87 Comments
User's avatar
Piccolomair's avatar

Because you mentioned the regime in your foot note - John paxson was at the round (rectangular?) table on draft night when they showed what was happening at "bulls HQ". And at the risk of being hated, I always felt pax had a good eye for talent....he's been far more of a failure, in my opinion, as a VP than a gm. I mean his failure as a gm comes more from being too "in love" with the players he drafted. He tried to quit, got promoted instead...then became walter white

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

yes, the Paxson influence is by far the most unsettling part of the Bryson Graham era. Paxson was reportedly part of the coaching interviews.

I felt a similar twinge when hearing Graham talk about his staff working the phones on draft night. Not much of a staff yet! But I rationalize that Graham is, himself, a draft guy so he doesn't need the support for that.

Jaina's avatar

Yeah I mean as much hate as garpax gets I mostly blame gar. Pax has his faults but the bad vibes and weird culture shift really started when gar got promoted.

MikeDC's avatar

Paxson went down and assaulted the team's coach after a game. That's not really the culture I'm looking for.

Jaina's avatar

My dad took depositions from those guys and said Pax was the only one remotely trustworthy. FWIW. It was not specifically about those actions but they were talked about.

Jaina's avatar

Also, I should say of course that doesn't excuse violence and I don't condone it. But I got the sense that he knew it was a mistake and actually was sorry and isn't a complete piece of shit human.

TheArtistJB's avatar

Some draft thoughts:

- I’m thrilled about Caleb. I think he’s going to be awesome. A few months ago, it seemed highly unlikely that the team would be in a position to draft a franchise difference-maker, but luck was finally on their side.

- My initial reaction to the Swain pick was that I liked it, but didn’t love it. I’ve read/heard more about him since and feel even better about it now. I find it’s fascinating that J. Kyle Mann thinks he can be a more athletic and defensively gifted version of Giddey. It’s clear that Graham’s previous comments about what he looks for in players were not just lip service. The days of AK building around one-way/limited players are over.

- I thought ESPN’s coverage of the draft was disappointing. This was the best draft class in years and the broadcast did not meet the moment. It was oddly low energy and the panel of Neghandi, Jefferson, Smith, and Williams had zero chemistry together.

TheMoon's avatar

Agreed on point 3. It was alternately boring and maudlin.

H_Vaughn's avatar

I was listening to Bleacher Report's YouTube stream from around pick 12. Unintentional comedy gold as they hired DeMarcus Cousins as an analyst. He liked Philon and basically suggested every team draft him as Labaron slid and slid and slid. Admitted he didn't know much about any of the other players and only perked up when he knew a team's GM, prompting him to say something along the lines of "That's a good pick. He always gets his guy." Nobody knows anything, but Boogie knows less than that.

JorgeFabregas's avatar

Hollinger had Swain #14 on his board and gave the pick an A-.

The80sGuy's avatar

CBS gave it a C+, said it was a dud.

JorgeFabregas's avatar

I'm not familiar with Adam Finkelstein's work. Is he a good evaluator?

TC's avatar

Im warming up to Swain. We have had so many non shooting wings on this team for a while that i was kinda pissed they didnt take Carr. But he shot 34% in college which isnt godawful and his FT% is good. Also he can get in the lane and finish very well so he can at least have that as a go to while he hopefully gets his shot together. Is he Giddey's replacement....kinda feels like that

Jaina's avatar

I don't really follow college so this is a genuine comment/question. I know people wanted Carr but I saw he fell all the way to 24 - so seems like maybe they made the right choice in passing on him? Felt a bit like a red flag that he dropped.

TheMoon's avatar

Do you think the track record of conventional draft wisdom is strong enough to warrant this reasoning?

Jaina's avatar

I mean it's almost always pretty much a crapshoot, isn't it? Guess all I meant is that obviously we weren't the only team not sold on this guy, but like I said I really don't watch college ball. I just don't get that upset about passing on a guy who dropped 10 spots.

Waveland14's avatar

I felt the same way about Carr. Devestated initially that we didn't hear his name, but felt better after seeing a bunch of other teams pass. Doesn't mean we made the right choice but at least provides the "if we're idiots then they are too" rationalization.

The80sGuy's avatar

He`s a forward, not a guard

SweetBeezus's avatar

His handle is really nice - I bet (hope!) he gets most of his run at the 2, since I expect Matas to be the starting 3. Will be interesting to see how it shakes out.

Ron's avatar

2.7 TO/G is a "really nice" handle?

Waveland14's avatar

If you can guard other guards, you can be a guard.

Jay Went's avatar

He's a wing, and he has the athleticism to guard quicker guards. Doesn't really matter what position he is

The80sGuy's avatar

I just meant, he wasn't a point guard, so not sure if he'd replace Giddy as suggested...

"TC : Is he Giddey's replacement....kinda feels like that"

I assumed Forward or Shooting Guard.

Ron's avatar

Shot 34% his last year in college when he was his own primary creator (which he won't be in the NBA). Under 30% career - not a catch-and-shoot guy with his release mechanics.

Punchandjudy's avatar

there are quite a few videos of people(analysts) I am seeing liking both pics as how they fit together.

H_Vaughn's avatar

One remark I liked in Graham's press conference was a response to Julie Poe asking about development infrastructure. He deferred to Splitter, saying it was his decision. I take this to mean he's open to hiring specialized coaches. Reassuring after the Patton fiasco, with AK firing him for insufficient bootlicking.

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

Now we have to wonder after Graham's bootlicking (gee maybe he did so great in the interview by telling Michael and Paxson what they wanted to hear?) will Splitter be the same way. 'actually I don't need a lot of development coaches, and you don't have to offer Billy Jr. a severance package I'll keep him on'

The80sGuy's avatar

I`ve been hearing we drafted Dailyn Swain on "Size" & 'Potential". Couple things come to mind....

Alot of mock draft boards had us selecting Cameron Carr at #15. Similar size, more importantly BETTER SHOOTER! No idea why he dropped to the lakers??? but thats another story altogether...

The Bulls have drafted players in the past on "Size" & 'Potential". Patrick Williams comes to mind....

Hope Caleb turns out to be "The Guy". I liked Peterson and Mikel Brown Jr. myself, but...we got what we got. Time will tell, not sold on Swain.

TheMoon's avatar

Not sure they're similar sized. Swain outweighs him by 30 lbs at the same age. And given Swain is almost 6'8", he could probably put on another 10-15 lbs without loss of athleticism. Carr seems like he'll always be skinny kind of like Derrick Jones.

Waveland14's avatar

I was high on Carr, but thick bested skinny in these recent playoffs, that's for sure. Skinny gets knocked over and pushed aside in the May/June NBA.

TheMoon's avatar

Yeah, I kind of broadly agree that strength is really important. But you know, Landry Fields, Mikal Bridges, and Alvarado were pretty important pieces to a title team!

Diabolo's avatar

By Landry Fields, did you mean Shamet?

TheMoon's avatar

Yeah, been a minute since Landry Fields has helped the Knicks lol.

Waveland14's avatar

Naming those guys kind of proves my point (though it's also your point to begin with). They were important over the course of the season but they only flashed in moments during the playoffs. Big, strong OG Anunoby was the one who shined (as well as solid-bodied Brunson and Towns) in the core moments in the postseason. Bridges was fine (and he's got a decently sturdy frame at this point of the year) and Shamet/Alvarado made some clutch plays when called into duty, but they weren't the ones leading the charge.

Across the conference finals and finals, looking at guys like Holmgren, Mobley, Fox, Kornet, and even Wemby towards the end, the skinny dudes didn't benefit from the style of play the refs were allowing.

TheMoon's avatar

Shamet rather notably did not flash at all during the season, and was strictly a postseason revelation. Ditto for Alvarado, who didn't really surface on the Knicks till deeper in the playoffs, and became more useful the further they went. Bridges is skinny. That's just objectively true. And lots of burly guys really struggled this playoffs as well (Randall, Dort, Duran, Jokic, just off the top of my head). I think people trying to figure out a formula for success these days are going to be frustrated. It isn't like it was 10 years ago. Lots of ways to be really successful now at the highest levels.

Punchandjudy's avatar

I dunno Ive watched two different analysts say he is plug and play and love this draft for the bulls

TC's avatar

Swain actually started and put up good numbers so he has skill and a good frame ....its the shooting that is the potential.

Belize's avatar

Excited to be unexcited for next year. Here is hoping we drafted someone we are all going to love watching. At the end of the day I just want to see us Wee-un

Brent_LZ's avatar

So has Bulls optimism now changed from See Red to SLAP Happy?

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

I wonder if Graham regrets divulging that acronym now that it's everywhere. And the S doesn't stand for shooting folks

Piccolomair's avatar

Next year it will be - SLAPS?

SweetBeezus's avatar

Most of the draftniks that I follow have been high on Swain, and I was pulling for him or Carr at 15. Admittedly, I liked Carr's shooting, hops, and crazy wingspan - but I think Swain's frame and handle are excellent, and as I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I hope he's able to stick at SG as a secondary creator. Obviously the shooting has to come around for it to all come together.

I'm hoping Bulls package 38 and 54 to move up a few spots - maybe to grab the Cavs pick at 34 since that's their only pick in this draft. Would be nice to snag Veesaar, who I think looks like he could be a solid backup stretch 5.

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

Cavs are a good target, they're already out of the 2nd apron and while second rounders get paid less than the vet minimum a high second rounder may command more (or at least an active roster spot and not 2-way). Kind of like how the Bulls - not in the 2nd apron or anywhere close - traded down last year

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

Hours later and this comment sure sounds naive

Jaina's avatar

Also I completely forgot that the second round is another night now. I went to see what happened and realized it had not occurred yet lol.

Waveland14's avatar

I feel like the semi-inevitability of Caleb Wilson robbed me of some excitement over the past couple of months. But man, at some point (summer league, preseason?) that excitement is gonna come raging back. Talent the Bulls have rarely seen in a joyful but ultra-competitive, charismatic package. This is gonna be awesome to watch, even if the team struggles to win games.

As for Swain, I wanted Carr but more because of the tantalizing athletic skill set. We'll see if Swain's shooting comes around, and if so he could be a star. Seems like he may profile as maybe a more defensive-minded version of DDR? Strong drives and scoring acumen, decent passer, good FT% but struggles to keep that good shooting form beyond 20 feet. (Also like DDR, seems like a solid human being)

Punchandjudy's avatar

#56 gone to Lakers for straight Cash Homey

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

welp, gotta turn on the "fire Bryson Graham" sign

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

RIP "Bryson Graham could be a different Bulls hire" 5/4/26-6/24/26, for the second straight season they have dealt a second round pick to the Lakers for cash

Was always leaning that way with the ever-present 'I thank Jerry and Michael for their support' talk and consigliere John Paxson involvement, but now official 🪦

This could be a notch in the belt for those who figure the Bulls are hopeless under this ownership, but I have to think a hire, even an underqualified cheap newbie, could convince the Reinsdorfs that it's better to receive something of transactional value for a late 2nd round pick.

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

I'm even more annoyed at the sure-to-come scolding from fans caping for ownership (they exist!) that this isn't the team being cheap. It's the definition of cheap! That they may spend elsewhere - still TBD on that by the way - is the point, you don't need to cheap out on the margins when you're The Chicago Bulls.

Punchandjudy's avatar

On one hand, I take a wait and see approach...on the other I remember our conversation the last time we had it early on with AKME...you turned out correct in your assesment, I did not

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

I just have my antennae up is all

AKME had a lot of other, and significant, early warning signs beyond this. It's just disappointing that Graham, at least in this aspect, is no different than them or GarPax.

Punchandjudy's avatar

is there any world where you are ok with them selling a pick? I dont know who Id want there, but if they were to keep the money and allocate it to a good fit that seems ok

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

no, because there's no salary cap aspect to this to where you're gaining an advantage in what you can 'allocate'. It's not even a case where they can send out more cash this year in a trade later because they took in more cash here

it's just the ownership 'budget', which is ownership discretion

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

it's literally an indefensible move, which makes it all the more strange when any fan tries to defend it (not saying you are. It's mostly a 'Bulls Twitter' thing where, I dunno, they're trying to be wisely contrarian, above what other fans say?

TheArtistJB's avatar

In all seriousness, is there any GM/President who doesn’t thank their owners when they’re first getting started and making their initial big moves? That seems pretty innocent.

I don’t like seeing a team sell their picks either, but since it’s the 56th pick, I’ll put this on a scale of like 3 in the 1-10 annoying scale for me. AK taking forever to decide what to do with Jim Boylen was a 6 or 7.

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

it's telling when they're not 'big' moves. Hiring Tiago Splitter at a reportedly league-average salary does not deserve a thank you. There hasn't been some big spending spree of front office staff yet.

it's just telling that John Paxson's famous "build equity with ownership" comment applies to Graham as well. That it's such a relatively minor amount of money makes it even more annoying

TheArtistJB's avatar

Eh. It was his first head coach hire. It’s big for him even if it’s not necessarily league altering. To each their own, but saying thanks even when it’s not necessary just isn’t a big deal to me.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending Reinsdorfs’ cheapness, which is what lead to this pick being sold. I just accepted a while ago that’s always going to be part of this team and they’re going to have to win while Jerry and Michael pull their typical crap.

Punchandjudy's avatar

the coach thing is different to me. Every body says they went cheap, but who were th ebig names that we'd want here. I havent seen people offer a who. To me it was a weak list

your friendly BullsBlogger's avatar

I'm not saying they went cheap with the coaching hire and it means a bad hire

I'm saying it's odd to talk about "support" in the wake of an average expenditure on coaching (and to that point, no significant raise in front office staffing yet either)

Waveland14's avatar

Welcome to our world, there's plenty of room on the Anti-Reinsdorf bus. I've been preaching this for years about the 'Dorfs. I would have put money on the Bulls selling a pick this draft or next (wasn't sure it would come so soon). It's just the way they operate. The team itself is, and always has been since the mid-1980s, the ultimate Cash Consideration.

Now, I don't think the Bulls are "hopeless" (6 championships and a few years of near-misses proved that they can win as long as they have a transcendent superstar and a good coach). They're just always operating at a disadvantage against teams with ownership who value winning at all costs (or even just most costs).

MikeDC's avatar

lol, wtf

Wake's avatar

"I'm back" -Cash Considerations

John dowling's avatar

Like the Sox this year and hopefully the Hawks next year, I think if this team just plays hard and is fun to watch, even if they lose a lot, Bulls fans will be happy.

Punchandjudy's avatar

IM a cards fan, and call this years team the Baby bulls... young like Sox and playing better than expected...but at moments so frustrating for those old enough to remember the Baby bulls

Punchandjudy's avatar

Better nail pick 38, if thats a thing...or blood will be in water

Punchandjudy's avatar

Why does Windhorst annoy me so much