Lonzo Ball

Discussion in 'Personnel moves' started by datamanwes, Jun 6, 2017.

  1. datamanwes

    datamanwes Active Member

    If the first four picks in the draft are Fultz, Jackson, Fox and Tatum. Would you pass on Lonzo Ball yes or no. If yes who would you pick instead?
  2. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member


    I'd grab him and be happy.

    Ball is an elite passer who posted video game level efficiency numbers on offense. He may never be a go-to scorer because of his odd shooting motion making it difficult to shoot off the dribble but he could be a catalyst for change. An offensive savant who ushers in a new era of Kings basketball.

    I would cringe every time his dad said something outrageous to garner attention but Lonzo himself has never been described as anything but a model teammate and leader on the floor.
    kingjatt and Suicide King like this.
  3. hrdboild

    hrdboild Well-Known Member

    I don't think you pass on him... you work out a trade if you don't think he fits on the team. Personally I'd rather have Ntilikina or Smith. Something about his game feels gimmicky to me and I don't know what his go-to skill is if the game slows down and he's forced to be more physical. If Ball is the consensus #2 guy we should be able to get something decent in a trade though. New Orleans got Jrue Holiday and two first round picks for Nerlens Noel. If i can get a young veteran starter and two lotto picks for Ball I'd make that trade. I don't buy the superstar hype but I'm more than willing to sell it to the highest bidder.
  4. Ozymandias

    Ozymandias Well-Known Member

    No. Take him and let the circus begin, he's NBA ready and can be handed the keys from day 1.

    He'd work very well with Skal and Buddy.

    I just don't see PHX passing on him though, I think that pick would be on the clock for about 2 seconds and their entire war room would be jumping for joy.
    Suicide King likes this.
  5. hrdboild

    hrdboild Well-Known Member

    I totally agree with this part. Phoenix has probably got Lonzo first overall on their board. He's a perfect fit for that team with a volume scorer locked in at SG already and several high energy athletic bigs who need someone else to create their scoring opportunities for them. The defense could get ugly but they'll just try to outsprint everybody and keep the pressure on by how quickly they can fill up the basket. Easy pick for them if he slides down to 4.
    206Fan, Suicide King and biltalent like this.
  6. Capt. Factorial

    Capt. Factorial Cantry Member Staff Member Contributor

    If Ball drops to five, we should absolutely NOT pass on Ball. Pick him, immediately.

    That said, despite bluster and rumor (which, as regards the NBA draft, are notoriously misleading almost all the time) that the Lakers might pass on Ball, I find it doubtful that they will do that. If he is not taken at #2, and Philly doesn't want him at #3, there is a good likelihood that somebody will trade up to #3 to get him. The same logic goes for Phoenix at #4. I think it would take a minor miracle for Ball to fall to #5.
    Suicide King likes this.
  7. ockingsfan

    ockingsfan Well-Known Member

    If the Lakers don't want Ball at #2, the Kings should absolutely try to trade up to #2 to grab him. I would offer the #5 and #10 to move up to #2 and draft Ball. Magic Johnson and Vlade have a good relationship, so I think they could have talks.

    I would then try to get another mid first round pick in a salary dump with another team, i.e. Portland or San Antonio.

    I watched a lot of UCLA basketball and Ball can take over a game. When he is on the floor, he always seems to be in control. He can single handily take over games with his passing and scoring. He is a legit game changer.

    He and Fultz are the only players I would trade the #5 and #10 to move up to get, and we are not getting Fultz.

    Lonzo's dad will stay in L.A. to take care of his wife and 2 other sons, so being away from his dad would be a good thing for Lonzo. Lonzo will be his own man, once he is in the NBA.
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017
    biltalent and 206Fan like this.
  8. Suicide King

    Suicide King Well-Known Member

    I am not as well versed talent scout as many here so I wont flat out advocate moving up for Ball, Fox or anyone. I don't have the resources to make those decisions.

    That said if Ball is there at 5 I don't see how you don't draft him. You figure out what your going to do with him after.
    steelevt and biltalent like this.
  9. ockingsfan

    ockingsfan Well-Known Member

    A trade that may work for both the Kings and Lakers would be the Kings trade #5 and #10, Aaron afflalo (expiring) and Galloway (salary match) to the lakers for #2 (Lonzo Ball) and lakers #28 pick and Luol Deng (salary dump).

    Why the Kings do it? They get one of the top 2 players in this draft and a real game changer, potential franchise player in Lonzo Ball. They pick up a late first rounder for the salary dump (Luol Deng). Deng can serve as a stop gap small forward. The Kings dump Galloways contract and opens a roster spot. At #28, the Kings draft a small forward like semi ojeleye or Tyler Lydon or Kurucs?

