The Qualifying Offer and you
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 10:27 AM CDT
180 comments
There's been a lot of comments lately regarding Deng&Gordon and the Qualifying Offer without realizing how poor an option that is for both sides.
First of all, it makes the player believe he's not coming back, and the team treating the player like they're not coming back. Maybe it's a self-fufilling prophecy, but it's borne out that they don't come back. (thanks to paxson43 in the comments)
Follow that link: since 2000, there's only been 4 players coming off their rookie-scale contracts that signed the QO. That's 4 out of 124 eligible draftees. All of them (with Pietrus signing yesterday) wound up on other teams, and only (in the case of Radmanovic) was the team able to deal the player in that season for something (Chris Wilcox).
And it's hard to deal a player under the QO because: " if the player is playing under a one-year contract and will have Larry Bird or Early Bird rights at the end of the contract, he can't be traded without his consent. If consent is granted and the player is traded, then he loses his Larry Bird or Early Bird rights, and enters free agency as a Non-Bird free agent."
The Bird rights are basically a team's ability to go over the salary cap to sign their own free agents. With the way the capped-out NBA is, that's the only way for many of these players to get above the mid-level, either with their own team or through sign/trade.
So, just a reminder when bringing it up: the QO is really a last-resort option, and pretty much a failure in negotiation.
5 recs |
180 comments
Email
Print
Comments
that actually
cleared up a lot of confusion about the bird rights. Thanks =)
by homemadesuperstar on Jul 9, 2008 10:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
But
if the players don’t come back, then they don’t use their Bird Rights anyway so why would they care about giving them up?
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 11:06 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Because they can't be used in a sign-and-trade either.
Which is, technically, the team re-signing the player. At that point, the only teams that are even allowed to sign him would be those under th cap enough to do so; not, theoretically, the entire league. That severely limits Gordon’s options, thus the market for his services, thus the money he can make—which is the whole reason for signing the QO in the first place.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Isn't it good to limit Gordon's options?
That gives us a higher chance of re-signing him after the QO, the slap-in-the-face part aside.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I took JSlakov to be asking...
...why wouldn’t Gordon waive it if he has no intention of coming back. Gordon doesn’t want to limit his options, and he’s the one waiving the Bird Rights.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If BG hits the open market next year
There will be plenty of teams that can waive a few players or as philly did to get brand trade for an exception. If your BG why wouldn’t you consider signing with a top contender for a little less than what the Bulls were offering.
by Blacknight23 on Jul 9, 2008 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Philly was already $15 mil under the cap
What top contender will be in that position next year? And what top contender sees Ben Gordon as the final piece to the puzzle?
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I think that's Gordon's perfect niche--
as a ‘final piece’ guy to a near-championship team…much as Kapono was with Miami.
In my mind, that makes Gordon about a $5 mil guy. I’d love to retain him for anything under $6 mil. At $8 he’s over-priced, and at $10 he’s a millstone.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stop w/ the Kapono bullcrap. You're just making yourself look dumber every time.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon provides a valuable piece
that a well-rounded team requires…someone to stand around the 3 point line, ready to heave up a shot.
If you don’t like my Kapono analogy, I’m fine substituting Steve Kerr, John Paxson (to a lesser degree), or even Craig Hodges.
Gordon’s Bulls stats have been inflated by the Bulls having no one else with anything even remotely resembling reliable offense.
On a contending team, Gordon would be, at best, a 3rd banana. If the Bulls are planning on putting together a contender, they shold pay Gordon (as Matt suggests) his future worth to the team.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Kapono, Paxson and Hodges were never 3rd bananas on any team...
...that won a championship. And 3rd bananas on “real” championship contenders make more than five or six million and typically around $9-$13 million. God, you’re an idiot. You literally, just make stuff up, don’t you?
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it is getting pretty ridiculous
Gordon’s a far better player than just a shooting specialist.
Naturally, this is Alec, who also wanted Craig Hodges for head coach.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I say that? I guess I might have.
My point is if Gordon doesn’t want to be here then I don’t want to have him.
If he thinks the Bulls offer is bad, then see what he can get elsewhere…it’s not like worthy players are not getting their money.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree.
Gordon is just a shooting specialist. Nothing more.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe you should put these in your sig
so even new users know to ignore you. sheesh.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Out of curiousity?
Why is there so much resistance to calling Gordon a shooting specialist?
I think he is a very good one. And he does have the ability to hit floaters in the lane, but his ball handling isn’t great, so he often loses the ball in the lane too.
I value a good shooting specialist on this team, and I like Gordon’s work ethic. So I would like him here next year, but I pretty much consider him a shooter.
Do you guys just not like Alec, or am I missing something?
by kidronmusic on Jul 9, 2008 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you're not missing anything.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is a difference
Kapono, Hodges, Kerr were all shooting specialists. All you needed to do to defend them was stand near them. Leave them open and they punish you, stand near them and they pass the ball off.
Gordon, though is a scoring specialist, and more in line with the Barbosas, Ray Allens, and to some degree, the Iversons and Carmelos of the league. Not only can they shoot a high percentage like shooting specialists, but they can take you off the dribble and create their own shot.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
..."to some degree"...
covers a lot of territory..roughly the distance between an MLE and a Max contract.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like alec.
He’s a far more high-usage player with a varied skill-set than a hodges or Kerr or Kapono. He’s a special shooter, but not a shooting specialist. He can create his own shots as well, and is a decent ballhandler (if not of starting PG quality).
And, I really don’t like alec.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah...
The comparisons to Kerr and Kapono are way off.
He creates his own shots a bit. But he mostly seems to rely on his jumpshot. Which is why I consider him a shooting specialist, as opposed to a slasher, or post player.
I guess I just didn’t view it as a negative label.
by kidronmusic on Jul 9, 2008 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can call him a shooter, sure...
...but not a shooting specialist (not that I could tell anyone what to actually say). How about a scorer who mostly shoots? It’s more cumbersome, but has less of the stand-around-the-3pt-line negative connotation.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lol
for a moment there I thought you were referring to Alec as a “high usage player” with a “varied skill set.”
The poster formerly known as Freethefro.
by MPG on Jul 9, 2008 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Me too
I thought we might be going somewhere special.
