Stephen Curry - Eric Gordon - Similar Story?

So one of my best friends who lives in Oakland and I talk sports everyday, me being a die hard hornets and saints fan and him being a die hard warriors and raiders fan. He is very knowlegable and knows more about sports than anyone else I know.

We got to talking and I told him how I am tired of Eric Gordon always getting hurt and how he barely plays and has this HUGE contract holding us back. I told him how I was wondering if it would be a good idea to get rid of him for a good player or just move him to get rid of his salary.

He laughed and told me he went through the exact same thing that I am going through now a year ago. Let me explain. He told me how he was tired of always seeing Curry hurt, rolling his ankle, missing games and then wondered why in the hell they would give him a HUGE contract when he is injury prone. He then also wanted the Warriors to trade him because being a fan u get impatient and want to see success now, its natural. His said he understands why the front office took the gamble on Curry now. Curry is a rare player and look what he is doing now.

When Curry missed almost all of last season he was 24, now this year, being 25, entering his prime and being a year removed and healthy he is playing to his potential.

This year Eric Gordon missed the majority of the season at 24 years old, next year he turns 25, and maybe after an entire off season of becoming healthy we to will see Gordon make that jump.

He told me since he lives in Cali that he keeps up with all teams, including the Clippers and told me he watched Gordon all the time and that he is something special and sees the same thing in him he sees in Curry, the potential that is.

I then went on to compare Curry and Gordon's stats by age:

22 Years Old per 36 minutes:
Curry: 17.4 PPG - 5.9 APG - 4.4 RPG - 3.0 TO
Eric Jr: 21.3 PPG - 4.2 APG - 2.8 RPG - 2.6 TO

23 Years Old per 36 minutes:
Curry: 19.9 PPG - 6.2 APG - 4.1 RPG - 3.3 TO
Eric Jr: 21.5 PPG - 3.6 APG - 3.6 RPG - 2.8 TO

24 Years Old per 36 minutes:
Curry: 18.8 PPG - 6.8 APG - 4.3 RPG - 3.2 TO
Eric Jr: 20.3 PPG - 4.0 APG - 2.2 RPG - 3.3 TO

25 Years Old per 36 minutes:
Curry (actually): 21.6 PPG - 6.5 APG - 3.8 RPG - 2.9 TO
Eric (projecting): 24.5 PPG - 4.8 APG - 4.2 RPG - 3.0 TO

The 25 year old stats for curry are what he did this season, the one's for Gordon are the ones I am projecting him to make this season when healthy, entering his prime, and with an improved supporting cast VIA free agency and the draft.

Outside of 1 injury riddled season, Curry has proven to be relatively healthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

Outside of 1 injury riddled season, Curry has proven to be relatively healthy.

---

This is true but none of Gordon's injuries are really major, he hasnt blown anything to pieces really, just bad luck. We will see.

There are however, key differences:

1. Stephen Curry lives and dies by his set shot -- an action that doesn't really get a lot of players injured. His greatness is in the quickness of his trigger, not by some athletic feat gifted only to few. Eric Gordon is a bulldog who likes attacking the lane and do acrobatic staff. That's an invitation for injury.

2. Stephen Curry accepted a favorable deal for his team because he knew he was marked as injury prone. Yes, Stephen Curry got his via an extension. Eric Gordon got his via an offer sheet. Stephen Curry got a 44 million, 4 year extension from GS. That's a contract WITHOUT the designated tag (5-year extension) and far less than what he COULD have gotten. Meanwhile Eric Gordon turned down a 4 year extension (similar to Curry's) reported to be around 50 million. That's SIX million dollars more for a player who's gotten injured FAR more often that Curry.

3. Eric Gordon's restricted free agency of doom got him into the wrong side. I do not need to recount the details of that one.

I'd be perfectly fine had Gordon done SOME sort of gesture towards the organization (similar to Curry who took far less than what the max and who's spoken about the Golden State organization well). I'd even go so far as to say I'd be perfectly fine had Gordon not done any BS with the organization. But he has.

I'm fine with Gordon staying. But in no way do I think he will.

Oh, and LOL at your projections. I thought you did some sort of analysis on that one when it was all pure hunch. hahaha

Yeah if EG could play 70 games in 3/4 seasons i would be more than happy.

I think you're over projecting how many rebounds EG will have.

