Official Brandon Ingram Thread

[YogurtProducer]

They need to prove it first. Their offence has been bottom 10 for over a decade. The idea that Bane is just going to turn that around could be wishful thinking.

They do need to prove it, but Bane is a 20-24 ppg scorer and an elite volume 3pt shooter who passes well. He has availability concerns, but he also directly addresses a core problem with Orlando's offense. And Suggs, I mean, they were on 47-win pace last year when he was playing, he's one of their most important defensive pieces.

I think it is. 47 and 41 win team last 2 years who still have all the same deficiencies as they always have. I am not ready to make them a HCA lock, let alone top 3 seed lock.

What is their lineup? Suggs/Bane/Franz/Paolo/WCJ? That is 1 above average shooter. We talk about the Raptors being deficient from 3 but we at least have 2 starters who can shoot (IQ/Ingram) and Barrett is still a better shooter than every Magic starter not named Bane.

They just have 0 offence. After Bane, they have 0 shooters.

Not really sure I trust a team whose offence is most likely going to be bottom 5/10 to be a 50+ win team.

I hear you, but again, they're going to have a large boost defensively, AND Bane's presence. I don't really see too many teams in the East who can challenge them.

Where is the huge boost coming from?

KCP was no slouch defensively. Bane isn’t going to make that much of a difference there IMO.

[YogurtProducer]

Heres the thing with the magic. We know they're 47 wins if healthy in a NORMAL east even if they don't improve at all. Same strengths. Same weaknesses. In THIS east? Just logically That 47 becomes something like 50.

50 wins in a really weak east this year... if thats not the 3rd seed who is? It has to be someone right?

Maybe its another injury riddled season and this debate is pointless. But all things being equal the magic don't have to fix their weaknesses or be much better to be 3rd seed is my point. Not this year.

And what if they actually do improve?

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

The east last year wasn’t great either, to be fair.

Atlanta, Toronto, Philly, all likely are going to be better. Then there’s the Miami, Charlottes, Detroits who don’t really make many moves but also “should” perform better than last as well just with internal improvements and what not.

Sure Boston/Indiana got worse. No one else really did. The top end is bad, but I think the depth of the conference is better. There is only 2 teams (BKN/WAS) that don’t have playoff aspirations imo

[Clay Davis]

Is there really a big difference between 24 and 27 ppg?

Yes. Especially when the 27ppg guys are doing it on 64-65% TS vs 58% TS.

Sure. That’s MVP/GOAT level. BI isn't there, but he’s an excellent scorer still. KD and Steph are at the tail end of their careers while BI isn't quite in his prime yet. I would like to see more from him, especially defensively, but the comparison to Demar is inaccurate. They’re wildly different players, except for their penchant for middies. Put it this way, I’d rather have BI than Randle, for example.

Just to be clear I didn't do the initial comparison to Demar as a way to downplay his rizz or insult him. Demar was a flawed scorer, yes, but also a very effective one; with him as a leading scorer, the Raptors had the best five year stretch they ever had as a franchise. Even if BI is closer to Demar than KD/Steph but still more efficient -- say, if there's a line from Deebozone to Stephsville and BI is at the 20-30% mark -- it stands to reason that we will be a very, very exciting team to follow.

[MEDIC]

Lets all hope BI rubs off on Scottie a little and he learns a thing or two from him. Might be a game changer.

[Young Moosehead]

I believe it was Zach Lowe who was saying they have been a bottom 10 offence for over a decade.

Yeah, but that's not suuuper salient to the current roster, the majority of which hasn't even been in the league that long. It's just a dramatic way of saying that Orlando's been in the crapper for a while.

Even at somewhat reduced efficiency, having an efficient 20+ ppg scorer who opens the floor up with his shooting in Bane is going to make a large difference. We're basically hoping for the same out of Quick and BI, remember. Meantime, again, if their guys are healthy, it's going to be a lot better for them than they were this past season. That's somewhat inescapable.

