RealGM

What do you all think?

It's very hard to say how good they'll be without their best player, but in the best case of our offseason, we could reach parity with them, even without Hali.

Probably not. There were some way-early power rankings released today and the Pacers were much higher.

I just don’t think we can count on the Bulls being good until they actually start playing well consistently.

sco wrote:It's very hard to say how good they'll be without their best player, but in the best case of our offseason, we could reach parity with them, even without Hali.

You mean the one in which Milwaukee trades us Giannis for Vuc and Coby?

The question strikes me as premature, as I sort of down the Bulls simply run it back next year. But if they do, IMO Indy is still better.

It’s possible that it does or at least makes them even. First we need to see the Bulls roster and what moves they make or don’t make.

Seems like a strong team, even without Haliburton. 4-7 seed.

I’d say we’re in 6-11 territory, like last year.

40W +/-3

As to the question, I would say no based on the assumption the Bulls simply use their pick, do some small free agency stuff or secondary lateral trades, sign Giddey and just roll into the season. Which, barring specific opportunities I would imagine to be unlikely, that is more or less what I want to see.

But to me there is risk behind this question and I hope (though I know otherwise) AK is not thinking like this. How the Bulls fare next year in what will be pretty much without question the weakest conference the NBA will have seen in the roughly 30 years I've paid close attention to the league, should be irrelevant to the team building plan.

If we start making win now moves that aren't "damn, now you're on a straight line to contender even if everyone's healthy" types of win now moves, we could do even more long lasting damage than we've already done to take advantage of a meaningless one year anomaly.

DuckIII wrote:As to the question, I would say no based on the assumption the Bulls simply use their pick, do some small free agency stuff or secondary lateral trades, sign Giddey and just roll into the season. Which, barring specific opportunities I would imagine to be unlikely, that is more or less what I want to see.

But to me there is risk behind this question and I hope (though I know otherwise) AK is not thinking like this. How the Bulls fare next year in what will be pretty much without question the weakest conference the NBA will have seen in the roughly 30 years I've paid close attention to the league, should be irrelevant to the team building plan.

If we start making win now moves that aren't "damn, now you're on a straight line to contender even if everyone's healthy" types of win now moves, we could do even more long lasting damage than we've already done to take advantage of a meaningless one year anomaly.

I just posted this in the "real or mirage" thread, but I'm going to copy myself here because it looks like we're thinking the same thing on the risks presented by the current state of the East:

This is why I'm not spending a lot of time thinking about how good the Bulls will be next year, as currently constructed. Now I think this would be a bad approach, but understanding AK is the GM we're talking about, doesn't it seem like there's a substantial chance that he's going to look at the injuries at the top of the East and say "now's the time to make a big swing?" Won't he also look at the Pacers this season and think that as long as you can get into the solid middle of the playoff seedings in the East, then you can go on a run and anything can happen (and maybe you even win a chip if your best player doesn't get injured early in game 7)?

I feel like these conditions really increase the chance the Bulls (and other East teams) make some sort of aggressive offseason trade this year.

Just get ready, since we all know this is how AK thinks, for a Vuc+Coby+#12 to GS for S&T Kuminga+filler. If we're lucky. A less likely version includes future FRPs. #allinfor26

I believe our off-season activities will be limited, especially considering that the Pacers have a more capable coach who can guide them to secure additional victories. Nonetheless, I am eager to witness a full season featuring Giddy and Coby, along with an improved Matas, to see how we perform in the relatively weaker Eastern Conference. Despite this, I anticipate that Boston will maintain an edge, and the Bucks are likely to excel as well due to their star players. However, I am curious about how the Pacers will cope with the emotional impact of losing Haliburton. Ultimately, our success hinges on whether our players can make significant progress, which will be the true measure of our potential as we approach the draft, free agency, and summer league.

jnrjr79 wrote:

DuckIII wrote:As to the question, I would say no based on the assumption the Bulls simply use their pick, do some small free agency stuff or secondary lateral trades, sign Giddey and just roll into the season. Which, barring specific opportunities I would imagine to be unlikely, that is more or less what I want to see.

But to me there is risk behind this question and I hope (though I know otherwise) AK is not thinking like this. How the Bulls fare next year in what will be pretty much without question the weakest conference the NBA will have seen in the roughly 30 years I've paid close attention to the league, should be irrelevant to the team building plan.

If we start making win now moves that aren't "damn, now you're on a straight line to contender even if everyone's healthy" types of win now moves, we could do even more long lasting damage than we've already done to take advantage of a meaningless one year anomaly.

I just posted this in the "real or mirage" thread, but I'm going to copy myself here because it looks like we're thinking the same thing on the risks presented by the current state of the East:

This is why I'm not spending a lot of time thinking about how good the Bulls will be next year, as currently constructed. Now I think this would be a bad approach, but understanding AK is the GM we're talking about, doesn't it seem like there's a substantial chance that he's going to look at the injuries at the top of the East and say "now's the time to make a big swing?" Won't he also look at the Pacers this season and think that as long as you can get into the solid middle of the playoff seedings in the East, then you can go on a run and anything can happen (and maybe you even win a chip if your best player doesn't get injured early in game 7)?

I feel like these conditions really increase the chance the Bulls (and other East teams) make some sort of aggressive offseason trade this year.

I share your fear 100%. With a team led by a late blooming, tall, fast paced PG who loves to dish the ball. All kinds of easy ways for him to talk himself into doing something stupid.

Nope, they are a solid playoff team even without Hali.

We are an eternal playin team.

First Pacers have a coach. 2nd Pacers have a defense even without Hali. Bulls have some guy called Billy Donovan and his trio of guards uncapable playing defense along Vuc at center anchoring mighty play in defense.

DuckIII wrote:

jnrjr79 wrote:

DuckIII wrote:As to the question, I would say no based on the assumption the Bulls simply use their pick, do some small free agency stuff or secondary lateral trades, sign Giddey and just roll into the season. Which, barring specific opportunities I would imagine to be unlikely, that is more or less what I want to see.

But to me there is risk behind this question and I hope (though I know otherwise) AK is not thinking like this. How the Bulls fare next year in what will be pretty much without question the weakest conference the NBA will have seen in the roughly 30 years I've paid close attention to the league, should be irrelevant to the team building plan.

If we start making win now moves that aren't "damn, now you're on a straight line to contender even if everyone's healthy" types of win now moves, we could do even more long lasting damage than we've already done to take advantage of a meaningless one year anomaly.

I just posted this in the "real or mirage" thread, but I'm going to copy myself here because it looks like we're thinking the same thing on the risks presented by the current state of the East:

This is why I'm not spending a lot of time thinking about how good the Bulls will be next year, as currently constructed. Now I think this would be a bad approach, but understanding AK is the GM we're talking about, doesn't it seem like there's a substantial chance that he's going to look at the injuries at the top of the East and say "now's the time to make a big swing?" Won't he also look at the Pacers this season and think that as long as you can get into the solid middle of the playoff seedings in the East, then you can go on a run and anything can happen (and maybe you even win a chip if your best player doesn't get injured early in game 7)?

I feel like these conditions really increase the chance the Bulls (and other East teams) make some sort of aggressive offseason trade this year.

I share your fear 100%. With a team led by a late blooming, tall, fast paced PG who loves to dish the ball. All kinds of easy ways for him to talk himself into doing something stupid.

It's not that there aren't "win-now" moves that could theoretically work out, but 1) I think in the abstract that's probably a less prudent approach, and 2) I just absolutely don't trust AK to be the guy to find the right win-now move.

Nope. Their 2nd best player is still better then the Bulls 1st best player.

Hali is the straw that stirs the drink in Indiana. They will miss him. I still think chances favor them being ahead of us.

DuckIII wrote:

sco wrote:It's very hard to say how good they'll be without their best player, but in the best case of our offseason, we could reach parity with them, even without Hali.

You mean the one in which Milwaukee trades us Giannis for Vuc and Coby?

I'd rather not give up coby, can we do carter and dalen?

I really do like this Pacers group. Super gutsy, very deep, and play the right way... but I don't think they are good enough to make the playoffs without Haliburton. They just need to almost adopt an entirely new style without him and I can't see them doing it for an entire season successfully.

Absolutely not. Their defense is elite 9/10. Our defensive unit is like a 3/10.

Offense is probably pretty comparable, but we are no where near their level.