Contract extension talks with Deng stall, thank goodness... maybe

CSN Chicago reports that contract extensions between Deng and the Bulls have stalled. Deng was looking to get an extension done this summer.

Here's a snippet from Deng's camp

“We were optimistic,” the source said of the mentality Deng’s camp had heading into the late August meeting, approximately two weeks ago. “Our goal was to get an extension done this summer. If that’s not what they want to do, so be it.

“We’re not upset, Luol isn’t upset. We’re just looking forward to this season and next summer,” continued the individual, who acknowledged that Bulls management expressed how much they value the two-time All-Star, even stating their desire to see him retire in a Bulls uniform. “They were willing to wait and risk losing him next summer as an unrestricted free agent.”

CSN reported a rival GM placed Deng's value at around 4/48 million dollars earlier this summer. While I have no idea what Deng was asking for in an extension, 12 million a year seems like a decent guess. I doubt he was asking for eight, and if I'm the Bulls there isn't that much incentive to extend him now.

However, there's a tiny bit of incentive. The Bulls can actually only extend Deng for three additional years vs paying him an additional five years as a free agent or matching the offer of another team of four years [Deng has no obligation to accept a matched offer as he'll be unrestricted].

If they feel highly likely to extend him at the end of the season, doing so now will save them at least one season of guaranteed money, and with Deng's age, that's probably a good thing.

So a lack of extension right now is probably a good move under the condition the Bulls don't extend Deng at all, but a bad move if they extend him next summer anyway, similar to his last extension where they waited a year and ended up adding one additional season and 14 million on to the total.

Now I've been pretty clear on my opinion that Luol Deng is not a difference maker, and unless the Bulls are willing to go full repeater tax style to win this thing, spending 12 million on a guy who's not a difference maker isn't the way to go.

Stats aren't everything, and Deng does many things which don't show up in the box score. That said you can always find defenders cheap. Ronnie Brewer's hanging out for the minimum now. Tony Allen isn't paid big bucks, and neither was Bruce Bowen. If a guy can't produce offensively, you shouldn't pay him a truckload of cash.

Season PER TS% FG% 3Pt% Net +/-
08-09 14.7 51.1% 44.8% 40.0% -1.3
09-10 16.1 53.1% 46.6% 38.6% 7.9
10-11 15.5 54.9% 46.0% 34.5% 3
11-12 14.1 50.0% 41.2% 36.7% 1.1
12-13 15.1 50.8% 42.6% 32.2% -1.3

His PER is nothing special, his TS% is actually fairly awful outisde of 10/11, and his three point percentage has tanked [note, 10/11 was the first year he started shooting threes in any volume, so the higher percentage years earlier aren't really representative of anything].

His FG% has dipped to ridiculously low levels for a guy who's not really generating many free throws for you. Overall, it looks to me that since the wrist injury, Luol Deng's more or less been awful on offense. Granted, missing Derrick Rose sure as hell hasn't helped things for him, but it's not like Luol Deng was facing double teams with Rose out.

The Bulls distributed the ball fairly evenly across the court for shots, and Deng was rarely put in the position as primary shot creator.

In short, I get why the Bulls love Luol Deng as a player, but there are only two reasons to consider extending him:

1: There's no cap on spending at all
2: Luol Deng agrees to a deal in the eight million and under range

People throw out 12 million like Deng's contemporaries are Andre Iguodala and Josh Smith, but how about Kevin Martin or O.J. Mayo? I'd swap Deng and Martin without blinking. Martin actually can hit threes, draw free throws, and play on offense. Unlike Deng, Martin's shown he can score even when he's the focal point of the opposing defense and still do it efficiently.

I know some fan will talk about how Deng can play defense and rebound, but the Bulls have these traits in spades, and players who are good at these things typically don't cost much money unless they're playing center where tremendous defense has a vastly, vastly higher impact.

In the end, the Bulls need far more from their SF than Luol Deng provides. He's a very good basketball player, a starting caliber NBA SF, but he's not an eight figure salary guy, and the Bulls are likely going to need to match that to keep him.

If that's the case, then I'm all for it if Bulls ownership says "we're going into this thing Prokhorov style". However, I don't think that's likely. Not with the repeater tax coming up next season. The Bulls will take a step back if they lose Deng for nothing, which is a near lock if they don't extend him.

However, it's better to take a small step back and retain some flexibility than to lock yourself into a guy who will make it impossible to take a step forward for the next four years after you extend him.

So no extension? Probably a good thing as long as it doesn't lead to an even worse extension next off season.

Filed under: Free Agency


Leave a comment
  • Luol Deng is a good basketball player and deserves a descent extension, but not with the Bulls. I also agree with Doug that the Bulls need to move on from a guy who isn't a difference maker because hopefully from what I've seen Butler and Snell can spell Deng and be much more than Deng. Don't know what the Bulls can get for Deng if they try the trade Deng option, but the Bulls FO should definitely be looking at that option cause Dengs time in Chicago imo needs to come to an end.

  • In reply to Reese1:

    I think that will happen, Reese. I do not recall a dominant playoff series by Deng since the Skiles era.

    So the problem is, will there be a favorable cost/benefit to resigning Deng? I do not think so. For example, if the Bulls get Mirotic over for $5 million, even if he is not quite so good as Deng, he will be costing $7 or $8 million less for the season! Which is a much better cost to value ratio. That money might go to extend Butler or for an FA.

    Unless Deng is dynamite in the playoffs this season, it’s time for a change at his position, and I believe the FO will make it. Extending him now would be a big mistake.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Reese1:

    I agree. My biggest problem with Garpax is that they tend to let their players go for nothing. Last year they were close to getting the Kings draft pick. Or was it the Warriors? Anyway right before the draft the Bulls had Harrison Barnes visit. That let's me know they were in position to make the deal. But they were delusional in thinking that they needed to keep Deng. Last year was the last chance. So their best bet is to let him go, at least the money is off the books. Try to replace him through the draft. Amnesty Boozer... Only if the parameters of getting Mirotic are on paper and agreed on. Sigh they did the same thing with Ben Gordon.

  • In reply to Jon Becnel:

    +100 Jon, on the Harrison Barnes blown opportunity, and the habit of losing assets for nothing. See my post below.

  • In reply to Edward:

    Are you sure such a deal was on the table? Or is this just speculation based on a visit? They might have wanted to make a deal but that doesn't mean one was available.

    "Lose assets for nothing" is called the Free Agency market, each and every year. Making trades is never easy.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    +1000 to Roman F.

