Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread: PT 2

[Bandit King]

Lauri still soft as a marshmallow after 3 years!!!

[Louri]

If I were Lauris agent, I would save clip from Memphis game where he totally stopped Morant @3p line.. he should not able to do that as 7”. D is there and that bad reputation will change in his next team for sure.

[Bandit King]

Lauri is being guarded by other teams guards instead of power forwards and centers cause he sucks on offense!!!

[imagge]

What is really interesting with Lauri play is that negotiations of contracts are built on stats. No team just offers a player a contract..Lauri agent should be currently negotiating with potential Teams...Teams base your price on past production and future potential. A player can not sabotage either because it hurts their leverage....to me how Lauri is performing is head scratching because this hurts his asking price from other teams... and certainly kills his current leverage with the bulls regardless of if he wants to stay or leave

[coldfish]

The defense and the pay are going to be why it isn't in Chicago.

This part is kinda funny considering Bulls just traded for Vuc.

Vuc brings a lot more to the table. He can create his own shot, is an elite rebounder and is a good passer. Overall, the trade for him has been a huge disappointment but you really can't seriously compare Lauri and Vuc. As you just said "someone would have to be blind" to put Lauri and Vuc in the same sentence.

[DuckIII]

AK and BD think Lauri stinks. We’re just playing out the string here to the summer, hoping some team will sign and trade for him.

As far as Bulls topics, at this point Lauri ranks somewhere near Arci and Green in significance. He’s only playing the limited time he is so as to not completely obliterate all narratives for AK in trying to get something out of him this summer.

[Neonblazer]

As you just said "someone would have to be blind" to put Lauri and Vuc in the same sentence.

Actually I didn't. But from management stand point saying Lauri is too expensive and bad defensively and then trading for Vuc.

[DuckIII]

As you just said "someone would have to be blind" to put Lauri and Vuc in the same sentence.

Actually I didn't. But from management stand point saying Lauri is too expensive and bad defensively and then trading for Vuc.

That’s only inconsistent if you ignore the numerous other things Vuc does that Lauri does not do. They both stink at defense and are good three point shooting bigs. That’s the end of the comparison.

More specifically, even if we accept the flawed premise that they are comparable, you certainly don’t want two guys like that as your front court.

[Neonblazer]

As you just said "someone would have to be blind" to put Lauri and Vuc in the same sentence.

Actually I didn't. But from management stand point saying Lauri is too expensive and bad defensively and then trading for Vuc.

More specifically, even if we accept the flawed premise that they are comparable, you certainly don’t want two guys like that as your front court.

Now I understand that Lauri and Vuc doesn't fit together and its obvious that the management has decided to move on from Lauri because they needed something else, but what I dont get is the bending over backwards making excuses why its Lauris fault that they are doing it. You cant say they are doing it because of Lauris defense or because he is too expensive, if thats not obviously a factor with other signings. If they wanted more production out of Markkanen they could played more through him, just like they are doing right now with Vuc. They made emphasis on getting him touches so he could make more points but suddenly when they are talking about Lauri its all about how Lauri needs to do more. Stacey was saying the same thing last game about how Lauri should be doing more and I distinctively remember him raging about team because they weren't getting the ball to Vuc more.

Remember my original reply on this was to someone basically just saying Lauri is ****.

[sco]

Why not name this one "Lauri Markkanen Appreciation Thread"?

Because you'd be the only one posting in it.

It's been 5 minutes and I'm still laughing.

[coldfish]

Actually I didn't. But from management stand point saying Lauri is too expensive and bad defensively and then trading for Vuc.

More specifically, even if we accept the flawed premise that they are comparable, you certainly don’t want two guys like that as your front court.

