Wiretap: Bulls Hope To Re-Sign Zach LaVine At $14M-$16M

[TheJordanRule]

Just said the other day in another thread booker and zach lavine have very similar advanced stats/peripherals

Difference is booker has a higher usage rate,more fga's,more mins which allows him to inflate his stats on a trash team.His defense is equally as bad/worse than lavines

Booker is gonna get 158 million, lavine won't get half of that.

3 letters, ACL.

Even if we threw out the ACL injury that Zach apologists are so eager to ignore, there's only a superficial similarity between Booker and Zach. Zach's career high PER is 14.6. Booker is far superior, with his PER at 18.1. That's the difference between a Top 60 NBA player (Booker), and the 153rd ranked NBA player (Zach). Booker is considerably younger-- he's only 21. Zach is 23. Booker scored 24.9 points per game last season. Zach's best scoring output ever has only been 18.9 points per game, although he could only manage 16.7 points per game with us last year. Booker averaged 4.7 assists per game. Zach could barely manage 3.0 assists per game. Booker averaged 1.5 more rebounds and shot much better than Zach has ever done from the free throw line. Booker has experienced a jump every year in production, going from an initial PER of 11.9, up to 14.6 in his sophomore season, to 18.1 this year. Zach started out at a PER of 11.3, and then remained in the 14 PER range for the next three seasons.

Saying Zach is like Booker is a superficial analysis. That idea seems plausible because the two do share similarities in weaknesses. Both are foul prone and bad at defense. But the claim that Zach is somehow on Booker's level because of that is patently false. Zach is nowhere near the offensive force that Booker is. Zach is far more incompetent than Booker is on the offensive side of the floor. It's like comparing Eddy Curry to Dirk Nowitzki because they both had some defensive issues and both were scorers. Just stop with the propaganda already.

[SensiBull]

Exactly. You'd think this was some sort of cartel.

It's like people are throwing up gang signs on behalf of Zach, trying to make it seem like, if the Bulls don't pay him, there will be 'consequences' from other players, as if they back each other up like that.

Meanwhile, Jimmy Butler is telling a league that is a year away from evaluation of Karl Anthony-Towns that Towns is, effectively, lazy, Bobby Portis punched Niko Mirotic in the jaw, Kyrie demanded to be traded away from LeBron, Kawhi Leonard is holding the entire Spurs franchise to ransom, John Wall and Marcin Gortat couldn't stand each other, .....

Hey. Wait a minute.

Have any of you seen some of the posters in this room and Bryan Colangelo and Zach LaVine's mom in the same place at the same time?

[SensiBull]

Like there's going to be hell to pay from other, future free agents if the Bulls don't overpay Zach LaVine.

[WindyCityBorn]

Just said the other day in another thread booker and zach lavine have very similar advanced stats/peripherals

Difference is booker has a higher usage rate,more fga's,more mins which allows him to inflate his stats on a trash team.His defense is equally as bad/worse than lavines

Booker is gonna get 158 million, lavine won't get half of that.

3 letters, ACL.

Even if we threw out the ACL injury that Zach apologists are so eager to ignore, there's only a superficial similarity between Booker and Zach. Zach's career high PER is 14.6. Booker is far superior, with his PER at 18.1. That's the difference between a Top 60 NBA player (Booker), and the 153rd ranked NBA player (Zach). Booker is considerably younger-- he's only 21. Zach is 23. Booker scored 24.9 points per game last season. Zach's best scoring output ever has only been 18.9 points per game, although he could only manage 16.7 points per game with us last year. Booker averaged 4.7 assists per game. Zach could barely manage 3.0 assists per game. Booker averaged 1.5 more rebounds and shot much better than Zach has ever done from the free throw line. Booker has experienced a jump every year in production, going from an initial PER of 11.9, up to 14.6 in his sophomore season, to 18.1 this year. Zach started out at a PER of 11.3, and then remained in the 14 PER range for the next three seasons.

Saying Zach is like Booker is a superficial analysis. That idea seems plausible because the two do share similarities in weaknesses. Both are foul prone and bad at defense. But the claim that Zach is somehow on Booker's level because of that is patently false. Zach is nowhere near the offensive force that Booker is. Zach is far more incompetent than Booker is on the offensive side of the floor. It's like comparing Eddy Curry to Dirk Nowitzki because they both had some defensive issues and both were scorers. Just stop with the propaganda already.

