Image ImageImage Image

Shams: Lonzo for Okoro

Moderators: HomoSapien, Ice Man, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10

User avatar
Jvaughn
RealGM
Posts: 28,080
And1: 4,650
Joined: May 18, 2009
   

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#421 » by Jvaughn » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:01 pm

drosestruts wrote:I don't really get the arguments about the Bulls not trading guys like DeRozan, Caruso, and LaVine at the height of their value.

I don't see people saying the Bucks should trade Giannis, the nuggets should trade Jokic, the Thunder should trade SGA.

I mean if you want top value from SGA, now is the time, hanging onto him any longer is asset mismanagement - it's not going to get better than MVP, Scoring leader, finals MVP, and champ. Now's the time Presti, right????

it's convienint having hindsight and knowing Lonzo's injury will be far more serious that initially diagnosed and that LaVine would himself run into some heath issues.


Those 3 teams were all contenders, and have now all shown those players were capable of leading championship teams. Outside of the first half season when Lonzo was healthy, this team has been a middling Play-In contender. It became clear long ago that we did not have the team capable of contending. The sign of a good FO is recognizing this and knowing when to sell high. Our FO did nothing but double and triple down on a flawed product.
spearsy23 wrote:Kobe is a low percentage chucker just like Jennings, he's just better at it.


teamCHItown wrote:Now we have threads on what violent felons think of our Bulls. Great. Next up, OJ Simpson's take on a possible Taj Gibson extension.
User avatar
Jcool0
RealGM
Posts: 15,326
And1: 9,306
Joined: Jul 12, 2014
Location: Illinois
         

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#422 » by Jcool0 » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:02 pm

DuckIII wrote:
Jcool0 wrote:
DuckIII wrote:
This year? Sure.

Other years when we are better positioned to win longer term? Also sure, if it works. I don't see anything about that description (other than completely ignoring Okoro's defense, which makes the argument less than sincere, as does citing raw 3pt attempts rather than per 36 volume) which inherently makes it a bad thing.


I am glad the Bulls traded for someone who isn't a defensive liability, but he also wont be making an All Defense team anytime soon either. So lets not act like he is the new Caruso.


Who is calling him the next Caruso? Who is saying Okoro is going to make all-defensive teams for Chicago? If anyone, then they aren't worth listening to.


You are talking about ignoring defense like its some huge calling card of his. He is a decent defender so there is no reason to be like wow we just got a top 5 wing defender in the league. We got a 9 ppg guy who takes around 3 3PA a game and plays +defense. Those aren't rare things.
wolffy
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,296
And1: 661
Joined: Dec 07, 2002
Location: Pa.
       

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#423 » by wolffy » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:15 pm

Guru wrote:
DASMACKDOWN wrote:I never used to like Joe Cowley. I really despised him for how he treated Derrick when he was here.

But with this new regime, he is the only media member that will ask very direct and hard questions.

Im sure he will have a field day for the next press conference.


He's the worst of a bad bunch of bulls media. Was going on a run this am so searched for a podcast to listen to trade discussion. The only one that had it was Gottlieb and Peck....All these guy do is yell and get frustrated because we don't trade for draft picks. Ignoring that we are getting the type of player we would want to get if we had traded for that draft pick. For instance if we trade Caruso for Topic last year....there isn't an argument that that is somehow better than Giddey. We would just want Topic to be Giddey and now we already have Giddey.

Okoro fits us very well because he will run and play D. Thats what we need. It was a good trade that was made using an asset that we could have just let walk. And if Okoro isn't great we probably trade him to a contender who needs defensive depth.

I love the draft but this draft pick or bust nonsense needs to stop.


You're missing the fundamental point. If Okoro is decent and helps win a few games. Its a BAD thing.

They need a difference maker, not the 14th pick in next years draft. The Bulls just continue to try and barely keep their head out the water.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 27,407
And1: 9,209
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#424 » by sco » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:21 pm

wolffy wrote:
Guru wrote:
DASMACKDOWN wrote:I never used to like Joe Cowley. I really despised him for how he treated Derrick when he was here.

But with this new regime, he is the only media member that will ask very direct and hard questions.

Im sure he will have a field day for the next press conference.


He's the worst of a bad bunch of bulls media. Was going on a run this am so searched for a podcast to listen to trade discussion. The only one that had it was Gottlieb and Peck....All these guy do is yell and get frustrated because we don't trade for draft picks. Ignoring that we are getting the type of player we would want to get if we had traded for that draft pick. For instance if we trade Caruso for Topic last year....there isn't an argument that that is somehow better than Giddey. We would just want Topic to be Giddey and now we already have Giddey.

