2020 NBA Draft Thread: Bulls pick 4th: PT 2

[Chi town]

Clarke is a very good prospect but he hasn't proven enough to be the only core piece coming back for LaVine.

brandon clarke just had a better season than zach lavine has ever put up

(zach is only 18 months older than clark so it's not quite as damning as it might otherwise seem. but i think the vast majority of teams would take clarke with three years left on his rookie deal over lavine on a two-year market-rate contract even if it's not a bad price)

That is intellectually dishonest. Clarke as a 3rd big in lower mins. Lavine as 1st option with 2nd and 3rd stringers due to injury. Add in Jimbo too.

Lavine def has room to grow especially with IQ. Clarke is probably the best 3rd big in the league. Def on that rookie deal.

[Senor Chang]

https://www.nbadraft.net/situational-analysis-tyrese-haliburton/

"Perhaps his greatest upside is on the defensive end, where Haliburton snagged 2.5 steals a game thanks in large part to his long wingspan (nearly 6-8) and his excellent anticipation skills. He projects as the ideal switch-everything wing defender along the perimeter. Even though he’s quite skinny at this stage of his development, he isn’t afraid to bang with bigger, heavier players on the boards. He is an incredible transition threat, given his predilection for jumping passing lanes and his ability to finish at the rim (nearly 69% at the tin, via Synergy)."

He is our Tayshuan Prince in a PG setting with passing and shooting.

If we can walk away from this draft with Haliburton and Devin Vassel without giving up too much to trade down then i will be very happy.

[MrFortune3]

Clarke is a very good prospect but he hasn't proven enough to be the only core piece coming back for LaVine.

brandon clarke just had a better season than zach lavine has ever put up

(zach is only 18 months older than clark so it's not quite as damning as it might otherwise seem. but i think the vast majority of teams would take clarke with three years left on his rookie deal over lavine on a two-year market-rate contract even if it's not a bad price)

No he didn't. Jesus, the vitriol for LaVine on this board is insane. No team in the league is trading Zach away with Clarke as anywhere near the centerpiece of the deal.

[MrFortune3]

I can't see us passing on Deni and Wiseman for Okongwu.

Okongwu is similar in many ways to Wendell. I can't see us abandoning Wendell right now. I like Okongwu and wouldn't be upset if we took him at #4 but position wise we don't need him and I don't see him being the BPA at #4 either.

He's on another tier athletically to Wendell. Okongwu also has actual hope of playing the 4.

Whether he has hopes of playing the 4 or not, he's still a net negative unless you're planning to move Lauri or WCJ. We have no use for a log jam with 3 guys needing minutes at PF/C while still needing a SF and another guard that can create their own offense.
It's one thing to take Wiseman because he's BPA and you figure it out since his size and skill set fits next to either, Okongwu is not that guy that you create a log jam for.

[drosereturn]

Clarke is a very good prospect but he hasn't proven enough to be the only core piece coming back for LaVine.

brandon clarke just had a better season than zach lavine has ever put up

(zach is only 18 months older than clark so it's not quite as damning as it might otherwise seem. but i think the vast majority of teams would take clarke with three years left on his rookie deal over lavine on a two-year market-rate contract even if it's not a bad price)

That is intellectually dishonest. Clarke as a 3rd big in lower mins. Lavine as 1st option with 2nd and 3rd stringers due to injury. Add in Jimbo too.

Lavine def has room to grow especially with IQ. Clarke is probably the best 3rd big in the league. Def on that rookie deal.

Impact wise Clarke has produced numbers Lavine can only dream of. (21per, 5 ws, .183 ws/48, 3.1 bpm, 1.7vorp)
Clarke was 3rd big but its not like he was bad he played limited minutes and over 22 min per game is good sample size as rookie.
So nothing dishonest when his career has been minus, negative for the entire time like his fellow friend Wiggins has been doing.
Clarke is making chump change and Lavine is making 20 while clearly wanting raises from 30 per yr.
Value wise, its not even close Memphis hangs up the phone. Now if you add Diengs toxic contract its gets closer.
The notion that Lavine is more valuable when he is getting paid over 10 times just bc he is a guard is one of the most ridiculous arguments I hear. Yes big man is devalued but when theres a huge talent differential, you pick the best talent.

[GimmeDat]

Clarke put up 12/6 on 62% FG in only 22mpg, shot 36% from 3 and 76% from the line, and is an exceptional big defender, all in his rookie season.

They're very different players, but given Clarke just finished the first year of his rookie contract, I don't think you can understate just how valuable of an asset he is right now.

[wonderboy2]

Clarke put up 12/6 on 62% FG in only 22mpg, shot 36% from 3 and 76% from the line, and is an exceptional big defender, all in his rookie season.

They're very different players, but given Clarke just finished the first year of his rookie contract, I don't think you can understate just how valuable of an asset he is right now.

Carter is averaging nearly a double double and is a high impact defender and most people on this board want him traded. Carter is top 15 in rebounding and is 2 years younger than Clarke. Might as well draft Toppin if you want somebody similar to Clark. What Clarke provides in defense Toppin projects to be overall more versatile on offense.

[GimmeDat]

Clarke put up 12/6 on 62% FG in only 22mpg, shot 36% from 3 and 76% from the line, and is an exceptional big defender, all in his rookie season.

They're very different players, but given Clarke just finished the first year of his rookie contract, I don't think you can understate just how valuable of an asset he is right now.

Carter is averaging nearly a double double and is a high impact defender and most people on this board want him traded. Carter is top 15 in rebounding and is 2 years younger than Clarke. Might as well draft Toppin if you want somebody similar to Clark. What Clarke provides in defense Toppin projects to be overall more versatile on offense.

Consider me someone who does not want Carter to be traded, at all. Both guys are very good prospects.

Toppin will be a very good offensive player, but the upgrade in offense is not equal to the downside in defense, if you're comparing between Clarke. As I mentioned before, 19.4pp/36, 66.2 TS%.... the guy was flat out excellent offensively in his own right last season.

[Just_Bullz]

https://www.nbadraft.net/situational-analysis-tyrese-haliburton/

"Perhaps his greatest upside is on the defensive end, where Haliburton snagged 2.5 steals a game thanks in large part to his long wingspan (nearly 6-8) and his excellent anticipation skills. He projects as the ideal switch-everything wing defender along the perimeter. Even though he’s quite skinny at this stage of his development, he isn’t afraid to bang with bigger, heavier players on the boards. He is an incredible transition threat, given his predilection for jumping passing lanes and his ability to finish at the rim (nearly 69% at the tin, via Synergy)."

He is our Tayshuan Prince in a PG setting with passing and shooting.

If we can walk away from this draft with Haliburton and Devin Vassel without giving up too much to trade down then i will be very happy.

It's a guard and wing era, can't go wrong with these choices.

[TheSuzerain]

Okongwu is similar in many ways to Wendell. I can't see us abandoning Wendell right now. I like Okongwu and wouldn't be upset if we took him at #4 but position wise we don't need him and I don't see him being the BPA at #4 either.

He's on another tier athletically to Wendell. Okongwu also has actual hope of playing the 4.

Whether he has hopes of playing the 4 or not, he's still a net negative unless you're planning to move Lauri or WCJ. We have no use for a log jam with 3 guys needing minutes at PF/C while still needing a SF and another guard that can create their own offense.
It's one thing to take Wiseman because he's BPA and you figure it out since his size and skill set fits next to either, Okongwu is not that guy that you create a log jam for.

He's not a net negative though. Lauri is the net negative right now.

[DASMACKDOWN]

I always say the true long term champions are the ones that think differently or do things others arent doing.

I think MJ for the dynasty teams, we had no offensive center in a league where there were tons.

I think GS decided to double down on shooting wins and they had the whole league playing catchup.

I think what people have in mind is that all because the top teams in the playoffs this year are a bunch of 6-8 players, doesnt mean the bigs are dead. It just means they haven't been used correctly in this 3pt barrage method.

Im not one for following who the champs are. If the Lakers win, they would win by being big. If the Clippers win, they win by being small. Does it mean now the Bulls should take the same path of whomever wins? No create your own path.

So what I am hoping for with AKME, is that they have a vision of what type of team they want the Bulls to be for long-term success and a champion.

[MrSparkle]

I always say the true long term champions are the ones that think differently or do things others arent doing.

I think MJ for the dynasty teams, we had no offensive center in a league where there were tons.

