Zach Lavine: Offered 4/80 from Kings update p26 Bulls Matched

[samwana]

Thinking the game

Between Games 3 and 4 of the NBA Finals, with the outcome all but a fait accompli, LeBron James spoke to the media in a particularly reflective session. "I felt like in order to win, you've got to have talent, but you've got to be very cerebral too," he said. "Listen, we're all NBA players. Everybody knows how to put the ball in the hoop. But who can think throughout the course of the game?"

Now, more than ever, front offices and coaches have come to this conclusion as well. Asked what kind of skills they currently place a premium on, basketball IQ was mentioned more than raw athleticism.

"Pure overall intellect is required now," Hawks coach Lloyd Pierce said. "It's hard to play with guys who don't understand concepts, don't understand tendencies and don't understand analytics. You need the intellectual factor to succeed as a player and as a team."

From this article

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/24012186/league-wide-chatter-utah-summer-league-nba

This is the reason I didn't want to sign LaVine to such a big contract. He can put the ball in the hoop if he is hot. But he plays dumb a lot and the above quote is why I would have been completely comfortable with letting him go with that offer sheet.

Sent from my SM-G920F using RealGM mobile app

[mymysql]

I remember that ecstatic feeling I had when I read the Kings made an $80M offer to Zach Lavine.

"Hahaha the Kings are such a joke. Only they would pull such a ridiculous offer. Well at least he's officially not our worry anymore! Thank you SAC"

Then 10 minutes later...

[samwana]

What intangibles does Zach bring?... I need those tangibles...

All he brings is entertainment with his dunks, which could bring energy for the team...I want defensive and team play intangibles though.

This too

Sent from my SM-G920F using RealGM mobile app

[DorO]

Exactly as predicted 4/70-85m and fell right there, good to have great player with fair price!

[Dankoz]

Exactly as predicted 4/70-85m and fell right there, good to have great player with fair price!

He was worst player included in trade & we are paying extremely bad overprice.

[BR0D1E86]

Exactly as predicted 4/70-85m and fell right there, good to have great player with fair price!

It is indeed, though you appear to be straying off topic and talking about some other player.

[realEAST]

This is contract we'll be discussing how to move in two summers.
He is signed too long for too much money. Guess Kings finally pulled one on somebody for a change.

[kingkirk]

I've had some hours to collect my thoughts on this. Recorded a pod, wrote some stuff, and through that my ultimate position is we need to wait and see.

It's not a good answer, but I don't want to make a rash judgement on who and what LaVine will be over the next season based on the sample size we saw with him as a Bull last season. If he can return to the player he was on track to be prior to the injury, as a second or third option and with the cap to continue to rise, this deal might be fine, even if it looks bad now.

Basically, this entire thing is a major IF. That in itself makes this a risk, but I still think it's too early to say how good, bad or indifferent this is.

He'll be earning 80% of his max. If he can become 80% of the type of player we usually see sign rookie-max extensions, it may be ok. That said, if this deal gives him a sense of entitlement, like he is the franchise guy, it will be problematic. Let's see.

4-years, $60m was the number I was realistically hoping for (lower would've been nicer), but for an extra $4.5m a season, there's some potential that this works out. Fingers crossed.

[PrimzyBulls81]

Jeezuz kryst we are talking about two million dollars difference between everyone liking this deal and losing their *** over it. If we had signed him at $17-18M we would have been ok.

Disagree. I’d have been unhappy at that number too. Lavine is a bad basketball player. I don’t like gambling huge dollars that he’ll change an entire career of being bad.

I would be fine with extension up to 15M,thats it.. 1+1 kind a deal

[RSP83]

well f**k.... I hope he's worth it

[RSP83]

... still can't believe we'll be committing 20 million every year for the next 4 years for Zach Lavine. We signed Jimmy for less and he's twice the player Lavine is. I'm afraid my Ron Mercer comparison is becoming reality.

[RSP83]

I've had some hours to collect my thoughts on this. Recorded a pod, wrote some stuff, and through that my ultimate position is we need to wait and see.

It's not a good answer, but I don't want to make a rash judgement on who and what LaVine will be over the next season based on the sample size we saw with him as a Bull last season. If he can return to the player he was on track to be prior to the injury, as a second or third option and with the cap to continue to rise, this deal might be fine, even if it looks bad now.

Basically, this entire thing is a major IF. That in itself makes this a risk, but I still think it's too early to say how good, bad or indifferent this is.

He'll be earning 80% of his max. If he can become 80% of the type of player we usually see sign rookie-max extensions, it may be ok. That said, if this deal gives him a sense of entitlement, like he is the franchise guy, it will be problematic. Let's see.

4-years, $60m was the number I was realistically hoping for (lower would've been nicer), but for an extra $4.5m a season, there's some potential that this works out. Fingers crossed.

