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

[rtblues]

Hey GarPax, F-you!
$20M per? Are you out of your minds?
Ugh, sick and disgusted. Had the perfect out, and, F-YOU GAR-PAX!

[RSP83]

If Lauri and WCJ turns out into All-Stars I will forgive this signing. This signing might be passable after year 1, but this feels like if you start your rebuilding with a Jason Richardson.

[TimRobbins]

Well, any FA plan is now out the door. This is our core. We'll have to see where it can go.

[realEAST]

My problem with LaVine is that with level he is playing defense at (not much engagement and awareness, even though he has physical tools) and picture he has of himself as a player, he'd have to become almost Harden level offensive player to be valuable, positive player, especially at this price.

Unfortunatelly, I see him sooner improving as defender - and I dont think he'll ever be passable defender - than becoming that level of offensive player.
So closer to lesser BBIQ CJ McCollum than Harden.

If only it was shorter deal, I could get behind the money. But four years is potentially crippling on the back end.

[ArtMorte]

I think we were always going to stick with him for more than half a season when we made that trade, so, let's hope Lavine can improve his efficiency and decision-making and become worth the money.

[Dankoz]

One big issue with LaVine is his "i'll do it myself" attitude. He doesn't have any interest for passing game & is worst playmaker i've ever seen on Bulls. Grant was master mind in terms of passing compared to LaVine.

[tiffac]

We traded for the right player. Lavine perfectly replaces Jimmy as the most hated member of the Bulls. Hahahahaha

[SHO'NUFF]

My projection for Zach’s #’s this upcoming season.

35 ppg
8 apg
8 rpg
4 bpg
8 spg

100% guaranteed. You heard it here first & last.

[suursahuri]

I've been trying to understand this move ever since I woke up and saw the news. I can't help myself, I feel devastated! There's two or three "max" player slots and we wasted our first one to Zach LaVine, who not only is a bad basketball player himself, but will drag our promising youngsters down with his selfish iso-ball.

Four year deal means that we are on a Orlando Magic path.

[Ctownbulls]

Wow that went quick.
Just woke up to this news. I'm disappointed. 20m for LaVine is too much. It isn't Booker or Wiggins bad, but I still think it is a bad contract already.
Paying so much for potential is not a good to spend money imo.

We will see though, if he wants to be the man with this contract, our potentially better players will not see much of the ball.

With the same attitude as last season he will probably win us some games and lose us many more.

I hope his game and especially IQ evolves, I'm not optimistic though. For our team's sake I hope I have to eat crow on this, I think we will regret matching big time.

Sent from my SM-G920F using RealGM mobile app

I would have rank Lauri first and LaVine second as offensive options right now. That could easily flip flop though.

Of course Lauri is 1 and of course Zach will play as if he is.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[jmajew]

I wouldn't have signed Lavine to this deal, but I can't say the extra 4-5 mil a year they are paying is going to break this team's future. Next year we can still create space for two max contracts. All we need to do is trade Felicio for an expring (Melo Anyone?), and then depending on who we are targeting/getting we can renounce the rights to Payne, Portis, or Grant, and possibly trade Dunn.

There is no reason to be devestated by this move. Would we have preferred Lavine at 14-16 mil a year yes, but we can't help that another team thought he was worth this deal. What we know is that Lavine is an incredibly hard worker and appears form the outside to be a good teammate. If we are going to gamble on someone reaching their ceiling he would be the ideal candidate.

[daspenguin]

Woke up this morning here in Europe and saw the headline: "Kings sign Lavine." First thought: wow, Bulls really dodged a bullet there. But of course it's the Bulls, so they will pay 20 million a year to a guy who will make no difference to the win/loss record.

Did the Bulls see Lavine at the end of last year? I don't think they did. Sure, he's a great athlete, but he is probably the worst and most unwilling passer in a Bulls uniform and that's saying something. Dude gets double teamed on pick and rolls and he never ever finds the open man. I'm sure he works hard and is probably a very nice guy, but that's no reason to pay him that money. Just let him go to the Kings.

[Chi town]

I think we were always going to stick with him for more than half a season when we made that trade, so, let's hope Lavine can improve his efficiency and decision-making and become worth the money.

Considering the cap is rising big next two seasons this deal will probably be neutral if he returns to pre acl form.