Two of Banchero, Wagner and Suggs need to become efficient 3pt shooters to open up their offence more. If they don’t, defences will just stick to Bane and make him a less efficient shooter. While they brought in Bane, it also cost them 2 of their more consistent 3pt shooters in Anthony & KCP.

For the Raps, they already have 4 shooters in BI, IQ, Agbaji and Dick, plus they are hoping RJ and JKW can be more efficient shooters.

Over the last 12 seasons, Orlando has only been above .500 twice (2018-19 they were 42-40 and in 2023-24 they were 47-32). I just don’t believe they are a lock for the 3rd seed, and are set up to be one of the more disappointing teams this season, just because of those expectations.

Yeah, you are right to be skeptical I think. 47-32 is a good record, but there is not going to be "Capture the Flagg" level tanking amongst the rest of the league this year. Orlando FEASTED on that. They went 22-8 for a .733 win record vs the bottom 10 teams. That level of garbage at the bottom will not be available to pad the win total.

[dagger]

It's interesting that Bane is seen by many writers as a good get for Orlando, but Ingram is not a good get. They are close in age, are paid similarly (though Bane's deal is longer.) Ingram has had big injuries, but Bane also has had two seasons playing fewer than 60 games including 23-24 when he played 42 games. However, the acquisition cost for each is dramatically different. The Raptors are gambling on Ingram's health at the cost of a mid-FRP that wasn't theirs. Orlando is gambling Bane is worth four first round picks, including three unprotected future picks. If Bane can't deliver up to the value of all those picks, it will hurt the Magic, especially given that they are closer to contention. If BI is a flop, the Raptors still have all their own first-round draft picks and can clear him off cap in two years, a setback to be sure.

Given the acquisition cost Orlando paid for Bane, it feels as if the Raptors bought on BI just before the cost of acquiring talent like his and Bane's took a sharp turn upward.

[GLF]

It's interesting that Bane is seen by many writers as a good get for Orlando, but Ingram is not a good get. They are close in age, are paid similarly (though Bane's deal is longer.) Ingram has had big injuries, but Bane also has had two seasons playing fewer than 60 games including 23-24 when he played 42 games. However, the acquisition cost for each is dramatically different. The Raptors are gambling on Ingram's health at the cost of a mid-FRP that wasn't theirs. Orlando is gambling Bane is worth four first round picks, including three unprotected future picks. If Bane can't deliver up to the value of all those picks, it will hurt the Magic, especially given that they are closer to contention. If BI is a flop, the Raptors still have all their own first-round draft picks and can clear him off cap in two years, a setback to be sure.

Given the acquisition cost Orlando paid for Bane, it feels as if the Raptors bought on BI just before the cost of acquiring talent like his and Bane's took a sharp turn upward.

The way I was thinking this same thing but I decided not to say anything because I know the negative people on this board would just be insufferable lol. It’s just go back to the whole all Raptors players are trash and everyone else’s players are God’s gift and will be that team’s saviour mindset people seem to have. Or any move Raptors make is bad and any move other team’s make is good. Rinse, wash and repeat. BI just like Bane brings a lot of the things our team has lacked and needs, but expecting Raptors to be a playoff team is crazy and expecting Orlando to be contenders is perfectly fine lol. It’s also funny because most of the people who like the BI trade are very realistic with their expectations of this team but still people act like they’re being delusional lol.

[Los_29]

It is pretty wild what the Magic gave up. I do like the fit but Magic are in bad shape if it doesn’t work. Lots of draft capital for a player like Bane.

[HangTime]

Do people really have a hard time envisioning how good of a pairing Scottie and Ingram can be?

And I think the trio of Scottie, Ingram, CMB, will be a game changer.
Not your standard big 3, but the most versalite trio.

My starters would be
IQ / Scottie / Ingram / CMB / Jakob

You may hate the traditional spacing, but I think smart 3 point shooting is enough.

