trying to move restricted free agent Ben Gordon in a sign-and-trade to fill another Chicago need <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>It is widely presumed that Chicago will soon trade guard Kirk Hinrich now that the Bulls have drafted Derrick Rose with the No. 1 overall pick, with Golden State likewise assumed to be atop the list of Hinrich suitors given the void created in the Warriors' backcourt by Davis' departure. But NBA front-office sources insist that there is some sentiment in the Bulls' organization to keep Hinrich -- a favorite of Bulls chairman Jerry Reinsdorf -- and play him at shooting guard alongside Rose while trying to move restricted free agent Ben Gordon in a sign-and-trade to fill another Chicago need.</div>
Why? Gordon is a much more important player at this point. He's our go-to scorer - in fact, I'd go out on a limb and say he's the only pure scorer on this team. Hinrich, on the other hand, should be expendable. Derrick Rose can come in immediately and replace him. This just seems like Reinsdorf is being a cheap skate and not wanting to give Gordon a big contract.
Well if you get say Marion in a trade for Gordon, then you wouldn't be missing that much, since you have instant offense with Marion. But looks like Harrington for Hinrich might be done as well, which I have to say would be the best deal for the Bulls.
If we end up getting Marion for Gordon, I'm definitely cool with that. The only real issue I'd have with deal is the fact that Marion is going on 30 while Gordon is already a one of the better scorers in the league and hasn't even entered his prime. However, Marion should still be able to play at a high level for at least a few more years and would definitely thrive having a Derrick Rose as his PG.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Jul 7 2008, 01:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well if you get say Marion in a trade for Gordon, then you wouldn't be missing that much, since you have instant offense with Marion. But looks like Harrington for Hinrich might be done as well, which I have to say would be the best deal for the Bulls.</div> Marion will only be instant offense if Rose is an instant hit. Look at Marion's numbers with PG's like Kidd, Marbury, Nash, compared to when he played with Wade (far from a traditional PG). -Petey
Marion's salary is like $20M, while Gordon's is $4.5M in one direction, even if he's signed to a max deal and traded.
After having looked over some stats and measurements pretty closely, I'm a bit more comfortable keeping Gordon. I think Ben will match up as well against most SG's as Kirk will, and despite what people will tell you, he's done about as well as Kirk has in that department over the last couple of years. I find it pretty amusing that the undercurrent of Bullsdom continually generates love for Kirk and enmity for Gordon when, as best I can tell, Gordon has been a consumate, hard-working pro and Kirk has... not as much.
Here is the thing: Do we have an abundance of 20 ppg? If the answer to that question is no, then Gordon needs to be kept. If the answer to that question is yes, Gordon is expendable. Do we have an abundance of people (or at least minutes committed) who can initiate an offense? If the answer to that question is yes, then Hinrich is expendable and Gordon can be kept. If the answer to that question is no, Hinrich needs to be kept and Gordon is expendable Do we have an abundance of people who can create offense for themselves? If the answer to that question is no, then Gordon needs to be kept. If the answer to that question is yes, Gordon is expendable. Do we have an abundance of shooters? If the answer to that question is no, then Gordon needs to be kept. If the answer to that question is yes, then Gordon is expendable. I came away with the following answers: 1. No 2. Yes 3. No 4. No Seems pretty simple to me, $ aside....
When looking at the Hinrich vs. Gordon debate, it is tough to pick one over the other. Put in the context of the current roster, it's not as tough. Hinrich is a little bigger. He's good at everything basketball, but not great at any one thing. I have always thought he could be a good SG alongside Gordon at PG, because we wouldn't have to rely on his spotty shooting to generate offense. Gordon and Deng and Nocioni are quite capable scorers to carry the load; though we should rarely see all three on the court at the same time anymore. Gordon has one gift that separates him from most players in the league - he's an oustanding scorer. Guys score, sure, but nowhere near as efficiently or in bunches like he does. I'm convinced the Bulls' more successful seasons since he joined the team were in large part to a lot of double-digit scoring quarters he's put up, as well as him taking the last shot of quarters, the big shots at end of games, and generally making teams pay when they have to foul at ends of games. As a SG, Gordon's tiny, but I do think his defense has been underrated. Paired with Kirk, Hinrich could always play the tougher of the two opposing guards and Gordon did pretty good against whoever he had to guard. As long as it wasn't a team like the Nets who had two guards who played big and could post up both Hinrich and Gordon. What remains to be seen is what a Rose/Hinrich backcourt and a Rose/Gordon backcourt really looks like. Rose/Gordon seems small, but so does Rose/Hinrich. Most likely, Rose/Hinrich is going to be the better on defense, while certainly Rose/Gordon is going to be fun to watch on offense. What I'm not sure of yet, is that Rose making his teammates better is going to translate into Hinrich making more of the open shots he's missed all along. Ultimately, I think keeping Hinrich over Gordon may compel VDN to play a less open and more half-court oriented scheme. That I'm sure is not the best thing for the team as constituted.
