NBA Trade Thread #11

[pipfan]

I think we offer BRK the Port pick for their later first

We could use a long-shot at a young/cheap talent now

They have 4 total firsts, too many rookies to bring in at one time (plus a 2nd round pick)

[Infinity2152]

I've come to a conclusion after these discussions. The best trade the Bulls could do right now is a trade similar to what the Suns did. That is psychologically brilliant. Turning a pick six years from now into three "valuable" trade pieces while we're rebuilding could be huge.

We suck now, could end up with a top 5 pick.
Use Coby and 1 of those "firsts' to get a second good pick in this draft and draft two of these great prospects. Let's say we get pick 7 for him and pick 3 for our own pick. If we have to use two of those "firsts" to get 7 so be it.

Don't know how attached the Pacers are to Myles Turner. Seems like there might be some problems there. Trade Pat Will and 1 of those "firsts" in sign and trade for new contract Turner at 4 yrs/$100 mill. Defensive, three point shooting center locked up for years.

Re-sign Giddey.

Trade Vuc, get whatever picks you can. If we can send him and one of those "firsts" for Turner instead of Pat, even better.

Bulls lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson (pick 7), Ace Bailey (pick 3), Matas, Myles Turner. Have Ball, Ayo, Smith. That's your core.

Hopefully you only used one of those "firsts" with Coby to get 7, so you're minus your 2031 pick and Coby, but still have a "first" left, most of your own picks, and whatever pick value you got for Vuc.

[Muzbar]

First, I stated no such thing in the statement where I called a truce. I had more to say in the previous statement and decided to stop and change the conversation. I thought calling a truce was basically agreeing to disagree and moving forward. I've never actually said a team would trade those picks. I'm merely open to the possibility. So I made proposed the question based on the possibility.

As for examples of dumb draft trades, I've posted plenty. They don't have to be the exact same dumb trade to show GM's will make trades people think are dumb. Every new dumb trade is the first of it's kind, and they happen all the time. I gave an example of a team giving up 3 first round picks to move up two spots. Gave an example of a team giving up a first for a player drafted one pick before him. Not exactly the same as team giving up 12 and 24 plus two firsts of indeterminate value, but close enough to make it possible. There are points where some firsts are valued as basically high seconds, or a couple of seconds. Webber, pick #1, was traded for Hardaway (pick#3) and three future firsts. So basically 4 firsts to move two spots. If this is an especially strong draft, I'd give more value to picks 4-6 than in an average draft. Maybe equivalent to picks 2-3 in an average draft.

As for stupid trades that shouldn't happen, they happen every year. Listed many. So acting like they can't happen when they obviously do is just ignoring what's actually happened.

I'd be willing to bet a lot you could not get the number 3 or 4 pick for Mikal Bridges, but he garnered 5 firsts. In terms of relative value, is he worth more than a top 5 pick in this draft in your opinion? The Knicks are not the only thirsty team in the league, hopefully. Suns made a thirsty play trading for Beal, and the Bucks did for Lillard, imo.

About the draft being 6 deep, thanks for that. If I felt like that I would not want to trade out of top 6. If I had pick 8 and my 6 were gone, it would be a different discussion. I don't personally have a strong opinion about most of these prospects.

I never said you mentioned it in your 'truce' post, just that you claimed I said such a thing and then tried to call a truce. You can't do that and expect me not to reply.

But, let's try and leave that be, I've voiced my concerns in regards to that. I'm sorry if I came across a bit heated.

The top 6 is just my opinion, that's just how I feel, obviously others may feel differently and only have a top 5. Personally I don't think those guys at 4-6 would warrant some team trading more than 2 FRPs to trade up and get them, but as you have said sometimes the impossible happens, but more often than not, it just doesn't happen.

I think most teams are tighter with FRPs when it comes to trading them for other FRPs but not so much with established players.

Here's the thing. If it's highly unlikely a team would offer that, it should therefore mean if you get that offer, you automatically accept it then right? The only reason it would be highly unlikely is if 30 out of 30 teams view those picks I described as worth far more than the #6 pick in this draft. If they were even close in value, it wouldn't be highly unlikely. You generally want to take the side of the trade with far greater value.

Do you feel that if we get that offer we should obviously accept it then? Since those picks are far more than what our pick is worth? It looks like most people here think the pick is more valuable than those picks and they wouldn't trade it. There couldn't be an NBA team that thinks the same?

I apologize if I came across some kind of way also. When I asked the question, I was far more interested in how people saw the later draft prospects value vs the top 5 as opposed to whether it's possible someone would offer it. That's mostly what I meant when I was talking about let's skip it, it's not really that important in the context of what I was actually asking to me at least. Not so much people can't talk about it, I know it's a message board, but it's really a separate discussion.

