So you want us to agree to disagree on the things that we believe in, but agree on what you believe in? No! I will agree that Lonzo is a better fit for LeBron and the starting lineup and it's only a matter of time before he takes what he's already shown he should have in the starting point guard role.
You're the worst Badley McReal! Fine, let's put Zo next to Beal in the starting lineup after we trade BI for him. Btw, didn't the Lakers overhaul our analytics dept? And since they took over, we targeted Rondo both summers in free agency. So y'all can choose to see what you want...meanwhile my eye test will focus elsewhere. Now let me shuffle on out of here before y'all drag me back into this.
I still can't believe we missed out on Tatum. Major blunder by the scouting department. Obviously Lonzo was a bigger need as we had already Ingram, Kuzma, Hart, KCP and we were going after George, Leonard, LeBron...all SF/PF players..so it made sense to get a PG as we had only Russell who was on the chopping block. Still...
I think management have a lot to do with high draft picks choices . " Blame " Magic not our scouting department imo
^The truth is we don't know yet. We know who Rondo is and what he will give us. But Lonzo? we don't know yet. Has Lonzo noticably improved by developing over the summer? We don't know. I don't care if his upper body looks bigger or his legs are stronger or his shot looks different. I want to see on the court whether he is more efficient and more productive. Whether he is more aggressive, whether he is a better player overall. In the NBA EVERY single player below 30 who wasn't injured talks about how they have worked over the summer, changed their diet, watched film and improved this and that...at the end of the day, 90% are lying or have made insignificant improvements or have even regressed. If he has really improved, he can outplay Rondo and force Luke to play him. if not, he is in trouble. Very simple.
Well don't frame it like that. I love that Rondo is here. Talent aside, Lonzo proved to be an injury risk. I love that we have maybe the two most talented and natural pure point guards in the league. I think that provides us tremendous opportunity. I just think Lonzo is a better starter for the team. It'll show itself eventually and either way it looks like you're getting what you want early.
I'm not sure how you can make a statement like that. The only issue Lonzo had was staying healthy, but so did ben simmons, the process, etc. When he was healthy, he showed transcendent ability. If lonzo ends up having permanent injury issues, then you can say that, but there was no way of knowing that when he was in college.
Fab4: if Zo didn't play defense, I would be regretting the move too. But Zo ain't all Balls...his D is exceptional (pause). Plus, Tatum has the same skillset that BI has minus the length. I'm fine with passing on Tatum. I'm just pissed Ainge got an extra pick out of it from phiLLy.
Maybe because we had LeBron (allegedly), Ingram and Kuz who all can play that position, as well. Edit: Oooops, no Kuz yet, he came later.
Well, maybe. Remember when Portland passed on Jordan because they had Drexler? I was on the Ball train though (still am). That being said, you should go with the best player available.
Generally, yes. But when you have a chance to work with this guy .... you jump on it. It's all about the clicks in today's NBA.
why is the we have a Tatum in BI an acceptable reason? It wouldnt' be acceptable to have 2 of these types of players? Bos had Brown who is similar to Tatum, they could've taken Jackson too who is also similar type players....This is a wing's league, I get Zo's strength and the need for a PG at the time but there's no logical way to explain away not getting Tatum because we already had BI, having 2 elite wings like that could only make this team so much more dangerous, especially considering Bi/Tatum can play 2-4.
