The 'difficulty' in the Bulls trading LaVine isn't entirely on LaVine

never forget: the Bulls are cheap and shortsighted. That can also make a market 'barren'

What have we learned in the two games where LaVine (and to a much much much lesser extent, Vucevic) returned to the Bulls?

As expected, since they were playing the Hornets B-squad: absolutely nothing.

Zach LaVine isn't rescuing anything

Both LaVine and Vuc came off the bench in these two games, which was extra strange in the 2nd game as all other banged-up members of the team were available as well. With an appropriately preseason mindset, Billy Donovan had 10 players in the game before 10 minutes had passed.

““HAY!”

Ultimately they won both games, though played terribly in the second one on Monday. In that one, they did not achieve ultimate hilarity where they were using the reformed Mid-3 in clutch time and choking away the game. They merely allowed it to be tied, with the Hornets having a chance to win. And since they were the Hornets (and backup versions, at that) they did not get the win in regulation and quickly rolled over in OT.

LaVine hasn’t looked too good: not very productive and playing a bit too passively. I’ve seen anecdotal praise for his defense…he did a good job defending that final Hornets attempt in regulation.

Anecdotally, I’ve seen some same old Bulls: LaVine standing, Vuc complaining.

Why was Zach even in the game for a defensive possession? Or the final few minutes and OT? The answer to that is illustrative of what a weird position the Bulls are in until the trade deadline. They feel they ‘have’ to play LaVine a lot to try and salvage some trade value, even if it’s at the expense of the season or development of other players.

That didn’t matter in these two games, and the schedule is fairly soft for the next couple weeks, but it’ll be an annoying interregnum.

As I said on the cusp of LaVine’s return, I don’t think his market sees any material difference based off of how he plays now. It can only go down if he gets hurt again. That market rests on other teams’ desperation when looking at their season goals, plus how the Bulls front office sees themselves in context of their own goals (allowing the East to be so terrible for the 25th season in a row that they are in da hunt for the postseason).

And another factor that I believe has gone undermentioned, in that it always needs to be mentioned: the Bulls being cheap.

I still think LaVine is ‘worth’ his salary. But many suitors for him wouldn’t just have to pay that salary, but additional tax penalties. And for multiple years. Similarly, if thinking without this context, one can understand the Bulls not paying the Luxury Tax for this ultimately mid squad. But if they were willing to do so allowing them to take back more salary in a LaVine trade, it'd improve his trade market.

We can safely assume the Bulls won’t spend more now to improve their current or future outlook. That’s why they haven’t used their cap exceptions either. It’s an embarrassment of shortsighted thinking, and a reason to not sign LaVine to that max extension in the first place, but that’s how they operate.

So without offering that incentive to suitors to trade for LaVine, it’s not some ‘biased narrative’ of LaVine’s career that is holding back a deal but the Bulls being self-deluded and unreasonable. They won’t take back bad players or multi-year contracts to get better assets, because assets don’t get them in the playoffs play-in this year. They’re not going to use Alex Caruso as a sweetener on their end, for the same reason. So they want competent players who are ALSO cheaper…oh and another goal is to not offend a star (?) by sending him somewhere he doesn’t want to go.

Is a LaVine trade to the Lakers inevitable?

It would probably be a fun exercise to go into every suitor more deeply, and there probably will be time for that. But just a cursory look based off of rumor-ing suggests that the Lakers or Warriors would only offer bad multi-year salary if they even get to the point of wanting to commit to include a first round pick or ‘good young player’ (Kuminga, Reaves).

That hopefully would be enough for the Bulls, but remember the money: they could instead value the present-day play and cap flexibility versus the asset. Like instead they’d prefer taking expiring-salary-and-not-harmful role players from, say, the Pistons or Hornets, but lowering the ask on the pick or prospect.

No matter their desires in a trade return, I hope the Bulls are motivated to get a deal done at any cost. It makes my eye twitch when I hear Bulls media partners say “change is coming…well, either at the deadline or the offseason”. No! This has to resolve this year, standing pat would be just as bad as tanking in that it throws away a season waiting for the next step.

I think the Bulls can make a good rebuild trade or a good re-tool trade. It’s clear they do not want to do the former, and that’s fine as long as they are consistent and competent with that philosophy. They haven’t been so far, and it’d be more of the same if they do a bad (yet money-saving) deal or no deal at all. They could do a ‘blah’ deal and it’d be marked improvement from this team, at least it’d confirm that they realize this is a ‘blah’ situation that needs immediate change.