Losing will be a blessing in disguise

[Chi]

I thought about making a separate thread but I'll just dump it here.

The Bulls are screwed. They are functionally just buying time. Between's Lonzo's contract and the missing firsts, Chicago just doesn't have much to try to change things up.

Personally, I think they should trade Lavine and just go in the toilet. It seems they kind of agree and tested the waters on that. Given the epic haul Portland just got for Dame, I kind of wonder if AKME was asking for too much.

The only real hope here is that Patrick and Coby jump up and the new role players create an interesting team. Its possible. That's what AKME is now banking on. The upside here is limited but at least watchable.

My thing is would Coby and Pat even be allowed to Jump?

What if one of them were capable of averaging 20ppg on 50ish % shooting...


Would they get the opportunity to do it?

I doubt coach would allow that.

[Dan Z]

I was curious so I looked up how many general managers the Bulls have had since Jerry Reinsdorf bought the team.

He bought the team in 1985 and Rod Thorn was the GM. Since that time they've had 4 general managers. I don't know how that compares to other teams, but I bet it's on the low side overall.

https://www.retroseasons.com/teams/chicago-bulls/history/general-managers/

I bring this up because it's been suggested that one reason why AK doesn't want to go into a rebuild is because it won't be good for his job security. However, based on past history it's possible that Reinsdorf keeps him on for awhile no matter what he does. Look at Gar Forman...he was on the job for 10 years (although Paxson was probably the decision maker during part of that time).

I'd be surprised if the team rebuilds, even if they have another season like last year.

[samwana]

I thought about making a separate thread but I'll just dump it here.

The Bulls are screwed. They are functionally just buying time. Between's Lonzo's contract and the missing firsts, Chicago just doesn't have much to try to change things up.

Personally, I think they should trade Lavine and just go in the toilet. It seems they kind of agree and tested the waters on that. Given the epic haul Portland just got for Dame, I kind of wonder if AKME was asking for too much.

The only real hope here is that Patrick and Coby jump up and the new role players create an interesting team. Its possible. That's what AKME is now banking on. The upside here is limited but at least watchable.

My thing is would Coby and Pat even be allowed to Jump?

What if one of them were capable of averaging 20ppg on 50ish % shooting...


Would they get the opportunity to do it?

I doubt coach would allow that.

If we still play the same iso ddr, iso lavine ball starting the season, I want to see Donovan go by the end of november and let someone else take over to see if this roster can play a different style.



Sent from my Pixel 7 using RealGM mobile app

[jmajew]

I've been thinking more and more about this. I'm going to the belief that the best way to become a contender is not to tank. I think you are better off being a 500 team. I know this seems odd, but if you look at all of the stars in this league...not many of them have been top 5 picks or still with original team.

Jokic - rd 2/ pick 41
Curry - rd 1 / pick 7
Giannis - rd 1 / pick 15
Durant - rd 1 / pick 2 (Switched teams multiple times)
embiid - rd 1 / pick 3
Tatum - rd 1 / pick 3
Doncic - rd 1 / pick 3
Leonard - rd 1 / pick 15 (Switched teams multiple times)
Butler - rd 1/ pick 31 (Switched teams multiple times)
Booker - rd 1 / pick 13
AD - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched teams)
Lebron - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched Teams)
Shai - rd 1 / pick 11
Lillard - rd 1 / pick 6
Mitchell - rd 1 / pick 13

Basically, 12 of these 15 were either picked 6th or later or traded to their current teams. This tells me that the easiest way to get a star is not necessarily to tank. If you are contending, but not quite there it is possible a star will want to come to you. It is also possible to find a star after the top 3 picks.

What I wouldn't do is trade 2 first rd picks for a borderline all-star like we did.

[drosestruts]

I've been thinking more and more about this. I'm going to the belief that the best way to become a contender is not to tank. I think you are better off being a 500 team. I know this seems odd, but if you look at all of the stars in this league...not many of them have been top 5 picks or still with original team.

Jokic - rd 2/ pick 41
Curry - rd 1 / pick 7
Giannis - rd 1 / pick 15
Durant - rd 1 / pick 2 (Switched teams multiple times)
embiid - rd 1 / pick 3
Tatum - rd 1 / pick 3
Doncic - rd 1 / pick 3
Leonard - rd 1 / pick 15 (Switched teams multiple times)
Butler - rd 1/ pick 31 (Switched teams multiple times)
Booker - rd 1 / pick 13
AD - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched teams)
Lebron - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched Teams)
Shai - rd 1 / pick 11
Lillard - rd 1 / pick 6
Mitchell - rd 1 / pick 13

Basically, 12 of these 15 were either picked 6th or later or traded to their current teams. This tells me that the easiest way to get a star is not necessarily to tank. If you are contending, but not quite there it is possible a star will want to come to you. It is also possible to find a star after the top 3 picks.

