Official Bulls Tankathon 2025 Thread

[Dan Z]

Bulls tied with Heat and sit in 10th in the lottery, this might go back and forth until the season ends.

Portland has 30 wins, so theres a chance the Bulls pass them too.

With the 11th pick in the NBA draft the Bulls select...

Which would mean us getting our pick back was far and away the most valuable asset in the Zach trade.

I still think AK should've asked for more because the Bulls didn't need to be in that trade. Spurs wanted Fox and Sacramento wanted an established player plus picks.

Also, that pick never should've been traded in the first place.

But what's done is done. I agree that it's good that the Bulls have their pick. I just hope they make good use of it.

[Muzbar]

Bulls tied with Heat and sit in 10th in the lottery, this might go back and forth until the season ends.

Portland has 30 wins, so theres a chance the Bulls pass them too.

With the 11th pick in the NBA draft the Bulls select...

Which would mean us getting our pick back was far and away the most valuable asset in the Zach trade.

I would say it only really became valuable as the 3 players they acquired exceeded expectations and their previous outputs. Also, Giddey playing the way he had been probably didn't help the tanking cause either.

[Ctownbulls]

Portland has 30 wins, so theres a chance the Bulls pass them too.

With the 11th pick in the NBA draft the Bulls select...

Which would mean us getting our pick back was far and away the most valuable asset in the Zach trade.

I still think AK should've asked for more because the Bulls didn't need to be in that trade. Spurs wanted Fox and Sacramento wanted an established player plus picks.

Also, that pick never should've been traded in the first place.

But what's done is done. I agree that it's good that the Bulls have their pick. I just hope they make good use of it.

Lavine clearly had no value. They were fortunate to get rid of him.

Sent from my Pixel 9 using Tapatalk

[Dan Z]

Which would mean us getting our pick back was far and away the most valuable asset in the Zach trade.

I still think AK should've asked for more because the Bulls didn't need to be in that trade. Spurs wanted Fox and Sacramento wanted an established player plus picks.

Also, that pick never should've been traded in the first place.

But what's done is done. I agree that it's good that the Bulls have their pick. I just hope they make good use of it.

Lavine clearly had no value. They were fortunate to get rid of him.

Sent from my Pixel 9 using Tapatalk

He's not a bad player and they didn't need to trade him. They waited this long, so trading him just to trade him isn't a good move and asking for a little more wouldn't hurt to try.

But don't get me wrong, I'm glad the Bulls got their pick back. I just wish they made an effort to tank so the pick is better than it is.

[JimmyButler21]

Bulls tied with Heat and sit in 10th in the lottery, this might go back and forth until the season ends.

Portland has 30 wins, so theres a chance the Bulls pass them too.

With the 11th pick in the NBA draft the Bulls select...

Which would mean us getting our pick back was far and away the most valuable asset in the Zach trade.

This was the whole point of the trade. They were never going to seriously try and tank like 50% of the NBA is doing right now.

[Ctownbulls]

I still think AK should've asked for more because the Bulls didn't need to be in that trade. Spurs wanted Fox and Sacramento wanted an established player plus picks.

Also, that pick never should've been traded in the first place.

But what's done is done. I agree that it's good that the Bulls have their pick. I just hope they make good use of it.

Lavine clearly had no value. They were fortunate to get rid of him.

Sent from my Pixel 9 using Tapatalk

He's not a bad player and they didn't need to trade him. They waited this long, so trading him just to trade him isn't a good move and asking for a little more wouldn't hurt to try.

But don't get me wrong, I'm glad the Bulls got their pick back. I just wish they made an effort to tank so the pick is better than it is.

Don't disagree but by the time they pivoted to "tank mode" they were basically locked into 6-10 unless they lost every single game. If Lavine isn't apart of the future then they are better off playing everyone else, irrespective of whether they are tanking.

[Chi town]

Good night for the tank. Spurs Blazers win

[JimmyButler21]

Good night for the tank. Spurs Blazers win

There's no tank

[dougthonus]

He's not a bad player and they didn't need to trade him. They waited this long, so trading him just to trade him isn't a good move and asking for a little more wouldn't hurt to try.

But don't get me wrong, I'm glad the Bulls got their pick back. I just wish they made an effort to tank so the pick is better than it is.

His rep around the league, fair or not, seemed to kill his trade value. I'm sure we asked for more and this was as much as we could get. I would have leaned towards not trading him too. The Kings swapped out Fox for him and have been just as good as they were pre-trade, and Kings fans are happier with LaVine than Fox whom was going to cost the same amount (if he agreed to stay anyway) on a 5 year deal.

If I'm a Kings fan, I probably feel like the big winner in this trade. I dumped salary I didn't want, an unhappy star that would have required a massive bad contract to keep, and I got a short term replacement whom will keep the team winning at the same rate as before along with some good draft assets.

[League Circles]

Portland has 30 wins, so theres a chance the Bulls pass them too.

With the 11th pick in the NBA draft the Bulls select...

Which would mean us getting our pick back was far and away the most valuable asset in the Zach trade.

This was the whole point of the trade. They were never going to seriously try and tank like 50% of the NBA is doing right now.

If 50% of the league is trying to be bad, that virtually ensures that trying to join them would be unwise. Obviously depends on the details, but it's just not clear that there was any notable roster moves to be made this year that would help the value of our pick without hurting our future in other, equal impact ways.

[League Circles]

We should always remember that we saw the greatest player who ever lived retire at the peak of his greatness after a 57 win season for a third straight title, and the team won 55 games the next year with no significant additions.

Speculating regular season win-loss impact of individual players has never been an easy thing.

The idea that keeping Zach was keeping us afloat for x number of "unecessary" wins by himself was always just a wild guess, let alone in comparison to any plausible and advisable trade return to match his salary. And the idea that Vuc was ever floating us to X number of wins vs any other rotation NBA big was always wishful thinking. This team is loaded with top 10 nba draft picks. It may have been a poorly assembled roster for years, but it's never been an untalented one.

[eierluke]

in 1994 Toni Kukoc arrived. He ain't Michael Jordan, but was a significant addition.

[Dan Z]

He's not a bad player and they didn't need to trade him. They waited this long, so trading him just to trade him isn't a good move and asking for a little more wouldn't hurt to try.

But don't get me wrong, I'm glad the Bulls got their pick back. I just wish they made an effort to tank so the pick is better than it is.

His rep around the league, fair or not, seemed to kill his trade value. I'm sure we asked for more and this was as much as we could get. I would have leaned towards not trading him too. The Kings swapped out Fox for him and have been just as good as they were pre-trade, and Kings fans are happier with LaVine than Fox whom was going to cost the same amount (if he agreed to stay anyway) on a 5 year deal.

If I'm a Kings fan, I probably feel like the big winner in this trade. I dumped salary I didn't want, an unhappy star that would have required a massive bad contract to keep, and I got a short term replacement whom will keep the team winning at the same rate as before along with some good draft assets.

Another thing I've thought about is the pick the Bulls previously owed to the Spurs. It was protected 1-10 correct? Right now the Bulls are slated to pick 9. Had they gone into this season with one goal being to get a top 2025 pick (meaning some tanking) then I bet they could've kept it.

I say this because if they had to walk away from the Sacramento trade then they still might be able to keep their pick. Of course lottery and messing up any attempts to tank could've changed this (plus the Bulls would still owe a pick next year).

Having said that, I don't hate the Zach trade.

PS I'm surprised that the Kings didn't get their 2031 swap back from the Spurs. Maybe they don't value it that much?

[jnrjr79]

He's not a bad player and they didn't need to trade him. They waited this long, so trading him just to trade him isn't a good move and asking for a little more wouldn't hurt to try.

But don't get me wrong, I'm glad the Bulls got their pick back. I just wish they made an effort to tank so the pick is better than it is.

His rep around the league, fair or not, seemed to kill his trade value. I'm sure we asked for more and this was as much as we could get. I would have leaned towards not trading him too. The Kings swapped out Fox for him and have been just as good as they were pre-trade, and Kings fans are happier with LaVine than Fox whom was going to cost the same amount (if he agreed to stay anyway) on a 5 year deal.

If I'm a Kings fan, I probably feel like the big winner in this trade. I dumped salary I didn't want, an unhappy star that would have required a massive bad contract to keep, and I got a short term replacement whom will keep the team winning at the same rate as before along with some good draft assets.

Another thing I've thought about is the pick the Bulls previously owed to the Spurs. It was protected 1-10 correct? Right now the Bulls are slated to pick 9. Had they gone into this season with one goal being to get a top 2025 pick (meaning some tanking) then I bet they could've kept it.

I say this because if they had to walk away from the Sacramento trade then they still might be able to keep their pick. Of course lottery and messing up any attempts to tank could've changed this (plus the Bulls would still owe a pick next year).

Having said that, I don't hate the Zach trade.

PS I'm surprised that the Kings didn't get their 2031 swap back from the Spurs. Maybe they don't value it that much?

