.
Pelicans Report
 
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 79

Thread: Brandon Ingram Contract Extension

  1. #51
    ^Yes, basically this.

    If you are talking about building a team with complementary pieces, the way the NBA is played today to achieve the highest levels of success, you simply must have shooting, ESPECIALLY if your team features stars who are non-shooters. That is just the era we are in.

    Unless BI is the featured non-shooting star on the team (and he has not remotely proven he has been that guy yet), you need more shooters to support Jrue and Zion. And let's not forget that Zo and Favors, who both should be getting heavy minutes, are non-shooters. And both compensate for this for having some solid non-scoring skill sets.

    It is my opinion that, assuming Zion and Jrue hold up their end of the bargain, BI will likely be traded for more complementary pieces if he continues to struggle from 3, doesn't turn himself into an untradable defensive maestro, or otherwise cannot make his game more team-friendly. It reminds me of another Lakers draft pick who ended up in NO, though with a totally different game: Randle, who was 'almost there', can help teams, but hasn't figured out a way to make his game complementary enough to other players he is playing with for a team to want to hold on to him. (i.e., shooting is the secret sauce unless you are inordinately talented in some other aspect of the game or your team is already filled with shooters). Here's hoping BI can put it all together this season, as I am absolutely sure he is as tired of hearing the word 'potential' as we are of saying it.

    Here's an excerpt from a Ringer article that sums up a few things I am talking about:

    Ball and Ingram never clicked in Los Angeles. Ingram’s best stretch with the Lakers came two seasons ago, when he took over at point guard after Lonzo injured his knee. And he was far more effective last season when Lonzo wasn’t on the court (a true shooting percentage of 59.0 in 1,005 minutes) than when he was (50.6 in 756 minutes). The same thing happened to Lonzo’s numbers without Ingram—his true shooting percentage jumped from 46.6 in 756 minutes with Ingram to 51.1 in 667 minutes without him. It’s hard to play two nonshooting perimeter players at the same time. Playing both with a nonshooter like Zion at power forward could make that issue even worse.

    https://www.theringer.com/nba/2019/9...akers-pelicans


    So, hey, maybe BI's path forward could be at the point where his passing can mask his shooting deficiencies.
    Last edited by SoCal4Pels; 09-18-2019 at 05:28 PM.

  2. #52
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    Hart and Ingram are no where even close to being equal. Hart had trouble even breaking rotation at times. Like I said before, this would be apparent to anyone who's followed the Lakers. Those two are in different stratospheres. Hart also struggled on defense. He's a complimentary player, that can give you solid play off the bench occasionally. Hopefully since he is still young, he'll be able to provide consistent production off the bench.
    Last edited by Nichols; 09-18-2019 at 10:51 PM.

  3. #53
    'It would be apparent to anyone who has followed the Lakers,' that though there are plenty of BI fans, there are also a huge number of Laker fans frustrated that BI has never quite been able to put it all together, and appreciate the play that Hart had given the team.

    When debating about 'equality of players', there are a number of different roads you can take. Many metrics show BI is superior, he is clearly the superior scorer and passer, but one can argue that since BI has not yet proven he can be either the focal point of an offense or a highly complementary piece (I call this 'Late-Stage Melo Syndrome'), and taking into account the ease with which Hart can plug into many/most teams and how his game will complement the projected center pieces of the NO offense, i.e. taking context into account, Hart could potentially have more value than Ingram.

    Time will tell. As everyone knows, BI's potential is higher.

  4. #54
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    This has nothing to do with anyone being a fan of Ingram, or anyone's frustration with him. Hart had trouble cracking rotations and getting significant playing time, on a squad that didn't have quality 2's. What does that tell you? There is a reason why he wasn't the principle piece in any trade talks. He's not a better complimentary piece, nor is there any aspect of his game that is superior to Ingram's. Sometimes, he's a good player coming off the bench. You're comparing a guy who is sometimes good off the bench to a solid starter, who was trending in the right direction in all facets of the game before he was sidelined.

    With all due respect it's an absurd notion.

    One could argue he's a slightly better 3pt shooter, but he's really not good at that either. I am hopeful he can regain his form from his rookie year. He was also playing while injured which accounts for his lackluster play. Hart will be a solid rotational player in this league, maybe even more.
    Last edited by Nichols; 09-18-2019 at 08:15 PM.

  5. #55
    Even with the lengthy period of time Hart was dealing with painful tendonitis, during which time his minutes were absolutely reduced and his 3p% dropped, he still averaged 25.6 mpg, so I suppose we have different definitions of 'trouble cracking rotations'.

