Road to nowhere

[panthermark]

You need to clarify which team this thread is for...being that it could be applied to all things Chicago.

[dougthonus]

I just can't wrap my head around you not being able to see that these are all just guys.

They were all generally 2x-3x MLE grade starting caliber guys. We have not had the ability to add a guy like that the past three off-seasons because we are capped out, which is part of the problem. We also got an MVP guy, which we would have no ability to add under any circumstances, which is why it is a high risk / high reward scenario.

Tyrus? Really? You're really going to claim that we built a playoff series win around Tyrus Thomas? And that that was worth something???

I said all those guys but Tyrus, so I agree with you, and you have misunderstood.

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.

Yes, and you'd be in better cap position, and you'd be able to trade those guys for more other things, and you'd have a more fun team to watch, and we'd have had more draft picks, so you can add Franz Wagner / Jett Howard and we'd be guaranteed to keep our pick this year too.

It almost certainly won't yield you a title, it'd just be better than our current plan which absolutely will not yield a title.

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.

I have studied it lots of times, and even though you don't want to hear it, by _far_ the most repeatable way to build a good team is through the draft. It doesn't mean building through the draft will always work. There are lots of teams that fail at it, but it is by _far_ the most likely thing to work.

This is true for elite teams with superstars, good teams with superstars, and good teams without superstars (effectively there are no elite teams without superstars). I have in fact, presented the data around it to you, by looking at every 50 win team over the past 20 years and how they basically got there, and it is overwhelmingly, the draft is the most important component.

The next most common route is probably a superstar just wants to be in your city which is an option that is almost certainly closed to us (and 26 other teams) and also is not something you can control the timing on or plan for.

[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.

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.

IMO those days were not more fun. I think we're more talented now and have been for years than we were then.

[MrSparkle]

I'm still okay with the first season swings and 2nd season patience (minus the top-4 protection on Vuc; in hindsight, should've hardball with ORL for top-10 prot. atleast on the first pick... careless to think he'd make us better... mis-evaluation, blah blah). Big risk with the Vuc trade and Demar acquisition -- could've paid off for atleast a perennial 45+ win / 2nd round team in a healthier Lonzo world. That 3+ year injury cascaded into various issues. $20M annually blocked against the cap. Ambiguously waiting on him vs. punting.

I think going past the 2nd year deadline (Dragic year) without shuffling the deck was nonsensical. We had enough to conclude that we were in trouble with Patrick being a conclusive bust; Demar was approaching 35; Zach wasn't getting healthier/better; Vuc wasn't getting younger... And Lonzo's injury was clearly the biggest injury the Bulls had since Rose's ACL, which derailed about 3+ years with an ambiguous build. At the onset, in my head, if Demar/Vuc didn't work out, we had a promising enough young core in Lonzo, Zach and Pat to do some damage. But when Pat came into S3 looking like he just woke up from day care, Lonzo reports came in about the dude still being incapable of jumping or running, I had seen/heard enough. Somehow that wasn't enough for AK to say "HEY - I need to do something now to get something better than a Dalen Terry."

So a lot of missed opportunities. It was not wise sitting on this roster for so long, and even with Vuc/Zach (even Lonzo) "rebuilding" their value... I don't see what the end-game is. You're not getting a lucrative Danny Ainge haul for them, and you're not getting a top-10 pick so long they help win off-night games in our terribly crappy conference.

Essentially, AK appears to be a man of prayer and hopes and miracles. It would be miraculous if he won a top pick in the draft AND took the right guy (probably Flag, but maybe not - maybe Harper, or maybe somebody else... I am souring on Ace Bailey). It would be miraculous if Ayo, Coby, Pat, Matas or Dalen turned into all-stars. (And believe me , I like Matas' tools, but I'm not betting on a guy averaging 5/2/0.6 at 37% becoming an all-star; I don't care if Billy is purposely hazing him on a tight leash... NO star starts this slow as a rookie. He is a long shot project. If he wasn't a long shot, he'd be playing more than 13 MPG on this injury plagued garbage sub-500 team.)

