lol Jim Boylen

knoxville7

Master of karate and friendship for everyone
4,252
1,051
70
My favorite teams
Chicago Cubs Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Tennessee Volunteers
Nah, Knicks and Kings are worse. But I will concede to you Bulls are bottom-5, perhaps bottom-3.

I also agree with you that many fans and posters significantly overvalue the quality of this roster.
Just Lauri really...he’s the only one I thought would be better than he has been to this point. The rest of the roster is what it is...and many of them are hurt.

Wendell - a solid rim defender...a guy that’ll get you 12 and 10 a night
Otto - an injury prone and overpaid guy, but when healthy he does help space the floor with solid shooting and he provides length at the 3 spot defensively.
Zach - a borderline all star that can take over a game and win it for you.
Dunn - a crap shooter, turnover prone...does play defense doe
Satoransky - a decent player that would be a nice 7th or 8th man on a contending team, but has no real business starting at PG
Coby - 19 year old still trying to figure things out. Has the potential to be the first guard off the bench that can score in bunches...however, he is not ever going to be a PG
Gafford - a nice backup center that can protect the rim and alter shots

The rest isn’t even worth going into really...mostly scrubs...
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
6,923
3,664
70
Just Lauri really...he’s the only one I thought would be better than he has been to this point. The rest of the roster is what it is...and many of them are hurt.

Wendell - a solid rim defender...a guy that’ll get you 12 and 10 a night
Otto - an injury prone and overpaid guy, but when healthy he does help space the floor with solid shooting and he provides length at the 3 spot defensively.
Zach - a borderline all star that can take over a game and win it for you.
Dunn - a crap shooter, turnover prone...does play defense doe
Satoransky - a decent player that would be a nice 7th or 8th man on a contending team, but has no real business starting at PG
Coby - 19 year old still trying to figure things out. Has the potential to be the first guard off the bench that can score in bunches...however, he is not ever going to be a PG
Gafford - a nice backup center that can protect the rim and alter shots

The rest isn’t even worth going into really...mostly scrubs...
I honestly do not believe they have even one player on the roster that would start for a title contending team. Zach and Wendell are super-subs on a great team, not starters.
 

Raskolnikov

Well-known member
16,570
4,863
85
I honestly do not believe they have even one player on the roster that would start for a title contending team. Zach and Wendell are super-subs on a great team, not starters.
I feel that Zach and Lauri could be starters for a good team not built around them. Give them 2 superstars and you'd be lucky to have them both. Zach more than Lauri can be a coveted third scorer, but as a top 2 it isn't good enough.
 

knoxville7

Master of karate and friendship for everyone
4,252
1,051
70
My favorite teams
Chicago Cubs Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Tennessee Volunteers
I honestly do not believe they have even one player on the roster that would start for a title contending team. Zach and Wendell are super-subs on a great team, not starters.
I know you don’t, bud. We will never agree on Zach. The guy is easily a #2 option on a good team IMO. Imagine if Zach had a guy like AD to play with...A roster like this...

Carter
AD
Otto
Zach
And a legit actual PG

To me, that’s a starting 5 that could actually contend. I know you don’t think so, though.

At the end of the day, the only real disagreement we have on the roster is the quality of Zach lavine. I’m not sure what else the guy has to do to prove he’s a quality starter to you. Not to sound like a dick, but have you been watching all the bulls games this year? I just can’t help but feel that you’re basing your opinion of Zach on his past years of playing ball...possibly a lot of which coming from his 1 year at UCLA, I know you’re a Cali guy lol
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
6,696
3,804
70
My favorite teams
Chicago Cubs Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Chicago Blackhawks
I honestly do not believe they have even one player on the roster that would start for a title contending team. Zach and Wendell are super-subs on a great team, not starters.
Zach can score but is a defensive turnstyle, Wendell would be a decent #6, horrid coaching and youth make Coby a tough call at this point, while he's added a bit of bulk Lauri needs to turn his workout scheme up a notch and of course Otto....always liked his game but he's never available. That's your rebuild....I mean a new franchise could put together a better group via an entry draft. Just ridiculous how lame the Bull's front office is....yet no heads roll.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
6,923
3,664
70
I know you don’t, bud. We will never agree on Zach. The guy is easily a #2 option on a good team IMO. Imagine if Zach had a guy like AD to play with...A roster like this...

Carter
AD
Otto
Zach
And a legit actual PG

To me, that’s a starting 5 that could actually contend. I know you don’t think so, though.

At the end of the day, the only real disagreement we have on the roster is the quality of Zach lavine. I’m not sure what else the guy has to do to prove he’s a quality starter to you. Not to sound like a dick, but have you been watching all the bulls games this year? I just can’t help but feel that you’re basing your opinion of Zach on his past years of playing ball...possibly a lot of which coming from his 1 year at UCLA, I know you’re a Cali guy lol
I base my assessment of Zack on his inability and unwillingness to play D. And he's a volume scorer, albeit a good one, but that trait that isn't highly coveted in the NBA.

Forget what you or I think about him, the market has spoken. No one wanted to touch him at $20 million per season other than 2 of the 3 most retarded and desperate franchises in the NBA. At the time I think he was 22 years old, and if teams didn't think he was worth $20/per at that age than he is not a star player, period. Objective measurement.
 

Raskolnikov

Well-known member
16,570
4,863
85
I would add that Zach has one of the worst basketball IQ's I have ever seen play the game. He is lucky he rarely see's the playoffs or big games because his mistakes would make the media.

Solidly a #3. He can be Chris Bosh without the defense. He would have been a good #3 for Lebron due to the scoring.

AD, Lebron, Lavine....

Is the type of #3 he is, where they play defense and rebound.

Or Paul, Gobert, Lavine (would love to see Lavine get an easy bucket sometime?!)


Something like that. One of the issues is the Bulls have no piece building vision. Our complimentary pieces don't add anything, its just more waves of players that don't fit in a scheme you can't see, bad decisions, no accountability...

Lavine can sure score alot on a team that can't create easy buckets.
 

knoxville7

Master of karate and friendship for everyone
4,252
1,051
70
My favorite teams
Chicago Cubs Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Tennessee Volunteers
I base my assessment of Zack on his inability and unwillingness to play D. And he's a volume scorer, albeit a good one, but that trait that isn't highly coveted in the NBA.

Forget what you or I think about him, the market has spoken. No one wanted to touch him at $20 million per season other than 2 of the 3 most retarded and desperate franchises in the NBA. At the time I think he was 22 years old, and if teams didn't think he was worth $20/per at that age than he is not a star player, period. Objective measurement.
Zach wasn’t the same player at age 22 that he is today. If he hit the open market after this season, he would certainly command more than 20 mil per year. The fact the bulls got him on what looks to be a great contract now does not prove he is not a star player. Very few guys are star players at age 22, so I’m not really seeing your point there. I think it’s fair to say there’s only around 20 players better in the league as of TODAY at most, and of those there’s only like 5-10 guys that would be considered true franchise altering players. So making the claim Zach could easily be some Batman’s robin is not a far fetched idea.

His defense has improved this season...not saying he’s a great defender by any means...but he has gotten better. Not to mention it’s hard to have to put forth the offensive effort to give this crap team a chance to win games, while still maintaining enough energy to play defense at a high level on the other end.

I’m still guessing you haven’t watched many bulls games this year, and that’s leading you to make assessments on him based on back when he was like 22 years old...not based on his actual play from this season...I could be wrong, but it definitely seems that way.
 

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
6,923
3,664
70
Zach wasn’t the same player at age 22 that he is today. If he hit the open market after this season, he would certainly command more than 20 mil per year. The fact the bulls got him on what looks to be a great contract now does not prove he is not a star player. Very few guys are star players at age 22, so I’m not really seeing your point there. I think it’s fair to say there’s only around 20 players better in the league as of TODAY at most, and of those there’s only like 5-10 guys that would be considered true franchise altering players. So making the claim Zach could easily be some Batman’s robin is not a far fetched idea.

His defense has improved this season...not saying he’s a great defender by any means...but he has gotten better. Not to mention it’s hard to have to put forth the offensive effort to give this crap team a chance to win games, while still maintaining enough energy to play defense at a high level on the other end.

I’m still guessing you haven’t watched many bulls games this year, and that’s leading you to make assessments on him based on back when he was like 22 years old...not based on his actual play from this season...I could be wrong, but it definitely seems that way.
You think far more of his abilities than I ever will, and that's fine. And I can only allocate so much of my time to watching an unwatchable team, but I follow closely enough.

A quick search on NBA Real Plus-Minus places Zach at 111th in the NBA, sure it's only one metric but that's not a Robin to a Batman stat by a longshot.

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm
 

knoxville7

Master of karate and friendship for everyone
4,252
1,051
70
My favorite teams
Chicago Cubs Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Tennessee Volunteers
You think far more of his abilities than I ever will, and that's fine. And I can only allocate so much of my time to watching an unwatchable team, but I follow closely enough.

A quick search on NBA Real Plus-Minus places Zach at 111th in the NBA, sure it's only one metric but that's not a Robin to a Batman stat by a longshot.

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm
K so, you haven’t watched many games, yet you’re commenting on Zach’s abilities of the present....cmon racer, you’re better than that. I get you have your mind made up on him from past years, but at least acknowledge the guy is still just 24 years old and has gotten better every year(a quick search will show you that).

To take a plus/minus stat on an individual player playing on a garbage team and make that some sort of determining factor as to the quality of the individual player is just asinine and you know it. By that metric, Daniel Theis is currently the 18th best player in the league. Now, we both know he isn’t...the reason he ranks that high is because he plays on a good Celtics team. Plus/minus is a horrible way to judge an individual, when it takes having 4 other competent players on the court with you.

How about looking at something like VORP(value over replacement player)?
In VORP Zach has a 1.7, which ranks him as the 21st most valuable player this season in the league. So, when I say there’s about 20 guys better than him in the league it’s actually pretty factual
 
Last edited:

RacerX

Silicon Valley CA Bears H
6,923
3,664
70
I know you don’t, bud. We will never agree on Zach. The guy is easily a #2 option on a good team IMO. Imagine if Zach had a guy like AD to play with...A roster like this...

Carter
AD
Otto
Zach
And a legit actual PG
Also, btw, if you add AD plus a legit starting caliber player to any team's biggest positional weakness, of course they will compete. That statement holds true for 32 NBA teams, pretty low bar IMO.
 

knoxville7

Master of karate and friendship for everyone
4,252
1,051
70
My favorite teams
Chicago Cubs Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Tennessee Volunteers
Please link the VORP, and where did you get the Daniel Theis reference from?

Scroll the to the end and click VORP to put them in order. The basketball version of WAR

The Daniel Theis reference came from looking over the plus/minus stats you linked. Just pointing out how garbage plus/minus is for judging individual players.
 

Gustavus Adolphus

Shoe Salesman of the Year
Donator
29,159
18,650
105
My favorite teams
Chicago White Sox Chicago Bulls Chicago Bears Chicago Blackhawks Nebraska Cornhuskers, Villanova Wildcats
You think far more of his abilities than I ever will, and that's fine. And I can only allocate so much of my time to watching an unwatchable team, but I follow closely enough.

A quick search on NBA Real Plus-Minus places Zach at 111th in the NBA, sure it's only one metric but that's not a Robin to a Batman stat by a longshot.

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm
It's funny, I heard on the radio today that Kobe was the last superstar in the old NBA. An isolation player that felt it was better he take a contested shot when he's shooting 3/13 for the night, then passing to an open teammate who might be shooting 11/12 that night. I feel like that is who Zach Levine thinks he is, but he is most certainly not.

I'll disagree with you on Wendell being a "super-sub" I think he's a great frontcourt player who starts on a good team. He's just unfortunate to be on a bad team.
 
Top