.
Pelicans Report
 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 49 of 49

Thread: I agree with Jake here...

  1. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by P_B_&_G View Post
    Just imagine a timeline in which we draft Garland instead of trading the 4th pick away. Just imagine.
    Yup

  2. #27
    It does not work. That's not out of animosity toward Brandon. But you can't have two main stars who don't shoot threes and compete in the modern NBA. Keep Brandon and you'll be running uphill against good teams for the next five years. I have no doubt a pairing of Zion/Ingram will get you to around 50+/- wins a year, if healthy (and that's a big if). But--barring a radical change in either player's game--you are not going to get the volume of 3-point shooting you need to compete against the top teams and get to conference finals or win a chip.

    There are no solutions, just trade-offs. Is it riskier to trade Ingram and face the uncertainty that you can make the roster better by giving up on a proven but limited player that hamstrings your team. Or is it better to lock yourself in with that player and hope some combination of motivation, coaching alchemy and good fortune propels a roster you know to be pretty good but flawed into contention. I'd opt for path one--every time.

  3. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by new city champ View Post
    It does not work. That's not out of animosity toward Brandon. But you can't have two main stars who don't shoot threes and compete in the modern NBA. Keep Brandon and you'll be running uphill against good teams for the next five years. I have no doubt a pairing of Zion/Ingram will get you to around 50+/- wins a year, if healthy (and that's a big if). But--barring a radical change in either player's game--you are not going to get the volume of 3-point shooting you need to compete against the top teams and get to conference finals or win a chip.

    There are no solutions, just trade-offs. Is it riskier to trade Ingram and face the uncertainty that you can make the roster better by giving up on a proven but limited player that hamstrings your team. Or is it better to lock yourself in with that player and hope some combination of motivation, coaching alchemy and good fortune propels a roster you know to be pretty good but flawed into contention. I'd opt for path one--every time.
    Great post! It all comes down to what ownership wants. Does Ms. B want to compete for titles or is she happy with a competitive team that will make the playoffs most years but may never get to the top? I suppose with the team as constructed there's a very slight chance everything breaks the right way and they sneak into a conference finals appearance. I just don't see a way this team ever gets to the finals as currently constructed unless Murphy takes a major leap and maybe Hawkins gets to play and goes nuclear.

    Oh yeah, and health. Everyone finds a way to stay healthy the entire year.

  4. #29
    I'm old enough to remember when suggesting trading BI for KD would get you laughed at

  5. #30
    The Franchise
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    1,533
    For those of you that want Ingram gone so bad.. who do you really think is going to come to NO willingly?? And of the willing, how many are of the same caliber as Ingram?

    Keep Ingram with Zion, hope for a 3rd fringe all-star to join them, and get a new coach. Or move Ingram, and forget about getting the 3rd all-star. Then lose Zion.

  6. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    For those of you that want Ingram gone so bad.. who do you really think is going to come to NO willingly?? .
    Don't know, don't care.

    ''But if you trade Ingram, you won't be contending and might lose Zion'' is not an argument when WITH Ingram we aren't contending and might lose Zion.

    We had this same argument last year. ''Gotta keep the team together, see how far it can go, who knows!''

    Why should this franchise pay through the nose to keep together a team that has won nothing. Nothing. I can understand going over the cap, entering the luxury tax, incurring penalties, if that's the price of keeping together a contender. This is not a contender. On what planet is it acceptable to enter cap torture to keep together a squad that continually underachieves?

    5 years of Zion and Ingram together. Not one secure playoff run. Two total playoff game wins until today - maybe that becomes three tonight, but I doubt it.

    How many years are we expected to just run it back, the contract situation getting worse and worse.

    ''hope for a 3rd fringe all star to join them'' HOW.

    With WHAT money? With WHAT salary cap flexibility? We have a third fringe all-star now, you're saying some team is going to trade their guy for CJ and that'll make us better? Someone has a player that's more impactful than CJ but we're going to somehow acquire that player with CJ, without giving up either Herb or Trey?

