How long until the Bulls actually fully commit to a rebuild?

[Dez]

They have also played the most difficult part of their schedule and are about to play out one of the easiest schedule in the league. So you are right. They should end up much higher than 10th

They lost to Utah, they can lose to anyone.

Ok. So can anyone else. Not sure how that addresses the schedule.

We're **** and inconsistent and rely on getting hot from deep with streaky shooters to win because we can't guard a chair.

[NZB2323]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/278235/Bulls-Expected-To-Make-Significant-Deal-Before-Trade-Deadline

Apparently the Bulls are trying to trade Lavine, Vooch, and/or Ball.

IMHO this is great news. Let’s keep our draft pick and possibly get Cooper Flagg!

I know you can't speak for everyone, but when you say this do you mean you only want to do it for Flagg? Let me ask it a different way:

If I told you today we could trade Lavine, Vuc and Ball for future assets, that as a result we would get worse and end up near the bottom of the league, but absolutely would not get the #1 pick in the draft with zero % to get Flagg, would you still want to trade them to rebuild and draft in the top 10 this summer?

Only if the Pope is Catholic.

[Infinity2152]

The general method of tanking is trading vet players/stars for young players/picks. It's not guys going out there trying to lose. All our vets are on the trade market. They were all at the bottom of their value (Ball, Lavine, Vuc), all look much more tradeable than before the season. This looks like a team that's tanking, while not being so blatant as to get fined, and trying to get value for their vets. Regardless of the outcome, I think that's a wise course. I don't think talent wise right now we're a bottom five team with Lavine and Vuc, we shouldn't expect bottom 5 results.

If we DO manage to move Zach and Vuc by the deadline, we could easily be a bottom 5 team for the second half of the season, so focusing on the tank right now is pointless. They're still here and they're trying to trade them.

[Dan Z]

I think tanking 2 years should be the baseline plan. If they happen to be good in 2027, great problem to have - then we deliver 10-20 pick to Spurs while being a good young team.

But I think the Bulls should waive the white flag (literally by going for Cooper Flag), and then double down with a harder tank next season. At that point, if AKME can’t find a star(s) from the next 2 top-8 drafts and Matas, then these idiots need to be cannoned far and away from the city of Chicago.

If we're good this year it will be because we're a good young team. Vuc is our only contributor over 30.

Why is being a playoff team now not a great problem to have but somehow it would be in two years?

Because the roster constructions would presumably be different, with one reaching the playoffs on the backs of purely young players and hopefully a rising franchise player or two.

Regardless, it would likely need to be a three year "tank" because if we get our pick this year then it drops to top 8 protected the next two years and then converts to second rounders. Ideally, we tank for 3 years and keep all or first round picks.

Well, actually ideally we draft a franchise player this year and he's so fricking awesome along with other developing players tanking is not an option. But that's extremely unlikely.

My point with all of this is that I think the Bulls could've said no to a first round pick or at the very least made it better protections. I don't think the Spurs or DDR had many options at that time. At least not for the kind of contract he wanted.

[Dan Z]

It cost trade capital for the Spurs to agree to take on the contracts of Thaddeus Young and Al-Farouq Aminu.

The Spurs later flipped Thad for a first, so he had positive value. Aminu did not, but like I said before...if the Bulls stood their ground what would the Spurs do? They didn't have a lot of options.

At least make the pick heabily protected. If the Bulls give their 2025 pick to the Spurs that will be frustrating.

Thad was not the point of that trade he was just salary matching. The crux of that trade was the Spurs took on salary the other team didn't want (Dragic, Raptors) in exchange for a heavily protected 1st round pick. Spurs immediately bought out Dragic, so they paid him $18M to not play for them. It's basically identical to what SAS did for Chicago that allowed us to S&T Derozan.
Toronto also got a DET 2nd rounder which at the time would be viewed as a low 1st rounder in value (ended up being pick #33).

but like I said before...if the Bulls stood their ground what would the Spurs do? They didn't have a lot of options.

They would have not resigned Derozan as they originally intended. Derozan signs in FA with a team with cap space, which would have excluded Chicago.

Which team had cap space that was serious in signing him to a deal? I don't remember the specifics of that year, but think that there weren't any teams that wanted to do that. Maybe another team offers a sign and trade, but I have my doubts that the Spurs would get much in return.

I also don't think DDR was the kind of player who was going to make the Bulls a contender so if they had to walk away from the deal then so be it.

