"Star player" Zach Lavine with 9pts.

[LAZERUSS]

He's a clown, not relevant, and still you make a thread about him

If you are directing this at me...I didn't start this topic...although I could have. My name is brought up every time Lavine has a good game. Which isn't very often.

[Cocaine80s]

Lavine is a superstar already

Everyone has a bad game

[LAZERUSS]

Lavine is a superstar already

Everyone has a bad game

Evidently everyone in the NBA is now a superstar.

[JtotheIzzo]

Hasn't this 21 year old clown played for nearly two seasons now? And with a combined W-L record of 39-110? And a career PER of 13.1?

Again...get back to me when he is putting up meaningful games on a winning team. As long as he is playing 35+ mpg...I don't see that happening any time soon.

This is a very disingenuous argument tactic and one that cripples discussion because of its asinine nature. Asinine, mainly because the author is dismissively putting the burden of proof on another from a hypothetical well in the future. The discussion is the ability of the player in question, and one cannot judge a player if you demand proof from a hypothetical set in the future.

We have to judge young players based on what we see, not from their environment. Yes, their environment does make the above request valid, but the above carries nowhere near the weight necessary to truly cloud judgement.

It can change things. For example bumps like this in production are often seen at the end of the season when players are getting a long look, and the opposition might be taking it a bit easy after a long grind.

Lavine is getting a long look, and basically his destiny in this league (IMHO) is not that of a superstar, nor is it that of a scrub. I initially thought he would be disposable since he is so lost on the defensive end of the floor and borderline special needs with his bball IQ, but he has shown an ability to score, and make plays.

Lavine's destiny in this league is that of an electric six man on a playoff team, a Jamal Crawford 2.0.

So while yes, we won't know how good a team he will contribute on until he gets on a better team, but balking at him whilt he is on a team that is basically Rubio, 5 kids 3 grandpas and a few scrubs is not fair.

We can with some sobriety see a change in his career arc over these past two weeks.

[GOATJono]

This thread is too harsh imo, give the kid a break he is already better than Wiggins.

[LAZERUSS]

This is a very disingenuous argument tactic and one that cripples discussion because of its asinine nature. Asinine, mainly because the author is dismissively putting the burden of proof on another from a hypothetical well in the future. The discussion is the ability of the player in question, and one cannot judge a player if you demand proof from a hypothetical set in the future.

We have to judge young players based on what we see, not from their environment. Yes, their environment does make the above request valid, but the above carries nowhere near the weight necessary to truly cloud judgement.

It can change things. For example bumps like this in production are often seen at the end of the season when players are getting a long look, and the opposition might be taking it a bit easy after a long grind.

Lavine is getting a long look, and basically his destiny in this league (IMHO) is not that of a superstar, nor is it that of a scrub. I initially thought he would be disposable since he is so lost on the defensive end of the floor and borderline special needs with his bball IQ, but he has shown an ability to score, and make plays.

Lavine's destiny in this league is that of an electric six man on a playoff team, a Jamal Crawford 2.0.

So while yes, we won't know how good a team he will contribute on until he gets on a better team, but balking at him whilt he is on a team that is basically Rubio, 5 kids 3 grandpas and a few scrubs is not fair.

We can with some sobriety see a change in his career arc over these past two weeks.

Here's the deal...

Before Lavine even started an NBA game there were those here touting him as something special. I merely pointed out at the time, that Lavine had been an average player, at best, in his one college season, and who rode the bench, shot poorly, and was a non-factor in UCLA's biggest games. To be honest, I was absolutely stunned that he was even drafted.

So, and as I expected, he did practically nothing in his rookie season. BUT, whenever he did have a good game...I was ripped for having claimed that he was nothing special in college. He had one good game early on, against a horrid Laker team with a putrid backcourt, and the Lavine-Lovers plastered the board.

As the season wore on he contributed nothing. But, at the end of the season, he again hung a couple of good games...and the lovers came out of the woodwork to point them out (with jabs at me.)

Then in his second season, he again was basically worthless until the last few weeks. But even those games need to be tempered. I have seen him shoot horrifically until the game is well out of reach, and I have seen games where he played well until the last few minutes, when he choked down the stretch. He finally had a clutch game a couple of nights ago, and the lovers made sure to point it out (specifically to me.)

I understand the most all players are drafted today on "potential", but the majority of them at least had flashes of brilliance in college (Wiggins, KAT, and AD come to mind.) Lavine had ZERO impact in his one college season. The scouts must have seen something that I didn't (I follow UCLA basketball, albeit, not nearly as much as I used to.)

If Lavine goes on to have a good NBA career...more power to him. But I am sick-and-tired of these "I told you so's" ...who only pop up in the few good games that he has played.

Get back to me when he actually plays well in a meaningful environment. I have seen a ton of "flash-in-the-pans" in my lifetime, and I certainly don't put much stock in a handful of meaningless games. I have even witnessed 50+ point games by scrubs. But what I need to see from Zach is exceptional play, in meaningful games, and in critical situations. Until then...I'm, sorry, but I'll continue to be a "doubting Lazeruss."

[Spurs m8]

He's 21 too...

[Ass Dan]

Here's the deal...

Before Lavine even started an NBA game there were those here touting him as something special. I merely pointed out at the time, that Lavine had been an average player, at best, in his one college season, and who rode the bench, shot poorly, and was a non-factor in UCLA's biggest games. To be honest, I was absolutely stunned that he was even drafted.

So, and as I expected, he did practically nothing in his rookie season. BUT, whenever he did have a good game...I was ripped for having claimed that he was nothing special in college. He had one good game early on, against a horrid Laker team with a putrid backcourt, and the Lavine-Lovers plastered the board.

As the season wore on he contributed nothing. But, at the end of the season, he again hung a couple of good games...and the lovers came out of the woodwork to point them out (with jabs at me.)

Then in his second season, he again was basically worthless until the last few weeks. But even those games need to be tempered. I have seen him shoot horrifically until the game is well out of reach, and I have seen games where he played well until the last few minutes, when he choked down the stretch. He finally had a clutch game a couple of nights ago, and the lovers made sure to point it out (specifically to me.)

I understand the most all players are drafted today on "potential", but the majority of them at least had flashes of brilliance in college (Wiggins, KAT, and AD come to mind.) Lavine had ZERO impact in his one college season. The scouts must have seen something that I didn't (I follow UCLA basketball, albeit, not nearly as much as I used to.)

If Lavine goes on to have a good NBA career...more power to him. But I am sick-and-tired of these "I told you so's" ...who only pop up in the few good games that he has played.

Get back to me when he actually plays well in a meaningful environment. I have seen a ton of "flash-in-the-pans" in my lifetime, and I certainly don't put much stock in a handful of meaningless games. I have even witnessed 50+ point games by scrubs. But what I need to see from Zach is exceptional play, in meaningful games, and in critical situations. Until then...I'm, sorry, but I'll continue to be a "doubting Lazeruss."

I agree with much of what you say, Lavine is a child

[robert de niro]

laz go feed the birds at the park instead of stalking and bullying a lil boy you creep