WCJ or Lauri

[DuckIII]

[looks at the advanced numbers]

Carter, with ease.

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

The rest of the league views him as replaceable? You know this how exactly?

(You don’t)

If you’re watching the actual games then I don’t understand how anyone can come to this conclusion but I guess that fine.

There are a lot people out there. So you can pretty much expect at least one person to reach any conclusion about anything. And that’s pretty much how I view that whole post.

Except the part about preferring Markkanen. Reasonable minds can differ. But the stuff about WCJ specifically doesn’t hold water.

[FranchisePlayer]

[looks at the advanced numbers]

Carter, with ease.

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

Exactly. I like them both but Lauri has a way higher ceiling. Despite what some Lauri haters claim, he could still very well develop into an All Star player with some proper coaching. Heck, he was there last season. Maybe Wendell too, he's a couple of years younger, not wise to nail just yet what the future holds for him. But IMO it seems more likely, what we're witnessing now, that with Wendell you'll just get solid performance in every game, nothing flashy, and if that what excites people here more then fair enough. I think it's better to have a high scoring PF with prowess in 3 point shooting than a very solid, 6'9" starting center, in building a contender.

[DuckIII]

[looks at the advanced numbers]

Carter, with ease.

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

Exactly. I like them both but Lauri has a way higher ceiling. Despite what some Lauri haters claim, he could still very well develop into an All Star player with some proper coaching. Heck, he was there last season. Maybe Wendell too, he's a couple of years younger, not wise to nail just yet what the future holds for him. But IMO it seems more likely, what we're witnessing now, that with Wendell you'll just get solid performance in every game, nothing flashy, and if that what excites people here more then fair enough. I think it's better to have a high scoring PF with prowess in 3 point shooting than a very solid, 6'9" starting center, in building a contender.

I think most posters agree that Lauri is the higher upside player. I know I certainly see it that way. The issue, for me at least, is that if I’m forced to choose between them TODAY, how concerned am I with Lauri’s awful start to the season? I’m concerned enough that I take the other guy.

Of course, I also value Carter much more than ZOMG (and you?) and find his description to be hyperbolic and inaccurate.

[ZOMG]

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

Exactly. I like them both but Lauri has a way higher ceiling. Despite what some Lauri haters claim, he could still very well develop into an All Star player with some proper coaching. Heck, he was there last season. Maybe Wendell too, he's a couple of years younger, not wise to nail just yet what the future holds for him. But IMO it seems more likely, what we're witnessing now, that with Wendell you'll just get solid performance in every game, nothing flashy, and if that what excites people here more then fair enough. I think it's better to have a high scoring PF with prowess in 3 point shooting than a very solid, 6'9" starting center, in building a contender.

I think most posters agree that Lauri is the higher upside player. I know I certainly see it that way. The issue, for me at least, is that if I’m forced to choose between them TODAY, how concerned am I with Lauri’s awful start to the season? I’m concerned enough that I take the other guy.

Of course, I also value Carter much more than ZOMG (and you?) and find his description to be hyperbolic and inaccurate.

To me, Lauri being clearly hurt at the start of the season is important. I'd be a lot more worried if he'd been healthy. While his game still has a lot of warts, of course, the oblique injury goes a very long way towards explaining his awful, ground-bound and lumbering performance in November.

These days, he's looking like a completely different player. I just checked his dunk numbers and was shocked to find out that he already has as many as he did ALL LAST SEASON. That is an excellent sign as it ties into Lauri scoring on the move and running the break. That should be one of his main weapons the rest of his career.

[kingkirk]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Beyond that, I don’t see anything in Markkanen that suggests he will better than Carter unless he were to develop as an isolation scorer, or someone who can create his own shot.

We’ve seen nothing in year three to suggest Markkanen can be that level of offensive player, so with that in mind, when you factor in the totality of skills, on both sides of the ball, Carter to me is the higher upside player.

I have no issue suggesting that, even though I’m sure that is a minority view.

Perhaps I’ve soured on Markkanen because several PFs from his draft class have easily gone past him as a prospect this season, but to me Carter is the higher upside player.

That isn’t to say you build around either. Neither is that type of player.

[FranchisePlayer]

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

Exactly. I like them both but Lauri has a way higher ceiling. Despite what some Lauri haters claim, he could still very well develop into an All Star player with some proper coaching. Heck, he was there last season. Maybe Wendell too, he's a couple of years younger, not wise to nail just yet what the future holds for him. But IMO it seems more likely, what we're witnessing now, that with Wendell you'll just get solid performance in every game, nothing flashy, and if that what excites people here more then fair enough. I think it's better to have a high scoring PF with prowess in 3 point shooting than a very solid, 6'9" starting center, in building a contender.

