Gordon has to go. It really is as simple as that. Trading for him was probably the worst trade in franchise history (dumping Paul was dumb and the team got trade raped). Re-signing him was even worse and will probably end up costing Demps his job (Benson can't be happy). The team needs to move on and close this chapter.

quote:
1.) If he stays injured nobody will trade us anything for him.

quote:
2.) If he heals up and becomes good enough and healthy enough to where other teams would move pieces for him, would we want to get rid if him, if he is producing well for our team?

I keep seeing this in threads and it doesn't make any sense. So he's either really good (like top 10 good) and will bring us to the promise land OR he's injured and we can't find anyone to trade us anything. There is no way the gap can be that far apart on a player. It's just not logical. Injured players are traded all the time. When we traded for Gordon he was hurt at that time. Did that stop us?

quote:
OR, given his injury history, would we sell high?

They should take whatever they can get right now. Late 1st, a couple of scrubs with potential or even an older vet with an expiring contract. Just get rid of the bad contract, plug the hole and center the rebuild around Davis like it should have always been about.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Fun Bunch

New Orleans

Member since May 2008

116320 posts

Posted on 5/13/13 at 9:59 am to brmark70816

quote:
Trading for him was probably the worst trade in franchise history (dumping Paul was dumb

I know you're not the brightest guy on here, but what does his mean? Dumping Paul?

What was the alternative? Do you know what went down? Its not like we had a choice.

The LAC trade was, BY FAR, the best one at the time. It was infinitely better for a rebuilding team than the LAL/HOU.

Its not really up for debate. GMs don't have crystal balls. Just because it didn't "work out" in the short term doesn't mean it wasn't the right move at the time.

The Grizzlies got "trade raped" and everyone called it one of the WORST TRADES OF ALL TIME. Look at them now.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by quail man

New York, NY

Member since May 2010

40930 posts

Posted on 5/13/13 at 10:03 am to brmark70816

quote:
quote:
2.) If he heals up and becomes good enough and healthy enough to where other teams would move pieces for him, would we want to get rid if him, if he is producing well for our team?

I keep seeing this in threads and it doesn't make any sense.

it makes complete sense. what people are saying is that if Gordon is good enough to warrant a trade that is actually worth making (i.e., a team is willing to trade decent pieces for him), then do you actually make the trade at that time?