I personally don't have as many ill feelings toward EG as some on here. The contract situation was a bad draw and EG had a lot of mistrust of an organization that he hadn't spent a ton of time with and that I think he felt was trying to play him with his injury to get him to take less money (not what I think but what he thought was happening). He had no incentive to work with the team on his contract so he took the money. Maybe if he had been here 3 years he would have taken a better contract for the team. A bad situation for all, but I'm not for just giving away Gordon.

He only has 2 years guarenteed anyway, 3 years max. That will just be when Davis / Rivers / this years draft are hitting primes. We can afford to keep Gordon because worst case he stays injured and is gone in 3 years. Best case he balls for two years and we try and extend him. Either way doesn't really effect our time table because Davis and Rivers needs time to develop anyway. What's the point of trading Gordon for less when we aren't ready to win it all anyway? You roll the dice that Gordon is beast mode and an all-star and that you can extend him for Davis prime because worst case his contract will be gone anyway when it's our time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

There are however, key differences:

1. Stephen Curry lives and dies by his set shot -- an action that doesn't really get a lot of players injured. His greatness is in the quickness of his trigger, not by some athletic feat gifted only to few. Eric Gordon is a bulldog who likes attacking the lane and do acrobatic staff. That's an invitation for injury.

2. Stephen Curry accepted a favorable deal for his team because he knew he was marked as injury prone. Yes, Stephen Curry got his via an extension. Eric Gordon got his via an offer sheet. Stephen Curry got a 44 million, 4 year extension from GS. That's a contract WITHOUT the designated tag (5-year extension) and far less than what he COULD have gotten. Meanwhile Eric Gordon turned down a 4 year extension (similar to Curry's) reported to be around 50 million. That's SIX million dollars more for a player who's gotten injured FAR more often that Curry.

3. Eric Gordon's restricted free agency of doom got him into the wrong side. I do not need to recount the details of that one.

I'd be perfectly fine had Gordon done SOME sort of gesture towards the organization (similar to Curry who took far less than what the max and who's spoken about the Golden State organization well). I'd even go so far as to say I'd be perfectly fine had Gordon not done any BS with the organization. But he has.

I'm fine with Gordon staying. But in no way do I think he will.

Oh, and LOL at your projections. I thought you did some sort of analysis on that one when it was all pure hunch. hahaha

---

This plus Curry choose GS at no point has Gordon chosen NO. We have no choice in whether or not he stays past 2014-15 and based on his behavior and actions I don't see him staying here. Sure it can work out, but the odds of this happening are far less worse than with Steph Curry IMO and that's the difference.

The longer we wait the less likely we are to get value for him. It will require the ideal situation for us to increase Gordon's value before the end of the 2014-15 season.

I'd rather trade Gordon and live with whatever we get rather than watch this dude get paid to wear a suit on the bench. Not wishing anything on the guy but I just can't see a scenario where he plays more than 50 games a year. His game (attacking/penetrating) doesn't jive with his threshold for pain and/or injury.

We're a couple seasons away from being a title contender anyway... let's move on now while we have time to develop another youngin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

This is true but none of Gordon's injuries are really major, he hasnt blown anything to pieces really, just bad luck. We will see.

---

That may be true but injuries are accumulative and once the body starts breaking down a weaken back leads to a bum knee which lead to hamstring problem etc. When your game relies on explosiveness like Gordon those injuries can prevent him from not only playing full seasons, but ever reaching his full potential.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikkoewan

There are however, key differences:

1. Stephen Curry lives and dies by his set shot -- an action that doesn't really get a lot of players injured. His greatness is in the quickness of his trigger, not by some athletic feat gifted only to few. Eric Gordon is a bulldog who likes attacking the lane and do acrobatic staff. That's an invitation for injury.

2. Stephen Curry accepted a favorable deal for his team because he knew he was marked as injury prone. Yes, Stephen Curry got his via an extension. Eric Gordon got his via an offer sheet. Stephen Curry got a 44 million, 4 year extension from GS. That's a contract WITHOUT the designated tag (5-year extension) and far less than what he COULD have gotten. Meanwhile Eric Gordon turned down a 4 year extension (similar to Curry's) reported to be around 50 million. That's SIX million dollars more for a player who's gotten injured FAR more often that Curry.

3. Eric Gordon's restricted free agency of doom got him into the wrong side. I do not need to recount the details of that one.

I'd be perfectly fine had Gordon done SOME sort of gesture towards the organization (similar to Curry who took far less than what the max and who's spoken about the Golden State organization well). I'd even go so far as to say I'd be perfectly fine had Gordon not done any BS with the organization. But he has.

