Potential Zach Trade Partners? Playoff Edition.

[MrSparkle]

Whoever lost the first round, the troubling thing for AKME should be the realization that Zach, Demar and Coby are nowhere near the 1st option on every team eliminated…. Besides for the Heat, who were missing their #1 (and blew us out anyway) and the Pelicans missing their #1 (who would def be our best player).

The talent gap is enormous- not some optimistic development nor a FA signing away. Incredulous that we’ll be doubling down on Vuc and co. If defense is our calling card, then I don’t see Vuc defending as well as Wendell or Valanciunas.

I just couldn’t imagine these Bulls hanging with anybody in these playoffs besides Zion-less NOP. Clear talent gap. The swept Suns would’ve cooked us on open Fire.

And that goes for last year’s and the Bucks series teams too (short-handed, but alas). This team is bottom 10 without doing what’s needed to get a top-10 pick.

Honestly, I need a few good reasons to watch the Bulls next year. At the moment, I’m planning on checking out on Chicago basketball after the Sky season ends (not that they project that well either- new build).

Now that the “new generation” has “arrived”, it’s clear that even Zach found his 2021 form, he’s like… a top-50 player at best. If he’s not gonna bounce back, then we’ve got ourselves a LeVert/McCollum/Beal type.

[Stratmaster]

Of course, he is now unhappy here. Of course, he now would prefer to be traded. No one ever said otherwise.

Fair enough, believe it or not, I wasn't trying to get you in a "haha, got you!" moment nor was I trying to trash Zach. I thought you literally just thought something different and clearly misinterpreted your point.

My interpretation now is that you are saying Zach is would prefer to be traded and is unhappy, but that is largely due to the context of management's prior treatment of him that made us arrive at this point due to their previous shopping of him and quiet scapegoating of him.

If that's what you meant, I agree. Zach is out on the Bulls now, but the Bulls were out on him first.

Yep. With the add-on that the narrative being spread that Lavine is disgruntled, without the full context, hurts his trade value even more than it already has been devastated.

Allowing Lavine to take the black eye is cowardly, counterproductive, and shows horrible business sense.

Personally, I think it's mostly Billy's doing and to save Billy's ass. BUT... that part is just my speculation. I understand others won't agree.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

[dougthonus]

Yep. With the add-on that the narrative being spread that Lavine is disgruntled, without the full context, hurts his trade value even more than it already has been devastated.

Allowing Lavine to take the black eye is cowardly, counterproductive, and shows horrible business sense.

Personally, I think it's mostly Billy's doing and to save Billy's ass. BUT... that part is just my speculation. I understand others won't agree.

TBH, I haven't seen anything significant about Zach being disgruntled. Mainly the problem holding up his value in all the articles is people think he is expensive and doesn't impact winning. The Bulls bounce back after he went out also greatly impacted this narrative, fairly or unfairly. I have noted when discussing this that Zach was also the primary reason for the 14-9 finish last year, so don't think it is entirely fair.

I also would doubt highly that Billy would be at the front of any such rumors. Seems both counter to his personality and counter to his role.

[Stratmaster]

Yep. With the add-on that the narrative being spread that Lavine is disgruntled, without the full context, hurts his trade value even more than it already has been devastated.

Allowing Lavine to take the black eye is cowardly, counterproductive, and shows horrible business sense.

Personally, I think it's mostly Billy's doing and to save Billy's ass. BUT... that part is just my speculation. I understand others won't agree.

TBH, I haven't seen anything significant about Zach being disgruntled. Mainly the problem holding up his value in all the articles is people think he is expensive and doesn't impact winning. The Bulls bounce back after he went out also greatly impacted this narrative, fairly or unfairly. I have noted when discussing this that Zach was also the primary reason for the 14-9 finish last year, so don't think it is entirely fair.

I also would doubt highly that Billy would be at the front of any such rumors. Seems both counter to his personality and counter to his role.

I should clarify. I don't think Billy is overtly spreading anything. "The Bulls" (meaning coach and front office) have just sat back and let the narratives run their own course.

