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

[chefo]

I think the odd man in CHA is Rozier. I seriously doubt MJ wants to pay him $18.5 per when he has Ball ready to take the reigns next year. I think if you throw them a protected 1st and a second or two, Shrek and Val or WCJ, they bite.

[ZOMG]

Graham is an unathletic SG in a PG's body.

We already have one of those.

[TheSuzerain]

I was intrigued by Graham last year, but he's regressed quite a bit this season. Some players do better with the ball in their hands, and having to play with LaMelo might have thrown off his rhythm. That said, we know the following:

1.) With Ball's season-ending injury, it likely makes Graham unavailable for trade.

2.) Graham has played poorly this year, and through a 140 is an absurdly bad 37% shooter from the field (and a so-so 36% from down town).

Since Graham's probably not available right now, we can see if his play rebounds as he gets moved back into the primary ball-handling role. Next season, we can determine who's the better player to pursue during free-agency (if either). That said, acquiring Lonzo Ball at least allows us to closely evaluate him and figure out if he make our team better and is worth a long-term committment.

And yet Graham has easily the best +/- stats on the Hornets.

It's almost as if being a great passer/playmaker can make up for mediocre personal efficiency (see: Doncic, Luka).

I'm not against him or anything, but as said, he's not available today. You were the one talking about realistic alternatives, but right now he's not one. So why not take a flyer on the guy that's actually available. Simulataneously, we learn more about Graham as he gets a second shot as the lead ball-handler on a team contending for a playoff spot.

Re: His plus/minus stats, I'm not a fan of discussing those without proper context. I haven't seen enough Hornet games this season to comment on that, but I will say that often times +/- is a byproduct of what lineup you get to play with. For instance, on our team, Zach's +/- is 10th on the roster. Why? Because he's been forced to primarily play with young players who are still learning how to play good basketball. The guys behind him include Lauri, Coby, Patrick Williams, and Carter --- all players who have started the majority of this season.

I feel like Graham is likely available. Maybe less available than he was pre-Ball injury, but it would be kind of silly for the Hornets to not listen for offers on Graham given where they're at in their team build.

That is assuming he's not in their long term plans which I think is a reasonable assumption given Lamelo/Rozier.

[HomoSapien]

I think the odd man in CHA is Rozier. I seriously doubt MJ wants to pay him $18.5 per when he has Ball ready to take the reigns next year. I think if you throw them a protected 1st and a second or two, Shrek and Val or WCJ, they bite.

Maybe, but Rozier essentially operates as the shooting guard for that team. Rozier could be the odd man out, but in today's market $18.5m for a guy averaging 20 points per game isn't unreasonable. Charlotte also doesn't have the easiest time attracting free-agents, so they have to overpay for undervalued guys like Rozier and Hayward.

[tunit213]

Wouldn't everyone agree offensively Ball is on par with what Sato is bringing this season. If it wasn't for those 2 4th qtr collapse vs the Spurs and Nuggets we would be 5-0 after the break. And this is disregarding the fact that Ball is the better defender, only 23, and isnt even close to his prime yet.

Ball/Lavine backcourt just makes sense. They cover each others weaknesses and there really is not a guard out there that can score like Lavine to pair with a player like Ball who has the hardest time creating his own shot. They compliment each other perfectly.

I say lets get our backcourt of the future set and that to PAW. Now lets go out and find a legit big man. One step at a time.

The NBA doesn't really work like this anymore where you have a guard bad at playmaking/passing (Lavine) and a guard bad at self-creation (Lonzo) that you then turn around and call a perfectly complimentary backcourt.

You need threats on the floor.

Fair point. But it is also not easy finding a 2 way PG who is only 23. No player is perfect, and both Lavine (26) and Ball (23) can still get better at their specific weakness.

But for now if we plan to keep Lavine long-term we need to cover up his weaknesses and AK seems to know this. Hence him trying to trade for Ball.

[HomoSapien]

And yet Graham has easily the best +/- stats on the Hornets.

It's almost as if being a great passer/playmaker can make up for mediocre personal efficiency (see: Doncic, Luka).

I'm not against him or anything, but as I said, he's not available today. You were the one talking about realistic alternatives, but right now he's not one. So why not take a flyer on the guy that's actually available? Simultaneously, we can learn more about Graham as he gets a second shot as the lead ball-handler on a team contending for a playoff spot.

Re: His plus/minus stats, I'm not a fan of discussing those without proper context. I haven't seen enough Hornet games this season to comment on that, but I will say that oftentimes +/- is a byproduct of what lineup you get to play with. For instance, on our team, Zach's +/- is 10th on the roster. Why? Because he's been forced to primarily play with young players who are still learning how to play good basketball. The guys behind him include Lauri, Coby, Patrick Williams, and Carter --- all players who have started the majority of this season.

