Gordon for Wallace?

[TheLegend]

I was talking to one of my friends at Chicago and told me that Ben Gordan doesn't want to play for the Bulls and I pitched in the idea of trading Gerald Wallace for him. Would you guys accept?

EDIT: Sorry for putting this in the wrong forum.

[ammofan]

how about Ben and Joakim for Gerald and a 2nd rounder?

[dnbman]

I don't want to trade Wallace unless we get a quality PF in return. Obviously, there are exceptions (Bryant, Lebron), but those are hardly realistic.

[jpf_v2.0]

Gotta agree with dnb on this one.

[SWedd523]

Why would we trade our best player and starting SF for an undersized non defensive scoring 2? We already have Richardson so why downgrade:confused:

[Alex]

that trade would make no sense for us whatsoever.

[Ghost Kat]

I have to agree, It won't help this team at all.

[WAM9]

Count me in with everyone else...This would not maker our team better in any way, shape or form.

[TheBeagle]

No way. This would be the equivalent of us valuing Shannon Brown over Kyle Weaver, and I mean, that would never happen, right?!?! :rolleyes:

Taking devious tongue out of cheek, yeah, if GW goes it going to have to be for a solid starting 4 (a la Boozer), not for a 6th man candidate. It would be highway robbery at its worst to trade GW for Gordon straight-up.

[spectre]

Would we do it if Gooden or Tyrus Thomas (or even Noah) is thrown in? Straight up is pretty much out of the question without a 3rd team due to Gordon's BYC status. The Bulls do have a TE of around 5 million, but they're prettty adamant on staying under the tax.

Who could we trade Crash straight up for that's realisitc...meaning the the other team would do it as well?

I'll even go one farther...IF we trade Crash for a starter quality PF (he won't be an all star), will it make enough difference to cover the weakness in D we'd have with no Crash?

[Dead_Real]

Would we do it if Gooden or Tyrus Thomas (or even Noah) is thrown in? Straight up is pretty much out of the question without a 3rd team due to Gordon's BYC status. The Bulls do have a TE of around 5 million, but they're prettty adamant on staying under the tax.

Who could we trade Crash straight up for that's realisitc...meaning the the other team would do it as well?

I'll even go one farther...IF we trade Crash for a starter quality PF (he won't be an all star), will it make enough difference to cover the weakness in D we'd have with no Crash?
I would jump all over the deal if we could land both Gordon and Ty Thomas in return. Although I'm not sure what other player we would have to give the Bulls along with Crash to make the deal a little more even on both sides Ammo, Davidson, or picks not sure if it could be done though.

Off topic a little but I would still love to pull of that Gerald Wallace and Sean May for Carlos Boozer and Brewer deal that came up a few months ago seemed more realistic on both sides sadly it didn't go anywhere.

[spectre]

This from the Bulls' board on RealGM. This is an EXAMPLE of how they could just trade Gordon by himself using their traded player exception. None said they would do this trade.


Just screwing around, let's say the Bulls have exactly $7.531744 million that they can add in salary and be right exactly at the LT threshold.

Adam Morrison makes $4.1592 million this season.
Sean May makes $2.661027 million this year.
Jermareo Davidson makes the minimum $711,517 this season.
That's a combined $7.531744 million.
All expiring deals.

The Bulls could trade Gordon, signed for $9.51468 million first-year, or $72.0737 million over 6 years. ($7.531744 million + 125% + $100k = $9.51468 million)

Ben's BYC value of $4.75 million allows the Bulls to take back May and Davidson and their combined $3.4 million-ish, and they can use the TPE to trade for Morrison.

From Charlotte's perspective, it's just one big 3-for-1 trade where they send out exactly enough salary to pay Ben the 6/72 he wants.

We'd really be devastated at the 4 after a deal like this, but there's no doubt we'd be getting the best player...and most times the team which does that wins the trade. I think it could be tweeked though:

Wait the required time (2 months?) and swap Shannon Brown for Davidson.

May/Hammer for Gordon...our out would be around 7.7

Hammer/Ajinca/Duds for Gordon...our out would be around 7.55.

Their fans are looking for expirings, but I don't know that they'd turn down a sick 3 pt shooter like Hammer as they'll be extremely lacking in that without Gordon.

These aren't "home run" packages for the Bulls, but with the impasse it seems the two camps have they can't expect a lot coming in.

Still don't know that I'd do it...paying Gordon that kind of change would be a hard decision to make.

[ammofan]

so spectre...


we could have what lineup?

PG. Felton
SG. Gordan
SF. J-Rich
PF-Wallace
C. Okafor

??

[SWedd523]

Why would we trade away our depth at the 4 just to get a 6th man? Gordon didn't do as well starting as he did coming off the bench. He's a spark plug player at best. I wouldn't even do it if they included the ever-under achieving Ty Thomas.

And I would definitely, most certainly, unequivocally, without a doubt (etc.), not trade May, Morrison, and Davidson for Gordon. Are you trying to say he's better than those 3 combined?:confused:

There is no way the FO will do a trade like this. I would much rather do the Boozer trade that was rumored before.

[GoBobs]

pass on Ben Gordan unless he wants mid level or less money which he doesn't

No way should we think of trading Gerald Wallace

go watch Gerald Wallace top 100 dunks and blocks on Youtube

[spectre]

Why would we trade away our depth at the 4 just to get a 6th man? Gordon didn't do as well starting as he did coming off the bench. He's a spark plug player at best. I wouldn't even do it if they included the ever-under achieving Ty Thomas.

And I would definitely, most certainly, unequivocally, without a doubt (etc.), not trade May, Morrison, and Davidson for Gordon. Are you trying to say he's better than those 3 combined?:confused:

There is no way the FO will do a trade like this. I would much rather do the Boozer trade that was rumored before.

I'm not advocating this trade at all, but I do think it's interesting in that we would get better quality out of the deal...so I'm not exactly saying Gordon is better than them combined, but he's most definitely the best player out of the group. The team getting the best player in trades almost always wins.

Besides, how often can you get a 20 ppg scorer without giving up any starters?

Ammofan, if we did that I'd probably still bring Gordon off the bench but split PG equally between the 3 (32 minutes each), but as I mentioned earlier our PF slot would be devastated.

In the end I'd probably just pass altogether on Gordon right now; if we had a starting PF maybe...but that price tag really hurts.

[SWedd523]

I'm not advocating this trade at all, but I do think it's interesting in that we would get better quality out of the deal...so I'm not exactly saying Gordon is better than them combined, but he's most definitely the best player out of the group. The team getting the best player in trades almost always wins.

Besides, how often can you get a 20 ppg scorer without giving up any starters?

Ammofan, if we did that I'd probably still bring Gordon off the bench but split PG equally between the 3 (32 minutes each), but as I mentioned earlier our PF slot would be devastated.

In the end I'd probably just pass altogether on Gordon right now; if we had a starting PF maybe...but that price tag really hurts.

No doubt he's the single best player in that deal. But is he better than those 3 combined? We'd be paying more money for that one guy than we would for the other three. We already have Richardson and they're just about identical in my eyes..

[spectre]

Nah, Swish is much better.

Heh, I'm not going to argue this as I've already said I didn't think we would/should do it. Bringing in Gordon would be a depth move sort of like Ginobli in SA, and we aren't in the position to do that yet.

I think there could be debate on whether the talent of Gordon < or > Ammo/May/Davidson, esp. with the injury history of the 1st 2. I think Chicago fans would feel very ripped off and I doubt seriously if they'd do it. That above was just an example of how they could do a 1 for 3 using their TPE.

[BIGCatBobcat]

bad trade, no.

[amour217]

there's hail in the forecast....

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAIL no

[ziggy]

there's hail in the forecast....

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAIL no
LOL :hysterical:

I'm actually a Ben Gordon fan, hes lit the Bobcats up nicely on more than one occasion but if we trade Crash then it has to be for a 4. We need another 2 like a hole in the head.

[Ghost Kat]

What happened to wanting a lock down type SG??
Ben Gordan isn't known for his defensive pressure.


Bad deal......

[SWedd523]

He's one hell of a 6th man though, thats for sure. Too bad we don't need one right now:rolleyes:

[Slam]

I was talking to one of my friends at Chicago and told me that Ben Gordan doesn't want to play for the Bulls and I pitched in the idea of trading Gerald Wallace for him. Would you guys accept?

EDIT: Sorry for putting this in the wrong forum.

Even if we did, they wouldn't.

Why would they bring Crash in after just sinking all that coin into Deng when they both play the 3?

(P.S. and I wouldn't from our POV anyway)

[WAM9]

No way I'd do the Gordon deal. Salary wise, you just can't have 25 mil in your starting and backup SG's. It would keep us from getting a quality 4 for years to come.

The Boozer deal is still the one that interests me the most. I saw some with Brewer involved and some without. While I would love to get Brewer back, I'd make the deal without him. Getting a low post scorer and rebounder like Boozer would be a best case scenerio. Him be a free agent after the season would cause concern but I would still take a chance on it. I think trading Wallace without getting a top quality 4 in return would probably, long term, be the worst thing the franchise could do.