Am I the only person who thinks Lonzo isn't very good? The Jazz essentially need one player, just one really, and that's a long, athletic wing so that Royce O'Neale either moves to the bench or to the 2 next to Mitchell.
Mike Conley Contingency Plan
- Thread starter Elizah Huge
- Start date
Ineptimusprime
Well-Known Member
The Jazz don’t need just one long, athletic dude. They need an upgrade in length and athleticism generally across the board. We need at LEAST one starter level long, athletic wing defender and two bench rotation level wing defenders, IMO.
This is why we need to sacrifice Bogey/Ingles/Clarkson. We need someone good enough to steal minutes, and won’t be able to get that person without opening up the minutes.
LoPo
Well-Known Member
I think Lonzo is good. Not great, but good. He can play with and without the ball which makes him an ideal fit next Don. He's also tall and talented enough to run the PnR with Rudy.
I would rather have Jrue or Brogdon, but Lonzo is being floated as a possibility since New Orleans had him out there available for trades at the deadline.
I don't think this is very possible though. Highly unlikely, but he would be a good fit. Good player, great fit, highly unlikely.
Mitchell/Royce/Bogey/BigWing/Gobert is fine for size, length and defense. That big wing needs to be a two-way player who can contribute 15/8. Then Clarkson, Ingles and Favors or Dok come off the bench.
That's the first move I would make. If you want a versatile, long-term guard next to Mitchell, then that's the second move.
Jazz shouldn't over-react.
I like Lonzo because I think he fills our needs in a very specific way. A few problems we have that are difficult to rectify with current personnel:
- Length and defensive ability in main lineups (the reality is that your closers will limit you to only having Royce be your defensive guy [sans Rudy]).
- If we move on from Mike, this playoffs did show the importance of having another ball handler to take pressure off Donovan.
- The only way to defeat small ball is to be able to punish it, and the only way to do that is with using him as a lob threat.
- We suck at rebounding. I don't care what stats say over the course of the season. In the crunch we can't pull down clutch rebounds.
So with Lonzo you address these in a few days...
- You're putting a guy at PG who's 6'6" and effectively is the SG on defense or could guard 1-3 or 1-4 depending on the matchup. He could be the default defender, and being able to go from 6'0" to 6'6" is huge.
- He's a ball handler and distributor so it's not like you're finding another non PG guy who has wing size and then putting all the ballhandling burden on Donovan.
- He's a better rebounder and you'd get more bang for your buck by upgrading the rebounding from that position than elsewhere (not that that's where you're seeking it out).
- I think the effect he'd have on Rudy would be pretty big. He's big enough to be able to throw the lobs to Rudy and I think this is an unlocked part of our offense.
- Lonzo has actually been hitting the three pretty well and on good volume the past couple years.
- LaVar brings the entertainment.
I like the idea of putting a versatile guard with some size/length next to Mitchell long term--someone who can play both on and off the ball. I'm just not keen on Lonzo being that guy.
Lonzo is gettable, but he is a worse player than Conley.
I believe so. But I think his fit may be surprisingly well and can take us to a new level based on where his strengths would be.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
List of gettable players, pls
TBH, I'd be just as interested in Nickeil Alexander-Walker as Lonzo.
The 76ers reportedly turned down an offer of Brogdon and a 1st for Simmons.
LoPo
Well-Known Member
I agree; on paper. But not for our roster when we are in such a need for perimeter defenders. We need a good perimeter defender much more than a good offensive player.
If we could turn Clarkson into Smart, then we should keep Conley.