UPDATE: Bulls match offer sheet for Zach LaVine (NEW Poll)

ESP47 · Jul 5, 2018

Yeah I thought Fox was awful last year. Like one of the worst full time players I've ever seen. Normally guys that are as bad as him wind up getting sent down to the G League or they get released or ride the bench. The Kings played him despite how bad he was which was the right thing to do last year. The wrong thing was Joerger never putting him in situations where he could succeed. Nearly everything about the offense was anti-Fox. De'Aaron showed me more in that one summer league game the other day than he did nearly all last season. The tools he used driving to the basket in that game are tools that he can build a career on. But as far as scouting Fox, people concentrate way too much on his 4 or 5 clutch shots, his 6 for 6 3pt display and a few of his euro steps while ignoring the other 99% of his minutes which were extremely bad.

https://www.basketball-reference.co...comp=gt&c1val=-4&order_by=vorp&order_by_asc=Y

This is a list of the worst VORP seasons for players 27 and under. Fox's rookie year is 80th on the list. LaVine's is 82nd. Look at the list and tell me how many great players are on this list? It's full of busts, guys that never even got close to their potential and career role players. It's not impossible for a guy on this list to become an outlier and actually wind up being a good player in the future, but the odds are really low. The odds are very low for just Fox to become a good player but now people want to add another player from this list to the Kings? Now the odds are exponentially low. Try going to the next page and taking a look. Again, it's full of bad players with a couple decent players sprinkled in.

LaVine's metrics are not good. Even for a bad team. He does not play winning basketball and even a career year for him is equal to about an average starter on an average team. His athleticism and numbers are eye opening but his actual effect on basketball games is nil.

Ozymandias · Jul 5, 2018

the above post about needing to absorb bad contracts is a silly, sitting-duck, perspective... absorb bad contracts for what exactly? future lottery tickets? why not buy one now, one that they can groom immediately while the young players are still on rookie deals... these kids need all the help they can get, they don't need any deadweight....

This team obviously could use more firepower off the dribble too. LaVine is in-line with the identity their trying to forge.

the kings aren't like the nets from a few years ago... they lost one pick... if they faceplant in 2019-2020 there's a very clear direction still, and you guessed it --- Future lottery picks...

look at all the young talent on the roster, if they pan out as y'all hope it's gonna cost a fortune to retain em all. .. the foundation of the team is here, they just need to tweak it. what they need to do is find young talent on the proper timeline before the waves of restricted contracts need to be re-upped, so thats one big signing this summer (and a backup PG hopefully) and one big one next...

Ozymandias · Jul 5, 2018

some of the stat hawking people on this site kill me, lol.. someone needs to pass these guys some brown paper bags to breathe into, i think they might hyperventilate.

ESP47 · Jul 5, 2018

Ozymandias said:

If you have a valid argument that refutes my stats, I'd love to hear it because I would like to be wrong in this case.

But if your argument is just your hunch with a bunch of "LOLs" thrown in, then save it because it's not worth the bandwidth.

gunks · Jul 5, 2018

I don't really see how signing Lavine is a good move. But whatever. FA is Vlade's "oops" time. I'm used to it by now.

rosa u podne · Jul 5, 2018

ESP47 said:

Yeah I thought Fox was awful last year. Like one of the worst full time players I've ever seen. Normally guys that are as bad as him wind up getting sent down to the G League or they get released or ride the bench. The Kings played him despite how bad he was which was the right thing to do last year. The wrong thing was Joerger never putting him in situations where he could succeed. Nearly everything about the offense was anti-Fox. De'Aaron showed me more in that one summer league game the other day than he did nearly all last season. The tools he used driving to the basket in that game are tools that he can build a career on. But as far as scouting Fox, people concentrate way too much on his 4 or 5 clutch shots, his 6 for 6 3pt display and a few of his euro steps while ignoring the other 99% of his minutes which were extremely bad.

https://www.basketball-reference.co...comp=gt&c1val=-4&order_by=vorp&order_by_asc=Y

This is a list of the worst VORP seasons for players 27 and under. Fox's rookie year is 80th on the list. LaVine's is 82nd. Look at the list and tell me how many great players are on this list? It's full of busts, guys that never even got close to their potential and career role players. It's not impossible for a guy on this list to become an outlier and actually wind up being a good player in the future, but the odds are really low. The odds are very low for just Fox to become a good player but now people want to add another player from this list to the Kings? Now the odds are exponentially low. Try going to the next page and taking a look. Again, it's full of bad players with a couple decent players sprinkled in.

