What are 2nd round picks worth really?

[sco]

We're seeing potential trades bantied about that have us getting back 2nd round picks for Vuc and others. And I find myself wondering what they are really worth in terms of real value coming back to the Bulls. On the one hand there have been some famous send round picks that have gone on to become stars in the league. Also, some starting caliber players have been gettable for packages of expirings and multiple 2nd round picks. Also, 2nd round picks don't come with the long-term guarantees of 1st rounders...so lower risk.

On the other hand, most of the teams trading for our guys would be contending teams with late 2nd rounders (if one were to ascribe some value to early 2nd rounders). Also, there is the notion that if a team wanted a second round pick, they can always be bought, without any cap/tax impact.

What do you think?

[MrSparkle]

They’re not worth all that much. I usually find them expendable. Believe you could straight up buy one, with cash considerations, on draft night. But Bulls have consistently traded out almost all of them… and with their lack of FRPs, they’ve done themselves a disservice. You can’t keep approaching each draft for half a decade with half a dart.

Ayo and Phillips have been ok pickups (JP on the fringe… Ayo’s been FRP quality). The guy we hired picked Jokic. Beyond this, they’re the cheapest means of filling roster spots. Late/Mid FRPs aren’t good value when you’re paying Dalen Terry (let alone #4 Pat) way more money than their outperforming vet min counterparts (Javonte, Craig, THT). 2nd rounders that outperform are good value.

But it’s all about the gamble… and if you’re gambling, quantity helps. They’re working with very little. The AK farm is very disappointing after 4y. All in all, I think a Vuc trade would be more for the tank than the 2nds. However, it’s getting late to secure a tank/top-10. This FO should just keep making their jobs harder… give the 12-15 pick to SAS and fight on another year with the Zach/Vuc/Billy combo.

Why the hell not? Play-in/playoff sweeps have integrity.

[League Circles]

2nd rounders are the lowest possible positive value asset. They typically represent the "opportunity" to give a non-NBA caliber player a multi year contract, and more importantly a roster spot.

They are the loose change of NBA trades. When two sides are close to a deal, one team insists on a 2nd rounder. The other team is like, ok sure.

Obviously once in a while they are used to draft a good player. But IMO it's way more rare than most think.

Not sure I can really recall a legit good player that the Bulls drafted in the 2nd round other than Omer Asik, who was a stash. Ayo isn't good yet, probably never will be.

[jnrjr79]

2nd rounders are the lowest possible positive value asset. They typically represent the "opportunity" to give a non-NBA caliber player a multi year contract, and more importantly a roster spot.

They are the loose change of NBA trades. When two sides are close to a deal, one team insists on a 2nd rounder. The other team is like, ok sure.

Obviously once in a while they are used to draft a good player. But IMO it's way more rare than most think.

Not sure I can really recall a legit good player that the Bulls drafted in the 2nd round other than Omer Asik, who was a stash. Ayo isn't good yet, probably never will be.

What are we doing here? Ayo is obviously "good" even if he's not a star.

Other good Bulls players drafted in the 2nd round, at least relative to their 2nd round status:

Chris Duhon
Daniel Gafford
Toni Kukoc
Norm Van Lier

Obviously they don't pop often, but they do occasionally. And the low cost contract can be useful if you're in a cap squeeze.

2nd round picks are probably most valuable, though, as trade facilitators. If that "loose change" gets a deal done, then it was good to have the loose change!

[League Circles]

2nd rounders are the lowest possible positive value asset. They typically represent the "opportunity" to give a non-NBA caliber player a multi year contract, and more importantly a roster spot.

They are the loose change of NBA trades. When two sides are close to a deal, one team insists on a 2nd rounder. The other team is like, ok sure.

Obviously once in a while they are used to draft a good player. But IMO it's way more rare than most think.

Not sure I can really recall a legit good player that the Bulls drafted in the 2nd round other than Omer Asik, who was a stash. Ayo isn't good yet, probably never will be.

What are we doing here? Ayo is obviously "good" even if he's not a star.

Other good Bulls players drafted in the 2nd round, at least relative to their 2nd round status:

Chris Duhon
Daniel Gafford
Toni Kukoc
Norm Van Lier

Obviously they don't pop often, but they do occasionally. And the low cost contract can be useful if you're in a cap squeeze.

2nd round picks are probably most valuable, though, as trade facilitators. If that "loose change" gets a deal done, then it was good to have the loose change!

LMFAO at the notion that Ayo is a "good" NBA player. He's solid. Not close to good. He's a pretty good defender and a very average offensive perimeter player. Duhon certainly wasn't good either. I haven't followed Gafford closely since he left us. Kukoc was a stash ages ago that we waited years for. Van Lier was 18th century.

