Who is Lonzo Ball?

[Pelicanidae]

The equation for me at least is building a championship winner. That’s all I care about. Lonzo improving his 3 and having facilitating gifts for me is all I’m paying attention to now that I know he’s not my lead superstar.

That's fair, and as much as I like Smart and do think he has serious value, I also do agree that he himself is not The Guy on a championship roster.

My issue with Lonzo is that next year is a contract year for him, and the better he plays (which obviously we want), the more likely he is to get paid at the end of that contract year. So there's a balance: obviously we want him to get better, but we don't want him to get valuable enough that another team will be willing to overpay him and force us to either risk overspending or losing him for nothing. This is the same balance you've got to work with when it comes to any young player.

So the question for me is, how likely is it that Lonzo reaches an ability/impact level where paying him the big money he will almost inevitably get offered isn't a horrible mistake? Given how far he has to go to be a reliable, consistent, high impact player, I think that it's not particularly likely. Of course I could always be wrong, and I'm not saying we must trade him immediately or anything, but if I see the possibility of making a deal that I can have reasonable expectations of positive value from that would cost us Lonzo, then I make that deal still.

Of course, in a perfect world Lonzo skips over that balance issue completely and takes the Ingram route, where yes, you're going to be forced to pay more than you would like to keep him but he's producing at a level where that's worth doing. That's an outlier scenario though, imo.

[msusousaphone]

The thing that impresses me the most about Zo is his work ethic. That's why, and I know this will produce audible groans but bear with me, I think he has a really high floor and could potentially reach Jrue levels (by that, I don't mean skillset, more overall quality of player). I mean, here we are, debating him vs Smart defensively and Smart does slightly edge him out.....but Smart has been in the league three years longer. Barring injury, with his work ethic, Ball is on a trajectory to blow Smart and Lowry out of the water defensively. And that work ethic is infectious. A priceless sort of infectious. Add that to the personalies of Zion, Hayes, Jrue.....that's a great team environment.

The dude reworked his shot, but that often doesn't pay off right away. The new mechanics are awkward. Sometimes numbers even drop after changing mechanics. So we'll see how that ends up but for the past fives games homedude is 16 of 34 from three. Yes yes. That will regress. But his shot will continue to improve as he puts more work on the new mechanics.

Buuuuuut redrum is right. How does his timetable fit in with ours? We HAVE to max BI, right? So...I dunno....as high as I am on him, I don't think we'll be able to justify his cost. It sounds like we're mostly agreeing on everything we just have different projections of improvement.

[Wowowowow]

That's fair, and as much as I like Smart and do think he has serious value, I also do agree that he himself is not The Guy on a championship roster.

My issue with Lonzo is that next year is a contract year for him, and the better he plays (which obviously we want), the more likely he is to get paid at the end of that contract year. So there's a balance: obviously we want him to get better, but we don't want him to get valuable enough that another team will be willing to overpay him and force us to either risk overspending or losing him for nothing. This is the same balance you've got to work with when it comes to any young player.

So the question for me is, how likely is it that Lonzo reaches an ability/impact level where paying him the big money he will almost inevitably get offered isn't a horrible mistake? Given how far he has to go to be a reliable, consistent, high impact player, I think that it's not particularly likely. Of course I could always be wrong, and I'm not saying we must trade him immediately or anything, but if I see the possibility of making a deal that I can have reasonable expectations of positive value from that would cost us Lonzo, then I make that deal still.

Of course, in a perfect world Lonzo skips over that balance issue completely and takes the Ingram route, where yes, you're going to be forced to pay more than you would like to keep him but he's producing at a level where that's worth doing. That's an outlier scenario though, imo.

And that’s the inevitable dilemma that every front office deals with and that point I can definitely agree with. But that’s just the reality of sports.

And in that dilemma lies the beauty and tragedy of it all. For that to happen and Lonzo to walk (or get traded) as a result would mean Lonzo has the chance to earn what he wants. It’s the story line of mostly all these point guards who while young have a drive to be a cornerstone superstar that inevitably win nothing until a real superstar comes strolling down the complex. But teams had to give up on them to only woulda coulda shoulda them in their prime.

But trust me...if our cornerstones that we are currently building around are what we all hope for them to be, we will just be looking for a player that plays at this current Lonzo’s production level who have settled their individual demons of knowing they are a role player and being paid like it. And that’s okay to me because we would have the hard part down.

