# Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs, $32M/4 yrs, $38M w/incentives)



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

> Talks between the Bulls and Mark Bartelstein, Gibson's Chicago-based agent, continue. Sources said the roughly $8 million gap over four years isn't atypical for this stage of negotiations.





> The Bulls want to avoid having Gibson become a restricted free agent next summer should they fail to reach an extension, particularly since they were burned when Omer Asik reached that status. But they also have no plans to commit $10 million annually to Gibson, 27, when Derrick Rose, Carlos Boozer, Luol Deng and Joakim Noah all average north of that figure.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/ct-spt-1029-bulls-chicago--20121029,0,2950094.story


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

8 million apart. Taj is aiming high. Hope he "plays within himself" and signs a reasonable contract.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Good Hope said:


> 8 million apart. Taj is aiming high. Hope he "plays within himself" and signs a reasonable contract.



What do you figure that gap actually is? $8 million/year - four years vs. $10 million/year - four years?


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



jnrjr79 said:


> What do you figure that gap actually is? $8 million/year - four years vs. $10 million/year - four years?


That was my guess. I'm guessing talks will settle at 4 years, $34 million or 3 years, $27 million. Taj may want to take the guaranteed money now, and still be in line for another major contract when he's 30 or 31.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

Hes a 5 million a year Player, 3 years 15 million... That is more than he ever imagined he would have been paid coming out of college.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



thebizkit69u said:


> Hes a 5 million a year Player, 3 years 15 million... That is more than he ever imagined he would have been paid coming out of college.


In reality he is only worth 5, but with the way these owners throw money around he can probably sucker someone into 8-9 on the open market.


I really hope the Bulls don't pay him 8 a year. He's not even close to worth it. Hes a backup big. He has no potential to be a quality starter so I don't understand why he'd get 8-10 a year.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

i actually thing taj is a starter caliber big man , he is just not a scorer but an ok rebounder who excels on defense.

he'd probably start on 8-12 teams.

to me thats worth about 8 mil. a season.

pretty much i could say the same for asik.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Da Grinch said:


> i actually thing taj is a starter caliber big man , he is just not a scorer but an ok rebounder who excels on defense.
> 
> he'd probably start on 8-12 teams.
> 
> ...


I don't agree, but Asik has been looking good so far this pre season at least so I could be wrong.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



thebizkit69u said:


> Hes a 5 million a year Player, 3 years 15 million... That is more than he ever imagined he would have been paid coming out of college.



That's silly. I don't think the Bulls should be lucking up a bunch of dough in bench players, but it's laughable to say he's a $5 million player. How do you even arrive at a number like that? He'll obviously get more than that (which in and of itself means your position is incorrect), and moreover, it wouldn't just be some rogue/crazy NBA exec who would give it to him. I bet you could find 10-15 teams that would be happy to have him locked up at $8 million/year.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



jnrjr79 said:


> That's silly. I don't think the Bulls should be lucking up a bunch of dough in bench players, but it's laughable to say he's a $5 million player. How do you even arrive at a number like that? He'll obviously get more than that (which in and of itself means your position is incorrect), and moreover, it wouldn't just be some rogue/crazy NBA exec who would give it to him. I bet you could find 10-15 teams that would be happy to have him locked up at $8 million/year.


1/3 to 1/2 of the league would be happy to have Gibson as their 4th (on average) most expensive player?

I don't think so.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

Under no circumstances is Taj Gibson only worth 5 million dollars a year. Assuming we're still talking about the NBA.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



R-Star said:


> I don't think so.



Which virtually assures its truthfulness.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



jnrjr79 said:


> Which virtually assures its truthfulness.


Good job elaborating and naming all the team that would line up to have Gibson as their 4th highest player.


I'm not saying there isn't any. But half the league? Not a chance.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Dornado said:


> Under no circumstances is Taj Gibson only worth 5 million dollars a year. Assuming we're still talking about the NBA.


His fair market value is well above 5. The problem is, fans always like to complain about owners overpaying, and then turn around and defend it in the next sentence.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



R-Star said:


> His fair market value is well above 5. The problem is, fans always like to complain about owners overpaying, and then turn around and defend it in the next sentence.


So you concede that your "in reality he's only worth 5 million" comment was wrong?


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



R-Star said:


> Good job elaborating and naming all the team that would line up to have Gibson as their 4th highest player.
> 
> 
> I'm not saying there isn't any. But half the league? Not a chance.


Assuming these teams have guys on rookie contracts being the 4th highest player on the team isn't a huge deal for a guy who is at worst a solid first big off the bench.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Dornado said:


> So you concede that your "in reality he's only worth 5 million" comment was wrong?