    Why the Lakers do it? If the rumors are true that they are not drafting Ball, then the Kings #5 and #10 gives them great value for the #2, which they can try to use of trade for Paul George Or draft BPA at 5. They unload a huge contract to clear salary cap to try and lure some free agents this summer, Klay Thompson?
    "The Serbian Sniper" likes this.
  10. ESP47

    ESP47 Well-Known Member

    I think we would be getting fleeced in that deal.
    Big Cuz 15 likes this.
  11. ockingsfan

    ockingsfan Well-Known Member

    How so? The kings move up 3 at the top of the draft. Could mean the difference between Lonzo Ball vs Tatum.

    You move #10 for #28. At 10, they likely take Markkaren or Collins. At 28, they can chose a small forward like Semi Ojeleye or Kurucs, who better fills a need. You still have 2 1st rounders

    The only thing you give up is cap space and you can get a franchise player in Lonzo Ball.
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017
  12. Big Cuz 15

    Big Cuz 15 Well-Known Member

    pass me whatever is being smoked.
  13. kingsboi

    kingsboi Well-Known Member

    someone else on here mentioned it all ready but all these silly rumors that the Lakers will pass up on Ball or if he drops to 3, the Sixers would pass him up is silly thinking. He won't drop til 5, under any circumstances, despite any rumors that will be thrown out there from today until the 22nd.
    Čarolija likes this.
  14. allrightythen

    allrightythen Well-Known Member

    I doubt he drops, but I really like his talent. He hits his shots despite it looking funny and he's a really advanced passer and has good length for the PG position. I really like him as a prospect. I don't like all the non-basketball stuff from his Dad and that would be a negative but I think you take the good with the bad with a guy like him.
  15. Joshoua

    Joshoua Well-Known Member

    How's a guy who can't create off the dribble nba ready a lot of people are in for a rude awakening with Ball. I'd take Dennis Smith over him if we are gonna have a bad defender at pg his game is tailor made for the NBA
  16. Hoovtrain

    Hoovtrain Well-Known Member

    No. This team can't afford to pass on Ball
  17. ockingsfan

    ockingsfan Well-Known Member

    I think Lonzo Ball is special.

    To me, he is Jason Kidd with a jump shot. :)

    If I were Vlade, I would try my best to get a deal done with the Lakers for #2 and take Ball.
  18. Hoovtrain

    Hoovtrain Well-Known Member

    Yeah no way I'm giving 5/10 AND taking back a bad contract. No thanks
    steelevt likes this.
  19. ESP47

    ESP47 Well-Known Member

    I have a bunch of reasons.

    The main one being the fact that he doesn't want to be here and we probably wont have him past his rookie contract. I also don't think his half court game is all that impressive. At least not #2 pick in the draft impressive. His transition game is elite but that's not a huge part of the game. He's riding high on a 73% FG% from inside the arc in college which is historic for just about anyone, let alone a PG. That is not going to happen in the NBA the same way Derrick Williams hasn't matched his 50%+ 3 point percentage from college. I also don't like his defense. He has late career Rondo type defense. Looks good on paper but you watch him on the court and where he gets exploited is going to be exacerbated even further in the NBA. I'm not trying to say he's not a good player right now and isn't going to be a good player in the future. I just don't think he's worth the 5 and 10 picks. Especially for a prima Donna who is trying to weasel his way onto the team of his choice. I can't stand players that do that. You have a gift that 99.9999% of people will never get to experience and you still aren't satisfied. That's why De'Aaron Fox is so loved by everyone. The kid appreciates absolutely everything.

    As for the trade...me personally, I would trade 5 and 10 for Fultz easy. I'd maybe do it for Fox and Jackson but I wouldn't trade it for any other rookie. I know pick 10 could get a little iffy if Smith, Isaac, Frank, Mitchell and all those guys are off the table but we need as many young potential starters as we can get. If we have to pick Tatum and Markkanen then so be it. I'm comfortable with Tatum if that's the BPA when we pick at 5. He has 2 way player potential and we currently don't really have any 2 way players. There is usually someone that drops as well so we could possibly end up with a guy that fits a need too.

    Vlade also has the option to trade 10 and move back and pick up guys like OG, Semi, Jackson, 2019 picks etc. Personally, I'd rather do a trade with the Blazers if we're talking cap space trades. I'd rather us acquire more assets to further up our chances of building a winning team. I know people are saying we can't have a billion rookies on the team but the rosters are expanding and that's what the D League is for. See what sticks and then fill in the veterans after. I don't want to pass up on possible solid players because we feel the need to sign a Barnes type player to be a vet.

