Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Welpee wrote:Question for everybody salivating over Lonzo Ball: when was the last time you actually watched him play? Not highlights, Not UCLA video. Watched him for a full game as a Pelican, and be honest.

Lonzo ball is not very good—-over rated. Not a guy who will tilt the needle

I think alot of guys would like him if he was here already. Giving up real assets for him is a little tough with a limited track record in the area we need (his shooting). I would sign him for money. I wouldn't give up future assets for him. Unless you can pull a Payton for Ball straight swap...

I think it would be the opposite. Like DSJ he looks intriguing on somebody else's team. Then he gets on your squad and you learn why they were willing to move him.

Not a great comparison because Lonzo is proven at this point to be a plus shooter, defender, and playmaker. He may be streaky and frustrating but we can all agree we need those things he brings. What does this team need most in the starting lineup? A good 3pt shooter and secondary playmaker without losing anything on defense. He provides that package.

So let me understand this, we're picking up Lonzo for his shooting?

The gap between Payton and Lonzo is marginal right now. If you asked me if I could just dump Payton and pick up Lonzo would I do it, sure. If you ask would I invest trading assets for Lonzo and then have to sign him to a contract likely making at least 3x what Payton makes, not interested.

And the DSJ comparisons is not about the specifics of their game. It's about a player looking decent on paper, putting up numbers you think are intriguing, or you watch highlights and think that's a guy I want in a Knick uniform. Then he gets here and he gets the Elfrid treatment and people want him out. I guarantee you if you looked on the Pelican message board removed the name "Lonzo" you'd probably swear they were talking about Payton. I bet their fans aren't dying to resign Lonzo.

This is what i'm not understanding. Ball is a better playmaker and defender than Payton and a significantly better shooting. It's like night and day. There isn't a world where Ball is only marginally better than Payton in any sense. I'm not saying Ball is some world beater or big missing piece, but he is a significant upgrade to both Payton and Bullock and covers areas we need improvements in. Look at his 3pt shooting numbers this year and last year. He's become a high-volume 38% 3pt shot maker. Payton is a non-shooter and has taken a step back in terms of playmaking because teams play zone and dare him to shoot. That won't happen as much with Ball.

Ball
16.3 ppg
5.5 assists
5.0 reb
2.4 to
74% FT
38% 3 pt
1.4 steals
.9 Defensive win share
-1.1 Defensive +/-

Payton
15.9 ppg
4.6 assists
5.0 reb
2.5 to
72% FT
25% 3 pt
.8 steals
.5 Defensive win share
-.4 Defensive +/-

I don't see where the stats indicated more than a marginal difference between the two and watching Ball play recently lines up with the stats. Difference certainly doesn't justify giving up assets and paying Ball at least triple what we're paying Payton.

Now if you are projecting Lonzo getting significantly better with time, that's a different discussion.

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Welpee wrote:Question for everybody salivating over Lonzo Ball: when was the last time you actually watched him play? Not highlights, Not UCLA video. Watched him for a full game as a Pelican, and be honest.

Lonzo ball is not very good—-over rated. Not a guy who will tilt the needle

I think alot of guys would like him if he was here already. Giving up real assets for him is a little tough with a limited track record in the area we need (his shooting). I would sign him for money. I wouldn't give up future assets for him. Unless you can pull a Payton for Ball straight swap...

I think it would be the opposite. Like DSJ he looks intriguing on somebody else's team. Then he gets on your squad and you learn why they were willing to move him.

Not a great comparison because Lonzo is proven at this point to be a plus shooter, defender, and playmaker. He may be streaky and frustrating but we can all agree we need those things he brings. What does this team need most in the starting lineup? A good 3pt shooter and secondary playmaker without losing anything on defense. He provides that package.

So let me understand this, we're picking up Lonzo for his shooting?

The gap between Payton and Lonzo is marginal right now. If you asked me if I could just dump Payton and pick up Lonzo would I do it, sure. If you ask would I invest trading assets for Lonzo and then have to sign him to a contract likely making at least 3x what Payton makes, not interested.

And the DSJ comparisons is not about the specifics of their game. It's about a player looking decent on paper, putting up numbers you think are intriguing, or you watch highlights and think that's a guy I want in a Knick uniform. Then he gets here and he gets the Elfrid treatment and people want him out. I guarantee you if you looked on the Pelican message board removed the name "Lonzo" you'd probably swear they were talking about Payton. I bet their fans aren't dying to resign Lonzo.

This is what i'm not understanding. Ball is a better playmaker and defender than Payton and a significantly better shooting. It's like night and day. There isn't a world where Ball is only marginally better than Payton in any sense. I'm not saying Ball is some world beater or big missing piece, but he is a significant upgrade to both Payton and Bullock and covers areas we need improvements in. Look at his 3pt shooting numbers this year and last year. He's become a high-volume 38% 3pt shot maker. Payton is a non-shooter and has taken a step back in terms of playmaking because teams play zone and dare him to shoot. That won't happen as much with Ball.

Per 36 min stats:

Ball
16.3 ppg
5.5 assists
5.0 reb
2.4 to
74% FT
38% 3 pt
1.4 steals
.9 Defensive win share
-1.1 Defensive +/-

Payton
15.9 ppg
4.6 assists
5.0 reb
2.5 to
72% FT
25% 3 pt
.8 steals
.5 Defensive win share
-.4 Defensive +/-

I don't see where the stats indicated more than a marginal difference between the two and watching Ball play recently lines up with the stats. Difference certainly doesn't justify giving up assets and paying Ball at least triple what we're paying Payton.

Now if you are projecting Lonzo getting significantly better with time, that's a different discussion.

Who do you wish to be our pg?

xblvdels3 wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Welpee wrote:Question for everybody salivating over Lonzo Ball: when was the last time you actually watched him play? Not highlights, Not UCLA video. Watched him for a full game as a Pelican, and be honest.

Lonzo ball is not very good—-over rated. Not a guy who will tilt the needle

I think alot of guys would like him if he was here already. Giving up real assets for him is a little tough with a limited track record in the area we need (his shooting). I would sign him for money. I wouldn't give up future assets for him. Unless you can pull a Payton for Ball straight swap...

I think it would be the opposite. Like DSJ he looks intriguing on somebody else's team. Then he gets on your squad and you learn why they were willing to move him.

Not a great comparison because Lonzo is proven at this point to be a plus shooter, defender, and playmaker. He may be streaky and frustrating but we can all agree we need those things he brings. What does this team need most in the starting lineup? A good 3pt shooter and secondary playmaker without losing anything on defense. He provides that package.

So let me understand this, we're picking up Lonzo for his shooting?

The gap between Payton and Lonzo is marginal right now. If you asked me if I could just dump Payton and pick up Lonzo would I do it, sure. If you ask would I invest trading assets for Lonzo and then have to sign him to a contract likely making at least 3x what Payton makes, not interested.

And the DSJ comparisons is not about the specifics of their game. It's about a player looking decent on paper, putting up numbers you think are intriguing, or you watch highlights and think that's a guy I want in a Knick uniform. Then he gets here and he gets the Elfrid treatment and people want him out. I guarantee you if you looked on the Pelican message board removed the name "Lonzo" you'd probably swear they were talking about Payton. I bet their fans aren't dying to resign Lonzo.

This is what i'm not understanding. Ball is a better playmaker and defender than Payton and a significantly better shooting. It's like night and day. There isn't a world where Ball is only marginally better than Payton in any sense. I'm not saying Ball is some world beater or big missing piece, but he is a significant upgrade to both Payton and Bullock and covers areas we need improvements in. Look at his 3pt shooting numbers this year and last year. He's become a high-volume 38% 3pt shot maker. Payton is a non-shooter and has taken a step back in terms of playmaking because teams play zone and dare him to shoot. That won't happen as much with Ball.

Per 36 min stats:

Ball
16.3 ppg
5.5 assists
5.0 reb
2.4 to
74% FT
38% 3 pt
1.4 steals
.9 Defensive win share
-1.1 Defensive +/-

Payton
15.9 ppg
4.6 assists
5.0 reb
2.5 to
72% FT
25% 3 pt
.8 steals
.5 Defensive win share
-.4 Defensive +/-

I don't see where the stats indicated more than a marginal difference between the two and watching Ball play recently lines up with the stats. Difference certainly doesn't justify giving up assets and paying Ball at least triple what we're paying Payton.

Now if you are projecting Lonzo getting significantly better with time, that's a different discussion.

Who do you wish to be our pg?

I still view Quickley as the PG of the future, but looking at options for combo guards and Ball just stands out.

martin wrote:

xblvdels3 wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Welpee wrote:Question for everybody salivating over Lonzo Ball: when was the last time you actually watched him play? Not highlights, Not UCLA video. Watched him for a full game as a Pelican, and be honest.

Lonzo ball is not very good—-over rated. Not a guy who will tilt the needle

I think alot of guys would like him if he was here already. Giving up real assets for him is a little tough with a limited track record in the area we need (his shooting). I would sign him for money. I wouldn't give up future assets for him. Unless you can pull a Payton for Ball straight swap...

I think it would be the opposite. Like DSJ he looks intriguing on somebody else's team. Then he gets on your squad and you learn why they were willing to move him.

Not a great comparison because Lonzo is proven at this point to be a plus shooter, defender, and playmaker. He may be streaky and frustrating but we can all agree we need those things he brings. What does this team need most in the starting lineup? A good 3pt shooter and secondary playmaker without losing anything on defense. He provides that package.

So let me understand this, we're picking up Lonzo for his shooting?

The gap between Payton and Lonzo is marginal right now. If you asked me if I could just dump Payton and pick up Lonzo would I do it, sure. If you ask would I invest trading assets for Lonzo and then have to sign him to a contract likely making at least 3x what Payton makes, not interested.

And the DSJ comparisons is not about the specifics of their game. It's about a player looking decent on paper, putting up numbers you think are intriguing, or you watch highlights and think that's a guy I want in a Knick uniform. Then he gets here and he gets the Elfrid treatment and people want him out. I guarantee you if you looked on the Pelican message board removed the name "Lonzo" you'd probably swear they were talking about Payton. I bet their fans aren't dying to resign Lonzo.

This is what i'm not understanding. Ball is a better playmaker and defender than Payton and a significantly better shooting. It's like night and day. There isn't a world where Ball is only marginally better than Payton in any sense. I'm not saying Ball is some world beater or big missing piece, but he is a significant upgrade to both Payton and Bullock and covers areas we need improvements in. Look at his 3pt shooting numbers this year and last year. He's become a high-volume 38% 3pt shot maker. Payton is a non-shooter and has taken a step back in terms of playmaking because teams play zone and dare him to shoot. That won't happen as much with Ball.

Per 36 min stats:

Ball
16.3 ppg
5.5 assists
5.0 reb
2.4 to
74% FT
38% 3 pt
1.4 steals
.9 Defensive win share
-1.1 Defensive +/-

Payton
15.9 ppg
4.6 assists
5.0 reb
2.5 to
72% FT
25% 3 pt
.8 steals
.5 Defensive win share
-.4 Defensive +/-

I don't see where the stats indicated more than a marginal difference between the two and watching Ball play recently lines up with the stats. Difference certainly doesn't justify giving up assets and paying Ball at least triple what we're paying Payton.

Now if you are projecting Lonzo getting significantly better with time, that's a different discussion.

Who do you wish to be our pg?

CADE or SUGGS, take your pick man!

Ok we will grab them with our 18th pick lol

I want that to but Dallas will have to do some serious losing the rest of the way.

xblvdels3 wrote:

martin wrote:

xblvdels3 wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Welpee wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Welpee wrote:Question for everybody salivating over Lonzo Ball: when was the last time you actually watched him play? Not highlights, Not UCLA video. Watched him for a full game as a Pelican, and be honest.

Lonzo ball is not very good—-over rated. Not a guy who will tilt the needle

I think alot of guys would like him if he was here already. Giving up real assets for him is a little tough with a limited track record in the area we need (his shooting). I would sign him for money. I wouldn't give up future assets for him. Unless you can pull a Payton for Ball straight swap...

I think it would be the opposite. Like DSJ he looks intriguing on somebody else's team. Then he gets on your squad and you learn why they were willing to move him.

Not a great comparison because Lonzo is proven at this point to be a plus shooter, defender, and playmaker. He may be streaky and frustrating but we can all agree we need those things he brings. What does this team need most in the starting lineup? A good 3pt shooter and secondary playmaker without losing anything on defense. He provides that package.

So let me understand this, we're picking up Lonzo for his shooting?

The gap between Payton and Lonzo is marginal right now. If you asked me if I could just dump Payton and pick up Lonzo would I do it, sure. If you ask would I invest trading assets for Lonzo and then have to sign him to a contract likely making at least 3x what Payton makes, not interested.

And the DSJ comparisons is not about the specifics of their game. It's about a player looking decent on paper, putting up numbers you think are intriguing, or you watch highlights and think that's a guy I want in a Knick uniform. Then he gets here and he gets the Elfrid treatment and people want him out. I guarantee you if you looked on the Pelican message board removed the name "Lonzo" you'd probably swear they were talking about Payton. I bet their fans aren't dying to resign Lonzo.

This is what i'm not understanding. Ball is a better playmaker and defender than Payton and a significantly better shooting. It's like night and day. There isn't a world where Ball is only marginally better than Payton in any sense. I'm not saying Ball is some world beater or big missing piece, but he is a significant upgrade to both Payton and Bullock and covers areas we need improvements in. Look at his 3pt shooting numbers this year and last year. He's become a high-volume 38% 3pt shot maker. Payton is a non-shooter and has taken a step back in terms of playmaking because teams play zone and dare him to shoot. That won't happen as much with Ball.

Per 36 min stats:

Ball
16.3 ppg
5.5 assists
5.0 reb
2.4 to
74% FT
38% 3 pt
1.4 steals
.9 Defensive win share
-1.1 Defensive +/-

Payton
15.9 ppg
4.6 assists
5.0 reb
2.5 to
72% FT
25% 3 pt
.8 steals
.5 Defensive win share
-.4 Defensive +/-

I don't see where the stats indicated more than a marginal difference between the two and watching Ball play recently lines up with the stats. Difference certainly doesn't justify giving up assets and paying Ball at least triple what we're paying Payton.

Now if you are projecting Lonzo getting significantly better with time, that's a different discussion.

Who do you wish to be our pg?

CADE or SUGGS, take your pick man!

Ok we will grab them with our 18th pick lol

I want that to but Dallas will have to do some serious losing the rest of the way.

C Robinson PF Randle SF Barrett SG Ball PG Quickley is a good team on both sides of the ball and the improvements in shooting and playmaking open up another level for this team

GustavBahler wrote:Lonzo is closer to the player we wanted Frank to develop into. Plsymaker, defender, 3pt shooter.

I read that the Pels have acknowledged the logjam, and want to thin out the backcourt. The truth is Ball isnt really needed on that roster with so many players who can run the point, and get buckets.

Quickley said Lou Williams was who he modeled his game after. A bench role should be considered as well long term. Might be better suited in that role. Build a bench that can challenge the starters in practice.

I think Ball is the one player they should keep in their backcourt for the same reasons i want him, he compliments Ingram and Zion well with the 3&D + secondary playmaking role. That is the type of role player you want around ball-dominant players. But the Pelicans are high on their bench backcourt of Lewis and Alexander-Walker and being a small market team they see that Ball will get a big contract so that's probably the thought-process there.

GustavBahler wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Lonzo is closer to the player we wanted Frank to develop into. Plsymaker, defender, 3pt shooter.

I read that the Pels have acknowledged the logjam, and want to thin out the backcourt. The truth is Ball isnt really needed on that roster with so many players who can run the point, and get buckets.

Quickley said Lou Williams was who he modeled his game after. A bench role should be considered as well long term. Might be better suited in that role. Build a bench that can challenge the starters in practice.

I think Ball is the one player they should keep in their backcourt for the same reasons i want him, he compliments Ingram and Zion well with the 3&D + secondary playmaking role. That is the type of role player you want around ball-dominant players. But the Pelicans are high on their bench backcourt of Lewis and Alexander-Walker and being a small market team they see that Ball will get a big contract so that's probably the thought-process there.

Dont believe thats a role that Lonzo relishes. Not after all the work he has put in to get better. Probably sees a larger role for himself. Which also might make it hard to keep him, at this stage in his career. New Orleans could get a nice deal for him.

The area he's worked on is his spot up shooting though. He has no in-between game and has stopped looking to make plays in the half-court. He takes no shots inside of the 3pt line ever unless it's on the break. I think he's sort of realizing he has more value as a 3&D guard than a lead guard. A 3&D guard that can also make plays in the open court might be the most valuable complimentary player in the league. But who knows.

GustavBahler wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Lonzo is closer to the player we wanted Frank to develop into. Plsymaker, defender, 3pt shooter.

I read that the Pels have acknowledged the logjam, and want to thin out the backcourt. The truth is Ball isnt really needed on that roster with so many players who can run the point, and get buckets.

Quickley said Lou Williams was who he modeled his game after. A bench role should be considered as well long term. Might be better suited in that role. Build a bench that can challenge the starters in practice.

I think Ball is the one player they should keep in their backcourt for the same reasons i want him, he compliments Ingram and Zion well with the 3&D + secondary playmaking role. That is the type of role player you want around ball-dominant players. But the Pelicans are high on their bench backcourt of Lewis and Alexander-Walker and being a small market team they see that Ball will get a big contract so that's probably the thought-process there.

Dont believe thats a role that Lonzo relishes. Not after all the work he has put in to get better. Probably sees a larger role for himself. Which also might make it hard to keep him, at this stage in his career. New Orleans could get a nice deal for him.

The area he's worked on is his spot up shooting though. He has no in-between game and has stopped looking to make plays in the half-court. He takes no shots inside of the 3pt line ever unless it's on the break. I think he's sort of realizing he has more value as a 3&D guard than a lead guard. But who knows.

Stretches in games where Lonzo doesnt touch, or bring up the ball. So it doesnt surprise me that he isnt looking to be as much of a playmaker when he does have the rock. Doesnt drive as much as he used to as well.

If Ball were given more responsibility with the offense, believe we would see a more complete player. Dont see the role he has on the Pels as making the best use of his skill set.