Maybe Ben KNOWS exactly that, Paxson will clear out some ‘guard glut’, and potentially some luxury tax room. So why accept a deal now when there’s potentially more room under the tax later?

He’s not the key to the team, but he’s pretty damn valuable and not worth giving up on until a suitable replacement or upgrade is found

And it was the second example, not the only one. Though it’s been said that several teams have inquired about Gordon in sign and trade. Those teams were probably offering garbage to the Bulls, but from Gordon’s perspective (the actual money he’d make) they were probably still offering more than the Bulls.

But I wasn’t really making analogies. Together with the experience of getting a better offer yanked, I’m simply pointing out that it’s human nature to not be happy in that situation and to look for a way out.

I don’t think it’s controversial to say that most people, if forced into accepting a lower offer than what had previously been made, will harbor some resentment and look for new employment. I think that’s simply common sense.

That doesn’t mean the player or the employee will “act like a petulant distraction”. There’s a pretty wide range of job satisfaction between “happy” and “petulant distraction”.

Which, again, ought to be proven time and again by observing things in our own places of employment. “Guy working in Office” isn’t going to go nuts and tell his boss off, but he might not skip lunch and come in every Saturday either.

I don’t know if that qualifies as a “pride premium” or not, but I do know that most people that give a shit, not just pro basketball players, take some pride in what they do. But most people can also get pretty turned off by slights, real or perceived.

So if you want to take the hard-ass approach, and say your employees should be thankful and that you were doing them “a favor” (a statement that, in this context, pretty clearly states you think they’re “ungrateful” and/or stupid), I’m not saying that never works. But what I am saying is it rarely commands much in the way of loyalty or anything more than the minimum amount of effort one might expect from self-interested effort in the first place.

Most employees skate by when that happens to them, and then leave at the first opportunity.

While the NBA rules are different than everyday employment rules, and while I don’t expect Gordon to completely flip, I see sticking to the hard-line as pretty silly when all we’re talking about is a couple million to make a face-saving, feel-good situation for all involved.

Be clear, I’m not talking about offering Ben $80M or anything. But if the Bulls are serious about having him back (and they’d better be if they’re offering him $59M or they’re ridiculously silly) then they really ought to consider what they’re getting for $59M vs. what they’d be getting for $63M.

At $59M, Ben is taking a smaller deal than what he was offered before. That’s the sort of thing that sticks in peoples’ craw whether they make $59M or $59K. So why go down that road when it’s so easy to avoid?

If it’s because you simply want to assuage your own ego and “win” the negotiation, and show him that he miscalculated last year, well, then who’s the one making it personal then? I’d say that’s a personal issue all around and you should re-consider whether you actually want the guy for what you’ve offered him in the first place.

but I believe that one wrong way is to say: no teams with cap room giving no offers determines that market value.

At best it’s a heavily regulated market with products we have a very hard time judging.

I agree…a Monta contract is due for BG…if he doesn’t take that…even though he said he will not sign the QO,I ask him what he does now? QO on the table,6/66MM on the table,Europe in your ear,nobody has agreed to your terms for a S/T,you decide BG! There is your options…At that point,the Bulls can go forward and shape the roster the way they want to if they plan on moving some guys or picking up some scrubs out of what is left in the garbage pile known at this point of the year as free agency.

I think this probably represents the state of the negotiations at this point.

Really, nobody has acted in what I consider an irrational way at this point.

1. The Bulls obviously shouldn’t risk the LT if they don’t have to, and saying they won’t is a credible bargaining position.

2. Gordon could sign the Bulls’ offer, which is not that much smaller than what he’d probably get in a sign and trade or next year, but why not wait and try to pressure the Bulls to upping it. They clearly want him back (or they wouldn’t be offering 6/$59), other teams have inquired about sign and trades, and there’s plenty of reason to expect the Bulls could still pull a trade to clear another million or two before they hit the tax. There’s, in fact, reason to expect the Bulls will do this any way.

Further, there are some credible non-monetary reasons. People are often pretty schizophrenic about players, I find. They complain because players are “all about the money” but in Gordon’s case they complain when he seems to want to ensure he’s got a role on the team. He should be concerned about that. Because he’s right, as we all know, we’ve got a lot of guards under contract, and Gordon has been very professional about being jerked around even before that. By maximizing his contract and looking to go to another team, I think Ben’s just being smart to protect his court time as well. And I don’t think there’s any downside to the Bulls for this, because they’ve done best, over his tenure, with him playing the most.