    Then again if you view Lonzo Ball as better than all of that, then everything I said is completely pointless. Part of the fun is that we all have different opinions on which route will make the Kings a playoff team. Only time will tell.
  20. 206Fan

    206Fan Well-Known Member

    Yes, you take Ball and never look back. Ball is an elite talent.. you don't pass up on that because of his dad............
    ockingsfan likes this.
  21. ockingsfan

    ockingsfan Well-Known Member

    The way I see the draft is the top 2 are Fultz and Ball, they are elite prospects. These players I would trade up for, but we are not getting Fultz.

    The next tier is Fox, Jackson and Tatum. I view the players at #3 to #5 as equal, that is why I would not trade up to draft anyone of those players, I would just take who falls to us at #5.

    I watched a lot of Lonzo Ball at UCLA and when he is on the court, as a fan, you think anything is possible and you are never out of the game. I don't get that feeling with any other prospect, including Fultz.

    As for the character, Lonzo actually had great character at UCLA. His dad, not so much. But, I think if the Lakers passed on Ball, his dad would be so pissed and hurt, he would declare war on the Lakers. ;)
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017
  22. LPKingsFan

    LPKingsFan Well-Known Member

    Been thinking the same thing. If the Lakers passed on Ball, why do folks think he'd be a lock to bolt there in free agency?
    ockingsfan likes this.
  23. hrdboild

    hrdboild Well-Known Member

    Agreed. But I don't think we can afford to draft him either. He looks really good when he's running up and down the court making plays but that's not always going to work in the playoffs and it's not going to work against elite teams without a lot of defensive help around him. It's interesting to me that Lonzo Ball is viewed by most as a lock for the top 2 (and someone we should trade up to get) and Frank Ntilikina is seen as a guy we hope is there at 10. These guys have similar size, similar body types, they're about the same age. Lonzo is one of the top prospects from this high school class and Frank is the top prospect in his country. As good as Lonzo could be as a playmaker, Frank might be that level as a defender. Why would we trade up, giving away our second lottery pick, for a guy who might lead the league in assists when we could stay where we're at and draft a guy who might be first team all-defense instead? Considering our continuing struggles defensively, which of these guys is likely to have a bigger impact on our playoff chances? Do I really have to remind you that we had the league assist leader a year ago (11.7 apg) and won all of 33 games? If we want to continue the longstanding tradition of Sacramento teams being finesse oriented scoring teams that fall apart when you put pressure on them I suppose trading up for Ball makes a lot of sense. That's not the direction I would like us to go.... and none of that has anything to do with his dad.
    Suicide King likes this.
  24. LPKingsFan

    LPKingsFan Well-Known Member

    I'd argue that, while defense is important from every position, and you are only as good as your worst defender, it's entirely reasonable to value playmaking above defense when you are evaluating point guards. I'd say a gifted playmaker point guard would have a bigger impact than a gifted defender point guard on our playoff chances, unless we feel confident we have a gifted playmaker at another position (I don't).
  25. Ozymandias

    Ozymandias Well-Known Member

    Lonzo has phenomenal instincts a sharp handle and excellent vision, he's oversized and a plus athlete at PG, that makes him NBA ready, he can also drill open 3's from NBA range. He brings a lot to the table right away.
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017
  26. Mass

    Mass Well-Known Member Contributor

    The only problem I have with Lonzo is that if we somehow get him, I feel like we'll develop him for 4 years just to see him walk away as soon as he can. I don't think Lavar will allow him to spend his whole career in a small market team.
    It's a huge risk in my opinion.
    steelevt likes this.
  27. hrdboild

    hrdboild Well-Known Member

    I agree with you up to a point. I think the concept of what a playmaker is has changed a lot in the last 20 years though. There's no NBA team left that doesn't play some modified version of Tom Thibodeau's team defensive scheme he popularized in Boston and then brought with him to Chicago. Defenses are all based around switching screens, trapping ball-handlers and pushing them to the sideline or the baseline, disrupting passing lanes, and trying to force the offense into taking long two point shots or contested threes. As a guard, if you're not creating your own shot at this point than you're not going to draw the attention of the defense and that limits your playmaking ability. I watch Steph Curry play in the Finals and I still don't think he's a PG -- but that doesn't matter anymore. He's a threat to score whenever he has the ball in his hands and that's what creates easy shots for everyone else because the defense has to focus on him.

