Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread

[coldfish]

Chicken or the egg. If he's only getting 6 attempts at the rim, how many would you want him to use to "play make" and get others involved? He did exactly that last game and everyone bashed him for it. "He only took 3s, he's not aggressive enough!!". His skillset easily calls for more usage. It's the 3 most valuable parts of the game: 3s, FTs, paint. You give him more touches and the looks will start to balance out.

And anyway, y'all still don't acknowledge the discrepancy in usage when he's playing with the starting lineup and when he's playing with the bench. If Lauri wasn't capable of increased usage, how does he manage to do it with the bench (Maybe because again...he's the FOCAL point there???) and not with the starting lineup?

Lavine is FINALLY doing well as a focal point. I am fine with his performance. I think the Coby effect is getting very underlooked with our fanbase because we are still captivated by "young player who can shoot". All the advanced stats paint a grim picture on his effect. He would be a addition by subtraction with his play right now. If Coby was playing SG, the effect gets reduced but at PG you need to be able to run the team. and he's doing that very poorly right now.

I just don't see anyway that an AD like usage rate can be demanded for Lauri. When I discuss this with the Lauri Defense Force (thanks madvillian!), the discussion often turns into a bunch of cherry picked anecdotes and complaints about everyone in the organization. Its just not realistic when you look at the entire forest.

Sure, by comparing the assisted rates, it's not to say he can reach AD level of usage/dominance. It's more like the creation RATE is very similar. If he was creating more unassisted looks, he would be BETTER than star wings/bigs in creation rates. So once you maximize the rate, you need to start looking at the volume. Which for Lauri is anemic.

Bump it up and see what happens. That's where opinion comes in. I think Lauri can excel with more volume. Others think that since Lauri is more of a roleplayer, increased volume should automatically lead to decreased efficiency. The limited data we have on Lauri with higher usage shows the former. FROM THE DATA, he usually produces with more usage. But saying that doesn't mean I expect him to reach the AD milestones (which would be amazing if possible). The reason it goes to cherry picked anecdotes it's because we still haven't seen Lauri with consistent high usage besides FebruLauri (which again he produced). KP when he got into the league was a defacto #1 on the NYKs. He got 28%+ USG and was pretty inefficient with it. However, since he got the benefit of the volume, he's a potential star.


Complains about everyone in the organization happen because again Lauri really hasn't gotten his fair share of looks. Last year it was the system and Lavine. We fix that and then put in another problem in place with Coby. "WE gotta develop COBY!!!" while killing the rest of the team.


----

I agree that Lauri isn't a self creator. So how do you resolve that? You make the focus him. Start the offense by getting him looks and CONTINUE to do so. Coby and Lavine will get theirs within the game. Lavine has started to realize that. Coby hasn't.

Most players get more shots when they are hot and/or have a favorable match up. OTOH most players stop shooting when they are off. 1 for 22 nights are pretty rare.

IMO, your statistical evidence that Lauri's efficiency goes up with his usage is confusing cause and effect. His usage goes up when his efficiency is high.

[GoBlue72391]

That's why you need to bump up the f**king volume and see what happens. You don't dismiss it.That's a flawed way to look at it. The comparison "doesn't fall apart". Some players continue to be efficient when they get volume (I strongly believe Lauri is one of them. He's produced the vast majority of the time when he gets it). Others the efficiency plummets when they get more volume. He hasn't shown that yet. Again, the efficiency drop usually coincides with injury with him. NOT increased usage.

nuances nuances nuances.

I wonder how we could make Lauri shoot more shots off the dribble that he creates?

Oh wait, Lauri could do that any time he wants to, and it isn't actually up to anyone other than Lauri to increase the volume of shots he creates.

In terms of Lauri always being efficient when he gets touches, this is literally the first year in his career, with a tiny sample size, where he has been more than league average efficiency ever, so no, this hasn't been universally true in the past.

Maybe it will be true in the future, maybe Lauri is finally healthy / will stay healthy / has good coaching / feels motivated / whatever, we'll see as time plays out. I've said lots of times that he's off to a great start this year, and he is. He's had good stretches in short bursts lots of time. Can he stay healthy? Can he stay productive? I hope so, but I need at least a half season and not 7 games to fully buy into it.

"In terms of Lauri always being efficient when he gets touches, this is literally the first year in his career, with a tiny sample size, mostly against teams going small, where he has been more than league average efficiency ever, so no, this hasn't been universally true in the past."

