Potential Zach Trade Partners? 24/25 Edition

[DuckIII]

I agree with DASMACKDOWN

There's so many common Zach misconceptions, even in this thread amongst Bulls fans.

I see comments about Zach's injury history. In the 5 years post ACL - pre-bone fragment surgery Zach played in 85% of games. This includes two missed stints due to Covid and some end of season tanking by the Bulls.

With covid and tanking sittings out - I think it's safe to say Zach played in 90% of available games over those 5 seasons, and yet - he is labeled as injury prone.

I agree that the perception about Zach is in many ways just plain old false. I also agree that if we were to keep one of the 3 it should be, and should always have been, Zach. But some of your points could use a little more discussion.

Like this one above. While that is all statistically true, Zach (to his credit) also has played through a lot of injuries and when doing so often does not play real well. Understandable and worthy of respect but it’s a very real part of his “injury prone” reputation. Given his history and seemingly increasing frequency, his health is a legitimate concern for outside teams. Just not some kind of awful poison pill.

[drosestruts]

I agree with DASMACKDOWN

There's so many common Zach misconceptions, even in this thread amongst Bulls fans.

I see comments about Zach's injury history. In the 5 years post ACL - pre-bone fragment surgery Zach played in 85% of games. This includes two missed stints due to Covid and some end of season tanking by the Bulls.

With covid and tanking sittings out - I think it's safe to say Zach played in 90% of available games over those 5 seasons, and yet - he is labeled as injury prone.

I agree that the perception about Zach is in many ways just plain old false. I also agree that if we were to keep one of the 3 it should be, and should always have been, Zach. But some of your points could use a little more discussion.

Like this one above. While that is all statistically true, Zach (to his credit) also has played through a lot of injuries and when doing so often does not play real well. Understandable and worthy of respect but it’s a very real part of his “injury prone” reputation. Given his history and seemingly increasing frequency, his health is a legitimate concern for outside teams. Just not some kind of awful poison pill.

I think it's fair to say that yes, Zach does play through things sometimes, so while not missing games he is at times impacted by a thumb or an ankle as two examples of things he's played through.

I also feel like this is commonplace in the NBA to an extent.

The main issue is that Zach's impact is rather limited to his scoring - if an injury affects Zach's scoring it's not like he's still helping you in many other areas - and this is a fair criticism of Zach. He is a bit one dimensional, while excelling in that dimension.

Looking at monthly splits I'm not sure this has impacted him for over a month at any point in his last 3 season, which I also think have been his best and when we saw him take that next step.

In 2022-23 he had a bad November - every other month was very good to great (peaking in March scoring 28 points on 65% TS%)

In 2020-21 and 2021-22 I don't think you can point to a single stretch where injuries hampered him for any significant period of time. Belive his April 2021 absence was covid related

I again think his surgery was a common one, and based on the information we have, I would expect Zach to be back at his 2020-2023 levels next season.

I think we all as Bulls fans, pay the most attention to the Bulls. I think that focus sometimes results in some of us forgetting what is and what isn't common within the NBA. Have other all-stars played more than Zach during this stretch? Why have we created these lofty expectation for Zach that few to no other players are meeting?

[sco]

A trade that nets the bulls value for a player who averages 25/5/5. Im fine taking on bad salary to match as long as we also receive real assets/picks. None of this late first and horrible contracts.

So like if we have to take on chris paul, for example, no chance unless we are also getting Kuminga.

Or give me igles, mo wagner add in isaac.

Or brooks, adams with Eason attached.

Or julius randle

Or vanderbilt, rui, with reaves attached. We can expand deal to include vuc even.

IMO, that's the rub. I just don't think that level of return, modest as it may seem, is possible for a version of Zach that ended a bad season with an injury and hasn't shown a return to form. Any despiration trade done in the offseason is going to yield salary relief and no players or picks with even starter potential.

His injury, and injury history, is a concern, but it seemed like if he choose to do so he would've been able to continue playing last year instead of getting surgery...? Plus, he should be healthy to start next season.

You don't think the Bulls could get a protected first or even 2nd round picks for him? If the offers are bad (negative contracts back...no assets/picks) then the Bulls should just keep him until they get something decent back. Also, it's possible that they might have to wait until free agency (because some teams might not get the player they want and turn to Zach as plan B) or even the season so he can prove that he's healthy and playing at a top level again.

I don't think other GM's are likely going to take the leap of faith that Zach is healthy until he plays in some number of NBA games. I do recall the story about the surgery being quasi optional, but that wouldn't be something I would count on as the whole truth if I was another GM. IMO the deals that Clint was citing are closer to what I would expect if Zach proved his health.

[kodo]

I think they'll assume the injuries into Zach's production, because it's true he's always banged up. But fully healthy, the season we have of that he put up all-nba #s, and they're talking about just salary dumping him for a roleplayer(s).

Fully Healthy 2021: 27.4 ppg 57% 2P% 42% 3P%, 63% TS%
Wrist/Hand Injury: 2022: 24.4 ppg 53% 2p% 39% 3P%, 60% TS%
Knee Surgery: 2023: 24.8 ppg 56% 2P% 38% 3P%, 60% TS%

Post ASG 2023 with knee healed he was right back up to 2021: 27 ppg on 64% TS

The kind of trade return we're hearing is already aligned with his injured performance. Because if we're assuming 100% healthy, those are Devin Booker type #s.

[drosestruts]

Control what you can control.

Zach is under contract. DeMar isn't.

If you can get a good trade return for Zach, cool. But nobody is forcing you to take a bad deal on what is a talented player. If there's not trade to be had, and you know the team works better with only one of Zach or DeMar on the court, and one of those players is under contract for 3 more years and one of those players is a Free Agent.... well, the answer becomes pretty clear and obvious to me. (Again, I really like DeMar - but control what you can control).

We know DeMar has an interest in LA. Maybe he'd welcome a reunion in San Antonio with Pop now that Wemby is there. Also, we don't have to sign and trade him, it'd be the ideal thing to do if he's leaving, but it's not 100% necessary.

[PaKii94]

Boys I'm sorry. Y'all can talk his stats, PPG, efficiency all you want. It seems like the GMs have realized he's not a winning impact player regardless of his scoring. It's not the injury stuff (not that that helps).

They are probably concerned that at such high volume and efficiency he was barely a positive impact player, how is he gonna fare as a #3 with reduced volume (scoring being the only thing he provided). Do they want to pay #1 money for a stumbling #3? Probs not

[kulaz3000]

Boys I'm sorry. Y'all can talk his stats, PPG, efficiency all you want. It seems like the GMs have realized he's not a winning impact player regardless of his scoring. It's not the injury stuff (not that that helps).

They are probably concerned that at such high volume and efficiency he was barely a positive impact player, how is he gonna fare as a #3 with reduced volume (scoring being the only thing he provided). Do they want to pay #1 money for a stumbling #3? Probs not

There are plenty of players that have produced statistically, bounced around and then go to a team that best utilizes them and they produce and then end up being a winning team also, the narrative completely shifts, and then the former teams fans are lamenting why they let him go or traded him to begin with.

He just needs to end up on the right team.

[dougthonus]

Boys I'm sorry. Y'all can talk his stats, PPG, efficiency all you want. It seems like the GMs have realized he's not a winning impact player regardless of his scoring. It's not the injury stuff (not that that helps).

They are probably concerned that at such high volume and efficiency he was barely a positive impact player, how is he gonna fare as a #3 with reduced volume (scoring being the only thing he provided). Do they want to pay #1 money for a stumbling #3? Probs not

There are plenty of players that have produced statistically, bounced around and then go to a team that best utilizes them and they produce and then end up being a winning team also, the narrative completely shifts, and then the former teams fans are lamenting why they let him go or traded him to begin with.

He just needs to end up on the right team.

i think Zach could contribute in the right role for sure. There's no doubt. The problem is can he contribute at a level worth 40M per year or find a team in a new 2nd apron era that doesn't care that he costs 40M per year.

[kulaz3000]

Boys I'm sorry. Y'all can talk his stats, PPG, efficiency all you want. It seems like the GMs have realized he's not a winning impact player regardless of his scoring. It's not the injury stuff (not that that helps).

They are probably concerned that at such high volume and efficiency he was barely a positive impact player, how is he gonna fare as a #3 with reduced volume (scoring being the only thing he provided). Do they want to pay #1 money for a stumbling #3? Probs not

There are plenty of players that have produced statistically, bounced around and then go to a team that best utilizes them and they produce and then end up being a winning team also, the narrative completely shifts, and then the former teams fans are lamenting why they let him go or traded him to begin with.

He just needs to end up on the right team.

i think Zach could contribute in the right role for sure. There's no doubt. The problem is can he contribute at a level worth 40M per year or find a team in a new 2nd apron era that doesn't care that he costs 40M per year.

You're not wrong, his price tag is the biggest issue, but for a team that is looking to extend their window like the Warriors, and maybe a team like the Clippers who aren't as worried about money, perhaps they'd be willing to bite. This deal has been mentioned before, but I think Zach would fit really well with the Nuggets, and we could do a straight MPJ and Zach deal, with some fillers, and though it wouldn't be a homerun for the Bulls, I wouldn't hate it.

[dougthonus]

You're not wrong, his price tag is the biggest issue, but for a team that is looking to extend their window like the Warriors, and maybe a team like the Clippers who aren't as worried about money, perhaps they'd be willing to bite. This deal has been mentioned before, but I think Zach would fit really well with the Nuggets, and we could do a straight MPJ and Zach deal, with some fillers, and though it wouldn't be a homerun for the Bulls, I wouldn't hate it.

I don't think Zach is entirely unmovable, just don't think you'll look at him later going "oh wow, why didn't we get that". We got Zach scoring a crap ton of points at high efficiency for a whole bunch of years and a couple all-star appearances. I doubt you're going to see Zach be some totally different player somewhere else where he's unlocked and doing some crazy stuff you couldn't imagine.

[kulaz3000]

You're not wrong, his price tag is the biggest issue, but for a team that is looking to extend their window like the Warriors, and maybe a team like the Clippers who aren't as worried about money, perhaps they'd be willing to bite. This deal has been mentioned before, but I think Zach would fit really well with the Nuggets, and we could do a straight MPJ and Zach deal, with some fillers, and though it wouldn't be a homerun for the Bulls, I wouldn't hate it.

I don't think Zach is entirely unmovable, just don't think you'll look at him later going "oh wow, why didn't we get that". We got Zach scoring a crap ton of points at high efficiency for a whole bunch of years and a couple all-star appearances. I doubt you're going to see Zach be some totally different player somewhere else where he's unlocked and doing some crazy stuff you couldn't imagine.

Oh, I don't disagree with that. He is what he is at this stage, provided he stays healthy. But I don't think he is still young enough, and proven to be an efficient enough scorer, that on the right team, he could be a pivotal player on a winning team. But even in that situation you know there are going to be Bulls fans that complain that we didn't build the right team around him, and that we should have kept him. It's inevitable.

[Hangtime84]

Boys I'm sorry. Y'all can talk his stats, PPG, efficiency all you want. It seems like the GMs have realized he's not a winning impact player regardless of his scoring. It's not the injury stuff (not that that helps).

They are probably concerned that at such high volume and efficiency he was barely a positive impact player, how is he gonna fare as a #3 with reduced volume (scoring being the only thing he provided). Do they want to pay #1 money for a stumbling #3? Probs not

There are plenty of players that have produced statistically, bounced around and then go to a team that best utilizes them and they produce and then end up being a winning team also, the narrative completely shifts, and then the former teams fans are lamenting why they let him go or traded him to begin with.

He just needs to end up on the right team.

Pretty sure that will happen 100% to Zach LaVine if he moved to team where he is option 2.

[PaKii94]

Boys I'm sorry. Y'all can talk his stats, PPG, efficiency all you want. It seems like the GMs have realized he's not a winning impact player regardless of his scoring. It's not the injury stuff (not that that helps).

They are probably concerned that at such high volume and efficiency he was barely a positive impact player, how is he gonna fare as a #3 with reduced volume (scoring being the only thing he provided). Do they want to pay #1 money for a stumbling #3? Probs not

There are plenty of players that have produced statistically, bounced around and then go to a team that best utilizes them and they produce and then end up being a winning team also, the narrative completely shifts, and then the former teams fans are lamenting why they let him go or traded him to begin with.

He just needs to end up on the right team.

Pretty sure that will happen 100% to Zach LaVine if he moved to team where he is option 2.

That's where we diverge. Yes Zach can be a useful player. Yes he can provide scoring. No he cannot lead a team as a #1. His game is theoretically great for a #2 off ball scorer shooter type player (think klay Thompson plus) BUT he doesn't have the bbiq (or focus) to play that way.

His ideal role is the spark plug off the bench scorer or like others said the MPJ role where when it's kind of a drought you can through him out there to go get a bucket. That is not worth the price tag.

He's not going to blossom as a top option on a different team. I've seen enough of Zach to be confident in that statement.

If starting role is a must, then I like OKC for him next to Shai. He can just run around focus on scoring while sga, chet playmake

[PaKii94]

Boys I'm sorry. Y'all can talk his stats, PPG, efficiency all you want. It seems like the GMs have realized he's not a winning impact player regardless of his scoring. It's not the injury stuff (not that that helps).

They are probably concerned that at such high volume and efficiency he was barely a positive impact player, how is he gonna fare as a #3 with reduced volume (scoring being the only thing he provided). Do they want to pay #1 money for a stumbling #3? Probs not

There are plenty of players that have produced statistically, bounced around and then go to a team that best utilizes them and they produce and then end up being a winning team also, the narrative completely shifts, and then the former teams fans are lamenting why they let him go or traded him to begin with.

He just needs to end up on the right team.

Can you make any that were the level of Zach lavine? The latest example is Bradley Beal. He got traded. His efficiency went up and yet he's still the same impact player. Maybe a slight positive because of the uptick in efficiency but since his volume was reduced his impact didn't really happen.

Same thing will happen to lavine.

An extreme comparison for lavine is KD. KD is obviously several tiers above lavine in the talent/impact/defense/IQ department but he's also a similar archetype of player. A player who's impact comes from his high level scoring. And you can see where KD lead teams have gone ever since he left GSW. Can't say he didn't have talent around him. If KD can't lead a team as a #1, lavine just doesn't even matter tbh.

[dougthonus]

An extreme comparison for lavine is KD. KD is obviously several tiers above lavine in the talent/impact/defense/IQ department but he's also a similar archetype of player. A player who's impact comes from his high level scoring. And you can see where KD lead teams have gone ever since he left GSW. Can't say he didn't have talent around him. If KD can't lead a team as a #1, lavine just doesn't even matter tbh.

To be a tiny bit fair to KD here, he got his team to the finals in OKC, and he was 2 inches away from getting his team to the finals in Brooklyn (and the team that he lost to won). In Brooklyn he never really had talent because Kyrie could never keep his **** together and stay healthy. In OKC, they had talent, but they were too young, and the West was an absolute buzz saw, but they probably would have won if they kept the team together instead of moving Harden.

In Phoenix, they really have two stars and Beal was a terrible guy to bring in there and KD is also not the dominant force he used to be.

That said, I agree that Zach isn't a #1, I think he could be a 2A/2B guy and in a situation where the 1A guy was potentially the best player in the world in his prime (prime LeBron, prime Steph, prime Luka, etc...), but it doesn't really matter, that wouldn't make me feel any differently about keeping Zach on a max contract here. Lots of good players could probably be that guy.

The max contract just makes this a lousy situation for teams. Because money at the very top is artificially constrained, a guy like Zach, Beal, Trae is probably worth paying vs losing, but they look really poor relative to the guys a tier ahead of them that are locked into the same deals.

[sco]

There are plenty of players that have produced statistically, bounced around and then go to a team that best utilizes them and they produce and then end up being a winning team also, the narrative completely shifts, and then the former teams fans are lamenting why they let him go or traded him to begin with.

He just needs to end up on the right team.

Pretty sure that will happen 100% to Zach LaVine if he moved to team where he is option 2.

That's where we diverge. Yes Zach can be a useful player. Yes he can provide scoring. No he cannot lead a team as a #1. His game is theoretically great for a #2 off ball scorer shooter type player (think klay Thompson plus) BUT he doesn't have the bbiq (or focus) to play that way.

His ideal role is the spark plug off the bench scorer or like others said the MPJ role where when it's kind of a drought you can through him out there to go get a bucket. That is not worth the price tag.

He's not going to blossom as a top option on a different team. I've seen enough of Zach to be confident in that statement.

If starting role is a must, then I like OKC for him next to Shai. He can just run around focus on scoring while sga, chet playmake

Some great points in these! And while I am of the mind that AK is desperate enough to trade Zach at his absolute lowest value because most GM's will discount what his current baseline level of performance is, I think that Zach will very likely return to form and near prior statistics (and trade value) if we keep him. The comparisons to Beal's fall-off are interesting, as he was returning from injury last year, but I think his problem was that when there are 3 shot-heavy scorers on one team, inevitably one guy's stats will take a hit because there aren't enough shots available to have all 3 be featured scorers (and why Phoenix underperformed IMO). If Zach went to a situation where he got his typical volumes, he'll likely thrive (as I think he would here).

Regarding his $40M salary, yes it shrinks the available universe but that's often what's said about moving MAX players (he's not a SUPERMAX guy) and with the cap likely increasing, it won't look unusually large in another year.

Also, I'm not buying the "Zach plays losing basketball" narative. While I agree he's not a superstar that elevates a mediocre team to greatness, I think that his occasional selfish play is more than offset by his ability to score pretty efficiently at all 3 levels. I also think that the Bulls have been so offensively lacking talent that there has been nobody other than DDR to pass to, and Zach knows it. Our main source of inefficiency comes from Billy's stupid notion to force feed the ball through Vuc, and that a Lavine/DDR pairing would be much better if there was not Vuc on the floor.

[Jcool0]

Zach's market will pick up when LeBron resigns with the Lakers and George resigns with the Clippers. Then all theses teams that think they are getting a top 5 player will reevaluated what they can realistically get and you will probably get a small bidding war for his services because its 100x better to trade for LaVine then signing Malik Monk to a big contract. Once LeBron resigns and Atlanta wont trade Trae Young for Austin Reaves and 3 1sts makes sense to make a similar offer to the Bulls.

[Andi Obst]

Zach's market will pick up when LeBron resigns with the Lakers and George resigns with the Clippers. Then all theses teams that think they are getting a top 5 player will reevaluated what they can realistically get and you will probably get a small bidding war for his services because its 100x better to trade for LaVine then signing Malik Monk to a big contract.

I guess that depends on how high the number for Monk will actually be (for, say, 20 mil AAV I'd rather have Monk, for example). In general, though, I think that where Monk ends up could really impact Zach's future. If the Kings can't keep Monk, they might be more willing to go after Zach because Monk was really important for that team. And if the Magic try to go after Monk (who should be their #1 FA priority IMO) and can't get him, that might make the Magic more willing to talk about Zach.

[Jcool0]

Zach's market will pick up when LeBron resigns with the Lakers and George resigns with the Clippers. Then all theses teams that think they are getting a top 5 player will reevaluated what they can realistically get and you will probably get a small bidding war for his services because its 100x better to trade for LaVine then signing Malik Monk to a big contract.

I guess that depends on how high the number for Monk will actually be (for, say, 20 mil AAV I'd rather have Monk, for example). In general, though, I think that where Monk ends up could really impact Zach's future. If the Kings can't keep Monk, they might be more willing to go after Zach because Monk was really important for that team. And if the Magic try to go after Monk (who should be their #1 FA priority IMO) and can't get him, that might make the Magic more willing to talk about Zach.

If you are trying to compete for a title signing Monk to be the 3rd guy isn't going to work out very well no matter how good the contract looks.

[Andi Obst]

Zach's market will pick up when LeBron resigns with the Lakers and George resigns with the Clippers. Then all theses teams that think they are getting a top 5 player will reevaluated what they can realistically get and you will probably get a small bidding war for his services because its 100x better to trade for LaVine then signing Malik Monk to a big contract.

I guess that depends on how high the number for Monk will actually be (for, say, 20 mil AAV I'd rather have Monk, for example). In general, though, I think that where Monk ends up could really impact Zach's future. If the Kings can't keep Monk, they might be more willing to go after Zach because Monk was really important for that team. And if the Magic try to go after Monk (who should be their #1 FA priority IMO) and can't get him, that might make the Magic more willing to talk about Zach.

If you are trying to compete for a title signing Monk to be the 3rd guy isn't going to work out very well no matter how good the contract looks.

Okay?

Where did I say that anybody should sign Monk as "the 3rd guy"?