The terribly mediocre Lakers

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,289
Lololol, it’s fun when two terrible teams agree before the game to treat it like an all star game.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Devin Booker is one of the most overrated players out there. Has like one good game every five and the rest of the time it’s just terrible hero ball, like late Kobe hero ball.
after having watched him live, he is noticeably less athletic than the guys he plays against. He can shoot it, and gets to fire at will in Phoenix, so he goes off once in a while. But, ma does he get torched of the dribble. I think if the left him on HArden of Westbrook for a whole game they would get into the 70s.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
Lonzo must have had six layups blocked. He just cannot get a contested shot off against anyone.
Yes six shots blocked. Plus he was 12-27 so he threw the ball up a lot.

Apparently Ball simply can't jump off one foot, which is strange since he has good hops off two.

Breakdown of Suns' lack of defense on Ball here: https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/how-lonzo-ball-quieted-the-haters-with-brilliant-bounce-back-vs-suns/. A few of those 3P shots couldn't have been more wide open.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Devin Booker is one of the most overrated players out there. Has like one good game every five and the rest of the time it’s just terrible hero ball, like late Kobe hero ball.
He's also one of the most underrated players out there due to being one of the most overrated. The dude is still 20 years old and has an incredible offensive game. He's younger than Jaylen Brown. He also improved his overall game in the 2nd half last year and if preseason and this game are any indication of things to come, he did this off season as well. He's never going to be great on defense but he has a chance to be special on offense.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Wow thats a terrible phoenix team.
Watching the end of the game, I felt bad for Chandler and Bledsoe. They both looked good playing a 2 man game on offense and both were trying to make things happen on defense. The rest of the team seemed mostly interested in taking bad shots and, well, they appear to have no interest in the other side of the floor.

The Lakers, in contrast, clearly are trying on defense and just are terrible at it.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
He's also one of the most underrated players out there due to being one of the most overrated. The dude is still 20 years old and has an incredible offensive game. He's younger than Jaylen Brown.
Yes, by a couple of days. Let's not pretend that there's some huge age gap between them.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,694
Lavar’s crowing after this game will be glorious
The "Lonzo stinks" (think if he'd started out with TWO games like Josh Jackson's -- ESPN would have the world coming to an end and this forum would have a thousand posts on it) and "Lonzo comes back" (I love the "he started summer AND pre-season with a bad game, but then...." line) alternating narratives that will probably go on all year are really unfair to Lonzo. But when it's his dad is leading the hot take charge it's sort hard to blame everyone else for their stupidity. Did I invent that his idiot dad said he was going to shut up? I guess even if he did make that promise, it'd be stupid of me to think there'd by any substance to it.

I will say from Fultz to Ball to Tatum and Jackson and Smith, this is going to be a great two years tracking which ones grow and develop and how.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Watching the end of the game, I felt bad for Chandler and Bledsoe. They both looked good playing a 2 man game on offense and both were trying to make things happen on defense. The rest of the team seemed mostly interested in taking bad shots and, well, they appear to have no interest in the other side of the floor.

The Lakers, in contrast, clearly are trying on defense and just are terrible at it.
34-86 under Earl Watson and nothing but a steady downtrend under Ryan McDonough's leadership. Countdown to the days when both are fired on same day. This organization needs a complete overhaul. I was sick to my stomach watching Josh Jackson jog down the floor completely disinterested in his first NBA game. The culture here appears to be god awful and that begins at the top.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
The "Lonzo stinks" (think if he'd started out with TWO games like Josh Jackson's -- ESPN would have the world coming to an end and this forum would have a thousand posts on it) and "Lonzo comes back" (I love the "he started summer AND pre-season with a bad game, but then...." line) alternating narratives that will probably go on all year are really unfair to Lonzo. But when it's his dad is leading the hot take charge it's sort hard to blame everyone else for their stupidity. Did I invent that his idiot dad said he was going to shut up? I guess even if he did make that promise, it'd be stupid of me to think there'd by any substance to it.

I will say from Fultz to Ball to Tatum and Jackson and Smith, this is going to be a great two years tracking which ones grow and develop and how.
Fox has looked good early and so has Markkanen. Dillon Brooks is looking like a steal in the 2nd round too.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,103
Fox has looked good early and so has Markkanen. Dillon Brooks is looking like a steal in the 2nd round too.
We'll have to wait for the season to wrap up for the stats to tell the whole story, but by the eye test this year's crop of rookies looks more impactful than last year's. Some of that has to do with Simmon's injury delaying his start, but seems to be true further down the draft order too.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
We'll have to wait for the season to wrap up for the stats to tell the whole story, but by the eye test this year's crop of rookies looks more impactful than last year's. Some of that has to do with Simmon's injury delaying his start, but seems to be true further down the draft order too.
I'd guess that's what most people expected. The 2017 class is going to be really good, even if it ends up lacking that generational talent. I think most people have/had Ben Simmons on par with Fultz, Ball, Tatum, and Jackson. Going into the 2017 draft, had Jaylen been available, there is no way he would have went in the top 3.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
We'll have to wait for the season to wrap up for the stats to tell the whole story, but by the eye test this year's crop of rookies looks more impactful than last year's. Some of that has to do with Simmon's injury delaying his start, but seems to be true further down the draft order too.
I know there were others on this train but I've felt that this 2017 drafts will go down as one of the best and most complete we've ever seen even without the once-a-decade talent like a LeBron or Brow at the top.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
34-86 under Earl Watson and nothing but a steady downtrend under Ryan McDonough's leadership. Countdown to the days when both are fired on same day. This organization needs a complete overhaul. I was sick to my stomach watching Josh Jackson jog down the floor completely disinterested in his first NBA game. The culture here appears to be god awful and that begins at the top.
Yeah, I was going to say they need a coaching change, but I don't think it happens this year since tanking is probably the right decision so why try to fix a broken system when you want it to stay broken.

I do wonder if Bledsoe staying healthy might have an impact over the course of the season because I get the sense he isn't happy losing every night and might push other guys to actually play real basketball. He may also just force a trade so he can play for a real team.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
I know there were others on this train but I've felt that this 2017 drafts will go down as one of the best and most complete we've ever seen even without the once-a-decade talent like a LeBron or Brow at the top.
Yup. I'm thinking of the 99 draft with Elton brand, Steve Francis, Baron Davis, Lamar Odom, Wally Szczerbiak, Richard Hamilton, Andrew Miller, Shawn Marion and Jason Terry all in the first ten picks (Jonathan Bender was the one bust). No superstars there, but everyone was above average, and most were all stars at some point. Later in the draft there was Artest, Corey Maggette, James Posey, Andrei Kirilenko and Manu Ginobili. An incredibly deep draft with no all-timers (although I suppose that depends on how one feels about ginobili). Definitely the early feeling I'm getting from 2017.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,103
Corey Brewer is the freshman who made the tenth spot on the varsity scrimmage but no one will pass him the ball.

 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,714
The "Lonzo stinks" (think if he'd started out with TWO games like Josh Jackson's -- ESPN would have the world coming to an end and this forum would have a thousand posts on it) and "Lonzo comes back" (I love the "he started summer AND pre-season with a bad game, but then...." line) alternating narratives that will probably go on all year are really unfair to Lonzo. But when it's his dad is leading the hot take charge it's sort hard to blame everyone else for their stupidity. Did I invent that his idiot dad said he was going to shut up? I guess even if he did make that promise, it'd be stupid of me to think there'd by any substance to it.
I know, making fun of the Ball hype-train is like shooting fish in a barrel. But today, ESPN had the caption "Lonzo nearly records triple-double in loss to Pelicans". His line: 36min, 8pts (on 3-13 shooting), 8 Reb, 13 ast, 5 turnovers, -24.

I think he'll be fine, but... if he winds up seriously struggling throughout the season, it will be the most entertaining ESPN self-inflicted coverage contortion to watch since the point when it became clear Tim Tebow couldn't throw a football.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I know, making fun of the Ball hype-train is like shooting fish in a barrel. But today, ESPN had the caption "Lonzo nearly records triple-double in loss to Pelicans". His line: 36min, 8pts (on 3-13 shooting), 8 Reb, 13 ast, 5 turnovers, -24.

I think he'll be fine, but... if he winds up seriously struggling throughout the season, it will be the most entertaining ESPN self-inflicted coverage contortion to watch since the point when it became clear Tim Tebow couldn't throw a football.
ESPN is pumping him up because Lonzo is what the consumer, particularly the west coast consumer, wants to see. I shared my story in Vegas this past summer of the Lakers summer league games being sold out the day before in a nearly 18,000 seat arena......for NBA summer league at a venue not associated with an NBA team! People were driving over 2 hours from CA to watch Lonzo play summer league......they surely want to click on their television set to do so.

The other thing is that the Lakers aren't completely horrible. They play hard and compete for the most part for a 30-win team and they have Lonzo. He's simply a draw and ESPN is feeding the frenzy as they should.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,847
NYC
I know, making fun of the Ball hype-train is like shooting fish in a barrel. But today, ESPN had the caption "Lonzo nearly records triple-double in loss to Pelicans". His line: 36min, 8pts (on 3-13 shooting), 8 Reb, 13 ast, 5 turnovers, -24.

I think he'll be fine, but... if he winds up seriously struggling throughout the season, it will be the most entertaining ESPN self-inflicted coverage contortion to watch since the point when it became clear Tim Tebow couldn't throw a football.
Lolz, the triple-double (or worse, the "almost triple double") remains the dumbest thing ever.

Like, Russell Westbrook achieved some great distinction last year that LeBron, Jordan, Magic and Bird never did, because he was way better than all of them at targeting and hitting groupings of round base-ten statistical thresholds for a mediocre team.

That said, plus-rebounding at any position tends to be a big positive (if perhaps not quite the unmitigated, all-encompassing positive that Dave Berri and co. made it out to be during the Wages of WIns era), and rebounding more than any other skill tends to stay pretty constant over the course of a young player's development, so Ball's impressive early glasswork should be an encouraging sign for Ball and LOLakers fans.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,437
Haiku
The baby Lakers have a game to forget against the Raptors. Lonzo shoots 2-of-6, 5 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assists and 2 turnovers. A pretty ugly game overall, but the Lakers were uglier.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,879
Twin Bridges, Mt.
This Lakers team is way too young to blossom this season. They're going to fade hard and we're going to get their pick. Brooklyn is going to win 3-5 more games than them and Danny will shine again.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
The baby Lakers have a game to forget against the Raptors. Lonzo shoots 2-of-6, 5 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assists and 2 turnovers. A pretty ugly game overall, but the Lakers were uglier.
Don't underestimate the "Triple Trip!"
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,103
The baby Lakers have a game to forget against the Raptors. Lonzo shoots 2-of-6, 5 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assists and 2 turnovers. A pretty ugly game overall, but the Lakers were uglier.
Apparently Walton benched the starters down the stretch because they weren't trying hard enough on transition defense:

Ball, Brandon Ingram, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Larry Nance Jr. and Brook Lopez were all yanked with 3 minutes, 42 seconds remaining and the Lakers trailing 91-83 before dropping a 101-92 loss to the Toronto Raptors at Staples Center.

"I took the starters out a little early in the third because they didn't get back in transition defense, which is our No. 1 key to being a good defensive team," Walton said. "We talked about how important that third quarter was with the momentum of the game changing and them being a playoff team, so we can't afford to give those up. So as a teaching lesson, we took them out a little earlier than I normally have done.

"Unfortunately, we didn't get back on defense again with four minutes to go in a close, winnable game," Walton added. "You can't just give away free points. To let them know how serious we are about transition defense, we pulled them out again. We were going to let the starters see what they can do with the game. But when they didn't get back on the break, they are telling me and each other that they don't really want to finish that game."
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/21190159/luke-walton-benches-los-angeles-lakers-starters-teaching-lesson-loss

Wonder if Lavar will take the bait and share his thoughts on this, or let Walton coach the team without speaking out publicly. Interesting test for that dynamic.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,937
Berkeley, CA
Wonder if Lavar will take the bait and share his thoughts on this, or let Walton coach the team without speaking out publicly. Interesting test for that dynamic.
I wonder about this too. It's amazing - and a quasi-miracle - how well this worked out for Lavar and Lonzo. Wanting to get on the Lakers, stating that want publicly, and actually getting on the Lakers is quite a feat and a lot of moving parts had to fall into place.

Does he want to imperil this ideal scenario? If he gets vocal and becomes a huge detriment, then he's flirting with the Lakers trading away Lonzo. Could Lonzo and Lopez and picks get Davis? Not serious about that, but I have to think this charmed position for Lonzo might finally squelch Lavar. How lucky for LaMelo!
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
If he gets loud and it's because Lonzo isn't playing well, then I'm not sure how tradable Lonzo would be at that point.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,694
Apparently Walton benched the starters down the stretch because they weren't trying hard enough on transition defense:



http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/21190159/luke-walton-benches-los-angeles-lakers-starters-teaching-lesson-loss

Wonder if Lavar will take the bait and share his thoughts on this, or let Walton coach the team without speaking out publicly. Interesting test for that dynamic.
Watched chunks of this game and Walton was spot-on to bench them. What stuck out to me wasn't just not getting back on defense, but that Ball was walking the ball up the court pretty consistently -- incredibly low energy and not at all like the style of pushing the ball constantly that Lonzo (and Walton) are supposed to be bringing. I didn't see any of the first half when I guess the Lakers were all over the place, but coming off a victory over Washington and a big first half lead, you'd think the one thing a young team would be is energetic. When Ball says:
"I think we just lost our intensity, to be honest," Ball said. "A good team over there, and they came back [in the] second half strong, and we didn't accept it very well, and we lost.
You really have to wonder. The game was tied (I think, or close) when Walton put the starters back in during the 4th quarter -- what's not to accept? I will say, on the more positive side, that Kuzma especially and Josh Hart in a more limited manner seem like real draft day finds. I assume Ball will continue to get open looks and his shot will start to drop more often, and he's not just a great passer but a superior rebounder for a guard, too (with the added ability make those long passes, so fast breaks aren't hurt by his banging the boards). All the harumphing about his point scoring so far seems silly, but I'd be worried about seeing quit in a guy so early. Be interesting to see how they play against the Jazz tonight, when at least they have 2nd night of back-to-back on the road to justify being low energy.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I assume Ball will continue to get open looks and his shot will start to drop more often, and he's not just a great passer but a superior rebounder for a guard, too (with the added ability make those long passes, so fast breaks aren't hurt by his banging the boards). All the harumphing about his point scoring so far seems silly, but I'd be worried about seeing quit in a guy so early. Be interesting to see how they play against the Jazz tonight, when at least they have 2nd night of back-to-back on the road to justify being low energy.
Is there any reason to assume Ball's shot will drop more often? He needs a lot of space to get his shot off, and he's not a great FT shooter. I'm not saying it's impossible, but his college 3P sample is quite small. Regarding his point scoring, people are harrumphing because he hasn't shown much explosiveness, much ability to finish against NBA defenders, or much ability to beat guys off the dribble who aren't members of the Suns.

Yes it's early, and these things could improve, but these are exactly the concerns that surrounded him pre-draft, and he hasn't done much to assuage them.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,694
There's never any reason to assume anything, which is leading way to pose a question. But, yes, the stats guys all say his shot should translate and the "needs a lot of space" thing is a red herring. He's not a 3 and D guy whose job is to get a 3-ball off against closing defenders. He's the offensive initiator who needs to make 3s when he's given space. The shots I saw him miss last night -- I'm an expert because I saw him for 15 minutes -- were all missed with plenty of space to spare. I don't particularly assume he will or will not start making those -- imperfect stats say he should and the Lakers say during practice he regularly makes them so based on those highly imperfect indicators I'd guess more likely than not he will. But I think rather than assuming one way or the other it'd be better to wait until there's more evidence. Ball is regularly compared to Jason Kidd, and Kidd hit 27% of his 3 pointers in his first year (I assume Kidd was older, too) and overall shot 38% his first two years and just 37% in year 2. Kidd got considerably better as time wore on. I know it's radical to say in this forum, but judging a very young player based on 4 games (or even 4 months) really doesn't fly.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I don't think Lonzo Ball has to score much to be effective as long as teams are forced to respect his shot.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,937
Berkeley, CA
If he gets loud and it's because Lonzo isn't playing well, then I'm not sure how tradable Lonzo would be at that point.
GM's do foolish things all the time. All it takes is one to say he's young, he's box office, new culture, etc. and they're on the road to ruin or riches. But you're right that his value does go down.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
There's never any reason to assume anything, which is leading way to pose a question. But, yes, the stats guys all say his shot should translate and the "needs a lot of space" thing is a red herring. He's not a 3 and D guy whose job is to get a 3-ball off against closing defenders. He's the offensive initiator who needs to make 3s when he's given space. The shots I saw him miss last night -- I'm an expert because I saw him for 15 minutes -- were all missed with plenty of space to spare. I don't particularly assume he will or will not start making those -- imperfect stats say he should and the Lakers say during practice he regularly makes them so based on those highly imperfect indicators I'd guess more likely than not he will. But I think rather than assuming one way or the other it'd be better to wait until there's more evidence. Ball is regularly compared to Jason Kidd, and Kidd hit 27% of his 3 pointers in his first year (I assume Kidd was older, too) and overall shot 38% his first two years and just 37% in year 2. Kidd got considerably better as time wore on. I know it's radical to say in this forum, but judging a very young player based on 4 games (or even 4 months) really doesn't fly.
Curious about this and where you see it, 3pt% is generally tough to accurately predict based on college, especially single seasons, his HS and tournament % suggest he's not a particularly good shooter and his FT% which is often considered a better indicator points toward him not being a good shooter.
Beyond that, some people had real concerns about his not having the ability to score off the dribble.
I saw much more of "he'll be good even if he can't get his own shot" than "he'll be a good shooter/scorer" from most draft guys.

I agree it's way too early to judge, and he could improve. On the other hand he's showing all the issues people were concerned about, and his unorthodox mechanics make people less confident of improvement. It's fine to have a weird shot that goes in, but if it doesn't, you just have a guy who needs not tweaks, but an entirely rebuilt shot and that's really hard to do.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
Lonzo's averaging 10.2/8.6/8.8 with 3.2 TO/1.2 steals in 34 minutes. That is just fine for a rookie five games in. He played well defensively against Wall earlier in the week (principally using his length very well against the smaller Wall) and continues be a good passer, aggressive rebounder and demonstrate an excellent basketball IQ. To respond to Cellar above, he is also showing all of the things people thought he would be good at. As for scoring off the dribble, he is getting to the hoop just fine, and plenty here were claiming he was too slow or lacked a handle to do that, which is clearly not the case. His finishing has been as bad as his 3 point shooting so far, but those are both things NBA players seem to fix pretty regularly.

If he fixes the jumper and develops some sort of effective shot at the rim on contested drives he is going to be a top 15-20 player at worst.

As for the team, they played a collective fours straight quarters of excellent basketball in the Washington second half and first half against Toronto, and then shit the bed in the late fourth quarter against Toronto. It will be interesting to see if Walton's move pays off going forward.


This Lakers team is way too young to blossom this season. They're going to fade hard and we're going to get their pick. Brooklyn is going to win 3-5 more games than them and Danny will shine again.
I don't know what you define as "blossom," but the Vegas O/U of 33 wins feels about right. Of course, we know LeBron & Silver are going to conspire to ensure the Lakers win the lottery, so the Celtics won't be getting the pick.
 

NYCSox

chris hansen of goats
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2004
10,446
Some fancy town in CT
I don't know what you define as "blossom," but the Vegas O/U of 33 wins feels about right. Of course, we know LeBron & Silver are going to conspire to ensure the Lakers win the lottery, so the Celtics won't be getting the pick.
Normally I'd expect that as well but the pick is going to Philly or Boston. There's no scenario where it stays in LA.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,937
Berkeley, CA
There was a recent story in GQ on the Ball's and the writer went to their home and talked to the whole family. Melo mentioned that he would go to his left and Lavar tied his left arm up with rope to force him to use his right. On and off the court. Lavar copped to it and said "they" would use left hand and it messed up how the family sat at the dinner table. There's no further mention of having to do this with Lonzo, but perhaps there's some connection to Lonzo's weird jump shot and footwork in getting up on layups. Maybe he's fighting his natural handedness.

https://www.gq.com/story/lavar-ball-lonzo-and-the-master-plan
 
Last edited:

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,694
Curious about this and where you see it, 3pt% is generally tough to accurately predict based on college, especially single seasons, his HS and tournament % suggest he's not a particularly good shooter and his FT% which is often considered a better indicator points toward him not being a good shooter.
Beyond that, some people had real concerns about his not having the ability to score off the dribble.
I saw much more of "he'll be good even if he can't get his own shot" than "he'll be a good shooter/scorer" from most draft guys.

I agree it's way too early to judge, and he could improve. On the other hand he's showing all the issues people were concerned about, and his unorthodox mechanics make people less confident of improvement. It's fine to have a weird shot that goes in, but if it doesn't, you just have a guy who needs not tweaks, but an entirely rebuilt shot and that's really hard to do.
Working off memory putting 2+2 together from ESPN, basically Pelton's statistical projection (though he includes Chad Ford's scouting that cited to Ball's deep range as one of Ball's positives). Ball is projected as by far the highest WARP this year at 4+ (and if I recall that was historically high) and in chat talked about his range and being the perfect 3 pointer/lay-up dunk efficient scorer as part of that high ranking.

Whether or not Pelton is right in his translations I can't say, that's well beyond my expertise and you could well be right that such translations are shaky (didn't Pelton have Marcus Smart way up high as an offensive player?). But, to the point, whatever imperfections there may be in that (and in my memory, which I can never vouch for, either), I'll take it over any rookie's first 4 games.

Beyond that, I agree completely on the mechanics. I'm an amateur so am not going to pass judgment on whether it can work or not, but god knows looking at it my gut says no.
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,714
Lonzo's averaging 10.2/8.6/8.8 with 3.2 TO/1.2 steals in 34 minutes. That is just fine for a rookie five games in.
Most rookies don't play 35 min a night (Lonzo leads all rookies in playing time), so I think the 10.2 PPG looks a little rosy out of context. The 31 FG% undergirding it isn't pretty. I agree about the rest of your post but
offense is still a serious question mark.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
6,844
Chicago, IL
Most rookies don't play 35 min a night (Lonzo leads all rookies in playing time), so I think the 10.2 PPG looks a little rosy out of context. The 31 FG% undergirding it isn't pretty. I agree about the rest of your post but
offense is still a serious question mark.
This. He's playing for a team with zero expectations and even less talent, so he can fuck around all he wants to get those 10 points. If he were on a playoff team, he'd be averaging at most 6 points a game, and that's assuming he shot 100% on every FG he was allowed to take in the short time he saw the floor each night.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
There's never any reason to assume anything, which is leading way to pose a question. But, yes, the stats guys all say his shot should translate and the "needs a lot of space" thing is a red herring. He's not a 3 and D guy whose job is to get a 3-ball off against closing defenders. He's the offensive initiator who needs to make 3s when he's given space. The shots I saw him miss last night -- I'm an expert because I saw him for 15 minutes -- were all missed with plenty of space to spare. I don't particularly assume he will or will not start making those -- imperfect stats say he should and the Lakers say during practice he regularly makes them so based on those highly imperfect indicators I'd guess more likely than not he will. But I think rather than assuming one way or the other it'd be better to wait until there's more evidence. Ball is regularly compared to Jason Kidd, and Kidd hit 27% of his 3 pointers in his first year (I assume Kidd was older, too) and overall shot 38% his first two years and just 37% in year 2. Kidd got considerably better as time wore on. I know it's radical to say in this forum, but judging a very young player based on 4 games (or even 4 months) really doesn't fly.
I think this is all spot on. He's not Magic II, he'll have growing pains, this may even be a rocky year for him overall. He's still got talent that can't be taught and a few key areas where he needs to improve that will no doubt be a focus of his offseason training. And, playing on a crap team, he'll get loads of experience. I'd buy - not sell - stock in Lonzo at this time.