Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread

[Pentele]

Lauri has never had a guard to get him the ball, Bulls should trade WCJ, White, for a PG. Everyone wants Lauri out, its amazing, Bulls have to make a comeback to beat the Pistons everyone is saying look now we don’t need Lauri. (Thats how the thread went)

Part of it appears to stem from concerns of deflecting "blame" from one or another player that one views favorably. Although it is as plain as day that Coby's struggles and/or the incabability of the management to find a playmaker is the single biggest factor affecting how many games the team win, many (especially Coby fans) are making a lot of effort to look past that. On that background, it is perfectly "reasonable" to find those sort of examples of "good play", even if against thrash teams, teams having a nightmarish shooting performances, and so forth. The Coby situation is not the only reason, of course, and certainly it is valid observation if the team somehow fares better without Lauri. That being said, as I find the practice that I just described mildly irritating, there is a part in me that would not be very sorry to see Lauri finding his fortune somewhere else as a slap on the wrist. Since I think that it would be pretty stupid to make trades like Lonzo for Lauri that many seem to advocate, and I still think the Bulls can put Lauri to good use in the future, as a fan of the team I am simply unable to join the chorus here.

Btw, what's up with that Lauri-Lonzo trade proposal? Was the whole point of getting a playmaker in the style of Lonzo, that he would be able to feed the big men that can actually score? If all real scoring threats are on the perimeter, how much can Lonzo, specifically, offer to the team? As I see it, any true pg would be an improvement to the current situation (with or without Lauri), but shouldn't the Bull target someone else if Lauri is traded/let go?

[FreePaulZipser]

First off, I wouldn't be particularly high on giving John Collins massive money.

Lauri's defense is terrible. I think one of the primary issues is that he is so terrible that many people don't realize how terrible he is. In the past, he wouldn't rotate at all and would just let people get wide open shots. He has helped some this year but he is still far less than most of the team. With Lauri out, watch how much the Bulls help the helper right now. Teams rarely get uncontested shots off. There is a reason the defense is so much better with him out. If he was playing, you would be seeing a lot more wide open shots and not realize it was Lauri's fault because Lauri would be 15 feet away diligently guarding a man without the ball.

Anyways, in order to be effective Lauri needs:
- A high end set up man
- An offense set up specifically for him
- Other good shooters around him to give him space
- An elite defensive help guy at the 3 and 5 spots to make up for him
- A few people to rebound

That's a really long list and why I would hesitate to give him a big contract.

Just in general, one thing that irritates a lot of people with Lauri is the long litany of excuses for him and needs about how other players have to do things for Lauri to make him effective. Flip this around. What does Lauri do to make his teammates better? Defense? Nope. Rebounding or boxing out? Nope. Passing? He is a black hole. The only thing he does is pull his man out of the middle but even when that happens, his fans will get angry because someone isn't doing something to pull that man off so Lauri get get his usage up.

This is why i haven't really respond to post about Lauri because very few in here are sensible about him. He is either SEVERLY overrated or underrated.

Probably not going to respond much after this but would you consider AD a black hole? His assist numbers are on par with his. He isn't being asked to pass the ball. Again for a POWER FORWARD he is a mid of the pack rebounder. So to say we need all of these rebounders just isn't true. We were one of the best rebounding teams with Robin and Lauri. Do you know what would help rebounding? How about the Starting center getting more than 1 more rebound than your starting power forward or just having a back-up CENTER that can rebound in general........

Most bigs need a high end set up man. i don't know if you noticed that but there are only a handful of bigs that get it on their own. He doesn't need a offense specifically for him. Have you not watched this season? Dude gets 13 shots and is giving us 19 points.... 13 shots isn't what i would call having to cater your offense to him.

Most people need shooters around them for space..... What are you on. This generation is built on space and pace lol. Also what is bad about having an Elite defensive Center and Wing? How many championships have you seen won without that type of combination...... i'll wait for that answer.

