O'Connor: Bulls interested in Gobert and Mitchell Robinson

[drosestruts]

Let's call it what it is.

Super low volume, better directly under basket. That's it.

Sure, but his size, length, athleticism combination make that a higher volume opportunity than what would be true of a lot of other players in the same position. You get highly efficient offense there and in decent volume still.

Offense with Gobert in general would be a problem, because his contract would also likely prevent us from improving our actual offensive weakness, shooting. One of the posts on this page nicely summed it up, we'd essentially be at the lux line already.

If the starting five is healthy in the playoffs, Lonzo, Pat, and Zach can all space the floor. Also worth noting that last year, Vuc wasn't really a threat anywhere on the floor, by the end of the season, no one was guarding him anywhere.

I'm very hesitant to include Williams on this list. I'm well aware of his good 3-point percentage his first two years, I just can't look past the low volume and be confident he'll ever at any time increase his aggressiveness and volume.

I think some of it is personality and some of it is his slow shot. If you look at William's shot dashboard (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1630172/shots-dash) he's only shooting when wide open.

you can cheat off of Williams up to 6 feet and if he catches it, he's not shooting. That's a problem. You'll have Rudy's defender camped out in the paint, whomever is guarding Ball, Zach, or DeMar will be near them, and William's reluctance gives the defenders another guy who can swipe in for help, because Williams, while good when he does shoot, simply doesn't do it unless absolutely wide open.

[jnrjr79]

Yep. At a minimum, in order for this to make sense, the Bulls have to be willing to pay tax for the next two seasons, until DeMar’s deal is over.

Looking at the numbers for next year

Demar $27,300,000
Gobert $37,631,520
Zach $36,000,000
Zo $19,534,884

$120, 466, 404

Projected nba salary cap

$122,000,000

AC $9,030,000
Pat $7,775,000
Ayo $1,563,518
Green $1,815,677
Marko $1,563,518
#18 $3,148,560

brings the total to $145,362,677

This is without knowing if Bradley picks up his player option( $2,036,318) Player or the Bulls pick up TBJ team option ($7,228,448)

Luxury tax is at $149,000,000

MLE is 10 million

Good post. If we can stay under the tax this is possible. Was anti-Rudy at first but I honestly really like the look of this team. Keeps some continuity with most of the roster and Rudy would fit well. We need his defense. Giannis isn’t leaving our division any time soon and we need a rim protector to stop him. No one better defensively in that area than Rudy.

It doesn't make any sense in this scenario to stay under the tax. If these numbers are accurate, the Bulls would be at $145M with only 10 players on the roster. You don't swing a win-now move for a contract like Gobert's only to refuse to pay the MLE to try to stay out of the tax. You use it, pay the tax for a couple of years, and then perhaps escape it when DeRozan's contract expires.

[dougthonus]

The teams I could see competing here in terms of assets/interest are:

TOR - O.G. is a better asset than we have and a good fit with Mitchell...and they would really benefit from a real C. Although I question how he'd fit next to Siakam.

ATL - He'd be a great fit with TY, and they have a ton of better assets.

DET - Maybe a good swap with Grant, but timeline seems off.

IND - A Turner swap may make sense to both teams.

LAL - Dark horse, but if they want a last gasp with LBJ, AD would be a good swap.

Hard to imagine Toronto parting with OG for Gobert.

Would be curious if Atlanta would want to swap Capela + ??? for Gobert. Does Gobert really move the needle over Capela? I think it's tough to make that case in many respects.

Detroit: Why would they want Gobert over Grant? Grant is half the cost and can generate his own offense and is younger. They aren't ready to win now, seems like an oddball thing for them to try and add a massive win-now salary player based on where they are, especially a center.

Indiana: Again why would you want to take on Gobert's massive salary that's pushing 2.5x Turner's deal based on where you are with the rest of your roster?

LAL: If they could swap Westbrook for Gobert straight up and maybe add a pick or soemthing, there is something intriguing there. Not sure that adds much for Utah though.

[The Force.]

