Potential Zach Trade Partners? 24/25 Edition

[Muzbar]

Clippers are terrible trade partners. Yes, they can match salary. But instead one player not worth of contract, we getting 3-4 garbage salary dump players. If Clippers want to get rid of all their trash for Lavine, I want multiple unprotected picks and swaps.

So not happening. From both sides. And now this story is concluded. On the next one.

How are they terrible trade partners? The players you'd get back from the Clippers would either be expiring or have 2 years left (unlike LaVine, who has 3 years left at hefty amounts).

It would likely have to be a 3 team trade though IMO.

No one is giving up unprotected (or even protected) picks for Zach LaVine.

Good. So no deal. We not taking long term deals. Why is removing one trash contract with 3 or more trash contracts better? If they were expiring I would take them. But they are not. Zach lavine is not cancer of NBA world. He is All-Star calibre player in still prime years worth 35M playing at 45M.

That doesnt make him what whatever you think he is. We have different evaluations of players value and worth. And that's ok.

How is 2 years 'long term'? Zach LaVine is a long-term contact at 3 years, that doesn't make any sense. Norm Powell is the only player that would be on a 2 year deal and he's an excellent 3pt shooter. The rest of the players would be expiring.

LaVines worth seems to be pretty well known league wide at this point, this isn't just my opinion.

[CROBulls]

How are they terrible trade partners? The players you'd get back from the Clippers would either be expiring or have 2 years left (unlike LaVine, who has 3 years left at hefty amounts).

It would likely have to be a 3 team trade though IMO.

No one is giving up unprotected (or even protected) picks for Zach LaVine.

Good. So no deal. We not taking long term deals. Why is removing one trash contract with 3 or more trash contracts better? If they were expiring I would take them. But they are not. Zach lavine is not cancer of NBA world. He is All-Star calibre player in still prime years worth 35M playing at 45M.

That doesnt make him what whatever you think he is. We have different evaluations of players value and worth. And that's ok.

How is 2 years 'long term'? Zach LaVine is a long-term contact at 3 years, that doesn't make any sense. Norm Powell is the only player that would be on a 2 year deal and he's an excellent 3pt shooter. The rest of the players would be expiring.

LaVines worth seems to be pretty well known league wide at this point, this isn't just my opinion.

2 years is long term. Because Vuc has no value around league on same length contract. And we want to get rid of him. And you are here trying add more vets to a team when we trying get rid of similar vets and similar lenghts.

[PistolP]

A deal with the Clippers would basically be a salary dump. You’d have to buyout Tucker/Westbrook and keep Powell as a shooter off the bench. Obviously a talent downgrade. But would keep the youth movement going and clear another ~$25m off the books for 2025.

Again for who? Free agency next year is dead. There is no path to build through free agency anymore. You just overpaying role players at some point. Unless Ingram at 50M is your prize?

Even if there’s no free agent prize, cap space is probably more valuable than warehousing a massive contract for a player you don’t want and who doesn’t want to be here. You can use cap space to absorb contracts and get assets. The Hornets just got two seconds to take Josh Green. The Spurs just got a pick swap to take on Barnes. And both of those are decent rotation players.

[kulaz3000]

Unless a team gets really desperate, I think you can bank on the fact that Zach is going to start the season with the Bulls, and quite frankly, that would be the best option for both parties, because if he can prove he is healthy, and back to the type of play that we know he is capable of, there will likely be more teams that have their interest level going up with him. Right now, the interest in him is so low, that it would be idiotic and irresponsible to trade him now.

[Muzbar]

Good. So no deal. We not taking long term deals. Why is removing one trash contract with 3 or more trash contracts better? If they were expiring I would take them. But they are not. Zach lavine is not cancer of NBA world. He is All-Star calibre player in still prime years worth 35M playing at 45M.

That doesnt make him what whatever you think he is. We have different evaluations of players value and worth. And that's ok.

How is 2 years 'long term'? Zach LaVine is a long-term contact at 3 years, that doesn't make any sense. Norm Powell is the only player that would be on a 2 year deal and he's an excellent 3pt shooter. The rest of the players would be expiring.

LaVines worth seems to be pretty well known league wide at this point, this isn't just my opinion.

