Free Noa.

[DuckIII]

Right. Its one of several non-panic-inducing possibilities that make tons and tons of sense. Just like, he is more ready than some of our worst players, but there are bigger picture things going on more important to his development than easing irrational fan anxiety . . . 7 games into his career.

I don't have "irrational anxiety", I don't think anything that happened one way or the other over this time frame is that important, but it doesn't mean that one thing isn't iteratively better in some very small way than the other thing. I'm not even stating definitively what that is. The idea that it is more important to look at Terry/Philips vs whatever is iteratively best for Noa is the only thing I would disagree with.

If something is 1% better for Noa than something else, screw Terry/Philips. They are 100% irrelevancies.

I don't care what is usual. That's a silly way of deciding how to a train a specific rookie and what that decision means 7 games into his career.

I'll leave you all to it. Its emotion, not rational thinking. And I'll add that if it were not for the assumed truth of the of Pels trade no one would be worried about any of this . . . after 7 games.

Every rookie is different as an individual and in context. Dallas is playing the hell out of Cooper Flagg, and doing it horribly. There are multiple ways to do this.

The Bulls behavior with Noa probably falls outside of 2 standard deviations of how a typical pick in his draft slot is managed. If you believe that is something that people would not notice or talk about, that's up to you. I disagree. I think when what is going on is significantly different than what normally goes on that it is noteworthy and spurs discussion.

That doesn't mean it is the worst ever or there aren't justifications or things are hopeless, but it certainly is a topic. People will tend to talk about highly unusual things far more than usual things. You're inferring the fact that is talked about is that everyone thinks it's a disaster. I don't see anyone saying "Noa is hopeless" because of this.

There is a difference between discussing something and attributing outsized significance to it based on virtually no information. The only information we do have is that at the fledgling stage of his NBA career the team temporarily wants him in an environment that will help expand his role and skill base.

[DuckIII]

The reason I guessed it was the reason before they said it was the reason is because its a logical approach to developing a rookie. Same reason you thought of it - it makes sense.

*logical approach to developing a rookie that is not ready to play in the NBA

True, but not the only context in which it is a logical approach. Logical approach to expanding a rookie's opportunity to develop a more broad range of skills - i.e., 6'10 wing handling the ball and making decisions with it as a passer and scorer off the dribble - that would not be part of his role as an 18 year old rookie on a team that is 6-1 in large part precisely because it is so deep.

This is not only logical, its exactly what the team is telling you it is doing. The extent to which it is ordinary is irrelevant. There is no reason to apply general trends to such a highly specific scenario.

[League Circles]

To Duck's point, the Bulls may have evaluated how poorly trying to turn #4 pick Patrick Williams into a 5th option 3 and D player turned out, and decided they don't want to do that again. It was obviously pretty bad for Williams, who is now playing much better in what might look like a reduced role but is actually an expanded role.

Maybe they don't want to risk training their best talents to first be 5th options?

[dougthonus]

IMO the reason it's not the norm is that most rookies as talented as Noa are on bad teams without other potential stars and big contract guys in front of them. Noa is on a first place team that was an average team last year and a very good team with the current roster approximation. He was drafted with a pick that we traded an all star in his prime for. He's a luxury.

The relevant similar examples to look at in Bulls history are Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah, both of whom were healthy scratches for a lot of their early rookie season games. It's all context.

It is not accurate that Tyrus or Joakim were healthy scratches with any frequency. They played 72 and 74 games in their rookie years. The Bulls also had higher expectations than this team did in their rookie years.

[dougthonus]

There is a difference between discussing something and attributing outsized significance to it based on virtually no information. The only information we do have is that at the fledgling stage of his NBA career the team temporarily wants him in an environment that will help expand his role and skill base.

I only speak for myself, but I agree that no one should attach outsized significance. At most I have outsized annoyance which is not relevant to any outcomes I totally agree, none of this really matters.

[dougthonus]

True, but not the only context in which it is a logical approach. Logical approach to expanding a rookie's opportunity to develop a more broad range of skills - i.e., 6'10 wing handling the ball and making decisions with it as a passer and scorer off the dribble - that would not be part of his role as an 18 year old rookie on a team that is 6-1 in large part precisely because it is so deep.

This is not only logical, its exactly what the team is telling you it is doing. The extent to which it is ordinary is irrelevant. There is no reason to apply general trends to such a highly specific scenario.

To the extent it is ordinary is probably some pretty strong evidence of whether it is logical or not. There are times where everyone is doing non logical things for a long time, but I don't think the NBA's development process of rookies is one of those things. I could be wrong on that of course, just my gut feel that the league isn't misdeveloping rookies by not using a significantly lower level of competition to run them up against.

I think this is a special niche case for guys not generally ready to contribute, otherwise you'd rather have them practicing against better players on your team and learning the players on your team and fitting into your team and working with higher level coaches that exist with your team.

There are a lot of advantages to being with your team, and the cases where you get a greater advantage by being coached by lesser coaches, playing against lesser players, and not working with the guys you will eventually play with seems to be fairly limited to NBA personnel making these decisions, and I tend to agree with them by and large and think the 98% of the use case of keeping the guy with your club typically makes more sense than the gleague.

[League Circles]

IMO the reason it's not the norm is that most rookies as talented as Noa are on bad teams without other potential stars and big contract guys in front of them. Noa is on a first place team that was an average team last year and a very good team with the current roster approximation. He was drafted with a pick that we traded an all star in his prime for. He's a luxury.

The relevant similar examples to look at in Bulls history are Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah, both of whom were healthy scratches for a lot of their early rookie season games. It's all context.

It is not accurate that Tyrus or Joakim were healthy scratches with any frequency. They played 72 and 74 games in their rookie years. The Bulls also had higher expectations than this team did in their rookie years.

Again, they were scratches for a lot of their EARLY rookie season games. Look at the game logs if you don't believe me. And that's the relevant comparison.

And I kinda disagree about expectations. The Bulls the year before Tyrus were a .500 team, and his rookie year (the year before Noah), yeah they won a whole 49 whopping games, but that's still a lower level of play than we had after our roster-revamping trade last season. While the Bulls shouldn't have expected to be good this year as a projection, they certainly shouldn't have projected to be bad.

[dougthonus]

Again, they were scratches for a lot of their EARLY rookie season games. Look at the game logs if you don't believe me. And that's the relevant comparison.

Joakim Noah missed 8 games on the season, the first 3 were due to a sprained ankle. Tyrus Thomas missed 10 games on the season and played in 14 of the first 18 games. Not really comparable. Not that it matters, but this just isn't a valid comparison. They also weren't really similar prospects.

And I kinda disagree about expectations. The Bulls the year before Tyrus were a .500 team, and his rookie year (the year before Noah), yeah they won a whole 49 whopping games, but that's still a lower level of play than we had after our roster-revamping trade last season. While the Bulls shouldn't have expected to be good this year as a projection, they certainly shouldn't have projected to be bad.

The teams Noah and Tyrus entered were expected to be a legit title contenders entering those season. AK wouldn't even commit to the playoffs as a goal this year.

[ghostinthepost1]

Like 95% of me wanting to see Noa play is the FOMO I'm feeling watching this amazing rookie class so far this season.

Flag, Harper, Edgecombe, Knuepple, Tre Johnson, Fears, CMB, Cedric Coward (#1 on my wish list leading up to the draft), and Derik Queen (#2 on my list) have all at the very least shown flashes early this season.

It's hard to not imagine what this 6-1 team would look like if Coward had fallen 1 pick or if Queen was coming off the bench and occasionally throwing up 12/8/7 with 4 steals in 18 minutes like he did a few nights ago.

Hopefully he at least dominates in his g-league games even if he doesn't contribute this year.

[League Circles]

Again, they were scratches for a lot of their EARLY rookie season games. Look at the game logs if you don't believe me. And that's the relevant comparison.

