Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread

[HomoSapien]

If the Bulls KNOW they're not going to match any offer sheets, it would be logical to try to get as much use out of him as possible for the playoff push while he's still under contract.

What they're doing now makes absolutely no sense, unless they're actively trying to sabotage those offers sheets... aiming to resign Markkanen to a very cheap deal.

A month ago I would've considered the latter just a conspiracy theory. Not anymore.

The possibility that they just don't think he's very good didn't cross your mind?

As has been pointed out many times - if they truly think he's suddenly and inexplicably become a guy who's almost unplayable, then they're idiots and don't deserve their jobs. Come on now, let's not play these silly games.

Lauri is still so efficient both behind the arc and near the basket that it's madness not to play him. I don't care if you hate him personally - if we're trying to win, he needs to play.

But I suspect we're not trying to win.

Zomg, don't play that game. I don't hate him personally, so stop trying to twist this into an ad hominem attack.

If you want to play that game, I will point out that you've dodged my question for weeks about our record and +/- with Lauri on the floor. There is no stat that can suggest we're better with Lauri on the floor, because that stat doesn't exist. Just because you say he helps us win doesn't make it true. The coaching staff sees Lauri as a 7th or 8th man on this roster, that's why he's become a 19 mpg player when our front-court is healthy.

They're not benching him to hurt his value, they're not benching him because it helps us tank, they're benching him because they don't believe in him.

[ZOMG]

The possibility that they just don't think he's very good didn't cross your mind?

As has been pointed out many times - if they truly think he's suddenly and inexplicably become a guy who's almost unplayable, then they're idiots and don't deserve their jobs. Come on now, let's not play these silly games.

Lauri is still so efficient both behind the arc and near the basket that it's madness not to play him. I don't care if you hate him personally - if we're trying to win, he needs to play.

But I suspect we're not trying to win.

Zomg, don't play that game. I don't hate him personally, so stop trying to twist this into an ad hominem attack.

If you want to play that game, I will point out that you've dodged my question for weeks about our record and +/- with Lauri on the floor. There is no stat that can suggest we're better with Lauri on the floor, because that stat doesn't exist. Just because you say he helps us win doesn't make it true. The coaching staff sees Lauri as a 7th or 8th man on this roster, that's why he's become a 19 mpg player when our front-court is healthy.

They're not benching him to hurt his value, they're not benching him because it helps us tank, they're benching him because they don't believe in him.

Didn't mean you with the "hate" comment. I just think there's a lot of general dislike for Markkanen, and it clouds this whole issue. Whether people want to or not, there's probably a tendency to use him as a scapegoat for the team's problems. He's one of the few remaining high-profile GarPax holdovers and he's not a face of the franchise like Zach.

Obviously benching Lauri has not helped us one bit. We play worse basketball now. That cannot be denied.

[Pentele]

Just so I'm clear, we're ready to draw conclusions after 10 games on the net-state of the Vucevic trade, however - Lauri needs more opportunity after 4 years and 3 radically different coaches?

Who is this we? You and who else? Here's an advice: whoever you are, do not be so hasty; it has only been 10 games.

There is nothing wrong with calling a team out for playing badly; that does not mean that one would have somehow arrived to a final conclusion on the trade. So save it.

[sco]

I do not think it is conspiracy either. In general, stupidity is almost always a better explanation than there being some "evil plan". It is clear that Lauri has been relegated to the role of the fourth big in the rotation. But for Pete's sake, why are you not utilizing that fourth big in his true role, i.e., as an offensive player? Because he is not supposed to be "featured" in the offense? That's bush league.

You shouldn't misunderstand the word "conspiracy". Or "sabotage". Nobody's saying there's any actual evil intent - it's mostly just a bunch of cynical business decisions. Someobody wants to keep their cushy FO job, somebody's trying to save face, somebody owes an agent a favor.

