Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread

[chefo]

Current Lauri that scores 20 on 13.5 shots, and shoots 60%+ on 2s and 40% on high volume of 3s will be a steal at 20 per, if he can keep it up. For real, let's play a game--name a low usage, 20 ppg scorer that has 65% TS that the Bulls can realistically get. That's a tiny set already, if I had to guess. Now, let's see how much that player makes and if anybody fitting that description intersects with the salary restriction of $20M. My guess would be: nobody.

Lauri has been playing like an ELITE second option this year on O. If he can keep it up (biggest if), that ship (Getting Lauri for 18-20 per) has probably sailed for good. Barring a career-threatening injury, people will be throwing rookie max contracts at him before 60 seconds have gone, once the FA period begins. Unless his agent is a chump, I think a lot of people on this board will be furious with how much the Bulls will have to shell out to keep him.

Dude. Whoever throws the max at Lauri, may they enjoy the ride. I have a feeling it's gonna be a lot like the Magic-Timberwolves sled. He has played 11 games and we struggle beating .500 teams missing key players, even when he has a great shooting night. "Elite second option" ??? I would hope an elite second option could help beat the struggling Warriors missing Draymond, or Blazers missing CJ and Nurkic.

If you totally build a concept around him and he works on his body (gains weight and core strength to play in the paint), I can see him developing into a more worthwhile player. It's just a high-risk/treadmill-reward.

Can you really envision Lauri becoming a comparable player to Sabonis, Vuc or KAT? To compare a few offensive-minded big men.

I'm afraid I don't follow the logic here. Lauri has easily been the Bulls' second best player this year. I don't know what Coby and WCJ sucking to start the year, and Pat Williams being thrown in the deep end have to do with Lauri. The Bulls are not losing games because of him. He's top 20 in the NBA in TS and one of the few high output players on that list.

So let's play the reverse--let's replace Coby with Brogdon, and WCJ with Jarrett Allen, for example, and hold everything else constant. That teams easily goes 12-6 or better. Is Lauri now worth the rookie max, putting up 20&7 on 65% TS on a 50-win pace team that can be easily projected to go deep in the playoffs?

Judge him by how well he's playing. You're penalizing him for having to share the floor with two kids and a barely old enough to drink WCJ, none of whom have pulled their weight so far.

[PaKii94]

Current Lauri that scores 20 on 13.5 shots, and shoots 60%+ on 2s and 40% on high volume of 3s will be a steal at 20 per, if he can keep it up. For real, let's play a game--name a low usage, 20 ppg scorer that has 65% TS that the Bulls can realistically get. That's a tiny set already, if I had to guess. Now, let's see how much that player makes and if anybody fitting that description intersects with the salary restriction of $20M. My guess would be: nobody.

Lauri has been playing like an ELITE second option this year on O. If he can keep it up (biggest if), that ship (Getting Lauri for 18-20 per) has probably sailed for good. Barring a career-threatening injury, people will be throwing rookie max contracts at him before 60 seconds have gone, once the FA period begins. Unless his agent is a chump, I think a lot of people on this board will be furious with how much the Bulls will have to shell out to keep him.

Dude. Whoever throws the max at Lauri, may they enjoy the ride. I have a feeling it's gonna be a lot like the Magic-Timberwolves sled. He has played 11 games and we struggle beating .500 teams missing key players, even when he has a great shooting night. "Elite second option" ??? I would hope an elite second option could help beat the struggling Warriors missing Draymond, or Blazers missing CJ and Nurkic.

The chicken/egg paradox happens when we start blaming Coby and Zach too much for Lauri losing games or not scoring enough. I agree that last year, he was mismanaged and the whole offensive system was brutal for everybody. But Lauri has proven regularly that he can't carry a team as a top-2 option; nothing remotely close to guys like John Collins or Christian Wood, who aren't even that great!

If you totally build a concept around him and he works on his body (gains weight and core strength to play in the paint), I can see him developing into a more worthwhile player. It's just a high-risk/treadmill-reward.

Can you really envision Lauri becoming a comparable player to Sabonis, Vuc or KAT? To compare a few offensive-minded big men.

I don't think Lauri is worth the max right now but I think looking at him like a big man is flawed. He's a big wing player. All the players you listed are much closer to the "big man" prototype. As a big man Lauri doesn't have the length or the bulk for primary rim protection. He doesn't have good post moves. His rebounding is average/below average for a "big man".

When you look at him as a wing, the balance tilts a little bit. He provided high volume efficient shooting from 3. Can drive to the rim and finish over smaller players/speed by big men. that's when he can draw more fouls. His perimeter defense is average and the poor rim protection is less detrimental. His length then becomes a deterrent in shot contests. His rebounding is then above average for a wing.

What he is missing that separates him from elite level wings is shot creation ability but being a B level star can still be valuable. If he was able to develop some mid range moves then he would be a bonafide superstar. I don't think he's on that trajectory but he IS still young. FFS we act like he's a finished product but he's only 23. Zach is finally learning winning basketball in year 7 at 25.


You say he has proven regularly that he can't be a 2nd option. Idk about that. Whenever Lauri gets usage he produces. It's just he doesn't get usage. That's why people complained about Lavine in years past and coby this year. Feed him until he maxes out his abilities. Get him shots till his efficiency starts dropping.

[Kukoc-Lauri]

Current Lauri that scores 20 on 13.5 shots, and shoots 60%+ on 2s and 40% on high volume of 3s will be a steal at 20 per, if he can keep it up. For real, let's play a game--name a low usage, 20 ppg scorer that has 65% TS that the Bulls can realistically get. That's a tiny set already, if I had to guess. Now, let's see how much that player makes and if anybody fitting that description intersects with the salary restriction of $20M. My guess would be: nobody.

Lauri has been playing like an ELITE second option this year on O. If he can keep it up (biggest if), that ship (Getting Lauri for 18-20 per) has probably sailed for good. Barring a career-threatening injury, people will be throwing rookie max contracts at him before 60 seconds have gone, once the FA period begins. Unless his agent is a chump, I think a lot of people on this board will be furious with how much the Bulls will have to shell out to keep him.

Dude. Whoever throws the max at Lauri, may they enjoy the ride. I have a feeling it's gonna be a lot like the Magic-Timberwolves sled. He has played 11 games and we struggle beating .500 teams missing key players, even when he has a great shooting night. "Elite second option" ??? I would hope an elite second option could help beat the struggling Warriors missing Draymond, or Blazers missing CJ and Nurkic.

The chicken/egg paradox happens when we start blaming Coby and Zach too much for Lauri losing games or not scoring enough. I agree that last year, he was mismanaged and the whole offensive system was brutal for everybody. But Lauri has proven regularly that he can't carry a team as a top-2 option; nothing remotely close to guys like John Collins or Christian Wood, who aren't even that great!

If you totally build a concept around him and he works on his body (gains weight and core strength to play in the paint), I can see him developing into a more worthwhile player. It's just a high-risk/treadmill-reward.

Can you really envision Lauri becoming a comparable player to Sabonis, Vuc or KAT? To compare a few offensive-minded big men.

I would rather have Lauri then Wood. Saw many of those Jonathan Bender,Miles types that had one breakout season and disapearee in next few years. Maybe Lauri is just like that Ryan Anderson type, but imo when his body is fully developed and he learns his best playing weight he could have Galinari type of career, show promise, strugglle little, have injuries but with time became starting calibeer pf for years. And he can shoot and that skill is vital in playoffs.

[cjbulls]

I obviously disagree about untradeables. Signing a bunch of players to untradeable contracts is how you get yourself into real trouble as an organization particularly with the Reinsdorf's financial limits. If you really think you are going to get stuck with Lauri at a given contract value, I think you have to trade him before you sign him to that deal.

I don't think Lauri would be an albatross contract at $20m with his current play.

Agreed. And of course there are levels of bust where a contract becomes negative. I just think some people follow the "price is right" model where a penny over the player's actual value makes them an upside-down contract and untradeable. When in reality paying a $15M player $20M doesn't alter their trade value all that much (especially in a world where so few trades are 1-for-1). And in the case of young players, gets you in on any potential upside they will get better as they get older.

This of course, is opposed to just letting a guy walk for nothing. All you get then is more cap space which you can do what with? Overpay a FA or trade for an overpaid contract.

The fear I would have is pretty much what you are talking about. A Ben Gordon or Kyle Korver situation where you overpay several players and then are forced to let others go in order to stay under the lux tax. Also, that JR vetoes every trade because he already has too much salary (Gasol many years ago).

