I've got ESPN on my side. I didn't write that text, I quoted it from the article. No mouthpiece for the Bulls org.
No offense, but that is quite comical. Why? The year that the Bulls let Korver and Watson go, they paid the Luxury Tax... so apparently Messers Korver and Watson and Coon were all wrong, because the Bulls paid the tax that year. And the Bulls would have paid the Luxury Tax again last season if Deng would have accepted their offer to sign an extension. He didn't, so they got a few draft picks for him instead of letting him go for nothing... which is the usual complaint about the front office "they let guys go for nothing". BTW, Korver was replaced with Belinelli, who was replaced with Dunleavy. I don't know where Snell plays into this? He replaced Hamilton on the roster. Korver and Watson made $8.2 million, they were replaced by Hinrich and Belinelli who made $5.9 million. Would you feel better if Hinrich and Belinelli were paid an extra $2.3 million combined?
The comical thing is they paid as minimal amount of tax as they could manage, they intended to trade Rip for cap space to get under, and their offer to Lu was downright insulting. Would you take a 33% pay cut to keep your job?
ESPN was 100% wrong, as the Bulls paid the tax after Korver and Watson were let go. If you and ESPN were correct, the Bulls would have signed minimum salary guys instead of Hinrich and Belinelli, if they would have done that they would have avoided the Luxury Tax. I don't know if you read this article, http://www.chicagonow.com/bullsville/2014/07/espn-nba-free-agen/ but ESPN just makes up whatever sounds good, because they know most people will just believe it without question. Today, I heard Stein say that "Reinsdorf doesn't want to amnesty Boozer to sign Anthony, he wants to trade Boozer". Just a blatant lie, because using the amnesty on Boozer doesn't even give the Bulls $10 million in cap space. If they amnesty Boozer instead of doing a sign and trade, they will also have to dump Gibson and Dunleavy and Snell to get enough cap space to sign Melo- and they'll have to not sign Mirotic, because they won't have cap space or the MLE to do it with. I'm also no "mouthpiece for the Bulls org", I just believe in putting all the facts out there. If you've noticed, I haven't "defended" Reinsdorf even once, I'm just telling the entire truth. Facts are facts, plain and simple, and ESPN loves to ignore them quite often.
How much do you think the Bulls should have paid Deng? If they could sign him right now, how much would you give him? I'm sorry, I just assumed you were like most Bulls fans who thought he was overpaid at $14.1 million, I apologize if I am wrong. It was widely reported that they could have traded Rip to get under the tax if they would have given up a first-round pick, but Reinsdorf refused. I'll ask again, would you feel better if they would have paid Hinrich and Belinelli an extra $2.3 million? I find this to often be the problem with the "Reinsdorf is cheap" crowd, when it gets down to actual facts, or answering real questions, they change the subject. Are you saying you are glad they kept Hamilton and paid the tax? Most people were complaining that he was overpaid, I'm sorry if you weren't one of them, I don't want to make assumptions.
In your own article, you acknowledged the Bulls could have gotten under the LT by trading Rip Hamilton. What they didn't count on was nobody wanting him or the draft pick being required as a deal sweetener. Over the one year, they paid $3.9M. For the draft pick, they paid a rookie scale wage, more than making back the $3.9M. Or the cost of buying a 1st round pick would have been $3.9M or more so they saved money in the long run. The whole Deng argument you make is, sorry, silly. They made him an offer they knew he wouldn't accept, take it or leave it, and you only have a few minutes to decide because we have Cleveland on the line. To make things worse, if Deng did call their bluff, I think the Bulls would have found another way to get under the tax. See ya, Jo, the money says you gotta go.
