Wayne Winston, an advanced stats guru, discussed with True Hoop adjusted plus/minus. In this discussion, Winston mentioned the Bulls and their decision to let Ben Gordon walk.

My prediction is that the Bulls are going to stink this year. Ben Gordon and Brad Miller were their best players. They let Ben Gordon go to the team they need to beat for the playoffs? Why’d they do that?

He wanted a lot of money.
Well, he’s worth it.

Letting him go is just beyond stupid. It’s ridiculous. And who’d they pick up to replace him? Jannero Pargo? I looked at their lineups, and I guess that they’re expecting that Luol Deng can play his position. If he’s healthy — and I don’t know if he’s healthy.

Winston followed up this True Hoop post, with a post of his own on his blog, to clarify his thoughts.

On Truehoop.com I was (correctly) quoted as saying the Bulls should not have let Ben Gordon go, especially to a bitter divisional rival (Detroit). Gordon’s performance has been erratic but last year was 18th in the league in our Adjusted +/- and he was 4th in Impact, which measure how you change the chance that your team wins. If you saw the Celtics-Bulls series you saw how his clutch shooting can change a game. In 2007-2008 Gordon had a negative impact, but this could be because the team was poor and many players mail it in when the games have no meaning. His offense held up in 2007-2008 but his defense was very poor, leading me to believe he might have mailed it in near the end of the season, In 2004-2005 Gordon had the the league’s 2nd best impact!. He plays over 30 minutes a game. While below average on defense, he is always an above average offensive player. The Bulls were at their best against the Celtics with Miller, Gordon, Hinrich and Rose on the court. They won by around a point a minute with these guys on the court. This 4 man combo cannot be used anymore. Is Ben a bad influence off the court? I have no idea. But on the court he will be missed.

Looking at his 2007-2008 season Hinrich began the season in a really bad shooting slump (he shot 33% in November) and Gordon’s offensive rating was poor(Gordon shot 37%), probably because the defense could lay off Hinrich. Gordon’s defensive rating was horrible after January 1, indicating that he may have mailed it in. If he is healthy and wants to play I believe he is worth $10 million a season.

I think that Winston is correct in everything he is saying. The impact rankings are especially impressive. When I watch the NBA, Ben Gordon has always stood out to me, as one of those guys that impacts a game in a big way. His clutch shooting has won the Bulls so many games over the past few years.

In addition, Gordon’s impact is extended because of the fear he strikes into a defense. Everytime Gordon steps on the court, he is the focus of the other team’s defense. This year, the Bulls’ players won’t have the luxury of having defensive attention drawn away from them from Gordon. Can they adjust? Only time will tell.

What Winston is saying is just statistical proof for everything that people such as myself and Fred Pfeiffer have been saying for awhile, in regards to Gordon.

The 2009 NBA Draft has come and gone. We did three mock drafts on our site, the final version which can be found here. How did our mock draft stack up against the big three’s mock drafts?  (The big three being Draft Express, Nbadraft.net, and Chad Ford’s mock draft for ESPN.com).

Dabullz.com

Correct Picks: 8/30 (26.7%)
Average Deviation: 4.7
Lottery Picks: 6/14 (42.9%)
Lottery Deviation: 1.07

Draftexpress.com

Correct Picks: 14/30 (46.7%)
Average Deviation: 5.03
Lottery Picks: 8/14 (57.1%)
Lottery Deviation: 1.43

Nbadraft.net

Correct Picks: 10/30 (33.3%)
Average Deviation: 5.5
Lottery Picks: 7/14 (50%)
Lottery Deviation: 2.71

Chad Ford

Correct Picks: 12/30 (40%)
Average Deviation: 3.77
Lottery Picks: 9/14 (64.3%)
Lottery Deviation: 0.57

(more…)

---

Update: March 16th, 2009 - 7:30 PM

It turns out that NBA players have to pay the state income tax for each place that they play. Therefore, only 41 of the games that Gordon would play if he signed in Miami, would be free of a state income tax. It still allows Miami to make a somewhat competitive offer, but not quite as competitive as the numbers in this article. After the draft, as we draw closer to free agency, the numbers will be updated in a new article.

---

This is an inconvenient truth that the Chicago media has yet to quite comprehend. The Bulls are going to have to make Ben Gordon a legitimately high contract offer if they wish to retain him. K.C. Johnson recently threw out a number of $8 million a year for how much the Bulls should pay Gordon. Newsflash, this isn’t going to get it done, and in this article, I will show you why.

