Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread

[Kukoc-Lauri]

Lauri is consistent in making points and rebounds 19/6. Lauri is above average shooter for position, 3 threes per game. Lauri is better defender than Carter so called anchor of defense and Young so called defensive stopper. Just look those two against Randle and Embiid. Lauri is playing with backcourt with least basketball iq and playmaking talent with worst perimeter defense. Really hoping for trade in good team with pointguard and structure and him to blossom, which would certinaly happend just to show those incompetent fans who knew very little about basketball who is he as player. And i will came after that and said i told you so.

[mj234eva]

^This dude is so biased.

[WindyCityBorn]

Lauri is consistent in making points and rebounds 19/6. Lauri is above average shooter for position, 3 threes per game. Lauri is better defender than Carter so called anchor of defense and Young so called defensive stopper. Just look those two against Randle and Embiid. Lauri is playing with backcourt with least basketball iq and playmaking talent with worst perimeter defense. Really hoping for trade in good team with pointguard and structure and him to blossom, which would certinaly happend just to show those incompetent fans who knew very little about basketball who is he as player. And i will came after that and said i told you so.

Bash LaVine, defend Lauri. Very consistent effort.

[Dieselbound&Down]

Lauri is consistent in making points and rebounds 19/6. Lauri is above average shooter for position, 3 threes per game. Lauri is better defender than Carter so called anchor of defense and Young so called defensive stopper. Just look those two against Randle and Embiid. Lauri is playing with backcourt with least basketball iq and playmaking talent with worst perimeter defense. Really hoping for trade in good team with pointguard and structure and him to blossom, which would certinaly happend just to show those incompetent fans who knew very little about basketball who is he as player. And i will came after that and said i told you so.

I'm also really hoping he is traded to a team that values his abilities and feels strongly that he will blossom in their system. Oh, and that this trade will net the Bulls some worthwhile pieces to help this team move forward and plug the gaping hole that will be left behind when he is working somewhere else in a few weeks.

[madvillian]

Lauri is consistent in making points and rebounds 19/6. Lauri is above average shooter for position, 3 threes per game. Lauri is better defender than Carter so called anchor of defense and Young so called defensive stopper. Just look those two against Randle and Embiid. Lauri is playing with backcourt with least basketball iq and playmaking talent with worst perimeter defense. Really hoping for trade in good team with pointguard and structure and him to blossom, which would certinaly happend just to show those incompetent fans who knew very little about basketball who is he as player. And i will came after that and said i told you so.

I'm also really hoping he is traded to a team that values his abilities and feels strongly that he will blossom in their system. Oh, and that this trade will net the Bulls some worthwhile pieces to help this team move forward and plug the gaping hole that will be left behind when he is working somewhere else in a few weeks.

Team seems to be playing about the same sans Lauri as with him. He probably has more value to a contender as a role playing 4th option than he does in Chicago and hopefully he gets moved for some value.

[DroseReturnChi]

huh? thats a great tactic rather than losing him for nothing. dealing him for 2nd rounder is a 2k move.
I agree its hard to max rather give him incentives.

Overpay Lauri is not a great tactic imo...never...ever...

rather loose him for nothing...

Do you prefer a bad contract on your team or cash to spend on relevant players and flexibility?

Don't think you know what the true market value of certain player when you tell me this.

What's the problem about paying Lauri 22 mil/yr if he earns it? We know what his baseline is. A high efficient spread bigman. AK is willing to pay 14-15 mil/yr for that. What's wrong with paying him 22 mil/yr if his productions warrant me? Compromise and set his base at 17 mil/yr and allow him the opportunity to earn more if his plays are good enough to meet the incentives.

Most of the anti Lauri fans dont know the difference between a traditional big and a stretch 4/5.
If Lauri was traditional post big, I wouldnt pay him above MLE as guys like Holmes are littered and more athletic.
But the latter group dont grow on trees and its hard to find someone better. Maybe KP.
Its sad they think White's 3pt volume can replace Lauri's production. Having a bunch of scoring guards is merely a quick fix.

[WindyCityBorn]

Overpay Lauri is not a great tactic imo...never...ever...

rather loose him for nothing...

Do you prefer a bad contract on your team or cash to spend on relevant players and flexibility?

Don't think you know what the true market value of certain player when you tell me this.

