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

[Threekola]

He has played 4 years in the NBA now.

His PER by year 11.3, 14.3, 14.6, 14.6
On off rating -10.1, -6.9, -4.3, -6.7

You are making good points about Lavine but my issue is people tend to stick to one metric like its the end all be all. With no real context in terms of play and what they actually see on the floor.

Based on this metric, it would mean Portis, Noah Vonleh and Camron Payne were our 3 best players last year. Archie our best PG.

No one in their right mind would ever agree with that. Because they have eyes.

Which is why I disagree with people that look hard at |he was a minus 6.7 therefore he sucks" argument and just conclude he sucks.

It would also automatically conclude that Toronto's Derozen and Lowry suck and have no business being allstars or the East's top record. It would conclude that them together make the team worse...which obviously isn't true.

i don’t know why people are acting like different metrics paint different pictures of Lavine. They pretty much all paint him as a mediocre at best basketball player.

And it’s not like the eye test disagrees with that diagnosis either.

Didn’t the eye test show spurts of superstar ability mixed in with inconsistency and trying to do too much? I don’t get how anyone can say he failed the eye test. What I saw is an ability to create/get to the rim I didn’t know he had in his game. Add that to his previously demonstrated ability to hit 3’s at a high rate, and all he’s missing is consistency. That’s something you expect to take some time coming off an injury, but all the skills are already there.

[Ice Man]

Based on this metric, it would mean Portis, Noah Vonleh and Camron Payne were our 3 best players last year. Archie our best PG.

Portis might well have been. Vonleh and Payne didn't get enough minutes to qualify.

Disagreeing with on/off measures because you find a couple of outliers is like disagreeing with ERA because you can find a few bad pitchers who had low ERAs one season, or vice versa. It doesn't invalidate the approach; it just says, as with any metric, that what the on/off indicator suggests should be validated by other measures.

[chrispatrick]

He has played 4 years in the NBA now.

His PER by year 11.3, 14.3, 14.6, 14.6
On off rating -10.1, -6.9, -4.3, -6.7

Last year really doesn't look like a flyer. What is really striking is how regularly he makes his teams worse when he gets on the floor and that's striking because he has exclusively played on bad teams. Effectively he makes some of the worst teams in the NBA look even worse, by a good bit, when he comes in.

He really doesn't fit with Dunn because he doesn't move well off ball. Not sure it matters because Dunn isn't particularly good either.

Excellent post. Last year was not an outlier for him, he really is that bad. He made more shots before (probably due to better lift and finishing pre-acl) but everything else was the same awfulness he’s exhibited for 4 years.

Last year was the first year he had got worst. He had grown every year until then.

He will be better and I believe he will improve again.
His TS had improve every year until last year. He is not a star but he is better then last season. His numbers improved every year until the ACL.

I get that he was trending from awful to below average, but the ACL did happen and there’s no guaranty he will get back to below average. He has very good athleticism, but hasn’t yet exhibited the type of athleticism he had pre-injury, which was vital to his potential success given the one dimensional nature of his game.

[sami71]

Didn’t the eye test show spurts of superstar ability mixed in with inconsistency and trying to do too much? I don’t get how anyone can say he failed the eye test. What I saw is an ability to create/get to the rim I didn’t know he had in his game. Add that to his previously demonstrated ability to hit 3’s at a high rate, and all he’s missing is consistency. That’s something you expect to take some time coming off an injury, but all the skills are already there.

Superstar ability for one game. A lot of consistent chucking a black hole in offense and completely detached from his team and very consistent bad to terrible defense. A fixed consistency would make him still a terrible player.

What apologists and Bulls are hoping for is another Zach to surface and many of the attributes are such that he has never ever shown in his game such as playing a team game and defense. Of course Zach has never mentioned any of that and being a gym rat and "a hard worker" which in itself is such a devalued term will not fix any of it.

Missing consistency does not even begin to tell the story. It is not about one facet of his game being bad. It is everything with the exception of being flashy.

Hopefully Bulls are right betting on him but it is my opinion that they took a medium reward super high risk proposition to bet on.

[transplant]

Haven’t read the whole thread, but I get the sense that more than a few of you die-hards are less than thrilled with the Bulls matching Sacto’s offer and would have preferred that the FO had just banked the cap room.

Wish I could offer some words of comfort and hope, but I got nothin’.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Stratmaster]

This FO has all the conviction of the chess club leader asking out the prom queen. Pick a **** path and walk it.. All indications are that this was a "1 year tank" which isn't even really a **** tank and the "one year tank" netted you the #7th and #22 picks and oh you also traded your best remaining asset in Mirotic.

My only question is, how was this not obvious when lavine was included on the deal for Jimmy and a deal for him was right around the corner?

How are people satisfied with the return for Jimmy then upset when one of the stipulations for the pieces in that return was taking care of the unrestricted free agent that came in the return?

When all you land is a 7th pick Why would they continue tanking? Especially now with the changes in the system that happens after the bulls decided to trade butler.

They got Lauri and Dunn out of the deal. That's a solid starter at worst and another potential solid starter or at worst solid backup PG on a contender.

Information changed from the time of the trade to now and the Bulls, rather than be happy that they got good value (good job scouting team on Lauri) decided to "go big or go home" when there was ZERO reason to go big or go home.

The biggest problem the FO has is that they are incredibly rigid in their thought process and do not adapt on the fly.

What information changed?

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Threekola]

Didn’t the eye test show spurts of superstar ability mixed in with inconsistency and trying to do too much? I don’t get how anyone can say he failed the eye test. What I saw is an ability to create/get to the rim I didn’t know he had in his game. Add that to his previously demonstrated ability to hit 3’s at a high rate, and all he’s missing is consistency. That’s something you expect to take some time coming off an injury, but all the skills are already there.

Superstar ability for one game. A lot of consistent chucking a black hole in offense and completely detached from his team and very consistent bad to terrible defense. A fixed consistency would make him still a terrible player.

What apologists and Bulls are hoping for is another Zach to surface and many of the attributes are such that he has never ever shown in his game such as playing a team game and defense. Of course Zach has never mentioned any of that and being a gym rat and "a hard worker" which in itself is such a devalued term will not fix any of it.

Missing consistency does not even begin to tell the story. It is not about one facet of his game being bad. It is everything with the exception of being flashy.

Hopefully Bulls are right betting on him but it is my opinion that they took a medium reward super high risk proposition to bet on.

Attributes that have been shown by Zach already include an ability to knock down threes at a very good rate, create shots for himself, get to and finish at the rim, okay passing ability, and okay on ball defense. If all those things are out together on a consistent basis, you have a really good player. There’s not a skill you’re hoping for him to develop, so it’s not a leap to see it coming together.

Saying everything is terrible is such hyperbole, and I’m just really shocked how much I’m seeing it. How can Bulls fans not see that Zach has impressive basketball skills to build off of?

[madvillian]

My only question is, how was this not obvious when lavine was included on the deal for Jimmy and a deal for him was right around the corner?

How are people satisfied with the return for Jimmy then upset when one of the stipulations for the pieces in that return was taking care of the unrestricted free agent that came in the return?

When all you land is a 7th pick Why would they continue tanking? Especially now with the changes in the system that happens after the bulls decided to trade butler.

They got Lauri and Dunn out of the deal. That's a solid starter at worst and another potential solid starter or at worst solid backup PG on a contender.

Information changed from the time of the trade to now and the Bulls, rather than be happy that they got good value (good job scouting team on Lauri) decided to "go big or go home" when there was ZERO reason to go big or go home.

The biggest problem the FO has is that they are incredibly rigid in their thought process and do not adapt on the fly.

What information changed?

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

Lauri turned into the potential 2nd banana on the next great Bulls team and Zach gave 25+ games of evidence that he's the same no D playing chucker that he was before the injury.

So what if you didn't get three studs from the trade, you got one and possibly one solid starter. Just move on.

[MisterRoy]

Something to keep in mind...we now have someone that can create their own shot. We sorely lacked that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[blicka]

Only the analytic geeks who don't watch games and are angry.4 years 78 mil with injury protection is a good deal for a 23 year old

If lavine doesn't workout like the bulls hope then they can trade him.There's always some dumb ass desperate team like the kings or nets who will take him.

You don't let assets walk for silly pie in the sky scenarios like 2 max slots

[sami71]

Didn’t the eye test show spurts of superstar ability mixed in with inconsistency and trying to do too much? I don’t get how anyone can say he failed the eye test. What I saw is an ability to create/get to the rim I didn’t know he had in his game. Add that to his previously demonstrated ability to hit 3’s at a high rate, and all he’s missing is consistency. That’s something you expect to take some time coming off an injury, but all the skills are already there.

