# Ben Gordon



## Redeemed (Feb 2, 2008)

In recent news, Ben Gordon said he expected to be traded. What do you guys think about bringing him in? I would hate to see Dunleavy go, and i'm not even sure i'd trade him for Gordon, but thats something we'd have to look at. If Dunleavy was gone, it would open the starting role up for Rush (or we could start Gordon). If we gave Gordon, say, a 11/55 deal I think that would make him happy and it would give us an explosive scorer (something we really don't have right now) and a clutch performer. We need that right now. There would have to be fillers in the deal, but we have plenty of that (adding Baston and Graham might work). I think the Bulls would do this deal, and we have leverage over them since Gordon pretty much asked for the trade. I just think we might be a major player in this sweepstakes, and that we might be one of the most ideal situations for him. What do you guys think?


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Gordon would have to come off the bench because you can't play TJ and Gordon at the 1/2.

I don't think the Pacers is a good fit for him. The Cavs would've been a good fit had they gotten him instead of Mo Williams.


----------



## Redeemed (Feb 2, 2008)

I agree that he shouldn't start. But he could still play big mintutes. We have two great defending 2/3s in Brandon Rush and Danny Granger that could defend the better 2/3 on the other team. Like if we are playing cleveland he could guard Pavlovic instead of James, on the Spurs he could guard Bowen instead of Ginobili etc. etc. etc. 

I think he is a good fit here though. O'Brien would love him, because he is the prototype of a SG in O'Brien's offense.


----------



## clownskull (Jun 21, 2002)

what is this 11/55 deal you're talking about?
if you mean an 11 year 55 mil deal, i'd say he would likely laugh at that price. and no, i really don't see the pacers making a run for him. plus i absolutely would not want to get into a deal that long- no more super long term deals. the possibility of him breaking down well before then is simply far too great for my tastes.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

clownskull said:


> what is this 11/55 deal you're talking about?
> if you mean an 11 year 55 mil deal, i'd say he would likely laugh at that price. and no, i really don't see the pacers making a run for him. plus i absolutely would not want to get into a deal that long- no more super long term deals. the possibility of him breaking down well before then is simply far too great for my tastes.


I am sure he is talking 11 mil per year for 5 years(55 mil).

I am not sold on paying a bench scorer that much money.....like it was earlier stated, he can't start in a back court with TJ Ford, and he does not run an offense well at all so he can't even sneak some minutes at the point guard spot either. Ben Gordon is a great scorer and nothing else....he needs to realize that and sign a deal with a contending team for realistic money.


----------



## Redeemed (Feb 2, 2008)

He would play minutes like a starter. Keep in mind also that Dunleavy isn't a good defender and he starts. I don't see the big deal with him being 6'2. Most SGs are 6'5 6'6 and if you're like me, I really think size is over rated. what is 3 inches between Gordon and his opponents forehead? Not much of a big deal in my opinion.


----------



## clownskull (Jun 21, 2002)

well, giving up 3-4 inches regularly and sometimes more actually is a pretty big deal. having that much advantage allows a guy to simply shoot over the shorter guy. not saying gordon is garbage but, there is a reason there aren't many 6'2 scoring guards out there- they are defensive liabilities.
but anyway, like i said earlier- really not interested in such a long term deal. those almost never work out.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

seifer0406 said:


> Gordon would have to come off the bench because you can't play TJ and Gordon at the 1/2.


This. Ben Gordon is a bad defender that would be schooled regularly. If the Pacers had some very good post defenders, you could think about this. Sadly though, they don't. Would be a bad trade, especially considering what you'd have to give up.


----------



## JPTurbo (Jan 8, 2006)

I don't think Gordon would sign a 5/55 deal. He's been quoted as saying he wants to be the highest paid player on the Bulls and Deng just got 70M.

From a Bulls fan perspective, I wouldn't really be interested in the deal. We just locked up Deng and most of us feel Tyrus may improve with Rose on the team.


----------



## ray_allen_20 (Dec 26, 2007)

Ben Gordon REALLY isnt what the pacers need.


----------



## someone (Jul 17, 2007)

maybe if he had point guard abilities... what do you think the chances of that are?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

liekomgj4ck said:


> maybe if he had point guard abilities... what do you think the chances of that are?


Is there a number lower than 0?


----------



## Redeemed (Feb 2, 2008)

We don't need another point guard anyway. What we need is a high scoring player that can score in the clutch. Thats what Gordon is.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

No thanks.


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

No Ben Gordon please...I have nothing against him, but I just don't think he's a good fit here in Indy.


----------

