The Zach Lavine Problem

[Paxson43]

I'm a Wolves fan so take it for what it's worth, but here's what you got:

Cons:
-Doesn't know how to defend yet in a team concept and is/was too weak physically to fight through screens in a league that more or less has made the moving pick legal.
-Significant injury that once was a career killer but now is, more often than not, something an athlete can recover from.

Pros:
-Potentially elite shooter
-Elite, fluid athlete with a top 5 first step and excellent handle. He's not just bouncy, he's fast as hell with or without the ball and has a lot of wiggle to him.
-Natural born scorer
-Workaholic gym rat who adds major pieces every year to date. The time off appears to have added some upper body mass as well.

Is he the perfect prospect? No, of course not, but his upside, if you can get him healthy and develop him, is immense. He can be a 28+ ppg scorer and true #1 option. From a pure box checking standpoint, he's super high end.

Thanks for your unbiased opinion, bro. We have a ton of butt-hurt Butler fans here that are trying to **** on everything Bulls because he's gone. It's tiring, I appreciate your honesty.

People's evaluation of Butler has little to do with their evaluation of LaVine. LaVine's issues (that he will command a max-ish contract prior to proving himself as a statistical positive difference maker, that he's coming off injury, and that he's not really an asset if he's a free agent who you could have thrown money at next year without trading for him) have nothing to do with Butler

For some, sure. I will bet money there are fans here that are viewing EVERYTHING Bulls through "poop"-colored glasses because Jimmy Butler is gone. Guarantee it.

If Jimmy was still here and this kid was traded to us for a 2nd round pick, these same people would be doing back flips.

[molepharmer]

It's truly fascinating to me how Bulls fans of all people can be so buoyant about a prospect after he's had an ACL injury, as if we didn't go through the Derrick Rose experience.

Having a science background helps tremendously, if you're genuinely fascinated and not being facetious......

If you have a science background, you might find this interesting. I don't know anything about the journal "Sports Health", but I assume this publication has been reviewed by peers since it's at PubMed and written by an orthopedics group.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3806178/

Apparently that 2011 publication has been referenced in a recent, although not as large sample size, 2017 publication.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28449611

TLDR version - Return to performance the first season after ACL is generally slightly less than pre-ACL. But by season 2, there's no significance difference in performance from controls (i.e. those w/o ACL injuries, and adjusted for adding two years in age). note - I probably butchered the conclusions a bit.

[KissedByaRose1]

I mean, you guys can rationalise an ACL injury all you like. Some definitely come back just as good, others don't. It's a case by case situation. Hopefully LaVine rediscovers his form, but until he does, I think people should be holstering their hopes on LaVine until he shows us how well his body has recovered and if he can stay away from out injuries that may be caused down the line because of the knee injury.

He could turn out to be a great player. He could also go down the Jabari Parker route and sustain another huge injury. All I'm saying is let's wait and see before banking on the Bulls having some 24 PPG scorer locked in at SG for the next 8-10 seasons.

I'm with you and I want to be excited about Lavine but the face that he just tore his knee is just devastating. Roses game was 150% based off of athleticism and quickness and from what i've seen/have read about Lavine he seems to be in a similar boat. I'm praying to God he didn't lose what made him special but there's just an OVERWHELMING amount of data out their point to the contrary.

If you're trying to be optimistic i'd suggest the below line of thinking

Adrian Petersen played in Minnesota, tore his ACL and came back better than ever....
Zach Lavine played in Minnesota, tore his ACL and.............

Pretty freaking thin. But it's all I have

[Paxson43]

Dennis Smith, Jr. is still jumping out of the gym after ACL surgery, and we're lucky that this happened to Lavine when he was 21 years old. He's ahead of schedule, the Bulls (I pray) will be conservative with him, and God-willing he'll be back to normal (if not better) by the time we are ready to try and compete in the Association.

