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

[BearsBulls78]

Another team spending x should never be a barometer.

Paul Milsap, Hassan Whiteside and Andre Drummond were top 20 guys. Batum, Dwight Howard, Chandler Parsons, and Harrison Barnes were top 30.

The league locks itself out all the time because the owners can’t help themselves from spending stupidly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MisterRoy]

I am the same. It's the "what could have been" that gets me.

I wouldn't get too down about it. The Bulls definitely would have had a few more years of contending in the East with an explosive Rose that would have been great to watch. And that's no small thing. Its what you hope for as a fan.

But Derrick Rose wasn't going to pull a LeBron and age like fine wine. He wouldn't have aged well at all and we would have ended up paying him at some point for several years of a diminishing returns contract. And I'm not saying that as sour grapes even though I can't stand the guy. A lot of us were saying before he ever got hurt that once his explosiveness faded he'd decline rapidly.

All very true. If he ever would have developed a consistent 3pt shot...

[dougthonus]

IMO that's a highly flawed comparison because post-injury Rose was the product of multiple injuries, including not just the ACL but also 2 meniscus tears. Not to mention that psychologically Rose seems to have been in a far different place post-injury (as evidence by the inordinate time to return versus Zach who seems to have been if anything held back by the team rather than sitting himself out).

What is your comparison of post ACL injury guys that you would like to use?

My reply is in the sense that people seem to ignore the fact that after returning from his ACL tear that Zach LaVine has been simply god awful, a complete trainwreck, one of the worst players in the league at his position, simply not sure how to make it any more clear how absolutely, abysmally, terribly he has played.

Everyone ignores that and just says "nah, it doesn't matter, he'll be back, it was just rust". There are lots of guys that never come back from that injury and Zach LaVine has not done anything in the NBA that should make you think he will come back yet. Beyond that, he also wasn't that good before the injury and was a guy mostly valuable for "potential" and not existing performance.

Maybe this will all go away, maybe Zach will come back and show me that he was just rusty. That is a legitimate, good possibility. However, to ignore the fact that there is also a good chance that he's never the same and that even if he was the same it wouldn't be good enough doesn't make sense to me.

[Poohdini1]

I did take that into account. LaVine's shot selection sucked, but it was clear he was also chucking to make up for the minutes limit. That's not to say he doesn't have a clear issue with decision-making on offense (because he does) but it's not really a huge shock that his efficiency tanked.

Booker shoots even more than LaVine and has good efficiency, so this would be a massive, massive difference, and make them not "near twins".

Booker's production despite being healthier doesn't impress me significantly to be cool with $32M per. That makes him the 4th highest paid player at his position with zero indication that he's actually a franchise player.

I wouldn't have paid Booker the max either.

Booker's also played on one of if not the worst team in the league since he got drafted

[TheStig]

Man I hope the Kings max him. Go Kings!

[DASMACKDOWN]

Another team spending x should never be a barometer.

Paul Milsap, Hassan Whiteside and Andre Drummond were top 20 guys. Batum, Dwight Howard, Chandler Parsons, and Harrison Barnes were top 30.

The league locks itself out all the time because the owners can’t help themselves from spending stupidly.

Unfortunately this is always the barometer.

All it takes is one GM to go coo-coo and throw everything off. But Most teams are actually backed into a corner and they sort of have to keep their unproven guy at the risk of starting over.

The fortunate part of our team right now is, we arent backed into a corner. We are already at ground zero. Now its about getting the right guys to build with on our way back to the top.

If we lose Zach, we move Hutch in as a starter and do our best to get into position to get RJ Barrett next season. Which may ultimately be the better move.

No need to rush or panic.

[dougthonus]

Man I hope the Kings max him. Go Kings!

I believe the most the Kings can offer is a deal starting at 18m to start and 4/77m total.

[dougthonus]

Booker's also played on one of if not the worst team in the league since he got drafted

So was Zach.

[pipfan]

We lose Lavine we should sign Nwaba to a 1+1 TO deal, and pay him 6 or 7 million on the deal. He gets a nice payday, and we keep 2019 space.

We'd still have Holiday, Valentine, Hutch and Nwaba on the wing, and Grant can play a little 2 as well. No worries for a rebuilding year

[musiqsoulchild]

We lose Lavine we should sign Nwaba to a 1+1 TO deal, and pay him 6 or 7 million on the deal. He gets a nice payday, and we keep 2019 space.

We'd still have Holiday, Valentine, Hutch and Nwaba on the wing, and Grant can play a little 2 as well. No worries for a rebuilding year

Its dicey. For me the opportunity cost is in potentially losing out a piece that could be super helpful on a winning team.