[CPT]

Do people really have a hard time envisioning how good of a pairing Scottie and Ingram can be?

And I think the trio of Scottie, Ingram, CMB, will be a game changer.
Not your standard big 3, but the most versalite trio.

My starters would be
IQ / Scottie / Ingram / CMB / Jakob

You may hate the traditional spacing, but I think smart 3 point shooting is enough.

How good?

Are they going to propel one another into All-NBA discussion? Will one or both be All-Stars?

This sounds combative, but I’m really just looking for an objective measure to agree or disagree with.

[JB7]

It's interesting that Bane is seen by many writers as a good get for Orlando, but Ingram is not a good get. They are close in age, are paid similarly (though Bane's deal is longer.) Ingram has had big injuries, but Bane also has had two seasons playing fewer than 60 games including 23-24 when he played 42 games. However, the acquisition cost for each is dramatically different. The Raptors are gambling on Ingram's health at the cost of a mid-FRP that wasn't theirs. Orlando is gambling Bane is worth four first round picks, including three unprotected future picks. If Bane can't deliver up to the value of all those picks, it will hurt the Magic, especially given that they are closer to contention. If BI is a flop, the Raptors still have all their own first-round draft picks and can clear him off cap in two years, a setback to be sure.

Given the acquisition cost Orlando paid for Bane, it feels as if the Raptors bought on BI just before the cost of acquiring talent like his and Bane's took a sharp turn upward.

The US media, not knowingly, is actually helping the Raps, and setting up the Magic for failure. Outside of tanking again this season, any success the Raps have will be viewed as this great success (even if they end up 8th - I expect them to end up higher). Whereas in the case of the Magic, anything less than a 3rd seed could be viewed as a failure. And Bane not achieving the numbers he has in the past, will be viewed as a failure. The pressure on the Magic will be immense this season. And really not justified when looking at their past performance.

[DreamTeam09]

Do people really have a hard time envisioning how good of a pairing Scottie and Ingram can be?

And I think the trio of Scottie, Ingram, CMB, will be a game changer.
Not your standard big 3, but the most versalite trio.

My starters would be
IQ / Scottie / Ingram / CMB / Jakob

You may hate the traditional spacing, but I think smart 3 point shooting is enough.

How good?

Are they going to propel one another into All-NBA discussion? Will one or both be All-Stars?

This sounds combative, but I’m really just looking for an objective measure to agree or disagree with.

All NBA will comes down to rep & name recognition, if they have a good yr this yr then next yr sure I can see one of em make all NBA - One or 2 of em will be an all-star tho this yr imo, I have Scottie on the All NBA defense team as well, 1st or 2nd

[CPT]

Do people really have a hard time envisioning how good of a pairing Scottie and Ingram can be?

And I think the trio of Scottie, Ingram, CMB, will be a game changer.
Not your standard big 3, but the most versalite trio.

My starters would be
IQ / Scottie / Ingram / CMB / Jakob

You may hate the traditional spacing, but I think smart 3 point shooting is enough.

How good?

Are they going to propel one another into All-NBA discussion? Will one or both be All-Stars?

This sounds combative, but I’m really just looking for an objective measure to agree or disagree with.

All NBA will comes down to rep & name recognition, if they have a good yr this yr then next yr sure I can see one of em make all NBA - One or 2 of em will be an all-star tho this yr imo, I have Scottie on the All NBA defense team as well, 1st or 2nd

It also comes down to winning - it’s not like people don’t know who Barnes and Ingram are. So the claim that they are going to be “so good” together (or however you want to word it) should mean they are going to win a lot, right?

Do they still need another player better than one/both of them?

I hope it works out the way you’re describing, with BI being a 25/5/5 All-Star and Scottie freed up to go for All-Defense, because that should mean a lot of wins.

I’m still not sure what specifically about them is supposed to fit together so well, but we’re getting closer and closer to finding out.

