Tom Haberstroh: Bulls Among NBA's Next Potential Superteams

[sco]

Until they feel they have 2 young guys (at minimum) that they feel can be franchise cornerstones, I wouldn't bother with free agency in terms of chasing the biggest available names.

Hopefully that's 2019 and the option can remain open due to an abundance of rookie deals on the books, but realistically I would be thinking 2020-21.

This!

I know we loathe the impending season or three of terrible basketball, it is the best path not to repeat this whole process again soon.

I saw someone say that the goal of a rebuild is to get to be a 50 win team. I think many who are focused on signing "good" FA's are of this mindset. That's fine, but I'm in it to win it!

Today's rules and talent disparity between the great and good have created a winning model that says you need a couple top 10 guys to even consider competing. The best way to accomplish that is through the draft (even though this is a massively imprecise way and bad for the NBA). So I say we need to suck and do so boldly and ruthlessly.

I think that our opportunity to shine would be if we can become faster at:
1) Developing talent
2) Assessing young guys and QUICKLY disposing of the "merely good" for another chance at a great player
3) Bringing in more young guys from secondary leagues for mid-season try-outs. This is a luxury of sucking that you can't really do when you are competing.

Lastly, it's about finding cap space for the 3rd max guy. The best way I see to do that is to avoid signing "good" players to multi-year deals until you have that 3rd "max" guy. Alas, I don't think we even have our 1st top 10 talent on the team yet, but maybe we already have 3 - I guess we'll see this year...and that will have to be our source of entertainment.

I disagree that you need 2 top 10 players to contend. Cleveland, San Antonio and Houston all competed with only one top 10 player.

I'm all about building a team 4 fringe all star types that complement each other well. I hope to draft 2 (as you said maybe we even already have one or two), and sign 2 as free agents. The key is having that double max cap space while you have your own guys on rookie deals.

I think you can "compete" with a team consisting of the young versions of the Gordon's, Deng's Boozer's and Noah's of the NBA, but IMO, that's what last year's Boston team was IMO. That's just not going to win...not in today's NBA. I won't call it "NBA hell", because those are top 3-4 divisional teams and at least there's post-may entertainment, but we've been there, done that - and I want another championship.

[Stratmaster]

Well, at least we got definitions. I'm not sure where they came from. A super-team is one that has at least 2 elite players all-star level guys on it? OK, I guess, although there are teams that have had 2 elite all-star level guys on them that haven't been even contenders, more or less super teams. I am sure if we list them though you will make the argument that despite the players meeting your criteria, one of those players really wasn't that good or deserving of the perennial all-star status.

As far as the Bulls building such a team... Pre-injury Rose and Jo Noah were 2 guys who had they remained healthy would have certainly been in multiple all-star games. One was ROY and MVP. The 2nd was DPOY and received MVP votes 2 seasons. That Deng guy made a couple consecutive all-star games too. Jimmy Butler was available to play that 2 spot if only someone would have realized he was a great player and could play SG. You didn't address Boozer. I get that he dropped off a cliff, but at the time of the signing he was certainly considered a marquee free agent with some saying he was a better "get" than Bosh. And signing (at the time) the best 3-point shooter in the history of the game is not a marquee signing? Too bad the Bulls never really used him well, as Atlanta proved later.

Jimmy Butler and Pau Gasol? They were both all-stars both seasons Pau was in Chicago and the Bulls had a 25 million ROY/MVP on the roster with them. Noah was coming off 2 straight all star appearances and seasons where he got MVP votes when Pau came on board. Again, injuries caught up with Noah.

Those are super-teams. Injuries derailed them. I guess you can say the Bulls should have predicted Rose's continuous injury issues. By the time it became apparent they were locked into a franchise level contract which they pretty deftly unloaded. Noah's injuries were a little more predictable but he fit the elite all-star designation at the time they signed Gasol.

So bringing this full circle, this thread is about the Bulls chances of being the next superteam. This was met with derision by some who say the Bulls FO is inept at getting big free agents and players don't want to come to Chicago. I was commenting on that take.

You are right about one thing though. This conversation is pointless. You keep saying you were talking about something else; but, this started with your response to MY post, and what I was talking about. If you didn't want to talk about this aspect, it was simple. Don't respond trying to tell me I shouldn't be posting about it.

Im not sure if you're intentionally being obtuse or not, but regardless, I'm sure you're doing this to bait me into some nonsense.

If you don't can't see the distinction between the 2011 Bulls and say, the 2013 Heat, in reference to a super team discussion, well...

I used your definitions. You talking about someone else baiting is pretty rich.

[jnrjr79]

To me, the whole "the Bulls have never signed an elite free agent" doesn't have to be an attack (it's just a statement of fact), but is often used as one. What I dislike about how that narrative is used is that people often push the "the Bulls should never plan to use cap space to build their team because they can't compete with the rest of the league in free agency" argument. That's silly.

The truly elite (top 5-ish players in the NBA) free agents move via free agency very, very rarely. Essentially, the sample size is so small that the fact that the Bulls haven't achieved it in the post-MJ era should not be taken to mean they should not try.

Every path to building an NBA team - draft, free agency, and trades - is unlikely in isolation or in combination to lead to an NBA championship. It's just math. But adopting a fatalistic attitude about free agency serves no real purpose. Yes, the Bulls have not signed a truly elite free agent. Very few teams have. The Bulls have done better than most in free agency generally and have been perceived, at times and by some players, as an attractive destination. Chicago is not Los Angeles, nor is it a warm weather tax haven like Florida or Texas, but in the scheme of 30 markets it is still an above average place to be.

