Bulls Realistic Lotto range

Post #1 » by **dougthonus** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:30 pm

The bulls have 16 wins right now. There are 6 teams with fewer wins:

Seattle, Minnestoa, and Miami seem like they are way too far away to catch up to us (sub 10)

Memphis, Clippers, and Knicks (12, 12, and 13) aren't that far away, but the Clippers and Grizzlies are awful and play out west, so they'll likely have much tougher schedules and aren't really good enough to catch up.

Only the Knicks stand a chance at passing us IMO, because they at least have offensive firepower to get lucky on some nights and will play an eastern schedule. That being said, it's hard for me to envision them outperforming us the rest of the season by 4 games.

There are 4 teams with 16 wins (us being one of them) where we currently have the best percentage of the group due to having the fewest losses. We could easily pass any of these teams in the lotto standings or any of them could easily pass us.

There are 4 more teams in the under 20 win category that we could easily out climb if we have a moderately successful second half of the season, but 2 of those teams are currently in the playoff bracket, so for lotto purposes, we can't pass them without making the playoffs.

Thus, realistically, our lotto range is 7-12 if we miss the playoffs. We can't be 13th or 14th because two crappy teams in the east will make the 8th seed, and two teams out west will have records that would have made the playoffs in the East.

Magilla_Gorilla · Post #2 » by **Magilla_Gorilla** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:34 pm

What I wrote in another thread...

On a serious note - whats the worst we could end up?

Tier 1:

The T-Wolves ave the worst record, but Miami is closing fast and the Sonics are right behind them. There is no way we end up bottom three.

Tier 2:

The Clippers, Knicks, and Memphis of the worlds. They were all expected to be better but were either hit with injuries or strife. Doubtful any of them could be any worse than they are now - I'd expect at least one of them to pick it up the second half of the season.

Tier 3:

A large group of teams all with between 16 and 18 wins. This is where the Bulls are right now. At this point we could have anywhere from the 7th to the 13th pick (10th right now). So if Deng is out for an extended period - how much damage could we do?

I think the best we could hope for is 5th, and even then we would have to tank hard. I'm talking about not winning more than 10 games the rest of the way - which given our current record isn't out of the realm of possibility.

Post #3 » by **dougthonus** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:38 pm

Your post inspired this post, I was just trying to make it a bit more specific

We can't realistically finish 13th like you have in our range though because 2 of the bad teams in the east have to go to the playoffs and thus won't be in the lotto.

There's basically no way I could see us finishing 5th. The players won't openly tank IMO. We could rest guys, try out rotations etc, but even so, I don't think we're so bad that 2 of the Grizzlies, Clippers, and Knicks would pass us. I honestly can't see any of those teams passing us.

If you compare us to those 3, we seem to have the most talent, and have underperformed the most this season, we'd be the most likely of the 4 to have a solid second half, so for 2 of the 3 to pass us just seems hard to believe.

I also don't think we'll end up being the worst of the tier we're in now (which would land us 7th). I would bet that 10th or so is a pretty good guess as to where we end up if we miss the playoffs.

Dieselbound&Down · Post #4 » by **Dieselbound&Down** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:39 pm

If management tried harder they could fall to 5 or so. Trade Hinrich and Noc for Brand and let Brand sit the rest of the year. Start TT at small forward, move Gordon to point for the rest of the year and start Thabo. Sit Deng for a few months. Little things, but they can add up fast to a truly shameful record for a team that last year played the final day of the regular season for 50 wins and the second best record in the east.

Magilla_Gorilla · Post #5 » by **Magilla_Gorilla** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:44 pm

dougthonus wrote:We can't realistically finish 13th like you have in our range though because 2 of the bad teams in the east have to go to the playoffs and thus won't be in the lotto.

Thats why we keep you around Doug - it hadn't even occurred to me thats how bad the 7th and 8th seed would be.

There's basically no way I could see us finishing 5th. The players won't openly tank IMO. We could rest guys, try out rotations etc, but even so, I don't think we're so bad that 2 of the Grizzlies, Clippers, and Knicks would pass us. I honestly can't see any of those teams passing us.

I agree for the most part - the only way we get to fifth is if we are hit by the injury bug again. With Deng possibly out for an extended time all it would take is an injury to Gordon or Noc and we'd really be in some trouble.

Post #6 » by **BrooklynBulls** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:47 pm

With Deng missing significant time, Duhon missing time, Kirk perhaps missing time with back issues, and who knows what kind of injuries, this could change. Plus, any trades could fathomably make us worse if we're dumping Noc, Hinrich, Smith. Dumping Wallace would make us considerably better.

What we're ignoring is that it IS a draft lottery, and even if we're set at 8, we could be picking 1,2,3,8,9,10. The outliers aren't likely, but they're possible.

