Did Zach Lowe identify some convincing points for being low on Raptors?

[Tacoma]

I was just talking to a buddy who used that same arbitrary line in the sand - 65 games. Like that number meant something particular. Then I checked BI's stats, and saw it as just goosing the statistics. He has played 65+ games 1 of 8 season, sounds really scary, until you realize He has played 59 games or more 5 out of 8 seasons. Fun with numbers. Or, check this: He has only missed more than 38 games once in his entire career, last year with us, and we were tanking and didn't want him to play.

I think it's a rough benchmark. 65 games is a little over 79% of a season. 65 versus 64 vs 66 isn't a huge deal. Under 60 games is a problem, and even 65 means you're missing 17 games, which can pivot a whole season. It can make a very large difference in seeding, right?

Sure it can. But I thought it was clear I was making the difference largely between 65 and 59 games. Which is the difference between 1 good season out of 8, and 5.

I think it is far more disingenuous to act like the 15 or so games missed over a 4 year period is the difference between healthy and not. Especially since most of those teams were tanking.

Your beef is with the 65-game benchmark but 65 games is the benchmark to be eligible for most awards, like MVP, All-NBA, etc. There is precedent.

In BI's career, there were 2 shorten seasons of 72 games (Pelicans) in 2019-21 & 2020-21. So between 2016-2025, the max games he could've played was 964 but he only played 495 games. Thus he has missed 469 games or 49% of his games in his career. That's a lot of misses any way you slice it.

[Young Moosehead]

I think it's a rough benchmark. 65 games is a little over 79% of a season. 65 versus 64 vs 66 isn't a huge deal. Under 60 games is a problem, and even 65 means you're missing 17 games, which can pivot a whole season. It can make a very large difference in seeding, right?

Sure it can. But I thought it was clear I was making the difference largely between 65 and 59 games. Which is the difference between 1 good season out of 8, and 5.

I think it is far more disingenuous to act like the 15 or so games missed over a 4 year period is the difference between healthy and not. Especially since most of those teams were tanking.

Your beef is with the 65-game benchmark but 65 games is the benchmark to be eligible for most awards, like MVP, All-NBA, etc. There is precedent.

In BI's career, there were 2 shorten seasons of 72 games (Pelicans) in 2019-21 & 2020-21. So between 2016-2025, the max games he could've played was 964 but he only played 495 games. Thus he has missed 469 games or 49% of his games in his career. That's a lot of misses any way you slice it.

The max regular season games he could have played in was 718, I think, not 964. How could it be over 820, when he hasn't been in the league for a decade? 495 seems right for games played though.

tsherkin had a far more detailed break down a few posts up He came up with 69% if I remember correctly. When you know we kept him out on purpose to end last year, that he missed some games for load management, that he had a 4 game suspension for fighting my case that his health isnt as bad as it seems is strengthened.

In the end, I get why the league added the 65 game threshold last year. Load management had become a big problem. My problem is the dishonest way it was being used. The idea is that it that threshold is supposed to represent a player who played the majority of the season. More than 65 is 80%. That seems like a high pass mark for bare minimum of what is considered healthy.

What makes it seem arbitrary in how it is discussed. Brandon Ingram was just shy of that 65 game threshold 4 times. When people use the stat, they use it like you did here: To exaggerate the problem. It ignores the two covid shortened seasons in which he played more than 80% of the season, aka that should be considered better than a 65 (79%) game season. BI has hit 78% of the games in a season 4 times.

His health could be better, it just isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

[tsherkin]

His health could be better, it just isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

On the whole, sure, that's fair. Of late? Much less so, wherefore the concern. But we'll see what happens with us. Someone noted that the Pels didn't even have a physiotherapist on staff until two years ago, so there's a reasonable chance they've been bungling things with him. And he's not going to have concussions and DVTs every year, either.

[Los_29]

I think it's a rough benchmark. 65 games is a little over 79% of a season. 65 versus 64 vs 66 isn't a huge deal. Under 60 games is a problem, and even 65 means you're missing 17 games, which can pivot a whole season. It can make a very large difference in seeding, right?

Sure it can. But I thought it was clear I was making the difference largely between 65 and 59 games. Which is the difference between 1 good season out of 8, and 5.

