Would you trade Battier for Ben Gordon?

I really don't get how you and lots of others on this board think Battier should start over Artest to make our bench stronger. I mean I get the logic, but don't see the fit with this scenario. I think you all are too in love with the SA Ginobili example. Most 6th men that come off the bench are not completely better players in every category over who is starting in front of them, but they are usually specialists in offense coming off the bench; and sometimes defensive specialists coming off the bench. Artest is better than Battier in every category. If Adelman starts Battier over Artest..I will be shocked!

That being said, I would NOT trade Battier for Gordon, or really anyone other than an elite starting PG, which I know is not out there for us to get in a straight up trade for Battier, hence to me we should not trade Battier at all. We only need a good backup PG and C at this point. I would not trade Battier to get either one of those. Battier makes us too good off the bench defensively and still does have an offensive game against other teams' bench.

 

Because it just makes the team better. Artest is both a better defensive and superior offensive player than Battier. There have been tons of games that we were with out the services of either Yao or TMac. There are also plenty of times that Yao started out hot but not TMac and vice versa. Having 3 legit offensive forces on the floor together is just better than 2. Imagine the benifits to both Rafer and Scola's games with another offensive dynamo in the game.

Ginobli comes off the bench in SA out of neccisity because their team suffers badly on offense when they go to the bench. If SA had a Ben Gordon on their team then I don't doubt for a second that Ginobli would start. Having said that Ginobli is a good defender but not on the scale of a Bruce Bowen.

That is the beauty of having Ron Artest in the starting line up in place of Battier...while we dramatically improve our starting offense we also improve our defense as well.

Artest may be one of only a very few (Kobe, Duncan, KG) that can say they are superstars on both ends of the court.

 

But he hasn't even been an all-star in a number of years. For now, let's just say he's very good on both ends and leave it at that.

 

We can't trade Battier away unless we get an offer that we are completely blown away with. Plus Bat is our best 3 pt shooter and Gordon gets shot happy most of the time

 

Reasons for him not making the all star teams have nothing to do with his talent or on the court ability.

He IS arguably the single best defender in the NBA. On offense his numbers speak for themselves.

Say what you want but he has superstar ability on both ends of the court.

 

Who is a better 3pt shooter? Battier or Gordon? I think we all know the answer to that question is Gordon.

 

He sure looked tremendous last February 13th, when Novak's clutch shot saved us from being destroyed by Ron, shooting 11/18 (2-2 from Downtown) for 30 points, with 4 boards, 4 assists, and 3 steals. I remember thinking Artest singlehandedly put the Kings on his back and damn near pulled off the win. The guy has an incredible desire to win and I think that's part of what's landed him in trouble in the past. I'd rather he had that desire, along with his obvious talent, then to have the talent and be "one of the guys."

 

Batter's 3 point shooting is created by TMAC and Yao. will he do that as a backup?

Gordon can create his own shot and shoot better. He can also backup Rafer. It is a big plus.

back to reality, Battier is not worth much to any non contending team. he wont get us anything that we need. Ben Gordon is just a dream. It is just crazy some of you can say that Battier is better than Gordon to this team.

 

great stats.

I would just like to add that if you have a guy coming off of the bench in a Vinnie Johnson type role you don't want him to be shy about shooting the Rock. Perticularly if he is as good at scoring as Gordon is.

 

You have a good point about Battiers 3s created by Tmac and Yao (although you have to think Battier comes in for one of Artest or Tmac so he'll still have two superstars on the floor to give him open shots). On the other hand, Gordon is a scorer and nothing else. If he's the 4th option on this team, how much can that scoring help?

Consider the Boston Celtics and James Posey. Battier has similar skills to Posey, good 3 point shot and plays defense. Now... do you think Gordon would've been a better fit for the Celtics? I say no for the same reason. As the 4th option, he's not going to be getting that many shots.

Now... the Celtics scenerio is slightly different from the Rockets scenario as they could bring in Posey to play along side their defensive stopper (Garnett) while we can't really do that unless Artest plays 4.

 

Than that means you'd be waiting til the end of time for a superstar swap for Battier.

I don't see anyone in their right minds ever pulling off a trade like that. Then again we did trade Gay for him and who knows what he'll turn out to be in the next few years.

If anything I wish their were more GM's that worked for the Lakers, Heat, Cavs, and Bulls that thought more like you and would trade trash for gold, in comparison. I'm not saying that he is complete trash I just mean that compared to any of the superstars in our league Battier is sub par.

So please don't make ridiculous statements that everyone knows for a fact would never, ever, ever, ever happen in the NBA.

OR WOULD IT???

 

will Ben Gordon accept a 8 or 9 mil per year deal from us? (thats Battier + Head + Harris)

Very doubtful...

Will we offer Gordon more?

