JimmyJammer wrote: Showtime23 wrote: MrSparkle wrote:
Thing with Zach is he’s not a even a true double-team threat (like Rose). He just shot such a high volume and teams knew he had the green flag, and they also knew he couldn’t make a pretty assist to save his life, so they started doubling him.
Rose was a guaranteed 2pts on any individual cover unless you put a huge athletic freak like Lebron on him. And even then, the real down-fall of that series wasn’t Rose getting shut down by Lebron as much as nobody else being able to provide any relief or spacing for Rose. Boozer, Deng and Korver got shut down and badly outplayed by their match-ups.
So the comparison is ludicrous. Zach’s offense is not in the same stratosphere.
I still see him more in the Will Barton, JR Smith and Jamal Crawford realm. He basically has more athleticism, a better attitude and a greener light to handle the ball (even though it generated one of the worst offenses in the league).
For a team with as many “shooters” as the Bulls have had the last 2 years, I don’t understand how it’s possible to be ranked 28th in offense if you have a legitimate all-star. Any all-star I could think of, even Iverson or Marbury, they knew how to create a simple play for others. Guys like Jamal, Lou and JR could not, so they often played 6th man or “out-of-offense” microwave roles.
Zach is not a playmaker, period. He’s not efficient either. So giving him 30%+ usage is absurd and a recipe for lottery records he’s amassed the last few years. He’s an athletic chucker. I do think part of the plan will be to trade him for a better core player, strategically sell him high.
I will say, he gets to the line a lot, and he is capable of making incredible shots and 3Ps.
So ideally, if you can't trade him for a better core player, than the goal should be to resign him below max and continue improving his ability to play off-the-ball, while building a better 3-man core to lead the way. Sounds hard to do , because it is. Zach is definitely the buy-low, chip addition type of player. Dirk Mavs were the type of culture that benefitted from acquiring the Stackhouses and Terrys. They had a top-down structure with a clear #1 option who embraced any talent. Tough seeing Zach as a veteran leader of a winning team.
Not only he doesnt draw double teams, he doesnt play fast nor motion offense which is what AK is all about.
If Lavine truly wants to be alpha dominant as the fanboys want, theres only 1 answer and become James Harden but we all know his brain cant handle it. Should have been seeing going to the line at least 10 times when hes several times more athletic.
The only characterstic he fits is shooting but thats only if he is willing to play the Klay Thompson off the ball below 30 usg rate.
AK already figured out Lavine is not a piece you build around. He is just figuring out how to sell him at the highest price to replace him with a low usage two way player.
Am I missing something here? Did AK say something about Lavine that I should know about?
Ha I don't think AK said anything about any individual players yet, besides for expecting a better year out of Lauri.
I think Showtime takes the Zach criticisms to the next level...
I would certainly give him a new coach with a new coach and a new system. I don't see why Zach couldn't play "fast" - he's one of the most athletic players and dunkers in the league. Only thing I second is that his usage rate must come down below 30%. Klay would be a wonderful player to emulate, but I just don't see that working out for Zach. Lunar opposite instincts and mentalities. My philosophy is feed into a player's strengths, and simply maneuver them into a position where they'll be pros and not cons.
IMO the key is forming a ball-handling system around 2 players not named Zach. I do think Coby and Otto are basically a working tandem.
I know he sets an impossible standard, but MJ played such a beautiful game on-and-off the ball within the triangle offense. There's so much to learn just by watching the guy. He routinely gave the ball up to Pippen. Zach should watch a compilation of MJ footage that highlights everything he did without scoring
. I do think it's worth a shot, getting Zach to build toward that type of game. It's not easy to re-invent your game in the NBA, but it is very possible for a 25 year old to mature as an individual, put the brakes on trying to wow the world with circus shots, dunks and pumping stats. If a coach believed in Zach's potential and they formed a symbiotic relationship, Zach DOES have a potential to unlock. It's not Klay. It's more along the lines of MJ (not the caliber of player, but the style of player). An athletic scorer. But he has a lot of things to work on (foot-work, off-the-ball/working with screens, assists, rebounding, general awareness). These are fundamentals that can be improved with teaching.
IMO Jim was a bad type of coach because he wanted to take all these soft offensive scorers and turn them into blitz defenders. Made them focus on nothing but defense, yet their offensive games all took a dump. I think they needed a more balanced approach. Actually a more structured offense, more rebounding, and less 3P/on-ball defensive pressure.
I'm definitely not
on-board with "dumping" Zach. I'm into the idea of trading him if he can net a star return like Simmons, but I realize that's a long-shot hypothetical. The decision of resigning him to a bigger contract is difficult and should be considered. But what you do have is a high-ceiling problem with problems mainly regarding fundamentals.
We know the league is different. It's not like the 80s and early 90s where guys left college with most fundamentals in-grained. Zach literally without structure. I think a few more years with Thibs and no ACL tear would've had him on the right track. I would definitely not write off a 25 year old player who averaged almost 30 ppg.
I dunno, maybe a less similar (style) but parallel player comparison would be Jerry Stackhouse.