2019 Draft Thread Volume #6 - Post Lottery

[panthermark]

Threw together my first mock. Obviously what Cleveland decides to do determines the back half of the top 5, and for some reason it just feels like Cam Reddish is such a Cleveland type pick.

I don't mind Culver, but I would be a a tiny bit bummed if we passed on Hunter for Culver. Mostly because Hunter provides great insurance for Otto (who can opt out next year).

[sco]

Read on Twitter

No Ball. no prob.

[NewEra21]

So you'd rather give all the money now to a bunch of C list and B list players instead of maybe having a shot at actual championship pieces?

If our "shot" involves banking on max FA's to come here, there isn't really a shot.

----------
This probably needs a separate thread....but I would like opinions on how much people believe in this core.

Just because you've failed before, doesn't mean you stop trying. That's a loser's mentality. Where would civilization be if that's how everyone thought?

It's not "banking" on them coming here. But you have to give yourself the opportunity to have them listen to you. And if you don't have the right amount funds, the conversation doesn't even get started.

[panthermark]

People may be tired of it, but punting for flexibility is the best move. Keep your options open so you don't lock yourself into contracts you may regret immediately.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I get what you are saying.
In theory it makes sense to not lock yourself into a mediocre team.
But what I don't want to see (and what seems to be our fate) is that we "cost control" ourselves into a mediocre team with lesser FA's, whiff on the big FA's, and then talk about staying flexible for the 2024 plan. Rinse and repeat

If we are really talking 2 year deals only, we've basically removed ourselves from both the tier A and tier B FA's. Unless we do a massive overpay (a Jabari contract) on a tier B FA, why would anyone want to come to a 22 win team for 2 years instead of going someplace else and getting a 4 year deal?

[VolumePoster]

Threw together my first mock. Obviously what Cleveland decides to do determines the back half of the top 5, and for some reason it just feels like Cam Reddish is such a Cleveland type pick.

I don't mind Culver, but I would be a a tiny bit bummed if we passed on Hunter for Culver. Mostly because Hunter provides great insurance for Otto (who can opt out next year).

I totally understand the interest in Hunter. But I am for Culver the whole way. The Bulls most pressing need, to my way of thinking, is a second playmaker. Hunter certainly has a clearcut future in the NBA. There's an obvious role. But right now the only reliable playmaker we have is Zach. Markannen is a primarily finisher at this point who pushes pace and hits threes. OPJ ditto. WCJ will not create unless he massively develops his post game.

Culver at least has that potential because of his handle. His lack of first step and shot concern me. But the attitude/work ethic, IQ, size, defensive aptitude, and offensive potential are enough for me to bite.

[panthermark]

So you'd rather give all the money now to a bunch of C list and B list players instead of maybe having a shot at actual championship pieces?

If our "shot" involves banking on max FA's to come here, there isn't really a shot.

----------
This probably needs a separate thread....but I would like opinions on how much people believe in this core.

Just because you've failed before, doesn't mean you stop trying. That's a loser's mentality. Where would civilization be if that's how everyone thought?

It's not "banking" on them coming here. But you have to give yourself the opportunity to have them listen to you. And if you don't have the right amount funds, the conversation doesn't even get started.

We've already punted on 2019, and you are saying that I have a loser mentality?

You are ignoring the fact that it is a two way street. We can have plenty of money, but if top tier FA's are not interested in Chicago....it does not matter.

Until we clean house (owner, FO, and coach), they are not coming here.

If we were the HEAT, I would be 100% behind a 2021 plan. I would trust Riley to do what needs to be done and work the ebb and flow of free agency. But I have little faith in this FO in terms of building a title team.

[SfBull]

A little news from my Bulls source. Of course they wanted one of the top two picks but think there’s value in seven. Also like both Garland and White. Nothing to overwhelming about the draft. Now the Bad News! Bulls will only offer two year contracts to perspective free agents this summer. So for fans like me who wanted Brogdon or Rozier doesn’t sound like the Bulls are interested. Hope my source is wrong because Brogdon in a Bulls uniform would of been ideal.

Hopefully they are planning this, it's a good and realistic strategy for the next two years, we're giving more time for development of the young players ( if it happens) ,add a vet point for starting,keep the chance of drafting a young and promising pg like Garland or White giving them time to develop without pressure for starting from day 1 and can upgrade the frontcourt with a good vet like Taj.I really like this plan and finishing it I'd try to trade Dunn and Denzel for another pick , preferentially a first like Boston's# 22 or Thunder's #21 which would be unlikely trades or,more realistically,try to get another 2nd round pick for one of them.

[SfBull]

People may be tired of it, but punting for flexibility is the best move. Keep your options open so you don't lock yourself into contracts you may regret immediately.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I get what you are saying.
In theory it makes sense to not lock yourself into a mediocre team.
But what I don't want to see (and what seems to be our fate) is that we "cost control" ourselves into a mediocre team with lesser FA's, whiff on the big FA's, and then talk about staying flexible for the 2024 plan. Rinse and repeat

If we are really talking 2 year deals only, we've basically removed ourselves from both the tier A and tier B FA's. Unless we do a massive overpay (a Jabari contract) on a tier B FA, why would anyone want to come to a 22 win team for 2 years instead of going someplace else and getting a 4 year deal?

Most posters here ( not me)believe that we have a young core in Zach, Lauri and WCJ with star ceiling so it's a reasonable strategy trying to give time for their development adding cheap vets for showing them how to win games.This strategy is coherent with extending Boylen and rounding him with good assistance.It seems that's the plan devised by the FO which is just keep rebuilding.For me it's reasonable as we aren't going to be contenders immediately.

[cjbulls]

Read on Twitter

I do not see the Bulls taking Reddish with any of the other 7 still on the board. Hunter and Culver are very Bullsy players. Only way is in an unrealistic trade down with Atlanta.

[NewEra21]

If our "shot" involves banking on max FA's to come here, there isn't really a shot.

----------
This probably needs a separate thread....but I would like opinions on how much people believe in this core.

Just because you've failed before, doesn't mean you stop trying. That's a loser's mentality. Where would civilization be if that's how everyone thought?

It's not "banking" on them coming here. But you have to give yourself the opportunity to have them listen to you. And if you don't have the right amount funds, the conversation doesn't even get started.

We've already punted on 2019, and you are saying that I have a loser mentality?

You are ignoring the fact that it is a two way street. We can have plenty of money, but if top tier FA's are not interested in Chicago....it does not matter.

Until we clean house (owner, FO, and coach), they are not coming here.

If we were the HEAT, I would be 100% behind a 2021 plan. I would trust Riley to do what needs to be done and work the ebb and flow of free agency. But I have little faith in this FO in terms of building a title team.

Im not ignoring that fact. I understand that the Bulls don't have the best track record of attracting top free agents. But you are putting in terms that is some absolute, undeniable fact that they won't come here. Which is just not true, unless you the have the ability to see the future. Kudos to you if you do.

Kind of ironic to mention the Heat and Pat Riley when they are currently in cap hell with the highest cap total in the league, spending their money on C and B class free agents these past years and having middling results to show for it.

[jump]

The only way you are building a contender through pure free agency is if the top stars WANT to go to said team. LA sucks. NY Sucks. Both are much larger draws for top FA's right now.

What tier FA's will be looking for 2 year deals on a 22 win team?

Nobody wants to come to a 22 W team but a lot can change in two seasons. What happened if we end up being a playoff team in 2 years on the play of Lauri and WCJ who made serious improvements to their games?

You will be the same person that complained about us capping our potential bc we locked into overpaid contracts for role players.

If the young core is naturally improving to the point where THEY are carrying us to the play-offs with lesser FA's, how much better would we have been with higher level FA's initially? Or was it the role players (who capped us out) that carried us to the play-offs? And if that is the case, then it means the "core" isn't all that good and no FA's are coming here anyway.

Wow, I've never seen anyone who can bend any situation into being way worse than it is. That is the craziest "logic" I've seen in awhile. It's not even worth trying to explain it to you.

[panthermark]

Just because you've failed before, doesn't mean you stop trying. That's a loser's mentality. Where would civilization be if that's how everyone thought?

It's not "banking" on them coming here. But you have to give yourself the opportunity to have them listen to you. And if you don't have the right amount funds, the conversation doesn't even get started.

We've already punted on 2019, and you are saying that I have a loser mentality?

You are ignoring the fact that it is a two way street. We can have plenty of money, but if top tier FA's are not interested in Chicago....it does not matter.

Until we clean house (owner, FO, and coach), they are not coming here.

If we were the HEAT, I would be 100% behind a 2021 plan. I would trust Riley to do what needs to be done and work the ebb and flow of free agency. But I have little faith in this FO in terms of building a title team.

Im not ignoring that fact. I understand that the Bulls don't have the best track record of attracting top free agents. But you are putting in terms that is some absolute, undeniable fact that they won't come here. Which is just not true, unless you the have the ability to see the future. Kudos to you if you do.

Kind of ironic to mention the Heat and Pat Riley when they are currently in cap hell with the highest cap total in the league, spending their money on C and B class free agents these past years and having middling results to show for it.

Not absolute, just not probable.

The Heat are in cap hell because of the farewell gift to Wade. Like I said, I would be fine trusting Pat with the ebb and flow.
We've avoided cap hell and we have how many rings to show for it?

[Jcool0]

If our "shot" involves banking on max FA's to come here, there isn't really a shot.

----------
This probably needs a separate thread....but I would like opinions on how much people believe in this core.

Just because you've failed before, doesn't mean you stop trying. That's a loser's mentality. Where would civilization be if that's how everyone thought?

It's not "banking" on them coming here. But you have to give yourself the opportunity to have them listen to you. And if you don't have the right amount funds, the conversation doesn't even get started.

We've already punted on 2019, and you are saying that I have a loser mentality?

You are ignoring the fact that it is a two way street. We can have plenty of money, but if top tier FA's are not interested in Chicago....it does not matter.

Until we clean house (owner, FO, and coach), they are not coming here.

If we were the HEAT, I would be 100% behind a 2021 plan. I would trust Riley to do what needs to be done and work the ebb and flow of free agency. But I have little faith in this FO in terms of building a title team.

The Heat have never been able to sign anyone and before you bring up the big 3... Wade was the reason they signed there not Riley. You just have to have the right player on your team to convince another star player to team up. Best way to do that is through a trade not signing in FA. If players cared about organizations KD would not be linked to NY which has been a dumpster fire for 20 years & LeBron never signs in LA.

[NewEra21]

We've already punted on 2019, and you are saying that I have a loser mentality?

You are ignoring the fact that it is a two way street. We can have plenty of money, but if top tier FA's are not interested in Chicago....it does not matter.

Until we clean house (owner, FO, and coach), they are not coming here.

If we were the HEAT, I would be 100% behind a 2021 plan. I would trust Riley to do what needs to be done and work the ebb and flow of free agency. But I have little faith in this FO in terms of building a title team.

Im not ignoring that fact. I understand that the Bulls don't have the best track record of attracting top free agents. But you are putting in terms that is some absolute, undeniable fact that they won't come here. Which is just not true, unless you the have the ability to see the future. Kudos to you if you do.

Kind of ironic to mention the Heat and Pat Riley when they are currently in cap hell with the highest cap total in the league, spending their money on C and B class free agents these past years and having middling results to show for it.

Not absolute, just not probable.

The Heat are in cap hell because of the farewell gift to Wade. Like I said, I would be fine trusting Pat with the ebb and flow.
We've avoided cap hell and we have how many rings to show for it?

Nothing is probable in this league. Its unpredictable as hell. But what i do know is star players get star player money. That has never changed. Therefore you have to have it available to obtain said players.

And is that serious? A farewell gift to Wade? Even if that were true, you'd put your trust in guy who set his franchise back several years just so his aging star player could squeeze out a couple more first round exits?

EDIT: on a 2nd thought, this does really make 0 sense considering Pat Riley made nearly all of these huge signings in the summer of 2016 and 2017. Wade left for Chicago the summer of 2016.

[panthermark]

People may be tired of it, but punting for flexibility is the best move. Keep your options open so you don't lock yourself into contracts you may regret immediately.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I get what you are saying.
In theory it makes sense to not lock yourself into a mediocre team.
But what I don't want to see (and what seems to be our fate) is that we "cost control" ourselves into a mediocre team with lesser FA's, whiff on the big FA's, and then talk about staying flexible for the 2024 plan. Rinse and repeat

If we are really talking 2 year deals only, we've basically removed ourselves from both the tier A and tier B FA's. Unless we do a massive overpay (a Jabari contract) on a tier B FA, why would anyone want to come to a 22 win team for 2 years instead of going someplace else and getting a 4 year deal?

Most posters here ( not me)believe that we have a young core in Zach, Lauri and WCJ with star ceiling so it's a reasonable strategy trying to give time for their development adding cheap vets for showing them how to win games.This strategy is coherent with extending Boylen and rounding him with good assistance.It seems that's the plan devised by the FO which is just keep rebuilding.For me it's reasonable as we aren't going to be contenders immediately.

I understand it...it just sounds very "Bulls-like"

2 years post blow-up, we win 22 games, and are already talking about trying to remain flexible for a free agent class another 2 years away. It sounds worse than it is (injuries, tanking), but given our track record of getting top tier FA's....the end goal sounds unrealistic.

When we picked up Otto, I was elated. That sped up the rebuild.
Pax said we are set at positions 2-5.
We have over $20M in cap space and a desperate need at PG (and depth).

I hope the goal isn't to add a lesser talent to a 22 win team and wait another two years to see if we can attract a top FA. I could actually live with that strategy if we strike out on Kemba (S&T), D-Lo, and Brogdon. But to take ourselves out of the equation already by only offering 2 year deals bugs me as it feels like we are going to skimp on upgrading the PG spot. It also means skimping on upgrades next year (1 year deals).

[Southpaw]

Appreciate the inside info, thanks!

if we're going for 2 year contracts only, I like to see what the team can do with Mike Conley. Don't think he'd cost that much and he'd be a solid vet for the young Bulls.

[3noD]

There is a reason why no NBA GM has ever made a move like this. Because it just doesn’t work. Look at Boston with all of its picks recently. Other than the early picks, how has it helped them? That many young players does turn you into a tank team, as was stated before.

Yeah, we’re already the youngest team in the league. Adding a bunch of rookies would be a mess. The draft is like a candy store: fans start looking at all these prospects and dream at how good they could be, and soon they want it all.

Best path forward is take our best shot at 7 or move up if it’s not too costly to get our guy. Then bring in 2/3 good vets and hope that the young core shows progression.



Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[panthermark]

The Heat have never been able to sign anyone and before you bring up the big 3... Wade was the reason they signed there not Riley. You just have to have the right player on your team to convince another star player to team up. Best way to do that is through a trade not signing in FA. If players cared about organizations KD would not be linked to NY which has been a dumpster fire for 20 years & LeBron never signs in LA.

Both of them are dumpster fires right now....but those two cities will always have more FA pull. Cities a tier below them like us (in terms of pull), need to have a good org rep (Dallas?) We do not.

I do agree that players play a huge part in recruiting, and for the Bulls, we are probably better off trading (or drafting) into a star vs trying to sign one or two as free agents.

[kodo]

A major star coming to a team as bad as Chicago just isn't improbable, IIRC it has not happened even once in recent history.
Chicago is a 22 win team.

* Lebron & Bosh went to a 47 win team
* Durant went to a 73 win team
* Lebron went to a 35 win team (LAL)
* Lebron went to a 33 win team (CLE)
* CP3 went to a 55 win team
* Paul George resigned with a 49 win team
* Kyrie forced a trade to a 53 win team
* Wade went to a 42 win team
* Cousins went to a 58 win team
* Pau Gasol went to a 48 win team
* Aldridge went to a 55 win team
* Ray Allen wen to a 57 win team (82 game adjusted)

Maybe we can talk about stars landing here after a season or two when we win 30 something, 40 something games. But a star going to a 22 win team? I just can't recall this happening at all in the last decade.

[Jcool0]

A major star coming to a team as bad as Chicago just isn't improbable, IIRC it has not happened even once in recent history.
Chicago is a 22 win team.

* Lebron & Bosh went to a 47 win team
* Durant went to a 73 win team
* Lebron went to a 35 win team (LAL)
* Lebron went to a 33 win team (CLE)
* CP3 went to a 55 win team
* Paul George resigned with a 49 win team
* Kyrie forced a trade to a 53 win team
* Wade went to a 42 win team
* Cousins went to a 58 win team
* Pau Gasol went to a 48 win team
* Aldridge went to a 55 win team
* Ray Allen wen to a 57 win team (82 game adjusted)

Maybe we can talk about stars landing here after a season or two when we win 30 something, 40 something games. But a star going to a 22 win team? I just can't recall this happening at all in the last decade.

Is there a reason you think a 33-35 win team is somehow in a better position then a 22 win team?