Image ImageImage Image

Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine

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

wonderboy2
Veteran
Posts: 2,855
And1: 1,816
Joined: Jul 05, 2013

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#101 » by wonderboy2 » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:07 am

dice wrote:
wonderboy2 wrote:
dice wrote:clearly false. and you understand basketball economics even less

"dur, zach lavine shoot good and jump real high. he must be great!"

Stop embarrassing yourself man lol. Sometimes I don’t even have to look at the posters name and know it’s you by some of the bull you be posting man. I’m actually shocked when you have a quality post.

all i need to see is 'lol' and "you be posting"

aren't you the same person who just said that the knicks could be scary w/ thibs? el oh el indeed

so does wonderboy wear a cape and goggles?

Let’s not compare my track record with yours.You have posted so many dumbass things on here I can’t even begin to make a list. Many poster have said you don’t know what you talking about. I’m going to leave it at that because I got banned for calling you out before.
DarkXaero
General Manager
Posts: 9,831
And1: 2,634
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#102 » by DarkXaero » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:38 am

cjbulls wrote:And you wonder why deals never get done.... the offers here are already crazy. Barrett and their own FRP? Levert and Dinwiddie?

Zach doesn't have that value for all the negative reasons sprinkled throughout this thread. And I say this as a Zach fan.

Here is a snippet of what the Knicks board is saying (on top of all the "not interested" comments):

"If Chicago is looking to dump salary, I'll take a pick and send them DSJ."
"I’d kick the tires on Zach and Lauri but not be willing to give up too much at the same time (alternatives are there in FA and neither guy is changing the team’s trajectory enough to get too hype on). But Zach and RJ on the wings can work and Mitch, Lauri, Stretch 4 is a nice big man trio for a rotation."
"Like if the deal is Randle, Knox, and 2 1sts, one of them being the Clippers pick this year, is that a bad deal, from a pure asset standpoint? "
"Randle + Dalas picks + 1 player from Knox/Dennis/Frank would be enough? "

The Nets board didn't even bother to discuss it so far, although I just don't think the Nets have fans.

No one on either side is being realistic about what a trade would look like.
We did discuss it, it's in our thread, "Planning for next season".
pipfan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,718
And1: 1,409
Joined: Aug 07, 2010

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#103 » by pipfan » Sun Jul 26, 2020 6:46 am

What no one is mentioning is that shipping of Zach (along with Porter and Young) would hurt the win total this year, and keep us in the bottom 6. The 2021 draft looks stacked with studs, and this season coming up has a LOT of uncertainty with the virus.

It's a step back, but not a huge one because we are bad right now. Let's say we do the trade of Lavine to NY for Knox and the #6. We get
1-a #6 pick and a 3rd year player who sucks, but has upside
2-more opportunities for White, Lauri and Carter on offense
3-we stay in the bottom 6, with 2 stacked drafts coming up (the 2022 draft could be the double draft)
4-Cap space to absorb bad deals and gain more assets
5-A fresh start for a new coach and FO

So, we rebuild with White, Hutch, Lauri, Carter, Gafford-plus Knox, the #6 and the #7 pick (and the minor assets we might get from Porter or Young).

We suck this year, but this year might suck anyway with the virus messing up the 2020-21 season too.

I like Lavine, and I am fine with keeping our team, getting a new coach, drafting BPA at #7 and praying we are healthy. But, there is clear logic in dumping Lavine and others and sucking
StunnerKO
Veteran
Posts: 2,770
And1: 1,863
Joined: Sep 25, 2017

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#104 » by StunnerKO » Sun Jul 26, 2020 12:56 pm

Getting the worst record is not a promise for a top 3 pick and frankly I’m tired of it let’s just put the best team on the floor and try and look competitive and win . Free agents don’t want to go to bum teams especially if we are trying to change how people view us. I understand you need to find stars in the draft and that’s correct but geeez us purposely tanking and dishing talent out won’t do so. Not With the new draft odds
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,887
And1: 3,801
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#105 » by sco » Sun Jul 26, 2020 1:37 pm

I agree Zach is a tough one to assess.

