Thunder vs Pelicans : Game 4 Playoffs! GAMEDAY THREAD!

[Pelicanidae]

This is why you're a liar, and you frame arguments by creating strawmen. Who in their right mind would say Ingram is better than the guys you mentioned? Did you see others on that list? I know you did. Don't play dumb. I know you've seen them. Just like everyone else. The consensus was there were at least 5 guys that Ingram was better than. I was on the high side with 9. One could argue 9 was a bit generous, and I'd say fine. If we went with only 5, that would still prove my point. Ingram type players get max contracts. Your 30% caveat only serves to make your point. One that doesn't matter because players like Ingram get max contracts. Nothing you say will change that. Everyone here knows this.

I have asked a very basic question about half a dozen times. Every time, you've either ducked it completely or pointed to a list of guys who don't actually answer that question as your answer.

I saw the others on that list. None of them have a 30% max. That's not an arbitrary number, it's the size of the max he qualifies for with the years he's played and no super-max eligibility. The players who do have a 30% max - that is, this contract that we're discussing - have far superior resumes.

The simple matter of fact is that you keep saying ''players like Ingram get max contracts''. I have asked you half a dozen times to name one other player like Ingram - that is to say, with a resume of his calibre - who has received this type of contract. You have repeatedly failed to do so, but repeatedly insisted you have by pointing to a list of players who either do not make that particular type of contract, or who have completely different resumes.

You say players like Ingram get max contracts. The reality is, historically, players like Ingram have not received this type of contract. If I was wrong, you could give me the name, but you can't, so you won't. You can call me a liar for that if you want, but if I was wrong, you could easily prove it. As you like to say, ''everyone knows this''.

That's the last I'm saying on this topic. I've beaten this particular dead horse into the ground, and anyone who reads the thread has the information there to make their own mind up. Not going to bother explaining again the premise of my question because you've made it exceedingly clear that you can't or won't answer it up front, and that alone tells me the answer.

[13 - 3]

Possibly a new coach could fix Ingram but that is unlikely to happen.

[Pelicanidae]

Possibly a new coach could fix Ingram but that is unlikely to happen.

Not with Willie Green's secret off-season extension lmao

[Nichols]

Most logical post you’ve made yet. And I wholeheartedly agree. But the difference may be how you view other players that BI could be traded for. I think Dejounte Murray is fairly close to BI and is certainly not a “role player.” Maybe you view him differently. If so, please let us know why.

Na.. I wouldn't call him a role player. I don't like the idea of getting him and Clint, and running that with Zion. But If another deal can be made to get a difference maker, that's a compelling squad. With a better coach of course.

[Nichols]

I have asked a very basic question about half a dozen times. Every time, you've either ducked it completely or pointed to a list of guys who don't actually answer that question as your answer.

I saw the others on that list. None of them have a 30% max. That's not an arbitrary number, it's the size of the max he qualifies for with the years he's played and no super-max eligibility. The players who do have a 30% max - that is, this contract that we're discussing - have far superior resumes.

The simple matter of fact is that you keep saying ''players like Ingram get max contracts''. I have asked you half a dozen times to name one other player like Ingram - that is to say, with a resume of his calibre - who has received this type of contract. You have repeatedly failed to do so, but repeatedly insisted you have by pointing to a list of players who either do not make that particular type of contract, or who have completely different resumes.

You say players like Ingram get max contracts. The reality is, historically, players like Ingram have not received this type of contract. If I was wrong, you could give me the name, but you can't, so you won't. You can call me a liar for that if you want, but if I was wrong, you could easily prove it. As you like to say, ''everyone knows this''.

That's the last I'm saying on this topic. I've beaten this particular dead horse into the ground, and anyone who reads the thread has the information there to make their own mind up. Not going to bother explaining again the premise of my question because you've made it exceedingly clear that you can't or won't answer it up front, and that alone tells me the answer.

We are talking past one another. Players who put up the numbers that he does during the regular season at his age get max contracts. They will always get max contracts. You're hanging on to the particulars of the contract to prove your point. I'm saying it doesn't matter. He will get his max, and anyone else that produces at his level will also get max deals. This issue isn't one we're going to see eye to eye on which is odd but I don't see the point in us talking past one another on this matter.

[Pelicanidae]

Na.. I wouldn't call him a role player. I don't like the idea of getting him and Clint, and running that with Zion. But If another deal can be made to get a difference maker, that's a compelling squad. With a better coach of course.

You don't necessarily need to get Clint.

Right now, Pistons fans on Twitter are seemingly somewhat interested in acquiring BI. At least some of them. They have a desperate need for starter-quality players and no real playoff hopes in the immediate future, they just want relatively young names who can do something.

A Pistons fan suggested BI + Our pick this year for Jalen Duren + their top 4 pick this year.

I'd do that, get Duren, obviously a pick, and then you could use the $30m trade exception created by that move (because the Pistons could just take BI into space) to acquire Murray.

Then you get Murray + Duren + Top 4 pick for BI, essentially. I'd do that in a heartbeat.

[Pelicanidae]

We aren't getting a different coach though. WG got a secret extension.

[Nichols]

You don't necessarily need to get Clint.

Right now, Pistons fans on Twitter are seemingly somewhat interested in acquiring BI. At least some of them. They have a desperate need for starter-quality players and no real playoff hopes in the immediate future, they just want relatively young names who can do something.

A Pistons fan suggested BI + Our pick this year for Jalen Duren + their top 4 pick this year.

I'd do that, get Duren, obviously a pick, and then you could use the $30m trade exception created by that move (because the Pistons could just take BI into space) to acquire Murray.

Then you get Murray + Duren + Top 4 pick for BI, essentially. I'd do that in a heartbeat.

That's a solid deal. Better than Clint. I'd like something sexier though lol. I think Zion wants to win now. Not sure he'd want to carry two young guys. I know it's a long shot but, Zion and Murray, or Ingram could possibly be appealing to KD, Beal, Booker, Paul George, Harden, or one of those types that have just had a disappointing season.

[Nichols]

We aren't getting a different coach though. WG got a secret extension.

A healthy Zion can mitigate Greens shortcomings. Though it's still not ideal.

[Pelicanidae]

That's a solid deal. Better than Clint. I'd like something sexier though lol. I think Zion wants to win now. Not sure he'd want to carry two young guys. I know it's a long shot but, Zion and Murray, or Ingram could possibly be appealing to KD, Beal, Booker, Paul George, Harden, or one of those types that have just had a disappointing season.

I think personally, if we were to go down that route, it wouldn't be a downgrade in terms of wins. Like, yes, you get a younger C in Duren but I don't think he's inherently worse than Nance, for example (in fact, I think he's better) and JV's contract's expired now so he may not even be back. Getting a young C who can grab rebounds is huge, and Duren is an elite rebounder already.

Dejounte is a fairly lateral move with BI in terms of their level of play in my opinion, but positionally he's an improvement since we've needed a PG for a long time and he's becoming more willing to shoot 3s. I think with BI gone, you probably slide Dejounte in at the starting 1 and put Trey in the starting lineup, hopefully getting CJ to become a 6th man and then you can hopefully juice his numbers against bench guys the first half of the year and move him off in the second half.

Then with the top 4 pick from Detroit, hopefully you get lucky and can draft Alexandre Sarr - there's your super mobile switchy big with shooting potential for the future and you'd be able to bring him off the bench to start so he didn't get fried.

Team gets younger, cheaper, but more defined positionally while filling in both the needs at PG and C, despite the probable loss of JV and losing BI. Probably win a similar number of games next year to this year, maybe a few less, but your future is far more flexible and you've added a ton of upside.

Might even be able to bring Naji back, in this arrangement, which would be a positive for the bench.

[Nichols]

I think personally, if we were to go down that route, it wouldn't be a downgrade in terms of wins. Like, yes, you get a younger C in Duren but I don't think he's inherently worse than Nance, for example (in fact, I think he's better) and JV's contract's expired now so he may not even be back. Getting a young C who can grab rebounds is huge, and Duren is an elite rebounder already.

Dejounte is a fairly lateral move with BI in terms of their level of play in my opinion, but positionally he's an improvement since we've needed a PG for a long time and he's becoming more willing to shoot 3s. I think with BI gone, you probably slide Dejounte in at the starting 1 and put Trey in the starting lineup, hopefully getting CJ to become a 6th man and then you can hopefully juice his numbers against bench guys the first half of the year and move him off in the second half.

Then with the top 4 pick from Detroit, hopefully you get lucky and can draft Alexandre Sarr - there's your super mobile switchy big with shooting potential for the future and you'd be able to bring him off the bench to start so he didn't get fried.

Team gets younger, cheaper, but more defined positionally while filling in both the needs at PG and C, despite the probable loss of JV and losing BI. Probably win a similar number of games next year to this year, but your future is far more flexible and you've added a ton of upside.

Might even be able to bring Naji back, in this arrangement, which would be a positive for the bench.

I can't disagree with anything you've said. All those moves seem solid, and prudent. I just think Zion would be frustrated with only winning 1 or 2 playoff series with that team. I can tell he's hungry. Now, based on what you've told me in the past, and others, his wants may not align with that of ownership financially. So, what he wants, and what I want is perhaps pie in the sky. Unless he threatens ownership the way Kobe did, when he suspected ownership might just be okay with not winning championships, and using him to sell tickets.

With all that said, your proposal is probably the more reasonable considering all things. It's just hard to get excited for. I loved hearing the pundits say "oooohhh watch out for the Pels".. A solid/good young team with potential is cool I guess.

[Pelicanidae]

I can't disagree with anything you've said. All those moves seem solid, and prudent. I just think Zion would be frustrated with only winning 1 or 2 playoff series with that team. I can tell he's hungry. Now, based on what you've told me in the past, and others, his wants may not align with that of ownership financially. So, what he wants, and what I want is perhaps pie in the sky. Unless he threatens ownership the way Kobe did, when he suspected ownership might just be okay with not winning championships, and using him to sell tickets.

With all that said, your proposal is probably the more reasonable considering all things. It's just hard to get excited for. I loved hearing the pundits say "oooohhh watch out for the Pels".. A solid/good young team with potential is cool I guess.

I think Zion would prefer to win one or two playoff series with that team than the zero he's won with the current team, and with JV's contract being expired, Naji's contract being expired, and the ongoing BI situation overhead, something has to be done.

I'd see room for excitement in that team though. You could start Trey, all of a sudden you're aligning Zion with Trey (minutes they played together have been overwhelmingly successful in their career), and Sarr is one of only a handful of legitimately exciting names from this draft (it isn't a great draft). Would love to see if he evolves into that true Jaren Jackson Jr type player that I think his upper outcomes resemble.

Ownership is always going to be an issue with the Pelicans, because while I think they may well pay for a team that's winning, they won't pay to get to winning. You have to already be winning first, and they may pay to keep that together, but not on potential. So it's on Griff to build a team that can win reasonably now and which also has the upside to explode. I think the situation I outlined there has that; we'd probably still win around 45 games next year, so that's slightly less than this year but not dramatically so, while you'd be opening the door for Trey to have his superstar leap as a starter and adding another young player who could be a potential all-star type guy on a rookie deal, so you get the upside without running into the finance issues.

I'd be excited to watch that team. Dejounte/Trey/Herb/Zion/Duren with CJ/Matt Ryan/Dyson/Sarr/Naji/Jose/Hawk as the bench mob? Tons of three point shooting, team that's built to play with pace, and I trust WG to establish defense as long as there's potential there, and I think the potential is very real there. And it wouldn't have the pall of doom that the current Pels teams do, knowing that the salary situation is going to force us to drop people soon.

It's true that it's not a lineup filled with huge names and all-stars, but that's fine. Denver only has one current all-star on their roster. People often don't realise that, but it's true: Jamal Murray has never made an All-NBA or All-Star team, yet we've all seen what he can do because the fit next to Jokic is fire and they compliment each other perfectly. That's the model I'd want to follow. All fit, no contract issues, stars or potential stars in multiple spots that we can just wait to see how they develop.

Obviously it's stunningly early in the off-season so there's a huge chance that better options comes up, but right now I like the look of that a lot.

[Nichols]

I think Zion would prefer to win one or two playoff series with that team than the zero he's won with the current team, and with JV's contract being expired, Naji's contract being expired, and the ongoing BI situation overhead, something has to be done.

I'd see room for excitement in that team though. You could start Trey, all of a sudden you're aligning Zion with Trey (minutes they played together have been overwhelmingly successful in their career), and Sarr is one of only a handful of legitimately exciting names from this draft (it isn't a great draft). Would love to see if he evolves into that true Jaren Jackson Jr type player that I think his upper outcomes resemble.

Ownership is always going to be an issue with the Pelicans, because while I think they may well pay for a team that's winning, they won't pay to get to winning. You have to already be winning first, and they may pay to keep that together, but not on potential. So it's on Griff to build a team that can win reasonably now and which also has the upside to explode. I think the situation I outlined there has that; we'd probably still win around 45 games next year, so that's slightly less than this year but not dramatically so, while you'd be opening the door for Trey to have his superstar leap as a starter and adding another young player who could be a potential all-star type guy on a rookie deal, so you get the upside without running into the finance issues.

I'd be excited to watch that team. Dejounte/Trey/Herb/Zion/Duren with CJ/Matt Ryan/Dyson/Sarr/Naji/Jose/Hawk as the bench mob? Tons of three point shooting, team that's built to play with pace, and I trust WG to establish defense as long as there's potential there, and I think the potential is very real there. And it wouldn't have the pall of doom that the current Pels teams do, knowing that the salary situation is going to force us to drop people soon.

It's true that it's not a lineup filled with huge names and all-stars, but that's fine. Denver only has one current all-star on their roster. People often don't realise that, but it's true: Jamal Murray has never made an All-NBA or All-Star team, yet we've all seen what he can do because the fit next to Jokic is fire and they compliment each other perfectly. That's the model I'd want to follow. All fit, no contract issues, stars or potential stars in multiple spots that we can just wait to see how they develop.

Obviously it's stunningly early in the off-season so there's a huge chance that better options comes up, but right now I like the look of that a lot.

My argument hinges on that, which I've bolded.. And If it's not an option with this ownership, then your course of action, and that of others is the only direction to go in.

I do agree that Jamal and Jokic have synergy, but Jamal is definitely an all-star. Unfortunately for him he plays in the west. I also feel strongly that it's up to the coach to implement a scheme that isn't a "your turn, okay my turn" type offense with your star players.

[Fedupfan]

Thank Goodness. Get these weak ****** bums out of here. What a miserable season.

[Fedupfan]

O fourth quarter comebacks in an entire season. Playing a 6?5 center all season that is absolute Basura. I mean what in the hell did we just witness. 49 wins was just enough to make the season even
More miserable because they underachieved drastically. When will this curse end?!

And yes the team is far off. Because they have to get rid of half the roster to move forward. BI, CJ, Jonas, Nance all need to go.

[Ivan Balakhonov]

For sure, it was an interesting discussion about Ingram's future contract. I'm definitely with Pelicanidae here: to give BI a max contract will torpedo our prospects of building a contender. And that's what NBA is about: you are either a contender, or are building one. I'm not interested in constant mediocrity, winning 2-3 postseason games every year (maybe even a series) and pretend being happy with what's going on. The past few seasons made me convinced that the current strategy of building the roster is not working and drastic changes are required. The bad thing is that they most likely will not happen. We are stuck with a disinterested owner, a stubborn GM and a clueless head coach.

[hornetsrebirth]

He will want a max contract. And he'll get it because that's what players make at his level of play. Whether fans like it or not.

He might want a max contract but he won't get one from any NBA team this offseason. I am willing to bet money on that.

[Nichols]

He might want a max contract but he won't get one from any NBA team this offseason. I am willing to bet money on that.

One playoff series doesn't negate what he does season after season. His numbers justify a max deal based on what all players get who put up the numbers he puts up during the regular season. We don't have to agree though. That's fine.

[hornetsrebirth]

One playoff series doesn't negate what he does season after season. His numbers justify a max deal based on what all players get who put up the numbers he puts up during the regular season. We don't have to agree though. That's fine.

Yeah it does. Nobody is paying 50 million a year to someone who got dominated in the playoffs. We don't agree but the good news is we can find out who is right soon enough.

[Fedupfan]

Yeah it does. Nobody is paying 50 million a year to someone who got dominated in the playoffs. We don't agree but the good news is we can find out who is right soon enough.

I pray you’re right. I’m sick of BI. Dude puts up numbers but don’t move the needle. Nobody fears Brandon Ingram.

[hornetsrebirth]

I pray you’re right. I’m sick of BI.

Its easy to feel that way because BI is at a low point right now, it was his worst season since he has been to New Orleans. I think he made strides defensively but now he needs to retool his offensive game. His identity has been iso dribbling into contested long mid range shots, which is just not a good plan. And he wasn't even able to do that against Dort or Jalen Williams. Hopefully he figures out a second act, if he is back with the Pelicans it needs to be a different look from him. Its possible he will still be with the Pelicans but it won't be for a max deal.

[AUSSIE_PELICAN]

One playoff series doesn't negate what he does season after season. His numbers justify a max deal based on what all players get who put up the numbers he puts up during the regular season. We don't have to agree though. That's fine.

I'm convinced you are his agent or a relative.
You cant honestly believe this ******** can you?

[Freyfamilyreuni]

Watching the Nuggets beat the Lakers and the refs was fun.

[Fedupfan]

I'm convinced you are his agent or a relative.
You cant honestly believe this ******** can you?

Or is it BI himself.

[Nichols]

I'm not going to reply to insults and dumb comments. If you guys don't think he should get max that's fine. I don't care. It doesn't matter to me. I'm just saying he's getting it. Aren't we all grown-ups on this forum? Is this something to go back and forth over? Move on.