Brandon Ingram Infatuation

[GreekAlex]

Since seeing his name in almost every thread, I have one question:

Do the people in the pro Brandon Ingram camp actually like the player that he is and everything that entails or what he is theoretically?

In his last 7 seasons, he’s averaged just under 57 games played per season. I understand that he’s a talent upgrade but at what cost?

His 3 is fairly erratic from season to season and he’s seeking huge money.

Sinking $200M into a player that misses 3 out of every 10 games on average and is a streaky shooter sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.

With Trajan coming from NO front office, who better than him to understand how the Pelicans value Ingram and why they haven’t extended him.

I’m sure he’s even got insight into what they’ve been offered for Ingram. I’m thankful for this factor so his not pulling a Weaver/ Gores and bidding against himself.

[MotownMadness]

I mean when it comes to finding a legit second option for the team thats actually attainable for us he fits the bill.

Doesn't come without the flaws either but i guess thats why he would be attainable to begin with.

He still avg almost 25, 6, 6 before last season on 48/39/88 splits though

[bstein14]

If it just cost Ivey + Stewart + 2nds but no 1st round picks, I can understand people wanting to do it. Nothing is given that Ivey will be more than a bench spark plug and Stewart is perhaps better in a 6th man type role. That said, with him being a free agent next summer the risk is that he doesn't like Detroit and doesn't want to resign with us so there is zero chance I'd give up firsts or Ausar for him. I am on the fence even to give up Ivey + Stewart but probably would.

[GreekAlex]

If it just cost Ivey + Stewart + 2nds but no 1st round picks, I can understand people wanting to do it. Nothing is given that Ivey will be more than a bench spark plug and Stewart is perhaps better in a 6th man type role. That said, with him being a free agent next summer the risk is that he doesn't like Detroit and doesn't want to resign with us so there is zero chance I'd give up firsts or Ausar for him. I am on the fence even to give up Ivey + Stewart but probably would.

I’m less concerned with the assets that are sent out than I am with the future capital that would be allocated to Ingram.

If he played 70 games per season and was consistently a 38+% 3 point shooter, I believe NO would have extended him or if it’s strictly a cap issue, another team would have traded for him.

I’d bet that many of the fans that advocated to trade for him would become disappointed once he starts missing games and the 3 isn’t falling.

[7r5ur]

I get why some people would want to, but I'm out on Ingram. I still think we need one more year in the bottom 5-7 of the league with a chance at a high pick in a draft that looks pretty deep at the top. You just don't want to be at the very very bottom, and Langdon has seemingly fixed that.

There are just too many question marks with Ingram to make him worth trying to skip steps and jump way up from 14 wins. The injuries. That contract looming. The obvious play-style clash with Cade. Can a team really be that good when the 2 max guys are inefficient mid-range types that create their offense in very similar ways? Just seems like a lot of things adding up that say it's a bad idea.

Someone else will become available later that is a better fit (or maybe Holland or someone else will be that guy). No need to rush it just because we've been down bad for so long.

[TPA]

I want nothing to do with the guy, for reasons you've explained. I like the idea of him, but the guy's health is not reliable, and I'm not paying a near max contract to watch him collect dust on the bench.

[Moses ShamMoses]

Durability concerns? Strike 1. Looming contract extension? Strike 2. Questionable fit with Cade? Strike 3. I'm personally out. I think he likely ends up more trouble than he's worth.

[Kalamazoo317]

I'm on the fence. In this league if you can get talent, you usually should, because you're not going anywhere without it. Depends on a ton of factors. But I think the reason people keep bringing it up is mostly just because it's been significantly rumored and any time we've seen significant rumors on something lately, there's usually been something to it.

[kellmellus50]

Ivey is not going anywhere after listening to the presser

[theBigLip]

Good points by the “no” crowd. But what’s the alternative? I guess we will have to wait and see.

Elite teams seem to have 2-3 max/near max players. We got one in Cade. It’s not easy to get them. This is an opportunity for sure, but we can’t afford to f—k it up. These can be franchise crippling decisions (eg Bulls w Lavine, Wizards w Beal, etc). I’d rather pass than get it wrong.

[7r5ur]

Good points by the “no” crowd. But what’s the alternative? I guess we will have to wait and see.

Elite teams seem to have 2-3 max/near max players. We got one in Cade. It’s not easy to get them. This is an opportunity for sure, but we can’t afford to f—k it up. These can be franchise crippling decisions (eg Bulls w Lavine, Wizards w Beal, etc). I’d rather pass than get it wrong.

Ingram at $52M/year feels eerily similar to Lavine and Beal.

There's a reason no team wants to give him that money.

The alternative is just waiting. We don't need to make the play-in this year. 25-30 wins would be a big positive jump and that can be achieved without Ingram.

Players become available as the dynamics of a team change. Dejounte Murray just got moved again. Haliburton and Sabonis got moved. Mikal Bridges got moved. Siakam got moved. Just have to wait and see.

[Invictus88]

Good points by the “no” crowd. But what’s the alternative? I guess we will have to wait and see.

Elite teams seem to have 2-3 max/near max players. We got one in Cade. It’s not easy to get them. This is an opportunity for sure, but we can’t afford to f—k it up. These can be franchise crippling decisions (eg Bulls w Lavine, Wizards w Beal, etc). I’d rather pass than get it wrong.

Ingram at $52M/year feels eerily similar to Lavine and Beal.

There's a reason no team wants to give him that money.

The alternative is just waiting. We don't need to make the play-in this year. 25-30 wins would be a big positive jump and that can be achieved without Ingram.

Players become available as the dynamics of a team change. Dejounte Murray just got moved again. Haliburton and Sabonis got moved. Mikal Bridges got moved. Siakam got moved. Just have to wait and see.

My biggest concern with him is fit. Apparently there were real problems there between him and Zion in terms of meshing? If that's the case then I don't see how he does well next to Cade who is and should be high usage as well.

It's kind of a bummer. If there were no fit concerns then I could see a player of his build and skills being exactly what we'd want. But if Ingram didn't have fit concerns then NOP wouldn't even be letting him go.

[Billl]

There just aren't a lot of options for us to grab an all-star level guy who is still pretty young. And he's a 2-way forward with great size, and if you haven't noticed, that's pretty valuable in the NBA right now. He's likely going to get a huge contract, but that's what happens with prime age all-stars.

The injury concerns are absolutely valid. And his 3 point shot looks fine, but the volume has been down the last couple years . I assume that's more system/role related given all the 3 point shooting NO has, but again, a question.

For the right price? Yeah, he's someone to look at.

[Kalamazoo317]

Good points by the “no” crowd. But what’s the alternative? I guess we will have to wait and see.

Elite teams seem to have 2-3 max/near max players. We got one in Cade. It’s not easy to get them. This is an opportunity for sure, but we can’t afford to f—k it up. These can be franchise crippling decisions (eg Bulls w Lavine, Wizards w Beal, etc). I’d rather pass than get it wrong.

Ingram at $52M/year feels eerily similar to Lavine and Beal.

There's a reason no team wants to give him that money.

The alternative is just waiting. We don't need to make the play-in this year. 25-30 wins would be a big positive jump and that can be achieved without Ingram.

Players become available as the dynamics of a team change. Dejounte Murray just got moved again. Haliburton and Sabonis got moved. Mikal Bridges got moved. Siakam got moved. Just have to wait and see.

My biggest concern with him is fit. Apparently there were real problems there between him and Zion in terms of meshing? If that's the case then I don't see how he does well next to Cade who is and should be high usage as well.

It's kind of a bummer. If there were no fit concerns then I could see a player of his build and skills being exactly what we'd want. But if Ingram didn't have fit concerns then NOP wouldn't even be letting him go.

Cade and Zion have *very* different games

[A_dub06]

Good points by the “no” crowd. But what’s the alternative? I guess we will have to wait and see.

