WT- Nate unlikely to be back (WAIT! + instagram pic pg 81!)

[Magilla_Gorilla]

I saw this on the Chicago Bulls rumors Facebook page. Sorry if it's been posted & considered redundant. Chicago Bulls Nate Robinson Status Update:

- As of today, there hasn't been any reports that any team is willing to offer more than the minimum. In fact, the only team that has reportedly offered a contract is the Chicago Bulls (minimum deal) according to Alex Kennedy. Now that isn't to say he hasn't been offered more than the minimum, but it hasn't been made publically that they have.

- The Bulls aren't going to wait for Nate Robinson. If another "steal" free agent is willing to sign for the minimum, they'll pull the offer from Nate Robinson and sign that other free agent.

- Nate Robinson is holding out hope that some team with remaining room will offer a multi year contract which is still possible but as each day passes, it's looking more likely that the best he'll get is the minimum.

- Beatwriter Jabari Davis believes that Nate Robinson will wait but will eventually re-sign with the Bulls in the upcoming weeks.

- A report yesterday indicated that Nate Robinson is in a bit of need of money. Each player in the NBA is allowed roughly $100 in money to spend on meals (Believe this was per meal, not everyday). The report indicated that Nate typically tends to wait and put his food on other players bills keeping the money for himself.

Either way, it's still slim Nate Robinson returns but with so much competition at Point Guard on the Free Agent Market, there is still a small chance he could return to the Chicago Bulls at the minimum.

sounds like there is still a chance. I don't know who would be the "steal" free agent the Bulls could get over him. I hope he returns.

LOL... That report was posted on here, but it was in regards to Nate understanding the value of a dollar and how to save his money. I don't think Nate is squirreling away per diems because he needs it to pay the bills. He strikes me as a rather intelligent guy - but its just my assumption.

[southpaw954]

No doubt Nate is greatly disappointed right now. He might be too resentful of us for not properly compensating him for all he's done for us last year. If all he can get is the vet min, he might prefer any team but the Bulls. He probably feels that we will short change him again next off-season. He could think that a different team will re-sign him to a decent contract next year if they just got to FEEL what it's like to have The Nate rolling with you.

we are not permitted by league rules to offer him more than a 20% raise over last season

really? That's a lame rule. So if another team offers him more than the minimum we are screwed? Is it based on the 1 year? Why can't we give him 3 years $15 million(I'm not saying I would pay him that, just trying to get a better understanding of the rule).

[pylb]

If we had the cap room to do so we could, but we don't. We could have used the MMLE to offer him more, but we used it on Dunleavy.
Other teams who are in the same situation as us can only offer him the minimum. We get to add 20%.

[pad300]

Ok, I haven't read all of this, but apparently, y'all see Nate's role as 3ed PG (behind Rose & Teague/Hinrich) - but he wants a) more money and b) a bigger role. So, would CHI consider a S&T for a 3ed PG?

SAS out Mills
CHI out Nate (S&T - vet min +20% salary, 2 years guaranteed)

It's not a lot of value for CHI, but I understand that Nate doesn't really want to be back (and you kind of owe him a solid after last year)... Mills is a good 3ed PG, and has no problems with a small minutes/bench role. Nate, meanwhile, gets 2 guaranteed years, a 20% raise, and a serious shot at the Spurs backup PG role - he has to beat out Cory Joseph, and he has the O to do it...

[Jvaughn]

People say with Rose back, Nate's role is no longer needed, so Kirk>Nate. I think it's just the opposite. With Rose back, Kirk's role is unnecessary. Rose will be back to run the offense, and if he's back to normal he's also a good defender. Behind him I'd prefer an explosive guy who can spark that 2nd unit. Kirk doesn't really have a role anymore.

If this is the case, think you'd be willing to trade Kirk to the Warriors for one of our TPEs? This brings you below the lux tax, and frees up $ to sign Nate. Dubs are in the market for a vet back-up pg on an expiring deal who can defend bigger guards and knock down the 3. Basically, he'd be perfect for us.

I'd do that in a heartbeat, but I think our FO is more attached to Kirk than I am.

Basically this.

I'd do it without a second thought. If we didn't have JR or Pax making decisions with their hearts, I think they would too. The only time you need that heady vet who doesn't do much, and is only there to not make mistakes is when you have a very volatile starter who is prone to make mistakes. Kind of like Maynor was for Westbrook or Kirk was to Wall. With Rose back we don't have that issue.

[League Circles]

If we I only offer nate the bare minimum and won't offer the 20% raise, that will be disgraceful IMO.

Although in fairness, I believe offering the 20% raise would make his entire salary subject to taxes instead of just the team paid portion of the bare minimum. So instead of bulls paying like 800k plus the taxes on 800k, we'd pay like 1.5 mil plus the taxes on 1.5 mil. In other words, to give nate like 200-300k more than the minimum, the bulls need to spend at least 1.7 million more, and possibly more than that (I'm assuming the lowest tax rate which is probably wrong).

[Ben]

I saw this on the Chicago Bulls rumors Facebook page. Sorry if it's been posted & considered redundant. Chicago Bulls Nate Robinson Status Update:

- As of today, there hasn't been any reports that any team is willing to offer more than the minimum. In fact, the only team that has reportedly offered a contract is the Chicago Bulls (minimum deal) according to Alex Kennedy. Now that isn't to say he hasn't been offered more than the minimum, but it hasn't been made publically that they have.

- The Bulls aren't going to wait for Nate Robinson. If another "steal" free agent is willing to sign for the minimum, they'll pull the offer from Nate Robinson and sign that other free agent.

- Nate Robinson is holding out hope that some team with remaining room will offer a multi year contract which is still possible but as each day passes, it's looking more likely that the best he'll get is the minimum.

- Beatwriter Jabari Davis believes that Nate Robinson will wait but will eventually re-sign with the Bulls in the upcoming weeks.

- A report yesterday indicated that Nate Robinson is in a bit of need of money. Each player in the NBA is allowed roughly $100 in money to spend on meals (Believe this was per meal, not everyday). The report indicated that Nate typically tends to wait and put his food on other players bills keeping the money for himself.

Either way, it's still slim Nate Robinson returns but with so much competition at Point Guard on the Free Agent Market, there is still a small chance he could return to the Chicago Bulls at the minimum.

sounds like there is still a chance. I don't know who would be the "steal" free agent the Bulls could get over him. I hope he returns.

LOL... That report was posted on here, but it was in regards to Nate understanding the value of a dollar and how to save his money. I don't think Nate is squirreling away per diems because he needs it to pay the bills. He strikes me as a rather intelligent guy - but its just my assumption.

Exactly. I laughed when I saw this posted. Classic: capture a lot of info from around the web, do a good job of sourcing most of it, but get just a few things completely twisted. As you say, the story was posted to suggest that Nate is a good money manager, not that he's desperately in need of money.

[Jvaughn]

No doubt Nate is greatly disappointed right now. He might be too resentful of us for not properly compensating him for all he's done for us last year. If all he can get is the vet min, he might prefer any team but the Bulls. He probably feels that we will short change him again next off-season. He could think that a different team will re-sign him to a decent contract next year if they just got to FEEL what it's like to have The Nate rolling with you.

we are not permitted by league rules to offer him more than a 20% raise over last season

really? That's a lame rule. So if another team offers him more than the minimum we are screwed? Is it based on the 1 year? Why can't we give him 3 years $15 million(I'm not saying I would pay him that, just trying to get a better understanding of the rule).

We're over the cap, and due to the fact that we don't have Nate's Bird Rights, we can't offer him any type of contract above our Vet min + 20%. If we had originally signed Nate for like 3 yrs, and that contract was up this year, he'd be eligible for a bigger raise, which I think the Bulls would actually offer.

[KissedByaRose1]

If we I only offer nate the bare minimum and won't offer the 20% raise, that will be disgraceful IMO.

Completely agree.

[Ben]

we are not permitted by league rules to offer him more than a 20% raise over last season

really? That's a lame rule. So if another team offers him more than the minimum we are screwed? Is it based on the 1 year? Why can't we give him 3 years $15 million(I'm not saying I would pay him that, just trying to get a better understanding of the rule).

We're over the cap, and due to the fact that we don't have Nate's Bird Rights, we can't offer him any type of contract above our Vet min + 20%. If we had originally signed Nate for like 3 yrs, and that contract was up this year, he'd be eligible for a bigger raise, which I think the Bulls would actually offer.

It didn't seem fair to me that the Knicks could retain JR Smith's Bird rights when they signed him as a UFA and he only played 1.5 seasons for them-- a little less than 1.5, really-- before opting out. Situation was so close to what it was with us and Nate, only half a year's difference, yet they could offer him anything they wanted whereas we can only offer the minimum (and their payroll is higher than ours). Seems like a stupid rule.

[RedBulls23]

Ok, I haven't read all of this, but apparently, y'all see Nate's role as 3ed PG (behind Rose & Teague/Hinrich) - but he wants a) more money and b) a bigger role. So, would CHI consider a S&T for a 3ed PG?

SAS out Mills
CHI out Nate (S&T - vet min +20% salary, 2 years guaranteed)

It's not a lot of value for CHI, but I understand that Nate doesn't really want to be back (and you kind of owe him a solid after last year)... Mills is a good 3ed PG, and has no problems with a small minutes/bench role. Nate, meanwhile, gets 2 guaranteed years, a 20% raise, and a serious shot at the Spurs backup PG role - he has to beat out Cory Joseph, and he has the O to do it...

We don't have Nate's bird rights so we can't do a sign and trade.

[dice]

If we I only offer nate the bare minimum and won't offer the 20% raise, that will be disgraceful IMO.

Completely agree.

i think we have already offered the 20% raise. no reason not to. it's peanuts

[Chitownbulls]

As the days keep going, the chances of him getting that contract decreases IMO. But since its not going to be tough beating out Chicagos price, it could still happen.

[KissedByaRose1]

If we I only offer nate the bare minimum and won't offer the 20% raise, that will be disgraceful IMO.

Completely agree.

i think we have already offered the 20% raise. no reason not to. it's peanuts

Wouldn't it put us deeper into the LT?

[Jvaughn]

really? That's a lame rule. So if another team offers him more than the minimum we are screwed? Is it based on the 1 year? Why can't we give him 3 years $15 million(I'm not saying I would pay him that, just trying to get a better understanding of the rule).

We're over the cap, and due to the fact that we don't have Nate's Bird Rights, we can't offer him any type of contract above our Vet min + 20%. If we had originally signed Nate for like 3 yrs, and that contract was up this year, he'd be eligible for a bigger raise, which I think the Bulls would actually offer.

It didn't seem fair to me that the Knicks could retain JR Smith's Bird rights when they signed him as a UFA and he only played 1.5 seasons for them-- a little less than 1.5, really-- before opting out. Situation was so close to what it was with us and Nate, only half a year's difference, yet they could offer him anything they wanted whereas we can only offer the minimum (and their payroll is higher than ours). Seems like a stupid rule.

Yeah, no matter how many times they have lockouts to fix the CBA, it always has some huge flaws and loopholes that aren't fair to certain teams. I.e: The Gilbert Arenas provision, and the early bird right rules. I honestly don't even understand how NY was able to do what they did.

[dice]

i think we have already offered the 20% raise. no reason not to. it's peanuts

Wouldn't it put us deeper into the LT?

not by a meaningful amount

[League Circles]

i think we have already offered the 20% raise. no reason not to. it's peanuts

Wouldn't it put us deeper into the LT?

not by a meaningful amount

Am I wrong about my claims in my previous post?

[Ben]

Wouldn't it put us deeper into the LT?

not by a meaningful amount

Am I wrong about my claims in my previous post?

That's what I was wondering, too. What are our sources of info to work with?

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

‏@JaredZwerling

Source: Toney Douglas has accepted an offer from the Golden State Warriors.
Details

Another suitor out of the mix. Golden State is who I feared most.

[Ben]

‏@JaredZwerling

Source: Toney Douglas has accepted an offer from the Golden State Warriors.
Details

Another suitor out of the mix. Golden State is who I feared most.

Is that for the minimum? B/c they already used their MMLE on Speights...