2020 NBA Draft Thread: Bulls pick 4th: PT 3

[Chi town]

AK is going to go with the highest ceiling player because he believes in his player development guys. I don’t think he cares about fit at all.

The highest ceiling players in this draft based on AKs two way, shooting, passing, and IQ rivals seems to me to be...

Deni
Hayes
Hali
Terry
Kira

[cjbulls]

I hope so. I would prefer another bite at the apple with lavine, lauri, or carter as the bait. If its lavine, though, it better be for another top 4 pick plus something. For lauri or Wendell, it better be for another top 10 pick.

I would not trade Lavine for “a pick” in this draft. There is not one single prospect that safely projects to be better and Lavine’s scoring is badly needed.

I would absolutely trade LaVine, but in this particular draft the package would need to be pretty good if it’s just based on picks.

To me the move is to look to trade Lauri for a pick in the 7-11 range.

I did say a top 4 pick plus something. But to me, if we are even considering a package for Lavine, its because we either don’t think his ceiling is that of a top option on a winning team, or that we feel whatever he will become will be not worth the amount of cap it will take to keep him past this current contract. To me, I fall in that category. So I would rather take another bite at the apple as I said. Might turn out to be a bad move, but in the end, his salary slot can be filled with a free agent or future trade anyway which would mitigate it if a mistake.

I do prefer trading Lauri for a 7-11 pick as well but I really have no feel if that is even a remote possibility.

The other side of the coin is the problem: teams aren't trading #1 or #2 for LaVine.

And I say this as someone who wouldn't want to trade him for #1 or #2. LaVine is too much mystery on whether he's an empty stats guy. A GM isn't going to stick their neck out for him when they can just take Edwards instead.

[MrSparkle]

Edwards is one heavy and stocky dude. Looks like a football player. You wish LaMelo’s pass/handle skills were in that frame instead.

Meanwhile you wonder if you’re getting a “power guard,” which generally hasn’t worked besides Jimmy. Seeing him shoot in drills, he has good form but looks like a clank machine at the NBA level.

[MrSparkle]

I would not trade Lavine for “a pick” in this draft. There is not one single prospect that safely projects to be better and Lavine’s scoring is badly needed.

I would absolutely trade LaVine, but in this particular draft the package would need to be pretty good if it’s just based on picks.

To me the move is to look to trade Lauri for a pick in the 7-11 range.

I did say a top 4 pick plus something. But to me, if we are even considering a package for Lavine, its because we either don’t think his ceiling is that of a top option on a winning team, or that we feel whatever he will become will be not worth the amount of cap it will take to keep him past this current contract. To me, I fall in that category. So I would rather take another bite at the apple as I said. Might turn out to be a bad move, but in the end, his salary slot can be filled with a free agent or future trade anyway which would mitigate it if a mistake.

I do prefer trading Lauri for a 7-11 pick as well but I really have no feel if that is even a remote possibility.

The other side of the coin is the problem: teams aren't trading #1 or #2 for LaVine.

And I say this as someone who wouldn't want to trade him for #1 or #2. LaVine is too much mystery on whether he's an empty stats guy. A GM isn't going to stick their neck out for him when they can just take Edwards instead.

I don’t know about that. At worst, you know that Zach is gonna play his ass off (nearing contract year) and at best, he might give you 25 ppg again. I will bet my savings account that ZERO of the top-4 prospects average 25 ppg anytime in the next 2-3 years, if ever, even if they’re on a losing team.

Edwards has the best potential for high scorer, but he’s going to need development and time.

I wouldn’t expect it, but I’m pretty sure that MIN or CHA would trade #1 or #3 for Zach. No for GS; their payroll is full and Zach doesn’t address any needs.

I lean towards not trading Zach for another pick in this bizarro draft. But in theory, a Hayes/Wiseman or Deni/Edwards pairing could be cool. Or if we want to puke when they’re on defense and lose a lot, LaMelo and Obi would make a few highlight reels.

[cjbulls]

I did say a top 4 pick plus something. But to me, if we are even considering a package for Lavine, its because we either don’t think his ceiling is that of a top option on a winning team, or that we feel whatever he will become will be not worth the amount of cap it will take to keep him past this current contract. To me, I fall in that category. So I would rather take another bite at the apple as I said. Might turn out to be a bad move, but in the end, his salary slot can be filled with a free agent or future trade anyway which would mitigate it if a mistake.

I do prefer trading Lauri for a 7-11 pick as well but I really have no feel if that is even a remote possibility.

The other side of the coin is the problem: teams aren't trading #1 or #2 for LaVine.

And I say this as someone who wouldn't want to trade him for #1 or #2. LaVine is too much mystery on whether he's an empty stats guy. A GM isn't going to stick their neck out for him when they can just take Edwards instead.

I don’t know about that. At worst, you know that Zach is gonna play his ass off (nearing contract year) and at best, he might give you 25 ppg again. I will bet my savings account that ZERO of the top-4 prospects average 25 ppg anytime in the next 2-3 years, if ever, even if they’re on a losing team.

Edwards has the best potential for high scorer, but he’s going to need development and time.

I wouldn’t expect it, but I’m pretty sure that MIN or CHA would trade #1 or #3 for Zach. No for GS; their payroll is full and Zach doesn’t address any needs.

I lean towards not trading Zach for another pick in this bizarro draft. But in theory, a Hayes/Wiseman or Deni/Edwards pairing could be cool. Or if we want to puke when they’re on defense and lose a lot, LaMelo and Obi would make a few highlight reels.

I want you to go to their board and present those options. No one will agree. Even that wacky Minnesota person on here who wanted LaVine would only do it if we included #4.

Zach is a risk. Why take a risk on a 20$ million dollar player with two years of control when you can have an $8 million dollar player with ostensibly 8 years of control.

If you take Zach and Edwards blows up, you’re fired. If Zach proves to be empty stats, you’re fired. Even if Zach lives up to his current levels, you aren’t winning with that team in Minny and you’ll have max him. Which in Minny means 3 max players and you’re a luxury tax team. So why do it?

Charlotte sees he can’t move the needle for Chicago, so why are they jumping into that?

[MrFortune3]

I agree that prospects have improved. I just think that AK wants another 1st in addition to #4 and doesn’t plan on trading down.

Just your hopes or anything to base them on?

Just a feeling I get from seeing AK in interviews. I think he wants to strike and add multiple guys in this draft.

[dougthonus]

Just a feeling I get from seeing AK in interviews. I think he wants to strike and add multiple guys in this draft.

Any particular interview you or things he said that you remember that made you think that? (okay if you don't have specifics, just would be interested to watch if you did).

[MrSparkle]

The other side of the coin is the problem: teams aren't trading #1 or #2 for LaVine.

And I say this as someone who wouldn't want to trade him for #1 or #2. LaVine is too much mystery on whether he's an empty stats guy. A GM isn't going to stick their neck out for him when they can just take Edwards instead.

I don’t know about that. At worst, you know that Zach is gonna play his ass off (nearing contract year) and at best, he might give you 25 ppg again. I will bet my savings account that ZERO of the top-4 prospects average 25 ppg anytime in the next 2-3 years, if ever, even if they’re on a losing team.

Edwards has the best potential for high scorer, but he’s going to need development and time.

I wouldn’t expect it, but I’m pretty sure that MIN or CHA would trade #1 or #3 for Zach. No for GS; their payroll is full and Zach doesn’t address any needs.

I lean towards not trading Zach for another pick in this bizarro draft. But in theory, a Hayes/Wiseman or Deni/Edwards pairing could be cool. Or if we want to puke when they’re on defense and lose a lot, LaMelo and Obi would make a few highlight reels.

I want you to go to their board and present those options. No one will agree. Even that wacky Minnesota person on here who wanted LaVine would only do it if we included #4.

Zach is a risk. Why take a risk on a 20$ million dollar player with two years of control when you can have an $8 million dollar player with ostensibly 8 years of control.

If you take Zach and Edwards blows up, you’re fired. If Zach proves to be empty stats, you’re fired. Even if Zach lives up to his current levels, you aren’t winning with that team in Minny and you’ll have max him. Which in Minny means 3 max players and you’re a luxury tax team. So why do it?

Charlotte sees he can’t move the needle for Chicago, so why are they jumping into that?

I get it. The finances are the real hang-up; do you want to max Zach or potentially get a bargain rookie salary player.

Minnesota does risk adding another Culver to their pot of young broken talent to develop, and even if the trade looked terrible in hindsight with Jimmy leaving, the 1y playoff rental was still better IMO than dealing with the development of Dunn, Lauri and Zach's ACL/RFA dilemma.

Long-story short, adding top-5 pick FRPs to your roster just for the hell of it has kept Minnesota in the basement for a long time. If they're serious and committed to Zach, they should do it if they're not comfortable drafting LaMelo, Wiseman or Edwards. Cause you get a certain guarantee that these guys, while they might be empty calorie defensive duds, at least they have camaraderie, similar ages and all 3 are in the same place where they want to do what it takes to start winning games.

Whether they can do better than JJ/#1 for Zach is a fair question.

I'm struggling to imagine the best offer for #1. I don't think it's gonna be very strong. I suppose a surprise team like SAS can put together an appealing offer, assuming they want to trigger a full rebuild (send out Murray, DeRozan or White with their #11). But I'd imagine Pop and Buford have more interest in the 4-6 guys like Hayes, Deni, Hali, Okoro than the top-3. (Popovich and LaMelo sounds hilarious; Wiseman or Edwards panning out in the Spurs culture does sound great though). But if you ask me, I'd rather have LaVine than DeRozan and #11 (or White or Murray)- and I'm not high on LaVine!

Otherwise, I'm not seeing a team in the top-9 for whom a pick swap would make sense. Wizards don't even consider trading Beal for one of these top-3 picks. Cavs, Pistons, Knicks, Hawks might be interested, but what do they have to trade for James Johnson and that #1? They're strong assets are too good to give up in a swap in a bad draft (Collins, Barrett, etc.), and their other assets are way too expensive or broken to have any positive value in a trade up (Love, Drummond, Griffin, etc.). Do Knox, Reddish or Garland do anything for MIN?

I don't really see who's paying a good price for MIN's #1 pick. The real question is which #1 pick will be better: this year's or 2014's (Wiggins).

[MrSparkle]

Just a feeling I get from seeing AK in interviews. I think he wants to strike and add multiple guys in this draft.

Any particular interview you or things he said that you remember that made you think that? (okay if you don't have specifics, just would be interested to watch if you did).

I'll just double this total speculation and say that it is fairly normal for a new FO to get busy in a draft as opposed to tooling around veteran players. It gives a clean slate, but it also secures their job and lowers expectations quite drastically. Psychologically, if Zach and Otto are on this squad next season, we'd expect that 8-9 seed goal with Donovan coaching.

If Zach or Otto are traded out for younger pieces, it gives you a 2+ year cushion with the rookies before talking playoffs. And if the team DOES happen to make the playoffs after a Zach/Otto dump, then Artunas is hailed a basketball god... which would be awfully reminiscent of Paxson's GM run between 04-07.

Frankly getting an 8-seed is easier done than said in the East; you just need to arm your roster with enough veterans as opposed to banking on a load of rookie salary players. And the strategy would be to let all the mediocre RFAs walk (Valentine, Dunn), cut Felicio, shuffle out some of the other youth for more mature mid-tier veterans (Gafford, Hutch, Shaq out), and you fix the build by having a mature locker-room with higher-ceiling young talent.

Now for all the talk of Paxson's young core in 04/05, everyone forgets that the team took a big step back when Antonio Davis, Othella, Piatkowski retired or moved on.. and Noc was an experienced FIBA champ rookie... and Curry/Chandler took big steps in their contract years and 4th year of development. Hell, 19yo Deng missed half the season. Kirk and Duhon were 4y college players. That was an 'old' team in many ways.

The worst thing about this present roster is that even IF Donovan happened to make +500 winners out of this group... Who is looking forward to the Otto, Zach, Lauri extensions? IMO it'd be a fool's gold extension-dilemma waiting to happen.

If Otto and Lauri have rebound seasons and finish strong with a decent 1st round showing, are they getting paid any less than $20m each? Is Zach getting any less than $30m? And then you have to balance the rest of the cap with contract-year inflated efforts and 10-man roster magic from Donovan. I just don't like the core; it's not a championship core at all. So I'm having trouble imagining regrets if AK did break it up now, as opposed to later.

Again, I get that the draft is 'bad', but in a field of 60+ players, it's hard to believe that Artunas can't find 2, let alone 1 player he'd like to build around. So the prospect of dealing with all these contract extensions the next 2-3 summers, I see the theoretical argument for going for a second lotto pick in this draft. I also think there are some complimentary rookie pairings if you went that route:

Deni & Edwards - Lower-ceiling, mature, pass-first Euro and the athletic specimen with character issues.

Hayes & Wiseman - 7ft who can catch any pass, a high-IQ point who can throw any pass.

Seems interesting on paper. If I did this, like I said, I'd make sure the average age of the roster is 26+. Keep it at Coby, WCJ, #1, #4 and replace the rest of the youngs with guys like Plumlee, Ibaka, Millsap, Gay, Mills, etc.

[dougthonus]

Just a feeling I get from seeing AK in interviews. I think he wants to strike and add multiple guys in this draft.

Any particular interview you or things he said that you remember that made you think that? (okay if you don't have specifics, just would be interested to watch if you did).

I'll just double this total speculation and say that it is fairly normal for a new FO to get busy in a draft as opposed to tooling around veteran players. It gives a clean slate, but it also secures their job and lowers expectations quite drastically. Psychologically, if Zach and Otto are on this squad next season, we'd expect that 8-9 seed goal with Donovan coaching.

If Zach or Otto are traded out for younger pieces, it gives you a 2+ year cushion with the rookies before talking playoffs. And if the team DOES happen to make the playoffs after a Zach/Otto dump, then Artunas is hailed a basketball god... which would be awfully reminiscent of Paxson's GM run between 04-07.

Frankly getting an 8-seed is easier done than said in the East; you just need to arm your roster with enough veterans as opposed to banking on a load of rookie salary players. And the strategy would be to let all the mediocre RFAs walk (Valentine, Dunn), cut Felicio, shuffle out some of the other youth for more mature mid-tier veterans (Gafford, Hutch, Shaq out), and you fix the build by having a mature locker-room with higher-ceiling young talent.

Now for all the talk of Paxson's young core in 04/05, everyone forgets that the team took a big step back when Antonio Davis, Othella, Piatkowski retired or moved on.. and Noc was an experienced FIBA champ rookie... and Curry/Chandler took big steps in their contract years and 4th year of development. Hell, 19yo Deng missed half the season. Kirk and Duhon were 4y college players. That was an 'old' team in many ways.

The worst thing about this present roster is that even IF Donovan happened to make +500 winners out of this group... Who is looking forward to the Otto, Zach, Lauri extensions? IMO it'd be a fool's gold extension-dilemma waiting to happen.

If Otto and Lauri have rebound seasons and finish strong with a decent 1st round showing, are they getting paid any less than $20m each? Is Zach getting any less than $30m? And then you have to balance the rest of the cap with contract-year inflated efforts and 10-man roster magic from Donovan. I just don't like the core; it's not a championship core at all. So I'm having trouble imagining regrets if AK did break it up now, as opposed to later.

Again, I get that the draft is 'bad', but in a field of 60+ players, it's hard to believe that Artunas can't find 2, let alone 1 player he'd like to build around. So the prospect of dealing with all these contract extensions the next 2-3 summers, I see the theoretical argument for going for a second lotto pick in this draft. I also think there are some complimentary rookie pairings if you went that route:

Deni & Edwards - Lower-ceiling, mature, pass-first Euro and the athletic specimen with character issues.

Hayes & Wiseman - 7ft who can catch any pass, a high-IQ point who can throw any pass.

Seems interesting on paper. If I did this, like I said, I'd make sure the average age of the roster is 26+. Keep it at Coby, WCJ, #1, #4 and replace the rest of the youngs with guys like Plumlee, Ibaka, Millsap, Gay, Mills, etc.

Agree with most of your take, I have been advocating a deep rebuild:
Trade Lauri for the best draft capital you can - no need to have him on an expensive extension or have him walk for nothing.

Offer Zach a max extension (3/75, which is no where near the max salary, just hte max we can offer in an extension) and trade him for the most draft capital we can get if he declines. If he accepts you have him on a reasonable deal for 5 years. No need to pay him 30m+ in 2 years or have him walk for nothing.

Trade Otto if he's ever worth a 1st at any point - Not a guy you want long term, but probably has no value. Maybe at the deadline if he's playing well.