[DreamTeam09]

How good?

Are they going to propel one another into All-NBA discussion? Will one or both be All-Stars?

This sounds combative, but I’m really just looking for an objective measure to agree or disagree with.

All NBA will comes down to rep & name recognition, if they have a good yr this yr then next yr sure I can see one of em make all NBA - One or 2 of em will be an all-star tho this yr imo, I have Scottie on the All NBA defense team as well, 1st or 2nd

It also comes down to winning - it’s not like people don’t know who Barnes and Ingram are. So the claim that they are going to be “so good” together (or however you want to word it) should mean they are going to win a lot, right?

Do they still need another player better than one/both of them?

I hope it works out the way you’re describing, with BI being a 25/5/5 All-Star and Scottie freed up to go for All-Defense, because that should mean a lot of wins.

I’m still not sure what specifically about them is supposed to fit together so well, but we’re getting closer and closer to finding out.

Yes I expect us to win games, I should've noted that. Ofcourse it's all predicted on winning.

What will make them good is that they compliment eachother needs, they'll draw off of eachother and they're both willing and good passers. Our offense instills passing & moving and they both pass well and Barnes does move well enough off the ball.
Last year the defensive game plan on us was to go under the screen/pack the paint - You can't do that with BI & Quickly like you could with Scottie n RJ last year. We didn't take enough & didn't convert enough 3s last year to make defenses pay. Can't do that this year with a healthy Quick BI gradey.
Defensively Barnes & Jakob form a stabalize good defense, add guys like Shead Walter CMB Mogbo, we should replicate what we did from January onward.
Schematically I'm high on Mamu as well, we have a certified pick n pop 5 who can get to the rim from the 3pt line one dribble & finish

Yes health & our young boys holding it down is the key

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

Zion and BI sure didn't win much.

[GLF]

All NBA will comes down to rep & name recognition, if they have a good yr this yr then next yr sure I can see one of em make all NBA - One or 2 of em will be an all-star tho this yr imo, I have Scottie on the All NBA defense team as well, 1st or 2nd

It also comes down to winning - it’s not like people don’t know who Barnes and Ingram are. So the claim that they are going to be “so good” together (or however you want to word it) should mean they are going to win a lot, right?

Do they still need another player better than one/both of them?

I hope it works out the way you’re describing, with BI being a 25/5/5 All-Star and Scottie freed up to go for All-Defense, because that should mean a lot of wins.

I’m still not sure what specifically about them is supposed to fit together so well, but we’re getting closer and closer to finding out.

Yes I expect us to win games, I should've noted that. Ofcourse it's all predicted on winning.

What will make them good is that they compliment eachother needs, they'll draw off of eachother and they're both willing and good passers. Our offense instills passing & moving and they both pass well and Barnes does move well enough off the ball.
Last year the defensive game plan on us was to go under the screen/pack the paint - You can't do that with BI & Quickly like you could with Scottie n RJ last year. We didn't take enough & didn't convert enough 3s last year to make defenses pay. Can't do that this year with a healthy Quick BI gradey.
Defensively Barnes & Jakob form a stabalize good defense, add guys like Shead Walter CMB Mogbo, we should replicate what we did from January onward.
Schematically I'm high on Mamu as well, we have a certified pick n pop 5 who can get to the rim from the 3pt line one dribble & finish

Yes health & our young boys holding it down is the key

Agreed. The only thing is I’m still a bit iffy on Mamu and this shooting everyone keeps talking about. He seems very inconsistent with the 3 ball. Like most “stretch bigs” (except for the elite ones) he seems to have one good year shooting then one bad and so on. He’s only ever shot it above average twice in his career and once was his rookie season where he barely played. Raptors have also been cursed with shooters coming to our team and forgetting how to shoot. I hope I’m wrong, but I wouldn’t hold my breath that his shooting is for real just yet. The driving is definitely for real though. Love that part of his game. I think he does shoot a good percentage from above the break for his career, so that stat I remember making me feel better because it was on a healthy sample size if I’m not mistaken. Being a good above the break 3 point shooter is so much more valuable than any other part of the court.

