Lauri Markkanen Discussion Thread: PT 2

[CobyWhite0]

I personally do not think DeRozan fits in for Bulls at all but I guess getting him in S&T would still be better than getting nothing.
If that does not fly, would Patty Mills make any sense in a situation where Bulls fail to sign Lonzo?

CBA S&T rules are weird, so I might understand the rules incorrectly.

Don't know if this would be easy to do. S&T for DeRozan would mean you would have to match his current salary, which is 27M and if Lauri would get 15M that would still mean Bulls would have to send 12M to Spurs way.

Also I don't see the reason why Spurs would do this. They have cap room they can use that to sign Lauri or anyone else. Off course option would be getting trade exception, but even then Bulls would have to offer something else with Lauri (Cash example). Getting trade exception would be great, so owner should find some cash from the bottom of his pockets.

The Spurs can't simply sign Lauri with their cap space, because Lauri is a Restricted Free Agent. The Bulls can match any offer Lauri gets from any team. That's why the Spurs would do a sign and trade, without one they can't sign Lauri unless the Bulls refuse to match their offer.

As for a sign and trade for DeRozan, his current salary has nothing to do with it. His new salary is what matters.

With Lauri, BYC rules say that since he will be getting a raise of more than 20%, his outgoing salary for trade purposes is 50% of his new salary. So if Lauri signs for $18 million in the first year of his new deal, his outgoing salary for the Bulls is $9 million.

That would mean the most the Bulls could take back in a sign and trade would be $14.1 million, unless the Bulls send out more salary

[TSS]

Thanks for clarification!

[Neonblazer]

I personally do not think DeRozan fits in for Bulls at all but I guess getting him in S&T would still be better than getting nothing.
If that does not fly, would Patty Mills make any sense in a situation where Bulls fail to sign Lonzo?

CBA S&T rules are weird, so I might understand the rules incorrectly.

Don't know if this would be easy to do. S&T for DeRozan would mean you would have to match his current salary, which is 27M and if Lauri would get 15M that would still mean Bulls would have to send 12M to Spurs way.

Also I don't see the reason why Spurs would do this. They have cap room they can use that to sign Lauri or anyone else. Off course option would be getting trade exception, but even then Bulls would have to offer something else with Lauri (Cash example). Getting trade exception would be great, so owner should find some cash from the bottom of his pockets.

The Spurs can't simply sign Lauri with their cap space, because Lauri is a Restricted Free Agent. The Bulls can match any offer Lauri gets from any team. That's why the Spurs would do a sign and trade, without one they can't sign Lauri unless the Bulls refuse to match their offer.

As for a sign and trade for DeRozan, his current salary has nothing to do with it. His new salary is what matters.

With Lauri, BYC rules say that since he will be getting a raise of more than 20%, his outgoing salary for trade purposes is 50% of his new salary. So if Lauri signs for $18 million in the first year of his new deal, his outgoing salary for the Bulls is $9 million.

That would mean the most the Bulls could take back in a sign and trade would be $14.1 million, unless the Bulls send out more salary

You are completely dismissing the fact that Bulls are pretty short in cap space considering they have others to sign as well. Spurs have no reason to do S&T if they dont really want to get rid of someone. Bulls just matching out of spite would mean they get Lauri and then have to wonder what they are going to do with him while having to go over the cap to sign other FA's this summer.

[coldfish]

Just to note, teams will frequently do a sign and trade just out of courtesy. Like Lauri for a top 59 protected 2nd round pick. The Bulls end up getting a trade exception.

I think everyone knows the Bulls aren't going to match a big offer. At this point, a trade exception is the most we can hope for.

[MrSparkle]

I don’t think we go for DeRozan. He’s not keeping up with guards and wings anymore, on defense. He’s practically their PF (69% if you want to look it up). Which imo is where Pat should be playing most the time.

We need two-way guards. If we go into next year with another glut of bigs and wings best suited to play small at 4, then we are going to see the same problems we’ve had since the trade deadline. Going to be a real problem if we have 5 guys qualified to play center, again, clogging minutes at PF..

