Given my experience, I would say that a lot of what you need depends on what pictures you will be taking and what vantage points you get. For longer-ish range photos in bright daylight outdoors, I'd say the 70-300VR since it has good reach, fast autofocus and has good VR. You'll stop down anyway in bright daylight, so most lenses will perform similarly optically, and the range of reach you get can be very useful. It's not that great at 250-300, but you get it if you really need it and somehow I doubt you should be shooting golf at that range anyway. If you know you can get much closer, you'd probably want the 70-200 VR2- the closer range means you don't need the 300, but it performs well under more miserable conditions (and indoors too if you need it).
I'd skip out on the normal zooms take a 50/1.8 or a 35/1.8 for a fast prime. I avoid normal zooms in general because I find they don't contribute that much, but you may be comfortable with one- in that case I'd take the 17-55 if you really need one. The gaps you get for not having a normal zoom is not really a problem with me, but may be for you. The 24-70 is another possibility- if is FX compatible, but will be less flexible on DX since 24 is not really wide.
I'd also suggest a wide zoom- surprisingly enough, they are all good enough (yes even the third party ones), but with a big budget, I'd suggest the 10-24. Th fast 10-20, 11-16 and 8-16 all have their own advantages, but if I was spending that much for a pro shoot, I'd prefer to stick with first party lenses.
So if you stick with the D7000, 70-300VR, 50/1.8 and 10-24, you've spend just under $3000, so you're way under budget- you could get a second D7000 and some lights. Or you could upgrade the 70-300 to the 70-200, but I think that still gives you about $1000 flexibility for other stuff.
But that's just my opinion, and that's based on my experience and on what I'd do- take that with a large grain of salt.