McGraw with more details on Deng signing
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 29, 2008 11:42 PM CDT
200 comments
I'm quoting the whole thing, because it is damned well done:
The night before Luol Deng was scheduled to depart for a two-month trip to play for the Great Britain national team, he and the Bulls finally agreed on a new contract.
The deal is worth $71 million over six years, according to a league source. With incentives, it could grow to $80 million over the life of the contract.
Deng's lead negotiator, Jason Levien, said two weeks ago that once Deng left the country, they planned to cease talks with the Bulls. Deng's camp felt negotiations had carried on long enough. If they couldn't make a deal by the time Deng went to England, Levien might ask the Bulls to work out a sign-and-trade deal.
The other alternative was for Deng to sign a one-year qualifying offer worth $4.45 million and become an unrestricted free agent next summer. But Deng said all along he wanted to stay with the Bulls. Levien traveled to Chicago on Tuesday morning to meet face-to-face with Bulls general manager John Paxson in hopes of getting a deal done.
Though nothing has been signed yet, Deng postponed his flight to London and expects to attend a news conference announcing the contract later this week, most likely on Thursday.
In the past few days, three other restricted free agents landed new deals, which helped establish a market value and surely played a role in the Bulls reaching an agreement with Deng.
Golden State signed guard Monta Ellis for a reported $66 million over six years and center Andris Biedrins for $63 million over six years. Charlotte center Emeka Okafor agreed to a deal worth a reported $72 million over six years on Monday.
The Bulls appeared to raise their offer significantly over the past few days. Deng's best season came in 2006-07 when he averaged 18.8 points and 7.1 rebounds. Last season, the 6-foot-8 forward missed time with back and Achilles injuries. He posted 17.0 points and 6.3 boards in an all-around disappointing season for the Bulls.
Great Britain is scheduled to play six games in European championship qualifying beginning Sept. 3. Deng, 23, was born in Sudan, but spent most of his early years living in London and was granted a British passport last year.
Now the question is whether the Bulls will come to an agreement with their other significant restricted free agent, guard Ben Gordon. The Bulls are concerned about not paying the luxury tax and once Deng's deal becomes official, with a first-year salary of $9.4 million, they will have less than $8 million to work with next season before hitting the luxury tax threshold.
If the Bulls do re-sign Gordon, they would face a crowded backcourt with Gordon, first-round draft pick Derrick Rose, Kirk Hinrich, Larry Hughes and Thabo Sefolosha. One of those players _ most likely Gordon, Hinrich or Hughes _ figures to be moved before the season begins.
If McGraw's $8m figure is accurate, it's close but may not be enough for Gordon.
However, I'm still confident (or, more accurately, hopeful) that if the numbers are close, Paxson can get Reinsdorf to budge on the no-tax doctrine when it comes to signing Ben, as the actual tax calculation doesn't occur until the end of the season.
That way, while still being a bit over the tax after a Gordon signing, Pax would have time to pare some '08-'09 salary before the start of the season (obviously some moves need to occur if he re-signs). Or better yet, wait until the trade deadline and if things are going well, tax away.
2 recs |
200 comments
Email
Print
Comments
gordon won't take 8
book it.
Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team.
-- Scottie Pippen
by Orlando Woolridge on Jul 29, 2008 11:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
well just a starting salary at 8
with raises?
(yeah, likely not)
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 29, 2008 11:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He wants to be the highest paid player on the team
Would you be alright with Hughes pulling down more than you?
"I tell you, Steve Blass, you pitch me inside, they never, never find that ball."
-Roberto Clemente
by cubbybear on Jul 30, 2008 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I think he’s finished as a Bull. Brian Hanley, this morning on Mully and Hanley, mentioned that Gordon’s camp was asking for $15m last year as they felt he should have been the highest paid player on the team (topping The Corpse). I don’t even know if a deal equivalent to Deng’s would placate his camp.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 6:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Based on the numbers I've put together
McGraw is (again) pretty close to right. With my salary data, I figured $7.74M based on current salaries, plus one minimum salary player (to get 14 on the roster) plus Rose.
by Sports2 on Jul 29, 2008 11:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's good for 5/$46M, not quite what Ben already turned down.
On the other hand, it would seem pretty likely we could shave a couple million off if we needed to. Couldn’t we find a taker for Simmons, for example?
by Sports2 on Jul 29, 2008 11:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could be FAR off from what Gordon wants
Hanley says (my bolds):
The Bulls remain far apart in negotiations with guard Ben Gordon, also a restricted free agent. Gordon’s agent, Raymond Brothers, has told the Bulls that Gordon should be the highest-paid player on the team because he has led the team in scoring each of the last three seasons… Brothers’ stand would translate into Gordon topping the $13 million per season left on the remaining two years of Larry Hughes’ contract. Brothers had tried to get Gordon more than the $15 million Ben Wallace was averaging before the Bulls traded the veteran center to Cleveland in February.
I don’t know if there are corroborating reports to confirm these ballpark figures, but if these numbers are even remotely accurate, I assume that Gordon will sign the QO and try to boost his value this season. I can think of no team in the league that would currently even consider giving him upward of $13M per in a S&T.
by paxson43 on Jul 30, 2008 1:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My bad
I just posted what you did, but this makes me revisit my “MEGALOMANIAC” theory.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 6:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't pay Gordon more than Monta Ellis
And I’m not 100% sure I want to do that.
by Sports2 on Jul 30, 2008 6:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boosting Gordon's value this season
It just occurred to me what a nightmare this would be if Gordon does sign the QO-he would be trying to boost his value. But with a crowded guard sitaution, the strong need to develop young players, the same problem with Hughes, and a new coach, and suddenly, I can see a very disfunctional, unharmonious locker room-not the place I would want to be as a rookie guard.
I am an economist. And the value of Gordon’s contract has implications that go beyond the actual dollar amount we discuss here. An unhappy Gordon results in other dollars being spent poorly on other investments.
by CainandAbull on Jul 30, 2008 7:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking the same thing.