What I wouldn't do is trade 2 first rd picks for a borderline all-star like we did.

The Spurs with Duncan are pretty much the only successful tank in the history of the NBA - every other tank as either failed or had it's greatest impact come from a trade or free agent signing.

And even the later year Spurs with Duncan were largely influenced by great later round picks - Parker, Ginboli, Diaw, Leonard, etc.

The Thunder are probably the best example in the past 20 years of tanking and hitting on all their picks with Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden and they made one finals and lost.

The tanking turned home-grown dynasty is a myth that doesn't exist. It's a mirage.

[chefo]

Rant coming.

The reason I've been giving AKME grief since the Vuc trade is that they had it made, and just couldn't see the forest for the trees their entire first season here.

I made up a metric that I posted here about how the Bulls' top players rank in terms of generating offensive output (a cross section of scoring x efficiency and generating O for others) per offensive touch. Nobody thought Lauri was special, except... according to that stat, Lauri produced offense like a superstar per touch. People laughed and thought I was out of my mind, that Lauri can't create for himself, whatever. My answer was that they're ascribing style points where they had to count raw productivity per opportunity given. Even with a somewhat limited skill-set, Lauri was producing like a top 15-20 NBA player--while on the Bulls, before his benching post the Vuc trade. The Jazz got a smart coach and Lauri probably should have made an all-NBA team last year. To F-up the evaluation of a talent of that magnitude who was willing to play for $17M per is a fireable offense in my book, if I were ownership.

Zach did produce like a star as well and has since.

Thad was a stud as well, but he was old. Everybody else was kind of garbage. So the brain trust, rather than jack up Lauri and Zach's usage to see what they truly got and get them complimentary pieces that can play D, get these 2 the ball and shoot, did what exactly? Got Vuc, who was the second heaviest-usage C in the entire league after the Joker, and who struggles to defend. For context, yes, Vuc was getting 20+ ppg and 4apg in Orlando, but he was doing it on double the touches Lauri was using to get 18 ppg as a starter on the Bulls. And Lauri was much more efficient to boot. However, Vuc was a "star", even if an older and third-tier one, while Lauri was a step-child of the former regime.

Point being is this:
If you screw up the most important decision, which is to let go of all-NBA-level talent that could have been locked-in for peanuts, everything else post that decision will likely be trying to dig yourself out of that hole, or hoping that the old vets you brought in (Vuc and DDR) will find the fountain of youth.

I don't think fans here realize how much of a train-wreck the Bulls would have been if DDR had not turned back the clock for a couple of years and had instead played at his Spurs' level. We are talking mid 30s win totals, probably and people would be taking out billboards to get AKME fired. So, the one truly good move they made, they got lucky. Everything else that required some thought and consideration, they F-up royally.

Right now, barring some miracle, you'll have older Vuc, older DDR and a maxed-out Zach, and we saw where that gets you two years in a row. Which is a team that's respectable enough to hover around .500 and sneak in the playoffs if things break well.

For the amount of talent and assets they spent on that team, in essence giving up a F rotation of Lauri (when he was 23) and F. Wagner to put the current roster together, that is almost an Isiah Thomas-level screw up. Again, the Bulls could have run with Lauri, Wagner and Zach for the next 5-6 years, and so long as you developed these guys and surrounded them with quality vets, you'd be a mid-tier playoff team with the upside to do some real damage for more than half a decade. Nobody in the NBA could ask for more. And, having pieces like these also means that when a superstar does ask out, you can beat ANY offer because you'd still have all your draft capital and incredibly productive young guys to send back. Instead, you'll be paying 35+-year old Vuc big $ and DDR is coming for his last big payday as well. Which they'll probably oblige him with because they've gone all-in on the current roster.

Facepalm ^ squared.

Worst thing is, some of us on this forum saw it coming from a mile out, but dudes that get paid seven figures to make hoop decisions did not.

[ImSlower]

Hollinger's article today on The Athletic has the Bulls as one of his 5 teams to take the under on (Bulls at 37.5). His argument is that the Bulls were preternaturally healthy last season other than Lonzo Ball. Injury and health is a hugely important aspect of the NBA with its rosters smaller than any other major team sport. We were one of the luckiest teams in the league last season. For me, major injuries are the worst part of being a sports fan; every single season in the NBA, a contender's season is impacted by injury to some degree.

I dearly hope we dodge major injury yet again - although of course we have to note that an injury (Lonzo's) is arguably what made this core collapse so badly since AK's major moves. All of the optimism in this thread (and I love sports optimism, if everyone here were as morose as I am about this team's future, GDTs would continue to shrink from our glory days of the Rose era) is a delight, but it's predicated on the hope that none of our important guys go down. That is one huge If.

I think tanking is a terrible way to go with the flattened odds, and our quickest way to contention would be multiple players taking great strides forward, on top of a clear win of a major trade. Maybe LaVine continues his red-hot play we saw last spring, DeMar continues to defy Father Time (and also manages to be less of a ball-stopper), Vucevic manages to contribute while not commanding major usage, we see Williams finally make a real step toward this potential people have been talking about since draft day. Everyone stays healthy. And on top of that, we move one of those four and whatever else for a player who slots in more efficiently with whoever stays on the roster.

There's just so, so many If's involved, and I won't bog down the thread further with pessimistic If's. Losing badly would be terrible, as it would mean our guys are unilaterally disappointing, not accruing value in trade, and continuing to make Chicago a weak destination. Even Negative Nancies like myself have to hope a lot of things go very right simultaneously this season, and this ship turns forward into a tailwind again and out of the doldrums I feel like we're doomed to repeat. ... go Bulls!

[chitownsports4ever]

Rant coming.

The reason I've been giving AKME grief since the Vuc trade is that they had it made, and just couldn't see the forest for the trees their entire first season here.

I made up a metric that I posted here about how the Bulls' top players rank in terms of generating offensive output (a cross section of scoring x efficiency and generating O for others) per offensive touch. Nobody thought Lauri was special, except... according to that stat, Lauri produced offense like a superstar per touch. People laughed and thought I was out of my mind, that Lauri can't create for himself, whatever. My answer was that they're ascribing style points where they had to count raw productivity per opportunity given. Even with a somewhat limited skill-set, Lauri was producing like a top 15-20 NBA player--while on the Bulls, before his benching post the Vuc trade. The Jazz got a smart coach and Lauri probably should have made an all-NBA team last year. To F-up the evaluation of a talent of that magnitude who was willing to play for $17M per is a fireable offense in my book, if I were ownership.

Zach did produce like a star as well and has since.

Thad was a stud as well, but he was old. Everybody else was kind of garbage. So the brain trust, rather than jack up Lauri and Zach's usage to see what they truly got and get them complimentary pieces that can play D, get these 2 the ball and shoot, did what exactly? Got Vuc, who was the second heaviest-usage C in the entire league after the Joker, and who struggles to defend. For context, yes, Vuc was getting 20+ ppg and 4apg in Orlando, but he was doing it on double the touches Lauri was using to get 18 ppg as a starter on the Bulls. And Lauri was much more efficient to boot. However, Vuc was a "star", even if an older and third-tier one, while Lauri was a step-child of the former regime.

Point being is this:
If you screw up the most important decision, which is to let go of all-NBA-level talent that could have been locked-in for peanuts, everything else post that decision will likely be trying to dig yourself out of that hole, or hoping that the old vets you brought in (Vuc and DDR) will find the fountain of youth.

I don't think fans here realize how much of a train-wreck the Bulls would have been if DDR had not turned back the clock for a couple of years and had instead played at his Spurs' level. We are talking mid 30s win totals, probably and people would be taking out billboards to get AKME fired. So, the one truly good move they made, they got lucky. Everything else that required some thought and consideration, they F-up royally.

Right now, barring some miracle, you'll have older Vuc, older DDR and a maxed-out Zach, and we saw where that gets you two years in a row. Which is a team that's respectable enough to hover around .500 and sneak in the playoffs if things break well.

For the amount of talent and assets they spent on that team, in essence giving up a F rotation of Lauri (when he was 23) and F. Wagner to put the current roster together, that is almost an Isiah Thomas-level screw up. Again, the Bulls could have run with Lauri, Wagner and Zach for the next 5-6 years, and so long as you developed these guys and surrounded them with quality vets, you'd be a mid-tier playoff team with the upside to do some real damage for more than half a decade. Nobody in the NBA could ask for more. And, having pieces like these also means that when a superstar does ask out, you can beat ANY offer because you'd still have all your draft capital and incredibly productive young guys to send back. Instead, you'll be paying 35+-year old Vuc big $ and DDR is coming for his last big payday as well. Which they'll probably oblige him with because they've gone all-in on the current roster.

Facepalm ^ squared.

Worst thing is, some of us on this forum saw it coming from a mile out, but dudes that get paid seven figures to make hoop decisions did not.

Lauri didnt want to be here and you dont know if we would have picked Franz again why does every time someone go on a hindsight rant they always go best case scenario when life itself doesnt play out.

Lauri saw Ak's first draft pick in PAT and his all star SF that he signed in free agency and decided he didnt want to compete or he wanted them to pay him more money than they were willing to to come off the bench .

Now if Lauri isnt afraid of competition and stays well guess what Pat gets hurt first week of the season and Lauri is running around that first half with Ball at PG but thats why I dont both with hindsight because there are so many other possibilities that could also play out but they are all dependent upon everything coming out exactly the way you wanted.

[TheJordanRule]

I've been thinking more and more about this. I'm going to the belief that the best way to become a contender is not to tank. I think you are better off being a 500 team. I know this seems odd, but if you look at all of the stars in this league...not many of them have been top 5 picks or still with original team.

Jokic - rd 2/ pick 41
Curry - rd 1 / pick 7
Giannis - rd 1 / pick 15
Durant - rd 1 / pick 2 (Switched teams multiple times)
embiid - rd 1 / pick 3
Tatum - rd 1 / pick 3
Doncic - rd 1 / pick 3
Leonard - rd 1 / pick 15 (Switched teams multiple times)
Butler - rd 1/ pick 31 (Switched teams multiple times)
Booker - rd 1 / pick 13
AD - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched teams)
Lebron - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched Teams)
Shai - rd 1 / pick 11
Lillard - rd 1 / pick 6
Mitchell - rd 1 / pick 13

Basically, 12 of these 15 were either picked 6th or later or traded to their current teams. This tells me that the easiest way to get a star is not necessarily to tank. If you are contending, but not quite there it is possible a star will want to come to you. It is also possible to find a star after the top 3 picks.

What I wouldn't do is trade 2 first rd picks for a borderline all-star like we did.

The Spurs with Duncan are pretty much the only successful tank in the history of the NBA - every other tank as either failed or had it's greatest impact come from a trade or free agent signing.

And even the later year Spurs with Duncan were largely influenced by great later round picks - Parker, Ginboli, Diaw, Leonard, etc.

The Thunder are probably the best example in the past 20 years of tanking and hitting on all their picks with Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden and they made one finals and lost.

The tanking turned home-grown dynasty is a myth that doesn't exist. It's a mirage.

Excellent, excellent posts guys. What I'd like to add is that tanking usually means you're screwed in free agency. The best in free agency will avoid you like the plague, and the majority of the good ones will get the same money or take less to play somewhere else. We've been through that, where we had the max money and everyone passed on us to the point where we had to overpay guys like E-Rob and Ron Mercer. You go through like three straight seasons of losing at minimum (if not more!) with your young developing studs while signing mediocre to bad free agents, and maybe by the end of the third or fourth season you can get into the playoffs to finally have a real shot at the good to decent free agents... but by that time, it's time to pay your young guys (who may not even want to stick around due to all the losing) and so you run into cap issues. So it really is a time wasting, self defeating "strategy". It's not a coincidence that D called it a mirage. That's exactly what it is.

[Jcool0]

I thought about making a separate thread but I'll just dump it here.

The Bulls are screwed. They are functionally just buying time. Between's Lonzo's contract and the missing firsts, Chicago just doesn't have much to try to change things up.

Personally, I think they should trade Lavine and just go in the toilet. It seems they kind of agree and tested the waters on that. Given the epic haul Portland just got for Dame, I kind of wonder if AKME was asking for too much.

The only real hope here is that Patrick and Coby jump up and the new role players create an interesting team. Its possible. That's what AKME is now banking on. The upside here is limited but at least watchable.

My thing is would Coby and Pat even be allowed to Jump?

What if one of them were capable of averaging 20ppg on 50ish % shooting...


Would they get the opportunity to do it?

I doubt coach would allow that.

Yes. See 2011 James Harden.

[chefo]

Lauri didnt want to be here and you dont know if we would have picked Franz again why does every time someone go on a hindsight rant they always go best case scenario when life itself doesnt play out.

Lauri saw Ak's first draft pick in PAT and his all star SF that he signed in free agency and decided he didnt want to compete or he wanted them to pay him more money than they were willing to to come off the bench .

Now if Lauri isnt afraid of competition and stays well guess what Pat gets hurt first week of the season and Lauri is running around that first half with Ball at PG but thats why I dont both with hindsight because there are so many other possibilities that could also play out but they are all dependent upon everything coming out exactly the way you wanted.

Lauri didn't want to be here because the Bulls, as in AKME, made it abundantly clear they didn't want him to be here. It had nothing to do with competition. It had everything to do with AKME's preferences.

As a rook, Pat was a train wreck in pretty much every aspect, whether headline stats, or advanced ones, where he was one of the worst players in the NBA. Like a minus double-digit net kind of player. Yet, on a team fighting for a playoff spot, he got to be a starter AND play starter minutes (near 30) despite being nowhere near the player Lauri was his last year on the Bulls.

The Bulls tried to trade Lauri at the deadline, failed, and then not only benched him for no apparent reason, but Billy had the infamous "we're not going to feature him on O any more," quote.

Which was said about a 23-year old, 18 ppg, 60+ TS scorer that was a 5th option in terms of touches, as-is. His touches post-benching went from 5th option to end-of-the bench scrub territory; so, they made good on the threat. He would have been an utter idiot to stay because they showed him where he belonged in their plans--somewhere on the deep bench.

Lauri just had a 26 ppg, 64% TS season and only missed the playoffs because Ainge decided to tank the season hard at the deadline by trading 4 main rotation pieces, including his starting and main back-up PG, for a copy machine and a future first.

Let that sink in. Lauri was an absolute stud first option on a playoff-bound team.

I don't care for the excuse that the Cavs were just as inept at evaluating talent. The Bulls had him on the roster. They misevaluated him so egregiously that I don't know how anybody can defend their stupidity. For crying out loud, as a soph Lauri was averaging 20 ppg before his heart issue flared up. As a 20-year old soph playing under Hoiberg and Jimbo. If people say he didn't have it in him, they didn't watch his fresh and soph seasons.

The above points had multiple 100-page threads on here with a lot of back-and-forth. So, it's not like that wasn't discussed from every possible angle.

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. The Bulls are what they are--an old team hoping for a lucky break because otherwise, AKME may be looking at filing for unemployment benefits next spring. If I were ownership and looked at their track record, as it currently stands, I wouldn't touch them with a 10-foot pole.

[Dan Z]

I've been thinking more and more about this. I'm going to the belief that the best way to become a contender is not to tank. I think you are better off being a 500 team. I know this seems odd, but if you look at all of the stars in this league...not many of them have been top 5 picks or still with original team.

Jokic - rd 2/ pick 41
Curry - rd 1 / pick 7
Giannis - rd 1 / pick 15
Durant - rd 1 / pick 2 (Switched teams multiple times)
embiid - rd 1 / pick 3
Tatum - rd 1 / pick 3
Doncic - rd 1 / pick 3
Leonard - rd 1 / pick 15 (Switched teams multiple times)
Butler - rd 1/ pick 31 (Switched teams multiple times)
Booker - rd 1 / pick 13
AD - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched teams)
Lebron - Rd 1 / pick 1 (Switched Teams)
Shai - rd 1 / pick 11
Lillard - rd 1 / pick 6
Mitchell - rd 1 / pick 13

Basically, 12 of these 15 were either picked 6th or later or traded to their current teams. This tells me that the easiest way to get a star is not necessarily to tank. If you are contending, but not quite there it is possible a star will want to come to you. It is also possible to find a star after the top 3 picks.

What I wouldn't do is trade 2 first rd picks for a borderline all-star like we did.

I don't agree with what I put in bold above. Nobody is clamoring to come to Chicago, even if the team is slightly better than they were a few years ago. If a player wants to come here it's not on the same level as Miami or LA.

I do agree with you that you can find a star outside of the top 5 picks, but it's not easy.

[chitownsports4ever]

Lauri didnt want to be here and you dont know if we would have picked Franz again why does every time someone go on a hindsight rant they always go best case scenario when life itself doesnt play out.

Lauri saw Ak's first draft pick in PAT and his all star SF that he signed in free agency and decided he didnt want to compete or he wanted them to pay him more money than they were willing to to come off the bench .

Now if Lauri isnt afraid of competition and stays well guess what Pat gets hurt first week of the season and Lauri is running around that first half with Ball at PG but thats why I dont both with hindsight because there are so many other possibilities that could also play out but they are all dependent upon everything coming out exactly the way you wanted.

Lauri didn't want to be here because the Bulls, as in AKME, made it abundantly clear they didn't want him to be here. It had nothing to do with competition. It had everything to do with AKME's preferences.

As a rook, Pat was a train wreck in pretty much every aspect, whether headline stats, or advanced ones, where he was one of the worst players in the NBA. Like a minus double-digit net kind of player. Yet, on a team fighting for a playoff spot, he got to be a starter AND play starter minutes (near 30) despite being nowhere near the player Lauri was his last year on the Bulls.

The Bulls tried to trade Lauri at the deadline, failed, and then not only benched him for no apparent reason, but Billy had the infamous "we're not going to feature him on O any more," quote.

Which was said about a 23-year old, 18 ppg, 60+ TS scorer that was a 5th option in terms of touches, as-is. His touches post-benching went from 5th option to end-of-the bench scrub territory; so, they made good on the threat. He would have been an utter idiot to stay because they showed him where he belonged in their plans--somewhere on the deep bench.

Lauri just had a 26 ppg, 64% TS season and only missed the playoffs because Ainge decided to tank the season hard at the deadline by trading 4 main rotation pieces, including his starting and main back-up PG, for a copy machine and a future first.

Let that sink in. Lauri was an absolute stud first option on a playoff-bound team.

I don't care for the excuse that the Cavs were just as inept at evaluating talent. The Bulls had him on the roster. They misevaluated him so egregiously that I don't know how anybody can defend their stupidity. For crying out loud, as a soph Lauri was averaging 20 ppg before his heart issue flared up. As a 20-year old soph playing under Hoiberg and Jimbo. If people say he didn't have it in him, they didn't watch his fresh and soph seasons.

The above points had multiple 100-page threads on here with a lot of back-and-forth. So, it's not like that wasn't discussed from every possible angle.

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. The Bulls are what they are--an old team hoping for a lucky break because otherwise, AKME may be looking at filing for unemployment benefits next spring. If I were ownership and looked at their track record, as it currently stands, I wouldn't touch them with a 10-foot pole.

The Bulls offered Lauri a contract extension his QO was 9 million and I believe and they offered around 13 million but he wanted 17mil which is what he got from the Cavs.

The mistake AK made was when there was nobody else who had the space on the market to even offer Lauri 17 million and instead of basically telling him to take our offer or play out the season and become unrestricted we traded him despite finally having traded for a high level playmaker. The play in that situation was to use our rights ot the fullest to allow Lauri and the team see how he would mesh with the new pieces and with Ball we then could have still had the ability to offer him max last summer if we warranted.

Lauri only missed the playoffs because of Ainge ? the same way we only missed the playoffs because of our PG situation..... not because we didnt have Lauri because he wasnt leading us to the playoffs either when we had him.

As I said there are simply way to almost and what ifs for these hindsight posts to work.

[Dan Z]

Lauri didnt want to be here and you dont know if we would have picked Franz again why does every time someone go on a hindsight rant they always go best case scenario when life itself doesnt play out.

Lauri saw Ak's first draft pick in PAT and his all star SF that he signed in free agency and decided he didnt want to compete or he wanted them to pay him more money than they were willing to to come off the bench .

Now if Lauri isnt afraid of competition and stays well guess what Pat gets hurt first week of the season and Lauri is running around that first half with Ball at PG but thats why I dont both with hindsight because there are so many other possibilities that could also play out but they are all dependent upon everything coming out exactly the way you wanted.

Lauri didn't want to be here because the Bulls, as in AKME, made it abundantly clear they didn't want him to be here. It had nothing to do with competition. It had everything to do with AKME's preferences.

As a rook, Pat was a train wreck in pretty much every aspect, whether headline stats, or advanced ones, where he was one of the worst players in the NBA. Like a minus double-digit net kind of player. Yet, on a team fighting for a playoff spot, he got to be a starter AND play starter minutes (near 30) despite being nowhere near the player Lauri was his last year on the Bulls.

The Bulls tried to trade Lauri at the deadline, failed, and then not only benched him for no apparent reason, but Billy had the infamous "we're not going to feature him on O any more," quote.

Which was said about a 23-year old, 18 ppg, 60+ TS scorer that was a 5th option in terms of touches, as-is. His touches post-benching went from 5th option to end-of-the bench scrub territory; so, they made good on the threat. He would have been an utter idiot to stay because they showed him where he belonged in their plans--somewhere on the deep bench.

Lauri just had a 26 ppg, 64% TS season and only missed the playoffs because Ainge decided to tank the season hard at the deadline by trading 4 main rotation pieces, including his starting and main back-up PG, for a copy machine and a future first.

Let that sink in. Lauri was an absolute stud first option on a playoff-bound team.

I don't care for the excuse that the Cavs were just as inept at evaluating talent. The Bulls had him on the roster. They misevaluated him so egregiously that I don't know how anybody can defend their stupidity. For crying out loud, as a soph Lauri was averaging 20 ppg before his heart issue flared up. As a 20-year old soph playing under Hoiberg and Jimbo. If people say he didn't have it in him, they didn't watch his fresh and soph seasons.

The above points had multiple 100-page threads on here with a lot of back-and-forth. So, it's not like that wasn't discussed from every possible angle.

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. The Bulls are what they are--an old team hoping for a lucky break because otherwise, AKME may be looking at filing for unemployment benefits next spring. If I were ownership and looked at their track record, as it currently stands, I wouldn't touch them with a 10-foot pole.

I posted this in another thread: I'm not so sure that AKME get fired even if the Bulls have another bad season. Reinsdorf bought the team in 1985 and, at that time, Rod Thorn was the GM. Since then the Bulls have only had 4 GMs. Reinsdorf typically likes to stick with the people he hired no matter what happens (Gar Forman was GM for 10 years!).

Having said that I'm with you in that I'd like to see some changes.

I'm also disappointed that they didn't see what they had in Lauri or do a better job developing him. Part of that is on the team, part of it's on the coach, part of it's on Lauri and part of it's on injuries. I wish the team had "Utah level" Lauri, but unfortunately it wasn't meant to be.

[The Box Office]

I'm anticipating that we miss the playoffs again. 29-35 wins this year. I better be wrong because I don't want to be correct again.

We only make playoffs if Pat Williams and Ayo step up and we don't have major injuries.

[chitownsports4ever]

I'm anticipating that we miss the playoffs again. 29-35 wins this year. I better be wrong because I don't want to be correct again.

We only make playoffs if Pat Williams and Ayo step up and we don't have major injuries.

Why would we only win 29 games ?

[sco]

Lauri didnt want to be here and you dont know if we would have picked Franz again why does every time someone go on a hindsight rant they always go best case scenario when life itself doesnt play out.

Lauri saw Ak's first draft pick in PAT and his all star SF that he signed in free agency and decided he didnt want to compete or he wanted them to pay him more money than they were willing to to come off the bench .

Now if Lauri isnt afraid of competition and stays well guess what Pat gets hurt first week of the season and Lauri is running around that first half with Ball at PG but thats why I dont both with hindsight because there are so many other possibilities that could also play out but they are all dependent upon everything coming out exactly the way you wanted.

Lauri didn't want to be here because the Bulls, as in AKME, made it abundantly clear they didn't want him to be here. It had nothing to do with competition. It had everything to do with AKME's preferences.

As a rook, Pat was a train wreck in pretty much every aspect, whether headline stats, or advanced ones, where he was one of the worst players in the NBA. Like a minus double-digit net kind of player. Yet, on a team fighting for a playoff spot, he got to be a starter AND play starter minutes (near 30) despite being nowhere near the player Lauri was his last year on the Bulls.

The Bulls tried to trade Lauri at the deadline, failed, and then not only benched him for no apparent reason, but Billy had the infamous "we're not going to feature him on O any more," quote.

Which was said about a 23-year old, 18 ppg, 60+ TS scorer that was a 5th option in terms of touches, as-is. His touches post-benching went from 5th option to end-of-the bench scrub territory; so, they made good on the threat. He would have been an utter idiot to stay because they showed him where he belonged in their plans--somewhere on the deep bench.

Lauri just had a 26 ppg, 64% TS season and only missed the playoffs because Ainge decided to tank the season hard at the deadline by trading 4 main rotation pieces, including his starting and main back-up PG, for a copy machine and a future first.

Let that sink in. Lauri was an absolute stud first option on a playoff-bound team.

I don't care for the excuse that the Cavs were just as inept at evaluating talent. The Bulls had him on the roster. They misevaluated him so egregiously that I don't know how anybody can defend their stupidity. For crying out loud, as a soph Lauri was averaging 20 ppg before his heart issue flared up. As a 20-year old soph playing under Hoiberg and Jimbo. If people say he didn't have it in him, they didn't watch his fresh and soph seasons.

The above points had multiple 100-page threads on here with a lot of back-and-forth. So, it's not like that wasn't discussed from every possible angle.

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. The Bulls are what they are--an old team hoping for a lucky break because otherwise, AKME may be looking at filing for unemployment benefits next spring. If I were ownership and looked at their track record, as it currently stands, I wouldn't touch them with a 10-foot pole.

The Bulls offered Lauri a contract extension his QO was 9 million and I believe and they offered around 13 million but he wanted 17mil which is what he got from the Cavs.

The mistake AK made was when there was nobody else who had the space on the market to even offer Lauri 17 million and instead of basically telling him to take our offer or play out the season and become unrestricted we traded him despite finally having traded for a high level playmaker. The play in that situation was to use our rights ot the fullest to allow Lauri and the team see how he would mesh with the new pieces and with Ball we then could have still had the ability to offer him max last summer if we warranted.

Lauri only missed the playoffs because of Ainge ? the same way we only missed the playoffs because of our PG situation..... not because we didnt have Lauri because he wasnt leading us to the playoffs either when we had him.

As I said there are simply way to almost and what ifs for these hindsight posts to work.

I'm not "blaming" AK for the Vuc mistake. That one was on ownership for hiring. I am willing to bet that the notion of AK recreating his Denver Joker (luck) model was the centerpiece of his interview. Hiring AK made the Vuc trade inevitable.

The Lauri dump, IMO, is on Billy. For some reason he couldn't see what we most of saw in Lauri as being better as a wing than a post player. To be fair, he sorta sucked on CLE too. If there was a message to take away is that you need to be cautious dumping high 19YO draft picks too soon because it takes time.

Also, to be fair to AK, he had a vision of a team (when you include Ball), that...well, worked...until the Bulls were effectively castrated (pun intended).