Okoro fits us very well because he will run and play D. Thats what we need. It was a good trade that was made using an asset that we could have just let walk. And if Okoro isn't great we probably trade him to a contender who needs defensive depth.

I love the draft but this draft pick or bust nonsense needs to stop.


You're missing the fundamental point. If Okoro is decent and helps win a few games. Its a BAD thing.

They need a difference maker, not the 14th pick in next years draft. The Bulls just continue to try and barely keep their head out the water.

You and I agree, but that's not the direction the Bulls FO wants to go. He is focused on getting that #6 seed come hell and high water.

The slim hope for a tank comes with AK's extension. If he isn't in immenant fear for his job, maybe he'd try it.
:clap:
burlydee
Starter
Posts: 2,369
And1: 1,350
Joined: Jan 20, 2010

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#425 » by burlydee » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:28 pm

wolffy wrote:
Guru wrote:
DASMACKDOWN wrote:I never used to like Joe Cowley. I really despised him for how he treated Derrick when he was here.

But with this new regime, he is the only media member that will ask very direct and hard questions.

Im sure he will have a field day for the next press conference.


He's the worst of a bad bunch of bulls media. Was going on a run this am so searched for a podcast to listen to trade discussion. The only one that had it was Gottlieb and Peck....All these guy do is yell and get frustrated because we don't trade for draft picks. Ignoring that we are getting the type of player we would want to get if we had traded for that draft pick. For instance if we trade Caruso for Topic last year....there isn't an argument that that is somehow better than Giddey. We would just want Topic to be Giddey and now we already have Giddey.

Okoro fits us very well because he will run and play D. Thats what we need. It was a good trade that was made using an asset that we could have just let walk. And if Okoro isn't great we probably trade him to a contender who needs defensive depth.

I love the draft but this draft pick or bust nonsense needs to stop.


You're missing the fundamental point. If Okoro is decent and helps win a few games. Its a BAD thing.

They need a difference maker, not the 14th pick in next years draft. The Bulls just continue to try and barely keep their head out the water.


That's not the way the Bulls are going to build this team. Ownership hates tanking - this predates AK. In addition, the entire idea behind a full year tank has been delegitimized. The top 3 teams in this years draft started the season trying to make the playoffs. The two teams that tanked all year finished 5th and 6th. This may be an unpopular opinion, but I think Essengue and Bailey have the same chance of being a superstar (this might reflect my skepticism around Bailey who i think is wildly overrated).

Utah and Washington have sacrificed years for nothing. That is just not what ownership or management want
Indomitable
RealGM
Posts: 25,588
And1: 6,481
Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Location: Yelzenbah!
     

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#426 » by Indomitable » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:50 pm

jbk1234 wrote:Cavs fan here. I come in peace. If you're looking for a reason to be bullish on Okoro, he had some of the best impact stats (on/off, +/-) on the Cavs every year since his rookie year.

Is he good in transition ?
:banghead:
Indomitable
RealGM
Posts: 25,588
And1: 6,481
Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Location: Yelzenbah!
     

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#427 » by Indomitable » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:55 pm

drosestruts wrote:I don't really get the arguments about the Bulls not trading guys like DeRozan, Caruso, and LaVine at the height of their value.

I don't see people saying the Bucks should trade Giannis, the nuggets should trade Jokic, the Thunder should trade SGA.

I mean if you want top value from SGA, now is the time, hanging onto him any longer is asset mismanagement - it's not going to get better than MVP, Scoring leader, finals MVP, and champ. Now's the time Presti, right????

it's convienint having hindsight and knowing Lonzo's injury will be far more serious that initially diagnosed and that LaVine would himself run into some heath issues.

You named 3 MVP and just All stars. There is a big difference.
:banghead:
jbk1234
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 59,176
And1: 36,223
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
 

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#428 » by jbk1234 » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:57 pm

Indomitable wrote:
jbk1234 wrote:Cavs fan here. I come in peace. If you're looking for a reason to be bullish on Okoro, he had some of the best impact stats (on/off, +/-) on the Cavs every year since his rookie year.

Is he good in transition ?


He's solid. He likes to leak out which is fine so long as you've already secured the defensive rebound and frustrating when you haven't.
cbosh4mvp wrote:
Jarret Allen isn’t winning you anything. Garland won’t show up in the playoffs. Mobley is a glorified dunk man. Mitchell has some experience but is a liability on defense. To me, the Cavs are a treadmill team.
Indomitable
RealGM
Posts: 25,588
And1: 6,481
Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Location: Yelzenbah!
     

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#429 » by Indomitable » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:57 pm

DuckIII wrote:
drosestruts wrote:I don't really get the arguments about the Bulls not trading guys like DeRozan, Caruso, and LaVine at the height of their value.

I don't see people saying the Bucks should trade Giannis, the nuggets should trade Jokic, the Thunder should trade SGA.



The fact that you are willing to equate these scenarios is mind-boggling. All three of those guys are in their primes and are arguably (definitely?) the three best basketball players in the entire human race. The Thunder just won the championship. Then Nuggets won the Championship 2 years ago and almost knocked the Thunder out this year. And there are a lot of people who do actually believe, even as insanely elite as Giannis is, Milwaukee should trade him to start over (I'm not one of those people, as I haven't taken the time to analyze their assets to assess the pros and cons).

It makes believe it is a troll. Are you pulling our leg..
:banghead:
Indomitable
RealGM
Posts: 25,588
And1: 6,481
Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Location: Yelzenbah!
     

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#430 » by Indomitable » Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:59 pm

burlydee wrote:
wolffy wrote:
Guru wrote:
He's the worst of a bad bunch of bulls media. Was going on a run this am so searched for a podcast to listen to trade discussion. The only one that had it was Gottlieb and Peck....All these guy do is yell and get frustrated because we don't trade for draft picks. Ignoring that we are getting the type of player we would want to get if we had traded for that draft pick. For instance if we trade Caruso for Topic last year....there isn't an argument that that is somehow better than Giddey. We would just want Topic to be Giddey and now we already have Giddey.

Okoro fits us very well because he will run and play D. Thats what we need. It was a good trade that was made using an asset that we could have just let walk. And if Okoro isn't great we probably trade him to a contender who needs defensive depth.

I love the draft but this draft pick or bust nonsense needs to stop.


You're missing the fundamental point. If Okoro is decent and helps win a few games. Its a BAD thing.

They need a difference maker, not the 14th pick in next years draft. The Bulls just continue to try and barely keep their head out the water.


That's not the way the Bulls are going to build this team. Ownership hates tanking - this predates AK. In addition, the entire idea behind a full year tank has been delegitimized. The top 3 teams in this years draft started the season trying to make the playoffs. The two teams that tanked all year finished 5th and 6th. This may be an unpopular opinion, but I think Essengue and Bailey have the same chance of being a superstar (this might reflect my skepticism around Bailey who i think is wildly overrated).

Utah and Washington have sacrificed years for nothing. That is just not what ownership or management want


Okay
:banghead:
wolffy
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,296
And1: 661
Joined: Dec 07, 2002
Location: Pa.
       

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#431 » by wolffy » Sun Jun 29, 2025 6:33 pm

Indomitable wrote:
burlydee wrote:
wolffy wrote:
You're missing the fundamental point. If Okoro is decent and helps win a few games. Its a BAD thing.

They need a difference maker, not the 14th pick in next years draft. The Bulls just continue to try and barely keep their head out the water.


That's not the way the Bulls are going to build this team. Ownership hates tanking - this predates AK. In addition, the entire idea behind a full year tank has been delegitimized. The top 3 teams in this years draft started the season trying to make the playoffs. The two teams that tanked all year finished 5th and 6th. This may be an unpopular opinion, but I think Essengue and Bailey have the same chance of being a superstar (this might reflect my skepticism around Bailey who i think is wildly overrated).

Utah and Washington have sacrificed years for nothing. That is just not what ownership or management want


Okay


Your right. Thats why the "rebuild" isn't a rebuild. Thats why they continue to miss playoffs. But hey its not actually insanity to do the same thing over and over and expect different results, its just stupid.
burlydee
Starter
Posts: 2,369
And1: 1,350
Joined: Jan 20, 2010

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#432 » by burlydee » Sun Jun 29, 2025 6:43 pm

wolffy wrote:
Indomitable wrote:
burlydee wrote:
That's not the way the Bulls are going to build this team. Ownership hates tanking - this predates AK. In addition, the entire idea behind a full year tank has been delegitimized. The top 3 teams in this years draft started the season trying to make the playoffs. The two teams that tanked all year finished 5th and 6th. This may be an unpopular opinion, but I think Essengue and Bailey have the same chance of being a superstar (this might reflect my skepticism around Bailey who i think is wildly overrated).

