Also Charles Bassey is shooting up extremely high on my draft board right now, dude can play and I like him a lot next to Zion. Is potential is very very high
 |
| . |
|
Also Charles Bassey is shooting up extremely high on my draft board right now, dude can play and I like him a lot next to Zion. Is potential is very very high
Last edited by HornetGuru; 02-26-2021 at 06:08 PM.
I have Bassey mid second round, as I did the last time he was a draft project which was, I think, 2019? Zion's year.Originally Posted by HornetGuru
Basketball.
Man I like him, he has great height, weight and insane length. Very very high rebounding and defensive potential while also has a jumper out to the 3 point line and shoots a good free throw.
"Lonzo, sign a four year deal with us (4th year - player option) at 18MM per, and we'll sign LiAngelo on a 2 way for 21-22 and guarantee him, at least, a roster spot in Birmingham for the remining three years."
http://www.bourbonstreetshots.com/20...t-cant-let-go/
A very good read from Shamit Dua here. I'd recommend reading the entire thing for the additional context behind his reasoning and examples that he gives from other teams, but here's the conclusion of the article for those who just want that straight up.
The Pelicans head into the trade deadline with Lonzo Ball and Josh Hart as pending restricted free agents. At the time of writing, the Pelicans are 15 -19, not exactly a good team. Brandon Ingram is already on the books as a max contract, Steven Adams received a 2 year, $35 millon extension, and Eric Bledsoe is owed $18.1 million next year. The team is already getting pricey without Ball’s and Hart’s second contracts on their books. The Pelicans are at a stage where they need to ask themselves if it is worth it to retain Ball and Hart on a team that clearly isn’t good. Are Hart and Ball so important to a 15-19 team that their skills need to be retained at 2-3x their current annual cost?
Personally, I’d be aggressive in fielding offers for both players. While sign and trades are technically a possibility, the biggest window to reap value occurs in three weeks at the trade deadline on March 25th. Hart may be a bit of an easier case to let play out in restricted free agency than Ball. His qualifying offer is only $5.2 million to Ball’s $14.3 million, and his cap hold is less than a third of Ball’s $28.7 million. It’s entirely possible that Hart doesn’t receive lucrative offers in restricted free agency and the Pelicans are able to retain their talent at very nominal cost, but are you willing to take the same gamble with Ball?
Between Ball’s large QO and cap hold, there is already an opportunity cost in place by letting him reach restricted free agency. What happens when Ball’s contract is on the books for $18-22 million per year for the remainder of Zion’s rookie contract and beyond? The Pelicans have already all but committed to being an above the cap team for the rest of Zion’s rookie deal, and the team will only get more expensive. So I ask again, how much is it worth to you to keep a bad team intact? What deals will re-signing Ball cost you in the future? Does a small sample of good play warrant foregoing potential assets at the deadline and optionality in the future? These questions might be impossible to answer today, but are the exact ones the Pelicans’ brass needs to be asking. There is little question that the Pelicans will one day be a good team with how rapidly Zion is ascending, but will it end up being in spite of Ball? Unless the Pelicans plan on importing a large amount of talent externally over the next few months, I worry what a large commitment to Ball will do to future flexibility. When in doubt, don’t Gary Harris it.
Without question if we get a good offer for Ball we take it. But are we going to get a reasonable offer to trade him? A lot of teams may think that they can pick him up for a reasonable price on the free agent market and we won't match it. And then there is the question of whether we have anyone on our current roster that can replace his contributions, and whether we can lure a free agent here if we don't.
That's only the case if you are insistent that you need to replace his contributions, or whether you think you can different contributions which end up being more valuable to this particular team for the same price or less, or if you think we already have figures on the roster who could potentially replace those contributions naturally. For example, do you believe in Kira as a shooter? If so, you might worry less about losing Lonzo as an improving shooter if you believe you have someone who is a better off-ball mover already signed.
It's important not to get so worried about losing a solid player (which is what Lonzo is becoming on his current trajectory) that you hamstring your team.
I respect Shamit and appreciate his work, but two of his three examples are Gary Harris and Eric Gordon, both of who had careers altered by injury. Sure, in hindsight, it's easy to say they should not have paid those guys. I'm fine with the theory, but the evidence provided doesn't support it IMO. As to Faried, he was just a bad player. The Nuggets paid a bad basketball player. I don't think that is the case for Lonzo, although it could be for Hart when he loses some athleticism.
