May 1st - New Orleans Pelicans @ Minnesota Timberwolves - 28-35

[MichaelMcNamara]

The Lonzo hate is so dumb at this point. He works really well with Zion and Ingram. I wouldn't max him but anything upto 20mil offer I'd match. We really just need one more guy that can corner 3 as a 5 then use them with Zion/BI/Lonzo and whoever is hot between Kira and NAW and we would be able to close games a lot better.

I really like Naz Reid personally.

The word hate is too strong. Nobody says he is awful, they say they wouldnt pay him 20-25 mil. Basically, what you are saying. So, are you a "hater"?

And yes, after games like this it is easy to say we cant lose him but would you have posted this after his last game where he went 0-8 from three and 3-12 overall? Lonzo is wildly inconsistent, and is often just a catch and shoot guy in the half court - which is all the playoffs are - so many have an issue paying him what his next contract could be. That is the real argument to debate against. If you disagree, tell us why

[PolishFan]

Finally a come back at the end of the game. Lonzo had a great game but he just cannot make a shot to win a game. Billy played really well in this game. Naji has to learn how to finish easy layups

[As I See It]

The Lonzo hate is so dumb at this point. He works really well with Zion and Ingram. I wouldn't max him but anything upto 20mil offer I'd match. We really just need one more guy that can corner 3 as a 5 then use them with Zion/BI/Lonzo and whoever is hot between Kira and NAW and we would be able to close games a lot better.

I really like Naz Reid personally.

Welcome aboard!! I've been saying this team needs a stretch 5 since we won the lottery in '19.

[Pelicanidae]

The word hate is too strong. Nobody says he is awful, they say they wouldnt pay him 20-25 mil. Basically, what you are saying. So, are you a "hater"?

And yes, after games like this it is easy to say we cant lose him but would you have posted this after his last game where he went 0-8 from three and 3-12 overall? Lonzo is wildly inconsistent, and is often just a catch and shoot guy in the half court - which is all the playoffs are - so many have an issue paying him what his next contract could be. That is the real argument to debate against. If you disagree, tell us why

Fairly rare happening here: totally agree with Mac.

Nobody is saying that Lonzo is the worst player in the league that shouldn't get a contract at all or anything like that. The issue isn't ''nobody wants Lonzo on the team for any price!!''.

The argument is ''Lonzo is wildly inconsistent and looks to be three years away from being two years away from a half-court threat. I don't want to pay him $25m to be basically a 3-and-D wing when his D isn't that impressive and his 3 is extremely unreliable night-to-night, especially when that payday has potentially disastrous cap ramifications if he doesn't improve rapidly.''

If there's an argument against that, make it; but don't just point out his best nights to do so. This was literally one of the best games of his entire career: he set a career high in scoring and he matched his career high from 3. You can't use that as the baseline for your arguments surrounding him because it is exceptional. That is, it is the exception from the norm.

If Lonzo wants to resign for $12m a year, he's welcome to. The problem is just that he's likely wanting a lot more than that, and there's some chance a team will offer it.

[Taker597]

Fairly rare happening here: totally agree with Mac.

Nobody is saying that Lonzo is the worst player in the league that shouldn't get a contract at all or anything like that. The issue isn't ''nobody wants Lonzo on the team for any price!!''.

The argument is ''Lonzo is wildly inconsistent and looks to be three years away from being two years away from a half-court threat. I don't want to pay him $25m to be basically a 3-and-D wing when his D isn't that impressive and his 3 is extremely unreliable night-to-night, especially when that payday has potentially disastrous cap ramifications if he doesn't improve rapidly.''

If there's an argument against that, make it; but don't just point out his best nights to do so. This was literally one of the best games of his entire career: he set a career high in scoring and he matched his career high from 3. You can't use that as the baseline for your arguments surrounding him because it is exceptional. That is, it is the exception from the norm.

If Lonzo wants to resign for $12m a year, he's welcome to. The problem is just that he's likely wanting a lot more than that, and there's some chance a team will offer it.

The jist is that if Championship basketball was to ever shy away from being half court dominate. There would be a lot of value in Lonzo, but the nature of the beast. Basketball isn't positionless and championship basketball is determined in half court efficiency.

Lonzo is a fine player, but still got a lot to room to grow to being a cornerstone player to sink irreversible cap space on in the future.

[JJackisangry]

Fairly rare happening here: totally agree with Mac.

Nobody is saying that Lonzo is the worst player in the league that shouldn't get a contract at all or anything like that. The issue isn't ''nobody wants Lonzo on the team for any price!!''.

The argument is ''Lonzo is wildly inconsistent and looks to be three years away from being two years away from a half-court threat. I don't want to pay him $25m to be basically a 3-and-D wing when his D isn't that impressive and his 3 is extremely unreliable night-to-night, especially when that payday has potentially disastrous cap ramifications if he doesn't improve rapidly.''

If there's an argument against that, make it; but don't just point out his best nights to do so. This was literally one of the best games of his entire career: he set a career high in scoring and he matched his career high from 3. You can't use that as the baseline for your arguments surrounding him because it is exceptional. That is, it is the exception from the norm.

If Lonzo wants to resign for $12m a year, he's welcome to. The problem is just that he's likely wanting a lot more than that, and there's some chance a team will offer it.

I’ve been on record saying quite often that I like Lonzo a lot but would hesitate to sign him for some of the silly money being mentioned. The romantic in me wants him to stay. I love the guys we have on our roster as people- Zion, BI, Zo, Hart, NAW, Kira, Jax all come across as great young men. I like the idea of Lonzo as a player- he has the size to play 3 positions, he obviously works his butt off in the offseason and he has shown he can play make pretty solidly in transition at times. It all falls apart in the half court though, and when we need him to make shots, he may be the most inconsistent guy on the floor. I have questions about where he is mentally and if he can overcome those numerous brain farts and absurdly streaky shooting.

[MichaelMcNamara]

I’ve been on record saying quite often that I like Lonzo a lot but would hesitate to sign him for some of the silly money being mentioned. The romantic in me wants him to stay. I love the guys we have on our roster as people- Zion, BI, Zo, Hart, NAW, Kira, Jax all come across as great young men. I like the idea of Lonzo as a player- he has the size to play 3 positions, he obviously works his butt off in the offseason and he has shown he can play make pretty solidly in transition at times. It all falls apart in the half court though, and when we need him to make shots, he may be the most inconsistent guy on the floor. I have questions about where he is mentally and if he can overcome those numerous brain farts and absurdly streaky shooting.

Out of curiousity - and this is a question for everyone - What does it mean to be "on record?" Is there an official place I can go to put something on record? Does someone else have to record it? Or is everything I type "on the record?" Is this post I am currently writing on the record???

[JJackisangry]

Out of curiousity - and this is a question for everyone - What does it mean to be "on record?" Is there an official place I can go to put something on record? Does someone else have to record it? Or is everything I type "on the record?" Is this post I am currently writing on the record???

It is simply a figure of speech as in -“I’ve said in the past”

Obviously paraphrasing because I can’t remember literally every word I utter, but I do like Lonzo and I’ve said it multiple times- so his argument that we hate a guy because we are hesitant to pay him is bunk

[ramsters60]

Out of curiousity - and this is a question for everyone - What does it mean to be "on record?" Is there an official place I can go to put something on record? Does someone else have to record it? Or is everything I type "on the record?" Is this post I am currently writing on the record???

do you want it to be? I think, that technically, you have to announce it ahead of time though.... which brings up the question.... just what does "technically" mean in this instance?

[PELICANSFAN]

Fairly rare happening here: totally agree with Mac.

Nobody is saying that Lonzo is the worst player in the league that shouldn't get a contract at all or anything like that. The issue isn't ''nobody wants Lonzo on the team for any price!!''.

The argument is ''Lonzo is wildly inconsistent and looks to be three years away from being two years away from a half-court threat. I don't want to pay him $25m to be basically a 3-and-D wing when his D isn't that impressive and his 3 is extremely unreliable night-to-night, especially when that payday has potentially disastrous cap ramifications if he doesn't improve rapidly.''

If there's an argument against that, make it; but don't just point out his best nights to do so. This was literally one of the best games of his entire career: he set a career high in scoring and he matched his career high from 3. You can't use that as the baseline for your arguments surrounding him because it is exceptional. That is, it is the exception from the norm.

If Lonzo wants to resign for $12m a year, he's welcome to. The problem is just that he's likely wanting a lot more than that, and there's some chance a team will offer it.

Not surprised you would agree given it has to do with Ball. There is a HUGE difference between $25 million a year and $12 million a year. If you honestly think he is only worth $12 million a year, you are being disingenuous. I agree that I would not want to pay him $25 million a year. However, the decision gets tougher if that number is in the $17-$18 million a year range.

[MichaelMcNamara]

Worth is a tricky topic. A person is worth what someone is willing to give them.

I think the better way to frame it is: If he plays like we expect him to over the next 4 years, how big would the contract have to be for him to have negative value in a trade?

I think Rubio was basically used as lateral, net neutral, salary in two trades and he was at a 17.4 mil average. I expect Lonzo to be at least as impactful and will have the perceived upside at his age that Rubio still doesnt have. I think you'd have to get over 20 mil per for Lonzo to be perceived as a negative asset, barring a severe or numerous injuries.

That said, I dont want to just give a guy a contract just because he wont be a negative. I want to be excited about every transaction I make. And if I am not, go find someone who I will be excited about signing for the contract.

[Pelicanidae]

Not surprised you would agree given it has to do with Ball. There is a HUGE difference between $25 million a year and $12 million a year. If you honestly think he is only worth $12 million a year, you are being disingenuous. I agree that I would not want to pay him $25 million a year. However, the decision gets tougher if that number is in the $17-$18 million a year range.

There is a huge difference between $12m and $25m, which was the entire point of using those two numbers.

In the case of $25m, that's a lot of money, and demonstrates why you wouldn't pay it.

In the case of $12m, that's very cheap and demonstrates why you would.

The exaggeration is there to make things clear: it's not about Lonzo as a player in a vacuum, it's about cost and opportunity. If you can get him at a bargain then of course you take it because the question is about the value of the contract; if you have to pay him near max money, you don't take it. That's point of the explanation.

I feel like I shouldn't have to explain this, it should be pretty self evident. The distinction doesn't work if you say ''No, I don't wanna pay him $20m a year but if he wants to resign for $18.7m a year it's okay!'' because in that case the distinction is so minor you get into an argument; what's the big deal about an extra $1.3m a year, that doesn't even cost us a vet min!'' and so on. Better to make the numbers extremely distinct, with clear levels of investment to them, so that the position is clear.