What's the problem about paying Lauri 22 mil/yr if he earns it? We know what his baseline is. A high efficient spread bigman. AK is willing to pay 14-15 mil/yr for that. What's wrong with paying him 22 mil/yr if his productions warrant me? Compromise and set his base at 17 mil/yr and allow him the opportunity to earn more if his plays are good enough to meet the incentives.

Most of the anti Lauri fans dont know the difference between a traditional big and a stretch 4/5.
If Lauri was traditional post big, I wouldnt pay him above MLE as guys like Holmes are littered and more athletic.
But the latter group dont grow on trees and its hard to find someone better. Maybe KP.
Its sad they think White's 3pt volume can replace Lauri's production. Having a bunch of scoring guards is merely a quick fix.

Lauri is just too injury prone. I’m tired of wondering how our season would have turned out if he could stay healthy. And he isn’t really good enough to roll the dice on paying him and hoping he can finally stay healthy.

[the ultimates]

I'm going to be as nice as I can be saying this. Who gives a f**k if he is seven feet tall. He's not some above-average shot blocker or rebounder. Teams are getting his level of shooting from small ball fours aka small forwards.

Real stretch 4/5's were Love, Dirk and to a lesser degree Niko. They could post up smaller defenders or work from the elbow and high post area. You put a big on them they take them outside to the three-point line or drive past the slower big.

The Bulls have missed his three-point shooting but it's still generating good looks and the flow of the offense without him certainly hasn't been broken. I said it before and I'll say it again. You can find his level of three-point shooting which is by far his best attribute for less than 20 million per year.

[CobyWhite0]

I'm going to be as nice as I can be saying this. Who gives a f**k if he is seven feet tall. He's not some above-average shot blocker or rebounder. Teams are getting his level of shooting from small ball fours aka small forwards.

Real stretch 4/5's were Love, Dirk and to a lesser degree Niko. They could post up smaller defenders or work from the elbow and high post area. You put a big on them they take them outside to the three-point line or drive past the slower big.

The Bulls have missed his three-point shooting but it's still generating good looks and the flow of the offense without him certainly hasn't been broken. I said it before and I'll say it again. You can find his level of three-point shooting which is by far his best attribute for less than 20 million per year.

Great post.

Lauri is shooting a career-high (by far) 39.6% from behind the arc this season.
The Bulls as a team are shooting 39.5% from behind the arc in the 9 games since Lauri got hurt yet again.

Our OffRtg was 110.5 the first 21 games (14 with Lauri)
Our OffRtg is 113.5 the last 9 games (all without Lauri)

[CobyWhite0]

After tonight's game, Lauri now has the worst +/- on the team with a -5.8
After tonight's game, Lauri now has the worst NetRtg on the team with a -9.5**

**Mokoka and Kornet are worse, if that makes anyone feel better lol

[the ultimates]

The thing that's frustrating isn't even Lauri. We clearly see what he is and what he isn't. Some though continue to make excuses saying he needs more shots, the Bulls guards are bad and Lavine is somehow holding him back. If they feel he still has that potential ok but why isn't that benefit given to other Bulls young players? Those same people will piss on Coby White in his second year (is Coby White a bust). They do the same to WCJ (is Gafford better than Carter).

[Dez]

The thing that's frustrating isn't even Lauri. We clearly see what he is and what he isn't. Some though continue to make excuses saying he needs more shots, the Bulls guards are bad and Lavine is somehow holding him back. If they feel he still has that potential ok but why isn't that benefit given to other Bulls young players? Those same people will piss on Coby White in his second year (is Coby White a bust). They do the same to WCJ (is Gafford better than Carter).

Thank you, this is the biggest issue.

One set of rules for Lauri and a completely different set for others who have been in the league for a lesser time.

[BullChit]

I just went back and watched some Lauri rookie highlights and the guy just moved differently back then...

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk

[Pentele]

The thing that's frustrating isn't even Lauri. We clearly see what he is and what he isn't. Some though continue to make excuses saying he needs more shots, the Bulls guards are bad and Lavine is somehow holding him back. If they feel he still has that potential ok but why isn't that benefit given to other Bulls young players? Those same people will piss on Coby White in his second year (is Coby White a bust). They do the same to WCJ (is Gafford better than Carter).

Thank you, this is the biggest issue.

One set of rules for Lauri and a completely different set for others who have been in the league for a lesser time.

