A team of 9-10 good players

[dougthonus]

I remember AK said in his presser he wants to build a team of 9-10 good players and doesn't believe he needs a star. Maybe he was just saying that because this is where he knew we'd end up given almost everyone was under contract and an aggressive trade didn't make much sense, but I was thinking of our roster this year, and going up and down it, I'm thinking on every player some variation of I like him at the right price:

Giddey - Starting caliber, non star guy
Matas - Hard to project how much he might improve, but you hope solid starting caliber guy
Coby - Solid starter or elite bench scorer
Collins - Rotation big
Smith - Rotation big
Vuc - Rotation big
Okoro - Situational starter or rotation guard
Huerter - Situational starter or rotation guard
Jones - great back up PG
Ayo - rotation guard

That's 10 quality rotation guys in the right role.

[ChiTownHero1992]

You know where that team as constructed goes - straight to the play in. Luckily they have time to mold together as they're all young but while they're hopefully modeling into a 5-6 seed over the years, other teams will be building better teams as well. I get where AK was coming from when he said it, but even those "good "non star" teams, have a minor star or multiple near stars. The way this roster stands Giddey is a "near star" if he continues to play well, Matas has the potential to be one but that is about it, everyone else is a role player.

Personally for me we lack that clear true leader, the guy the team rallies behind. Beyond that our "depth rotatioanl guys" are guys that would be great rotationally on a contender, but on a team still trying to build and find themselves they're kinda worthless (Vuc, Collins, Huerter, Jones, Carter) or they're raw/inconsisteant (Ayo, Okoro, WIlliams). Our "prospects" are raw and likely either not NBA-caliber or at minimum not NBA-ready (Essengue, Phillips, Terry)

[SimonFish]

Sent from my ASUS_AI2401_H using RealGM mobile app

[jnrjr79]

I remember AK said in his presser he wants to build a team of 9-10 good players and doesn't believe he needs a star. Maybe he was just saying that because this is where he knew we'd end up given almost everyone was under contract and an aggressive trade didn't make much sense, but I was thinking of our roster this year, and going up and down it, I'm thinking on every player some variation of I like him at the right price:

Giddey - Starting caliber, non star guy
Matas - Hard to project how much he might improve, but you hope solid starting caliber guy
Coby - Solid starter or elite bench scorer
Collins - Rotation big
Smith - Rotation big
Vuc - Rotation big
Okoro - Situational starter or rotation guard
Huerter - Situational starter or rotation guard
Jones - great back up PG
Ayo - rotation guard

That's 10 quality rotation guys in the right role.

I think on the one hand, what AK said is sort of the thing you say until you happen to luck out in the draft and get a star or an opportunity to trade for one presents itself. I’m sure AK isn’t opposed to stars when the opportunity arises.

But, the Bulls are pretty clearly committed to the idea that drafting a star will only occur with luck - either jumping up in the lottery or having a mid-1st rounder happen to develop into one. I think he was already aiming for this approach, but I’m sure the Pacers this season have emboldened him to say “see, you just have to stay relevant, and eventually with one lucky draft pick and a good trade, you can be right there” as a justification for “remaining” competitive and not tearing it down.

Anyway, the Bulls have lots of serviceable players, with IMO a couple of guys who could become stars but are young enough that nobody knows. But a good chunk of these good players are not under team control, so I’m not sure how much they mean re: this approach long-term. With all this expiring salary, they certainly seem set up to make a trade for an interesting piece this year, and I kinda doubt AK would avoid doing that simply to maintain this 9-10 good players approach. I am glad, though, that he does seem to be exhibiting more patience than he did in the first rebuild.

[Red Larrivee]

In theory, do I think a team with 9-10 "very good players", who are not superstars or all-stars, could win a championship in today's NBA? Maybe. I guess it depends if they're all as good as a player can be without being an all-star.

Do I think it's possible to build such a team? No.

It feels like a modern wish of building the 2004 Pistons, and nobody has been able to build that team since. Even then, Chauncey Billups was a 3x All-Star, Richard Hamilton was a 3x All-Star and Ben Wallace was a 4x All-Star and one of the best defensive players ever. That was the caveat that John Paxson kept ignoring when it was clear he was trying to emulate it for so many years.