Friend_Of_Haley · Post #7 » by **Friend_Of_Haley** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:48 pm

Techinically, by being in the lottery our range is 1-3, 7-12. I know the odds are less, but wasn't Portland and Seattle 7 and 8 last season? Even if we got 7 at best, I think it has a lot more trade value than the 14th pick. If we aren't top 3, a trade is the only use I see us having from the pick.

blumeany · Post #8 » by **blumeany** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:11 pm

I'm less worried about where we land and more worried about the talent in this draft. When I see so many foreign players projected early, I get nervous. Not that foreign players can't be successful, just that they are usually the least scouted - or at least they are always a big unknown due to the competition they play against. I look at these mock drafts and wonder who all these players are. Also, I don't see many SG at the size we would like them in. There's some more 6'3'', 6'4'' guys higher up, but who needs another short guard? :roll:

ptpablo · Post #9 » by **ptpablo** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:25 pm

Do we even want a pick to come in? I just peaked at DX. I am not impressed with the prospects in range 1-15 accept for Rose and Beasley. What kind of player is Buddinger, Douglas-Roberts, and that big from Syracuse? Are they ready? I say we trade this pick and make a serious upgrade. Keep TT, Noah, and Thabo. Get rid of the big deals. Then deal with Deng and BG after we established a direction.

kyrv · Post #10 » by **kyrv** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:28 pm

I would like to see the youngsters play, and play a ton, and let the chips, or ping pong fall (or not fall) where they may.

I don't think the Bulls will get a top five pick. In fact if they were to lose that much playing the youngsters, that might be a bad sign.

I do think the Bulls have the assets to move up, if they so choose.

JeffJordan · Post #11 » by **JeffJordan** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:41 pm

The east is so weak that I bet we make a run and make the playoffs as the 8th seed -- if we miss the playoffs I think we will end up with the 11-13th pick which won't do us much good.

cool007 · Post #12 » by **cool007** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:46 pm

IMO, unless we get top 3 pick, I don't want any more 7th to 12th pick any more.

If we don't fall in at 1 to 3 spot, then I think we better trade the pick and package it for something that really is worth it.

I think Pax also needs to decide on what direction he wants to go to? Still keep the core or trade 1 or 2 of them along with the pick for a star???

robg · Post #13 » by **robg** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:07 pm

OJ MAYO is my guy for this upcoming draft. 6'5 athletic. i've seen drafts where he falls to 7 and down but there is no way this guy is slipping past 4. If the bulls get anywhere near the top 5 i hope they get this guy.
BTW i'm tired of all the beasley talk-this guy has no position in the NBA: he will not get the baskets under the rim as easy as he does in college(only 6'9 just like TT) and he is kindda is slow to get around any 3's in the NBA. And he is too short to be a true power forward (see TT).

VinTheBarber · Post #14 » by **VinTheBarber** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:22 pm

how do we know if tyrus is to short to be a pf unless we give him pt ? he looked pretty good last year playin pf during the playoffs no ?

robg · Post #15 » by **robg** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:27 pm

i think TT is listed as 6'9 but he is probably more like 6'8 it is very rare that a undersize player excels at his position. barkley is example of a player who was able to play well at his height.

gnk2727 · Post #16 » by **gnk2727** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:27 pm

robg wrote:OJ MAYO is my guy for this upcoming draft. 6'5 athletic. i've seen drafts where he falls to 7 and down but there is no way this guy is slipping past 4. If the bulls get anywhere near the top 5 i hope they get this guy.
BTW i'm tired of all the beasley talk-this guy has no position in the NBA: he will not get the baskets under the rim as easy as he does in college(only 6'9 just like TT) and he is kindda is slow to get around any 3's in the NBA. And he is too short to be a true power forward (see TT).

Yeah I wonder why nbadraft.net has Beasley's Athleticism ranked as a 10, his quickness as a 9 and his strength as a 9. Additonally his jumpshot is a 9 as well as his post skills a 9. The kid is 6'9" and 235. How can you say he doesnt have a position in the NBA? Please dont talk about things you do not know about.

Beasley is averaging 24.8 ppg and 12.6 rpg on 56.8% fg and 36.8% from 3. Im not sure what part of his game cant translate to the NBA. You should watch some of his games more closely.

gnk2727 · Post #17 » by **gnk2727** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:28 pm

robg wrote:i think TT is listed as 6'9 but he is probably more like 6'8 it is very rare that a undersize player excels at his position. barkley is example of a player who was able to play well at his height.

Yeah but Barkley was thick and strong in addition to being athletic as hell......

JeffJordan · Post #18 » by **JeffJordan** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:36 pm

The hope for TT is that he develops into a SF type of player like Kirilenko. A player that is long and athletic that can rebound, block shots, steal the ball and hit the midrange jumper as well as being good at put backs. Not sure if TT has the heart or IQ to reach AK's level but if we keep TT I REALLY hope he becomes something special. I have strong doubts... but even if TT becomes a better rebounding Travis Outlaw that would be Very nice.

I remember people talking about TT becoming a Larry Nance player but I haven't heard anyone compare him to Nance this season. Only time will tell.

RyGuy24 · Post #19 » by **RyGuy24** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:48 pm

blumeany wrote:I'm less worried about where we land and more worried about the talent in this draft. When I see so many foreign players projected early, I get nervous. Not that foreign players can't be successful, just that they are usually the least scouted - or at least they are always a big unknown due to the competition they play against. I look at these mock drafts and wonder who all these players are. Also, I don't see many SG at the size we would like them in. There's some more 6'3'', 6'4'' guys higher up, but who needs another short guard?

There aren't that many foreign players projected to go high at all. Batum and Gallinari will go 6-15ish, with a chance Ibaka goes 10-15 but likely later.