Brandon Ingram - Blood Clot

[RobertM320]

Looks like just the mention of a player and the Pels can cause problems now. Did we dodge a bullet here?

Brandon Ingram has a DVT - a blood clot that forms in the leg (usually when immobile, like on a flight). A DVT can become a pulmonary embolism. That's what Chris Bosh had. It can kill you. He'll need to take a blood-thinning med for a few months. You can't play while on that med.

— Alex Kennedy (@AlexKennedyNBA) March 9, 2019

If Brandon Ingram gets 2nd DVT, he'd need to be on a blood-thinning med long-term to prevent a possibly lethal clot. You can't play while on that med because you're at risk of a bleeding episode. Hopefully this is a one-time thing. Otherwise, he may be in same boat as Chris Bosh.

— Alex Kennedy (@AlexKennedyNBA) March 9, 2019

Correction: Ingram's DVT is in his arm, not his leg. When I had my DVT, it was in my arm too (it became a pulmonary embolism). Again, this should only become concerning if he develops a second DVT. Going forward, he'll need to stretch on planes, wear compression sleeves, etc.

— Alex Kennedy (@AlexKennedyNBA) March 9, 2019

[Pelicans78]

If he has a genetic predisposition to blood clots, he'll need blood thinners for the rest of his life.

[Tinman]

If he has a genetic predisposition to blood clots, he'll need blood thinners for the rest of his life.

If it is the case, his career will end. I hope this young fella has a 1 off. This would be horrible for that young man.

[Pelicanidae]

Hopefully it's just a one time thing. I don't know what the odds of recurrence are on something like this, but nobody wants to see anyone get their career taken away from them, especially when they're so young. It was sad enough for Bosh, and he had all-star appearances, rings, and over a decade of league experience. Would be tragic beyond tragic to see it happen to someone so young, before they've even had a chance to play for anything other than a bottom feeder.

[6warddude]

i guess it depends on who you ask....i dont think we dodge a bullet because i didnt believe we was going to trade AD to the lakers before the dead line......now i do think this may have put a dent in the lakers future offer for AD if the new GM look at ingram as a liability..... i think ingram status take the lakers out of a AD trade completely as of now...

i hope him can recover and live his dream...

[Mythrol]

Sucks for him. The risk is high and I'd hate for his career to end like this. Hopefully he makes a recovery and it doesn't affect him going forward.

I wonder how this affects his value? Like Bosh the team that gives him a big contract can always have his money removed from the cap if he's unable to play again, but I wonder if that makes teams apprehensive of trading for him.

[Pelicanidae]

Sucks for him. The risk is high and I'd hate for his career to end like this. Hopefully he makes a recovery and it doesn't affect him going forward.

I wonder how this affects his value? Like Bosh the team that gives him a big contract can always have his money removed from the cap if he's unable to play again, but I wonder if that makes teams apprehensive of trading for him.

Probably. And as much as it's a cold and kind of callous thing to say, doesn't this re-affirm how waiting until after the deadline was the right move? Imagine if we had taken the final Lakers offer, only for Ingram to come over, have half a dozen good games and then possibly be out of the league. Would have been an unbelievable mess.

[6warddude]

Probably. And as much as it's a cold and kind of callous thing to say, doesn't this re-affirm how waiting until after the deadline was the right move? Imagine if we had taken the final Lakers offer, only for Ingram to come over, have half a dozen good games and then possibly be out of the league. Would have been an unbelievable mess.

its business...you are not suppose to have feelings about others when doing whats best for you.......the way AD and his crew handle this was bad and things are backfiring on the lakers......

it looks like the basketball gods maybe giving us another star in zion by sending AD out,if everything fall right for the knicks....

my question is do the ingram thing low ball us in a boston trade....the lakers dont have anything to offer now so will boston still throw tatum in a deal to bid against themselves if another team dont come with something good?...

[Pelicanidae]

its business...you are not suppose to have feelings about others when doing whats best for you.......the way AD and his crew handle this was bad and things are backfiring on the lakers......

it looks like the basketball gods maybe giving us another star in zion by sending AD out,if everything fall right for the knicks....

my question is do the ingram thing low ball us in a boston trade....the lakers dont have anything to offer now so will boston still throw tatum in a deal to bid against themselves if another team dont come with something good?...

Well, in a world where no other team offers stuff and it's just Boston and LA, then yeah Boston probably pull Tatum now.

But considering there's still NY and the Nets, and the potential offers from any other teams like Chicago or Phoenix, they won't really be able to pull Tatum if they want the deal.

[Mythrol]

If Boston pulled Tatum I'd rather take a flyer on Ingram. Tatum is that key to the deal.

Brown + smart and picks ain't cutting it.

[Pelicanidae]

If Boston pulled Tatum I'd rather take a flyer on Ingram. Tatum is that key to the deal.

Brown + smart and picks ain't cutting it.

You'd take Lonzo + Kuzma + the 10th pick over something like Brown + Smart + 14th + 19th + 22nd?

Edit: Note, I left Ingram out because the risk is that his career is effectively over. Also remember that Lonzo played 52 games in his rookie year, and 47 games this year.

[Tinman]

You'd take Lonzo + Kuzma + the 10th pick over something like Brown + Smart + 14th + 19th + 22nd?

Edit: Note, I left Ingram out because the risk is that his career is effectively over. Also remember that Lonzo played 52 games in his rookie year, and 47 games this year.

Uh, No!

But, Tatums off the board, I want Memphis pick also.

[Mythrol]

You'd take Lonzo + Kuzma + the 10th pick over something like Brown + Smart + 14th + 19th + 22nd?

Edit: Note, I left Ingram out because the risk is that his career is effectively over. Also remember that Lonzo played 52 games in his rookie year, and 47 games this year.

The idea is flip Lonzo and Ingram, Kuzma, three 1st. You can probably get another first out of the Lakers now due to his injury.

Yes I'd do that over a Boston package without Tatum. Tatum is non negotiable in any deal.

[Pelicanidae]

The idea is flip Lonzo and Ingram, Kuzma, three 1st. You can probably get another first out of the Lakers now due to his injury.

Yes I'd do that over a Boston package without Tatum. Tatum is non negotiable in any deal.

Flip them for what? Ingram might not be able to play, Lonzo barely plays as it is, Kuzma is a one way player, and the Laker's picks aren't super high quality. Sure, 10th is good, but it's not exactly stunning, even for two of them. Whereas Boston could easily throw in the Memphis pick.

[Mythrol]

Flip them for what? Ingram might not be able to play, Lonzo barely plays as it is, Kuzma is a one way player, and the Laker's picks aren't super high quality. Sure, 10th is good, but it's not exactly stunning, even for two of them. Whereas Boston could easily throw in the Memphis pick.

Clearly you don't make the deal if Ingram isn't good to go. I mean other players have had the same issue once and never again. A risk yes but one that is treatable and may never come up again.

If we get 3 future picks who knows what that will be. Lebron will be gone by the last one.

You can disagree that's fine but if I'm talking to Boston and they pull Tatum I stop talks. They need AD to keep Kyrie. I'm not playing games with them. Tatum and the Memphis pick 100% locked or I don't continue with them

[Tinman]

Flip them for what? Ingram might not be able to play, Lonzo barely plays as it is, Kuzma is a one way player, and the Laker's picks aren't super high quality. Sure, 10th is good, but it's not exactly stunning, even for two of them. Whereas Boston could easily throw in the Memphis pick.

I was kinda thinking if we're gonna go the flip route, we'd get more for Smart & Brown than for Kuzma & Ball? No?

[Pelicanidae]

I understand that, especially from the perspective of a front office, because you try and force them to give up as much as possible. But if it was a vacuum, and you had two options

1) Ingram with the risk of further clots, Lonzo with his injury history, Kuzma + 2 Laker's 1sts
of
2) Brown + Smart + Memphis pick + 16th pick + 19th pick

Do you actually go LA?

[Mythrol]

I understand that, especially from the perspective of a front office, because you try and force them to give up as much as possible. But if it was a vacuum, and you had two options

1) Ingram with the risk of further clots, Lonzo with his injury history, Kuzma + 2 Laker's 1sts
of
2) Brown + Smart + Memphis pick + 16th pick + 19th pick

Do you actually go LA?

I think you keep missing that I'm saying 3 Laker 1st with the last one being when Lebron is gone. All of these picks would be unprotected. So let's say their pick this year hits at 10. Next year hits at 22. Then once LBJ is gone I think it's a crap shoot. I could so that unprotected pick being high. So Ingram, Lonzo, Kuzma, 10th, 20th, and another mid lottery pick.

Compared to Brown, Smart, Memphis 1st, 16th, and 19th.

Yeah I'd probably bank on Ingram and that 10th pick being the best players in that deal.

[Pelicanidae]

I'm not missing it, I just don't think it happens. I don't believe the Laker's give up more than 2 firsts.

I think you're slightly underrating the risk with regards to Ingram. You say that you'd take a flier on him. Well what if there's no flier to take. Ingram isn't involved. He's gone. That's the question I'm asking. If Ingram is gone: not ''if there's Ingram with a 20% chance of there being health issues'', but instead, ''if you get Ingram at all, there's a 50% chance he's gone from the league forever in a year.''

[Mythrol]

Where are you getting the 50% chance he's out of the league from? Like I said I'd only do the deal if Ingram is medically cleared. I also don't do the trade if they don't add a 3rd 1st.

[Pelicanidae]

Where are you getting the 50% chance he's out of the league from? Like I said I'd only do the deal if Ingram is medically cleared. I also don't do the trade if they don't add a 3rd 1st.

I'm making it up. I'm not saying that there's any good reason yet to suspect that. I'm asking a ''what if'' scenario. I do not claim that that's a probability, or even a possibility, I'm not a doctor.

But that's part of my question. You said you don't do the LA deal if they don't add a third first, and you also said you don't do the Boston deal if they don't add Tatum and the Memphis pick. Cool, and I agree that those should be what our FO should be wanting as a minimum. But if neither, do either, then which of the two minimised offers is better?

Edit: I do also acknowledge that this is assuming a binary choice between the two. Obviously other teams could get involved which changes everything. I'm asking of the two diminished offers, between LA and Boston, which is best?

[Mythrol]

Oh. That wasn't my original premise when I said I'd do a trade with the Lakers for Ingram if Boston took Tatum out. And my real answer would be I'd probably do a Knicks deal or a 3rd teams deal over a Boston deal without Tatum, assuming they have a top 3 pick.

However, in the scenario you laid out where Ingram has a 50% chance of never playing again and the Lakers only include 2 picks and I have to pick between Boston and the Lakers I'd do a Boston package without Tatum.

[Pelicanidae]

Oh. That wasn't my original premise when I said I'd do a trade with the Lakers for Ingram if Boston took Tatum out. And my real answer would be I'd probably do a Knicks deal or a 3rd teams deal over a Boston deal without Tatum, assuming they have a top 3 pick.

However, in the scenario you laid out where Ingram has a 50% chance of never playing again and the Lakers only include 2 picks and I have to pick between Boston and the Lakers I'd do a Boston package without Tatum.

That's fair enough, it's totally possible I wasn't clear enough in my question at first. Sorry if that's the case.

I think agree that in that scenario, the Boston package would be best, but that if it came to that kind of thing then a third party like the Knicks would be the overwhelming favourite.

[RobertM320]

That's fair enough, it's totally possible I wasn't clear enough in my question at first. Sorry if that's the case.

I think agree that in that scenario, the Boston package would be best, but that if it came to that kind of thing then a third party like the Knicks would be the overwhelming favourite.

If a BOS deal has no Tatum and a LAL deal has no Ingram, there's going to be SOME team out there that will take a shot on AD and offer a better package than either of those do.

[GuardianAngel25]

Damn this sucks! That’s alright as long as he can come back 100% doesn’t change anything for me. Would like to see him finish the season but this also doesn’t allow them to increase Ingram’s value if he continued to play at a post all star break to finish out the season. Will not concentrate on a few other. Young teams and packages they will have to offer. That Lakers pick with Lebron and now Ingram our is looking pretty good. They will have trouble winning another game if Lebrons minutes and games are slashed as much as they say it will be.