RealGM

It's a truism that the NBA is a superstar driven league. However since everyone knows this, superstars are usually really hard to acquire. The best teams in the NBA have gotten them on the cheap. The Bucks got Giannis at 15 in the draft, the Rockets got Harden for two decent vets and two mid round firsts. Curry was drafted at 7. The Raptors got Kawhi at a discount due to his pending FA.

Who are the buy low superstar candidates that the Bulls should be looking at?

One NBA guy that comes to mind for me is Ben Simmons. I don't think he pairs well with Embiid and his lack of shooting does dampen his upside. If he does fix that though, he's going to be one of the best players in the league. If Philly is willing to trade him, I think the Bulls should be all over it.

In the draft, after watching more of Darius Garland, I see a lot of Kyrie Irving (hopefully minus the weird moodiness). I'd look to move up a few picks if needed.

Any other candidates?

Not really a buy low candidate (neither are those in OP imo) but Bradley Beal is closest thing to superstar currently kind of on the market.

Here is comprasion of him and Harden at same age:



I'd give #7 + Lauri (or Wendell, but imo it would take Lauri), maybe some minor asset too (ideally, Wiz would take on Felicio in salary matching process) - not saying I advocate the move absolutely since there is risk of Beal leaving in two years, but it would make us pretty interesting as better fitting Wizards with more flexibility to add talent.

We can fill our gap at forward posotion through FA this or next year (Draymond?) or internally (development, good low profile draft picks: Hutch, Paschall, Samanic?).

Also, having Beal along rest of our guys might put us in the discussion for some bigger name FA in more optimistic scenario.

Lonzo Ball

This is essentially just get lucky in draft or wait until a superstar or potential superstar wants out. Aside from Anthony Davis, I don't see anybody in that boat at this moment. Looks like its a wait and see approach on our end.

Zach LaVine is probably the ultimate in a guy who I would classify as a "buy low" superstar potential, which is ironic because we already have him. He's got good scoring efficiency, good volume, a package of skills that show elite potential, and the athleticism to make it all happen.

He's defensive / decision making improvements away from being a great player, and we've seen those things improve throughout his career already. Lots of reasons to think it's unlikely he will get there though (just like any buy low guy).

drosestruts wrote:Lonzo Ball

Superstar upside?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Toronto was desperate to make one last run before pulling the trigger on a rebuild. We are not in that situation. As such, I would never give up quality assets for a potential rental like Toronto did. Made sense for them, but not us. So that type of a trade - like AD - is folly without a backdoor deal on an extension.

The draft is the draft. I'd trade up for Garland, but I've also discussed why I think we are unlikely to be able to pull that off.

As for Beal, Lavine/Otto/Beal doesn't make much sense to me if the cost is as high as the OP suggests - #7 plus Lauri. That kind of looks like the Wizards. If you can get Beal for Lavine (I like Lavine) and the pick then it starts to look like a more cohesive unit going forward.

Simmons to me does seem the most likely choice, but I don't see Philly dealing him for our pieces. We don't have guys that make sense on their roster other than Lauri, who I would not trade to get Simmons.

That leaves Lonzo Ball. Which now that we've dropped in the draft, I'm okay with.

dougthonus wrote:Zach LaVine is probably the ultimate in a guy who I would classify as a "buy low" superstar potential, which is ironic because we already have him. He's got good scoring efficiency, good volume, a package of skills that show elite potential, and the athleticism to make it all happen.

He's defensive / decision making improvements away from being a great player, and we've seen those things improve throughout his career already. Lots of reasons to think it's unlikely he will get there though (just like any buy low guy).

Excellent point. If this thread appeared on other team boards, he'd likely get mentioned quite a bit after the way he concluded last season.

Red Larrivee wrote:

drosestruts wrote:Lonzo Ball

Superstar upside?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I think on the right team he can be a 12/9/8 guy, which might not be a superstar, but he's definitely on the "high upside" list.

Red Larrivee wrote:

drosestruts wrote:Lonzo Ball

Superstar upside?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Not that I think it is likely, but yes. If Ball could learn to shoot, he'd have superstar upside. It's just that learning to shoot is such a long shot.