Re-watch the Dallas game. His best game of the season so far. The Mavs had 7'3" Porzingas and 7'4" Boban. Absolutely NOT small. Lauri made several highly contested drives with them bothering his shot. This is something he's been doing consistently all season.

It seems like people want him to fail. They just crawl out of the woodwork to try and discredit anything he does. Someone presents a point, then someone else presents a counterpoint, then the original person grasps at something to attempt to discredit the counterpoint.

Some of it's reasonably valid ("Well, he has lower volume") some of it is laughable, insulting, and completely misses the point ("Get a load of this guy comparing Lauri to AD and Jokic")

Wanting a 7 footer to create his own 3s is a ridiculous expectation, as evidenced by the fact that the elite bigs barely even do it. But yet it's apparently a credible point of criticism against Lauri.

Pointing out that Lauri compares favorably to elite bigs in terms of creating his own 2 point shots is met with "well that doesn't count because his volume isn't as high as theirs." Well, I pointed out those guys are 1st and 2nd options who have more of a responsibility to be creators, while Lauri is a 3rd option, so obviously the volume isn't the same. If Lauri was a 1st or 2nd option he would have more responsibility to create.

Moving goal posts. It only doesn't count because it doesn't fit the narrative. If it did, then it would be a perfectly reasonable criticism.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

[madvillian]

He was one of the worst PFs in the league last year by RAPM, if we want to insert some sanity into this thread (Doug is trying).

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/year/2020/position/6

Wow bulls should hire you. You're such a great analyst!!!

With that same great overall stat you posted, Lavine has been rated poorly for years. Why haven't we dumped him yet??

Like you used a pointless whataboutism and insulted me. What does that add to the discussion? How should I respond? I posted some facts and you ignored them and insulted me.

Sadly it really seems like this is no longer a place to discuss bulls. It's a place to (mostly) settle scores. Frankly, IMO, you should have been suspended for bumping three threads and continuing personal insults in lieu of actually discussing basketball.

I can tell that this behavior is largely tolerated here now and it's not even in good fun, it's just cynical name calling nanananboo ****.

[PaKii94]

I just don't see anyway that an AD like usage rate can be demanded for Lauri. When I discuss this with the Lauri Defense Force (thanks madvillian!), the discussion often turns into a bunch of cherry picked anecdotes and complaints about everyone in the organization. Its just not realistic when you look at the entire forest.

Sure, by comparing the assisted rates, it's not to say he can reach AD level of usage/dominance. It's more like the creation RATE is very similar. If he was creating more unassisted looks, he would be BETTER than star wings/bigs in creation rates. So once you maximize the rate, you need to start looking at the volume. Which for Lauri is anemic.

Bump it up and see what happens. That's where opinion comes in. I think Lauri can excel with more volume. Others think that since Lauri is more of a roleplayer, increased volume should automatically lead to decreased efficiency. The limited data we have on Lauri with higher usage shows the former. FROM THE DATA, he usually produces with more usage. But saying that doesn't mean I expect him to reach the AD milestones (which would be amazing if possible). The reason it goes to cherry picked anecdotes it's because we still haven't seen Lauri with consistent high usage besides FebruLauri (which again he produced). KP when he got into the league was a defacto #1 on the NYKs. He got 28%+ USG and was pretty inefficient with it. However, since he got the benefit of the volume, he's a potential star.


Complains about everyone in the organization happen because again Lauri really hasn't gotten his fair share of looks. Last year it was the system and Lavine. We fix that and then put in another problem in place with Coby. "WE gotta develop COBY!!!" while killing the rest of the team.


----

I agree that Lauri isn't a self creator. So how do you resolve that? You make the focus him. Start the offense by getting him looks and CONTINUE to do so. Coby and Lavine will get theirs within the game. Lavine has started to realize that. Coby hasn't.

Most players get more shots when they are hot and/or have a favorable match up. OTOH most players stop shooting when they are off. 1 for 22 nights are pretty rare.

IMO, your statistical evidence that Lauri's efficiency goes up with his usage is confusing cause and effect. His usage goes up when his efficiency is high.

Again. That's for roleplayers. For people you want as focal points, you keep the volume up. Two good examples are Tatum and Siakum. They both experienced dips in efficiency with a higher volume when they became focal points. Lauri has gotten minimal chance as a focal point (and again he's produced.)

Also, I have never said his efficiency goes up with USAGE. I just said he produces. In fact healthy Lauri's efficiency is pretty much the same regardless of USAGE.