We have 4 starters (Zach/Vuc/Giddey/Lonzo) and a bunch of scrubs/fringe-playoff players. I can see 3 years going by and this core still being 36-46 in 2028. Even worse if we send an 11th pick to Spurs, resign Giddey/Coby/Ayo to market values. It's crazy town. We don't even have 2nd round picks for a Jokic miracle. Jesus - I haven't even considered the possibility of resigning Lonzo to some guaranteed money since he's proven he could play 15MPG.

But if we get flag and all the lucky chips fall in place... Sure, AK's big ass gambles would pay off. Anybody else love 1.7% odds?? Cause that's where I'm at. A literal sub-2% chance of this team getting on a DEEP playoff track in the next few years. This is one of the worst tread mills I've ever seen in my life short of the VIVEK KINGS and ISIAH KNICKS.

[GoBlue72391]

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

Wow. Woooow.

I knew it wasn't great, but when it's put in black and white like that it's really eye opening.

We're in the worst position an NBA team can possibly be. We're in NBA hell.

[League Circles]

I have studied it lots of times, and even though you don't want to hear it, by _far_ the most repeatable way to build a good team is through the draft. It doesn't mean building through the draft will always work. There are lots of teams that fail at it, but it is by _far_ the most likely thing to work.

The problem here is that I genuinely, honestly don't know what is meant by "repeatable" or "building through the draft". No team repeats itself. No process should be characterized as the same as another IMO. Every single nba team and sequence of transactions is a one-off, bespoke thing. Every team has players they drafted on the roster. All the bad teams, all the great teams. They virtually all have both good and bad players that they themselves drafted, and good and bad players that other teams drafted. I'm very anti-essentialist in this way. Did Denver "build through the draft" when they won a title where their only special player was a 2nd round pick? Not in the context we're discussing, I'd argue.

This is true for elite teams with superstars, good teams with superstars, and good teams without superstars (effectively there are no elite teams without superstars). I have in fact, presented the data around it to you, by looking at every 50 win team over the past 20 years and how they basically got there, and it is overwhelmingly, the draft is the most important component.

I would disagree with much of this. There have been title winners without superstars IMO (3 this century IMO). And there are certainly top 8 teams in the league without superstars. Hell we had the best record IIRC in year one of AK before Ball went down with nobody remotely approaching superstar level.

But I don't disagree that the draft is very important. But it's more about how well you draft than where you pick. There are countless bad players selected with very high draft picks, and many very great players selected with pedestrian draft picks.

The next most common route is probably a superstar just wants to be in your city which is an option that is almost certainly closed to us (and 26 other teams) and also is not something you can control the timing on or plan for.

I disagree that it's closed to us (or most other teams). The key is putting together a situation that is appealing on multiple levels to the player. We've already had great players want to play for Chicago, even when we weren't that good. But I'm certainly not relying on that (or any other luck), because I don't think we should be focusing on superstars or championships. I want to focus on having a perpetually good roster and top 8 caliber team.

[Guru]

Does Cleveland have a superstar?

[Guru]

I often wonder why many of you are Bulls fans or basketball fans. If the Bulls hit on Matas or Pwill and had everyone else the same they are a rising 4th best team in the East. Sports is happenstance and luck in many cases. We are fine and will be fine. This catastrophizing is Sad

[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.

IMO those days were not more fun. I think we're more talented now and have been for years than we were then.

More talented. More hopeless.

[League Circles]

Does Cleveland have a superstar?

No, probably not.

[League Circles]

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

Wow. Woooow.

I knew it wasn't great, but when it's put in black and white like that it's really eye opening.

We're in the worst position an NBA team can possibly be. We're in NBA hell.

I mean, we would easily have been in a worse position than we are now if we hadn't traded Caruso for Giddey.

[dougthonus]

Does Cleveland have a superstar?

They are led by a player that has single handedly won playoff series and made the all-star game 5x in a row (and will make it 6 this year) and probably has already done enough to make the HOF.

We could quibble over what it means to be a superstar, but for intents of building a team, getting a player whom can do those things is a good place to start when building a team.

[dougthonus]

I mean, we would easily have been in a worse position than we are now if we hadn't traded Caruso for Giddey.

If we had traded him a year a go for two 1st rounders, we'd might be in a better position towards building a good team, because we'd have fewer wins this year, keep our pick in an elite draft and have more assets to build with going forward.

Granted, if Giddey becomes a player whose value exceeds his contract by a good amount next year, that might no longer be true, we'll have to see if Giddey is a value add long term which is unknowable now.