I set a high price to make the deal attractive to us from the beginning. Wouldn't be much of a discussion talking about trading 6 for 12 and 24 straight up, lol.

I also tried to make the latter two picks sound as crappy as possible. Picks are like lottery tickets. Generally, the farther they're out the less they're worth. The more protections, the less they're worth. A 2027 top 10 protected pick that goes to 8 the next year could be more valuable than two 2028, 2031 firsts that are lottery protected then convert to seconds. If the deal was 6 for 12, 24 and a team's 2027 top 10 protected pick, would that be so outlandish to offer? In a 6 player draft when a player you really like is on the board. Your actual cost is pick 24 and that pick in two years that hopefully far worse than 10, maybe 25 for the chance to move up 6 spots and get a star now. Or you trade your 2027 protected pick to the Suns for two of those crap picks first and send two firsts to the Bulls.

Sorry for the late reply.

I'm not sure it's an automatic accept, whilst it is obviously a very good deal, it depends on how much you like the remaining prospect that may have just fallen into your lap.

If you're moving back from 6 to 12 (and 24 (plus futures)) then there would also have to be a prospect you think could develop into a good starter or more down the road, players like Asa Newell, Khaman Malauch, Noa Essengue, Ben Saraf or Egor Demin.

But as I mentioned before, I'm not sure they guys in the 4-6 range would be worth a team trading that kind of package, unless of course Ace Bailey were to fall perhaps.

If of course you're a 6 and the guy 'left over' isn't very high on your draft sheet then by all means, make that trade.

[sco]

I've come to a conclusion after these discussions. The best trade the Bulls could do right now is a trade similar to what the Suns did. That is psychologically brilliant. Turning a pick six years from now into three "valuable" trade pieces while we're rebuilding could be huge.

We suck now, could end up with a top 5 pick.
Use Coby and 1 of those "firsts' to get a second good pick in this draft and draft two of these great prospects. Let's say we get pick 7 for him and pick 3 for our own pick. If we have to use two of those "firsts" to get 7 so be it.

Don't know how attached the Pacers are to Myles Turner. Seems like there might be some problems there. Trade Pat Will and 1 of those "firsts" in sign and trade for new contract Turner at 4 yrs/$100 mill. Defensive, three point shooting center locked up for years.

Re-sign Giddey.

Trade Vuc, get whatever picks you can. If we can send him and one of those "firsts" for Turner instead of Pat, even better.

Bulls lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson (pick 7), Ace Bailey (pick 3), Matas, Myles Turner. Have Ball, Ayo, Smith. That's your core.

Hopefully you only used one of those "firsts" with Coby to get 7, so you're minus your 2031 pick and Coby, but still have a "first" left, most of your own picks, and whatever pick value you got for Vuc.

I love the Turner deal except the reason IND is supposedly concerned is that they don't want to pay big $ for him. IMO, the only way they deal with a S&T is if someone has the cap space to sign him outright (which we don't), so unless they are sure they'll lose him to someone else (possible, but unlikely), they are better off not raising the market price for him. Also, IMO, Turner is (besides being a good defender) a 3rd option scorer. Next season, we don't even have a #2, much less, a #1. We might be able to afford one the following season. Seems a little premature.

[Infinity2152]

I've come to a conclusion after these discussions. The best trade the Bulls could do right now is a trade similar to what the Suns did. That is psychologically brilliant. Turning a pick six years from now into three "valuable" trade pieces while we're rebuilding could be huge.

We suck now, could end up with a top 5 pick.
Use Coby and 1 of those "firsts' to get a second good pick in this draft and draft two of these great prospects. Let's say we get pick 7 for him and pick 3 for our own pick. If we have to use two of those "firsts" to get 7 so be it.

Don't know how attached the Pacers are to Myles Turner. Seems like there might be some problems there. Trade Pat Will and 1 of those "firsts" in sign and trade for new contract Turner at 4 yrs/$100 mill. Defensive, three point shooting center locked up for years.

Re-sign Giddey.

Trade Vuc, get whatever picks you can. If we can send him and one of those "firsts" for Turner instead of Pat, even better.

Bulls lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson (pick 7), Ace Bailey (pick 3), Matas, Myles Turner. Have Ball, Ayo, Smith. That's your core.

Hopefully you only used one of those "firsts" with Coby to get 7, so you're minus your 2031 pick and Coby, but still have a "first" left, most of your own picks, and whatever pick value you got for Vuc.

I love the Turner deal except the reason IND is supposedly concerned is that they don't want to pay big $ for him. IMO, the only way they deal with a S&T is if someone has the cap space to sign him outright (which we don't), so unless they are sure they'll lose him to someone else (possible, but unlikely), they are better off not raising the market price for him. Also, IMO, Turner is (besides being a good defender) a 3rd option scorer. Next season, we don't even have a #2, much less, a #1. We might be able to afford one the following season. Seems a little premature.

