Around The NBA: 2019-20 RESTART

[TheSuzerain]

It's especially preposterous when you're well under the cap and can sign your 2nd rounders to very team-friendly deals without eating into your exceptions. As was the case for us.

[dougthonus]

I think this is a silly arguement. If everyone in that draft picks 34 and higher was worthless, why did other teams value it? Why wasn't there this amazing big sell? Why even have a 2nd round at that point.

The Bulls decided they didn't like anyone. Their evaluation isn't the same as everyone elses. I never said the correct and only evaluation is that all these guys will be bad. I think any given year, you probably know 10-20% of these guys will pan out. The question is do you have a feeling about one of those guys that makes it worth taking one or doing something else.

The Bulls have historically not taken many, but have something like double the hit rate of the next closest team when taking second rounders which shows that they're extremely selective and only take guys when they project out the guy has a role and value for them.

Answer is, there is some low cost value there. Particularly in those first few picks. If the Bulls FO can't utilize an asset, then what are they expecting cash to bring to the floor?

No one is denying that there can be value in second round picks, but you have varying degrees of confidence of whether you will get any. When you don't feel you will get value, it's reasonable to do something else. That's what the Bulls did.

I'm not saying you have to love it or that it was a stroke of genius. I'm just saying the Bulls clearly didn't like anyone at 38 and so they sold the pick.

Do you think they were in love with some player but sold it anyway?

[Mech Engineer]

The narrative about Bulls being geniuses at second round picks in the past is Bull. Paxson has a zillion drafts while other GMs have had 5 or 6 drafts. Give any average GM 20 years and they will have their share of good draft picks.

[TheStig]

I think this is a silly arguement. If everyone in that draft picks 34 and higher was worthless, why did other teams value it? Why wasn't there this amazing big sell? Why even have a 2nd round at that point.

The Bulls decided they didn't like anyone. Their evaluation isn't the same as everyone elses. I never said the correct and only evaluation is that all these guys will be bad. I think any given year, you probably know 10-20% of these guys will pan out. The question is do you have a feeling about one of those guys that makes it worth taking one or doing something else.

The Bulls have historically not taken many, but have something like double the hit rate of the next closest team when taking second rounders which shows that they're extremely selective and only take guys when they project out the guy has a role and value for them.

Answer is, there is some low cost value there. Particularly in those first few picks. If the Bulls FO can't utilize an asset, then what are they expecting cash to bring to the floor?

No one is denying that there can be value in second round picks, but you have varying degrees of confidence of whether you will get any. When you don't feel you will get value, it's reasonable to do something else. That's what the Bulls did.

I'm not saying you have to love it or that it was a stroke of genius. I'm just saying the Bulls clearly didn't like anyone at 38 and so they sold the pick.

Do you think they were in love with some player but sold it anyway?

I don't think they didn't see value in the pick. I think there was someone there they thought was worth a shot. But most importantly, I think they saw dollar signs. There is value in taking a shot in a guy.

[MrSparkle]

I think this is a silly arguement. If everyone in that draft picks 34 and higher was worthless, why did other teams value it? Why wasn't there this amazing big sell? Why even have a 2nd round at that point.

The Bulls decided they didn't like anyone. Their evaluation isn't the same as everyone elses. I never said the correct and only evaluation is that all these guys will be bad. I think any given year, you probably know 10-20% of these guys will pan out. The question is do you have a feeling about one of those guys that makes it worth taking one or doing something else.

The Bulls have historically not taken many, but have something like double the hit rate of the next closest team when taking second rounders which shows that they're extremely selective and only take guys when they project out the guy has a role and value for them.

Answer is, there is some low cost value there. Particularly in those first few picks. If the Bulls FO can't utilize an asset, then what are they expecting cash to bring to the floor?

No one is denying that there can be value in second round picks, but you have varying degrees of confidence of whether you will get any. When you don't feel you will get value, it's reasonable to do something else. That's what the Bulls did.

I'm not saying you have to love it or that it was a stroke of genius. I'm just saying the Bulls clearly didn't like anyone at 38 and so they sold the pick.

Do you think they were in love with some player but sold it anyway?

Between Erik Murphy, Bairstow, and Paul Zipser, I have a hard time believing they have double the hit rate.

Paxson has taken exactly 3 good 2nd rders in his GM/VP career. Duhon, Asik and now Gafford. So far, neither of the guys lasted past their rookie contract - we'll see how Gafford goes. Reality is that by the time his contract is up and he learns the league, if he projects to be any good, the Bulls are going to find themselves in the exactly same dilemma that Paxson has presented himself countless times before. Do you pay market value for a backup, seeing as WCJ is the starting big for the fore-seeable future? If Gafford touches up rebounding and screen-setting fundamentals and gets more comfortable/experienced (less fouls, takes good care of his body/injury-prevention, defensive awareness), the guy is going to get $10m a year.

