Brandon Ingram Infatuation

[Kilo]

Money is simply too big for max level fas not to sign extension as soon as they can and then demand a trade. No playing out contract and blowing an achilles late in season risk worth it.

Gotta have the FRP's available when a disgruntled one demands a trade.

[Drwho17]

No team wants to pay his asking price.

Let’s not be the suckers that give up ANY assets of value for the “opportunity” to sign him to an instantly untradeable negative contract.

Makes more sense to wait until next year when he is a UFA.

Yes, I would be fine with that, won't hurt this years tank, won't cost assets and he would have to settle for a deal that may not be less than what he's asking for. No reason to trade for him with 1 year left is there really? I think the same options will be available next year.

[Cowology]

No team wants to pay his asking price.

Let’s not be the suckers that give up ANY assets of value for the “opportunity” to sign him to an instantly untradeable negative contract.

Makes more sense to wait until next year when he is a UFA.

Yes, I would be fine with that, won't hurt this years tank, won't cost assets and he would have to settle for a deal that may not be less than what he's asking for. No reason to trade for him with 1 year left is there really? I think the same options will be available next year.

Not advocating for Ingram specifically... but kicking the tires, even if the right thing to do, still feels bad after 4 years of kicking. Kinda just feels like we'll be back in the same spot making the same argument about somebody else next year.

[Billl]

No team wants to pay his asking price.

Let’s not be the suckers that give up ANY assets of value for the “opportunity” to sign him to an instantly untradeable negative contract.

Makes more sense to wait until next year when he is a UFA.

Yes, I would be fine with that, won't hurt this years tank, won't cost assets and he would have to settle for a deal that may not be less than what he's asking for. No reason to trade for him with 1 year left is there really? I think the same options will be available next year.

If you want him long term, there is a huge reason to trade for him as long as he agrees to an extension. We aren't a free agent destination, so saying "we can just sign him as a FA" is not realistic.

[Crymson]

If you want him long term, there is a huge reason to trade for him as long as he agrees to an extension. We aren't a free agent destination, so saying "we can just sign him as a FA" is not realistic.

With the money he's looking for, he wouldn't be eligible for an extension until six months after the trade.

[7r5ur]

Makes more sense to wait until next year when he is a UFA.

Yes, I would be fine with that, won't hurt this years tank, won't cost assets and he would have to settle for a deal that may not be less than what he's asking for. No reason to trade for him with 1 year left is there really? I think the same options will be available next year.

If you want him long term, there is a huge reason to trade for him as long as he agrees to an extension. We aren't a free agent destination, so saying "we can just sign him as a FA" is not realistic.

All reports say no one wants to give him a max, so maybe we could. I guess you risk him having a big contract year and that dynamic changing.

Either way, other options will become available on the trade market. There is no huge risk in losing out on Ingram. He's a good player but has a lot of questionable aspects about his fit/health/cost.

[Snakebites]

The Pelicans prefer Trey Murphy III and Herb Jones to him as fits and as part of their overall plan, and they're right to.

[Billl]

If you want him long term, there is a huge reason to trade for him as long as he agrees to an extension. We aren't a free agent destination, so saying "we can just sign him as a FA" is not realistic.

With the money he's looking for, he wouldn't be eligible for an extension until six months after the trade.

Eligible to sign it, sure. They could agree to before the trade even happens though and just wait to make it official with the league.

[theBigLip]

Similar to Siakam and OG, we can trade for them but it’s understood to pay him the max. With the new CBA, it seems like 2 max deals is the most you can do. So, as a franchise, are we ready to cash in and have the next 5 years a Pistons team led by Cade and BI? That’s the question.

[Crymson]

Similar to Siakam and OG, we can trade for them but it’s understood to pay him the max. With the new CBA, it seems like 2 max deals is the most you can do. So, as a franchise, are we ready to cash in and have the next 5 years a Pistons team led by Cade and BI? That’s the question.

Siakam and OG were acquired at the deadline. They signed free agent deals, not extensions.

The CBA has no prohibitions on the number of max contracts a team can carry.

[theBigLip]

Similar to Siakam and OG, we can trade for them but it’s understood to pay him the max. With the new CBA, it seems like 2 max deals is the most you can do. So, as a franchise, are we ready to cash in and have the next 5 years a Pistons team led by Cade and BI? That’s the question.

Siakam and OG were acquired at the deadline. They signed free agent deals, not extensions.

The CBA has no prohibitions on the number of max contracts a team can carry.

Indiana and NYK got Bird rights, would pretty much be the same thing as if we got BI. And I know the CBA doesn’t say you can’t have 3 max deals, it just makes it nearly impossible to operate (see Phoenix).

[NYPiston]

If that's all the Pelicans could get for him they're not dealing him.

IMO it would likely take:

Ausar or Holland
Stewart
Ivey

If we're not sending FRPs - which we really shouldn't considering we owe 1 to the Knicks and you'd think a starting unit of Duren, Harris, BI, THJ & Cade is very competent with Reed, Fontecchio, Ausar or Holland, Beasley, Moore and Sasser still off the bench.

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app

Well, if that's the Pelicans demand they can go kick rocks and pawn him off to another sucker who will not only give them the assets but also pay him max money.

[7r5ur]

If that's all the Pelicans could get for him they're not dealing him.

