Solution to BG and Deng Contracts

by kite on Jul 18, 2008 4:35 PM CDT Comment 18 comments

So the Bulls have been negotiating with Deng and Gordon for a while now, and there seems to be a good chance that they'll sign and trade at least one of them (probably Gordon), and possibly both. When a player is signed and traded, it is hard to get anything of value in return because it is very hard to match salaries and the other team knows that you have no other choice but to trade the player. That is why I believe it is best to resign both Deng and Gordon.

The problem with resigning Gordon and Deng is that they want too much money and the team wants to maintain flexibility so that if there is a star free agent available in 2010, they can actively pursue him. Also, there are no more teams with cap space that might be interested in signing them (except for the Grizzlies, but they won't spend their money).

That leaves 3 options:

1. Gordon and Deng resign wth the Bulls.

2. Either Gordon, Deng, or both are signed and traded.

3. They take the qualifying offer and try to find a team in free agency next offseason.

The first option is probably the best for both parties. The Bulls keep their 2 best players, the players get their money, and everyone's happy. The second option would make the players happy because they would be getting paid; however, the Bulls would probably only take contracts expiring in the next two years, which would probably make them a bad team for the next two years and put all hope in the summer of 2010 (not a good idea in my opinion because there's always the chance that they don't get a star free agent acquisition that year). The third option is the last resort, and would be the worst case scenario for both parties because it would mean losing the players for nothing and the players would lose their Bird rights and have to find a team with cap space to sign them to their desired contracts.

My idea is that the Bulls give Gordon and Deng their desired annual salaries (probably 13 million for Deng and 11 or 12 milion for Gordon), but in shorter deals so that they remain tradeable in the future and leave the team with more flexibility in what they choose to do with the roster.

Deng: 3 years, $38 million

Gordon: 3 years, $34 million

They could include player/team options for more years or even after 2 years. I think this is the best way to go with Gordon, but if Deng was to sign long term for something like 6 years, $63 million, that would also be good.

FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.

2 recs | Comment 18 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

good thinking

the way i see it, the bulls only chance of contention for the next 2 years would be to resign both gordon and deng. i think gordon should be signed to a 2-year deal because that way we have more flexibilty when it comes to that magical summer of 2010 and maybe make a run at d-wade. the qualifying offer is basically a death sentence, and like you said, if we trade them, we could probably only afford to take expiring contracts in turn and make us a lottery team once again for the next two years

by Rose1 on Jul 18, 2008 5:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

that'd be nice

but it would put the bulls over the luxury tax… which we all know jerry won’t do. i think the most we can offer them this year is something around 8.5 million a piece to still be under the tax. with that kind of starting salary, those contract figures (unfortunately) aren’t viable. Although I very much agree that short term salaries are a much bettern option then either sign and trade or QO (which would be very, very bad).

by carlirvington on Jul 18, 2008 6:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh yeah,

good point, I totally forgot about the whole luxury tax thing. My bad

by kite on Jul 18, 2008 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd like to see a link to where you got your salary numbers, because they're wrong.

by tyger1147 on Jul 18, 2008 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The 8.5's for each

sound like the numbers Mike McGraw had in the DH a few weeks ago. I’ve never attempted to dig back in their archives, but I think I’d rather trust Sports2’s numbers anyway. Have we had a post from him about this?

Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky

by alec on Jul 18, 2008 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Value, value, value

Without assigning a value to each option, what do we have?? We’re at square one. Without that we can hypothesis forever. And for that we have to know what the Bulls’ organization is thinking. But this is a blog so each of us can hypothesis forever. I have a medium high value for Deng and a very low value for BG. Matt has a very high value for BG.

I suspect that the economic realities of the current NBA climate are forcing Deng and BG to take a test in Econ 101 in which they will get a failing grade. The Bulls will not lose.

by hlac on Jul 18, 2008 10:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I probably wasn't clear.

All I meant to say was that I’m pretty sure Sports2 has a spreadsheet that he keeps currant with all the contracts, cap and tax numbers for every player and team. I believe he’s more conscientious about accuracy than Mike McGraw.

Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky

by alec on Jul 19, 2008 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heh

http://sportstwo.com/NBA/LeagueSalaries#jump_CHI

I try to be conscientious about accuracy, but some of the stuff we just can’t know.
By my count, we’ve got $48.7M in salary committed for next year already.

That includes PeeOn Curry, who reportedly has a $250k buyout (which would bring that number down to just under $48.3M

The luxury tax bar is $71.15M

Unsigned we’ve got Demetrius Nichols (would make the $711,517 minimum salary) and Rose, who will make anything between $4,019,000 and $4,822,200. The former number is the minimum amount he’s guaranteed under the NBA 1st round draft scale contract and the latter is the maximum amount we could pay him. Teams usually pay the latter amount (see the CBA FAQ for an explanation).

Thus, the conservative assumption is to add Nichols and the $4.8M version of Rose’s contract. That could give us up to $16.87M before we hit the luxury tax threshold. Or $8.4M each for Deng and Gordon.

By cutting Curry, we could be at $8.6M per player.

So yeah, McGraw is pretty close. McGraw, by the way, is a very good guy and seems to take his fact checking seriously as compared to his competitors. At least in my experience.

And yeah, like carlirvington said, those numbers probably aren’t viable. Put into 5 year deals, they work out to $52M, which is about what they turned down already.

Of course, I wonder if that’s even been offered.

by Sports2 on Jul 19, 2008 7:27 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Also, Deng and Gordon are welcome to take my Econ 101 class!

by Sports2 on Jul 19, 2008 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The tax is assesed at the end of the regular season

So as long as the Bulls moved some salary after signing these deals, they’d be ok. I haven’t run the numbers but I don’t think the proposed money would put them so far over that it’d be impossible to get back below.

management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 19, 2008 4:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So we can assume the probably won't be using the trade exception, huh?

by tyger1147 on Jul 19, 2008 9:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

How likely is it we can move salary?

Especially if a team knows the Bulls are over the barrel already, they’ll drive a hard bargain.

But mostly it doesn’t seem very Bulls-esque to make a deal that puts them in the tax range and then worry about how to get under it later.

Most importantly, there are now a limited number of teams under the cap. So if we make a deal, we’re going to take about the same salary back that give out. Even an expiring contract would still have us paying the tax this year.

by Sports2 on Jul 20, 2008 6:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess

don’t be surprised if a Hinrich deal is merely a ‘dump’.

(also, god that Noc contract sucks to high heaven)

management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 21, 2008 12:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If only it weren't soooooooooooo looooooooooooooong.

Imagine how much you’d actually like the contract if it were two years shorter. $21 million coming off the books after 2010. They’d only have to worry about Hinrich’s contract, and of course, he’s the better player of the two. Bulls could “slightly overpay” for Deng and Gordon and still have the max deal available to give outright to any FA.

by tyger1147 on Jul 21, 2008 7:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Salaries - Worth

The whole NBA salary structure is becoming absurd. Like MLB, where 4-12 pitchers, with 6.30 ERAs, who play infrequently, are collecting millions based on one good year they had.
Like Posey’s RIDICULOUS contract, I ain’t into PaxDorf, AT ALL, and their mis-steps over the past few years, especially the last year, show this plainly to all. BUT, I am actually glad they are passing on some of these “deals” out there. HUGE money for a guy Posey’s age, who never averaged double-figure scoring in his entire career is just stupid.
I agree with the youth movement. As far as our two friends go, I pay to keep Deng, try to S+T BG, or sign him to short term contract. But letting two NBA starter caliber guys get away as unrestricted free agents next year, well, that’s just a mistake. They drafted and developed these two. Are they trying to build something, or just a hit and run approach, signing whoever until new contract time? Rebuilding for 9 years here guys! What the heck!
Truth out:
BG: too small to defend just about anyone, combined with his defensive “work effort” to begin with. Also, were any of you guys getting really annoyed watching BG get double-teamed into turnovers last year? He is not a PG, and can’t guard the other shooting guards. Very much a specialist and reserve, so why give him the mega-bucks? For every game he got 30, how many did his man get, how many turnovers and assists does he get? Do the math. See you Ben, it’s been nice to know you. He is a great shooter, but it’s not enough, sorry.
LD: Keep. High character guy, hard worker, was injured, this is a case of, if they lose him, he will break out with another team. If he added a 3-pt dimension to his game, he could be scary. He could amp up his D, for sure. Anybody who knows Achilles injuries, well, they are very tough. I believe he will have an improved year. He also could use an effective PF and Center to play with, but that’s another post,
They don’t have a true Center, and they can dress him up and call him one, but Noah ain’t no NBA Center, sorry. And Gray is not “the answer”.
Encouraged by Gray’s 20 rebound final game of the season, only to be brought down to earth again quickly by his dismal Summer League showing, against scrubs whose names I don’t remember. Ditto NOAH.
What have they been doing since the season ended?
Man, Noah looked terrible, and while Gray looks like he did drop some of the baby fat, he was getting his stuff pinned left and right by smaller scrubs. So, it seems that Gray can’t run, can’t jump, can’t move laterally, and can’t defend. This is the man in the middle for the future? Don’t think so. The draft had it right, a second round pick, at best.
they still need a Center. Period.

by rtblues on Jul 19, 2008 3:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs