Lauri:' I can make the comeback'

[chefo]

Bobby has a lot going against him to be considered a comparison to anybody, not just Lauri.

Bobby looks underpaid for his production for a couple of reasons:

1.) He's known as 'crazy eyes' for a reason. Breaking a teammate's face with a sucker punch probably cost him tens of millions of $ over the long term. To add to that, he seems to have a certain level of self-delusion about his talent and importance, which does not speak well with regards to his mental faculties.

2.) He's utterly unplayable on D, which is the sole reason why he can't stay on the floor for more than 20-25 min a game and never gets to close games for any of the teams he's ever been on. He's always been a decent player on O (in his role as a bench scorer) and a good rebounder, but his D is comically bad, unless he's on your team and then it's just tragic. Slow, heavy and clumsy feet, extremely poor awareness, very poor technique, and couldn't guard a chair when he was on the Bulls, neither on the outside nor inside. With him it wasn't even about poor effort--he just couldn't play ANY D no matter how much he tried. If I saw that, so did everybody whose job was to scout him--and these are the people the GM asks for advice when signing players.

3.) Maybe things have changed since leaving, but when he was on the Bulls, other teams let him be on O. He wasn't game planned for, and frankly nobody cared when he was on the floor that I can remember. The one time anybody did was in the Celtics series where after he had a good game Brad Stevens actually told his players to guard him and he scored more than 5 (!) points only one time (8) the rest of the series. Bobby is the kind of player who cannot usually scale up his output when other teams actually start paying attention to him.

He's always had the same issue--His per 36 splits look good to great, but he can never stay on the floor long enough to really make a difference, and with good reason.

So anyhow, Bobby is a very unique case. His extreme limitations on D have made him a career bench guy--good for 20 min, if you need some scoring, and not good for much else.

[PaKii94]

Bobby has a lot going against him to be considered a comparison to anybody, not just Lauri.

Bobby looks underpaid for his production for a couple of reasons:

1.) He's known as 'crazy eyes' for a reason. Breaking a teammate's face with a sucker punch probably cost him tens of millions of $ over the long term. To add to that, he seems to have a certain level of self-delusion about his talent and importance, which does not speak well with regards to his mental faculties.

2.) He's utterly unplayable on D, which is the sole reason why he can't stay on the floor for more than 20-25 min a game and never gets to close games for any of the teams he's ever been on. He's always been a decent player on O (in his role as a bench scorer) and a good rebounder, but his D is comically bad, unless he's on your team and then it's just tragic. Slow, heavy and clumsy feet, extremely poor awareness, very poor technique, and couldn't guard a chair when he was on the Bulls, neither on the outside nor inside. With him it wasn't even about poor effort--he just couldn't play ANY D no matter how much he tried. If I saw that, so did everybody whose job was to scout him--and these are the people the GM asks for advice when signing players.

3.) Maybe things have changed since leaving, but when he was on the Bulls, other teams let him be on O. He wasn't game planned for, and frankly nobody cared when he was on the floor that I can remember. The one time anybody did was in the Celtics series where after he had a good game Brad Stevens actually told his players to guard him and he scored more than 5 (!) points only one time (8) the rest of the series. Bobby is the kind of player who cannot usually scale up his output when other teams actually start paying attention to him.

He's always had the same issue--His per 36 splits look good to great, but he can never stay on the floor long enough to really make a difference, and with good reason.

So anyhow, Bobby is a very unique case. His extreme limitations on D have made him a career bench guy--good for 20 min, if you need some scoring, and not good for much else.

Sorry this is a nuance free zone. We only look at p36 here

[cjbulls]

Everyone brings different strengths and weaknesses, even if their net effect and role is very similar (ala Shaq and Dunn). But sure - if you look at Bobby and Lauri's Per 36 and Advanced stats, they are extremely similar: https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=markkla01&p1yrfrom=2020&player_id2=portibo01&p2yrfrom=2020

Lauri has a much better head on his shoulders, much nicer guy, albeit at the cost of confidence and intensity. He's also been starting whereas Bobby's been a career reserve. Bobby earned himself a $3.5m salary in MIL. Is Lauri worth $15-20m in comparison?

