Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread: PT 2

[the ultimates]

So are you saying that if the coaching staff would tell Lauri to post up more, and also tell the whole team to get the ball to Lauri in the post more, it wouldn't happen in this most free-flowing offense in the NBA? And just for the record, I'm not arguing that they should have done that, I'm arguing about the way basketball teams operate. (Don't know if this sentence about blaming just coaches etc. for Lauri's shortcomings was aimed at me, but that's not my intention.)

It's not about the coaching staff telling Lauri to post up more. He already has the freedom to do it. Do you think the staff was telling Thad to post up or was he just doing it? Young likes to operate at the elbow and on the block whether he has an obvious mismatch or not. The Bulls didn't call out or run plays for him to do that and many a time his teammates within the flow of the offense got him the ball. Please tell me why Lauri couldn't do that. Teams can still have a good post player and not have a rigid, plodding, slow-it-down offense and maintain spacing.

Yes, they have definitely discussed about how Thad should play. It doesn't mean that they would need to run a play every time they want Thad to post up, but most definitely he is encouraged to post up when the opportunity comes, and also to look for that opportunity. I'm pretty sure the discussion with Markkanen was not similar, he has had different instructions. Of course coaches take in to account individual players skills and where they are a comfortable fit, and that's why Thad is most probably not encouraged to take a lot of 3 point shots. If the coaching staff would have liked to see what happens when Markkanen posts up more, they could have made that happen, but as I stated before maybe they had a reason not do that, despite the efficiency stats making it look like an experiment worth doing.

All your saying is another derivative of the Lauri isn't better because of coaches, teammates, system narrative. You say it's an experiment worth doing when looking at the efficiency stats this season so do we ignore the numbers and games we saw from the previous seasons?

His best attribute is his three-point shooting. That's been shown through various coaches and systems. He hasn't been used differently because he doesn't have the skill set to be used differently.

[CobyWhite0]

Jamal Crawford was S&T from here to the Knicks.

Brogdon was S&T from the Bucks to Indy

That's the only two I can think outside of the two that Doug mentioned.

[dice]

I wouldn't mind seeing Lauri in a Maverick's uniform. Maybe he thinks he could be Dirk Lite

I wish they had more to send back that would help the Bulls, Brunson and $17M worth of filler isn't what anybody should be suggesting. Not Dwight Powell, not an opting in Josh Richardson, I wouldn't say Tim Hardaway jr on a return S&T. Maxi Kleber from a long distance almost seems like he'd be an option but he never played more than 26 MPG for them, a high water mark of 9.1 PPG. You just figure if they thought he could contribute more they would have played him more. Theis looks like a lot better option

They've only got picks going out so that's not an option. The longshot would be if they could make a trade before making a S&T deal for Markkanen with the Bulls and get assets to pass along.

has a restricted free agent ever been sign-and-traded for? doesn't make much sense. if the bulls offer him 12, why would the mavs give up assets and pay him 12 when they can just sign him outright for 13?

for the record, the bulls signed mirotic for 2/25, which is the current equivalent of $14 mil a year. and lauri is basically a poor man's niko

Because the Mavs (and every other team in the league) can't just "sign Lauri outright for 13" - the Bulls can still just match his offer sheet. And probably would at that price.

the point is that in order for the mavs to want to S&T for lauri, they'd have to want to give up assets in addition to paying what the bulls are willing to pay him. alternately, they can just pay him a bit more than what the bulls are willing to pay him!

let's say that the mavs make him an offer of $15 mil a season or whatever (more than he's worth). the bulls match. the mavs aren't gonna then turn around and say "hey, let's make this a sign and trade then. will give you assets in addition to what we were previously willing to pay him!"

[dice]

Jamal Crawford was S&T from here to the Knicks.

