Huerter (love to have him) is a nice player with a much lower ceiling than Lonzo. So, no thanks.
Printable View
One person saying no thanks from the Pels perspective while the other says no thanks from the Hawks perspective makes me think it was a pretty decent trade idea
I'd trade Lonzo for Huerter fairly quickly if that deal came to us, though I don't think it's likely we'd be able to extract him Inna deal that was also bringing us in additional assets without us having to give up more as well.
If it’s true about the hawks willing to move Collins. I say go get him. A back court of Collins, Zion, and Adams could be special. Finishing the game with Zion and Collins would be nice. As long as we don’t go crazy with compensation we could still shoot for Beal. Lonzo, Melli, and Hayes for Collins, Snell, and Reddish could be close I think. We could throw in a couple seconds or a late first. Then throw the house at Beal. JJ to a third team, Bledsoe probably to a third or fourth team and 4-5 first rounders sounds good. (JJ should get you a late first back and Bledsoe could get us at least a couple seconds. We have 2 lakers first and 2 bucks picks or we can throw in a couple of our and keep a couple from lakers/bucks)
Kira
Beal, NAW
BI, Hart
Zion, Reddish
Collins, Adams
https://tradenba.com/trades/rCfpdi7tn
Wrong thread
1. Dallas shooting 54% from three with volume.
2. JJ should not see the court again until he's traded.
3. I would play NAW tonight; his defense is sorely needed.
When we have to constantly change out tune on how Lonzo plays I say no. We have too many of those players on the team now.
LOL so we back off keeping Lonzo again?
“He’s a phenomenal connective tissue player, but he doesn’t stir the drink. New Orleans might be the spot, but the Pelicans shouldn’t necessarily be revamping its roster to make Ball work; rather, the players in Ball’s position should be working to help Ingram and Zion.“
An incredibly accurate quote from the new Sam Vecenie article in which he ranked Lonzo as the 33rd prospect in the NBA. The prospect list includes only players on rookie contracts, for the most part.
For context, he has Lonzo behind Derrick White, Coby White, and Darius Garland. In front of Onyeka Okongwu, Brandon Clarke, and PJ Washington. Personally, even though Im not the biggest Zo guy, I think he’s too low on the list. Vecenie seems to value pure scoring and star potential over role player, solid starter guys. I guess thats fair since its a prospect list
I think it depends how far behind those people he is [I have not read Vecenie's article]. I think there's a strong argument, for example, for putting him behind Garland and potentially even C. White, but not by like 10+ spots or anything.
I also think if we're using the logic you mention, that ranks guys according to ceiling since we're talking about prospects rather than where they are right now, PJ Washington would be better.
That said, I don't really see much argument for Derrick White being better than Lonzo.
Okongwu, the jury is kind of out on because he's barely played and had a serious foot/ankle injury so it's very hard to judge.
I do agree that the quotation is good though. Plenty of people have said it as well: his best work is always in the roleplayer position, and as a result that means that even if he's a good roleplayer he's always expendable in the search for better.
In today's NBA though, role players are getting big bucks. Look at Harris, Bogdanovic, and to some extent, Gallinari and Anunoby. Those are all pretty big contracts and the argument could be made that they are all role players.
Y'all gonna see Lonzo become a top guard in this league and you'll be kicking yourselves for wanting to trade him in the first place. He keeps progressing every season, and he's still young.
It's the same thing as Ingram.
Everyone remembers that I was very very negative about him when we traded for him, but I said the moment he was on the team that I hope everyone else is right and I'm wrong because he's on this roster now. I was wrong, Ingram took huge improvements, and you know what? That's a good thing: happy to have been wrong.
It's the same with Lonzo. If he decides to become great all of a sudden, awesome!
Well, Ingram is really different. He came in day one being a completely different player. Lonzo is an absurd high/low player. He has a tendency to be really low when you need him the most. So, It's gonna take us a lot longer to really trust him..
Like the moment he starts playing well in last February. Then, he follows it up in the bubble as Worst player in the bubble. He simply plays decent to start the season and we praise him. Then, he has like the worst ten game run of his career. Then, we almost claw back to 0.500. He falls off a cliff again.
His play probably cost us a chance in the play in tournament, and about 5 games in his WOAT run.
I already got burned twice praising Lonzo. I'm pretty much done till he can do it for a whole year and when we need it the most.
I'm not just talking about scoring either. It's his whole game.
There is a cult-like mindset about trading him for scraps. Not saying you specifically are apart of that.
I love being wrong on players too. But this team is still rebuilding, and Lonzo is supposed to be a key figure of this rebuild. Sorry, but I'm not giving up on a 23 year old with extremely high upside, and someone who keeps improving so soon.
It's way more likely to me that we end up keeping Lonzo than not. So I really do hope he fixes the broken parts of his game or the team evolves to where his inability to play on ball in late moments is irrelevant because Zion will be the one doing the heavy lifting and all Lonzo has to do is catch and shoot.
Lonzo has absolutely improved in every way besides defense this season, but I’m more than happy to take that trade off for him driving to the basket more and actually hitting free throws. This teams needs a 3 and D. Lonzo looks like he can be a 3 and D, but with amazing passing and creative ability. That’s rare. And he’s young. He’s gonna keep getting better
I honestly be glad getting a vet point like Rose on this team and see if you can dump Bledsoe in the process.