Well thinking about it, healthy Lauri's efficiency is stellar with low usage. I would expect it to go down with higher usage but to still remain efficient.

[PaKii94]

He was one of the worst PFs in the league last year by RAPM, if we want to insert some sanity into this thread (Doug is trying).

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/year/2020/position/6

Wow bulls should hire you. You're such a great analyst!!!

With that same great overall stat you posted, Lavine has been rated poorly for years. Why haven't we dumped him yet??

Like you used a pointless whataboutism and insulted me. What does that add to the discussion? How should I respond? I posted some facts and you ignored them and insulted me.

Sadly it really seems like this is no longer a place to discuss bulls. It's a place to (mostly) settle scores. Frankly, IMO, you should have been suspended for bumping three threads and continuing personal insults in lieu of actually discussing basketball.

I can tell that this behavior is largely tolerated here now and it's not even in good fun, it's just cynical name calling nanananboo ****.

No I called you out because you presented a stat without any context and you expect that to hold up with a more detailed discussion. f**k outta here. I then shared that same stat on how it applies to another player you have a bias for to show that I could make the same exact flawed argument that you did.

If you were actually trying to discuss the bulls you would actually provide a detailed discussion instead of laughing off the actual discussion. So please sit down and learn before you talk.

[PaKii94]

That's why you need to bump up the f**king volume and see what happens. You don't dismiss it.That's a flawed way to look at it. The comparison "doesn't fall apart". Some players continue to be efficient when they get volume (I strongly believe Lauri is one of them. He's produced the vast majority of the time when he gets it). Others the efficiency plummets when they get more volume. He hasn't shown that yet. Again, the efficiency drop usually coincides with injury with him. NOT increased usage.

nuances nuances nuances.

I wonder how we could make Lauri shoot more shots off the dribble that he creates?

Oh wait, Lauri could do that any time he wants to, and it isn't actually up to anyone other than Lauri to increase the volume of shots he creates.

In terms of Lauri always being efficient when he gets touches, this is literally the first year in his career, with a tiny sample size, where he has been more than league average efficiency ever, so no, this hasn't been universally true in the past.

Maybe it will be true in the future, maybe Lauri is finally healthy / will stay healthy / has good coaching / feels motivated / whatever, we'll see as time plays out. I've said lots of times that he's off to a great start this year, and he is. He's had good stretches in short bursts lots of time. Can he stay healthy? Can he stay productive? I hope so, but I need at least a half season and not 7 games to fully buy into it.

"In terms of Lauri always being efficient when he gets touches, this is literally the first year in his career, with a tiny sample size, mostly against teams going small, where he has been more than league average efficiency ever, so no, this hasn't been universally true in the past."

Re-watch the Dallas game. His best game of the season so far. The Mavs had 7'3" Porzingas and 7'4" Boban. Absolutely NOT small. Lauri made several highly contested drives with them bothering his shot. This is something he's been doing consistently all season.

It seems like people want him to fail. They just crawl out of the woodwork to try and discredit anything he does. Someone presents a point, then someone else presents a counterpoint, then the original person grasps at something to attempt to discredit the counterpoint.

Some of it's reasonably valid ("Well, he has lower volume") some of it is laughable, insulting, and completely misses the point ("Get a load of this guy comparing Lauri to AD and Jokic")

Wanting a 7 footer to create his own 3s is a ridiculous expectation, as evidenced by the fact that the elite bigs barely even do it. But yet it's apparently a credible point of criticism against Lauri.

Pointing out that Lauri compares favorably to elite bigs in terms of creating his own 2 point shots is met with "well that doesn't count because his volume isn't as high as theirs." Well, I pointed out those guys are 1st and 2nd options who have more of a responsibility to be creators, while Lauri is a 3rd option, so obviously the volume isn't the same. If Lauri was a 1st or 2nd option he would have more responsibility to create.

Moving goal posts. It only doesn't count because it doesn't fit the narrative. If it did, then it would be a perfectly reasonable criticism.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

pretty much this. Last year's sh*tshow did a number to this fanbase.

[dougthonus]

ChOoSEs NoT To!!! C'mon man. He needs the ball for that. We have gone ad nauseum he is a big that needs to be fed in his spots. How many missed opportunities are there when the guards turn over the ball 10x a game. How many missed opportunities when Coby decides to chuck up a early in the shot clock mid range jumper? Or the fact that the only read Coby can make is a simple dump off pass to the big instead of finding the cutters?

