Left Off of Depleted Team USA: A Wakeup Call for LaVine?

[NWIBullsFan]

Zach isn't better than Fox, who plays a different position, and while I think he's comparable to Mitchell, if that's who they're taking as their young scoring guard, it's not wild to think they slotted in a position for a defensive guard like Smart.

This should be a message to Zach that he needs to becoming a more winning player, both in metrics and on the floor. He's never really been part of a team that did anything of note. Guys like that get overlooked.

Imo Zach is clearly a better player than Fox.
Fox has an efg% of .497 and 17ppg.

As far as scoring they are in different tiers, and I know they play different positions but 1 of these stat lines is all star caliber the other isnt.

Maybe it's those 27 and 39 win teams Fox has played with in SAC that has the committee so impressed?

[Jvaughn]

I actually think that Zach has gotten a little underrated at this point. The 2nd half of the season under Boylen he showed some significant improvement

This times 1000.

You'd think Zach just came off a crappy season the way this board has talked about him this offseason. I was almost convinced myself. I seriously don't get what's changed people's perception.

[bearadonisdna]

I actually think that Zach has gotten a little underrated at this point. The 2nd half of the season under Boylen he showed some significant improvement

This times 1000.

You'd think Zach just came off a crappy season the way this board has talked about him this offseason. I was almost convinced myself. I seriously don't get what's changed people's perception.

Well I made this comparison on the GB, that Beal and zachs stats aren't that far apart and Beal is all NBA caliber so I think that shows the type of player Zach is despite the recognition.

[kingkirk]

My question is this. What exactly is a winning player? Guys that play on winning teams? Sure. I get that. But how many examples have we seen of guys that were dubbed as “winners” when they were on great teams but later went into non winning situations only to become a shell of themselves. Kobe was a winner. But how much winning did he do when the teams around him were bad. Same with Wade. What about Ben Wallace? JR Smith was a decent contributor on some good Cavs teams. Does that make him a winner?

Now, I know that there are a handful of players that can single handedly lift a mediocre team to greatness. But generally speaking, being a winner has more to do with the team than any one individual. And in the case of Zach, he could definitely stand to do more to help his team win. But he’s been in some pretty jacked up situations that weren’t exactly conducive to winning. Hell, this dude really doesn’t know much else other than rebuilds. That’s just the hand that he’s been dealt.

Being on a bad team doesn't mean you can't make winning plays, nor does being on a winning team mean you're free from being classed a losing player, or any other adjective you want to use.

Ultimately, it comes down to skill and basketball IQ. The latter is something that Zach has struggled with at times, be it with turnovers, defense, shot selection etc.

That doesn't mean I think he's a bad player or can't improve, but he's been inconsistent in those aspects of the game, which doesn't surprise a sound and trust worthy player like Fox gets in over him.

[johnnyvann840]

Zach isn't better than Fox, who plays a different position, and while I think he's comparable to Mitchell, if that's who they're taking as their young scoring guard, it's not wild to think they slotted in a position for a defensive guard like Smart.

This should be a message to Zach that he needs to becoming a more winning player, both in metrics and on the floor. He's never really been part of a team that did anything of note. Guys like that get overlooked.

Imo Zach is clearly a better player than Fox.
Fox has an efg% of .497 and 17ppg.

As far as scoring they are in different tiers, and I know they play different positions but 1 of these stat lines is all star caliber the other isnt.

Maybe it's those 27 and 39 win teams Fox has played with in SAC that has the committee so impressed?

Or, maybe it's the fact that the Kings were much, much better with Fox on the floor than his replacements. Kings were +5.8 per 100 with Fox and the teams offense and defense were both significantly better with him playing than with him on the bench.

[dice]

I actually think that Zach has gotten a little underrated at this point. The 2nd half of the season under Boylen he showed some significant improvement

This times 1000.

You'd think Zach just came off a crappy season the way this board has talked about him this offseason. I was almost convinced myself. I seriously don't get what's changed people's perception.

pretty sure this board is higher on lavine this offseason than they were last offseason

as for why he's unwanted on the national team, they actually DON'T need scoring. few all-star teams do. they've got 2 first option scorers in kemba and mitchell, both of whom are clearly better all-around players than lavine. then they have a plethora of second option scorers in kuzma, middleton, tatum and barnes. even thaddeus, lopez and lowry have been second options in the past. there's only one ball

there is no niche for lavine on this or any other all-star team. not a good enough shooter to be a shooting specialist, obvious liability on defense. maybe a 2nd unit primary scorer, but i'm not sure that his liabilities make that worthwhile

[bearadonisdna]

Imo Zach is clearly a better player than Fox.
Fox has an efg% of .497 and 17ppg.