Here's Lauri year 2 against Danilo Gallinari. Gallinari just inked 3/61.5 at age 31, Lauri will be 24.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=markkla01&p1yrfrom=2019&player_id2=gallida01&p2yrfrom=2020

So you have Portis and you have Gallinari. What now?

Ha, wait - why did you compare Gallo's 19/20 season to Lauri's 18/19?

Gallo's numbers were better in 18/19, and Lauri's were worse in 19/20. Regardless, even in your comparison, Galli's advanced stats were better in almost every area. You should also check out the Play-By-Play stats.

Yes, anyone reasonable is expecting last year to be more of an outlier, whether it's external issues, coaching, bulking up, etc. The idea that a guy in his back-prime peforms slightly better in a few limited areas than a w22/23yo year one-and-done isn't cause for marking him down.

If you insist, here's Gallinari in his 3rd year against Lauri's 3rd year (the bad one). It's almost as if players learn to maximize their strengths as they develop. Gallinari after this season signed an extension with the Nuggets for 4/42. That's in 2012 money.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=gallida01&p1yrfrom=2011&player_id2=markkla01&p2yrfrom=2020

[cjbulls]

Listening to the Bulls Talk podcast, KC Johnson intimated that the Bulls gave a below market offer (in his eyes) and didn't really budge.

KC: I mean, yeah (stammering a bit). An offer was made, I mean, from my understanding it was not what (stopping himself) it wouldn't, be considered, uhh, a very high offer.

Goff: Exactly So the Bulls but it was sort of like, yeah, I got you. We had to do this.

KC: Yeah.

Goff: Yeah, I've gotten similar offers. And I went away.

Combine this with other reports we've heard over the 11 and 20 split, 4M apart. And we're probably looking at something like 12/16 or 13/17 as the gap.

[Jiipee84]

I have an idea.
Lets change this threads title to Lauri Markkanen The Bust instead of Lauri i can make the comeback.
This thread has turned to unreadable bull and last 28-to 30 pages are mostly just bashing and **** talk about Lauri.

My eyes are so hurt of all this **** so i really can't read this crap any further anymore.
It also seems quite clear even all last hopes about so called comeback of Lauri are totally dead.

So lets agree together that Lauri busted and very near future he'll be out of NBA.
Merry Christmas to everyone.

Hard to think anyone, who doesn't hold a grudge against the Markksman, willing to go on record for such an asinine idea.

If healthy and he himself willling, Lauri "The Finnisher" Markkanen, will play 10 more years in NBA.

But yeah, a lot of unacknowledged smack talk in the late pages of this thread. A new thread with a neutral title like "Lauri Markkanen 2020-2021 season" would be a killer so people wouldn't join the thread with an attitude.

Lets get something straight and correct.
That my suggestion of the change title of this thread was meant sarcastic and it was made by tongue on the cheek.
Don't read all my comments like a devil a bible.

I can agree with that you're right on that this thread has turned unreadable smack-talk.
And yeah maybe a new thread with neutral title should be next step.
But perhaps it's not an option because this thread has already 44 pages.

[FranchisePlayer]

I have an idea.
Lets change this threads title to Lauri Markkanen The Bust instead of Lauri i can make the comeback.
This thread has turned to unreadable bull and last 28-to 30 pages are mostly just bashing and **** talk about Lauri.

My eyes are so hurt of all this **** so i really can't read this crap any further anymore.
It also seems quite clear even all last hopes about so called comeback of Lauri are totally dead.

So lets agree together that Lauri busted and very near future he'll be out of NBA.
Merry Christmas to everyone.

Hard to think anyone, who doesn't hold a grudge against the Markksman, willing to go on record for such an asinine idea.

If healthy and he himself willling, Lauri "The Finnisher" Markkanen, will play 10 more years in NBA.

