# League insiders expect Bulls to make a big offer to big Ben



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

http://www.hoopshype.com/rumors.htm 

scroll down to the Akron Beacon Journal (not subscribed). Hawks too.

I thought it was kind of a given he'll stay with Pistons.

Wallace will be 32 next year...


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Is Gordon up for an extension already after this season?


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

That would be horrible. We're going to be paying Ben 14 + Mil. when he is in his mid to late 30s.


----------



## greekbullsfan (Oct 26, 2003)

told u so guys yestrday but u laughed at me


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

It will never happen.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Dennis Rodman was effective until he was 38 or 39 years old. So was Karl Malone. Ben Wallace is in the same league as these guys when it comes to work ethic and keeping his body in tip-top shape. Signing Big Ben to a big 5-year deal from the age of 32-37 is a safe enough bet if you ask me.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

I really hope not.


----------



## Deng101 (Jan 13, 2005)

We already have our Ben Wallace his name is Tyson Chandler.....


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Hmm. Big Ben just turned 31, so he'll be 32 at the begninning of next season. Under the CBA, we could sign him for five years, and we'd probably have to in order to make a competitive offer. Could he be a productive player until the age of 36? Is he the type of player that would be productive for at least three to four out of those five years? Would it be a case of paying for past performance as opposed to future performance?

Ben and Chandler would be monsterous defensively, simply monstrous, but who would score? Rasheed was able to counterbalance Ben with a lot of scoring ability. Would Gordon have to score 25 a game for us to have a chance?


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

I agree with Yodurk that I could see Big Ben being effective in his mid to late 30's, but does anyone know of a particular incentive he'd have to come here over Detroit? I know we'll have the stigma of being a blue collar, hardworking team in a blue collar town, but that's pretty much Detroit to a tee as well. Does he have family here, or have some sort of relationship with Scott Skiles or any of the other players on our team? Or are we just planning on outbidding the Pistons? 

If that's the case, I'd rate our chances as 'so-so.' Ben seems to be in a perfect situation in Detroit, and I'm guessing Joe Dumars has already allocated a bit of money to sign him to a decent contract, and Big Ben doesn't seem like the type of guy that would jump ship too easily. The only other Ace in our sleeves that we might be able to have is if we'd be a significantly better team than the Pistons, but I think we can all agree that that isn't a very likely scenario.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

The Pistons have a lot of money tied up in Sheed and Rip for 3 and 4 seasons after next summer, close to half their cap. They're going to have to pony up for Tayshaun, and I don't think he's signing cheap (he still hasn't signed an extension with 2 days left to do so).

If they decide Darko is a player, they may prefer to pay him and Sheed instead of Big Ben? 

I'm not saying Detroit will let him go, but I can see them not wanting to max him out for 6 years considering their payroll situation.

But just to dream for a second, Tyson and Big Ben would make a scary 4th quarter tandem, and if Kirk and Ben and Duhon and Deng continue to develop, we'd be contenders for the East in 2006-07.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

bullsville said:


> The Pistons have a lot of money tied up in Sheed and Rip for 3 and 4 seasons after next summer, close to half their cap. They're going to have to pony up for Tayshaun, and I don't think he's signing cheap (he still hasn't signed an extension with 2 days left to do so).
> 
> If they decide Darko is a player, they may prefer to pay him and Sheed instead of Big Ben?
> 
> ...


Don't you think that would give us a debilitating lack of frontcourt scoring? Seriously, who would you pass the ball to in the post? I get the idea that the opposition could allocate one big man to guard those two and have one play roamer, making it that much harder for our guards and wings. 

Big Ben is a serious player, but does he fit next to Chandler?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Big Ben is a serious player, but does he fit next to Chandler?


Well, they could each play 36 minutes and only be on the floor for 1/2 the time. It's not ideal but the great D makes up for the lack of O. And it's not like you can leave either alone completely b/c they are such good offensive rebounders.

But I don't see Pax paying such a premium for an older player like Wallace. Or Wallace leaving the Pistons.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

johnston797 said:


> Well, they could each play 36 minutes and only be on the floor for 1/2 the time. It's not ideal but the great D makes up for the lack of O. And it's not like you can leave either alone completely b/c they are such good offensive rebounders.
> 
> But I don't see Pax paying such a premium for an older player like Wallace. Or Wallace leaving the Pistons.


DMD, I was going to reply to your post, but johnston797 made most of my points.

I agree that I don't see the Pistons not wanting to give Ben near-max money, and I was thinking 32 minutes for Ben and 35 for Tyson which only puts them on the floor together for 19 minutes. Most of that would be in the 4th quarter when Ben is doing most of our scoring anyway.

In the preseason, I've seen Tyson hit a few jumpers, and I expect he'll eventually be good enough to keep the defense honest. And like johnston said, they are each so good on the offensive glass that you can't leave them alone. And Ben is pretty good on pick and roll, although if you foul him going to the hole he can't hit FTs.

I just don't think that for the minutes they are on the floor together they would be any more debilitating to our offense than they would be to the other team's offense. Especially with the perimeter defenders we have, teams simply wouldn't drive the lane much at all with TC and Ben on the floor together (and their offensive rebounding game would be a non-factor).

But I do disagree that Pax wouldn't pay for Big Ben, IMHO he wouldn't hesitate to throw the max (5 years, $75 million) out there. The only caveat being that Pax misses out on Przybilla, IMO he's the #1 target because his game is so similar to Ben's and he's 5 years younger. 

But Big Ben brings the championship experience and leadership that this team may still need next summer, depending of course on who (if anyone) steps up in the leadership department this season.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

johnston797 said:


> Well, they could each play 36 minutes and only be on the floor for 1/2 the time. It's not ideal but the great D makes up for the lack of O. And it's not like you can leave either alone completely b/c they are such good offensive rebounders.
> 
> But I don't see Pax paying such a premium for an older player like Wallace. Or Wallace leaving the Pistons.


I don't like in when the two highest paid an longest tenured players on the team aren't ideal partners to play at the same time.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Really and truly, this is a no-brainer. It's surprising we haven't really talked about it seriously before. He's young enough so he'd likely be effective throughout his contract. And signing him would cripple a key division rival.

And if he elects to stay there, we ensure they've got a lot of money tied up in him. It's can't lose for us.

For those who worry about Tyson and him playing together, my response is so what? Tyson appears iffy to even be starting this year and Big Ben is a perennial DPOY. How about we sign the perennial DPOY and then worry about what to do with Tyson?

Ideally, we figure out how to get a Dirk/KG type player to play next to the two of them.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

Mikedc said:


> Really and truly, this is a no-brainer. It's surprising we haven't really talked about it seriously before. He's young enough so he'd likely be effective throughout his contract. And signing him would cripple a key division rival.
> 
> And if he elects to stay there, we ensure they've got a lot of money tied up in him. It's can't lose for us.
> 
> ...


I agree Mike.

I think the reason we never brought it up is that Dumars has been saying that Pistons will 'compensate' Big Ben on his next contract , so although it came up now , I'd still give it more than 90% he'll get a good offer from Pistons and stay.

I also agree with Yodurk about Ben being a guy that is likely to be effective for at least 5 more years.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Mikedc said:


> Really and truly, this is a no-brainer. It's surprising we haven't really talked about it seriously before. He's young enough so he'd likely be effective throughout his contract. And signing him would cripple a key division rival.
> 
> And if he elects to stay there, we ensure they've got a lot of money tied up in him. It's can't lose for us.
> 
> ...


Good points, Mike. Hadn't thought about using it as a way to "cripple" a division rival.

And even so, having Ben Wallace and Tyson Chandler creates it's own offense. You know how many offensive rebounds they'd get playing together? That's a whole lot of put-backs and 2nd chance opportunities.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Mikedc said:


> Really and truly, this is a no-brainer. It's surprising we haven't really talked about it seriously before. He's young enough so he'd likely be effective throughout his contract. And signing him would cripple a key division rival.
> 
> And if he elects to stay there, we ensure they've got a lot of money tied up in him. It's can't lose for us.
> 
> ...



Exactly right. You've got to keep your priorities straight. If you can get Big Ben, you go for it. Considering his style of play, I don't expect him to be a hugely different player at 36 than he is now.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Exactly right. You've got to keep your priorities straight. If you can get Big Ben, you go for it. Considering his style of play, I don't expect him to be a hugely different player at 36 than he is now.


