Image ImageImage Image

Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram?

Moderators: HomoSapien, Tommy Udo 6 , dougthonus, GimmeDat, DASMACKDOWN, Payt10, kulaz3000, fleet, RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper, Ice Man

MGB8
RealGM
Posts: 15,460
And1: 1,565
Joined: Jul 20, 2001
Location: Philly

Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#1 » by MGB8 » Wed Sep 9, 2020 2:40 pm

The Bulls currently don't have much cap space under the expected no-increase, no decrease 109M cap - just 3M (pre-draft pick)....

However, IMO they could easily clear up enough room for a max deal because you can waive and stretch Felicio (opening up almost 6M), and I don't think it would be hard to trade Thad Young at 13.5M for 2 years (2nd year partially guaranteed), Lauri at 6.7M, WCJ at 5.5 for no salary coming back (and without "packaging" anything to make such a trade). Satoransky might be harder to trade in a salary opening move but he might be "packageable" with Lauri or Carter Jr., since both should still be considered assets at their rookie salary costs. And he was widely regarded as a good depth signing last season so it's possible he could be moved in a pure salary dump.

*If* they could get Ingram to agree to sign (I'm assuming that would take a MAX deal - 25% of the cap and 5% increases after that - about 29M) - would it be worth doing? He just turned 23, and put up 24, 6, and 4 in 34 minutes on solid but not spectacular efficiency (though 39% from 3 on good volume, and fixed his FT% from the mid 60s to the mid 80s). Mid-level defender. At the same time, is he really a MAX player?

Let's assume that the Pelicans could be persuaded to take Lauri or Carter Jr. back in a trade that would open the last bit of cap space necessary, and would be willing to do that rather than matching a max deal (completely speculative, I know).
User avatar
PlayerUp
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,879
And1: 821
Joined: Feb 21, 2014
Contact:

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#2 » by PlayerUp » Wed Sep 9, 2020 2:44 pm

The New Orleans Pelicans reportedly have no interest in losing Brandon Ingram. In a mailbag examining various options for the Cleveland Cavaliers, Chris Fedor of Cleveland.com cited multiple sources who said the Pelicans plan on matching any offer sheet Ingram receives as a restricted free agent.


https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2882098-brandon-ingram-rumors-pelicans-expected-to-match-any-offer-sheet-in-free-agency

If he is available sure make an offer but since he is a restricted free agent and we have no cap space, then odds of us getting him are next to none. Expect he re-signs on a max deal and continues his career with the Pelicans.
The Box Office
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,362
And1: 774
Joined: Jun 14, 2016

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#3 » by The Box Office » Wed Sep 9, 2020 2:48 pm

No. Move on.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 47,410
And1: 7,462
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#4 » by dougthonus » Wed Sep 9, 2020 2:55 pm

MGB8 wrote:The Bulls currently don't have much cap space under the expected no-increase, no decrease 109M cap - just 3M (pre-draft pick)....

However, IMO they could easily clear up enough room for a max deal because you can waive and stretch Felicio (opening up almost 6M), and I don't think it would be hard to trade Thad Young at 13.5M for 2 years (2nd year partially guaranteed), Lauri at 6.7M, WCJ at 5.5 for no salary coming back (and without "packaging" anything to make such a trade). Satoransky might be harder to trade in a salary opening move but he might be "packageable" with Lauri or Carter Jr., since both should still be considered assets at their rookie salary costs. And he was widely regarded as a good depth signing last season so it's possible he could be moved in a pure salary dump.

*If* they could get Ingram to agree to sign (I'm assuming that would take a MAX deal - 25% of the cap and 5% increases after that - about 29M) - would it be worth doing? He just turned 23, and put up 24, 6, and 4 in 34 minutes on solid but not spectacular efficiency (though 39% from 3 on good volume, and fixed his FT% from the mid 60s to the mid 80s). Mid-level defender. At the same time, is he really a MAX player?

Let's assume that the Pelicans could be persuaded to take Lauri or Carter Jr. back in a trade that would open the last bit of cap space necessary, and would be willing to do that rather than matching a max deal (completely speculative, I know).


You'd have to probably trade all those guys together. Sato/Young won't be able to be moved into cap room IMO. Lauri/WCJ would probably be enough positive value to take on the other two though. That said, trading 4 rotation to starting caliber players just for the privilege of opening enough room to overpay Ingram and still face the possibility that NOP matches and leaves you with a bunch of cap room you can't use and less talent on the roster.

