Kings after Ingram
- Thread starter Section 101
- Start date
Really not a fan of Ingram on this team.
- I don’t like his mentality and energy (especially for someone who is supposed to be one of your stars/leaders).
- Brown has been emphasizing physicality and toughness. Ingram strikes me as the exact opposite of that type of player
- Ingram takes the majority of his shots between 0-16ft which isn’t an ideal offensive fit considering how Fox & Sabonis like to score/attack. I’d prefer someone who is more perimeter oriented to complement those guys
- Ingram’s size/strength will likely push Murray to PF which I’m not in favor of. Sabonis is already below average length-wise at C. I’d prefer to have a bigger and longer PF next to him to help cover those weaknesses
- Ingram is not really known for his defense. He’s probably average at best.
- Ingram misses a fair amount of games each season.
- He’s reportedly seeking a max extension but isn’t a max level player. Would hate to be in the position of having to pay him the max or lose him for nothing
Last edited:
Then why didn't they choose Ingram over Jones or Murphy and move one of them? Because they have a better chance to win with players who are better shooters and better defenders. As would we. I just think we should keep looking. Ingram doesn't fill a need for us -- he's not a defensive presence and he's only so-so from 3pt range. His primary selling point is that he can create his own offense outside the structure of the DHO and the Fox/Monk drive and kick game. Okay great, but what does he add within the context of the offense then? Worse shooting than Barnes and a high usage %.
I think Keegan Murray might already be more valuable than Ingram as early as next season if he can regain some of his shooting touch from his rookie season, keep the gains he made on defense in year 2, and sharpen the mid-range turn around game he flashed at times last season. At that point he and Ingram become redundant. We need either a defensive stud or a floor spacer at the other forward spot and Ingram is neither.
I think Keegan Murray might already be more valuable than Ingram as early as next season if he can regain some of his shooting touch from his rookie season, keep the gains he made on defense in year 2, and sharpen the mid-range turn around game he flashed at times last season. At that point he and Ingram become redundant. We need either a defensive stud or a floor spacer at the other forward spot and Ingram is neither.
If you can flat out just add him while keeping your young core you do it IMO. I'm sure if Monte could nab Murphy he would at this point but they obviously wouldn't do that. Remember, Monte was actually considering taking Murphy way high as a reach pick according to the rumors swirling before that draft. He went Davion instead.
I tend to agree with you about Ingram. He's not the model of toughness, consistency and defense that I would like at the position. And I wonder if the Kings do get him without giving up Murray whether Ingram would crowd him out of the offense. Because of his experience, he's better currently than Murray, but I could see Murray taking another step up to eventually be a better player. Frankly, I think NO has it right. I'd be a lot more interested in the Murphy and Jones than Ingram.
With a guy like Ingram, the Kings would presumably be imagining a considerably more optimized version of him rather than what we've seen from Ingram the last few seasons. You'd be betting on Ingram evolving as he steps into the next phase of his NBA career. Perhaps that's just blue sky thinking, but we've seen it happen to several Kings since they began playing for Mike Brown. Domas evolved into the entire fulcrum of the Kings' offense once Brown got his hands on him. Fox evolved into a capable volume shooter under Brown. Monk evolved into a legit playmaker under Brown. Keegan has evolved dramatically under Brown from what he was known for in college.
That said, I'm not super high on Ingram as a trade target. His injury history is what concerns me most, and I certainly don't love the notion of Ingram on a max contract if that's what it would take to keep him beyond next season. But he's still only 26 years old, the talent is obvious, and the fit seems like it could be massaged with a bit of creativity. I don't have to squint too hard to see how Ingram would elevate this Kings team, especially if they don't have to surrender any of their core to complete the deal.
That said, I'm not super high on Ingram as a trade target. His injury history is what concerns me most, and I certainly don't love the notion of Ingram on a max contract if that's what it would take to keep him beyond next season. But he's still only 26 years old, the talent is obvious, and the fit seems like it could be massaged with a bit of creativity. I don't have to squint too hard to see how Ingram would elevate this Kings team, especially if they don't have to surrender any of their core to complete the deal.
All I know is that at some point a move does need to be made with this team. & unless he takes an unlikely leap to an all-star level guy this coming season, we aren’t “Keegan getting a bit better” away from being in any relevant position. Fringe playoffs / play-in still. At some point you push the chips in. A 26 year old former All-Star is now available, fits positional need, fits the timeline we have, and of course there’s everything wrong with him.
When’s the perfect fit going to come up? Okay, and let’s pretend that perfect fit does come up… Are we really going to get him for a package of Harrison Barnes and picks? In all likelihood, there’s no perfect solution out there. This is a big opportunity to get a wing player we haven’t had in a long while. HB and picks, I’m all the way in. No doubt.