    BI's scoring was much needed on a struggling Lakers team. It remains to be seen if BI's methods of scoring without outside shooting, if they remain the same, will be detrimental or helpful to a team featuring Zion, Jrue, Favors, and Zo.

    Some fans are unsure which player will provide greater contribution to wins in NO, given the as yet unseen dynamics of essentially a brand new team. Some people have made their mind up. Both are okay.

  6. #56
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    People who have watched both play and develop have no doubts as to who would contribute more. They aren't even in the same ballpark. I also would be careful about presuming Ingram will always struggle from 3. He was trending upward before he was sidelined.

    The "fit" argument isn't really a good one in regards to Ingram. He was asked to fill a lot of different roles for the Lakers, and after acclimating did solid in every single one.

    Hart had to be yanked from the starting line up because of his horrendous play.. he was also yanked from games for bad defense as well. I don't wan't to appear to be dumping on him cause he's personable and very easy to like. Like I said, when healthy he has the potential to be a really nice player in your lineup. Him and Ingram are worlds apart.

  7. #57
    You are welcome to your opinion, Nichols, but when you make statements like: "People who have watched both play and develop have no doubts as to who would contribute more." , "Like I said before, this would be apparent to anyone who's followed the Lakers." , "You clearly demonstrate you know nothing about him when you question his IQ." , you are demonstrating what is called "gatekeeping". This is a fairly transparent tactic used by people to try to give the impression that their opinions are more valid than those of others, reflects poorly on those who attempt to use it, and is one of the main reasons I thought you were a kid and not an adult. (Aside from each of these statements being demonstrably false, as there are rabid fans on both sides of the fence about BI... lots of them, whether you know it or not.)

    For instance, you have no idea how many Lakers games I have watched per season over the last multiple decades, how many games I actually have gone to per year, how many autographed balls I have , how close I live to Staples Center, how many players I have chatted with, or even how many of their players I have played pick-up with over at UCLA during the summers. I don't need to even tell you these things, because it logically does not make my opinions any more valid than yours. So feel free to stick to logical arguments, utilizing what you believe to be statistics to support your arguments, understanding that your arguments are mere opinions, just like anyone else's and with the same validity, and leave the attempts at gatekeeping for the forums populated by kids and teens, and everyone will have a much better time

  8. #58
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    We can simply disagree.. You won't find anyone who's a Lakers fan that actually watched the games that would question who would contribute more. The idea borders on nonsensical. I was trying to explain it in as non abrasive way as I could. It's just a silly take. So is the IQ remarks. A poster here just provided a link to a sports writer who went out of his way to compliment Ingram on his IQ.

    And yes.. These things are clearly apparent to people who have followed both players. These are very silly arguments to make. You can characterize my characterization of these positions as "gatekeeping" or some sort of tactic I suppose. In actuality I'm only telling the truth.

    Hart was a throw in on any trade that the Lakers were going to make. He would get abused regularly on defense by good perimeter players. The only facet of his defense that is better than Ball and Ingram's is his ability to hold his position on the block against 4's and 5's.

    Informing you that a comparison between Ingram and Hart in regards to contributing is beyond ridiculous isn't gatekeeping. It's simply truth. Questioning Ingram's IQ is also ridiculous, that is the truth also. And I stand by my position that you couldn't have possibly been following these players to engage in the speculations that you have.

    I don't want to be an antagonist so I guess I'll just leave it at that. We can agree to disagree.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    And I stand by my position that you couldn't have possibly been following these players to engage in the speculations that you have.
    I suppose that's what I get for making the assumption you could read between the lines of my previous post Stupid assumptions all the way around I guess

  10. #60
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    I read and understood boss.. I find it hard to believe is all. It would be like observing a thing.. and surmising that what you saw wasn't what you actually saw lol.. With that being said, it wouldn't be cool to insinuate you're a liar, which I guess in some way my post could be interpreted. So my apologies.

    I guess it's possible for someone to follow these players and believe Hart contributes as much as Ingram.

  11. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    I guess it's possible for someone to follow these players and believe Hart has the potential to possibly/potentially/maybe synergize with a brand new team as much as Ingram.
    Corrected.

  12. #62
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    "I have one question... any of yall think Hart>Ingram for value and productivity?"

    "I think they're about equal. As of right now, Hart is the superior team defender, superior shooter on higher volume, is much less ball dominant, and shows up as the superior player in basically all impact metrics (BPM, PIPM, RPM, etc). He is also on a smaller contract, and his rookie scale deal stretches longer into the future."

