Road to nowhere

[dougthonus]

I posted a variation of this in the Giddey thread, but thought it was worth splitting out separately.

In the AK era:
24 teams have more playoff wins than Chicago (1) - (1 tied, 4 less).

Chicago has earned 0 top 10 picks over that period. Those other 5 teams have had 2, 3, 4, 4, 4 top 10 picks.

Combination of top 10 picks + Playoff wins for all teams with 0-2 playoff wins over the AK era:
CHI: (1) - 1 win / Picks none
CHO: (2) - 0 wins / Picks at #2, #6
TOR: (3) - 2 wins / Pick #4
NOP: (4) - 2 wins / Picks #8, #10
WAS: (4) - 1 win / Picks at #2, #8, #10
DET: (4) - 0 wins / Picks at #1, #5, #5, #5
HOU: (4) - 0 wins / Picks at #2, #3, #3, #4
SAS: (4) - 0 wins / Picks at #1, #4, #8, #9
POR: (5) - 2 wins / Picks #3, #7, #7

[League Circles]

I wonder where the Bulls would rank in number of top 10 picks on their roster. #1 in the league????

[DuckIII]

I posted a variation of this in the Giddey thread, but thought it was worth splitting out separately.

In the AK era:
24 teams have more playoff wins than Chicago (1) - (1 tied, 4 less).

Chicago has earned 0 top 10 picks over that period. Those other 5 teams have had 2, 3, 4, 4, 4 top 10 picks.

Combination of top 10 picks + Playoff wins for all teams with 0-2 playoff wins over the AK era:
CHI: (1) - 1 win / Picks none
CHO: (2) - 0 wins / Picks at #2, #6
TOR: (3) - 2 wins / Pick #4
NOP: (4) - 2 wins / Picks #8, #10
WAS: (4) - 1 win / Picks at #2, #8, #10
DET: (4) - 0 wins / Picks at #1, #5, #5, #5
HOU: (4) - 0 wins / Picks at #2, #3, #3, #4
SAS: (4) - 0 wins / Picks at #1, #4, #8, #9
POR: (5) - 2 wins / Picks #3, #7, #7

This is fine.

[cocktailswith_2short]

Almost all the teams listed are in a worse spot and most of them have had a lot more lottery pick help .

[dougthonus]

Almost all the teams listed are in a worse spot and most of them have had a lot more lottery pick help .

I don't know if there is a team in the league in a worse spot. The Pelicans / Wizards might be in similar spots. Everyone else feels like they're in a better spot to me.

[DuckIII]

Almost all the teams listed are in a worse spot and most of them have had a lot more lottery pick help .

Maybe 3 of those teams are in a “worse spot” than us. And that’s kinda generous.

I wonder what adding a third data point would show? The one I have in mind is “future picks/swaps held/owed”.

[League Circles]

Hard to discuss without a more specific suggestion of what "position" means. Position to win a title in 5 years? Position to be a playoff team in 3 years? Position to be a top 8 team for 5 years starting in 6 years? Etc.

[dougthonus]

Hard to discuss without a more specific suggestion of what "position" means. Position to win a title in 5 years? Position to be a playoff team in 3 years? Position to be a top 8 team for 5 years starting in 6 years? Etc.

How about projected playoff wins over the next 3 years. I'd project 0. Of the teams I'd project 0 playoff wins for (would guess maybe 7-8 teams), I think the the Bulls would be in the high middle area of my confidence pool. I give them a non-zero chance of getting a playoff win this year which is their best shot IMO.

[League Circles]

Hard to discuss without a more specific suggestion of what "position" means. Position to win a title in 5 years? Position to be a playoff team in 3 years? Position to be a top 8 team for 5 years starting in 6 years? Etc.

How about projected playoff wins over the next 3 years. I'd project 0. Of the teams I'd project 0 playoff wins for (would guess maybe 7-8 teams), I think the the Bulls would be in the high middle area of my confidence pool. I give them a non-zero chance of getting a playoff win this year which is their best shot IMO.

Nah, way too subjective. And possibly too short term.

I just think it's funny to highlight how few top 10 picks we've "earned", which implies that earning them would be good for our future, when we literally have 4 top 10 picks age 24 and younger already on the roster and we aren't any good. And that's not even counting Ball who is 27, Matas who was #11, or Zach, who has played like a top 4 pick and who projects to do so for years to come.

The Bulls have drafted 16 players in the top 10 in the last 25 years. IMO, only ONE of them was the type of talent that typically could be as good as the 2nd best player on a great team.

[dougthonus]

Nah, way too subjective. And possibly too short term.

Well glad to see you are full of ideas.

I just think it's funny to highlight how few top 10 picks we've "earned", which implies that earning them would be good for our future, when we literally have 4 top 10 picks age 24 and younger already on the roster and we aren't any good. And that's not even counting Ball who is 27, Matas who was #11, or Zach, who has played like a top 4 pick and who projects to do so for years to come.

I mean the obvious thing with high draft picks is they are valuable for the potential that they will turn into superstars. It's like powerball tickets with 1/30 odds of hitting. By the time someone is on their 2nd contract it doesn't really matter anymore, that upside is gone. The Bulls have one guy whom is in that boat (Matas), whom wasn't top 10, but I'm not trying to quibble over the magic cut off at #10, he's a high upside project player with pretty low odds of that upside panning out into superstar stuff (lower than most high upside draft choices based on weak draft + what we've seen to date).

The Bulls have drafted 16 players in the top 10 in the last 25 years. IMO, only ONE of them was the type of talent that typically could be as good as the 2nd best player on a great team.

They built two separate teams that won playoff series based on the vast majority of those players and had the best record in the league twice and without tragedy might have had a title or at least a decade of competitive playoff appearances. If they stuck with the ones they drafted more recently, they'd have had better odds of building another such team now.

Up until the Jimmy Butler trade, the Bulls were always at least a threat to make the playoffs and were in fact making it almost every year even if the results were diminishing. They've yet to get back to that status since then unfortunately.

[League Circles]

Nah, way too subjective. And possibly too short term.

Well glad to see you are full of ideas.

I just think it's funny to highlight how few top 10 picks we've "earned", which implies that earning them would be good for our future, when we literally have 4 top 10 picks age 24 and younger already on the roster and we aren't any good. And that's not even counting Ball who is 27, Matas who was #11, or Zach, who has played like a top 4 pick and who projects to do so for years to come.

I mean the obvious thing with high draft picks is they are valuable for the potential that they will turn into superstars. It's like powerball tickets with 1/30 odds of hitting. By the time someone is on their 2nd contract it doesn't really matter anymore, that upside is gone. The Bulls have one guy whom is in that boat (Matas), whom wasn't top 10, but I'm not trying to quibble over the magic cut off at #10, he's a high upside project player with pretty low odds of that upside panning out into superstar stuff (lower than most high upside draft choices based on weak draft + what we've seen to date).

The Bulls have drafted 16 players in the top 10 in the last 25 years. IMO, only ONE of them was the type of talent that typically could be as good as the 2nd best player on a great team.

They built two separate teams that won playoff series based on the vast majority of those players and had the best record in the league twice and without tragedy might have had a title or at least a decade of competitive playoff appearances. If they stuck with the ones they drafted more recently, they'd have had better odds of building another such team now.

Up until the Jimmy Butler trade, the Bulls were always at least a threat to make the playoffs and were in fact making it almost every year even if the results were diminishing. They've yet to get back to that status since then unfortunately.

The Bulls are clearly a threat to make the playoffs right now and have been for the 3 prior seasons. And I'd argue a player away.

The vast majority of our top ten picks were used to build two playoff winning teams???

Brand - no
Fizer - no
Crawford - no
Chandler - no
Curry - no
Jay Will - no
Hinrich - thanks for the one playoff series win
Gordon - thanks for the one playoff series win
Deng - yes
Tyrus - lol
Noah - yes
Rose - the one legit guy
Lauri - Kevin Love part 2 at best - but no
Carter - no
Coby - no
Patrick - no

So, 5 of the 16 won a playoff series. Two of those guys washed out hard and were not even wanted by us in Kirk and BG. Deng and Noah were good players who were absolutely positively not the type of high end building blocks people think of when they pine for high picks. But even if you count them, that's 3 out of 16.

I know, I know, it's easy to say "look at Brand, Chandler and Lauri". Meh. I've actually always said Chandler was the 2nd best or 2nd most important player on a title team........ because of chemistry and team needs. That's why I'm always more focused on fit and complementary skills than pure talent. Elite pure talent is virtually impossible to acquire (LeBron, Durant, Wemby etc). Meanwhile, you can have a thoroughly mediocre team from a pure talent standpoint that actually wins a title because the pieces fit together so utterly well.

Brand was a relatively consensus #1 pick, earned ROY, went on to a successful career.....but was probably never even a top 4 PF in the league and never really won much. Lauri is a talented body /shooter on a bad team. He could be another Dirk in the right situation perhaps (not meant as the compliment it sounds like), but most likely won't ever do squat.

Hell, I don't even think our good teams (Rose Thibbs era) were really even that talented. Carlos **** Boozer as the #2 lmfao! But they fit together very, very, very well.

[League Circles]

People are literally desperate to repeat the same mediocre Bulls teams from 2003-2007. Collect lottery picks and win a tiny bit, then realize you're going nowhere and start over. But the last part of the narrative hasn't been considered yet. And that's all when the lottery wasn't as much of a crapshoot as it is now.

[League Circles]

Bulls drafted OUTSIDE the top 10 in the past 25 years who rival anyone drafted inside the top 10 other than Rose in peak talent /impact:

Artest
Taj
Butler
Asik
Mirotic
Matas (hopefully - obviously a guess)

I might even be missing someone. And I know people will scoff at Asik and Niko and even Taj, but in my genuine opinion they're wrong. Those guys at their best were every bit as good as Deng and Noah IMO. The best do NOT necessarily rise to the top in sports. Injuries and opportunities have a massive impact.

[dougthonus]

The Bulls are clearly a threat to make the playoffs right now and have been for the 3 prior seasons. And I'd argue a player away.

A player away from the sacrificial lamb team is different from a player away from having a chance to win a series. It's also notable that we achieved the close to but not quite sacrificial lamb status largely around older declining players, being completely capped out, and not being able to trade a future 1st rounder until 2029 which all adds up to making it exceedingly difficult to do anything sustainable or even anything at all (which is of course, why we haven't).

The vast majority of our top ten picks were used to build two playoff winning teams???

Sorry was only going back to the Pax era not all the way back to Krause, but agree, Krause didn't do well in the draft.

Hinrich - thanks for the one playoff series win
Gordon - thanks for the one playoff series win
Deng - yes
Tyrus - lol
Noah - yes
Rose - the one legit guy

So all these guys but Tyrus yes.

Lauri - Kevin Love part 2 at best - but no
Carter - no
Coby - no
Patrick - no

Had we not traded for Vuc and stuck with these guys, might have had a chance, but sadly, AK is the worst.

[League Circles]

The Bulls are clearly a threat to make the playoffs right now and have been for the 3 prior seasons. And I'd argue a player away.

A player away from the sacrificial lamb team is different from a player away from having a chance to win a series. It's also notable that we achieved the close to but not quite sacrificial lamb status largely around older declining players, being completely capped out, and not being able to trade a future 1st rounder until 2029 which all adds up to making it exceedingly difficult to do anything sustainable or even anything at all (which is of course, why we haven't).

