Plan B: Shooting Guard

[TheGuiltyParty]

SF76 posted his most recent update on the other board....

The Sixers think Jamont Gordon or McClellan will make the team this fall.

Josh Childress will be wined and dined here on Monday.

The Smith visit as you have seen on TV is going well....he will leave town with a verbal offer.....the Sixers are trying to move Green or Evans with the Utah pick as incentive around the league for any bit of cap relief they can get.

Maggette may not wait until the Josh Smith thing is over to sign with a contender for the mid level.

The backup plan if no PF is to move Thad to the 4 spot again and get a SG moving Andre Iguodala to the SF.

WE seem to have all our eggs in one basket right now.

I know Childress is coming in but am I wrong for thinking the Sixers should also bring in Ben Gordon? If we're going to go with a 2 guard, I'd prefer to get a scorer like Gordon than Childress. I also think Gordon could possibly co-exist in a backcourt with Iguodala if/when Miller leaves the team.

So much for the big splash or the PF. I think I can live with Thad and Speights splitting time at the 4 though.

[Howardmgm3]

I just do not see Gordan as that much of an upgrade over Lou Willliams.  I see both as an 3'd guard instant offense combo guard off the bench type....

[tk76-]

Yes, I think you are wrong- but I'm just not a Gordon fan.  I would not want him on the Sixers.  He is skilled, and good to have on the floor in clutch situations- but I would not want him as our SG.  To much of a high volume/low percentage shooter who brings little else.

As a Philly fan, we know what is like to have low percentage high volume shooters- and he does not bring the positives of AI.

[tk76-]

Thanks for the SF update, although it is not hugely encouraging.  Hopefully we get some better news in the next few days.

[TheGuiltyParty]

I think I would take Maggette over Gordon but Childress is WAY down on my list. When is Ed going to investigate this trade market? I mean, he said he got offers on Draft Night for his cap space and he's repeatedly said that they can use the space in a trade (we all know this). Anyway, while he might be able to keep a tight lip on any negotiations he is having with other teams, it doesn't mean the other team is able to do the same. I've said it before and I'll say it again... I'm a little disappointed at the lack of rumors involving us.

As SF76 said, right now all of our eggs are in one basket. That doesn't seem like a good decision.

[bebopdeluxe]

TGP:

If we are not going to get Smith, and we look to get a Chicago Bulls guard on the team, I would prefer Hinrich.  As somebody once said to me, 2's and 3's are a dime-a-dozen...but PG's and legit bigs are the key.

I would rather lock down the PG position for the next few years than bring in another high-volume, low-percentage SG...we had that for a decade...and we still have one on the roster.  And I do believe that - if Hinrich was here, we could play Iggy at the 2 and get through another season without that prototypical PF.

Still need to lose Miller's contract, though...

[TheGuiltyParty]

I agree about Hinrich but it's not a given that he's available. I said on realgm that signing Gordon to a big offer sheet could make Hinrich available if the Bulls match, so maybe that's the way to go.

If we don't get Smith, this could end up being a really busy off-season. If we got Smith, Stefanski might call it a day and roll into next season with the roster the way it is. If we don't get Smith, Stefanski may get creative (trading Miller) and that could mean 1 or 2 more moves.

Also... one of the worst case scenarios could be Ed trading Evans and Utah's pick to some team for cap space and then not landing anyone with that extra space. That would mean that Ed struck out in free agency and stripped this team of a couple of assets. I'm sure that won't happen but I'm just saying....

[Derek Bodner]

To much of a high volume/low percentage shooter who brings little else.

How is he high volume/low percentage?  He only averages 14 attempts per game for his career, and averages 1.23 pps.  His FG% isn't great (although not terrible either, at 43.2%), but that's not taking into account that nearly 1/3 of his makes are 3's, and that he gets to the line, and converts (86% for his career).

