Official Scottie All Star Barnes Thread 9

[tsherkin]

I'm just more annoyed with the brain dead blind faith takes I see when people try to defend decidedly mediocre moves. The team has no spacing and now that Scottie operates primarily in the mid range, we add another guy who primarily operates in the mid range, but with some better 3pt shooting, that's not a paradigm shift, that's another coat of paint on rotting wood.

It's less about the individual players to me, and more about the incessant need to double down on mediocrity at every turn. You don't make a team that has inefficient scoring better, by adding another inefficient scorer. This isn't a "pick your poison" situation, it's "pick your tepid glass of water".

I hear you, but Ingram isn't "some better 3pt shooting." If he has a strength, that's sort of it. He has multiple seasons of 6+ 3PA/g at 37-39% from 3, and that's not trivial for us. A volume shooter from 3 who has to be taken that seriously can do a lot, even if his individual scoring isn't that great. Like, that's basically a roleplayer 3pt shooter, right? So even if he is decidedly mediocre in a volume role as he has been, that effect can still be a positive for Scottie and RJ, and even Dick, right? Ingram should have ANY element of gravity. And he IS a good mid-range shooter, so if he can get it on the deck, he's a pretty decent scorer at the nail, at the elbows, from the baselines, etc. And he draws fouls. The issue in my head is more that we can't use him to float volume as a way to bolster our offense, but much in the way that Scottie helps RJ and RJ helps Scottie, Ingram should (in theory) have any element of positive effect as a result of just his 3pt shooting, right? He's like a Glenn Robinson-level scorer when he's on the floor, give or take.

That does, of course, put a cap on our total efficacy on the offensive end, which we've all discussed at this point. But we've also been discussing pretty regularly ITT that Scottie needs to have his volume reduced and that he needs much of what RJ does: a better selection of higher-efficiency shot types, with better spacing around him to shave off defensive pressure and increase passing support. Right?

So at least in an ideal world, which also includes Ingram being healthy and on the floor, that's how I imagine positive outlook comes for this acquisition.

[PushDaRock]

I'm just more annoyed with the brain dead blind faith takes I see when people try to defend decidedly mediocre moves. The team has no spacing and now that Scottie operates primarily in the mid range, we add another guy who primarily operates in the mid range, but with some better 3pt shooting, that's not a paradigm shift, that's another coat of paint on rotting wood.

It's less about the individual players to me, and more about the incessant need to double down on mediocrity at every turn. You don't make a team that has inefficient scoring better, by adding another inefficient scorer. This isn't a "pick your poison" situation, it's "pick your tepid glass of water".

I hear you, but Ingram isn't "some better 3pt shooting." If he has a strength, that's sort of it. He has multiple seasons of 6+ 3PA/g at 37-39% from 3, and that's not trivial for us. A volume shooter from 3 who has to be taken that seriously can do a lot, even if his individual scoring isn't that great. Like, that's basically a roleplayer 3pt shooter, right? So even if he is decidedly mediocre in a volume role as he has been, that effect can still be a positive for Scottie and RJ, and even Dick, right? Ingram should have ANY element of gravity. And he IS a good mid-range shooter, so if he can get it on the deck, he's a pretty decent scorer at the nail, at the elbows, from the baselines, etc. And he draws fouls. The issue in my head is more that we can't use him to float volume as a way to bolster our offense, but much in the way that Scottie helps RJ and RJ helps Scottie, Ingram should (in theory) have any element of positive effect as a result of just his 3pt shooting, right? He's like a Glenn Robinson-level scorer when he's on the floor, give or take.

That does, of course, put a cap on our total efficacy on the offensive end, which we've all discussed at this point. But we've also been discussing pretty regularly ITT that Scottie needs to have his volume reduced and that he needs much of what RJ does: a better selection of higher-efficiency shot types, with better spacing around him to shave off defensive pressure and increase passing support. Right?

So at least in an ideal world, which also includes Ingram being healthy and on the floor, that's how I imagine positive outlook comes for this acquisition.

This is a beggars can't be choosers situation. We are not in the position to get someone that fixes everything (Superstar) so Masai is trying to find pieces to the puzzle that fit instead. I don't think anyone is saying this is a contending team as built but if everything breaks right, this can at least be a decent team and you go from there. Maybe you consolidate into a bigger piece at some point, guys take some unexpected positive steps in development and etc.

I know some people want to keep tanking until we draft a generational talent and/or true #1 option but Masai opting for IQ/RJ instead of a pick package for OG set us on a different path from the tear everything down rebuild some people want.

[tsherkin]

This is a beggars can't be choosers situation. We are not in the position to get someone that fixes everything (Superstar) so Masai is trying to find pieces to the puzzle that fit instead.

No, not likely. But we are technically still in the running for some quality in what appears to be a pretty strong draft.

I know some people want to keep tanking until we draft a generational talent and/or true #1 option but Masai opting for IQ/RJ instead of a pick package for OG set us on a different path from the tear everything down rebuild some people want.

I think "keep tanking" is hyperbolic. I suspect most are discussing just this draft.

Now, Ingram may not play much for us this year. We only have so many games left and IIRC, he isn't even cleared for contact drills at the moment. So there is a chance that he won't play much of a role in altering our chances at moving up the draft ladder. If that's the case, then we kind of get the potential for a best of both worlds type of situation, I guess.

[PushDaRock]

This is a beggars can't be choosers situation. We are not in the position to get someone that fixes everything (Superstar) so Masai is trying to find pieces to the puzzle that fit instead.

No, not likely. But we are technically still in the running for some quality in what appears to be a pretty strong draft.

I know some people want to keep tanking until we draft a generational talent and/or true #1 option but Masai opting for IQ/RJ instead of a pick package for OG set us on a different path from the tear everything down rebuild some people want.

I think "keep tanking" is hyperbolic. I suspect most are discussing just this draft.

