CSKA Moscow has offered Ben Gordon $5.5 mill per year

[ziggy]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=232078&src=150

They are the richest team in Europe, and they can easily afford Ben Gordon.  Bulls are reportedly offering $59 million for 6 years, which puts the year one salary at about $7,650,000 with a 10% raise per year.

[WayOutWest]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=232078&src=150

They are the richest team in Europe, and they can easily afford Ben Gordon.  Bulls are reportedly offering $59 million for 6 years, which puts the year one salary at about $7,650,000 with a 10% raise per year.

Why is he turning down the 6 year deal?  Seems like a decent offer, does he think he deserves superstar money?

[jemagee]

Well...Andre Iguodala and Luol Deng got more and both aren't 'superstars' - and ben gordon DOES seem to have an over inflated sense of his own value, but he is the best scoring threat the bulls have...even from the bench...the problem seems to stem from how the bulls (and much of the NBA) see ben gordon and how ben gordon sees ben gordon.

[Lurker]

Gordan is a good scorer.  But he doesn't improve his team. 

Also he couldn't play defense if his life depended on it.  He would have been great back in the 60s & 70s on one of the run & gun teams.  All you tried to do was outscore your opponent.  Nowadays you have to be able to stop...or at least slow...your opponent.

$60 mil over 6 years is too much for him.  Let him go to Moscow.

[jemagee]

Were we talking about Giricek?

Ben Gordon is not as bad defensively as you state it and led the bulls in scoring when they made the playoffs, but he's probably best used as a bench guy, he sees it differently.

[WayOutWest]

....how ben gordon sees ben gordon.

I could totally see those words comming out of Ben Gordon's mouth on ESPN.    "Ben Gordon's got to do what's best for Ben Gordon..."

[ziggy]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=232078&src=150

They are the richest team in Europe, and they can easily afford Ben Gordon.  Bulls are reportedly offering $59 million for 6 years, which puts the year one salary at about $7,650,000 with a 10% raise per year.

Why is he turning down the 6 year deal?  Seems like a decent offer, does he think he deserves superstar money?

He is a restricted FA, and the qualifying offer is $6.5 million +/-.  If he signs for one year with CSKA he becomes an unrestricted FA, and increases his leverage.

This reminds me a bit of Bonzi Wells and Sacramento.  He had a great offer ($47 million or something) but his agent thought he could get more, and as it turned out Bonzi has earned something like $6 million in the last 3 years.

[jemagee]

All things being equal, Ben Gordon would net much more from a CSKA contract than an NBA contract due to the fact that the NBA contract is taxed.

Is it true that professional athletes have to pay state taxes on their 'game' incomes based on where the games are played?

[westkoast]

Ben Gordon's defense STINKS for the amount of athletic ability he has.  I don't even think he cannot defend.  I don't think he wants to defend.  He just wants to score.  I would let him walk to tell you the truth.  The reason being is I think that Rose is going to be able to create plays for other people that would make up for whatever they lose in Ben Gordon collectively.

What's odd is just the whole Bulls situation within the last 3 years.  That year they were on fire and beat Miami in the first round, they played excellent defense and played solid offense.  Then the following year, when they were picked to go deep, they couldn't make a single jump shot for the first 50 games of the season.  Then just as they started to score a little bit, the defense took a major nose dive.  It's crazy how in 3 years you go from solid on both ends, to good on one end, to not good on any end.

[jemagee]

I think they were over hyped because of the heat win
ben wallace was a bad signing
luol dengs injuries didn't help
kirk hinrich was just god awful last year but might not be as good as people thought
Scott Skiles seems to rub people the wrong way - QUICKLY

I think the bulls will be better this year but their PF/C rotation is kind of messy...and the east is getting better in that department

[ziggy]

All things being equal, Ben Gordon would net much more from a CSKA contract than an NBA contract due to the fact that the NBA contract is taxed.

Is it true that professional athletes have to pay state taxes on their 'game' incomes based on where the games are played?

