The Bulls should go all in for Zion

[Infinity2152]

I think Coby + our 2025 pick + portland pick + filler salary is the most I would consider offering, and possibly enough they'd consider doing it. They probably flip Coby somewhere else.

That would leave us with a lot of problems in that Matas, Giddey, and Zion are probably terrible fits next to each other as Coby is our main volume shooter (assuming Lonzo can't play big minutes for you). That said, you'd increase the talent a lot, and I feel like you can find another Coby White. Finding guys who can be good volume one dimensional scorers if given a lot of touches doesn't seem too hard.

This is where I'm at. Not trading the world for him, but I saw a trade proposal from a respected pundit suggesting Coby White, Vucevic and Jevon Carter, no picks. Is that too much to give up for Zion too? Not at any price? Or is it because, not having any idea what the Pels are looking for, the cost is automatically to great to even consider.

I think you just put two good/great defenders around Giddey, Matas, Zion, hopefully with range, you're good. You don't need playmakers, and Giddey, Matas, Zion should provide a ton of scoring. Zion easily eats up Coby's scoring with far higher efficiency. Good 3 and D shooting guard, doesn't need to be Coby's "level". Good paint defending center, athletic, be nice if he has decent range. We don't really need to add All-Stars to Giddey, Matas, Zion, lottery rookie.

I'd be pretty surprised if you didn't have to include draft capital with that offer, but if you didn't, I'd do it. Vooch and Carter are just filler, so you're down to Coby vs. Zion. I'd say Zion, including his extreme health risk, is still more likely to become a true #1 than Coby, since he already is one when he plays and I severely doubt Coby ever becomes one.

My man. And that's where negotiations come in. They probably will want some draft compensation. How many picks? What are the protections? Are they even likely to convey? If I'll trade for him without the pick and they demand at least 1 first, how much is a lottery protected 2027 first worth to my team? When you add a star, hopefully your pick is lower anyway. You're expecting your 2027 pick to be 20 or lower, what value do you place on it? That usually results in an average to below average to out of the league player.

Does anybody disagree that Zion is probably at his lowest trade value of his career? Anybody disagree Coby is around the highest his trade value has been? Anybody disagree that as a pure ASSET, Zion is far more valuable than Coby. We keep talking about adding assets. Even as a trade asset, a even slightly higher than now value Zion kills Coby at $30 mill and a tick or two.

[jnrjr79]

This is where I'm at. Not trading the world for him, but I saw a trade proposal from a respected pundit suggesting Coby White, Vucevic and Jevon Carter, no picks. Is that too much to give up for Zion too? Not at any price? Or is it because, not having any idea what the Pels are looking for, the cost is automatically to great to even consider.

I think you just put two good/great defenders around Giddey, Matas, Zion, hopefully with range, you're good. You don't need playmakers, and Giddey, Matas, Zion should provide a ton of scoring. Zion easily eats up Coby's scoring with far higher efficiency. Good 3 and D shooting guard, doesn't need to be Coby's "level". Good paint defending center, athletic, be nice if he has decent range. We don't really need to add All-Stars to Giddey, Matas, Zion, lottery rookie.

I'd be pretty surprised if you didn't have to include draft capital with that offer, but if you didn't, I'd do it. Vooch and Carter are just filler, so you're down to Coby vs. Zion. I'd say Zion, including his extreme health risk, is still more likely to become a true #1 than Coby, since he already is one when he plays and I severely doubt Coby ever becomes one.

My man. And that's where negotiations come in. They probably will want some draft compensation. How many picks? What are the protections? Are they even likely to convey? If I'll trade for him without the pick and they demand at least 1 first, how much is a lottery protected 2027 first worth to my team? When you add a star, hopefully your pick is lower anyway. You're expecting your 2027 pick to be 20 or lower, what value do you place on it? That usually results in an average to below average to out of the league player.

Right. This is basically the way I see it:

Scenario 1: Trade for Zion

20-40% chance of it working out, if working out means "you now have a #1 player who is reasonably available to play"

60-80% chance it doesn't work out, mostly for health issues, but I suppose also for maturity/character ones.

If it doesn't pan out, you're out Coby White (who you may or may not have wanted to sign at his market value in 2026 and there's no guarantee he'll be around, anyways) and whatever draft capital you trade away, which is the real rub. But you also have a voidable Zion contract that would give you some immediate cap relief.


Scenario 2: Don't trade for Zion.

Here, you presumably have Matas, Giddey, and you spend what you need to spend to keep Coby.

Does this have a great chance of panning out than a Zion trade? I don't think so. It's certainly possible, but you're going to have to go find a true #1 player somewhere, yet don't project to be bad enough to be picking at the top of the draft. There's no obvious path here to a #1 other than trading some of the stuff you would have traded for Zion, but likely more, given someone without his injury history will presumably be more expensive.


It's tough, because you don't really know what other options will be out there, but I can't unequivocally write off the Zion idea because if his price is low enough, given his tremendous upside and flexible contract, you could probably take the swing without screwing over the franchise for a million years.

[Infinity2152]

I'd be pretty surprised if you didn't have to include draft capital with that offer, but if you didn't, I'd do it. Vooch and Carter are just filler, so you're down to Coby vs. Zion. I'd say Zion, including his extreme health risk, is still more likely to become a true #1 than Coby, since he already is one when he plays and I severely doubt Coby ever becomes one.

My man. And that's where negotiations come in. They probably will want some draft compensation. How many picks? What are the protections? Are they even likely to convey? If I'll trade for him without the pick and they demand at least 1 first, how much is a lottery protected 2027 first worth to my team? When you add a star, hopefully your pick is lower anyway. You're expecting your 2027 pick to be 20 or lower, what value do you place on it? That usually results in an average to below average to out of the league player.

Right. This is basically the way I see it:

Scenario 1: Trade for Zion

20-40% chance of it working out, if working out means "you now have a #1 player who is reasonably available to play"

60-80% chance it doesn't work out, mostly for health issues, but I suppose also for maturity/character ones.

If it doesn't pan out, you're out Coby White (who you may or may not have wanted to sign at his market value in 2026 and there's no guarantee he'll be around, anyways) and whatever draft capital you trade away, which is the real rub. But you also have a voidable Zion contract that would give you some immediate cap relief.


Scenario 2: Don't trade for Zion.

Here, you presumably have Matas, Giddey, and you spend what you need to spend to keep Coby.

Does this have a great chance of panning out than a Zion trade? I don't think so. It's certainly possible, but you're going to have to go find a true #1 player somewhere, yet don't project to be bad enough to be picking at the top of the draft. There's no obvious path here to a #1 other than trading some of the stuff you would have traded for Zion, but likely more, given someone without his injury history will presumably be more expensive.


It's tough, because you don't really know what other options will be out there, but I can't unequivocally write off the Zion idea because if his price is low enough, given his tremendous upside and flexible contract, you could probably take the swing without screwing over the franchise for a million years.

His contract is what makes this possible, imo. You can trade him to recover what you spent, or worst case void him out and still retain all our principal pieces and gain a ton of cap space. That's worst case, if he doesn't work out. Take the shot for a year; if we want to, flip him back out summer 2026 when a ton of teams will have cap space and nobody to spend it on.

Wonder what Zion's history looks like if you take contact injuries out and games they sat him when he could have played. Too lazy to do the math, lol. They're a major component of his history and could happen to anybody. Usually the result of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, falling wrong, or being hit the wrong way by the wrong player. Completely unpredictable in a contact sport. He's missed tons of games from banging knees too hard and falling on his back wrong. Is there a right way really to fall on your back on a wooden floor while being pushed?

Might sound like excuses, ok. But frequency of unrelated injuries vary widely among players. Some will have the worst luck, or be outliers at times.

We do know there is a non-zero chance we lose Coby for absolutely nothing, right? They're going to offer him an extension. He turns it down which is the move everyone expects, they figure we have enough to re-sign him this summer. A team offers him $40 mill AAV. Don't want to hear it can't happen, teams will have cap space and be competing that summer, plus he's a 20+ scorer and scorers get overpaid all the time. That won't be near max in 2026. We lose him for nothing, or whatever we can get if we can convince the other team with cap space they want to do a sign and trade, rather than just signing him outright.

[dougthonus]

My man. And that's where negotiations come in. They probably will want some draft compensation. How many picks? What are the protections? Are they even likely to convey? If I'll trade for him without the pick and they demand at least 1 first, how much is a lottery protected 2027 first worth to my team? When you add a star, hopefully your pick is lower anyway. You're expecting your 2027 pick to be 20 or lower, what value do you place on it? That usually results in an average to below average to out of the league player.

That's probably the rub with Zion, you can't count on him improving you team in 2027, so you still need decent protections. There's a good chance if you trade for Zion you are one of hte worst teams in the league in 2027.

Does anybody disagree that Zion is probably at his lowest trade value of his career? Anybody disagree Coby is around the highest his trade value has been? Anybody disagree that as a pure ASSET, Zion is far more valuable than Coby. We keep talking about adding assets. Even as a trade asset, a even slightly higher than now value Zion kills Coby at $30 mill and a tick or two.

This isn't how I would view markets.

Zion's value is what it is now based on the sum total of what has happened to date as is Coby. The idea that they are at their highest or lowest points is sort of irrelevant, because it is how their trade value will change over the next year. If one of them were to play even better than they have in the past or one of them were to tear an ACL then their trade value would change.

It's like the stock market, expected future assumptions are already priced into the equation by smart people. The odds of Zion staying healthy and making his trade value lower than they were before are because he has continued to stay injured and the odds of him staying healthy in the future are likely less because of that. Coby's trade value now is higher because he's had back to back really strong seasons and no longer looks like just a flash in the pan.

You should view the odds of either guy's trade value going up or down from its present state as 50/50 if you were in an intelligent market place.

Granted, it's not a truly efficient market because:
1: Player value isn't necessarily fungible (if I need a SG, getting value at center does nothing for me)
2: Agreed upon (it's 30 experts trying to decide which isn't enough to get true wisdom of crowds)
3: Nor the same in all situations (ie, Kevin Durant probably has a lot more value to certain teams next year than he would to a team like ours that is further away)
4: Openly bid on (we don't know how other people value the players)

[sco]

My man. And that's where negotiations come in. They probably will want some draft compensation. How many picks? What are the protections? Are they even likely to convey? If I'll trade for him without the pick and they demand at least 1 first, how much is a lottery protected 2027 first worth to my team? When you add a star, hopefully your pick is lower anyway. You're expecting your 2027 pick to be 20 or lower, what value do you place on it? That usually results in an average to below average to out of the league player.

That's probably the rub with Zion, you can't count on him improving you team in 2027, so you still need decent protections. There's a good chance if you trade for Zion you are one of hte worst teams in the league in 2027.

Does anybody disagree that Zion is probably at his lowest trade value of his career? Anybody disagree Coby is around the highest his trade value has been? Anybody disagree that as a pure ASSET, Zion is far more valuable than Coby. We keep talking about adding assets. Even as a trade asset, a even slightly higher than now value Zion kills Coby at $30 mill and a tick or two.

This isn't how I would view markets.

Zion's value is what it is now based on the sum total of what has happened to date as is Coby. The idea that they are at their highest or lowest points is sort of irrelevant, because it is how their trade value will change over the next year. If one of them were to play even better than they have in the past or one of them were to tear an ACL then their trade value would change.

It's like the stock market, expected future assumptions are already priced into the equation by smart people. The odds of Zion staying healthy and making his trade value lower than they were before are because he has continued to stay injured and the odds of him staying healthy in the future are likely less because of that. Coby's trade value now is higher because he's had back to back really strong seasons and no longer looks like just a flash in the pan.

You should view the odds of either guy's trade value going up or down from its present state as 50/50 if you were in an intelligent market place.

Granted, it's not a truly efficient market because:
1: Player value isn't necessarily fungible (if I need a SG, getting value at center does nothing for me)
2: Agreed upon (it's 30 experts trying to decide which isn't enough to get true wisdom of crowds)
3: Nor the same in all situations (ie, Kevin Durant probably has a lot more value to certain teams next year than he would to a team like ours that is further away)
4: Openly bid on (we don't know how other people value the players)

While I agree about their relative market values, it is really our take. We don't really know how much they have moved relative to one another.

