# The only problem with Gordon



## YearofDaBulls (Oct 20, 2004)

Is that his shot is not falling in. Considering the fact that he was a shooter in college, I think he will be fine. Our rookies really do look good. Thoughts?


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

The other problem is that he can't handle the ball and run an offense.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

or play any defense


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

I am still taking a "wait and see" attitude about Gordon. I think he will be able to score, play defence and run an offense in the NBA given a little time. 

I am very impressed with Deng and Nocioni. They are the rookies who will contribute early. The nice thing is that this take some of the pressure off of Gordon.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> or play any defense


Actually I thought his defense looked alright from the few minutes I watched him in the past 2 games.

Granted I didn't watch all of the games, so I'm probably missing quite a bit.


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

I think some of you need to lighten up on Gordon. It's just way too "Bulls fan" to start needling away at a guy who has played 7 pre-season games, all with an agenda behind it. I don't know, I get the impression that some fans feel thretened by him; what does repeatedly tearing him down accomplish? Get him traded to the Knicks for a can of YAMS? In the grand scheme of things, guys like Kirk and JC will be fine without you having to defend them.

The way I see it, you weren't going anywhere with or without him this season so let him play through this. Remember Hinrich's TO fests? Baron didn't light the world on fire his rookie season, and there are other examples. Let's wait and see, shall we?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Trade him. Please.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

I didn't see the game tonight, but I was actually pretty happy with Ben's few minutes against Washington. I saw him get to the rim several times. A few shots just didn't roll in. Yeah, he's turning the ball over quite a bit, but that's actually a pretty normal phenomenon for rookie guardds. Paxson says he only drafts guys with good work ethic. Gordon is struggling but not without ballhandling skill. Given time, I can't see any reason why he won't be able to learn how to protect the ball and still get where he wants to go.

Did anyone here see tonight's game? I know Ben shot poorly, but how did he look outside the box score? Was he getting to spots on the court? Was he beating defenders with the dribble?


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Trade him. Please.


You know HKF, Ben's not an ideal situation with us, but realistically the guy is not as ready as some of us thought he might be. He's going to have to put in some work, but if he got traded today and got to play only point guard, I wouldn't expect him to start playing lights out ball right away. 

I don't think it's legitimate to simply blame the GM for putting Ben in a bad place. I think you also have to blame the player for not cutting it. Whereas Ben is a rookie, I don't think he deserves blame yet, but you have to just accept that some rookies struggle to acclimate and you wait it out.

But, hypothetically speaking, I'm not going to put all the blame on John Paxson for making Gordon a shooting guard and therefore making him suck.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> You know HKF, Ben's not an ideal situation with us, but realistically the guy is not as ready as some of us thought he might be. He's going to have to put in some work, but if he got traded today and got to play only point guard, I wouldn't expect him to start playing lights out ball right away.
> ...


Good post DMD, the thing I've liked so far, despite his shaky play, is that at this point we're not relying on him at all, which was the mindset going into the year.

Now, whenever he comes around, which I think he will based on what I've seen from his play, it's only going to help. And its going to help in our 2nd unit until he proves he's worthy of starting, and that can't hurt with that lineup.

From what I saw tonight both him and Duhon were handling the ball, and I think that helped him get involved more like he's used to. He made some nice moves and plays, some that ended with a basket, and some that he missed, but besides from the missed shots and occasional turnover, he didn't look miserable or anything.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Wow. All this rush to judgment after 7 preseason games. I am far from giving up on BG that's for sure.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> Wow. All this rush to judgment after 7 preseason games. I am far from giving up on BG that's for sure.


I think he's going to be fine too. I also think he would be best off as a point guard, but him playing that position is not going to solve all of his problems. It's just going to take longer than expected with Ben.

I was never his biggest fan (yes, I booed at the draft when we picked him), but I still think he has a lot of talent and I'm still expecting good things from him in our future.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> I was never his biggest fan (yes, I booed at the draft when we picked him), but I still think he has a lot of talent and I'm still expecting good things from him in our future.


I feel exactly the same way. In fact, I was probably the least happy at the draft party when Gordon was picked. Too much of a combo guard IMO... Then again, the NBA is littered w/ them anyways so its no biggie.

However, <b>you have to give Ben consistent time and minutes.</b> I hope to God Skiles doesn't somehow put BG in the doghouse on account of defense or poor shooting. That would be about the worst thing to do to the kid.

Let Ben play at least 20 minutes a game and find his rhythm. Its not like his game just magically disappeared. Its going to take some time.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> Wow. All this rush to judgment after 7 preseason games. I am far from giving up on BG that's for sure.


