Lets talk Zach Lavine

[Muzbar]

They changed the lottery rules so now so if the Knicks end up with the 8th seed there’s a decent chance they’ll get a top 4 pick.

How does that work? If the Knicks end up as the 8th seed, they're outside the lottery, so they have no chance of getting a top 4 pick...

[MrFortune3]

The article mentions that the Knicks have 5 first-round picks over the next 3 drafts. That's something that I want.

Which given the likely draft position of the Knicks, means we'd be trading LaVine for a 8-10 selection if not worse for the hopes of drafting a player who would be like LaVine...

They changed the lottery rules so now so if the Knicks end up with the 8th seed there’s a decent chance they’ll get a top 4 pick. Also this year’s draft is supposed to be really good and next year’s draft is supposed to be the “double draft” where they allow teams to take players straight out of high school.

If the Knicks include all 5 first round picks unprotected it’s something to consider. I like Lavine but he’s a defensive liability and I feel like we’ll have to give him the max in order to keep him and he’s not a top 15 player.

There’s a chance we could get a player much better than Lavine in the lottery.

And this years draft was supposed to suck and yet most of the rookies are playing better than most loaded years.
The "strength" of the draft is irrelevant, the question is how likely are you to grab a player equal to or better than Zach. If it's not a lock for a top 4 pick then you don't make that move.

Also, the rules changes all but eliminate the Knicks from a top 4 pick, barely have a shot at a top 5-6 pick if they were the 8th seed.

[sco]

As a Knick fan as my second team, I'll be interested to see what they do in terms of being buyers or sellers at the deadline. Thibs has helped Randle change into a poor man's Lebron, as a playmaking PF who plays defense. He has a team option for next season on his deal, and he has turned into a very good to build around. Robinson and Barrett are both showing the right sort of trajectory to call "core". Quickley looks like at least a 6th man type guy, maybe a legit starting scoring PG (which works better when you have a guy like Randle handling the ball a lot). That all said, the Knicks are still mediocre and Toppin is redundant at PF with Randle and hasn't shown too much yet, and clearly their hole is at SG.

I can't see a deal for Zach getting done there without their inclusion of Barrett, who they seemingly don't want to part with. I wouldn't do a Zach deal for Robinson, even coupled with their picks.

[Stratmaster]

The article mentions that the Knicks have 5 first-round picks over the next 3 drafts. That's something that I want.

Which given the likely draft position of the Knicks, means we'd be trading LaVine for a 8-10 selection if not worse for the hopes of drafting a player who would be like LaVine...

They changed the lottery rules so now so if the Knicks end up with the 8th seed there’s a decent chance they’ll get a top 4 pick. Also this year’s draft is supposed to be really good and next year’s draft is supposed to be the “double draft” where they allow teams to take players straight out of high school.

If the Knicks include all 5 first round picks unprotected it’s something to consider. I like Lavine but he’s a defensive liability and I feel like we’ll have to give him the max in order to keep him and he’s not a top 15 player.

There’s a chance we could get a player much better than Lavine in the lottery.

Who? Who in the draft is a lock to be an elite scorer and be better than Lavine in other areas of their game? Are there 3 or 4 of those guys because odds are you don't get the first pick.

And even if those guys are out there, first you have to be lucky in the lottery to even be in a position to draft one of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Stratmaster]

You ignored my post. I didn’t suggest staying put. I said why wouldn’t you use your lottery tickets and cash it in for an established player to pair with Zach (making Zach your #2)

You named three drafted guys who are the only three who happened to be good in the last 5 years, and whose teams are all roughly .500 so I don’t see the big value-add even if you were lucky enough to luck into them.

The idea there are 5 guys who project to be Luka is laughable. It’s a strong draft but in the end only 1 or 2 guys will end up better than Zach

I never said that they are new Luka, but they defintevly all can be and are projected to be better than Zach. Ja was in play in games as rookie, Luka almost won playoffs series last year, so i see massive added value to their franchises and future projections. In that case what value Lavine brought in his tenure with Bulls. Zero 30 wins season, zero playoffs, zero all stars, zero stars fa who want to be his running mate. Lavine is 26, his 7 season and his playmaking and defense improved from being awful to being below average or average at best. Iq is what it is. I would rather be completley bad and have top three pick than being in mid to late lottery with Lavine. Kawhi isnt signing here, Oladipo most likley in Miami, Drummond is average player for max contract, Zach Lavine of centers. Even unpopular trading Zach and tanking for Cade/Suggs/Green is our best way to improve longterm.

Yeah I remember when the Bulls did that after Jordan....and nothing good happened....and then they traded Jimmy Butler....and nothing good happened.

Forgive me if I don't want to sign up for another 5 years of waiting for Kumminga to break out and then hear the explanation for how we just need to get another star so we should trade X (probably even Kumminga) for more draft picks.

