Image ImageImage Image

2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged

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

New poll, re-voting allowed

Carter
21
12%
Porter
102
58%
Bridges
38
22%
Young
10
6%
Sexton
4
2%
 
Total votes: 175

User avatar
kulaz3000
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 42,657
And1: 24,867
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1761 » by kulaz3000 » Tue May 22, 2018 1:29 am

Red Larrivee wrote:
TheHrvReport wrote:You guys really think the Bulls wanted to tank the season so they could draft essentially the younger version of Robin Lopez in WCJ? I think they go home-run with this pick and go with MPJ/Bamba/JJJ (likely off the board by 7), or even Trae Young. If all else fails they'll go with Mikal Bridges over Carter as they value a wing more than a big man right now it seems.


It's a mistake to think like that though. You're not going to compensate for not getting an obvious superstar by going for a perceived home run.

Getting a good player from this draft is not a bad result.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I'd go as far as to say that going for the home-run is what you do if you want to set back your franchise.
Why so serious?
the ultimates
Analyst
Posts: 3,671
And1: 1,616
Joined: Jul 06, 2012

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1762 » by the ultimates » Tue May 22, 2018 1:31 am

Red Larrivee wrote:
fleet wrote:Depends on what your ultimate definition of success means really, as far as what a good result (pick) is for tanking.


If Carter is a two-way player with positive basketball impact, is it a bad result?

I want a star too, but you have to be realistic. Every player we're projected to get has some sort of significant concern.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Exactly. It's year two of a rebuild yet the chance to get productive two-way players (Carter, Bridges) is scoffed upon.
Losing to get high draft picks and hoping they turn into franchise players is not some next level, genius move. That's what teams want to happen in any rebuild/tank or whatever you want to market it as.
fleet
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 69,958
And1: 37,279
Joined: Dec 23, 2002
 

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1763 » by fleet » Tue May 22, 2018 1:32 am

kulaz3000 wrote:
Red Larrivee wrote:
TheHrvReport wrote:You guys really think the Bulls wanted to tank the season so they could draft essentially the younger version of Robin Lopez in WCJ? I think they go home-run with this pick and go with MPJ/Bamba/JJJ (likely off the board by 7), or even Trae Young. If all else fails they'll go with Mikal Bridges over Carter as they value a wing more than a big man right now it seems.


It's a mistake to think like that though. You're not going to compensate for not getting an obvious superstar by going for a perceived home run.

Getting a good player from this draft is not a bad result.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I'd go as far as to say that going for the home-run is what you do if you want to set back your franchise.

Or hit a homer.
User avatar
Red Larrivee
RealGM
Posts: 42,227
And1: 19,063
Joined: Feb 15, 2007
Location: Hogging Microphone Time From Tom Dore

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1764 » by Red Larrivee » Tue May 22, 2018 1:32 am

fleet wrote:Of course not. But can he win me a ring? I know he can get help get me back up onto the treadmill.


I mean, if you're looking for Michael Jordan I don't know what to tell you. The player we get can certainly be a valuable part of a championship team one day.

I can realistically hope to get a star out of this draft. Its not unrealistic.


Between the players who most mocks have us choosing from at 7, where is the clear superstar potential?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Betta Bulleavit
General Manager
Posts: 7,761
And1: 2,870
Joined: Oct 29, 2004
       

Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1765 » by Betta Bulleavit » Tue May 22, 2018 1:34 am

The game tends to be rather cyclical. What’s hot now might not be so hot in say....the next five years. But then it’ll get hot again in another 10 years. I see WCJ as being the type of big that’s going to be a very hot commodity right as he’s entering his prime. If we had a higher pick, I’d probably be looking in a different direction. But for where we’re drafting, he could end up being our best shot at a high impact player.

In my opinion, it’s not whether or not worse players will go before him, it’s just a matter of how many. His game is very polished for him to be the age that he is. It’s damn near as good as getting a prep to pros type of player. I think the biggest concern I have with him is how long it will take him to adjust to the next level. Not really a matter of if. And despite what’s people might think about his fit with Lauri, there is really only one player that I think would be a better fit and that’s Bamba.
kingkirk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 80,406
And1: 23,765
Joined: Jan 24, 2004
 

Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1766 » by kingkirk » Tue May 22, 2018 1:35 am

bad knees wrote:I'd love WCJ if it was 1998, or even 2008. I even like him a lot now. But here's my question: can he be on the floor in a conference finals when everyone has gone small, and the centers are the equivalent of Love, Horford, Green and Capela? Can he cover guards and wings out on the perimeterr well enough to be effective and stay on the floor?

He seems like he has good feet, but I have heard there are doubts about his "north-south" mobility. Is there any reason to think that these doubts are incorrect or that his deficit can be addressed through player development?

Because it seems like a real waste to make a pick at 7 that you know will not be able to play at the highest levels. The trend toward positionless basketball, small lineups, and centers who must be able guard on the perimeter, is fully here, and there is no reason to think that it is going to go away anytime soon.

Some people say that the Bulls shouldn't just copy the current successful teams. We need to zig when the others are zagging. It seems to me that the next phase is finding two bigs who have the ability to be two-way players, and can still guard the little guys. We are lucky in that it appears we have found one - Lauri demonstrated that he can be a small ball center with his defense last year, and his offense speaks for itself. We should only add a big guy if we think that guy can be out there with Lauri at the end of games against the great teams. That's why I like JJJ so much. I am confident that he is one of those guys. With WCJ, I'm just not seeing it so far.


I keep seeing this line of thinking going around, not just for WCJ, but for Bamba and even someone like Bagley.

How many teams out there actually have the ability to go super small, to the point where drafting a big like WCJ isn’t a favourable thing?

You noted the 4 conference finals centers. Two started their careers as PFs. Their shooting improvements has allowed them to move to 5 and stay on the floor. Love certainly doesn’t have the footspeed to guard the five, but his offense gets him over the line.

As for Capela, he’s being played less because of these smaller lineups, despite being the modern archetype of what a center should now be.

The only ‘center’ in the league who can really do it all is Draymond Green. He’s unique but we’re reacting as if it’s easy to find a center who can do what he can. It’s not. It will be a generational shift that will take years to be the norm, if it happens at all.

My point is this: You can’t just pass on guys because they may have a tough time matching up against who will be declining as players once the Bulls (hopefully) are contending again. When the Bulls next make the Finals, the Warriors won’t be there. Draymond won’t be playing. What then?

What about the rest of the league and the entire NBA season, not just the ECF and Finals?

Centers haven’t been rendered completely useless and are still needed. I think we’re all going too far about how centers have been marginalised. And until there’s a greater supply of wings who can shift up positions, there’s nothing you can really do about it. That’s why guys like Tatum and Brown are so damn valuable at the moment. There may not be that type of two-way guy in this draft. As much as we want these players, if they don’t exist, what are the alternatives?

Against someone like Embiid, guys like WCJ and Bamba could be very important. But beyond that, really, matchups shouldn’t matter to Chicago this early in the rebuild. As I said, they shouldn’t be concerning themselves with if their No. 7 draft pick can stay on the floor against the Warriors or Rockets as they’re too far away from those teams for it to matter, and league trends may have shifted another direction at that point, anyway.
fleet
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 69,958
And1: 37,279
Joined: Dec 23, 2002
 

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1767 » by fleet » Tue May 22, 2018 1:37 am

Red Larrivee wrote:
fleet wrote:Of course not. But can he win me a ring? I know he can get help get me back up onto the treadmill.


I mean, if you're looking for Michael Jordan I don't know what to tell you. The player we get can certainly be a valuable part of a championship team one day.

No, I dont believe we discussed Jordan.

Can be. But it means there is still the little manner of putting together a championship big 2

Between the players who most mocks have us choosing from at 7, where is the clear superstar potential?

Nothing is clear. But I'm taking the guy with the most upside available. Because this chance in a draft like this does not come around too often. You can quote all the outliers you have in the quiver. This is a high pick that can be reasonably be taken on the upside player.
wonderboy2
Analyst
Posts: 3,151
And1: 1,949
Joined: Jul 05, 2013

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1768 » by wonderboy2 » Tue May 22, 2018 1:37 am

AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:
Red Larrivee wrote:
AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:Carter’s a smart team defensder but he can’t guard in space. That’s the biggest knock against him. And bigs that can’t guard in space are getting played off the floor more and more often.

It’d be one thing if he were an elite rim protector and could play a drop defense a la Gobert or an aging DeAndre Jordan, but he isn’t that either. 2 blocks per game in college doesn’t translate to impactful shot blocking in the NBA.

And then there’s fit. Between Lauri and WCJ, which of our bigs would be asked to chase small ball fours around the court? The answer’s Lauri. Is that a good use of Lauri? The answer’s probably no.


But then why do people want Markkanen guarding wings on pick and roll switches as a starting center?

I share the same concern about Carter's north/south quickness, but at the very least you know you're working with a 19-year-old who's already above average defensively and knows where to be. That's a lot more than you can say for players like Ayton and Bagley who look absolutely clueless on that side.

