# The official Who's your guy NBA Draft Thread.



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Its that time of the year again. 

Bulls have picks 28,30 and 44. Gone are the day's of looking at lottery picks and looking for legit franchise changers but still IMO the next couple of drafts will be extremely important in us finding some additional pieces to try to make our team a complete one. 

About a month or 2 ago I had a kid named Bismark Biyambo as a guy I really wanted the Bulls to take with one of our late round picks, at the time he was projected a late first rounder to second rounder but boy oh boy his stock has sky rocketed. He's now projected as a top 10 pick and the #3 overall prospect in Draft Express and as low as a lottery pick in NBADRAFT.net. So it looks like I might have to look for a new guy now.

While I look for some new guy's, who do you guys feel the Bulls would benefit most from drafting or who do you guy's just flat out like or want on the Bulls. Try to keep it to players projected OUT of the lottery since there is really no point in saying that Kemba Walker is your guy knowing that we have no shot at Kemba.


----------



## Bulls rock your socks (Jun 29, 2006)

i think marshon brooks and jeremy tyler would be good for us. brooks is a pretty good scoring guard 6'5 and has a 7'1 wingspan! im intrigued by tyler, hes 6'10 and looked pretty good at the combine. the only problem i have with him is his maturity and in an interview he said he would rather play than be on the bench on a team.


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

I concur with Marshon Brooks. If you look at his combine results you will also see he has large hands for 6'5". I would also like to get JaJuan Johnson in order to replace Taj because if the Bulls make a trade, you know he will have to be included. He is the most tradeable asset on our team. Teams want his energy, work ethic, and cheap contract. Taj has been great for us and all, but he gave us exactly what I expect a 4 year senior who played against players 2 and at times 5 years younger than him in college. Of course he plays great defense. If he didn't, he wouldn't make it in the NBA.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Who do I want? * Alec Burks. *

I haven't seen much of him in games, but can easily tell from videos and scouting reports that he has terrific NBA potential. Has the legit SG size (6'6 in shoes), length (6'10 wingspan), really solid athletic results from all angles. More importantly, the guy can handle the rock and create off the dribble. That is one of our biggest flaws. As the lone star of his college team, he produced pretty efficiently and kept the TO's down. 3-pt shot needs work but that is something that a 19-yr old kid can improve with hard work when his only job is to play basketball.

Issues with getting him -- (a) he will likely go top 10 and may be hard to trade down; and (b) I HIGHLY doubt GarPax (and Thibs too) will actually want to rely on any rookies to crack the top 8 rotation. They may trade out of the draft altogether or just draft Euro and stash them away for down the road.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I'm going to go with Jimmer. We need more shooters. I have watched virtually no college bball this year though, save for a game here and there (had to check out Jimmer after hearing about him, so he's one of the few I've seen). Personally, if I'm the Bulls, I go after Dwight first and foremost, and if we can't get him, package those 3 picks and Boozer to move up and draft a legit prospect. It wouldn't even have to be a PF, since Taj could replace him, and you'd have a 3-man rotation of Taj, Noah and Asik in the post. Get a 2-way player at the 2, rather than the one dimensional guys we have now, or a PF with more length that can actually make high-impact plays, whether it be scoring in the post without getting blocked EVERY time, or as a shot blocker....hell even a 3-point shooting type PF like Kevin Love.


----------



## eazy8o5 (May 15, 2010)

marshon brooks..good size for a 2 guard


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

marshon brooks i think is getable but Burks would be great but the question is how far the bulls could trade up there three picks and is that enough to move to 10 to 12 to get him. We shall see but we dont need three more players we just need a SG. And seriously no way are we going to trade Taj.


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

giusd said:


> marshon brooks i think is getable but Burks would be great but the question is how far the bulls could trade up there three picks and is that enough to move to 10 to 12 to get him. We shall see but we dont need three more players we just need a SG. *And seriously no way are we going to trade Taj*.


I guarantee Taj will be included in a trade by the other GM(s).


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Take Jimmer, you need outside shooting badly


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Brooks does intrigue me as a later prospect but there are some things that stand out that I worry about. 

Pros-
Long arms
decent ball handling ability
confident 
confident in his shooting ability
not afraid to have his back to the basket
Defensively he has all the tool's to be a very good one. 
Cons-
Hes got some nice crossover moves but when he attacks he has a sort of spider like dribble very similar to Deng's probably because of his long arms, this creates a ton of opportunities for opposing 2's to swipe the ball, he will be one of those players who will be able to get to the basket but will either fumble the ball away or get it swiped away at the last minute. 

LONGGGGG release on his shot, hes got a jump shot that looks like it takes forever to launch. It will create opportunities for guys at the next level to block it or defend it quicker than at the college level. 

Streaky shooter, scored 52 points once but does not dominate every game. 

Finishes weakly around the basket, will need to work on finishing strong at the NBA level because those slow layups and floaters will get blocked at the next level.

Not a great athlete, uses his long arms to finish dunks and create space. 

In conclusion

He really reminds me a lot of Deng if Deng was 6'5. Awkward at times looking dribbler, streaky shooter with range and the ability to defend at a high level. 

Worth a look late but he will struggle offensively at first.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

HB said:


> Take Jimmer, you need outside shooting badly


Unless Jimmer looks horrible during the individual workouts I just don't see him slipping to the Bulls.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Iman Shumpet is a prospect that really intrigues me, hes very raw offensively and seems to not have an NBA Jumper yet but his athleticism is off the charts (42 inch max vertical!) and he can handle the ball, he was a projected late second round pick but his combine workouts have sky rocketed his stock. 

Height 6'5
Weight 222

17 ppg 3 ast 6 rbs 2.7 stls per game 40% fg 27% from 3. 

Pros

Big time athletic ability
NBA ready body
Great size for his position
can handle the ball played some PG at Georgia Tech. 
Finishes better than most college level guards. 
At times an absolute defensive HAWK, 15 steals in his last 3 games wow. 
Can get his shot off at the next level and can create for himself. 

Cons-

Incredibly streaky shooter
Bad jump shot mechanics
in consistent shooter
Has range but shoots incredibly poorly from the arc.
will jack up a ton of shots mostly because they needed him too 
decision making questionable 
questions whether he can play productively without the ball in his hands.

In conclusion,

IMO a true prospect with all the NBA physical tools to succeed. The guy oozes talent but is soo held back by his poor shooting that who knows if he can ever combine all his skills to become more than a role player at the next level. Honestly has all the tool's to be the next Dwayne Wade but without a jumper he might just be the next Dahntay Jones. The kid had a ridiculous 22 point 12 rebound 11 ast 7 stl game against VA Tech earlier last year.. hes got some skills. 

If I'm Garpax I give the guy a look in workouts and I would have 0 problems with giving him a chance with one of our late first round picks. Hes not as well rounded as Brooks but athletically he blows Brooks out of the water.


----------



## S.jR. (May 18, 2010)

Jordan Hamilton...
Marshon Brooks..
LaceDarius Dunn.
Alec Burks (waaaay outside shot)

2 of these guys and a big who can defend, rebound, block shots with above average height that can possibly shoot FT's would be nice in the 2nd round.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I'm kind of wondering about a trade up for Donatas Motiejunas if he slides to the teens or 20, as I've seen him mocked that low lately. He'd give us a PF with great size, potential and versatility.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> I'm kind of wondering about a trade up for Donatas Motiejunas if he slides to the teens or 20, as I've seen him mocked that low lately. He'd give us a PF with great size, potential and versatility.


Donatas has probably the most upside out of all the Euro talent in this draft. That being said he does not play Tom Thib's style basketball. Hes a big man who can't defend NBA 4's, is not a strong rebounder and someone who made highlight reel blocks against guy's half his size. 

Pros-
Fantastic passer, look at the video while highlight tapes make players look better than they are, the skills are there to showcase and passing is something he really does very well. 
Beautiful jump shot, for a 7 footer that stroke is just pretty.
Quick in transition player. 
Runs floor like a gazelle.
Good 3 point shot.
Will be able to get his shot off on anyone in the NBA.
Spread's the floor and will create defensive problems. 

Cons-
Not a strong finisher
Not a strong Pick and Role player
Good hands but does not finish strong
Post moves are good enough in Europe but will not even come close to getting some of those inside layups of at the next level.
Not strong, can't back down anyone in the post. 
settles for high awkward looking hookshots, again he makes them against smaller Euro players but will not get be successful at it in the NBA.
Defensively does not show any interest in it.
Body will need to fill out.

Overall 

Very talented and gifted 4, he can turn into a fantastic offensive player at the next level but will need to develop NBA ready post moves. Needs to bulk up and finish like a man or he will get stuffed each time he goes up in the post. Not a great athlete but not a terrible one either. 

Top ten pick but will take sometime to develop. I just don't think hes a fit with the Bulls but I do like what he can turn into.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Well in theory, Boozer is hardly a fit for Thibs either. He plays zero defense unless he gets pissed and is committing flagrant fouls to cost us huge games. The only thing he does is rebound some, and we have plenty of guys that can do that. I'd take a Taj Gibson or a raw Dirk over that pile of crap any day. Give me Tyrus Thomas any day over him for damn sure! 

After watching that video, he certainly looks like some additional firepower, which is what we're missing now. You could do a rotation of O vs D with him and Taj at the PF, like they do with Korver and Brewer/Bogans now. If he is available in the middle of the draft and we could just use this year's picks to get him, I'd do it in a heartbeat.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well in theory, Boozer is hardly a fit for Thibs either. He plays zero defense unless he gets pissed and is committing flagrant fouls to cost us huge games. The only thing he does is rebound some, and we have plenty of guys that can do that. I'd take a Taj Gibson or a raw Dirk over that pile of crap any day. Give me Tyrus Thomas any day over him for damn sure!
> 
> After watching that video, he certainly looks like some additional firepower, which is what we're missing now. You could do a rotation of O vs D with him and Taj at the PF, like they do with Korver and Brewer/Bogans now. If he is available in the middle of the draft and we could just use this year's picks to get him, I'd do it in a heartbeat.


While I think he will be the first euro to get taken in the draft I don't think hes as highly touted as Danillo or Bargnani were so its not like his talent is that much better than those 2. BUT I do think Donatas can become a better player than both these guy's, he's just not an out of this world talent. I do think hes a much better passer than both of them combined but I don't think hes on same level in shooting as both guy's were. 

I just don't see Thibs giving him a ton of minutes, he gave Asik minutes because he could defend but offensively Asik is horrible and I think Thibs will always give guy's with D more chance than guy's with no D. 

As for Boozer, he was a legit 20 and 10 guy, he got paid a huge amount of money, no way he sits.


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

Jordan Hamilton 
Alec Burks
Marshon Brooks

None of them will be available when the Bulls pick BUT I CAN DREAM RIGHT??? Of course the Bulls will end up holding onto their picks and drafting Ty Honeycutt or Shelvin Mack instead... :banghead:


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> While I think he will be the first euro to get taken in the draft I don't think hes as highly touted as Danillo or Bargnani were so its not like his talent is that much better than those 2. BUT I do think Donatas can become a better player than both these guy's, he's just not an out of this world talent. I do think hes a much better passer than both of them combined but I don't think hes on same level in shooting as both guy's were.
> 
> I just don't see Thibs giving him a ton of minutes, he gave Asik minutes because he could defend but offensively Asik is horrible and I think Thibs will always give guy's with D more chance than guy's with no D.
> 
> As for Boozer, he was a legit 20 and 10 guy, he got paid a huge amount of money, no way he sits.


Well according to the mock drafts, he's the 4th or 5th one to be taken (if you count Kanter as a Euro, even though he's listed as a kentucky guy)

The scouting report I like is Jan Vesely. I don't see him being on the radar, or even close to available, but he is the most intriguing to me. This is one year where I'd love to nab a Euro guy, after trading up, and stashing them for a year. Vesely, Motiejunas, Valanciunas. Usually I'm opposed to Euros, but I like what I read/see about those guys, and Asik impressed me as well. Fredette is my more realistic wish list though.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well according to the mock drafts, he's the 4th or 5th one to be taken (if you count Kanter as a Euro, even though he's listed as a kentucky guy)
> 
> The scouting report I like is Jan Vesely. I don't see him being on the radar, or even close to available, but he is the most intriguing to me. This is one year where I'd love to nab a Euro guy, after trading up, and stashing them for a year. Vesely, Motiejunas, Valanciunas. Usually I'm opposed to Euros, but I like what I read/see about those guys, and Asik impressed me as well. Fredette is my more realistic wish list though.


Someone will probably take Kanter first because of his size, he does remind me a bit of Marc Gasol but talent alone I think Donatas is the more talented euro. Jan doesn't blow me away, Valanciunas is ok too but outside of Kanter nobody really stands out more than Donatas. This euro class seems a bit weak IMO, there is no Ricky Rubio this year or someone that is heads above the rest of his peers. I think each player has something that the other does not have, there's just not that one player who has it all combined. Fredette is not going to slip to the Bulls, hes actually measured out decently and his athleticism test are not bad so I doubt he makes it out the lottery. 

On a side note look up videos on Davis Bertans, he sucks at almost everything but shooting but tell me that is not one of the prettiest jumpers you have ever seen. The arc that he gets on that shot is unreal.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Well I don't expect any of the players I've mentioned, including Fredette, to get anywhere near the Bulls. BUT, with 2 1sts and a mid 2nd, plus a ton of role players, a trade-up could happen. I'd love to package those 1sts and the 2nd with Boozer to move up and get any of the 4. I really want him gone. 20-10 my a$$. He can't compete against a legit defense with some length, on either end, so he's useless to a contender.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well I don't expect any of the players I've mentioned, including Fredette, to get anywhere near the Bulls. BUT, with 2 1sts and a mid 2nd, plus a ton of role players, a trade-up could happen. I'd love to package those 1sts and the 2nd with Boozer to move up and get any of the 4. I really want him gone. 20-10 my a$$. He can't compete against a legit defense with some length, on either end, so he's useless to a contender.


If I'm trading up it sure is not for Jimmer Fredette or Donatas. I would only trade up for guy's like Kemba, Burks and Derrick Williams.

Sad to say this but Boozer is not going anywhere.


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

So whos this Klay Thompson kid? I really dont watch a lot of college ball outside of the big east and acc plus the tourney 

Is he any good?

He has been getting linked to the Bulls a lot in a trade up


----------



## S.jR. (May 18, 2010)

Merk said:


> So whos this Klay Thompson kid? I really dont watch a lot of college ball outside of the big east and acc plus the tourney
> 
> Is he any good?
> 
> He has been getting linked to the Bulls a lot in a trade up


Actually haven't heard much about him.. but I know he's a good scorer who can create his own shot. Guess I'll go look him up.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> If I'm trading up it sure is not for Jimmer Fredette or Donatas. I would only trade up for guy's like Kemba, Burks and Derrick Williams.
> 
> Sad to say this but Boozer is not going anywhere.


Well Fredette can shoot from anywhere, which is needed, and can create his own shot. We need that, so I'd definitely trade up for him. Donatas would give us something we don't currently have, so I'd definitely do it for him too. Huge ceiling. 

I agree, that POS Boozer isn't going anywhere, but that doesn't change that I'd give up something just to get rid of him.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Merk said:


> So whos this Klay Thompson kid? I really dont watch a lot of college ball outside of the big east and acc plus the tourney
> 
> Is he any good?
> 
> He has been getting linked to the Bulls a lot in a trade up


He doesn't really create his own shot all that well. He doesn't have NBA athleticism, his handle is shaky although he has a few moves, and his shot is slow. He's a smart passer, though, and the kid's a spectacular shooter. I can't see him being any better than a poor man's Mike Miller, though. I'd say the Bulls could use him just because he can shoot and he might fall to a place they could trade up to (18-22), but he won't be able to defend in the NBA.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Well Fredette can shoot from anywhere, which is needed, and can create his own shot. We need that, so I'd definitely trade up for him. Donatas would give us something we don't currently have, so I'd definitely do it for him too. Huge ceiling.
> 
> I agree, that POS Boozer isn't going anywhere, but that doesn't change that I'd give up something just to get rid of him.


Fredette is not that great at creating his own shot, hes got a nice little step back cross over but his size will limit some of those shots he made in College at the next level. Hes not a 2 at the next level, he can't guard NBA 2's and he does not have the size to be a starting 2 in the NBA. Hes gonna have to develop into a competent 1, he might be able to do it since he will NEVER have to share the entire responsibility of carrying a teams offense like he did in BYU.

Hes just not a fit for us IMO, he scored so many of his points with the ball in his hands I'm not sure if he can adjust as a spot up shooter or someone who has to continually run off screens without out the ball, I say that because there is just no way in hell the Bulls put the ball in his hands over Rose's.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Pacers Fan said:


> He doesn't really create his own shot all that well. He doesn't have NBA athleticism, his handle is shaky although he has a few moves, and his shot is slow. He's a smart passer, though, and the kid's a spectacular shooter. I can't see him being any better than a poor man's Mike Miller, though. I'd say the Bulls could use him just because he can shoot and he might fall to a place they could trade up to (18-22), but he won't be able to defend in the NBA.


Yeah I'm just not feeling Klay Thompson either. Hes a good 3 point shooter and has good size but hes a 2 playing in a 3's body without any of the athleticism of an elite 2 or 3. 

Decent ball handling skills and plays the baseline surprisingly well, at times he play's it just as good as Ronnie Brewer but other than that he underwhelms in soo many other areas. 






Pros-

Size
Nice jump shooting form
Solid baseline play
Play's hard and smart
Uses the glass very well 

Cons-

Average speed
Average ballhandling ability
Below average defense
Below average Athleticism 
Not a lights out shooter.
Below the rim finisher 

In conclusion

One of those players who can be either a complete bust or a very good role player and might start on a team or 2. Can get drafted anywhere from the lottery to the second round, it all depends on how he works out. He fits a need but I just don't know if his game translates to the next level.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> Fredette is not that great at creating his own shot, hes got a nice little step back cross over but his size will limit some of those shots he made in College at the next level. Hes not a 2 at the next level, he can't guard NBA 2's and he does not have the size to be a starting 2 in the NBA. Hes gonna have to develop into a competent 1, he might be able to do it since he will NEVER have to share the entire responsibility of carrying a teams offense like he did in BYU.
> 
> Hes just not a fit for us IMO, he scored so many of his points with the ball in his hands I'm not sure if he can adjust as a spot up shooter or someone who has to continually run off screens without out the ball, I say that because there is just no way in hell the Bulls put the ball in his hands over Rose's.


Oh I'm very aware of the concerns with Fredette and his basic skillset. I just am in the camp that thinks he'll be able to use the tremendous skills he does have, develop some other skills, and become an adequate role player. I'm not expecting him to be a star. But I do think he's a guy that can be instant offense off the bench, playing with Rose on or off the ball, and become an adequate all around player. I'm sure if he was in a different system with more talent around him, you'd have seen a more balanced skillset out of him in college too. He'll develop that in the NBA, especially if he's with a dominant guard like Rose. I think he could easily become a JJ Redick type player, but with a much more extensive offensive reportoire. Fredette is (with shoes) 2.25 inches shorter, but has 1.25 inches longer reach, and standing reach is only 1 inch less, so basically the same size for all extensive purposes. 6 lbs heavier, with only .7% difference in body fat. Essentially the same verts and reaches. Jimmer is way stronger at 14 reps vs 6. Agility is better at 10.42 vs 10.94, and speed is better at 3.21 vs 3.29. Redick has surprised me with how good of a defender he is, and he's a decent option on O. I don't see any reason why Jimmer couldn't be better than him, and I expect him to be a better all-around offensive player. 

I also don't think that Jimmer is pigeon-holed in at PG either. He's basically the same size as Ben Gordon, and actually just as fast (.02 difference is all), but he's also more agile and stronger. (Just going off the combine #s here. Jimmer has a better handle, but somewhat similar otherwise)

I think there are times where the matchups would definitely allow for Jimmer and Rose to be out there together, just like when Watson is out there with Rose. It happens. Rose needs breaks, and quality depth is always good.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> Yeah I'm just not feeling Klay Thompson either. Hes a good 3 point shooter and has good size but hes a 2 playing in a 3's body without any of the athleticism of an elite 2 or 3.
> 
> Decent ball handling skills and plays the baseline surprisingly well, at times he play's it just as good as Ronnie Brewer but other than that he underwhelms in soo many other areas.
> 
> ...


I guess I'm going off of those highlights, but it looks to me like he is a pretty damn good shooter. 

What I didn't like, was as you said a below the rim finisher, that missed FT, and going for 2 when they needed a 3 and he'd been making them all game. That put back on the missed FT at the end was nice, but pointless as you needed 3 and .4 seconds left = game over. No choice though, as he had no time to try and get a 3 lol. I think he could be a Korver-type from what I saw in that one clip there, although Korver's quick release and hard running on screens sets him apart from damn near everyone.


----------



## Job (Feb 28, 2011)

If Derrick makes the second shot at the foul line, then the Bulls would have probably won game four, and maybe the series. We all feel crappy after the Heat swept four straight games. The draft will not help the Bulls against the Heat, unless we can get a player like Kyle Irving from Duke. The Bulls should offer Gibson and draft picks. Irving will make the Bulls smaller, but with Rose at SG and Irving at point, scoring would vastly improve.

All of the big men in this draft, bums!


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> I guess I'm going off of those highlights, but it looks to me like he is a pretty damn good shooter.
> 
> What I didn't like, was as you said a below the rim finisher, that missed FT, and going for 2 when they needed a 3 and he'd been making them all game. That put back on the missed FT at the end was nice, but pointless as you needed 3 and .4 seconds left = game over. No choice though, as he had no time to try and get a 3 lol. I think he could be a Korver-type from what I saw in that one clip there, although Korver's quick release and hard running on screens sets him apart from damn near everyone.


Well there is a difference between lights out shooter and a good one. Klay does not and never had impressive FG% numbers in fact this year is his career high at an un impressive 43%. Hes not the shooter that Korver was in college either, Korver's 3 point shooting %'s where just SICK in Creighton and all he was able to do was get drafted in the second Round, I don't see Klay as a first rounder I just dont. 

If we are looking for just another 3 point Shooter I think I take Davis Bertans ahead of Klay Thompson, Bertans is 6'10 with an AMAZING high arcing 3 point shot that if he continues to develop he could become an un blockable 3 point shooter... Too bad hes not very good at anything else.






Bertans is just a flat out shooter.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Ricky Rubio will officially play with Minny next season, so I wonder if that #2 pick is now becoming available. This might be a good opportunity for the Bulls to trade down in the draft, Taj Gibson and the Charlotte Pick for the #2 or Utah's 3 and draft Alec Burks who is probably the best NBA 2 guard talent in the draft. Before everyone cries about Taj Gibson I think this draft has a similar player to Taj who can even turn out to be a better Taj in a few years, Bismack Biyombo will play defense from the get go and will only get better, hes got dominating defensive potential. It will take trading our 2 late first rounders to get in the lottery to pick him up though.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I would be OK trading Taj largely b/c Asik is the real deal defensively, and more importantly Taj's offense is very spotty at times. I don't think he's the type of guy whose offense will improve. So trading while his stock is high would be acceptable. Of course, the right deal would have to come along; I'm not trading Taj just to trade him, it would need to be for a significant upgrade on the wing.

Alec Burks would be terrific, IMO, but I think GarPaxThibs won't consider him b/c he's very young (19 yrs old?) and would need probably 2 years to turn into a legit starter. He also has questionable catch and shoot abilities which is risky. Beyond that, he has the athleticism and shot creating abilities that we desperately need to help Rose out. That is the skill that will help get us past Miami, b/c then when Rose gets constantly trapped you have someone to abuse the hole in the defense off the dribble. 

Hell, if we could afford Iguodala's salary I would advocate for him. IMO, the shot creating/playmaking ability is really the biggest problem on the Bulls, not 3-pt shooting.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> I would be OK trading Taj largely b/c Asik is the real deal defensively, and more importantly Taj's offense is very spotty at times. I don't think he's the type of guy whose offense will improve. So trading while his stock is high would be acceptable. Of course, the right deal would have to come along; I'm not trading Taj just to trade him, it would need to be for a significant upgrade on the wing.
> 
> Alec Burks would be terrific, IMO, but I think GarPaxThibs won't consider him b/c he's very young (19 yrs old?) and would need probably 2 years to turn into a legit starter. He also has questionable catch and shoot abilities which is risky. Beyond that, he has the athleticism and shot creating abilities that we desperately need to help Rose out. That is the skill that will help get us past Miami, b/c then when Rose gets constantly trapped you have someone to abuse the hole in the defense off the dribble.
> 
> Hell, if we could afford Iguodala's salary I would advocate for him. IMO, the shot creating/playmaking ability is really the biggest problem on the Bulls, not 3-pt shooting.


Yeah like I told JOB, Iggy fits so many needs that his lack of lights out 3 point shooting is something I will gladly pass up if we can get the good defense, ball handling and shot creating abilities that Iggy brings as a whole. 

I'm telling you Bismack would make a ton of Bulls fan's forget about Taj Gibson and Alec Burks even at his young age is an upgrade over Bogans, its not even close. The Bull's have to try things, if trades and signings become hard the draft is going to be our only shot at improving.


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

Thoughts on Jeremy Tyler? Seems to be a knucklehead of sorts but a lot of raw physical talent


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

Biyombo will be too high to get unless the bulls do some moving around, which will not happen. He would def be nice to replace Taj. Taj is a great trade piece right now and you've got to buy low/sell high. We have 2 late 1st round picks to get someone similar to Taj, a hard worker, who is long, plays good D, good attitude, and a cheap contract. One thing we have been missing is a shot blocker like Tyrus Thomas. We need someone to make people think twice before entering the paint and force them to shoot outside shots instead. Taj can do that but he doesn't have the lift like Tyrus does to slightly alter shots. I'm mainly referring to the Heat. Option #1 for me is DH12, but if they don't make that move yet, then they need to make a move on their #1 NEED this year and that is for a scoring SG. To do that i think the bulls will have to include Taj in the trade. 

3J would be a great replacement because he is like Taj Gibson with Tyrus Thomas' athleticism. Plus we most likely won't have to move up to get him and he already does certain things better than Taj that really are difference makers in a playoff game. He already shoots 80% from the FT line, which translates over to the NBA game and he is less foul prone than Taj. Sometimes he is over aggressive and is foul prone due to it. JaJuan Johnson only averaged 1.6 fouls in his senior year.


----------



## eazy8o5 (May 15, 2010)

looks like we wont get marshon brooks..his stock is rising


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

eazy8o5 said:


> looks like we wont get marshon brooks..his stock is rising


Good. I don't like Brooks. He's a great athlete and can score, but I'm predicting some black hole syndrome for him. Doesn't strike me as a particularly good ballhandler/passer, and will be a questionable defender at the pro level. Just another JR Smith or Nick Young, at best. I understand some folks want that at our 2-guard spot but I really believe we need more ballhandling/playmaking at the 2-guard more than just a black hole scorer.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Good. I don't like Brooks. He's a great athlete and can score, but I'm predicting some black hole syndrome for him. Doesn't strike me as a particularly good ballhandler/passer, and will be a questionable defender at the pro level. Just another JR Smith or Nick Young, at best. I understand some folks want that at our 2-guard spot but I really believe we need more ballhandling/playmaking at the 2-guard more than just a black hole scorer.


I honestly didn't see the great athleticism, I saw a guy who used his size and length more than athleticism ala Luol Deng. Spider dribblers who dunk because of a large wing span don't really intrigue me much at the 2, if I'm taking a spider armed 2 its Jeremy Lamb next year.


----------



## BullFan16 (Jun 2, 2003)

I could see us taking jereme richmond...unfortunately...he seems like more of a project than darius miles was


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Chandler Parsons is a bit intriguing for depth at SF. 6'10", great handle, good shooter and rebounder. I could definitely live with a guy with his skillset at any of our picks, especially if we got lucky and traded Deng + for Dwight.


----------



## Xeneise (Jul 5, 2010)

I'm not a bulls fan but I noticed this thread, and I wanted to say, Nolan Smith would be perfect for you guys, and should be around at 28 and 30.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Xeneise said:


> I'm not a bulls fan but I noticed this thread, and I wanted to say, Nolan Smith would be perfect for you guys, and should be around at 28 and 30.


We already have CJ Watson.


----------



## Xeneise (Jul 5, 2010)

DaBabyBullz said:


> We already have CJ Watson.


Watson shot 37% from the field. Are you not looking to get better? I still think Smith would be a good fit, because he could spend some time at the 2 as well depending on matchups. He's a much better scorer than Watson, and you need scoring punches outside of Rose. He's also one of the most NBA ready players in the draft to step in right away.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Xeneise said:


> Watson shot 37% from the field. Are you not looking to get better? I still think Smith would be a good fit, because he could spend some time at the 2 as well depending on matchups. He's a much better scorer than Watson, and you need scoring punches outside of Rose. He's also one of the most NBA ready players in the draft to step in right away.


From what I've seen out of him, he looks like a younger CJ Watson, which is who nbadraft.net compared him to (I liked their comparison). Since Watson is only 27, I'd say that's not needed. We already have 2 guards that are 6'3" and under, don't need another. I personally think CJ is pretty good too, for the record. 

Smith is 6'1.5", though he'd be listed at 6'3". If we needed a backup PG, I wouldn't mind. But he's not a great shooter, and we already have a solid backup PG in Watson, so I don't see the need. We either need a SG that has good size, or a guy like Fredette that can flat out shoot to space the floor, if we're looking at guards.


----------



## S.jR. (May 18, 2010)

Xeneise said:


> I'm not a bulls fan but I noticed this thread, and I wanted to say, Nolan Smith would be perfect for you guys, and should be around at 28 and 30.


Duke homer...










J/k.. I wanted a reason to use this gif.. lol


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

If Mario Chalmers wasn't a complete thug I would love to have him as a backup or starting PG and move Rose to the 2.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

With late 1st rounders, our best bet of getting a legit rotation player is at the PG position. And what do you know, CJ Watson really wasn't very good for us so it would be a nice fit to draft a PG.

This guy Charles Jenkins looks like he could be a player. Not a very fast/explosive player on paper, but strong as an ox, good size (6'3ish), great head on his shoulders, high skill level, etc. Description sounds very Chauncey Billups like.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Charles-Jenkins-6189/


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

I thought Watson was decent.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I really think we need a backup 3 more than we need a backup PG... Watson was downright useful for the second half of the season.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/charles-jenkins

Jenkins sounds ok. Kind of like a poor man's Jimmer Fredette from what I've read.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Dornado said:


> I really think we need a backup 3 more than we need a backup PG... Watson was downright useful for the second half of the season.


Exactly. Watson was terrible to start the year, but towards the end I was EXPECTING him to make big 3s and be a pretty good player when spelling Rose. We have zero depth at SF really. Korver and Brewer are both listed as SGs, but could play it, but then you have a lack of depth at SG behind Bogans whose minutes should be limited. Chandler Parsons, who I mentioned before would give us a long, versatile SF for depth. I've only seen him play a few times, but he looks like he could contribute to me. 

To me, we need a complete SG, and then depth at SF and PF (I don't even consider Boozer worth mentioning due to his inability to stay healthy and not suck, so basically only Taj is worth noting at PF).


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Exactly. Watson was terrible to start the year, but towards the end I was EXPECTING him to make big 3s and be a pretty good player when spelling Rose. We have zero depth at SF really. Korver and Brewer are both listed as SGs, but could play it, but then you have a lack of depth at SG behind Bogans whose minutes should be limited. Chandler Parsons, who I mentioned before would give us a long, versatile SF for depth. I've only seen him play a few times, but he looks like he could contribute to me.
> 
> To me, we need a complete SG, and then depth at SF and PF (I don't even consider Boozer worth mentioning due to his inability to stay healthy and not suck, so basically only Taj is worth noting at PF).


So Chandler Parsons is this years official DaBabyBullz Great White Hope?

... joining Chase Buddinger, Joe Alexander, BJ Mullins...


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Dornado said:


> So Chandler Parsons is this years official DaBabyBullz Great White Hope?
> 
> ... joining Chase Buddinger, Joe Alexander, BJ Mullins...


Nah, I just think he's someone worth a look.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I'm fine with just picking the best player available, but I hope folks realize there is little to no chance we will find our desired "SG of the future" in this draft. At best, we'll find a decent SG defender who can nail 3's, but even then I don't see Thibs giving significant playing time to a rookie unless it's a really nice looking rookie.

I really doubt Marshon Brooks (as an example) will get any meaningful playing from Thibs his rookie year.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

yodurk said:


> I'm fine with just picking the best player available, but I hope folks realize there is little to no chance we will find our desired "SG of the future" in this draft. At best, we'll find a decent SG defender who can nail 3's, but even then I don't see Thibs giving significant playing time to a rookie unless it's a really nice looking rookie.
> 
> I really doubt Marshon Brooks (as an example) will get any meaningful playing from Thibs his rookie year.


the funny thing is this the 2 guard spot is the easiest to fill in the nba and is the position to take a chance at getting a star or at least an extremely solid starter with a low pick, from manu, gilbert arenas,kevin martin wes mathews to mike redd to monta ellis to even landry fields in last season's draft.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> the funny thing is this the 2 guard spot is the easiest to fill in the nba and is the position to take a chance at getting a star or at least an extremely solid starter with a low pick, from manu, gilbert arenas,kevin martin wes mathews to mike redd to monta ellis to even landry fields in last season's draft.


I agree, very good guards can be found in the later rounds. While obviously the higher the pick the better player you are going to get but it seems like almost every draft has 1 guy who gets drafted in the late first round or second round that actually pan's out. I'm thinking that guy is Iman Shumpert.


----------



## S.jR. (May 18, 2010)

So what do you guys think about the possibility of trading out of this years first round for future first round picks to package along with our Charlotte pick, so we can put them together with which ever players to offer for Dwight Howard? Just thinking out loud.. And yes I do realize how important this draft *could* be for us.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

S.jR. said:


> So what do you guys think about the possibility of trading out of this years first round for future first round picks to package along with our Charlotte pick, so we can put them together with which ever players to offer for Dwight Howard? Just thinking out loud.. And yes I do realize how important this draft *could* be for us.


Dwights not coming here, for one no way in hell Orlando trades him to an Eastern Conference rival. Also, when was the last time a Chicago team ever signed a top 5 player in any sport? Bears nope, Blackhawks getting Hossa is debatable, Cubs nope, White Sox nope.


----------



## S.jR. (May 18, 2010)

While I don't disagree about the Eastern Conference thing.. That's a lot of first rounders to pass up, if the Magic go the rebuilding route. Not to mention whatever players are offered as well.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> I agree, very good guards can be found in the later rounds. While obviously the higher the pick the better player you are going to get but it seems like almost every draft has 1 guy who gets drafted in the late first round or second round that actually pan's out. I'm thinking that guy is Iman Shumpert.


iman certainly is athletic enough , there are others like malcolm lee or josh selby who have the talent if things pan out for them as well.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

S.jR. said:


> While I don't disagree about the Eastern Conference thing.. That's a lot of first rounders to pass up, if the Magic go the rebuilding route. Not to mention whatever players are offered as well.


A lot of bad low first round picks, unless Dwight demands a trade to a contender I'm looking at the Nets, Wizards and Clippers of the world. I would take John Wall, a first rounder and JaVale McGee over any number of first rounders and Joakim Noah. But obviously if Dwight wants to be traded to a good team I just don't see him going to the Bulls, the Magic would give up 5+ years of winning because there is no way in hell they ever get past Derrick Rose and Dwight Howard.


----------



## S.jR. (May 18, 2010)

thebizkit69u said:


> A lot of bad low first round picks, unless Dwight demands a trade to a contender I'm looking at the Nets, Wizards and Clippers of the world. I would take John Wall, a first rounder and JaVale McGee over any number of first rounders and Joakim Noah. But obviously if Dwight wants to be traded to a good team I just don't see him going to the Bulls, the Magic would give up 5+ years of winning because there is no way in hell they ever get past Derrick Rose and Dwight Howard.


That would all depend on who were trading this years first rounders to, bad teams like to think they can rebuild one draft with free agency and be in the playoff race. So they could trade back into this draft with our picks this year, for their future picks. (Also gotta remember the Bobcats pick.)

Yea that's why I acknowledged the Eastern Conference thing, them taking L's to any Eastern Conference team they trade him to is just about gonna happen. And of course he's kinda gonna be on the Melo stance, if he asks the Magic to change the roster and/or win the 'ship this year he wants to go to a contender. There's only so many teams that can offer them a legit deal, still be contenders and Howard would sign an extension with. I think were one, if he wants to play here.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Out of guys likely to be available in the late 1st round:

1. Justin Harper
2. Chandler Parsons
3. Charles Jenkins
4. Nolan Smith
5. Jordan Williams
6. Travis Leslie



I'm always a big fan of going international with the second round picks, especially if your team is pretty well composed. That said, guys I like include:

1. Nikola Mirotic
2. Davis Bertans
3. Bojan Bogdanovic


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Iman Shumpert worked out for the Bulls earlier this month and tweeded that "it went great!" His stock is rising very fast and some mock drafts now have him going as early as 22. I'm just amazed with his measurements and his defensive ability, hes a very special talent that is lacking a jumper and some refined basketball IQ but if he can get it together hes an absolute steal.


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

As much as I want to believe the Bulls can make do with the #28 and #30 picks, the players available at that point won't be making any great impact on the team. We have enough role players. I prefer management makes some kind of deal to pick up one of these three: Jordan Hamilton (fills needed depth at SF), Alec Burks (SG w/ability to play like PG) or Marshon Brooks (solid compliment to D.Rose). Then, I'd feel better about the team heading into free agency (IF THERE IS NO LOCKOUT OF COURSE).


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

Charles Jenkins at 28, JaJuan Johnson at 30. Don't think we keep both picks though.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

I'd like the Bulls to take Shelvin Mack or Malcom Lee. I'll support the other two picks they'll make.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Shelvin Mack bad


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Shelvin Mack bad


I like how you write off Mack based on one game.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

TwinkieTowers said:


> I like how you write off Mack based on one game.


A 6'2 combo guard who doesn't shoot lights out, no thanks.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Not a fan at all of Malcolm Lee. Mack would be a minor upgrade over Watson, but I'd rather fill some gaps. JaJuan is kind of interesting, especially if we are looking to make a trade and need more frontcourt depth


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

[double post]


----------



## eazy8o5 (May 15, 2010)

dang boston just selected marshon brooks


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

BULLS pick Norris Cole trade his rights to TIMBERWOLVES. WTF is going on here?


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

Bulls get Nikola Mirotic, trade #28 & #43. Draft Jimmy Butler (Marquette).


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

For now, the Bulls have Nikola Mirotic and Jimmy Butler.


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

Actually for now the Bulls have Jimmy Butler. Mirotic is under contract with Real Madrid for the next four years(signed an extension in April 2011). 

Meanwhile Dallas just traded Jordan Hamilton to the Blazers for Rudy Fernandez.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

So the Bulls trade 2 picks and Cash for a player who will is under contract in Europe until 2016 and then we draft a 6'6 SF who is projected as this *" all-around player, but lacks any one great skill... Fits the "jack of all trades, master of none" mold ... Not a stand-out athlete ... Hasn't proven that he can consistently create offense for himself ... Not an isolation player, feeds off the play of his teammates ... Could really open up his game by adding range to his jump shot ... Hasn't shown that he can be a consistent threat from behind the arc ..."*

Passed up on Reggie Jackson, Marshon Brooks, Jordan Hamilton who was a projected lottery pick and Justin Harper a perimeter oriented 4. 

Horrible draft for the Bulls, filled absolutely 0 holes. Throwing away picks is a not a recipe for success.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Players don't develop in Europe, this is an absolutely dumb way of thinking. The game is completely different over there, different rules and you can forget about him developing a post game over there, they DON'T work on that over there. 

I could live with the Pick if he was going to develop his game over here, against NBA talent and learn how to play the NBA style of Basketball. I just don't know what the hell they are thinking, I really dont.

4 years lol, Deng will be past his prime in 4 years, Boozer will be gone, Rose will be 26.. Taj would be 50. Its a joke honestly, we have a window to win a title and we drafted non factors lol, its so Bulls.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Bulls get a guy who will fill a hole when Boozer and/or Gibson are gone and a late pick whom by all accounts Thibodeau will likely play right away. Very good for where they drafted.

Time to get a SG in free agency. There are many available.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Players don't develop in Europe, this is an absolutely dumb way of thinking. The game is completely different over there, different rules and you can forget about him developing a post game over there, they DON'T work on that over there.
> 
> I could live with the Pick if he was going to develop his game over here, against NBA talent and learn how to play the NBA style of Basketball. I just don't know what the hell they are thinking, I really dont.


Toni Kukoc and Manu Ginobili disagree.


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

I have no idea why the BULLS would trade 2 picks for a guy that will likely never play for the team. Nikola Mirotic is under contract with Real Madrid until the end of the 2015-16 season. Let's just call it what it is, a truly dumb move on management's part.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

SWIFTSLICK said:


> I have no idea why the BULLS would trade 2 picks for a guy that will likely never play for the team. Nikola Mirotic is under contract with Real Madrid until the end of the 2015-16 season. Let's just call it what it is, a truly dumb move on management's part.


At the end, the Bulls traded James Johnson for Nika Mirotic. By 2015-16, chances are Mirotic will probably know more about the game of basketball than Johnson will.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

TwinkieTowers said:


> Toni Kukoc and Manu Ginobili disagree.


Second Round picks man, you don't trade picks and money for a guy who will be a 25 year old rookie when he comes here and unknown to the NBA game.

It makes zero sense... Unless he will be used in a big time trade but who the hell is going to wan't a prospect who we don't even know if he will ever play in the NBA.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

This also means that the Bulls will likely keep Gibson and Asik. Brewer, Korver, Rasual Butler, and possibly Deng will be trade pieces in the near future.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

TwinkieTowers said:


> This also means that the Bulls will likely keep Gibson and Asik. Brewer, Korver, Rasual Butler, and possibly Deng will be trade pieces in the near future.


They have a better chance of trading Gibson and Asik than they do Deng and Korver.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> They have a better chance of trading Gibson and Asik than they do Deng and Korver.


They have a better chance of winning by not trading Gibson and Asik.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

TwinkieTowers said:


> They have a better chance of winning by not trading Gibson and Asik.


Huh?

This makes no sense since at BEST Gibson and Asik are average players while Deng and Korver are incredibly important to Tom Thibs defense/offense.


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> Players don't develop in Europe, this is an absolutely dumb way of thinking. The game is completely different over there, different rules and you can forget about him developing a post game over there, they DON'T work on that over there.
> 
> I could live with the Pick if he was going to develop his game over here, against NBA talent and learn how to play the NBA style of Basketball. I just don't know what the hell they are thinking, I really dont.
> 
> *4 years lol, Deng will be past his prime in 4 years, Boozer will be gone*, Rose will be 26..* Taj would be 50*. Its a joke honestly, we have a window to win a title and we drafted non factors lol, its so Bulls.



Which is why they picked him, in 4 years we are going to need F's


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

The more I think about it, I think these guy's are just trade chips. I think Memphis would gladly wait a couple of years on Mirotic, maybe we can ship him out in some OJ Mayo trade. I don't think Mirotic will ever play in on the Bull's and I just din't see how the Bulls improved even a bit, a big trade might be on its way... Atleast I hope.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Merk said:


> Which is why they picked him, in 4 years we are going to need F's


So lets develop him here NOT OVER THERE FOR 4 years. If Mirotic is a great talent then lets bring him here ASAP and have him learn the NBA game. I'm not hating the pick, I'm hating the idea of waiting 4 years. Ask Orlando fan's how happy they are about a similar situation with Fran Vázquez, a promising 22 year old when drafted who was going to play alongside Dwight Howard during the Magic's prime, now hes a 28 year old prospect with no real desire to play in the NBA and the Magic's championship window is shut closed, not to mention that Dwight might be on his way out.


----------



## Job (Feb 28, 2011)

I like the UCLA guard with the 43 pick. Did we trade this pick? Why?


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> Out of guys likely to be available in the late 1st round:
> 
> 1. Justin Harper
> 2. Chandler Parsons
> ...


Got the guy at the top of my International Prospect list, but fail to draft Justin Harper (who went 2 picks after our 2nd).

Mirotic + Harper, Parsons, or Jenkins I would have loved. Turns our we could have had Harper, Parsons, and Jenkins (unless it changed other teams draft boards).

I don't hate the Jimmy Butler pick, but I'm not a fan of it either. The only thing I like about it is that he can come in and fill a role (backup SF). If he can guard either wing position, that would help Korver see more minutes on the floor as well while not being the offensive liability of Brewer.

That said, there were a handful of guys I liked above Butler, but at least we didn't draft Singler, Honeycutt, Mack, or Tyler.

My Grade: B-


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Job said:


> I like the UCLA guard with the 43 pick. Did we trade this pick? Why?


Bulls traded 2 picks for Nikola Mirotic‎.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

FYI, Mirotic best game as a pro so far.

35 pts, 23 reb, 9 stl, 6 blk
9/9 FG, 14/14 FT, 1/1 3PT

I read the stat from another source, and don't know who he was playing against. Pretty impressive no matter the competition, though.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Man how disappointing. I thought that the Bulls got Motiejunas all this time. That is EDITas hell. Leave it to the damn Wolves to screw the pooch, and the Bulls as well. At least before I thought the Wolves drafted a guy I liked and traded him to the Bulls. Now I find out they drafted him, and traded him to the damn Rockets, who are only worth watching due to Budinger.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> So lets develop him here NOT OVER THERE FOR 4 years. If Mirotic is a great talent then lets bring him here ASAP and have him learn the NBA game. I'm not hating the pick, I'm hating the idea of waiting 4 years. Ask Orlando fan's how happy they are about a similar situation with Fran Vázquez, a promising 22 year old when drafted who was going to play alongside Dwight Howard during the Magic's prime, now hes a 28 year old prospect with no real desire to play in the NBA and the Magic's championship window is shut closed, not to mention that Dwight might be on his way out.


Current contract and team:
Real Madrid, Spain (ACB) & Euroleague
Nikola signed a long term contract with Real Madrid *(through 2013)* and showed no rush to jump to the NBA.

Where are you getting this waiting 4 years BS? http://www.nba.com/draft/2011/prospects/nikola-mirotic/


----------



## Job (Feb 28, 2011)

thebizkit69u said:


> Bulls traded 2 picks for Nikola Mirotic‎.


Thank-you for the Reply.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

DaBabyBullz said:


> Current contract and team:
> Real Madrid, Spain (ACB) & Euroleague
> Nikola signed a long term contract with Real Madrid *(through 2013)* and showed no rush to jump to the NBA.
> 
> Where are you getting this waiting 4 years BS? http://www.nba.com/draft/2011/prospects/nikola-mirotic/


From the official Euroleague website.



> Real Madrid has announced a new agreement with forward Nikola Mirotic to extend his contract until the *end of the 2015-16 season.*


Oh and this tid bit can't be all that nice to hear.



> "This is my home and my first big dream has come true," Mirotic said of his new contract. "This is just the beginning for me, because *I want to stay in the club as long as possible.* I want to fulfill my dreams, improve as a player and help this club in any way I can."


So the NBA Champions turn a late first round pick into Rudy Fernandez and we turn 2 draft picks and cash into a player who does not even want to play in the NBA.. YAY.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Job said:


> Thank-you for the Reply.


No problem.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

From what I read, Mirotic is expected to play another 2-3 years overseas before his contract has a reasonable buyout. For him, I'm willing to wait 2-3. If it's longer, then we probably didn't do as well as we could with the pick.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> From the official Euroleague website.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok fair enough.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I'm fine with our draft results. This draft was just simply awful anyways, and when you're drafting deep down the list there's only so much you can get.

Mirotic is the kind of talent that could fit w/ Rose down the line as a stretch 4. He could also be a trade chip if we find a nice trade option for the short-term. We have multiple options and I like that.

I don't know squat about Jimmy Butler, though first impression is he'll be (at best) a career backup SF, and at worst he won't ever crack a rotation. I don't see much upside but that's OK if he's just there to reduce Deng's burden.

I really belive there were ZERO good SG options in this draft that we could realistically obtain. I'm not a fan of Marshon Brooks at all. Alec Burks was "my guy" but he went too high and could end up another Larry Hughes anyway. 

We were never about to improve much through this draft...just a weak draft, and probably the most boring draft I've ever witnessed (at least in 2000, we had two top 10 picks, haha).


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> So lets develop him here NOT OVER THERE FOR 4 years. If Mirotic is a great talent then lets bring him here ASAP and have him learn the NBA game. I'm not hating the pick, I'm hating the idea of waiting 4 years. Ask Orlando fan's how happy they are about a similar situation with Fran Vázquez, a promising 22 year old when drafted who was going to play alongside Dwight Howard during the Magic's prime, now hes a 28 year old prospect with no real desire to play in the NBA and the Magic's championship window is shut closed, not to mention that Dwight might be on his way out.



