RealGM

TheJordanRule wrote:

CobyWhite0 wrote:

TheJordanRule wrote:
We'd have to do better than #4 to get a shot at Cade. He's the consensus #1 pick. He's not perfect, but he IS a 6 ft 8 monster at PG. Lucking into Cade would represent a dramatic shift in our fortunes. We would actually have a future if it happens.

Where did he say, infer, or imply that we could get Cade at #4??

He gave a hypothetical that we get a top-4 pick, and proceeded to list every player in the consensus top-4, in the consensus order in which they are expected to be drafted.

To be clear, Dan Z NEVER suggested we could get Cade at #4. And although he DIDN'T, the casual understatement of, "Let's say we get Cade, and he has a good rookie season..." rubbed me the wrong way. Cade is a franchise changing talent. The other guys don't really come close right now. It's like saying, "Let's say your grandfather gives you 10 million dollars. Well, then you probably won't have to worry about your finances for the next month" Okay, that's true, but WHAT?! Cade is an absolute beast. Whereas giving away picks #2-4 + Pat to grab Ben Simmons would be a pipedream of the highest order, given what a crapshoot the draft is, what little Pat has accomplished, and how incredibly valuable Simmons is to not just the Sixers but around the league. But we're turning that down because... ???

I agree that Cade is a great prospect, but you make is sound as though he'll be an all-star from day 1. The last time a number 1 overall pick was an all-star in his rookie year was Blake Griffin (2011) and he missed the first year of his career due to injury.

Before that it was Yao Ming in 2003. Its rare.

I don't think we can get Cade at #4 and was going off of Pipfan suggesting that we'd need a pick in the top four to get Simmons (he didn't say a specific pick). I wouldn't trade Cade or Suggs or Mobley or Green plus Williams for Simmons.

I'll be very happy with keeping a top 4 pick+Williams over trading both for Simmons.

Lonzo Ball gives shoutout to Bulls guard Zach LaVine on Instagram

https://sports.yahoo.com/watch-lonzo-ball-gives-shoutout-005541632.html

Dan Z wrote:

TheJordanRule wrote:

CobyWhite0 wrote:
Where did he say, infer, or imply that we could get Cade at #4??

He gave a hypothetical that we get a top-4 pick, and proceeded to list every player in the consensus top-4, in the consensus order in which they are expected to be drafted.

To be clear, Dan Z NEVER suggested we could get Cade at #4. And although he DIDN'T, the casual understatement of, "Let's say we get Cade, and he has a good rookie season..." rubbed me the wrong way. Cade is a franchise changing talent. The other guys don't really come close right now. It's like saying, "Let's say your grandfather gives you 10 million dollars. Well, then you probably won't have to worry about your finances for the next month" Okay, that's true, but WHAT?! Cade is an absolute beast. Whereas giving away picks #2-4 + Pat to grab Ben Simmons would be a pipedream of the highest order, given what a crapshoot the draft is, what little Pat has accomplished, and how incredibly valuable Simmons is to not just the Sixers but around the league. But we're turning that down because... ???

I agree that Cade is a great prospect, but you make is sound as though he'll be an all-star from day 1. The last time a number 1 overall pick was an all-star in his rookie year was Blake Griffin (2011) and he missed the first year of his career due to injury.

Before that it was Yao Ming in 2003. Its rare.

I don't think we can get Cade at #4 and was going off of Pipfan suggesting that we'd need a pick in the top four to get Simmons (he didn't say a specific pick). I wouldn't trade Cade or Suggs or Mobley or Green plus Williams for Simmons.

It's highly likely that at least one, if not two, of Suggs / Mobley / Green are going to bust. It's also highly likely that all three of those guys never reach Simmons' level of play. The draft is typically one big mirage. The next KG and Shaq combo turn into Chandler and Curry. The next Charles Barkley turns out to be Marcus Fizer. Even the good draft picks typically never become decade long franchise players (i.e., Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, Loul Deng, Tyrus Thomas, Noah, etc.). It's better to trade a combination of these guys for literal franchise talents before the stink of who they really are starts pouring on strong.

