NBA Trade Verdict

Slight Lakers Edge

Chicago received cash for 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel), but the other team generated modestly stronger realized value.

May 11, 1966 Chicago Bulls / Los Angeles Lakers Record confidence: Medium

Los Angeles Lakers Received

Draft Pick 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel)

Trade Analysis

Reconstructing the Deal

The May 11, 1966 transaction between Chicago Bulls and Los Angeles Lakers is easiest to evaluate by reconstructing the trade before judging the result. Chicago received cash for 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel), but the partner generated modestly stronger realized value. The list of assets identifies 2 distinct pieces: cash and 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). Chicago Bulls received cash, while Los Angeles Lakers received 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). That distinction matters because a trade can combine players, draft rights, picks, cash, or transaction mechanisms whose value is not interchangeable. The retrospective grade therefore follows what the specific assets became and how much useful basketball or asset value each side ultimately captured, rather than treating every line item as equal simply because it appeared in the same transaction.

Why the Grades Diverge

The verdict is Slight Lakers Edge, with Chicago Bulls graded C and Los Angeles Lakers graded C+. The realized-value outcome gives the partner a modest edge. Finkel became rotation center and 1974 champion reserve in Boston. Cash provided no basketball value. Early franchise cash-out loss. Those findings define the direction of the evaluation. The relevant comparison is cash for Chicago Bulls against 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel) for Los Angeles Lakers. Roster need, contract timing, competitive window, and front-office intent can help explain why a team accepted a particular return, but they do not replace the realized-value record. Based on the results, the stronger side is Los Angeles Lakers; the grade shows the size of that advantage without requiring every asset in the winning package to have become a major success.

The Value-Creating Side

Los Angeles Lakers' return centered on 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). The available evidence explains the advantage this way: The realized-value outcome gives the partner a modest edge. Finkel became rotation center and 1974 champion reserve in Boston. Cash provided no basketball value. Early franchise cash-out loss. That is the core support for the C+ grade. The point is not merely that Los Angeles Lakers received a package with a recognizable name or a particular number of pieces. It is that the assets credited to that side produced the more consequential result in the historical record. A winning package may derive most of its value from one player, one draft conversion, or one asset that later created additional leverage. Here, the trade details are strong enough to place Los Angeles Lakers on the favorable side of Slight Lakers Edge while keeping the evaluation tied to the exchange itself.

The Other Team's Rationale and Return

Chicago Bulls received cash. That package still has to be evaluated on its own terms rather than dismissed because the verdict favors the other side. The grade for Chicago Bulls is C, which measures the completed return against what Los Angeles Lakers obtained. A lower grade can still include a useful player, a pick, financial flexibility, or a defensible short-term objective; the issue is whether those benefits matched the value surrendered. In this case, the analysis does not place the two returns on equal footing. The gap between Los Angeles Lakers' C+ and Chicago Bulls' C reflects the difference in realized production, asset conversion, or durable value documented for 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel) versus cash.

Final Verdict

Slight Lakers Edge. The grades are Chicago Bulls C and Los Angeles Lakers C+. The trade itself was: Chicago Bulls received cash, while Los Angeles Lakers received 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). The realized-value outcome gives the partner a modest edge. Finkel became rotation center and 1974 champion reserve in Boston. Cash provided no basketball value. Early franchise cash-out loss. That evidence is enough to preserve the verdict without rewriting the trade around hindsight that is unrelated to the assets actually exchanged. The grade evaluates the completed transaction, not whether every front-office motive was unreasonable on the day of the deal. On that basis, Los Angeles Lakers produced the stronger realized return, and the C+/C grade relationship captures how clearly that side finished ahead.

For Hardcore NBA Heads

Chicago Bulls–Los Angeles Lakers: What the Trade Became

The deeper story of the May 11, 1966 Chicago Bulls–Los Angeles Lakers trade is the difference between the transaction's surface simplicity and the value that emerged from its component parts. The four locked transaction sources document the exchange from both franchise histories, while the canonical record supplies the Slight Lakers Edge judgment and the explicit C/C+ grades. The deal moved cash and 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). Following those pieces keeps the review disciplined: the analysis can recognize trade-day context, but the historical verdict stays anchored to what Chicago Bulls and Los Angeles Lakers actually received from this specific exchange.

The Piece That Set the Direction

The most important value on the favorable side was concentrated in 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). The realized-value outcome gives the partner a modest edge. Finkel became rotation center and 1974 champion reserve in Boston. Cash provided no basketball value. Early franchise cash-out loss. That finding is what separates a substantive retrospective evaluation from a simple transaction recap. Asset count alone is a poor guide because one productive player, one meaningful draft outcome, or one reusable trade asset can outweigh several smaller pieces. For Los Angeles Lakers, the C+ grade reflects the consequence attached to the package rather than its length. The supplied record identifies enough realized value in 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel) to make that return the central reason the trade finishes as Slight Lakers Edge.

What the Full Package Contributed

The rest of the exchange provides the scale for that conclusion. Across the full trade, Chicago Bulls took in cash and Los Angeles Lakers took in 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). Secondary assets matter because they can narrow a gap, add optionality, or reveal what each side was willing to pay to accomplish a roster objective. Cash, lower-order picks, draft rights, exceptions, and secondary players are therefore counted, but they are not automatically valued like a proven contributor. Nothing in the available evidence indicates that the supporting pieces reverse the direction of Slight Lakers Edge; instead, they complete the picture around the decisive value already identified in the analysis.

Outcome Is Not the Same as Intent

The deal can make sense from both front offices' perspectives and still produce an uneven result. Chicago received cash for 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel), but the partner generated modestly stronger realized value. That is the trade-day structure; the retrospective grade asks a different question—what did those choices ultimately yield? Historical analysis should not pretend that teams had perfect foresight, but it also should not erase the evidence that became available once the players and draft assets developed. The C grade for Chicago Bulls and C+ for Los Angeles Lakers preserve that distinction. Context can explain the decision, while the realized return determines why the final judgment remains Slight Lakers Edge.

Why the Grades Stay Consistent

The grade spread—Chicago Bulls C, Los Angeles Lakers C+—is more informative than a winner label by itself because it shows the degree of separation supported by the record. Los Angeles Lakers are credited for 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel); Chicago Bulls are credited for cash. Each package is measured by the value it actually produced, including meaningful player contribution and draft conversion when the supplied record identifies them. The grades are not a claim that every secondary asset had identical importance or that the losing team received nothing. They are a compact expression of the completed exchange, and in this case that exchange supports Slight Lakers Edge.

Deep-Dive Verdict

Slight Lakers Edge. The full analysis reaches the same conclusion: Chicago Bulls C, Los Angeles Lakers C+. The available sources confirm the trade and show Chicago Bulls receiving cash while Los Angeles Lakers received 1966 second round pick (#14-Hank Finkel). The analysis is decisive: The realized-value outcome gives the partner a modest edge. Finkel became rotation center and 1974 champion reserve in Boston. Cash provided no basketball value. Early franchise cash-out loss. That conclusion does not depend on inflating the significance of cash, draft mechanisms, or minor pieces, and it does not assume a team would have made different downstream choices with an asset it never controlled. It follows the value tied to this transaction. On that record, Los Angeles Lakers' package finishes ahead of Chicago Bulls', making Slight Lakers Edge the durable historical judgment.

Research sources (4)