I don't know. Wallace could be aweful at 36 and 37. If he loses a step and some intensity, he will be frigtheningly average or worse.


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

Deng101 said:


> We already have our Ben Wallace his name is Tyson Chandler.....


 :laugh: good one


----------



## Brian. (Jul 11, 2002)

Interesting he is such a part of the team and city I would think Joe D is almost forced to resign him. I also worry though how good of player he really will be in a couple of years. His relies on his athletism and hustle. Once he loses a step he is going to be a marginal NBA player at best.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Brian said:


> Interesting he is such a part of the team and city I would think Joe D is almost forced to resign him. I also worry though how good of player he really will be in a couple of years. His relies on his athletism and hustle. Once he loses a step he is going to be a marginal NBA player at best.


Good points. The health is a concern for a guy who relies on his athleticism, but I'm not sure about it being a huge worry. I think he's actually a pretty smart player, and when I look at guys who are somewhat comparable - Charles Oakley and Antonio Davis come to mind as similar but lesser players - guys who were extremely built and physical too - they were/are still effective players though obviously on the decline at 37-38. I'd take a risk on the last year given the high level we'd be pretty sure to get for 4 years.

I do think it's unlikely the Pistons wouldn't match an offer. I also have a hard time seein him leave. He's the face of Pistons basketball in a lot of ways.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> I do think it's unlikely the Pistons wouldn't match an offer. I also have a hard time seein him leave.


Yeah have that mixed feeling aswell. Though I wouldn't hesitate to throw a decent offer at Big Ben.
I also believe DET have worked there way into replacing him anyways. McDeyess proved he could play again, they do have Dale Davis to boot aswell, and finally it would give Milicic more minutes.



> "Under the rules of the NBA’s collective bargaining agreement, the sides must reach an agreement on an extension by Monday or Prince becomes an unrestricted free agent next summer. It is believed Prince is asking for $50 million for five years; the Pistons are offering $45 million.


Either way, i reckon we should target either of the players. If Prince doesn't resign, i'd say Wallace would be a lock (unless he wants to leave).

Forgot to add, i don't even think it would take a max contract to pry Wallace away. If we over something along the lines of 5yr/50-55M, i think it would be too much for the Pistons to match (they'd have around 50Mill tied in their starting 5 alone).



> Charles Oakley and Antonio Davis come to mind as similar but lesser players - guys who were extremely built and physical too


I too believe he'll be fine, he reminds me of those players and Karl Malone, players who really took care of their bodies.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

If it were legit under the CBA, would anyone here pay Wallace $25M for one season? Maybe $40M for two?

If you look at the contract in those terms, but the money has to be spread out because of the CBA, then it may make sense in spite of his age.

Of course, the Bulls would have his contract to deal with at age 37 still.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

Latest on Prince:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2208888



> The Detroit Pistons and the agent for Pistons defensive ace Tayshaun Prince told ESPN.com on Sunday night that they have reached an agreement in principle on a five-contract extension believed to be worth nearly $50 million.


----------



## kamego (Dec 29, 2003)

Ben is more then likely going to sign for near what Prince got. As Rasheed was given a similar contract also, it would be hard to think Ben values himself any more then those 2 players. I would expect him to resign easily.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

kamego said:


> Ben is more then likely going to sign for near what Prince got. As Rasheed was given a similar contract also, it would be hard to think Ben values himself any more then those 2 players. I would expect him to resign easily.


I agree with your premise for sure, but on the other hand a 5 year, $75 million offer from the Bulls would seemingly make Ben realize that he's worth more than Prince and Sheed.

It could come down to whether or not Ben chooses to give the Pistons the home team discount. He signed for not much over the MLE back in the summer of 2000, so he has definitely been severly "underpaid" in relation to his contributions.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

bullsville said:


> I agree with your premise for sure, but on the other hand a 5 year, $75 million offer from the Bulls would seemingly make Ben realize that he's worth more than Prince and Sheed.
> 
> It could come down to whether or not Ben chooses to give the Pistons the home team discount. He signed for not much over the MLE back in the summer of 2000, so he has definitely been severly "underpaid" in relation to his contributions.