John Paxson has been like family to me. I can no more disown him than I can disown my white grandmother, who also was unable to pull off any deals for superstar free agents or hire a top-notch coach.
by preverbal on Jul 9, 2008 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well he is to an extent
He’s a shooting specialist that can create his own shot, although not consistently. The problem is, his handles are not good enough to create under pressure. When teams put defensive pressure on him, he struggles mightily. The give-the-ball-to-Gordon-and-watch offense that the Bulls ran for the final shot last season was terrible. Gordon isn’t that kind of player. He’s a player that comes off screens and hits or misses a shot with a hand in his face. All this talk about him being the leading scorer on this team isn’t anything special. This could be the easiest team in the league to be the leading scorer of.
by Parrotman on Jul 9, 2008 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
...all the new users who love Gordon
even though every comment attributed to him sounds like he’s either pining for some other team or complaining about there being too much competition on the Bulls at guard?
And it’s not just me. I have yet to read an article lauding Gordon’s ‘good judgement’ in turning down last year’s Bulls offer, or touting Gordon as a prize catch in this year’s free agent market.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where are the articles talking about the demand for Deng?
So, should we replace him with Jamario Moon?
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 9, 2008 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's an argument?
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shooting specialists can't go off for big scoring nights and carry teams on that end
They are almost entirely reiliant on an efficient offense to give them points. I would bet any money that Steve Kerr or Kyle Korver would not average more than 10 points if the coach just gave them the ball and told them, “Here take as many shots as you want, create some offense for yourself.”
You’ve watched this team, Gordon has done just that for 4 seasons when the team has needed it. He’s not the greatest option, but honestly there’s nothing else out there. Sign him to a 3-4 year deal with a ETO and frontload the contract, and trade him away in a couple of seasons when a better option becomes available.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 9, 2008 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tony Delk was the best scorer on a playoff team?
Scoring 50 points once a season isn’t what I was talking about.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 9, 2008 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you never cease to amaze
I’ve now come to the realization that you have not watched any games over the past 3 seasons.
Whatever floats your boat.
Fine, if you don’t think he’s worth $10m…or even $8m…I can halfway understand. But to call him nothing more than a shooting specialist and to compare him to Kapono, Hodges, Paxson, and Kerr is just lunacy.
by NormVanBeer on Jul 9, 2008 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Disagree.
In my opinion, Gordon is a better player than those guys. He can create his own shot, carry a team through tough stretches on offense, and he has shown the ability to be a reliable clutch player when he isn’t being double and triple-teamed every time the shot clock turns off and there’s an opportunity for the last shot. His overall game (like defense, passing ability, etc.) might not be all that great, but there’s no comparing him to the guys you mentioned on offense, as he’s clearly better.
Also: “Gordon’s Bulls stats have been inflated by the Bulls having no one else with anything even remotely resembling reliable offense.”
Couldn’t you also argue that once he has other players around him that might be a threat to score, he might become more efficient and actually improve his stats? I just think that could go either way.
I’m not saying that Gordon could be the best player on a championship team, but I think that he could be the second best scoring option on a championship team; and his defensive shortcomings can be hidden, as evidenced by the Bulls having very good team defense 2 and 3 years ago with Gordon playing major minutes at SG.
by kite on Jul 10, 2008 3:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will freely admit
that no small part of my sentiments stem from and are a reaction to my belief that Ben no longer wants to be here.
Yes, there is more than one way to look at his game. I’m taking it in the direction of Jason Kapono…and YaoPao is taking it in the direction of Carmelo Anthony.
Realistically, both are probably equally false, although the best measure of the only opinion that really matters will be how he eventually gets paid.
Will it be closer to Kapono or Carmelo? My guess is Kapono.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 10, 2008 7:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's not the best measure of his worth.
And if Gordon didn’t want to be here, why is he still negotiating almost exclusively w/ the Bulls?
by tyger1147 on Jul 10, 2008 7:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because no one else has any more to negotiate with him?
I mean nobody else has any real money right now Tyger. Warriors still have Biedrins and Ellis to take care of. The only real options for Gordon is the Bulls or a sign& trade with the Bulls.
(Just thought I would enter the conversation for no real reason.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jul 10, 2008 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't see him
being the 2nd best scorer on a championship team. Name one championship team that had a number 2 scoring option that has a hard time dribbling or passing the ball under pressure and has a hard time scoring other than shooting jump shots.
by Parrotman on Jul 10, 2008 8:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hamilton is kind of similar
However, back in those days, Hamilton actually took almost twice as many shots as Gordon near the basket and scored at a high percentage with those shots. I also don’t see him struggling to pass out of a double team as much as Gordon… based on height issues perhaps.
by Parrotman on Jul 11, 2008 9:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon brings more offense than a Kapono
perhaps a JR Smith that shoots more jumpers?
by Parrotman on Jul 9, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Weren't you comparing Gordon with Kapono on another thread?
Kapono played 1 minute in the playoffs when Miami won a title. I don’t know if that’s a running joke or what, but I don’t see the similarity.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
heh
nice catch.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know the numbers
but Portland will be significantly under the cap next season.
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
by iDea on Jul 9, 2008 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe Indiana is also trying to get under
plus the Heat. And of course, the Griz.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, Indiana's got Dunleavy
and alec said they figured out how to use him, so we wouldn’t have to worry about them going after Gordon.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on Jul 9, 2008 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Matt the only teams with Cap Room
Are effectively Memphis and the Clippers. Everyone else has cap room tied up in prospective free agents or exceptions that put them over the cap (Seattle is the best example of the latter).
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jul 10, 2008 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
we're talking about next year.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 10, 2008 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well
its hard to have it both ways. If a sign and trade is possible after the QO then its not really the end of the world is it? Either we could resign him ourselves with the knowledge of what he’s done this year, we could sign and trade him or he could walk to a team with cap space, which, while not ideal, at least would get us under the cap, I think, since Drew Gooden would be off the books too and we could use the money elsewhere.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Could we have some clarification on this?
This is what I was trying to say yesterday about letting Gordon go in order to create a non-slot salary slot. If he goes, he leaves us with a parting gift of cap space, which we can then use to get a player that might better fit our needs.
