Discussion about this post

User's avatar
TheMoon's avatar

Regarding Zach, I think it's really important to be honest about his play last year. He was on the shortlist for worst player in the league. Not hyperbole. He truly was. I tracked how the Bulls did last year with him and without him. The Bulls were something like a +0.8 point differential team in games without him. When he played, they were something like -9.0 per game. Imagine being so bad that when you play for the Miami Heat you single-handedly make them as bad as the Pistons. Certainly no one on the Bulls was this bad last year. Who in the league was? Most players that bad won't play 900 minutes.

If one is honest about last year, then rehabbing Zach's value is not only not foolish, it is essential. If I were another GM right now, the only way I am taking Zach off the Bulls is if I own the Bulls draft till like 2029. Basically an inverse superstar trade. Why? Because while I think there is a good chance Zach plays way better this year, I can't be sure he won't play like last year. The odds are not negligible. Paying over 40M per year for the worst player in the league? That's an incredible risk, and I'd have to be fairly compensated for that.

Expand full comment
Piccolomair's avatar

I'm not sure why the bulls orgs always prefer the "aw shucks" method of initiating a plan. Like every thing that happens to them is always a suprised-pikachu face moment.

"Whaaaaaa our pick isnt our pick anymore because it was protected?"

"OKC didn't want to include a pick, ah well, such is life?"

"You mean us using our only exception to sign Kirk hinrich instead of trading for him or waiting to sign him after we picked up some other useful players means we are hard capped...we had no idea!” (I'm never letting this go)

It's not even about arturas, I'm just done with everyone in that front office.

Expand full comment
69 more comments...

No posts