[ontnut]

FWIW from CPT 5.0:

Do an analysis on Brandon Ingram's past contract and determine, based on his performance, games played, and the NBA salary cap and comparative players and contracts at the time, how much his last contract should actually have been worth. Transcribed by https://otter.ai
ChatGPT said:
Thought for 4m 4s

Here’s a clean, agent-style valuation of Brandon Ingram’s 2025 extension using (1) the cap environment, (2) recent performance + availability, and (3) comparable wing contracts signed around the same time.

What he signed

3 years, $120M (AAV $40M) with a 2027-28 player option after his trade to Toronto in Feb 2025. That AAV is ~25.9% of the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1
Spotrac

Data points I used

Cap context: $136.021M (2023-24), $140.588M (2024-25), $154.647M (2025-26).
NBA
+2
NBA
+2

Recent production & availability (pre-extension window):

2022-23: 45 GP, WS 3.5, BPM 1.7

2023-24: 64 GP, WS 5.1, BPM 1.2

2024-25 (at time of signing): 18 GP, later shut down with ankle issues.
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Comparable wing deals (age/role-adjacent):

OG Anunoby (two-way, injury history): 5/$212.5M (AAV $42.5M = ~30.3% of 2024-25 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Khris Middleton (older, recent injuries): 3/$102M (AAV $34M = ~25.0% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Jerami Grant (high-minutes scorer/forward): 5/$160M (AAV $32M = ~23.5% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Paul George (max-tier, older All-NBA level): 4/$212M in 2024 (AAV ~$53M = ~37.7% of 2024-25 cap). (Used as an upper ceiling reference.)
SB Nation
NBA

Valuation method (quick + transparent)

Comp band (share-of-cap): a prime, near-All-Star wing typically prices ~25–30% of cap (Grant/Middleton at the low end; OG in the upper-mid; PG at true max).

On the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M), that band is $38.7M–$46.4M AAV.
NBA

Availability/risk haircut: Ingram’s last 3 years show good impact but uneven availability (45, 64, then only 18 GP at signing + ankle shutdown). I apply a ~10% risk discount to that comp band rather than a punitive games-played ratio (teams pay for ceiling/creation, not just raw GP).
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Adjusted AAV range ≈ $34.8M–$41.8M.

Creation premium: Relative to OG/Middleton/Grant, Ingram provides on-ball shot creation + playmaking (22-5-5 on solid efficiency in 2023-24) which typically commands a premium over pure 3-and-D types. Add ~$2–3M AAV.
ESPN.com

Blended fair AAV range ≈ $37–$45M.

Player option value: A final-year player option has real monetary value for the player (flexibility/upswing capture). I value that at roughly $1–1.5M AAV in equivalent money. (Net effect: pushes a “fair” AAV slightly up if keeping years/pricing otherwise constant.)

So… what should his deal have been worth?

Putting the pieces together, a fair market outcome lands around $40–43M AAV over this term, given his 2023-24 impact, age (27), and injury risk at signing.

Point estimate: $3 years, ~$126M (AAV $42M).

Signed deal: $3/120M (AAV $40M with a player option).

Verdict vs the actual contract

On a pure dollars/production basis, $120M is within the fair band and ~5% below my point estimate.

Accounting for the player option (added player leverage), the structure shifts a touch back toward the player.

