PDA

View Full Version : Bulls intending to sign Jimmy Butler to Max Deal



InRoseWeTrust
01-09-2015, 01:54 PM
"They fully expect to sign Butler to a max deal next July before another team even gets involved to tempt him with an offer sheet, which the CBA says they can after the moratorium ends. They accept that the size of Butler's contract will put the Bulls in position to pay the luxury tax, something Chairman Jerry Reinsdorf says he will do for a championship contender his team is."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-jimmy-butler-bulls-haugh-spt-0108-20150107-column.html

jaydubb
01-09-2015, 01:56 PM
Very good decision.. Now what do they do with Drose? I'd try to keep him personally but I understand that they might not wanna keep both.

InRoseWeTrust
01-09-2015, 01:59 PM
They'll keep Rose because:

(a) He's shown flashes of what he can still do after 2 years away from competitive basketball, notwithstanding the massive slump he's in right now. Way too early to move on.

(b) Even if they wanted to trade him, there would be next to no interest in him given his contract and it would be very difficult to get any sort of value back for Chicago.

I want to keep this thread about Jimmy though, especially because of the constant libel spread about how cheap the Bulls are and how they are going to let him walk, etc.

JNA17
01-09-2015, 02:02 PM
They'll keep Rose because:

(a) He's shown flashes of what he can still do after 2 years away from competitive basketball, notwithstanding the massive slump he's in right now. Way too early to move on.

(b) Even if they wanted to trade him, there would be next to no interest in him given his contract and it would be very difficult to get any sort of value back for Chicago.

I want to keep this thread about Jimmy though, especially because of the constant libel spread about how cheap the Bulls are and how they are going to let him walk, etc.

Yeah they will probably keep him.

Although for the Bulls's sake, they should try to get a good deal for him and not overpay for him.

nycericanguy
01-09-2015, 02:10 PM
Wouldn't Butler signing an offer sheet with another team be a GOOD thing for CHI? I don't really get this article. Butler is getting max obviously... but other teams max can only be 4 years and 4.5% raises... CHI's MAX would be 5 years with 7.5% raises.

So it would be in CHI's best interest to let Butler sign another teams offer and then just match.

Unless they really just want to be on Butler's good side maybe?

bleedprple&gold
01-09-2015, 02:14 PM
Wouldn't Butler signing an offer sheet with another team be a GOOD thing for CHI? I don't really get this article. Butler is getting max obviously... but other teams max can only be 4 years and 4.5% raises... CHI's MAX would be 5 years with 7.5% raises.

So it would be in CHI's best interest to let Butler sign another teams offer and then just match.

Unless they really just want to be on Butler's good side maybe?

They probably want to lock him up for that extra year.

InRoseWeTrust
01-09-2015, 02:15 PM
Wouldn't Butler signing an offer sheet with another team be a GOOD thing for CHI? I don't really get this article. Butler is getting max obviously... but other teams max can only be 4 years and 4.5% raises... CHI's MAX would be 5 years with 7.5% raises.

So it would be in CHI's best interest to let Butler sign another teams offer and then just match.

Unless they really just want to be on Butler's good side maybe?

No, Rose got the 5 year deal, which is limited to 1 per team. Butler can only get 4 years, no matter where he goes. Getting it done without matching the offer sheet is basically just a sign of good faith and communicates to the player how much they want him in Chicago.

nycericanguy
01-09-2015, 02:19 PM
No, Rose got the 5 year deal, which is limited to 1 per team. Butler can only get 4 years, no matter where he goes. Getting it done without matching the offer sheet is basically just a sign of good faith and communicates to the player how much they want him in Chicago.

ahh ok, so basically CHI can offer something like 4/64m, other teams could offer about 4/60m... not much of a difference then.

mngopher35
01-09-2015, 02:21 PM
I think this was pretty obvious with how he has been playing. No way Chicago would let him walk.

