Noah and Bulls agree on $60 million extension

[Who]

I don't think the Bulls need another star to be a Championship caliber side. I think the foursome of Rose, Boozer, Noah and Deng is good enough to win a title.

Not wild about their supporting cast but they'll be able to address that over time + some of their younger reserves will hopefully show improvement and grow into their roles.

  I don't see them as better than 4th in the conference right now.

I have them fourth too.

[Chris]

Here is my question.  What risk do the Bulls take by waiting until next season to resign Noah?  Even on the current CBA, does anyone really see Noah getting significantly more money than that as a RFA?  

Unless there is a massive change to the cap ... I cannot see Chicago signing Noah to a cheaper deal if they waited until next summer.

I think the most likely contract is in the $60-65 million range and that Noah would have a legit shot at $68-72 million deal as a free agent next summer.

If there was a major change to the CBA, then all bets are off.

What is your definition of a major change to the CBA?  Hard cap?  Lower cap total?  Lower max contracts?  No more MLE?  Shorter contract lengths?

All of those I think are very real possibilities, and all would lead to a more team friendly contract if signed next summer.

The bottom line is the Bulls had the leverage here since all signs point to the CBA being team friendly (which is why everyone wants extensions now, rather than next summer) and somehow Noah got a tremendous deal for himself.  Not great work by the Bulls.    

[Who]

Here is my question.  What risk do the Bulls take by waiting until next season to resign Noah?  Even on the current CBA, does anyone really see Noah getting significantly more money than that as a RFA?  

Unless there is a massive change to the cap ... I cannot see Chicago signing Noah to a cheaper deal if they waited until next summer.

If there was a major change to the CBA, then all bets are off.

What is your definition of a major change to the CBA?  Hard cap?  Lower cap total?  Lower max contracts?  No more MLE?  Shorter contract lengths?

If the cap were to go down to $50 million or below, then yes I think it would be a bad deal. If it stays in the $55 million range, then all is well.

If they brought in a hard cap of $70 million, then it's a fine contract (in general terms it's fine ... specifically for Chicago it means they lose Deng which hurts). If it was $65 million, then it's a slight negative but they can work around it. If the hard cap was $60 million, then it's a major problem.

I don't think they'll reduce the maximum number of years below five years. So no issues there.

-------------------------------------------------

I don't consider major CBA changes to be a certainty. A possibility, yes, but not a certainty.

I would be very surprised if we saw a hard cap implemented that was below the current luxury tax threshold + would be very surprised if the cap fell down to $50 million or lower.

[Chris]

Also, for those of you expecting Noah's numbers to go through the roof next year, making this contract look good, let's think about it a little more.

Last year, Noah played most of the season next to guys like Gibson and Brad Miller as the other big men in the rotation, and he averaged 10.7 points and 11 rebounds.  Next year he will be playing next to Carlos Boozer.  Is it safe to assume that Boozer will be averaging more than 7 rebounds per game?  I think there is plenty of reason to think Noah's numbers will stay the same, if not go down next year, lowering the chances even more that he will get a significantly larger offer as a RFA next summer.

[Chris]

Here is my question.  What risk do the Bulls take by waiting until next season to resign Noah?  Even on the current CBA, does anyone really see Noah getting significantly more money than that as a RFA?  

Unless there is a massive change to the cap ... I cannot see Chicago signing Noah to a cheaper deal if they waited until next summer.

If there was a major change to the CBA, then all bets are off.

What is your definition of a major change to the CBA?  Hard cap?  Lower cap total?  Lower max contracts?  No more MLE?  Shorter contract lengths?

If the cap were to go down to $50 million or below, then yes I think it would be a bad deal. If it stays in the $55 million range, then all is well.

If they brought in a hard cap of $70 million, then it's a fine contract (in general terms it's fine ... specifically for Chicago it means they lose Deng which hurts). If it was $65 million, then it's a slight negative but they can work around it. If the hard cap was $60 million, then it's a major problem.

I don't think they'll reduce the maximum number of years below five years. So no issues there.