IMO it would likely take:

Ausar or Holland
Stewart
Ivey

If we're not sending FRPs - which we really shouldn't considering we owe 1 to the Knicks and you'd think a starting unit of Duren, Harris, BI, THJ & Cade is very competent with Reed, Fontecchio, Ausar or Holland, Beasley, Moore and Sasser still off the bench.

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app

Well, if that's the Pelicans demand they can go kick rocks and pawn him off to another sucker who will not only give them the assets but also pay him max money.

Yeah, they can't even find a team that is willing to pay him the max to make a trade viable, much less pay the max and send a ton of assets. They're not getting some huge haul for him. That's the whole issue here. Pels don't want to pay him, so they don't want to keep him. No one else wants him because they don't want to pay him.

Dejounte is locked up to a long term deal at a good salary and they gave 1 decent young prospect and a couple of poor quality late 1sts. Ingram is worth less than that, easily given the contract situation and injuries.

[GreekAlex]

Yes, I would be fine with that, won't hurt this years tank, won't cost assets and he would have to settle for a deal that may not be less than what he's asking for. No reason to trade for him with 1 year left is there really? I think the same options will be available next year.

If you want him long term, there is a huge reason to trade for him as long as he agrees to an extension. We aren't a free agent destination, so saying "we can just sign him as a FA" is not realistic.

All reports say no one wants to give him a max, so maybe we could. I guess you risk him having a big contract year and that dynamic changing.

Either way, other options will become available on the trade market. There is no huge risk in losing out on Ingram. He's a good player but has a lot of questionable aspects about his fit/health/cost.

THIS.

The second aprons ramifications will start being felt in future years and opportunities will arise.

Desperately going after Ingram right now based on the past follies seems like what executives refer to as “skipping a step”.

We need some of our draft picks to show more growth first so we can add a supplemental piece to an existing foundation.

We’re still in the process of sifting through the puzzle pieces.

[Snakebites]

It really doesn’t strike me that the Pels are in a particularly good situation when it comes to trading him. They don’t have the leverage to get a good package for him given it’s widely known they don’t want to resign him at the max and the fact that nobody else wants to give up assets to go down that same road with him.

I think their better leverage is with Ingram himself given the rest of the league appears to agree he’s not a max player.

My prediction at this stage is they keep him. No idea if they’ll manage to re-sign him at a more team friendly deal, but I think taking that shot is their best play right now.

[Moses ShamMoses]

If you want him long term, there is a huge reason to trade for him as long as he agrees to an extension. We aren't a free agent destination, so saying "we can just sign him as a FA" is not realistic.

All reports say no one wants to give him a max, so maybe we could. I guess you risk him having a big contract year and that dynamic changing.

Either way, other options will become available on the trade market. There is no huge risk in losing out on Ingram. He's a good player but has a lot of questionable aspects about his fit/health/cost.

THIS.

The second aprons ramifications will start being felt in future years and opportunities will arise.

Desperately going after Ingram right now based on the past follies seems like what executives refer to as “skipping a step”.

We need some of our draft picks to show more growth first so we can add a supplemental piece to an existing foundation.

We’re still in the process of sifting through the puzzle pieces.

Agreed with this having the stink of "skipping steps". Basically needing to give up solid assets for a high risk move that is unlikely to pay off.

[NYPiston]

Yeah, they can't even find a team that is willing to pay him the max to make a trade viable, much less pay the max and send a ton of assets. They're not getting some huge haul for him. That's the whole issue here. Pels don't want to pay him, so they don't want to keep him. No one else wants him because they don't want to pay him.

Dejounte is locked up to a long term deal at a good salary and they gave 1 decent young prospect and a couple of poor quality late 1sts. Ingram is worth less than that, easily given the contract situation and injuries.

They're hurting themselves by letting this info leak that they don't want to pay him max so if they don't want to pay him, why would any team give up significant assets for the right to pay him max money? It's as simple as that really. Not to say that Ingram has negative value but Ausar or Holland+Ivey+Stewart is laughably absurd.

[Kalamazoo317]

With each passing day, I think our trading for him is less and less likely. Seems like something would've happened by now if it were going to. I think we probably don't make any big trades until close to the trade deadline. Langdon probably wants to take a look at the young guys under Bickerstaff and evaluate based on that.

[vege]

With Fontecchio and Beasley officially singing with us, I think this boat have sailed.

[DET_Athletics]

I would give him the money and even load management him to keep him fresh, but I wouldn't give up young assets to get him at that price tag. Something to the tune of Hardaway + Reed + 1st round + 1st pick swap

Sent from my SM-S908U using RealGM mobile app

If that's all the Pelicans could get for him they're not dealing him.

IMO it would likely take:

Ausar or Holland
Stewart
Ivey

If we're not sending FRPs - which we really shouldn't considering we owe 1 to the Knicks and you'd think a starting unit of Duren, Harris, BI, THJ & Cade is very competent with Reed, Fontecchio, Ausar or Holland, Beasley, Moore and Sasser still off the bench.

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app

Your right, I really do love Harris new contract because we can try and flip next year because he will be an expiring to whoever we send him to. We could very well try and do a sign in trade if Ingram plays well, is healthy and they still don't want to pay him.

Sent from my SM-S908U using RealGM mobile app