Who says we are waiting 4 years? Thats the MAX we would have to wait for him, if the Bulls decide they want him earlier they are 2 million dollars away from bringing him over at any point. Until then he is a 20 year old kid who wont sniff playing time over here which will hurt his development a lot more than playing on a regular basis in Europe. 

Im not seeing the problem with this. Its nothing but low risk and high reward. We dont have to commit any cap space which allows us to go look for a legit SG(because there was not a single player we could have drafted that was going to fill that hole) and gives us a tradeable asset that we have almost nothing invested in


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

yodurk said:


> I'm fine with our draft results. This draft was just simply awful anyways, and when you're drafting deep down the list there's only so much you can get.
> 
> Mirotic is the kind of talent that could fit w/ Rose down the line as a stretch 4. He could also be a trade chip if we find a nice trade option for the short-term. We have multiple options and I like that.
> 
> ...


This is about where I am... not super excited but wasn't really expecting to be super excited given our draft slot. We made an investment in the future in Mirotic which gives us some flexibility in the short term... and Jimmy Butler could potentially fill out a spot at the end of the roster. I think maybe people forgot what it was like to pick so late...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Merk said:


> Who says we are waiting 4 years? Thats the MAX we would have to wait for him, if the Bulls decide they want him earlier they are 2 million dollars away from bringing him over at any point. Until then he is a 20 year old kid who wont sniff playing time over here which will hurt his development a lot more than playing on a regular basis in Europe.
> 
> Im not seeing the problem with this. Its nothing but low risk and high reward. We dont have to commit any cap space which allows us to go look for a legit SG(because there was not a single player we could have drafted that was going to fill that hole) and gives us a tradeable asset that we have almost nothing invested in


I agree that its a good trade chip and investment down the line but everything Mirotic has said has him committing the full 4 years over there. By time he actually play's here hes 4 years older and who knows how much longer it would take him to learn the NBA style of playing. About The 2 million dollars away from bringing him over at any point, you have to remember that an NBA team can only pay a fraction of that 2 million, someting like 500k I believe so its still up to Mirotic to pay the rest, I just don't see him paying 2 million to come to the NBA and get paid basically the same amount of money or less.


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> I agree that its a good trade chip and investment down the line but everything Mirotic has said has him committing the full 4 years over there. By time he actually play's here hes 4 years older and who knows how much longer it would take him to learn the NBA style of playing. About The 2 million dollars away from bringing him over at any point, you have to remember that an NBA team can only pay a fraction of that 2 million, someting like 500k I believe so its still up to Mirotic to pay the rest, I just don't see him paying 2 million to come to the NBA and get paid basically the same amount of money or less.


In the end this is the Front Office trying to hit a home run which is something that some of us complain they never try to do. By all accts he was the best player on the board but a very big margin and while the Orlando point was made and talking to there fans about their situation on waiting for European players we should also talk to the Spurs fans about taking chances on lotto level talent with mid to late first rounders and see how they feel about the concept.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Merk said:


> In the end this is the Front Office trying to hit a home run which is something that some of us complain they never try to do. By all accts he was the best player on the board but a very big margin and while the Orlando point was made and talking to there fans about their situation on waiting for European players we should also talk to the Spurs fans about taking chances on lotto level talent with mid to late first rounders and see how they feel about the concept.


You have to understand that the Spurs did not wait 4 years for Tony Parker and while they did wait a while for Manu the Spurs only took a chance on these guys after winning a title in 99. The Bulls aren't there yet and with Dallas improving and Miami continuing to be better than the Bulls I just don't see how we can wait 4 more years for some help. 

The Bulls could have easily gone the try to hit a home run with Jeremy Tyler in the second round who is a more NBA style big, or Davis Bertans a guy who by far was probably the best 3 point shooter in the draft or Justin Harper a stretch 4 who brings something completely different to the 4 position. 

When its all said and done there will be guys taken after Mirotic that WILL contribute to a couple of good teams, there might even be a very good player taken in the second round that will contribute. At the end of the day I don't know how a GM can watch stuff like that happen and be happy with that, especially when the team is chasing other teams for a title, 4 years is a very long time... heck by that time our title window might be completely shut.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> You have to understand that the Spurs did not wait 4 years for Tony Parker and while they did wait a while for Manu the Spurs only took a chance on these guys after winning a title in 99. The Bulls aren't there yet and with Dallas improving and Miami continuing to be better than the Bulls I just don't see how we can wait 4 more years for some help.
> 
> The Bulls could have easily gone the try to hit a home run with Jeremy Tyler in the second round who is a more NBA style big, or Davis Bertans a guy who by far was probably the best 3 point shooter in the draft or Justin Harper a stretch 4 who brings something completely different to the 4 position.
> 
> When its all said and done there will be guys taken after Mirotic that WILL contribute to a couple of good teams, there might even be a very good player taken in the second round that will contribute. At the end of the day I don't know how a GM can watch stuff like that happen and be happy with that, especially when the team is chasing other teams for a title, 4 years is a very long time... heck by that time our title window might be completely shut.


I admit being a little disappointed with passing over Justin Harper, who is 6'10 and can really shoot the ball from deep. But then again, we basically picked a [potentially] better version in Mirotic, it's just the waiting that sucks (at least he won't consume cap dollars).

The reason I'm not totally disappointed in Jimmy Butler is he's maybe another good defensive option vs. Lebron James. I have to imagine that went through GarPax's head...


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Here is a nice little compilation video of Mirotic from the Nike Hoops Summit. Mirotic and Kanter looked like the two best players for the world team for those who have not seen it.


----------



## Merk (May 24, 2006)

thebizkit69u said:


> You have to understand that the Spurs did not wait 4 years for Tony Parker and while they did wait a while for Manu the Spurs only took a chance on these guys after winning a title in 99. The Bulls aren't there yet and with Dallas improving and Miami continuing to be better than the Bulls I just don't see how we can wait 4 more years for some help.


and you have to understand that there wasnt a single player at #23 that was going to make this team any better this year. We won 62 games last year and we are not waiting 4 more years to get better. We got an asset for the future and still FA'cy to go through. A rookie isnt going to help this team, a vet player will




> The Bulls could have easily gone the try to hit a home run with Jeremy Tyler in the second round who is a more NBA style big, or Davis Bertans a guy who by far was probably the best 3 point shooter in the draft or Justin Harper a stretch 4 who brings something completely different to the 4 position.
> 
> When its all said and done there will be guys taken after Mirotic that WILL contribute to a couple of good teams, there might even be a very good player taken in the second round that will contribute. At the end of the day I don't know how a GM can watch stuff like that happen and be happy with that, especially when the team is chasing other teams for a title, 4 years is a very long time... heck by that time our title window might be completely shut.


We'll see how many of these players contribute because of all the players you named, I'll be shocked if a single one avgs even 8 mins a game next season. Ill be sure to keep an eye on all these playoff team draft picks and see if any of them even remotely crack the rotation


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Rhyder said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdGCimlMzm8&feature=player_embedded
> 
> (sorry, could not get the embed feature to work--please edit if you can fix it)
> 
> Here is a nice little compilation video of Mirotic from the Nike Hoops Summit. Mirotic and Kanter looked like the two best players for the world team for those who have not seen it.


Mirotic looked like he has tons of potential, but he sure missed a lot of layups/bunnies.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

According to KC Johnson:

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/06/25/3726761/bulls-plan-to-keep-mirotic-with.html

Bulls plan on Mirotic playing with Real Madrid for two or three seasons out of his 5-year deal, further confirming everything that I have read prior to the draft.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

It'll be GREAT when he gets here and Boozer hits the road.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Merk said:


> and you have to understand that there wasnt a single player at #23 that was going to make this team any better this year. We won 62 games last year and we are not waiting 4 more years to get better. We got an asset for the future and still FA'cy to go through. A rookie isnt going to help this team, a vet player will


Nobody knows that, honestly this idea that Justin Harper, Marshon Brooks or Jordan Hamilton can't produce like the greaet Keith Bogans can is a joke. NO GM in their right mind ever goes with this mentality that a draft can't make a team better, its ludicrous. Honestly this idea that playing Luol Deng and Noah 40+ minutes a game again is going to bite the Bulls in the ass. Landry Fields a LATE second Rounder and Gary Neal an undrafted rookie all helped their respected playoff teams. Only incompetent franchises feel that they can't find help in a draft. 



> We'll see how many of these players contribute because of all the players you named, I'll be shocked if a single one avgs even 8 mins a game next season. Ill be sure to keep an eye on all these playoff team draft picks and see if any of them even remotely crack the rotation



OKC basically told Reggie Jackson to stop working out for other teams, I doubt they would basically guarantee a pick and not give him some minutes. Boston will find some minutes for Jajuan Johnson, heck the gave chances to guy's like Glen Davis and Leon Powe.

I still hold out hope that we have someone big locked in for a trade or at least an upgrade at the 2 but if the Bulls just felt that nobody in the draft can give us more than Bogans then I just have to question their Basketball IQ's.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Nobody knows that, honestly this idea that Justin Harper, Marshon Brooks or Jordan Hamilton can't produce like the greaet Keith Bogans can is a joke. NO GM in their right mind ever goes with this mentality that a draft can't make a team better, its ludicrous. Honestly this idea that playing Luol Deng and Noah 40+ minutes a game again is going to bite the Bulls in the ass. Landry Fields a LATE second Rounder and Gary Neal an undrafted rookie all helped their respected playoff teams. Only incompetent franchises feel that they can't find help in a draft.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What exactly are you disputing? The Bulls drafted Jimmy Butler, who for all theoretical intents and purposes based on his intangibles and production in college and the PIT will keep Deng from playing 40+ minutes a game. And, the bonus is that the Bulls have ONLY the cheapest guaranteed contract in the NBA draft and not the additional higher salary that the 23rd pick would've required. Remember, financially-speaking, the most important thing the Bulls need to address is re-signing Derrick Rose.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

TwinkieTowers said:


> What exactly are you disputing? The Bulls drafted Jimmy Butler, who for all theoretical intents and purposes based on his intangibles and production in college and the PIT will keep Deng from playing 40+ minutes a game. And, the bonus is that the Bulls have ONLY the cheapest guaranteed contract in the NBA draft and not the additional higher salary that the 23rd pick would've required. Remember, financially-speaking, the most important thing the Bulls need to address is re-signing Derrick Rose.


So the Bulls saved 200k wow. They could have easily taken a better prospect at 23 and pay the 1million and then traded away the 30th pick for a non guaranteed second rounder. Either way if we go a hard cap route there is no way we can resign Derrick Rose without getting rid of Deng or Noah but if we keep some sort of Bird rule the 23rd pick money is a non issue because regardless if we drafted anyone 23rd we are going to be over the cap. 

If you think about it we wasted money on Butler, he would have been available in the second round. 

As for Buttler the player, I hope he takes minutes from Deng but everything Ive heard about the guy is that hes just another hustle defense first player, one of many that we already have. Not loving the idea of continually throwing similar players on the court especially when its playoff time.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> So the NBA Champions turn a late first round pick into Rudy Fernandez and we turn 2 draft picks and cash into a player who does not even want to play in the NBA.. YAY.



Right. And Dwight Howard wants to stay in Orlando. And Lebron James wants to stay in Cleveland. And...


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

> If you think about it we wasted money on Butler, he would have been available in the second round.
> 
> As for Buttler the player, I hope he takes minutes from Deng but everything Ive heard about the guy is that hes just another hustle defense first player, one of many that we already have. Not loving the idea of continually throwing similar players on the court especially when its playoff time.


I think Butler was slated for the second round until his life story became public merely five days before the draft. After that it likely became a risk for the Bulls to have to wait until their 43rd to get him.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

I haven't seen much of Mirotic but he reminds me of Ilyasova which isn't all that great.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

TwinkieTowers said:


> I think Butler was slated for the second round until his life story became public merely five days before the draft. After that it likely became a risk for the Bulls to have to wait until their 43rd to get him.


I really hope the Bulls did not waste a pick on a story.

A few reports on Butler had him at best as a 3rd SF on an NBA teams rotation.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> I really hope the Bulls did not waste a pick on a story.
> 
> A few reports on Butler had him at best as a 3rd SF on an NBA teams rotation.



Which is perfectly appropriate given his draft position.


Those in this thread that think we should have been picking All-Star players seem to fail to understand two things: (1) this draft was bad; and (2) in any draft, from where the Bulls were picking, simply getting a guy who can make the team is all you can really hope, unless you are willing to gamble on foreign talent and be patient.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

If you think about it, in a draft this bad Jimmy Butler is about as safe a pick as you can get in the late 1st. He shares many important qualities with successful NBA role players such as,

a) NBA body (6'7, good enough athleticism)
b) Plays good defense
c) Takes care of the ball (low turnovers), plays smart basketball, doesn't make dumb mistakes
d) Works his tail off

He is without a doubt an NBA level defender, that is why we drafted him; he will actually get a chance under Thibodeau. 

The question mark is, what does (d) produce...does he become a competent shooter or finisher? I really don't know. That could be the difference between him becoming a starter/borderline starter and him being a perennial 3rd stringer/journeyman.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> Which is perfectly appropriate given his draft position.
> 
> 
> Those in this thread that think we should have been picking All-Star players seem to fail to understand two things: (1) this draft was bad; and (2) in any draft, from where the Bulls were picking, simply getting a guy who can make the team is all you can really hope, unless you are willing to gamble on foreign talent and be patient.


The Bulls had a chance to draft a couple role players at a need position who also where more talented than Butler. A 3rd rotation SF should be drafted in the mid second round, not in the first round. Regardless of what people thought of this draft, its just dumb to go a bout a draft just throwing up your hands and saying "Well people think this draft sucks so don't blame us if we got a bad player"


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> If you think about it, in a draft this bad Jimmy Butler is about as safe a pick as you can get in the late 1st. He shares many important qualities with successful NBA role players such as,
> 
> a) NBA body (6'7, good enough athleticism)
> b) Plays good defense
> ...


The big picture question is what can he do that will help the Bulls beat the Miami Heat or Dallas Mavericks... the answer is nothing really. We are a team badly in need of bench scoring and creativity on offense, we did 0 in the draft to help patch up these areas. While the draft lacked all around great players or players that will noticeably impact a team this draft still had offensive role players/specialist and we intentionally decided to play it too safe instead of taking a low risk high reward pick. 

Butler is a low risk, low reward talent, at best we got Ronnie Brewer v2. Honestly hes probably going to give you the occasional 10 point 5 rebound 2 steal game and will instantly satisfy gullible Bulls fans and quickly join Omer, Taj and Noah as an extremely overvalued player. 

Bulls fan's are an easy bunch to impress so the Bulls really had no pressure on them to hit a home run in this draft.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> The big picture question is what can he do that will help the Bulls beat the Miami Heat or Dallas Mavericks... the answer is nothing really. We are a team badly in need of bench scoring and creativity on offense, we did 0 in the draft to help patch up these areas. While the draft lacked all around great players or players that will noticeably impact a team this draft still had offensive role players/specialist and we intentionally decided to play it too safe instead of taking a low risk high reward pick.
> 
> Butler is a low risk, low reward talent, at best we got Ronnie Brewer v2. Honestly hes probably going to give you the occasional 10 point 5 rebound 2 steal game and will instantly satisfy gullible Bulls fans and quickly join Omer, Taj and Noah as an extremely overvalued player.
> 
> Bulls fan's are an easy bunch to impress so the Bulls really had no pressure on them to hit a home run in this draft.


sad but true , butler was a need filled but there were ,more pressing and more important needs, in reality taking a couple of fliers on some 2 guards who had the ability to score without being set up by rose and in the coming years when 1 or more of those guys behind Mirotic become something while he is living it up in europe .

if the goal is to win a title GarPax need to at least act like it.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> The Bulls had a chance to draft a couple role players at a need position who also where more talented than Butler. A 3rd rotation SF should be drafted in the mid second round, not in the first round. Regardless of what people thought of this draft, its just dumb to go a bout a draft just throwing up your hands and saying "Well people think this draft sucks so don't blame us if we got a bad player"



This is ridiculous. How many mid-2nd round picks even last 5 years in the NBA? Silly, silly, silly.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> sad but true , butler was a need filled but there were ,more pressing and more important needs, in reality taking a couple of fliers on some 2 guards who had the ability to score without being set up by rose and in the coming years when 1 or more of those guys behind Mirotic become something while he is living it up in europe .
> 
> if the goal is to win a title GarPax need to at least act like it.


They are certainly not going in the direction the Orlando Magic are going in (shaking up a roster for the sake of shaking it up and coming out worse because of it). I don't remember the pre-'91, post-Cartwright Bulls shaking up the roster much when they kept on losing to the Pistons.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> The big picture question is what can he do that will help the Bulls beat the Miami Heat or Dallas Mavericks... the answer is nothing really. We are a team badly in need of bench scoring and creativity on offense, we did 0 in the draft to help patch up these areas.


There was a player in the draft that would have allowed us to beat the Heat and Mavs? Wow! Who was this phenom?



> While the draft lacked all around great players or players that will noticeably impact a team this draft still had offensive role players/specialist and we intentionally decided to play it too safe instead of taking a low risk high reward pick.


You're contradicting yourself by saying no noticeable impact could be had from a player in the draft and yet we played it "too safe." Also, what is a "low risk, high reward pick" when you're picking in the 2nd round?




> Butler is a low risk, low reward talent, at best we got Ronnie Brewer v2. Honestly hes probably going to give you the occasional 10 point 5 rebound 2 steal game and will instantly satisfy gullible Bulls fans and quickly join Omer, Taj and Noah as an extremely overvalued player.


Ronnie Brewer x2 would be an excellent, excellent value at that draft position.



> Bulls fan's are an easy bunch to impress so the Bulls really had no pressure on them to hit a home run in this draft.



Oh my God. Get real. Who was truly "impressed" by this draft? Your problem is believing you could solve the Bulls problems (scoring 2 guard) via this draft. You could not. Anyone paying any reasonable degree of attention understands this. The Bulls are among the elite in the NBA now. They can no longer get very talented players via the draft, unless they find an unexpected diamond in the rough, mostly likely by stashing foreign talent for a while. They did everything anyone could expect them to do: draft a talented foreigner we'll have to wait for and draft a solid-seeming college player who may be able to crack the rotation next season. If you had expectations beyond that, you're living in NBA fantasy land. The major deficiency the Bulls have was not going to be solved by picking some college kid in the 2nd round of the NBA draft.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

The more I see of Butler, I think his offense is very underrated and his defense is overrated.

He has a sharp little mid range game and around the hoop. Not very flashy, but he is athletic. I don't see him as any sort of lock down defender. His lateral movement isn't that great. Best case for upside as a defender is in the Deng mold, IMO.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

If he's as good of a defender as Deng I'll be a happy man.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

garnett said:


> I haven't seen much of Mirotic but he reminds me of Ilyasova which isn't all that great.


