RealGM

LoveDaBoo wrote:

Luke NOT Luc wrote:Fine, dude. But don't come on here complaining next season about how the Bulls can't score any points because BG's gone. I don't see how ANYONE could've watched the playoffs and come out thinking that the answer is letting Ben Gordon go. It's a ridiculous thought, and if people think Henderson is going to fill the void, they need to stop partying with Noah on the beach

You would be satisfied with 50 wins and a win in a playoff series every year, wouldn't you? I can only assume that's the case, or that you're simply incapable of considering the impacts of drafts, signings, and trades more than 1 year out.

So you're saying that any team with Ben Gordon will never do better than win a playoff series?! The Magic made it to the finals with COURTNEY LEE and Pietrus! Am I taking crazy pills? What's going on?

Luke NOT Luc wrote:Time will tell, but everyone that thinks you can just subtract Gordon and get the same or better result is delusional

Sigh. So Gordon's the best SG in the league? Or are you only considering next year, and nothing else? Also, you're evidently ignoring price vs. performance, which is an unknown as no one knows what the market will dictate for Gordon's services. Please, remove Gordon's sack from your mouth, and breathe for a moment. We're not talking about Jordon here; Gordon's a nice player, but he's not some special gem that you'd eternally regret losing.

lou4gehrig wrote:Honestly who cares about this pick? It'll be the most insignificant pick in Bulls history. Take a flyer on a high-risk, high-reward player and hope for the best. If you draft somebody at 16 in a weak draft for need, you're nuts. A top 5 pick doesn't guarantee an NBA caliber player, let alone 16. I'm much more interested in potential trades or getting more 2010 expirings, etc.

"I strenuously object"

A pick at 16 should be a player that can contribute to your roster. I don't think anyone is expecting a home run, but to say this pick doesn't matter is wrong.

We need a guy that can go into our rotation and give us minutes. The more quality players you have, the better.

Luke NOT Luc wrote:

LoveDaBoo wrote:

Luke NOT Luc wrote:Fine, dude. But don't come on here complaining next season about how the Bulls can't score any points because BG's gone. I don't see how ANYONE could've watched the playoffs and come out thinking that the answer is letting Ben Gordon go. It's a ridiculous thought, and if people think Henderson is going to fill the void, they need to stop partying with Noah on the beach

You would be satisfied with 50 wins and a win in a playoff series every year, wouldn't you? I can only assume that's the case, or that you're simply incapable of considering the impacts of drafts, signings, and trades more than 1 year out.

So you're saying that any team with Ben Gordon will never do better than win a playoff series?! The Magic made it to the finals with COURTNEY LEE and Pietrus! Am I taking crazy pills? What's going on?

What I'm saying is that this squad will not come close to winning a championship next year, regardless of whether Gordon is a member or not. Let me ask you directly: what's the big difference whether the Bulls win 38 or 48 games next year?

LoveDaBoo wrote:Sigh. So Gordon's the best SG in the league? Or are you only considering next year, and nothing else? Also, you're evidently ignoring price vs. performance, which is an unknown as no one knows what the market will dictate for Gordon's services. Please, remove Gordon's sack from your mouth, and breathe for a moment. We're not talking about Jordon here; Gordon's a nice player, but he's not some special gem that you'd eternally regret losing.

Gordon is a scores at an elite efficiency rate good enough IMO to keep especially considering we don't have enough players that know how to put the ball in the damn basket

Also our best player on this team for past two years has been Ben Gordon. Only problem is that we won't be successful in the playoffs with that being the case. But that isn't a reason to trade ben gordon.

Luke NOT Luc wrote:So you're saying that any team with Ben Gordon will never do better than win a playoff series?! The Magic made it to the finals with COURTNEY LEE and Pietrus! Am I taking crazy pills? What's going on?

He's probably talking about how signing Gordon for $10 mil over 6 years could seriously hinder our ability to be able to add a premier talent in the front court provided Jerry won't go over the luxury tax.

ScottyKCMO wrote:

kulaz3000 wrote:I'm still thinking that Williams could be a good pick. I just think he could be a diamond in the rough. He seems like a very confident person, has an NBA body, as well as NBA athletic ability already. I think with the right coaching he has all the tools to be an all-star.