LaVine's metrics are not good. Even for a bad team. He does not play winning basketball and even a career year for him is equal to about an average starter on an average team. His athleticism and numbers are eye opening but his actual effect on basketball games is nil.

Wow! Jakar Sampson and Mateen Cleves (remember him?) were better then both Fox and LaVine!

ESP47 · Jul 5, 2018

rosa u podne said:

VORP takes into account a players towel waving skills so Mateen's stats are a little misleading

Ozymandias · Jul 5, 2018

ESP47 said:

You're right bruh. De'Aaron Fox was awful.

15points 6assists 3 turnovers and 4 boards per 36 minutes for a 19 year old rookie is awful.

should've been much higher.

22 points, 9 assists, 3 turnovers and 6 boards per 36 is a much more reasonable expectation for a rookie.

Horace Grant in 91-92 posted one of the better VORP #'s you'll see from the qualifications you listed too... Color me a non-believer of this stat as some great infallible indicator.

Ozymandias · Jul 5, 2018

ESP47 said:

Do you recognize that season where CP3 was robbed of the MVP by Kobe as one of the best you've seen? His VORP that season is the only one 10.0 or above not by Jordan or LeBron.

Blob · Jul 5, 2018

Mass said:

If you are going to make an assessment of LaVine solely on 24 games after an ACL, of course you pass. Of course Bulls fans are going to have negative sentiment. He shot 50% TS over this span. This is losing basketball unless you are DPOY on the other end. LaVine was 58% TS in 50 games before his injury and boosted his scoring from 14 PPG to 19 PPG. His assist rate was 19%. These are winning numbers if you can get it together defensively. Boggy had a 18% assist rate last year, who I think is a nifty and selfless passer. LaVine is right there with him in willingness and ability to deliver dimes. With a 1-2-3 of Fox-Boggy-LaVine you have guys who are going to make it easy for our 4-5 whether Giles-Bagley or Skal-Willie. The pick and roll and lob game is going to be formidable no matter who has the ball. It gives you a lot of options and keeps defense on their toes.

If you don't think LaVine can play SF then excluding him from consideration is logical. What is the argument for this by the way? He's too small? He has not played the SF with Wolves or Bulls? I don't find those substantive or compelling arguments. I think it is lazy conventional thinking. The biggest question to me is whether he is destined to be a lousy defender or can he become solid and formidable there? He turned 23 three months ago, he's not a finished product. It's not a slam dunk case to throw this guy a 4 year contract 15M - 20M but it is not as dismissive of an idea as some like Carl are making it out to be. The rebel in me wants to see it happen so Carl, Sactown Royalty and others will lose their collective minds.

Gguod · Jul 5, 2018

Ozymandias said:

Good question, why not just buy lottery tickets in free agency? Well lets compare these situations. If you buy a lottery ticket (1st round pick) by taking in lets say 28mil/2years worth of salary, you absorb the first year of it while you wont win anyway so the opportunity cost is pretty low. Then you get your lottery ticket with 4 years in a rookie scale contract while you have 14 mil/1year left of the bad salary. Its basically free to let go that lottery ticket if he doesnt pan out. If he pans out, you get a good player in a 4 year very cheap team friendly deal that is a)valuable tradeable asset and b)helps with the roster construct because of the low caphold. Also after four years he will be a restricted free agent so you can most likely retain him for at least 7-8 years if you want to.

If you buy lottery ticket Zach Lavine, you probably would have to spend 4/70-80mil since he is a restricted fa correct? You are basically in a situation where if it pans out, he lives up to that contract and cobtributes as you wanted. On the other hand if it doesnt pan out, you are holding a 4/75 untradeable contract that will make it harder to build a competitive team once the rookie deals start to expire. Also if he pans out, he still has that 19mil/year salary compared to ~5mil to a rookie "lottery ticket". Thats 13million more to gain assets.

You can get assets in free agency too but there is a reason why draft picks are so valuable. They have basically zero risk and if they pan out the upside is huge since they are locked in on rookie contracts.

