Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread

[chefo]

What's the rush to trade Lauri? I still don't get it.

Everybody can miss a 2-3 weeks in the NBA...

Stack talent, don't ship it out... Lauri at 18-20 is a steal, IMO, even if he only plays 65-70 games / year, if he can keep up his current level of play. Hell, he'll probably get a bit more if he comes back and balls just as well as before he got injured.

This has been explained a bunch of times. But the arguments for trading Lauri is simple. There are basically three reasons:

1.) Lauri playing style does not complement Zach's (Lauri lacks defense, lack of post play and his inability to create his own shot when his 3 isn't falling).

2.) It's a questionable use of cap-space to spend $20m on an inconsistent, one-way big that seems to miss 25% of each season to injury. People would prefer to spend it on someone else.

3.) If we want to build around Zach, we may need to move piece to acquire players - Lauri can be used as a trade asset to help get us other pieces who complements Zach more.

Now, I'm not saying all of that is true. It's subjective and a lot of people disagree with it (and, to your point, there does seem to be some element of the 'grass is always greener' mindset). But those are the reasons.

[Added: As noted by the user above - the rush is because of free agency and the estimate value of his contract. Most people who believe the above three things seem to agree they would keep Markkanen for $15m.]

On point 1.), I'll have to completely disagree--Lauri is absolutely perfect to pair with a super-high usage player like Zach, because Lauri gets his points on very low usage with elite efficiency. Inability to 'create' his own shot is why he'll get paid 20+, if he comes back healthy because if he actually had that ability, every team in the league with cap space would have maxed him out on the spot. Again, warts in terms of "shot creation" an all, he's at 19 per game on 65% TS, and 23 per 36.

On point 2.), a lot of bigs, and smalls miss time these days. Ok, let's play this game--who else can the Bulls realistically get that will outperform current year Lauri for $20M? I looked through the list of FAs available in 2021 and can't see any intersection of the "will settle for $20M or even $25M" and "is materially better than Lauri right now".

Again, $20M these days is the salary of a decent starter--not a superstar, or even an all-star.

I think the biggest issue on our board is that Lauri is being judged for being 7 feet tall because he either straight up sucks at things dudes that big are expected to be good at--rebounding, blocking shots, etc... or is at the very least bad at them. At the same time, people tend to overlook the fact that he's played like an elite second banana on O all year.

Hell, as I've pointed out a bunch of times over the last 3 years, get him a big wing like Pat Williams next to him that can play the 4 on D and have Lauri guard the other wing as a SF on D. In this bizzaro world we're in, Lauri has shown better fundamentals guarding people 1-on-1, even outside, than anybody on the entire team sans Temple. The only times Randoplh, AD and Dame struggled scoring against our Swiss cheese D was when Lauri bodied them up 1-on-1. Then you don't have to pull your hair why he's not Gobert-like on D. Then, keep teaching him how to contest on D and play him for 15 min / game at C, which he's been much better at this year. By the way, the PF in the Bulls defensive scheme has a much more difficult job making decisions than the C, because he often has to guard a stretch player and is expected to help in the paint. The C knows exactly what's expected of him because shooting 5s are still a rarity.

3.) If we build around Zach, you want the lane as open as the Red Sea for Moses. To do that, you need elite shooting and lots of it. I think there isn't a single GM in the entire league who'd ship out a Lauri-like, 23 year old player who's having a great year on O, for the simple reason that if he blows up, they'd look like an utter idiot... which guys who make seven figure salaries prefer not to. So, the odds of Lauri going anywhere at the trade deadline are pretty slim to none, IMO, no matter how much many on here want to pack his bags.

[ZOMG]

IMO it's clear as day that Markkanen will get several contract offers around $20 million per.

Many people thought Gordon Hayward was done. Can't stay healthy, couldn't mesh with his teammates in Boston, just a guy on a downward trajectory who's already 30. Stick a fork in him.

Then the Hornets shocked the world by giving him a humongous deal out of the blue. At that point everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY laughed at them. Desperate small market team doing desperate small market team things. But Charlotte had looked past the circumstances Hayward had found himself in and recognized a guy whose talent had never disappeared. And now he's having a career year in pretty much every category. Nobody's laughing.