My question is. Who else do we think would be in the market to offer more than say Coby + our '25 pick and Por 1st? What teams have GM's who are stuck in mediocrity, have a job at risk, and need an upgrade at forward? I'm sure the playoffs may play a role there too.

Teams I could see are:
BKN
PHI (Embiid for Zion?)
CHA
ATL
MIA
DET
MEM
DEN
POR
WAS

That may not even be complete, but I think there will be at least 3 teams that put in an actual non-lowball bid. Many of the teams on that list have better assets than we do.

Back on our package, I think we'd be dumb to throw in any other year's pick than this one (see the Vuc trade...an injury to Zion would make that pick go up that year).

Beyond Zion, I could see NO rebooting around Murphy and Missi, with other guys possibly becoming available. I'm a fan of Herb Jones. We might also be able to be a player in a 3 team deal for Zion (or Murray or McCollum), contributing expirings for worse contract(s) and pick(s).

[Infinity2152]

My man. And that's where negotiations come in. They probably will want some draft compensation. How many picks? What are the protections? Are they even likely to convey? If I'll trade for him without the pick and they demand at least 1 first, how much is a lottery protected 2027 first worth to my team? When you add a star, hopefully your pick is lower anyway. You're expecting your 2027 pick to be 20 or lower, what value do you place on it? That usually results in an average to below average to out of the league player.

That's probably the rub with Zion, you can't count on him improving you team in 2027, so you still need decent protections. There's a good chance if you trade for Zion you are one of hte worst teams in the league in 2027.

Does anybody disagree that Zion is probably at his lowest trade value of his career? Anybody disagree Coby is around the highest his trade value has been? Anybody disagree that as a pure ASSET, Zion is far more valuable than Coby. We keep talking about adding assets. Even as a trade asset, a even slightly higher than now value Zion kills Coby at $30 mill and a tick or two.

This isn't how I would view markets.

Zion's value is what it is now based on the sum total of what has happened to date as is Coby. The idea that they are at their highest or lowest points is sort of irrelevant, because it is how their trade value will change over the next year. If one of them were to play even better than they have in the past or one of them were to tear an ACL then their trade value would change.

It's like the stock market, expected future assumptions are already priced into the equation by smart people. The odds of Zion staying healthy and making his trade value lower than they were before are because he has continued to stay injured and the odds of him staying healthy in the future are likely less because of that. Coby's trade value now is higher because he's had back to back really strong seasons and no longer looks like just a flash in the pan.

You should view the odds of either guy's trade value going up or down from its present state as 50/50 if you were in an intelligent market place.

Granted, it's not a truly efficient market because:
1: Player value isn't necessarily fungible (if I need a SG, getting value at center does nothing for me)
2: Agreed upon (it's 30 experts trying to decide which isn't enough to get true wisdom of crowds)
3: Nor the same in all situations (ie, Kevin Durant probably has a lot more value to certain teams next year than he would to a team like ours that is further away)
4: Openly bid on (we don't know how other people value the players)

While I agree about their relative market values, it is really our take. We don't really know how much they have moved relative to one another.

My question is. Who else do we think would be in the market to offer more than say Coby + our '25 pick and Por 1st? What teams have GM's who are stuck in mediocrity, have a job at risk, and need an upgrade at forward? I'm sure the playoffs may play a role there too.

Teams I could see are:
BKN
PHI (Embiid for Zion?)
CHA
ATL
MIA
DET
MEM
DEN
POR
WAS

That may not even be complete, but I think there will be at least 3 teams that put in an actual non-lowball bid. Many of the teams on that list have better assets than we do.

Back on our package, I think we'd be dumb to throw in any other year's pick than this one (see the Vuc trade...an injury to Zion would make that pick go up that year).

Beyond Zion, I could see NO rebooting around Murphy and Missi, with other guys possibly becoming available. I'm a fan of Herb Jones. We might also be able to be a player in a 3 team deal for Zion (or Murray or McCollum), contributing expirings for worse contract(s) and pick(s).

