People were interested in these podcasts
Image ImageImage Image

Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits

Moderators: HomoSapien, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10, Ice Man, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23

Stratmaster
RealGM
Posts: 21,857
And1: 8,753
Joined: Oct 02, 2010
       

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#61 » by Stratmaster » Fri Jun 20, 2025 1:01 am

ghostinthepost1 wrote:
dougthonus wrote:I will say if I wanted to put a positive spin on this, I'd say that maybe AK has learned from his first round of mistakes and will be better this time around.

KC saying they want a draft oriented, methodical rebuild around young talents is at least a reasonable approach given our current position. Though I think he's largely been a disaster so far, the idea that he may have realized a lot of things he did were poor and that he needs to change gives me some hope.

I think the Giddey extension will be a good barometer of that. You just got burned by Pat/Vuc extensions where you bid against yourself. Do you do that now with Giddey or do you play hard ball? If he plays hard ball with Giddey, I will feel way more confident that he is taking on some of the lessons from his past failures. This is regardless of whether Giddey is the right move or not, just the idea that you realize you need to execute your leverage in negotiations would be a huge improvement.


Just to add to the "maybe AK learned from his first failure" positive spin: He seems more concerned about fit this time around. A lot of the reporting this off-season has been about how AK wants players who fit the new "system" of playing super fast and shooting a bunch of 3s.


The problem is, playing super fast and shooting a bunch of 3's is so 10 seasons ago. The Bulls were 3rd in possessions per game last season. The 2 worst teams in the league were both in the top 5. Only 2 of the top 7 had a winning record, with the best team of those 7 being the Knicks.

Boston shot way more 3's than anyone and were successful. But their possessions per game were DEAD LAST IN THE LEAGUE. GSW did pretty well shooting 3's and shot the 2nd most. But their possessions per game were 19TH IN THE LEAGUE.

You need to shoot 3's, that I agree with. But the teams trying to play as fast as they can are the bad teams. Because they see it as their only chance to win. You want an offense that gets shooters the ball for wide open 3's. But that would require Billy to actually run an offense.
Guru
Analyst
Posts: 3,667
And1: 756
Joined: Oct 29, 2001

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#62 » by Guru » Fri Jun 20, 2025 1:04 am

An executive had just started working at Andrew Carnegie's company, US Steel. The new guy ruined a million-dollar project and humbly asked the boss if he would be fired. Andrew Carnegie said "Fire you? We just spent a million dollars training you!"
The Box Office
Veteran
Posts: 2,501
And1: 1,446
Joined: Jun 14, 2016

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#63 » by The Box Office » Fri Jun 20, 2025 1:56 am

They're delusional as ****. Any fool can make money from Bulls franchise off Michael Jordan and 6 championships alone. Which we still do. That's absolutely nothing to brag about.
fleet
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 69,485
And1: 36,941
Joined: Dec 23, 2002
 

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#64 » by fleet » Fri Jun 20, 2025 2:35 am

Technically not a rebuild since there was no first build until now, if you will grant the now. Carry on :)
Guru
Analyst
Posts: 3,667
And1: 756
Joined: Oct 29, 2001

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#65 » by Guru » Fri Jun 20, 2025 2:56 am

He redid a team incredibly quickly and had them first in the East. And then Ball got hurt. People act like he would have just stopped building there. They act like Ball wasn't all that important. They act like the unknown of the ball injury wasn't an issue. They act like free agent additions are nothing. Caruso is nothing. Drummond is nothing. Drafting Ayo is nothing. It's a sad state of affairs for Bulls fans.

There is an argument that he built a great team.
There is an argument that he didn't do enough after the Ball injury.

Those are both fine arguments not greeted with equal merit
CobysHairpick
Sophomore
Posts: 215
And1: 140
Joined: Aug 26, 2020

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#66 » by CobysHairpick » Fri Jun 20, 2025 3:31 am

Guru wrote:He redid a team incredibly quickly and had them first in the East. And then Ball got hurt. People act like he would have just stopped building there. They act like Ball wasn't all that important. They act like the unknown of the ball injury wasn't an issue. They act like free agent additions are nothing. Caruso is nothing. Drummond is nothing. Drafting Ayo is nothing. It's a sad state of affairs for Bulls fans.

There is an argument that he built a great team.
There is an argument that he didn't do enough after the Ball injury.

Those are both fine arguments not greeted with equal merit

Agreed. I think KC Johnson said his extension goes through 27-28. Three more seasons to build a legitimate core seems fair for a second chance.
rosenthall
Pro Prospect
Posts: 819
And1: 523
Joined: May 26, 2001

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#67 » by rosenthall » Fri Jun 20, 2025 3:49 am

KeithBoothfan wrote:
dougthonus wrote:
Dominator83 wrote:
The Caruso/Giddey swap depends a lot on how you feel about Giddey, but I think the market value was fine and it was the better risk to take vs pick #13 based on what their options were at the time.



Getting Giddey as a piece, even the main piece, of the Caruso trade is fine. Giddey is a pretty good player, still super young, and put up some video game-ish stats while the team was winning some games at the end of the year. All good things! I wouldn't bet on him ever being a top 1-2 player on a contender, but I think he *could* be a 3rd or 4th if he keeps improving and the rest of the roster balances out some of his shortcomings.

But is there a reason you frame it so that the Bulls either trade for Giddey OR a pick, but not both? Maybe they don't get a 1st rounder in this draft, but it seems like they could have picked at least one 1st from OKC's stash, or multiple 2nds, or something. It seemed like OKC and perhaps other teams valued Caruso highly enough to include some draft capital. Not Bridges/Bane type hauls, but a pick or two along with Giddey or a similarly valued player. Are you privy to info suggesting this kind of deal wasn't feasible? It just seemed to me that AK had leverage he didn't use in that deal, and OKC has more picks than they can realistically use so it shouldn't have been a hard ask.


1). Nice to see you here again! It's fun seeing these old-timers resurface lately. If any of you others are reading this -- please continue with the coming out party!

2). I think calling acquiring Giddey "fine" is doing a lot of the work here. Historically players with his age and productivity are only moved as centerpieces for top-line stars. It's extremely rare for a young productive guy on a rookie contract getting traded for a much older role player (who's oft injured) who is about to enter UFA. Most of the time it's the former that's tilting the scales in the trade and Chicago would be the team attaching picks to get their young chip.

So I kind of get the disappointment of not getting picks out of OKC, but it doesn't shift my opinions on the return we got in the trade. I think in 10 years this trade will go down as possibly the best move the AK made.
Chi town
RealGM
Posts: 28,969
And1: 8,905
Joined: Aug 10, 2004

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#68 » by Chi town » Fri Jun 20, 2025 4:11 am

So we are doing a youth movement with a GM that doesn’t value draft picks.

Great.
Dan Z
RealGM
Posts: 18,253
And1: 8,980
Joined: Feb 19, 2002
Location: Chicago
 

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#69 » by Dan Z » Fri Jun 20, 2025 4:39 am

Guru wrote:He redid a team incredibly quickly and had them first in the East. And then Ball got hurt. People act like he would have just stopped building there. They act like Ball wasn't all that important. They act like the unknown of the ball injury wasn't an issue. They act like free agent additions are nothing. Caruso is nothing. Drummond is nothing. Drafting Ayo is nothing. It's a sad state of affairs for Bulls fans.

There is an argument that he built a great team.
There is an argument that he didn't do enough after the Ball injury.

Those are both fine arguments not greeted with equal merit


They finished in 6th place that season and were easily defeated by the Bucks in the playoffs.

I agree that Lonzo's injury was unfortunate, but he's a player with a history of health issues (he averaged 54 games per season before Chicago traded for him).

The problem is that AK waited to long to move on to the next iteration of the team. He let players value decrease over time and kept thinking it was important to make the playoffs (which they couldn't even do).
Dan Z
RealGM
Posts: 18,253
And1: 8,980
Joined: Feb 19, 2002
Location: Chicago
 

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#70 » by Dan Z » Fri Jun 20, 2025 4:42 am

Chi town wrote:So we are doing a youth movement with a GM that doesn’t value draft picks.

Great.


Yep. All I can do is hope that he hits a home run with the #12 pick.

I said this in another post, but I'd like him to use expiring contracts to take on additional salary for draft picks (OKC style), but realistically he won't do that. That means we're either looking at a big trade or those contracts will just expire.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,166
And1: 18,398
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#71 » by dougthonus » Fri Jun 20, 2025 11:45 am

Guru wrote:He redid a team incredibly quickly and had them first in the East. And then Ball got hurt. People act like he would have just stopped building there. They act like Ball wasn't all that important. They act like the unknown of the ball injury wasn't an issue. They act like free agent additions are nothing. Caruso is nothing. Drummond is nothing. Drafting Ayo is nothing. It's a sad state of affairs for Bulls fans.

There is an argument that he built a great team.
There is an argument that he didn't do enough after the Ball injury.