Markkanen may not be Hayward, but he's a whopping SEVEN years younger than Gordon. There is literally zero chance teams around the NBA don't take a chance on someone like Lauri after seeing him play for dysfunctional teams and bad coaches for years. If he pans out, that's the kind of genius move that makes GM careers. In the same vein, if the Bulls give him up for next to nothing and the aforementioned happens, it's just one more embarrassment for this team in a long line of them. Not sure if they want to take that risk - $20 million per is simply a market price for a guy playing like Markkanen this season.

Lauri has already shown enough to make this situation a reality. IMO it doesn't matter that much what happens the rest of the way.

If true, don't you think someone would give us something decent in trade value for him to get his RFA rights?

People act like Lauri is a unique talent. He is not. He is a solid role player at best. He will get overpayed and I say let someone else do it.

Gordon was an all star and use to dual Jimmy toe to toe. He was a truly good player. His leg got destroyed and he is still better then Lauri.

Lauri is a solid shooter. That is his NBA skill. He would have been the perfect player for 2011 Bulls.

If Lauri had Toni Kukoc type of ability. I would be in his corner. Kukoc would have been a player worth watching in todays game. He could pass, shoot, and post up. People who make comparisons between the two do not remember how much better Kukoc was at all areas of the game.

True. That's why Lauri won't get paid $120 million over 4 years at age 30.

He will get paid around 80/4 at age 24 though.

[LateNight]

What's the rush to trade Lauri? I still don't get it.

Everybody can miss a 2-3 weeks in the NBA...

Stack talent, don't ship it out... Lauri at 18-20 is a steal, IMO, even if he only plays 65-70 games / year, if he can keep up his current level of play. Hell, he'll probably get a bit more if he comes back and balls just as well as before he got injured.

This has been explained a bunch of times. But the arguments for trading Lauri is simple. There are basically three reasons:

1.) Lauri playing style does not complement Zach's (Lauri lacks defense, lack of post play and his inability to create his own shot when his 3 isn't falling).

2.) It's a questionable use of cap-space to spend $20m on an inconsistent, one-way big that seems to miss 25% of each season to injury. People would prefer to spend it on someone else.

3.) If we want to build around Zach, we may need to move piece to acquire players - Lauri can be used as a trade asset to help get us other pieces who complements Zach more.

Now, I'm not saying all of that is true. It's subjective and a lot of people disagree with it (and, to your point, there does seem to be some element of the 'grass is always greener' mindset). But those are the reasons.

[Added: As noted by the user above - the rush is because of free agency and the estimate value of his contract. Most people who believe the above three things seem to agree they would keep Markkanen for $15m.]

On point 1.), I'll have to completely disagree--Lauri is absolutely perfect to pair with a super-high usage player like Zach, because Lauri gets his points on very low usage with elite efficiency. Inability to 'create' his own shot is why he'll get paid 20+, if he comes back healthy because if he actually had that ability, every team in the league with cap space would have maxed him out on the spot. Again, warts in terms of "shot creation" an all, he's at 19 per game on 65% TS, and 23 per 36.

On point 2.), a lot of bigs, and smalls miss time these days. Ok, let's play this game--who else can the Bulls realistically get that will outperform current year Lauri for $20M? I looked through the list of FAs available in 2021 and can't see any intersection of the "will settle for $20M or even $25M" and "is materially better than Lauri right now".

Again, $20M these days is the salary of a decent starter--not a superstar, or even an all-star.

I think the biggest issue on our board is that Lauri is being judged for being 7 feet tall because he either straight up sucks at things dudes that big are expected to be good at--rebounding, blocking shots, etc... or is at the very least bad at them. At the same time, people tend to overlook the fact that he's played like an elite second banana on O all year.

Hell, as I've pointed out a bunch of times over the last 3 years, get him a big wing like Pat Williams next to him that can play the 4 on D and have Lauri guard the other wing as a SF on D. In this bizzaro world we're in, Lauri has shown better fundamentals guarding people 1-on-1, even outside, than anybody on the entire team sans Temple. The only times Randoplh, AD and Dame struggled scoring against our Swiss cheese D was when Lauri bodied them up 1-on-1. Then you don't have to pull your hair why he's not Gobert-like on D. Then, keep teaching him how to contest on D and play him for 15 min / game at C, which he's been much better at this year. By the way, the PF in the Bulls defensive scheme has a much more difficult job making decisions than the C, because he often has to guard a stretch player and is expected to help in the paint. The C knows exactly what's expected of him because shooting 5s are still a rarity.

