Is Zach LaVine a Winner?

[Red Larrivee]

okay we are arguing semantics but i'll bite. The on/off numbers you quoted are on a team basis. i.e. if your offense that is one pass, create a tough shot, and make a bucket, yes Zach LaVine reigns supreme. No doubt. Which brings back up being the tallest midget in a group of midgets isn't an accomplishment. The discussion here is "Is Zach a winner" with a side dose of "does he deserve an all-star nod". Your numbers actually backup my case that NO. No Zach is NOT a winner and No Zach is NOT worthy of an all star nod.

If at best you can do on offense (while taking a HUGE portion of the team's shots and playing the most minutes) is an ORTG of 107 on the court (the equivalent of a bottom 5 team offense) then no you probably aren't a good offensive player. This again is not the case for true star players. Their on court rating SHOULD far exceed their team rating and their off court rating.

LaVine's offensive value this season is clearly positive, but he's still not a player you should build your offense around. Both things can be true.

Unfortunately we built around Lavine... at least for this season. With the role comes the criticism for being the lead guy.
When the guy who hogs the ball the majority of the time and can't do anything in a team concept but can create & make tough shots is obviously going to be "better" offensively when he gives up the ball to his teammates and tell them "now your turn, go ahead and create some shots... wait you can't, oh well y'all trash, more shots for me"

There is a reason why the bench earlier on had a better offensive flow vs the starters. Lavine was doing his (iso ball shot creation) thing while the bench was truly playing motion offense. The starters initially had poor stats because they were trying to play motion offense while Lavine was chucking around breaking it. Archi & Dunn had bought into the motion offense, coby was used as a scorer and not shot creator (Which is what I want Lavine to be).

Our problems at that point in time were happening at THE END OF games. What was the common theme then? The offense dissolved into Zach iso ball.

As the season has gone on, injuries have disrupted the bench, and Zach has set up the precedence of getting your own. Now we have one pass chuckfest which is not a motion offense (and doesn't really fit the other players well...besides Coby). Coby is following Zach's lead in the chuckfest and Zach is carrying himself and the team to a bottom 5 offense.

This is a really, really bad take. There are no smarter, high volume and efficiency offensive players on the Bulls that LaVine is holding down.

Maybe now it is with all the injuries but at the beginning of the season, I would much rather reduce Lavine's FGA by like 5 and let those go towards WCJ/OPJ/Lauri/Sato. Also, again this is not on shot creation. This would help the system flow. But it unfortunately can't happen if the lead guard continually breaks the system. And it doesn't seem like the team is motivated to play a motion system when the game is gonna be thrown away at the end of the game with Zach's hero ball.

Read on Twitter

Empty stats all day.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[PaKii94]

okay we are arguing semantics but i'll bite. The on/off numbers you quoted are on a team basis. i.e. if your offense that is one pass, create a tough shot, and make a bucket, yes Zach LaVine reigns supreme. No doubt. Which brings back up being the tallest midget in a group of midgets isn't an accomplishment. The discussion here is "Is Zach a winner" with a side dose of "does he deserve an all-star nod". Your numbers actually backup my case that NO. No Zach is NOT a winner and No Zach is NOT worthy of an all star nod.

If at best you can do on offense (while taking a HUGE portion of the team's shots and playing the most minutes) is an ORTG of 107 on the court (the equivalent of a bottom 5 team offense) then no you probably aren't a good offensive player. This again is not the case for true star players. Their on court rating SHOULD far exceed their team rating and their off court rating.

LaVine's offensive value this season is clearly positive, but he's still not a player you should build your offense around. Both things can be true.

Unfortunately we built around Lavine... at least for this season. With the role comes the criticism for being the lead guy.
When the guy who hogs the ball the majority of the time and can't do anything in a team concept but can create & make tough shots is obviously going to be "better" offensively when he gives up the ball to his teammates and tell them "now your turn, go ahead and create some shots... wait you can't, oh well y'all trash, more shots for me"

There is a reason why the bench earlier on had a better offensive flow vs the starters. Lavine was doing his (iso ball shot creation) thing while the bench was truly playing motion offense. The starters initially had poor stats because they were trying to play motion offense while Lavine was chucking around breaking it. Archi & Dunn had bought into the motion offense, coby was used as a scorer and not shot creator (Which is what I want Lavine to be).

Our problems at that point in time were happening at THE END OF games. What was the common theme then? The offense dissolved into Zach iso ball.

As the season has gone on, injuries have disrupted the bench, and Zach has set up the precedence of getting your own. Now we have one pass chuckfest which is not a motion offense (and doesn't really fit the other players well...besides Coby). Coby is following Zach's lead in the chuckfest and Zach is carrying himself and the team to a bottom 5 offense.

This is a really, really bad take. There are no smarter, high volume and efficiency offensive players on the Bulls that LaVine is holding down.

Maybe now it is with all the injuries but at the beginning of the season, I would much rather reduce Lavine's FGA by like 5 and let those go towards WCJ/OPJ/Lauri/Sato. Also, again this is not on shot creation. This would help the system flow. But it unfortunately can't happen if the lead guard continually breaks the system. And it doesn't seem like the team is motivated to play a motion system when the game is gonna be thrown away at the end of the game with Zach's hero ball.

Read on Twitter

Empty stats all day.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

1) Notice how that Nov 23 coincides with AFTER the benching, when I said Zach is FINALLY having an impact (barely net positive)

2) I acknowledged Zach can make tough iso shots. when your system (with system players) devolves into tough iso shots for 70% of the offense, yes Zach will shine and the system players will crash and burn.

3) Zach is shining.... all the way to a 108.9 ORTG on court and 110 player ORTG. Horray! When you take even more of the volume, put up 28 points on 58%TS and yet the best you can muster is the equivalent of a 20th ranked team offense, maybe there is something fundamentally wrong with the offense you're playing? Maybe something is deficient in the intangibles?

Can you give me any examples of ANY true star that puts up 28 ppg on 58%TS and still has such low advanced numbers?


I've said this before. Lavine's key elite trait is creating and making tough tough shots. This is the trait that separates superstars out of stars. Unfortunately, while lavine is like a 9/10 in tough shot making, he's deficient in everything else to the point where his one elite trait is pretty much wiped out by his deficiencies unless again, he's putting up huge number of points at high efficiency... to finally have a small positive effect.

If you take away that tough shot making, Lavine has a ways to go to be a quality NBA player let alone a star, let alone an all-star

[Red Larrivee]

2) I acknowledged Zach can make tough iso shots. when your system (with system players) devolves into tough iso shots for 70% of the offense, yes Zach will shine and the system players will crash and burn.

3) Zach is shining.... all the way to a 108.9 ORTG on court and 110 player ORTG. Horray! When you take even more of the volume, put up 28 points on 58%TS and yet the best you can muster is the equivalent of a 20th ranked team offense, maybe there is something fundamentally wrong with the offense you're playing? Maybe something is deficient in the intangibles?

Can you give me any examples of ANY true star that puts up 28 ppg on 58%TS and still has such low advanced numbers?

You're arguing against a point that nobody is making. I never said that LaVine is a star. He's obviously a flawed player, but he's still having a positive impact on an awful team.

The Bulls have nobody else on this team right now who can score at high volume or create at high volume like LaVine. As a result, the offense funnels everything back to him. You're blaming LaVine for role players performing at a low level, which couldn't be further from the truth. If LaVine didn't play tonight, this team would easily be the worst offensive team in the league.

There are plenty of reasons the offense is bad, but LaVine is not one of them.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[PaKii94]

2) I acknowledged Zach can make tough iso shots. when your system (with system players) devolves into tough iso shots for 70% of the offense, yes Zach will shine and the system players will crash and burn.

3) Zach is shining.... all the way to a 108.9 ORTG on court and 110 player ORTG. Horray! When you take even more of the volume, put up 28 points on 58%TS and yet the best you can muster is the equivalent of a 20th ranked team offense, maybe there is something fundamentally wrong with the offense you're playing? Maybe something is deficient in the intangibles?

Can you give me any examples of ANY true star that puts up 28 ppg on 58%TS and still has such low advanced numbers?

You're arguing against a point that nobody is making. I never said that LaVine is a star. He's obviously a flawed player, but he's still having a positive impact on an awful team.

The Bulls have nobody else on this team right now who can score at high volume or create at high volume like LaVine. As a result, the offense funnels everything back to him. You're blaming LaVine for role players performing at a low level, which couldn't be further from the truth. If LaVine didn't play tonight, this team would easily be the worst offensive team in the league.

There are plenty of reasons the offense is bad, but LaVine is not one of them.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

If he is not a star why are we arguing if he's deserving of an all-star?

If you remove Lavine & continue to run Lavine's offense (create a tough shot and score) it will crash and burn. If you remove Lavine & go back to trying to run a motion offense (albeit it also requires WCJ/OPJ on the floor) I assure you the offense would look a lot more functional.

The bulls have devolved into bad iso ball habits lead by Lavine. They don't even bother with the motion anymore. You can't say the system is broken if the system isn't even being executed anymore. The offense isn't funneled back to him because of no other options, it is funneled to him BECAUSE he is the highest usage player and wants to be the leader where he's supposed to bring it back out to his teammates and lift them up. Instead it ends in a bad iso shots whether it goes in or not OR Zach passes back out as if it's a my turn your turn thing and says "Go! Go create your own shot. Your turn!".

The problem with the offense is as our highest usage player, the ball comes back and sticks to him. I posted this in the Lauri thread but the offense revolves around continuous breakdown of the defense which happens with good quick decisions and moving the ball. These breakdowns should happen 2-3 times at least before a shot is attempted. Instead, the pass comes around the first time, and sticks to Lavine which results in A) bad iso shot or B) resetting the offense because the defense is set again, pass it around again ONCE and it touches lavine, ball sticks, repeat until shot clock is low and Zach (using his one elite trait of tough shot making) makes a tough iso jumper and that's coined "carrying the team".

This continues to the bench now with Coby playing the ball sticking role.

This also cascades into Lauri getting lower usage because again, the offense doesn't go through it's progressions and Lauri is the receiver at the end (where Lavine should be too instead of the beginning)

[PaKii94]

This is not an awful team because the players are just trash. All the players have had more success before this season. You have to remember it was universally considered a competitive team for the playoffs this off season. The team is awful because the game isn't being played the right way. Not all of it is on Zach (a good portion of the offense tanking is because of his bad habits), it's also on coaching (time out/rotation management), also on injuries (Both OPJ/WCJ are fundamentally sound players who play the right way and are very missed. Lauri being MIA for the first month) , also on poor roster construction (lack of SFs and FO thinking Lauri could play C), gimmicky defense (the defense we are playing requires perfection. There is no middle ground and this group of young players can't be expected to reach the unattainable)

The fixable aspect of all those this season is Zach if he's willing to/learns to play the right way.

[Red Larrivee]

If he is not a star why are we arguing if he's deserving of an all-star?

If you remove Lavine & continue to run Lavine's offense (create a tough shot and score) it will crash and burn. If you remove Lavine & go back to trying to run a motion offense (albeit it also requires WCJ/OPJ on the floor) I assure you the offense would look a lot more functional.

The bulls have devolved into bad iso ball habits lead by Lavine. They don't even bother with the motion anymore. You can't say the system is broken if the system isn't even being executed anymore. The offense isn't funneled back to him because of no other options, it is funneled to him BECAUSE he is the highest usage player and wants to be the leader where he's supposed to bring it back out to his teammates and lift them up. Instead it ends in a bad iso shots whether it goes in or not OR Zach passes back out as if it's a my turn your turn thing and says "Go! Go create your own shot. Your turn!".

The problem with the offense is as our highest usage player, the ball comes back and sticks to him. I posted this in the Lauri thread but the offense revolves around continuous breakdown of the defense which happens with good quick decisions and moving the ball. These breakdowns should happen 2-3 times at least before a shot is attempted. Instead, the pass comes around the first time, and sticks to Lavine which results in A) bad iso shot or B) resetting the offense because the defense is set again, pass it around again ONCE and it touches lavine, ball sticks, repeat until shot clock is low and Zach (using his one elite trait of tough shot making) makes a tough iso jumper and that's coined "carrying the team".

