Hypothetical: LaVine or McDermott

Post #1 » by **Klomp** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 7:38 pm

Assume that the rest of the offseason (ie the Love trade) went exactly the same. Who would you have drafted if both LaVine and McDermott were available and you knew they would team up with Wiggins, Young and Bennett?

guest81 · Post #2 » by **guest81** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 7:50 pm

Klomp wrote:Assume that the rest of the offseason (ie the Love trade) went exactly the same. Who would you have drafted if both LaVine and McDermott were available and you knew they would team up with Wiggins, Young and Bennett?

Probably Lavine. Dough is great and will play for 10+ years but his ceiling isn't that of a superstar player. Lavine could easily turn out to be a bust, but with the state of the Wolves and you have to try to get a replacement for the face of the franchise. I'd say Wiggins has about a 80% chance of being that guy, and Lavine about 50%. Combine them both though, and odds are at least one will pan out.

I don't see an in between with Lavine. I think either he's a complete bust, or the next dynamic guard. The BIG thing that worries me though, is the fact that Sidney Lowe is going to be the guy developing him, and he SUCKS. I really hope Flip only coaches a year just to get rid of his crummy assistants.

Post #3 » by **C.lupus** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 7:50 pm

This feels like a trick question but I'll play.

At the time of the draft my answer would have been McDermott. I wasn't high on LaVine at all at that time. Now, knowing what I know of the roster and LaVine, I'd go with Zach. McDermott is better now but Zach has a lot of intriguing potential and he isn't a SF, of which we already have six.

cpfsf · Post #4 » by **cpfsf** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 7:55 pm

at the draft i wanted mcdermott
today i would reluctantly choose lavine

if we had a better team, i'd want mcdermott b/c i think he's more capable of contributing on day 1.

Post #5 » by **Klomp** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 8:09 pm

C.lupus wrote:McDermott is better now but Zach has a lot of intriguing potential and he isn't a SF, of which we already have six.

But there is also a weakness on this team of 3-point shooting. McDermott helps that quite a bit.

Chicago is playing McDermott at both the 2 and 3. And when you have a defender like Wiggins on the wing, you can play him at either position to guard the opponent's best player. With LaVine in Wiggins, you won't see it as often because Zach won't be able to handle the physical SFs.

Post #6 » by **The J Rocka** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 8:10 pm

LaVine hands down. This franchise needed to swing for the fences instead of taking the 'safe' pick. He could very well be a top 5 player (top 3 for the kool aid fans out there - raises hand) from this draft when it's all said and done. His skill set/physical abilities are an ideal fit next to a player like Wiggins.

criteriado · Post #7 » by **criteriado** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 8:10 pm

I'd take Lavine because he's got a high ceiling and McDermott can't contribute in steals, rebounds, blocks..etc. McDermott has to be a great scorer to be a good player on this league, that's really hard to do. At least Lavine can handle the ball and jumps high.

Post #8 » by **The J Rocka** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 8:18 pm

Klomp wrote:
C.lupus wrote:McDermott is better now but Zach has a lot of intriguing potential and he isn't a SF, of which we already have six.

But there is also a weakness on this team of 3-point shooting. McDermott helps that quite a bit.

Chicago is playing McDermott at both the 2 and 3. And when you have a defender like Wiggins on the wing, you can play him at either position to guard the opponent's best player. With LaVine in Wiggins, you won't see it as often because Zach won't be able to handle the physical SFs.

I believe LaVine will be able to have a consistent 3 pt shot down the road. Tough to say if it'll be as good as McDs but for the other skills LaVine brings to the table, I wouldn't pass on him because he's not as polished in that area.

LaVine might not be able to defend physical 3s but I believe he'll be able to defend majority of PGs in the future if you want Wiggins to play some 2. LaVine 1/2, Wiggins 2/3, Young 3/4 is a pretty good fit.

Saltine · Post #9 » by **Saltine** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 8:46 pm

We have too many forwards already, this one is a no brainer.

LaVine

djeros612 · Post #10 » by **djeros612** » Tue Oct 7, 2014 10:38 pm

Draft ... Had no idea who lavine was so I woulda took Doug ,

But knowing the roster now I'm happy with Zach .

Also I feel like Doug has a better 3pt shot but I feel like he needs to be assisted for the most part where with Lavine he can create his own space off the dribble and shoot off the dribble also he jumps so high he can shoot over a lot of guards with out getting to crowded .

Also people been knocking Lavine for his ability to get to the hole in traffic but remember he's a year out of high school if he puts in the work he will get a lot bigger and stronger and that should help a lot .

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

minimus · Post #11 » by **minimus** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 8:18 am

Yesterday McDermott looked lost in defense and automatic from 3pt line. So depending on Chase health I'd say that if Chase is okay, than Zach is my choice. If not, I'd like to have McDermott who can open paint for others

shangrila · Post #12 » by **shangrila** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 10:14 am

If the offseason is the exact same? It's LaVine, easily. We might not be tearing it down for a full rebuild but we're still in talent/potential gathering mode.

And as someone else said, we've already got McDermott on the roster with Budinger.

wildvikeswolves · Post #13 » by **wildvikeswolves** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 12:54 pm

If we had a need at both positions, I would take McDermott. I like Lavine though, hopefully he turns out

LordBaldric · Post #14 » by **LordBaldric** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 3:23 pm

Well, McDermott is clearly the better prospect, but he plays the same position as Wiggins, so my answer is Jordan Adams.

kmgarnett21 · Post #15 » by **kmgarnett21** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 4:07 pm

I'm excited to see what LaVine can do, but I think way too many of you are putting way too high expectations on LaVine.

Krapinsky · Post #16 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 4:50 pm

McDermott. This team needs shooters. Wiggins could play the 2 just fine.

But, I think Harris would have made the most sense now. Doesn't have the 'upside' of Lavine, but with Wiggins and Bennett here, maybe a safe bet guy like Harris at the same position of need (SG), would make the most sense. Defensively, Rubio-Harris-Wiggins could be pretty special.

LordBaldric · Post #17 » by **LordBaldric** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 5:03 pm

Krapinsky wrote:McDermott. This team needs shooters. Wiggins could play the 2 just fine.

But, I think Harris would have made the most sense now. Doesn't have the 'upside' of Lavine, but with Wiggins and Bennett here, maybe a safe bet guy like Harris at the same position of need (SG), would make the most sense. Defensively, Rubio-Harris-Wiggins could be pretty special.

Harris would have been a worthy choice as well.

Post #18 » by **The J Rocka** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 8:00 pm

I'd rather have Harris over McDermott.

Krapinsky · Post #19 » by **Krapinsky** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 9:24 pm

The J Rocka wrote:I'd rather have Harris over McDermott.

It's probably a more relevant comparison too, since Harris was actually available at the time and was seemingly the obvious pick. In the past, when we passed on the 'obvious pick' it has come back to haunt us (Curry, Cousins).

All that said, Lavine has exceeded my expectations thus far and I think he has a chance to be really good.

Post #20 » by **Klomp** » Wed Oct 8, 2014 9:31 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
The J Rocka wrote:I'd rather have Harris over McDermott.

It's probably a more relevant comparison too, since Harris was actually available at the time and was seemingly the obvious pick. In the past, when we passed on the 'obvious pick' it has come back to haunt us (Curry, Cousins).

All that said, Lavine has exceeded my expectations thus far and I think he has a chance to be really good.

If Harris was the obvious pick, he would've been picked right after us. Instead, he didn't go until six picks later.

Who would you take?