RealGM

When asked if New Orleans offered the Bulls two first-round picks, including its unprotected one next summer, in order to move up to select Derik Queen in June, Artūras Karnišovas said:

“I don’t know exactly, but they landed one good player.”

Maybe he just doesn't want to say, but knows damn well, but every time he speaks I'm embarrassed for him.

Also, quite telling about his F those picks philosophy is that he sides with the NOP side of this trade (apparently) saying they got a heck of a player in Queen which seems to be his philosophy of never trading for picks here as well and matches my general view of his complete incompetence and idiocy in not looking at this deal and also being on the opposite side of it as every NBA media person in the world who evaluated the trade.

----- edit -----
Actual question was:
Did Dumars offer unprotected picks to everyone from 9-13. Not did the Bulls receive this offer. Of course AK doesn't know what Joe Dumars did. They did not specifically ask about whether the Bulls got this offer and AK didn't answer specifically about the Bulls.

If it comes out that he's the first lobotomized GM in NBA history I will not be surprised.

Whether you think he's doing a good job or not, his public statements portray him as a drooling moron who has no idea what's going on.

AKME really is abysmal. We been screwed and we're staying effed up.

Did anyone ever ask him about the reported Lonzo for Smart + a first deal? Hollinger was the only one to report it, but I'm leaning even more towards it being true.

2weekswithpay wrote:Did anyone ever ask him about the reported Lonzo for Smart + a first deal? Hollinger was the only one to report it, but I'm leaning even more towards it being true.

Was definitely true. Memphis made the same trade afterwards for a different expiring deal that was slightly worse for Memphis.

I don’t have an issue with us not getting involved with this trade because: (a) ME’s post draft explanation made it clear the Bulls were locked in on Essengue and once they knew he would be available they valued him above the trade; (b) I also highly valued Essengue going into the draft and still do; (c) every player is a unique asset and if my GM really loves a specific guy I want the team to get the guy as an organizational philosophy; and (d) I do not accept without evidence the premise that the Hawks made the same offer over and over again until someone took it. It’s equally plausible that in their desperation to get the specific player that was Queen, they sweetened the pot as they were getting shut down repeatedly.

Anyway, none of that means AK doesn’t continue to act and sound like a grossly incompetent buffoon every time he opens his mouth. He always comes across as someone way, way too far in the deep end of the pool despite having no idea how to swim.

I have zero issue with this. It was a stupid question that didn't deserve a dignified response and so AK just mouthed some words.

He obviously just doesn't want to say, but just say "I'm not going to discuss the specifics of trade talks," don't pretend not to know.

AK really needs some media training.

IF and it's a big IF that offer was made, you've got to think AK made the wrong call and that the NOP were lucky the Bulls said No.

More than likely it's Drew Petersen being told something by someone after the fact who likes to stir the pot and has a grudge against the NO GM. A free draft pick, hopefully down the road, would be perfect for the Bulls considering they brought back the same basic roster and drafted a project in Noa. They could have just as easily moved back in this draft and found the same value and time frame project and with all the UFAs they have next summer brought in a 2nd FRP who wouldn't have been needed in the rotation .

League Circles wrote:I have zero issue with this. It was a stupid question that didn't deserve a dignified response and so AK just mouthed some words.

Man I agree with this. That is a question for training camp. Someone is just trying to stir things up and get clicks.

DuckIII wrote:I don’t have an issue with us not getting involved with this trade because: (a) ME’s post draft explanation made it clear the Bulls were locked in on Essengue and once they knew he would be available they valued him above the trade; (b) I also highly valued Essengue going into the draft and still do; (c) every player is a unique asset and if my GM really loves a specific guy I want the team to get the guy as an organizational philosophy; and (d) I do not accept without evidence the premise that the Hawks made the same offer over and over again until someone took it. It’s equally plausible that in their desperation to get the specific player that was Queen, they sweetened the pot as they were getting shut down repeatedly.

Anyway, none of that means AK doesn’t continue to act and sound like a grossly incompetent buffoon every time he opens his mouth. He always comes across as someone way, way too far in the deep end of the pool despite having no idea how to swim.