There's all kinds of behind-the-scenes machinations in the NBA that fans simply are not privy to. This is the stuff you NEVER hear home announcers or analysts talking about, as they're all part of the same machine. Essentially they work for the owners, directly or indirectly. They don't work for the players.

This is why Stacey finished the Grizzlies game by calling out Lauri Markkanen, of all people - he said Lauri should "step up" or something ridiculous like that. He simply pretended not to notice that Lauri gets like 13 minutes and 3 shots per game these days and has been completely marginalized. In essence, he was lying. Stacey knows where the wind blows.

It's the same reason he's careful not to criticize Vucevic or Theis at any point. They're off limits for now, no matter how they play.

The Bulls have made a business decision on Lauri Markkanen, and I suspect there's more to it than meets the eye.

Yes, I'll give part of that. It is probably about saving faces etc. But I just don't think that there is an intention to lower Lauri's value in order to resign him. Stacy certainly knows where the wind blows, and he is doing his best to justify the recent roster choices. Another thing that caught my ear was how vigorously Stacy was blaming Markkanen's defense in the instance Coby came to help and left his own man unguarded at the three point line. That was over the top, I'd say. But that does not really move the needle for me to draw the conclusion that the FO is lowering Lauri's value intentionally. That does not mean that the media games would not be played for other reasons.

Btw, funnily, Amin is complimenting Lauri for this or that thing at the time. I guess he feels the need to stay positive, or something, but Stacy rarely shares that sentiment anymore. Of course, Amin is sometimes simply reading the situation badly; the funniest instance was when Donovan gave that big F U to Lauri by keeping him on the court with Felicio and others. Amin said something like "This is a good opportunity for Lauri to find some chemistry with the other bench guys", and Stacy responded almost ashamed (for Amin?) that "No... this is not going to be the rotation in the future".

Good points. Unfortunately, this year has been about trying to assign blame as to why we suck. I give Stacy credit for continuing to point out our player and coaching deficiencies and not be a total homer (Amin has his head too far up Stacy's but to see the game). The reality is that all it takes are 3-4 sub-par/inexperienced players in your rotation to make a team bad. I had high hopes for White and Carter this season, but both took a step back. PWill is playing too much for a rookie, and IMO, it is always bad to hand kids a starting job. Lauri has had good moments and bad, but it was clear at the deadline that he wasn't coming back next season. I really think there is an effort to find working rotations within the group that are likely to come back before adding in those potentially better pieces who likely won't (i.e. Lauri, Arci).

[HomoSapien]

As has been pointed out many times - if they truly think he's suddenly and inexplicably become a guy who's almost unplayable, then they're idiots and don't deserve their jobs. Come on now, let's not play these silly games.

Lauri is still so efficient both behind the arc and near the basket that it's madness not to play him. I don't care if you hate him personally - if we're trying to win, he needs to play.

But I suspect we're not trying to win.

Zomg, don't play that game. I don't hate him personally, so stop trying to twist this into an ad hominem attack.

If you want to play that game, I will point out that you've dodged my question for weeks about our record and +/- with Lauri on the floor. There is no stat that can suggest we're better with Lauri on the floor, because that stat doesn't exist. Just because you say he helps us win doesn't make it true. The coaching staff sees Lauri as a 7th or 8th man on this roster, that's why he's become a 19 mpg player when our front-court is healthy.

They're not benching him to hurt his value, they're not benching him because it helps us tank, they're benching him because they don't believe in him.

Didn't mean you with the "hate" comment. I just think there's a lot of general dislike for Markkanen, and it clouds this whole issue. Whether people want to or not, there's probably a tendency to use him as a scapegoat for the team's problems. He's one of the few remaining high-profile GarPax holdovers and he's not a face of the franchise like Zach.

Obviously benching Lauri has not helped us one bit. We play worse basketball now. That cannot be denied.

But there's nothing to suggest that we play better with Lauri playing more.

Re: people disliking him... People wanted nothing more than for this guy to succeed. He was brilliant as a rookie but has taken significant steps backwards since then. If people don't like Lauri, it's because of how he's played and, if I'm being honest, his dogmatic fans on this forum have done his popularity a massive disservice because as they've overwhelmingly been unable to acknowledge that he owns any of the blame for his play.

[ZOMG]

Zomg, don't play that game. I don't hate him personally, so stop trying to twist this into an ad hominem attack.

If you want to play that game, I will point out that you've dodged my question for weeks about our record and +/- with Lauri on the floor. There is no stat that can suggest we're better with Lauri on the floor, because that stat doesn't exist. Just because you say he helps us win doesn't make it true. The coaching staff sees Lauri as a 7th or 8th man on this roster, that's why he's become a 19 mpg player when our front-court is healthy.

They're not benching him to hurt his value, they're not benching him because it helps us tank, they're benching him because they don't believe in him.

Didn't mean you with the "hate" comment. I just think there's a lot of general dislike for Markkanen, and it clouds this whole issue. Whether people want to or not, there's probably a tendency to use him as a scapegoat for the team's problems. He's one of the few remaining high-profile GarPax holdovers and he's not a face of the franchise like Zach.

Obviously benching Lauri has not helped us one bit. We play worse basketball now. That cannot be denied.

But there's nothing to suggest that we play better with Lauri not benching.

Re: people disliking him... People wanted nothing more than for this guy to succeed. He was brilliant as a rookie but has taken significant steps backwards since then. If people don't like Lauri, it's because of how he's played and, if I'm being honest, his dogmatic fans on this forum have done his popularity a massive disservice because as they've overwhelmingly been unable to acknowledge that he owns any of the blame for his play.

That's not true, but I know people will keep repeating it. Can't do anything about that. Stats don't matter, eye tests don't matter. *shrug*

Markkanen has improved considerably at finishing near the basket this season, particularly on mismatches (which are the most important plays for him anyway) and you know it very well. He's become almost elite, which would have been a preposterous thought just a year ago. I just expect honesty, since his inability to finish at the rack was always one of the favorite talking points of his detractors.

He's also having a career shooting season. Again, just repeating facts here.

I've always considered Lauri a flawed player, but he's managed to improve this season at two areas that are very important for a scorer, just like people wanted him to. Absolutely no "significant steps back".

[DuckIII]

Occum’s Razor: Assuming one starts from the premise the Bulls are using Lauri poorly (a premise I am torn on), it’s far more likely the decision is based on the collective “stupidity” of the coaching staff and FO rather than some premeditated scheme to drive down his value.

[Pentele]

You shouldn't misunderstand the word "conspiracy". Or "sabotage". Nobody's saying there's any actual evil intent - it's mostly just a bunch of cynical business decisions. Someobody wants to keep their cushy FO job, somebody's trying to save face, somebody owes an agent a favor.

There's all kinds of behind-the-scenes machinations in the NBA that fans simply are not privy to. This is the stuff you NEVER hear home announcers or analysts talking about, as they're all part of the same machine. Essentially they work for the owners, directly or indirectly. They don't work for the players.

This is why Stacey finished the Grizzlies game by calling out Lauri Markkanen, of all people - he said Lauri should "step up" or something ridiculous like that. He simply pretended not to notice that Lauri gets like 13 minutes and 3 shots per game these days and has been completely marginalized. In essence, he was lying. Stacey knows where the wind blows.

It's the same reason he's careful not to criticize Vucevic or Theis at any point. They're off limits for now, no matter how they play.

The Bulls have made a business decision on Lauri Markkanen, and I suspect there's more to it than meets the eye.

Yes, I'll give part of that. It is probably about saving faces etc. But I just don't think that there is an intention to lower Lauri's value in order to resign him. Stacy certainly knows where the wind blows, and he is doing his best to justify the recent roster choices. Another thing that caught my ear was how vigorously Stacy was blaming Markkanen's defense in the instance Coby came to help and left his own man unguarded at the three point line. That was over the top, I'd say. But that does not really move the needle for me to draw the conclusion that the FO is lowering Lauri's value intentionally. That does not mean that the media games would not be played for other reasons.

Btw, funnily, Amin is complimenting Lauri for this or that thing at the time. I guess he feels the need to stay positive, or something, but Stacy rarely shares that sentiment anymore. Of course, Amin is sometimes simply reading the situation badly; the funniest instance was when Donovan gave that big F U to Lauri by keeping him on the court with Felicio and others. Amin said something like "This is a good opportunity for Lauri to find some chemistry with the other bench guys", and Stacy responded almost ashamed (for Amin?) that "No... this is not going to be the rotation in the future".

Good points. Unfortunately, this year has been about trying to assign blame as to why we suck. I give Stacy credit for continuing to point out our player and coaching deficiencies and not be a total homer (Amin has his head too far up Stacy's but to see the game). The reality is that all it takes are 3-4 sub-par/inexperienced players in your rotation to make a team bad. I had high hopes for White and Carter this season, but both took a step back. PWill is playing too much for a rookie, and IMO, it is always bad to hand kids a starting job. Lauri has had good moments and bad, but it was clear at the deadline that he wasn't coming back next season. I really think there is an effort to find working rotations within the group that are likely to come back before adding in those potentially better pieces who likely won't (i.e. Lauri, Arci).

I agree with everything you say there. I guess the point me and some others are making is that what they are currently doing with Lauri is not conducive to winning as much as you can this season. And indeed, AK conveyed that the team is still a work in progress, but we, the fans, have understood the trade as an attempt to win as many games as possible. Lauri's handling + playing Coby and Pwill so much are clearly unreasonable things to do from that perspective, and it suggests that we, the fans, are wrong in that we have misinterpreted what is going on.

Like I said, I do not buy Zomg's theory, and I think it is clear that Lauri has no future in the Bulls. Yes, that means that the FO is not "high on him", quite the contrary. But it takes a lot more for me to be convinced that the current rotations and schemes are the best a NBA coach can put together with the current roster. Does anyone really believe that? Also, it takes equally much for me to be convinced that the current bench Lauri is somehow optimally used or truly representative of the player Lauri Markkanen is. Does anyone really believe even that? I mean, after one loses the mentality to blame a player one is disappointed with, or the need to write snarky comments to irritate other posters, is there a single person who actually thinks that the player we have seen this season (or any other season, including the terrible third season) has now found his niche in NBA?

[HomoSapien]

Didn't mean you with the "hate" comment. I just think there's a lot of general dislike for Markkanen, and it clouds this whole issue. Whether people want to or not, there's probably a tendency to use him as a scapegoat for the team's problems. He's one of the few remaining high-profile GarPax holdovers and he's not a face of the franchise like Zach.

Obviously benching Lauri has not helped us one bit. We play worse basketball now. That cannot be denied.

But there's nothing to suggest that we play better with Lauri not benching.

Re: people disliking him... People wanted nothing more than for this guy to succeed. He was brilliant as a rookie but has taken significant steps backwards since then. If people don't like Lauri, it's because of how he's played and, if I'm being honest, his dogmatic fans on this forum have done his popularity a massive disservice because as they've overwhelmingly been unable to acknowledge that he owns any of the blame for his play.

That's not true, but I know people will keep repeating it. Can't do anything about that. Stats don't matter, eye tests don't matter. *shrug*

Markkanen has improved considerably at finishing near the basket this season, particularly on mismatches (which are the most important plays for him anyway) and you know it very well. He's become almost elite, which would have been a preposterous thought just a year ago. I just expect honesty, since his inability to finish at the rack was always one of the favorite talking points of his detractors.

He's also having a career shooting season. Again, just repeating facts here.

I've always considered Lauri a flawed player, but he's managed to improve this season at two areas that are very important for a scorer, just like people wanted him to. Absolutely no "significant steps back".

You can't be elite at something if you do it infrequently and improving in two areas doesn't overshadow the rest of the game.

Lauri's having career lows in blocks per game, rebounds per game, steals per game, assists per game, free-throw attempts, vorp, and rebound rate. Perhaps most importantly, the team does not perform well with Lauri plays.

If you actually believe in his potential, then you should be demanding more from him rather than making excuse after excuse.

[Pentele]

Occum’s Razor: Assuming one starts from the premise the Bulls are using Lauri poorly (a premise I am torn on), it’s far more likely the decision is based on the collective “stupidity” of the coaching staff and FO rather than some premeditated scheme to drive down his value.

Off-topic to lighten the mood: btw, what I earlier talked about is sometimes referred to as Hanlon's razor, or "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Granted, it is not perfectly applicable in what I argued for (as Zomg correctly pointed out) but I like it! It finds a lot of application in politics, and especially in how people discuss about politicians. As in "Is that person either stupid or evil?"

[GetBuLLish]

The Lauri Markkanen debates are eerily similar to the Carlos Boozer debates we had years ago. There was a group of fans (which I called the Boozer Brigade) that for years made every excuse known to mankind about his subpar play. The fallback position was always, "Just wait until he goes to another team and proves his true value." Well after he was dumped by the Bulls, he got signed by the Lakers for basically the vet minimum, played for one year, and then was out of the league.

Of course, not one member of the Boozer Brigade ever fessed up for their years long worth of completely unfounded arguments. I imagine a similar outcome here with Lauri.

[ZOMG]

Yes, I'll give part of that. It is probably about saving faces etc. But I just don't think that there is an intention to lower Lauri's value in order to resign him. Stacy certainly knows where the wind blows, and he is doing his best to justify the recent roster choices. Another thing that caught my ear was how vigorously Stacy was blaming Markkanen's defense in the instance Coby came to help and left his own man unguarded at the three point line. That was over the top, I'd say. But that does not really move the needle for me to draw the conclusion that the FO is lowering Lauri's value intentionally. That does not mean that the media games would not be played for other reasons.

Btw, funnily, Amin is complimenting Lauri for this or that thing at the time. I guess he feels the need to stay positive, or something, but Stacy rarely shares that sentiment anymore. Of course, Amin is sometimes simply reading the situation badly; the funniest instance was when Donovan gave that big F U to Lauri by keeping him on the court with Felicio and others. Amin said something like "This is a good opportunity for Lauri to find some chemistry with the other bench guys", and Stacy responded almost ashamed (for Amin?) that "No... this is not going to be the rotation in the future".

Good points. Unfortunately, this year has been about trying to assign blame as to why we suck. I give Stacy credit for continuing to point out our player and coaching deficiencies and not be a total homer (Amin has his head too far up Stacy's but to see the game). The reality is that all it takes are 3-4 sub-par/inexperienced players in your rotation to make a team bad. I had high hopes for White and Carter this season, but both took a step back. PWill is playing too much for a rookie, and IMO, it is always bad to hand kids a starting job. Lauri has had good moments and bad, but it was clear at the deadline that he wasn't coming back next season. I really think there is an effort to find working rotations within the group that are likely to come back before adding in those potentially better pieces who likely won't (i.e. Lauri, Arci).

I agree with everything you say there. I guess the point me and some others are making is that what they are currently doing with Lauri is not conducive to winning as much as you can this season. And indeed, AK conveyed that the team is still a work in progress, but we, the fans, have understood the trade as an attempt to win as many games as possible. Lauri's handling + playing Coby and Pwill so much are clearly unreasonable things to do from that perspective, and it suggests that we, the fans, are wrong in that we have misinterpreted what is going on.

Like I said, I do not buy Zomg's theory, and I think it is clear that Lauri has no future in the Bulls. Yes, that means that the FO is not "high on him", quite the contrary. But it takes a lot more for me to be convinced that the current rotations and schemes are the best a NBA coach can put together with the current roster. Does anyone really believe that? Also, it takes equally much for me to be convinced that the current bench Lauri is somehow optimally used or truly representative of the player Lauri Markkanen is. Does anyone really believe even that? I mean, after one loses the mentality to blame a player one is disappointed with, or the need to write snarky comments to irritate other posters, is there a single person who actually thinks that the player we have seen this season (or any other season, including the terrible third season) has now found his niche in NBA?

The trouble is that Lauri's "future" on the Bulls is relative.

Certainly it seems clear that AKME are not going to pay him $22 million per season. He's not going to have a future like that on this team.

But AKME can read the stats and analytics just like you and me. I think they know very well how useful Markkanen can be. And if they can somehow get him to sign on the dotted like for $13 mil per season, with NO guarantees of starting roles or anything like that, it's an absolute jackpot for them. IMO that's what they're going for here.

Lauri may have been stupid, letting the FO know somehow that he's willing to do almost anything to stay in Chicago. If you show your hand like that, you're going to suffer in the cutthroat business that is the NBA.

In short, I don't think AK is nearly as opposed to having Markkanen on the team next season as people seem to think. But he doesn't want to pay him. That in itself is no surprise - it's the nature of the business. But NBA players normally have agents whispering in their ears that they should always do what's best for them financially. I'm not sure if Lauri is listening to his agent.

It'll be a very interesting offseason.

[ZOMG]

The Lauri Markkanen debates are eerily similar to the Carlos Boozer debates we had years ago. There was a group of fans (which I called the Boozer Brigade) that for years made every excuse known to mankind about his subpar play. The fallback position was always, "Just wait until he goes to another team and proves his true value." Well after he was dumped by the Bulls, he got signed by the Lakers for basically the vet minimum, played for one year, and then was out of the league.

Of course, not one member of the Boozer Brigade ever fessed up for their years long worth of completely unfounded arguments. I imagine a similar outcome here with Lauri.

"Subpar play"?

Are you one of those people who have just conveniently forgotten about the first half of this season when Lauri was having a career year - before covid protocols, injuries and office politics ruined it all?

[GoBlue72391]

My rationale is they know they let Lauri walk and since he is not in next year plans they play folks that are.
It does not play well with the "win now" plan but neither does multiple other things they do.

If that is the case then they should have traded him at the deadline for anything. They supposedly couldn't get a 1st round pick for him...ok, so take a 2nd round pick for him then if you know for sure you're not bringing him back next season? A 2nd round pick for Lauri is better than losing him for nothing.

[GoBlue72391]

If the Bulls KNOW the're not going to match any offer sheets, it would be logical to try to get as much use out of him as possible for the playoff push while he's still under contract.

What they're doing now makes absolutely no sense, unless they're actively trying to sabotage those offers sheets... aiming to resign Markkanen to a very cheap deal.

A month ago I would've considered the latter just a conspiracy theory. Not anymore.

It’s definitely not a conspiracy. Maybe they just think he is worse fit/player than the 3 guys in front of him.

I do not think it is conspiracy either. In general, stupidity is almost always a better explanation than there being some "evil plan". It is clear that Lauri has been relegated to the role of the fourth big in the rotation. But for Pete's sake, why are you not utilizing that fourth big in his true role, i.e., as an offensive player? Because he is not supposed to be "featured" in the offense? That's bush league.

This. If he's not going to start or even be the 3rd big in the rotation, fine, but at least use him to his strengths in the limited minutes he is on the court. Involve him in the offense, run some plays for him, let him touch the ball during those 15 or so minutes he's out there, especially when the starters are on the bench. It would help the team more than letting Coby just run wild doing whatever he pleases out there.

[GoBlue72391]

It’s definitely not a conspiracy. Maybe they just think he is worse fit/player than the 3 guys in front of him.

I do not think it is conspiracy either. In general, stupidity is almost always a better explanation than there being some "evil plan". It is clear that Lauri has been relegated to the role of the fourth big in the rotation. But for Pete's sake, why are you not utilizing that fourth big in his true role, i.e., as an offensive player? Because he is not supposed to be "featured" in the offense? That's bush league.

I hope Lauri appreciates the support he has from fans like you guys. Seriously.

Look, we all agree that we want to win now because there is no tanking this season. I think it is correct that the Bulls have decided to take a path that likely doesn't include Lauri going forward. They added several new guys, who have had little time to build chemistry and learn the system, which likely requires extra in-game time. That has resulted in less time for Lauri, despite his better stats. I don't think there is any conspiracy against Lauri, I just think they are trying to make the new guys successful as possible this season and to help them assess what's needed for next season.

If Lauri is not in their future plans that is perfectly fine, but he's still on the team and the last time I checked we're trying to win now. Regardless of his future, make use of him while he's here. He's much more useful being involved than standing around like Keith Bogans.

[GoBlue72391]

Occum’s Razor: Assuming one starts from the premise the Bulls are using Lauri poorly (a premise I am torn on), it’s far more likely the decision is based on the collective “stupidity” of the coaching staff and FO rather than some premeditated scheme to drive down his value.

Hanlon's razor*

[ZOMG]

It’s definitely not a conspiracy. Maybe they just think he is worse fit/player than the 3 guys in front of him.

I do not think it is conspiracy either. In general, stupidity is almost always a better explanation than there being some "evil plan". It is clear that Lauri has been relegated to the role of the fourth big in the rotation. But for Pete's sake, why are you not utilizing that fourth big in his true role, i.e., as an offensive player? Because he is not supposed to be "featured" in the offense? That's bush league.

This. If he's not going to start or even be the 3rd big in the rotation, fine, but at least use him to his strengths in the limited minutes he is on the court. Involve him in the offense, run some plays for him, let him touch the ball during those 15 or so minutes he's out there, especially when the starters are on the bench. It would help the team more than letting Coby just run wild doing whatever he pleases out there.

See, I kind of agree with you. If there's any logic, that's what they should be doing - as I've said before.

But they're not doing it, and I simply refuse to believe that dudes making millions of dollars to think about basketball are that stupid. It's too far-fetched. There are many people in that coaching staff who have forgotten more about NBA basketball than any of us will ever know. They make mistakes, but they don't make mistakes like this. A high school coach would not F this up.

It's such a no-brainer to involve Markkanen in the offense - or at least pass him the ball now and then - that the Bulls have to be thinking that totally marginalizing him is more important for some reason. I think we will see the endgame of this in the offseason.

While were talking illogical things - why is Coby suddenly a playmaker again, playing starter level minutes despite receiving the "these guys will not be featured anymore" speech from Donovan, just like Lauri?

Because we're not trying to win. The coaches know that Coby is horrible. And that's why he's playing.

[GetBuLLish]

"Subpar play"?

Are you one of those people who have just conveniently forgotten about the first half of this season when Lauri was having a career year - before covid protocols, injuries and office politics ruined it all?

Lauri Markkanen is not a good NBA player. Any rational, reasonable observer understands this by now. The Bulls almost certainly tried to unload him before the deadline but couldn't get a first round pick for him.

Lauri having a "career year" means nothing given the type of career he has had.

[MrSparkle]

In 20 years I've never really gotten too frustrated reading this board. Generally just a place to vent and share ideas on how to improve the dumpster fire since #23 retired. Debates might've gotten hot in year 1 or 2 of Doug's, Tyrus', Nocioni's careers... but by years 3-4, typically the writing is on the wall and the debate is over. We move on.

The pro-Lauri, anti-Coby dissonance (seems to go hand-in-hand, for whatever reason - obviously Coby at PG ruined what was otherwise a MIP run for Lauri) borders obsession and goes beyond rationale.

He has a good offensive skill-set and intriguing size. It's not worth paying big bucks and building around, considering flat, inconsistent empirical results and defensive issues. Does that sum up the player? Or is he a 30/10 player who needs a max contract and top-2 option usage, stuck in the worst situation ever?