[League Circles]

I mean, we would easily have been in a worse position than we are now if we hadn't traded Caruso for Giddey.

If we had traded him a year a go for two 1st rounders, we'd might be in a better position towards building a good team, because we'd have fewer wins this year, keep our pick in an elite draft and have more assets to build with going forward.

Granted, if Giddey becomes a player whose value exceeds his contract by a good amount next year, that might no longer be true, we'll have to see if Giddey is a value add long term which is unknowable now.

Sure, though I think trading Giddey this season before the deadline has potential to be the best alternative of all of them. But we digress. Another poster said we couldn't possibly be in a worse situation, which as I've shown is false.

[Guru]

I mean, we would easily have been in a worse position than we are now if we hadn't traded Caruso for Giddey.

If we had traded him a year a go for two 1st rounders, we'd might be in a better position towards building a good team, because we'd have fewer wins this year, keep our pick in an elite draft and have more assets to build with going forward.

Granted, if Giddey becomes a player whose value exceeds his contract by a good amount next year, that might no longer be true, we'll have to see if Giddey is a value add long term which is unknowable now.

How do you sleep at night with this mindset. It's not fun

[MrSparkle]

Does Cleveland have a superstar?

They are led by a player that has single handedly won playoff series and made the all-star game 5x in a row (and will make it 6 this year) and probably has already done enough to make the HOF.

We could quibble over what it means to be a superstar, but for intents of building a team, getting a player whom can do those things is a good place to start when building a team.

Not to mention it's arguable that their 4th best player could be the best player on our team (Jarrett Allen), as far as overall impact and PER go.

But besides that, I think Evan Mobley is on his way to being a superstar... and Mitchell can undoubtedly be considered a superstar. I don't what more he needs to do besides win a chip. His career playoff averages:

21 PER
28/5/5
1.3 steals
54 games

Those aren't GOAT numbers, but fwiw, they're comparable to Kobe's (minus the amount of post-season games).

I favor BOS for their experience, but these days the playoffs are an injury marathon. If CLE is healthy, and BOS isn't (might be the case as Horford/Jrue/Porzingis are a year older), the Cavs are stacked enough to win a ring. OKC stands in their way, but they'd be the youngest champion of all time- don't see that happening. Rest is kind of a Wild West... as the superstars are surrounded by scrubs and/or meeting Father Time.

[League Circles]

Does Cleveland have a superstar?

They are led by a player that has single handedly won playoff series and made the all-star game 5x in a row (and will make it 6 this year) and probably has already done enough to make the HOF.

We could quibble over what it means to be a superstar, but for intents of building a team, getting a player whom can do those things is a good place to start when building a team.

Agreed. We should just draft our own with our #13 pick where he was drafted.

[dougthonus]

Agreed. We should just draft our own with our #13 pick where he was drafted.

For sure, we should get a lot of picks so the odds of that low percentage chance thing happening are multiplied to the point where it is no longer a low percentage chance, but a good chance.

[dougthonus]

Sure, though I think trading Giddey this season before the deadline has potential to be the best alternative of all of them. But we digress. Another poster said we couldn't possibly be in a worse situation, which as I've shown is false.

Yeah, things could be worse, if someone intentionally wanted to make them worse. Could just trade all our 1sts and Matas and Pat for a bad contract and it'd be worse, but that's nonsensical.

From a win now perspective, we'd probably be better with Caruso than Giddey. From a win later perspective that same thing might be true too if Caruso was willing to sign an extension with us. Giddey might be worse than no trade or trading for picks.

It would be hard for things to be much worse while actually trying to be competent at your job though.

[League Circles]

Agreed. We should just draft our own with our #13 pick where he was drafted.

For sure, we should get a lot of picks so the odds of that low percentage chance thing happening are multiplied to the point where it is no longer a low percentage chance, but a good chance.

Yeah, that would be good in a vacuum, but unfortunately the moves that would get us additional good draft picks are also generally moves that would increase the number of additional good players we'd need. To some extent it can be a zero sum game. I'm definitely open to trading players for picks, but not just to do it, and not just cause a guy is 29 years old or whatever. And not just to hopefully be bad enough to keep our pick this year just to give it up next year.