Who knows. Maybe you’re right and we just come full circle later with him. Because for me and how I see championship winning teams constructed with 2 potential superstars, we’ll be looking for in the future what it feels like we are currently discarding and that’s why I can’t currently diss Lonzo. I’ve seen his movie too many times.

[GuardianAngel25]

That's fair, and as much as I like Smart and do think he has serious value, I also do agree that he himself is not The Guy on a championship roster.

My issue with Lonzo is that next year is a contract year for him, and the better he plays (which obviously we want), the more likely he is to get paid at the end of that contract year. So there's a balance: obviously we want him to get better, but we don't want him to get valuable enough that another team will be willing to overpay him and force us to either risk overspending or losing him for nothing. This is the same balance you've got to work with when it comes to any young player.

So the question for me is, how likely is it that Lonzo reaches an ability/impact level where paying him the big money he will almost inevitably get offered isn't a horrible mistake? Given how far he has to go to be a reliable, consistent, high impact player, I think that it's not particularly likely. Of course I could always be wrong, and I'm not saying we must trade him immediately or anything, but if I see the possibility of making a deal that I can have reasonable expectations of positive value from that would cost us Lonzo, then I make that deal still.

Of course, in a perfect world Lonzo skips over that balance issue completely and takes the Ingram route, where yes, you're going to be forced to pay more than you would like to keep him but he's producing at a level where that's worth doing. That's an outlier scenario though, imo.

If we left this up to you this team would let every good player walk cause they might become really good and be worth a nice contract or you would trade them off. You and Dell Demps would work so well together! Can’t believe he never hired you.

[GuardianAngel25]

Y’all I told y’all this kid just needs time! He has potential to be one of the best all around PGs in the NBA. He is only 21 years old! Just a few months before the season he reworked his entire shooting form and is still trying to build muscle memory to havenitnbe second nature. Next year he could be deadly and turn somewhat into that 6’6 Steph Curry many thought he would be before the draft. At worse this kid is a 6’6 version of Ben Simmons who can actually shoot 3s and somewhat hit FTs. In a couple of years Lonzo will be right in the all star PG discussion just like Ingram was this year. Kid is ridiculously talented and it blows my mind how many people just give up on guys like this who are so young they could still be plsyimg in college. I can point to case after case of guys improving much later then Lonzo who have half the talent and didn’t show signs anywhere close to how good he has been especially when he’s on. His last name has made people view and dissect him so much more then any player in the NBA outside of maybe Lebron.

His shot is only going to get better to where I see him hovering around 38%-42% from 3pt. His driving will continually to grow as he becomes a threat from outside along with his mid range game steadily improving. Outside of that he has near elite tools when it comes to passing and creating for others, rebounding, and defense. He needs to improve his decision making, where/when to take shots along with where his spots are, and just continually improve his all around game and shot which will come as he gains more experience. This kid is going to be a star guard and perfect 4th piece to a championship team. Lonzo being surrounded by Jrue/Ingram/Zion/Hayes is absolutely incredible and arguably the best group in the entire NBA to be surrrounded around and grow with for his game. People can keep hating when he takes 3s and misses but we need him doing this for his progression and the future as of our team. This season and next are about growing and helping players reach their potential to go win some championships. Trust the process!

[GuardianAngel25]

Lonzo needs to be the future PG of this franchise and let him grow and develop alongside our other young studs. Keep Jrue around as long as possible as he might be the best player on and off the court for these young kids to learn from. Let NAW be our 6th man until Jrue moves on and slide him into the SG spot when his time comes. Having NAW learn from Jrue is as good as it gets.

Ball/NAW
Jrue/NAW/Frank/Hart
Ingram/Hart/Williams
Zion/Niko
Hayes/Favors/Okafor
Would love to see us use our draft pick this year adding another big who is versatile to backup both the 4&5. The future of our team is so bright along with all of our future draft picks we have to try and hit on another stud. I would keep Favors and ship him out at next years trade deadline so Hayes can continually learn from him this season and throughout the summer into the next year. Next season I expect us to improve and make the playoffs while possibly jumping into a high seed. The following year is when I believe our dynasty for the next decade plus starts.

[Pelicanidae]

And that’s the inevitable dilemma that every front office deals with and that point I can definitely agree with. But that’s just the reality of sports.

