Eric Gordon

shrink · Post #1 » by **shrink** » Mon May 23, 2011 12:22 pm

This probably isn't worth a thread, because I don't know if this poster is legit, but if this is true, it's worth sticking away in the back of our minds.

geistmoney wrote: 2.) I'm from Indy and have personal ties to Eric Gordon. Eric hates LA and expressed interest in playing for a Midwest team. Indy would be the front runner, Chicago being second (played with Drose in AAU), and Milwaukee being third.

If he likes the Midwest, I think Gordon would be a nice fit here.

Foye · Post #2 » by **Foye** » Mon May 23, 2011 2:14 pm

Does he hate LA or Sterling? :lol:

moss_is_1 · Post #3 » by **moss_is_1** » Mon May 23, 2011 2:28 pm

Seriously I would be all over Eric Gordon. I'm one of his biggest fans, he plays very good defense, can get to the line and has a legit 3 point shot. He really reminds me of the next Dwyane Wade, except for instead of just being physically dominant as wade, he has a better 3 point shot. Him and Love with Rubio would make an excellent trio.

Esohny · Post #4 » by **Esohny** » Mon May 23, 2011 2:33 pm

I would give a LOT to get Gordon on this team. As moss_is_1 suggested, he is a 2-way player and is already playing at an all-star level. Besides that, he's perfect next to Rubio, and I'm pretty sure he's in that group of players with Love who played AAU ball together and are friendly, which doesn't hurt.

However, I don't really buy that poster's "inside info." Shrug.

Krapinsky · Post #5 » by **Krapinsky** » Mon May 23, 2011 2:38 pm

THey wouldn't trade us Gordon because it would significantly hurt the value of our 2012 1st that they own.

eyeteeth · Post #6 » by **eyeteeth** » Mon May 23, 2011 2:47 pm

Include a swap, 2011 1st for 2012 with Gordon coming to the Wolves... 8-)

Post #7 » by **Basti** » Mon May 23, 2011 4:28 pm

Give them anything they want, save for Rubio and Love (whom they wouldn't need anyway)

shrink · Post #8 » by **shrink** » Mon May 23, 2011 4:34 pm

I'm sure LAC fans love Gordon, but we may have gotten lucky with Blake Griffin joining the Clippers for two reasons:

1. Gordon may have the tools to be "the Man" in LA, but that role (and all the fawning attention) now falls on Blake Griffin. NBA players with gordon's level of talent can often be a little egotistical, and if I want to believe this poster truly has inside info, then this could be a reason Gordon wouldn't mind leaving the Clippers.

2. Fans and front offices tend to over-value their top player. He sells tickets, and it's the rare poster that can truly evaluate the proper trade value for their team's brightest star. Any look at the pricetag that some posters here want for non-superstars like Monta Ellis and Danny Granger demonstrate that fact. Anyway, the fact that Gordon is now, so clearly, a #2 in so many eyes, may mean that he comes off the "Why, we'd never trade this guy!" list.

Post #9 » by **revprodeji** » Mon May 23, 2011 4:37 pm

Honestly Johnson+pick for Gordon+out pick could work.

They get a great draft pick, but they also get the shooter at the 3 spot they want.

Krapinsky · Post #10 » by **Krapinsky** » Mon May 23, 2011 4:45 pm

revprodeji wrote:Honestly Johnson+pick for Gordon+out pick could work.

They get a great draft pick, but they also get the shooter at the 3 spot they want.

How is that fair value? We get the best assets in the trade. I think if you took out our pick returning they still wouldn't do it.

Believe it or not, Gordon is just as untouchable as Blake for them. He may be #2, but every team needs a #2 and those guys are pretty hard to find. Just ask the Wolves who don't have a #1 or #2 and probably haven't since KG left.

south_fl_twolf · Post #11 » by **south_fl_twolf** » Mon May 23, 2011 5:09 pm

I dont see the clips trading Gordan anytime soon. I think i read on the clips board that the gm stated griffin and gordon were basically untouchable.

B Calrissian · Post #12 » by **B Calrissian** » Mon May 23, 2011 5:17 pm

Wes/Beas/#2(Kanter) for Gordon/Gomes is still my offer.

skorff26 · Post #13 » by **skorff26** » Mon May 23, 2011 5:39 pm

B Calrissian wrote:Wes/Beas/#2(Kanter) for Gordon/Gomes is still my offer.

I'd offer that as well. Heck #2 could be Irving and I'd still offer the deal (maybe best chance for the trade to happen).

Post #14 » by **revprodeji** » Mon May 23, 2011 6:16 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
revprodeji wrote:Honestly Johnson+pick for Gordon+out pick could work.

They get a great draft pick, but they also get the shooter at the 3 spot they want.

How is that fair value? We get the best assets in the trade. I think if you took out our pick returning they still wouldn't do it.

Believe it or not, Gordon is just as untouchable as Blake for them. He may be #2, but every team needs a #2 and those guys are pretty hard to find. Just ask the Wolves who don't have a #1 or #2 and probably haven't since KG left.

1.) I am working off the assumption that he wants out. Also, he will be up for a contract soon.

2.) Our draft pick loses value if Gordon comes to us.

So Gordon=2nd overall (perhaps we still need to add something?)

Wes Johnson= modified value of our draft pick (Adding Rubio and Gordon will make us late lotto- decent value for Wes)

Am I getting something wrong?

Krapinsky · Post #15 » by **Krapinsky** » Mon May 23, 2011 6:34 pm

revprodeji wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:
revprodeji wrote:Honestly Johnson+pick for Gordon+out pick could work.

They get a great draft pick, but they also get the shooter at the 3 spot they want.

How is that fair value? We get the best assets in the trade. I think if you took out our pick returning they still wouldn't do it.

Believe it or not, Gordon is just as untouchable as Blake for them. He may be #2, but every team needs a #2 and those guys are pretty hard to find. Just ask the Wolves who don't have a #1 or #2 and probably haven't since KG left.

1.) I am working off the assumption that he wants out. Also, he will be up for a contract soon.

2.) Our draft pick loses value if Gordon comes to us.

So Gordon=2nd overall (perhaps we still need to add something?)

Wes Johnson= modified value of our draft pick (Adding Rubio and Gordon will make us late lotto- decent value for Wes)

Am I getting something wrong?

I think you are undervaluing Gordon or overvaluing the #2. Memphis turned down Rudy Gay for the #4 and a TPE and Rudy Gay is already signed to a max deal. That's before you add to the fact that Gordon > Gay.

I think the player they would want the most from us is Rubio and they would want Rubio + #2. We would offer Wes/Beasley + #2.

You don't get the opportunity to add a player like Eric Gordon often so I would do either of those deals, but would hedge against the Rubio deal.

I would do Wes/Beasley + #20 + #2 for Gordon before I would do Rubio + #2.

Rubio should be much more valuable to us. If he's good, he'll be incredibly marketable and worth a lot of $$$.

shrink · Post #16 » by **shrink** » Mon May 23, 2011 6:46 pm

Krapinsky wrote: I think you are undervaluing Gordon or overvaluing the #2. Memphis turned down Rudy Gay for the #4 and a TPE and Rudy Gay is already signed to a max deal. That's before you add to the fact that Gordon > Gay.

The crazy Memphis' front office can't be used for a baseline for valueing how Sterling would value Gordon.

The MEM front office spent over $40 mil on Zach Randolph, Conley and Gay, but dumped Gasol for financial reasons, and messed with Xavier Henry over $400,000! And who knows about their ability to value young talent (Mayo/Love trade and Thabeet).

Krapinsky · Post #17 » by **Krapinsky** » Mon May 23, 2011 6:48 pm

Reagrdless, if you think we're getting Gordon for the #2 and our 2012 pick back for the rookie bust that was Wes Johnson, then I have some beach shore property to sell you in Antarctica.

Breakdown777 · Post #18 » by **Breakdown777** » Mon May 23, 2011 11:38 pm

Why is Wes a bust? I've getting vibes that many on this board feel this way. I feel like the mantra of many posters is "Superstar or Bust", which is silly to me.

Wes was playing out of position almost the entire season, and he shined in most games when Beasley was out and more was asked of him. He made the 2nd all-rookie team. Yeah, he wasn't a Shawn Marion/Ray Allen in their primes clone, but it was his rookie season playing out of position for a poor coach and a poor system. I'd give up Wes for Eric Gordon (or others), but I think it's silly to write him off as a bust after one year.

If we keep Wes, I'm really excited to see his improvement next season with an off-season and training camp in which he will presumably have a more defined role.

Krapinsky · Post #19 » by **Krapinsky** » Mon May 23, 2011 11:49 pm

I'm not writing him off as a bust. I said his rookie season was a bust. And it was. Statistically his rookie season was worse than Flynn's the year prior.

PER was something like 10 and his defense usually left me scratching my head. He's known as a shooter, but he shot less than 40% and rarely made it to the free throw line. When you're a 23 year old rookie asking to play a limited role, you would expect better efficiency than that. Maybe he'll improve by next season but at already 24 come training camp one would have to lower his expectations as to Wes's ceiling compared to when we first drafted him

If you're anything but disappointed after Wes's rookie year than I'm not sure what to say. Time to take off your homer goggles, maybe? I'm tired of making excuses for our players. Good players find away to be productive. Wes was not.

Post #20 » by **revprodeji** » Tue May 24, 2011 6:01 pm

Krap. Value is different if LAC is convinced he wants out and will leave when he is a FA. That is why the Rudy Gay value is different. He is not "wanting" out, nor is he a soon-to-be free agent.