Clyde_Style wrote:Buttah304 wrote:I don’t think people realize just how good a job Lonzo has done under the circumstances this year in Nola.
For starters Stan Van Gundy is an absolutely dreadful coach. He has done an awful job staggering his lineups, his team seems to break plays all the time to call their own number (looking at you Ingram) and he has a weird obsession with his washed veteran PG bum in Bledsoe. That dude plays way too many minutes and has the ball in his hands far more than he should.
At the end of games Lonzo hasn’t been called on to orchestrate the offense enough (much to the chagrin of Nola fans) in favor of inefficient, ball stopping, off balance shots by Ingram who isn’t clutch at all.
Their entire fan base knows that Nola isn’t using him to his optimal ability and that there is another level to his game. We’ve already seen him turn into a near 40% 3PT shooter on 8 attempts which is pretty elite in and of itself.
He’s got an amazing work ethic, a well rounded skill set and he’s got great vision. Mix that in with his long range shooting and defense and he absolutely should be a target.
I agree that he doesn’t break down the defense as much as he should and the lack of FT is a disappointing aspect of his game. But with RJ and Randle attacking the paint they would thrive with a player who can keep the defense honest while finding them on their favorite spots on the floor and keeping them in rhythm all game.
You made me think of one of the positives of having big guards who can defend. When you have guys like Mitch and Randle crashing the offensive boards it is useful to have a guard who can defend ready to drop back on defense to defend the fast break.
Overall, I think Lonzo would fit well with our starters. That's what really matters.
Another thing that gets brought up is this assumption Thibs wants a slashing PG who breaks down defenses, yet you already have Randle getting into the paint at will and shifty guys like IQ. I still think the best shot opportunties are created by teams that pass until they find the open man and I think we can create that synergy with a guy like Lonzo.
I sort of agree with some of both of your takes and disagree with both of you on others.
First, MAYBE the Pels/SVG aren't using Lonzo to his max ability, but I have some doubts on that statement. If Lonzo could drive it more or orchestrate at a higher level than some other option on that team, he'd be doing it. I think as fans we like to second guess coaches - I know I've done it - but wonder how often we are right. Not very often, I'd say.
Anyway - Lonzo MIGHT have another level to unlock, basically because of his age.
I'd be wary of paying him too much on that chance. That's what Mills articulated immediately after signing THJr.
Pay the player their value NOW and if they get better, team has a bargain.
That said, A player like Lonzo probably falls somewhere into that 15 to 18 million per, based on not being a bust, pretty good, and up for a second contract.
I think I'd be happy if the Knicks could manage the lower end and not mad if the higher.
I also think I'd envision his role as being the way he plays right now. Creates from the perimeter, hits 3's, doesn't drive too often.
So, he needs to be paired with a slashing wing/SG/PG - yes, a PG, as he could potentially be part of a two PG attack, depending on the other PG.
I see Clyde bringing up that Lonzo could stay as is and be featured in a lineup with IQ, RJ, Randle, as RJ and Randle could handle most of the slashing, with IQ providing "some", which would satisfy Thibs requirement/system for a guard who attacks the rim.
This feels a bit like a reboot of the "Frank fits with RJ" argument, where RJ and Randle could slash and Frank spots up.
Except Thibs has had multiple opportunities to stylistically do this, first with Frank himself, next with IQ emerging a very legit outside shooter.
And both times, he stuck with Payton, and then doubled down on the "rim attacker" by getting DRose.
And STILL started Payton.
Because initially Payton was the only one vaguely competent at it while not being a total liability on defense.
DRose was acquired for actually being good at it.
I'm still puzzled why Thibs stuck with Payton starting, other than lineup balance or locker room harmony or who know what.
Now, RJ has made some strides this season, and especially last 5 games, in terms of driving it. Getting more adept with the footwork etc. But if the theoretical Lonzo trade is the "big move" of the trade deadline/offseason, Knicks are banking on RJ getting much better. Much better like "can impose his will driving the ball and attacking from all 3 levels", and not sure that's going to be the case, right away, or ever. Like, RJ will be very good, but not put the ball on the floor and attack like Rose good.
Anyway, in spite of me saying "Lonzo probably not a Thibs PG", I'd still get him, since he's 6'8", can guard 3 positions, and Knicks would have switchability between 2/3 and somewhat at 1/2/3, if Rose or IQ is the PG.
And that's my final point.
IF the Knicks got Lonzo, if he's starting, it's probably in the Bullocks role (SG), with Rose at the PG (attacking PG) and then IQ off the bench where he can back up 1/2, but IQ opens up different lineup combos where it can be RJ/IQ/Lonzo or Rose/IQ/Lonzo or RJ/Rose/IQ etc.
And while I think Lonzo is better than Bullocks and definitely has a higher upside left, and of course is 23 vs 30 years old, are the Knicks THAT much better with Lonzo?
I say they are better, and Lonzo would fit having an asset and player that other teams might want. Have to weigh that he'll cost 10 million more per year than Bullocks with a 3 to 4 year commitment to that extra amount.
I'd get Lonzo and worry about his exact position later or never, just that he's a good basketball player.
