2024 Ingram and Zion

I think the flaws many teams make is they see who their players currently are and add guys based on that. As opposed to seeing who they might evolve be and get guys who might fit that better.

With that said, who do you guys think Ingram and Zion will be in 2024? Not just stat wise, but skill set wise. Who will they play like? What will their strengths be and maybe more importantly what weaknesses will they still have and are unlikely to go away (so we will need to cover up with rest of roster)

Give me players from the present or past that you think will be what Ingram and Zion look like in 2024

In a perfect world, Ingram is basically Warriors KD and Zion is prime Barkley but without the gaps in defense and playmaking*.

In reality, that's such a ridiculous ask that it's probably never going to happen.

I think in 2024 Ingram will be essentially who he is now, but with improved decision making that grows out of experience and familiarity with the team (Assuming he's still here). His physical issues are unlikely to ever be resolved significantly and some of them just can't be resolved (high hips are not a weight room issue) and as a result he's probably always going to have defensive issues related to those things. Similarly, as much as he's a good passer for his size and position he's never really shown genius vision or anything. If he could just improve his team defense and iron out his pass-or-shoot decision making, I would view that as success even if he never takes the step as a pullup 3 point shooter.

In 2024, assuming no injuries and normal growth, Zion will be a top 10 player in the league with no question. He'll probably be the single best finisher in the NBA, and he's shown a lot of potential as a passer and ballhandler although admittedly some of that was more at Duke than in the league. If he can polish his handle up a little and if he's trusted more to handle the ball (which he should be) I see him as being an easy 24/9/5 on any given year, with 60% or better TS. His height might limit his rebounding a little. I do personally view his shooting as likely to be at least decent (35% ish on a few a game) but I don't think he's ever likely to be a sharpshooter, and that will translate to his FT shooting. For me, 70 or 75% is possible but I would be pretty surprised if Zion was an 80%+ guy at the line at any point, let alone in the next few seasons.

For me, the issue with Zion is really defensive. He was never the perfect defender at Duke but he was a legitimate event creator who showed really impressive instincts and a ton of habits that should work in the NBA, but then while he did improve over the course of his 24 games with us, that difference-maker potential never showed up defensively and he was totally out of place more often than not. I see the potential for him to be a plus defender, even if not all-NBA, and I expect that from him by 2024. Plus defensively. This is an area that he differs from Barkley, who was not a particularly impressive defender despite plus steals numbers.

That's a long answer to the question but hopefully it clarifies my views.

*Barkley was an impressive passer for his position and role and made a bunch of great flashy passes but if you actually watch his game back there's a ton of passes he missed habitually and was not very reliable in making well. I don't see that being an issue for Zion, if things go well.

richard hamilton and shawn kemp.....

ingram weakness....leadership

zion weakness....defense and outside game..

Ingram a poor man's Durant with perhaps slightly better passing.

Kemp for Zion is a pretty good one. Perhaps Dominique Wilkins

I like the Kemp comparison but I think Zion is going to wow some people with his shooting ability by 2024.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

I like the Kemp comparison but I think Zion is going to wow some people with his shooting ability by 2024.

---

Not with his current stroke. It's too flat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

Not with his current stroke. It's too flat

---

He will inevitably work on his shot. How much improvement that will result in is up in the air, but the idea that he will work on the shot is just a given in the Year of Our Lord 2020.

I will bring this up for the millionth time: Zion's college shooting %ages were depressed by a really horrifically awful start to the year. If you just take his final 20 games, he was a 39.6% three point shooter on 2.5 a game. If you just take his final 10 games, that goes up even more to 41.4% on 2.6 a game. Just the tournament games? 43.5% from 3 on 3.4 per game.

Does that mean I think he'll be a 40%+ shooter at the NBA level on major volume? Absolutely not. NBA threes are further away, and the defenders are better and give you less comfort on those shots.

Does it mean that I believe in time, with work, Zion can be a solid 35 to 37% three point shooter on 2.5 or 3 a game? Yes it does. I see no real reason Zion can't be as good a 3pt shooter as Lebron, for example, at least.

I have always looked at Zion as having a Barkley ceiling, but a floor of Clarence Weatherspoon. I think his defense and ball handling will improve over the next four years, but I have doubts that he will ever be the rebounder either of those guys were. So the Pelicans would want to make sure they have a player who is a dominant rebounder. It wouldn't have to be a traditional center either (maybe a Rodman type), but I think it would probably be best to have a center who can dominate in the paint and finish. That player would really complement Zion and Ingram.

While Ingram could have a Durant ceiling as an offensive player, I have doubts that his defense and decision-making will ever reach a level that people will be comfortable with. He may improve his defense over the next four years to a point where he isn't a liability on that end, but I suspect he will always need to be surrounded by great defenders and ball handlers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mount Zion

I have always looked at Zion as having a Barkley ceiling, but a floor of Clarence Weatherspoon. I think his defense and ball handling will improve over the next four years, but I have doubts that he will ever be the rebounder either of those guys were. So the Pelicans would want to make sure they have a player who is a dominant rebounder. It wouldn't have to be a traditional center either (maybe a Rodman type), but I think it would probably be best to have a center who can dominate in the paint and finish. That player would really complement Zion and Ingram.

While Ingram could have a Durant ceiling as an offensive player, I have doubts that his defense and decision-making will ever reach a level that people will be comfortable with. He may improve his defense over the next four years to a point where he isn't a liability on that end, but I suspect he will always need to be surrounded by great defenders and ball handlers.

---

I mostly agree here, although I dispute the idea that Zion will have trouble being the rebounder that Clarence Weatherspoon, who averaged 7 boards a game for his career and had one season averaging double digit boards in his career, was. He probably won't be a Barkley level rebounder simply because individual player rebounds in general are down across the NBA for various reasons in this era of basketball (team rebounding is a much bigger focus than having an individual guy who hoovers up boards), and that will probably limit his upper ceiling. I could easily see Zion having multiple seasons averaging double digit rebounds, although I doubt he'll ever have a Barkley level season on the glass where he averages 12 or 14 a game.

It's kinda hard to do comparisons with these two because both have unique physical traits. However, I'd say here's their floor and ceiling at this point:

Floor: Rudy Gay and Larry Johnson. Both had their careers limited by injuries.

Ceiling: Tracy McGrady and Charles Barkley. Barkley and Larry Johnson of course are the popular choices for comparing Zion, but who else is there to compare on a physical level. Barkley and Zion have a lot of differences in their games as well, with Barkley being a far better rebounder. Zion will almost certainly be a better 3pt shooter and he could eventually be a better defender.

TMac was a 6'8" shooting guard that showed remarkable improvement in his 4th season and became an all-star for the first time when he went to a new team and also tripled his average number of 3pt attempts per game. Griffin did call Ingram basically a 2-guard. I do wonder depending on what happens with Jrue and who the team signs/trades for/drafts in the future, if Ingram will eventually fill that role. I know that wasn't Griffin's intention when he called him a 2-guard though, but that it's basically how he currently plays the game.

Ingram, his ceiling so hard for me to predict. Because he's not a special athlete. He's pretty average there. The area of his game where he can improve is all skill based so there's really no limit, techically. A smaller, less athletic, even weaker Durant? That's not even Durant, even though it's the first place I wanna go. You can't be Durant if you aren't strong enough to back someone down and then use center like-length to rise over them. Even Durant lite, because he doesn't play the game that way.

Ingram's ceiling is someone who, like him, was always thin. But could score from every level and get to the FT line.

So my instinct is take a skinny 2 guard and just stretch their limbs out. Way out. So my brain goes to elongated less efficient Reggie Miller as the absolute best. My memory is incomplete, but I know Miller wasn't just a 3pt threat. He did some damage from midrange. And he got to the FT line at about the same clip as Ingram. If Ingram improves and hits close to 90% he'll be close to Reggie Miller there too eventually. It's the best I could ever see Ingram playing.

Zion? I got nothing. I never watched Barkley play. And I don't remember anything special about Larry Johnson except he was literally the first person I ever heard use the words "Allah" and my parents refusing to talk to me about what that even meant.

What I want is for him to use every trait he has to his advantage. I saw Zion pull off a post fadeaway and I was like "That's going to be his bread and butter once he loses his 45 inch vertical." His touch around the rim is his greatest asset. He can be deadly within 15 feet and draw all kinds of double teams. And he's a great passer. But everyone I wanna compare him to is way taller like Shaq or Randolph

Brandon Ingram = Tracey McGrady in his prime

Zion Williamson = A less durable Karl Malone or Adrian Dantley with potential of three point shot,

I don't know what Comparison i can give to zion but by 2024, this kid should be well rested with all his minutes restriction

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Ingram, his ceiling so hard for me to predict. Because he's not a special athlete. He's pretty average there. The area of his game where he can improve is all skill based so there's really no limit, techically. A smaller, less athletic, even weaker Durant? That's not even Durant, even though it's the first place I wanna go. You can't be Durant if you aren't strong enough to back someone down and then use center like-length to rise over them. Even Durant lite, because he doesn't play the game that way.

Ingram's ceiling is someone who, like him, was always thin. But could score from every level and get to the FT line.

So my instinct is take a skinny 2 guard and just stretch their limbs out. Way out. So my brain goes to elongated less efficient Reggie Miller as the absolute best. My memory is incomplete, but I know Miller wasn't just a 3pt threat. He did some damage from midrange. And he got to the FT line at about the same clip as Ingram. If Ingram improves and hits close to 90% he'll be close to Reggie Miller there too eventually. It's the best I could ever see Ingram playing.

Zion? I got nothing. I never watched Barkley play. And I don't remember anything special about Larry Johnson except he was literally the first person I ever heard use the words "Allah" and my parents refusing to talk to me about what that even meant.

What I want is for him to use every trait he has to his advantage. I saw Zion pull off a post fadeaway and I was like "That's going to be his bread and butter once he loses his 45 inch vertical." His touch around the rim is his greatest asset. He can be deadly within 15 feet and draw all kinds of double teams. And he's a great passer. But everyone I wanna compare him to is way taller like Shaq or Randolph

---

The thing that made Miller so deadly was that he was the absolute king of off-ball movement for his era, in the way that someone like Curry is now. Three point shooters double their threat level, or even triple it, without having to increase their volume at all, simply by always dragging the defense around with movement. Players like Redick and Korver are examples of this: what makes someone like Redick a better raw shooter all time than, say, any other random guy who shoots 40% in a given year? It's his ability to use motion off-ball to absolutely warp a defense.

If Ingram ever figures out how to do that on a high level, his value sky-rockets as a shooter. That would be a huge step.

The Zion/Barkley comparison is one of those things that people make all the time, and even I make it, but it's not really because they're twins. It's because Zion is a very unique player and Barkley is probably the closest you can imagine.

Completely agree that Zion's going to continue to expand his post game to include that turnaround jumper. While he's still young and at his athletic peak, he's not really going to need it that often and I would hate for him to dilute his game by using it at high volumes and damaging his otherworldly efficiency, but when he's like 30+ that ability to score without needing to sky above people all the time becomes vital. That's partly why I care so much about him reaching decent shooter level; it opens so many more doors when age comes calling.

Ingram and Zion are 2 unique players who simply don't have good comps. Especially this early in their careers. Ingram is more well rounded than Durant was at this point in both their careers, but he also doesn't jump off the page at anything like Durant did. Ingram is definitely the better ball handler. He just needs to gain the confidence Durant always had in his jumper to pull up anywhere on the floor, guarded or unguarded. Ingram isnt there yet. Ingram is also definitely an above average athlete. I cant say his quickness to the basket is underrated, because I've never really heard anyone question his athleticism. He just needs to continue to add weight and strength.

Zion is fine. His rookie year was historic. It is being undermined and underappreciated because of all the games missed, the fact that he plays for the Pelicans, and the team's awful showing in the bubble. There just isn't a good comp for him given his size and athleticism. Then add his handle and touch around the basket. It'd have to be some Shaq/Barkley combo then Larry Johnson once he added a 3 point shot later in his career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

Ingram and Zion are 2 unique players who simply don't have good comps. Especially this early in their careers. Ingram is more well rounded than Durant was at this point in both their careers, but he also doesn't jump off the page at anything like Durant did. Ingram is definitely the better ball handler. He just needs to gain the confidence Durant always had in his jumper to pull up anywhere on the floor, guarded or unguarded. Ingram isnt there yet. Ingram is also definitely an above average athlete. I cant say his quickness to the basket is underrated, because I've never really heard anyone question his athleticism. He just needs to continue to add weight and strength.

Zion is fine. His rookie year was historic. It is being undermined and underappreciated because of all the games missed, the fact that he plays for the Pelicans, and the team's awful showing in the bubble. There just isn't a good comp for him given his size and athleticism. Then add his handle and touch around the basket. It'd have to be some Shaq/Barkley combo then Larry Johnson once he added a 3 point shot later in his career.

---

I think it's quite a stretch to say that by this point in their careers, Ingram was more well rounded than Durant:

Thru his fourth season, Durant:

* was averaging 27 points a game (30+ in year 3) to Ingram's 16.3 points per four year average.
* shoots free throws much better
* was a better rebounder
* was a better defender

This is not to say I don't believe there is tremendous upside for Ingram, but it will depend on two things:

1. First and foremost he has to add strength to his physique. Right now opponents can 'out-physical' Brandon and, with too much frequency, do.
2. Moving full time to the 2. I salivate thinking of posting up our 6.7 'elastic man' against any off guard.