I just really think he cherry picked examples here without presenting the opposing side. Imagine if Milwaukee had the opinion "when in doubt, don't Gary Harris it" when it came to Khris Middleton. Or Boston with Jaylon Brown. Or Utah with Rudy Gobert. Or even New Orleans with Jrue Holiday.
Jrue Holiday had already been an all-star by the time we acquired him.
By the summer of Gobert's final rookie contract year, he was all-NBA 3rd team, all defensive first team, NBA blocks leader, and finished 2nd in DPOY voting
Khris Middleton, by the end of his rookie deal, had spent three consecutive years averaging at least 44/39/85 in Milwaukee, which would be career numbers for Lonzo at this point.
These are not apples to apples comparisons.
Plus, you also have to look at impact. Shamit's point is not ''don't sign players'', it's be careful about committing big money extensions to players when you are a team that sucks and that they don't improve.
The key line there isn't ''don't Gary Harris it'', that's a quippy closer. The key line in that conclusion is ''how much is it worth to you to keep a bad team intact''.
We suck. Lonzo just had the best month of his career and we still, generally, played sub-.500 ball. It's quite clear that what he provides does not, in itself, raise the floor of this team: the question is, how much do you think it's worth paying to keep a 15-19 squad together. If you think it's worth committing $20m a year for multiple years to individuals to keep that squad together, then that's your view and you're entitled to it. But it's a question that you have to ask yourself.
Plus, just as a side note, if your concern is that Harris and Gordon have been injured, might I direct you towards Lonzo Ball's long and storied injury history?
He would acknowledge that. I read the piece before it went up and gave him the same feedback and he is looking around for data that shows how guys are likely to project moving forward for a future part in this series.
The biggest issue is that bad/mediocre teams pay players based on who they are for them when they are bad/mediocre, but those players wont perform those same roles when the team is good. The player I would use is Dillon Brooks. Brooks, if the Grizz ever become great, is a 7th or 8th man. But you start him when you are bad and he puts up good numbers and now you gotta pay him based off of THAT.
And thats why I would never start Hart. If we ever get great, Hart is a 7th man. So I wanna see him in that role. Pay him for that role. It would be a mistake to start him, make him your 4th option, let him put up numbers and then pay him 16 mil a year, and then in two years when you bring in a guy much better than Hart, tell him he has to go back to the bench and pay a guy 16 when the going rate for that role is closer to 8-10
@mcnamara247
Let me start off by saying I don't think this team sucks; and, specifically, I don't think that you can put that label on a team who's best player is a 20 year old transcendent talent who is very clearly still learning.
Before you project Lonzo moving forward, you have to project Zion, and to a lesser extent BI. Like Vecenie said, it's important to have guys who compliment our two stars.
It's already quite clear to me that Lonzo compliments Zion extremely well. I'm confident that the shooting is very very real based on the eye test, what guys like JJ have said, and what I hear from people around the team. He has deficiencies of course, but those deficiencies are very manageable if he understands his role. Kira, in theory, basically covers all of Lonzo's weaknesses.
For the record, I'm quite sure Lonzo is having a greater impact than Jrue did that season he was an all star. And how many games has Lonzo missed in the past 2 years combined?
Hart is actually way more difficult to me. What happens when a player who relies entirely on effort gets the bag. It can go one of two ways. If his effort drops, even slightly, he might not even be a rotation player. He still can't shoot a damn at 34% from 3 for the season. On the other hand, its clear over the past month or so what his impact can be if he continues to give 110%.
Maybe the better question would be why we chose to invest $36 million a year in Bledsoe and Adams rather than something probably less than that in Zo and Hart.
On one hand, effort is a very fragile thing. How many times effort guys absolutely tank it once they hit a small market. You never know what someone battles with or if something can impact their lives greatly (Ryan Anderson). Good thing about Josh is he seems happy, he looks a strong guy mentally and he has the right demeanor. You need some motor guys, but as you said the risk is overpaying them.
We got extra draft compensation to take on that contract in the hopes that we could flip him into even more draft compensation in the future or package him in a deal for a star. Bledsoe's on court production would rank like 5th or 6th in reasons we invested.
As for Adams, he's been very good. The investment in him will make even more sense whenever the Pels are finally able to acquire the stretch 4 they've been looking for
POST OF THE YEAR!!!
