Early Season evaluation: Zach LaVine

[Coolbreeze44]

I'm out of these discussions. Have at it, pretend you're clairvoyant, I don't care anymore. I'll just leave with this: For every player you can name who's "outline" was established after 20 games, I will give you 5 guys whose wasn't.

Those speculative numbers seem askew. (as was your silly Larry Bird angle.)

Q's analysis is sound. The better NBA players simply improve as they get older. That doesn't mean they routinely acquire skills they never really had.

I don't know your age Abe, but judging by your chub for "Fish" I have to assume you've been around the block a time or two. Larry Bird added a new skill to his repertoire every off season. He was a completely re-made player over his career from where he was as a rookie. Your statement above just isn't factual.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

What skills do Wiggins and Lavine just not have? Wiggins' ball handling skills exist, they are just not great yet. Other than that, what do they truly not possess because your point is you won't develop it if you don't have it by 20 on some level. From what I have seen, they have the ability to do just about everything to some degree meaning they need refinement more than learning something brand new. That's the whole reason both of their ceilings are compared to some of the best players in the league. Just curious as to what you think they have no chance of developing that will hold them back from reaching their potential.

Do you think Wiggins' ball handling is at the league average? If not, where is it?

It's pretty rare for a guy to come in very poor or mediocre or even subpar at something... and then have it become better than most other guys in the league. You see some guys develop a three point shot. And I'll never forget how Eric Snow went from a 30% foul shooter to an 80% guy several years later in the pros.

But, when you're starting behind the curve, you have a lot of guys to leapfrog (most of which are also working to improve their games). It's why you can't just assume a guy like Rubio will become a better shooter. It's why we simply have to embrace him for the things he is elite at compared to everybody else. And "hope" he improves other stuff.

That's the thing though. Wiggins' ball handling just has to improve to the point where he can leverage his athleticism to get to the rim at will. He doesn't have to become Kyrie. He just has to improve enough to allow his other skills to reach their full potential. Look at a guy like Paul George. He didn't have much of a handle coming into the league and still doesn't have the ball on a string, but his offensive game opened up significantly just by growing that skill to a competent level. Wiggins and Lavine have such broad "outlines" that they really just need to increase a few areas to competent levels to reach new overall levels of play. Rubio this year kicked his FG% up almost 6% and you could see it open other parts of his game that defenders could no longer only focus on taking away. They kept going under screens and he started making the open jumper they were giving him. If he can keep making that jumper they won't be able to just keep giving him the open look which will let him get to the rim more often and find the open man which is his elite offensive skill. You don't have to be great at everything. You just have to be good enough at some things to be able to keep doing your elite things. Other examples are guys like Wall and Rose developing their jump shots to competent levels. Nobody would say they are great shooters, but they can shoot well enough to force the defense to respect the shot thus allowing them to leverage their athleticism again to get past their man and get to the rim. If neither of them would have become competent shooters, they never would have reached the level of play they have shown to date.

[mjs34]

To be fair, Larry Bird was 22 when he started in the NBA

[AbeVigodaLive]

I'm out of these discussions. Have at it, pretend you're clairvoyant, I don't care anymore. I'll just leave with this: For every player you can name who's "outline" was established after 20 games, I will give you 5 guys whose wasn't.

Those speculative numbers seem askew. (as was your silly Larry Bird angle.)

Q's analysis is sound. The better NBA players simply improve as they get older. That doesn't mean they routinely acquire skills they never really had.

I don't know your age Abe, but judging by your chub for "Fish" I have to assume you've been around the block a time or two. Larry Bird added a new skill to his repertoire every off season. He was a completely re-made player over his career from where he was as a rookie. Your statement above just isn't factual.

Your comment on Bird is ridiculous. Sure, he might have improved. Don't all great players? But he didn't have far to go. He was ELITE the moment he stepped on an NBA court. He was basically the polar opposite of LaVine and Wiggins.

21 / 10 / 5.

4th in MVP voting.