What's the fix for increasing Carter's mobility? If he drops to 240, does that help?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Lauri guarding pick and rolls is unavoidable. Add WCJ and you now have now two bigs that get headhunted in switches.

I don’t know the key to improving WCJ’s speed. Some guys are slow because they’re playing too heavy. And others just have slow feet. If Carter’s in the former category, he should’ve been advised to trim down before the combine, otherwise we have to take it on blind faith that he can one day be fast.

As for Ayton and Bagley... yeah, their defense sucks. If you draft either it’s because of their offensive upside, and they both have way more potential than Carter on that end, imo.

Lauri is actualy a very good perimeter defender for his size and position. He has very good feet. That was probably the most surprising aspect of his game. He guarded wings and guards very well. So much so that when he was matched up on the perimeter vs guards they rarely went at him. Lauri struggled guarding the post and bruising bigs. But he did an excellent job defending the perimeter last year.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 17,389
And1: 11,404
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1769 » by TheSuzerain » Tue May 22, 2018 1:38 am

Mark K wrote:
bad knees wrote:I'd love WCJ if it was 1998, or even 2008. I even like him a lot now. But here's my question: can he be on the floor in a conference finals when everyone has gone small, and the centers are the equivalent of Love, Horford, Green and Capela? Can he cover guards and wings out on the perimeterr well enough to be effective and stay on the floor?

He seems like he has good feet, but I have heard there are doubts about his "north-south" mobility. Is there any reason to think that these doubts are incorrect or that his deficit can be addressed through player development?

Because it seems like a real waste to make a pick at 7 that you know will not be able to play at the highest levels. The trend toward positionless basketball, small lineups, and centers who must be able guard on the perimeter, is fully here, and there is no reason to think that it is going to go away anytime soon.

Some people say that the Bulls shouldn't just copy the current successful teams. We need to zig when the others are zagging. It seems to me that the next phase is finding two bigs who have the ability to be two-way players, and can still guard the little guys. We are lucky in that it appears we have found one - Lauri demonstrated that he can be a small ball center with his defense last year, and his offense speaks for itself. We should only add a big guy if we think that guy can be out there with Lauri at the end of games against the great teams. That's why I like JJJ so much. I am confident that he is one of those guys. With WCJ, I'm just not seeing it so far.


I keep seeing this line of thinking going around, not just for WCJ, but for Bamba and even someone like Bagley.

How many teams out there actually have the ability to go super small, to the point where drafting a big like WCJ isn’t a favourable thing?

You noted the 4 conference finals centers. Two started their careers as PFs. Their shooting improvements has allowed them to move to 5 and stay on the floor. Love certainly doesn’t have the footspeed to guard the five, but his offense gets him over the line.

As for Capela, he’s being played less because of these smaller lineups, despite being the modern archetype of what a center should now be.

The only ‘center’ in the league who can really do it all is Draymond Green. He’s unique but we’re reacting as if it’s easy to find a center who can do what he can. It’s not. It will be a generational shift that will take years to be the norm, if it happens at all.

My point is this: You can’t just pass on guys because they may have a tough time matching up against who will be declining as players once the Bulls (hopefully) are contending again. When the Bulls next make the Finals, the Warriors won’t be there. Draymond won’t be playing. What then?

What about the rest of the league and the entire NBA season, not just the ECF and Finals?

Centers haven’t been rendered completely useless and are still needed. I think we’re all going too far about how centers have been marginalised. And until there’s a greater supply of wings who can shift up positions, there’s nothing you can really do about it. That’s why guys like Tatum and Brown are so damn valuable at the moment. There may not be that type of two-way guy in this draft. As much as we want these players, if they don’t exist, what are the alternatives?

Against someone like Embiid, guys like WCJ and Bamba could be very important. But beyond that, really, matchups shouldn’t matter to Chicago this early in the rebuild. As I said, they shouldn’t be concerning themselves with if their No. 7 draft pick can stay on the floor against the Warriors or Rockets as they’re too far away from those teams for it to matter, and league trends may have shifted another direction at that point, anyway.

Every championship team in recent memory has had a killer small-ball lineup. I see no reason that won't continue.

It's not about the viability of Carter by himself, it's about the viability of Carter/Lauri.
bearadonisdna
RealGM
Posts: 19,757
And1: 5,394
Joined: Jul 07, 2012

Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1770 » by bearadonisdna » Tue May 22, 2018 1:38 am

Rangier Elton brand or less athletic Dwight with range
User avatar
Red Larrivee
RealGM
Posts: 42,227
And1: 19,063
Joined: Feb 15, 2007
Location: Hogging Microphone Time From Tom Dore

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1771 » by Red Larrivee » Tue May 22, 2018 1:38 am

fleet wrote:Or hit a homer.


I don't want to get too deep into the baseball analogy, but what's wrong with a triple or a double? It's not like this is your only chance to hit big.

Like I said, if Wendell Carter becomes a valuable two-way center, that's not insignificant. That can definitely play a key role on the next really good Bulls team. How do we forget that Luol Deng and Joakim Noah were here before the superstar was found.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
kingkirk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 80,406
And1: 23,765
Joined: Jan 24, 2004
 

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1772 » by kingkirk » Tue May 22, 2018 1:39 am

fleet wrote:I can realistically hope to get a star out of this draft. It's not unrealistic.


It's typically unrealistic to ever get a star player with the No. 7 pick. Knowing this, I don't know how we can 'realistically' set a standard of expecting to find a star at 7. It may happen, but in no way is it realistic to assume it's likely, and that if it doesn't occur, that it's a fail.

Basically, the standard you're applying is something that should be typically reserved for pick 1, 2 & 3.
fleet
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 69,958
And1: 37,279
Joined: Dec 23, 2002
 

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1773 » by fleet » Tue May 22, 2018 1:42 am

Red Larrivee wrote:
fleet wrote:Or hit a homer.


I don't want to get too deep into the baseball analogy, but what's wrong with a triple or a double? It's not like this is your only chance to hit big.

Like I said, if Wendell Carter becomes a valuable two-way center, that's not insignificant. That can definitely play a key role on the next really good Bulls team. How do we forget that Luol Deng and Joakim Noah were here before the superstar was found.

We got the superstar with the number one overall. That happens a lot.

Nothing is wrong with doubles. I think we already covered that. I can hit a double my way too. Just that you want to settle for the double.
User avatar
Red Larrivee
RealGM
Posts: 42,227
And1: 19,063
Joined: Feb 15, 2007
Location: Hogging Microphone Time From Tom Dore

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1774 » by Red Larrivee » Tue May 22, 2018 1:42 am

fleet wrote:Nothing is clear. But I'm taking the guy with the most upside available. Because this chance in a draft like this does not come around too often. You can quote all the outliers you have in the quiver. This is a high pick that can be reasonably be taken on the upside player.


The higher upside player isn't necessarily the player that's apart of this "Championship 2." That's my point.

I'm not adverse to either type of player, I just don't get the mentality that a good player isn't an appealing result because of the hopes before the season. Just because you don't land a lead option with this pick, doesn't mean it wasn't successful.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
AshyLarrysDiaper
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 16,169
And1: 7,841
Joined: Jul 16, 2004
Location: Oakland

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1775 » by AshyLarrysDiaper » Tue May 22, 2018 1:43 am

wonderboy2 wrote:
AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:
Red Larrivee wrote:
But then why do people want Markkanen guarding wings on pick and roll switches as a starting center?

I share the same concern about Carter's north/south quickness, but at the very least you know you're working with a 19-year-old who's already above average defensively and knows where to be. That's a lot more than you can say for players like Ayton and Bagley who look absolutely clueless on that side.

What's the fix for increasing Carter's mobility? If he drops to 240, does that help?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Lauri guarding pick and rolls is unavoidable. Add WCJ and you now have now two bigs that get headhunted in switches.

I don’t know the key to improving WCJ’s speed. Some guys are slow because they’re playing too heavy. And others just have slow feet. If Carter’s in the former category, he should’ve been advised to trim down before the combine, otherwise we have to take it on blind faith that he can one day be fast.

As for Ayton and Bagley... yeah, their defense sucks. If you draft either it’s because of their offensive upside, and they both have way more potential than Carter on that end, imo.

Lauri is actualy a very good perimeter defender for his size and position. He has very good feet. That was probably the most surprising aspect of his game. He guarded wings and guards very well. So much so that when he was matched up on the perimeter vs guards they rarely went at him. Lauri struggled guarding the post and bruising bigs. But he did an excellent job defending the perimeter last year.


That wasn’t my point. Lauri is a good defensive big, but every big gets tested on switches since, more often than not, they’re one of your weaker perimeter defenders. Which is why if you can help it you don’t bank on playing two seven footers together for large stretches in today’s game.

