Wiretap: Bulls Hope To Re-Sign Zach LaVine At $14M-$16M

[ChiCitySPORTS#1]

The Phoenix Suns are going to look at Zach:

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/06/suns-may-renounce-elfrid-payton-alex-len-others.html

With Booker, Josh Jackson & Mikal Bridget already on the team? - why?

Money could be used elsewhere

[JimmyJammer]

I think Zach is going to get about 75 mil for 4 years with possibly an opt-out after the third season. If I were Pax, I'd frontload his contract on the first and second year since we have the money to spend now anyway, and we are not getting any meaningful free-agent. If you pay Zach about 45mil, 25 next season and 20 the following, you'll only owe him 30 mil for the remaining two seasons, which would not be so bad because he'd be 25 years old with a tradeable contract. So, there are many ways it can be done.

[MisterRoy]

The Phoenix Suns are going to look at Zach:

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/06/suns-may-renounce-elfrid-payton-alex-len-others.html

Seems like due diligence. There are a lot of people in that list.

[Ccwatercraft]

I'm saying Sean Kilpatrick can do everything Zach LaVine can do.

If you think one is good and the other is not, the burden of proof is on you, not me. You prove it.

Numerically, I don't see the difference.

looks like I seriously need to bust out some Kilpatrick highlight videos.

the good news is we got him locked up super cheap.

[TheJordanRule]

But how can we put so much weight in last year’s handful of games coming off an acl? He obviously had awesome games and some bad ones, but what he showed is he can get to the rim and still has elite athleticism, in addition to his shot. You have to think there will be in uptick in the stats next year.

Idk Threekola. Everyone said similar things about Rose after his first year back from his ACL injury-- "Well, he wasn't that consistent, but he looked fast out there and had some really good games." We waited for two years on that premise-- put our franchise in limbo for YEARS-- only to find out that there would be no improvement or return to MVP form. MVP form? Ha. Rose could barely be counted on as a decent 7th or 8th man.

I hear you but you can’t discount the multiple other injuries. Who knows what would have happened if it was only the one ACL for Rose? I think you have to give Zach a full season and see what it is, otherwise why did you ever trade for him to begin with? What was expected in limited minutes in a handful of games, all-star level play?

My take might seem more extreme than it actually is Threekola. I would like to keep Zach. My past posts were in reference to reasons why we should be careful about how much we pay him. Zach has major injury concerns and is so unproven, so he should have played like an all-star if he expected to get paid max or close to max money. Zach didn't. As SensiBull pointed out, even though Zach was one of the pieces we received in exchange for Jimmy, Zach was the least significant piece of that trade and is not entitled to big bucks. But, like I said, I would still like to keep Zach. He grades highly as a prospect with big tools and the potential to break out. Of course, that's the problem-- Zach is still more prospect than pro three years into his career. Raw draft pick type players cannot expect that kind of money. What's the difference between Zach's career and Noah Vonleh's? They're both just talented unproven guys with huge tools. Should we pay Vonleh $20 mil per year too? The #1 pick in the draft got 8 mil per season. That would be below market value for a guy like Zach. IMHO the max we should pay Zach is 12 mil per season. If a team wants to spend considerably more than that on Zach, let them have the kid. We don't want to mess up our chances at a productive, proven young stud who would actually be worth max or close to max money. We have enough dead weight on this team signed to deals just for the sake of nostalgia / continuity.

[Houston_Bulls]

I think Zach is going to get about 75 mil for 4 years with possibly an opt-out after the third season. If I were Pax, I'd frontload his contract on the first and second year since we have the money to spend now anyway, and we are not getting any meaningful free-agent. If you pay Zach about 45mil, 25 next season and 20 the following, you'll only owe him 30 mil for the remaining two seasons, which would not be so bad because he'd be 25 years old with a tradeable contract. So, there are many ways it can be done.

[SensiBull]

I hope someone buys him. His one-man show doesn't fit our system at all.

Nailed it. Nor the system of any team preparing for the modern NBA.

Boston. Golden State.

I even think this culture clash is why there were sparks in San Antonio between Pop and Aldridge and now Kawhi.

I think its how LeBron has seduced himself into gutting his own team, being 'the man' and GM and Coach.

This is not the And1 era any more. It's not hero-ball anymore.

Golden State didn't have any do-it-all players until KD and no only did they win two before his arrival,but they beat KD to get there. He joinedthem, not the other way around, and they were a rag-tag team of specialists, like the A-Team or the X-Men, not Gladys Knight and the Smurfs or whatever.

Not only am not. in the market for a 'saviour', if I'm the Bulls front office, I don't know how I'm imagining Zach LaVne as that person.

I'm looking at the dysfunction between Bradley Beal and John Wall, thinking that eventually,one of the two is going to give up and demand achange of scenery. Same with Dame Lillard andCJ McCollum.

If an opportunity like that materialized, given that salaries would have to match, do I:

A. Want to be caught with my pants down, trying to trade LaVine for one of those four straight up while other teams offer multi-player packages, because they priced their talent more rationally and not so emotionally? Or

B. Price my player reasonably enough that, if I had to add another player or two, to make up the difference between Zach and one of those four (and there IS a difference) there is room over Zach's salary to add that extra player without killing the salary requirements needed to make the trade happen?

[Houston_Bulls]

Devin booker win share .63 in his 3rd year and booker is -2.5 dpm for his career. He is considered just as bad a defender as zach lavine

with a much higher usage rate,more fga's more mins booker is .3 higher opm than lavine. Booker is considered a franchise cornerstone for phoenix and will get a 140 million extension this fall.

Let anyone tell it booker is one of the best young players in the nba .Advanced stats arent the end all be all for judging a player especially on bad teams that stay in the lottery.Booker is about to get a contract that value wise won't make sense and may never will ,and lavine is equally as good based off several ppp offensive stats.

Guarantee you won't see any suns fans talking about booker the way bulls fans talk about lavine.

Booker is also a big risk, he might turn out to be a one dimensional volume scorer.

[JimmyJammer]

I think Zach is going to get about 75 mil for 4 years with possibly an opt-out after the third season. If I were Pax, I'd frontload his contract on the first and second year since we have the money to spend now anyway, and we are not getting any meaningful free-agent. If you pay Zach about 45mil, 25 next season and 20 the following, you'll only owe him 30 mil for the remaining two seasons, which would not be so bad because he'd be 25 years old with a tradeable contract. So, there are many ways it can be done.

Bro, stop being upset for Reinsdorf's money. If the money is there, we might as well spend it. Besides, we will not be a player in the free-agent market this year anyway. While Zach LaVine may not be a superstar, he does have some values. When you consider what guys like Wiggins, Bradley Beal, Hardaway and Harris are getting, this is not overpaying at all. Even freaking Courtney Lee is making 12mil a season. Based on my idea, in two years when you have LaVine making 15mil a season, it will be considered a bargain.

[Houston_Bulls]

Bro, stop being upset for Reinsdorf's money. If the money is there, we might as well spend it. Besides, we will not be a player in the free-agent market this year anyway. While Zach LaVine may not be a superstar, he does have some values. When you consider what guys like Wiggins, Bradley Beal, Hardaway and Harris are getting, this is not overpaying at all. Even freaking Courtney Lee is making 12mil a season. Based on my idea, in two years when you have LaVine making 15mil a season, it will be considered a bargain.

There are so many talented young players coming off the bench who the Bulls could grab if they wanted too; Fred Van Vleet, Delon Wright, Norman Powell, Cedi Osman, Ante Zizic, Terry Rozier, Furkan Korkmaz, Timothy Luwawu-Caborot, Richaun Holmes, Joe Harris, Tomas Satoransky, Kelly Oubre, etc. etc. Every dollar the Bulls give to Lavine is another dollar the Bulls can't use to attract a quality free agent with upside.

[ChicagoStrong]

Sean Kilpatrick - 13.2 PER, .543 TS%, 10.3 PPG, 19.6 MPG
Zach LaVine - 13.5 PER, .540 TS%, 14.0 PPG, 28.7 MPG

Hmm

[SensiBull]

Devin booker win share .63 in his 3rd year and booker is -2.5 dpm for his career. He is considered just as bad a defender as zach lavine

with a much higher usage rate,more fga's more mins booker is .3 higher opm than lavine. Booker is considered a franchise cornerstone for phoenix and will get a 140 million extension this fall.

Let anyone tell it booker is one of the best young players in the nba .Advanced stats arent the end all be all for judging a player especially on bad teams that stay in the lottery.Booker is about to get a contract that value wise won't make sense and may never will ,and lavine is equally as good based off several ppp offensive stats.

Guarantee you won't see any suns fans talking about booker the way bulls fans talk about lavine.

Booker is also a big risk, he might turn out to be a one dimensional volume scorer.

That may sound like a contradiction, or even a back-handed compliment to some, but, you're basically describing a 6th man, which is not a max contract investment. It's what some fear Trae Young will become - a volume scorer with so many other deficiencies that his +/- winds upnullifying that volume scoring. Thus the limited minutes of a sixth man.

[johnnyvann840]

I think Zach is going to get about 75 mil for 4 years with possibly an opt-out after the third season. If I were Pax, I'd frontload his contract on the first and second year since we have the money to spend now anyway, and we are not getting any meaningful free-agent. If you pay Zach about 45mil, 25 next season and 20 the following, you'll only owe him 30 mil for the remaining two seasons, which would not be so bad because he'd be 25 years old with a tradeable contract. So, there are many ways it can be done.

LOL. $25M for Zach Lavine next season is a foocking joke. It would be egregious.

But WHY? Why would we even think about paying that for him. No chance a team is going to offer anywhere near that and if they do then just say buh-bye. It's really very simple. Let the market decide what he is worth. Look, if you want to gamble on him becoming a positive impact player and give him a chance. Fine. I'm cool with that. But why would we even think about overpaying him like that? Let him go get an offer and then decide whether it's worth the risk to match it. Period. End of story. Anything else would be purely idiotic from our FO.

I know he was coming off and injury last season but he was one of the worst players in the entire NBA when it comes to floor impact. And his prior three seasons in Minnesota he was almost as bad. He had one half of one season where he was efficient but even then his impact was negative. He has essentially played 3 seasons of NBA basketball over 4 years and has had one 2.5 month span where he wasn't terrible. Career 37% 3 pt shooter. A little better than average. 3 assists per game with extremely high usage. One of the worst defenders in the entire NBA at his position. What are we paying for? And WHY? Is it his slam dunk title from a three years ago? Potential? This is his 5th season and it is highly likely he is what he is at this point. It would be an extreme outlier if he all of a sudden broke out and became a top wing in this league with positive impact on winning.

I just don't understand the logic in some of you who insist on paying Lavine preemptively that kind of money. There is just no reason at all to do it. ZERO benefit. All risk.

[HomoSapien]

How difficult would it be to work our a Lavine sign and trade to the Spurs for Leonard? If it’s doable I’d push for that. Spurs are motivated to trade him to the East and we are seemingly afraid to make a long term commitment to LaVine. It seems like the right risk for both sides, IMO.

[League Circles]

I think Zach is going to get about 75 mil for 4 years with possibly an opt-out after the third season. If I were Pax, I'd frontload his contract on the first and second year since we have the money to spend now anyway, and we are not getting any meaningful free-agent. If you pay Zach about 45mil, 25 next season and 20 the following, you'll only owe him 30 mil for the remaining two seasons, which would not be so bad because he'd be 25 years old with a tradeable contract. So, there are many ways it can be done.

Bro, stop being upset for Reinsdorf's money. If the money is there, we might as well spend it. Besides, we will not be a player in the free-agent market this year anyway. While Zach LaVine may not be a superstar, he does have some values. When you consider what guys like Wiggins, Bradley Beal, Hardaway and Harris are getting, this is not overpaying at all. Even freaking Courtney Lee is making 12mil a season. Based on my idea, in two years when you have LaVine making 15mil a season, it will be considered a bargain.

The value of the contract cannot decline that quickly. It can only decline by the same percentage as the max allowable raises which is something like four and a half percent if I recall correctly.

[johnnyvann840]

I lived in Phoenix almost the entire last season. I personally think Booker is the most overrated player in the NBA and a big reason why the Suns were the worst team in the NBA. Just because another team makes a poor decision and overpays an overrated young athletic wing by tens of millions doesn't mean the Bulls should do the same.

[PrimzyBulls81]

How difficult would it be to work our a Lavine sign and trade to the Spurs for Leonard? If it’s doable I’d push for that. Spurs are motivated to trade him to the East and we are seemingly afraid to make a long term commitment to LaVine. It seems like the right risk for both sides, IMO.

Pop would tear apart Zach at first.. but in long term, Zach could benefit a loooot to play under Pop, he certainly could became
much better all rounded team player.

[waffle]

Honest question - how many here would rather see Lavine get 25 MPG this year or Hutch getting 20?

I have been a Zack supporter but - not sure he does fit what this team looks like right now

They may have been telling the truth when they say the play book now is designed to run through Lauri. Would make sense

I ONLY see a short term, highish money contract.

[johnnyvann840]

Sean Kilpatrick - 13.2 PER, .543 TS%, 10.3 PPG, 19.6 MPG
Zach LaVine - 13.5 PER, .540 TS%, 14.0 PPG, 28.7 MPG

Hmm

Just to add.

Kilpatrick per 36, 23.4 pts

Lavine per 36, 22 pts.

Kilpatrick had a higher 3 pt % on higher volume. He had a higher FG%. He's a better defender. Less turnovers %. Higher FT %. About the same FT attempts. .. .574 TS% for Kilpatrick vs. .499 for Lavine.

Nobody is talking about paying Sean Kilpatrick anywhere near $15M per year.

[coldfish]

As I have said, Zach isn't even a starter in the NBA. Not ideally. He doesn't move well without the ball to allow him to be a secondary option, can't be a number one option and is a defensive liability.

He isn't worthless though. He seems like a Jamal Crawford type. Just a bench gunner. I think he would be an asset in that role. A lot of teams would love to have a guy like that coming in off the bench.

Problem is that he doesn't want to get paid like that or play like that. He isn't going to accept it, IMHO.

Paying guys like Lavine big money is the type of thing that locks teams into "mediocre at best" for years at a time. Quite frankly, a sign and trade for draft picks looks to be the best option, even if you are taking junk salary back. That would pretty much open up every team in the NBA.