Author Topic: Aaron gordon  (Read 14409 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #30 on: June 01, 2014, 09:47:30 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
Did Exum not dominate against the US team at the 2013 Hoops summit?

That is one game, bro.  Are you aware it is one game because I don't think one should scout guys on one game, otherwise Lorenzo Charles would have went number one.

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/2013-Nike-Hoop-Summit-Game-Recap-4149/

Anyone can get hot one game.   I think he is a good player but most of his playing comes against vastly inferior competition.   Wiggins played well that game too.   All these guys don't play well once they are scouted and their habits are noted.   The international guys have an edge in this regard until they get scouted. 

Embiid had one hook that is mentioned that game and he is probably going to be the number one and he had a bad game.   So much for using that for a prognosticator.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2014, 09:54:08 AM by Celtics4ever »

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #31 on: June 01, 2014, 10:03:39 AM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15965
  • Tommy Points: 1833
I wouldn't get my hopes up....DA doesn't tend to keep these picks.

If he does Gordon is one of the best choices left to choose from

I trust Gordon to be better than Exum

I would be very, very, very surprised if that is true.

Gordon really doesn't have any attributes that Exum doesn't have.  Both are excellent defenders, both are very young, both are exceptional athletes, both have high IQ, both have good passing and ball handling skills for their position, both are good rebounders for their position.  On the down side both have weak jump shots, both are sub-par free throw shooters (though Gordon is far worse), both have a major need to add muscle.

The difference is that Exum has far greater physical advantage at his positions (his size is either elite at PG, or excellent at SG).   Gordon's size can be an advantage at SF, but could be a major liability at PF.  Exum's position isn't as depending on strength, so his lack of bulk isn't as much an issue as it is for Gordon (who would get slaughtered by stronger NBA PF's). 

Also Exum is also a far superior scorer.  He can be dominant attacking the basket, he's at least CAPABLE from the foul line (around 64%) and he is a very good post scorer which (combined with his size) will make him very hard for opposing NBA guards to defend.  Gordon has a far more limited offensive game and depends mostly on his athleticism to get points - he's really not a very skilled scorer at all.

The difference to me is that Exum has a LOT more offensive upside and IMHO has the potential to be an 18/5/7 player in the NBA, wheras I think Gordon's celing is around 14/8/3.  I really think Gordon will be a MKG / Tayshaun Prince / Nicholas Batum / Gerald Wallace type player, while Exum will be more of a Penny Hardaway / Michael Carter-Williams / Derek Rose / Russel Westbrook type.     

This analysis ignores the shift in player positioning that has occurred in the NBA over the last several seasons, away from the traditional 1-5 positions (which themselves were created during the 70's) and toward recruitment of hybrid players who can defend multiple positions, due to rotational help defense that has become increasingly popular.  As a result, players like Gordon have an increased value, for the very reason  you are critical of him: that he doesn't fit neatly into a prototype 3 or 4 position. 

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #32 on: June 01, 2014, 10:45:51 AM »

Offline Evantime34

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11942
  • Tommy Points: 764
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
My thoughts on Gordon
1. Going to be an elite defender in the NBA at multiple positions, I  see some Scottie Pippen in him (Pippen shot a worse percentage from 3 in his first two college seasons than Gordon did in his first at a younger age)

2. If we are going to use our draft pick, it means that we are going to stick with our young guys in Sullinger and Olynyk. That pair has a lot of scoring upside IMO but they are both minuses athletically. I think if we are to go with these two as our frontcourt we need to add athleticism all around them to make up for theirs.

3. I believe Gordon can play the 3. If you watch his pre draft videos as well as what he does on the break, you know that Gordon is already a very good ball handler. I think his shot will come around but his handle will allow him to get to the bucket immediately in the NBA.

4. His shooting form looked good in his workout video, which gives me hope. He holds the ball kind of far out in front of him when shooting, so I don't see him shooting off the dribble much because it will be hard to create space with someone on him. I think his shot is short compact and very repeatable, all lead me to believe with more practice he can become a good corner 3 shooter or 3 point shooter.

5. Him a full strength Rondo, Bradley and Gordon could be a lot of fun. All of them are plus turnover creators so they could force teams into a lot of mistakes.

6. They could use creative ways to get him into scoring position in his first year. I think his best scoring early on would be running the pick and roll with Rondo. Rolling hard to the hole with shooters on the wings to open space.
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #33 on: June 01, 2014, 11:17:13 AM »

Offline Nef-Oracle

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 283
  • Tommy Points: 5
Aaron Gordon will be a beast in 1-2 yrs or even in his rookie season. He is the bpa at #6 imo. He's athletic, smart, intangile, versatile, young, plays good d & have a lot of potential. Honestly i think he could be better than Blake Griffin. He is better than any other forward in the draft except Jabari & Wiggins. Boston should take him or lal will do.

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #34 on: June 01, 2014, 11:29:32 AM »

Offline NorthernLightning

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 759
  • Tommy Points: 69
  • zap
When casual fans think "Star", they think about stats.

That's why they love players like Kevin Love, even though Joakim Noah makes his team much better than Love, even though he doesn't put up gaudy stats.

Look at Houston this year. I'd rather have a self-less winner than a selfish stat padding no defense SuperStar like Love or Harden.


Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #35 on: June 01, 2014, 11:34:20 AM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
When casual fans think "Star", they think about stats.

That's why they love players like Kevin Love, even though Joakim Noah makes his team much better than Love, even though he doesn't put up gaudy stats.

Look at Houston this year. I'd rather have a self-less winner than a selfish stat padding no defense SuperStar like Love or Harden.

+1

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #36 on: June 01, 2014, 12:56:26 PM »

Offline Kane3387

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8269
  • Tommy Points: 944
  • Intensity!!!
When casual fans think "Star", they think about stats.

That's why they love players like Kevin Love, even though Joakim Noah makes his team much better than Love, even though he doesn't put up gaudy stats.

Look at Houston this year. I'd rather have a self-less winner than a selfish stat padding no defense SuperStar like Love or Harden.

Well the good thing about love is he could eventually be flipped into a joakim Noah type and then some down the road.


KG: "Dude.... What is up with yo shorts?!"

CBD_2016 Cavs Remaining Picks - 14.14

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #37 on: June 01, 2014, 01:13:28 PM »

Offline krumeto

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 476
  • Tommy Points: 72
When casual fans think "Star", they think about stats.

That's why they love players like Kevin Love, even though Joakim Noah makes his team much better than Love, even though he doesn't put up gaudy stats.

Look at Houston this year. I'd rather have a self-less winner than a selfish stat padding no defense SuperStar like Love or Harden.

+1
+1 too

One of the reasons I prefer the team-first Gordon to the me-first Randle.
"We do so many defensive drills in practice, I come home and I'm putting the press on my woman, denying her the ball.
Y'all are laughing, but it's sad. I go home and deny the wing."

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #38 on: June 01, 2014, 01:32:53 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
When casual fans think "Star", they think about stats.

That's why they love players like Kevin Love, even though Joakim Noah makes his team much better than Love, even though he doesn't put up gaudy stats.

Look at Houston this year. I'd rather have a self-less winner than a selfish stat padding no defense SuperStar like Love or Harden.

+1
+1 too

One of the reasons I prefer the team-first Gordon to the me-first Randle.

you know i don't mind either.  We could also use a me first, take charge guy like Randle.  When the game calls upon for a guy to score you the 1 on 1 points, you can give it down low to randle. Or have him beat his man to the basket.

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #39 on: June 01, 2014, 03:04:05 PM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501
You people putting a definitive cap on Aaron Gordon's offense are extremely shortsighted and lacking imagination.

He was barely 18 when his season started, and he played with remarkable composure and iq for a freshman. He shot 35+ from 3 as a freshman and his fg% was good.

He had a different, funky shooting form on his free throws, that he has fixed if you read Kevin O'Conners article about it.

He has supreme athleticism, good handles, and is a good passer. He has the entire foundation to be an above average everything, including scorer.

You lose all credibility when you declare definitively that he will never be more than a mediocre scorer, just because you nitpicked his shooting %s from different spots on the floor when he was barely 18.

Step up your game.
I read the O'Connor article already. Gordon's improved in drills. Lots of players can do things in drills playing against air that they can't do in games or in pressure situations and we'll never have a chance to see him do it in game or 3-on-3 action before the draft.

Go look at his breakdown videos on DraftExpress. He's not a mediocre offensive player.  He's a bad offensive player. He fails the eye test and it's confirmed when you drill into the numbers. His decent shooting percentages come from dunking and that will change a lot when he gets to the NBA. Not a lot a freebies for PFs and he has no low post game whatsoever either. Also, if he can't shoot FTs a lot better than what he's done he'll be getting hacked every time he gets free and will be off the floor when it counts.

Gordon has a long way to go to get to mediocre offensively and having other positive attributes doesn't guarantee anything especially when your shooting has been poor historically. He's riskier than Vonleh, who is raw, but has a stroke, and far riskier than Smart or Randle.

Go to other team forums who are picking in the 5-10 range, and there's not a more polarizing player than Gordon and it all comes down to his offense. There are guys like you who love him and guys like me who have him last on their list in that range and not many people in between. Of the 12 mock drafts at NBA.com, Gordon's got both the most variability in his ranking and the lowest average ranking of himself, Randle, Vonleh, and Smart. 7 of the 12 mocks had him picked 8th or worse.

A lot of people seem to have doubts about him even if you don't.

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #40 on: June 01, 2014, 03:26:24 PM »

Offline hpantazo

  • Kevin McHale
  • ************************
  • Posts: 24882
  • Tommy Points: 2700
You people putting a definitive cap on Aaron Gordon's offense are extremely shortsighted and lacking imagination.

He was barely 18 when his season started, and he played with remarkable composure and iq for a freshman. He shot 35+ from 3 as a freshman and his fg% was good.

He had a different, funky shooting form on his free throws, that he has fixed if you read Kevin O'Conners article about it.

He has supreme athleticism, good handles, and is a good passer. He has the entire foundation to be an above average everything, including scorer.

You lose all credibility when you declare definitively that he will never be more than a mediocre scorer, just because you nitpicked his shooting %s from different spots on the floor when he was barely 18.

Step up your game.
I read the O'Connor article already. Gordon's improved in drills. Lots of players can do things in drills playing against air that they can't do in games or in pressure situations and we'll never have a chance to see him do it in game or 3-on-3 action before the draft.

Go look at his breakdown videos on DraftExpress. He's not a mediocre offensive player.  He's a bad offensive player. He fails the eye test and it's confirmed when you drill into the numbers. His decent shooting percentages come from dunking and that will change a lot when he gets to the NBA. Not a lot a freebies for PFs and he has no low post game whatsoever either. Also, if he can't shoot FTs a lot better than what he's done he'll be getting hacked every time he gets free and will be off the floor when it counts.

Gordon has a long way to go to get to mediocre offensively and having other positive attributes doesn't guarantee anything especially when your shooting has been poor historically. He's riskier than Vonleh, who is raw, but has a stroke, and far riskier than Smart or Randle.

Go to other team forums who are picking in the 5-10 range, and there's not a more polarizing player than Gordon and it all comes down to his offense. There are guys like you who love him and guys like me who have him last on their list in that range and not many people in between. Of the 12 mock drafts at NBA.com, Gordon's got both the most variability in his ranking and the lowest average ranking of himself, Randle, Vonleh, and Smart. 7 of the 12 mocks had him picked 8th or worse.

A lot of people seem to have doubts about him even if you don't.

I agree. Gordon is a smart kid with a great attitude, but he's got a long, long way to go to be even mediocre offensively. People also thought a great attitude, intelligence,  and atlheticism were going to be enough to make MKG an NBA star, and that didn't happen.

You can't discount pure talent as being a learned skill, it is not. If it were, we could take any guy with atlhetic ability and make him a star basketball player, but it never works that way.

I'm shocked by the comparison some posters on here make of Gordon to Scottie Pippen. He will never be anything close to Scottie Pippen. Pippen was a great offensive player with pure instincts.

« Last Edit: June 01, 2014, 03:32:17 PM by hpantazo »

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #41 on: June 01, 2014, 07:28:06 PM »

Offline NorthernLightning

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 759
  • Tommy Points: 69
  • zap
Quote
I'm shocked by the comparison some posters on here make of Gordon to Scottie Pippen. He will never be anything close to Scottie Pippen. Pippen was a great offensive player with pure instincts.

Let me guess, you watched the draftexpress video and Gordon didn't pass the "eye" test.

One thing about those draftexpress videos you might want to consider. The format of the videos is 50% good + 50% bad. That means every player is going to look average in those videos. They don't finish off the videos with an "Overall" section where they tell you the good greatly outweighs the bad, or vice versa.

Gordon can be a Pippen for the modern age. In Pippen's day, 6'7 was the ideal height to be a versatile lock down defender of the league's biggest wing stars.

In the modern age, many of the biggest wing stars are 6'7-6'10, and strong. Gordon has a much better body than Pippen for guarding Lebron, Melo, George, Durant, Jabari, Deng, and even Blake and Kevin Love and Aldridge.

Many of today's biggest stars are simply closer to Gordon's size and expected future strength than they are to Scottie Pippen, while many of the biggest stars in Pippen's day were shooting guards and smaller SFs. Reggie Miller, Ray Allen, Grant Hill, Clyde Drexler, etc.

Sure, Pippen could defend pgs better than Gordon, but Gordon can defend oversized SFs and PFs better than Pippen, especially when he fills out to 235ish.

Pippen didn't make the Hall of Fame because of his stats. He only shot 32% from 3 for his career, and wasn't the scorer that most HOF players are. He got to the Hall of Fame because of his versatility, defensive dominance, team-first attitude, and being such a winner. Without the rings he wouldn't have made the HoF.

Gordon possesses those same traits, and he also possesses the same basic ball handling and passing ability/potential at 18 years old.

Pippen played 4 years of second rate college ball. Nobody was comparing him to anybody special after his freshman year, or even junior year.

If you've convinced yourself that Gordon won't develop past what you saw with your youtube eye test, I'll never convince you that Gordon can be a great one.

If Joakim Noah wins a couple championships with DRose, he might make the Hall of Fame as well.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfVitXBMWY0

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #42 on: June 01, 2014, 07:50:56 PM »

Offline hpantazo

  • Kevin McHale
  • ************************
  • Posts: 24882
  • Tommy Points: 2700
Quote
I'm shocked by the comparison some posters on here make of Gordon to Scottie Pippen. He will never be anything close to Scottie Pippen. Pippen was a great offensive player with pure instincts.

Let me guess, you watched the draftexpress video and Gordon didn't pass the "eye" test.

One thing about those draftexpress videos you might want to consider. The format of the videos is 50% good + 50% bad. That means every player is going to look average in those videos. They don't finish off the videos with an "Overall" section where they tell you the good greatly outweighs the bad, or vice versa.

Gordon can be a Pippen for the modern age. In Pippen's day, 6'7 was the ideal height to be a versatile lock down defender of the league's biggest wing stars.

In the modern age, many of the biggest wing stars are 6'7-6'10, and strong. Gordon has a much better body than Pippen for guarding Lebron, Melo, George, Durant, Jabari, Deng, and even Blake and Kevin Love and Aldridge.

Many of today's biggest stars are simply closer to Gordon's size and expected future strength than they are to Scottie Pippen, while many of the biggest stars in Pippen's day were shooting guards and smaller SFs. Reggie Miller, Ray Allen, Grant Hill, Clyde Drexler, etc.

Sure, Pippen could defend pgs better than Gordon, but Gordon can defend oversized SFs and PFs better than Pippen, especially when he fills out to 235ish.

Pippen didn't make the Hall of Fame because of his stats. He only shot 32% from 3 for his career, and wasn't the scorer that most HOF players are. He got to the Hall of Fame because of his versatility, defensive dominance, team-first attitude, and being such a winner. Without the rings he wouldn't have made the HoF.

Gordon possesses those same traits, and he also possesses the same basic ball handling and passing ability/potential at 18 years old.

Pippen played 4 years of second rate college ball. Nobody was comparing him to anybody special after his freshman year, or even junior year.

If you've convinced yourself that Gordon won't develop past what you saw with your youtube eye test, I'll never convince you that Gordon can be a great one.

If Joakim Noah wins a couple championships with DRose, he might make the Hall of Fame as well.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfVitXBMWY0

Maybe you didn't read my last post, or have me confused with someone else, because not once did I ever mention any youtube or draft express videos or anything of the sort.

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #43 on: June 03, 2014, 11:12:30 PM »

Offline loco_91

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
  • Tommy Points: 145
I'd like to dispel a few things about Aaron Gordon.

1. Gordon is nothing like Blake Griffin! They are in totally different molds. Griffin is a mediocre defender at the 4 who uses his outstanding strength to dominate offensively in the low post. Gordon is an elite defender at the 3 who cannot score in the post, and whose offensive contribution will be as a slasher/finisher and as a passer. This brings me to

2. Gordon is not hopeless offensively. People seem to think that there is only one way of contributing on the offensive end as a wing player-- to shoot the lights out-- and that is why they overvalue guys like Doug McDermott. But in fact, shooting is merely the most easily quantified offensive skill, not the most important. Gordon excels at getting to the rim and finishing, and he passes well, too. He can easily be a net positive offensively, and if he develops into an average shooter, he could be an offensive star.

3. That said, Gordon is not a better prospect than Marcus Smart, who has similar strengths and weaknesses. Smart is also an elite defender, but even more so, I think. He generates steals at an incredible rate. His shot is also bad, but not quite as bad, and he often shot off the dribble. Also like Gordon, Smart excels at getting to the rim and finishing. He is more of a mismatch threat at the 1 than Gordon is at the 3.

Re: Aaron gordon
« Reply #44 on: June 05, 2014, 09:26:34 AM »

Offline Galeto

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1263
  • Tommy Points: 71
I wish Gordon was a better shotblocker.  It's a big hole for the type of player he is.  This is where the comparisons to Kirilenko and Josh Smith fall apart.  Their elite shotblocking, when added to their rebounding, passing and individual defense, gave them enough value to be very valuable players despite poor outside shots. 

If he's a small forward, there's only so much he can do defensively because of the amount of picks that are run and the high skill level of the top scorers.  It's not enough to be an elite small forward defender, which isn't necessarily a given with Gordon because he didn't contain dribble penetration all that well at Arizona, he also has to be a good enough scorer.  With the 6th overall pick, that's an absolute necessity.

It's great that he moves well off the ball but he's also missing a floater right now.  Take someone like Marion, who is another frequent comparison.  Marion's elite floater gave him the ability to maximize his cuts to the basket.  That was the foundation of his offensive game.  Gordon's not going to be able to just dunk everything because no one can.  I haven't see the type of body control and soft touch that would portend an elite floater from Gordon.