# Gordon is Untouchable



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

I don't wanna hear any more of these trade Gordon for Scalabrine/Maggette/ZhiZHi suggestions because realistically the guy is untouchable.


When I say realistically I mean forget names like Lebron and Yao et al and come to grips with the fact that when you start rating players today on their "Unstoppable Factor" Ben is in the top 5-10 in the league already as a 23 mpg. ROOKIE with a hyper-tedious and demanding coach. 

I don't wanna hear any of 'em...


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

lol 3 minutes later :

http://web.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=149639


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

spongyfungy said:


> lol 3 minutes later :
> 
> http://web.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=149639


  alas, in the world of message boards we follow the Reinsdorf slogan. "No one is untouchable. . . except Michael Jordan."


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

madox said:


> I don't wanna hear any more of these trade Gordon for Scalabrine/Maggette/ZhiZHi suggestions because realistically the guy is untouchable.
> 
> 
> When I say realistically I mean forget names like Lebron and Yao et al and come to grips with the fact that when you start rating players today on their "Unstoppable Factor" Ben is in the top 5-10 in the league already as a 23 mpg. ROOKIE with a hyper-tedious and demanding coach.
> ...



I agree with you though... Gordon shouldn't be traded, his rookie season is reminding me of Wade's rookie season... let's see how far Ben can get us in the playoffs this year and build around him... it's hard to find a rookie that can close out games... he is this season's dwayne wade


----------



## Krazy!!! (Jul 10, 2002)

HAWK23 said:


> I agree with you though... Gordon shouldn't be traded, his rookie season is reminding me of Wade's rookie season... let's see how far Ben can get us in the playoffs this year and build around him... it's hard to find a rookie that can close out games... he is this season's dwayne wade


Before we even THINK about trading Ben Gordon....WHO on this Bulls team is capable of hitting clutch shot to propel the Bulls to wins?

Kirk Hinrich: When he's on he can put up points...but his scoring is too erratic for the Bulls to count on him.

Curry: Has the best chance of being that clutch scorer. Problem? He's too inconsistent a ballplayer to be counted on for that type of situation.

Chandler: Has the desire but not the scoring ability.

Deng: Has a chance to grow into a fairly potent scorer....but am highly uncertain as to whether Luol can become that clutch scorer.

Duhon: Can do just everything that's asked of him except score a lot of points.


----------



## Krazy!!! (Jul 10, 2002)

What I don't understand is the fans desire to trade a guy who is LARGELY responsible for the Bulls to even BE in the situation that they're in the first place as far as making a playoff push?


----------



## Krazy!!! (Jul 10, 2002)

Add me to the "[email protected] NO....Gordon don't go" bandwagon.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

Krazy!!! said:


> Add me to the "[email protected] NO....Gordon don't go" bandwagon.



Sign me up as well. I'll live with the short backcourt if it means we're going to have to trade Gordon to get "coveted" that bigger guard. I mean these Maggette and such ideas are fair deals, but it's not worth it. BG just wins games. He needs to be a Bull for life.


----------



## Krazy!!! (Jul 10, 2002)

Have a rookie help the franchise get into the thick of the postseason possibilities when such talk was completely non-existent with the Bulls record at 0-9 and fans want to play GM and trade the guy.

What gratitude.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

I posted this in another thread, but it fits here as well...

*I'm not worried about Paxson trading Ben for Maggette, if for no other reason than he wouldn't enjoy being laughed at by every other GM in the league- which they would do IMO.

The real superstars are the ones who do it in the clutch, in close games down the stretch. Do you want to know how close Ben is to becoming a superstar? In every close game the Bulls play down the stretch, all of us posters here scream bloody murder if Ben isn't getting the ball in the final 2 minutes of the game- no matter if he's 0-12 up until then.

Jamal vs Kirk, Eddy vs Kirk, Fire Pax! vs Pax is a god, we all agree that Ben should have the ball in his hands in the final minutes.*

Needless to say, there are very few players I would trade Ben for right now- I really can't wait to see how he does in the playoffs.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Yeah, yeah, no one is untouchable.

For me it comes down to this. Gordon has done enough to convince me that he's a "special" talent. There are maybe a dozen players in the NBA that I'd say this about.

He's not a great NBA player yet, but there's a good chance he'll become one. Conditioning and experience are the only missing ingredients.

I don't trade a special talent who has a good chance of becoming a great player for anything less than another special talent who is, or has a good chance of becoming a great player.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

I sense the Gordon wing of bbb.net has been born and the Gordon-hater labels will be soon to follow.

:sfight:


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Chad Ford: I think Okafor will win the Rookie of the Year Award. However, I can't think of anyone who deserves the Sixth Man award than Ben Gordon. He's the true definition of the term. He plays 24 minutes a night, provides a huge spark off the bench and often is on the floor during crunch time.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Since the All-Star Break, Ben is averaging 17.7 points in 25 minutes.


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

bullsville said:


> Since the All-Star Break, Ben is averaging 17.7 points in 25 minutes.



that is an amazing staistic...


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Oddly enough, if Jamal Crawford would have just learned how to play defense and be a pass first PG, we wouldn't have these problems, and KH would be on the trading block. Not that I have anything against Kirk. He's great, but BG and KH won't coexist in that backcourt on a championship quality team. ANd BG isn't gonna settle for 25 minutes a night for the next 2-3 seasons either. By the ASG next year, if we haven't addressed it, we are gonna have a problem.

That said, you don't unload BG for anything short of a young superstar 2 guard, based on the numbers this kid is putting up. And since that isn't happening any time soon, he stays.

This brings us to a bigger issue. Knowing that BG likely won't be traded, and knowing that our backcourt needs to be bigger what do we do with Kirk???

The only way to effectively compliment BG in his CURRENT form (which assumes he doens't develop his ball handling skills this summer), is to get a BIG (6'5") PG that can handle the ball.


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Bump. 

35 points, 22 in the 4th quarter. Bulls win. 

I don't wanna hear any more of these trade Gordon for Joe Duke ideas. 

Unstoppable... Untouchable.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> Oddly enough, if Jamal Crawford would have just learned how to play defense and be a pass first PG, we wouldn't have these problems, and KH would be on the trading block. Not that I have anything against Kirk. He's great, but BG and KH won't coexist in that backcourt on a championship quality team. ANd BG isn't gonna settle for 25 minutes a night for the next 2-3 seasons either. By the ASG next year, if we haven't addressed it, we are gonna have a problem.
> 
> That said, you don't unload BG for anything short of a young superstar 2 guard, based on the numbers this kid is putting up. And since that isn't happening any time soon, he stays.
> 
> ...


I seem to remember Eric Snow and Allen Iverson going to the Finals a couple years back. And those seem to be equal comparisons.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

T.Shock said:


> I seem to remember Eric Snow and Allen Iverson going to the Finals a couple years back. And those seem to be equal comparisons.


Here's my post from another thread about that.

---------------

An Iverson-Snow-McKie backcourt made it to the finals and was the number 1 defensive team in the league in 2001. They were amazing defensively, even with Iverson. They just couldn't defend Shaq... and no one can.

That team:
Eric Snow
Allen Iverson
Aaron McKie
Tyrone Hill
Jumaine Jones
Dikembe Mutombo
Todd McCullough/Matt Geiger

That was their rotation. Tyrone Hill and Jumaine Jones combined for about 70 minutes a night, amazingly.

If you think about it, this team could be extremely similar to that one. Hell, Chandler is basically the second coming of Mutombo, and Gordon will be (or is) a scorer on a level similar to Iverson. Hinrich is Eric Snow v2 (but I have higher hopes for him than that). Then we have Deng and Curry and they didn't.

Trading Gordon for Maggette would be a huge mistake. You don't trade a game-changer like Gordon for a better fitting piece like Corey. Horrible trade for us-- not that Maggette is a bad player but he's not great, either. Gordon can be. He just needs development. That includes passing, ball-handling, and defense, but there's no reason to think that he won't get better at all of those. I would be highly upset if this trade happened.

I digress, but if this was any other team, he would be getting 35 minutes a night and those aspects of his game would be neglected. Think about how Houston handled Steve Francis his rookie year and look at him now. He really hasn't improved that much. Ben will, because he'll have to earn his playing time.

We just need our Aaron McKie and we'll be set. Gordon's talent transcends the need for a traditional 6'6 SG.

--------------

Pretty cool, huh?


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

rwj333 said:


> Here's my post from another thread about that.
> 
> ---------------
> 
> ...


Yes, Indeed. :clap:


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

rwj333 said:


> Gordon's talent transcends the need for a traditional 6'6 SG.


That should be the Bulls forum slogan. You'd lose about half the posts, but it would mean a whole less **** to sift through...


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Great post, *rwj*.

