Bulls wanted to dump Gordon no matter what?

Based on a realgm user's email to K.C. Johnson:


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?


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.

I hereby retract everything I just wrote in the last article, at least in regards to anyone who believed the above.   Reading this really angers me, but my man coldfish sums it up on realgm really nicely in that thread.

The defense was fine with Gordon at SG. Many people kept pointing
this out over and over and over. There are 3 physical facets to
defense, speed, height and strength. On two of those characteristics,
Gordon was exemplary. He didn't get backed down and he didn't get
beaten with speed. The problem with the Bulls defense is at PG, because
Rose sucks and in the paint. That's why the Bulls defense is worse this
year than last, despite changing the 2/3 to Salmons/Deng. The 2/3
defense wasn't the problem.

The Bulls could have given Gordon
$9M to Gordon and forgot about the SG position for 6 years and dealt
with more pressing problems.

The Bulls **** up. I really don't
see how this can be debated. Right now, Hinrich isn't in Gordon's
league as far as contribution and they are paying him the same amount
and likely will for several more years.

This was one of the worst personnel evaluations I have ever seen in professional sports.



Leave a comment
  • Coldfish never disappoints.

    If this truly did happen, I wonder if management actually have any interest in retaining talented players or they're just interested in retaining players who fit preference personality-wise.

  • In reply to MortenJensen:

    Exactly right. And when you talk about "preference personality-wise" you should include Paxson in that assessment as well as players The biggest mistake this franchise has made was hiring Paxson instead of going out and getting a proven talent evaluator like Geoff Petrie. The only reason I can think of for hiring Paxson is that he was a nice guy, loyal, and JR was comfortable being around him. Sort of like how you select a pet.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    The sad thing is that there is no chance Paxson/Foreman get fired any time soon. Remember how highly Reinsdorf spoke of Paxson personally when there were rumors last year that he might quit? The two have a very close personal relationship dating back to the early 90s.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    Not really a shock.

    The Bulls have valued "jib" over talent since Paxson took over. This poor decision has lead to many of the Bulls' woes and the finger should be pointed squarely at John Paxson.

    Hinrich? Lock him up. Heck, he was announced last and had the role of "bulls star" and "build with Kirk" for years.

    Deng? Lock him up.

    Gordon. Persona non grata. And he's the best of the bunch.

    Heck, go back to Jamal Crawford. Strange watching him drop 29 on the Bulls the other night with ease as Paxson's gang of fools can't get the ball in the hoop.

    Nothing really new here. Heck, many Bulls fans didn't like Gordon either. There were plenty on the Bulls message boards that would bad mouth him and plenty of fans at the UC who unleashed a torrent of boos on the poor lad when he returned to the UC.

    Sigh. What a mess. Fire Paxson.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    Also, why the outrage now?

    It was clear last year when they traded for Salmons and Miller that it was the likely end of Gordon.

    It was probable that Salmons would regress back to his usual self and that last year's production was the anomaly.

    It was pretty clear that Rose can score pretty much via taking it to the rack and the mid range J. We all know Kirk's game (pretty lousy really since he got married!) Deng is no world beater.

    Ben Gordon was labeled as "selfish" and "ballhog" even though he was one of the most efficient scorers on the team. He was labeled as "bad on D" even though he wasn't... he was average on D which is a big difference.

    Just look at the Bulls payrolls over the last 8 years and you will see the sour fruits of woeful management and and the squandering of millions upon millions of dollars. The Bulls don't pay the right guys the big money. Year after Year. The guys making the picks on who should play and stay with the Chicago Bulls are messing up. Year after year.

    Fire them. Fire them now. Should have fired them years ago.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    This is an answer to the people who ask why this still bothers a lot of posters/fans:

    Because the sort of cements the fear many fans had. That Chicago was all about their own preferences, and completely ignored talent, fit (playing wise), and offensive contribution.

    We now know the Bulls believe wins can come with just a defensive roster (they can't), that positions don't matter (they do), and talent is a distant priority as long as you're making money and the players on the team fit management from a personality stand-point.

    Name me one team in the NBA with the same philosophy. Obviously you have owners who are driven on the financial aspect. But where is the owner who lets a 20 point scorer (on 57 TS% no less) walk for nothing based on a personal matter?

  • In reply to MortenJensen:

    "Name me one team in the NBA with the same philosophy"

    There isn't one. "The Right Way" has been a backwards NBA philosophy from day 1.

    Heck, this is the team that just flat out gave away JR Smith who is a pretty productive player for the Denver Nuggets.