I think GS decided to double down on shooting wins and they had the whole league playing catchup.

I think what people have in mind is that all because the top teams in the playoffs this year are a bunch of 6-8 players, doesnt mean the bigs are dead. It just means they haven't been used correctly in this 3pt barrage method.

Im not one for following who the champs are. If the Lakers win, they would win by being big. If the Clippers win, they win by being small. Does it mean now the Bulls should take the same path of whomever wins? No create your own path.

So what I am hoping for with AKME, is that they have a vision of what type of team they want the Bulls to be for long-term success and a champion.

Well, in the end, talent wins, not formula. It just so happens that a 6’6-6’9 wing with high IQ, athleticism, handles, jumpshot and good FG% has been the most dominant player in the league for about 40 years straight. But I agree; don’t go tunnel vision looking for Kawhi in a Josh Jackson prospect when Curry or Jokic are there.

Excluding MLE Gasol, the Bulls have had 4 all-stars since 98: Rose, Deng, Noah, Jimmy. Two of whom were defensive specialists with limited offensive game. The other two weren’t elite 3P shooters.

IMO the lack of quality SG/SF prospects probably speaks for the Bulls’ mediocre playoff results the past 20 years. I can’t even think of a guy who came remotely close to Deng, let alone Jimmy. I guess, Noc or Salmons?

Now we have Zach; serious issues with defense and IQ. If he improves those intangibles to an average level, he does make the ASG. But he should be considered a strong piece regardless of his flaws.

[drosereturn]

https://www.nbadraft.net/situational-analysis-tyrese-haliburton/

"Perhaps his greatest upside is on the defensive end, where Haliburton snagged 2.5 steals a game thanks in large part to his long wingspan (nearly 6-8) and his excellent anticipation skills. He projects as the ideal switch-everything wing defender along the perimeter. Even though he’s quite skinny at this stage of his development, he isn’t afraid to bang with bigger, heavier players on the boards. He is an incredible transition threat, given his predilection for jumping passing lanes and his ability to finish at the rim (nearly 69% at the tin, via Synergy)."

He is our Tayshuan Prince in a PG setting with passing and shooting.

If we can walk away from this draft with Haliburton and Devin Vassel without giving up too much to trade down then i will be very happy.

This is my dream scenario as well. Haliburton is probably the highest floor/most intelligent player in this draft.
Like this guys a day 1 starter judging by how good he reads the game like Rondo. And Vassell the best 3 and D in this draft. Dont even have to workout as these guys are born to play ball. The beauty of these players are that you can get rid of Lavine and the rest of the core or build with them. You cannot just go wrong fit wise and they happen to be the best players at their positions.
The ability to guard up to 3 positions and versatility is very tough to pass up even if Wiseman, Ball was up.

[drosereturn]

He's on another tier athletically to Wendell. Okongwu also has actual hope of playing the 4.

Whether he has hopes of playing the 4 or not, he's still a net negative unless you're planning to move Lauri or WCJ. We have no use for a log jam with 3 guys needing minutes at PF/C while still needing a SF and another guard that can create their own offense.
It's one thing to take Wiseman because he's BPA and you figure it out since his size and skill set fits next to either, Okongwu is not that guy that you create a log jam for.

He's not a net negative though. Lauri is the net negative right now.

Okongwu is a tough choice. He can easily be a Draymond but become a mess like Carter and complain getting banged up resulting in bulking up and losing all the mobility while giving up shooting. You need to work out to see if his range can extend to the 3 while wiseman doesnt need the 3 due to being Dwight Howard.
Calling Lauri net negative is dishonest tho when hes 1 yr away from his sophomore yr and went under Boylen.

[PlayerUp]

Calling Lauri net negative is dishonest tho when hes 1 yr away from his sophomore yr and went under Boylen.

To be fair here, our entire team for the most part was a net negative last season. The only one who is a clear net positive is Otto Porter when healthy. That's it. We lack a top 50 player on this roster and we have a weak bench as well. The bulk of our wins last season was from teams who also have net negative rosters like ours.