    To which you replied..

    "^Yes, basically this."

    I respect the viewpoints here.. Hart, and Ingram being equals or Hart conceivably being a better contributor sounds crazy to me lol. There is a reason why he was a throw in on trade talks. Reasons why he couldn't stick as a starter.

    You clarified your position and I guess you could make an argument that there is potential.

  13. #63
    It's very strange how, when asked about the VALUE of the two players (which isn't dependent on production alone, but which is essentially a measure of production-to-cost ratio), someone can completely disregard the material cost and just get stroppy about stats.

    The fact is, when I am defending Hart, there's a bunch of stuff I can point to. I can show you his percentages, his 3ptR, his PIPM, his BPM, his RPM, his on/off stats. I don't need to refer to vague stuff, I can just give you the numbers that describe his abilities and his impact. Essentially, what I'm saying is that I can give evidence to support my perspective.

    For some reason, you can't do the same. When it comes to Ingram, we are expected to believe that he's X player instead of Y, on the strength of your eye test and your eye test alone. I'm sorry but that's just not good enough. Eye test alone doesn't do it. There's people out there who still eye test Carmelo as a starting calibre NBA player, and I saw someone only today say that Julius Randle is like "mini Al Horford*. The eye test is only as good as the persons judgement, and therefore isn't some kind of magic bullet that kills discussion dead.

    At this point, in a vacuum, one on one, is Ingram better than Hart? Yes.

    Is Hart currently more skilled at the things a team built around Jrue and Zion needs? Also yes.

    Is Hart CHEAPER than Ingram, and will be for a longer time? Again, yes.

    Therefore his VALUE is higher for this team, at this juncture. Could that change if Ingram improves as a shooter, or if Hart takes a step back? Of course if could. But I'm not making my assessments through a crystal ball.
    Zion ''The Earthquake'' Williamson

    Paying attention to the next draft too early.

  14. #64
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    "I have one question... any of yall think Hart>Ingram for value and productivity?"

    "Some fans are unsure which player will provide greater contribution to wins in NO"

    Simply put, he isn't more productive. I also get the value angle, given his relatively cheap contract compared to Ingram's, he's still not even close in terms of value. I can understand why some fans wonder who would contribute more, for obvious reasons. When the season starts they'll see.

    And again....... There is a reason why Hart was just a throw in on all Laker trade negotiations. There are a plethora of highly astute basketball minds and analytic aficionados who evaluate talent for teams involved in the trade market. If they thought Hart was equal value or provided the same production, he wouldn't have been a throw in.

    No amount of debate or reason will get you to see how ridiculous your takes on Ingram are. When the season starts and you can observe just how silly these takes were, I suppose you can always say they were justified based on the data =)..

    Until then I will respectfully disagree when I see takes that I believe miss the mark.
    Last edited by Nichols; 09-20-2019 at 06:13 AM.

  15. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    "I have one question... any of yall think Hart>Ingram for value and productivity?"

    "Some fans are unsure which player will provide greater contribution to wins in NO"

    Simply put, he isn't more productive. I also get the value angle, given his relatively cheap contract compared to Ingram's, he's still not even close in terms of value. I can understand why some fans wonder who would contribute more, for obvious reasons. When the season starts they'll see.

    And again....... There is a reason why Hart was just a throw in on all Laker trade negotiations. There are a plethora of highly astute basketball minds and analytic aficionados who evaluate talent for teams involved in the trade market. If they thought Hart was equal value or provided the same production he wouldn't have been a throw in.

    No amount of debate or reason will get you to see how ridiculous your takes on Ingram are. When the season starts and you can observe just how silly these takes were, I suppose you can always say they were justified based on the data =)..

    Until then I will respectfully disagree when I see takes that I believe miss the mark.
    That's a very impressive way to say very little at all. Good job.

  16. #66
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    That's a very impressive way to say very little at all. Good job.
    Not nearly as impressive as your ability to paint false pictures with analytics.. I'll leave this here again..

    And again....... There is a reason why Hart was just a throw in on all Laker trade negotiations. There are a plethora of highly astute basketball minds and analytic aficionados who evaluate talent for teams involved in the trade market. If they thought Hart was equal value or provided the same production, he wouldn't have been a throw in.
    Last edited by Nichols; 09-20-2019 at 06:13 AM.

  17. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    Not nearly as impressive as your ability to paint false pictures with analytics.. I'll leave this here again..