Now I understand that Lauri and Vuc doesn't fit together and its obvious that the management has decided to move on from Lauri because they needed something else, but what I dont get is the bending over backwards making excuses why its Lauris fault that they are doing it. You cant say they are doing it because of Lauris defense or because he is too expensive, if thats not obviously a factor with other signings. If they wanted more production out of Markkanen they could played more through him, just like they are doing right now with Vuc. They made emphasis on getting him touches so he could make more points but suddenly when they are talking about Lauri its all about how Lauri needs to do more. Stacey was saying the same thing last game about how Lauri should be doing more and I distinctively remember him raging about team because they weren't getting the ball to Vuc more.

Remember my original reply on this was to someone basically just saying Lauri is ****.

The defense is why he doesn't fit next to Vuc. Vuc and him actually fit together quite nicely offensively.

The reason why Lauri is going to get paid too much is because of his one dimensionality. Its his lack of rebounding, defending, passing, self shot creation, ball handling, etc. Vucevic can't do all of that either but he does enough stuff well that he isn't overpaid at his current salary. Lauri is going to get paid roughly the same amount to do far less.

[sco]

As you just said "someone would have to be blind" to put Lauri and Vuc in the same sentence.

Actually I didn't. But from management stand point saying Lauri is too expensive and bad defensively and then trading for Vuc.

That’s only inconsistent if you ignore the numerous other things Vuc does that Lauri does not do. They both stink at defense and are good three point shooting bigs. That’s the end of the comparison.

More specifically, even if we accept the flawed premise that they are comparable, you certainly don’t want two guys like that as your front court.

Not saying you guys are wrong, but I find it interesting that most arguments (both ways) regarding Lauri involve the need to include another player - either in the capacity of "Lauri would have much better stat's if [Coby, Zach, etc] wasn't here" or "Look at Lauri's stats - he's better than [Carter, Zach, Thad, etc.]".

[DuckIII]

Actually I didn't. But from management stand point saying Lauri is too expensive and bad defensively and then trading for Vuc.

More specifically, even if we accept the flawed premise that they are comparable, you certainly don’t want two guys like that as your front court.

Now I understand that Lauri and Vuc doesn't fit together and its obvious that the management has decided to move on from Lauri because they needed something else, but what I dont get is the bending over backwards making excuses why its Lauris fault that they are doing it. You cant say they are doing it because of Lauris defense or because he is too expensive, if thats not obviously a factor with other signings. If they wanted more production out of Markkanen they could played more through him, just like they are doing right now with Vuc. They made emphasis on getting him touches so he could make more points but suddenly when they are talking about Lauri its all about how Lauri needs to do more. Stacey was saying the same thing last game about how Lauri should be doing more and I distinctively remember him raging about team because they weren't getting the ball to Vuc more.

Remember my original reply on this was to someone basically just saying Lauri is ****.

You can’t run an offense through Lauri like you can with Vuc, for obvious reasons. This goes back to the flawed premise that they are comparable players. Offensively, they are very different.

[WindyCityBorn]

The defense and the pay are going to be why it isn't in Chicago.

This part is kinda funny considering Bulls just traded for Vuc.

Vuc is hundred times more versatile on offense than Lauri though. He can do everything Lauri does and much more. Like rebound, pass, post up, mid-range. Lauri is a better athlete, but still a bad defender,

[WindyCityBorn]

Actually I didn't. But from management stand point saying Lauri is too expensive and bad defensively and then trading for Vuc.

More specifically, even if we accept the flawed premise that they are comparable, you certainly don’t want two guys like that as your front court.

Now I understand that Lauri and Vuc doesn't fit together and its obvious that the management has decided to move on from Lauri because they needed something else, but what I dont get is the bending over backwards making excuses why its Lauris fault that they are doing it. You cant say they are doing it because of Lauris defense or because he is too expensive, if thats not obviously a factor with other signings. If they wanted more production out of Markkanen they could played more through him, just like they are doing right now with Vuc. They made emphasis on getting him touches so he could make more points but suddenly when they are talking about Lauri its all about how Lauri needs to do more. Stacey was saying the same thing last game about how Lauri should be doing more and I distinctively remember him raging about team because they weren't getting the ball to Vuc more.

