Free Noa.

[pipfan]

Obviously it's early, but I am having major buyers remorse here. Given how poorly the Pelicans are doing, I think we would be better off with Newell and that pick. Then we'd be headed in the 2026 draft with potentially three first round picks which just gives us enormous flexibility and trade value. Essengue has to end up being a franchise cornerstone for me to change my mind on this one.

Totally how I feel. I like Noa but we missed a HUGE opportunity with that deal. Having the NO pick could have made a big difference next summer, and it'd be an awesome trade chip if we wanted to cash in some assets/expirings this year

Even if Newell (my choice at #12) wouldn't have dropped to 23, we could have taken any of a number of guys who'd have been solid prospects. I'd really like to hear AKME's honest justification for passing on the NO deal

[Red Larrivee]

Obviously it's early, but I am having major buyers remorse here. Given how poorly the Pelicans are doing, I think we would be better off with Newell and that pick. Then we'd be headed in the 2026 draft with potentially three first round picks which just gives us enormous flexibility and trade value. Essengue has to end up being a franchise cornerstone for me to change my mind on this one.

Totally how I feel. I like Noa but we missed a HUGE opportunity with that deal. Having the NO pick could have made a big difference next summer, and it'd be an awesome trade chip if we wanted to cash in some assets/expirings this year

Even if Newell (my choice at #12) wouldn't have dropped to 23, we could have taken any of a number of guys who'd have been solid prospects. I'd really like to hear AKME's honest justification for passing on the NO deal

There's still no concrete proof that the Pelicans offered that trade to us or any of the teams above us.

[Indomitable]

Obviously it's early, but I am having major buyers remorse here. Given how poorly the Pelicans are doing, I think we would be better off with Newell and that pick. Then we'd be headed in the 2026 draft with potentially three first round picks which just gives us enormous flexibility and trade value. Essengue has to end up being a franchise cornerstone for me to change my mind on this one.

Totally how I feel. I like Noa but we missed a HUGE opportunity with that deal. Having the NO pick could have made a big difference next summer, and it'd be an awesome trade chip if we wanted to cash in some assets/expirings this year

Even if Newell (my choice at #12) wouldn't have dropped to 23, we could have taken any of a number of guys who'd have been solid prospects. I'd really like to hear AKME's honest justification for passing on the NO deal

There's still no concrete proof that the Pelicans offered that trade to us or any of the teams above us.

Hey, let them have it.

Giddey looks like a cornerstone.
We have all our draft picks back
Portland pick might convey
The team looks young and engaged.

The New Orleans trade situation allows people to stay resentful.

[DuckIII]

Oh man, this board's impatience with young players is crazy given the evolutions we have seen with many players in recent years. Its just emotion.

Often it takes years. Years. Vs. 7 games in which said player has not yet even played so as to be evaluated at all. Damn. Chill.

In my defense, this was my stance the moment we heard about the Pelicans trade and isn't really a reaction to Essengue not playing. It's a reaction to NOP being terrible. If we were to learn there was no trade available to us, I would be fully satisfied with the Essengue selection/gamble... but that doesn't seem to be the case. Next year's draft appears to be so deep, that an unprotected NOP feels like a no brainer to me.

I reject the Pels trade as being a reliable fact like its treated here. But I've explained that many times before. I'm one Bulls fan who will be wasting zero time regretting that we didn't do something I have zero proof was offered and, based on the information known, most likely was not offered.

[dougthonus]

IMO it's absolutely plausible that the coaching staff thinks he's more ready to help than Phillips or Terry but plays those guys anyway for these reasons:

1. We have Noa locked up for 4 years and Phillips and Terry are about to expire. For timing reasons, we theoretically need to see what we have in them quickly, whereas Noa we have ample time.
2. We're winning anyway with them playing very little.
3. Matas and Patrick are both playing well. Hell almost everyone is other than Phillips and Terry that Noa could potentially take minutes from. If Smith struggled maybe we'll see Noa get a few minutes at C I suppose before Collins returns.

I really hope we aren't getting into super weird rationalizations like that. If we're rationalizing that we aren't going to play our lottery pick because we want to see what we got in two way worse prospects that have been here for three years and shown absolutely nothing of value, then we are horrifically stupid.

We made the decision prior to knowing about how well Matas/Pat would play or if we'd be winning, so that doesn't seem to be a big part of this.

I'll simplify it down to one of two things:
1: They are making a mistake and this is not the right thing to do
2: Noa simply isn't ready and definitely needs this time and this is the right thing to do

If Noa is ready to contribute now, it is a mistake not to play him and get him experience. If he's completely not ready, that's a different challenge and this decision makes sense (though calls into serious question or decision to draft him vs taking the Pelicans trade which of course probably should be called into question regardless).

[DuckIII]

I really hope we aren't getting into super weird rationalizations like that. If we're rationalizing that we aren't going to play our lottery pick because we want to see what we got in two way worse prospects that have been here for three years and shown absolutely nothing of value, then we are horrifically stupid.

I don't agree with League's one reason of wanting to see Terry and Phillips, but even if I did your hyperbolic response ignores one thing: its been 7 games!

7 games people.

Its perfectly logical for a team looking to make final decisions on some deeper bench role players to give them a little extra run over a raw rookie early in the year as they do the final evaluation. Its certainly plausible, for example, the Bulls have decided they do intend to keep one of Phillips or Terry, but not both, and the best time to have them compete against one another is early in the season in limited minutes when Noa is least ready to take over those minutes himself.

You guys are losing perspective with rookies to increased degrees every year. I don't know exactly when it happened, but sometime over the last 5-6 years everyone seems to have collectively decided rookies are to be evaluated in months not years. Or evidently weeks. Everyone needs to chill.

[dougthonus]

I don't agree with League's one reason of wanting to see Terry and Phillips, but even if I did your hyperbolic response ignores one thing: its been 7 games!

7 games people.

Its perfectly logical for a team looking to make final decisions on some deeper bench role players to give them a little extra run over a raw rookie early in the year as they do the final evaluation. Its certainly plausible, for example, the Bulls have decided they do intend to keep one of Phillips or Terry, but not both, and the best time to have them compete against one another is early in the season in limited minutes when Noa is least ready to take over those minutes himself.

You guys are losing perspective with rookies to increased degrees every year. I don't know exactly when it happened, but sometime over the last 5-6 years everyone seems to have collectively decided rookies are to be evaluated in months not years. Or evidently weeks. Everyone needs to chill.

If Noa is ready to play, it's not reasonable to play crap players over him to "see what we have" that we've seen for 3 years. Let them earn it practice. If he isn't ready, then it's fine. I noted that as one of the possibilities, that he may just not be ready.

Lottery picks more or less always play immediately and have more or less always played immediately for the entirety of me watching the NBA. These aren't NFL QBs. You're making it sound like expecting your lottery pick to get some amount of minutes right away is unusual rathe than the absolutely standard.

Look at how many lottery picks in the last 20 years didn't play a minute in the first 7 games.

[DuckIII]

I don't agree with League's one reason of wanting to see Terry and Phillips, but even if I did your hyperbolic response ignores one thing: its been 7 games!

7 games people.

Its perfectly logical for a team looking to make final decisions on some deeper bench role players to give them a little extra run over a raw rookie early in the year as they do the final evaluation. Its certainly plausible, for example, the Bulls have decided they do intend to keep one of Phillips or Terry, but not both, and the best time to have them compete against one another is early in the season in limited minutes when Noa is least ready to take over those minutes himself.

You guys are losing perspective with rookies to increased degrees every year. I don't know exactly when it happened, but sometime over the last 5-6 years everyone seems to have collectively decided rookies are to be evaluated in months not years. Or evidently weeks. Everyone needs to chill.

If Noa is ready to play, it's not reasonable to play crap players over him to "see what we have" that we've seen for 3 years.

Sure it is. In the first 7 games. Might also happen again once the trade deadline draws closer.

Let them earn it practice. If he isn't ready, then it's fine. I noted that as one of the possibilities, that he may just not be ready.

Right. Its one of several non-panic-inducing possibilities that make tons and tons of sense. Just like, he is more ready than some of our worst players, but there are bigger picture things going on more important to his development than easing irrational fan anxiety . . . 7 games into his career.

Lottery picks more or less always play immediately and have more or less always played immediately for the entirety of me watching the NBA. These aren't NFL QBs. You're making it sound like expecting your lottery pick to get some amount of minutes right away is unusual rathe than the absolutely standard.

Look at how many lottery picks in the last 20 years didn't play a minute in the first 7 games.

I don't care what is usual. That's a silly way of deciding how to a train a specific rookie and what that decision means 7 games into his career.

I'll leave you all to it. Its emotion, not rational thinking. And I'll add that if it were not for the assumed truth of the of Pels trade no one would be worried about any of this . . . after 7 games.

Every rookie is different as an individual and in context. Dallas is playing the hell out of Cooper Flagg, and doing it horribly. There are multiple ways to do this.

[KissedByaRose1]

I'm still very high on Noa and am excited to see what he looks like next year. Even though he's not playing right now i think it's a huge plus that he's been around some competitive basketball early and a 6'10 19 year old who has already shown a lot of nice defensive tools fits perfectly with any future we envision.

Just gota pray he's got more Matas in him than he does P-Will and is busting his ass everyday. And that Billy Donovan's kid is an actual good developmental coach and not a complete Nepo hire....

[Evil_Headband]

I'll simplify it down to one of two things:
1: They are making a mistake and this is not the right thing to do
2: Noa simply isn't ready and definitely needs this time and this is the right thing to do

There is also..

3: Noa's long-term development could be enhanced by playing a larger role on Windy City's team than a smaller role with the main team

I think it could very well be both 2 and 3.

[DuckIII]

I'll simplify it down to one of two things:
1: They are making a mistake and this is not the right thing to do
2: Noa simply isn't ready and definitely needs this time and this is the right thing to do

There is also..

3: Noa's long-term development could be enhanced by playing a larger role on Windy City's team than a smaller role with the main team

I think it could very well be both 2 and 3.

You mean we get to include the thing on the list that they said publicly was the reason?

[Evil_Headband]

I'll simplify it down to one of two things:
1: They are making a mistake and this is not the right thing to do
2: Noa simply isn't ready and definitely needs this time and this is the right thing to do

There is also..

3: Noa's long-term development could be enhanced by playing a larger role on Windy City's team than a smaller role with the main team

I think it could very well be both 2 and 3.

You mean we get to include the thing on the list that they said publicly was the reason?

I would prefer to give credit to my amazing basketball acumen.

[dougthonus]

Right. Its one of several non-panic-inducing possibilities that make tons and tons of sense. Just like, he is more ready than some of our worst players, but there are bigger picture things going on more important to his development than easing irrational fan anxiety . . . 7 games into his career.

I don't have "irrational anxiety", I don't think anything that happened one way or the other over this time frame is that important, but it doesn't mean that one thing isn't iteratively better in some very small way than the other thing. I'm not even stating definitively what that is. The idea that it is more important to look at Terry/Philips vs whatever is iteratively best for Noa is the only thing I would disagree with.

If something is 1% better for Noa than something else, screw Terry/Philips. They are 100% irrelevancies.

I don't care what is usual. That's a silly way of deciding how to a train a specific rookie and what that decision means 7 games into his career.

I'll leave you all to it. Its emotion, not rational thinking. And I'll add that if it were not for the assumed truth of the of Pels trade no one would be worried about any of this . . . after 7 games.

Every rookie is different as an individual and in context. Dallas is playing the hell out of Cooper Flagg, and doing it horribly. There are multiple ways to do this.

The Bulls behavior with Noa probably falls outside of 2 standard deviations of how a typical pick in his draft slot is managed. If you believe that is something that people would not notice or talk about, that's up to you. I disagree. I think when what is going on is significantly different than what normally goes on that it is noteworthy and spurs discussion.

That doesn't mean it is the worst ever or there aren't justifications or things are hopeless, but it certainly is a topic. People will tend to talk about highly unusual things far more than usual things. You're inferring the fact that is talked about is that everyone thinks it's a disaster. I don't see anyone saying "Noa is hopeless" because of this.

[DuckIII]

There is also..

3: Noa's long-term development could be enhanced by playing a larger role on Windy City's team than a smaller role with the main team

I think it could very well be both 2 and 3.

You mean we get to include the thing on the list that they said publicly was the reason?

I would prefer to give credit to my amazing basketball acumen.

The reason I guessed it was the reason before they said it was the reason is because its a logical approach to developing a rookie. Same reason you thought of it - it makes sense.

[dougthonus]

I'll simplify it down to one of two things:
1: They are making a mistake and this is not the right thing to do
2: Noa simply isn't ready and definitely needs this time and this is the right thing to do

There is also..

3: Noa's long-term development could be enhanced by playing a larger role on Windy City's team than a smaller role with the main team

I think it could very well be both 2 and 3.

I agree, though in my head that's bucket #2.

[dougthonus]

The reason I guessed it was the reason before they said it was the reason is because its a logical approach to developing a rookie. Same reason you thought of it - it makes sense.

*logical approach to developing a rookie that is not ready to play in the NBA

The NBA by and large by overwhelming majority of action does not feel this is the logical way to develop players generally speaking. In particular it is rare for players that are expected to play a major role in the future.

There are exceptions to that, and Noa fits the general exception based use case. Maybe that is being overly precise in language, and you are really just stating the simple thing (it makes sense in this case), and I'm reading your statement as overly generalized.

I probably sound overly argumentative or passionate on a forum post, I don't really feel that strongly about what we're doing, but it isn't "normal" for the majority of rookies. I agree with your larger holistic thought thought that it being abnormal isn't necessarily important though. I don't think anything is really lost here, but I think it's maybe the most interesting thing to talk about with Noa at this point in time.

We'll get to see him in a G-League game in a couple days, so hopefully that will be more interesting

[League Circles]

Doug, it's 62 minutes of court time. That's the combined total that Terry and Phillips have played, neither one in the rotation for every game.

Also, we've only seen Phillips for two years, not three.

I think a lot of people have a problem with the one foot in each lane of winning now and winning later. I love it. Like you want to prioritize winning later as you've made clear. Well, winning later primarily means asset management. If Terry and Phillips are both benched entirely such that Noa plays, their current and potential asset value immediately goes permanently to zero for the Bulls. If they play a tiny bit, for now, we have a non-zero chance that they will have value in a trade package mid season, or, much less likely, be re-signed as role player(s) going forward.

This is Terry's last chance, and it's a tiny one. It's not going to hurt Noa's development and it's a marginal future-minded move.

It's probably not at all clear who's better in practice between Noa, Dalen and Julian, but the latter two MIGHT have value in trade this season IF they play well even in small minutes, and we very likely aren't keeping them, especially Terry. Also the role more likely for Noa long term is not the same role those guys are playing now.

Lastly, I don't know the stats on "lottery picks" playing or not playing in their first 7 games, but I do believe that the binary grouping of "lottery" vs "non-lottery" picks has always veen nonsensical. What's the meaningful distinction between say a #11 pick like Noa and a #15 "non lottery" pick?

I just see this as a total non issue.

But I personally would rather see Noa than at least Terry. I just get the strategy. In my world neither Dalen nor Julian's options for this season should have even been picked up (even though I believe both are plus NBA defenders!), but since they're here, and wins and losses this season aren't our top priority (right?!), we should at least nominally see what we have in them, mostly for purposes of in-season trade evaluation and so called pump and dump (on the most basic, minimal level imaginable).

[League Circles]

Also, there is no such binary as "ready" vs "not ready" to play in the nba. Only degrees of readiness, which translates to current ability.

This same exact thing happened last year almost to a T with Matas. Made sense then, makes sense now. Guys like Matas and Noa are going to get AMPLE opportunities over the course of years. Much lesser prospects like Dalen and Phillips (who in fairness are both great physical frame /athleticism prospects) will barely get any chances, so you fit them in when you can. This is a rational one of those times. It will end soon, UNLESS their play compels it to continue, which would be great, if only as mid-season trade sweetener.

[League Circles]

The reason I guessed it was the reason before they said it was the reason is because its a logical approach to developing a rookie. Same reason you thought of it - it makes sense.

*logical approach to developing a rookie that is not ready to play in the NBA

The NBA by and large by overwhelming majority of action does not feel this is the logical way to develop players generally speaking. In particular it is rare for players that are expected to play a major role in the future.

There are exceptions to that, and Noa fits the general exception based use case. Maybe that is being overly precise in language, and you are really just stating the simple thing (it makes sense in this case), and I'm reading your statement as overly generalized.

I probably sound overly argumentative or passionate on a forum post, I don't really feel that strongly about what we're doing, but it isn't "normal" for the majority of rookies. I agree with your larger holistic thought thought that it being abnormal isn't necessarily important though. I don't think anything is really lost here, but I think it's maybe the most interesting thing to talk about with Noa at this point in time.

We'll get to see him in a G-League game in a couple days, so hopefully that will be more interesting

IMO the reason it's not the norm is that most rookies as talented as Noa are on bad teams without other potential stars and big contract guys in front of them. Noa is on a first place team that was an average team last year and a very good team with the current roster approximation. He was drafted with a pick that we traded an all star in his prime for. He's a luxury.

The relevant similar examples to look at in Bulls history are Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah, both of whom were healthy scratches for a lot of their early rookie season games. It's all context.

[League Circles]

Also, it's entirely likely that Phillips and Terry are more "ready" to play a 5th man role on the court right now than Noa, cause they know the schemes better, have more strength and can probably shoot better, while Noa may be more ready than them to play say a top 3 option role (cause of his ball handling and elevated natural talent), but that is a role that is not available and that Dalen and Julian aren't playing.

That dynamic is VERY common in the nba. Different guys are better at different roles.