corndeaux

quote:

---

no one is arguing that BI has failed to be a consistent defender in this league, literally that was the thesis of this discussion that you attempted to interject into multiple times to try and argue

---

All I've ever said is that he needs to try more and he'll be good enough, but I don't know if he will get to that point because he hasn't been able to do that yet 5+ years in. You didn't like that thought.

What I argued is your claim that he was a plus defender during his time in LA, which just isn't true on any level other than selecting a tiny sample of games during one season.

quote:

---

comparison with Curry was apt

---

It's low key wild if your main point is that Ingram's problem is he needs to try. Curry has always tried on defense. I'd love to have 2013-2015 Curry effort in Brandon Ingram's body.

quote:

---

they need/needed to embrace it in order to raise the level of their team’s ceilings,

---

Curry played huge minutes on a top 3 defense and the best defense in the league for 2 different coaches and won a title during the time you specifically mentioned. How much higher do you think a ceiling can get?

quote:

---

GT put effort into his threes, he was consistently making them at a 40% clip, but for some reason he refuses to take them or does so with no effort. GT absolutely does try to take them and puts effort into it, he’s just not good

---

Glad we agree that doing something only a handful of times is not enough to be good at something.

quote:

---

When he puts in the effort he can be a good to elite defender…he just lacks giving consistent effort and focus

---

Effort and focus:defense as form and touch:3pt shooting

Fundamentally, if you don't give consistent effort and focus, you are a bad defensive player. Maybe that's changing now for Ingram, as that link I shared argues. I hope so. Would be great for him and the team.

quote:

---

he was literally a plus defender last night, so again, you are simply wrong.

---

Garrett Temple was literally an excellent 3pt shooter last night so anyone who says he isn't is simply wrong.

quote:

---

the only question with BI is does he?

---

We have 5+ years of evidence he doesn't want it. Maybe it's clicked and he does now. I hope so. Forgive me for wanting to see it more than once or twice before I believe he will get there.

quote:

---

rolled in trying to argue stupid points

---

quote:

---

it’s childish and immature.

---

You desperately need everyone who posts here to agree with your opinions and then melt down when anyone has a different view.

Again, I hope you are right and Ingram hits that level. Have a nice day bud.

lol. You're incredible, my man. Just make sure you are back responding after one game where he is a disaster on defense.

Yes. He played really well tonight, just like that one game v Kyrie in Feb 2019. Let's see if he can do it consistently. He hasn't been able to do it in 5+ years.

Again, I truly hope you're right about where he can get defensively. That would be great for him and the team

And I'll happily eat shite when you come back and bang on about your correct analysis and how wrong I was if/when Ingram proves it consistently.

I agree that Zion is probably the better bet, even though his height/reach is not ideal. If you've got so so perimeter defenders, you need back end help to clean up the mess. And that doesn't mean Zion needs to be a Gobert or Draymond, but just in the right place at the right time often enough to help teammates. Ingram would be interesting there, but he's never been able to put on the weight to be a 4

Also agree on outscoring teams, so it's not like the Pels need to be GS. Just be average on defense and have a great offense and you're cooking.

Part of this is also thinking about the team over the next 3 years or so. If you believe Zion/Ingram can work well enough defensively and you believe in Murphy developing, roster possibilities are wide open if your core is Zion/Ingram/Herb and a player like Murphy as a solid 3 and D wing. Can go in a lot of different directions.

quote:

---

Which is why even moreso with BI, he needs to step up defensively for this project to work

---

Right. The only difference here is you think he can step up and be a plus defender. I don't, but also don't think he needs to be. Just try off ball and within the scheme. If does that, I think it can work.

Like we agreed 4 posts ago, if he and Zion can't play reasonable defense, this project is DOA

And if you can get Zion/Ingram to give a damn, that opens up some interesting lineups down the line.

What can you put around Zion/Ingram/Herb if those first 2 care? Herb at the 5...

Ingram should be better, but I don't see him as ever being much more than average.

And even if Ingram improves, it is going to be hard to play McCollum/Graham/Valanciunas together much and expect to have a defense that isn't a tire fire. And that's before adding Zion back to the mix.

I like the trade. It helps a lot with backcourt issues on offense. But defense was a problem before and is still one.

That whole article is just fascinating. Great look at all the angles teams/players can play.

The Jody Allen stuff is on point. She may have all the $$, but she fundamentally doesn't give a shite about the team.

And Ziller had a different take this AM. He went back to when the Blazers sold Gerald Wallace after Roy/Oden injuries for the pick that became Lillard. Cronin was there for that quick turnaround with Lillard and Aldrige, so maybe he tries it again?

quote:

---

It’s called hedging your bet. Better odds of one of them working out. Cavs had no reason to draft Garland after just drafting Sexton

---

Again, ignoring the reality. There was not the 30mpg rookie Garland got with rebuilding/tanking Cleveland on a Pels team that had Holiday, Ball, Reddick and was openly gunning for a playoff spot.

If you want to claim you wanted Garland back in 2019, congrats. You're a genius.

They made other bets that didn't work out they way they wanted. Griffin whiffed on them. It sucks for us that he bet wrong and Garland has blossomed.

Acting like passing on him at the time was the dumbest decision ever made is all hindsight. And if we're playing the hindsight game, there is no guarantee that Garland develops into the player he is now in NO.

quote:

---

So you saying Balls past injury history with the Lakers and his dads desire for him to be in a big market for the big baller brand is hindsight?

---

No. These were known issues. What's 20/20 is saying Ball was never going to stay or work out, ergo they should have drafted his replacement as soon as he arrived in NO.

That is a recipe for disaster because these are human beings.