If a guy is movable then all these concerns go away. Its only where you are truly stuck with him that its a problem. What is that number for Lauri? $25m or more?

I don't know if that era exists anymore in the world of 4 year FA contracts. By the time you confirm the guy sucks and has no value, he has one or two years left. For Lauri at $25M, he would need to suffer a serious injury or fall back to or below his 3rd year numbers before his value was truly negative (by negative, I mean no team will even trade you an expiring for him).

Bulls management is a scenario I have ignored, but probably shouldn't. I guess I'm hoping AK has more leverage with this team.

[cjbulls]

I picked ORL because I watched them in the bubble, and preferred their team with Gordon out. They played lower-usage energy wings at PF, and I like them more.

Indiana is different. I'd say Sabonis is their "Lauri" ; Turner is their "Wendell." Both guys were/are/probably-will be (much) better, and it's possible that their extension contracts were the same or cheaper than what Lauri/Wendell demand (I mean, Sabonis took 77/4). Sabonis made ASG in year 4. Turner was invited to Team USA on his rookie deal. I'm not sure Wendell is anywhere near there, even if Miles underperformed.

Charlotte's an odd comparison because I don't really see any logic in what MJ's done with that roster. They were on right to let Kemba go; I think Rozier was actually promising enough to take the 60/3 gamble, because he can do a little bit of everything and play multiple positions. Obviously they're make-or-break moment is LaMelo. He needs more time to develop, but if he pans out into a true superstar (kind of looking like he'll be a star), they are not going to want any Rozier-esque salaries on their books. You look at DAL, they were in a kind of cap-hell when they added Luka. They managed to convert some mediocre contracts into a risky KP but they also had to take THJ. And they're just kind of stuck with this crappy roster.

ORL/Gordon is more the Lauri scenario, to me.

It's not about the Lauri scenario. It's about asset management. Lauri at $20M > $20M cap space next year. And that extends in future years when you know you can always trade him for an expiring contract. Plus, if he continues playing like he is now (or getting better), he is worth $20M, arguably more.

You act as if Orlando missed out on signing AD because they held onto Aaron Gordon.

Not really. I'd much rather sign multiple 1y contracts like Temple than lock up Lauri. You can also trade cap for salary, get a pick for compensation.

Minnesota has $130m guaranteed next year for a garbage dumpster fire of a team. After their top-3 draft pick (unless it goes to GSW), they're paying luxury tax. Pretty sure they'll be begging for teams to take players off their books.

Milwaukee is going over the cap and they need to resign Jrue.

I'd just keep an eye on all these teams with massive excess tied up into mediocre rotation players. Easy mid/late FRPs and 2nd rounders, and you get an expiring chip on top of it all. Or even a decent rotation vet.

There are no "multiple 1yr contracts like Temple". Might as well say the Bulls should sign a bunch of LaVine's for 4/76. Those guys either have serious flaws (Whiteside) or they sign with contenders (Marc Gasol), which you have shown you are not interested in by letting all of your talent walk away for nothing. Temple was thought of as washed up but a good leader, he just happened to overperform so far.

Your other plan is to take overpaid players from bad teams or the least valuable high-salary players from good team (MKE is out of FRPs btw).

Who are you getting in these scenarios? Malik Beasley? D'Angelo Russell? Brook Lopez? Pat Connaughton? Are any of these an upgrade over Lauri at $20M?

Now you want to go after KAT, I'm all ears, but you're basically doing the opposite by taking their worst.

[PaKii94]

Last night was again a tale of two halves but this time Lauri got usage in the 2nd half! He seems to have turned the corner on his cold spell shooting since returning. Hopefully it keeps up.

He's back up to 23ppg p26 on 51/40, 65%TS. More data points for the healthy utilized Lauri dataset.

The usage is starting to creep up with the injury to WCJ. Maybe we can see a FebruLauri 2021 edition?? Let's get him some more usage!

[PaKii94]

A comment on his defense. The rim protection has been pretty bad as expected but he has stepped up a bit during close/pressure situations like last night's 4Q against Portland and his defense on AD in the second half of the LA game. I wonder if he's cruising/conserving energy during the beginning of the games.... I don't think he can afford to. It reminds me of the carelessness with TOs by our guards. All our players need to focus in for 48 mins.