Meh

Bulls need a shooter at 5. Without a stretch big our offense falls apart, especially with Lonzo potentially being DNPd.

IMO they should be targeting young guys with upside like Isaiah Hartenstein or Jalen Smith.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[ATRAIN53]

I'll take DONOVAN Mitchell please.
I'd rather have him than Zach Lavine!
Money would be similar and Playoff Mitchell is $$$$$

Gobert would great, but way too expensive.

If Thibs isn't looking to re-up Mitchell Robinson, than we should not be looking to pay him.
They have spent 4 years working on him and giving up on him now is bad sign to me.
Unless they are up to something, if they straight up let him walk.....

[rosenthall]

It's also worthwhile to consider just how different these neighborhoods of players are. In terms of impact, Gobert shares the same air as Jokic and Giannis. Vuc shares it with mid-round draft picks who are still on their rookie contracts.

Good overall post, but it loses some effect w/this statement because it comes off as pro-Rudy propaganda given those two standout out even amongst the list you posted...with Giannis about 43% higher and Jokic an insane 67% higher. They’re in their own air...Rudy isn’t sharing it.

Your overall point remains, I’m only highlighting nuance that can be important in holding up or hurting one’s argument.

Fair enough. I actually don't think Gobert is comparable to those guys, just pointing out that he's in their orbit when it comes to measured impact. I switched 'Jokic and Giannis' to 'All-NBA players', which seems like a safer statement.

[Tetlak]

Let's call it what it is.

Super low volume, better directly under basket. That's it.

Sure, but his size, length, athleticism combination make that a higher volume opportunity than what would be true of a lot of other players in the same position. You get highly efficient offense there and in decent volume still.

Offense with Gobert in general would be a problem, because his contract would also likely prevent us from improving our actual offensive weakness, shooting. One of the posts on this page nicely summed it up, we'd essentially be at the lux line already.

If the starting five is healthy in the playoffs, Lonzo, Pat, and Zach can all space the floor. Also worth noting that last year, Vuc wasn't really a threat anywhere on the floor, by the end of the season, no one was guarding him anywhere.

You're not wrong about the starting 5, but my god is that a big IF. Also we currently don't have a single shooter off the bench, because unfortunately we need to factor in Lonzo's availability, as our only high level catch and shoot player.

[LateNight]

I would not give up any major assets for Gobert. Definitely no picks and not pat. It would have to be Vuc and salary matching, but if that takes anyone important than no. The contract is just too big

[gobullschi]

People on the trade board are expecting Vucevic + Patrick Williams + more.

Pass.

[dougthonus]

You're not wrong about the starting 5, but my god is that a big IF. Also we currently don't have a single shooter off the bench, because unfortunately we need to factor in Lonzo's availability, as our only high level catch and shoot player.

Yeah, I'm not saying it's something that I think is an amazing opportunity that we can't pass up. The cost is really high too, and I'm skeptical we'd pay that much tax. Just that I think if you hit the playoffs with that five, you could have a pretty deadly playoff roster. That said, obviously high risk you stay healthy which is a negative that is hard to manage for the Bulls regardless of what they do this off-season.

Separate from the Gobert idea (though related), is really just the concept of whether you optimize the roster assuming for full health or try to build redundancy at the cost of lowering your ceiling if everyone is healthy. If you want to win a title, you probably need to optimize for full health and hope to get lucky, because you're such a long shot team that it would require everything to go right to win anyway.

Simply put, would you rather have a 50% chance at the 2nd round, but a 2-3% chance at the title or a 7% chance at the title and a 30% chance at the 2nd round? Numbers obviously made up, but I think are illustrative of what optimizing your best lineup vs optimizing for redundancy would actually do. I don't know that there is a wrong answer there either.

[Andi Obst]

TOR - O.G. is a better asset than we have and a good fit with Mitchell...and they would really benefit from a real C. Although I question how he'd fit next to Siakam.

ATL - He'd be a great fit with TY, and they have a ton of better assets.

DET - Maybe a good swap with Grant, but timeline seems off.

IND - A Turner swap may make sense to both teams.

