UPDATE: Bulls match offer sheet for Zach LaVine (NEW Poll)
- Thread starter lwc
- Start date
With how many wins we had (or actually earned from non-tanking teams) last year we should look under every stone to improve.
Lavine is talented.
Do u want temple jacking up unefficient shots?
Who do u think the kings should target?
Easy to tear down others. Howabout insight? Thoughts?
How will it be a bullet to the core?
Try to Elaborate
Lavine is talented.
Do u want temple jacking up unefficient shots?
Who do u think the kings should target?
Easy to tear down others. Howabout insight? Thoughts?
How will it be a bullet to the core?
Try to Elaborate
Nick Friedell @NickFriedell
about 16 minutes ago
From Bulls perspective on LaVine, 4 yrs for $60 mil has always felt like preferred number to them. At 23, nobody is sure what kind of player he'll become. If I'm the Bulls I'm not going too much higher than that because I'm still not convinced he's worth that big of an investment As Bulls prepare for start of free agency the big question for them remains: What will they decide to do with restricted free agent Zach LaVine? On Draft night, executive VP John Paxson explained where his team stood heading into July 1."The restricted free agency business is what it is," Paxson said on ESPN 1000's Draft show. "I do know this -- we have a real good relationship with Bill Duffy, who is Zach's agent. Bill's one of the best. Gar talked to him in the last couple of weeks and said let's get through the Draft and let's get into the week after and let's sit down and start talking because we have that opportunity since he's ours. The way the league is set up, and this is part of the collective bargaining agreement. Zach has the ability to go out and entertain offers. We have the chance to match if he goes out and gets one. But obviously we made the trade last year he was a big part of that. So we want to continue to move forward hopefully with Zach as a part of our team."
Plus Our cap just went up $869,000
so its a little over 19.5 mil
Then give 8.6 mil mid-level exception to Herzonja
about 16 minutes ago
From Bulls perspective on LaVine, 4 yrs for $60 mil has always felt like preferred number to them. At 23, nobody is sure what kind of player he'll become. If I'm the Bulls I'm not going too much higher than that because I'm still not convinced he's worth that big of an investment As Bulls prepare for start of free agency the big question for them remains: What will they decide to do with restricted free agent Zach LaVine? On Draft night, executive VP John Paxson explained where his team stood heading into July 1."The restricted free agency business is what it is," Paxson said on ESPN 1000's Draft show. "I do know this -- we have a real good relationship with Bill Duffy, who is Zach's agent. Bill's one of the best. Gar talked to him in the last couple of weeks and said let's get through the Draft and let's get into the week after and let's sit down and start talking because we have that opportunity since he's ours. The way the league is set up, and this is part of the collective bargaining agreement. Zach has the ability to go out and entertain offers. We have the chance to match if he goes out and gets one. But obviously we made the trade last year he was a big part of that. So we want to continue to move forward hopefully with Zach as a part of our team."
Plus Our cap just went up $869,000
so its a little over 19.5 mil
Then give 8.6 mil mid-level exception to Herzonja
Last edited:
I would sign LaVine if we trade Bogi or Hield in a three way deal with the Suns/Hawks where we get Warren and the Hawks get whoever they want (WCS/Bogi/Hield/Skal) plus Jackson and the Suns gets Dennis as the PG.
PG: Fox
SG: Lavine/ 6th man Bogi or Hield
SF: Warren/Temple
PF: Bagley/Giles
C: WCS or someone else
Geroge Karl would be wetting himself seeing that exciting up tempo team even if they don't win games the upside to that team is MASSIVE and they will excite the building.
PG: Fox
SG: Lavine/ 6th man Bogi or Hield
SF: Warren/Temple
PF: Bagley/Giles
C: WCS or someone else
Geroge Karl would be wetting himself seeing that exciting up tempo team even if they don't win games the upside to that team is MASSIVE and they will excite the building.
Zach Lavine responded to the tweet about 4/60 from the Bulls with a a laugh emoji. This means its not true, I think.
The Hawks allegedly have interest in LaVine too. We should absolutely remind LaVine's team that his client will be playing in front of a half empty arena in Atlanta and apathetic fan base with a ball dominant shoot-first PG (Trae Young) behind us in their rebuild. This is where Vlade is an epic fail as a communicator and persuader and I would hope there is someone in the front office with the salesmanship to draw this distinction. Vlade needs to turn over the phone or presentation to Brandon Williams or others. If the money is the same there is NO reason to choose Atlanta over Sacramento. It would be sad to lose out on LaVine because the GM cannot sell the benefits of joining the Kings over a dreary outpost like Atlanta.
The Hawks allegedly have interest in LaVine too. We should absolutely remind LaVine's team that his client will be playing in front of a half empty arena in Atlanta and apathetic fan base with a ball dominant shoot-first PG (Trae Young) behind us in their rebuild. This is where Vlade is an epic fail as a communicator and persuader and I would hope there is someone in the front office with the salesmanship to draw this distinction. Vlade needs to turn over the phone or presentation to Brandon Williams or others. If the money is the same there is NO reason to choose Atlanta over Sacramento. It would be sad to lose out on LaVine because the GM cannot sell the benefits of joining the Kings over a dreary outpost like Atlanta.
Everyone is looking for Lavine to play the 3 for us, but he's more of a combo guard. Honestly, playing him or Bogdan at back up PG behind Fox may be the way to solve this hypothetical logjam. You'd have to push out Mason (who I like well enough), but if we're establishing a core I think I can get over that.
Add Lavine, and it looks something like this.
Fox: 1
Bogdan: 1/2/3
Buddy: 2/3
Lavine: 1/2
Bagley: 4/5
Giles: 4/5
If you conclude that Fox, Lavine, Buddy, and Bogdan should be playing 30+ minutes (they should) then you need to spread these four players through three positions.
At this point, you're missing a combo forward and probably a third big (Skal perhaps?). The problem with this though is that most of these guys are too valuable pieces to NOT have them play 30+ minutes a game, so you have to be running an 8 man rotation. Having one or more of them rotting on the bench is a no-no, which is a problem with Joerger's preference for veterans and 10-11 man rotation.
Add Lavine, and it looks something like this.
Fox: 1
Bogdan: 1/2/3
Buddy: 2/3
Lavine: 1/2
Bagley: 4/5
Giles: 4/5
If you conclude that Fox, Lavine, Buddy, and Bogdan should be playing 30+ minutes (they should) then you need to spread these four players through three positions.
At this point, you're missing a combo forward and probably a third big (Skal perhaps?). The problem with this though is that most of these guys are too valuable pieces to NOT have them play 30+ minutes a game, so you have to be running an 8 man rotation. Having one or more of them rotting on the bench is a no-no, which is a problem with Joerger's preference for veterans and 10-11 man rotation.
Would be very dumb to not pursue Lavine. He was looking like a legitimate all-star before the injury. Can play both guard spots well. Attacks and plays above the rim harder than any guard we’ve had on this team in a long time, if not ever. Would be an extremely fun team to watch. Would be so hard for those hacks at ESPN to keep our dunkfests off their highlight reels. Fox and Lavine on the fastbreak would be absurdly hard to defend against. Not too mention Bagley and hopefully Willie. Bogs and Buddy’s open looks would double. I don’t care if “positions get clogged” or it takes minutes from other pieces of ours. He would instantly be our best player. It would take so much pressure off of Fox this year and they could absolutely turn into a top 5 guard duo in the league in 4 or 5 years. Core of:
Fox
Lavine/Buddy
Bogs/JJ
Bagley/Giles
WCS
All of a sudden we’re looking at a team that has Justin Jackson or Willie as our 9th best player. In 4 years that could be a very solid squad, especially if the other guys pan out (Giles bagley and fox) and Lavine is our 4th best. Massive change from the days of old in terms of full team potential
Fox
Lavine/Buddy
Bogs/JJ
Bagley/Giles
WCS
All of a sudden we’re looking at a team that has Justin Jackson or Willie as our 9th best player. In 4 years that could be a very solid squad, especially if the other guys pan out (Giles bagley and fox) and Lavine is our 4th best. Massive change from the days of old in terms of full team potential
I am having slight reservations about LaVIne at 4/80M, the cost to prevent the Bulls from matching. I still say we go for it but I admit one of the reasons I want to add him is because it will push G-Leaguer Jackson and Temple down the depth chart OR out of the rotation altogether. This has strong appeal to me. I do NOT want to watch these guys. I know what they can do and it is not winning basketball. G-Leaguer would have to show dramatic improvement just to be average. Not only does he need improvement in physique and skills, he needs mental overhaul where he does not embrace the passive role, throw up weak floaters, spray long open jumpers, refuse to draw contact, can't finish above the rim with any hops or force, runs up and down the court wearing a wedding ring like a p-whipped girly man. Yeah, I said it. What are the odds these weaknesses are addressed? Lets not delude ourselves. G-Leaguer rode his NCAA pedigree and polite kid persona to the 14th pick. When the rubber hit the road, the gig was up. But here's the deal, you cannot give LaVine 80 mill because G-Leaguer looks like the next bust in a conga line of busts. If I set aside my low opinion of Jackson and Temple, handing out a massive contract to LaVine becomes less definitive. How many teams would give LaVine 80M if they had the cap space to do so and minutes in their rotation to allocate? I would venture not many. This is the reason to proceed with caution. If LaVine addresses his defensive weaknesses (awareness and effort), regains his burst and efficiency (over 55% TS) and can spend a lot of time at the SF, his signing is justified. But we can't go sign him just because Jackson is terrible. That's desperaton not prudence.
