Re-sign Ben Gordon Poll

[LikeMike23]

I'll say what I've been saying: It doesn't matter if they sign him or not. Given that not signing aids in going after a major free agent in 2010, while not meaningfully damaging the team in the short term, I'd pass. So I voted "no."

However, you won't read me bitching about it if they do sign him. I'd lean towards not signing him, but I'm pretty much meh about the whole damn thing.

Big-time free agents in 2010 are not signing with the Bulls, if they miss the playoffs next year. Therefore, resigning Ben Gordon is very important because the Bulls are not a playoff team without him.

[DuckIII]

Big-time free agents in 2010 are not signing with the Bulls, if they miss the playoffs next year.

Maybe, maybe not.

Therefore, resigning Ben Gordon is very important

No its not.

because the Bulls are not a playoff team without him.

Yes they will be. My opinion rests on the belief that the Bulls won't miss a beat if Gordon leaves. I don't consider him to be a particularly consequential player, in either direction, when drawn out over an 82 game season. Especially post-Salmons trade.

[coldfish]

Yes they will be. My opinion rests on the belief that the Bulls won't miss a beat if Gordon leaves. I don't consider him to be a particularly consequential player, in either direction, when drawn out over an 82 game season. Especially post-Salmons trade.

If the Bulls have Hinrich, Salmons and a healthy Deng, they still make the playoffs without Gordon, IMO. In that situation, Gordon's role really is minimized to an extent where you have a bunch of quality players fighting for minutes. The minutes Gordon doesn't play get filled by other quality players.

My concern is that Hinrich will be traded for scraps and Deng will have lingering health issues regardless of what happens with Gordon. If both of those are true, I think retaining Gordon is the difference between Chicago making the playoffs and missing them.

[Cliff Levingston]

Cliff Levingston leans toward letting him walk even if he's only going to cost $9 mil per year on average. Cliff Levingston would hate to see us tie so much money in the 1-3 positions and lose out on a great big as a result. Gordon/Rose is far from an ideal back court so why (eventually) pay $25+ million anually for it?

[DuckIII]

My concern is that Hinrich will be traded for scraps and Deng will have lingering health issues regardless of what happens with Gordon. If both of those are true, I think retaining Gordon is the difference between Chicago making the playoffs and missing them.

I choose not to operate under the assumption that Deng will get injured when the question is whether to throw 50 million dollars at a player on a long term deal. Especially when that player, when the team is healthy, isn't terribly important to the record at the end of the season. Its a risk, I realize, but I wouldn't evaluate it that way.

As for Hinrich, if the Bulls were to dump Hinrich AND let Gordon walk then, yes, I'd fear they might not be a playoff team. Maybe.

But I just don't see it happening that way.

[bulletbill]

Cliff Levingston leans toward letting him walk even if he's only going to cost $9 mil per year on average. Cliff Levingston would hate to see us tie so much money in the 1-3 positions and lose out on a great big as a result. Gordon/Rose is far from an ideal back court so why (eventually) pay $25+ million anually for it?

Lose out on a big? You know the Bulls can easily dump Hinrich (who has decent value again) if necessary, PDX is just waiting for our call. Salmons is too old to extend (same age as Rip, who DET could get rid of for BG). It really makes 0 sense to lose Gordon, especially when Wayne Ellington was sitting there @ 26 and we took Taj. I would say the Bulls are not only prioritizing but banking on BG to return.

[GM_JAMES]

The Answer is no. He is too streaky and plays no defense. Plus, he scores away from the offense in ISO plays. That hurts other players stats because he isn't a play maker, It's make the three or bust with him. Plus, reinsdorf isn't paying a luxury tax on that guy. And last I checked they didn't even have 10 million to pay him, let alone 11.

LET THE GUY WALK...

[Woody Allen]

the Bulls can easily dump Hinrich if necessary

I think we can't be so sure about that one.

[Cliff Levingston]

Lose out on a big? You know the Bulls can easily dump Hinrich (who has decent value again) if necessary, PDX is just waiting for our call. Salmons is too old to extend (same age as Rip, who DET could get rid of for BG). It really makes 0 sense to lose Gordon, especially when Wayne Ellington was sitting there @ 26 and we took Taj. I would say the Bulls are not only prioritizing but banking on BG to return.

Well, almost for sure, Rose will be a max contract player. Once that kicks in, you're going to have a really hard time creating enough financial flexibility under the tax to be able to be ready to grab a great big man. Not only that but Noah is a up for extension next year and will need to be re-upped either then or the year after; that won't come cheap. On top of that, you've got Deng. If he can't shake the recent injury bug and mesh well with Rose, he could become quite the albatross. Nonetheless, without Gordon on the payroll (and perhaps even Hinrich as well) we'll still have enough room under the cap to offer a max contract.

In other words, if we have Rose and Bosh or Rose and Amare or even Rose and Millsap/Boozer/West locked in already, retaining Gordon would indeed be a no-brainer. But until then, Cliff Levingston would lean toward staying flexible and not committing too much money to a back court that's far from ideal.

[DJhitek]

I'd pay Gordon 11 million without blinking. That's just me though.

[#1TKfan]

I'd pay Gordon 11 million without blinking. That's just me though.

me too. he has been our leading scorer the past few years. make the deal.

[bulletbill]

Well, almost for sure, Rose will be a max contract player. Once that kicks in, you're going to have a really hard time creating enough financial flexibility under the tax to be able to be ready to grab a great big man. Not only that but Noah is a up for extension next year and will need to be re-upped either then or the year after; that won't come cheap. On top of that, you've got Deng. If he can't shake the recent injury bug and mesh well with Rose, he could become quite the albatross. Nonetheless, without Gordon on the payroll (and perhaps even Hinrich as well) we'll still have enough room under the cap to offer a max contract.

In other words, if we have Rose and Bosh or Rose and Amare or even Rose and Millsap/Boozer/West locked in already, retaining Gordon would indeed be a no-brainer. But until then, Cliff Levingston would lean toward staying flexible and not committing too much money to a back court that's far from ideal.

Thing is Cliff, I view Gordon as an asset (unlike 4 year older Rip that just got extended), so I want to lock him in, and dump Kirk, Salmons opts out after this year, and on top of that we have close to 25 mil in expiring. Gordon won't be an albatross if we can get rid of Hinrich for non-guaranteed deals, and start him off with the highest possible salary w/o hitting the tax. Perhaps get BG on a descending deal?

[theanimal23]

I'd give him Monta money (6/66). I don't see the Bulls giving more than they did last year. I hope that's enough. Gordon isn't the problem, even at that price. Its the other overpaid players on this roster.

[coldfish]

The whole situation is actually pretty complicated. I think a lot of people are stating their opinions based on assumptions that are unstated. I'll try to lay out the situation, as best I can:

There are really 4 slots that are in play here.
- Hinrich at $9.5M
- Gordon at some unknown amount
- Luol at $10.4M
- A max contract player at $15 to $18M
That's assuming that Tyrus is renounced and Salmons opts out.

Out of those 4 slots, the Bulls can have any 3 of them under contract next year. However, getting rid of Deng or Hinrich requires some team to give up mostly expirings for them.

Now, when evaluating the players, certain assumptions are being made regularly. How much will Gordon get? How healthy is Deng? etc.

Personally, if I ignore injuries, fit and contracts, I would rank them:
1. Max contract player
2. Deng
3T. Gordon - Hinrich
Basically, if you look at it that way, the Bulls just need to dump either Gordon or Hinrich. Gordon is the easier one, since he isn't even under contract.

Now, if I take fit, contract (assuming Gordon at an escalating $10M per year deal) and injuries into account, I would rank them:
1. Max contract player
2. Gordon


3T. Deng - Hinrich
Basically, when I look at it this way the team should be bending over backwards to get rid of Deng or Hinrich to keep Gordon while retaining space for a max contract guy.

In both cases though, I rank the max contract slot in 2010 as the highest value. That means I would dump any of the lower three if I had to in order to get the max contract slot.

Now, the last issue is that if the Bulls can *trade* their expiring deals this year for a stud, then there is no need to dump any of the players other than a minutes crunch problem.

[Ajosu]

Injuries are a huge factor. IMO, this should make your last ranking the most important one, coldfish. Maybe you should include "how one fits with Rose" in your rankings, too.

[theanimal23]

But Fish, even if you have a healthy Deng, IMO, Gordon is still better. Deng IMO is still living off the 06-07 season, specifically the Miami series.

I think it's simple -- Gordon or Kirk. There isn't room for both. The Bulls will not move Deng for the same reason why Kirk has yet to be moved. And the Bulls cherish Deng more than any other player. I hope he bounces back and is healthy. But even them, I'm pessimistic about his impact. It'll be 07-08ish -- fill in the stat sheet but the impact on the game isn't there.

I see Gordon gone. Most Bulls who get dealt or sign elsewhere usually become the 'enemy' for me, perhaps outside Brand/Artest (who I've always had a soft spot for), but I hope Gordon flourishes in his new city.

[Ajosu]

If it's between Kirk and Gordon...it's pretty clear Kirk should go. You don't build a contender by paying your backup PG 10million a year. The tough part is that Hinrich is under contract, while Gordon is not. But still, to build the right type of team, we need to get this right.

[AirP.]

If it's between Kirk and Gordon...it's pretty clear Kirk should go. You don't build a contender by paying your backup PG 10million a year.

Remember, it's up to JR to allow Gordon to be signed and he's got a history of overpaying defensive players and really valuing defense which isn't Gordon's strong suit.

Wonder if Detroit will play hard ball with Gordon by giving him a small window to sign a contract with them so they can move forward with reshaping that team. The longer they wait the less options they'll have this offseason as other teams make moves and signings.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

If it's between Kirk and Gordon...it's pretty clear Kirk should go. You don't build a contender by paying your backup PG 10million a year.

Lucky for us Kirk is making less than 9 million a year.

[BrooklynBulls]

Wonder if Detroit will play hard ball with Gordon by giving him a small window to sign a contract with them so they can move forward with reshaping that team. The longer they wait the less options they'll have this offseason as other teams make moves and signings.

Ben Gordon, 99% chance, will sign a contract 1st day of free agency. They have a week to work out the contract. UFA's that are sought after do not stay UFAs for very long.