I feel like Graham is likely available. Maybe less available than he was pre-Ball injury, but it would be kind of silly for the Hornets to not listen for offers on Graham given where they're at in their team build.

That is assuming he's not in their long term plans which I think is a reasonable assumption given Lamelo/Rozier.

I think he definitely was available prior to the injury, but I would be shocked if he's available for anything other than an overpay right now. Jordan has to be tired of hearing about how he's such a terrible owner. This is his first realitic shot in years at a playoff birth, and knowing his personality I have to believe trying to make the playoffs is the only thing on his mind.

Coby for Ball seems like a relatively fair trade if NO is determined to trade him. Sato and 2nd round picks would be great value for us but seems unlikely to interest them. Although I'd be more apprehensive about trading Coby for Graham than for Ball, I could probably be talked into it simply because I'm becoming more pessimistic about White's future here and Graham can at least successfully dribble the ball.

I think White's realistic best-case scenario is a microwave scorer off the bench (ala Jason Terry). While that type of player is valuable to any team, I also don't particularly want to waste LaVine's prime by waiting around several season for Coby to figure things out. I also think that microwave type of player is often an overlooked FA/trade bait that can be relatively easily signed/acquired.

[CobyWhite0]

Once again - Lonzo's been playng with two guys who get ALL the defensive attention. In a way his situation is not unlike that of Patrick Williams playing with Zach, Lauri and Thad. If you can make weak side spot up 3's and cut now and then, you're gonna look pretty good.

Like any dude who's been overdribbling the ball since he was 5 years old, Lonzo probably wants a different role in his next team. The Bulls would be fools to give it to him.

Is that a good description of what Ball wants? I mean, yeah he's grown up hearing he's a star with the ball constantly in his hands, but for all that's said about him he's about as willing of a passer as they come. I don't know if he'll be as successful here as he is in NO, but I do think he will make things easier in particular for Lauri and PWill. I also think he'll make us significantly better just by not being a walking turnover threat like Coby.

People don't realize how huge it would be for our offense if we just cut down our turnovers from being 30th in the league to even middle-of-the-pack.

We're 29th right now in TO% at 15.7% - if Lonzo could help us cut that to 13.7%, which would rank 13th in the league, our scoring would go from our current 114.0 to 116.7 - and our Offensive Rating would go from 111.2 to 113.8

When we don't turn the ball over, our Off Rtg on those possession is 131.9, so every TO is costing us 1.319 points. Get rid of 2% of our TO, right at 2 TO a game, and our 113.8 Off Rtg would rank 9th in the league.

This is where Lonzo's value lies. I'm sure AKME and BD know enough about how to properly use analytics that they would be very interested in a low-TO, pass-first PG who also defends 3 positions and shoots over 38% from behind the arc on fairly high volume.

[tunit213]

Once again - Lonzo's been playng with two guys who get ALL the defensive attention. In a way his situation is not unlike that of Patrick Williams playing with Zach, Lauri and Thad. If you can make weak side spot up 3's and cut now and then, you're gonna look pretty good.

Like any dude who's been overdribbling the ball since he was 5 years old, Lonzo probably wants a different role in his next team. The Bulls would be fools to give it to him.

Is that a good description of what Ball wants? I mean, yeah he's grown up hearing he's a star with the ball constantly in his hands, but for all that's said about him he's about as willing of a passer as they come. I don't know if he'll be as successful here as he is in NO, but I do think he will make things easier in particular for Lauri and PWill. I also think he'll make us significantly better just by not being a walking turnover threat like Coby.

People don't realize how huge it would be for our offense if we just cut down our turnovers from being 30th in the league to even middle-of-the-pack.

We're 29th right now in TO% at 15.7% - if Lonzo could help us cut that to 13.7%, which would rank 13th in the league, our scoring would go from our current 114.0 to 116.7 - and our Offensive Rating would go from 111.2 to 113.8

When we don't turn the ball over, our Off Rtg on those possession is 131.9, so every TO is costing us 1.319 points. Get rid of 2% of our TO, right at 2 TO a game, and our 113.8 Off Rtg would rank 9th in the league.

This is where Lonzo's value lies. I'm sure AKME and BD know enough about how to properly use analytics that they would be very interested in a low-TO, pass-first PG who also defends 3 positions and shoots over 38% from behind the arc on fairly high volume.

Agree! I cringe every time I see Coby dribbling late in games. He should only be off-ball running around screens until he can prove other wise. Having a competent ball handler will do this team wonders. Especially with our late game turnovers that cost us 2 games this past week. We really could have been 5-0 after the break and everyone would be singing a different tune right now.

[PaKii94]

Once again - Lonzo's been playng with two guys who get ALL the defensive attention. In a way his situation is not unlike that of Patrick Williams playing with Zach, Lauri and Thad. If you can make weak side spot up 3's and cut now and then, you're gonna look pretty good.

Like any dude who's been overdribbling the ball since he was 5 years old, Lonzo probably wants a different role in his next team. The Bulls would be fools to give it to him.

Is that a good description of what Ball wants? I mean, yeah he's grown up hearing he's a star with the ball constantly in his hands, but for all that's said about him he's about as willing of a passer as they come. I don't know if he'll be as successful here as he is in NO, but I do think he will make things easier in particular for Lauri and PWill. I also think he'll make us significantly better just by not being a walking turnover threat like Coby.

People don't realize how huge it would be for our offense if we just cut down our turnovers from being 30th in the league to even middle-of-the-pack.

We're 29th right now in TO% at 15.7% - if Lonzo could help us cut that to 13.7%, which would rank 13th in the league, our scoring would go from our current 114.0 to 116.7 - and our Offensive Rating would go from 111.2 to 113.8

When we don't turn the ball over, our Off Rtg on those possession is 131.9, so every TO is costing us 1.319 points. Get rid of 2% of our TO, right at 2 TO a game, and our 113.8 Off Rtg would rank 9th in the league.

This is where Lonzo's value lies. I'm sure AKME and BD know enough about how to properly use analytics that they would be very interested in a low-TO, pass-first PG who also defends 3 positions and shoots over 38% from behind the arc on fairly high volume.

People vastly underrate how much turnovers hurt the team (especially live ball ones). A single one theoretically could be a swing of up to 8 points (missed opportunity for 3 + and one, and giving up a 3+ and one to the other team) which is HUGE in per game terms.

Obviously that scenario isn't all that likely but even the most likely one, missed opportunity for a layup on one end and giving the opposing team an easy uncontested layup on the other end is still a 4 point swing which is still big in the contest of close games.

Then when you add in the factor that we usually struggle with them in crunch time, that's where you can see why our team easily melts down under pressure. 2-3 turnover possessions in a row (which we have constantly with Coby) can easily wipe double digit leads.

[HomoSapien]

Is that a good description of what Ball wants? I mean, yeah he's grown up hearing he's a star with the ball constantly in his hands, but for all that's said about him he's about as willing of a passer as they come. I don't know if he'll be as successful here as he is in NO, but I do think he will make things easier in particular for Lauri and PWill. I also think he'll make us significantly better just by not being a walking turnover threat like Coby.

People don't realize how huge it would be for our offense if we just cut down our turnovers from being 30th in the league to even middle-of-the-pack.

We're 29th right now in TO% at 15.7% - if Lonzo could help us cut that to 13.7%, which would rank 13th in the league, our scoring would go from our current 114.0 to 116.7 - and our Offensive Rating would go from 111.2 to 113.8

When we don't turn the ball over, our Off Rtg on those possession is 131.9, so every TO is costing us 1.319 points. Get rid of 2% of our TO, right at 2 TO a game, and our 113.8 Off Rtg would rank 9th in the league.

This is where Lonzo's value lies. I'm sure AKME and BD know enough about how to properly use analytics that they would be very interested in a low-TO, pass-first PG who also defends 3 positions and shoots over 38% from behind the arc on fairly high volume.

People vastly underrate how much turnovers hurt the team (especially live ball ones). A single one theoretically could be a swing of up to 8 points (missed opportunity for 3 + and one, and giving up a 3+ and one to the other team) which is HUGE in per game terms.

Obviously that scenario isn't all that likely but even the most likely one, missed opportunity for a layup on one end and giving the opposing team an easy uncontested layup on the other end is still a 4 point swing which is still big in the contest of close games.

Then when you add in the factor that we usually struggle with them in crunch time, that's where you can see why our team easily melts down under pressure. 2-3 turnover possessions in a row (which we have constantly with Coby) can easily wipe double digit leads.

Plus, factor in how many games we've lost by a point or two and imagine how many of those losses would have swung the other way if we had less turnovers.

A turnover can be theoretically costly in terms of points for the other team like you illustrated, but it also disrupts the rhythm and momentum of our own offense.

[TheStig]

The amount of love "future hall of famer" Lonzo Ball is getting on this board is insane. He will be another average player playing alongside 11 other average/below average players...

Both Lauri and Lonzo want the best lucrative deal and I dont want to be the team overpaying them.

Who at this point is calling Lonzo a future hall of famer? He's a good starter. I think he's a more impactful player than anyone on this roster other than Lavine. So if you can get a good young piece for a low cost, what does it hurt? Do you think Sato or the 2nd rounder are better?