Edit: I realize Carter isn’t a seven footer. He moves like a C though. Not plodding, but not with plus speed either.
Contribute to the "Fire GarPax" billboard here:
https://www.gofundme.com/3v7fc-let-our-voices-be-heard-firegarpax
fleet
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 69,958
And1: 37,279
Joined: Dec 23, 2002
 

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1776 » by fleet » Tue May 22, 2018 1:44 am

Mark K wrote:
fleet wrote:I can realistically hope to get a star out of this draft. It's not unrealistic.


It's typically unrealistic to ever get a star player with the No. 7 pick. Knowing this, I don't know how we can 'realistically' set a standard of expecting to find a star at 7. It may happen, but in no way is it realistic to assume it's likely, and that if it doesn't occur, that it's a fail.

Basically, the standard you're applying is something that should be typically reserved for pick 1, 2 & 3.

why is everybody making leaps of substance as far as what I'm saying? This is a 6 or 7 deep draft in the top tier. 5 of the 7 look like they may have superstar upside. If one of the 5 is there at 7, I'm grabbing him. Not one of the others. You go for the safer floor if you want to. The end.
kingkirk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 80,406
And1: 23,765
Joined: Jan 24, 2004
 

Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1777 » by kingkirk » Tue May 22, 2018 1:45 am

TheSuzerain wrote:Every championship team in recent memory has had a killer small-ball lineup. I see no reason that won't continue.

It's not about the viability of Carter by himself, it's about the viability of Carter/Lauri.


And the Bulls can still form a small-ball lineup/rotation. Who they take with pick No. 7 won’t prevent that given the team is nowhere near a finished product.

Like I said, if there is no viable alternative or someone who fits and enables small ball, what should the team do? Reach on Miles Bridges because maybe down the line he could slide down to PF, and Lauri himself could maybe play some center?

There’s too many unknowns about the roster to be excluding certain players from the equation based purely on what the ideal model should look like.

The Bulls can’t dictate the archetype of player available to them in the draft. They may want a wing who can play both sides of the ball, but if none exist, what then?
fleet
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 69,958
And1: 37,279
Joined: Dec 23, 2002
 

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1778 » by fleet » Tue May 22, 2018 1:48 am

Red Larrivee wrote:
fleet wrote:Nothing is clear. But I'm taking the guy with the most upside available. Because this chance in a draft like this does not come around too often. You can quote all the outliers you have in the quiver. This is a high pick that can be reasonably be taken on the upside player.


The higher upside player isn't necessarily the player that's apart of this "Championship 2." That's my point.

I'm not adverse to either type of player, I just don't get the mentality that a good player isn't an appealing result because of the hopes before the season. Just because you don't land a lead option with this pick, doesn't mean it wasn't successful.

Oh well we can end this conversation right now. Because I never said unappealing. Just not AS appealing. Cool?
kingkirk
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 80,406
And1: 23,765
Joined: Jan 24, 2004
 

Re: RE: Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1779 » by kingkirk » Tue May 22, 2018 1:48 am

fleet wrote:why is everybody making leaps of substance as far as what I'm saying? This is a 6 or 7 deep draft in the top tier. 5 of the 7 look like they may have superstar upside. If one of the 5 is there at 7, I'm grabbing him. Not one of the others. You go for the safer floor if you want to. The end.


You can’t ask why people are making leaps about what you’re saying, then get mad at it, only to follow it up by saying that 5 of the 7 players in this draft have superstar upside.

Like I said, if that’s the standard you’re assuming about this draft, then you’re probably going to be disappointed, even if they do go and grab one of the 5 guys you’re perceiving to have superstar potential.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 17,389
And1: 11,404
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: 2018 NBA Draft 2.0 - pick #7, #22 . - Merged 

Post#1780 » by TheSuzerain » Tue May 22, 2018 1:48 am

Mark K wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:Every championship team in recent memory has had a killer small-ball lineup. I see no reason that won't continue.

It's not about the viability of Carter by himself, it's about the viability of Carter/Lauri.


And the Bulls can still form a small-ball lineup/rotation. Who they take with pick No. 7 won’t prevent that given the team is nowhere near a finished product.

Like I said, if there is no viable alternative or someone who fits and enables small ball, what should the team do? Reach on Miles Bridges because maybe down the line he could slide down to PF, and Lauri himself could maybe play some center?

There’s too many unknowns about the roster to be excluding certain players from the equation based purely on what the ideal model should look like.

The Bulls can’t dictate the archetype of player available to them in the draft. They may want a wing who can play both sides of the ball, but if none exist, what then?

There is no small ball line-up that exists with Lauri + Center.

We shouldn't spend this pick on anyone that you can't reasonably expect to be in a game-closing line-up. Only bigs that pass that test are JJJ and Bagley.

Return to Chicago Bulls