[MrSparkle]

It's not about the Lauri scenario. It's about asset management. Lauri at $20M > $20M cap space next year. And that extends in future years when you know you can always trade him for an expiring contract. Plus, if he continues playing like he is now (or getting better), he is worth $20M, arguably more.

You act as if Orlando missed out on signing AD because they held onto Aaron Gordon.

Not really. I'd much rather sign multiple 1y contracts like Temple than lock up Lauri. You can also trade cap for salary, get a pick for compensation.

Minnesota has $130m guaranteed next year for a garbage dumpster fire of a team. After their top-3 draft pick (unless it goes to GSW), they're paying luxury tax. Pretty sure they'll be begging for teams to take players off their books.

Milwaukee is going over the cap and they need to resign Jrue.

I'd just keep an eye on all these teams with massive excess tied up into mediocre rotation players. Easy mid/late FRPs and 2nd rounders, and you get an expiring chip on top of it all. Or even a decent rotation vet.

There are no "multiple 1yr contracts like Temple". Might as well say the Bulls should sign a bunch of LaVine's for 4/76. Those guys either have serious flaws (Whiteside) or they sign with contenders (Marc Gasol), which you have shown you are not interested in by letting all of your talent walk away for nothing. Temple was thought of as washed up but a good leader, he just happened to overperform so far.

Your other plan is to take overpaid players from bad teams or the least valuable high-salary players from good team (MKE is out of FRPs btw).

Who are you getting in these scenarios? Malik Beasley? D'Angelo Russell? Brook Lopez? Pat Connaughton? Are any of these an upgrade over Lauri at $20M?

Now you want to go after KAT, I'm all ears, but you're basically doing the opposite by taking their worst.

Every year there’s a bargain bin. Always has been, always will be. There are tons of Temples. It’s not a strategy to contend, it’s a place-holder while you develop or figure out your core, which we haven’t done.

And Yeah - I’d rather get the back-end of an empty calorie contract (D’Lo, Lopez) with an extra asset than the front-end.

[cjbulls]

Not really. I'd much rather sign multiple 1y contracts like Temple than lock up Lauri. You can also trade cap for salary, get a pick for compensation.

Minnesota has $130m guaranteed next year for a garbage dumpster fire of a team. After their top-3 draft pick (unless it goes to GSW), they're paying luxury tax. Pretty sure they'll be begging for teams to take players off their books.

Milwaukee is going over the cap and they need to resign Jrue.

I'd just keep an eye on all these teams with massive excess tied up into mediocre rotation players. Easy mid/late FRPs and 2nd rounders, and you get an expiring chip on top of it all. Or even a decent rotation vet.

There are no "multiple 1yr contracts like Temple". Might as well say the Bulls should sign a bunch of LaVine's for 4/76. Those guys either have serious flaws (Whiteside) or they sign with contenders (Marc Gasol), which you have shown you are not interested in by letting all of your talent walk away for nothing. Temple was thought of as washed up but a good leader, he just happened to overperform so far.

Your other plan is to take overpaid players from bad teams or the least valuable high-salary players from good team (MKE is out of FRPs btw).

Who are you getting in these scenarios? Malik Beasley? D'Angelo Russell? Brook Lopez? Pat Connaughton? Are any of these an upgrade over Lauri at $20M?

Now you want to go after KAT, I'm all ears, but you're basically doing the opposite by taking their worst.

Every year there’s a bargain bin. Always has been, always will be. There are tons of Temples. It’s not a strategy to contend, it’s a place-holder while you develop or figure out your core, which we haven’t done.

And Yeah - I’d rather get the back-end of an empty calorie contract (D’Lo, Lopez) with an extra asset than the front-end.

Who were all the bargain bin guys to sign this year? And that want to sing with a rebuilding team?

If you think you’d rather have Brook Lopez/Russell and a protected 2025 pick over $20M Lauri, then I’m not sure where to find agreement on what value even is.

[sco]

There are no "multiple 1yr contracts like Temple". Might as well say the Bulls should sign a bunch of LaVine's for 4/76. Those guys either have serious flaws (Whiteside) or they sign with contenders (Marc Gasol), which you have shown you are not interested in by letting all of your talent walk away for nothing. Temple was thought of as washed up but a good leader, he just happened to overperform so far.

