Your 'best player' isn't your best player if he doesn't set foot on the court.
Printable View
Your 'best player' isn't your best player if he doesn't set foot on the court.
I agree but it does not change the fact that fans are insane and we flip from extremes at will. If gordon manages 70 games ppl wont care about this anymore (unless he says something really stupid-total possibility bc of his crappy PR). Balls in your court Eric Gordon...
"I've checked with Doc," Williams said, "but for him to explain to me what's going on with his body and then have Eric feel a certain way doesn't matter. You know what I'm saying? If Doc says one thing and the guy is feeling another, then you have to . . . what am I supposed to say?
Things like that just anger me so much.
It's not that he's injured, it's just how unclear it is. Eventually enough is enough. I've just about had it.
At least Rivers and Davis will get more shot opportunities.
There's no flip-flopping by the fans. How many games did Gordon play last seasons? Eight? And he was rewarded with a max (for him/restricted) contract? The onus is on Gordon to prove his worth. So far he's doing a miserable job of it.
Honestly, the bolder prediction would be to say Gordon would play more than 50 games this year.
Best get baking.
I can lend you some.
http://www.grocerycouponnetwork.com/...es_Cookies.jpg
The move made by the front office today with respect to Eric Gordon was done for non-health related reasons. Mr. Gordon is trying to force a trade behind the scenes. Any speculation as to the health of his knee is pure poppycock and cover for the real fact that Gordon wants out but the organization doesn't want to burn Gordon's reputation if he has a last second change of heart with respect to the Organization and the City of New Orleans.
I read Monty's comments in the nola.com article, and it's CLEAR that Monty's getting information from the team physician that Gordon's injury at its current state is less severe than Gordon's making it out to be. There's no other way to read it any differently.
If that proves to be true, I can't believe there isn't a way for the team to recoup money on a contract if a player is medically cleared to play and a player refuses to play.
Color me unsurprised. They should trade him on Dec 15th -- I don't care what they get for him. I'll take a first rounder and nothing else at this point.
I forgot to add this but it is my understanding that Eric Gordon will not be allowed on the Hornets bench for tonights game and that he will not be introduced as being part of the team.
If and only if this info is true, it really shows you how immature Gordon is. He could have a little class and play ball until trading him is a possibility. After the debacle in the summer, you'd think he grew up a little.
Maybe he left his tear ducts in Phoenix along with his heart?
In my personal opinion it would absolutely insane to have Gordon sit on the bench for tonights game. His presence would create a huge distraction for the team and it would be in both his and the Organizations best interest to keep him out of the arena tonight for safety reasons. I think the Organization is doing a smart thing but getting him out of Dodge today.
Who is going to trade for a guy who hasn't played this season and has a max contract? Is this dude brain dead? Wouldn't it be best to go and ball out if you want a trade so other teams will actually be interested in your sorry ***. Obviously after his "summer tour" the only team that was interested was Phoenix.
I know what I'd do.
Well, it's sort of a good thing from the Hornets perspective. A legitimately injured Gordon is worth less (trade value wise) than Gordon with a 'fake' injury. Moreover, you tank more games for a higher pick!
I don't see how there isn't a clause where if a player CAN play and WON'T you cant renege/recoup the deal. I mean isn't it essentially the same thing as an EMPLOYEE refusing to work? (this is IF what snowlaw is speculating about trade is true)