The closest you're going to get is building a team with 1 clear-cut superstar, and 9 good players. But that's such a drastically different build and still really tough to create.

Either way, whatever the Bulls are building is closer to a team dominated by MLE rotation players and a few players who could be more, but aren't yet.

[dougthonus]

In theory, do I think a team with 9-10 "very good players", who are not superstars or all-stars, could win a championship in today's NBA? Maybe. I guess it depends if they're all as good as a player can be without being an all-star.

Do I think it's possible to build such a team? No.

It feels like a modern wish of building the 2004 Pistons, and nobody has been able to build that team since. Even then, Chauncey Billups was a 3x All-Star, Richard Hamilton was a 3x All-Star and Ben Wallace was a 4x All-Star and one of the best defensive players ever. That was the caveat that John Paxson kept ignoring when it was clear he was trying to emulate it for so many years.

The closest you're going to get is building a team with 1 clear-cut superstar, and 9 good players. But that's such a drastically different build and still really tough to create.

I think the problem for us is we don't have 9-10 very good players. We have 10 guys who could probably good enough to be in the top 8 of a rotation and maybe 0 that are clear top 3. I think for this strategy to work without any clear top 3 type guys that you'd probably need all 10 to be in the 4-6 range, and we got a lot of guys that are probably in the 6-8 range. So lots of good players, but 0 great players, and not enough very good players.

[League Circles]

Here are the players we have that are likely to be good players:

Coby
Giddey
Matas

Here are the guys that still have a decent chance:

Smith
Noa
Okoro
Jones

Here are the guys with a low chance to be good but still possible IMO:

Patrick
Ayo
Terry (very unlikely)

I just don't think Phillips has a skill that looks likely enough to be leveraged such that he'd be good even after addressing weaknesses.


Probably need a minimum of 5 actual good players, and even more importantly those 5 need to complement each other very well, in order to be a contender.
Everybody else is too old IMO to have a decent chance to become what I'd call a good player:

Vuc
Collins
Phillips
Huerter
Carter

[GoBlue72391]

A team of 9-10 good players in today's game is going nowhere. This is a star driven league. You need stars to win.

Having a GM who's trying to model his build from a 20+ year old anomaly of a team in the Detroit Pistons, who had one of the best defenses of the era, shows how completely out of touch our FO is.

If that's truly what AK is going for and not just nonsense words to make the fanbase feel good about the current team, then this situation is truly and utterly hopeless.

[Chi town]

I think AK’s comment about two ways to build…

Two stars or 9-10 really good players infers that those two stars are MVP type players and the 9-10 have at All Star Non MVP players. AK and KC have consistently talked about the Pacers build. Depth and running people of the floor continually coming at you. Never stopping. Constant attack.

I don’t think it really matters because we know AK can’t make a trade for a star. We will have to develop them. Buz looks like he def could be.

[sco]

Like many concepts we discuss, the idea gets muddled in the ambiguity of the terminology. What's a good player is it a starting caliber guy who isn't an allstar? Or can an allstar be "good" as long as he isn't all nba? I also think great defensive players may be neither, definitionally. Then there is the notion of roster construction. For example, when we had 3 "all stars", they were all one-way players, and our team was flawed.

Back on topic, regarding this team and it's current roster, I think AK's goal is to find/add young players with upside potential via trade, FA, and draft and hope that he lucks into a couple of great players. The way that happens outside of the draft is to look for guys who flashed upside and give them the opportunity to shine in a bigger role (usually guys who were playing behind great players elsewhere and didn't get a chance to show what they can do).

As for this roster this season, it's all about seeing what, if any progress we'll see from Giddey, Coby and Matas this season. IMO, they all have the potential (hate that word) to be allstars, but could just as easily max out at just starting caliber guys. The challenge to do that is to put competent and complementary role players around them. I think AK did an admirable job of getting Jones and Okoro to bolster POA defense. I feel like the one remaining job is to get adequate paint/rim protection out there at the C position. Without that, our guys may look worse than they actually are on defense because everyone is covering for Vuc and it really mucks things up. And on offense, with Vuc, we need to funnel the ball to him more than we otherwise would and it hinders our new 3 from taking bigger roles.

So whether there are 5 good guys or 10, if the roster is still flawed per above, we may come away from the season not knowing what we do/don't have to build from here.

[MrSparkle]

We don’t have top-50 players. Nice if Giddey and Matas make the leap, but that’s optimistic. Coby is up and down with efficiency and defense. All in all, more of a top-75 crowd, more like 100 on their bad months.

In the Bulls’ defense, we are finally a young team. Vuc’s turning 35, but otherwise the entire rotation is 19-27yo.

The other caveat is that some players “should be good”, but they end up rating incredibly poorly. Patrick uniquely at the top of this list. Just one of the worst in the league, per minute. Along with Terry. Phillips, Ayo bring the energy and right game but not the results (maybe development, lineups, who knows). Vuc’s defense is left/negative on the attribute slider that only goes to 0. Jalen and Zach don’t have established roles, as Vuc dominates minutes. Just seems like a lot of uncertain roles, all around.

So it ends up being more of a lopsided roster that needs injuries to open up log-jams. I don’t know how Noa will see the floor, unless a trade happens.

[dougthonus]

A team of 9-10 good players in today's game is going nowhere. This is a star driven league. You need stars to win.

Having a GM who's trying to model his build from a 20+ year old anomaly of a team in the Detroit Pistons, who had one of the best defenses of the era, shows how completely out of touch our FO is.

If that's truly what AK is going for and not just nonsense words to make the fanbase feel good about the current team, then this situation is truly and utterly hopeless.

I will say the Pacers may have been an achilles tear away from winning the title this year, and Haliburton is a fringe star by traditional metrics, certainly prior to this year, not a guy I think many would view as a superstar that could lead you to a title as a clear 1A best player on a team type.

Not to say I believe in the model, just interesting that the Pacers almost got there this year in this model.

[MikeDC]

A team of 9-10 good players in today's game is going nowhere. This is a star driven league. You need stars to win.

Having a GM who's trying to model his build from a 20+ year old anomaly of a team in the Detroit Pistons, who had one of the best defenses of the era, shows how completely out of touch our FO is.

If that's truly what AK is going for and not just nonsense words to make the fanbase feel good about the current team, then this situation is truly and utterly hopeless.

I will say the Pacers may have been an achilles tear away from winning the title this year, and Haliburton is a fringe star by traditional metrics, certainly prior to this year, not a guy I think many would view as a superstar that could lead you to a title as a clear 1A best player on a team type.

Not to say I believe in the model, just interesting that the Pacers almost got there this year in this model.

Well, Haliburton was All-NBA 3rd team for two seasons in a row and was an all-star the year before that. Which would put him in the top 15 range.

Siakam is probably a top 25 player. A 3 time all-star.

So, the "Pacers model", if you want to boil it down, is
1 Top 15 (All-NBA) player (Haliburton
1 Top 25 (All-Star) (Siakam)
1 ~Top 5-10 at his position starter (Turner)
3 generic starters (Nesmith, Nembhard, Mathurin)
3 Rotational players (McConnell, Sheppard, Toppin)

As Mr. Sparkle said, the Bulls don't have anyone in the top 50, and don't have any obvious candidates to make the leap to All-NBA, let alone all-star. Maybe Matas in a couple years (or Noa in a couple more) if all goes perfectly?

But the basic point is that the Bulls are just as far away from the Pacer's approach to success as they are from every other model of success.

[kodo]

I don't get the Pacers comp, Haliburton is not only a multiple time All-Star he's also multiple time All-NBA. Siakam is also a multiple All-Star and multiple All-NBA, and even more convincingly he's actually won a championship as a #2 guy. If the Bulls had two All-NBA players on their roster in addition to everyone else, eg Brunson & Evan Mobley, not really sure them contending would be at all surprising.

When people say the Pacers have no stars do they really mean no MVPs?

