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

[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?

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

I'm losing my mind here. $15 mil most likely isn't going to fetch you a Lavine level player. And on top of that, we've had max capspace multiple times and haven't been able to fetch top tier talent. Why would now be different? If we want to keep resetting and trading away stars every few years to put our faith in a rookie or young unproven player we're going to continue the mediocrity treadmill.

[GimmeDat]

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.

Bit facetious to just go and pick one of the most overpaid players in the league and suggest that's some gauge for the value of cap space. And again, I never said the player you get is better than Lavine (was never even my argument to begin with), I'm talking about the player plus Clarke. It's certainly a competitive offer.

[MrSparkle]

Honestly, I watched Clarke play a handful of times. He looked great as a bench low-minute hybrid forward. Quick, handles, scores, efficient, defends. Uhm. Pretty hard jump imagining him as a top-2 scoring option on a bad team with no playmaker.

I'd just ask, is the trade appealing because of his contract, or because of basketball? He's an entirely promising and intriguing player, but finding a guy who can score 3Ps with double-teams in his face and average 25 ppg is kind of a rarer skill. You are still going to be left with the task of finding guards who can shoot the ball, and sure as hell aren't finding iso scorers like Zach in unrestricted free agency with $20m.

[MrFortune3]

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.

I'm losing my mind here. $15 mil most likely isn't going to fetch you a Lavine level player. And on top of that, we've had max capspace multiple times and haven't been able to fetch top tier talent. Why would now be different? If we want to keep resetting and trading away stars every few years to put our faith in a rookie or young unproven player we're going to continue the mediocrity treadmill.

Because Bulls fans want Jimmy Butler, only they want the traded away version of Jimmy Butler which is the same version of Jimmy Butler except the perception of him has now changed.

[MrFortune3]

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.

Bit facetious to just go and pick one of the most overpaid players in the league and suggest that's some gauge for the value of cap space. And again, I never said the player you get is better than Lavine (was never even my argument to begin with), I'm talking about the player plus Clarke. It's certainly a competitive offer.

No, it's not a competitive offer at all. It literally makes no sense for the Bulls.
My point in picking Harrison Barnes as an example is that Barnes would be viewed in a similar vein to LaVine in terms of contract parameters you would have to use to sign him into your cap space as a FA.
If a guy like him costs that much, the player you get for that 15 mil + Clarke is not going to be comparable to LaVine alone. Cap space and flexibility does the Bulls no good.

We've gone down this road before. We need players and to develop talent. In today's NBA, someone will always been looking to trade a player with a bigger contract. But no one is going to sign in Chicago without talent already there.

[GimmeDat]

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.

Bit facetious to just go and pick one of the most overpaid players in the league and suggest that's some gauge for the value of cap space. And again, I never said the player you get is better than Lavine (was never even my argument to begin with), I'm talking about the player plus Clarke. It's certainly a competitive offer.

No, it's not a competitive offer at all. It literally makes no sense for the Bulls.
My point in picking Harrison Barnes as an example is that Barnes would be viewed in a similar vein to LaVine in terms of contract parameters you would have to use to sign him into your cap space as a FA.
If a guy like him costs that much, the player you get for that 15 mil + Clarke is not going to be comparable to LaVine alone. Cap space and flexibility does the Bulls no good.

We've gone down this road before. We need players and to develop talent. In today's NBA, someone will always been looking to trade a player with a bigger contract. But no one is going to sign in Chicago without talent already there.

A guy like him, in general, does not cost that much though. If he was on the open market right now, I would be dumbfounded if Harrison Barnes got a 4/85 deal. It's not a reasonable measuring stick.

Again, I never advocated for the deal. My opinion is, if we trade anyone, trade Lauri. But it's wrong to just completely dismiss this from a value standpoint.

[Andi Obst]

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.

Age and his measurements (especially the short arms). I get why people value both, but Clarke is yet another example why being an extremely smart and productive player should be way more important than it seems to be a lot of times when we talk about draft prospects. Clarke was obviously a top 10 pick last year and the people who make the decisions just didn't want to hear it.