I mention Billy because he has always scapegoated Zach, and any negative narrative about Zach hindering winning is protective for him.

"The team is better without Zach" is based on a 5-14 start where Lavine didn't dress for 1 of the losses due to injury, then tried to come back from injury for 3 games (3 more losses) before going out injured long term.

The Bulls were 5-10 before he missed his first game due to injury. Zach scored 51 points in one of those losses. He had 22 points on 54% shooting with 8 rebounds and 8 assists in another loss.

20 points, 8 rebounds and 5 assists in another (the type of numbers that made most of this board declare that Coby had arrived).

Zach was not the Zach of previous seasons. But it is ridiculous to put all of the blame on him (not that you are doing that) for the poor start. The entire team was putrid.

Coby was playing 30mpg and shot horribly (39% from the field) the first 15 games.

Demar shot 43% the first 11 games before taking a game off.

Vuc took 235 shots the first 15 games after convincing Billy the offense should run through him and made 46% of them.

The Bulls, as a team, simply couldn't put the ball in the basket. And the front office and Billy said nothing when it was put on Zach because they needed an excuse. Even if it were all because of little old Zach Lavine, it was stupid of them not to try to push back on that narrative. They never did, even letting it leak that "we want to see the team without Zach" before making moves, as if the Bulls were suddenly going to be catapulted by losing their most prolific and efficient scorer.

Pure stupidity.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

[DuckIII]

I don’t believe anything the organization did has anything to do with Zach Lavine’s trade value. While I do believe the league as a whole is pretty badly miscalculating Lavine’s value as a player, and as a result someone will end up getting a really good deal for him, I’ve seen no indication at all that it’s due to perceptions regarding Lavine’s attitude.

And as I said before, there have been plenty of excellent players who threw huge crybaby **** fits on a level Lavine didn’t come anywhere near, and they still had great trade value.

If teams felt Zach was important to winning - and they should if they have the right roster - they would offer value for him. We’ll see if they do. It’s that simple.

Last season all indications were they would not, and the reason reported repeatedly was that teams didn’t think he impacted winning enough to justify his salary. Not because he wanted a trade or because he was unhappy.

[dougthonus]

I should clarify. I don't think Billy is overtly spreading anything. "The Bulls" (meaning coach and front office) have just sat back and let the narratives run their own course.

Eh, I don't think there is any meaningful way anyone fights those things while actively shopping him.

I mention Billy because he has always scapegoated Zach, and any negative narrative about Zach hindering winning is protective for him.

I don't get that impression from Billy, and if you believe what you wrote above (that they are only passively letting the narrative take shape), I'm not sure how you would have expected Billy to behave differently given that it would be weird for him to address anything around that while Zach is out unless a question was directly asked. Like did you think he would say "Hold up for a second, I don't want to discuss the game, I want to discuss this thing in ESPN about Zach not being a winning player, that's just not true!", like there is no context that would make any sense.

"The team is better without Zach" is based on a 5-14 start where Lavine didn't dress for 1 of the losses due to injury, then tried to come back from injury for 3 games (3 more losses) before going out injured long term.

I don't think that's really true. The Zach is not a winning player thing has followed him his whole career. It's based a lot more than on that 5-14 stretch at the start of the season. Whether you believe it or not is up to you, but it's definitely existed for many years now with the key points being lack of defense, poor basketball IQ, poor ball handling, and poor late game decision making.

You are right that each of the big 3 was very poor to start the season. Just using TS%, Zach was the smallest piece of the problem of the big 3 in terms of drop off from previous year. That said, TS% isn't everything, just perhaps the best all in one offensive stat I an pull from the split pages combining Oct/Nov.