3.) If we build around Zach, you want the lane as open as the Red Sea for Moses. To do that, you need elite shooting and lots of it. I think there isn't a single GM in the entire league who'd ship out a Lauri-like, 23 year old player who's having a great year on O, for the simple reason that if he blows up, they'd look like an utter idiot... which guys who make seven figure salaries prefer not to. So, the odds of Lauri going anywhere at the trade deadline are pretty slim to none, IMO, no matter how much many on here want to pack his bags.

Fair enough - I just don’t agree with you on his fit.

I don’t think he’s actually that strong of a spot up shooter (career numbers support that) for someone whose game relies heavily on being a perimeter threat.

I also think, as you mentioned, we need good help defense from our PF and I think he’s kind of crappy at that.

I also question the choice to make a #2 option out of someone who misses games and has erratic offensive output.

But I totally get that he has value and I’ve enjoyed watching lots of his games. I would rather move him in a consolidation trade. But you’re probably right - maybe AK will keep him

[Indomitable]

If true, don't you think someone would give us something decent in trade value for him to get his RFA rights?

People act like Lauri is a unique talent. He is not. He is a solid role player at best. He will get overpayed and I say let someone else do it.

Gordon was an all star and use to dual Jimmy toe to toe. He was a truly good player. His leg got destroyed and he is still better then Lauri.

Lauri is a solid shooter. That is his NBA skill. He would have been the perfect player for 2011 Bulls.

If Lauri had Toni Kukoc type of ability. I would be in his corner. Kukoc would have been a player worth watching in todays game. He could pass, shoot, and post up. People who make comparisons between the two do not remember how much better Kukoc was at all areas of the game.

True. That's why Lauri won't get paid $120 million over 4 years at age 30.

He will get paid around 80/4 at age 24 though.

That is why unless you are about to make a run. You move him. I could not careless what happens after he leaves.

[ZOMG]

Hey, remember back when Lauri Markkanen used to play basketball for the Bulls?

What's up with that guy?

[MGB8]

Hey, remember back when Lauri Markkanen used to play basketball for the Bulls?

What's up with that guy?

He's still kind of critical, in the sense that he either needs to step up and become part of a long term core, or at least show enough value to fetch a good return in a trade. His injury really came at a bad time, because he was progressing towards both of those goals.

In the meantime, I still think that to maximize Lauri's value, he has to be a small-ball 5. If Thad Young can play a ton of 5 at 6'8, 235, Lauri can play the 5 too. Yes, he doesn't give you the rebounding or rim defense that you want from a 5 - though occasionally he rebounds well (and it's not like a guy like KAT gives you much defense). Yes, he's be overwhelmed by a small number of powerful opposing centers - Cousins, Drummond, Embiid (not that he goes into the post nearly as much as he should) and a couple of others. But those centers aren't going to have a ton of fun guarding Lauri on the perimeter if they play man. And not playing man and going full (or near full) zone concept, and thus giving the offense room to create free men on the perimeter, is probably not the best bet against a team that has some good shooters on it. Lauri also is quick enough to switch a good amount from the 5 spot.

Hopefully Markkanen is back soon and they give him more time as a small 5, kind of platooned with WCJ rather than trying to force them together.

[madvillian]

His absence has proven imo that Wendell is more important to the current team than Lauri.

[PaKii94]

His absence has proven imo that Wendell is more important to the current team than Lauri.

Yes with our current construction. There is zero players who can provide the average defense/big man work that wcj provides. The drop off from him to gafford is gargantuan.

Lauri's strengths can be covered by committee if one of our role players (or coby) gets hot. Lauri can still be useful for the offense when it stagnates (like it did in the 2nd quarter last game). He is more of a backbone offensive player

[madvillian]

His absence has proven imo that Wendell is more important to the current team than Lauri.

Yes with our current construction. There is zero players who can provide the average defense/big man work that wcj provides. The drop off from him to gafford is gargantuan.

Lauri's strengths can be covered by committee if one of our role players (or coby) gets hot. Lauri can still be useful for the offense when it stagnates (like it did in the 2nd quarter last game). He is more of a backbone offensive player

He's certainly less valuable when Zach is doing what he's doing. I'm still open to resigning Lauri but he needs to put together a great 2nd half and contribute to wins. Right now his value is less than it was this offseason, which is I guess sort of a win for Chicago.

