Battier was also a lottery pick (6th overall in 2001). Having said that, I would trade him for a guy like Gordon if we could afford signing both Artest and Gordon to long-term deals. Unfortunately, that isn't likely going to happen.
I know he was, that along with the Gay trade, Olympic berth and all the fans here tells me he is definitely overrated. And your argument is the only one I would buy for not replacing him with Gordon.
you just saw it with Boston ... Defense wins championships! Battier is more valuable to us than Gordon given his reasonable contract, and Gordon's sure-to-be unreasonable salary expectations. Furthermore, he's a bad defender ...furthermore, he's a streaky shooter ...furthermore, he's like 6 feet nothing. I think Gordon is a good SG, don't get me wrong, but I've learned that you need height, consistancy, and defense from the 2 position ... in addition to shooting. THis wouldn't be a bad deal, but im not sure it would be worth breaking up the Chemistry for a guy like Ben Gordon, knowing that we won't be able to resign both him and Artest. I say no way.
That is a tough call, i guess the anwer would be whom would play better with Yao and Tracy. The answer is Shane. Ben is too one dimensional, see a little bit better than Bobby Jackson. He would come off the bench and hoist up a lot of shots and sometimes they wil fall and somtimes they wont. Shane is going to play D every night and can hit that corner three with his eyes closed. In the finals do you know how many times James Posey was given that shot in the corner.
I would definitley take that trade if we was willing to take a little less for a championship. A lot of people are saying that Battier hustles and has good D, yes which is true, but we really need scoring. i know we have Artest but if you add Gordon to the mix we would be a killer squad. Ben is a great shooter palying for a bad team. I know that Shane hits those corner 3's like crazy but imagine having someone that can take a lot of the shots that were missed by our Head's, Alston's, and even Battier's and taken by a clutch shooter like Ben Gordon. He would definitley have the shots come his way with Tmac, Yao, and Artest workin down low. And we could use him against the j*zz when they try to clog up the lane in the playoffs. if we meet them again that is.
Gordon's a great player who in most circumstances I would take instatnly for Battier. But beacuse this tema already has 3 superstars, all much better than Gordon, we don't need him. I'd rather have someone to help put down the otehr teams scoring.
i say we trade luther and dorsey to the bucks for francisco elson and some cash(if we can get it) and then sign landry, deke & bonzi(if we get the cash) Championchip roster complete: alston/francis/brooks(barry will spot minutes and i think francis will contribute) tmac /barry /bonzi(either backup can get you 20 depending on the night) ron /shane /harris(DEFENSE!!, harris wont play........yet) scola/landry /hayes(all have great roles, solid postion for us) yao /eslon /deke (enough height to match any team) tell me im not a genious!!
I don't think anyone (anyone sane atleast) is saying Battier is better than Gordon. Battier is a nice role player, but Gordon is younger, better scorer (can score on his own). Gordon can't play defense, but in the 6th man role that is basically a wash. I think if the trade was Battier for Gordon straight up with no other variables, everyone would do that deal. Unfortunately, that is not the case. There are some huge variables: 1. Ben wants to get paid... big: Ignoring the fact that the salaries might not even match up, Gordon wants big money. He wanted to be the highest paid player on the Bulls. I'd almost rather have an 8 million dollar Battier than a 14 million dollar overpaid Gordon. Plus... if he wants 14 million you have to think he wants to be the man of the team. This is the same thing we are worried about with Artest. We can't have a guy on the team causing chemistry issues because he thinks he's the ****. We did this with Mike James twice and it didn't work out either time. All this is a risk, but considering our need for a 3rd scorer is gone, the risk isn't near worth it. 2. This would cause some problem trying to resign Artest. We would be hitting lux cap territory fast and with other teams trying to make a bid for Artest I could see Morey just declaring it not worth it since we have Gordon who could start with Artest gone. And I would rather have Artest over Gordon for sure. 3. Chemistry issues: Gordon might not even want to be the 6th man. Plus... Battier is the perfect chemistry guy. You can only add so many "knuckleheads" before you become the Denver Nuggets. You have Artest, Rafer, and Gordon... if Battier leaves there goes your one guy that was probably the anchor in the lockerroom... Deke is the other one and he'll be gone soon. Perhaps I would've done this deal before we got Artest, but not now.
I would do it 100 percent, we trade Battier and get Gordon, he is our 6th man. The guy is insane when hot, plus it gives Artest the definite starting SF spot. But the only reason why I wouldn't do this trade because I have a strong feeling if we trade any one of our starters(Alston,Battier), that any chemistry would be lost.
Taking only age and pure talent/skill as the only factors, Gordon has Battier beat by a long shot. Battier plays solid defense, is a smart player and can hit the corner 3 all day long. But there are only a few players out there that can create their own shot. Gordon can, Battier can't. Plus, Gordon is younger. And for those that cry that we got duped on the Gay-Battier trade, this would basically be a reversal of that deal. Problem is, we already have 3 guys that can score at will. What we need are solid role players. Sure, there are only a few players that can create their shot, but there are just as few that are considered perfect role players. Guys like Battier who don't take shots away from stars, but you still can't leave em open, and they offer all kinds of intangibles (defense, leadership).
Everyone knows Gordon is a better offensive player than Battier, but we have 3 superstars that can score. Gordon is not a superstar but he think he is. When he's hot he's good but we don't need another volume shooter. He almost never passes, I watch the Bulls and when the ball touches his hand in the half court about 90% of the time he is going to shoot. A guy like him who handle the ball that much should easily average 5 apg(not 3apg). As much as these people complain about Steve, Gordon is worse. Atleast Steve averaged 5.7-7.0apg when healthy with the same amount of points that Gordon average. Don't get me wrong I like Gordon and would love to have him if we didn't have our 3rd scorer already. But I like him better doing his Kobe Bryant impersonation for the young Bulls.
NO way, we need batman and ron to shut down any stars in the playoff. Ben is just another Mike james.
would love to add ben gordon, but 1) He wants too much money 2) He does not fit the system here 3) He cant defend the point or the 2 spot If its just a plain trade of gordon and battier, i do it everyday. But with the addition of artest, the gordon role is pretty limited.
Only if he can play point guard (better than Rafer) , we already have a star player T-mac at the SG position and with Artest and Battier we are set at SF.
