Gordon's been. Noah? LOL. Hughes has actually done it, so there's a candidate. Brother Abe? He could actually become a 20/10 guy or close to it just by giving him more minutes, but is he a "scorer?" Not really. Thabo? Next! Hinrich? He's done it on a few occasions (big quarters, big Q4s), but not regularly. Deng? Needs to step up to the next level, not sure he has it in him. That leaves... Tyrus. Good luck with that.
The least we can do is see if a Rose/Gordon backcourt can work. When Rose drives, he is going to need shooters to kick the ball out too. Without Gordon, we have....
In theory, Rose and Gooden should work the pick and roll quite nicely. Gooden can finish at the rim fine, and can also hit the mid-range shot. Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, and Nocioni aren't bad guys to kick the ball out on the wings for shots. Deng's not a 3pt shooter, but has shown a very accurate mid-range shot from the baseline in past seasons. I've griped about a small backcourt for a while now, but it remains to be seen what Vinnie does with the offense. Skiles' offense was clearly meant for the half-court; maybe we'll run a lot more. Even though we may have a small back court, the opponent still has to match up with us just as we do with them. But we have to make that small size an advantage - obviously by outscoring the opposing players at the same position, game after game.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ Jul 2 2008, 02:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The least we can do is see if a Rose/Gordon backcourt can work. When Rose drives, he is going to need shooters to kick the ball out too. Without Gordon, we have....</div> Errm... Hinrich (I agree, Gordon's the much better shooter)
I remember having discussion on how nice it would be to pair up Gordon with another prolific scorer. We didn't go that route in the draft. But I also remember discussions on how we needed someone to pair up with Gordon, who can create offense for themself/others. We do have that in Rose.