[PaKii94]

His absence has proven imo that Wendell is more important to the current team than Lauri.

Yes with our current construction. There is zero players who can provide the average defense/big man work that wcj provides. The drop off from him to gafford is gargantuan.

Lauri's strengths can be covered by committee if one of our role players (or coby) gets hot. Lauri can still be useful for the offense when it stagnates (like it did in the 2nd quarter last game). He is more of a backbone offensive player

He's certainly less valuable when Zach is doing what he's doing. I'm still open to resigning Lauri but he needs to put together a great 2nd half and contribute to wins. Right now his value is less than it was this offseason, which is I guess sort of a win for Chicago.

If Lavine continues to be a flamethrower at such a high frequency then yeah Lauri is less useful. But I really want to see how Lauri's integrated back in now that it's clicking for lavine and coby is playing more of an off ball role.

I disagree that Lauri's value is less than the off season. His injury risk is a valid concern but I think he's shown that last year with Boylen was a down year that he's past now

[coldfish]

Bulls are now 4th in defensive rating since Lauri went out.

[TheFinishSniper]

If Lavine continues to be a flamethrower at such a high frequency then yeah Lauri is less useful. But I really want to see how Lauri's integrated back in now that it's clicking for lavine and coby is playing more of an off ball role.

I disagree that Lauri's value is less than the off season. His injury risk is a valid concern but I think he's shown that last year with Boylen was a down year that he's past now

nah, he aint getting more excuses. enough is enough. he will either sign in offseason max 13M per year or he can look for another job accross NBA. we are past this "shown", "valid", "boylen" etc crap

[sco]

Yes with our current construction. There is zero players who can provide the average defense/big man work that wcj provides. The drop off from him to gafford is gargantuan.

Lauri's strengths can be covered by committee if one of our role players (or coby) gets hot. Lauri can still be useful for the offense when it stagnates (like it did in the 2nd quarter last game). He is more of a backbone offensive player

He's certainly less valuable when Zach is doing what he's doing. I'm still open to resigning Lauri but he needs to put together a great 2nd half and contribute to wins. Right now his value is less than it was this offseason, which is I guess sort of a win for Chicago.

If Lavine continues to be a flamethrower at such a high frequency then yeah Lauri is less useful. But I really want to see how Lauri's integrated back in now that it's clicking for lavine and coby is playing more of an off ball role.

I disagree that Lauri's value is less than the off season. His injury risk is a valid concern but I think he's shown that last year with Boylen was a down year that he's past now

Given the shorter window under his contract, I see his trade value (ie option value) being lower than the offseason, but his elevated play (when healthy) probably has offset that aspect.

As much as I want to trade Lauri for even a bag of beans, it's not because he isn't a good basketball player. So I can imagine some GM saying that he sees upside in the kid, which could easily be true. I am just too tired of him missing 30% of his games due to non-chronic injuries.

[PaKii94]

If Lavine continues to be a flamethrower at such a high frequency then yeah Lauri is less useful. But I really want to see how Lauri's integrated back in now that it's clicking for lavine and coby is playing more of an off ball role.

I disagree that Lauri's value is less than the off season. His injury risk is a valid concern but I think he's shown that last year with Boylen was a down year that he's past now

nah, he aint getting more excuses. enough is enough. he will either sign in offseason max 13M per year or he can look for another job accross NBA. we are past this "shown", "valid", "boylen" etc crap

13 mil

[PaKii94]

He's certainly less valuable when Zach is doing what he's doing. I'm still open to resigning Lauri but he needs to put together a great 2nd half and contribute to wins. Right now his value is less than it was this offseason, which is I guess sort of a win for Chicago.

If Lavine continues to be a flamethrower at such a high frequency then yeah Lauri is less useful. But I really want to see how Lauri's integrated back in now that it's clicking for lavine and coby is playing more of an off ball role.

I disagree that Lauri's value is less than the off season. His injury risk is a valid concern but I think he's shown that last year with Boylen was a down year that he's past now

Given the shorter window under his contract, I see his trade value (ie option value) being lower than the offseason, but his elevated play (when healthy) probably has offset that aspect.

As much as I want to trade Lauri for even a bag of beans, it's not because he isn't a good basketball player. So I can imagine some GM saying that he sees upside in the kid, which could easily be true. I am just too tired of him missing 30% of his games due to non-chronic injuries.

