You guys, I think we need to pay Lonzo

[luckyman]

Now you have 3 options in my opinion. In the offseason you either sign him, sign and trade him or match whatever the offer is. I don't care if it's the max. You can yell sunk cost or anything else to let him sign elsewhere, but if Griff lets him walk for free I'm off his side. That's just bad GM'ing. And I get the idea, "well overpaying him is a bad idea or maybe he doesn't want to be here"...in that case you should've at least known what was coming in the offseason and did something about it before this deadline. I think he does enjoy playing with Ingram and Zion, not sure about the rest of it.

Who cares if he's fine with the "rest of it" or not? He's not the kind of player to dictate anything. Anybody offers him the max, which I highly doubt, let him walk.

[donato]

Who cares if he's fine with the "rest of it" or not? He's not the kind of player to dictate anything.

Just from the standpoint you don't want him to sign an offer sheet and say, "My heart is in..."

[donato]

So overpaying is a good GM move?

If you're not prepared to overpay (let's be honest, whatever he gets with his current production will be an overpay at $20+), then you should've moved him for assets now. Even small ones.

[Pelicanidae]

If you're not prepared to overpay (let's be honest, whatever he gets with his current production will be an overpay at $20+), then you should've moved him for assets now. Even small ones.

This is true, but in reality one mistake now doesn't justify another mistake later.

If Lonzo gets an offer sheet more than you think he's worth, let him walk. Don't ruin your cap sheet and flexibility for the next 4 or 5 years just so that you can do some faux tough-guy ''We Didn't Lose Him'' nonsense.

[Erose]

If you're not prepared to overpay (let's be honest, whatever he gets with his current production will be an overpay at $20+), then you should've moved him for assets now. Even small ones.

Having cap space is also an asset.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Wecandothis]

Hurry up and trade Lonzo you moron

Lonzo could walk for nothing in return.

[Eman5805]

Pels need to leak some of the trades we turned down.

[Eman5805]

Lonzo could walk for nothing in return.

And we need to be willing to accept that.

[Taker597]

Lonzo could walk for nothing in return.

Why not match his contract? He's an RFA. If someone willing to overpay. They are probably willing to give up assets for a sign and trade.

[MichaelMcNamara]

Pels need to leak some of the trades we turned down.

I can tell you that if we wanted Duncan Robinson on this team, we could have had him. Thats the one that pisses me off.

As for Chicago, we were engaged for days, but didn't want Markkenen and the reason that Lonzo isnt a Bull right now is because Chicago couldnt fetch anything we wanted to him. I dont know much about NY or what the Clips offered

[Eman5805]

Oofah.

[SoCal4Pels]

I can tell you that if we wanted Duncan Robinson on this team, we could have had him. Thats the one that pisses me off.

I find this hard to believe, unless Miami wanted a king's ransom in picks. You don't have to be very clever to find out a way to make sure that happens if Miami would allow it.

[PaKwAn]

If someone signs lonzo to an offer sheet in the off season, can they do a sign and trade and give us a huge tpe? Kinda like what boston got for hayward

[new city champ]

Lonzo could walk for nothing in return.

Repeat what I said a few days ago--not moving Lonzo at the deadline cannot lock you in to matching whatever he gets in free agency later. That is bad GMing.
Maybe you are rolling the dice that he won't get the offer Klutch thinks he will. You may lose that gamble. But the far greater sin is saying "Welp, I guess we have to pay up." Saying "I have to do 'X' now because I did 'Y' earlier" is the worst kind of management. Place a value on the player and stick to that value. If he ends up walking for nothing, that sucks. But covering your ****** by overpaying and wrecking your cap for years to come is worse...

[PolishFan]

I can tell you that if we wanted Duncan Robinson on this team, we could have had him.

I’m sure it’s not true

[donato]

Repeat what I said a few days ago--not moving Lonzo at the deadline cannot lock you in to matching whatever he gets in free agency later. That is bad GMing.
Maybe you are rolling the dice that he won't get the offer Klutch thinks he will. You may lose that gamble. But the far greater sin is saying "Welp, I guess we have to pay up." Saying "I have to do 'X' now because I did 'Y' earlier" is the worst kind of management. Place a value on the player and stick to that value. If he ends up walking for nothing, that sucks. But covering your ****** by overpaying and wrecking your cap for years to come is worse...