    Jerry isn't going to pay the tax and all the money is locked into Kirk, Deng and Brad Miller this year. The mis allocation of payroll resources the last 8 years has been deplorable.

  • In reply to MortenJensen:

    The things wrong with this year's team is Miller(got old) and Salmons(maybe can't be a no. 1 option) not playing up to last year's level, injuries to Tyrus, Kirk and Rose, and the lack of depth because Hunter just got old and Pargo hasn't recovered from his injuries from last year. Look at what Gordon has done for Detroit, nothing. When healthy and Miller and Salmons playing better, I like this years team rather than last years. I see 5 games we should have won if we had more depth.

  • In reply to madskills:

    Excuse me but Hunter did not "just get old." He was old and finished when they signed him. Truly amazing when you think of it. And if Pargo didn't recover from his injuries why do you sign him at all? These two signings alone are evidence enough as to what douche bags Forman and Pax are.

  • In reply to madskills:

    If I remember correctly, around this time last year Hunter was out of the league and trying to stay in shape by running with his son's cross country team.

    Now he's the team captain.

    Not really shocking that its a bad one.

  • In reply to madskills:

    I still dont think Gordon was worth the big contract...not saying Luol or Kirk are earning their money either and we obviously are missing Gordon. But big picture is this team that much better with him this year? I dont know any more. All this losing makes it easy to 2nd guess everything....what station are the Blackhawks on :-)

  • In reply to madskills:

    Egh I dont like to live in the past, what happened happened. If we land a big free agent in the summer all will be forgotten and if we dont well than heads will start to roll.

  • In reply to madskills:

    Wrong. Heads will not roll. At least not Gar/Pax. That is the problem. At best, they will overpay second tier talent and the Bulls will be fighting for a playoff spot.

  • In reply to madskills:

    Wrong. Heads will not roll. At least not Gar/Pax. That is the problem. At best, they will overpay second tier talent and the Bulls will be fighting for a playoff spot.

  • In reply to madskills:

    Wrong. Heads will not roll. At least not Gar/Pax. That is the problem. At best, they will overpay second tier talent and the Bulls will be fighting for a playoff spot.

  • In reply to madskills:

    Wrong. Heads will not roll. At least not Gar/Pax. That is the problem. At best, they will overpay second tier talent and the Bulls will be fighting for a playoff spot.

  • In reply to madskills:

    Wrong. Heads will not roll. At least not Gar/Pax. That is the problem. At best, they will overpay second tier talent and the Bulls will be fighting for a playoff spot.

  • In reply to madskills:

    "First, teams that don't care about character rarely win. Don't mistake this decision with a character one IMO. Gordon was a high character guy who worked tremendously hard"

    Doug, I agree to some extent, but do you think the Lakers cared about character when they signed Artest? Or when the Bulls signed Rodman back in the day? No...they signed those guys because they were good at basektball...

  • In reply to madskills:

    I know that we are not supposed to call people names, however, this guy is a clown plain and simple.

    Anyone who calls any aspect of Gordons defense exemplary should immediately have his head examined and never be allowed to comment on any sporting event in the history of the world ever again.

    Anything and everything he says is completly invalidated by his comment. No one has ever backed him(Gordon) down, lets ask Chauncey Billups just for starters. No one has ever beaten him(Gordon) with speed, lets ask Lindsay Hunter about practice every day just for starters.

    That is the problem with the Gordon appologists, because you are in love with his one and only "exemplary" skill you not only overlook all of his faults, you dedicate your entire life to justifying them as not being significant nevermind downright awfull.

    Gordon may not have been "the problem" with the Bulls defense but on defense, just like the author of this blog Gordon was, is and always will be a clown.

    Finaly, I know that the Bulls play right now is dreadful, but Gordon wouldn't have changed a thing, just as it didn't for the past 5 years. We suck without him and would suck with him. The Bulls have overated thier talent for years, and are nothing more than a collection of mediocre talent.

    Management has to be held accountable, Paxson pretty much has to go, especially if he doesn't hit a home run in 2010.

  • In reply to madskills:

    It's funny how often times the perception defies reality. Is life really like a movie where there's always a good guy who's fighting the system or a bad guy who fools everybody, and secretly gets away with his dirty deeds? Sometimes you just get inconsistent boneheads otherwise known as human beings.

    Look at Kobe Bryant. Whether he really did something terrible or just foolish in his personal life we'll never really know. What about Michael Jordan? He was fooling around on his wife, and then the woman was stalking him if I'm not mistaken. Then he decides it's cool to spend time with a notorious gambler with mob ties while he's playing competitive professional sports the night before a big playoff game?!

    Course since they were/are superstars after the initial headlines do we really care? Hell no. All we care about is who is better Kobe or Michael. Please.

    Ben Gordon is no superstar. He's an at times exciting player who also has off games where he doesn't look like he belongs in the league. That's why we have to stay mired in a constant assessment and reassessment of his game and him as a person. It's like the wife from a middle class family who thinks they're upper class, and she marries Marty Mediocrity. And then everybody in the middle class/average people have to lambaste in their fantasy disappointments about how Marty could have had the(championship/all star) promotion if he just wouldn't be so absent minded or obnoxious what have you. Can we just get over the obsession with a symbolic image/effigy we want to endlessly use as a catharsis to bitch away are own crummy short comings in our lives we have to deal with/hide from?

    In reality Ben is a fallible character just like so many of us average Joes. At times he lights it up like Jordan, but he's also a career 41% FG shooter and shot a miserable 38% in last years playoffs. Can't we just say he was a nice guy, but who also could be stubborn/had his faults. And at times he was entertaining to watch, but every other game like in the Boston series he'd fall flat on his face. If he were really a "star" contenders would have at least been inquiring about him over the summer. Instead the phone was pretty quiet except from currently mediocre teams like Detroit or worse.

    Ben Gordon. Willy Lowman. Rest In Peace.

  • I might just be done with this team.

  • The pure hatred Reinsdorf displayed for this fantastic player is astounding.

    Remember also when Gordon took the qualifying offer last summer, that Reinsdorf told him to remain professional and not become a problem. That was another slap in the face to Gordon, who is one of the most professional players in the league, even after the constant displayers of disrespect by the organization.

    In the end i'm real happy for Ben Gordon, who got away from this garbage and is playing for a classy organization.

  • Im guilty of making this threat before...okay many times : )
    Usually its just out of frustration in really really wanting the Bulls to succeed.
    How could I root for anyone else though? Id be better off giving up bball alltogether, because even if you switched teams, you'd know you were a Bulls fan at heart, just a traiter !

  • Its really a commentary on sports in this city in general. We love outdated philosphies...the Bears refuse to accept that its a passing league and continue to say, "were a running team"...the Bulls think you can win without scoring points, and the Cubs build a roster around power, instead of speed and defense. No suprise, they all suck.

    The Bulls continue to show they care more about character than winning. I dont want a team of hardworking losers. This also may explain why they didnt even glance at AI...I know, I know, you guys think that was a dumb comment, but I think it would have at least kept us relevant this season.

  • Did you watch the Bulls / Hawks game this week?

    Likely no, since he torched the Bulls.

    He'll be getting 6th man consideration this year. He
    has an 18.1 PER on one of the best teams in the east. Playoff bound baby.

    He was a good player on a bad team with the Knicks. At least Larry Brown thought so.

    Kirk rots on the pine collecting his fat check. Paxson flounders.

    Paxson is bad. Just look at the multi year track record. Time to fire him. How many years are you going to give the guy? A decade? Two decades?

  • Well I don't like being right about these types of things but I always thought JR was negotiating in bad faith with BG. Just like the bad faith statement Gar made after the playoffs that signing BG would be their top priority despite not even making him an offer. You can't trust anything this group of greedy idiots says, certainly not that they would be willing to pay for a winner. Simply, the bulls won't get good till JR dies.

  • Yah, well, the thing is, that trade really juiced the team last year.

    Salmons and Miller made the Bulls a better team and gave us our "historic" and "memorable" battle against the Celtics in the 1st round.

    Gordon was the best player on the team last year. The Bulls lost their best player, have not had steps up from anyone save Noah and have had regressions from Salmons, Miller and Kirk. That, along with a lame coach and bad management and you have the mess you have now.

    Gordon is not a superstar and the Bulls would not be markedly better with him on the team this year either.

    He's not *that* much of a difference maker and wasn't asking to be paid nor is he being paid like one.

    Guys like JR Smith, Gordon and Crawford are all good player, IMO. Their style just does into the corporate culture of the Paxson Bulls and they are not valued by the team.

  • What has Petrie done lately? Drafted Tyreke who is arguably the best player in the draft outside of Griffin. Drafted Jason Thompson who was the sleeper of that draft. Drafted Kevin Martin when no one else wanted him. Found a niche for Noc (sort of rhymes actually) and got rid of Miller who was done and Salmons who wasn't needed. May have overpaid a bit for Beno but paid a lot less than the Bulls paid for Kirk. Done a much better job at rebuilding that franchise and he has done it more than once. Please don't insult your readers by saying Pax has a better eye for talent.

  • He actually had a few pretty productive years for the Knicks as well. 15 to 16 PER pretty much every year. Hall of fame coach Larry Brown loved him.

    Its obvious now to all that he's good. He was just stuck on a bad team.

    Crawford is lighting it up on a far better team than Kirk, Paxson and the Bulls. Good for him, he deserves it.

    It was always clear as day that Crawford was a good basketball player.

    Once constant throughout all these years is that Kirk, Jamal, Gordon, Deng, Nocioni, Curry, Chandler, JR Smith... all of them... none were superstars.

    People can choose to obsess about Gordon if they choose. He's good but not great as well, just like all the players the Bulls let go and the ones they chose to keep.

    Gordon is currently an 18PER player on a below .500 team. Good but not great.

    The Bulls would still likely be average to bad this year with Gordon, assuming the Salmons/Miller decline and Hinrich/TT injuries.

  • I dunno. Maybe this is what wanting a divorce feels like. I love the team and the good times it's brought me over the years, but I know I neither like nor respect the people in charge and there's little prospect for that to change. Their values and interests aren't just different than mine, they're incompatible.

    I'm totally cool with a team not wanting to pay the luxury tax every year. I'm totally cool with a team that's in business to make money.

    I recently did a pretty detailed analysis of the Bulls in contrast with other NBA teams as investments. I was quite surprised that, although the Bulls are frequently knocked for their profit-first mentality, the Bulls didn't necessarily look like the most attractive investment out there. The Bulls are one of the most profitable investments in the league, but they're not far out of the range of other many other NBA teams- the Lakers, Pistons, Rockets, Suns, Spurs, etc. The Bulls represent one model of extremely risk averse profit-taking, but the lesson was it's also very profitable to field a good team.

    The kicker is those those teams have all been extremely profitable while winning. They're in business to make money too. To varying degrees, I accept that winning is secondary to making money. But in the question is how much.

    With most teams, I think ownership values winning as somewhat secondary to profit, but ownership strongly values both. With the Bulls, however, the impression I get is they value profit first, some sort of personal preferences second, and then winning is a pretty distant third.

    And that's not for me. Especially when the personal preferences include things like treating a player and team member who's brought me a lot of enjoyment over the years like garbage. And simultaneously rewarding and lavishing praise on a guy... to the extent of invoking a father-son relationship when talking about him... who's ultimately been a fairly ineffective employee.

    It's not even that I dislike loyalty and think it shouldn't play a role. But this team's sense of loyalty is warped as all get out.

    What I want is
    1. A team that is out to profit... but understand that long-run profitability is tied to winning. You can live off past successes for a long time, but not forever.
    2. A team that values loyalty... but recognizes that loyalty ought to be earned, not doled out on personal whims.
    3. A team that values winning, and recognizes that evaluating talent and making sound decisions is paramount to long-run success and profitability. That starts at the top. If the team truly acted as an excellent business, selecting good management and rewarding success, it would be just as profitable but it would also win more.

    This team is content to coast on its past status and it's current home-grown cash cow. It's not that they want to lose, but they've been lousy at putting together a winner and worst of all don't feel much incentive to change.

    Sorry for the rant...

  • We get the point john :)

    The basic problem isn't that the Bulls haven't spent enough, it's that they've spent poorly. They've repeatedly rewarded the wrong people from top (Pax) to bottom (Lindsey Hunter).

    In most businesses, at least most successful ones, when the people at the top make bad decision after bad decision, they're replaced. When it comes to this team, the people making bad decisions are the owner and a man the owner has said is "like a son" to him. So... don't hold your breath.

  • In reply to Sports2:

    That is really the crux of the problem. Paxson likes to mouth off about "accountability" but after years of mediocrity he gets promoted. If Reinsdorf truly ran his business in a rational manner Paxson would have been gone a long time ago. Yes, he is like a son- Fredo Corleone.

  • In reply to Sports2:

    Why all this Ben Gordon love? If I remember correctly he is a great three point shooter but doesn't do anything else spectacular.He does not have a post up game, does not defend or handle the ball all that well. I think ben could be a very good 6th man on a very good team but i don't think you will win championships with him being your main scorer. If you look at stats his efficiency rating is only a 14 not very high for your go to guard.

  • "The guyis a straight chucker. He's not efficient offensively nor does he play defense."

    Now you sound like one of those Gordon haters! :)

Leave a comment