Booker achieved that PER this season while Zach was rehabbing a torn ACL. Prior to this season they very close in most metrics. And 18.7 is still not impressive at all for 25ppg.

[fleet]

Like there's going to be hell to pay from other, future free agents if the Bulls don't overpay Zach LaVine.

Still the same team that overpaid for Ben Wallace. Aaaand, Felicio. D-Wade. They. Just. Might. But yeah, there isn't an agent in the league that expects overpayment. Although, they might like fishing in Chicago.

[TheJordanRule]

3 letters, ACL.

Even if we threw out the ACL injury that Zach apologists are so eager to ignore, there's only a superficial similarity between Booker and Zach. Zach's career high PER is 14.6. Booker is far superior, with his PER at 18.1. That's the difference between a Top 60 NBA player (Booker), and the 153rd ranked NBA player (Zach). Booker is considerably younger-- he's only 21. Zach is 23. Booker scored 24.9 points per game last season. Zach's best scoring output ever has only been 18.9 points per game, although he could only manage 16.7 points per game with us last year. Booker averaged 4.7 assists per game. Zach could barely manage 3.0 assists per game. Booker averaged 1.5 more rebounds and shot much better than Zach has ever done from the free throw line. Booker has experienced a jump every year in production, going from an initial PER of 11.9, up to 14.6 in his sophomore season, to 18.1 this year. Zach started out at a PER of 11.3, and then remained in the 14 PER range for the next three seasons.

Saying Zach is like Booker is a superficial analysis. That idea seems plausible because the two do share similarities in weaknesses. Both are foul prone and bad at defense. But the claim that Zach is somehow on Booker's level because of that is patently false. Zach is nowhere near the offensive force that Booker is. Zach is far more incompetent than Booker is on the offensive side of the floor. It's like comparing Eddy Curry to Dirk Nowitzki because they both had some defensive issues and both were scorers. Just stop with the propaganda already.

Booker achieved that PER this season while Zach was rehabbing a torn ACL. Prior to this season they very close in most metrics. And 18.7 is still not impressive at all for 25ppg.

This is another example of how sometimes, when you're a hardcore fan of someone, you can't see the forest for the trees. Review that stuff you yourself said about Zach and then ask yourself why you're pushing for a fat contract. ACL. No longer close in most metrics. Volume scoring is not impressive at all. Etc.

[DJhitek]

Booker is a superior player to Lavine, but there isn't some large gap between the two. Lavines advances numbers suffered this year because his usage was up but shooting %'s were way down.

I actually think they are more closer than people would rather admit but I'm not Booker's biggest fan in the role he is in right now. I think Booker would take a massive leap as a player if he focused on more off the ball action and worked on his effort defensively.

I also say all of this on the pretense that I'm not a Zach Lavine fan, at all really.

[SensiBull]

Ironically, the exact same stuff that would make people take a different stance on Zach. It's not that he doesn't do what he does well enough. It's that there is more to the role than what he does.

Movement off the ball and defense are two of those things. That's the point.

Great! He can score, and, even more impressively, he can jump really, really high while doing it. I mean REALLY high, but, guess what.

The basket is still only worth 2 points and it doesn't always go in.

So, what are some of the things he can do when the ball is NOT in his hands, to contribute to the team?

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/steals/sort/avgSteals/seasontype/2/position/shooting-guards
http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/blocks/seasontype/2/position/shooting-guards
http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/rebounds/position/shooting-guards

Look at some of the names that appear in the top 20 of all three lists.

What do we pay Zach, over and above the max, when he inevitably blossoms into the absolute star that absolutely every athletic 2-Guard becomes, and he starts showing up on these other lists, if we're already paying him the max?

[WindyCityBorn]

Even if we threw out the ACL injury that Zach apologists are so eager to ignore, there's only a superficial similarity between Booker and Zach. Zach's career high PER is 14.6. Booker is far superior, with his PER at 18.1. That's the difference between a Top 60 NBA player (Booker), and the 153rd ranked NBA player (Zach). Booker is considerably younger-- he's only 21. Zach is 23. Booker scored 24.9 points per game last season. Zach's best scoring output ever has only been 18.9 points per game, although he could only manage 16.7 points per game with us last year. Booker averaged 4.7 assists per game. Zach could barely manage 3.0 assists per game. Booker averaged 1.5 more rebounds and shot much better than Zach has ever done from the free throw line. Booker has experienced a jump every year in production, going from an initial PER of 11.9, up to 14.6 in his sophomore season, to 18.1 this year. Zach started out at a PER of 11.3, and then remained in the 14 PER range for the next three seasons.

Saying Zach is like Booker is a superficial analysis. That idea seems plausible because the two do share similarities in weaknesses. Both are foul prone and bad at defense. But the claim that Zach is somehow on Booker's level because of that is patently false. Zach is nowhere near the offensive force that Booker is. Zach is far more incompetent than Booker is on the offensive side of the floor. It's like comparing Eddy Curry to Dirk Nowitzki because they both had some defensive issues and both were scorers. Just stop with the propaganda already.

Booker achieved that PER this season while Zach was rehabbing a torn ACL. Prior to this season they very close in most metrics. And 18.7 is still not impressive at all for 25ppg.

This is another example of how sometimes, when you're a hardcore fan of someone, you can't see the forest for the trees. Review that stuff you yourself said about Zach and then ask yourself why you're pushing for a fat contract. ACL. No longer close in most metrics. Volume scoring is not impressive at all. Etc.

I would be fine with LaVine getting like 4 years $75 million. Certainly not $100 million and $150 million would be absurd. Is there any one out there that believes Devin Booker will ever be good enough to be a top 5 player first option on championship caliber team. Because that is the type of deal he is signing. I'm advocating LaVine signing a 3rd option type deal.

[nomorezorro]

Booker is a superior player to Lavine, but there isn't some large gap between the two. Lavines advances numbers suffered this year because his usage was up but shooting %'s were way down.

I actually think they are more closer than people would rather admit but I'm not Booker's biggest fan in the role he is in right now. I think Booker would take a massive leap as a player if he focused on more off the ball action and worked on his effort defensively.

I also say all of this on the pretense that I'm not a Zach Lavine fan, at all really.

i think the illustrative point about booker is that he is much farther along in terms of developing the same types of lead-guard skills zach lavine needs to realize his potential of becoming a star, and it's still questionable whether booker's ceiling in that role is high enough to be the primarily offensive weapon on a contender. and booker is a year and a half younger than lavine.

booker is, of course, worth the rookie max. that's because he's shown a significantly better flash of potential than lavine at a younger age, even if they share some of the same general issues. it's also because, if booker fails to realize his ceiling, it seems clear that he could still become a very useful cog in a very effective offense.

if lavine fails to realize his ceiling — a much more likely outcome — well, who knows what use he has in the league?

[Fantastik_Goat]

Just said the other day in another thread booker and zach lavine have very similar advanced stats/peripherals

Difference is booker has a higher usage rate,more fga's,more mins which allows him to inflate his stats on a trash team.His defense is equally as bad/worse than lavines

Booker is gonna get 158 million, lavine won't get half of that.

3 letters, ACL.

Even if we threw out the ACL injury that Zach apologists are so eager to ignore, there's only a superficial similarity between Booker and Zach. Zach's career high PER is 14.6. Booker is far superior, with his PER at 18.1. That's the difference between a Top 60 NBA player (Booker), and the 153rd ranked NBA player (Zach). Booker is considerably younger-- he's only 21. Zach is 23. Booker scored 24.9 points per game last season. Zach's best scoring output ever has only been 18.9 points per game, although he could only manage 16.7 points per game with us last year. Booker averaged 4.7 assists per game. Zach could barely manage 3.0 assists per game. Booker averaged 1.5 more rebounds and shot much better than Zach has ever done from the free throw line. Booker has experienced a jump every year in production, going from an initial PER of 11.9, up to 14.6 in his sophomore season, to 18.1 this year. Zach started out at a PER of 11.3, and then remained in the 14 PER range for the next three seasons.

Saying Zach is like Booker is a superficial analysis. That idea seems plausible because the two do share similarities in weaknesses. Both are foul prone and bad at defense. But the claim that Zach is somehow on Booker's level because of that is patently false. Zach is nowhere near the offensive force that Booker is. Zach is far more incompetent than Booker is on the offensive side of the floor. It's like comparing Eddy Curry to Dirk Nowitzki because they both had some defensive issues and both were scorers. Just stop with the propaganda already.

Booker is considerably younger? Lavine was born in 95, Booker in 96. If they were closer in age they would be the same age.
Booker was drafted by a team that won 23 games. During his ascent to greatness he’s led them to 24 and 21 win seasons.
Until Lavine’s acl the careers are pretty similar, but booker had higher usage.
Like comparing Eddy Curry to Dirk Nowitzki?
I’m gonna stick with me being the reasonable one in the comparisons category.
I’m not arguing that either of them deserve a max deal, but I can understand how Lavine thinks he’s worth at least half of what Booker gets.