I can see the other side as well...the one that says Zach's future salary will keep us from becoming a winning team.

[TheStig]

Man I hope the Kings max him. Go Kings!

I believe the most the Kings can offer is a deal starting at 18m to start and 4/77m total.

I hope they work out a sign and trade to get him more.

[Poohdini1]

Booker's also played on one of if not the worst team in the league since he got drafted

So was Zach.

KAT was ROY averaged 25/12 during Zach's last year, which they were 10+ under .500% when HE PLAYED.

Even Wiggins is better than anybody Booker has played with up to this point.

[dougthonus]

KAT was ROY averaged 25/12 during Zach's last year, which they were 10+ under .500% when HE PLAYED.

Even Wiggins is better than anybody Booker has played with up to this point.

You commented on Booker being on really bad teams, I said so has Zach. His teams were 16, 29, 31, and 27 wins.

I'm not sure what you mean by your point. Do you mean you think that having no good teammates makes Booker even better or that having worse results makes him worse? I don't really know what you are getting at exactly.

I'm just noting Zach LaVine has also exclusively been on bad teams though not quite as bad as Phoenix.

[dougthonus]

Man I hope the Kings max him. Go Kings!

I believe the most the Kings can offer is a deal starting at 18m to start and 4/77m total.

I hope they work out a sign and trade to get him more.

I'd be quite content to work out a S&T with the Kings. If they gave us back Hield, I'd be all in (that was one of the rumors) without even blinking.

[sh0ck]

I believe the most the Kings can offer is a deal starting at 18m to start and 4/77m total.

I hope they work out a sign and trade to get him more.

I'd be quite content to work out a S&T with the Kings. If they gave us back Hield, I'd be all in (that was one of the rumors) without even blinking.

I remember thinking how awesome Hield would be fitting next to Jimmy Butler...... haha

[Peelboy]

IMO that's a highly flawed comparison because post-injury Rose was the product of multiple injuries, including not just the ACL but also 2 meniscus tears. Not to mention that psychologically Rose seems to have been in a far different place post-injury (as evidence by the inordinate time to return versus Zach who seems to have been if anything held back by the team rather than sitting himself out).

What is your comparison of post ACL injury guys that you would like to use?

My reply is in the sense that people seem to ignore the fact that after returning from his ACL tear that Zach LaVine has been simply god awful, a complete trainwreck, one of the worst players in the league at his position, simply not sure how to make it any more clear how absolutely, abysmally, terribly he has played.

Everyone ignores that and just says "nah, it doesn't matter, he'll be back, it was just rust". There are lots of guys that never come back from that injury and Zach LaVine has not done anything in the NBA that should make you think he will come back yet. Beyond that, he also wasn't that good before the injury and was a guy mostly valuable for "potential" and not existing performance.

Maybe this will all go away, maybe Zach will come back and show me that he was just rusty. That is a legitimate, good possibility. However, to ignore the fact that there is also a good chance that he's never the same and that even if he was the same it wouldn't be good enough doesn't make sense to me.

Off the top of my head, RUssell Westbrook, Kyle Lowry, Baron Davis, and lesser players like Brandon Knight, Lou Williams, Gallinari, etc. Most of those guys returned to their former ability, and all returned in a much better way than Rose did (I speculate that in large part that's because of a combination of reinjury and mental toughness).

My main point on Lavine's 24 game stint is not that you ignore it, it's that it has minimal predictive value IMO because of the combination of circumstances. So while it's accurate that he was bad, it's minimally if at all meaningful in terms of predicting what he'll look and play like this coming season and beyond.

[BullsFTW]

I believe the most the Kings can offer is a deal starting at 18m to start and 4/77m total.

I hope they work out a sign and trade to get him more.

I'd be quite content to work out a S&T with the Kings. If they gave us back Hield, I'd be all in (that was one of the rumors) without even blinking.

Where was that reported?

[NecessaryEvil]

1+1 deal 20 mill per season.

[Red8911]

1+1 deal 20 mill per season.

This would probably be best for both sides. Lavine gets paid a lot for this year and has the opportunity to get his value back up in order to get a better multi year contract. Then bulls would have another season to evaluate him,see if he’s really worth it or not and also keeps them more in the game for next years free agency. Both would benefit out of a one plus one deal, but whoever controls the option for that second year has the upper hand, for us a team option would be best case scenario.

[TheStig]

I believe the most the Kings can offer is a deal starting at 18m to start and 4/77m total.

I hope they work out a sign and trade to get him more.

I'd be quite content to work out a S&T with the Kings. If they gave us back Hield, I'd be all in (that was one of the rumors) without even blinking.

Me too. That would be great.