His eFG% last year was 50% on the dot.  To put that in perspective, Iguodala's was 49.5%, despite making 45.6% of his attempts.  Andre Miller's was 49.4%.  On the high end of the spectrum for guards is LeBron (51.8%).  Kobe's was 50.3%.  Low percentage shooters would be guys like Carney (45.2%).   Josh Smith was 46.8%.

If you're just looking at fg%, then I could see Gordon being a low percentage shooter.  But that doesn't really tell the whole story, IMO.  When you factor in 3's, Gordon's a very high percentage shooter.

[bebopdeluxe]

dabods:

I appreciate what you are saying about Gordon's eFG%...and 86% from the line is nice...but I'm not getting a chubby over his 43% from the field, and I don't view Gordon as some kind of defensive stud, either (although I am certianly open to hearing stats that would smack me down there, as well).

[Derek Bodner]

but I'm not getting a chubby over his 43%

eFG% doesn't include FT's.  It simply adds the appropriate value for 3 pointers over 2 pointers.  A 43% shooter making 2 three's per game is inherently more valuable than a 43% shooter making none.  That's why despite Igduodala shooting 45.6% last year, Gordon had a higher eFG%.

Gordon's eFG% during his career:
2007-2008: 50%
2006-2007: 51.3%
2005-2006: 49.5%
2004-2005: 47.5%

Gordon has never been a low percentage shooter.  In fact, the last 3 years he's been a very high percentage shooter.  Looking at just FG% to make the claim that he is a low percentage shooter is a fallacy considering the amount of 3 point attempts he makes and the high percentage he shoots them.

[TheGuiltyParty]

What I like a LOT about Ben Gordon is that he's able to get his points in a half-court set unlike almost every other player on this team (this could change as the players gain experience and get better). If we had a proven scorer on this team, I would probably be against him but I think he's a really good fit for this team.

[Derek Bodner]

What I like a LOT about Ben Gordon is that he's able to get his points in a half-court set unlike almost every other player on this team

Agreed.  He's most definitely NOT a defensive stud (although from what I remember in Chicago, he does a lot better when there's a shot blocker behind him), but his strengths is exactly what this team is lacking.  His shooting would go a long way to helping in the half court set.  If he could be had relatively cheaply, then I'm actually pretty much for signing him.

[bebopdeluxe]

TGP:

What I DON'T like about Gordon is his defense is less-than stellar, and my sense (which can probably be disputed) that ball movement tends to die a little when Gordon is out there.

Not Willie Green-die, mind you...

 

There are lots of offensively-productive 2's and 3's out there who put up numbers on teams that go nowhere...and I guess that my impression - rightly or wrongly - is that Gordon fits that mold.

[Pure Hatred]

Ugh, Childress is a good player but exactly the wrong type of player we need for this team.

+ He's an efficient scorer off the bench
- But he can't really score in boatloads and you wouldn't really be able to count on him to score consistently.
+ Sure, he's better than Carney and/or Green as our swingman backup, but I don't want to be spending our cap space on a position where we do not have the greatest need. This is hardly a Bowie/ Jordan scenario.
- One of his best skills offensively (IMO, offensive rebounding) is already provided by a forward on our roster. His name is Thaddeus Young. You can only have so many offensive rebounds and minutes to go around.

I'd much rather have players like Pietrus, Vujacic or Maurice Evans at a lower price than Childress, who doesn't fill a need at all and will certainly command a high price tag.


But yeah, Gordon would be a good player to go after if/when(?) we don't get Smith

[Derek Bodner]

There are lots of offensively-productive 2's and 3's out there who put up numbers on teams that go nowhere...and I guess that my impression - rightly or wrongly - is that Gordon fits that mold.

Keep in mind that the Bulls did make the playoffs the previous three years, with Gordon playing a major part in that (24, 31 and 33 mpg, 15, 17, 21 ppg).  His PER differential was also very good those 3 years, including a +7.7 in 2006-2007 that was second on the team to Deng (to put that in comparison, Iguodala was a +6.9 this year as our best player).