Official Brandon Ingram Thread

[Scase]

Well the whole point of buying low on him was to "rehabilitate" his value, if all we are expecting is the bare minimum of games played, then why did we bother making such a short sighted move? What's to rehabilitate if he plays the exact same way he did prior to the trade?

I think the expectation is that he'll play more than the 45-55 he's been playing of late, and be more like 60-65.

I don't buy all the people who call our medical staff exceptional, so if he plays 60 or less games I won't be bothered by them, but rather again with the pointlessness of the trade.

I think it was a value trade. We gave up very little for him, all told, so the weight of it isn't a big deal.

But if a guy can be off for almost an entire year, and still cant manage to play at LEAST 65 games, I don't see how that isn't a complete and utter failure. Like he doesn't have any chronic issues like Kawhi did with his knees, there's no logical reason he can't play a reasonable amount of games.

That's one perspective. Given the nature of many of his injuries, however, there is a luck component to consider as well. And the time frame matters only so much in this context, especially since he isn't perpetually injuring the same part endlessly.

He's injured that ankle more than a couple times, so that is a genuine cause for concern. As for the outgoing assets being low, I agree with that, but what benefit does a team get if the guy that helped the team take a leap is always injured when it matters?

Like cool if we make it to the playoffs, but then he's injured and we lose endlessly in the playoffs. Who does that benefit? Doesn't help the team, or the fans. We'd be better off getting better draft picks and rookies, I just don't have any respect or patience with short term moves like this, so if I'm going to be won over by them, they need to blow me away.

Those "45-55" game seasons account for 2-3 of 9, that is not what I would gauge as the baseline. 60 is the baseline to me, otherwise it's a trade for the sake of making a trade.

[tsherkin]

He's injured that ankle more than a couple times, so that is a genuine cause for concern.

Given the mechanism, less so.

As for the outgoing assets being low, I agree with that, but what benefit does a team get if the guy that helped the team take a leap is always injured when it matters?

Then he's still potentially around when it matters, and is still better than what was sent out to acquire him, when he's here. Or did you think those guys would feature prominently in our play for relevance instead of BI?

Those "45-55" game seasons account for 2-3 of 9, that is not what I would gauge as the baseline. 60 is the baseline to me, otherwise it's a trade for the sake of making a trade.

Well, no. He's played 55 or fewer games in 4 of his 9 seasons, not 2 or 3. And indeed, in 3 of the last 4.

But as I was saying, I think the expectation is 60-65 if it goes well. If he plays less, that's unfortunate, but it's still better than what we gave up for him based on the way a player of his caliber will impact the team around him.

[anotherhomer]

the julius randle contract shows how overpaid IQ and BI is

[Scase]

He's injured that ankle more than a couple times, so that is a genuine cause for concern.

Given the mechanism, less so.

As for the outgoing assets being low, I agree with that, but what benefit does a team get if the guy that helped the team take a leap is always injured when it matters?

Then he's still potentially around when it matters, and is still better than what was sent out to acquire him, when he's here. Or did you think those guys would feature prominently in our play for relevance instead of BI?

Those "45-55" game seasons account for 2-3 of 9, that is not what I would gauge as the baseline. 60 is the baseline to me, otherwise it's a trade for the sake of making a trade.

Well, no. He's played 55 or fewer games in 4 of his 9 seasons, not 2 or 3. And indeed, in 3 of the last 4.

But as I was saying, I think the expectation is 60-65 if it goes well. If he plays less, that's unfortunate, but it's still better than what we gave up for him based on the way a player of his caliber will impact the team around him.

The assets used to acquire him could have been used for other trades, not that they would be useful as roster pieces, we traded for BI, no reason to think those pieces couldn't be used in another trade. Say the rumoured Derrick White trade that was refused earlier for just the 9th.

And him "being around" was meant as in during the playoffs. Who cares if we make the playoffs, if the major reason we made it, is on the bench injured during said playoffs.

