Raptors should have resigned Siakam if the end goal was to get Ingram

srhcan · Post #1 » by **srhcan** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:10 pm

I dont get the Ingram trade. If this is the path then why not keep the better player Siakam when he wanted to resign with the team? Siakam would not have cost FRP. Only positive is Ingram is 2 years younger than Siakam. But Ingram has huge injury concerns which Siakam do not have.

DelAbbot · Post #2 » by **DelAbbot** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:11 pm

We are back to 2022/2023.

Less selfish but also less defense.

LarSiN · Post #3 » by **LarSiN** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:13 pm

Disagree

TheDunc · Post #4 » by **TheDunc** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:13 pm

We saw the fit between Barnes and Siakam, not sure it was ever going to work. Ingram is a natural SF and Barnes can play PF. Plus Ingram is a little younger and fits our timeline.

That being said the only thing that worries me is his injury history. Hopefully the thought is the raptors medical staff work their magic with him.

The thing i love is this move should have limiting impact this year so we get a top 10 pick and next year we start trying to make the playoffs for real

Mak · Post #5 » by **Mak** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:13 pm

It's an easy win. Siakam for Ingram, Jakobe and Ochi. Ingram is 3 years younger and we'll pay them next year pretty much the same as Siakam makes by himself. This is not very confusing.

bluerap23 · Post #6 » by **bluerap23** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:14 pm

I disagree. Ingram is younger and a better positional fit - but more importantly - we have young depth now. Ochai, Shead, Jakobe all came from the Pascal trade tree.

Godaddycurse · Post #7 » by **Godaddycurse** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:15 pm

if you re-signed siakam you wont get a high draft pick this year..

bluerap23 · Post #8 » by **bluerap23** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:15 pm

TheDunc wrote:We saw the fit between Barnes and Siakam, not sure it was ever going to work. Ingram is a natural SF and Barnes can play PF. Plus Ingram is a little younger and fits our timeline.

That being said the only thing that worries me is his injury history. Hopefully the thought is the raptors medical staff work their magic with him.

The thing i love is this move should have limiting impact this year so we get a top 10 pick and next year we start trying to make the playoffs for real

If I"m the FO I put BI on load management program. 60 games per year. No back-to-backs. Get him optimized for the playoffs.

Post #9 » by **Duffman100** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:16 pm

DelAbbot wrote:We are back to 2022/2023.

Less selfish but also less defense.

With a ton more youth and depth.

But yeah, it's the same... :roll:

mtcan · Post #10 » by **mtcan** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:18 pm

srhcan wrote:I dont get the Ingram trade. If this is the path then why not keep the better player Siakam when he wanted to resigned with the team? Siakam would not have cost FRP. Only positive is Ingram is 2 years younger than Siakam. But Ingram has huge injury concerns which Siakam do not have.

Siakam is:

a) not as good a shooter as BI and so doesn't fit as well next to Scottie;

b) 3 years older than BI

And besides...In addition to BI...we also got Jakobe and Ochai...so we could have kept Pascal and give him the max...or we can have Ingram, Jakobe and Ochai. IMO...Ingram, Jakobe and Ochai >>>>>>> Pascal

Post #11 » by **tsherkin** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:21 pm

I would 100% prefer Siakam to Ingram.

DelAbbot · Post #12 » by **DelAbbot** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:24 pm

One is multiple time all NBA, and the other is a one time all star

iBall101 · Post #13 » by **iBall101** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:24 pm

Why keep Siakam? He goes defrozen in the playoffs. We all know this. I don't miss watching him brick crucial free throws in the playoffs neither. Scottie & Ingram > Pascal & Ingram.

ATLTimekeeper · Post #14 » by **ATLTimekeeper** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:26 pm

I think the original sin is Scottie as a cornerstone. All the decisions are flowing from that, and most of them are questionable at best.

We can't go back in time, though. Should have re-upped Playoff Powell, too. Masai's rebuild makes no sense because he doesn't build teams like this, and never has.

TheDunc · Post #15 » by **TheDunc** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:26 pm

tsherkin wrote:I would 100% prefer Siakam to Ingram.

I prefer BI if he actually stays healthy which is a big IF. Not sure how many games you can win with Siakam playing the type of defense he was playing with us at the 4

YogurtProducer · Post #16 » by **YogurtProducer** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:28 pm

Duffman100 wrote:
DelAbbot wrote:We are back to 2022/2023.

Less selfish but also less defense.

With a ton more youth and depth.

But yeah, it's the same...

And more shooting.

Younger, deeper, better fit, better future assets (2025 pick especially).

Mak · Post #17 » by **Mak** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:28 pm

tsherkin wrote:I would 100% prefer Siakam to Ingram.

Why are you making it this simple? It does not make sense, its not what the deal is.

we got Ingram, Jakobe and Ochi + top 6 pick this year

Post #18 » by **Duffman100** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:28 pm

Y'all realize we also got Ochai, Walter and used the TPE for Shead and Mogbo right?

So at minimum you're looking at Siakam vs Ingram (3 years younger), Ochai and Walter with an argument to Shead/Mogbo

S ID · Post #19 » by **S ID** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:28 pm

older, worse fit, while making 47m avv, no thank you (with no walter/ochai to boot)

youngRAPZ · Post #20 » by **youngRAPZ** » Thu Feb 6, 2025 2:29 pm

srhcan wrote:I dont get the Ingram trade. If this is the path then why not keep the better player Siakam when he wanted to resign with the team? Siakam would not have cost FRP. Only positive is Ingram is 2 years younger than Siakam. But Ingram has huge injury concerns which Siakam do not have.

You pick lovers don’t even make sense anymore. We would not have the Indy pick if we didn’t trade siakam, so how can you say signing him would not cost a pick. Not to mention I guarantee Ingram signs for less and we also picked up Agbagi and Walter. You guys are totally out to lunch here!