I'll admit my over-excitement for Collins may be just "anybody but Lauri - grass is always greener" syndrome. That said, Lauri has showed me that it's better to have a quicker 6'8 PF than an average speed 7'0 PF.

But that's a valid reason. Saying we shouldn't keep him because he needs to be set up like most bigs or he rebounds like most power forwards or you need a defender at center and the wing( so does every team), is what i'm talking about.

Saying you want the ability to switch everything. Or saying you want someone who is going to be more assertive all of the time than some of the time like Lauri. Or saying how come when Lauri is feeling himself he will try and dunk through a big but when he gets a small on him he just wants to shoot over the top.

It's why I don't post much on here and i honestly don't know why i did today. It's too much nitpicking. Like if I went and criticized Zach's defense and playmaking, most on here will come to his defense and give him every excuse. I can still think he is great and criticize him at the same time. Or i've seen people act like Lauri can be a #1 option and it's just crazy to me. So i usually just stick to reading and laughing.

[Pentele]

Most people need shooters around them for space..... What are you on. This generation is built on space and pace lol. Also what is bad about having an Elite defensive Center and Wing? How many championships have you seen won without that type of combination...... i'll wait for that answer.

This is a very good point, and I wondered the same thing myself reading that post. The more general issue is this: pretty much every thing that Lauri "needs" is also needed by the team when you are building a contender. If that is so, it should show us that Lauri actually would have a place in a contending team. That issue is separate, though, from the issue whether Lauri has a place in the Bulls either right now or going forward. Perhaps he is the kind of player that is best added to a team when all the other pieces are already there - a luxury item as someone said earlier. If that is so, it is probably a fair argument that the Bulls have no need for Lauri right now.

One of the problems of discussing Lauri's utility to the Bulls is that people are mixing these things when arguing for or against Lauri's case. That is only to be expected if the discussion goes back and forth in a black-and-white manner. Suddenly a discussion of Lauri's worth as a player that he is on the free market is equated with Lauri's worth to the Bulls in their current situation. There is also a temptation to select one's arguments either for or against, strictly, which is also very normal on this type of forum. It does not really help that some contributions are of the type "If others want to make bad contracts, it does not mean that the Bulls should". That implies that Lauri with a certain contract is without a question a bad contract. The truth could be instead, and it probably is, that he can be the final piece to a team that already has other pieces in place, in which case they are willing to offer him whatever the cap and the owner of the team allow.

[FreePaulZipser]

Most people need shooters around them for space..... What are you on. This generation is built on space and pace lol. Also what is bad about having an Elite defensive Center and Wing? How many championships have you seen won without that type of combination...... i'll wait for that answer.

This is a very good point, and I wondered the same thing myself reading that post. The more general issue is this: pretty much every thing that Lauri "needs" is also needed by the team when you are building a contender. If that is so, it should show us that Lauri actually would have a place in a contending team. That issue is separate, though, from the issue whether Lauri has a place in the Bulls either right now or going forward. Perhaps he is the kind of player that is best added to a team when all the other pieces are already there - a luxury item as someone said earlier. If that is so, it is probably a fair argument that the Bulls have no need for Lauri right now.

One of the problems of discussing Lauri's utility to the Bulls is that people are mixing these things when arguing for or against Lauri's case. That is only to be expected if the discussion goes back and forth in a black-and-white manner. Suddenly a discussion of Lauri's worth as a player that he is on the free market is equated with Lauri's worth to the Bulls in their current situation. There is also a temptation to select one's arguments either for or against, strictly, which is also very normal on this type of forum. It does not really help that some contributions are of the type "If others want to make bad contracts, it does not mean that the Bulls should". That implies that Lauri with a certain contract is without a question a bad contract. The truth could be instead, and it probably is, that he can be the final piece to a team that already has other pieces in place, in which case they are willing to offer him whatever the cap and the owner of the team allow.