    This is what irritates me. People saying to move BI are saying to do so because of the actual, real life problems with the salary cap, and are suggesting actual, real life potential moves that we could look into to try and improve the situation.

    People saying to keep BI are basically just saying ''welp, not gonna get anything better so just hope for someone to show up, I guess? Might help.''

    And then that's being sold as the voice of reason. Absurdity.
    Basketball.

  7. #32
    Nichols is just an Ingram fanboy. Refuses to see reality both in on-court results and the reality of the New Orleans market/cap situation. Bigger concern is whether the front office is willing to make the smart decision.

  8. #33
    And for what it's worth, the whole ''who will you get back that's as good as him'' argument means even less to me, because I've personally said multiple times that I'm happy to take back for example, two worse players with better fit.

    Take this season for example. Let's say we wanted to trade BI. I've seen some Piston's fans proposing trading BI and our pick for Ivey and their pick.

    Would I do that? No, Ivey isn't a position of need player and I don't rate him that highly.

    Would I trade BI + 17 for Duren + Flynn + 1?

    I think so. You can then move JV and Nance and try and shore up the PG position a little further, because you'd have Duren as a solid C option (I wanted him during his draft, and while I don't think he's as good as BI right now, I think the upside is there and he's already a huge rebounder and rim protector, both skills we need) and we'd be able to draft Alexandre Sarr at #1, and he's another mobile rim protecting big who's showing shooting potential which would be improved fit alongside Zion and would help us towards playing 5-out. As well as providing potential all-star upside for a cost controlled rookie deal.

    We'd also get a near $30m trade exception, which in a season like this one where the luxury tax is going to come rushing in as it's the final season before the cap changes, would present a huge amount of opportunity to absorb larger contracts for players who are still good but maybe overpaid a little, in exchange for replenishing the 'war chest' of assets.

    Would solve our C problems, give us an opportunity to try and address the PG issue, would re-set our salary cap timer by adding quality play on rookie deals, and potentially clear up the fit issues.

    Edit: for clarity, Pistons obviously don't have the #1 pick locked down right now, that's just a hypothetical. I'd still do it even if they got #3 or something though, I do think there's obvious upside picks in the top 5
    Last edited by Pelicanidae; 04-29-2024 at 05:16 PM.

  9. #34
    Charter Member PELICANSFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    23,291
    Quote Originally Posted by P_B_&_G View Post
    Just imagine a timeline in which we draft Garland instead of trading the 4th pick away. Just imagine.
    Makes me sick whenever I think about it. Griffin has completely wasted almost every part of the AD trade.

  10. #35
    Charter Member PELICANSFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    23,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    For those of you that want Ingram gone so bad.. who do you really think is going to come to NO willingly?? And of the willing, how many are of the same caliber as Ingram?

    Keep Ingram with Zion, hope for a 3rd fringe all-star to join them, and get a new coach. Or move Ingram, and forget about getting the 3rd all-star. Then lose Zion.
    I really like BI. However, it really appears he and Zion do not fit together. If I have to choose, I choose Zion. We need a more modern NBA player that will open up the floor and let Zion work. I do not think we will get a player that is as good as BI, but hopefully we can get a player that fits with Zion and opens up cap to extend Trey.

  11. #36
    The Franchise
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    1,533
    Quote Originally Posted by pr1840 View Post
    Nichols is just an Ingram fanboy. Refuses to see reality both in on-court results and the reality of the New Orleans market/cap situation. Bigger concern is whether the front office is willing to make the smart decision.
    You're clearly not working with a full deck.

  12. #37
    The Franchise
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    1,533
    Quote Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN View Post
    I really like BI. However, it really appears he and Zion do not fit together. If I have to choose, I choose Zion. We need a more modern NBA player that will open up the floor and let Zion work. I do not think we will get a player that is as good as BI, but hopefully we can get a player that fits with Zion and opens up cap to extend Trey.
    Zion's not staying with someone almost as good as Ingram.

    I do think he stays with Ingram, plus another talent of that level. It's not so much about Ingram as it is having a player of that talent with another to pair with Zion.

  13. #38
    The Franchise
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    1,533
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    Don't know, don't care.

    ''But if you trade Ingram, you won't be contending and might lose Zion'' is not an argument when WITH Ingram we aren't contending and might lose Zion.

    We had this same argument last year. ''Gotta keep the team together, see how far it can go, who knows!''

    Why should this franchise pay through the nose to keep together a team that has won nothing. Nothing. I can understand going over the cap, entering the luxury tax, incurring penalties, if that's the price of keeping together a contender. This is not a contender. On what planet is it acceptable to enter cap torture to keep together a squad that continually underachieves?

    5 years of Zion and Ingram together. Not one secure playoff run. Two total playoff game wins until today - maybe that becomes three tonight, but I doubt it.

    How many years are we expected to just run it back, the contract situation getting worse and worse.

    ''hope for a 3rd fringe all star to join them'' HOW.

    With WHAT money? With WHAT salary cap flexibility? We have a third fringe all-star now, you're saying some team is going to trade their guy for CJ and that'll make us better? Someone has a player that's more impactful than CJ but we're going to somehow acquire that player with CJ, without giving up either Herb or Trey?

    This is what irritates me. People saying to move BI are saying to do so because of the actual, real life problems with the salary cap, and are suggesting actual, real life potential moves that we could look into to try and improve the situation.

    People saying to keep BI are basically just saying ''welp, not gonna get anything better so just hope for someone to show up, I guess? Might help.''

    And then that's being sold as the voice of reason. Absurdity.
    The entire point.. is you need a 3rd all-star type player. With a better coach. If this team stays pat Zion is gone. Trade Ingram for better fits, Zion is gone. Get another all-star, he stay's and you're playing for something.

  14. #39
    The Franchise
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    1,533
    And yes, you'll have to pair a bad contract with an asset to move it. And after the playoffs there's going to be quite a few all-star talents available.

  15. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    The entire point.. is you need a 3rd all-star type player. With a better coach. If this team stays pat Zion is gone. Trade Ingram for better fits, Zion is gone. Get another all-star, he stay's and you're playing for something.
    Fantasy land. Keep Ingram, you're not getting another star. Already outlined the problems with the contract situation and our position with relation to the cap. If you don't want to listen that's not my problem.

  16. #41
    The Franchise
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Long Beach
    Posts
    1,533
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    Fantasy land. Keep Ingram, you're not getting another star. Already outlined the problems with the contract situation and our position with relation to the cap. If you don't want to listen that's not my problem.
    Of course it's not your problem. You're just a fan on a message board. We don't need to agree. You act like there aren't other teams in the league with 3 bloated contracts on their cap.

  17. #42
    Charter Member PELICANSFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    23,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    Zion's not staying with someone almost as good as Ingram.

    I do think he stays with Ingram, plus another talent of that level. It's not so much about Ingram as it is having a player of that talent with another to pair with Zion.
    We cannot afford to keep BI AND get another talent of that level. Zion staying is not dependent on BI. He just wants to win. What we have now may not be the answer, especially if re-signing BI means jettisoning players like Trey, Naji, JV, Jose, etc.

  18. #43
    RIP BDJ AUSSIE_PELICAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    7,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Pelicanidae View Post
    Fantasy land. Keep Ingram, you're not getting another star. Already outlined the problems with the contract situation and our position with relation to the cap. If you don't want to listen that's not my problem.
    Don't bother Dae.

  19. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Nichols View Post
    The entire point.. is you need a 3rd all-star type player. With a better coach. If this team stays pat Zion is gone. Trade Ingram for better fits, Zion is gone. Get another all-star, he stay's and you're playing for something.
    You have no idea what will make Zion want to leave or stay. He is under contract for 4 more years. If he eventually wants to leave, so be it...hopefully he's healthy and we can get a giant trade haul for him. We already have 3rd all-star type players in CJ and Murphy (assuming continued improvement with Trey)...the issue is that this current roster has been proven to be a bad fit at the top. Financially locking in the top of the roster seems, at best, foolhardy.

  20. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by P_B_&_G View Post
    Just imagine a timeline in which we draft Garland instead of trading the 4th pick away. Just imagine.
    Why? The team had Jrue and Lonzo Ball. Garland had major questions going into the draft, including injury concerns (played only 5 games in college). The draft was seen as a major drop off after the 3rd pick, who turned out to not be that great anyway.

    There was not a ton of hype around getting Garland with that pick on this board if I recall, so why go back and wish about a player that ended up turning out better than expected? This scenario isn't anywhere close to Kings fans imagining that they drafted Luka.

    If you want to imagine something, then why not just imagine a timeline where Zion and Lonzo weren't constantly injured?

    I can remember clearly half the board pissed when Dyson Daniels was drafted. Not shocking that some of the major people pushing nonstop for the team to draft him, and then trashing anyone who disagreed with them, are nowhere to be seen now. But I don't remember hardly anyone pissed when the team traded down from 4 to 8/17/35 in that draft.

  21. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by brad01 View Post
    Why? The team had Jrue and Lonzo Ball. Garland had major questions going into the draft, including injury concerns (played only 5 games in college). The draft was seen as a major drop off after the 3rd pick, who turned out to not be that great anyway.

    There was not a ton of hype around getting Garland with that pick on this board if I recall, so why go back and wish about a player that ended up turning out better than expected? This scenario isn't anywhere close to Kings fans imagining that they drafted Luka.

    If you want to imagine something, then why not just imagine a timeline where Zion and Lonzo weren't constantly injured?

    I can remember clearly half the board pissed when Dyson Daniels was drafted. Not shocking that some of the major people pushing nonstop for the team to draft him, and then trashing anyone who disagreed with them, are nowhere to be seen now. But I don't remember hardly anyone pissed when the team traded down from 4 to 8/17/35 in that draft.
    Because I'm cheating by using the magic of hindsight. So again, where would the team be right now had they taken Garland with that pick? I was okay with the trade down at the time but I would also have been good had we taken Garland. It's above my pay grade to make that call. But with hindsight it would have changed the trajectory of the franchise had they taken him.

  22. #47
    The Voice of Reason Contributor RaisingTheBar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    13,168
    Quote Originally Posted by 13 - 3 View Post
    Willie did not even make the list. Not a wasted click. Nobody buying the injury B.S. anymore. Enjoy Galveston!

    What?s the joy that you and others get about the constant Galveston comments? The team isn?t leaving and it honestly just makes people look like huge D?s.

  23. #48
    The Voice of Reason Contributor RaisingTheBar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    13,168
    Quote Originally Posted by P_B_&_G View Post
    Just imagine a timeline in which we draft Garland instead of trading the 4th pick away. Just imagine.
    I was screaming Garland when he wasn?t picked before us. Even without knowing how poo Jaxon and NAW would turn out, who ever thinks trading 4 for 9 and 17 is a good deal? That?s just?.dumb

    I honestly think we should be targeting garland in a trade. If Cs win out 4-1 who knows Cleveland might be willing to part with him.

  24. #49
    Charter Member PELICANSFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kenner, LA
    Posts
    23,291
    Quote Originally Posted by brad01 View Post
    But I don't remember hardly anyone pissed when the team traded down from 4 to 8/17/35 in that draft.
    There were many who said that trading down in an NBA draft is never a good idea. We were strapped by some dumb contracts (i.e. Solomon) that Griff had to dump in his desire to get JJ.

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
  •