So what's the pivot? (Beal, Lavine, or smaller moves)? - Post Harden ideas and rumors

[Iverson Armband]

You also have to take into account that if he's the highest usage player on bad teams, it's possible that he's a primary reason that they're a bad team. He's the common denominator for all of those bad teams he's been on.

Also, if he's not capable of elevating a bad team, how is he going to be elevating a good team? If he were an actual difference maker, he'd be making a difference.

You must think every good player on a bad team isn’t good then. If that’s your argument, then there is nothing further to discuss.

No, because good players on bad teams typically have their team perform better when they're on the court.

Take KAT for an example. He's always elevated his teams - he's had positive on/offs every year of his career. His teams clearly play better when he's out there.

You can do the same for Pelicans Anthony Davis as well - he was generally massively elevating the Pelicans while he was on the floor.

LaVine is the opposite. He's never elevated his teams - he's had negative on/offs every year of his career but one. His teams clearly play worse when he's out there.

Sounds like the Bulls should just cut Lavine then

You mentioned two likely HOFers. Not once did I imply Lavine would have that type of impact nor would we need him to. Also, on/off numbers are tricky and sometimes misleading. No one in their right mind would say the Bulls are a better team without Lavine than with. Don’t be silly.

[76ciology]

You must think every good player on a bad team isn’t good then. If that’s your argument, then there is nothing further to discuss.

No, because good players on bad teams typically have their team perform better when they're on the court.

Take KAT for an example. He's always elevated his teams - he's had positive on/offs every year of his career. His teams clearly play better when he's out there.

You can do the same for Pelicans Anthony Davis as well - he was generally massively elevating the Pelicans while he was on the floor.

LaVine is the opposite. He's never elevated his teams - he's had negative on/offs every year of his career but one. His teams clearly play worse when he's out there.

Sounds like the Bulls should just cut Lavine then

You mentioned two likely HOFers. Not once did I imply Lavine would have that type of impact nor would we need him to. Also, on/off numbers are tricky and sometimes misleading. No one in their right mind would say the Bulls are a better team without Lavine than with. Don’t be silly.

Ok.
Expirings for Lavine and a first.

We’re going to absorb this toxic Zach Lavine guy and his contract.

[Sportfan73]

Is there any evidence that we will slide from being an elite defensive team into a something worse if we traded Ben for a guy like Robert Covington, Derrick Jones Jr, Aaron Gordon, Otto Porter?

Can’t we be a much better team say we trade Ben and expirings for Lavine and Otto Porter? A big upgrade on offense while a slight drop (if there’s any) on defense.

Zach Lavine
Shake Milton
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

This team worse?

If defense is still a problem..

Zach Lavine
Danny Green
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

No but we can trade green, maxey, and 1 or two firsts. Or green maxey and thybulle for him

[skulky]

You also have to take into account that his point totals are on a bad team with a usage rate he wouldn't get close to on good team.

I think it's fair to say he could be more efficient here than he has been. Its just incorrect to say he's been doing this at elite efficiency beyond this season.

Your earlier comment even concedes his ts% is above average and you’re trying to take it out of context. His efficiency is even more impressive with everything you and iverson armband are mentioning. Last year Lavine had 31.7 usage rate and season before 30.5. He was putting up a ton of shots and initiating the offense on a bad team when he was the main focus of the opposing defense, and he still shot above average.
This year he’s playing with a better coach, playing within the flow less forced shots, just look at his 2 pt fg% and attempts. Last year 11.9 attempts and 2p% 49.7. This season 9.8 attempts with a 2p% 59.9. Again smaller sample size but that’s a huge shift. Even if he regresses and you split the difference in 2p%, he’s still going to be over 60% true shooting.

Now put him in a defined role, next to embiid and not the only focus of the defense and I don’t think it’s a stretch for him to have low to mid 60s ts% on volume.

Guys with 25%+ USG and 62%+ TS% in either of the last two seasons:

KAT (twice)
Lillard
Harden
Giannis
Curry
Durant

It's definitely a stretch to suggest that LaVine can reach mid 60s TS% on volume and end up in that group.

I don’t think he’s doing anything at this point that’s unsustainable, let alone when paired next to a player like embiid that demands even more attention. So no I don’t think it’s a stretch that Lavine could have. 60+ ts% when paired next to embiid or jokic or Durant.

[76ciology]

Is there any evidence that we will slide from being an elite defensive team into a something worse if we traded Ben for a guy like Robert Covington, Derrick Jones Jr, Aaron Gordon, Otto Porter?

Can’t we be a much better team say we trade Ben and expirings for Lavine and Otto Porter? A big upgrade on offense while a slight drop (if there’s any) on defense.

Zach Lavine
Shake Milton
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

This team worse?

If defense is still a problem..

Zach Lavine
Danny Green
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

No but we can trade green, maxey, and 1 or two firsts. Or green maxey and thybulle for him

If that’s possible, then DEAL! Hahaha

[Iverson Armband]

No, because good players on bad teams typically have their team perform better when they're on the court.

Take KAT for an example. He's always elevated his teams - he's had positive on/offs every year of his career. His teams clearly play better when he's out there.

You can do the same for Pelicans Anthony Davis as well - he was generally massively elevating the Pelicans while he was on the floor.

LaVine is the opposite. He's never elevated his teams - he's had negative on/offs every year of his career but one. His teams clearly play worse when he's out there.

Sounds like the Bulls should just cut Lavine then

You mentioned two likely HOFers. Not once did I imply Lavine would have that type of impact nor would we need him to. Also, on/off numbers are tricky and sometimes misleading. No one in their right mind would say the Bulls are a better team without Lavine than with. Don’t be silly.

Ok.
Expirings for Lavine and a first.

We’re going to absorb this toxic Zach Lavine guy and his contract.

I’m sure the Bulls would jump at that opportunity to get rid of the bum!

[TTP]

How about you LaVine fanboys find me examples of guys that spent a lot of time on bad teams with perennially negative on/offs that suddenly went to a good team and were positive impact on high usage?

I'm going back in recent years to look for high usage All Star level players stuck on bad teams, and all of them were elevating their teams while they were on the court: KAT, AD, Kemba, Booker, Cousins, Pistons Blake, Knicks Melo, Wall and Beal, Lillard in the few years they were bad.

[76ciology]

Btw in terms of trading baskets..

Can Lavine, Milton and Embiid, running 2 man games to take advantage of DeAndre Jordan’s poor defense can match-up with KD, Harden and Kyrie ISO or 2 man games against Milton and Tobias’ defense.

I think they have a good chance.

[TTP]

You must think every good player on a bad team isn’t good then. If that’s your argument, then there is nothing further to discuss.

No, because good players on bad teams typically have their team perform better when they're on the court.

Take KAT for an example. He's always elevated his teams - he's had positive on/offs every year of his career. His teams clearly play better when he's out there.

You can do the same for Pelicans Anthony Davis as well - he was generally massively elevating the Pelicans while he was on the floor.

LaVine is the opposite. He's never elevated his teams - he's had negative on/offs every year of his career but one. His teams clearly play worse when he's out there.

Sounds like the Bulls should just cut Lavine then

You mentioned two likely HOFers. Not once did I imply Lavine would have that type of impact nor would we need him to. Also, on/off numbers are tricky and sometimes misleading. No one in their right mind would say the Bulls are a better team without Lavine than with. Don’t be silly.

On/off numbers being tricky and sometimes misleading would apply to single seasons of outlier data, not 6+ years worth. Honestly, the single season where he was positive is the most likely to be the outlier.

If the Bulls are a better team with him than without him, then why have they not been a better team with him than without him?

[GutUNC]

Is there any evidence that we will slide from being an elite defensive team into a something worse if we traded Ben for a guy like Robert Covington, Derrick Jones Jr, Aaron Gordon, Otto Porter?

Can’t we be a much better team say we trade Ben and expirings for Lavine and Otto Porter? A big upgrade on offense while a slight drop (if there’s any) on defense.

Zach Lavine
Shake Milton
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

This team worse?

If defense is still a problem..

Zach Lavine
Danny Green
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

Yeah, that's defensible for 2020-21, but when Porter's contract ends (or he gets hurt again) then you're left having exchanged Simmons for Lavine and......bleh. Just don't think Morey has them as that all-in for this season.

[76ciology]

Is there any evidence that we will slide from being an elite defensive team into a something worse if we traded Ben for a guy like Robert Covington, Derrick Jones Jr, Aaron Gordon, Otto Porter?

Can’t we be a much better team say we trade Ben and expirings for Lavine and Otto Porter? A big upgrade on offense while a slight drop (if there’s any) on defense.

Zach Lavine
Shake Milton
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

This team worse?

If defense is still a problem..

Zach Lavine
Danny Green
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

Yeah, that's defensible for 2020-21, but when Porter's contract ends (or he gets hurt again) then you're left having exchanged Simmons for Lavine and......bleh. Just don't think Morey has them as that all-in for this season.

Dunno. But Morey’s quite good in finding those Danuel House Jr. type wings with the Rox so I expect him getting us an atleast 1-2 3&D wings.

[GutUNC]

Is there any evidence that we will slide from being an elite defensive team into a something worse if we traded Ben for a guy like Robert Covington, Derrick Jones Jr, Aaron Gordon, Otto Porter?

Can’t we be a much better team say we trade Ben and expirings for Lavine and Otto Porter? A big upgrade on offense while a slight drop (if there’s any) on defense.

Zach Lavine
Shake Milton
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

This team worse?

If defense is still a problem..

Zach Lavine
Danny Green
Otto Porter
Tobias Harris
Joel Embiid

Yeah, that's defensible for 2020-21, but when Porter's contract ends (or he gets hurt again) then you're left having exchanged Simmons for Lavine and......bleh. Just don't think Morey has them as that all-in for this season.

Dunno. But Morey’s quite good in finding those Danuel House Jr. type wings with the Rox so I expect him getting us an atleast 1-2 3&D wings.

No doubt - I just don't see him downgrading Simmons for a 1 year move with this roster. Or put more clearly, I don't see him making a deal that he knows makes the team worse next season. We're not enough of a contender to do something like that.

[youngcrev]

No, because good players on bad teams typically have their team perform better when they're on the court.

Take KAT for an example. He's always elevated his teams - he's had positive on/offs every year of his career. His teams clearly play better when he's out there.

You can do the same for Pelicans Anthony Davis as well - he was generally massively elevating the Pelicans while he was on the floor.

LaVine is the opposite. He's never elevated his teams - he's had negative on/offs every year of his career but one. His teams clearly play worse when he's out there.

Sounds like the Bulls should just cut Lavine then :lol:

You mentioned two likely HOFers. Not once did I imply Lavine would have that type of impact nor would we need him to. Also, on/off numbers are tricky and sometimes misleading. No one in their right mind would say the Bulls are a better team without Lavine than with. Don’t be silly.

On/off numbers being tricky and sometimes misleading would apply to single seasons of outlier data, not 6+ years worth. Honestly, the single season where he was positive is the most likely to be the outlier.

If the Bulls are a better team with him than without him, then why have they not been a better team with him than without him?

TTP, with that in mind, would you be completely out on the idea of acquiring him (taking price off the table)? Even with all the red flags, the skill set still intrigues me.

[TTP]

Sounds like the Bulls should just cut Lavine then

You mentioned two likely HOFers. Not once did I imply Lavine would have that type of impact nor would we need him to. Also, on/off numbers are tricky and sometimes misleading. No one in their right mind would say the Bulls are a better team without Lavine than with. Don’t be silly.

On/off numbers being tricky and sometimes misleading would apply to single seasons of outlier data, not 6+ years worth. Honestly, the single season where he was positive is the most likely to be the outlier.

If the Bulls are a better team with him than without him, then why have they not been a better team with him than without him?

TTP, with that in mind, would you be completely out on the idea of acquiring him (taking price off the table)? Even with all the red flags, the skill set still intrigues me.

Sure. Guys that can both shoot and create their own shot are always intriguing, but I imagine there's going to be a large price disconnect between what the Bulls would want and what I'd be willing to pay. That said, if Morey made a move for him, I'd trust that he knows what he's doing better than I do.

[youngcrev]

On/off numbers being tricky and sometimes misleading would apply to single seasons of outlier data, not 6+ years worth. Honestly, the single season where he was positive is the most likely to be the outlier.

If the Bulls are a better team with him than without him, then why have they not been a better team with him than without him?

TTP, with that in mind, would you be completely out on the idea of acquiring him (taking price off the table)? Even with all the red flags, the skill set still intrigues me.

Sure. Guys that can both shoot and create their own shot are always intriguing, but I imagine there's going to be a large price disconnect between what the Bulls would want and what I'd be willing to pay. That said, if Morey made a move for him, I'd trust that he knows what he's doing better than I do.

Where do you come down on LaVine vs Oladipo as targets? I think I trust Oladipo more as an impact guy (and obviously there's a large defensive discrepancy), but I think I'd be willing to give up slightly more for the extra year on Lavine's deal. Re-signing Oladipo might be tough with our cap situation.

[TTP]

TTP, with that in mind, would you be completely out on the idea of acquiring him (taking price off the table)? Even with all the red flags, the skill set still intrigues me.

Sure. Guys that can both shoot and create their own shot are always intriguing, but I imagine there's going to be a large price disconnect between what the Bulls would want and what I'd be willing to pay. That said, if Morey made a move for him, I'd trust that he knows what he's doing better than I do.

Where do you come down on LaVine vs Oladipo as targets? I think I trust Oladipo more as an impact guy (and obviously there's a large defensive discrepancy), but I think I'd be willing to give up slightly more for the extra year on Lavine's deal. Re-signing Oladipo might be tough with our cap situation.

Oladipo's a way better player than LaVine, even post-injury. I take him for sure. I have no idea what he gets on his next contract and it could be scary to give it to him, but I'd be scared to give LaVine his next contract too. If Oladipo looks great with us, then you give him the extension and figure out how to make it work salarywise in the offseason (maybe Tobias becomes moveable in the offseason or you ultimately decide to move Ben).

If we're only considering rentals, I probably just take the half season of Oladipo.

The emergence of Shake probably just makes me prefer staying put to moving assets for either though if you're not willing to commit to Oladipo long-term. I think there's a very real chance that Shake is already a better player than LaVine, or at minimum can be in the near future.

[Mik317]

you guys can't act like Ben is the worst player ever and then expect to get the world for him in the same post lol. He either is a good player worth something or he isn't.

[76ciology]

Why Zach Lavine?
27ppg 64TS%
Top 20 in Win Probability Added (78th last season)
Top 5 in FGM during clutch
Top 2 in FGM on clutch 2 (the most crucial shots to win games)

He’s been one of the most clutch players in the league since last season (lazy to check past last season).

Exactly what we need for the playoffs

[Stanford]

you guys can't act like Ben is the worst player ever and then expect to get the world for him in the same post lol. He either is a good player worth something or he isn't.

He can be bad (he's not) and have perceived value!

[Stanford]

Why Zach Lavine?
27ppg 64TS%
Top 20 in Win Probability Added (78th last season)
Top 5 in FGM during clutch
Top 2 in FGM on clutch 2 (the most crucial shots to win games)

He’s been one of the most clutch players in the league since last season (lazy to check past last season).

Exactly what we need for the playoffs

I admit: I have a huge historical bias against Lavine, but I'm starting to come around. He's at 2+ seasons of very good offensive output at this point. 8+ 3PA per game at 38%; ~6 FTA per game at 80%+. Assist rate is even way up from his Wolves years. I'm in.