EDIT:
Tbh, I could care less about the arbitrary all-star classification. Out of the last 10 years, FIVE of the last 10 #1 draft picks had great rookie seasons.

2010 - At age 20, John Wall averaged 16.4 ppg, 8.3 apg, 4.6 rpg and 1.8 spg.
2011 - At age 19, Kyrie Irving averaged 18.5 ppg, 5.4 apg, 3.7 rpg and 1.1 spg.
2012 - At age 19, Anthony Davis averaged 13.5 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 1.2 spg and 1.8 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2015 - At age 20, Karl Anthony Towns averaged 18.3 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.0 apg, and 1.7 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2018 - At age 20, DeAndre Ayton averaged 16.3 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 0.9 spg, 0.9 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.

More importantly, SEVEN of the last 10 #1 draft picks became great players. The two players who haven't been mentioned yet are Zion Williamson (2019) and Ben Simmons (2017), whose rookie seasons were either skipped due to injury or greatly hampered by injury, but they've become dominant impactful game changing franchise level talents. In a draft with any depth, the #1 consensus has traditionally had a 70 % chance or higher to reach elite NBA greatness. Cade is the consensus and quite literally projects to be part of this group.

TheJordanRule wrote:

Dan Z wrote:

TheJordanRule wrote:
To be clear, Dan Z NEVER suggested we could get Cade at #4. And although he DIDN'T, the casual understatement of, "Let's say we get Cade, and he has a good rookie season..." rubbed me the wrong way. Cade is a franchise changing talent. The other guys don't really come close right now. It's like saying, "Let's say your grandfather gives you 10 million dollars. Well, then you probably won't have to worry about your finances for the next month" Okay, that's true, but WHAT?! Cade is an absolute beast. Whereas giving away picks #2-4 + Pat to grab Ben Simmons would be a pipedream of the highest order, given what a crapshoot the draft is, what little Pat has accomplished, and how incredibly valuable Simmons is to not just the Sixers but around the league. But we're turning that down because... ???

I agree that Cade is a great prospect, but you make is sound as though he'll be an all-star from day 1. The last time a number 1 overall pick was an all-star in his rookie year was Blake Griffin (2011) and he missed the first year of his career due to injury.

Before that it was Yao Ming in 2003. Its rare.

I don't think we can get Cade at #4 and was going off of Pipfan suggesting that we'd need a pick in the top four to get Simmons (he didn't say a specific pick). I wouldn't trade Cade or Suggs or Mobley or Green plus Williams for Simmons.

It's highly likely that at least one, if not two, of Suggs / Mobley / Green are going to bust. It's also highly likely that all three of those guys never reach Simmons' level of play. The draft is typically one big mirage. The next KG and Shaq combo turn into Chandler and Curry. The next Charles Barkley turns out to be Marcus Fizer. Even the good draft picks typically never become decade long franchise players (i.e., Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, Loul Deng, Tyrus Thomas, Noah, etc.). It's better to trade a combination of these guys for literal franchise talents before the stink of who they really are starts pouring on strong.

EDIT:
Tbh, I could care less about the arbitrary all-star classification. Out of the last 10 years, FIVE of the last 10 #1 draft picks had great rookie seasons.

2010 - At age 20, John Wall averaged 16.4 ppg, 8.3 apg, 4.6 rpg and 1.8 spg.
2011 - At age 19, Kyrie Irving averaged 18.5 ppg, 5.4 apg, 3.7 rpg and 1.1 spg.
2012 - At age 19, Anthony Davis averaged 13.5 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 1.2 spg and 1.8 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2015 - At age 20, Karl Anthony Towns averaged 18.3 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.0 apg, and 1.7 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2018 - At age 20, DeAndre Ayton averaged 16.3 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 0.9 spg, 0.9 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.

