Brian Hanley, possibly from Mariotti's old desk:

MetLife, the NBA's insurer which covers the top 150 salaries in the league under a group policy, has the right to exclude 14 high-risk players every year.

Decisions are based on the player's injury history and the amount of money remaining on his contract. Deng came under MetLife scrutiny when he signed a $71million, six-year contract at the start of this month. It is the fourth-highest contract in the NBA in terms of outstanding money.

MetLife subsequently used an MRI scan taken last November when Deng, 23, injured his back and missed three games to exclude him from the coverage.

He may or may not play for Great Britain, who have to find a way to get him covered.

Interesting that Deng is deemed 'high-risk' for an injury that didn't cost him much playing time. I'd guess when the next round of contracts come in next summer he'll be pushed off that 'top 14'.

(previously: here, and here)

As far as I can tell, nobody quite knows what J.R. Smith signed for, but the general guess is in the $5-7m range for 3 years. [3yrs $16.5m -ed.]

And as it further dwindles the list of significant unsigned 2004 draftees to pretty much Ben Gordon (with apologies to Delonte West)...the comparisons have come out.

Matt Watson at Fanhouse:

He's only 22 years old, but I doubt he'd want to agree to a longer deal, especially considering the only thing stopping him from getting Ben Gordon money (ie, $10 million plus a year, which Ben Gordon may or may not even get) is minutes. Smith averaged 23.0 points per 36 minutes last year; Gordon, just 21.0. And considering Smith is three inches taller and just as dangerous in the lane as behind the three-point line, there's no question he has loads more long-term upside.

Tom Ziller at Sporting Blog:

Ben Gordon will still be sitting at home, waiting for someone to offer him 175% what the Nuggets guard—younger, taller, more explosive, and increasingly reliable—got. If this doesn't hammer home the concept of "market value" to Gordon, really, nothing will.

J.R. Smith is certainly taller than Ben Gordon! Doesn't quite help him be a better defender, draw more fouls, or rebound more effectively than Gordon, but...taller, sure.

And they do have similar numbers. But Smith is no comparison to Ben Gordon, or pretty much anyone. The reason why a 3-season near-MLE deal isn't particularly raising eyebrows is Smith's off-court and on-court combustibility.

As much as I enjoy a good perception-shattering through better analysis (though that's a bit much to ask considering the format of Fanhouse and TSB), the issue with Smith is purely his issues. 

I wouldn't personally group Smith's attitude and maturity problems with the easily overvalued 'character' attributes that the Bulls usually fawn over, like the adulation of Nocioni's game-face. And I don't even mind a few slightly dirty off-court incidents on my basketball team. But in terms of what actually effects a player and his team on the court, such as preparation, hard work, coachability...Gordon and Smith are not just divergent, but on complete opposite sides of the spectrum.

It can be said that just looking at cost/benefit, it's worth the risk to pay less for J.R. Smith to hope he puts up similar numbers (getting more minutes to do so, naturally). Smith is 2 years younger, and that certainly matters.

But to me, there's no price that makes Smith a bargain (and though it's increasingly not turning out to be great company, at one time the Bulls agreed, dealing Smith to the Nuggets for two 2nd-round picks). It's like saying it's worth the risk to flush some cash down the toilet because some day you may find it in some sewer-alligator's insides. 

It's true (and a bit strange, to be honest): BlogABull (including its previous independent blogspot incarnation) is celebrating its 5th anniversary. Rather than merely the usual single self-serving post, this year I've instead decided to extend my self-congratulations through the summer. I'll be picking out some landmark posts through the years for reflection and laughs about the blog and the franchise it's covered in that time. So consider it my thanks to all the readers over the years: needless to say, it's more fun for me with all of you around to share it.

If you thought that the Rose vs. Beasley debate was intense, the lower-stakes-but-many-more-options discussion over what the Bulls should do with the #2 overall pick was fairly head-spinning. I particularly enjoyed writing this rant.

This was originally published 06/15/2006. Titled "This draft has officially driven me insane".

See, now if I were that type of dolt (as opposed to another type), I could pound my chest over wanting Aldridge all along. However, it's been long since established that  Tyrus Thomas was the correct pick, is indeed awesome, and certainly far better than the jump-shooting ninny suffering from Joe Smith career path syndrome. (ok, Brandon Roy, even with his old man lower extremities, could've worked out pretty well)

In the latest Bulls Beat podcast, Doug echoes a lot of what I've been saying the past few weeks. Namely, Gordon's better than what many may believe, and his loss will hurt the Bulls drastically. Also some interesting analysis on what a $10m/yr player really means in the league 'market'.

That all said, Doug also thinks Ben's full of crap when Ben says he won't take the QO and a sign/trade is imminent, because no teams can really offer the Bulls anything worthwhile (Doug has more faith in Paxson not taking back crap than I do).  Also supports the idea of just going temporarily into the tax to get a deal done.

Worth a listen (yes, sure, I'd consider it less worthwhile of a listen if he disagreed with my opinions).