[CobyWhite0]

You are completely dismissing the fact that Bulls are pretty short in cap space considering they have others to sign as well.

I don't know what that means. The Bulls don't need any cap space to re-sign their own Free Agents.

Spurs have no reason to do S&T if they dont really want to get rid of someone.

Of course they do, once again the Bulls can match any offer sheet - if the Spurs REALLY want him, a sign and trade is the only way to guarantee they get him.

And I don't know what "they don't really want to get rid of someone" means - in this hypothetical, they're trading DeRozan, who is a free agent. He won't be there's to "get rid of", so they wouldn't be getting rid of anyone.

And if they do want to keep DeRozan, this entire hypothetical doesn't exist.

Bulls just matching out of spite would mean they get Lauri and then have to wonder what they are going to do with him while having to go over the cap to sign other FA's this summer.

Again, I don't know what this means. Again, the Bulls can go over the cap to re-sign any of their own free agents. And even if they let Lauri walk, they won't be under the salary cap.

[CobyWhite0]

I don’t think we go for DeRozan. He’s not keeping up with guards and wings anymore, on defense. He’s practically their PF (69% if you want to look it up). Which imo is where Pat should be playing most the time.

We need two-way guards. If we go into next year with another glut of bigs and wings best suited to play small at 4, then we are going to see the same problems we’ve had since the trade deadline. Going to be a real problem if we have 5 guys qualified to play center, again, clogging minutes at PF..

Yeah, I really don't see us being interested in DeRozan, all I did was explain the math of a Lauri - DeRozan double sign and trade.

[FanInTheAttic]

Even though Lauri has improved his defensive game, it's a shame he couldn't step up with scoring now when Vuc and Zach are out, his FG% and 3P% are terrible in the last two games. Even though they don't run a lot of plays for him and especially last night he didn't get a lot of minutes (probably for a reason) I would have liked to see him play a bit more selfishly and succeed in scoring. I know it's just a couple of games, but he has played so inconsistently during the season that now he would have had a good chance to show off his offensive skills.

[sco]

Even though Lauri has improved his defensive game, it's a shame he couldn't step up with scoring now when Vuc and Zach are out, his FG% and 3P% are terrible in the last two games. Even though they don't run a lot of plays for him and especially last night he didn't get a lot of minutes (probably for a reason) I would have liked to see him play a bit more selfishly and succeed in scoring. I know it's just a couple of games, but he has played so inconsistently during the season that now he would have had a good chance to show off his offensive skills.

IMO, many "shooter/scorers" in the NBA are specialists and when they take on bigger roles on either/both ends, their numbers plummet. IMO, Lauri lacks the endurance to be more...I think it was one of his own admissions in the offseason.

[chefo]

On O, Lauri's biggest problem by far is that he tends to revert back to Boylen-ball and chuck semi-contested 3s almost EVERY time he sees daylight certain games, like last night. Why? Because it's an easy shot for him to take that doesn't require him to try or work hard on O. He usually does that after he doesn't see the ball and/or is frustrated. It's a tendency his next team will have to beat out of him.

He got a couple of very nice pin downs where he got his guy right underneath the hoop, didn't get the ball in either case and then just gave up even trying the rest of the game. I'm sure in his head there's an excuse, but it's just lazy, sloppy ball both from him and from his teammates. You have to keep trying and if they still don't pass you the ball when you've got a clean attempt from 3 feet, you need to get in their ear... forcefully. I don't think he has it in him. Not at 23 or however old he is. Maybe he'll be that one day, but it won't be on the Bulls.

I've been saying for 2 years now that Lauri needs a sports psychologist much more so than he needs an Icelandic "strongest-man-in-the-world" type coach to make him pump iron. I can tell that on probably 90% of his on-court possessions, he starts in the weakside corner. The problem is, for 80% of these, that's where he stays put. If I'm him, I'd be like--"screw the scheme; screw that's what the coach tells me; that's what Mr. Egghead told me to do last year. It was a shyte idea back then, it's a shyte idea now. I'm breaking the O to get myself going and I'll keep breaking it until he takes me out. Our O is shyte anyways with me sitting in the corner."

