RealGM

The Chicago Bulls have interest in Rudy Gobert should he become available on the trade market, sources tell Kevin O'Connor of The Ringer.

Gobert has previously also been linked with the Toronto Raptors. 

Gobert signed a five-year, $205 million extension with the Utah Jazz before the 20-21 season. Gobert has a player option for the 25-26 season.

With Quin Snyder leaving the Jazz after another disappointing playoff exit, the franchise is believed to be considering more significant changes.

Sounds like a natural fit to me. Vucevic would add scoring for Utah, and I'm not sure if Bulls would need to provide too much more in terms of quality assets. A pick for a playoff team and filler?

Let the Raps take him, you can find a defensive center for a better value.

Not interested

Gobert for Vucevic, Caruso, Pat Williams works salary wise.

Who says no? What picks would be needed to balance anything out.

Scalabrine wrote:Gobert for Vucevic, Caruso, Pat Williams works salary wise.

Who says no? What picks would be needed to balance anything out.

CHI says no. they were moderately successful this season for two reasons, their depth and they have a center that can get his own and pass. That group combined for 86 MPG. That's a lot of floor time to give up for Gobert. And I'm not sure DeRozan is nearly as effective with a big on the floor that can't shoot. Besides, Look at the "Change in Team Outlook" for CHI: -18.5 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and -7.0 apg.

Gobert to Chicago, Vucevic to Phoenix and Ayton to Utah.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:Gobert for Vucevic, Caruso, Pat Williams works salary wise.

Who says no? What picks would be needed to balance anything out.

CHI says no. they were moderately successful this season for two reasons, their depth and they have a center that can get his own and pass. That group combined for 86 MPG. That's a lot of floor time to give up for Gobert. And I'm not sure DeRozan is nearly as effective with a big on the floor that can't shoot. Besides, Look at the "Change in Team Outlook" for CHI: -18.5 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and -7.0 apg.

First part is fair, Chicago already lacks depth, really only 8 guys deep (Derozan, Lavine, Vuc, Ball, Caruso, White, Williams, Ayo) and only 5 of those guys are trusted commodities.

Scalabrine wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:Gobert for Vucevic, Caruso, Pat Williams works salary wise.

Who says no? What picks would be needed to balance anything out.

CHI says no. they were moderately successful this season for two reasons, their depth and they have a center that can get his own and pass. That group combined for 86 MPG. That's a lot of floor time to give up for Gobert. And I'm not sure DeRozan is nearly as effective with a big on the floor that can't shoot. Besides, Look at the "Change in Team Outlook" for CHI: -18.5 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and -7.0 apg.

First part is fair, Chicago already lacks depth, really only 8 guys deep (Derozan, Lavine, Vuc, Ball, Caruso, White, Williams, Ayo) and only 5 of those guys are trusted commodities.

IDK, they're pretty deep for the EC. I mean, how many teams in the East have even 5 trusted guys? I think the NYK might have 2.

But that's kind of my point. They had enough depth to be good and when they lost a couple of players they couldn't stay afloat. Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:Gobert for Vucevic, Caruso, Pat Williams works salary wise.

Who says no? What picks would be needed to balance anything out.

CHI says no. they were moderately successful this season for two reasons, their depth and they have a center that can get his own and pass. That group combined for 86 MPG. That's a lot of floor time to give up for Gobert. And I'm not sure DeRozan is nearly as effective with a big on the floor that can't shoot. Besides, Look at the "Change in Team Outlook" for CHI: -18.5 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and -7.0 apg.

Chicago is going nowhere with Vucevic as it's starting center. He's one of the core reasons the team finished 13th offensively and 22nd defensively.

The goal is to not be first round fodder.

It's also dubious to suggest a team w/ DeRozan/LaVine needs another offensive shot creator (which Vuce's lackluster season doesn't exactly support)

DeRozan had the same production next to Jakob Poeltl for 3 years.

Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

Williams & Caruso combined for 1500 minutes.

Rashidi wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:Gobert for Vucevic, Caruso, Pat Williams works salary wise.

Who says no? What picks would be needed to balance anything out.

CHI says no. they were moderately successful this season for two reasons, their depth and they have a center that can get his own and pass. That group combined for 86 MPG. That's a lot of floor time to give up for Gobert. And I'm not sure DeRozan is nearly as effective with a big on the floor that can't shoot. Besides, Look at the "Change in Team Outlook" for CHI: -18.5 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and -7.0 apg.

Chicago is going nowhere with Vucevic as it's starting center. He's one of the core reasons the team finished 13th offensively and 22nd defensively.

The goal is to not be first round fodder.

It's also dubious to suggest a team w/ DeRozan/LaVine needs another offensive shot creator (which Vuce's lackluster season doesn't exactly support)

DeRozan had the same production next to Jakob Poeltl for 3 years.

Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

Williams & Caruso combined for 1500 minutes.

I don't disagree with you entirely. All I'm saying is that Gobert is not the answer, especially if it cost them depth. And yes, Caruso and Williams averaged 1500 minutes, but if you don't see a correlation between Caruso going down and their loss total going up you might not be paying attention. To clarify, you are talking about 3 players on team friendly deals for one outstanding defender that will clog the lane and is probably overpaid... even though he is outstanding at what he does. I think he is a rough pairing with DeRozan.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:CHI says no. they were moderately successful this season for two reasons, their depth and they have a center that can get his own and pass. That group combined for 86 MPG. That's a lot of floor time to give up for Gobert. And I'm not sure DeRozan is nearly as effective with a big on the floor that can't shoot. Besides, Look at the "Change in Team Outlook" for CHI: -18.5 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and -7.0 apg.