When’s the perfect fit going to come up? Okay, and let’s pretend that perfect fit does come up… Are we really going to get him for a package of Harrison Barnes and picks? In all likelihood, there’s no perfect solution out there. This is a big opportunity to get a wing player we haven’t had in a long while. HB and picks, I’m all the way in. No doubt.
Last edited:
Yeah, the Kings are asset poor, unfortunately. The trade for Kevin Huerter was a very solid move at the time, but the first rounder that's tied up in eventual conveyance to Atlanta has made an asset poor team even more hamstrung in their ability to compile assets for a trade. Then you consider the new CBA penalties which constrain both what the Kings can do and what their potential trade partners can do, and the path to contention gets narrower and narrower. There will be no perfect fit available who elevates the Kings into contention. So if you're Monte McNair, you can either make modest moves for fit, like signing a Naji Marshall type, and hope that chemistry and internal improvement are enough to keep you in the conversation, or you take a big swing on a depressed asset like Ingram while parting with no core pieces in the process, and hope that talent wins out in the end.
I can see that line of thinking making sense if Ingram ultimately ends up being gettable for a package of players we consider to be low value (the oft discussed Barnes / Huerter package deal, essentially). I'm reading a lot of comments though that we need to offer more to get Ingram (he is a former All-Star after all )-- multiple picks, a valuable young player, *gulp* maybe even Keegan Murray? When I read these comments I wonder whether people understand what they're buying in Ingram. He is not a ready made talent upgrade -- he's a bit of a reclamation project. His style of game is not ideal for the modern NBA and some teams (maybe even ours?) would probably be better served sticking with a motion shooter like Kevin Huerter instead. And we already have Huerter signed for 2 more years at half the price of Ingram.
Your whole schtick for the last year plus has been "just do something!" but just doing something for the sake of doing something is a terrible idea. We need to make moves which improve the team, not just moves which improve our pre-season win projections from ESPN writers. Isaiah Stewart is also reportedly on the block, a lot cheaper, and actually would give us that injection of toughness which we all know this team needs. There are better moves out there.
Your whole schtick for the last year plus has been "just do something!" but just doing something for the sake of doing something is a terrible idea. We need to make moves which improve the team, not just moves which improve our pre-season win projections from ESPN writers. Isaiah Stewart is also reportedly on the block, a lot cheaper, and actually would give us that injection of toughness which we all know this team needs. There are better moves out there.
I've been preaching this for a while now...I don't understand people's desire to want Monte to make a move for the sake of being able to tell their family and friends, "Hey guys, look! Monte made a move!" We all know that Monte is not going to make a move just so he can tell all of his other GM buddies out there, "Hey guys, look! I can actually make a move!" He's gonna wait it out and find the perfect opportunity. Which I am perfectly fine with.
Yeah, I'd be okay with future firsts, but if you start throwing Keegan's name around, that's an instant no from me. Ingram will be an unrestricted free agent next summer, he's missed a lot of time with injury throughout his career, and he's four years removed from his single all-star appearance. There's no world in which giving Keegan up for Ingram would be smart or even necessary. Buying low makes sense to me. You're betting on talent and you're betting on your coaching staff to optimize that talent. The Kings have few routes to significant roster improvement outside of internal development, so I would be on board with a trade for Ingram as long as none of the team's core gets moved in the process.
We don’t know what we don’t know. Your theory is that every deal Monte hasn’t made is not the perfect opportunity. Since this team took off two seasons ago, he hasn’t made a move that has bankrupted our future, but he also hasn’t made a move to push us forward. My guess is that if I had all the details of the trades he’s passed on, I’d be happy he has played it cautious; however there is a non-zero percent chance in my mind that there are moves he hasn’t made that would have been a net positive.
I’m a very big Monte fan, and I’m also risk averse by nature, but at some point he needs to take another calculated risk in the mold of the Sabonis trade.
I’m a very big Monte fan, and I’m also risk averse by nature, but at some point he needs to take another calculated risk in the mold of the Sabonis trade.
There very likely is no perfect opportunity. Monte can tool on the margins, of course, but if the Kings want to upgrade their talent level in a meaningful way, they can't just sit on their hands and "wait it out". They're over the cap, they don't have many tradable assets, and the new CBA is squeezing both the free agent market and the trade market. If the Kings don't want to "run it back", and if they want to move on from the likes of Huerter and Barnes, they'll need to scour the league for other teams' depressed assets. A guy like Ingram is "damaged goods", in a sense, but that's unfortunately the kind of talent that's attainable when the best the Kings can offer is Huerter/Barnes/distant future firsts.
The big desire for Monte to make a move is so last season doesn’t happen. I’m sure as hell not okay with last season, and having another one like it can’t happen again. I mean, it absolutely can, but Monte can’t just sit and wait and wait and wait for THE opportunity, because THAT opportunity isn’t even likely to fall in our laps