The Bulls should rebuild now.

[BigJimFinn]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/brownja02.html

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

Brown was a plus defender from day one and a useful 3&D rotation guy in year 2. The only similarity to Lauri is his regression in year 3. Boston knew what they had and have steadily increased his offensive role, while he has improved his shooting, best visible in FT%.

[Jcool0]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/brownja02.html

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

Brown was a plus defender from day one and a useful 3&D rotation guy in year 2. The only similarity to Lauri is his regression in year 3. Boston knew what they had and have steadily increased his offensive role, while he has improved his shooting, best visible in FT%.

Brown has never been a plus defender. He has been teetering between average to below average.

[cjbulls]

If Lakers only have 3 future first round picks, they are nearly perfect for Lavine,Phila cames close second. It is mainly oportunistic approach with Lavine and timeline. Stars aligned for us to be able to aquire some young players who can be realy good on value rookie deals, future frp-s and opportunity to select game changer in next draft. Many times draft is crap shot and non guarantee so as loterry, but my eye test sees Suggs in Rose mode, popular phrase built different, Green as high school Kobe, Cade ad Simmons type, Mobley as Bosh, Kumminga as Giannis light, even those kids Boston and Zaire Williams looking like Ingram, high school TMac types. To much talent to risk, to go all in with Lavine and play in tournament to lose to Pacers and that whole thing ends up with 12 pick and Moses Moody. I would personally ship Lavine for rookie deals and picks, go to draft with 2 lottery picks and enough cap space to take expiring bad contracts for assets. There is hughe difference between Carter and Doncic/Young, White and Zion/Ja Morant or Kirk Hinrich and James/Wade/Anthony/Bosh. I want Sam Prestie strategy not freakinn John Paxson conservative approach and some Forman guy from Iowa (although Haliburton would be nice). Give me alpha and highflyer typhe like Jordan,Kobe,Rose in maybe Green,Suggs not Ricky Davis,Monta Ellis typhe athlete in Lavine.

The Lakers can start trading their pick in 2026. So you have to wait until 2026, hope the Lakers are terrible, hope they win the lottery (which even at worst record is like 18%), hope that draft has a top superstar and then wait for him to develop. So that player will be a championship competitor sometime after 2030.

[MrSparkle]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/brownja02.html

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

I hear you... I keep saying, most rookies need 5-6 years to “start winning.” So it’s funny when these tank teams give up on the 4th or 5th year, and hit the hard reset.

But I will say, Brown was balling since his second season. Jaylen’s been a steady improver, two way, multi-position, deep playoff threat all along. He couldn’t shoot very well so his PER took a hit, but he did everything else really well (ala PW). And he really came along in the post-season.

That whole 17/18 Celtics crew just got criminally underrated. Their two stars Hayward and Kyrie were out for the season. Tatum, Brown, Smart and Rozier went to game 7 ECFs against Lebron. Tatum and Brown were 19 and 20, the other two were 23 each, and Brad was playing a 7-man rotation all post-season... Horford was a great vet, but he wasn’t that good. How many young players carry such a load? As usual, the critics were blasting Brown and Tatum’s ECF short-comings as if it was their 10th rodeo. Reminded me how Harden was clowned after his finals debut.

There is a world of difference between these playoff proven young guys, and Lauri, who has had maybe 8-weeks total of good basketball, still doesn’t really know what his best defensive position is, and can’t really stay healthy either.

Seeing the trend of PF and Cs getting really shut down and exploited in every playoff series, my 2c is that there is a fine line between a big man’s handle and a wing’s. The big-man is just sloppier and less lethal with the ball in his hands, particularly in half-court, and unless he’s shooting lights out with a hand in his face (which isn’t sustainable) or able to also pass like Jokic, he’s gonna face adjustments and get shut down rather easily. Whereas guys like Brown and Tatum can shoot, defend and take almost anybody off the dribble (every time).

Lauri isn’t a threat at all off the dribble, and he’s also not a threat in the post. It’s nice seeing Donovan getting him going in a few rusty reg. season games against poor opponents, but playoffs? Man oh man do I see those slow handles hitting a wall. At his future peak, I see a mis-match center, not a full-time forward.

[Leslie Forman]

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

He's on the Jimmy Butler progression, not the Lauri one. Like Jimmy, he probably could have put up bigger numbers earlier if Hayward wasn't there, just like Jimmy and Deng.

Lauri from day one has been given chosen one status, starting immediately and being given the FGAs of a #1/2.

I hear you... I keep saying, most rookies need 5-6 years to “start winning.” So it’s funny when these tank teams give up on the 4th or 5th year, and hit the hard reset.

You kind of have to, because of NBA rookie contracts. That year 3/4 is where you have to make the decision.

For every Jaylen Brown, there's a whole lot of Dengs/Gordons/Hinrichs/Chandlers/etc. The vast majority of players show who they pretty much are by their 3rd or 4th year. Hell even Brown really showed what he could potentially do last season. He averaged 22/8 in the playoffs, and it was a good sample size (17 games), because, you know, they kept winning series with him playing a lot of minutes.

This is why flat out busts like Anthony Bennett are actually better for you to end up with than OK guys. So many teams have been burned by giving their picks a big post-rookie deal assuming more development…but then there isn't any.

If Glen Taylor lets Thibs do his job and dump Wiggins at his peak value, they might still have Jimmy and be a solid playoff team right now. instead…well…you know.

And that's why you REALLY have to put the young guys under a magnifying glass instead of falling in love with them.

[gobullschi]

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

He's on the Jimmy Butler progression, not the Lauri one. Like Jimmy, he probably could have put up bigger numbers earlier if Hayward wasn't there, just like Jimmy and Deng.

Lauri from day one has been given chosen one status, starting immediately and being given the FGAs of a #1/2.

I hear you... I keep saying, most rookies need 5-6 years to “start winning.” So it’s funny when these tank teams give up on the 4th or 5th year, and hit the hard reset.

You kind of have to, because of NBA rookie contracts. That year 3/4 is where you have to make the decision.

For every Jaylen Brown, there's a whole lot of Dengs/Gordons/Hinrichs/Chandlers/etc. The vast majority of players show who they pretty much are by their 3rd or 4th year. Hell even Brown really showed what he could potentially do last season. He averaged 22/8 in the playoffs, and it was a good sample size (17 games), because, you know, they kept winning series with him playing a lot of minutes.

This is why flat out busts like Anthony Bennett are actually better for you to end up with than OK guys. So many teams have been burned by giving their picks a big post-rookie deal assuming more development…but then there isn't any.

If Glen Taylor lets Thibs do his job and dump Wiggins at his peak value, they might still have Jimmy and be a solid playoff team right now. instead…well…you know.

And that's why you REALLY have to put the young guys under a magnifying glass instead of falling in love with them.

Comparing a G/SF to a PF isn’t really fair. Big men usually take a little longer to develop.

[MrSparkle]

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

He's on the Jimmy Butler progression, not the Lauri one. Like Jimmy, he probably could have put up bigger numbers earlier if Hayward wasn't there, just like Jimmy and Deng.

Lauri from day one has been given chosen one status, starting immediately and being given the FGAs of a #1/2.

I hear you... I keep saying, most rookies need 5-6 years to “start winning.” So it’s funny when these tank teams give up on the 4th or 5th year, and hit the hard reset.

You kind of have to, because of NBA rookie contracts. That year 3/4 is where you have to make the decision.

For every Jaylen Brown, there's a whole lot of Dengs/Gordons/Hinrichs/Chandlers/etc. The vast majority of players show who they pretty much are by their 3rd or 4th year. Hell even Brown really showed what he could potentially do last season. He averaged 22/8 in the playoffs, and it was a good sample size (17 games), because, you know, they kept winning series with him playing a lot of minutes.

This is why flat out busts like Anthony Bennett are actually better for you to end up with than OK guys. So many teams have been burned by giving their picks a big post-rookie deal assuming more development…but then there isn't any.

If Glen Taylor lets Thibs do his job and dump Wiggins at his peak value, they might still have Jimmy and be a solid playoff team right now. instead…well…you know.

And that's why you REALLY have to put the young guys under a magnifying glass instead of falling in love with them.

Comparing a G/SF to a PF isn’t really fair. Big men usually take a little longer to develop.

Hmm - it'd be nice to see more than 4 games from Lauri. We'll see how he returns. I seriously doubt he maintains a 48% 3P shooting clip. Otherwise, he averaged more turnovers than assists, his rebounding was as mediocre as always. The only reason his PER is 19.9 right now is because he's shooting a very high 3P% clip on good volume, albeit in tiny sample size.

A true star comes back from any hiatus and gets back to torching the net - all the injuries hardly stopped Embiid from dominating the stat sheet. 35yo Pau Gasol on 1 leg was still a high-impact (offensive) player for the Bulls. So if Lauri comes back and doubles down that he is the 3P assassin he was drafted as, then we can talk about his development curve. I don't see the same fire in Lauri, let alone the defensive/rebounding floor and ball-handling skills to fall back on when the shot is not falling, but I'm very open-minded.

But pretty much every all-star big man makes their first all-star game by year 3 or 4, and this is year 4. I need more than an inflated 3P% stat to conclude he's in star company.

[Leslie Forman]

Comparing a G/SF to a PF isn’t really fair. Big men usually take a little longer to develop.

They really don't. You generally know what you've got by year 4 and it's just small gains from there. PG is the position that historically takes some time. Whereas with every single great big man, you already knew you had something special sometime during their rookie deal, except maybe Jermaine O'Neal, who was stuck in a bad situation in Portland.

Giannis, AD, Jokic, Embiid, Bam, Gobert, Porzingis, Siakam, Towns, Sabonis, all these dudes were balling by their third or fourth year. You pretty much knew if you were gonna give them the bag or not. WIth absolute elite, ATG-level bigs, you actually know even earlier.

On rare occasion you'll get a Giannis who goes from "damn he's good" to "holy f*ck he's insane." Or maybe they go from a more athletic/bruising game to a more skillful game like Blake Griffin…but again…they were already really freaking good.

[MrSparkle]

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

He's on the Jimmy Butler progression, not the Lauri one. Like Jimmy, he probably could have put up bigger numbers earlier if Hayward wasn't there, just like Jimmy and Deng.

Lauri from day one has been given chosen one status, starting immediately and being given the FGAs of a #1/2.

I hear you... I keep saying, most rookies need 5-6 years to “start winning.” So it’s funny when these tank teams give up on the 4th or 5th year, and hit the hard reset.

You kind of have to, because of NBA rookie contracts. That year 3/4 is where you have to make the decision.

For every Jaylen Brown, there's a whole lot of Dengs/Gordons/Hinrichs/Chandlers/etc. The vast majority of players show who they pretty much are by their 3rd or 4th year. Hell even Brown really showed what he could potentially do last season. He averaged 22/8 in the playoffs, and it was a good sample size (17 games), because, you know, they kept winning series with him playing a lot of minutes.

This is why flat out busts like Anthony Bennett are actually better for you to end up with than OK guys. So many teams have been burned by giving their picks a big post-rookie deal assuming more development…but then there isn't any.

If Glen Taylor lets Thibs do his job and dump Wiggins at his peak value, they might still have Jimmy and be a solid playoff team right now. instead…well…you know.

And that's why you REALLY have to put the young guys under a magnifying glass instead of falling in love with them.

Well, I definitely agree you don't want to resign the Dunleavy Jrs (GSW), Hinrichs, and Lauris to those big deals while still holding hope for some imaginary ceiling that was never really demonstrated. Especially not a Wiggins max (oh Glen).

The problem really just comes back to the type of players you draft. If you use a lotto pick on a guy (or even a top-20), and he's anywhere near half-decent, his agent is going to leverage that lotto draft reputation to the end of that negotiation. If he doesn't get the max (Barnes, Wiggins), he'll get way the hell more than the MLE even if he's the most mediocre starter in the conference (Biyombo, Evan Turner).

So the key really is to simply draft very high-ceiling players, or not bother at all. Elite wingspan/athleticism/handles/IQ - bit of it all. There really is going to be no pay-off to drafting Fredette, JJ, McDermott in the top-15; why? Cause all these guys left after the first contract when home-team decided against paying a role-player 3/4ths the max. Best case ever, you get yourself a Steve Nash -- he changed teams twice, cheap, before becoming MVP.

So long the PW-type picks keep coming, I'm happy. Wouldn't mind a Greek Freak (or Albanian, Egyptian or wherever the hell) if he comes along.

Otherwise, I'm not fundamentally opposed to resigning an OK 4y player. Just like Artunas did, I'd draw a firm line on the offer. If Lauri resigns under 12m a year, I'm OK with it. I'd prefer to just get a new forward to eliminate Lauri from the starting line-up, but at 12m he'd be a good bench player; probably a better backup to have on the books than Thad. I just really hope Artunas doesn't think "OK Lauri checked the improvement boxes, here's $20m a year." Cause that would indeed suck. At the end of the day, you just want tradeable salaries on the books. If Kirk was signed to $5m a year, he would've been a great trade piece, but nobody wanted a $10m PG who could barely score 10 ppg, so he cost us a FRP to dump.

[gobullschi]

Comparing a G/SF to a PF isn’t really fair. Big men usually take a little longer to develop.

They really don't. You generally know what you've got by year 4 and it's just small gains from there. PG is the position that historically takes some time. Whereas with every single great big man, you already knew you had something special sometime during their rookie deal, except maybe Jermaine O'Neal, who was stuck in a bad situation in Portland.

Giannis, AD, Jokic, Embiid, Bam, Gobert, Porzingis, Siakam, Towns, Sabonis, all these dudes were balling by their third or fourth year. You pretty much knew if you were gonna give them the bag or not. WIth absolute elite, ATG-level bigs, you actually know even earlier.

On rare occasion you'll get a Giannis who goes from "damn he's good" to "holy f*ck he's insane." Or maybe they go from a more athletic/bruising game to a more skillful game like Blake Griffin…but again…they were already really freaking good.

We will have a better idea who Lauri Markkanen is after this season. A lot of the guys you named didn’t miss as many games with injury. Boylen relegating him to a catch and shoot player didn’t help either.

Time is definitely running out though.

[Leslie Forman]

The problem really just comes back to the type of players you draft. If you use a lotto pick on a guy (or even a top-20), and he's anywhere near half-decent, his agent is going to leverage that lotto draft reputation to the end of that negotiation. If he doesn't get the max (Barnes, Wiggins), he'll get way the hell more than the MLE even if he's the most mediocre starter in the conference (Biyombo, Evan Turner).

So the key really is to simply draft very high-ceiling players, or not bother at all. Elite wingspan/athleticism/handles/IQ - bit of it all. There really is going to be no pay-off to drafting Fredette, JJ, McDermott in the top-15; why? Cause all these guys left after the first contract when home-team decided against paying a role-player 3/4ths the max. Best case ever, you get yourself a Steve Nash -- he changed teams twice, cheap, before becoming MVP.

So long the PW-type picks keep coming, I'm happy. Wouldn't mind a Greek Freak (or Albanian, Egyptian or wherever the hell) if he comes along.

This is exactly why I am so in favor of a tank. Right off the bat, the new guys are so much better at scouting than the old regime. Even the rando cheap no-name bench vet they signed, Temple, is a better player and value than many of the bench vets MyHusbandPax used to sign.

Why everyone is so attached to these guys the old, crappy, outdated management handpicked is just beyond me. I really don't get it. It's not like they are out there playing winning basketball.

Imagine if the Bears got a new hotshot GM and everyone insisted he absolutely had to keep Trubisky. That's basically what's happening.

[nomorezorro]

not sure i track the logic of "the new front office is good at evaluating talent, which is why i want them to make a bunch of trades that they haven't made yet"

if lavine is still on the team next season, i would take that to mean that the front office has actively decided they would rather keep him than move him for whatever he could draw via trade. i think that's why lauri and thad and otto didn't get traded this offseason, too.

[Kukoc-Lauri]

Jaylen Brown, PER by year:
10.3
13.6
13.5
16.9
24.2 (only a few games)

Brown was literal crap for his first few years. Its one of the major problems with the tank treadmill. You frequently give up on players way too early. Its a cautionary tale for Lauri haters like myself.

He's on the Jimmy Butler progression, not the Lauri one. Like Jimmy, he probably could have put up bigger numbers earlier if Hayward wasn't there, just like Jimmy and Deng.

Lauri from day one has been given chosen one status, starting immediately and being given the FGAs of a #1/2.

I hear you... I keep saying, most rookies need 5-6 years to “start winning.” So it’s funny when these tank teams give up on the 4th or 5th year, and hit the hard reset.

You kind of have to, because of NBA rookie contracts. That year 3/4 is where you have to make the decision.

For every Jaylen Brown, there's a whole lot of Dengs/Gordons/Hinrichs/Chandlers/etc. The vast majority of players show who they pretty much are by their 3rd or 4th year. Hell even Brown really showed what he could potentially do last season. He averaged 22/8 in the playoffs, and it was a good sample size (17 games), because, you know, they kept winning series with him playing a lot of minutes.

This is why flat out busts like Anthony Bennett are actually better for you to end up with than OK guys. So many teams have been burned by giving their picks a big post-rookie deal assuming more development…but then there isn't any.

If Glen Taylor lets Thibs do his job and dump Wiggins at his peak value, they might still have Jimmy and be a solid playoff team right now. instead…well…you know.

And that's why you REALLY have to put the young guys under a magnifying glass instead of falling in love with them.

Well, I definitely agree you don't want to resign the Dunleavy Jrs (GSW), Hinrichs, and Lauris to those big deals while still holding hope for some imaginary ceiling that was never really demonstrated. Especially not a Wiggins max (oh Glen).

The problem really just comes back to the type of players you draft. If you use a lotto pick on a guy (or even a top-20), and he's anywhere near half-decent, his agent is going to leverage that lotto draft reputation to the end of that negotiation. If he doesn't get the max (Barnes, Wiggins), he'll get way the hell more than the MLE even if he's the most mediocre starter in the conference (Biyombo, Evan Turner).

So the key really is to simply draft very high-ceiling players, or not bother at all. Elite wingspan/athleticism/handles/IQ - bit of it all. There really is going to be no pay-off to drafting Fredette, JJ, McDermott in the top-15; why? Cause all these guys left after the first contract when home-team decided against paying a role-player 3/4ths the max. Best case ever, you get yourself a Steve Nash -- he changed teams twice, cheap, before becoming MVP.

So long the PW-type picks keep coming, I'm happy. Wouldn't mind a Greek Freak (or Albanian, Egyptian or wherever the hell) if he comes along.

Otherwise, I'm not fundamentally opposed to resigning an OK 4y player. Just like Artunas did, I'd draw a firm line on the offer. If Lauri resigns under 12m a year, I'm OK with it. I'd prefer to just get a new forward to eliminate Lauri from the starting line-up, but at 12m he'd be a good bench player; probably a better backup to have on the books than Thad. I just really hope Artunas doesn't think "OK Lauri checked the improvement boxes, here's $20m a year." Cause that would indeed suck. At the end of the day, you just want tradeable salaries on the books. If Kirk was signed to $5m a year, he would've been a great trade piece, but nobody wanted a $10m PG who could barely score 10 ppg, so he cost us a FRP to dump.

If anything Lauri have way higher celling of all above named guys. Label him as only bench scoring guy is bigest mistake. If involved in offence he is missmatch on 80% possesions. He is small forward skill shooter with pf height. Smart teams and coaches will use that in their favour. He is not that self aware self create atittude player like Lavine&White but in Miami or Dallas system he would trive. I am willing to pay 15-18 mil per year, 3 or 4 years for him as third or second offensive option.

[Am2626]

We are one of the bottom 5 teams in the league. Set us backwards how ? Especially when you’re already at the bottom. And this team does not have a single player under 25 that’s projected to be a stud. This is the perfect time to hit a reset button because there’s literally not much to reset outside of Lavine.

That’s precisely why the Bulls need to be in the draft lottery. However with the new lottery odds they don’t have to gut the team or hit the reset button. They can continue to develop what they have and still be in play for getting a franchise player in the draft.

No. you still have to be bottom top 5 team to get a stud under age 20. Right now, we have one stud in PW and need 2 more to go.
I expect AK, a top drafting gm, to complete this rebuild in 2 yrs. Just tank until 2022 and go for championships once lebron, nets are washed up. The timeline all fits too well not to gut. I just dont want Lavine to add 5 wins and mess up a potential dynasty.

