“As Will Gottlieb at CHGO pointed out, it is especially strange that AK would still talk this way, presumably to avoid blowback, given that AK has the benefit of 1) job security and 2) helming a totally irrelevant team.”
Reinsdorf employees are like stray cats. Once they figure out what it takes to survive, it becomes their instinct.
AK learned years ago that if he keeps his head down, stays away the national spotlight, and simply avoids falling into the basement of the league, his job will be safe. That’s how he’s arrived at this place where he’s just quietly riding things out with a play-in team every year.
It's even funny how he doesn't understand the nuance of a statement like "focus on winning every game". It's pretty universally agreed upon that you try to win every game. Most teams know that you couch that statement because you might be trying to win while resting fatigued or injured players. Or you try to win while playing your young guys to see what they got. AK just means all hands on deck every game because these marginal, borderline irrelevant wins are all he needs to keep his job and his talking points in place.
he's not in the right role. He should be like an assistant coach or something. Everything is motivational, and positive, and 'doesn't want to put limits or goals' on anything when that is his job to make longer-view assessments not just this February Wednesday game in Memphis
he definitely is player friendly but not in a way befitting an executive. He mentioned how the deadline acquisitions loved Chicago because 'how we commit to winning', and I think guys want to play here because they'll get no-pressure minutes and be in a 'free-flowing' offense, plus they'll pay you handsomely.
but it's only better than the half-dozen tanking teams. The other teams that commit to winning actually do it more successfully than the Bulls.
I know I sound like a broken record, but I keep hammering these points about AK because they’re so transparent.
When he says “focus on winning every game” that just basically means “we’re not tanking.”
I’d argue one of the few philosophical constants over the course of the AK era has been a refusal to take any kind of strategy that might remotely resemble tanking. I believe this is because it’s the only mandate the Reinsdorfs gave him.
Remember, the lazy tanking in the late 2010s was what started the beginning of the end for Gar Forman. I think Michael Reinsdorf told AK “just don’t do that and you’ll be fine.”
It's pretty weird to see someone who has been deeply involved in competitive sports their whole life act this indifferent to coming across as weak. It's weird if he can't see that; and if he can, it's really weird he isn't bothered by it at all.
Honestly making the playoffs is very achievable for this team, in this iteration of the NBA East, as the roster is constructed right now. I also think AK considers the play-in as the playoffs (ask the MLB teams competing in the wildcard round right now... are they in the playoffs or just the "postseason"? Does that distinction matter?).
I mean, of course AK would rather make it to the official 1st round, and would relish the pat on the back from ownership that would follow. But he's not going to actually put that out there as a goal. Why back himself into that corner?
The difference between the 6 and 12 seeds in the East this year is 100% going to come down to all those middling teams' health/injuries. If the Bulls have injury issues they're likely to be in the 10-12 range -- but that'll also be a perfect excuse for AK at the end of the year. So the only "fail" is if the Bulls stay very healthy all year and miss the play-in. I think thar scenario is unlikely and AK recognizes this as well.
I suppose what makes this iteration of the bulls so bad is that they’ve had decent injury luck the past few seasons to my recollection. And they’ve really done so very little with that luck.
Their luck hasn't been that great. LaVine missed tons of games the last few years. Whenever PWill would start to seem like a useful player he'd get hurt. Ayo missed the last few months last year. But even if that's not that bad on the whole, my point isn't that the team will be great if healthy. Many other franchises will pack it in and "soft tank" if stars get injured but the Bulls never will.
I think we’ve seen this team at full strength and it’s already bad. Indiana immediately grabbed their 26’ draft pick either right before or right after Halliburton got injured they’ll tank for a year for a gain. The bulls are just so mid, that even without being able point to injuries as a reason they’re below par, they still are
I think maybe you're misunderstanding my initial comment. I'm not saying the Bulls are "good", just that making the playoffs is very achievable. There are 15 teams in the conference, so even the last playoff seed is, by definition, a "below par" team. What did the Bulls lose from last year's 39-win team or the previous year's 39-win team (or the previous year's 40-win team) that makes them likely to crash and burn this year? (Please don't say Zach Lavine!) What did the rest of the East gain that makes them so much more formidable?
I'm not celebrating where the Bulls are at -- far from it! It is the definition of NBA Hell. And I know the team isn't constructed for playoff success. But it's super weird when I see people talking about so "bad" they are when their track record keeps showing they're "just a bit below average". That's exactly where they're gonna land this year, and "just a bit below average" has proven to be enough to get into the NBA East Playoffs most years. The 8th seed was 37-45 last year.
Don't misunderstand this as "hopium" -- I'd like nothing more than for the Bulls to tank and try to rebuild around a young core. Making the playoffs and getting destroyed in round 1 isn't my dream, but I'd give that about a 50% probability right now (though less if we have injury trouble).
As in prior years, the year will start with some rough patches and a losing record, and we'll catch up to the pack in the 2nd half scrapping our way past teams who are phoning it in. The way the modern NBA works isn't going to change.
Oh I agree with what you had said the playoffs are achievable. And the east is weaker this year due to contenders having injuries to key pieces. My comment was more. Even without major injuries to bulls starters (ayo aside) they’re as you said. A bit worse than average in a worse conference.
“Honestly making the playoffs is very achievable for this team, in this iteration of the NBA East, as the roster is constructed right now.”
It’s easy to talk yourself into this given the injuries in the East, but here’s the reality:
Even without Tatum, it’s not inconceivable to think Boston can win at least 45 games, which will likely be more than the Bulls. Indiana isn’t a guarantee to win less games than the Bulls either, but it’s at least more feasible.
But there’s still Cleveland, New York, Milwaukee, Detroit, Orlando with Bane, and Atlanta with their additions. There is not a single person outside of Chicago who will pick the Bulls to have a better record than any of those teams. Add Boston to that group and there’s seven teams right there.
So that tells us unless the 15-5 March was actually for real or unless Matas makes an instant leap, it’s highly unlikely that the Bulls finish higher than the 8 seed (and get killed in the first round).
AK would consider that a step forward though, so *shrugs*
Nobody on this site or nationally picked the Bulls to win 39 games the last 2 years. I'm not saying 15-5 is the new norm, but the same scenario could easily play out where the Bulls hover several games under .500 over the first few months and then overachieve in the last 2 months against teams who aren't trying to win.
It's easy to talk myself into this because I've seen the same pattern play out the last two years! And unless you think missing LaVine and DeRozan is going to be the death knell for the play-in Bulls, then it's reasonable to think the pattern will play out again -- where the Bulls end up having a better record than teams who started the year with better rosters.
Also, I do think Matas will be better this year and that Giddey will be better than he was as the start of last year (even if not as good as he played towards the end). Those factors will keep the team from sinking too low before the All Star break.
Indiana is still going to win 40-44 games even without Hali. I think Nembhard can level up more and they have a well balanced team. Hali is the straw that stirs the drink but they can still win in the reg season without him
I think you're underrating the East in general... as a way to give the Bulls cover? The Top is worse has Pacers and Celtics will take a step back, but I don't think either of those teams are down to the Bulls' level. The Magic, Hawks, and Pistons are clearly above the Bulls. I don't think Giannis is going to let the Bucks tank.
And yes, those in the Wild card consider themselves in the playoffs. Those in a Game 163 playoff do not. That's exactly what this is. And yes, the distinction does matter. The only difference is that a Game 83 and/or Game 84 is guaranteed.
If Boston, after losing 4 of their top 6 players and replacing them with Anfernee Simons, is still better than the Bulls, that would be sad.
Pacers will be interesting. I thought their run last year was magic and mirrors. They have Siakam and a bunch of role players now. A lot of people are expecting Nembhard and Mathurin to both make a big leap. I don't see it, but I don't do this for a living either.
Who knows what's going to happen with Giannis? Who knows if Embiid will get healthy? Bulls just need to keep improving, try to get to 43 or 44 wins, and let's see where that puts them.
“As Will Gottlieb at CHGO pointed out, it is especially strange that AK would still talk this way, presumably to avoid blowback, given that AK has the benefit of 1) job security and 2) helming a totally irrelevant team.”
Reinsdorf employees are like stray cats. Once they figure out what it takes to survive, it becomes their instinct.
AK learned years ago that if he keeps his head down, stays away the national spotlight, and simply avoids falling into the basement of the league, his job will be safe. That’s how he’s arrived at this place where he’s just quietly riding things out with a play-in team every year.
sure, it's such a small likelihood that anyone would remember/care he said a goal was the playoffs, but I suppose it's more than zero
It's even funny how he doesn't understand the nuance of a statement like "focus on winning every game". It's pretty universally agreed upon that you try to win every game. Most teams know that you couch that statement because you might be trying to win while resting fatigued or injured players. Or you try to win while playing your young guys to see what they got. AK just means all hands on deck every game because these marginal, borderline irrelevant wins are all he needs to keep his job and his talking points in place.
he's not in the right role. He should be like an assistant coach or something. Everything is motivational, and positive, and 'doesn't want to put limits or goals' on anything when that is his job to make longer-view assessments not just this February Wednesday game in Memphis
he definitely is player friendly but not in a way befitting an executive. He mentioned how the deadline acquisitions loved Chicago because 'how we commit to winning', and I think guys want to play here because they'll get no-pressure minutes and be in a 'free-flowing' offense, plus they'll pay you handsomely.
but it's only better than the half-dozen tanking teams. The other teams that commit to winning actually do it more successfully than the Bulls.
I know I sound like a broken record, but I keep hammering these points about AK because they’re so transparent.
When he says “focus on winning every game” that just basically means “we’re not tanking.”
I’d argue one of the few philosophical constants over the course of the AK era has been a refusal to take any kind of strategy that might remotely resemble tanking. I believe this is because it’s the only mandate the Reinsdorfs gave him.
Remember, the lazy tanking in the late 2010s was what started the beginning of the end for Gar Forman. I think Michael Reinsdorf told AK “just don’t do that and you’ll be fine.”
It's pretty weird to see someone who has been deeply involved in competitive sports their whole life act this indifferent to coming across as weak. It's weird if he can't see that; and if he can, it's really weird he isn't bothered by it at all.
Honestly making the playoffs is very achievable for this team, in this iteration of the NBA East, as the roster is constructed right now. I also think AK considers the play-in as the playoffs (ask the MLB teams competing in the wildcard round right now... are they in the playoffs or just the "postseason"? Does that distinction matter?).
I mean, of course AK would rather make it to the official 1st round, and would relish the pat on the back from ownership that would follow. But he's not going to actually put that out there as a goal. Why back himself into that corner?
The difference between the 6 and 12 seeds in the East this year is 100% going to come down to all those middling teams' health/injuries. If the Bulls have injury issues they're likely to be in the 10-12 range -- but that'll also be a perfect excuse for AK at the end of the year. So the only "fail" is if the Bulls stay very healthy all year and miss the play-in. I think thar scenario is unlikely and AK recognizes this as well.
I suppose what makes this iteration of the bulls so bad is that they’ve had decent injury luck the past few seasons to my recollection. And they’ve really done so very little with that luck.
They've had terrible injury luck. Vuc hasn't missed any notable time with an injury.
(I don't actually hope for Vuc to be injured. Or any player who plays clean... Grayson Allen, Draymond, & Johni Broome being obvious exceptions)
Their luck hasn't been that great. LaVine missed tons of games the last few years. Whenever PWill would start to seem like a useful player he'd get hurt. Ayo missed the last few months last year. But even if that's not that bad on the whole, my point isn't that the team will be great if healthy. Many other franchises will pack it in and "soft tank" if stars get injured but the Bulls never will.
I think we’ve seen this team at full strength and it’s already bad. Indiana immediately grabbed their 26’ draft pick either right before or right after Halliburton got injured they’ll tank for a year for a gain. The bulls are just so mid, that even without being able point to injuries as a reason they’re below par, they still are
I think maybe you're misunderstanding my initial comment. I'm not saying the Bulls are "good", just that making the playoffs is very achievable. There are 15 teams in the conference, so even the last playoff seed is, by definition, a "below par" team. What did the Bulls lose from last year's 39-win team or the previous year's 39-win team (or the previous year's 40-win team) that makes them likely to crash and burn this year? (Please don't say Zach Lavine!) What did the rest of the East gain that makes them so much more formidable?