Exactly, nd then on top of that, People will assume that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to trade him after you sign him to 20+million when that is the farthest thing from the truth.

[MrSparkle]

Most people need shooters around them for space..... What are you on. This generation is built on space and pace lol. Also what is bad about having an Elite defensive Center and Wing? How many championships have you seen won without that type of combination...... i'll wait for that answer.

This is a very good point, and I wondered the same thing myself reading that post. The more general issue is this: pretty much every thing that Lauri "needs" is also needed by the team when you are building a contender. If that is so, it should show us that Lauri actually would have a place in a contending team. That issue is separate, though, from the issue whether Lauri has a place in the Bulls either right now or going forward. Perhaps he is the kind of player that is best added to a team when all the other pieces are already there - a luxury item as someone said earlier. If that is so, it is probably a fair argument that the Bulls have no need for Lauri right now.

One of the problems of discussing Lauri's utility to the Bulls is that people are mixing these things when arguing for or against Lauri's case. That is only to be expected if the discussion goes back and forth in a black-and-white manner. Suddenly a discussion of Lauri's worth as a player that he is on the free market is equated with Lauri's worth to the Bulls in their current situation. There is also a temptation to select one's arguments either for or against, strictly, which is also very normal on this type of forum. It does not really help that some contributions are of the type "If others want to make bad contracts, it does not mean that the Bulls should". That implies that Lauri with a certain contract is without a question a bad contract. The truth could be instead, and it probably is, that he can be the final piece to a team that already has other pieces in place, in which case they are willing to offer him whatever the cap and the owner of the team allow.

Exactly, nd then on top of that, People will assume that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to trade him after you sign him to 20+million when that is the farthest thing from the truth.

It’s been impossible to trade him at $6m... because he gets injured for before each deadline.

[FreePaulZipser]

This is a very good point, and I wondered the same thing myself reading that post. The more general issue is this: pretty much every thing that Lauri "needs" is also needed by the team when you are building a contender. If that is so, it should show us that Lauri actually would have a place in a contending team. That issue is separate, though, from the issue whether Lauri has a place in the Bulls either right now or going forward. Perhaps he is the kind of player that is best added to a team when all the other pieces are already there - a luxury item as someone said earlier. If that is so, it is probably a fair argument that the Bulls have no need for Lauri right now.

One of the problems of discussing Lauri's utility to the Bulls is that people are mixing these things when arguing for or against Lauri's case. That is only to be expected if the discussion goes back and forth in a black-and-white manner. Suddenly a discussion of Lauri's worth as a player that he is on the free market is equated with Lauri's worth to the Bulls in their current situation. There is also a temptation to select one's arguments either for or against, strictly, which is also very normal on this type of forum. It does not really help that some contributions are of the type "If others want to make bad contracts, it does not mean that the Bulls should". That implies that Lauri with a certain contract is without a question a bad contract. The truth could be instead, and it probably is, that he can be the final piece to a team that already has other pieces in place, in which case they are willing to offer him whatever the cap and the owner of the team allow.

Exactly, nd then on top of that, People will assume that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to trade him after you sign him to 20+million when that is the farthest thing from the truth.

It’s been impossible to trade him at $6m... because he gets injured for before each deadline.

or the more likely scenario which is they haven't been shopping him.........

[Leslie Forman]

Just to be clear, I think Lauri has played well this year. I think he could be a contributor on a title contender and would be happy if the Bulls could extend him on a reasonable contract.

Lauri is more efficient than he's ever been this year, but I am more convinced than ever that he would be relegated to Kapono status on a true title contender like the Lakers or Clippers. He is more experienced than he's ever been now and he's not even 1% better in terms of defense, passing, ball handling, and general toughness. Big men like that simply are not top-of-the-rotation guys for contenders that have better players who would be taking most of the shots.

I mean, this team that isn't even any good is just plain better when Thad Young, a 32-year-old journeyman with absolutely no single high level skill in particular, is playing instead of him. One side effect of Lauri being so injury prone (yet another reason why you should absolutely not pay him) is that we've seen the team play a LOT of games without him. There's pretty much no difference if he's playing or not.

