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

[Hold That]

I’d honestly trade Wendell and Sato for Zo right now. I think it’s a fair trade where both players would need a fresh start being very young still.

[dougthonus]

I’d honestly trade Wendell and Sato for Zo right now. I think it’s a fair trade where both players would need a fresh start being very young still.

Wouldn't give up Wendell for Lonzo. Not that I value Wendell so much, but even as just a cheap contract big for a year and a half, Wendell probably has more value than Lonzo for half a season before he's a FA.

[gobullschi]

The Bulls have needed a true point guard for years and when one is available, you're shocked that people are interested? We aren't realistically talking about moving any big assets for the guy. He is about to be a free agent, it's very obvious that his days in New Orleans are numbered, he's having his worst season of his career, and is clearly a terrible fit in Stan Van Gundy's system. His trade value is literally at an ALL-TIME low. Plus, when you project what type of contract he is expecting to receive next season it becomes even more transparent why New Orleans wants to move him.

Ricky Rubio is probably his closest comparison right now, although you could certainly make the argument that Rubio has outplayed Lonzo in nearly every statistical category. Given his age (23) and upside, MAYBE he could get a contract at 17M/annually. That's not the most ideal way to use the Bull's cap space, even though there aren't that many options that are better in the offseason.

I don't see the harm in moving guys like Valentine, Hutchison, or Satoransky with a second round pick to see if he would flourish in Billy Donovan's system. None of those guys can really stay healthy either and Lonzo is younger than all of them.

Why do the Bulls need a "true" PG when such players haven't been that common on the league's best teams in decades????

The Bulls invested in a bunch of players that struggle to create for themselves. Hence, they need a point guard that can create scoring opportunities for them. Billy Donovan has pointed out this flaw on multiple occasions and it’s why many get frustrated with Zach LaVine. When defenses clamp down in the 4th quarter, Zach is the only player that can consistently create his own shot. Defenses know this.

Coby is the only other player on the Bulls roster that can create some space, although not nearly as consistently as LaVine.

[Hold That]

I’d honestly trade Wendell and Sato for Zo right now. I think it’s a fair trade where both players would need a fresh start being very young still.

Wouldn't give up Wendell for Lonzo. Not that I value Lonzo so much, but even as just a cheap contract big for a year and a half, Wendell probably has more value than Lonzo for half a season before he's a FA.

Then maybe Denzel and Temple both probably won’t be on the roster next year for us. I just dont want any picks involved with the bulls sending them out.

[Kukoc-Lauri]

Mission pointguard 1.Young for Rubio 2.Porter for Ball and Redick 3.Porter,Satoransky for Conley. 4. Carter and Valentine for Graham. 5. Young for P.Mills 6. Young for Monte Morris 7. Carter and Hutchinson for G.Hill 8. Lavine,Markkanen and 21 frp for B.Simmons 9. Hutchinson,Kornet and second rdp 21 for D.Rose 10. Porter for Powell and Brunson.

[jnrjr79]

What about Thad and a 2nd for Lonzo? You're giving up a guy who won't likely be around next year, but you get off his partially guaranteed 3rd year just in case. Then you can get a look at Lonzo and sign him if you like what you see or have slightly enhanced cap space next season if you let him walk.

[DroseReturnChi]

I’d honestly trade Wendell and Sato for Zo right now. I think it’s a fair trade where both players would need a fresh start being very young still.

Wouldn't give up Wendell for Lonzo. Not that I value Wendell so much, but even as just a cheap contract big for a year and a half, Wendell probably has more value than Lonzo for half a season before he's a FA.

whats the point of having cheap contracts whose not long term?
at this point, these guys are not worth the development time its better disposing for someone like zo who is a long term solution.

[LateNight]

What about Thad and a 2nd for Lonzo? You're giving up a guy who won't likely be around next year, but you get off his partially guaranteed 3rd year just in case. Then you can get a look at Lonzo and sign him if you like what you see or have slightly enhanced cap space next season if you let him walk.

Thad has more value than Lonzo right now (on our team and as a trade asset). In fact, I think most of the pieces we would be trading have more value than Zo.

Someone pointed out that it feels like you'd need a 3 team trade to make this work functionally, and that's probably right.

[DroseReturnChi]

Coby has been a disappointment this year. He hasn't shot well, doesn't run the offense well, etc.

Coby per 36
16.3p 6.0a 5.3r 2.9tov 51.4%ts

Ball per 36
13.6p 5.3a 4.3r 2.8tov 48.2%ts

WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Why would anyone consider trading something of value for him?

your literally counting stats man theres nothing to debate if you cannot see their difference.
white is on his way to become josh jackson to the point playing him is a net negative.
lonzo has fatal flaws but he covers our weakness very well its worth a gamble. keeping bc his cheap is a stupid argument to become lou williams which is basically trash.

[RSP83]

I'd definitely take Lonzo over Sato. But won't switch Coby with Lonzo.

If Coby and Lonzo can be combined into a single player, they will turn into a perfect Point Guard.

[dougthonus]

whats the point of having cheap contracts whose not long term?

Because they still fill valuable minutes at good rates of ability per dollar in the short term.

at this point, these guys are not worth the development time its better disposing for someone like zo who is a long term solution.

There is literally no reason to think Lonzo is more of a long term solution to anything than Carter / Coby. He's probably less likely to be a long term solution given that he's objectively worse this season than either player and has played, by FAR, the most minutes and had the most opportunity to develop.

[coldfish]

Coby has been a disappointment this year. He hasn't shot well, doesn't run the offense well, etc.

Coby per 36
16.3p 6.0a 5.3r 2.9tov 51.4%ts

Ball per 36
13.6p 5.3a 4.3r 2.8tov 48.2%ts

WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Why would anyone consider trading something of value for him?

your literally counting stats man theres nothing to debate if you cannot see their difference.
white is on his way to become josh jackson to the point playing him is a net negative.
lonzo has fatal flaws but he covers our weakness very well its worth a gamble. keeping bc his cheap is a stupid argument to become lou williams which is basically trash.

Lonzo is a bad NBA player. Coby is also a bad NBA player. Their flaws are different but they both are not acceptable NBA PG's.

If the Bulls are going to give up assets to try to fix the PG position they should try to get someone that actually fixes the position.

[DroseReturnChi]

I'd definitely take Lonzo over Sato. But won't switch Coby with Lonzo.

If Coby and Lonzo can be combined into a single player, they will turn into a perfect Point Guard.

pointless statement. what does coby has to do with lonzo? trading for lonzo means AK is going to serious playoff mode and woe fas.
You think a top 10 player like AD is going to take us seriously if Coby is chucking 15 shots a game and impeding development pw?
When your a playoff team, guys like thad, sato becomes extremely valuable bc they do a lot for their low usage and know to sacrifice for the team. Like you dont freaking develop pw and white at the same time and go to playoffs.
I dont mind keeping coby but you gotta choose a direction. you cannot have it both ways like garpax.

[League Circles]

I just don't understand. Do people think Lonzo has a chance to be the long term guy running the offense for this team? If not, why do we care about bringing a guy in on an expiring contract to maybe, but most likely not, be a marginal upgrade over Temple????

Coby hasn't played well, but he at least has a chance to be an effective long term starter. Because he is 2 years less into his contract than Ball and doesn't shoot like Joakim Noah. Adding Ball to this roster, even for free, would harm it IMO.

We're really, really at a point with this roster where we need to ONLY add actual good players or great prospects. Lonzo Ball is absolutely surely neither one of those things. We have enough flawed cooks in the kitchen......

[GoBlue72391]

If we can get Lonzo as our PG while sliding Coby to 6th man without giving up anything of consequence I'd be in favor of it. And I say that as someone who hates the Ball family.

We would probably lose him in the off-season to a team who offers him more than we're willing to match. I wouldn't want his extension to possibly interfere with our potential free agency moves down the line.

Sent from my SM-S115DL using RealGM mobile app

[cjbulls]

I just don't understand. Do people think Lonzo has a chance to be the long term guy running the offense for this team? If not, why do we care about bringing a guy in on an expiring contract to maybe, but most likely not, be a marginal upgrade over Temple????

Coby hasn't played well, but he at least has a chance to be an effective long term starter. Because he is 2 years less into his contract than Ball and doesn't shoot like Joakim Noah. Adding Ball to this roster, even for free, would harm it IMO.

We're really, really at a point with this roster where we need to ONLY add actual good players or great prospects. Lonzo Ball is absolutely surely neither one of those things. We have enough flawed cooks in the kitchen......

I think he’s shown more than you’re giving him credit for. He shot well from 3 last year and is a decent defender which the Bulls are missing in the backcourt. He is now stuck in a different system where he’s playing SG. I think his flaws are likely too big to overcome, but I’m willing to risk Sato (who isn’t much of a long term fit) to take a four month lotto ticket on Ball.

I’m more fearful he slightly breaks out to the point we overpay him.

[MGB8]

Like most on this thread, I wouldn't object to a true "buy low" scenario - Sato + a (conditional) 2nd; Hutchinson + a (conditional) 2nd; heck, the Pels needs shooting so maybe Valentine for Ball straight up.

But I wouldn't trade anything of value for Ball - if he plays fantastically for the Bulls there's the new contract to worry about; if he doesn't, he just isn't worth much --- very MCW around the time that the Bulls acquired MCW.

My guess is that the Pels want something of value for Ball.

[MGB8]

What about Thad and a 2nd for Lonzo? You're giving up a guy who won't likely be around next year, but you get off his partially guaranteed 3rd year just in case. Then you can get a look at Lonzo and sign him if you like what you see or have slightly enhanced cap space next season if you let him walk.

My preference honestly would be to keep Thad. He has more value in the offseason as a partially guaranteed contract (a way for teams to shed cap) and, in the meantime, you need veterans who can play to help youngsters.

Thad's deal is reasonable, too - maybe a slight overpay, maybe not. When he started last season he gave the Bulls ~14/6/2 in 32 minutes - and he likely was underperforming a bit due to role.

Otto Porter is the guy who I'd be most looking to trade during the season - since I think someone will offer him more than what the Bulls should pay given his injury history.

The next guy to seriously think about is Lauri, because of the impending FA... but only if it's a legitimately fair deal.

[MGB8]

Speaking of trading with the Pels... a more interesting idea, that I don't think I'd do, but I'd have to think about, would be LaVine for Ingram, straight up.

Now, would Ingram conflict with Pat Williams in the same way that he and Zion don't quite compliment each other (which is why LaVine might be more appealing for New Orleans)? Maybe

Am I comfortable with Ingram's injury history - along with the post-rookie Max money? No.

Does Lavine likely have more upside even at just under 26 years old than Ingram at 23.5 - just due to his natural athleticism? Yes.

But give the impending free agency situation, should the Bulls think long and hard about that kind of move (unless LaVine is willing to take a slight discount via an extension in the very near future)? Probably.

[Clint Eastwood]

I’d honestly trade Wendell and Sato for Zo right now. I think it’s a fair trade where both players would need a fresh start being very young still.

Wouldn't give up Wendell for Lonzo. Not that I value Wendell so much, but even as just a cheap contract big for a year and a half, Wendell probably has more value than Lonzo for half a season before he's a FA.

Doug, even I wouldn’t trade Wendell and his mushy contused quadracepts for Ball. I don’t want anyone on my team who is a primary ball handler that can’t shoot the ball.