And if, as JSlakov suggests here, we combine that with Gooden coming off the books, we should have enough money to make a difference.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think they let both go.
Let’s say Deng signs for $10 mil per. Even if Gordon walks, combined w/ Gooden coming off the books, that still puts the Bulls at $53 mil w/ a cap probably around $59/60. Sure they could finaggle something w/ Hinrich or Hughes to get them off the books, but have you seen the 2009 Free Agent group? Who there, w/ an eye towards 2010 and beyond, do you really want over Gordon?
You have a unicorn in mind, and I’m just not seeing it.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's Gordon waiving the Bird Rights to be traded.
He can’t be traded w/o his consent, and if he does that, he loses those rights. There’s no way he wants to lose those rights and limit his options. This all that I was responding to. I really don’t get what you’re saying from your first comment to my reply to this comment. I really am confused.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
Let’s imagine that Gordon takes the QO and the Bulls then try to trade him during the season.
If he consents to the trade, he goes to Team B for a year and enters free agency without Early Bird rights. Gordon is limited to the cap space of potential suitors.
But let’s imagine that he refuses the trade. It’s hard to see how he benefits. Yes, he retains his Early Bird rights, but the only team that can use those rights are the Bulls. Given that the Bulls just tried to trade Gordon (in the hypothetical), that’s a pretty clear indication that the franchise has no interest in retaining Gordon and actually excercising those rights. Gordon will still be limited to the existing cap space of potential suitors.
There would only be two potential benefits for Gordon in refusing the trade: (1) he can spite the franchise and ensure that the Bulls don’t get anything in return for him; or (2) he can hope that the Bulls sign and trade him after the QO season for an Early Bird amount. However, I am dubious of option 2, since I am not certain that is how the Early Bird rights work. If the Bulls sign Gordon using their Early Bird rights and then trade him, does the receiving team somehow benefit from the Early Bird rights? Or would Gordon’s entire salary count against their cap? If the latter, from the point of view of the Bulls’ trade partner, there would be no difference between that sign and trade and a simple free agency signing.
LSU 38 OHIO STATE 24 - LSU IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION AND I AM THE KING OF BOURBON STREET!!
by 1958ChiTown on Jul 9, 2008 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, in post above, should be Full Bird rights, not Early Bird.
Though that doesn’t change the analysis.
LSU 38 OHIO STATE 24 - LSU IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION AND I AM THE KING OF BOURBON STREET!!
by 1958ChiTown on Jul 9, 2008 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bird Rights also only apply to a Sign & Trade Chi
That’s the reason Gordon wouldn’t want the trade to go through assuming your scenario held. (That’s the problem Baron Davis has. He’s stuck in LA for a whole year before being able to leave in a trade.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jul 10, 2008 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Via Larry Coon
Under no circumstances can a team sign and then trade another team’s free agent. But there is a rule that allows teams to re-sign their own free agents for trading purposes, called the sign-and-trade rule. Under the sign-and-trade rule, the player is re-signed and immediately traded to another team. This is done by adding a clause to the contract which stipulates that the contract is invalid if the player’s rights are not traded to the specific team within 48 hours.This should answer any further questions.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jul 10, 2008 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Bird rights make it possible for Gordon
to go to a team without the room under the cap needed to sign him. If say New Orleans wants him, but only has 5 million in cap room. Gordon isn’t going to sign for 5 million, but he could sign with the Bulls for 10 million a year even with the Bulls over the cap using his Bird rights and then be traded to the Hornets. The Bird rights allow Gordon to go to a lot more teams through a sign and trade.
by Scotter on Jul 9, 2008 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In this scenario the Hornets would have to send salary to the Bulls to
make t work under the cap.
by Scotter on Jul 9, 2008 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose that is the advantage from Gordon's perspective.
By structuring it as a sign and trade, the receiving team can clear cap space by sending players and (hence) salaries back to the Bulls in order to accomodate Gordon’s full salary.
In that case, do the Bulls still benefit from the Bird exception? That is, if the players sent back to Chicago put Chicago over the cap (as Gordon’s salary did), are the Bulls still entitled to the exception?
LSU 38 OHIO STATE 24 - LSU IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION AND I AM THE KING OF BOURBON STREET!!
by 1958ChiTown on Jul 9, 2008 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The players the Bulls take back would
retain their Bird rights, and the Bulls could go over the cap to resign them.
by Scotter on Jul 9, 2008 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My question wasn't very clear.
In your example, the Bulls signed Gordon for $10 MM and that put them over the cap. Then they traded Gordon to the Hornets. As I understand it, in the NBA, teams must exchange equivalent salaries in a trade. Thus, presumably, the Hornets would have to send $10 MM back to the Bulls, which would still put them over the cap. Would the Bulls be entitled to a cap exception for the players they were given to them by the Hornets?
LSU 38 OHIO STATE 24 - LSU IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION AND I AM THE KING OF BOURBON STREET!!
by 1958ChiTown on Jul 9, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. They don't have to cut anyone or anything like that.
That’s how a lot of teams, especially the Knicks get so far over the cap. Think the Shaq trade or Jason Kidd for recent examples. By the beginning of the season, nearly every team is over the cap and this is how trades are made. In fact, a team being over the cap is the prerequisite to HAVING to match the salaries in a trade.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see. Informative.
Since that is true, Option 2 from my original post is viable and I can understand why Gordon might refuse a mid-season QO trade in the hopes of negotiating an offseason Bird sign and trade.
LSU 38 OHIO STATE 24 - LSU IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION AND I AM THE KING OF BOURBON STREET!!
by 1958ChiTown on Jul 9, 2008 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your terminology is wrong
A sign & trade and bird rights are 2 different things. They exist mutually, but bird rights usually exist under most scenarios for most players.
Gordon can negotiate a sign & trade with the Bulls next offseason because of his Bird rights. But once that happens whatever team he negotiates with gets those Bird Rights too.
(The Qualifying Offer is one of a few scenario’s where you lose your Bird rights if you consent to being traded. The Devean George scenario is another actually if you remember that.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jul 10, 2008 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is also true of this offseason
If he decided to go that route a year early. No matter to me anyway. The real point of this conversation is why he turned down the money from the Bulls a year ago. Being an un-restricted FA as early as possible is the best place for any player to be. That is unless they want to play out a qualifying offer with their original team which is then difficult to execute too since the Qualifying Offer almost invariably screws the team in the long run if they do a sign & trade without talent they want back. Gordon screwed himself big time. So did Deng and Igoudala for that matter.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jul 10, 2008 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I gotcha.