BG might also be very jealous because Lu got the big contract and he didn’t. If your Paxson, and always preaching teamwork, you need to get rid of BG. In order to have TRULY good teamwork, you cannot have resentment and jealousy. I would have no problem paying BG more then anyone else if he provided something other then scoring. I say they drop BG for something, anything.
by Bigred15 on Jul 30, 2008 7:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The perception if you dump BG
Signed Wallace. Extended Hinrich. Extended Nocioni. Traded Wallace for Hughes and Gooden. Extended Deng. Completely screwed the best player on the team in BG by failing to sign him to an extension.
The club made some mistakes, but to treat Ben Gordon this way is an awful precedent. They’d basically be screwing Gordon for all their own mistakes.
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 8:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll take that risk
If it means not overpaying Gordon. I disagree with the sentiment that BG is ‘the best player’ and should be paid as such.
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 8:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not what I said
BG is the best player, but I don’t think he deserves the highest level of pay. He does, however, deserve to be paid for what he produces for the club, 20 points per game.
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The best player?
“Completely screwed the best player on the team in BG by failing to sign him to an extension.”
BG is not the best player on the team.
I value Deng’s all around game much more than BG’s!
But even IF you think he’s the best player on the team – his team won 33 games last year! Certainly not worth 15m / year, not even 12m / year.
They offered BG a FAIR offer last year and he turned it down!
There is no other team out there willing to pay BG that much, and you think the Bulls are “screwing” him? Maybe, just maybe, BG doesn’t fit into the future plans of the Bulls now after lucking into Rose?! That was a risk BG took.
I still don’t understand the love for BG on BAB? His defense and ball-handling are attrocious. I would rather keep Kirk than BG for this coming season! Kirk can play both guard positions well. BG cannot!! Kirk has shot well from the 3 in the past. With Rose coming on but being young, Kirk is the better choice to keep right now.
“He does, however, deserve to be paid for what he produces for the club, 20 points per game.”
Again, what about all the other aspects of his game (defense) that he does NOT do well? Cartainly not worth even $10m / year in my mind. Geesh, if we just want someone who can score, let’s get Crawford back.
Offense may win the fans, but defense wins championships. This past NBA finals was more proof of that!
by StephenAA on Jul 30, 2008 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
article on the trib website says:
Gordon, sources said, is seeking a deal that is at least equal to Deng’s. That’s now impossible unless the Bulls enter luxury-tax territory.
and i just don’t think he deserves it. i would give deng basically exactly what he got – i’m glad they worked it out, and i wouldn’t give gordon more than the 10 he was offered last year.
he may be the team’s best scorer but he’s not the team’s best player.
by Jaina on Jul 30, 2008 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One way or another
It looks like BG is no longer a part of the bulls long term picture. No way JR risks entering luxury tax territory for BG.
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you think Noc-hate is bad now...
wait until his contract keeps the Bulls from signing Gordon.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I somehow don't think it's just the luxury tax issue
that’s impeding BG negotiations. He seems to think he’s worth more than the team thinks he is worth – having the extra cap room doesn’t mean the Bulls would go as high as he wants. I’m sure you are right about people blaming Noc (and Kirk, and the Wallace signing, and Reinsdorf being cheap, etc.), but there are also an awful lot of people around here who will be equally upset if the team pays BG as much as he seems to be asking for.
Anyway, the short version of this is that I somehow doubt Pax and Reinsdorf are sitting around thinking they would love to give BG $12M+ per year if only they had it.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
by wjb1492 on Jul 30, 2008 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well I'll be upset
if he’s gone and Noce (and Kirk) are here. I’d rather overpay for Gordon than pay for those two.
‘Kirk-bashing’ only due to Rose.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I've somehow gathered that you'll be upset ;)
I’d actually like BG to stay, too, although I don’t think he’s worth as big a contract as you do. I agree with everyone that he’s been extremely valuable on offense over the past several years, and that he’s been professional and a team player beyond expectations considering he believes he’s a starter but keeps getting moved back to the bench.
I just don’t think it’s really a luxury tax issue. It makes a nice excuse for the org, though.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
by wjb1492 on Jul 30, 2008 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah maybe
I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re continuing they’re neverending quest to lower the value of Ben Gordon.
but a luxury tax excuse means they wouldn’t offer 8. A ‘we don’t think you’re that good’ excuse would be just offering slightly less than Deng.
And, of course, why didn’t they just trade him before it got to this point?
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nocioni is overpaid by about $18-20 million.
That money could have gone to Gordon.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All I'm saying is that, imo, the org doesn't think BG
is worth $18-20M over what they’re offering, whether they have it to spend or not.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
by wjb1492 on Jul 30, 2008 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Scoring droughts
They have already had enough trouble scoring even with his 20ppg. They really can’t afford to let him walk or have him unhappy this upcoming season. Perhaps they can find some way to dump salary like Denver did with Camby.
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lets hope
they can count. Minus 20 points from BG. Plus 2 from where? Plus 3 from where? Plus 5 from where? How many players will have to increase production to get back that 20?
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say figure 12-15 points from whoever gets his minutes,
so while it still leaves a bit of a gap to make up, it’s not as big of an increase from everyone else as people keep making it. It’s not like the Bulls will now play 4 on 5 for 30 minutes a night and those 4 guys need to make up the whole deficit.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
by wjb1492 on Jul 30, 2008 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the Bulls have no margin for error as it is
when it comes to scoring points. Even with a rolling Ben Gordon, as a team they’re terrible.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 1:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who knows how they'll be
New coach, new system, an additional year for all the kids, back on track for the guys who had down years last year. Yes, guys will have to step up. But people keep talking like BG’s 20 points will be erased and whoever is playing those minutes won’t score at all.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
by wjb1492 on Jul 30, 2008 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
his shooting % is not good...
...you can’t look only at points, also look at scoring efficiency.
by bullsfaninbigapple on Jul 30, 2008 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
His .558 True Shooting % ranked 22nd of all SGs. It’s not like someone else can’t take those shot at a reasonably shooting %.
by CJ Bulls on Jul 30, 2008 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look at the shooting %s of the other
Bulls. Gordon had the highest ORtg on the team, which meant he was the most efficient player on the team when you factor in turnovers, assists, offensive rebounds, and scoring. Who are these guys who can take those shots at a reasonable shooting%?
by Scotter on Jul 30, 2008 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the worst DRtg
Not to mention Duhon had the teams second highest ORtg. I don’t think it’s the most reliable stat for offensive productivity.
by CJ Bulls on Jul 30, 2008 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But...
you think DRtg is reliable enough to throw out there when it suits your argument? :)
by Sports2 on Jul 30, 2008 10:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No just felt like his argument didn't hold up either way you looked at it
So I thought I’d throw out both.
by CJ Bulls on Jul 31, 2008 5:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you look historically
Gordon’s been right with Hinrich in the upper DRtg echelon :)
by Sports2 on Jul 31, 2008 7:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ben Gordon and Luol Deng are exactly the kind of
pieces to surround a penetrating PG like Rose. It seems to me that a long range jump shooter and a mid-range jump shooter are exactly what the Bulls will need to succeed with Rose. So if BG leaves, we’ll feel the loss of his production even more with Rose running the point. The thought of D-Nichols, Hinrich, Noc and L-Hughes spotting up for jumpers off of Rose’s penetration—this probably won’t come close to matching the production with BG out there, and this is nowhere near as appealing.
"It’d be ridiculous to hate someone for simply what they say in a sports blog. But I greatly dislike every syllable of your angst-filled, smarmy, nondescript, half-assed, elitist-garbage responses." –Rogerspark Kris
by bullhockey on Jul 30, 2008 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
and consider that if Ben is still on the team he’ll likely be coming off the bench. Probably not going to help him in the open market. I think he won’t be on the team for the 08-09 season.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 7:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last year on CTL it was
either Sam Smith or KC that was asked if BG and Kirk got along and they said that Kirk and BG got along fine but BG and Deng do not. Deng’s deal may add more fuel to the fire than we think.
Carlos Zambrano and Rich Harden. Now that's a pair of Aces.
by sue369 on Jul 30, 2008 8:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's odd
I thought the two had a good enough relationship that Deng was able to cajole BG into joining the UK team. If anything, I thought it was Kirk who had the “teacher’s pet” label on him, evidenced by the staff’s reluctance to bench him yet would bench Gordon or Duhon even though those two clearly were outplaying Kirk -some would argue – many times.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't trust Hanley.
Nor, um, certain other persons when it comes to Gordon. Some have an irrational dislike for the guy.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's hard to believe
In that BG interview posted in the fanshots, he says that him and Lu call each other and talk pretty often.
by NormVanBeer on Jul 30, 2008 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just telling you
what was said on the show.
Carlos Zambrano and Rich Harden. Now that's a pair of Aces.
by sue369 on Jul 30, 2008 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Heh, I'm also an economist :)
And I agree. I actually see it cutting both ways. We worry about Gordon playing to “boost his value” but I actually think it’s more likely the Bulls would “screw” Gordon than vice versa.
You see all the time situations where better players are put on the bench to “develop the future”. If Gordon isn’t the future (and on the QO he won’t be), the team will have every incentive to find someone who is and play him, even if Gordon is a better player this particular year.
That, of course, would really screw Gordon’s position for the future. If I were him, I’d be extremely hesitant to put my future in the Bulls’ hands. And that’s not even considering Paxson publicly stating the issue with Gordon as a starter was because of his height a few months ago.
by Sports2 on Jul 30, 2008 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't want to see it play out with the QO either
but I will say that Gordon publicly has never complained and always said he wanted to be here. He certainly had reason to behave otherwise.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is Gordon's agent is serious about $15 mil
Raymond Brothers’ biggest client is Zach Randolph, who is similar to Ben Gordon in that he’s a phenomenal scorer and not much else. After the ‘03-’04 season, when Randolph averaged 20-10 (with .5 blocks), Randolph get 6 years, $84 million from the Blazers. And that was back in ‘04.
Brothers’ starting off the negotiations with 6 years, $90 mil sounds about right. When Reinsdorf fired back with 6 years, $55 mil and a doughy glare, the intern likely left the meeting to start printing out the qualifying offer paperwork. This deal won’t get done, and this time, I don’t think it’s the Bulls’ fault.
by YaoPau on Jul 30, 2008 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then he has a bad agent
Just because my condo could have netted $450K three years ago doesn’t mean I should ignore the fact that it’s only going for $350K this year, unless I don’t intend on selling that condo.
If that made no sense it’s because I haven’t had my coffee yet.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 10:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
NYC
If Gordon wants to be a Knick, grant him his wish.
Homecoming
by illwill on Jul 29, 2008 11:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
They've got fuck all to help us in a sign and trade
I spose I’d like to have David Lee, but I wouldn’t trade him were I the Knicks.
by Sports2 on Jul 30, 2008 12:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
supposedly
from different things I’ve read, Mike D doesn’t like David Lee because he isn’t much of an offensive player. Loves Crawford though.
by KT on Jul 30, 2008 7:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then I'm really glad he went to NY and not Chicago.
by Scotter on Jul 30, 2008 7:46 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, I'd happily take David Lee :)
I’ll believe that (Lee on his way out of New York) when I see it though.
Would they want to play Crawford and Gordon plus Du? I could see D’Antoni doing that.
Even better if we can get them to take Noc too.
by Sports2 on Jul 30, 2008 9:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's no use for players that can't shoot that well in his mind
That’s why Balkman was traded, and he’s a very solid hustle player, and that’s why he’s a very stubborn man.
I was a multiple time all star throughout my little league career. Won 5 championships- 4 in a row- thats more in a row than MJ… (kenwo4life@aol.com)
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 30, 2008 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sign and trade Gordon for Malik Rose's expiring contract and Mardy Collins
Homecoming
by illwill on Jul 30, 2008 12:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no kidding
Collins would be cut without his guaranteed contract.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Knicks won't overpay for Gordon either
when it’s clear they’re clearing cap space for 2010. I get the impression that Raymond Brothers has done a disservice to Gordon unless it’s Gordon steering these demands.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 6:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
or it's Brian Hanley
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, he could very well be the mouthpiece for Jerry
to turn public sentiment against resigning Gordon. But I’ve heard this similar story before, last year, and I don’t believe it was from Hanley then.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it just seems way too simplistic a demand
Gordon’s agents are professionals, right? Who says “I’m the best pay me better than the best paid”.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
NBA players say that, that's who
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wasn't I talking about his agents?
ease up, man.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did not intend for an acerbic tone
if that’s how it came across, I apologize. The point I was hoping to make is that even though agents are professionals, they do what the players tell them to do at the end of the day. So while an agent may not personally make such a simplistic demand, I would not be surprised if an NBA player, in this case Gordon, did.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't make it wrong.
I mean, let’s not outsmart ourselves here. Shouldn’t the team’s best player be paid like it? Why should Gordon be punished for the organization’s bad decision-making?
And for all the guys that hate on Gordon, I see a lot of 80 point offensive outputs in our future without him. “All he does is score”? Well shit, scoring is how you win, and without Gordon I see this team really struggling to manufacture points.
by Sports2 on Jul 30, 2008 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's not the team's best player
he’s the team’s best scorer. He does one thing well and that’s shoot. He doesn’t pass the ball all that well, he doesn’t get into the lane, he relies way too much on his jump shot, and he’s not a good rebounder. He also doesn’t get to the line because he doesn’t drive nearly enough for a starting two guard (mostly because when he does, he falls down and loses the ball).
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That one thing
He does that one thing better than anybody else on a team that has trouble scoring as it is. The other thing about this that could send a bad message is that they have always praised his work ethic during the off season and they claim to value those types of players. He has done what they’ve asked of him and even though his demands may be outrageous, they need to come to terms with him or the consequences will be bigger than they think (chemistry, future negotiations with players, etc.).
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't pay everyone
and still be under the luxury tax, which right or wrong are the rules pax has to play by. I don’t think any future players will be dissuaded from coming to play in chicago based on this. The bulls have spent their money, unfortunately it is allocated where it is and bg is left out in the cold.
with or without bg this team is not going to contend for anything more than the #8 seed in the 08-09. Chemsitry should only enter the picture for title contenders.
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's great
Noah grabs rebounds better than anyone else on the team, does that mean we should pay him the most money when we resign him? Being a – more or less – one dimensional scorer who doesn’t contribute on the other end (he’s not a terrible defender, but he is bad and he does get exploited) is a value limiter. He shouldn’t get neat Deng money because Deng can do a bit of everything. He hits the boards, he defends his position very well, he slashes and gets to the rim and he can finish. Oh and there’s that long jumper that he’s so proficient at. Deng > BG (oh and Deng’s younger too).
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
I never said he should get the most money so where does the Noah thing come in? If you have an NBA skill that you do very well, such as being a great defender/rebounder as Wallace once was, that is something that teams value. He is a very good scorer in the league.I’m simply saying that all this talk about he only does one thing well is diminishing the fact that he does that one thing better than most people in the league. I never said he was better than Deng or should get more.
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
noted.
misinterpreted your clarification of a point with disagreeing with my overarching theme (Deng > BG and the pay should reflect that). My mistake.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If no one else on the team rebounded well at all...
...and he was one of the 20 or 30 best rebounders EVER after only 4 years in the NBA, maybe.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not quite
Top 10 rebounders of all time > Top 10 3 pt shooters of all time
I get your point though.
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get it BG can make a lot of 3 pointers
it doesn’t change the fact that is his only elite skill and he’s below average at a lot of things that are also important for winning basketball games and more importantly, championships.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why there are other players on the T-E-A-M.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, now you're arguing that BG fits a role
but he wants to be paid like he’s a borderline superstar when he’s never even been an All-Star. Him fitting a role in a team scheme would lend itself more to the argument that he should be paid as a cog in the team. Just because his agent and he overvalue scoring doesn’t mean the Bulls should fall into that trap.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
also,
I had no problem with Ben getting something like $60-63 million over 6 years (Monta money, discounted for Monta’s youth and BG’s lack thereof). But when the demands of 13 million or atleast Deng money came out, I became more okay with the thought of QO’ing Ben and/or sign and trading him away.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he's asking for $15, you're right.
If he’s asking for $13 but won’t go for a shorter deal, then I’m wavering. But I dont think he’s so bad that paying an extra mil or two per year is ridiculous.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad we can agree on some of this
I don’t mean to be so adversarial, and I think your points are valid. I honestly hope Ben hasn’t peaked yet and that he can become an All-Star, it’s just that I haven’t seen enough from him to justify paying him like an All-Star when he’s never been one and I’m not sure he ever will be.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keep in mind
His role on the team has been to score and many times he has to try to do so with the clock running down. He is not as bad at other things as is being stated here. He is a decent rebounder for his size and I don’t see him as a worse than average defender. He does at least try in that area. I think having a guy that can get in the lane and break down defenses (Rose) will make him that much better. But we all agree, if he’s asking for what Deng got, he’s going overboard. Pax won’t let him go for nothing I’m sure.
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not only that
but the Skiles play would get him double-teamed with no help.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean
BG standing at the top of the key as if he’s waiting for a screener, then getting double teamed and either turning over the ball or getting up a horrible shot? Yeah, I hate that play too, lol.
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and
that screener is Ben Wallace
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agree
He isn’t the best defender, but there is a huge difference between Gordon who tries and those who don’t even bother in the league. That is why for me he fits solidly into the average area. The effort is there. He won’t ever be great, but he is usable.
Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.
by cranscape on Jul 30, 2008 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is where I'm leaning too
obviously my ‘pay the man’ stance has limits. But it’s a range. $15 is too much, $13 (especially if short-term) is very high. $10-12 is fine, and I’d guess if it’s done it’ll be in that range anyway.