Which is what Nurkic is getting, and Lavine is a player in that same tier.

[Fastbrk4brkfast]

Not the choice I would've made. Then again was it even a choice at this point? They had their minds made up about Zach before he even stepped on the court in a Bulls uniform. At least they matched it quick. No sense in going through a weekend of media drama over a decision you made a year ago right?

It's an okay deal as bad deals go. It makes some sense even if he underperforms it given the salary cap increase next year and the thing I haven't seen discussed AT ALL which is the shooting guard position is incredibly weak around the whole league. Honestly all I want out of him is a 17 PER and I'm okay with it. If he comes in under that, well, there are already tons of bad contracts around the league and there're about to be even more of them real soon.

[bearadonisdna]

This deal is nothing to cry about. Your basically getting the best nba wing prospect in FA.

While lavine was in his minute restriction it was common kniwledge that he was practically a 20 mil per year player. Even matching last season, for a full season in this nba cap landscape ur kinda getting wat ur paying for. He is 22 , fits the timeline. Thats worth something too imo.

[Alcatraz17]

I'd like to pose an out-of-the box question for those who think the sky is falling regarding LaVine's contract.

Chris Paul signed a 4 year/160 million dollar deal.

Paul George signed a 4 year/137 million dollar deal.

Zach LaVine signed a 4 year/78 million dollar deal.

My question is....considering each player, how much they are making per year, and performance expectations for the upcoming season....what % would you give each player to live up to that per year number for NEXT YEAR ? I ask that you to not consider the situation of the team, Example CP just needs to be good enough for Houston to make it to finals, not 40 million/year good. Think of it more in a vacuum.

For me...I see CP3 (40 million/year) at a 75% chance perception of his play will be below his per year earning, and 24% chance he meets it, with a 1% chance his impact succeeds 40 million (Basically...Houston wins championship).

Paul George...34.25 million/year...I see him at 40% chance his play is perceived as below his per year earning...50% chance his play meets the money..and 10% chance he exceeds the expectations of a 34 million dollar contract.

Finally...Zach LaVine...I see Zach at a 55% chance his play falls short of what 19.5/million year looks like...35% chance he meets the expectations of a 19.5 million/year player...and 10% chance he surprises all of us and plays beyond the level of his per year salary.


I know this little exercise doesn't really prove much...but I thought it was an interesting way to break down this situation and look at it differently compared to other bigger signings. Maybe even temper some minds a bit.

And whatever your breakdown ends up being...consider the ages of the player in years 2,3,4. I think we all can assume that Zach probably has the highest percentage of truly earning his salary in 4th year with age being on his side.

If nothing changed for you... sorry, thanks for reading anyway!

[Alcatraz17]

I've had some hours to collect my thoughts on this. Recorded a pod, wrote some stuff, and through that my ultimate position is we need to wait and see.

It's not a good answer, but I don't want to make a rash judgement on who and what LaVine will be over the next season based on the sample size we saw with him as a Bull last season. If he can return to the player he was on track to be prior to the injury, as a second or third option and with the cap to continue to rise, this deal might be fine, even if it looks bad now.

Basically, this entire thing is a major IF. That in itself makes this a risk, but I still think it's too early to say how good, bad or indifferent this is.

He'll be earning 80% of his max. If he can become 80% of the type of player we usually see sign rookie-max extensions, it may be ok. That said, if this deal gives him a sense of entitlement, like he is the franchise guy, it will be problematic. Let's see.

4-years, $60m was the number I was realistically hoping for (lower would've been nicer), but for an extra $4.5m a season, there's some potential that this works out. Fingers crossed.

Which is what Nurkic is getting, and Lavine is a player in that same tier.

Except Nurkic got 4 yr/48 million.

[Alcatraz17]

... still can't believe we'll be committing 20 million every year for the next 4 years for Zach Lavine. We signed Jimmy for less and he's twice the player Lavine is. I'm afraid my Ron Mercer comparison is becoming reality.

1. Wait and see how he plays his first full year back.

2. Wait and see what kind of players are making 20 million a year in 22-23....

[Sarni]

You have basically done the same thing Portland did with Crabbe but in a Summer where it had already become clear for two years that cap space isn’t going to keep going up by 20% every year like teams thought back in 2016.

I will never understand teams committing to untradeable deals like this. You won’t be able to get rid of him without attaching a first rounder unless he turns out to be a star which I think the chances of are very slim. This also takes away a lot of cap flexibility for the next three years.

Should have let Kings take him. They are doing what Nets were doing for the previous two years, offering poison deals.

[SensiBull]

I think people mix up Nurkic and Jokic. Nurkic's deal was $53MM. I don't remember how many years, but it was less per year than Zach's $20MM.

[SensiBull]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/250617/Jusuf-Nurkic-Agrees-Upon-Four-Year-$53M-Deal-With-Blazers