Comments on: The Big Answer?: Ben Gordon http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/ Your Go-To Source For Pistons Coverage Tue, 21 May 2013 05:57:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: 2Tough http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29313 2Tough Wed, 11 May 2011 22:40:59 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29313 I'm seriously laughing at the notion of Will freaking Bynum being a better option at the starting point guard position than Rodney Stuckey. Bynum is AT BEST a spark-plug off the bench, ala JJ Barea (though I think Barea is much better). There are simply way too many holes in his game for him to be starting, let alone over a player who's pretty clearly superior to him (Stuckey). I’m seriously laughing at the notion of Will freaking Bynum being a better option at the starting point guard position than Rodney Stuckey. Bynum is AT BEST a spark-plug off the bench, ala JJ Barea (though I think Barea is much better). There are simply way too many holes in his game for him to be starting, let alone over a player who’s pretty clearly superior to him (Stuckey).

]]> By: Need some recipes for patient who can not have any salt, meat, artificial chemical in her diet.? | Osteoporosis Diagnosis http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29284 Need some recipes for patient who can not have any salt, meat, artificial chemical in her diet.? | Osteoporosis Diagnosis Wed, 11 May 2011 17:27:41 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29284 [...] The Big Answer?: Ben Gordon « PistonPowered [...] [...] The Big Answer?: Ben Gordon « PistonPowered [...]

]]> By: Laser http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29282 Laser Wed, 11 May 2011 17:04:38 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29282 yes. i still think bynum's probably a better option at PG than stuckey. but more than anything, i think he deserves an <strong>opportunity</strong> to earn the starting job. not for the last few games when we're plagued by injuries and just playing the season out, but with a full, healthy roster. it seems like everybody else gets a chance. why not give one to a guy who's shown more heart than all the prima donnas combined? tell him it's his job to lose (for once) and see what he can do running a team that's "his."   not long ago, someone (hayes maybe?) said that the reason bynum played out of control at times was because he was always playing like every minute was his last. this isn't a great mentality to go in with, but it's better than someone like stuckey, who's had all the chances in the world but coasts. if bynum took that work ethic and intensity he's consistently exhibited but dialed it back a bit and played a little more under control instead of feeling like he's playing for his job every night. i'm not saying bynum's the answer, just that he deserves an honest chance.   also, i'll think about stopping dogging joe dumars when he makes his next impressive personnel move. he's made numerous terrible decisions (trading our leader and best player for cap space, turning that cap space into two MAJOR liabilities, committing to stuckey way too quickly, putting a ton of money into two volume-shooting SGs, giving away arron afflalo for nothing, drafting three small forwards in perhaps the richest PG draft in history when we had a desperate need he refused to acknowledge, the list goes on...). but the thing is, he hasn't made a single solitary<strong> GOOD</strong> GM decision since signing dyess in 2005. that's a very long stretch.   and finally (i love this old one), joe had many options for how to use that cap space. he wasn't forced to use it at all. you won't convince very many smart people that it had to be spent. i mean, he cleared the cap space. it's not like the space was waiting for him. he traded years of contracts away to make that cap space. maybe he put all his eggs in the boozer basket, which would have been a bad idea in itself, but he chose to clear that space when he did. then he spent the money like an idiot. we would have been <strong>MUCH </strong>better off if he'd sat on it for the last two years. it's not like signing gordon and charlie was a "push." it was a disaster. my personal choice for using that cap space would have been to take on money in lopsided trades, fleecing teams who were hoping to strike gold last summer. there were a lot of quality players with reasonable price tags out there to be had. so don't give me this "he had to sign those guys" hogwash. yes. i still think bynum’s probably a better option at PG than stuckey. but more than anything, i think he deserves an opportunity to earn the starting job. not for the last few games when we’re plagued by injuries and just playing the season out, but with a full, healthy roster. it seems like everybody else gets a chance. why not give one to a guy who’s shown more heart than all the prima donnas combined? tell him it’s his job to lose (for once) and see what he can do running a team that’s “his.”
 
not long ago, someone (hayes maybe?) said that the reason bynum played out of control at times was because he was always playing like every minute was his last. this isn’t a great mentality to go in with, but it’s better than someone like stuckey, who’s had all the chances in the world but coasts. if bynum took that work ethic and intensity he’s consistently exhibited but dialed it back a bit and played a little more under control instead of feeling like he’s playing for his job every night. i’m not saying bynum’s the answer, just that he deserves an honest chance.
 
also, i’ll think about stopping dogging joe dumars when he makes his next impressive personnel move. he’s made numerous terrible decisions (trading our leader and best player for cap space, turning that cap space into two MAJOR liabilities, committing to stuckey way too quickly, putting a ton of money into two volume-shooting SGs, giving away arron afflalo for nothing, drafting three small forwards in perhaps the richest PG draft in history when we had a desperate need he refused to acknowledge, the list goes on…). but the thing is, he hasn’t made a single solitary GOOD GM decision since signing dyess in 2005. that’s a very long stretch.
 
and finally (i love this old one), joe had many options for how to use that cap space. he wasn’t forced to use it at all. you won’t convince very many smart people that it had to be spent. i mean, he cleared the cap space. it’s not like the space was waiting for him. he traded years of contracts away to make that cap space. maybe he put all his eggs in the boozer basket, which would have been a bad idea in itself, but he chose to clear that space when he did. then he spent the money like an idiot. we would have been MUCH better off if he’d sat on it for the last two years. it’s not like signing gordon and charlie was a “push.” it was a disaster. my personal choice for using that cap space would have been to take on money in lopsided trades, fleecing teams who were hoping to strike gold last summer. there were a lot of quality players with reasonable price tags out there to be had. so don’t give me this “he had to sign those guys” hogwash.

]]> By: Dan Feldman http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29280 Dan Feldman Wed, 11 May 2011 16:57:32 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29280 <p>Why do you assume the players offered for Gordon weren't also shooting guards? Also, the pick the Pistons offered Cleveland was lottery protected.</p> Why do you assume the players offered for Gordon weren’t also shooting guards? Also, the pick the Pistons offered Cleveland was lottery protected.

]]> By: Laser http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29279 Laser Wed, 11 May 2011 16:37:47 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29279 (Personal attack removed) 1) joe most certainly <strong>has</strong> been able to make trades the last year, he was just severely limited. he was allowed to take back draft picks and expiring contracts. that's been established. there was almost a highly publicized deadline trade that involved rip going to the cavaliers if you were paying any attention.   2) this "rumor" is not irrelevant. for a while now i've been an advocate of dumping ben gordon if it was possible, since trading rip has seemed all but impossible. we don't know if this "high profile player" was on an expiring contract (in which case joe could have pulled off that trade but chose not to) or not (in which case it's relevant based on the issue of <strong>gordon's intrinsic movability</strong>, not joe's freedom to move him).   3) in the simplest possible terms (Personal attack removed): i was simply responding to the assertion that joe could do NOTHING to alleviate the SG logjam (that joe made all on his own and, therefore, deserves much blame and no sympathy) by saying that <strong>we do not know</strong> what joe has been free to do. the organization sure insists that ben gordon is "tradable," so it sands to reason that somebody would have given us an expiring contract for him. could we have unloaded him for an expiring contract? i don't know. you don't know.   as for joe, i dislike him personally, but based only on his job performance. he's been that bad. every bit of "that bad." my hunch is that he's been too stubborn to do anything to this logjam besides futilely hoping on a wing and a prayer that he can somehow move rip. he would be better off in my eyes "admitting" his mistake and unloading ben gordon. if he's been refusing to pull the plug on gordon because it would be an admission of failure (i mean, you free up a TON of cap space and lock all of it up in two complete and total liabilities for five years... that's pretty bad GM'ing), he's compounding the problem and trying to save face rather than do his job of acting in the best interests of the team.   thing is, if joe could trade rip (even if he had to attach that future lottery pick), the organization could spin it any way they wanted. they could focus on "finally" being able to see stuckey and gordon together as our main guards, downplay the loss of the pick, act like it was a foregone conclusion that rip had to be moved (which, for some reason, even some clued-in people like hayes seem to believe), focus on the idea that the gordon signing is finally paying off (even though, regardless of what he does here for the next three years, it will be impossible for him to earn that contract now that the first two years have been a total loss). on the other hand, if he was forced to trade gordon instead (which has pretty much been the case so far, since rip looks untradeable), there's no positive spin to be made. we signed the guy as a top free agent, dropped a load of cash, and he was a dud here from day one before being traded away for cap space. there's no spin in the world to make that look acceptable. and yet, it's almost certainly the correct basketball decision. (Personal attack removed) 1) joe most certainly has been able to make trades the last year, he was just severely limited. he was allowed to take back draft picks and expiring contracts. that’s been established. there was almost a highly publicized deadline trade that involved rip going to the cavaliers if you were paying any attention.
 
2) this “rumor” is not irrelevant. for a while now i’ve been an advocate of dumping ben gordon if it was possible, since trading rip has seemed all but impossible. we don’t know if this “high profile player” was on an expiring contract (in which case joe could have pulled off that trade but chose not to) or not (in which case it’s relevant based on the issue of gordon’s intrinsic movability, not joe’s freedom to move him).
 
3) in the simplest possible terms (Personal attack removed): i was simply responding to the assertion that joe could do NOTHING to alleviate the SG logjam (that joe made all on his own and, therefore, deserves much blame and no sympathy) by saying that we do not know what joe has been free to do. the organization sure insists that ben gordon is “tradable,” so it sands to reason that somebody would have given us an expiring contract for him. could we have unloaded him for an expiring contract? i don’t know. you don’t know.
 
as for joe, i dislike him personally, but based only on his job performance. he’s been that bad. every bit of “that bad.” my hunch is that he’s been too stubborn to do anything to this logjam besides futilely hoping on a wing and a prayer that he can somehow move rip. he would be better off in my eyes “admitting” his mistake and unloading ben gordon. if he’s been refusing to pull the plug on gordon because it would be an admission of failure (i mean, you free up a TON of cap space and lock all of it up in two complete and total liabilities for five years… that’s pretty bad GM’ing), he’s compounding the problem and trying to save face rather than do his job of acting in the best interests of the team.
 
thing is, if joe could trade rip (even if he had to attach that future lottery pick), the organization could spin it any way they wanted. they could focus on “finally” being able to see stuckey and gordon together as our main guards, downplay the loss of the pick, act like it was a foregone conclusion that rip had to be moved (which, for some reason, even some clued-in people like hayes seem to believe), focus on the idea that the gordon signing is finally paying off (even though, regardless of what he does here for the next three years, it will be impossible for him to earn that contract now that the first two years have been a total loss). on the other hand, if he was forced to trade gordon instead (which has pretty much been the case so far, since rip looks untradeable), there’s no positive spin to be made. we signed the guy as a top free agent, dropped a load of cash, and he was a dud here from day one before being traded away for cap space. there’s no spin in the world to make that look acceptable. and yet, it’s almost certainly the correct basketball decision.

]]> By: detroitpcb http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29248 detroitpcb Wed, 11 May 2011 11:02:59 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29248 Ben Gordon is a bum: he is careless with the ball, easily ripped, cannot play defense, cannot get over a screen, is undersized for his position, forces high degree of difficulty shots, and with the Pistons has been the exact oppposite of clutch. As soon as Joe's hands are untied - he should get rid of Gordon. And after watching last season and seeing Will Bynum (during the stretch in the middle when he was playing well) consistently blow games by making bad decisions that inevitably involved him shooting the ball instead of setting up teammates........how can anybody, even Laser, suggest that Bynum is a better option than Stuckey? And lets stop dogging Joe Dumars. He made one terrible decision to sign Gordon, and one shakey decision to sign CV, but he was kind of forced to use that cap space and there wasn't much to be had that year - and those folks who say the Pistons should have saved that space for the LeBron sweepstakes....get real....none of the big free agents from that class were coming to Detroit.  Ben Gordon is a bum: he is careless with the ball, easily ripped, cannot play defense, cannot get over a screen, is undersized for his position, forces high degree of difficulty shots, and with the Pistons has been the exact oppposite of clutch.

As soon as Joe’s hands are untied – he should get rid of Gordon.

And after watching last season and seeing Will Bynum (during the stretch in the middle when he was playing well) consistently blow games by making bad decisions that inevitably involved him shooting the ball instead of setting up teammates……..how can anybody, even Laser, suggest that Bynum is a better option than Stuckey?

And lets stop dogging Joe Dumars. He made one terrible decision to sign Gordon, and one shakey decision to sign CV, but he was kind of forced to use that cap space and there wasn’t much to be had that year – and those folks who say the Pistons should have saved that space for the LeBron sweepstakes….get real….none of the big free agents from that class were coming to Detroit. 

]]> By: steve http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29247 steve Wed, 11 May 2011 10:29:46 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29247 @laser...  dont u realize joe hasnt been able to make ANY trades in the last couple years, especially not ones with "high profile" stars coming back..  u are just trying to take an irrelevent trade rumor, (which would have been nixed by karen davidson anyway) and using it to paint joe d in a bad light, bc u personally dont like him.  if u are going to say something to criticize him, then u should use common sense... @laser…  dont u realize joe hasnt been able to make ANY trades in the last couple years, especially not ones with “high profile” stars coming back..  u are just trying to take an irrelevent trade rumor, (which would have been nixed by karen davidson anyway) and using it to paint joe d in a bad light, bc u personally dont like him.  if u are going to say something to criticize him, then u should use common sense…

]]> By: Laser http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29225 Laser Wed, 11 May 2011 06:08:59 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29225 <strong>may 5, page two:</strong> "Joe Dumars has fielded numerous trade requests for Gordon. It happened at the trade deadlines in both of his seasons with the Pistons. I have knowledge of a trade offer made to the Pistons that involved a high-profile player coming the other way..." something tells me it's gilbert arenas. i dunno... link: http://www.nba.com/pistons/chat_mailbox/mailbag_110505_2.html may 5, page two:
“Joe Dumars has fielded numerous trade requests for Gordon. It happened at the trade deadlines in both of his seasons with the Pistons. I have knowledge of a trade offer made to the Pistons that involved a high-profile player coming the other way…”

something tells me it’s gilbert arenas. i dunno…

link: http://www.nba.com/pistons/chat_mailbox/mailbag_110505_2.html

]]> By: Laser http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29223 Laser Wed, 11 May 2011 05:51:56 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29223 one or two 'bags ago. should be easy enough to find if you just scan the last few. it pissed me off for a few reasons. one or two ‘bags ago. should be easy enough to find if you just scan the last few. it pissed me off for a few reasons.

]]> By: Dan Feldman http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/comment-page-1/#comment-29211 Dan Feldman Wed, 11 May 2011 02:08:30 +0000 http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/05/the-big-answer-ben-gordon/#comment-29211 <p>"in a recent Pistons Mailbag keith langlois insisted that joe had multiple offers for ben gordon last season, including one with a “big name” player coming back"</p> <p>Where did Langlois say that?</p> “in a recent Pistons Mailbag keith langlois insisted that joe had multiple offers for ben gordon last season, including one with a “big name” player coming back”

Where did Langlois say that?

]]>