    And again....... There is a reason why Hart was just a throw in on all Laker trade negotiations. There are a plethora of highly astute basketball minds and analytic aficionados who evaluate talent for teams involved in the trade market. If they thought Hart was equal value or provided the same production, he wouldn't have been a throw in.
    Your argument boils down to

    ''I'm right, you're wrong, and there are also some people who agree with me, so nyer!''

    Which is like... fine? Good for you, but I don't understand why you seem to think anyone should be convinced with this.

    And not to be rude here, but the way you keep throwing around insults to analytics is really kind of stupid. There are a plethora of highly astute basketball minds and analytic aficionados who use analytic data in order to evaluate players. If they thought analytics painted inaccurate pictures or that the eye test provided the same information, they wouldn't be sought out so highly by teams throughout the league.

    You might think that's a stupid argument, but hey, if it's good enough for you

    The fact is, up to this point in his career, Ingram has been incredibly underwhelming and is going to be paid a lot of money. Hart hasn't set the world on fire, but he's provided positive value across the board, and is being paid very little. I've totally conceded that in a 1 on 1 vacuum, Ingram is still the better player, and it's true that he is younger and so is more likely to develop more dramatically in the coming years. But to move with the idea that Hart is somehow this useless nothing player while Ingram is a young trailblazer who's going to light the league up next year isn't supported by anything but speculation.

    Now personally, I don't mind speculation: if you wanna hype Ingram up ignoring things like team construction and contract value, then go for it. But it's just a little weird that you, the guy who was getting annoyed a few pages back in this very thread about the fact that people were speculating, are basing your entire argument on what you think Ingram might do rather than anything he's already done.

    I'm not going to respond to this line of discussion anymore, because it's pretty clear that you're not going to change your mind regardless of how much information I give you, and until you can provide any evidence beyond PPG, I'm not changing mine either. So that's my final bit of input on that.

  18. #68
    It's tough from an admin standpoint, because everyone has the right to their opinion, but when someone lacks the more basic argument skills, lacks social skills, and clearly has trouble understanding and respecting other people's perspectives and the context from which other people are speaking, it reduces the quality of the threads and forums if such a person is insessantly posting. Especially when the poster feels just typing more words and more posts constitutes 'sound evidence', or 'winning an argument'.

    Not trying to be a jerk to you, Nichols, and his has nothing to do with your opinion on BI, but rather the way you express your opinion, interact with others, and support your arguments. You would do well to post less and read more, be more tentative before you post, and ask yourself if you are being respectful (you haven't been), if you are understanding the other person's perspective (you have shown repeated difficulty with this), aren't contradicting your own points you are trying very hard to make (don't speculate), and are using solid evidence to back up your case (not attempts at gatekeeping or saying someone else shares your opinion therefore that constitutes evidence). This will truly benefit you in the long run in far more ways than just posting on sports forums.

  19. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCal4Pels View Post
    It's tough from an admin standpoint, because everyone has the right to their opinion, but when someone lacks the more basic argument skills, lacks social skills, and clearly has trouble understanding and respecting other people's perspectives and the context from which other people are speaking, it reduces the quality of the threads and forums if such a person is insessantly posting. Especially when the poster feels just typing more words and more posts constitutes 'sound evidence', or 'winning an argument'.

    Not trying to be a jerk to you, Nichols, and his has nothing to do with your opinion on BI, but rather the way you express your opinion, interact with others, and support your arguments. You would do well to post less and read more, be more tentative before you post, and ask yourself if you are being respectful (you haven't been), if you are understanding the other person's perspective (you have shown repeated difficulty with this), aren't contradicting your own points you are trying very hard to make (don't speculate), and are using solid evidence to back up your case (not attempts at gatekeeping or saying someone else shares your opinion therefore that constitutes evidence). This will truly benefit you in the long run in far more ways than just posting on sports forums.
    Who are you and why is such a smart person on this board?

    Great post. I would say possibly even....elite!
    @mcnamara247

  20. #70
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    You guys act as if your arguments are nuanced.. I say this with all due respect, they aren't. They are easy to understand. Me not agreeing with you doesn't mean I don't understand you. And of course analytics is an effective tool one might use to assess talent. Neither of you have yet to address the question I asked 3 times now.. I'll try again. Why.... was Hart a throw in on trade negotiations when there are analytic departments for most teams in the NBA? Why did they not come to the same conclusion as you?

    Then the IQ argument.. Another poster just posted a link to an article written by a sports writer who lauded Ingram's IQ, right after you two calling it into question. I'm a reasonable person, but in regards to these two specific arguments leveled at Ingram It is my opinion that they make very little sense.