I think the closest analog to him is Enes Kanter, even though they play nothing alike, except on defense, of course.

[Kukoc-Lauri]

Closest players in terms of stats, shooting splits and impact on winning according to espn career projections analitics/stats are 1.Tim Thomas 2.Andrea Bargnani 3.Mike Miller 4.Nicholas Batum(Blazers) 5.Charlie Villaneuva. Those players have been part of good playoffs/contending teams, averaged more than 20 ppg (Bargnani in Toronto) and signed at least one medium size large deal over 60 mil at some point in their careers. Majority of those players were payed and played like solid third options on playoff team at height of their careers. I expect similar career path for Markkanen both in contracts signed and production wise.

[coldfish]

Just to be clear, I think Lauri has played well this year. I think he could be a contributor on a title contender and would be happy if the Bulls could extend him on a reasonable contract.

Lauri is more efficient than he's ever been this year, but I am more convinced than ever that he would be relegated to Kapono status on a true title contender like the Lakers or Clippers. He is more experienced than he's ever been now and he's not even 1% better in terms of defense, passing, ball handling, and general toughness. Big men like that simply are not top-of-the-rotation guys for contenders that have better players who would be taking most of the shots.

I mean, this team that isn't even any good is just plain better when Thad Young, a 32-year-old journeyman with absolutely no single high level skill in particular, is playing instead of him. One side effect of Lauri being so injury prone (yet another reason why you should absolutely not pay him) is that we've seen the team play a LOT of games without him. There's pretty much no difference if he's playing or not.

I think the closest analog to him is Enes Kanter, even though they play nothing alike, except on defense, of course.

That makes 13.5m this year and 14.2m next year. If you have read through the thread, that's kind of the ballpark that I think Lauri should be in. Maybe a little bit more due to youth but when you look around the league, its a stretch.

There is a lot of talk about where Lauri fits on a competitive team. As I have been getting to, a one dimensional player is more like a 4th banana than a 3rd. At that salary level I still think you can put together a high level team. No team worth a dam pays its 4th best player $20m. Not the Lakers, Clippers, Knicks, etc. For most teams, their 4th highest paid player is in the 10 to 12m range.

It just doesn't work. If someone is OK paying Lauri $20m or more, they are convinced that Lauri is capable of being the 2nd or 3rd best player on a contender. I just don't see it. Ironically, his biggest fans will give you all the reasons why with the excuses for him.

[DJhitek]

I’d actually be hesitant to pay him 14 million a year. I just don’t think he impacts winning all that much and his shooting just isn’t good enough to justify his flaws.

[League Circles]

Yeah, because Thad is a little better, way more durable, more well rounded and balanced, a better leader, and under contract next year at a lower rate than we can likely extend Lauri for, and with less commitment, I think you've got to look hard at trading Lauri before the deadline if you can get some good value, alone or more likely in a package for a better player. I just don't think it's wise to bring them both back next year. Or, to be more precise, to enter free agency with them both.

[League Circles]

I think the only way bringing Lauri back next year make sense is if you somehow make a trade before the deadline that moves Thad in a package for a real good player, and then combined with other moves this summer, you find yourself still with Lauri and a strong team at the other 4 positions such that you can theoretically overpay to keep Lauri long term in a way that doesn't kill you cause you already amassed your core team and are willing to eventually pay highly to keep them together.

I just think that's kind of unlikely. It's gotta be him or Thad moved before the deadline IMO. Way too dumb to waste either of them and way too optimistic to think keeping both is good roster management.

[coldfish]

I’d actually be hesitant to pay him 14 million a year. I just don’t think he impacts winning all that much and his shooting just isn’t good enough to justify his flaws.

I just spent some time looking at all of the good teams and how they pay. You are probably right.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/PHI.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/BRK.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/BOS.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/UTA.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/LAL.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/LAC.html

He is probably more in the 10-12m per year range for a contender.

[League Circles]

The dream would be to trade Lauri along with Hutchison and our draft pick for the best player available who is on a rookie deal. Should obviously be better than Lauri.

Then you enter FA with well over 40 million in cap space to add something significant to whoever we got for that trade package plus Carter, Thad, Williams, Zach and Coby. That's asset management IMO. You've got talent at all positions and no more than 1-2 players who need to start (Zach and maybe whoever we got for the Lauri/pick/Hutchison package), so it opens up tons of options in FA.

[Pentele]

It just doesn't work. If someone is OK paying Lauri $20m or more, they are convinced that Lauri is capable of being the 2nd or 3rd best player on a contender. I just don't see it. Ironically, his biggest fans will give you all the reasons why with the excuses for him.

Excuses? Do you perchance mean what I wrote earlier given that you are now suddenly finding out that it is actually possible to compare how Lauri would fit with a current contender? If so I am very happy and slightly offended at the same time. I am happy because I have been able to nudge this discussion forward so that people will actually discuss or debate something new for a change. I am offended because I do not see the constant need to talk disparagingly about other posters (here it does not really matter whether you meant to include me or not). Btw, I would have sent this privately had I been able.

[coldfish]

It just doesn't work. If someone is OK paying Lauri $20m or more, they are convinced that Lauri is capable of being the 2nd or 3rd best player on a contender. I just don't see it. Ironically, his biggest fans will give you all the reasons why with the excuses for him.

Excuses? Do you perchance mean what I wrote earlier given that you are now suddenly finding out that it is actually possible to compare how Lauri would fit with a current contender? If so I am very happy and slightly offended at the same time. I am happy because I have been able to nudge this discussion forward so that people will actually discuss or debate something new for a change. I am offended because I do not see the constant need to talk disparagingly about other posters (here it does not really matter whether you meant to include me or not). Btw, I would have sent this privately had I been able.

I wasn't referring to you. I don't think I even saw your post. Forgive me if you said something on the attached list.

The Lauri excuse thing has been a long running discussion point regarding him and that's what I was referring to. As I said, his biggest supporters will tell you that:
- He needs someone else to set him up for shots
- Help defense isn't his job, that's the center's job
- Rebounding? Not that important
- Post offense isn't necessary

[GoBlue72391]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

I randomly found this stat on Twitter. It seems to imply Lauri is taking extremely difficult at the rim attempts, yet he's making them at an extremely high rate. Kind of goes in the face of the argument that all of Lauri's shots are easy and uncontested and could be replicated by any player.

On the season he has an overall at the rim percentage of 81%, and 91%/77% specifically on those extremely difficult attempts (not sure which, either way, it's a very high percentage). That tells me that he's an elite finisher, or at least close to it. That matches the eye test from what I've seen from him this season, and it's even more impressive considering he doesn't dunk the ball a ton like most other bigs with high finishing rates. So imagine how much more efficient he could be if he had better PG play to generate him some better looks at the rim. Keep in mind he already has a 65 TS% and is flirting with 50/40/90.

I know people will cry about Lauri needing to be set up, but I really don't think that's a fair criticism. All 7 foot bigs need to be set up, with the exception of (literally) a handful of elite guys. Lauri's shot creation ability is mostly an unknown, because he's not asked to do it. I feel like he flashed some creation ability his first 2 years. It would be interesting to see him in, say, Jerami Grant's shoes on the Pistons, but it's generally a good thing that we don't need Lauri to create, considering we have Zach and Coby for that.

Lauri's apparently near elite finishing ability plus his high volume 3 point efficiency sounds like an ideal 3rd option for a contender/acceptable 2nd option for a non-contender. His health is obviously a concern, though the good thing is his injuries have all been of the random, freak accident nature.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

[Kukoc-Lauri]

His offer is coming from young team with cap space in hope to used him better than Bulls, and he is still young enough to improve in some areas. Hornets,Knicks,Mavs,Spurs,Oklahoma.