This continues to the bench now with Coby playing the ball sticking role.

This also cascades into Lauri getting lower usage because again, the offense doesn't go through it's progressions and Lauri is the receiver at the end (where Lavine should be too instead of the beginning)

There's a difference between a star (superstar) and an all-star. I do not believe LaVine is going to be selected as an all-star, but he has absolutely played all-star caliber basketball.

LaVine has not established bad isolation habits to this team, nor has he broken the system. This team has nothing else if LaVine does not score a ton of points. They have no shot of winning no matter how well they defend. Lack of talent, coaching, experience, injuries, and execution are the reason why this offense has been awful. LaVine is the only thing holding it somewhat off the ground.

[ZOMG]

2) I acknowledged Zach can make tough iso shots. when your system (with system players) devolves into tough iso shots for 70% of the offense, yes Zach will shine and the system players will crash and burn.

3) Zach is shining.... all the way to a 108.9 ORTG on court and 110 player ORTG. Horray! When you take even more of the volume, put up 28 points on 58%TS and yet the best you can muster is the equivalent of a 20th ranked team offense, maybe there is something fundamentally wrong with the offense you're playing? Maybe something is deficient in the intangibles?

Can you give me any examples of ANY true star that puts up 28 ppg on 58%TS and still has such low advanced numbers?

You're arguing against a point that nobody is making. I never said that LaVine is a star. He's obviously a flawed player, but he's still having a positive impact on an awful team.

The Bulls have nobody else on this team right now who can score at high volume or create at high volume like LaVine. As a result, the offense funnels everything back to him. You're blaming LaVine for role players performing at a low level, which couldn't be further from the truth. If LaVine didn't play tonight, this team would easily be the worst offensive team in the league.

There are plenty of reasons the offense is bad, but LaVine is not one of them.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

If he is not a star why are we arguing if he's deserving of an all-star?

If you remove Lavine & continue to run Lavine's offense (create a tough shot and score) it will crash and burn. If you remove Lavine & go back to trying to run a motion offense (albeit it also requires WCJ/OPJ on the floor) I assure you the offense would look a lot more functional.

The bulls have devolved into bad iso ball habits lead by Lavine. They don't even bother with the motion anymore. You can't say the system is broken if the system isn't even being executed anymore. The offense isn't funneled back to him because of no other options, it is funneled to him BECAUSE he is the highest usage player and wants to be the leader where he's supposed to bring it back out to his teammates and lift them up. Instead it ends in a bad iso shots whether it goes in or not OR Zach passes back out as if it's a my turn your turn thing and says "Go! Go create your own shot. Your turn!".

The problem with the offense is as our highest usage player, the ball comes back and sticks to him. I posted this in the Lauri thread but the offense revolves around continuous breakdown of the defense which happens with good quick decisions and moving the ball. These breakdowns should happen 2-3 times at least before a shot is attempted. Instead, the pass comes around the first time, and sticks to Lavine which results in A) bad iso shot or B) resetting the offense because the defense is set again, pass it around again ONCE and it touches lavine, ball sticks, repeat until shot clock is low and Zach (using his one elite trait of tough shot making) makes a tough iso jumper and that's coined "carrying the team".

This continues to the bench now with Coby playing the ball sticking role.

This also cascades into Lauri getting lower usage because again, the offense doesn't go through it's progressions and Lauri is the receiver at the end (where Lavine should be too instead of the beginning)

Excellent post.

I often despair when people say "take away LaVine and this team can't score at all". Duh - we all saw what happened when Lauri sucked early on and wasn't a factor in the offense. But this just shows you how invested people are in the way the Bulls play these days. It's like the Stockholm syndrome - this has been going on for so long that many Bulls fans can't even imagine another way anymore.

That's why the thought of "removing LaVine" (which is, of course, an irrational thing in itself) strikes fear in their hearts. But if LaVine was replaced with a different player, the team would play differently.

This impatient, dumb, half-hearted chucking offense led by Zach is barely two years old. It's nothing that can't be changed. But IMO we need a different coach for that.

[Red Larrivee]

You wouldn't say "Daniel Gafford has a 127 oRTG and the Bulls have a 105.3 oRTG, therefore, he's +21.7 net."

To address the gafford blurb, yes 21.7 is the net on that. The way of reading that is "on average he scores 22 more points than the team does p100". It doesn't address how he scores those points. It can still be contextually valid. I think the energy gafford provides and the offensive gravity warping effect he has with his rim running is pretty obvious. You don't see that in the lineup weighted on/off court numbers (-4.2 net ORTG)

Obviously with any stat, it requires context. We would have a beast on our hands if Gafford could create his own shot, had high volume and was putting up a 127 ORTG. gafford has played limited minutes (<500) so his ORTG can be inflated with his very idealized role currently (grab ball, dunk). It would plummet if he starts taking jumpers. Likewise, maybe Zach is given too much of the offensive pie? With a reduced role, you can have more of an impact.


but it also goes the other way and due to Gafford's limited minutes/volume, he has a very small weight in the overall team average and he can't move the needle too much for the team

Every stat requires context, but the way you're using those stats requires a ridiculous amount of context because it's an awful way of using it. There is no net, because you're comparing two different things. It has zero consistency.

Kawhi On: 116.1 oRTG
Kawhi Off: 109.9 oRTG
(+6.2)

Your Method:
Kawhi: 112 oRTG
Clippers: 112.5 oRTG

"Whoa, maybe Kawhi isn't having a real impact on the Clippers offense."

[kingkirk]

Saying 'LaVine" is barely a net positive player would carry some weight if the Bulls had a team full of positive players.

They don't.

The last 25 games, Carter only has a 0.3 Net Rtg. Satoransky, Dunn and LaVine are the only regulars who have a positive net rating through this time (Shaq and Kornet are too).

LaVine is +1.4 while the team is -1.4. He's nowhere close to the problem.

[Red Larrivee]

Excellent post.

I often despair when people say "take away LaVine and this team can't score at all". Duh - we all saw what happened when Lauri sucked early on and wasn't a factor in the offense. But this just shows you how invested people are in the way the Bulls play these days. It's like the Stockholm syndrome - this has been going on for so long that many Bulls fans can't even imagine another way anymore.

That's why the thought of "removing LaVine" (which is, of course, an irrational thing in itself) strikes fear in their hearts. But if LaVine was replaced with a different player, the team would play differently.

This impatient, dumb, half-hearted chucking offense led by Zach is barely two years old. It's nothing that can't be changed. But IMO we need a different coach for that.

Nobody here values the Bulls offense; it's one of the worst in the league. But to sit here and pretend that LaVine is not having any positive value on this offense is completely wrong.

Yes, if you replace LaVine with a legitimate superstar, the Bulls offense would be better. Why stop there? If you replaced any player on this team with a legitimate superstar, the Bulls offense would be better. LaVine is not the reason this offense sucks; it's a collection of reasons.

[ZOMG]

Excellent post.

I often despair when people say "take away LaVine and this team can't score at all". Duh - we all saw what happened when Lauri sucked early on and wasn't a factor in the offense. But this just shows you how invested people are in the way the Bulls play these days. It's like the Stockholm syndrome - this has been going on for so long that many Bulls fans can't even imagine another way anymore.

That's why the thought of "removing LaVine" (which is, of course, an irrational thing in itself) strikes fear in their hearts. But if LaVine was replaced with a different player, the team would play differently.

This impatient, dumb, half-hearted chucking offense led by Zach is barely two years old. It's nothing that can't be changed. But IMO we need a different coach for that.

Nobody here values the Bulls offense; it's one of the worst in the league. But to sit here and pretend that LaVine is not having any positive value on this offense is completely wrong.

He has positive value if you play offense like this. We shouldn't play offense like this. We don't win.

Yes, if you replace LaVine with a legitimate superstar, the Bulls offense would be better. Why stop there? If you replaced any player on this team with a legitimate superstar, the Bulls offense would be better. LaVine is not the reason this offense sucks; it's a collection of reasons.

I didn't say anything about a superstar. But I guarantee the Bulls would be a better team if LaVine was replaced with Brogdon.

[dice]

If he is not a star why are we arguing if he's deserving of an all-star?

If you remove Lavine & continue to run Lavine's offense (create a tough shot and score) it will crash and burn. If you remove Lavine & go back to trying to run a motion offense (albeit it also requires WCJ/OPJ on the floor) I assure you the offense would look a lot more functional.

The bulls have devolved into bad iso ball habits lead by Lavine. They don't even bother with the motion anymore. You can't say the system is broken if the system isn't even being executed anymore. The offense isn't funneled back to him because of no other options, it is funneled to him BECAUSE he is the highest usage player and wants to be the leader where he's supposed to bring it back out to his teammates and lift them up. Instead it ends in a bad iso shots whether it goes in or not OR Zach passes back out as if it's a my turn your turn thing and says "Go! Go create your own shot. Your turn!".

The problem with the offense is as our highest usage player, the ball comes back and sticks to him. I posted this in the Lauri thread but the offense revolves around continuous breakdown of the defense which happens with good quick decisions and moving the ball. These breakdowns should happen 2-3 times at least before a shot is attempted. Instead, the pass comes around the first time, and sticks to Lavine which results in A) bad iso shot or B) resetting the offense because the defense is set again, pass it around again ONCE and it touches lavine, ball sticks, repeat until shot clock is low and Zach (using his one elite trait of tough shot making) makes a tough iso jumper and that's coined "carrying the team".

This continues to the bench now with Coby playing the ball sticking role.

This also cascades into Lauri getting lower usage because again, the offense doesn't go through it's progressions and Lauri is the receiver at the end (where Lavine should be too instead of the beginning)

There's a difference between a star (superstar) and an all-star. I do not believe LaVine is going to be selected as an all-star, but he has absolutely played all-star caliber basketball.

even with a very weak crop of all-star caliber performers in the east he has not played like an all-star. but i think he's close. he's actually earning his money this season, which i never thought he would for the length of his contract

[StunnerKO]

Read on Twitter

?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Stratmaster]

Yes. Too bad not many others on the team seems to be.

Zach is a winner.

I think Sato also falls into that category in the right role. I think he has a winner's mentality. But he is a bench player.

Gafford could be. Looks like we are going to have to wait longer to find out.

OPJ probably qualifies if and when he is on the court.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[SHO'NUFF]

Zach is pretty damn good.

[The Box Office]

For all the crap I give him about not playing defense and having tunnel vision, LaVine truly earned an All Star reserve spot. I'll be rooting for him.

[jordanwilliams6]

He's been great this year. I still don't think he's the best player on a top 4 seed, but he can absolutely be the best scorer. Imagine if we had an ageing Chris Paul on the team this year. A guy able to take a lot of the decision making out of Zach's hands and just get him the ball in scoring spots.

It wouldn't be a good long term solution but the team would be in the playoffs if someone like Paul was dictating the game if the final couple of minutes in all of those close losses, and the perception of Zach changes drastically.

[WindyCityBorn]

He's been great this year. I still don't think he's the best player on a top 4 seed, but he can absolutely be the best scorer. Imagine if we had an ageing Chris Paul on the team this year. A guy able to take a lot of the decision making out of Zach's hands and just get him the ball in scoring spots.

It wouldn't be a good long term solution but the team would be in the playoffs if someone like Paul was dictating the game if the final couple of minutes in all of those close losses, and the perception of Zach changes drastically.

No is arguing that LaVine can be the best player on a great team any more, but it's not his fault the Bulls management can't put together a team or that Lauri is a bust. Any one saying he is part of the problem is full of **** though.

[WindyCityBorn]

Any one notice most of the main critics of Zach are also the same ones convinced Markannen will be a star?

[Clocian]

Any one notice most of the main critics of Zach are also the same ones convinced Markannen is still a star?

Oh for sure