(This post refers to both quotes above as you can see by the issues covered. There is no need to take anything personally as I am trying to talk about a general issue)

To me, it seems that there are a couple of posters who have gone a bit overboard with finding reasons for why Lauri is not succesfull. I think the vast majority are quite cognizant of the fact that Lauri has been missing games too much, and that has to count against him in the overall evaluation. It is also generally acknowledged that he does not bring much to the table on the defensive end. Where people differ quite a lot is how much room they perceive there is still for Lauri to develop. I think that is a reasonable disagreement since we are talking about young athletes after all.

I cannot comment on that Coby White is a bust discussion (as I am not sure that I have even opened that thread more than a couple of times) but is there really a legion of Lauri's fierce supporters who are arguing unreasonably against Coby? Or just one or two? For what is worth, I think Coby is a very likable player who is in a very tough spot when playing as a pg. I do not think that he is going to be a good pg, but then again, who knows. All I know is that he is currently much more useful to the team off the ball. But a bust? It is certainly much too early to tell. Right now, definitely not.

About excuses. It is true that there were a lot of people saying, last year, that Boylen's system does not fit Lauri. I remember people calling it an excuse back then. Well, how about that, we all can now see what an utter failure Boylen's stint as a head coach was. So there has been this narrative going on for some time that people are finding excuses for Lauri, but as it turns out, those alleged excuses turned to be quite correct. Another thing that is often labelled as an "excuse" is the on-going, and a bit frustrating, discussion about Lauri's lack of creation. When people say that bigs are not typically creators, they are right. It is not an excuse. Are some people finding genuine excuses for Lauri's deficiencies. Yes, I could name two posters, but everyone else falls under a normal, even if sometimes heated, forum discussion.

And now that we are finding blame in people participating in discussing Lauri's game, what should we think of the utter lack of reflection when some are clamoring for a player like Collins as a piece that fills the gaps Lauri has in his game? It is of course only one example. The general point is this: You cannot tell me with a straight face that debating Lauri's usefullness is not lopsided on the both sides of the argument? Sure, there are many reasonable takes - I think on the both "sides" - but there are also utter trash comments, or some that have no basis in reality. Although I am a new poster, I have lurked here a lot, and it is easy to perceive something shifting here, even if Lauri himself has played as well as ever (is his play enough? it is reasonable to argue it is not, but I am not referring to that aspect). Maybe people are frustrated to some vocal posters, and they project that to their evaluations, I do not know. Yet the truth of the matter appears to be that the discussion around Lauri is skewed to many directions. Maybe it tells us something about the high hopes we all have or had regarding him, and that adds to emotional strain of a sports fan.

Perhaps it is time to reflect on how to continue from here (if someone found time to actually read what I wrote). But then again, it does not matter much what we say here. I think it is also ok to vent one's frustrations, that is what the internet is for, eh? It is only that the excuse narrative that has developed especially during the last two seasons is quite unfair, I think.

[sco]

The thing that's frustrating isn't even Lauri. We clearly see what he is and what he isn't. Some though continue to make excuses saying he needs more shots, the Bulls guards are bad and Lavine is somehow holding him back. If they feel he still has that potential ok but why isn't that benefit given to other Bulls young players? Those same people will piss on Coby White in his second year (is Coby White a bust). They do the same to WCJ (is Gafford better than Carter).

Thank you, this is the biggest issue.

One set of rules for Lauri and a completely different set for others who have been in the league for a lesser time.

(This post refers to both quotes above as you can see by the issues covered. There is no need to take anything personally as I am trying to talk about a general issue)

To me, it seems that there are a couple of posters who have gone a bit overboard with finding reasons for why Lauri is not succesfull. I think the vast majority are quite cognizant of the fact that Lauri has been missing games too much, and that has to count against him in the overall evaluation. It is also generally acknowledged that he does not bring much to the table on the defensive end. Where people differ quite a lot is how much room they perceive there is still for Lauri to develop. I think that is a reasonable disagreement since we are talking about young athletes after all.

I cannot comment on that Coby White is a bust discussion (as I am not sure that I have even opened that thread more than a couple of times) but is there really a legion of Lauri's fierce supporters who are arguing unreasonably against Coby? Or just one or two? For what is worth, I think Coby is a very likable player who is in a very tough spot when playing as a pg. I do not think that he is going to be a good pg, but then again, who knows. All I know is that he is currently much more useful to the team off the ball. But a bust? It is certainly much too early to tell. Right now, definitely not.