Don't most of those teams already have a starting PF? Brooklyn has Cam Johnson, etc. I don't think any team that's currently a very good team would disrupt their team because they have to give up critical pieces so that takes Detroit, Denver, probably Memphis out. I'm NO, no way I take Embid for Zion, for what? Embid makes $16 mill more than Zion next year, Pels would have to send 1 or two extra players to take on a much older, always injured player. The other teams, what better packages would they give up better than Coby, Vuc and picks and still have a team to make it worth it? Cha, Lamelo Ball is always injured, they're going to gut their team to add Zion and go nowhere even if both are healthy, which is unlikely?

If we play Matas at SF, we have a need at PF. many of those teams don't. We have other good pieces that would be left (Coby and Matas). He costs near $40 mill, most team will have to send out that much in players the Pelicans would want. Find me two players going to them, guard averaging 20pts, a 19/10 center, both expiring, plus picks and I'll agree. Not going to keep debating Vuc and Coby's value, Coby's a 20 pt scorer, and Vuc is a 19/10 player. Show me equivalents scorers. Look at the contracts throughout the league, offense is valued and paid more than defense.

Seems to be a common theme in here: We shouldn't get/keep/pay player X because he's not worth it, but there will be intense interest in the league for other teams to overpay that player (Coby, Giddey, Zion, etc) who's not good enough for us. If 10-15 teams will bid on a player or take a player, why don't we want him again? Because we have too much talent here already?

If anyone thinks barring a career ending injury or some meteoric rise by Coby that Coby with be even close to Zion's value over the next few years, don't know what to tell you. Zion's floor is near Coby's ceiling, imo. People are currently expecting healthy Coby to get $30 mill and saying that's too much. You're not getting current Zion as a free agent for that much, although I'm sure there would be injury clauses.

[Sinistar6]

I loved Zion as a prospect and his talent is off the charts. That being said, I am out. This is my un educated opinion. I assume Zion does not address his health as a pro. People can change but I believe the chances of that are low for Zion. A prospect whose main attribute is athleticism that does not take measures to prolong that trait is something I would stay away from.

If Zion does change or his health issues are a product of something besides effort, he is the most attainable possible superstar franchise changer.

[dougthonus]

If we play Matas at SF, we have a need at PF. many of those teams don't. We have other good pieces that would be left (Coby and Matas). He costs near $40 mill, most team will have to send out that much in players the Pelicans would want. Find me two players going to them, guard averaging 20pts, a 19/10 center, both expiring, plus picks and I'll agree. Not going to keep debating Vuc and Coby's value, Coby's a 20 pt scorer, and Vuc is a 19/10 player. Show me equivalents scorers. Look at the contracts throughout the league, offense is valued and paid more than defense.

If you think Vuc has any value whatsoever over expiring contract, there is no reason worth arguing about it, because you are simply wrong. The Pelicans wouldn't want Vuc, he has no purpose. Sadly Stacey King is not the GM of another franchise and simply yelling out raw box score numbers and equating it to value is not how any GM/EVP in the NBA does business.

Coby might be interesting for them except that he'll be unrestricted at the end of the season and can merely walk away, and they can't extend him, so it's a really big risk for them to take. I don't think either of those guys have much use in a trade if I'm the Pelicans. Coby might be a good asset because you can flip it into a 3 team trade though, and someone else takes him and gives the Pelicans the assets.

Seems to be a common theme in here: We shouldn't get/keep/pay player X because he's not worth it, but there will be intense interest in the league for other teams to overpay that player (Coby, Giddey, Zion, etc) who's not good enough for us. If 10-15 teams will bid on a player or take a player, why don't we want him again? Because we have too much talent here already?

By default, trades are always that way because value is typically 50/50 right? Like any time you trade for a guy you should expect that you are getting the same value as you are giving up. People will disagree on what the value is, but ultimately, both GMs have to agree the value is better for them, and that usually happens because they want different types of values. On top of that, the value is set for reach player at whomever in the league has the highest assessment of that player.

For your own younger players, it's very frequently you. Like we probably think higher of Matas than every other team and higher of Coby White than every other team.