Net: I’d call it basically fair, with a slight team-friendly tilt on cap share (25.9% vs peers like OG at ~30.3% the prior summer) but small player-friendly tilt via the option. Overall, reasonable for both sides given the ankle at signing and Toronto’s need for a primary creator.
NBA
+1

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

FWIW from CPT 5.0:

Do an analysis on Brandon Ingram's past contract and determine, based on his performance, games played, and the NBA salary cap and comparative players and contracts at the time, how much his last contract should actually have been worth. Transcribed by https://otter.ai
ChatGPT said:
Thought for 4m 4s

Here’s a clean, agent-style valuation of Brandon Ingram’s 2025 extension using (1) the cap environment, (2) recent performance + availability, and (3) comparable wing contracts signed around the same time.

What he signed

3 years, $120M (AAV $40M) with a 2027-28 player option after his trade to Toronto in Feb 2025. That AAV is ~25.9% of the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1
Spotrac

Data points I used

Cap context: $136.021M (2023-24), $140.588M (2024-25), $154.647M (2025-26).
NBA
+2
NBA
+2

Recent production & availability (pre-extension window):

2022-23: 45 GP, WS 3.5, BPM 1.7

2023-24: 64 GP, WS 5.1, BPM 1.2

2024-25 (at time of signing): 18 GP, later shut down with ankle issues.
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Comparable wing deals (age/role-adjacent):

OG Anunoby (two-way, injury history): 5/$212.5M (AAV $42.5M = ~30.3% of 2024-25 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Khris Middleton (older, recent injuries): 3/$102M (AAV $34M = ~25.0% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Jerami Grant (high-minutes scorer/forward): 5/$160M (AAV $32M = ~23.5% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Paul George (max-tier, older All-NBA level): 4/$212M in 2024 (AAV ~$53M = ~37.7% of 2024-25 cap). (Used as an upper ceiling reference.)
SB Nation
NBA

Valuation method (quick + transparent)

Comp band (share-of-cap): a prime, near-All-Star wing typically prices ~25–30% of cap (Grant/Middleton at the low end; OG in the upper-mid; PG at true max).

On the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M), that band is $38.7M–$46.4M AAV.
NBA

Availability/risk haircut: Ingram’s last 3 years show good impact but uneven availability (45, 64, then only 18 GP at signing + ankle shutdown). I apply a ~10% risk discount to that comp band rather than a punitive games-played ratio (teams pay for ceiling/creation, not just raw GP).
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Adjusted AAV range ≈ $34.8M–$41.8M.

Creation premium: Relative to OG/Middleton/Grant, Ingram provides on-ball shot creation + playmaking (22-5-5 on solid efficiency in 2023-24) which typically commands a premium over pure 3-and-D types. Add ~$2–3M AAV.
ESPN.com

Blended fair AAV range ≈ $37–$45M.

Player option value: A final-year player option has real monetary value for the player (flexibility/upswing capture). I value that at roughly $1–1.5M AAV in equivalent money. (Net effect: pushes a “fair” AAV slightly up if keeping years/pricing otherwise constant.)

So… what should his deal have been worth?

Putting the pieces together, a fair market outcome lands around $40–43M AAV over this term, given his 2023-24 impact, age (27), and injury risk at signing.

Point estimate: $3 years, ~$126M (AAV $42M).

Signed deal: $3/120M (AAV $40M with a player option).

Verdict vs the actual contract

On a pure dollars/production basis, $120M is within the fair band and ~5% below my point estimate.

Accounting for the player option (added player leverage), the structure shifts a touch back toward the player.

Net: I’d call it basically fair, with a slight team-friendly tilt on cap share (25.9% vs peers like OG at ~30.3% the prior summer) but small player-friendly tilt via the option. Overall, reasonable for both sides given the ankle at signing and Toronto’s need for a primary creator.
NBA
+1

Why's he getting a raise from his last contract? He underperformed. That typically means a reduction.

*Are we being run by Chat GPT? It's a funny thought.

[ontnut]

FWIW from CPT 5.0:

Do an analysis on Brandon Ingram's past contract and determine, based on his performance, games played, and the NBA salary cap and comparative players and contracts at the time, how much his last contract should actually have been worth. Transcribed by https://otter.ai
ChatGPT said:
Thought for 4m 4s

Here’s a clean, agent-style valuation of Brandon Ingram’s 2025 extension using (1) the cap environment, (2) recent performance + availability, and (3) comparable wing contracts signed around the same time.

What he signed

3 years, $120M (AAV $40M) with a 2027-28 player option after his trade to Toronto in Feb 2025. That AAV is ~25.9% of the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1
Spotrac

Data points I used

Cap context: $136.021M (2023-24), $140.588M (2024-25), $154.647M (2025-26).
NBA
+2
NBA
+2

Recent production & availability (pre-extension window):

2022-23: 45 GP, WS 3.5, BPM 1.7

2023-24: 64 GP, WS 5.1, BPM 1.2

2024-25 (at time of signing): 18 GP, later shut down with ankle issues.
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Comparable wing deals (age/role-adjacent):

OG Anunoby (two-way, injury history): 5/$212.5M (AAV $42.5M = ~30.3% of 2024-25 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Khris Middleton (older, recent injuries): 3/$102M (AAV $34M = ~25.0% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Jerami Grant (high-minutes scorer/forward): 5/$160M (AAV $32M = ~23.5% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Paul George (max-tier, older All-NBA level): 4/$212M in 2024 (AAV ~$53M = ~37.7% of 2024-25 cap). (Used as an upper ceiling reference.)
SB Nation
NBA

Valuation method (quick + transparent)

Comp band (share-of-cap): a prime, near-All-Star wing typically prices ~25–30% of cap (Grant/Middleton at the low end; OG in the upper-mid; PG at true max).

On the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M), that band is $38.7M–$46.4M AAV.
NBA

Availability/risk haircut: Ingram’s last 3 years show good impact but uneven availability (45, 64, then only 18 GP at signing + ankle shutdown). I apply a ~10% risk discount to that comp band rather than a punitive games-played ratio (teams pay for ceiling/creation, not just raw GP).
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Adjusted AAV range ≈ $34.8M–$41.8M.

Creation premium: Relative to OG/Middleton/Grant, Ingram provides on-ball shot creation + playmaking (22-5-5 on solid efficiency in 2023-24) which typically commands a premium over pure 3-and-D types. Add ~$2–3M AAV.
ESPN.com

Blended fair AAV range ≈ $37–$45M.

Player option value: A final-year player option has real monetary value for the player (flexibility/upswing capture). I value that at roughly $1–1.5M AAV in equivalent money. (Net effect: pushes a “fair” AAV slightly up if keeping years/pricing otherwise constant.)

So… what should his deal have been worth?

Putting the pieces together, a fair market outcome lands around $40–43M AAV over this term, given his 2023-24 impact, age (27), and injury risk at signing.

Point estimate: $3 years, ~$126M (AAV $42M).

Signed deal: $3/120M (AAV $40M with a player option).

Verdict vs the actual contract

On a pure dollars/production basis, $120M is within the fair band and ~5% below my point estimate.

Accounting for the player option (added player leverage), the structure shifts a touch back toward the player.

Net: I’d call it basically fair, with a slight team-friendly tilt on cap share (25.9% vs peers like OG at ~30.3% the prior summer) but small player-friendly tilt via the option. Overall, reasonable for both sides given the ankle at signing and Toronto’s need for a primary creator.
NBA
+1

Why's he getting a raise from his last contract? He underperformed. That typically means a reduction.

*Are we being run by Chat GPT? It's a funny thought.

It's not really a raise though - he signed the rookie max extension which is the 25% max, and it ended up last season at 25.6% of the cap, after is yearly raises. This contract is also at 25% of the cap. So really, it's just a continuation of his last contract, it's not a raise.

Yes, you are in the matrix..