PROS:
- Elite Athleticism
- Great shooter
- Great finisher
- Above average ball handler

CONS:
- Shoots a lot
- Inconsistently willing passer
- Inconsistent defender
- On a losing team

To me it's about what narrative one chooses to place on the cons. Does he shoot a lot because he's a chucker or there's nobody else who can make a shot on the floor? Same with passing. Is he not defending because he's lazy or because he is expending all his energy on offense? Is the team losing because of Zach or because our starters have played something like 15 games together over 2 years?

IMO, Zach has the potential to be the #2 option on a contender. I am willing to trade him for a guy that has a decent shot at being a #1 option, but those deals are rare.
:clap:
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,902
And1: 7,036
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#106 » by dougthonus » Sun Jul 26, 2020 1:52 pm

Jvaughn wrote:I disagree about Zach's value for multiple reasons. He's shown he can do much more than K-Mart. He has facilitated and played defense when his number has been called. It hasn't been consistent, but he's still young and has room to grow. And in the fact that he's on a great value contract, and you have a positive asset. I definitely don't see any viable trade where we win out in a deal, so I'd give Zach a chance with a real coach and system before you toss him away for chips.


I don't know that I would toss Zach out for a bag of chips or anything, but he's only got two years left on his current deal, so if you want to trade him and get anything for him, it will be this off-season where a team can get some good value out of him on this cheap deal.

I'm okay keeping Zach, I just said if you feel you need to reset the roster, then trading Zach now will bring back the peak value you'll ever get from him. It will be interesting to see what his value looks like next FA if he plays the next two seasons averaging 20+ points per game on good but not great efficiency, then he should be much more expensive than last contract where he was still coming off the ACL and had terrible numbers on awful efficiency and you were still just hoping.

If you don't find Zach on a 25-28M per year deal attractive on his next deal then there's absolutely a case to get out ahead of this and move him now.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,887
And1: 3,801
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#107 » by sco » Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:31 pm

:clap:
MrSparkle
RealGM
Posts: 15,633
And1: 5,256
Joined: Jul 31, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#108 » by MrSparkle » Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:33 pm

sco wrote:https://pippenainteasy.com/2020/07/25/chicago-bulls-3-possible-zach-lavine-trades-with-the-knicks/


These are pretty rationale, fair trades.

The ideas the Knicks fans posted are comical.

Anyway, I do think there’s some flexibility and logic to working out something. I don’t think Knicks fans realize they don’t have anybody remotely close to Zach’s scoring range, and the draft doesn’t address it.

We have Coby to develop. I don’t think Zach fits compliments anybody here. I also don’t think AK will want to build around him, whereas Thibs would be content giving Zach the keys and focusing on his defensive armada. The approach and stylistic goal counts for something.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,887
And1: 3,801
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#109 » by sco » Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:53 pm

MrSparkle wrote:
sco wrote:https://pippenainteasy.com/2020/07/25/chicago-bulls-3-possible-zach-lavine-trades-with-the-knicks/


These are pretty rationale, fair trades.

The ideas the Knicks fans posted are comical.

Anyway, I do think there’s some flexibility and logic to working out something. I don’t think Knicks fans realize they don’t have anybody remotely close to Zach’s scoring range, and the draft doesn’t address it.

We have Coby to develop. I don’t think Zach fits compliments anybody here. I also don’t think AK will want to build around him, whereas Thibs would be content giving Zach the keys and focusing on his defensive armada. The approach and stylistic goal counts for something.

I agree...not terrible trades, but totally see Knicks fans disagreeing.

I disagree about the part where Zach and Coby don't fit. Honestly, I think they fit pretty well. Having the 2 guard spots do the bulk of the scoring is normal in today's NBA with the 3pt shot being so important. If Coby can become a more consistent 3pt shooter, he and Zach make a deadly backcourt tandem. I also think that both guys are/can become "average defenders".
:clap:
cjbulls
Starter
Posts: 2,037
And1: 722
Joined: Jun 26, 2018

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#110 » by cjbulls » Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:58 pm

MrSparkle wrote:
sco wrote:https://pippenainteasy.com/2020/07/25/chicago-bulls-3-possible-zach-lavine-trades-with-the-knicks/


These are pretty rationale, fair trades.

The ideas the Knicks fans posted are comical.

Anyway, I do think there’s some flexibility and logic to working out something. I don’t think Knicks fans realize they don’t have anybody remotely close to Zach’s scoring range, and the draft doesn’t address it.

We have Coby to develop. I don’t think Zach fits compliments anybody here. I also don’t think AK will want to build around him, whereas Thibs would be content giving Zach the keys and focusing on his defensive armada. The approach and stylistic goal counts for something.


These were not fair. This line is the worst:

"About the only way that the Knicks are going to be able to pull off a trade deal with the Bulls to get their hands on LaVine is by trading at least one unprotected first round draft pick."

This terrible Knicks team is not trading unprotected future firsts in virtually any scenario, let alone Zach. Yet all three offers have them giving up one or two future unprotected picks. Really?

Although I think the value is pretty close, I can confidently say the Knicks would not trade RJ Barrett for Zach, just as a straight swap. We can make fun of Knicks fans but need to be reasonable ourselves.
MrSparkle
RealGM
Posts: 15,633
And1: 5,256
Joined: Jul 31, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#111 » by MrSparkle » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:10 pm

cjbulls wrote:
MrSparkle wrote:
sco wrote:https://pippenainteasy.com/2020/07/25/chicago-bulls-3-possible-zach-lavine-trades-with-the-knicks/


These are pretty rationale, fair trades.

The ideas the Knicks fans posted are comical.

Anyway, I do think there’s some flexibility and logic to working out something. I don’t think Knicks fans realize they don’t have anybody remotely close to Zach’s scoring range, and the draft doesn’t address it.

We have Coby to develop. I don’t think Zach fits compliments anybody here. I also don’t think AK will want to build around him, whereas Thibs would be content giving Zach the keys and focusing on his defensive armada. The approach and stylistic goal counts for something.


These were not fair. This line is the worst:

"About the only way that the Knicks are going to be able to pull off a trade deal with the Bulls to get their hands on LaVine is by trading at least one unprotected first round draft pick."

This terrible Knicks team is not trading unprotected future firsts in virtually any scenario, let alone Zach. Yet all three offers have them giving up one or two future unprotected picks. Really?

Although I think the value is pretty close, I can confidently say the Knicks would not trade RJ Barrett for Zach, just as a straight swap. We can make fun of Knicks fans but need to be reasonable ourselves.


Then you don’t trade Zach. I think the unprotected 1st generally applies to this draft, which relatively sucks. And additional FRP applies if RJ isn’t offered.

If Knicks get #1-4, I’d do something like this:

Zach
Thad
Hutchinson

Randle
Knox
#1-4 Pick
2022 FRP (unprotected if this year’s pick is #3-4, top-3 protected if it’s #1-2)

Gamble on that 22 FRP with Randle’s contract.
jcuuofd
Analyst
Posts: 3,122
And1: 511
Joined: Dec 12, 2004

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#112 » by jcuuofd » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:14 pm

I'd trade Lavine to the Knicks for RJ Barrett and Julius Randle. I'd also consider trading him to the Nets for Jarret Allen, Taurean Prince, and Joe Harris. The Bulls should not settle for anything less because there are about 15 other teams who would like to trade for Lavine.
User avatar
Jvaughn
RealGM
Posts: 24,923
And1: 2,687
Joined: May 18, 2009
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#113 » by Jvaughn » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:33 pm

dougthonus wrote:
Jvaughn wrote:I disagree about Zach's value for multiple reasons. He's shown he can do much more than K-Mart. He has facilitated and played defense when his number has been called. It hasn't been consistent, but he's still young and has room to grow. And in the fact that he's on a great value contract, and you have a positive asset. I definitely don't see any viable trade where we win out in a deal, so I'd give Zach a chance with a real coach and system before you toss him away for chips.


I don't know that I would toss Zach out for a bag of chips or anything, but he's only got two years left on his current deal, so if you want to trade him and get anything for him, it will be this off-season where a team can get some good value out of him on this cheap deal.

I'm okay keeping Zach, I just said if you feel you need to reset the roster, then trading Zach now will bring back the peak value you'll ever get from him. It will be interesting to see what his value looks like next FA if he plays the next two seasons averaging 20+ points per game on good but not great efficiency, then he should be much more expensive than last contract where he was still coming off the ACL and had terrible numbers on awful efficiency and you were still just hoping.

If you don't find Zach on a 25-28M per year deal attractive on his next deal then there's absolutely a case to get out ahead of this and move him now.


Good points. Can't disagree with anything here. I think I'm just more optimistic of where I think Zach will ultimately peak as a player. He hasn't had a chance to play on a good team with a good coach here yet, so we really haven't had a chance to evaluate him. Instead of trading him away for a player we hope will one day be as good as he is today, I'd like to build around him and see what he can become.

I think we're getting closer on the PG side, and can bolster that in the draft this year depending on where we land. I don't see any scenario where all 5 of the top PGs are gone before we pick. We also need to address the other wing spot. I love Otto when he's healthy, but we haven't had that consistently yet.

We also have got to get some consistency out of Lauri. I'm almost at the point where I just want to jettison him. We don't need 20ppg, but he has got to knock down his open shots, and rebound at least at an average level. Wendell just needs to stay healthy. He seems to always start improving and then gets hurt. All in all it someone offers a FRP for either one of them, I'm good letting them go.
spearsy23 wrote:Kobe is a low percentage chucker just like Jennings, he's just better at it.


teamCHItown wrote:Now we have threads on what violent felons think of our Bulls. Great. Next up, OJ Simpson's take on a possible Taj Gibson extension.
Little Nathan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,114
And1: 3,699
Joined: Mar 11, 2013
Location: Germany
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#114 » by Little Nathan » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:34 pm

If we take on Randle's terrible contract, I'm done. I may not be the biggest LaVine fan on this board and would definitely explore trading him right now because his next contract scares me, but I'm not taking back a trash player on a bad contract to do that unless there is an insane amount of first rounders included (and that's not happening).
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,902
And1: 7,036
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#115 » by dougthonus » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:41 pm

Jvaughn wrote:Good points. Can't disagree with anything here. I think I'm just more optimistic of where I think Zach will ultimately peak as a player. He hasn't had a chance to play on a good team with a good coach here yet, so we really haven't had a chance to evaluate him. Instead of trading him away for a player we hope will one day be as good as he is today, I'd like to build around him and see what he can become.

I think we're getting closer on the PG side, and can bolster that in the draft this year depending on where we land. I don't see any scenario where all 5 of the top PGs are gone before we pick. We also need to address the other wing spot. I love Otto when he's healthy, but we haven't had that consistently yet.

We also have got to get some consistency out of Lauri. I'm almost at the point where I just want to jettison him. We don't need 20ppg, but he has got to knock down his open shots, and rebound at least at an average level. Wendell just needs to stay healthy. He seems to always start improving and then gets hurt. All in all it someone offers a FRP for either one of them, I'm good letting them go.


Zach's had 6 years in the league, granted, more like 5 due to the ACL. He's played massive minutes and as a lead dog the last two years as the #1 option more or less completely controlling everything. I'd struggle to find any example in the NBA where a guy had as much time and opportunity as Zach to change considerably moving forward.

I think he's a good player, but his odds of being a great player are very low at this point IMO. Like I said, I'm fine keeping him. I just don't expect him to be more than what he is now (or at least not much more) and don't think I'll probably want to pay him market value next contract.
User avatar
Jvaughn
RealGM
Posts: 24,923
And1: 2,687
Joined: May 18, 2009
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#116 » by Jvaughn » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:46 pm

sco wrote:
MrSparkle wrote:
sco wrote:https://pippenainteasy.com/2020/07/25/chicago-bulls-3-possible-zach-lavine-trades-with-the-knicks/


These are pretty rationale, fair trades.

The ideas the Knicks fans posted are comical.

Anyway, I do think there’s some flexibility and logic to working out something. I don’t think Knicks fans realize they don’t have anybody remotely close to Zach’s scoring range, and the draft doesn’t address it.

We have Coby to develop. I don’t think Zach fits compliments anybody here. I also don’t think AK will want to build around him, whereas Thibs would be content giving Zach the keys and focusing on his defensive armada. The approach and stylistic goal counts for something.

I agree...not terrible trades, but totally see Knicks fans disagreeing.

I disagree about the part where Zach and Coby don't fit. Honestly, I think they fit pretty well. Having the 2 guard spots do the bulk of the scoring is normal in today's NBA with the 3pt shot being so important. If Coby can become a more consistent 3pt shooter, he and Zach make a deadly backcourt tandem. I also think that both guys are/can become "average defenders".


Agreed. Especially on the points about fit. You have multiple top teams that have 2 scoring guards and they make it work. We need one of two things to happen to make it work. Either Coby or Lavine to evolve into a better creator for others, or another player (preferably a SF) to be a primary creator.

As for the defense, we've seen games where Zach has had to guard the opposition's best player in the clutch because Sato was getting torched. He did very well and showed he's capable when he's dialed in. His biggest issue has always been off the ball, and that just requires focus and a defensive schemes that makes sense.

Coby was surprisingly much better than I was expecting this year on defense. Not perfect, but he's a rookie, so it's expected. But he was very active on ball, and in the passing lanes. Moved much better laterally than anyone could've hoped for. I think he'll be just fine on that side of the ball as time goes on.
spearsy23 wrote:Kobe is a low percentage chucker just like Jennings, he's just better at it.


teamCHItown wrote:Now we have threads on what violent felons think of our Bulls. Great. Next up, OJ Simpson's take on a possible Taj Gibson extension.
User avatar
Jvaughn
RealGM
Posts: 24,923
And1: 2,687
Joined: May 18, 2009
   

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#117 » by Jvaughn » Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:58 pm

dougthonus wrote:
Jvaughn wrote:Good points. Can't disagree with anything here. I think I'm just more optimistic of where I think Zach will ultimately peak as a player. He hasn't had a chance to play on a good team with a good coach here yet, so we really haven't had a chance to evaluate him. Instead of trading him away for a player we hope will one day be as good as he is today, I'd like to build around him and see what he can become.

I think we're getting closer on the PG side, and can bolster that in the draft this year depending on where we land. I don't see any scenario where all 5 of the top PGs are gone before we pick. We also need to address the other wing spot. I love Otto when he's healthy, but we haven't had that consistently yet.

We also have got to get some consistency out of Lauri. I'm almost at the point where I just want to jettison him. We don't need 20ppg, but he has got to knock down his open shots, and rebound at least at an average level. Wendell just needs to stay healthy. He seems to always start improving and then gets hurt. All in all it someone offers a FRP for either one of them, I'm good letting them go.


Zach's had 6 years in the league, granted, more like 5 due to the ACL. He's played massive minutes and as a lead dog the last two years as the #1 option more or less completely controlling everything. I'd struggle to find any example in the NBA where a guy had as much time and opportunity as Zach to change considerably moving forward.

I think he's a good player, but his odds of being a great player are very low at this point IMO. Like I said, I'm fine keeping him. I just don't expect him to be more than what he is now (or at least not much more) and don't think I'll probably want to pay him market value next contract.


Fair enough. Just comes down to your faith in a player.

Sidenote, I just looked at this season comparison for Beal, Lavine, and Booker and the numbers are all very close. Wish I could embed the chart, but here's the link:

http://bkref.com/tiny/M69zK

To make it fair, on a per minute basis, Beal/Booker are better passers. Lavine is a better rebounder. Zach surprisingly has the most steals and blocks (not saying he's a great defender).

Most agree that Beal/Booker can be built around, but statements that Lavine can only be your 3rd best player on a successful team come up. I'm not saying he's ready yet, but I don't think he's that far away, and I think he can still be a big impact player on a good team. We just haven't given him the chance to compete on a good team yet.
spearsy23 wrote:Kobe is a low percentage chucker just like Jennings, he's just better at it.


teamCHItown wrote:Now we have threads on what violent felons think of our Bulls. Great. Next up, OJ Simpson's take on a possible Taj Gibson extension.
StunnerKO
Veteran
Posts: 2,770
And1: 1,863
Joined: Sep 25, 2017

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#118 » by StunnerKO » Sun Jul 26, 2020 6:18 pm

Only way I’ll think about trading Lavine is if we are for sure drafting Edwards and getting a top 10 pick back for 2020
MrSparkle
RealGM
Posts: 15,633
And1: 5,256
Joined: Jul 31, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#119 » by MrSparkle » Sun Jul 26, 2020 6:53 pm

Jvaughn wrote:
dougthonus wrote:
Jvaughn wrote:Good points. Can't disagree with anything here. I think I'm just more optimistic of where I think Zach will ultimately peak as a player. He hasn't had a chance to play on a good team with a good coach here yet, so we really haven't had a chance to evaluate him. Instead of trading him away for a player we hope will one day be as good as he is today, I'd like to build around him and see what he can become.

I think we're getting closer on the PG side, and can bolster that in the draft this year depending on where we land. I don't see any scenario where all 5 of the top PGs are gone before we pick. We also need to address the other wing spot. I love Otto when he's healthy, but we haven't had that consistently yet.

We also have got to get some consistency out of Lauri. I'm almost at the point where I just want to jettison him. We don't need 20ppg, but he has got to knock down his open shots, and rebound at least at an average level. Wendell just needs to stay healthy. He seems to always start improving and then gets hurt. All in all it someone offers a FRP for either one of them, I'm good letting them go.


Zach's had 6 years in the league, granted, more like 5 due to the ACL. He's played massive minutes and as a lead dog the last two years as the #1 option more or less completely controlling everything. I'd struggle to find any example in the NBA where a guy had as much time and opportunity as Zach to change considerably moving forward.

I think he's a good player, but his odds of being a great player are very low at this point IMO. Like I said, I'm fine keeping him. I just don't expect him to be more than what he is now (or at least not much more) and don't think I'll probably want to pay him market value next contract.


Fair enough. Just comes down to your faith in a player.

Sidenote, I just looked at this season comparison for Beal, Lavine, and Booker and the numbers are all very close. Wish I could embed the chart, but here's the link:

http://bkref.com/tiny/M69zK

To make it fair, on a per minute basis, Beal/Booker are better passers. Lavine is a better rebounder. Zach surprisingly has the most steals and blocks (not saying he's a great defender).

Most agree that Beal/Booker can be built around, but statements that Lavine can only be your 3rd best player on a successful team come up. I'm not saying he's ready yet, but I don't think he's that far away, and I think he can still be a big impact player on a good team. We just haven't given him the chance to compete on a good team yet.


I don't really think you can build around those guys. They've both led tank jobs. I do think those two are more skilled than Zach (with the ball), which counts for something. Although Zach is more athletic. Beal is a better ball-handler IMO than the other two, where you can kind of run your offense through him. That doesn't really show up on the stat sheet.

I agree the Bulls have something to work with in a Coby-Zach 2-man punch, but it is a fact that Wendell and Lauri are after-thoughts in that direction. And I realize the hard truth might be that they were both wastes of #7 picks, but on the other hand, I'm not entirely ready to give up on either guy, let alone both. I'm entirely not willing to pay Zach $30m+ (on the low hopeful side) as the veteran alpha.

But that's also coupled with the premise that I have not seen one game with Zach where the Bulls' offensive flow looked good.

If you're building defensively (i.e. the Thibs Bulls concept), that's fine. You're not going for Showtime or Nash buckets. It's like a classic Italian soccer defense with a super-talented striker; boring as hell to watch but you do put yourself in position to win. But nothing in the Bulls' roster has suggested a move in that direction (besides I suppose Wendell), and AK's past GM'ing and statements absolutely don't make it seem like he wants a defensive team that keeps the ball between 1 or 2 scorers to generate baskets.

All this said, a coaching change (or at least a Boylen re-design) could make it work. I know in 1 week of sample size, Zach-Otto-Lauri looked functional last February. That said, I put *very* little stock in trade deadline honey-moons. If you go by that metric, then the 02/03 Bulls should've been a deep playoff team with superstar Jalen, along with the 09/10 super-loaded Salmons/Gordon/D-Rose 3-headed monster. But it doesn't work out that way- a team shows their true colors in November. Not to say they can't improve and squeeze in a late post-season push (which would happen often with those GarPax's 41-41 rosters between 05-16), but it's a bad sign if you come in from training camp and look like a Pinto with cubes for wheels. Your ceiling is pretty low. IMO it was demonstrated with last year's Celtics, the Nash/Dwight Lakers, the Butler T-Wolves.

Totally different to Jimmy. I dunno why people had the pitch-forks out for him, but he led an epically bad team with an epically bad coach to a playoff appearance. Very few players who can do that - pretty much just elite two-way wings, or manically talented scoring guards (i.e. prime Westbrook).

So yeah. I'm OK kicking the board with Zach and taking a chance on someone in the top-4, if we were to acquire the Knicks' pick. (Not to mention another chance with the Bulls' own pick) Given this draft, it wouldn't be a 2-star aspiration, but rather a "2 shots at 1 star" kind of a deal. Which, assuming we hired the right VP and GM, then you like those odds. I've ragged LaMelo and Deni, but I dunno- maybe they are the answer. Maybe it's Haliburton or Hayes. Maybe it's Wisemen. I don't know, but our FO should. A good thing to do is remove all positional expectations and just imagine which of these guys can be the Mitchell, Bam, Pascal, Shai or Brogdon of the draft. When you get a player like that, you don't really worry if they'll conflict with anyone's minutes, because they'll be able to play alongside anybody good.

The nice thing about Coby is he'll be able to play alongside a tall PG (LaMelo, Haliburton, Hayes), or compliment a SG (Edwards). Nice thing about the big men prospects is that we don't have a star big man, so we shouldn't be worried about moving Wendell/Lauri/Gafford to the trade-market. If Wiseman or Ogonkwu look like Bam+ as prospects, then I take them. Their combo of athleticism, length and skill is far and beyond WCJ and Gafford.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,902
And1: 7,036
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Knicks/Nets Looking At Lavine 

Post#120 » by dougthonus » Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:25 pm

Jvaughn wrote:Fair enough. Just comes down to your faith in a player.

Sidenote, I just looked at this season comparison for Beal, Lavine, and Booker and the numbers are all very close. Wish I could embed the chart, but here's the link:

http://bkref.com/tiny/M69zK

To make it fair, on a per minute basis, Beal/Booker are better passers. Lavine is a better rebounder. Zach surprisingly has the most steals and blocks (not saying he's a great defender).

Most agree that Beal/Booker can be built around, but statements that Lavine can only be your 3rd best player on a successful team come up. I'm not saying he's ready yet, but I don't think he's that far away, and I think he can still be a big impact player on a good team. We just haven't given him the chance to compete on a good team yet.


I don't think you could build a good team with Beal or Booker as your best player and think both are better than Zach right now. Both are more efficient in their scoring and both are better at facilitating by a pretty good margin. Beal is a much better defender as well.

Zach doesn't necessarily need to be your best player to be a good piece, even at whatever price he'll command. He's making 3a/3b type money now, and will probably make 2a/2b type money next contract.

Return to Chicago Bulls