Bulls far apart with Gordon and Deng, would ok short-term deals

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...1,1719162.story
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>With the two sides far apart financially, sources said shorter-term deals have been discussed. Such contracts often are negotiated to bridge differences. They allow players to have security but also to re-enter the free-agent market quicker, presumably, in the players' minds, after a strong performance over the life of the shortened contract.

The Bulls are said to be amenable to such ideas—again, merely seeking cost certainty before making their next move.

Indeed, there's a reason Paxson didn't start shopping Kirk Hinrich for a proven frontcourt player immediately after drafting Derrick Rose. Imagine this scenario: The Bulls trade Hinrich, fail to sign Gordon to an extension and then lose him as an unrestricted free agent in 2009.

Suddenly, a crowded backcourt becomes a crevice. And the Bulls, in that scenario, would be left with Rose, Thabo Sefolosha and Larry Hughes.</div>

Shorter term deals seem to make pretty good sense to me. I think in Gordon's case because there's such a crowd and such questions about how he'll work out with the guys who are there.

I'm not quite sure in Deng's case. If 6yrs $60M is really the sticking point, I tend to think he's worth that. On the other hand, if someone jumps up and plays great all of a sudden (Thabo? Tyrus? Not calling it likely), then they could probably do the same job for quite a bit less. I could also see Deng as wanting quite a bit more than that given what guys like Rashard Lewis, Antawn Jamison and Corey Maggette are getting.

 

But is he really worth that much more?

Jamison is basically a 20/10 player with more diverse offensive skillset. Maggette, yeah, Deng should probably make more. And again, Lewis offers more offensive skills than Deng too. But Deng does have youth (23) going in his favor. Its not unrealistic to believe last year was a fluke and he can get better.

Gordon, I actually like the idea of a short term deal too. We get to see if a Rose/Gordon backcourt can work, first. And we get to see if Gordon can continue to improve and possibly thrive in a new system (or fail, for that matter).

And it gives us some time to continue to develop Thabo and look for a bigger SG, if we wish.

 

I think $60mil for deng over 6 six years is more than fair given his performance last season and I hope he ends up taking a deal of that sort.

If not the short term deals would be a good idea and would love to see the league shorten contracts in the next CBA.

 

The organization is really pissin me off with not making moves as far as signings or trades...

 

I would be okay with Ben signing a short term deal. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I'm not sure there's any other option.

In general, for a team that is as cost conscious as the Bulls, I'm inclined to think it's best to sign players to 2-4 year deals whenever possible, unless they're getting an undeniable bargain or the guy is a Tim Duncan or Lebron type. For teams that are LT adverse, signing less than superstar guys to long contracts almost always seems to gum up the waters. That, and you have to resign yourself to the fact that you're going to have to recycle the bench players on your team.

 

There is no one on the Bulls who is a true superstar or a leader. Typically, only those types of players get $10M+ per year deals. The only reason Magic signed Lewis to that contract is because 1) he's young , 2) he's almost unique with his skill set and 3) he compliments Howard very well (in theory).

Maggette is getting around $50M/5 but he's a better player than Deng. Jamison is a more diverse player both offensively and defensively than Deng.

It's one of the problems with the Bulls. They find good players, give them $10M/yr deals and end up with no identity. Think about it. Hinrich is making $10M per year. Nocioni was making almost the same amount when he signed the contract. Now they have Gordon and Deng who both feel they should get around $10M/year. Gordon's nothing more than an improved version of Eddie House. Hell, House plays with more intensity on defense than Gordon ever did.
Deng is a good young player, but he's just too perimeter oriented to command that sort of money. And he's not that great of a defender. Almost every good/great team has had a versatile defender at the SF spot.