If you truly think White/Carter are building blocks, your truly wrong this is rebuild yr 1 done properly. Garpax did a retool never tanked and wasted 3 yrs. Atlanta is paying the price for not tanking and selling another lavine type fools gold in Collins.

With LaVine the Bulls are currently the 6th worst team record wise. I don’t think he has to be dumped for nothing for the Bulls to stay in good draft position. It’s better to keep him, stay in the lottery with a bottom 10 record and be in a good spot to get a top 4 pick in the draft. Then next year the Bulls will have LaVine and a good draft pick instead of just the draft pick. If needed use anyone on the team except LaVine or Patrick Williams to move up in the draft or to get future draft picks in the upcoming drafts.

[Am2626]

We have projected Williams won’t be a stud? Based on what? Definitely not his on court performance so far.

I think by Stud you are basically saying that he will eventually become a true number 1 on a contending team. I don’t see that ever happening. He can project into an All Star one day but he doesn’t have the talent to be a top 5 player in the league.

Bad news for you then. Those type of players are ultra rare. Maybe 3 or 4 in the entire league right now. We will be in the lottery forever if that is the goal. It’s much common to sign or trade for that level of player than draft one and actually win something with them.

Ok maybe getting a top 5 player isn’t realistic but I’m pretty sure someone in next year’s draft will eventually be a top 10 player in the league. Possibly more than 1 guy. In great drafts like 2003, 4 of the first 5 picks were franchise players and top 10 players at some point in their careers.

There isn’t anyone on the Bulls current roster that projects to ever be a top 10 player. If the Bulls want to realistically win championships they have to get this player. The easiest way in the near future is through the draft. I think after next years draft they will have enough assets to make a consolidation trade. I don’t think the Bulls will be in the mix for a top free agent until 2022.

[WindyCityBorn]

I think by Stud you are basically saying that he will eventually become a true number 1 on a contending team. I don’t see that ever happening. He can project into an All Star one day but he doesn’t have the talent to be a top 5 player in the league.

Bad news for you then. Those type of players are ultra rare. Maybe 3 or 4 in the entire league right now. We will be in the lottery forever if that is the goal. It’s much common to sign or trade for that level of player than draft one and actually win something with them.

Ok maybe getting a top 5 player isn’t realistic but I’m pretty sure someone in next year’s draft will eventually be a top 10 player in the league. Possibly more than 1 guy. In great drafts like 2003, 4 of the first 5 picks were franchise players and top 10 players at some point in their careers.

There isn’t anyone on the Bulls current roster that projects to ever be a top 10 player. If the Bulls want to realistically win championships they have to get this player. The easiest way in the near future is through the draft. I think after next years draft they will have enough assets to make a consolidation trade. I don’t think the Bulls will be in the mix for a top free agent until 2022.

I hope we get lucky and land that guy in this upcoming draft, but I’m not gonna turn my nose up at guys that might be “just” all-star caliber. I think we have one in Zach. PWill we have a few years to watch him develop, but early returns are encouraging. Lauri I don’t know. He looked like he was back on track before the injury. White is extremely inconsistent and we don’t know if he can play PG full-time. Hopefully we win around 33 games with our key pieced playing well and luck into a top 3 pick. And then playoffs or bust next season.

[Just_Bullz]

I thought we have been rebuilding since the Jordan days?

Until we win a championship, it's always in rebuild mode.

[troza]

I thought we have been rebuilding since the Jordan days?

Until we win a championship, it's always in rebuild mode.

No, just no. From 2010 to 2015 or something we were on winning now mode, not rebuild. We can also discuss the rebuild phase when we tried Ben Wallace since we were trying to win with that squad.

Just because you didn't get the title, you don't get to call rebuild what wasn't a rebuild.

What is left for us to read here? We win 5 titles in 8 years and we say that until 6 in 8 we are rebuilding?

[Hangtime84]

I thought we have been rebuilding since the Jordan days?

Until we win a championship, it's always in rebuild mode.

I think there’s two modes rebuild and build mode.

Build mode has lots of variants tho. Imo we are in build mode.

[Kukoc-Lauri]

Call it rebuild or retool we need better players and more both skilled and athlethic players. Most of our guys lack both skills and athlethicism including high picks as White and Carter. I hope they improve, but those kind of players should go between 20-35 pick range not in top 7.