Ditto. I'm just not convinced that Gordon can play PG in the NBA. He couldn't in college.

He does have serious talent, though. He just needs consistent minutes to develop his college-to-pro translation.

I think we might all be laughing at this thread this time next year.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

I agree SD and VV: Gordon needs minutes. Just like JWill needed minutes. Now we can debate or not debate JWill getting handed the starting job or not, yada yada yada, but if the guy is working hard in practice, as I assume he is, I think he deserves 20+ minutes of court time to work this out.

Look at the composition of our team. We are not built to win! We need to develop our most talented young players. That's Curry, Mr. Glass, Chapu, Deng, Hinrich, and Gordon. Maybe add Duhon to the mix. That's what our team is about if you ask me.

If we want veterans to help our team win, then let's get some people on the team who are between the ages of 26 and 32 besides Griffin and Harrington.


----------



## Bolts (Nov 7, 2003)

Where are all the posters now who said Gordon would send Hinrich to the bench as a back-up? There were a few.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Ditto. I'm just not convinced that Gordon can play PG in the NBA. He couldn't in college.
> ...


Agreed on all counts. Gordon will be fine as an NBA player, period. Whether he can play PG is questionable, but I'm not sure he'll have to, at least not here. The guy is way too talented of a player to keep playing like this. As Bulls fans especially, we should not be rushing to judgement, considering we've seen this kind of start from the last two guards we picked (Hinrich and JayWill).

He's playing very hesitantly right now and I think that's partly because he's adjusting to the speed of NBA guards and partly because he's trying not to force it. He'll be fine and I think we'll see steady improvement as each game goes on. I'm still as thrilled as I was on draft day that we have him. For whatever that's worth. :grinning:


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bolts</b>!
> Where are all the posters now who said Gordon would send Hinrich to the bench as a back-up? There were a few.


Let's remember that Hinrich was not so hot in the summer league or the preseason. I don't mention that because I have anything against Hinrich. Rookies can struggle, and Kirk did too, but man he turned it around pretty quickly into the season. Perhaps Gordon can do the same.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Gordon will come around 

He just needs a different cut to his jib


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>F.Jerzy</b>!
> Gordon will come around
> 
> He just needs a different cut to his jib


FJ, in which thread did the jib first come to us?

Linky?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Trade him please. I really would prefer to see him on another team that is committed to him and I don't feel the Bulls will be.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Still waiting for an anwser....*



> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Trade him please. I really would prefer to see him on another team that is committed to him and I don't feel the Bulls will be.


http://basketballboards.net/forum/s...ht=gordon+draft



> Originally posted on 7/27 by Hong Kong Fooey!
> 
> I love Gordon and think the Hinrich-Gordon backcourt, while suffering growing pains can reak havoc on opposing teams


LOL. Your undisputed best guy in the draft has a few bad games and now he has to be traded? What's changed in the last 3 months?

p.s. You were right about the growing pains.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

I don't know why this is such a surprise. 

Gordon's skill set is most like guys like Bobby Jackson and Chancey Billups and they both took quite a bit of time getting adjusted to the league.

I think Gordon can be even more effective on O than those guys, but it's not going to happen overnight.

Hopefully, unlike those guys, it at least happens while he is with the team that drafted him.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Still waiting for an anwser....*



> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> http://basketballboards.net/forum/s...ht=gordon+draft
> ...


I think it could wreak havoc, but truth be told, I want Gordon at the PG spot, so why waste time now, realize that he is not going to be a SG and trade him. Lots of teams need PG's. 

You could trade him to the Hawks for Childress and Delk. I'm sure they would take it. I personally don't want to see him on the Bulls because I feel they will ruin his career.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*I dont take all this too seriously ,*

Gordon is doing his best I know and accept that.

but he was brought in to be a 1st year contributor and he has only shown that he shouldn't be thus far.

he may adjust soon , he may take all season , i do take a perverse chuckle though at all the gordon was going to be the next best thing stuff we were hearing when he was drafted despite the fact very few people said it before he was drafted.Undersized players often struggel only the special , the truly special can prosper immediately with a size diadvantage trying to be a big time scorer , i can only think of one in a similar situation who ever did (allen iverson) and they gave him the ball on day 1 and made sure he got himself together , something the bulls aren't quite bad enough to do,the bobcats are the only team bad enough to do this.

it always came off as blind cool aid drink type stuff, gordon should be a good player, he's quick, he has good shot so it will go in eventually and he has a very good 1st step , but he also has flaws and they are overcoming any good he does at the moment. 