I've been advocating for a true playmaker on this team for 3(!!) years now! Last year the problem was the heavily guard reliant stagnant offense (and partially lavine's mental). It has finally started to click for lavine this year (he still has lapses) but now we have to deal with Coby's ineptitude.

I agree that Lauri would be helped with a better facilitator, but all of the players mentioned in comparisons that are elite big men, create more than twice as many shots as Lauri per game. Lauri could create those shots but doesn't.

For his career, he has been a league average efficiency guy. You don't build your whole offense around trying to get a league average efficiency guy way more shots. If he continues to play as well as he has for a bigger length of time, the Bulls should (and likely will) look to get him more shots.

I was talking to KC Johnson on my podcast, and he mentioned how the Bulls have to work hard to get Lauri looks because he doesn't generate them himself, and that they run more plays for Lauri than any other player on the roster.

Again with talking overall. You can't get out of this habit can you? Again. Healthy Lauri = efficient Lauri. Has been the case throughout his career. Then you look at the period where he has gotten usage, HE HAS PRODUCED. Can you give me ANY portion of Lauri's career where he has been highly utilized but also inefficient? I would bet you can't. Because he hasn't been.

He has been league average in efficiency for each of his full seasons. It is literally the opposite of what you say. He has not put together a season of good efficiency in his life. Every time he has had good efficiency he has offset that with a stretch of really bad efficiency to end up at average efficiency. The usage, is irrelevant, because if he was great with high usage and bad with low usage, then he would average out to great since great would have way more possessions, but that hasn't happened.

completely disagree. Don't know why you don't acknowledge the fact that bigs have to be fed their looks. You're expectations for him are expectations of a superstar wing.

The vast majority of his efficient looks come from getting wide open 3s. That isn't a traditional way bigs score or get efficient looks. Fundamentally, I believe the Bulls are already maximizing hte number of wide open three point looks they can get for Lauri. That isn't a look that you can just generate on the fly. If he could score with guys close to him on the perimeter or could consistently score down low, then that would be a different thing, but that's not how he gets his points.

Lauri gets his points fundamentally by being open and getting the ball. That isn't a situation you can readily, easily, and repetitively create. Most of his basket attacks start with him open on the perimeter and attacking a too aggressive closeout and most of his threes are when wide open and shooting before a defender arrives. The Bulls can't ramp up that activity more.

Lauri isn't Embiid. You can't feed him teh ball in the post with a guy on him and then have him go score anyway. You can't toss him the ball on the perimeter while he's covered and have him score. That is what star players do, even big men. They can kill the match up because no one matches up on them. Lauri's not at that level yet (and IMO, likely won't be ever but here's t hoping I'm wrong).

Lauri's so far been a guy this season whom can punish a defense that makes a mistake, but he's not a guy you can easily ramp up volume, and I don't know how you think the Bulls can ramp up volume for him.

[dougthonus]

It's the same with many people. Those people have a skill A which they think is good and they are comfortable using it. Then they have a skill B which is average and they feel if they use it can lead to champagne or disaster.

I'm a sort of an able amateur pianist. I could play Chopin decently but anything could happen while playing some piece. Now why would I do that when I can do Billy Joel's hits with ease and get praise for it? I believe Lauri feels similar; he feels pressured if he has to shoot off the dribble, not his best asset and the odds for making buckets that way are therefore against him. So he rather takes the percentage shot, he's more of a realist I guess.

Maybe not a sign of a player with loads of self belief and desire to be the best. But he's no Valentine either who doesn't seem to know where his ceiling is on the court.

I guess you could argue Lavine in his 7th season should know how to run the clock down and many wonder what's stopping him? He could do that. Yet, in every game he chooses not to. Plenty of good reasons behind that continuous flawed decision too, I suspect.

It's also certainly fine to be patient with Lauri, be happy with his significant growth to date this season, and be excited about what the future might bring.

I just roll my eyes when people think that everyone is holding back Lauri, and the only reason Lauri isn't better is because of non Lauri factors. Lauri (just like literally every single player ever) is most responsible for whether he becomes a better player. If he's capable and willing to dominate then it will happen. It won't be stopped because Coby White is the PG. Yeah, maybe statistically he'd be better if he was playing with Chris Paul, but Lauri wouldn't be better, Chris Paul would just be amazing and Lauri would benefit.

[GoBlue72391]

He was one of the worst PFs in the league last year by RAPM, if we want to insert some sanity into this thread (Doug is trying).

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/year/2020/position/6

Wow bulls should hire you. You're such a great analyst!!!