It's a really wash, but I think Rose would be a decent culture move.
As it was you who started this thread and reasoned that we should keep him (even at 25MM), I suppose 22MM would be a bargain. I agree with you, too; we wouldn't get equal value for him at the trade deadline. I'd prefer to pay no more than 20MM, but more than likely, you are right...it's going to take more.
$10m plus what he's already making is $21m. That's a lot of money for any one player, particularly when you factor in that it would almost certainly include the yearly increases. If it's a 4 year contract by the end it could be worth $26m or more in the final year. Not only is that a lot of money, it's also not just a cost factor.
The reality is, it's easier to trade $26m in salary if it's spread across two guys (earning, say, $16m and $10m apiece) than one dude worth $26m. Unless you think Lonzo is an indispensable piece, an absolute core element, of a high powered playoff team, there's no real justification for paying him that kind of money. You absolutely have to buy the idea that he will be a star for that to make any sense.
Admittedly, this article is dated, but......
https://lonzowire.usatoday.com/2020/...nation-sports/
Most of those guys have an elite skill better than any one of Lonzo's best skills, but Lonzo does more things at a higher level than those specialist guys. Plus he's way younger than anyone but OG who is a fantastic defender and an improved shooter, but not much else
I maintain that 22 mil is the lowest Lonzo gets
From what I've heard, it's more likely that Lonzo will not be traded, which is a change from the last time I spoke on it. There's so much at play here in terms of culture and behind the scenes stuff that it's really not easy to decide on a offer they feel comfortable with. I think they're listening, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if he's here past the deadline. I'd be extremely surprised if JJ is still here past the trade deadline/buyout date.
That being said, it's not at all a guarantee he's on the roster next season even if he isn't traded
That's true, but we're not doing a Lonzo v Player X here in terms of signing a real world contract. I mean you can use other contracts as guides, but that is just a guide/reference point
It's Lonzo vs his real open market value and what contract space suitors are willing to spend
Maybe there's not as much cap space available around the league as I'm assuming and he only attracts an 18-20 mil tag. I think we match that.
One thing I will probably bet on, is that he signs an offer sheet somewhere else. As much an ego thing as anything else.
He has no love or ties with NOLA and he is with Klutch
Best case scenario to worst case, in my opinion:
1. We sign a better 3&D shooter than Lonzo for less or the same amount that he wants, or trade him for a package that includes one or can be flipped into one in the near future
2. We get Lonzo for a 'fair' price
3. We over-pay Lonzo a few million per year
4. We get a great deal on someone who is worse at shooting and defense than Lonzo (which i guess gives us some added cap flexibility at some point that will be utilized in some way ostensibly for something beneficial...)
Now we need to look at the probabilities of each and make a choice. #1 probability seems to be dropping...
Ostensibly, we have the final say. Lonzo is a RFA and we hold his Bird Rights. So, it's up to Klutch to go find that mega deal they pine for elsewhere. I don't think that's going to be as easy as some think it will be. But, if they do, the ball is still in our court to match or detach.
You're probly right, Lonzo may not be worth $26m in four years and it's probly an overpay for him individually.
I'm just trying to look at the situation through a different lens. Is it worth thinking of a larger core group and keeping them together and building around them? I'm thinking of Lonzo/BI/Zion/Adams, offensively they are performing well just need to improve the defence.
If so offsetting some of Adam's paycut with a raise for Lonzo means you can keep that core group without significantly increasing your net salary at least for a couple of years.
Of course if that group isn't worth keeping or Lonzo isn't a valuable contributor would be better to trade him while we can. But if it is a viable group a couple of decent trades might be enough to lift them, maybe not immediately, to contender status.
I really don't understand how hard its for some of you to understand.
He wants the max and if he wants the max and BI got the max and Zion will get the max = cant have 3 guys on the roster with the max.
You can have 3 max guys if the rest are rookies and vet mins. You cant have a josh hart and a JJ and an Adams but you can have the justice league of ball+bi+Z.
Would a team thrive with 3 stars and scrubs/rookies? Maybe if your rooks outperform their draft place.... like we could move bledsoe and JJ this deadline for a salary break next season to sign ball to a 3 for 66 deal. Idk what the smartest move is.
You let Lonzo explore free agency. If he gets the max you don?t match, if he gets less and we slightly over pay I?m fine with that. He?s only going to keep getting better, he?s 22. A slight overpay now won?t be that much in the future. I don’t know if he’s gonna get the max regardless of how bad he wants it
If it was three stars, then that's a debate.
If it's 2 stars and Lonzo Ball, even a really really good Lonzo Ball, you're in trouble.
Imagine if Houston was like ''ah yes, our three stars, Chris Paul, James Harden, and Robert Covington.''
...What?! Covington was one of the absolute best roleplayers in basketball at the time! Of course he should be a central pillar that they build around!
Sound unconvincing? Exactly.
Honestly, I think we let him hit free agency with a rfa tender and see where it goes. I wouldnt be upset at a 3/60 deal.
I am more interested what we may or may not do with bledsoe and JJ at the deadline this season.