2020 NBA Draft Thread: Bulls pick 4th: PT 2

[Jvaughn]

I'm not reading any debate about Clarke and Lavine --- that's the sort of disrespect that makes it embarrassing to be a Bulls fan.

Yeah I go away for one day, and I come back to see this crazy argument. We really need this next season to hurry up and get here. You'd think Lavine was Felicio or something.

[MrFortune3]

I'm not reading any debate about Clarke and Lavine --- that's the sort of disrespect that makes it embarrassing to be a Bulls fan.

It’s why we can’t have nice things anymore. We never appreciate them.

[Grodoboldo]

Read on Twitter

?s=19
I'll try to watch this. I think he's a worthy bet in the 2nd round.

[GimmeDat]

Let's put it this way (and keep in mind, I never advocated for such a trade, just weighed in on Clarke's value) -

Clarke would be top 5-7 in a re-draft. Would you trade Lavine for a top 5-7 pick? (remember, in a stronger draft than this upcoming one).

I've always liked Lavine a lot, not advocating to trade him at all, but let's not act like the above is completely lopsided.

It's not just about who is the better player right now... it's about the disparity in contract flexibility and longevity.

[Jvaughn]

Let's put it this way (and keep in mind, I never advocated for such a trade, just weighed in on Clarke's value) -

Clarke would be top 5-7 in a re-draft. Would you trade Lavine for a top 5-7 pick? (remember, in a stronger draft than this upcoming one).

I don't think it's that simple. Clarke just finished with his rookie year. And while he did play very well in his role as a 3rd big, are you willing to bank your team future that he'll sustain or improve on that to the level that you'd consider building a team around him? I'm definitely not. While Lavine may have his issues, he's way closer to being a centerpiece than Clarke may ever be. I don't think you'd find one FO that would make that trade straight up.

[kodo]

It’s why we can’t have nice things anymore. We never appreciate them.

Kevin Durant appreciates them.

Host: Kevin who are some young players that you've played against that have impressed you?

KD: ...Zach Lavine...I think he has superstar potential...

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0VgMtWsYgiYDspKvAPpwqb?si=hf8EuH-uRueUYJJGVP7jKQ

[Chicago-Bull-E]

Brandon Clarke is a monster. Depending on what a team needs, but I think most teams would take Clarke and the 15 million a year to spend elsewhere over Lavine. Clarke has the highest production rating and net rating on the Grizzlies according to 82games, as a rookie! His advanced numbers crush anything WCJ has done so far in his career.

What’s funny about Clarke is his advanced college numbers were off the charts. All the signs to be a very good player were there. Teams just ignored them and cited age.

If the Bulls could somehow guarantee getting Edwards (not really feasible), I’d probably trade Lavine for Clarke.

White
Edwards
Clarke
Lauri
WCJ

Really great balance on that team, will be really tough defensively, if Edwards can create for himself, watch out.

[MrFortune3]

It’s why we can’t have nice things anymore. We never appreciate them.

Kevin Durant appreciates them.

Host: Kevin who are some young players that you've played against that have impressed you?

KD: ...Zach Lavine...I think he has superstar potential...

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0VgMtWsYgiYDspKvAPpwqb?si=hf8EuH-uRueUYJJGVP7jKQ

If only Bulls fans did.

[nomorezorro]

brandon clarke is good on both sides of the ball and he measured out better in most advanced metrics this season. he had a very good year!

i didn't bother putting the caveat that finding a very productive role player is easier than finding a star, or that clarke still doesn't have the upside lavine does. if you can only build a team around one player, you'd take zach, obviously. but teams aren't built in a vacuum.

"guy on a rookie contract who you are almost 100% certain can effectively and valuably fill a role on your team" vs. "guy making $20 million a year who is very talented and a great scorer, but has not in six seasons demonstrated he moves the needle when it comes to winning"

[nomorezorro]

checking in with grizzlies fans



i like zach and want to keep him. i just think brandon clarke is really really really good. i promise i won't talk about it anymore please don't yell at me

[cjbulls]

Brandon Clarke is a monster. Depending on what a team needs, but I think most teams would take Clarke and the 15 million a year to spend elsewhere over Lavine. Clarke has the highest production rating and net rating on the Grizzlies according to 82games, as a rookie! His advanced numbers crush anything WCJ has done so far in his career.

What’s funny about Clarke is his advanced college numbers were off the charts. All the signs to be a very good player were there. Teams just ignored them and cited age.

If the Bulls could somehow guarantee getting Edwards (not really feasible), I’d probably trade Lavine for Clarke.

White
Edwards
Clarke
Lauri
WCJ

Really great balance on that team, will be really tough defensively, if Edwards can create for himself, watch out.

He also had t-rex arms and was undersized you even play the 4. Old, undersized power forward prospects with short arms tend to have low ceilings in the nba. I was screaming on this board for the Bulls to trade up on draft night last year so I'm not biased, but he had some big red flags.

Glad he worked out as I thought, but he needs to be the 4th/5th/6th banana to be successful. Nothing wrong with that. He will likely be a better 4th banana than Zach will ever be as a 2nd banana.

[PlayerUp]

2019 NBA Draft was supposed to be a poor draft outside the Top 3. Turned out to be quite a decent draft overall with lots of players spread out like Brandon Clarke, Tyler Herro, Coby White after Zion, Morant, RJ. I expect a similar outcome for the 2020 NBA Draft. Reason it's weaker though is this draft lacks a Zion, Morant, RJ in the Top 3. We don't have a Top 3 pick so that shouldn't matter much to us.