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

FWIW from CPT 5.0:

Do an analysis on Brandon Ingram's past contract and determine, based on his performance, games played, and the NBA salary cap and comparative players and contracts at the time, how much his last contract should actually have been worth. Transcribed by https://otter.ai
ChatGPT said:
Thought for 4m 4s

Here’s a clean, agent-style valuation of Brandon Ingram’s 2025 extension using (1) the cap environment, (2) recent performance + availability, and (3) comparable wing contracts signed around the same time.

What he signed

3 years, $120M (AAV $40M) with a 2027-28 player option after his trade to Toronto in Feb 2025. That AAV is ~25.9% of the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1
Spotrac

Data points I used

Cap context: $136.021M (2023-24), $140.588M (2024-25), $154.647M (2025-26).
NBA
+2
NBA
+2

Recent production & availability (pre-extension window):

2022-23: 45 GP, WS 3.5, BPM 1.7

2023-24: 64 GP, WS 5.1, BPM 1.2

2024-25 (at time of signing): 18 GP, later shut down with ankle issues.
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Comparable wing deals (age/role-adjacent):

OG Anunoby (two-way, injury history): 5/$212.5M (AAV $42.5M = ~30.3% of 2024-25 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Khris Middleton (older, recent injuries): 3/$102M (AAV $34M = ~25.0% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Jerami Grant (high-minutes scorer/forward): 5/$160M (AAV $32M = ~23.5% of 2023-24 cap).
ESPN.com
NBA
+1

Paul George (max-tier, older All-NBA level): 4/$212M in 2024 (AAV ~$53M = ~37.7% of 2024-25 cap). (Used as an upper ceiling reference.)
SB Nation
NBA

Valuation method (quick + transparent)

Comp band (share-of-cap): a prime, near-All-Star wing typically prices ~25–30% of cap (Grant/Middleton at the low end; OG in the upper-mid; PG at true max).

On the 2025-26 cap ($154.647M), that band is $38.7M–$46.4M AAV.
NBA

Availability/risk haircut: Ingram’s last 3 years show good impact but uneven availability (45, 64, then only 18 GP at signing + ankle shutdown). I apply a ~10% risk discount to that comp band rather than a punitive games-played ratio (teams pay for ceiling/creation, not just raw GP).
Basketball-Reference.com
NBA

Adjusted AAV range ≈ $34.8M–$41.8M.

Creation premium: Relative to OG/Middleton/Grant, Ingram provides on-ball shot creation + playmaking (22-5-5 on solid efficiency in 2023-24) which typically commands a premium over pure 3-and-D types. Add ~$2–3M AAV.
ESPN.com

Blended fair AAV range ≈ $37–$45M.

Player option value: A final-year player option has real monetary value for the player (flexibility/upswing capture). I value that at roughly $1–1.5M AAV in equivalent money. (Net effect: pushes a “fair” AAV slightly up if keeping years/pricing otherwise constant.)

So… what should his deal have been worth?

Putting the pieces together, a fair market outcome lands around $40–43M AAV over this term, given his 2023-24 impact, age (27), and injury risk at signing.

Point estimate: $3 years, ~$126M (AAV $42M).

Signed deal: $3/120M (AAV $40M with a player option).

Verdict vs the actual contract

On a pure dollars/production basis, $120M is within the fair band and ~5% below my point estimate.

Accounting for the player option (added player leverage), the structure shifts a touch back toward the player.

Net: I’d call it basically fair, with a slight team-friendly tilt on cap share (25.9% vs peers like OG at ~30.3% the prior summer) but small player-friendly tilt via the option. Overall, reasonable for both sides given the ankle at signing and Toronto’s need for a primary creator.
NBA
+1

Why's he getting a raise from his last contract? He underperformed. That typically means a reduction.

*Are we being run by Chat GPT? It's a funny thought.

It's not really a raise though - he signed the rookie max extension which is the 25% max. This contract is also at 25% of the cap. So really, it's just a continuation of his last contract.

Yes, you are in the matrix..

UFA, we set the price. No?