LAL - Dark horse, but if they want a last gasp with LBJ, AD would be a good swap.

I only view TOR as a realistic option out the ones mentioned here. Gobert doesn't fit the timeline in Indiana or Detroit. ATL already has a really solid center rotation and other issues to solve. The Lakers don't have the assets aside from AD and Klutch is not letting that happen. But yeah, the Raptors make a lot of sense in theory.

[Jcool0]

I'll take DONOVAN Mitchell please.
I'd rather have him than Zach Lavine!
Money would be similar and Playoff Mitchell is $$$$$

Gobert would great, but way too expensive.

If Thibs isn't looking to re-up Mitchell Robinson, than we should not be looking to pay him.
They have spent 4 years working on him and giving up on him now is bad sign to me.
Unless they are up to something, if they straight up let him walk.....

Mitchell is 2-5 in playoff series. This year he averaged 25 ppg on 39% shooting in a 4-2 series loss.

[DuckIII]

Let's call it what it is.

Super low volume, better directly under basket. That's it.

Sure, but his size, length, athleticism combination make that a higher volume opportunity than what would be true of a lot of other players in the same position. You get highly efficient offense there and in decent volume still.

Offense with Gobert in general would be a problem, because his contract would also likely prevent us from improving our actual offensive weakness, shooting. One of the posts on this page nicely summed it up, we'd essentially be at the lux line already.

If the starting five is healthy in the playoffs, Lonzo, Pat, and Zach can all space the floor. Also worth noting that last year, Vuc wasn't really a threat anywhere on the floor, by the end of the season, no one was guarding him anywhere.

I'm very hesitant to include Williams on this list. I'm well aware of his good 3-point percentage his first two years, I just can't look past the low volume and be confident he'll ever at any time increase his aggressiveness and volume.

I think some of it is personality and some of it is his slow shot. If you look at William's shot dashboard (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1630172/shots-dash) he's only shooting when wide open.

you can cheat off of Williams up to 6 feet and if he catches it, he's not shooting. That's a problem. You'll have Rudy's defender camped out in the paint, whomever is guarding Ball, Zach, or DeMar will be near them, and William's reluctance gives the defenders another guy who can swipe in for help, because Williams, while good when he does shoot, simply doesn't do it unless absolutely wide open.

This is all true to an extent. A couple of counterpoints:

1. Spacing the floor is not based on the volume of shots or makes. It’s based solely on what the defense does. If they consider you a threat to shoot and guard you accordingly, you’ve spaced the floor. That said, the ability to hit the 3 obviously plays a big role in how teams defend you. Pat’s not the type of guy who you have a defender chase around all the time because you are terrified of his 3 ball. So he’s not a super-spacer right now. But defenders do have to, and in fact do, respect his 3 ball. Once the ball is in his hands they will close out (and therefore need to be close enough to close out) and he has the skills to both pass and drive on that, which is a significant part of the benefit of the spacing.

2. When Pat came back at the end of the season he showed a quicker release from 3, took more while defended, and even took a couple of pull-up 3s off the dribble.

Point being, I think he should be listed as a floor spacer in a Gobert hypothetical, albeit just barely.

[sco]

Sure, but his size, length, athleticism combination make that a higher volume opportunity than what would be true of a lot of other players in the same position. You get highly efficient offense there and in decent volume still.



If the starting five is healthy in the playoffs, Lonzo, Pat, and Zach can all space the floor. Also worth noting that last year, Vuc wasn't really a threat anywhere on the floor, by the end of the season, no one was guarding him anywhere.

I'm very hesitant to include Williams on this list. I'm well aware of his good 3-point percentage his first two years, I just can't look past the low volume and be confident he'll ever at any time increase his aggressiveness and volume.

I think some of it is personality and some of it is his slow shot. If you look at William's shot dashboard (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1630172/shots-dash) he's only shooting when wide open.

you can cheat off of Williams up to 6 feet and if he catches it, he's not shooting. That's a problem. You'll have Rudy's defender camped out in the paint, whomever is guarding Ball, Zach, or DeMar will be near them, and William's reluctance gives the defenders another guy who can swipe in for help, because Williams, while good when he does shoot, simply doesn't do it unless absolutely wide open.