[PlayerUp]

What’s funny about Clarke is his advanced college numbers were off the charts. All the signs to be a very good player were there. Teams just ignored them and cited age.

His age was the exact reason he dropped. If he was 19, he would have been a Top 4 Pick. Just for reference Clarke had a 138 offensive rating, 84 defensive rating, 37.2 PER.

We can't really complain though. We have Coby White who looked pretty solid in his final games of the season.

[Jvaughn]

Brandon Clarke is a monster. Depending on what a team needs, but I think most teams would take Clarke and the 15 million a year to spend elsewhere over Lavine.

So I just want to make sure I'm understanding this part. You guys are essentially saying
Clarke + Capspace > Lavine?

[MrFortune3]

Let's put it this way (and keep in mind, I never advocated for such a trade, just weighed in on Clarke's value) -

Clarke would be top 5-7 in a re-draft. Would you trade Lavine for a top 5-7 pick? (remember, in a stronger draft than this upcoming one).

I've always liked Lavine a lot, not advocating to trade him at all, but let's not act like the above is completely lopsided.

It's not just about who is the better player right now... it's about the disparity in contract flexibility and longevity.

Even if you have Clarke, the play you would get for that extra 15 mil in space is not going to be nearly as good as LaVine.
So the point still stands. No team is trading Zach with Clarke as the centerpiece.

[drosereturn]

Let's put it this way (and keep in mind, I never advocated for such a trade, just weighed in on Clarke's value) -

Clarke would be top 5-7 in a re-draft. Would you trade Lavine for a top 5-7 pick? (remember, in a stronger draft than this upcoming one).

I've always liked Lavine a lot, not advocating to trade him at all, but let's not act like the above is completely lopsided.

It's not just about who is the better player right now... it's about the disparity in contract flexibility and longevity.

Lavine would at best be a top 5 pick as well. and he only gained that status bc he was born as a guard whereas Clarke had to freaking earn it from his draft position just because he was tall.

Lets say who do you want to start a franchise with those 2 rn, having Clarke start at 3mil is way better than a number 2 scorer who is more of a 6th man type guy ideally. Its all abt value. If you can get Curry at 12mil you win a chip bc hes doing several times more while getting several times less. cap space matters if your contending.

[drosereturn]

Brandon Clarke is a monster. Depending on what a team needs, but I think most teams would take Clarke and the 15 million a year to spend elsewhere over Lavine. Clarke has the highest production rating and net rating on the Grizzlies according to 82games, as a rookie! His advanced numbers crush anything WCJ has done so far in his career.

What’s funny about Clarke is his advanced college numbers were off the charts. All the signs to be a very good player were there. Teams just ignored them and cited age.

If the Bulls could somehow guarantee getting Edwards (not really feasible), I’d probably trade Lavine for Clarke.

White
Edwards
Clarke
Lauri
WCJ

Really great balance on that team, will be really tough defensively, if Edwards can create for himself, watch out.

This is the type of move I really want. get younger, cheaper while having more potential and buy time for the rebuild.
I think Edwards is at least Lavines caliber.

[GimmeDat]

Let's put it this way (and keep in mind, I never advocated for such a trade, just weighed in on Clarke's value) -

Clarke would be top 5-7 in a re-draft. Would you trade Lavine for a top 5-7 pick? (remember, in a stronger draft than this upcoming one).

I've always liked Lavine a lot, not advocating to trade him at all, but let's not act like the above is completely lopsided.

It's not just about who is the better player right now... it's about the disparity in contract flexibility and longevity.

Even if you have Clarke, the play you would get for that extra 15 mil in space is not going to be nearly as good as LaVine.
So the point still stands. No team is trading Zach with Clarke as the centerpiece.

I think that's pretty hard to say definitively. Plus we're talking about the combination of Clarke + whoever you sign with the cap-space, not just the signee.

Additionally, Lavine is a UFA in 2022. Clarke is an RFA with likely rookie extension in 2023. There's a lot more control long term.

[MrFortune3]

Let's put it this way (and keep in mind, I never advocated for such a trade, just weighed in on Clarke's value) -

Clarke would be top 5-7 in a re-draft. Would you trade Lavine for a top 5-7 pick? (remember, in a stronger draft than this upcoming one).

I've always liked Lavine a lot, not advocating to trade him at all, but let's not act like the above is completely lopsided.

It's not just about who is the better player right now... it's about the disparity in contract flexibility and longevity.

Even if you have Clarke, the play you would get for that extra 15 mil in space is not going to be nearly as good as LaVine.
So the point still stands. No team is trading Zach with Clarke as the centerpiece.

I think that's pretty hard to say definitively. Plus we're talking about the combination of Clarke + whoever you sign with the cap-space, not just the signee.

Additionally, Lavine is a UFA in 2022. Clarke is an RFA with likely rookie extension in 2023. There's a lot more control long term.

A player like Harrison Barnes costs the max. The only player you are getting for 15 mil is a lesser player than LaVine unless you are getting a guy coming off a cheap price it extension. And it’s still likely to be a lesser player.

[MrFortune3]

Brandon Clarke is a monster. Depending on what a team needs, but I think most teams would take Clarke and the 15 million a year to spend elsewhere over Lavine.

So I just want to make sure I'm understanding this part. You guys are essentially saying
Clarke + Capspace > Lavine?

Yep. This is the lunacy that fans are attempting to peddle.