Zach LaVine

[Lipoli390]

Zach had 42 points, 6 rebounds, 5 steals and 2 blocks last night, leading the Bulls to a win over the Cavs. But it wasn't just one great game for him. Zach has been having a heck of a season thus far. He's averaging 25 points, 4.7 rebounds, 4.0 assists and 1.4 steals per game. He's hitting 44.6% of his FG attempts, 39.1% of his threes and 82.6% of his 5.5 free throws per game.

None of this should be surprising. We saw his offensive talent, including his ability to hit threes AND drive to the hoop, when he was here. Is his success this year the result of the stellar player development for which the Bulls organization is known? A little sarcasm goes a long way. :) The obviously answer is, of course not! It's just a talented player with the drive to succeed getting better after a temporary set-back, namely a torn ACL. Sure, a coaching staff can help with a player's development in the NBA. But that help is, in my view, marginal. In the end, building a successful roster is about the three Ps and LaVine is a prime example. What are the three Ps?

1. Picks. This means making the right picks in the draft or free agency. It also means making the right picks on who to keep and who to let go or trade. The Wolves make a good pick in drafting LaVine, but a bad pick in trading him rather than Wiggins for Butler. That choice is even worse given the report that the Wolves could have kept their 1st round pick in that deal if Wiggins rather than LaVine had been in the deal. The Wolves are where there are primarily because of bad picks - drafting Dunn instead of Murray or Hield and Patton instead of Collins or Anunoby, Dieng instead of Gobert, Bazz instead of Giannis or McCollum; selling a first round pick for cash that could have been used to draft Gobert. The list goes on.

2. Playing Time. Ultimately, players won't develop without playing time. You can only improve so much in practice. Even playing time in the G-League can only do so much. That's why it's important for the Wolves to keep giving significant playing time to Okogie and Culver. Now I'd like to see significant PT given Nowell and Martin.

3. Patience. An organization has to be patient with young players. I'm not talking about 5 or 6 years of patience as with Wiggins. But 2-3 seasons are often needed for a young player to finally start tapping into the bulk of his talents. I think the Wolves failed to show adequate patience making the Butler deal. They certainly showed a lack of patience when they let Billups go in favor of starting Brandon at PG years ago. I think it's imperative that the Wolves show patience with Culver and Okogie, but also Nowell and Martin.

[BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]]

Lavine and Maarkanon shoot the ball so well from deep and of course Zach can get to the tin. Dunn is now a backup but the Butler trade set us back...again.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

LaVine is definitely having a career year. Buuuuuuut....he STILL has a negative On/Off rating, meaning the team is better when he is on the bench. They are like a #1 defense when he sits.

Every year Zach has played except one (last season) his team does better when he is on the bench. Compare him to Wiggins, where every year the team does worse when he is on the bench (granted, some of that has to do with our horrible wing depth backing him up over the years).

Zach is still young and the On/Off differential is getting better. But it's amazing how he almost single-handedly tanks a defense. They may just finally have the players in Wendell Carter and Kris Dunn that can help cover up for him.

[Lipoli390]

LaVine is definitely having a career year. Buuuuuuut....he STILL has a negative On/Off rating, meaning the team is better when he is on the bench. They are like a #1 defense when he sits.

Every year Zach has played except one (last season) his team does better when he is on the bench. Compare him to Wiggins, where every year the team does worse when he is on the bench (granted, some of that has to do with our horrible wing depth backing him up over the years).

Zach is still young and the On/Off differential is getting better. But it's amazing how he almost single-handedly tanks a defense. They may just finally have the players in Wendell Carter and Kris Dunn that can help cover up for him.

Those on-off numbers can be misleading. Ask yourself this: Would the Bulls trade Zach straight up for Wiggins? I think the obvious answer is absolutely not. Is there any team out there that would choose Andrew over Zach? Maybe. I'd like to know who those teams are so the Wolves can start pitching them Wiggins deals. :)

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

LaVine is definitely having a career year. Buuuuuuut....he STILL has a negative On/Off rating, meaning the team is better when he is on the bench. They are like a #1 defense when he sits.

Every year Zach has played except one (last season) his team does better when he is on the bench. Compare him to Wiggins, where every year the team does worse when he is on the bench (granted, some of that has to do with our horrible wing depth backing him up over the years).

Zach is still young and the On/Off differential is getting better. But it's amazing how he almost single-handedly tanks a defense. They may just finally have the players in Wendell Carter and Kris Dunn that can help cover up for him.

Those on-off numbers can be misleading. Ask yourself this: Would the Bulls trade Zach straight up for Wiggins? I think the obvious answer is absolutely not. Is there any team out there that would choose Andrew over Zach? Maybe. I'd like to know who those teams are so the Wolves can start pitching them Wiggins deals. :)

I'm not sure how misleading those on-off numbers are when they say the same thing every year and with two different teams. It's a big sample and the bottom line is Zach's team does better when he's not playing and it's because of defense. We'd be an absolute disaster defensively with him and KAT. Wiggins isn't a good defender, but he's passable at least.

That being said, it's a lot easier to ultimately cover for a defensively inept guard and the Bulls are starting to figure that out. It's amazing how solid Carter is already on that end of the floor in only his 2nd season.

[kekgeek]

LaVine is definitely having a career year. Buuuuuuut....he STILL has a negative On/Off rating, meaning the team is better when he is on the bench. They are like a #1 defense when he sits.

Every year Zach has played except one (last season) his team does better when he is on the bench. Compare him to Wiggins, where every year the team does worse when he is on the bench (granted, some of that has to do with our horrible wing depth backing him up over the years).

Zach is still young and the On/Off differential is getting better. But it's amazing how he almost single-handedly tanks a defense. They may just finally have the players in Wendell Carter and Kris Dunn that can help cover up for him.

Those on-off numbers can be misleading. Ask yourself this: Would the Bulls trade Zach straight up for Wiggins? I think the obvious answer is absolutely not. Is there any team out there that would choose Andrew over Zach? Maybe. I'd like to know who those teams are so the Wolves can start pitching them Wiggins deals. :)

I'm not sure how misleading those on-off numbers are when they say the same thing every year and with two different teams. It's a big sample and the bottom line is Zach's team does better when he's not playing and it's because of defense. We'd be an absolute disaster defensively with him and KAT. Wiggins isn't a good defender, but he's passable at least.

That being said, it's a lot easier to ultimately cover for a defensively inept guard and the Bulls are starting to figure that out. It's amazing how solid Carter is already on that end of the floor in only his 2nd season.

I also want to say Lavine teams since his last year with the wolves have a better record, % wise when he is out and dosen't play then when he actually plays.

[bleedspeed]

I am with Lipoli on this. Trading LaVine and Rubio basically made me stop caring about the Wolves.

[Lipoli390]

LaVine is definitely having a career year. Buuuuuuut....he STILL has a negative On/Off rating, meaning the team is better when he is on the bench. They are like a #1 defense when he sits.

Every year Zach has played except one (last season) his team does better when he is on the bench. Compare him to Wiggins, where every year the team does worse when he is on the bench (granted, some of that has to do with our horrible wing depth backing him up over the years).

Zach is still young and the On/Off differential is getting better. But it's amazing how he almost single-handedly tanks a defense. They may just finally have the players in Wendell Carter and Kris Dunn that can help cover up for him.

Those on-off numbers can be misleading. Ask yourself this: Would the Bulls trade Zach straight up for Wiggins? I think the obvious answer is absolutely not. Is there any team out there that would choose Andrew over Zach? Maybe. I'd like to know who those teams are so the Wolves can start pitching them Wiggins deals. :)

I'm not sure how misleading those on-off numbers are when they say the same thing every year and with two different teams. It's a big sample and the bottom line is Zach's team does better when he's not playing and it's because of defense. We'd be an absolute disaster defensively with him and KAT. Wiggins isn't a good defender, but he's passable at least.

That being said, it's a lot easier to ultimately cover for a defensively inept guard and the Bulls are starting to figure that out. It's amazing how solid Carter is already on that end of the floor in only his 2nd season.

I also want to say Lavine teams since his last year with the wolves have a better record, % wise when he is out and dosen't play then when he actually plays.

The on-off is a tough stat to rely on for a player playing on really bad teams. But the bottom line is this: There are few if any who follow the NBA who wouldn't trade Wiggins straight up for LaVine. My point is that simple.

[WildWolf2813]

Even if you wouldn't trade Zach for Wiggins, Zach LaVine would look pretty awful on the contract Wiggins has for us.

[Lipoli390]

Even if you wouldn't trade Zach for Wiggins, Zach LaVine would look pretty awful on the contract Wiggins has for us.

Zach would look better than Wiggins on that contract - much better. That's he point.