    This suggestion to post less, because you don't like absurd takes being challenged is almost as ridiculous as your commentary on Ingram.

    Was the writer of the article that was posted in here wrong about Ingram's IQ? Were the scores of analytic departments that teams employ wrong for not believing Hart had equal value with Ingram? Let's not act as if my positions are outside of the mainstream simply because you two don't agree with them.
    Last edited by Nichols; 09-20-2019 at 05:16 PM.

  21. #71
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    "But to move with the idea that Hart is somehow this useless nothing player while Ingram is a young trailblazer who's going to light the league up next year isn't supported by anything but speculation."

    That is a blatantly dishonest characterization of what took place.. Considering I said this about Hart..

    "Hart had to be yanked from the starting line up because of his horrendous play.. he was also yanked from games for bad defense as well. I don't wan't to appear to be dumping on him cause he's personable and very easy to like. Like I said, when healthy he has the potential to be a really nice player in your lineup."

    "One could argue he's a slightly better 3pt shooter, but he's really not good at that either. I am hopeful he can regain his form from his rookie year. He was also playing while injured which accounts for his lackluster play. Hart will be a solid rotational player in this league, maybe even more."

  22. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCal4Pels View Post
    It's tough from an admin standpoint, because everyone has the right to their opinion, but when someone lacks the more basic argument skills, lacks social skills, and clearly has trouble understanding and respecting other people's perspectives and the context from which other people are speaking, it reduces the quality of the threads and forums if such a person is insessantly posting. Especially when the poster feels just typing more words and more posts constitutes 'sound evidence', or 'winning an argument'.

    Not trying to be a jerk to you, Nichols, and his has nothing to do with your opinion on BI, but rather the way you express your opinion, interact with others, and support your arguments. You would do well to post less and read more, be more tentative before you post, and ask yourself if you are being respectful (you haven't been), if you are understanding the other person's perspective (you have shown repeated difficulty with this), aren't contradicting your own points you are trying very hard to make (don't speculate), and are using solid evidence to back up your case (not attempts at gatekeeping or saying someone else shares your opinion therefore that constitutes evidence). This will truly benefit you in the long run in far more ways than just posting on sports forums.
    Lesson not learned


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  23. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    You guys act as if your arguments are nuanced.. I say this with all due respect, they aren't. They are easy to understand. Me not agreeing with you doesn't mean I don't understand you. And of course analytics is an effective tool one might use to assess talent. Neither of you have yet to address the question I asked 3 times now.. I'll try again. Why.... was Hart a throw in on trade negotiations when there are analytic departments for most teams in the NBA? Why did they not come to the same conclusion as you?

    Then the IQ argument.. Another poster just posted a link to an article written by a sports writer who lauded Ingram's IQ, right after you two calling it into question. I'm a reasonable person, but in regards to these two specific arguments leveled at Ingram It is my opinion that they make very little sense.

    This suggestion to post less, because you don't like absurd takes being challenged is almost as ridiculous as your commentary on Ingram.

    Was the writer of the article that was posted in here wrong about Ingram's IQ? Were the scores of analytic departments that teams employ wrong for not believing Hart had equal value with Ingram? Let's not act as if my positions are outside of the mainstream simply because you two don't agree with them.
    Let me ask this. Show me where you have proof that Hart was just a throw in, and not a valued part of the deal from the Pelicans end? How do you know FOR SURE, that it wasn't the Lakers wanting to keep Kuzma, but actually the Pels WANTING Hart? My point is, you REALLY don't know for sure. And yet, you try to use that phrase (Hart was a throw in) to prove your point. I think you need more than that one catchphrase to try and prove your position.

  24. #74
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    Maybe throw in conveys zero value, which isn't my intent. He certainly has value. For clarity I just meant he wasn't the principle part of any trade proposed and finalized.

    It has been reported from many sources that the Pels wanted Kuz, but since Kuz did a good job of endearing himself to the front office, (some would say brown nose) namely Ms. Buss, and considering his rate of production on a cheap contract, the Lakers resisted and opted to give up the high draft pick instead.

    I know for sure Hart wasn't a principle piece, or essential to getting the deal done. But I can see how you'd take exception to the "throw in" statement. He was a valued piece I'm sure.
    Last edited by Nichols; 09-21-2019 at 08:57 PM.

  25. #75
    Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    231
    Also consider almost every analyst and commentator on the Lakers/Pels negotiations stating that Ingram, and Ball would have to be included as the foundation to any trade. That they were two of the Lakers biggest assets.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •