To those of you who think LaVar Ball is a fool.
To those of you who think he is using his sons’ talent for his own personal gain.
To those of you who think he is a bad father for putting a target on his eldest son’s back.
You’re wrong.
Now, I by no means think it is wrong to disagree with LaVar’s parenting style. Nor do I deny that the boisterous 50-year-old irks me too sometimes. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Your opinion just doesn’t concern the father of three basketball talents.
The bottom line is LaVar Ball is a father who is there for his sons.
LaVar Ball’s biggest crime was being a vocal supporter of his son. He is so supportive that it has rubbed some people the wrong way. Obviously, Lonzo Ball is nowhere near the level of the seasoned Stephen Curry. But why should we be angry that LaVar Ball says he’s better than him? Lonzo is his kid; he has the right to say what he wants about his own child. He knows what he’s doing by putting a target on Lonzo’s back. He’s just expediting the process towards impending superstardom for his eldest.
Yes, Lonzo has a target on his back, and yes, LaVar most certainly crosses a line of insanity when comparing his son to certain players. But he by no means is putting his son at a disadvantage, and I’m sure Lonzo is simply appreciative his father has his back and is putting him in the spotlight.
Imagine an alternative scenario. LaVar Ball is absent from young Lonzo’s life, yet on sheer talent alone, Lonzo still is the number two pick for the Lakers. Initially coming into the league, he is guarded no differently than the way fledglings De’Aron Fox or Dennis Smith Jr. are by opposing teams. He isn’t defended more aggressively because he doesn’t have a “target” on his back. Patrick Beverly doesn’t go out of his way to make his first matchup with Lonzo a nightmare for the rookie. Yet because of this, Lonzo shreds opposing defenses and records triple doubles on a regular basis because he actually is that good. Only then would Lonzo have a target on his back because he proved he’s no average NBA player and warrants special attention.
The point is that all great players have a target on their back; they just have to prove it first before teams see it. Yet even with that target, they perform and exceed expectations. Every team knows to guard LeBron James when the Cavaliers come to town. But that barely mitigates the damage the dominant James inflicts every time he strolls down the court.
Jeremy Lin is a prime example of how having a target reduces a player’s effectiveness. Lin is an average NBA player — however, nobody treated him as such when he first came into the league in 2012, which is why Linsanity happened in the first place. Lin led the New York Knicks on a seven-game win streak, averaging 26.8 points per game in the first six. Now Lin is still in the NBA, but he isn’t averaging 27 points and lighting up opposing defenses because he isn’t able to overcome a typical defense the way Kobe was able to — or how LeBron, Durant and Russell Westbrook routinely do with a so-called target on their back.
Lonzo needs more time before people can dismiss LaVar as a lunatic who overhyped his son; the season is barely a month old, and even Stephen Curry averaged fewer than 10 points per game his first month as a rookie.
I certainly understand your displeasure with LaVar — he can come off as self-centered and greedy for the spotlight. But I caution you to not jump to this conclusion. Because if Lonzo Ball is really just an above average NBA player, LaVar can only run his mouth for so long after his son has no room to improve. If five years from now — about the time most stars solidify themselves as a force in the league — Lonzo is still averaging under nine points on 30 percent shooting, and the Lakers are still a mediocre team, LaVar will no longer be able to speak to Lonzo’s potential a half decade into his career.
But let’s say Lonzo Ball does end up being better than Stephen Curry and leads the Lakers to multiple championships.
Well, I guess that means LaVar was right? Doesn’t it?
Contact Zach Naidu at znaidu ‘at’ stanford.edu.