Your other plan is to take overpaid players from bad teams or the least valuable high-salary players from good team (MKE is out of FRPs btw).

Who are you getting in these scenarios? Malik Beasley? D'Angelo Russell? Brook Lopez? Pat Connaughton? Are any of these an upgrade over Lauri at $20M?

Now you want to go after KAT, I'm all ears, but you're basically doing the opposite by taking their worst.

Every year there’s a bargain bin. Always has been, always will be. There are tons of Temples. It’s not a strategy to contend, it’s a place-holder while you develop or figure out your core, which we haven’t done.

And Yeah - I’d rather get the back-end of an empty calorie contract (D’Lo, Lopez) with an extra asset than the front-end.

Who were all the bargain bin guys to sign this year? And that want to sing with a rebuilding team?

If you think you’d rather have Brook Lopez/Russell and a protected 2025 pick over $20M Lauri, then I’m not sure where to find agreement on what value even is.

Next off-season is weak on PF's, but I'd rather pay-up for John Collins than Lauri. I think we'd have enough to nab both Collins and Drummond if we don't sign Lauri.

[Pax for Prez]

This tweet is just how I feel ....

Read on Twitter

[cjbulls]

Every year there’s a bargain bin. Always has been, always will be. There are tons of Temples. It’s not a strategy to contend, it’s a place-holder while you develop or figure out your core, which we haven’t done.

And Yeah - I’d rather get the back-end of an empty calorie contract (D’Lo, Lopez) with an extra asset than the front-end.

Who were all the bargain bin guys to sign this year? And that want to sing with a rebuilding team?

If you think you’d rather have Brook Lopez/Russell and a protected 2025 pick over $20M Lauri, then I’m not sure where to find agreement on what value even is.

Next off-season is weak on PF's, but I'd rather pay-up for John Collins than Lauri. I think we'd have enough to nab both Collins and Drummond if we don't sign Lauri.

I'd have to see the salary gap between the two. I think Collins probably has more untapped potential stemming from being stuck with Trae in that system. He also may be able to play more center than Lauri.

I don't understand Drummond though with him. Not enough defense for my taste at the 4/5. Plus then you are capped out with Zach.

[cjbulls]

This tweet is just how I feel ....

Read on Twitter

I debated making a new post about this very issue but it would just end up in the same old arguments about everyone favorite/hated guy.

I see three team fit issues on this team that hold it back.

1. Coby/Zach are two very good shooting guards but they really don't play well together.

2. Lauri and Wendell appear complementary, but do not play well together on the court.

3. Lauri and Zach are the two best players on the team but they are both just efficient scorers that provide few other advantages. Your two best players shouldn't be redundant unless you create a very unique team build.

AK has to solve for these three problems. So who stays and goes? Is the plan to get good in the short or long term? Who has value and who doesn't? This is an interesting job for the FO, but it isn't easy

[Red8911]

Keep both Lavine and Lauri. All the bulls need is to trade for a player who is on Lavines level, meaning a star or close to it. Examples are Drummond, Beal,Kemba,Derozen,Conley .A trio of this player, Lavine, and Lauri is not bad at all. The bulls have the chips to get a player like that if they wanted to whether it’s now or next season. Let’s see what they do.

[DroseReturnChi]

Dude. Whoever throws the max at Lauri, may they enjoy the ride. I have a feeling it's gonna be a lot like the Magic-Timberwolves sled. He has played 11 games and we struggle beating .500 teams missing key players, even when he has a great shooting night. "Elite second option" ??? I would hope an elite second option could help beat the struggling Warriors missing Draymond, or Blazers missing CJ and Nurkic.

The chicken/egg paradox happens when we start blaming Coby and Zach too much for Lauri losing games or not scoring enough. I agree that last year, he was mismanaged and the whole offensive system was brutal for everybody. But Lauri has proven regularly that he can't carry a team as a top-2 option; nothing remotely close to guys like John Collins or Christian Wood, who aren't even that great!

If you totally build a concept around him and he works on his body (gains weight and core strength to play in the paint), I can see him developing into a more worthwhile player. It's just a high-risk/treadmill-reward.

