Remind me again why did we ditch gafford?

[poolshark52]

I know many moves were financially motivated but he was cheap. Why did we get rid of him?

[prolific passer]

Something something continuity and competitiveness.

[kodo]

Basically, to get Javonte Green.

There were some other players involved (Theis, Troy), but we never resigned them so I assume the guy the FO wanted was Javonte.
Kind of ironic because the guys we gave up both Gafford & Kornet are playing solid minutes for two excellent playoff teams now.

[terry]

Hes a role player. Who cares. Drummond is better. You can find role players.

[greenwing]

I was upset when we traded Gafford since he showed flashes of being a capable starter and at worst a good third big. But at the time we traded for Vucevic - who was an all star - and we still had Thaddeus Young, Patrick Williams, Lauri Markkanen and had traded for Daniel Theis. There was simply no meaningful minutes for Gafford on the roster back then.

[poolshark52]

Hes a role player. Who cares. Drummond is better. You can find role players.

If it's so easy to find said roleplayer, then why do we not have one rim protector on the team?

[Dan Z]

I was upset when we traded Gafford since he showed flashes of being a capable starter and at worst a good third big. But at the time we traded for Vucevic - who was an all star - and we still had Thaddeus Young, Patrick Williams, Lauri Markkanen and had traded for Daniel Theis. There was simply no meaningful minutes for Gafford on the roster back then.

I think AK wanted to bring in his own guys and Gafford wasnt one of them.

Theis wasn't re-sign so he wasn't in any kind of long term plans (does AK even have long term plans?). Young was an older player who wasn't going to stay for long and Markkanen had his ups and downs while in Chicago (plus he was up for a contract extension).

[sco]

Our model was clear...we wanted C's who could playmake and set picks/screens on the perimeter. IMO, we went after AD because he was a good passer/screener as much as his rebounding. Gafford was purely a paint guy. He was also a bit pouty, IIRC.

[League Circles]

Hes a role player. Who cares. Drummond is better. You can find role players.

If it's so easy to find said roleplayer, then why do we not have one rim protector on the team?

Because AK thought it was better to have like 13 guards on the team than to keep Tony Bradley, who was quite solid at rim protection. I wouldn't say Drummond is too bad at rim protection either.

[Jcool0]

He was kind of bad on the Bulls? Its great he became a good rim running player, but not every team needs or wants that.

[Ice Man]

He was kind of bad on the Bulls? Its great he became a good rim running player, but not every team needs or wants that.

Gaff was the same player for us. I mean, not quite as good as he is now because he traded him when he was 22 years old so naturally he has improved since then. But the same strengths and weaknesses. A pure rim runner/rebounder/rim protector who can't dribble or shoot a lick. I like that type of player, but I guess AKME doesn't. Carlisle does, though. (As with Tyson Chandler, who was a similar but better version of Gaff.)

[Jcool0]

He was kind of bad on the Bulls? Its great he became a good rim running player, but not every team needs or wants that.

Gaff was the same player for us. I mean, not quite as good as he is now because he traded him when he was 22 years old so naturally he has improved since then. But the same strengths and weaknesses. A pure rim runner/rebounder/rim protector who can't dribble or shoot a lick. I like that type of player, but I guess AKME doesn't. Carlisle does, though. (As with Tyson Chandler, who was a similar but better version of Gaff.)

FWIW Carlisle has been coaching in Indiana since 2021.

[GoBlue72391]

Hes a role player. Who cares. Drummond is better. You can find role players.

Gafford would be the perfect starting C for this team. Plus we would have $20m+ per year in salary that we wouldn't be paying Vuc.

[GoBlue72391]

He was kind of bad on the Bulls? Its great he became a good rim running player, but not every team needs or wants that.

Well we do need that. We may not want that, but that's another discussion entirely.

Also, not sure how 13 and 8 with 3 blocks per 36 with a 69 TS% is in any way "bad."

[Jcool0]

He was kind of bad on the Bulls? Its great he became a good rim running player, but not every team needs or wants that.

Well we do need that. We may not want that, but that's another discussion entirely.

Also, not sure how 13 and 8 with 3 blocks per 36 with a 69 TS% is in any way "bad."

Bulls need 3 point shooting not rim running. He was bad when you actually watched Bulls games not checking box scores years later. There was a reason he would be inactive for multiple games in a row.

[dougthonus]

I know many moves were financially motivated but he was cheap. Why did we get rid of him?

We wanted to get Daniel Theis for a playoff push that season.

If you ask "why did we do this move, that now looks stupid, and was easy to predict would look stupid" then the answer is almost always "we wanted to win in the next few months and are too stupid to look further into the future than that".

I'd also note, that they weren't likely to keep Gafford long term anyway, because they wouldn't have had the room after all the other stuff they wanted to do.

[Michael Jackson]

Basically, to get Javonte Green.

There were some other players involved (Theis, Troy), but we never resigned them so I assume the guy the FO wanted was Javonte.
Kind of ironic because the guys we gave up both Gafford & Kornet are playing solid minutes for two excellent playoff teams now.

I actually it was for all 3 and Theis was a better fit at the moment. I am sure AK was planning on resigning Theis but Caruso became avaialable and they didn't have capspace available to sign both so it was one or the other. I do think long term it was the plan to resign Theis... Oddly the Caruso thing negated Javonte's need too and TBJ was raw and it was like a free draft pick that never panned out.

All that being said I always liked Gafford. At the time of the trade though Theis did make the Bulls better. Gafford never really got going until Westbrook started throwing him dimes. They were a good fit and Dallas is a good fit for him too. Ball would have worked with Gafford but aside from him on this team I don't think he reaches potential.

[ChettheJet]

He wasn't surrounded by 4 very good scorers, they needed someone who could get the attention of the defense and contribute to the scoring, his shooting range was and remains 2 feet and in, they needed some kind of jump shooting from the 5 even a stretch element. Did you actually ever see him play for the Bulls?

[Michael Jackson]

Hes a role player. Who cares. Drummond is better. You can find role players.

Gafford would be the perfect starting C for this team. Plus we would have $20m+ per year in salary that we wouldn't be paying Vuc.

True but afford is 14 mil so it really is only a 6 mil savings, that being said I would prefer Gafford still.

[Hangtime84]

Our model was clear...we wanted C's who could playmake and set picks/screens on the perimeter. IMO, we went after AD because he was a good passer/screener as much as his rebounding. Gafford was purely a paint guy. He was also a bit pouty, IIRC.

Thad young basically outplayed all the centers with his IQ. We wanted more of those people. Also Billy likes hub center schemes as Steven Adams played that role as well bulls fave Noah.