[Leslie Forman]

That makes 13.5m this year and 14.2m next year. If you have read through the thread, that's kind of the ballpark that I think Lauri should be in. Maybe a little bit more due to youth but when you look around the league, its a stretch.

There is a lot of talk about where Lauri fits on a competitive team. As I have been getting to, a one dimensional player is more like a 4th banana than a 3rd. At that salary level I still think you can put together a high level team. No team worth a dam pays its 4th best player $20m. Not the Lakers, Clippers, Knicks, etc. For most teams, their 4th highest paid player is in the 10 to 12m range.

It just doesn't work. If someone is OK paying Lauri $20m or more, they are convinced that Lauri is capable of being the 2nd or 3rd best player on a contender. I just don't see it. Ironically, his biggest fans will give you all the reasons why with the excuses for him.

Thad is easy to picture playing in a deep playoff rotation, though. He would probably play Morris/Crowder type minutes.

Lauri? I don't see how he isn't gameplanned to death on defense and relegated to just standing around doing nothing on offense. I genuinely think he'd be maybe a 10MPG guy at best. Big men who can't defend and aren't named Nikola Jokic get absolutely annihilated over and over again by the top teams in a series. Throw in the complete lack of any other intangibles and reliance on just jacking up 3s (not very reliable for offense in the playoffs) and open lanes (a lot harder to come by in the playoffs) and I don't see how he isn't glued to the bench.

Honestly I could see him being relegated all the way to Meyers Leonard status in a Conference Finals and up setting. With how awful this team has been for years I don't think Lauri's fans realize just how high the intensity really is in a playoff series at that level and how far away Lauri's style of play is from that.

[ZOMG]

That makes 13.5m this year and 14.2m next year. If you have read through the thread, that's kind of the ballpark that I think Lauri should be in. Maybe a little bit more due to youth but when you look around the league, its a stretch.

There is a lot of talk about where Lauri fits on a competitive team. As I have been getting to, a one dimensional player is more like a 4th banana than a 3rd. At that salary level I still think you can put together a high level team. No team worth a dam pays its 4th best player $20m. Not the Lakers, Clippers, Knicks, etc. For most teams, their 4th highest paid player is in the 10 to 12m range.

It just doesn't work. If someone is OK paying Lauri $20m or more, they are convinced that Lauri is capable of being the 2nd or 3rd best player on a contender. I just don't see it. Ironically, his biggest fans will give you all the reasons why with the excuses for him.

Thad is easy to picture playing in a deep playoff rotation, though. He would probably play Morris/Crowder type minutes.

Lauri? I don't see how he isn't gameplanned to death on defense and relegated to just standing around doing nothing on offense.

For the good teams in this league, that kind of gravity from a non-superstar is worth serious money. They have other players who can and will take advantage if/when one role player type has a defender inside his jersey at the perimeter.

Lauri's one of the few guys on this team who's been gameplanned for all his career to some extent. But the above equation hasn't worked well on the Bulls - we haven't had those other good players. Teams have parked a dude near Lauri but we haven't been able to take advantage of the resulting space because we haven't moved the ball in a smart way before this season. The Bulls have "spaced the floor" for Zach's tough fadeaway jump shots, which is the height of insanity.

There's another trait Markkanen has that will make him very attractive to teams: he never takes bad shots. This is something that Bulls fans have a tendency to interpret as not being able to "create your own shot". Sure, manufacturing something out of thin air in 5 seconds can be a valuable skill, but most of the time the only thing you're "creating" is a difficult, forced jumper. The less a team finds itself in these situations, the better it probably is.

When Markkanen ends up taking a shot, it's pretty likely that something in the offense has worked well and the ball has moved. That's why high FGA/USG numbers for Markkanen usually happen in games where the Bulls have played well as a team.