Utah and Washington have sacrificed years for nothing. That is just not what ownership or management want


Okay


Your right. Thats why the "rebuild" isn't a rebuild. Thats why they continue to miss playoffs. But hey its not actually insanity to do the same thing over and over and expect different results, its just stupid.


People act like the Bulls are alone in this, but they aren't. Indiana, New York and Miami never tank. I'd argue Miami is in the exact same position as the Bulls, with better PR.

If the Bulls are 24-30 at mid-season (which they probably will be) I support a tank. But I don't think it makes much sense starting the season trying to lose when it doesn’t consistently yield anything.

And I hate what Utah has done sitting key guys. They ended up killing Lauri's value. Let Matas and Giddey play. Trade Coby mid-season if you have too. There is always the chance to pivot.
Bulliever2020
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,359
And1: 2,620
Joined: Jul 13, 2018
       

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#433 » by Bulliever2020 » Sun Jun 29, 2025 6:54 pm

burlydee wrote:
wolffy wrote:
Indomitable wrote:
Okay


Your right. Thats why the "rebuild" isn't a rebuild. Thats why they continue to miss playoffs. But hey its not actually insanity to do the same thing over and over and expect different results, its just stupid.


People act like the Bulls are alone in this, but they aren't. Indiana, New York and Miami never tank. I'd argue Miami is in the exact same position as the Bulls, with better PR.



It's amazing that you compare a team that has made the finals 2 of the last 6 seasons to the Bulls who have won 3 playoff games in the last 10 years.
PlayinTourney4Lyfe
wolffy
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,296
And1: 661
Joined: Dec 07, 2002
Location: Pa.
       

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#434 » by wolffy » Sun Jun 29, 2025 7:37 pm

burlydee wrote:
wolffy wrote:
Indomitable wrote:
Okay


Your right. Thats why the "rebuild" isn't a rebuild. Thats why they continue to miss playoffs. But hey its not actually insanity to do the same thing over and over and expect different results, its just stupid.


People act like the Bulls are alone in this, but they aren't. Indiana, New York and Miami never tank. I'd argue Miami is in the exact same position as the Bulls, with better PR.

If the Bulls are 24-30 at mid-season (which they probably will be) I support a tank. But I don't think it makes much sense starting the season trying to lose when it doesn’t consistently yield anything.

And I hate what Utah has done sitting key guys. They ended up killing Lauri's value. Let Matas and Giddey play. Trade Coby mid-season if you have too. There is always the chance to pivot.



I dont love tanking either but.. Magic, Bird, MJ, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Bron, KD etc are the problem. The problem is reality. You can try to be the Sheed Pistons or draft Jokic in round 2 but reality is usually waiting for you.

You get a superstar or you're largely irrelevant. That doesn't mean you need to draft 1 overall but the higher the better, at least til you have a guy to make a run with. We have Giddey and we're trying to win a few more games. Its just not gonna work.

If hes the best player on this team, they won't compete his entire career.
Dan Z
RealGM
Posts: 18,473
And1: 9,159
Joined: Feb 19, 2002
Location: Chicago
 

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#435 » by Dan Z » Sun Jun 29, 2025 7:49 pm

wolffy wrote:
burlydee wrote:
wolffy wrote:
Your right. Thats why the "rebuild" isn't a rebuild. Thats why they continue to miss playoffs. But hey its not actually insanity to do the same thing over and over and expect different results, its just stupid.


People act like the Bulls are alone in this, but they aren't. Indiana, New York and Miami never tank. I'd argue Miami is in the exact same position as the Bulls, with better PR.

If the Bulls are 24-30 at mid-season (which they probably will be) I support a tank. But I don't think it makes much sense starting the season trying to lose when it doesn’t consistently yield anything.

And I hate what Utah has done sitting key guys. They ended up killing Lauri's value. Let Matas and Giddey play. Trade Coby mid-season if you have too. There is always the chance to pivot.



I dont love tanking either but.. Magic, Bird, MJ, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Bron, KD etc are the problem. The problem is reality. You can try to be the Sheed Pistons or draft Jokic in round 2 but reality is usually waiting for you.

You get a superstar or you're largely irrelevant. That doesn't mean you need to draft 1 overall but the higher the better, at least til you have a guy to make a run with. We have Giddey and we're trying to win a few more games. Its just not gonna work.

If hes the best player on this team, they won't compete his entire career.


I've said it before...OKC had two years where they were bad (I remember correct they sat Horford for half a season) and it got them Giddey and Chet.