he is playing a mix of pg and 2 guard imo because the team is trying very hard to get him in a rythym and whatever he takes to quicker is what he'll do. He has talent so eventually he should be ok , but that does very little for me at the moment seeing as he was billed as a 1st year impact player, and based off his play he should not be on the active roster he is defintely behind duhon deng chapu, pargo,griffin and kirk at guard ...and its very debateable he should be ahead of pike who also has been brutal , but he at least is a vet who knows how to play and can be counted on to keep his head right with little playing time. Since neither gordon or pike really deserve any, thats the lesser of 2 evils.

but since gordon was the #3 pick he'll get every opportunity to make good on his promise so i'm not worried about him long term.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Hinrich didn't have a very hot rookie preseason either, you know.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

Listen to the postgame by Skiles. He comments on Gordon's progress

He gets good looks but doesn't get them in. He has long ways to go on defense. I doubt he gets lots of minutes early. We may have to wait around january for him to get some good minutes. He's behind Duhon, Pargo, a healthy Williams right now.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Still waiting for an anwser....*



> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> I think it could wreak havoc, but truth be told, I want Gordon at the PG spot, so why waste time now, realize that he is not going to be a SG and trade him. Lots of teams need PG's.
> ...


Well, thanks for addressing the question. 

I still think that Hinrich and Gordon could be part of a nice 3 man rotation. Gordon has to show a bit more game before I am ready to trade him as you know he will be able to play sooner or later.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>spongyfungy</b>!
> Listen to the postgame by Skiles. He comments on Gordon's progress
> 
> He gets good looks but doesn't get them in. He has long ways to go on defense. I doubt he gets lots of minutes early. We may have to wait around january for him to get some good minutes. He's behind Duhon, Pargo, a healthy Williams right now.


My synopsis of all that, trade him. The Bulls aren't going to win anyway, yet they still are going to have Ben behind all of those guys.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Still waiting for an anwser....*



> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, thanks for addressing the question.
> ...


I just don't feel the Bulls are committed to Gordon as much as they should. He is not shooting well, but like I said, he is a PG, not a SG. I know Hinrich is going nowhere, so just realize they made a mistake trying to force Gordon out of position and move him at the Dec. 15th deadline. 

I never said Gordon could be a great SG, I always contended he is a PG, which he is.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

The boxscore says Gordon had a better night tonight, thats good news atleast.


----------



## Johnjo (Jun 4, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>spongyfungy</b>!
> Listen to the postgame by Skiles. He comments on Gordon's progress
> 
> He gets good looks but doesn't get them in. He has long ways to go on defense. I doubt he gets lots of minutes early. We may have to wait around january for him to get some good minutes. He's behind Duhon, Pargo, a healthy Williams right now.


Yea, it is not like he is just heaving up ill-advised shots. I've watched 5 of the preseason games so far and I have actually been very impressed with the way he has been able to create space when he drives and also can sometimes create his own shots. Most of them look good to and even roll around the rim, just don't fall in. 

I don't think he will ever be a great 3-point shooter, but, by te time he really pans out the Bulls will most likely have a decent system going and he will probably be able to fill in by draining mid-range jumpers and driving to the basket. Or at least that's what I'm hoping.


----------



## hoops (Jan 29, 2003)

*Re: Re: Still waiting for an anwser....*

QUOTE]Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
Trade him please. I really would prefer to see him on another team that is committed to him and I don't feel the Bulls will be. [/QUOTE]

you talked as if he's not getting any minutes in fact he's getting more minutes than hinrich around this time last year. 




> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> I think it could wreak havoc, but truth be told, I want Gordon at the PG spot, so why waste time now, realize that he is not going to be a SG and trade him. Lots of teams need PG's.


i agree, we should trade him to another team, if you want him at the pg spot. he still hasn't proven he can be a pg yet in this league. he can play some point though i see him more as a combo guard and will be be a good one at that. 

i think the kid will be good, but damn let him earn it first b4 some of you annoint him as the next iverson or the next baron davis. i believe i don't have to name names for people to know who i mean.


