Image ImageImage Image

What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine

Moderators: HomoSapien, dougthonus, kulaz3000, fleet, RedBulls23, Ice Man, Tommy Udo 6 , AshyLarrysDiaper, GimmeDat, DASMACKDOWN, Payt10

Mbrahv0528
Starter
Posts: 2,295
And1: 919
Joined: May 19, 2010
       

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#121 » by Mbrahv0528 » Wed Jun 10, 2020 6:55 pm

Shai was and still is a great prospect? Kinda kills your narrative

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app
MrSparkle
RealGM
Posts: 15,519
And1: 5,163
Joined: Jul 31, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#122 » by MrSparkle » Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:11 pm

Showtime23 wrote:
MrSparkle wrote:
I'm definitely not on-board with "dumping" Zach. I'm into the idea of trading him if he can net a star return like Simmons, but I realize that's a long-shot hypothetical. The decision of resigning him to a bigger contract is difficult and should be considered. But what you do have is a high-ceiling problem with problems mainly regarding fundamentals.

We know the league is different. It's not like the 80s and early 90s where guys left college with most fundamentals in-grained. Zach literally without structure. I think a few more years with Thibs and no ACL tear would've had him on the right track. I would definitely not write off a 25 year old player who averaged almost 30 ppg.

I dunno, maybe a less similar (style) but parallel player comparison would be Jerry Stackhouse.


ppg doesnt mean jack when guys like Shai (type of two way player, less usg im talking abt) already eclipsed him and this is a guy that was not a great prospect. Meaning he had a way better understanding of the game from yr 1 and already figured everything out by yr 2 to become the next perennial allstar.

How do you know whether to dump a player or not? Simply, if your committing more resources than the output he is producing, you dump him. Hence why Rose was dumped, and Noah so on. Dunno why so many are caught in fantasy land. No one is going to trade away a star for our trash and an all time talent like Simmons will never play for Chicago. Just look at his jacked muscle. Looks like the next Lebron incoming. Expecting a player that has no fundamentals whatsoever to become the next MJ is just a pipedream and hating on Lavine. I have following this guy from UCLA and wanted him drafted in the first place but def not for this stupid experiment.
To a lesser degree, even White has some of those concerns it really worries me literally every Chicago prospects has some serious defect.


Well, IMO the Rose trade was a mistake. Didn't like it then, and definitely don't like it in hindsight. Would've rather had the expiring cap-space than the mediocre players (Lopez and Jerian). Noah wasn't dumped, he walked (and rightfully so, injuries completely took their toll on a defensive/hustle specialist by the 2014 playoffs - completely opposite player and situation to Zach).

Zach is outputting more than his salary is worth. There aren't many 20 PER guards making $20m in the NBA (excluding rookie contracts). Yeah, there are some exciting young guards like Shai, Trae, Fox, Morant far outproducing their rookie salaries. But if you look at the rest of the top-20 guards in PER, scoring, efficiency... you see that they are mostly on max contracts. Few anomalies (Rose, Dinwiddie), but Zach is in that range of top-30 guard production at half the price.

Again, if the Bulls have a more offensive cohesion under a new coach next year, and the team's efficiency improves, then an offer like Zach, some combo of Lauri/Gafford/Wendell, this year's and future FRPs.... that's a blockbuster trade concoction. I don't know what the future holds. I'll say that in 2016, I did not expect Kawhi to change teams twice. I did not expect Davis and Lebron to be playing LAL. I did not expect Durant to tear an ACL and team up with Kyrie in BRK. Look at all this player movement.... it's literally a race to be ready for the unexpected.
bullsnewdynasty
RealGM
Posts: 23,318
And1: 2,238
Joined: Sep 11, 2009

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#123 » by bullsnewdynasty » Thu Jun 11, 2020 1:19 am

johnnyvann840 wrote:
bullsnewdynasty wrote:Rose was always a net negative defensively yet people never fixated on it the same way they do for LaVine. I don't know if that was because Rose was a homegrown talent or not but I never heard anybody say Rose should've been a 6th man. Maybe because Rose had a great coach and defensive team around him?


What are you talking about? Derrick was not "always a net negative defensively". He was actually an above average PG in the league defensively in his prime. Whereas, Zach is not only one of the worst defensive guards in the league but one of the worst defensive players overall in the league. Also, we are talking about a league MVP who was an overall net positive player who played on a team with very little offensive talent around him. The fact is that the Bulls were always better when Derrick was on the floor. Lavine for his entire career has been an overall net negative player. Even on one of the worst teams in the NBA he still couldn't stay in net positive territory except for about a half a season when his replacement players were G league level talent or guys who shouldn't even be in the NBA.


He was never a good defender. The Bulls won 45 to 50 games without him because the team defense was that good.

My point is that LaVine can work if you put a good defensive team around him. People act like his individual defense kills the team when the rest of the team is also bad at defense yet nobody talks about it.
dice
RealGM
Posts: 36,430
And1: 9,700
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#124 » by dice » Thu Jun 11, 2020 3:25 am

bullsnewdynasty wrote:
johnnyvann840 wrote:
bullsnewdynasty wrote:Rose was always a net negative defensively yet people never fixated on it the same way they do for LaVine. I don't know if that was because Rose was a homegrown talent or not but I never heard anybody say Rose should've been a 6th man. Maybe because Rose had a great coach and defensive team around him?


What are you talking about? Derrick was not "always a net negative defensively". He was actually an above average PG in the league defensively in his prime. Whereas, Zach is not only one of the worst defensive guards in the league but one of the worst defensive players overall in the league. Also, we are talking about a league MVP who was an overall net positive player who played on a team with very little offensive talent around him. The fact is that the Bulls were always better when Derrick was on the floor. Lavine for his entire career has been an overall net negative player. Even on one of the worst teams in the NBA he still couldn't stay in net positive territory except for about a half a season when his replacement players were G league level talent or guys who shouldn't even be in the NBA.


He was never a good defender. The Bulls won 45 to 50 games without him because the team defense was that good.

team defense was ranked 1st and 2nd in his two prime seasons. it fell 6th/2nd/11th in thib's last 3 seasons. derrick also had career highs in steals rate and blocks rate specifically in those two seasons. they were also the only 2 seasons in his career that he had a positive DBPM (which is harder for a point guard to achieve)
"all those muscles ain't gonna help you tonight. i'm gonna bust you up" - larry bird to rookie anthony mason before going for 29/18/11
User avatar
PaKii94
Head Coach
Posts: 6,687
And1: 3,544
Joined: Aug 22, 2013
     

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#125 » by PaKii94 » Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:50 pm

So total bulls nerd move but I've started rewatching this year's games now that we have more context. Two things I've realized is Lauri's game is fully dependent on pick and pop game. He uses that to get the ball in motion and ready for drives. If he gets the ball in those spots, more likely than not he excels.

Unfortunately, the other thing I've noticed is Zach doesn't know how to run the pick and pop. He's not bad at transition passing and pick and roll dump offs but he's horrid at pnp. I saw him take double takes on multiple plays when he spots Lauri open on pick and pops.
User avatar
Showtime23
Veteran
Posts: 2,993
And1: 914
Joined: Oct 12, 2018

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#126 » by Showtime23 » Sun Jun 21, 2020 8:44 pm

bullsnewdynasty wrote:
johnnyvann840 wrote:
bullsnewdynasty wrote:Rose was always a net negative defensively yet people never fixated on it the same way they do for LaVine. I don't know if that was because Rose was a homegrown talent or not but I never heard anybody say Rose should've been a 6th man. Maybe because Rose had a great coach and defensive team around him?


What are you talking about? Derrick was not "always a net negative defensively". He was actually an above average PG in the league defensively in his prime. Whereas, Zach is not only one of the worst defensive guards in the league but one of the worst defensive players overall in the league. Also, we are talking about a league MVP who was an overall net positive player who played on a team with very little offensive talent around him. The fact is that the Bulls were always better when Derrick was on the floor. Lavine for his entire career has been an overall net negative player. Even on one of the worst teams in the NBA he still couldn't stay in net positive territory except for about a half a season when his replacement players were G league level talent or guys who shouldn't even be in the NBA.


He was never a good defender. The Bulls won 45 to 50 games without him because the team defense was that good.

My point is that LaVine can work if you put a good defensive team around him. People act like his individual defense kills the team when the rest of the team is also bad at defense yet nobody talks about it.


Wait you gotta be serious. I like Lavine as a person but one of the reason why I hate him so much as a Bull is that he plays no defense which makes his ceiling Jamal Crawfordesque. If he played a lick of defense which he does 1 in every 10 game, I would be willing to hand over the entire franchise. But unfortunately hes just not what your claiming about.
Like if Lavine played 10% of Roses defense, I would retire him as a Bull but his brain just thinks he just needs to score.
I dont know how he went to UCLA with that kind of bbiq. Him and White are basically grade school toddlers Boylen had to teach bc they have never played in a well coordinated system before. They are literally athletes (Derrick Jones) that happen to play ball.




In case you didnt follow the Bulls before, watch from 50 seconds. In his prime, he was a great defender like Wade infamous for chasedown blocks and converts it into a 4pt swing. Lavine will never do this in his entire career.
WindyCityBorn
RealGM
Posts: 12,898
And1: 6,230
Joined: Jun 26, 2014
     

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#127 » by WindyCityBorn » Sun Jun 21, 2020 9:14 pm

PaKii94 wrote:So total bulls nerd move but I've started rewatching this year's games now that we have more context. Two things I've realized is Lauri's game is fully dependent on pick and pop game. He uses that to get the ball in motion and ready for drives. If he gets the ball in those spots, more likely than not he excels.

Unfortunately, the other thing I've noticed is Zach doesn't know how to run the pick and pop. He's not bad at transition passing and pick and roll dump offs but he's horrid at pnp. I saw him take double takes on multiple plays when he spots Lauri open on pick and pops.


Re-watching Bulls games seems like torture.
kodo
RealGM
Posts: 13,759
And1: 8,573
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
Location: Wrigleyville

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#128 » by kodo » Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:23 pm

PaKii94 wrote:Unfortunately, the other thing I've noticed is Zach doesn't know how to run the pick and pop. He's not bad at transition passing and pick and roll dump offs but he's horrid at pnp. I saw him take double takes on multiple plays when he spots Lauri open on pick and pops.


Nobody on this team got more open shots than Lauri. With the closest defender 6'+ away, Markkanen led the Bulls in open shot attempts. He averaged 3.5 "wide open" 3 point attempts per game. Lavine had to shoot under more duress, only 2.1 open 3s per game.

In context, Trae Young who starts with the ball in his hands and is prone to jacking up a 3 well beyond the line, averaged almost the same amount of open 3s at 3.8 per game.

Lauri had a lot of problems this year, but the # of open shots his team gave him was not one of them.
User avatar
PaKii94
Head Coach
Posts: 6,687
And1: 3,544
Joined: Aug 22, 2013
     

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#129 » by PaKii94 » Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:24 pm

WindyCityBorn wrote:
PaKii94 wrote:So total bulls nerd move but I've started rewatching this year's games now that we have more context. Two things I've realized is Lauri's game is fully dependent on pick and pop game. He uses that to get the ball in motion and ready for drives. If he gets the ball in those spots, more likely than not he excels.

Unfortunately, the other thing I've noticed is Zach doesn't know how to run the pick and pop. He's not bad at transition passing and pick and roll dump offs but he's horrid at pnp. I saw him take double takes on multiple plays when he spots Lauri open on pick and pops.


Re-watching Bulls games seems like torture.


I'm slowly going through November now lol. Guess I like the pain :lol:
User avatar
PaKii94
Head Coach
Posts: 6,687
And1: 3,544
Joined: Aug 22, 2013
     

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#130 » by PaKii94 » Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:51 pm

kodo wrote:
PaKii94 wrote:Unfortunately, the other thing I've noticed is Zach doesn't know how to run the pick and pop. He's not bad at transition passing and pick and roll dump offs but he's horrid at pnp. I saw him take double takes on multiple plays when he spots Lauri open on pick and pops.


Nobody on this team got more open shots than Lauri. With the closest defender 6'+ away, Markkanen led the Bulls in open shot attempts. He averaged 3.5 "wide open" 3 point attempts per game. Lavine had to shoot under more duress, only 2.1 open 3s per game.

In context, Trae Young who starts with the ball in his hands and is prone to jacking up a 3 well beyond the line, averaged almost the same amount of open 3s at 3.8 per game.

Lauri had a lot of problems this year, but the # of open shots his team gave him was not one of them.


Not disagreeing with anything you're saying lol. Lauri's shot was wayyyy off early on. That's on him.

The pnp point was for generating more looks for drives. As I said earlier in that post, Lauri's whole game is dependent on getting the ball on the move in that pnp situation so he can drive to the rim. Archi + Sato are really good at the setup. Lavine not so much (I think he did get better with it as the year went on but initially Lavine was deer in headlights) but that could be an explanation of why Lauri and Lavine don't usually have good games together

--

A comment on Lauri's shot: I think his cold streak got extended due to the oblique injury, otherwise I think we would have seen him return to form sooner. The main culprit was the wing shots which from the games I've watched so far Lauri's foot work was bad (that's on him). Before the oblique stuff he was shooting 44% from the corners and top of the key (43 3pa) [these are more set catch and shoot shots] and 22% from the wing (32 3pa)


After the oblique stuff, his hot month, he was at 45% from corners and top of key (62 3pa) but he raised his wings from 22% to 36.7% (68 3pa). For some reason the right wing has given him trouble this season. During the hot streak he was at 40% on the left and 32% from the right.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,615
And1: 6,819
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#131 » by dougthonus » Mon Jun 22, 2020 2:16 pm

bullsnewdynasty wrote:He was never a good defender. The Bulls won 45 to 50 games without him because the team defense was that good.


Felt Derrick was a very good defender his last 2 healthy seasons.

My point is that LaVine can work if you put a good defensive team around him. People act like his individual defense kills the team when the rest of the team is also bad at defense yet nobody talks about it.


Agree that it's not so hard to hide one poor wing defender.
User avatar
kyrv
RealGM
Posts: 60,031
And1: 3,616
Joined: Jan 02, 2003
Location: Intimidated by TNT

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#132 » by kyrv » Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:53 am

PaKii94 wrote:
WindyCityBorn wrote:
PaKii94 wrote:So total bulls nerd move but I've started rewatching this year's games now that we have more context. Two things I've realized is Lauri's game is fully dependent on pick and pop game. He uses that to get the ball in motion and ready for drives. If he gets the ball in those spots, more likely than not he excels.

Unfortunately, the other thing I've noticed is Zach doesn't know how to run the pick and pop. He's not bad at transition passing and pick and roll dump offs but he's horrid at pnp. I saw him take double takes on multiple plays when he spots Lauri open on pick and pops.


Re-watching Bulls games seems like torture.


I'm slowly going through November now lol. Guess I like the pain :lol:


;p Major kudos to you! Are you finding things better or worse than we first thought, or is it a mixed bag?
User avatar
PaKii94
Head Coach
Posts: 6,687
And1: 3,544
Joined: Aug 22, 2013
     

Re: What no one ever coherently explained to me about Lavine 

Post#133 » by PaKii94 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:22 am

kyrv wrote:
PaKii94 wrote:
WindyCityBorn wrote:
Re-watching Bulls games seems like torture.


I'm slowly going through November now lol. Guess I like the pain :lol:


;p Major kudos to you! Are you finding things better or worse than we first thought, or is it a mixed bag?


I'm quite more optimistic for next season than I was earlier this year. The talent of our young players is still there, it was suppressed by the (nonexistent) broken offensive system and the high gamble high risk defense Boylen wanted to commandeer.

This put pretty much every player out of their spots/roles.

This is what I typed out in the other thread:

I've been rewatching the games and watching them again, it seems like the biggest problem with the offense is there is no offensive system. Boylen put all his eggs in the blitzing defense basket and for offense he took the analytics mandate and implemented "pass the ball, only take 3s and layups" without any nuance.

The offense should have been heavy on Lauri/Lavine in the first few games. Instead it was "equal balance". That's why everyone's post game interview was usually "we are trying to find our offensive role".

That's why the offense devolved into Lavine/Coby iso ball
during tough situations and only those two had "good" years and not down years like everyone else. This team was like top 3 youngest in the league! They need a structure and need to learn how to win. Not to be thrown into the fire to just make things happen.

Then add in the tough defense that was too unbalanced (easy bucket for the other team if not everyone is tuned on a string) and didn't cater to 90% of our players (you need lengthy wings to play that type of defense...instead we downsized to 3 guard rotations)


-Without the system, that over burdens scoring guards and depresses everyone else.

-Coby was neutered early on. First few games they let him play PG. He took a few bad shots for 2 games and they put him off ball. I'm in mid nov. I remember after all-star break I noticed he started balling again when put at PG

-WCJ does so much for the baseline of this team. People don't remember he injured his thumb at the beginning of the season and he was playing through it.

-Thad is washed and ass as a vet. Both the offense/defense didn't suit his play.

-Otto is the key player for this team. When he's healthy the bulls are a much more oiled machine. He takes the playmaking/play creating burden from Lavine.

-Lavine was straight ass for the first few games. It seems like a turnover every time he touches the ball and multiple blown defensive assignments. However in his defense, the offense wasn't utilizing him correctly at all.

-Lauri actually looked good outside of the open shot clanks. What changed between his opener and the games after is he went from looking to score first at every touch/drive to looking to pass first at every drive.
The problem with this is the people he kicked out to WCJ/Dunn are bad shooters. He had a few nice outlet passes and hockey assists.

-Kornet was very meh but again, bad system.

-Sato hasn't disappointed so far but he hasn't overachieved

-the only person to overachieve is Dunn. And that was supposed to be expected. The high gambling defense is tailor made for his aggressive style.

Return to Chicago Bulls