[DuckIII]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/278235/Bulls-Expected-To-Make-Significant-Deal-Before-Trade-Deadline

Apparently the Bulls are trying to trade Lavine, Vooch, and/or Ball.

IMHO this is great news. Let’s keep our draft pick and possibly get Cooper Flagg!

I know you can't speak for everyone, but when you say this do you mean you only want to do it for Flagg? Let me ask it a different way:

If I told you today we could trade Lavine, Vuc and Ball for future assets, that as a result we would get worse and end up near the bottom of the league, but absolutely would not get the #1 pick in the draft with zero % to get Flagg, would you still want to trade them to rebuild and draft in the top 10 this summer?

Only if the Pope is Catholic.

That’s what I thought. Thank you for helping me illustrate something.

[Stratmaster]

They lost to Utah, they can lose to anyone.

Ok. So can anyone else. Not sure how that addresses the schedule.

Perhaps he's just saying he doesn't put much stock in strength of schedule after 20 games. Regardless, I agree with you that there is a very real chance we finish outside of the top 10. Absolutely no doubt about it.

If you don't take into account the first 20 plus games being their toughest stretch when assessing their performance to date...

... and you don't consider that they have one of the 3 easiest schedule in the league the rest of the season...

...then you either have poor analytic skills are you are just being disingenuous to deny that your pessimism may be misplaced.

You want a bet on whether the Bulls are top 10 in the East? I would put a significant amount on that but a Zach or Vuc trade would have to nullify the bet.

If the Bulls want to be, they can be a top 6 team in the East.

[Stratmaster]

They lost to Utah, they can lose to anyone.

Ok. So can anyone else. Not sure how that addresses the schedule.

We're **** and inconsistent and rely on getting hot from deep with streaky shooters to win because we can't guard a chair.

Which also doesn't address the point. Why are you stating this in a reply to me?

[JimmyButler21]

Never until people stop showing up

[ScrantonBulls]

Never until people stop showing up

This is the truth. Why are Bulls fans so loyal? It definitely fun to go to a game and get loaded, but I'm past that point. I'm not paying the absurd costs to see the Bulls trot out a joke year after year.

[Chi town]

We took a different path to reach this point, but I feel like we're already in a rebuild:

Patrick Williams - 23 years old - 4th overall pick
Coby White - 24 years old - 7th overall pick
Jalen Smith - 24 years old - 10th overall pick
Josh Giddey - 22 years old - 6th overall pick
Matas Buzelis - 20 years old - 11th overall pick

We have 5 lottery picks 24 or younger

Then we have additional young players like:

Ayo Dosunmu - 24 years old
Dalen Terry - 22 years old
Talen Horton Tucker - 24 years old
Julian Phillips - 21 years old

Just because we never intentionally tanked or something doesn't mean this team doesn't have a good deal of young talent.

The end result is the same - multiple years worth of top 10 picks and additional young talent from later first round and early second round picks.

With the rumors of our veteran players on the trade block I'm curious to see if AK/ME are looking for future draft consideration or current young players.

I always think it's interesting looking at the current Rockets team. They pretty much copied the AK/ME playbook, I just think they executed it better. They acquired young talent and then quickly added multiple veteran pieces. I just think their veteran talent fit the youth better.

I've long said - the Bulls haven't lacked talent, they've just lacked a cohesive team that compliments each other.

Normally it’s 3 years of tank bad to get 3 chances at a franchise cornerstone to build around with good vets and be a playoff team. Basically what the Magic did when they got Banchero and Franz.

I think Buz is going to be 2nd option 2nd best player.

Ideally we get our lead guard wing first option in this draft and we have our two most important pieces.

Lots of teams don’t have that top two. The ones that win do. Let’s hope Buz is one of them.

[DuckIII]

Ok. So can anyone else. Not sure how that addresses the schedule.

Perhaps he's just saying he doesn't put much stock in strength of schedule after 20 games. Regardless, I agree with you that there is a very real chance we finish outside of the top 10. Absolutely no doubt about it.

If you don't take into account the first 20 plus games being their toughest stretch when assessing their performance to date...

... and you don't consider that they have one of the 3 easiest schedule in the league the rest of the season...

...then you either have poor analytic skills are you are just being disingenuous to deny that your pessimism may be misplaced.

You want a bet on whether the Bulls are top 10 in the East? I would put a significant amount on that but a Zach or Vuc trade would have to nullify the bet.

If the Bulls want to be, they can be a top 6 team in the East.

