Lonzo Ball Thread (UPDATE: Bulls Offer Sato + 2nd Round picks)

[nomorezorro]

"we shouldn't trade for lonzo ball because i don't want to have to deal with insane lonzo ball fans" is a compelling argument tbh

[TheStig]

Nobody is calling him a future hall of famer...But the amount of love he is getting is ridiculous...Not only here but twitter, reddit etc...

He will not put us over the top just like Sato wouldnt...And he will ask for a lot of money next year...Thats just my opinion...

What does put us over the top? I think he's a guy who can defend, shoot, create and has great vision. He's a good starter and solid 2 way player. Those guys have value. I think he does make the team a few wins better and address an area of need.

Save your money to a star...Dont waste on guys like ball or lauri...Rather have bums like Sato making 10M a year than Lonzo making over 20M a year.

There are no stars to sign in the next couple of years. That cap space isn't helping you get one. Becoming a good team and having assets when one demands out or the draft will be the way to get one. We obviously refuse to really tank. So getting a guy like Ball will improve your team.

It's also worth noting that he's young and still improving. He will just be hitting his prime at the end of the deal you're giving him.

And to be honest, if the cap is really going to skyrocket in the new tv deal, Ball and Lauri will be good deals at 20mill.

[TheStig]

One crazy out-of-the-box idea:

Bulls Trade: Otto Porter
Pelicans Trade: Lonzo Ball, Bledsoe, and a 1st round pick

Bledsoe's contract isn't great, but he can contribute and overall can make us better. It's been reported that NO has been trying to get out of his contract and knows that it will likely cost them a 1st round pick. For us, it does take us out of the FA market, but improves our depth, gets us the guard we want, and gives us a 1st round pick for our troubles.

I don't love the idea, but it's a different idea.

Doubt you're going to get a 1st rounder here. Bledsoe is only owed 37M over two years next year. Maybe you could get one that projects into absolute crap, but even just Porter for Bledsoe + Ball without the 1st is intriguing.

Challenge with that is it prevents you from locking up Zach with our own cap room this summer, but I might be okay with that.

Surprised how many people want to dump Coby for Ball given Coby has two years left of cheap deal and Ball is going to be a massive contract. Hard for me to be excited about Ball on a 4/80 or something similar type deal starting next year. With Ball a lot depends on if you really trust his three point shooting, and I can't say I do.

I don't see how a 4/80 deal for Ball comes back to bite you in the butt. He's young, athletic, 2 way player, can shoot, defend, create a little and has excellent vision. I think that's the kind of guy you would want to bring in. He'll have an immediate impact and help you win. He'll continue to improve throughout the deal and he'll come in and fill one of our biggest needs. Our pg play sucks and we have soooo many turnovers.

I think you'll see a huge impact bringing him in. We have no real 2 way players. He's a guy you can throw out there for 32mpg and get good minutes.

[BahamaBull]

What does put us over the top? I think he's a guy who can defend, shoot, create and has great vision. He's a good starter and solid 2 way player. Those guys have value. I think he does make the team a few wins better and address an area of need.

Save your money to a star...Dont waste on guys like ball or lauri...Rather have bums like Sato making 10M a year than Lonzo making over 20M a year.

There are no stars to sign in the next couple of years. That cap space isn't helping you get one. Becoming a good team and having assets when one demands out or the draft will be the way to get one. We obviously refuse to really tank. So getting a guy like Ball will improve your team.

It's also worth noting that he's young and still improving. He will just be hitting his prime at the end of the deal you're giving him.

And to be honest, if the cap is really going to skyrocket in the new tv deal, Ball and Lauri will be good deals at 20mill.

OMG! Do you really think paying Lauri 20M a good deal? Wow! Wondering why do you think that? Dude cant create his own shot, average outside shooter, horrible defender, soft, injury prone...and still gets 20M?

I respect your opinion but I think with this new FO we have a much better shot at attracting FAs. Dont see Lauri or Ball as starters in the future (especially Lauri) so I wouldnt pay them that much.

But at the end of the day I trust Arturas

[TheStig]

Save your money to a star...Dont waste on guys like ball or lauri...Rather have bums like Sato making 10M a year than Lonzo making over 20M a year.

There are no stars to sign in the next couple of years. That cap space isn't helping you get one. Becoming a good team and having assets when one demands out or the draft will be the way to get one. We obviously refuse to really tank. So getting a guy like Ball will improve your team.

It's also worth noting that he's young and still improving. He will just be hitting his prime at the end of the deal you're giving him.

And to be honest, if the cap is really going to skyrocket in the new tv deal, Ball and Lauri will be good deals at 20mill.

OMG! Do you really think paying Lauri 20M a good deal? Wow! Wondering why do you think that? Dude cant create his own shot, average outside shooter, horrible defender, soft, injury prone...and still gets 20M?

I respect your opinion but I think with this new FO we have a much better shot at attracting FAs. Dont see Lauri or Ball as starters in the future (especially Lauri) so I wouldnt pay them that much.

But at the end of the day I trust Arturas

If the cap more than doubles with the new tv deal, then a 20 million dollar deal will be a few mill over the mle. I'm not a big Lauri fan but at the right price I'd keep him.

But I definitely think Ball will be worth his deal if he's not playing with a couple of ball dominant players.

[dougthonus]

I don't see how a 4/80 deal for Ball comes back to bite you in the butt. He's young, athletic, 2 way player, can shoot, defend, create a little and has excellent vision. I think that's the kind of guy you would want to bring in. He'll have an immediate impact and help you win. He'll continue to improve throughout the deal and he'll come in and fill one of our biggest needs. Our pg play sucks and we have soooo many turnovers.

I think you'll see a huge impact bringing him in. We have no real 2 way players. He's a guy you can throw out there for 32mpg and get good minutes.

Yeah, just not sure he's really much more of a playmaker than Satoransky is and I don't trust his shooting, though it has been fine for two years.

[dougthonus]

If the cap more than doubles with the new tv deal, then a 20 million dollar deal will be a few mill over the mle. I'm not a big Lauri fan but at the right price I'd keep him.

The new TV deal won't kick in until the 25/26 season. If Lauri signs a 4 year deal this off-season, none of it would be on the new TV deal, if he did a 5 year with us only 1 year would.

[TheStig]

If the cap more than doubles with the new tv deal, then a 20 million dollar deal will be a few mill over the mle. I'm not a big Lauri fan but at the right price I'd keep him.

The new TV deal won't kick in until the 25/26 season. If Lauri signs a 4 year deal this off-season, none of it would be on the new TV deal, if he did a 5 year with us only 1 year would.

Good point, forget him lol.

[TheStig]

I don't see how a 4/80 deal for Ball comes back to bite you in the butt. He's young, athletic, 2 way player, can shoot, defend, create a little and has excellent vision. I think that's the kind of guy you would want to bring in. He'll have an immediate impact and help you win. He'll continue to improve throughout the deal and he'll come in and fill one of our biggest needs. Our pg play sucks and we have soooo many turnovers.

I think you'll see a huge impact bringing him in. We have no real 2 way players. He's a guy you can throw out there for 32mpg and get good minutes.

Yeah, just not sure he's really much more of a playmaker than Satoransky is and I don't trust his shooting, though it has been fine for two years.

I think he's played with a lot of ball dominant guys. It's hard to create when you have Bron/Ingram or Ingram/Zion getting all the touches. But he can do it on a higher level and is better than Sato. I think he'd be great pushing the tempo for these guys and finding open looks. Zach isn't a huge ball stopper and would look even better off the ball at times.

[dougthonus]

I think he's played with a lot of ball dominant guys. It's hard to create when you have Bron/Ingram or Ingram/Zion getting all the touches. But he can do it on a higher level and is better than Sato. I think he'd be great pushing the tempo for these guys and finding open looks. Zach isn't a huge ball stopper and would look even better off the ball at times.

He has athletic limitations and isn't great at making plays off the dribble. He's good at pushing the pace and making plays in transition. I actually think Sato might be a better half court playmaker, but I can't say I've watched enough Lonzo to really have a definitive view on that.

[TheStig]

I think he's played with a lot of ball dominant guys. It's hard to create when you have Bron/Ingram or Ingram/Zion getting all the touches. But he can do it on a higher level and is better than Sato. I think he'd be great pushing the tempo for these guys and finding open looks. Zach isn't a huge ball stopper and would look even better off the ball at times.

He has athletic limitations and isn't great at making plays off the dribble. He's good at pushing the pace and making plays in transition. I actually think Sato might be a better half court playmaker, but I can't say I've watched enough Lonzo to really have a definitive view on that.

Doug, this is silly. Why would we offer Sato and a 2nd to get a RFA if he's the worse player? Ball is a better player than Sato and has room to grow. He's not Steph Curry and that's why he's available.

[fleet]

Sato is 30 and is has more or less completed his development, while Lonzo is 23 and just beginning to fill out some of his potential. Lonzo has a sort of Joe Johnson career glide path opportunity. Lonzo has had a lot of expectations placed on him perhaps too early. To compare Sato and Ball is to look away from respective circumstances

[Leslie Forman]

At what point does a player who's supposedly "good" have to actually help a team?

For a guy who is supposedly a basketball genius he sure doesn't seem to actually improve teams much.

Paying a lot of money to a guy who's strongest trait is "nice passes in fastbreaks" seems incredibly stupid to me.

[BigUps]

Good snippet from the below article on trading for Lonzo.

It’s... more than fair to say that Ball isn’t on a Hall-of-Fame trajectory right now. And there is a reason Lonzo has shifted to more of an off-ball role during his NBA career, and especially in New Orleans.

In order to earn primary initiator reps, you have to bend defenses in some way. You can stress defenses with the threat of deep pull-ups -- think Steph Curry, Damian Lillard, Trae Young. You can stress defenses with constant rim pressure -- think Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Russell Westbrook, De’Aaron Fox. The best players in the sport can do both, but you need at least one of those skills to warrant a lead role.

Lonzo hasn’t done that to this point of his career. He’s averaging 5.8 drives per 36 minutes, according to NBA.com’s tracking data, down from his 6.5 average attempts in the same category last season. He’s never converted higher than 37.5% of his field goal attempts on drives in a season, which is problematic for obvious reasons.

The threat of the pull-up isn’t there yet. Though his percentages have risen over the past couple of seasons -- Lonzo ranks in the 65th percentile in dribble jumpers this season, per Synergy -- teams still largely guard him the same way, ducking under picks and daring him to shoot. It’s a positive that he’s gotten better at knocking those shots down, but defenses are dictating that shot for him, not the other way around.

Compare that to the growth of his off-ball shooting -- he’s drilled 38% of his threes on nearly seven attempts over the past two seasons -- and it’s easy to see why a secondary role makes sense for him. When you have rim threats like Zion and Ingram forcing rotations, Lonzo is able to feast on easier catch-and-shoot looks or “one-more” passes.

The article states it better than I have been able to while debating with friends about Ball. His success this season is because he's been moved to a complimentary role on the Pelicans. He was drafted to be a playmaker, but that hasn't panned out in his career. Its a testament to him for being able to adapt his game to a new role that isn't what he's used to. I give him a ton of credit for that, but its fair to question if he'd help us fix any perceived PG problems that we have. Lonzo's success is because he's been moved away from being a PG, not because he's grown his PG game.

If the Bulls are trading for an off the ball spot up shooter that can play some defense I don't want that players name to be Lonzo Ball. He's just not a good enough shooter and for his production in that role he'll cost significantly more than what we should be paying for that role.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-trade-deadline-rumors-where-does-lonzo-ball-go-from-here-memphis-grizzlies-miami-heat-new-york-knicks

[BigUps]

I think he's played with a lot of ball dominant guys. It's hard to create when you have Bron/Ingram or Ingram/Zion getting all the touches. But he can do it on a higher level and is better than Sato. I think he'd be great pushing the tempo for these guys and finding open looks. Zach isn't a huge ball stopper and would look even better off the ball at times.

He has athletic limitations and isn't great at making plays off the dribble. He's good at pushing the pace and making plays in transition. I actually think Sato might be a better half court playmaker, but I can't say I've watched enough Lonzo to really have a definitive view on that.

Doug, this is silly. Why would we offer Sato and a 2nd to get a RFA if he's the worse player? Ball is a better player than Sato and has room to grow. He's not Steph Curry and that's why he's available.

For me, the two 2nd rounders we're offering are because Lonzo has more potential than Sato. I'd agree with that, but as of today, I'm with Doug to where I don't believe Lonzo is a better overall player than Sato. They are both role players with gaps in their games, but Lonzo is younger and certainly showed very good playmaking ability in college (just not so much in the NBA).

[StunnerKO]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[PaKii94]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[VolumePoster]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

The old flexor, eh? Wonder if Lauri is similarly stricken.

[League Circles]

Man please don't do it AK. We can do better than that for our PG. Keep looking.

[GoBlue72391]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

The old flexor, eh? Wonder if Lauri is similarly stricken.

So it's very likely Lonzo is getting traded at this point. But where? What other teams have been involved in trade talks for him other than the Bulls?

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app