Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread

[BigJimFinn]

Other fans after team is starting to get it:

"New coach, new system. It takes time to get used to a new system. It's team sport after all. Wendell even said "he has never played a predominantly drop defense in his basketball career. He takes a great deal of responsibility for Bulls' defensive woes."

Bulls fans after team is starting to get it:

"HA, see they are immediately better after Markkanen is injured. It was obviously all on Lauri."

Sure, a minority of Bulls fans will outright blame Lauri. Will I? No. Instead, I'd just use this as evidence to support my belief that he is not the type of player you build with in today's NBA.

See the thing about the Zach haters is that Zach always had obvious potential in the areas that make players great - shot creation/making, physicals/athleticism, work ethic.

What part of Lauri's game makes him an outstanding NBA player even if he pops? Shooting open 3's off the catch? These are pros, and there are a ton of guys who can do that, and up until this small sample size, he hasn't even been above average at it. It's not like he can create for himself or even post up against smaller players, and it's not like he can defend smaller or bigger players or protect the rim.

Now if Lauri suddenly becomes a mismatch in the post along with being able to anchor a defense as a center, then he is absolutely a winning player...but he has shown no indication of being able to do any of this.

To summarize, his current skillset has little value in the current NBA.

There aren't too many replaceable role players in the league who per 36 give you 3 made threes at 40% AND 4 made paint shots at 70% AND 3 made FTs at 85%. If his scoring efficiency will stay around that level, that does "pop" to the tune of a highly useful 3rd option. He can't do many things well that NBA 7-footers usually can, but he can very consistently be 7 feet tall, and that alone makes his shots more open and opponents' shots less open. The quick shot release also helps to get that high volume of 3s.

The key difference on offense to last year is that he is catching on the move, "going downhill" as Donovan says, much more often, and forcing hopeless stationary postups rarely if ever. His combination of mobility, good hands and finishing touch make him an effective cutter, when there are teammates capable of passing, and that has raised his inside scoring efficiency. Overall, Bulls are cutting and passing much more than last year; Boylen's scheme had almost forbidden off-ball movement, it was 3 guys told to stand in their spots behind the arc like a homeless man's Harden Rockets while Zach and any 5 ran pick&rolls. On the passing side, Lauri rarely gets assists because he can't create any advantage unless he is attacking a closeout; however, if he doesn't shoot or drive, he will move the ball quickly. Blaming him as selfish or unwilling passer because of low AST rate is shallow; he does what his role requires and very rarely takes bad shots.

[madvillian]

People are really saying his "role" is what prevents him from moving the ball? Come on now. He doesn't move the ball because he has no vision, struggles to create situations requiring help, and in general just likes to stand in his spots and fire up threes. The next time Lauri creates for someone else off a pick and roll situation will be the first. People had high hopes he'd expand his game as he got more experience, including myself -- but it's been the other way. His game is now more limited than when he was a rookie. Over 55% of his shots are now from deep! His assist rate was 6.4% as a rook, now it's 4.3%. Rebound rate from rookie year: down. Block rate from rookie: down. Steal rate: flat.

He's lucky he's shooting lights out. And so are the Bulls, trade him while he's in this hot stretch! Before he gets hurt again.

[Pentele]

People are really saying his "role" is what prevents him from moving the ball? Come on now.

No, I do not think anyone is saying that, at least not the way you are construing it. It is just that some are talking about Lauri as he would be a black hole from which no ball ever comes out. The same people are saying that Lauri is chucker, and often his assist rated is cited as evidence of that. It is true that he often finishes plays and he has done so remarkably efficiently this season, so there should be no complaints. Should he shoot less three point shots if the shots he takes are, so it is said, always open shots? Maybe pass the ball to someone else so that he could notch an assist instead of taking the open shot? Come on now. Antonio Blakeney was both a black hole and a chucker, and Lauri sure is no Blakeney There is simply no stat in the world that can convince me of that (or should convince anyone else).

[Tetlak]

I mean look. He's about to be a RFA. He's objectively shown ZERO improvement since day 1.

I'm sorry, but no, you can not take his shooting numbers from the small sample size this season and label them improvement.

If he blossoms, let it be for somebody else, on their pay roll. I'd rather keep the cap space and utilize it in a different way.

[madvillian]

People are really saying his "role" is what prevents him from moving the ball? Come on now.

No, I do not think anyone is saying that, at least not the way you are construing it. It is just that some are talking about Lauri as he would be a black hole from which no ball ever comes out. The same people are saying that Lauri is chucker, and often his assist rated is cited as evidence of that. It is true that he often finishes plays and he has done so remarkably efficiently this season, so there should be no complaints. Should he shoot less three point shots if the shots he takes are, so it is said, always open shots? Maybe pass the ball to someone else so that he could notch an assist instead of taking the open shot? Come on now. Antonio Blakeney was both a black hole and a chucker, and Lauri sure is no Blakeney There is simply no stat in the world that can convince me of that (or should convince anyone else).

He's not a chucker he's reliant on others for offense. That's a big flaw in his game.

[CobyWhite0]

People are really saying his "role" is what prevents him from moving the ball? Come on now. He doesn't move the ball because he has no vision, struggles to create situations requiring help, and in general just likes to stand in his spots and fire up threes. The next time Lauri creates for someone else off a pick and roll situation will be the first. People had high hopes he'd expand his game as he got more experience, including myself -- but it's been the other way. His game is now more limited than when he was a rookie. Over 55% of his shots are now from deep! His assist rate was 6.4% as a rook, now it's 4.3%. Rebound rate from rookie year: down. Block rate from rookie: down. Steal rate: flat.

He's lucky he's shooting lights out. And so are the Bulls, trade him while he's in this hot stretch! Before he gets hurt again.

You left out that his TO% is also higher than during his rookie year. And that this season's "hot stretch" (of 14 whole games) is really just a case of DecembeLauri:

Dec: 47.8% on 3's
Rest of season: 37.1% on 3's

But your post summed up the problem with Lauri, he hasn't really improved since his rookie year.

[Pentele]

People are really saying his "role" is what prevents him from moving the ball? Come on now.

No, I do not think anyone is saying that, at least not the way you are construing it. It is just that some are talking about Lauri as he would be a black hole from which no ball ever comes out. The same people are saying that Lauri is chucker, and often his assist rated is cited as evidence of that. It is true that he often finishes plays and he has done so remarkably efficiently this season, so there should be no complaints. Should he shoot less three point shots if the shots he takes are, so it is said, always open shots? Maybe pass the ball to someone else so that he could notch an assist instead of taking the open shot? Come on now. Antonio Blakeney was both a black hole and a chucker, and Lauri sure is no Blakeney There is simply no stat in the world that can convince me of that (or should convince anyone else).

He's not a chucker he's reliant on others for offense. That's a big flaw in his game.

I agree with you that he's reliant on others for offense. But how big a flaw that is, we probably disagree there.

Actually, to be honest, it is very hard to decipher how much true disagreement there is between people around here. Many are using so over the top descriptions that it is difficult to take them seriously - and perhaps they are not serious, in the end. There are also cultural clashes going on; I bet many Finnish posters are frequently marvelling "did he really say that" since over-the-top superlatives and pejoratives are not really part of everyday speech in Finland. And like the poster who replied to me earlier more or less suggested (sco, if I recall correctly), player evaluations all relative to one's expectations as well as roster construction (and other things of that nature) anyway.

[madvillian]

No, I do not think anyone is saying that, at least not the way you are construing it. It is just that some are talking about Lauri as he would be a black hole from which no ball ever comes out. The same people are saying that Lauri is chucker, and often his assist rated is cited as evidence of that. It is true that he often finishes plays and he has done so remarkably efficiently this season, so there should be no complaints. Should he shoot less three point shots if the shots he takes are, so it is said, always open shots? Maybe pass the ball to someone else so that he could notch an assist instead of taking the open shot? Come on now. Antonio Blakeney was both a black hole and a chucker, and Lauri sure is no Blakeney There is simply no stat in the world that can convince me of that (or should convince anyone else).

He's not a chucker he's reliant on others for offense. That's a big flaw in his game.

I agree with you that he's reliant on others for offense. But how big a flaw that is, we probably disagree there.

Actually, to be honest, it is very hard to decipher how much true disagreement there is between people around here. Many are using so over the top descriptions that it is difficult to take them seriously - and perhaps they are not serious, in the end. There are also cultural clashes going on; I bet many Finnish posters are frequently marvelling "did he really say that" since over-the-top superlatives and pejoratives are not really part of everyday speech in Finland. And like the poster who replied to me earlier more or less suggested (sco, if I recall correctly), player evaluations all relative to one's expectations as well as roster construction (and other things of that nature) anyway.

I think there are basically three camps:

Lauri Defense Force (pretty quiet lately)

Most Bulls Fans that see it's a complicated decision even if they like or dislike him as a player/person

Lauri Haters (coming out more now that he got hurt again, which is fair)

The Finnish posters tend to go back and forth between extreme homerism and bizarre critiques, might be a cultural thing. Finland seems like a cool place but having the weight of an entire country's hoop dreams on you like Lauri cannot be easy.

[Chi town]

Anybody hear Amin mention Billy said Lauri won’t be back before the ASG.

Sucks.

He better come back strong when he returns.

[PaKii94]

Anybody hear Amin mention Billy said Lauri won’t be back before the ASG.

Sucks.

He better come back strong when he returns.

