Official Whine, Moan, Complain Thread 19/20-CLOSED "WE CHAMPS!"

I guess it's time to take the "Real Deal's path"...

 

if he basically didn’t consider us, was it a path?

 

The point is that I'm trying to look at it objectively. I do have a sentimental feeling for Ingram... but I agree with what some others have said in terms of his ability to close and create wins. The talent is there... but he's choked in some big games, he still has issues with his strength and handles... and he's injured again. Of course I was being dramatic by using the words epic tragedy but if Ingram sorts out those issues... it is a really bad thing from the Lakers perspective. Zo, on the other hand was really bad but has come on during the Pels resurgence and it's not coincidence that they came at the same time.

Obviously Zion is the main component, but using Zo more than just Holiday has also paid dividends.

I think it was fair to comment on that net rating statistic because I've been scolded over and over for even suggesting the collective impact of the kids could have a similar impact as AD and going specifically by net rating... it turns out I do have a point.

 

You don’t.

 

He's voting for Bernie, man. Leave the guy alone!

 

Hate jumping into this morass but the most fair criticism is the Lakers gave up too many first rounders/pick swaps
If you look at expiring deals
Cavs gave up the #1 (wiggins) and filler for Love
76ers got Butler for Saric, Covington and filler

Once the Lakers got the #4 pick that is good haul right then and there with Ingram, Ball, and Hart. Add in another first rounder and that in line with other stars going into FA got. I guess the Lakers were getting nervous about Griffin not taking their calls but it's hard to see someone like the Knicks coming up with a better offer

 

butler's value was in the gutter at that point. wiggins was considered a surefire multi-allstar at draft time.

pick swaps imply NO is better than us at those times. maybe, but not my much. and if their top guys stay fragile, those are non-existent.

got AD. won. hard.

 

No talking bout boners plz

Family site

 

Look at what Ben Simmons made for his extension. If you're comfortable paying that to Ingram to be your 2nd star behind LeBron, go at it. I'll take AD as the 2nd option who WILLINGLY gave up money to help the team. Thank you.



Who here is comfortable paying Ingram that kind of money? Any takers?

 

Yep. Paying max for non-superstars is something to avoid—and something bad teams get forced into regularly. If you already have a legit franchise player, you can survive it, but those are the deals that can get you stuck.

 

Thick. Solid.

 

Ingram and AD at 22 years old

https://www.basketball-reference.co...gram&y2=2020&player_id2=ingrabr01&idx=players

AD's winning percentage was 41% at this point

IF the Pels somehow win say 38 games this season... BI's winning percentage will be 41% for his career as well.

Now, I've said that right now BI is on the second tier of stars... significantly below AD especially because of defense... but he's probably going to be a better offensive player and passer.

If this year is his peak... then sure, it's probably too much... but if he maintains this efficiency or even improves slightly, it becomes a better contract

Ben is a better passer, defender, and rebounder... but BI is a significantly better offensive player at this point

Ingram and Ben at 22 years old

https://www.basketball-reference.co...gram&y2=2020&player_id2=ingrabr01&idx=players

The difference between BI vs. Ben or AD is that those two came into the league with full grown men's bodies. They were better athletes. BI probably had more basketball skills.

With BI you have significant growth every season... he starts out looking like a complete bust... then becomes decent... then becomes good... then becomes all star level. AD and Ben have been the same almost their whole careers. They started at a much higher level but haven't evolved that much.

So if you take the growth arc and project what Ingram might become... all of a sudden that contract doesn't seem so absurd.

I agree if this is Ingram's peak, then he's probably not worth the Simmons contract... but if he continues to grow then that's another story.

And whether you like BI or not... the one thing you can say is that each year he seems to get better.

 

lots of young players improve their first few years. but there's always a tailing off point. if ingram improves much beyond this, he'll be off the growth charts like kawhi was.

and still not as good as AD.

 

The discussion wasn't whether Ingram was better than AD... the question was whether he merited Simmons contract.

Considering he needs to build more strength, improve his handles and clutch shooting... I still think he has room to grow.

Again Ingram will never be the two way player that AD or Kawhi are... but his offensive numbers exceed Kawhi at 22 while equaling the elite efficiency

https://www.basketball-reference.co...nard&y2=2014&player_id2=leonaka01&idx=players

 

Nope, that is not what my point was. Would the LAKERS be comfortable paying Ingram that money playing 2nd option to LeBron when we've seen that those two just didn't pair very well together? Realistically, we could take Lonzo+Hart out of this discussion. I think we can both agree that those two could be replaced in the open market. I don't have any faith Ingram would be able to replicate this playing 2nd option for the Lakers. He's someone who requires the ball to generate production. And this is why AD is an infinitely better value than Ingram. AD's ability to play without the ball means he doesn't take away from others. You can put KD, Kawhi, MJ, Kobe, etc., next to AD and you won't see a drop in production. He can dominate when given the ball as well so it's not like the guy isn't capable of generating offense for you. Defensively? I don't think there is a legitimate discussion. AD's ability to guard the perimeter and rim is second to none. You can't find many players capable of guarding BOTH the pick and roll. That's what AD can do. So what are we discussing here? Ben Simmons made sense for the Sixers because he is their best playmaker and his potential is incredibly high. Did Ingram make sense for us to keep and pay the max when we have guys like AD out there?

Also, comparing Kawhi's offensive output at age 22 isn't fair to Kawhi considering the Spurs system didn't rely on Kawhi to score the ball. He certainly could have done a lot more but he was the 4-5th option on that Spurs squad.

Pelicans will pay Ingram the max because they know superstars aren't going to sign with the Pelicans. Lakers paying Ingram the max would have been a mistake. I am far more confident in AD's ability to dominate for us than Ingram and so that is where the discussion of this trade really ends.

 

I've said over and over in my posts that my purpose for keeping Ingram would be for after LBJ.

Obviously he's an insufficient substitute... but better than most at 22

IF LBJ was 27, then I completely understand the trade. But you all keep acting like LBJ will play for five years.

Is it possible? Yes. I've said myself that if he adopts his style to Magic Johnson that he could extend his career. But I'm guessing a 24 year old Ingram will be more dangerous than a 37 year old LBJ in terms of creating his shot. I think I'm being generous by assuming LBJ will still be better next season in terms of iso play.

Right now we'd probably be competing for a lower seed in the playoffs with LBJ/BI/Zo/Hart/#4 and still the possibility of signing AD next season.

Who knows, maybe AD falls in love with Zion and he never wants to come... or he goes somewhere else... I get the risk and the bird and the hand principal. But what if we could have signed AD and kept most of the core? Even if we let Ingram walk... we could have traded him for a number one pick this season.

You rebuild with AD, BI and the core... and you have plenty of assets to trade to fill in any holes.

BI was the replacement for LBJ in my mind... not his sidekick. He doesn't fit with LBJ like Kuz doesn't fit with AD.

 

Lol, what? Your argument is moot. You have LeBron still being a top three NBA player, you make the moves to compete and win now...

 

Now that we've established dominance over the Grizzlies, I'd let them win.

I'd much rather see the Grizzlies over the Pelicans or Portland in the first round.