CHI-NOP-UTA: Ingram to Chicago

[YayBasketball]

CJ trade instead....

NOP trades: McCullom
In: Collins

LAC trades: Norm Powell, Tucker
In: McCullom

UTA trades: Collins
In: Powell, Tucker

Pels get a starter(ish) strech(ish) 5 in Collins and save cap space this year and next, clearing up the minutes/roles logjam in the backcourt.

Clippers upgrade their shooting with own of the best vet off ball scorers whose contract lines up with Harden's.

Jazz shed money next season, get a vet wing to start and mentor the young guys, and could be more easily tradeable than Collins. Tucker is likely a buyout.

[babyjax13]

CJ trade instead....

NOP trades: McCullom
In: Collins

LAC trades: Norm Powell, Tucker
In: McCullom

UTA trades: Collins
In: Powell, Tucker

Pels get a starter(ish) strech(ish) 5 in Collins and save cap space this year and next, clearing up the minutes/roles logjam in the backcourt.

Clippers upgrade their shooting with own of the best vet off ball scorers whose contract lines up with Harden's.

Jazz shed money next season, get a vet wing to start and mentor the young guys, and could be more easily tradeable than Collins. Tucker is likely a buyout.

This just compounds our existing problem: way too many guards. I get the savings and that might be worth it, but this is blocking young guys from getting minutes, etc. ideally a 4th team would take Powell for an expiring.

[giberish]

CJ trade instead....

NOP trades: McCullom
In: Collins

LAC trades: Norm Powell, Tucker
In: McCullom

UTA trades: Collins
In: Powell, Tucker

Pels get a starter(ish) strech(ish) 5 in Collins and save cap space this year and next, clearing up the minutes/roles logjam in the backcourt.

Clippers upgrade their shooting with own of the best vet off ball scorers whose contract lines up with Harden's.

Jazz shed money next season, get a vet wing to start and mentor the young guys, and could be more easily tradeable than Collins. Tucker is likely a buyout.

This just compounds our existing problem: way too many guards. I get the savings and that might be worth it, but this is blocking young guys from getting minutes, etc. ideally a 4th team would take Powell for an expiring.

IMO the Jazz guard glut is overblown - outside of Claxton and George there really isn't anyone who needs minutes and there are plenty of minutes behind them to give to any young guys who play their way into them.

In a rebuilding year you can just play Powell as an undersized SF anyway.

[babyjax13]

CJ trade instead....

NOP trades: McCullom
In: Collins

LAC trades: Norm Powell, Tucker
In: McCullom

UTA trades: Collins
In: Powell, Tucker

Pels get a starter(ish) strech(ish) 5 in Collins and save cap space this year and next, clearing up the minutes/roles logjam in the backcourt.

Clippers upgrade their shooting with own of the best vet off ball scorers whose contract lines up with Harden's.

Jazz shed money next season, get a vet wing to start and mentor the young guys, and could be more easily tradeable than Collins. Tucker is likely a buyout.

This just compounds our existing problem: way too many guards. I get the savings and that might be worth it, but this is blocking young guys from getting minutes, etc. ideally a 4th team would take Powell for an expiring.

IMO the Jazz guard glut is overblown - outside of Claxton and George there really isn't anyone who needs minutes and there are plenty of minutes behind them to give to any young guys who play their way into them.

In a rebuilding year you can just play Powell as an undersized SF anyway.

Clarkson + Sexton + George is about 80 of 96 minutes at those positions. We also have Sensabaugh, Juzang, Collier, Svi, and Mills. At small forward he can get some minutes if we don't decide to start Lauri/Hendricks at the forward positions, otherwise small forward will be 48 minutes of Lauri/Williams.

[giberish]

This just compounds our existing problem: way too many guards. I get the savings and that might be worth it, but this is blocking young guys from getting minutes, etc. ideally a 4th team would take Powell for an expiring.

IMO the Jazz guard glut is overblown - outside of Claxton and George there really isn't anyone who needs minutes and there are plenty of minutes behind them to give to any young guys who play their way into them.

In a rebuilding year you can just play Powell as an undersized SF anyway.

Clarkson + Sexton + George is about 80 of 96 minutes at those positions. We also have Sensabaugh, Juzang, Collier, Svi, and Mills. At small forward he can get some minutes if we don't decide to start Lauri/Hendricks at the forward positions, otherwise small forward will be 48 minutes of Lauri/Williams.

Clarkson can be DNP'd if they young guys are good enough to play. I'd figure Lauri and Hendricks are covering all the PF minutes (Collins is moved in this deal or some other deal where Kessler is moved and Collins is full-time C).so there's significant minutes for undersized SF options.

I'd also expect Lauri will miss 20-40 games with a vaguely sore back (for brazen tanking purposes). Sexton may also come down with a similar ailment.

[YayBasketball]

Yea I was thinking of Powell as a veteran undersized SF in front of Cody Williams.

[babyjax13]

IMO the Jazz guard glut is overblown - outside of Claxton and George there really isn't anyone who needs minutes and there are plenty of minutes behind them to give to any young guys who play their way into them.

In a rebuilding year you can just play Powell as an undersized SF anyway.

Clarkson + Sexton + George is about 80 of 96 minutes at those positions. We also have Sensabaugh, Juzang, Collier, Svi, and Mills. At small forward he can get some minutes if we don't decide to start Lauri/Hendricks at the forward positions, otherwise small forward will be 48 minutes of Lauri/Williams.

Clarkson can be DNP'd if they young guys are good enough to play. I'd figure Lauri and Hendricks are covering all the PF minutes (Collins is moved in this deal or some other deal where Kessler is moved and Collins is full-time C).so there's significant minutes for undersized SF options.

