With PG out for the year would it be possible that the PELS send Gordon to PACERS?

[nola007]

People see Gordon's past production when healthy and skill set, and assume he makes a team better than a guy with a lesser skill set (offensively) and past production, but are we sure that is true with THIS SPECIFIC TEAM? You take Gordon away and the shots he takes goes to Tyreke, Jrue, AD, and Ryno. It is not about Austin vs. Gordon in that scenario. You take away the 12-14 shots he would take and maybe you give 5-6 to his replacement- let's say Austin. The other 6-9 shots go to the big dogs.

The team, in that scenario, is as efficient or more efficient. And it gets better defense from Austin. Is this just conjecture or do I have evidence?

Well, the offensive rating was 108.4 without Gordon last year, and 106.4 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

Defensive rating was 106.7 without Gordon, 112.8 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

The Pels were + 1.7 without Gordon on the floor last year and -6.2 with him on the court. A staggering 7.9 point difference.

Numbers aren't everything, but you have to at least look at those and wonder if there is some truth to addition by subtraction.

I'm not looking at past production, i'm looking at this stat line from last season:

2013-14 Regular Season 64 32.1 5.6-12.8 .436 1.6-4.0 .391 2.7-3.5 .785 2.6 3.3 0.2 1.2 1.8 2.1 15.4

Not worthy of his salary, but not far off. A few players who didn't produce this stat line got better deals than his this off season. This is a stat line that Austin Rivers will never produce in his nba career. NEVER.

[Nola3]

People see Gordon's past production when healthy and skill set, and assume he makes a team better than a guy with a lesser skill set (offensively) and past production, but are we sure that is true with THIS SPECIFIC TEAM? You take Gordon away and the shots he takes goes to Tyreke, Jrue, AD, and Ryno. It is not about Austin vs. Gordon in that scenario. You take away the 12-14 shots he would take and maybe you give 5-6 to his replacement- let's say Austin. The other 6-9 shots go to the big dogs.

The team, in that scenario, is as efficient or more efficient. And it gets better defense from Austin. Is this just conjecture or do I have evidence?

Well, the offensive rating was 108.4 without Gordon last year, and 106.4 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

Defensive rating was 106.7 without Gordon, 112.8 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

The Pels were + 1.7 without Gordon on the floor last year and -6.2 with him on the court. A staggering 7.9 point difference.

Numbers aren't everything, but you have to at least look at those and wonder if there is some truth to addition by subtraction.

I think a lot of people missed the point of this post but I think it makes it about as clear as it gets that Gordon does not necessarily make this team better, contract or not.

[NMThreeMVP]

People see Gordon's past production when healthy and skill set, and assume he makes a team better than a guy with a lesser skill set (offensively) and past production, but are we sure that is true with THIS SPECIFIC TEAM? You take Gordon away and the shots he takes goes to Tyreke, Jrue, AD, and Ryno. It is not about Austin vs. Gordon in that scenario. You take away the 12-14 shots he would take and maybe you give 5-6 to his replacement- let's say Austin. The other 6-9 shots go to the big dogs.

The team, in that scenario, is as efficient or more efficient. And it gets better defense from Austin. Is this just conjecture or do I have evidence?

Well, the offensive rating was 108.4 without Gordon last year, and 106.4 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

Defensive rating was 106.7 without Gordon, 112.8 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

The Pels were + 1.7 without Gordon on the floor last year and -6.2 with him on the court. A staggering 7.9 point difference.

Numbers aren't everything, but you have to at least look at those and wonder if there is some truth to addition by subtraction.

So basically what you're saying is...

Gordon : Pelicans :: Gay : Raptors

[nola007]

I think a lot of people missed the point of this post but I think it makes it about as clear as it gets that Gordon does not necessarily make this team better, contract or not.

Which clearly Dell Demps does not believe because he has not traded him for peanuts and clearly Monty Williams does not believe because he is still the starting SG and a focal point of the offense. So it's only the posters who think these numbers mean something, numbers that organization has and knows.

He absolutely makes the team better.