First, let’s work within the confines of the MLE. Here, we’ll examine that potential Bulls offer against potential MLE offers that the Miami Heat, Cleveland Cavaliers, Los Angeles Lakers, and New York Knicks can make.

First let’s look at what the Bulls offer actually comes out to be. An offer from the Bulls to Gordon of $8 million a year, amounts to a $48 million over 6 years. Gordon would end up netting $29.76 million from this deal. The first five years of this deal (for comparisons sake, as the other teams will only be able to offer 5 year MLE deals) is worth $38.337 million, of which Gordon would net $23.77 million. The first year of this deal would be worth $6.337 in the first year. Gordon would net $3.93 in the first year of that deal.

In their memo, the NBA estimated the 2008-2009 salary cap to be set the estimated salary cap at $57.3 million. This makes the possible first year of an MLE contract to be worth $5.73 million. The max another team could sign Gordon to for the MLE would be $33.234 million over five years.

Let’s start with Miami, who attempted to trade for Gordon this past summer, but the Bulls declined. The Heat could offer Gordon a five year contract that would net him $21.60 million. That is only $2.17 million less than the proposed Bulls offer.

The Cleveland Cavaliers are one of the best teams in the NBA. They are committed to winning, and would definitely spend money on a talent like Gordon for the MLE to try to win a championship. (Any team in the NBA would probably take Gordon for the MLE). The Cavaliers can make Gordon a five year offer that will net him $19.11 million. That is $4.66 million less than the Bulls would be giving him. Something tells me that Gordon could make up that difference in extra Nike endorsements from playing with Lebron James, and being on a legitimate championship contedner.

The Los Angeles Lakers are in the same boat as the Cavaliers. They’re a championship contender, and any extra piece of fire power that could help them get over the top would help immensely. The most the Lakers could offer Gordon is a deal that nets him $18.51 million. That is $5.26 million less than the Bulls offer. Again, playing on a championship contender could help Gordon get extra endorsements to close that gap.

The last team to look at from this group is the New York Knicks. The Knicks attempted to trade for Gordon this summer, using Stephon Marbury’s expiring contract, but couldn’t get the Bulls to bite. Donnie Walsh also showed interest in Gordon during the 2004 NBA Draft, with rumors that he offered Jermaine O’neal to the Bulls in exchange for Gordon. The Knicks could sign Gordon to the MLE, and then use him as a piece to attract 2010 free agents. Gordon lobbied for the Bulls to make the Knicks current coach, Mike D’Antoni, the Bulls’ head coach this past summer. The Knicks could make an offer that would net Gordon $19.04 million, which is $4.73 million less than the proposed Bulls offer. Gordon could help make up that money in endorsements, by getting a larger profile in New York, and potentially blossoming into a superstar on the offensive side of the ball in D’Antoni’s offense.

Another scenario that could play out is that these teams offer Gordon a three year deal. if Gordon plays three years on one of these teams, the team would secure his bird rights, at which point, they could give Gordon a pay raise. The Knicks, because of their large revenue and their willingness to spend money seems like the best destination for this scenario to fold out in. Gordon makes the Knicks into a playoff team next year on the MLE, helps attract some big name free agents, and then when his three years are up, the Knicks would reward Gordon with a big contract of his own.

If Gordon is looking for a longterm contract, I would think the Heat’s offer would have to be the best. The lack of a state income tax is what allows the Heat’s offer to be so competitive with the Bulls. I think the Heat would have the best chance of becoming a championship team while giving Gordon a competitive salary. They already have Dwyane Wade and Michael Beasley, and under this scenario would be adding Gordon. The Heat would still have money to sign one of the big name free agents in 2010. That would be a scary team. The $2.17 million (or $434,000 a year) difference between the Bulls and Heat’s contracts should be easy for Gordon to make up the difference from new endorsements from being on a winner. If Gordon could go to Miami and start, and be part of a great team, why would he stay in Chicago for about the same money? He would be crazy to.

What the Bulls can do however, is make a quality contract offer to Gordon. They don’t have to offer him the sky and the moon to keep him. They just have to make him a respectable offer. If they offer him $9 million a year ($54 million over 6 years, what the Bulls offered Gordon this past summer), the first five year gap between the Bulls and Heat’s potential offers increases to $5.14 million. Increase Gordon’s offer to $10 million a year ($60 million over 6 years, the equivalent to what the Bulls offered Gordon when he was up for extension) the gap increases to $8.11 million. Increase it to $11 million a year ($66 million over 6 years, what Monta Ellis got), then the gap increases to $11.08 million. Increase it to $12 million a year ($72 million over 6 years, basically what Luol Deng got) then the gap increases to $14.05 million.