I think most posters agree that Lauri is the higher upside player. I know I certainly see it that way. The issue, for me at least, is that if I’m forced to choose between them TODAY, how concerned am I with Lauri’s awful start to the season? I’m concerned enough that I take the other guy.

Of course, I also value Carter much more than ZOMG (and you?) and find his description to be hyperbolic and inaccurate.

Well, the way some posters ridicule Lauri atm I really am not so sure about that. Last season definitely.

If you'd choose TODAY, you obviously would have to take Lauri. Trending upwards for the whole December and now this sort of performance only a day after flushing all of his strength literally down the toilet.

I really thought you and many posters would've concluded by now that his awful start was mostly injury related. That's the only plausible explanation NOW having witnessed his December.

Yeah well, maybe I shouldn't have bolded that last sentence, maybe it gave the wrong impression. Just tried to underline what's essential in this debate, the ceiling, 'exactly' referring not those exact words.

[DuckIII]

I hope it’s just the vague injury. I’m starting to buy it, but I haven’t bought it yet. Part of me believes it was the Bulls covering for a young and important player who was having a disastrous start to a season. He was playing more mpg when he was “injured” than he is now. That makes no sense.

Time will tell. When the season ends and it’s 20 games terriblauri followed by 62 games marvelauri then I’ll happily - really, really happily - accept the injury explanation.

[DuckIII]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Yes. And because he’s shown the ability to rebound at a strong level and to be a neutral level defender. I can’t just ignore what I’ve seen in the past from Lauri when evaluating his “ceiling.”

His ceiling is pretty high. The problem is that this year has muddled significantly the picture of how likely he is to reach anything near it.

[ZOMG]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Beyond that, I don’t see anything in Markkanen that suggests he will better than Carter unless he were to develop as an isolation scorer, or someone who can create his own shot.

We’ve seen nothing in year three to suggest Markkanen can be that level of offensive player, so with that in mind, when you factor in the totality of skills, on both sides of the ball, Carter to me is the higher upside player.

I have no issue suggesting that, even though I’m sure that is a minority view.

Perhaps I’ve soured on Markkanen because several PFs from his draft class have easily gone past him as a prospect this season, but to me Carter is the higher upside player.

That isn’t to say you build around either. Neither is that type of player.

I'm genuinely interested to hear what you're referring to when you say "totality of skills on both sides of the ball" and apply it to Carter's offense. I mean, we all know he battles hard on defense and rebounds, but the man has zero offensive skills. Yes, he can throw it to an open player from the elbow, but he's an NBA player and a high lottery pick. You expect that.

The fact is that currently he's useless as a post scorer. Wendell cannot be counted upon to get anything done when he posts up or gets a face-up look at the high post. In the modern NBA, that is a serious flaw that his own team has to plan around. Not good.

That said - he did make those two wide-open 3s against Atlanta, and I'm happy for him. It would be HUGE if Carter developed the ability to pop after a perimeter screen. It would open up so many new opportunities for Zach, Lauri & co.

[DorO]

Lauri can't create his own shot, he is shy in rebounds and right now is maybe the softest Bull out there. He might have some upside but it gotta be Wendell in fantasy choice.

[kingkirk]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Beyond that, I don’t see anything in Markkanen that suggests he will better than Carter unless he were to develop as an isolation scorer, or someone who can create his own shot.

We’ve seen nothing in year three to suggest Markkanen can be that level of offensive player, so with that in mind, when you factor in the totality of skills, on both sides of the ball, Carter to me is the higher upside player.

I have no issue suggesting that, even though I’m sure that is a minority view.

Perhaps I’ve soured on Markkanen because several PFs from his draft class have easily gone past him as a prospect this season, but to me Carter is the higher upside player.

That isn’t to say you build around either. Neither is that type of player.

I'm genuinely interested to hear what you're referring to when you say "totality of skills on both sides of the ball" and apply it to Carter's offense. I mean, we all know he battles hard on defense and rebounds, but the man has zero offensive skills. Yes, he can throw it to an open player from the elbow, but he's an NBA player and a high lottery pick. You expect that.

The fact is that currently he's useless as a post scorer. Wendell cannot be counted upon to get anything done when he posts up or gets a face-up look at the high post. In the modern NBA, that is a serious flaw that his own team has to plan around. Not good.

That said - he did make those two wide-open 3s against Atlanta, and I'm happy for him. It would be HUGE if Carter developet the ability to pop after a perimeter screen. It would open up so many new opportunities for Zach, Lauri & co.

You’ve long held the view that Carter is a rim roller and in the correct role for himself right now with the Bulls (false) while also suggesting other teams in the league view him as a replaceable player (false) so I’m not sure there’s anything I could say to convince you otherwise given I believe you’re fundamentally wrong about knowing what his game was prior to entering the league, so I’ll leave it at that.

[Stratmaster]

[looks at the advanced numbers]

Carter, with ease.

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

Well... we agree on something.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[kingkirk]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Yes. And because he’s shown the ability to rebound at a strong level and to be a neutral level defender. I can’t just ignore what I’ve seen in the past from Lauri when evaluating his “ceiling.”

His ceiling is pretty high. The problem is that this year has muddled significantly the picture of how likely he is to reach anything near it.

I just don’t think he’s that multi-faceted in offense as some do. As I said, he’s a play finisher, not a creator. For me to believe his overall game was to surpass my projection of who Carter can be, his offense would need to be significantly better than what he’s shown to be, which in the past is a player who is a league average shooter and not someone who gets to the line.

He’s has shown anything on offense, to me at least, that suggests he will top out as anything more than a Kevin Love in Cleveland type offensive player/role.

But ultimately, if someone believes Lauri is the higher ceiling player, while I certainly disagree, that doesn’t bother me in comparison to some of the takes I’ve seen on here which suggest Gafford is the better prospect over Carter.

[Stratmaster]

[looks at the advanced numbers]

Carter, with ease.

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

The rest of the league views him as replaceable? You know this how exactly?

(You don’t)

If you’re watching the actual games then I don’t understand how anyone can come to this conclusion but I guess that fine.

I don't know about there rest of the league, but I have watched every minute of every game.

Carter is indeed low usage, has stone hands, can't finish well and his offensive stats are propped up by his unwillingness to take anything but the easiest shots.

He passes the ball out of offensive rebounds instead of going back up strong.

He is a very good defensive player although in my opinion overrated. I think Gafford could have a bigger impact and is more disruptive.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[ZOMG]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Beyond that, I don’t see anything in Markkanen that suggests he will better than Carter unless he were to develop as an isolation scorer, or someone who can create his own shot.

We’ve seen nothing in year three to suggest Markkanen can be that level of offensive player, so with that in mind, when you factor in the totality of skills, on both sides of the ball, Carter to me is the higher upside player.

I have no issue suggesting that, even though I’m sure that is a minority view.

Perhaps I’ve soured on Markkanen because several PFs from his draft class have easily gone past him as a prospect this season, but to me Carter is the higher upside player.

That isn’t to say you build around either. Neither is that type of player.

I'm genuinely interested to hear what you're referring to when you say "totality of skills on both sides of the ball" and apply it to Carter's offense. I mean, we all know he battles hard on defense and rebounds, but the man has zero offensive skills. Yes, he can throw it to an open player from the elbow, but he's an NBA player and a high lottery pick. You expect that.

The fact is that currently he's useless as a post scorer. Wendell cannot be counted upon to get anything done when he posts up or gets a face-up look at the high post. In the modern NBA, that is a serious flaw that his own team has to plan around. Not good.

That said - he did make those two wide-open 3s against Atlanta, and I'm happy for him. It would be HUGE if Carter developet the ability to pop after a perimeter screen. It would open up so many new opportunities for Zach, Lauri & co.

You’ve long held the view that Carter is a rim roller and in the correct role for himself right now with the Bulls (false) while also suggesting other teams in the league view him as a replaceable player (false) so I’m not sure there’s anything I could say to convince you otherwise given I believe you’re fundamentally wrong about knowing what his game was prior to entering the league, so I’ll leave it at that.

I know what his "game" was like at Duke, but then again, what difference does it make? Compared to the NBA, college ball sucks. Hell, Lauri Markkanen used to punish people in the low post at Arizona when he wasn't taking wide open threes, just moving them out of the way as if they weren't there. I know it sounds preposterous in light of his nonexistent NBA post game, but that's how it goes. Not everything translates.

In college, Wendell was a big man. Now he's undersized for his position, and more importantly - under skilled.

[Stratmaster]

[looks at the advanced numbers]

Carter, with ease.

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

This is a preposterous post. It's patently absurd to suggest that he wouldn't fetch a first round pick in return or that he can never be better than what he essentially already is at age 20.

I need to back down on my agreement with ZOMG's past and acknowledge that, yes, he is only 20. He certainly is not a finished product.

However, I agree with the assessment of his current impact.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Stratmaster]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Beyond that, I don’t see anything in Markkanen that suggests he will better than Carter unless he were to develop as an isolation scorer, or someone who can create his own shot.

We’ve seen nothing in year three to suggest Markkanen can be that level of offensive player, so with that in mind, when you factor in the totality of skills, on both sides of the ball, Carter to me is the higher upside player.

I have no issue suggesting that, even though I’m sure that is a minority view.

Perhaps I’ve soured on Markkanen because several PFs from his draft class have easily gone past him as a prospect this season, but to me Carter is the higher upside player.

That isn’t to say you build around either. Neither is that type of player.

I think the confusion in this discussion is that Lauri and Carter play different positions. It's not like they are vying for minutes with each other.

I have been critical of both this season. I think Gafford is looking like he can replace Carter's production (still way too small a sample size) and they have no one who can replace "good Lauri's" production.

Fortunately this isn't a decision that needs to be made right now, if ever. I want to see a lot more basketball before making a move like trading either of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[ZOMG]

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

This is a preposterous post. It's patently absurd to suggest that he wouldn't fetch a first round pick in return or that he can never be better than what he essentially already is at age 20.

I need to back down on my agreement with ZOMG's past and acknowledge that, yes, he is only 20. He certainly is not a finished product.

However, I agree with the assessment of his current impact.

I agree that Carter is by no means a finished product. For instance, there doesn't seem to be much wrong with his shooting mechanics. He may still become serviceable with hard work.

The fact that he doesn't have any dependable post moves is more serious for a dude who's always played the 5, but as I said, I'm not counting him out just yet. I just can't see him ever being a true 2-way player.

[kingkirk]

[Looks at actual games]

Lauri, with ease.

Wendell Carter jr is a low usage guy who looks efficient because the Bulls haven't been willing to expose their #7 pick by making him play a modern center's game. He's a dude straight out of 1998. To some nostalgic fans, that's actually a good thing, but the rest of the league sees him as utterly replacable. If he were traded now, he wouldn't bring back anything resembling a 1st round pick.

Undersized, stone hands, can't finish anything but lobs, can't shoot, hopeless foul magnet. Most teams have these guys on their bench as insurance policies, but on the Bulls, Carter is starting. That tells you more about this team than you need to know.

I just don't know what people are seeing - or rather, thinking they're seeing. Carter's hard ceiling is an NBA starter and he's really not even there yet.

The rest of the league views him as replaceable? You know this how exactly?

(You don’t)

If you’re watching the actual games then I don’t understand how anyone can come to this conclusion but I guess that fine.

I don't know about there rest of the league, but I have watched every minute of every game.

Carter is indeed low usage, has stone hands, can't finish well and his offensive stats are propped up by his unwillingness to take anything but the easiest shots.

He passes the ball out of offensive rebounds instead of going back up strong.

He is a very good defensive player although in my opinion overrated. I think Gafford could have a bigger impact and is more disruptive.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

You largely just described Daniel Gafford, who’s scored most of his points this season by dunking the ball and showing little to no other offensive skill.

Carter passes on offensive rebounds because his instinct as a player is to pass first. It’s one of his best skills, his passing ability, something that is rarely used within this offense.

And I have no idea how Carter is overrated on defense. The reads he makes and what he cleans up despite being tasked to guard the perimeter and rim on the same possession is insane for a 20 year old.

Seriously, what Boylen’s ultra aggressive scheme asks of a player like Carter is immense, to the point where I don’t understand at all how one can think he’s overrated on defense.

[Stratmaster]

Why is Markkanen the higher upside player? Because he has more scope as an offensive finisher?

Yes. And because he’s shown the ability to rebound at a strong level and to be a neutral level defender. I can’t just ignore what I’ve seen in the past from Lauri when evaluating his “ceiling.”

His ceiling is pretty high. The problem is that this year has muddled significantly the picture of how likely he is to reach anything near it.

I just don’t think he’s that multi-faceted in offense as some do. As I said, he’s a play finisher, not a creator. For me to believe his overall game was to surpass my projection of who Carter can be, his offense would need to be significantly better than what he’s shown to be, which in the past is a player who is a league average shooter and not someone who gets to the line.

He’s has shown anything on offense, to me at least, that suggests he will top out as anything more than a Kevin Love in Cleveland type offensive player/role.

But ultimately, if someone believes Lauri is the higher ceiling player, while I certainly disagree, that doesn’t bother me in comparison to some of the takes I’ve seen on here which suggest Gafford is the better prospect over Carter.

Which takes were those Mark?

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app