Brogdon was S&T from the Bucks to Indy

That's the only two I can think outside of the two that Doug mentioned.

the crawford trade yielded a bunch of garbage from the knicks. the brogdon one was more substantial. the bucks got a late first rounder and a couple of 2nd rounders. probably a case where the pacers didn't have the cap room to make a bigger offer than what he ended up getting, so milwaukee (who didn't WANT to pay him more than that) took advantage of the situation. while it's certainly possible that the bulls could do the same w/ lauri, it's hard to imagine they could extract nearly as much as the bucks were able to w/ brogdon

[CobyWhite0]

has a restricted free agent ever been sign-and-traded for? doesn't make much sense. if the bulls offer him 12, why would the mavs give up assets and pay him 12 when they can just sign him outright for 13?

for the record, the bulls signed mirotic for 2/25, which is the current equivalent of $14 mil a year. and lauri is basically a poor man's niko

Because the Mavs (and every other team in the league) can't just "sign Lauri outright for 13" - the Bulls can still just match his offer sheet. And probably would at that price.

the point is that in order for the mavs to want to S&T for lauri, they'd have to want to give up assets in addition to paying what the bulls are willing to pay him. alternately, they can just pay him a bit more than what the bulls are willing to pay him!

let's say that the mavs make him an offer of $15 mil a season or whatever (more than he's worth). the bulls match. the mavs aren't gonna then turn around and say "hey, let's make this a sign and trade then. will give you assets in addition to what we were previously willing to pay him!"

Yeah, that's the story with any RFA who is in Lauri's position - how much does the 1st-year salary have to be in order to make sure the player's original team doesn't match? And how far over his value does the team want to go just to make sure their Offer Sheet doesn't get matched?

"More than he's worth" is a very subjective figure - that's how MIL got a 1st and two 2nd's for Brogdon. IND wanted Brogdon and MIL didn't really want him, but IND didn't want to take a chance that MIL would match anything up to the max and just trade Brogdon later.

Just like how Otto Porter got the max because NJ signed him to a max offer sheet thinking WAS wouldn't match... but they did. Of course WAS just traded him and we wound up paying 1/2 his deal. But MIL could have done the same thing with Brogdon, which is why IND gave them 3 draft picks in a S&T and wound up getting him - for $6 million under the max.

[CobyWhite0]

And it should go without saying that Brogdon had more trade value than Lauri does, though I'm guessing a few people will disagree.

[kodo]

Niko was not comparable to Lauri when he signed w/ the Bulls, because he wasn't very good at 3P shooting or scoring in general. He was basically the same kind of 3P shooter as Hutchison (33%).

Mirotic 16-17: 10.6 ppg 5.5 rpg 41% FG 34% 3P 54% TS

Bad FG%, below average TS%, bad 3P%, mediocre rebounding, not a rim defender. It was no surprise he got zero interest in the free market and had to sign for what he did, as he did nothing particularly well. At 25, he wasn't considered to have much upside at all. The upside was the surprise from Niko.

Lauri, while looking like a roleplayer, does his role well as a stretch big. 40% 3P, 62% TS.
There are almost no roleplayers players 6' 10"+ that are scoring at least 13 ppg at 40% 3P. There are few players in that category at all, even including guys like Durant.
Bertrans is worse in every category: PPG, 3P%, TS%, defense, 2P% and got $15M per year. Gallo got $20M.

I think people exaggerate how bad of a contract Lauri will be on whatever team that signs him. We have $18M tied up in Felicio & Aminu this year, how much have they contributed?

Memphis has $13M tied up in Justise Winslow who scores 6 ppg on 18% 3P shooting.
Aldridge for $18M was 13 ppg like Lauri, far worse TS% (54%), worse 3P% shooter, and fell off a cliff defensively.

[dice]

Because the Mavs (and every other team in the league) can't just "sign Lauri outright for 13" - the Bulls can still just match his offer sheet. And probably would at that price.

the point is that in order for the mavs to want to S&T for lauri, they'd have to want to give up assets in addition to paying what the bulls are willing to pay him. alternately, they can just pay him a bit more than what the bulls are willing to pay him!

let's say that the mavs make him an offer of $15 mil a season or whatever (more than he's worth). the bulls match. the mavs aren't gonna then turn around and say "hey, let's make this a sign and trade then. will give you assets in addition to what we were previously willing to pay him!"

Yeah, that's the story with any RFA who is in Lauri's position - how much does the 1st-year salary have to be in order to make sure the player's original team doesn't match? And how far over his value does the team want to go just to make sure their Offer Sheet doesn't get matched?

"More than he's worth" is a very subjective figure - that's how MIL got a 1st and two 2nd's for Brogdon. IND wanted Brogdon and MIL didn't really want him, but IND didn't want to take a chance that MIL would match anything up to the max and just trade Brogdon later.

indy didn't want to blow all their cap space on brogdon, which is what necessitated a trade. and no team that HAD the cap space was willing to offer him more money. here were the top teams in terms of cap space that summer:

Brooklyn Nets—$66.9 million - signed durant and kyrie
New York Knicks—$60.4 million - (struck out on big names) randle, morris and portis
Sacramento Kings—$59.1 million - barnes, dedmon, ariza, joseph
Philadelphia 76ers—$58.9 million - tobias and horford
Los Angeles Clippers—$54.1 million - kawhi, beverley
Dallas Mavericks—$46.9 million - porzingis
Indiana Pacers—$32.5 million - brogdon, lamb

apparently the pacers wanted to sign jeremy lamb to a reasonable 3 year deal more than the wanted the picks dealt for brogdon

milwaukee wasn't gonna match a max offer for brogdon, pay the luxury tax on it in the meantime, and hope to trade him later. would have been financial suicide. and no team would have given up assets for a maxed out malcolm brogdon. the bucks had to have a deal in place at the time of the signing. they simply weren't keeping him. couldn't afford to. they maxed out middleton that summer, also had to re-sign lopez and were about to super-max giannis

apparently the knicks and kings had no interest in maxing out brogdon

[dice]

Niko was not comparable to Lauri when he signed w/ the Bulls, because he wasn't very good at 3P shooting or scoring in general. He was basically the same kind of 3P shooter as Hutchison (33%).

Mirotic 16-17: 10.6 ppg 5.5 rpg 41% FG 34% 3P 54% TS

Bad FG%, below average TS%, bad 3P%, mediocre rebounding, not a rim defender. It was no surprise he got zero interest in the free market and had to sign for what he did, as he did nothing particularly well. At 25, he wasn't considered to have much upside at all. The upside was the surprise from Niko.

Lauri, while looking like a roleplayer, does his role well as a stretch big. 40% 3P, 62% TS.
There are almost no roleplayers players 6' 10"+ that are scoring at least 13 ppg at 40% 3P. There are few players in that category at all, even including guys like Durant.
Bertrans is worse in every category: PPG, 3P%, TS%, defense, 2P% and got $15M per year. Gallo got $20M.

I think people exaggerate how bad of a contract Lauri will be on whatever team that signs him. We have $18M tied up in Felicio & Aminu this year, how much have they contributed?

Memphis has $13M tied up in Justise Winslow who scores 6 ppg on 18% 3P shooting.
Aldridge for $18M was 13 ppg like Lauri, far worse TS% (54%), worse 3P% shooter, and fell off a cliff defensively.

lauri is simply not as good as niko was. comparable offensively, but niko was a better defender. niko was effectively a delayed sign and trade that netted a first rounder w/ the potential to become unprotected (it didn't). lauri would not get that in a trade

[FanInTheAttic]

It's not about the coaching staff telling Lauri to post up more. He already has the freedom to do it. Do you think the staff was telling Thad to post up or was he just doing it? Young likes to operate at the elbow and on the block whether he has an obvious mismatch or not. The Bulls didn't call out or run plays for him to do that and many a time his teammates within the flow of the offense got him the ball. Please tell me why Lauri couldn't do that. Teams can still have a good post player and not have a rigid, plodding, slow-it-down offense and maintain spacing.

Yes, they have definitely discussed about how Thad should play. It doesn't mean that they would need to run a play every time they want Thad to post up, but most definitely he is encouraged to post up when the opportunity comes, and also to look for that opportunity. I'm pretty sure the discussion with Markkanen was not similar, he has had different instructions. Of course coaches take in to account individual players skills and where they are a comfortable fit, and that's why Thad is most probably not encouraged to take a lot of 3 point shots. If the coaching staff would have liked to see what happens when Markkanen posts up more, they could have made that happen, but as I stated before maybe they had a reason not do that, despite the efficiency stats making it look like an experiment worth doing.

All your saying is another derivative of the Lauri isn't better because of coaches, teammates, system narrative. You say it's an experiment worth doing when looking at the efficiency stats this season so do we ignore the numbers and games we saw from the previous seasons?