This is all true to an extent. A couple of counterpoints:

1. Spacing the floor is not based on the volume of shots or makes. It’s based solely on what the defense does. If they consider you a threat to shoot and guard you accordingly, you’ve spaced the floor. That said, the ability to hit the 3 obviously plays a role in how teams defend you. Pat’s not the type of guy who you have a defender chase around all the time because you are terrified of his 3 ball. So he’s not a super-spacer right now. But defenders do have to, and in fact do, respect his 3 ball. Once the ball is in his hands they will close out and he has the skills to both pass and drive on that, which is just as important as the spacing itself.

2. When Pat came back at the end of the season he showed a quicker release from 3, took more while defended, and even took a couple of pull-up 3s off the dribble.

Point being, I think he should be listed as a floor spacer in a Gobert hypothetical, albeit just barely.

I'll lead in by saying, I doubt a deal could be done for Gobert without including Pat, but just my opinion. That said, I agree that Pat is a useful floor spacer, and more importantly, Pat would be aided by no longer being the 4th/5th option in that scenario...with Vuc gone, Pat should see another 3 or 4 shots a game.

[rosenthall]

Gobert is under contract for 160M for a player playing the least valuable position in the game, with skills that don't match the modern game, and will be 30, 31, 32, and 33 for those years, where centers typically start having pretty big drop offs after 30 because they are just so big that the wear is worse on them.

I agree that Gobert's contract is risky, and it's definitely not cheap. However, I think players who impact the game the way he does have historically aged well, and there's a good chance he's productive throughout his contract.

Consider the following:

- Mutombo won his last DPOY at the age of 34, and made his last All-NBA and all-star appearance at the age of 35
- Tim Duncan peaked defensively around 30, but made All-defense teams until he was 35
- Marcus Camby won DPOY at the age of 32, and made 1st team all defense at the age of 33. His prime defensive years were with the Nuggets between the ages of 29 and 33
- Marc Gasol was an effective defensive anchor for the Grizzlies up until the age of 32
- Tyson Chandler was an effective defensive anchor up until the age of 32, when he was the starting center for a 50-32 Mavericks team
- Javale McGee(!) had one of his best seasons at the age of 34 this year

What all these guys have in common is that they didn't have to leave their feet to play defense. Guys who can play defense using their wingspan and instinct seem to have a really good glide path to NBA longevity. Every player I mentioned above played at least until their mid-thirties.

This is in stark contrast to defenders like Ben Wallace and Alonzo Mourning, who declined sharply after the age of 30. But they were mostly weak side defenders who used their leaping ability to make plays.

Obviously a lot depends on the particulars of Gobert's health, and I'm not going to pretend like I have a really informed opinion on this. But assuming he doesn't have degenerative conditions in his lower body, he seems well suited to be productive into his 30's.

The NBA will also go into a new TV contract the last year of his contract, which should reduce the risk of his salary that year.

I don't disagree with you about his contract situation being a potential problem, but I think Gobert's a good bet to be some semblance of himself throughout most of it.

[MGB8]

People on the trade board are expecting Vucevic + Patrick Williams + more.

Pass.

I agree on that. And Gobert's contract is horrid, he's basically a neutral value player-contract - desirable only for playoff teams looking.

That said, if the Bulls were serious about Gobert... I'd be concerned about the fit with DeRozan. If DDR needs to use the mid-range to be most effective, Gobert's non-range doesn't work. That's one of the issues that limited Vuc, to some degree.

So I think, if there was fire under this (tiny bit) of smoke, the trade might be: Vuc + DeRozan for Gobert + Bogdanovic. Maybe including Coby going out from the Bulls to make salary even (though it works on tradechecker without).

And that would be ... very interesting for both teams.

Bogs is a few months older than DeRozan, and much more a (very good) secondary offensive player than a team's primary scorer. He doesn't get to the line much, about half the rate of DDR. But Gobert is a year and a half younger than Vuc... so outside of potentially losing Coby, the Bulls don't get notably older or younger.