I don’t think any rational person is saying pay Gordon all the money you can throw at him under the CBA, or even the money Luol Deng got. I think most just want the Bulls to pay whatever it takes to bring Gordon back, no more, no less. If the Bulls just offer Gordon $8 million a year, as K.C. Johnson mentioned, that’s probably not going to get it done. But if the Bulls say offer Gordon $10 million a year, that gap between the Bulls’ offer and the Heat’s offer increases to a respectable amount, such that Gordon might actually take the Bulls offer.

Here is the reality of the situation. The Bulls are not going to get Ben Gordon at some huge discount price. Some other team might get Gordon at a discount price on the MLE, but the Bulls are not going to be the team to get the discount. Why would Gordon re-sign in Chicago, when he could go to a championship contender, and make roughly the same amount after he gets a bit of an increase in his endorsement money? If the Bulls want to keep Ben Gordon, they are going to have to pay him fair value. Personally, I think a $10 million a year deal would be a good starting place, as that’s a fair contract offer to Gordon that gives us a good chance of retaining him. I can only hope the Bulls front office also realized te reality of the situation, and that they don’t try to get him to sign a low contract around $8 million a year as K.C. Johnson proposed, because that just isn’t going to happen.

At the end of yesterday’s Bulls vs. Knicks game, a selfish and bad shot sunk the Bulls. The first was a drive to the basket in which Derrick Rose was blocked. The second was a contested three point shot. The Gordon play wasn’t that bad, as the Bulls were looking Gordon to bail them out with a three at that point. We’ve seen him hit three pointers in the past. The play just looked so bad because Gordon missed so poorly.

However, the Derrick Rose play should have gone differently. Derrick Rose needs to learn that it’s not always about making the big shot, it’s just about making the big play. The Christmas Day Game between the Spurs and Suns would be good viewing material for Derrick Rose. First, Amare Stoudemire made a pass to Grant Hill for an easy lay in with 4 seconds left. The play that was to come, was very similar to the play that unfolded in New York yesterday. Tony Parker drove to the basket, met help defense, and dished it to the wide open Roger Mason Jr. who sunk the open three.

As you can see by the screen cap below, Derrick Rose has Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, and Kirk Hinrich all wide open.

The logical play would have been to make a bounce pass to Gordon in the corner. Gordon would have then had a chance at a wide open three to give the Bulls a two point lead. Ben Gordon is the guy you want shooting the big shot if Derrick Rose is covered, as he was on this play. If Duhon was to rotate over, Gordon would just swing the ball to Kirk Hinrich, who would take the three.

Another option that Rose could have taken, would have been to twist in the air to throw a pass to Deng in the corner. Deng hit two crucial threes in the Cleveland game from the same spot.

Hopefully Derrick learns from this experience, and begins looking to make the big play during the clutch and not necessarily the big shot.

Ben Gordon has often been maligned for the disadvantage he presents the Bulls because of his height on the defensive end. Fans tell tales of nightmares of Gordon constantly being posted up, and often being abused on the defensive end of the floor. But is this actually the reality of it all?

In the 29 games that Gordon started this season, the starting shooting guards were expected to score on average 16.2 points per a game based on their season scoring averages. Against Gordon, they scored on average 17.3 points per a game. So on average, Gordon gives up more to his opponents than they average.

This of course is including Vince Carter’s 41 point and 31 point games in which Gordon did not guard Carter. Or Joe Johnson’s 41 point game or Kevin Martin’s 29 point games, where Gordon spent very little time guarding them.

A common complaint is Gordon hurts the Bulls as a starting shooting guard, because while he scores 20, he gives up 20. (Which has somehow been rationalized as being worse than Thabo scoring 8 but giving up 19 or so points a game). But this is obviously not the case. Gordon is averaging 21.5 points per game as a starter this year, and the opposing shooting guards are only scoring scoring on average 17.3 points per game. The Bulls are +4.2 in the starting shooting guard matchup with Gordon as the starting shooting guard.

Gordon has outscored the opponents’ starting shooting guard in 17 of the 29 games that he started in.