I would agree with that. Williams or Henderson would be my preference, with Gordon walking.

OK, I may as well get this off my chest. I can't understand the huge love for Terrence Williams. I just don't see how he has the offensive tools necessary to make a big splash in the pros. He certainly wouldn't be anything like a Ben Gordon replacement. He's built kind of like Ronnie Brewer but has had lower shooting percentages throughout his collegiate career. Brewer not only shot better but was a lot better a drawing fouls and getting to the line, something that's VERY important for the NBA transition. Williams is a poor shooter (I don't even know whether he's averaged 40% from the field over his 4-year career!) TS% down around 50% or a bit lower (over 4 years), and he only averaged 3.7 FTA/ 40 minutes in his senior (best) year. Those are not impressive averages at all. Even Corey Brewer, who was also fancied b/c he was supposed to be a lock-down defender, shot a LOT better in college than Williams did, and Brewer has sucked offensively in the pros.

Again, I just don't see it.

LoveDaBoo wrote:What I'm saying is that this squad will not come close to winning a championship next year, regardless of whether Gordon is a member or not. Let me ask you directly: what's the big difference whether the Bulls win 38 or 48 games next year?

I'm not saying Ben Gordon is THE piece that we build around and call our superstar, but I have no doubt he can be a vital piece to a championship level team. I don't know how anyone could argue that. Resigning Ben, keeping Noah and Rose and trading for an elite PF and finding a defensive SF would give us all the necessary pieces to win a title. Are you trying to tell me that if we had Rose, Noah, someone like Amare for example, and Gordon that we would never win a title because we have Ben Gordon? Because that's just ridiculous. You think Gordon's so expendable? Great. Good for you. I happen to disagree with you. He's an elite shooter and scorer and Johnny Fish is not going to replace that. Not now. Not ever.

LoveDaBoo wrote:What I'm saying is that this squad will not come close to winning a championship next year, regardless of whether Gordon is a member or not. Let me ask you directly: what's the big difference whether the Bulls win 38 or 48 games next year?

Credibility to free agents. If the Heat win 48 next year and we win 38, Miami will look like a much more attractive destination to the Amare's and Bosh's of the world.

If the suns want Johnson trade up and get him add salmons and tyrus and Omer and get Amare.

Kirk for Blake and outlaw to replace salmons and were good

Ben B. wrote:

ScottyKCMO wrote:

kulaz3000 wrote:I'm still thinking that Williams could be a good pick. I just think he could be a diamond in the rough. He seems like a very confident person, has an NBA body, as well as NBA athletic ability already. I think with the right coaching he has all the tools to be an all-star.

I would agree with that. Williams or Henderson would be my preference, with Gordon walking.

OK, I may as well get this off my chest. I can't understand the huge love for Terrence Williams. I just don't see how he has the offensive tools necessary to make a big splash in the pros. He certainly wouldn't be anything like a Ben Gordon replacement. He's built kind of like Ronnie Brewer but has had lower shooting percentages throughout his collegiate career. Brewer not only shot better but was a lot better a drawing fouls and getting to the line, something that's VERY important for the NBA transition. Williams is a poor shooter (I don't even know whether he's averaged 40% from the field over his 4-year career!) TS% down around 50% or a bit lower (over 4 years), and he only averaged 3.7 FTA/ 40 minutes in his senior (best) year. Those are not impressive averages at all. Even Corey Brewer, who was also fancied b/c he was supposed to be a lock-down defender, shot a LOT better in college than Williams did, and Brewer has sucked offensively in the pros.

Again, I just don't see it.

Don't worry, because apparently you can get a 20 ppg scorer who can hit any shot in any amount of traffic any time you want

I'm with Luke Not Luc. Re-sign Gordon. For all the reason Luke sez. I can't believe the cavalier logic (no pun intended) here about letting Gordon walk. Mind-boggling.

Ben B. wrote:OK, I may as well get this off my chest. I can't understand the huge love for Terrence Williams.

And let me get this off of MY chest: If we aren't going for Blair or Hansbrough, I prefer Williams over Henderson.

And so does Jay Bilas, per wiretap:

ESPN analyst and Duke alum Jay Bilas prefers Louisville's Terrence Williams over the Blue Devils' Gerald Henderson.

Charlotte could be choosing between Williams and Henderson when they are called upon to use the 12th overall pick.

Bilas says that Williams is bigger, stronger and more versatile than Henderson, who he believes is a better shooter.

I'm not sure how to feel about that.

DuckIII wrote:And let me get this off of MY chest: If we aren't going for Blair or Hansbrough, I prefer Williams over Henderson.

And so does Jay Bilas, per wiretap:

ESPN analyst and Duke alum Jay Bilas prefers Louisville's Terrence Williams over the Blue Devils' Gerald Henderson.

Charlotte could be choosing between Williams and Henderson when they are called upon to use the 12th overall pick.

Bilas says that Williams is bigger, stronger and more versatile than Henderson, who he believes is a better shooter.

I'm not sure how to feel about that.

Feel afraid. Feel very, very afraid.

Cliff:

Why? Hinrich still wouldn't have a place here. IMO, Hinrich will not, and should not, be a Bull after this summer. As for John.. Well, Salmons is a three, not a two. He should be a 6th man or start at the three. He's too slow for the two full time, and would not be a good pairing next to Rose in a back-court.

jump wrote:I'm with Luke Not Luc. Re-sign Gordon. For all the reason Luke sez. I can't believe the cavalier logic (no pun intended) here about letting Gordon walk. Mind-boggling.

Thank you! I'm not saying he's worth a max contract but it kind of saddens me to see just how much he's taken for granted. If he goes, we're gonna miss him a hell of a lot more than people think, and if he goes to Detroit, watch out, cause he's gonna be a nightmare for years

Cliff Levingston wrote:

LoveDaBoo wrote:What I'm saying is that this squad will not come close to winning a championship next year, regardless of whether Gordon is a member or not. Let me ask you directly: what's the big difference whether the Bulls win 38 or 48 games next year?

Credibility to free agents. If the Heat win 48 next year and we win 38, Miami will look like a much more attractive destination to the Amare's and Bosh's of the world.

I suppose that would be the one consideration. Though, I'm not of the mind that Amare or Bosh get it done anyhow. Adding Amare/Bosh to our current roster does not make the Bulls a favorite at any point in the foreseeable future, IMO. I'm aiming a bit higher, so I don't know that it'd matter that much anyways.

Luke NOT Luc wrote:I forgot that 20 pt scorers with the ability to go for 40 on any given night and hit big shots in the 4th quarter and OT in the playoffs grow on trees. My bad

Yeah... some people have been partying it up with Joakim on the beach a little too much I think!

jump wrote:I'm with Luke Not Luc. Re-sign Gordon. For all the reason Luke sez. I can't believe the cavalier logic (no pun intended) here about letting Gordon walk. Mind-boggling.

Let's no get carried away. There's plenty of valid reasons for letting Gordon walk:

- He's giving up a lot of size at his position.
- He's average defensively when he tries while he doesn't always try.
- He'll likely cost about $10 mil per year. Add that to the max deal Rose will eventually get and Deng's big deal and you've got a sh*t ton of money invested in the back court before even coming close to having the kind of frontcourt you need to compete for a title. Having that difference between Gordon's $10 mil and a decent but lesser stand-in for $2 mil or so (rookie contract of Henderson for example) could be the difference in being able to bring in that elite front court talent you need.

If we already had Bosh or Amare on this team then keeping Gordon is an absolute no-brainer. But where we're at; still developing while re-tooling and a ways away from legitimate title contention... there's plenty reason to opt for the cheaper/younger 2 to try to keep your options open.

Grand.Champ wrote:

Luke NOT Luc wrote:I forgot that 20 pt scorers with the ability to go for 40 on any given night and hit big shots in the 4th quarter and OT in the playoffs grow on trees. My bad

Yeah... some people have been partying it up with Joakim on the beach a little too much I think!

Nice! I made that joke too. I love how anytime anyone says something ridiculous the first joke that comes to mind is hanging out with Joakim Noah