If Ayo is good then we have a bunch of good players and should be a good team...... .

[League Circles]

2nd rounders are in fact not a way to save money either. You can always fill a roster spot for as cheap or cheaper than any 2nd rounder would be in that roster spot.

[Rose2Boozer]

It depends on the draft.

[jnrjr79]

2nd rounders are the lowest possible positive value asset. They typically represent the "opportunity" to give a non-NBA caliber player a multi year contract, and more importantly a roster spot.

They are the loose change of NBA trades. When two sides are close to a deal, one team insists on a 2nd rounder. The other team is like, ok sure.

Obviously once in a while they are used to draft a good player. But IMO it's way more rare than most think.

Not sure I can really recall a legit good player that the Bulls drafted in the 2nd round other than Omer Asik, who was a stash. Ayo isn't good yet, probably never will be.

What are we doing here? Ayo is obviously "good" even if he's not a star.

Other good Bulls players drafted in the 2nd round, at least relative to their 2nd round status:

Chris Duhon
Daniel Gafford
Toni Kukoc
Norm Van Lier

Obviously they don't pop often, but they do occasionally. And the low cost contract can be useful if you're in a cap squeeze.

2nd round picks are probably most valuable, though, as trade facilitators. If that "loose change" gets a deal done, then it was good to have the loose change!

LMFAO at the notion that Ayo is a "good" NBA player. He's solid. Not close to good. He's a pretty good defender and a very average offensive perimeter player. Duhon certainly wasn't good either. I haven't followed Gafford closely since he left us. Kukoc was a stash ages ago that we waited years for. Van Lier was 18th century.

If Ayo is good then we have a bunch of good players and should be a good team...... .

I don't see any difference between "solid" and "good," so maybe this is just semantics.

If you are a fringe starter or solid bench player, you are a "good" NBA player.

[jnrjr79]

2nd rounders are in fact not a way to save money either. You can always fill a roster spot for as cheap or cheaper than any 2nd rounder would be in that roster spot.

Not true. 2nd round picks are only entitled to a minimum NBA salary based on years of service, so veteran minimum guys are generally going to earn more. And 2nd rounders do not have to be guaranteed (though nor do minimum guys).

[League Circles]

What are we doing here? Ayo is obviously "good" even if he's not a star.

Other good Bulls players drafted in the 2nd round, at least relative to their 2nd round status:

Chris Duhon
Daniel Gafford
Toni Kukoc
Norm Van Lier

Obviously they don't pop often, but they do occasionally. And the low cost contract can be useful if you're in a cap squeeze.

2nd round picks are probably most valuable, though, as trade facilitators. If that "loose change" gets a deal done, then it was good to have the loose change!

LMFAO at the notion that Ayo is a "good" NBA player. He's solid. Not close to good. He's a pretty good defender and a very average offensive perimeter player. Duhon certainly wasn't good either. I haven't followed Gafford closely since he left us. Kukoc was a stash ages ago that we waited years for. Van Lier was 18th century.

If Ayo is good then we have a bunch of good players and should be a good team...... .

I don't see any difference between "solid" and "good," so maybe this is just semantics.

If you are a fringe starter or solid bench player, you are a "good" NBA player.

Yeah, I guess it is semantics. IMO, good definitely means clearly above average. There are 14 required players on a roster. So the 7th man on an average team I'll define as average. We're a bit below average, and Ayo is probably somewhere between our 4th and 8th best player.

[League Circles]

2nd rounders are in fact not a way to save money either. You can always fill a roster spot for as cheap or cheaper than any 2nd rounder would be in that roster spot.

Not true. 2nd round picks are only entitled to a minimum NBA salary based on years of service, so veteran minimum guys are generally going to earn more. And 2nd rounders do not have to be guaranteed (though nor do minimum guys).

League minimum is the relevant number, not veteran minimum. The cheapest way to fill a roster spot is league minimum. IIRC some 2nd rounders only get that in year 1, but I think many get more than that, and they all get more than that in year 2 and beyond.

[jnrjr79]

LMFAO at the notion that Ayo is a "good" NBA player. He's solid. Not close to good. He's a pretty good defender and a very average offensive perimeter player. Duhon certainly wasn't good either. I haven't followed Gafford closely since he left us. Kukoc was a stash ages ago that we waited years for. Van Lier was 18th century.

If Ayo is good then we have a bunch of good players and should be a good team...... .

I don't see any difference between "solid" and "good," so maybe this is just semantics.