When it comes to wins and losses, supreme talent supercedes "prototypical" players IMO, i.e. 6'6" 215 lb. SG's. 

Let's just enjoy these performances from Ben and see how far he can go.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Damn. Gordon had 35 points in 23 minutes! Good lord!!!!!


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

Wait so lets break it down more.

Eric Snow = Kirk Hinrich
Allen Iverson = Ben Gordon
Aaron McKie = 
Tyrone Hill = Othella Harrington
Dikembe Mutombo = Tyson Chandler
Matt Geiger = Eddy Curry 
Jumaine Jones = 

Didn't even need all that, just wanted to see how many PMs I'd get by comparing Geiger to Curry.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

lougehrig said:


> Damn. Gordon had 35 points in 23 minutes! Good lord!!!!!


I wonder if that's ever been done before. That is crazy.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

T.Shock said:


> Wait so lets break it down more.
> 
> Eric Snow = Kirk Hinrich
> Allen Iverson = Ben Gordon
> ...


 You forgot Deng and Nocioni.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

madox said:


> Bump.
> 
> 35 points, 22 in the 4th quarter. Bulls win.
> 
> ...


Nobody is unstoppable and nobody is untouchable. 

Ben had a *fabulous* game tonight. I don't recall seeing any Bull take over like that since MJ.

Our ball handling by Ben and Du was atrocious. I thought Duhon looked flat out terrible most of the game. Perhaps he's wearing down. IMO, Gordon again states the case that we need look no further than a Hinrich-Gordon backcourt for the future. Duhon moves to backup PG and we find the backup SG we originally were looking for.

Bernie Bickerstaff after the game - "Well its real simple, that was about as good a performance that I've seen in a critical time in a basketball game for not only a rookie but for anybody that I've been around. Very difficult shots, guys on him, just a tremendous performance. My hats off to him. Our guys did the best that the could do on him. It didn't matter, he had it going."


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> I wonder if that's ever been done before. That is crazy.


MJ did it in a half. In the NBA finals no less. Not sure if he played every minute though....which would be 24 rather than 23 if he did. I'm pretty sure he played less than 24 minutes in that first half.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

madox said:


> Bump.
> 
> 35 points, 22 in the 4th quarter. Bulls win.
> 
> ...


How many is that per 48 minutes?

WOW

But because of his Ast/TO ratio, he shouldn't play more, obviously.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

The Krakken said:


> MJ did it in a half. In the NBA finals no less. Not sure if he played every minute though....which would be 24 rather than 23 if he did. I'm pretty sure he played less than 24 minutes in that first half.


Well, of course. MJ's 69-point game was a brisker pace, as was Wilt's 100, David Robinson's 70, David Thompson's 73, etc.

I guess there are two ways to phrase my question -- what's the fewest number of minutes it ever took a player to score 35, and what's the most number of points scored by someone playing 23 or fewer minutes.


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Mr. T said:


> Nobody is unstoppable and nobody is untouchable.


Nobody stopped him tonight. 

I wasnt issuing an edict, just saying that nothing sounds mas estupido IMO than people saying let's trade Gordon for a prototype SG when Ben, in his rookie year, is already one of the hardest players to guard in the league. No one with 2 eyes and a nose can debate that. 

People just like saying "no one is untouchable."

I like saying "Gordon is untouchable."


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

madox said:


> Nobody stopped him tonight.
> 
> I wasnt issuing an edict, just saying that nothing sounds mas estupido IMO than people saying let's trade Gordon for a prototype SG when Ben, in his rookie year, is already one of the hardest players to guard in the league. No one with 2 eyes and a nose can debate that.
> 
> ...


He had a fabulous game. He scored at will. He's a scorer. He could be a very special player. Bulls win, Bulls win. 

But nothing sounds mas estupido IMO than people saying we can't have a legitimate discussion in response to a Sam Smith article suggesting Gordon could be traded to obtain Maggette. You may not LIKE what the media talks about, but it would seem fair to discuss it if the media is. Comprendo?

It wasn't as though the original thread was clamoring for the Bulls to trade the guy because he was shooting 30% over his last four games. It wasn't like the original thread was ripping on him because of his turnover ratio or PG skills. On the contrary, while Hinrich has been shipped out of town several times over, "because he's hickory boy playing the right way" (felt the need to match DaBullz sarcasm), no such talk has dominated Ben. 

The fact is, no such talk needs to dominate EITHER player.

You like saying Gordon is untouchable, I'm simply saying nobody is untouchable. You may say Gordon is unstoppable, I say Gordon was unstoppable tonight. 

