Lavine is....

[Jcool0]

One of the comps on Lavine at draft time was JR Smith. I can't help thinking how accurate that is.

I cant help thinking how random that comparison is.

another excellent shooting dunk champ with low IQ and taken in the middle of the first round

1. Lavine isn't low IQ.

2. Lavine was a lottery pick.

3. Lavine is a better player.

[dice]

I cant help thinking how random that comparison is.

another excellent shooting dunk champ with low IQ and taken in the middle of the first round

1. Lavine isn't low IQ.

ok

2. Lavine was a lottery pick.

the lottery ends...in the middle of the first round. "lottery pick" is an artificial designation

3. Lavine is a better player.

doesn't make the comparison random. smith was a very similar player when he was lavine's age. the difference is that he was appropriately a sixth man on a good nuggets team, which lavine probably would have been as well

[Jcool0]

another excellent shooting dunk champ with low IQ and taken in the middle of the first round

1. Lavine isn't low IQ.

ok

2. Lavine was a lottery pick.

the lottery ends...in the middle of the first round. "lottery pick" is an artificial designation

3. Lavine is a better player.

doesn't make the comparison random. smith was a very similar player when he was lavine's age. the difference is that he was appropriately a sixth man on a good nuggets team, which lavine probably would have been as well

Its random just except it. Its not a huge thing. People love to make random comparisons that are rarely ever close. This is just another one. FYI when JR Smith was Zach's age he was averaging 15 points on 41% shooting (33% from 3) with a 15 PER. Zach's stats last year 25 points on 45% shooting (38% from 3) with a 19 PER.

[dice]

1. Lavine isn't low IQ.

ok

2. Lavine was a lottery pick.

the lottery ends...in the middle of the first round. "lottery pick" is an artificial designation

3. Lavine is a better player.

doesn't make the comparison random. smith was a very similar player when he was lavine's age. the difference is that he was appropriately a sixth man on a good nuggets team, which lavine probably would have been as well

Its random just except it. Its not a huge thing. People love to make random comparisons that are rarely ever close. This is just another one. FYI when JR Smith was Zach's age he was averaging 15 points on 41% shooting (33% from 3) with a 15 PER. Zach's stats last year 25 points on 45% shooting (38% from 3) with a 19 PER.

to reiterate, lavine would not have been averaging 25 points on that nuggets team. he wouldn't have been averaging much more than j.r. smith. put j.r. on this bulls team in zach's place and he would've averaged 20+

comparing 2 players does not suggest that they are equally as good. it merely means that they are similar

[TheJordanRule]

ok


the lottery ends...in the middle of the first round. "lottery pick" is an artificial designation


doesn't make the comparison random. smith was a very similar player when he was lavine's age. the difference is that he was appropriately a sixth man on a good nuggets team, which lavine probably would have been as well

Its random just except it. Its not a huge thing. People love to make random comparisons that are rarely ever close. This is just another one. FYI when JR Smith was Zach's age he was averaging 15 points on 41% shooting (33% from 3) with a 15 PER. Zach's stats last year 25 points on 45% shooting (38% from 3) with a 19 PER.

to reiterate, lavine would not have been averaging 25 points on that nuggets team. he wouldn't have been averaging much more than j.r. smith. put j.r. on this bulls team in zach's place and he would've averaged 20+

comparing 2 players does not suggest that they are equally as good. it merely means that they are similar