I have a difficult time distinguishing the overall advantage of keeping one of Gordon or Hinrich. I think both scenarios come out about even. At this point, I think it would make sense to trade whoever brings back the most attractive players in a trade. The way I've always seen it, either Ben or Kirk could benefit from playing with Rose, but not both. Too many minutes, $, and development to go around. I think the same thing is mostly true for Thabo as well, but to a lesser degree. I think it's likely we may have to make two different consolidation trades, with each one combining one frontcourt and backcourt player.
I don't base this post on the first game of summer league where Rose got 10 points and Beastly like 25 in 23 minutes. I haven't even really looked at the summer team rosters, but I'm sure Rose isn't running with Deng and Gordon and Hinrich and Gooden or players of that caliber. I hope I'm terribly wrong about this, but consider the team if Rose is on the busty side, for at least the first season. Because he's drafted #1, we expect him to be some sort of savior or superstar. Maybe that isn't in the cards. Think about Duhon - he's been a much better PG than people think and it's possible that Rose isn't as good at first. Not a slap at Rose, but rather praise for Duhon, who was a good defender for us and a better PG than Hinrich. Aren't we expecting Rose to be a better PG, too? I keep thinking about when we drafted JWill. He had all the credentials, but was a little on the short and slow side. He was a bit better than Duhon, but not by that much. We'll never know if he'd take a step up in his second season, of course, which is part of the point I'm trying to make. It may take 3 years for Rose to develop into the kind of PG who would start on a contender. Now consider trading away Gordon. I guess we get by with Hughes at SG, and he does bring things (like height) that are good for the current makeup of the starting lineup. Assuming Rose doesn't come out and put up 20 point quarters a few times and 10 point ones a lot of times, we're going to see mucho sucko.
Gordon vs. Hinrich, who's bigger? At the pre-draft measurements: Weight: Gordon: 192 Hinrich: 186 Wingspan: Gordon: 6" 8.5" Hinrich: 6' 6" Standing Reach: Gordon: 8' 3" Hinrich: 8' 2.5" When I went back and looked at that, it suggested to me that there's no physical reasons to pick Hinrich over Gordon. The latter has just has much "height" in terms of an ability to keep a hand in a guy's face as Kirk does. If you factor in the fact that Ben can jump out of the gym, he's probably got slightly better defensive tools than Kirk. The one think I don't know that Gordon has is quite the agility that Kirk once had, but I don't see Kirk with that either. He looks like he's put on weight and lost some of his quickness.
I saw Chris Paul and Pargo play big mins in the playoffs and do fine. I think any of our guards can play together in stretches.
Ben Gordon On The Move? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The Chicago Bulls need some help. Someone has got to explain to them its bad to play money games with young players. We could spend an hour running down the "odd decisions" the Bulls have made this week – from not sending PR people to Orlando to handle the media requests for Derrick Rose and company to Vinny Del Negro spending more time on the bench being coached by Del Harris and Bernie Bickerstaff than actually coaching his team. The Bulls decision to again play money games with Ben Gordon and Luol Deng is just crazy. Last summer the Bulls destroyed their team with trade rumors and botched contract talks. This summer was supposed to be a reversal of fortunes, where the Bulls were going to get their act together - so far that's not happening. People close to Ben Gordon are saying he would openly welcome contract talks with other teams, that he simply does not see how he is in the long-term future of the Bulls, not with how he's being treated. The word is Ben's camp may be seeking a sign and trade rather than a new deal with the Bulls. Luol Deng met with the Bulls and was reportedly underwhelmed by their discussions. Luol is a team guy and really wants to make it work in Chicago and his young teammates really respect him. Luol has been organizing off-season workouts with teammates, keeping guys together. Why would you mess with that? Especially after how last year went? But like everything else the Bulls have done recently, its clear they are working from a different playbook than the rest of the league.</div> Again news about Ben being traded, I think the Bulls in the end keep Hinrich. Or could there be a possibility that they trade both?
There's talk in this Hoopsworld article in both directions. One thing it suggests Hinrich to the Warriors. That'd make some sense, and while we're at it, I could live with is getting Al Harrington back, who would immediately be our best scorer up front. We could start him and Gooden, even, I'd think.
Harrington has 2 more years, right? I like the idea. Gives us more frontcourt scoring....and another scorer in general.
I remember talking about using cap space to sign Gooden and Harrington instead of Ben Wallace, at the time. Too bad it's coming at the cost of Gordon and/or Hinrich.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jul 9 2008, 08:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I remember talking about using cap space to sign Gooden and Harrington instead of Ben Wallace, at the time. Too bad it's coming at the cost of Gordon and/or Hinrich.</div> Hinrich, I'm not sure I care.... Gordon, then yeah, its a problem. With the drafting of Rose, we weren't going to pay Gordon, Hinrich, and the investment of a #1 pick for another G. One was going to have to go anyway. So if it becomes Hinrich for Harrington; I don't see the problem. And I think the deal would be contigent upon keeping Gordon then. Then the next offseason, it becomes decision time. Do we keep Gooden? Do we let him walk? Then the following season with Harrington. I'd rather keep Gooden than Harrington, personally. Either way, next year, we'd have two players in the frontcourt who can score. And it will help Rose develop (by giving him another scorer).
