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

[johnnyvann840]

Strat-

I used the two man lineups only to isolate a certain player and then look at how he affects and impacts the other players. So, if I start to look at EVERY Bulls player and how they played with EVERY other Bulls players I can start to see who helps and who hurts.. Try it. Look at Dunn, Valentine, Lauri, Lopez, Grant, Niko, Holiday, Nwaba. EVERYBODY. Start going through their two man results and you start to see a common denominator (Lavine) in terrible lineups. Even players who were net positive on the season were negative with Zach.

Anyway, I said I was done criticizing him.. and I am. It's just that talking about stats and how to use them starts to become criticizing Zach simply because the scoreboard don't lie and it makes him look terrible, regardless of his own individual pts.

[The Force.]

Yeah this is concerning and points to Zach's selfishness as a player. Watching his highlights, the skill is apparent but so is his tunnel vision. He rarely looks to pass unless absolutely necessary or it's a designed play. Other than that he's gunning for his shot. Mind you, he's certainly good enough to get his shot off almost anywhere on the court, and consistently gets to the rim in traffic, but creating for others is not one of his strong-suits.

Now that he got his contract one of two things will happen: 1) he will play more unselfishly and learn to assimilate to Fred's system or 2) he will haphazardly assume the role of 'alpha' and become a supreme gunner

I'm very curious to see which path he takes. If it's the latter this signing will quickly become an albatross.

[Stratmaster]

Strat-

I used the two man lineups only to isolate a certain player and then look at how he affects and impacts the other players. So, if I start to look at EVERY Bulls player and how they played with EVERY other Bulls players I can start to see who helps and who hurts.. Try it. Look at Dunn, Valentine, Lauri, Lopez, Grant, Niko, Holiday, Nwaba. EVERYBODY. Start going through their two man results and you start to see a common denominator (Lavine) in terrible lineups. Even players who were net positive on the season were negative with Zach.

Anyway, I said I was done criticizing him.. and I am. It's just that talking about stats and how to use them starts to become criticizing Zach simply because the scoreboard don't lie and it makes him look terrible, regardless of his own individual pts.

All fair enough. My only comment is I dont think you can take anything away from last season on zach other than his knee seems healed. It was obvious the purpose of his minutes on the court was for his rehab. That won't be the case this season.

If you want to point to his pre-injury numbers in Minnesota and you believe that he will not improve over those so be it. (Was he a ball hogging chucker there?) There is no argument against that other than me saying I believe he still has upside.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Habs72]

Well, we have 24 games and 420 minutes that Lavine and Lauri played together. We have 2020 minutes of Lauri total. So, 1600 minutes Lauri played without Zach and 420 minutes with Zach on the floor. Lauris shots per game and 3 pt attempts per game were down drastically and his efficiency and shooting %'s all took a big hit when Zach was on the floor. Zach and Lauri two man lineup together for 420 minutes the Bulls got beat by a whopping 13.2 pts per 100 possessions. Which is right around what the Bulls as a team got beat by whenever Lavine was on the floor. So, we can deduce from looking at all the data together and against other lineups, many other lineups and see that the Bulls as a team got worse by 6.3 pts worse, or beaten by 13.2 PP100 versus about 6.9 PP100 whenever Zach/ was off the floor. Bulls were bad last year, we know this, but with Zach on the floor they were about twice as bad in pt differential.

And how much of those minutes were Dunn outta lineup? Nothing to do with anything?

Well, let's see...

Dunn/Lauri/Zach played together for 256 minutes. But, what is more valuable is looking at ALL of Dunn and Lavine together because we have two different teams and many different lineups.

With just Dunn and Lavine together last season (we only have 370 minutes), but they were a staggering negative -18.4 PP100. Meaning whenever Dunn and Lavine played together, the Bulls got KILLED by 18.4 pts per 100. Dunn and Lavine together didn't work in Minnesota either.
This is where looking at Lavine isolated with EVERY player he played with can be used for context....

Notice that it doesn't matter who he was on the floor with. He made every player worse... You can go individually and see how every player on the Bulls performed with every other player on the Bulls and you start to see a common denominator with terrible lineups. Zach being that common denominator. Look at the pts column in the two man lineups..
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01/lineups/2018#all_lineups-2-man

So, one would say that Dunn is considered a pretty good defender and and LaVine a pretty bad...right?
lets see:

Dunn+Markkanen -10,5 in +1100mins
LaVine+Markkanen -13,4 in +400mins

I see not that much of a difference. Also Dunn´s and LaVine´s 2-Man comps dont differ that much except time played and that LaVine was injured with the stretch run and Dunn wasnt. But then again you can toggle these stats as much as you want from last year, data is still lacking and i thought you said you leave LaVine be and give him a chance to prove himself and yet here you are again ?

[johnnyvann840]

So, one would say that Dunn is considered a pretty good defender and and LaVine a pretty bad...right?
lets see:

Dunn+Markkanen -10,5 in +1100mins
LaVine+Markkanen -13,4 in +400mins

I see not that much of a difference. Also Dunn´s and LaVine´s 2-Man comps dont differ that much except time played and that LaVine was injured with the stretch run and Dunn wasnt. But then again you can toggle these stats as much as you want from last year, data is still lacking and i thought you said you leave LaVine be and give him a chance to prove himself and yet here you are again ?

3 pts per 100 doesn't seem like much only because both of those samples are terrible and over 10 PP100 negative. But 3 pts per 100 is quite a lot. What you have to do though, because these are not large samples is start to look for common denominators. Why was Dunn and Lauri such a bad two man. How was that two man with Lavine and without Lavine? How many minutes did they play together with and without Zach, in that two man. So, we start to look at how bad that two man is with other players. Is there one player who is skewing everybody? Sometimes there is. Take a look at how incredibly awful the three man combination is of Lauri/Dunn/Lavine. An almost unbelievable negative -20.5 PP100. But look at Lavine/Lauri/Nwaba. Even worse. -21.2. So was it Dunn or Lavine making that combo bad? Keep going deeper now... Look at those players do with other players.. You can see now that Lavine just made everybody he played with worse and almost every two man, ,three man, four man and complete 5 man lineups get worse when you add one certain player (Z. Lavine). Play around with it a little and you will see what I mean. Go to a different player like Lauri.. See the lower link... Take Dunn/Lauri and now replace Zach (or Nwaba) with Holiday... that combo is only -5.4 which is actually about 1.5 pts per100 BETTER than the Bulls were as a team. It's over 800 minutes and still not a huge sample but when we start to compare you see the common denominator in the worst lineups again (Lavine) Holiday/Dunn/Lauri were actually a net positive against the Bulls mean as a team. Still a net neg on the whole but better than the Bulls team as a whole. Whereas, Dunn//Lavine/Lauri are -20.5 or about -13.5 pts worse than the Bulls as a team. See what I mean about context?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01/lineups/2018#all_lineups-3-man


https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/markkla01/lineups/2018#all_lineups-3-man

[MrFortune3]

So, one would say that Dunn is considered a pretty good defender and and LaVine a pretty bad...right?
lets see:

Dunn+Markkanen -10,5 in +1100mins
LaVine+Markkanen -13,4 in +400mins

I see not that much of a difference. Also Dunn´s and LaVine´s 2-Man comps dont differ that much except time played and that LaVine was injured with the stretch run and Dunn wasnt. But then again you can toggle these stats as much as you want from last year, data is still lacking and i thought you said you leave LaVine be and give him a chance to prove himself and yet here you are again ?

3 pts per 100 doesn't seem like much only because both of those samples are terrible and over 10 PP100 negative. But 3 pts per 100 is quite a lot. What you have to do though, because these are not large samples is start to look for common denominators. Why was Dunn and Lauri such a bad two man. How was that two man with Lavine and without Lavine? How many minutes did they play together with and without Zach, in that two man. So, we start to look at how bad that two man is with other players. Is there one player who is skewing everybody? Sometimes there is. Take a look at how incredibly awful the three man combination is of Lauri/Dunn/Lavine. An almost unbelievable negative -20.5 PP100. But look at Lavine/Lauri/Nwaba. Even worse. -21.2. So was it Dunn or Lavine making that combo bad? Keep going deeper now... Look at those players do with other players.. You can see now that Lavine just made everybody he played with worse and almost every two man, ,three man, four man and complete 5 man lineups get worse when you add one certain player (Z. Lavine). Play around with it a little and you will see what I mean. Go to a different player like Lauri.. See the lower link... Take Dunn/Lauri and now replace Zach (or Nwaba) with Holiday... that combo is only -5.4 which is actually about 1.5 pts per100 BETTER than the Bulls were as a team. It's over 800 minutes and still not a huge sample but when we start to compare you see the common denominator in the worst lineups again (Lavine) Holiday/Dunn/Lauri were actually a net positive against the Bulls mean as a team. Still a net neg on the whole but better than the Bulls team as a whole. Whereas, Dunn//Lavine/Lauri are -20.5 or about -13.5 pts worse than the Bulls as a team. See what I mean about context?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01/lineups/2018#all_lineups-3-man


https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01/lineups/2018#all_lineups-3-man

So basically your stance is that not only will Lauri not improve as a scorer and defender but neither will Zach by getting healthy and having no rust from injury?