First part is fair, Chicago already lacks depth, really only 8 guys deep (Derozan, Lavine, Vuc, Ball, Caruso, White, Williams, Ayo) and only 5 of those guys are trusted commodities.

IDK, they're pretty deep for the EC. I mean, how many teams in the East have even 5 trusted guys? I think the NYK might have 2.

But that's kind of my point. They had enough depth to be good and when they lost a couple of players they couldn't stay afloat. Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

Probably at least 2 1sts to Chicago to eat Goberts deal. It's pretty bad now but the last 2 years are complete cap killers for uptown Clint Capella.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:CHI says no. they were moderately successful this season for two reasons, their depth and they have a center that can get his own and pass. That group combined for 86 MPG. That's a lot of floor time to give up for Gobert. And I'm not sure DeRozan is nearly as effective with a big on the floor that can't shoot. Besides, Look at the "Change in Team Outlook" for CHI: -18.5 ppg, -4.0 rpg, and -7.0 apg.

First part is fair, Chicago already lacks depth, really only 8 guys deep (Derozan, Lavine, Vuc, Ball, Caruso, White, Williams, Ayo) and only 5 of those guys are trusted commodities.

IDK, they're pretty deep for the EC. I mean, how many teams in the East have even 5 trusted guys? I think the NYK might have 2.

But that's kind of my point. They had enough depth to be good and when they lost a couple of players they couldn't stay afloat. Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

The Bulls 6th best player is who? Coby White? Patrick Williams?

Both guys have potential but I'd take Randle, RJ, Robinson, Rose, Fournier, Burks, Quickley, Toppin all over those guys. Noel too.

Scalabrine wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:
First part is fair, Chicago already lacks depth, really only 8 guys deep (Derozan, Lavine, Vuc, Ball, Caruso, White, Williams, Ayo) and only 5 of those guys are trusted commodities.

IDK, they're pretty deep for the EC. I mean, how many teams in the East have even 5 trusted guys? I think the NYK might have 2.

But that's kind of my point. They had enough depth to be good and when they lost a couple of players they couldn't stay afloat. Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

The Bulls 6th best player is who? Coby White? Patrick Williams?

Both guys have potential but I'd take Randle, RJ, Robinson, Rose, Fournier, Burks, Quickley, Toppin all over those guys. Noel too.

You can't compare the 6th guy to the first guy on any team. But how many CHI players would you take over Randle or Fournier with contracts as part of the equation?

But I'll give you this, maybe "depth" was the wrong term. CHI had 7-8 reliable players to start the season and when it got down to 5-6 they were toast. It was collective success, and as LAL saw this past season, guys 3-7 are often the most important. Trading away three reliable players for one brings them right back down to 5-6. That's a problem. On top of that Vuc/DeRozan fit better than Gobert/DeRozan even though Gobert is clearly the better player.

Best case scenario after that trade: CHI is a 5-seed... but I think it would be worse.

Rashidi wrote:

Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

Williams & Caruso combined for 1500 minutes.

Are they both going to have freak arm injuries due to flagrant fouls again this season? They're ~28 minute a game players when the team is healthy, especially if Lonzo's knee needs load managing.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Scalabrine wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:IDK, they're pretty deep for the EC. I mean, how many teams in the East have even 5 trusted guys? I think the NYK might have 2.

But that's kind of my point. They had enough depth to be good and when they lost a couple of players they couldn't stay afloat. Trading 3 for 1 will set them back, even if I believe in Gobert more than most people seem to.

The Bulls 6th best player is who? Coby White? Patrick Williams?

Both guys have potential but I'd take Randle, RJ, Robinson, Rose, Fournier, Burks, Quickley, Toppin all over those guys. Noel too.

You can't compare the 6th guy to the first guy on any team. But how many CHI players would you take over Randle or Fournier with contracts as part of the equation?

But I'll give you this, maybe "depth" was the wrong term. CHI had 7-8 reliable players to start the season and when it got down to 5-6 they were toast. It was collective success, and as LAL saw this past season, guys 3-7 are often the most important. Trading away three reliable players for one brings them right back down to 5-6. That's a problem. On top of that Vuc/DeRozan fit better than Gobert/DeRozan even though Gobert is clearly the better player.

Best case scenario after that trade: CHI is a 5-seed... but I think it would be worse.

Only reason I compared them is because you brought it up. I agree with your point though. The Bulls two biggest issues are depth and lack of outside volume 3 point shooting. Trading depth and shooting for someone who can't shoot is just going to exasperate that problem.

To answer your question, Randle regress last year, but he still averaged 20/10/5. He's the 43rd highest paid player in the league, and that ranking will probably drop into the 50's after contracts are doled out this off-season. Add in the guys still on rookie contracts that are number 1 options... That means he's being paid like a 2nd or 3rd option, which I think he's good enough for, so his contract is fair. Fournier is in the same salary tier as most other elite shooters (Joe Harris, Duncan Robinson, Hardway Jr, both Bogdanovic's, Kevin Huerter), that's just the going rate for an elite shooter. Those are constantly talked about as bad contracts on here, but I don't really understand why...neither are bargain deals, but both are fair.