Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread: PT 2

[CobyWhite0]

All you can do is laugh.

Bulls about to be 4-3 without Lavine. Why don't you start a new thread about that? Since you like posting the record with and without Lauri so much

Someone already made one of those. That also means we are 4-3 with Coby White back in the starting lineup. So does Zach make us worse, is Coby a winner and now our PG of the future, is Vuc not overrated anymore? Lots of agendas to hash out for such a small sample size.

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

[WindyCityBorn]

All you can do is laugh.

Bulls about to be 4-3 without Lavine. Why don't you start a new thread about that? Since you like posting the record with and without Lauri so much

Someone already made one of those. That also means we are 4-3 with Coby White back in the starting lineup. So does Zach make us worse, is Coby a winner and now our PG of the future, is Vuc not overrated anymore? Lots of agendas to hash out for such a small sample size.

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

My point is we can’t draw any real conclusion from this small sample size post trade deadline. Although people definitely try to do so.

[GoBlue72391]

Someone already made one of those. That also means we are 4-3 with Coby White back in the starting lineup. So does Zach make us worse, is Coby a winner and now our PG of the future, is Vuc not overrated anymore? Lots of agendas to hash out for such a small sample size.

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

My point is we can’t draw any real conclusion from this small sample size post trade deadline. Although people definitely try to do so.

Agendas, agendas, agendas. Posters are not even trying to hide them anymore.

[CobyWhite0]

Someone already made one of those. That also means we are 4-3 with Coby White back in the starting lineup. So does Zach make us worse, is Coby a winner and now our PG of the future, is Vuc not overrated anymore? Lots of agendas to hash out for such a small sample size.

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

My point is we can’t draw any real conclusion from this small sample size post trade deadline. Although people definitely try to do so.

Agreed 100%.

I was actually replying to Pakii94's post, but you're involved because you pointed out the obvious - small sample size.

In reality, as it pertains to the last 7 games, the main difference is having Temple starting instead of Sato. Temple's defense means a lot more to the starting lineup than Sato's PG abilities.

[CobyWhite0]

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

My point is we can’t draw any real conclusion from this small sample size post trade deadline. Although people definitely try to do so.

Agendas, agendas, agendas. Posters are not even trying to hide them anymore.

Agreed 100%.

I could be wrong, but I'd guess that 100% of the people who post here have an agenda - for 95% of us, that agenda is "we want to see the Bulls win as many games as possible."

But I'd also guess that up to 5% of the people who post here have a different agenda - that agenda being "what can the Bulls do to get Lauri as many shots as possible".

[GrowingHorns]

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

My point is we can’t draw any real conclusion from this small sample size post trade deadline. Although people definitely try to do so.

Agreed 100%.

I was actually replying to Pakii94's post, but you're involved because you pointed out the obvious - small sample size.

In reality, as it pertains to the last 7 games, the main difference is having Temple starting instead of Sato. Temple's defense means a lot more to the starting lineup than Sato's PG abilities.

Been since Temple replaced Lauri it's all about getting more D. Whoever is out and we enter Temple, the starter line-up gets better. Answer: we start Zach, Vuc and Temple when available, rest of pieces may vary.

[WindyCityBorn]

I think Markkanen is worth keeping...at the the right price. Unfortunately I think at least one team will make a offer that isn’t worth matching. I think he is actually learning how to playing as a big since Vuc have Theis joined the team.

[coldfish]

Not a popular take but with how poorly Pat has played, Lauri starting at SF makes some sense.

I still think that he is done on Chicago so I'm not sure tinkering is really worth the time.

[CobyWhite0]

I think Markkanen is worth keeping...at the the right price. Unfortunately I think at least one team will make a offer that isn’t worth matching. I think he is actually learning how to playing as a big since Vuc have Theis joined the team.

I think 99% of us feel the same way - I'd say the only reason this thread even exists is because some folks think Lauri is worth $20 million/year, while the majority of us think he's worth more like $10 million/year.

[suursahuri]

I think Markkanen is worth keeping...at the the right price. Unfortunately I think at least one team will make a offer that isn’t worth matching. I think he is actually learning how to playing as a big since Vuc have Theis joined the team.

