dagger wrote: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.
I may have Blog Boy Brain Rot, but I think the difference is Bane is “good”, and Ingram is “not.”
Ingram is more talented and “better” than Bane. But I think most Blog Boys would rather have Bane as he’s seen to have more impact on winning.
I think Ingram kind of has to be your 1 or 2. But if he is, your team probably isn’t very good. If he’s your third best offensive option, maybe that’s a good thing, but will he be helping that much? See Beal in Phoenix. That clearly won’t be a problem for us, but it’s likely why good teams weren’t/aren’t interested.
Bane can be your 2, 3, 4, whatever in any lineup. He’s one of the best shooters in the league, particularly if you’re talking about players who can play real minutes, and he’s decent defensively.
Of course, the costs were wildly different, but when the perception is that one guy is someone everyone would want, and one guy is someone nobody wants, you’re not going to score points for getting the latter at a lower price. As for what Orlando gave up, I’ve seen a decent amount of skepticism/criticism, but most people eventually land on “good player, great fit” and give Orlando credit for going for it instead of being overly concerned about value.
It’s hard to see us losing the Ingram deal too terribly, with the low(ish) cost and short deal. People also don’t see a ton of chance to win the deal - he’d have to actually be a normally healthy player for that to happen. None of this “60 games will be a win” business. 65-75+ and no issues in the playoffs, which we’d also have to get to.
On the other hand, it’s fairly easy to see how Orlando wins the Bane trade. He plays well and they win one or more playoff series. They’d have to really flame out and cough up high picks for it to be bad.
Again, this is where the brain rot comes in: if you gave every team the opportunity to add either Bane or Ingram on their current deals, I think 30/30 are taking Bane. If that premise is wrong, everything falls apart, but that’s my read on their relative value. The question then becomes how much extra would you be willing to pay to get your preferred choice. For teams not ready to do anything, giving up that many picks is crazy, but Orlando feels they are ready, and that it’s worth it to them.
Time will tell on both, and Memphis might just quietly clean up if Wells and/or Coward can replace Bane or come close to it.