Anyways, probably best that he and the Bulls part ways.

It's been a shyte franchise for some time now, and it will probably be one going forward. And he, for as good as he looked as a rook and soph, has flamed out here, whether out of his making or not. Just a waste of talent from the Bulls, but at this point, it's a closed chapter. Onto the next great hope... oh wait, we don't have one right now.

[sco]

On O, Lauri's biggest problem by far is that he tends to revert back to Boylen-ball and chuck semi-contested 3s almost EVERY time he sees daylight certain games, like last night. Why? Because it's an easy shot for him to take that doesn't require him to try or work hard on O. He usually does that after he doesn't see the ball and/or is frustrated. It's a tendency his next team will have to beat out of him.

He got a couple of very nice pin downs where he got his guy right underneath the hoop, didn't get the ball in either case and then just gave up even trying the rest of the game. I'm sure in his head there's an excuse, but it's just lazy, sloppy ball both from him and from his teammates. You have to keep trying and if they still don't pass you the ball when you've got a clean attempt from 3 feet, you need to get in their ear... forcefully. I don't think he has it in him. Not at 23 or however old he is. Maybe he'll be that one day, but it won't be on the Bulls.

I've been saying for 2 years now that Lauri needs a sports psychologist much more so than he needs an Icelandic "strongest-man-in-the-world" type coach to make him pump iron. I can tell that on probably 90% of his on-court possessions, he starts in the weakside corner. The problem is, for 80% of these, that's where he stays put. If I'm him, I'd be like--"screw the scheme; screw that's what the coach tells me; that's what Mr. Egghead told me to do last year. It was a shyte idea back then, it's a shyte idea now. I'm breaking the O to get myself going and I'll keep breaking it until he takes me out. Our O is shyte anyways with me sitting in the corner."

Anyways, probably best that he and the Bulls part ways.

It's been a shyte franchise for some time now, and it will probably be one going forward. And he, for as good as he looked as a rook and soph, has flamed out here, whether out of his making or not. Just a waste of talent from the Bulls, but at this point, it's a closed chapter. Onto the next great hope... oh wait, we don't have one right now.

I like Lauri chucking semi-open 3's. The way I see it, either he's an elite 3pt shooter or he's nobody you want as your starting PF. It's not that he can't do other things well, but so do many, many other PF's - but he is elite on top of those things, he'd be a keeper IMO. Otherwise, the likely outcome is that you end-up overpaying.

[kodo]

On O, Lauri's biggest problem by far is that he tends to revert back to Boylen-ball and chuck semi-contested 3s almost EVERY time he sees daylight certain games, like last night. Why? Because it's an easy shot for him to take that doesn't require him to try or work hard on O. He usually does that after he doesn't see the ball and/or is frustrated. It's a tendency his next team will have to beat out of him.

He got a couple of very nice pin downs where he got his guy right underneath the hoop, didn't get the ball in either case and then just gave up even trying the rest of the game. I'm sure in his head there's an excuse, but it's just lazy, sloppy ball both from him and from his teammates. You have to keep trying and if they still don't pass you the ball when you've got a clean attempt from 3 feet, you need to get in their ear... forcefully. I don't think he has it in him. Not at 23 or however old he is. Maybe he'll be that one day, but it won't be on the Bulls.

I've been saying for 2 years now that Lauri needs a sports psychologist much more so than he needs an Icelandic "strongest-man-in-the-world" type coach to make him pump iron. I can tell that on probably 90% of his on-court possessions, he starts in the weakside corner. The problem is, for 80% of these, that's where he stays put. If I'm him, I'd be like--"screw the scheme; screw that's what the coach tells me; that's what Mr. Egghead told me to do last year. It was a shyte idea back then, it's a shyte idea now. I'm breaking the O to get myself going and I'll keep breaking it until he takes me out. Our O is shyte anyways with me sitting in the corner."