It will be as much fun tracking his development (maybe more) as it will be watching Zion's maturation.

Hopefully we develop Zion as a wing. He has the raw skillset to be an efficient on the perimeter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

Brandon Ingram = Tracey McGrady in his prime

Zion Williamson = A less durable Karl Malone or Adrian Dantley with potential of three point shot,

---

Ingram will never reach TMac heights. No where near the athleticism or explosion

I think Ingram is going to be a mixture of Paul George and Kevin Durant. He will be right there with Tatum for the next decade as best SFs in the NBA who can do it all. IMO Zion is going to have the same impact if not more then Lebron taking it to the rim and will always be a threat near the basket. If he can increase his shot from 3pt then I believe he can be similar to a Lebron/Giannis without being as gifted of a passer. These 2 will be top 5 in the NBA and be our core 2 we build around to win a championship!

A lot of this depends on coaching imo. I see Zion being a much better shooter in 2024 and he will be a better defender if he has the coaching he needs. He will have to develop his shooting and defense to get to the next level. If he improves in these areas he?s going to be a champion.

Ingram is going to be a better decision maker and maybe a slightly better defender than he is now. I think Durant and Kobe are fair comparisons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

I think it's quite a stretch to say that by this point in their careers, Ingram was more well rounded than Durant:

Thru his fourth season, Durant:

* was averaging 27 points a game (30+ in year 3) to Ingram's 16.3 points per four year average.
* shoots free throws much better
* was a better rebounder
* was a better defender

This is not to say I don't believe there is tremendous upside for Ingram, but it will depend on two things:

1. First and foremost he has to add strength to his physique. Right now opponents can 'out-physical' Brandon and, with too much frequency, do.
2. Moving full time to the 2. I salivate thinking of posting up our 6.7 'elastic man' against any off guard.

It will be as much fun tracking his development (maybe more) as it will be watching Zion's maturation.

---

You are looking at 4 year averages, while I clearly said "at this point in their careers." It's pretty obvious Ingram needed some development he did not get in L.A. Hence the near astronomical jumps in almost every statistic.

So you cannot compare their 4 year averages. I'm pretty sure that is a clear violation of stationarity given Ingram's change in scenery.

Secondly, Durant was a better defender according to what?

Thirdly, I say Ingram is more well rounded because he is a better ball handler, better shot creator, and better facilitator at this point in both there careers. Durant didn't crack the 4 assists per game mark until his 6th year, and that was while playing 40 minutes per game every year in the league to that point. Ingram has never averaged more than 34 minutes per game and has been at or past 4 assists per game twice in his 4 years already.

In Durant's first 3 - 4 years, he could spot up or pull up from anywhere, but putting the ball on the floor was problematic. He was a straight line slasher at best. Ingram has always been able to put the ball down and get where ever he wants to get to.

So like i said, Ingram is a more well rounded player at this point in his career, but is not the scorer Durant was. I stand by that 100%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

You are looking at 4 year averages, while I clearly said "at this point in their careers." It's pretty obvious Ingram needed some development he did not get in L.A. Hence the near astronomical jumps in almost every statistic.

So you cannot compare their 4 year averages. I'm pretty sure that is a clear violation of stationarity given Ingram's change in scenery.

Secondly, Durant was a better defender according to what?

Thirdly, I say Ingram is more well rounded because he is a better ball handler, better shot creator, and better facilitator at this point in both there careers. Durant didn't crack the 4 assists per game mark until his 6th year, and that was while playing 40 minutes per game every year in the league to that point. Ingram has never averaged more than 34 minutes per game and has been at or past 4 assists per game twice in his 4 years already.

In Durant's first 3 - 4 years, he could spot up or pull up from anywhere, but putting the ball on the floor was problematic. He was a straight line slasher at best. Ingram has always been able to put the ball down and get where ever he wants to get to.

So like i said, Ingram is a more well rounded player at this point in his career, but is not the scorer Durant was. I stand by that 100%.

---

You are entitled. I look forward to the day when we can say that Ingram is one of the top two or three players in the league (as much as I like BI, I'm not holding my breath, though).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I think the flaws many teams make is they see who their players currently are and add guys based on that. As opposed to seeing who they might evolve be and get guys who might fit that better.

With that said, who do you guys think Ingram and Zion will be in 2024? Not just stat wise, but skill set wise. Who will they play like? What will their strengths be and maybe more importantly what weaknesses will they still have and are unlikely to go away (so we will need to cover up with rest of roster)

Give me players from the present or past that you think will be what Ingram and Zion look like in 2024

---

I think we could have the next AD and Lebron in house. LETS FARKIN GO YA DINGDONG!