Off-season Deal: Detroit/OKC/New Orleans

[Bentley1225]

Ill offer this idea for:
-Detroit to add a legit young SF in Ingram while mitigating effect on cap space
-OKC adds a young starting calibre 5
-New Orleans adds a young PG and further picks to re-tool around Zion

To Detroit (Trade Stewart, Ivey, 2029 1st)
-Brandon Ingram (1 year, $36 million)

To OKC (Trade 2025 Philly 1st)
-Isaiah Stewart (3 years, $45 million plus T.O.)

To New Orleans (Trade Ingram)
-Jaden Ivey (2 years, $18 million plus Q.O.)
-2025 Philadelphia 1st round pick (1-6 protected, 2026 1-4 protected. 2027 1-4 protected or 2027 2nd)
-2029 Detroit 1st round pick (lottery protected)

The Pistons land a young wing who can start at the 3 as they mitigate impact on cap space to spend on 1-2 free agents to bolster front end of roster this off-season

The Thunder add a young 5 with experience in Stewart on a reasonable long term deal as they look to add to frontcout

The Pelicans get a combination of a prospect, cap flexibility and 2 1sts for Ingram as they look to re-tool around Zion

[oldncreaky]

I just don't like the direction for Detroit. Weaver's win-loss record as Detroit's GM is 74-244. We're bad, and if anything, we're trending down because I'm not sold we have a core worth building around.
Detroit should be accumulating assets, not trading for players in their prime, and definitely not using up a future FRP in a win-now move. I want the FO to use the $60M in cap space to acquire FRPs by taking on other team's overpaid, injured, or unplayable flotsam

[Kalamazoo317]

Cut the outgoing FRP from Detroit and I'd consider it.

[vege]

Expiring Ingram is not even worth that 1st alone. Detroit have been consistently drafting in the top 5.

[BK_2020]

Expiring Ingram is not even worth that 1st alone. Detroit have been consistently drafting in the top 5.

It's lottery protected.

[Euphonetiks]

I cannot see the Pelicans moving Ingram for some weak picks and Ivey. Ingram in an off year still put up 20+/5+/5+ on .578 TS%. This leaves the Pelicans with a big scoring hole and I don't think a turnover prone guard with shooting issues is the right fit. I believe any trade with the Pistons would involve Duren+ or Stew/#5.

I also don't think the Pistons should be trying to trade their way to wins yet, but that situation is so jacked up that ownership may have issued a mandate for the short term.

[theBigLip]

Ingram isn’t as valuable as he may seem. It’s a one year rental, or it’s a max extension, both paths are not very desirable. Why give up a couple of starters and a FRP for either scenario? If he had a long term deal in the $25-30M range, he would be a lot more valuable.

[vege]

Expiring Ingram is not even worth that 1st alone. Detroit have been consistently drafting in the top 5.

It's lottery protected.

Doesn't matter. Detroit can't send picks out, they need to get picks. Ingram is not going to make Detroit good and an expiring Ingram is not worth all that.

[vege]

I cannot see the Pelicans moving Ingram for some weak picks and Ivey. Ingram in an off year still put up 20+/5+/5+ on .578 TS%. This leaves the Pelicans with a big scoring hole and I don't think a turnover prone guard with shooting issues is the right fit. I believe any trade with the Pistons would involve Duren+ or Stew/#5.

I also don't think the Pistons should be trying to trade their way to wins yet, but that situation is so jacked up that ownership may have issued a mandate for the short term.

Duren for Murphy sure. Duren for an expiring Ingram no thanks. even without the +.

[DrModesty]

I don't like OKC paying a first for a slightly overpaid back up big. I do like Stewart as a fit for OKC in general, but it would be seconds (OKC has about 20) or going after a different target.

[louc1970]

It is difficult to put a true value on Ingram. As a final year his value is reduced. Some see him as good scoring SF. Some see him as negative value.
I see a player plus a mid-first. Just really depends on who wants him and the value they attach.

[YayBasketball]

It is difficult to put a true value on Ingram. As a final year his value is reduced. Some see him as good scoring SF. Some see him as negative value.
I see a player plus a mid-first. Just really depends on who wants him and the value they attach.

Yea I think Ingram trades should be viewed as, the team trading for him will have assurances that he will re-sign/extend with them, like Siakam and Pacers. And only desperate teams will consider extending him at max salary numbers and giving up good assets to do so (DET, SAC, ?).

So Ingram and his agent may give Pels a list of teams he would be okay with extending at a less than max number, and let those teams know this position, making those teams more willing to give up assets. Or he may just extend with the Pelicans at a less than max number, try to have a better season and increase his trade value for a later trade.

[A_dub06]

If Detroit wants Ingram (I don’t think they do, our new POBO was the gm of the Pels) they can just wait until next offseason to get him. What’s the point of stretching assets for one extra year? Ingram also wants a max which is simply not worth. The guy can’t even stay healthy for more than 75% of the season, and he doesn’t take as many 3’s as he should falling in love with the kid-range.

Easy pass

[YayBasketball]

If Detroit wants Ingram (I don’t think they do, our new POBO was the gm of the Pels) they can just wait until next offseason to get him. What’s the point of stretching assets for one extra year? Ingram also wants a max which is simply not worth. The guy can’t even stay healthy for more than 75% of the season, and he doesn’t take as many 3’s as he should falling in love with the kid-range.

