Shams: Lonzo for Okoro

NecessaryEvil · Post #121 » by **NecessaryEvil** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:53 pm

Axolotl · Post #122 » by **Axolotl** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:53 pm

I searched my feelings about this trade, and found none.

I guess the FO wanted a 3&D-guy who they can reasonably expect to play significantly more than half the games – and it doesn't hurt he doesn't need the ball that much. If they can get him some more shots (or get him to take some more shots, I dunno), it should keep the defenses honest too.

drosestruts · Post #123 » by **drosestruts** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:53 pm

This board continues to be obsessed with picks while simultaneously hating the young players those picks become

Post #124 » by **coldfish** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:54 pm

burlydee wrote:
coldfish wrote:AKME is basically trying to take up a bunch of guys coming into the prime of their careers who are on bargain contracts. Its an interesting, never been tried philosophy but Okoro has been bad.

Going a little with this, if you look at most players they peak right around age 27. They usually suck from age 18 to 22. AKME is trying to play a statistical game of putting together a bunch of 24 to 27 year olds and hoping it works out.

I don't think AKME is a good GM but I'll give them credit for trying something unique.

I think they could have got a better deal. This strikes me as a complete reach on Okoro. I'm not sure why any team needs to pay Okoro and PWill $29 million a year. Its the same guy.

Oh, most definitely. The Bulls have lost virtually every trade they have made. Its to the point where I expect it. At a minimum, Chicago should have gotten 2nd round picks back.

Post #125 » by **DuckIII** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:54 pm

CROBulls wrote:Clown show. First you extended Lonzo when you shouldnt. Then for some magic dumb reason you turned 1st round pick down for him and now you traded him to get Okoro. Like free tickets to clown show. And we having them.

Extends him when we shouldn’t have? I’d need to see your rationale on that one. Please explain.

We extended him to a ridiculously team friendly deal that had no downside, and then traded him for exactly the type of player we need, who is young, and on a bargain basement contract. No Lonzo, no Okoro. No Lonzo, no asset return AT ALL.

The Lonzo extension, to me, is one of the very few indisputably smart things AK has done. Convince me otherwise.

Peelboy · Post #126 » by **Peelboy** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:54 pm

On talent: Lonzo by a lot. Okoro is a solid defender and (maybe) a solid spot up shooter, but really is a mostly one-way player (defense). Lonzo is equal as a defender. He's also equal or better as a shooter, and Lonzo can pass and is a connector on both ends ala Caruso. Okoro.....is not.......

On contract: Lonzo by a lot. Marginally cheaper than Okoro, and a TO instead of guaranteed 2d year. Plus, helps Cavs who were in a cap jam with their core guys getting more expensive.

You're assuming that AK is finding a diamond in the rough, which is a pretty big stretch given history. Last year was a solid year for that w Matas and Giddey, but all prior years look pretty bad on that front.

But bigger issue is that you paid a price assuming he's more than an 18min reserve, but can be a real contributor. Say all you want about Lonzo, but I'll take a part time high value guy with a good contract all day every day over a reliably there marginal player. It's just another example of AK not having any freaking clue of how to maximize asset value. Whatever we thought of GarPax "holding onto guys too long," etc - they were light years above this clown show of an FO in terms of generating value in trade.

Post #127 » by **HomoSapien** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:54 pm

It's sad as a fan that every trade we ever make gets ripped apart by Twitter/the media. Would feel nice to feel like we won one once in awhile.

The Grizzlies trade we passed on is a bummer... that pick could have been KJ.

Bowly · Post #128 » by **Bowly** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:55 pm

dougthonus, See Red Fred is going to be over the moon that we got his guy. The Bus will be bigger than ever

ShadyMoney · Post #129 » by **ShadyMoney** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:56 pm

HomoSapien wrote:It's sad as a fan that every trade we ever make gets ripped apart by Twitter/the media. Would feel nice to feel like we won one once in awhile.

The Grizzlies trade we passed on is a bummer... that pick could have been KJ.

You didn’t like the John Salmons trade?

nomorezorro · Post #130 » by **nomorezorro** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:58 pm

NecessaryEvil wrote:

Read on Twitter

i like jones and would be happy to re-sign him but like. even when these individual moves are defensible, at some point this front office has got to realize that shooting is an important basketball skill...

boozapalooza · Post #131 » by **boozapalooza** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:58 pm

WindyCityBorn wrote:
boozapalooza wrote:
WindyCityBorn wrote:
You seriously overrate Ball’s value.

You sure pal? Cause we turned down Smart and Memphis FRP (16th overall) at the deadline. Thats a better offer and was before he signed an extremely team friendly extension.

Like it or not, hes got a lot of value for a contender. Doesnt need to play 82. Just be healthy for the stretch run / playoffs

I don’t want Smart’s awful contract. You just proved my point.

Dude what are you talking about. Smart is on an expiring contract. 1/21. Who cares, thats not awful to take on. Proves a point you have no clue what youre talking about.

Post #132 » by **DuckIII** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 4:58 pm

HomoSapien wrote:It's sad as a fan that every trade we ever make gets ripped apart by Twitter/the media. Would feel nice to feel like we won one once in awhile.

Twitter and media can go suck eggs. You know more about the Bulls than any of them. All well informed fans do (as opposed to ill informed fans who still have strong opinions).

nomorezorro · Post #133 » by **nomorezorro** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:04 pm

i don't really care about the General Reaction to this trade but it is kind of odd to me that the kneejerk response was "lol what are the bulls doing!!" and not "are the cavs really going to turn to 2025 lonzo ball as their replacement for ty jerome in a season where they should have finals aspirations"

NecessaryEvil · Post #134 » by **NecessaryEvil** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:09 pm

nomorezorro wrote:
NecessaryEvil wrote:

Read on Twitter

i like jones and would be happy to re-sign him but like. even when these individual moves are defensible, at some point this front office has got to realize that shooting is an important basketball skill...

Truth but this is also why I see Huerter being extended.

Tetlak · Post #135 » by **Tetlak** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:09 pm

Dan Z wrote:AK couldn't even get one 2nd round pick for taking on the worst contract (out of the two) in this deal.

What an odd trade over all. I'd rather have Lonzo for the limited amount of games he'll play than Okoro.

Okoro makes less than the MLE...he makes less than some rookies, and he made the same amount as Lonzo Ball while actually being able to contribute on the court.

Although you didnt outright say he has a bad contract, mentioning his contract at all seems irrelevant due to the above factors.

sco · Post #136 » by **sco** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:10 pm

nomorezorro wrote:i don't really care about the General Reaction to this trade but it is kind of odd to me that the kneejerk response was "lol what are the bulls doing!!" and not "are the cavs really going to turn to 2025 lonzo ball as their replacement for ty jerome in a season where they should have finals aspirations"

Actually, if we don't keep Jones, I'd be happy to bring in Jerome!

Indomitable · Post #137 » by **Indomitable** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:11 pm

GoBlue72391 wrote:
drosestruts wrote:

Watch on YouTube

There's a video with that exact same title about Pat, too.

Before the extra 20 pounds

tunit213 · Post #138 » by **tunit213** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:11 pm

Red Larrivee wrote:
Betta Bulleavit wrote:For those saying that we were offered a FRP for Lonzo at the deadline, is there anything that substantiates that as fact?

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6128022/2025/02/12/best-nba-trade-deadline-moves-lakers-mavericks/?source=user_shared_article

According to a league source, the Bulls had a firm offer to get a first-round pick and take on future money for Lonzo Ball and extended him instead. Good news, though: 12 of the Bulls’ players are signed for next season. They can just re-sign Josh Giddey, run it back and chase the Play-In again. Yay?

Yes but it says “take on future money”. Lonzo's contract was $20mil at that time meaning it was a player that had years left on his contract. I’m sure AKME didn’t want to ruin our cap space.

Salo23 · Post #139 » by **Salo23** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:11 pm

Ball had a team option for 2026, Okoro’s deal is guaranteed and cuts into that coveted summer 2026 cap space AKME keep emphasizing. Half measures.

Dan Z · Post #140 » by **Dan Z** » Sat Jun 28, 2025 5:14 pm

Tetlak wrote:
Dan Z wrote:AK couldn't even get one 2nd round pick for taking on the worst contract (out of the two) in this deal.

What an odd trade over all. I'd rather have Lonzo for the limited amount of games he'll play than Okoro.

Okoro makes less than the MLE...he makes less than some rookies, and he made the same amount as Lonzo Ball while actually being able to contribute on the court.

Although you didnt outright say he has a bad contract, mentioning his contract at all seems irrelevant due to the above factors.

His contract is fine, but I dont think much of him as a player. A decent role player at best.

The Cavs get to take a flier on Lonzo and if it doesn't work out they can opt out in a year. I'd like to think there's value in having flexibility.