Ozymandias said:

If you want to discuss Lavine, you probably should addres his bad metrics stated by couple of posters here. Its easy to look at highlight tapes and I agree, he has a lot of raw talent. Those low rpm and vorp metrics are obviously worrying and to me the answer isnt "those metrics doesnt mean anything". They indicate something and if you know why he is one of the outliers that rpm and vorp cannot evaluate correctly at all, then I'd very much like to hear it.

Lavine isnt a bad player. He has a place in the league for many years and for the right price he would have a place on this team. But to me, he hasnt shown he is worth 4/80mil. He already laughed at 4/60 so its clear we wont get him with a price that I would be comfortable with.

Showtime · Jul 5, 2018

Ozymandias said:

Wrong. It's forward thinking, proactive, net positive moves that adds VALUE to the future strategies of the team instead of not providing value to the franchise via adding a player like Lavine.

Because Lavine isn't that guy. We aren't talking about a second year player here that can prove himself but isn't in the right situation. We are talking about a guy who provides nothing that we don't already have on the perimeter who will take minutes AWAY from developing talent all the while eating up more cap space while entering his fifth season coming off an injury who is a defensive red carpet.

Lavine doesn't help the team. Using cap on him doesn't help the team. Using cap to acquire assets helps the team. One way helps, the other doesn't. I'm for helping the team put themselves in a better position for the future.

Doesn't make any sense to sign a guy who isn't going to improve and take away minutes from other players that can do the exact same thing he will do with the Kinds while adding nothing to the future development or team flexibility.

Blob · Jul 5, 2018

206Fan said:

Anyone who does not recognize the future stardom of Fox discredits themselves. Fox will be more of a franchise player than Boogie ever was. He is going to be a 20+ PPG scorer and multiple time all-star. Those differing in opinion are likely SG DSJ and Lonzo Bust Fans or simply do not recognize all of the boxes De'Aaron checks. Fox is more mature at 20 than Boogie at 28. He's smarter more poised and more natural leader. "But....but....the three point shot?!??!" Fox had moments of brilliance against guys 10-20 pounds heavier than him. That disadvantage is being narrow or eliminated with Fox adding 6-7 pounds of muscle so far this summer. His combination of speed, fundamentals and increased strength is going to terrorize the league.

One reason his advanced numbers don't look good is because the Kings were a TERRIBLE team. The Kings point differential was historically bad much of the year. Their offense and defense rating was dead last much, a feat never accomplished since the stats have been compiled over two decades. We may have finished 30th in defense and 30th in offense if a handful of teams did not intentionally try to lose! This is the context critics say look at VORP, his WARP, his DORK or whatever nerd stat they want to pull that is a derivation of the box score. Advanced stats have their place but it is easy to misuse and abuse to support a predetermined narrative. It is easy to go on a data mining exploration and strike "gold".

Back in the day Anthony Davis or Kevin Durant had the worst plus / minus in the league and critics said "overrated"! In a couple of years those citing De'Aaron's poor rookie numbers are going to look just as foolish.

Kingsfan23 · Jul 5, 2018

I think Woj was just restating Bulls beat writer garbage with inconclusivity but I won’t be happy

The notion is insulting to Buddy/Bogdan. Buddy who shown plenty at the end of last season to be a super efficient 18/5/3 type player improving on both ends

LaVine post injury is a bad player. Even if we didn’t have two better SGs on the roster, you still don’t handcuff yourself to a player who may never be solid post injury again

Capt. Factorial · Jul 5, 2018

Blob said:

It never fails to amaze me that people continue to use the "DORK" (etc.) argument against advanced stats without recognizing that not only is it the single worst argument against advanced stats in the world but that it also makes the reader completely tune out any other potentially valid points that might have been made alongside it.

Kingster · Jul 5, 2018

I want people to watch this video and ask themselves: Is it possible that Zach Lavine could be better than either Bogs or Hield? In particular, watch who is guarding him. Possible? Impossible? Are you certain that Bogs and Hield are better? How certain? I'm not certain at all that Bogs and Hield are better. As I write this, if I had to make a guess, I'd say LaVine is better than both of them. If he is better, do we not want him?

