Conspiracy Theory Corner
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
Only thing that scares me about Ingram is the kind of contract he is expecting to get. I think 50 per is too rich for a guy who is seen as a one way player and kinda does his own thing on offense. It has the stink of a Lavine deal and with the current CBA it feels like teams are very cautious with the high priced deals.
If he holds steady on his number then we either pay him and risk it turning into a negative deal or lose him for nothing after just 1 year if some other team meets his claim.
If he holds steady on his number then we either pay him and risk it turning into a negative deal or lose him for nothing after just 1 year if some other team meets his claim.
All recent championship teams had good defense: Boston, Denver, Milwaukee. There is one good defender on the Jazz now, Kessler, and he is seriously discussed as part of the deal for Ingram. The team featuring Lauri, Ingram, Keyonte and Sexton is going nowhere and getting killed defensively in the first round of the playoffs (if they make it). Ainge is not stupid, the two Boston championship teams that he built were very good defensively. He will not go for expensive, defensively challenged core with poor playmaking.
That’s why no team is touching him, and we shouldn’t either.
If no team wants to pay him that much money, then he won't get that much money.
If we acquire him in a trade then here are the scenarios:
A) He plays so well that he is worth the money and we have a great player locked up for the future (Best Case scenario)
B) He plays so well that he is worth the money and then chooses to sign somewhere else in free agency (would hurt pretty bad)
B) He doesn't play well enough to earn the money, and someone pays him anyway (not our problem),
C) He doesn't play well enough to earn the money and we sign him for what he's worth.
D) He doesn't play well enough to earn the money, but we pay him anyway (Worst Case Scenario, but also very unlikely imo)
If the acquisition cost is cheap enough, then it might be worth the risk.
If the acquisition cost is really just Collins and a first then what you are really balancing is the benefit of getting off of Collins contract and the possibility of adding a significant piece to our puzzle against a first round pick and the risk of losing our 2025 pick to OKC for a guy we end up not wanting long term.
I love the 2025 draft, and so that is a tough decision for me, but I'm starting to like the 2026 draft even better and so if it doesn't work and we had to pivot to going all in for 2026 then that might not be so bad. If it works, and we don't have to endure all of the losing, that is very tempting.
Well you’ve just proven that there are too many unknowns.
The thing is if we trade for him we’re automatically in a win now mode no matter the outcome - meaning the opportunity cost is the tank and potentially a franchise changing player in the 20215 draft.
And for that reason - I’m out.
How many players in this draft will be top 20 players at any point in their career and how long will it take them to become that?
The reality might be that Lauri takes another step, Sexton takes another step, Walker takes a big step, and the the rest of the players also progress. The fact might be the Jazz are too good to tank.
You are dealing with the probability that the 2025 draft pick we can get with Lauri playing is going to be a better player than Ingram within Lauri's contract. I love the 2025 draft, but I'm not sure that probability is very high.
Tanking with Lauri is potentially problematic because I don't think you can just flip a switch and we're going to be good in 2026. We will have just as many reasons, if not more to be worse in 2026 than 2025, and then at that point we are talking about trying to be good in 2027? Are we really going to ask Lauri to be THAT patient?
FWIW, I'm not necessarily pro go get Ingram, but I would understand it if the FO got him on a good deal, and would be happy that we might be working towards a good team sooner than later.
Theoretically I think Sexton/Ingram/Lauri can be great together. I could see it having a learning curve period. Both Sexton and Ingram are known for holding the ball too long, but they are both great playmakers. Sexton just had his career high in assist % at 30% and Ingram's last 3 years have been 28/27/27. In theory you would have really great playmakers 1-3 next to Lauri's spacing and Walker's vertical spacing. Maybe the Collins trade is like Collins/Sensabaugh/1st round pick.
I think you go into the season with:
Sexton
Keyonte
Ingram
Lauri
Walker
Then you have Hendricks/Clarkson/Filipowski/Eubanks/Juzang off the bench. Maybe sign Gordon Hayward or Lonnie Walker?
And you see how that does, you might need to make a decision on Sexton/Keyonte for a better defensive guard who can fit a role better, but you would have so much firepower around Walker's defense.
Who has space next year and would want to sign Ingram to a big deal? I guess San Antonio would be the biggest competition?
The sticking point for a potential Ingram/Utah trade I think would be Kessler. I would imagine Utah would want to keep Walker as he would fit well next to the four other projected starters since they can all shoot at a high level.
Currently the Pelicans only have Theiss and Missi as centers. I would guess Theiss is the projected starter currently.
But it's crazy because if they dont trade Ingram, they will have to bring both Jones and Murphy off the bench, and they are both top 100 (maybe like top 80, maybe even higher) players. And now that they have Dejounte, they dont need Ingram's playmaking as much as the ball will be in Murray/McCollum/Zion's hands the a lot.
That's kind of why I think you may be able to get away with the best player in the trade going back being Collins. Whatever you think of John Collins, he is better in all aspect than Daniel Theiss. Theiss might be a smidge better as a rim protector, but it's not by much and he's a much worse rebounder.
Maybe Pelicans get stubborn because they know they are getting shortchanged on value, but they kind of have to trade him if they can get a first round and a roster upgrade at a position of need (even if the player doesnt fully fit that position)
Currently the Pelicans only have Theiss and Missi as centers. I would guess Theiss is the projected starter currently.
But it's crazy because if they dont trade Ingram, they will have to bring both Jones and Murphy off the bench, and they are both top 100 (maybe like top 80, maybe even higher) players. And now that they have Dejounte, they dont need Ingram's playmaking as much as the ball will be in Murray/McCollum/Zion's hands the a lot.
That's kind of why I think you may be able to get away with the best player in the trade going back being Collins. Whatever you think of John Collins, he is better in all aspect than Daniel Theiss. Theiss might be a smidge better as a rim protector, but it's not by much and he's a much worse rebounder.
Maybe Pelicans get stubborn because they know they are getting shortchanged on value, but they kind of have to trade him if they can get a first round and a roster upgrade at a position of need (even if the player doesnt fully fit that position)