Use cap room next year to attempt to buy draft picks - Possibly will be some for sale from poor teams based on the pandemic, if not you're kind of hosed.

Evaluate Coby / Carter / Gafford this year to see what role the play in a rebuild. Everyone else not mentioned is available for trade (so are Coby / Carter for a good price though) but I just see no one else as having any value whatsoever.

[cjbulls]

I continue to sour on drafting Deni. His ceiling seems like a 3rd/4th starter combo forward. So what, Otto Porter (better playmaking, worse shooting)? Doesn’t seem like a good use of the 4th pick.

[ZOMG]

I just don't like the core; it's not a championship core at all.

Championship core?? Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves?

How about establishing this team as a playoff team first. Yes, that will take years. But as a consequece, the "playoff" core could have a much easier time to lure the reinforcements it needs to contend for a championship.

Trying to build a "championship core" out of what we have right now (including lateral trades and players turned into draft picks) is a fool's errand. There is absolutely no way it will work.

[MrSparkle]

I just don't like the core; it's not a championship core at all.

Championship core?? Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves?

How about establishing this team as a playoff team first. Yes, that will take years. But as a consequece, the "playoff" core could have a much easier time to lure the reinforcements it needs to contend for a championship.

Trying to build a "champiohip core" out of what we have right now (including lateral trades and players turned into draft picks) is a fool's errand. There is absolutely no way it will work.

Well, when you have the dilemma of resigning 3 high-salary lottery guys hitting their prime to above market value, pretty much all at the same time (bad forward-cap planning by GarPax btw), you're getting into long-term trouble if none of them are established all-stars.

"Championship core" is a loose phrase. I wouldn't get ahead of myself; Wiggins/KAT were not a championship core, even with a star in Jimmy. Lowry/DeRozan/Valanciunas (kind of) were; the guys also had positive enough value to be swapped for the final pieces. A lot has to do with timing of salaries, roster construction, etc.

Getting a chip is a near impossibility without top-3 player. So when you look at Jokic/Murray/MPJ, honestly, I'd sooner bet on them never winning a championship, but atleast you can hold out for a 00-10 Mavs or 15-20 Raptors style long-shot hope where MAYBE they sneak one in with luck and circumstance. So I see the value in paying money to the two top guys and riding the flow.

Rest assured: LaVine, Lauri nor Otto will ever be in an MVP race (first and foremost), and secondly, not one of these guys will ever be more than a 3rd-5th option on a contender if they end up in the fortunate role of landing on a superstar team. This pairing reminds me more of the T-Wolves or Magic rather than the Raptors, Grizzlies, Hawks, where "win or lose", you can tell spot a difference in the 2-4 player cores.

So really, it has everything to do with contracts, and the fact that they all pretty much expire in the same time-frame, making it incredibly difficult to decide what to do other than 'trade high.' And the only 'high' is Zach right now.

To boil it down to a simple question: are Lauri, Zach or Otto all tradeable contracts if they get paid market value? I don't know what that value will be, but let's hypothetically say:

27yo Zach: Max
25yo Lauri: $15-20m per year
28yo Otto: $20-25m per year

Seeing as they have a combined zero all-star appearances and injury histories, I'd be nervous paying any of these amounts.

[jump]

Is this trade crazy?
BULLS trade
Lauri
Otto
#4
BULLS get
#2 (Wiseman)
#8 (Halliburton)
Wiggins

WARRIORS trade
#2
Wiggins
WARRIORS get
Lauri
Otto
Cap relief next year
#27
Dallas FRP 2021

NEW YORK trades
#8
#27
Dallas FRP 2021
NEW YORK gets
#4

If that's not enough for the Ws, what more might it take?

[ImSlower]

Agree with most of your take, I have been advocating a deep rebuild:
Trade Lauri for the best draft capital you can - no need to have him on an expensive extension or have him walk for nothing.

Offer Zach a max extension (3/75, which is no where near the max salary, just hte max we can offer in an extension) and trade him for the most draft capital we can get if he declines. If he accepts you have him on a reasonable deal for 5 years. No need to pay him 30m+ in 2 years or have him walk for nothing.

Trade Otto if he's ever worth a 1st at any point - Not a guy you want long term, but probably has no value. Maybe at the deadline if he's playing well.