His best attribute is his three-point shooting. That's been shown through various coaches and systems. He hasn't been used differently because he doesn't have the skill set to be used differently.

Well now you conveniently changed the topic of our discussion from how a NBA team operates to your views about Markkanen. At least now you admit that Markkanen is being used in a certain way in this most free flowing NBA offense.

I will answer anyway. Yes, if you have a developing player that shows development in efficiency, it is very natural to check if it's gonna fly at a higher rate. This is not even about Markkanen, could be any player. And I will say it again, the coaching staff has much more information about their players than we will ever have, and there might be a reason why Lauri was not played in the post more, otherwise they would (or should) have experimented with him a little bit more. But we can't say, just based on his previous seasons, that he has or hasn't developed a better post play before we see him play more in the post, despite his efficiency stats. Why does it feel I'm beating a dead horse....

[FranchisePlayer]

Niko was not comparable to Lauri when he signed w/ the Bulls, because he wasn't very good at 3P shooting or scoring in general. He was basically the same kind of 3P shooter as Hutchison (33%).

Mirotic 16-17: 10.6 ppg 5.5 rpg 41% FG 34% 3P 54% TS

Bad FG%, below average TS%, bad 3P%, mediocre rebounding, not a rim defender. It was no surprise he got zero interest in the free market and had to sign for what he did, as he did nothing particularly well. At 25, he wasn't considered to have much upside at all. The upside was the surprise from Niko.

Lauri, while looking like a roleplayer, does his role well as a stretch big. 40% 3P, 62% TS.
There are almost no roleplayers players 6' 10"+ that are scoring at least 13 ppg at 40% 3P. There are few players in that category at all, even including guys like Durant.
Bertrans is worse in every category: PPG, 3P%, TS%, defense, 2P% and got $15M per year. Gallo got $20M.

I think people exaggerate how bad of a contract Lauri will be on whatever team that signs him. We have $18M tied up in Felicio & Aminu this year, how much have they contributed?

Memphis has $13M tied up in Justise Winslow who scores 6 ppg on 18% 3P shooting.
Aldridge for $18M was 13 ppg like Lauri, far worse TS% (54%), worse 3P% shooter, and fell off a cliff defensively.

Very good post, kodo!

Has anyone here suggested who better player/PF the Bulls will be able to acquire with the money they are going to save from not signing Lauri? I don't think there are many interesting choices in line, certainly not two-way players and maybe not many offensively minded either.

So the idea is what; move Williams to PF, and IF Theis stays, he splits time with Pat? And with whatever money is left on the table, they'll sign a third in the string PF, defensively sound but nothing to give on offense?

[Hugi Mancura]

Yes, they have definitely discussed about how Thad should play. It doesn't mean that they would need to run a play every time they want Thad to post up, but most definitely he is encouraged to post up when the opportunity comes, and also to look for that opportunity. I'm pretty sure the discussion with Markkanen was not similar, he has had different instructions. Of course coaches take in to account individual players skills and where they are a comfortable fit, and that's why Thad is most probably not encouraged to take a lot of 3 point shots. If the coaching staff would have liked to see what happens when Markkanen posts up more, they could have made that happen, but as I stated before maybe they had a reason not do that, despite the efficiency stats making it look like an experiment worth doing.

All your saying is another derivative of the Lauri isn't better because of coaches, teammates, system narrative. You say it's an experiment worth doing when looking at the efficiency stats this season so do we ignore the numbers and games we saw from the previous seasons?

His best attribute is his three-point shooting. That's been shown through various coaches and systems. He hasn't been used differently because he doesn't have the skill set to be used differently.

Well now you conveniently changed the topic of our discussion from how a NBA team operates to your views about Markkanen. At least now you admit that Markkanen is being used in a certain way in this most free flowing NBA offense.

I will answer anyway. Yes, if you have a developing player that shows development in efficiency, it is very natural to check if it's gonna fly at a higher rate. This is not even about Markkanen, could be any player. And I will say it again, the coaching staff has much more information about their players than we will ever have, and there might be a reason why Lauri was not played in the post more, otherwise they would (or should) have experimented with him a little bit more. But we can't say, just based on his previous seasons, that he has or hasn't developed a better post play before we see him play more in the post, despite his efficiency stats. Why does it feel I'm beating a dead horse....

GM does what owner wants him to do. Coach does what GM wants him to do. Player does what coach wants him to do. So in the end players are no different than cleaning ladies or factory workers. That is a long road before we reach coaches will or player will.

Lets remove the post play. Why not run Lauri in pick & rolls / pops? He has always been quite efficient in those his whole career. He has been as efficient as Vucevic has been with Bulls. If they would have run pick & pop with Lauri as much they have run with Vucevic Lauri would have scored 5 points more per game his whole career. Would you think differently about Lauri if Lauri would have scored 23 point per game before the trade this season?

Same way I feel I'm beating a dead horse when I claim Bulls never wanted Lauri to become a star. Fans did, but honestly how easy it is if the people who decides what you do on the court doesn't want to become better and have the power to decide your future in the league.

[CobyWhite0]

All your saying is another derivative of the Lauri isn't better because of coaches, teammates, system narrative. You say it's an experiment worth doing when looking at the efficiency stats this season so do we ignore the numbers and games we saw from the previous seasons?

His best attribute is his three-point shooting. That's been shown through various coaches and systems. He hasn't been used differently because he doesn't have the skill set to be used differently.

Well now you conveniently changed the topic of our discussion from how a NBA team operates to your views about Markkanen. At least now you admit that Markkanen is being used in a certain way in this most free flowing NBA offense.

I will answer anyway. Yes, if you have a developing player that shows development in efficiency, it is very natural to check if it's gonna fly at a higher rate. This is not even about Markkanen, could be any player. And I will say it again, the coaching staff has much more information about their players than we will ever have, and there might be a reason why Lauri was not played in the post more, otherwise they would (or should) have experimented with him a little bit more. But we can't say, just based on his previous seasons, that he has or hasn't developed a better post play before we see him play more in the post, despite his efficiency stats. Why does it feel I'm beating a dead horse....

GM does what owner wants him to do. Coach does what GM wants him to do. Player does what coach wants him to do. So in the end players are no different than cleaning ladies or factory workers. That is a long road before we reach coaches will or player will.

Lets remove the post play. Why not run Lauri in pick & rolls / pops? He has always been quite efficient in those his whole career. He has been as efficient as Vucevic has been with Bulls. If they would have run pick & pop with Lauri as much they have run with Vucevic Lauri would have scored 5 points more per game his whole career. Would you think differently about Lauri if Lauri would have scored 23 point per game before the trade this season?

Same way I feel I'm beating a dead horse when I claim Bulls never wanted Lauri to become a star. Fans did, but honestly how easy it is if the people who decides what you do on the court doesn't want to become better and have the power to decide your future in the league.

Are you serious? Do you really think teams have a #7 draft pick and they don't WANT him to become a star? If so, then you're absolutely beating a dead horse. Because it's crazy.

[DuckIII]

Same way I feel I'm beating a dead horse when I claim Bulls never wanted Lauri to become a star. Fans did, but honestly how easy it is if the people who decides what you do on the court doesn't want to become better and have the power to decide your future in the league.

Please elaborate. I want to follow you down the rabbit hole.

[CobyWhite0]

Niko was not comparable to Lauri when he signed w/ the Bulls, because he wasn't very good at 3P shooting or scoring in general. He was basically the same kind of 3P shooter as Hutchison (33%).

Mirotic 16-17: 10.6 ppg 5.5 rpg 41% FG 34% 3P 54% TS

Bad FG%, below average TS%, bad 3P%, mediocre rebounding, not a rim defender. It was no surprise he got zero interest in the free market and had to sign for what he did, as he did nothing particularly well. At 25, he wasn't considered to have much upside at all. The upside was the surprise from Niko.

Lauri, while looking like a roleplayer, does his role well as a stretch big. 40% 3P, 62% TS.
There are almost no roleplayers players 6' 10"+ that are scoring at least 13 ppg at 40% 3P. There are few players in that category at all, even including guys like Durant.
Bertrans is worse in every category: PPG, 3P%, TS%, defense, 2P% and got $15M per year. Gallo got $20M.

I think people exaggerate how bad of a contract Lauri will be on whatever team that signs him. We have $18M tied up in Felicio & Aminu this year, how much have they contributed?