    Nobody says a word when the Bulls GET a player for nothing, Dunleavy or Robinson or Belinelli or Korver or Brewer or Boozer or......

    "Losing assets for nothing" is the dumbest complaint I've ever heard in my life. Like you said, it's called Free Agency.

    The Lakers just let Dwight freaking Howard go "for nothing", I guess they are idiots?

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    No, I don't think the Lakers are idiots. That's your opinion.
    My opinion is you are an idiot, Mr. Paducah Pud.

    The Lakers didn't let Dwight Howard go for nothing. That's 100% factually inaccurate. Howard was an unrestricted free agent that Lakers had no right to trade, nor right to match. The Lakers never possessed any rights in Howard to begin with. Orlando held the rights to Howard and could have chosen to hold him for another year and lost him for nothing. Instead, Orlando traded Howard and got 5 draft picks and some players.

    Being a superstar, the Lakers took a gamble on trading for a player who would become an UFA in one season. They Lakers made a good offer, and Howard chose Houston instead. The Lakers lost a gamble and lost a couple draft picks. They never "let Howard go for nothing."

    As I described elsewhere, my opinion is Bulls should have traded Deng during the window of Rose's ACL while Deng still had two season remaining on his contract. I'd prefer the Bulls at least got something for Deng rather than lose the 2004 No. 7 pick for nothing (along with earlier losing the 2004 No.3 pick for nothing). Orlando got something for 2004 No.1 pick Howard and did not lose him for nothing.

  • In reply to Edward:

    Actually, as usual, you are 100% wrong.

    The Lakers could have traded Howard any time between December 15, 2012 and February 21, 2013, which was last year's trade deadline.

    If they would have done their due diligence, they would have found out that Howard had no interest in resigning with them unless Kobe was leaving. Howard wanted him amnestied, which the Lakers weren't going to do.

    And they were idiots to hire D'Antoni if they expected to keep Howard, considering the fact that Howard is a horrible fit for D'Antoni's system. Howard even stated this summer that he wanted D'Antoni fired if he were to stay- big effing surprise there.

    Anyone who knows anything about the NBA knew that Howard didn't want D'Antoni hired in the first place- but the Lakers hired him anyway. Did they bother asking Howard what he thought before they hired D'Antoni??

    Cleveland let LeBron walk for nothing. Idiots.
    Toronto let Bosh walk for nothing. Idiots.
    Dallas let Tyson walk for nothing after he helped them win a ring. Idiots.
    Dallas let Steve Nash walk for nothing. Idiots.
    The Magic let Shaq walk for nothing. Idiots.
    Toronto let Tracy McGrady walk for nothing. Idiots.
    The Jazz let Kyle Korver walk for nothing. Idiots.

    But even though Deng sucks, is horrible on offense, and is grossly overpaid and not worth what he'll get this summer as a free agent- some team was supposed to give up anything of value to trade for him?

    If Deng has no chance to ever be the starting SF on a Championship team, why in hell would anyone trade for him?

    You can't have it both ways- Deng can't suck as much as The Mom's Basement Boys claim he does and at the same time have trade value.

    At least not in reality.....

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    That was hilarious...made my day. "The Mom's Basement Boys"....instant classic.

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    This is spot on. The same people who think Deng isn't very good also think we should have dealt him for a lottery pick. The same people who don't want to lose assets for nothing also think he's overpaid.

    I thought he was overpaid initially but in the end he earned his contract. I think he's good but not great, nobody would give up a lottery pick for him, and it's ok to lose him now. I'll be the first to criticize if they pay him this time, please no.

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    Why would any team trade for Deng? To save money that's why. For the Maloof's in 2012 it was all about getting their hands on the cash.

    So take back salary off the King's books (greater than Deng's salary) and Bulls could have had King's No. 5 pick whom they didn't want to pay $4 million annually to because they were selling the team and embroiled in a hatefest with Sacramento's fans and mayor.

    The Maloof's sold their 2012 2nd round pick for $3 million cash, during the season traded away that same 2012 1st round No. 5 choice in a cash savings deal, then sold the entire team at season's end - cashing out completely. The Maloof's would have pimped out the Kings cheerleaders if they thought they could get away with it.

    It was a rare opportunity to acquire a top draft pick in a pretty strong draft. But there was a price tag attached, a price Rein$dorf refused to pay. Given Rose's ACL causing 2012-13 to be a known lost season, I would have pulled the trigger. It would have cost Rein$dorf money upfront in 2012-13 and 2013-14, but saved him money in 2014-15 and 2015-16 when Barnes was still on his rookie contract and the bad contracts from Sacramento expired. And Bulls would have in essence traded/purchased a 2004 No. 7 for a 2012 No. 5.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    EVERYTHING was available from the financially desperate Maloofs in 2012!

    In 2012, The Maloof's sold their 2nd round pick for cash, later traded their 1st round No. 5 draft choice to save cash as well, then sold the entire team - cashing out completely.

    It was all about the cash for the desperate Maloofs and Rein$dorf should have let them win the finances of the trade - for he would have won the trade overall, BIG TIME. But it would have cost upfront money, as Maloof's wanted Rein$dorf to take back more salary than Deng's - i.e. Maloof's wanted to net cash from the trade. They were conducting a fire sale, but Rein$dorf wouldn't buy.

    Rein$dorf made a decision based more on finance than basketball, not the first time and won't be the last, imo.

  • In reply to Edward:

    "It was a rare opportunity to acquire a top draft pick in a pretty strong draft. But there was a price tag attached, a price Rein$dorf refused to pay. Given Rose's ACL causing 2012-13 to be a known lost season, I would have pulled the trigger. It would have cost Rein$dorf money upfront in 2012-13 and 2013-14, but saved him money in 2014-15 and 2015-16"

    So if it would have cost Reinsdorf money the first two years but saved him money the last two years, wouldn't he have broken even?

    I mean which is it, it was going to cost him money or save him money? Sounds to me like a break-even deal monetarily. According to YOUR OWN WORDS, anyway.

    I'm pretty sure the truth is that money had nothing to do with it, that "Reinsdorf" would rather keep Deng than trade him for an unproven rookie. And history says he's 110% right so far, since Deng was once again an All-Star after "Reinsdorf" turned down the deal.

    Of course I could be wrong, but according to you it wasn't money as he would have broken even. I'm assuming that like 99% of NBA coaches and front office people, he sees that Deng is a pretty damned good player.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    I tend to not believe that such a deal was ever actually on the table.

    In fact I highly doubt that anyone has ever been willing to give us a lottery or top ten pick for Deng, at least since he signed his current deal. Just like Gordon and Hinrich before them became virtually untradeable before the ink dried on their new deals.

