So what I'm reading is that if Lonzo plays less than stellar, he misses out on millions of dollars. Sounds like we agree that the only variable controlling his value is his play on the court. That's not dissimilar to any other athlete. If Fultz struggles out of the gate, no one is going to want to hitch their wagons to him.
Again, I really think dad's impact on Lonzo's value is greatly overstated. If anything, we are talking about Lonzo far more than Tatum, Fultz, Fox, Lauri, et al, combined. His exposure is off the chain and that alone promotes value.
I'm more focused on how LaVar is going to react to LiAngelo being at UCLA this season, who's far less talented and believed by dad to be equally as talented. When Alford doesn't play him major minutes, LaVar won't be happy.
Full disclosure: I listen to The Herd everyday, so I know about how they think of LaVar.
This is where LaVar needs to learn restraint and to placate to his detractors as part of his schtick. He knows damn well he's a polarizing figure and has to be a bit more political. That exchange did not need to go to where it did. Part of signing up to be on the show is to be interviewed by both Cowherd, a LaVar sycophant, and Leahy, a critic. Amidst all of the mishegas, Leahy brought up a valid point in that LaVar needs to do a better job appealing to women.
