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

[Betta Bulleavit]

That's pretty **** reasoning honestly. Not much reason to believe that Vlade Divac and Vivek Ranadive are good evaluators.

If you say so. Then again, everyone's reason seems to be **** outside of yours. So it's whatever as far as I'm concerned.

I mean there is clear precedent in sports where the top nerds on blogs were better talent evaluators than the actual GMs/decision makers themselves. Speaking obviously of the MLB.

I get that. I myself have observed talent in players when the professionals didn't. Jimmy being the most recent. But by no means does that make me more qualified than the people that do it for a living.

For example, if I take 10,000 shots and hit 300 of them. And say...Klay Thompson takes 500 shots and makes the same 300, does that make me just as qualified to shoot a basketball as Klay? Of course not. What you are saying is kind of the same. You have 30 GMs in the league compared to 10s of thousands of blogger nerds. They are bound to get hits at some point. Right?

[SensiBull]

I didn't say Holiday was on his level.

This is the point where people can't refute the argument you're actually making. So, they start putting silly words in your mouth to make you seem wrong about stuff you've never said.

I don't think Steph Curry has Russell Westbrook's athleticism, but I know which one has three rings.

I don't think Draymond Green has Paul George's 'breakout potential' (whatever the 'F' that is) but I know which one I'd want on my team.

People keep advocating this concept of 'replacing' Zach LaVine, like we've already arrived at some wonderful destination - a plot of land that we should be afraid to be moved off of.

We suck, people.

Some of you want to change that by rubbing the rosary beads and hoping that Zach becomes a 30+ ppg scorer, and, somehow has a game that still depends on his youth and athleticism, despite the injury he has already incurred, well into the next decade.

Others of us see teams able to rebuild on the fly by laddering their portfolios, because they have a team-wide strategy that doesn't hinge on the abilities of a single player, involves interaction with other players, and, can replace many of its interchangeable parts on the fly because it doesn't 'get a flat tire' when the 'star' is 'in his trailer' with an injury.

[Truebiscuit]

I didn't say Holiday was on his level.

This is the point where people can't refute the argument you're actually making. So, they start putting silly words in your mouth to make you seem wrong about stuff you've never said.

That's rich, because you did actually say this:

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.

And it's freaking ridiculous if you've actually watched both these players play basketball.

[Betta Bulleavit]

I didn't say Holiday was on his level.

This is the point where people can't refute the argument you're actually making. So, they start putting silly words in your mouth to make you seem wrong about stuff you've never said.

I don't think Steph Curry has Russell Westbrook's athleticism, but I know which one has three rings.

I don't think Draymond Green has Paul George's 'breakout potential' (whatever the 'F' that is) but I know which one I'd want on my team.

People keep advocating this concept of 'replacing' Zach LaVine, like we've already arrived at some wonderful destination - a plot of land that we should be afraid to be moved off of.

We suck, people.

Some of you want to change that by rubbing the rosary beads and hoping that Zach becomes a 30+ ppg scorer, and, somehow has a game that still depends on his youth and athleticism, despite the injury he has already incurred, well into the next decade.

Others of us see teams able to rebuild on the fly by laddering their portfolios, because they have a team-wide strategy that doesn't hinge on the abilities of a single player, involves interaction with other players, and, can replace many of its interchangeable parts on the fly because it doesn't 'get a flat tire' when the 'star' is 'in his trailer' with an injury.

So lets reset here then. You aren't saying that Holliday would be the answer. What I'm saying is that if Lavine walks for nothing, we will need a "replacement". So if you aren't saying that Holliday is the answer, who would that player be? Because, after all, as of today, Zach is slated as our starting SG...love it or hate it.

[Truebiscuit]

I didn't say Holiday was on his level.

This is the point where people can't refute the argument you're actually making. So, they start putting silly words in your mouth to make you seem wrong about stuff you've never said.

I don't think Steph Curry has Russell Westbrook's athleticism, but I know which one has three rings.

I don't think Draymond Green has Paul George's 'breakout potential' (whatever the 'F' that is) but I know which one I'd want on my team.

People keep advocating this concept of 'replacing' Zach LaVine, like we've already arrived at some wonderful destination - a plot of land that we should be afraid to be moved off of.

We suck, people.

Some of you want to change that by rubbing the rosary beads and hoping that Zach becomes a 30+ ppg scorer, and, somehow has a game that still depends on his youth and athleticism, despite the injury he has already incurred, well into the next decade.

Others of us see teams able to rebuild on the fly by laddering their portfolios, because they have a team-wide strategy that doesn't hinge on the abilities of a single player, involves interaction with other players, and, can replace many of its interchangeable parts on the fly because it doesn't 'get a flat tire' when the 'star' is 'in his trailer' with an injury.

So lets reset here then. You aren't saying that Holliday would be the answer. What I'm saying is that if Lavine walks for nothing, we will need a "replacement". So if you aren't saying that Holliday is the answer, who would that player be? Because, after all, as of today, Zach is slated as our starting SG...love it or hate it.

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.

[SensiBull]

I think Sacramento's logic is just finding any super talented player who can present the idea of a playoff push. They struggle attracting players anyway, so it makes some sense to overpay a restricted free agent.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

If they overpay Zach, that frees us up to “overpay” Exum. Given all the studs on their roster looking for paydays, the Jazz may not be able to match a 10-12 mil per year offer for Exum... especially not if we front load the contract. And I’d take Exum at 12 mil per year over Zach at 17+. Shoot, I’d take Exum at 12 over Zach at 12.

I wouldn't give Exum anything big. Way too deep an injury history. If LaVine walks, I'm starting Valentine and riding into the season.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I like it.

Frankly, the idea will get a lot of flack, because Valentine doesn't do between-the-legs dunks, and because I've become Public Enemy Number one for not supporting a max contract for Zach LaVine. Plus, people don't see him as having 'breakout potential', but, Valentine:

1. Has similar size to LaVine, for those who are worried about such things.
2. Was actually the only player in all of college basketball who had stats in the same stratosphere as Ben Simmons (19 pts, 8reb and 8 asst)until a knee injury of his own, which shouldn't deserve any less excuses than Zach's
3. Shoots efficiently from the perimeter AND the field while ranking only 9th in FG Attempts on the team
4. Averages 3 assists and 5 rebounds in 27 minutes of play (so he can contribute even when his shot isn't falling- whenever THAT is)
5. Isn't going to start making insane money at a cost to the franchise in 2018-19.

Plus, all of these people who are falsely putting all of the burden to replace Zach LaVine's scoring onto whomever 'replaces him' need to put up what they expect Wendell Carter Jr. is going to be scoring in his rookie season.

Bogus reasoning, bordering on superstitions and voodoo.

[SensiBull]

You can't argue that you think WCJ is going to put up 10ppg and still put it on whomever 'replaces' Zach LaVine to score more than the missing 7.

If you think WCJ can't score 10ppg, you should be saying that in your argument about how lost the Bulls will be without LaVine.

[TheSuzerain]

If you say so. Then again, everyone's reason seems to be **** outside of yours. So it's whatever as far as I'm concerned.

I mean there is clear precedent in sports where the top nerds on blogs were better talent evaluators than the actual GMs/decision makers themselves. Speaking obviously of the MLB.

I get that. I myself have observed talent in players when the professionals didn't. Jimmy being the most recent. But by no means does that make me more qualified than the people that do it for a living.

For example, if I take 10,000 shots and hit 300 of them. And say...Klay Thompson takes 500 shots and makes the same 300, does that make me just as qualified to shoot a basketball as Klay? Of course not. What you are saying is kind of the same. You have 30 GMs in the league compared to 10s of thousands of blogger nerds. They are bound to get hits at some point. Right?

There is a huge difference with how NBA players are selected and prove themselves and how GMs/Coaches are.

[Truebiscuit]

You can't argue that you think WCJ is going to put up 10ppg and still put it on whomever 'replaces' Zach LaVine to score more than the missing 7.

If you think WCJ can't score 10ppg, you should be saying that in your argument about how lost the Bulls will be without LaVine.

Dude, you are a trip.

Why are you tying WCJ's output to LaVine's and ignoring the output last season from the front court that used those minutes?

WCJ is going to be taking minutes from Lopez/Felicio, which accounted for 17.4 PPG last season. If you want to play this game (for whatever reason) then that must be factored in based on who is losing minutes/output to WCJ.

[Betta Bulleavit]

If they overpay Zach, that frees us up to “overpay” Exum. Given all the studs on their roster looking for paydays, the Jazz may not be able to match a 10-12 mil per year offer for Exum... especially not if we front load the contract. And I’d take Exum at 12 mil per year over Zach at 17+. Shoot, I’d take Exum at 12 over Zach at 12.

I wouldn't give Exum anything big. Way too deep an injury history. If LaVine walks, I'm starting Valentine and riding into the season.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I like it.

Frankly, the idea will get a lot of flack, because Valentine doesn't do between-the-legs dunks, and because I've become Public Enemy Number one for not supporting a max contract for Zach LaVine. Plus, people don't see him as having 'breakout potential', but, Valentine:

1. Has similar size to LaVine, for those who are worried about such things.
2. Was actually the only player in all of college basketball who had stats in the same stratosphere as Ben Simmons (19 pts, 8reb and 8 asst)until a knee injury of his own, which shouldn't deserve any less excuses than Zach's
3. Shoots efficiently from the perimeter AND the field while ranking only 9th in FG Attempts on the team
4. Averages 3 assists and 5 rebounds in 27 minutes of play (so he can contribute even when his shot isn't falling- whenever THAT is)
5. Isn't going to start making insane money at a cost to the franchise in 2018-19.

Plus, all of these people who are falsely putting all of the burden to replace Zach LaVine's scoring onto whomever 'replaces him' need to put up what they expect Wendell Carter Jr. is going to be scoring in his rookie season.

Bogus reasoning, bordering on superstitions and voodoo.

A couple of things. I (for one) am not and never have been impressed with between the leg dunks and the other stuff that you just mentioned. I don't need flash. Hence the reason that I've been one of the biggest supporters in the drafting of WCJ. I would venture to say that this thought process is pretty consistent across the board.

You also seem to be developing this me against the world attitude as it pertains to this topic as if YOU are the only person on this board that would rather let Lavine walk than paying him the max. The fact of the matter is that there are LOTS of others that think along those same lines. Me in particular. I'm all for keeping Lavine, but only...and I do mean ONLY at the right price. So from that end, all I can advise is that you get out of your feelings.

Your opposition is coming from this idea that Zach can be easily replaced. And you know something...perhaps he can be. But if that's the case, then there really should be no trouble with coming up with several viable options, which you really haven't done up to this point. What you have effectively done is try to convince everyone that Zach wouldn't need to be replaced at all because certain guys stepping up will offset the loss of Zach's production, which is plausible if it weren't for the fact that we are talking about a team that is very much devoid of talent. Particularly from an offensive perspective.

[Betta Bulleavit]

You can't argue that you think WCJ is going to put up 10ppg and still put it on whomever 'replaces' Zach LaVine to score more than the missing 7.

If you think WCJ can't score 10ppg, you should be saying that in your argument about how lost the Bulls will be without LaVine.

Dude, you are a trip.

Why are you tying WCJ's output to LaVine's and ignoring the output last season from the front court that used those minutes?

WCJ is going to be taking minutes from Lopez/Felicio, which accounted for 17.4 PPG last season. If you want to play this game (for whatever reason) then that must be factored in based on who is losing minutes/output to WCJ.

Thank You!!

[Betta Bulleavit]

I mean there is clear precedent in sports where the top nerds on blogs were better talent evaluators than the actual GMs/decision makers themselves. Speaking obviously of the MLB.

I get that. I myself have observed talent in players when the professionals didn't. Jimmy being the most recent. But by no means does that make me more qualified than the people that do it for a living.

For example, if I take 10,000 shots and hit 300 of them. And say...Klay Thompson takes 500 shots and makes the same 300, does that make me just as qualified to shoot a basketball as Klay? Of course not. What you are saying is kind of the same. You have 30 GMs in the league compared to 10s of thousands of blogger nerds. They are bound to get hits at some point. Right?

There is a huge difference with how NBA players are selected and prove themselves and how GMs/Coaches are.

Of course there is. I would never deny that. But it still doesn't change my belief that posters like us on a message board (a very good one..) are far less qualified than GMs that do this job for a living.

[johnnyvann840]

You can't argue that you think WCJ is going to put up 10ppg and still put it on whomever 'replaces' Zach LaVine to score more than the missing 7.

If you think WCJ can't score 10ppg, you should be saying that in your argument about how lost the Bulls will be without LaVine.

Dude, you are a trip.

Why are you tying WCJ's output to LaVine's and ignoring the output last season from the front court that used those minutes?

WCJ is going to be taking minutes from Lopez/Felicio, which accounted for 17.4 PPG last season. If you want to play this game (for whatever reason) then that must be factored in based on who is losing minutes/output to WCJ.

What the hell are you people talking about? Replace Zach Lavine's points? WTF? That is the most F'up logic I've ever heard.

First of all. There is NOTHING to replace as the Bulls have a much better point differential without Zach Lavine than with him!! They are -6.3 with him on the floor. The offense scores the same amount with or without him. The defense is MUCH worse though.

In 3248 minutes WITHOUT Lavine the Bulls scored 105.3 PP100

In 642 minutes WITH Lavine the Bulls scored 105 PP100

In 3248 minutes WITHOUT Lavine the Bulls gave up 111.3 PP100

In 642 minutes WITH Lavine the Bulls gave up 118 PP100

So, the offense is the same with or without Lavine while the defense just pisses all over themselves.
What's to replace? Getting the F kicked out of you?

[Truebiscuit]

^ I hear what you're saying, but using that logic every single player on our roster save for Mirotic and Portis were a negative BPM.

[DASMACKDOWN]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/250408/Bulls-Hope-To-Re-Sign-Zach-LaVine-At-$14M-$16M-Per-Season

per wiretap

[TheSuzerain]

Do people realize how bad our offense will probably be next year? I can see us having a league average defense or something if the team plays hard.

I can't fathom the Bulls being anything other than bottom 5 offensively. And if Lavine leaves, it's going to be lol bad.

[gardenofsound]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/250408/Bulls-Hope-To-Re-Sign-Zach-LaVine-At-$14M-$16M-Per-Season

per wiretap

Wiretap is slightly misleading. KC says he's guessing here:

Suddenly, the Smart rumors make more sense. ... Mostly kidding as the Bulls have publicly stated at every turn their hope to retain LaVine. That said, the Tribune reported last week that the Bulls are prepared for at least one Western Conference team to make a run at LaVine. If the price tag gets crazy, they’d have to take a hard look at what to do. They now have six other young players who are considered part of their core. At least one — Markkanen — is headed for a no-doubt large payday. The Bulls’ history with restricted free agents is well documented. They make a proactive offer they feel is the right value and tell the player to go beat it if he feels he’s worth more. That approach happened with Omer Asik, Jimmy Butler and Nikola Mirotic. Asik got a better offer. The Bulls had to pay Butler a virtual max contact after he won most improved player. And Mirotic got no offers and ultimately signed a trade-friendly deal with the Bulls. I still think LaVine ends up with the Bulls, whom I’d guess would prefer to re-sign him in the $14 million to $16 million range annually. But it’s going to be messy if this team signs him to an offer sheet at $20 million or more annually.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/ct-spt-bulls-mailbag-wendell-carter-free-agency-20180627-story.html

[League Circles]

Jesus christ please change the thread title.

I'd guess the Bulls would prefer to resign him to a 5 year deal for the vet minimum.

My guess is as meaningful as KC's.

[bulliedog8]

Hawks (20), Mavs (20-25), Lakers (up to 70), 76ers (30), Kings (17) and Pacers (up to 33) have room to offer Lavine over 15.

Of those teams, I cant see the lakers 76ers or pacers offering him. Kings maybe but I doubt it. Hawks maybe but I doubt it.

He doesnt have a big market.

[Truebiscuit]

KC jumps in:

Read on Twitter