Turner fits so many ways, though. He's the rare center that's good at shot blocking and shooting. 28, so fits our timeline. If we draft two rookies in this draft, plus Matas improvement and addition of Turner, we could rise fast. He'd be more necessary years 2,3, and 4 when we're trying to win. With Giddey, Tre Johnson, Ace Bailey, and Matas on the squad would hope he's nothing more than the 3rd option scorer at best. He's our first option paint defender, lol. I figure we get two rookies to add to Matas, we've jumpstarted the rebuild. Robert Williams and Naz Reid are guys I'd target if that failed.

If money is the issue with Indy, it's probably a no go. But you know how negotiations fail between a team or a player has had enough, things change. Think he'd be ideal to run with the young guys the next few years. We wouldn't have many big contracts.

[MrSparkle]

Signing a past-prime C to a rich deal would be the worst thing this team could do. He’s looking for $30M.

You want to block max contract flexibility for Miles Turner?

[kodo]

Turner fits so many ways, though. He's the rare center that's good at shot blocking and shooting. 28, so fits our timeline. If we draft two rookies in this draft, plus Matas improvement and addition of Turner, we could rise fast. He'd be more necessary years 2,3, and 4 when we're trying to win. With Giddey, Tre Johnson, Ace Bailey, and Matas on the squad would hope he's nothing more than the 3rd option scorer at best. He's our first option paint defender, lol. I figure we get two rookies to add to Matas, we've jumpstarted the rebuild. Robert Williams and Naz Reid are guys I'd target if that failed.

If money is the issue with Indy, it's probably a no go. But you know how negotiations fail between a team or a player has had enough, things change. Think he'd be ideal to run with the young guys the next few years. We wouldn't have many big contracts.

I doubt we're a winning team in the next 3 years. A team based on this year's rookie + Matas is losing for 3 years minimum, even if we draft Flagg. Durant's first two seasons he won 20 & 22 games, and he had Westbrook & Harden as his teammates. And nobody in this draft projects to be as close to as good as Durant. Anthony Davis first two seasons was 27 & 34 wins, but he had vet Jrue Holiday on his team. SGA once he became a #1, won 22 and 24 games his first two seasons as a #1. Wemby was 22 wins last year.

And the reality is we're probably not going to get anyone close to as good as Durant, AD, or SGA. If we don't win the lottery it will most likely be another Coby White caliber player, Lauri Markkanen if we draft well.

I don't think 28 year old is our timeline, if it was we would have been better of keeping Lavine than trading him for Huerter, Lavine is only a year older than Turner.

[Infinity2152]

Turner fits so many ways, though. He's the rare center that's good at shot blocking and shooting. 28, so fits our timeline. If we draft two rookies in this draft, plus Matas improvement and addition of Turner, we could rise fast. He'd be more necessary years 2,3, and 4 when we're trying to win. With Giddey, Tre Johnson, Ace Bailey, and Matas on the squad would hope he's nothing more than the 3rd option scorer at best. He's our first option paint defender, lol. I figure we get two rookies to add to Matas, we've jumpstarted the rebuild. Robert Williams and Naz Reid are guys I'd target if that failed.

If money is the issue with Indy, it's probably a no go. But you know how negotiations fail between a team or a player has had enough, things change. Think he'd be ideal to run with the young guys the next few years. We wouldn't have many big contracts.

I doubt we're a winning team in the next 3 years. A team based on this year's rookie + Matas is losing for 3 years minimum, even if we draft Flagg. Durant's first two seasons he won 20 & 22 games, and he had Westbrook & Harden as his teammates. And nobody in this draft projects to be as close to as good as Durant. Anthony Davis first two seasons was 27 & 34 wins, but he had vet Jrue Holiday on his team. SGA once he became a #1, won 22 and 24 games his first two seasons as a #1. Wemby was 22 wins last year.

And the reality is we're probably not going to get anyone close to as good as Durant, AD, or SGA. If we don't win the lottery it will most likely be another Coby White caliber player, Lauri Markkanen if we draft well.

I don't think 28 year old is our timeline, if it was we would have been better of keeping Lavine than trading him for Huerter, Lavine is only a year older than Turner.

In this scenario we're getting two rookies from this draft class. Plus Matas is a key piece, his first season was this season. He's in his second season next year. We all have different opinions, but I view Giddey as an exciting piece, and with two rookies plus Matas, we're past the point of losing to add more young guys. At that point, you need good vets and a good system. Plus cap space to make moves. Bulls have avenues to add that. You only have two of your most important guys in their first season. Giddey's in his fifth, Matas his second, and Turner's been around for awhile. And the East is still the weaker conference.

Don't think Lavine was traded mostly because of his age. If he's making Myles Turner money, he's probably still a Bull. If we get two draft picks in the top 10 of this draft and we expect nothing better than White, there was no point in tanking. Flagg looks like the best right now, he may not by the end of next year. In fact, he probably won't. If the best player is White/Markannen level, agree it's a long rebuild. If the best of the two is Tatum, Banchero level and the other is Lauri level, we're a damn good team once we add vets. We'll have solid veteran role players in Ball, Ayo, Pat if he's here, and Smith.

There's a reason Spurs added Fox and Rockets added Brooks. When you have enough talented young guys, time to add the solid vets. If our biggest contracts are Turner and Giddey, we can swing a star/semi star trade in year two while 2 of our starting 5 are still on rookie contracts. Wemby probably won't go thru three losing years. Don't care who you are, you join one of the worst teams in the league, you're losing your first few years. Unless you're Lebron, who started winning pretty quickly.

We still probably don't win a ton of games first year with all the youngsters. Get another good draft prospect. Second year, they'll have way more experience together, sophomore year for two, junior year for one. The KD, Westbrook, Harden fit wasn't great, so bad they had Harden coming off the bench in fact. Can't say I think either of them is a leader, either, and there wasn't much leadership on that team. Thunder also tore that team down to the studs and were tanking for years, so yeah, low record. When the Celtics drafted tatum and Brown, they won a lot their first few seasons and they're not as good as KD, Westbrook or Harden. Had a better team around them. Better team than ours too obviously, but I think the rest of our guys are better than the rest of the OKC crew at that time. SGA went to a perennially tanking, losing team too. Spurs were a losing team. Bulls are trying to get that bad on purpose, and still can't get as bad as those teams they joined.

[sco]

I've come to a conclusion after these discussions. The best trade the Bulls could do right now is a trade similar to what the Suns did. That is psychologically brilliant. Turning a pick six years from now into three "valuable" trade pieces while we're rebuilding could be huge.

We suck now, could end up with a top 5 pick.
Use Coby and 1 of those "firsts' to get a second good pick in this draft and draft two of these great prospects. Let's say we get pick 7 for him and pick 3 for our own pick. If we have to use two of those "firsts" to get 7 so be it.

Don't know how attached the Pacers are to Myles Turner. Seems like there might be some problems there. Trade Pat Will and 1 of those "firsts" in sign and trade for new contract Turner at 4 yrs/$100 mill. Defensive, three point shooting center locked up for years.

Re-sign Giddey.

Trade Vuc, get whatever picks you can. If we can send him and one of those "firsts" for Turner instead of Pat, even better.

Bulls lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson (pick 7), Ace Bailey (pick 3), Matas, Myles Turner. Have Ball, Ayo, Smith. That's your core.

Hopefully you only used one of those "firsts" with Coby to get 7, so you're minus your 2031 pick and Coby, but still have a "first" left, most of your own picks, and whatever pick value you got for Vuc.

I love the Turner deal except the reason IND is supposedly concerned is that they don't want to pay big $ for him. IMO, the only way they deal with a S&T is if someone has the cap space to sign him outright (which we don't), so unless they are sure they'll lose him to someone else (possible, but unlikely), they are better off not raising the market price for him. Also, IMO, Turner is (besides being a good defender) a 3rd option scorer. Next season, we don't even have a #2, much less, a #1. We might be able to afford one the following season. Seems a little premature.

Turner fits so many ways, though. He's the rare center that's good at shot blocking and shooting. 28, so fits our timeline. If we draft two rookies in this draft, plus Matas improvement and addition of Turner, we could rise fast. He'd be more necessary years 2,3, and 4 when we're trying to win. With Giddey, Tre Johnson, Ace Bailey, and Matas on the squad would hope he's nothing more than the 3rd option scorer at best. He's our first option paint defender, lol. I figure we get two rookies to add to Matas, we've jumpstarted the rebuild. Robert Williams and Naz Reid are guys I'd target if that failed.

If money is the issue with Indy, it's probably a no go. But you know how negotiations fail between a team or a player has had enough, things change. Think he'd be ideal to run with the young guys the next few years. We wouldn't have many big contracts.

I'm definitely of the mind that if we do anything in FA it should be to try to find young role players who can grow into potential future near-allstars, but ideally not hurt our tank chances too much next season.

