Vucevic Trade Watch 2025

[dougthonus]

I'll repeat again. I think the Bulls are still trying to get a first or the equivalent in any Vuc trade and would prefer to use him in a big trade. Do you disagree with that? Is that the same as no team wanting to give up equal player value for him?

I think it means that trading Vuc is an irrelevancy, because Vuc is an irrelevant player. We could get a different irrelevant player for Vuc potentially.

You discuss him by throwing out counting stats and refer to him as an 18/11 guy, it implies that he has some meaningful trade value. He doesn't. Which we know because we couldn't get a late 1st for him, which is pretty low value by NBA standards.

Sure, you could trade him for something of very low enough value. His theoretical value is probably 20M in dead salary + a 2nd rounder.

The problem is that there aren't many completely and totally dead 20M salaries in the NBA, and for that trade to happen, you'd need to find one on a team that needs a back up center and is trying to win now with a short term player.

It hasn't happened yet, despite our efforts. There are no meaningful rumors about anyone having any interest in him outside of a brief rumor with GS that went no where, and we've been shopping him for three transaction cycles.

[PaKii94]

Here is a question, does dfg% at the rim count when Vuc is blown by and someone gets an easy layup?

Does dfg% for 3s count when Vuc can't make it to the perimeter in time leaving a teammate to scramble and cover a open 3 pt shooter?

It doesn't. The numbers need to be interpreted correctly.

Vuc, when he is in position on a post up play, is a big body and can hold his own to an extent -> ok dfg% at the rim

Vuc when he is in position to contest a shot is tall enough to provide some contest -> ok 3pt dfg%

That's why his numbers look reasonable. When he's in position to guard those specific plays he can be average. But that's a minority. The majority of the time is he's not in position at all because of age/length/etc. which as a weighed average comes out to piss poor defender

It was similar to lavine's numbers. Lavine when in position to guard an iso possession wasn't a"bad" defender. He could hold his own. It's defending the rest of the plays he was bad at.

[GuardianEnzo]

Vuc is not an irrelevant player unless you assume Smith and Collins are irrelevant players, as his presence prevents us from finding out for sure whether they are or not.

[Chi town]

I agree with DC that Smith is a tease.

I do want to see if his conditioning has improved and if he can fly up and down the court and make 3: in smaller mins.

[dougthonus]

Here is a question, does dfg% at the rim count when Vuc is blown by and someone gets an easy layup?

Does dfg% for 3s count when Vuc can't make it to the perimeter in time leaving a teammate to scramble and cover a open 3 pt shooter?

It doesn't. The numbers need to be interpreted correctly.

Vuc, when he is in position on a post up play, is a big body and can hold his own to an extent -> ok dfg% at the rim

Vuc when he is in position to contest a shot is tall enough to provide some contest -> ok 3pt dfg%

That's why his numbers look reasonable. When he's in position to guard those specific plays he can be average. But that's a minority. The majority of the time is he's not in position at all because of age/length/etc. which as a weighed average comes out to piss poor defender

It was similar to lavine's numbers. Lavine when in position to guard an iso possession wasn't a"bad" defender. He could hold his own. It's defending the rest of the plays he was bad at.

I agree with your point, except Vuc's at the rim DFG% is one of the worst in the NBA among centers, so even if he is there it's not actually okay.

[MikeDC]

Here is a question, does dfg% at the rim count when Vuc is blown by and someone gets an easy layup?

Does dfg% for 3s count when Vuc can't make it to the perimeter in time leaving a teammate to scramble and cover a open 3 pt shooter?

It doesn't. The numbers need to be interpreted correctly.

Generally it does, and over a large sample size, the edge cases get washed out. If what you were suggesting were happening, Vuc's defensive usage would show it (that is, his shots defended DFGA/36 would be abnormally low in these categories. But it is not.

Vuc, when he is in position on a post up play, is a big body and can hold his own to an extent -> ok dfg% at the rim

But his dfg% at the rim isn't ok, it's pretty bad. He also has notably high usage at the rim, which, if anything, is indicating that he's actually soaking up defensive possessions by being in position (that is, at the margin, he's probably defending some extra shots at the rim because our guards don't stop anyone).

That's why his numbers look reasonable. When he's in position to guard those specific plays he can be average. But that's a minority. The majority of the time is he's not in position at all because of age/length/etc. which as a weighed average comes out to piss poor defender

The numbers clearly indicate that he's in position "the majority" of the time. His usage clearly indicates he's doing the opposite of avoiding being counted for shots he's responsible for.

It was similar to lavine's numbers. Lavine when in position to guard an iso possession wasn't a"bad" defender. He could hold his own. It's defending the rest of the plays he was bad at.

Again, the usage number is important.While Vuc's is notably higher than average, Zach is a much more accurate example, because he's a low usage defender in general, and especially inside the line. So if someone gets by him, or moves, it's "no longer his problem".

The thing they have in common is they're well below average in possession plays (steals, blocks, deflections, etc). This is a big component of defense that neither are very good at.

The funny thing is, the stats I'm pointing out do indicate that Vuc is a bad defender. But they're valuable because they shed light on how and why he is, and how and why other guys are not.

Likewise, they explain why guys like Alex Caruso are awesome defenders.

But, I'm sorry to say, they also explain why guys like Jalen Smith are pretty bad.

[dougthonus]

Vuc is not an irrelevant player unless you assume Smith and Collins are irrelevant players, as his presence prevents us from finding out for sure whether they are or not.

From a trade aspect perspective, I view Collins and Smith as irrelevant players too.

[Infinity2152]

I'll repeat again. I think the Bulls are still trying to get a first or the equivalent in any Vuc trade and would prefer to use him in a big trade. Do you disagree with that? Is that the same as no team wanting to give up equal player value for him?

I think it means that trading Vuc is an irrelevancy, because Vuc is an irrelevant player. We could get a different irrelevant player for Vuc potentially.

You discuss him by throwing out counting stats and refer to him as an 18/11 guy, it implies that he has some meaningful trade value. He doesn't. Which we know because we couldn't get a late 1st for him, which is pretty low value by NBA standards.

Sure, you could trade him for something of very low enough value. His theoretical value is probably 20M in dead salary + a 2nd rounder.

The problem is that there aren't many completely and totally dead 20M salaries in the NBA, and for that trade to happen, you'd need to find one on a team that needs a back up center and is trying to win now with a short term player.

It hasn't happened yet, despite our efforts. There are no meaningful rumors about anyone having any interest in him outside of a brief rumor with GS that went no where, and we've been shopping him for three transaction cycles.

Because counting stats count. It's strange to me that only when we consider the trade value of Bulls players do the counting stats not count. Like players who regularly average over 18 pts are valued and they are starters. Guys who average 10+ rebounds usually keep starting positions. Centers who shoot 40% from 3 are considered good shooters. Unless they are Bulls.

I don't think most of you guys even understand how you sound. In order for you guys to be correct, every single GM has to agree with your evaluation of Vucevic, for instance. Every single coach. It's already clear at least Billy doesn't agree with you. When you say Vucevic has no trade value and can't start on any NBA team, if only 28 GM's agree with you, you're wrong.

You say I put up counting stats. What makes advanced stats more relevant to MARKET VALUE? Counting stats are the stats a team sells to the public. The average fan know the points, rebounds, assists, blocks of their favorite players. Most won't know the Efg, or TS%, or DEPM, or any of the 20 advanced stats. When I throw PER, which is advanced stat, it gets ridiculed. I don't think a player ever signed a contract based on his Efg, Win Shares, etc. There are plenty of players who are advanced stat superstars, like Isiah Joe, think Jalen Smith is good in several, who don't get paid.

It's like confusing market value with appraised value. Let's say average 100k house in this area is 1500 sq ft. 2bdrms (scoring), 2 bathrooms (rebounds), mid size kitchen (assists). Let's use power (electrical) and plumbing (water) for offense and defense. Both are critical functions of the house.

I have a house that has 3 bdrms (above average scoring), 3 bathrooms (above average rebounding) and large kitchen (above average passer for position, imo). This house has been featured as one of the best houses in the city (multiple AllStar games). But the plumbing has been bad for years, whoever buys it has to deal with that. In a market where there are many people with money who are actively looking for a house, and have a need, you could sell that house, and probably for at least 100k. How well the house is painted, number of rooms, large kitchen, easily visible things affect market value more than fundamental strengths. I'll sell it to a contractor or plumber (team with supplementary defender like JJJ at PF)

Let's say Vucevic was exactly Myles Turner in every statistical way on our team, for instance. He's played exactly like him offensively and defensively the last 3 years. Except he's still 32 and expiring. Bulls are asking for a first round pick in return. Which teams right now would give up at least a first and $20 mill worth of players to acquire Turner/Vucevic? I don't think many teams would be willing to give up a first for most 32 year old centers who are expiring. That guy would have to be pretty exceptional. Is there a middle spot between exceptional (teams are willing to give up a first) and trash (nobody wants you)?