    The reason that the bulls "lose assets for nothing" is that most of these so called assets are not particularly valued by the rest of the league, i.e. Gordon, Hinrich & now Deng. Nobody has ever been willing to give us anything of value for any of them. Which ends up making our only strategy to keep them to the end of their overpaid contracts and milk them for whatever they are worth.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    I couldn't agree more. I don't think any team values these guys as highly as the Bulls do, yet everyone thinks we should deal them for lottery picks. I'm glad the Bulls are passing this time, let's see if some other team really thinks as highly of Deng as his agent does.

  • Agree that Deng should only be signed if they can get him on a good deal ($9 or less I guess) . But Kevin Martin as a comp? Seriously?
    He is fading fast, and even in his prime he was maybe the worst wing defender in the league. He doesn't get to the line as much anymore (i would bet that deng shoots more free throws this year) which really has hurt his offensive game and has made him a pretty one-dimensional catch-and-shoot guy, since he doesn't pass, rebound, etc. Deng is an elite defender that you at least have to guard (unlike tony allen, etc) and gives you average offense. Martin is quickly fading from elite to average offensively, who even when he was good gave up most of what he added on offense on the defensive end.

  • In reply to aaaa:

    Kevin Martin had a TS% of 60% last year which is elite.

    He scored 18.2 points per 36 minutes which is higher volume scoring than Deng's career high.

    He didn't get to the line as much last year, because his role in OKC was the third option, something he did fairly fricken brilliantly by landing a TS% of 60% when given space and hitting a very high percentage of his three point shots.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Clearly a better scorer than Deng...but his free throw rate dropped at Houston, I think it is a sign of age, not role. His 3 pt % had a big jump, partly fluky, partly because of westbrook and durant. You seem to forget that your team doesn't have the ball 1/2 the time, and defense is as important as offense. He also does not pass or rebound, plus is 2 years older. Signing him to a 4 year contract at $7 a year will be prove to be a terrible deal, especially in year 3 and 4.

  • In reply to aaaa:

    Perimeter defense is vastly overrated. Interior defense is critical. This is why top notch perimeter defenders frequently sign sub-MLE contracts and great scorers still land huge deals even if they are lousy defenders.

    Signing Martin to a four year deal at 7 million per year may prove out to be a bad deal, but no where near as bad a signing Deng to a four year 12 million dollar deal next year.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    You may be right that deng at $12 and age 32 night be worse than martin at $7 and age 34. Troubling how he seems to be declining...Post-wrist injury (coincidence or not) his efficiency has plummeted. He should be at his peak...easy to forget he is younger than lebron and with alot less mileage.
    the quote i strongly disagree with is " I'd swap Deng and Martin without blinking." Do you remember Kyle Korver trying to guard Wade and James a couple of years ago? Martin makes Korver look like Tony Allen. Perimeter d is important even if not as important as interior d.
    Bottom line is iguodala>deng>martin, so he should end up signing somewhere in between the 48/4 and 28/4 deals those guys got. He signs for 36/4, you take him...otherwise let him walk.

  • In reply to aaaa:

    Completely agree with this. Martin is a good scorer but doesn't impact winning. Lu is more valuable. Dengs offensive game has dropped off a cliff the last two years. I felt his best year as a pro was 2010-11. (Ironically the only year under Thibs he didn't make the allstar team. However martin is one of the worst defensive players in the league. If Deng accepts 8 million per season I would probably resign him, any more and I would let him walk. Josh smiths 12 million dollar contract is a terrible deal and should not be used for comparison

  • If the Bulls signed Deng to a contract of any length beyond $10M, aren't we looking at the contract the same way people look at the Gerald Wallace contract?

  • Have to quibble with the Kevin Martin comparisons. Has he ever played in a meaningful game? Sure he can hit open 3's, but he can't guard anybody, and consequently he has to be hidden on defense. Deng is a guy who allows a team to hide others on defense, like Carlos Boozer. A team definitely couldn't play Martin and Boozer next to each other.

    Deng's offensive numbers are also pretty good for a guy who is asked to play more minutes than anyone should. His PER would be in the 18-19 range if he played 34 min/night as opposed to the 40+ he does. And he also put up those numbers playing through torn wrist ligaments and a fractured thumb. Why do you always fail to mention that, Doug?

    The bigger problems for the bulls are still at the 2 and what do you do with Boozer. And if they plan on starting Butler at 2, then he and Deng overlap too much probably. Are they going to amnesty Boozer and bring over Mirotic next year? Because Deng makes a lot of sense next to Mirotic as a guy who can slide over and play some 4's defensively that Mirotic might struggle with. The other problem is that while Deng isn't the problem, he isn't the answer either. So there isn't an upside and he shouldn't be paid as if there was one.

  • In reply to bullshooter:

    I liked your observation, 'Deng isn't the answer and he shouldn't be paid as if [he was].' Agreed.

    However, maybe he will kill in the playoffs this year. Then I would sign him for $8 million per year, which then he would no way accept. So it looks like "He gone'.

  • Close the Window, Turn Out the Lights

    Finally, a straight forward assessment of Deng. Thank you(Doug).

    Where is Deng now in his career? I mean he's only 28 right? But what about that proverbial window..? Looking at TS, PER to determine longevity of useful? Of course. Telling stats, but stats that sometimes tell you more then others.

    The window opens and closes on this fact::Championship caliber players with major roles shoot 45% and up. Don't think so? Look up every Championship core as in top three players for the last decade if you don't believe me..

    And that will never change. Guys like Pippen Centrl. Ark., Grant at Clemson, Paxson at N.D. shot in the 50's percentage range in college. A.C. Green ditto. Of course for bigs that is not as exceptional but still all those guys were legit shooters. Kerr whose specialty was threes was ridiculous at Arizona.

    If you look at the careers of most perennial All-Stars and NBA championship core players you'll find a window exists for their superior shooting proficiency which is needed as cogs in the gears that drive Championships. Jerry West defies the usual 5-7 or 8 year window with with what, over a decade of above 45% field goals(?!), absurd.

    Deng had a six year window of above 45% shooting. That's very good. In the right situation he might have been a champion as a third wheel. Though incomplete as an athlete and probably not an All-Star per se as he barely scratched 17ppg in a few seasons with the exception of his one lone perhaps "All-Star" season shooting .517 on 19ppg(18.8). The point being not debating whether he's an All-Star which is fairly meaningless in some respects, but whether his window of needed superior field goal production is closed.