Memphis has $13M tied up in Justise Winslow who scores 6 ppg on 18% 3P shooting.
Aldridge for $18M was 13 ppg like Lauri, far worse TS% (54%), worse 3P% shooter, and fell off a cliff defensively.

Very good post, kodo!

Has anyone here suggested who better player/PF the Bulls will be able to acquire with the money they are going to save from not signing Lauri? I don't think there are many interesting choices in line, certainly not two-way players and maybe not many offensively minded either.

So the idea is what; move Williams to PF, and IF Theis stays, he splits time with Pat? And with whatever money is left on the table, they'll sign a third in the string PF, defensively sound but nothing to give on offense?

I'm not too worried. For a backup stretch 4 and 5 who is a 7-footer, who's a good catch and shoot 3pt player that can give you a post bucket against a mismatch once ever 3 games or so, we can bring Simonovic over for the minimum this summer. And sign him last, where he won't effect the cap since he doesn't have a cap hold.

[Hugi Mancura]

Same way I feel I'm beating a dead horse when I claim Bulls never wanted Lauri to become a star. Fans did, but honestly how easy it is if the people who decides what you do on the court doesn't want to become better and have the power to decide your future in the league.

Please elaborate. I want to follow you down the rabbit hole.

Do you have any idea how you develop big's?

You develop bigs by making them run pick & rolls / pops all the time. Is this something Bulls have done with Lauri constantly?

Other way is to make them play post or any other position they feel comfortable. In Lauri's situation that was midrange offense. And again this is something you should run constantly. Did Bulls do this with Lauri?

So there is the two ways you develop your bigs. Have Bulls done this with Lauri? Be honest with yourself when you answer this.

Lauri has gotten playing time. And the way they have used it is suitable when you are developing a guard player. Is Lauri a guard?

If you believe he is, then why did they wanted him to become much stronger and lose his mobility while doing so, instead of becoming faster what you need to be a guard? So claim they wanted him to become a guard is a lie.

So if you really understand player development and see what Bulls have wanted Lauri to do to develop himself, then you would really question the claim they wanted a star. They wanted a stretch 5 who would spread the floor so guards can shine.

I know lot of now comes out and claims he wasn't good at these? But when you are developing young players you let them do their mistakes. No-one was born to become a star. Every young player have had their bad moments, but when you developing you give them their chance to do those mistakes. Again did Lauri got a chance to any of this constantly?

[ChettheJet]

If DAL really wants to sign Lauri and make it a S&T they have to make moves prior to that. Once they find a team interested in Porzigis they need to get back the assets to send to the Bulls not what changes their own roster, that's why they're signing Markkanen.

The primary reason I'm for moving on from Markkanen is he's been given ample opportunities to show what he can do. There are times when that is really good and some times when he's just out there, and there's no way of determining if a big 4 year contract will make him more likely to play one way or the other. When you add in that he manages to get a different injury every year it's a bad gamble to tie up money in a player like that

[dice]

bleacher report free agent 2021 ranking:

1 kawhi (very likely to opt out and re-up w/ clippers)
2 CP3 (will any team give him a huge multi-year deal at age 36? probably the requirement to get him to opt out)
3 collins (restricted - would hawks match a max offer?)

4 lonzo (restricted)
5 conley
6 allen (restricted)
7 lowry
8 derozan
9 lauri (ridiculous)
10 hardaway
11 d. robinson (restricted)
12 olynyk
13 drummond
14 dinwiddie (player option at $12.3 mil)
15 powell (PO at $11.6 mil)
16 graham (restricted)
17 richardson (PO at $11.6 mil)
18 oubre
19 harrell (PO at $9.7 mil)
20 schroeder

no oladipo? mitchell robinson also an interesting omission

nbc sports chicago has lauri at #18 and derrick at 21 on their terrible list

[FanInTheAttic]

Well now you conveniently changed the topic of our discussion from how a NBA team operates to your views about Markkanen. At least now you admit that Markkanen is being used in a certain way in this most free flowing NBA offense.

