RealGM

WAS: Brandon Ingram
NOP: Kyle Kuzma, Brandon Ingram, 2029 1st rd pick (via POR)

Why for NOP: use Ingram to recover the value they surrendered for Murray with better fitting pieces. Kuzma fits into a bench scoring role, providing some roster balance and Kispert is a knock down shooter on the wing to pair with the defense the Pels currently have. The extra draft pick is more amo to add frontcourt depth:

Murray/McCollum/Jones/Zion
Alvarado/Murphy/Kispert/Kuzma/Missi

Still need a starting C

Why for WAS: although you have to max Ingram, this is a pretty good price to acquire a player with his ability entering his age 27 season. Everyone loves to say just build through the draft, but that doesn't always yield results. This trade gives WAS a chance to let their young pieces grow around BI with an easy pivot of trading BI to recoup this value (I would argue that he will have more value on a 4 year max vs 1 year remaining) and still have all future draft picks in hand.

Jones/Coulibaly/Ingram/Bagley/Valancunis
Brogdon/Poole/Carringon/George/Sarr

Ideally WAS can flip Poole or Brogdon for a PF. They also have the expiring contracts of Holmes and Shamet to play with.

Guess you mean Kuzma/Kispert?

I don't really get it for either side. Washington should not trade for him so they can max him. And Washington is a team that would absolutely have to overpay to keep him as a bunch of teams project to have cap space next year. He's just not a needle movers.

And I don't get bringing back more mouths to feed for the Pels. Nor do I think Kuzma is happy as a bench player.

Texas Chuck wrote:Guess you mean Kuzma/Kispert?

I don't really get it for either side. Washington should not trade for him so they can max him. And Washington is a team that would absolutely have to overpay to keep him as a bunch of teams project to have cap space next year. He's just not a needle movers.

And I don't get bringing back more mouths to feed for the Pels. Nor do I think Kuzma is happy as a bench player.

That's correct re: Kuzma/Kispert - you can't trade Ingram for Ingram LOL.

My gamble for Washington is that Ingram on a 4 year max has more value than Ingram entering the last year of his deal. Washington's books are pretty empty besides Poole so they can afford him. If Sarr or some of the other young guys pop, you can use your picks in trades to build out the roster. If they don't, I think you can get more back for Ingram than what you gave up for him.

Ingram is so often injured, I just can't see him holding much value for a building team. Maybe for someone who is already a contender, but not for a team projecting 3 years down the line.