Depends upon the State.  Obviously States with no income tax wouldn't tax you.  Not all States apply the tax either though most do.  With regards to CSKA, the $5.5 million offer may or may not have the taxes paid, that is negotiable.  That is negotiable in the US, but the net terms of the deal cannot exceed the max contract amount. 
It is also my understanding, though I must defer to Lurker on this as he is a CPA, that Gordon would be get a tax credit from the US for the amount of Russian taxes paid, and then he would be required to pay the remainder of his US tax due to the US government, as he would be a US citizen working off-shore.  So if he is in a 32% US bracket, and the Russian tax was 20%, then he would pay 20% in tax to Russia, and 32% to the US with a 20% credit for taxes paid in Russia, a net of 12%.

[Lurker]

All things being equal, Ben Gordon would net much more from a CSKA contract than an NBA contract due to the fact that the NBA contract is taxed.

Is it true that professional athletes have to pay state taxes on their 'game' incomes based on where the games are played?

Depends upon the State.  Obviously States with no income tax wouldn't tax you.  Not all States apply the tax either though most do.  With regards to CSKA, the $5.5 million offer may or may not have the taxes paid, that is negotiable.  That is negotiable in the US, but the net terms of the deal cannot exceed the max contract amount. 
It is also my understanding, though I must defer to Lurker on this as he is a CPA, that Gordon would be get a tax credit from the US for the amount of Russian taxes paid, and then he would be required to pay the remainder of his US tax due to the US government, as he would be a US citizen working off-shore.  So if he is in a 32% US bracket, and the Russian tax was 20%, then he would pay 20% in tax to Russia, and 32% to the US with a 20% credit for taxes paid in Russia, a net of 12%.

ziggy hit it pretty well.  The more aggressive states (NY, Cali) do tax athletes for their games in those states.  With California it can be several games for some players (2 games @ LAL, LAC, GS, Sac).  State taxation also is impacted by where the players call their permanent off season home.  Someone like Paul Pierce who plays in Boston but lives in California should have his whole salary taxed by California...and I am pretty sure that Massachusetts takes its fair share also.  But multi-state taxation is a very complicated area.

[westkoast]

So since players are taxed in all the states they play in does that mean a team gets a portion of the money made when they show up on the road?  I thought I read somewhere that the home team gets all the money from the game.  Technically the players are not making money in those states in that case right?

[Lurker]

So since players are taxed in all the states they play in does that mean a team gets a portion of the money made when they show up on the road?  I thought I read somewhere that the home team gets all the money from the game.  Technically the players are not making money in those states in that case right?

The definition is where you are earning your salary.  I believe that a player earns 1/82nd of his salary for each game played.  Thus he earns income in around 20 different states.  Most states do give credit for taxes paid to other states.  I have heard recently of some baseball players challenging NY state's law - NY & California are two of the most aggressive states when it comes to claiming that you earn income in their state.  Their argument is that they are not staying in the state long enough...in other words it would be like your boss sending you to Phoenix for a week.  Arizona wouldn't consider that state income.  But I would guess that with pro athletes the numbers are a little larger.

[westkoast]

So since players are taxed in all the states they play in does that mean a team gets a portion of the money made when they show up on the road?  I thought I read somewhere that the home team gets all the money from the game.  Technically the players are not making money in those states in that case right?

The definition is where you are earning your salary.  I believe that a player earns 1/82nd of his salary for each game played.  Thus he earns income in around 20 different states.  Most states do give credit for taxes paid to other states.  I have heard recently of some baseball players challenging NY state's law - NY & California are two of the most aggressive states when it comes to claiming that you earn income in their state.  Their argument is that they are not staying in the state long enough...in other words it would be like your boss sending you to Phoenix for a week.  Arizona wouldn't consider that state income.  But I would guess that with pro athletes the numbers are a little larger.

That's why I was confused.  I stay in other areas longer then most basketball players do but I never pay taxes to Texas, Arizona, Nevada, or Colorado.  Aside from when teams are in the Texas Triangle or playing the Lakers/Clippers in the same week they are barely even in town.