And in that dilemma lies the beauty and tragedy of it all. For that to happen and Lonzo to walk (or get traded) as a result would mean Lonzo has the chance to earn what he wants. It’s the story line of mostly all these point guards who while young have a drive to be a cornerstone superstar that inevitably win nothing until a real superstar comes strolling down the complex. But teams had to give up on them to only woulda coulda shoulda them in their prime.

Oh sure, I'm not pretending that this is a dilemma that's unique to the Pels or anything. Like you said, this is the kind of question every team has to face at some point or another with all kinds of players.

For me, my issue with Lonzo is not ''he will never figure it out'', because I do think many of his problems are mental and he might well get over them in time. Not all of them, sure, for example his lack of touch isn't really a mental thing, but his refusal to consistently drive definitely is, and so is the inconsistent motor on defense. Those kinds of things could totally work out.

I just think that those are also the things where youth doesn't actually help: I constantly talk about how important youth is with drafting and stuff, and it's totally true that it's a big deal, but it does have its downsides. One of those downsides is that sometimes there are issues players have that they only really figure out later in their career and when you draft them, you're essentially paying them for their first contract to grow up and you don't expect real production until the second deal that takes them into their late 20s. And if someone takes until they're 26, 27, 28 to really figure everything old, that's not old: but is often too long for the team that had them when they were 21 to wait. Especially if some other team which is further behind you in development feels that they can afford to pay that premium and wait. That's when the price exceeds the value, imo, and you have to just let the guy go.

It's not identical to this, but it's a bit like when we had Randle last year and several people on this board insisted that he was really good and totally worth offering a 2yr/$40m deal to or something. I, and a few others (I think Mythrol maybe?) insisted that this was a bad idea, Randle isn't worth that money because his downsides are too big a deal and it was a crapshoot on if he ever really fixed them or not. Luckily, we didn't pay him. He went to the Knicks, his shooting regressed hard, his downsides have yet to be worked on (his defense is still horrific) and we used the money we saved by letting him go on acquiring Favors, who we have all seen have a huge impact for us this year. Could Randle still be good when he's 28? Sure. Could he fix his defensive issues and get that shot consistent? Of course he could. Do I want to be paying him $20m to figure that out? God no.

[redrum]

These are the same discussions this board had about Austin Rivers.

[Pelicanidae]

These are the same discussions this board had about Austin Rivers.

I wasn't on the board at that time, is this so?

Were people legitimately saying that we couldn't afford to let Rivers go because he had star potential if he could just figure out a few things?

[Wowowowow]

Even if that was a point to show the other side of the coin.

The people who were arguing for Austin Rivers at the time were right.

Again it’s about knowing your personnel and their play to a teams expectation.

Look at Rivers draft class. Anyone arguing that Rivers could be a solid role player on a CHAMPIONSHIP contending roster was actually in fact, correct...I mean that is true once you realize he’s a role player.

Rewatch that draft.

[redrum]

I never said anyone was wrong. Rivers was drafted at about the correct spot and has turned into a solid role player.
The point of this thread is who is Lonzo Ball? Correct?

I am just pointing out that his career might end as a Hall of Famer like Jason Kidd or he might be just another Austin Rivers.

The Pelicans need to figure how they see him and put a monetary value on that assessment. He wants more, trade him.

[msusousaphone]

I now have six kids (quintuplet 7 year olds and a 4 year old) so my memory could be way off but I can't remember exactly.....I recall everyone hating Rivers. Can't remember his defenders. I don't like the comparison as much because....I don't know how to put it exactly...just something about Lonzo's work ethic off the court has me higher on his ceiling and floor than Rivers.

[PELICANSFAN]

I now have six kids (quintuplet 7 year olds and a 4 year old) so my memory could be way off but I can't remember exactly.....I recall everyone hating Rivers. Can't remember his defenders. I don't like the comparison as much because....I don't know how to put it exactly...just something about Lonzo's work ethic off the court has me higher on his ceiling and floor than Rivers.

Not too many people were high on Rivers even from draft night.

[redrum]

I wasn't high on Rivers either, but I can remember people saying he is young, if he can fix his jumper, he should be given the chance to run the team, gym rat with a coach for a dad.

When Ball was a Laker just about everyone on this board thought very little of him, he put on a Pelican jersey and now people look at him very differently.

I was never intending to compare the players, just how they both inspire posters to see an unlimited future for them that probably is not reality.

[Pelicanidae]

That's fair.