I was being rhetorically lazy.
LSU 38 OHIO STATE 24 - LSU IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION AND I AM THE KING OF BOURBON STREET!!
by 1958ChiTown on Jul 10, 2008 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I read the post correctly, I agree
It seems that the whole Bird Rights issue is overhyped. As far as a I can see, it would only hinder him from doing two things: 1) signing a contract elsewhere for one or two years, which he wouldn’t do anyway, and 2) getting traded mid-season to a team that will be over the cap.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he loses his Bird rights a team cannot sign him over their cap. If he stays with the Bulls
they can sign him over their cap. is this correct?
by chgobr on Jul 9, 2008 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
From members.cox.net salary cap faq
“The only rule is that the player can’t have been waived or changed teams as a free agent for three seasons. However, if a team renounces a player (see question number 33), they can’t use the Bird exception to re-sign him for one year.”
We wouldn’t be renouncing Gordon, and we wouldn’t be waiving him. It would essentially be the same as letting an unrestricted free agent’s contract run out. So, if I’m interpreting this correctly, Gordon would keep his Bird Rights with the Bulls, yes.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Gordon signs a 3+ year contract somewhere else
at the end of his contract, he will have Bird Rights again, and can re-sign with that team for big money regardless of their cap situation.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That doesn't make sense.
Lay our your logic fully.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You get Bird Rights by staying with the same team for 3 years
If Gordon signs for 1 or 2 years, he doesn’t meet that requirement, and cannot re-sign if his new team is over the cap.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But his salary would still be
limited for 3 years.
by JeffD on Jul 9, 2008 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
He gives up his bird rights for that three-year contract, limiting how much that contract can be. That’s what I thought YaoPau was getting at, but it didn’t make sense.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough, but the limited salary
is basically a non-issue. Gordon wouldn’t turn down 5 years / 50 million to sign somewhere else for significantly less, just for the opportunity to sign for more three years down the line.
If we give Gordon the QO, his two options are 1) signing a big contract with a crappy team, or 2) sign a slightly less big contract to play for a contending Bulls team.
by YaoPau on Jul 9, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
true, but it's not a vaccum
Hughes will still be here, the season will be spent feeding KC information about how Thabo’s the next Ron Harper (the young kind too)...it’ll just be a not-fun year for the Gordon-Bulls relationship.
I just don’t see after two summers of not agreeing to a contract, that they’ll honestly say that they have Gordon in their long-term plans.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why wouldn't he sign a
a three year deal and try to cash in when the dust settles from 2010. Loyalty means a lot to BG. No matter what people think he works his ass off and IMO thats why hes worth the cash. After watching E-Rob, Bagaric, Mercer, Rose,etc this means something. Or was PAX just feeding us bullshit about character and hard work.
by Blacknight23 on Jul 9, 2008 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think a 3 year deal (or an early termination option after 3 years)
is a solid compromise for both sides.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
We pay him a little more per year over a 3-year deal than we’d be willing to pay on a 5- or 6-year deal, and Gordon gets some measure of security. Gordon could still hold out hope that the market would “wise up” (in his eyes) and pay him eight figures per year – he’d still be in his prime when the contract expires, and the valuable Bird rights will be intact – and the Bulls would have security and cost certainty over the period. Sounds like a win-win to me.
Parental Advisory - Explicit Content
by Jivas on Jul 9, 2008 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One thing that popped in my head
this ‘market’ that keeps getting mentioned…it’s not a true marketplace. I’ve said this before, but just because Gordon and Deng can’t get offers above the MLE doesn’t mean they’re only worth the MLE. It’s just the reality of nearly every team being over the cap.
And this ‘market’ hampers the Bulls as well. If they let these guys go, there’s no way to rebound with signing someone comparable this offseason. So they don’t have all the leverage, as some suggest.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
and that's what makes it a market.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well it's a market
but not as simple as some seem to make it out to be. As in ’ if they can’t find an offer, let them go, we’ll sign someone else’.
(wait, I’m not supposed to be replying to you)
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
Some people that don’t understand the salary cap think that in the event neither player is signed, that frees up cap space.
It’s not that direct, unfortunately. And while I’d like to retain both players, I don’t want to see the team cap-crippling themselves for years in the event some of the younger players fail to develop as anticipated.
by kingj41 on Jul 9, 2008 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
but
Gooden comes off next year and Hughes the year after. Not signing Gordon and/or Deng does certainly allow for more flexibility down the road.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't want flexibility
in lieu of a competitive team. I want the team to compete annually while having flexibility. We’ve seen those non-competitive years all ready. Awful.
by kingj41 on Jul 9, 2008 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you mean
like last year? Deng and Gordon seemed to be pretty big parts of that travesty. I’d rather lose big and get some nice pieces in the draft to put around Rose than to have a repeat of last year and I don’t see this team taking a step forward with a 19 year old point guard, I’m sorry.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They were also a big part of sweeping the Heat.
I do agree w/ the last part, though. Although, I don’t think it necessarily follows. If you want Rose to mature as fast as Paul and Williams did, they need to put better, older players around him like New Orleans and Utah did. They don’t have to be that old, but it’d be nice to have a few players hitting their peaks while Rose is emerging.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the answer is always to keep good players
and get more of them. I think the idea of letting both walk just for ‘flexibility’ is lunacy.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and as a pre-emptive strike
Nocioni’s not good.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well
its not just gaining flexibility, its also avoiding being stuck in a rut, which I could see happening if we lock up Gordon and Deng for big money long term. Do you want to be like the Cavs and have a superstar without enough around him? And thats with Lebron who I think its reasonable to say can do more by himself than Rose will be able to.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
by the way
I’ve been lumping Gordon and Deng together in too many posts. Deng I think we should resign for the right price. Gordon I think we should let go if we can’t sign and trade him or sign him to a much smaller deal than he wants. But the general principle that not signing guys if they want too much money stands. Its not losing them for nothing if you look at the big picture. That attitude has led to way too many players being signed to deals that were too long and too big and I’d prefer it not happen to the Bulls.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am generally in agreement with this.
