Who should start at SG? John Salmons or Ben Gordon

JordansBulls · Post #1 » by **JordansBulls** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:03 am

treis · Post #2 » by **treis** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:04 am

You start your best 2G.

lou4gehrig · Post #3 » by **lou4gehrig** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:07 am

treis wrote:You start your best 2G.

Why did Manu come off the bench last year for San Antonio? Why did Kukoc used to come off the bench for us?

You start who makes sense for team balance.

Rose-Salmons-Deng-Tyrus-Miller
Hinrich-Gordon-Thabo-Noah

Gordon excels versus the 2nd team so he can focus solely on his offense and not worry about his weak D.

MJ-23 · Post #4 » by **MJ-23** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:08 am

Salmons because he's a tall sg and can actually defend.

lou4gehrig · Post #5 » by **lou4gehrig** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:08 am

MJ-23 wrote:Salmons because he's is a real sg and can actually defend.

Yeah, but Gordon is an elite scorer. :roll:

bullzman23 · Post #6 » by **bullzman23** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:09 am

lou4gehrig wrote:
treis wrote:You start your best 2G.

Why did Manu come off the bench last year for San Antonio? Why did Kukoc used to come off the bench for us?

You start who makes sense for team balance.

Rose-Salmons-Deng-Tyrus-Miller
Hinrich-Gordon-Thabo-Noah

Gordon excels versus the 2nd team so he can focus solely on his offense and not worry about his weak D.

Your Kukoc point doesn't make any sense. He wasn't better than Pippen, MJ, or Rodman. We weren't going to have Pippen defend PGs full-time, or have Rodman defend C's full-time.

Kukoc and Ginoboli come off the bench because those teams had that luxury. They have franchise players. We're still trying to establish that.

If Gordon is done in Chicago then he shouldn't start.

Scott May · Post #7 » by **Scott May** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:10 am

Gordon's a vastly better player -- on both sides of the ball -- than John Salmons. So you start Gordon.

BuLLs>LiFe · Post #8 » by **BuLLs>LiFe** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:10 am

We should start Salmons at SG, because he's 6'6. I would also like to start Deng at PG, because he's tall and can defend.

SlimD235 · Post #9 » by **SlimD235** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:10 am

Kirk Hinrich

jax98 · Post #10 » by **jax98** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:12 am

Ben Gordon without question. I don't see the Salmons/Gordon debate being valid. If we move Kirk (which we should regardless of what happens) Salmons is a 6th man who can back up the SG & SF. I do not want to close the door on a Gordon return. Benching him does that, IMO.

boogydown · Post #11 » by **boogydown** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:12 am

Hughes

girlygirl · Post #12 » by **girlygirl** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:13 am

Considering the fact that John Salmons is like Thabo -- a better SF than SG -- this is easy. Gordon.

Chi · Post #13 » by **Chi** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:13 am

Gordon has proven he will excel off the bench and Salmons supposedly has proven he won't. Should be an easy decision. Unfortunately these things are never that simple...

So we should tell salmons he'll come off the bench to start with, and give him good minutes still. then give him an opportunity to earn a starting spot. That way there's no hurt feelings.

Either way they'll both get there minutes, but I think we're better off with Salmons starting since thats where he personally is better at, and Gordon is great off the bench.

StoudeRose1 · Post #14 » by **StoudeRose1** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:13 am

lou4gehrig wrote:
MJ-23 wrote:Salmons because he's is a real sg and can actually defend.

Yeah, but Gordon is an elite scorer.

If we need scoring, we can bring him off the bench. I'd rather start the game with defense before offense.

lou4gehrig · Post #15 » by **lou4gehrig** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:13 am

ScottMay wrote:Gordon's a vastly better player -- on both sides of the ball -- than John Salmons. So you start Gordon.

Damn. You should call Paxson / Gar right now and tell them to extend him right away!

Many teams were interested in acquiring Salmons this week. Absolutely nobody was interested in a S & T for Gordon over the summer for the $10M a year he wanted. Hmmm.... interesting.

The Evidence · Post #16 » by **The Evidence** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:14 am

Deng/Sefolosha/Tyrus
Tyrus/Deng/Noah
Noah/Miller
Miller/Gray/Andriuskevicius
Gray/Andriuskevicius

lou4gehrig · Post #17 » by **lou4gehrig** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:15 am

StoudeRose1 wrote:
lou4gehrig wrote:
MJ-23 wrote:Salmons because he's is a real sg and can actually defend.

Yeah, but Gordon is an elite scorer.

If we need scoring, we can bring him off the bench. I'd rather start the game with defense before offense.

I agree. Gordon would be perfect coming off the bench. Heck he can even finish the games. Salmons can at least attempt to stop SG's from being on fire the entire game.

bullzman23 · Post #18 » by **bullzman23** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:15 am

Morten Jensen wrote:Ben Gordon without question. I don't see the Salmons/Gordon debate being valid. If we move Kirk (which we should regardless of what happens) Salmons is a 6th man who can back up the SG & SF. I do not want to close the door on a Gordon return. Benching him does that, IMO.

I agree, Salmons is the perfect 6th man in theory since he can handle the 1-3 spots when needed. His ball-handling abilities make him a nice fit next to BG, and his scoring compliments Rose and Deng.

That being said, if we've closed the door ourselves already by making financial moves that prevent us from keeping him, then we might as well move on.

lou4gehrig · Post #19 » by **lou4gehrig** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:15 am

The Evidence wrote:Deng/Sefolosha/Tyrus
Tyrus/Deng/Noah
Noah/Miller
Miller/Gray
Gray/Andriuskevicius

?

BuLLs>LiFe · Post #20 » by **BuLLs>LiFe** » Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:16 am

lou4gehrig wrote:
Damn. You should call Paxson / Gar right now and tell them to extend him right away!

Many teams were interested in acquiring Salmons this week. Absolutely nobody was interested in a S & T for Gordon over the summer for the $10M a year he wanted. Hmmm.... interesting.

Right, because those are exactly the same situation with the same circumstances.