Cause that's all that the data you are utilizing says. Dunn and LaVine were both developing players in Minnesota(Dunn and Rubio were pretty much the only defenders on that team then), Dunn is still developing and LaVine is adjusting to being the primary scorer and franchise player.
Lauri is developing and again... LaVine is adjusting to being the primary scorer and franchise player.

How about we let them actually grow together, play as one for a full season or more and then look back at the stats.

[johnnyvann840]

So, one would say that Dunn is considered a pretty good defender and and LaVine a pretty bad...right?
lets see:

Dunn+Markkanen -10,5 in +1100mins
LaVine+Markkanen -13,4 in +400mins

I see not that much of a difference. Also Dunn´s and LaVine´s 2-Man comps dont differ that much except time played and that LaVine was injured with the stretch run and Dunn wasnt. But then again you can toggle these stats as much as you want from last year, data is still lacking and i thought you said you leave LaVine be and give him a chance to prove himself and yet here you are again ?

3 pts per 100 doesn't seem like much only because both of those samples are terrible and over 10 PP100 negative. But 3 pts per 100 is quite a lot. What you have to do though, because these are not large samples is start to look for common denominators. Why was Dunn and Lauri such a bad two man. How was that two man with Lavine and without Lavine? How many minutes did they play together with and without Zach, in that two man. So, we start to look at how bad that two man is with other players. Is there one player who is skewing everybody? Sometimes there is. Take a look at how incredibly awful the three man combination is of Lauri/Dunn/Lavine. An almost unbelievable negative -20.5 PP100. But look at Lavine/Lauri/Nwaba. Even worse. -21.2. So was it Dunn or Lavine making that combo bad? Keep going deeper now... Look at those players do with other players.. You can see now that Lavine just made everybody he played with worse and almost every two man, ,three man, four man and complete 5 man lineups get worse when you add one certain player (Z. Lavine). Play around with it a little and you will see what I mean. Go to a different player like Lauri.. See the lower link... Take Dunn/Lauri and now replace Zach (or Nwaba) with Holiday... that combo is only -5.4 which is actually about 1.5 pts per100 BETTER than the Bulls were as a team. It's over 800 minutes and still not a huge sample but when we start to compare you see the common denominator in the worst lineups again (Lavine) Holiday/Dunn/Lauri were actually a net positive against the Bulls mean as a team. Still a net neg on the whole but better than the Bulls team as a whole. Whereas, Dunn//Lavine/Lauri are -20.5 or about -13.5 pts worse than the Bulls as a team. See what I mean about context?

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01/lineups/2018#all_lineups-3-man


https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01/lineups/2018#all_lineups-3-man

So basically your stance is that not only will Lauri not improve as a scorer and defender but neither will Zach by getting healthy and having no rust from injury?

Cause that's all that the data you are utilizing says. Dunn and LaVine were both developing players in Minnesota(Dunn and Rubio were pretty much the only defenders on that team then), Dunn is still developing and LaVine is adjusting to being the primary scorer and franchise player.
Lauri is developing and again... LaVine is adjusting to being the primary scorer and franchise player.

How about we let them actually grow together, play as one for a full season or more and then look back at the stats.

I'm not saying, AT ALL, in any way, that Lauri will not improve as a defender or scorer. I'm saying that Lavine really threw a left handed monkey wrench into what Lauri was doing last year before he came back. I'm not going to explain the data any more than I have or what I glean from it. It should be obvious and what you are stating it shows is not even close to what it shows.

I think Lauri WILL improve a LOT. I just hope Lavine lets him because last season Lauri fell apart when Zach played... so did Dunn. THAT is partly what that data shows. and why I said you have to look at several different combinations to get to the common denominator making so many lineups bad (Lavine). For instance, the Dunn/Lauri combination was terrible but look at the minutes with Lavine -20.5. and the minutes without Lavine. It is night and day. So, I'm concluding that Dunn and Lauri were really really bad when on the floor with Zach (negative -20.5) and that skews their two man data.

Now if you want to go back and look at my posts again and read them carefully fine. But if you are going to state something that is not true or completely misunderstand the data, then it's a futile conversation to have. Not everybody will understand what I'm trying to say. Some will.

btw, the original post had the same link which was Zach's twice when I referenced the bottom one to be Lauri's (accidental)... I had to edit it and put Lauri's link for his lineups in place. Which it is now. But your quote has the duplicate Lavine lineup links.

[sami71]

My only comment is I dont think you can take anything away from last season on zach other than his knee seems healed. It was obvious the purpose of his minutes on the court was for his rehab. That won't be the case this season.

There is a lot of speculation, I would even say blind hope that he will turn out to be a different player. All I see is him wanting to be the man and achieve personal goals while telling everyone how great he is. I would love to be wrong but I very much doubt that I am.

I will wear a Zach avatar as long as he is a Bull if he turns out even trying to play a team game instead of going iso and hero and if he is a net positive player next season.

[Habs72]

My only comment is I dont think you can take anything away from last season on zach other than his knee seems healed. It was obvious the purpose of his minutes on the court was for his rehab. That won't be the case this season.

There is a lot of speculation, I would even say blind hope that he will turn out to be a different player. All I see is him wanting to be the man and achieve personal goals while telling everyone how great he is. I would love to be wrong but I very much doubt that I am.

I will wear a Zach avatar as long as he is a Bull if he turns out even trying to play a team game instead of going iso and hero and if he is a net positive player next season.

Hoiberg wont be allowing that even if that would be the case. If he would it would be a career suicide for the coach too as it is his final contract year.

[Sinistar6]

I am so happy we are givin ZL the keys to the car for the for-Seeable future. I am probably his biggest fan and am super excited.
He is incredibly skilled offensively, has world class athleticism, and wants to be a star at 23 years old.

I understand his plus minus is worrisome but when I watch him I see someone that can win games by himself.

[Jcool0]

Read on Twitter

[Ice Man]

ESPN has an article today suggesting that many in the NBA regard the Levine signing as this year's worst summer deal. Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. My point is that sometimes in this thread it has been suggested that only Bulls fans question this deal, that they are being particularly hard on their own. That is not true.

[Sinistar6]

ESPN has an article today suggesting that many in the NBA regard the Levine signing as this year's worst summer deal. Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. My point is that sometimes in this thread it has been suggested that only Bulls fans question this deal, that they are being particularly hard on their own. That is not true.

I think this article was by Nick Friedell, which is as homer of an ESPN source as it gets...so it is kind of still true.

Actually I saw the article and you were right, my bad.

[BR0D1E86]

ESPN has an article today suggesting that many in the NBA regard the Levine signing as this year's worst summer deal. Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. My point is that sometimes in this thread it has been suggested that only Bulls fans question this deal, that they are being particularly hard on their own. That is not true.

Bleacher report had an article recently about players that have almost no chance to live up to their deals. Lavine was #1 on the list.

To be fair, though, we hadn’t signed Parker yet.

[Stratmaster]

ESPN has an article today suggesting that many in the NBA regard the Levine signing as this year's worst summer deal. Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. My point is that sometimes in this thread it has been suggested that only Bulls fans question this deal, that they are being particularly hard on their own. That is not true.

Oh the price is too high, no doubt; but unfortunately the price was dictated by the Sac offer.

There is a difference between slightly overpaying a player and that player being a bust who sucks the life out of your team.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Leslie Forman]

ESPN has an article today suggesting that many in the NBA regard the Levine signing as this year's worst summer deal. Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. My point is that sometimes in this thread it has been suggested that only Bulls fans question this deal, that they are being particularly hard on their own. That is not true.

Oh the price is too high, no doubt; but unfortunately the price was dictated by the Sac offer.

There is a difference between slightly overpaying a player and that player being a bust who sucks the life out of your team.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

The players on those kinds of contracts are often the worst of all because they're just good enough to make you think they're worth it but in reality you'd be better of just knowing they stink and ignoring them in your future plans.

[Hangtime84]

I am so happy we are givin ZL the keys to the car for the for-Seeable future. I am probably his biggest fan and am super excited.
He is incredibly skilled offensively, has world class athleticism, and wants to be a star at 23 years old.

I understand his plus minus is worrisome but when I watch him I see someone that can LOSE games by himself.

FIXED THAT FOR YA

[SensiBull]

Too many people on this board who think conducting a lot of fuchery around what you've just put in writing is somehow going to create some sort of 'come to Jesus' moment of realization and repentance.

Too much "Did you just say (insert something plainly implausible)"?

Juvenile.

[erlim]

ESPN has an article today suggesting that many in the NBA regard the Levine signing as this year's worst summer deal. Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. My point is that sometimes in this thread it has been suggested that only Bulls fans question this deal, that they are being particularly hard on their own. That is not true.

Just wait until they see our Jabari Parker deal.

[sco]

Read on Twitter

Gotta say, if a guy says he wants to be a ball hog ISO player, I like the way that Zach says it better than Parker. Vince definitely was trying to lead him down that path. Too bad he didn't go after his defense!