Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread: PT 2

[kingkirk]

Actually Hoibergs offense wasn't bad for lauri so I'm not sure where you are pulling the 3 coaches. Boylen changed the scheme for last year and this year started off good until someone decided that Lauri should be just a 3 point shooter just like they played him with Boylen. His FGA went down by 4 on 2019-20. And stayed the same this year now that he has been shooting less since the trade. He was shooting more before he got hurt for and after that he was just relegated to 3 point shooter and then to bench.

Extra trivia question, how did Lavine go from 16p average to 23 point average, FGA went from 15->18. Lavine went from 23 to 25 with 20 FGA. This year its still the same around 20 shots but he is bit more efficient and shoots slightly more and better on 3 ball.

Per 36 by season:
1: 15.4fga 18.4p 9.1r 1.4a 15.6per
2: 17.0fga 20.8p 10.1r 1.6a 17.1per
3: 14.3fga 17.8p 7.6r 1.8a 14.3per
4: 14.5fga 19.3p 7.2r 1.3a 15.1per

Lauri is basically the same guy through his entire career here. He has got several different roles in the offense and defense and basically does the same thing every time, which forces coaches to put him in the role he works the best: Off ball shooter you have to cover on defense.

Wherever he goes next, I'm sure he will have this same pattern and when he has his hot games and hot streaks, I'm sure we will hear about it but I think just about everyone sees the writing on the wall.

So you are seriously trying to say that nothing happened between 2 and 3 year? Or are you trying to say that what happened in the 2 year was just fluke and he regressed third year. Because you would have to be blind if you did not notice how differently Boylen ran offense compared to Hoiberg.

Boylen coached Lauri in Y2, and was his coach as he went on that FebruLauri run.

If you're blaming his regression on Boylen, then are we completely ignoring that Markkanen played his best basketball under Boylen, too?

[Neonblazer]

Per 36 by season:
1: 15.4fga 18.4p 9.1r 1.4a 15.6per
2: 17.0fga 20.8p 10.1r 1.6a 17.1per
3: 14.3fga 17.8p 7.6r 1.8a 14.3per
4: 14.5fga 19.3p 7.2r 1.3a 15.1per

Lauri is basically the same guy through his entire career here. He has got several different roles in the offense and defense and basically does the same thing every time, which forces coaches to put him in the role he works the best: Off ball shooter you have to cover on defense.

Wherever he goes next, I'm sure he will have this same pattern and when he has his hot games and hot streaks, I'm sure we will hear about it but I think just about everyone sees the writing on the wall.

So you are seriously trying to say that nothing happened between 2 and 3 year? Or are you trying to say that what happened in the 2 year was just fluke and he regressed third year. Because you would have to be blind if you did not notice how differently Boylen ran offense compared to Hoiberg.

Boylen coached Lauri in Y2, and was his coach as he went on that FebruLauri run.

If you're blaming his regression on Boylen, then are we completely ignoring that Markkanen played his best basketball under Boylen, too?

Everyone should know Boylen didn't implement his offense until 19-20 season. They mainly ran Hoibergs stuff. Talking about ignorance, isn't that what your twitter is all about? You are literally out there running hate campaign on Markkanen.

[kingkirk]

Everyone should know Boylen didn't implement his offense until 19-20 season. They mainly ran Hoibergs stuff. Talking about ignorance, isn't that what your twitter is all about? You are literally out there running hate campaign on Markkanen.

Not shocked by this response. It's always someone elses fault, not Lauri's!

[checks join date]

Right, so you've definitely been here before, and back again to defend the honour of your man.

Enjoy!

[johnnyvann840]

Coby White is the ultimate tank commander

[PaKii94]

It's pretty simple to figure out if Lauri is going to have a decent game. Here is a flow chart:

If Lauri == utilized:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 80%
Else if Lauri == role-player utilization:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 40%
Else if Lauri == standing in the corner:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 10%

[GrowingHorns]

It's pretty simple to figure out if Lauri is going to have a decent game. Here is a flow chart:

If Lauri == utilized:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 80%
Else if Lauri == role-player utilization:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 40%
Else if Lauri == standing in the corner:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 10%

This is also the exact reason why he should invest in expanding his offensive skills next summer. Wherever he ends up, there might be some situations he will be used to mostly floor spacing purpose even if it wasn't most of his role. If he could do damage more consistently inside like Vuc, it'd help him tremendously.

BTW what do you guess is the reason his dunks end up flat nowadays... Is it something he did with "playing thru injuries" last season, bc it's like his coordination with them isn't there anymore like it was seasons 1 and 2.

[GoBlue72391]

It's pretty simple to figure out if Lauri is going to have a decent game. Here is a flow chart:

If Lauri == utilized:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 80%
Else if Lauri == role-player utilization:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 40%
Else if Lauri == standing in the corner:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 10%

It really is that simple. If he's involved he contributes. If he's not, he doesn't.

[GoBlue72391]

It's pretty simple to figure out if Lauri is going to have a decent game. Here is a flow chart:

If Lauri == utilized:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 80%
Else if Lauri == role-player utilization:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 40%
Else if Lauri == standing in the corner:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 10%

This is also the exact reason why he should invest in expanding his offensive skills next summer. Wherever he ends up, there might be some situations he will be used to mostly floor spacing purpose even if it wasn't most of his role. If he could do damage more consistently inside like Vuc, it'd help him tremendously.

BTW what do you guess is the reason his dunks end up flat nowadays... Is it something he did with "playing thru injuries" last season, bc it's like his coordination with them isn't there anymore like it was seasons 1 and 2.

It always seems like he loses control of the ball just before/just as he's slamming it through the rim. If he could retain control I think he would make most of those poster attempts. I also think when he tries to make a statement dunk, he overdoes it to put an exclamation point and ends up losing control. The ball was extended over the square on that attempt tonight for crying out loud.

[PaKii94]

It's pretty simple to figure out if Lauri is going to have a decent game. Here is a flow chart:

If Lauri == utilized:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 80%
Else if Lauri == role-player utilization:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 40%
Else if Lauri == standing in the corner:
Lauri's decent or better game chance: 10%

This is also the exact reason why he should invest in expanding his offensive skills next summer. Wherever he ends up, there might be some situations he will be used to mostly floor spacing purpose even if it wasn't most of his role. If he could do damage more consistently inside like Vuc, it'd help him tremendously.

BTW what do you guess is the reason his dunks end up flat nowadays... Is it something he did with "playing thru injuries" last season, bc it's like his coordination with them isn't there anymore like it was seasons 1 and 2.

It always seems like he loses control of the ball just before/just as he's slamming it through the rim. If he could retain control I think he would make most of those poster attempts. I also think when he tries to make a statement dunk, he overdoes it to put an exclamation point and ends up losing control. The ball was extended over the square on that attempt tonight for crying out loud.

I actually think it's him bulking up and losing some hops. He was finishing these dunks in year 1-2. You can also see it hurting him in rim protection. A healthy lauri a few seasons ago had just enough hops to get his fingers on the ball for some blocks. It was at the point where you could tell if he's healthy or not just by seeing his block attempts. Now he's just flailing about And his hands never reach the ball

[TSS]

Hey guys, I need to do a small cameo back here as I cannot find any other feasible forum to ask. I did find SpursTalk but they do not seem to take registrations.

This Spurs rumor could potentially be extremely good thing. Their need, current strengths and age structure are pretty much a perfect fit. Not to mention that Pop always runs an offense perfectly suited for Lauri.

In my personal dream scenario Lauri would sign a long term, very affordable deal with Spurs something like 4 years / 48 mil. It is more than enough to have anyone set for life unless your name is Latrell Sprewell and you "need to feed your family" or Shawn Kemp and you actually do need 20 mil / season to feed all your offspring. Spurs with Lauri on that kind of spending are in very good situation and they are traditionally an excellent franchise both drafting and player development wise.

I am a bit unclear on how Lauris contractual situation works now? Bulls have no use for him and will not resign for basketball purposes. If Spurs give him that kind of offer like mentioned above, I assume the Bulls can match it and keep him as a trade chip. So either Spurs would need to up the offer to an amount it makes no sense for Bulls to match for a stashed trade chip, correct?
What would you think that amount would be?

Then we have S&T possibility. If Lauri went on and signed an affordable deal with Bulls for the trade to happen, can he have certainty that Bulls will not keep him when putting his name on the paper?

[bulls_troy]

Per 36 by season:
1: 15.4fga 18.4p 9.1r 1.4a 15.6per
2: 17.0fga 20.8p 10.1r 1.6a 17.1per
3: 14.3fga 17.8p 7.6r 1.8a 14.3per
4: 14.5fga 19.3p 7.2r 1.3a 15.1per

Lauri is basically the same guy through his entire career here. He has got several different roles in the offense and defense and basically does the same thing every time, which forces coaches to put him in the role he works the best: Off ball shooter you have to cover on defense.

Wherever he goes next, I'm sure he will have this same pattern and when he has his hot games and hot streaks, I'm sure we will hear about it but I think just about everyone sees the writing on the wall.

So you are seriously trying to say that nothing happened between 2 and 3 year? Or are you trying to say that what happened in the 2 year was just fluke and he regressed third year. Because you would have to be blind if you did not notice how differently Boylen ran offense compared to Hoiberg.

Boylen coached Lauri in Y2, and was his coach as he went on that FebruLauri run.

If you're blaming his regression on Boylen, then are we completely ignoring that Markkanen played his best basketball under Boylen, too?

Sorry Mark but you can't credit Boylen for one month of play. Thats Lauri stepping up and being the player everyone knows he can be. Its also on Lauri for not being the player he can be and on any coach not pushing him to be that player. Whether it be Hoiberg, Egghead or Donovan

[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.)

UPDATE: Sample size of 13 games:

Markkanen +11
Vucevic -79
Theis -36
Young -3
Lavine -8
White -11
Williams -97
Sato -53

[WindyCityBorn]

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.)

UPDATE: Sample size of 13 games:

Markkanen +11
Vucevic -79
Theis -36
Young -3
Lavine -8
White -11
Williams -97
Sato -53

No one is saying he is the cause of our free fall, but he isn’t the solution either. If he played he did last night every night we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.

The fact that Coby is so how high and Vuc so low shows faulty this stat is.

[Pentele]

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.)

UPDATE: Sample size of 13 games:

Markkanen +11
Vucevic -79
Theis -36
Young -3
Lavine -8
White -11
Williams -97
Sato -53

No one is saying he is the cause of our free fall, but he isn’t the solution either. If he played he did last night every night we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.

The fact that Coby is so how high and Vuc so low shows faulty this stat is.

It is faulty only if it is applied in the wrong way. Nobody is saying that +/- correctly ranks players according to what they bring to the team (at least no one should think so). It rather directs attention to where specifically the Bulls have been struggling lately. The starting line-up has not played up to the competition they have faced. Then we can ask why, and there +/- stat does not really help that much. Sure, it sort of confirms the obvious that Williams has been struggling a lot, and with that high number he has probably struggled with practically anyone he has played with, and that Vuc-centric offense has not yet gotten off the ground. One does not have to blame Vuc for it, and most likely should not, even if +/- gives him a bad score. The stats are not "flawed" per se, only people that make unfounded conclusions based on them.

[coldfish]

Hey guys, I need to do a small cameo back here as I cannot find any other feasible forum to ask. I did find SpursTalk but they do not seem to take registrations.

This Spurs rumor could potentially be extremely good thing. Their need, current strengths and age structure are pretty much a perfect fit. Not to mention that Pop always runs an offense perfectly suited for Lauri.

In my personal dream scenario Lauri would sign a long term, very affordable deal with Spurs something like 4 years / 48 mil. It is more than enough to have anyone set for life unless your name is Latrell Sprewell and you "need to feed your family" or Shawn Kemp and you actually do need 20 mil / season to feed all your offspring. Spurs with Lauri on that kind of spending are in very good situation and they are traditionally an excellent franchise both drafting and player development wise.

I am a bit unclear on how Lauris contractual situation works now? Bulls have no use for him and will not resign for basketball purposes. If Spurs give him that kind of offer like mentioned above, I assume the Bulls can match it and keep him as a trade chip. So either Spurs would need to up the offer to an amount it makes no sense for Bulls to match for a stashed trade chip, correct?
What would you think that amount would be?

Then we have S&T possibility. If Lauri went on and signed an affordable deal with Bulls for the trade to happen, can he have certainty that Bulls will not keep him when putting his name on the paper?

The trade agreement has to happen before Lauri signs a deal. Everything has to be hashed out as far as terms and then the sign and trade is executed all at once.

If Lauri signs a contract, there are only two outcomes: Bulls match and he stays on Chicago or they do not and he goes to the new team.

I would be surprised if Chicago didn't just match a $12m deal. That's Sato/Thad money. Its the $20m type offers that Dallas or NY might make that are going to cause Chicago to walk away.

[Neonblazer]

Hey guys, I need to do a small cameo back here as I cannot find any other feasible forum to ask. I did find SpursTalk but they do not seem to take registrations.

This Spurs rumor could potentially be extremely good thing. Their need, current strengths and age structure are pretty much a perfect fit. Not to mention that Pop always runs an offense perfectly suited for Lauri.