Use cap room next year to attempt to buy draft picks - Possibly will be some for sale from poor teams based on the pandemic, if not you're kind of hosed.

Evaluate Coby / Carter / Gafford this year to see what role the play in a rebuild. Everyone else not mentioned is available for trade (so are Coby / Carter for a good price though) but I just see no one else as having any value whatsoever.

I'm pretty much with you, Doug, on a relatively heavy retooling being the best plan when looking at our roster from a newcomer's perspective. What resonates with me was the snippet that Donovan was won over by the KarnEvers (forgive me) plan. I find it doubtful that Donovan would sign on with this team instead of better-off ones - unless there was some conversation in that room that significantly deviates from "Here's our 5 guys and our guy at #4. Wanna sign?"

I can squint and see that beginning - showcasing six guys for this next year, I guess, and then a major change come the next off-season. I don't think Donovan is as likely to be interested in a One More Year Of plan, though. I think it's more likely they agreed on, as Doug infers, two of our four young guys as keepers, and a plan for either a current NBA player or heavy drafting to forge the team they envision.

Seriously, damnit, can we have some real rumors already? I feel like this forum has been coasting on 100% speculation for weeks! At some point somebody's blackberry's gonna blow up with something juicy, surely. Where you at Shams, do it for your old friends.

[Grodoboldo]

Is this trade crazy?
BULLS trade
Lauri
Otto
#4
BULLS get
#2 (Wiseman)
#8 (Halliburton)
Wiggins

WARRIORS trade
#2
Wiggins
WARRIORS get
Lauri
Otto
Cap relief next year
#27
Dallas FRP 2021

NEW YORK trades
#8
#27
Dallas FRP 2021
NEW YORK gets
#4

If that's not enough for the Ws, what more might it take?

This is clever! I think Chi and GSW would pull the trigger, but NY says no.

[MrFortune3]

Just a feeling I get from seeing AK in interviews. I think he wants to strike and add multiple guys in this draft.

Any particular interview you or things he said that you remember that made you think that? (okay if you don't have specifics, just would be interested to watch if you did).

The initial one he did after moving up to #4 when he talked about moving up shortening the draft board due to where they moved to.

Then in all of the subsequent ones he’s essentially talked about the talent level of this draft and finding the right talents to develop.

[jStuNNa]

Is this trade crazy?
BULLS trade
Lauri
Otto
#4
BULLS get
#2 (Wiseman)
#8 (Halliburton)
Wiggins

WARRIORS trade
#2
Wiggins
WARRIORS get
Lauri
Otto
Cap relief next year
#27
Dallas FRP 2021

NEW YORK trades
#8
#27
Dallas FRP 2021
NEW YORK gets
#4

If that's not enough for the Ws, what more might it take?

That's bad for the Knicks. Giving up three first around picks to move up from #8 to #4 in an uncertain draft? No way would they make that deal.

[R3AL1TY]

I see why Lamelo is rumored to be performing bad in interviews and workouts. His own dad and brothers have called him out for being lazy, and not taking preparations serious before. Even his workout videos have him looking very amateurish as if he's not used to it, yet he's supposed to be an athlete. Then when you look at some of the interviews he's done, he gives very short, vague answers that doesn't convince you of wanting him to be your leader or franchise player. But I'm somewhat open minded to him being drafted. Despite his poor 3 pt shooting, he shoots it better as a set shot rather than off the bounce. Also, his layup package, floaters, and change of speeds looks more advanced than the other PGs in the lottery. His defense is underwhelmed, but he has a knack for getting steals.

[VolumePoster]

I see why Lamelo is rumored to be performing bad in interviews and workouts. His own dad and brothers have called him out for being lazy, and not taking preparations serious before. Even his workout videos have him looking very amateurish as if he's not used to it, yet he's supposed to be an athlete. Then when you look at some of the interviews he's done, he gives very short, vague answers that doesn't convince you of wanting him to be your leader or franchise player. But I'm somewhat open minded to him being drafted. Despite his poor 3 pt shooting, he shoots it better as a set shot rather than off the bounce. Also, his layup package, floaters, and change of speeds looks more advanced than the other PGs in the lottery. His defense is underwhelmed, but he has a knack for getting steals.

He also has an oulier trait which is coincident with one of our needs. The concerns you bring up are completely legitimate. But 4 might be the right place to gamble.