For the Jazz, if they wanted to reboot, the idea of a Conley-Mitchell-DDR trio would be really interesting, with Royce at the 4, and then Vuc, maybe Whiteside back to back them up. Rudy Gay has played with DDR so there's some established relations. And Clarkson is still a fairly killer 3rd guard. I could see them getting Ingles back, too.

For the Bulls, if Lonzo and Pat are healthy, you have Gobert and 4 guys who can shoot well from range, so that could work. Gobert would allow them to be a bit smaller at the 4 like Billy seems to like. Of course, still don't have established shooting off the bench (either Coby stepping up if kept, or otherwise), and Bogs is not any better defensively than DDR... so...

Basically, the teams would be flipping plans to see if the other team's approach from the prior year - and seeing of that approach works better for them, with their personnel. And, honestly, looking at personnel groupings - it might be better for both teams.

[DuckIII]

I'm very hesitant to include Williams on this list. I'm well aware of his good 3-point percentage his first two years, I just can't look past the low volume and be confident he'll ever at any time increase his aggressiveness and volume.

I think some of it is personality and some of it is his slow shot. If you look at William's shot dashboard (https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1630172/shots-dash) he's only shooting when wide open.

you can cheat off of Williams up to 6 feet and if he catches it, he's not shooting. That's a problem. You'll have Rudy's defender camped out in the paint, whomever is guarding Ball, Zach, or DeMar will be near them, and William's reluctance gives the defenders another guy who can swipe in for help, because Williams, while good when he does shoot, simply doesn't do it unless absolutely wide open.

This is all true to an extent. A couple of counterpoints:

1. Spacing the floor is not based on the volume of shots or makes. It’s based solely on what the defense does. If they consider you a threat to shoot and guard you accordingly, you’ve spaced the floor. That said, the ability to hit the 3 obviously plays a role in how teams defend you. Pat’s not the type of guy who you have a defender chase around all the time because you are terrified of his 3 ball. So he’s not a super-spacer right now. But defenders do have to, and in fact do, respect his 3 ball. Once the ball is in his hands they will close out and he has the skills to both pass and drive on that, which is just as important as the spacing itself.

2. When Pat came back at the end of the season he showed a quicker release from 3, took more while defended, and even took a couple of pull-up 3s off the dribble.

Point being, I think he should be listed as a floor spacer in a Gobert hypothetical, albeit just barely.

I'll lead in by saying, I doubt a deal could be done for Gobert without including Pat, but just my opinion. That said, I agree that Pat is a useful floor spacer, and more importantly, Pat would be aided by no longer being the 4th/5th option in that scenario...with Vuc gone, Pat should see another 3 or 4 shots a game.

Other than Vuc, I would not give up significant assets for Gobert (Coby White is not a significant asset). So no way I include Lavine, DDR, Pat or Caruso. Probably not Ball either, who I absolutely love for our team. But I have to admit his injury situation makes me less concrete about him.

However, I’m not scared off by his contract or narrow skill set as a scorer. Adding him at a buyer’s price massively upgrades the quality of our team, helps balance the roster which is our biggest problem, and I would be supportive of it. Though I agree it has several potential cons as well.

[StunnerKO]

Read on Twitter

?s=21&t=3cTMv-JIjnAqvUWufeIZsQ

[DuckIII]

Read on Twitter

?s=21&t=3cTMv-JIjnAqvUWufeIZsQ

AK loves Pat. But I do think he’d trade him in the right deal. This is not the right deal.

Gobert’s contract is worth the risk, but at a buyer’s price.

[jnrjr79]

Read on Twitter

?s=21&t=3cTMv-JIjnAqvUWufeIZsQ

AK loves Pat. But I do think he’d trade him in the right deal. This is not the right deal.

Gobert’s contract is worth the risk, but at a buyer’s price.

Let's say they ask for Pat and the Bulls stand firm. Utah blinks, and says "ok, fine, we'll take Vooch, Coby, and Ayo."

Deal?