tredigs
01-09-2015, 02:28 PM
Of course he'll get it. #1, he's only cost Jerry $5 million over 4 years, #2 it's the pre new-max (so it will still be a relative bargain), and #3... look at him. We saw that Parsons/Hayward/Klay all received virtual max contracts and know it's inevitable for Butler. It's a cut and dry decision if they plan on keeping him.

slaker619
01-09-2015, 02:38 PM
He earned it

Htownballa1622
01-09-2015, 02:46 PM
GOOD for HIM and BULLS! :clap:

Jimmy deserves it. He's a good kid and comes from a tough upbringing. His path wasn't conventional but nonetheless it works out!

Props to Bulls owner too for not being cheap and willing to go to tax if needed!

Dumb*** Thunder get everything they deserve for trying to be cheap over a potential dynasty!

Jamiecballer
01-09-2015, 02:52 PM
how much would a max contract for a player in his position be?

Crackadalic
01-09-2015, 03:04 PM
Nice. Love watching him play.

rhd420
01-09-2015, 03:12 PM
GOOD for HIM and BULLS! :clap:

Jimmy deserves it. He's a good kid and comes from a tough upbringing. His path wasn't conventional but nonetheless it works out!

Props to Bulls owner too for not being cheap and willing to go to tax if needed!

Dumb*** Thunder get everything they deserve for trying to be cheap over a potential dynasty!

AND good for the Bulls and Butler -
This is what the NBA should be about - a 30th pick in the draft, works his way up and takes advantage of opportunities and isn't a "big name"
He will be now but in the Thibs system ... heck I drafted him in fantasy basketball because I knew Rose was going to miss games, but he's in the starting line up permanently on my squad

Htownballa1622
01-09-2015, 03:18 PM
AND good for the Bulls and Butler -
This is what the NBA should be about - a 30th pick in the draft, works his way up and takes advantage of opportunities and isn't a "big name"
He will be now but in the Thibs system ... heck I drafted him in fantasy basketball because I knew Rose was going to miss games, but he's in the starting line up permanently on my squad

Definitely. A few years ago the sg position going forward past Kobe and Wade looked bleak but it looks promising with guys like him, Klay, Harden, Derozan, etc.

InRoseWeTrust
01-09-2015, 03:55 PM
how much would a max contract for a player in his position be?

4 years, starting at around 15.75ish, with 15% raises each year.

nycericanguy
01-09-2015, 03:59 PM
4 years, starting at around 15.75ish, with 15% raises each year.

Butlers max would start at 14.6m, with 7.5 % raises from CHI... 4.5 from other teams. you can;t give raises higher than 7.5% under any circumstance.

Its going to be something like 4/64m for Butler

Pierzynski4Prez
01-09-2015, 04:04 PM
No brainer here.

Munkeysuit
01-09-2015, 04:07 PM
He deserves it, happy for dude.

GiantsSwaGG
01-09-2015, 04:11 PM
Well deserved

IndyRealist
01-09-2015, 05:12 PM
Definitely. A few years ago the sg position going forward past Kobe and Wade looked bleak but it looks promising with guys like him, Klay, Harden, Derozan, etc.

DeMar DeRozan is nowhere near that group of players. Eric Bledsoe, Wes Matthews, even Danny Green are all better SGs. I'll never understand why scorers who don't score well are still praised. We don't celebrate rim protectors who can't protect the rim, or 3pt shooters who can't shoot. But someone puts up 20ppg on 53% TS and he's a franchise player.

Edit: Bledsoe or Dragic, whichever you consider to be playing SG.

Ty Fast
01-09-2015, 05:15 PM
great move by chi-town!!

sens#11fan
01-09-2015, 05:37 PM
I think he's gonna get overpaid, in terms of what he is actually worth. However, he deserves it in today's market and you can't say that for most players. He is one of my favorite players in the NBA, I admire his hard work and hustle, he has that blue collar type attitude. Its amazing how he went from a foster child, living with different AAU teammates to now.

mike_noodles
01-09-2015, 06:05 PM
DeMar DeRozan is nowhere near that group of players. Eric Bledsoe, Wes Matthews, even Danny Green are all better SGs. I'll never understand why scorers who don't score well are still praised. We don't celebrate rim protectors who can't protect the rim, or 3pt shooters who can't shoot. But someone puts up 20ppg on 53% TS and he's a franchise player.

Edit: Bledsoe or Dragic, whichever you consider to be playing SG.

You would be hard pressed to find anyone anywhere ever that said that about Demar.

Back on topic, have to agree with most that this is a no brainer for Chicago.

Bruno
01-09-2015, 06:16 PM
damn i was hoping they wouldn't be able to afford him. so pretty much, Chicago goes deep into the tax next season, but when the TV money kicks in it forgives this additional max.

InRoseWeTrust
01-09-2015, 06:21 PM
Butlers max would start at 14.6m, with 7.5 % raises from CHI... 4.5 from other teams. you can;t give raises higher than 7.5% under any circumstance.

Its going to be something like 4/64m for Butler

Butler's first year max would be for 25% of the cap, and the latest league projection is that 25% of the max will come in at $15.5MM.

tredigs
01-09-2015, 06:22 PM
damn i was hoping they wouldn't be able to afford him. so pretty much, Chicago goes deep into the tax next season, but when the TV money kicks in it forgives this additional max.

yep. Teams are gladly paying this Max in anticipation of the new one.

RLundi
01-09-2015, 06:30 PM
No, Rose got the 5 year deal, which is limited to 1 per team. Butler can only get 4 years, no matter where he goes. Getting it done without matching the offer sheet is basically just a sign of good faith and communicates to the player how much they want him in Chicago.

Butler can get a 5-year deal because it's not an extension.

RLundi
01-09-2015, 06:34 PM
Butlers max would start at 14.6m, with 7.5 % raises from CHI... 4.5 from other teams. you can;t give raises higher than 7.5% under any circumstance.

Its going to be something like 4/64m for Butler

He actually turned down $14M a year this past year. His new salary would start closer to $16.5M with cap projections.

EDIT: he didn't turn down $14M, my mistake.

InRoseWeTrust
01-09-2015, 08:25 PM
Butler can get a 5-year deal because it's not an extension.

You may actually be right. Since he's signing it as a free agent, perhaps 5 years is available (but that would be from any team)

cheetos185
01-09-2015, 08:47 PM
Wouldn't Butler signing an offer sheet with another team be a GOOD thing for CHI? I don't really get this article. Butler is getting max obviously... but other teams max can only be 4 years and 4.5% raises... CHI's MAX would be 5 years with 7.5% raises.

So it would be in CHI's best interest to let Butler sign another teams offer and then just match.

Unless they really just want to be on Butler's good side maybe?
Other team can pull Cuban by giving him ETO/PO

Saddletramp
01-09-2015, 09:19 PM
Other team can pull Cuban by giving him ETO/PO

That's what I was thinking. 4 years (or 5, depending on if it's available) at the max is way easier to swallow (and it might be seen as an unspoken "we shoulda paid you last year" apology from management) than some other team swooping in and Butler falling in love with them (e.g. Eric Gordan) where he'd be unhappy if the Bulls matched or a situation like Parsons where to match it would be crippling to the cap space (although I doubt Butler is the kind of guy to do either of these things to the Bulls, and the Bulls aren't really a wheeling and dealing kind of team).

As far as "the Bulls being cheap" stuff is concerned (they most definitely don't seem that way), why did they trade Deng? I thought it was because he wanted too much money and they knew they had to pay Butler?

