TheStig wrote: dice wrote:
I'm sure he's including the 2nd rounders we had to include to dump one last contract to Orlando. This was to make room and allow for the anointed one to come to us.
well, that's very disingenuous. the secondary trade you're referring to the bulls gave up #51 and #47, cleared a little cap space (itself a benefit) and also got a former late 2nd rounder who never ended up coming to play in the nba. the players taken w/ the #51 and #53 picks the bulls gave up never played in the nba either. the #47 turned into jake layman
so that's harris, nurkic and 3 mid-to-late 2nd rounders (5 picks in total) for mcdermott, a former 2nd round pick who almost certainly wasn't coming over, and a little cap space. i never liked the trade, and it certainly didn't work out for the bulls, but mcdermott has finally become an nba caliber player in indy, while harris for some reason has regressed to trash the last couple of seasons, making the trade not look as awful as it had a couple of years ago. regardless, it never had anything to do with the late draft picks
if there's a good point to make there shouldn't be any need to distort the truth
It's not a distortion. I didn't call them high lotto picks. But the Bulls were forced to take on someone when they were planning on using that cap space and sent out picks to dump him. Those are all a result of the mcdermott deal.
first of all, it was 5 picks, not 6. and context matters. you clearly brought it up to make the trade sound even worse than it was. picks in the mid-to-late 2nd round rarely pan out. here are the relative pick values according to the results of a study:
53 87#11 for all those picks is the equivalent of #11 for #14 and #17
. bad, but hardly as sensationalist as "we traded 5 picks for mcdermott." the number of picks is completely irrelevant. in fact, the bulls could have traded FIFTEEN future 2nd round picks protected for 31-45 and it would be good value for the #11 pick. but if you broke the news to someone by saying "the bulls traded 15 picks for doug mcdermott" you'd get a shocked reaction
you can judge the trade on the results, which were bad, or you can judge the trade on the relative pick value, which was bad, but you can't logically COMBINE the two into one argument