Zach LaVine

[Ruzious]

When listing all those negatives, you gotta factor in that he turned 19 in March, that he was an efficient scorer with a 55% TS% which is excellent for a freshman, and had a nice assist/to ratio for a freshman 2. His scoring was low in large part because his role was small on the team. He clearly has major things to work on, but his combination of athleticism, length, and raw skills is elite. It's a matter of development.

[Vides990]

his combination of athleticism, length, and raw skills is elite. It's a matter of development.

Don't know much about Lavine and I know their positions are dfifferent but you just described Joe Alexander......

[jpengland]

I'd draft him much higher than Marcus Smart.

[KillMonger]

I'd draft him much higher than Marcus Smart.

hyperbole

[mattg]

his combination of athleticism, length, and raw skills is elite. It's a matter of development.

Don't know much about Lavine and I know their positions are dfifferent but you just described Joe Alexander......

Joe A was a junior before he did anything and in any case he turned out to be lazy with a weak work ethic in the nba. Combined with him being late to the game that doomed any potential development.

I guess LaVine is sort of similar in that if he doesn't work on his game and turns out to be lazy he will bust because he's raw right now. However he's also got more positive things in his favor such as age, better athleticism, shooting, and ball handling ability. He's also not new to the game, he just had a late HS growth spurt that leaves him somewhat between positions going forward as he gets used to his new body.

[E-Balla]

I'd draft him much higher than Marcus Smart.

He's a scrub. Smart can be a star and he will at least be the best defensive PG since Payton.

[Notanoob]

When listing all those negatives, you gotta factor in that he turned 19 in March, that he was an efficient scorer with a 55% TS% which is excellent for a freshman, and had a nice assist/to ratio for a freshman 2. His scoring was low in large part because his role was small on the team. He clearly has major things to work on, but his combination of athleticism, length, and raw skills is elite. It's a matter of development.

His TS% was propped up by his 3P%, and like I said, was 2nd to last among SGs in this draft class.

And with regards to his shooting ability, I don't credit him as a shooter much at all. Consider, He took 128 3 pointers. Rodney Stuckey took 148 3 pointers his freshman year, hitting them at the same rate as LaVine. Stuckey also backed it up with a much better FT%. Yet Rodney Stuckey hasn't been able to break 30% from 3 ever since his freshman year of college.

I'm just illustrating the importance of sample size here. LaVine simply did not take enough shots to get a trustworthy idea of his capabilities as a shooter.

And again, if it turns out that he can't shoot and just was on a lucky hot streak at the starter of the year, you've got a guy who can't do anything.

Also, while you note that his low scoring had to do with his role on the team, shouldn't you also apply that to his TOs? I contend that his (mediocre) A/TO ratio has to do with the fact that he wasn't handling the ball or creating shots for others, so he had little opportunity to turn the ball over.

Furthermore, wouldn't his limited role suggest that he was in fact a limited player?

I mean, he hasn't actually done anything to prove that he deserved a bigger role. His handle is nothing special. He's a terrible defender-no instincts, not great effort on that end of the court, awful fundamentals... he won't be getting hidden in a zone defense in the NBA, he will be exposed as the sieve he is.

If he wasn't hot to start the season he wouldn't be getting drafted IMO. The guy brings nothing to the table besides running and uncontested dunks.

[miltk]

His TS% was propped up by his 3P%, and like I said, was 2nd to last among SGs in this draft class.

And with regards to his shooting ability, I don't credit him as a shooter much at all. Consider, He took 128 3 pointers. Rodney Stuckey took 148 3 pointers his freshman year, hitting them at the same rate as LaVine. Stuckey also backed it up with a much better FT%. Yet Rodney Stuckey hasn't been able to break 30% from 3 ever since his freshman year of college.

I'm just illustrating the importance of sample size here. LaVine simply did not take enough shots to get a trustworthy idea of his capabilities as a shooter.

And again, if it turns out that he can't shoot and just was on a lucky hot streak at the starter of the year, you've got a guy who can't do anything.

Also, while you note that his low scoring had to do with his role on the team, shouldn't you also apply that to his TOs? I contend that his (mediocre) A/TO ratio has to do with the fact that he wasn't handling the ball or creating shots for others, so he had little opportunity to turn the ball over.

Furthermore, wouldn't his limited role suggest that he was in fact a limited player?

I mean, he hasn't actually done anything to prove that he deserved a bigger role. His handle is nothing special. He's a terrible defender-no instincts, not great effort on that end of the court, awful fundamentals... he won't be getting hidden in a zone defense in the NBA, he will be exposed as the sieve he is.

