Lavine for Poole

[TheNewEra]

If LaVine plays “blank” amount of games.. you probably can flip him for negative salary and a small asset.

Poole will never have that statement be true.

feels like if this was true Lavine would of been traded way before the foot injury.

[jayjaysee]

If LaVine plays “blank” amount of games.. you probably can flip him for negative salary and a small asset.

Poole will never have that statement be true.

feels like if this was true Lavine would of been traded way before the foot injury.

Think everyone knows Chicago didn’t want to tank/rebuild.

Team look a little bit different now.

[basketballwacko2]

Chicago trade: Lavine
Washington trade: Poole, filler (Davis?)

Change of scenery trade for 2 of the worst contracts in NBA right now. Chicago saves some $, Washington takes a flier on the better player in Lavine to rehab value.

Who says no/needs to add?

One terrible nearly useless player for another!

[vxmike]

If LaVine plays “blank” amount of games.. you probably can flip him for negative salary and a small asset.

Poole will never have that statement be true.

Lavine is negative salary himself. The best Chicago can do is swap him for worse players on smaller contracts or attach assets for another team to eat his bad money. Basically they need a contender who sees Lavine’s offense as the final piece and has some bad but shorter and/or smaller bad money to offload.

[jayjaysee]

If LaVine plays “blank” amount of games.. you probably can flip him for negative salary and a small asset.

Poole will never have that statement be true.

Lavine is negative salary himself. The best Chicago can do is swap him for worse players on smaller contracts or attach assets for another team to eat his bad money. Basically they need a contender who sees Lavine’s offense as the final piece and has some bad but shorter and/or smaller bad money to offload.

I feel like you’re agreeing with me? He’ll never be an asset, but there’s contracts in the league that teams would add minor value to end up with pre-injury Zach. So if/when he gets back to that level, those contracts will still be there.

Poole? I see a lot less opportunity for that. (none really, except Beal maybe? But that’s not realistic)

[vxmike]

If LaVine plays “blank” amount of games.. you probably can flip him for negative salary and a small asset.

Poole will never have that statement be true.

Lavine is negative salary himself. The best Chicago can do is swap him for worse players on smaller contracts or attach assets for another team to eat his bad money. Basically they need a contender who sees Lavine’s offense as the final piece and has some bad but shorter and/or smaller bad money to offload.

I feel like you’re agreeing with me? He’ll never be an asset, but there’s contracts in the league that teams would add minor value to end up with pre-injury Zach. So if/when he gets back to that level, those contracts will still be there.

Poole? I see a lot less opportunity for that. (none really, except Beal maybe? But that’s not realistic)

Sort of….i just don’t think Lavine returns any kind of asset. I don’t think any of the teams with bad enough contracts who would want to swap for Zach would be interested in giving up assets (ie. WAS with Poole).

[theBigLip]

Regardless of which player one thinks is better, both players (and their teams) need for both players to be healthy next year, play good including on D, and restore their values. If that is happening by the trade deadline next year, both could get moved.

Lavine is good, but $50M player you need to carry your team. And Poole seriously won some playoff games in 2022 that got GSW another championship, before the punch. If they don't stay healthy or just keep chucking up shots on bad teams, their legacy will not be so good. But I can see the scenario that one or both of these players is playing in the playoffs next year for a new team.

[penbeast0]

Poole. (snort). Defense. (snort). Really, get serious.

We are hoping he turns back into Anfernee Simons, we aren't going into fantasy land.

[basketballwacko2]

If LaVine plays “blank” amount of games.. you probably can flip him for negative salary and a small asset.

Poole will never have that statement be true.

Lavine is negative salary himself. The best Chicago can do is swap him for worse players on smaller contracts or attach assets for another team to eat his bad money. Basically they need a contender who sees Lavine’s offense as the final piece and has some bad but shorter and/or smaller bad money to offload.

Yeah $43 million for LaVine is about 2 times or more than he's worth.

[bgrep14]

I’d consider Garland, Jerome, and Niang for Lavine, Buzelis, 1 first, and 2 swaps.

[basketballwacko2]

If I was the bulls I'd try to rebuild, Vuc is 33, LaVine is a huge expensive contract, lonzo may never play again. So I'd try trading Vuc for picks or a pick, then try to move LaVine for 2-3 smaller contracts, breaking up his massive $43 million into 3 pieces could work out if any of those guys respond and play well, they could develop value.

[bgrep14]

I think BkN should trade Simmons for Lavine and a 1st.