Poll: Zion or Ingram?

[Jcity08]

I had time to think about it and yeah, no question on Zion, even with his food addiction and his personal issues.

[Merit]

I think if we have a chance to get a borderline all star or even Zion who is motivated and hopefully healthier I don't think people realize how good we can be. This is all talk though but I like what FO is thinking.

It's not just you...I'm not putting this on you.
But this is the hopium that eminates from the eternal tank crew.
It's the hopium of the mystery box, like Zion, or lotteries.

Even if you grant a 50/50 chance on all of "your" hopes....
"borderline", "motivated", "hopefully healthier".....the odds of all 3 clicking a the same time are 12.5% (1/8 chances, and at this point it's likely less). And that's still not considering team fit or the fact that we've already run the Charles Barkley experiment, and he didn't win a chip.

Neither of these guys are winners. Zion is closer to Simmons than he is to Barkley. He doesn't love the game. I'm a big proponent of "trading up" for borderline star type players, but the caveat would be...I want a borderline guy who's pissed about being borderline and wants to be more than that. You can't get that out of a #1 pick.

I think the perception of Zion is why you get him cheaply. It’s tough to love the game when your situation has also sucked pretty consistently. We can forget that athletes are also human.

I could argue that Zion is pissed he’s not the face of the league the way he was in high school and in college. Now who knows how much of that is my own “hopium”, but it’s hard to argue against his talent and to a lesser extent Ingram’s.

Could he be a problem? Sure. But it’s worth the risk for what we are projected to be trading for him. Could he turn into our next Kyle Lowry? Absolutely. Is he more likely to be the next RJ in terms of year to year improvement? Yup. I’d take that though. Darko is precisely the kind of coach to bring the most out of Zion IMO.

Exit: one thing about Zion is he isn’t a mystery box. You know precisely what you’re getting when he’s on the floor. The issue is his never being on the floor.

[Scase]

Not quite sure how you jumped to that conclusion…

Well then give me some more to work with here. What is the result of us acquiring BI? What are we giving up to get him?

All I'm saying is that you can argue that adding any desirable player at no cost will improve the team, that's kind of a give in. What you are suggesting sounds like we get BI, we give up no core players, or picks. I'm asking you for clarification on what the structure of this suggested deal is.

Hey brother, check above. Posted mid-thought by accident.

No worries, I get what you are saying now.

Cost wise if all it was, were some expirings makes sense for us. I'm still not keen on BI and what he will cost moving forward though, but I get it.

Thing is, NOP would expect picks coming back from us, otherwise they could just let him expire/walk. BI is absolutely more valuable than the expirings we'd be sending back, but there is no reason for NOP to do the trade unless we are sending back something of value. Be it RJ, IQ, picks etc. It makes no sense for them to trade expirings for expirings.

Now as for us, we cant afford to field a SL of IQ/RJ/SB/BI/JP, we'd be going into the tax. If we move/let walk BB/CB/KO we'd have about 160mil tied up in the starting 5, leaving us about 27mil below the tax line, and we'd only have a roster of 9 players. Add in the lotto pick with #1 OA being 11.5mil and #10 OA being 5mil, that means we'd need another 5 players making roughly 20mil total.

We wouldn't be particularly deep, so while I think the team would be better for sure, it's by no means a guarantee we'd be making the playoffs. That's a very expensive team for the play in, MLSE doesn't go into the tax unless there is a chip on the line.

[ontnut]

I think if we have a chance to get a borderline all star or even Zion who is motivated and hopefully healthier I don't think people realize how good we can be. This is all talk though but I like what FO is thinking.

It's not just you...I'm not putting this on you.
But this is the hopium that eminates from the eternal tank crew.
It's the hopium of the mystery box, like Zion, or lotteries.

Even if you grant a 50/50 chance on all of "your" hopes....
"borderline", "motivated", "hopefully healthier".....the odds of all 3 clicking a the same time are 12.5% (1/8 chances, and at this point it's likely less). And that's still not considering team fit or the fact that we've already run the Charles Barkley experiment, and he didn't win a chip.

Neither of these guys are winners. Zion is closer to Simmons than he is to Barkley. He doesn't love the game. I'm a big proponent of "trading up" for borderline star type players, but the caveat would be...I want a borderline guy who's pissed about being borderline and wants to be more than that. You can't get that out of a #1 pick.

I think the perception of Zion is why you get him cheaply. It’s tough to love the game when your situation has also sucked pretty consistently. We can forget that athletes are also human.

I could argue that Zion is pissed he’s not the face of the league the way he was in high school and in college. Now who knows how much of that is my own “hopium”, but it’s hard to argue against his talent and to a lesser extent Ingram’s.

Could he be a problem? Sure. But it’s worth the risk for what we are projected to be trading for him. Could he turn into our next Kyle Lowry? Absolutely. Is he more likely to be the next RJ in terms of year to year improvement? Yup. I’d take that though. Darko is precisely the kind of coach to bring the most out of Zion IMO.

Exit: one thing about Zion is he isn’t a mystery box. You know precisely what you’re getting when he’s on the floor. The issue is his never being on the floor.

I just don't want him, unless he's going for Boucher, Brown and Olynyk. I'll throw in one future pick. That's about it.

[refshateRaps]

Zion. If there is value in the asking price. We really have nothing to lose.

Nothing

[Parataxis]

I think if we have a chance to get a borderline all star or even Zion who is motivated and hopefully healthier I don't think people realize how good we can be. This is all talk though but I like what FO is thinking.

It's not just you...I'm not putting this on you.
But this is the hopium that eminates from the eternal tank crew.
It's the hopium of the mystery box, like Zion, or lotteries.

Even if you grant a 50/50 chance on all of "your" hopes....
"borderline", "motivated", "hopefully healthier".....the odds of all 3 clicking a the same time are 12.5% (1/8 chances, and at this point it's likely less). And that's still not considering team fit or the fact that we've already run the Charles Barkley experiment, and he didn't win a chip.

Neither of these guys are winners. Zion is closer to Simmons than he is to Barkley. He doesn't love the game. I'm a big proponent of "trading up" for borderline star type players, but the caveat would be...I want a borderline guy who's pissed about being borderline and wants to be more than that. You can't get that out of a #1 pick.

I know what you mean. I think the idea is to get a high risk high reward player right now for cheap instead of giving away some first rounders and players part of our core. This is a risk I wouldn't mind the front office taking because it will put them ahead in the rebuilding process instead of just tanking the next two seasons.

The thing about picking up Zion cheaply is that it isn't even high risk/high reward.

It's low-risk/high-reward.

The reward is obvious (the change of scenery helps, and he becomes a star). The risk though? It's cap space. Nobody is talking about trading away multiple unprotected firsts for him.

[ontnut]

It's not just you...I'm not putting this on you.
But this is the hopium that eminates from the eternal tank crew.
It's the hopium of the mystery box, like Zion, or lotteries.

Even if you grant a 50/50 chance on all of "your" hopes....
"borderline", "motivated", "hopefully healthier".....the odds of all 3 clicking a the same time are 12.5% (1/8 chances, and at this point it's likely less). And that's still not considering team fit or the fact that we've already run the Charles Barkley experiment, and he didn't win a chip.

Neither of these guys are winners. Zion is closer to Simmons than he is to Barkley. He doesn't love the game. I'm a big proponent of "trading up" for borderline star type players, but the caveat would be...I want a borderline guy who's pissed about being borderline and wants to be more than that. You can't get that out of a #1 pick.

I know what you mean. I think the idea is to get a high risk high reward player right now for cheap instead of giving away some first rounders and players part of our core. This is a risk I wouldn't mind the front office taking because it will put them ahead in the rebuilding process instead of just tanking the next two seasons.

The thing about picking up Zion cheaply is that it isn't even high risk/high reward.

It's low-risk/high-reward.

The reward is obvious (the change of scenery helps, and he becomes a star). The risk though? It's cap space. Nobody is talking about trading away multiple unprotected firsts for him.

