monsterpile wrote:I think someday in the future we will look back and be very glad we didn't trade Lavine.
The thing about Lavine is he doesn't seem clueless as much as just inexperienced. I think the odds Lavine actually reaches his potential, or most of it, are pretty high. Compare Zach to previous Wolves high draft picks like DWill and Wes "That Smile" Johnson and they really were different, DWill was just plain cluess while both he and That Smile didn't appear to care enough to work hard. We've seen pretty steady improvement from Lavine from year one to the end of year two where DWill and That Smile pretty much were the same when they left as what they were when they arrived.
To my very undiscerning basketball eye that is why I'm very reluctant to let him go. Given the history of flameouts for the Wolves you would think we'd be on the edge of our seats ready to trade for proven talent, but it's just not the same old story with Lavine IMO.
I think you make some good points. I will add that I think there is a wide gap between Lavine and D-Will/Wes when it comes to basketball skill. Wes turned out to not have much game outside of spot up shooting (and he was bad at that) and some passes here and there. D-Will had little post game was an ok ball handler (depending on what position he played), but turned out his jumper wasn't very good. Seriously those guys just aren't that skilled. Williams wasn't anywhere near as skilled as Beasely for example that was easy to see but he gave a more consistent effort and was able to stay healthy. Lavine on the other hand has shown real flashes of well above average ball handling and shooting plus he has actually shown that he can do something with his special athletic ability. He is still young at 21. He finished off a season having played most of the year at the age of 20 by putting up 14 ppg in 28 minutes and putting up pretty good shooting percentages especially from 3. In addition the times he has really flourished in both his rookie and 2nd year seasons was when he played SG. He has had some really nice stretches of good play now. Sorry to derail this thread a bit but I am really high on Lavine.
There is no reason to give away a ransom for Westbrook as some are suggesting. We'd get Westbrook for one-yes one-year and some of you are willing to give up at least three of Ricky, Dunn, Zach, Dieng or future first rounder for a lousy one year rental when we'd still have no chance to win a title. I know some of you think we'd get a commitment from Westbrook. Ha! And if he really wanted to play for us, we can wait a year and we have the cap space to sign him without giving up anyone. If we took on Westbrook eventually we'd have to trade Ricky, Zach or Dunn, but all of them should have good trade value and we could get a top 5 to 10 draft pick back in exchange.
TeamRicky wrote:There is no reason to give away a ransom for Westbrook as some are suggesting. We'd get Westbrook for one-yes one-year and some of you are willing to give up at least three of Ricky, Dunn, Zach, Dieng or future first rounder for a lousy one year rental when we'd still have no chance to win a title. I know some of you think we'd get a commitment from Westbrook. Ha! And if he really wanted to play for us, we can wait a year and we have the cap space to sign him without giving up anyone. If we took on Westbrook eventually we'd have to trade Ricky, Zach or Dunn, but all of them should have good trade value and we could get a top 5 to 10 draft pick back in exchange.
I don't disagree with your first statement, I wouldn't do the trade either for the fact Westbrook can leave, but I strongly disagree if we could get a commitment from him I think we would be dumb not to go get him because we hope that Lavine and Dunn become special (I am high on Lavine and I am coming around on Dunn)
TeamRicky wrote:There is no reason to give away a ransom for Westbrook as some are suggesting. We'd get Westbrook for one-yes one-year and some of you are willing to give up at least three of Ricky, Dunn, Zach, Dieng or future first rounder for a lousy one year rental when we'd still have no chance to win a title. I know some of you think we'd get a commitment from Westbrook. Ha! And if he really wanted to play for us, we can wait a year and we have the cap space to sign him without giving up anyone. If we took on Westbrook eventually we'd have to trade Ricky, Zach or Dunn, but all of them should have good trade value and we could get a top 5 to 10 draft pick back in exchange.
I don't disagree with your first statement, I wouldn't do the trade either for the fact Westbrook can leave, but I strongly disagree if we could get a commitment from him I think we would be dumb not to go get him because we hope that Lavine and Dunn become special (I am high on Lavine and I am coming around on Dunn)
Because we have lots of capspace, we can afford to wait the year and sign him as a free agent. We don't need him this season. We won't have to make a decision about Zach until he is due to become a free agent.
If he doesn't want to sign with us, no big deal. We didn't give away anything for a one year rental and frankly I love the core we have right now.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Why is LaVine only compared to other Wolves busts who played nothing like him?
I used DWill and Johnson as examples because they're two of the more recent high draft picks that crushed my hopes. The point had nothing to do with being similar players, but comparing why after two years with Lavine I'm still as excited, more so even, than I was on draft day whereas both of the aforementioned busts lost their luster relatively quickly.
I'd be happy to hear your comparisons of players from other teams who played like him though.
While we have loads of potential, we aren't an attractive destination for stars at the peak of their careers. They want to win now. Until we start winning games we will not attract those types of players. Yes we have the assets to get Westbrook and from an OKc viewpoint we are a great partner. Trading the farm for a rental is silly.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Why is LaVine only compared to other Wolves busts who played nothing like him?
I used DWill and Johnson as examples because they're two of the more recent high draft picks that crushed my hopes. The point had nothing to do with being similar players, but comparing why after two years with Lavine I'm still as excited, more so even, than I was on draft day whereas both of the aforementioned busts lost their luster relatively quickly.
I'd be happy to hear your comparisons of players from other teams who played like him though.
Nah. I get the Wolves-centric take. Even though those picks were from a different regime and awhile ago, this is a Wolves message board, so it makes sense in a lot of ways.
Sometimes, I just think we lose sight of the rest of the NBA because of our Wolves fandom. Maybe not the best place to point it out.
Dunn is out of the question for Westbrook, but totally in play for NERLANS NOEL!?!?!?!?!?!
Seems kind of backwards to me. Make me wish I could see the pretzel some of you bend yourselves into while typing your responses. Make the whole "Gasol is good unless Jason says he is" seem like cogent, graduate-school-level argument.