2 years is long term. Because Vuc has no value around league on same length contract. And we want to get rid of him. And you are here trying add more vets to a team when we trying get rid of similar vets and similar lenghts.

Vuc has no value because he's, like Zach, overpaid and is an empty stats player, the 2 years isn't the problem, it's the amount.

Either way, the only way Zach is leaving the Bulls is when his contract expires.

[WindyCityBorn]

How is 2 years 'long term'? Zach LaVine is a long-term contact at 3 years, that doesn't make any sense. Norm Powell is the only player that would be on a 2 year deal and he's an excellent 3pt shooter. The rest of the players would be expiring.

LaVines worth seems to be pretty well known league wide at this point, this isn't just my opinion.

2 years is long term. Because Vuc has no value around league on same length contract. And we want to get rid of him. And you are here trying add more vets to a team when we trying get rid of similar vets and similar lenghts.

Vuc has no value because he's, like Zach, overpaid and is an empty stats player, the 2 years isn't the problem, it's the amount.

Either way, the only way Zach is leaving the Bulls is when his contract expires.

Nah Zach is good. Just overpaid. Vuc actually sucks. His stats aren’t even good. If Zach making $30 instead of $40 million there would a ton more interest. If he was making $25 million just about every team in the NBA would want him.

[Muzbar]

2 years is long term. Because Vuc has no value around league on same length contract. And we want to get rid of him. And you are here trying add more vets to a team when we trying get rid of similar vets and similar lenghts.

Vuc has no value because he's, like Zach, overpaid and is an empty stats player, the 2 years isn't the problem, it's the amount.

Either way, the only way Zach is leaving the Bulls is when his contract expires.

Nah Zach is good. Just overpaid. Vuc actually sucks. His stats aren’t even good. If Zach making $30 instead of $40 million there would a ton more interest. If he was making $25 million just about every team in the NBA would want him.

I 100% agree, but Zach is definitely an empty stats guy, he can definitely score the basketball, but it often doesn't translate to wins. I'm not saying Zach isn't a good player, he is, but he's not a star many peg him to be.

[DASMACKDOWN]

Unless a team gets really desperate, I think you can bank on the fact that Zach is going to start the season with the Bulls, and quite frankly, that would be the best option for both parties, because if he can prove he is healthy, and back to the type of play that we know he is capable of, there will likely be more teams that have their interest level going up with him. Right now, the interest in him is so low, that it would be idiotic and irresponsible to trade him now.

Honestly to me, this has to be one of those situations where you like play him 10 games. Let him cook, then sit him till a trade.

I think the worst possible outcome out of this is that Zach pulls a "Sean KilDraftPick" and he kills 2 birds with one stone against us.

One by getting in the way of another young player. And two preventing us keeping the pick.

I cant imagine how mad Bulls fans would be if you have Zach bringing us victories over the course of the season, then traded at the deadline. The trade deadline isn't the halfway point, it's like 50 games in. If it takes that long, its not going to be good for us.

By that time other teams will be highly entrenched in "Capture the Flagg" and we would have to play a hardcore tank job just to be in the running to keep the pick.

[kulaz3000]

Unless a team gets really desperate, I think you can bank on the fact that Zach is going to start the season with the Bulls, and quite frankly, that would be the best option for both parties, because if he can prove he is healthy, and back to the type of play that we know he is capable of, there will likely be more teams that have their interest level going up with him. Right now, the interest in him is so low, that it would be idiotic and irresponsible to trade him now.

Honestly to me, this has to be one of those situations where you like play him 10 games. Let him cook, then sit him till a trade.

I think the worst possible outcome out of this is that Zach pulls a "Sean KilDraftPick" and he kills 2 birds with one stone against us.

One by getting in the way of another young player. And two preventing us keeping the pick.

I cant imagine how mad Bulls fans would be if you have Zach bringing us victories over the course of the season, then traded at the deadline. The trade deadline isn't the halfway point, it's like 50 games in. If it takes that long, its not going to be good for us.

By that time other teams will be highly entrenched in "Capture the Flagg" and we would have to play a hardcore tank job just to be in the running to keep the pick.

I was actually thinking the same thing, play him for a stint to prove his health and performance, and then agree to mutually sit, but then I remembered the new policy of sitting players. would that even be possible under the new rules?

[Rose2Boozer]

Read on Twitter

They have some salaries that can match in Powell, Tucker, Mann, Westbrook and Hyland.

I don't think the Clippers would part with Mann. We'll probably end up with Powell, Tucker, Westbrook, and Brown. I'm cool with it. AK can waive Tucker, and more than likely trade Powell and Westbrook before the start of the season.

[Muzbar]

Read on Twitter

They have some salaries that can match in Powell, Tucker, Mann, Westbrook and Hyland.

I don't think the Clippers would part with Mann. We'll probably end up with Powell, Tucker, Westbrook, and Brown. I'm cool with it. AK can waive Tucker, and more than likely trade Powell and Westbrook before the start of the season.

In order for it to work salary wise I think they have to include Mann in order to stay under the first apron.

I'd be looking for a third team to send Mann and get a big back instead of another guard.

[Ccwatercraft]

Unless a team gets really desperate, I think you can bank on the fact that Zach is going to start the season with the Bulls, and quite frankly, that would be the best option for both parties, because if he can prove he is healthy, and back to the type of play that we know he is capable of, there will likely be more teams that have their interest level going up with him. Right now, the interest in him is so low, that it would be idiotic and irresponsible to trade him now.

Fwiw if he really wants out, he should be motivated to play hard, that way he might be a target.

Frankly (and this goes for vuc too) the issue right now is that no one is desperate yet, most everyone is healthy. We're one injury of a good player on a good team from receiving a fair offer for one of them.

[Ccwatercraft]

Unless a team gets really desperate, I think you can bank on the fact that Zach is going to start the season with the Bulls, and quite frankly, that would be the best option for both parties, because if he can prove he is healthy, and back to the type of play that we know he is capable of, there will likely be more teams that have their interest level going up with him. Right now, the interest in him is so low, that it would be idiotic and irresponsible to trade him now.

Honestly to me, this has to be one of those situations where you like play him 10 games. Let him cook, then sit him till a trade.

I think the worst possible outcome out of this is that Zach pulls a "Sean KilDraftPick" and he kills 2 birds with one stone against us.

One by getting in the way of another young player. And two preventing us keeping the pick.

I cant imagine how mad Bulls fans would be if you have Zach bringing us victories over the course of the season, then traded at the deadline. The trade deadline isn't the halfway point, it's like 50 games in. If it takes that long, its not going to be good for us.

By that time other teams will be highly entrenched in "Capture the Flagg" and we would have to play a hardcore tank job just to be in the running to keep the pick.

The way everyone talks about the guy, even if he's playing his best, it doesn't translate to the win column, so in theory, he shouldn't ever help us win.

I know everybody wants the pick, In theory, the the loss of Demar will pretty much guarantee that we fall into the bottom 7-10, as long as the ping pong balls don't push us to 11th. Demar was our closer, and that's important stuff considering how many "clutch " games we had last year.

If there's a spoiler in the bunch, it might be Giddey, if he really is the floor general we need, he might contribute to more wins than y'all would like to see.

I've mentioned before, but the key is to somehow lose to the bottom feeders in the east, most of our draft competition is in our conference. If the front office is serious, we need a few perfectly timed "injuries " when playing teams like detroit/Brooklyn/Charlotte/Washington

[jnrjr79]

Clippers are terrible trade partners. Yes, they can match salary. But instead one player not worth of contract, we getting 3-4 garbage salary dump players. If Clippers want to get rid of all their trash for Lavine, I want multiple unprotected picks and swaps.

So not happening. From both sides. And now this story is concluded. On the next one.

How are they terrible trade partners? The players you'd get back from the Clippers would either be expiring or have 2 years left (unlike LaVine, who has 3 years left at hefty amounts).

It would likely have to be a 3 team trade though IMO.

No one is giving up unprotected (or even protected) picks for Zach LaVine.

IMO, they're bad trade partners because they have to aggregate so many salaries to make a LaVine trade work, and the Bulls don't have the roster spots. So, yeah, you'd probably need a third team that can send you a bigger contract or has cap space and is going to get something for their trouble.

[boozapalooza]

Read on Twitter

They have some salaries that can match in Powell, Tucker, Mann, Westbrook and Hyland.

