RealGM

NOP trade: Ingram, JRE
NOP receive: Claxton, JHS

Brooklyn trade: Claxton
Brooklyn receive: Russell, Hachimura, LAL 2029 unprotected 1st

LAL trade: Russell, Hachimura, JHS, 2029 unprotected 1st
LAL receive: Ingram, JRE

Why for LAL: add a 3rd star to Lebron/AD
Why for NOP: add a starting C for Ingram
Why for Brooklyn: get a future unprotected post AD/Lebron 1st

I don't think Ingram has this value.

I don't want to trade Clax, but give us JHS instead of Rui, and I would at least consider it.

Colbinii wrote:I don't think Ingram has this value.

he's not even worth 1 future unprotected 1st?

The Nets would trade an on the fence All-Star/future All-Defense player for a 1st? I do not see them making this mistake.

JKiddy wrote:The Nets would trade an on the fence All-Star/future All-Defense player for a 1st? I do not see them making this mistake.

Well fortunately Claxton is neither of those things

Godaddycurse wrote:

Colbinii wrote:I don't think Ingram has this value.

he's not even worth 1 future unprotected 1st?

At the trade deadline? No.

Look what Siakam was moved for.

JKiddy wrote:The Nets would trade an on the fence All-Star/future All-Defense player for a 1st? I do not see them making this mistake.

Claxton is like a Top 75-100 player. How is he ever going to become an All-Star?

He won't be this until 2025/26 when the cast changes. But, he's considered a Top 60 player now. He cannot achieve more until the team is better. It will take 2 seasons.

Lakers would hold Rui, rather they move Vando and Vincent..but there is something here with these 3 teams.


Nets get DLo, Vincent, FRPs
Pels get Claxton, Vando
Lakers get Ingram, Sharpe

If the Nets got 3 FRPs that were unprotected they might consider this. But, if not they would not even pick up the phone. They truly value Claxton very very very much. He is young, on a great contract, and is a top 10 defensive player in the league, who is only improving offensively. I just do not see them taking on DLO now. It won't work.

Colbinii wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

Colbinii wrote:I don't think Ingram has this value.

he's not even worth 1 future unprotected 1st?

At the trade deadline? No.

Look what Siakam was moved for.

Wasn’t it a solid player (Brown) filler and three firsts?

JKiddy wrote:If the Nets got 3 FRPs that were unprotected they might consider this. But, if not they would not even pick up the phone. They truly value Claxton very very very much. He is young, on a great contract, and is a top 10 defensive player in the league, who is only improving offensively. I just do not see them taking on DLO now. It won't work.

Role players don't fetch unprotected FRPs, let alone multiples of them.

Karmaloop wrote:

JKiddy wrote:If the Nets got 3 FRPs that were unprotected they might consider this. But, if not they would not even pick up the phone. They truly value Claxton very very very much. He is young, on a great contract, and is a top 10 defensive player in the league, who is only improving offensively. I just do not see them taking on DLO now. It won't work.

Role players don't fetch unprotected FRPs, let alone multiples of them.

Nobody told new york that..

brackdan70 wrote:

Colbinii wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:
he's not even worth 1 future unprotected 1st?

At the trade deadline? No.

Look what Siakam was moved for.

Wasn’t it a solid player (Brown) filler and three firsts?

Maybe he thinks Ingram is worth more than that, but I would’ve thought that lakers pick is enough to get it done.

The Ingram fit on LA isn’t too bad, if they’re around they play-in again they’d have to consider it.

Claxton is not just a "role player" lol

Feel like the Lakers would be better off taking Claxton here.

brackdan70 wrote:

Colbinii wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:
he's not even worth 1 future unprotected 1st?

At the trade deadline? No.

Look what Siakam was moved for.

Wasn’t it a solid player (Brown) filler and three firsts?

Not all 1st are created equal.

It was 2 mid-late 1sts in a historically weak draft, a Top 4 protected pick 2.5 years out, and an overpaid role player in Bruce Brown [Salary Filler].

Godaddycurse wrote:Nobody told new york that..

Something about calling Bridges a role player is...odd.

jdiddy wrote:Claxton is not just a "role player" lol

He is. Can he create offense for himself or others? He's a really good player that 99% of the league would like to have on a value contract. But let's not inflate his contract beyond what it actually is. If you want to say that you'd need 3 unprotected FRPs to move him, sure. But let's not pretend like that's what his value is around the league.

Colbinii wrote:

brackdan70 wrote:

Colbinii wrote:
At the trade deadline? No.

Look what Siakam was moved for.

Wasn’t it a solid player (Brown) filler and three firsts?

Not all 1st are created equal.

It was 2 mid-late 1sts in a historically weak draft, a Top 4 protected pick 2.5 years out, and an overpaid role player in Bruce Brown [Salary Filler].

Right. I don’t think anyone is suggesting unprotected picks or likely lotto picks need to be part of an Ingram package either.
The post you were ready to asked about a single unprotected pick. Doesn’t seem out of line for Ingram.it depends on the team for sure and likely a protected is more realistic