What's new
By:
Filters

Zach Lavine's rise to greatness

fishonjazz said:
If he puts up those numbers then you will have been right imo
Click to expand...

it's possible to put up empty stats, right?

(that's my point with Jefferson. If you score 20 but are a sieve on the defensive end, are you a star? If your team can't win 30 games, are you a star?)
 
fishonjazz said:
If he puts up those numbers then you will have been right imo
Click to expand...

He already averaged that for the last month of the season, and every other game he got starter minutes.

I'm not breaking ground here. He's already shown he can do it. And he did it at a very young 20 years old. This isnt rocket science. I'm just battling morons who have a bias against him and foolishly think he's just a dunker.

All anyone had to do is watch him last year and look at the box score. Hell, he went off on us. How this is hard to see is a mystery to me.
 
Ya but I think if lavine puts those numbers up, in combination with his flashy style, he will be considered a star by almost everyone.

And I think that young al jefferson was thought of as an up coming star.

I remember jazz fans getting very excited by a d-will big al pairing
 
Hack said:
He already averaged that for the last month of the season, and every other game he got starter minutes.

I'm not breaking ground here. He's already shown he can do it. And he did it at a very young 20 years old. This isnt rocket science. I'm just battling morons who have a bias against him and foolishly think he's just a dunker.

All anyone had to do is watch him last year and look at the box score. Hell, he went off on us. How this is hard to see is a mystery to me.
Click to expand...
I with ya. I think he will be very good. I like him.
And his dunk contest win was one of the best I have seen.
 
He shows a lot of signs of empty-stating.

He needs major improvement on defense.

I'm uncomfortable calling someone a "star" when their teams don't win.
 
NAOS said:
He shows a lot of signs of empty-stating.

He needs major improvement on defense.

I'm uncomfortable calling someone a "star" when their teams don't win.
Click to expand...

He's only 20 years old fool. We are projecting. But I'm sure you are gonna be back tracking real soon here. I can feel it.

His whole team is young. I don't think the Wolves are a good organization by any stretch, but they now have enough young talent that it's going to be real hard for them not to be good. So in a couple years, they will be winning a lot of games, and Zach Lavine will be a big part of the success because he's going to be really good. He's already really good.

The Wolves not winning a lot of games this year, will have nothing to do with how good Lavine is going to be
 
He's a really terrible defender. I see him as Harold Miner 2.0 Pretty flashy and looks like he might be a real good player but he'll go nowhere. Don't see him being a player who helps his team to win.
 
NAOS said:
He shows a lot of signs of empty-stating.

He needs major improvement on defense.

I'm uncomfortable calling someone a "star" when their teams don't win.
Click to expand...

I detest this argument.
Mgmt, coaching, roster... All things a player doesn't choose.
I don't give a **** about Lavine, fwiw, but I hate our measuring stick.
 
Hack said:
He's so gonna ball.

He's getting the starting job because they can see how good he is in training camp. He's tearing it up.

Making fun of NAOS is going to happen a lot sooner than he would like.
Click to expand...

can't wait for him to empty-stat his way through a season where his team wins approximately 25 games. GUNNA BE EPIC BROUGHS!
 
Zach may turn into a good player.

When I saw him play in-person a few times (at UCLA), he looked soft in all the wrong ways. All I've said is that it would take years to turn himself into a different type of player. I've never said that was impossible.

At this point, acting like he's a sure thing is just stupid fanboy behavior.
 
NAOS said:
I wouldn't call that an argument. It's more of a I-refuse-to-argue-with-the-stupidest-person-on-jazzfanz kind of comment.
Click to expand...

1) You are right, it's not much of an argument.

2) Who is this Stupidest person you speak of?

3) Because you aren't doing a very good job of refusing to argue.

4)it's a weak argument because if gives you your out no matter what he does

5) grow up

6) grow a brain

7) you suck at analyzing basketball players

8) truth
 
you're the stupidest person on jazzfanz. If you weren't so stupid, that part would have been obvious.
 
Zach Lavine:

ORPM: -2.53 DRPM:-4.34 RPM:-6.87 WAR: -5.34

OBVIOUSLY A STAR HAS BEEN BORN!!!
 
NAOS said:
Zach Lavine:

ORPM: -2.53 DRPM:-4.34 RPM:-6.87 WAR: -5.34

OBVIOUSLY A STAR HAS BEEN BORN!!!
Click to expand...


Why do people use stats like those to try and prove anything? You don't think that his teamates have something to do with those numbers? You do know that it's just an estimate of his impact right?

He was also just a rookie. You don't think he is gonna get better?

That's why you stats nerds will never get it, and will never be good at analyzing players. You don't have an eye for the game and talent. It's funny because those numbers will dramatically change, and then what will you argue?
 
Hack said:
Why do people use stats like those to try and prove anything? You don't think that his teamates have something to do with those numbers? You do know that it's just an estimate of his impact right?

He was also just a rookie. You don't think he is gonna get better?

That's why you stats nerds will never get it, and will never be good at analyzing players. You don't have an eye for the game and talent. It's funny because those numbers will dramatically change, and then what will you argue?
Click to expand...

Stats nerds, lol. Do you even know what those stats measure?

Stats are one thing you can use for evidence in an argument.

Dear Hacl, What's your evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top