----------



## MiSTa iBN (Jun 16, 2002)

I still have hope for the kid.. his shooting average is 21%? Can't get any worse than that can it? He just needs to let the game come to him, I think it's obvious he can get by anyone to the basket, he's just not knocking down the jumper like he's supposed to right now. We get a good contribution out of him we should be in playoff contention. I'll be damned if he turns out like William Avery.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Gordon is a good shooter and he will be fine offensively in time. He has good form on his shot, the ability to penetrate, nice range. He still will probably need to move to the pg spot permananently to be effective in this league, he is just too short to play the 2 day in & day out (he is no Iverson). He will have to play the point and the Bulls already have commited to a point so I am not sure what the point was in drafting him to be honest. I assume Pax thought he was the best available and he may be right...still don't know that he can be a good fit though. Plus, he is REALLY gonna struggle defensively. He doesn't have good size and he doesn't have great lateral quickness or defensive technique.


----------



## L.O.B (Jun 13, 2002)

Didn't we already have Ben Gordon on this team or am I thinking of AJ Guyton?

I am not very high on Ben Gordon. Putting a point guard at shooting guard can cause match up problems but it doesn't look like Ben is a point guard, so far he looks like AJ, an undersized 2 that will have problems his entire career getting off shots. 

So far Ben Gordon is shooter that can't shoot .


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> FJ, in which thread did the jib first come to us?
> ...


The "jib" stuff is pure invention, inspired by Paxson's comments on Eddy's haircut (which is quoted in someone's--I can't remember whose--sig). There was a thread (Jamal Crawford tainted, no doubt) that touched on management's inability to relate to players, and I invoked Paxson's comments, comparing them to something corny a Judge Smails-type person would say: "Young man, I like the cut of your jib." (I have no idea if Judge Smails actually says that in "Caddyshack, though.)

I just like the sound of the phrase, and to me it's a great metaphor for how badly off track things have gotten with the Bulls. I know it's an oversimplification, but our "organization" seems absurdly preoccupied with the cuts of our young men's jibs and less so with getting the freaking job done. Hence my suggestion that Pax apply for an AD job at a Div III school -- he can get his charges wearing blue blazers, crisp white shirts, and snazzy rep ties, and so on. Skiles could coach wrestling, track, and basketball, and naturally, everyone would play the right way.


----------



## L.O.B (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ScottMay</b>!
> 
> 
> The "jib" stuff is pure invention, inspired by Paxson's comments on Eddy's haircut (which is quoted in someone's--I can't remember whose--sig). There was a thread (Jamal Crawford tainted, no doubt) that touched on management's inability to relate to players, and I invoked Paxson's comments, comparing them to something corny a Judge Smails-type person would say: "Young man, I like the cut of your jib." (I have no idea if Judge Smails actually says that in "Caddyshack, though.)
> ...


Maybe Reinsdorf exhumes Ted Knight for the Bulls next coach after he mishears Paxson saying that Bob Knight would be the perfect coach for this collection of grit and determination


----------



## YearofDaBulls (Oct 20, 2004)

I just think as Bulls fans we are dying to have a consistent all star on our team.


----------



## AZwildcats4 (Feb 9, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Ditto. I'm just not convinced that Gordon can play PG in the NBA. He couldn't in college.
> ...


I'm not sure why you think Gordan couldn't play point gaurd in college. If it weren't for Taliek Brown thats the position he probably would have played. And when he did run the point he played well, I can't remember what his stats were but they were good.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Gordon couldn't play point in college, period.


----------



## AZwildcats4 (Feb 9, 2004)

Actually he can, and did, play point gaurd in college. I believe it was his junior year when he Brown got hurt and Gordon filled in for him for a few games and played quite well. I think his stats for those games are on his draftcity.com profile but I'm not sure if you can still view it. Anyway do you really think just about every scout and draft site would have projected him as a point gaurd if he was incapable of playing the position? I can understand why you think shooting gaurd is his best position, but he shouldn't be put in the same category as undersized off gaurds like Hollis Price and Joe Forte who have no point gaurd skills whatsoever.


----------



## BigEast55 (Mar 30, 2004)

Ben Gordan sucked in college, if not for their great foward play, there was no way he could have won a national championship, he wasn't even PotY, hell, he wasn't even the best point in the Big East (GMac anyone), BEN GORDAN SUCKS


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> The other problem is that he can't handle the ball and run an offense.


Hey, other than that, he is fine.  :laugh:


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

Big Ben Gordon.


----------



## airety (Oct 29, 2002)

Use this thread as evidence that:

A)Pretty much everyone on this board is wrong fairly often.
B)We are somewhat fair-weather when it comes to players (but never the team!)
C)Some of us will never abandon our love for one player or another.
D)When the sky is falling, everything is doom and gloom. But when the roses are starting to bloom, things should do smell sweet.

We aren't all-together perfect, but we are perfect all together.


----------