I'd much rather pay shooting than effort, personally. I also get the feeling that Hart would rather a starting role than more money
That would be the worry. I like Hart, but he is exactly the type of guy we don’t want to overpay. Effort guys can be found. Talent is another thing all together.
I'm not sure that Lonzo passes the eye test for me in terms of shooting. I think he's worked hard on his shot and he's gotten to a point to where when he is absolutely uncovered he can make a team pay, (sometimes). But how much of his shooting percentage is because teams are leaving him completely unguarded? How many times has he been so wide open that he's had time to catch the ball, take a dribble and then shoot? How many true shooters in the league are left that open? Is Lonzo ever going to get to a point where he can run off of screens stop and shoot before his defender can recover? Because that's what real NBA shooters can do. They can put pressure on the defense out on the perimeter to either open up other shooters or to open up the middle. Lonzo can't do that. NAW can't do that. Kira can't do that. Bledsoe can't do that. The only player on our roster that's a real bonafide three point threat is JJ and father time is starting to limit his effectiveness.
If someone offers a nice package for Lonzo like a first round pick in this draft I listen, if not I roll into free agency and see what other teams offer him. I absolutely resign josh hart, he has 2 elite skills, rebounding and hustle, while being a good 3pt shooter and defender. Like MM said keep him coming off the bench until next year because if not and he balls you you gotta pay him more.
I am all for trading Bledsoe and JJ tho, as for Ball I wanna see what he gets offered.
I strongly disagree, Lonzo has be draining 3s all year with people all in his face, don’t think it’s because he’s wide open. Last night he hit some tough contested 3s.
How can anyone say Lonzo doesn’t need to be paid?! He’s average to above average in every area. Those type of players don’t grow on trees. He had Donovan Mitchell completely frustrated all night. The only thing that bailed Spider out was the refs as usual. Let’s not even mention he’s still extremely young. I don’t know why ppl think Zo doesn’t deserve time to improve.
Yeah Lonzo has been playing great offensively while also taking on the toughest assignment.
The issues are Bledsoe, and our bench, fix those and you start winning games. Bledsoe can be fixed with Kira, you keep Hart and hope you can draft some good bench guys.
What about Hart starting? BI, Zion, and Zo all take turns with the ball in the PNR. Hart would bring the energy needed. When Stan subbed him with three minutes left, you could easily tell the energy shifted. Hart is like the Pels RoCo. I do think that Bled is only starting to get that trade value up, but like JJ that stock is falling. If JJ can have a couple more games like last night, then maybe they can package the two. The vets on this team outside of Adams just don’t move the needle like you would want them to. Also, they are really hindering the development of Kira and NAW. NAW has really gotten worse, and I hope he gets another chance.
Last edited by Fedupfan; 03-02-2021 at 01:41 PM.
If you start Hart this year and he kills it like MM said you have to pay him much more, but if you wait until next year to start heart and you resign Lonzo you now have Lonzo and heart as the starters, which would be fine, but you take away minutes from Kira. The good news would still be that you probably got Hart for cheap so you can move him back to the bench and Lonzo to SG but Kira is ready. Like it’s been said with Lonzo it’s just about how much, I wouldn’t trade him tho, I’d take the risk and see what other teams pay him, we could get lucky. Also it’s not like you would get a boat load for him in a trade anyway
There's hundreds of real NBA shooters that don't make 39% of their 3s on 8 per game. If Lonzo was doing the things you mentioned in your post, he would be unquestionably a max guy. I don't think anyone is saying he is a max guy.
You're right that Lonzo is basically only taking open 3s. As per NBA tracking data, 7.2 of his 7.8 3pg are either open or wide open. I'm fine with that, though. It shows decent shot selection, as well as a willingness to take the open 3.
Do you understand why he's so open though? It's because Zion's gravity is so insane that defenses literally have no choice but to leave guys like Lonzo wide open, and he's hitting those shots at a 41.5% clip. You can't fault him for being open. If he continues to knock those open 3s down at an elite level, teams will have to make a choice to either help off of Lonzo or give Zion a 1v1 dribble drive. The Pels are also starting to incorporate the JJ-Zion pick play, except with Zo as the screen setter.
For the record, I've been in favor of the Pels drafting Corey Kispert for quite a while now. You can't have too many good shooters, and currently the Pels don't have enough.
People haven't gotten to see it yet, but Kira is a very good shooter. If you're basing your opinion on stats from his 12 games played thus far, you're playing yourself.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote