Started By
Message
locked post

Is it really probable that Gordon gets moved at all?

Posted on 5/10/13 at 9:35 am
Posted by droman225
HTown by way of BR
Member since Aug 2011
13383 posts
Posted on 5/10/13 at 9:35 am
I have two points to look at..

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

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?

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

Tough situation, but I don't see us moving Gordon if he's healthy, we are winning, and he isn't being a little whiny bitch
Posted by ShamelessPel
Metairie
Member since Apr 2013
12719 posts
Posted on 5/10/13 at 9:39 am to
quote:

I have two points to look at..

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

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?

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

Tough situation, but I don't see us moving Gordon if he's healthy, we are winning, and he isn't being a little whiny bitch


Get ready...This did not end well the last time I suggested it.
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
115479 posts
Posted on 5/10/13 at 9:39 am to
I see your point, but:

We either try and sell now, and take whatever we can get. At this point it won't be much, but someone might be willing to give us garbage in the hopes that he pans out.

or

We wait, and if he can play 30-40 games, we move him just to get rid of him to a desperate bubble playoff team and again take what we can get, just because we want nothing to do with him.

I think those are alternative likely scenarios. Its possible that we are anchored with the contract forever, he uses his player option and everything...but there are often some pretty foolish teams willing to take a contract, especially if he can stay healthy for the early part of next season.
This post was edited on 5/10/13 at 9:41 am
Posted by TigerinATL
Member since Feb 2005
61438 posts
Posted on 5/10/13 at 9:43 am to
quote:

Is it really probable that Gordon gets moved at all?


76.6% that he gets traded was the confidence DRIVEMAN gave us. The question is what situation leads to the 23.4% not traded? Drafting a non SG? Getting crap offers?
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34248 posts
Posted on 5/10/13 at 9:49 am to
Surgery
Posted by Gtothemoney
Da North Shore
Member since Sep 2012
17713 posts
Posted on 5/10/13 at 10:32 am to
This team needs talent. We can't be giving away our 2nd best player for nothing. We have to keep him.
Posted by slutiger5
Parroquias de Florida
Member since May 2007
10633 posts
Posted on 5/10/13 at 10:59 am to
quote:

We either try and sell now, and take whatever we can get. At this point it won't be much, but someone might be willing to give us garbage in the hopes that he pans out.


Any offer recieved will cause the team to take a hit.

My hunch is he will be amnestyed by whatever organization before 2015-16 season.
This post was edited on 5/10/13 at 11:02 am
Posted by swlaLSUfan
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2009
3579 posts
Posted on 5/12/13 at 6:35 am to
Remember. Chandler he recovered nicely and now contributes for his team.
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34248 posts
Posted on 5/12/13 at 8:23 am to
quote:

My hunch is he will be amnestyed by whatever organization before 2015-16 season.



His contract was signed under the new CBA. Only contracts signed during/under the old CBA are eligible for amnesty. As such, your hunch is a nonstarter.
Posted by brmark70816
Atlanta, GA
Member since Feb 2011
9758 posts
Posted on 5/12/13 at 9:38 am to
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.
Posted by slutiger5
Parroquias de Florida
Member since May 2007
10633 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 9:19 am to
How do teams get rid of big arse contracts with busted knees?
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34248 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 9:37 am to
quote:

How do teams get rid of big arse contracts with busted knees?


Trade is the only way with his contract.
Posted by slutiger5
Parroquias de Florida
Member since May 2007
10633 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 9:52 am to
wow! gotta ship him out IMO. hopefully we will get some offers.
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
115479 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 9:59 am to
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.
Posted by quail man
New York, NY
Member since May 2010
40925 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 10:03 am to
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?

quote:

Trading for him was probably the worst trade in franchise history (dumping Paul was dumb and the team got trade raped)


yeah trading paul for something was worse than letting him walk for nothing
Posted by Gtothemoney
Da North Shore
Member since Sep 2012
17713 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 10:04 am to
I just can't she Gordon getting traded. Monty and Dell have hitched their wagon to him (max contract). If they throw in the towel already, isn't that admission that that they were wrong?

Personally, I think it's a no win situation. Gordon has alienated himself to most fans, but, like it or not, he's an important piece to our team.
Posted by BarbaricPelican
LaPlace
Member since Apr 2013
129 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 10:08 am to
Personally think Gordon can't be traded this summer with the ankle surgery, though minor. I say trade deadline if the team isn't performing well or next summer. But if they can get an asset or two this summer, I definitely wouldn't be opposed to it. Just highly doubt they will get any offers worth talking about unless a team that misses out on FA stars are desperate hoping Gordon hits potential and stays healthy.

Only takes one dumb/crazy GM.
Posted by slutiger5
Parroquias de Florida
Member since May 2007
10633 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 10:13 am to
Phoenix might still be interested. I bet Indiana would be interested in getting rid of old West and Grangers contract. They would be very talented with a healthy gordon.
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34248 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 10:13 am to
quote:

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


The only argument against the trade would be (if you assume Bledsoe v. Gordon was the final piece) would be that we should have taken Bledsoe instead, but I still think Gordon's potential is much higher than Bledsoe.
Posted by Jester
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
34248 posts
Posted on 5/13/13 at 10:15 am to
quote:

If they throw in the towel already, isn't that admission that that they were wrong?


Not really. If they eat shite and dump him by taking on shite, then yes, but if they trade him and get any positive value, then they were pretty much justified in resigning him.

ETA - Point being, sometimes controlling the asset is as valuable to you as the asset itself.
This post was edited on 5/13/13 at 10:16 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram