Lauri:' I can make the comeback'

[ZOMG]

The bottom line is Lauri needs to become elite at *something* to justify being misfit at either the 4 or the 5.

Right now, he’s kind of average at everything: shooting, post play, passing, rebounding.

Not sure I agree. Yes, it would be ideal to have a truly elite NBA skill, but there's a lot of people in the league that are greater than the sum of their parts, and some of them are very highly paid. It doesn't hurt when you're also 7ft tall.

[sami71]

I don't think there is much for the Bulls to gain by offering Lauri an early extension. He had a terrible season and I think he knows it. But he also thinks he can make a "come back" and I assume his mind set about his career is based on that idea of getting back to second year form - or worse if he is completely deluded - to the idea of that one February so long ago. If the Bulls give him 12 or more a year and he comes back like he was last year, it will be a bad contract for four years. If he comes back at 20/10 - how much more will it be? Not much more.

[PaKii94]

I don't think there is much for the Bulls to gain by offering Lauri an early extension. He had a terrible season and I think he knows it. But he also thinks he can make a "come back" and I assume his mind set about his career is based on that idea of getting back to second year form - or worse if he is completely deluded - to the idea of that one February so long ago. If the Bulls give him 12 or more a year and he comes back like he was last year, it will be a bad contract for four years. If he comes back at 20/10 - how much more will it be? Not much more.

20/10 production wise would be close to a max contact. Impact wise? I'm not so sure

[cjbulls]

I don't think there is much for the Bulls to gain by offering Lauri an early extension. He had a terrible season and I think he knows it. But he also thinks he can make a "come back" and I assume his mind set about his career is based on that idea of getting back to second year form - or worse if he is completely deluded - to the idea of that one February so long ago. If the Bulls give him 12 or more a year and he comes back like he was last year, it will be a bad contract for four years. If he comes back at 20/10 - how much more will it be? Not much more.

His numbers last year are worth about 12 million so I’m not sure how you can say he’d be on a bad contract. Never thought I’d be the one defending Lauri on here btw.

[Swuul]

Rather would wait than to try and get a discount.

If Bulls offer the QO, Lauri will take it without blinking his eyes. You do not have to worry about waiting

[dougthonus]

I don't think there is much for the Bulls to gain by offering Lauri an early extension. He had a terrible season and I think he knows it. But he also thinks he can make a "come back" and I assume his mind set about his career is based on that idea of getting back to second year form - or worse if he is completely deluded - to the idea of that one February so long ago. If the Bulls give him 12 or more a year and he comes back like he was last year, it will be a bad contract for four years. If he comes back at 20/10 - how much more will it be? Not much more.

20/10 production wise would be close to a max contact. Impact wise? I'm not so sure

Nikola Mirotic rejected 3/45 from Utah after having a similar year in 18/19 to Lauri's season in 19/20. Mirotic's was actually better that season. I'd say they actually have extremely similar profiles. Guys expected to be stretch fours that actually were better attacking closeouts and were dicey defensively (I'd give Niko the edge there though).

Lauri vs Niko, most recent years

I'm not sure if you're paying a premium still on what Lauri might due as a young player, but I wouldn't go past Niko's number of 15M per year and think that number gives Lauri a premium still relative to his last year of performance.

[dougthonus]

Rather would wait than to try and get a discount.

If Bulls offer the QO, Lauri will take it without blinking his eyes. You do not have to worry about waiting

Lauri is under contract this year, they would offer him the QO next year regardless to put him in restricted status.

Why do you think Lauri would take the QO? That's an extremely disadvantageous contract for the player most of the time. You seem to think Lauri is a moron, Lauri is awful, or simply are ignorant to basketball economics all together.

[cjbulls]

I don't think there is much for the Bulls to gain by offering Lauri an early extension. He had a terrible season and I think he knows it. But he also thinks he can make a "come back" and I assume his mind set about his career is based on that idea of getting back to second year form - or worse if he is completely deluded - to the idea of that one February so long ago. If the Bulls give him 12 or more a year and he comes back like he was last year, it will be a bad contract for four years. If he comes back at 20/10 - how much more will it be? Not much more.

20/10 production wise would be close to a max contact. Impact wise? I'm not so sure

Nikola Mirotic rejected 3/45 from Utah after having a similar year in 18/19 to Lauri's season in 19/20. Mirotic's was actually better that season. I'd say they actually have extremely similar profiles. Guys expected to be stretch fours that actually were better attacking closeouts and were dicey defensively (I'd give Niko the edge there though).

Lauri vs Niko, most recent years

I'm not sure if you're paying a premium still on what Lauri might due as a young player, but I wouldn't go past Niko's number of 15M per year and think that number gives Lauri a premium still relative to his last year of performance.

I think it hinges on how you want to judge last year. Do you think that is the current and future Lauri?

Even Lauri pessimists like myself recognize something was off with Lauri mentally and/or physically but think it’s probable he shakes off those issues.

[Louri]

Lauri MIP confirmed.

[dougthonus]

I think it hinges on how you want to judge last year. Do you think that is the current and future Lauri?

If it was the future of Lauri, I wouldn't offer him an extension of over 10M per year.

Even Lauri pessimists like myself recognize something was off with Lauri mentally and/or physically but think it’s probable he shakes off those issues.

I think 15M per year represents reasonable value with a 1-2M per year hair cut for getting security. Lauri, even when playing well, can only defend one position on the floor, so kills your defensive versatility, and is a good scorer, but can't initiate or create offense on his own, so you still need someone else to be doing a lot of the work.

This makes Lauri fairly limited in value IMO. He's just a guy who can chip in points, but not do much else.

[coldfish]

To a large degree, I think a lot of people are behind the times. Lauri was a 4 back in the days when stretch 4's just started appearing. Nowadays, 4's are actually far more athletic and shooting the 3 is a full expectation. No one in the league wants to start a 4 who can't shoot. Pascal Siakam is a prototypical 4, not Lauri.

Frankly he wouldn't be any good at the 4 in any era. Even Ryan Anderson really didn't work there - he didn't even start half the games in his career, and he was absolutely atrocious in the playoffs. The Rockets regretted signing him immediately and didn't even have him in the rotation by the end of his second year there. He basically became a 12th man by the time he was 30.

And this is a guy who was better than Lauri. Any time before the 2010s, of course, Lauri would have just been absolutely wrecked by all the more post-oriented 4s of the time. Imagine him going up against the likes of McHale, Barkley, Malone, Kemp. Even combo forwards back then were guys like Larry goddamn Bird, Chambers, McDaniel, Schrempf.

He is simply the deadly combination of soft and slow - not just physically, but in terms of processing the game. He is the antithesis of what Karnisovas wants, judging by the Williams draft pick. If he wants a new contract here, he better come in looking like he was on the Barry Bonds vitamin plan these last eight months.

I assume he's just gonna be the same exact guy he has been for these last four years in America, however.

I do see why certain people are enamored with Lauri. He isn't slow for a 7 footer and does have some driving abilities. If he were to accept certain things, I think he could be a good player. I just don't think he or the people around him accept him as a big and look at him as a wing. He just doesn't have the skills or speed to play the game he seems to want to play at an NBA level.

IMO, as a perimeter 5 he could be an asset but he really needs to learn help defense or be willing to body up people like Embiid.

[sami71]

I don't think there is much for the Bulls to gain by offering Lauri an early extension. He had a terrible season and I think he knows it. But he also thinks he can make a "come back" and I assume his mind set about his career is based on that idea of getting back to second year form - or worse if he is completely deluded - to the idea of that one February so long ago. If the Bulls give him 12 or more a year and he comes back like he was last year, it will be a bad contract for four years. If he comes back at 20/10 - how much more will it be? Not much more.

His numbers last year are worth about 12 million so I’m not sure how you can say he’d be on a bad contract. Never thought I’d be the one defending Lauri on here btw.

Well, yes, if he had played the whole season. But once more he was fatigued and shut down, and it wasn't the first time. What is with that? That and the fact that he has been regressing rather than progressing. I am not at all optimistic.

[Rimspy]

Better trade him for peanuts then. That way you can eat the salt and keep it for later.

[Dez]

Advocating 10-12 is a bit over the top. Might as well not make him an offer so you don’t piss him off. I am down on Lauri almost as much as anyone, but that’s 7th man money. Or MLE money. He put up 19 and 9 at age 22.

Looking at just FA last year, here are the guys closest to that range in average annual value and/or position

Jerami Grant - 20M
Bertans - 16M
Morris - 16M
M. Beasley - 14.9M
Clarkson - 12.88
C. Wood - 13.7
KCP - 13.1
Crowder - 9.7M
Derick Jones Jr - 9.5M

I would say that Lauri’s value in production + age is higher than any of these players.

I would say that Grant, Bertans, Wood and Crowder all had better years last year than Lauri and I'd be willing to bet, have better careers for the next 3 seasons too.

Grant is 26.
Bertans is 28.
Wood is 25.
Crowder is 30, FFS.

At age 24, Bertans averaged 14/4 per 36 for the Spurs, possibly an ideal team for a guy like him, with GREAT, HOF level coaching.

Lauri won't be 24 until May.

How come you give Lauri a pass because of his age but nobody else?

[cjbulls]

I think it hinges on how you want to judge last year. Do you think that is the current and future Lauri?

If it was the future of Lauri, I wouldn't offer him an extension of over 10M per year.

Even Lauri pessimists like myself recognize something was off with Lauri mentally and/or physically but think it’s probable he shakes off those issues.

I think 15M per year represents reasonable value with a 1-2M per year hair cut for getting security. Lauri, even when playing well, can only defend one position on the floor, so kills your defensive versatility, and is a good scorer, but can't initiate or create offense on his own, so you still need someone else to be doing a lot of the work.

This makes Lauri fairly limited in value IMO. He's just a guy who can chip in points, but not do much else.

Ok so it’s fair to say you see Lauri as a roughly 19/9 guy on decent efficiency and above average 3pt% and attempts.

It seems hard to argue that player isn’t a 3rd banana type, with some remaining upside to be a 2nd banana. 3rd bananas are worth more than 14.8% of the cap (17M/115M cap next year).

I agree that Lauri is pretty limited so fit on some teams doesn’t always make sense (Bulls may be an example of one of those teams. But for places where he does fit, he becomes worth above 20M. Or places desperate to spend available cap money even if he’s not a perfect fit.

Maybe I’m mixing up what you would pay him over what he’s worth on the open market, but it feels like you are underestimating his market value.

[Swuul]

Lauri is under contract this year, they would offer him the QO next year regardless to put him in restricted status.

If Bulls and Lauri doesn't come on terms during the season (Bulls are free to offer an extension any time they want), then the QO is just a technical thing.

Why do you think Lauri would take the QO? That's an extremely disadvantageous contract for the player most of the time. You seem to think Lauri is a moron, Lauri is awful, or simply are ignorant to basketball economics all together.

It is a cultural thing, ie the finnish code of honor which demands you always see through all agreements you have made (a promise is a promise, a contract is a promise, an agreement is a promise, and you *always* keep your promises or you become a pariah). Not only that, as Lauri has publically (at least twice now) and privately (several times) said he has already more money than he knows what to do with, but that he wants to win in basketball, and be a meaningful part of that win. If it comes down to Bulls offering QO, Lauri won't hang around and see what the "market price" for him is, but accept the QO and then play out the contract and thus being free according to the finnish code of honor.

You have to remember Lauri is from a very traditional region in Finland, and has been grown up in that enviroment, and he truly believes in those very traditional values. It probably is hard for americans to understand, but money isn't everything for him (in his hometown there is an old saying "raha on välttämätön paha" aka "money is the necessary/unavoidable evil"). Maybe it is a moron thing, but most finns believe in life there are more important things than money.

[dougthonus]

Ok so it’s fair to say you see Lauri as a roughly 19/9 guy on decent efficiency and above average 3pt% and attempts.

It seems hard to argue that player isn’t a 3rd banana type, with some remaining upside to be a 2nd banana. 3rd bananas are worth more than 14.8% of the cap (17M/115M cap next year).

I agree that Lauri is pretty limited so fit on some teams doesn’t always make sense (Bulls may be an example of one of those teams. But for places where he does fit, he becomes worth above 20M. Or places desperate to spend available cap money even if he’s not a perfect fit.

Maybe I’m mixing up what you would pay him over what he’s worth on the open market, but it feels like you are underestimating his market value.

He had a worse season than Mirotic, whom was offered 3/45 and is getting early security. It's hard for me to see why you think he's so much better than Mirotic. He's worse defensively and not really definitively better at anything. He's younger, so maybe there is some upside there, but not a whole bunch.

A 3rd banana type (especially if you think there is upside to be a 2nd banana) should have a lot more versatility and add defensive abilities.

[dougthonus]

It is a cultural thing, ie the finnish code of honor which demands you always see through all agreements you have made (a promise is a promise, a contract is a promise, an agreement is a promise, and you *always* keep your promises or you become a pariah). Not only that, as Lauri has publically (at least twice now) and privately (several times) said he has already more money than he knows what to do with, but that he wants to win in basketball, and be a meaningful part of that win. If it comes down to Bulls offering QO, Lauri won't hang around and see what the "market price" for him is, but accept the QO and then play out the contract and thus being free according to the finnish code of honor.

You have to remember Lauri is from a very traditional region in Finland, and has been grown up in that enviroment, and he truly believes in those very traditional values. It probably is hard for americans to understand, but money isn't everything for him (in his hometown there is an old saying "raha on välttämätön paha" aka "money is the necessary/unavoidable evil"). Maybe it is a moron thing, but most finns believe in life there are more important things than money.