Can you really envision Lauri becoming a comparable player to Sabonis, Vuc or KAT? To compare a few offensive-minded big men.

What is this logic man? Lets penalize Lauri bc white, carter, other guys suck he doesnt deserve max?
As the other guy said, if the Bulls had Beal, Allen, Dinwiddie, that team would have went like top 3-5 seed rn with how well Lauri is playing right now. Sabonis, vuc these type of players arent even comparable to Lauri as they are more traditional big men. Idc what stats these guys put up they just suck.

This season in fact proves you can build around Lauri as a legit 2nd option or even a 1st option is what I would experiment.
If he succeeds post feb Lauri, you can get even unprotected picks.

[DroseReturnChi]

This tweet is just how I feel ....

Read on Twitter

I debated making a new post about this very issue but it would just end up in the same old arguments about everyone favorite/hated guy.

I see three team fit issues on this team that hold it back.

1. Coby/Zach are two very good shooting guards but they really don't play well together.

2. Lauri and Wendell appear complementary, but do not play well together on the court.

3. Lauri and Zach are the two best players on the team but they are both just efficient scorers that provide few other advantages. Your two best players shouldn't be redundant unless you create a very unique team build.

AK has to solve for these three problems. So who stays and goes? Is the plan to get good in the short or long term? Who has value and who doesn't? This is an interesting job for the FO, but it isn't easy

its just simple. just ship out the underachievers. white/Carter as I have expected have always played below avg starter level they are replacement levels. There is no excuse to keep them to develop your just wasting lavine's contract.
Even Lavine is not untouchable. His on-off numbers still dont impact and he will make a lot of money its better to flip him for a disgruntled star.

[LateNight]

Idc what stats these guys put up they just suck.

This season in fact proves you can build around Lauri as a legit 2nd option or even a 1st option is what I would experiment.

Saying “Idc what stats these guys put up they just suck” sort of undercuts any argument you make after that.

Lauri is having a good shooting stretch - but he still has flaws. I guess you *could* build around him as a number one option, but he really doesn’t seem like one. He can be amazing when his shot is dropping and he’s cutting - but the fact that he can really create shots for himself or play defense or exploit mismatches severely limits his potential as a number #1 option.

[PaKii94]

Who were all the bargain bin guys to sign this year? And that want to sing with a rebuilding team?

If you think you’d rather have Brook Lopez/Russell and a protected 2025 pick over $20M Lauri, then I’m not sure where to find agreement on what value even is.

Next off-season is weak on PF's, but I'd rather pay-up for John Collins than Lauri. I think we'd have enough to nab both Collins and Drummond if we don't sign Lauri.

I'd have to see the salary gap between the two. I think Collins probably has more untapped potential stemming from being stuck with Trae in that system. He also may be able to play more center than Lauri.

I don't understand Drummond though with him. Not enough defense for my taste at the 4/5. Plus then you are capped out with Zach.

Don't get fooled by John collins guys. He's a perfect example of "grass is greener on the other side". "stuck with trae"? lololol Trae is who makes him what he is! The attention he draws and the playmaking he provides is a great help to Collins.

1) We rag on Lauri's lack of self creation -> John Collins is FULLY playmaking dependent.
2 point FG assisted rate:
Lauri- this year (61%) -> second highest of career, career (53%)
Collins- this year (65%) -> lowest by far of career, career (73%)

2) Lauri is by far the better shooter compared to Collins. His 3 point rate is nearly 2x that of collins. That's a more valuable trait to have than "dunks"

3) Lauri's FT rate is again higher than Collins even though Collins is a lot more of a rim runner/traditional big. (Lauri is also the better FT shooter) That's a more valuable trait

4) We rag on Lauri's rebounding but Collins' isn't that much better. They are similar defensive rebounders (% wise) Collins is a better offensive rebounder but I think that's to be a given considering how close he plays to the basket. His average distance of play is 8 ft (this year is the highest at 11 ft). Lauri on the other hand plays at the minimum of 15 ft (almost double!).

5) Lauri is more efficient while creating more and taking a LOT more jumpers

6) Defense wise both are poor. Rim protection is probably a wash. I think Lauri is the better perimeter defender. IMO Collins is both mental + physical deficiency on defense. Lauri it's mostly physical.

I'd rather have the more shot creating/sharpshooting big with potential to be okay on defense. But I can see how a more athletic specimen would be more enticing.

[cjbulls]

This tweet is just how I feel ....

Read on Twitter

I debated making a new post about this very issue but it would just end up in the same old arguments about everyone favorite/hated guy.

I see three team fit issues on this team that hold it back.

1. Coby/Zach are two very good shooting guards but they really don't play well together.

2. Lauri and Wendell appear complementary, but do not play well together on the court.

3. Lauri and Zach are the two best players on the team but they are both just efficient scorers that provide few other advantages. Your two best players shouldn't be redundant unless you create a very unique team build.

AK has to solve for these three problems. So who stays and goes? Is the plan to get good in the short or long term? Who has value and who doesn't? This is an interesting job for the FO, but it isn't easy

its just simple. just ship out the underachievers. white/Carter as I have expected have always played below avg starter level they are replacement levels. There is no excuse to keep them to develop your just wasting lavine's contract.
Even Lavine is not untouchable. His on-off numbers still dont impact and he will make a lot of money its better to flip him for a disgruntled star.

It's not simple. Lavine and Lauri are not enough on their own. They are duplicative and you need big talent around them still. They would need a third star, one that is a difference maker either as a playmaker or defender. They also would need a non-star that fills the remaining playmaker/defender spot that isn't your third star.

Wendell and Coby have low trade value, essentially none for any players of consequence. Further, Coby is Lavine insurance since there is a strong possiblity Lavine leaves in a year and half. Trading them right now will only get you someone else's bust. It's better to keep them around and hope they develop and/or raise their value.

Lauri is in contract limbo so he is much harder to trade.

Lavine has the best trade value but he's the one defined piece that is reliable and can help attract other players.

[E-DC]

Next off-season is weak on PF's, but I'd rather pay-up for John Collins than Lauri. I think we'd have enough to nab both Collins and Drummond if we don't sign Lauri.

I'd have to see the salary gap between the two. I think Collins probably has more untapped potential stemming from being stuck with Trae in that system. He also may be able to play more center than Lauri.

I don't understand Drummond though with him. Not enough defense for my taste at the 4/5. Plus then you are capped out with Zach.

Don't get fooled by John collins guys. He's a perfect example of "grass is greener on the other side". "stuck with trae"? lololol Trae is who makes him what he is! The attention he draws and the playmaking he provides is a great help to Collins.

1) We rag on Lauri's lack of self creation -> John Collins is FULLY playmaking dependent.
2 point FG assisted rate:
Lauri- this year (61%) -> second highest of career, career (53%)
Collins- this year (65%) -> lowest by far of career, career (73%)

2) Lauri is by far the better shooter compared to Collins. His 3 point rate is nearly 2x that of collins. That's a more valuable trait to have than "dunks"

3) Lauri's FT rate is again higher than Collins even though Collins is a lot more of a rim runner/traditional big. (Lauri is also the better FT shooter) That's a more valuable trait

4) We rag on Lauri's rebounding but Collins' isn't that much better. They are similar defensive rebounders (% wise) Collins is a better offensive rebounder but I think that's to be a given considering how close he plays to the basket. His average distance of play is 8 ft (this year is the highest at 11 ft). Lauri on the other hand plays at the minimum of 15 ft (almost double!).

5) Lauri is more efficient while creating more and taking a LOT more jumpers

6) Defense wise both are poor. Rim protection is probably a wash. I think Lauri is the better perimeter defender. IMO Collins is both mental + physical deficiency on defense. Lauri it's mostly physical.

I'd rather have the more shot creating/sharpshooting big with potential to be okay on defense. But I can see how a more athletic specimen would be more enticing.

This is something I had noticed last years when I was comparing Lauri and Collins. It's also worth noting that during Lauri's rookie season 64% of his 2P FG's came by way of assists and then over the last two seasons that percentage plummeted to around 53%. Bulls fans often point out that Lauri's shooting percentages haven't improved, but fail to note this discrepancy. 53% is a low percentage for a big man not named Giannis or Durant. Anthony Davis's career percentage is 67%, Sabonis' is 66%, Porzingis is 66%, and Adebayo, Zion, and Wood are all at 69%. And as you point out Lauri's percentage this season is 61% which is still relatively low compared to the career averages of his peers.