If he wasn't hot to start the season he wouldn't be getting drafted IMO. The guy brings nothing to the table besides running and uncontested dunks.

i'm repeating myself for the umpteenth time.

i agree with everything here. i watched all the games and i'm a bruin. there is not doubt that zl is impressive to watch in that he has so much bounce in his gate. i think "nimble" is a good way to describe him. he has a charismatic style of play because everything he does seems so fluid and natural. he was 62.3%...58.3% in his first 7 games against cupcakes when he was tagged with the westy similarity and it stuck. BUT from the missouri game going forward he was 38.9%...31.5%.

he bricked all his shots when guarded. once they figured out he doesn't shot with someone's in his grill and his side-step shot, he was done. he blew 98% of his contested layups. he fumbled all but one of the alley oops (he has small hands). basically, we're talking about a practice player. never contributed to a single bruin victory. played sg to alford's pg and alford was an sg in high school. unless coach alford was going strictly by size (bryce is only 6'3") it made more sense to reverse the roles since bryce was a better shooter who had the balls to shoot when he was guarded. maybe zach is better at pg because he doesn't have the gonads to take the shot.

but we're talking about a no impact, athletic player who might be lottery, and that's the disconnect. he got 25mpg - that's plenty of time to show numbers. he's like an athletic nimble danny green without a 3.

[jpengland]

I'd draft him much higher than Marcus Smart.

He's a scrub. Smart can be a star and he will at least be the best defensive PG since Payton.

Lol.

Depending on how you look at it.

Smart is either a PG with poor handles, limited distribution skills and no 3 point shot.

or

An SG with a limited first step and no 3 point shot.

He will be a decent defender, no doubt (although no reason to believe that he will ever be able to lick Gary Paytons shoes).

But the fact remains he has no real position and is not quick enough to blow by people to score at the hoop. His shot is mechanically broken and inconsistent and there is no real reason to believe he is ever going to be a 3 point threat.

So if he can't blow by his man and he can't hit a jumpshot, teams are simply going to sag off and watch him struggle at sub 40%FG.

He can be a decent role player, probably a first guard off the bench - But he doesn't have the skillset to be a star in the league. He is probably never going to develop great handles, his atleticsism will never be that of Wade or Westbrook and it's unlikely he ever becomes a knock down three point shooter.

I really wouldn't draft him top 15.

LaVine is a risk, but he is very young, very raw and has all the tools to be an elite offensive player. His first step and athleticism are fantastic and he has NBA range on his 3 point shot already. He has the tools to be a decent defender if he gets coached properly and he should be able to take contact once he bulks out a bit. He has a lower floor than Smart, yes. But a much, much higher ceiling.

[E-Balla]

I'd draft him much higher than Marcus Smart.

He's a scrub. Smart can be a star and he will at least be the best defensive PG since Payton.

Lol.

Depending on how you look at it.

Smart is either a PG with poor handles, limited distribution skills and no 3 point shot.

or

An SG with a limited first step and no 3 point shot.

He will be a decent defender, no doubt (although no reason to believe that he will ever be able to lick Gary Paytons shoes).

But the fact remains he has no real position and is not quick enough to blow by people to score at the hoop. His shot is mechanically broken and inconsistent and there is no real reason to believe he is ever going to be a 3 point threat.

So if he can't blow by his man and he can't hit a jumpshot, teams are simply going to sag off and watch him struggle at sub 40%FG.

He can be a decent role player, probably a first guard off the bench - But he doesn't have the skillset to be a star in the league. He is probably never going to develop great handles, his atleticsism will never be that of Wade or Westbrook and it's unlikely he ever becomes a knock down three point shooter.

I really wouldn't draft him top 15.

LaVine is a risk, but he is very young, very raw and has all the tools to be an elite offensive player. His first step and athleticism are fantastic and he has NBA range on his 3 point shot already. He has the tools to be a decent defender if he gets coached properly and he should be able to take contact once he bulks out a bit. He has a lower floor than Smart, yes. But a much, much higher ceiling.

Decent defender? Name one defender at any position that was better in college ball last year (take minutes into account too). Smart is the best defensive guard prospect I've ever seen by far.

Offensively he can't shoot but his free throw percentage shows he can improve without much change to his form. His passing isn't bad. He had a 30 assist percentage and really as a young point improvement is what I want to see as a playmaker and he showed improvement. He's also a 227lb pg so I'd expect him to use his strength, balance, and touch to get open looks at rim.

His offensive skill set is Lance Stephenson like and I see him as more of an alpha dog than Lance and he'll be a walking mismatchon all points.

[Grits n Gravy]

^ Are you saying he'll be an irrational confidence guy?

[doordoor123]

I don't know. I also watch every UCLA game and I actually think LaVine can translate to the NBA well. Mostly for his athleticism, which would give him an edge against other guards. His three point shooting helps too.
A big thing I noticed when his production dropped was that it seemed like he didn't care. He looked like he was lost in UCLA's system.
No one really talks about his defense though. UCLA mostly played zone to hide their lack of defense. With LaVine's length and athleticism, a coach should find a way to make him a better defender.
The one thing I notice in interviews with him is that he's a competetor. Reminds me of Kobe how confident and cocky he is. That needs to show up in his game -- that he cares and hes confident.
Having said that, I dont think he goes to the d-league at all. Maybe stays at the very end of the bench. He's just too athletic not to keep on the main roster.
Everything LaVine does is very fixable with the right staff. In the future, I think there's a slim chance he fails.

[Ruzious]

his combination of athleticism, length, and raw skills is elite. It's a matter of development.

Don't know much about Lavine and I know their positions are dfifferent but you just described Joe Alexander......

Gosh no. Joe Alexander could jump out of the gym, but that's not basketball athleticism. If you have to gather yourself before jumping and take extra time to get off the ground (like Alexander), you're not a good basketball athlete. And other than Alexander's ability to jump high, there wasn't anything special about him. I'm a Bucks fan, and when they picked him over Lopez, I threw a fit.

[TheOGJabroni]

I'd draft him much higher than Marcus Smart.

Smart can be a star and he will at least be the best defensive PG since Payton.

I like Smart but to say that he will be the best defensive PG since Payton, as if it's fact, without having him play once against NBA competition is a little crazy. If I had to choose blindly, I'd take my chances with Eric Bledsoe, Avery Bradley, or Tony Allen first. I'm not saying he can't reach that level or even possibly surpass them defensively, but let's just slow our roll.

[FootballFan33]

46" at the mickey mouse camp but only 33" standing at the real combine.

[SelfishPlayer]

I like Zach, but he could fail for the same reasons why Elliot Williams hasn't found success in the NBA yet.

[siar617]

I like Zach, but he could fail for the same reasons why Elliot Williams hasn't found success in the NBA yet.

Dont know Elliott'sgame can he shoot handle the rock?

[jpengland]

He's a scrub. Smart can be a star and he will at least be the best defensive PG since Payton.

Lol.

Depending on how you look at it.

Smart is either a PG with poor handles, limited distribution skills and no 3 point shot.

or

An SG with a limited first step and no 3 point shot.

He will be a decent defender, no doubt (although no reason to believe that he will ever be able to lick Gary Paytons shoes).

But the fact remains he has no real position and is not quick enough to blow by people to score at the hoop. His shot is mechanically broken and inconsistent and there is no real reason to believe he is ever going to be a 3 point threat.

So if he can't blow by his man and he can't hit a jumpshot, teams are simply going to sag off and watch him struggle at sub 40%FG.

He can be a decent role player, probably a first guard off the bench - But he doesn't have the skillset to be a star in the league. He is probably never going to develop great handles, his atleticsism will never be that of Wade or Westbrook and it's unlikely he ever becomes a knock down three point shooter.

I really wouldn't draft him top 15.

LaVine is a risk, but he is very young, very raw and has all the tools to be an elite offensive player. His first step and athleticism are fantastic and he has NBA range on his 3 point shot already. He has the tools to be a decent defender if he gets coached properly and he should be able to take contact once he bulks out a bit. He has a lower floor than Smart, yes. But a much, much higher ceiling.

Decent defender? Name one defender at any position that was better in college ball last year (take minutes into account too). Smart is the best defensive guard prospect I've ever seen by far.

Offensively he can't shoot but his free throw percentage shows he can improve without much change to his form. His passing isn't bad. He had a 30 assist percentage and really as a young point improvement is what I want to see as a playmaker and he showed improvement. He's also a 227lb pg so I'd expect him to use his strength, balance, and touch to get open looks at rim.

His offensive skill set is Lance Stephenson like and I see him as more of an alpha dog than Lance and he'll be a walking mismatchon all points.

He is unlikely to play PG IMO, which means he is guarding 2s or 3s and i'm not sure quite how well he will translate as a lock down defender, he has a lot of tools but he is still a little undersized and he needs to improve his foot speed, he COULD be a great defender, he will probably be an above average defender at worst.

He's a little smaller than Stephenson, not as good a ball handler and a slower first step.

His passing is OK as an SG, but not as a PG. With his lack of handles, that pushes him in to undersized SG territory, which is fine if he can knock down the three ball well, but he can't.

I really think he is going to be a non factor on offense, and he has a high ceiling defensively, but certainly not a sure thing on that side of the ball either.

Classic tweener guard issues.

[Notanoob]

He is unlikely to play PG IMO, which means he is guarding 2s or 3s and i'm not sure quite how well he will translate as a lock down defender, he has a lot of tools but he is still a little undersized and he needs to improve his foot speed, he COULD be a great defender, he will probably be an above average defender at worst.

At worst? This guy has no idea how to play defense as it stands. Absolutely none. At worst he'll be James Harden on that end. There is a lot more to defense than physical tools especially, for non-centers. He can learn and improve, but his worst case scenario is atrocious, not "above average".

[Ruzious]

I like Zach, but he could fail for the same reasons why Elliot Williams hasn't found success in the NBA yet.

Gotta admit I was an Elliot Williams fan, but he had issues that Zach doesn't have. EW had off-court issues, injuries, and transfers that set him back several years. Poor kid never had a chance to get settled down in one place.