Lonzo Ball expected to see first action Wednesday

[sco]

At this point does anyone expect anything out of Lonzo this season? He's played 3 out of 18 games.

I'm glad his knee seems to be okay, but he's often injured. He averaged 54 games per season before the Bulls traded for him. On the Bulls he's played a total of 38 games out of 264.

Eh, I'm not sure I believe in "injury prone" when it comes to injuries like a sprained wrist. That to me feels more fluky to me. Thus, I feel more positive about him today than before he played in pre-season and I had no idea what he'd look like. He looks like he can be a positive impact player when on the court, and his injuries this year do not pose any long term concern or relation to injuries in the past.

I generally still subscribe to the theory that IF all of his procedures work well enough for him to regain NBA style athleticism, then the skill is still there (visually confirmed already from what we've seen) and the type of surgeries he had should be preventative of any recurrence in that knee. He effectively has all new muscle and cartilage implanted, so if it works for a decent period of time then my level of concern over it is actually a lot smaller.

The biggest hump for me was proving he'd ever be able to play at all.

I agree with you that a wrist injury is fluky, but when you've missed as many games as Lonzo has throughout his career how can you not call him injury prone?

Its impressive that he's come back from the knee injury and looked as good as he has (in the limited amount that hes played), but i still don't expect much from him. I wouldn't be surprised if he's on limited minutes and at some point misses more games for whatever reason.

I've made the point before, but the best defenders (especially guards) in the league are all "injury prone"...I think it's par of the course.

[Dan Z]

Eh, I'm not sure I believe in "injury prone" when it comes to injuries like a sprained wrist. That to me feels more fluky to me. Thus, I feel more positive about him today than before he played in pre-season and I had no idea what he'd look like. He looks like he can be a positive impact player when on the court, and his injuries this year do not pose any long term concern or relation to injuries in the past.

I generally still subscribe to the theory that IF all of his procedures work well enough for him to regain NBA style athleticism, then the skill is still there (visually confirmed already from what we've seen) and the type of surgeries he had should be preventative of any recurrence in that knee. He effectively has all new muscle and cartilage implanted, so if it works for a decent period of time then my level of concern over it is actually a lot smaller.

The biggest hump for me was proving he'd ever be able to play at all.

I agree with you that a wrist injury is fluky, but when you've missed as many games as Lonzo has throughout his career how can you not call him injury prone?

Its impressive that he's come back from the knee injury and looked as good as he has (in the limited amount that hes played), but i still don't expect much from him. I wouldn't be surprised if he's on limited minutes and at some point misses more games for whatever reason.

I've made the point before, but the best defenders (especially guards) in the league are all "injury prone"...I think it's par of the course.

I wonder why that is...? Is it the current rules? In the 80s/90s players were allowed to play more defense and I dont think they were all injury prone.

[sco]

I agree with you that a wrist injury is fluky, but when you've missed as many games as Lonzo has throughout his career how can you not call him injury prone?

Its impressive that he's come back from the knee injury and looked as good as he has (in the limited amount that hes played), but i still don't expect much from him. I wouldn't be surprised if he's on limited minutes and at some point misses more games for whatever reason.

I've made the point before, but the best defenders (especially guards) in the league are all "injury prone"...I think it's par of the course.

I wonder why that is...? Is it the current rules? In the 80s/90s players were allowed to play more defense and I dont think they were all injury prone.

Good question. Maybe it has to do with teams spreading the floor more and the better defenders needing to cover more ground than before leading to a combination of more fatigue and chance for injury because they are moving faster on closeouts?

[Indomitable]

I love his ability to elevate his teammates. His defensive IQ is still great.

[Michael Jackson]

I've made the point before, but the best defenders (especially guards) in the league are all "injury prone"...I think it's par of the course.

I wonder why that is...? Is it the current rules? In the 80s/90s players were allowed to play more defense and I dont think they were all injury prone.

Good question. Maybe it has to do with teams spreading the floor more and the better defenders needing to cover more ground than before leading to a combination of more fatigue and chance for injury because they are moving faster on closeouts?

It is covering more ground and that the assignments are tougher 1-5 in the floor than they were in the past. The players have to extend themselves.