Very doubtful.

that said...I do believe Ben Gordon is the better player out of him and Battier...both overall and as a fit for the Rockets.I love Shane but he sucks in the playoffs where it really matters, and reducing Kevin Durant to 4 points doesn't exactly impact our record much, if at all. All this talk about his defensive prowess is true, but in the playoffs we haven't seen how that was able to help us win.

 

Your critique of Battier's playoff performances has some holes in it. He shot 31-68 (46%) from three, 45% overall and averaged over 10 ppg in the playoffs since becoming a Rocket. He also averaged nearly 40 mpg during that stretch and barely turned the ball over. In other words, he was extremely efficient. And, you also have to consider his defensive contributions, as usual, even if he was a bit hobbled in the last series.

The point being I don't think you can blame Battier for losing those two series against Utah. The team lost, not one player. Statistically, it's easier to make the argument that we would have lost by more without Battier.

Having said that, I actually would give up Battier for Gordon if we could afford to sign both him and Artest long-term. It's not that I don't appreciate Battier, I just think Gordon would fill a greater need as another scoring perimeter player off the bench.

 

Excellant analogy and points of view on the Ginobili comparison that many here seem to think is the same as ours. Great post.

 

Gordon plans on leaving the Bulls
<i>
In a new development, Bulls guard Ben Gordon said he wouldn't sign the Bulls' one-year qualifying offer of $6.4 million, setting the stage for a possible stalemate.

"I'm definitely not taking it," Gordon said Friday night at a charity function in New York. "I've already expressed that to them. I mean, that's not an option."

Gordon also offered hollow ultimatums about playing his last game for the Bulls since, as a restricted free agent, he can't force a sign-and-trade. The Bulls' leading scorer for the last three seasons could choose to sign in Europe or sit out a season.

Nevertheless, general manager John Paxson could explore the sign-and-trade route rather than deal with an unhappy Gordon, whose desire to sign a long-term extension with the Bulls has produced wide disparities in contract negotiations for two straight summers.

"It's a numbers game there," Gordon said. "Obviously, they don't want to pay the luxury tax.

"Last season, even though we had a poor season, I was one of the players that suffered the most on the team because at the trade deadline we brought in even more guards and I saw my minutes drop. And there really was no merit for that. I really don't understand why my minutes dropped. This year, the problem is still the same. I don't see it getting better. Maybe somewhere else is better for my career."

Asked if he believed he'd played his last game for the Bulls, Gordon said: "Yeah, I guess that's safe to say. ... Unless something changes with the negotiations, but I really don't see that happening right now."
<b>
Gordon turned down a five-year, $50-million extension last summer. The most the Bulls can offer without incurring the luxury tax is a six-year, $58 million deal. Gordon seeks upward of $72 million.
</b>
"I was definitely trying to work something out with the Bulls," Gordon said. "I told them I wanted to go back. It was a numbers game."</I>

<hr>

Hottoddie,

A core part of your position in this thread is that Gordon will take a deal for less than what was offered to him last season.

From you <b>opening post</b> in this thread:

Later in the thread.........

We aren't missing the bonus of a point producer off of the bench. You keep missing that Gordon has given no indication of signing a contract for less than was offered to him last season. When other mention Gordon turning down the 5 year $50 million extension, you wave it off and/or don't respond at all. When it is mentioned that it would be too expensive for the Rockets to pay the combined salaries of McGrady, Yao, Gordon (at probably 10 million or better first year) and a resigned Artest (at probably 10 million or better first year) in 2009, you wave it off and/or don't respond.

In a recent post, you did some research pulling up various stat information;

Before you got hostile and post things like this:

You should have stepped forward yourself and provide documentation to support this from your<b> initial post</b> in the thread:

Many of the people posting against you in this thread are basing their opposition to trading for Gordon on the <B>documentation</b> showing that Gordon wants more than the <I>first year $8.0 million range</I>. Your position in this thread is based much more on an ethereal foundation and you seem unable to realize that.

<b>Provide documentation</b> to support your <I>first year $8.0 million range</I> premise and you will win over more people to your POV.

 

I agree with the first part, but Barry and Artest both had better years percentage wise in 3 pointers than Battier did last year.

 

Nuff said...good post.

 

It's called matchups. Battier and pretty much this whole team isn't a real good matchup for Utah. It's unfortunate we have to keep running into these punks.

If we played the Lakers and Battier plays his standard D on Kobe, something tells me he wouldn't be so sucky as far as his playoff value goes. The players Battier would guard on the Jazz weren't huge scoring threats, so that's why you didn't see The Bat Man at his best. That isn't a reason to trade him though, especially for someone who isn't nearly the defensive player as Shane.

Another example was Nowitzky in the Warriors series vs how he played the previous year when they went to the Finals. GS was just a bad matchup for him.

 

I would say that is not a good trade with respect.