I'm fine with Gordon staying. But in no way do I think he will.

Oh, and LOL at your projections. I thought you did some sort of analysis on that one when it was all pure hunch. hahaha

---

Very good points. I remember when CP3 was rumored to be going to GS for Curry. What might have been...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

This is true but none of Gordon's injuries are really major, he hasnt blown anything to pieces really, just bad luck. We will see.

---

Hard to believe that with the time he's missed.

Gordon doesn't have to be an All-Star to impress me. If he can keep the amount of games he missed in a season in the single digits I would be very impressed.

Hopefully another team believes what HornetGuru projects and will give us good value in a trade.

Interesting. Also interesting that everyone has also given Derrick Rose a pass when he was cleared by "doctors" also. Read the article on Grantland where Simmons gives Rose a pass because everyone around the league is fearful of coming back too early, a la Gilbert Arenas.

How is Gordon's "HUGE" contract holding us back? Otherwise yes I agree. A pre -emptive move, unless he has flat out told to org. to move him at all costs, would be dumb.

His contract isn't hurting the team so let reality play out on the court. Not make moves on maybes empirical hunches.

Unless you count on some outside need, like a contending team loses a player and needs some offense (in which case their draft pick wouldn't be of much value anyway), if we keep Gordon and he stays healthy, we'd probably just keep him. Otherwise, not shopping him this summer makes no sense.

Nikkoewan's said it almost all..but let's add a couple of numbers

In the last 4 years (gordon has played for 5, curry for 4, so let's just see when they were in the nba at the same time) gordon has played a grand total of 169 games over the possible 328. Curry has played 258 games over that span, almost 100 more.

What are we talking about? Gordon is a whiny injury-prone player, i'd rather have an average player for 82 games a year than gordon for 1/3 or half the season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurgan

Nikkoewan's said it almost all..but let's add a couple of numbers

In the last 4 years (gordon has played for 5, curry for 4, so let's just see when they were in the nba at the same time) gordon has played a grand total of 169 games over the possible 328. Curry has played 258 games over that span, almost 100 more.

What are we talking about? Gordon is a whiny injury-prone player, i'd rather have an average player for 82 games a year than gordon for 1/3 or half the season.

---

This is depressing. You can have all the ability but if you can't play half of the games, what's the point? Just a bunches of excuses really.

i think we all thought Gordon would have another setback this season but that wasn't the case. If he plays full season next year and plays well people learn to forgive. especially when we were in a rebuilding phase

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AD23nEG10

i think we all thought Gordon would have another setback this season but that wasn't the case. If he plays full season next year and plays well people learn to forgive. especially when we were in a rebuilding phase

---

Better hope so. He only has 2 seasons left on his contract before he opts out. I bet the year that he opts out, he'll play 70-80 games easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nola Hornet

Better hope so. He only has 2 seasons left on his contract before he opts out. I bet the year that he opts out, he'll play 70-80 games easily.

---

If he's as injury prone as everyone is saying he won't opt out. . .and his next contract will be more reasonable.

Tbh I could care less if he only plays 50 games a year. As long as he can play when we start making the playoffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

If he's as injury prone as everyone is saying he won't opt out. . .and his next contract will be more reasonable.

Tbh I could care less if he only plays 50 games a year. As long as he can play when we start making the playoffs.

---

If your max player only plays 50 games a year there's a good chance you won't make the playoffs or you'll be facing a one or two seed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

If your max player only plays 50 games a year there's a good chance you won't make the playoffs or you'll be facing a one or two seed.

---

If you trade your max player for peanuts there's a good chance you don't make the playoffs or you'll be facing a one or two seed.

Personally I'd rather roll with Gordon on the off chance he is an All-Star rather than give him up for a sure fire average player.

We're not going to get back much value via trade for Gordon. It's also not like we are a FA hot spot. Gordon's contract will end right when AD's max extension kicks in if it doesn't work out. If it works out and he wants to leave then we'll trade him for value then, unless there is a great deal this summer I don't understand trading him at a seeming low.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeeBall Reasons

We're not going to get back much value via trade for Gordon. It's also not like we are a FA hot spot. Gordon's contract will end right when AD's max extension kicks in if it doesn't work out. If it works out and he wants to leave then we'll trade him for value then, unless there is a great deal this summer I don't understand trading him at a seeming low.

---

You can still get a guy like Ellis who can give you pretty much what Gordon gives you for 70-80 games.