With that same great overall stat you posted, Lavine has been rated poorly for years. Why haven't we dumped him yet??

Like you used a pointless whataboutism and insulted me. What does that add to the discussion? How should I respond? I posted some facts and you ignored them and insulted me.

Sadly it really seems like this is no longer a place to discuss bulls. It's a place to (mostly) settle scores. Frankly, IMO, you should have been suspended for bumping three threads and continuing personal insults in lieu of actually discussing basketball.

I can tell that this behavior is largely tolerated here now and it's not even in good fun, it's just cynical name calling nanananboo ****.

But it's ok when you do it?

"Someone just used AD, Joker and Ebmid and KATs assisted three percentage to group them with Lauri as a player? That's what we call the Lauri Defense Force and why it's made fun of here."

That was your response to my comment that I took time to research to address your criticism that "Lauri doesn't create his own looks from 3." I said that's a ridiculous expectation for a 7 footer, even the elite ones, and I provided the stats to prove it.

You A) intentionally ignored and missed the point I was trying to make B) insulted me and C) falsely claimed I was trying to put Lauri in the same group of players as AD, KAT, etc.

You "ignored my facts" and "insulted me." What does that add to the discussion? The fact that you're crying about other people doing the exact same things you do is hilarious.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

[dougthonus]

"In terms of Lauri always being efficient when he gets touches, this is literally the first year in his career, with a tiny sample size, mostly against teams going small, where he has been more than league average efficiency ever, so no, this hasn't been universally true in the past."

Re-watch the Dallas game. His best game of the season so far. The Mavs had 7'3" Porzingas and 7'4" Boban. Absolutely NOT small. Lauri made several highly contested drives with them bothering his shot. This is something he's been doing consistently all season.

I edited my post to remove the small part, he had some really big games against lineups that he was just suited to dominate, but I agree that wasn't all of them.

It seems like people want him to fail. They just crawl out of the woodwork to try and discredit anything he does. Someone presents a point, then someone else presents a counterpoint, then the original person grasps at something to attempt to discredit the counterpoint.

I've not discredited him. I said he's off to a fantastic start and has had a great season.

I don't think he's a superstar though, and people make these superstar arguments for him. Pointing out that I don't agree with a superstar assessment isn't rooting for him to fail. I hope he becomes a superstar.

Some of it's reasonably valid ("Well, he has lower volume") some of it is laughable, insulting, and completely misses the point ("Get a load of this guy comparing Lauri to AD and Jokic")

Wanting a 7 footer to create his own 3s is a ridiculous expectation, as evidenced by the fact that the elite bigs barely even do it. But yet it's apparently a credible point of criticism against Lauri.

Pointing out that Lauri compares favorably to elite bigs in terms of creating his own 2 point shots is met with "well that doesn't count because his volume isn't as high as theirs." Well, I pointed out those guys are 1st and 2nd options who have more of a responsibility to be creators, while Lauri is a 3rd option, so obviously the volume isn't the same. If Lauri was a 1st or 2nd option he would have more responsibility to create.

Lauri has the option to create. I believe he doesn't create because he isn't a good creator. If Lauri is a really good creator and chooses not to create then the problem with him is 100% mental and someone needs to convince him to shoot more and create more. Watching him on the court, that isn't my impression though.

Moving goal posts. It only doesn't count because it doesn't fit the narrative. If it did, then it would be a perfectly reasonable criticism.

I look at a lot of these arguments as people trying to squint really hard to figure out a way in which Lauri is really a much better player than he is. Fundamentally, many of Paki's "well if you discount all the games where I decided Lauri was hurt, then he's really great" stats are exactly that.

Right now, he's off to a great start this season and is a really good player. I'd say my current evaluation is this:

Offense:
Very good three point shooter for his position
Very good at attacking closeouts
Can finish when getting past his primary defender
Average to below average ball handler for his position
Average to below average court vision as a passer for his position
Average to below average in creating offense in isolation for his position

Defense
Can defend his position adequately
Can defend some fives
Below average defending the pick and roll / switches
Below average shot blocking / playing passing lanes
Below average defensive IQ on rotations

His net impact this year is positive, his ability to punish opposing defenses is high and makes up for his shortcomings on defense, particularly given how many shortcomings this team has overall on defense. His weaknesses on offense don't really impact the team at all given the other players on it.

If he finishes the season like this, I think he might get a max contract. I think his value to a team is probably closer to 18M, so I would probably let him go and if I anticipate letting him go, I'd probably look to trade him. If he's able to fix any of his defensive short comings or be able to improve on his offensive pieces to become a guy whom can ramp up his own volume, then I would also pay him the max.