[nola007]

People see Gordon's past production when healthy and skill set, and assume he makes a team better than a guy with a lesser skill set (offensively) and past production, but are we sure that is true with THIS SPECIFIC TEAM? You take Gordon away and the shots he takes goes to Tyreke, Jrue, AD, and Ryno. It is not about Austin vs. Gordon in that scenario. You take away the 12-14 shots he would take and maybe you give 5-6 to his replacement- let's say Austin. The other 6-9 shots go to the big dogs.

The team, in that scenario, is as efficient or more efficient. And it gets better defense from Austin. Is this just conjecture or do I have evidence?

Well, the offensive rating was 108.4 without Gordon last year, and 106.4 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

Defensive rating was 106.7 without Gordon, 112.8 with Gordon on the court. Advantage - Pels without Gordon.

The Pels were + 1.7 without Gordon on the floor last year and -6.2 with him on the court. A staggering 7.9 point difference.

Numbers aren't everything, but you have to at least look at those and wonder if there is some truth to addition by subtraction.

So you must believe Dell Demps is a horrible GM for keeping him here and Monty Williams is a horrible head coach for continuing to start him and making him a focal point?

[RaisingTheBar]

Defensive rating was 106.7 without Gordon, 112.8 with Gordon on the court.

To me ^^^ that is huge and is the most underrated statement of that post. Defensively we were clearly better when Gordon was on the bench.

[nola007]

Then you must think Monty is a very bad coach for keeping him on the court over one of our great bench players?

To me ^^^ that is huge and is the most underrated statement of that post. Defensively we were clearly better when Gordon was on the bench.

[nola007]

Are our defensive numbers better with Ryan Anderson on the bench?

[BallHawk]

To me ^^^ that is huge and is the most underrated statement of that post. Defensively we were clearly better when Gordon was on the bench.

Ok, let's just assume for one second that Indy would be interested in taking Gordon. Obviously, a third team would need to be involved. I would venture to guess Portland would be the best bet and here is the deal I would propose:

Pacers receive

Eric Gordon and Robin Lopez

Blazers receive

Roy Hibbert and Luke Babbitt

Pels receive

Nicolas Batum and CJ Watson

This would allow Rivers and Fredette to share minutes at the 2 with Watson being our primary backup PG.

Batum may be a long shot, but he was rumored to want out and would fit perfectly in our offense. Blazers could start Wright and the 3 and get a good big in Hibbert who they wanted a couple of years ago.

[RaisingTheBar]

Then you must think Monty is a very bad coach for keeping him on the court over one of our great bench players?

I've thought Monty was a bad coach for the Pelicans for a while now that is no secret. But if Gordon is on the team he is going to get playing time. I've never seen a player get paid 15 million not play if he's healthy.

Maybe you need to look at those facts and wonder why they are the way they are instead of immediately turning into defensive mode.

[msw2024]

Austin Rivers

There is a 12 mil a year difference so you got no argument.

[PelsFan2313]

One of the worst threads in a while.

[The JNR]

The main issue with this, as has been stated, is that Indy doesn't have the cap space to take Gordon, and they'd have to send something out that we don't need/want. It's a fun idea, but it isn't feasible.

[RaisingTheBar]

The main issue with this, as has been stated, is that Indy doesn't have the cap space to take Gordon, and they'd have to send something out that we don't need/want. It's a fun idea, but it isn't feasible.

It would have to be a 3 team deal. But I'm not even convinced that Indy would even want Gordon.

[The JNR]

It would have to be a 3 team deal. But I'm not even convinced that Indy would even want Gordon.

Yeah, I didn't account for that, but I don't suspect they would. Gordon doesn't really change their team for the better enough to make up for PG, nor for the worse enough to make them a bottom 5 team. It doesn't make enough sense to me.

[Jabberwalker]

My mind would be blown if they traded Paul George. Outside of him I tried working out a three team trade giving them Gordon. I couldn't find anything that seemed remotely realistic. The only asset that they'd be likely to give away with enough of a contract would be George Hill and I can't find a team that would need Hill and have a contract they could send to us that's better than us just keeping Gordon.

[BallHawk]

I could have sworn they were trying to move Hibbert earlier this offseason. I could be mistaken, but he could be moved to a third team whilst allowing Gordon to be moved to Indy. Indy would basically be more of a small ball type team.