El Topo
01-09-2015, 09:28 PM
Great player, but I'm always wary of offering a player such a deal on less than a season's great play.

dtmagnet
01-09-2015, 09:42 PM
DeMar DeRozan is nowhere near that group of players. Eric Bledsoe, Wes Matthews, even Danny Green are all better SGs. I'll never understand why scorers who don't score well are still praised. We don't celebrate rim protectors who can't protect the rim, or 3pt shooters who can't shoot. But someone puts up 20ppg on 53% TS and he's a franchise player.

Edit: Bledsoe or Dragic, whichever you consider to be playing SG.

Give me a break.

Tony_Starks
01-09-2015, 09:47 PM
That's whatsup! Keep that core of him, Rose, Taj, Noah, Gasol together and they are a ECF team every year....

beasted86
01-09-2015, 10:32 PM
I have little doubt they will pay Butler his worth, but I still have zero belief Reinsdorf is willing to pay the luxury tax even though his team currently is a contender. I expect Gibson, Dunleavy, and possibly other casualties as a result of Butler getting his due.

Gibson will likely get dumped for a pick with the explanation "we have Mirotic", Dunleavy will not get resigned with the explanation "we have McDermott". Somehow brainwashing fans that McDermott + Mirotic is somehow unimaginably better than McDermott + Mirotic + Dunleavy + Gibson. I don't know what type of hee-bee-gee-bee voodoo jedi mind trick they have over those guys, but somehow they will buy into it and believe it.

Confusious
01-09-2015, 11:06 PM
Trade Rose and Chicago is in a good situation.

DaBear
01-09-2015, 11:26 PM
I have little doubt they will pay Butler his worth, but I still have zero belief Reinsdorf is willing to pay the luxury tax even though his team currently is a contender. I expect Gibson, Dunleavy, and possibly other casualties as a result of Butler getting his due.

Gibson will likely get dumped for a pick with the explanation "we have Mirotic", Dunleavy will not get resigned with the explanation "we have McDermott". Somehow brainwashing fans that McDermott + Mirotic is somehow unimaginably better than McDermott + Mirotic + Dunleavy + Gibson. I don't know what type of hee-bee-gee-bee voodoo jedi mind trick they have over those guys, but somehow they will buy into it and believe it.

I knew we couldn't go a whole thread without someone pulling the "Reinsdorf is still cheap" crap. If the Bulls are contenders, which they are, Reinsdorf will have no problem going into the luxury tax. Get over it already.

jp611
01-09-2015, 11:31 PM
Reinsdorf is cheap though.

InRoseWeTrust
01-09-2015, 11:36 PM
I have little doubt they will pay Butler his worth, but I still have zero belief Reinsdorf is willing to pay the luxury tax even though his team currently is a contender. I expect Gibson, Dunleavy, and possibly other casualties as a result of Butler getting his due.

Gibson will likely get dumped for a pick with the explanation "we have Mirotic", Dunleavy will not get resigned with the explanation "we have McDermott". Somehow brainwashing fans that McDermott + Mirotic is somehow unimaginably better than McDermott + Mirotic + Dunleavy + Gibson. I don't know what type of hee-bee-gee-bee voodoo jedi mind trick they have over those guys, but somehow they will buy into it and believe it.


Reinsdorf is cheap though.

You realize he paid the tax 2 years ago for a roster than wasn't as good, right? We were one of like 5-6 teams to do so. I love though "I have zero belief he's willing to pay the luxury tax" comment when he's done exactly that in the recent past.

beasted86
01-10-2015, 12:05 AM
You realize he paid the tax 2 years ago for a roster than wasn't as good, right? We were one of like 5-6 teams to do so. I love though "I have zero belief he's willing to pay the luxury tax" comment when he's done exactly that in the recent past.

Well, we'll see what happens this summer though, but its just my opinion. Reinsdorf is a capitalist and operates the team on the basis of profit. I guess when you hear "cheap" it somehow sits badly with you as though we are taking a personal jab at you, or we were talking about one of your family members or something.