Maybe I'm just hopeful Gordon doesn't become the next guard in the "he's god", "he sucks" cycle of stupidity here at bbb.net.

I enjoyed the game and I was amazed by the performance. Way to pull it out and keep the streak alive! Go Ben, Go Bulls! (Get well Curry & Hinrich)


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

If the Bulls decide to play Hinrich at PG at all costs, then why not Gordon for Magette?

I don't see how we can keep Gordon happy as a bench player next season.

35 points tonight, sure. FIVE assists, too. The guy really can play PG, but he's not the pass-first variety.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

DaBullz said:


> If the Bulls decide to play Hinrich at PG at all costs, then why not Gordon for Magette?
> 
> I don't see how we can keep Gordon happy as a bench player next season.
> 
> 35 points tonight, sure. FIVE assists, too. The guy really can play PG, but he's not the pass-first variety.


I think the case has been made by many others that we already have in Hinrich, the type of player Gordon needs as a backcourt mate. 

Ben may have had 5 assists, but he's still got a long way to go before he looks like he could run an offense. But why bother? Again, Hinrich looks like the perfect compliment. 

I don't understand why anyone would think Gordon won't be a starter next year. I say Gordon, Hinrich, Deng, Chandler, Curry looks very formidable. Next year ought to be the year Skiles alters their breaks as opposed to splitting their minutes. The deep rotation won't be as necessary as these guys start playing big time ball together.

Finally, I think what we saw tonight is what Gordon can do when he's got a backcourt mate who is also a threat. Pargo stepped up offensively and Ben exploded. That pre-requisite may have been taken for granted before. I think that is another indicator that the Hinrich-Gordon pairing is a good one.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Since 1960, only 3 players have scored more than 35 points in 23 minutes or less.

DAMN!!!


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

bullsville said:


> Since 1960, only 3 players have scored more than 35 points in 23 minutes or less.
> 
> DAMN!!!


You are talking about a TOTAL of 23 minutes right? Cause if not, as I alluded to, its been done in a half. In the finals, at that.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

I think most of the Kirk/Ben problems comes from their abilities on the defensive end. How will they fare against the Kobe, T-Mac, Pierce contingent of bigger 2 guards. Honestly, here is what I'd like to see down the line...

PG - Kirk Hinrich
SG - Ben Gordon
SF - Andres Nocioni
PF - Free Agent Pickup
C - Tyson Chandler

Chris Duhon(PG)
Luol Deng(SG/SF)
Antonio Davis(PF/C)

Basically, we'd have to replace Curry with a 4 who can score buckets. Deng would be the guy guarding the bigger twos in a lineup with Nocioni when it's needed. And after next season we'd have to find a veteran big guy who can hit the jumper and play some D. A 9-man rotation suits me, so I'd like to see an athletic swingman that'll hit the break and finish at the rim. Not sure who fits the bill of these three pieces, but that's personally what I would like to see.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

The Krakken said:


> You are talking about a TOTAL of 23 minutes right? Cause if not, as I alluded to, its been done in a half. In the finals, at that.


I'm assuming, that's just what they said on NBA Fastbreak.

EDIT: Yeah, it's for a player who logged 23 minutes or less in a game.

The record? 38. Who holds it? A former Bull.

Any guesses?


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

hype notwithstanding, nobody is untradeable, or untouchable if Shaq isn't. Yes, it was dumb to trade Shaq
But Ben isn't Shaq either. He's a guard.

and it all depends on what Ben projects to be if i would trade him. If he's just a shooter (albeit cold-blooded clutch) off the bench, or a one dimensional guy....its in the realm of considerable. Please.

He may indeed be an all-star starter. If he is, its tough to trade him. But its easier if he's not a complete player. Is he or will he be a complete player?....just asking.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

bullsville said:


> I'm assuming, that's just what they said on NBA Fastbreak.
> 
> EDIT: Yeah, it's for a player who logged 23 minutes or less in a game.
> 
> ...


Dragan Tarlac ?


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Machinehead said:


> Dragan Tarlac ?


You could have let a few people guess before you gave it away. :curse:


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Nobody on this team is untouchable, I thought we went through this with Hinrich? Gordon is untouchable from the stand point that he is working out for us, so we don't need to trade him, but by the same logic, so is everyone else on the team. 

If a trade makes us better, we should do it, regardless of who is involved.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

bullsville said:


> You could have let a few people guess before you gave it away. :curse:


LOL!! NOw you all know how I felt in the 30ppg thread..... :curse: :biggrin:


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

if gordon's going to hit almost every shot in the fourth quarter, then that just lessons the need for a starting big SG. if ben wants to start next year, being in the starting line-up with kirk, deng and chandler with curry improving should make up for ben's defensive woes.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

The Krakken said:


> LOL!! NOw you all know how I felt in the 30ppg thread..... :curse: :biggrin:


How did I know you would bring that up? :biggrin:


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

fleetwood macbull said:


> ...
> 
> He may indeed be an all-star starter. If he is, its tough to trade him. But its easier if he's not a complete player. Is he or will he be a complete player?....just asking.


Every indication so far is that he is a hard worker and very coachable. We've seen the results of his work in practice as he's already been improving throughout his rookie season. While he may never be a "complete" player -- who is? -- I'm sure that he'll become a better player than he is now, and he's certainly already more than an adequate option at SG.


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Mr. T said:


> Maybe I'm just hopeful Gordon doesn't become the next guard in the "he's god", "he sucks" cycle of stupidity here at bbb.net.



O man, I hope that wasn't a Jamal Crawford comparison. 

If it was than you just lost all credibility in my mind. 

If it wasn't then who are you comparing him to? Personally, I think it's quite clear... but please clarify if that was not a JC comparison, and maybe you can save some face.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Gordon is Untouchable*

That's not what the Luv-a-Bulls have indicated.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

madox said:


> O man, I hope that wasn't a Jamal Crawford comparison.
> 
> If it was than you just lost all credibility in my mind.
> 
> If it wasn't then who are you comparing him to? Personally, I think it's quite clear... but please clarify if that was not a JC comparison, and maybe you can save some face.


 
If you calmed down you might see it was a clear comparison to Crawford, Williams and then Hinrich. 

Your theatrics aside, its a plea to can the hero worship for those inclined to do so. It's also a plea to can the ragging of our players for those likewise inclined to do so. 

It has absolutely nothing to do with making any comparisons between players with respect to talent. It has everything to do with keeping things in perspective.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

Wynn said:


> Every indication so far is that he is a hard worker and very coachable. We've seen the results of his work in practice as he's already been improving throughout his rookie season. While he may never be a "complete" player -- who is? -- I'm sure that he'll become a better player than he is now, and he's certainly already more than an adequate option at SG.


all true. yet theres only like oh maybe 5-10 "untradeable or "untouchables" in the NBA. If that. And he causes some matchup problems, and system problems because his backcourt mate is out of position at least on defense. Lets not go bananas. 

Hes a damn good player though


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

fleetwood macbull said:


> all true. yet theres only like oh maybe 5-10 "untradeable or "untouchables" in the NBA. If that. And he causes some matchup problems, and system problems because his backcourt mate is out of position at least on defense. Lets not go bananas.
> 
> Hes a damn good player though


Good point.

He can't be considered untouchable if you would trade him straight up for another player. I would trade Gordon for Shaq, for instance.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

bullsville said:


> Since 1960, only 3 players have scored more than 35 points in 23 minutes or less.
> 
> DAMN!!!


I have been a supporter or Skiles' minutes management for Ben. I do believe it is what has help keep Ben's rookie legs fresh and help get the message across that he has work to do on other aspects of his game.

But I have to say that the reason only 3 players have scored more than 35 points in 23 minutes or less since 1960 is probably because when a player has the ability to drop that many points that quickly, the coach, um, plays him.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I have been a supporter or Skiles' minutes management for Ben. I do believe it is what has help keep Ben's rookie legs fresh and help get the message across that he has work to do on other aspects of his game.
> 
> But I have to say that the reason only 3 players have scored more than 35 points in 23 minutes or less since 1960 is probably because when a player has the ability to drop that many points that quickly, the coach, um, plays him.


Yeah, I would think that the other 3 players did it because of injury, foul trouble or ejection... the Bull who holds the record, for example, I could easily see him getting ejected.


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> *Re: Gordon is Untouchable*
> 
> That's not what the Luv-a-Bulls have indicated.



:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

Rhyder said:


> Good point.
> 
> He can't be considered untouchable if you would trade him straight up for another player. I would trade Gordon for Shaq, for instance.



If anyone read the original post I was talking about realistic trades, which doesn't include stuff like Shaq or LeBron straight up for Gordon. 

My point was that a trade like Gordon for Maggette will never happen.


----------

