Aaron Gordon
- Thread starter biltalent
- Start date
It's hard to say. If there's one thing about Hezonja that bothers me is that he seems to have lost his fire. I've been where he is, and it's hard when you think you can do more, and those in power don't. You start dreaming of being somewhere else where you'll get a better opportunity. At the same time, the great players always have that competitive fire in them that never goes out. The Magic have been a disaster. The make the Kings organization look like one of the best in the league.
Hezonja could be one of those players that simply needs a change of scenery. That's why he's worth the risk. He wouldn't cost that much by comparison to someone, like Gordon, and he fills a position of need. Another player I would pursue is Joe Harris. He's the type of player that you want on your bench. He can guard two or three positions, and he's a 40% 3 pt shooter. And he's still young. Now if you can get me Gordon for 14 or 15 mil a year, I'm on board. But I want it written in his contract that he can't chuck up more than three 3 pt shots a game. How happy would people be if Willie started chucking up 6 three's a game while shooting 29%?
That's a possibility isn't it? When you compare Willie's third season with Gordon's third season, Willie looks to have had the better season overall. So why shouldn't he be able to chuck up 6 three's a game? He's just as good an athlete, and hey, he's a lot taller. Here's their third seasons.
Gordon: 28:43 mpg - 12.7 ppg - 10.8 fga - 45.4% fgp - 28.8% 3pp - 5.1 rpg - 1.9 apg - 0.8 steals - 0.5 blocks
Willie: 28:00 mpg - 12.8 ppg - 10.6 fga - 50.2% fgp - 25.0% 3pp - 7.0 rpg - 2.4 apg - 1.1 steals - 0.9 blocks
Overall, Willie has the better stats, and although I posted his 25% 3pp, he only took 4 three's all season if memory serves. Does anyone want to pay Willie 30 mil a year? Just asking, because the major difference in Gordon from year three to year four is the amount of shots he took. He averaged four more shots a game, and three of those shots were 3 pointers. His overall shooting percentage went down a percentage point. While I agree that the team that scores the most points, wins. How you score those points, and the efficiency with which you do it does matter.
If I were to agree that Gordon's fourth year was his breakout year, then why shouldn't I expect Willie to have a breakout year next season when it appears he's on the same growth track that Gordon is; And if so, then why do I need Gordon? Look, I'll acknowledge that Gordon might someday become a decent to good 3 pt shooter, and if so, then he becomes an entirely different player. But I don't want to gamble 30 mil a year on it. It's the money and the length of contract I object to, not the player.
I think Hezonja is a much safer gamble. And so is Joe Harris as a solid bench player who can shoot, and can guard both the SF and SG positions.
Hezonja could be one of those players that simply needs a change of scenery. That's why he's worth the risk. He wouldn't cost that much by comparison to someone, like Gordon, and he fills a position of need. Another player I would pursue is Joe Harris. He's the type of player that you want on your bench. He can guard two or three positions, and he's a 40% 3 pt shooter. And he's still young. Now if you can get me Gordon for 14 or 15 mil a year, I'm on board. But I want it written in his contract that he can't chuck up more than three 3 pt shots a game. How happy would people be if Willie started chucking up 6 three's a game while shooting 29%?
That's a possibility isn't it? When you compare Willie's third season with Gordon's third season, Willie looks to have had the better season overall. So why shouldn't he be able to chuck up 6 three's a game? He's just as good an athlete, and hey, he's a lot taller. Here's their third seasons.
Gordon: 28:43 mpg - 12.7 ppg - 10.8 fga - 45.4% fgp - 28.8% 3pp - 5.1 rpg - 1.9 apg - 0.8 steals - 0.5 blocks
Willie: 28:00 mpg - 12.8 ppg - 10.6 fga - 50.2% fgp - 25.0% 3pp - 7.0 rpg - 2.4 apg - 1.1 steals - 0.9 blocks
Overall, Willie has the better stats, and although I posted his 25% 3pp, he only took 4 three's all season if memory serves. Does anyone want to pay Willie 30 mil a year? Just asking, because the major difference in Gordon from year three to year four is the amount of shots he took. He averaged four more shots a game, and three of those shots were 3 pointers. His overall shooting percentage went down a percentage point. While I agree that the team that scores the most points, wins. How you score those points, and the efficiency with which you do it does matter.
If I were to agree that Gordon's fourth year was his breakout year, then why shouldn't I expect Willie to have a breakout year next season when it appears he's on the same growth track that Gordon is; And if so, then why do I need Gordon? Look, I'll acknowledge that Gordon might someday become a decent to good 3 pt shooter, and if so, then he becomes an entirely different player. But I don't want to gamble 30 mil a year on it. It's the money and the length of contract I object to, not the player.
I think Hezonja is a much safer gamble. And so is Joe Harris as a solid bench player who can shoot, and can guard both the SF and SG positions.