NBA Trade Verdict

Slight Bulls Edge

Chicago acquired Jo Jo English from Minnesota for a conditional future draft pick that was not exercised.

November 4, 1993 Chicago Bulls / Minnesota Timberwolves Record confidence: High

Minnesota Timberwolves Received

  • Draft Pick conditional future draft pick (not exercised)

Trade Analysis

A Conditional Pick Bought Chicago a Guard

Chicago acquired Jo Jo English from Minnesota on November 4, 1993, giving up a conditional future draft choice. The pick condition ultimately wasn't exercised, so the Timberwolves never received a conveyed selection from the deal. That difference between the original draft-pick promise and the completed return is the transaction's key feature. Chicago brought English into its guard rotation without ultimately losing a drafted player through the agreed compensation.

English Provided Limited but Identifiable Bulls Minutes

English appeared in NBA games for Chicago, though his role was modest and not a long-term starting assignment. The Bulls later waived and re-signed him, showing that his roster situation continued to change rather than leading to a stable major contract. Even with that narrow impact, Chicago's side can point to actual game appearances from the acquired guard. The acquired production is more concrete than a conditional pick that never converted into an asset for Minnesota.

Minnesota’s Selection Never Materialized

The Timberwolves' return was entirely contingent upon the terms of a future draft pick. Because the condition was not satisfied, Minnesota didn't select a player or receive another choice from this particular trade. There is no grounds to assign them the output of some other draft pick simply because a second-round selection was initially promised. The modest Chicago win is due to English's limited games, not a big missed opportunity for the Timberwolves.

Final Verdict

Slight Bulls Edge. Chicago receives C+ for modest playing time from Jo Jo English with no draft selection ultimately surrendered. Minnesota gets C because its conditional future pick did not convey. This was a small rotation transaction, and its result warrants a narrow rather than decisive grade gap.

Research sources (6)