No. The in reality part was meant to be there. With the way teams overpay, he's worth well over 5 like I said. But if teams would quit getting in bidding wars over bench players, and maxing out anyone who's a starter these days Taj would be worth around 5.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



R-Star said:


> No. The in reality part was meant to be there. With the way teams overpay, he's worth well over 5 like I said. But if teams would quit getting in bidding wars over bench players, and maxing out anyone who's a starter these days Taj would be worth around 5.


So... in some universe where NBA teams don't have to compete over talent he isn't worth 5 million dollars? Got it.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



jnrjr79 said:


> That's silly. I don't think the Bulls should be lucking up a bunch of dough in bench players, but it's laughable to say he's a $5 million player. How do you even arrive at a number like that? He'll obviously get more than that (which in and of itself means your position is incorrect), and moreover, it wouldn't just be some rogue/crazy NBA exec who would give it to him. I bet you could find 10-15 teams that would be happy to have him locked up at $8 million/year.


On this team, hes a five million dollar player. His value is coming off the bench, scoring a few points and shutting down the other teams backup bum. You don't pay 8-10 million for a 28 year old niche role player. 

Listen I like Taj, but the Bulls don't need to lock him up at the PERCEIVED NBA value. He may be a borderline NBA starter, but hes not that kind of player on *THIS *team. The Guy is a very good defender but hes a below average big man on offense, the guy can't score when defended, how do you pay that kind of player 8 million a year on a team that's trying to build a title winner?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

You get five million just to sit on the bench and chew gum if you're tall enough. You hustle, grab some rebound and play defense you get 8 million. Of course you can opt out of this reality and chose one in which Gibson is worth 5 million per year, but he's still going to get 8 to 10 in the real world.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Diable said:


> You get five million just to sit on the bench and chew gum if you're tall enough. You hustle, grab some rebound and play defense you get 8 million. Of course you can opt out of this reality and chose one in which Gibson is worth 5 million per year, but he's still going to get 8 to 10 in the real world.



Udonis Haslem has won 2 NBA titles while never making over 7 million a season and he was MUCH more than a chew bubble gum player in his career. 

Just because 90% of NBA GM's are retarded, it doesn't mean the Bull have to be as well. This team has very little financial flexibility, they have a problem scoring points without Rose and Taj doesn't help that. Taj isn't a young prospect to build around and the Bulls are aging.... Why would they commit 8-10 million on a player who isn't even a starter on this team?

I think 5-6 million a year is a fair deal from the Bulls. If Taj wants to earn 10 million a year playing for Sacramento, Orlando or Charlotte then good for him, but there is no way in hell another title contender is going to break the bank for this guy. 

26 mil over 4 years, he gets his 8 million on the last year on his deal. Major market perk, high visibility due to playing next to Rose and he would be on a good team.. Its a good and fair deal IMO.

If its not good enough, then trade him for an asset.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

A younger Haslem. That was a very good comparison. Obviously there's some differences, but I'd say its an apt comparison.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

How much of Cuban's money did Haslem turn down to stay in Miami? I want to say 12 per, but I honestly don't recall exactly. Haslem did not chose to make more money. I don't think that's very likely here.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Diable said:


> How much of Cuban's money did Haslem turn down to stay in Miami? I want to say 12 per, but I honestly don't recall exactly. Haslem did not chose to make more money. I don't think that's very likely here.


Wasn't aware of that. Doesn't surprise me though. Kind of proves the point that there's always someone willing to overpay, especially for a big.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

Haslem, even at his best, was never the defender Gibson is.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Dornado said:


> Haslem, even at his best, was never the defender Gibson is.


I'm not sure I agree with that at all. Haslem up until a couple years ago was a very nice defender.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



thebizkit69u said:


> On this team, hes a five million dollar player. His value is coming off the bench, scoring a few points and shutting down the other teams backup bum. You don't pay 8-10 million for a 28 year old niche role player.
> 
> Listen I like Taj, but the Bulls don't need to lock him up at the PERCEIVED NBA value. He may be a borderline NBA starter, but hes not that kind of player on *THIS *team. The Guy is a very good defender but hes a below average big man on offense, the guy can't score when defended, how do you pay that kind of player 8 million a year on a team that's trying to build a title winner?



That's fine with me. I largely agree. I thought you were saying his market value was $5 million. I agree he could well be worth less to the Bulls than his market value is. 

Taj's market value is probably $8 million or so. If he wants $10 million and can find someone to pay him that, good for him. But I'm not sure the Bulls should even go to $8 million. 