Maybe if NOP was interested you could work it into a direct S&T with them which is the only way this type of risk would be worth taking, but it doesn't seem to solve their needs in any particular way.
MrSparkle
RealGM
Posts: 16,079
And1: 5,608
Joined: Jul 31, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#5 » by MrSparkle » Wed Sep 9, 2020 3:01 pm

Nah.

I'm personally not a fan of his game. His 3P and FT% improved a lot this year, and with his height and ability to score, there is something positive going on, but I think he's very stiff and uncreative.

I'm also bothered by a guy with 7'3 wing-span who averages 0.6 blocks, 6 rpg (and next-to-no offensive rebounds), along with a 4:3 assist/turnover ratio.

I'm sure he'll improve gradually more with time and peak out into a fine winning player for a season or two, but he strikes me as an "empty calorie" type of star like Russell, DeRozan, etc.
kodo
RealGM
Posts: 14,047
And1: 8,833
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
Location: Wrigleyville

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#6 » by kodo » Wed Sep 9, 2020 3:12 pm

I can't possibly see Griffin not maxing out Ingram. There's only 7 players under 25 in the top 20 of NBA scoring, and Ingram is one of them along with Lavine, Trae, Luka, Tatum, etc. . There is no way he'll get a cent under max.

Pels will also probably need to spend money. Lowe thinks Holiday will be traded, Favors expires, leaving their most expensive contract at JJ for $13M.
User avatar
drosereturn
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,413
And1: 1,426
Joined: Oct 12, 2018

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#7 » by drosereturn » Wed Sep 9, 2020 4:53 pm

I would trade all 4 just to make 3 max spots which is a huge plus instead of diluting cap Space and splitting.
I dont know who is our big 3 but im 100percent certain ingram counts as one. Just need 1 more superstar to lure AD although i hoped Bulls
drafted one. Maybe a giannis AD collusion work.
Ak should target disgruntled stars like Embiid or even Simmons if hes available and deal rest of the assets in Lavine, White, picks as they are just eating salary.
Lamelo will be a future superstar Bull. Book it. Lavar for president!
User avatar
Little Nathan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,360
And1: 3,896
Joined: Mar 11, 2013
Location: Germany
   

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#8 » by Little Nathan » Wed Sep 9, 2020 5:48 pm

He had a weird season to me. Really improved on the offensive end, definitely one of the most improved players there, but looked much worse on defense than he did in LA. Maybe that's just what Alvin Gentry does to you. I don't know if I would love him on his max deal tbh. But, as others have pointed out, it's not happening anyway. Letting him walk now makes no sense for the Pels since he's still young and was a key part of the Davis trade and our cap situation makes it almost impossible for us to create the necessary room.
"Heart is a skill that player who shoot 3s might not have." - Chris Webber, actually getting paid for this
User avatar
TheStig
RealGM
Posts: 12,809
And1: 3,099
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
Location: Get rid of GarPaxDorf

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#9 » by TheStig » Wed Sep 9, 2020 6:26 pm

Pels would be silly not to match a max contract for him.
Hangtime84
RealGM
Posts: 18,691
And1: 3,520
Joined: Aug 18, 2006
Location: Rogers Park
     

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#10 » by Hangtime84 » Wed Sep 9, 2020 7:20 pm

I was for Bulter for Ingram and pick but yeah that ship sailed
Jcool0 wrote:
aguifs wrote:Do we have a friggin plan?


If the Bulls do, you would be complaining to much to ever hear it.


NBA fan logic we need to trade one of two best players because (Player X) one needs to shine more.
AshyLarrysDiaper
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 13,739
And1: 4,938
Joined: Jul 16, 2004
Location: Oakland

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#11 » by AshyLarrysDiaper » Wed Sep 9, 2020 7:32 pm

Pels will match.

But if the intel is that they’re on the fence about paying him max money, I’d offer them Lauri as compensation for not matching his offer sheet.

Either way, it makes sense for us to sign him to a sheet. Who are we risking missing out on, Derrick Jones Jr? We’ll live.
Contribute to the "Fire GarPax" billboard here:
https://www.gofundme.com/3v7fc-let-our-voices-be-heard-firegarpax
User avatar
Michael Jackson
RealGM
Posts: 15,110
And1: 1,798
Joined: Jun 15, 2001

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#12 » by Michael Jackson » Wed Sep 9, 2020 9:38 pm

Pels match. Zion is still a huge question mark health wise. They need that guy for games (not that Ingram doesn’t have his own health issues). They don’t want to get into a spot where they were with AD though and have no help for Zion.
Rose2Boozer
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,373
And1: 331
Joined: Apr 07, 2011

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#13 » by Rose2Boozer » Wed Sep 9, 2020 11:38 pm

I'll leave this here...thank me later

Trying to get excited about a one handed bandit small forward. Sadness.
Charlesareed
Sophomore
Posts: 171
And1: 45
Joined: Jun 14, 2013
         

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#14 » by Charlesareed » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:52 am

I’d definitely sign him to a backloaded offer sheet or sign and trade Zach for him straight up with a couple 2ndR picks then try flip Laurie and sacto for what ever we can get tbh don’t seem anyone taking in Thad young’s contract tho
Chicago Raised me
dice
RealGM
Posts: 36,943
And1: 9,943
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#15 » by dice » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:58 am

Hangtime84 wrote:I was for Bulter for Ingram and pick but yeah that ship sailed

isn't ingram just a modestly better version of lavine, though (less bad defensively)?

grass is always greener
check your voter registration status:

https://www.vote.org/
Charlesareed
Sophomore
Posts: 171
And1: 45
Joined: Jun 14, 2013
         

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#16 » by Charlesareed » Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:01 am

Rose2Boozer wrote:I'll leave this here...thank me later




He gotta motor on him he could be better if he work on his handles and passing he hit ok foot speed and ok defense I’d take a fillier on him for sure


Skylar Mays Is a solid pick in the 2nd round aswell
Chicago Raised me
Rose2Boozer
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,373
And1: 331
Joined: Apr 07, 2011

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#17 » by Rose2Boozer » Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:33 am

Charlesareed wrote:
Rose2Boozer wrote:I'll leave this here...thank me later




He gotta motor on him he could be better if he work on his handles and passing he hit ok foot speed and ok defense I’d take a fillier on him for sure


Skylar Mays Is a solid pick in the 2nd round aswell


I don't wanna turn this into the draft thread, but you have to take a flier on developing talent and skillset. The only thing this kid really needs is a year or two in a pro level strength and conditioning program. As far as Brandon Ingram is concerned, the Bulls didn't gamble at the right time and now he's all but off our realistic radar. He'll rightfully get a max deal from the Pels.
Trying to get excited about a one handed bandit small forward. Sadness.
User avatar
drosereturn
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,413
And1: 1,426
Joined: Oct 12, 2018

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#18 » by drosereturn » Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:12 am

TheStig wrote:Pels would be silly not to match a max contract for him.


ofc they will match but the entire thread is based on sign and trade scenarios where the Bulls offer so much Pelicans trade.
at worst he is a 3rd option on a championship team. Thats easily max worthy.
Lamelo will be a future superstar Bull. Book it. Lavar for president!
User avatar
MrFortune3
Head Coach
Posts: 6,658
And1: 2,163
Joined: Jul 03, 2010
         

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#19 » by MrFortune3 » Thu Sep 10, 2020 10:35 am

There is not a single solitary snowballs chance in hell that the Pelicans don't retain him. He and Zion are the future of that team.
MGB8
RealGM
Posts: 15,460
And1: 1,565
Joined: Jul 20, 2001
Location: Philly

Re: Should the Bulls be in on Brandon Ingram? 

Post#20 » by MGB8 » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:08 pm

dice wrote:
Hangtime84 wrote:I was for Bulter for Ingram and pick but yeah that ship sailed

isn't ingram just a modestly better version of lavine, though (less bad defensively)?

grass is always greener


I don't see the comp. LaVine assets are his superior foot speed, all-around athleticism, and handle combined with his natural shot, and his deficiencies are strength and defensive awareness (and sometimes offensive awareness).

Ingram's assets are his length / size and all around scoring ability and fairly good awareness on both ends - but lacks natural advantages in foot speed, athleticism, or a particularly advanced handle - just "good enough" in those facets.

Return to Chicago Bulls