2026-10-16 · 7:00 PM CT · Preseason
Chicago Bulls31-51ESPN standings data retrieved October 6, 2026. NBA comparisons use the completed 2025–26 regular season. Each upcoming fixture labels preseason or regular-season status.
Minnesota Timberwolves2025–26 regular season
| Measure | Season average | League rank |
|---|---|---|
| STANDARD STATS | ||
| Points / game | 118.0 | 7 / 30 |
| Rebounds / game | 44.1 | 13 / 30 |
| Assists / game | 26.1 | 16 / 30 |
| Turnovers / game | 14.1 | 19 / 30 |
| Steals / game | 8.7 | 12 / 30 |
| Blocks / game | 5.8 | 2 / 30 |
| FG% | 48.1% | 9 / 30 |
| 3PT% | 37.0% | 6 / 30 |
| FT% | 75.2% | 29 / 30 |
| THE LAB MEASURES | ||
| eFG% | 55.9% | 6 / 30 |
| Turnover rate | 12.4% | 18 / 30 |
| Offensive rebound rate | — | — |
| Free-throw pressure | 0.285 | 7 / 30 |
Chicago Bulls2025–26 regular season
| Measure | Season average | League rank |
|---|---|---|
| STANDARD STATS | ||
| Points / game | 116.3 | 12 / 30 |
| Rebounds / game | 45.0 | 9 / 30 |
| Assists / game | 28.5 | 7 / 30 |
| Turnovers / game | 14.6 | 24 / 30 |
| Steals / game | 7.6 | 23 / 30 |
| Blocks / game | 5.0 | 11 / 30 |
| FG% | 46.9% | 14 / 30 |
| 3PT% | 35.6% | 19 / 30 |
| FT% | 77.6% | 18 / 30 |
| THE LAB MEASURES | ||
| eFG% | 54.7% | 14 / 30 |
| Turnover rate | 12.7% | 23 / 30 |
| Offensive rebound rate | — | — |
| Free-throw pressure | 0.246 | 22 / 30 |
ESPN team totals and game box scores checked October 6. NBA season averages and ranks use 2025–26; preseason game results are shown separately. Ranks are within the league, with ties sharing a rank; a lower turnover rate is better. Season offensive rebound rate needs opponent defensive-rebound totals, which this feed does not supply. A dash means unavailable. This game’s offensive rebound rate uses the opponent’s actual rebounds.
eFG% gives a made three its extra value. Turnover rate estimates the share of plays lost before a shot. Offensive rebound rate is the share of available offensive rebounds collected. Free-throw pressure is FTA/FGA. The calculations are (FGM + 0.5 × 3PM)/FGA; TOV/(FGA + 0.44 × FTA + TOV); OREB/(OREB + opponent DREB); and FTA/FGA.
This is preseason. Use the team numbers as background and watch how the new lineups play together. No spread or Lab win probability is published for this game.
Last season 49-33 | 6th in the West | Conference semifinals loss to San Antonio, 4-2
2025-26 efficiency 115.6 offense | 112.5 defense | +3.1 net per 100 possessions
Minnesota finished sixth at 49-33, eliminated Denver and lost to San Antonio in six games. Its eighth-ranked defense was a more established advantage than its 13th-ranked offense. Anthony Edwards could produce difficult baskets, but the roster needed another creator who could give him more possessions that began with an advantage.
Tim Connelly acquired LaMelo Ball and Jonathan Kuminga while moving Julius Randle, Naz Reid and Mike Conley. Ball can initiate the offense and find Edwards away from the ball. That matters because Edwards made 49.6 percent of his catch-and-shoot threes last season, although the sample was 139 attempts. Kuminga supplies athleticism at forward and an opportunity to build a more defined role.
The concern is what Minnesota traded away from the frontcourt. Randle supplied regular-season scoring and Reid supplied flexible big-man minutes. Rudy Gobert remains essential to the paint defense, and the new roster has less room for him to miss time or lose effectiveness. Ball's availability and defensive fit also matter. Connelly improved creation, but left the replacement of dependable size partly to development and smaller combinations.
Projected finish is fifth in the West. We credit the new offensive partnership while leaving room for the fit to settle. Minnesota has a higher playoff ceiling than that place might suggest if Ball stays available and Edwards gets easier shots. The regular-season projection is more cautious because thinner frontcourt depth can cost ordinary games long before the best lineup is ready.
Last season 31-51 | 12th in the East | Missed postseason
2025-26 efficiency 112.1 offense | 117.4 defense | -5.3 net per 100 possessions
Chicago finished 12th at 31-51 and missed the playoffs for a fourth consecutive season. Its minus-5.3 net rating reflected a roster short of both efficiency and extra possessions. The Bulls averaged 3.6 fewer shot opportunities than opponents, with weak offensive rebounding and limited ability to force turnovers making the scoring assignment harder.
Bryson Graham took over the front office and hired Tiago Splitter. Caleb Wilson, the fourth pick, joins Matas Buzelis and Josh Giddey as the young foundation. Nic Claxton gives Chicago a more credible interior defender, and Norman Powell supplies experienced scoring. The late acquisition of Buddy Hield adds shooting after Rob Dillingham moved out.
The unfinished issue is producing enough advantages around those players. Claxton can improve the defense without fixing loose possessions or creating perimeter pressure on his own. Powell can score without guaranteeing the young players get better attempts. Graham has made the rebuild more legible, but the roster still needs a sustainable shot-creation structure and a better way to win the possession count. Wilson's development should be supported by that structure rather than treated as its substitute.
Projected finish is 13th in the East. The added size and a clearer development plan should make Chicago more functional, but we do not see enough two-way improvement for a Play-In forecast. The important progress would be better chances for Wilson and Buzelis, fewer wasted possessions and evidence that the defense can hold together with the main offensive players on the court.
A matching published game video is not available in the verified archive yet.