He actually reminds me of a young Keith Van Horn.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieTowers said:


> They are certainly not going in the direction the Orlando Magic are going in (shaking up a roster for the sake of shaking it up and coming out worse because of it). I don't remember the pre-'91, post-Cartwright Bulls shaking up the roster much when they kept on losing to the Pistons.


you dont remember it because that team never existed.

cartwright was a bull til 94 so there was no post-cartwright team that kept losing to the pistons...unless you mean when he came back as a coach in the next decade .

the magic are shaking things up because they hit their ceiling and they knew it ...to some degree so have the bulls, boozer is a nice piece but he is no real star , noah is a deluxe role player as is deng ...the starting 2 is k. bogans which s probably the worst starting 2 in the league or at least close to it.there is no 6th man of note.

the bulls are essentially staking their title hopes on the hope that rose turns out to be the best pg of all time ...because even magic and isiah (the only other pg's who led his team to titles in the last 30 or so years) had multiple all stars and HOF's playing with them...and the bulls at this point dont have any to play with rose so if he falters even a bit its very hard to win.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Jimmy Butler CAN help us against the Heat. He is a legit defensive option against arguably the game's best player. We can't ask Luol Deng to guard Lebron James for 40 minutes a game. We need depth at that position and Butler helps with that. 

It's the little things like this that count. If 10-15 minutes of stellar Jimmy Butler defense makes Lebron miss a few extra shots, that could be the difference between winning and losing a playoff game.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> He actually reminds me of a young Keith Van Horn.


Sounds like a very good comparison, based on my memories of Van Horn and the videos/scouting reports from Mirotic.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> you dont remember it because that team never existed.
> 
> cartwright was a bull til 94 so there was no post-cartwright team that kept losing to the pistons...unless you mean when he came back as a coach in the next decade .


I probably picked the wrong name or the wrong term. I meant post-Oakley or post-Cartwright trade.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieTowers said:


> I probably picked the wrong name or the wrong term. I meant post-Oakley or post-Cartwright trade.


completely different scenario

oakley was traded after horace grant and scottie's rookie season , they were going to get alot better and everyone knew it ...in fact krause thought grant was going to be better than oakley(he turned out to be a better fit but about the same level of player) so he dealt him to fill a hole at center . 

those bulls were ascending , they had 3 1st round picks in the next year's draft (one turned out to be 6th which they wasted on stacey king the 20th which they wasted on jeff sanders and they got BJ at 14th) those bulls had alot going for them in 1988

oh yeah and that jordan fellow.


now on the current bulls outside of rose , where is the bulls improvement going to come from?

deng...plateaued 
boozer in all likelihood descending.
maybe noah gives small incremental improvements but statistically he actually dipped a bit PERwise from 17.9 to 16.5.
asik should get better significantly, better but he isn't a scorer which is what the team really needs
taj has basically plateaued
brewer , bogans , korver are basically as good as they are gonna get.
watson doesn't matter 

jimmy butler is basically slated to be a decent backup , a poor man's deng.

everyone else is a fill in

the 1988 bulls only needed time, their oldest player in 88 was bill cartwright who was only a year older than boozer is now and he like paxson wasn't integral just role players .

scottie went from a promising rook to a top 50 player all time
grant turned into an all star level 4 (as did oakley actually)

and as they rose so did the bulls .

but to answer your question at the time of the the oakley-cartwright deal the bulls had 4 players on their roster who lasted til they finally beat the pistons 3 seasons later (pippen jordan grant and paxson) so I guess they did shake it quite abit including their coach who was at the time doug collins


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> This is ridiculous. How many mid-2nd round picks even last 5 years in the NBA? Silly, silly, silly.


2000 to 2006

Gilbert Arenas
Memet Okur
Earl Watson
Bobby Simmons
Mo Williams
Anderson Varajao
Trevor Ariza
Monta Ellis PICK 40!
Andre Blache
Marcin Gortat
Daniel Gibson
Paul Millsap
Brian Cardinal
Michael Redd
Carlos Boozer
Matt Barnes
Darius Songalia
Rasual Butler
Luis Scola SECOND TO LAST PICK IN THE ENTIRE DRAFT!

Lets just look at some recent second rounders
Marc Gasol pick 48
Mario Chalmers
Omer Asik
Luc Mbah Moute
Goran Dragic
Patrick Mills, Dejuan Blair and Sam Young all got minutes on playoff teams.
Landry Fields

Please do actual research before posting something dumb.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> 2000 to 2006
> 
> Gilbert Arenas
> Memet Okur
> ...


Well, you've given yourself an 11 year window...which means these 28 guys are out of a pool of 325... which means that over 90% of 2nd round draft picks didn't rise to the level of Rasual Butler or Bobby Simmons... not sure which point is being proven.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Dornado said:


> Well, you've given yourself an 11 year window...which means these 28 guys are out of a pool of 325... which means that over 90% of 2nd round draft picks didn't rise to the level of Rasual Butler or Bobby Simmons... not sure which point is being proven.


Well he asked how many second round guys have played five years in the league. 11 year window? I only counted guys in a six year span. 

I'm not arguing the idea that most second round picks will not make a career in the NBA but this idea that nothing good can be found in the second round is just stupid. History has proven time and time again that very good players can be found in the second round. Heck Manu Ginobili was drafted #57 thats the second to last pick in a draft.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> 2000 to 2006
> 
> Gilbert Arenas
> Memet Okur
> ...



It's not dumb. Your post just conceded the vast majority of 2nd round picks wash out of the league. So maybe you should think a bit more about your logic, eh?

The point of the conversation is that if you think there is a decent statistical probability that the Bulls could find themselves a solid starting 2-guard in the 2nd round, you are wrong. The vast majority of players at that position won't make it in the league long-term. You've admitted as much. You may have been able to find a small minority of diamonds in the rough, but that only proves my point.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Dornado said:


> Well, you've given yourself an 11 year window...which means these 28 guys are out of a pool of 325... which means that over 90% of 2nd round draft picks didn't rise to the level of Rasual Butler or Bobby Simmons... not sure which point is being proven.


Yes, exactly.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well he asked how many second round guys have played five years in the league. 11 year window? I only counted guys in a six year span.
> 
> I'm not arguing the idea that most second round picks will not make a career in the NBA but this idea that nothing good can be found in the second round is just stupid. History has proven time and time again that very good players can be found in the second round. Heck Manu Ginobili was drafted #57 thats the second to last pick in a draft.



History has proven dozens of people will become millionaires via lottery tickets every year. It doesn't mean the statistical probability of any single ticket being a winner is good (or realistic to expect).


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well he asked how many second round guys have played five years in the league. 11 year window? *I only counted guys in a six year span*.


I was including the guys from 2008 on that you listed... 

actually the 2007 2nd round (which is the one you skipped over, I think.. + I'd add Deandre Jordan from 2008, but we'll see how that ends up) was pretty strong... Marc Gasol, Carl Landry, Glen Davis and Ramon Sessions. 

Still, you're far more likely to pick someone in the second round who has zero impact than someone who has a measurable impact.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> History has proven dozens of people will become millionaires via lottery tickets every year. It doesn't mean the statistical probability of any single ticket being a winner is good (or realistic to expect).


Dozens out of millions that play the lottery who probably purchased multiple tickets. The chances of one of 30 NBA teams getting a 5 year NBA player in the second round is MUCH greater than winning the lottery. 

I don't like this comparison because for the most part drafting requires superb scouting much more than just blind luck. 



> but that only proves my point.


No the point you was TRYING to make was that nobody in the second round can't play in the NBA, why else make a statement like try to find a player who lasted 5 years? I never said the Bulls where going to a savior at the 2 via the second round, I just questioned why draft a guy in the first who was a clear second round pick and that some of the guys passed over because of the Mirotic drafting will contribute in the NBA while Mirotic might not even set foot on an NBA court.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Dozens out of millions that play the lottery who probably purchased multiple tickets. The chances of one of 30 NBA teams getting a 5 year NBA player in the second round is MUCH greater than winning the lottery.
> 
> I don't like this comparison because for the most part drafting requires superb scouting much more than just blind luck.



It does take more than blind luck, including scouting, but it still takes luck. If your coveted "subperb scouting" were all that was necessary, a team with the best scouts would find the diamonds in the rough year-in and year-out. Though some teams are better than others at this (e.g. the Spurs), that is not what occurs. To pretend there isn't any randomness involved is just silly and desperate. If you think it's reasonable to count on getting long-term starters via the 2nd round of the NBA draft, you wouldn't make a very effective GM, eh? I virtually guarantee that if Gar Forman said before the draft "We don't see any need to pursue a shooting guard via free agency or trade, because we can fill that need with our 2nd round draft pick," you would have called for his head on a plate. Why? Because that is an unlikely way to effectively solve the problem.



> No the point you was TRYING to make was that nobody in the second round can't play in the NBA, why else make a statement like try to find a player who lasted 5 years? I never said the Bulls where going to a savior at the 2 via the second round, I just questioned why draft a guy in the first who was a clear second round pick and that some of the guys passed over because of the Mirotic drafting will contribute in the NBA while Mirotic might not even set foot on an NBA court.



Well, now you're simply resorting to dishonesty. I didn't _try_ to make a point. I made one, and now you're mischaracterizing the point to continue the argument, rather than just conceding that most 2nd round picks flame out. 

You've badly paraphrased what I said. What I said was:



> _How many mid-2nd round picks even last 5 years in the NBA?_



Anyone reading that with any honesty would understand that I did not ask anyone to "try to find" a player that lasted 5 years who was drafted in the 2nd round. I didn't ask that because that is a stupid question, and I presume all here are aware that 2nd rounders have had success in the NBA. However, any _particular_ 2nd rounder is more likely to wash out of the league within 5 years than to make it. That's an incontrovertible fact. However, if you'd rather knock down strawmen, that's up to you.

Also, why do you believe Mirotic might never play in the NBA? How is that at all a legitimate gripe? Drafting foreign players and waiting for their deals with their original teams to run out is common practice nowadays. There is no concern particular to Mirotic vs. any other foreign player, to my knowledge, that he won't come over. Picking him allows you to reach for a guy with potentially greater talent than you would be able to get from a U.S. player at that draft position. I thought you wanted to hit home runs, right? You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth when bemoaning drafting a guy ready to contribute right away (Butler) and also a guy who won't be ready to contribute for a few seasons, but has a higher ceiling (Mirotic). If you think there were a bunch of guys ready to be stars now that the Bulls passed on, I guess I'm all ears.


----------