One of the resident cap-ologists can chime in here, but I have severe doubts that adding a guy making close to $10 million is a good idea when you already have four guys north of $10 million on the roster for the next couple of seasons. Moreover, if the supposed "2014 plan" exists, extending Taj for big bucks past that could prove problematic, I would think.

The other factor is whether you really believe you have something special in Mirotic. If you do, then does a long-term investment in Taj really make any sense at a high cost?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

I agree that 8 mil is his fair market value and he could sucker a team into more.

My only point is that these guys are getting overpaid.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



jnrjr79 said:


> That's fine with me. I largely agree. I thought you were saying his market value was $5 million. I agree he could well be worth less to the Bulls than his market value is.
> 
> Taj's market value is probably $8 million or so. If he wants $10 million and can find someone to pay him that, good for him. But I'm not sure the Bulls should even go to $8 million.
> 
> ...


the thing is , if he worth it , pay him if he plays at or beyond his value he is very tradeable ....mirotic's value means nothing, its better to have too many good and tradeable players , than too few.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

If we don't pay him, then what do we trade him for? There is no reason to not get some value after a decently sought after big. 

For example, we could turn his contract and the TPE into OJ Mayo next season assuming he really was interested in signing with us.

If we do not extend him, then Boozer most likely does not get amnestied at all and we better hope that Mirotic is our future starting PF, else we will be replacing one major hole with another.

It is sort of odd to me that a lot of the same people complaining that we won't pay for a winner think that shelling out an extra $2 million a year for a proven guy who knows the system and is a good 7th man to spot starter is overpaying. To me, Taj skillset is more of an Ibaka lite.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Da Grinch said:


> ...the thing is , if he worth it , pay him if he plays at or beyond his value he is very tradeable ....


I agree, it is the best course of action ... unfortunately we have some significant financial ballast that has an effect on management judgment for the next two years.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



Rhyder said:


> If we don't pay him, then what do we trade him for? There is no reason to not get some value after a decently sought after big.
> 
> For example, we could turn his contract and the TPE into OJ Mayo next season assuming he really was interested in signing with us.
> 
> ...


My concern would be that if Taj is holding steady at $10 million, that contract may actually not be incredibly move-able. At $8 million, I suppose I would agree that the risk is fairly low if Taj performs comparably to where he has in the past.

The biggest factor in my mind in favor of extending Taj is simply that Boozer has significant injury history and has some games where he underperforms woefully and Thibs relies on Taj to close.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



jnrjr79 said:


> My concern would be that if Taj is holding steady at $10 million, that contract may actually not be incredibly move-able. At $8 million, I suppose I would agree that the risk is fairly low if Taj performs comparably to where he has in the past.
> 
> The biggest factor in my mind in favor of extending Taj is simply that Boozer has significant injury history and has some games where he underperforms woefully and Thibs relies on Taj to close.


Trading Taj this season or during next offseason makes the most sense for us (should we not extend him). This could open up some wiggle room to make another offseason move and use our TPE (Mayo or someone of that nature).

Sans that, I wouldn't mind keeping him at $8/year over the course of his contract, especially if it is only for three years. Retaining Taj allows us to amnesty Boozer if we can get someone better and/or cheaper to replace him.

I do not want to lose Taj for nothing like we did with Asik. If you recall, I had been in favor of trading Omer last offseason (not a very popular position).


----------



## Ragingbull33 (Apr 10, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

I think Gibson is great, but he is not worth more than 9 mil per, max! That said, if we lose him I am going to be pissed.


----------



## Ragingbull33 (Apr 10, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

D'oh! Trade him!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...-bulls-deal-unlikely-20121031,0,4864577.story

Barring a last-minute change of mind that even Taj Gibson said is unlikely, the fourth-year Chicago Bulls forward will not agree to a contract extension by the 10:59 p.m. deadline.

That means Gibson, 27, will be a restricted free agent at season's end. The Bulls can match any offers he receives.

Ads by Google
According to sources, the Bulls have offered a four-year extension worth roughly $32 million. Gibson is believed to be seeking in the $9-10 million range annually.

"I doubt it," Gibson said, when asked if he'd change his mind postgame. "Gotta move on."


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

The Swirsk just tweeted Gibson signed.

https://twitter.com/swirsk054


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*

Woohoo! Hopefully it doesn't go over 8 million annually


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



mvP to the Wee said:


> Woohoo! Hopefully it doesn't go over 8 million annually


I still haven't seen anything else on it since the papers have all reported he was going to free agency. But I can't imagine chuck got this wrong.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update*



narek said:


> I still haven't seen anything else on it since the papers have all reported he was going to free agency. But I can't imagine chuck got this wrong.


Ah but now I find this from Doug Thonas:

https://twitter.com/dougthonus:



> 11th hour deal for Taj, 4/38, pricey for taj but less than open market would be


 So that's 9.5 mill.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*

38 over 4. Hmm, slightly overpaid.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*



mvP to the Wee said:


> 38 over 4. Hmm, slightly overpaid.


he wanted more:




> Taj Gibson changed his mind and agreed to a contract extension with the Bulls. The extension for the forward is for four years and is worth $38 million.
> 
> "I looked at the numbers and that's a lot of money, especially the security," Gibson said.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...bulls-kings-chicago--20121101,0,3472958.story
Might have gotten it.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*

I wonder how it is distributed over the 4 years


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*

So people are complaining about Derozan getting 10 mil a year, but Gibson gets 9.5?


Ridiculous.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*

Agent Mark Bartelstein tells USAT incentives need to be reached for Bulls forward Taj Gibson's four-year extension to be $38 million


May not be too bad


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*



R-Star said:


> So people are complaining about Derozan getting 10 mil a year, but Gibson gets 9.5?
> 
> 
> Ridiculous.


Apples and oranges... a big man who can defend or an athletic wing that can't shoot from the perimeter...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*



Dornado said:


> Apples and oranges... a big man who can defend or an athletic wing that can't shoot from the perimeter...


He's a slashing guard with a quality inside game. Hes worth a hell of a lot more than Taj Gibson.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*

$8M/yr now being reported. $38M is with incentives.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*



King Joseus said:


> $8M/yr now being reported. $38M is with incentives.


That's more sensible.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

*Re: Gibson Extension Update (Gibson re-signs)*



King Joseus said:


> $8M/yr now being reported. $38M is with incentives.


That is somewhat a fair market for Taj. Would have preferred $6-7 range but that was just wishful thinking. Our main pieces are all locked up. We now just need to add other pieces preferably another star player.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

From what I gather, Taj's deal is 4 years, almost $33 million. He has incentives that should bring him up to $35 million fairly easily barring injury, and the rest of his incentives are unlikely to be reached.

Sounds like the cap hit will be roughly $8.75 million per year over the course of his contract. I don't mind the extension at all as that's a very tradable contract. I know people's opinions on this vary, but I would gladly pay Taj almost $9 million per year over Omer's $8 million.

Good move.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

With this deal, I am expecting a trade to be made by the Bulls this year in February. I think they will finally pull it this year at the trading deadline.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

I'm with Rhyder. A good deal that leaves the Bulls options going forward. And its good to commit to the guys who commit to the team.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Boozer will be gone next year. Taj is not a starter on a contending team, but the bulls aren't going to compete for a title in a while so its a decent cheap boozer replacement.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Boozer will be gone next year. Taj is not a starter on a contending team, but the bulls aren't going to compete for a title in a while so its a decent cheap boozer replacement.



I could see that, depending on Boozer's performance this year, assuming Taj isn't moved. That would likely give you 1 year to see Taj as the starter before moving Mirotic over.


----------



## FutureBullsDr (Apr 17, 2012)

Why is everyone so high on Mirotic?


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

FutureBullsDr said:


> Why is everyone so high on Mirotic?


From what I've seen, his game is going to translate to the NBA well. Boozer is gone, and Mitotic is poised to be the PF of the future moving forward. Taj will assume the backup PF role, defensive stopper... Who can also play along side mitotic when the Bulls go small. 

I'm not big on YouTube clips, but if you can't watch any of the Madrid games live or in full, spend a little time watching some film on mitotic and I think you'll jump on board. 

Sent from my SGH-T999 using VerticalSports.Com App


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Firefight said:


> From what I've seen, his game is going to translate to the NBA well. Boozer is gone, and Mitotic is poised to be the PF of the future moving forward. Taj will assume the backup PF role, defensive stopper... Who can also play along side mitotic when the Bulls go small.
> 
> I'm not big on YouTube clips, but if you can't watch any of the Madrid games live or in full, spend a little time watching some film on mitotic and I think you'll jump on board.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-T999 using VerticalSports.Com App


We are talking about years from now until he had an impact on this team. Mirotic will not start over Taj on a Tom Thibs team, mirotic hasn't shown anything on defense that warrants him an instant starting job.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

FutureBullsDr said:


> Why is everyone so high on Mirotic?



http://www.in-the-game.org/?p=21126


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

FutureBullsDr said:


> Why is everyone so high on Mirotic?


Everyone but Tom Thibodeau.


----------