He has 3 years remaning at $42m. We see how difficult it is to move borderline all-star guys making that kinda money, who also don't play games (or play subpar ball). Jimmy, Beal, Lavine, soon to be PG13...
The risk isn't "just cap space" as if the acquisition cost is the only thing that matters. It's tanking your team for 3 years BECAUSE you lack cap space or flexibility to do anything with the rest of your roster.

For the sake of discussion, say Zion plays 35 games a season the next 3 years (that's his avg games played over his career). Well, we're now entering Scottie's next free agency with a team that has done diddly squat, and he's frustrated after 3 years of "unintentional tanking". Scottie's trade value also gets tanked because we have $42m fewer dollars to put guys around him who can actually score. See what the Pelicans are going to get for Ingram - that's what we'd be lining ourselves up to get for Scottie in 3 years. Not to mention we treadmill even worse because the games Zion DOES play, we end up winning a decent percentage.

Zion is the ultimate "what if" mystery box in the league right now. The problem is, there's no proof that even when he's healthy, that the team he's on can actually contend. We're not that desperate to be mediocre. Maybe the Wizards are.

[Merit]

It's not just you...I'm not putting this on you.
But this is the hopium that eminates from the eternal tank crew.
It's the hopium of the mystery box, like Zion, or lotteries.

Even if you grant a 50/50 chance on all of "your" hopes....
"borderline", "motivated", "hopefully healthier".....the odds of all 3 clicking a the same time are 12.5% (1/8 chances, and at this point it's likely less). And that's still not considering team fit or the fact that we've already run the Charles Barkley experiment, and he didn't win a chip.

Neither of these guys are winners. Zion is closer to Simmons than he is to Barkley. He doesn't love the game. I'm a big proponent of "trading up" for borderline star type players, but the caveat would be...I want a borderline guy who's pissed about being borderline and wants to be more than that. You can't get that out of a #1 pick.

I think the perception of Zion is why you get him cheaply. It’s tough to love the game when your situation has also sucked pretty consistently. We can forget that athletes are also human.

I could argue that Zion is pissed he’s not the face of the league the way he was in high school and in college. Now who knows how much of that is my own “hopium”, but it’s hard to argue against his talent and to a lesser extent Ingram’s.

Could he be a problem? Sure. But it’s worth the risk for what we are projected to be trading for him. Could he turn into our next Kyle Lowry? Absolutely. Is he more likely to be the next RJ in terms of year to year improvement? Yup. I’d take that though. Darko is precisely the kind of coach to bring the most out of Zion IMO.

Exit: one thing about Zion is he isn’t a mystery box. You know precisely what you’re getting when he’s on the floor. The issue is his never being on the floor.

I just don't want him, unless he's going for Boucher, Brown and Olynyk. I'll throw in one future pick. That's about it.

No idea if he goes for that, but yeah - a buy low offer for sure.

[Merit]

I know what you mean. I think the idea is to get a high risk high reward player right now for cheap instead of giving away some first rounders and players part of our core. This is a risk I wouldn't mind the front office taking because it will put them ahead in the rebuilding process instead of just tanking the next two seasons.

The thing about picking up Zion cheaply is that it isn't even high risk/high reward.

It's low-risk/high-reward.

The reward is obvious (the change of scenery helps, and he becomes a star). The risk though? It's cap space. Nobody is talking about trading away multiple unprotected firsts for him.

He has 3 years remaning at $42m. We see how difficult it is to move borderline all-star guys making that kinda money, who also don't play games (or play subpar ball). Jimmy, Beal, Lavine, soon to be PG13...
The risk isn't "just cap space" as if the acquisition cost is the only thing that matters. It's tanking your team for 3 years BECAUSE you lack cap space or flexibility to do anything with the rest of your roster.

For the sake of discussion, say Zion plays 35 games a season the next 3 years (that's his avg games played over his career). Well, we're now entering Scottie's next free agency with a team that has done diddly squat, and he's frustrated after 3 years of "unintentional tanking". Scottie's trade value also gets tanked because we have $42m fewer dollars to put guys around him who can actually score. See what the Pelicans are going to get for Ingram - that's what we'd be lining ourselves up to get for Scottie in 3 years. Not to mention we treadmill even worse because the games Zion DOES play, we end up winning a decent percentage.

