Hornets Winning as of late... How much credit do you give to Gordon?

[BallSoHard]

We saw what the team was doing without Gordon. Whether directly via stats or indirectly via confidence, motivation, direction etc; Gordon is the root cause. All was equal less Gordon before (except jason smith to a degree) and we were terrible.

[rubicon]

Hell yeah!

Because he's injuried often, he's yet to prove he can have an impact that warrants a max deal(yes I know he has the potential), he appears to be mentally weak or at the very least immature(so while some are ecstatic he appears to be "happy" now that immaturity means his state of mind is subject to change) and he's injuried all the time.

I understand anybody in the camp of gambling on Gordon however I don't know why some are shock that others would rather not risk the franchise on Eric Gordon.

Like I said yesterday. Most NBA players are divas. Espically the ones that have been labeled "the man" since high school. He has the skills at both ends of the floor, which you don't see that often. The reason why the Hornets have to risk it, is cause they are a small market team. In the NBA a small market team is already at a disadvantage. They need to take risks. Gordon is a risk/reward player. NBA players with big egos want to build their "brand" and go to a city with he big lights and endorsement deals. Gordon is used to the small city, he just wants to get embraced and that hasn't happened ever since he's been in the NBA. If we have a promising team in three years and we are still willing to pay the max, he'll stay. (I'd only pay the max if he produces as is healthy 70% of the rest of his career)

[Dbeard06]

thats the best part, he's still far off from producing how he can but you see the better defense our team is playing, guys getting open looks.

whether great players are hot or not the other team isn't going to stop focusing on them. he's been huge

but don't let J-Smith's return get lost in all this either

This is dead-on correct!!!!!!! Both Gordon and Smith have been game changers. Opposing teams have to account for them which free up other players for open looks. It similar to the Reggie Bush affect with the Saints in 09.

[Inner_GI]

Well Gordon took a pretty good shot on a knee to knee hit where it took a moment for him to walk over to the free throw line. He looked normal after that, but the true test will be if he plays next game...

[sipclip]

I would give it 50% EJ and 25% Aminu and 25% Smith. The addition of EJ and Aminu getting back into the starting lineup has improved the defense drastically.

[MichaelMcNamara]

If the question (which I think it is) is how much has Gordon individually had to do with us winning, I don't think it's much. You're right in that if you remove Vasquez or Anderson, we also are not likely to win those games. So no, Gordon is not "carrying this team on his shoulders".

However, having Gordon back makes the team better. Being able to take Rivers out of the starting lineup, for instance, takes the pressure off of him and reduces the number of minutes the team has with an underperforming 2. As has been mentioned in this thread, it allows players to go back to their more natural roles. It also simply makes us a much deeper team. The guys coming off the bench are higher quality than what we had to do with Gordon and Davis injured.

We saw that this team was close several times during the time Gordon was out. I think getting Gordon back is more of the piece that pushes the team over the edge, rather than being a "savior."

Nailed it again. Color me impressed