Potential Zach Trade Partners? Playoff Edition.

[jnrjr79]

The only team I could see trading for Zach is the Suns in exchange for Beal.

I simply cant bear to watch Zach play or coast as he did lat season...this is likely the only deal where I would firmly say NO in Lavine's case. Hopefully, we can find someone willing to take his contract but it would be challenging to say the least.

The Suns might do it, but I agree with pretty much everyone else in the thread on this - it would be dumb for the Bulls to do it. He's older, worse, higher-paid, and similarly-injured.

I continue to think trading him to a cap space team is the most likely option since the Bulls are going to want to try to avoid the tax (and I suspect they extend DeRozan). Detroit, Philly, Charlotte - I could see any of these potentially being willing to take on Zach's contract in exchange for not too much going back to the Bulls. Maaaaaybe Golden State gets desperate trying to keep things afloat around Steph in his final seasons.

Would LaVine + Vooch for Paul (expiring/waivable), Wiggins, and a 1st interest either side?

Wiggins sucks and is probably bad salary, but could be an interesting reclamation project. Paul is waivable or you could pick up his option and keep him around for Coby development purposes for a season (while potentially trading him at the deadline). The Bulls do this if they think Zach has little value, because it saves them a good chunk of salary($58M/year outbound, $24M/year inbound via Wiggins) and they get a pick.

In this scenario, GS is letting Klay walk.

[DropStep]

After the recent playoff performances, somebody that might be becoming a bit of a distressed asset before our eyes is Brandon Ingram. If we could get him in a Zach trade, or really any other way, I'd be ok with that. I believe in his talent. They're at the point where they need to extend him or try to get something for him, there are questions about how well he meshes with their roster, and it feels like he could use a change of scenery. They also need to find more minutes for Trey Murphy next year. I think he can play anywhere 2-4, and he makes 36 next year in the final year of his contract.

[madvillian]

After the recent playoff performances, somebody that might be becoming a bit of a distressed asset before our eyes is Brandon Ingram. If we could get him in a Zach trade, or really any other way, I'd be ok with that. I believe in his talent. They're at the point where they need to extend him or try to get something for him, there are questions about how well he meshes with their roster, and it feels like he could use a change of scenery. He makes 36 next year in the final year of his contract.

Good call. We need to try and make some big changes I'd welcome Ingram. Is his defense still pretty strong?

[sco]

After the recent playoff performances, somebody that might be becoming a bit of a distressed asset before our eyes is Brandon Ingram. If we could get him in a Zach trade, or really any other way, I'd be ok with that. I believe in his talent. They're at the point where they need to extend him or try to get something for him, there are questions about how well he meshes with their roster, and it feels like he could use a change of scenery. He makes 36 next year in the final year of his contract.

Good call. We need to try and make some big changes I'd welcome Ingram. Is his defense still pretty strong?

Despite the loss, his market value is not tainted. Can't see any way (short of attaching a couple 1sts) that they'd do that deal.

[Bulliever2020]

If we trade Zach before the next season, the best we are going to do is cap relief. Brandon Ingram? Cmon guys, that is an absolute pipe dream.

[Stratmaster]

Well, there are reports from K.C. Johnson that there will be activity around trading Zach this summer, not waiting until after he is back.

So you guys are reassuring me by saying there aren't any deals out there. Because the Bulls are trading the wrong guy. But the report makes it sound like that isn't the case.

He also confirms that Zach Lavine never asked the Bulls for a trade, simply agreed, after being out there on the market for some time, that he wouldn't fight their efforts. As I have been trying to explain all along but 80% of the people on here seem to insist otherwise.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

[WindyCityBorn]

The only team I could see trading for Zach is the Suns in exchange for Beal.

I simply cant bear to watch Zach play or coast as he did lat season...this is likely the only deal where I would firmly say NO in Lavine's case. Hopefully, we can find someone willing to take his contract but it would be challenging to say the least.

The Suns might do it, but I agree with pretty much everyone else in the thread on this - it would be dumb for the Bulls to do it. He's older, worse, higher-paid, and similarly-injured.

I continue to think trading him to a cap space team is the most likely option since the Bulls are going to want to try to avoid the tax (and I suspect they extend DeRozan). Detroit, Philly, Charlotte - I could see any of these potentially being willing to take on Zach's contract in exchange for not too much going back to the Bulls. Maaaaaybe Golden State gets desperate trying to keep things afloat around Steph in his final seasons.

Would LaVine + Vooch for Paul (expiring/waivable), Wiggins, and a 1st interest either side?

Wiggins sucks and is probably bad salary, but could be an interesting reclamation project. Paul is waivable or you could pick up his option and keep him around for Coby development purposes for a season (while potentially trading him at the deadline). The Bulls do this if they think Zach has little value, because it saves them a good chunk of salary($58M/year outbound, $24M/year inbound via Wiggins) and they get a pick.

In this scenario, GS is letting Klay walk.

Why the Hell would you want Wiggins? He is garbage and takes shot away from Pat in frontcourt. Hell he probably start. No thanks.

[League Circles]

Well, there are reports from K.C. Johnson that there will be activity around trading Zach this summer, not waiting until after he is back.

So you guys are reassuring me by saying there aren't any deals out there. Because the Bulls are trading the wrong guy. But the report makes it sound like that isn't the case.

He also confirms that Zach Lavine never asked the Bulls for a trade, simply agreed, after being out there on the market for some time, that he wouldn't fight their efforts. As I have been trying to explain all along but 80% of the people on here seem to insist otherwise.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

This is the exact quote from KC:

"LaVine’s representation made clear to management that LaVine---for the first time---would be open to a change of address should the losing ways continue. To be clear, LaVine never specifically asked for a trade."

That's a soft ask for a trade. Obviously. What would "fighting their efforts" possibly mean? He doesn't have a no trade clause. Zach kinda wanted out due to the losing and feeling underappreciated and had his agent essentially float the idea as a nudge. Unfortunately for both parties it didn't work. Though I still think there is a notable chance that he stays and that things work out with him in Chicago.

This situation is really hard, because offensively (and obviously defensively), the trio of Zach, Demar and Vuc just doesn't work. None of the three are probably worth a lot, but Zach is definitely worth more than Vuc who is basically just a bad contract for a low level starter, and Demar is a UFA so he's likely not worth nearly what Zach is cause it would have to be a sign and trade. And Demar is probably worth more to the Bulls on the court even if only due to durability and leadership.

I'd personally prioritize dumping Vuc before dumping Zach for sure. I think we're almost forced to re-sign Demar unfortunately (even though I'm a big fan). To me, the most obvious thing to try to do this summer is package Caruso and Vuc for somebody useful with size, and re-sign Demar and Patrick and Drummond. Caruso and Vuc for Draymond Green would be risky but solves a lot of issues IMO:

5: Drummond, Green, #11?
4: Green, Williams
3: Demar, Williams
2: Zach, Ayo
1: Coby, Ayo, Ball?

We're immediately better defensively amd get a really good playmaker as well in Green.

[Chi town]

After the recent playoff performances, somebody that might be becoming a bit of a distressed asset before our eyes is Brandon Ingram. If we could get him in a Zach trade, or really any other way, I'd be ok with that. I believe in his talent. They're at the point where they need to extend him or try to get something for him, there are questions about how well he meshes with their roster, and it feels like he could use a change of scenery. He makes 36 next year in the final year of his contract.

Good call. We need to try and make some big changes I'd welcome Ingram. Is his defense still pretty strong?

Dude plays less than Lavine!

Walking injury.

[Chi town]

Zach will get traded for salary relief and a young player. Now that these teams see how much they need shooting and a guy that can get their own shot Zach has value.

Amazing how quickly the “market” changes.

Dumb AK will resign DDR. Ensuring we stay a play in team.

[Andi Obst]

Ingram doesn't help you more than Zach does. Volume scorer on okay efficiency with no (desire to play) defense. Not a good playmaker. Terrible off-ball.

That's the type of player you try to stay away from IMO.

[Peelboy]

The good news: There are some desperate teams that might be open to actually giving up some value for Zach: LAL, maybe MKE/PHL/GSW.

The bad news: Bulls are still managed by AK, meaning they'll overdemand and miss out, or will target toolsy guys who can't actually play basketball or do things like "shoot." Or alternately target mediocre vets like Craig/Carter.

Best case scenario: they get some mid-late picks back in exchange for Zach.......then promptly use them on toolsy guys that can't shoot in hopes of developing them such that they can MAYBE be deep reserves 3 years down the line right before getting more expensive.

GOOD TIMES!!!!!

[jnrjr79]

The only team I could see trading for Zach is the Suns in exchange for Beal.

I simply cant bear to watch Zach play or coast as he did lat season...this is likely the only deal where I would firmly say NO in Lavine's case. Hopefully, we can find someone willing to take his contract but it would be challenging to say the least.

The Suns might do it, but I agree with pretty much everyone else in the thread on this - it would be dumb for the Bulls to do it. He's older, worse, higher-paid, and similarly-injured.

I continue to think trading him to a cap space team is the most likely option since the Bulls are going to want to try to avoid the tax (and I suspect they extend DeRozan). Detroit, Philly, Charlotte - I could see any of these potentially being willing to take on Zach's contract in exchange for not too much going back to the Bulls. Maaaaaybe Golden State gets desperate trying to keep things afloat around Steph in his final seasons.

Would LaVine + Vooch for Paul (expiring/waivable), Wiggins, and a 1st interest either side?

Wiggins sucks and is probably bad salary, but could be an interesting reclamation project. Paul is waivable or you could pick up his option and keep him around for Coby development purposes for a season (while potentially trading him at the deadline). The Bulls do this if they think Zach has little value, because it saves them a good chunk of salary($58M/year outbound, $24M/year inbound via Wiggins) and they get a pick.

In this scenario, GS is letting Klay walk.

Why the Hell would you want Wiggins? He is garbage and takes shot away from Pat in frontcourt. Hell he probably start. No thanks.

I don't want Wiggins. He sucks. But I think you have to be realistic about what the Bulls could actually get in return for Zach. Like, obviously Kuminga would be the guy you'd want in a swap with GS, but I have no reason to believe they'd do that.

Time to get real.

[Ice Man]

Ingram, Wiggins ... man. If that's what we're talking, let's keep Zach. Last year was a write-off but the previous years he was a useful player. Ingram is an ongoing mess and Wiggins is a 10th man who is not paid like a 10th man.

[jnrjr79]

Ingram, Wiggins ... man. If that's what we're talking, let's keep Zach. Last year was a write-off but the previous years he was a useful player. Ingram is an ongoing mess and Wiggins is a 10th man who is not paid like a 10th man.

KC says consistently in the Bulls Talk podcast that both Zach and the Bulls still very much want to move on from each other. Regardless of what we think, IMO there isn't a "let's just keep him" scenario unless the Bulls are forced to because there's not a market until he proves he's healthy.

I floated the Wiggins thing because 1) it's salary relief, to a degree, and 2) I was contemplating a pick coming to the Bulls as payment to take him.

Can the Bulls do better than Expiring salary, a Wiggins-type contract, and a pick for Zach? I'm not sure.

Their best hope is to trade him to a team with cap space who is effectively willing to just take on his contract and get it off the Bulls' books, with maybe some minor young development player(s) going out.

[Stratmaster]

Well, there are reports from K.C. Johnson that there will be activity around trading Zach this summer, not waiting until after he is back.

So you guys are reassuring me by saying there aren't any deals out there. Because the Bulls are trading the wrong guy. But the report makes it sound like that isn't the case.

He also confirms that Zach Lavine never asked the Bulls for a trade, simply agreed, after being out there on the market for some time, that he wouldn't fight their efforts. As I have been trying to explain all along but 80% of the people on here seem to insist otherwise.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

This is the exact quote from KC:

"LaVine’s representation made clear to management that LaVine---for the first time---would be open to a change of address should the losing ways continue. To be clear, LaVine never specifically asked for a trade."

That's a soft ask for a trade. Obviously. What would "fighting their efforts" possibly mean? He doesn't have a no trade clause. Zach kinda wanted out due to the losing and feeling underappreciated and had his agent essentially float the idea as a nudge. Unfortunately for both parties it didn't work. Though I still think there is a notable chance that he stays and that things work out with him in Chicago.

This situation is really hard, because offensively (and obviously defensively), the trio of Zach, Demar and Vuc just doesn't work. None of the three are probably worth a lot, but Zach is definitely worth more than Vuc who is basically just a bad contract for a low level starter, and Demar is a UFA so he's likely not worth nearly what Zach is cause it would have to be a sign and trade. And Demar is probably worth more to the Bulls on the court even if only due to durability and leadership.

I'd personally prioritize dumping Vuc before dumping Zach for sure. I think we're almost forced to re-sign Demar unfortunately (even though I'm a big fan). To me, the most obvious thing to try to do this summer is package Caruso and Vuc for somebody useful with size, and re-sign Demar and Patrick and Drummond. Caruso and Vuc for Draymond Green would be risky but solves a lot of issues IMO:

5: Drummond, Green, #11?
4: Green, Williams
3: Demar, Williams
2: Zach, Ayo
1: Coby, Ayo, Ball?

We're immediately better defensively amd get a really good playmaker as well in Green.

I don't disagree with any of this. Except, on whether Lavine asked for a trade. Again, they had already been trying to actively trade Lavine for months, and it was clear Billy didn't want him there. Lavine simply said he wouldn't fight a trade.

Whether a player of his caliber has a no-trade or not, they can dampen any trade talks by simply stating they don't want to play for the team. You going to trade for a 40 mil salary when the guy says he doesn't want to be there?

My only point is the narrative that Lavine was unhappy and "asked to be traded" or "didn't want to be in Chicago" is far, far, far from what actually happened.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

[Chi town]

Well, there are reports from K.C. Johnson that there will be activity around trading Zach this summer, not waiting until after he is back.

So you guys are reassuring me by saying there aren't any deals out there. Because the Bulls are trading the wrong guy. But the report makes it sound like that isn't the case.

He also confirms that Zach Lavine never asked the Bulls for a trade, simply agreed, after being out there on the market for some time, that he wouldn't fight their efforts. As I have been trying to explain all along but 80% of the people on here seem to insist otherwise.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

This is the exact quote from KC:

"LaVine’s representation made clear to management that LaVine---for the first time---would be open to a change of address should the losing ways continue. To be clear, LaVine never specifically asked for a trade."

That's a soft ask for a trade. Obviously. What would "fighting their efforts" possibly mean? He doesn't have a no trade clause. Zach kinda wanted out due to the losing and feeling underappreciated and had his agent essentially float the idea as a nudge. Unfortunately for both parties it didn't work. Though I still think there is a notable chance that he stays and that things work out with him in Chicago.

This situation is really hard, because offensively (and obviously defensively), the trio of Zach, Demar and Vuc just doesn't work. None of the three are probably worth a lot, but Zach is definitely worth more than Vuc who is basically just a bad contract for a low level starter, and Demar is a UFA so he's likely not worth nearly what Zach is cause it would have to be a sign and trade. And Demar is probably worth more to the Bulls on the court even if only due to durability and leadership.

I'd personally prioritize dumping Vuc before dumping Zach for sure. I think we're almost forced to re-sign Demar unfortunately (even though I'm a big fan). To me, the most obvious thing to try to do this summer is package Caruso and Vuc for somebody useful with size, and re-sign Demar and Patrick and Drummond. Caruso and Vuc for Draymond Green would be risky but solves a lot of issues IMO:

5: Drummond, Green, #11?
4: Green, Williams
3: Demar, Williams
2: Zach, Ayo
1: Coby, Ayo, Ball?

We're immediately better defensively amd get a really good playmaker as well in Green.

I don't disagree with any of this. Except, on whether Lavine asked for a trade. Again, they had already been trying to actively trade Lavine for months, and it was clear Billy didn't want him there. Lavine simply said he wouldn't fight a trade.

Whether a player of his caliber has a no-trade or not, they can dampen any trade talks by simply stating they don't want to play for the team. You going to trade for a 40 mil salary when the guy says he doesn't want to be there?

My only point is the narrative that Lavine was unhappy and "asked to be traded" or "didn't want to be in Chicago" is far, far, far from what actually happened.

Sent from my SM-S911U using RealGM mobile app

Zach certainly didn’t play like he wanted to be in Chicago during those first 20 games.

Zach checked out after hearing names in rumors and the Bulls still sucking with Billy D choosing DDR and Vuc over Zach in the offense.

Will be interesting to see if he fights a trade to DET or a team that is worse off than the Bulls. He seems like he wants to win and is fine being the 2nd or 3rd guy.

Strat what do you think will happen with Zach?

[kodo]

With all these incredibly close games, KC mentioned that executives he's talked to think Lavine is going to be easier to move. There are teams losing playoff games by just a couple of buckets and a ton of roleplayers just bricking from 3. Overall 3P% is down to 34% and a lot of teams fundamentally rely on it.

Pacers: 34%, Mavs: 32%, Denver 30%, Magic 30%, LA 29%, Cavs 28%, Pels 26%.

Lavine is still way too expensive, but it's not like there are other wasted salaries out there. Just one example, Levert + Strus + Niang. 7 ppg on 26% 3P, 8 ppg on 25% 3P, 3 ppg on 9% 3P; total: $39M.

[DropStep]

If we trade Zach before the next season, the best we are going to do is cap relief. Brandon Ingram? Cmon guys, that is an absolute pipe dream.

In October, or two years ago, it might have been. I think things are changing now, and he's likely to be on a different team a year from now, whether us or somebody else. The fact that some are calling this a pipe dream, and others are calling him an injured mess that we don't want, is exactly why we should be looking at him. He's a top talent who has had issues that make him gettable. It's worth some meetings at Bulls HQ, at least. We need a talent infusion, and he's younger than Zach and way younger than DDR.

[Red8911]

Zach is apparently ahead of schedule and will get back to playing way before the NBA season begins. Teams that are interested in him shouldn’t need to see him play games before they trade for him since this wasn’t a major surgery and they already know what he can or cannot provide for them.

Bulls are also motivated to move him ASAP and need to in order to save some cap space. KC believes Zach will most likely get traded early in the off season by July. This is looking like the most likely scenario at this point. AK didn’t even want to talk about Zach, it’s happening.

I just hope they get a solid deal out of this.AK waited too long for over a year looking for the perfect trade. He won’t get that now but anything positive l like a starter along with creating some cap space will be good enough at this point.