As far as scoring they are in different tiers, and I know they play different positions but 1 of these stat lines is all star caliber the other isnt.

Maybe it's those 27 and 39 win teams Fox has played with in SAC that has the committee so impressed?

Or, maybe it's the fact that the Kings were much, much better with Fox on the floor than his replacements. Kings were +5.8 per 100 with Fox and the teams offense and defense were both significantly better with him playing than with him on the bench.

So a buried stat is supposed to bear that much weight?
It's kind of weird that Zach conversations always end up with analytical criticisms but is the bulls most efficient player practically, and end up with a positive BPM despite being on a tanking team.

For context, klay freaking hall of fame Thompson has a lower BPM, so I Think Zach deserves a lot of credit when it comes to the adv stats.



On/ off doesn't have much context to me when it comes to a tanking team. That particular narrative is longstanding in league circles but to me it so freaking subjective I don't think it should be cherry picked.

[bearadonisdna]

I actually think that Zach has gotten a little underrated at this point. The 2nd half of the season under Boylen he showed some significant improvement

This times 1000.

You'd think Zach just came off a crappy season the way this board has talked about him this offseason. I was almost convinced myself. I seriously don't get what's changed people's perception.

pretty sure this board is higher on lavine this offseason than they were last offseason

as for why he's unwanted on the national team, they actually DON'T need scoring. few all-star teams do. they've got 2 first option scorers in kemba and mitchell, both of whom are clearly better all-around players than lavine. then they have a plethora of second option scorers in kuzma, middleton, tatum and barnes. even thaddeus, lopez and lowry have been second options in the past. there's only one ball

there is no niche for lavine on this or any other all-star team. not a good enough shooter to be a shooting specialist, obvious liability on defense. maybe a 2nd unit primary scorer, but i'm not sure that his liabilities make that worthwhile

Well if your trying to compete against superteam, I don't think having a 2nd option as your their 3rd best player is really better than a 1st option.

For him to fit with Mitchell and kemba he would have to play the 3, which he did a lot of last season.

Like you said they have a lot of 2nd options to play the 3. Zach isn't perceived as a 3, but if I'm a GM , I think a fair argument can be made that zach is better than Kuzma,Tatum, middleton. Ppl will value defense but at some point the offensive liability of players can negate their defensive impact, ex. Somebody like Zachy dropping 30 on them.

[johnnyvann840]

Maybe it's those 27 and 39 win teams Fox has played with in SAC that has the committee so impressed?

Or, maybe it's the fact that the Kings were much, much better with Fox on the floor than his replacements. Kings were +5.8 per 100 with Fox and the teams offense and defense were both significantly better with him playing than with him on the bench.

So a buried stat is supposed to bear that much weight?
It's kind of weird that Zach conversations always end up with analytical criticisms but is the bulls most efficient player practically, and end up with a positive BPM despite being on a tanking team.

For context, klay freaking hall of fame Thompson has a lower BPM, so I Think Zach deserves a lot of credit when it comes to the adv stats.



On/ off doesn't have much context to me when it comes to a tanking team. That particular narrative is longstanding in league circles but to me it so freaking subjective I don't think it should be cherry picked.

What does Fox being a highly positive impact player have to do with Zach Lavine? My comment was about D. Fox not about Zach Lavine. Did I mention Lavine?

But, since you brought it up I would much rather have Fox on my team than Lavine.

[bearadonisdna]

Or, maybe it's the fact that the Kings were much, much better with Fox on the floor than his replacements. Kings were +5.8 per 100 with Fox and the teams offense and defense were both significantly better with him playing than with him on the bench.

So a buried stat is supposed to bear that much weight?
It's kind of weird that Zach conversations always end up with analytical criticisms but is the bulls most efficient player practically, and end up with a positive BPM despite being on a tanking team.

For context, klay freaking hall of fame Thompson has a lower BPM, so I Think Zach deserves a lot of credit when it comes to the adv stats.



On/ off doesn't have much context to me when it comes to a tanking team. That particular narrative is longstanding in league circles but to me it so freaking subjective I don't think it should be cherry picked.

What does Fox being a highly positive impact player have to do with Zach Lavine? My comment was about D. Fox not about Zach Lavine. Did I mention Lavine?

But, since you brought it up I would much rather have Fox on my team than Lavine.