The way I see it is he mainly wants to profit from the team. He isn't like Arison who is willing to lose money or break even if it meant winning a championship. That's kind of sad when in comparison the Bulls play in the 3rd largest market in the US, and Miami is like the 15th, and its a lot harder to lose money operating the Bulls even if you were an idiot who overspent every year.

As I said, don't call me Nastradamus when the team is not built onto and pieces are moved/cut to fit Butler's new contract. If Reinsdorf were really true to his willingness to spend on a "true contender" then I'd expect Gibson to be kept or traded for positive value that helps the team immediately (sorry, not allowing myself to be brainwashed that future picks help a team to win now), Dunleavy will be resigned, and they will spend the MLE on top of those two moves. Those moves would put the Bulls pretty deep into the luxury for at least the next 2 seasons, basically going all chips in to win while Gasol has game left, and Noah has good feet/knees to play on. But I have a feeling he will sell short and make the moves that still keep them in good standing and at the top of the conference, but will not make these "all in" type spending moves that I'm suggesting and cost will still be the driving factor to all decisions. Maybe I'm not seeing this realistically because I'm just a fan, and its not my money to spend, but at the end of the day Arison did it, Cuban, and plenty of others did it.... I feel like Reinsdorf owes it to the city to do it if even just for 2 years of having one of the highest payrolls.

InRoseWeTrust
01-10-2015, 12:09 AM
Well, we'll see what happens this summer though, but its just my opinion. Reinsdorf is a capitalist and operates the team on the basis of profit. I guess when you hear "cheap" it somehow sits badly with you as though we are taking a personal jab at you, or we were talking about one of your family members or something.

Ok. So you admit you've seen him pay the luxury tax in the last two years, yet for some reason for the next season, you have "zero belief" he will? What is the basis for that opinion? What changed in the last two years that he's no longer willing to go into the tax (for a better roster)?

beasted86
01-10-2015, 12:13 AM
Ok. So you admit you've seen him pay the luxury tax in the last two years, yet for some reason for the next season, you have "zero belief" he will? What is the basis for that opinion? What changed in the last two years that he's no longer willing to go into the tax (for a better roster)?

Chicago did NOT pay the tax the last 2 years. They paid it 2 years ago.
http://www.shamsports.com/2014/07/complete-history-of-nba-luxury-tax.html

When you factor in Rose's insurance payout for missing the season, Reinsdorf got his money back anyway.

Reinsdorf did what he had to do to make sure he didn't pay it last year by trading away Deng. I see the same type of maneuvers being taken to keep Butler.

InRoseWeTrust
01-10-2015, 12:16 AM
Chicago did NOT pay the tax the last 2 years. They paid it 2 years ago.
http://www.shamsports.com/2014/07/complete-history-of-nba-luxury-tax.html

Reinsdorf did what he had to do to make sure he didn't pay it last year by trading away Deng. I see the same type of maneuvers being taken to keep Butler.

Right, they paid it two years ago. That's what I intended to convey. My bad on saying "in the last."

That being said, they paid it 2 years ago. What makes you think he won't do it again? Trading Deng last year made perfect sense. Rose went down again. What was the point of dipping into the tax for what everyone knew would be a second or first round exit? Reinsdorf's attitude has always been, even publicly, that he is willing to go into the tax for a contender, and he's backed that up with his wallet.

So again, he did it 2 seasons ago. What changed?

beasted86
01-10-2015, 12:22 AM
Right, they paid it two years ago. That's what I intended to convey. My bad on saying "in the last."

That being said, they paid it 2 years ago. What makes you think he won't do it again? Trading Deng last year made perfect sense. Rose went down again. What was the point of dipping into the tax for what everyone knew would be a second or first round exit? Reinsdorf's attitude has always been, even publicly, that he is willing to go into the tax for a contender, and he's backed that up with his wallet.

So again, he did it 2 seasons ago. What changed?

What changed is Rose's insurance money which payed for half of his $16M salary paid him back $8M dollars. In a sense, yes he lost out on the revenue sharing gains, but got some of it back in an insurance check.

