ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 11:23 AM) Isn't the Iron Bank in Braavos, the "Free City of Braavos," on the show though? I'm not entirely sure that it's consistent that the Iron Bank would be like "we can't support Dany because she freed slaves in Slavers Bay and if she wins the Iron Throne she will spread those ideas to Westeros where slavery is already illegal?" That scene didn't work for me. But that scene kind of points to a larger issue. Cersei literally destroyed the Sept of Baelor, killing a popular Pope and popular Queen in the process. She's calling it "an accident" but there's no way that everybody doesn't know the truth of the matter - that Cersei did this. That act makes her the Mad Queen. But she is able to hand wave it away by being like "remember how crazy Aerys was? What if Dany is mad!" Or, "yeah, we haven't paid bills in awhile and, yeah, that caused you to bankroll Stannis. But Dany is anti-slavery! And something about Lannisters always paying their debts!" The point is that it doesn't make narrative sense for Cersei to continue to be able to persuade and consolidate her power. She started this season in a terrible spot, after having committed a straight up atrocity (that should have actually led to a popular revolt against her right?) and in 3 episodes, she's more powerful than she, or the Lannisters, have been at literally any other point in the show. This is basically my point, I just didn't want to type that much on my phone. Well said.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 11:15 AM) I thought they handled that pretty well though. Her counter wasn't just a promise to pay in 14 days, it was that the bank has no choice but to fund Cersei's war. They can't align with Dany because Dany is opposed to how the bank makes money. The bank loses if Dany wins the war. As others pointed out, it's a stretch. Slavery in Westeros isn't a thing, they supported a much weaker option than Danny, and the debt racked up by The Crown (and threatening to go higher) isn't good for business either. That was just one example of several. It seems like things just show up and go away because they have to right now instead of building up or cause/effect like earlier in the story.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 10:00 AM) There has to be more to the story. I'm hoping next episode we still if they put all of their eggs in the HG basket. Cersei is going to get hers eventually I assume. This is the thing that bothers me right now. Cersei has made enough mistakes to kill at least 3 Starks. Sure, she's had a few setbacks, but she's still alive and improving her position. She literally hand-waved away their massive debt to The Iron Bank with "the check is in the mail." Time warping to get people where they want when they want has happened the whole series. Remember like episode 3? Ros got from Winterfell to Kings Landing in like an hour in a rocket-fueled turnip cart. Tyrion went from Winterfell to The Wall to an inn in the Riverlands to The Eyrie in like 3 episodes.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 23, 2017 -> 10:26 PM) I'm the opposite. The dorne characters have fallen too easily. Euron wasn't supposed to be a great warrior Probably because they decided to focus on Ellaria and the Sandsnakes instead of Ariane, Doran and Areo Hotah.

Is it wrong that I was happy when the two Sandsnakes bit the dust? Totally useless and annoying characters.

I definitely would have rather dumped Crowder than Bradley. Jae is superfluous with the Hayward signing and the two early picks on wings recently. I also think he's a bit overrated at this point because everyone is obsessed with 3-and-D wings (and he's not that good at either). Bradley is a legimately elite defender that can shoot and has some ballhandling ability. Now they have to use Marcus Smart more, who I hate as a player (obviously I would give Smart away first, zero interest in paying him). The one thing in Crowder's favor is the contract. He's really cheap for 3 more years while Bradley will get paid a ton after this season.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 07:23 PM) Hayward -26 Gobert - 24 Hood - 24 Lyles - 21 Exum -21 That's a pretty nice young core. A lot of their future potential depends on Lyles and Exum. But like I said, losing Heyward is a big setback. Far as tanking, they're probably a 38-42 win team even without Hayward. Quin Snyder looks to be a really nice coach. So they couldn't tank if they wanted to. Sucks to see the Jazz take such a hit considering Boston probably still can't see Cleveland anyway. They traded Lyles to move up to get Mitchell. Doesn't materially change the point though. Hayward/Gobert is a pretty good core duo and you hope Hood/Exum/Mitchell stay healthy and develop. Favors and Burks are still both only 25 too, though I'm less optimistic about their health. Hell, even Rubio is only 26. It's still way too early to worry about it, but Brooklyn, Sacramento, Atlanta and the Bulls all look like total trash to me and Phoenix, the Lakers and Orlando don't look much better. There are another half dozen teams at least that could be in that range with a key injury too.

Same report says Boston offered 3 firsts (not Brooklyn or the LA/Kings pick), Crowder and another starter on draft night. That seems way better.

I do wonder if things have gone to s*** because Gar gradually got more power. They used to draft decently and while they were conservative, they didn't actively hurt the team. The last few years have been a complete tire fire though. I have a terrible feeling that they're going to find a way to trade for Melo now that Phil is gone.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jun 29, 2017 -> 01:39 PM) I think Snell was a solid pick (he's an NBA starter at pick #20), and I would still defend the decision to trade up for McDermott (they needed a shooter badly and got the best one in the draft). Some moves don't pan out, obviously that was one of them. To me their biggest sin was not tanking when Rose missed the entire 2011 (or 12?) season. They should have directed Thibs, Noah and Deng to take it easy. If they didn't want to go along with that, get rid of them. It was a terrible decision to not take advantage of that lost year like the Spurs did with Duncan and Robinson. Snell is a below average NBA player that they traded for MCW. He made some 3's this year, but his PER was still under 10. Not exactly a sparkling asset, and he wasn't their worst. They do a lot of things wrong. Bmags listed most of them, but the biggest is that they hang on to players until they walk with no return or get traded for pennies on the dollar. They basically ended up with just cash for Luol Deng. That's insane.

The Bulls front office has been bad for a while. The 1.whatever percent miracle for Rose hid that. Without Rose falling in their lap, they're the Charlotte Bobcats.They routinely turn players and assets into nothing. They hit on one great late round pick and another solid one, but that's the bulk of their resume. Phil was a complete disaster, but even he managed to get Porzingis. Edit- Yes, I know they're the Hornets now. Also, Noah was a solid pick. Gordon and Deng were slightly above average picks.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 23, 2017 -> 11:43 AM) The 2018 class is unfortunately not considered to be that riddled with 1 and done level talent. MPJ and then some players that could be top ten. Definitely a year you want shots at #1. The freshmen always move around a ton once they start playing. This time last year, the top-4 was Giles, Fultz, Jackson and Smith in most places. Ayton could be interesting, probably one more emerges. Also, Luka Doncic should be rated much higher than any foreigners this year.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 10:51 PM) KC Johnson had this blurb in his article (which I haven't seen anyone talk about). I'm looking at Zoom for my answer (if he hasn't had too many fancy beers). What is the unique structure in Rondo's contract? I presume Rondo's option somehow counts (and a team can walk away from it)...so technically Bulls can leverage the cap exeption and Rondo to help facilitate moves when FA opens (and ideally accumulate some picks)? Or am I being way too optimistic? I'm not that familiar with the new CBA, so take that with a grain of salt. I believe the trade exception is the difference between Jimmy's salary and what they took in. I don't believe it can be combined with other assets. Only like 3 mil of Rondo's deal is guaranteed, so in theory they can trade him at 13/14 mil or whatever he's making and the other team can save 10 mil by cutting him.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 10:23 PM) Dunn and smith wouldn't really work though. The problem is the bulls took a deal that makes no sense and then had to draft players to compliment it. Yeah, I'm mostly venting about players in a vacuum and not trying to build on the faulty foundation set by that trade. Bell is an interesting player, should at least be able to get on the floor. Figures that he's moving.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 10:09 PM) Here is how I see it. (Discounting the horrible trade) Bulls need an entirely new team, almost all of their players are bench level or old. Marrakannen at least has unique skills. If he develops he could be a starter on a high level team. Monk reminds me of Ben gordon, but every year their will be guards who can score. The real miss may have been smith. Would smith/ leaf be better than dunn/ marrakannen, I don't know. But that's why losing the 1st hurts, it's a lost opportunity for a team that should be doing everything ro get more picks. Meh, barring pipedream scenarios, I think the best case for Markkanen is a more mobile Ryan Anderson (though still a bad defender). That's an expensive player to get in FA, but not someone that really moves the needle. My preference was Smith, I think he could be an upper-tier PG, but also has a low floor. Monk is at least a top-tier bench scorer, though I think he can be better. Admittedly, he's kind of superfluous with LaVine on the roster. He's more of a fit if they make a smarter trade.

Anyone got a guess for 38? Mine is Rabb. Decent talent, but no real place in the modern NBA.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 09:44 PM) Not sure that Bulls have done anything recently to make me believe they know more than a douchebag drinking beer. Marrakannen is weak but he's 19. He can definitely hit the weight room and gtlet stronger. Also with the way the nba is going shooting is a premium. It just feels like the rest of the package is from the Isle of misfit toys. Keeping bulls first and getting more future picks was worth more than dunn/levine imo As a role player on a team with some pieces already, Markkanen is okay. He'll space the floor and mostly stay out of the way. I really worry about his defense/rebounding though. Also, I think your first priority in a rebuild should be to find your shot-creators. That's definitely not Markkanen. Fox/Smith/Monk do that more often. Isaac doesn't really create his shot either, but at least he could be an ELITE role player that can guard multiple spots and hit some 3's. Admittedly, I think this draft is mostly about upside after Fultz and Ball (I really like the former, I voiced my concerns about the latter earlier).

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 09:32 PM) At the very least you have solid taste in beer. Don't get me started on beer. My beer takes are much better than my NBA takes.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 09:25 PM) I'd have preferred Smith too Markkamen but when they traded for lavine and Dunn you knew they couldn't take another guard. Basically the extra guards in the trade forced the pick. Worst part is Im not sure dunn goes top 10 if he was in this draft. It's hard for me to comment on that because I was never a big Dunn fan. I wouldn't take him over Smith or Monk, but I'm just some douchebag watching a few of his college games and some YouTube clips while drinking imperial stouts.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 09:04 PM) 7 was not an ideal pick. I know zoom hates him but Markanen at least has upside. Had they kept the 16 maybe they can turn 7, 16 and something into Fox. But instead they have Dunn and are basically hoping that somehow last year was not indicative of his fulure performance. Personally just bummed we couldn't turn Butler into fox. I would have much rather had Smith or Monk. Unfortunately, the Bulls have like 40 s***ty guards, so they think they're set. I just don't trust Markkanen to do anything but shoot 3's. No rim protection, lack of strength hurts him on both ends, not a lot of finishing in traffic. I'm agnostic about Fox. His speed and ballhandling gives him some upside, but I think it's really hard to play guards that can't shoot at all in the current NBA environment. He also needs to bulk up quite a bit.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 07:55 PM) You mean Grayson Allen That's just mean and depressing since I can't rule it out for the Bulls given their recent drafting.

I guess I should start watching clips of Michael Porter, Luka Doncic and Deandre Ayton.

FFFFUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCKKKKKKK Does anyone know a good defense attorney? I need some help evaluating my options. Can I pull off a justifiable homicide defense?

QUOTE (Boogua @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 07:14 PM) Sounds like that's why they're taking. Awful. The guy sounds like Channing Frye. At least Frye used to block some shots.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 07:12 PM) Who do want the Bulls to take at #7 now? Got to be Isaac since they already have 7 billion guards. Too bad, because Smith or Monk would be good in a vacuum.