All guys are doing is setting themselves up to be miserable, lol. Billy's going to start who he's going to start. It's probably Vucevic. Going to be a looooong season if guys are complaining about the line-up before the season even starts.

He's here, he's our starting center, he's carried himself well and given great effort since he's been here, been the most durable player period. I'll support him until he's no longer a Bull, and I'll still wish him the best for his hard work here.

[kodo]

The boxscore stats aren't being discussed in this specific conversation much because most of the debate around Vuc is around defense, and there are no boxscore stats for defense other than steals/blocks which don't really measure defense well because even a great center only averages 3 bpg, but you know great centers like Olajuwon deterred more than 3 possessions in an entire game. You can also have a poor defender like Tyrus Thomas who blocked 2 shots in a game, and just zoned out for the other 98 possessions. The truly great defenders never get to even add a boxscore stat like blocks because once players see Tim Duncan in the paint they just turn around and dribble back out.

Most of the defense discussion happens around advanced and tracking stats because of this. There's no way anyone is saying Josh Giddey is a better defender than Lu Dort because Giddey has more BPG and RPG than Dort.

And I think most people are focused on defense because it's the center position, it's the goalkeeper. The Bulls are one of the highest scoring teams in the league but the weakness of the team is defense. If the Bulls were flipped, top 5 on defense but bottom 5 on offense, I think Vuc's PPG would be very relevant and we'd certainly start him over many centers. But that's the opposite situation we're in.

Rebounding is interesting, but the short version IMO is there isn't a strong correlation between rebounds & team success. Some of the league's top rebounding teams are contenders, some are bottom feeders. Top 10 rebounding teams: Bulls, Hornets, Jazz, Raptors.

There is a strong correlation for an advanced stat like Net Rating and team success, it's basically 1.0. Top Net Rating teams: OKC, Cavs, Celtics, etc.. It's natural when a stat like Net Rating lines up so closely with team success, people are going to look at player advanced stats more than a stat like RPG.

[Infinity2152]

We're pressed here because we've had bad defensive players for so long. Vucevic is FAR from the only culprit. With Lavine, Derozan, Vucevic, White playing major minutes, Pat Will being mid or worse and Ball's injury, it's inevitable we would have bad team defense. I could name dozens of scorers who are bad defenders that don't get nearly the hate that Vucevic gets. However bad Vuc actually is, surely playing with those guys didn't make him look better.

You're right most people are focusing on it because it's the center position. Every team wants a mobile 6'10-7 ft center that can defend the paint and rotate to the perimeter, grab 10+ rebounds a game, block shots, get 4+ assists a game, AND play 70+ games a year, pretty important. 32 teams want that guy. Wemby's there, but his injury history not looking great so far. Every other center gives up something in multiple boxes. Gafford can't shoot. Myles Turner doesn't rebound. Mo Bamba and Bol Bol are failing. Most starting centers are injured 20+ games/yr. There's not a huge number of multi talented centers.

Vucevic is a huge plus in a LOT of those boxes, most importantly durability. Not pushing that he's the best center in the league or even that he fits what we need at all. But the idea that he's not a starting center right now in the NBA, there are 32 healthy NBA players who would start at center over Vucevic on every single NBA team, just no.

https://fadeawayworld.net/nba/ranking-25-best-centers-for-2025-26-nba-season

https://www.hoopshype.com/story/sports/nba/2025/09/08/nba-ranking-the-top-26-centers-for-2025-26/86040732007/

Pulled up center rankings for next year, just to get an unbiased opinion. First two that came up, did not cherry pick. One had Vuc at 13, the other at 20. I don't think the general opinion around the league is he's below center number 32, and even the 33rd most valuable center should have some value. Every team has at least two centers, most have 3. He's ranked around 13th or 20th most valuable among 100-150 available players. Not including the money issue of course, we're likely paying that $20 mill whether or not we have Vucevic.

He's gone next year anyway. When did we start caring so much over team performance this year over trying to get more assets/use in a trade?

[2weekswithpay]

Article on DFG% if anybody is interested. TLDR: DFG% is fine for shots at the rim but useless for everywhere else on the court.

The NBA's tracking for DFG is wonky and unreliable.

Read on Twitter

[Infinity2152]

Just don't get the hate. He's worse defensively than most starting centers, granted. Though that's not altogether true, since defensive rebounds are a huge part of defense. And he tries most plays, at least. His size and weight help when defending bigger players in the paint. So basically perimeter defense and rim protection.

He's elite for position at shooting, rebounding, scoring, playmaking and BBall IQ, imo. I say for position assuming every team will have a legit starting center. He's elite at actually being healthy and playing, unlike guys like Embid, better player by far but can't stay on the court. Those things have to count for something. There are just not a lot of 6'10-7'0 players more skilled than hm.

[jnrjr79]

Just don't get the hate. He's worse defensively than most starting centers, granted. Though that's not altogether true, since defensive rebounds are a huge part of defense. And he tries most plays, at least. His size and weight help when defending bigger players in the paint. So basically perimeter defense and rim protection.

I'm not sure I'd agree that defensive rebounds are a "huge" part of defense. Vooch is 13th in rebounds per 36, which is certainly good. I'd not KAT is 4th in that regard and Thibs has had to bench him at times because he's been defensively unplayable.

It's true Vooch has the body to guard bigger guys in the paint, but that is an increasingly small need for NBA teams.

He's elite for position at shooting, rebounding, scoring, playmaking and BBall IQ, imo. I say for position assuming every team will have a legit starting center. He's elite at actually being healthy and playing, unlike guys like Embid, better player by far but can't stay on the court. Those things have to count for something. There are just not a lot of 6'10-7'0 players more skilled than hm.

Vooch is not an "elite" shooter or scorer. He's probably not an "elite" rebounder, either, but he's certainly closer to that than shooting or scoring.

I agree that Vooch is super durable and, while not exactly skill, definitely matters a lot when comparing him to other players.

I also tend to agree that there aren't a lot of bigs that are "more skilled" than him, but lesser skilled bigs who have more athleticism/defense/motor would be more impactful generally and better firts specifically for this team.

[dougthonus]

Just don't get the hate. He's worse defensively than most starting centers, granted. Though that's not altogether true, since defensive rebounds are a huge part of defense. And he tries most plays, at least. His size and weight help when defending bigger players in the paint. So basically perimeter defense and rim protection.

He's elite for position at shooting, rebounding, scoring, playmaking and BBall IQ, imo. I say for position assuming every team will have a legit starting center. He's elite at actually being healthy and playing, unlike guys like Embid, better player by far but can't stay on the court. Those things have to count for something. There are just not a lot of 6'10-7'0 players more skilled than hm.

It isn't hate.

It is a rational observation of Vuc's trade value. We've been looking to dump him for three transaction cycles and have been unable to do so. The general NBA world when discusses him views him as a bad contract. The outcome of our attempts to trade him is that the rest of the league views him as a bad contract.

You create a bunch of meaningless groupings combined with 90s style analysis to make you think he's good, but no one else in the NBA agrees with you based on the actual outcomes of what has happened.

[jnrjr79]

Just don't get the hate. He's worse defensively than most starting centers, granted. Though that's not altogether true, since defensive rebounds are a huge part of defense. And he tries most plays, at least. His size and weight help when defending bigger players in the paint. So basically perimeter defense and rim protection.

He's elite for position at shooting, rebounding, scoring, playmaking and BBall IQ, imo. I say for position assuming every team will have a legit starting center. He's elite at actually being healthy and playing, unlike guys like Embid, better player by far but can't stay on the court. Those things have to count for something. There are just not a lot of 6'10-7'0 players more skilled than hm.

It isn't hate.

It is a rational observation of Vuc's trade value. We've been looking to dump him for three transaction cycles and have been unable to do so. The general NBA world when discusses him views him as a bad contract. The outcome of our attempts to trade him is that the rest of the league views him as a bad contract.

You create a bunch of meaningless groupings combined with 90s style analysis to make you think he's good, but no one else in the NBA agrees with you based on the actual outcomes of what has happened.

I'm not sure Vooch's current value is "bad contract" or that the Bulls' apparent inability to trade him suggests that. To me, "bad contract" means another team wouldn't want him for for free, so you'd need to add a sweetener. I think some teams might take Vooch at no cost, they just aren't willing to trade any particularly positive assets for him. And for the Bulls, now that Vooch is expiring, there probably aren't a lot of contracts you'd actually want to exchange for him, because you don't want to screw up the 2026 cap space situation.

I do think Vooch's value has been "bad contract" at times in the past. But the fact that he had a strong shooting season last year combined with his expiring deal probably gets him to relatively neutral value.

[League Circles]

Just don't get the hate. He's worse defensively than most starting centers, granted. Though that's not altogether true, since defensive rebounds are a huge part of defense. And he tries most plays, at least. His size and weight help when defending bigger players in the paint. So basically perimeter defense and rim protection.

He's elite for position at shooting, rebounding, scoring, playmaking and BBall IQ, imo. I say for position assuming every team will have a legit starting center. He's elite at actually being healthy and playing, unlike guys like Embid, better player by far but can't stay on the court. Those things have to count for something. There are just not a lot of 6'10-7'0 players more skilled than hm.

It isn't hate.

It is a rational observation of Vuc's trade value. We've been looking to dump him for three transaction cycles and have been unable to do so. The general NBA world when discusses him views him as a bad contract. The outcome of our attempts to trade him is that the rest of the league views him as a bad contract.

You create a bunch of meaningless groupings combined with 90s style analysis to make you think he's good, but no one else in the NBA agrees with you based on the actual outcomes of what has happened.

I'm not sure Vooch's current value is "bad contract" or that the Bulls' apparent inability to trade him suggests that. To me, "bad contract" means another team wouldn't want him for for free, so you'd need to add a sweetener. I think some teams might take Vooch at no cost, they just aren't willing to trade any particularly positive assets for him. And for the Bulls, now that Vooch is expiring, there probably aren't a lot of contracts you'd actually want to exchange for him, because you don't want to screw up the 2026 cap space situation.

I do think Vooch's value has been "bad contract" at times in the past. But the fact that he had a strong shooting season last year combined with his expiring deal probably gets him to relatively neutral value.

It's hard to say because almost all the time, players must be exchanged in a deal for similar salaries. So by "neutral value", I don't necessarily disagree. I could definitely see a team sending one or two similar average rotation players on expiring deals our way. It's just that that doesn't do much for the Bulls.

I see him as a bad contract because I doubt most teams would consider offering him more than the MLE, if that. We're just as jammed at the 1 through 4 positions as we are at the 5, so unless some big package deal gets done for a difference maker that needs to include Vuc for salary purposes, I doubt he gets traded.

[dougthonus]

I'm not sure Vooch's current value is "bad contract" or that the Bulls' apparent inability to trade him suggests that. To me, "bad contract" means another team wouldn't want him for for free, so you'd need to add a sweetener. I think some teams might take Vooch at no cost, they just aren't willing to trade any particularly positive assets for him. And for the Bulls, now that Vooch is expiring, there probably aren't a lot of contracts you'd actually want to exchange for him, because you don't want to screw up the 2026 cap space situation.

I do think Vooch's value has been "bad contract" at times in the past. But the fact that he had a strong shooting season last year combined with his expiring deal probably gets him to relatively neutral value.

Do you think if every team in the NBA had 20M in cap room right now that a team would use that cap room to take Vuc's contract?

If the answer is no, it means bad contract. I don't believe there is a single team in the league that would take him into cap room and that every team in the league would prefer to do something else with 20M dollars.

Bad contract doesn't mean untradeable. You could trade him for an even worse 20M dollar contract without a sweetener, like you could probably trade Vuc for Fred Van Vleet right now as an example.

[jnrjr79]

It isn't hate.

It is a rational observation of Vuc's trade value. We've been looking to dump him for three transaction cycles and have been unable to do so. The general NBA world when discusses him views him as a bad contract. The outcome of our attempts to trade him is that the rest of the league views him as a bad contract.

You create a bunch of meaningless groupings combined with 90s style analysis to make you think he's good, but no one else in the NBA agrees with you based on the actual outcomes of what has happened.

I'm not sure Vooch's current value is "bad contract" or that the Bulls' apparent inability to trade him suggests that. To me, "bad contract" means another team wouldn't want him for for free, so you'd need to add a sweetener. I think some teams might take Vooch at no cost, they just aren't willing to trade any particularly positive assets for him. And for the Bulls, now that Vooch is expiring, there probably aren't a lot of contracts you'd actually want to exchange for him, because you don't want to screw up the 2026 cap space situation.