Dice, I respect your view of Zach. I think you were spot on early about Zach as far as his deficiencies go and you have provided many useful critiques over the years but at this point I think your objectivity may have been compromised, brother. Zach certainly doesn't play great defense but he is a passable defender. Zach scores relatively efficiently on high-volume and is slowly but surely improving his ability to pass. Basketball IQ was never his strong suit but he has certainly trended up from where he was, and I think it's reasonable to assume that he will continue to grow in this regard. I don't expect Zach to become a superstar, although he has tons of talent and is still a couple years away from his prime, but Zach is a borderline all-star already, and I don't think it's fair to ask him to play up to a level that his contract doesn't even ask him to reach. I'm against moving Zach for anything other than another young borderline all-star. Young iso-scorers who can hit it from deep can contribute to this roster. I know that you don't like that self-centered, team interrupting style, but without iso-scoring you are not going to get the ball in the hoop sometimes when it matters, especially not on a roster that is this sorely lacking in creativity. The goal for this roster should be the playoffs for the simple reason that you can't walk if you haven't learned how to crawl. Jettisoning assets like Zach or Lauri for a draft pick or-- God forbid-- at the price of a JR Smith would probably result in a self inflicted wound. Neither Zach nor Lauri are untouchable-- far from it-- but they still have upside. It's not like either of those guys were busts or have grown too old so we should be above selling low or chasing low percentage plays.

[TheStig]

I think if Zach defends a little better and creates a little better than he can be an all star. I'm just worried about his next deal. Is it close to this one? Or is it 30 mill a year?

[dice]

I think if Zach defends a little better and creates a little better than he can be an all star. I'm just worried about his next deal. Is it close to this one? Or is it 30 mill a year?

depending on the financial impacts of 2020, i can see him getting significantly more than 30 mil a year

[dice]

Its random just except it. Its not a huge thing. People love to make random comparisons that are rarely ever close. This is just another one. FYI when JR Smith was Zach's age he was averaging 15 points on 41% shooting (33% from 3) with a 15 PER. Zach's stats last year 25 points on 45% shooting (38% from 3) with a 19 PER.

to reiterate, lavine would not have been averaging 25 points on that nuggets team. he wouldn't have been averaging much more than j.r. smith. put j.r. on this bulls team in zach's place and he would've averaged 20+

comparing 2 players does not suggest that they are equally as good. it merely means that they are similar

Dice, I respect your view of Zach. I think you were spot on early about Zach as far as his deficiencies go and you have provided many useful critiques over the years but at this point I think your objectivity may have been compromised, brother.

i have defended him on occasion, so i don't think i'm being non-objective at all

Zach certainly doesn't play great defense but he is a passable defender.

he may indeed have improved to passable...if by passable you still mean below average

Zach scores relatively efficiently on high-volume

yep

and is slowly but surely improving his ability to pass

eh

Basketball IQ was never his strong suit but he has certainly trended up from where he was, and I think it's reasonable to assume that he will continue to grow in this regard.

could be

I don't expect Zach to become a superstar, although he has tons of talent and is still a couple years away from his prime, but Zach is a borderline all-star already

he's not a borderline all-star. few thought he was snubbed in a weak eastern field this season. and most nba players peak at age 25-26. he did not improve offensively this season and it's arguable whether he improved defensively despite being more active with regard to steals and blocks

I'm against moving Zach for anything other than another young borderline all-star. Young iso-scorers who can hit it from deep can contribute to this roster. I know that you don't like that self-centered, team interrupting style, but without iso-scoring you are not going to get the ball in the hoop sometimes when it matters, especially not on a roster that is this sorely lacking in creativity. The goal for this roster should be the playoffs for the simple reason that you can't walk if you haven't learned how to crawl. Jettisoning assets like Zach or Lauri for a draft pick or-- God forbid-- at the price of a JR Smith would probably result in a self inflicted wound. Neither Zach nor Lauri are untouchable-- far from it-- but they still have upside. It's not like either of those guys were busts or have grown too old so we should be above selling low or chasing low percentage plays.

i'm not going to speculate on what the minimum return should be because i'm confident that he's overrated by enough teams that whatever the best offer would be would surely be good enough

i brought it up earlier in the thread, but i speculated last season that i would be willing to deal lavine for rookie #19 pick kevin huerter and the expiring contract of kent bazemore. i proposed it on the hawks board and...it was not received well

[TheStig]

I think if Zach defends a little better and creates a little better than he can be an all star. I'm just worried about his next deal. Is it close to this one? Or is it 30 mill a year?

depending on the financial impacts of 2020, i can see him getting significantly more than 30 mil a year

I'd love for them to do an extension at 25 this off season. I think it would be nice to lock him up.