Back to the Turner point, I really want to give Smith next season to show something. Not that it's a perfect predictor but, per 36:

Smith 20.1ppg 12.9rb 1.7bk shooting 48%fg 35% from 3 (6.6 attemps) 84% ft%
Turner 17.8ppg 7.7rb 2.1bk shooting 54%fg 40% from 3 (6 attempts) 75% ft%

[Infinity2152]

I love the Turner deal except the reason IND is supposedly concerned is that they don't want to pay big $ for him. IMO, the only way they deal with a S&T is if someone has the cap space to sign him outright (which we don't), so unless they are sure they'll lose him to someone else (possible, but unlikely), they are better off not raising the market price for him. Also, IMO, Turner is (besides being a good defender) a 3rd option scorer. Next season, we don't even have a #2, much less, a #1. We might be able to afford one the following season. Seems a little premature.

Turner fits so many ways, though. He's the rare center that's good at shot blocking and shooting. 28, so fits our timeline. If we draft two rookies in this draft, plus Matas improvement and addition of Turner, we could rise fast. He'd be more necessary years 2,3, and 4 when we're trying to win. With Giddey, Tre Johnson, Ace Bailey, and Matas on the squad would hope he's nothing more than the 3rd option scorer at best. He's our first option paint defender, lol. I figure we get two rookies to add to Matas, we've jumpstarted the rebuild. Robert Williams and Naz Reid are guys I'd target if that failed.

If money is the issue with Indy, it's probably a no go. But you know how negotiations fail between a team or a player has had enough, things change. Think he'd be ideal to run with the young guys the next few years. We wouldn't have many big contracts.

I'm definitely of the mind that if we do anything in FA it should be to try to find young role players who can grow into potential future near-allstars, but ideally not hurt our tank chances too much next season.

Back to the Turner point, I really want to give Smith next season to show something. Not that it's a perfect predictor but, per 36:

Smith 20.1ppg 12.9rb 1.7bk shooting 48%fg 35% from 3 (6.6 attemps) 84% ft%
Turner 17.8ppg 7.7rb 2.1bk shooting 54%fg 40% from 3 (6 attempts) 75% ft%

Smith's a great option. I like him too. Would still want more real center depth than just Smith and Collins, though. An under 30 center is probably the only thing outside our free agents I'd even consider spending money on, if I'm the Bulls. It could be a much cheaper backup to Smith.

Don't think we tank next year, regardless of if we're able to trade Coby for a pick in this draft. If we can: (I'm throwing some high rookies in )

Lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson, Bailey, Matas, Smith with Ball, Pat, Ayo, Collins, whatever we get back for Vuc

If we can't:
Lineup: Giddey, White, Bailey, Matas, Smith, with same bench

Neither of those are tank teams (bottom 5), and if Ball is healthy he'll add a disproportionate amount of wins.

In the East, we'd probably have to work to miss the play in, especially with Philly and Milwaukee self-destructing. Miami could be better or worse. Pistons still bad. Wizards horrible. Hornets weak. Raptors and Nets not good.

Billy's an underrated coach too. With our team composition and multiple injuries, we probably shouldn't have made the play in the last few years.

[jnrjr79]

Turner fits so many ways, though. He's the rare center that's good at shot blocking and shooting. 28, so fits our timeline. If we draft two rookies in this draft, plus Matas improvement and addition of Turner, we could rise fast. He'd be more necessary years 2,3, and 4 when we're trying to win. With Giddey, Tre Johnson, Ace Bailey, and Matas on the squad would hope he's nothing more than the 3rd option scorer at best. He's our first option paint defender, lol. I figure we get two rookies to add to Matas, we've jumpstarted the rebuild. Robert Williams and Naz Reid are guys I'd target if that failed.

If money is the issue with Indy, it's probably a no go. But you know how negotiations fail between a team or a player has had enough, things change. Think he'd be ideal to run with the young guys the next few years. We wouldn't have many big contracts.

I'm definitely of the mind that if we do anything in FA it should be to try to find young role players who can grow into potential future near-allstars, but ideally not hurt our tank chances too much next season.

Back to the Turner point, I really want to give Smith next season to show something. Not that it's a perfect predictor but, per 36:

Smith 20.1ppg 12.9rb 1.7bk shooting 48%fg 35% from 3 (6.6 attemps) 84% ft%
Turner 17.8ppg 7.7rb 2.1bk shooting 54%fg 40% from 3 (6 attempts) 75% ft%

Smith's a great option. I like him too. Would still want more real center depth than just Smith and Collins, though. An under 30 center is probably the only thing outside our free agents I'd even consider spending money on, if I'm the Bulls. It could be a much cheaper backup to Smith.

Don't think we tank next year, regardless of if we're able to trade Coby for a pick in this draft. If we can: (I'm throwing some high rookies in )

Lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson, Bailey, Matas, Smith with Ball, Pat, Ayo, Collins, whatever we get back for Vuc

If we can't:
Lineup: Giddey, White, Bailey, Matas, Smith, with same bench

Neither of those are tank teams (bottom 5), and if Ball is healthy he'll add a disproportionate amount of wins.