[PaKii94]

People don't realize how huge it would be for our offense if we just cut down our turnovers from being 30th in the league to even middle-of-the-pack.

We're 29th right now in TO% at 15.7% - if Lonzo could help us cut that to 13.7%, which would rank 13th in the league, our scoring would go from our current 114.0 to 116.7 - and our Offensive Rating would go from 111.2 to 113.8

When we don't turn the ball over, our Off Rtg on those possession is 131.9, so every TO is costing us 1.319 points. Get rid of 2% of our TO, right at 2 TO a game, and our 113.8 Off Rtg would rank 9th in the league.

This is where Lonzo's value lies. I'm sure AKME and BD know enough about how to properly use analytics that they would be very interested in a low-TO, pass-first PG who also defends 3 positions and shoots over 38% from behind the arc on fairly high volume.

People vastly underrate how much turnovers hurt the team (especially live ball ones). A single one theoretically could be a swing of up to 8 points (missed opportunity for 3 + and one, and giving up a 3+ and one to the other team) which is HUGE in per game terms.

Obviously that scenario isn't all that likely but even the most likely one, missed opportunity for a layup on one end and giving the opposing team an easy uncontested layup on the other end is still a 4 point swing which is still big in the contest of close games.

Then when you add in the factor that we usually struggle with them in crunch time, that's where you can see why our team easily melts down under pressure. 2-3 turnover possessions in a row (which we have constantly with Coby) can easily wipe double digit leads.

Plus, factor in how many games we've lost by a point or two and imagine how many of those losses would have swung the other way if we had less turnovers.

A turnover can be theoretically costly in terms of points for the other team like you illustrated, but it also disrupts the rhythm and momentum of our own offense.

One key trait that people over looked with jimmy being a star players was his low low TO% even with increased usage. Sure he's not a 30ppg player but he makes up for it by not giving up 10ppg with turnovers. Then compound that with him being excellent at drawing FTs "freebies" and that's why he always remains a strong positive impact player even though he isn't a high volume scorer.

On the flip side, TOs is what I think was and still is hindering Lavine. He has always been able to score at an elite level but last year he was a constant turnover machine in the 4th quarter/under pressure/end games. This wipes out half the offensive impact he could provide by just scoring at the same level and taking care of the ball

[D_GoLow]

One of our 7 picks (Markannen, WCJ, Coby) and a conditional 1st is something I'm leaning heavily in favor of.

What have either of those 3 players done to proove they're a long term building block?

If not Lonzo, I want Dinwiddie

[CaPiTanAK]

One of our 7 picks (Markannen, WCJ, Coby) and a conditional 1st is something I'm leaning heavily in favor of.

What have either of those 3 players done to proove they're a long term building block?

If not Lonzo, I want Dinwiddie

Dinwiddie is done, due to injuries and no jumper. I don't want any part of him.

The Pelicans know that teams are going to overpay for Lonzo and don't want any of it. Up to them if they want to get something back or just delay the inevitable and lose him for nothing. My bet is that Lonzo will wear another jersey after the trading deadline. I personally hope that it's a Chicago Bulls jersey.

[WindyCityBorn]

One of our 7 picks (Markannen, WCJ, Coby) and a conditional 1st is something I'm leaning heavily in favor of.

What have either of those 3 players done to proove they're a long term building block?

If not Lonzo, I want Dinwiddie

Yeah just what need. An older guy that was never that good coming off of an ACL tear.

[TheHrvReport]

I'm 99% confident AK won't make any deals at the deadline but Lonzo for Sato and 2nd round picks would be a nice get.

[dukeespn]

According to the Athletic Lonzo is seeking $20 million annually. I think there will be some stupid teams which will give big contract to him this offseason.

I hope the Bulls not to offer him that massive contract. This team is going nowhere if the Bulls give someone who can't create on halfcourt big contract.

[imagge]

According to the Athletic Lonzo is seeking $20 million annually. I think there will be some stupid teams which will give big contract to him this offseason.

I hope the Bulls not to offer him that massive contract. This team is going nowhere if the Bulls give someone who can't create on halfcourt big contract.

I don’t think 20 mil is a massive contract when the MLE avg at 10 mil a year for 4 years...20 mil is starters money

[Jcool0]

According to the Athletic Lonzo is seeking $20 million annually. I think there will be some stupid teams which will give big contract to him this offseason.

I hope the Bulls not to offer him that massive contract. This team is going nowhere if the Bulls give someone who can't create on halfcourt big contract.

That would make him the 52nd highest paid player in the NBA. Not sure i would call that massive.

[fleet]

Well, we agree. So one of us is wrong

Read on Twitter