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

[WindyCityBorn]

Paxson mentioned LaVine as part of key players for the upcoming season amd LaVine has been repping the Bulls non-stop this summer. He even tweeted at Wendell Carter to welcome him to Chicago. Anything can happen, but barring a crazy offer from another team LaVine is here for the short term at least. I still think he has a lot to prove and the talent to do it. This year will be crucial for him and Dunn.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[WindyCityBorn]

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.

Bro, why do you want so badly to pay Zach Lavine all this money? What benefit is it to you or any other Bull fan? What benefit is it to the Bulls organization? Seems to me the only one who benefits ANYTHING at all from that would be Zach Lavine.

I mean, why needlessly just pay somebody? Just to pay him? What is the goal here? You make no sense at all. You just keep trying to convince everyone that we should just throw money at Zach Lavine. Are you his mom? I just cannot figure this out. What is in this for anybody who wants to see the Bulls succeed?

Might be blasphemy to you, but some of us actively believe LaVine can be a big part of our winning future. Enough to gamble on.

[the ultimates]

Oladipo and Harris signed new deals that average out to 21 million per year over four years. I like Lavine and think he'll improve but he is NOT as good as those players. So something in the real of four years at around 15-18 million per season should be fine.

[johnnyvann840]

I don't understand why we are continuing to throw numbers out there. Even if you think Lavine is the next Michael Jordan there is still ZERO reason to pay him more than another team might offer. There are just a few teams out there that can even pay him more than $14M per year based on projected cap. Why in the World would the Bulls even think about paying him anything before he tests the market. Chances are very good he doesn't get an offer for more than $15M per. Just wait and let the market decide the terms. If another team proffers a huge offer sheet, just say "good for you Zach, congrats, but we are going to pass". Rather just roll with Kilpatrick anyway for a fraction of the cost.

[johnnyvann840]

Might be blasphemy to you, but some of us actively believe LaVine can be a big part of our winning future. Enough to gamble on.

That is fine. Believe that. But why would you want to pay more than you have to? It would be like going to the store to buy a pair of shoes and they are marked at $140 but you call the manager over and say... "hey, I really like those shoes but I want to give you $200 for them". Who would do that? It's the same damn thing only on a mega scale comparatively.

[BR0D1E86]

Vince Carter and Melo aren't very smart but they are Hall of Fame players due to their talent. Chicago has to lock Lavine up.

Which has what to do with the significantly less talented than either Lavine?

And I was always thrilled when the Melo rumors fell through anyway. He’s a selfish loser of a basketball player.

[WindyCityBorn]

Might be blasphemy to you, but some of us actively believe LaVine can be a big part of our winning future. Enough to gamble on.

That is fine. Believe that. But why would you want to pay more than you have to? It would be like going to the store to buy a pair of shoes and they are marked at $140 but you call the manager over and say... "hey, I really like those shoes but I want to give you $200 for them". Who would do that? It's the same damn thing only on a mega scale comparatively.

I don't really care exactly how much he gets, but I want to to be something fair. If they believe he is their SG of the future then pay him like it even if it shorter deal if they want to mitigate risk.

[MrSparkle]

I don't understand why we are continuing to throw numbers out there. Even if you think Lavine is the next Michael Jordan there is still ZERO reason to pay him more than another team might offer. There are just a few teams out there that can even pay him more than $14M per year based on projected cap. Why in the World would the Bulls even think about paying him anything before he tests the market. Chances are very good he doesn't get an offer for more than $15M per. Just wait and let the market decide the terms. If another team proffers a huge offer sheet, just say "good for you Zach, congrats, but we are going to pass". Rather just roll with Kilpatrick anyway for a fraction of the cost.

Well, I agree... it's the best way forward with this fork in the road. If some team is stupid enough to offer Zach more than 80/4 (2 out of 3 strikes: ACL history, poor advanced metrics), then good luck with that risk. Personally, the 2 strikes are big in my book. You're looking at a 66% chance of bust IMO, in regards to long-term salary (not even talking max). That said, $15-20m is what guys like Dieng and Lopez get, so it's not entirely fair to pigeon Zach in that salary bracket. Yes, the market was different, but still, he does have star-caliber offensive skills. And it will hurt to lose 1/3rd of the Jimmy pie for nothing in return. I'm willing to sacrifice that in the grand scheme, but the possibility of 60-80m for 4y would make Zach a depth piece possibly worth keeping. I don't really think we're in play for premiere FAs in '19 and 20.

All it takes is one team to screw the RFA process, and I think Atlanta's the one. Zach's entire situation would fit well with Atlanta. They'll still tank, but it doesn't mean they can't atleast have a high-octane offense and make it look fun. Trae and Zach wouldput fans in seats as Curry/Klay-lite (minus the defense and IQ), and it won't impede another few years of top-10 picks. This right here is your max contract slot, folks. I can 75% see it happening: 4-year offer.

And it'd be stupid for Chicago to match Zach's 4y max. But I dunno. This is why I didn't want any part of LaVine. It wasn't worth this headache. Thank god for Lauri.

[chrispatrick]

What's everybody problem with lavine??? Do you guys not think he can become any better??? If we don't max him and he goes somewhere and shows out will you guys not regret it??? If we going based off potential I say max him because Wiggins got maxed based off potential before last season and tbh in 24 games that zach played in he was better than Wiggins ijs

I don't think it's good logic to say "___________ got a terrible contract, let's give one to LaVine."

Sure, Wiggins (who despite being a complete waste of money is still better than LaVine) got a big contract. Why would we try to emulate other teams' bad decisions?

He has the talent to be an above average player, but the reality is that his teams have been better without him all 4 years he's been in the league. In the unlikely event that he becomes a plus player, it's still unlikely he's one we'd significantly regret losing given his deficiencies on the defensive end. It's painful trying to build a competent defense with him regardless of whether he becomes decent offensively (which he wasn't last year).

[Risk Addict]

Lavine is a net negative player. He loses games by his selfish play on offense and lack of defense. Why do people like this clown? Just cuz he can dunk?

[Truebiscuit]

He's the best athlete on our team, just turned 23, and I'm of the opinion he is ascending. He needs to get better on defense but I love his offensive game.

[Bulls23Nation]

I don't understand why we are continuing to throw numbers out there. Even if you think Lavine is the next Michael Jordan there is still ZERO reason to pay him more than another team might offer. There are just a few teams out there that can even pay him more than $14M per year based on projected cap. Why in the World would the Bulls even think about paying him anything before he tests the market. Chances are very good he doesn't get an offer for more than $15M per. Just wait and let the market decide the terms. If another team proffers a huge offer sheet, just say "good for you Zach, congrats, but we are going to pass". Rather just roll with Kilpatrick anyway for a fraction of the cost.

This. Zach should know by now the NBA is a business. The Bulls want to keep him, and have said as much but it takes two to tango in any business transaction. I think it would be a steal to get Lavine at 3 yrs/45 mil personally. Might even get him cheaper let's wait and see who's throwing money around.

[chrispatrick]

He's the best athlete on our team, just turned 23, and I'm of the opinion he is ascending. He needs to get better on defense but I love his offensive game.

Just curious, why do you think he's ascending? I respect that your opinion differs from mine, just wondering what strides you believe he's made.

By most accounts, he appears to be a hard working player, I just haven't really seen his game advance in any way throughout his career and his bball IQ is on the low end. We all know athleticism doesn't get better with age and bad defenders rarely become decent after 4 years in the league, so those mental strides and knowing where to pick his spots and play within the offense are key to him developing.

[TheJordanRule]

I don't understand why we are continuing to throw numbers out there. Even if you think Lavine is the next Michael Jordan there is still ZERO reason to pay him more than another team might offer. There are just a few teams out there that can even pay him more than $14M per year based on projected cap. Why in the World would the Bulls even think about paying him anything before he tests the market. Chances are very good he doesn't get an offer for more than $15M per. Just wait and let the market decide the terms. If another team proffers a huge offer sheet, just say "good for you Zach, congrats, but we are going to pass". Rather just roll with Kilpatrick anyway for a fraction of the cost.

Well, I agree... it's the best way forward with this fork in the road. If some team is stupid enough to offer Zach more than 80/4 (2 out of 3 strikes: ACL history, poor advanced metrics), then good luck with that risk. Personally, the 2 strikes are big in my book. You're looking at a 66% chance of bust IMO, in regards to long-term salary (not even talking max). That said, $15-20m is what guys like Dieng and Lopez get, so it's not entirely fair to pigeon Zach in that salary bracket. Yes, the market was different, but still, he does have star-caliber offensive skills. And it will hurt to lose 1/3rd of the Jimmy pie for nothing in return. I'm willing to sacrifice that in the grand scheme, but the possibility of 60-80m for 4y would make Zach a depth piece possibly worth keeping. I don't really think we're in play for premiere FAs in '19 and 20.

All it takes is one team to screw the RFA process, and I think Atlanta's the one. Zach's entire situation would fit well with Atlanta. They'll still tank, but it doesn't mean they can't atleast have a high-octane offense and make it look fun. Trae and Zach wouldput fans in seats as Curry/Klay-lite (minus the defense and IQ), and it won't impede another few years of top-10 picks. This right here is your max contract slot, folks. I can 75% see it happening: 4-year offer.

And it'd be stupid for Chicago to match Zach's 4y max. But I dunno. This is why I didn't want any part of LaVine. It wasn't worth this headache. Thank god for Lauri.

No way Mr. Sparkle! There is no headache whatsoever because our team has cap space. Either we keep Zach at a reasonable deal, or we replace Zach with someone who will be as good an asset for our roster or better using that cap space. Three quick points: first, the option to invest in an equally productive more healthy UFA youngster for half of the price or less-- like Mario Hezonja or Joe Harris, and perhaps Will Barton-- is appealing. The point of a move in this direction would be to add a cheap, moveable contract that would become a strong team asset with only marginal improvement from the player signed. For instance, it wouldn't surprise me if Mario or Joe upped their PER by two or three points next year. Second, the option to invest in a more proven more healthy RFA is equally attractive. That's because, even if these RFA wingmen won't come at a heavily discounted price, they will still probably come cheaper than Zach's pricing while offering a decent to terrific amount of upside with more proven production (Dante Exum or Kyle Anderson). Exum, for example, has all the tools Zach does and more, but Exum has shown much longer flashes of productive play. Kyle Anderson, on the other hand, doesn't have Zach's tools but he's a lock down defender who can be productive on offense and on the boards, posting a 15.9 PER last season. Third, if we can dump Lopez, the UFA and RFA market for bigs this summer is LOADED. I'd like to add a Nikola Jokic or Aaron Gordon but since those guys are RFAs and working out a deal with them would be complicated, perhaps we'd have better luck with a UFA Derrick Favors or UFA DeMarcus Cousins. In conclusion, we have a ton of great options to choose from. Zach is only one of a wide variety of choices, and if he prices himself up out of a reasonable deal, we need to move on.

[JimmyJammer]

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

Am I really reading this? Sean freaking Kilpatrick? A journeyman who could not even be on a roster? You are comparing stats of a journeyman to a young player coming off a severe injury?

[Chi town]

Might be blasphemy to you, but some of us actively believe LaVine can be a big part of our winning future. Enough to gamble on.

That is fine. Believe that. But why would you want to pay more than you have to? It would be like going to the store to buy a pair of shoes and they are marked at $140 but you call the manager over and say... "hey, I really like those shoes but I want to give you $200 for them". Who would do that? It's the same damn thing only on a mega scale comparatively.

I don't really care exactly how much he gets, but I want to to be something fair. If they believe he is their SG of the future then pay him like it even if it shorter deal if they want to mitigate risk.

Nope. Let the market dictate. I dont see him getting more than a 15M per offer.

I think he will def outperform that too. I will be very surprised if the Bulls dont get a deal done.

Pax has said Bulls have changed the offense to get up and down more and talked about Lavine in the open court. I think Lavine will put up pre acl numbers and even exceed them. I think he will be more of a 3pt shooter and fastbreak player. I think thats best for everyone.

[Scalaboner]

Oladipo and Harris signed new deals that average out to 21 million per year over four years. I like Lavine and think he'll improve but he is NOT as good as those players. So something in the real of four years at around 15-18 million per season should be fine.

People forget that while Oladipo had a phenomenal season this past year with Indiana, him and LaVine had a very similar career up until that point. This was a person on his third team that didn’t live up to his hype (second overall pick) until last season so i think LaVine could get in the ballpark of Dipos deal. I’m not saying it’s a good deal or he will be worth it, but with the space the Bulls have he is worth the risk IF it isn’t a max deal.

[WindyCityBorn]

That is fine. Believe that. But why would you want to pay more than you have to? It would be like going to the store to buy a pair of shoes and they are marked at $140 but you call the manager over and say... "hey, I really like those shoes but I want to give you $200 for them". Who would do that? It's the same damn thing only on a mega scale comparatively.

I don't really care exactly how much he gets, but I want to to be something fair. If they believe he is their SG of the future then pay him like it even if it shorter deal if they want to mitigate risk.

Nope. Let the market dictate. I dont see him getting more than a 15M per offer.

I think he will def outperform that too. I will be very surprised if the Bulls dont get a deal done.

Pax has said Bulls have changed the offense to get up and down more and talked about Lavine in the open court. I think Lavine will put up pre acl numbers and even exceed them. I think he will be more of a 3pt shooter and fastbreak player. I think thats best for everyone.

$15 million would be pretty damn fair so I don't know why you said nope. Also it was reported that the Bulls will make him a good faith offer and if he wants more then he has to get an offer sheet.

[Hangtime84]

I don't really care exactly how much he gets, but I want to to be something fair. If they believe he is their SG of the future then pay him like it even if it shorter deal if they want to mitigate risk.

Nope. Let the market dictate. I dont see him getting more than a 15M per offer.

I think he will def outperform that too. I will be very surprised if the Bulls dont get a deal done.

Pax has said Bulls have changed the offense to get up and down more and talked about Lavine in the open court. I think Lavine will put up pre acl numbers and even exceed them. I think he will be more of a 3pt shooter and fastbreak player. I think thats best for everyone.

$15 million would be pretty damn fair so I don't know why you said nope. Also it was reported that the Bulls will make him a good faith offer and if he wants more then he has to get an offer sheet.

15 Million is fair offer

[R3AL1TY]

I don't mind giving Lavine a chance to prove himself and to grow. The key thing is to not overpay him or give him a terrible contract that won't be tradeable if necessary.