In my personal dream scenario Lauri would sign a long term, very affordable deal with Spurs something like 4 years / 48 mil. It is more than enough to have anyone set for life unless your name is Latrell Sprewell and you "need to feed your family" or Shawn Kemp and you actually do need 20 mil / season to feed all your offspring. Spurs with Lauri on that kind of spending are in very good situation and they are traditionally an excellent franchise both drafting and player development wise.

I am a bit unclear on how Lauris contractual situation works now? Bulls have no use for him and will not resign for basketball purposes. If Spurs give him that kind of offer like mentioned above, I assume the Bulls can match it and keep him as a trade chip. So either Spurs would need to up the offer to an amount it makes no sense for Bulls to match for a stashed trade chip, correct?
What would you think that amount would be?

Then we have S&T possibility. If Lauri went on and signed an affordable deal with Bulls for the trade to happen, can he have certainty that Bulls will not keep him when putting his name on the paper?

The trade agreement has to happen before Lauri signs a deal. Everything has to be hashed out as far as terms and then the sign and trade is executed all at once.

If Lauri signs a contract, there are only two outcomes: Bulls match and he stays on Chicago or they do not and he goes to the new team.

I would be surprised if Chicago didn't just match a $12m deal. That's Sato/Thad money. Its the $20m type offers that Dallas or NY might make that are going to cause Chicago to walk away.

I have hard time believing Lauri would sign 12m deal offer sheet anyway. Because Bulls would just match that and get happy discount. Especially for 4 years.

[Pentele]

Hey guys, I need to do a small cameo back here as I cannot find any other feasible forum to ask. I did find SpursTalk but they do not seem to take registrations.

This Spurs rumor could potentially be extremely good thing. Their need, current strengths and age structure are pretty much a perfect fit. Not to mention that Pop always runs an offense perfectly suited for Lauri.

In my personal dream scenario Lauri would sign a long term, very affordable deal with Spurs something like 4 years / 48 mil. It is more than enough to have anyone set for life unless your name is Latrell Sprewell and you "need to feed your family" or Shawn Kemp and you actually do need 20 mil / season to feed all your offspring. Spurs with Lauri on that kind of spending are in very good situation and they are traditionally an excellent franchise both drafting and player development wise.

I am a bit unclear on how Lauris contractual situation works now? Bulls have no use for him and will not resign for basketball purposes. If Spurs give him that kind of offer like mentioned above, I assume the Bulls can match it and keep him as a trade chip. So either Spurs would need to up the offer to an amount it makes no sense for Bulls to match for a stashed trade chip, correct?
What would you think that amount would be?

Then we have S&T possibility. If Lauri went on and signed an affordable deal with Bulls for the trade to happen, can he have certainty that Bulls will not keep him when putting his name on the paper?

The trade agreement has to happen before Lauri signs a deal. Everything has to be hashed out as far as terms and then the sign and trade is executed all at once.

If Lauri signs a contract, there are only two outcomes: Bulls match and he stays on Chicago or they do not and he goes to the new team.

I would be surprised if Chicago didn't just match a $12m deal. That's Sato/Thad money. Its the $20m type offers that Dallas or NY might make that are going to cause Chicago to walk away.

There is no point in tying $12m to the fourth rotational big. Unless... no one really thinks that is Lauri's real place. But yeah, it would be a surprise because the fourth year Lauri with $12m contract is still an asset.

What is intriguing perhaps strictly from individual, and not as much team, perspective is whether Lauri is able to turn this adversity into real growth. Of course, for that to happen, he needs real playing time at some point, and in a role in which he is not solely a spacer. The Cavs game gave me a bit of hope that perhaps Lauri is not in the doghouse for the rest of the season (even if the reason probably is that both Thad and Theis have been struggling lately). He has now a good oppurtunity to watch and learn from two bigs that each excel in an area Lauri is lacking: Vuc for his post game and passing, Theis for his defensive hustle (that Lauri has some capacity to imitate because he has surprisingly good feet for a big). Even in this bad bench stretch, I see some more improvement in Lauri's defense game. There are going to be bad games in the future but right now there are more good defensive games, which has not been the case during his career so far (even if he has not been the sieve many perceive him to be). Who knows, maybe some years later we all say that Vuc/Theis trade, and the subsequent Lauri benching, should have happened already year three of Larui's career for everything to work out optimally.

Unless Lauri ups his defensive game a lot, the fit with Vuc/Zach combo is probably too suspect for Lauri's to have future in the Bulls. From the Bulls perspective, by ending the season strong and continuing personal development on different areas, Lauri would reclaim some of his value as an asset. It is then up to the Bulls to decide whether they would consider Lauri's new contract as an asset or not. Obviously not ideal for the Bulls, put their best case scenario still is that Lauri does not completely tank it.

[Bulldog23]

Laurie is going to get $18 to $22 million. All you need to do is look at Duncan Robinson and Bertans. Laurie has not played with a point guard or a coach that has catered towards his game since Fred Hogberg.

[Swuul]

I am quite certain Lauri will take the QO if Bulls offer that, unless there some team offering him 20+ per year. And I doubt that.

[coldfish]

Hey guys, I need to do a small cameo back here as I cannot find any other feasible forum to ask. I did find SpursTalk but they do not seem to take registrations.

This Spurs rumor could potentially be extremely good thing. Their need, current strengths and age structure are pretty much a perfect fit. Not to mention that Pop always runs an offense perfectly suited for Lauri.

In my personal dream scenario Lauri would sign a long term, very affordable deal with Spurs something like 4 years / 48 mil. It is more than enough to have anyone set for life unless your name is Latrell Sprewell and you "need to feed your family" or Shawn Kemp and you actually do need 20 mil / season to feed all your offspring. Spurs with Lauri on that kind of spending are in very good situation and they are traditionally an excellent franchise both drafting and player development wise.

I am a bit unclear on how Lauris contractual situation works now? Bulls have no use for him and will not resign for basketball purposes. If Spurs give him that kind of offer like mentioned above, I assume the Bulls can match it and keep him as a trade chip. So either Spurs would need to up the offer to an amount it makes no sense for Bulls to match for a stashed trade chip, correct?
What would you think that amount would be?

Then we have S&T possibility. If Lauri went on and signed an affordable deal with Bulls for the trade to happen, can he have certainty that Bulls will not keep him when putting his name on the paper?

The trade agreement has to happen before Lauri signs a deal. Everything has to be hashed out as far as terms and then the sign and trade is executed all at once.

If Lauri signs a contract, there are only two outcomes: Bulls match and he stays on Chicago or they do not and he goes to the new team.

I would be surprised if Chicago didn't just match a $12m deal. That's Sato/Thad money. Its the $20m type offers that Dallas or NY might make that are going to cause Chicago to walk away.

There is no point in tying $12m to the fourth rotational big. Unless... no one really thinks that is Lauri's real place. But yeah, it would be a surprise because the fourth year Lauri with $12m contract is still an asset.

What is intriguing perhaps strictly from individual, and not as much team, perspective is whether Lauri is able to turn this adversity into real growth. Of course, for that to happen, he needs real playing time at some point, and in a role in which he is not solely a spacer. The Cavs game gave me a bit of hope that perhaps Lauri is not in the doghouse for the rest of the season (even if the reason probably is that both Thad and Theis have been struggling lately). He has now a good oppurtunity to watch and learn from two bigs that each excel in an area Lauri is lacking: Vuc for his post game and passing, Theis for his defensive hustle (that Lauri has some capacity to imitate because he has surprisingly good feet for a big). Even in this bad bench stretch, I see some more improvement in Lauri's defense game. There are going to be bad games in the future but right now there are more good defensive games, which has not been the case during his career so far (even if he has not been the sieve many perceive him to be). Who knows, maybe some years later we all say that Vuc/Theis trade, and the subsequent Lauri benching, should have happened already year three of Larui's career for everything to work out optimally.

Unless Lauri ups his defensive game a lot, the fit with Vuc/Zach combo is probably too suspect for Lauri's to have future in the Bulls. From the Bulls perspective, by ending the season strong and continuing personal development on different areas, Lauri would reclaim some of his value as an asset. It is then up to the Bulls to decide whether they would consider Lauri's new contract as an asset or not. Obviously not ideal for the Bulls, put their best case scenario still is that Lauri does not completely tank it.

Personally, I think a lot of the issue between Lauri and the Bulls revolve around him likely getting around $20m per year.

At $12m, you could easily give Lauri 25mpg and be happy with his production off the bench. He is now playing the 3, 4 and 5 at times. For a 6th or 7th man, it would work out great.

I seriously doubt he would sign a $12m deal and I think opposing teams will offer a lot more. Once you get into the $20m range, that's 3rd man type money and it appears the Bulls don't see him in that light. I think both Lauri and Chicago have functionally given up on the relationship, which is why Lauri is just getting filler minutes.

I strongly suspect the Bulls will be more than open to a sign and trade to a team of Lauri's choice. I wouldn't be surprised if they HOPE its a team over the cap so the Bulls get assets back.

Lastly, I doubt that anything that happens over the next few weeks radically changes Lauri's trade or contract value. Unless he starts again and leads the team in a deep playoff run, everyone knows who he is.