I'm not celebrating where the Bulls are at -- far from it! It is the definition of NBA Hell. And I know the team isn't constructed for playoff success. But it's super weird when I see people talking about so "bad" they are when their track record keeps showing they're "just a bit below average". That's exactly where they're gonna land this year, and "just a bit below average" has proven to be enough to get into the NBA East Playoffs most years. The 8th seed was 37-45 last year.
Don't misunderstand this as "hopium" -- I'd like nothing more than for the Bulls to tank and try to rebuild around a young core. Making the playoffs and getting destroyed in round 1 isn't my dream, but I'd give that about a 50% probability right now (though less if we have injury trouble).
As in prior years, the year will start with some rough patches and a losing record, and we'll catch up to the pack in the 2nd half scrapping our way past teams who are phoning it in. The way the modern NBA works isn't going to change.
Oh I agree with what you had said the playoffs are achievable. And the east is weaker this year due to contenders having injuries to key pieces. My comment was more. Even without major injuries to bulls starters (ayo aside) they’re as you said. A bit worse than average in a worse conference.
>>Whenever PWill would start to seem like a useful player he'd get hurt.
He's gotten hurt way more often than that!
“Honestly making the playoffs is very achievable for this team, in this iteration of the NBA East, as the roster is constructed right now.”
It’s easy to talk yourself into this given the injuries in the East, but here’s the reality:
Even without Tatum, it’s not inconceivable to think Boston can win at least 45 games, which will likely be more than the Bulls. Indiana isn’t a guarantee to win less games than the Bulls either, but it’s at least more feasible.
But there’s still Cleveland, New York, Milwaukee, Detroit, Orlando with Bane, and Atlanta with their additions. There is not a single person outside of Chicago who will pick the Bulls to have a better record than any of those teams. Add Boston to that group and there’s seven teams right there.
So that tells us unless the 15-5 March was actually for real or unless Matas makes an instant leap, it’s highly unlikely that the Bulls finish higher than the 8 seed (and get killed in the first round).
AK would consider that a step forward though, so *shrugs*
I'm pretty sure they'll be a top 6 team in the East ... across games played in March!
Nobody on this site or nationally picked the Bulls to win 39 games the last 2 years. I'm not saying 15-5 is the new norm, but the same scenario could easily play out where the Bulls hover several games under .500 over the first few months and then overachieve in the last 2 months against teams who aren't trying to win.
It's easy to talk myself into this because I've seen the same pattern play out the last two years! And unless you think missing LaVine and DeRozan is going to be the death knell for the play-in Bulls, then it's reasonable to think the pattern will play out again -- where the Bulls end up having a better record than teams who started the year with better rosters.
Also, I do think Matas will be better this year and that Giddey will be better than he was as the start of last year (even if not as good as he played towards the end). Those factors will keep the team from sinking too low before the All Star break.
Indiana is still going to win 40-44 games even without Hali. I think Nembhard can level up more and they have a well balanced team. Hali is the straw that stirs the drink but they can still win in the reg season without him
Boston could still be a .500 as well.
I think you're underrating the East in general... as a way to give the Bulls cover? The Top is worse has Pacers and Celtics will take a step back, but I don't think either of those teams are down to the Bulls' level. The Magic, Hawks, and Pistons are clearly above the Bulls. I don't think Giannis is going to let the Bucks tank.
And yes, those in the Wild card consider themselves in the playoffs. Those in a Game 163 playoff do not. That's exactly what this is. And yes, the distinction does matter. The only difference is that a Game 83 and/or Game 84 is guaranteed.
If Boston, after losing 4 of their top 6 players and replacing them with Anfernee Simons, is still better than the Bulls, that would be sad.
Pacers will be interesting. I thought their run last year was magic and mirrors. They have Siakam and a bunch of role players now. A lot of people are expecting Nembhard and Mathurin to both make a big leap. I don't see it, but I don't do this for a living either.
Who knows what's going to happen with Giannis? Who knows if Embiid will get healthy? Bulls just need to keep improving, try to get to 43 or 44 wins, and let's see where that puts them.
The East: Every team is flawed and no team is tanking. 41 and 41 for everyone.
Happy Bulls Preseason Opener Day!
Apparently, it’s on Peacock and not CHSN so I might watch a few minutes of it.