Do we need to go the Bulls/Mavs route with Mo?

[EastSideBucksFan]

The Chicago Bulls offered Ben Gordon a $50M extention to stay with the Bulls. It seems as though they had always planned to keep him a bench scorer. Even with the new coach in place, he is still coming off the bench.


The Mavericks paid Jason Terry $50M to be a starting PG for one year just to have him sent to the bench when Devin Harris was brought in.


Mo is very comparable to both these players, moreso to JET but also to Ben Gordon.

The Bucks paid Mo $50M to be our starting PG, but we have never won with him as our starting PG.

When TJ Ford was here, Mo excelled at a 6th man role of SG/PG off the bench.

It's obvious to plenty we need to upgrade our defense in our backcourt.

Would it or could it ever work to start Charlie Bell and bring Mo off the bench or would that just screw with team chemistry too much. Would Mo ever be able to accept that bringing him off the bench on this team, would be best for this team? Or would his ego be so big that he would demand to be traded?

Have the Bucks ever come close to broaching this subject?

Do LK really believe in Mo as our starting PG?


You can say he's paid to be our starter, but look at what the Bulls and Mavs have done with very comparable players.

Regardless of salary structure, you need to do what is best for the team.


I am a big supporter of Mo and think he brings a lot to the table, but I also can't stand watching him not play defense night after night.


I know there is already another Mo thread and I hate to start another Mo debate, but I was really thinking about this last night and wanted to see the general consesus.

Would Mo ever accept coming off the bench in a long term role?

He could still play plenty of minutes, he would just be filling a role more beneficial to the team.

[MickeyDavis]

There is no need for a separate thread on Mo.

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=767730