I think it is far more disingenuous to act like the 15 or so games missed over a 4 year period is the difference between healthy and not. Especially since most of those teams were tanking.

Your beef is with the 65-game benchmark but 65 games is the benchmark to be eligible for most awards, like MVP, All-NBA, etc. There is precedent.

In BI's career, there were 2 shorten seasons of 72 games (Pelicans) in 2019-21 & 2020-21. So between 2016-2025, the max games he could've played was 964 but he only played 495 games. Thus he has missed 469 games or 49% of his games in his career. That's a lot of misses any way you slice it.

Your math ain’t mathing.

[tsherkin]

Sure it can. But I thought it was clear I was making the difference largely between 65 and 59 games. Which is the difference between 1 good season out of 8, and 5.

I think it is far more disingenuous to act like the 15 or so games missed over a 4 year period is the difference between healthy and not. Especially since most of those teams were tanking.

Your beef is with the 65-game benchmark but 65 games is the benchmark to be eligible for most awards, like MVP, All-NBA, etc. There is precedent.

In BI's career, there were 2 shorten seasons of 72 games (Pelicans) in 2019-21 & 2020-21. So between 2016-2025, the max games he could've played was 964 but he only played 495 games. Thus he has missed 469 games or 49% of his games in his career. That's a lot of misses any way you slice it.

Your math ain’t mathing.

So, based on the little spreadsheet I put together...

96.3, 72, 63.4, 84.9, 84.7, 67.1, 54.9, 78.0, 22.0. 68.8% over his whole career (games played).

So he has missed 224 games and PLAYED 495 games, out of 719 possible games.

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

He's never been accused of being durable. He was playing 50ish games on his rookie contract. When he's suppose to be his most durable.

[HangTime]

How many games did he sit out "just because?"

Like in Scottie's 3rd year, after the hand injury, he could have came back, but we held him out. This past year, he could have sat out more, in the pro-tankers eyes, but they would use those missed games against him down the line.

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

How many games did he sit out "just because?"

Like in Scottie's 3rd year, after the hand injury, he could have came back, but we held him out. This past year, he could have sat out more, in the pro-tankers eyes, but they would use those missed games against him down the line.

Even though he's only 6'8", because of his slight build. He's got the same Deep Vein Thrombosis issued that plagues most bigger guys.

[Young Moosehead]

His health could be better, it just isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

On the whole, sure, that's fair. Of late? Much less so, wherefore the concern. But we'll see what happens with us. Someone noted that the Pels didn't even have a physiotherapist on staff until two years ago, so there's a reasonable chance they've been bungling things with him. And he's not going to have concussions and DVTs every year, either.

Yeah, I understand the concern. I agree that it is something to keep an eye on. I just think that some of it was circumstantial. Dyson Daniels was talking about how bad the issues with health surrounding that franchise. He was joking that the Pels were cursed.

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

The Pel's medical staff sucks, no doubt. But, this stuff was known when he was drafted.

[tsherkin]

Yeah, I understand the concern. I agree that it is something to keep an eye on. I just think that some of it was circumstantial. Dyson Daniels was talking about how bad the issues with health surrounding that franchise. He was joking that the Pels were cursed.

Yeah, I read that. And they were not a particularly good organization in terms of health maintenance. That's kind of what we're banking on, really.

[JB7]

A lot of star players are hovering around the 65 game mark now. The idea that BI is some outlying anomaly in games missed is off.

[tsherkin]

A lot of star players are hovering around the 65 game mark now. The idea that BI is some outlying anomaly in games missed is off.

I mean, there are athletic guys who wreck themselves with the added stress on their ligaments from the way they play, sure. Or the ones who throw themselves at the back line aggressively and get hammered apart, sure. But for decades and decades, guys playing a game fairly similar to Ingram's were a lot more durable. And he doesn't have the same underlying issues with his knees or other bits which harry a lot of the guys in today's game who are especially injured.

Obviously, it would be more ideal to have him around for more games. We will lose much more as he plays less, this is no revelation. So the more he's available, the better for us. There are definitely a bunch of injury-prone guys out there... but a bunch of them are also old stars past their prime. Or guys who were ALWAYS made of glass. And there are guys who are more capable of staying healthy, as well. And not just the DeRozan types, but Harden's been reasonably available, for example. Jokic, too. Shai has been stable the last couple of years, after a rockier start. Giannis has been averaging about 69 games per over the past 9 years. Ant's pretty healthy. Tatum was pretty solid until the Achilles.

So indeed, there are some guys who have issues (like Kawhi and BI) and some guys who are more durable, as in any era.

[JB7]

A lot of star players are hovering around the 65 game mark now. The idea that BI is some outlying anomaly in games missed is off.

I mean, there are athletic guys who wreck themselves with the added stress on their ligaments from the way they play, sure. Or the ones who throw themselves at the back line aggressively and get hammered apart, sure. But for decades and decades, guys playing a game fairly similar to Ingram's were a lot more durable. And he doesn't have the same underlying issues with his knees or other bits which harry a lot of the guys in today's game who are especially injured.

Obviously, it would be more ideal to have him around for more games. We will lose much more as he plays less, this is no revelation. So the more he's available, the better for us. There are definitely a bunch of injury-prone guys out there... but a bunch of them are also old stars past their prime. Or guys who were ALWAYS made of glass. And there are guys who are more capable of staying healthy, as well. And not just the DeRozan types, but Harden's been reasonably available, for example. Jokic, too. Shai has been stable the last couple of years, after a rockier start. Giannis has been averaging about 69 games per over the past 9 years. Ant's pretty healthy. Tatum was pretty solid until the Achilles.

So indeed, there are some guys who have issues (like Kawhi and BI) and some guys who are more durable, as in any era.

I was just speaking to the general trend that star players are playing less games during the season, whether due to injury, or simply load management.

Games played last season:
- Tatum played 72
- Mitchell played 71
- Curry, Lebron, Cade & Jokic played 70
- Giannis played 67
- Brown played 63
- FVV played 60
- Butler played 55
- Luka & Ja played 50

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

If he was playing 60 games, we wouldn't be having this debate. The problem is, that's projection.

Like, in my mind when we went from "Hey, we're a tanking team" to "Now we're a playoff team". Mid season. That's rarely ever justified. That's panic.

[tsherkin]

I was just speaking to the general trend that star players are playing less games during the season, whether due to injury, or simply load management.

It's true, but even still, Ingram has played less overall, and especially so the last half decade or so. It isn't an idle concern. He isn't totally absent, but it's not for nothing that people are concerned.

[Merit]

I was just talking to a buddy who used that same arbitrary line in the sand - 65 games. Like that number meant something particular. Then I checked BI's stats, and saw it as just goosing the statistics. He has played 65+ games 1 of 8 season, sounds really scary, until you realize He has played 59 games or more 5 out of 8 seasons. Fun with numbers. Or, check this: He has only missed more than 38 games once in his entire career, last year with us, and we were tanking and didn't want him to play.

I think it's a rough benchmark. 65 games is a little over 79% of a season. 65 versus 64 vs 66 isn't a huge deal. Under 60 games is a problem, and even 65 means you're missing 17 games, which can pivot a whole season. It can make a very large difference in seeding, right?

Sure but if you’re being held out and if your FO has a horrific medical team that needs to be factored in as well. BI has been injury prone, but then so was Steph Curry, until he wasn’t.

[Merit]

1) He has been on tanking teams for most his career To protect his value teams saved his body 4-5 meaningless games a year.

Let's look at his injury breakdown, yes?

-2016-17 Rookie season. 79/82 games played. Becomes a full-time starter in February and starts the last 26 games of the season excluding a 3 game injury stint for a hyper-extended left knee near the end of the season.

-2017-18. 59/82 games played. Appeared in 57 of the first 61 games of the season before suffering a left groin strain that caused him to miss 12 games. Returned for 2 games before suffering a concussion that would force him to miss the remaining 7 games of the season.

-2018-19. 52/82 games played. Ingram served a 4 game suspension for a fight just two games into the season but was healthy until spraining his left ankle in December that forced a 7 game absence. Then played every game until a deep vein thrombosis in his left arm ended his season 19 games early

-2019-20. Played in 62/72 games (71 game pace for an 82 game season). Covid/Bubble season. First season with the Pelicans. Missed 4 games in November with a hyper-extended right knee. Missed 3 games with a right ankle sprain in February. Sat the last two games of the season once the Pels were eliminated in the bubble. Earned MIP and made his lone all-star game this season.

