Lets talk Zach Lavine

[TheStig]

You can make a pretty compelling case that Butler was better/more valuable than Lavine + PWill who to me are the only assets of significance we currently have on the roster.

Butler and Mirotic are more valuable than Lavine and PWill. Butler also actively recruits guys. I think this team would have been better if he was given time here.

After the Portis punch Mirotic wanted out so I don't think he'd be here even if the Bulls kept Butler.

I'm pretty sure it was an either or situation. The Bulls chose Portis.

[TheSuzerain]

It doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not Butler then was better than Zach now. Butler being good had very little to do with trading him. It was contextual.

Exactly... And... has nothing to do with Lavine now.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

Really, juxtaposing Lavine and Butler in context of team building misses the point anyway. Unless you are talking elite superstars, the decision to trade and rebuild or keep and build around has way more to do with: (a) what you can get in return if you opt for the trade; and (b) the rest of the assets you had to work with.

The unfortunate reality is that between Rose’s injury and some draft missteps, the FO had no young assets with which to build around Butler.

One could argue that's true of Lavine as well. Our young assets are not good other than PWill who I like but is a projection.

[Dan Z]

Butler and Mirotic are more valuable than Lavine and PWill. Butler also actively recruits guys. I think this team would have been better if he was given time here.

After the Portis punch Mirotic wanted out so I don't think he'd be here even if the Bulls kept Butler.

I'm pretty sure it was an either or situation. The Bulls chose Portis.

If they kept Butler do you think they'd trade Portis and keep Mirotic?

One thing that the Portis/Mirotic situation would've done was meant the Bulls lose more games than expected, so the team would still have a decent pick that year.

[Jcool0]

After the Portis punch Mirotic wanted out so I don't think he'd be here even if the Bulls kept Butler.

I'm pretty sure it was an either or situation. The Bulls chose Portis.

If they kept Butler do you think they'd trade Portis and keep Mirotic?

One thing that the Portis/Mirotic situation would've done was meant the Bulls lose more games than expected, so the team would still have a decent pick that year.

Who cares. Everyone you are talking about are not Bulls. It has no bearing on what they will do now.

[Jcool0]

Read on Twitter

[TheStig]

After the Portis punch Mirotic wanted out so I don't think he'd be here even if the Bulls kept Butler.

I'm pretty sure it was an either or situation. The Bulls chose Portis.

If they kept Butler do you think they'd trade Portis and keep Mirotic?

One thing that the Portis/Mirotic situation would've done was meant the Bulls lose more games than expected, so the team would still have a decent pick that year.

That team was incredibly dysfunctional and had terrible coaching. I don't know that it gets to that with a clearleader.

But yea, I do think Mirotic was better and the team was in a downward spiral and took the better return. if they were playoff bound, I think they keep Mirotic.

[TheStig]

I'm pretty sure it was an either or situation. The Bulls chose Portis.

If they kept Butler do you think they'd trade Portis and keep Mirotic?

One thing that the Portis/Mirotic situation would've done was meant the Bulls lose more games than expected, so the team would still have a decent pick that year.

Who cares. Everyone you are talking about are not Bulls. It has no bearing on what they will do now.

Who cares then. Most of the roster won't be on the team in a couple of years.

[Stratmaster]

It doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not Butler then was better than Zach now. Butler being good had very little to do with trading him. It was contextual.

I fail to see the context that makes signing a far inferior player to 200million+ suddenly make sense now.

I'm a Pat truther who thinks he is going to eventually be great, but frankly, he has shown absolutely nothing so far to show he's actually going to be any better than Mirotic yet. For all we know he's just an OK guy and nothing more. Lauri/Wendell/Coby have about as much trade value as a fax machine. The random vets on the roster are obviously not going to be here much longer.

It's basically Zach and a bunch of random replaceable parts. And Zach is nowhere near as good as Jimmy. So why is Zach and random dudes somehow so much more appealing to everybody now than Jimmy and random dudes? Jimmy and random dudes was basically a guaranteed .500+ team. Zach and random dudes meanwhile is stuck in the 20s in SRS.

None of this makes sense, context or not.

Explain how Zach Lavine at 25 is "far inferior" to Jimmy Butler at 25.