About excuses. It is true that there were a lot of people saying, last year, that Boylen's system does not fit Lauri. I remember people calling it an excuse back then. Well, how about that, we all can now see what an utter failure Boylen's stint as a head coach was. So there has been this narrative going on for some time that people are finding excuses for Lauri, but as it turns out, those alleged excuses turned to be quite correct. Another thing that is often labelled as an "excuse" is the on-going, and a bit frustrating, discussion about Lauri's lack of creation. When people say that bigs are not typically creators, they are right. It is not an excuse. Are some people finding genuine excuses for Lauri's deficiencies. Yes, I could name two posters, but everyone else falls under a normal, even if sometimes heated, forum discussion.

And now that we are finding blame in people participating in discussing Lauri's game, what should we think of the utter lack of reflection when some are clamoring for a player like Collins as a piece that fills the gaps Lauri has in his game? It is of course only one example. The general point is this: You cannot tell me with a straight face that debating Lauri's usefullness is not lopsided on the both sides of the argument? Sure, there are many reasonable takes - I think on the both "sides" - but there are also utter trash comments, or some that have no basis in reality. Although I am a new poster, I have lurked here a lot, and it is easy to perceive something shifting here, even if Lauri himself has played as well as ever (is his play enough? it is reasonable to argue it is not, but I am not referring to that aspect). Maybe people are frustrated to some vocal posters, and they project that to their evaluations, I do not know. Yet the truth of the matter appears to be that the discussion around Lauri is skewed to many directions. Maybe it tells us something about the high hopes we all have or had regarding him, and that adds to emotional strain of a sports fan.

Perhaps it is time to reflect on how to continue from here (if someone found time to actually read what I wrote). But then again, it does not matter much what we say here. I think it is also ok to vent one's frustrations, that is what the internet is for, eh? It is only that the excuse narrative that has developed especially during the last two seasons is quite unfair, I think.

I think an issue (and I am guilty) is that we wrongly characterize "pretty good" and "good" players as sucking. And I can only speak for myself, but IMO "good is the enemy of great" in the NBA. Teams need at least 2 "great" players to contend in today's NBA. We drafted Lauri, Carter and White relatively high in their drafts (because we stunk) with the hope that they will become great players, and, at least so far, they all seem closer to their initial perceived floors than than ceilings. That frustrates fans (like me).

Moreover, look around the league or even at our own roster, you can find guys who can produce at "good" levels for deals around the MLE or even vet min. So my thing is that FO's need to ruthlessly recycle "good" players like Lauri for the chance to get someone who could potentially be great, before their rookie deal expires. Lauri, IMO, has become better this year and caught the eye of potential trade partners, but IMO, showed me that he is not at the level that he can carry a team.

More importantly, while his injuries all seem to be one-timers (vs. a chronic issue), I see more of that down the road. That's the biggest reason I want him traded, as I think his contract will have the impact of reducing our chance of potentially signing or trading for an additional great player.

[coldfish]

Two of the things that I have brought up in complaining about Lauri are his lack of help defense and his lack of passing. With him being out for several weeks, I hope people have noticed that the ball moves around like a ping pong ball on offense and on defense, people help the helper constantly. The results have been great.

I don't blame Lauri for single handedly pulling down the defense or stalling the offense. Its clear that the team has been learning the help defense and learning to share the ball and its just continued to get better over the course of the season.

It will be interesting to see if Lauri "gets with the program" when he comes back. If he doesn't help on defense or pass on offense, he is going to stick out like a sore thumb.

As a last note, the Bulls are running the same set virtually every possession. They are running plays for no one. Its just continuing movement and picks. They only run plays for Lavine at end of quarter / games. Wanting plays set up for him is a continuing request from Lauri supporters but we see that isn't necessary or optimal. He just needs to fit in.

[chefo]

As I've proposed before--let's play a game:

Would you like to have a player that:
* Scores 20 per game in only 30 min
* Scores super efficiently (65% TS) on a high volume of 3s
* Finishes at an elite level at the rim (70%+)
* Plays off-ball and does not require high usage, so fits very well with your young scoring star who does require 1st option usage
* Plays average team D
* Is the best man-to-man defender among the team's bigs

The above is like all-star Zach's perfect side-kick.

Some people here tend to have mutually exclusive standards for Lauri--"we want him to be Dirk on O, and Gobert on D, and pay him $15M because... crickets"... and because he's neither Dirk on O, nor Rudy on D, "ship his posterior out of town", even though he was the Bulls' best player to start the year (before Zach got his rhythm) and was the second best player, and best big defender after that.

Be mindful of what you're gifted because the grass ain't always greener on the other side.

His one legit downside is his health--and it's also the reason the Bulls can probably lock him up for 18-22, rather than the rookie max, because any player fitting the criteria listed above, if healthy, would be getting a rookie max or close it.

Don't let him NOT living up to super-star expectations cloud the fact that we have one of the most efficient, high-volume scorers in the NBA already on the team.

He's already made big strides on D this year under coach D. If he adds being a GOOD team defender to being the best man-defender on the Bulls frontline, he'll be a bargain at 20. If you think he can't keep up his offensive production under coach D, that's a different story, but I don't see why he can't.

[JohnnyTapwater]

Lauri was getting closer to meeting my requirements to resign him - 50/40/90 - That is special as a 7 footer.

Just stay healthy kid.

[sco]

As I've proposed before--let's play a game:

Would you like to have a player that:
* Scores 20 per game in only 30 min
* Scores super efficiently (65% TS) on a high volume of 3s
* Finishes at an elite level at the rim (70%+)
* Plays off-ball and does not require high usage, so fits very well with your young scoring star who does require 1st option usage
* Plays average team D
* Is the best man-to-man defender among the team's bigs

The above is like all-star Zach's perfect side-kick.

Some people here tend to have mutually exclusive standards for Lauri--"we want him to be Dirk on O, and Gobert on D, and pay him $15M because... crickets"... and because he's neither Dirk on O, nor Rudy on D, "ship his posterior out of town", even though he was the Bulls' best player to start the year (before Zach got his rhythm) and was the second best player, and best big defender after that.

Be mindful of what you're gifted because the grass ain't always greener on the other side.

His one legit downside is his health--and it's also the reason the Bulls can probably lock him up for 18-22, rather than the rookie max, because any player fitting the criteria listed above, if healthy, would be getting a rookie max or close it.

Don't let him NOT living up to super-star expectations cloud the fact that we have one of the most efficient, high-volume scorers in the NBA already on the team.

He's already made big strides on D this year under coach D. If he adds being a GOOD team defender to being the best man-defender on the Bulls frontline, he'll be a bargain at 20. If you think he can't keep up his offensive production under coach D, that's a different story, but I don't see why he can't.

I would be 100% all-in on wanting the guy you talk about, except you forgot the * that says "Plays in 70% of games". I let myself be fooled with similar "on paper" points about how Otto is a great get too.

[chefo]

Two of the things that I have brought up in complaining about Lauri are his lack of help defense and his lack of passing. With him being out for several weeks, I hope people have noticed that the ball moves around like a ping pong ball on offense and on defense, people help the helper constantly. The results have been great.

I don't blame Lauri for single handedly pulling down the defense or stalling the offense. Its clear that the team has been learning the help defense and learning to share the ball and its just continued to get better over the course of the season.

It will be interesting to see if Lauri "gets with the program" when he comes back. If he doesn't help on defense or pass on offense, he is going to stick out like a sore thumb.

As a last note, the Bulls are running the same set virtually every possession. They are running plays for no one. Its just continuing movement and picks. They only run plays for Lavine at end of quarter / games. Wanting plays set up for him is a continuing request from Lauri supporters but we see that isn't necessary or optimal. He just needs to fit in.

I completely agree.

But then again, I'd like to remind people that we didn't start the year poorly because of Lauri. While he was scoring his 20 on 11 shots and playing passable man D, WCJ and Coby were out-of-the-league, headed-to-China by all-star break "trrible" and PWill was getting cooked night-in and out by opposing scoring wings.

Now that our other prized 7th picks are no longer the worst-of-peers at their positions (mostly because Coby's PG duties have been reduced by 85% percent as Sato came back and Zach took over)--yeah, the team plays better. But once again, Lauri wasn't holding any of these guys down--they just royally sucked at basic things related to hooping like dribbling and catching the ball, or not letting everybody but the janitor score on them.

Fish, as you know--we had 5 very young guys starting. I bet you, if you put healthy Lauri with Zach and three vets on the floor with them--say Temple, Thad and Sato, that lineup would likely crush people for 30-35 minutes a night. But we're somehow prescribing faults to a player who was having a career year on BOTH sides of the ball before he went down for having to play virtually all his minutes on the floor with what were arguably the 3 worst big minute rotational players on the team to start the year.

Anyhow, I think if he comes back as good as before the injury--the Bulls will become a top 5 team in the East, because now the rest of the team are not anchors of the bad kind any longer.