[PaKii94]

ChOoSEs NoT To!!! C'mon man. He needs the ball for that. We have gone ad nauseum he is a big that needs to be fed in his spots. How many missed opportunities are there when the guards turn over the ball 10x a game. How many missed opportunities when Coby decides to chuck up a early in the shot clock mid range jumper? Or the fact that the only read Coby can make is a simple dump off pass to the big instead of finding the cutters?

I've been advocating for a true playmaker on this team for 3(!!) years now! Last year the problem was the heavily guard reliant stagnant offense (and partially lavine's mental). It has finally started to click for lavine this year (he still has lapses) but now we have to deal with Coby's ineptitude.

I agree that Lauri would be helped with a better facilitator, but all of the players mentioned in comparisons that are elite big men, create more than twice as many shots as Lauri per game. Lauri could create those shots but doesn't.

For his career, he has been a league average efficiency guy. You don't build your whole offense around trying to get a league average efficiency guy way more shots. If he continues to play as well as he has for a bigger length of time, the Bulls should (and likely will) look to get him more shots.

I was talking to KC Johnson on my podcast, and he mentioned how the Bulls have to work hard to get Lauri looks because he doesn't generate them himself, and that they run more plays for Lauri than any other player on the roster.

Again with talking overall. You can't get out of this habit can you? Again. Healthy Lauri = efficient Lauri. Has been the case throughout his career. Then you look at the period where he has gotten usage, HE HAS PRODUCED. Can you give me ANY portion of Lauri's career where he has been highly utilized but also inefficient? I would bet you can't. Because he hasn't been.

He has been league average in efficiency for each of his full seasons. It is literally the opposite of what you say. He has not put together a season of good efficiency in his life. Every time he has had good efficiency he has offset that with a stretch of really bad efficiency to end up at average efficiency. The usage, is irrelevant, because if he was great with high usage and bad with low usage, then he would average out to great since great would have way more possessions, but that hasn't happened.

completely disagree. Don't know why you don't acknowledge the fact that bigs have to be fed their looks. You're expectations for him are expectations of a superstar wing.

The vast majority of his efficient looks come from getting wide open 3s. That isn't a traditional way bigs score or get efficient looks. Fundamentally, I believe the Bulls are already maximizing hte number of wide open three point looks they can get for Lauri. That isn't a look that you can just generate on the fly. If he could score with guys close to him on the perimeter or could consistently score down low, then that would be a different thing, but that's not how he gets his points.

Lauri gets his points fundamentally by being open and getting the ball. That isn't a situation you can readily, easily, and repetitively create. Most of his basket attacks start with him open on the perimeter and attacking a too aggressive closeout and most of his threes are when wide open and shooting before a defender arrives. The Bulls can't ramp up that activity more.

Lauri isn't Embiid. You can't feed him teh ball in the post with a guy on him and then have him go score anyway. You can't toss him the ball on the perimeter while he's covered and have him score. That is what star players do, even big men. They can kill the match up because no one matches up on them. Lauri's not at that level yet (and IMO, likely won't be ever but here's t hoping I'm wrong).

Lauri's so far been a guy this season whom can punish a defense that makes a mistake, but he's not a guy you can easily ramp up volume, and I don't know how you think the Bulls can ramp up volume for him.

sigh I'm out of time and energy right now to type out a detailed reply... I feel like we are going in circles but I just want to put one last note out there. I don't think bumping up Lauri's usage is that hard of a task. I do think the 3 point looks are maximized. I think we would run 1-2 more plays with him running off the double screens and diving to the rim. That's been money all season but seems to only be used with the bench and not with the starting lineup. We saw a glimpse of Lauri playing PnR ball handler with a big (but only a dozen or so plays), we could add 1-2 of those plays, haven't seen that much. The coby factor could improve 1-2 plays for Lauri. Lavine has started to run the PnR with him more, that's encouraging.

All of those little things add up. That's not a tall task. that's 4-8 more touches a game. Which could make the difference between 18ppg and 25ppg. None of what I said above their is out of current Lauri's skillset. Him getting those touches wouldn't fundamentally change the offense or make him a different player. It would just be more usage.

[PaKii94]

Wow bulls should hire you. You're such a great analyst!!!

With that same great overall stat you posted, Lavine has been rated poorly for years. Why haven't we dumped him yet??