Those are both fine arguments not greeted with equal merit


That is because they don't really have equal merit.

The good part of this was for a half season, and while exciting, had more earmarks of utter fluke than maybe any first place position that deep in the season in the history of basketball.
1: All teams are playing in empty gyms due to COVID
2: All teams are throwing out different rosters every night due to COVID
3: We won an insane number of games on last second shots (huge luck factor)
4: Our position of first was very brief and by a record that normally wouldn't hold first
5: Our net rating at the time would have had us as a 45 win quality team

In terms of Ball, sure he was important. He also averaged 30 games missed a year. We definitely did a lot worse than that, but injury risk was literally the #1 reason people didn't want to sign him, so it is hard to give him much of a pass for having no back up plan. It's also worth noting he leaned on Ball as an excuse for 4 seasons. Literally, he was talking about Lonzo Ball being hurt and how that hurt him in the fourth year of his contract. We didn't bitch about the 10x as good, MVP, paid 2x as much as a percentage of the cap, Derrick Rose becoming worthless as AK did about Lonzo Ball.

If I wanted to give AK the most benefit of the doubt possible, it would probably be that he made one really, really bad move (trading for Vuc). If you could remove that move things would just be a ton better for this team. Even in that year, Vuc was really bad, and WCJ (while just a guy) wouldn't have cost them any wins and may have added some because his skillset would have fit better. They'd also have had a lot more room to rebound with the Lonzo trade with two extra firsts.

The really inexcusable part isn't a ton of other bad moves, it's really just all the non moves. The Bulls went the longest in the NBA after the Derozan trade before making another trade. They didn't really add anyone meaningful after that either. I think Jevon Carter and Jalen Smith were their biggest signings. Letting all the assets rot on the vine, which was a problem in how he treated Zach, DeMar, Caruso, and Vuc.

I can understand not being as aggressive with this as I wanted (I called for trading everyone the summer after the Ball injury when I thought it was obvious this thing had no head room and our play was a fluke), but at the time, Lonzo was anticipated to still come back that year, and I get why they wanted to run it back. In September of that year though when you knew Lonzo was out for the year, you should have at this point said "this version of the team is over, Lonzo is never coming back". At that deadline a good GM would have started unloading people, not an aggressive one, but a top 10 guy would have known.

He didn't do that of course. He waited until the off-season, and of course it becomes clear that Lonzo is done as a meaningful player, and even a bad GM probably at this point realizes that this isn't it, and now starts unloading the guys with value, but not AK, he still lets everything go a full more year.

In the end, the time period matters here. You can't have success for a half season and then think people are going to care about 3.5 years later. He had so many chances to get out of this thing cleanly (which is actually pretty surprising to me), but he didn't take any of them. Reminds me of this old joke:

A big storm approaches. The weatherman urges everyone to get out of town. The priest says, "I won't worry, God will save me".

The morning of the storm, the police go through the neighborhood with a sound truck telling everyone to evacuate. The priest says "I won't worry, God will save me".

The storm drains back up and there is an inch of water standing in the street. A fire truck comes by to pick up the priest. He tells them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises another foot. A National Guard truck comes by to rescue the priest. He tells them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises some more. The priest is forced up to his roof. A boat comes by to rescue the priest. He tells them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises higher. The priest is forced up to the very top of his roof. A helicopter comes to rescue the priest. He shouts up at them "Don't worry, God will save me."

The water rises above his house, and the priest drowns.

When he gets up to heaven he says to God "I've been your faithful servant ever since I was born! Why didn't you save me?"

God replies "First I sent you a fire truck, then the national guard, then a boat, and then a helicopter. What more do you want from me!!??"


He had both some good and bad luck early. DDR playing at an all-NBA player level on a 28M dollar contract was an insanely unlikely thing to happen. Way more unlikely than Lonzo getting hurt. If he had played his cards perfectly, he could have gotten 7-8 1st rounders for Zach, Caruso, Vuc, and DeMar. We would still be in a rebuild now most likely, but we'd be feeling pretty good about our odds of coming out of it.

Given the totality of everything, he had success for a half season with a crap ton of *s on it, and he had failure for 3.5 years after that with tons of obvious pivots he refused to take. When you weigh that, 3.5 years of bad decisions is a lot heavier weight than a summer of good decisions if you believe they were all good decisions.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
User avatar
KissedByaRose1
Rookie
Posts: 1,062
And1: 557
Joined: Feb 22, 2010

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#72 » by KissedByaRose1 » Fri Jun 20, 2025 12:22 pm

dougthonus wrote:I will say if I wanted to put a positive spin on this, I'd say that maybe AK has learned from his first round of mistakes and will be better this time around.

KC saying they want a draft oriented, methodical rebuild around young talents is at least a reasonable approach given our current position. Though I think he's largely been a disaster so far, the idea that he may have realized a lot of things he did were poor and that he needs to change gives me some hope.

I think the Giddey extension will be a good barometer of that. You just got burned by Pat/Vuc extensions where you bid against yourself. Do you do that now with Giddey or do you play hard ball? If he plays hard ball with Giddey, I will feel way more confident that he is taking on some of the lessons from his past failures. This is regardless of whether Giddey is the right move or not, just the idea that you realize you need to execute your leverage in negotiations would be a huge improvement.


There's no positive spin here man. We're the laughing stock of the league and our ownership is not only is ok with this but they view it as a success. We will not enjoy Bulls basketball until Jerry dies and Michael sells the team. And even then it's a coin flip that whatever private equity DBag just doesn't do more of the same. Hard to imagine it being worse than this though.
DuckIII wrote: We can't out-Miami, Miami. But based on their roster, we can out-Chicago them.
Guru
Analyst
Posts: 3,667
And1: 756
Joined: Oct 29, 2001

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#73 » by Guru » Fri Jun 20, 2025 2:36 pm

rosenthall wrote:
KeithBoothfan wrote:
dougthonus wrote:


Getting Giddey as a piece, even the main piece, of the Caruso trade is fine. Giddey is a pretty good player, still super young, and put up some video game-ish stats while the team was winning some games at the end of the year. All good things! I wouldn't bet on him ever being a top 1-2 player on a contender, but I think he *could* be a 3rd or 4th if he keeps improving and the rest of the roster balances out some of his shortcomings.

But is there a reason you frame it so that the Bulls either trade for Giddey OR a pick, but not both? Maybe they don't get a 1st rounder in this draft, but it seems like they could have picked at least one 1st from OKC's stash, or multiple 2nds, or something. It seemed like OKC and perhaps other teams valued Caruso highly enough to include some draft capital. Not Bridges/Bane type hauls, but a pick or two along with Giddey or a similarly valued player. Are you privy to info suggesting this kind of deal wasn't feasible? It just seemed to me that AK had leverage he didn't use in that deal, and OKC has more picks than they can realistically use so it shouldn't have been a hard ask.


1). Nice to see you here again! It's fun seeing these old-timers resurface lately. If any of you others are reading this -- please continue with the coming out party!

2). I think calling acquiring Giddey "fine" is doing a lot of the work here. Historically players with his age and productivity are only moved as centerpieces for top-line stars. It's extremely rare for a young productive guy on a rookie contract getting traded for a much older role player (who's oft injured) who is about to enter UFA. Most of the time it's the former that's tilting the scales in the trade and Chicago would be the team attaching picks to get their young chip.

So I kind of get the disappointment of not getting picks out of OKC, but it doesn't shift my opinions on the return we got in the trade. I think in 10 years this trade will go down as possibly the best move the AK made.


If you got picks from OKC the goal would be to use those for a player as good as Giddey.
drosestruts
General Manager
Posts: 9,045
And1: 4,190
Joined: Apr 05, 2012
 

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#74 » by drosestruts » Fri Jun 20, 2025 3:17 pm

Chi town wrote:So we are doing a youth movement with a GM that doesn’t value draft picks.

Great.


I'll be interested to see if all the Kuminga rumors are true and to see what it is we offer for him.

It'd be kind of a unique strategy to target all these young players at the end of their first, or on their 2nd deals:

Ball
Giddey
Kuminga*
Smith
Collins
Huerter
Jones

If there's a "late bloomer" or two here AK starts looking real smart.
_txchilibowl_
Starter
Posts: 2,470
And1: 2,648
Joined: Aug 17, 2017
     

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#75 » by _txchilibowl_ » Fri Jun 20, 2025 5:32 pm

Is there a link to the podcast?

I'd like some context to "view as a success"....
Chi town
RealGM
Posts: 28,969
And1: 8,905
Joined: Aug 10, 2004

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#76 » by Chi town » Fri Jun 20, 2025 5:48 pm

drosestruts wrote:
Chi town wrote:So we are doing a youth movement with a GM that doesn’t value draft picks.

Great.


I'll be interested to see if all the Kuminga rumors are true and to see what it is we offer for him.

It'd be kind of a unique strategy to target all these young players at the end of their first, or on their 2nd deals:

Ball
Giddey
Kuminga*
Smith
Collins
Huerter
Jones

If there's a "late bloomer" or two here AK starts looking real smart.


It only works if they are on value contracts.
dpucane
Sophomore
Posts: 195
And1: 69
Joined: Feb 07, 2009

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#77 » by dpucane » Fri Jun 20, 2025 8:19 pm

_txchilibowl_ wrote:Is there a link to the podcast?

I'd like some context to "view as a success"....



omg they pulled it from the channel lol, its usually here: https://www.youtube.com/@CHSN_Media

KC Johnson mentioned a couple times "Arturas might be mad at me for mentioning this..." so I assume the Bulls pulled the episode? What a mess.

@dougthonus do you remember what KC said Arturas might be mad he brought up?
dpucane
Sophomore
Posts: 195
And1: 69
Joined: Feb 07, 2009

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#78 » by dpucane » Fri Jun 20, 2025 8:47 pm

dpucane wrote:
_txchilibowl_ wrote:Is there a link to the podcast?

I'd like some context to "view as a success"....



omg they pulled it from the channel lol, its usually here: https://www.youtube.com/@CHSN_Media

KC Johnson mentioned a couple times "Arturas might be mad at me for mentioning this..." so I assume the Bulls pulled the episode? What a mess.

@dougthonus do you remember what KC said Arturas might be mad he brought up?


found a rough transcript, it might be the anecdote that AK gets in a bad mood during home losses and leaves

https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/by-the-horns-a-chicago-bulls-s-224912/episodes/bulls-reportedly-extend-front-256611023/transcript
drosestruts
General Manager
Posts: 9,045
And1: 4,190
Joined: Apr 05, 2012
 

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#79 » by drosestruts » Fri Jun 20, 2025 9:45 pm

I don't think you could label their first go as a "success"

I also think it was heavily impacted by injuries - something i personally don't hold against a front office or a plan, but i know others do


I also don't think their previous plan be unsuccesful, or not a success, or incomplete (however you want to split the hairs) as much indication on if their next iteration can or will be successful

I don't think we're in a position like we were with garpax where we're viewed negatively as an organization. Our reputation is fine.

Players are excited to play here, our current players are happy, the front office hasn't lost the team or anything.

I'm mostly indifferent to giving them another shot at things.

change for the sake of change is something i'm always opposed to.
User avatar
DuckIII
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 71,372
And1: 36,687
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Location: On my high horse.
     

Re: Bulls viewed AK's rebuild as a success / other tidbits 

Post#80 » by DuckIII » Sat Jun 21, 2025 12:07 am

rosenthall wrote:
KeithBoothfan wrote:
dougthonus wrote:


Getting Giddey as a piece, even the main piece, of the Caruso trade is fine. Giddey is a pretty good player, still super young, and put up some video game-ish stats while the team was winning some games at the end of the year. All good things! I wouldn't bet on him ever being a top 1-2 player on a contender, but I think he *could* be a 3rd or 4th if he keeps improving and the rest of the roster balances out some of his shortcomings.

But is there a reason you frame it so that the Bulls either trade for Giddey OR a pick, but not both? Maybe they don't get a 1st rounder in this draft, but it seems like they could have picked at least one 1st from OKC's stash, or multiple 2nds, or something. It seemed like OKC and perhaps other teams valued Caruso highly enough to include some draft capital. Not Bridges/Bane type hauls, but a pick or two along with Giddey or a similarly valued player. Are you privy to info suggesting this kind of deal wasn't feasible? It just seemed to me that AK had leverage he didn't use in that deal, and OKC has more picks than they can realistically use so it shouldn't have been a hard ask.


1). Nice to see you here again! It's fun seeing these old-timers resurface lately. If any of you others are reading this -- please continue with the coming out party!

2). I think calling acquiring Giddey "fine" is doing a lot of the work here. Historically players with his age and productivity are only moved as centerpieces for top-line stars. It's extremely rare for a young productive guy on a rookie contract getting traded for a much older role player (who's oft injured) who is about to enter UFA. Most of the time it's the former that's tilting the scales in the trade and Chicago would be the team attaching picks to get their young chip.

So I kind of get the disappointment of not getting picks out of OKC, but it doesn't shift my opinions on the return we got in the trade. I think in 10 years this trade will go down as possibly the best move the AK made.


Damn, I didn't even notice it was KBF. Nice to see you.
Once a pickle, never a cucumber again.

Return to Chicago Bulls