-------------------------------------------------

I don't consider major CBA changes to be a certainty. A possibility, yes, but not a certainty.

I would be very surprised if we saw a hard cap implemented that was below the current luxury tax threshold + would be very surprised if the cap fell down to $50 million or lower.

Fair enough.  But even if its a possibility, why take the risk of signing him now, when you can just wait until next summer?

[indeedproceed]

Also, for those of you expecting Noah's numbers to go through the roof next year, making this contract look good, let's think about it a little more.

Last year, Noah played most of the season next to guys like Gibson and Brad Miller as the other big men in the rotation, and he averaged 10.7 points and 11 rebounds.  Next year he will be playing next to Carlos Boozer.  Is it safe to assume that Boozer will be averaging more than 7 rebounds per game?  I think there is plenty of reason to think Noah's numbers will stay the same, if not go down next year, lowering the chances even more that he will get a significantly larger offer as a RFA next summer.

I think 12 points and 11 rebounds is pretty probable. Just like Noah played next to Taj Gibson (a slightly better rebounder than Paul Millsap) and Brad Miller (a worse rebounder than Okur), Boozer played next to two not so special rebounders.

If anything I think Noah takes rebounds away from Boozer, rather than the other way around. Also, since Boozer will be a legitimate post presence next to Noah, I think Noah's offensive game jumps just a little bit. His baskets are predicated by hustle and opportunity, and Boozer won't take away from Noah's hustle, and should only increase his opportunity.

[Roy H.]

I think 12 points and 11 rebounds is pretty probable.

Let's go with that number.  Is 12/11 plus good to very good defense worth $12 million per year?  Is it worth the $14.2 million the Bulls will be paying in 2016?

I would lean toward "no".

[Who]

Here is my question.  What risk do the Bulls take by waiting until next season to resign Noah?  Even on the current CBA, does anyone really see Noah getting significantly more money than that as a RFA?  

Unless there is a massive change to the cap ... I cannot see Chicago signing Noah to a cheaper deal if they waited until next summer.

If there was a major change to the CBA, then all bets are off.

What is your definition of a major change to the CBA?  Hard cap?  Lower cap total?  Lower max contracts?  No more MLE?  Shorter contract lengths?

If the cap were to go down to $50 million or below, then yes I think it would be a bad deal. If it stays in the $55 million range, then all is well.

If they brought in a hard cap of $70 million, then it's a fine contract (in general terms it's fine ... specifically for Chicago it means they lose Deng which hurts). If it was $65 million, then it's a slight negative but they can work around it. If the hard cap was $60 million, then it's a major problem.

I don't think they'll reduce the maximum number of years below five years. So no issues there.

-------------------------------------------------

I don't consider major CBA changes to be a certainty. A possibility, yes, but not a certainty.

I would be very surprised if we saw a hard cap implemented that was below the current luxury tax threshold + would be very surprised if the cap fell down to $50 million or lower.

Fair enough.  But even if its a possibility, why take the risk of signing him now, when you can just wait until next summer?

I have no problem with paying a player what he is worth ... especially when he is a major part of your foundation and embodies everything you are modeling your team around with Tom Thibodeau.

This is the guy that gives Chicago it's identity. You don't play around with that.

This is an opportunity to send a message to the rest of the team. That this is a defense first organization and if you do do that it'll be recognized and you'll be rewarded.

I would be fine waiting until next summer if Noah was asking for far too much money but when it's a fair deal? Pay the man and get back to business on the court.

[Chris]

Here is my question.  What risk do the Bulls take by waiting until next season to resign Noah?  Even on the current CBA, does anyone really see Noah getting significantly more money than that as a RFA?  

Unless there is a massive change to the cap ... I cannot see Chicago signing Noah to a cheaper deal if they waited until next summer.

If there was a major change to the CBA, then all bets are off.

What is your definition of a major change to the CBA?  Hard cap?  Lower cap total?  Lower max contracts?  No more MLE?  Shorter contract lengths?