But yeah, a lot of unacknowledged smack talk in the late pages of this thread. A new thread with a neutral title like "Lauri Markkanen 2020-2021 season" would be a killer so people wouldn't join the thread with an attitude.

Lets get something straight and correct.
That my suggestion of the change title of this thread was meant sarcastic and it was made by tongue on the cheek.
Don't read all my comments like a devil a bible.

I can agree with that you're right on that this thread has turned unreadable smack-talk.
And yeah maybe a new thread with neutral title should be next step.
But perhaps it's not an option because this thread has already 44 pages.

Add smileys or put it in green font next time.

I'll create that thread after we see a few RS games of him.

[dougthonus]

Or perhaps there is more to it than per 36 from a down year in evaluating players?

Of course there is. What non box score areas do you feel Lauri excels at?

I'll just leave it at the concept of several teams willing to pay Lauri $15M but no one wanting to play Bobby $5M+ is not a mistake (although it may not work out). I think if the rest of the league is generally in agreement and you are not, it's probably you.

1: Bobby got 15M just one year ago.
2: You have no idea what Lauri will get.

They are different players with different attributes, personalities and potential. It's disingenuous to say you can replace the numbers based on per36. That isn't what Lauri's contract is going to be about, how he did on a per 36 in his worst season under Boylen.

Agree. They are different players. I bring up Portis because he's an empty calories guy that does nothing outside the box score. Lauri is pretty similar to my estimation, though Lauri is more efficient than Portis and is better than Portis. Just not sure he's a lot better than Portis.

But instead we can just mark down that you feel Portis and Markkanen are equivalent players.

I don't think they're equivalent, I'd take Lauri, just think they're a lot closer than people think.

Again, I'm down on Lauri and don't want to pay him big money absent some major change this year, but this effort to turn Lauri into a bottom of the roster player is getting more than a bit out of hand. Somehow over the course of this offeason, the die-hard Lauri fans have been overtaken by the die-hard Lauri haters in who can try to be more outrageous. I'm half expecting to see someone start bringing up Simi Shittu's G league numbers next as an equivalent replacement.

I brought up a player that played nearly the same number of minutes and put up the same stats and also signed for 15M just a season ago. So don't be disingenuous and talk G-League players.

Note, while noting what I said was ridiculous, you didn't mention a single reason as to why. There are many reasons why this comparison isn't so crazy as you make it seem.
1: Portis also went for about 15M a year ago, so its not like his value was viewed entirely differently not that long ago.
2: Portis also had much higher per minute numbers and better stats and regressed statistically similarly to what Lauri has done.
3: Portis also provides little outside the box score, lacks versatility, and struggles in many of the same ways Lauri does.

Sorry if you hate the comparison, but I'd like to know why you feel it so bad.

[dougthonus]

Here's Lauri year 2 against Danilo Gallinari. Gallinari just inked 3/61.5 at age 31, Lauri will be 24.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=markkla01&p1yrfrom=2019&player_id2=gallida01&p2yrfrom=2020

So you have Portis and you have Gallinari. What now?

1: You are comparing year old data on Lauri instead of recent data.
2: Galinari's efficiency numbers and advanced stats are much better than Lauri's. That was not the case between Lauri/Portis.

[Jiipee84]

Hard to think anyone, who doesn't hold a grudge against the Markksman, willing to go on record for such an asinine idea.

If healthy and he himself willling, Lauri "The Finnisher" Markkanen, will play 10 more years in NBA.

But yeah, a lot of unknowledgeable smack talk in the late pages of this thread. A new thread with a neutral title like "Lauri Markkanen 2020-2021 season" would be a killer so people wouldn't join the thread with an attitude.

You are totally free to believe and think whatever you want.
But even you can't deny that Lauri's regression last season caused more questions than it gave answers.
Or can you honestly say that Lauri had fine season?

