The Bulls should rebuild now.

[thebizkit]

I've let this simmer a bit and I still see no value in holding on to most of these guys. Heck, I think we lost a ton of value with Carter injured AGAIN and Lauri injured AGAIN.

Move Lavine before it's too late. I would love to keep Lavine and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore.

[d boy gentleman]

I've let this simmer a bit and I still see no value in holding on to most of these guys. Heck, I think we lost a ton of value with Carter injured AGAIN and Lauri injured AGAIN.

Move Lavine before it's too late. I would love to keep Lavine and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore.

And 4 years ago, it was "Move Jimmy before it's too late. I would love to keep Jimmy and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore."

How about acquiring talent to surround Zach with instead of trading him away and don't get fair value in return?

[TheSuzerain]

I've let this simmer a bit and I still see no value in holding on to most of these guys. Heck, I think we lost a ton of value with Carter injured AGAIN and Lauri injured AGAIN.

Move Lavine before it's too late. I would love to keep Lavine and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore.

And 4 years ago, it was "Move Jimmy before it's too late. I would love to keep Jimmy and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore."

How about acquiring talent to surround Zach with instead of trading him away and don't get fair value in return?

Zach is significantly worse than prime Butler is the biggest reason why.

It would have been easy to build around Butler. It would be very hard to build a top team around Zach.

[d boy gentleman]

I've let this simmer a bit and I still see no value in holding on to most of these guys. Heck, I think we lost a ton of value with Carter injured AGAIN and Lauri injured AGAIN.

Move Lavine before it's too late. I would love to keep Lavine and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore.

And 4 years ago, it was "Move Jimmy before it's too late. I would love to keep Jimmy and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore."

How about acquiring talent to surround Zach with instead of trading him away and don't get fair value in return?

Zach is significantly worse than prime Butler is the biggest reason why.

It would have been easy to build around Butler. It would be very hard to build a top team around Zach.

Zach is only 25 years old and is having a career year so far. At the very least, you have a guy that is a solid #2 where you can get a
#1 guy and team them together

[TheSuzerain]

And 4 years ago, it was "Move Jimmy before it's too late. I would love to keep Jimmy and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore."

How about acquiring talent to surround Zach with instead of trading him away and don't get fair value in return?

Zach is significantly worse than prime Butler is the biggest reason why.

It would have been easy to build around Butler. It would be very hard to build a top team around Zach.

Zach is only 25 years old and is having a career year so far. At the very least, you have a guy that is a solid #2 where you can get a
#1 guy and team them together

I think Lavine can be a very nice #2 scoring option next to a #1 who runs the show.

Realistically, you probably want Lavine to be your #3 best player though when taking defense into account as well. If you can pull that off, you probably have a contender or close to it.

I think that's a very separate situation than Butler who could be that #1 guy running the show offensively.

[d boy gentleman]

Zach is significantly worse than prime Butler is the biggest reason why.

It would have been easy to build around Butler. It would be very hard to build a top team around Zach.

Zach is only 25 years old and is having a career year so far. At the very least, you have a guy that is a solid #2 where you can get a
#1 guy and team them together

I think Lavine can be a very nice #2 scoring option next to a #1 who runs the show.

Realistically, you probably want Lavine to be your #3 best player though when taking defense into account as well. If you can pull that off, you probably have a contender or close to it.

I think that's a very separate situation than Butler who could be that #1 guy running the show offensively.

I'm not saying that Zach is Jimmy at all; I'm just comparing the situations. You have a very nice young player that busts his ass every season and has improved every season with the team and having a career year so far. Why not add to that instead of trading and "tanking" draft 7th while another leapfrogs into the top 3? I'm not a fan of doing that.

[TheSuzerain]

Zach is only 25 years old and is having a career year so far. At the very least, you have a guy that is a solid #2 where you can get a
#1 guy and team them together

I think Lavine can be a very nice #2 scoring option next to a #1 who runs the show.

Realistically, you probably want Lavine to be your #3 best player though when taking defense into account as well. If you can pull that off, you probably have a contender or close to it.

I think that's a very separate situation than Butler who could be that #1 guy running the show offensively.

I'm not saying that Zach is Jimmy at all; I'm just comparing the situations. You have a very nice young player that busts his ass every season and has improved every season with the team and having a career year so far. Why not add to that instead of trading and "tanking" draft 7th while another leapfrogs into the top 3? I'm not a fan of doing that.

Because it's not going to work. We have no avenue to attain that #1 player while retaining Lavine.

[LateNight]

I've let this simmer a bit and I still see no value in holding on to most of these guys. Heck, I think we lost a ton of value with Carter injured AGAIN and Lauri injured AGAIN.

Move Lavine before it's too late. I would love to keep Lavine and build around him, but we are so far away from surrounding him with title contending talent, that I just don't think there is point in keeping him anymore.

Disagree on Zach.

Keep Lavine. He's more valuable that the assets you'll get back - he's also more talented and younger than most of the FA's you'd be able to pursue this off-season. Add to him and build. Time to shop other pieces.

[MrSparkle]

I had questions about Zach getting the max. Seeing him develop this season, I have no issue. The hard truth is he’s not agreeing to the extension max (a sub-30m salary); it’s gonna have to be a renegotiated 150/4 type offer, or you wait and play UFA market where you probably have to do 190/5 to retain.

Artunas and DEN did not hesitate paying Jamal Murray, and they’re not gonna hesitate paying Zach. That’s where we’re at; I think there’s a whole lot of over-thinking the scenario.

You test the trade market to see if you can obtain a better, potential top-15 star, but besides Simmons and Beal who don’t particularly make sense when you consider throw-in cost (FRPs), I don’t see anything remotely feasible.

I’m not seeing this FO take a farm FRP type of offer either, unless there’s a 2021 top-10/unprotected guaranteed pick in there. And with this crazy season and the play-in, that’s something you don’t want to risk until the draft order is set.

I like Thad but fact remains, he’s basically the vet anchor. With Wendell and Lauri (and Otto) out, there are many games where depth-less small ball will fall short. So I think we’re in perfect opportunity to soft tank while keeping Zach, continuing PW and Coby’s development. Don’t want to trade Thad, but if a great offer comes up (FRP and an expiring forward), then you take it.

[d boy gentleman]

I think Lavine can be a very nice #2 scoring option next to a #1 who runs the show.

Realistically, you probably want Lavine to be your #3 best player though when taking defense into account as well. If you can pull that off, you probably have a contender or close to it.

I think that's a very separate situation than Butler who could be that #1 guy running the show offensively.

I'm not saying that Zach is Jimmy at all; I'm just comparing the situations. You have a very nice young player that busts his ass every season and has improved every season with the team and having a career year so far. Why not add to that instead of trading and "tanking" draft 7th while another leapfrogs into the top 3? I'm not a fan of doing that.

Because it's not going to work. We have no avenue to attain that #1 player while retaining Lavine.

And tanking only guarantees that you suck for even longer, especially if you don't end up with a top 3 pick. All you pro-tankers and rebuilders conveniently miss out the fact that the lottery odds have changed and you have a greater chance of drafting out of the top 3 than you do actually drafting in the top 3. I'm not a fan of tanking for a chance--not a guarantee--of lucking into the top 3. The only guarantee is that you stink for a long long time and you're in perpetual lottery hell.

[drosestruts]

With our record, the injuries, and the likelihood of trading veterans at the deadline, why also trade Zach? I think the pro-tank crowd will find we're capable of losing games with this roster without trading away laVine.

With the lottery odds the way they are, I don't see value in moving him. Not like Washington or Detroit are going to trade an unprotected 1st for him.

[TheSuzerain]

With our record, the injuries, and the likelihood of trading veterans at the deadline, why also trade Zach? I think the pro-tank crowd will find we're capable of losing games with this roster without trading away laVine.

With the lottery odds the way they are, I don't see value in moving him. Not like Washington or Detroit are going to trade an unprotected 1st for him.

Desire to trade Zach isn't so much driven by wanting to tank.

It's wanting to sell high on him before having to hand him a max deal when his contract expires. This is because while I think his market value is going to be a max contract, I don't think he's likely to be a valuable player on such a large contract. Value comes from players who outplay their contract, and I doubt Zach will outplay $30-40 million a year.

It's just good asset management. Sell High.

[gobullschi]

With our record, the injuries, and the likelihood of trading veterans at the deadline, why also trade Zach? I think the pro-tank crowd will find we're capable of losing games with this roster without trading away laVine.

With the lottery odds the way they are, I don't see value in moving him. Not like Washington or Detroit are going to trade an unprotected 1st for him.

Desire to trade Zach isn't so much driven by wanting to tank.

It's wanting to sell high on him before having to hand him a max deal when his contract expires. This is because while I think his market value is going to be a max contract, I don't think he's likely to be a valuable player on such a large contract. Value comes from players who outplay their contract, and I doubt Zach will outplay $30-40 million a year.

It's just good asset management. Sell High.

Teams can afford 3 max contract players on the same team. Why not find 2 more instead of trading the 1 we have?

[TheSuzerain]

With our record, the injuries, and the likelihood of trading veterans at the deadline, why also trade Zach? I think the pro-tank crowd will find we're capable of losing games with this roster without trading away laVine.

With the lottery odds the way they are, I don't see value in moving him. Not like Washington or Detroit are going to trade an unprotected 1st for him.

Desire to trade Zach isn't so much driven by wanting to tank.

It's wanting to sell high on him before having to hand him a max deal when his contract expires. This is because while I think his market value is going to be a max contract, I don't think he's likely to be a valuable player on such a large contract. Value comes from players who outplay their contract, and I doubt Zach will outplay $30-40 million a year.

It's just good asset management. Sell High.

Teams can afford 3 max contract players on the same team. Why not find 2 more instead of trading the 1 we have?

Well how the hell are you going to do that?

I mean we've seen people openly advocating for us to bring in Andre Drummond as a big money piece next to Lavine. This really says it all about how slim the pickings are to build around Lavine when handing a huge contract to a guy like Drummond is plan A for some people.

I've yet to see any reality-based plan to surround Lavine with even one additional max player level alone two.

[League Circles]

Realistically there probably is no avenue for this team to be a contender for 10 years or so. You always trade any player if the offer is right, but you almost never should trade a good player from a good market just because you're afraid to lose him (or have to pay market value).

This predicament is why we should maximize the talent on this roster via trade and/or FA BEFORE Zach's deal expires, so that re-signing him doesn't really matter, as opposed to dumping him just for the sake of it.

I mean, sure, if an equal or better player on a longer, more reasonable deal is available in exchange for zach, of course you do it. Let me know when that happens.

As for everyone else, same applies. They should be traded for a great offer, and kept otherwise.

AK should be focusing all his efforts on a consolidation trade. This team simply isn't good enough to have guys like Otto and Thad on the bench. Those guys can start on a fair number of teams in this league, so we need to get them where that will be the case, where they're valued more.

I'd focus on, ideally, trading Lauri and Otto and our pick or bs like Sato for BPA.

[gobullschi]

Desire to trade Zach isn't so much driven by wanting to tank.

It's wanting to sell high on him before having to hand him a max deal when his contract expires. This is because while I think his market value is going to be a max contract, I don't think he's likely to be a valuable player on such a large contract. Value comes from players who outplay their contract, and I doubt Zach will outplay $30-40 million a year.

It's just good asset management. Sell High.