[dougthonus]

But the basic point is that the Bulls are just as far away from the Pacer's approach to success as they are from every other model of success.

I agree. I was just stating the Pacers feel like a non traditional superstar driven team.

People were referencing this as the Detroit approach. The Pacers were pretty similar to Detroit. People described Detroit as not having any stars too despite having two hall of famers, and their big four had 3, 3, 4, and 4 all-star games, but they lacked an MVP level star which I think is what people more traditionally think of when they say star.

Either way, for us to get close to this model, you'd two guys to become all-star caliber players.

[League Circles]

We don’t have top-50 players. Nice if Giddey and Matas make the leap, but that’s optimistic. Coby is up and down with efficiency and defense. All in all, more of a top-75 crowd, more like 100 on their bad months.

In the Bulls’ defense, we are finally a young team. Vuc’s turning 35, but otherwise the entire rotation is 19-27yo.

The other caveat is that some players “should be good”, but they end up rating incredibly poorly. Patrick uniquely at the top of this list. Just one of the worst in the league, per minute. Along with Terry. Phillips, Ayo bring the energy and right game but not the results (maybe development, lineups, who knows). Vuc’s defense is left/negative on the attribute slider that only goes to 0. Jalen and Zach don’t have established roles, as Vuc dominates minutes. Just seems like a lot of uncertain roles, all around.

So it ends up being more of a lopsided roster that needs injuries to open up log-jams. I don’t know how Noa will see the floor, unless a trade happens.

I expect Noa will be the primary backup to Matas at the 4 initially, playing 15+ mpg. What's the problem?

[HearshotKDS]

Just my opinion, but if the Bulls are trying to build a competitive team of 9-10 good players, they're only 2-3 players away from getting there. Unfortunately, the 2 players they are missing in my mind are the best player on the team and then also the 2nd best.

[Almost Retired]

Maybe I've drank too much from the kool-aid pitcher but I think Matas is going to be an All Star and I think that might happen by the 2026-2027 season. He's already pretty much the face of the franchise, and you can tell he relishes the role. He's a worker too. He really does seem to love the game. He showed an elite level of fearlessness as a rookie, especially for his age. I get the sense that he wants to become great. Almost the antithesis of PWill.

[DuckIII]

A team of 9-10 good players in today's game is going nowhere. This is a star driven league. You need stars to win.

Having a GM who's trying to model his build from a 20+ year old anomaly of a team in the Detroit Pistons, who had one of the best defenses of the era, shows how completely out of touch our FO is.

If that's truly what AK is going for and not just nonsense words to make the fanbase feel good about the current team, then this situation is truly and utterly hopeless.

I will say the Pacers may have been an achilles tear away from winning the title this year, and Haliburton is a fringe star by traditional metrics, certainly prior to this year, not a guy I think many would view as a superstar that could lead you to a title as a clear 1A best player on a team type.

Not to say I believe in the model, just interesting that the Pacers almost got there this year in this model.

True. It was a bit of a miracle run though. On the other hand, a team with "9-10 good players" needs a miracle run. And those are extreme exceptions.

[jnrjr79]

A team of 9-10 good players in today's game is going nowhere. This is a star driven league. You need stars to win.

Having a GM who's trying to model his build from a 20+ year old anomaly of a team in the Detroit Pistons, who had one of the best defenses of the era, shows how completely out of touch our FO is.

If that's truly what AK is going for and not just nonsense words to make the fanbase feel good about the current team, then this situation is truly and utterly hopeless.

I will say the Pacers may have been an achilles tear away from winning the title this year, and Haliburton is a fringe star by traditional metrics, certainly prior to this year, not a guy I think many would view as a superstar that could lead you to a title as a clear 1A best player on a team type.

Not to say I believe in the model, just interesting that the Pacers almost got there this year in this model.

True. It was a bit of a miracle run though. On the other hand, a team with "9-10 good players" needs a miracle run. And those are extreme exceptions.

IMO, the Pacers being "an Achilles tear away" was contingent on them benefiting from a separate Achilles tear. I don't think they get by a healthy Boston this season.