[Above the Rim]

I'm not looking at past production, i'm looking at this stat line from last season:

2013-14 Regular Season 64 32.1 5.6-12.8 .436 1.6-4.0 .391 2.7-3.5 .785 2.6 3.3 0.2 1.2 1.8 2.1 15.4

Not worthy of his salary, but not far off. A few players who didn't produce this stat line got better deals than his this off season. This is a stat line that Austin Rivers will never produce in his nba career. NEVER.

Um...

[nola007]

If our SG's are Rivers and Fredette, we have no shot of making the playoffs. NO SHOT! Dell and Monty would never put themselves in this situation. Rivers is garbage, Jimmer is a third string SG.

Ok, let's just assume for one second that Indy would be interested in taking Gordon. Obviously, a third team would need to be involved. I would venture to guess Portland would be the best bet and here is the deal I would propose:

Pacers receive

Eric Gordon and Robin Lopez

Blazers receive

Roy Hibbert and Luke Babbitt

Pels receive

Nicolas Batum and CJ Watson

This would allow Rivers and Fredette to share minutes at the 2 with Watson being our primary backup PG.

Batum may be a long shot, but he was rumored to want out and would fit perfectly in our offense. Blazers could start Wright and the 3 and get a good big in Hibbert who they wanted a couple of years ago.

[nola007]

They are not apples to apples stats, and they certainly not facts. You can spin numbers however you want. I'm not getting defensive at all, quite the opposite but i guess you can determine that because of you 10,514 posts. Have a convo with a live person once in a while eh.

I've thought Monty was a bad coach for the Pelicans for a while now that is no secret. But if Gordon is on the team he is going to get playing time. I've never seen a player get paid 15 million not play if he's healthy.

Maybe you need to look at those facts and wonder why they are the way they are instead of immediately turning into defensive mode.

[Above the Rim]

If our SG's are Rivers and Fredette, we have no shot of making the playoffs. NO SHOT! Dell and Monty would never put themselves in this situation. Rivers is garbage, Jimmer is a third string SG.

What if you had Jimmer, Rivers, a 5 million dollar SG and a 10 million dollar SF?

THAT is what people are arguing for when they are hoping to dump Gordon. Nobody wants to just move him and never replace his production. Maybe you have to scrap together spare parts for a year, but the eventually you use his money for better parts.

But I do agree that this is a moot point because the team has obviously chose to move forward and see if he can produce this year to up his trade value and/or be rid of him for free in July. But what I don't agree with is that you point to his individual stats and say that the team is better with him than without him because his individual stats are better than another player's individual stats. That don't mean jack. Teams are often greater than or worse than the sum of their individual parts.

[Above the Rim]

They are not apples to apples stats, and they certainly not facts. You can spin numbers however you want. I'm not getting defensive at all, quite the opposite but i guess you can determine that because of you 10,514 posts. Have a convo with a live person once in a while eh.

So when we post stats that clearly show out argument has some legs, it is "spinning stats", but when you post Gordon's numbers to show that he is better than Rivers or Jimmer or whoever, then it is just fact?

Interesting.

[RaisingTheBar]

They are not apples to apples stats, and they certainly not facts. You can spin numbers however you want. I'm not getting defensive at all, quite the opposite but i guess you can determine that because of you 10,514 posts. Have a convo with a live person once in a while eh.

Yeah we are all just spinning numbers to get rid of Gordon. No one here wants what's best for the team.

You're threatened by my post count? You mad bro? I've been here since 2008 if you do the math smart guy it averages out to like 4 posts a day.....and at the rate you're going you wont be around to see 200. Can't wait for that day

[daybreaker]

If our SG's are Rivers and Fredette, we have no shot of making the playoffs. NO SHOT! Dell and Monty would never put themselves in this situation. Rivers is garbage, Jimmer is a third string SG.

We would still have Reke in that scenario... obviously our starting lineup after his trade would be Jrue/Reke/Batum/AD/Asik with Rivers and Jimmer splitting *backup* minutes at the 2. I like that lineup better than our current one. And Batum also only has 2 years left on his contract, same as Gordon.

[nola007]

See the sunshine, engage with humans.

Yeah we are all just spinning numbers to get rid of Gordon. No one here wants what's best for the team.

You're threatened by my post count? You mad bro? I've been here since 2008 if you do the math smart guy it averages out to like 4 posts a day.....and at the rate you're going you wont be around to see 200. Can't wait for that day