I think 99% of us feel the same way - I'd say the only reason this thread even exists is because some folks think Lauri is worth $20 million/year, while the majority of us think he's worth more like $10 million/year.

For about 15 years (2001-2017) mid level exception was ~$5M. Next season it's going to be a tad under $10M. Just making sure everybody's keeping up with the league's salary development when estimating player values.

[coldfish]

I think Markkanen is worth keeping...at the the right price. Unfortunately I think at least one team will make a offer that isn’t worth matching. I think he is actually learning how to playing as a big since Vuc have Theis joined the team.

I think 99% of us feel the same way - I'd say the only reason this thread even exists is because some folks think Lauri is worth $20 million/year, while the majority of us think he's worth more like $10 million/year.

For about 15 years (2001-2017) mid level exception was ~$5M. Next season it's going to be a tad under $10M. Just making sure everybody's keeping up with the league's salary development when estimating player values.

If you look around the league, virtually no one has 4 players paid $20m or more. Many contenders have their 3rd highest paid guy at less than $20m.

If you think that Lauri is worth $20m, you are basically saying he is a 3rd/4th man on a contender. Some people think that is true, others don't.

[suursahuri]

For about 15 years (2001-2017) mid level exception was ~$5M. Next season it's going to be a tad under $10M. Just making sure everybody's keeping up with the league's salary development when estimating player values.

If you look around the league, virtually no one has 4 players paid $20m or more. Many contenders have their 3rd highest paid guy at less than $20m.

If you think that Lauri is worth $20m, you are basically saying he is a 3rd/4th man on a contender. Some people think that is true, others don't.

I'm not saying Lauri is worth $20M. I would pay that amount only for a player who can create scoring opportunities for both himself and others.

I wrote that thing about salaries because I myself have struggled with raising salary cap and the fact that $10M used to be a big salary and is now mid level.

I see no reason for Lauri to sign a long term contract at $10M per. If there's no better offers he would probably just play out the QO or sign something like 1+1 with player option.

Players get signed for more than they are worth almost every off season. It all depends on money vs. talent available on the market.

[the ultimates]

Lauri's best attribute is his three-point shooting. In a league where everybody is chucking threes, you should be able to find that skill for far less than 20 million a year.

[Pentele]

Someone already made one of those. That also means we are 4-3 with Coby White back in the starting lineup. So does Zach make us worse, is Coby a winner and now our PG of the future, is Vuc not overrated anymore? Lots of agendas to hash out for such a small sample size.

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

My point is we can’t draw any real conclusion from this small sample size post trade deadline. Although people definitely try to do so.

The truth is one cannot draw any real conclusions regarding an individual player even based on all the games of the season. But people definitely try do so, I see, as they have tried all season based on even a smaller sample. In that regard, the win/lose record is even worse than on off stat, there are simply too many variables, especially since the win/lose record does not do anything to track the performance of a single player. It would be intellectually honest just to admit that and not keep up the simplistic charade.

[Swuul]

I think Markkanen is worth keeping...at the the right price. Unfortunately I think at least one team will make a offer that isn’t worth matching. I think he is actually learning how to playing as a big since Vuc have Theis joined the team.

I think 99% of us feel the same way - I'd say the only reason this thread even exists is because some folks think Lauri is worth $20 million/year, while the majority of us think he's worth more like $10 million/year.

Markkanen's QO is $9,026,952 ie pretty close to the $10 mio you are prepared to offer him or the $11 mio Bulls were ready to offer him. Which is why I think he will sign the QO if Bulls offers it, and he is then "free to go" (as by the finnish code of honour he has then fulfilled his part of the agreement with Bulls).

So far Markkanen has in total earned some $13 mio in NBA, and he has stated he has already earned more money than he will ever be able to spend, and money as such isn't the reason he is going to sign or not sign.

[sco]

I think Markkanen is worth keeping...at the the right price. Unfortunately I think at least one team will make a offer that isn’t worth matching. I think he is actually learning how to playing as a big since Vuc have Theis joined the team.

I think 99% of us feel the same way - I'd say the only reason this thread even exists is because some folks think Lauri is worth $20 million/year, while the majority of us think he's worth more like $10 million/year.

Markkanen's QO is $9,026,952 ie pretty close to the $10 mio you are prepared to offer him or the $11 mio Bulls were ready to offer him. Which is why I think he will sign the QO if Bulls offers it, and he is then "free to go" (as by the finnish code of honour he has then fulfilled his part of the agreement with Bulls).

So far Markkanen has in total earned some $13 mio in NBA, and he has stated he has already earned more money than he will ever be able to spend, and money as such isn't the reason he is going to sign or not sign.

Lauri signing the QO would be ok for us. I don't see a S&T coming or adding value. I respect codes of honor, but that's why guys have agents to shield them from dishonor. I expect someone will offer him $13-$15M per year, and he'll jump (I mean his agent will jump) all over it.

[coldfish]

For about 15 years (2001-2017) mid level exception was ~$5M. Next season it's going to be a tad under $10M. Just making sure everybody's keeping up with the league's salary development when estimating player values.

If you look around the league, virtually no one has 4 players paid $20m or more. Many contenders have their 3rd highest paid guy at less than $20m.

If you think that Lauri is worth $20m, you are basically saying he is a 3rd/4th man on a contender. Some people think that is true, others don't.

I'm not saying Lauri is worth $20M. I would pay that amount only for a player who can create scoring opportunities for both himself and others.

I wrote that thing about salaries because I myself have struggled with raising salary cap and the fact that $10M used to be a big salary and is now mid level.

I see no reason for Lauri to sign a long term contract at $10M per. If there's no better offers he would probably just play out the QO or sign something like 1+1 with player option.

Players get signed for more than they are worth almost every off season. It all depends on money vs. talent available on the market.

Personally, I think some team will offer Lauri that $20m per year . . . or more. The FA class is terrible and lots of teams have money. Lauri is one of the more attractive targets. I have no issue with Lauri signing that contract.

I'm just trying to be realistic about this whole thing. I think that's the fundamental issue with Lauri and the Bulls right now. They don't think he is worth what he is about to be paid so both him and the team are consigned to the fact that he will be gone.

[KissedByaRose1]

If we can steal a 2nd rounder in a Sign and trade I'll consider it a huge win. Very ready for the Lauri experience to be over and I think Arturas agrees.

[CobyWhite0]

First of all, we're now 4-4 without LaVine.

Zach: 22-31 with, 4-4 without

Lauri: 15-26 with, 11-9 without. 8-17 when Lauri starts, 7-9 when he comes off the bench.

Coby: 25-33 with, 1-2 without. 20-23 when Coby starts, 5-10 when he comes off the bench.

So Coby has the best record of the 3 as a starter, and we also have a worse record when Coby doesn't play than we have when Zach or Lauri doesn't play.

My point is we can’t draw any real conclusion from this small sample size post trade deadline. Although people definitely try to do so.

The truth is one cannot draw any real conclusions regarding an individual player even based on all the games of the season. But people definitely try do so, I see, as they have tried all season based on even a smaller sample. In that regard, the win/lose record is even worse than on off stat, there are simply too many variables, especially since the win/lose record does not do anything to track the performance of a single player. It would be intellectually honest just to admit that and not keep up the simplistic charade.

Of course one can, if it's blatant.

Like the Lakers are 28-13 when LeBron plays, 8-12 when he doesn't.

And I'm not at all saying that on/off or win/loss are of much use, but even the simplest of box score stats have many variables.

A guy playing Center next to Dennis Rodman is going to have less opportunities to grab rebounds. A Center playing with Steph and Klay is going to get less shots, and obviously less points.

Someone like Lauri, who is dependent on his teammates getting him shots, is going to score more points on higher efficiency with CP3 at PG instead of Coby.

A PG is going to have less assists playing with a bunch of bricklayers than a PG playing with a bunch of offensively talented teammates.

Steals and blocked shots can be greatly affected by the other four defenders and his coach's defensive schemes.

[suursahuri]

Personally, I think some team will offer Lauri that $20m per year . . . or more. The FA class is terrible and lots of teams have money. Lauri is one of the more attractive targets. I have no issue with Lauri signing that contract.

I also think that's probable. And Theiss will get his big offer too.

I mean we got praise around the league when we signed, 30 year old, average starting power forward in Thad for $13M/year. Remember that was pre-Thadgic -version who averaged 12.6/6.5 in 30 mpg and with no 3 point shooting with the Pacers.