    Deng has been fairly injury plagued in recent years, and his six year window of efficient scoring, which was fairly long as is, likely is closed. It's time to move him unless the Bulls are willing to spend and reward fans for past huge profits while also bringing in a second legit scorer for Rose, as in RIGHT NOW which Doug and most posters here feel is an 'impossibility'. And with the Bulls they are probably right.

    I didn't always like Deng. At times I thought his contract hold out with enabling Jerry was a bit spoiled and enabled. Still, for most of his career he was a battler and winning player who Bulls fans I'm sure are proud of.

    Good luck with your next $10 Million plus contract Luol. It was nice knowing you and watching you play. Come back any time, and make Chicago your real home for good whenever you decide to hang them up. Same goes for Joakim. He's(Lu) a player we all can welcome anytime when his days on the NBA hardwood are done. And, what the hell, thank you Gar/Pax while were at it for bringing these two exciting, character players to Chicago. Two things you didn't f-ck up. Congrats

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    "The window opens and closes on this fact::Championship caliber players with major roles shoot 45% and up. Don't think so? Look up every Championship core as in top three players for the last decade if you don't believe me."

    I don't believe you, because it's not a fact.

    2004 Pistons: Billups was their 2nd leading scorer by a good margin, the guy who was 3rd averaged 3.2 pts/game LESS than Billups. Billups shot .394 from the field......

    2006 Heat: Jason Williams averaged 12.3/game and 'Toine Walker averaged 12.2/game. Williams shot .442 from the field and Walker .435.

    2008 Celtics: Ray Allen was their 3rd leading scorer and shot .445 from the field.

    And that doesn't even take into account the actual fact that Deng might not even be a top-3 option in another year or two. I'm assuming that Rose will continue to be #1, with Mirotic and Butler fighting (figuratively, of course) fighting for the role of #2 scorer.

    And that's ignoring Snell and the MJ pick...

    So I guess now that means the window stays open??

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    Hey freak, Your radio station just called and wondered how the f-ck you have time to re-butt(as in butthead) every post within minutes or nary a couple of hours? Answer: you're a no life spaz.

    I just happened back since i was interested if anybody else found this point also of interest. Instead I get Myron Dorkowitz pointing to one exception out of a decade's worth of championship teams.

    No Myron, I didn't recently have the time to re-check all ten teams because I have a life. Still, the fact is that your one spaz insta response exception to the rule just shows how rare and unusual it is.

    And what the f-ck does Deng or any other players window of 45% field goal percentage production have to do with your spaz quest to "foil" other poster's statements such as mine about limited years of high field goal production anyway? Yes six years is a good run and his is likely over dink. He's been a shell of himself the last two years now, and the point is why spend all that money which some schlunk will pay him?

    By the way, nobody really wants to hear your weird ass comments out of left field about your narcissistic wife who probably was superior by a long shot from your decrepit little boy "you're wrong, you're wrong" nerd ass spaz fireback retorts. And even then she still probably was barely above being a knuckledragger like yourself.

    Really, just do everybody a favor with your hall monitor "corrections" and f- ck off.

    Jason Williams at 44% is an anal finger pointing nerd's rebuttal. You are a dork. And the only radio station that would hire a dipsh*t like yourself would be WDB-G(as in douchebag).

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    +100. He get's absolutely no activity on his own worthless blog so posts here on Doug's excellent blog, attempting to attract attention to his worthless self.

    He's the Paducah Pud.

  • In reply to Edward:

    I enjoy reading different points of view, and believe that's the idea behind comments. I think we all have someone who's POV we don't care for but he's not the same guy for everyone, it's Reese in my case.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Oh you care cause if you didn't you wouldn't take the time to even mention me and read my comments...LOL LOL...try not to let my comments get to you too much genius.

  • In reply to Reese1:

    I try not to read them because they tend make me stupider than I already am, but you almost always post first, so...

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Its good to know that you know your condition of stupidity and trust me I have nothing to do with that. Good luck with your problem. Again a day later, very entertaining keep it coming...HA HA!!!...

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Yeah, apparently some people would be happier if they could just make stuff up and not worry about whether or not it's true.

    And they get pissed if you don't think that Deng and Boozer suck.

    But, I don't care what a bunch of 12-year-olds think, although I do worry about mental stability of people who get so upset over basketball comments. But as long as they don't tear up their mom's basement too bad, I guess it all OK.

    Obviously they are very jealous of the fact that I have my own blog and that I work in radio. I don't understand, it's not like I'm some superstar or anything- but when people keep bringing it up over my opinions on basketball, any reasonable person can see that I'm 100% correct.

    They don't have a basketball comeback to any of my comments, so they throw a temper tantrum and talk about me as a person instead. At least I get a lot of good laughs knowing that people are sitting there steaming over nothing, it sure as hell isn't any skin off of my back.

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    Paducah Pud,
    It's you who are jealous of Doug Thonus and the community of posters here on Chicago Bulls Confidential, which is why you post here so often and not on your own blog. Please believe me, NOBODY here is jealous of you or your silly blog, which has no activity, nor your work in radio. You flatter yourself, obviously.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    I think the reason that a lot of people find DE offensive is not the content of his posts but the nature of the way that he snarkily attacks others points of view virtually everytime that he makes a point. Some of his points have basketball validity, but he seldom does so with any style points. He is sort of the anti Dr. MLK.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    You just made a dumbass comment that wasn't true, and I called you on it.

    I didn't bother reading the rest of your post. I know some of who talk out of your ass don't like "corrections" because it takes away from your ability to just make stuff up off the top of your head.

    YOU are the one who said " Look up every Championship core as in top three players for the last decade if you don't believe me.."

    So I looked it up, I can't help it if you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Some players don't decline by age 28 but many do, and Deng sure looks like one of them.

    Deng's next contract isn't for who he is right now, but who he'll be for the next 4 years. Almost for sure a less effective player than he is today.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    and if he really is only 28, then he is an old 28

  • Most think Deng's market is anywhere between the 10-13 million range. Wallace being the low end and Iguodala being the high end. I think Deng sees himself as Iguodala's equal so I doubt he wants to take less. Would the Bulls settle in the middle for a 3/33 deal? Personally I'm not against resigning Deng for 3 years since he's still relatively young and has a few good years left but not at a premium. If he wants an extension, he has to take a slight discount to stay with a contender. His first year under Thibodeau, his 3pt shot looked decent but has really gone bad the last few years. I even remember Rose saying the corner 3 shot was a "good look for Luol" but he's lost his touch. We'll see what he does but the Bulls don't want to get burned again when many think they overpayed Taj Gibson after he had a mediocre season for his standards. Snell longterm is a better fit since he can space the floor for Derrick and Butler should become more consistent with his jumpshot with experience.

  • In reply to Defense-Rebound13:

    I highly doubt that Deng is taking a discount(in years or dollars) from anybody, not just the Bulls. If he ends up taking a discount, it will be because the market wasn't there for him. If the Bulls extended him now, they would likely be paying a premium for him, since we really don't know what the market for him will be next summer. My sense is that the prices for players are coming down as the realities of the new CBA are becoming more and more evident, especially for the mid tier players.

  • I couldn't have said it better myself.

    Regardless what you think of the PER stat, it certainly shows that Deng is the definition of the average NBA player, i.e. mediocre. Those guys are closer to a dime a dozen than they are to $12-14 million per.

    Nice man, just not good enough of a basketball player, at this point, irregardless of the price.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    The NBA's coaches couldn't disagree with you more.

    I'm assuming that they didn't vote him to the All-Star team the last 2 years and All-Defense last year (with enough votes this year to make 3rd-Team if one was named) because they think he's meidiocre or average??

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    You really need to make up your mind and the stick to it. Do you want to argue stats or do you want to argue opinions(voting for the all star team). As you stated yourself, Deng's PER for the past 4 years is 15.2. The statistic is calculated specifically so that 15 is the average for all NBA players. How much more average could he be. He might just be the single most average player in he NBA over the past 4 seasons.

    As for the high school popularity contest know as the all star game voting. You mean those same NBA coaches who get fired at about a 50% clip every year. I hate to break the news to you, but making the all star team doesn't automatically make you one of the best 25-30 players in the league. There is a lot of politics involved and a lot of career achievement awards just for playing a lot of minutes in a way that coaches like. Where do you think Deng finished in the fan voting, if he even registered. I also doubt that there are more than a couple of those same coaches who would want Deng on their team today and for the next 5 years @$12-14 million per, even among the handful who voted for him for the all star team

    I'd also bet that 50% of all star players throughout history probably never came close to sniffing an NBA title, which is what we are all really discussing here when we talk about what the Bulls should do going forward.

    Again, Mr stat head, Deng was tied for the 142/143 best PER in the league last season, and 167th in 2011-12. Meaning that in a 30 team league he was barely good enough to be a starter on the 29th worst team in the league last season, and not good enough to start for anybody in the league the year before.

    What part of the definition of mediocre do you not understand. The guy was never worth the last contract that he signed, and in the new CBA there is no way he is worth an 8 figure contract per year for 4 years.

    Nobody on this site is saying that he sucks, he is just not the answer for the Bulls going forward. In his best season ever 06-07 he was maybe worthy of being the 3rd best player on a championship contender, the rest of his career he has been no better than a 4rth, if that. I always compare slots to the Jordan Bulls, Deng has never been as good as either Horace Grant or Dennis Rodman, the obvious 3rd bananas on those teams, and likely he wasn't as good/valuable as Toni Kukoc who was the 4rth best/most valuable on the second 3 peat teams.

    I believe that Doug himself has called Deng one of the worst all stars , after year one, and definitely the worst 2 time all star ever. NBA history is littered with guys who made all star teams who nobody outside of their immediate family can name today, starting with BJ Armstrong in 1994. Deng will go down in history in that group.

    If you want to build the next 5 years of your team around that guy fine, just don't try to tell me or anybody else outside of Paducah that you are right, because you are flat out wrong and just want to argue with people for the sake of arguing and making yourself feel good about it. It is not an insult to you if most people think that Deng is average/mediocre and don't want to resign him for 4 more years @ $10 million plus per.

    Does the average NBA fan doesn't even know that Deng played in the last 2 all star games, and does he even care that he did.

    You have fun while you continue to cherry pick which facts/stats you want to use today to justify whatever side of an argument you decide to be on today. The rest of the intelligent and humble Bulls fans on this site and others will continue a mostly civil discourse on how the Bulls can best become legitimate championship contenders.

  • I agree that I don't want to see the Bulls give Deng 4/48, because I don't think he can get that much from a contender. I'd give him one year next summer for as much as we can offer while staying under the Luxury Tax, but after that he needs to give us a home-team discount AND a playing for a ring every year discount.

    Hopefully he can be resigned for $10 million/year. That way we avoid the Luxury Tax for 2014-15 and still have Deng on a very tradable contract. If he gets 4 years, he's still only 32 in the last season of his contract.

    And personally I'm not worried about "not being able to make any moves" if we resign Deng. I'm more than happy to roll with Rose/Butler/Deng/Mirotic/Noah thru 2015-16, which is when Noah's contract expires. Plus we still have the MJ pick plus our own picks.

    I certainly expect his TS% to go up this season, now that he''ll be going from option #1a in 2012 (because Rose was hurt so much) and option #1 in 2013 to option #2 or 3 this season.

    Iggy just got 4/56 from a playoff team (GSW), for this production over the last 4 years:
    17.8 PER, .535 TS%
    17.2 PER, .530 TS%
    17.6 PER, .537 TS%
    15.2 PER, .520 TS%
    AVG.... 17.0 PER, .530 TS%

    His numbers aren't much better than Deng's:
    16.1 PER, .531 TS%
    15.5 PER, .549 TS%
    14.1 PER, .500 TS%
    15.1 PER, .508 TS%
    AVG..... 15.2 PER, .522 TS%

    Josh Smith just signed for 4/54 with a lottery team (Pistons):
    21.0 PER, .536 TS%
    19.2 PER, .540 TS%
    21.1 PER, .499 TS%
    17.7 PER, .501 TS%
    AVG...... 19.8 PER, .519 TS%

    All 3 of those guys are fairly equal. Smith has the highest PER but the lowest TS%.

    Mayo just got 3/24 from a lottery team (Bucks):
    14.6 PER, .551 TS%
    12.6 PER, .499 TS%
    14.7 PER, .513 TS%
    13.9 PER, .556 TS%
    Avg....... 14.0 PER, .530 TS%

    Martin just got 4/28 from a lottery team (Wolves):
    17.0 PER, .561 TS%
    21.4 PER, .601 TS%
    16.5 PER, .554 TS%
    16.0 PER, .608 TS%
    Avg........ 17.7 PER, .581 TS%

    Obviously, all 5 of these guys have put up fairly similar numbers over the last 4 years. Both Iggy and Smith got over $13 million for 4 years, while OJ and KMart both got $8 million or less.

    So why does everyone think Smith and Iggy got paid so much more money than OJ and KMart?

