Back in 1987, Indiana Pacers general manager Donnie Walsh had a real dilemma on his hands. With the No. 11 pick in the draft, there was immense pressure to draft hometown hero Steve Alford, who had just led Indiana University to a national championship and had pretty much been a basketball hero in a basketball-crazy state his whole life. It would've been the easy thing to do. Temporarily, the Pacers likely would have benefitted, if only for increased ticket sales. But Walsh saw the big picture, withstood the pressure and drafted Reggie Miller instead.
It was, suffice it to say, a good decision.
And so here we are with Lonzo Ball and the Lakers, who have the No. 2 pick in this year's draft and appear poised to select Ball, who has lived in the Los Angeles area his whole life, winning a state championship at Chino Hills before leading UCLA to the Sweet 16 in his lone college campaign. It's not the same kind of connection that Alford had with Indiana, but the hometown factor certainly has played a role in this conversation.
Maybe it's mostly LaVar Ball and all his chirping about how he's going to will Lonzo's marriage to the Lakers, and how he's going to be selling out crowds the same way he did at UCLA, and how he's going to lead the Lakers to the playoffs in his first season. At this point, I can't really tell how much people are influenced by LaVar's babble. To me, whatever the reason, it feels like Lonzo is one of a handful of legit prospects at that No. 2 slot, but he's being talked about as if he's a slam dunk to go there. And the only reason I can come up with is the hometown factor.
Listen, it would be easy to get caught up in the excitement Ball would bring to a franchise that has to be pretty sick of existing in the shadows of the NBA, particularly post-Kobe. And the hometown-kid pull is strong. The headlines write themselves. Look at LeBron James to Cleveland. Derrick Rose to Chicago. The difference with those two, of course, is that their roots and stories aside, they were no-brainers to go where they did. Lonzo Ball, despite what some are saying, shouldn't be.
That doesn't mean he's not right at that spot, but had he grown up in -- I don't know, Virginia or Pittsburgh or anywhere outside of southern California -- and played college ball at, say, Michigan or Florida, I think the intrigue of him playing for the Lakers would be measured. Throw in LaVar watering the Lonzo-to-Lakers seed already in our heads, and the whole thing is starting to feel like a formality, like nobody else should or will be considered. Even I have to admit, the idea of Lonzo Ball going to the Lakers seems fun as hell. I'm hoping for it, to be honest. But the Lakers can't afford to look at it the same way. This isn't about fun. It's about winning.
Remember the 2006 NFL Draft? Remember how the Houston Texans were getting all that pre-draft pressure to take Texas hero Vince Young No. 1 overall? "Think of all the seats they'll fill," people said. It was the feel-good story, an obvious match. Never mind that Young's throwing motion was about as unconventional as, dare I say, Lonzo's shot. When the Texans went with Mario Williams over Young (and Reggie Bush), it was unpopular. But in hindsight, the Texans clearly would have regretted taking Young. The story would've worn off. And they would've been left with a bust.
Lonzo Ball will not be a bust. You can be nearly certain of that. And the Lakers figure to do their due diligence. In the end, they're not going to take anyone they don't believe in, first and foremost, as a basketball player. And there definitely are reasons to believe in Ball.
He's very easy to watch, which isn't as shallow an evaluation as it sounds. An easy, smooth game plays on any court. HIs instincts and spatial awareness, too often overlooked around draft time, also are off the charts. He just feels the game, really understands pace and movement, both ball and player, and he's a savant passer. He'll make the flashy drive and dish, but he'll also make the simple swing pass or just keep the ball moving in the half court, and he can be Jason Kidd-like in the open floor. That's not an overstatement. He can be the best player on the floor without looking to score.
The flip side is Ball probably will not truly impact NBA games as a scorer, certainly not off his own creation and at least not right away. He needs help. Think about what a guy like Rajon Rondo does with good players around him compared to what he does without good players around him. Ball can shoot, so he's not a true offensive parallel to Rondo, but he is a guy who benefits as much from his teammates as they do from him. This is where it gets tricky with the Lakers, who don't have a hell of a lot to put around Ball right now.
Enter Paul George. If the Lakers eventually land George (a distinct possibility, it appears), then Ball is the pick at this spot for sure. If he doesn't have the be the main guy, he will organically raise the level of those around him, as he did at UCLA where he turned an NIT team into a national title contender as its third-leading scorer, but one of five who averaged in double-digits. That's the look of an ideal Ball team.
What if the Lakers don't land George or another big-name guy via trade or free agency? Suddenly you're looking at a team that needs Ball to be a franchise-changing player mostly on his own, or at the very least the offensive catalyst. In this way, Ball, as the rosters are constructed, would fit better in Boston than in L.A. Ball would flourish with all those players around him in Boston, and if the Celtics were to land a Gordon Hayward to add to Isaiah Thomas' scoring punch, Ball could have a field day running the show and hitting the occasional 3.
Meanwhile, Markelle Fultz, a true scorer from all three levels, would be a guy who could walk in and be the best scorer on the Lakers tomorrow. He is much more of a self-creator who can thrive independent of circumstance or teammates. The Lakers could stink and he could still go out and average 22 a game as a rookie.
But Fultz, more than likely, is going to Boston. Which leaves the Lakers, presumably, to decide between Ball and maybe Josh Jackson, Jayson Tatum and Jonathan Isaac. I think Ball is a clear pick over Tatum. Jackson is interesting, and Isaac could end up being a real steal with his ability to step out and shoot and defend on the perimeter at a seriously athletic 6-feet-11. We're all ready to give up on D'Angelo Russell at the sight of Lonzo Ball, but he was a No. 2 pick himself. And he's still raw. If he's still a point guard the Lakers believe in, Isaac and Jackson become pretty interesting.
But if they've decided that Russell isn't their guy, and point guard is a priority, the really interesting debate here is Ball vs. Kentucky's De'Aaron Fox, who owned Ball in their Sweet 16 matchup this past March, dropping 39 points to Ball's 10. That's one game. Don't make too much of it. But it also showcased Fox's ability to get to his spot, and shot, basically whenever he wants, while Ball couldn't consistently do either against an athletic, intense defense. When the game settled into the half court, Ball was effectively invisible. The numbers say Fox can't shoot, especially from deep, but he is a blur, and his jumper has the fluid look of one that can improve. But it's that speed that immediately translates. That and his defense, another part of Ball's game that is suspect.
Ultimately, Ball probably remains the pick over all of these guys. But it shouldn't have anything to do with where he's from or whatever LaVar fills our heads with. That sounds obvious, but these narratives have a way of growing. Lonzo to L.A. already just feels right. And that can be a dangerously seductive thing.