Yeah I'm about to hit the breaking point with the injuries too. As others have said availability is also a skill. Lauri definitely hasn't shown that so far in his career. But it is kind of a luck factor. Hopefully luck looks his way going forward (doubt it ...sigh)

[PaKii94]

Bulls are now 4th in defensive rating since Lauri went out.

Cause we played so many world beaters since then
It's kind of like december from last season when we had a top 3 defense ( I think) while playing a string of below 0.500 teams. I'm pretty sure gimpy lauri was in the lineup for that


I think the bigger factor on defensive swing is WCJ. If he's regained how to play ball then the main sour spot on our roster this year becomes the starting PG.

[sco]

Bulls are now 4th in defensive rating since Lauri went out.

Cause we played so many world beaters since then

I think the bigger factor on defensive swing is WCJ. If he's regained how to play ball then the main sour spot on our roster this year becomes the starting PG.

Yeah, I've seen enough defensive improvement from Lauri to say he's closer to average than bad at defense, but he isn't helping from the bench.

[ZOMG]

His absence has proven imo that Wendell is more important to the current team than Lauri.

Yes with our current construction. There is zero players who can provide the average defense/big man work that wcj provides. The drop off from him to gafford is gargantuan.

Lauri's strengths can be covered by committee if one of our role players (or coby) gets hot. Lauri can still be useful for the offense when it stagnates (like it did in the 2nd quarter last game). He is more of a backbone offensive player

He's certainly less valuable when Zach is doing what he's doing. I'm still open to resigning Lauri but he needs to put together a great 2nd half and contribute to wins. Right now his value is less than it was this offseason, which is I guess sort of a win for Chicago.

That's a crazy take. Less??

He's been an efficient 19/6 guy this season. You think the League cares that he hurt his shoulder? People get injured literally EVERY DAY in the NBA and it doesn't do anything to their value - trade or otherwise. He's just 23 years old.

The fact remains that when it comes to his RFA status, Lauri's holding all the cards now, not the Bulls. Markkanen bet on himself - aided by the FO's misguided decision to play hardball with him - and won. Now AK is running a real risk of losing him for nothing, which would be a disaster.

I don't see teams frantically putting together packages of assets for a Lauri trade. They know very well what's up. Someone will give him that $20 million offer and the Bulls FO will have an extremely painful decision to make.

[TheFinishSniper]

If Lavine continues to be a flamethrower at such a high frequency then yeah Lauri is less useful. But I really want to see how Lauri's integrated back in now that it's clicking for lavine and coby is playing more of an off ball role.

I disagree that Lauri's value is less than the off season. His injury risk is a valid concern but I think he's shown that last year with Boylen was a down year that he's past now

nah, he aint getting more excuses. enough is enough. he will either sign in offseason max 13M per year or he can look for another job accross NBA. we are past this "shown", "valid", "boylen" etc crap

13 mil

you are right seems like overpay when I think about it now

[LateNight]

Yes with our current construction. There is zero players who can provide the average defense/big man work that wcj provides. The drop off from him to gafford is gargantuan.

Lauri's strengths can be covered by committee if one of our role players (or coby) gets hot. Lauri can still be useful for the offense when it stagnates (like it did in the 2nd quarter last game). He is more of a backbone offensive player

He's certainly less valuable when Zach is doing what he's doing. I'm still open to resigning Lauri but he needs to put together a great 2nd half and contribute to wins. Right now his value is less than it was this offseason, which is I guess sort of a win for Chicago.

That's a crazy take. Less??

He's been an efficient 19/6 guy this season. You think the League cares that he hurt his shoulder? People get injured literally EVERY DAY in the NBA and it doesn't do anything to their value - trade or otherwise. He's just 23 years old.

The fact remains that when it comes to his RFA status, Lauri's holding all the cards now, not the Bulls. Markkanen bet on himself - aided by the FO's misguided decision to play hardball with him - and won. Now AK is running a real risk of losing him for nothing, which would be a disaster.

I don't see teams frantically putting together packages of assets for a Lauri trade. They know very well what's up. Someone will give him that $20 million offer and the Bulls FO will have an extremely painful decision to make.

I don’t know why everything thinks AK are terrified of losing Lauri. Their behavior in the off-season indicates otherwise.