Like you used a pointless whataboutism and insulted me. What does that add to the discussion? How should I respond? I posted some facts and you ignored them and insulted me.

Sadly it really seems like this is no longer a place to discuss bulls. It's a place to (mostly) settle scores. Frankly, IMO, you should have been suspended for bumping three threads and continuing personal insults in lieu of actually discussing basketball.

I can tell that this behavior is largely tolerated here now and it's not even in good fun, it's just cynical name calling nanananboo ****.

But it's ok when you do it?

"Someone just used AD, Joker and Ebmid and KATs assisted three percentage to group them with Lauri as a player? That's what we call the Lauri Defense Force and why it's made fun of here."

That was your response to my comment that I took time to research to address your criticism that "Lauri doesn't create his own looks from 3." I said that's a ridiculous expectation for a 7 footer, even the elite ones, and I provided the stats to prove it.

You A) intentionally ignored and missed the point I was trying to make B) insulted me and C) falsely claimed I was trying to put Lauri in the same group of players as AD, KAT, etc.

You "ignored my facts" and "insulted me." What does that add to the discussion? The fact that you're crying about other people doing the exact same things you do is hilarious.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

This serves no constructive purpose -Doug

[dougthonus]

sigh I'm out of time and energy right now to type out a detailed reply... I feel like we are going in circles but I just want to put one last note out there. I don't think bumping up Lauri's usage is that hard of a task. I do think the 3 point looks are maximized. I think we would run 1-2 more plays with him running off the double screens and diving to the rim. That's been money all season but seems to only be used with the bench and not with the starting lineup. We saw a glimpse of Lauri playing PnR ball handler with a big (but only a dozen or so plays), we could add 1-2 of those plays, haven't seen that much. The coby factor could improve 1-2 plays for Lauri. Lavine has started to run the PnR with him more, that's encouraging.

All of those little things add up. That's not a tall task. that's 4-8 more touches a game. Which could make the difference between 18ppg and 25ppg.

I'd be happy to see more LaVine/Lauri pick and rolls and more Lauri/Coby pick and rolls for that matter. I certainly don't mind if they experiment with trying to get him more looks. They DO run a lot of plays for him though (as noted, according to Billy Donovan, via KC Johnson, more plays than anyone else on the roster).

I also don't care if Lauri scores 18ppg or 25ppg, and the same could be said for me about Zach or Coby or whomever. The goal isn't for one player to get more points, the goal is to make the offense as a whole more efficient. That should evolve pretty naturally, and I think under Donovan we will continue to trend towards whatever is working. He quickly abandoned Carter shooting threes as an example.

I do think Donovan believes in Lauri and is trying hard to put him in position to succeed and do better. He played him tons of minutes right away on his return, even mostly benching Thad to do so, whom was playing outstanding.

[dougthonus]

It really is funny. He just described himself.

This is the second time you jumped in to make a comment solely about a poster rather than about a post, when the poster wasn't even replying to you. Please nip that in the bud before it leads to personal attacks and keep the discussion on Lauri not on members of this forum.

[dougthonus]

He was one of the worst PFs in the league last year by RAPM, if we want to insert some sanity into this thread (Doug is trying).

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/year/2020/position/6

Wow bulls should hire you. You're such a great analyst!!!

With that same great overall stat you posted, Lavine has been rated poorly for years. Why haven't we dumped him yet??

Like you used a pointless whataboutism and insulted me. What does that add to the discussion? How should I respond? I posted some facts and you ignored them and insulted me.

Sadly it really seems like this is no longer a place to discuss bulls. It's a place to (mostly) settle scores. Frankly, IMO, you should have been suspended for bumping three threads and continuing personal insults in lieu of actually discussing basketball.

I can tell that this behavior is largely tolerated here now and it's not even in good fun, it's just cynical name calling nanananboo ****.

Don't attack other users because you don't like their opinion, keep the discussion on Lauri.

[PaKii94]

sigh I'm out of time and energy right now to type out a detailed reply... I feel like we are going in circles but I just want to put one last note out there. I don't think bumping up Lauri's usage is that hard of a task. I do think the 3 point looks are maximized. I think we would run 1-2 more plays with him running off the double screens and diving to the rim. That's been money all season but seems to only be used with the bench and not with the starting lineup. We saw a glimpse of Lauri playing PnR ball handler with a big (but only a dozen or so plays), we could add 1-2 of those plays, haven't seen that much. The coby factor could improve 1-2 plays for Lauri. Lavine has started to run the PnR with him more, that's encouraging.