Yeah, at the time the Bulls made the trade, there were a lot of folks saying "but they would have kept it anyway." That's looking pretty precarious right now, and in any event, there's value in having those future protections gone.

I feel like this trade is one that seems to have worked well enough for both sides. Plus, the guys we received have played well and rehabilitated their values to the point where they might be future trade assets or keepers, which has been a bit surprising.

[dougthonus]

I say this because if they had to walk away from the Sacramento trade then they still might be able to keep their pick. Of course lottery and messing up any attempts to tank could've changed this (plus the Bulls would still owe a pick next year).

Having said that, I don't hate the Zach trade.

From a value perspective, I hate the Zach trade, but the problem is that Zach has simply been here too long. They likely needed to move on from him culturally, and the value piece simply wasn't going to change. Sometimes people just reach their expiration date with an organization (in any field, not just the NBA) and will just be worth more in a new, refreshed scenario. I think that was true of Zach. It's simply a shame not enough other teams were thinking the same way.

It's also hard to speculate as to if the Bulls were particularly excited about their own pick and thus overvalued it. I could see that from our organization.

[League Circles]

in 1994 Toni Kukoc arrived. He ain't Michael Jordan, but was a significant addition.

He basically sucked as a rookie. Poor shooting, poorer defense.

[sco]

I say this because if they had to walk away from the Sacramento trade then they still might be able to keep their pick. Of course lottery and messing up any attempts to tank could've changed this (plus the Bulls would still owe a pick next year).

Having said that, I don't hate the Zach trade.

From a value perspective, I hate the Zach trade, but the problem is that Zach has simply been here too long. They likely needed to move on from him culturally, and the value piece simply wasn't going to change. Sometimes people just reach their expiration date with an organization (in any field, not just the NBA) and will just be worth more in a new, refreshed scenario. I think that was true of Zach. It's simply a shame not enough other teams were thinking the same way.

It's also hard to speculate as to if the Bulls were particularly excited about their own pick and thus overvalued it. I could see that from our organization.

I think there was a handshake deal with Zach at the start of the season that he'd play nice and keep his mouth shut and we'd take our best offer for him at the deadline. Both sides did their part.

I think our goal may have been to tank post trade, but it has become obvious to me anyway that this team wasn't underperforming because Zach was bad, it was because Pat, Terry and Vuc are really horrible, and if you replace their minutes with capable rotation-level players you more than make up for any drop-off in losing Zach. Also, clearly Zach created some sort of psychological barrier for Coby and Josh being more aggressive, which wasn't on Zach, but it was a problem.

[Jcool0]

in 1994 Toni Kukoc arrived. He ain't Michael Jordan, but was a significant addition.

He basically sucked as a rookie. Poor shooting, poorer defense.

He was 16/6/5 Per 36 as a rookie. 43% from the field and 74% from the line. His DBPM was 0.5 for comparison it was 0.9 when he won 6th Man.

[dougthonus]

I think there was a handshake deal with Zach at the start of the season that he'd play nice and keep his mouth shut and we'd take our best offer for him at the deadline. Both sides did their part.

Agreed.

I think our goal may have been to tank post trade, but it has become obvious to me anyway that this team wasn't underperforming because Zach was bad, it was because Pat, Terry and Vuc are really horrible, and if you replace their minutes with capable rotation-level players you more than make up for any drop-off in losing Zach. Also, clearly Zach created some sort of psychological barrier for Coby and Josh being more aggressive, which wasn't on Zach, but it was a problem.

I think it is highly suspicious that we're playing well/better at all.

We're 7-11 (32 win pace) since the trade, the wins are all against teams that threw out tanking worthy rosters except perhaps the Magic.

Philadeliphia - absolute free fall
Raptors - actively tanking and required 4point play at the buzzer to force OT
Magic - below .500 but at least trying
Miami - absolute free fall since Butler trade
Pacers - Haliburton sat this game out
Nets - Tanking
Jazz - Tanking

[League Circles]

in 1994 Toni Kukoc arrived. He ain't Michael Jordan, but was a significant addition.

He basically sucked as a rookie. Poor shooting, poorer defense.

He was 16/6/5 Per 36 as a rookie. 43% from the field and 74% from the line. His DBPM was 0.5 for comparison it was 0.9 when he won 6th Man.

Not sure what you're trying to say. 43% from the field isn't good. He shot something like 27% from three, and everyone on earth knows that he was always a bad defender. Yes, he could score a little bit and pass well as a rookie, but he wasn't a good player overall. He was literally the worst shooter among the main guys and also probably the worst or second worst defender.