Kingsfan23 · Jul 5, 2018

Kingster said:

One game, most of the time he was impacting negatively with his horrible efficiency/advanced stats barely able to get to the whole with limited athleticism

The stats say Buddy/Bogdan we’re better last year, and Buddy much better as he ended the season on a tear

If we are even arguing the issue of whether or not a major injury risk is better than two pieces we already have it means we have other needs IMO

LaVine wasn’t a strong impact player even pre-injury. Though hyped which many here appreciate. How about showing any number of Hields final fourth of the season games? Is the grass always greener? Do people not have confidence in him?

kingsboi · Jul 5, 2018

Blob said:

Anyone who does not recognize the future stardom of Fox discredits themselves. Fox will be more of a franchise player than Boogie ever was. He is going to be a 20+ PPG scorer and multiple time all-star. Those differing in opinion are likely SG DSJ and Lonzo Bust Fans or simply do not recognize all of the boxes De'Aaron checks. Fox is more mature at 20 than Boogie at 28. He's smarter more poised and more natural leader. "But....but....the three point shot?!??!" Fox had moments of brilliance against guys 10-20 pounds heavier than him. That disadvantage is being narrow or eliminated with Fox adding 6-7 pounds of muscle so far this summer. His combination of speed, fundamentals and increased strength is going to terrorize the league.

One reason his advanced numbers don't look good is because the Kings were a TERRIBLE team. The Kings point differential was historically bad much of the year. Their offense and defense rating was dead last much, a feat never accomplished since the stats have been compiled over two decades. We may have finished 30th in defense and 30th in offense if a handful of teams did not intentionally try to lose! This is the context critics say look at VORP, his WARP, his DORK or whatever nerd stat they want to pull that is a derivation of the box score. Advanced stats have their place but it is easy to misuse and abuse to support a predetermined narrative. It is easy to go on a data mining exploration and strike "gold".

Back in the day Anthony Davis or Kevin Durant had the worst plus / minus in the league and critics said "overrated"! In a couple of years those citing De'Aaron's poor rookie numbers are going to look just as foolish.

Don't hate on my boy Dennis, he is going to be a stud.

Kingster · Jul 5, 2018

Kingsfan23 said:

One game, most of the time he was impacting negatively with his horrible efficiency/advanced stats barely able to get to the whole with limited athleticism

The stats say Buddy/Bogdan we’re better last year, and Buddy much better as he ended the season on a tear

If we are even arguing the issue of whether or not a major injury risk is better than two pieces we already have it means we have other needs IMO

LaVine wasn’t a strong impact player even pre-injury. Though hyped which many here appreciate. How about showing any number of Hields final fourth of the season games? Is the grass always greener? Do people not have confidence in him?

He was barely able to get the basket against Temple, Hield, Bogs, and Fox? Hmmm....

Blob · Jul 5, 2018

Kingster said:

I want people to watch this video and ask themselves: Is it possible that Zach Lavine could be better than either Bogs or Hield? In particular, watch who is guarding him. Possible? Impossible? Are you certain that Bogs and Hield are better? How certain? I'm not certain at all that Bogs and Hield are better. As I write this, if I had to make a guess, I'd say LaVine is better than both of them. If he is better, do we not want him?

He's the same size as Justin Jackson. If Justin Jackson is a SF then so is LaVine.

Kingster · Jul 5, 2018

Blob said:

I'm glad you pointed that out. LaVine isn't small. He definitely looks taller than Bogs.

Gguod · Jul 5, 2018

Blob said:

Well.. not quite

Lavine
6-6
6-10 wingspan
185lbs

Jj
6-8
6-11 wingspan
210lbs

funkykingston · Jul 5, 2018

Blob said:

Strictly speaking that's not true.

Based on combine measurements JJ is 1.25" taller, has a 3" longer wingspan and a 4.5" greater standing reach.

He also came out 20lbs heavier but was significantly older as a draftee. LaVine looks to have added weight and strength while Jackson doesn't appear to have gained significant muscle since being drafted.

Sac.Kings · Jul 5, 2018

I would love to get LaVine on this roster. He's young, uber athletic, and can play. He's been inconsistent, but when he's on he's a star in the making. He just needs guidance and needs to be held accountable for mistakes and whatnot.

If someone told me a year ago we could have Fox, Bagley, Giles, Bogs, Buddy and LaVine to start this season, I'd have laughed myself to death. It's possible.