If the cap were to go down to $50 million or below, then yes I think it would be a bad deal. If it stays in the $55 million range, then all is well.

If they brought in a hard cap of $70 million, then it's a fine contract (in general terms it's fine ... specifically for Chicago it means they lose Deng which hurts). If it was $65 million, then it's a slight negative but they can work around it. If the hard cap was $60 million, then it's a major problem.

I don't think they'll reduce the maximum number of years below five years. So no issues there.

-------------------------------------------------

I don't consider major CBA changes to be a certainty. A possibility, yes, but not a certainty.

I would be very surprised if we saw a hard cap implemented that was below the current luxury tax threshold + would be very surprised if the cap fell down to $50 million or lower.

Fair enough.  But even if its a possibility, why take the risk of signing him now, when you can just wait until next summer?

I have no problem with paying a player what he is worth ... especially when he is a major part of your foundation and embodies everything you are modeling your team around with Tom Thibodeau.

This is the guy that gives Chicago it's identity. You don't play around with that.

This is an opportunity to send a message to the rest of the team. That this is a defense first organization and if you do do that it'll be recognized and you'll be rewarded.

I would be fine waiting until next summer if Noah was asking for far too much money but when it's a fair deal? Pay the man and get back to business on the court.

The problem is, they paid him what he is worth (actually, more than he is currently worth) on the current CBA, however, the contract will not kick in until the new CBA, which could be completely different, and they had the ability to wait and sign him under the new CBA.

There was zero chance of them losing him by waiting, since they retain RFA rights, so its not "playing around" with anything. 

I guess this is just not how I would run a business.  We will see if it pays off for them.  But I have a feeling it won't.

[indeedproceed]

I think 12 points and 11 rebounds is pretty probable.

Let's go with that number.  Is 12/11 plus good to very good defense worth $12 million per year?  Is it worth the $14.2 million the Bulls will be paying in 2016?

I would lean toward "no".

I'd lean pretty hard towards 'yes'. The only centers to average a double double last season were David Lee, Andrew Bogut, Tim Duncan, and Dwight Howard. Team leader, defensive anchor, leading rebounder and double digit scorer...that guy should be the 2nd or 3rd highest paid player on your team.

EDIT: Although I do think CHicago screwed the pooch by not waiting to get this done. Noah would still have been a RFA, and I don't think he gets this money under the new CBA, plus who knows what kind of shinanigans the lockout could bring next season.

[Who]

Here is my question.  What risk do the Bulls take by waiting until next season to resign Noah?  Even on the current CBA, does anyone really see Noah getting significantly more money than that as a RFA?  

Unless there is a massive change to the cap ... I cannot see Chicago signing Noah to a cheaper deal if they waited until next summer.

If there was a major change to the CBA, then all bets are off.

What is your definition of a major change to the CBA?  Hard cap?  Lower cap total?  Lower max contracts?  No more MLE?  Shorter contract lengths?

If the cap were to go down to $50 million or below, then yes I think it would be a bad deal. If it stays in the $55 million range, then all is well.

If they brought in a hard cap of $70 million, then it's a fine contract (in general terms it's fine ... specifically for Chicago it means they lose Deng which hurts). If it was $65 million, then it's a slight negative but they can work around it. If the hard cap was $60 million, then it's a major problem.

I don't think they'll reduce the maximum number of years below five years. So no issues there.

-------------------------------------------------

I don't consider major CBA changes to be a certainty. A possibility, yes, but not a certainty.

I would be very surprised if we saw a hard cap implemented that was below the current luxury tax threshold + would be very surprised if the cap fell down to $50 million or lower.

Fair enough.  But even if its a possibility, why take the risk of signing him now, when you can just wait until next summer?

I have no problem with paying a player what he is worth ... especially when he is a major part of your foundation and embodies everything you are modeling your team around with Tom Thibodeau.

This is the guy that gives Chicago it's identity. You don't play around with that.

This is an opportunity to send a message to the rest of the team. That this is a defense first organization and if you do do that it'll be recognized and you'll be rewarded.

