who would you rather have? Ben Gordon is an unrestricted free agent. Could we get Ben if we didn't sign Ronny? http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=FreeAgents-09-10
Jesus, Shane cant get any respect from some of you people, you just want to see a guy who will have youtube highlights I guess...
Man come on, really? You want to know that if we take off Rons 8 can we pick up the guy asking for a 50 million dollar deal? The salaries don't even match right now. Boo sir, booooooooooooo
well they are both free agents. it doesn't seem like anyone would offer Ron the same length and amount of money as Ben Gordon, but you never know. Gordon can be a chucker and with the economy, etc, etc. The obvious problem with Ben is that he is undersized. But I think he could be a decent fit. he is actually a SG, which it doesn't seem like the team has had in forever. And he is, without question, a scorer. He strikes me as a better, shorter version of Wafer. So are they sign and tradable for each other - unlikely. Artest could be a decent fit in Chicago as they continue to improve, but I don't think it's likely. Lebron, Wade and Kobe he's not, but he shot 45.5% on the season and 41% from three, gets to the line 4+ times a game. He's just too short.
well, both jack up shots, but ron on a good day is about 23-24 points, but gordon on a good day is 30-35....so........
I'd rather have Artest for his defense, but if we also lost Wafer and McGrady, I'd probably favor Gordon over Artest. But knowing me, I'd see who I could get for the least amount of money. But good heaven, I'm cheap mother lover.