I do think Vooch's value has been "bad contract" at times in the past. But the fact that he had a strong shooting season last year combined with his expiring deal probably gets him to relatively neutral value.

It's hard to say because almost all the time, players must be exchanged in a deal for similar salaries. So by "neutral value", I don't necessarily disagree. I could definitely see a team sending one or two similar average rotation players on expiring deals our way. It's just that that doesn't do much for the Bulls.

I see him as a bad contract because I doubt most teams would consider offering him more than the MLE, if that. We're just as jammed at the 1 through 4 positions as we are at the 5, so unless some big package deal gets done for a difference maker that needs to include Vuc for salary purposes, I doubt he gets traded.

I largely agree with this, but a player's market value is not what most teams would pay him. It's what the highest-bidding team would. But you might be right that no team in the NBA would do better than the MLE for him - it wouldn't shock me.

[jnrjr79]

I'm not sure Vooch's current value is "bad contract" or that the Bulls' apparent inability to trade him suggests that. To me, "bad contract" means another team wouldn't want him for for free, so you'd need to add a sweetener. I think some teams might take Vooch at no cost, they just aren't willing to trade any particularly positive assets for him. And for the Bulls, now that Vooch is expiring, there probably aren't a lot of contracts you'd actually want to exchange for him, because you don't want to screw up the 2026 cap space situation.

I do think Vooch's value has been "bad contract" at times in the past. But the fact that he had a strong shooting season last year combined with his expiring deal probably gets him to relatively neutral value.

Do you think if every team in the NBA had 20M in cap room right now that a team would use that cap room to take Vuc's contract?

If the answer is no, it means bad contract. I don't believe there is a single team in the league that would take him into cap room and that every team in the league would prefer to do something else with 20M dollars.

Bad contract doesn't mean untradeable. You could trade him for an even worse 20M dollar contract without a sweetener, like you could probably trade Vuc for Fred Van Vleet right now as an example.

If literally every team in the NBA had $20M+ in space, it would neither shock me if someone gave Vooch $20M for one season of work, nor would it shock me if he could do no better than the MLE or thereabouts (setting aside that nobody would have the full MLE in that scenario).

To my understanding, there were teams that called about Vooch last offseason, but accoridng to Fischer, the Bulls' price as a 1st, and nobody would meet that price. That suggests there are some teams out there that was comfortable with Vooch at $20M, but it's hard to assess what that means if you don't know what outbound salary those teams proposed including.

I agree Vooch is likely tradeable. As I noted, there are just very few trades that would make sesne for the Bulls if they require taking on a longer deal.

[sco]

Just don't get the hate. He's worse defensively than most starting centers, granted. Though that's not altogether true, since defensive rebounds are a huge part of defense. And he tries most plays, at least. His size and weight help when defending bigger players in the paint. So basically perimeter defense and rim protection.

I'm not sure I'd agree that defensive rebounds are a "huge" part of defense. Vooch is 13th in rebounds per 36, which is certainly good. I'd not KAT is 4th in that regard and Thibs has had to bench him at times because he's been defensively unplayable.

It's true Vooch has the body to guard bigger guys in the paint, but that is an increasingly small need for NBA teams.

He's elite for position at shooting, rebounding, scoring, playmaking and BBall IQ, imo. I say for position assuming every team will have a legit starting center. He's elite at actually being healthy and playing, unlike guys like Embid, better player by far but can't stay on the court. Those things have to count for something. There are just not a lot of 6'10-7'0 players more skilled than hm.

Vooch is not an "elite" shooter or scorer. He's probably not an "elite" rebounder, either, but he's certainly closer to that than shooting or scoring.

I agree that Vooch is super durable and, while not exactly skill, definitely matters a lot when comparing him to other players.

I also tend to agree that there aren't a lot of bigs that are "more skilled" than him, but lesser skilled bigs who have more athleticism/defense/motor would be more impactful generally and better firts specifically for this team.

What isn't shown in Vuc's stats per se is that our defense requires everyone else to hedge off of their man to cover the paint (aka lay-up line) for Vuc, so Vuc's man's performance may not be impacted every time, but the domino effect is real.

To me it's not really about Vuc, he's gone after this year. It's about whether to keep Coby, and it will be harder to see if the Coby Giddey tandem is something that can be covered for with a good C or not. If not, we shouldnt' keep Coby.