| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tony Anapolis wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | Tony Anapolis wrote: | | I honestly don't see us moving the former top 2 pick for this year's. It makes no sense. If the top 2-3 in this draft are that much better then Ingram, why would another team do that? |
I don't see us or another team doing that either, it's just a hypothetical.
And Ingram certainly has his believers as well, with some of them seemingly being in important positions. |
Personally and I know you are not a fan, but I would have at least considered trading him for Cousins. Most def would trade him for a Jimmy Butler. Pg13 of course. |
I wouldn't trade him for Cousins, but that has more to do with my opinion of Cousins than Ingram. Definitely for Butler and PG13 if we have to. I'd rather just sign him outright if that's an option. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
KeepItRealOrElse
Retired Number
Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 32767
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fortysixn2
Star Player
Joined: 22 Jun 2016
Posts: 2849
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The jury is still out on Ingram. I think he has the tools to be a very high level player, but not transformational one. He could possibly be the 2nd or 3rd best player on a championship team. If I were to actually rank potential and moveability
Ingram - Possible 2nd or 3rd best player on a championship team - Give one more year, do not trade
DLO - Possible starter on a championship team, is a consistent 3pter away from being a top 10 guard in the league - Give 1 more year, do not trade
Clarkson - decent bench player in the NBA. Not going to get any better, can be traded at will.
Zubac - Possible starter on a championship team - Give 2-3 more years to see how body and defense develops. Do not trade
Randle - A starter who puts up numbers on a lottery/low playoff seed team. Not suited to play on a championship team due to lack of defensive ability/willingness and his physical shortcomings. Unlike DLO and Ingram who I think love basketball and want to improve, I don't see any evidence that Randle's game has improved at all this year in terms of mechanics or understanding - Trade at will
Nance - Bench player on a championship team - Do Not trade.
No players we have now are capable of even being the 2nd best player on a championship team. If Indy is willing...Clarkson/JR/Houstons pick for George. If the answer is no, move on. Either way, we aren't going to be able to lure a top tier FA here so let's hope we keep our pick this year and get a transformational guy in the draft some time in the next 5 years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
doesn't take blind faith. He's shooting 35.0% from three in 2017, total of 28 games. 41.2% from the field over that stretch as well. That's not too bad.
Last edited by dao on Thu Mar 09, 2017 4:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocho
Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53835
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | Tony Anapolis wrote: | | I honestly don't see us moving the former top 2 pick for this year's. It makes no sense. If the top 2-3 in this draft are that much better then Ingram, why would another team do that? |
I don't see us or another team doing that either, it's just a hypothetical.
And Ingram certainly has his believers as well, with some of them seemingly being in important positions. |
I wonder how people would perceive him if we had drafted him with the #12 pick.
_________________
14-5-3-12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KeepItRealOrElse
Retired Number
Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 32767
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dao wrote: | | KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
doesn't take blind faith. He's shooting 35.0% from three in 2017, total of 28 games. 41.2% from the field over that stretch as well. That's not too bad. |
Thanks for that. That's an encouraging stretch that people should look more to |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | | dao wrote: | | KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
doesn't take blind faith. He's shooting 35.0% from three in 2017, total of 28 games. 41.2% from the field over that stretch as well. That's not too bad. |
Thanks for that. That's an encouraging stretch that people should look more to |
agreed. Ingram has been progressing pretty consistently over the past several months. Just to be lazy I'll do a 2016/2017 split.
2016: 7.4 ppg, 34.7 fg% , 25.0 3pt%
2017: 9.5 ppg, 41.2 fg% , 35.0 3pt%
Reality is that Ingram isn't playing too bad anymore. His cumulative stats suck due to his incredibly slow start. Looking at the 2016 numbers, you'd say he looks like a bust. Looking at the 2017 numbers only, you'd say damn, not too bad for a relatively raw 19 year old rook that can barely bench press a weighted bar.
Everyone was excited about Russell's shooting efficiency his rookie year. Well, they look very similar to Ingram's 2017 numbers... 41.0 fg% , 35.1 3pt%.
Ingram will be just fine. Give him an offseason to bulk up a bit, learn some footwork from Kobe, and I could easily see him have a strong sophomore season.
