Zach Lavine

[Dan Majerle]

Current Rating : 78
Proposed Rating : 81

Second highest PER in his team behind Towns. Below are the comparable stats from the last season and this season.

	MIN	PPG	OFFR	DEFR	RPG	APG	SPG	BPG	TPG	FPG	A/TO
Current Rating	37.9	21.4	0.5	2.8	3.3	3.1	0.8	0.3	2	2.3	1.6
Previous Season	28	14	0.3	2.5	2.8	3.1	0.8	0.2	1.9	2.4	2

[Andrei Kirilenko]

I really like Lavine but I worry that we're getting into another "parts are greater than the whole" scenario... which always seems to happen with the Wolves for some reason. I'm fine with increasing Lavine but we need to decrease Rubio and/or Wiggins if we do that. We just can't have four guys above an 80 on one of the worst teams in the league.

[Kevin Hollis]

Dec 24, 2016 15:33:48 GMT Andrei Kirilenko said:

I really like Lavine but I worry that we're getting into another "parts are greater than the whole" scenario... which always seems to happen with the Wolves for some reason. I'm fine with increasing Lavine but we need to decrease Rubio and/or Wiggins if we do that. We just can't have four guys above an 80 on one of the worst teams in the league.

Agree. 79

[Jeremiah Hill]

Dec 24, 2016 15:33:48 GMT Andrei Kirilenko said:

I really like Lavine but I worry that we're getting into another "parts are greater than the whole" scenario... which always seems to happen with the Wolves for some reason. I'm fine with increasing Lavine but we need to decrease Rubio and/or Wiggins if we do that. We just can't have four guys above an 80 on one of the worst teams in the league.

I said it from the start that Wiggins was overrated in the sim even with his athleticism. Rubio can't even make a layup being as high as he is/was is laughable.

Towns is still inconsistent on defense.

I've been railing against inflated rookie ratings for years now. Rookies and 2nd year players just do not contribute to winning. Look at Davis, his team blows dick and he is one of the highest rated players (his team is actual combo of injury ridden and scrubs though).

Minnesota is one of the youngest teams in the West with one of the worst records. What is the likelihood that the T Wolves D5 ovr ratings is higher than another team in the west with a better record? Does that not mean anything?

[Jeremiah Hill]

Just did the math. Only used players we have

Real T Wolves Roster Avg D5 Ratings
76.38

Real Denver Nuggets Avg D5 Ratings
74.57

[Kevin Hollis]

I agree that young player ratings are over inflated, but people have one good game and people think they should be increased to an 80.

[Ian Noble]

Dec 24, 2016 18:29:15 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

I agree that young player ratings are over inflated, but people have one good game and people think they should be increased to an 80.

Not so much with our 2016 crop IMHO. Brandon Ingram has started life at 71 iirc, most players are 70 or below.

I'm a big fan of LaVine. It always seems like TWolves players get overrated though, like Pekovic was an 81 until recently.

79

[Kevin Hollis]

Dec 24, 2016 20:06:03 GMT Ian Noble said:

Dec 24, 2016 18:29:15 GMT Kevin Hollis said:

I agree that young player ratings are over inflated, but people have one good game and people think they should be increased to an 80.

Not so much with our 2016 crop IMHO. Brandon Ingram has started life at 71 iirc, most players are 70 or below.

I'm a big fan of LaVine. It always seems like TWolves players get overrated though, like Pekovic was an 81 until recently.

79

It's more of a young player rating rather than rookies.

[Walt Frazier]

I'm going to slightly agree with you guys, but we should look at the whole roster and not necessarily take it out on one player just b/c he's the one up for review currently.

Second, young players do have a higher athleticism generally that does need to be accounted for.

Third, we should always try to consider not just "how much a player has improved" but also "what should their rating be right now." They are sometimes separate things. That does imply a recognition that players could be rated incorrectly.

Fourth - I find it HILARIOUS that Barber is trashing LaVine/Wolves while at the same time asking for Booker to be an 80 from the Suns (one more loss than the TWolves, same # of Wins). Care to compare their stats?

Anyway, for me, LaVine is an 81 and I believe that's a little conservative with his athleticism.

[Walt Frazier]

9-21 record. 33:15 mpg. 41.3 / 33.3 / 81.1 - 2.3Def/0.6Off, 3.2AST, 2.7TO, 0.9ST, 0.3BK, 19.3PPG
9-20 record. 37:56 mpg. 47.7 / 39.8 / 87.8 - 2.8Def/0.5Off, 3.1AST, 2.0TO, 0.8ST, 0.3BK, 21.4PPG

Alright, so considering Lavine's 4+ extra minutes per game, I'd say Points are a wash, Def Rebound are a wash. Booker slightly better Block, and steal, and Assist. LaVine WAY better FG, 3PT, FT. Lavine a little better Def Rebound. Lavine a less careless ball handler/off aware.

Call me overly analytical, but LaVine's advantages are much larger in the terms of the ratings we use. And, he plays on an ever-so-slightly better team than Booker. And, his stamina should be maxed out, that's a ton of minutes.

Should be at least a 2-point rating gap even w/o factoring in athleticism. 3PT Rating should be one entire OVR rating by itself. FT is 6-7 (which is almost half of an OVR rating point). FG, which is going to be broken down into inside and FG and Dunk, has to make up at least another one, probably close to two OVR rating points. Everything else comes close to washing out, then LaVine probably has some athletic advantages. So, 3 or more OVR rating point difference now that I look at it more in depth.

Just my opinion based on the ratings we use and how stats translate into ratings.

[Alex English]

80.

I get the point Josh is making, but there isn't a 1:1 ratio of ratings to wins. Also Rubio needs to be lowered, that guy is very mediocre and nothing more. He still can't shoot, and at this point in his career, he never will. So an 84 for Towns, 80 for Wiggins and an 80 for Lavine won't yield great results imo. The Pelicans and Rockets of D5 last season were similarly rated, and they were both sub .500 teams.

[Deleted]

drops 40 points? I'd say a player like that is worthy of an 80 rating.

[Andrei Kirilenko]

Dec 25, 2016 1:27:52 GMT Walt Frazier said:

I'm going to slightly agree with you guys, but we should look at the whole roster and not necessarily take it out on one player just b/c he's the one up for review currently.

Second, young players do have a higher athleticism generally that does need to be accounted for.

Third, we should always try to consider not just "how much a player has improved" but also "what should their rating be right now." They are sometimes separate things. That does imply a recognition that players could be rated incorrectly.

Fourth - I find it HILARIOUS that Barber is trashing LaVine/Wolves while at the same time asking for Booker to be an 80 from the Suns (one more loss than the TWolves, same # of Wins). Care to compare their stats?

Anyway, for me, LaVine is an 81 and I believe that's a little conservative with his athleticism.

chill bruva my very first sentence was that i liked Lavine

[Walt Frazier]

Dec 25, 2016 2:21:17 GMT Andrei Kirilenko said:

Dec 25, 2016 1:27:52 GMT Walt Frazier said:

I'm going to slightly agree with you guys, but we should look at the whole roster and not necessarily take it out on one player just b/c he's the one up for review currently.

Second, young players do have a higher athleticism generally that does need to be accounted for.

Third, we should always try to consider not just "how much a player has improved" but also "what should their rating be right now." They are sometimes separate things. That does imply a recognition that players could be rated incorrectly.

Fourth - I find it HILARIOUS that Barber is trashing LaVine/Wolves while at the same time asking for Booker to be an 80 from the Suns (one more loss than the TWolves, same # of Wins). Care to compare their stats?

Anyway, for me, LaVine is an 81 and I believe that's a little conservative with his athleticism.

chill bruva my very first sentence was that i liked Lavine

Fair enough. I missed your actual rating (did you give one?) so I just assumed the body of your statement implied LaVine didn't deserve a boost.

[Brian Scalabrine]

81

[Jeremiah Hill]

I agree with Ian that this set of rookies was the least overrated but we have to catch up with the ones who are bad from years before and bring them down to reality.

He's been more efficient overall. I change my rating to 80. Thats fine.

[Charles Barkley]

Lavine is from the Wiggins class, yes? They came in massively overrated and we talked about it when it happened.

I don't think Lavine is an 80, but I think he is better than Booker.

IMO, all Lavine does is score and dunk. Which is literally all the stats and highlight reels tell us he does. He may do those things at a very efficient rate, yes, but I feel like his defense holds him back.

Also, I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure Lavine's athleticism is in no need of an adjustment. IIRC, we adjusted him and built a great template for him.

79

[Charles Barkley]

Dec 25, 2016 2:08:52 GMT @raptorfan707 said:

drops 40 points? I'd say a player like that is worthy of an 80 rating.

This sort of thinking is pretty dumb

[Deleted]

Dec 29, 2016 4:28:11 GMT Charles Barkley said:

Dec 25, 2016 2:08:52 GMT @raptorfan707 said:

drops 40 points? I'd say a player like that is worthy of an 80 rating.

This sort of thinking is pretty dumb

Okay, i guess that this would need more backing up.but dropping 40 points is impressive this was just one reason as to why lavine should be an 80.Thus was just some of my input on my opinion but my vote doesnt really count and you guys are posting plenty of other great reasons so i just put an input worthy coming from an assistan GM  

[Deleted]

But yeah he can drop 40 points but that doesnt mean hes good at defense.All aspects of his stats need to be considered so yeah my reasoning was dumb but he's worthy of an increase lets just say that.

[Hanamichi Sakuragi]

80.

[Jeremiah Hill]

Honestly we need to drop Wiggins to an 80 and raise Lavine to an 80.


They are basically the same damned player.

www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&hint=Andrew+Wiggins&player_id1_select=Andrew+Wiggins&y1=2017&player_id1=wiggian01&hint=Zach+LaVine&player_id2_select=Zach+LaVine&y2=2017&player_id2=lavinza01#per_game::none

[Deleted]

Dec 29, 2016 4:43:52 GMT @raptorfan707 said:

But yeah he can drop 40 points but that doesnt mean hes good at defense.All aspects of his stats need to be considered so yeah my reasoning was dumb but he's worthy of an increase lets just say that.

mo Williams had a 50 point game on the Twolves 2 years ago.

[Deleted]

81

[James Kay]

80