DuckIII wrote:Toronto was desperate to make one last run before pulling the trigger on a rebuild. We are not in that situation. As such, I would never give up quality assets for a potential rental like Toronto did. Made sense for them, but not us. So that type of a trade - like AD - is folly without a backdoor deal on an extension.

The draft is the draft. I'd trade up for Garland, but I've also discussed why I think we are unlikely to be able to pull that off.

As for Beal, Lavine/Otto/Beal doesn't make much sense to me if the cost is as high as the OP suggests - #7 plus Lauri. That kind of looks like the Wizards. If you can get Beal for Lavine (I like Lavine) and the pick then it starts to look like a more cohesive unit going forward.

Simmons to me does seem the most likely choice, but I don't see Philly dealing him for our pieces. We don't have guys that make sense on their roster other than Lauri, who I would not trade to get Simmons.

That leaves Lonzo Ball. Which now that we've dropped in the draft, I'm okay with.

That's what I proposed in the other thread. I think Lavine and #7 for Beal makes sense if their new GM comes in and wants to blow it up. And I think if you trade for Beal and sign Beverly, you're going to be in the playoffs next year. It's a good move and Beal is still young.

I don't like the Holiday or Conley suggestions. Those guys are too old to move the #7 and Ball is too injury prone and not good enough. I'd rather take a chance on a PG in the draft.

The only other thing I'd try for is #2 and Parsons for #7 and next years protected top5 pick. I think Memphis will want to trim salary. They've got a lot tied up in a really bad team.

dougthonus wrote:Zach LaVine is probably the ultimate in a guy who I would classify as a "buy low" superstar potential, which is ironic because we already have him. He's got good scoring efficiency, good volume, a package of skills that show elite potential, and the athleticism to make it all happen.

He's defensive / decision making improvements away from being a great player, and we've seen those things improve throughout his career already. Lots of reasons to think it's unlikely he will get there though (just like any buy low guy).

Lavine kinda strikes me as empty stats. Guys with numbers like that like Booker should produce more wins. He doesn't play D, at all, not great with handles or creating. I just don't see star. I see future Eric Gordon. I can't see him being that guy who carries a team anywhere.

I wouldn't dump him and I can see him being a good player on a winning team but neither him nor Lauri strike me as the guy. If there is some plan to add a really good max FA, I think he'd be a nice fit.

TheStig wrote:Lavine kinda strikes me as empty stats. Guys with numbers like that like Booker should produce more wins. He doesn't play D, at all, not great with handles or creating. I just don't see star. I see future Eric Gordon. I can't see him being that guy who carries a team anywhere.

I wouldn't dump him and I can see him being a good player on a winning team but neither him nor Lauri strike me as the guy. If there is some plan to add a really good max FA, I think he'd be a nice fit.

That's why he's a "buy low" star, not a "star" though. I agree with what you're saying in many respects to how LaVine is now. The question is can he transform a few things to become more than that.

If he was already more than that, he'd be a superstar today. Booker is another example of a guy like that, but Booker's cost and reputation is considerably higher than LaVine's IMO.

dougthonus wrote:

TheStig wrote:Lavine kinda strikes me as empty stats. Guys with numbers like that like Booker should produce more wins. He doesn't play D, at all, not great with handles or creating. I just don't see star. I see future Eric Gordon. I can't see him being that guy who carries a team anywhere.

I wouldn't dump him and I can see him being a good player on a winning team but neither him nor Lauri strike me as the guy. If there is some plan to add a really good max FA, I think he'd be a nice fit.

That's why he's a "buy low" star, not a "star" though. I agree with what you're saying in many respects to how LaVine is now. The question is can he transform a few things to become more than that.

If he was already more than that, he'd be a superstar today. Booker is another example of a guy like that, but Booker's cost and reputation is considerably higher than LaVine's IMO.

TheStig, I saw lavine the same way as you did up until February came along. Somehow something did click with him and he started playing a gamestyle that was actually a positive for the team. To me that's encouraging that he can improve on it and hopefully sustain it for a season.

TheStig wrote:The only other thing I'd try for is #2 and Parsons for #7 and next years protected top5 pick. I think Memphis will want to trim salary. They've got a lot tied up in a really bad team.

I agree with a lot of your post.

On this point, ff this draft was deeper, maybe. But there is no way Memphis trades down in this crappy draft with Morant on the board. Not only is a great fit with JJJ to start building a new team, but he's "local." Murray State is about 2.5 hours from Memphis. He'll be a known and anticipated prospect to boost local interest. They aren't trading that pick.