Does the majority of players have a career where they've never had a disappointing season? No.
Have some future All-Star players had seasons where they've played under expectations? Yes so why can't a not All-Star do that.
Has the majority of players been coached by Boylen and been told to stand in the corner? No.
Does a disappointing season mean a player will be out of NBA in the "very near future"? No.
Are you allowed to be 5 years older than Markkanen and have, say, 3 very disappointing seasons in a row, yet have no trouble being on the roster? Yes.

This is not about what you believe in, those Q & A's reflect the reality and the percentages are on Lauri's side.

No matter how high YOU set the bar, there are many GM's trying to keep their jobs and are willing to sign players, who have had bumps in their career, but believe those players can improve their team. Markkanen is one of those.

Saying Markkanen will be out of NBA is an uneducated, gross hyperbole probably caused by some frustration and deep misunderstanding. Really an incomprehensive idea.

Since you're Finnish, I really really cannot understand why you're so keen to dig a hole under Markkanen. He has been and probably will be for some time the best basketball player your country has to offer. Enjoy the ride while it lasts.

Don't come to tell me that Lauri might be best basketball player what Finland has ever produced.
Because i know that damn well already i saw Lauri playing first time in U20 Eurobasket tournament in Helsinki summer 2016.
Lauri also was named tournament's allstar line up in that year and he was also top scorer of tournament
scoring 24,9 points per game.

In that tournament Lauri helped Finland to beat France and Spain which are best European national teams today.
Am i disappointed of that Lauri hasn't yet turned his national team performances to NBA ? HELL YES I AM.
Am i pissed on that Lauri has played 3 years in NBA team which have mostly lose more than win YES I AM.

Am i frustrated of all this unreadable crap in this thread which is targeted to Lauri ? YES I AM.
But first and foremost i'm a Bulls fan first and do like Lauri that's not question but he needs to finally start play better
and reach that full potential what he has if he really wants to get paid next off season.

Yes there might be some or many NBA teams who are ready to pay for Lauri ( depending that how Lauri will play this season ).
But if Lauri cannot show any improvement this season
then he won't get same moneys what Mitchell, Tatum, Adebayo and Fox have got.

Have you noticed that Lauri is developmentally behind of guys like Tatum, Mitchell, Adebayo
who are playing in allstar game very near future if not already played.

Even Luka Doncic and Trae Young have played their first allstar game ( last season )
and those two are YOUNGER THAN Lauri. That has to tell something if you look closer what Lauri is now as a player.

[Jiipee84]

Hard to think anyone, who doesn't hold a grudge against the Markksman, willing to go on record for such an asinine idea.

If healthy and he himself willling, Lauri "The Finnisher" Markkanen, will play 10 more years in NBA.

But yeah, a lot of unacknowledged smack talk in the late pages of this thread. A new thread with a neutral title like "Lauri Markkanen 2020-2021 season" would be a killer so people wouldn't join the thread with an attitude.

Lets get something straight and correct.
That my suggestion of the change title of this thread was meant sarcastic and it was made by tongue on the cheek.
Don't read all my comments like a devil a bible.

I can agree with that you're right on that this thread has turned unreadable smack-talk.
And yeah maybe a new thread with neutral title should be next step.
But perhaps it's not an option because this thread has already 44 pages.

Add smileys or put it in green font next time.

I'll create that thread after we see a few RS games of him.

I will thanks for advice.
Merry Christmas any ways to you.

[cjbulls]

Here's Lauri year 2 against Danilo Gallinari. Gallinari just inked 3/61.5 at age 31, Lauri will be 24.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=markkla01&p1yrfrom=2019&player_id2=gallida01&p2yrfrom=2020

So you have Portis and you have Gallinari. What now?

1: You are comparing year old data on Lauri instead of recent data.
2: Galinari's efficiency numbers and advanced stats are much better than Lauri's. That was not the case between Lauri/Portis.

Yes, I’m not counting the outlier data as the main data. That’s common when you’re preparing long term contracts. The big advantage to Lauri is you could sign him coming off a down year that is easily correctable (new coach, role) but lower the dollar value based off his poor season. Now you’re waiting for his inevitable rebound and paying more.

But you’re right, we should just get on the phone with MKE. I guarantee you can get Portis for Lauri in a heartbeat. And according to you it’s a great deal to swap into Bobby’s 2/$8M. You’d be praising Bulls management for such an astute move, right? Somehow I don’t think you’d be excited for that one.

[dougthonus]

Yes, I’m not counting the outlier data as the main data.

His second season is a bigger outlier than his 3rd season based on his three seasons. Granted, I agree that his rookie season should be expected to be lower, but from a pure data standpoint, his 3rd season isn't an outlier.

That’s common when you’re preparing long term contracts. The big advantage to Lauri is you could sign him coming off a down year that is easily correctable (new coach, role) but lower the dollar value based off his poor season. Now you’re waiting for his inevitable rebound and paying more.

That might be true if you the following things are true:
1: He was actually willing to sign based on his low 3rd season at a deal that those numbers warrant.
2: He actually improves considerably this year to raise his value.
3: We pay him more if he performs better vs letting him walk.

I wouldn't assume that any of those points are true necessarily, let alone all three of them, but none of them are outrageous, it could work out that way. I think point #1 seems like least likely of these to be true, we know they were $4m part according to KC, but I haven't seen anyone reputable quote numbers yet as to where each side ended.

But you’re right, we should just get on the phone with MKE. I guarantee you can get Portis for Lauri in a heartbeat. And according to you it’s a great deal to swap into Bobby’s 2/$8M. You’d be praising Bulls management for such an astute move, right? Somehow I don’t think you’d be excited for that one.

I'd rather trade Lauri for a late 1st, but if it came down to it, with current data, I'd take Portis on at $4 mil and $14M in cap room to spend over Lauri at $18M. As I said, I don't think Portis is better. I think Lauri is better. I wouldn't make that trade most likely, I'd just grab whatever other bargains there are in FA next year, and of course, Portis has very personal baggage with Chicago that makes him an unlikely guy to add with that value type deal.

[cjbulls]

Yes, I’m not counting the outlier data as the main data.

His second season is a bigger outlier than his 3rd season based on his three seasons. Granted, I agree that his rookie season should be expected to be lower, but from a pure data standpoint, his 3rd season isn't an outlier.

That’s common when you’re preparing long term contracts. The big advantage to Lauri is you could sign him coming off a down year that is easily correctable (new coach, role) but lower the dollar value based off his poor season. Now you’re waiting for his inevitable rebound and paying more.

That might be true if you the following things are true:
1: He was actually willing to sign based on his low 3rd season at a deal that those numbers warrant.
2: He actually improves considerably this year to raise his value.
3: We pay him more if he performs better vs letting him walk.

I wouldn't assume that any of those points are true necessarily, let alone all three of them.

But you’re right, we should just get on the phone with MKE. I guarantee you can get Portis for Lauri in a heartbeat. And according to you it’s a great deal to swap into Bobby’s 2/$8M. You’d be praising Bulls management for such an astute move, right? Somehow I don’t think you’d be excited for that one.

I'd rather trade Lauri for a late 1st, but if it came down to it, with current data, I'd take Portis on at $4 mil and $14M in cap room to spend over Lauri at $18M. As I said, I don't think Portis is better. I think Lauri is better. I wouldn't make that trade most likely, I'd just grab whatever other bargains there are in FA next year, and of course, Portis has very personal baggage with Chicago that makes him an unlikely guy to add with that value type deal.

So the equivalent of Thad Young and Bobby over Lauri. I’m marking this one down.

That 18M is an overstatement based on KC’s reporting as well.

[Leslie Forman]

He's always had the same issue--His per 36 splits look good to great, but he can never stay on the floor long enough to really make a difference, and with good reason.

So anyhow, Bobby is a very unique case. His extreme limitations on D have made him a career bench guy--good for 20 min, if you need some scoring, and not good for much else.

This would be a nice explanation to describe the difference…

…if any of it was true. Markkanen is every bit as terrible on defense. He only gets so many minutes and such a green light to chuck away because he was anointed the Great White Hope who would make ditching Jimmy Butler worth it all by the old regime.

He has probably the worst help defense of literally any starting 4 in the entire league right now. His man-to-man is called some sort of a positive, when he constantly gets cooked by absolute nobodies who just miss their layups they get after blowing by him because, well, they're nobodies. He puts up the resistance of a Yorkshire Terrier in the paint against anybody.

The one time these two guys shared a full season here ('17-'18), the defense was actually better with Bobby on the court. It may have been Lauri's rookie year, but it sure isn't like he's improved at all.



Markkanen, Bargnani, Wiggins, these guys all are just flat out mediocre bench players at best who simply got given lots of minutes and green lights because of the status anointed to them by their front offices. If they were literally the same players but the 22nd pick like Bobby, they would have been nothing more than 15MPG guys too.

[dougthonus]

That 18M is an overstatement based on KC’s reporting as well.

Link? I haven't seen KC say how much Lauri wanted, just that the sides were 4M apart.

[ZOMG]

Personally, I've always thought prime Gallinari is pretty much Lauri's ceiling. He's a very good player, underrated as hell. Gallo's career is winding down now, but he's still effective as he knows exactly what he's capable of and is very smart. One of the best pump fakes in the League as well.

Gallinari's straightforward ballhandling in half court is something Lauri should have started emulating a long time ago, IMO.

[cjbulls]

That 18M is an overstatement based on KC’s reporting as well.

Link? I haven't seen KC say how much Lauri wanted, just that the sides were 4M apart.

Here’s the transcript from Bulls Talk Live Podcast I posted earlier in the thread

KC: I mean, yeah (stammering a bit). An offer was made, I mean, from my understanding it was not what (stopping himself) it wouldn't, be considered, uhh, a very high offer.

Goff: Exactly So the Bulls but it was sort of like, yeah, I got you. We had to do this.

KC: Yeah.

Goff: Yeah, I've gotten similar offers. And I went away.

[DroseReturnChi]

I'd rather trade Lauri for a late 1st, but if it came down to it, with current data, I'd take Portis on at $4 mil and $14M in cap room to spend over Lauri at $18M. As I said, I don't think Portis is better. I think Lauri is better. I wouldn't make that trade most likely, I'd just grab whatever other bargains there are in FA next year, and of course, Portis has very personal baggage with Chicago that makes him an unlikely guy to add with that value type deal.

You can make that claim to any Bulls player. Trade Zach/White for Lou Williams and keep the change. Theres no point comparing crap players out of the league when these guys are young. Unless you can predict his ceiling is Portis.
By your logic, Bertans, Robinson should be not resigned bc they are not max players. NBA doesnt work that way.

[dougthonus]

That 18M is an overstatement based on KC’s reporting as well.

Link? I haven't seen KC say how much Lauri wanted, just that the sides were 4M apart.

Here’s the transcript from Bulls Talk Live Podcast I posted earlier in the thread

KC: I mean, yeah (stammering a bit). An offer was made, I mean, from my understanding it was not what (stopping himself) it wouldn't, be considered, uhh, a very high offer.

Goff: Exactly So the Bulls but it was sort of like, yeah, I got you. We had to do this.

KC: Yeah.

Goff: Yeah, I've gotten similar offers. And I went away.

So the number you quoted was just made up?

[cjbulls]

Link? I haven't seen KC say how much Lauri wanted, just that the sides were 4M apart.

Here’s the transcript from Bulls Talk Live Podcast I posted earlier in the thread

KC: I mean, yeah (stammering a bit). An offer was made, I mean, from my understanding it was not what (stopping himself) it wouldn't, be considered, uhh, a very high offer.

Goff: Exactly So the Bulls but it was sort of like, yeah, I got you. We had to do this.

KC: Yeah.

Goff: Yeah, I've gotten similar offers. And I went away.

So the number you quoted was just made up?

I never quoted a number, you did. Read the history

I'd take Portis on at $4 mil and $14M in cap room to spend over Lauri at $18M.