[AbeVigodaLive]

To be fair, Larry Bird was 22 when he started in the NBA

Yet another reason why comparing LaVine or Wiggins to Bird seems odd.

[mjs34]

What skills do Wiggins and Lavine just not have? Wiggins' ball handling skills exist, they are just not great yet. Other than that, what do they truly not possess because your point is you won't develop it if you don't have it by 20 on some level. From what I have seen, they have the ability to do just about everything to some degree meaning they need refinement more than learning something brand new. That's the whole reason both of their ceilings are compared to some of the best players in the league. Just curious as to what you think they have no chance of developing that will hold them back from reaching their potential.

Do you think Wiggins' ball handling is at the league average? If not, where is it?

It's pretty rare for a guy to come in very poor or mediocre or even subpar at something... and then have it become better than most other guys in the league. You see some guys develop a three point shot. And I'll never forget how Eric Snow went from a 30% foul shooter to an 80% guy several years later in the pros.

But, when you're starting behind the curve, you have a lot of guys to leapfrog (most of which are also working to improve their games). It's why you can't just assume a guy like Rubio will become a better shooter. It's why we simply have to embrace him for the things he is elite at compared to everybody else. And "hope" he improves other stuff.

I do think Wiggins is at the league average, but the problem with your question is that it doesn't take into account him being a rookie. Other than Lebron, Melo, and Durant, I don't consider other SF's to have particularly strong handles. PG, Ariza, Gay, Parsons, Hayward all might be better, but weren't as rookies. How about Wes Johnson, Matt Barnes, Otto Porter, Batuum, Tashaun Prince, Cory Brewer, Harrison Barnes etc. Who am I missing??

Most players don't have a great work ethic, and that is what sets the very good players apart from the mediocre ones. I don't think that will be an issue with AW. I could be wrong though.

[AbeVigodaLive]

What skills do Wiggins and Lavine just not have? Wiggins' ball handling skills exist, they are just not great yet. Other than that, what do they truly not possess because your point is you won't develop it if you don't have it by 20 on some level. From what I have seen, they have the ability to do just about everything to some degree meaning they need refinement more than learning something brand new. That's the whole reason both of their ceilings are compared to some of the best players in the league. Just curious as to what you think they have no chance of developing that will hold them back from reaching their potential.

Do you think Wiggins' ball handling is at the league average? If not, where is it?

It's pretty rare for a guy to come in very poor or mediocre or even subpar at something... and then have it become better than most other guys in the league. You see some guys develop a three point shot. And I'll never forget how Eric Snow went from a 30% foul shooter to an 80% guy several years later in the pros.

But, when you're starting behind the curve, you have a lot of guys to leapfrog (most of which are also working to improve their games). It's why you can't just assume a guy like Rubio will become a better shooter. It's why we simply have to embrace him for the things he is elite at compared to everybody else. And "hope" he improves other stuff.

I do think Wiggins is at the league average, but the problem with your question is that it doesn't take into account him being a rookie. Other than Lebron, Melo, and Durant, I don't consider other SF's to have particularly strong handles. PG, Ariza, Gay, Parsons, Hayward all might be better, but weren't as rookies. How about Wes Johnson, Matt Barnes, Otto Porter, Batuum, Tashaun Prince, Cory Brewer, Harrison Barnes etc. Who am I missing??

Most players don't have a great work ethic, and that is what sets the very good players apart from the mediocre ones. I don't think that will be an issue with AW. I could be wrong though.

Hey, I love the optimism. Great. But, you have NO IDEA if Wiggins has the work ethic or not.

[Coolbreeze44]

I'm out of these discussions. Have at it, pretend you're clairvoyant, I don't care anymore. I'll just leave with this: For every player you can name who's "outline" was established after 20 games, I will give you 5 guys whose wasn't.

Those speculative numbers seem askew. (as was your silly Larry Bird angle.)

Q's analysis is sound. The better NBA players simply improve as they get older. That doesn't mean they routinely acquire skills they never really had.

I don't know your age Abe, but judging by your chub for "Fish" I have to assume you've been around the block a time or two. Larry Bird added a new skill to his repertoire every off season. He was a completely re-made player over his career from where he was as a rookie. Your statement above just isn't factual.

Your comment on Bird is ridiculous. Sure, he might have improved. Don't all great players? But he didn't have far to go. He was ELITE the moment he stepped on an NBA court. He was basically the polar opposite of LaVine and Wiggins.

21 / 10 / 5.

4th in MVP voting.

I'm not talking about improving. I'm talking about adding specific skills to his game. Another example is Magic. Do you think he entered the league with that hook shot? Could he play defense as a 20 year old? Did he have anything close to a 3 point jump shot? No, no, and no. Those were all things he didn't have or do as a rookie that he made himself into. Bird did the same thing. Lebron has added a post up game. Paul George is completely different than when he came out. I'm just not buying that these evaluations have any merit 45 days into a 19 year olds career. If they do, then Q would be highly sought after by every organization in the NBA to tell them exactly what is right and wrong with their young players. Knowing that Andrew and Zach are likely to fall short as offensive players would be terrific information to have. What a bunch of BS.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

What skills do Wiggins and Lavine just not have? Wiggins' ball handling skills exist, they are just not great yet. Other than that, what do they truly not possess because your point is you won't develop it if you don't have it by 20 on some level. From what I have seen, they have the ability to do just about everything to some degree meaning they need refinement more than learning something brand new. That's the whole reason both of their ceilings are compared to some of the best players in the league. Just curious as to what you think they have no chance of developing that will hold them back from reaching their potential.

Do you think Wiggins' ball handling is at the league average? If not, where is it?

It's pretty rare for a guy to come in very poor or mediocre or even subpar at something... and then have it become better than most other guys in the league. You see some guys develop a three point shot. And I'll never forget how Eric Snow went from a 30% foul shooter to an 80% guy several years later in the pros.

But, when you're starting behind the curve, you have a lot of guys to leapfrog (most of which are also working to improve their games). It's why you can't just assume a guy like Rubio will become a better shooter. It's why we simply have to embrace him for the things he is elite at compared to everybody else. And "hope" he improves other stuff.

I do think Wiggins is at the league average, but the problem with your question is that it doesn't take into account him being a rookie. Other than Lebron, Melo, and Durant, I don't consider other SF's to have particularly strong handles. PG, Ariza, Gay, Parsons, Hayward all might be better, but weren't as rookies. How about Wes Johnson, Matt Barnes, Otto Porter, Batuum, Tashaun Prince, Cory Brewer, Harrison Barnes etc. Who am I missing??

Most players don't have a great work ethic, and that is what sets the very good players apart from the mediocre ones. I don't think that will be an issue with AW. I could be wrong though.

Hey, I love the optimism. Great. But, you have NO IDEA if Wiggins has the work ethic or not.

You have NO IDEA what Wiggins' work ethic is either so don't play that BS card. He didn't say for sure Wiggins has the ethic. That's just his opinion which he has the right to believe that. Everything Wiggins has said after these games against Kobe and Wade point to him having the ethic. I have yet to see or hear anyone label him as lazy or not having any work ethic. If you don't believe Wiggins when he says he has it, you should believe Self when he said he is a hard worker because Self is a tough guy to play for with very high expectations of effort on both ends of the court. The evidence we do have to go off of backs our opinion up that he has the ethic so until you can show me something that says otherwise, I wouldn't call it optimistic to believe he has it.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Funny, khans rips Abe for ripping sjm's opinion, but khans ripped Q for his opinions on LaVine and Wiggins. What a small world we live in.

And while work ethic is great, there have been plenty of guys with high potential and good "lunch pale" work ethic to never reach their heights as NBA stars. All we can do is discuss it, but I feel like some on here are a bit too optimistic in what Andrew will become (McGrady, Jordan-ish comparisons are odd to me).