My view on Lonzo is that he's never going to be a superstar like some people think. He might well one day be a perfectly good starting calibre PG, but that point in time will probably be several years away, in my view, and I don't want to pay him until he's 28 in the hopes that he figures it out at some point. Sometimes that happens: you just have to let someone go and then later things fall into place for them and everyone acts like that's who they were when they were with you and you made a mistake.

You didn't. If Lonzo is going to be really good, but not until he's 28 (just picking 28 since that's a typical age for someone to be in the middle of their prime) you can't pay someone for the next 6 years in the vague hope that it'll come together.

[P_B_&_G]

That's fair.

My view on Lonzo is that he's never going to be a superstar like some people think. He might well one day be a perfectly good starting calibre PG, but that point in time will probably be several years away, in my view, and I don't want to pay him until he's 28 in the hopes that he figures it out at some point. Sometimes that happens: you just have to let someone go and then later things fall into place for them and everyone acts like that's who they were when they were with you and you made a mistake.

You didn't. If Lonzo is going to be really good, but not until he's 28 (just picking 28 since that's a typical age for someone to be in the middle of their prime) you can't pay someone for the next 6 years in the vague hope that it'll come together.

Agreed, you don't pay a guy on potential for their second contract. That's what the rookie deal is for. That's what got Dell in trouble. The young vet route is a crap shoot just like the draft but at least drafted players are on rookie scale contracts and you retain flexibility.

If Zo makes a sizable leap in his play or shows to be the perfect compliment to Zion or something we will resign him when the time comes. I think he has until that option runs out to prove it though. Right now he isn't there yet.

He doesn't need to be a star though. He just needs to run the offense, hit open 3's and defend. A 3 and D PG if you will.

[pelicanchamp]

Pg is by far the hardest position to play as a rookie in the nba. Lonzo has had injuries and a ton of distractions LA, Lavar, etc being traded was a distraction given that he lived his whole life in California.

Imo Lonzo gets the rest of his contract to prove he is a star or perfect point guard for the pels. I somewhat agree with other posters who say it may best to trade him sooner than later.

We could wind up overpaying him if he makes improvements...

What would have to happen, be specific, for y’all to be comfortable keeping Lonzo?

For me it’s gotta be:
1. Put on more weight more muscle and master attacking the basket. (This will be very hard to do...)

2. Consistently win games with Lonzo flirting with triple doubles regularly.

3. Improve FT shooting and play with more emotion.

4. Get to playoffs and be dominant.

5. Cut down turnovers.


If most of these things happen then we should pay Lonzo. He will have to improve his touch and get points driving to basket.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pelicanidae]

We could wind up overpaying him if he makes improvements...

What would have to happen, be specific, for y’all to be comfortable keeping Lonzo?

For me it's this

1) Increased volume of drives, with consistency.
2) Improvement at the FT line (not asking for 85% here, but even 65% would be a big leap for him)
3) Consistency on defense. We know he can do it, I want to see it nightly, not just whenever he feels like it.
4) League average TS% (will come with FT improvement, but also with rim finishing improvement)
5) Shot selection needs to improve.

If he can do that, he'll be worth keeping around. That's quite a lot to change though, and some of that stuff (drive volume, for example) is largely mental which is often harder to fix than physical issues like a shot profile.

1, 4, and 5 are all clearly interrelated, obviously. Driving more and taking more shots at the rim instead of awkwardly hopping into bad jumpers is better shot selection, and if he can actually finish those shots, his TS% will improve.

[Biasvasospasm]

I think Lonzo is worth keeping around to see what happens, and you hope he can piece together enough positive aspects of his game that he's a long-term piece or at least has value to someone at the deadline next year.

He doesn't need to be a high level at traditional point guard skills, as long as you aren't paying him to do those things. If he gets starter money and is a solid starter, that would be fine too. There's a path of team development where you want the ball in Ingram's hands and Zion's hands as your primary creators. In that world, if Lonzo can become an above-average catch and shoot player who pushes in the open floor, makes good decisions and can convert difficult passes in the halfcourt and is a really good defender, that's a good fit.

He does have to be able to drive and convert a layup as a secondary creator or run an occasional pick and roll at an acceptable level.

His pedigree makes it hard to believe he won't be overpaid, which is a real concern.

This year, he just hasn't been good enough at the other things (the defense, rebounding, transition stuff) to compensate for his shortcomings. He hasn't athletically looked good until the past couple of weeks, so some of that may be injury-related, but if you're always injured you can't just excuse that, either.