I will answer anyway. Yes, if you have a developing player that shows development in efficiency, it is very natural to check if it's gonna fly at a higher rate. This is not even about Markkanen, could be any player. And I will say it again, the coaching staff has much more information about their players than we will ever have, and there might be a reason why Lauri was not played in the post more, otherwise they would (or should) have experimented with him a little bit more. But we can't say, just based on his previous seasons, that he has or hasn't developed a better post play before we see him play more in the post, despite his efficiency stats. Why does it feel I'm beating a dead horse....

GM does what owner wants him to do. Coach does what GM wants him to do. Player does what coach wants him to do. So in the end players are no different than cleaning ladies or factory workers. That is a long road before we reach coaches will or player will.

Lets remove the post play. Why not run Lauri in pick & rolls / pops? He has always been quite efficient in those his whole career. He has been as efficient as Vucevic has been with Bulls. If they would have run pick & pop with Lauri as much they have run with Vucevic Lauri would have scored 5 points more per game his whole career. Would you think differently about Lauri if Lauri would have scored 23 point per game before the trade this season?

Same way I feel I'm beating a dead horse when I claim Bulls never wanted Lauri to become a star. Fans did, but honestly how easy it is if the people who decides what you do on the court doesn't want to become better and have the power to decide your future in the league.

Are you serious? Do you really think teams have a #7 draft pick and they don't WANT him to become a star? If so, then you're absolutely beating a dead horse. Because it's crazy.

I also don't believe that Bulls didn't want Markkanen to become a star. Maybe they didn't think of him as the first option, but maybe 2nd or 3rd. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the Bulls failed to develop Markkanen into a valuable player for the team. Now he is almost as good as gone and Bulls wasted 4 years on him without getting much in return. This is a major failure, I hope they learned from their mistakes and we will see PW and Coby and future picks developed to become key players in a winning team.

[the ultimates]

Yes, they have definitely discussed about how Thad should play. It doesn't mean that they would need to run a play every time they want Thad to post up, but most definitely he is encouraged to post up when the opportunity comes, and also to look for that opportunity. I'm pretty sure the discussion with Markkanen was not similar, he has had different instructions. Of course coaches take in to account individual players skills and where they are a comfortable fit, and that's why Thad is most probably not encouraged to take a lot of 3 point shots. If the coaching staff would have liked to see what happens when Markkanen posts up more, they could have made that happen, but as I stated before maybe they had a reason not do that, despite the efficiency stats making it look like an experiment worth doing.

All your saying is another derivative of the Lauri isn't better because of coaches, teammates, system narrative. You say it's an experiment worth doing when looking at the efficiency stats this season so do we ignore the numbers and games we saw from the previous seasons?

His best attribute is his three-point shooting. That's been shown through various coaches and systems. He hasn't been used differently because he doesn't have the skill set to be used differently.

Well now you conveniently changed the topic of our discussion from how a NBA team operates to your views about Markkanen. At least now you admit that Markkanen is being used in a certain way in this most free flowing NBA offense.

I will answer anyway. Yes, if you have a developing player that shows development in efficiency, it is very natural to check if it's gonna fly at a higher rate. This is not even about Markkanen, could be any player. And I will say it again, the coaching staff has much more information about their players than we will ever have, and there might be a reason why Lauri was not played in the post more, otherwise they would (or should) have experimented with him a little bit more. But we can't say, just based on his previous seasons, that he has or hasn't developed a better post play before we see him play more in the post, despite his efficiency stats. Why does it feel I'm beating a dead horse....

The topic was partly how NBA teams operate. You intimated Lauri didn't post up more because of spacing issues. I pointed out that teams still do things on the block for post up players and still shoot three's, don't run rigid or slow it down offenses.

Again through 4 seasons we've seen Lauri not perform well in the post. That doesn't mean that him doing well in s small sample size says yeah lets do that more often him. It's amazing how you dismiss the three years prior to focus on this year's play. So when you admit they have more information that's the information they have .

You're beating a dead horse because you making excuses for a limited offensive player. You keep trying to use a small post-sample size this year to override the previous three years. You keep intimating in some posts and flat out saying in others he would be better if used differently and ignoring through four seasons he hasn't shown that ability.

If he were more skilled he would be used in more varied ways but he isn't. His lack of skills is on him. Teams don't go out of their way to feature those types of players. What other skill outside of three-point shooting should the Bulls have tried to exploit with Lauri?