Easy pass

I agree that Langdon as new head of the Pistons makes them less likely to trade for Ingram. In theory, the point of trading for him a year early is to get him before other teams trade for and/or sign/extend him. Do many high caliber players really hit free agency anymore?

Ingram wants a max-- sure, probably so. As every player and person does. But are there cases where a player agrees to a contract less than the max possible or expected? Surely, yes. D. Murray's recent extension with the Hawks comes to mind. Everyone was surprised he agreed to a long-term contract at that number below the expected.

I think that will be the case with Ingram, either with the Pelicans or with a new team. With his injury history and inconsistent play, I think he and his agent will realize that compromising to a lower-than-max salary number is the best way to secure still-enormous long-term money. Has there been recent examples of former all stars in their 20's playing out the last year of their contract without extension? I guess Siakam is the closest one, but he and his agent directed him to the right team to get him that guarantee beforehand.

[A_dub06]

If Detroit wants Ingram (I don’t think they do, our new POBO was the gm of the Pels) they can just wait until next offseason to get him. What’s the point of stretching assets for one extra year? Ingram also wants a max which is simply not worth. The guy can’t even stay healthy for more than 75% of the season, and he doesn’t take as many 3’s as he should falling in love with the kid-range.

Easy pass

I agree that Langdon as new head of the Pistons makes them less likely to trade for Ingram. In theory, the point of trading for him a year early is to get him before other teams trade for and/or sign/extend him. Do many high caliber players really hit free agency anymore?

Ingram wants a max-- sure, probably so. As every player and person does. But are there cases where a player agrees to a contract less than the max possible or expected? Surely, yes. D. Murray's recent extension with the Hawks comes to mind. Everyone was surprised he agreed to a long-term contract at that number below the expected.

I think that will be the case with Ingram, either with the Pelicans or with a new team. With his injury history and inconsistent play, I think he and his agent will realize that compromising to a lower-than-max salary number is the best way to secure still-enormous long-term money. Has there been recent examples of former all stars in their 20's playing out the last year of their contract without extension? I guess Siakam is the closest one, but he and his agent directed him to the right team to get him that guarantee beforehand.

It’s a valid point that good players get resigned and forgo free agency and Ingram is good, but he’s also flawed even when healthy. Not debating whether he would help a team like the Pistons improve because he would but signing him to an even close to a max deal would be kryptonite and basically telling the league you're long term goal is to get the 8th seed and bounced in the 1st round. any team reading for him would want to have an agreed deal on the table before hand so I guess that will also determine where he plays.

With all that said, I’d only be interested if Langdon got him on a good deal. And even then, would depend what was given up.

[Billl]

Pistons aren't in a position to be giving up future first.

As far as ingram's contract goes, he's going to get close to the max or the max from someone. And if a horrible team like the pistons want him to sign an extension, you can be 100% positive he's only doing it for max $$$. That's just the reality of being a bad team and max contracts. Maybe a guy takes a little less to stay on a winning team, but he's not signing at a discount to go to a rebuilding situation.

[Euphonetiks]

It’s a valid point that good players get resigned and forgo free agency and Ingram is good, but he’s also flawed even when healthy. Not debating whether he would help a team like the Pistons improve because he would but signing him to an even close to a max deal would be kryptonite and basically telling the league you're long term goal is to get the 8th seed and bounced in the 1st round. any team reading for him would want to have an agreed deal on the table before hand so I guess that will also determine where he plays.

With all that said, I’d only be interested if Langdon got him on a good deal. And even then, would depend what was given up.

I don't think the Pistons should trade for Ingram because I don't think they have a plan in place, but I'm also of the opinion that Pistons are so far away from competence that they should start over, blank slate, trade Cade, and tear it down to the studs. If DET wants Ingram due to ownership mandate to start winning, they would have to trade for him as I cannot see Ingram playing out this last year without an extension.

But if DET traded for Ingram, the contract wouldn't matter much. With the cap rising 10% every year, even a near max deal will not be kryptonite in 2 years and the Pistons are more than an NBA contract's length in time from competing in the playoffs.

[Kalamazoo317]

I forget, but is an extend and trade a thing? I'd do Stew and Ivey for Ingram (no pick) if Ingram were extended as part of the trade (don't want to risk losing the asset).

[Euphonetiks]

I forget, but is an extend and trade a thing? I'd do Stew and Ivey for Ingram (no pick) if Ingram were extended as part of the trade (don't want to risk losing the asset).

Any team trading for Ingram could negotiate a 3 year extension (expiring at the conclusion of the 27-28 season) starting at 120% of his former salary with 5% raises and a 15% trade kicker. The trade kicker would not operate for the initial trade, so he cannot get to his max in an extend and trade.

No clue if Ingram will leave money on the table for the security of the extension or bet on himself staying healthy for free agency. If he signs the extension, he gives up ~$18M over the 3 years extension plus he does not get the 4th year (3 years at $43M per vs 3 years at $49M per + 4th year at $53.8M).

24-25: $36,016,200
25-26: $43,219,440
26-27: $45,380,412
27-28: $47,649,433

$136.3M/3

Next offseason, Ingram can sign a max with his prior team starting at 30% with 8% raises for 4 years (or with a new team starting at 30% with 5% raises)

24-25: $36,016,200
25-26: $46,530,000
26-27: $50,252,400 ($48,856,500)
27-28: $54,272,592 ($51,299,325)
28-29: $58,614,400 ($53,864,291)

$209M/4 ($200/4)

[Kalamazoo317]

Definitely riskier to trade anything of value for him without the extension in place.