(I know you don’t want to hear that—”Ack! Poison agrees with me!”).
What I’d like to hear from the people who want to up last year’s offers to Deng and Gordon is where the money will be coming from when it comes time to sign an elite player?
It seems to me that you’re just crossing your fingers hoping another miracle drops in our lap…Chris Bosh saying, “No-I insist-I will only play for the Bulls. Find a way to make it happen!”
I think we need to be ready to pay these guys when they hit the market. How do we do that except by holding the line on our ‘nice’ players Gordon and Deng?
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aren't you just crossing your fingers hoping for a free agent?
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there's a difference between having the money for him and not
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
tyger, I'm happy to keep Gordon
I just don’t know how we can afford his asking price and still be in the market for the 2010 elites.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's true, but I think it's foolish to hope for that.
I was there before winning the lottery. Not now.
Besides, the thing biggest thing people are forgetting is that w/ the Bird Rights teams don’t HAVE to be under the cap. Think about this: If Wade wants to come to Chicago, why can’t he do a sign-and-trade?
Gordon + Deng at 18-20 mil total plus a draft pick or two to Miami for Wade at 18-20 million sounds pretty damn good to me. Why would Chicago not do this? Why not Wade? Why not Miami? If Marion leaves, as long as Gordon and Deng don’t tank, why not a starting four of Chalmers, Gordon, Deng, Beasley + _.
For this team, as constituted and looking forward, it’s a huge gamble to hinge so much on that one off-season.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's the most realistic, odds-on way
to add another elite player (assuming Rose turns into an elite, which I am counting on)?
Is the best way to do it signing Gordon and Deng, then using them in a trade?
If yes, I’m for it. I don’t want to be a lower teir play-off team.
I’d rather bite the bullet (which we’re doing anyway now taht we drafted Rose) and take a couple years to get to the top, than hang around in upper mediocrity.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But if we overpay them
why will it be easy to trade them for a “Superstar.” It just doesn’t make sense.
by hlac on Jul 9, 2008 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure it does.
As long as they’re not grossly overpaid, which they won’t be.
by tyger1147 on Jul 9, 2008 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not even sure
I’d be happy to have someone who is so delusional about his value to the team. Perhaps most pro-athletes are just seeking to get as much money as they possibly can through a contract that they don’t deserve. Ben Gordon needs to play at least twice as better as he did last season if he wants to be paid even 10 million a year. If Gordon really wants to boost his value, he needs to work hard on his handles, court vision, passing, and defense big time. All I hear about is him working on his shooting.
by Parrotman on Jul 9, 2008 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon's better than any non LeBron Cav
maybe besides a younger BigZ.
I think letting them both go, knowing that you also want to let Hinrich and Nocioni go (honestly, how do they figure in your future plans then)...then you have to put some work togeth…
forget it.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hinrich and Nocioni
its too late to not sign them to long deals. I’d like to unload them but I’m not as confident in being able to get rid of them, especially Nocioni. And I’d rather keep Hinrich than trade him for something stupid and resign Gordon big.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
The Cavs would win the east every year if they had a player who could knock down open shots. Imagine BG instead of Boobie gibson . Be serious.
by Blacknight23 on Jul 9, 2008 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Boobie can knock down open shots!
He just can’t do anything else, so when they play the almighty box-and-one [the one guarding(read: standing near) him, the box guarding Lebron], the Cavaliers are totally helpless.
by Prevenge on Jul 10, 2008 12:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, no, no
In JSlakov’s world, nothing prior to last season ever happened. Get it right.
Parental Advisory - Explicit Content
by Jivas on Jul 9, 2008 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't rather lose big
and the Bulls won’t go for that anyway.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well
would you prefer the frustrating win one, lose two of last season?
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well? well?
oh, come on.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
seriously
do you envision more than that for the Bulls in the next year or two?
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
for super serial
yes.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok
well I think thats kind of unrealistic considering we’ll have a 19 year old point guard next year and a 20 year old point guard the year after. Rose may become Chris Paul or Deron Williams but both those guys were already 21 or 22 coming into the league and it took them a year or two before their teams made the playoffs.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
as I said in another thread
it’s ok to think they won’t make the playoffs. It’s jerkiness to act surprised when you’re in the minority with that opinion.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not to say your logic makes sense anyway
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
its not jerkiness
I really am surprised. I heard many people say that Rose was the choice because he was the better long term guy over Beasley. We’ve got 2/3 of our front court rotation still in summer league and having watched those games, Thomas has definitely shown some good signs but is still inconsistent and Noah has not looked great by any stretch. To me that just doesn’t sound like the makings of a playoff team. Deng and Gordon should improve but they’ll still be surrounded by the youngest team in the league. The Sixers and Bucks made significant upgrades and other teams may get better by their young players improving as well like the Hawks. Even the Nets still have Vince Carter. I don’t see it.
If the Bulls do resign Gordon and Deng than I hope I’m wrong and they start winning, but for now I’m going to want them to do what my informed opinion suggests. That’s part of the point of being a fan.
by JSlakov on Jul 9, 2008 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm hoping but not expecting playoffs next season.
I mean, our conference is so bad that we have a shot pretty much no matter what. I wouldn’t base your opinions off summer league, though. It just seems … really iffy.
As for Noah, I don’t think he started working out until now. :P Hopefully he’ll be in shape for the real season, I think he was partying for the space between end of year and summer league, and now he’ll work out to get in shape for the new offense. Maybe he’ll even get stronger. We can only hope.
by Prevenge on Jul 10, 2008 12:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Flexiblity is overrated.
The 2 most common (best) ways to have a contending team are through the draft and through trades. There usually aren’t many big free agent sigings over the summer. This year, surprisingly, is a bit of an exception and some believe that the summer of 2010 is going to be really different, with a lot of good players opting out and having expiring contracts that year. However, that plan is assuming that those players don’t resign with their own teams (where they could probably get more money, because their teams can go over the cap, and a sixth year, but I could be wrong about that) and choose to test free agency. Also, you want to have as many good players as possible on your team, and by letting two good players go for nothing just to have a chance at a possible free agent in 2 years is probably not the best way to go.
The Bulls have had seven lottery picks since 2003, and there is a possibility that they can keep most of those players (except Hinrich) and still have the ability to sign a top free agent in 2010 (that plan was laid out by Doug Thonus in one of the Bulls Beat podcasts).
My preference is that they resign both, trade Hinrich and Nocioni, and then begin to think about 2010 when Hughes’ contract will expire and Goodens will have expired. If they’re able to trade Hinrich and Nocioni for contracts that expire in 2010, then that should leave them with available cap room after all those contracts expire. Even if they don’t land a star in free agency, they would still have some good assets in Gordon, Deng, Rose, Tyrus, Thabo, and Noah.
If they only sign one, I am in the minority that would prefer Gordon because Deng… actually, I just don’t like Deng as much as Gordon. However, that scenario (if either player is resigned) would leave more cap room available in the future.
One last thing: By resigning either or both, the Bulls have a lot of trading options in the future that they can pursue if the 2010 free agency thing doesn’t work out. If both are let go, the Bulls would have very few trading options because they wouldn’t have many assets, just some nice players and the rest would be garbage (other than Rose).
I just think it’s better to leave as many options open as possible, instead of putting all their eggs (marbles?) in one basket (2010), which would be the case if neither player was resigned.
by kite on Jul 10, 2008 3:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly what I've been saying.
The past few years, the Bulls have had their best players on rookie contracts and therefore nothing worth trading. It’s okay to put themselves in position to do something that summer, but to completely bank on it is absolute stupidity.
by tyger1147 on Jul 10, 2008 7:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the nets have VC. lol
Don’t forget about Yi. LOL.
East
1. Boston
2. Detroit
3. Cleveland
4. Orlando
5. Philly
6. Toronto
7. Chicago
8. Milwauke
by Blacknight23 on Jul 9, 2008 3:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Wizards don't make the playoffs?
One of the trio of Chicago, Milwaukee, and Atlanta aren’t making the playoffs, I hope it’s Skiles and his angst-ridden soul.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 9, 2008 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even if they bring back both Smith and Childress
my money would be on the Hawks not making it back. They only won 37 games last year and are highly unlikely to significantly improve the team this year.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on Jul 9, 2008 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miami with a healthy Wade
will probably be in.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 9, 2008 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea
If Wade is healthy, along with Marion and Beasley, and the already immortal Mario Chalmers, Miami should be a lock for the playoffs. ::Especially if they flip Marion for Kirk and Noc::
by BNeL21 on Jul 9, 2008 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you about that
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on Jul 9, 2008 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
I don’t believe there a better team. I need to see Gil at 100 %. I know for a fact it takes a year or two to get the explosiveness back after knee surgery.
by Blacknight23 on Jul 9, 2008 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so, your saying chicago is beating out
Milwaukee, when we have only added a Rookie Coah w/ no experience…and a rookie PG w/ 1 yr of college experience….meanwhile the Bucks add a top flight SF in Jefferson…sorry, but don’t see it…skiles usually does a good job of turnign a team around in his first year too
and the hawks, it all falls on whether they keep Josh & Childress….i mean, if they traded for Bibby, you’d think they would be willing to match anything Smith gets, but we’lll see
and Washington? healthy Arenas, Jamison back, Butler…
by Jbonelli on Jul 9, 2008 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bibby is a rather large expiring contract this year, about 15 million.
I think that was a good chunk of ATL’s motivation to get him(the owners at least, all 37 of them), and not necessarily to make a playoff push.
I agree though, Milwaukee and Washington>our currently constructed Bulls.
by BNeL21 on Jul 9, 2008 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Milwaukee is probably going to disappoint a lot of people
Honestly, Redd and Jefferson aren’t likely to be that much better than Gordon and Deng if at all. The rest of their roster doesn’t stack up to the rest of the Bulls roster. Skiles will improve the D, but still not likely even get them to league average. This team would have easily made the playoffs the last 10 years in the East. They look to be a year too late.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on Jul 9, 2008 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's going to hate Mo Williams
Ramon Sessions should thank God Skiles came along.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 9, 2008 8:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He seems to have the Duhon thing of one big game a year down
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on Jul 9, 2008 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agree to disagree...
hes gonna have them hustling on D, at least for this year (i expect a mutiny by playoff time), and i doubt they will have trouble scoring, even though they have no real dominant low post player….they have a bunch of perimeter players
by Jbonelli on Jul 10, 2008 2:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hustle and effort are a big part of defense
Skill is also required on that side of the ball. There are still far too many players on the roster who seem to lack defensive skills. At least, they’ve never bothered showing them before. Terry Porter’s being lauded as a defensive specialist in Phoenix and even he couldn’t get the Bucks to play better than bad defense. They weren’t even that good offensively last year, ranking 21st in the NBA. I don’t think they’ll be terrible. I have a hard time seeing them do much better than .500 ball, and in the East this season, that will probably be just enough to keep them competing for the 8 seed until the final week.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan
by snley on Jul 10, 2008 8:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
BG was just bad at defense
Michael Redd seems to not give a shit. Krystowiak was a Skiles clone and he fought a ton with Redd. Richard Jefferson has had 100 injuries and won’t be able to defend that well, the only solid defensive player they have is Bogut. They’ll be better, but they aren’t going to have the Skiles turnaround we saw in Chicago, and in Phoenix where he had Kidd, Penny, and a rookie Matrix.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 10, 2008 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Atlanta
is a mirage. They still don’t have a PG or a C unless there going to play small ball.
by Blacknight23 on Jul 9, 2008 9:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
idk
I think bibby is fine there…not a long term option, but Joe J. & Childress can handle..they Def gave the Celts a run for their money…
by Jbonelli on Jul 10, 2008 2:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Celtics were a completely different team by the Finals rolled around
You think Atlanta would win a single game against Boston if they were in their Finals form? The Hawks are a very athletic team, and the Celtics are old and underestimated them. I don’t see Joe Johnson improving that much, only Josh Smith and Horford can really elevate that team, and I wouldn’t be happy putting my franchise’s hopes in Josh Smith.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 10, 2008 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would rank them this way as of right now
1. Boston
2. Detroit
3. Orlando
4. Cleveland
5. Philly
6. Toronto
7. Washington
8. Miami
Blasphemy you say? No bulls? Not until they resolve the roster/contract issues adequately.
by BNeL21 on Jul 9, 2008 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's a long way to go
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 9, 2008 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
toronto's could be as high as 3,4 seed
with bosh and o’neal on the frontline, and more importantly calderon getting big minutes – they’re gonna be real tough.