Really, another 2nd tier offensive player?
The bulls are already aware that these type of players won't ever get them over the hump.

[Bandit King]

More motivation for Lavine to prove all the haters wrong and have a great season this year!

[johnnyvann840]

So a buried stat is supposed to bear that much weight?
It's kind of weird that Zach conversations always end up with analytical criticisms but is the bulls most efficient player practically, and end up with a positive BPM despite being on a tanking team.

For context, klay freaking hall of fame Thompson has a lower BPM, so I Think Zach deserves a lot of credit when it comes to the adv stats.



On/ off doesn't have much context to me when it comes to a tanking team. That particular narrative is longstanding in league circles but to me it so freaking subjective I don't think it should be cherry picked.

What does Fox being a highly positive impact player have to do with Zach Lavine? My comment was about D. Fox not about Zach Lavine. Did I mention Lavine?

But, since you brought it up I would much rather have Fox on my team than Lavine.

Really, another 2nd tier offensive player? The bulls are already aware that these type of players won't ever get them over the hump.

No, a really smart high IQ, great play making guard, a real competitor who plays with fire on both ends of the floor. Takes good shots, makes good passes, rebounds the ball well for a PG... was good in the clutch. A 20 year old kid who averaged 19.8, 8.3 and 4.3 per 36 with a couple of steals and made a decent team a lot better when he played. Yeah, give me that.

[dice]

More motivation for Lavine to prove all the haters wrong and have a great season this year!

if hatred was his motivation he'd be a much better defender. nobody has ever hated his potential on offense

[dice]

This times 1000.

You'd think Zach just came off a crappy season the way this board has talked about him this offseason. I was almost convinced myself. I seriously don't get what's changed people's perception.

pretty sure this board is higher on lavine this offseason than they were last offseason

as for why he's unwanted on the national team, they actually DON'T need scoring. few all-star teams do. they've got 2 first option scorers in kemba and mitchell, both of whom are clearly better all-around players than lavine. then they have a plethora of second option scorers in kuzma, middleton, tatum and barnes. even thaddeus, lopez and lowry have been second options in the past. there's only one ball

there is no niche for lavine on this or any other all-star team. not a good enough shooter to be a shooting specialist, obvious liability on defense. maybe a 2nd unit primary scorer, but i'm not sure that his liabilities make that worthwhile

Well if your trying to compete against superteam, I don't think having a 2nd option as your their 3rd best player is really better than a 1st option.

the point is that if a player's only strong suit is scoring and he's only the 2nd or 3rd scoring option his value to a team diminishes substantially

For him to fit with Mitchell and kemba he would have to play the 3, which he did a lot of last season.

he was never going to be a starter, so that's not really relevant

[bearadonisdna]

What does Fox being a highly positive impact player have to do with Zach Lavine? My comment was about D. Fox not about Zach Lavine. Did I mention Lavine?

But, since you brought it up I would much rather have Fox on my team than Lavine.

Really, another 2nd tier offensive player? The bulls are already aware that these type of players won't ever get them over the hump.

No, a really smart high IQ, great play making guard, a real competitor who plays with fire on both ends of the floor. Takes good shots, makes good passes, rebounds the ball well for a PG... was good in the clutch. A 20 year old kid who averaged 19.8, 8.3 and 4.3 per 36 with a couple of steals and made a decent team a lot better when he played. Yeah, give me that.

We probably value the ability to be a teams leading scorer differently.
You seem to prefer balanced play but a guy like fox will need a supplemental piece to lead the team. A guy ironically like zach.

[LateNight]

I actually think that Zach has gotten a little underrated at this point. The 2nd half of the season under Boylen he showed some significant improvement

This times 1000.

You'd think Zach just came off a crappy season the way this board has talked about him this offseason. I was almost convinced myself. I seriously don't get what's changed people's perception.

Yeah - I was pretty harsh on Zach at the midway point of last season (having wanted to draft him out of college) - but he actually started to address a lot of the issues during the second half, and it showed in the win column. He was making the first pass, not dribbling into traps as much.

I have high hopes for Zach. He shows improvement constantly -- and if he can become a solid team defender (or even just a better/elite 1-on-1 defender)... the ceiling's the roof.

[Ccwatercraft]

I haven't been made aware that Zach was upset. As a fan, and as an organization I find it preferable that he is not on the team, focus on the Bulls, stay healthy, eat right, workout as needed, get ready for the season, learn more about your Bulls teammates, etc...

As far as I'm concerned, no strong message was sent or received, so this talk about a wakeup call is just trying to make an issue where there isn't one. I honestly have no idea who is on the 15 man roster as I write this. Basically my opinion is that whoever wants to get upset or make it like some kind of statement is free to do as they wish, I'm used to ignoring the white noise.

[drosereturn]

My question is this. What exactly is a winning player? Guys that play on winning teams? Sure. I get that. But how many examples have we seen of guys that were dubbed as “winners” when they were on great teams but later went into non winning situations only to become a shell of themselves. Kobe was a winner. But how much winning did he do when the teams around him were bad. Same with Wade. What about Ben Wallace? JR Smith was a decent contributor on some good Cavs teams. Does that make him a winner?

Now, I know that there are a handful of players that can single handedly lift a mediocre team to greatness. But generally speaking, being a winner has more to do with the team than any one individual. And in the case of Zach, he could definitely stand to do more to help his team win. But he’s been in some pretty jacked up situations that weren’t exactly conducive to winning. Hell, this dude really doesn’t know much else other than rebuilds. That’s just the hand that he’s been dealt.

Being on a bad team doesn't mean you can't make winning plays, nor does being on a winning team mean you're free from being classed a losing player, or any other adjective you want to use.

Ultimately, it comes down to skill and basketball IQ. The latter is something that Zach has struggled with at times, be it with turnovers, defense, shot selection etc.

That doesn't mean I think he's a bad player or can't improve, but he's been inconsistent in those aspects of the game, which doesn't surprise a sound and trust worthy player like Fox gets in over him.

He cant improve if he has low iq. Who cares abt athleticism if you dont even know what your weaknesses are and only play one side of the ball. You can literally argue JR was better on the Cavs since he played decent D and knew his role as a 3rd option.

[drosereturn]

I actually think that Zach has gotten a little underrated at this point. The 2nd half of the season under Boylen he showed some significant improvement

This times 1000.

You'd think Zach just came off a crappy season the way this board has talked about him this offseason. I was almost convinced myself. I seriously don't get what's changed people's perception.

Yeah - I was pretty harsh on Zach at the midway point of last season (having wanted to draft him out of college) - but he actually started to address a lot of the issues during the second half, and it showed in the win column. He was making the first pass, not dribbling into traps as much.

I have high hopes for Zach. He shows improvement constantly -- and if he can become a solid team defender (or even just a better/elite 1-on-1 defender)... the ceiling's the roof.

Basically the difference between Beal and Lavine is defense and playmaking.
Those are not hard to improve but its more about having the right mindset rather than being talented.
I am worried he becomes Carmelo 2.0 and doesnt care abt winning but more abt getting his 30 pts per game.

[Betta Bulleavit]

My question is this. What exactly is a winning player? Guys that play on winning teams? Sure. I get that. But how many examples have we seen of guys that were dubbed as “winners” when they were on great teams but later went into non winning situations only to become a shell of themselves. Kobe was a winner. But how much winning did he do when the teams around him were bad. Same with Wade. What about Ben Wallace? JR Smith was a decent contributor on some good Cavs teams. Does that make him a winner?

Now, I know that there are a handful of players that can single handedly lift a mediocre team to greatness. But generally speaking, being a winner has more to do with the team than any one individual. And in the case of Zach, he could definitely stand to do more to help his team win. But he’s been in some pretty jacked up situations that weren’t exactly conducive to winning. Hell, this dude really doesn’t know much else other than rebuilds. That’s just the hand that he’s been dealt.

Being on a bad team doesn't mean you can't make winning plays, nor does being on a winning team mean you're free from being classed a losing player, or any other adjective you want to use.

Ultimately, it comes down to skill and basketball IQ. The latter is something that Zach has struggled with at times, be it with turnovers, defense, shot selection etc.

That doesn't mean I think he's a bad player or can't improve, but he's been inconsistent in those aspects of the game, which doesn't surprise a sound and trust worthy player like Fox gets in over him.

He cant improve if he has low iq. Who cares abt athleticism if you dont even know what your weaknesses are and only play one side of the ball. You can literally argue JR was better on the Cavs since he played decent D and knew his role as a 3rd option.

Wasn’t it just a few weeks ago where there was an article/interview with Zach where he talked at length about defense and how he wanted to become better as a help defender and how that would be a point of emphasis next season? He’s plenty aware. He just needs to get better. The bottom line is that some people just don’t like him as a player but they find it hard to really reason that. So they come up with unsubstantiated reasoning such as bbiq, not being a winner and other stuff because they can’t back up that he’s a poor player via core stats. That’s how I see it.