But volume only tells part of the story. How do these guards do efficiency wise against Gordon? The guards are expected to score at a mark of 54.8 TS% based on their season averages. What they actually have gotten against Gordon is remarkably close, being 54.9 TS%. There is no significant variation in scoring efficiency between the players performance league wide and against Gordon.

So if the scoring efficiency is the same, where is the increase in volume coming form? The volume increase is likely a result of the Bulls playing one of the fastest paces in the league. The Bulls have the 5th fastest pace in the NBA.

As a whole, players performed against Gordon about what you would expect out of them.

In the end, there is no argument. Ben Gordon is not a liability in any shape or form at the shooting guard position. Gordon scores 21.5 points per game on 57.2 TS% as a starter, while holding the opposing shooting guard to 17.3 points per game on 54.9 TS%. The Bulls are winning the shooting guard matchup by a large margin. The Bulls should continue to start Gordon and not think twice about it.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

Every November the Bulls go on a early season road trip, called “The Circus Trip” and come back with a hole that they have to dig themselves out of. Since Jordan retired, in the Bulls’ nine full circus trips (that is excluding the lockout season), the Bulls have gone a combined 6-52 on the circus trip. The Bulls have barely won 10% of their circus trip games.

It is not like all of these teams were that good. The Bulls have entered the circus trip with a combined 18-42 in past seasons. Not exactly great play, but there is a noticeable drop off in performance when the Bulls’ go on the circus trip from their early November play.

From 1999 to 2003, the Bulls went a combined 0-32 on the circus trip. It wasn’t until the Bulls got Ben Gordon and Luol Deng that they were able to win their first circus trip game. The Bulls beat the Utah Jazz 101-99 on November 24, 2008 to win their first game after starting the season 0-9. Eddy Curry played a big role in the Bulls’ win, scoring 21 points, but the Bulls’ savior was Ben Gordon, who finished with 22 points, and led the Bulls to victory in the fourth.

Since the arrival of Deng and Gordon, the Bulls have gone a combined 6-20. With Gordon and Deng, the Bulls have entered the circus trip with a combined 7-14 record.

The Bulls’ best circus trip was in 2005, when the Bulls went 3-3 on the circus trip after starting the season 3-2.

So how will the Bulls do on this year’s circus trip? I plotted the Bulls’ pre-circus trip win percentage against their circus trip in the 9 full circus trips since Jordan retired. Then I put a trend line over those points.

>

The Bulls went 5-5 prior to the circus trip this year, for a 50% win percentage. The 50% pre-circus trip win percentage on the x-axis intercepts the trend line at approximately 17%.

As a result, the Bulls predicted record on the circus trip is: 1-6

This is the result of the Bulls’ unbearably bad play on multiple circus trips. The Bulls have gone win-less on five of the circus trips, won 1 game on three of the circus trips, and won multiple games on only one of the circus trips.

Here is what the plot looks like for just the years that Gordon and Deng have been with us.

This outlook is a little brighter. On this plot, the trend line intercepts the 50% win percentage mark on the x-axis at approximately 31%.

Using this, the Bulls predicted record on the circus trip is: 2-5

What does this all mean? It means that fans should not be expecting too much out of the Bulls on this circus trip. Fans should expect the team to do very poorly on the circus trip.

However, this Bulls team has one big thing going for it that the others didn’t, and that is double star power. In the past few years, the Bulls only had Gordon as a guy who could just go out and win you a game by himself. This year, the Bulls have two of those guys with the addition of Derrick Rose.

The Bulls also have the detriment of shaky road play going against them this year. The Bulls are currently 0-3 on the road and lost their games by an average of 11 points a game. However, it is hard to say that we lost those games because we were on the road. It is more likely we just lost those games because they were going against really good teams. In our power rankings the Celtics are currently ranked 2, the Cavaliers 3, and the Magic 4, so we were losing to some of the best team’s in the league in our 3 road games.

The Bulls are currently 1-5 against team’s above them in our power rankings and 4-0 against teams that they are ranked ahead of in our power rankings. So far, the Bulls are winning the games they are supposed to win. If this trend holds true, the Bulls would be expected to go 2-5 on the circus trip, winning their game against the Warriors while losing 5 out of the 6 games against the Lakers, Blazers, Nuggets, Jazz, Spurs, and 76ers.

As a result of all of this, the Dabullz.com prediction for the Bulls’ circus trip record is 2-5.