I would be fine waiting until next summer if Noah was asking for far too much money but when it's a fair deal? Pay the man and get back to business on the court.

The problem is, they paid him what he is worth (actually, more than he is currently worth) on the current CBA, however, the contract will not kick in until the new CBA, which could be completely different, and they had the ability to wait and sign him under the new CBA.

There was zero chance of them losing him by waiting, since they retain RFA rights, so its not "playing around" with anything. 

I guess this is just not how I would run a business.  We will see if it pays off for them.  But I have a feeling it won't.

Just to go back to my earlier post

(1) I think the $60-65 million range is the most likely ball-park for Noah next off-season.

(2) I think Noah has a shot at a $68-72 million contract and would consider that the second most likely outcome to Noah entering the FA marketplace next summer.

(3) The third most likely option, least likely, would be a drastic change to the CBA which forces Noah's contract to fall down to the $55 million range.

The Bulls are in the lower end of the most likely scenario which is a good place to be.

Plus the avoid all the negativity of bad contract negotiations, potential damaging of their relationship with Noah and possible internal strife within the locker room this season.

And gain all the benefits of pointing to Noah and building their team identity (multiple effort, defense first identity) around him.

[Roy H.]

I think 12 points and 11 rebounds is pretty probable.

Let's go with that number.  Is 12/11 plus good to very good defense worth $12 million per year?  Is it worth the $14.2 million the Bulls will be paying in 2016?

I would lean toward "no".

I'd lean pretty hard towards 'yes'. The only centers to average a double double last season were David Lee, Andrew Bogut, Tim Duncan, and Dwight Howard. Team leader, defensive anchor, leading rebounder and double digit scorer...that guy should be the 2nd or 3rd highest paid player on your team.

EDIT: Although I do think CHicago screwed the pooch by not waiting to get this done. Noah would still have been a RFA, and I don't think he gets this money under the new CBA, plus who knows what kind of shinanigans the lockout could bring next season.

The other guys you cited will all get you around 16 - 20 points per night, though.  I don't think 11 points is all that impressive from your center.  Also, if you stretch the criteria only slightly, to include players averaging 9.3 to 9.9 rebounds, you add six more players to the list, with Dalembert and Haywood just falling short in terms of points.

I think paying your non-superstars as if they're near-max guys is the recipe for killing your cap.  I understand that NBA teams repeatedly do this (see the Dalembert contract, which Philly spent years trying to rid itself of, etc.)  However, I think it's a bad idea.

[indeedproceed]

I think 12 points and 11 rebounds is pretty probable.

Let's go with that number.  Is 12/11 plus good to very good defense worth $12 million per year?  Is it worth the $14.2 million the Bulls will be paying in 2016?

I would lean toward "no".

I'd lean pretty hard towards 'yes'. The only centers to average a double double last season were David Lee, Andrew Bogut, Tim Duncan, and Dwight Howard. Team leader, defensive anchor, leading rebounder and double digit scorer...that guy should be the 2nd or 3rd highest paid player on your team.

EDIT: Although I do think CHicago screwed the pooch by not waiting to get this done. Noah would still have been a RFA, and I don't think he gets this money under the new CBA, plus who knows what kind of shinanigans the lockout could bring next season.

The other guys you cited will all get you around 16 - 20 points per night, though.  I don't think 11 points is all that impressive from your center.  Also, if you stretch the criteria only slightly, to include players averaging 9.3 to 9.9 rebounds, you add six more players to the list, with Dalembert and Haywood just falling short in terms of points.

I think paying your non-superstars as if they're near-max guys is the recipe for killing your cap.  I understand that NBA teams repeatedly do this (see the Dalembert contract, which Philly spent years trying to rid itself of, etc.)  However, I think it's a bad idea.

I'd rate Noah in about the same tier as David Lee or Amare Stoudemire, but skewed more towards a defensive slant.

Noah ought to improve his scoring next season, but I don't feel comfortable going beyond 12 or 13 ppg (a 2 point improvement), but Noah's defense is in another class when contrasted against Lee and Amare, so what he's lacking in scoring he's making up for in defense.

What would you rather have; great team defense, along with 14 ppg and 7 boards a night at 20+million a year or great team defense along with 12ppg and 11 boards a night, at 12 million a year?

[Fan from VT]

I'll throw this out there too: Emeka Okafor.

I've always liked him, but I think he's another example of everyone immediately thinking he's overrated/overpaid because he's on terrible teams. If we take off the green goggles for a minute, just imagine the C's with Okafor instead of Perk. They lose almost nothing (if anything) defensively, get better rebounding, and significant offensive upgrade in the sense that Okafor, though no offensive master, isn't one of the league leaders in turnovers like Perk. If Okafor is on the C's the past three years, guess what? He's not considered overpaid at all.

Okafor
Min:   FG%  FT%   Pts  Rbs Assts Blks Stls PER
35.6  .447 .609  15.1  10.9  0.9   1.7   .8  16.39
33.6  .415 .656  13.2  10.0  1.2   1.9   .8  14.94
34.8  .532 .593  14.4  11.3  1.2   2.6   .9  20.15
33.1  .535 .570  13.8  10.7  0.9   1.7   .8  17.46

Then: 6 year, 72 million dollar contract (12 mil per, same as Noah)

Point being, it's amazing how quickly a guy goes from "Rising Bigman" to "Overrated deadweight contract."
A lot of it has much to do with circumstances outside of the player's control. For example, Okafor is but 1/5 of a starting lineup; it's not all his fault the other parts of the starting lineup have generally stunk. Second, the perception of Okafor is colored by the fact that he was in the same draft as Howard, and there was supposed to be debate about the better center prospect. So Okafor is being hurt perception wise for not being Dwight; had Okafor been picked tenth or so (like Noah), he'd be thought of differently. 

[Fan from VT]

I think 12 points and 11 rebounds is pretty probable.

Let's go with that number.  Is 12/11 plus good to very good defense worth $12 million per year?  Is it worth the $14.2 million the Bulls will be paying in 2016?

I would lean toward "no".

I'd lean pretty hard towards 'yes'. The only centers to average a double double last season were David Lee, Andrew Bogut, Tim Duncan, and Dwight Howard. Team leader, defensive anchor, leading rebounder and double digit scorer...that guy should be the 2nd or 3rd highest paid player on your team.

EDIT: Although I do think CHicago screwed the pooch by not waiting to get this done. Noah would still have been a RFA, and I don't think he gets this money under the new CBA, plus who knows what kind of shinanigans the lockout could bring next season.

The other guys you cited will all get you around 16 - 20 points per night, though.  I don't think 11 points is all that impressive from your center.  Also, if you stretch the criteria only slightly, to include players averaging 9.3 to 9.9 rebounds, you add six more players to the list, with Dalembert and Haywood just falling short in terms of points.

I think paying your non-superstars as if they're near-max guys is the recipe for killing your cap.  I understand that NBA teams repeatedly do this (see the Dalembert contract, which Philly spent years trying to rid itself of, etc.)  However, I think it's a bad idea.

I'd rate Noah in about the same tier as David Lee or Amare Stoudemire, but skewed more towards a defensive slant.

Noah ought to improve his scoring next season, but I don't feel comfortable going beyond 12 or 13 ppg (a 2 point improvement), but Noah's defense is in another class when contrasted against Lee and Amare, so what he's lacking in scoring he's making up for in defense.

What would you rather have; great team defense, along with 14 ppg and 7 boards a night at 20+million a year or great team defense along with 12ppg and 11 boards a night, at 12 million a year?

I think in general "double double" is not even really a "stat" in the sense of any type of usefulness. It's arbitrarily based on our constructed base-ten number system which has no natural basis and is purely an intellectual construct designed to enable us to have conversations using numbers. But setting a hard line at "double double" is useless, as it is somehow assigning artificial value to averaging 10 points and 10 rebounds over, say, 9.5 points and 14 rebounds or 16 points and 9.0 rebounds.