Superstar ability for one game. A lot of consistent chucking a black hole in offense and completely detached from his team and very consistent bad to terrible defense. A fixed consistency would make him still a terrible player.

What apologists and Bulls are hoping for is another Zach to surface and many of the attributes are such that he has never ever shown in his game such as playing a team game and defense. Of course Zach has never mentioned any of that and being a gym rat and "a hard worker" which in itself is such a devalued term will not fix any of it.

Missing consistency does not even begin to tell the story. It is not about one facet of his game being bad. It is everything with the exception of being flashy.

Hopefully Bulls are right betting on him but it is my opinion that they took a medium reward super high risk proposition to bet on.

Attributes that have been shown by Zach already include an ability to knock down threes at a very good rate, create shots for himself, get to and finish at the rim, okay passing ability, and okay on ball defense. If all those things are out together on a consistent basis, you have a really good player. There’s not a skill you’re hoping for him to develop, so it’s not a leap to see it coming together.

Saying everything is terrible is such hyperbole, and I’m just really shocked how much I’m seeing it. How can Bulls fans not see that Zach has impressive basketball skills to build off of?

I have seen no indication of okay passing ability and less indication of okay defense. The rest of it is all about Zach and flash and not about the team and winning. I guess we disagree.

[ZOMG]

Only the analytic geeks who don't watch games and are angry.4 years 78 mil with injury protection is a good deal for a 23 year old

If lavine doesn't workout like the bulls hope then they can trade him.There's always some dumb ass desperate team like the kings or nets who will take him.

You don't let assets walk for silly pie in the sky scenarios like 2 max slots

Nice analysis.

I watch the games, and he didn't look like a winning basketball player at any stage.

And (eventually) winning is the point here. The point is not for LaVine to average 26ppg in losses or to get him an All-Star nod.

[madvillian]

Only the analytic geeks who don't watch games and are angry.4 years 78 mil with injury protection is a good deal for a 23 year old

If lavine doesn't workout like the bulls hope then they can trade him.There's always some dumb ass desperate team like the kings or nets who will take him.

You don't let assets walk for silly pie in the sky scenarios like 2 max slots

Nice analysis.

I watch the games, and he didn't look like a winning basketball player at any stage.

And (eventually) winning is the point here. The point is not for LaVine to average 26ppg or get him an All-Star nod.

I like how he says the Bulls can just pawn him off on some dumbass team -- like the Kings...bruh, we just outdumbed the Kings. They aren't gonna give Chicago a 2nd chance here.

[GameBredAPBT]

(In my Lakers fan voice) Yeah we will definitely have a lineup next season of

Kyrie/LaVine/Buckets/Lauri/AD

That should be enough to take Warrior gods the distance.

The Lakers aren't a fa destination. No more than any other team. James signing there was highly bizarre & irregular. The last relevant guy they signed was like Nash or something way back, during his dying days. The boozer signing when it went down was superior to that one. The only thing that wards people from the Bulls is their brass

Lakers just got the best player in the game despite not having a ready made contender. Kawhi is demanding to go there. They will highly likely land another big fish next year be it Kawhi, Jimmy, or Cousins if he proves himself, etc.


I would have preferred to have seen us go into next summer with 2 MAX slots and take a swing at the Jimmy/Kawhi combo. Even though it's a long shot

The Lakers throughout their history have acquired many established superstars via trades and free agency. Us on the other hand, the next superstar we get thru either Avenue will be the 1st since Dennis Rodman in 1995. And this current regime would have never in a million years traded for him due to his character

James going there is one of the most bizarre, nonsensical things to happen in recent memory. Leonard wanting to go there was supremely odd as well, but I suppose makes more sense now that James is there. Still, a very strange situation, the entire thing. Cousins is finished. The only other elite player to return from an Achilles rupture is Dominique Wilkins. The Warriors signed him to such a small number because they know he's likely done, but they can afford to bet on the .0000000001% that he regains even a fraction of what he had.