Remember my original reply on this was to someone basically just saying Lauri is ****.

You cannot run offense through Lauri. They acquired after they decided Lauri was a disappointment and not worth keep. He is a massive upgrade and Lauri will basically want to be paid a similar salary for way less production. Vuc only makes like $44 million over the next two seasons. Bargain for him. Crippling massive overpay to give Lauri the same deal.

[Robin Jones]

There is a lot of discussion about this topic. Some comments very relevant, some missing the target.

One thing is certain. Markkanen is not the culprit for the Bulls losses since the major trades.

For sure, his overall stats, especially scoring stats, have not been great, but when analysing the plus and minus stats of all the 12 games played since the trade, the team has played much better Markkanen on the court than off it.

PLUS/MINUS OF THE CORE PLAYERS SINCE THE TRADES - 12 GAMES
(From the 28th March San Antonio game until 17th April Memphis game. Total of 9 losses and 3 wins.)

Markkanen -3
Vucevic -95
Theis -32
Young +3
Lavine -8
White -19
Williams -100
Sato -57.

Just sayin.

(And yes, I understand that +/- is just one stat, and has its flaws, but still, the sample of 12 games tells already something.)

[Hugi Mancura]

More specifically, even if we accept the flawed premise that they are comparable, you certainly don’t want two guys like that as your front court.

Now I understand that Lauri and Vuc doesn't fit together and its obvious that the management has decided to move on from Lauri because they needed something else, but what I dont get is the bending over backwards making excuses why its Lauris fault that they are doing it. You cant say they are doing it because of Lauris defense or because he is too expensive, if thats not obviously a factor with other signings. If they wanted more production out of Markkanen they could played more through him, just like they are doing right now with Vuc. They made emphasis on getting him touches so he could make more points but suddenly when they are talking about Lauri its all about how Lauri needs to do more. Stacey was saying the same thing last game about how Lauri should be doing more and I distinctively remember him raging about team because they weren't getting the ball to Vuc more.

Remember my original reply on this was to someone basically just saying Lauri is ****.

You cannot run offense through Lauri. They acquired after they decided Lauri was a disappointment and not worth keep. He is a massive upgrade and Lauri will basically want to be paid a similar salary for way less production. Vuc only makes like $44 million over the next two seasons. Bargain for him. Crippling massive overpay to give Lauri the same deal.

So Vuc passes more and takes defensive rebounds. Adding Vuc Bulls change offense from ball moving to ISO ball. That means the offense has actually worsened. Bulls were second best in defensive rebounds and now they are the first, so adding Vuc helps Bulls take 1 rebounds more in two games. Yes, that is huge help on offensive end and on rebounds.

Bulls defense is better with Lauri on the court than without him. Bulls defense is 15 points lousier with Vuc than without him. So you would rather pay 44M$ for someone who makes team much lousier than same amount for person who doesn't? Who cares about team success as long there are all star's who score 25 points in a game. I rather pay for someone who actually makes team better than someone who makes it much lousier. But I care about winning. I must be stupid. Does Lauri help team better so much he actually would deserve that 20M? No, but he deserves it more than current Vucevic.

[thedarkstark]

Why not name this one "Lauri Markkanen Appreciation Thread"?

Because you'd be the only one posting in it.

Savage. Also factually accurate.

[WindyCityBorn]

Now I understand that Lauri and Vuc doesn't fit together and its obvious that the management has decided to move on from Lauri because they needed something else, but what I dont get is the bending over backwards making excuses why its Lauris fault that they are doing it. You cant say they are doing it because of Lauris defense or because he is too expensive, if thats not obviously a factor with other signings. If they wanted more production out of Markkanen they could played more through him, just like they are doing right now with Vuc. They made emphasis on getting him touches so he could make more points but suddenly when they are talking about Lauri its all about how Lauri needs to do more. Stacey was saying the same thing last game about how Lauri should be doing more and I distinctively remember him raging about team because they weren't getting the ball to Vuc more.