Last edited by dao on Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:09 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chase.button07
Star Player
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 4996
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dao wrote: | | KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
doesn't take blind faith. He's shooting 35.0% from three in 2017, total of 28 games. 41.2% from the field over that stretch as well. That's not too bad. |
isn't that the time when he moved into the starting lineup? with DLO/Randle handling the ball?
his catch&shoot % will be higher then his point forward role bs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KeepItRealOrElse
Retired Number
Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 32767
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chase.button07 wrote: | | dao wrote: | | KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
doesn't take blind faith. He's shooting 35.0% from three in 2017, total of 28 games. 41.2% from the field over that stretch as well. That's not too bad. |
isn't that the time when he moved into the starting lineup? with DLO/Randle handling the ball?
his catch&shoot % will be higher then his point forward role bs |
yep. I think there's something to it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
He's been at mid 30s (35%) for about 2 mos now. Even now an 0-6 slump can bring that down to like 32% but it's starting to seem to me that his jump shot is translating.
Last edited by tox on Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:31 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chase.button07 wrote: | | dao wrote: | | KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
doesn't take blind faith. He's shooting 35.0% from three in 2017, total of 28 games. 41.2% from the field over that stretch as well. That's not too bad. |
isn't that the time when he moved into the starting lineup? with DLO/Randle handling the ball?
his catch&shoot % will be higher then his point forward role bs |
He came into the starting lineup circa early February. His good shooting started in January though.
He was terrible both at catch & shoot and wide open 3s in 2016, so it wasn't just a matter of shot selection. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| let's just sweep 2016 under the rug guys. Aint nobody see (bleep) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BynumForThree
Star Player
Joined: 27 Feb 2016
Posts: 1254
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You guys think a PG13/Russell/Ball core is a serious contender? We'd be Golden State's sacrificial lamb come playoff time every year for the next 5 years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andre2K
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 12199
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BynumForThree wrote: | | You guys think a PG13/Russell/Ball core is a serious contender? We'd be Golden State's sacrificial lamb come playoff time every year for the next 5 years. |
It's a start.
If you have a way for us to become a championship contender without crossing through "decent team" territory first, I'm all ears. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
al242
Star Player
Joined: 28 Sep 2012
Posts: 3120
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dao wrote: | | KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | | dao wrote: | | KeepItRealOrElse wrote: | Still haven't been dislodged from the "better Batum" comparison. I think his two-wayness puts him up there with the top prospects in this draft.
His lack of shooting ability has been absouletly gross, but I have blind faith it'll get in the mid-30s like Batum |
doesn't take blind faith. He's shooting 35.0% from three in 2017, total of 28 games. 41.2% from the field over that stretch as well. That's not too bad. |
Thanks for that. That's an encouraging stretch that people should look more to |
agreed. Ingram has been progressing pretty consistently over the past several months. Just to be lazy I'll do a 2016/2017 split.
2016: 7.4 ppg, 34.7 fg% , 25.0 3pt%
2017: 9.5 ppg, 41.2 fg% , 35.0 3pt%
Reality is that Ingram isn't playing too bad anymore. His cumulative stats suck due to his incredibly slow start. Looking at the 2016 numbers, you'd say he looks like a bust. Looking at the 2017 numbers only, you'd say damn, not too bad for a relatively raw 19 year old rook that can barely bench press a weighted bar.
Everyone was excited about Russell's shooting efficiency his rookie year. Well, they look very similar to Ingram's 2017 numbers... 41.0 fg% , 35.1 3pt%.
Ingram will be just fine. Give him an offseason to bulk up a bit, learn some footwork from Kobe, and I could easily see him have a strong sophomore season. |
I agree, thanks for putting things in perspective. I still don't believe we have that superstar on our roster that could be a #1 option on a championship squad. We really need to get the #1 pick and draft Fultz, if this is done then I'm officially retired from team tank. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23912
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 46681
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Treble Clef wrote: | Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
He's already better then Marvin Williams or Johnson ever was. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
justsomelakerfan
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Jul 2016
Posts: 10939
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Treble Clef wrote: | Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
So knowing what we know, do we hope the team cashes out on him while they still can? Or play the long game with him, where you run the risk of depleting his trade value if he doesn't live up to expectations.
My support of selling high on Ingram isn't because I think he's a bust although I am not thrilled with his season.. It's because I'd like the Lakers to cash out to the highest bidder while the bidding could still be high, because they're currently lacking assets to trade that wouldn't gut the roster.
If Ingram doesn't work out, the Lakers are kinda screwed. How long does a team without a ton of assets decide to wait it out?
_________________
Austin Reaves
Tweeter: @sarah_dotbiz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23912
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Inspector Gadget wrote: | | Treble Clef wrote: | Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
He's already better then Marvin Williams or Johnson ever was. |
I think he should be but I don't think he has proven that he is yet. I am sure that fans of their teams optimistically saw them trending upward after their first seasons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23912
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| justsomelakerfan wrote: | | Treble Clef wrote: | Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
So knowing what we know, do we hope the team cashes out on him while they still can? Or play the long game with him, where you run the risk of depleting his trade value if he doesn't live up to expectations.
My support of selling high on Ingram isn't because I think he's a bust although I am not thrilled with his season.. It's because I'd like the Lakers to cash out to the highest bidder while the bidding could still be high, because they're currently lacking assets to trade that wouldn't gut the roster.
If Ingram doesn't work out, the Lakers are kinda screwed. How long does a team without a ton of assets decide to wait it out? |
If they are in a position to get an all-star for him, I would sign off in it. The worst case scenario is you still have an all star. You'd miss out on the possibility of him becoming a superstar but you'd also remove the risk of him just ending up as a decent player. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 46681
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Treble Clef wrote: | | justsomelakerfan wrote: | | Treble Clef wrote: | Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
So knowing what we know, do we hope the team cashes out on him while they still can? Or play the long game with him, where you run the risk of depleting his trade value if he doesn't live up to expectations.
My support of selling high on Ingram isn't because I think he's a bust although I am not thrilled with his season.. It's because I'd like the Lakers to cash out to the highest bidder while the bidding could still be high, because they're currently lacking assets to trade that wouldn't gut the roster.
If Ingram doesn't work out, the Lakers are kinda screwed. How long does a team without a ton of assets decide to wait it out? |
If they are in a position to get an all-star for him, I would sign off in it. The worst case scenario is you still have an all star. You'd miss out on the possibility of him becoming a superstar but you'd also remove the risk of him just ending up as a decent player. |
It depends what kind of all star we are getting, it could be a all star that isn't a good fit then that is when the discussions are moot.
Ingram is the closest thing to Giannis and Paul George, we shouldn't trade him just cause we are getting a player with a star name, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
justsomelakerfan
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Jul 2016
Posts: 10939
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Treble Clef wrote: | | justsomelakerfan wrote: | | Treble Clef wrote: | Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
So knowing what we know, do we hope the team cashes out on him while they still can? Or play the long game with him, where you run the risk of depleting his trade value if he doesn't live up to expectations.
My support of selling high on Ingram isn't because I think he's a bust although I am not thrilled with his season.. It's because I'd like the Lakers to cash out to the highest bidder while the bidding could still be high, because they're currently lacking assets to trade that wouldn't gut the roster.
If Ingram doesn't work out, the Lakers are kinda screwed. How long does a team without a ton of assets decide to wait it out? |
If they are in a position to get an all-star for him, I would sign off in it. The worst case scenario is you still have an all star. You'd miss out on the possibility of him becoming a superstar but you'd also remove the risk of him just ending up as a decent player. |
Given how the Kings were really interested in Ingram, I kinda wonder about how they have two lotto picks around 6-7th for this draft...
_________________
Austin Reaves
Tweeter: @sarah_dotbiz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scoffs
Starting Rotation
Joined: 12 Aug 2001
Posts: 875
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ingram has improved every month; if he keeps improving at the current rate, he will surpass Westbrook by next March.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| justsomelakerfan wrote: | | Treble Clef wrote: | | justsomelakerfan wrote: | | Treble Clef wrote: | Ingram was a legitimate top of the draft guy so flipping him for another lottery pick makes no sense. For a bona fide star I think you make the trade however.
Its impossible to tell if Ingram will go up or down from here. He could keep going up like Giannis. Or what if he is only a Marvin Williams or Wesley Johnson? |
So knowing what we know, do we hope the team cashes out on him while they still can? Or play the long game with him, where you run the risk of depleting his trade value if he doesn't live up to expectations.
My support of selling high on Ingram isn't because I think he's a bust although I am not thrilled with his season.. It's because I'd like the Lakers to cash out to the highest bidder while the bidding could still be high, because they're currently lacking assets to trade that wouldn't gut the roster.
If Ingram doesn't work out, the Lakers are kinda screwed. How long does a team without a ton of assets decide to wait it out? |
If they are in a position to get an all-star for him, I would sign off in it. The worst case scenario is you still have an all star. You'd miss out on the possibility of him becoming a superstar but you'd also remove the risk of him just ending up as a decent player. |
Given how the Kings were really interested in Ingram, I kinda wonder about how they have two lotto picks around 6-7th for this draft... |
I don't want Ingram traded. But getting something like Monk+Jonathan Isaac for him is actually rather interesting if you think about it...Depends on how highly the Lakers value those guys compared to Ingram. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