The Bulls should absolutely try to use cap space. Every team should. Every team should be trying to improve their roster using any possible means.

But in reference to this thread, which is built upon an article discussing the next superteam built by cap space as early as next season, there's no reason to think the Bulls should plan for that or qualify as a destination for the leagues elite players.

All I'm arguing is that the Bulls' chances of landing a free agent of the magnitude of LeBron, George, Westbrook etc next season is extremely low, to the point where the premise is entirely pointless.

How do you square the two bolded parts? The Bulls are presumably having some internal discussions about the superteam option (as they should be), no matter how remote the prospects. And honestly, the Bulls' young talent isn't that far off what the Lakers have, and you seem to believe it's fine to discuss them as a potential superteam.

Anyway, I agree the chances of it materializing for the Bulls next year are very slim, but it's as worth message board discussion as anything else, and I wouldn't be critical of Haberstroh for noting that the Bulls will have darn near the most cap room in the league next year.

[jnrjr79]

I understand where you are coming from 100%. What you are saying makes sense. I think there are just 2 separate classes of tankers out there. The first being to tank for however long it takes until we have a top 4 team in the league with a high probability of winning the finals. I'm in the class of tanking for a year and becoming a top 10 team in the league with at least a small probability of winning the finals.

I believe we had 0 chance of winning the finals in the future as our main player. I just don't think he was good enough so I was ok with trading him and tanking this year. I would rather see us fight in the playoffs with a punchers chance 4/5 years then to spend the next 3-6 years watching us suck season after season. Is the potential high/rush from a championship that good that it out weighs the enjoyment from watching a fun 50-32 season team every year?

Personally, the aim of the tank shouldn’t be to build a 50 win team. Depending on how it plays out, that may be the eventual result, and I would be ok with it if it sustainable over 5 or more years, but the goal should be higher.

Reason for this is I think with had the Bulls operated competently over the last 2 or so seasons, a team lead by Jimmy Butler in a weak Eastern Conference could’ve been a top 4 team out East, winning anywhere between 46-50 games over the next 3-4 years.

I certainly understand what you’re saying. Watching a constant 50-win team isn’t a bad thing. Hell, the Baby Bulls winning 47 games is still one of the best memorable season I’ve had. There’s definite value there. But after moving Butler and failing to build a capable team around him, building a contender through the draft should be the only goal right now.

I would be extremely irritated if the Bulls tank for one year, collecting a top 5 pick in next years draft, then looking to blow their free agency load on good roles players that will help get the team back into the playoffs in 2018-19.

Sadly, that’s exactly what I think the plan is.

This I definitely agree with. If you're going to blow a bunch of cap space next year, let it be on true difference-making stars. Loading up on good, but not great, players in order to become a "competitive" team would be a huge mistake. If that's the best you can do, keep riding the draft train for a year or two more.

What's funny is that many on the board say people should boycott games in order to protest the front office. I worry we need to make sure there are butts in seats in order for the team to have the patience to properly complete the rebuilding process.

[kingkirk]

How do you square the two bolded parts? The Bulls are presumably having some internal discussions about the superteam option (as they should be), no matter how remote the prospects. And honestly, the Bulls' young talent isn't that far off what the Lakers have, and you seem to believe it's fine to discuss them as a potential superteam.

Anyway, I agree the chances of it materializing for the Bulls next year are very slim, but it's as worth message board discussion as anything else, and I wouldn't be critical of Haberstroh for noting that the Bulls will have darn near the most cap room in the league next year.

The Lakers have been connected to James, George and Westbrook, in some form, for some time now.

It's much easier to see them landing two of these guys in free agency than the Bulls because a connection of sorts already exists. If the Bulls had some tangible link to a pending free agent of that caliber, I'd say the same, but they don't.

I'd also say that Ball and Ingram are two significantly better pieces than anything Chicago has. I'd take them both over any younger player on this roster. Random probably isn't in their long term plans, but in a vacuum, I would maybe take him over LaVine too (I'd have to think about that more).

[kingkirk]

I used your definitions. You talking about someone else baiting is pretty rich.

You used my definition, but you didn't comprehend it or apply it correctly at all. Your examples highlight as much.

So, again, if you think the 2011 Bulls or 2015 Bulls were superteams and had the same sense of star power as the 2013 Heat, or someone similar, then you're wrong.

[Stratmaster]

I used your definitions. You talking about someone else baiting is pretty rich.

You used my definition, but you didn't comprehend it or apply it correctly at all. Your examples highlight as much.

So, again, if you think the 2011 Bulls or 2015 Bulls were superteams and had the same sense of star power as the 2013 Heat, or someone similar, then you're wrong.

I never said they had the same level of star power. If you think that level of star power is out there and available you are wrong; but I acknowledge you never said that. Maybe you could do the same?

Otherwise, the last word is all yours.

[The Senator]

This I definitely agree with. If you're going to blow a bunch of cap space next year, let it be on true difference-making stars. Loading up on good, but not great, players in order to become a "competitive" team would be a huge mistake. If that's the best you can do, keep riding the draft train for a year or two more.

What's funny is that many on the board say people should boycott games in order to protest the front office. I worry we need to make sure there are butts in seats in order for the team to have the patience to properly complete the rebuilding process.

The problem comes for the people who believe we need to take the proper time to rebuild, but do not want or believe in GarPax as the facilitators of the process. If you don't think GarPax can get the proper picks, sign the right players, run a strong organization and build a proper contender, then the dichotomy that you're left with is bad no matter which way you go.

[RebuildaBulls]

If they do build a superteam I hope they are young stars

[IrishBeatdown]

If the sleuth were here, he would have the cheerleaders and the band out and ready to go for free agency 2018