Also despite our contract situations, I would hope we could outperform Washington. That franchise has proven this summer they’re stuck in ‘reverse.’
by swede2287 on Jul 10, 2008 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think maybe
detroit and clevelend don’t do so good as last year. Philly with brand sounds better. Chicago is a better team then last year. Probably better then 2 years ago.
by gman2849 on Jul 9, 2008 3:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't see that!
not with this team, unless 19 year od Rose explodes into a Kobe Garnet Carmillio first year wonder!
by exult463 on Jul 9, 2008 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Kobe had much of a first year...
he averaged more turnovers than assists, and played something like 15 min/game. not too much of a first year 19 year old wonder.
....But i get ur point
by scottie33 on Jul 9, 2008 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
19 year old will probably play better
then 5th year pro from Kansas did last year… (again 13.13 PER)
Gordon and Deng should be healthy (tho gordon might not be as good as an injured Kapono, but still…)
Tyrus’ 3rd season of development
Gooden is best inside finisher that’s played with this outside shooting team since Curry “fatboy slim” (He’s coming off of his worst year… mostly with Cleveland’s “one on five” team offense… played better with bulls…. ) prior 2 years PER were: 17.67 and 16.59
Inside scoring is easer for bulls forwards who can finish because teams play us to shoot outside….
see: Smith, Joe; Brown, PJ (fricken Tyrus learn to POST!!!...arghhh….)
Noah’s 2nd season of development
NO MORE DUHON and his crappy shooting (thanks again new york ; )
No more Skiles 3.5 guard schemes
Hinrich/Noc contracts could seriously net us a needed backup at the 5.
Thabo’s 3rd year could/should contribute more within guard rotation and improving his shooting %
we have 3 consecutive playoff appearances with this team.
by gman2849 on Jul 10, 2008 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
first point
Hinrich set a pretty low bar for Rose, even as a 19 year old.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 10, 2008 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
how about
on the defensive end? anyone who’s watched the summer league, can see that Rose needs a lot of work. That is of course to be expected from a 19 year old but its fairly unrealistic to think he can step right into the starting lineup and win a lot of games.
by JSlakov on Jul 10, 2008 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's a fair point
I’d say even replacing Hinrich with Rose, the team defense will improve simply by trying again.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 10, 2008 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
its hard to know
what to expect in that regard since we know so little about Vinny D. I hope you’re right.
by JSlakov on Jul 10, 2008 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly think defense comes from the players, the coaches can only scheme so much
Tom Thibodeau could coach the Suns, but Nash would still be an atrocious defender, and Amare would still not care enough to try on D.
I’m with Matt, that the Bulls will be a top 10 defensive team simply because they are going to go back to their hustle hard ways on D. Vinny should realize that’s a strength of this team, one that can make his life and Rose’s life a lot easier this season.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 10, 2008 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
could be
but watching Noah get abused by Brook Lopez right now isn’t helping my confidence too much :-p
by JSlakov on Jul 10, 2008 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My point is that I'm basing this team's success
on more then last years losses. Especially when you have a team that has been developing for 4 years.
by gman2849 on Jul 11, 2008 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My god...bogut just got $72.5 Million
over 5 years….thats about $14 Mill a year? I believe he Averaged 14.8 ppg, 9.8 rbg….I guess the BUlls have to step it up…although they play different positions (and Bogut has size, even though he is more of a perimeter big), I def think Deng is a better player currently, and has more room to grow in the future, than Bogut…def a shocker
by Jbonelli on Jul 9, 2008 6:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's what sucks about the NBA
The players (and agents) know that they can always get some dumb GM to overpay, which forces the rest of the league to have to take dumb-ness into consideration.
by potato0328 on Jul 9, 2008 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the bullz must decide what to do with deng and gordon.......
so I think you have to trade one of them. But really b4 this I think they need to decide how thabo plays in. Can he really play back-up point? If not then kirk is needed, you need at least 2 pg. Can he improve his shooting/scoring good enough to lock down the two spot? If so how big of a need is gordon then. Can Thabo become strong enough to play some three-spot how will that affect things or will thabo just be a perimeter utililty player off the bench a good role player of sorts. Based on current standings I see we need all the guards except Larry unless we make some moves. If Thabo can play the point then use a combo of Ben, Kirk & maybe Noce to make a trade pretty good low post player who can run the break and finish and possible play some center.
by Ibleedbullsred on Jul 10, 2008 9:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't know how much stock to put in this
but it’s possible the Bulls are looking at JamesOn Curry as a potential back up for Rose. I notice the coaches are taking him aside and talking to him quite a bit in Orlando.
He had a solid D-League season last year, and even with his well-publicized ‘incident’ the Bulls stuck by him. So it seems maybe he’s in their plans.
Plus, and you can’t overlook this with potential big pay-outs coming to Gordon and Deng, he’ll provide very inexpensive minutes.
Here’s a little DX info on him:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/JamesOn-Curry-404/
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 10, 2008 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
From that DX info:
Indeed, he’s a scoring guard in the Jannero Pargo mold
I’d be happy with that type of backup point guard. The backup point guard is typically a cheap position to fill. There are a lot of quality backup point guards in the league, and a lot of jameson’s who could step in and fill that spot. I don’t like paying a backup point what Kirk’s getting. We should groom curry for when that good hinrich trade comes around.
by swede2287 on Jul 10, 2008 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think
the Bulls will go with a non-veteran to back up Rose, whether it’s Hinrich or otherwise. Curry hasn’t proven he can even play, and has earned the KC tag of ‘not in the Bulls plans’ (the successor to ‘who will be shopped’)
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 10, 2008 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
does it really matter at this point?
a rookie coach, rookie pg, a rookie backup?
by exult463 on Jul 10, 2008 7:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thabo's incidental to me
his draft-mate Rodney Carney was dealt for nothing. If Thabo’s thrown in to a deal, Larry Hughes can do most of his role (albeit without the defensive tools Thabo has)
I’m not sure if this is the right move or not, but Paxson’s said he’s completely freezing the roster until he signs (or doesn’t) Gordon and Deng. Only then will he start making deals. Friggin’ risky.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 10, 2008 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It'd be risky to do the opposite
and then paint yourself in a corner and have to end up overpaying either or both Deng and Gordon. Paxson is doing the right thing by waiting for this to be resolved and staying steadfast and not overpaying these guys. Right now the market for these guys isn’t there, and anyone with cap space next year would be tempted to hold onto it for 2010 unless they are one or two complimentary but contributing players away. Let those teams overpay for these guys like Orlando did for a Rashard Lewis.
