Originally Posted by
Pelicanidae
Yeah, I don't get it either.
Right now, based on what he's shown, Lonzo's best games are games where he is lights out from 3. As you say, if that's not happening for him, he basically just doesn't impact games in the halfcourt whatsoever. At his worst he's a complete liability on both ends.
The argument that he's been improving every year is a sketchy one. He hasn't. He's improved as a shooter sure, and that's a very very valuable skill - nobody would deny that. But I would argue that his defense this year was actually pretty clearly worse than last year in some ways, and he actually got to the rim at his career lowest rate this year. He also shot the fewest self-created 3s of his career this year, and had the lowest REB% of his career this year.
Do those things mean he sucks? No, in some ways this was the most impactful year of his career. But the idea that he's just shown uniform growth everywhere is inaccurate. He's been at his most impactful this year purely because he's being asked to do less. You don't pay more for someone who is most valuable when they are being trusted with fewer responsibilities.
Can you pay $20m or more per year for a 4th or 5th option? Yeah, sure, if you're a really good team trying to keep a guy around because he's integral to a winning core. That's why the Warriors paid Iguodala so much; he wasn't objectively worth it but they had their core guys and just needed to pay whatever it took to keep a vital cog in their machine around.
We are not in that situation. We do not have a winning core. It's been said before but it needs to be re-iterated; how much are you willing to pay to keep a lottery team together? For me, I'm glad to hear that we're not likely to capitulate on a massive contract. Maybe one day Lonzo will be worth that, but I don't think that day is today and probably won't be next year either. You cannot sign a guy for his 5th-8th NBA years (assuming a 4 year deal) in the hopes that he'll figure things out by year 9.