Zach Lavine: Offered 4/80 from Kings update p26 Bulls Matched

[RedBulls23]

That's why people don't want to pay him this much money, because of the risk factors of him being a mediocre player.

Especially with his defensive issues he would have to be a high efficient 25+ ppg player to justify playing him when he kills the defense due to his trash awareness. Man defense can almost he irrelevant in today's league due to teams running more motion offenses.

So, what is the likelihood that he improves as a team defender and matures his shot selection?

I think his shot selection can improve if you move him off the hall more. Move him off of screens and curl routes. Spot up.

No clue in how he improves his team defense. Do we know if he understands what's going on out there because he just seems completely loss when his man doesn't have the ball. Who knows how correctable that is.

[League Circles]

Again, 23-year-old Gerald Green was so bad that no team thought he was worth an NBA contract for two years. At age 22 he had an 8.7 PER and struggled to get to an 11.7 PER the next season.

It's a terrible comparison. Green is basically the exaggeration of how bad some people think LaVine is. It's clear LaVine is going to have to take a big step to live up to a deal that is immediately awful. But, if we're pretending that he's this fringe NBA talent then it's not much of a discussion.

I have always said that the NBA is much more about opportunity than ability. In my opinion Zach LaVine is basically Danny Green with having had a much better opportunity early in his career. If he didn't play effectively the most minutes per game in the league and shoot Every Time he Touch the ball thus having a points per game average that appears to be high in his third year which was really just a half of the year nobody would really even think anything about him. He would be lucky to get the full mle for four years.

You mean Danny Green who is a good defender, but otherwise only has one NBA talent which is spotting up? Green doesn't have the athleticism, ball skills, or ability to finish like Lavine. I don't see the comp at all.

I misspoke. I totally meant Gerald Green. I'm a fan of Danny Green.

[Hangtime84]

That's why people don't want to pay him this much money, because of the risk factors of him being a mediocre player.

Especially with his defensive issues he would have to be a high efficient 25+ ppg player to justify playing him when he kills the defense due to his trash awareness. Man defense can almost he irrelevant in today's league due to teams running more motion offenses.

So, what is the likelihood that he improves as a team defender and matures his shot selection?

I think his shot selection can improve if you move him off the hall more. Move him off of screens and curl routes. Spot up.

No clue in how he improves his team defense. Do we know if he understands what's going on out there because he just seems completely loss when his man doesn't have the ball. Who knows how correctable that is.

Lots of game film not just studying your own offensive plays.

[Betta Bulleavit]

I just hope a reporter asks Paxson:

"John, over 70% of the fanbase opposed matching this contract in a recent poll because they want to save the cap space to try to sign good players instead. What would you tell this strong majority of Bulls fans who opposed making this struggling player such a focus of such a bad team for the next 4 years?"

And his response should be “While we respect the thoughts and opinions of our fan base, it’s important to understand that we are tasked with the responsibility of seeing the cube rather than just a square. Fans have the luxury of calling shots from a keyboard with emotional rationalizations. As true professionals in this field, we don’t have that luxury. We must operate with logic and see the big picture. And that is why we made the logical decision to match this offer. It fits where we are trying to go and we are confident that people will see that in due time”. Yeah...that’s about right. And I’d endorse that 100%.

[Big Pippen]

Well shoooooot...

Lavine signed for more money than I would have liked, and I don't consider him a very impactful basketball player at this stage of his career. But Pax/Fred are trying to build a team that can compete in the new NBA (outside - in) and Lavine will develop in to a very good outside shooter. He came in so raw, has played on bad teams, and lost a ton of time to the knee injury. I think it is reasonable to project (with modern medicine) that the knee will come back to (near) full strength and he will still be an elite NBA athlete. I think it is reasonable that his shooting, pick and roll skills, and defense will all improve (the degree is up to him).

So fast forward to next summer... we have a core of:

Wendall Carter Jr
Lauri Markannen
(wing)
Zach Lavine
(point)

and then we fill in the gaps with Kyrie and Butler? I think you could win the east with that.

[Onibuh]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Bulls FO mouthpiece at it again.

He's not wrong.
The cap is going to rise and the % will go down too. Cap space is not a problem.

What's the benefit of losing him for nothing?
Without him the Bulls will be worse and tank. With him they may improve and get a better team to be much more attractive to finally get those superstar UFAs.
If you think he sucks, it will better the Bulls tank and you still get your wish.

Who would they sign with him gone? Smart to 16 a year?

[Boardwalker]

I just hope a reporter asks Paxson:

"John, over 70% of the fanbase opposed matching this contract in a recent poll because they want to save the cap space to try to sign good players instead. What would you tell this strong majority of Bulls fans who opposed making this struggling player such a focus of such a bad team for the next 4 years?"

And his response should be “While we respect the thoughts and opinions of our fan base, it’s important to understand that we are tasked with the responsibility of seeing the cube rather than just a square. Fans have the luxury of calling shots from a keyboard with emotional rationalizations. As true professionals in this field, we don’t have that luxury. We must operate with logic and see the big picture. And that is why we made the logical decision to match this offer. It fits where we are trying to go and we are confident that people will see that in due time”. Yeah...that’s about right. And I’d endorse that 100%.

Yep, I totally agree. But if this thread has done one thing it's given the FO haters a platform and a chance to fully reveal themselves.

[Lauri_Legend]

Not bad at all.

In 2013, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Serge Ibaka, Tony Parker, Kevin Garnett and Andree Iguodala all made $11-12M annually.

Whether you scale to the 2013 cap or to 2020, this is a bad contract.

I strongly disagree. Hordford and Noah were both Allstars. Noah especially under that salary range the next year was 4th in MVP voting.

Tony Parker was a big piece in 2014 to win another title. 2013 they went to 7 games with the Heat. He was worth every penny of that deal.

Serge Ibaka was another huge role player for the Thunder in 2013. Igoudala under that contract ended up winning a title for the Warriors as a big piece of that rotation. Only person you can question from your list is KG but KG was awarded his deal more so because he was a walking hall of famer.

If you're comparing to Zach to any of those players, whether that'd be the two allstars in Noah and Horford, 2 players who helped their teams win a ring in Parker and Iggy, or a very good role player in Serge Ibaka, I'm down as hell to pay for that deal then.

[PrimzyBulls81]

What is that language protection in offer,related to his injured knee?

[micromonkey]

Good news
Tank is still on for 4 more years

[Betta Bulleavit]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Bulls FO mouthpiece at it again.

He's not wrong.
The cap is going to rise and the % will go down too. Cap space is not a problem.

What's the benefit of losing him for nothing?
Without him the Bulls will be worse and tank. With him they may improve and get a better team to be much more attractive to finally get those superstar UFAs.
If you think he sucks, it will better the Bulls tank and you still get your wish.

Who would they sign with him gone? Smart to 16 a year?

Exactly. I wish more people could see this rationale and stop getting there emotions all wrapped up in the dollar amount. This move establishes a clear direction, which is consistent with what they’ve pitched from the start. That’s the kind of stuff that is going to matter to free agents. There is going to be a ton of teams out there with money to spend next year. The ones that will stand the best shot at landing the “limited” big fish are the ones that can communicate their direction and show proof of implementation.

[League Circles]

I just hope a reporter asks Paxson:

"John, over 70% of the fanbase opposed matching this contract in a recent poll because they want to save the cap space to try to sign good players instead. What would you tell this strong majority of Bulls fans who opposed making this struggling player such a focus of such a bad team for the next 4 years?"

And his response should be “While we respect the thoughts and opinions of our fan base, it’s important to understand that we are tasked with the responsibility of seeing the cube rather than just a square. Fans have the luxury of calling shots from a keyboard with emotional rationalizations. As true professionals in this field, we don’t have that luxury. We must operate with logic and see the big picture. And that is why we made the logical decision to match this offer. It fits where we are trying to go and we are confident that people will see that in due time”. Yeah...that’s about right. And I’d endorse that 100%.

Yep, I totally agree. But if this thread has done one thing it's given the FO haters a platform and a chance to fully reveal themselves.

Except that I'm notorious here as one of the biggest FO supporters/apologists. I just can't justify this move.

[Flopper]

Positive advanced stats, stay healthy, make All-Star selection, make team better when he is on the court (which includes defense), improve playmaking, be 2nd option behind Lauri. Basically everything what he isnt.

Dont forget we just matched 20M per year offer over next 4 years to 23 year old version of Gerald Green.

This contract is terrible, but the Gerald Green comparison is also terrible. 23 year old Gerald Green was out of the NBA. LaVine is not even close to that.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Career:
Green 13.2 PER 53.3%ts -2.4 +/-
Lavine 13.5 PER 54.0%ts -2.1 +/-

Subjectively, both 6'5" high jumping, low IQ SG's.

Hell, both have 3 syllable names ending in an "een" sound.

From basketball-reference

Uncanny.

[JohnnyTapwater]

So guys..

What do you need to see from Zach to feel better about this?

I need him to be a 20 ppg scorer a night. I need him to do that efficiently and not gun. I need him to really show he will make sure Lauri is involved..I need him to be a + defender...

[TheSuzerain]

Not bad at all.

In 2013, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Serge Ibaka, Tony Parker, Kevin Garnett and Andree Iguodala all made $11-12M annually.

Whether you scale to the 2013 cap or to 2020, this is a bad contract.

I strongly disagree. Hordford and Noah were both Allstars. Noah especially under that salary range the next year was 4th in MVP voting.

Tony Parker was a big piece in 2014 to win another title. 2013 they went to 7 games with the Heat. He was worth every penny of that deal.

Serge Ibaka was another huge role player for the Thunder in 2013. Igoudala under that contract ended up winning a title for the Warriors as a big piece of that rotation. Only person you can question from your list is KG but KG was awarded his deal more so because he was a walking hall of famer.

If you're comparing to Zach to any of those players, whether that'd be the two allstars in Noah and Horford, 2 players who helped their teams win a ring in Parker and Iggy, or a very good role player in Serge Ibaka, I'm down as hell to pay for that deal then.

You agree with him. That’s his point.

[League Circles]

Not bad at all.

In 2013, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Serge Ibaka, Tony Parker, Kevin Garnett and Andree Iguodala all made $11-12M annually.

Whether you scale to the 2013 cap or to 2020, this is a bad contract.

I strongly disagree. Hordford and Noah were both Allstars. Noah especially under that salary range the next year was 4th in MVP voting.

Tony Parker was a big piece in 2014 to win another title. 2013 they went to 7 games with the Heat. He was worth every penny of that deal.

Serge Ibaka was another huge role player for the Thunder in 2013. Igoudala under that contract ended up winning a title for the Warriors as a big piece of that rotation. Only person you can question from your list is KG but KG was awarded his deal more so because he was a walking hall of famer.

If you're comparing to Zach to any of those players, whether that'd be the two allstars in Noah and Horford, 2 players who helped their teams win a ring in Parker and Iggy, or a very good role player in Serge Ibaka, I'm down as hell to pay for that deal then.

I think you misunderstood his post. The point is that those players were way better than Zach, thus, by making the same scaled money, Zach's deal is bad unless he improves a ton. Which is rare after year 4.

[League Circles]

Funny part of this is that Bobby Portis has a legit argument that he should be paid as much or more. Maybe the Bulls will indeed do that hahaha.

[Betta Bulleavit]

And his response should be “While we respect the thoughts and opinions of our fan base, it’s important to understand that we are tasked with the responsibility of seeing the cube rather than just a square. Fans have the luxury of calling shots from a keyboard with emotional rationalizations. As true professionals in this field, we don’t have that luxury. We must operate with logic and see the big picture. And that is why we made the logical decision to match this offer. It fits where we are trying to go and we are confident that people will see that in due time”. Yeah...that’s about right. And I’d endorse that 100%.

Yep, I totally agree. But if this thread has done one thing it's given the FO haters a platform and a chance to fully reveal themselves.

Except that I'm notorious here as one of the biggest FO supporters/apologists. I just can't justify this move.

You have been a notorious FO supporter and I have to acknowledge that. But it’s for that reason that I’m shocked that you can’t see the logic behind the move. I totally get why it would make some people nervous given the stats and the injury etc. But whether people recognize or not, Zach is a very unique proposition given all circumstances involved. So even if you aren’t sure about the decision, we know that this is a front office that knows when it’s time to let guys go. They knew with Gordon. They knew with Noah and Rose. Deng. If they saw fit to match, we can conclude that there was a reason why. Even if it’s not necessarily apparent to all of us.

[Dresden]

I don't care about the money one way or the other as long as we are able to clear enough cap space to sign two max free agents in a year or two. By that time, hopefully we have a decent young core centered around Lauri, Dunn, Carter and possibly Lavine/Portis/Hutch. Having a nice group of young talent plus having the ability to tell a free agent- "come here and bring whoever you want with you" could be a good enough sales pitch to lure some Tier 1 players here. And then we'd be in business.

[IrishBeatdown]

I think his shot selection can improve if you move him off the hall more. Move him off of screens and curl routes. Spot up.

No clue in how he improves his team defense. Do we know if he understands what's going on out there because he just seems completely loss when his man doesn't have the ball. Who knows how correctable that is.

I'm really trying to be positive, seeing as we are married to Lavine for the time being, but Zach is awful off the ball. He rarely gets points off cuts to the hoop, doesn't free himself up for his teammates, and often crowds his teammates by standing out at the perimeter, killing the spacing. He's not that great at running screens, but obviously this isn't much of a talent, and could be something he develops. Zach is a good jump shooter, I think he needs a huge amount of work on his off-ball game to fully realize his scoring potential.