Image ImageImage Image

Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine

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

User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 12,929
And1: 8,103
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#161 » by TheSuzerain » Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:30 pm

othawhitemeat wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:
Jcool0 wrote:
You were better off calling him a good passer. At lest you could of made a realistic argument for that.

He is 8th in the league in assists per game. Other than the uber-usage players (LeBron, Trae, Luka, Lillard), he's only behind Rubio, Simmons, and Lowry.

He averages less turnovers than any of those guys. He averages more assists than Harden.

He does this in Charlotte where it's not like there is a ton of supporting talent (they are 29th in O-Rating).

Offensively he's a lot like Lowry. Maybe with better handles/pull-up game.


I do like Graham paired w Coby. If there is any way to get thhe 1st this year paired w Graham, why not.

Give me Graham with Haliburton. We'll go from perhaps the dumbest team in the league to one that can actually play good team basketball.

I think it would astound this forum how quickly Lauri/Wendell would turn things around if we had actual playmaking talent in the lineup instead of mindless gunners at the guard spots.
User avatar
Jcool0
General Manager
Posts: 8,578
And1: 5,064
Joined: Jul 12, 2014
Location: Illinois
         

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#162 » by Jcool0 » Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:55 pm

The key to winning... Start a 6'1" PG with average athleticism. Working wonders for Cleveland.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 12,929
And1: 8,103
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#163 » by TheSuzerain » Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:12 pm

Jcool0 wrote:The key to winning... Start a 6'1" PG with average athleticism. Working wonders for Cleveland.

The most recent NBA champs closed out games with two 6' guards.
DarkXaero
General Manager
Posts: 9,840
And1: 2,635
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#164 » by DarkXaero » Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:32 pm

chefo wrote:Zach seems like a really good, serious dude. Let's get that out of the way. He doesn't seem like a prima donna, or a spoiled child, but rather a guy who knows he's good, but can't understand why it never translates in the W column.

After his first half season, I opined that the Bulls will inevitably do the stupid thing because of political and marketing purposes and make him a lead guard with super high usage... and if that is the case, the Bulls will not break low/mid 30 Ws while that lasts.

The Wolves tried Zach as a lead/PG for a couple of years, and it drove his coaches insane on top of being an unmitigated disaster. Go lookup Sam Mitchell's comments from way back then about how Zach doesn't know HOW to play ball. He just did not have the technique, or the understanding and just got by on his natural talents.

Zach has obviously put in a ton of work over the years--his jumper and shooting motion is one of the smoothest I've ever seen. When open, he's pretty much money from anywhere within 30 feet. The guy overcame an injury that has wrecked many a career. It shows resilience and dedication.

The problem is not with him, per say... it's how the Bulls have decided to use him and I stand by that old statement. His one biggest weakness is that he does not see the game well, neither on O, nor on D. That's why he can't anticipate what's about to happen, nor see the triple team in the lane when he drives. That's why he does not rotate well on D, or at all many times.

But, he is an insanely talented scorer, if put in the right spots and the only player apart from Lauri on the current team that has 'gravity'. The Dubs pre-Durant showed how you use two players with gravity... and that is, get somebody else (Dray) who moves the ball very well and sees the game, and have these two (Steph and Klay) move constantly, off-ball. That was Kerr's genius and why Mark Jackson couldn't get anywhere with almost the same roster. When you put the ball in the hands on an elite shooter and ask him to create, you actually emphasize his weaknesses (unless they are an all-time great) because he needs to make decisions on the P&R, when to pass, when to drive, etc... and that is with two extremely high IQ players. If you remember, the pre-Kerr Dubs were in essence Klay and Steph taking turns going solo with some David Lee P&R thrown in there. These guys still got numbers, and won some, but a simple change in play style (and Dray + Iggy facilitating) turned them into a dynasty.

That's how Zach has to be used on a good team. The D can't afford to lose him or else he'd be dunking or shooting open 3s all night. He'll have to learn to move off ball and cut and the like, but unlike real-time feel for the game, moving off-ball CAN be taught. And there is evidence to back that up--some of Zach's best games as a Bull came when he was a catch-and-shoot, catch-and-dunk player.

But, the Bulls need a playmaker or two who sees the field well. I was hoping that can be WCJ when he got drafted, but he's been put in the garbage-man role. It's not Lauri--Lauri needs a playmaker more than anybody else on the team. The Bulls need a poor-man's Scottie at the 3 real, real bad, if Coby is to start. In other words, the Bulls need at least two very bright players that touch the ball in good spots a lot. Bam for example, will make Zach look much better, just like a healthy and engaged Otto did for that brief stint.

Anyhow, on topic--I don't see what the NY teams can possibly offer that makes sense for the Bulls. If Zach is used as I described and is a 21 ppg off-ball scorer at 60% TS, he'd be worth the 25-30M he'll get on his next contract, if the cap moves back up. But, Zach as your lead guard and 35% usage is like a homeless-man Harden and that is only good for high lottery most years.
Good informative post, much appreciated. Just curious to see what would you ideally want if Lavine had to be traded. Because no disrespect intended but I feel that both NY teams have enough to make a trade for Lavine. I do agree that Lavine is potentially a 20+ PPG scorer on 60+ TS% if placed on a good team that knows how to use him, which makes him pretty valuable. But like you've mentioned, his deficiencies as a player are pretty serious, and he remains a huge negative on the defensive end, which limits his value as a player to a good team. That being said, I'm curious to see what would you guys see as a good return for Lavine, if you had to trade him.
User avatar
Vince Strong
Rookie
Posts: 1,169
And1: 38
Joined: Jul 08, 2010

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#165 » by Vince Strong » Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:52 pm

TheFinishSniper wrote:Only reason they are interested is because of new FO. In past Zach was only available for top pick or superstar in return. Let's be real neither was possible. But they think new managment with AK is soft and is maybe willing sell for less.

Bulls fans shouldnt get excited about possibile good haul.



Where the **** do you guys get this ****, good god. I doubt they think AK's 'soft'. Its more probable that with a new 'regime' the current players may not fit the long term vision of the regime and other GM's are feeling him out, dont you think? Nah, its probably cause they think hes soft.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 12,929
And1: 8,103
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#166 » by TheSuzerain » Thu Jul 30, 2020 9:03 pm

DarkXaero wrote:
chefo wrote:Zach seems like a really good, serious dude. Let's get that out of the way. He doesn't seem like a prima donna, or a spoiled child, but rather a guy who knows he's good, but can't understand why it never translates in the W column.

After his first half season, I opined that the Bulls will inevitably do the stupid thing because of political and marketing purposes and make him a lead guard with super high usage... and if that is the case, the Bulls will not break low/mid 30 Ws while that lasts.

The Wolves tried Zach as a lead/PG for a couple of years, and it drove his coaches insane on top of being an unmitigated disaster. Go lookup Sam Mitchell's comments from way back then about how Zach doesn't know HOW to play ball. He just did not have the technique, or the understanding and just got by on his natural talents.

Zach has obviously put in a ton of work over the years--his jumper and shooting motion is one of the smoothest I've ever seen. When open, he's pretty much money from anywhere within 30 feet. The guy overcame an injury that has wrecked many a career. It shows resilience and dedication.

The problem is not with him, per say... it's how the Bulls have decided to use him and I stand by that old statement. His one biggest weakness is that he does not see the game well, neither on O, nor on D. That's why he can't anticipate what's about to happen, nor see the triple team in the lane when he drives. That's why he does not rotate well on D, or at all many times.

But, he is an insanely talented scorer, if put in the right spots and the only player apart from Lauri on the current team that has 'gravity'. The Dubs pre-Durant showed how you use two players with gravity... and that is, get somebody else (Dray) who moves the ball very well and sees the game, and have these two (Steph and Klay) move constantly, off-ball. That was Kerr's genius and why Mark Jackson couldn't get anywhere with almost the same roster. When you put the ball in the hands on an elite shooter and ask him to create, you actually emphasize his weaknesses (unless they are an all-time great) because he needs to make decisions on the P&R, when to pass, when to drive, etc... and that is with two extremely high IQ players. If you remember, the pre-Kerr Dubs were in essence Klay and Steph taking turns going solo with some David Lee P&R thrown in there. These guys still got numbers, and won some, but a simple change in play style (and Dray + Iggy facilitating) turned them into a dynasty.

That's how Zach has to be used on a good team. The D can't afford to lose him or else he'd be dunking or shooting open 3s all night. He'll have to learn to move off ball and cut and the like, but unlike real-time feel for the game, moving off-ball CAN be taught. And there is evidence to back that up--some of Zach's best games as a Bull came when he was a catch-and-shoot, catch-and-dunk player.

But, the Bulls need a playmaker or two who sees the field well. I was hoping that can be WCJ when he got drafted, but he's been put in the garbage-man role. It's not Lauri--Lauri needs a playmaker more than anybody else on the team. The Bulls need a poor-man's Scottie at the 3 real, real bad, if Coby is to start. In other words, the Bulls need at least two very bright players that touch the ball in good spots a lot. Bam for example, will make Zach look much better, just like a healthy and engaged Otto did for that brief stint.

Anyhow, on topic--I don't see what the NY teams can possibly offer that makes sense for the Bulls. If Zach is used as I described and is a 21 ppg off-ball scorer at 60% TS, he'd be worth the 25-30M he'll get on his next contract, if the cap moves back up. But, Zach as your lead guard and 35% usage is like a homeless-man Harden and that is only good for high lottery most years.
Good informative post, much appreciated. Just curious to see what would you ideally want if Lavine had to be traded. Because no disrespect intended but I feel that both NY teams have enough to make a trade for Lavine. I do agree that Lavine is potentially a 20+ PPG scorer on 60+ TS% if placed on a good team that knows how to use him, which makes him pretty valuable. But like you've mentioned, his deficiencies as a player are pretty serious, and he remains a huge negative on the defensive end, which limits his value as a player to a good team. That being said, I'm curious to see what would you guys see as a good return for Lavine, if you had to trade him.

If we were to trade Lavine, we would want a genuinely promising young player with a higher ceiling than Lavine's current level. If not an actual young player, I think we would want the draft capital to presumably draft such a player on our own.

Certainly not expecting a top tier prospect (e.g. Zion (lol), Morant, bona fide future star). But I think there's a tier of young player below that which Lavine could be worth. There's probably quite a few teams that have such a player in that tier who would pass on the trade, but I still think it's what they should be asking for.

Zach has his warts, but I think he could fit quite nicely offensively as a 2nd option somewhere next to an actual first-option who runs the show. No arguments here that he's an inadequate 1st option, but those typically don't get traded. Neither do 2nd option scorers either which I think gives Lavine some value despite his other shortcomings.
User avatar
Jcool0
General Manager
Posts: 8,578
And1: 5,064
Joined: Jul 12, 2014
Location: Illinois
         

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#167 » by Jcool0 » Thu Jul 30, 2020 10:57 pm

TheSuzerain wrote:
Jcool0 wrote:The key to winning... Start a 6'1" PG with average athleticism. Working wonders for Cleveland.

The most recent NBA champs closed out games with two 6' guards.


Well if the Bulls can get Kawhi Leonard then by all means trade for Graham.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 12,929
And1: 8,103
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#168 » by TheSuzerain » Thu Jul 30, 2020 10:59 pm

Jcool0 wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:
Jcool0 wrote:The key to winning... Start a 6'1" PG with average athleticism. Working wonders for Cleveland.

The most recent NBA champs closed out games with two 6' guards.


Well if the Bulls can get Kawhi Leonard then by all means trade for Graham.

What the hell are you talking about?
User avatar
Jcool0
General Manager
Posts: 8,578
And1: 5,064
Joined: Jul 12, 2014
Location: Illinois
         

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#169 » by Jcool0 » Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:04 pm

TheSuzerain wrote:
Jcool0 wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:The most recent NBA champs closed out games with two 6' guards.


Well if the Bulls can get Kawhi Leonard then by all means trade for Graham.

What the hell are you talking about?


"The most recent NBA champs". So if you can get one of the best players in the NBA on the Bulls then sure it can work. But if you want to start a team with a 6'1" PG... Well good luck with that because your PG with winning intangibles won one more game then the Bulls.
DarkXaero
General Manager
Posts: 9,840
And1: 2,635
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#170 » by DarkXaero » Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:54 pm

TheSuzerain wrote:
DarkXaero wrote:
chefo wrote:Zach seems like a really good, serious dude. Let's get that out of the way. He doesn't seem like a prima donna, or a spoiled child, but rather a guy who knows he's good, but can't understand why it never translates in the W column.

After his first half season, I opined that the Bulls will inevitably do the stupid thing because of political and marketing purposes and make him a lead guard with super high usage... and if that is the case, the Bulls will not break low/mid 30 Ws while that lasts.

The Wolves tried Zach as a lead/PG for a couple of years, and it drove his coaches insane on top of being an unmitigated disaster. Go lookup Sam Mitchell's comments from way back then about how Zach doesn't know HOW to play ball. He just did not have the technique, or the understanding and just got by on his natural talents.

Zach has obviously put in a ton of work over the years--his jumper and shooting motion is one of the smoothest I've ever seen. When open, he's pretty much money from anywhere within 30 feet. The guy overcame an injury that has wrecked many a career. It shows resilience and dedication.

The problem is not with him, per say... it's how the Bulls have decided to use him and I stand by that old statement. His one biggest weakness is that he does not see the game well, neither on O, nor on D. That's why he can't anticipate what's about to happen, nor see the triple team in the lane when he drives. That's why he does not rotate well on D, or at all many times.

But, he is an insanely talented scorer, if put in the right spots and the only player apart from Lauri on the current team that has 'gravity'. The Dubs pre-Durant showed how you use two players with gravity... and that is, get somebody else (Dray) who moves the ball very well and sees the game, and have these two (Steph and Klay) move constantly, off-ball. That was Kerr's genius and why Mark Jackson couldn't get anywhere with almost the same roster. When you put the ball in the hands on an elite shooter and ask him to create, you actually emphasize his weaknesses (unless they are an all-time great) because he needs to make decisions on the P&R, when to pass, when to drive, etc... and that is with two extremely high IQ players. If you remember, the pre-Kerr Dubs were in essence Klay and Steph taking turns going solo with some David Lee P&R thrown in there. These guys still got numbers, and won some, but a simple change in play style (and Dray + Iggy facilitating) turned them into a dynasty.

That's how Zach has to be used on a good team. The D can't afford to lose him or else he'd be dunking or shooting open 3s all night. He'll have to learn to move off ball and cut and the like, but unlike real-time feel for the game, moving off-ball CAN be taught. And there is evidence to back that up--some of Zach's best games as a Bull came when he was a catch-and-shoot, catch-and-dunk player.

But, the Bulls need a playmaker or two who sees the field well. I was hoping that can be WCJ when he got drafted, but he's been put in the garbage-man role. It's not Lauri--Lauri needs a playmaker more than anybody else on the team. The Bulls need a poor-man's Scottie at the 3 real, real bad, if Coby is to start. In other words, the Bulls need at least two very bright players that touch the ball in good spots a lot. Bam for example, will make Zach look much better, just like a healthy and engaged Otto did for that brief stint.

Anyhow, on topic--I don't see what the NY teams can possibly offer that makes sense for the Bulls. If Zach is used as I described and is a 21 ppg off-ball scorer at 60% TS, he'd be worth the 25-30M he'll get on his next contract, if the cap moves back up. But, Zach as your lead guard and 35% usage is like a homeless-man Harden and that is only good for high lottery most years.
Good informative post, much appreciated. Just curious to see what would you ideally want if Lavine had to be traded. Because no disrespect intended but I feel that both NY teams have enough to make a trade for Lavine. I do agree that Lavine is potentially a 20+ PPG scorer on 60+ TS% if placed on a good team that knows how to use him, which makes him pretty valuable. But like you've mentioned, his deficiencies as a player are pretty serious, and he remains a huge negative on the defensive end, which limits his value as a player to a good team. That being said, I'm curious to see what would you guys see as a good return for Lavine, if you had to trade him.

If we were to trade Lavine, we would want a genuinely promising young player with a higher ceiling than Lavine's current level. If not an actual young player, I think we would want the draft capital to presumably draft such a player on our own.

Certainly not expecting a top tier prospect (e.g. Zion (lol), Morant, bona fide future star). But I think there's a tier of young player below that which Lavine could be worth. There's probably quite a few teams that have such a player in that tier who would pass on the trade, but I still think it's what they should be asking for.

Zach has his warts, but I think he could fit quite nicely offensively as a 2nd option somewhere next to an actual first-option who runs the show. No arguments here that he's an inadequate 1st option, but those typically don't get traded. Neither do 2nd option scorers either which I think gives Lavine some value despite his other shortcomings.
If Lavine's ceiling is an all star caliber guard, then the tier above him is a superstar prospect. You aren't getting a Ja Morant, Zion type prospect for Zach, and you say that there is a tier below that, but who would be those players?
User avatar
Showtime23
Analyst
Posts: 3,317
And1: 993
Joined: Oct 12, 2018

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#171 » by Showtime23 » Sat Aug 1, 2020 12:16 am

TheSuzerain wrote:
Certainly not expecting a top tier prospect (e.g. Zion (lol), Morant, bona fide future star). But I think there's a tier of young player below that which Lavine could be worth. There's probably quite a few teams that have such a player in that tier who would pass on the trade, but I still think it's what they should be asking for.

Zach has his warts, but I think he could fit quite nicely offensively as a 2nd option somewhere next to an actual first-option who runs the show. No arguments here that he's an inadequate 1st option, but those typically don't get traded. Neither do 2nd option scorers either which I think gives Lavine some value despite his other shortcomings.


Why would a lottery team would trade a younger prospect than Lavine thats locked in a rookie contract?
Unless your expecting late draft prospects like Clarke, Thybulle theres no such guy that exists on the planet.
Instead of greeding for a bluechip prospect every team wants, its wiser to ask a top pick this draft every gm is shunning and build through the draft. People in this forum often misunderstand trading for draft picks takes 5 yrs to rebuild but if you luck into Morant caliber, you can make it to the playoffs next yr. You can even split Lavine into 3 mid picks and if all 3 of them make a splash similar to Kendrick Nunn its a great start.
Dez
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,776
And1: 5,170
Joined: Jul 23, 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
 

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#172 » by Dez » Sat Aug 1, 2020 4:56 am

Showtime23 wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:
Certainly not expecting a top tier prospect (e.g. Zion (lol), Morant, bona fide future star). But I think there's a tier of young player below that which Lavine could be worth. There's probably quite a few teams that have such a player in that tier who would pass on the trade, but I still think it's what they should be asking for.

Zach has his warts, but I think he could fit quite nicely offensively as a 2nd option somewhere next to an actual first-option who runs the show. No arguments here that he's an inadequate 1st option, but those typically don't get traded. Neither do 2nd option scorers either which I think gives Lavine some value despite his other shortcomings.


Why would a lottery team would trade a younger prospect than Lavine thats locked in a rookie contract?
Unless your expecting late draft prospects like Clarke, Thybulle theres no such guy that exists on the planet.
Instead of greeding for a bluechip prospect every team wants, its wiser to ask a top pick this draft every gm is shunning and build through the draft. People in this forum often misunderstand trading for draft picks takes 5 yrs to rebuild but if you luck into Morant caliber, you can make it to the playoffs next yr. You can even split Lavine into 3 mid picks and if all 3 of them make a splash similar to Kendrick Nunn its a great start.


There is literally zero logical sense in this post.

- Trade LaVine for a top pick in this draft that every GM is shunning.
- Build through the draft.

So every GM is "shunning" this draft yet the Bulls should trade LaVine for a top pick and build through this draft?

People misunderstand trading for draft picks takes five years to rebuild? Got any sort of basis for this claim? Reading this post gives me the impression it is actually you that misunderstands.

Split LaVine into 3 mid picks in this draft that apparently every GM is "shunning" and if all three of them are good it's a great start? In your typical trade LaVine rampage you're advocating this draft sucks but the Bulls should trade the proven NBA talent for either a top pick in this crap draft or three mid picks in this crap draft.

You're asking Chicago to throw random s*** at the wall and see what sticks, absolutely no logical thought or rationale went into that post.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 12,929
And1: 8,103
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#173 » by TheSuzerain » Sat Aug 1, 2020 12:45 pm

DarkXaero wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:
DarkXaero wrote:Good informative post, much appreciated. Just curious to see what would you ideally want if Lavine had to be traded. Because no disrespect intended but I feel that both NY teams have enough to make a trade for Lavine. I do agree that Lavine is potentially a 20+ PPG scorer on 60+ TS% if placed on a good team that knows how to use him, which makes him pretty valuable. But like you've mentioned, his deficiencies as a player are pretty serious, and he remains a huge negative on the defensive end, which limits his value as a player to a good team. That being said, I'm curious to see what would you guys see as a good return for Lavine, if you had to trade him.

If we were to trade Lavine, we would want a genuinely promising young player with a higher ceiling than Lavine's current level. If not an actual young player, I think we would want the draft capital to presumably draft such a player on our own.

Certainly not expecting a top tier prospect (e.g. Zion (lol), Morant, bona fide future star). But I think there's a tier of young player below that which Lavine could be worth. There's probably quite a few teams that have such a player in that tier who would pass on the trade, but I still think it's what they should be asking for.

Zach has his warts, but I think he could fit quite nicely offensively as a 2nd option somewhere next to an actual first-option who runs the show. No arguments here that he's an inadequate 1st option, but those typically don't get traded. Neither do 2nd option scorers either which I think gives Lavine some value despite his other shortcomings.
If Lavine's ceiling is an all star caliber guard, then the tier above him is a superstar prospect. You aren't getting a Ja Morant, Zion type prospect for Zach, and you say that there is a tier below that, but who would be those players?

Lavine's ceiling isn't actually an all star caliber guard. He's an all star caliber scorer and that's it. Sure he could squeak in given how the all star game works, but he's just not a top 25 player in the league.

Names that come to mind: Isaac, Clarke, Graham, Shai
pipfan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,722
And1: 1,410
Joined: Aug 07, 2010

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#174 » by pipfan » Sat Aug 1, 2020 1:41 pm

Lavine is a very solid #2 option. I think he would be worth a 4-8 pick in this draft, plus salary relief. I would LOVE to get the NY pick, and make them add the Dallas 2021 unprotected 1st, but I doubt it
DarkXaero
General Manager
Posts: 9,840
And1: 2,635
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#175 » by DarkXaero » Sat Aug 1, 2020 7:05 pm

TheSuzerain wrote:
DarkXaero wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:If we were to trade Lavine, we would want a genuinely promising young player with a higher ceiling than Lavine's current level. If not an actual young player, I think we would want the draft capital to presumably draft such a player on our own.

Certainly not expecting a top tier prospect (e.g. Zion (lol), Morant, bona fide future star). But I think there's a tier of young player below that which Lavine could be worth. There's probably quite a few teams that have such a player in that tier who would pass on the trade, but I still think it's what they should be asking for.

Zach has his warts, but I think he could fit quite nicely offensively as a 2nd option somewhere next to an actual first-option who runs the show. No arguments here that he's an inadequate 1st option, but those typically don't get traded. Neither do 2nd option scorers either which I think gives Lavine some value despite his other shortcomings.
If Lavine's ceiling is an all star caliber guard, then the tier above him is a superstar prospect. You aren't getting a Ja Morant, Zion type prospect for Zach, and you say that there is a tier below that, but who would be those players?

Lavine's ceiling isn't actually an all star caliber guard. He's an all star caliber scorer and that's it. Sure he could squeak in given how the all star game works, but he's just not a top 25 player in the league.

Names that come to mind: Isaac, Clarke, Graham, Shai
Brandon Clarke and Devonte Graham? You think those guys have higher ceiling than Lavine? Isaac is a hell of a two way talent, so I get that. SGA is also very good but there's no chance that you're getting either Isaac or SGA for Lavine.
StunnerKO
Veteran
Posts: 2,772
And1: 1,864
Joined: Sep 25, 2017

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#176 » by StunnerKO » Mon Aug 3, 2020 11:14 am

Read on Twitter
?s=21


Read on Twitter
?s=21
User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 8,405
And1: 3,718
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#177 » by Leslie Forman » Mon Aug 3, 2020 8:57 pm

Getting Graham for LaVine could be a steal. You'd have to pay me to watch a Hornets game so I haven't seen much of his play, but I wonder if that's a guy with a potential Lowry/Billups-like career path. He was 27th in RPM wins this year, 50 spots higher than LaVine. On paper he was their MVP and so you can assume he was the biggest reason they outplayed expectations. So you could argue Devonte Graham is already better than LaVine.

Again, that's just on paper…but it's not like LaVine is giving you any off-paper intangibles.

Return to Chicago Bulls


cron