[Andi Obst]

I like LaVine. I feel like he gets too much hate here sometimes. But man, reading numbers like 25 or even 30 mil for him scares the hell out of me. I'd definitely trade him before doing that. On the other hand, I also don't see him getting that (or even more). Jaylen Brown got roughly 26 mil per year and that was before COVID. Don't really see a team paying him that.

[dice]

I like LaVine. I feel like he gets too much hate here sometimes. But man, reading numbers like 25 or even 30 mil for him scares the hell out of me. I'd definitely trade him before doing that. On the other hand, I also don't see him getting that (or even more). Jaylen Brown got roughly 26 mil per year and that was before COVID. Don't really see a team paying him that.

he's sure as hell getting a significant raise on his current salary

[Andi Obst]

I like LaVine. I feel like he gets too much hate here sometimes. But man, reading numbers like 25 or even 30 mil for him scares the hell out of me. I'd definitely trade him before doing that. On the other hand, I also don't see him getting that (or even more). Jaylen Brown got roughly 26 mil per year and that was before COVID. Don't really see a team paying him that.

he's sure as hell getting a significant raise on his current salary

Raise? Sure, I agree (unless the COVID situation ends up being even worse than expected). But significant? I just don't see teams waiting in line to sign LaVine long-term for 25+ mil a year.

[TheJordanRule]

to reiterate, lavine would not have been averaging 25 points on that nuggets team. he wouldn't have been averaging much more than j.r. smith. put j.r. on this bulls team in zach's place and he would've averaged 20+

comparing 2 players does not suggest that they are equally as good. it merely means that they are similar

Dice, I respect your view of Zach. I think you were spot on early about Zach as far as his deficiencies go and you have provided many useful critiques over the years but at this point I think your objectivity may have been compromised, brother.

i have defended him on occasion, so i don't think i'm being non-objective at all

Zach certainly doesn't play great defense but he is a passable defender.

he may indeed have improved to passable...if by passable you still mean below average

Zach scores relatively efficiently on high-volume

yep

and is slowly but surely improving his ability to pass

eh

Basketball IQ was never his strong suit but he has certainly trended up from where he was, and I think it's reasonable to assume that he will continue to grow in this regard.

could be

I don't expect Zach to become a superstar, although he has tons of talent and is still a couple years away from his prime, but Zach is a borderline all-star already

he's not a borderline all-star. few thought he was snubbed in a weak eastern field this season. and most nba players peak at age 25-26. he did not improve offensively this season and it's arguable whether he improved defensively despite being more active with regard to steals and blocks

I'm against moving Zach for anything other than another young borderline all-star. Young iso-scorers who can hit it from deep can contribute to this roster. I know that you don't like that self-centered, team interrupting style, but without iso-scoring you are not going to get the ball in the hoop sometimes when it matters, especially not on a roster that is this sorely lacking in creativity. The goal for this roster should be the playoffs for the simple reason that you can't walk if you haven't learned how to crawl. Jettisoning assets like Zach or Lauri for a draft pick or-- God forbid-- at the price of a JR Smith would probably result in a self inflicted wound. Neither Zach nor Lauri are untouchable-- far from it-- but they still have upside. It's not like either of those guys were busts or have grown too old so we should be above selling low or chasing low percentage plays.

i'm not going to speculate on what the minimum return should be because i'm confident that he's overrated by enough teams that whatever the best offer would be would surely be good enough

i brought it up earlier in the thread, but i speculated last season that i would be willing to deal lavine for rookie #19 pick kevin huerter and the expiring contract of kent bazemore. i proposed it on the hawks board and...it was not received well

You see? This is what I'm talking about brother. I said we cannot jettison assets to sell low or chase low percentage plays. You immediately have us jettisoning assets to sell low and chase low percentage plays . And this is in no way to diminish Kevin Huerter. I see the pluses in that kid because he is a decent team first player with a great deep ball, and he's four years younger than Zach, but what has he proven other than that he can be a good seventh or eighth man on an NBA team? His per is at 11, he's a net negative at both ends of the floor, and he couldn't dream of volume scoring to save his life. He's an arguably mild upgrade on defense than Zach, but not an extraordinary defender by any means. Plus, this is a weak draft, and you have us picking up the 19th pick. What is the bust rate for 19th picks, especially ones in weak drafts? The trade you propose would generate public outrage against the front-office yet again, and at this point we can't afford to create that kind of relationship with the public all over again, much less diminish our own assets in the process. The grass is always greener with these younger players because it's easy to daydream about them reaching their ceilings and becoming the next big thing, but in the cold light of reality, those dreams usually end up dashed. Remember back in 2000, when we were sure that we had the next Kevin Garnet and the next Shaq on the same team? How did that turn out?

[FranchisePlayer]

He's a 5 for me. Hugely talented offensively, but his bbiq holds him back. I can see him going through his career without making the playoffs until he reaches his 30's and settles for a lesser role.

Ain't that the truth!

Since you can predict the future, can i get the winning lottery numbers?

What has predicting the future to do with me agreeing with someone?

[dice]

Dice, I respect your view of Zach. I think you were spot on early about Zach as far as his deficiencies go and you have provided many useful critiques over the years but at this point I think your objectivity may have been compromised, brother.

i have defended him on occasion, so i don't think i'm being non-objective at all

Zach certainly doesn't play great defense but he is a passable defender.

he may indeed have improved to passable...if by passable you still mean below average

Zach scores relatively efficiently on high-volume

yep

and is slowly but surely improving his ability to pass

eh

Basketball IQ was never his strong suit but he has certainly trended up from where he was, and I think it's reasonable to assume that he will continue to grow in this regard.

could be

I don't expect Zach to become a superstar, although he has tons of talent and is still a couple years away from his prime, but Zach is a borderline all-star already

he's not a borderline all-star. few thought he was snubbed in a weak eastern field this season. and most nba players peak at age 25-26. he did not improve offensively this season and it's arguable whether he improved defensively despite being more active with regard to steals and blocks

I'm against moving Zach for anything other than another young borderline all-star. Young iso-scorers who can hit it from deep can contribute to this roster. I know that you don't like that self-centered, team interrupting style, but without iso-scoring you are not going to get the ball in the hoop sometimes when it matters, especially not on a roster that is this sorely lacking in creativity. The goal for this roster should be the playoffs for the simple reason that you can't walk if you haven't learned how to crawl. Jettisoning assets like Zach or Lauri for a draft pick or-- God forbid-- at the price of a JR Smith would probably result in a self inflicted wound. Neither Zach nor Lauri are untouchable-- far from it-- but they still have upside. It's not like either of those guys were busts or have grown too old so we should be above selling low or chasing low percentage plays.

i'm not going to speculate on what the minimum return should be because i'm confident that he's overrated by enough teams that whatever the best offer would be would surely be good enough

i brought it up earlier in the thread, but i speculated last season that i would be willing to deal lavine for rookie #19 pick kevin huerter and the expiring contract of kent bazemore. i proposed it on the hawks board and...it was not received well

You see? This is what I'm talking about brother. I said we cannot jettison assets to sell low or chase low percentage plays. You immediately have us jettisoning assets to sell low and chase low percentage plays . And this is in no way to diminish Kevin Huerter. I see the pluses in that kid because he is a decent team first player with a great deep ball, and he's four years younger than Zach, but what has he proven other than that he can be a good seventh or eighth man on an NBA team? His per is at 11, he's a net negative at both ends of the floor, and he couldn't dream of volume scoring to save his life. He's an arguably mild upgrade on defense than Zach, but not an extraordinary defender by any means. Plus, this is a weak draft, and you have us picking up the 19th pick. What is the bust rate for 19th picks, especially ones in weak drafts? The trade you propose would generate public outrage against the front-office yet again, and at this point we can't afford to create that kind of relationship with the public all over again, much less diminish our own assets in the process. The grass is always greener with these younger players because it's easy to daydream about them reaching their ceilings and becoming the next big thing, but in the cold light of reality, those dreams usually end up dashed. Remember back in 2000, when we were sure that we had the next Kevin Garnet and the next Shaq on the same team? How did that turn out?