[MrFortune3]

Bit facetious to just go and pick one of the most overpaid players in the league and suggest that's some gauge for the value of cap space. And again, I never said the player you get is better than Lavine (was never even my argument to begin with), I'm talking about the player plus Clarke. It's certainly a competitive offer.

No, it's not a competitive offer at all. It literally makes no sense for the Bulls.
My point in picking Harrison Barnes as an example is that Barnes would be viewed in a similar vein to LaVine in terms of contract parameters you would have to use to sign him into your cap space as a FA.
If a guy like him costs that much, the player you get for that 15 mil + Clarke is not going to be comparable to LaVine alone. Cap space and flexibility does the Bulls no good.

We've gone down this road before. We need players and to develop talent. In today's NBA, someone will always been looking to trade a player with a bigger contract. But no one is going to sign in Chicago without talent already there.

A guy like him, in general, does not cost that much though. If he was on the open market right now, I would be dumbfounded if Harrison Barnes got a 4/85 deal. It's not a reasonable measuring stick.

Again, I never advocated for the deal. My opinion is, if we trade anyone, trade Lauri. But it's wrong to just completely dismiss this from a value standpoint.

Thad Young cost 13.6 mil per just last season. Guys like Brogdon, Rubio, Valanciunas, Randle, Bogdanovic, Rozier, Barnes all signed for 15 mil per or better. Most of them were 17-21 mil per. There is no way in hell you're signing a player for 15 mil that is even baseline as good as LaVine, much less better.

It's pretty easy to dismiss because it makes no sense and the value is not commiserate. People have this weird hang up about LaVine and what his value is. It's far more than Clarke and some cap space.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

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.

I'm losing my mind here. $15 mil most likely isn't going to fetch you a Lavine level player. And on top of that, we've had max capspace multiple times and haven't been able to fetch top tier talent. Why would now be different? If we want to keep resetting and trading away stars every few years to put our faith in a rookie or young unproven player we're going to continue the mediocrity treadmill.

You seem very sure about the respective trade value of both. I’d love for you to post the trade on the trade board where neutral fans can comment and see the results. It may help open your eyes a bit to what you think is a very lopsided deal.

Again, depending on team need, I think of teams are defensively strong and need a punch of scoring they may go Lavine. But most teams are taking Clarke and the money. I feel pretty good about that evaluation.

For the Bulls in particular, they need scoring, so the question is tougher. But that’s why I stated if they can draft Edwards, who I like, they may get some of that back. And that Bulls team is so well balanced, but very very young, so they’ll still be losing for another year or two, pick up another high draft pick in 2021, and you’ll start seeing that team pick it up, playoffs, next Boston and Miami.

[cjbulls]

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.

Age and his measurements (especially the short arms). I get why people value both, but Clarke is yet another example why being an extremely smart and productive player should be way more important than it seems to be a lot of times when we talk about draft prospects. Clarke was obviously a top 10 pick last year and the people who make the decisions just didn't want to hear it.

Carsen Edwards was a smart and productive player, but older with below average length (at a position where length matters less). He has sucked so far.

There is no defining rule that GMs are missing. Drafting is just hard.

[PrimzyBulls81]

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.

Clarke plus asset over Lavine, who is on great contract??? stop smoking weed, bro..

[weneeda2guard]

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.

I'm losing my mind here. $15 mil most likely isn't going to fetch you a Lavine level player. And on top of that, we've had max capspace multiple times and haven't been able to fetch top tier talent. Why would now be different? If we want to keep resetting and trading away stars every few years to put our faith in a rookie or young unproven player we're going to continue the mediocrity treadmill.

Meanwhile the resetting and trading away 1st options is exactly what made our franchise untrustworthy and why free agents are hesitant to come here.

But yea let's get that 2 max slot plan going again after we once again show the players in the league we will trade them in a heartbeat smh

[PlayerUp]

Age and his measurements (especially the short arms). I get why people value both, but Clarke is yet another example why being an extremely smart and productive player should be way more important than it seems to be a lot of times when we talk about draft prospects. Clarke was obviously a top 10 pick last year and the people who make the decisions just didn't want to hear it.

Unique Skillset
Mildly Athletic to Athletic
High Motor
Workaholic
High IQ

These are some of the most important qualities you need in a prospect.

[PlayerUp]

Carsen Edwards was a smart and productive player, but older with below average length (at a position where length matters less). He has sucked so far.

Advanced stats aren't good for Edwards in college. Have to look at advanced stats.

110 Offensive Rating
104 Defensive Rating
23 PER
54% TS

For someone his age, these are just okay advanced numbers for someone going in the draft. Much better options.

[Andi Obst]

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.

Age and his measurements (especially the short arms). I get why people value both, but Clarke is yet another example why being an extremely smart and productive player should be way more important than it seems to be a lot of times when we talk about draft prospects. Clarke was obviously a top 10 pick last year and the people who make the decisions just didn't want to hear it.

Carsen Edwards was a smart and productive player, but older with below average length (at a position where length matters less). He has sucked so far.

There is no defining rule that GMs are missing. Drafting is just hard.

I didn't say there should be a general rule, just wanted to make clear that people over-think certain prospect, especially when the main concerns are age/size. Drafting is super hard, no question, but Clarke was an easy pick.

[TheSuzerain]

Clarke was clearly better than White as a prospect. That was botched.

[cjbulls]

Clarke was clearly better than White as a prospect. That was botched.

You are clearly wrong. It is a close call to the point where there would be a good split depending on the GM, but there is no “clearly better” for Clarke as a prospect over White.

The botched piece was that he could have been had for very little. Bulls should have jumped on him as he was dropping, but so should have everyone.

The draft isn’t easy.

[cjbulls]

Carsen Edwards was a smart and productive player, but older with below average length (at a position where length matters less). He has sucked so far.

Advanced stats aren't good for Edwards in college. Have to look at advanced stats.

110 Offensive Rating
104 Defensive Rating
23 PER
54% TS

For someone his age, these are just okay advanced numbers for someone going in the draft. Much better options.

Fair rebuttal, but the point was advanced stats (or any one factor) are not indicative of much on their own, especially for college, and even more especially for weak advanced stats like Org and Drtg. It’s not like the GMs missed those factors. They are the reason he went as high as he did.

[gobullschi]

Brandon Clarke is exactly who I expected him to be. He’s an energy big man, with great athleticism, and does all the little things really well. That being said, his ceiling was always a borderline starter because he’s limited offensively and has below average size for the position. He’s fortunate to be playing with one of the best young passing guards in the NBA. Clarke is a nice player to have on your roster but comparing him to LaVine is laughable. They’re completely different players with completely different roles on their teams.

This board still surprises me with how critical y’all are on Zach LaVine. He’s one of the best young scoring guards in the NBA. He might not be that elite two-way player, but let’s not pretend a lot of guards are. (Harden, Mitchell, Booker, Beal)

LaVine would be an all star if the Bulls made the playoffs. It’s not his fault WCJ, OPJ, and Markkanen all can’t stay healthy.

[wonderboy2]

Brandon Clarke is exactly who I expected him to be. He’s an energy big man, with great athleticism, and does all the little things really well. That being said, his ceiling was always a borderline starter because he’s limited offensively and has below average size for the position. He’s fortunate to be playing with one of the best young passing guards in the NBA. Clarke is a nice player to have on your roster but comparing him to LaVine is laughable. They’re completely different players with completely different roles on their teams.

This board still surprises me with how critical y’all are on Zach LaVine. He’s one of the best young scoring guards in the NBA. He might not be that elite two-way player, but let’s not pretend a lot of guards are. (Harden, Mitchell, Booker, Beal)

LaVine would be an all star if the Bulls made the playoffs. It’s not his fault WCJ, OPJ, and Markkanen all can’t stay healthy.

Excellent post.