Anyways, probably best that he and the Bulls part ways.

It's been a shyte franchise for some time now, and it will probably be one going forward. And he, for as good as he looked as a rook and soph, has flamed out here, whether out of his making or not. Just a waste of talent from the Bulls, but at this point, it's a closed chapter. Onto the next great hope... oh wait, we don't have one right now.

So basically play terrible basketball to fill up the stat sheet? No thanks, we already have 1 Coby White. If that's what we wanted I'm sure we can give Antonio Blakeney a spot again.

[MikeDC]

On O, Lauri's biggest problem by far is that he tends to revert back to Boylen-ball and chuck semi-contested 3s almost EVERY time he sees daylight certain games, like last night. Why? Because it's an easy shot for him to take that doesn't require him to try or work hard on O. He usually does that after he doesn't see the ball and/or is frustrated. It's a tendency his next team will have to beat out of him.

He got a couple of very nice pin downs where he got his guy right underneath the hoop, didn't get the ball in either case and then just gave up even trying the rest of the game. I'm sure in his head there's an excuse, but it's just lazy, sloppy ball both from him and from his teammates. You have to keep trying and if they still don't pass you the ball when you've got a clean attempt from 3 feet, you need to get in their ear... forcefully. I don't think he has it in him. Not at 23 or however old he is. Maybe he'll be that one day, but it won't be on the Bulls.

I've been saying for 2 years now that Lauri needs a sports psychologist much more so than he needs an Icelandic "strongest-man-in-the-world" type coach to make him pump iron. I can tell that on probably 90% of his on-court possessions, he starts in the weakside corner. The problem is, for 80% of these, that's where he stays put. If I'm him, I'd be like--"screw the scheme; screw that's what the coach tells me; that's what Mr. Egghead told me to do last year. It was a shyte idea back then, it's a shyte idea now. I'm breaking the O to get myself going and I'll keep breaking it until he takes me out. Our O is shyte anyways with me sitting in the corner."

Anyways, probably best that he and the Bulls part ways.

It's been a shyte franchise for some time now, and it will probably be one going forward. And he, for as good as he looked as a rook and soph, has flamed out here, whether out of his making or not. Just a waste of talent from the Bulls, but at this point, it's a closed chapter. Onto the next great hope... oh wait, we don't have one right now.

So basically play terrible basketball to fill up the stat sheet? No thanks, we already have 1 Coby White. If that's what we wanted I'm sure we can give Antonio Blakeney a spot again.

Ironically, he's saying something almost opposite. Lauri's been tasked with (or allowed to) simply stand there and not move. I think chefo is saying "break the offense if you need to by moving and looking for good shots". That's the opposite of guys like Blakeney who just jacked up the ball every time they touched it.

The problem is, the evidence suggests that Lauri doesn't need to break the scheme to do this. He's just given up doing it because he doesn't/didn't get the ball the way he wanted to. So he effectively quits and gets passive instead of being demanding and continuing to grind and get open. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, since he doesn't get the ball and doesn't get good looks by standing there.

It's the eternal problem of losers. Motivated, "right way" guys look at that situation and keep grinding. "I'm going to get open, get a good look, and be in the right place. And if I don't get the ball, then I can point it out".

Loser mentality is to use other guys' not doing the right thing to not do the right thing yourself. "I'm not going to get the ball, so I'm not gonna kill myself trying". People do that all the time, but that doesn't make it right, and it really doesn't make it smart for them to do it. Because ultimately, what everyone is going to see is a guy that doesn't handle adversity very well.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

Just to note, teams will frequently do a sign and trade just out of courtesy. Like Lauri for a top 59 protected 2nd round pick. The Bulls end up getting a trade exception.

I think everyone knows the Bulls aren't going to match a big offer. At this point, a trade exception is the most we can hope for.

What were the logistics that allowed the Bucks to get a 1st rounder for Brogdon in a sign and trade? Wasn't it Indy was over the cap and could never sign him with space, so they worked through a sign and trade and had to give up something significant?