The Lakers have signed the free agents they have due to two draft picks they made: Johnson & Bryant. People wanted to play with those guys because they wanted the chance to win. The Bulls, on the other hand, never ever needed to spend the unnecessary money on free agents, because Krause drafted so well. They had no desire to sign anyone they didn't need. Since then, the Bulls have never really been in a situation to sign a marquee free agent. The initial post-Jordan botched rebuild, Curry & Chandler busting, Jay Williams in the motorcycle wreck, the "Baby Bulls" not panning out...then fast forward to the Derrick Rose draft. During James & Bosh's free agency that year, the Bulls were completely unproven. They had cap space, but Miami had a proven all-time great SG in Wade. There were big time doubts about whether or not Rose would make the jump to great player. He did break out the following year, but obviously he completely fell apart shortly thereafter. Even so, the Bulls were still able to sign Boozer, who, at the time, was considered by far & away the third best free agent that off-season, with many teams, including the Lakers, vying for him.

Since then, it's been blunder after blunder, shady story after shady story of mistreatment of both talent & staff alike, etc etc etc. That, and only that, is the reason that the Bulls have a nasty reputation amongst players. I'm of the belief that they're trying to alter this perception, but after all the damage they've done to the Bulls good name, it's going to take a good deal of time.

Also, Garpax being big on "character" is also some weird dumb, self-loathing myth over on the Bulls board. They drafted Joachim Noah, who's #1 concern around his future in the League was a volatile attitude. They signed Rondo & Wade. They tried to build around Jimmy Butler. They drafted Tyrus Thomas. They signed Boozer, who had a very shady rep in Utah. So on & so forth.

[jc23]

does this season count as year one of the deal?

[League Circles]

Everyone knew the Bulls were going to have to pay him when the trade was made.

What on Earth do you mean? They didn't have to pay him.

Sure. They can let Dunn walk when he comes up too. Acquiring young assets, and then letting them walk for nothing. What a great tank strategy.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

And of course they absolutely should let Dunn walk if he doesn't improve significantly. Players are really only assets if they are good Beyond their rookie contracts.

Miami let #2 overall pick Michael Beasley walk for nothing to the tune of 4 consecutive finals and 2 rings. The Lakers just let a top 10 pick walk in Randle so they could sign Lebron. The list goes on and on. Great teams don't commit to mediocre players for the long term. Unless they are already great and the mediocre player in question is an important role player who fills a need.

[chrispatrick]

Based on this metric, it would mean Portis, Noah Vonleh and Camron Payne were our 3 best players last year. Archie our best PG.

Portis might well have been. Vonleh and Payne didn't get enough minutes to qualify.

Disagreeing with on/off measures because you find a couple of outliers is like disagreeing with ERA because you can find a few bad pitchers who had low ERAs one season, or vice versa. It doesn't invalidate the approach; it just says, as with any metric, that what the on/off indicator suggests should be validated by other measures.

Agreed, I don’t understand the argument of comparing 4 years of consistent poor performance against data for players who don’t have enough sample size to be relevant. I don’t truly believe that anyone could think the comparison to Vonley/Payne is a good example in this situation. I’m a big analytics fan, but even I agree it can take more than a full season to draw conclusions. Using players who barely played minutes is simply silly.

Instead, find me some examples of guys who all the metrics have hated for 4 straight years who are supposedly good. I would suspect you’ll instead find a bunch of one dimensional players who don’t play defense.

[Betta Bulleavit]

does this season count as year one of the deal?

Yep.

[Benedict Miller]

I'm rooting for Zach. Good kid, hardworker, I'm happy he's back!

[blicka]

Only the analytic geeks who don't watch games and are angry.4 years 78 mil with injury protection is a good deal for a 23 year old

If lavine doesn't workout like the bulls hope then they can trade him.There's always some dumb ass desperate team like the kings or nets who will take him.

You don't let assets walk for silly pie in the sky scenarios like 2 max slots

Nice analysis.

I watch the games, and he didn't look like a winning basketball player at any stage.

And (eventually) winning is the point here. The point is not for LaVine to average 26ppg in losses or to get him an All-Star nod.

right now the bulls arent winning anything so why does it matter? Again letting a young asset go for nothing is stupid.

now let's see if lavine can improve his defense and play better and become a better overall player if not bye.

Jimmy butler is a "winning player" yet his teams are 9,8,8 seeds with him as a the lead dog and he couldn't lead the bulls to ONE win with 3 home games out of 4 vs boston after rondo was injured. If a Jimmy butler led team faced lebron in a series jimmys team will lose 100 out of 100 times. So who cares about that? talent can be molded and that's the bulls job with lavine.