Zion is the ultimate "what if" mystery box in the league right now. The problem is, there's no proof that even when he's healthy, that the team he's on can actually contend. We're not that desperate to be mediocre. Maybe the Wizards are.

What you’ve outlined is the worst case scenario. Let’s say we get him for what you offered. It’s still a win. Someone else - like you suggest the wizards - would still bite.

Consider the optimistic scenario. How does that hit?

[ontnut]

The thing about picking up Zion cheaply is that it isn't even high risk/high reward.

It's low-risk/high-reward.

The reward is obvious (the change of scenery helps, and he becomes a star). The risk though? It's cap space. Nobody is talking about trading away multiple unprotected firsts for him.

He has 3 years remaning at $42m. We see how difficult it is to move borderline all-star guys making that kinda money, who also don't play games (or play subpar ball). Jimmy, Beal, Lavine, soon to be PG13...
The risk isn't "just cap space" as if the acquisition cost is the only thing that matters. It's tanking your team for 3 years BECAUSE you lack cap space or flexibility to do anything with the rest of your roster.

For the sake of discussion, say Zion plays 35 games a season the next 3 years (that's his avg games played over his career). Well, we're now entering Scottie's next free agency with a team that has done diddly squat, and he's frustrated after 3 years of "unintentional tanking". Scottie's trade value also gets tanked because we have $42m fewer dollars to put guys around him who can actually score. See what the Pelicans are going to get for Ingram - that's what we'd be lining ourselves up to get for Scottie in 3 years. Not to mention we treadmill even worse because the games Zion DOES play, we end up winning a decent percentage.

Zion is the ultimate "what if" mystery box in the league right now. The problem is, there's no proof that even when he's healthy, that the team he's on can actually contend. We're not that desperate to be mediocre. Maybe the Wizards are.

What you’ve outlined is the worst case scenario. Let’s say we get him for what you offered. It’s still a win. Someone else - like you suggest the wizards - would still bite.

Consider the optimistic scenario. How does that hit?

Optimistically even with Zion, I don't have us as a HCA team. He's got his own set of defensive problems even when healthy. He's not a great on-ball creator or 3pt shooter and thus he shares too much of the operating space with RJ, Barnes and Poeltl.

If we are optimistic and say he plays 65 games a year, we probably win a bit more than half - around 35 of those games. If we won similar to the Pels 42-28 record with Zion healthy last year, that would be an optimistic 39 wins out of 65 games that Zion plays. And then we probably lose like 2/3rds of the rest (our current season win%), so 5 wins out of 17 games. That gets us to 44 wins. That would put us around 5th with the Bucks with a 53.5% win rate.

If we go SUPER optimistic and say we internally improve our win rate through development of our youth by about 20%, which is a realistic to high end target year over year, that's an estimated extra 5 wins. So going SUPER optimistic, we win about 44+5 = 49 games. Same as the Pels last year. Good for 4th in the East this year.

[Raptorfan2012]

Ingram fits better than Zion if we are trying to build around Scottie. Both Scottie and Zion love to play the power game, whereas Ingram is an actual 3-way scorer.

[Jcity08]

At the very least Zions future trade value is probably worth it even if you don't like the fit. I'd take that risk that a 24yo athletic phenome not even in his prime yet former #1 pick signed through the next 3 years can be moved for a lot of value in the future.

[Psubs]

Isn't Bruce Brown at $20 million better than Ingram at $40 million?

[everdiso]

Zion is far better than BI. not really a close comp.

[arbsn]

We are not a Brandon Ingram away from being a contender.

Of course you go with Zion who still has superstar upside.

[hype_2004]

Masai gunning for that home run ala Kawhi, no way he going after Ingram with his track record alone it has to be Zion or bust.

[hype_2004]

I had time to think about it and yeah, no question on Zion, even with his food addiction and his personal issues.

Obese or not Zion is an absolute superstar, MLSE and their shareholders creaming their pants in their Momma's basement dreaming of a Zion to Toronto scenario.