Maybe I'm just completely disconnected and underestimate Finnish culture, but none of the things about the QO seem to violate this.

1: It isn't part of an existing contract. There is nothing to honor here. It is a contract he can accept or reject. It is a very disadvantageous one for him for many reasons, so there is little reason to think he would accept it immediately.

2: Unless he is miserable in Chicago (which is contradicted by the idea he wants an extension done here), then the QO makes no sense to take as it is something you would only do if you want to force yourself away from Chicago.

3: If he doesn't care about money (highly unlikely in my experience, everyone says people don't care about money, but people of almost all backgrounds end up maximizing it anyway likely because agents shield them from the process), then he could easily sign an extension tomorrow for radically more than the QO, stay in Chicago where he apparently wants to be, and have generational security and not have any drama in negotiations.

I don't see where any of your points on Finnish culture would point towards any of these things and make him take the QO, which is something the Bulls have to offer anyway. I would bet you any amount of money you like and give you 5 to 1 odds that Lauri will not take the QO immediately when the Bulls offer it to ensure his RFA status (assuming an extension is not done this year). It is just a ridiculous assertion that he would do so, and his agent could be likely sued for malpractice if he let him do so.

He may take it eventually, but only after exhausting other options.

[coldfish]

Lauri is under contract this year, they would offer him the QO next year regardless to put him in restricted status.

If Bulls and Lauri doesn't come on terms during the season (Bulls are free to offer an extension any time they want), then the QO is just a technical thing.

Why do you think Lauri would take the QO? That's an extremely disadvantageous contract for the player most of the time. You seem to think Lauri is a moron, Lauri is awful, or simply are ignorant to basketball economics all together.

It is a cultural thing, ie the finnish code of honor which demands you always see through all agreements you have made (a promise is a promise, a contract is a promise, an agreement is a promise, and you *always* keep your promises or you become a pariah). Not only that, as Lauri has publically (at least twice now) and privately (several times) said he has already more money than he knows what to do with, but that he wants to win in basketball, and be a meaningful part of that win. If it comes down to Bulls offering QO, Lauri won't hang around and see what the "market price" for him is, but accept the QO and then play out the contract and thus being free according to the finnish code of honor.

You have to remember Lauri is from a very traditional region in Finland, and has been grown up in that enviroment, and he truly believes in those very traditional values. It probably is hard for americans to understand, but money isn't everything for him (in his hometown there is an old saying "raha on välttämätön paha" aka "money is the necessary/unavoidable evil"). Maybe it is a moron thing, but most finns believe in life there are more important things than money.

I don't think people understand that Lauri *is* leaving. Chicago needs to get his value up and then trade him for whatever they can to whomever will give it. The QO is just a disaster for all involved and the odds that Lauri ends up taking it next year are very high.

[Dez]

Lauri is under contract this year, they would offer him the QO next year regardless to put him in restricted status.

If Bulls and Lauri doesn't come on terms during the season (Bulls are free to offer an extension any time they want), then the QO is just a technical thing.

Why do you think Lauri would take the QO? That's an extremely disadvantageous contract for the player most of the time. You seem to think Lauri is a moron, Lauri is awful, or simply are ignorant to basketball economics all together.

It is a cultural thing, ie the finnish code of honor which demands you always see through all agreements you have made (a promise is a promise, a contract is a promise, an agreement is a promise, and you *always* keep your promises or you become a pariah). Not only that, as Lauri has publically (at least twice now) and privately (several times) said he has already more money than he knows what to do with, but that he wants to win in basketball, and be a meaningful part of that win. If it comes down to Bulls offering QO, Lauri won't hang around and see what the "market price" for him is, but accept the QO and then play out the contract and thus being free according to the finnish code of honor.

You have to remember Lauri is from a very traditional region in Finland, and has been grown up in that enviroment, and he truly believes in those very traditional values. It probably is hard for americans to understand, but money isn't everything for him (in his hometown there is an old saying "raha on välttämätön paha" aka "money is the necessary/unavoidable evil"). Maybe it is a moron thing, but most finns believe in life there are more important things than money.

I don't think people understand that Lauri *is* leaving. Chicago needs to get his value up and then trade him for whatever they can to whomever will give it. The QO is just a disaster for all involved and the odds that Lauri ends up taking it next year are very high.

There was a tweet yesterday that Lauri told his agent to get an extension done, now obviously I don't see why he would do this given his value is in the toilet but if they could get him cheap I'd be fine.

I'd go like 2 years 24 million, probably an overpay still honestly but not cap killing otherwise just trade him for whatever.