Chisoxfn

And so what does that accomplish exactly? We paid him a max deal and didn't let him play? Why would we than give him a max deal that following year, when he has never even proven whether he can be his former self (post-achilles injury)? So basically your strategy is give him a max deal, let him rehab, than give him another max deal next year (for multiple years)?

He isn't even going to play until the all star break and when he comes back he's going to play small minutes and build up his minutes. He's going to have such a short stint (in terms of regular season action) that it would be hard for him to not play well. Also, where is this lockeroom cancer stuff coming from? I recognize he's crazy and gets too many technicals but he's a fantastic basketball player (and not an albatross defender). I wouldn't touch him with any long-term deal this year because achilles injuries can be extremely tough to recover from, but if he proved himself in the 2nd half of the season, the possibility becomes far more interesting.

Wait, you think Cousins wanted to come to a team like the Bulls this year (on a 1 year deal)? You basically wanted the Bulls to pay him a max deal for one year...just because and than try to give him a mega deal in a year, after not letting him play? That would be massive risk. Cousin's wasn't going to come to a team like the Bulls without getting more money and more years (and thus taking on more risk). I think this is great cause if he shows he is healthy, has burst, and gels on a championship club, you can go get him next year.

Random question but why do a handful of teams play in multiple "summer" leagues while most just play in the Vegas one? This allows for a team like the Lakers (or Warriors or Kings) to play in a few additional "summer" league games? Seems like it would be beneficial to give guys "more" games vs. "less". I recognize summer league is not like overly important and health is key but I'd think a few extra games (and practices) with the coaching staff would be helpful from a pure player development / evaluation perspective (especially for those undrafted / dleague guys you are evaluating).

I actually think this off-season has been pretty fantastic for the Bulls, if you take a step back and think about it. Thus far, neither Philly, Boston, or Toronto have done anything to improve (3 best teams in the East) all while LBJ went west. As far as I'm concerned, the path to the finals is carved with non-elite teams. I recognize Boston is very deep and very good and extremely well coached but I don't think they are an unbeatable dynasty (not yet at least) and I tend to think Philly is overrated at this point (don't get me wrong, I'd love their pieces, but they could very easy never emerge...ala the Wizards with a young Wall, Beal, Porter (they never took that step forward everyone expected). I also think that helps the Bulls when it comes to pitching other teams FA (well until the NBA changes the playoffs to a seeding of 1-16) as at some point we are going to see some of these stars move east. If the Bulls are a quality team, the pitch of an easier path to finals and overall weaker conference should certainly help. Add in the fact that they'd be contending with really only one historical powerhouse franchise (Boston + of course you always have to contend with power of New York if they ever get a halfway decent nucleus of young players) and it should bode somewhat well. On the west your only major competition (in free agency) will be the Lakers (and possibly Clippers) and while they are massive competition they'll only have room for one max deal and we might be headed into a couple year stretch where we see some elite names come out and "team up" and if we are one of the only options where the guys can team up...we might actually be alright. I'm putting a somewhat crazy prediction out there of Kyrie and Jimmy Buckets joining the Bulls with them swinging the fences for Anthony Davis as well (after Davis forces a trade and prior to Bulls paying him a supermax).

One thing to remember is Boogie is going to be out until at least January and coming back from a serious injury. The other upside is Bulls aren't contending this year anyway and if Boogie kicks butt he'll be a free agent and he won't resign in Golden State so next year he'll be available to the highest bidder (to extent he is worth it). So technically him signing a 1 year deal is good for the Bulls, imo. He can either prove he is healthy and worthy of a max deal and if so, Bulls can be one of the teams to offer him. Had Boogie signed a big deal this year, it would have meant we had no shot at him next year so fact that he is back on radar for next year is good. Albeit would prefer a non Warriors team pick him up. I like the Pelicans getting Randle at that price. Seems to be a very reasonable rate for someone like Julius.

Actual this is a curious topic. What are peoples views. We debate this a lot as a mod team about when to be more aggressive at potentially taking action vs. being more laid back. In general, we try to be pretty laid back (to extent people follow the rules), however from time to time, it becomes necessary to tighten moderation. Is the overwhelming view that we need to clean up things...issues specific to a certain forum? Palehose talk or extend to filabuster?

Is this serious? WOW.

That is just one player we are contending with though. Lakers won't be able to fit two max guys next year (going to be really hard to do with Deng's contract on the books).

I'll say it again, but outside of King James, they aren't making the shrewdest basketball moves. That said, they have lots of flexibility next year. Wish they signed a couple of those guys to multi-year deals

I'm not surprised we didn't get a top 50 guy but glad we are still investing. You just never know who the late bloomer is going to be and in the case of Miguel Jr, I'll bet on bloodlines all day long.

I thought Japan was going to pull it out (when they went up 2-0). I still put Belgium, France, and Brazil as the 3 best teams in the world (right now). We'll see though....England sure has been ripping.

Yes, I completely agree with you. I actually thought it was interesting looking at a couple college arms drafted above him in the draft and how different their developmental path has been vs. Fulmer who we literally forced straight to the majors. I'm not one to usually point a finger at our aggressive promotion tactics and I've been one of the first posters down on Carson, but man, we were so focused on rushing him straight to the majors (in an ill fated attempt to compete) that we did very little for the kids actual development. You could almost say we didn't "develop" him and just tried to rush him. I actually think we should break him down and build him back up and see if we can do that (not like fully rebuild but it certainly is beyond the point where that is what we need to do). No quick fixes, give him time to truly develop (and if that is in AA I don't care). He never got real "development" with the Sox so I'm okay investing it while we rebuild (should have done it sooner in the process) and than if that doesn't work, move him to the pen.

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.