TeamMan wrote:As the quote goes "I can't understand why you don't understand".
No, literally, I have no idea what you meant. I wasn't trying to be insulting or argumentative. I have no idea what point you were driving at one way or the other.
Gar/Pax wanted desperately to get rid of Dunn, but everything that they tried failed.
They clearly didn't desperately want to get rid of him or they would have. They didn't think he was valuable, they were shopping him for a second rounder. When they couldn't get that, they figured he was more valuable than swapping for dead space and were likely correct.
They are gone, but there is no way that the Bulls are going to cramp their cap space for him.
They aren't losing space. They don't have space. I mean, yeah, they might not keep him, and I'm not saying they should or should not. He's a role player and will be paid a role player salary next year either way. Maybe he's an okay guy to have or maybe not.
There was nothing reasonable about him. He was a PG that couldn't shoot in a league that is being driven by PGs who can shoot.
He was the best perimeter defender on the team by far. Your quote is thinking of him as a starter instead of a niche player.
From the second that Coby White was drafted Dunn had no future with the Bulls, but they wanted to try and salvage something of value, but the rest of the league could also see the problems.
Dunn doesn't have a future as a starting PG anywhere in the league. He won't be paid a starter salary. If Coby White is a starter, the fact that Dunn is or is not here isn't relevant. They aren't competing for the same space, because Dunn isn't good enough. If they are competing for the same space it means White isn't all that successful either and is also just fighting for backup minutes.
He didn't earn it. After both OPJ and Hutch went out with injuries they still wanted to try to showcase him in one last desperate effort before the trade deadline.
Yes, maybe I should be more specific, relative to the options we had to start, Dunn was most deserving and playing the best. I agree that if Porter was healthy all year that Dunn wouldn't start. I do think he pretty clearly outplayed Hutchison though.
IMHO the correct roster change would have been to move Thad Young to SF, bring Gafford off the bench for 10-15 minutes a game and play WCJ for 10-15 minutes a game at PF.
Young can't defend the SF position anymore, he's too slow now, and would have been killed there. That said, I wouldn't have hated this plan either, because it's not like what we did was great and getting Gafford more playing time would be nice.
Then (at most) Dunn would have come off the bench as backup SF.
Which would have been fine (or as backup PG/SG as well).
It's my expectation that the Bulls will draft a SF during the draft. Even if Dunn stayed with the team he would hardly ever get off the bench. Coby will get all of the extra minutes at PG.
Maybe, depends on health, on the roster as it exists today, I think he's better than Hutchison and Arci (though Arci might fill a more valuable niche because of his shooting). I agree Coby, Sato, LaVine, and Porter would all be ahead of him if they remain healthy. Dunn certainly doesn't look to command any significant playing time on the Bulls next year without injuries and for the 7M on the QO is probably pretty expensive relative to his role.
If they don't get lucky in the lotto, then maybe Dunn could be put into a package for a trade-up in the draft as filler with a S&T. But they would 1st have to make the QO. And unless there is a deal already on the table, I can't see it happening.
You can't trade Dunn because he isn't under contract and can't sign a new contract prior to FA starting.
However, this statement underlines your overall contradictory view that Dunn sucks, but maybe someone else values him or Dunn sucks, but now we screwed up by allowing his QO to be higher.
7 mil. for a player that will have trouble getting off the bench makes no sense even it the Bulls had extra cap space.
He won't be needed at PG (his defense does not make up for his poor shooting, not for 7 mil.) and actually Archi-D is a better 3rd option because of 3P shooting (and he also has a better A/TO than Dunn).
Meanwhile, the Bulls had to be happy with Adam Mokoka (after the defense that he played against Doncic in the Dallas game) and he comes at a fraction of the cost.
So, no matter how you look at it, Dunn will not be back with the Bulls.
Again, you don't seem to understand the cap space argument, from a cap space perspective, Dunn at one price vs the next is completely irrelevant. It would be more relevant if the Bulls had space, because then it would count against that space.
I agree, 7M for Dunn is expensive, you'd only do it because he doesn't require an exception and the room won't hurt you. If you let Dunn leave, then you will replace him with a vet min player. Dunn is probably better than the vet min guy that would agree to come here (given the good vet min guys sign on at contenders generally).
Not saying we should definitely keep him, just that hammering away at the 7M number is an irrelevant part of the argument. It doesn't change anything we can do other than save the Bulls cash they can pay out to investors but can't legally put back into the roster. The comparison on court talent wise is Dunn vs a vet min roster spot.
Agree that he probably won't be back, they didn't seem to want him last year, and he's expensive for what he is. It's only a matter of whether or not you like him more than the vet min guy who will replace him enough to spend the extra money or whether you want to save cash. I think it's highly unlikely that Dunn is worse than whomever the last guy to take up a roster spot on a vet min deal is, but I agree that the Bulls may not think he's worth paying 6M in cash to have instead of that guy.