I was just reading this

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bulls/bulls-lauri-markkanen-unlikely-return-nba-all-star-break

[CobyWhite0]

But it's not as if the Bulls have sputtered without him. The team entered Wednesday 6-3 in the last nine games he's missed -- with the league's 12th-rated offense, ninth-rated defense and fifth-highest net rating in that span -- and 9-7 in games he hasn't played for the season.

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bulls/bulls-lauri-markkanen-unlikely-return-nba-all-star-break

After tonight's game, you can update those numbers to:

7-3 in the last ten games he's missed
#13 offense
#9 defense
#4 net rating
10-7 in games he hasn't played for the season

[TSS]

The Finnish posters tend to go back and forth between extreme homerism and bizarre critiques, might be a cultural thing. Finland seems like a cool place but having the weight of an entire country's hoop dreams on you like Lauri cannot be easy.

You got that right. We are bizarre and Finland is not only cool but downright frozen place nowadays. Lauri is the sole NBA player Finland has and obviously many of us root for him heavily. I myself try to stay as objective as possible when analyzing him as a player or any given game he has had. It is clear that we have certain true homers on board as well as irrational haters.

I fully recognize the decision what to do with him - as it is contract year - is not an easy decision by any means. Considering the injury history especially. Another aspect I've noticed is that my valuation and preferences about players in general are much different from many others on board, which is perfectly fine and only gives more possibilities for discussion. Most veteran posters here write nicely formatted and reasoned posts and while I may disagree with some of their thoughts, I can still very much understand where they come from.

On Lauris case I guess I mostly carry different opinion regarding defense versus many of the other folks on board. As a coach my defensive philosophy relies mostly on not losing at the point of attack and that is a strength of Lauri comparing to most bigs.
That is also why I do not rate WCJ very high as a defensive player. Additionally I feel there is lots of potential on him still to capitalize. "If he only ..." type of thoughts which would round him up as a much better player. Make a later jump like Zach has done.

What comes to not so well thought or reasoned anti-Lauri posts, there is one right before this one. My quoting skills are on par with Gaffords recent performances so I do not know how to bring that in this one. But CobyWhite0, it is true Bulls are 7-3 while Lauri has been gone. However, it would be good to mention they've played really the bottom feeders of the league. Yes Bulls did not fall of the cliff but during that 10 game span there is one quality win in OT against Indy and one disaster loss against Washington. So in my books they played like they looking at the schedule should have done, not good, not bad.

[CobyWhite0]

But CobyWhite0, it is true Bulls are 7-3 while Lauri has been gone. However, it would be good to mention they've played really the bottom feeders of the league. Yes Bulls did not fall of the cliff but during that 10 game span there is one quality win in OT against Indy and one disaster loss against Washington. So in my books they played like they looking at the schedule should have done, not good, not bad.

Yeah, except for the fact that in the last 10 games, we were underdogs in 6 of those games (meaning we should have lost) - and we won 3 of them. (Pacers, Kings, Pelicans).

We were favorites in 4 games and won 3 of them (you already mentioned the bad loss).

So the actual game results tell me that your book that says we've played as we "should have done" needs a re-write. Because we've actually played better than expected over the last 10 games.

And in the 6 games since WCJ came back:

2-1 as an underdog (games we should have lost)
3-0 as a favorite (games we should have won)

EDIT:

7-3 in the last ten games he's missed
#13 offense
#9 defense
#4 net rating
10-7 in games he hasn't played for the season

And calling this an "anti-Lauri post" is funny, what do you think we'd be reading right now if the numbers were the exact opposite, and the Bulls were:

3-7 in the last 10 games Lauri's missed
#18 offense
#22 defense
#27 net rating
7-10 in games Lauri hasn't played this season
9-5 in games Lauri has played this season

I can tell you what we'd be reading, every other post in this thread would be saying:

"See how much we miss Lauri, and see how much better the Bulls are when he's playing? That just proves how valuable he is"

[TSS]

Bulls were clearly underdogs against Indy and Philly but what is the third team we were underdogs against? I cannot figure looking at schedule.

EDIT: Sorry, I see you mention it in post. But were we really underdogs at home against 12-17 Sacto without Barnes and Holmes?
If so, I stand corrected and really should have put in a bet or two.

[CobyWhite0]

Bulls were clearly underdogs against Indy and Philly but what is the third team we were underdogs against? I cannot figure looking at schedule.

EDIT: Sorry, I see you mention it in post. But were we really underdogs at home against 12-17 Sacto without Barnes and Holmes?
If so, I stand corrected and really should have put in a bet or two.

Yeah, we were 1 point underdogs when we played SAC. +4.5 when we beat Indy, and +2.5 when we beat the Pels.

[Pentele]

Bulls were clearly underdogs against Indy and Philly but what is the third team we were underdogs against? I cannot figure looking at schedule.

EDIT: Sorry, I see you mention it in post. But were we really underdogs at home against 12-17 Sacto without Barnes and Holmes?
If so, I stand corrected and really should have put in a bet or two.

Yeah, you should have. I think Vegas has been slow to catch how good a team the Bulls are this season. I do not really blame them for it, though. The roster is essentially the same as last year, and typically you want to be rather conservative when setting the odds. Usually there is no reason to think that a team is suddenly considerably better when they manage to win some games against historical expectations. And some narrow losses to start the season could have thrown projections off even further. But like it has been repeated almost ad nauseam, this season is different (generally speaking, yes, but I mean the Bulls as a team in particular). And if you do not believe me, ask the players.

Our fellow forumite CobyWhite0 continues throwing shade on Lauri (even in quite imaginative ways, as is evidenced by his comparison of injury proneness of Lauri and Kristaps in another thread), but he has blinders on at least in this particular issue. The overall shift in the Bulls is truly remarkable this season; most other positive consequences relate to that directly rather than to performance or absence of any single player (Zach is a possible exception, here, I grant happily).

[Hangtime84]

I think Chicago needs Lauri. Lauri knows and set a few goals on his availability problem. Clearly his first two seasons he was NOT ready for the amount of stress the NBA requires.

While I don’t expect him to get 20million dollar a season check as his “ prove it” season he has continued to struggle with availability.

I have always expected to rise for the next contract and become a more productive player. Simply cause how “not ready” his body was for the NBA grind.

At the start of the this season he was our most consistent bull and was finding ways to impact the game when his shot wasn’t falling. He needs to continue to improve his shooting, ball handling, and ability to finish around the rim. (Same thing can be said about most of our rookie contract players)

I can be patient while that it’s not like his peers are blowing out the water.

[sco]

I think Chicago needs Lauri. Lauri knows and set a few goals on his availability problem. Clearly his first two seasons he was NOT ready for the amount of stress the NBA requires.

While I don’t expect him to get 20million dollar a season check as his “ prove it” season he has continued to struggle with availability.

I have always expected to rise for the next contract and become a more productive player. Simply cause how “not ready” his body was for the NBA grind.

At the start of the this season he was our most consistent bull and was finding ways to impact the game when his shot wasn’t falling. He needs to continue to improve his shooting, ball handling, and ability to finish around the rim.

I can be patient while that it’s not like his peers are blowing out the water.

Is this something you are guessing at or do you have a source? Not that it shouldn't be obvious.

I am hopeful Lauri returns with enough time before the deadline to boost his trade value. If he is missing more than 1/2 the season so far in a "prove it" season, I think it is unrealistic to assume he's going to play more than 70% of his games in his next contract. That is such a penalty for our team to work under if we resign him.

[coldfish]

The Bulls actually have 7 players with a TS% above 60. Here they are with their assist rate:
Felicio 73.1%ts 16.4%ast
Gafford 68.1%ts 6.4%ast
Markkanen 65.4%ts 4.3%ast
Satoransky 65.1%ts 29.7%ast
Lavine 64.8%ts 24.2%ast
Thad Young 61.3%ts 25.8%ast
Carter 60.4%ts 11.7%

The idea that Markkanen is a good shooter, therefore he shouldn't have to pass is laughable. All of the other efficient scorers on the team find teammates for assists many times as often as Lauri. That's because Lauri is either incapable or unwilling to do so. Gafford is a horrible passer and he still finds a teammate for a bucket 50% more often than Lauri.

I can do the numbers on a "per 100 possession" basis and Lauri comes out last on the team. He assists a teammate 1.3 times per 100 possessions. Lauri ranks as one of the worst players in the NBA. He very well might be THE worst if you start ignoring the low minutes players but I haven't looked at every team.

[sco]

The Bulls actually have 7 players with a TS% above 60. Here they are with their assist rate:
Felicio 73.1%ts 16.4%ast
Gafford 68.1%ts 6.4%ast
Markkanen 65.4%ts 4.3%ast
Satoransky 65.1%ts 29.7%ast
Lavine 64.8%ts 24.2%ast
Thad Young 61.3%ts 25.8%ast
Carter 60.4%ts 11.7%

The idea that Markkanen is a good shooter, therefore he shouldn't have to pass is laughable. All of the other efficient scorers on the team find teammates for assists many times as often as Lauri. That's because Lauri is either incapable or unwilling to do so. Gafford is a horrible passer and he still finds a teammate for a bucket 50% more often than Lauri.

I can do the numbers on a "per 100 possession" basis and Lauri comes out last on the team. He assists a teammate 1.3 times per 100 possessions. Lauri ranks as one of the worst players in the NBA. He very well might be THE worst if you start ignoring the low minutes players but I haven't looked at every team.

I'm hard on Lauri, but it's clear to me that, more than any other player, his primary responsibility has been to score when he has the ball. Zach and Coby have more playmaking responsibilities because they are primary ball handlers.