Zach Lavine: Offered 4/80 from Kings update p26 Bulls Matched

[RedBulls23]

Some fans are just hell bent on saying he is bad without any context. Then when he posts like a 22/5/5 season, people will throw some stupid metric out there to try and justify its still not good. smh

So the question to you fans is, what does Zach Lavine have to do this season to justify the contract in your eyes?

Be a positive impact player when he's on the floor at an allstar level, something he hasn't been yet in his career.

22/5/5 is irrelevant if he's chucking 20 shots a game and turning the ball over 3-4 times a game. Plus being a shiv defensively.

[coldfish]

Some fans are just hell bent on saying he is bad without any context. Then when he posts like a 22/5/5 season, people will throw some stupid metric out there to try and justify its still not good. smh

So the question to you fans is, what does Zach Lavine have to do this season to justify the contract in your eyes?

Positive advanced stats, stay healthy, make All-Star selection, make team better when he is on the court (which includes defense), improve playmaking, be 2nd option behind Lauri. Basically everything what he isnt.

Dont forget we just matched 20M per year offer over next 4 years to 23 year old version of Gerald Green.

This contract is terrible, but the Gerald Green comparison is also terrible. 23 year old Gerald Green was out of the NBA. LaVine is not even close to that.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Career:
Green 13.2 PER 53.3%ts -2.4 +/-
Lavine 13.5 PER 54.0%ts -2.1 +/-

Subjectively, both 6'5" high jumping, low IQ SG's.

Hell, both have 3 syllable names ending in an "een" sound.

From basketball-reference

[Red Larrivee]

Some fans are just hell bent on saying he is bad without any context. Then when he posts like a 22/5/5 season, people will throw some stupid metric out there to try and justify its still not good. smh

So the question to you fans is, what does Zach Lavine have to do this season to justify the contract in your eyes?

'

Be a positive impact player when he's on the floor at an allstar level, something he hasn't been yet in his career.

22/5/5 is irrelevant if he's chucking 20 shots a game and turning the ball over 3-4 times a game. Plus being a shiv defensively.

What is the probability that he does become a net-positive? Like we discussed in the other LaVine thread, he isn't lacking in physical tools or talent. Defensively, his actual man-to-man defense is respectable, but his awareness otherwise is trash.

Basically, how correctable are his issues? Most of them seem to be BBIQ and instincts. That's a tougher road defensively, but offensively it should be easier to dial him back.

[Red Larrivee]

Positive advanced stats, stay healthy, make All-Star selection, make team better when he is on the court (which includes defense), improve playmaking, be 2nd option behind Lauri. Basically everything what he isnt.

Dont forget we just matched 20M per year offer over next 4 years to 23 year old version of Gerald Green.

This contract is terrible, but the Gerald Green comparison is also terrible. 23 year old Gerald Green was out of the NBA. LaVine is not even close to that.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Career:
Green 13.2 PER 53.3%ts -2.4 +/-
Lavine 13.5 PER 54.0%ts -2.1 +/-

Subjectively, both 6'5" high jumping, low IQ SG's.

Hell, both have 3 syllable names ending in an "een" sound.

From basketball-reference

Again, 23-year-old Gerald Green was so bad that no team thought he was worth an NBA contract for two years. At age 22 he had an 8.7 PER and struggled to get to an 11.7 PER the next season.

It's a terrible comparison. Green is basically the exaggeration of how bad some people think LaVine is. It's clear LaVine is going to have to take a big step to live up to a deal that is immediately awful. But, if we're pretending that he's this fringe NBA talent then it's not much of a discussion.

[League Circles]

This contract is terrible, but the Gerald Green comparison is also terrible. 23 year old Gerald Green was out of the NBA. LaVine is not even close to that.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Career:
Green 13.2 PER 53.3%ts -2.4 +/-
Lavine 13.5 PER 54.0%ts -2.1 +/-

Subjectively, both 6'5" high jumping, low IQ SG's.

Hell, both have 3 syllable names ending in an "een" sound.

From basketball-reference

Again, 23-year-old Gerald Green was so bad that no team thought he was worth an NBA contract for two years. At age 22 he had an 8.7 PER and struggled to get to an 11.7 PER the next season.

It's a terrible comparison. Green is basically the exaggeration of how bad some people think LaVine is. It's clear LaVine is going to have to take a big step to live up to a deal that is immediately awful. But, if we're pretending that he's this fringe NBA talent then it's not much of a discussion.

I have always said that the NBA is much more about opportunity than ability. In my opinion Zach LaVine is basically Danny Green with having had a much better opportunity early in his career. If he didn't play effectively the most minutes per game in the league and shoot Every Time he Touch the ball thus having a points per game average that appears to be high in his third year which was really just a half of the year nobody would really even think anything about him. He would be lucky to get the full mle for four years.

[RedBulls23]

Some fans are just hell bent on saying he is bad without any context. Then when he posts like a 22/5/5 season, people will throw some stupid metric out there to try and justify its still not good. smh

So the question to you fans is, what does Zach Lavine have to do this season to justify the contract in your eyes?

'

Be a positive impact player when he's on the floor at an allstar level, something he hasn't been yet in his career.

22/5/5 is irrelevant if he's chucking 20 shots a game and turning the ball over 3-4 times a game. Plus being a shiv defensively.

What is the probability that he does become a net-positive? Like we discussed in the other LaVine thread, he isn't lacking in physical tools or talent. Defensively, his actual man-to-man defense is respectable, but his awareness otherwise is trash.

Basically, how correctable are his issues? Most of them seem to be BBIQ and instincts. That's a tougher road defensively, but offensively it should be easier to dial him back.

That's why people don't want to pay him this much money, because of the risk factors of him being a mediocre player.

Especially with his defensive issues he would have to be a high efficient 25+ ppg player to justify playing him when he kills the defense due to his trash awareness. Man defense can almost he irrelevant in today's league due to teams running more motion offenses.

[League Circles]

Jason Richardson is actually a very good comp IMO. He put up numbers and you might think he's good if you don't really inspect them very closely but at the end of the day he was probably never top 10 or 15 his position in terms of actual winning impact.

[Chi town]

Jason Richardson is actually a very good comp IMO. He put up numbers and you might think he's good if you don't really inspect them very closely but at the end of the day he was probably never top 10 or 15 his position in terms of actual winning impact.

Decent comp but JRICH didn’t shoot many 3s like Lavine has and probably will continue to do with even more volume.

If Lavine stays healthy he will put up his pre acl numbers and be a neutral contract the next couple years as the cap rises.

[Jax Teller]

LoL at people who fantasize the Bulls would sign 2 stars with bigger cap space next year. Wake up people, no top player with options is coming to the Chicago Bulls and this front office. I can’t believe after all this time there are some who are still drinking kool aid by the gallon.

Signing guys like Lavine are really the only options for this franchise in todays NBA. Free agency next season will pretty much come down to overpaying for another guy similar to Lavine or carrying the cap space forward again. Unless these babies we draft every year turn into stars quickly it going to be the same for each offseason. The only hope now is the east stinks so much you can become a factor with mediocre talent.

I was the guy who created the 2019 plan thread, so this is obviously aimed at me.

My rebuttal: I never said that there was a good chance it would work. The hope was that Chicago would be one of the only teams with two max deals. If two guys wanted to pair up, Chicago could offer that as well as a bunch of young lottery picks to support them.

Lavine? Lavine isn't very good. He is a below average NBA player by most marks. Players like him are eminently replaceable. You are talking about a sub 15 PER, net negative guy. Players like that are a dime a dozen. So what if he can jump. Gerald Green switched teams 10 times or so doing pretty much the same stuff.

IMHO, the Bulls just gave $80m to the next Gerald Green.

Their only hope is Lavine with his athleticism develops into something special. That’s pretty much all the Bulls franchise has, hoping players under their control develop. Lavine had no choices, the Bulls controlled him. Top players who have choices will not sign here, period. People who think otherwise are dreaming a bit. Its unfortunate, but this franchise and lousy cheap owner who keeps supporting this lousy front office has no other options but to hope players under their control magically develop. Its a shame, the city of Chicago should be a destination top players want to play. It isnt.

[StunnerKO]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[HoopsterJones]

Career:
Green 13.2 PER 53.3%ts -2.4 +/-
Lavine 13.5 PER 54.0%ts -2.1 +/-

Subjectively, both 6'5" high jumping, low IQ SG's.

Hell, both have 3 syllable names ending in an "een" sound.

From basketball-reference

Again, 23-year-old Gerald Green was so bad that no team thought he was worth an NBA contract for two years. At age 22 he had an 8.7 PER and struggled to get to an 11.7 PER the next season.

It's a terrible comparison. Green is basically the exaggeration of how bad some people think LaVine is. It's clear LaVine is going to have to take a big step to live up to a deal that is immediately awful. But, if we're pretending that he's this fringe NBA talent then it's not much of a discussion.

I have always said that the NBA is much more about opportunity than ability. In my opinion Zach LaVine is basically Danny Green with having had a much better opportunity early in his career. If he didn't play effectively the most minutes per game in the league and shoot Every Time he Touch the ball thus having a points per game average that appears to be high in his third year which was really just a half of the year nobody would really even think anything about him. He would be lucky to get the full mle for four years.

Do you mean Gerald Green? Because Danny Green plays good defense.

[HoopsterJones]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Bulls FO mouthpiece at it again.

[Red Larrivee]

That's why people don't want to pay him this much money, because of the risk factors of him being a mediocre player.

Especially with his defensive issues he would have to be a high efficient 25+ ppg player to justify playing him when he kills the defense due to his trash awareness. Man defense can almost he irrelevant in today's league due to teams running more motion offenses.

So, what is the likelihood that he improves as a team defender and matures his shot selection?

[waffle]

not a fan

just don't think he plays a game that fits the rest of our pieces.

Yes, he is only 23, but he has probably been playing organized basketball since he was in grade school. There are lots of lessons along the way that he appears to have ignored. I do think there is a CHANCE his D improves and I do think there is a CHANCE he starts to play within the system offensively but I would not be comfortable betting 20 million a year to find out.

Optimism gets you in trouble when evaluating talent.

[League Circles]

Jason Richardson is actually a very good comp IMO. He put up numbers and you might think he's good if you don't really inspect them very closely but at the end of the day he was probably never top 10 or 15 his position in terms of actual winning impact.

Decent comp but JRICH didn’t shoot many 3s like Lavine has and probably will continue to do with even more volume.

If Lavine stays healthy he will put up his pre acl numbers and be a neutral contract the next couple years as the cap rises.

Not true about JRich. He shot the same frequency of threes per 36 at the same % as Lavine. Almost exact on both counts for their careers.

[Lauri_Legend]

Not bad at all.

[League Circles]

Again, 23-year-old Gerald Green was so bad that no team thought he was worth an NBA contract for two years. At age 22 he had an 8.7 PER and struggled to get to an 11.7 PER the next season.

It's a terrible comparison. Green is basically the exaggeration of how bad some people think LaVine is. It's clear LaVine is going to have to take a big step to live up to a deal that is immediately awful. But, if we're pretending that he's this fringe NBA talent then it's not much of a discussion.

I have always said that the NBA is much more about opportunity than ability. In my opinion Zach LaVine is basically Danny Green with having had a much better opportunity early in his career. If he didn't play effectively the most minutes per game in the league and shoot Every Time he Touch the ball thus having a points per game average that appears to be high in his third year which was really just a half of the year nobody would really even think anything about him. He would be lucky to get the full mle for four years.

Do you mean Gerald Green? Because Danny Green plays good defense.

Yes I did mean Gerald Green sorry thanks for the correction. I just misspoke. I've always been a fan of Danny Green.

[League Circles]

One thing is apparent to me. Zach LaVine's success in helping this team win over the long term will be significantly dependent on the coaching he receives. I've never been a fan of Hoiberg but I'm not going to say that he's the world's worst coach. I hope he's up to the task. I am not particularly confident. Zach needs a really really good coach.

[Jvaughn]

Career:
Green 13.2 PER 53.3%ts -2.4 +/-
Lavine 13.5 PER 54.0%ts -2.1 +/-

Subjectively, both 6'5" high jumping, low IQ SG's.

Hell, both have 3 syllable names ending in an "een" sound.

From basketball-reference

Again, 23-year-old Gerald Green was so bad that no team thought he was worth an NBA contract for two years. At age 22 he had an 8.7 PER and struggled to get to an 11.7 PER the next season.

It's a terrible comparison. Green is basically the exaggeration of how bad some people think LaVine is. It's clear LaVine is going to have to take a big step to live up to a deal that is immediately awful. But, if we're pretending that he's this fringe NBA talent then it's not much of a discussion.

I have always said that the NBA is much more about opportunity than ability. In my opinion Zach LaVine is basically Danny Green with having had a much better opportunity early in his career. If he didn't play effectively the most minutes per game in the league and shoot Every Time he Touch the ball thus having a points per game average that appears to be high in his third year which was really just a half of the year nobody would really even think anything about him. He would be lucky to get the full mle for four years.

You mean Danny Green who is a good defender, but otherwise only has one NBA talent which is spotting up? Green doesn't have the athleticism, ball skills, or ability to finish like Lavine. I don't see the comp at all.

[AshyLarrysDiaper]

Not bad at all.

In 2013, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Serge Ibaka, Tony Parker, Kevin Garnett and Andree Iguodala all made $11-12M annually.

Whether you scale to the 2013 cap or to 2020, this is a bad contract.