The Bulls won''t even do that for one year.
User avatar
MrFortune3
General Manager
Posts: 8,694
And1: 3,278
Joined: Jul 03, 2010
         

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#436 » by MrFortune3 » Sun Jun 29, 2025 7:54 pm

Dan Z wrote:
Peelboy wrote:
MrFortune3 wrote:Here's what I take from this and many other threads. People hate the draft picks that AKME make and they loathe the job they have done in developing them. Then in the same breath they get pissed that they aren't gathering more draft picks instead of players...

Lonzo is an injury prone expiring contract, there is nothing wrong with nabbing Okoro for him.

Analogy: I think you’re a terrible chef whose food is near inedible. I can also be upset that you buy spoiled produce at excessive prices.

Some is generally poor at drafting. They also generally misvalue their assets in trade, and lack strategy of the kind of assets to trade for given their position.

This trade is just another example of that, IMO. By no means the most egregious one though. Just a small brick in that wall.


My issue with AKME is that they don't try to acquire additional draft picks. it's NBA currency and the team needs to find it's franchise player to build around.


I can understand the frustration in that. But we need players and development more than we need picks.
Would more picks potentially add flexibility? Yes. Does that mean we would use it? No.
User avatar
MrFortune3
General Manager
Posts: 8,694
And1: 3,278
Joined: Jul 03, 2010
         

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#437 » by MrFortune3 » Sun Jun 29, 2025 7:59 pm

Peelboy wrote:
MrFortune3 wrote:Here's what I take from this and many other threads. People hate the draft picks that AKME make and they loathe the job they have done in developing them. Then in the same breath they get pissed that they aren't gathering more draft picks instead of players...

Lonzo is an injury prone expiring contract, there is nothing wrong with nabbing Okoro for him.

Analogy: I think you’re a terrible chef whose food is near inedible. I can also be upset that you buy spoiled produce at excessive prices.

Some is generally poor at drafting. They also generally misvalue their assets in trade, and lack strategy of the kind of assets to trade for given their position.

This trade is just another example of that, IMO. By no means the most egregious one though. Just a small brick in that wall.


Yet again, people keep asking for more picks because they see other teams stockpiling them. Those same people hate the draft picks that they make.
It's going to be hated either way.

We had an ill fitting roster that was having success before Lonzo got hurt. AK stuck to that plan for too long before pivoting.
Now he is looking to maximize development and make trades to correct the roster construction.
User avatar
coldfish
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 60,665
And1: 37,980
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
   

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#438 » by coldfish » Sun Jun 29, 2025 8:09 pm

DuckIII wrote:
Guru wrote:I cant name one trade he got fleeced in. People just want the hope that comes with draft picks


There is no objective way to say AK did not get fleeced in the Vuc trade. I'm sure you'll concoct some theory to defend it, but everyone who doesn't troll the board with posts like "AK Don't Miss!!!!" knows that trade sucked and severely crippled the franchise.


I read that response and my brain locked up. I can't even put together a response. Its like someone posting that NBA players are short.
jnrjr79
Head Coach
Posts: 6,748
And1: 4,009
Joined: May 27, 2003
Location: Chicago

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#439 » by jnrjr79 » Sun Jun 29, 2025 8:11 pm

drosestruts wrote:I don't really get the arguments about the Bulls not trading guys like DeRozan, Caruso, and LaVine at the height of their value.

I don't see people saying the Bucks should trade Giannis, the nuggets should trade Jokic, the Thunder should trade SGA.

I mean if you want top value from SGA, now is the time, hanging onto him any longer is asset mismanagement - it's not going to get better than MVP, Scoring leader, finals MVP, and champ. Now's the time Presti, right????

it's convienint having hindsight and knowing Lonzo's injury will be far more serious that initially diagnosed and that LaVine would himself run into some heath issues.


You absolutely do see people saying the Bucks should trade Giannis!
Guru
Analyst
Posts: 3,700
And1: 784
Joined: Oct 29, 2001

Re: Shams: Lonzo for Okoro 

Post#440 » by Guru » Sun Jun 29, 2025 8:20 pm

coldfish wrote:
DuckIII wrote:
Guru wrote:I cant name one trade he got fleeced in. People just want the hope that comes with draft picks


There is no objective way to say AK did not get fleeced in the Vuc trade. I'm sure you'll concoct some theory to defend it, but everyone who doesn't troll the board with posts like "AK Don't Miss!!!!" knows that trade sucked and severely crippled the franchise.


I read that response and my brain locked up. I can't even put together a response. Its like someone posting that NBA players are short.


It didn't, it started the shift and directly lead to DD and Ball.

Return to Chicago Bulls