[wonderboy2]

Whether he has hopes of playing the 4 or not, he's still a net negative unless you're planning to move Lauri or WCJ. We have no use for a log jam with 3 guys needing minutes at PF/C while still needing a SF and another guard that can create their own offense.
It's one thing to take Wiseman because he's BPA and you figure it out since his size and skill set fits next to either, Okongwu is not that guy that you create a log jam for.

He's not a net negative though. Lauri is the net negative right now.

Okongwu is a tough choice. He can easily be a Draymond but become a mess like Carter and complain getting banged up resulting in bulking up and losing all the mobility while giving up shooting. You need to work out to see if his range can extend to the 3 while wiseman doesnt need the 3 due to being Dwight Howard.
Calling Lauri net negative is dishonest tho when hes 1 yr away from his sophomore yr and went under Boylen.

Luari sucked ass last year. Carter was better than Markannan. And so what the whole team went through Boylen. If you give Markannan a pass, everybody should get a pass.

[sco]

He's not a net negative though. Lauri is the net negative right now.

Okongwu is a tough choice. He can easily be a Draymond but become a mess like Carter and complain getting banged up resulting in bulking up and losing all the mobility while giving up shooting. You need to work out to see if his range can extend to the 3 while wiseman doesnt need the 3 due to being Dwight Howard.
Calling Lauri net negative is dishonest tho when hes 1 yr away from his sophomore yr and went under Boylen.

Luari sucked ass last year. Carter was better than Markannan. And so what the whole team went through Boylen. If you give Markannan a pass, everybody should get a pass.

IMO, the only focus in terms of who to draft should be who has the best chance to be an allstar - even if he is worse than other guys right now. Worrying about positional logjams should not be a draft concern.

[MrFortune3]

He's on another tier athletically to Wendell. Okongwu also has actual hope of playing the 4.

Whether he has hopes of playing the 4 or not, he's still a net negative unless you're planning to move Lauri or WCJ. We have no use for a log jam with 3 guys needing minutes at PF/C while still needing a SF and another guard that can create their own offense.
It's one thing to take Wiseman because he's BPA and you figure it out since his size and skill set fits next to either, Okongwu is not that guy that you create a log jam for.

He's not a net negative though. Lauri is the net negative right now.

He would be if you took him for the Bulls. Lauri and WCJ need 35 mins a game of steady roles to work on their development. Gafford also needs minutes and then you throw a rookie who would be the same functional position as WCJ and he’s going to need 28-30 a night for his own development. No point in doing that. That’s a net negative.

[MrFortune3]

brandon clarke just had a better season than zach lavine has ever put up

(zach is only 18 months older than clark so it's not quite as damning as it might otherwise seem. but i think the vast majority of teams would take clarke with three years left on his rookie deal over lavine on a two-year market-rate contract even if it's not a bad price)

That is intellectually dishonest. Clarke as a 3rd big in lower mins. Lavine as 1st option with 2nd and 3rd stringers due to injury. Add in Jimbo too.

Lavine def has room to grow especially with IQ. Clarke is probably the best 3rd big in the league. Def on that rookie deal.

Impact wise Clarke has produced numbers Lavine can only dream of. (21per, 5 ws, .183 ws/48, 3.1 bpm, 1.7vorp)
Clarke was 3rd big but its not like he was bad he played limited minutes and over 22 min per game is good sample size as rookie.
So nothing dishonest when his career has been minus, negative for the entire time like his fellow friend Wiggins has been doing.
Clarke is making chump change and Lavine is making 20 while clearly wanting raises from 30 per yr.
Value wise, its not even close Memphis hangs up the phone. Now if you add Diengs toxic contract its gets closer.
The notion that Lavine is more valuable when he is getting paid over 10 times just bc he is a guard is one of the most ridiculous arguments I hear. Yes big man is devalued but when theres a huge talent differential, you pick the best talent.

It had nothing to do with him being a big. This is like when some Pistons fans argue about Kennard vs Mitchell. One is a solid role player and One is a proven #1 option. Different values. Clarke vs LaVine is only a debate in some fans head because no NBA personnel guy is taking Clarke as the centerpiece of a Zach trade.
Nor did Clarke have a better season. He stuffed the stat sheet but that doesn’t make his season better.

[JohnnyTapwater]

I'm not reading any debate about Clarke and Lavine --- that's the sort of disrespect that makes it embarrassing to be a Bulls fan.