[BearsBulls78]

Long time lurker, finally decided to join...

I just don't see the natural instincts on LaVine. He just doesn't seem to have the feel. I think that's, in part, why Minnesota moved on from him as a point guard so quickly.

Some of it last year could've been him trying to prove he's worth the extension. But watching him in moments like on a pick and role, he was so determined to score there that he didn't make the right basketball play more often than not. The ball just sticks to him. He seemed to struggle with how to leverage Lauri in the pick and roll, which should've been a staple for us.

He's not an efficient scorer, and e doesn't do much else other than score. He hasn't had a double digit assist game since the last game of his rookie season, and has never had a double digit rebounding game. Heck, he's only had 5 or more assists in a game 50 times (out of a career 230 games) and 5 or more rebounds 53 times.

Bulls will probably just push the deal back as long as they can to get his requests down, but I'm imagining they'll only sign him to a 2 year deal with a team option for year 2. And that's probably the right decision to make.

[Kurt Heimlich]

Booker is 2X the player zach is, zero injury history 2 years younger. And that said, yikes Booker at 150M+ is one slight regression year away from being Andrew Wiggins 2.0.

Let's not try to emulate or analogize the Booker contract plz. It's not a good thing.

[SensiBull]

Long time lurker, finally decided to join...

I just don't see the natural instincts on LaVine. He just doesn't seem to have the feel. I think that's, in part, why Minnesota moved on from him as a point guard so quickly.

Some of it last year could've been him trying to prove he's worth the extension. But watching him in moments like on a pick and role, he was so determined to score there that he didn't make the right basketball play more often than not. The ball just sticks to him. He seemed to struggle with how to leverage Lauri in the pick and roll, which should've been a staple for us.

He's not an efficient scorer, and e doesn't do much else other than score. He hasn't had a double digit assist game since the last game of his rookie season, and has never had a double digit rebounding game. Heck, he's only had 5 or more assists in a game 50 times (out of a career 230 games) and 5 or more rebounds 53 times.

Bulls will probably just push the deal back as long as they can to get his requests down, but I'm imagining they'll only sign him to a 2 year deal with a team option for year 2. And that's probably the right decision to make.

Welcome!

Exactly.

That's what I saw/thought too.

[SensiBull]

Vert out of this world and never had a double-digit rebounding game.

That's like Rudy Gobert never having more than one block per game, or Kyle Korver never taking more than 5 3's in a game.

[Truebiscuit]

Vert out of this world and never had a double-digit rebounding game.

That's like Rudy Gobert never having more than one block per game, or Kyle Korver never taking more than 5 3's in a game.

Ignoring the 2 games last season where he had 9 further paints my opinion of your stance.

For comparison sake: Vince Carter averages 4.5 rebounds per game for his career.

Vert = rebounding is pretty nonSensical

[Truebiscuit]

Well, BB, it's here in this exchange:

What are you on about?

I said they told him to go out there and get his wits about him, which is what he did. It sucks that he sucked, of course we'd rather him be lights out. Fact of the matter is you're going to have rust 11 months without playing 'ball.

Hoiberg wasn't going to have him running around the floor going through screens, etc, and firing off shots. You don't do that to someone coming off an ACL tear... I thought that was common sense; apparently not.

Yes, it's reasonable that someone with an ACL tear was rusty and playing poorly. It's not reasonable to expect a big contract hand out when you're out with an ACL tear for the majority of the season and rust issues remain. That's common sense too.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I never said he should have a big contract "handed out" to him.

[SensiBull]

Try to imagine him in an offense like this:

(Skip past the first 45 seconds, which is basically just an ad)

Watch on YouTube

[Alcatraz17]

Try to imagine him in an offense like this:

(Skip past the first 45 seconds, which is basically just an ad)

Watch on YouTube

Dude...stop...please.

You have 6 posts on this page alone. We get it. You don't think Zach is a good basketball player. Are you just monitoring this thread to address anyone who possibly doesn't agree with you?

[Truebiscuit]

https://art19.com/shows/bulls-talk-podcast/episodes/82fd2d80-0bb4-4adf-a648-856f38daa462

Listen to the whole thing, but for the sake of this post listen to Kendall Gill starting at 13:20