The vast majority of our top ten picks were used to build two playoff winning teams???

Sorry was only going back to the Pax era not all the way back to Krause, but agree, Krause didn't do well in the draft.

Hinrich - thanks for the one playoff series win
Gordon - thanks for the one playoff series win
Deng - yes
Tyrus - lol
Noah - yes
Rose - the one legit guy

So all these guys but Tyrus yes.

Lauri - Kevin Love part 2 at best - but no
Carter - no
Coby - no
Patrick - no

Had we not traded for Vuc and stuck with these guys, might have had a chance, but sadly, AK is the worst.

I just can't wrap my head around you not being able to see that these are all just guys. Tyrus? Really? You're really going to claim that we built a playoff series win around Tyrus Thomas? And that that was worth something???

Coby White and all the other mediocre guys we have now are very, very, very much like the incredibly overrated "baby Bulls". People just can't remember how mediocre we were because it was after the absolute trash of the Krause-Floyd era.

And yeah, if our lineup was:

Coby
Zach
Patrick
Lauri
Carter

Yeah we might be able to grab a single 2nd round series win long term with that flawed group. Just like the Bulls in 2006.

We need to stop playing baseball and acting like this is all a game of acquiring and adding up assets. We should be studying the very best teams that DIDN'T/DON'T have a superstar, and figuring out how and why they achieved success. Or just tune out entirely for 5-30 years until we luck into another one.

[League Circles]

Don't look now but 4 of the top 6 teams in the league right now are led by guys drafted outside the top 10.

[HomoSapien]

Okay, but how many of these teams were able to sign Emmanuel Miller?

[coldfish]

What team is the worst position in the NBA?
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2426380

Bulls fans: Its us. Definitely us.
Some random people: Well, team X is in a bad spot
Bulls fans: Yeah. That's nice. Its definitely us.

.....

OK, so, when was the last time the Lakers drafted a player in the top 10 that became a core player on a good team? Answer: Probably James Worthy in 1983. They have won a lot of titles from multiple groups since then.

There are many ways to build a good team. The draft is just one. Chicago's problem is that ownership is effectively disavowing ALL of them. They won't go for capspace. They won't tank for picks and they won't buy a team using salary.

Personally, I don't think that we will ever see the Bulls in a conference championship again in our lifetimes as long as the current ownership group is in charge. They just won't allow it. The Derrick Rose run was lightning striking multiple times:
- The Curry trade leading to Noah
- A core group of talented players that just fell apart getting a top 1 pick on a 1.7% chance
- Reinsdorf going outside his comfort zone and hiring Thibodeau at Arne Duncan's (Obama's Education secretary) suggestion
- A historically weak eastern conference outside of the Heat because the Heat soaked up all the talent

I'm not even sure the Bulls make that ECF if Obama didn't win in 2008. Talk about butterfly effect.

Personally, I think that even if the Bulls had a few top 10 picks it wouldn't make much difference. Hell, Patrick, Giddey and Coby are top 10 guys in their primes.

Going forward, the Bulls are a moneyball team that spends money very poorly. Lavine is overpaid. Ball is overpaid. Vucevic is overpaid. Williams is overpaid. Maybe if they start spending money such that a player's contribution is equal to or better than his contribution, this will start turning around and they can at least get competitive using their "let's not tank, spend lux tax money, get draft picks or really do anything of note" model of franchise building.

Basically, the summer of 2026 you might start to see something happen. Until then, might as well enjoy the games.

[fleet]

Reinsdorfian

[fleet]

People are literally desperate to repeat the same mediocre Bulls teams from 2003-2007. Collect lottery picks and win a tiny bit, then realize you're going nowhere and start over. But the last part of the narrative hasn't been considered yet. And that's all when the lottery wasn't as much of a crapshoot as it is now.

Yeah. Still tank though. Those days were more fun. Way more fun than whatever the hell we’ve been up to lately. Fun bad is fun. A little.