[MagicMarkkanen]

I've been trying to understand this move ever since I woke up and saw the news. I can't help myself, I feel devastated! There's two or three "max" player slots and we wasted our first one to Zach LaVine, who not only is a bad basketball player himself, but will drag our promising youngsters down with his selfish iso-ball.

Four year deal means that we are on a Orlando Magic path.

Completely agree.

However, there is a small (unfortunately very small) change that Zach's poor play and the lacking (to say the least) BBIQ (especially last year) were partly to blame on him trying to prove himself on a contract year when not yet fully healthy, which would have led him to try to force things without any regard on what takes place around him. (there is even a small change that Fred and GarPax were asking him to "show his full potential" and to "take over" - just for tanking purposes).

In a sense, Zach has been playing for a contract the last couple of years and maybe it has affected his play in a negative way. What I am trying to say is that there is a small change that Zach can now relax, take a deep breath and a look around himself (especially when he is on the floor) and start playing basketball as a functional part of the team. If this happens (I don't believe it actually will, just to be clear), then this signing can actually work out great: after all, there are some clear positives in his game (shooting, slashing, athleticism) and if only those can be harnessed to be used for the betterment of the team, then he can be at least a decent pickup for 20mil/year.

However, I think it is much more probable that he is just a selfish BBplayer who will never get his sh*t together.

[samwana]

Wow that went quick.
Just woke up to this news. I'm disappointed. 20m for LaVine is too much. It isn't Booker or Wiggins bad, but I still think it is a bad contract already.
Paying so much for potential is not a good to spend money imo.

We will see though, if he wants to be the man with this contract, our potentially better players will not see much of the ball.

With the same attitude as last season he will probably win us some games and lose us many more.

I hope his game and especially IQ evolves, I'm not optimistic though. For our team's sake I hope I have to eat crow on this, I think we will regret matching big time.

Sent from my SM-G920F using RealGM mobile app

I would have rank Lauri first and LaVine second as offensive options right now. That could easily flip flop though.

Of course Lauri is 1 and of course Zach will play as if he is.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

That is exactly why I wouldn't have matched this deal. We will see who is right though. I hope the FO is right and I'm wrong. LaVine as a first option is gonna result in a very good draft pick next year. That could be the silver lining here

Sent from my SM-G920F using RealGM mobile app

[Ice Man]

I sure hope that GarPax are correct and I am not.

[WindyCityBorn]

Woke up this morning here in Europe and saw the headline: "Kings sign Lavine." First thought: wow, Bulls really dodged a bullet there. But of course it's the Bulls, so they will pay 20 million a year to a guy who will make no difference to the win/loss record.

Did the Bulls see Lavine at the end of last year? I don't think they did. Sure, he's a great athlete, but he is probably the worst and most unwilling passer in a Bulls uniform and that's saying something. Dude gets double teamed on pick and rolls and he never ever finds the open man. I'm sure he works hard and is probably a very nice guy, but that's no reason to pay him that money. Just let him go to the Kings.

I seriously doubt he will be that selfish going forward. He was trying to prove his worth knowing this would happen. He doesn't have to press now that he has security. Also the thing about pick and roll isn't true. He isn't a poor passer. Unwilling can't disagree with that from that 24 game sample, but again I think that had more to do with the situation.

[WindyCityBorn]

I would have rank Lauri first and LaVine second as offensive options right now. That could easily flip flop though.

Of course Lauri is 1 and of course Zach will play as if he is.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

That is exactly why I wouldn't have matched this deal. We will see who is right though. I hope the FO is right and I'm wrong. LaVine as a first option is gonna result in a very good draft pick next year. That could be the silver lining here

Sent from my SM-G920F using RealGM mobile app

I expect the offense to run through Markkanen first based on Paxson's comments prior to free agency. There are enough shots to go around with the style we play. Hopefully both will average at least 20ppg on good efficiency. Dunn or Portis will be the 3rd leading scorer. I think we will be fun to watch and we will have a better record than last season.

[DuckIII]

My projection for Zach’s #’s this upcoming season.

35 ppg
8 apg
8 rpg
4 bpg
8 spg

100% guaranteed. You heard it here first & last.

Blocks are a little low.

[samwana]

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.

I agree 100% and still hope I'm wrong

Sent from my SM-G920F using RealGM mobile app