LaVine traded to the Kings as part of 3 team deal (Huerter, Tre Jones to Bulls)

[coldfish]

The Bulls getting their pick back is more about feelings or anxiety than any statistical value. Worst cast is they gave it up as 9 or 10 but that is unlikely. Either they would have just kept it every year or they would have popped up and made it a pick in the teens, harming its value.

Chicago barely saves any salary as a result of this too. Chicago will be in no position to be a player in free agency, or just sell capspace, for YEARS.

The primary value here is simply being worse for this draft. That could be accomplished in other ways.

This just continues Chicago's doom loop of incompetence. Our only hope is lottery balls and even with them, the odds aren't good.

.......

If the Bulls do get a high lottery pick, I sure hope Michael Reinsdorf asks himself if AKME is really the leadership that he wants to train that player and build around him.

I think with the new lotto odds, there is a pretty good chance they give up 9 or 10 if they don't get the pick back. If you are slotted at 8th, there's a very good probability that someone moves up past you, and the Bulls could trivially rebuild to 8th in the next 2 years.

I also think you are underselling the trade flexibility and salary relief. Collins and Huerter only have one year left each, so you save the full 48M or whatever in Zach's final year, you save 10M next year, so if you envision this as a 2 year dip to rebuild (with this being year 1), you save a ton of money in year 3 when you are rising.

Huerter and Collins are also likely not "bad salary" guys, and could pretty easily rebuild value on this team to possibly fit a need as future trade targets for 2nd rounders possibly. It's also the case that getting much further away from the tax will allow the Bulls (if they choose to, and they should) to save their MLE to take on money at the deadline and be a facilitator much easier and possibly gain asses that way.

Overall, that extra wiggle room gives them a lot more options to do something small too (granted, they may have ended up their anyway based on who they signed and for how much this off season).

I give this trade a C. They clearly canvased the market on Zach for years, and this was the best out there. It might have gotten better this off-season, but it might not have. Zach's an injury or coach blow up away from being negative value again, and you have to believe the Bulls and Zach had some agreement that if he toes the line they'll get him off the roster.

As such, saving 60M on money, getting more flexible, tradeable contracts, while firmly setting a direction and reducing the risk of giving away your pick feels like about as much return out there as possible. It wasn't sexy, but in this case, I truly believe there was no sexy trade out there for Zach. Unlike Caruso, where there were lots of bidders and we had options or DeMar whom we sat on too long, with Zach, this was probably the first real opportunity we had to trade him without attaching something in the last year and so we jumped on it before the teeter totter went back down.

Where is the $60m money saved?

[SfBull]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

So Zach will play with DeMar again,not sure if that was the best trade for him,at least he got more chances of making the playoffs.

[SfBull]

I believe Spurs and especially Kings were the great winners of this trade.Our return for Zach was average at most.I just hope AK won't stop by this trade , hopefully he can move Vuc and Coby.

[dougthonus]

The Bulls getting their pick back is more about feelings or anxiety than any statistical value. Worst cast is they gave it up as 9 or 10 but that is unlikely. Either they would have just kept it every year or they would have popped up and made it a pick in the teens, harming its value.

Chicago barely saves any salary as a result of this too. Chicago will be in no position to be a player in free agency, or just sell capspace, for YEARS.

The primary value here is simply being worse for this draft. That could be accomplished in other ways.

This just continues Chicago's doom loop of incompetence. Our only hope is lottery balls and even with them, the odds aren't good.

.......

If the Bulls do get a high lottery pick, I sure hope Michael Reinsdorf asks himself if AKME is really the leadership that he wants to train that player and build around him.

I think with the new lotto odds, there is a pretty good chance they give up 9 or 10 if they don't get the pick back. If you are slotted at 8th, there's a very good probability that someone moves up past you, and the Bulls could trivially rebuild to 8th in the next 2 years.

I also think you are underselling the trade flexibility and salary relief. Collins and Huerter only have one year left each, so you save the full 48M or whatever in Zach's final year, you save 10M next year, so if you envision this as a 2 year dip to rebuild (with this being year 1), you save a ton of money in year 3 when you are rising.

Huerter and Collins are also likely not "bad salary" guys, and could pretty easily rebuild value on this team to possibly fit a need as future trade targets for 2nd rounders possibly. It's also the case that getting much further away from the tax will allow the Bulls (if they choose to, and they should) to save their MLE to take on money at the deadline and be a facilitator much easier and possibly gain asses that way.

Overall, that extra wiggle room gives them a lot more options to do something small too (granted, they may have ended up their anyway based on who they signed and for how much this off season).

I give this trade a C. They clearly canvased the market on Zach for years, and this was the best out there. It might have gotten better this off-season, but it might not have. Zach's an injury or coach blow up away from being negative value again, and you have to believe the Bulls and Zach had some agreement that if he toes the line they'll get him off the roster.

As such, saving 60M on money, getting more flexible, tradeable contracts, while firmly setting a direction and reducing the risk of giving away your pick feels like about as much return out there as possible. It wasn't sexy, but in this case, I truly believe there was no sexy trade out there for Zach. Unlike Caruso, where there were lots of bidders and we had options or DeMar whom we sat on too long, with Zach, this was probably the first real opportunity we had to trade him without attaching something in the last year and so we jumped on it before the teeter totter went back down.

Where is the $60m money saved?

2025/26: Jones (0) + Huerter (18)+ Collins (18) = 36M - Zach = 46M (10M saved)
2026/27: Jones (0) + Huerter (0) + Collins (0) = 0 - Zach = 49M

The extra 1M was me rounding.

[SfBull]

Wow we sold low on Zach

Exactly

[League Circles]

So incredibly gross to be paying 36 mil to Huerter and Collins next year to hopefully be 3rd stringers.

[DASMACKDOWN]

The Bulls getting their pick back is more about feelings or anxiety than any statistical value.

Its actually both.

Put it this way, don't you think if someone was offering their top 10 in this draft, wouldn't you consider if valuable?

Bulls got access to their pick this year. Which could be top 10 or higher. Which in itself is very valuable.

I think we get mad at the semantics of how we actually got here. And that's ok because well, its been a mess. But when you look at the bigger picture and take away bias, you cant be highly upset at it.

[Jeffster81]

Bad, bad trade for the Bulls.

How is getting out of a bad contract for a non-impact player a "bad, bad trade"?

People expectations on the Lavine trade were too high. Yes, it's a blah trade but the Bulls no longer have that contact. That makes the Bulls a non loser in this trade.

[DASMACKDOWN]

Wow we sold low on Zach

Exactly

Rather, the market is the market.

[dougthonus]

This is a B-/C+ trade. Not exciting, but I doubt there was a B+ trade out there right now. Feels like waiting for the offseason may have yielded something better, but player value feels weird right now across the league.

The protections on the SA pick made it likely that it would have at least warped our roster building during those years, even if it didn't convey. It's more valuable draft capital than I would have expected to have gotten back for Zach. We got 3 JAG's who should be able to be re-purposed into something else if we want.

I think the TPE is low-key interesting. Seems like we ought to be able use it on an overpaid player to collect assets with.

The TPE might be the best part of the trade if they use it. There’s a lot of teams with Apron problems who would love to ship salary into a large TPE.

Agreed, but I'd be shocked if they used it. That would signal the biggest shift in philosophy over the past 25 years.

Sent from my Pixel 9 using Tapatalk

I'd say a few things about the TPE:

1: The use we'd make for it now is to take on some salary and get assets back from a team in the tax. We've never really been in a position where we had a TPE and could use it like that before.

2: The odds of that are a lot less now than they used to be because now people can absorb people into the MLE in trades, so the amount of options to trade guys without taking money back is now very high, and thus the value you get for doing it is now much lower.

I'd say these things offset, and you're both right, we don't use it.

[DuckIII]

The quality of this trade hinges upon what AKME do with Vuc, Lonzo, and possibly Coby. If he’s truly dedicated to a tear-down, this is a decent first step. If their plan is to treadmill into another play-in, I’d say it’s a shockingly horrible trade, even by AKME standards.

In the last 7 months they have traded DDR, Caruso and Lavine. They are trying to bottom out and fully rebuild at this point.

I know a lot of you feel like a rebuild is staring at the abyss for several years. But the alternative was sniffing around the play-in for 3 more seasons and then tear it down to the studs and rebuild. The franchise was out of options guys. I guess you can take solace in there no longer being any real alternatives.

[coldfish]

I think with the new lotto odds, there is a pretty good chance they give up 9 or 10 if they don't get the pick back. If you are slotted at 8th, there's a very good probability that someone moves up past you, and the Bulls could trivially rebuild to 8th in the next 2 years.

I also think you are underselling the trade flexibility and salary relief. Collins and Huerter only have one year left each, so you save the full 48M or whatever in Zach's final year, you save 10M next year, so if you envision this as a 2 year dip to rebuild (with this being year 1), you save a ton of money in year 3 when you are rising.

Huerter and Collins are also likely not "bad salary" guys, and could pretty easily rebuild value on this team to possibly fit a need as future trade targets for 2nd rounders possibly. It's also the case that getting much further away from the tax will allow the Bulls (if they choose to, and they should) to save their MLE to take on money at the deadline and be a facilitator much easier and possibly gain asses that way.

Overall, that extra wiggle room gives them a lot more options to do something small too (granted, they may have ended up their anyway based on who they signed and for how much this off season).

I give this trade a C. They clearly canvased the market on Zach for years, and this was the best out there. It might have gotten better this off-season, but it might not have. Zach's an injury or coach blow up away from being negative value again, and you have to believe the Bulls and Zach had some agreement that if he toes the line they'll get him off the roster.

As such, saving 60M on money, getting more flexible, tradeable contracts, while firmly setting a direction and reducing the risk of giving away your pick feels like about as much return out there as possible. It wasn't sexy, but in this case, I truly believe there was no sexy trade out there for Zach. Unlike Caruso, where there were lots of bidders and we had options or DeMar whom we sat on too long, with Zach, this was probably the first real opportunity we had to trade him without attaching something in the last year and so we jumped on it before the teeter totter went back down.

Where is the $60m money saved?

2025/26: Jones (0) + Huerter (18)+ Collins (18) = 36M - Zach = 46M (10M saved)
2026/27: Jones (0) + Huerter (0) + Collins (0) = 0 - Zach = 49M

The extra 1M was me rounding.

Zach's 26/27 year was a player option that he would have opted out of if healthy.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/CHI.html

IMO, Huerter and Collins are bad contracts. No one is going to trade even capspace for them. At best, they are expiring filler next year.

So, if Zach opts in and if the Bulls get a pick above 8, the Bulls get some value out of this trade
If Zach opts out and the Bulls either get a late teens pick or a pick at 8 or better in future years, the Bulls get virtually no value out of this trade

I'm looking at this from the latter side.

[DASMACKDOWN]

We just need to clean out the rest of the guys. Hopefully its Vooch today. Then we can fully just start over.

Also dont make this a mess again but overpaying any of Coby, Ayo, Giddey. We would just be making the same mistake.

Out of the 3, I feel the most comfy with Ayo. I do think Ayo is in the driver seat of "easiest to return" because his max isn't crazy. Unless someone goes way overboard for his services, I think he will remain a Bull. I do think Giddey and Coby can be had for the right trade.

[League Circles]

Bad, bad trade for the Bulls.

How is getting out of a bad contract for a non-impact player a "bad, bad trade"?

People expectations on the Lavine trade were too high. Yes, it's a blah trade but the Bulls no longer have that contact. That makes the Bulls a non loser in this trade.

I don't think having his contract was as big of a problem as not having his talent will be. And we really only got out of one player-option year anyway.

[Jvaughn]

Can someone explain to me how the 27 million trade exception works ? How would we use it ?

The exception can be used to trade for a player or multiple players with salaries adding up to that amount without adding to their cap and luxury-tax liabilities.

Can they use it for a Cap Dump and get additional Pick(s) ?

Yes, although I'd be unbelievably shocked if they did. This organization, and especially this current FO, doesn't make moves like that.

[dougthonus]

Zach's 26/27 year was a player option that he would have opted out of if healthy.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/CHI.html

IMO, Huerter and Collins are bad contracts. No one is going to trade even capspace for them. At best, they are expiring filler next year.

So, if Zach opts in and if the Bulls get a pick above 8, the Bulls get some value out of this trade
If Zach opts out and the Bulls either get a late teens pick or a pick at 8 or better in future years, the Bulls get virtually no value out of this trade

I'm looking at this from the latter side.

We won't know until the option year hits, but it's pretty clear everyone in the league expects he opts in when accounting for him as a trade asset. I think you are probably right to consider the odds are higher than people credit, but I'd say they're still pretty low overall, and that it is better to assume opt in vs opt out.

I agree that if Zach opts out and the pick would have conveyed into 2nds anyway that value they get is zero, but the interesting thing is Zach being elsewhere probably increases the odds of both those things. Ie, he's more likely to prove himself in Sacramento in a playoff run and increase his value than he was to do so here, and the odds of us staying below 8 are _much_ higher with LaVine off the roster than if he were here.

In that sense, even in the scenario where both those things potentially happen in reality, it's hard to assume they both happen in a scenario where we keep Zach.

[Ctownbulls]

Bad, bad trade for the Bulls.

How is getting out of a bad contract for a non-impact player a "bad, bad trade"?

People expectations on the Lavine trade were too high. Yes, it's a blah trade but the Bulls no longer have that contact. That makes the Bulls a non loser in this trade.

I don't think having his contract was as big of a problem as not having his talent will be. And we really only got out of one player-option year anyway.

The rest of the league obviously disagrees. These old max contracts for #3/#4 championship level players are death sentences. It really restricts flexibility.

This feels like the first step towards a true direction. They are actually taking on bad, shorter term contracts. They should continue to dump everyone for the same thing and picks. We want a roster that will lose, a lot, the next year and a half and allows Matas and whatever young pieces they can acquire to just play.

If this move is actually calculated then in the summer of 2026 the Bulls should have Matas, back to back lottery picks, and as much cap flexibility than anyone in the league.

Of course, if they resign Giddey it would be devastating unless it's a big 1 year deal with a team option for year 2.

Sent from my Pixel 9 using Tapatalk

[ChiTownHero1992]

We just need to clean out the rest of the guys. Hopefully its Vooch today. Then we can fully just start over.

Also dont make this a mess again but overpaying any of Coby, Ayo, Giddey. We would just be making the same mistake.

Out of the 3, I feel the most comfy with Ayo. I do think Ayo is in the driver seat of "easiest to return" because his max isn't crazy. Unless someone goes way overboard for his services, I think he will remain a Bull. I do think Giddey and Coby can be had for the right trade.

I have a strong feeling we'll see at least 1 more trade still.

A) We have too many ball handling-guards (Coby, Ayo, Ball, Giddey, Carter, Jones, etc) somebody is likely gone

B) Half-joking but we are WAYYYY to tall for a Billy Donovan team (Collins, Vuc, Smith, Craig, Williams, Matas) so I see Vuc likely on the way out

I'm guessing we see a trade centered around Vuc+Carter on the way out or Ball+Craig, I could see them try to move Huerter/Collins to a contender needing some playoff run depth as well, to get another expiring, late pick or more 2nds.

[coldfish]

Zach's 26/27 year was a player option that he would have opted out of if healthy.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/CHI.html

IMO, Huerter and Collins are bad contracts. No one is going to trade even capspace for them. At best, they are expiring filler next year.

So, if Zach opts in and if the Bulls get a pick above 8, the Bulls get some value out of this trade
If Zach opts out and the Bulls either get a late teens pick or a pick at 8 or better in future years, the Bulls get virtually no value out of this trade

I'm looking at this from the latter side.

We won't know until the option year hits, but it's pretty clear everyone in the league expects he opts in when accounting for him as a trade asset. I think you are probably right to consider the odds are higher than people credit, but I'd say they're still pretty low overall, and that it is better to assume opt in vs opt out.

I agree that if Zach opts out and the pick would have conveyed into 2nds anyway that value they get is zero, but the interesting thing is Zach being elsewhere probably increases the odds of both those things. Ie, he's more likely to prove himself in Sacramento in a playoff run and increase his value than he was to do so here, and the odds of us staying below 8 are _much_ higher with LaVine off the roster than if he were here.

In that sense, even in the scenario where both those things potentially happen in reality, it's hard to assume they both happen in a scenario where we keep Zach.

If you look above, I said the primary value for the trade was simply not having Zach and getting worse as a team.

Maybe his value had sunk so much that getting virtually zero to accomplish that is the most you could hope for. My gut tells me that isn't true but with all of the negative rumors about his value, maybe it is.

[DuckIII]

The Bulls getting their pick back is more about feelings or anxiety than any statistical value. Worst cast is they gave it up as 9 or 10 but that is unlikely. Either they would have just kept it every year or they would have popped up and made it a pick in the teens, harming its value.

Chicago barely saves any salary as a result of this too. Chicago will be in no position to be a player in free agency, or just sell capspace, for YEARS.

The primary value here is simply being worse for this draft. That could be accomplished in other ways.

This just continues Chicago's doom loop of incompetence. Our only hope is lottery balls and even with them, the odds aren't good.

.......

If the Bulls do get a high lottery pick, I sure hope Michael Reinsdorf asks himself if AKME is really the leadership that he wants to train that player and build around him.

I think with the new lotto odds, there is a pretty good chance they give up 9 or 10 if they don't get the pick back. If you are slotted at 8th, there's a very good probability that someone moves up past you, and the Bulls could trivially rebuild to 8th in the next 2 years.

I also think you are underselling the trade flexibility and salary relief. Collins and Huerter only have one year left each, so you save the full 48M or whatever in Zach's final year, you save 10M next year, so if you envision this as a 2 year dip to rebuild (with this being year 1), you save a ton of money in year 3 when you are rising.

Huerter and Collins are also likely not "bad salary" guys, and could pretty easily rebuild value on this team to possibly fit a need as future trade targets for 2nd rounders possibly. It's also the case that getting much further away from the tax will allow the Bulls (if they choose to, and they should) to save their MLE to take on money at the deadline and be a facilitator much easier and possibly gain asses that way.

Overall, that extra wiggle room gives them a lot more options to do something small too (granted, they may have ended up their anyway based on who they signed and for how much this off season).

I give this trade a C. They clearly canvased the market on Zach for years, and this was the best out there. It might have gotten better this off-season, but it might not have. Zach's an injury or coach blow up away from being negative value again, and you have to believe the Bulls and Zach had some agreement that if he toes the line they'll get him off the roster.

As such, saving 60M on money, getting more flexible, tradeable contracts, while firmly setting a direction and reducing the risk of giving away your pick feels like about as much return out there as possible. It wasn't sexy, but in this case, I truly believe there was no sexy trade out there for Zach. Unlike Caruso, where there were lots of bidders and we had options or DeMar whom we sat on too long, with Zach, this was probably the first real opportunity we had to trade him without attaching something in the last year and so we jumped on it before the teeter totter went back down.

Where is the $60m money saved?

Zach was owed $95 million over the next two years. Huerter and Collins are owed $36 million next year and that's it. Jones is owed nothing after this year.