Right now the prevailing theory is that Gordon is nursing his injury or perhaps sitting out intentionally and might be having a spat with the organization. Timeline: Feb. 2: Gordon's first game after sitting out 5 games with a wrist injury. He plays great. Feb. 4: Gordon's second game post-injury, Hinrich gets injured in this game. Gordon plays well. (I missed both of these games.) Theory: Gordon asks to start the next game since he is playing well and Hinrich is out. The Bulls say no. Gordon is upset by this. Feb. 6: Gordon decides he needs more time to rest his wrist. Feb. 13: Jim Boylan states that injured Bulls will need to earn their way back into the rotation. Theory: Boylan uses this nonsensical decree as an after the fact explanation meant to mollify Gordon and justify his bench role. Feb. 14: We find out that the Bulls are discussing a horrible trade that is basically Gordon for crap. Theory: The Bulls have decided that they have really screwed up with Ben and there's no way they can resign him/Ben will never accept a 6th man role and they don't want him back as a starter. etc. --- A few thoughts, if this is in fact what happened. 1. I think the organization deserves the lion's share of the blame if their refusal to start Gordon initiated this. I do want Gordon to come off the bench, but I don't see anything wrong with throwing him a bone and letting him start for a few games. Once you sign him to a contract you can treat him how you wish. The after the fact explanation by Boylan is ridiculous and insulting and I'm betting Gordon and his agent saw right through it. 2. If I had to bet, I would bet that Gordon did not explicitly demand a trade or threaten to leave in FA. If he had, the org. would not have had Boylan issue that nonsensical decree - there would be no point in trying to salvage the relationship at that point. if Gordon had demanded a trade and the org. decided to trade him, they would leak his trade demand in advance to gain an edge in PR. Or perhaps they will leak this afterwards. I guess we'll find out soon. 3. If Hinrich had stayed healthy the rest of the season, maybe this doesn't happen, the team goes on a playoff run, and Gordon re-ups for the next 5 seasons. Long shot, I know. 4. It was a weak move on Gordon's part if he decided to be ultra-conservative with his injury. He's playing well of the bench, sitting out only hurts his value. This was not the best way to get payback.
The facts are so few you could probably develop a completely different theory, so feel free to post one if you have one.
How about that his wrist injury is worse than expected? That was a nasty fall he took, all right on his wrist. I'm surprised he didn't break it.
With the team mired in sub-mediocrity, there's no reason for Gordon to be anything but conservative with his injury. If he intends to stay with the Bulls, then this year is his contract year, but he's already shown what he's capable of and worth. If he intends to take the QO and go the UFA route, then next season is his contract year, and it's a great way to show is value to a club by contrasting this season (without him) and next season (playing for his contract). This stable of Bulls management has shown their methodology too many times to fool the players going forward. The Bulls are in something of a tough spot now. They can't force Gordon to take an S&T deal over the summer; if Gordon wants to be a UFA, he's not going along. Thus you see rumors like this Hornets deal that is just terrible, but the only way the Bulls can get at least something back. If I'm GM and I have a guy like Gordon in this situation, I'd probably sit him for the rest of this season and give him paltry minutes next season. It's not my job to pump up his value as a UFA, and he really isn't a part of "the team" anyway. Gordon's not the only one. Deng's been sitting out, too, and not coincidentally, the two had contract negotiation difficulties with Pax over the summer. The team isn't treating Tyrus very good, and he's the next guy in line to get this treatment. I'm sticking with my reading between the lines. The situation looks like Pax has been given the rest of the season to prove to Reinsdorf that he's worth keeping on. No long-term coach was signed - I read this as the next GM will be given the chance to sign his guy. Paxson is calling the shots - I read this as him being held responsible for the performance so he's taking responsibility for who plays (to prove his guys/picks are worth it). It all goes back to Reinsdorf being a baseball guy. They give GMs 5 years to rebuild a team, AKA the "5-year plan." Pax's time is just about up. As a baseball guy, Reinsdorf has paid ridiculous sums to sign FAs. As a basketball guy, he's paid big bucks for Jordan and Kukoc and others; he actually went to California to sign Chandler to a big deal. Something has got to give on the LT side of things, if even for a year or two to get things right, or we're seeing the best the Bulls will ever be.
I can't think of many theories that make things look good. Hell, I can't even figure out how I feel about Gordon. I was looking around at various players the other day and I saw Mo Williams. Mo signed a six year $51.5M deal Gordon turned down a five year $50M deal. I was looking at their physical attributes and they measured out almost exactly the same at pre-draft combines. They're about the same age. Mo isn't exactly a pure PG, but he's way close to it than Gordon. He turns it over less and generates way more assists when doing it. Gordon's quite a bit better pure shooter though. So look at both of those guys and which one is better? Which one would fit better on the Bulls? Do we feel good about the sort of money Mo Williams makes for Gordon?