I'd also expect Lauri will miss 20-40 games with a vaguely sore back (for brazen tanking purposes). Sexton may also come down with a similar ailment.

Realistically we aren't going to DNP Clarkson for a majority of the season. He's a an okay player at this point, great in the lockerroom, great in the community, I don't see us alienating a player who still deserves minutes. As I said, I can see it for the savings, but it makes way more sense from a roster construction perspective to send Powell elsewhere (and honestly, I'd rather keep Collins than trade for another undersized player who needs the ball). I'm happy to get worse, but at a certain point you still have to keep minutes and reps open for the young guys, and Powell affects both.

[YayBasketball]

Been thinking of the bleacher report idea of Smart, Clarke, and MEM '25 1st for Ingram, with Smart going to a 3rd team for a Center and/or assets. Bucks with Lopez or Hawks with Capela + makes some sense.

[YayBasketball]

Been thinking of the bleacher report idea of Smart, Clarke, and MEM '25 1st for Ingram, with Smart going to a 3rd team for a Center and/or assets. Bucks with Lopez or Hawks with Capela + makes some sense.

MEM trades: Smart, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.)
In: Ingram

MIL trades: Lopez, 2031 MIL 2nd
In: Smart

NOP trades: Ingram
In: Lopez, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.), 2031 MIL 2nd

[letsgobulls23]

As mentioned, I don't like where this leaves CHI. Trading for Ingram would mean that CHI has intentions of being good, correct? How does that happen with Jalen Smith as the only big on the team? Not to mention, I would not want to be the team stuck paying Ingram.

I'd pass from CHI perspective.

I don't think it signals that at all. I think it signals that they are being opportunistic about targeting a young, potential core piece. Being bad while adding him would be a huge boon given where Chicago is. Start Smith, sign a gleague center, give up a million points a game and figure put which guys are keepers. Obviously try to trade LaVine.

Is 27 that young? I just don't see the point in giving up assets to pay Ingram close to a max, when we're pretty far from being good. I don't get it.

[psman2]

Been thinking of the bleacher report idea of Smart, Clarke, and MEM '25 1st for Ingram, with Smart going to a 3rd team for a Center and/or assets. Bucks with Lopez or Hawks with Capela + makes some sense.

MEM trades: Smart, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.)
In: Ingram

MIL trades: Lopez, 2031 MIL 2nd
In: Smart

NOP trades: Ingram
In: Lopez, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.), 2031 MIL 2nd

Cannot see it. He is not a good enough fit and off-ball player for us to have interest with him expecting a max. If he was an OG or Bridges type of player I could see it.

[babyjax13]

As mentioned, I don't like where this leaves CHI. Trading for Ingram would mean that CHI has intentions of being good, correct? How does that happen with Jalen Smith as the only big on the team? Not to mention, I would not want to be the team stuck paying Ingram.

I'd pass from CHI perspective.

I don't think it signals that at all. I think it signals that they are being opportunistic about targeting a young, potential core piece. Being bad while adding him would be a huge boon given where Chicago is. Start Smith, sign a gleague center, give up a million points a game and figure put which guys are keepers. Obviously try to trade LaVine.

Is 27 that young? I just don't see the point in giving up assets to pay Ingram close to a max, when we're pretty far from being good. I don't get it.

It's 6-7 years of potential prime left. Certainly young enough to play next to a developing young star. But I can appreciate preferring to totally bottom out, instead.

[YayBasketball]

Been thinking of the bleacher report idea of Smart, Clarke, and MEM '25 1st for Ingram, with Smart going to a 3rd team for a Center and/or assets. Bucks with Lopez or Hawks with Capela + makes some sense.

MEM trades: Smart, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.)
In: Ingram

MIL trades: Lopez, 2031 MIL 2nd
In: Smart

NOP trades: Ingram
In: Lopez, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.), 2031 MIL 2nd

Cannot see it. He is not a good enough fit and off-ball player for us to have interest with him expecting a max. If he was an OG or Bridges type of player I could see it.

Fair enough. That's the case with every fake trade idea involving Ingram now. But there is a world where a wannabe contender will take the risk about contract expectations in order to increase their talent level to contend. A team can take him for this year while negotiating/waiting for more reasonable contract expectations to emerge, or have sign and trade options next summer.

So Grizzlies-- who else on the team is an on-ball creator other than Morant? I guess Bane has improved greatly in this area as a clear number 2 option on ball? And Smart as 3rd option creator? I guess that's the plan, but I'm sure they would have interest in another/better on ball player.

[psman2]

MEM trades: Smart, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.)
In: Ingram

MIL trades: Lopez, 2031 MIL 2nd
In: Smart

NOP trades: Ingram
In: Lopez, Clarke, '25 MEM 1st (top-8 prot.), 2031 MIL 2nd

Cannot see it. He is not a good enough fit and off-ball player for us to have interest with him expecting a max. If he was an OG or Bridges type of player I could see it.

Fair enough. That's the case with every fake trade idea involving Ingram now. But there is a world where a wannabe contender will take the risk about contract expectations in order to increase their talent level to contend. A team can take him for this year while negotiating/waiting for more reasonable contract expectations to emerge, or have sign and trade options next summer.

So Grizzlies-- who else on the team is an on-ball creator other than Morant? I guess Bane has improved greatly in this area as a clear number 2 option on ball? And Smart as 3rd option creator? I guess that's the plan, but I'm sure they would have interest in another/better on ball player.

Yes Bane has become a very good on the ball player and JJJ also has blossomed his ISO game this past year. We have our 3 20+ point scores and need to surround that core with pieces that compliment them, which I think we have done a good job of going into the season. But maybe someone like a DFS as a steady vet 3nD to augment our young forwards could be something I see us doing. Ingram would just be under utilized here and too expensive to retain in the role available to him.