I mean outside of the top 10 picks. Not outside top 10 in the East. I’m saying they absolutely could finish in the top 10 in the East.

[jnrjr79]

Doubting that he's the number 1 pick or doubting he's the best player? Because he's extremely likely to be pick 1. And there may be a very few posts, nothings absolute.

Talking about whether he should be the #1 pick, not whether he will be.

So let's say 98% of the posts are talking about tanking for Flagg.

Lets not. Because that's not true nor is it relevant.

Again, I'm talking general discussion threads, not a thread on who's the top prospect. I do think a lot would be happy for a pick 4 or 5, however. This organization had a #4 pick not too long ago, pretty strong draft class. Anthony Edwards, Lamelo Ball, Okungwu, Obi Toppin, Tyrese Maxey, Tyrese Haliburton, Quickley, Desmond Bane, Devin Vassell. We got Patrick Williams.

Means nothing to me. Horrible GMs have made great picks tons of times. AK, tragically incompetent as he is, has made a couple of great picks. You gotta be in it to win it. Rebuilding is about odds, not certainty.

Sigh. It's relevant because the initial discussion you jumped in was specifically talking about that. I said most of the posts do, you say they don't, it's easy enough to prove, all you have to do is look. If you want to play word games about specific numbers fine, MOST of the posts. If you can show me 51% of the posts or more talking about tanking mentioning players other than Falgg, you win, ok? Otherwise, I stand by most of the posts talking about tanking are talking about Flagg. I later stated I believe many would be happy with a 4 or 5 pick, so don't even know why that's even an issue.

And again, it's not a zero sum game. Being in it to win it this summer means potentially not being in it to win it next summer. With probably much greater odds for a high pick than in a season where multiple players are shooting their career highs. If rebuilding is really about odds. The ODDS of a top 3 pick in 2026 with no Zach, Vuc, or our 2025 draftee, are MUCH higher than our current odds.

The other point was outside the top three picks, it's really a crapshoot to find a star. Don't really fault AK for passing on any of the others except Haliburton, but a lot are better than Willams. And again, what could the Bulls do more to tank? They've already put Lavine and Vuc on the block all season.

\

Lol, you went from asserting 98-99% of references were to flag to move the goalposts ever so slightly to 51%.

In any event, the logic of your post is basically "it's hard to get a high draft pick, even if you tank, given lottery odds, so the Bulls shouldn't do it." But that logic really means teams should never try to rebuild through the draft, which is crazy, because the vast majority of NBA teams have no other real mechanism rebuild.

The draft is a crapshoot. Odds are low. It's still the best option. That's the nature of the beast when 32 teams are trying to win a single championship title each season.

[jnrjr79]

Never until people stop showing up

This is the truth. Why are Bulls fans so loyal? It definitely fun to go to a game and get loaded, but I'm past that point. I'm not paying the absurd costs to see the Bulls trot out a joke year after year.

I truly never, ever understand the "boycott the team to send a message" people. Not because I don't get the sentiment, but because it's so unrealistic.

Chicago is one of the most populous cities in the country. Filling up the UC here is a pretty paltry task compared to asking a city like New Orleans to fill an arena. The winter weather is generally pretty meh, and going to a basketball game is an indoor thing to do that people enjoy. The Bulls have a big international following and tourists like coming to games. Families (like mine), aren't going to deprive their kids of growing up experiencing the Bulls because they want to send a message to the Reinsdorfs. We also have a tradition of taking our nieces/nephews to a game every year and I'm not going to stop doing that and tell them "sorry, guys, I can't take you this year because I'm mad at Jerry." Corporations aren't going to stop using boxes and 100-level seats as a means of entertaining employees and clients.

And mostly, very few people are as passionate about the team as those you'd see on this board and would just find it kind of weird to be asked to skip going to a game as part of some broader project to show anger at the team.

One other note - White Sox fans routinely don't attend when the team isn't good. I'm not sure this is so much a protest as just a lack of interest. (It's summer, there's other stuff to do, and the Sox are a much smaller fanbase, etc.). Has that changed Reinsdorf's approach at all? Nope.

[League Circles]

Never until people stop showing up

This is the truth. Why are Bulls fans so loyal? It definitely fun to go to a game and get loaded, but I'm past that point. I'm not paying the absurd costs to see the Bulls trot out a joke year after year.

I think Chicago just has the biggest fan market, not that the fans are necessarily that loyal. NY and LA fan markets are split into two teams each.