Teams can afford 3 max contract players on the same team. Why not find 2 more instead of trading the 1 we have?

Well how the hell are you going to do that?

I mean we've seen people openly advocating for us to bring in Andre Drummond as a big money piece next to Lavine. This really says it all about how slim the pickings are to build around Lavine when handing a huge contract to a guy like Drummond is plan A for some people.

I've yet to see any reality-based plan to surround Lavine with even one additional max player level alone two.

Teams typically add talent through the draft, free agency, or via trade. With the new lottery rules, the Bulls could be drafting top 5 again. It’s too early to know.

I’m not sure what you have against Drummond. He’s one of the best rebounders of all time, but like all players, it comes down to their contracts. Traditional centers typically cost less than other positions. (Nurkic, Valanciunas, & Adams all signed extensions under 17 million annually).

It’s not like Drummond is the only free agent option available. There’s guys like Victor Oladipo, Mike Conley, John Collins that will be available and some young guys with upside like THT and Lonzo.

Plus, it seems like a new super-star is available via trade every year.

Also, for the first time in decades the Bulls front office has committed resources for player development. Any of the Bulls young players could take a big jump in the next 2-3 years.

[weneeda2guard]

These takes make no sense. What we are looking at is the result of a rebuild. Now people want to go back and do the exact same course that landed us here in the 1st place?

I could get with another course maybe saying screw the crap shoot of the nba draft continuing to sell the hope drug to the fans dangling the elite of the draft as potential additions just to continue to land in position to draft yet another guy with a role player ceiling.

Maybe let's flip a few guys to try and get better and then try to add some guys in free agency or make trades but not just to dump guys for mediocre return but trade for real additions to the positives we have on the roster. Oh that route is unsure and risky? Well let's look back and view the path we took and we don't have to guess how that ends because we are living it now. What's the definition of insanity? Lol

[gobullschi]

I never really understood what constitutes as a #1, #2, or #3. I’ve always viewed LaVine as a #1 scoring option because he can score from all three levels and create his own shot at will.

When people say he can’t be a #1, what specifically is holding him back? How many #1s are in the league and who are they? If Zach LaVine is a #2, name 3 #1’s and 3 #2’s that would mesh well with him. I think that would help clarify.

[d boy gentleman]

These takes make no sense. What we are looking at is the result of a rebuild. Now people want to go back and do the exact same course that landed us here in the 1st place?

I could get with another course maybe saying screw the crap shoot of the nba draft continuing to sell the hope drug to the fans dangling the elite of the draft as potential additions just to continue to land in position to draft yet another guy with a role player ceiling.

Maybe let's flip a few guys to try and get better and then try to add some guys in free agency or make trades but not just to dump guys for mediocre return but trade for real additions to the positives we have on the roster. Oh that route is unsure and risky? Well let's look back and view the path we took and we don't have to guess how that ends because we are living it now. What's the definition of insanity? Lol

My point exactly! This is the result of trading away Jimmy: "rebuilding".

[Am2626]

I never really understood what constitutes as a #1, #2, or #3. I’ve always viewed LaVine as a #1 scoring option because he can score from all three levels and create his own shot at will.

When people say he can’t be a #1, what specifically is holding him back? How many #1s are in the league and who are they? If Zach LaVine is a #2, name 3 #1’s and 3 #2’s that would mesh well with him. I think that would help clarify.

#1 simply means you are the best player on your team which Zach is for the Bulls. That is very different than being a #1 on a title contender. That guy is probably a top 10 player in the league.

The below article lists the top 10 players in the League according to ESPN. I don’t think LaVine will ever be a top 10 player in the league. To be that player you have to be able to take over a game, put your team on your back, be able to consistently hit game winning shots, etc. While Zach is a great talent and All Star type player he is not a generational player. Do people see him as being a Future Hall of Famer?

https://tv5.espn.com/basketball/story/_/id/30489070/ranking-top-10-nba-players-2020-21