I like Essengue, but don't think he's such a great prospect that he's worth passing on this deal (if it was really offered). Moving down in the draft, plus the potential for a real difference maker in the 2026 draft, is a better bet IMO. It's one of the only ways the Bulls could potentially get a prospect like that (a top pick).

I think it's fair to try to get to the bottom of eventually - if you're the one that gets him to explain, that's a good thing for your career/site. But it is opening night, so maybe it's not the time? I will yield to others on the etiquette there.

In any event, "I don't know exactly" sounds weird coming out of a GM's mouth. Seems like it would have been a notable event in your life. You really don't know what you were offered for your pick in the last draft? Shouldn't you? Either they dismissed it out of hand and it made no impression, which strains credulity. Or he is lying. Or he has a really bad memory for someone in a responsible position. We remember the rumors around here, but he doesn't remember the real thing? Yeah, not a good look.

dougthonus wrote:

2weekswithpay wrote:Did anyone ever ask him about the reported Lonzo for Smart + a first deal? Hollinger was the only one to report it, but I'm leaning even more towards it being true.

Was definitely true. Memphis made the same trade afterwards for a different expiring deal that was slightly worse for Memphis.

He was dumb not to take that deal.

How would Smart effect the Bulls cap space going forward?

Easy enough to say no if it wasn't. He's clearly being evasive, but doing it in a way that makes him seem dumb.

AK isn't a native English speaker, correct?

I feel like people should chill on his verbiage and that ME should take the reins on the press platitude presentations.

All that matters is who AK drafts, signs, and trades, and which coach he hires.

Front office people generally don't explicitly confirm or lay out what other teams were offering or talking about.

AK certainly answered the questions in an AK way

But I feel like he was ultimatley just deflecting and that there's really nothing here

I understand not wanting to tank but his disdain for draft picks is moronic, especially when you consider his vision of “9-10 very good players.”

Watching how teams like the Spurs, Rockets, Magic, Timberwolves and possibly Philly with VJ have turned things around, it’s hard to be content with a FO that consistently strives for mediocrity.

The Force. wrote:I understand not wanting to tank but his disdain for draft picks is moronic, especially when you consider his vision of “9-10 very good players.”

Watching how teams like the Spurs, Rockets, Magic, Timberwolves and possibly Philly with VJ have turned things around, it’s hard to be content with a FO that consistently strives for mediocrity.

At this point, it's just not a coincidence that both Paxson and AK did not want to do full teardowns around lots of draft picks. I genuinely think it's an ownership philosophy regardless of what they'll say publicly about AK having full autonomy to build how he wants to.

Maybe one day we'll actually get the real story of what happened with this trade if it proves to be impactful.

The Force. wrote:I understand not wanting to tank but his disdain for draft picks is moronic, especially when you consider his vision of “9-10 very good players.”

Watching how teams like the Spurs, Rockets, Magic, Timberwolves and possibly Philly with VJ have turned things around, it’s hard to be content with a FO that consistently strives for mediocrity.

And you don't even need to roster those picks. OKC barely used any of their traded picks to build their team, just Cason Wallace. But they do collect them to use as currency.

Sacramento's unprotected swap from Derozan, Memphis' 1st round for Marcus Smart, Dumars unprotected 1st round from the draft offer...all these should be in the Bulls asset list. These 3 1st rounders can be traded for an impact player, instead the best Chicago could do over the offseason was to add Okoro in a no pick deal. Because we don't have any picks to swing a bigger deal.

If no picks are added to a deal, you'll just get the same value of player back in a trade, which is basically what happened with Okoro/Lonzo. You're not getting any better unless dealing with an idiot on the other side.

Whether you use them or trade them, picks are the only avenue of improvement for an NBA team. And AK doesn't care about them.

I think we're going to HATE this non-deal in May at the lotto. There's a good chance NO is a bottom 6 team, and we could have a great shot at a top pick.
Plus Asa Newell was my guy at the draft. I like Noa and think he'll be good but to get Newell (cheaper deal for 4 years) and a shot at a top 8 2026 pick is SOOO worth it