No, nothing is guaranteed, but as of RIGHT NOW the prospects of him not being negatively impacted by this injury are promising.

[Ice Man]

If Jimmy was still here and this kid was traded to us for a 2nd round pick, these same people would be doing back flips.

?

Yes of course people would be delighted to get LaVine for a 2nd round pick. Or a middle first round pick. Or probably a high first round pick. He hasn't been an overall good player yet in his NBA career, but he clearly *could* be -- he has high upside.

What does any of this have to do with Jimmy Butler?

[Paxson43]

If Jimmy was still here and this kid was traded to us for a 2nd round pick, these same people would be doing back flips.

?

Yes of course people would be delighted to get LaVine for a 2nd round pick. Or a middle first round pick. Or probably a high first round pick. He hasn't been an overall good player yet in his NBA career, but he clearly *could* be -- he has high upside.

What does any of this have to do with Jimmy Butler?

I think some of the "hate" being throw LaVine's way is because it came, ostensibly, at the expense of Jimmy Butler and some posters here are pissy about it. Just my opinion, of course, but I believe in it strongly.

[Ice Man]

I think some of the "hate" being throw LaVine's way is because it came, ostensibly, at the expense of Jimmy Butler and some posters here are pissy about it.

Nah. The debate is between those who like advanced stats and those who prefer the eye test. Jimmy Butler >>>> Zach LaVine on advanced stats, whereas Zach is at least as good already as Butler on the eye test. He's a high-flying 3-point bomber who is a ton of fun to watch. So the first group values Butler highly and doesn't think that LaVine is yet a particularly good player, and the second group thinks that Butler was overrated (not a real superstar) and LaVine is a star on the rise.

That is what is going on here, for the most part.

[tedwilliams1999]

It's truly fascinating to me how Bulls fans of all people can be so buoyant about a prospect after he's had an ACL injury, as if we didn't go through the Derrick Rose experience.

Having a science background helps tremendously, if you're genuinely fascinated and not being facetious......

If you have a science background, you might find this interesting. I don't know anything about the journal "Sports Health", but I assume this publication has been reviewed by peers since it's at PubMed and written by an orthopedics group.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3806178/

Apparently that 2011 publication has been referenced in a recent, although not as large sample size, 2017 publication.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28449611

TLDR version - Return to performance the first season after ACL is generally slightly less than pre-ACL. But by season 2, there's no significance difference in performance from controls (i.e. those w/o ACL injuries, and adjusted for adding two years in age). note - I probably butchered the conclusions a bit.

Those are the same studies I found as well, when doing a literature search on ACL tears and the subsequent recovery. Obviously the data is pretty limited in sample size when it comes to elite, NBA athletes, but the new research coming out is definitely very encouraging. That first study has most of its results confounded by including players with ACL tears in the 80s and 90s, when sports rehabilitation was just exploding as a medical field. Despite this, they still didn't find any significant drop off in performance in year 2, when compared to the control group. The second study is more recent, and has similar findings.

I've been scrubbed in on two ACL reconstructive surgeries, and the procedure itself is pretty simple in concept - it also hasn't changed all that much over the years. Depending on the doctor, different grafts are used, but the research on which one is better is inconclusive so far. Regardless of this, all the grafts used are all usually stronger than the native ligament, so ligament strength is certainly never the issue. The most complicated aspect, then, ends up being the rehab process. Most elite athletes, especially if below their physical prime years (late 20s), will regain all of the original strength in the knee, and then usually get even stronger. Remember Rose jumping even higher after his ACL injury?

So strength obviously isn't an issue, unless you tear an ACL in your late 20s or early 30s. The biggest obstacle for these younger players then is the proprioception that's lost with an ACL tear. This is where partial tears can be differentiated from whole ACL tears, even though the surgery and rehab process is the same. With partial tears, like LaVine's most likely was, during the surgery the original ACL ligament strands that are undamaged are left in place, and the new graft is added to the bundle. The research on preserving the original undamaged ligaments is pretty new over the past 10 years, but early studies have shown a faster return to sport, and improved recovery times with respects to balance and proprioception. This is all because the remaining ACL fibers still carry some of native receptors, making the recovery process much smoother.

There are no guarantees when it comes to ACL tears, but being a 22 year old and tearing an ACL is infinitely better than being 26+. Guys like Dennis Smith, Kyle Lowry, Baron Davis, Bonzi Wells, and Jamal Crawford, who had ACL tears in college or early in their NBA careers, all returned as better players, and as more athletic players. On the flip side, players like Rondo and Al Jefferson, who suffered the injury later on in their career, returned as shells of their former selves.

And then we have Derrick Rose, the guy who's causing most of us on this board to be extremely pessimistic when it comes to LaVine... That's another topic entirely. Standard ACL re-injury rates are about 3-5%, and Rose's ACL repaired knee actually did hold up pretty well. It was all of his other problems that ruined him. What was the cause of those injuries? Who knows...

[Stratmaster]

I think some of the "hate" being throw LaVine's way is because it came, ostensibly, at the expense of Jimmy Butler and some posters here are pissy about it.

Nah. The debate is between those who like advanced stats and those who prefer the eye test. Jimmy Butler >>>> Zach LaVine on advanced stats, whereas Zach is at least as good already as Butler on the eye test. He's a high-flying 3-point bomber who is a ton of fun to watch. So the first group values Butler highly and doesn't think that LaVine is yet a particularly good player, and the second group thinks that Butler was overrated (not a real superstar) and LaVine is a star on the rise.

That is what is going on here, for the most part.

I am likely in the eye test crowd. I don't consider Butler a superstar and think Lavine could be something special. Still, I in no way am projecting Lavine as becoming a superior player to what Butler was the last couple of seasons. Assuming good health for both players, I think 2019-2020 Lavine has a chance to be better than 2019-2020 Butler as Lavine enters his prime and Jimmy begins to exit from his prime. There is upside for Lavine past the player Butler is right now; however, that is all that it is...upside.

When you add in that the Bulls also got Dunn and Lauri (or at least got a better player in Lauri than they could have drafted otherwise) I don't understand those who consider the trade to be a disaster, or that the Bulls got robbed. The Bulls chose a course and as much as I disagree with the course...I think the trade was perfectly appropriate for the path they chose.

[DroseReturnChi]

Browsing through this thread i saw lots of comparisons (Klay Thompson, Demar Derozen, James Harden, etc). Just think of Zach as a bigger, more athletic, much better shooting Devin Booker.

The funny thing is I bet the majority in this forum will trade everything plus Butler for Booker who is a similar player to Zach.
Zach and Booker are one of the best upcoming sgs under age 22 but one seems to be way overrated here just bc he's a first option.

[DroseReturnChi]

I think some of the "hate" being throw LaVine's way is because it came, ostensibly, at the expense of Jimmy Butler and some posters here are pissy about it.

Nah. The debate is between those who like advanced stats and those who prefer the eye test. Jimmy Butler >>>> Zach LaVine on advanced stats, whereas Zach is at least as good already as Butler on the eye test. He's a high-flying 3-point bomber who is a ton of fun to watch. So the first group values Butler highly and doesn't think that LaVine is yet a particularly good player, and the second group thinks that Butler was overrated (not a real superstar) and LaVine is a star on the rise.

That is what is going on here, for the most part.

So then why are people raving about Booker while trash talking Lavine when they are literally the same player? I just dont get the hate on Zach when he has a better character than Butler and always humble. Offensive wise, Lavine pretty much has the whole package at age 22. I doubt a single ACL and 1 year difference makes that worse of a player and Zach is already scheduled to attend training camp.

[Paxson43]

I think some of the "hate" being throw LaVine's way is because it came, ostensibly, at the expense of Jimmy Butler and some posters here are pissy about it.

Nah. The debate is between those who like advanced stats and those who prefer the eye test. Jimmy Butler >>>> Zach LaVine on advanced stats, whereas Zach is at least as good already as Butler on the eye test. He's a high-flying 3-point bomber who is a ton of fun to watch. So the first group values Butler highly and doesn't think that LaVine is yet a particularly good player, and the second group thinks that Butler was overrated (not a real superstar) and LaVine is a star on the rise.

That is what is going on here, for the most part.

So then why are people raving about Booker while trash talking Lavine when they are literally the same player? I just dont get the hate on Zach when he has a better character than Butler and always humble. Offensive wise, Lavine pretty much has the whole package at age 22.

That's what I don't understand either and it's a big part of why I think the Butt-ler hurt Bulls fans are intentionally viewing LaVine through "poop"-colored lenses. We've had Wolves fans come here and rave about the kid, I don't think I've seen a single one say "wow, I'm glad that bum is gone!".

It's perplexing.

[chrispatrick]

Nah. The debate is between those who like advanced stats and those who prefer the eye test. Jimmy Butler >>>> Zach LaVine on advanced stats, whereas Zach is at least as good already as Butler on the eye test. He's a high-flying 3-point bomber who is a ton of fun to watch. So the first group values Butler highly and doesn't think that LaVine is yet a particularly good player, and the second group thinks that Butler was overrated (not a real superstar) and LaVine is a star on the rise.

That is what is going on here, for the most part.

So then why are people raving about Booker while trash talking Lavine when they are literally the same player? I just dont get the hate on Zach when he has a better character than Butler and always humble. Offensive wise, Lavine pretty much has the whole package at age 22.

That's what I don't understand either and it's a big part of why I think the Butt-ler hurt Bulls fans are intentionally viewing LaVine through "poop"-colored lenses. We've had Wolves fans come here and rave about the kid, I don't think I've seen a single one say "wow, I'm glad that bum is gone!".

It's perplexing.

1.) it seems odd to generalize that everyone loves Booker. I'm sure a couple people said as much but i doubt they speak for everyone.
2.) you basically call people butt hurt or "butt-ler" hurt because they disagree with your opinion of LaVine.
3.) i've seen many mixed opinions on LaVine on the Wolves board. I've seen posts on the Wolves board saying it was a mistake to let LaVine go and I've seen posts on their board saying losing LaVine will help (i'm not saying either opinion is right). I think everyone agrees the offensive tools are all there, but some have expressed serious concern over his defense and why the team has performed better offensively without him. we all agree he has potential, it's just that you're going to have to pay him the max to find out if he can reach it.

[Paxson43]

So then why are people raving about Booker while trash talking Lavine when they are literally the same player? I just dont get the hate on Zach when he has a better character than Butler and always humble. Offensive wise, Lavine pretty much has the whole package at age 22.

That's what I don't understand either and it's a big part of why I think the Butt-ler hurt Bulls fans are intentionally viewing LaVine through "poop"-colored lenses. We've had Wolves fans come here and rave about the kid, I don't think I've seen a single one say "wow, I'm glad that bum is gone!".

It's perplexing.

1.) it seems odd to generalize that everyone loves Booker. I'm sure a couple people said as much but i doubt they speak for everyone.

I never said that, unless you were speaking to DroseReturnChi

2.) you basically call people butt hurt or "butt-ler" hurt because they disagree with your opinion of LaVine.

This is a false generalization, but I do think there are plenty of fans with that perspective

3.) i've seen many mixed opinions on LaVine on the Wolves board. I've seen posts on the Wolves board saying it was a mistake to let LaVine go and I've seen posts on their board saying losing LaVine will help (i'm not saying either opinion is right). I think everyone agrees the offensive tools are all there, but some have expressed serious concern over his defense and why the team has performed better offensively without him. we all agree he has potential, it's just that you're going to have to pay him the max to find out if he can reach it.

I think there's a lot to that... do you know how many 2016-2017 Timberwolves had a positive DBPM last season, playing more than 1,000 minutes that season? Three. Know how many the 2016-2017 Bulls had? 7. I think our system is a lot easier to learn compared to what Thibs runs and I'm of the opinion it will help LaVine (as well as the added strength he has added since last season)

My answers above in red

[kingkirk]

Thanks for your unbiased opinion, bro. We have a ton of butt-hurt Butler fans here that are trying to **** on everything Bulls because he's gone. It's tiring, I appreciate your honesty.

[Paxson43]

Thanks for your unbiased opinion, bro. We have a ton of butt-hurt Butler fans here that are trying to **** on everything Bulls because he's gone. It's tiring, I appreciate your honesty.

Fairrrrrrllllly certain he's watched more Timberwolves games than you have, and he has no reason to blow sunshine up our asses. Unbiased and I appreciate it!

Chin up, Mark. Everything will be ok!

[kingkirk]

Fairrrrrrllllly certain he's watched more Timberwolves games than you have, and he has no reason to blow sunshine up our asses. Unbiased and I appreciate it!

Chin up, Mark. Everything will be ok!

He can have his unbiased opinion. I'm laughing st your ridiculous assertion.

[Paxson43]

Fairrrrrrllllly certain he's watched more Timberwolves games than you have, and he has no reason to blow sunshine up our asses. Unbiased and I appreciate it!

Chin up, Mark. Everything will be ok!

He can have his unbiased opinion. I'm laughing st your ridiculous assertion.

Laugh away! The word 'ton' was probably hyperbole but overall I know I'm right.

[Dominator83]

Thanks for your unbiased opinion, bro. We have a ton of butt-hurt Butler fans here that are trying to **** on everything Bulls because he's gone. It's tiring, I appreciate your honesty.

Im more Butt-ler hurt about the fact that they could have just drafted Lavine instead of Doug and maybe they wouldn't have had to trade Jimmy.

This is why I have my doubts in this rebuild. I'm all for it, but we still have the same mopes picking the players that put us in this position of having to blow it up in the 1st place. It's already looking like they blew their first high pick of the rebuild with DSJ looking miles better than Lauri. I know it's early and hopefully Lauri makes me eat some crow, but at this point Gar doesn't get the benefit of the doubt considering he hasn't hit on a pick in 5 years running. I know his picks weren't very high, but every one of those drafts produced guys that were significantly better AFTER gars pick

[Paxson43]

Thanks for your unbiased opinion, bro. We have a ton of butt-hurt Butler fans here that are trying to **** on everything Bulls because he's gone. It's tiring, I appreciate your honesty.

Im more Butt-ler hurt about the fact that they could have just drafted Lavine instead of Doug and maybe they wouldn't have had to trade Jimmy.

This is why I have my doubts in this rebuild. I'm all for it, but we still have the same mopes picking the players that put us in this position of having to blow it up in the 1st place. It's already looking like they blew their first high pick of the rebuild with DSJ looking miles better than Lauri. I know it's early and hopefully Lauri makes me eat some crow, but at this point Gar doesn't get the benefit of the doubt considering he hasn't hit on a pick in 5 years running. I know his picks weren't very high, but every one of those drafts produced guys that were significantly better AFTER gars pick

I find a ton of solace in the fact that we have a direction. Whether Hoiberg is the right guy or not at this point is going to be irrelevant. We're acquiring young talent that will fit what he wants to do, and my hope is that we're building something great and he'll be coaching us for a while.

Is that a longshot? Sure, absolutely. But what's the alternative? Cursing every move and **** on everything Bulls until the entire organization is demolished? Not interested.

Maybe loving the Cubs re-build and actually reaping the rewards of my patience changed me, but I don't think we would ever have won a title with Butler, so we turned him into young assets and we're trying again.