I think his limitations in terms of his handle, touch, and lack of an in-between game mean that he won't ever do most of the NBA lead guard stuff at a high level. Not that he can't be a valuable player, but you need to play him next to a guy who does most of that stuff.

[Pelicanidae]

His pedigree makes it hard to believe he won't be overpaid, which is a real concern.

This year, he just hasn't been good enough at the other things (the defense, rebounding, transition stuff) to compensate for his shortcomings. He hasn't athletically looked good until the past couple of weeks, so some of that may be injury-related, but if you're always injured you can't just excuse that, either.

I think his limitations in terms of his handle, touch, and lack of an in-between game mean that he won't ever do most of the NBA lead guard stuff at a high level. Not that he can't be a valuable player, but you need to play him next to a guy who does most of that stuff.

Totally agree with all of this.

The pedigree is what's going to concern me. When his contract is up, he'll only be 23, which isn't exactly super young, but it's not old either. There's going to be some team out there who looks at him, especially if he's made any slight improvements (for example, becomes a decent shooter even if he doesn't improve his FT% or his at-rim finishing) and says man, 23 years old? #2 overall pick? I'm gonna bet on that kid.

So then it all depends on how much they're willing to bet. Maybe they're not willing to bet that much, and then we match it. But what happens when some idiot team comes out and throws him 4yrs/$80m? It seems unlikely now, but the Knicks just threw 3yrs/$62m at Julius Randle, and he was older than Lonzo will be when his contract comes up, and he was only picked 7th rather than 2nd. The leap Lonzo would have to take to be worth $20m/year is pretty significant imo, and I'm not sure if we want to play that game here.

[msusousaphone]

There's a qualitative factor to Lonzo that just doesn't translate into the quantitative and that's what makes the analytical junkies (used affectionately) dislike him and the more rhythm watchers like him. He does change the flow of a game. He settles the team. Watch in our games and try to feel the natural flow/rhythm the game is going in.....when Zo is on his game, it feels like watching Brazilians play futbal. There have been multiple games where we were getting gashed and shooting bad shots and he entered and everything just stabilized. It'll get more consistent and pronounced as he gets older.

I think spasm brings up a great point, however, in that if Ingram and Zion start turning into point forwards and Jrue stays on the team.....or NAW blossoms or we trade for another all-star with handling abilities....it makes Ball moot.

[Pelicanidae]

There's a qualitative factor to Lonzo that just doesn't translate into the quantitative and that's what makes the analytical junkies (used affectionately) dislike him and the more rhythm watchers like him. He does change the flow of a game. He settles the team.

I'm not even sure what this means.

What's a ''rhythm watcher''? Is that just supposed to be a new term for the ol' fashioned ''eye test'' guys?

[Wowowowow]

I understand what he means perfectly, but to get it sometimes you have to dive deeper into what the game is.

It’s chemistry. Analytics doesn’t account for chemistry and the make up of teams, who players routinely guard, what’s their role on the team, what sacrifices for the betterment of the team they make etc. You want to get an honest impression of what wins and loses in this league read Jared Dudley’s brutal honesty about the talented Clippers teams he was on.

But really focusing on Lonzo in the construction of this team, if we are arguing what his pedigree is based on the Lakers expectations of him when they drafted him versus what ours should be when we wiped his slate clean, then we are already evaluating upside down. We are in the lucky position to feel like right now we already have players in roles for what the Lakers were expecting Lonzo to be. Why are we - if we have our cornerstone superstars - worrying about evaluating Lonzo based on if he’s a superstar? We should only be worrying about how he fits with this team and the direction his play is trending for what our team needs.

Im reading the scouting report above of Lonzo on everything he doesn’t do and it’s evaluating him in metrics to me what looks like a comparison to a Damian Lillard, Kyrie Irving...lead scoring guards. Guards who have responsibilities on their team to carry a chunk of the scoring load and identity leadership roles. Again I ask, if we are confident in the scoring and leadership potential of what we proclaim now as our scoring cornerstones, why are we evaluating Lonzo based on how multifaceted his offensive scoring is? If both of their usage is super high, why are we worrying about what a Kyrie does great on this specific team? Why are we evaluating Lonzo in comparison to lead players on their team (not even just guards) who have green lights in losing environments? We would be paying Lonzo based on the things he does for our team. Not based on what other players can do in small expectation environments. And if in your honest opinion he isn’t worth the money, throw some names out there at the PG position at the price tag you’re willing to not pay Lonzo who would be in Lonzos age bracket. Check the rosters. Lonzo is like 1 of 3 players right now.