Now, Ingram may not play much for us this year. We only have so many games left and IIRC, he isn't even cleared for contact drills at the moment. So there is a chance that he won't play much of a role in altering our chances at moving up the draft ladder. If that's the case, then we kind of get the potential for a best of both worlds type of situation, I guess.

I am expecting opportunistic tanking at the end of the year where our young guys get development time. With the schedule being what it is though, we're still going to win some games no matter what we do though.

My point is more that people complaining about mediocrity will never be happy without a top 10 player on the roster or at least someone they think can become one.

[tsherkin]

I am expecting opportunistic tanking at the end of the year where our young guys get development time. With the schedule being what it is though, we're still going to win some games no matter what we do though.

My point is more that people complaining about mediocrity will never be happy without a top 10 player on the roster or at least someone they think can become one.

Which is fair, though. Mediocre teams are boring, not fun to watch and unsatisfying. So I get that. But there does have to be a framework and timeline for how long you're willing to be crap before you start trying to claw back up to and through mediocrity, because watching a BAD team is even worse than watching a mediocre one, no doubt.

[Scase]

I'm just more annoyed with the brain dead blind faith takes I see when people try to defend decidedly mediocre moves. The team has no spacing and now that Scottie operates primarily in the mid range, we add another guy who primarily operates in the mid range, but with some better 3pt shooting, that's not a paradigm shift, that's another coat of paint on rotting wood.

It's less about the individual players to me, and more about the incessant need to double down on mediocrity at every turn. You don't make a team that has inefficient scoring better, by adding another inefficient scorer. This isn't a "pick your poison" situation, it's "pick your tepid glass of water".

I hear you, but Ingram isn't "some better 3pt shooting." If he has a strength, that's sort of it. He has multiple seasons of 6+ 3PA/g at 37-39% from 3, and that's not trivial for us. A volume shooter from 3 who has to be taken that seriously can do a lot, even if his individual scoring isn't that great. Like, that's basically a roleplayer 3pt shooter, right? So even if he is decidedly mediocre in a volume role as he has been, that effect can still be a positive for Scottie and RJ, and even Dick, right? Ingram should have ANY element of gravity. And he IS a good mid-range shooter, so if he can get it on the deck, he's a pretty decent scorer at the nail, at the elbows, from the baselines, etc. And he draws fouls. The issue in my head is more that we can't use him to float volume as a way to bolster our offense, but much in the way that Scottie helps RJ and RJ helps Scottie, Ingram should (in theory) have any element of positive effect as a result of just his 3pt shooting, right? He's like a Glenn Robinson-level scorer when he's on the floor, give or take.

That does, of course, put a cap on our total efficacy on the offensive end, which we've all discussed at this point. But we've also been discussing pretty regularly ITT that Scottie needs to have his volume reduced and that he needs much of what RJ does: a better selection of higher-efficiency shot types, with better spacing around him to shave off defensive pressure and increase passing support. Right?

So at least in an ideal world, which also includes Ingram being healthy and on the floor, that's how I imagine positive outlook comes for this acquisition.

In theory yeah, I just don't trust the concept of scoring by committee, I can't think of a single team that has every really won anything with that setup in the last 20+ years. If we moved RJ, I'd be in much bigger support of the trade, perhaps that's an off season thing, but that still doesn't help us tank the remainder of the year, and I have a massive sinking feeling that BI WILL play this season, and he WILL be back during the softest part of our schedule. Masai cannot help himself when it comes to evaluating, and in his defence this time, he SHOULD be evaluating the trade before potentially signing him to a 35-40/yr contract.

And all that means is more hits to our draft positioning, which then further limits the ceiling. With or without BI, we're still in the same spot we were before the trade, going nowhere until we get a non secondary/tertiary scoring option. It's why this draft is/was so important, and it's why I say this trade is just Jak 2.0. I don't hate the trade in theory, but just like Jak, the issue was never the player, but the stupid timing.

If we can manage a top 5 pick, BI sits for the rest of the year, and we get him signed to a reasonable contract, I'll be much more amicable towards it. But as of right now it might open up a bit more spacing, but the same issues persist. Bringing it back to Scottie though, what we did with RJ and getting him to better spots works because he has an elite scoring skill at getting to the rim, Scottie doesn't have a single elite scoring skill, so getting him in those spots is not going to be easy, cause well, they don't really exist in the same way as they do for RJ.

The acquisition also puts more strain, or at the very least doesn't alleviate any, for Scottie on the defensive end. BI is in the same vein as RJ, perhaps a slightly better defender. The potential benefit I can see is if there is less pressure on Scottie to score, he can focus more on defence like Siakam used to when we had Kawhi.

[canada_dry]

He has once again dipped under 20 ppg, and 20 isn't the big number it once was.


If we took into consideration stat inflation i think it gets a bit disturbing.

If it was 2005 and we were trying to build around a 17/6/4 guy on poor efficiency, what would we really be saying?

I think he can be the best player on a team hes not the #1 scoring option on though. Hopefully we can see that come to fruition with Ingram. The motor needs to go up. The production needs to go up consistently not just in phases. The perimeter shooting needs to go up but that's gonna be tough.

Still holding out faith for him. I see it in there. At times.

[PushDaRock]

He has once again dipped under 20 ppg, and 20 isn't the big number it once was.


If we took into consideration stat inflation i think it gets a bit disturbing.

If it was 2005 and we were trying to build around a 17/6/4 guy on poor efficiency, what would we really be saying?

I think he can be the best player on a team hes not the #1 scoring option on though. Hopefully we can see that come to fruition with Ingram. The motor needs to go up. The production needs to go up consistently not just in phases. The perimeter shooting needs to go up but that's gonna be tough.

Still holding out faith for him. I see it in there. At times.

if you consider it's also stat inflation on a bad team, then you really get down on him

[tsherkin]

In theory yeah, I just don't trust the concept of scoring by committee, I can't think of a single team that has every really won anything with that setup in the last 20+ years.

I guess the Pistons were 21 years ago, so that's fair. But let's be honest, we arent at the "thinking about contention" stage, so that doesnt hugely matter at the moment.

If we moved RJ, I'd be in much bigger support of the trade, perhaps that's an off season thing, but that still doesn't help us tank the remainder of the year, and I have a massive sinking feeling that BI WILL play this season, and he WILL be back during the softest part of our schedule. Masai cannot help himself when it comes to evaluating, and in his defence this time, he SHOULD be evaluating the trade before potentially signing him to a 35-40/yr contract.

Moved RJ to where, for what?

If we can manage a top 5 pick, BI sits for the rest of the year, and we get him signed to a reasonable contract, I'll be much more amicable towards it. But as of right now it might open up a bit more spacing, but the same issues persist. Bringing it back to Scottie though, what we did with RJ and getting him to better spots works because he has an elite scoring skill at getting to the rim, Scottie doesn't have a single elite scoring skill, so getting him in those spots is not going to be easy, cause well, they don't really exist in the same way as they do for RJ.

We shall see, I suppose.

[PushDaRock]

I'm just more annoyed with the brain dead blind faith takes I see when people try to defend decidedly mediocre moves. The team has no spacing and now that Scottie operates primarily in the mid range, we add another guy who primarily operates in the mid range, but with some better 3pt shooting, that's not a paradigm shift, that's another coat of paint on rotting wood.

It's less about the individual players to me, and more about the incessant need to double down on mediocrity at every turn. You don't make a team that has inefficient scoring better, by adding another inefficient scorer. This isn't a "pick your poison" situation, it's "pick your tepid glass of water".

I hear you, but Ingram isn't "some better 3pt shooting." If he has a strength, that's sort of it. He has multiple seasons of 6+ 3PA/g at 37-39% from 3, and that's not trivial for us. A volume shooter from 3 who has to be taken that seriously can do a lot, even if his individual scoring isn't that great. Like, that's basically a roleplayer 3pt shooter, right? So even if he is decidedly mediocre in a volume role as he has been, that effect can still be a positive for Scottie and RJ, and even Dick, right? Ingram should have ANY element of gravity. And he IS a good mid-range shooter, so if he can get it on the deck, he's a pretty decent scorer at the nail, at the elbows, from the baselines, etc. And he draws fouls. The issue in my head is more that we can't use him to float volume as a way to bolster our offense, but much in the way that Scottie helps RJ and RJ helps Scottie, Ingram should (in theory) have any element of positive effect as a result of just his 3pt shooting, right? He's like a Glenn Robinson-level scorer when he's on the floor, give or take.

That does, of course, put a cap on our total efficacy on the offensive end, which we've all discussed at this point. But we've also been discussing pretty regularly ITT that Scottie needs to have his volume reduced and that he needs much of what RJ does: a better selection of higher-efficiency shot types, with better spacing around him to shave off defensive pressure and increase passing support. Right?

So at least in an ideal world, which also includes Ingram being healthy and on the floor, that's how I imagine positive outlook comes for this acquisition.

In theory yeah, I just don't trust the concept of scoring by committee, I can't think of a single team that has every really won anything with that setup in the last 20+ years. If we moved RJ, I'd be in much bigger support of the trade, perhaps that's an off season thing, but that still doesn't help us tank the remainder of the year, and I have a massive sinking feeling that BI WILL play this season, and he WILL be back during the softest part of our schedule. Masai cannot help himself when it comes to evaluating, and in his defence this time, he SHOULD be evaluating the trade before potentially signing him to a 35-40/yr contract.

And all that means is more hits to our draft positioning, which then further limits the ceiling. With or without BI, we're still in the same spot we were before the trade, going nowhere until we get a non secondary/tertiary scoring option. It's why this draft is/was so important, and it's why I say this trade is just Jak 2.0. I don't hate the trade in theory, but just like Jak, the issue was never the player, but the stupid timing.

If we can manage a top 5 pick, BI sits for the rest of the year, and we get him signed to a reasonable contract, I'll be much more amicable towards it. But as of right now it might open up a bit more spacing, but the same issues persist. Bringing it back to Scottie though, what we did with RJ and getting him to better spots works because he has an elite scoring skill at getting to the rim, Scottie doesn't have a single elite scoring skill, so getting him in those spots is not going to be easy, cause well, they don't really exist in the same way as they do for RJ.

The acquisition also puts more strain, or at the very least doesn't alleviate any, for Scottie on the defensive end. BI is in the same vein as RJ, perhaps a slightly better defender. The potential benefit I can see is if there is less pressure on Scottie to score, he can focus more on defence like Siakam used to when we had Kawhi.

We just traded Brown, Olynyk, Mitchell and Boucher likely gets moved as well. That's 4 rotation players likely gone replaced by rookies, not sure how that doesn't help the tank? How many games do you realistically expect Ingram to play? He's still weeks away and then likely gets load managed, rested on B2B's and etc the rest of the way. You're probably looking at maybe 15 games IMO, the impact of him playing is likely minimal towards wins. There will be considerable rust for him to work off too when he does get back.

[Scase]

In theory yeah, I just don't trust the concept of scoring by committee, I can't think of a single team that has every really won anything with that setup in the last 20+ years.

I guess the Pistons were 21 years ago, so that's fair. But let's be honest, we arent at the "thinking about contention" stage, so that doesnt hugely matter at the moment.

If we moved RJ, I'd be in much bigger support of the trade, perhaps that's an off season thing, but that still doesn't help us tank the remainder of the year, and I have a massive sinking feeling that BI WILL play this season, and he WILL be back during the softest part of our schedule. Masai cannot help himself when it comes to evaluating, and in his defence this time, he SHOULD be evaluating the trade before potentially signing him to a 35-40/yr contract.

Moved RJ to where, for what?

If we can manage a top 5 pick, BI sits for the rest of the year, and we get him signed to a reasonable contract, I'll be much more amicable towards it. But as of right now it might open up a bit more spacing, but the same issues persist. Bringing it back to Scottie though, what we did with RJ and getting him to better spots works because he has an elite scoring skill at getting to the rim, Scottie doesn't have a single elite scoring skill, so getting him in those spots is not going to be easy, cause well, they don't really exist in the same way as they do for RJ.

We shall see, I suppose.

RJ, either in the actual Ingram trade, or something else over the summer that I haven't thought too much about yet. This is going to be a very expensive play in team.

I hear you, but Ingram isn't "some better 3pt shooting." If he has a strength, that's sort of it. He has multiple seasons of 6+ 3PA/g at 37-39% from 3, and that's not trivial for us. A volume shooter from 3 who has to be taken that seriously can do a lot, even if his individual scoring isn't that great. Like, that's basically a roleplayer 3pt shooter, right? So even if he is decidedly mediocre in a volume role as he has been, that effect can still be a positive for Scottie and RJ, and even Dick, right? Ingram should have ANY element of gravity. And he IS a good mid-range shooter, so if he can get it on the deck, he's a pretty decent scorer at the nail, at the elbows, from the baselines, etc. And he draws fouls. The issue in my head is more that we can't use him to float volume as a way to bolster our offense, but much in the way that Scottie helps RJ and RJ helps Scottie, Ingram should (in theory) have any element of positive effect as a result of just his 3pt shooting, right? He's like a Glenn Robinson-level scorer when he's on the floor, give or take.

That does, of course, put a cap on our total efficacy on the offensive end, which we've all discussed at this point. But we've also been discussing pretty regularly ITT that Scottie needs to have his volume reduced and that he needs much of what RJ does: a better selection of higher-efficiency shot types, with better spacing around him to shave off defensive pressure and increase passing support. Right?

So at least in an ideal world, which also includes Ingram being healthy and on the floor, that's how I imagine positive outlook comes for this acquisition.

In theory yeah, I just don't trust the concept of scoring by committee, I can't think of a single team that has every really won anything with that setup in the last 20+ years. If we moved RJ, I'd be in much bigger support of the trade, perhaps that's an off season thing, but that still doesn't help us tank the remainder of the year, and I have a massive sinking feeling that BI WILL play this season, and he WILL be back during the softest part of our schedule. Masai cannot help himself when it comes to evaluating, and in his defence this time, he SHOULD be evaluating the trade before potentially signing him to a 35-40/yr contract.

And all that means is more hits to our draft positioning, which then further limits the ceiling. With or without BI, we're still in the same spot we were before the trade, going nowhere until we get a non secondary/tertiary scoring option. It's why this draft is/was so important, and it's why I say this trade is just Jak 2.0. I don't hate the trade in theory, but just like Jak, the issue was never the player, but the stupid timing.

If we can manage a top 5 pick, BI sits for the rest of the year, and we get him signed to a reasonable contract, I'll be much more amicable towards it. But as of right now it might open up a bit more spacing, but the same issues persist. Bringing it back to Scottie though, what we did with RJ and getting him to better spots works because he has an elite scoring skill at getting to the rim, Scottie doesn't have a single elite scoring skill, so getting him in those spots is not going to be easy, cause well, they don't really exist in the same way as they do for RJ.

The acquisition also puts more strain, or at the very least doesn't alleviate any, for Scottie on the defensive end. BI is in the same vein as RJ, perhaps a slightly better defender. The potential benefit I can see is if there is less pressure on Scottie to score, he can focus more on defence like Siakam used to when we had Kawhi.

We just traded Brown, Olynyk, Mitchell and Boucher likely gets moved as well. That's 4 rotation players likely gone replaced by rookies, not sure how that doesn't help the tank? How many games do you realistically expect Ingram to play? He's still weeks away and then likely gets load managed, rested on B2B's and etc the rest of the way. You're probably looking at maybe 15 games IMO, the impact of him playing is likely minimal towards wins. There will be considerable rust for him to work off too when he does get back.

Adding him to this team from a talent and win perspective is a net positive, even with rust etc. Meaning increased chance to win overall. Putting him against the dregs of the NBA who have shut down for the season, even if he plays like crap should result in easy wins, our march schedule is pathetic.

If the difference between sitting him the entire remainder of the season, or playing him even 15 games, with a low win rate and only another 5 or 6 wins, is the difference between 5th and 9th. That is absolutely massive in terms of draft odds.

The reason so many people are equating this to the Jak trade, is the potential for it to completely **** our draft positioning in a good draft.

And on the flip side, if he doesn't play at all, then we go into contract negotiations with absolutely zero clue on how he fits into this system, or even what shape his body is in. So then you have even less leverage than before, cause now you have yet ANOTHER player you traded for as a UFA who could hold you hostage so as to not waste the assets you traded away to get them, we just did this with IQ, and he was overpaid.

Trades like this are not just measured in the W/L column, they impact tons of things that are far reaching, for every brain dead comment of "HURR DURR YOU JUST WANNA TANK FOREVER" there are 10+ of people explaining HOW these types of trades have long lasting effects.

If he comes back and plays, we suffer and get a worse pick. If we over pay him we have a contract that no one wanted to pick up from the Pels other than us, because he wasn't seen as worth his asking price. That cap hell then forces us to make less than ideal moves down the line to alleviate the pressure. We end up paying guys too much, for a team that is a 1st round exit, meaning you continue to stockpile middling picks that are not franchise impacting. Then you take into account his injury history making the contract an even bigger issue to move without having to attach picks to it. And then you can see it snowball.

The issue with trades like these, and Jak, are that you need EVERYTHING to go well, for it to have a positive impact. If even one thing goes sideways, the entire payoff is at a high risk of disappearing. These boom or bust trades make sense when you are on the cusp of something like the kawhi trade. If that didn't pan out, it sucks but you can see the logic behind it, trades for players like that don't come along very often.

But trades like these? Players of this calibre are not hard to find, Siakam last year, Fox this year, and a plethora of others over the years. These are not franchise altering players, even if things go perfectly, but they sure as **** are if even a couple things go bad. It's short-sighted, but not at all surprising with our FO.

We have so much future salary tied up in just Scottie, and with each passing game he looks less and less like he is worth building a team around. So adding players like this, with the risks attached also impact Scotties long term value, and whether or not he even stays. Again, far reaching. But everyone gets all hyped up because there is a recognizable name on the roster, and 99% of this board and social media overall doesn't watch non Raps games, and has no clue what that consists of. but the people who do, are the ones that get labelled as complainers, simply because they have the context.

I said this in another thread, if this scenario was 2 years down the road, and we just managed a top 5-10 pick in 25 and 26, I would be in support of it. But it isn't and we aren't set up for long term success, it's just another flash in the pan trade that has sadly become Masai's M.O.

[PushDaRock]

In theory yeah, I just don't trust the concept of scoring by committee, I can't think of a single team that has every really won anything with that setup in the last 20+ years.

I guess the Pistons were 21 years ago, so that's fair. But let's be honest, we arent at the "thinking about contention" stage, so that doesnt hugely matter at the moment.

If we moved RJ, I'd be in much bigger support of the trade, perhaps that's an off season thing, but that still doesn't help us tank the remainder of the year, and I have a massive sinking feeling that BI WILL play this season, and he WILL be back during the softest part of our schedule. Masai cannot help himself when it comes to evaluating, and in his defence this time, he SHOULD be evaluating the trade before potentially signing him to a 35-40/yr contract.

Moved RJ to where, for what?

If we can manage a top 5 pick, BI sits for the rest of the year, and we get him signed to a reasonable contract, I'll be much more amicable towards it. But as of right now it might open up a bit more spacing, but the same issues persist. Bringing it back to Scottie though, what we did with RJ and getting him to better spots works because he has an elite scoring skill at getting to the rim, Scottie doesn't have a single elite scoring skill, so getting him in those spots is not going to be easy, cause well, they don't really exist in the same way as they do for RJ.

We shall see, I suppose.

RJ, either in the actual Ingram trade, or something else over the summer that I haven't thought too much about yet. This is going to be a very expensive play in team.

In theory yeah, I just don't trust the concept of scoring by committee, I can't think of a single team that has every really won anything with that setup in the last 20+ years. If we moved RJ, I'd be in much bigger support of the trade, perhaps that's an off season thing, but that still doesn't help us tank the remainder of the year, and I have a massive sinking feeling that BI WILL play this season, and he WILL be back during the softest part of our schedule. Masai cannot help himself when it comes to evaluating, and in his defence this time, he SHOULD be evaluating the trade before potentially signing him to a 35-40/yr contract.

And all that means is more hits to our draft positioning, which then further limits the ceiling. With or without BI, we're still in the same spot we were before the trade, going nowhere until we get a non secondary/tertiary scoring option. It's why this draft is/was so important, and it's why I say this trade is just Jak 2.0. I don't hate the trade in theory, but just like Jak, the issue was never the player, but the stupid timing.

If we can manage a top 5 pick, BI sits for the rest of the year, and we get him signed to a reasonable contract, I'll be much more amicable towards it. But as of right now it might open up a bit more spacing, but the same issues persist. Bringing it back to Scottie though, what we did with RJ and getting him to better spots works because he has an elite scoring skill at getting to the rim, Scottie doesn't have a single elite scoring skill, so getting him in those spots is not going to be easy, cause well, they don't really exist in the same way as they do for RJ.

The acquisition also puts more strain, or at the very least doesn't alleviate any, for Scottie on the defensive end. BI is in the same vein as RJ, perhaps a slightly better defender. The potential benefit I can see is if there is less pressure on Scottie to score, he can focus more on defence like Siakam used to when we had Kawhi.

We just traded Brown, Olynyk, Mitchell and Boucher likely gets moved as well. That's 4 rotation players likely gone replaced by rookies, not sure how that doesn't help the tank? How many games do you realistically expect Ingram to play? He's still weeks away and then likely gets load managed, rested on B2B's and etc the rest of the way. You're probably looking at maybe 15 games IMO, the impact of him playing is likely minimal towards wins. There will be considerable rust for him to work off too when he does get back.

Adding him to this team from a talent and win perspective is a net positive, even with rust etc. Meaning increased chance to win overall. Putting him against the dregs of the NBA who have shut down for the season, even if he plays like crap should result in easy wins, our march schedule is pathetic.

If the difference between sitting him the entire remainder of the season, or playing him even 15 games, with a low win rate and only another 5 or 6 wins, is the difference between 5th and 9th. That is absolutely massive in terms of draft odds.

The reason so many people are equating this to the Jak trade, is the potential for it to completely **** our draft positioning in a good draft.

And on the flip side, if he doesn't play at all, then we go into contract negotiations with absolutely zero clue on how he fits into this system, or even what shape his body is in. So then you have even less leverage than before, cause now you have yet ANOTHER player you traded for as a UFA who could hold you hostage so as to not waste the assets you traded away to get them, we just did this with IQ, and he was overpaid.

Trades like this are not just measured in the W/L column, they impact tons of things that are far reaching, for every brain dead comment of "HURR DURR YOU JUST WANNA TANK FOREVER" there are 10+ of people explaining HOW these types of trades have long lasting effects.