[DuckIII]

Never until people stop showing up

This is the truth. Why are Bulls fans so loyal? It definitely fun to go to a game and get loaded, but I'm past that point. I'm not paying the absurd costs to see the Bulls trot out a joke year after year.

I truly never, ever understand the "boycott the team to send a message" people. Not because I don't get the sentiment, but because it's so unrealistic.

Chicago is one of the most populous cities in the country. Filling up the UC here is a pretty paltry task compared to asking a city like New Orleans to fill an arena. The winter weather is generally pretty meh, and going to a basketball game is an indoor thing to do that people enjoy. The Bulls have a big international following and tourists like coming to games. Families (like mine), aren't going to deprive their kids of growing up experiencing the Bulls because they want to send a message to the Reinsdorfs. We also have a tradition of taking our nieces/nephews to a game every year and I'm not going to stop doing that and tell them "sorry, guys, I can't take you this year because I'm mad at Jerry." Corporations aren't going to stop using boxes and 100-level seats as a means of entertaining employees and clients.

And mostly, very few people are as passionate about the team as those you'd see on this board and would just find it kind of weird to be asked to skip going to a game as part of some broader project to show anger at the team.

One other note - White Sox fans routinely don't attend when the team isn't good. I'm not sure this is so much a protest as just a lack of interest. (It's summer, there's other stuff to do, and the Sox are a much smaller fanbase, etc.). Has that changed Reinsdorf's approach at all? Nope.

They might even react like the dopes the running the St. Louis Cardinals. Some of the most loyal fans in all of professional sports finally had enough and stopped going to games this year due to managerial incompetence. Management’s response? Holding a press conference to effectively tell the fans if they don’t come back out the to games the organization will spend even less and get worse.

[jnrjr79]

This is the truth. Why are Bulls fans so loyal? It definitely fun to go to a game and get loaded, but I'm past that point. I'm not paying the absurd costs to see the Bulls trot out a joke year after year.

I truly never, ever understand the "boycott the team to send a message" people. Not because I don't get the sentiment, but because it's so unrealistic.

Chicago is one of the most populous cities in the country. Filling up the UC here is a pretty paltry task compared to asking a city like New Orleans to fill an arena. The winter weather is generally pretty meh, and going to a basketball game is an indoor thing to do that people enjoy. The Bulls have a big international following and tourists like coming to games. Families (like mine), aren't going to deprive their kids of growing up experiencing the Bulls because they want to send a message to the Reinsdorfs. We also have a tradition of taking our nieces/nephews to a game every year and I'm not going to stop doing that and tell them "sorry, guys, I can't take you this year because I'm mad at Jerry." Corporations aren't going to stop using boxes and 100-level seats as a means of entertaining employees and clients.

And mostly, very few people are as passionate about the team as those you'd see on this board and would just find it kind of weird to be asked to skip going to a game as part of some broader project to show anger at the team.

One other note - White Sox fans routinely don't attend when the team isn't good. I'm not sure this is so much a protest as just a lack of interest. (It's summer, there's other stuff to do, and the Sox are a much smaller fanbase, etc.). Has that changed Reinsdorf's approach at all? Nope.

They might even react like the dopes the running the St. Louis Cardinals. Some of the most loyal fans in all of professional sports finally had enough and stopped going to games this year due to managerial incompetence. Management’s response? Holding a press conference to effectively tell the fans if they don’t come back out the to games the organization will spend even less and get worse.

I will say as a person with a lot of friends/family in STL, I've enjoyed seeing the empty stadium after being told for decades how it's the greatest fanbase in the universe (even if they are justified in staying home under current circumstances).

[Stratmaster]

Never until people stop showing up

This is the truth. Why are Bulls fans so loyal? It definitely fun to go to a game and get loaded, but I'm past that point. I'm not paying the absurd costs to see the Bulls trot out a joke year after year.

Your definition of a joke would include over half of the teams in the NBA. I guess only people in Boston and Cleveland should go to games.

[Stratmaster]

Talking about whether he should be the #1 pick, not whether he will be.



Lets not. Because that's not true nor is it relevant.



Means nothing to me. Horrible GMs have made great picks tons of times. AK, tragically incompetent as he is, has made a couple of great picks. You gotta be in it to win it. Rebuilding is about odds, not certainty.