(I noted this as a 73-game season because several teams did play 73 games, but that was a minor error, because the Pels only played 72).

So there's your example of missing a couple games due to team quality/circumstance. Can't project what would have happened over 10 remaining games, but this wasn't so bad.

-2020-21. Played in 61/72 games (69 game pace for 82 game season). Another Covid season. Played every game until Apr 1st, when a toe injury forced a 5 game absence. Then played the rest of the season until a left ankle sprain ended his season 6 games early.

-2021-22. Played in 55/82 and 6/6 playoff games. 7 games missed early in the season with a right hip contusion. Had a left Achilles scare in December that ended up being minor and only needed two games to heal. A left ankle sprain then forced a 5 game absence in January. Then another 10 game absence from a right hamstring injury. Returned for 5 games before the hamstring caused him to miss the final three games of the season. Did return for the playoffs.

Not tanking, bunch of repeated injuries. And hamstring stuff always needs to be taken seriously.

-2022-23. Played in 45/82 games. Missed 3 games with a concussion early in the season. Suffered a sprained toe in November that caused him to miss 28 straight games (29 total). Essentially played the rest of the season short of a 2 game absence from a right ankle sprain.

This was a 42-win team, not a tanking team.

-2023-24. Played in 64/82 games and 4/4 playoff games. Missed 3 games early in the season with right knee soreness. Achilles soreness kept him out of one game in January but in March he hyper-extended his left knee causing a bone contusion that forced him to miss 12 games, before returning for the playoffs.

This was a 49-win team.


So there, we've had a chance to discuss team context a little, and it mostly appears that tanking didn't really factor into the major amounts of missed games at all. He was actually his healthiest in the seasons with the fewest wins.

2) He has had 2 healthy years, not 1. Everyone forgets covid

If you're talking about 2020 again, we went over that. It was a 72-game season, not a 65-game season. The 66-game season was in 2012, not 2020 or 2021. That was a lockout year. I suppose you can call it a relatively healthy season, but let's stop saying people are forgetting it, because I'd already addressed this prior to this post.

Just for reference.

Code: Select all


League Games Played, BI Games, Games Missed
2017........82........79.........3
2018........82........59.........23
2019........82........52.........30
2020........73........62.........11
2021........72........61.........11
2022........82........55.........27
2023........82........45.........37
2024........82........64.........18
2025........82........18.........64


Missed this response.

[kleatius_01]

I'm all for optimism, but has a single NBA analyst come out in support of the current team and direction? The outlook appears dire.

[Merit]

I didn't think IQ's deal was way overpriced at the time it was given out. I thought it was rich but not insane. I don't think there was as much chatter about that contract until end of last season when the team and him weren't performing. And in the context of the hyperinflation that we're seeing in contracts, people will have to do a revision to their opinions. Just like everyone else, I think we have talent, some pieces. I just don't know about the "fit". Which is the recurring theme of roster construction post 2019.

I have more than a little faith that the FO recognizes the fit issues and will correct it in due time. People just want things done NOW. We barely saw the starters healthy together last year, and now we add in a offensive focal point - the thing everyone was clamoring over for years - and still - people don't even want to give it a chance. Our bench looks pretty solid too. Two major issues from last year were addressed. Third being a legit backup C. I just don't understand what people expect to happen to a roster esp without giving up future 1sts - which lord forbid - if we were to trade any 1st round pick it's like the sky is falling lol.

We just haven't reloaded/restocked as well as we could have. So giving up those 1sts are costly in the context of how well Masai has drafted objectively, feels very costly. Think Pacers and how quickly they pivoted away, 1st from Paul George, to Sabonis/Oladipo, to Haliburton/Siakam/young guys. So while I understand the logic at the time losing those picks do add up.

Well, we got 4 rotation players last draft. Shead/Mogbo/Jakobe/Battle. We also moved off Davion Mitchell for another 2nd and still have Gradey. Plus CMB and Alijah this year - oh and can’t forget Chomche.

Yes, having more picks is better because we have a solid draft history. Agreed. However, moving a Mid to late 1st for Brandon Ingram and his shot creation and 24 points is well worth it. If we drafted a player with Ingram’s talent and pedigree we’d be excited.