I'm of the belief that we really need to keep Ben Gordon around, especially if Nocioni is to be traded. Gordon is our best offensive player, and I think the Bulls will struggle horribly to score without him next year. Taking into account KC Johnson's article today which indicates that we may trade Noc and 6/58 isn't enough to satisfy Gordon, it got me thinking. How could we trade Nocioni and clear and grab an expiring player (or two expiring players), get back a bit less salary in return, and therefore make Gordon a big enough offer that he would accept? Nocioni is scheduled to make 8 million next year, so we would have to trade him for a player that makes less than 8 mil but more that about 6.35 mil in order to satisfy the CBA. Here are some ideas. All the following players are or can be expiring contracts unless listed as otherwise. Noc for Jerry Stackhouse (7 mil) - I don't know if Dallas would do this. Cuban is looking to buy some Cubs. Noc for Antonio McDyess (6.8) - Highly unlikely we would ever deal with Detroit. Noc for Adonal Foyle (6.8) - Blech. And do the Warriors really need another small forward? Really? Noc for Bobby Jackson and Steve Novak (6.9 total) - This would only be an option if the Artest trade breaks down. Noc for Marquis Daniels (6.9) - Pacers also have too many small forwards who can play. Noc for Juwon Howard (7.4) - Howard really can't play anymore. Noc for Stromile Swift and Maurice Ager (7.25) Our winner? The Nets have been known to covet Nocioni. Would Swift be a bad influence? Noc for Malik Rose (7.65) - Oh boy, can we really trade with NY again? Plus probably doesn't save us enough money. Perhaps the most realistic option in that bunch is Noc for Swift and Ager. This saves us about 750,000 right away, and if we offerred Gordon that much more in a starting salary right now, I believe we could offer him a deal worth about 6/64. Would he take that?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Aug 1 2008, 03:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There's other scenarios if the Bulls pay the LT for a year.</div> Yeah, and also it would be easy if we could trade Cedric Simmons to a team under the cap for future considerations. I'm not sure anyone would take him though.
If we go over the cap for a year, you can add players to your list who are 125% Nocioni's salary but are expiring deals.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Aug 1 2008, 06:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There's other scenarios if the Bulls pay the LT for a year.</div> And still more scenarios if hell freezes over! DMD, my theory is if the Bull have such a deal in mind they've got it arranged and won't do it until 34 seconds after they've gotten Ben to agree to terms. If they do the deal before it, they can't use it as a negotiating ploy any more.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MikeDC @ Aug 3 2008, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Aug 1 2008, 06:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There's other scenarios if the Bulls pay the LT for a year.</div> And still more scenarios if hell freezes over! DMD, my theory is if the Bull have such a deal in mind they've got it arranged and won't do it until 34 seconds after they've gotten Ben to agree to terms. If they do the deal before it, they can't use it as a negotiating ploy any more. </div> Yes, but that doesn't work if Gordon digs in his heels and won't sign for what the Bulls offer. This leads to another interesting question. Are the Bulls not offering Gordon more because they won't pay the tax, or, if there were some way to diminish the team's salary number, would they pay Gordon more, or do they just think this (under 10 mil/year) is all he's worth?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (darius miles davis @ Aug 5 2008, 04:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MikeDC @ Aug 3 2008, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Aug 1 2008, 06:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There's other scenarios if the Bulls pay the LT for a year.</div> And still more scenarios if hell freezes over! DMD, my theory is if the Bull have such a deal in mind they've got it arranged and won't do it until 34 seconds after they've gotten Ben to agree to terms. If they do the deal before it, they can't use it as a negotiating ploy any more. </div> Yes, but that doesn't work if Gordon digs in his heels and won't sign for what the Bulls offer. This leads to another interesting question. Are the Bulls not offering Gordon more because they won't pay the tax, or, if there were some way to diminish the team's salary number, would they pay Gordon more, or do they just think this (under 10 mil/year) is all he's worth? </div> I suspect it's mostly the tax, although they probably wouldn't pay him every penny he'd like either. How's about this deal: Larry Hughes and Cedric Simmons for Malik Rose and Jerome James (saves us $722k). That'd let us offer Ben a contract starting at $8.5M, which is 5yrs and $51.4M, so a little bit more than we offered him last summer. I could see the Knicks using Hughes and they ain't gonna use the guys they give up. We, on the other hand, could at least use a couple bigs who don't blow over in a stiff wind.
