Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Amateur Mathematics Of Linsanity

[D2.0 is right, I have many annoying vocal habits. I still recommend this as a listen however, because after all: it's still me -ed.]

Doug Thonus has, like, a guest host...someone named Matt from Blog a Bull...?!? I am listening now...apparently the interview got cut short...and Doug is, uh, a big fan.

almost 3 years ago Ahlogobulls_tiny Dionysus2.0 88 comments 0 recs  | 

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

are you using the 'like' and 'uhs' as a dig at my crappy speech habits?

damn you.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 1, 2009 6:47 PM CST reply actions  

Yep

…and I deserve that.

Good job though…

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 1, 2009 7:04 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

I deserve it

I don’t think I can start expressing a thought without trying to get 5 more in. Just this damned throbbing brain of mine!

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 1, 2009 10:18 PM CST up reply actions  

I've learned to overcome that problem by becoming a teacher

On the good days, my students actually learn something.
On the other days, I’m still getting in practice at becoming a better public speaker.

by Sports2 on Mar 2, 2009 8:09 AM CST up reply actions  

Good episode

I found it an enjoyable listen.

Matt did a good job speaking on the show (not sarcasm). He did a good job representing BaB.

I kept refreshing bullsbeat.com on my iphone because I was looking forward to this episode. Aside from being shorter than I would have hoped for, I was pleased.

Bullscast and the BullsBeat are my two favorite Bulls podcasts. I used to listen to Kush’s a lot, but his constant Ben Gordon slurping and Neil Funk hate turned me off. Fred’s podcast isn’t bad, but it doesn’t come as frequent as the rest.

Maybe next time they have a crossover episode, Matt could be in on it too?

by Syxx on Mar 1, 2009 9:45 PM CST reply actions  

It's kind of like the Blog a Buller's equivalent

of that scene in Heat where Deniro and Pacino finally meet face to face in that restaurant… I think I need to get out more:(

"That's a spicy meatball-a!" - Vinny Del Negro

by Juiceboxjerry on Mar 1, 2009 10:42 PM CST reply actions  

Ha I thought that was pretty funny...

"The Zen philosopher Basho once wrote: 'A flute with no holes is not a flute, And a doughnut with no hole is a Danish.' He was a funny guy."

by Ugh It Live! on Mar 2, 2009 8:54 AM CST up reply actions  

It was good that Doug agreed with you on the Vinny critique.

Interesting, though, that he did not agree with you on the extended 4th quarter minutes for Hinrich over Rose. He said something like, “Even when he was getting lit up by TJ Ford and Devin Harris, I like the defensive energy he had on them.”

I guess I find it interesting because the question then becomes, “How much worse could it have gone with Rose guarding those guys insead?”

Very nice job overall.

"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 Mar 1, 2009 11:02 PM CST reply actions  

thonus made an intresting point

i think once i was criticised that i didnt know much about basketball being a hinrich fan, when the more accurate statement was what thonus said…if you really are a diehard bulls fan, then you cant help but appreciate what ben gordon brings to this team. Thonus might have taken it too far by saying you cant help be a bg fan if you are a diehard bulls fan, but what he was getting at made sense to me.

He wasnt saying hinrich sucks, and he wasnt saying that ben gordon was flawless, he was saying what alot of people here have been saying on blogabull, but probably in its more accurate (neutral?) way…you cant be a bulls fan and not appreciate what ben gordon brings to the table….and you know what….i agree with that much…

On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!

by piccolomair on Mar 2, 2009 12:38 AM CST up reply actions  

Thonus really annoyed me with that thread...

…because I have been a die hard fan for years and I am not a hardcore BG fan…I like him but not at the expense of the organization or the other players on the floor…to me, BG insulted the Bulls and their fans by turning down those two contracts…so, I like him less now than I did two years ago…but I thought those were fair offers while I know others (Andrew) think Gordon deserves closer to max money…I am going to be angry if/when he signs a contract this summer for less than he was offered by the Bulls…and both Matt and Doug seemed to share that sentiment.

With that said, I certainly appreciate what Ben brings to the table, and when he puts up double figures in the 4th quarter, I am out of my seat cheering just like everyone else…

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 2, 2009 7:31 AM CST up reply actions  

See... I don't get why your anger would be directed at Gordon for signing for less somewhere else

I mean, if he’s gonna leave money on the table to go somewhere else, it’s pretty solid evidence of just how dicked around he’s gotten. Nor do I see why it’s “insulting” to turn down a contract.

Maybe it’s my schooling, but a contract is a business proposition. The Bulls don’t deserve a “loyalty discount” and Gordon doesn’t deserve a “loyalty bonus”. While that (amusingly discussed by Doug and Matt) seems to be how Jerry Reinsdorf operates, I’ve never seen good things come of it. I mean, Gordon wasn’t like some undrafted free agent. He was the third pick in the draft and he’s a high quality player in the NBA. He doesn’t owe the team anything beyond what he’s given them. Which has been to go out, shut up and work hard for five years.

“Insult” implies the Bulls have done something for Gordon that other teams wouldn’t do. But I don’t see it. If the Bulls had picked someone else, and Gordon was playing for another team, I don’t see any reason to expect Gordon would be significantly better or worse off.

On the other hand, merely considering own self-interest (which I’ve always thought was a cost effective, winning team), I don’t really understand the logic behind what the Bulls have done with Gordon. That’s not to say he should be “insulted” per se, it’s just that, if I were him, I wouldn’t necessarily want to trust my fate to a team that seemed to have such a schizophrenic view of me or the rest of the team.

by Sports2 on Mar 2, 2009 8:39 AM CST up reply actions  

I suppose one could argue...

…if they really wanted, if Gordon had been drafted on to a team with evidently better scorers, he couldn’t use the “highest scorer” reasoning for getting paid and might “know his role” better. Along the lines of Leandro Barbosa of JR Smith who some have compared him to (albeit wrongly, in my opinion.)

For me, Gordon is somewhere in between Barbosa/Smith (5-7 million) and Redd/Allen (16-17). He should get paid something between. I dunno. Seems logical to me. Why people have the “max contract or MLE and nothing in between” theory, I don’t understand.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 2, 2009 10:22 AM CST up reply actions  

i agree for the most part

however, i don’t think redd is really deserving of 16-17, tbh.

before this season, when contracts were being decided, i always thought of about 9million for gordon and 11 for deng.

also, no one knows how gordon might have played if he had gotten the money, cause the guy is playing for his contract right now.

i’ve always been lukewarm on gordon but i certainly appreciate his strengths, and would never think he’s a MLE type guy.

"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"

by Jaina on Mar 2, 2009 10:43 AM CST up reply actions  

I don't get this

Gordon is playing for a contract talk. If you look at his stats for the last three years he has been pretty consistent. How is this year any different from the 06/07 season? If he was a guy who was averaging 15-16 points a game his career and suddenly was taking a ton more shots trying to fluff his stats then I’d be suspicious, but he is pretty much playing back up to his 06/07 year, shooting a similar number of shots, playing the same kind of game he has as always. Where do you see any differences?

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 Mar 2, 2009 12:44 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't think that's the sort of "favor" organizational partisans mean

Sure, he could go to a team in a better or worse situation for Gordon, but that’s the luck of the draw.

My impression is that it’s some kind of personal loyalty thing. A “Gordon should be thankful he’s on the Bulls and Jerry Reinsdorf was kind enough to offer to let him stay in the first place” sort of thing.

by Sports2 on Mar 2, 2009 12:50 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't see what the organization has done with Gordon...

To make him feel dicked around…they offered him an extension two seasons ago when they didn’t have any obligation to offer anything, then they followed it up by offering another contract when he was a restricted free agent…both offers were, in my opinion, more than fair. But I am not going to rehash all of that…

I didn’t mean to imply that anyone should receive any sort of discount…but if Gordon signs for less money, it feels to me like a slap in the face…implying that he didn’t really want to be with a Bulls player, so much so that he is willing to accept less money for a different situation…and that is fine, but as a fan of the team, that sucks. That is what I meant by insulted…

Then again, I think Gordon gambled big by turning down those contracts…and he bet on himself…so if he signs for less money than was offered, in a sense, he lost that wager…and with the stakes, I doubt he would be happy with that outcome…its like both sides lose.

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 2, 2009 10:05 PM CST up reply actions  

I mostly agree

However, the change in the economy will greatly effect Gordon’s offers this summer as well. I think you’re going to see a lot of big name people get poor offers.

Also, it’s a matter of his pay relative to his peers. He feels he’s as good or better htan Deng and is offered less in consecutive seasons. Deng also would get no where near 72 million this summer.

In the end, Gordon’s refusal to take a deal will end up spiting himself rather than helping him out, but it’s not too hard to understand why he’d be upset either.

by dougthonus on Mar 2, 2009 11:06 PM CST up reply actions  

the first contract offer

was most certainly an attempt at a discount by Paxson. Early security for less money. That’s how it works. Gordon turned it down as did Deng.

Last offseason, I can see why Gordon would feel dicked around. Firstly, it’s not just the money, but also his minutes were reduced so a fuckhead interim coach could give them to Larry Hughes. And his contract offer was less than Deng, on par with Hinrich (laughable), and the first year was less than what Nocioni would make this year.

I don’t get why you see it as a personal insult that Gordon turned down contracts, but it explains a lot. Unfortunately, I think Reinsdorf and Paxson took at as insulting. If it’s Gordon’s fault for either year it was that first early extension…but it’s understandable not to take the offer when the team has all the leverage. If Gordon was offered Deng’s contract he likely would’ve taken it. Not to mention that he took the fairly crappy take-it-or-leave-it offer past the deadline only to have it pulled off the table.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 3, 2009 12:02 AM CST up reply actions  

On the court...

I see what you guys mean by dicked around…the idiot coach reduced his minutes to end the season, even though he had consistently been the team’s best scorer…I was thinking of dicked around in reference to the contract offers…which I thought showed the team wanted a long term commitment to the player…

It was my impression that when Ben turned down those offers, it was about the money…not about his role with the team…perhaps it was a combination of the two…

Ultimately, this doesn’t really matter…the past is the past and Ben Gordon will finally be an unrestricted free agent on the open market, so his value will not be skewed by the threat of the Bulls matching the contract…

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 3, 2009 8:15 AM CST up reply actions  

Money does equal roles when it comes to the Bulls.

Money is the only reason Hughes saw the light of day for example. People get the feeling you can’t keep that much money on the bench despite how much the person sucks. It took almost a whole season to get Hughes off the floor. Same with Hinrich. He isn’t our PG anymore, but he is being paid more than a bench player thus must play play play. He must be shoehorned into the SG position. Whatever it takes. Can’t have that money riding the pine. Wallace. cough If Ben had any hope to start for the Bulls and have any kind of prominent role he would have to have a contract to match that. Otherwise it is very easy to play the guy getting paid more than you and be forever marked as a 6th, 7th, 8th man.

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 Mar 3, 2009 8:26 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Unfortunately...
Ultimately, this doesn’t really matter…the past is the past and Ben Gordon will finally be an unrestricted free agent on the open market, so his value will not be skewed by the threat of the Bulls matching the contract…

This comes at a very bad time for Gordon, and unfortunately for the Bulls, they’ve already spent their money elsewhere.

It’s really unfortunate for the Bulls in general, because it seems to me that if you really wanted to get good deals in free agency, this would be the summer to do it in. If we’d been able to get well under the salary cap, it’s quite possible we’d be in a position to lock in Gordon on a favorable deal and perhaps take a run at another good player (Millsap, Marion, Boozer) and try to lock them on a several year deal.

It’d take a lot to get it done, but suppose the Bulls could have traded Deng and Hinrich for the Blazer’s expirings and then not traded Gooden.

The net effect would have been the Bulls having $18-$20M to spend at a time when there are some good players available at a good price.

by Sports2 on Mar 3, 2009 8:54 AM CST up reply actions  

What's your theory...

…as to why Deng was offered more money than the previous season when he had a regression on the same manner as Gordon or Hinrich, but Gordon was offered the same or less?

I have my theory, but I wonder what you think it is… and why you think that, by itself, isn’t “dicking” someone around.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 3, 2009 9:31 AM CST up reply actions  

the money he was offered was nearly equivalent, actually.

57/5 and 71/6 are 11.4mil and 11.8mil on average, respectively. he didn’t earn a huge raise or something.

"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"

by Jaina on Mar 3, 2009 10:17 AM CST up reply actions  

Deng got $80 million

As Rose/Gordon are going to drag him to his incentives this year, and probably years into the future.

http://www.dabullz.com

Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.

by Andrew7 on Mar 3, 2009 12:26 PM CST up reply actions  

yes, the full value is 80 million

but since you are oh so informed, why don’t you tell me what his incentives are and how you’re so sure he’s going to get them?

"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"

by Jaina on Mar 3, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions  

An extra guaranteed year, especially a year later...

…to a player with an injury history IS a big raise. Especially since it is a little bit more anyway. What was Gordon’s six-year offer? 6/57.5, reportedly. So if he wants the extra security, he has to take nearly a half-million per year pay cut, while Deng gets nearly a half-million per year more.

So that’s .75-1.0 million difference per year for two players who had similar downturns in their games. I can see giving Deng more compared to Gordon, but why does one get a raise while the other gets a pay cut, no matter how small?

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 3, 2009 1:11 PM CST up reply actions  

probably because they saw they were able to compromise with deng.

if an extra 500k a year would get it done for gordon, maybe they would have considered choosing him over deng. but the fact is, all signs were that he wanted at least what deng did, and they certainly couldn’t offer them both that.

"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"

by Jaina on Mar 3, 2009 2:32 PM CST up reply actions  

IIRC, Deng's payment is deferred the full 30% the CBA allows for over the next 20 years or so

If you calculate that out in terms of present value (especially in light of our fucktard government fixing to run the printing presses about 80% faster for the next several years to pay for a bunch of new dog parks), it’s very possible Deng took less than he was initially offered, or about the same.

by Sports2 on Mar 4, 2009 3:36 PM CST up reply actions  

Its not fair to compare the contracts of Deng and Gordon.

As its apples to oranges….And as Jaina pointed out, there is very little difference between Deng’s first offer and the one he signed.

However, if I am theorizing why Deng would be more highly paid than Gordon, then I then I think there are several factors. First, Deng brings more than just scoring, evident in him leading the team in PER last season even though it was a down year (or a regression as you put it)…Secondly, Deng is two years younger than Gordon, which to me translates into greater upside and less likely to decline before the end of the contract…Third, there was a more clearly defined role for Deng (starting SF).

Now, my theory written off the cuff, I have not put much thought into this…but it seems that you have…so, tyger1141, what is your theory?

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 3, 2009 10:28 AM CST up reply actions  

Deng regretted that he didn't take the offer.

Gordon didn’t.

Not a lot of thought into that theory, no. But thanks for being condescending.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 3, 2009 1:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Also, see above.

one got a raised per year offer, the other got a demoted per year offer. What’s apples to oranges about that?

And I’m not disputing or disagreeing and definitely not asking you why Deng was paid more in total.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 3, 2009 1:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Its only apples to apples...

…in that they are both NBA player contract offers. The similarities pretty much end there…

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 3, 2009 2:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Not sure that it was actually less... like I said, I'm not sure

I’m calculating it out just to get an idea. Still you have to make some assumptions

  • If Deng’s contract is deferred to the maximum amount (30%)
  • Let’s say it’s deferred over the 20 years following his actual contract.
  • We have to assume a discount rate to make a present value calculation. I pulled 5% purely out of my ass. I wouldn’t guess it’s much lower than that, but I could imagine it being a lot higher (in which case Deng would have signed a lesser offer)
  • The NPV of a 5yrs/$57.5M contract is $49.4M.
  • The NPV of a 6yr/$71M contract is $59.2M.
  • However, the NPV of a 6yr/$71M contract 30% deferred over 20 years is $51.6M.

by Sports2 on Mar 4, 2009 4:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Nice theory.

You are really in touch with the emotions of the players.

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 3, 2009 2:09 PM CST up reply actions  

wouldn't be the first or last one to guess what the players motivations are

but Tyger’s referring to Reinsdorf’s comments about one player regretting not taking the offer.

And since Gordon is selfish and hates the Bulls fans who pay hard-earned money like you (if you pay, or you earn your money hard-earned stylezzzz, of course), he said it wasn’t him…which leaves Deng or Jannero Pargo.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 3, 2009 3:39 PM CST up reply actions  

Remember, Deng was going to save Africa on a great humanitarian mission, so he needed the extra money.

Just had to put that into the contract though and give him $80 million. Couldn’t just donate it in conjunction with Luol in an NBA cares kind of thing, and not have all that money on our cap…

http://www.dabullz.com

Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.

by Andrew7 on Mar 3, 2009 12:25 PM CST up reply actions  

The thing people have to realize with Gordon

It’s not all that much about the money, but about his role and respect.

Although it was pretty dicky by Gardorf to bring out the red carpet for Deng, giving him $80 million, which was way more than he turned down the previous year, despite Deng playing worse the previous year. I think asking him to take less than Hinrich the second time around was a bit of an insult. We all know who is better. Deng at least had that high upside thing going for him, we all knew that Hinrich would never be better than Gordon, barring a major injury. They didn’t show much respect to Gordon when they were freely throwing money to all the other guys, and then all of a sudden ran out of money when it came to Gordon, who was undoubtedly the best of the bunch. John Paxson’s plan planned to pay Gordon more, but someone, called Derrick Rose interrupted the financials by being a #1 pick, when the Bulls were expecting around #9. The Bulls used the increase in salary numbers because of Derrick as a reason to play dumb ball with Gordon. Of course, if they didn’t pad Deng’s deal up to $80 million, it wouldn’t have amttered. But that was only a small part of it.

I think his role played a big part in it. For a guy like Gordon, the second deal is the one where he can really net a lot of money if the market conditions are right and depending on how he does on his second contract. (See Rashard Lewis). His role is endangered on the Bulls, and for silly reasons. Gordon is a much better player than Hinrich, Hunter, Hughes, Sefolosha, etc. Yet he was still coming off the bench behind these fools at the beginning of the year (Sefolosha was starting and Hinrich was subbed in before Gordon off the bench!).

But this was also seen at the end of last year. Last year, at the trade deadline, Ben Gordon was averaging 20.2 PPG on the season. 20 PPG is a bit of a line of demarcation in terms of money in the NBA. After the trade deadline, Boylan the Clown threw Gordon under the bus.

The last month of the season? Gordon only played 22 minutes a game.

Why the hell would you want to re-sign with a team that is playing you less than half the game, if you know you can go to a contender and start? Go to say New York, and become the featured guy in the offense of the coach you wanted your team to sign, or team up with Wade in Miami? (Although Mario Chalmers has altered that situation a lot).

It’s really easy to understand why Gordon would want to leave. He was playing less than half the game at the end of last year, while being asked to take under what he was offered the previous year, despite giving the other guy a raise. Who here wouldn’t want to leave if that was happening to them? The NBA’s restricted free agency just didn’t make it possible.

http://www.dabullz.com

Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.

by Andrew7 on Mar 3, 2009 12:43 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

He won't reach the incentives

Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

Because the Bulls have done their financial planning on the basis that he won’t. The incentives were also considered unlikely at the start of the season, and his year has been awful, it’s hard to come up with any metric that he would not have met at the start of the season based on last years numbers that would now seem likely he’d meet now.

by dougthonus on Mar 5, 2009 7:26 PM CST up reply actions  

Perhaps it is more

insulting that Deng SIGNED the contract and then has sucked and made everyone look stupid for putting so much hope in him.

Maybe it is best not to be insulted by either of them though. I don’t think either guy went into it thinking, “I’m going to do this to insult the fans” be it getting their money and then sucking or not getting their money and showing everyone what they will miss when they are gone. Contracts can be hard to nail out and it is isn’t singly on the player to decide to take a monetary hit for the sake of the team. We are also talking about Jerry here and he pays who he likes, not necessarily who is best for the team either. If we are talking about doing what is best for the team Jerry would have split the money between Deng and Gordon and made it clear they were both equally important to the team instead playing favorites. It wasn’t like people were knocking on Deng’s door at that point any more than Gordon’s.

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 Mar 2, 2009 9:15 AM CST up reply actions  

Its not a relation

ITs not that if you have an x ammount of love for the bulls then you must have an x ammount of love for gordon. I am not a bg fan at all, but thats not saying that i hate the guy or anything. I do appreciate him being on this team, and ive always liked him being on the team. The contract things dont bother me so much if it wasnt that it comes down to my favorite player might have to booted because of contract reasons. Thonus was just getting to the point, in my opinion, about gordon being so valuable to this team, and how a guy who doeesnt know much about the team would regard gordon as what the media has sort of spun about gordon.

I like gordon, but im not pessemistic about the bulls future without him though.

On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!

by piccolomair on Mar 2, 2009 11:03 AM CST up reply actions  

To me a guy like Gordon

should have been able to be a positive for the Bulls as either a guy continuing with us or someone who would be a great asset in a trade. SOMETHING. The tone you hear from general fans is that he is garbage that should be put in his place and kicked out into the street. Hell, you have people here who wet their pants if he dares to shoot the ball in the 4th quarter because they have a storyline in their head where he is jealous and selfish etc etc. The bottom line is that he actually is a good player who Jerry has managed to dick around with enough we are likely to get zilch from him. And that is pretty unheard of for a player of his quality to go like that. I would be perfectly fine if we had managed to sign Gordon and trade him for something that could compliment Rose. I like him, but realistically not everyone will be with the team in the coming years. I just hate the idea we get nothing back for a consistently productive player.

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 Mar 2, 2009 12:37 PM CST up reply actions  

I think there is another reason why people dont like gordon

In general i think this is how its been for me, and it may be the same for other fans. No big news but im a hinrich fan, and it so happens that hinrich plays a similar position as gordon….now its never been that off the bat i hated gordon or any part of his game, but how many times has there been a situation that has been presented, especially this year more than any other, where a line has been drawn….gordon or hinrich. No matter where you stand in the initial argument, you must realize that negative comments towards hinrich create the need to defend hinrich, and then we create fallacies picking apart games and personalities and thus we have the negative spins on different players.

Sometimes its not as simple as people dont appreciate gordon or are so damn ignorant, its more that after having defend their own beliefs or players for so long, suddenly this guy named gordon, no matter what kind of person or player he actually is, he becomes a sort of a pest, and that leads to people seeing his actions in negative light.

Note: THis is not a call to arms in the hinrich vs gordon debate, i was just offering another reason for why gordon is looked down upon by some fans aside from just being general fans and being ignorant….

On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!

by piccolomair on Mar 2, 2009 3:22 PM CST up reply actions  

This wasn't a problem

until we drafted Rose. Which should have had Hinrich traded away pronto. Because he is an asset and there was always going to be tension since his is a big ? at the SG position and Rose was awesome from day one at Hinrich’s natural position. This year has definitely been the worst when it comes to tensions among the guards. It will be over after this season, one way or another.

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 Mar 2, 2009 4:05 PM CST up reply actions  

I should add that

Hinrich getting hurt stalled the whole “can he become a SG or not” debate longer than it should have gone on.

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 Mar 2, 2009 4:11 PM CST up reply actions  

"It will be over after this season, one way or another."

True that…..

On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!

by piccolomair on Mar 2, 2009 4:48 PM CST up reply actions  

I am not pessimistic...

…at all. Those 15 shots a night will be easily replaced…perhaps by someone who can bring more than just the ability to score…

I think I may have missed this, but what has media really spun about Gordon? I know Sam Smith thinks he should be scoring sixth man, but what about McGraw or KC, have they really stated an opinion about Gordon, his role or the contract he should command? And that is an honest question, because I haven’t felt like the media has Ben Gordon out to be a bad guy or bad team mate…well maybe once, when he said dirty words to Vinny, but even Ben said that was a non-issue right away…

" I've looked at these numbers and decided the #1 problem

is that Ben Gordon is selfish..." -your friendly bulls blogger

by Dionysus2.0 on Mar 2, 2009 10:14 PM CST up reply actions  

McGraw's a fan

but I don’t think he’s put a number out there.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Mar 3, 2009 12:03 AM CST up reply actions  

The shots will almost certainly be replaced.

The makes, however, not so easily.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 3, 2009 9:32 AM CST up reply actions  

It's the old "how much leash do you give the kid" argument

I look at it as two poles and a spectrum in between. Doug is probably closer to the “win now, play the vet” pole, and Matt seems to have the default position of “play the kid” unless he’s just absolutely and incorrigibly brutal on a particular occasion and it makes a lot of sense that the vet can pick things up.

Like, I think Doug made a pretty good point about Kirk coming in and dealing with Chauncy Billups pretty well. But to me, I can’t take that and extrapolate to “Kirk should be the default option in the 4th” or even that “Kirk should be the default stopper”.

Kirk should be the “break glass in case of emergency” guy. And on top of that, it has to be the kind of emergency he’s equipped to handle (eg not TJ Ford).

by Sports2 on Mar 2, 2009 8:17 AM CST up reply actions  

I like your spectrum idea

i think if kirk really worked on his shooting more than anything he could be a decent 6th man on this team. At times when his defense doesnt seem to be working, he needs to have some sort of offense…and again i dont completely buy this hinrich cant guard smaller guards thing, he did a good job on tony parker and devin harris and those are the two of the best quick guards in the league. I think he really underestimated tj ford and barea which is the reason he got burned…..its funny how the size thoughts are considered jokes against gordon but no one considers that in terms of a kirks defense. Kirk has guarded d.wade better than many in the league on a pretty consistant basis, and except for size, d-wade is way better in every way than tj ford…i think its just kirk underestimated some of the guards they went against and so he got burned.

On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!

by piccolomair on Mar 2, 2009 11:10 AM CST up reply actions  

Kirk is paid at least 40% too much for a sixth man,

(excluding the type of 6th men who play “starter” minutes).

Maybe we can (but probably not)?

by Granny Waiters on Mar 2, 2009 5:25 PM CST up reply actions  

umm thank you for that information....

On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!

by piccolomair on Mar 2, 2009 5:36 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't think Kirk should be the default 4th quarter guy

It just worked one game, it was tried another game and didn’t work. Then it worked again, then it didn’t work. Then we went back to Rose.

Against Indy, Rose was pretty brutal 1/9 from the field. He had 8 assists, but I believe 6 were in the first quarter. The previous game we had just won by going to Kirk in the 4th, and even if Ford is blowing by Kirk, you can’t tell me you honestly think Rose would do a better job regardless of the matchup.

Against NJ, Rose was a little better 4/9 with 5 assists, but Hinrich was 5/8 with 5 assists as well, and our really good play in the game was with Hinrich on the floor while Rose was on the bench.

I think as a general rule, Rose should be on the floor in crunch time, but in these two losses Rose wasn’t playing well at all. I wouldn’t like to see a scenario where Rose’s minutes per game start drifting below 30, and I’d prefer him to get used to playing in pressure situations.

For that reason, I’m okay if Rose had played instead of Hinrich, even if it was in the Denver game and it cost us a win. I’m just not upset with the reverse as long as it isn’t a persistent non-changing pattern.

by dougthonus on Mar 2, 2009 7:36 PM CST up reply actions  

It's a fair point, but...

You just beat a Denver team specifically because you put in Hinrich instead of Rose. That was one of the primary reasons we won that game. So the next day you figure you’ll try Hinrich again, it just doesn’t seem that crazy, i t didn’t work that time though.

I’d also add to the point, what would Rose have done instead of Hinrich on offense? Based on what he’d done the rest of the game not much at all. Hinrich over Rose in the fourth quarter seemed to really help the Bulls in a couple of big wins. Rose over Hinrich certainly helped the Bulls against the Rockets big time.

If you think the season is only about developing Rose, then he should play, but if you think it’s about winning games, then I don’t think it’s quite that clear cut. He’s by FAR the worst guard defender on the team, and the games where he’s playing passively offensively he’s not bringing that much to the table there either. He’s got the lowest TS% on the team of anyone who plays regular minutes, so his overall offensive ability is very up and down.

I have no problem if we play Rose over Hinrich in all important minutes with the point being that it’s more important to develop Rose, especially in key situations. I also have no problem with Hinrich coming in for Rose in a game where Rose isn’t doing anything and going for the win because the team wants to make the playoffs, and I see value in that. It’s not like Rose isn’t getting any clutch minutes or is hurting in overall playing time or anything, he’s getting tons of burn in both situations normally.

I also think that it’s important to send the message to Rose, if you’re lazy on defense your ass is going to sit in the fourth quarter. If you watch Gordon defensively his rookie year vs now, you’ll see what a tremendous difference there is. He’s still not credited with much of one, but his defensive intensity and fundamentals are significantly better. Part of that (IMO anyway) is that Scott Skiles forced Gordon to play defense to stay on the floor. VDN needs to do at least some of the same with Rose.

by dougthonus on Mar 2, 2009 7:27 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Recd

for being fresh (?)

On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, majoyenrac, Bullshooter and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light!

by piccolomair on Mar 2, 2009 8:29 PM CST up reply actions  

We did

just win the Houston game solely because we were playing Rose.
I do agree with the ‘play defense’ thing though. I’ve never understood why people are so down on Gordon’s defense, it’s adequate now. Rose can be an elite defender, he just needs to learn and needs to want it.

"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com

by Prevenge on Mar 2, 2009 11:14 PM CST up reply actions  

I agree with Doug that "if you're lazy on defense your ass (should) sit in the 4th quarter"

I also agree with Matt that the best way to learn is by being on the court during those pressure situations. Rose seems to have the ability to reach a new gear in crunch time, even after playing lethargically for most of the game, but I don’t believe he should be awarded entitlement minutes in every situtation and Kirk has been key in a few wins down the stretch as well.

The Houston win was not a one man show. Miller played great defense against Yao, Noah gave max effort and both Derrick and Ben scored 11 each in their amazing 23-3 finish. For the Bulls to win consistently they have to paly unselfishly and I beleive our young bigs should get the majority of floor time, not only for development purposes but because they play better than their substitutes.

Doug, I never miss your podcasts. You and Matt make a great team, with the most entertaining blog and podcast on the net each offering insights our other media whether broadcasting or print fail to bring (with the exception of good old Sam Smith, who I think would make a dynamite guest on Doug’s show). You 3 guys are a Godsend for us diehard Bulls fans because you all have a common denominator which makes your troika Number one by a wide margin. Your love/hate relationship with the Bulls is because you passionately care about them (in a manly way) and it is demonstrated with every post Matt leads us on, every column Sam writes, and every commentary Doug offers. Thanks for all your hard work and dedication. It has paid huge dividends for the rest of us.

If you can't answer a man's arguments, all is not lost. You can still call him vile names.
Elbert Hubbard

by Tyrusmancrush on Mar 3, 2009 12:35 AM CST up reply actions  

The question with Derrick is whether the effort is there.

If the effort is there, he should be the one in the game. If he’s loathing around the court, which we’ve seen him do in critical minutes multiple times, I think he should go on the bench. The problem is what do you want to do? Gordon and Salmons? Not enough ball handling. Hinrich and Gordon? The Denver game was a one time exception, Hinrich is historically one of the worst clutch players in the league. So by default, you’re back to Rose and Gordon on the court together, even if Rose isn’t giving a full effort.

http://www.dabullz.com

Chicago Bulls Blog and Forums. NBA Power Rankings.

by Andrew7 on Mar 3, 2009 12:49 AM CST up reply actions  

Doug should post here more

I go to realgm to read his (and Sham’s) posts, but that’s about it. If we could get those 2 guys over here consistently, this place would be seriously mega.

When I watch NBA games I often call the fouls before the referees do. Sometimes it’s a gift. Most of the time it's troublesome. - NBA Observer

by Illini15 on Mar 3, 2009 1:45 AM CST up reply actions  

It took me awhile to get used to the threading system here, so for awhile I thought it’d be more confusing than it was.

I’ll probably post more, especially when my life slows down a little more, and I have a little more spare time. It’s hard to really dedicate yourself to post in multiple places, and I’m pretty well integrated into realgm.

by dougthonus on Mar 5, 2009 7:31 PM CST up reply actions  

This is impossible to answer definitively, but...

….if Rose’s development is even hampered one smidgen, one iota, by taking him out (and recognizing that the confidence of winning is “development”, even if you’re, um, on the bench), isn’t it wrong to take him out?

Let’s say that it’s not even for sure, but there’s only a chance, even a small one, that Rose is a lesser player next year by sitting him, shouldn’t you play him?

I don’t believe (and this is speculation of course) that Del Negro sat rose to teach him a lesson, or that sitting him without teaching him is beneficial (because you could teach w/o sitting). Is Rose the type of person that if the coaches were teaching him and drilled into his head that he had to play defense, that he wouldn’t “get it” unless he was being benched? I don’t know (thus the speculation), but it doesn’t seem like it. That point makes sense as a logical and general excuse, but concerning the two involved specifically, Del Negro and Rose, I’m not buying it.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 3, 2009 9:41 AM CST up reply actions  

If his development is enhanced by being pulled for defense and realizing he needs to improve and give effort to stay on the floor then isn’t it wrong to leave him in?

I’m not saying either one is the case necessarily, you don’t know what he’s learning by being pulled, but I would bet whether VDN did it on purpose or not, Rose knows darn well that he’s being pulled because he’s not getting it done particularly on the defensive side of the ball.

I also think it will help teach Rose that he needs to be more aggressive as well.

by dougthonus on Mar 5, 2009 7:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Meh... I already heard better podcasts

Just kidding… It was a good talk. Keep the good work :)

by bull83 on Mar 2, 2009 9:25 AM CST reply actions  

Very nice - enjoyed it.

But comparing Larry Hughes to Luol? I hope that we don’t end up putting those two in the same category anytime in the future…

"The Zen philosopher Basho once wrote: 'A flute with no holes is not a flute, And a doughnut with no hole is a Danish.' He was a funny guy."

by Ugh It Live! on Mar 2, 2009 9:44 AM CST reply actions  

LOL at saying "people" give Thomas and Noah more slack than Deng...

…in their potential.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 2, 2009 10:55 AM CST reply actions  

Matt, that was the best

interview on the Bulls that I ever heard.

You are our voice.

by PricanStar on Mar 2, 2009 1:21 PM CST reply actions  

nice

now I can put a voice to the post.

"I guess I can’t do anything if you’re just irrational, but to point it out and move on."

- fundamentallysound

by J Theory on Mar 2, 2009 3:16 PM CST reply actions  

I'll stick with Optimus Prime as the voice of Blog-a-Bull

Confusion breeds success. If they don't know each other, opponents can't have strategy. GENIUS.

by Ozzie Montana on Mar 2, 2009 4:21 PM CST up reply actions  

I always had this Cobra Commander voice in my head

"I guess I can’t do anything if you’re just irrational, but to point it out and move on."

- fundamentallysound

by J Theory on Mar 3, 2009 7:42 AM CST up reply actions  

What is NBAO?

"I guess I can’t do anything if you’re just irrational, but to point it out and move on."

- fundamentallysound

by J Theory on Mar 3, 2009 8:48 AM CST up reply actions  

The guy who posts here

as “NBA Observer”.

Maybe we can (but probably not)?

by Granny Waiters on Mar 3, 2009 8:50 AM CST up reply actions  

gotcha

"I guess I can’t do anything if you’re just irrational, but to point it out and move on."

- fundamentallysound

by J Theory on Mar 3, 2009 8:51 AM CST up reply actions  

lol

When I watch NBA games I often call the fouls before the referees do. Sometimes it’s a gift. Most of the time it's troublesome. - NBA Observer

by Illini15 on Mar 3, 2009 12:34 PM CST up reply actions  

Even though it's retarded to say it

I’m going to anyway: Interesting stuff Matt.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....

by pookeyguru on Mar 2, 2009 5:42 PM CST reply actions  

Just wanted say thanks again for doing the show

Again, apologies for cutting you off so quickly again, I know the show overall was long, but I usually like to hang out and BS for a bit afterwards and get to know people, but I just couldn’t that day.

I just wanted to say the show got great reviews from all my emailers so far. I’ve had a number of emails from regular listeners who said you were outstanding, and it was the best interview I’ve down on the show though I tend to consider it more of a guest host than an interview, since I like the back and forth, but your views

Finally, on the Ben Gordon being for die-hard fans thing, I almost went back and edited that out, but my daughter had a 105 fever the day before, and it was kind of a crazy weekend leading into a crazy week for me. I actually didn’t mean it in such a way that “only die hard fans like Gordon” or that “only knowledgeable fans like Gordon” as if to imply Gordon detractors don’t have a leg to stand on.

I didn’t mean the comment to go so far as “only a stupid person wouldn’t like Gordon” which is sort of how it came out. I simply meant it as the casual fan will generally have a poor opinion of Gordon due to the way he’s presented by our local sports radio stations where most of the hosts don’t seem to regularly follow the team. The fan who watches all the Bulls games tends to appreciate Gordon far more (though I know plenty of intelligent die hards who don’t like Gordon as well).

Anyway, I hope we can do it again sometime, it was a lot of fun.,

by dougthonus on Mar 2, 2009 7:12 PM CST reply actions  

Great podcasts, Doug

I listen to them pretty frequently

by NittanyCub on Mar 2, 2009 8:50 PM CST up reply actions  

That makes sense.

I was trying to figure out what you mean because I didn’t get the vibe how others were interpreting it—that you’re an idiot or not a true fan if you don’t like Gordon—but I couldn’t put my finger on it.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Mar 3, 2009 9:45 AM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Chicago Bulls.

FanPosts

Links

"Best NBA Blogroll"
-- Dan Shanoff

The Essentials:
Bulls.com
NBA.com
HoopsHype
BallHype
ESPN.com NBA

Workin' the Beat:
KC Johnson - Tribune (blog)
John Jackson - Sun-Times (blog)
Mike McGraw - Daily Herald (blog)
Nick Friedell -  ESPNChicago.com
Sam Smith - Bulls.com
Aggrey Sam - CSNChicago.com


More Bulls Blogs/Forums:
Thank You Isiah
Chicago Bulls Podcasters
Bulls Confidential
By the Horns
Bullish Thoughts
Chicago Bulls KY
Pippen Ain't Easy
RealGM Bulls Forum
SportsTwo Bulls Forum

Blogging the Association:
(League Wide)
True Hoop
HoopsAnalyst
Give Me the Rock
The Basketball Jones
NBA Fanhouse
Hoops Addict
SBNation.com - NBA
ProBasketballTalk
ShamSports
Ball Don't Lie
The Painted Area


(Team-Centric)
Queen City Hoops

Bobcats Baseline
Knickerblogger.net    
Sixers' Shots
Forum Blue and Gold
SuperSonicSoul
Hornets247.com 
SonicsCentral.com 
ClipperBlog.com  
The Nugg Doctor
Loy's Place
Reds Army
Need4Sheed
THE WIZZNUTZZ
RaptorsForum.com
TWolvesBlog.com
Spurs Dynasty
David's Memphis Grizzlies Blog
The Bratwurst
Sixers Journal
Sixers 4 Guidos 
3 Shades of Blue  
CavsNews.com
RaptorTalk
Deceptively Quick
TheLakersNation.com
Utah Jazzer Blog
KnicksDefense.com
T. Jose Caldeford
Hoopinion
RaptorBlog.com
Suns @NBAWeblog.com
The Cowhide Globe
Stepien Rules
Project Spurs
Raptors Republic
Dino Nation Blog
Lake Show Life
Valley of the Suns
The KnicksBlog.com
Big Lakers Fan
Roundball Mining Company
Cavs: The Blog
48 Minutes of Hell
Daily Thunder
Piston Powered
The Two Man Game
PistonsNationBlog.com
Cowbell Kingdom.com
Hot Hot Hoops
NetsAreScorching
Celtics Hub
Orlando Magic Daily
Philadunkia
Truth About It
Always Miller Time
Slippery When Nets
Eight Points Nine Seconds
Howlin' T-Wolf
Red 94

MSM NBA blogs:

Ira Winderman (Heat)
Jason Quick (Blazers)
IndyStar.com (Pacers)
Michael Cunningham (Hawks) 
Full-Court Press (Pistons)
Jonathan Feigen (Rockets)
Rick Bonnell (Bobcats)
Jazz Notes
Chris Herrington (Grizzlies)
Orlando Sentinel
Michael Lee (Wizards)
Alan Hahn (Knicks)   
Doug Smith (Raptors)
Marc Berman (Knicks)
Al Iannazzone (Nets)

For the Statheads:
Basketball-Reference.com
APBR Discussion
Knickerblogger's Stat Page
82Games.com
Doug's Stats
Popcorn Machine
HoopData


Other Resources:

HoopsHype Salaries
SportsTwo Salaries
ESPN.com Trade Machine
RealGM: NBA Draftpicks Owed
ShamSports.com Salaries
DraftExpress

 


Guy who does everything

Blogabull_s_small your friendly BullsBlogger