If they’re offering less than $10, I think it’s a mistake.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
keeping in mind
Hinrich got $9.5m!
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I don't get is
Don’t most teams plan for this by cutting salary ahead of time so they can make sure they can resign they’re players? This one of their best “assets” here so why didn’t they make some moves last year to get enough under the cap to make sure it wouldn’t be a problem? ugh!
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really don't know
I think Paxson may have been a bit naive in thinking everyone would take extensions early ‘for the good of the team’.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well
Were the bulls not thinking of trading the number 9 pick? I am sure the bulls did not foresee derrick’s rookie contract, which is sizable enough to effect these negotiations
by homemadesuperstar on Jul 30, 2008 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i doubt it
While that’s a valid point, I think even if the Bulls had stayed on the board at #9 (the pick wasn’t traded…huh?) they would still be yanking Gordon around.
by NormVanBeer on Jul 30, 2008 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well,
it seems that while I might have been more negative in tone, we agree generally speaking in terms of range of pay for Gordon. 10-12 is the area I’d like to see him signed for, luxury tax be damned.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'd ideally like 10
maybe 11 if necessary. or hell, boost it with incentives – i like having the extra mil or so be with incentives because if he gets them, that means both he and the team are doing well, and he’s earned the money!
by Jaina on Jul 30, 2008 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is another thing I'd like to clarify my stance on
I’d obviously would rather Gordon signed for $10m than $12m. I don’t really care how much he ‘wins’ in his negotiation, or how fat his wallet gets.
But if it’s $12m or QO?
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
right, that makes sense
i’d prefer not to go above 10 in all honesty, but if something can be worked out for him for a little more i’m not going to be too upset about it.
i think the QO is a bad option for all sides, i’d so much rather get a s&t done than have him sign the QO.
by Jaina on Jul 30, 2008 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
why would he take incentives
when he’s coming off the bench?
can his agent be suckered? an extra 100k if he actually starts > 25 games?
no defense, no rim attack, no dice.
Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team.
-- Scottie Pippen
by Orlando Woolridge on Jul 30, 2008 11:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is what's hilarious about all this arguing.
In my guess, messwiththebull, FundamentallySound, you, me, just about everyone (except for a few noteables), is in about the same range.
Only a few of us are arguing “They might only be offering him less than $9 m/yr? That’s ridiculous! Pay the man!!!”
And another few are arguing “He’s asking for $15 m/yr? That’s ridiculous! Don’t pay the man!!!”
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
but but but
arguing is fun. it’s what sports blogs are for, especially ones being used during the offseason when there are no games to comiserate over. as long as arguments remain civil I think they can be enjoyable and educating.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately...
...I veer from the civil probably too often. I need to work on the deep breath method of blog-commenting.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha we all do from time to time
no worries. you’ve not veered to far into incivility in this discussion with me anyway.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
but our passion is obvious and no matter how many times you call me an idiot I can respect where that energy is coming from.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he creates shots for himself very well also
otherwise he would just be an outside shooter
but unfortunately this skill was taken away from him in the playoffs by detroit’s bigger bulling guards…
by gman2849 on Jul 30, 2008 1:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he does get in the lane and he does pass
he’s not GREAT at it, but calling his one-dimensionally-shooty is selling him short (ooof).
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he does dribble the ball off of himself
and fall down untouched exceptionally well also..
by gman2849 on Jul 30, 2008 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
still hilarious.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should have been more specific
he doesn’t get into the lane enough and he doesn’t pass enough. he can do both things, yes, but he doesn’t do them enough. and I also stand by stance that last year and not this year was the aberration. He maxed out on the things that he is good at pretty much. He had a TS% of 57% that year and had his highest USG% since his rookie year. I can’t see him doing much better than that level of efficiency, and even with all that he was only at an 18.2 PER and shoddy defense.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
$$$$
With Rose and Goodens contracts expiring in 2009 and Hughes contract expiring in 2010. Not to mention if we get Miller whos contract expires in 2010 as well. We would be able to retain Tyrus, Noah and Sefo. We still would have Rose, Deng and Gordon. with this roster I am sure we could tempt D-Wade enough to leave Miami and play in Chicago with a all-chicago back court of D-Rose and D-Wade, with Deng @ the SF slot. This of course will all depend on if Thomas and Noah ever develope, but if they do that lineup will get you a ring 2-3 years from now.
Homecoming
by illwill on Jul 30, 2008 12:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Correction
Switch Gordon with Hinrich
Homecoming
by illwill on Jul 30, 2008 12:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
hit reply
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon For A 4 or 5
Better not count on Thomas or Noah exclusively.
by hhirb on Jul 30, 2008 3:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What team is gonna deal a 4 or 5
for an undersized 2-guard? You don’t trade height unless you get height back. (Unless you’re the Nuggets.) Unfortunately Denver wouldn’t want BG unless AI is shipped out.
by kingj41 on Jul 30, 2008 8:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of Denver
From a pure production standpoint, wouldn’t JR Smith fit the bill to replace Gordon? JR had a better PER and TS% last year, and it would be mostly likely 1/2 the cost of BG. For that kind of bang for your buck, I might be willing to gamble on JR’s perceived attitude problem. I won’t bother mentioning defense for either player.
But then that would mean Pax admitting he was wrong in trading him for a sack of basketballs…nevermind.
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 8:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
FYI: Biedrins dollar figures were misreported
He’s actually getting 6 years and 54 million according to a guess from Tim Kawakami of the Mercury News. Apparently Stein agrees.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2008/07/27/the-big-biedrins-deal-minus-bonus-clauses-im-guessing-that-itll-officially-come-in-at-54m/
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 8:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I need to follow up on the story today
A brief google news viewing shows multiple reports of 6 years and 62 million. Why contract terms aren’t just disclosed to the press by the organizations is a mystery.