Sigh. It's relevant because the initial discussion you jumped in was specifically talking about that. I said most of the posts do, you say they don't, it's easy enough to prove, all you have to do is look. If you want to play word games about specific numbers fine, MOST of the posts. If you can show me 51% of the posts or more talking about tanking mentioning players other than Falgg, you win, ok? Otherwise, I stand by most of the posts talking about tanking are talking about Flagg. I later stated I believe many would be happy with a 4 or 5 pick, so don't even know why that's even an issue.

And again, it's not a zero sum game. Being in it to win it this summer means potentially not being in it to win it next summer. With probably much greater odds for a high pick than in a season where multiple players are shooting their career highs. If rebuilding is really about odds. The ODDS of a top 3 pick in 2026 with no Zach, Vuc, or our 2025 draftee, are MUCH higher than our current odds.

The other point was outside the top three picks, it's really a crapshoot to find a star. Don't really fault AK for passing on any of the others except Haliburton, but a lot are better than Willams. And again, what could the Bulls do more to tank? They've already put Lavine and Vuc on the block all season.

\

Lol, you went from asserting 98-99% of references were to flag to move the goalposts ever so slightly to 51%.

In any event, the logic of your post is basically "it's hard to get a high draft pick, even if you tank, given lottery odds, so the Bulls shouldn't do it." But that logic really means teams should never try to rebuild through the draft, which is crazy, because the vast majority of NBA teams have no other real mechanism rebuild.

The draft is a crapshoot. Odds are low. It's still the best option. That's the nature of the beast when 32 teams are trying to win a single championship title each season.

Of course the draft is one piece in rebuilding. You just shouldn't purposely lose to move up. All kinds of solid players were drafted outside of the top 4 or 5.

The GM skill is in finding the gems within the draft. Any idiot can lose on purpose every year hoping the lottery hits them with the 1 "can't miss" guy (who still sometimes ends up a miss) at the top.

[jnrjr79]

Sigh. It's relevant because the initial discussion you jumped in was specifically talking about that. I said most of the posts do, you say they don't, it's easy enough to prove, all you have to do is look. If you want to play word games about specific numbers fine, MOST of the posts. If you can show me 51% of the posts or more talking about tanking mentioning players other than Falgg, you win, ok? Otherwise, I stand by most of the posts talking about tanking are talking about Flagg. I later stated I believe many would be happy with a 4 or 5 pick, so don't even know why that's even an issue.

And again, it's not a zero sum game. Being in it to win it this summer means potentially not being in it to win it next summer. With probably much greater odds for a high pick than in a season where multiple players are shooting their career highs. If rebuilding is really about odds. The ODDS of a top 3 pick in 2026 with no Zach, Vuc, or our 2025 draftee, are MUCH higher than our current odds.

The other point was outside the top three picks, it's really a crapshoot to find a star. Don't really fault AK for passing on any of the others except Haliburton, but a lot are better than Willams. And again, what could the Bulls do more to tank? They've already put Lavine and Vuc on the block all season.

\

Lol, you went from asserting 98-99% of references were to flag to move the goalposts ever so slightly to 51%.

In any event, the logic of your post is basically "it's hard to get a high draft pick, even if you tank, given lottery odds, so the Bulls shouldn't do it." But that logic really means teams should never try to rebuild through the draft, which is crazy, because the vast majority of NBA teams have no other real mechanism rebuild.

The draft is a crapshoot. Odds are low. It's still the best option. That's the nature of the beast when 32 teams are trying to win a single championship title each season.

Of course the draft is one piece in rebuilding. You just shouldn't purposely lose to move up. All kinds of solid players were drafted outside of the top 4 or 5.

The GM skill is in finding the gems within the draft. Any idiot can lose on purpose every year hoping the lottery hits them with the 1 "can't miss" guy (who still sometimes ends up a miss) at the top.

It depends what you mean by "purposely lose." The players shouldn't be giving half-effort and the coaches shouldn't be coaching to lose. But the idea that teams should not occasionally take a deliberate step back in terms of roster construction when they realize they've peaked with their current group is pretty obviously incorrect. It is an extremely traditional part of team-building across all major US sports.

And in this specific situation, it doesn't matter if occasionally great players are found later in the draft. The Bulls simply lose their pick if they get into the playoffs, so the debate whether to try to keep the pick at all or to lose it this season.

Further, while great players have been found all over the draft, it's statistically true that the higher up in the draft, the better chance you have of acquiring a really good player. If you could simply choose your own pick every year, you'd choose #1, for obvious reasons.