Elite teams seem to have 2-3 max/near max players. We got one in Cade. It’s not easy to get them. This is an opportunity for sure, but we can’t afford to f—k it up. These can be franchise crippling decisions (eg Bulls w Lavine, Wizards w Beal, etc). I’d rather pass than get it wrong.

Ingram at $52M/year feels eerily similar to Lavine and Beal.

There's a reason no team wants to give him that money.

The alternative is just waiting. We don't need to make the play-in this year. 25-30 wins would be a big positive jump and that can be achieved without Ingram.

Players become available as the dynamics of a team change. Dejounte Murray just got moved again. Haliburton and Sabonis got moved. Mikal Bridges got moved. Siakam got moved. Just have to wait and see.

My biggest concern with him is fit. Apparently there were real problems there between him and Zion in terms of meshing? If that's the case then I don't see how he does well next to Cade who is and should be high usage as well.

It's kind of a bummer. If there were no fit concerns then I could see a player of his build and skills being exactly what we'd want. But if Ingram didn't have fit concerns then NOP wouldn't even be letting him go.

On the podcasts I’ve listened to they mentioned that the Pelicans had instructed Ingram to take more 3’s since he’s been a decent shooter but instead fell in love with the mid-range.

When you look at his stats on paper he looks like someone that would help the pelicans, the fact they are aggressively shopping him should give people concern when he’s demanding that contract even if the cost of acquiring him is only Ivey and Stewart.

[A_dub06]

Before even considering his contract look at those games played. 25% of games missed every season, how anyone can think he is the right piece for us with an declining volume of 3’s, as well as making us better right now where we will drop in the lottery is a massive cause for concern and I wouldn’t want him even if it was for pure cap space.

The assets to dump his contract when he almost certainly proves he can’t stay healthy will be atrocious and put us back even further.

Risk vs Reward comparison stinks, and people are just desperate to stop seeing losses SOR hey are willing to throw the towel in but trading for Ingram would be in contradiction to everything Langdon has said so far so I doubt it happens.

[catari11]

mixed feeling about BI. He's a legit scorer who would take pressure off of Cade. But his insistence on a max contract is a non-starter imo. It strikes me as arrogant, greedy, and a reflection of his own overestimation of his abilities. He's not worth it. Not only b/c he misses too many games, but his defense is suspect. If the Pistons could acquire him for a reasonable price that would be acceptable.

[DetroitSho]

mixed feeling about BI. He's a legit scorer who would take pressure off of Cade. But his insistence on a max contract is a non-starter imo. It strikes me as arrogant, greedy, and a reflection of his own overestimation of his abilities. He's not worth it. Not only b/c he misses too many games, but his defense is suspect. If the Pistons could acquire him for a reasonable price that would be acceptable.

Wanting a max contract is wanting to get paid as much as allowable, it's that simple. The fact that people use the term max contract as some automatic negative connotation is hilarious.

Ingram's max is 4 years and like $200 million. If he took 4 years and $160 million he'd get lauded and praised. But if his max was 4 years/$160 million and he was asking for it, people would say he shouldn't get it because he's not a "max player", even though there's no such thing. It's the most nonsensical commentary ever, to be honest.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[King Bugs]

No, no, no. This roster doesn't need anymore injury prone players. Every offseason this board would be having discussions along the lines of "if such and such stayed healthy we would've won X amount of games or made the play-in".

Also, If we're looking for a second scorer I would rather it be someone that doesn't play so similar to Cade. Having your 2 best scorers firing up contested mid-range jumpers while not getting to the free throw line very much doesn't seem like winning offensive basketball to me.

[NYPiston]

I think some Pistons fans are so desperate to see a legit established talent here that they'll take anything at this point.

The reality is that Ingram is an oft injured, inconsistent shooter who also seems to lack drive and wants a max contract for being a part time player. He does put up good numbers and would without question make this a better team but I just think there's too many red flags with this guy. If the cost is cheap enough I wouldn't hate the addition but I don't know, I'm just not a big Ingram fan.