Vuc: 51.4 TS% (drop of 8% from previous year) (20 games) (accounted for 2.54 ppg)
Demar: 54.3% TS% (drop of 4.9% from previous year) (18 games) (accounted for 1.68 ppg)
Zach: 56.8% TS% (drop of 3.9% from previous year) (18 games) (accounted for 1.14 ppg)

That's a total of 5.36 ppg with just those three guys shooting poorly. If you just add that 5.36 to all our games, we have 3 more wins, and the team is 8-11 which still isn't great by any stretch, but isn't abysmal given a tough opening schedule.

I think Zach got disproportionate blame for the poor start relative to what actually happened, but the narrative of his overall impact on winning extends well past that.

[Stratmaster]

I don’t believe anything the organization did has anything to do with Zach Lavine’s trade value. While I do believe the league as a whole is pretty badly miscalculating Lavine’s value as a player, and as a result someone will end up getting a really good deal for him, I’ve seen no indication at all that it’s due to perceptions regarding Lavine’s attitude.

And as I said before, there have been plenty of excellent players who threw huge crybaby **** fits on a level Lavine didn’t come anywhere near, and they still had great trade value.

If teams felt Zach was important to winning - and they should if they have the right roster - they would offer value for him. We’ll see if they do. It’s that simple.

Last season all indications were they would not, and the reason reported repeatedly was that teams didn’t think he impacted winning enough to justify his salary. Not because he wanted a trade or because he was unhappy.

I agree. It's the "not conducive to winning" label. To which neither his coach nor his front office have ever attempted to squelch.

True or not, the team should have been stomping that out from day one for their own good.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

[Stratmaster]

I should clarify. I don't think Billy is overtly spreading anything. "The Bulls" (meaning coach and front office) have just sat back and let the narratives run their own course.

Eh, I don't think there is any meaningful way anyone fights those things while actively shopping him.

I mention Billy because he has always scapegoated Zach, and any negative narrative about Zach hindering winning is protective for him.

I don't get that impression from Billy, and if you believe what you wrote above (that they are only passively letting the narrative take shape), I'm not sure how you would have expected Billy to behave differently given that it would be weird for him to address anything around that while Zach is out unless a question was directly asked. Like did you think he would say "Hold up for a second, I don't want to discuss the game, I want to discuss this thing in ESPN about Zach not being a winning player, that's just not true!", like there is no context that would make any sense.

"The team is better without Zach" is based on a 5-14 start where Lavine didn't dress for 1 of the losses due to injury, then tried to come back from injury for 3 games (3 more losses) before going out injured long term.

I don't think that's really true. The Zach is not a winning player thing has followed him his whole career. It's based a lot more than on that 5-14 stretch at the start of the season. Whether you believe it or not is up to you, but it's definitely existed for many years now with the key points being lack of defense, poor basketball IQ, poor ball handling, and poor late game decision making.

You are right that each of the big 3 was very poor to start the season. Just using TS%, Zach was the smallest piece of the problem of the big 3 in terms of drop off from previous year. That said, TS% isn't everything, just perhaps the best all in one offensive stat I an pull from the split pages combining Oct/Nov.

Vuc: 51.4 TS% (drop of 8% from previous year) (20 games) (accounted for 2.54 ppg)
Demar: 54.3% TS% (drop of 4.9% from previous year) (18 games) (accounted for 1.68 ppg)
Zach: 56.8% TS% (drop of 3.9% from previous year) (18 games) (accounted for 1.14 ppg)

That's a total of 5.36 ppg with just those three guys shooting poorly. If you just add that 5.36 to all our games, we have 3 more wins, and the team is 8-11 which still isn't great by any stretch, but isn't abysmal given a tough opening schedule.

I think Zach got disproportionate blame for the poor start relative to what actually happened, but the narrative of his overall impact on winning extends well past that.

Meh. I don't really disagree about the losing. Except that not a single team Zach was on would have been EXPECTED to even be close to .500 until Vuc, Demar and Lonzo got here.

So no, he didn't have that reputation in Minny. It would have been laughed at.