    I think it's pretty obvious that NBA GM's either don't put much stock into PER and TS%, or they just put a hell of a lot more stock into defense.

    The only difference I can see is that Iggy and Smith are both known as outstanding defenders, Mayo and KMart are known for being lousy defenders.

    KMart has a career .596 TS% and 18.1 PER. For two seasons (2007-08 and 2008-09), he averaged 23.7 and 24.6 pts, 21.0 and 19.2 PER, and .618 and .601 TS%. 6th and 9th in the NBA in scoring those years. Yet he's never made an All-Star team.

    Deng has attempted 15.7 [FGA + (.44 x FTA)] per game over the last 2 years- and while those numbers are 2% below his career .526 TS% AND he's been hurt both years, AND he's been the Bulls #1 option of offense (last season) and #2 option the year before (#1 in the games he played that Rose missed), we'll still use them for a comparison.

    At Deng's shooting volume and TS%, over every 10-game stretch:
    Deng: 157.0 pts in 2012, 159.5 in 2013
    Iggy: 168.6 pts in 2012, 163.3 in 2013
    Josh: 156.7 pts in 2012, 157.3 in 2013
    KMart: 170.8 pts in 2012, 190.9 in 2013
    Mayo: 161.1 pts in 2012, 174.6 in 2013

    Over the last 2 years, those 4 outscored Deng by:
    Iggy: 1.16 pts/game and 0.38 pts/game
    Josh: -0.3 pts/game and -2.2 pts/game
    KMart: 1.38 pts/game and 3.14 pts/game
    Mayo: 0.41 pts/game and 1.51 pts/game

    I could be wrong, but it seems like too much emphasis it put into TS%. Deng's .500 last season is "horrible", but at his shooting attempts per game level, a guy with a TS% of .550 only scores 1.7 more points per game.

    How much of a difference does a player's defense make? I have no clue, except to say that is seems to make a pretty bid difference to the league's General Managers, when you look at how much money Iggy and Josh make compared to Martin and Mayo.

    A simple comparison tells us that if I have two players who each take 16 shots a game, and one of them:
    Has a .500 TS% and allows his opponent to make 7/16 FGA

    and the other player:
    Has a .550 TS% but allows his guy to make 8/16 FGA

    I'm taking player #1, because he's scoring 16/game and allowing 14/game while the other guy is scoring 17.6/game but allowing 18/game.

    And still, that doesn't account for team defense- Deng, for example, gives LeFlop his season averages, but he does it solo without disrupting the team defense.

    KMart will give you more points than Deng , but how many more will he allow to his man on defense? Not to mention how many easier shots the rest of the team will get because KMart will need
    double-team help to stop LeFlop.

  • At some price there is a good value for signing Deng. But I do not think he will sign at that salary, so ... Better to undervalue a player and not get him than to overvalue the player and get him! As we all well know from too many examples.

    As one of the fans just wrote in effect, Keep the flexibility! There are a number of potential positives on the horizon, but those options will be greatly limited if the Bulls are at or over the cap.

  • In reply to rustyw:

    Good point -- there's a good price to get Deng at, but he probably won't sign for it.

  • To most observers, it's obvious now that Deng is not worth resigning to another 8-figure contract. Isn't the goal of management to foresee what later becomes obvious? Where were columns like this 1-2 years ago when some of us on this blog could tell you:
    1) Deng is not talented enough to ever be a main pillar on an NBA Championship team.
    2) Deng should have been traded 1-2 years ago (even if it cost money to do so) to avoid losing him for nothing.
    3) Bulls should avoid at all costs opening themselves to another contract negotiation with a player who previously turned down a 5/$55 million offer to go to free agency.

    How was it not obvious to close observers, including management, that keeping Deng this last 1-2 years could only lead to two results, both unacceptable: losing Deng for nothing, or overpaying him yet again.

    Jon Becnel (above) is correct that a Deng for Harrison Barnes trade was there to be made with a financially desperate owner - the Maloofs of Sacramento. Unfortunately, Rein$dorf insisted upon winning the finances of the trade (wanting to dump all or a large portion of Deng's salary upon the Maloofs) in addition to winning the talent in acquiring Harrison Barnes. To complete the trade, Rein$dorf needed to take back more in salary than Deng's last two years (and pay additional luxury tax too) so the Maloof's could save several million cash which is all they wanted - they were selling the team. It would have been some of the best money Rein$dorf ever spent!

    - To those that mistakenly felt Deng was the better talent than Barnes on a rookie contract please reread Nos. 1-3 above.
    - The Maloof's sold their 2nd round pick for cash, later traded their No. 5 draft choice to save cash as well, then sold the Kings - cashing out completely. It was all about the cash for the desperate Maloofs and Rein$dorf should have let them win the finances of the trade - he would have won the trade overall, BIG TIME.

    Bulls management is above average at drafting and below average at making trades. They shouldn't resign Deng, but now they will lose another asset for nothing. This is no way to build a championship roster around Rose. It's deja vu all over again....

  • In reply to Edward:

    You would have just given up any championship aspirations 2 years ago? That was an OBVIOUS decision to give up championship hopes? That's your argument?

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Funny, isn't it?

    That's the level of Deng hatred for some folks, even though we are competing for championships, they want to trade away an All-Star who is one of the best defenders in the league for a rookie draft pick.

    And you know how good Barnes is? The Warriors just gave Andre Iguodala $56 million over 4 years to take Barnes' spot in the starting lineup.

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    Funny, isn't it, maybe even hilarious, that for a self proclaimed genius and stat geek, you sure have a hard time getting the facts correct. This is at least the second time that you gave Iggy an $8 million dollar raise. He signed for 4/48.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    No, that is not my argument and I never used those words. Giving up championship aspirations is your argument.

    You will have to explain your contention that the Bulls had championship aspirations while Derrick Rose was out with an ACL tear, for I disagree. Last season was a wash and that was fully known on April 28, 2012. I would have taken advantage of that window to make a much needed move, and take advantage of another owner's financial desperation.

    The difference is between acquiring a longer-term asset - No. 5 pick Barnes on a rookie contract VS. having No. 7 pick Deng for one season's push in 2013-14 and losing that asset for nothing at season's end. (the Rose ACL season doesn't count as Bulls had no chance at a championship).

    I'd have chosen the former and would have paid to do so in June 2012 to avoid the outcome of the later in July 2014.

    My point is, the Bulls current position with Deng is a poor one and was avoidable with foresight. Now, they either overpay Deng or lose an asset (a No. 7 pick) for nothing - both unacceptable, imo. Will Bulls own draft pick ever again be in the top 10 during the Derrick Rose era? Top draft picks don't grow on trees, so I think Bulls allowing themselves to be in this position with Deng is poor asset management.