I'm not sure Ben is going to get the max. I mean, he will be 32 years old. Past a certain age, whether you were a max level player before you sign your big deal is less and less relevant. Shaq signed a max deal at 33, but he's sort of a special case. Kidd and Nash both signed 6 year deals at age 30, and Nash didn't get the max.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> I'm not sure Ben is going to get the max. I mean, he will be 32 years old. Past a certain age, whether you were a max level player before you sign your big deal is less and less relevant. Shaq signed a max deal at 33, but he's sort of a special case. Kidd and Nash both signed 6 year deals at age 30, and Nash didn't get the max.


I think Ben is worth more than Kidd or Nash, but maybe that's just me.

Ben has been Defensive Player of the Year in two of the past 3 seasons, and big men like that are much harder to find than even great PGs like Kidd and Nash. I just don't see any way that Ben isn't a max player at age 32, especially only for 5 years from another team (Kidd got 7 years and Nash 6).

Ben seems like a poster boy for the Pax/Skiles right way, IMHO if there is one FA who Pax would easily give the max to next summer without blinking an eye, it's Big Ben. Even if Ben slows down a little at age 35, at 36 he's a $17 million expiring contract.

Now that Tayshaun has reportedly signed a 5 year, $50 million extension, the Pistons have a hell of a lot of money tied up long-term in Tay and Sheed and Rip. We can always hope that the Pistons experience a drop-off this season under Flip, who never impressed me as a great coach with the Wolves.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

bullsville said:


> (Kidd got 7 years and Nash 6).


Actually, Kidd only signed a six year deal. In the previous CBA, that was the maximum possible number of years for players 30 and over signing new contracts.

I wish there was a rule like that for 32 year olds that said they could only get four year deals, but I doubt there is.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Ben would be worth throwing the max at him. When ben gets older he will use his strength and bball IQ to continue getting double digit rebounds. An interior that scores 20 pts and grabs 25 rebounds is fine and equates to most frontlines.

However, I really see Atlanta throwing the most dough at him. It depends on how much Darko grows this season. Darko looks like he is going to be worth $10 million per (like Curry, Chandler, Dalembert) and it is hard to imagine the Pistons have 4 $10 million plus players in their frontcourt alone not including Dice.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> Ben is more then likely going to sign for near what Prince got. As Rasheed was given a similar contract also


Rasheed was given a similar contract? His contract is huge, and its what Portland gave him if memory serves correctly.
2005/06: $10,260,000
2006/07: $11,400,000
2007/08: $12,540,000
2008/09: $13,680,000
And you really don't want to see Rip's contract either.

Refer to my previous post, i really cbf repeating myself. But having Ben could be a positive influence on Chanlder, which would be an added bonus.


----------



## BULLS23 (Apr 13, 2003)

With Prince signed, they do have a hell of alot of money tied up in the starting five . . . BUT you have to think about the parties involved here. What motivates Big Ben is probably different than what motivates other players in the league at this point. It will be very hard to pry him away from a winning situation that possibly could continue to be a winning situation until his next contract is up. I mean, they have Billups, Rip, Tayshaun, and Sheed locked up right? I think if Ben decides to go for rings, he can stay in Detroit and they can be in the mix for the Finals for 3-5 more years at least with most (if not all) of that core plus an improving Darko. I'd absolutely love to have a guy like Ben on this team simply for his outstanding jib, but outside of more money I don't see his incentive to come being greater than the chance at rings. If I were Pax my sights would be set on Nene next year(RFA I believe?) a better scorer, maybe not as physical, but who is?


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

Chicago will have the money and could target Pistons' burly center as free-agent acquisition.





> That brings us to the Bulls, who are desperately trying to get back to the top of the NBA world. And with $20 million to play with, and Wallace an unrestricted free agent in July, they could do it.
> 
> The Bulls and the Atlanta Hawks, the franchise closest to Wallace's home in Alabama, will be the two teams that come after Wallace the hardest.
> 
> ...


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> The Pistons have been prudently preparing for Wallace's eventual free agency the past few years. They should be in a position to reward him with the most lucrative contract offer in Pistons history.


I don't see how that could be, sure they could offer him the max, but suffer the luxury tax to boot. And i'd go further to say it seems to be more likely they've prepared for his escape, rather than the ability to offer him the most lucrative contract in Pistons history.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

No brainer to max out Wallace, in my opinion, from a basketball perspective. You guys are talking about it in the sense of Wallace/Chandler. But it would likely be Wallace/Chandler/Sweetney/Sogaila. There is your mix of scoring and defense at the 4/5. Not to mention the absolutley sick dominance of the paint that the defensive end of the court during the 4th quarter when Wallace/Chandler are out there together. 

The Bulls would contend for the eastern conference championship next season. Period. It would be freakin' brilliant. But all that is from a basketball perspective only.

The real question is whether or not a max offer is wasted on Wallace, thus limiting the opportunity to make a run at Pryz, Nene or others. I can easily see the Pistons not matching. Particularly if they don't make the Finals (or even the eastern conference finals) and if Darko keeps coming along. 

But what I do see is Ben rejecting it and staying in Detroit. If Paxson thinks its a waste of time with potentially severe opportunity costs, he needs to take a pass on the offer. 

Oh yeah, impied in the above is that I don't have any concerns with Wallace's age. 3 reasons: (a) the rest of the core would be extremely young; (b) Wallace, as others have pointed out, will be effective even near the end of that contract; and (c) the immediate return is that we become a contender NOW without sacrificing too much by way of long term growth.

If it went down, it would be the ****.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> The real question is whether or not a max offer is wasted on Wallace, thus limiting the opportunity to make a run at Pryz, Nene or others. I can easily see the Pistons not matching.


A max offer to a UFA like Wallace won't limit us because there's no waiting period or anything the way there is with a RFA.

If we make an offer to an RFA, the amount we offer is counted against the cap for the 7 day waiting period while the right-holding team considers whether to match.

For UFAs, that's not the case. If we make an offer and Wallace accepts, he's ours. If not, we can always keep the offer on the table (and not sign anyone) if we so desire, but we're not locked into anything.

Typically you see the big UFAs go pretty quick though.

However, I think we'd see some major-league rioting if the Pistons let him walk.


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

our only hope of landing big ben is detriot has a bad season, and darko becomes a decent starter. then we might have a chance of getting big ben, but it will come costly, though i think ben is well worth the max for 5 years, not sure about 6 though, but he will be a big expiring contract at his final year anyway. mutombo was making 18mil a year in his last year, and he was contributing something like 5pts 5rebs. i think Ben will be better than that.
realistically i dont see the pistons let go of big ben, if darko indeed emerges as a young stud, i see the pistons trying to trade rasheed wallace for an expring contract then sign Ben wallace to pair with darko.
rasheed is far more expandable than Ben for the pistons.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Mikedc said:


> A max offer to a UFA like Wallace won't limit us because there's no waiting period or anything the way there is with a RFA.
> 
> If we make an offer to an RFA, the amount we offer is counted against the cap for the 7 day waiting period while the right-holding team considers whether to match.
> 
> ...


There would be a waiting period while he's thinking about it, right? Or can the Bulls make an offer to him and Pryz at the same time, with one offer being revoked upon acceptance of the other? 

If the Bulls offered a max deal to Wallace, I doubt we'd get an immediate response. Wouldn't that hamstring us?


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> I'm not sure Ben is going to get the max. I mean, he will be 32 years old. Past a certain age, whether you were a max level player before you sign your big deal is less and less relevant. Shaq signed a max deal at 33, but he's sort of a special case. Kidd and Nash both signed 6 year deals at age 30, and Nash didn't get the max.


If we sign Ben, he'll get the max. He would probably take less than max to stay in Detroit, but he isn't leaving for less than it.

As for whether or not I'd like to have Wallace, I'm a little torn. On paper, it's a great move, although to be an honest-to-goodness contender, we'd need Deng, Gordon, and Hinrich to step up their offensive games to a new level, and really quickly.

But imo, there were signs of slippage in Wallace's game last year. He's definitely slowing down a bit, even if only out of self-preservation. I also don't think he has the sort of game that will age well. Sure, he's a beast, strength-wise, but the league has lots of those. What sets Wallace apart is his freakish quickness and pogo-stick leaping ability. Those qualities can go by the wayside real, real quick when you're on the wrong side of 30.

The other thing to consider here is that despite the fact that Detroit isn't a major market, they are a heavyweight when it comes to revenue-generating. The Palace is basically the model for every NBA arena that's been built since, including the UC, and they do quite well when it comes to the bottom line. Poverty is not going to be a reason why the Pistons might let him go.


----------



## Sith (Oct 20, 2003)

if the pistons dont make to the finals this year, i dont see both wallaces being pistons together again the following year. they have to either let ben walk, or trade rasheed for an expiring contract, and use that moeny to sign ben. because they know their future is on darko. they will not let darko go anywhere if he had a solid season. hes big, can play the center, can score, reb and block shots. no way they let him go and keep both wallaces.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> There would be a waiting period while he's thinking about it, right? Or can the Bulls make an offer to him and Pryz at the same time, with one offer being revoked upon acceptance of the other?
> 
> If the Bulls offered a max deal to Wallace, I doubt we'd get an immediate response. Wouldn't that hamstring us?


Pretty sure they can do the latter. They can make an offer... the issue is with signing an RFA to an offer sheet. That's a binding contract subject to matching by the other team.

I think it's more of a theoretical problem than a real one. The real issue is that guys typically signal their willingness to listen beforehand. It's like any other negotiation process where you've got to pay attention to the cues.

For example, the Bulls 2000 cap space fiasco is a good example of how your concern could come to pass. The Bulls (supposedly at Jerry Reinsdorf's insistences) spent a week or two fruitlessly trecking to San Antonio and then Detroit to meet with Tim Duncan and Grant Hill. In the meantime the Magic stepped in and got the inside track on Tracy McGrady.

Yet things didn't have to go that way. Krause reportedly wanted to just go after TMac first because the signals he'd gotten from the bigger name guys led him to believe they didn't have much of a shot (for example, the fact those guys weren't even willing to come to Chicago to visit should have clued us in).

So the main thing is to pay attention to what gets said. If every sign points to the Pistons matching and/or Ben not being receptive to playing here anyway, then don't waste time. But if things don't go that well for the Pistons, it might be worth it. The likelihood of a catch determines how much time you should spend fishing.

The other thing to consider is that almost no one I can think of steps up and signs a RFA to an offer sheet. First, you have to get their agreement on terms, but as I mentioned, it's binding and imposes a cap hold. Thus, making an immediate offer to a RFA pretty much ends your chances at anyone else, whereas making an immediate offer to a UFA allows you to back out right up to the moment the deal is signed.


----------



## SPIN DOCTOR (Oct 31, 2002)

This is almost an entirely no-lose proposition.

Best case - We have a studly frontline for the next 5 years, we will have so many extra possesions a game, that we be fine even if we cant shoot.

Worst case - Piston are locked into matching (even with a small hometown discount), and are off the lux-tax cliff for the next half decade.

Me really likes, if a deal like this happened, we could be in the title mix, and if we get a decent draft with our 2 first-rounders...

never mind, too many ifs.


----------



## hps (Jul 23, 2002)

I'd like it if Chicago signed Wallace...for one thing, I wouldn't be suprised is Chandler comes off the bench again in favor of Othella, Skiles sure isn't afraid to use unconventional lineups.

We could start Wallace, Songalia, and have Tyson and Sweetney rotate. And Othella is the fifth big instead of starting.

And Wallace's leadership, toughness, and attitude is also sorely needed, especially with AD gone.

Add to those 5 bigs a maturing Hinrich, Gordon, Duhon, Deng, Nocioni, and two draft picks, and we are very solid.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

It's a no-brainer to give Wallace $80M over 5 after giving Chandler about $55M (pro-rated to 5 yeas) assuming you are also ready to give $50M to Hinrich, Gordon and Deng and another $45M to a big that can give you some low post scoring (Sweetney?) and spend another $10M a year on the other 6 roster spots. 

80 + 55 + 150 + 45 + 50 ($10m *5 years) = $380M every 5 years = $77M a year

Now luckily Deng and Gordon are cheap for 2 more years after this one. But still for the last 3 years of Wallace's deal, that's going to be very healthy payroll and assumes that the MLE is NOT used most years and some of Duhon and Nocioni and Songalia might have to be replaced with cheaper alternatives.

Not sure I see that happening....


----------



## Brian. (Jul 11, 2002)

From today's detroit news FWIW



> Q: Do you think the Pistons are going to have a hard time signing Ben Wallace next summer?
> 
> A: No, I don't. And please don't buy into the propaganda that has already started to leak out about how Wallace, at 31, is somehow past his prime and too old to deserve a huge contract.
> 
> ...


http://www.detnews.com/2005/pistons/0511/02/E04-369002.htm


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Brian said:


> From today's detroit news FWIW
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.detnews.com/2005/pistons/0511/02/E04-369002.htm


Wow, I can't groove with that writer's take on Ben. First off, who gets better in the NBA after age 31? Even Jordan didn't really get better, he was just able to maintain his ability until the age of, what was it, 35 or 36? Nobody gets better at this point. I can't think of one person off hand.

Secondly, the dude has got to learn about new CBA. The Bulls and Hawks can't even offer Wallace a six year deal. The maximum would be five barring a sign and trade, which is not what he's talking about.

Booo!


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Wow, I can't groove with that writer's take on Ben. First off, who gets better in the NBA after age 31? Even Jordan didn't really get better, he was just able to maintain his ability until the age of, what was it, 35 or 36? Nobody gets better at this point. I can't think of one person off hand.
> 
> Secondly, the dude has got to learn about new CBA. The Bulls and Hawks can't even offer Wallace a six year deal. The maximum would be five barring a sign and trade, which is not what he's talking about.
> 
> Booo!


Not only that, but he thinks the Pistons will be able to offer him 4 years, $70M. That can't possibly be right. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be able to exceed a certain percentage (25%??) of the salary cap unless it's for the player raises of 8-10%. In other words, the best the Pistons can do is offer him 6 years, $90M, roughly speaking (ala Michael Redd). The best the Bulls or Hawks could do is 5 years, $70M (ala Joe Johnson). 

I'll overlook the fact that he called the Bulls a lottery team. He must've missed out on last season.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

*Ben: My heart is here*

*AUBURN HILLS *-- If he has his way, Ben Wallace, who will be an unrestricted free agent this summer, will finish his career as a Piston. 

"I came here and played the best basketball of my career here," he said before the season opener Wednesday night against the 76ers. "This team, this organization opened their arms up to me and let me come in at a time when probably only a couple of other teams would have. The Pistons stepped up to the plate. 

"There is no question where my heart is at." 

Wallace, whose agent, Steve Kauffman, was at The Palace on Wednesday, added that being in a contract year will have no effect on how he approaches the season. 

"Not at all," he said. "I am just going out there to do what I do: just play basketball. I am not worrying about anything else except getting my crown back. That's the only thing on my mind." 

Wallace probably will be the marquee name in the free-agent market next summer and is likely to command a maximum-salary contract from several teams. 

But, Wallace said, he won't talk about any of that during the season. 

"We have a group of guys here that enjoy playing the game," he said. "We're not easily sidetracked by anything, and that's a big key for us. We don't go out and try to negotiate our contracts through the media. 

"We just go out and play basketball and let everything else take care of itself. Like I said last year, if you got something coming, you are going to get it. Just play." 

Wallace's mini pregame news conference marked the first time he had spoken to the media since media day. He wasn't mad at anybody, he said. This was his first full training camp in two years (he missed much of last year's after having an appendectomy), and he wanted to devote all his energy to it. 

"I just wanted to get through the camp and see what was going on and give some of the other guys a chance to shine," he said.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

spongyfungy said:


> "Not at all," he said. "I am just going out there to do what I do: just play basketball. I am not worrying about anything else except getting my crown back. That's the only thing on my mind."





> "We have a group of guys here that enjoy playing the game," he said. "We're not easily sidetracked by anything, and that's a big key for us. We don't go out and try to negotiate our contracts through the media.
> 
> "We just go out and play basketball and let everything else take care of itself. Like I said last year, if you got something coming, you are going to get it. Just play."


 


> "I just wanted to get through the camp and see what was going on and give some of the other guys a chance to shine," he said.


I have to say, I really like the cut of his deoxyribonucleic acid.

I'd love to have him play in Chicago, but I agree that there is no chance in H-E-double hockey sticks that he is going to leave Detroit.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Brian said:


> From today's detroit news FWIW
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.detnews.com/2005/pistons/0511/02/E04-369002.htm


Pssst, garbage. Piston lackey trying desperately to keep Wallace through media propaganda. Ironically, it's exactly what he decries.

Most Pistons fans can see that Big Ben is slowly declining physically, and that he only has so many good years left. I wouldn't sign him to more than a 4 year deal if I could help it.


----------