I'd see this 2nd rounders as excellent trade chips if anything. But I think in Pax's brain it's "resign" or "let walk."

Jordan Bell had a high value at the start of his career. You can't forget that. They sold the pick for NOTHING in basketball terms.

I don't defend that move at all, just like I wouldn't have defended the Sarver Suns from dumping picks.

Collect all talent possible and make power trades. Don't collect Felicios, Satos, and Thads. This is a month-to-month scouting/working job, not a work-every-3-years kind of a position, which I think is the problem with GarPax. They think that you load up all your moves for these once every 4 year power plays, while "standing pat" and "generating income" with "cost-saving"... while at the same burning tons of money on bad coaches, bad players, and losing results.

It really makes no sense. Boylen is the perfect culmination/representation of this horrible FO. Right moves at the wrong times, wrong non-moves at the right times, every time.

[Dresden]

I think this is a silly arguement. If everyone in that draft picks 34 and higher was worthless, why did other teams value it? Why wasn't there this amazing big sell? Why even have a 2nd round at that point.

The Bulls decided they didn't like anyone. Their evaluation isn't the same as everyone elses. I never said the correct and only evaluation is that all these guys will be bad. I think any given year, you probably know 10-20% of these guys will pan out. The question is do you have a feeling about one of those guys that makes it worth taking one or doing something else.

The Bulls have historically not taken many, but have something like double the hit rate of the next closest team when taking second rounders which shows that they're extremely selective and only take guys when they project out the guy has a role and value for them.

Answer is, there is some low cost value there. Particularly in those first few picks. If the Bulls FO can't utilize an asset, then what are they expecting cash to bring to the floor?

No one is denying that there can be value in second round picks, but you have varying degrees of confidence of whether you will get any. When you don't feel you will get value, it's reasonable to do something else. That's what the Bulls did.

I'm not saying you have to love it or that it was a stroke of genius. I'm just saying the Bulls clearly didn't like anyone at 38 and so they sold the pick.

Do you think they were in love with some player but sold it anyway?

I don't think they didn't see value in the pick. I think there was someone there they thought was worth a shot. But most importantly, I think they saw dollar signs. There is value in taking a shot in a guy.

If the Bulls really only care about money, why sign Felicio to such a large contract? Why put yourself in a position where you are paying 3 coaches at the same time? That argument doesn't add up.

[MrFortune3]

It's odd that the Pelicans let their guards and Ingram defend LeBron on many possessions and Zion doesn't spend a fair amount of time guarding him.

But Zion is crushing it right now despite not playing for half of the season. He still needs to add a jumper to his game though.

Zion is being handled with kid gloves. We've already seen his impact on the Pelicans and the NBA as a rookie. Let him continue to play and develop. No need to tax him with the knee by putting him on LBJ.

[dougthonus]

Between Erik Murphy, Bairstow, and Paul Zipser, I have a hard time believing they have double the hit rate.

Hits:
Duhon, Asik, Gafford, Gray

Misses:
Bairstow, Murphy, Curry, Zipser

50% is about double the hit rate of the next closest franchise from when I looked which as I noted was about 3 years ago.

[dumbell78]

They sold the pick for the amount they lost in getting rid of Rondo, the same guy that could provide the veteran leadership you are implying.

You're just spit balling without any actual evidence to back up your claim. We all knew what it is was then and random theories years later wont change that.

They wanted the money, period.

1: They sold the pick for more than Rondo's buy out and Rondo was causing locker room problems not smoothing them over.
2: Your theory that they were forced into it is just as made up as any other theory (could be true, but also has no evidence to back it up and was explicitly denied though I think it is reasonable)
3: My theory is actually backed up by the 16 year history of the Bulls in the second round which is that they're extremely selective and often move out of second rounders but are aggressive when they see someone they like in the second round.

Given that the Bulls once traded three second rounders for Asik (which moved up like 5 picks), it seems highly likely that if the Bulls liked Jordan Bell (or anyone else) they would have found a way to make it happen and that they just didn't like him. Their entirely second round history would back up the theory that they generally don't feel strongly about second rounders, but if they do they are aggressive.

John Paxson literally said they sold the pick to "build equity" with ownership. lol, why are you defending them or trying to give them the benefit of doubt years later?

Its ok, Im not going to rehash this....no worries, you have your opinion.

[dougthonus]

John Paxson literally said they sold the pick to "build equity" with ownership. lol, why are you defending them or trying to give them the benefit of doubt years later?

I'm not defending them or giving them the benefit of the doubt. I'm stating a few things about the way they operate in regards to second rounders:
1: The Bulls didn't like anyone in the second round.
2: They rarely like anyone in the second round.
3: If they do like someone in the second round they will go after them aggressively.

You can disagree with the above approach. I'm not placing a value on it. I'm stating this is what is true about how they value second rounders.

From a practical perspective, the guy everyone complaining about missing out on was a bust. He was worthless. They lost no value with this move. With the power of hindsight this move was not a mistake.

[dumbell78]

John Paxson literally said they sold the pick to "build equity" with ownership. lol, why are you defending them or trying to give them the benefit of doubt years later?

I'm not defending them or giving them the benefit of the doubt. I'm stating a few things about the way they operate in regards to second rounders:
1: The Bulls didn't like anyone in the second round.
2: They rarely like anyone in the second round.
3: If they do like someone in the second round they will go after them aggressively.

You can disagree with the above approach. I'm not placing a value on it. I'm stating this is what is true about how they value second rounders.

From a practical perspective, the guy everyone complaining about missing out on was a bust. He was worthless. They lost no value with this move. With the power of hindsight this move was not a mistake.

You are absolutely misguided or distorting what a good amount of this board felt that draft night. There were plenty who weren't talking about Bell being the pick. It was the fact they sold the pick in a start of a rebuild. I'm surprised someone like you would spin it like that.

If those 3 points you listed are true, well then you have an incompetent FO and frankly a joke for one.

[The Explorer]

John Paxson literally said they sold the pick to "build equity" with ownership. lol, why are you defending them or trying to give them the benefit of doubt years later?

I'm not defending them or giving them the benefit of the doubt. I'm stating a few things about the way they operate in regards to second rounders:
1: The Bulls didn't like anyone in the second round.
2: They rarely like anyone in the second round.
3: If they do like someone in the second round they will go after them aggressively.

You can disagree with the above approach. I'm not placing a value on it. I'm stating this is what is true about how they value second rounders.

From a practical perspective, the guy everyone complaining about missing out on was a bust. He was worthless. They lost no value with this move. With the power of hindsight this move was not a mistake.

Do you disagree with the above approach?

[dumbell78]

John Paxson literally said they sold the pick to "build equity" with ownership. lol, why are you defending them or trying to give them the benefit of doubt years later?

I'm not defending them or giving them the benefit of the doubt. I'm stating a few things about the way they operate in regards to second rounders:
1: The Bulls didn't like anyone in the second round.
2: They rarely like anyone in the second round.
3: If they do like someone in the second round they will go after them aggressively.

You can disagree with the above approach. I'm not placing a value on it. I'm stating this is what is true about how they value second rounders.

From a practical perspective, the guy everyone complaining about missing out on was a bust. He was worthless. They lost no value with this move. With the power of hindsight this move was not a mistake.

Do you disagree with the above approach?

and moreover do you agree that the pick was sold for "equity" (money) and that is what ownership valued more than anything in the exact scenario?

Its unbelievable we are debating this now.

[Mech Engineer]

Between Erik Murphy, Bairstow, and Paul Zipser, I have a hard time believing they have double the hit rate.

Hits:
Duhon, Asik, Gafford, Gray

Misses:
Bairstow, Murphy, Curry, Zipser

50% is about double the hit rate of the next closest franchise from when I looked which as I noted was about 3 years ago.

This is such a false narrative you are pushing here. If you go from Duhon to Gafford(who has not proven anything for that matter), in that time span, many teams have good and better success rate. Just pick Houston...Carl Landry, Chandler Parsons, Montrez Harrell, Isiah Canaan and they don't even care about picks or drafting.

[The Explorer]

From a practical perspective, the guy everyone complaining about missing out on was a bust. He was worthless. They lost no value with this move. With the power of hindsight this move was not a mistake.

You cannot say they lost no value by looking at the player several years later and ignore what happened in the prior years. Jordan Bell was a decent player for Steve Kerr at times, He was a rotation player, even got a few starts, and got some playing time in the finals. Now, he did not contribute much in statistics, but at least he was a live body to throw out there and grab some rebounds. That itself is more valuable than having a full time bench warmer, or extra cash, or having 32m tied up in someone like Felicio. Kerr is one of the top coaches in the league and utilized him to the best of his abilities. He may have fallen off afterwards, but his value was apparent in the last couple years.

[The Explorer]

Between Erik Murphy, Bairstow, and Paul Zipser, I have a hard time believing they have double the hit rate.

Hits:
Duhon, Asik, Gafford, Gray

Misses:
Bairstow, Murphy, Curry, Zipser

50% is about double the hit rate of the next closest franchise from when I looked which as I noted was about 3 years ago.

He also drafted Mario Austin and Tommy Smith, who I believe never played for the Bulls other than maybe preseason or summer. Also not sure how Aaron Gray was a hit. Its definitely not a 50% hit rate.

[MrSparkle]

Between Erik Murphy, Bairstow, and Paul Zipser, I have a hard time believing they have double the hit rate.

Hits:
Duhon, Asik, Gafford, Gray

Misses:
Bairstow, Murphy, Curry, Zipser

50% is about double the hit rate of the next closest franchise from when I looked which as I noted was about 3 years ago.

He also drafted Mario Austin and Tommy Smith, who I believe never played for the Bulls other than maybe preseason or summer. Also not sure how Aaron Gray was a hit. Its definitely not a 50% hit rate.

Not to mention, Aaron Gray was a hit?

He was HugaBull, but here are his Bulls stats:

11.0 mpg
4.3 ppg
3.2 rpg
2.1 fpg (fouls)

And nothing else over the digit "number 1."

You barely have to drive a little north to Milwaukee to find some 2nd picks who actually had star ceiling (Brogdon, Redd going way back) or were productive role-players (Ilyasova, Leuer, Mouete, Meeks, Sessions, Gadzuric).

Go way back for Paxson, it's Duhon and nobody else.

Again, I'm not confusing anything here. I realize the odds and ceilings of 2nd round picks are super low. But... they have clearly proven useful one way or another for many good teams. I thought it was a slap in the face that a team that "drafts well" sold their 38th pick to a dynasty contender deep in luxury tax for cash considerations.

At least gamble on an international player, or trade for a decent bench player, or a future 2nd. There is NO defense for just selling it for cash considerations. None at all. The team wasn't even in the luxury tax. It was total BS.

[dice]

The Bulls decided they didn't like anyone. Their evaluation isn't the same as everyone elses. I never said the correct and only evaluation is that all these guys will be bad. I think any given year, you probably know 10-20% of these guys will pan out. The question is do you have a feeling about one of those guys that makes it worth taking one or doing something else.

The Bulls have historically not taken many, but have something like double the hit rate of the next closest team when taking second rounders which shows that they're extremely selective and only take guys when they project out the guy has a role and value for them.



No one is denying that there can be value in second round picks, but you have varying degrees of confidence of whether you will get any. When you don't feel you will get value, it's reasonable to do something else. That's what the Bulls did.

I'm not saying you have to love it or that it was a stroke of genius. I'm just saying the Bulls clearly didn't like anyone at 38 and so they sold the pick.

Do you think they were in love with some player but sold it anyway?

I don't think they didn't see value in the pick. I think there was someone there they thought was worth a shot. But most importantly, I think they saw dollar signs. There is value in taking a shot in a guy.

If the Bulls really only care about money, why sign Felicio to such a large contract? Why put yourself in a position where you are paying 3 coaches at the same time? That argument doesn't add up.

why sell a 2nd round draft pick for a relatively tiny amount of cash rather than trade it for a future 2nd rounder if you don't like your options? there is one and only one plausible answer: penny pinching. it's not something extreme, but the motivation is blindingly obvious nonetheless

this is the same owner who had michael jordan with a plane waiting on the tarmac to go sign with the knicks because he was unwilling to pay him what he was worth. the same owner who has paid a pittance in luxury tax over the years despite immense profitability. bulls fans have been around the block on this issue

i can assure you that they didn't sign felico to a sizable contract out of largess. it was simply a bad bet. as was hoiberg

[HomoSapien]

There is no such thing as a 'risk free' move. Every move has an opportunity cost to it.

Doug, please. What is this? As far as things go in the NBA, selecting someone in the second-round comes with little risk. On an NBA scale it costs little money, does not come with a guaranteed roster spot, allows you to control a player's rights cheaply for several years.

The Bulls decided that the guys in the second round did not increase their roster quality. They were full of tons of young players already and likely liked the ones they had more than the guys available.

Well, that decision was an incorrect one. There were guys available who would increase their roster quality.

You don't see why I'm inclined to evaluate the circumstances and judge a move rather than just say "I'm unhappy with them so everything most be awful"? Well, sorry, that's not how I operate. Beyond that fact, the move has been validated as reasonable with the passage of time, so not only does the logical explanation make sense, it also in hindsight looks reasonable.

It has not been validated as a reasonable move (only if you're speaking specifically about Bell). The philosophy of selling off assets when your rebuilding is a bad strategy. Knowing the Bulls modus operandi, this fully appeared to be a move that was financially motivated and not about improving the roster.

[dumbell78]

Aaron Gray was a hit? I'm done.