Remember my original reply on this was to someone basically just saying Lauri is ****.

You cannot run offense through Lauri. They acquired after they decided Lauri was a disappointment and not worth keep. He is a massive upgrade and Lauri will basically want to be paid a similar salary for way less production. Vuc only makes like $44 million over the next two seasons. Bargain for him. Crippling massive overpay to give Lauri the same deal.

So Vuc passes more and takes defensive rebounds. Adding Vuc Bulls change offense from ball moving to ISO ball. That means the offense has actually worsened. Bulls were second best in defensive rebounds and now they are the first, so adding Vuc helps Bulls take 1 rebounds more in two games. Yes, that is huge help on offensive end and on rebounds.

Bulls defense is better with Lauri on the court than without him. Bulls defense is 15 points lousier with Vuc than without him. So you would rather pay 44M$ for someone who makes team much lousier than same amount for person who doesn't? Who cares about team success as long there are all star's who score 25 points in a game. I rather pay for someone who actually makes team better than someone who makes it much lousier. But I care about winning. I must be stupid. Does Lauri help team better so much he actually would deserve that 20M? No, but he deserves it more than current Vucevic.

Bulls could literally use Vuc exactly like Lauri on offense. He could easily just stand on the perimeter and shoot open threes, but thankfully he has the ability to do so much more. Markkanen is bad defender too. Being slightly less bad than Vuc doesn't make up for massive gap in offense. And wow I can't believe you actually said Vuc is overpaid and that Markkanen is worth more. That's a joke. The only thing Markkanen has on Vuc is age. He had every opportunity possible to cement himself as a franchise cornerstone this year and blew it. You think AK really wanted to give two 1st round picks for a 30 year old? Lauri and Wendel's poor performance forced his hand. Maybe Lauri will play better in a new environment like Carter. I won't be rooting against him. It just hasn't worked out.

[Pentele]

There is a lot of discussion about this topic. Some comments very relevant, some missing the target.

One thing is for sure. Markkanen is not the culprit for the Bulls losses since the major trades.

For sure, his stats, especially scoring stats, have not been great, but when analysing the plus and minus stats of all the 12 games played since the trade, the team has played much better Markkanen on the court than off it.

PLUS/MINUS OF THE CORE PLAYERS SINCE THE TRADES - 12 GAMES
(From the 28th March San Antonio game until 17th April Memphis game. Total of 9 losses and 3 wins.)

Markkanen -3
Vucevic -95
Theis -32
Young +3
Lavine -8
White -19
Williams -100
Sato -57.

Just sayin.

(And yes, I understand that +/- is just one stat, and has its flaws, but still, the sample of 12 games tells already something.)

DISCLAIMER: I am not advocating for Lauri to stay with the Bulls as it goes agains my standing policy of wanting him to move out as soon as possible.

That being said, +/- stat is highly accurate stat on one thing, and probably one thing only: what has taken place points-differential-wise when a player has been on the court. When the post trade strecth of games was a few games old, Lauri was getting a lot of flack from posters for basically being one big reason why the Bulls were losing. That was not the case, of course, what our dear friend +/- stat also suggested right from the start was that Lauri had become a non-factor. He is not contributing to wins, but neither does he contributes to losing. Was he playing well? No, I do not think so. But still the team was not losing games when he was on the floor unlike some of our friends here were shouting from top of their lungs.

Think about those numbers for a second. Like many have beginning to grasp, the Bulls future is looking extremely perilous at the moment. The one guy who is the official whipping boy, and who everyone seem to think is outmatched in bad defense only by a traffic cone, is not actually the reason the team is hemorrhaging points even when he is in a funk. It brings me no joy to point towards more blameworthy players, and I won't do it (in the end, it is a team-wide issue), but the state the Bulls are at the moment is catasthrophic. Like Duck said, "As far as Bulls topics, at this point Lauri ranks somewhere near Arci and Green in significance". I am afraid that is mostly because the Bulls have huge issues in comparison to which whatever Lauri's situation is pales.