Grading the Ingram Trade

[arbsn]

I like the player.

I think it's extremely stupid to keep trading picks for win now talent when we are nowhere close to winning now.

We need to be stacking young assets so that we can create or trade for a star. After we have a star we can trade future picks for win now players.

Dont we have like 5 rookies rn?

How many more rookies would you like to add to the team?

A roster of 15 rookies and sophs + scottie barnes?

Lmao it's called strategy. But I know you probably love treadmills and play in games.

[Scase]

C.

I was on board with an Ingram trade. I was not on board with trading a lightly protected 1st and keeping all our salary. Barrett should not be on this roster this morning.

I’ve officially lost my trust in this FO. We have an expensive roster built around the most underwhelming franchise player in our history and coached by a kindergarten teacher. I get that this organization has pride in itself and refuses to act like a small market team, but they’re just coming off as stubborn at this point.

Same vibes here, I gave it an F though due to the far reaching impacts I expect it to have. I think this needs 2 votes, 1 of the trade in a vacuum, and another for the trade with the potential future contextual impact of it.

The team is filled with a bunch of mediocre talent, and it's going to be 160mil price tag for just the starting 5, that is insane Bulls/Hawks/Wizards level roster construction.

I'll happily revisit my rating if the contract is smaller than I expect, and we make a concerted effort to tank hard the rest of the season. Otherwise it's another impatient treadmill move by a FO who refuses to rebuild.

[Dalek]

On principle I gave it a D. Our GM said we are rebuilding and we went and played rookies most of the year and developed a .5 system which looked good. Then he goes out and trades for a ball dominant guy you have to pay $40m a season for.

It is why I have wanted to fire FO for years. They only know shortsighted moves to plug holes. Back in the Siakam/FVV era they needed a C so they burnt picks to get Poeltl. Then in 2024-25 they have a poor scoring team so they trade for in prime Ingram. You don't trade for a guy like this to figure things out. He is more of a missing piece for contention.

Rather than make smart moves on the margins we take big swings with little in the way of plan. To repeat Bill Simmons: "what is Toronto doing? They are not that good and very expensive."

We going to soon run out of small contracts to do deals and become stuck with a oddly fitting and poorly defending core. We better get Cooper Flagg to save us.

You do realize that we still have our MLE, right? Plus Boucher and Mitchell as expirings? Plus all our future firsts and a couple extra 2nds…

We better have all of our picks and MLE and hope we hit on those. We are a 16 win team that is getting close to the tax line.

We went from being unable to flip Bruce Brown because his contract was too much, to flipping him for a guy who will be paid more than double and plays about 60 games a season.

I get the talent level goes up with Ingram, but fit, flexibility all take a hit. Do you guarantee playoffs next season based on this move? NOP sure didn't feel confident in Ingram raising their level but somehow we do. I don't even see this team as in the top 6 given that our defense got worse.

[Merit]

On principle I gave it a D. Our GM said we are rebuilding and we went and played rookies most of the year and developed a .5 system which looked good. Then he goes out and trades for a ball dominant guy you have to pay $40m a season for.

It is why I have wanted to fire FO for years. They only know shortsighted moves to plug holes. Back in the Siakam/FVV era they needed a C so they burnt picks to get Poeltl. Then in 2024-25 they have a poor scoring team so they trade for in prime Ingram. You don't trade for a guy like this to figure things out. He is more of a missing piece for contention.

Rather than make smart moves on the margins we take big swings with little in the way of plan. To repeat Bill Simmons: "what is Toronto doing? They are not that good and very expensive."

We going to soon run out of small contracts to do deals and become stuck with a oddly fitting and poorly defending core. We better get Cooper Flagg to save us.

You do realize that we still have our MLE, right? Plus Boucher and Mitchell as expirings? Plus all our future firsts and a couple extra 2nds…

We better have all of our picks and MLE and hope we hit on those. We are a 16 win team that is getting close to the tax line.

We went from being unable to flip Bruce Brown because his contract was too much, to flipping him for a guy who will be paid more than double and plays about 60 games a season.

I get the talent level goes up with Ingram, but fit, flexibility all take a hit. Do you guarantee playoffs next season based on this move? NOP sure didn't feel confident in Ingram raising their level but somehow we do. I don't even see this team as in the top 6 given that our defense got worse.

I never want to jinx anything but I like the addition. We don’t know enough about fit/flexibility until we see how the team does with Ingram. I’m optimistic that an Ingram/Scottie pairing is better than a Pascal/Scottie pairing and that an IQ/Shead pairing is better than Fred/?. We cannot replace OG defensively, but Ochai is a similar player. Gradey is the bench shooter we wanted in GTJ/Norm. We still have Jak.

NOP didn’t want Ingram because they have Jones and TM3 on amazing contracts.

[Scase]

I don't see why there is any rush for him or the team to have him back. And if they do, massive minutes restriction.

This is exactly what I was thinking. With no backup 5 and playing the kids, 14 minutes of Ingram is probably not going to win us too many games.

Masai will want to see him on the court with the rest of the SL to gauge fit etc, typical Masai evaluation stuff. But in this case it is extremely justified, we're going to be walking into salary negotiations, and not seeing him on the court for any useful amount of time basically removes what little leverage we have in those talks.

this is one of those rock and a hard place situations, you dont want him to play at all so the pick doesn't get impacted, but signing him to a contract without having a single clue how he looks with the team, or how healthy he is, sets us up for a potential real bad contract.

[mihaic]

I voted B but it is a B+ for me. I will give it an A if BI is resigned under 40mil/year.

Same

[Duffman100]

I don't see why there is any rush for him or the team to have him back. And if they do, massive minutes restriction.

This is exactly what I was thinking. With no backup 5 and playing the kids, 14 minutes of Ingram is probably not going to win us too many games.

Masai will want to see him on the court with the rest of the SL to gauge fit etc, typical Masai evaluation stuff. But in this case it is extremely justified, we're going to be walking into salary negotiations, and not seeing him on the court for any useful amount of time basically removes what little leverage we have in those talks.

this is one of those rock and a hard place situations, you dont want him to play at all so the pick doesn't get impacted, but signing him to a contract without having a single clue how he looks with the team, or how healthy he is, sets us up for a potential real bad contract.

We already traded a first for him, the extension is already done.

He may want to see how he fits for a brief period to see if he wants to deal RJ/Quickley etc...but this really isn't going to impact the contract.

[mihaic]

I don't see why there is any rush for him or the team to have him back. And if they do, massive minutes restriction.

This is exactly what I was thinking. With no backup 5 and playing the kids, 14 minutes of Ingram is probably not going to win us too many games.

Masai will want to see him on the court with the rest of the SL to gauge fit etc, typical Masai evaluation stuff. But in this case it is extremely justified, we're going to be walking into salary negotiations, and not seeing him on the court for any useful amount of time basically removes what little leverage we have in those talks.

this is one of those rock and a hard place situations, you dont want him to play at all so the pick doesn't get impacted, but signing him to a contract without having a single clue how he looks with the team, or how healthy he is, sets us up for a potential real bad contract.

I think Ingram is a known quantity no need to evaluate especially if they lined up an extension prior to the actual trade (which they should've). We should extend him before asg imo. Evaluating is not required, perhaps put a clause in the contract for #games played

[MoneyBall]

I gave it a C. In a vacuum, the value is at least a B, maybe even and A. But given our situation, the player himself (not a huge Ingram fan, personally), the fit, the new contract, injury history... I can't give it more than a C for now.

[Dennis 37]

In a non-Free Agent market we only get talent via draft and trade.

Therefore I like getting qyality injured players on the cheap. It is great asset management if the injuries can be managed.

We got OG because of injury. That turned out well.

Even if BI decides not to stay, we have bird rights which means we can send him off in a sign and trade.

[nikster]

The money doesn't matter. MLSE will pay whatever. We're never going to be below the cap.. so why worry about that? Every contract in the NBA, good or bad can be moved.

Roster construction doesn't happen overnight I'm not sure how things are more complicated. It took two no-impact guys and a pick that could amount to nothing, for a guy that is something and will likely be a lot better in Toronto than he was in NO.

Injuries? So be it, sometimes you have a bad run. It's not like Scottie has been bulletproof. Develop depth... RJ will probably be the odd man out and his contract will be easy to move if they so desire.

Ever heard of luxury tax? If you haven't noticed, teams don't touch that **** unless they are contending. Raptors have actively avoided that for a while.

Who cares? MLSE will pay it if the team has a shot. Ya'll worry about the dumbest things as armchair GMs.

This team is still likely below the luxury tax for next year anyway

[Scase]

This is exactly what I was thinking. With no backup 5 and playing the kids, 14 minutes of Ingram is probably not going to win us too many games.

Masai will want to see him on the court with the rest of the SL to gauge fit etc, typical Masai evaluation stuff. But in this case it is extremely justified, we're going to be walking into salary negotiations, and not seeing him on the court for any useful amount of time basically removes what little leverage we have in those talks.

this is one of those rock and a hard place situations, you dont want him to play at all so the pick doesn't get impacted, but signing him to a contract without having a single clue how he looks with the team, or how healthy he is, sets us up for a potential real bad contract.

We already traded a first for him, the extension is already done.

He may want to see how he fits for a brief period to see if he wants to deal RJ/Quickley etc...but this really isn't going to impact the contract.

And if another major injury happens, or any other variable that can change the value of that extension happens? Like if the dude blows out his knee, or tears an ACL, we would be stupid to honour that contract. The extension is a handshake deal, nothing is in stone, it should be adjusted as we see fit.

The extension already being done doesn't change that it could be a horrible fit, and that's what I mean by rock and a hard place. We are offering a contract to a guy who is constantly injured with zero idea what it looks like on the team. If we sit him and he doesn't play, sure it doesn't negatively impact the tank, but it's a mystery box how it looks next season.

It's just a bad position to be in.

This is exactly what I was thinking. With no backup 5 and playing the kids, 14 minutes of Ingram is probably not going to win us too many games.

Masai will want to see him on the court with the rest of the SL to gauge fit etc, typical Masai evaluation stuff. But in this case it is extremely justified, we're going to be walking into salary negotiations, and not seeing him on the court for any useful amount of time basically removes what little leverage we have in those talks.

this is one of those rock and a hard place situations, you dont want him to play at all so the pick doesn't get impacted, but signing him to a contract without having a single clue how he looks with the team, or how healthy he is, sets us up for a potential real bad contract.

I think Ingram is a known quantity no need to evaluate especially if they lined up an extension prior to the actual trade (which they should've). We should extend him before asg imo. Evaluating is not required, perhaps put a clause in the contract for #games played

Known quantity on NOP, not overall. Could be a great fit, could be a horrendous fit, could mean we move RJ, could mean we move IQ, could mean we shouldn't re-sign him in general. My point is, that aside from box scores from a bad team, and a ton of injuries, we're going into this pretty blindly.

I think it's naive for people to expect him to not step foot on the court for the rest of the year, unless he's really injured, which calls into question the trade and extension either way. Everyone has gone on and on how tanking was impossible because Masai would never just sit players for no reason, but we're expecting him to do it with a brand new large acquisition that needs the fit assessed?

[Duffman100]

And if another major injury happens, or any other variable that can change the value of that extension happens? Like if the dude blows out his knee, or tears an ACL, we would be stupid to honour that contract. The extension is a handshake deal, nothing is in stone, it should be adjusted as we see fit.

The extension already being done doesn't change that it could be a horrible fit, and that's what I mean by rock and a hard place. We are offering a contract to a guy who is constantly injured with zero idea what it looks like on the team. If we sit him and he doesn't play, sure it doesn't negatively impact the tank, but it's a mystery box how it looks next season.

It's just a bad position to be in.

Yes but the only that happens right now really is if you play him (unless he gets injured in practice).

Playing him this season to evaluate him makes little sense in terms of a contract extension. The extension (barring injury of him getting off the plane) is done.

[load management]

Good player. Horrible fit with Barret. Need a 3D guard/wing with Ingram



Sent from my 2412DPC0AG using RealGM mobile app

[Scase]

And if another major injury happens, or any other variable that can change the value of that extension happens? Like if the dude blows out his knee, or tears an ACL, we would be stupid to honour that contract. The extension is a handshake deal, nothing is in stone, it should be adjusted as we see fit.

The extension already being done doesn't change that it could be a horrible fit, and that's what I mean by rock and a hard place. We are offering a contract to a guy who is constantly injured with zero idea what it looks like on the team. If we sit him and he doesn't play, sure it doesn't negatively impact the tank, but it's a mystery box how it looks next season.

It's just a bad position to be in.

Yes but the only that happens right now really is if you play him (unless he gets injured in practice).

Playing him this season to evaluate him makes little sense in terms of a contract extension. The extension (barring injury of him getting off the plane) is done.

I agree, I just don't expect him to be sat for the rest of the season, not really Masai's M.O.

Side note, holy hell realgm needs to get better server infrastructure, this is brutal. Getting a proper cloud host to handle the traffic is not that expensive lol

[Duffman100]

And if another major injury happens, or any other variable that can change the value of that extension happens? Like if the dude blows out his knee, or tears an ACL, we would be stupid to honour that contract. The extension is a handshake deal, nothing is in stone, it should be adjusted as we see fit.

The extension already being done doesn't change that it could be a horrible fit, and that's what I mean by rock and a hard place. We are offering a contract to a guy who is constantly injured with zero idea what it looks like on the team. If we sit him and he doesn't play, sure it doesn't negatively impact the tank, but it's a mystery box how it looks next season.

It's just a bad position to be in.

Yes but the only that happens right now really is if you play him (unless he gets injured in practice).

Playing him this season to evaluate him makes little sense in terms of a contract extension. The extension (barring injury of him getting off the plane) is done.

I agree, I just don't expect him to be sat for the rest of the season, not really Masai's M.O.

Side note, holy hell realgm needs to get better server infrastructure, this is brutal. Getting a proper cloud host to handle the traffic is not that expensive lol

It has to be their SQL DBs. My guess is there are on an older version of this forum and the newer has schema changes. But porting over the data is a herculian effort and would involve site downtime.

They're probably hitting limitations of some legacy DB table schema.

[TheMainEvent]

Just on its own, value for value, it's an A

Based on the context of the team overall, maybe a B

[Grew]

Would rather it be boucher over kelly. Would rather it be 2nds over the indy first. Any trade that gets me Ingram and sends out bruce brown without touching our young players or this years pick is an A however.

[Scase]

Yes but the only that happens right now really is if you play him (unless he gets injured in practice).

Playing him this season to evaluate him makes little sense in terms of a contract extension. The extension (barring injury of him getting off the plane) is done.

I agree, I just don't expect him to be sat for the rest of the season, not really Masai's M.O.

Side note, holy hell realgm needs to get better server infrastructure, this is brutal. Getting a proper cloud host to handle the traffic is not that expensive lol

It has to be their SQL DBs. My guess is there are on an older version of this forum and the newer has schema changes. But porting over the data is a herculian effort and would involve site downtime.

They're probably hitting limitations of some legacy DB table schema.

At this rate the downtime would be worth it, the forums have been getting progressively worse, and not just due to the activity around the deadline.

That said, there is nothing to say they can't backup/migrate the current DBs and run them concurrently until they are ready to full switch over. Definitely work involved, but it's like 2 weeks of work now to avoid constant days here and there until the end of time and it not really be an issue for a looooong time.

That said I don't know enough about phpBB and how archaic it is. Either way, tech debt is a bitch lol

[SFour]

pointless to grade the trade until we see the new contract and where the Raptors 2025 FRP ends up falling