i did not remotely insinuate that kevin huerter has a high ceiling. nor did i suggest trading for THIS year's #19 pick. huerter was already established as an nba player when i proposed it. and i am using that example now to illustrate how low the bar is for me on a zach lavine trade: rookie contract(s) + expiring(s)/cap space

the bulls are not going to land a borderline all-star or top draft pick for lavine. ain't gonna happen. we couldn't get that for jimmy butler. any lavine deal would be to obtain modest young talent/draft picks and free up cap space. if you would prefer to stick with lavine and overpay him (which is probably the likely scenario), that's your prerogative. i think it would be a mistake. and if AK makes that decision i will have little hope for the new FO regime

[dice]

Ain't that the truth!

Since you can predict the future, can i get the winning lottery numbers?

What has predicting the future to do with me agreeing with someone?

and predicting lavine's future team success is obviously way easier that predicting lotto numbers

[TheJordanRule]

i have defended him on occasion, so i don't think i'm being non-objective at all


he may indeed have improved to passable...if by passable you still mean below average


yep


eh


could be


he's not a borderline all-star. few thought he was snubbed in a weak eastern field this season. and most nba players peak at age 25-26. he did not improve offensively this season and it's arguable whether he improved defensively despite being more active with regard to steals and blocks


i'm not going to speculate on what the minimum return should be because i'm confident that he's overrated by enough teams that whatever the best offer would be would surely be good enough

i brought it up earlier in the thread, but i speculated last season that i would be willing to deal lavine for rookie #19 pick kevin huerter and the expiring contract of kent bazemore. i proposed it on the hawks board and...it was not received well

You see? This is what I'm talking about brother. I said we cannot jettison assets to sell low or chase low percentage plays. You immediately have us jettisoning assets to sell low and chase low percentage plays . And this is in no way to diminish Kevin Huerter. I see the pluses in that kid because he is a decent team first player with a great deep ball, and he's four years younger than Zach, but what has he proven other than that he can be a good seventh or eighth man on an NBA team? His per is at 11, he's a net negative at both ends of the floor, and he couldn't dream of volume scoring to save his life. He's an arguably mild upgrade on defense than Zach, but not an extraordinary defender by any means. Plus, this is a weak draft, and you have us picking up the 19th pick. What is the bust rate for 19th picks, especially ones in weak drafts? The trade you propose would generate public outrage against the front-office yet again, and at this point we can't afford to create that kind of relationship with the public all over again, much less diminish our own assets in the process. The grass is always greener with these younger players because it's easy to daydream about them reaching their ceilings and becoming the next big thing, but in the cold light of reality, those dreams usually end up dashed. Remember back in 2000, when we were sure that we had the next Kevin Garnet and the next Shaq on the same team? How did that turn out?

i did not remotely insinuate that kevin huerter has a high ceiling. nor did i suggest trading for THIS year's #19 pick. huerter was already established as an nba player when i proposed it. and i am using that example now to illustrate how low the bar is for me on a zach lavine trade: rookie contract(s) + expiring(s)/cap space

the bulls are not going to land a borderline all-star or top draft pick for lavine. ain't gonna happen. we couldn't get that for jimmy butler. any lavine deal would be to obtain modest young talent/draft picks and free up cap space. if you would prefer to stick with lavine and overpay him (which is probably the likely scenario), that's your prerogatives. i think it would be a mistake. and if AK makes that decision i will have little hope for the new FO regime

Dice, I am curious about your thoughts on an article from FanSided that came out a few days ago, which discussed three trade scenarios in which we unload Zach to the Nets. One of the trades mentioned shipping out Zach and Felicio for Caris LeVert, Jarrett Allen, and a future first-round pick. I think that would probably be the ceiling of what we can get in exchange for Zach. The basement level of what we could get in exchange for Zach to me would be the second trade mentioned in the article... Zach for Joe Harris, LeVert, and a couple of first-round picks. While I wouldn't be thrilled about it, I'd consider that a decent haul. The third scenario was really pie-in-the-sky, with us shipping out Zach and Lauri in a three team deal for JRue Holiday, LeVert and a 1st round pick. I thought that was fun to think about, since it would free us up to draft a PF if needed.
PG Holiday
SG Sato
SF Otto?
PF ?
C Carter
https://pippenainteasy.com/2020/09/12/chicago-bulls-3-zach-lavine-trade-packages-with-the-nets/2/

[dice]

You see? This is what I'm talking about brother. I said we cannot jettison assets to sell low or chase low percentage plays. You immediately have us jettisoning assets to sell low and chase low percentage plays . And this is in no way to diminish Kevin Huerter. I see the pluses in that kid because he is a decent team first player with a great deep ball, and he's four years younger than Zach, but what has he proven other than that he can be a good seventh or eighth man on an NBA team? His per is at 11, he's a net negative at both ends of the floor, and he couldn't dream of volume scoring to save his life. He's an arguably mild upgrade on defense than Zach, but not an extraordinary defender by any means. Plus, this is a weak draft, and you have us picking up the 19th pick. What is the bust rate for 19th picks, especially ones in weak drafts? The trade you propose would generate public outrage against the front-office yet again, and at this point we can't afford to create that kind of relationship with the public all over again, much less diminish our own assets in the process. The grass is always greener with these younger players because it's easy to daydream about them reaching their ceilings and becoming the next big thing, but in the cold light of reality, those dreams usually end up dashed. Remember back in 2000, when we were sure that we had the next Kevin Garnet and the next Shaq on the same team? How did that turn out?

i did not remotely insinuate that kevin huerter has a high ceiling. nor did i suggest trading for THIS year's #19 pick. huerter was already established as an nba player when i proposed it. and i am using that example now to illustrate how low the bar is for me on a zach lavine trade: rookie contract(s) + expiring(s)/cap space

the bulls are not going to land a borderline all-star or top draft pick for lavine. ain't gonna happen. we couldn't get that for jimmy butler. any lavine deal would be to obtain modest young talent/draft picks and free up cap space. if you would prefer to stick with lavine and overpay him (which is probably the likely scenario), that's your prerogatives. i think it would be a mistake. and if AK makes that decision i will have little hope for the new FO regime

Dice, I am curious about your thoughts on an article from FanSided that came out a few days ago, which discussed three trade scenarios in which we unload Zach to the Nets. One of the trades mentioned shipping out Zach and Felicio for Caris LeVert, Jarrett Allen, and a future first-round pick. I think that would probably be the ceiling of what we can get in exchange for Zach. The basement level of what we could get in exchange for Zach to me would be the second trade mentioned in the article... Zach for Joe Harris, LeVert, and a couple of first-round picks. While I wouldn't be thrilled about it, I'd consider that a decent haul. The third scenario was really pie-in-the-sky, with us shipping out Zach and Lauri in a three team deal for JRue Holiday, LeVert and a 1st round pick. I thought that was fun to think about, since it would free us up to draft a PF if needed.
PG Holiday
SG Sato
SF Otto?
PF ?
C Carter
https://pippenainteasy.com/2020/09/12/chicago-bulls-3-zach-lavine-trade-packages-with-the-nets/2/

i'd be fine with any of those, though i can't imagine the nets making that mistake and i'm not sure where it leaves WCJ if we bring in jarrett allen

[Onibuh]

25 yo - 25 ppg scorer
missed significant development time in his early 20s. Lavine has still room to improve. Him being the #1 Option isn't the Problem we have. He is a skilled scorer and can put up Points. He should not be seen as your best Player, if you have a Jokic then Lavine is a guy you can Keep as scoring Option.
Need to start giving him teammates to Play with and Coaching.

[Repeat 3-peat]

It sure would be nice for Zach to be coached by a legit coach. He only had Thibs for a short time in his 3rd year but tore his ACL halfway through the season.

Could help him with his development of understanding the game.