More importantly, SEVEN of the last 10 #1 draft picks became great players. The two players who haven't been mentioned yet are Zion Williamson (2019) and Ben Simmons (2017), whose rookie seasons were either skipped due to injury or greatly hampered by injury, but they've become dominant impactful game changing franchise level talents. In a draft with any depth, the #1 consensus has traditionally had a 70 % chance or higher to reach elite NBA greatness. Cade is the consensus and quite literally projects to be part of this group.

Cade's a great prospect, but your previous post made it sound like he'll be awesome from day one. How many of those #1 picks helped their team win games? It takes time, which is why I added "Let's say he has a good rookie season".

Look at Anthony Edwards this year. He started off slow and picked it up as the season went on, but the Timberwolves were still a bad team overall.

Again Cade's a great prospect (I feel like I need to say that twice). I also think Suggs, Mobley and Green are good too and would rather take the chance that one of them, plus Williams, will be better than Simmons. We'd also get cost control (rookie deal) with said rookie and that gives the Bulls roster flexibility.

Dan Z wrote:

TheJordanRule wrote:

Dan Z wrote:
I agree that Cade is a great prospect, but you make is sound as though he'll be an all-star from day 1. The last time a number 1 overall pick was an all-star in his rookie year was Blake Griffin (2011) and he missed the first year of his career due to injury.

Before that it was Yao Ming in 2003. Its rare.

I don't think we can get Cade at #4 and was going off of Pipfan suggesting that we'd need a pick in the top four to get Simmons (he didn't say a specific pick). I wouldn't trade Cade or Suggs or Mobley or Green plus Williams for Simmons.

It's highly likely that at least one, if not two, of Suggs / Mobley / Green are going to bust. It's also highly likely that all three of those guys never reach Simmons' level of play. The draft is typically one big mirage. The next KG and Shaq combo turn into Chandler and Curry. The next Charles Barkley turns out to be Marcus Fizer. Even the good draft picks typically never become decade long franchise players (i.e., Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, Loul Deng, Tyrus Thomas, Noah, etc.). It's better to trade a combination of these guys for literal franchise talents before the stink of who they really are starts pouring on strong.

EDIT:
Tbh, I could care less about the arbitrary all-star classification. Out of the last 10 years, FIVE of the last 10 #1 draft picks had great rookie seasons.

2010 - At age 20, John Wall averaged 16.4 ppg, 8.3 apg, 4.6 rpg and 1.8 spg.
2011 - At age 19, Kyrie Irving averaged 18.5 ppg, 5.4 apg, 3.7 rpg and 1.1 spg.
2012 - At age 19, Anthony Davis averaged 13.5 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 1.2 spg and 1.8 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2015 - At age 20, Karl Anthony Towns averaged 18.3 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.0 apg, and 1.7 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2018 - At age 20, DeAndre Ayton averaged 16.3 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 0.9 spg, 0.9 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.

More importantly, SEVEN of the last 10 #1 draft picks became great players. The two players who haven't been mentioned yet are Zion Williamson (2019) and Ben Simmons (2017), whose rookie seasons were either skipped due to injury or greatly hampered by injury, but they've become dominant impactful game changing franchise level talents. In a draft with any depth, the #1 consensus has traditionally had a 70 % chance or higher to reach elite NBA greatness. Cade is the consensus and quite literally projects to be part of this group.

Cade's a great prospect, but your previous post made it sound like he'll be awesome from day one. How many of those #1 picks helped their team win games? It takes time, which is why I added "Let's say he has a good rookie season".

Look at Anthony Edwards this year. He started off slow and picked it up as the season went on, but the Timberwolves were still a bad team overall.

Again Cade's a great prospect (I feel like I need to say that twice). I also think Suggs, Mobley and Green are good too and would rather take the chance that one of them, plus Williams, will be better than Simmons. We'd also get cost control (rookie deal) with said rookie and that gives the Bulls roster flexibility.