If you are a fringe starter or solid bench player, you are a "good" NBA player.

Yeah, I guess it is semantics. IMO, good definitely means clearly above average. There are 14 required players on a roster. So the 7th man on an average team I'll define as average. We're a bit below average, and Ayo is probably somewhere between our 4th and 8th best player.

Yeah, I agree with this. Good would be synonymous with something above average/replacement level.

The Bulls have 18 rostered players. I guess you can ignore the two-way guys if you want and focus on the 15 actual player. I think Ayo is worse than LaVine. He's worse than Lonzo if you don't ding Lonzo for his minutes restriction. After that, I think there are a lot of slots you can argue. He's worse than 2024-2025 Vooch, but probably better than all prior seasons of Vooch, just because Vooch is so horrid on the defensive end. He can't do what Coby did yesterday, but I'm open to an argument he's better overall than Coby, because Coby also gets cold and is another terrible defender. He's better than Williams, IMO. He's probably better than Giddey, but then lacks Giddey's elite court vision.

Ayo's basic attribute is he's a jack of all trades, but a master of none. So it's interesting to compare him to some of his teammates that have offensive skills that really exceed Ayo's, but all but Lonzo are worse defenders.

Obviously some of this is the Bulls' roster - he'd be lower on the totem pole on a better team.

[jnrjr79]

2nd rounders are in fact not a way to save money either. You can always fill a roster spot for as cheap or cheaper than any 2nd rounder would be in that roster spot.

Not true. 2nd round picks are only entitled to a minimum NBA salary based on years of service, so veteran minimum guys are generally going to earn more. And 2nd rounders do not have to be guaranteed (though nor do minimum guys).

League minimum is the relevant number, not veteran minimum. The cheapest way to fill a roster spot is league minimum. IIRC some 2nd rounders only get that in year 1, but I think many get more than that, and they all get more than that in year 2 and beyond.

To my understanding, there's no such thing as "league minimum" vs. "veteran minimum." It's just "minimum" and a sliding scale based on your years of service:

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/minimum

Anyone with 0 years of service is by definition the cheapest option. But, veteran players only "count" on the books as a 2 years of experience player, to encourage teams to sign vets rather than ditch them to get cheaper guys, even though those vets actually make more than that.

[League Circles]

I don't see any difference between "solid" and "good," so maybe this is just semantics.

If you are a fringe starter or solid bench player, you are a "good" NBA player.

Yeah, I guess it is semantics. IMO, good definitely means clearly above average. There are 14 required players on a roster. So the 7th man on an average team I'll define as average. We're a bit below average, and Ayo is probably somewhere between our 4th and 8th best player.

Yeah, I agree with this. Good would be synonymous with something above average/replacement level.

The Bulls have 18 rostered players. I guess you can ignore the two-way guys if you want and focus on the 15 actual player. I think Ayo is worse than LaVine. He's worse than Lonzo if you don't ding Lonzo for his minutes restriction. After that, I think there are a lot of slots you can argue. He's worse than 2024-2025 Vooch, but probably better than all prior seasons of Vooch, just because Vooch is so horrid on the defensive end. He can't do what Coby did yesterday, but I'm open to an argument he's better overall than Coby, because Coby also gets cold and is another terrible defender. He's better than Williams, IMO. He's probably better than Giddey, but then lacks Giddey's elite court vision.

Ayo's basic attribute is he's a jack of all trades, but a master of none. So it's interesting to compare him to some of his teammates that have offensive skills that really exceed Ayo's, but all but Lonzo are worse defenders.

Obviously some of this is the Bulls' roster - he'd be lower on the totem pole on a better team.

Well, average is way better than replacement level. Replacement level is a borderline nba player.

IMO, Zach and Lonzo are clearly better than Ayo, and I have Coby as better than him too (though not necessarily by much or forever). Then IMO Ayo could be a bit better or a bit worse than all these guys:

Vuc
Smith
Patrick
Giddey

Patrick is IMO definitely a better defender than Ayo, and a better spacer / shooter. Though Ayo is a better ball handler, passer and finisher off the drive. I also think Smith has a better defensive impact than Ayo.

[League Circles]

Not true. 2nd round picks are only entitled to a minimum NBA salary based on years of service, so veteran minimum guys are generally going to earn more. And 2nd rounders do not have to be guaranteed (though nor do minimum guys).

League minimum is the relevant number, not veteran minimum. The cheapest way to fill a roster spot is league minimum. IIRC some 2nd rounders only get that in year 1, but I think many get more than that, and they all get more than that in year 2 and beyond.

To my understanding, there's no such thing as "league minimum" vs. "veteran minimum." It's just "minimum" and a sliding scale based on your years of service:

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/minimum

Anyone with 0 years of service is by definition the cheapest option. But, veteran players only "count" on the books as a 2 years of experience player, to encourage teams to sign vets rather than ditch them to get cheaper guys, even though those vets actually make more than that.

League minimum = 0 years of experience.

Phillips, for example last year earned like 500k or so more than the minimum for a 0 years of experience guy, and this year he's at about 700-800k more than a 0 years guy.

Zero years guys (league minimum) are always as cheap as you can get. Therefore, having a 2nd round pick doesn't facilitate any cost savings over not having that pick.

[jnrjr79]

Yeah, I guess it is semantics. IMO, good definitely means clearly above average. There are 14 required players on a roster. So the 7th man on an average team I'll define as average. We're a bit below average, and Ayo is probably somewhere between our 4th and 8th best player.

Yeah, I agree with this. Good would be synonymous with something above average/replacement level.

The Bulls have 18 rostered players. I guess you can ignore the two-way guys if you want and focus on the 15 actual player. I think Ayo is worse than LaVine. He's worse than Lonzo if you don't ding Lonzo for his minutes restriction. After that, I think there are a lot of slots you can argue. He's worse than 2024-2025 Vooch, but probably better than all prior seasons of Vooch, just because Vooch is so horrid on the defensive end. He can't do what Coby did yesterday, but I'm open to an argument he's better overall than Coby, because Coby also gets cold and is another terrible defender. He's better than Williams, IMO. He's probably better than Giddey, but then lacks Giddey's elite court vision.

Ayo's basic attribute is he's a jack of all trades, but a master of none. So it's interesting to compare him to some of his teammates that have offensive skills that really exceed Ayo's, but all but Lonzo are worse defenders.

Obviously some of this is the Bulls' roster - he'd be lower on the totem pole on a better team.

Well, average is way better than replacement level. Replacement level is a borderline nba player.

IMO, Zach and Lonzo are clearly better than Ayo, and I have Coby as better than him too (though not necessarily by much or forever). Then IMO Ayo could be a bit better or a bit worse than all these guys:

Vuc
Smith
Patrick
Giddey

Patrick is IMO definitely a better defender than Ayo, and a better spacer / shooter. Though Ayo is a better ball handler, passer and finisher off the drive. I also think Smith has a better defensive impact than Ayo.

I think Patrick is a worse defender than Ayo, and less valuable because the Bulls desperately need defenders at the point of attack. Agreed he's a better shooter.

I'm kinda meh on Smith. I don't hate him, but he seems awfully limited.

Giddey and Vooch are tougher to peg. Both are pretty horrendous on defense, though Giddey is certainly trying hard lately. Giddey is a worse shooter, but a much better passer, organizer, and rebounder. Vooch I think is better right now, but he's having a career year and I don't really expect that to sustain for the remainder of his contract.

[jnrjr79]

League minimum is the relevant number, not veteran minimum. The cheapest way to fill a roster spot is league minimum. IIRC some 2nd rounders only get that in year 1, but I think many get more than that, and they all get more than that in year 2 and beyond.

To my understanding, there's no such thing as "league minimum" vs. "veteran minimum." It's just "minimum" and a sliding scale based on your years of service:

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/minimum

Anyone with 0 years of service is by definition the cheapest option. But, veteran players only "count" on the books as a 2 years of experience player, to encourage teams to sign vets rather than ditch them to get cheaper guys, even though those vets actually make more than that.

League minimum = 0 years of experience.

Phillips, for example last year earned like 500k or so more than the minimum for a 0 years of experience guy, and this year he's at about 700-800k more than a 0 years guy.

Zero years guys (league minimum) are always as cheap as you can get. Therefore, having a 2nd round pick doesn't facilitate any cost savings over not having that pick.

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Phillips makes more because the Bulls gave him more, but didn't have to. 0 years guys who aren't second round picks are UDFAs, so less likely to contribute than 2nd round picks. But sure, they'll make the minimum for a 0 year player.

[HomoSapien]

I think a second-round pick in the 30s can be valuable. Talk about them being the lowest possible positive asset is outdated thinking, and I tell League of Circles this every single time he says this -- which is very often. In recent years, the following players have been drafted in the second round:

2014:
Nikola Jokic
Jerami Grant
Spencer Dinwiddie
Jordan Clarkson
Joe Harris
Dwight Powell

2015
Cedi Osman
Montrezl Harrell
Norman Powell
Pat Caugnaton
Josh Richardson
Richaun Holmes

2016
Ivica Zubac
Malcolm Brogdon
Georges Niang

2017
Isaiah Hartenstein
Dillon Brooks
Thomas Bryant
Monte Morris

2018
Jalen Brunson
Mitchell Robinson
Gary Trent Jr.
Bruce Brown
Jared Vanderbilt
Devonte Graham

2019
Nic Claxton
Daniel Gafford


Plenty of starters have been found, and a lot of them in that 30-40 range. Let's not overvalue the pick, it's still far from a guarantee but this isn't the 90s anymore where a 2nd round pick is destined to go to the CBA. Teams are finding real players. Including the Bulls who found Ayo, who is arguably their most desirable young player.

[League Circles]

To my understanding, there's no such thing as "league minimum" vs. "veteran minimum." It's just "minimum" and a sliding scale based on your years of service:

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/minimum

Anyone with 0 years of service is by definition the cheapest option. But, veteran players only "count" on the books as a 2 years of experience player, to encourage teams to sign vets rather than ditch them to get cheaper guys, even though those vets actually make more than that.

League minimum = 0 years of experience.

Phillips, for example last year earned like 500k or so more than the minimum for a 0 years of experience guy, and this year he's at about 700-800k more than a 0 years guy.

Zero years guys (league minimum) are always as cheap as you can get. Therefore, having a 2nd round pick doesn't facilitate any cost savings over not having that pick.

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Phillips makes more because the Bulls gave him more, but didn't have to. 0 years guys who aren't second round picks are UDFAs, so less likely to contribute than 2nd round picks. But sure, they'll make the minimum for a 0 year player.

Sounds like you understand it exactly lol. You cannot pay a second rounder less than a zero year salary. Thus, having a second round pick cannot help you save money relative to not having it. Yes, in year one some 2nd rounders probably only get the zero year salary (unlike Phillips), but they all make more in year 2.

Yes, an UDFA projects to contribute slightly less than most second rounders, but IMO it is marginal and I never said it would make a team better on the court anyway. Though I'd argue most 2nd rounders are drafted due to (limited) potential. IMO, having low potential guys as third stringers is often a mistake. IMO, teams are better served having lower potential, more polished guys in those roles. Like think 4 year college players who don't make mistakes but just don't have the physical tools to ever be good. Other good alternatives for end of bench guys on zero year salaries are older G league and foreign pros who were never drafted.

If I was running a team I would routinely be using these zero year contracts to fill out the irrelevant end of my bench rather than pay 17 million **** dollars to Duarte, Carter, THT and Phillips like we are. If we replaced those 4 guys with the best 4 undrafted G league and foreign pros we could find, we'd save like 13 mil against the cap and have an absolutely negligible impact on our season.

[jnrjr79]

League minimum = 0 years of experience.

Phillips, for example last year earned like 500k or so more than the minimum for a 0 years of experience guy, and this year he's at about 700-800k more than a 0 years guy.

Zero years guys (league minimum) are always as cheap as you can get. Therefore, having a 2nd round pick doesn't facilitate any cost savings over not having that pick.

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Phillips makes more because the Bulls gave him more, but didn't have to. 0 years guys who aren't second round picks are UDFAs, so less likely to contribute than 2nd round picks. But sure, they'll make the minimum for a 0 year player.

Sounds like you understand it exactly lol. You cannot pay a second rounder less than a zero year salary. Thus, having a second round pick cannot help you save money relative to not having it. Yes, in year one some 2nd rounders probably only get the zero year salary (unlike Phillips), but they all make more in year 2.

Yes, an UDFA projects to contribute slightly less than most second rounders, but IMO it is marginal and I never said it would make a team better on the court anyway. Though I'd argue most 2nd rounders are drafted due to (limited) potential. IMO, having low potential guys as third stringers is often a mistake. IMO, teams are better served having lower potential, more polished guys in those roles. Like think 4 year college players who don't make mistakes but just don't have the physical tools to ever be good. Other good alternatives for end of bench guys on zero year salaries are older G league and foreign pros who were never drafted.

If I was running a team I would routinely be using these zero year contracts to fill out the irrelevant end of my bench rather than pay 17 million **** dollars to Duarte, Carter, THT and Phillips like we are. If we replaced those 4 guys with the best 4 undrafted G league and foreign pros we could find, we'd save like 13 mil against the cap and have an absolutely negligible impact on our season.

What I'm suggesting is that in reality, most teams are not going to sign 0 year UDFAs with their extra roster slots. They are going to sign vets who make more than a 2nd rounder. You *can* sign an UDFA, but it's generally not going to be the best use of a slot.