Joakim Noah missed 8 games on the season, the first 3 were due to a sprained ankle. Tyrus Thomas missed 10 games on the season and played in 14 of the first 18 games. Not really comparable. Not that it matters, but this just isn't a valid comparison. They also weren't really similar prospects.

And I kinda disagree about expectations. The Bulls the year before Tyrus were a .500 team, and his rookie year (the year before Noah), yeah they won a whole 49 whopping games, but that's still a lower level of play than we had after our roster-revamping trade last season. While the Bulls shouldn't have expected to be good this year as a projection, they certainly shouldn't have projected to be bad.

The teams Noah and Tyrus entered were expected to be a legit title contenders entering those season. AK wouldn't even commit to the playoffs as a goal this year.

This is kinda comical cause as you and Duck pointed out we're all kinda arguing about nothing of importance lol but this is some wild revisionist history. A .500 team plus 32 year old Ben Wallace is expected to be a legit title contender?????? Come on now lol. Ben Gordon as the #1 option coming off the bench for half the games averaging under 17 a night???? I know you don't believe that lol.

But yeah, they weren't similar prospects. Noah and Tyrus were much more heralded and drafted higher. Ok maybe Noah had a sprained ankle, but Tyrus was an excellent comparison in many ways to Essengue both in type of player prospect and team dynamics. Still didn't play much to begin the year, but notably didn't have guys like Matas and Patrick blocking his way, nor even a last-chance athlete like Phillips to contend with. He had the corpse of PJ Brown, and........ expiring, promising, albeit out of position Andres Nocioni WHO THUS NEEDED TO BE EVALUATED to contend with.

Don't kid yourself about whatever AK may or may not have committed to about goals this year. The Bulls, and probably 95% of teams in 95% of seasons this early on, are definitely and obviously and appropriately trying to make the playoffs. You don't ink Giddey and Jones and mostly run back a roster that performed very well together in the regular season last year if you don't think you have something at least competitive.

If AK didn't commit to that obvious platitude as a goal, it's simply because he's following the long time organizational cultural practice of not telling the media any more than you have to because it's much more likely to hurt you than help you in terms of PR.

[jnrjr79]

Right. Its one of several non-panic-inducing possibilities that make tons and tons of sense. Just like, he is more ready than some of our worst players, but there are bigger picture things going on more important to his development than easing irrational fan anxiety . . . 7 games into his career.

I don't have "irrational anxiety", I don't think anything that happened one way or the other over this time frame is that important, but it doesn't mean that one thing isn't iteratively better in some very small way than the other thing. I'm not even stating definitively what that is. The idea that it is more important to look at Terry/Philips vs whatever is iteratively best for Noa is the only thing I would disagree with.

If something is 1% better for Noa than something else, screw Terry/Philips. They are 100% irrelevancies.

I don't care what is usual. That's a silly way of deciding how to a train a specific rookie and what that decision means 7 games into his career.

I'll leave you all to it. Its emotion, not rational thinking. And I'll add that if it were not for the assumed truth of the of Pels trade no one would be worried about any of this . . . after 7 games.

Every rookie is different as an individual and in context. Dallas is playing the hell out of Cooper Flagg, and doing it horribly. There are multiple ways to do this.

The Bulls behavior with Noa probably falls outside of 2 standard deviations of how a typical pick in his draft slot is managed. If you believe that is something that people would not notice or talk about, that's up to you. I disagree. I think when what is going on is significantly different than what normally goes on that it is noteworthy and spurs discussion.

That doesn't mean it is the worst ever or there aren't justifications or things are hopeless, but it certainly is a topic. People will tend to talk about highly unusual things far more than usual things. You're inferring the fact that is talked about is that everyone thinks it's a disaster. I don't see anyone saying "Noa is hopeless" because of this.

I guess my thought here is Noa is not a “typical pick in his draft slot.” He was the youngest guy drafted, is pretty raw, and was an upside play. So, perhaps unsurprising to see him treated a little differently at first. I think it’s also just a sign that the Bulls are more conservative (rightly or wrongly) about rookie development under the current regime than other franchises.

[Chi town]

Noa will be FREED sat for WCB.

https://windycity.gleague.nba.com/schedule?month=11

[madvillian]

This is insane concern for the 2nd youngest guy in the draft, drafted as a massive boom/bust archetype going down to get some cardio in and maybe try out some things he couldn't on a surprisingly competitive Bulls team.

AKME have earned some fan leeway for now imo. A lot of moves most of us figured were dead ends turned into runways. Let them cook.

[dougthonus]

This is kinda comical cause as you and Duck pointed out we're all kinda arguing about nothing of importance lol but this is some wild revisionist history. A .500 team plus 32 year old Ben Wallace is expected to be a legit title contender?????? Come on now lol. Ben Gordon as the #1 option coming off the bench for half the games averaging under 17 a night???? I know you don't believe that lol.

Ben Wallace was the 4 time consecutive DMVP, the Bulls a year prior had won 47, and they were stocked with young talent. They were viewed as commonly a dark horse contender for the title that year, and won the preseason award for best off-season in the NBA. If you think otherwise, go actually read the data from that time, because the revisionist history is yours and not mine.

In Noah's year, they actually HAD won a playoff round the year before. In Tyrus's case, they added a legitimate all-star, DMVP and were a playoff team the previous year. The Bulls this year were going through a functional retooling, Vegas put them at 32.5 wins on the season vs probably ~50 for the two years of Noah / Tyrus (though my number is just a guess here).

Edit, looked it up, Tyrus's rookie year, Bulls were over/under 49, Noah 50.5. Noa 32.5, to put in perspective the relative view of how good those teams would be preseason.

(again, none of this matters, I just like arguing about irrelevancies )

[dougthonus]

I guess my thought here is Noa is not a “typical pick in his draft slot.” He was the youngest guy drafted, is pretty raw, and was an upside play. So, perhaps unsurprising to see him treated a little differently at first. I think it’s also just a sign that the Bulls are more conservative (rightly or wrongly) about rookie development under the current regime than other franchises.

I'd generally say the G-League is for when you can't get time to play against NBA players, and so the two primary reasons for that are probably:

1: The further away you are from contributing, the more you should be in the G-League
2: The fewer minutes you could reasonably get on your team based on its goals / roster the more you should be in the G-League

Otherwise, it is generally better to develop against the competition you are trying to compete with/against than a much lower level of competition. Noa probably falls some into both these buckets. The Bulls don't have a surplus of minutes and have a ton of depth, and Noa needs a fair amount of work.

It's likely the combination of both these thins puts him where he is (ie, if we had no depth we'd play him anyway or if he were just much more ready we'd play him anyway).

[NZB2323]

We’re 6-1 and the 1st seed in the East, and we’re not playing a rookie who is the 2nd youngest player in the league, and is 6-9 and 194 pounds. How is this controversial?

What NBA player is 6-9 and weighs less than 200 pounds? Let the kid put on some muscle.

[meekrab]

Noa will be FREED sat for WCB.

https://windycity.gleague.nba.com/schedule?month=11

He will not, he's travelling with the team to Milwaukee and Cleveland.

Read on Twitter

[madvillian]

We’re 6-1 and the 1st seed in the East, and we’re not playing a rookie who is the 2nd youngest player in the league, and is 6-9 and 194 pounds. How is this controversial?

What NBA player is 6-9 and weighs less than 200 pounds? Let the kid put on some muscle.

Yup good point he can def lean into weight training harder in season with the G league.

[GoBlue72391]

Right. Its one of several non-panic-inducing possibilities that make tons and tons of sense. Just like, he is more ready than some of our worst players, but there are bigger picture things going on more important to his development than easing irrational fan anxiety . . . 7 games into his career.

I don't have "irrational anxiety", I don't think anything that happened one way or the other over this time frame is that important, but it doesn't mean that one thing isn't iteratively better in some very small way than the other thing. I'm not even stating definitively what that is. The idea that it is more important to look at Terry/Philips vs whatever is iteratively best for Noa is the only thing I would disagree with.

If something is 1% better for Noa than something else, screw Terry/Philips. They are 100% irrelevancies.

I don't care what is usual. That's a silly way of deciding how to a train a specific rookie and what that decision means 7 games into his career.

I'll leave you all to it. Its emotion, not rational thinking. And I'll add that if it were not for the assumed truth of the of Pels trade no one would be worried about any of this . . . after 7 games.

Every rookie is different as an individual and in context. Dallas is playing the hell out of Cooper Flagg, and doing it horribly. There are multiple ways to do this.

The Bulls behavior with Noa probably falls outside of 2 standard deviations of how a typical pick in his draft slot is managed. If you believe that is something that people would not notice or talk about, that's up to you. I disagree. I think when what is going on is significantly different than what normally goes on that it is noteworthy and spurs discussion.

That doesn't mean it is the worst ever or there aren't justifications or things are hopeless, but it certainly is a topic. People will tend to talk about highly unusual things far more than usual things. You're inferring the fact that is talked about is that everyone thinks it's a disaster. I don't see anyone saying "Noa is hopeless" because of this.

I guess my thought here is Noa is not a “typical pick in his draft slot.” He was the youngest guy drafted, is pretty raw, and was an upside play. So, perhaps unsurprising to see him treated a little differently at first. I think it’s also just a sign that the Bulls are more conservative (rightly or wrongly) about rookie development under the current regime than other franchises.

18 year olds straight out of HS usually played right away, especially lottery picks, and they didn't have high level pro experience to fall back on. Essengue is only a year younger than the one-and-dones who play right away.

He's super raw, but I don't think he's sooo raw that he's not even worthy of seeing the court. He showed me enough in preseason and summer league to convince me he can easily fill those 5 to 10 minutes that Phillips and Terry are getting.

He's still very much an unknown, though.

[Dan Z]

Doug, it's 62 minutes of court time. That's the combined total that Terry and Phillips have played, neither one in the rotation for every game.

Also, we've only seen Phillips for two years, not three.

I think a lot of people have a problem with the one foot in each lane of winning now and winning later. I love it. Like you want to prioritize winning later as you've made clear. Well, winning later primarily means asset management. If Terry and Phillips are both benched entirely such that Noa plays, their current and potential asset value immediately goes permanently to zero for the Bulls. If they play a tiny bit, for now, we have a non-zero chance that they will have value in a trade package mid season, or, much less likely, be re-signed as role player(s) going forward.

This is Terry's last chance, and it's a tiny one. It's not going to hurt Noa's development and it's a marginal future-minded move.

It's probably not at all clear who's better in practice between Noa, Dalen and Julian, but the latter two MIGHT have value in trade this season IF they play well even in small minutes, and we very likely aren't keeping them, especially Terry. Also the role more likely for Noa long term is not the same role those guys are playing now.

Lastly, I don't know the stats on "lottery picks" playing or not playing in their first 7 games, but I do believe that the binary grouping of "lottery" vs "non-lottery" picks has always veen nonsensical. What's the meaningful distinction between say a #11 pick like Noa and a #15 "non lottery" pick?

I just see this as a total non issue.

But I personally would rather see Noa than at least Terry. I just get the strategy. In my world neither Dalen nor Julian's options for this season should have even been picked up (even though I believe both are plus NBA defenders!), but since they're here, and wins and losses this season aren't our top priority (right?!), we should at least nominally see what we have in them, mostly for purposes of in-season trade evaluation and so called pump and dump (on the most basic, minimal level imaginable).

I doubt that Terry or Philips have much in terms of trade value and playing time isn't going to change that. At best they're most likely filler in a trade.

Teams already have two years of Philips and three of Terry to evaluate them.