I can tell you who Lonzo is right now on our team. He’s a big pointguard - one of the tallest - who consistently grabs a high rate in offensive and defensive rebounds for his position. That seems to be missed in this discussion and a lot of times that’s one of those you never know what you have til it’s gone aspects of the game that people think is easily replaceable until you see roars on other teams about how they wish they were a better rebounding team. He’s 6-6 and can beat smaller guards up the floor with the ball. He doesn’t lose the adjacent speed test against smaller and quicker guards that big guards usually stumble with and he can even press full court on defense against small guards at 6-6. And then most importantly to me, his three ball is trending right now in a direction that we should be satisfying us all. That’s the most important aspect to me because if we have the stars, the most important thing is 3 and D guys who spread the floor for them.

But it’s still all going to end up going back to team chemistry in my opinion. If Lonzo stays healthy, his game continues to trend upwards AND he has great chemistry with our team, that’s how we should evaluate Lonzo in determining who he is.

[pelafanatic]

I think some people on here are falling into the trap of focusing on what Lonzo could be instead of just realizing and enjoying what it is. He's not as bad as some people think but he's also not as good as others think. At this point he's an average guard with some severe limitations but also some very nice skills. If we stop thinking of him as a future all star and instead think of him as just a nice guard, then we'll be a lot more pleased with the output.

The issue here, however, is what do you pay a guy like that. Vanvleet signed a 2 year, 18 million dollar contract last season. I don't think Lonzo would settle for under 10 million a year. Malcolm Brogdon, on the other hand, signed a 4 year 85 million dollar contract. I think even the biggest of Lonzo supporters can agree that he doesn't bring the same value as Brogdon who was coming off of a 50/40/90 season.

So where does that leave Lonzo? Again I go back to my Marcus Smart comparison. Smart was the 6th pick in the NBA draft, and he underperformed in his rookie contract in the eyes of many, while providing a lot of value that doesn't show up in the box score. Additionally, he signed a contract with a team that did not draft him. Smart signed a 4 year 51 million dollar contract at the age of 24. If we take into account inflation, I could see Lonzo getting a similar deal as long as he continues on this path and doesn't either drastically improve or vice versa. Something like 4 years 60 million would make a lot of sense for Ball and whatever team decides to sign him.

If Lonzo does continue to improve, specifically scoring the basketball, then he could follow the Oladipo path. Oladipo was another high lottery picked who struggled to score as a young player but eventually found his niche in the league and earned a 4 year 85 million dollar contract.

Personally, I'd expect Lonzo to fall somewhere between Smart and Oladipo/Brogdon because I think that's the level of value he brings.

[PELICANSFAN]

I think some people on here are falling into the trap of focusing on what Lonzo could be instead of just realizing and enjoying what it is. He's not as bad as some people think but he's also not as good as others think. At this point he's an average guard with some severe limitations but also some very nice skills. If we stop thinking of him as a future all star and instead think of him as just a nice guard, then we'll be a lot more pleased with the output.

The issue here, however, is what do you pay a guy like that. Vanvleet signed a 2 year, 18 million dollar contract last season. I don't think Lonzo would settle for under 10 million a year. Malcolm Brogdon, on the other hand, signed a 4 year 85 million dollar contract. I think even the biggest of Lonzo supporters can agree that he doesn't bring the same value as Brogdon who was coming off of a 50/40/90 season.

So where does that leave Lonzo? Again I go back to my Marcus Smart comparison. Smart was the 6th pick in the NBA draft, and he underperformed in his rookie contract in the eyes of many, while providing a lot of value that doesn't show up in the box score. Additionally, he signed a contract with a team that did not draft him. Smart signed a 4 year 51 million dollar contract at the age of 24. If we take into account inflation, I could see Lonzo getting a similar deal as long as he continues on this path and doesn't either drastically improve or vice versa. Something like 4 years 60 million would make a lot of sense for Ball and whatever team decides to sign him.

If Lonzo does continue to improve, specifically scoring the basketball, then he could follow the Oladipo path. Oladipo was another high lottery picked who struggled to score as a young player but eventually found his niche in the league and earned a 4 year 85 million dollar contract.

Personally, I'd expect Lonzo to fall somewhere between Smart and Oladipo/Brogdon because I think that's the level of value he brings.

That sounds like a logical take. 4/$60 million seems like a pretty reasonable ballpark.