[Dan Z]

Lauri didn't want to be here because the Bulls, as in AKME, made it abundantly clear they didn't want him to be here. It had nothing to do with competition. It had everything to do with AKME's preferences.

As a rook, Pat was a train wreck in pretty much every aspect, whether headline stats, or advanced ones, where he was one of the worst players in the NBA. Like a minus double-digit net kind of player. Yet, on a team fighting for a playoff spot, he got to be a starter AND play starter minutes (near 30) despite being nowhere near the player Lauri was his last year on the Bulls.

The Bulls tried to trade Lauri at the deadline, failed, and then not only benched him for no apparent reason, but Billy had the infamous "we're not going to feature him on O any more," quote.

Which was said about a 23-year old, 18 ppg, 60+ TS scorer that was a 5th option in terms of touches, as-is. His touches post-benching went from 5th option to end-of-the bench scrub territory; so, they made good on the threat. He would have been an utter idiot to stay because they showed him where he belonged in their plans--somewhere on the deep bench.

Lauri just had a 26 ppg, 64% TS season and only missed the playoffs because Ainge decided to tank the season hard at the deadline by trading 4 main rotation pieces, including his starting and main back-up PG, for a copy machine and a future first.

Let that sink in. Lauri was an absolute stud first option on a playoff-bound team.

I don't care for the excuse that the Cavs were just as inept at evaluating talent. The Bulls had him on the roster. They misevaluated him so egregiously that I don't know how anybody can defend their stupidity. For crying out loud, as a soph Lauri was averaging 20 ppg before his heart issue flared up. As a 20-year old soph playing under Hoiberg and Jimbo. If people say he didn't have it in him, they didn't watch his fresh and soph seasons.

The above points had multiple 100-page threads on here with a lot of back-and-forth. So, it's not like that wasn't discussed from every possible angle.

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. The Bulls are what they are--an old team hoping for a lucky break because otherwise, AKME may be looking at filing for unemployment benefits next spring. If I were ownership and looked at their track record, as it currently stands, I wouldn't touch them with a 10-foot pole.

The Bulls offered Lauri a contract extension his QO was 9 million and I believe and they offered around 13 million but he wanted 17mil which is what he got from the Cavs.

The mistake AK made was when there was nobody else who had the space on the market to even offer Lauri 17 million and instead of basically telling him to take our offer or play out the season and become unrestricted we traded him despite finally having traded for a high level playmaker. The play in that situation was to use our rights ot the fullest to allow Lauri and the team see how he would mesh with the new pieces and with Ball we then could have still had the ability to offer him max last summer if we warranted.

Lauri only missed the playoffs because of Ainge ? the same way we only missed the playoffs because of our PG situation..... not because we didnt have Lauri because he wasnt leading us to the playoffs either when we had him.

As I said there are simply way to almost and what ifs for these hindsight posts to work.

I'm not "blaming" AK for the Vuc mistake. That one was on ownership for hiring. I am willing to bet that the notion of AK recreating his Denver Joker (luck) model was the centerpiece of his interview. Hiring AK made the Vuc trade inevitable.

The Lauri dump, IMO, is on Billy. For some reason he couldn't see what we most of saw in Lauri as being better as a wing than a post player. To be fair, he sorta sucked on CLE too. If there was a message to take away is that you need to be cautious dumping high 19YO draft picks too soon because it takes time.

Also, to be fair to AK, he had a vision of a team (when you include Ball), that...well, worked...until the Bulls were effectively castrated (pun intended).

I don't know if the Bulls really did that or not (your "Jokic model" mentioned above) and I never understood why teams do it. Why form a team using a 2nd rate "Jokic level" player? They're never going to find another Jokic (but might find a different player with a different skill set). The same with the Warriors. For years many teams have been trying to use an offense similar to them and the reality is only one team has the best shooter of all time (Curry).

Why not look at the roster you have and figure out a way to best utilize it instead of trying to copy someone else? Then continue to build upon it.

[The Box Office]

I'm anticipating that we miss the playoffs again. 29-35 wins this year. I better be wrong because I don't want to be correct again.

We only make playoffs if Pat Williams and Ayo step up and we don't have major injuries.

Why would we only win 29 games ?

Hey yo dude, I wrote "29-35 wins." Not just "29 wins."

[GoBlue72391]

I'm anticipating that we miss the playoffs again. 29-35 wins this year. I better be wrong because I don't want to be correct again.

We only make playoffs if Pat Williams and Ayo step up and we don't have major injuries.

Why would we only win 29 games ?

Hey yo dude, I wrote "29-35 wins." Not just "29 wins."

No chance we finish 11 wins worse than last year unless we get absolutely pelted by injuries. 35 is your ceiling, I think it's our floor. I think we'll have a season similar to last year, maybe sneak into the first round this time.