WrigleyField 22

Yea, I think if they're swapping picks and taking back Parsons, also giving up Portis is too much... in fact almost think the Bulls need a tad more in that scenario. The Bulls have two good bargaining chips. 1. ATL seems open to a trade down so the Bulls can take the best offer if they are reaching out to both (and all things equal you'd want to make the trade with Atl so you dont get jumped) 2. The Bulls are better positioned than most to take on salary, which is what Mem wants. That said, anything not involving 7 is totally unrealistic.

Who do you want. I by no means follow the draft as closely these days, but had kind of resigned myself to one of Bamba, MPJ, or Young being there at 7 and each offering a similar boom/bust profile (granted all in uniquely different ways). It seems possible a trade up to 4 is for one of these guys. Should I feel strongly enough for 1 over the other 2?

What's wrong with boom or bust?

I don't even think you can complain about being cheap here, just plain dumb. Like there is zero chance the 10,000 was the determining factor, but I think a genuine arrogance that it wasn't worth it to attend.

Win shares can be based so much on usage and rates. Jordan's peak was played within an offense that encouraged him to share the ball and Pippen did a majority of the ball control. LeBron is in an offense that is stand and watch LeBron play. I think it's why so many of his teammates that were stars before him(Bosh and Love) struggle to find roles with him. I personally believe LeBron would have been even better than he is if he would have been forced to play for a coach like a Phil Jackson that could have convinced him that he needed other teammates capable of making big plays to win championships. Either way, it's splitting hairs. I have no problem with LeBron being someone's choice as the best. But, I don't think it is insane to still suggest Jordan could be as well. The main pet peeve I have now is the people that argue out of one side of their mouth how watered down the league was when Jordan played, but then prop Pippen up like he was somehow immune to that. Sure seems convenient. What? LeBron has a usage of 31.5% for his career. Jordan 33.3% I'm not taking sides of this but I've literally never heard anyone say Jordan's edge is that he shared the ball and LeBron doesn't. LeBron is a facilitator and an incredibly skilled passer and one of the most common criticisms people levy against him is that he's too willing to defer at times he needs to take over. What in the hell? EDIT - LeBron career AST% - 35.7% (and in the 40's the last couple years) MJ - 24.9% (and only eclipsed 30% two times, one of which was one of those dumb Wizards seasons) Also Phil Jackson is overrated as hell and is a complete dinosaur in today's NBA...someone like him would do nothing for LBJ. EDIT 2 - and reminder that i horsefeathering hate lebron james I'm not sure I follow his argument as it relates to measuring any substantive argument between the two, but I think the relationships between the players and the offenses and usage/ast% that you quoted make sense. Usage really just tracks % of completed plays . A player in a more iso based offense may have a higher ast% just because they have more opportunities. In a movement based offense, a player will spend less time with the ball. And you can't look at usage to determine who spends more time with the ball in his hand (since it only tracks finished plays). Also presumably, if you could track hockey assists, that ast% gap between the iso and movement based offensives could close. So if you don't take it as an argument that Jordan was a better passer, but rather Jordan played in an offense where everyone played a bigger role in passing, it's at least a logical (no idea if correct) argument. And the usg% stat is useless to defend for or against that claim, and the ast% numbers may be backing it up. Unfortunately we don't have really advanced stats from Jordan's era to track how much time a player actually spends with the ball in his hands, which we have today.

Guys, the GOAT debate will never be settled. That said, can we talk about who has the better crying meme?

Meh. It's the All Star team, not the All-VORP team. Stars drive in runs and hit dongs.

Doesnt the NBA require their players to stand during the anthem?

The rule states that players are required not only to stand, but also to "show respect" during the anthem. The language is purposefully vague. The whole thing is such a shameful, needless capitulation to Trumpists. Would they really abandon the NFL? Where would they go? CFL? ?NFL doesnt just compete against football leagues for viewers eyes.

Take on Parsons deal. He's got 2/50 left on it. That gets you from 7 to 4, plus the 32nd pick, and maybe a protected future 1st as well. Are they severely up against the luxury tax or something?

There's no value in that 22nd pick, it might get them to 6 at best. They'd have to include an unconditional #1 next year to get into top 4 range. Yeah, the 22nd pick doesn't have that much value. I don't think the pick for next year's draft would have to be unconditional to move up. You could probably put some limited protection on it, but all teams know the Bulls will probably be better next year so that pick would most likely fall somewhere in the 10-15 range. The package would have to be this year's pick + next year's pick (limited protection) + probably B. Portis + maybe a 2nd round pick down the road. It would hurt to move up. Interestingly, Bobby Portis was pick 22 which is about as good of a turnout you could realistically hope for with that level pick. I'm not sure I like any attempt to move up. I'd rather take two swings at building assets.

That said, theres more than one way to go about this. Miami (first chanouonship) and Boston are two examples of teams turning a bunch of very good but not great assets into trade fodder and a NBA championship (they both also had a mid-lotto cornerstone, let's just call Lauri that and assume he continues to develop for the sake of this arguement). Bulls had a chance to do that too if not for a no trade clause from Kobe, some overvaluing of assets (Gasol), and undervaluing of other assets because of the luxury tax. Obviously neither Miami or Boston built a dynasty with that approach and if you wanna be in there year-in and year-out you need a Lebron, Durant, Curry, but if that's the goal... well yea, not much you can do. That being the case, if the Bulls want a volume approach they have to stop selling picks and start buying picks. So I'm not overall that hopeful.

I like Porter, but we need to be careful about drafting players with back issues. I'm sure the Bulls will do a full physical and MRI on him. I want to avoid drafting a player who is chronically injured. Porter has a high ceiling, but he also has a low floor (could bust). We all remember how much potential Jabari Parker had, and injuries have taken their toll on him. He's not the same player anymore and that's why Milwaukee will let him walk. I am worried about Porter's health and slightly above-average athleticism. There's the problem with where the Bulls are at and where they are drafting. They have no superstar, no go-to guy, they go safe and they might get a 5th guy in their rotation or more likely 6th-7th man. That does nothing. They need a superstar, they've failed miserably at getting that in FA, they need to do it in the draft. They're probably better off having the pick bust and stay around 25 wins rather than drafting a guy who might help them get to 30 wins. I want them to draft guys with the highest ceilings, if that comes with the biggest risk, it's what they have to do. Drafting for high potential is one thing, but if chronic injury concerns are a component of the risk, it's a whole additional thing.

Lol bolls.

JFC. I've been trying to wear away at my wife (a Sox fan) to name or first born Javi and she wont give in. WHHYY

That's potentially fair, but if you're doing the all inclusive Mexico trip like I'm imaging David did, that's definitely like 60% the point, otherwise you could do much cooler things.

Why not just draft a true guard then? Because it's literally the exact same job minus snapping the ball? Well that's not exactly true.

Rough cut at depth chart post-draft. All UDFAs asterisked. This is at 88, so they have 2 more open spots without any other cuts. DL, OT, RB, or S could use additional depth. OLB could use more quality depth, but there is no shortage of bodies. Blue I see as locks or near-locks, which number 37. So the bubble guys are competing for 16 spots (plus PS spots).

Upgrade to Kevin White at the WR6 spot.

So decent athlete/size, but sounds like he plays a little stiff?

It just means they'll be bottom 5 in turnovers for the 12th straight* year, but I dont think they'll give up a lot of yards or points. *citation needed

Not really. 139th best player according to my favorite ranking site. Picked 115. My Steelers fan buddy thinks he was their target at the end of this round. Not sure why they drafted a 2nd ILB though. Definitely not a "need" pick If you can't find the edge guy you like nothing wrong with loading up inside if you like the guy better. Play to your strengths. But maybe they won't play him inside. I think Vic is going to be forced to try and get pass rush from the inside...

Maybe they think this is Trevathan's last year as a Bear? Yeah, very real possibility. Would be going into the last year of his deal in 2019, no more guaranteed money. If he can't play 16 games this coming year, they may look to move on, especially with a potential stud LB already on the roster. Kwiatkoski is also a FA after 2019. He has to be pretty upset right now though. Yea I'd say 50/50 odds on Danny T in 2019.

Not really. 139th best player according to my favorite ranking site. Picked 115. My Steelers fan buddy thinks he was their target at the end of this round. Not sure why they drafted a 2nd ILB though. Definitely not a "need" pick Obviously Edge is the biggest need. Outside of that, everything else is pretty close at this point, IMO.