I don't think the Clippers would part with Mann. We'll probably end up with Powell, Tucker, Westbrook, and Brown. I'm cool with it. AK can waive Tucker, and more than likely trade Powell and Westbrook before the start of the season.

Works in the trade machine. I’m good with this deal too, good way for LAC to offload some trash and add another legit scorer, and for us to offload Zach’s contract without taking back too much bad salary. Works for both sides and would go a long way in helping our tanking efforts.

Prob can flip Powell somewhere for a draft pick at least

[TheJordanRule]

Read on Twitter

They have some salaries that can match in Powell, Tucker, Mann, Westbrook and Hyland.

I don't think the Clippers would part with Mann. We'll probably end up with Powell, Tucker, Westbrook, and Brown. I'm cool with it. AK can waive Tucker, and more than likely trade Powell and Westbrook before the start of the season.

Works in the trade machine. I’m good with this deal too, good way for LAC to offload some trash and add another legit scorer, and for us to offload Zach’s contract without taking back too much bad salary. Works for both sides and would go a long way in helping our tanking efforts.

Prob can flip Powell somewhere for a draft pick at least

What can Westbrook bring that makes him a net positive? We would have to cut him and get him away from the team just to avoid his cancerous mindset. This move would be making a trade for the sake of making a trade. No value gained. Tucker is an ancient journeyman. Powell getting flipped for a draft pick is the only palatable part of this. I do not think we need to be so desperate to get rid of Zach that we trade him for peanuts. And that's what this deal is. Peanuts.

[Ballerkingn23]

If Zach issues with the coaching staff are based on a bench 2 years ago, then Zach needs to grow the F up. Otherwise, Idk why he can't just stay here for the foreseeable future.

[Muzbar]

Clippers are terrible trade partners. Yes, they can match salary. But instead one player not worth of contract, we getting 3-4 garbage salary dump players. If Clippers want to get rid of all their trash for Lavine, I want multiple unprotected picks and swaps.

So not happening. From both sides. And now this story is concluded. On the next one.

How are they terrible trade partners? The players you'd get back from the Clippers would either be expiring or have 2 years left (unlike LaVine, who has 3 years left at hefty amounts).

It would likely have to be a 3 team trade though IMO.

No one is giving up unprotected (or even protected) picks for Zach LaVine.

IMO, they're bad trade partners because they have to aggregate so many salaries to make a LaVine trade work, and the Bulls don't have the roster spots. So, yeah, you'd probably need a third team that can send you a bigger contract or has cap space and is going to get something for their trouble.

So pretty much every team is a bad trade partner then....

[HomoSapien]

Read on Twitter

They have some salaries that can match in Powell, Tucker, Mann, Westbrook and Hyland.

I don't think the Clippers would part with Mann. We'll probably end up with Powell, Tucker, Westbrook, and Brown. I'm cool with it. AK can waive Tucker, and more than likely trade Powell and Westbrook before the start of the season.

In order for it to work salary wise I think they have to include Mann in order to stay under the first apron.

I'd be looking for a third team to send Mann and get a big back instead of another guard.

Mann had a moment a few years ago but never really built upon that. He's sort of plateaued, perhaps even taken a slight step backward. He's also going to be 28, so he's not exactly this uber-young prospect. I think the Clippers would be pretty open to trading him.

[boozapalooza]

I don't think the Clippers would part with Mann. We'll probably end up with Powell, Tucker, Westbrook, and Brown. I'm cool with it. AK can waive Tucker, and more than likely trade Powell and Westbrook before the start of the season.

Works in the trade machine. I’m good with this deal too, good way for LAC to offload some trash and add another legit scorer, and for us to offload Zach’s contract without taking back too much bad salary. Works for both sides and would go a long way in helping our tanking efforts.

Prob can flip Powell somewhere for a draft pick at least

What can Westbrook bring that makes him a net positive? We would have to cut him and get him away from the team just to avoid his cancerous mindset. This move would be making a trade for the sake of making a trade. No value gained. Tucker is an ancient journeyman. Powell getting flipped for a draft pick is the only palatable part of this. I do not think we need to be so desperate to get rid of Zach that we trade him for peanuts. And that's what this deal is. Peanuts.

We can cut Russ and PJ for all I care. I don’t think either will want to be here. This is all about just moving on from Zach without having to attach assets and handing over the keys to our young core.