1. Memphis wants to move on from Conley and rebuild.

2. The draft is at most a "3 player draft" and the drop off between 2 and 7 is massive.

3. Morant plays a position of need critical need for them once they trade Conley.

4. He's exciting and local.

Its a perfect storm. The dream of trading up for Morant died instantly when Memphis, rather than say Dallas, Atlanta, Cleveland or NY, got the pick.

DuckIII wrote:

TheStig wrote:The only other thing I'd try for is #2 and Parsons for #7 and next years protected top5 pick. I think Memphis will want to trim salary. They've got a lot tied up in a really bad team.

I agree with a lot of your post.

On this point, ff this draft was deeper, maybe. But there is no way Memphis trades down in this crappy draft with Morant on the board. Not only is a great fit with JJJ to start building a new team, but he's "local." Murray State is about 2.5 hours from Memphis. He'll be a known and anticipated prospect to boost local interest. They aren't trading that pick.

1. Memphis wants to move on from Conley and rebuild.

2. The draft is at most a "3 player draft" and the drop off between 2 and 7 is massive.

3. Morant plays a position of need critical need for them once they trade Conley.

4. He's exciting and local.

Its a perfect storm. The dream of trading up for Morant died instantly when Memphis, rather than say Dallas, Atlanta, Cleveland or NY, got the pick.

is there really that strong of a trade market for Conley?
Yes he's good (really good), but so many teams already have a good PG.

What teams are willing to pay the trade price, have 30 mil in matching salary (with players that Memphis actually wants back) AND desperately need a PG?

DuckIII wrote:
As for Beal, Lavine/Otto/Beal doesn't make much sense to me if the cost is as high as the OP suggests - #7 plus Lauri. That kind of looks like the Wizards. If you can get Beal for Lavine (I like Lavine) and the pick then it starts to look like a more cohesive unit going forward.

Just to provide some more reasoning for Beal trade since I proposed it.

First off, if one of Culver or Garland is still there at #7 when we pick, I'd just take him.

Secondly, Lauri + #7 is a lot, but just remember when it was obvious we are going to trade Jimmy, many here expected three strong assets, and he got dealt for something that is actually quite close to Lauri + #7, and some were furious at first (I'd say LaVine then and pick this year are comparable, while Lauri and pick that year has similar value - Lauri is proven, but has two years less on rookie deal, had some nagging injuries both seasons). So, I'd say it is going rate, while Beal is three years younger than Jimmy back then.

Also, I'd expect Wizards to take on Felicio in process, opening up some cap space in process (I think we could end up with around 15 mil in cap space this or next summer, if needed), so we can find other forward in one of two coming FA windows, as well the Draft - imo there are few interesting options with role player potential early in the 2nd round..

As for fit, I think we'd actually be closer to Portland than Wizards - their big problem is/was that Wall can't play off the ball. With Lavine as backcourt partner, it would be a lot closer to Trailblazers without bad contracts (hoping both Beal and LaVine continue their development, it is not far fetched). We'd be in better position from team building perspective because have better players or talent at other positions as well - Porter is better than any forwards they have, and Carter is modern looking center able to influence both ends of the floor, and even though I like both Nurkic and Z. Collins, he has potential to be better than both imo.

Still staying on topic of fit, I don't think Lauri and Wendell are ideal front court fit long term, so we can get ahead of that before it affects their value.

Again, I am not ardent advocate of such move because building slowly in the end of the day gives us more contractual security with our youngsters (opposite to Beal potentially leaving in two years) and gives us more chances through the Draft to luck into an unexpected hit.
Of course, on the other hand, move like this would alleviate some of the risks with having a young, developing team too.

Ccwatercraft wrote:What teams are willing to pay the trade price, have 30 mil in matching salary (with players that Memphis actually wants back) AND desperately need a PG?

Utah. And if Memphis doesn't trade him at all, they'll still just draft Morant. I'll eat my shoe if Memphis trades out of #2.

Buying low like what the Nets did getting D’Angelo Russell?

Not even a few options like that out there that I can think of.

Draft Bol Bol if you're into a gamble on superstar upside.
I myself think that he's essentially a flawed player.