As for the 55 or less, I didn't count last year since I assumed they were just sitting him, but it would seem as though that was not the case. Regardless, I have higher standards, a trade is a loss if you get a guy that can't even play 60 games. Cause as I already mentioned that means the odds are, they will not be available for the playoffs, and that makes for a waste of a season. Unless you're a big fan of another stretch of years with great season records and getting stomped in the 1st round. Not what I call success.

Honestly, how low have our standards become, where seeing a guy hit 60 games is cause for celebration, my lord.

[tsherkin]

The assets used to acquire him could have been used for other trades, not that they would be useful as roster pieces, we traded for BI, no reason to think those pieces couldn't be used in another trade. Say the rumoured Derrick White trade that was refused earlier for just the 9th.

I doubt what we included for BI would have swung the White trade.

And him "being around" was meant as in during the playoffs. Who cares if we make the playoffs, if the major reason we made it, is on the bench injured during said playoffs.

He's played in both postseasons the Pelicans have made in the past 6 seasons, so I don't know if that's really the concern to emphasize.

As for the 55 or less, I didn't count last year since I assumed they were just sitting him, but it would seem as though that was not the case. Regardless, I have higher standards, a trade is a loss if you get a guy that can't even play 60 games.

I mean, that's certainly one way to look at it, but as far as the low opportunity cost goes, it really doesn't seem that way. It's a calculated gamble, and if it works out for half seasons as opposed to 2/3s of seasons, it's still producing more value than what we sent out.

Honestly, how low have our standards become, where seeing a guy hit 60 games is cause for celebration, my lord.

That is certainly one perspective, but it does seem to escape the point.

[YogurtProducer]

the julius randle contract shows how overpaid IQ and BI is

Randle isn’t very good, so it’s not really indicative of anything lol

I’d personally take BI and IQ over him and not think twice about it

[YogurtProducer]

Honestly, how low have our standards become, where seeing a guy hit 60 games is cause for celebration, my lord.

82 players in the entire NBA started 60 games last year.

You seem to be slightly out of touch with how often guys play. Missing 22 games nowadays isn’t a lot.

[Scase]

The assets used to acquire him could have been used for other trades, not that they would be useful as roster pieces, we traded for BI, no reason to think those pieces couldn't be used in another trade. Say the rumoured Derrick White trade that was refused earlier for just the 9th.

I doubt what we included for BI would have swung the White trade.

And him "being around" was meant as in during the playoffs. Who cares if we make the playoffs, if the major reason we made it, is on the bench injured during said playoffs.

He's played in both postseasons the Pelicans have made in the past 6 seasons, so I don't know if that's really the concern to emphasize.

As for the 55 or less, I didn't count last year since I assumed they were just sitting him, but it would seem as though that was not the case. Regardless, I have higher standards, a trade is a loss if you get a guy that can't even play 60 games.

I mean, that's certainly one way to look at it, but as far as the low opportunity cost goes, it really doesn't seem that way. It's a calculated gamble, and if it works out for half seasons as opposed to 2/3s of seasons, it's still producing more value than what we sent out.

Honestly, how low have our standards become, where seeing a guy hit 60 games is cause for celebration, my lord.

That is certainly one perspective, but it does seem to escape the point.

Again, this ignores opportunity cost. If we make the POs just to get smoked due to injuries, we get no lotto pick. That's a lost season IMO, unless the goal is to be the Bulls of the latter half of the 2020's.

As for him making the playoffs, despite injuries. In 23-24 he played 64 games, missed 11 of the final 12 of the season, then went on to put up 14/4.5/3 on 34/25/89 splits, not exactly filling me with confidence.

17-18 he missed 18 of the last 20 games.
18-19 he missed 19 of the last 20 games.
19-20 he missed 2 of the last 20 games.
20-21 he missed 6 of the last 20 games.
21-22 he missed 13 of the last 20 games.
22-23 he missed 2 of the last 20 games.
23-24 he missed 11 of the last 20 games.

There's a pattern there, and while I'm sure some of that can be excused for "tanking reasons", he sure misses a lot of time at the end of the year, whether or not the team is in the playoffs/hunt. Based off history, there is a much higher chance he's out at the end of the year than not, and I'm not sure why it's seen as so crazy to expect a guy to play more than 60 games, especially when he doesn't seem to have anything chronic.

And having a set of standards doesn't escape the point, it is exactly why I have qualifiers to what I think is successful or not. I see no value trading for a guy if you expect to miss him for 20+ games, unless you are taking a gamble on players worth taking that gamble, Kawhi for instance.

Lastly, you don't think the 9th pick, a 2026 FRP, a 2031 SRP, and an expiring contract would have been enticing to a team that just traded away their C to shed salary. A trade that would give future assets, and cap relief? Maybe it doesn't get it done as that's obviously a hypothetical, but that's pretty much exactly what the C's have been doing. I just think it's a little silly to assume that the BI trade was the best, or only possible use of those assets.

[Kingsway_fan]

I don't understand why people are complaining about IQ or Ingrams pay...

First, Raptors, as a Canadian team, must overpay for free agent signings...and retention of talent. think of it as another Canadian TAX.

Second, all things being equal, top talent will prefer to sign with sunny warm locations in the USA. NOT COLD TORONTO.

Why are we a capped out team? WHY?

see point 1 and 2.

[tsherkin]

Again, this ignores opportunity cost. If we make the POs just to get smoked due to injuries, we get no lotto pick. That's a lost season IMO, unless the goal is to be the Bulls of the latter half of the 2020's.

What postseason has he missed due to injury so far, though? You're projecting an event which hasn't really come up. He's played on two postseason teams since leaving the Lakers and he was there for both.

As for him making the playoffs, despite injuries. In 23-24 he played 64 games, missed 11 of the final 12 of the season, then went on to put up 14/4.5/3 on 34/25/89 splits, not exactly filling me with confidence.

You mean when they faced the Thunder, who were the 4th-best defense in the league? And he was rolling with Jonas and CJ McCollum and nothing else?

And having a set of standards doesn't escape the point, it is exactly why I have qualifiers to what I think is successful or not. I see no value trading for a guy if you expect to miss him for 20+ games, unless you are taking a gamble on players worth taking that gamble, Kawhi for instance.

That's your prerogative, of course, but if it changes our play for the 60ish games he's on the court, it could make a massive difference in the quality of our season.

Lastly, you don't think the 9th pick, a 2026 FRP, a 2031 SRP, and an expiring contract would have been enticing to a team that just traded away their C to shed salary. A trade that would give future assets, and cap relief? Maybe it doesn't get it done as that's obviously a hypothetical, but that's pretty much exactly what the C's have been doing. I just think it's a little silly to assume that the BI trade was the best, or only possible use of those assets.

No, not really. I don't think those extra assets were going to turn into anything a lot better, nor anything close to what BI could be if he's even moderately healthy. I think you're just looking for a reason to be irritable, to be honest.

[Scase]

Again, this ignores opportunity cost. If we make the POs just to get smoked due to injuries, we get no lotto pick. That's a lost season IMO, unless the goal is to be the Bulls of the latter half of the 2020's.

What postseason has he missed due to injury so far, though? You're projecting an event which hasn't really come up. He's played on two postseason teams since leaving the Lakers and he was there for both.

As for him making the playoffs, despite injuries. In 23-24 he played 64 games, missed 11 of the final 12 of the season, then went on to put up 14/4.5/3 on 34/25/89 splits, not exactly filling me with confidence.

You mean when they faced the Thunder, who were the 4th-best defense in the league? And he was rolling with Jonas and CJ McCollum and nothing else?

And having a set of standards doesn't escape the point, it is exactly why I have qualifiers to what I think is successful or not. I see no value trading for a guy if you expect to miss him for 20+ games, unless you are taking a gamble on players worth taking that gamble, Kawhi for instance.

That's your prerogative, of course, but if it changes our play for the 60ish games he's on the court, it could make a massive difference in the quality of our season.

Lastly, you don't think the 9th pick, a 2026 FRP, a 2031 SRP, and an expiring contract would have been enticing to a team that just traded away their C to shed salary. A trade that would give future assets, and cap relief? Maybe it doesn't get it done as that's obviously a hypothetical, but that's pretty much exactly what the C's have been doing. I just think it's a little silly to assume that the BI trade was the best, or only possible use of those assets.

No, not really. I don't think those extra assets were going to turn into anything a lot better, nor anything close to what BI could be if he's even moderately healthy. I think you're just looking for a reason to be irritable, to be honest.

Or, crazy idea, I just think the trade was a bad move. Any time you rely entirely on one guy to carry a season, and that guy is chronically injured despite not having any chronic injuries, it's not a great scenario. You've said it yourself multiple times, none of the mainstays on this roster have any real likelihood of taking large steps, so the forward momentum of the entire team is hinging on one guy being able to play 60ish games and be healthy for the playoffs.

If reality is being iritable, a lot of people must be pretty annoyed daily. Nothing I have suggested is particularly out of left field, if your bar of success is topping out at 55 games played for 40mil a year be my guest, but expecting better doesn't make me irritable. The team is just reaching for treadmill wins, if you are happy with that, so be it, but not everyone else is.

Oh and for his performance against the 4th rated Thunder? Yeah the other series, was against the 3rd ranked defence in the Suns, who also happened to have the best NETRTG in the league. DRTG being 106.8 for the suns and 111 for the thunder. And if memory serves correctly he was rolling with.... checks notes, ah yes, Jonas and CJ, with 2 rookies in Herb and Trey eating up a ton of minutes. So yeah, just maybe it was injury related.

[tsherkin]

Or, crazy idea, I just think the trade was a bad move. Any time you rely entirely on one guy to carry a season, and that guy is chronically injured despite not having any chronic injuries, it's not a great scenario. You've said it yourself multiple times, none of the mainstays on this roster have any real likelihood of taking large steps, so the forward momentum of the entire team is hinging on one guy being able to play 60ish games and be healthy for the playoffs.

It is a starting point, yes. There is an inherent assumption in your remarks that this is it, that we're done and nothing else will happen between now and forever... which I find odd. You are harping on this team as if it will never change beyond its present state, which makes no sense.

Oh and for his performance against the 4th rated Thunder? Yeah the other series, was against the 3rd ranked defence in the Suns, who also happened to have the best NETRTG in the league. And if memory serves correctly he was rolling with.... checks notes, ah yes, Jonas and CJ, with 2 rookies in Herb and Trey eating up a ton of minutes. So yeah, just maybe it was injury related.

Mmm hmm. And missing Booker for half of the series, so he was chewing up Mikal Bridges and Cam Johnson instead of dealing with Williams. The difference in what he was facing individually on defense was considerable. He was moving just fine in the Thunder series, it wasn't injury-related.

Attention to those sorts of details does matter.

[ItsDanger]

We essentially traded a 1st for rights to negotiate exclusively with Ingram. A 2+1 deal. 1st year of deal will be an adjustment period, still figuring out roster. 2nd year will be expiring and talks of potentially leaving.

This deal was 1 year too early. But falls into their maxing out contracts for trading instead of being more flexible. Everyone always forgets when these contracts amount to little to nothing though.

[Scase]

Or, crazy idea, I just think the trade was a bad move. Any time you rely entirely on one guy to carry a season, and that guy is chronically injured despite not having any chronic injuries, it's not a great scenario. You've said it yourself multiple times, none of the mainstays on this roster have any real likelihood of taking large steps, so the forward momentum of the entire team is hinging on one guy being able to play 60ish games and be healthy for the playoffs.

It is a starting point, yes. There is an inherent assumption in your remarks that this is it, that we're done and nothing else will happen between now and forever... which I find odd. You are harping on this team as if it will never change beyond its present state, which makes no sense.

Oh and for his performance against the 4th rated Thunder? Yeah the other series, was against the 3rd ranked defence in the Suns, who also happened to have the best NETRTG in the league. And if memory serves correctly he was rolling with.... checks notes, ah yes, Jonas and CJ, with 2 rookies in Herb and Trey eating up a ton of minutes. So yeah, just maybe it was injury related.

Mmm hmm. And missing Booker for half of the series, so he was chewing up Mikal Bridges and Cam Johnson instead of dealing with Williams. The difference in what he was facing individually on defense was considerable. He was moving just fine in the Thunder series, it wasn't injury-related.

Attention to those sorts of details does matter.

So where does the growth come from exactly? Scottie isn't turning into some offensive savant, RJ and IQ are likely what they are, also not particularly attractive assets, BI is only going to eventually have value as a 40mil expiring...oh wait he's got a **** PO on his last year lol. So the only real hope for this team is to completely swindle another team, which doesn't seem to be in the cards, or guys like GD/JKW/CMB taking us to the promised land. Cause we certainly aint adding any other young blue chip prospects.

You think being capped out completely for a ~40win team is a good road to be going down just because "this isn't even the raptors final form"? Hard pass.

And yeah, known defensive stalwart Devin Booker being out was the only reason Ingram popped off. Again, you are welcome to have optimism for the team, but that doesn't make it real, I don't rely on blind faith, and based on our previous discussions I didn't think you did either. And now with the Turner trade, this acquisition is looking even worse.

[earthtone]

Or, crazy idea, I just think the trade was a bad move. Any time you rely entirely on one guy to carry a season, and that guy is chronically injured despite not having any chronic injuries, it's not a great scenario. You've said it yourself multiple times, none of the mainstays on this roster have any real likelihood of taking large steps, so the forward momentum of the entire team is hinging on one guy being able to play 60ish games and be healthy for the playoffs.

It is a starting point, yes. There is an inherent assumption in your remarks that this is it, that we're done and nothing else will happen between now and forever... which I find odd. You are harping on this team as if it will never change beyond its present state, which makes no sense.

Oh and for his performance against the 4th rated Thunder? Yeah the other series, was against the 3rd ranked defence in the Suns, who also happened to have the best NETRTG in the league. And if memory serves correctly he was rolling with.... checks notes, ah yes, Jonas and CJ, with 2 rookies in Herb and Trey eating up a ton of minutes. So yeah, just maybe it was injury related.

Mmm hmm. And missing Booker for half of the series, so he was chewing up Mikal Bridges and Cam Johnson instead of dealing with Williams. The difference in what he was facing individually on defense was considerable. He was moving just fine in the Thunder series, it wasn't injury-related.

Attention to those sorts of details does matter.

So where does the growth come from exactly? Scottie isn't turning into some offensive savant, RJ and IQ are likely what they are, also not particularly attractive assets, BI is only going to eventually have value as a 40mil expiring...oh wait he's got a **** PO on his last year lol. So the only real hope for this team is to completely swindle another team, which doesn't seem to be in the cards, or guys like GD/JKW/CMB taking us to the promised land. Cause we certainly aint adding any other young blue chip prospects.

You think being capped out completely for a ~40win team is a good road to be going down just because "this isn't even the raptors final form"? Hard pass.

And yeah, known defensive stalwart Devin Booker being out was the only reason Ingram popped off. Again, you are welcome to have optimism for the team, but that doesn't make it real, I don't rely on blind faith, and based on our previous discussions I didn't think you did either. And now with the Turner trade, this acquisition is looking even worse.

Whatever the polar opposite of blind faith is what you have. Endless negativity? Wide-eyed hatred?

Just because you view your pessimism as ‘reality’ doesn’t mean it’s right.

[tsherkin]

So where does the growth come from exactly? Scottie isn't turning into some offensive savant, RJ and IQ are likely what they are, also not particularly attractive assets, BI is only going to eventually have value as a 40mil expiring...oh wait he's got a **** PO on his last year lol. So the only real hope for this team is to completely swindle another team, which doesn't seem to be in the cards, or guys like GD/JKW/CMB taking us to the promised land. Cause we certainly aint adding any other young blue chip prospects.

That's, again, certainly a perspective. We've got some interesting youth that we're looking at, but like... no, we don't project as a contending team. And that's fine. You need a reaming ton of luck for that. We need to work on being good first. Don't get so far ahead of yourself.

And yeah, known defensive stalwart Devin Booker being out was the only reason Ingram popped off. Again, you are welcome to have optimism for the team, but that doesn't make it real, I don't rely on blind faith, and based on our previous discussions I didn't think you did either. And now with the Turner trade, this acquisition is looking even worse.

All right, so, don't watch. *shrug*

I've not been super high on the CMB pick, but I'm trying to at least see where that could go and how I might be wrong. I'm looking at what we might appear to be with 60 games from BI. Looking to get back to the playoffs.

RJ might get moved. Quick might get moved. We don't know. Just HAVING Quick back and healthy will be a big deal for our offense.

You're looking at everything from the maximally-negative POV. That's got to be exhausting, man. Take a breath, enjoy SOMEthing about the team for a minute, until it's proven not to be the case. It'll feel better.

[VanWest82]

We essentially traded a 1st for rights to negotiate exclusively with Ingram. A 2+1 deal. 1st year of deal will be an adjustment period, still figuring out roster. 2nd year will be expiring and talks of potentially leaving.

This deal was 1 year too early. But falls into their maxing out contracts for trading instead of being more flexible. Everyone always forgets when these contracts amount to little to nothing though.

It was still a good trade imo. Ingram is a psuedo all star talent. There are only so many of those guys, and the shorter term deal now lines up with the rest of the shorter rebuild timeline, so even though it's an overpay it isn't crippling from a team building or potential reset perspective all while allowing us to better evaluate the rest of our roster within the context of a functional team (unlike last few years where we just didn't have enough good players).

As it turns out, that '26 Pacers FRP will be valuable especially now that they have it back, and so one could argue the price was steeper than we thought, but two weeks ago Pacers looked like they had a chance to not only win the title but get back there next year. It was a great bet all the way up until Hali blew out his achilles.

[Scase]

So where does the growth come from exactly? Scottie isn't turning into some offensive savant, RJ and IQ are likely what they are, also not particularly attractive assets, BI is only going to eventually have value as a 40mil expiring...oh wait he's got a **** PO on his last year lol. So the only real hope for this team is to completely swindle another team, which doesn't seem to be in the cards, or guys like GD/JKW/CMB taking us to the promised land. Cause we certainly aint adding any other young blue chip prospects.

That's, again, certainly a perspective. We've got some interesting youth that we're looking at, but like... no, we don't project as a contending team. And that's fine. You need a reaming ton of luck for that. We need to work on being good first. Don't get so far ahead of yourself.

And yeah, known defensive stalwart Devin Booker being out was the only reason Ingram popped off. Again, you are welcome to have optimism for the team, but that doesn't make it real, I don't rely on blind faith, and based on our previous discussions I didn't think you did either. And now with the Turner trade, this acquisition is looking even worse.

All right, so, don't watch. *shrug*

I've not been super high on the CMB pick, but I'm trying to at least see where that could go and how I might be wrong. I'm looking at what we might appear to be with 60 games from BI. Looking to get back to the playoffs.

RJ might get moved. Quick might get moved. We don't know. Just HAVING Quick back and healthy will be a big deal for our offense.

You're looking at everything from the maximally-negative POV. That's got to be exhausting, man. Take a breath, enjoy SOMEthing about the team for a minute, until it's proven not to be the case. It'll feel better.

Being negative about the outlook of the team doesn't impact the rest of my life, it's called compartmentalization lol. I had things to be positive about the team over the last couple of years, but as they continue to not pan out, and we continue to make stupid moves why should I manufacture optimism for something that doesn't deserve it?

If your argument is that I have to actively LOOK for something about this team to be positive about, that says more about the team than it does me. I've mentioned elsewhere I'm not super keen on us picking another non shooting forward, but I have trust in the teams drafting record so I'm curious to see where that goes, but I'm not going to lie to myself and be hyped saying maybe he will turn into a superstar.

I still think GD has room to get better, JKW seems interesting, and I still have hope for Scottie to be a defensive stalwart. But the team has nothing that screams any sort of potential to even be a deep playoff team. And I don't mean that in the sense of this exact roster, but the possible projections of the players are all kinda "meh". No one has any real upside beyond like a solid to good starter.

Having a healthy team will result in a better season for sure, but it's not some panacea, nor is health something intrinsic to our team.

[tsherkin]

Being negative about the outlook of the team doesn't impact the rest of my life, it's called compartmentalization lol. I had things to be positive about the team over the last couple of years, but as they continue to not pan out, and we continue to make stupid moves why should I manufacture optimism for something that doesn't deserve it?

Then don't. But manufacturing TOO much negativity, as in it being basically all you do, is technically against board policy these past dozen years. It's something to keep in mind.

I still think GD has room to get better, JKW seems interesting, and I still have hope for Scottie to be a defensive stalwart. But the team has nothing that screams any sort of potential to even be a deep playoff team. And I don't mean that in the sense of this exact roster, but the possible projections of the players are all kinda "meh". No one has any real upside beyond like a solid to good starter.

Having a healthy team will result in a better season for sure, but it's not some panacea, nor is health something intrinsic to our team.

GD has some room to improve. We'll see if he can adapt his physicality, improve on D and figure out how to shoot against close-outs. Scottie's D is the main thing to be optimistic about him, for sure.

Yeah, we need something to happen for us in order to take the next step. Health will be a big deal. We lost Quick for 50 games or so last year, give or take the tanking. He's played 64, 78, 81, 68 and 33 games in his career. I'd lean on that 70ish games from him in an average season. And that's a 17/6 player who can shoot the 3. That's HUGE for our offense. And then we have whatever we get from BI, and whatever we get from our rook, and whatever we get from improvement out of our guys in their second season.

We're gonna be a decent team. How we elevate our ceiling is the next step, but we have moves to make, potentially. So we'll have to see what the FO does. But not every team has ultimate title potential. You need luck. You need a certain threshold of talent. And you can be a decent FO and not produce something magical because the opportunity wasn't there. But we'll see with this squad. We should be above average at either end of the floor, and that's not far different from how things started with the best stretch in franchise history.

It's worth remembering that we gave up Bosh and had very little... but we'd acquired Lowry and DeRozan, and they gave us something. We eventually got Jonas, and then we got Anunoby and Siakam and that worked out well for us... from the kinds of picks we'll have access to with this team. So again, we'll have to see what our opportunities become going forward.

[Mattatron]

We essentially traded a 1st for rights to negotiate exclusively with Ingram. A 2+1 deal. 1st year of deal will be an adjustment period, still figuring out roster. 2nd year will be expiring and talks of potentially leaving.

This deal was 1 year too early. But falls into their maxing out contracts for trading instead of being more flexible. Everyone always forgets when these contracts amount to little to nothing though.

It was still a good trade imo. Ingram is a psuedo all star talent. There are only so many of those guys, and the shorter term deal now lines up with the rest of the shorter rebuild timeline, so even though it's an overpay it isn't crippling from a team building or potential reset perspective all while allowing us to better evaluate the rest of our roster within the context of a functional team (unlike last few years where we just didn't have enough good players).

As it turns out, that '26 Pacers FRP will be valuable especially now that they have it back, and so one could argue the price was steeper than we thought, but two weeks ago Pacers looked like they had a chance to not only win the title but get back there next year. It was a great bet all the way up until Hali blew out his achilles.

Every team has like 1 or 2 pseudo all stars. Ingram is a 1x all star, and his nomination was like 4 years ago. Once doesn't count. This deal was Nonsens from the beginning. He's like RJ just with a Jumper but without the drive to the basket.

Would RJ and Ingram be one person, now that's a player.... but this is garbage