Also, I know you will also dismiss it as hearsay, but there was talk that they might have waived Nate Robinson to avoid the tax. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/chicago-bulls-considering-cutting-nate-robinson-various-nebulous-193255696--nba.html

You will also get mad at me like I'm the one who type up and reported this stuff and make up the rumors. Like, did this writer just make this up out of nowhere? Where there is smoke there is fire. I'm sure he considered it because he wants to operate the team on the basis of profit. That's all fine, but don't try and sell me how he's an owner that likes to spend. That's BS.

Captain Moroni
01-10-2015, 12:47 AM
Bulls have no choice, if they don't someone else will

jp611
01-10-2015, 12:53 AM
Trade Rose and Chicago is in a good situation.

Who knows? Maybe you'll become a Bulls fan again...

jp611
01-10-2015, 12:54 AM
You realize he paid the tax 2 years ago for a roster than wasn't as good, right? We were one of like 5-6 teams to do so. I love though "I have zero belief he's willing to pay the luxury tax" comment when he's done exactly that in the recent past.

Yeah, but... HE TRADED LUOL DENG!!

jp611
01-10-2015, 01:01 AM
What changed is Rose's insurance money which payed for half of his $16M salary paid him back $8M dollars. In a sense, yes he lost out on the revenue sharing gains, but got some of it back in an insurance check.

Also, I know you will also dismiss it as hearsay, but there was talk that they might have waived Nate Robinson to avoid the tax. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/chicago-bulls-considering-cutting-nate-robinson-various-nebulous-193255696--nba.html

You will also get mad at me like I'm the one who type up and reported this stuff and make up the rumors. Like, did this writer just make this up out of nowhere? Where there is smoke there is fire. I'm sure he considered it because he wants to operate the team on the basis of profit. That's all fine, but don't try and sell me how he's an owner that likes to spend. That's BS.

Nate Robinson was never going to be cut.

Yahoo Sports is some of the worst reporting in the history of sports. They literally throw crap at a wall and hope to get hits. This proves nothing.
Read up on these two guys:
Jay Williams
Eddie Robinson


You're right, Reinsdorf won't pay the tax for a team that isn't contending for a championship (which is a good thing, I would rather an owner be smart then be a dumb *** like Prokhorov)... But Reinsdorf absolutely will pay the tax for a title contender.

I know you are hoping and praying that the Bulls let Butler go, but it's not happening.

jp611
01-10-2015, 01:02 AM
Does anyone else remember when the Bulls were going to lose Thibs because Reinsdorf is too cheap?

Saddletramp
01-10-2015, 02:06 AM
Nate Robinson was never going to be cut.

Yahoo Sports is some of the worst reporting in the history of sports. They literally throw crap at a wall and hope to get hits. This proves nothing.
Read up on these two guys:
Jay Williams
Eddie Robinson


You're right, Reinsdorf won't pay the tax for a team that isn't contending for a championship (which is a good thing, I would rather an owner be smart then be a dumb *** like Prokhorov)... But Reinsdorf absolutely will pay the tax for a title contender.

I know you are hoping and praying that the Bulls let Butler go, but it's not happening.

Isn't Woj a Yahoo guy? The story wasn't his but I doubt everyone "literally throw(s) crap at a wall and hope(s) to get hits (with the exception of Adrian Wojnarowski, who is the best NBA insider of our time)".

kozelkid
01-10-2015, 02:37 AM
He isn't like Arison who is willing to lose money or break even if it meant winning a championship.

Oh, you mean like when Miami just gave away Mike Miller and alienated Lebron, that Mickey Arison?

beasted86
01-10-2015, 08:30 AM
Oh, you mean like when Miami just gave away Mike Miller and alienated Lebron, that Mickey Arison?

Alienated LeBron? How? What are you talking about?

Yes, he cut Mike Miller to save repeater taxes... the difference is Miami fans weren't happy about it and pretending like it was the good thing to do. I understood the economics of the situation, but as a fan was upset since he had such a unique skill set, and was a rotation player in both of the two finals wins in the LeBron-HEAT era. He could have still helped the team and that's why Riley wanted to keep him. So, yes, that one move by Arison was sort of cheaping out for a team that sold out the last 4 years and had the best player in the league bringing in a lot of revenue. There are many here in Miami who looked down on him for the move, but still the main body of his ownership has not been cheap.

Conversely, Bulls fans seem to be full support of them avoiding the tax like a plague and dumping main rotation guys en route to a first round exit while selling out that man's arena when he's had the highest league payroll like 2 singular years during ownership. That's the difference there and why I said some sort of brainwashing exists.

kozelkid
01-10-2015, 08:47 AM
Alienated LeBron? How? What are you talking about?

Yes, he cut Mike Miller to save repeater taxes... the difference is Miami fans weren't happy about it and pretending like it was the good thing to do. I understood the economics of the situation, but as a fan was upset since he had such a unique skill set, and was a rotation player in both of the two finals wins in the LeBron-HEAT era. He could have still helped the team and that's why Riley wanted to keep him. So, yes, that one move by Arison was sort of cheaping out for a team that sold out the last 4 years and had the best player in the league bringing in a lot of revenue. There are many here in Miami who looked down on him for the move, but still the main body of his ownership has not been cheap.

Conversely, Bulls fans seem to be full support of them avoiding the tax like a plague and dumping main rotation guys en route to a first round exit while selling out that man's arena when he's had the highest league payroll like 2 singular years during ownership. That's the difference there and why I said some sort of brainwashing exists.
Not really. As bulls fans there were two recent such moments that we were rather upset with.

The first was dumping Korver for peanuts to avoid tax because this was right after Rose went down. Obviously we had very little chance to compete that year, but giving away such a valuable player was a short-sighted move at best.

Similarly was losing Asik though it was more to the Rockets taking advantage of a previous CBA loophole. And longterm, it probably has turned into a blessing in disguise

In the end, you can believe whatever you want. Being a Heat fan, you have obvious biases whether you want to admit them or not. Trying to back your point of view based on questionable evidence like googling "Reinsdorf is cheap" is rather irresponsible research. In the end of the day, Bulls will be in the tax just like they were prepared to be in 2012 before Rose went down (again, I wasn't happy that we literally gave away Korver at the time). You can believe whatever you want, just like you were adamant that Bulls wouldn't cut Boozer. Barring a catastrophic injury, we will be in luxury tax.

jp611
01-10-2015, 09:37 AM
Google "Politicians are Reptilians" and it comes up with a bunch of stuff too, doesn't make it true.

cvnhgj
01-10-2015, 11:20 AM
Very good decision.. Now what do they do with Drose? I'd try to keep him personally but I understand that they might not wanna keep both. http://ehealthca.com/hu12uk1.jpg http://ehealthca.com/ipad/images/123.gif

InRoseWeTrust
01-10-2015, 01:01 PM
You will also get mad at me like I'm the one who type up and reported this stuff and make up the rumors. Like, did this writer just make this up out of nowhere? Where there is smoke there is fire. I'm sure he considered it because he wants to operate the team on the basis of profit. That's all fine, but don't try and sell me how he's an owner that likes to spend. That's BS.

I'm not mad at you. Just wanting to have an honest conversation.

And listen, I'm not trying to call him Mikhail Prokhorov. He's not going to pay the tax every year, just because he can. He's a guy that has obviously made clear that it will be paid if the team has a chance to contend, and he's backed that up in the past.

So what I'm saying is, given that he has done that for a team that wasn't as good, it's illogical to have zero belief that he'd do it again. There's no sound basis to think that.

KG2TB
01-10-2015, 05:20 PM
Google "Politicians are Reptilians" and it comes up with a bunch of stuff too, doesn't make it true.

You mean they're not?!?!?!