If anyone thinks barring a career ending injury or some meteoric rise by Coby that Coby with be even close to Zion's value over the next few years, don't know what to tell you. Zion's floor is near Coby's ceiling, imo. People are currently expecting healthy Coby to get $30 mill and saying that's too much. You're not getting current Zion as a free agent for that much, although I'm sure there would be injury clauses.

Zion's floor is lighting 120M dollars on fire and not only is that his floor, it is also the reality of what he has done to date. The Pelicans have been absolutely ruined by him because you can't game plan around the focal point of your team playing in 1/3rd of the games. Coby's ceiling is much higher than that.

Again, I'd be okay trading for Zion and even moving Coby for Zion, but this statement is ridiculous.

[Jeffster81]

Zion’s amazing in his 29 games a year. It’s just that this team can’t afford such a high-risk. Reason being at best, he still wouldn’t have a complimentary core (Rim protector? Point-of-attack guard? Established stars?), and at worst (injuries), we’d be capped as an Eastern play-in team with no picks.

The way AK settles, and the way NOP is preparing his market with the trade press, I’m certain the bare minimum will have to be two FRPs (3 if Patrick is included).

NO have to tack on frp to get the Bulls to take him of their hands.

No, because NO can simply cut him b/c he didn't hit his minimum games played threshold this year for the remainder of his contract to be guaranteed.

I'm not interested in Zion, is my point.

[boozapalooza]

NO have to tack on frp to get the Bulls to take him of their hands.

No, because NO can simply cut him b/c he didn't hit his minimum games played threshold this year for the remainder of his contract to be guaranteed.

I'm not interested in Zion, is my point.

Why would this team be interested in making a high risk move for once? If it doesnt work out, we will be a bottom 5 team. Is that worse than losing in the play in game 3 years in a row?

I can’t understand the mentality some people have. If you can’t get interested by the possibility of having Zion on your team…wtf are you hoping for the Bulls to do? Sign more mediocre talent and run it back?

Maybe NO is just a toxic environment for him. We have seen plenty of young guys benefit from a change of scenery (Lauri). To write off Zion at this stage of his career is way too extreme.

[boozapalooza]

I'd consider trading for Zion, but not sure he's a good match with Giddey.

Spoiler he’s not

Have seen this before…why exactly is Giddey a bad fit with Zion? Just because of shooting?

Giddeys a pretty elite passer and could set up Zion in all kinds of ways. Both guys are young and should be able to grow together. Wouldnt mind their fit at all, just need to add some more shooting around them.

[jnrjr79]

I'd consider trading for Zion, but not sure he's a good match with Giddey.

Spoiler he’s not

Have seen this before…why exactly is Giddey a bad fit with Zion? Just because of shooting?

Giddeys a pretty elite passer and could set up Zion in all kinds of ways. Both guys are young and should be able to grow together. Wouldnt mind their fit at all, just need to add some more shooting around them.

I think the passing thing would work well together. Mostly I'd be worried about enough shooting and whether Giddey's hot streak is "real."

Assuming Coby is outbound in the deal, I feel like you need a 1 who can shoot the 3 and defend (a healthy Lonzo would be great here, but alas), + Giddey, Matas, Zion + a good defensive/mobile C.

TBH, if he could get his shot back, Ayo is not a bad fit with that sort of a group.

[PJSteven22]

I'd consider trading for Zion, but not sure he's a good match with Giddey.

Spoiler he’s not

Have seen this before…why exactly is Giddey a bad fit with Zion? Just because of shooting?

Giddeys a pretty elite passer and could set up Zion in all kinds of ways. Both guys are young and should be able to grow together. Wouldnt mind their fit at all, just need to add some more shooting around them.

You need guys that can create their own shots off the dribble to succeed in the half court and ultimately in the playoffs. You just be in the same spot if you trade Coby for Zion. That’s why I think it’s preferable that you trade Giddey in that case.

[PJSteven22]

Spoiler he’s not

Have seen this before…why exactly is Giddey a bad fit with Zion? Just because of shooting?

Giddeys a pretty elite passer and could set up Zion in all kinds of ways. Both guys are young and should be able to grow together. Wouldnt mind their fit at all, just need to add some more shooting around them.

I think the passing thing would work well together. Mostly I'd be worried about enough shooting and whether Giddey's hot streak is "real."

Assuming Coby is outbound in the deal, I feel like you need a 1 who can shoot the 3 and defend (a healthy Lonzo would be great here, but alas), + Giddey, Matas, Zion + a good defensive/mobile C.

TBH, if he could get his shot back, Ayo is not a bad fit with that sort of a group.

That team doesn’t have enough perimeter shot creation and it’s still a negative on defense depending on the center they acquire.

[prolific passer]

Be easy to move on from Vuc and Coby as you have Collins, Smith, Ayo, and Huerter to step in and take their spots. Thing is Zion plays hard when he wants to and is near unstoppable. Don't know if Billy is the right coach for him to reach his potential.

I actually think Billy is the perfect coach for Zion.

He’d be good

Ime Udoka would be the perfect coach for him though.

With all that said, I’m glad the board has decided to come to my side. I’ve been dreaming about this move since early in the season.

I think there were some who wanted Zion last season.

[jnrjr79]

Have seen this before…why exactly is Giddey a bad fit with Zion? Just because of shooting?

Giddeys a pretty elite passer and could set up Zion in all kinds of ways. Both guys are young and should be able to grow together. Wouldnt mind their fit at all, just need to add some more shooting around them.

I think the passing thing would work well together. Mostly I'd be worried about enough shooting and whether Giddey's hot streak is "real."

Assuming Coby is outbound in the deal, I feel like you need a 1 who can shoot the 3 and defend (a healthy Lonzo would be great here, but alas), + Giddey, Matas, Zion + a good defensive/mobile C.

TBH, if he could get his shot back, Ayo is not a bad fit with that sort of a group.

That team doesn’t have enough perimeter shot creation and it’s still a negative on defense depending on the center they acquire.

Yeah, I specifically noted you'd need a defensive C and a shooter at 1. Shot "creation" does look like an issue and you're going to have to bank on Matas being able to do some of that in the long-term.

There is literally no good and balanced roster that the Bulls are a single transaction away from creating.

[drosestruts]

What's interesting with Zion is that it's not a matter of talent or ability to perform. The question marks are around his health and durability.

You can play for the draft lottery but there your biggest question is almost always talent and ability.

Zion removes the biggest question.

If the Clippers win a title this year, ask their fans if all the Kawhi injury uncertainty was worth it.

No one doubts Kawhi's talent. And talent is always the biggest question and differentiator.

[prolific passer]

What's interesting with Zion is that it's not a matter of talent or ability to perform. The question marks are around his health and durability.

You can play for the draft lottery but there your biggest question is almost always talent and ability.

Zion removes the biggest question.

If the Clippers win a title this year, ask their fans if all the Kawhi injury uncertainty was worth it.

No one doubts Kawhi's talent. And talent is always the biggest question and differentiator.

With Zion it's all about motivation and he hasn't been that motivated since joining the pels because he was drafted there after the AD debacle but when he is motivated to play he is nearly unstoppable. I seen him last year destroy the twin towers of the twolves twice.

[kodo]

Clippers are a bad example of gambling on a broken superstar because if they didn't gamble on Kawhi they'd still have SGA & Jalen Williams (since Ballmer basically traded them to get PG + Kawhi as a FA), they'd be close to what OKC is right now.

With only 30ish games played, Kawhi is fairly irrelevant to the LAC success this season. Night in and night out it's been Harden, Zubac, Norm Powell. If they relied on Kawhi as a #1, they wouldn't even be in the playoffs since he caps your Ws at about 37ish, assuming he even has a 100% win rate.

If you want to remove the PG link and look at Kawhi signed as a pure FA it looks a lot better (although he said he was 100% not going to sign as a FA without PG). If we get Zion and give up absolutely nothing, sure it can't be bad because we gave up nothing. But I highly doubt NOP is just handing us Zion for just bad contracts like PWill. If they do, sure who can complain even if Zion only plays 30 games.

[nekorajo]

They trade away Coby White and various pics for Zion. Are we closer to a championship now? I don't see how the answer could possibly be yes. Not saying that any of our pieces are untradable, but the path to the top does not go through Zion. Never has. Probably never will imo.