It almost feels like piling on at this point when rehashing all of former Bulls executive vice president Arturas Karnisovas’ blind spots.
The contracts he handed out, the draft picks he made, the trades he completed . . . the list goes on. His most glaring sin, however, was an inability to understand the talent of the 2025 and 2026 draft classes and how to best set his organization up to acquire as many bites at the apple as possible.
Sure, thanks to the Lauri Markkanen deal early in his tenure, Karnisovas was able to land a second first-round pick in this loaded class, but that was more about what the Trail Blazers did to make that pick finally kick in than anything Karnisovas did.
And while the Bulls did select No. 12 in ’25, they not only blew an opportunity to pick much higher by going 15-5 to end that regular season but selected a project in Noa Essengue, who was also damaged goods with a bum shoulder.
But that also leads to the question: Which class is better? That’s the beauty of it. They’re both loaded but in different ways. The ’25 class was more top heavy, while ’26 has serious depth. If there was a draft with both classes combined, that’s where a Top 10 would get interesting, especially with ’26 still an unknown.
10. Mikel Brown Jr. (’26) — There are a lot of positives to like about the 6-5 point guard, starting with his shooting depth and his court vision. That could also be his curse, as Brown sometimes has LaMelo Ball moments and hunts the highlight over the high-substance play. Still, he has star potential.
9. Collin Murray-Boyles (’25) — After an up-and-down rookie regular season, Murray-Boyles seemed to have an awakening in his first postseason, serving notice that Scottie Barnes might have a running mate. His 22-point Game 3 against the Cavaliers was an eye-opener.
8. Darryn Peterson (’26) — The only reason the Kansas guard is this low is because of the strange freshman season he just put on tape — and didn’t put on tape with all the load-management nights. Talent-wise, Peterson can easily jump into the top five, but he has to show that.
7. Caleb Wilson (’26) — The 6-10 forward feels like a nightly highlight in waiting and could very well be putting on that show in a Bulls jersey. The comps to Shawn Kemp might be a bit ambitious, but there’s no question he’ll play above the rim offensively and defensively.
6. Cameron Boozer (’26) — Few players will come into the league with as much momentum as Boozer, fresh off one of the more historic college debuts. The forward won AP National Player of the Year and led Duke to a 35-3 record and Elite Eight appearance. He’s a better athlete than his critics think.
5. VJ Edgecombe (’25) — The rookie looked worn down in the sweep by the Knicks, but his playoff showing against the favored Celtics in Round 1 was stellar, including a 30-point performance in Game 2 and 23 points in Game 7. Edgecombe has two-way star potential.
4. AJ Dybantsa (’26) — The hype was real for the BYU product as he led the nation in scoring with 25.5 points and established himself as the No. 1 player in a deep class. He had eight 30-plus scoring games. But he’s more than just a scorer, and the league is about to find that out.
3. Kon Knueppel (’25) — All Knueppel did was become the first rookie to lead the NBA in three-point shooting, turning the Hornets from punch line to play-in team. A high-IQ player, Knueppel easily could have won Rookie of the Year, but his former college teammate had something to say about that.
2. Dylan Harper (’25) — Knueppel had a better regular season than Harper, but what the big guard has done off the bench for the Spurs in this run to the Finals has been beyond impressive. Yes, he seems to have finally hit a wall in the last week, but he’s still averaging 16.3 points through four Finals games.
1. Cooper Flagg (’25) — Flagg became the youngest player in league history to score at least 35, 40, 45 and 50 points. On top of that, he had some of the most versatile rookie performances since LeBron James’ first season and has a chance to be the next face of the league.