Dan, I probably came off as too high on Cade's ability to make an impact on Day 1 as if he's gonna be a superstar from the jump. He's not. My hype on Cade actually has nothing to do with that. It's what Cade represents: the chance for us to eat our cake and have it, too... to build with Zach and Vuce to win now... AND build with Cade to win later on top of that. To be clear, I would expect Cade to be our third wheel from Day 1, though... which fits what the majority of the ten most recent consensus #1 picks have been able to do in their early years... and which also just happens to be exactly what our team needs right now. While I'd tend to believe you when you say Suggs, Mobley, and Green are pretty good for rookies, we've had the "pretty good for a rookie" brigade in the past Dan. Look what it turned into: Tyrus Thomas, Eddie Curry, Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, Loul Deng, etc... hell Coby was pretty good for a rookie. If we're passing on Simmons, we need a dude who's on the right side of the odds to move the needle significantly in the long term. Cade's about the only dude who fits that bill. The rest are a much lower odds crapshoot.

TheJordanRule wrote:

Dan Z wrote:

TheJordanRule wrote:
To be clear, Dan Z NEVER suggested we could get Cade at #4. And although he DIDN'T, the casual understatement of, "Let's say we get Cade, and he has a good rookie season..." rubbed me the wrong way. Cade is a franchise changing talent. The other guys don't really come close right now. It's like saying, "Let's say your grandfather gives you 10 million dollars. Well, then you probably won't have to worry about your finances for the next month" Okay, that's true, but WHAT?! Cade is an absolute beast. Whereas giving away picks #2-4 + Pat to grab Ben Simmons would be a pipedream of the highest order, given what a crapshoot the draft is, what little Pat has accomplished, and how incredibly valuable Simmons is to not just the Sixers but around the league. But we're turning that down because... ???

I agree that Cade is a great prospect, but you make is sound as though he'll be an all-star from day 1. The last time a number 1 overall pick was an all-star in his rookie year was Blake Griffin (2011) and he missed the first year of his career due to injury.

Before that it was Yao Ming in 2003. Its rare.

I don't think we can get Cade at #4 and was going off of Pipfan suggesting that we'd need a pick in the top four to get Simmons (he didn't say a specific pick). I wouldn't trade Cade or Suggs or Mobley or Green plus Williams for Simmons.

It's highly likely that at least one, if not two, of Suggs / Mobley / Green are going to bust. It's also highly likely that all three of those guys never reach Simmons' level of play. The draft is typically one big mirage. The next KG and Shaq combo turn into Chandler and Curry. The next Charles Barkley turns out to be Marcus Fizer. Even the good draft picks typically never become decade long franchise players (i.e., Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, Loul Deng, Tyrus Thomas, Noah, etc.). It's better to trade a combination of these guys for literal franchise talents before the stink of who they really are starts pouring on strong.

EDIT:
Tbh, I could care less about the arbitrary all-star classification. Out of the last 10 years, FIVE of the last 10 #1 draft picks had great rookie seasons.

2010 - At age 20, John Wall averaged 16.4 ppg, 8.3 apg, 4.6 rpg and 1.8 spg.
2011 - At age 19, Kyrie Irving averaged 18.5 ppg, 5.4 apg, 3.7 rpg and 1.1 spg.
2012 - At age 19, Anthony Davis averaged 13.5 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 1.2 spg and 1.8 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2015 - At age 20, Karl Anthony Towns averaged 18.3 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.0 apg, and 1.7 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2018 - At age 20, DeAndre Ayton averaged 16.3 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 0.9 spg, 0.9 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.

More importantly, SEVEN of the last 10 #1 draft picks became great players. The two players who haven't been mentioned yet are Zion Williamson (2019) and Ben Simmons (2017), whose rookie seasons were either skipped due to injury or greatly hampered by injury, but they've become dominant impactful game changing franchise level talents. In a draft with any depth, the #1 consensus has traditionally had a 70 % chance or higher to reach elite NBA greatness. Cade is the consensus and quite literally projects to be part of this group.