[ZOMG]

On O, Lauri's biggest problem by far is that he tends to revert back to Boylen-ball and chuck semi-contested 3s almost EVERY time he sees daylight certain games, like last night. Why? Because it's an easy shot for him to take that doesn't require him to try or work hard on O. He usually does that after he doesn't see the ball and/or is frustrated. It's a tendency his next team will have to beat out of him.

He got a couple of very nice pin downs where he got his guy right underneath the hoop, didn't get the ball in either case and then just gave up even trying the rest of the game. I'm sure in his head there's an excuse, but it's just lazy, sloppy ball both from him and from his teammates. You have to keep trying and if they still don't pass you the ball when you've got a clean attempt from 3 feet, you need to get in their ear... forcefully. I don't think he has it in him. Not at 23 or however old he is. Maybe he'll be that one day, but it won't be on the Bulls.

I've been saying for 2 years now that Lauri needs a sports psychologist much more so than he needs an Icelandic "strongest-man-in-the-world" type coach to make him pump iron. I can tell that on probably 90% of his on-court possessions, he starts in the weakside corner. The problem is, for 80% of these, that's where he stays put. If I'm him, I'd be like--"screw the scheme; screw that's what the coach tells me; that's what Mr. Egghead told me to do last year. It was a shyte idea back then, it's a shyte idea now. I'm breaking the O to get myself going and I'll keep breaking it until he takes me out. Our O is shyte anyways with me sitting in the corner."

Anyways, probably best that he and the Bulls part ways.

It's been a shyte franchise for some time now, and it will probably be one going forward. And he, for as good as he looked as a rook and soph, has flamed out here, whether out of his making or not. Just a waste of talent from the Bulls, but at this point, it's a closed chapter. Onto the next great hope... oh wait, we don't have one right now.

The trouble is, I don't think his next team will do anything like that. Lauri's next team will probably have analytics guys who'll take one look at him - a 7 footer who can shoot 38% from the perimeter while not "needing" the ball - and tell the head coach to use him pretty much the same way he's been used on the Bulls.

And... they're not "wrong". Not really. They're following the logic that's ruling everything in the NBA right now. When you can get 3pt looks almost whenever you want (Lauri can, being 7ft) and make them at a good clip, its the best shot in basketball... after a dunk. Even if you can't make them all the time, there's other advantages to being a perceived threat from the perimeter. That's why the Bulls have never had a problem with teams surgically attaching defenders to Markkanen when he's standing 25ft from the basket. Wonder why we've never sent guys to screen for Lauri in these off ball situations? Because the Bulls have always had a paint-clogging, non-shooting center out there playing with him. The perception has been that by and large, Lauri is worth more just providing that gravity on the perimeter than trying to work his way closer to the basket, where there's too many bodies as it is.

Sucks for him, but hey, take one for the team, right? Unfortunately, the team has sucked royally for years at trying to exploit that added space. Why? Bad coaching, lots of dumb players.

In the modern NBA, it's just so extremely convenient to tell a guy like Markkanen to stand in the corner. There isn't any malice in it, and it's not like the coaches don't know he can do some other things as well... but everyone needs spacing. That's a fact. And the ideal guy to provide spacing is a 7ft guy who's not a threat off the dribble. I remain extremely disappointed that Markkanen neglected to develop his half court ballhandlling. IMO it's by far the worst mistake of his career and will probably cost him millions of dollars.

[coldfish]

Just to note, teams will frequently do a sign and trade just out of courtesy. Like Lauri for a top 59 protected 2nd round pick. The Bulls end up getting a trade exception.

I think everyone knows the Bulls aren't going to match a big offer. At this point, a trade exception is the most we can hope for.

What were the logistics that allowed the Bucks to get a 1st rounder for Brogdon in a sign and trade? Wasn't it Indy was over the cap and could never sign him with space, so they worked through a sign and trade and had to give up something significant?

That's my hope. That Chicago either bluffs teams into doing the S&T or a team over the cap is forced to.

They need to make it clear that they will match any offer but S&T to any team. I would have no issue taking salary back if an asset comes back with it.

[GoBlue72391]

I still think giving up on the Vuch/Lauri pairing after one game was a huge mistake, compounded by using him like Keith Bogans off the bench, but alas, we made our bed and now we have to lie in it.

[coldfish]

I still think giving up on the Vuch/Lauri pairing after one game was a huge mistake, compounded by using him like Keith Bogans off the bench, but alas, we made our bed and now we have to lie in it.

There was one report that the Bulls shopped Lauri everywhere at the deadline, with only wanting a 1st round pick in return. They obviously didn't get it.

Its entirely possible, I would even say likely, that the team had decided to move on from Lauri so putting him with Vuc would be a waste of time. The fact that he isn't starting now, with both Vuc and Lavine out is just more evidence of that.

Overall, it seems that the Bulls used the first half of the season as an evaluation period and determined that Lauri wasn't going to be worth the contract he was about to get.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

Just to note, teams will frequently do a sign and trade just out of courtesy. Like Lauri for a top 59 protected 2nd round pick. The Bulls end up getting a trade exception.

I think everyone knows the Bulls aren't going to match a big offer. At this point, a trade exception is the most we can hope for.

What were the logistics that allowed the Bucks to get a 1st rounder for Brogdon in a sign and trade? Wasn't it Indy was over the cap and could never sign him with space, so they worked through a sign and trade and had to give up something significant?

That's my hope. That Chicago either bluffs teams into doing the S&T or a team over the cap is forced to.

They need to make it clear that they will match any offer but S&T to any team. I would have no issue taking salary back if an asset comes back with it.

I guess the big difference is Brogdon held a ton more value than Lauri. Unless it's a top 5 team that doesn't care about its 1st, tough to see getting a 1st like Brogdon. But maybe a high to middling 2nd?

[FanInTheAttic]

I'm not so sure about Lauri not handling adversity very well. If just looking at his FG% and 3P% he is having the best season of his career. To me it also looks like he has improved his defense, maybe at the expense of his 3P shooting like sco pointed out in an earlier post. But even with some bad games scoring-wise, his FG% and 3P% is still better than in any other season.

I know that FG% and 3P% is not all, and the general opinion seems to be that he has had a disappointing season. Some like to blame it on Lauri and some argue that it is mostly the fault of the environment he is playing in. I would say that it is not so black and white, the answer lies somewhere in between. But the one who loses the most in this situation is the Bulls since they have been wasting their time on Markkanen for 4 years and most probably will not get much in return. I think this is not good player development and they have wasted another draft pick. Bulls should have had the knowledge and skill to develop Markkanen in to a player that is most useful for them. Recognize his talent level and develop him in to a reliable bench player or a key player in the starting unit. If he just doesn't fit in to the system, develop him in to a player that can be used as a valuable asset in trades. Now it looks like they couldn't do neither, like many picks from recent years. Giving a player enough chances in the starting unit might not be enough for a player to become valuable for the team, there are many aspects in player development to take in to consideration. A few days ago I bumped in to a highlight reel of Lauri's second season as a Bull and boy did he look like a future star. If you think about Jokic for example, would you think he would be the player he is now without good player development? Maybe, but not necessarily, some players can develop more easily, some players need more assistance. Just an extreme example, I'm not comparing Markkanen to Jokic...

So the Bulls didn't have success in 4 years with Markkanen and he will most probably get an offer from another team during the offseason and will play somewhere else next season. I hope Bulls can make a S&T and get at least something in return. Markkanen is 24 and can still have plenty of good years in the NBA. And maybe with the right team, can even be an all-star level player. Or he could just become an off the bench 3 point shooter playing 15 MPG. Or maybe he fades out of the league in some years. Who knows, but at least now he still has a future with possibilities in the NBA. Looks like Bulls lost their chances with him, and I hope they don't waste any more possibilities with PAW or other draft picks in the future.