Chisoxfn

How is Dillon Tate doing? He was picked 4th overall in that same draft and I don't think he's even been up to the bigs. Or what about Tyler Jay (who was picked 2 picks before Fulmer). Both were college pitchers and I don't think either has pitched in the majors yet. It might put a little perspective on the Fulmer pick and also maybe give perspective on how much we screwed up with him from a pure player development time (i.e., forcing him through the majors vs. breaking down his mechanics and developing him through the minors. Actually I think the best player picked after Fulmer (1st round) was Walker Buehler of the Dodgers and if I remember right, not many on this board wanted him and people were afraid that is who we might have ended up drafting? Maybe I'm mis-remembering

That is probably the realistic destiny of almost every NBA team. Your best chance is to either suck horrifically forever and be lucky to get the greatest player of the world (their is only one LBJ so only one team really achieved that since LBJ was drafted) or you try to be as good as possible while maintaining overall flexibility so that you can try and lure a great player (all while internally seeking to develop as many great players). The Bulls obviously tried the 2nd strategy and succeeded and got very close to the pinnacle for an extended run...than they took a path towards rebuilding and eventually pivoting back to that 2nd strategy (bolded for emphasis). Whether they get back to that 45-55 win pace quickly or not is a whole other question. I'm not going to go into overkill mode and go into all my examples, but I'm sure Bulls fans would have called the Warriors stuck in NBA hell the season before they set the league on fire (pre Durant). No one knew Steph would become the GOAT at 3s and that Klay would become as good as he was and that the combination of them with Draymond and just a really deep team would become one of the greatest juggernauts the league would ever see. NO ONE saw it...except maybe Jerry West (who killed the Klay for Klove trade).

That is my view. That said, they will have a great chance next off-season at offering another max player. But for at least one year they are stuck and I'll settle for that as someone who hates the Lakers.

Exactly...they need to move Deng, but if they move Deng, that means the Lakers are giving up multiple 1st to the team who absorbs that contract (or they are getting a player like Ingram) and than that means they have less to offer the Spurs. Basically, unless the price tag drops dramatically, I don't see a deal happening between Lakers/Spurs during the off-season. If Kwahi is traded it will be to a team like Boston or Philly who can make a good offer now and who thinks they can win and will thus take their chance on convincing Leonard to stay during the season (i.e., OKC and Paul George).

The only good thing about the moves the Lakers made after signing Lebron was that they were 1 year deals. Otherwise, from a basketball perspective, they were bad moves (good if you don't like the Lakers like I do).

I actually think it is going to be pretty unlikely the two teams work out a deal (at least before the season starts). It appears that cap wise the Lakers are basically going to roll into the year with the team currently designed, outside of some possible maneuvering our Julius Randle, Ingram and Ball.

Interesting that Lebron took such a long term deal. Essentially cements the fact that LA will be his last major destination. I can't imagine 3 years from now, Lebron will still be the same "game changer" he is today. He could still be a one or two year assassin to push a team over the top but I'd imagine his career arch will be on the downside (I still expect him to be very very good 3 years from now...but I doubt he'll still be the best player on the planet at that point). Will be interesting to see how the young Lakers emerge as well as interesting to see what happens to Ingram. Evidently he is on the block and if I were the Bulls, I'd be seeing if we could find a way to acquire him. Lakers aren't going to just "give him up", but they obviously want different pieces to surround LBJ with and whatever they expect their final piece to be will likely come next off-season (since they weren't able to land any other mega fishes). The bad part is that will bring competition to the Bulls because the Lakers + LBJ recruiting will be a major favorite in any free agent sweepstakes...albeit there are always players who may not want to do that. For example, I don't think that Jimmy Buckets is necessarily the best player to put next to LBJ (if I were the Lakers). My best bet is that Buckets ends up a Clipper or a Bull after he finishes up in Minnesota.

By the way, it was just reported that Ball has a torn meniscus in his knee. He should be ready for the start of the season but the Lakers are down on him for more than just "Lavar" reasons. He couldn't even stay on the court last year and when he did he couldn't shoot. I happen to believe in Ball's basketball IQ and ability to pass (they are both phenomenal) but there are real concerns beyond just his father which are whether he can be healthy enough to stay on the court and whether he can figure out how to shoot and finish.

No way. I want to get Ball because he is undervalued (albeit I don't know how he fits on this roster) and is a talent to acquire, but I'm not giving up a future 1st round pick unless I somehow know I'm about to control Lavar.

Why do you think the Spurs don't want Ball? It has nothing to do with his basketball skills and everything to do with the sideshow that comes with him. I don't know how you can ignore that fact. The impact it had on the entire Lakers season this past year was awful. It isn't just a loud mouth talking about his son, it impacted Luke Walton, the front office, etc. He is a major problem and unless he's going to go away, the affiliation of him will directly impact his value and you can not ignore that fact.

Talent wise, I would do that in a heartbeat. The problem is I don't want to deal with Lavar.

What is this Lonzo Ball rumor? Is it like Ball and Deng to the Bulls for a 2nd round pick or something? Otherwise I have a hard time figuring out how the Bulls could possibility be involved in a Lonzo Ball trade.

Exactly; Bulls were willing entering the draft, but the whole concept of Memphis giving up a #4 pick purely for a contract like Parsons was nuts. Now maybe they give up a future 1st rounder (whether there is a bit more uncertainty, lottery protections, etc added in).

Why is that? They couldn't still do a "sign and trade"?

Bulls are reportedly telling teams they are willing to help facilitate transactions by taking bad contracts off their hands. Good.

It actually wasn't that torched. There have been all kinds of talk about how Butler still likes Chicago and that the relationships are generally fine. The only major question would be Hoiberg. Players respect the heck out of Pax. I have heard that from a number of people who are extremely well connected to the NBA.

Just wait until Butler comes back next season

Why? What exactly have they screwed up since the Butler deal? Did they screw up the 7th overall draft pick a year ago when they arguably got one of the 3 best players in the draft? Did they not get quality development out of Dunn this past year? Lavine has to still be evaluated but that shouldn't be a major surprise given he was coming back from an ACL injury. Yes, the Bulls didn't suck as bad as everyone expected but they got two quality picks in this past draft. So people wanted us to suck and now they are knocking on the Butler deal? I thought there was only a very small minority who were against the Butler deal?

Some rumblings that the Sacramento Kings are going to make a big money offer to Lavine.

Presume you are talking about LBJ? The word on the street is LBJ is going to decide pretty quickly.

Not outright...you'd just have to manage your cap and make some trades to create the space. I think the key is making sure you have contracts that you move to the extent that you need to do cap gymnastics. You need to know you can do it...so that if you get two max guys in, you are able to go execute on some trades. Now if one of those contracts is a Luol Deng type contract...than you might have issues, but if it is a quality player at a fair rate, you shouldn't have any issue moving them.

NBA will be evaluating the Rockets proposal to switch the order of the "draft" and "free agency". I actually think this proposal makes a lot of sense. I would think teams would want to have a better idea as to what is going to happen in free agency so they can than draft accordingly (especially teams like the Cavs who may take two different tacts depending on the outcome of a LBJ). http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23911959/zach-lowe-houston-rockets-proposal-flip-nba-draft-free-agency

That is why the only thing that will upset me this offseason would be if they handed out some ridiculous contract to minimal upside players. Lavine & Nwaba will probably be the two contracts the Bulls give out and as long as they aren't going "max type" money on Lavine I'm okay with that (and similarly as long as Nwaba is in that 5-6M camp that should be fine and a totally moveable deal if new FA's want to come). I'm not ready to give up on Lavine, but I will admit, there will be some risk to that deal.

Germany losing to Korea has to be one of the bigger upsets in group play the past few world cups.

Yeah - Asik doesn't become a problem 2 years from now. Felicio is the one "bad" contract we have. We need to stay away from that type of deal and hope that Felicio gets his act back in gear this year to where we could move him.