It is a loss what you say, but you better be prepared to stretch your budget and overpay to an extent because you didn't take assets when you could've. Letting him go for the cap relief is not a win compared to getting anything of value before the just passed trade deadline. If he goes because he was offered $25m a year or whatever and we don't match then Griff needs to take a lot of blame because he should've seen it coming.

[SoCal4Pels]

I don't see anyone except maybe Charlotte offering Zo $25M, in which case everyone loses except Klutch and Zo.

[Eman5805]

Don’t fall into the sink cost fallacy. It’s a trap. Cut bait before you lose your entire fishing pole to the deep.

[new city champ]

It is a loss what you say, but you better be prepared to stretch your budget and overpay to an extent because you didn't take assets when you could've. Letting him go for the cap relief is not a win compared to getting anything of value before the just passed trade deadline. If he goes because he was offered $25m a year or whatever and we don't match then Griff needs to take a lot of blame because he should've seen it coming.

Yes, it would be a loss. And Griffin would deserve blame. But you still can't be locked into paying whatever kind of offer he gets from a team that may have massive cap room or front load the contract to punish you for matching. You gambled by not dealing Lonzo at the deadline. Don't compound that gamble by doubling down if he get's a massive offer. That would be the worst outcome. If it comes to that, take your medicine, accept you lost your gamble and move on. You'll take heat, but you should accept that possibility right now and not buckle to pressure to over pay later because you decided not to trade him when you had the chance.

[MichaelMcNamara]

The narrative that needs to die, and the one I need you guys to educate people on is that there is no scenario in which the Pelicans can "lose Lonzo for nothing"

Even if they let him walk and dont get anything DIRECTLY for him, I still have them at a little over at 20 mil in cap room, with the ability to get to 35 if they stretch Bledsoe or 40 if they dump him. But regardless, they then take that same money they would use for Lonzo if they keep him and use it on X player or X and Y player - thereby getting something in the place of Ball.

People think too simply and linearly with moves. Long story short, there is NO scenario in which Lonzo leaves for nothing and people need to understand that

[As I See It]

The narrative that needs to die, and the one I need you guys to educate people on is that there is no scenario in which the Pelicans can "lose Lonzo for nothing"

Even if they let him walk and dont get anything DIRECTLY for him, I still have them at a little over at 20 mil in cap room, with the ability to get to 35 if they stretch Bledsoe or 40 if they dump him. But regardless, they then take that same money they would use for Lonzo if they keep him and use it on X player or X and Y player - thereby getting something in the place of Ball.

People think too simply and linearly with moves. Long story short, there is NO scenario in which Lonzo leaves for nothing and people need to understand that

Exactly!!

To the extreme, if they did free up 40MM, by doing as you suggest, would being able to sign Kawhi Leonard this summer appeal to anybody? I wonder how long 'letting Lonzo walk' would sting? I use this example only to illustrate that all is not lost as you say.

[MichaelMcNamara]

Exactly!!

To the extreme, if they did free up 40MM, by doing as you suggest, would being able to sign Kawhi Leonard this summer appeal to anybody? I wonder how long 'letting Lonzo walk' would sting? I use this example only to illustrate that all is not lost as you say.

Kawhi is an extreme example that wont happen. But correct. Even if it is Norman Powell or Dinwiddie or Duncan Robinson -- you would have traded Lonzo for that guy. Not lost him for nothing. Because if you kept Lonzo, you couldnt have afforded that guy. So, although it isnt a direct trade, you still got that guy "for Lonzo"

[pelicanchamp]

Lonzo still has a lot to prove before we match a big contract offer. We already have Zion and Ingram and we have decent role players. Lonzo has improved but he would have to be critical in getting us to the playoffs for me to justify paying him 20mil or more. Also, if Kira and NAW continue to impress then it makes me more comfortable letting go of Lonzo.

If we miss the playoffs, which is likely, then we probably get a decent player in the lottery. We can focus on developing our young team and let the right players compliment Zion.

If we focus on getting tough defenders that play hard every minute then we can beat anyone. As long as we play a little better defense and play at a fast pace we will beat any team. They can hit 3s against us but if it takes 18 seconds to get 3 points and us, Zion, only 18 seconds to get 4 points then we win. Just slowing teams down and giving it to Zion is enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[13 - 3]

No wait is Lonzo a restricted free agent? Can the Pelicans match an offer this summer? Mixed signals.

[13 - 3]

This is what I’m talking about

Perk just said Lonzo is an unrestricted free agent.

I mean this dude is paid a lot of money to be on TV during the trade deadline.

— Scott Kushner (@ScottDKushner) March 25, 2021