Reinsdorf got the wrong guy

[pinkizdead]

seriously ben gets 39 points against the bobcats...and you give luol the 12million dollar deal....seriously...thanks. thanks alot.

the bulls would be a better team if we could trade owners.

 

[dougthonus]

Altered the title, please, no swearing, or abbreviated swearing, misspelling of swearing etc..

 

[dougthonus]

Anyway, it's hard to argue with that right now, but at the time the decision was made it wasn't nearly so crazy. Deng had a decent year last year and a really good year two years ago.

More or less the same thing with Gordon.

As it's turned out Gordon bounced back to have a great year this year while Deng continued his decline. I'm not sure how predictable that was though. I can understand liking Gordon more this past summer than Deng, but both guys had a similar pattern in their NBA.

Go by year in comparison:
1st year: Gordon is better
2nd year: Deng is better
3rd year: Tough to call
4th year: Tough to call

Go by overall performance each year and it was similar. Both were decent their first two years with holes in their game. Both had great 3rd years where they were outstanding, in their 4th years both took a step back.

Now in their 5th years Gordon bounced back and Deng fell off a cliff to have perhaps his worst year in the NBA. I just don't see how you would have predicted that earlier using rational thought. I mean they had similar trends going into the season.

 

[??? ??????]

Doug, I think it was pretty predictable at what happened. While both took a step back, Luol took a step back to a 52.8 TS%, which isn't that great of a scoring efficiency. Ben Gordon only took a step back to 55.8 TS%, which while not as great as 06-07 or this year, it still rivaled Deng's career best scoring efficiency.

Also, at the moment we made the Hughes trade, Ben Gordon was averaging 20.2 PPG on the season, which is a pretty solid average. But Boylan proceeded to bench Gordon, only playing him 22 minutes a game in April, in what I think was his dumb attempt to try to gain favor with management by damaging Gordon's value.

 

[MADman24]

At the time I wanted them both back but thought Deng's contract was to much for a few reasons in particular:

Deng's injury history, bidding against ourselves, and pure need at the position. At the time, if I had to pick between Deng and BG, I chose Gordon because we had Noc on the roster and I figured the drop off from Deng to Noc wasn't as severe as Gordon to Hughes whom I simply despised. And lastly I felt that we could have had him for cheaper. However I didn't think it was that bad of a decision just slightly bad.

Like Doug said I don't think anyone saw this kind of season coming for Deng. I'm much more interested in figuring out what to do with Deng now and who we are going to get to replace Gordon if he walks as expected by many including myself.

 

[dougthonus]

Doug, I think it was pretty predictable at what happened. While both took a step back, Luol took a step back to a 52.8 TS%, which isn't that great of a scoring efficiency. Ben Gordon only took a step back to 55.8 TS%, which while not as great as 06-07 or this year, it still rivaled Deng's career best scoring efficiency.

Also, at the moment we made the Hughes trade, Ben Gordon was averaging 20.2 PPG on the season, which is a pretty solid average. But Boylan proceeded to bench Gordon, only playing him 22 minutes a game in April, in what I think was his dumb attempt to try to gain favor with management by damaging Gordon's value.

I think it's predictable that Gordon would average a higher scoring efficiency than Deng because he shoots lots of 3s. Deng's never been as good at scoring efficiency as Gordon. While I believe scoring efficiency is very important, and it's one of the reasons why Gordon is so good, I don't think the difference between the two players is summed up by scoring efficiency.

What I find unpredictable is that Gordon went out and had the best year of his career while Deng went out and possibly had the worst year of his career. I think we all expected Gordon to be a better scorer, but I don't think we all expected Deng to go turn to absolute crap, and figured Deng would bring other things to the table.

 

[dougthonus]

Or let me put it this way:

I don't think there was any reason to expect the gap between Deng and Gordon to change from where you historically viewed it.

 

[J-Mart]

dougthonus wrote:

Doug, I think it was pretty predictable at what happened. While both took a step back, Luol took a step back to a 52.8 TS%, which isn't that great of a scoring efficiency. Ben Gordon only took a step back to 55.8 TS%, which while not as great as 06-07 or this year, it still rivaled Deng's career best scoring efficiency.

Also, at the moment we made the Hughes trade, Ben Gordon was averaging 20.2 PPG on the season, which is a pretty solid average. But Boylan proceeded to bench Gordon, only playing him 22 minutes a game in April, in what I think was his dumb attempt to try to gain favor with management by damaging Gordon's value.

I think it's predictable that Gordon would average a higher scoring efficiency than Deng because he shoots lots of 3s. Deng's never been as good at scoring efficiency as Gordon. While I believe scoring efficiency is very important, and it's one of the reasons why Gordon is so good, I don't think the difference between the two players is summed up by scoring efficiency.

What I find unpredictable is that Gordon went out and had the best year of his career while Deng went out and possibly had the worst year of his career. I think we all expected Gordon to be a better scorer, but I don't think we all expected Deng to go turn to absolute crap, and figured Deng would bring other things to the table.

I agree for the most part. I always said it was more important to sign Gordon than Deng, but even so, I did not think Deng would regress as much as he did. I was happy that we got him signed, but like others have said, I felt we payed way too much and bid against ourselves. Its funny how quick people point there was no market for Gordon, well there wasn't a huge one for Deng either and he still got his money from the Bulls.

As much as I am not a fan of Deng, I don't expect him to suck as bad next year. And if he does, it will show how unmotivated he is. If there was ever a time to motivate Deng, his crap season this year should be it.

 

[dougthonus]

I've always thought the two were similarly valuable. I thought Deng's contract was a little high when he signed it. The economic collapse and him not making the group insurance policy changed it from a little too high to WAY too high IMO. Had I known it was uninsured, I would have probably lowered my thoughts by another 5 million.

Still based on whom I thought Deng would be this summer, even factoring in the injury risk I probably would have gone 6/60-6/65.

I also always thought Gordon was just as valuable ad Deng and would have tried to split the money evenly.

 

[The Essence of Boerwinkle]

dougthonus wrote:

Or let me put it this way:

I don't think there was any reason to expect the gap between Deng and Gordon to change from where you historically viewed it.

I agree with this and would add that I don't think the story is fully played out. Deng has had some injury issues -- and I think his choice of personal trainers and his pushing himself with the Euro ball thing has made that worse. If Deng settles himself in, he very well could still turn out to be the overall better baller between him and Gordon.

Looking through a limited view lens though it is easy to jump to the conclusion that the contract negotiations were a disaster. Not sure if that will turn out so in the big picture view. No guarantees, of course, but I think a lot of fans just make the easy conclusion and be done with it and I think its potentially more complicated than that long term.

 

[Hendu0520]

I disagree. The mistake was not signing Deng who knew he would suck and be so soft. I think Reinsdorf is wrong in not giving Gordon what he wanted and signing both of them. At the time 12 million really isn't too bad for Deng, maybe 1 or 2 mil too much only. Remember they were basically building the team around him. Supposedly the Bulls turned down a Kevin Garnett deal because they wanted Deng and the Bulls didn't want to give him up. That was the mistake, he was never a good enough scorer one on one to be a go to guy. Bull's management should have known that at least. But I really don't understand why they just didn't go a little higher if that is what Ben wanted. Most of the time the better scorers make more money, in this case that is Gordon, easily. Turns out it might work out for managment because of the economy so if they sign Ben this summer it could be for what they offered last summer or less. If they don't sign Gordon only because of the luxury tax they are stupid.

 

[dougthonus]

I think what they should have done is split the money 50/50 and offered it to both.

Realistically, neither one could have gotten anything better on the open market anyway, nor could they really get that bad of feelings if the Bulls did their offers in this way.

 

[TheStig]

dougthonus wrote:

I think what they should have done is split the money 50/50 and offered it to both.

Realistically, neither one could have gotten anything better on the open market anyway, nor could they really get that bad of feelings if the Bulls did their offers in this way.[/quote
Thats what I was saying, 6/60 for both. Firm offer like the cavs did with Pavloic and Varejo. Maybe go up to 6/65 for both but thats it. 6/71 was just way to far, espically if with the exclusions in the insurance and bonus opportunities.

 

[The Half Moon Bay]

It's obvious in hindsight that the Bulls should have paid Gordon and let Deng walk. Deng is completely worthless because he sits on the bench injured half the season. Beyond that, even when Deng is healthy, he doesn't fit in with the style that the Bulls are playing with Rose and VDN. And that style, I might add, has proved effective in the second half of the season. John Salmons is showing us the value of a small forward that can hit the 3, which makes Deng look that much worse in comparison. I don't care how effective Deng is at the 17-20 footer, it is the most inefficient shot in basketball. What else does he do besides hit that long two? Ok, he cuts to the basket, but we don't run that much anymore. The reason I don't like Deng is because he is not quick enough to beat anyone off of the dribble or to stay in front of most small forwards on defense.

All that said, who in the world can blame the Bulls for picking Deng over Gordon? At the time that the offer was made, there was no reason whatsoever to believe that Deng would fold up his tent and go home. At that point, he had improved each year for 3 years, taken a step back, but was expected to return to pre-2007 levels with Rose running the point. He didn't, Gordon has played great, and the rest is history. The focus of our efforts should not be blaming the Bulls for an unforeseeable mistake, but rather on figuring out who will take Deng off of our hands this offseason.

 

[Newskoolbulls]

Egh what can you do?

 

[clonetrooper264]

At the time signing Luol seemed like a wonderful thing. Of course I was disappointed that Ben never signed long term, but at the time of the signing there was nothing wrong with the decision. Deng seemed like he was on the rise and could be a really productive player in the future. No one could have predicted things to turn out like they did. It's sort of like the Kirk signing, at the time it was perfectly fine because he was our pg of the future. Now with Rose in the picture and Hinrich coming off the bench people complain that he was overpaid when he signed. But that's another topic.

 

[shortlunatic]

Although the contract was to high, i think people bash Deng way to much. The guy is still very young and has plenty of time to recooperate from his injury and poor play. I think everyone is to quick to to judge him when they say we should trade him for just expirings. Rememeber, we have yet to see what a healthy combo of Salmons and Deng can really do. Ill be evry excited to see that next year.

 

[pinkizdead]

i'm sure deng is a great player, but i do believe that he has a hughes-like contract. Inside of our current market, the deng contract is grossly overpriced. Furthermore deng hasn't shown an ability to create his own shot. Given his inability to completely mesh inside of our current offense( the lack of play calling... vinny... the inability to be consistent from the 3point line) i think that we should trade him. Ideally, i would like to sign gordon. pay the tax for a season. spotlight deng for a season, half a season, and trade him for an expiring and a first round pick. Afterwards i would like to extend salmons contract for two seasons(given that he continues to play as welll as he has).

 

[dougthonus]

I think if you trade Deng at this point, you're going to get back someone like Peja. A bad contract with a shorter deal. If Deng can stay healthy for the first half of the year then I think his value will rise, and you may be able to get an expiring back. If the can stay healthy and be productive you may get an expiring and a pick.

 

[pinkizdead]

"If Deng can stay healthy for the first half of the year then I think his value will rise, and you may be able to get an expiring back. "


yeah... but do you think we'd trade him at that point?