You guys, I think we need to pay Lonzo

Printable View

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-23-2021, 07:22 PM
SoCal4Pels

Let's narrow it down. Every remotely available decent shooter with at least ~4.5 attempts per game. Which are available for Zo or Zo/Bled or Zo/Bled/Redick/picks and play defense and aren't old and would be cheaper than Zo? Not as easy at it might seem to hit that criteria. (pardon the eye-bleed format)

POS 3PA 3P%
3 Joe HarrisBKN SF 6.9 48.7
9 Marcus Morris Sr.LAC SF 5.1 44.8
10 Paul GeorgeLAC SG 7.7 44.1
11 Zach LaVineCHI SG 8.1 43.7
12 Norman PowellTOR SF 6.5 43.4
16 Khris MiddletonMIL SF 5.2 42.9
22 Wayne EllingtonDET SG 6.4 42.2
23 Mike ConleyUTAH PG 6.6 42.2
26 Tyrese HaliburtonSAC PG 5.2 42
27 Terry RozierCHA SG 7.9 41.8
28 Shai Gilgeous-AlexanderOKC SG 4.9 41.8
29 Michael Porter Jr.DEN SF 5.6 41.6
31 Julius RandleNY PF 4.6 41.4
35 Gordon HaywardCHA SF 4.8 41.2
38 Anfernee SimonsPOR SG 4.8 40.9
39 Danilo GallinariATL PF 5.3 40.9
40 Malik MonkCHA SG 5.1 40.8
42 Nikola VucevicORL C 6.5 40.7
44 Malik BeasleyMIN SG 8.7 40.6
48 Grayson AllenMEM SG 4.9 40.1
49 OG AnunobyTOR SF 5.4 40
51 D'Angelo RussellMIN PG 7.4 39.9
53 Malcolm BrogdonIND PG 6.5 39.8
54 Lauri MarkkanenCHI PF 7.2 39.6
55 Alec BurksNY SG 4.8 39.6
55 Darius GarlandCLE PG 4.4 39.6
57 Justin HolidayIND SF 6.6 39.6
58 Patty MillsSA PG 6.9 39.4
60 Gary Trent Jr.POR SG 7.5 39.3
61 Reggie BullockNY SF 5.2 39.3
62 Kyle LowryTOR PG 7.2 39.1
66 Danny GreenPHI SF 6.1 39
67 Tim Hardaway Jr.DAL SF 7.6 38.9
68 Jaylen BrownBOS SG 6.5 38.8
71 Will BartonDEN SF 4.6 38.7
72 Saddiq BeyDET SF 5.7 38.6
75 Cameron JohnsonPHX SF 5.6 38.5
77 Buddy HieldSAC SG 10.5 38.4
78 Evan FournierORL SG 7 38.3
82 Duncan RobinsonMIA SG 8.6 38.2
83 Davis BertansWSH SF 7.3 38.2
85 Jae CrowderPHX PF 6.3 38.1
87 Andrew WigginsGS SF 5.1 37.9
88 Jrue HolidayMIL PG 4.6 37.8
03-23-2021, 07:25 PM
Darkhorse985

What do you guys think about this trade?

Lonzo, Bledsoe, JJ Redick

For

Obi Toppin, I. Quickley, E.Payton (expiring) , F, Ntilikina (expiring), Alec Burks (expiring), and 2021 Dallas 1st

Pels lineup for rest of season

PG: Lewis/Payton/Ntilikina
SG: NAW/Quickley/Burks
SF: Ingram/Hart
PF: Zion/Toppin/Melli/Gabriel
C: Adams/Hayes/Hernangomez

Knicks

PG: Ball/Rose
SG: Bledsoe/Redick
SF: Barrett/Bullock/Knox
PF: Randle/Gibson/Knox
C: Robinson/Noel
03-23-2021, 09:13 PM
kinglio21093

Sorry, still not high on trading a 23 year old player who keeps improving every year. It just makes zero sense. And yes, I would be willing to pay.

Y'all HATED the fact that Jrue was getting the contract he got, and now you all want him back.
03-23-2021, 09:23 PM
AusPel

Quote:

Originally Posted by kinglio21093

Sorry, still not high on trading a 23 year old player who keeps improving every year. It just makes zero sense. And yes, I would be willing to pay.

Y'all HATED the fact that Jrue was getting the contract he got, and now you all want him back.

None of this sounds correct
03-23-2021, 09:33 PM
JJackisangry

Quote:

Originally Posted by AusPel

None of this sounds correct

Not a bit. We got a good haul for Jrue. It’s just unfortunate that we got stuck with Bledsoe as well
03-23-2021, 10:28 PM
kinglio21093

Quote:

Originally Posted by AusPel

None of this sounds correct

On this board, everyone got so mad at the fact we gave Jrue that 5 year $126 million contract. He turned out to be one of the most beloved players in franchise history. I remember everyone here would say that he's nowhere near worth the money. Now look at the value he holds amongst Pels fans.
03-24-2021, 01:20 AM
Darkhorse985

And Jrue didn’t transform this team into a winner, just like Lonzo won’t. We need a Beal-like scoring guard as the 3rd star on this team. Signing Lonzo would completely lock us into that big 3.
03-24-2021, 04:44 AM
KoMikaera

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkhorse985

And Jrue didn’t transform this team into a winner, just like Lonzo won’t. We need a Beal-like scoring guard as the 3rd star on this team. Signing Lonzo would completely lock us into that big 3.

Would it though ? If Lonzo didn't work out, could he be a part of a future trade for a superstar like Beal ?
03-24-2021, 05:46 AM
Pelicanidae

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoMikaera

Would it though ? If Lonzo didn't work out, could he be a part of a future trade for a superstar like Beal ?

Tell me who is trading a really good player on a max contract for a mediocre player for essentially the same price, without us also having to attach a shedload of additional assets?
03-24-2021, 06:03 AM
KoMikaera

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Tell me who is trading a really good player on a max contract for a mediocre player for essentially the same price, without us also having to attach a shedload of additional assets?

Someone who wants to rebuild with younger players, who thinks the player they are trading for is improving in line with their timeline, and thinks the player is or projects to be better than mediocre, and/or is attracted by a load of assetts to sweeten the deal(just not a shedload).

But if the right player could be acquired in the future for such a player and a massive swag of picks, why not do it ?
03-24-2021, 06:08 AM
Pelicanidae

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoMikaera

Someone who wants to rebuild with younger players, who thinks the player they are trading for is improving in line with their timeline, and thinks the player is or projects to be better than mediocre, and/or is attracted by a load of assetts to sweeten the deal(just not a shedload).

But if the right player could be acquired in the future for such a player and a massive swag of picks, why not do it ?

Most teams aren't that stupid: nobody is going to trade a star player for Lonzo unless Lonzo takes huge leaps. You may wonder why I think that's the case despite be also thinking teams are going to offer him $20m+, and the answer is basically the fact that teams value their own players more highly than other team's players; they're not likely to move an individual player they love for another player unless they think it's a clear upgrade or their team is in a complete rebuild - something you note.

The issue is that when teams go into rebuild what they tend to prioritise is flexibility. Locking into a long term, $20m+ contract for a roleplayer is not how you achieve that.

When you do have an overpaid roleplayer that you're trying to move, you don't just have to attach the picks and such required to make the trade, you also have to add additional compensation to the other team in return for them taking the bad deal off your hands, and it would obliterate the entire war-chest of assets to try and convince a team to simultaneously part with a star and take on a Lonzo-for-$25m-a-year. We'd get absolutely fleeced if we were put into that position.
03-24-2021, 06:20 AM
KoMikaera

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Most teams aren't that stupid: nobody is going to trade a star player for Lonzo unless Lonzo takes huge leaps. You may wonder why I think that's the case despite be also thinking teams are going to offer him $20m+, and the answer is basically the fact that teams value their own players more highly than other team's players; they're not likely to move an individual player they love for another player unless they think it's a clear upgrade or their team is in a complete rebuild - something you note.

The issue is that when teams go into rebuild what they tend to prioritise is flexibility. Locking into a long term, $20m+ contract for a roleplayer is not how you achieve that.

When you do have an overpaid roleplayer that you're trying to move, you don't just have to attach the picks and such required to make the trade, you also have to add additional compensation to the other team in return for them taking the bad deal off your hands, and it would obliterate the entire war-chest of assets to try and convince a team to simultaneously part with a star and take on a Lonzo-for-$25m-a-year. We'd get absolutely fleeced if we were put into that position.

Thanks for the explanation, that makes sense mostly.

I don't know too much about our picks and so on, but what if we used Bradley Beal as an example. Why not trade the whole war chest to get him and make a big three of Ingram, Beal and Zion and then attract solid vets wanting a chip more than money ?
03-24-2021, 06:37 AM
Pelicanidae

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoMikaera

Thanks for the explanation, that makes sense mostly.

I don't know too much about our picks and so on, but what if we used Bradley Beal as an example. Why not trade the whole war chest to get him and make a big three of Ingram, Beal and Zion and then attract solid vets wanting a chip more than money ?

I think the first thing is that usually the attracting solid vets who are chip-hunting works, but it usually works after you've had a few seasons of promising progress towards success, usually including some playoff appearances. We're not at that stage yet, so if we acquired Beal now that doesn't really mean we'd have any guarantee of any ring-chasers coming over yet. Why come here chasing a ring when you could go to, say, LA for the min and know that this is a legit proven championship core?

The second thing is the size of the war-chest. Ours is huge, the second largest in the NBA behind OKC at the moment. Trading the whole thing for almost any player is an overpay, especially when you know that you have to match salaries so players would have to go out as well. I think the priority should be to try and make sure that we have at least one FRP every year. Maybe we don't end up using it, but there should be that option come that year's draft to either move off it or package it elsewhere. This is fine for us because we have Lakers and Bucks picks all lined up to provide that second-pick support, but it does mean that the picks you move are up for debate. For example, I'm fine trading 3 FRPs if they're the Bucks picks, because they're spread over time. I'm much less okay with it if we're trading multiple firsts from the same year.

These are just general guidelines, of course; if someone turned around and said ''do you want Luka for 5 firsts'' the answer would be ''yes of course, please let's do that now before you snap out of your insanity''. But that's cause Luka is a top 10 player, bordering on top 5, while someone like Beal is much more like a top 25 figure.
03-24-2021, 07:28 AM
KoMikaera

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I think the first thing is that usually the attracting solid vets who are chip-hunting works, but it usually works after you've had a few seasons of promising progress towards success, usually including some playoff appearances. We're not at that stage yet, so if we acquired Beal now that doesn't really mean we'd have any guarantee of any ring-chasers coming over yet. Why come here chasing a ring when you could go to, say, LA for the min and know that this is a legit proven championship core?

The second thing is the size of the war-chest. Ours is huge, the second largest in the NBA behind OKC at the moment. Trading the whole thing for almost any player is an overpay, especially when you know that you have to match salaries so players would have to go out as well. I think the priority should be to try and make sure that we have at least one FRP every year. Maybe we don't end up using it, but there should be that option come that year's draft to either move off it or package it elsewhere. This is fine for us because we have Lakers and Bucks picks all lined up to provide that second-pick support, but it does mean that the picks you move are up for debate. For example, I'm fine trading 3 FRPs if they're the Bucks picks, because they're spread over time. I'm much less okay with it if we're trading multiple firsts from the same year.

These are just general guidelines, of course; if someone turned around and said ''do you want Luka for 5 firsts'' the answer would be ''yes of course, please let's do that now before you snap out of your insanity''. But that's cause Luka is a top 10 player, bordering on top 5, while someone like Beal is much more like a top 25 figure.

Fair enough. Personally I lean towards keeping Lonzo if he wants to stay but I get where you're coming from. Will be really interesting to see what the FO decides to do this week...
03-24-2021, 07:48 AM
PolishFan

Quote:

Originally Posted by kinglio21093

Sorry, still not high on trading a 23 year old player who keeps improving every year. It just makes zero sense. And yes, I would be willing to pay.

Y'all HATED the fact that Jrue was getting the contract he got, and now you all want him back.

I’m with you. He would have to declare that he wants to play here long term though. I don’t get the hate for him. All he is missing is the ability to attack the rim however he shows some improvements. If he does improve and I think there is a very high chance he will then the 20mil wouldnt be so bad especially that his contract wouldn’t count as 20mil as far as cap is concerned right?
03-24-2021, 07:48 AM
As I See It

This is not an argument to keep or trade Lonzo, but does anybody really see NAW (or Kira for that matter) as being better than Lonzo is today in two or three years?
03-24-2021, 07:59 AM
13 - 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by As I See It

This is not an argument to keep or trade Lonzo, but does anybody really see NAW (or Kira for that matter) as being better than Lonzo is today in two or three years?

NAW is learning.
03-24-2021, 08:08 AM
Pelicanidae

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolishFan

I’m with you. He would have to declare that he wants to play here long term though. I don’t get the hate for him. All he is missing is the ability to attack the rim however he shows some improvements. If he does improve and I think there is a very high chance he will then the 20mil wouldnt be so bad especially that his contract wouldn’t count as 20mil as far as cap is concerned right?

He's shooting at a career low frequency at the rim.

And why wouldn't his contract actually count for its value against the cap?
03-24-2021, 08:09 AM
Pelicanidae

Quote:

Originally Posted by As I See It

This is not an argument to keep or trade Lonzo, but does anybody really see NAW (or Kira for that matter) as being better than Lonzo is today in two or three years?

Yes.

Kira, that is, probably not NAW.
03-24-2021, 08:17 AM
DroopyDawg

10:10 mark
03-24-2021, 08:59 AM
luckyman

Quote:

Originally Posted by As I See It

This is not an argument to keep or trade Lonzo, but does anybody really see NAW (or Kira for that matter) as being better than Lonzo is today in two or three years?

YES...really. How could you not?
03-24-2021, 09:03 AM
luckyman

Quote:

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

10:10 mark

This is a purely clickbait channel.
03-24-2021, 09:17 AM
PELICANSFAN

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

This is not a fun game of chicken to play. Especially for an average player. To me, Griff needs to talk with Klutch and Lonzo today or tomorrow and know his desire to be here and his likelihood of not taking any visits or playing any games if Griff gives him a fair offer this summer.

I would hope that discussion has taken place before today.
03-24-2021, 09:22 AM
PELICANSFAN

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Yes.

Kira, that is, probably not NAW.

Too early to tell. I really like what I see in Kira, but he desperately needs to add some muscle. Too easy for teams to bully him on the defensive end.
03-24-2021, 09:33 AM
luckyman

Quote:

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Too early to tell. I really like what I see in Kira, but he desperately needs to add some muscle. Too easy for teams to bully him on the defensive end.

I don't think he's been bullied as much as people think. Blocked a shot last night on Shroder at the rim and has had some really good contests in the lane these last few games.

Even today, both Kira's and NAw's floors are lower than Lonzo's, as they should be. They both just got into the league for Pete's sakes. They are both just now cracking the egg on the game mentally. Their heads aren't even out of the shell yet.

And still, their ceiling games are already better (NAW) or close to what Lonzo has shown. They are both just more dynamic basketball players. So 2 - 3 years from now seems an odd question to me.

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page