It is very doubtful that Deng and Gordon can be all-stars in either conference at their positions so why pay them like all-stars? And these guys have been in the league long enough, have already had their third year breakouts, and then held steady in year 4 rather than show a continued upward improvement. They may surprise us and have another breakout year in the making, but I’d only expect gradual improvement to steady maintenance of their recent production. Of the two, I’d say Deng has the better chance to more than marginally improve. I’d love to keep both, but BG at Kirk Hinrich money and Deng at no more than $11m/year on average. These guys aren’t franchise players, they’re not superstars, and they’re not even all-stars so you cannot pay them as such when you are not on the verge of winning the title.
by messwiththebull on Jul 10, 2008 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some chad ford tidbits on deng, gordon
4. Luol Deng, Bulls: Everyone loves Deng’s talent, including the Bulls. At least they used to. Injuries and a poor season have hurt his value around the league. Still, it’s hard to see the Bulls not matching any offer Deng gets next summer.
He declined a $57.5 million extension in October, so if he makes more than that, he’ll come out ahead. It will be interesting to see whether the budget-conscious Bulls will take advantage of the market conditions and offer him much less.8. Ben Gordon, Bulls: Of all the players who turned down lucrative contract extensions last summer, Gordon made the most mind-boggling decision. He turned down a five-year, $50 million deal that seemed above market value on a down season.
For him to recoup that money this summer seems almost impossible. And now that the Bulls have added Larry Hughes to the mix, it’s no longer clear where Gordon fits into the picture.
There isn’t a huge market for undersized 2-guards who have streaky jump shots. Gordon most likely will be the top restricted free agent not to have his offer matched, but he’ll struggle to get a huge offer from anyone. Gordon might be better off taking the Bulls’ one-year tender offer.
I don’t know about the idea of lowballing deng. I don’t think that we have a glut of small forwards (like we do guards) and deng has proven to be a NBA small forward, with a body that fits the position. If he can improve his outside shot, his value will skyrocket in the league. And he’s one of the few guys on our team who can score effectively in the paint. Rose will help deng by feeding him when he’s slashing to the hoop. I’d expect his value to increase this season.
That’s an interesting idea of giving gordon a one-year tender offer.
by swede2287 on Jul 10, 2008 10:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
As much as I've been anti-Gordon on this thread,
I think, in fairness, it should be pointed out that Chad is wrong about Gordon turning down that deal “on a down season.”
The truth is just the opposite. Gordon turned down the money after a very good year two seasons ago, in the hope, I imagine, that he’d follow it up with an even better year last year.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
by alec on Jul 10, 2008 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well break down the roster:
I get:
PG: 2.5 (KH, DR)
2G: 3.5 (BG,LH,JC)
SF: 3 (LD,AN,DN)
PF: 3.5 (DG,TT,CS)
C: 1.5 (AG)
Plus JN at C/PF & TS at PG/2G
14 Names, we could use another center for balance or lose a 2G and get a scorer and a back up center.
by Ibleedbullsred on Jul 10, 2008 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No leaks this time !
You hear all kind of rumors or news that x team is interested in y player, or z team is now focused on v player, etc…
Okafor, Smith, Iguodala, etc, have all been mentioned in the news lately. Of all the interesting restricted and non-restricted free agents, only Gordon and Deng harldy got any press at all. No teams have reportedly shown any interest in them yet.
Is it because other teams feel that the Bulls will match any offer for Deng ?
Is it because Gordon’s value around the league really has plummeted ?
The Game chose him !
by Diabolo on Jul 11, 2008 9:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
seriously.
even on espn the “best of the rest” shows a picture of smith, iguodala, posey, and okafor… even though it lists luol as the fourth best restricted free agent behind the other three other than posey… and posey is stil listed behind kurt thomas for unrestricted. still… seems like deng should have his photo up there.
by Jaina on Jul 11, 2008 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and absolutely no news coming from the Bulls side either,
as regards negociations with both Deng and Gordon (apart from the news more than a week ago that the team had met with both to kick it off).
It feels as much reassuring (in a way, they’re keeping things private) as worrysome.
The Game chose him !
by Diabolo on Jul 11, 2008 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah i don't know
it makes me feel like they haven’t gotten anywhere with the negotiations.
by Jaina on Jul 11, 2008 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's either that
Or that they are pretty close to signing an extension. The only Bulls related news I hear is Marc Stein keeps pushing that BG is going to be signed and traded, because the organization feels Kirk is a better fit at the 2 guard.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 11, 2008 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
could be.
i’ll believe it when i see it, given how slow they’ve been recently.
the thing is, keeping kirk isn’t an awful option – he can play the 2 as well as backup rose. just where bg will go is the big question mark.
by Jaina on Jul 11, 2008 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If they trade BG
It better be for a legit player that will actually pay dividends. I don’t want to see Gordon traded for an expiring contract that Paxson may or may not actually use in 2 seasons. He’s too valuable to just give up on like that, Kirk too.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 11, 2008 10:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree.
i’d love to parlay our guards (and noc?) into a true C, but not a huge lumbering one like gray. gray should not be our backup center. 3rd string for specific matchups is ok. we don’t need another PF either but i’d like to strengthen our front court with a bigger body. oh well. hopefully pax will sort it out right.
by Jaina on Jul 11, 2008 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if by "our guards"
i really mean, whoever we end up giving up.
by Jaina on Jul 11, 2008 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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.
