Bulls Only Offered Gordon $54-55 Million According to Hoopsworld at least: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10151
This is the second time today HoopsWorld mentioned $50 million as the base, instead of something like $59+ million they had been using before. Seems like the Bulls weren't offering Gordon $58 million. http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10153 50 year, 6 year contract is $8.3 million. Assuming the salary cap is around $61 million, a max MLE contract with say the San Antonio Spurs next year is $35.5 million (or $7.1 million a year). If this turns out to be the Bulls offer, this just will make the Bulls look pathetic.
Not sure I buy that. They'd been offering him $58M. Is this article saying that at the last minute they pulled that and replaced it with 6/$50M? That's classy.
Yeah, it looks like that is probably the case. If all Gordon was looking for was $70 million, you have to be extremely disappointed that they couldn't get something done. That is not an outrageous demand at all. They could have easily met at somewhere like Monta Ellis money, at $66 million.
You can change the title for the new information. http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=240008 No wonder he was so upset, and had no problem turning this crap down. The Bulls straight up lowballed Gordon. And why did the Bulls have to bring in an attorney to find how to backload this deal? I have an excel program that can do that. Send me an email if you want it Pax!
McGraw is leaps and bounds above the other beat writers. He got quite a bit of info here, and most of it seems to indicate it was basically a luxury tax avoidance issue for the Bulls. They are truly inflexible when it comes to that, aren't they? Lots of stuff to digest there, most of which makes me further question the Bulls' competence. 1. $54-55M over six years is obviously (h/t to Vinnie Del Negro) even further below last year's 5/$50M offer on an annual basis than the speculated $58/59M deal. Further reason for Gordon to tell them to go jump in a lake. 2. Other teams were willing to pay Gordon a salary he'd accept. The stuff I'd heard otherwise didn't pass the sniff test to me, and this is further confirmation. Other teams (principly Miami, I spose) wouldn't be bothering with the continued interest they showed unless they had some agreement with Gordon. 3. Gordon still wanted to be a Bull and get a long-term deal done despite all this nonsense. 3. The part about the Bulls calling up Irwin Mandel is sort of laughable, since it's not exactly rocket science to calculate NBA contracts, but it does show the Bulls actually wanted him too. 4. And it points to, again, a complete inflexibility when it comes to dealing with paying the luxury tax. I mean, the Bulls actually want to get a deal done (at least if you take seriously the notion they're bringing in guys to think about the problem), but they don't because they're unwilling to take the chance they can't pawn off a couple million in salary? That doesn't make sense. That is a stand on principle. Reinsdorf saying "not a penny over the tax, even for a second, and no worming your way around it". Puke.
I just realized I did a little study on how much Gordon should be paid over the summer. http://www.sportstwo.com/dabullz/08-12-08-how-much-should-the-bulls-play-gordon The Bulls offered about in line with what my study found. I hope the Bulls didn't read this, and I cost Ben his contract : (