It’s also possible that 1,2,or all 3 of them will end up being as good or even better than Simmons. We honestly don’t know. I don’t think Simmons looked any better then these guys in his 1 year at LSU. Yeah if the draft pick by itself lands Simmons go for it but it will take a lot more than that to get him. In addition you have to factor in Rookie Salary vs Simmons salary. Is it better to add Simmons while gutting the core and not having much financial flexibility to build around him or just add the pick with FA’s and or another trade. I think it is easier and better just to add the pick if the Bulls are lucky enough to get it.

TheJordanRule wrote:

Dan Z wrote:

TheJordanRule wrote:
It's highly likely that at least one, if not two, of Suggs / Mobley / Green are going to bust. It's also highly likely that all three of those guys never reach Simmons' level of play. The draft is typically one big mirage. The next KG and Shaq combo turn into Chandler and Curry. The next Charles Barkley turns out to be Marcus Fizer. Even the good draft picks typically never become decade long franchise players (i.e., Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, Loul Deng, Tyrus Thomas, Noah, etc.). It's better to trade a combination of these guys for literal franchise talents before the stink of who they really are starts pouring on strong.

EDIT:
Tbh, I could care less about the arbitrary all-star classification. Out of the last 10 years, FIVE of the last 10 #1 draft picks had great rookie seasons.

2010 - At age 20, John Wall averaged 16.4 ppg, 8.3 apg, 4.6 rpg and 1.8 spg.
2011 - At age 19, Kyrie Irving averaged 18.5 ppg, 5.4 apg, 3.7 rpg and 1.1 spg.
2012 - At age 19, Anthony Davis averaged 13.5 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 1.2 spg and 1.8 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2015 - At age 20, Karl Anthony Towns averaged 18.3 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.0 apg, and 1.7 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.
2018 - At age 20, DeAndre Ayton averaged 16.3 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 0.9 spg, 0.9 bpg along with massive scoring efficiency.

More importantly, SEVEN of the last 10 #1 draft picks became great players. The two players who haven't been mentioned yet are Zion Williamson (2019) and Ben Simmons (2017), whose rookie seasons were either skipped due to injury or greatly hampered by injury, but they've become dominant impactful game changing franchise level talents. In a draft with any depth, the #1 consensus has traditionally had a 70 % chance or higher to reach elite NBA greatness. Cade is the consensus and quite literally projects to be part of this group.

Cade's a great prospect, but your previous post made it sound like he'll be awesome from day one. How many of those #1 picks helped their team win games? It takes time, which is why I added "Let's say he has a good rookie season".

Look at Anthony Edwards this year. He started off slow and picked it up as the season went on, but the Timberwolves were still a bad team overall.

Again Cade's a great prospect (I feel like I need to say that twice). I also think Suggs, Mobley and Green are good too and would rather take the chance that one of them, plus Williams, will be better than Simmons. We'd also get cost control (rookie deal) with said rookie and that gives the Bulls roster flexibility.

Dan, I probably came off as too high on Cade's ability to make an impact on Day 1 as if he's gonna be a superstar from the jump. He's not. My hype on Cade actually has nothing to do with that. It's what Cade represents: the chance for us to eat our cake and have it, too... to build with Zach and Vuce to win now... AND build with Cade to win later on top of that. To be clear, I would expect Cade to be our third wheel from Day 1, though... which fits what the majority of the ten most recent consensus #1 picks have been able to do in their early years... and which also just happens to be exactly what our team needs right now. While I'd tend to believe you when you say Suggs, Mobley, and Green are pretty good for rookies, we've had the "pretty good for a rookie" brigade in the past Dan. Look what it turned into: Tyrus Thomas, Eddie Curry, Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, Loul Deng, etc... hell Coby was pretty good for a rookie. If we're passing on Simmons, we need a dude who's on the right side of the odds to move the needle significantly in the long term. Cade's about the only dude who fits that bill. The rest are a much lower odds crapshoot.

Tyrus Thoms and Eddy Curry were prospects who needed time (very raw). I think Suggs/Green/Mobley are all ahead of them at this point. Gordon and Hinrich were limited and Deng turned out to be good.

I guess I value Suggs/Green/Mobley more than you do and you value Simmons more than I do. Nothing wrong with that. I just see Simmons as a good player with flaws and would rather take a chance on one of the rookies (plus continuing with Williams).

Take this how ever you want.

Repeat 3-peat wrote:

Read on Twitter

Take this how ever you want.

Who?

Jeffster81 wrote:

Repeat 3-peat wrote:

Read on Twitter

Take this how ever you want.

Who?

I must know is that a legitimate who or a Dr Suess reference?

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk

Jeffster81 wrote:

Repeat 3-peat wrote:

Read on Twitter

Take this how ever you want.

Who?

A two way SF who's a super sub at age 20. That said, he's a high risk, high reward guy to chase because super subs frequently fail to become legit NBA starters. I'm down to bet on the kid, though.

TheJordanRule wrote:

Jeffster81 wrote:

Repeat 3-peat wrote:

Read on Twitter

Take this how ever you want.

Who?

A two way SF who's a super sub at age 20. That said, he's a high risk, high reward guy to chase because super subs frequently fail to become legit NBA starters. I'm down to bet on the kid, though.

So........another young player who needs development.

Bulls need to find a way to get either Ball, Brogdon, or Dinwiddie. I also wouldn’t mind Lowery or Rose. If Sato is playing significant minutes the off-season was a failure.

is our best option to trade for a decent PG on a bad contract? Something we can match up?

Wonderboy5 wrote:Bulls need to find a way to get either Ball, Brogdon, or Dinwiddie. I also wouldn’t mind Lowery or Rose. If Sato is playing significant minutes the off-season was a failure.

While, sure, Sato isn't the answer as our starting PG. I really liked the Sato/Thad off the bench combo. Those two alone turned our bench into a net-positive, but neither is good as a starter.

I would love Brogdon, but NFW are we getting him from Indy (I'd love Turner too, and he might be gettable). I really don't want Dinwiddie as our starting PG. Even when he was healthy, his vision/passing will make us miss Coby's lacking playmaking - and dude such an injury risk - might as well go for Dipo.

From that group, Ball is the only one who I would like. He's not perfect, but he has all the pieces to be a great fit and he showed that he keeps improving his game - and that's what you bank on to overpay him. Problem is that we would likely end-up losing Theis, Thad and Sato and the chance to get anything in return for Lauri (unlikely anyway) to have enough to cap to sign Ball outright (or even to put the pressure on NO to S&T him to us).

Thoughts on Nerlens Noel playing PF next to Nikola Vucevic? He gives the Bulls needed rim protection and can play back up center minutes too.

He played with Billy Donovan in OKC.

gobullschi wrote:Thoughts on Nerlens Noel playing PF next to Nikola Vucevic? He gives the Bulls needed rim protection and can play back up center minutes too.

He played with Billy Donovan in OKC.

Was thinking about him too. I would love him too.

sco wrote:

gobullschi wrote:Thoughts on Nerlens Noel playing PF next to Nikola Vucevic? He gives the Bulls needed rim protection and can play back up center minutes too.

He played with Billy Donovan in OKC.

Was thinking about him too. I would love him too.

I’m curious what his next contract will look like. He seems like such a bargain at $5M, when people want to pay Theis 10M.

gobullschi wrote:

sco wrote:

gobullschi wrote:Thoughts on Nerlens Noel playing PF next to Nikola Vucevic? He gives the Bulls needed rim protection and can play back up center minutes too.

He played with Billy Donovan in OKC.

Was thinking about him too. I would love him too.

I’m curious what his next contract will look like. He seems like such a bargain at $5M, when people want to pay Theis 10M.

He has been a backup C (even this year, but looked good as a starter). Theis has shown he can play PF and away from the basket better. I still like Noel - he is quick enough to guard the perimeter and Vuc has enough of a perimeter game to make the pairing work.