If he comes back and plays, we suffer and get a worse pick. If we over pay him we have a contract that no one wanted to pick up from the Pels other than us, because he wasn't seen as worth his asking price. That cap hell then forces us to make less than ideal moves down the line to alleviate the pressure. We end up paying guys too much, for a team that is a 1st round exit, meaning you continue to stockpile middling picks that are not franchise impacting. Then you take into account his injury history making the contract an even bigger issue to move without having to attach picks to it. And then you can see it snowball.

The issue with trades like these, and Jak, are that you need EVERYTHING to go well, for it to have a positive impact. If even one thing goes sideways, the entire payoff is at a high risk of disappearing. These boom or bust trades make sense when you are on the cusp of something like the kawhi trade. If that didn't pan out, it sucks but you can see the logic behind it, trades for players like that don't come along very often.

But trades like these? Players of this calibre are not hard to find, Siakam last year, Fox this year, and a plethora of others over the years. These are not franchise altering players, even if things go perfectly, but they sure as **** are if even a couple things go bad. It's short-sighted, but not at all surprising with our FO.

We have so much future salary tied up in just Scottie, and with each passing game he looks less and less like he is worth building a team around. So adding players like this, with the risks attached also impact Scotties long term value, and whether or not he even stays. Again, far reaching. But everyone gets all hyped up because there is a recognizable name on the roster, and 99% of this board and social media overall doesn't watch non Raps games, and has no clue what that consists of. but the people who do, are the ones that get labelled as complainers, simply because they have the context.

I said this in another thread, if this scenario was 2 years down the road, and we just managed a top 5-10 pick in 25 and 26, I would be in support of it. But it isn't and we aren't set up for long term success, it's just another flash in the pan trade that has sadly become Masai's M.O.

The issue with your thought process is he isn't worth 5-6 wins alone over 15 games. You're looking at him being worth maybe 1-2 actual wins at best over a replacement player over a 15 game stretch.

You take those 15 games without Ingram and it's not likely we would lose every single game without him.

If you're comparing him to Siakam and Fox, then it's also fair to compare the value given up for them compared to what we gave up for Ingram. We got Ingram for substantially less.

[Scase]

I guess the Pistons were 21 years ago, so that's fair. But let's be honest, we arent at the "thinking about contention" stage, so that doesnt hugely matter at the moment.



Moved RJ to where, for what?



We shall see, I suppose.

RJ, either in the actual Ingram trade, or something else over the summer that I haven't thought too much about yet. This is going to be a very expensive play in team.

We just traded Brown, Olynyk, Mitchell and Boucher likely gets moved as well. That's 4 rotation players likely gone replaced by rookies, not sure how that doesn't help the tank? How many games do you realistically expect Ingram to play? He's still weeks away and then likely gets load managed, rested on B2B's and etc the rest of the way. You're probably looking at maybe 15 games IMO, the impact of him playing is likely minimal towards wins. There will be considerable rust for him to work off too when he does get back.

Adding him to this team from a talent and win perspective is a net positive, even with rust etc. Meaning increased chance to win overall. Putting him against the dregs of the NBA who have shut down for the season, even if he plays like crap should result in easy wins, our march schedule is pathetic.

If the difference between sitting him the entire remainder of the season, or playing him even 15 games, with a low win rate and only another 5 or 6 wins, is the difference between 5th and 9th. That is absolutely massive in terms of draft odds.

The reason so many people are equating this to the Jak trade, is the potential for it to completely **** our draft positioning in a good draft.

And on the flip side, if he doesn't play at all, then we go into contract negotiations with absolutely zero clue on how he fits into this system, or even what shape his body is in. So then you have even less leverage than before, cause now you have yet ANOTHER player you traded for as a UFA who could hold you hostage so as to not waste the assets you traded away to get them, we just did this with IQ, and he was overpaid.

Trades like this are not just measured in the W/L column, they impact tons of things that are far reaching, for every brain dead comment of "HURR DURR YOU JUST WANNA TANK FOREVER" there are 10+ of people explaining HOW these types of trades have long lasting effects.

If he comes back and plays, we suffer and get a worse pick. If we over pay him we have a contract that no one wanted to pick up from the Pels other than us, because he wasn't seen as worth his asking price. That cap hell then forces us to make less than ideal moves down the line to alleviate the pressure. We end up paying guys too much, for a team that is a 1st round exit, meaning you continue to stockpile middling picks that are not franchise impacting. Then you take into account his injury history making the contract an even bigger issue to move without having to attach picks to it. And then you can see it snowball.

The issue with trades like these, and Jak, are that you need EVERYTHING to go well, for it to have a positive impact. If even one thing goes sideways, the entire payoff is at a high risk of disappearing. These boom or bust trades make sense when you are on the cusp of something like the kawhi trade. If that didn't pan out, it sucks but you can see the logic behind it, trades for players like that don't come along very often.

But trades like these? Players of this calibre are not hard to find, Siakam last year, Fox this year, and a plethora of others over the years. These are not franchise altering players, even if things go perfectly, but they sure as **** are if even a couple things go bad. It's short-sighted, but not at all surprising with our FO.

We have so much future salary tied up in just Scottie, and with each passing game he looks less and less like he is worth building a team around. So adding players like this, with the risks attached also impact Scotties long term value, and whether or not he even stays. Again, far reaching. But everyone gets all hyped up because there is a recognizable name on the roster, and 99% of this board and social media overall doesn't watch non Raps games, and has no clue what that consists of. but the people who do, are the ones that get labelled as complainers, simply because they have the context.

I said this in another thread, if this scenario was 2 years down the road, and we just managed a top 5-10 pick in 25 and 26, I would be in support of it. But it isn't and we aren't set up for long term success, it's just another flash in the pan trade that has sadly become Masai's M.O.

The issue with your thought process is he isn't worth 5-6 wins alone over 15 games. You're looking at him being worth maybe 1-2 actual wins at best over a replacement player over a 15 game stretch.

