crazysauce wrote:I dont get the Aaron Gordon love either. Everyone considered James Johnson mostly a bad contract and compare him similar to value of Gordon.
Jonhson fits our team much better and gives us a toughness we have always lacked along with being a savvy veteran and is much better from 3. Also think he is much rougher defensively. Add that to the fact that we are giving up a 17th pick or any pick for that matter and its a hard no for me. In addition Gordon is paid even more the Johnson is. He is a bad contract which is why Orlando wants to move him. I really dont get the thought here. Really hope we dont take the bait here.
Confused on you saying Johnson is a way better 3 pt shooter. Gordon has legit a higher career average
crazysauce wrote:I dont get the Aaron Gordon love either. Everyone considered James Johnson mostly a bad contract and compare him similar to value of Gordon.
Jonhson fits our team much better and gives us a toughness we have always lacked along with being a savvy veteran and is much better from 3. Also think he is much rougher defensively. Add that to the fact that we are giving up a 17th pick or any pick for that matter and its a hard no for me. In addition Gordon is paid even more the Johnson is. He is a bad contract which is why Orlando wants to move him. I really dont get the thought here. Really hope we dont take the bait here.
Confused on you saying Johnson is a way better 3 pt shooter. Gordon has legit a higher career average
In recent years? Johnson has shot marginally better recently, I guess. He barely shot threes early in his career.
Gordon is better than Johnson though. And I don't think it's arguable. And Johnson has never played more than 27 mpg. Six different teams... and nobody thought of him as a full-time starter or a big minutes guy. Not one team.
I find the information about him playing the four as compared to the 3 interesting. The stats thing though rings a bit hollow as that team is a whos who of basketball vagabonds. He had to score. I compare it ro Love being the guy here putting up 26 q game and going to cleveland and now averaging 16 or 17 a game. On another team Gordon is very similar statistically to Johnson I believe. For some reason I just cant get there.
I was counting from when he started actually shooting 3 or so per game which was the last few years. I really liked what Johnson brought to our team last year. He has a nastyness to him that I would hate to lose for a very similar player.
crazysauce wrote:I find the information about him playing the four as compared to the 3 interesting. The stats thing though rings a bit hollow as that team is a whos who of basketball vagabonds. He had to score. I compare it ro Love being the guy here putting up 26 q game and going to cleveland and now averaging 16 or 17 a game. On another team Gordon is very similar statistically to Johnson I believe. For some reason I just cant get there.
Aaron Gordon was 3rd on his team in FGA only shooting 0.1 more then the 4th place person and 5th on his team in Usage %. Can't compare him to Love getting more inflating stats due to opportunities.
crazysauce wrote:I dont get the Aaron Gordon love either. Everyone considered James Johnson mostly a bad contract and compare him similar to value of Gordon.
Jonhson fits our team much better and gives us a toughness we have always lacked along with being a savvy veteran and is much better from 3. Also think he is much rougher defensively. Add that to the fact that we are giving up a 17th pick or any pick for that matter and its a hard no for me. In addition Gordon is paid even more the Johnson is. He is a bad contract which is why Orlando wants to move him. I really dont get the thought here. Really hope we dont take the bait here.
Confused on you saying Johnson is a way better 3 pt shooter. Gordon has legit a higher career average
In recent years? Johnson has shot marginally better recently, I guess. He barely shot threes early in his career.
Gordon is better than Johnson though. And I don't think it's arguable. And Johnson has never played more than 27 mpg. Six different teams... and nobody thought of him as a full-time starter or a big minutes guy. Not one team.
Ya I'm just frustrated, James Johnson isn't good. He has had one legit good NBA year what got him paid and that year was worse then what Aaron Gordon just had and people are meh on it.
I just can't see how Gordon for #17 and Johnson isn't a great trade for the Wolves. Getting a guy who is 8 years younger who is better at probably everything then Johnson outside of intimidating opponents and the 17th where there is legit 3 players in currently in a rotation in the last 14 years who were selected 17th (holiday, Schroeder and divincenzo)
He averages 12 to 14 shots a game. If you shoot a bunch you will eventually score. He shoots .44 percent from the field for his career as compared to Johnson shooting close to .48 percent for his career on about 6 per game. He attempted 9 per game last year which was close to his career high and averaged 12 per. Johnson is much more efficient and cheaper.
Getting Gordon for me depends 100% on what we come out of the early draft with. If we take Wiseman with the intention to keep him then bringing in Gordon to play SF just doesn't work. If we trade out of the top pick and get a Haliburton then Gordon makes sense to get with the 17th pick and Johnson to play the 4 next to Towns.
With that said though, I don't think people realize what playing next to guys like Russell and Towns would do for Gordon offensively. Who in Orlando has ever been a threat while Gordon has been there to draw the defense's attention on the wing or in the backcourt? Their best season in recent memory had DJ Augustin and Evan Fournier as the primary playmakers and ball handers. Vucevic is the best player he's played with and neither of them control the ball. He's been in mediocrity hell playing with 1 all-star his whole career. He's not an all-star, but we don't need him to be one here. We need him to be a glue guy who cleans up on offense next to 2 highly talented players and who can hopefully pick up some tough defensive matchups that we don't currently have the personnel to handle. Aaron Gordon is a better playmaking and rebounding version of Thad Young which fits the small ball mold. Give him some new scenery. Pair him with some all-stars who can get him the ball in easy bucket situations and see what happens. At worst he's an overpaid role player on a team who doesn't have extra cash to play with anyway for a mid-late first round pick and an older player who isn't gonna be here after this year.
crazysauce wrote:He averages 12 to 14 shots a game. If you shoot a bunch you will eventually score. He shoots .44 percent from the field for his career as compared to Johnson shooting close to .48 percent for his career on about 6 per game. He attempted 9 per game last year which was close to his career high and averaged 12 per. Johnson is much more efficient and cheaper.
Just to be fair... his stint with the Wolves was a 14-game sample size... out of 634 career games.
I like a lot of what James Johnson can do off the bench. He's pretty versatile. But his expiring contract is more of an asset than his on-court production.
Gordon turns the ball over less and fouls less while providing similar usage to Johnson and better defense. He's just a smarter player IMO not to mention a lot younger.
I think Khans sums it up nicely. If after the dust settles from our 1st pick we still don't have a legit starting 4, we could do a lot worse than Aaron Gordon.