We have one all-star, let's get a second. And, if they did it in a smart way, you could set it up so a third signs with you. Not sure what is out there, but that seems like a more reasonable plan than the 2026 plan or whatever it would take.

Amen

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Kukoc-Lauri]

I never said that they are new Luka, but they defintevly all can be and are projected to be better than Zach. Ja was in play in games as rookie, Luka almost won playoffs series last year, so i see massive added value to their franchises and future projections. In that case what value Lavine brought in his tenure with Bulls. Zero 30 wins season, zero playoffs, zero all stars, zero stars fa who want to be his running mate. Lavine is 26, his 7 season and his playmaking and defense improved from being awful to being below average or average at best. Iq is what it is. I would rather be completley bad and have top three pick than being in mid to late lottery with Lavine. Kawhi isnt signing here, Oladipo most likley in Miami, Drummond is average player for max contract, Zach Lavine of centers. Even unpopular trading Zach and tanking for Cade/Suggs/Green is our best way to improve longterm.

Yeah I remember when the Bulls did that after Jordan....and nothing good happened....and then they traded Jimmy Butler....and nothing good happened.

Forgive me if I don't want to sign up for another 5 years of waiting for Kumminga to break out and then hear the explanation for how we just need to get another star so we should trade X (probably even Kumminga) for more draft picks.

We have one all-star, let's get a second. And, if they did it in a smart way, you could set it up so a third signs with you. Not sure what is out there, but that seems like a more reasonable plan than the 2026 plan or whatever it would take.

Amen

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

Now we have great draft experts. Krause was old and didnt had best picks in 99 and 00. We could select Steve Francis instead of Brand, Pau Gasol before Tyson, Amare in 02 instead of JWill. Same happend to Paxson late. Instead of Markkanen,Carter,White we had chance to pick Adebayo,Shai,Herro and results would be different.

[LateNight]

I never said that they are new Luka, but they defintevly all can be and are projected to be better than Zach. Ja was in play in games as rookie, Luka almost won playoffs series last year, so i see massive added value to their franchises and future projections. In that case what value Lavine brought in his tenure with Bulls. Zero 30 wins season, zero playoffs, zero all stars, zero stars fa who want to be his running mate. Lavine is 26, his 7 season and his playmaking and defense improved from being awful to being below average or average at best. Iq is what it is. I would rather be completley bad and have top three pick than being in mid to late lottery with Lavine. Kawhi isnt signing here, Oladipo most likley in Miami, Drummond is average player for max contract, Zach Lavine of centers. Even unpopular trading Zach and tanking for Cade/Suggs/Green is our best way to improve longterm.

Yeah I remember when the Bulls did that after Jordan....and nothing good happened....and then they traded Jimmy Butler....and nothing good happened.

Forgive me if I don't want to sign up for another 5 years of waiting for Kumminga to break out and then hear the explanation for how we just need to get another star so we should trade X (probably even Kumminga) for more draft picks.

We have one all-star, let's get a second. And, if they did it in a smart way, you could set it up so a third signs with you. Not sure what is out there, but that seems like a more reasonable plan than the 2026 plan or whatever it would take.

Amen

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

For real! Our highest draft pick in recent memory was 2008 when we got Rose. We were not tanking - we were in 9th.

Sure, you can't plan on getting lucky - but the new draft odds mean that if you want a top pick, you have to get lucky no matter what. In 2018, we had identical records to the Kings - we WON the coin toss and got better lottery odds than them. Still, after the ping pong balls, they ended up with the #2 pick, we picked #7.

Sure, maybe getting vets in free agency makes you a treadmill team - but constantly trading players for future picks is a different kind of treadmill. And tanking isn't fun to watch.

[Gert42]

I meant about the Williams untouchable comment more as a thought that he is the only pick from the new regime, not necessarily what his ceiling is.

I am a secondary Bulls fan to have conversations with my brother in-law. I could probably be swayed either way. Signing him to a max deal is almost certainly an overpay, but I think the percentage that a return package nets a player as good or better than him is also less than 50%.

A Wiseman-Minnesota Pick deal would worry me that somehow they keep their pick this year and then the pick could become in the 8-14 range versus being a Top 1-3 pick. I also am dubious about the Warriors wanting to sell all of their young assets for a guy that will keep them paying luxury tax versus multiple younger talents.

[MrFortune3]

Which given the likely draft position of the Knicks, means we'd be trading LaVine for a 8-10 selection if not worse for the hopes of drafting a player who would be like LaVine...

They changed the lottery rules so now so if the Knicks end up with the 8th seed there’s a decent chance they’ll get a top 4 pick. Also this year’s draft is supposed to be really good and next year’s draft is supposed to be the “double draft” where they allow teams to take players straight out of high school.