You take those 15 games without Ingram and it's not likely we would lose every single game without him.

If you're comparing him to Siakam and Fox, then it's also fair to compare the value given up for them compared to what we got to Ingram. We got Ingram for substantially less.

If a guy who is going to be signed to a 35-40mil a year contract, can't manage to get us more than 1-2 wins over teams like the hornets, wiz, and Jazz, what the **** are we doing trading for him and signing him?

We play UTA 2x, WAS 3x, BKN 1x, CHA 1x, that's just 7 games there. It's not that he is the difference maker alone between winning or losing, it's the fact that the SL will need to be playing so masai can see what the hell that group looks like. This isn't some scenario where Scottie, RJ, and IQ are all sitting ans it's just BI out there with Jak, Masai will play them together to see them play together.

Then you factor in teams like ORL 2x, PHI 2x, CHI 2x (feb 28/Apr1), POR 2x, and so on, who are "fringe" teams we have a chance to win or lose, and THOSE ones become the winnable ones. That's another 8 right there, and that's not all of them.

BI is not stealing games by himself, he's also not going to play by himself, he's going to play with a full lineup, otherwise there's no point and you might as well sit him. I don't think you understand how tightly packed the 5th to 11th standings are, it's literally just 6 games. 5th place is just under a 45% chance at a top 5 pick, 11th is just over 9%, and it's just 6 wins, people aren't so adamant about this for a couple percentage points.

[PushDaRock]

RJ, either in the actual Ingram trade, or something else over the summer that I haven't thought too much about yet. This is going to be a very expensive play in team.



Adding him to this team from a talent and win perspective is a net positive, even with rust etc. Meaning increased chance to win overall. Putting him against the dregs of the NBA who have shut down for the season, even if he plays like crap should result in easy wins, our march schedule is pathetic.

If the difference between sitting him the entire remainder of the season, or playing him even 15 games, with a low win rate and only another 5 or 6 wins, is the difference between 5th and 9th. That is absolutely massive in terms of draft odds.

The reason so many people are equating this to the Jak trade, is the potential for it to completely **** our draft positioning in a good draft.

And on the flip side, if he doesn't play at all, then we go into contract negotiations with absolutely zero clue on how he fits into this system, or even what shape his body is in. So then you have even less leverage than before, cause now you have yet ANOTHER player you traded for as a UFA who could hold you hostage so as to not waste the assets you traded away to get them, we just did this with IQ, and he was overpaid.

Trades like this are not just measured in the W/L column, they impact tons of things that are far reaching, for every brain dead comment of "HURR DURR YOU JUST WANNA TANK FOREVER" there are 10+ of people explaining HOW these types of trades have long lasting effects.

If he comes back and plays, we suffer and get a worse pick. If we over pay him we have a contract that no one wanted to pick up from the Pels other than us, because he wasn't seen as worth his asking price. That cap hell then forces us to make less than ideal moves down the line to alleviate the pressure. We end up paying guys too much, for a team that is a 1st round exit, meaning you continue to stockpile middling picks that are not franchise impacting. Then you take into account his injury history making the contract an even bigger issue to move without having to attach picks to it. And then you can see it snowball.

The issue with trades like these, and Jak, are that you need EVERYTHING to go well, for it to have a positive impact. If even one thing goes sideways, the entire payoff is at a high risk of disappearing. These boom or bust trades make sense when you are on the cusp of something like the kawhi trade. If that didn't pan out, it sucks but you can see the logic behind it, trades for players like that don't come along very often.

But trades like these? Players of this calibre are not hard to find, Siakam last year, Fox this year, and a plethora of others over the years. These are not franchise altering players, even if things go perfectly, but they sure as **** are if even a couple things go bad. It's short-sighted, but not at all surprising with our FO.

We have so much future salary tied up in just Scottie, and with each passing game he looks less and less like he is worth building a team around. So adding players like this, with the risks attached also impact Scotties long term value, and whether or not he even stays. Again, far reaching. But everyone gets all hyped up because there is a recognizable name on the roster, and 99% of this board and social media overall doesn't watch non Raps games, and has no clue what that consists of. but the people who do, are the ones that get labelled as complainers, simply because they have the context.

I said this in another thread, if this scenario was 2 years down the road, and we just managed a top 5-10 pick in 25 and 26, I would be in support of it. But it isn't and we aren't set up for long term success, it's just another flash in the pan trade that has sadly become Masai's M.O.

The issue with your thought process is he isn't worth 5-6 wins alone over 15 games. You're looking at him being worth maybe 1-2 actual wins at best over a replacement player over a 15 game stretch.

You take those 15 games without Ingram and it's not likely we would lose every single game without him.

If you're comparing him to Siakam and Fox, then it's also fair to compare the value given up for them compared to what we got to Ingram. We got Ingram for substantially less.

If a guy who is going to be signed to a 35-40mil a year contract, can't manage to get us more than 1-2 wins over teams like the hornets, wiz, and Jazz, what the **** are we doing trading for him and signing him?

We play UTA 2x, WAS 3x, BKN 1x, CHA 1x, that's just 7 games there. It's not that he is the difference maker alone between winning or losing, it's the fact that the SL will need to be playing so masai can see what the hell that group looks like. This isn't some scenario where Scottie, RJ, and IQ are all sitting ans it's just BI out there with Jak, Masai will play them together to see them play together.

Then you factor in teams like ORL 2x, PHI 2x, CHI 2x (feb 28/Apr1), POR 2x, and so on, who are "fringe" teams we have a chance to win or lose, and THOSE ones become the winnable ones. That's another 8 right there, and that's not all of them.

BI is not stealing games by himself, he's also not going to play by himself, he's going to play with a full lineup, otherwise there's no point and you might as well sit him. I don't think you understand how tightly packed the 5th to 11th standings are, it's literally just 6 games. 5th place is just under a 45% chance at a top 5 pick, 11th is just over 9%, and it's just 6 wins, people aren't so adamant about this for a couple percentage points.

I am saying if it's the (Full line-up with Ingram) vs (Full line-up without Ingram), that's likely about a 1-2 win difference if that in a 15 game span. If we do all kinds of other shenanigans as a tanking strategy, that's hard to account for and calculate an accurate percentage for the effect.

Some of the games that you think we win more of with Ingram are also balanced out some by games where we don't have him likely for another few weeks if not longer. We have a reduced bench after trading away Mitchell, Olynyk and Brown which should lead to more losses too.

[GoRapstheoriginal]

Hopefully bounces back on Friday night with a AWESOME game against the OKC!

[tsherkin]

Hopefully bounces back on Friday night with a AWESOME game against the OKC!

\We're gonna get so smushed. That's a nasty defense even WITHOUT Chet. I won't blame Scottie if he struggles in that one.

[Scase]

The issue with your thought process is he isn't worth 5-6 wins alone over 15 games. You're looking at him being worth maybe 1-2 actual wins at best over a replacement player over a 15 game stretch.

You take those 15 games without Ingram and it's not likely we would lose every single game without him.

If you're comparing him to Siakam and Fox, then it's also fair to compare the value given up for them compared to what we got to Ingram. We got Ingram for substantially less.

If a guy who is going to be signed to a 35-40mil a year contract, can't manage to get us more than 1-2 wins over teams like the hornets, wiz, and Jazz, what the **** are we doing trading for him and signing him?

We play UTA 2x, WAS 3x, BKN 1x, CHA 1x, that's just 7 games there. It's not that he is the difference maker alone between winning or losing, it's the fact that the SL will need to be playing so masai can see what the hell that group looks like. This isn't some scenario where Scottie, RJ, and IQ are all sitting ans it's just BI out there with Jak, Masai will play them together to see them play together.

Then you factor in teams like ORL 2x, PHI 2x, CHI 2x (feb 28/Apr1), POR 2x, and so on, who are "fringe" teams we have a chance to win or lose, and THOSE ones become the winnable ones. That's another 8 right there, and that's not all of them.

BI is not stealing games by himself, he's also not going to play by himself, he's going to play with a full lineup, otherwise there's no point and you might as well sit him. I don't think you understand how tightly packed the 5th to 11th standings are, it's literally just 6 games. 5th place is just under a 45% chance at a top 5 pick, 11th is just over 9%, and it's just 6 wins, people aren't so adamant about this for a couple percentage points.

I am saying if it's the (Full line-up with Ingram) vs (Full line-up without Ingram), that's likely about a 1-2 win difference if that in a 15 game span. If we do all kinds of other shenanigans as a tanking strategy, that's hard to account for and calculate an accurate percentage for the effect.

Some of the games that you think we win more of with Ingram are also balanced out some by games where we don't have him likely for another few weeks if not longer. We have a reduced bench after trading away Mitchell, Olynyk and Brown which should lead to more losses too.

To which I say again. If the difference of having vs not having him, is 1-2 games over a 15 game span, that's like 5-10 wins max over an entire season, why the ****, are we trading picks and jeopardizing the cap of this team? And hell, that's being optimistic. He plays about 60 games a season, so we're talking 4-6 wins over the course of an entire season.

You going to tell me that adding him to the team and spending a pick is worth taking this team from like 33 wins to 37-40? Holy ****, maybe Masai should've kept Dragic to learn what higher aspirations are.

[HumbleRen]

I think that BI trade signals that the FO is aware Scottie is more like Lowry than he is Kawhi. Not so much their play style but more so as in Scottie’s at his best when he doesn’t have to focus on shot creation.

He’ll still get 20/8/7 in his sleep but his shot diet will be more of a play finisher rather than being a shot creator. He’ll be a much more efficient and a better defender with Ingram shouldering the shot creation burden.

It was a worthwhile experiment to let Scottie try his hand at it but it’s pretty evident that he has too many physical limitations to be a #1 option and that he’s just not tall/big enough to get away with not having a 3 point shot.

RJ has done an admirable job at trying to help shoulder the offensive burden but he’s still a playfinishing wing, not a shot creating wing. It’ll just never be enough vs what Ingram brings to the table.

It’ll be an interesting offseason/draft.

Yep.

Read on Twitter

?s=46

[tsherkin]

I think that BI trade signals that the FO is aware Scottie is more like Lowry than he is Kawhi. Not so much their play style but more so as in Scottie’s at his best when he doesn’t have to focus on shot creation.

He’ll still get 20/8/7 in his sleep but his shot diet will be more of a play finisher rather than being a shot creator. He’ll be a much more efficient and a better defender with Ingram shouldering the shot creation burden.

It was a worthwhile experiment to let Scottie try his hand at it but it’s pretty evident that he has too many physical limitations to be a #1 option and that he’s just not tall/big enough to get away with not having a 3 point shot.

RJ has done an admirable job at trying to help shoulder the offensive burden but he’s still a playfinishing wing, not a shot creating wing. It’ll just never be enough vs what Ingram brings to the table.

It’ll be an interesting offseason/draft.

Yep.

Read on Twitter

?s=46

It's a good development, in concept. Acknowledging that Scottie isn't That Guy will help us starting building in a way which will leave him operating to his strengths and not trying to ice skate uphill.

[dballislife]

its actually good for scottie he has a very good slasher driver scorer that can shoot a bit, and now he has a very good perimeter scorer that can drive a bit

and both can give you an efficient 20-23...its obvious scottie isn't ready to shoulder a lot of scoring yet, and can further focus on D and passing and creating

scottie ingram and rj also gives us great size with all 3 being able to run the point and all we need is a og or mcdaniels like defender