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To boost the agent's ego/street cred
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 8:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
megalomaniacs :-p
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It happens all the time in every sport
see Boras/Hendry/Maddux deal
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On interesting nugget in Kawakami's post
But Andrew Bogut’s contract last month was first reported to be worth $72M–and again, it could be worth that, at maximum, if all the bonus targets are hit. Once the contract was filed, however, and it was put under standard measurements, the actual Bogut deal came out to about $61M.
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 8:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So does this mean Deng's contract could be less?
And the 71 million figure is what he could hit after getting all incentives?
I was a multiple time all star throughout my little league career. Won 5 championships- 4 in a row- thats more in a row than MJ… (kenwo4life@aol.com)
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 30, 2008 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everything i've read thus far
points to 71MM as the base salary, with incentives that could make it worth up to 80MM. But it seems like all reports on this summer’s contract signings are intially inaccurate, so who knows…
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thats crazy
if that really is what gordon wants, being the highest paid guy on the team. i mean u gotta realize the situation the bulls are in with hughes. does he not get that hughes is the cause of a lot of this. i mean he should have ten the deal last year, and then wouldnt be in this problem now. hes gotta think of it this way, this coming season ben wallace will be getting paid more than lebron. its just the situation he is in, and he put himself there. i dont know who will give him the number he wants?
Rose lobs it up for the alley oop... and it's caught and put down by Rose
by Yibs on Jul 30, 2008 9:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
maybe he figures
this is the only way he can start a game :)
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Read this post
here and tell me you really think BG “put himself there”.
Despite those moves, BG continues to publicly state “I want to play for the team that drafted me.”
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
BG is pretty darn media savvy
He’s too smart to burn his bridges in Chicago, but smart enough to talk about playing elsewhere. There’s a major caveat on the end of that statement – the whole, provided they pay me what I think I’m worth and let me start, but otherwise I’ll happily play whereever they show me the love.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
by wjb1492 on Jul 30, 2008 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon will remain a Bull this year
I do not see a team out there willing to pay him what he wants. If they did it would have happened by now. Gordon will either sign a long term deal with the Bulls or the QO. No team is going to pay him what he wants in a sign and trade deal. Gordon is stuck. I assume he doesn’r want to sign for the QO because he may get less minutes which would hurt him next year. My guess is he signs a 3-4 year deal.
by chgobr on Jul 30, 2008 11:14 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't see a team out there either
but I would be a bit surprised if Gordon risked coming off the bench during his contract year. And the Bulls still have to address that crowded backcourt and he currently appears to be the most logical odd man out.
Also, I now think the issue has gone from “paying him what he wants” to “paying him more than the Bulls can or even intend to”.
by messwiththebull on Jul 30, 2008 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also do not think Gordon wants to come off the bench being paid the qualifying offer.
My uneducated guess is a deal will be worked out before the season begins. However this may not get worked out until October 27th.
by chgobr on Jul 30, 2008 12:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe you're right
he has to know that the Bulls treat him ridiculously even when designated a ‘core’ player. Imagine how they’ll bury him for the not-so-young-or-talented Thabo (or, TALLER, Hughes) knowing he’s leaving after the season.
However, the ‘09 class isn’t that deep, and his QO is $6.5m….
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let me clarify what I meant by
“a deal will be worked out before the season begins”. The “deal” is a contract agreement between Gordon and the Bulls. I do not believe there will be a sign and trade deal because I do not believe another team wants to take on a long-term Gordon contract for a 2 guard.
by chgobr on Jul 30, 2008 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way BG gets over 10 mil from anyone else
Homecoming
by illwill on Jul 30, 2008 12:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no way the Bulls acquire as good of a player as BG
see how this works?
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude
Can you name any 20+ ppg player in the NBA that isn’t making 10+ mil excluding players presently locked into the rookie scale?
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
only BG isn't a 20+ ppg player
he’s an 18 ppg player for his career and he’s only reached 20+ ppg in one year (last year, his breakout year, which looks sort of like an aberration). If you look at his other three years in the league Ben Gordon is just an above average player. His PER has been 14.9, 14.5, 18.2 (aberration), and 16.5 (returning to his normal level). Add that to the fact that all he offers you is offense and it’s clear that Ben is slighty above average at best.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ben Gordon peaked at age 23.
First player to ever to do that!!! Woot!
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
terrible luck.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
huh?
how about crawford, eddie curry, marcus fizer, etc? have they gotten better since age 23/3rd year in the league? Just glancing at their PER, i would say no.
Curious as to what you think Ben can improve on? he already is a top 10 3pt shooter, and by all accounts is one of the hardest workers in practice on the team. Pretty sure he’s done growing too
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not that hard to believe
he’s been more or less the same player his entire career. He just upped his scoring efficiency to a very high level and got to use a lot more possessions than he had in previous years. This year his USG% dropped and so did his scoring efficiency. That was pretty much the only difference. He does the same things every year, his game hasn’t really evolved since year 1, he’s gotten smarter and incrementally more efficient, but does anyone ever see him being an All-Star (I don’t)? The only thing I can really remember that he’s ever done to change his game is adding a step back jumper that he used last year, that he became pretty good at. Other than that it’s been a lot of jump shooting and poorly executed drives into the trees in the paint.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should also note
that I’m not saying he can’t return to his 2006-07 level of play, but that I think that that’s his ceiling. Which makes him a guy you don’t pay $13 million a year or whatever ungodly number his agent is demanding.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he can increase his efficiency.
His best year came on the best team. Rose’s best ready-to-contribute-right-now skill is penetration. He’s also very good (since it was his college offense) at kicking out off that penetration. I think that alone will get Gordon more open shots than he’s ever had.
Nearly every Bull played worse last year.
Why not treat Hinrich to this some evaluation, thus making it ridiculous that he’ll ever be able to play the 2guard?
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like the option of Hinrich at the 2
anymore than you do. I hated Hinrich’s pouting, miserable display all year. I’d much rather keep Ben than not. I just think the idea that he should be paid more than Deng or even the same amount is ludicrous and Ben’s ego is apparently gigantic. 60-63 million over 6 years for BG (throw some incentives in if you like to increase the overall value) would make me very happy.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem right now is
60-63 still puts them in luxury tax land (This is where Nocioni comes back to haunt us). But I would hope that he would take a deal like that because I think that 6 year 60 mil is fair considering what someone like Monta Ellis signed for.