    This isn't about hating Deng. It's recognizing his limitations:
    - he is not the difference maker Rose needs
    - he is overpaid
    - he will demand to be overpaid again, just like last time he refused a generous 5/$55 million extension. Why allow yourself to be in that identical/unfavorable position again?!?

    Trading Deng for Barnes would have cost cash money - that's all the Maloof's wanted - which is why Rein$dorf didn't. He made a decision based more on finance than basketball, imo.

  • In reply to Edward:

    Your exact words were "Deng should have been traded 1-2 years ago" -- 2 years ago the Bulls were trying to win a championship so you are in fact saying that the Bulls should have forgone the short-term in favor of the long term. If you didn't use those words, then you're not taking a stance.

    Maybe your stance is, they could have then dealt Barnes for a player better than Deng -- this is extremely dicey, e.g. a roll of the dice. Everyone wishes we could have dealt Deng for a player that then got us someone better than Deng, but name a real player they could have gotten for Barnes, and even then, you're talking about 2 trades, it's tough to make happen.

    Harrison Barnes would have improved the Bulls' position for the long-term, but Deng improved the Bulls' championship chances 2 years ago, and again this year. I think there's an argument to be made that against the incredible talent pulled together by the Heat, the Bulls should have just given up on the short-term and focused on the long-term; or they should have rolled the dice and dealt Deng because they weren't going to win with him. But neither scenario is the obvious move you're crying about it being.

    They did get something for Deng -- 2 years with a good shot to win a championship, both 2 years ago and this year (not last year). You think he's not that good but also think it's such a shame to lose him for nothing -- you're trying to have your cake and eat it too, no wonder your posts are so angry.

    I'd like to see some sources on the things you say, like this Barnes deal was available and nixed by money, or that Reindsorf broke up the Bulls.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Again you attempt to twist my words for your own convenience. All along, and at length, I’ve discussed the window provided by Rose’s ACL injury, and the opportunity with the financially desperate Maloofs and Harrison Barnes, which Jon Becnel brought up early in this blog. Why is that not clear to you? What don’t you understand?

    It’s you who are attempting to twist my words to say Bulls should have given up championship aspirations while Barnes was still playing in college. I never said that, those are your words. I also never discussed trading Barnes for another unnamed player in a 2nd trade – again your twist, not mine.

    If you want to state your own opinions go ahead and do so. But don’t try to twist my words to use in constructing your personal straw man argument.

  • In reply to Edward:

    Be careful Edward, you're dealing with a couple of remedials and I'm sure you know who I'm talking about.

  • In reply to Reese1:

    Thanks for adding to the discussion. Very astute points you made.

  • In reply to Edward:

    What I don't understand is how the Bulls should have dealt Deng "1-2 years ago" yet still compete for a championship 2 years ago. Explain this to me. I'm sorry if you don't like that I'm taking your words "1-2 years" ago literally, I guess you mean last year. Next time I'll assume you don't mean what you say because it seems to make you uncomfortable.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    You are not taking my words literally.
    What you are doing, Roman, is ignoring the entirety of multiple paragraphs I wrote over several posts, then extracting and twisting a few words out of that context in a pathetic attempt to construct your own straw man argument.

    I doubt you even understand the definition of a straw man argument and its inherent flawed logic.

  • In reply to Edward:

    "How was it not obvious to close observers, including management, that keeping Deng this last 1-2 years could only lead to two results, both unacceptable: losing Deng for nothing, or overpaying him yet again."

    2 years ago: Bulls compete for a championship.

    1 year ago: You believe the Bulls refused to trade for Harrison Barnes for financial reasons, despite your refusal to cite any sources for this.

    This year: Bulls compete for a championship.

    Quoting you directly is twisting your words around? Lining up your time frame with other things in that time frame is twisting your words around?

    I'm challenging your words, no doubt about that. It's to see if there's any substance to your accusations. Sorry that it bothers you so much and it won't happen again -- no need.

  • In reply to Edward:

    And of course, just as I said, you've proven you've you have no understanding of the definition of a straw man argument and its inherent flawed logic.

  • I'm interested in how the market truly values Deng. It seems that no team wants to trade anything to get him, but apparently they'll pay him $50MM for 4 years? Have to see it to believe it.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Bulls waited too long and asked too much to trade the overpaid Deng. Just like Josh Smith last year, a player is virtually untradeable when they will be an unrestricted free agent in 1 year. Superstar Dwight Howard was an exception, which backfired, thereby reinforcing the general rule.

  • In reply to Edward:

    Deng has been rumored in trades for years so I don't really know that they waited. They might have asked for a lot -- but that should be fair for a guy that teams are going to pay $14MM per year for. IF Deng gets signed for even $12MM per year, then I'll agree they muffed this one but I'm not convinced Deng will get that much.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Your absolutely correct, nobody wanted him on his current deal, so I will be surprised if he gets anywhere near $12 million per in his next deal. I'd bet he doesn't break 8 figures, which means that he Bulls are correct in not signing him to a neal deal now, because they would again have to overpay him to do so.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    When starring at the prospect of acquiring a good player without giving up any assets (picks or players) GM's often get caught-up-in-the-moment and overpay for good, not great, talent. It happens quite often: Josh Smith got $54 million, Iggy signed for $48 million, Asik's balloon, Ben Wallace, Ben Gordon, Carlos Boozer, David Lee, one could construct a very long list of overpaid free agents....

    It only takes one enthusiastic GM with cap space and an open checkbook. That's all Deng needs is one big offer, and he very well may get it. I'm not saying Bulls should resign Deng, no, just saying some team will pay him 8 figures, especially if he has a good season.

  • In reply to Roman F:

    You just don't get it.

    Deng sucks, and he's overpaid- but the Bulls are idiots for not trading him, because teams usually jump at the chance to trade for overpaid players who suck.

    The Bulls need to hurry up and put players around Rose before they waste his career- but the Bulls are idiots for not trading an All-Star, All-Defense player for an unproven rookie. Somehow that puts us closer to a championship this year than keeping Deng.

    The Bulls Front Office sucks because they never make any risky moves- but they are idiots for hoping they can resign Deng to a reasonable contract instead of trading him, which is a very, very risky move. AND the Bulls are idiots for hoping that Mirotic will be an All-Star, even though some Bulls fans constantly state that counting on Mirotic to be a #2 option on offense is a huge risk.

    The Bulls are idiots for letting Asik go for nothing as Asik is an All-Star caliber player, and they are idiots for counting on Mirotic to be an All-Star caliber player, even though he's much more highly touted than Asik ever was coming out of Europe (except by a handful of Bulls fans).

    I hope that explains it for you... ;-)

  • In reply to Don Ellis:

    This made me laugh out loud! Thanks! All because Reinsdorf is a cheap meanie!

  • Do we know what teams will have 8 figures of cap space next year?

    I ask, because looking at the list of Deng's comparables, most went to fairly poor situations. If Deng is choosing between $11 million with Dallas (just throwing out as an example) or $8.5 million with the Bulls, should we really get that upset if he chooses Dallas?

  • In reply to Salvamini:

    No. I'll wish them well.

  • Totally agree, Doug. I love Deng as a fan. Great team guy. Rebounds. Plays D. Never complains. A competitor. Total Thibs kind of guy.

    But, we have those kinds of guys and we need shooting, floor spacing. One of my theories is that Deng's wrist can fully heel now since he has a summer off. Perhaps his shooting will improve? I think that's the key... if he can be a corner 3 Bruce Bowen type and play great D and rebound and absorb a lot of minutes, I say you lock him up for upwards of $10 mil. (To be clear: $10 mil ONLY if his shooting improves AND that's the going rate for him next summer.) If his wrist is still hurting and his shooting stats still suck, you don't need him around unless it's under $8 mil.

    So, do not sign him now unless it's for $6-7 mil, which he probably won't do anyway. He's probably asking for $12 and would take $10-11 this year? NO WAY!

    I'd much rather go with an aging Pau Gasol next summer - assuming that he's still got game for a couple years.

  • I agree with you Doug well thought out posting! I am hoping they trade him or more likely in typical Bulls fashion let him walk for nothing...

  • The easiest way to get out of the luol deng situation and better our current one is to trade him for eric gordon..

    Getting eric gordon not only solves our dilemma of losing players for nothing but for multiple reasons it makes sense..

    - An actual 20 point scorer

    - An actual shooter (go ahead and try to say hes inefficient..but he never had the chance to be a great shooter because he never had to playoff of someone elses penetration or even play much off ball since he had to have the ball in his hand because of how bad the offense was and coached espec when he was with del negro

    - Doesnt mess with the mirotic project

    - Doesnt mess with the bobcats pick

    - dont have to give up a noah or butler or even a taj or any future assest to get a young likely allstar

    - get a good locker room guy

    - not only a scorer but a willing and strong defender who can easily be improved more by thibs

    - makes the future even more promising since gordon is young and around rose's age

    - and speaking of rose its well documented that these guys played basketball before and thought of joining up together in college and are close friends

    - look at how dynamic the wall & beal duo are .. Even the wizards started winning when these guys clicked .. No reason to believe that two far superior players who are friends and once played before together cant click and be better .. Especially when they have a coach and a team that encourages teamwork and play together ..

    Rose gordon butler & mirotic are easily the future .. That bobcats pick may end up a replacement for noah who knows but if not your talking about a likely young top 10 stud whos coming off your bench in maybe a harden situation.. or maybe its traded for a host of players who can help..

  • In reply to Yunqn:

    You've convinced me! Now if only the Pelicans would trade Eric Gordon for Deng, we're all set!

  • In reply to Roman F:

    Yes, I like Gordon, but the guy has not been healthy since like 2010. Plus, he's got nearly $15 mil per season coming to him for the next 3 years. That's too much cap space to waste on a 50-50 player.

    I'd like the gamble over the long-term if his deal was much less. I hate it this year because we need Deng to win.

  • It's tough to be a Bulls fan on days like this. I stated in an earlier post that in my humble opinion, the team should take a chance on Michael Beasley. I've seen him play court side at the United Center on his first stint with the Heat. He was a horse, and his potential was obvious. Like a lot of young men, he's made plenty of mistakes. That said, he has the talent that is worth risking the small amount he'll make this year. Bad enough the Bulls didn't sign him, but this is compounded by the fact that Miami apparently has. He at least warranted a meeting and a tough love conversation. He will be a heck of an addition if the front office and couching staff at Miami get him some counseling. He's one project worth the risk.

    Good Lord, I hate the Miami Heat!

  • In reply to logicprisoner:

    Remember how Jackson, Jordan, Pippen kept Rodman's craziness under control? I think the combined presence of Riley, Mourning, LeBron, Wade will keep Beasley under control. They will influence Beasley to get his act together.

    Greatness Leads. And Miami had the inside track with Beasley

    And as you say, Beasley is undeniably athletic/talented and still young enough (24) to recover from his foolishness. Beasley is on a minimum-wage, non-guaranteed deal with the Heat. But so is Mike James now with the Bulls!

  • In reply to Edward:

    I think our coach could've gotten through to him. Being wealthy is a heck of a lot better than being poor. I'm sure he'll figure that out at some point. The Jackson, Pippen, Rodman senario came to mind.

    He's physically built to last and probably could have a long career. The Heat should definitely make him go to counseling. But if he works out, which I think he will... well, he's gonna be yet another thorn in the side of the Bulls. Man do I ever hate that Miami got him.

    I can't say this enough... I HATE THOSE GUYS! LOL

  • In reply to logicprisoner:

    Don't worry too much, even the Heat refused to sign Beasley until he agreed to accept a non-guaranteed contract.

    Obviously, they don't think very highly of him, either.

  • BigWay, Don Ellis, Edward, Roman F:

    1) We all want the same thing -- a championship, better yet, several.
    2) All 4 of you strike me as intelligent, thoughtful, fans. We all know that there are trade-offs to every scenario. Every move has potential benefits and potential downsides. It is impossible for anyone to always make the best move. We all know that.
    Thus, can't we be a bit more respectful of each others' opinions? I recall that Jesus of Nazareth, (Who, BTW, did not play basketball), gave The Golden Rule, which basically is, Treat others as you wish to be treated. It is not worth it to get in trouble with Him over opinions on a game, is it?
    3) Here are a few questions for you: Would you have drafted Taj? Or Butler? Or Mirotic? Or Snell? Care to give honest answers?
    I would not have picked any of them. (Of course, the jury is still out on Snell.) But I'm glad all of those picks were made.
    So someone calling the Bulls' drafts judges talent better than I do. But I still like to throw in my two cents' worth on this site. And that is about all it's worth. And I like to read your opinions -- but I prefer them without you dissing another fan.
    4) If the Bulls keep drafting like they have, we will all be enjoying them in the Finals, if not this year then in another two or three. That is, IMHO.

    Best to you all.

Leave a comment