If the Knicks include all 5 first round picks unprotected it’s something to consider. I like Lavine but he’s a defensive liability and I feel like we’ll have to give him the max in order to keep him and he’s not a top 15 player.

There’s a chance we could get a player much better than Lavine in the lottery.

Who? Who in the draft is a lock to be an elite scorer and be better than Lavine in other areas of their game? Are there 3 or 4 of those guys because odds are you don't get the first pick.

And even if those guys are out there, first you have to be lucky in the lottery to even be in a position to draft one of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

I don't get it. People are wanting to trade LaVine for a shot at another LaVine.

[Dan Z]

They changed the lottery rules so now so if the Knicks end up with the 8th seed there’s a decent chance they’ll get a top 4 pick. Also this year’s draft is supposed to be really good and next year’s draft is supposed to be the “double draft” where they allow teams to take players straight out of high school.

If the Knicks include all 5 first round picks unprotected it’s something to consider. I like Lavine but he’s a defensive liability and I feel like we’ll have to give him the max in order to keep him and he’s not a top 15 player.

There’s a chance we could get a player much better than Lavine in the lottery.

Who? Who in the draft is a lock to be an elite scorer and be better than Lavine in other areas of their game? Are there 3 or 4 of those guys because odds are you don't get the first pick.

And even if those guys are out there, first you have to be lucky in the lottery to even be in a position to draft one of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

I don't get it. People are wanting to trade LaVine for a shot at another LaVine.

Then when we get the next good player people will want to trade him for draft picks and/or young players. A never ending cycle.

[Stratmaster]

They changed the lottery rules so now so if the Knicks end up with the 8th seed there’s a decent chance they’ll get a top 4 pick. Also this year’s draft is supposed to be really good and next year’s draft is supposed to be the “double draft” where they allow teams to take players straight out of high school.

If the Knicks include all 5 first round picks unprotected it’s something to consider. I like Lavine but he’s a defensive liability and I feel like we’ll have to give him the max in order to keep him and he’s not a top 15 player.

There’s a chance we could get a player much better than Lavine in the lottery.

Who? Who in the draft is a lock to be an elite scorer and be better than Lavine in other areas of their game? Are there 3 or 4 of those guys because odds are you don't get the first pick.

And even if those guys are out there, first you have to be lucky in the lottery to even be in a position to draft one of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

I don't get it. People are wanting to trade LaVine for a shot at another LaVine.

Yep. It defies all logic. Let's start over with Pwill and a draft pick?

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Stratmaster]

Who? Who in the draft is a lock to be an elite scorer and be better than Lavine in other areas of their game? Are there 3 or 4 of those guys because odds are you don't get the first pick.

And even if those guys are out there, first you have to be lucky in the lottery to even be in a position to draft one of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

I don't get it. People are wanting to trade LaVine for a shot at another LaVine.

Then when we get the next good player people will want to trade him for draft picks and/or young players. A never ending cycle.

Yep. SMH

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[erasmusmrr]

Not trading him means paying him 190M.

[cjbulls]

Not trading him means paying him 190M.

Yes, they should save their money for.....Thad? Hutch? No no, Dotson?

[LateNight]

Not trading him means paying him 190M.

Yes, they should save their money for.....Thad? Hutch? No no, Dotson?

If we can give Thad $190m, then I’m in.

[MisterRoy]

Not trading him means paying him 190M.

Yep. Pay the man and then surround him with the right players.


Sent from somewhere you've never been.

[greenwing]

We’ve seen this story before. Trade a legit star (Butler) before you properly build around him to contend for a championship. Trading Zach Lavine at this point is as stupid as when we traded Butler. We might have gotten a good return for Butler overall, but it set us back years. Build around Lavine and you have a chance. Trade Lavine for unknowns and maybe you get another Lavine down the road. Chances are you don’t hit on a generational player from trading him.

Bottom line is the Bulls should keep Lavine for now. Period.

[bulls_troy]

Not trading him means paying him 190M.

And he deserves it

[DroseReturnChi]

Not trading him means paying him 190M.

Yes, they should save their money for.....Thad? Hutch? No no, Dotson?

Is this a stab at Lavine? You realize you can take back other team bad contracts and get picks right?
Lavine making 200 probably gives room for only 1 max instead of 2. Right now, him making 20 means nothing since they cannot compete.

[Jcool0]

Not trading him means paying him 190M.

Yes, they should save their money for.....Thad? Hutch? No no, Dotson?

Is this a stab at Lavine? You realize you can take back other team bad contracts and get picks right?
Lavine making 200 probably gives room for only 1 max instead of 2. Right now, him making 20 means nothing since they cannot compete.

None of that is remotely true.