He isn't as good as Butler defensively. What else? He is a better shooter than Butler was. Better passer wth more assists. Equal in rebounds. Better TS%. Same PER.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Stratmaster]

Yawn. Here at halftime of the Kings game. Lavine with just another easy 20 point half.... on 8 shots.

So what did he do wrong so far that you can use to justify an argument not to keep and pay the man?

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[StunnerKO]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[StunnerKO]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[Jcool0]

Read on Twitter

[Stratmaster]

38 points... on 20 shots... 3 steals... 2 big q4 defensive rebounds.

Nah... we shouldn't pay this guy. Players like him are a dime a dozen.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Jcool0]

Read on Twitter

[PaKii94]

The crazy thing is zach is going INTO his prime. The best is yet to come!

[Jcool0]

I am usually one to argue how little NBA coaches bring to the table compared to other sports. But without Donovan not sure Zach and the Bulls are were they are right now.

[CaPiTanAK]

We have gotten our unicorn. It’s time to dump the Titos and get Zach some real help. Time to win rings instead of settling for playoff spots.

[StunnerKO]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[nomorezorro]

I find it crazy how even Chicago fans keep underrating Jimmy. He dragged an arguably even worse roster than this one to .500 (40-36 in games he actually played). He dragged that trash ass Minnesota team to the playoffs. We know what he did with Miami.

He was considerably better than Zach. He's still the most underrated player in the league. Even after last season people are still thinking his entire career is some fluke or something. He was a straight up top-10 player, not "maybe top 15-20" or something. He was easily better than Towns. He was better than Embiid. He went inch-for-inch with LeBron in the damn Finals. Kawhi asked him to come to LA before PG for good reason.

If you wanted Jimmy out but suddenly have absolutely no issue with throwing $200million (even more after revenues go back up with fans next season) at Zach LaVine I'm sorry but that is just nonsense. It's like saying getting rid of Scottie Pippen to give Mitch Richmond a max contract is a great idea.

i agree with this generally, but my conclusion is "it was stupid to trade butler, and it would be slightly less stupid — but still pretty stupid — to trade lavine"

i think the one argument you could make for trading jimmy but keeping lavine is that the bulls front office had proven itself incompetent at building a team that complemented butler's strengths, so they might as well cut their losses and move on because they weren't going to take their head out of their ass. the bulls current front offense is theoretically competent, so they should try to build around the elite talent already on the roster. (it's a backwards argument, but i at least kind of understand how someone would arrive at it)

but like, in general, if people are now recognizing that it's smart to retain talented players in their prime...i'll take it. no need to revisit the dark past

[Jcool0]

I find it crazy how even Chicago fans keep underrating Jimmy. He dragged an arguably even worse roster than this one to .500 (40-36 in games he actually played). He dragged that trash ass Minnesota team to the playoffs. We know what he did with Miami.

He was considerably better than Zach. He's still the most underrated player in the league. Even after last season people are still thinking his entire career is some fluke or something. He was a straight up top-10 player, not "maybe top 15-20" or something. He was easily better than Towns. He was better than Embiid. He went inch-for-inch with LeBron in the damn Finals. Kawhi asked him to come to LA before PG for good reason.

If you wanted Jimmy out but suddenly have absolutely no issue with throwing $200million (even more after revenues go back up with fans next season) at Zach LaVine I'm sorry but that is just nonsense. It's like saying getting rid of Scottie Pippen to give Mitch Richmond a max contract is a great idea.

i agree with this generally, but my conclusion is "it was stupid to trade butler, and it would be slightly less stupid — but still pretty stupid — to trade lavine"

i think the one argument you could make for trading jimmy but keeping lavine is that the bulls front office had proven itself incompetent at building a team that complemented butler's strengths, so they might as well cut their losses and move on because they weren't going to take their head out of their ass. the bulls current front offense is theoretically competent, so they should try to build around the elite talent already on the roster. (it's a backwards argument, but i at least kind of understand how someone would arrive at it)

but like, in general, if people are now recognizing that it's smart to retain talented players in their prime...i'll take it. no need to revisit the dark past

Bulls had zero assets then. They had an aging Wade and Rondo. You weren't going to get anything for them.