Page 1 of 9
KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:29 am
by HomoSapien
Not sure if this is thread worthy, but obviously there will be an interest in this. I emailed K.C. Johnson the following question:
The Bulls benched Gordon for Chris Duhon for a season and a half. They benched him for Larry Hughes for 25 games. They offered him much less money than Luol Deng, and then took away his offer the moment he was ready to accept it. This off-season Reinsdorf was quoted as saying that Gordon wouldn't have been able to get playing time behind Rose, Hinrich, and Salmons. Gordon is arguably the best player amongst this group, and currently has the highest PER. Are the Bulls brass just delusional or are they just really disrespectful towards him?
His response:
Disrespectful to him. Never understood their stance with BG. As for the pulled offer, I've heard they decided they made a mistake even offering it to him so even if he said he wanted to sign it, the offer was going to be pulled.
Re: Bulls May Have Pulled Offered From BG Before Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:30 am
by sdeezy
F*** management
Re: Bulls May Have Pulled Offered From BG Before Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:33 am
by Ajosu
There's got to be some explanation. Got to be...
Re: Bulls May Have Pulled Offered From BG Before Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:35 am
by jax98
Seriously. That's just downright poor management.
This also proves my biggest fear; They're stubborn to a fault.
Because let's be honest. Gordon was the most talented player (Rose excluded) the Bulls had since MJ. Maybe you throw Elton Brand in there, but then that's it. And he was only here for two years anyway.
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:36 am
by sonny
Maybe BG James Johnson'd all of management's women
Re: Bulls May Have Pulled Offered From BG Before Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:36 am
by HINrichPolice
Ajosu wrote:There's got to be some explanation. Got to be...
It's called the Luxury Tax. That simple.
Re: Bulls May Have Pulled Offered From BG Before Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:37 am
by Ajosu
HINrichPolice wrote:Ajosu wrote:There's got to be some explanation. Got to be...
It's called the Luxury Tax. That simple.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the 6/54 contract would not have put us in the Luxury Tax, no?
Re: Bulls May Have Pulled Offered From BG Before Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:38 am
by sonny
HINrichPolice wrote:Ajosu wrote:There's got to be some explanation. Got to be...
It's called the Luxury Tax. That simple.
The team benching him for inferior players makes this more than a financial issue I think.
I mean, Larry Hughes?
Remember when Duhon shot about 23% for a couple of months.
Remember when Vinny said he would have to earn a spot over Sefolosha, the guy we traded for a late first round pick>
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:42 am
by da mayor
Good. Ben Gordon isn't worth that money. You're not winning any championship paying Gordon that.
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:44 am
by sonny
da mayor wrote:Good. Ben Gordon isn't worth that money. You're not winning any championship paying Gordon that.
A team won't win a championship paying a guy that gives us 20+ a game 9M a year?
But we'll win one paying a backup pg 9M? Or a non allstar sf 12M?
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:45 am
by jax98
da mayor wrote:Good. Ben Gordon isn't worth that money. You're not winning any championship paying Gordon that.
Right. Because we're surely winning a ring paying Hinrich big money
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:49 am
by Evil_Headband
The problem with re-signing Ben was that his cap-space would define your team for the next 5 years or so. I still think the flexibility is preferred even if that means a worse team for the next year or 2.
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:50 am
by fisher
Morten Jensen wrote:da mayor wrote:Good. Ben Gordon isn't worth that money. You're not winning any championship paying Gordon that.
Right. Because we're surely winning a ring paying Hinrich big money
That's irrelevant because the team is more than two years away from winning a ring (if they ever do).
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:51 am
by HomoSapien
fisher wrote:Morten Jensen wrote:da mayor wrote:Good. Ben Gordon isn't worth that money. You're not winning any championship paying Gordon that.
Right. Because we're surely winning a ring paying Hinrich big money
That's irrelevant because the team is more than two years away from winning a ring (if they ever do).
How can you make such a blanket statement?
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:52 am
by fisher
Evil_Headband wrote:The problem with re-signing Ben was that his cap-space would define your team for the next 5 years or so. I still think the flexibility is preferred even if that means a worse team for the next year or 2.
Agreed. Ben Gordon's a good player, but he's not special or an all star or anything.
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:53 am
by theanimal23
**** THIS TEAM
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:54 am
by theanimal23
da mayor wrote:Good. Ben Gordon isn't worth that money. You're not winning any championship paying Gordon that.
I hope this is your first and final post.
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:56 am
by fisher
HomoSapien wrote:fisher wrote:Morten Jensen wrote:Right. Because we're surely winning a ring paying Hinrich big money
That's irrelevant because the team is more than two years away from winning a ring (if they ever do).
How can you make such a blanket statement?
Have you watched this Bulls team play? More importantly, have you checked out the rest of the NBA lately? No moves we make (short of landing Bosh and Lebron through some miracle trade involving Deng, Rose breaking out into elite PG status, and landing top 3 guy in the lotto) will put us over the Lakers, Celtics, or Magic during the next two years.
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:59 am
by HomoSapien
fisher wrote:
Have you watched this Bulls team play? More importantly, have you checked out the rest of the NBA lately? No moves we make (short of landing Bosh and Lebron through some miracle trade involving Deng, Rose breaking out into elite PG status, and landing top 3 guy in the lotto) will put us over the Lakers, Celtics, or Magic during the next two years.
Right, but had we resigned Gordon and then done well in 2010 we may not have been two years away.
A starting lineup of:
Noah
2010 PF
Deng
Gordon
Rose
Is a team that can get to the finals.
Re: KC: Bulls Would Have Pulled BG Offer Regardless of Deadline
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:01 am
by waffle
Hum
that is pretty much how duck and I thought it might have gone down, piecing together the evidence, such as it was.