All of those little things add up. That's not a tall task. that's 4-8 more touches a game. Which could make the difference between 18ppg and 25ppg.

I'd be happy to see more LaVine/Lauri pick and rolls and more Lauri/Coby pick and rolls for that matter. I certainly don't mind if they experiment with trying to get him more looks. They DO run a lot of plays for him though (as noted, according to Billy Donovan, via KC Johnson, more plays than anyone else on the roster), and often those plays don't yield a look for him.

I also don't care if Lauri scores 18 or 25ppg. The key is the offense overall being more efficient and working well. You want to run more Zach/Lauri PnRs or Lauri/Carter PnRs or Lauri whomever whatever plays if those plays overall yield a better offense. I think as Lauri consistently shows good touch, efficiency, willingness to shoot out of a play, and score, than that will happen.

Frankly, it's not surprising they run the most plays for him. He's one of their best scorers and relies on the system for his touches. Lavine/Coby can get theirs without the system. and I agree. im all for Lauri at 16 PPG if it's for the good of the team but it's frustrating when Coby is getting the same amount of focus when his efficiency is 10% lower.

"The plays that don't yield a good look for him" are very guard/system dependent. the timing is key. The timing isn't there with the starting lineup (i.e. coby). It's there with the bench and that's why he's producing more from the bench. Now that Lavine is taking more of the playmaking role (and things have started to click with him), we are starting to see more Lauri usage with the starting group which is encouraging.

I am off the train of thought that the system is broken/not utilizing Lauri. That was last years discussion with the stagnant offense. I think this year's system is great for him. It's pretty much maximizing his strengths and hiding his weaknesses. It's more of a tuning/timing thing this year.

[PaKii94]

It really is funny. He just described himself.

This is the second time you jumped in to make a comment solely about a poster rather than about a post, when the poster wasn't even replying to you. Please nip that in the bud before it leads to personal attacks and keep the discussion on Lauri not on members of this forum.

Don't want to use the childish reason "he started it!" but he started it and he was replying to me btw.

[dougthonus]

Madvillian, Pakii, GoBlue

Collectively, knock it off. We can discussion Lauri Markkannen without insulting each other. If you see a post where someone is insulting you, then use the report function instead of escalating the situation. We can all be better than this.

[dougthonus]

It really is funny. He just described himself.

This is the second time you jumped in to make a comment solely about a poster rather than about a post, when the poster wasn't even replying to you. Please nip that in the bud before it leads to personal attacks and keep the discussion on Lauri not on members of this forum.

Don't want to use the childish reason "he started it!" but he started it and he was replying to me btw.

I warned him too, and for now I have left these as friendly warnings.

There is a report function. If you think someone is insulting you, use it. Don't make insults back. If you can't handle using the report function and instead behave against the TOS of this site, then you are just as guilty regardless of who started it.

[dougthonus]

Frankly, it's not surprising they run the most plays for him. He's one of their best scorers and relies on the system for his touches. Lavine/Coby can get theirs without the system. and I agree. im all for Lauri at 16 PPG if it's for the good of the team but it's frustrating when Coby is getting the same amount of focus when his efficiency is 10% lower.

I'm super frustrated with Coby White. I think the Bulls definitely have to consider how long they want to keep allowing Coby to play this way with the results it is generating.

"The plays that don't yield a good look for him" are very guard/system dependent. the timing is key. The timing isn't there with the starting lineup (i.e. coby). It's there with the bench and that's why he's producing more from the bench. Now that Lavine is taking more of the playmaking role (and things have started to click with him), we are starting to see more Lauri usage with the starting group which is encouraging.

It is partially that, as I said, Chris Paul would definitely get Lauri more good looks, but that would be more due to Paul's greatness. Lauri isn't a guy who creates the same type of separation or is as easy to feed more looks to as a superstar type player. I mean obviously he's getting a pretty healthy amount of looks now, it isn't like trying to generate looks for a scrub either.

I am off the train of thought that the system is broken/not utilizing Lauri. That was last years discussion with the stagnant offense. I think this year's system is great for him. It's pretty much maximizing his strengths and hiding his weaknesses. It's more of a tuning/timing thing this year.

Agree the system is much better, and I think it has gotten much better as the season has progressed too. It is worth remembering there was a very short preseason, very few practices to date, tons of guys missing time due to COVID contact tracing (including Lauri), a new coach, etc... I'm actually incredibly impressed so far with how well Donovan has pieced things together so quickly and how much improvement we have seen in such a short time.