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I know about the luxury tax problems
for the sake of the hypothetical, I’m ignoring them. 60-63 million over 6 years for BG is what I think is an accurate reflection of his value. Get him signed to that deal and worry about sliding under the cap later in the year (like near the trading deadline in February).
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
also, I know every Bulls player played worse last year
but that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be factored in the negotations and our evaluations of these players. Also, if the only reason that Gordon’s efficiency is going up is playing with Rose, shouldn’t Rose be getting the credit for that and not BG? Granted, Rose is locked onto a rookie salary, but still Rose making BG better shouldn’t mean more dollars for BG should it?
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why not?
Gordon is still the one being efficient. Or whatever. Players help other players, yeah?
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps,
but as discussed further up the thread, my problem with Ben isn’t him as a player (he’s quite good) but with his apparent demands via his agent, Brothers. For him to get more than Deng would be wrong, especially given the fact that Deng has MUCH more value around the league than Ben. I just don’t think Ben understands what other teams think of him.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Come off the bench BG
OK. I want to start, but I’ll come off the bench for the team.
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he's willing to sacrifice his ego
until contract negotiation time? I’ll buy that. However, he is certainly overvaluing himself if he thinks he is more valuable to the Bulls over the next 6 years than a 23 year old SF who is among the top 10 in the league at his position.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It bothers me more that
his points are inconsistent because so much of them come from the outside. especially when it matters
by gman2849 on Jul 30, 2008 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sucks when you enter games and your team is already behind
It tends to lead to wanting to take greater risk, greater reward type shots.
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They're all like that
For the most part, the whole team is like that. They get most of the points from jumpers or transition buckets. They hardly ever go to the hole or get to the line. I’m hoping Rose, Deng, BG, Tyrus, and Sefolosha will get to the line more than the team has in the past. I give up on Hinrich going to the basket, he just doesn’t seem willing to do it very much other than dribbling past the hoop like Steve Nash and kicking it to the corner.
by bigballa10 on Jul 30, 2008 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hate that move by hinrich
because he’ll do it even when he has a clear path to the bucket.
by Jaina on Jul 30, 2008 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't you think the Blazers could use
a pure shooter like BG? This would stretch the defense for the slashing of B-Roy, and the interior play of Oden/Aldridge (in theory; we all know how BaBers feel about Aldridge’s low post offense, but that ’s not the point). Plus, the Blazers young guns just don’t have the clutch/playoff experience, nor the relatively gaudy numbers, that BG has. Also, consider that in the past, Paul Allen has shown he’s not shy when it comes to doling out money.
"It’d be ridiculous to hate someone for simply what they say in a sports blog. But I greatly dislike every syllable of your angst-filled, smarmy, nondescript, half-assed, elitist-garbage responses." –Rogerspark Kris
by bullhockey on Jul 30, 2008 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I considered BG in Portland
but the only way it could even come close to working is if BG is in a 3 or 4 year deal. They clearly want to move forward with Roy running the point late and in close games, so Bayless is a good compliment that should produce in year 2, 3 and beyond, but BG would produce all that right now.
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I'd only add that
anyone can be a “projected” clutch player. Ben Gordon actually has a track record. On a team that he carried on a lot of nights.
No outside shooter on the Blazers can say that. (A couple of big games from Outlaw might make you think twice about this, but those were only a couple of games).
"It’d be ridiculous to hate someone for simply what they say in a sports blog. But I greatly dislike every syllable of your angst-filled, smarmy, nondescript, half-assed, elitist-garbage responses." –Rogerspark Kris
by bullhockey on Jul 30, 2008 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ive gotta be honest
Deng aint worth that much.
by Belize on Jul 30, 2008 1:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
BTW...
Somebody punch the guy that paid Ellis and Biedrins that damn money
by Belize on Jul 30, 2008 1:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You are certainly Chicago Tough
Please let me know when teams are able to lock their young talented players that still have potential for anything less than what the Warriors/Bulls and eventually Sixers/Hawks are going to have to pay.
I was a multiple time all star throughout my little league career. Won 5 championships- 4 in a row- thats more in a row than MJ… (kenwo4life@aol.com)
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 30, 2008 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this signing..
is gonna hurt us in the long run. Is it me or does deng remind you of a longer version of larry hughes. Great slasher/potential that can’t create his own shot, i.e. just stand there and pivot…
Im just sayin
by Belize on Jul 30, 2008 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
except Deng shoots at a very high percentage and Larry, uh, doesn't. At all. And never did.
by fundamentallysound on Jul 30, 2008 3:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Terrible comparison
Hughes can create his own shot he just can’t make them… and Deng can’t create his own shot, but he makes the shots he does take…
by kidronmusic on Jul 30, 2008 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except Deng actually scores, plays defense, etc etc
You’re entitled to your opinion, but I completely disagree. Deng is going to be a solid 18-20 ppg game player for the Bulls for a long time. As bad as last season was, he was still decent. We know he’s not going to be a superstar, but as long as he has that efficient midrange game and can develop an outside shot he’s going to be a very good teammate for Rose, which is all I care about right now.
I was a multiple time all star throughout my little league career. Won 5 championships- 4 in a row- thats more in a row than MJ… (kenwo4life@aol.com)
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 30, 2008 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he learns a few post moves and
increases his 3pt shooting percentage, the man could be averaging 22 – 25 ppg.
by gman2849 on Jul 30, 2008 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Those are summer 2007 dreams my friend
I’ll be pleasantly surprised if he can start hitting 3s and realizes that he in fact can actually drive to the basket for points once in a while. I think he can average 20 ppg, especially if Gordon doesn’t come back the burden of scoring will naturally shift to Lu.
I was a multiple time all star throughout my little league career. Won 5 championships- 4 in a row- thats more in a row than MJ… (kenwo4life@aol.com)
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 30, 2008 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well
4 more possessions a game ran for Loul will put him right around 22 ppg. He is only 23, it doesn’t seem very far fetched to me. We are all down him somewhat after last year, but to say he doesn’t improve his game at all as he matures…. well I don’ t think that is the type of guy he is.
by ridindirty on Jul 31, 2008 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Deng
I’m just saying…he’s not worth that much. That’s all..
by Belize on Jul 31, 2008 4:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The root of the problem
has got to be Nocioni’s contract. He’s making 8mil this season, and another 30mil over the next 4 after that. If we could somehow free up that cap space by getting rid of Nocioni to a team that is far enough under the cap to absorb the bulk of his contract, then we will have enough to give BG 10mil over 6yrs. If he wants more than that, let him get if from some one else.
"I really miss DannyRange"
by DropUOff on Jul 30, 2008 2:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
they’ve got Artest off the books, but i think that they are still at least 10mil over the cap. How’s that gonna work with the Kings?
"I really miss DannyRange"
by DropUOff on Jul 30, 2008 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
here. here
It bugs me that Paxson has declared he wants to deal with Deng and BG before moving on to the rest of the roster, when dealing with the rest of the roster could help the Gordon situation. Hopefully it’s just Pax speak and he’s not that close minded.
by The90sBullsRevival on Jul 30, 2008 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
like Memphis??
the team who pretended to want him in the first place? I will eternally stick by my stance that Pax was punked into the Noc extension. He should’ve called their bluff and let them sign him. I doubt we would even be having these conversations right now.
by NormVanBeer on Jul 30, 2008 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not the Ben Wallace contract
that is now the Hughes/Gooden contract that clogs up the guard rotation at a paltry ~13mil per?
I think the crapping on the Nocioni contract is too strong, when in reality these problems begin with the Wallace signing.
Sign Wallace.
Trade Chandler.
Give away JR Smith.
Extend Hinrich.
Extend Nocioni.
Deng declines offer.
Gordon declines offer.
Rose drafted.
Deng extended.
Gordon???
by NBA Observer on Jul 30, 2008 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Wallace contract is in hindsight.
They overpaid, but he was still really good and a starter. The Nocioni contract was bad before it ever happened.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So true
It was an accumulation of events, but the one that we can effect positively now is the dumping of Nocioni. And that JR Smith Debacle just leaves you scratching your head. Thats why he drops 35+ every time he plays us.
"I really miss DannyRange"
by DropUOff on Jul 30, 2008 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the nets
want Noc. Bobby Simmons contract expires in 2 years.
Has this already been discussed?
by ridindirty on Jul 31, 2008 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Simple calculation
Derrick Rose = Hinrich or Gordon gone.
Homecoming
by illwill on Jul 30, 2008 5:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That is simple
My bet is Gordon, whose deal will be worth more, into more important FA years.
"I tell you, Steve Blass, you pitch me inside, they never, never find that ball."
-Roberto Clemente
by cubbybear on Jul 30, 2008 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
May I modify this - - - Derrick Rose = Hinrich or Gordon gone one summer from now
It is too much to expect Rose to carry this team 2008-9. We are a summer away from trading Hinrich or Gordon
by chgobr on Jul 30, 2008 6:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so simple
let gordon go, and sign jr smith. if only pax wasn’t so damn stubborn. JR will be a very good player in this league. In my opinion better than BG. and he’s younger too…and he would be cheaper too. WAY cheaper. Again too bad management can’t admit when they make a mistake.
by masputo on Jul 30, 2008 8:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Byron Scott and George Karl are also stubborn
or JR is just a dope.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 30, 2008 9:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or the rest of the league is stubborn?
Because he’s gotten ZERO phone calls this summer.
by tyger1147 on Jul 30, 2008 10:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you too 'stubborn' to google?
To be fair, has Gordon’s phone rung?
Keeping in mind the luxury tax situation the Bulls face, is JR Smith 5MM per year a better deal then BG say 11MM per year?
by Mr M on Jul 30, 2008 11:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
to me, even if JR Smith was at the league minimum
you’d still be doing the equivalent of setting that money on fire.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 31, 2008 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh for sure...
I think the Bulls would agree – based on how they dealt him in the past.
by swede2287 on Jul 31, 2008 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Traded him for Adrian Griffin
That’s just the ultimate slap in the face considering how little talent Griffin has compared to Smith’s potential.
I was a multiple time all star throughout my little league career. Won 5 championships- 4 in a row- thats more in a row than MJ… (kenwo4life@aol.com)
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 31, 2008 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or too uninterested to check every two days on the status of J.R. Smith.
Four weeks after they could actually talk and he hadn’t received any calls is good enough for me to say that no one was interested.
by tyger1147 on Jul 31, 2008 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If JR wasn't such a headcase he would have been signed by now
His numbers given the lack of minutes are ridiculous, yet not a single offer, not even from organizations that could seemingly handle his craziness (Spurs). The Bulls, led by a rookie head coach and a very young team would not have a positive effect on Smith at all. He’d score a lot, not try on defense (at least Gordon makes an effort), and act like a fool the entire season.
I was a multiple time all star throughout my little league career. Won 5 championships- 4 in a row- thats more in a row than MJ… (kenwo4life@aol.com)
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 30, 2008 10:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So he has a bad rep...
so what….look at his upside…..i dont see any problem taking a risk on a guy like that for 4-5 mill a year… 3 years/ 15 million…..not a lot of money and the rewards could be very good. and yes the team is very young, but for the most part, we have some hard-working intelligent guys on this team. that could be contagious for a young player still maturing. i think its worth the risk. its not gonna happen, but u never know what VDN is capable of accomplishing with “headcases”. From what i’ve seen outta the new coach, he seems very calm and confident. He seems to know how to talk to guys with respect..sometimes thats all it takes to turn a player around.
by masputo on Jul 31, 2008 12:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Blog a Bull
Related FanShots on Blog a Bull
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