Certainly he did affect winning when he first got to Chicago. Several memorable shots and wins. But no. He certainly isn't a guy who was going to take a 22 win Bulls team (I think people forget how bad the team was when he joined them) and single-handedley make them a 2nd round playoff team. I'm really not sure what people expected.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

[PaKii94]

I don’t believe anything the organization did has anything to do with Zach Lavine’s trade value. While I do believe the league as a whole is pretty badly miscalculating Lavine’s value as a player, and as a result someone will end up getting a really good deal for him, I’ve seen no indication at all that it’s due to perceptions regarding Lavine’s attitude.

And as I said before, there have been plenty of excellent players who threw huge crybaby **** fits on a level Lavine didn’t come anywhere near, and they still had great trade value.

If teams felt Zach was important to winning - and they should if they have the right roster - they would offer value for him. We’ll see if they do. It’s that simple.

Last season all indications were they would not, and the reason reported repeatedly was that teams didn’t think he impacted winning enough to justify his salary. Not because he wanted a trade or because he was unhappy.

I agree. It's the "not conducive to winning" label. To which neither his coach nor his front office have ever attempted to squelch.

True or not, the team should have been stomping that out from day one for their own good.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

So you wanted the FO to lie? But you are right, FO propaganda is a part of the game. There wasn't really a big moment where they could have addressed it. The lavine "not really a winner" label is more from the public than from the media. If other FOs don't believe he's conducive to winning then that's because of analytics not because of what the FO have or have not put out

[Rose2Boozer]

So, Detroit and Orlando are looking like the leading candidates for Lavine?

[dougthonus]

Meh. I don't really disagree about the losing. Except that not a single team Zach was on would have been EXPECTED to even be close to .500 until Vuc, Demar and Lonzo got here.

So no, he didn't have that reputation in Minny. It would have been laughed at.

Certainly he did affect winning when he first got to Chicago. Several memorable shots and wins. But no. He certainly isn't a guy who was going to take a 22 win Bulls team (I think people forget how bad the team was when he joined them) and single-handedley make them a 2nd round playoff team. I'm really not sure what people expected.

The non-impact on winning comes from all of the advanced stats that show him consistently having one of the worst +/-s on the team. I'm not a huge believer in +/- for many reasons, but that's really where the narrative is built from.

[jnrjr79]

I don’t believe anything the organization did has anything to do with Zach Lavine’s trade value. While I do believe the league as a whole is pretty badly miscalculating Lavine’s value as a player, and as a result someone will end up getting a really good deal for him, I’ve seen no indication at all that it’s due to perceptions regarding Lavine’s attitude.

And as I said before, there have been plenty of excellent players who threw huge crybaby **** fits on a level Lavine didn’t come anywhere near, and they still had great trade value.

If teams felt Zach was important to winning - and they should if they have the right roster - they would offer value for him. We’ll see if they do. It’s that simple.

Last season all indications were they would not, and the reason reported repeatedly was that teams didn’t think he impacted winning enough to justify his salary. Not because he wanted a trade or because he was unhappy.

I agree. It's the "not conducive to winning" label. To which neither his coach nor his front office have ever attempted to squelch.

True or not, the team should have been stomping that out from day one for their own good.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

There is nothing the organization can do to tamp down the "not conducive to winning" narrative, other than putting together a much better team around Zach. That narrative is not due to the team's treatment of him, but rather due to his on-the-court performance.

[MrSparkle]

I like the bb-ref/Hollinger GmSc (game score) stat. Seems to fit my narrative... the formula I needed to concluded Vuc stinks (even in Orlando times).

When an NBA player has a game score over 20, they usually win you games. Our record in 22/23 was 20-5 when Zach had a game score over 20. He scored efficiently, and filled the rest of the columns for those 20 games. He played a total of 77; so frankly, while the ratio isn't great, in my head, he was very directly responsible for 15 wins, which is pretty OK (worth max? No.. but certainly an impact player).. Ultimately, not a reliable, high-usage offensive option.

For comparison sake, this year D. Mitchell had 30 games over 20. Brunson had 42. (This is not even including their very strong playoff runs). Demar had 34... Jokic had 61. Dame was 27-3 this year when he was over 20 (problem is he wasn't nearly as consistent as his prior years, but that still goes to show how significantly better a struggling declined Dame is, over prime Zach).

Obviously 22/23 Zach was a pretty good player, despite flaws. I was hoping he'd improve his consistency, not decline tremendously. Injuries are injuries, but this year, his IQ/defense/ball impact was especially bad. This year he was 1-5 in his 6 games over 20 (against mostly bad teams, at that). The whole team seemed shell-shocked. His ratio of high-scoring games was high, but his impact on wins was terrible. So a team trading for him has arguments for both sides, to the gamble. If he's healthy and good to go, and buys into wherever he goes, he'd be a great player to pick up cheap. I.E. Knicks sending us #24 & 25 in this crap draft with an expiring/injured/old Bogdanovic or Randle). Or Pelicans selling AK on a McCollum swap (who is slightly worse and older than Zach)... maybe Ingram...

Anyway, Zach's overrated, but the shake-down here on both sides of having an injured malcontent overpaid player is a narrative that ultimately was the AK wrecking ball. All he can do is move Zach for one of those buy-low packages, unless he could somehow reset relations, get a healthy and motivated Zach back on the floor and drastically improve (just to return to his 21-23 level).

I don't know how many more hits AK can take. He's already done/toast. At this point, we're going on plainly stupid miracles. Coby and Ayo becoming an all-star tandem. Arturas finding the next Jokic in the 2nd round (although he hilariously doesn't even have any 2nd round picks). Lonzo coming back healthy and contributing. As I said, based on typical optimistic trajectories and odds, these would be STUPID miracles. There are currently only 3 worse builds: Phoenix, Brooklyn and Atlanta. Worse being highly subjective.

[Red8911]

I don’t believe anything the organization did has anything to do with Zach Lavine’s trade value. While I do believe the league as a whole is pretty badly miscalculating Lavine’s value as a player, and as a result someone will end up getting a really good deal for him, I’ve seen no indication at all that it’s due to perceptions regarding Lavine’s attitude.

And as I said before, there have been plenty of excellent players who threw huge crybaby **** fits on a level Lavine didn’t come anywhere near, and they still had great trade value.

If teams felt Zach was important to winning - and they should if they have the right roster - they would offer value for him. We’ll see if they do. It’s that simple.

Last season all indications were they would not, and the reason reported repeatedly was that teams didn’t think he impacted winning enough to justify his salary. Not because he wanted a trade or because he was unhappy.

I agree. It's the "not conducive to winning" label. To which neither his coach nor his front office have ever attempted to squelch.

True or not, the team should have been stomping that out from day one for their own good.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

There is nothing the organization can do to tamp down the "not conducive to winning" narrative, other than putting together a much better team around Zach. That narrative is not due to the team's treatment of him, but rather due to his on-the-court performance.

Exactly, his on court performance hasn’t been great the last couple of years. This season was by far his worst. The last time he looked really good was when he made the all star team, unfortunately he hasn’t been the same player since. This is also the reason the Bulls don’t want him anymore.

The teams treatment of him has been more than fine. First they gave him 40 million a year, just from that Zach should forever be grateful. Also Billy has always been good to Zach, never once said anything bad about him.

[sco]

I agree. It's the "not conducive to winning" label. To which neither his coach nor his front office have ever attempted to squelch.

True or not, the team should have been stomping that out from day one for their own good.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

There is nothing the organization can do to tamp down the "not conducive to winning" narrative, other than putting together a much better team around Zach. That narrative is not due to the team's treatment of him, but rather due to his on-the-court performance.

Exactly, his on court performance hasn’t been great the last couple of years. This season was by far his worst. The last time he looked really good was when he made the all star team, unfortunately he hasn’t been the same player since. This is also the reason the Bulls don’t want him anymore.

The teams treatment of him has been more than fine. First they gave him 40 million a year, just from that Zach should forever be grateful. Also Billy has always been good to Zach, never once said anything bad about him.

Good points. I believe that Zach's numbers last season were impacted by his trying to play through injury. I think this team, if the same guys returned, would be better next season. That said, no way that happens. That said, the move that would have the most beneficial impact would be finding a way to replace Vuc with a defensive C and keep Zach, but again, AK is a bit of a slimy dude and will go out of his way to avoid admitting to that mistake.

[ChettheJet]

So, Detroit and Orlando are looking like the leading candidates for Lavine?

those are the teams that seem to need a 24+ ppg scorer at the SG. Cade is the PG until he shows he can't be that guy in DET, They have Sasser and Ivey who always look good against the Bulls among the guys who they hope can step up. I still see Zach as a stopgap in DET, he can score the basketball while their current kids and new draftees get their NBA games down. Once the kids mature they can move Zach with 1 or 2 years left on his deal.

ORL has Wagner and Banchero to be their #1 and 2 stars, Suggs has potential at the PG, you would think Fultz and Anthony could provide veteran leadership at that spot. In ORL I think he becomes the #3 guy, he can spot up shoot very well if someone can get him the ball, he can get his own shot just about whenever he wants and if you look he gets quite a few assists for a scorer. He could be what the Magic need to take the next step. That said, what I don't see from Zach is leadership, either on or off the court. Not everybody can be a leader no matter how good a player he might be or how long they've been in the league, if you know that going in then it's not a problem.

There may be others who don't get talked about because they don't make a lot of noise.

[Muzbar]

So, Detroit and Orlando are looking like the leading candidates for Lavine?

Based on what exactly?

Orlando fans want nothing to do with Zachs contract, maybe their front office thinks differently, but that's one of Zachs biggest blemishes atm. Maybe Orlando takes a stab at him if they whiff on other targets (they're rumoured to have interest in Klay and Paul George).

Pistons had previous interest apparently last year, but maybe that has changed now he missed 70odd% of the season.

I still think GS is the best place for Zach, followed by Philly and Sacto. Orlando makes sense, but I don't think he'll be a first target.

[Rose2Boozer]

So, Detroit and Orlando are looking like the leading candidates for Lavine?

Based on what exactly?

Orlando fans want nothing to do with Zachs contract, maybe their front office thinks differently, but that's one of Zachs biggest blemishes atm. Maybe Orlando takes a stab at him if they whiff on other targets (they're rumoured to have interest in Klay and Paul George).

Pistons had previous interest apparently last year, but maybe that has changed now he missed 70odd% of the season.

I still think GS is the best place for Zach, followed by Philly and Sacto. Orlando makes sense, but I don't think he'll be a first target.

Detroit and Orlando can offer deals where they can eat half of Lavine's contract. The Bulls need a team that's willing and able to give us tax relief.

[Muzbar]

So, Detroit and Orlando are looking like the leading candidates for Lavine?

Based on what exactly?

Orlando fans want nothing to do with Zachs contract, maybe their front office thinks differently, but that's one of Zachs biggest blemishes atm. Maybe Orlando takes a stab at him if they whiff on other targets (they're rumoured to have interest in Klay and Paul George).

Pistons had previous interest apparently last year, but maybe that has changed now he missed 70odd% of the season.

I still think GS is the best place for Zach, followed by Philly and Sacto. Orlando makes sense, but I don't think he'll be a first target.

Detroit and Orlando can offer deals where they can eat half of Lavine's contract. The Bulls need a team that's willing and able to give us tax relief.

By eat half do you mean only have to send out half his salary for next season? In that case, yes that's true, but they still have to take on the remaining 3 years left on his deal.

Philly and San Antonio can also do that.

Pretty sure if dealt for CP3 (plus other parts) on draft night, CP3 can be released straight after, rendering his contract unguaranteed (guaranteed after 28th of June), thus providing immediate tax relief if that's the path they chose to go down.

[HomoSapien]

Keep an eye on Brandon Ingram. He’s clearly in his way out.