    If we're having this same conversation about Markelle Fultz I'd agree with you -- a bigger guard who can score from anywhere on the floor is bound to make the game easier for everyone else. That's why he's the consensus #1 pick -- his style of game fits the current NBA to a T. But with Lonzo I think he benefited enormously from playing against a lot of soft NCAA defenses that don't have the athletes or the preparation time to out-scheme a fast-paced scoring attack the way NBA teams do. I would compare it to the way Chip Kelly dominated Pac12 football for 5 years with his no huddle option offense and then completely failed to translate that success to the NFL. I became skeptical of Lonzo because the guy I saw struggle against Kentucky and USC didn't resemble the superstar prospect I kept hearing about. He had some great plays in all of those games but I didn't feel like he was ever imposing his will on the game. He never got into a zone where the defense couldn't stop him. He had almost as many turnovers as assists. Granted UCLA won 3 out of 5 of those match-ups but I was hoping to be impressed with his NBA potential and never really got there.

    Here's my counter-argument though -- that's all eye of the beholder stuff about Lonzo struggling against better defenses, but there is a general point here to be made about defensive versatility. The importance of team defenses has placed a premium not just on good individual defenders but on players who can defend multiple positions at a high level. Chris Paul has always been known as a great individual defender at the PG position but what happens when you switch him onto a SF? He can keep his feet in front of them and try to make the shot difficult but it's still going to be a mismatch. If you have a guard with the physical ability and the desire to guard PGs, SGs, and SFs your defense is never going to be in a position where you're compromised due to switching an undersized guard onto a wing player. It almost doesn't matter anymore if a player isn't great at stopping the ball because you're going to be using multiple players to stop the ball. What actually matters now is how well players function within the team defensive scheme. Can they make the right rotation instinctively? Do they know how to seal off a passing lane without losing track of their man? Can they help and recover fast enough to contest a shot? Do they close out under control with their legs underneath them or are they going to get pump faked into the air and blown by? All this stuff adds up over the course of a game. And it really only works to it's full potential if you have 5 players on the court at the same time who all work together. A great defender who can defend 3 or more positions on the floor and always make the smart rotation is also making their teammates better. And that kind of 'playmaking' -- defensive playmaking -- isn't affected by shooting slumps.

    Let me put it this way, San Antonio hasn't consistently been one of the best teams in the league for 20 years because they have elite playmakers. Who on that team is an elite playmaker at this point? Tony Parker led the team this season with 4.5 assists per game. This is the team with the second best record in the league. What they do consistently well is defend at a high level. They find players who fit their scheme and they teach them a role and then they drill it into them over and over again until it becomes automatic. That's what works. Golden State is a flash in the pan compared to the playoff streak Popovich has managed to put together and it's all built around defense. So when you look at Lonzo Ball and say "yeah but he's an elite playmaker, he'll make everyone else on the team better" I can't help thinking to myself that we'd be inviting the weak leak into the team defense and then playing him 35-40 minutes per game to keep his offensive playmaking abilities on the floor. That's not a compromise that I'm comfortable with. Buddy Hield and Skal Labissiere can both hold their own on defense but they're not standout defenders. That's fine if you put 3 very good defenders next to them. It starts to tip too far the other way if you focus on the offensive side of the ball instead. Other teams can do what they want with their rosters and I don't care all that much. If it were up to me I'm not going to voluntarily start out this next rebuild capping our defensive potential in the below-average range again. That's the same reason why I don't want Jayson Tatum.
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017
    upinsmoke likes this.
  28. ockingsfan

    ockingsfan Well-Known Member

    To be fair, Lonzo Ball was injured during the 1st (or 2nd game?) of the NCAA tournament. He took a bad spill on his hip in that game. He wasn't playing the same after that injury.

    It came out later that he was playing through that hip injury in the next game and in the Sweet Sixteen game vs Kentucky.
  29. ockingsfan

    ockingsfan Well-Known Member

    Lavar will have 2 other sons in the NBA to worry about, by the time Lonzo becomes a free agent. Lavar can't get all 3 of his boys in big markets. There will be one or two of them that will be with small market teams.

    I think Lonzo will be his own man by that point and if he and the Kings have something special brewing, I can see him staying with the Kings long term. Plus, the Kings could pay him a lot more than any other team in free agency.
  30. hrdboild

    hrdboild Well-Known Member

    I'd heard that, but he wasn't very impressive in their first match up either (although UCLA did win that one). Or in three games against USC. My theory is that he struggles against teams with multiple NBA level athletes at the guard positions and a more disciplined defensive gameplan. And that's the kind of team he's going to be playing every night from now on. Certainly you hope he'll get stronger, work on his jumper, tighten his handle and overcome those deficiencies in time like any prospect. But the line on him has been that he's so talented offensively that you just get him on your team and sort out the rest later as he dominates the league with JKidd level savvy. I don't think he's nearly as imposing as he's been made out to be in any aspect of the game and I'm not convinced that he can excel playing anything other than the run and gun style full-court offense he played in high school and in his one year at UCLA.
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017

Share This Page