In the East, we'd probably have to work to miss the play in, especially with Philly and Milwaukee self-destructing. Miami could be better or worse. Pistons still bad. Wizards horrible. Hornets weak. Raptors and Nets not good.

Billy's an underrated coach too. With our team composition and multiple injuries, we probably shouldn't have made the play in the last few years.

Those lineups would absolutely be tank-level teams, absent Matas going absolutely nuts and becoming a star in year two.

[Infinity2152]

I'm definitely of the mind that if we do anything in FA it should be to try to find young role players who can grow into potential future near-allstars, but ideally not hurt our tank chances too much next season.

Back to the Turner point, I really want to give Smith next season to show something. Not that it's a perfect predictor but, per 36:

Smith 20.1ppg 12.9rb 1.7bk shooting 48%fg 35% from 3 (6.6 attemps) 84% ft%
Turner 17.8ppg 7.7rb 2.1bk shooting 54%fg 40% from 3 (6 attempts) 75% ft%

Smith's a great option. I like him too. Would still want more real center depth than just Smith and Collins, though. An under 30 center is probably the only thing outside our free agents I'd even consider spending money on, if I'm the Bulls. It could be a much cheaper backup to Smith.

Don't think we tank next year, regardless of if we're able to trade Coby for a pick in this draft. If we can: (I'm throwing some high rookies in )

Lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson, Bailey, Matas, Smith with Ball, Pat, Ayo, Collins, whatever we get back for Vuc

If we can't:
Lineup: Giddey, White, Bailey, Matas, Smith, with same bench

Neither of those are tank teams (bottom 5), and if Ball is healthy he'll add a disproportionate amount of wins.

In the East, we'd probably have to work to miss the play in, especially with Philly and Milwaukee self-destructing. Miami could be better or worse. Pistons still bad. Wizards horrible. Hornets weak. Raptors and Nets not good.

Billy's an underrated coach too. With our team composition and multiple injuries, we probably shouldn't have made the play in the last few years.

Those lineups would absolutely be tank-level teams, absent Matas going absolutely nuts and becoming a star in year two.

Let's see: Giddey's averaging 16, 7, and 7. Coby's averaging 22, maybe 25. Don't expect Matas to go nuts, but could see him at 16pts/6 rebounds. Smith at about 14 and 9 starting. The whole point of tanking is presuming you're getting a great rookie, so let's go with that. 15 pts, 4 and 4, let's say. You get Ball playing 25 minutes/gm. Ayo gets back to normal. You're probably getting something back in a Vuc trade. Probably still have Pat's he can eat up minutes as a defender.

You don't need Matas to instantly turn into a star if we get Bailey or Dylan Harper and they're as good as hoped to be. That team can run, shoot, has playmaking and should be much better defensively starting Smith instead of Vuc, a healthy Ball and no Derozan. Imagine if Ball gets to 30+ minutes.

Add in the fact that the entire team is young and literally every player who gets minutes, not just Matas, but White, Smith, Ayo, Pat, Phillips should all be better by next year than they are now. Not a high tier talent team, but a very balanced one and I think having Billy and Lonzo, that's a 30-35 win team at least.

[sco]

Smith's a great option. I like him too. Would still want more real center depth than just Smith and Collins, though. An under 30 center is probably the only thing outside our free agents I'd even consider spending money on, if I'm the Bulls. It could be a much cheaper backup to Smith.

Don't think we tank next year, regardless of if we're able to trade Coby for a pick in this draft. If we can: (I'm throwing some high rookies in )

Lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson, Bailey, Matas, Smith with Ball, Pat, Ayo, Collins, whatever we get back for Vuc

If we can't:
Lineup: Giddey, White, Bailey, Matas, Smith, with same bench

Neither of those are tank teams (bottom 5), and if Ball is healthy he'll add a disproportionate amount of wins.

In the East, we'd probably have to work to miss the play in, especially with Philly and Milwaukee self-destructing. Miami could be better or worse. Pistons still bad. Wizards horrible. Hornets weak. Raptors and Nets not good.

Billy's an underrated coach too. With our team composition and multiple injuries, we probably shouldn't have made the play in the last few years.

Those lineups would absolutely be tank-level teams, absent Matas going absolutely nuts and becoming a star in year two.

Let's see: Giddey's averaging 16, 7, and 7. Coby's averaging 22, maybe 25. Don't expect Matas to go nuts, but could see him at 16pts/6 rebounds. Smith at about 14 and 9 starting. The whole point of tanking is presuming you're getting a great rookie, so let's go with that. 16 pts, 4 and 4, let's say. You get Ball playing 25 minutes/gm. Ayo gets back to normal. You're probably getting something back in a Vuc trade. Probably still have Pat's he can eat up minutes as a defender.

You don't need Matas to instantly turn into a star if we get Bailey or Dylan Harper and they're as good as hoped to be. That team can run, shoot, has playmaking and should be much better defensively starting Smith instead of Vuc, a healthy Ball and no Derozan. Imagine if Ball gets to 30+ minutes.

Add in the fact that the entire team is young and literally every player who gets minutes, not just Matas, but White, Smith, Ayo, Pat, Phillips should all be better by next year than they are now. Not a high tier talent team, but a very balanced one and I think having Billy and Lonzo, that's a 30-35 win team at least.

Yeah, I don't see those line-ups getting us out of the lottery, but that's a good thing next season. IMO the best thing we can do is to sort through our weak roster and find 3 very good role players that we can add to, while working to nab another decent pick to add to that new foundation.

[Infinity2152]

Those lineups would absolutely be tank-level teams, absent Matas going absolutely nuts and becoming a star in year two.

Let's see: Giddey's averaging 16, 7, and 7. Coby's averaging 22, maybe 25. Don't expect Matas to go nuts, but could see him at 16pts/6 rebounds. Smith at about 14 and 9 starting. The whole point of tanking is presuming you're getting a great rookie, so let's go with that. 16 pts, 4 and 4, let's say. You get Ball playing 25 minutes/gm. Ayo gets back to normal. You're probably getting something back in a Vuc trade. Probably still have Pat's he can eat up minutes as a defender.

You don't need Matas to instantly turn into a star if we get Bailey or Dylan Harper and they're as good as hoped to be. That team can run, shoot, has playmaking and should be much better defensively starting Smith instead of Vuc, a healthy Ball and no Derozan. Imagine if Ball gets to 30+ minutes.

Add in the fact that the entire team is young and literally every player who gets minutes, not just Matas, but White, Smith, Ayo, Pat, Phillips should all be better by next year than they are now. Not a high tier talent team, but a very balanced one and I think having Billy and Lonzo, that's a 30-35 win team at least.

Yeah, I don't see those line-ups getting us out of the lottery, but that's a good thing next season. IMO the best thing we can do is to sort through our weak roster and find 3 very good role players that we can add to, while working to nab another decent pick to add to that new foundation.

Yeah, when I said it's not a tank team, it's still a likely lottery team. Don't want to project like it's a 40 win team immediately. But I don't think 30 is out of the question. Every year there are teams deliberately tanking. Don't think we'll be bottom 5 is what I mean.
Agree with the just add role players and our pick next year, add rehab and dump the contracts of Huerter and Collins.

Wild card is if Vuc doesn't get traded. He'll be a $20 mill expiring, which is not the worst thing to have. All predictions are different in that case.

On another note, saw a report today Doncic was going to be eligible for 5yrs/$345 mill. That's $69 mill/yr AAV. How do you build a team around that and another max player without staying crazy in the tax every year? Thy definitely should have shopped him though. That low value, under the table trade was so bad, it should be investigated.

[Dez]

Those line-ups are not sniffing 30 wins.

[Infinity2152]

Those line-ups are not sniffing 30 wins.

OK.

[Ccwatercraft]

Let's see: Giddey's averaging 16, 7, and 7. Coby's averaging 22, maybe 25. Don't expect Matas to go nuts, but could see him at 16pts/6 rebounds. Smith at about 14 and 9 starting. The whole point of tanking is presuming you're getting a great rookie, so let's go with that. 16 pts, 4 and 4, let's say. You get Ball playing 25 minutes/gm. Ayo gets back to normal. You're probably getting something back in a Vuc trade. Probably still have Pat's he can eat up minutes as a defender.

You don't need Matas to instantly turn into a star if we get Bailey or Dylan Harper and they're as good as hoped to be. That team can run, shoot, has playmaking and should be much better defensively starting Smith instead of Vuc, a healthy Ball and no Derozan. Imagine if Ball gets to 30+ minutes.

Add in the fact that the entire team is young and literally every player who gets minutes, not just Matas, but White, Smith, Ayo, Pat, Phillips should all be better by next year than they are now. Not a high tier talent team, but a very balanced one and I think having Billy and Lonzo, that's a 30-35 win team at least.

Yeah, I don't see those line-ups getting us out of the lottery, but that's a good thing next season. IMO the best thing we can do is to sort through our weak roster and find 3 very good role players that we can add to, while working to nab another decent pick to add to that new foundation.

Yeah, when I said it's not a tank team, it's still a likely lottery team. Don't want to project like it's a 40 win team immediately. But I don't think 30 is out of the question. Every year there are teams deliberately tanking. Don't think we'll be bottom 5 is what I mean.
Agree with the just add role players and our pick next year, add rehab and dump the contracts of Huerter and Collins.

Wild card is if Vuc doesn't get traded. He'll be a $20 mill expiring, which is not the worst thing to have. All predictions are different in that case.

On another note, saw a report today Doncic was going to be eligible for 5yrs/$345 mill. That's $69 mill/yr AAV. How do you build a team around that and another max player without staying crazy in the tax every year? Thy definitely should have shopped him though. That low value, under the table trade was so bad, it should be investigated.

I thought the doncic trade took the 345 extension off the table for him, he has to wait now.

[Muzbar]

Yeah, I don't see those line-ups getting us out of the lottery, but that's a good thing next season. IMO the best thing we can do is to sort through our weak roster and find 3 very good role players that we can add to, while working to nab another decent pick to add to that new foundation.

Yeah, when I said it's not a tank team, it's still a likely lottery team. Don't want to project like it's a 40 win team immediately. But I don't think 30 is out of the question. Every year there are teams deliberately tanking. Don't think we'll be bottom 5 is what I mean.
Agree with the just add role players and our pick next year, add rehab and dump the contracts of Huerter and Collins.

Wild card is if Vuc doesn't get traded. He'll be a $20 mill expiring, which is not the worst thing to have. All predictions are different in that case.

On another note, saw a report today Doncic was going to be eligible for 5yrs/$345 mill. That's $69 mill/yr AAV. How do you build a team around that and another max player without staying crazy in the tax every year? Thy definitely should have shopped him though. That low value, under the table trade was so bad, it should be investigated.

I thought the doncic trade took the 345 extension off the table for him, he has to wait now.

It did, that's why he wrote he 'was' going to be eligible.

[Infinity2152]

Kyrie also has a player option for $44 mill next year, so they may have to extend him or pay him. He might get $50 AAV or more, look at Butler. Add just the $44 mill to Luka's $69 mill, you're at $113 mill on a $155 mill cap for just two players. At $50 mill for Kyrie, you're at $119 mill, or $36 mill left for the other 13 players before you're over the cap. When most contenders have at least 3 stars, that's a tough one.

[WesPeace]

Turner fits so many ways, though. He's the rare center that's good at shot blocking and shooting. 28, so fits our timeline. If we draft two rookies in this draft, plus Matas improvement and addition of Turner, we could rise fast. He'd be more necessary years 2,3, and 4 when we're trying to win. With Giddey, Tre Johnson, Ace Bailey, and Matas on the squad would hope he's nothing more than the 3rd option scorer at best. He's our first option paint defender, lol. I figure we get two rookies to add to Matas, we've jumpstarted the rebuild. Robert Williams and Naz Reid are guys I'd target if that failed.

If money is the issue with Indy, it's probably a no go. But you know how negotiations fail between a team or a player has had enough, things change. Think he'd be ideal to run with the young guys the next few years. We wouldn't have many big contracts.

I'm definitely of the mind that if we do anything in FA it should be to try to find young role players who can grow into potential future near-allstars, but ideally not hurt our tank chances too much next season.

Back to the Turner point, I really want to give Smith next season to show something. Not that it's a perfect predictor but, per 36:

Smith 20.1ppg 12.9rb 1.7bk shooting 48%fg 35% from 3 (6.6 attemps) 84% ft%
Turner 17.8ppg 7.7rb 2.1bk shooting 54%fg 40% from 3 (6 attempts) 75% ft%

Smith's a great option. I like him too. Would still want more real center depth than just Smith and Collins, though. An under 30 center is probably the only thing outside our free agents I'd even consider spending money on, if I'm the Bulls. It could be a much cheaper backup to Smith.

Don't think we tank next year, regardless of if we're able to trade Coby for a pick in this draft. If we can: (I'm throwing some high rookies in )

Lineup: Giddey, Tre Johnson, Bailey, Matas, Smith with Ball, Pat, Ayo, Collins, whatever we get back for Vuc

If we can't:
Lineup: Giddey, White, Bailey, Matas, Smith, with same bench

Neither of those are tank teams (bottom 5), and if Ball is healthy he'll add a disproportionate amount of wins.

In the East, we'd probably have to work to miss the play in, especially with Philly and Milwaukee self-destructing. Miami could be better or worse. Pistons still bad. Wizards horrible. Hornets weak. Raptors and Nets not good.

Billy's an underrated coach too. With our team composition and multiple injuries, we probably shouldn't have made the play in the last few years.

Isaiah Jackson, Thomas Bryant, Mo Bamba
Could be some cheaper FA backup centers..