Another guy I love is Smart, but that's for another thread.

burekijogurt · Jul 5, 2018

Kingster said:

The player in this video shot 50% from the field and 50% from three. Zach Lavine career percentages are 43% and 37%. My gut says we don't want him but cannot claim with certainty it would be a bad move to get him...

Mike · Jul 5, 2018

Showtime said:

Boston got lucky that the Nets trade didn't work out as the Nets planned otherwise those picks would not have been as valuable as they were. Had the Nets been good the Celtics wouldn't have draft Jaylen Brown, they wouldn't have been able to sell the top pick in 2017 to Philly to get the third pick and our pick in 2019, and they wouldn't have had the 2018 Nets pick to include the Kyrie trade.

Philly gutted their roster and lost to increase their odds and the other picks they gained were useful but didn't end up being high value picks. They got aided by this team's stupidity with the salary dump pick swap.

Which team's pick are we going to get?

The Lakers want to dump Deng but that's likely to be a pick in the 20s, not the lottery unless they are terrible next season.

The Knicks want to dump Noah but they aren't giving us their pick in 2019 or any first rounders because they are smart.

As for other possible salary dumps we are typically talking about play off teams wanting to clear space to sign someone else or avoid the tax. Maybe OKC will send us Melo and a pick, but again it's not really a high value pick we'll get.

Showtime said:

My post clearly stated next year 30 win range, 19/20 aim for .500, 20/21 winning season and playoff contender. That timeline would be Fox's fourth season, Bagley's third, Giles's third, and Lavine's seventh. Our young core would be heading towards new contract time and some would be in their prime years. Plus with the cap space we have we can target additions in 2019 or 2020 to boost our chances.

Showtime said:

Lavine has played 4 seasons to Fox's one. Both players primes will be in a similar time frame. It's not like we are looking to sign Michael Beasley to a contract.

Those assets are likely to be late first round picks at best. The teams likely to be in the lottery aren't likely to want to give up their picks. Sure we should collect assets but let's not lose and tank on the way. Stay competitive and build a positive culture.

Showtime said:

This team needs to build a positive culture and get out of this losing habit as soon as possible. We've potentially got our point guard in Fox, or power forward in Bagley, and we have other young upside players like Buddy, Bogdanovic, Willie, Giles and anyone else we bring on board. Do we still need to improve at certain positions? Of course we do, but we don't need to tank or have high end picks to do that. If Utah and Denver can rebuild without top picks, we should be able to fill the remaining holes on this roster without resorting to more prolonged losing.

Showtime · Jul 5, 2018

Lavine adds nothing to the team. There's literally no net gain by this signing. Winning a handful more games (best case scenario) due to signing him for 15+ mil a season is not a cultural revolution. It is simply a poor decision.

And I don't understand why tanking is brought up. Nobody is talking about tanking. What we're talking about is the reality that this team isn't very good right now, and won't be until their key players establish themselves in the league, which typically happens by their third or fourth seasons. Until that point, this team is a lottery team. You don't have to tank to be bad. Learn to accept that.

dude12 · Jul 5, 2018

Lavine would help take pressure off our rookie bigs. Pushes Bogi to SF and JJ off bench. Pushes Mason to 3 rd string.

Fox, Lavine, Bogi
Bogi, Hield, JJ
Fox, Hield, Lavine

VF21 · Jul 5, 2018

dude12 said:

Yeah, but that renews the old argument about whether or not Bogs can/should play SF.

dude12 · Jul 5, 2018

VF21 said:

Upgrades the roster. I think Bogi is tough enough to play it and versus some teams, he probably out toughs there small ball 3 guard lineup.

UPDATE: Bulls match offer sheet for Zach LaVine (NEW Poll)

What's your take on the 4/78 offer to Zach LaVine?

Great

Good but Chicago will match

Meh

Bad but Chicago will match

Horrible, too much money

Horrible, we don't need him

Other

Good

Bad

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star

Hall of Famer

Bench

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star

Starter

Bench

Starter

Starter

All-Star

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est

Hall of Famer

All-Star

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Starter

Hall of Famer

Bench

Super Moderator

All-Star

Starter

Bench

Starter

Hall of Famer

Super Moderator Emeritus

Hall of Famer