Pascal Siakam or Brandon Ingram

[WiggyRuss]

15, 7 and 3 is no joke though.

Siakam is older- but as was ssaid above, has not been playing basketball that long.

siakam is shooting like well over 50% too- which is pretty damn impressive.

Ingram of course was more hyped as a young guy- and has more time to develop- and i think Ingram has the better shooting stroke for the long term-

but Siakam just seems to have that "it" factor- and he plays aggressive and with no fear---- Ingram seems tentative at times and is just not that impressive physically.

siakam seems like a guy that could mix it up and get tough- Ingram doesnt seem to have that.

 

[ericd7633]

Siakam. Both in their third year. Ingram hasn't proven to be anything other than average(possibly below average) Siakam has played as an All-Star this year IMO.

 

[raptorlife4]

Revisit

 

[Shanemansj13]

Lolz same answer except it isnt even close now

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

Ingram's good and has great potential but Siakam is here now. You'd be crazy to not take the young now guy over the young maybe later guy playing for a moribund franchise.

 

[WiggyRuss]

i mean if you just look at the 2 guys, one guy looks like a an elite athlete that youd never want to meet in the dark alley, one looks like someone who has been mal-nourished most of his life.

Siakam has "it". Ingram does not.

 

[trojanfan12]

Interesting question.

They're career averages to this point are very close.

Ingram: 13.9 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 2.9 apg
Siakam: 10.1 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 2.0 apg

Both have improved a good bit since their rookie years.

Ingram, being the younger player, probably has more upside. But having his last 2 seasons cut short by injury hurts him because we don't know if it's just a little bad luck, or if he's injury prone.

End of the day (assuming Ingram can stay healthy) I probably want Ingram because he's younger and has a bit more upside.

But I don't think I'd be disappointed with either.

 

[tlance]

Interesting question.

They're career averages to this point are very close.

Ingram: 13.9 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 2.9 apg
Siakam: 10.1 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 2.0 apg

Both have improved a good bit since their rookie years.

Ingram, being the younger player, probably has more upside. But having his last 2 seasons cut short by injury hurts him because we don't know if it's just a little bad luck, or if he's injury prone.

End of the day (assuming Ingram can stay healthy) I probably want Ingram because he's younger and has a bit more upside.

But I don't think I'd be disappointed with either.

Does INGram have more upside though?

Siakam is the 2nd best player on a top 5 team. He is scoring over 23 PPG so far in the playoffs and is just coming into his own. Siakam shoots better than Ingram and is probably the better athlete too.

I don't know what Ingram has that gives him "more upside" aside from his pedigree.

Ingram is a good NBA player. But he doesn't have more upside than Siakam. And Siakam is probably better right now too.

 

[raptorlife4]

I don't think it's even close. Siakam is Light Years better than Ingram will ever be. Siakam hasn't even scratched his potential yet either

 

[raptorlife4]

Siakam is also one of the best defenders on the team. His length is a matchup nightmare.

 

[The Derski]

I’ll take the one that weighs more than 160 pounds and doesn’t have a blood clot.

 

[ericd7633]

Give me Siakim all day, every day. Honestly at this point, I don't think it's particularly close either.

 

[trojanfan12]

Does INGram have more upside though?

Siakam is the 2nd best player on a top 5 team. He is scoring over 23 PPG so far in the playoffs and is just coming into his own. Siakam shoots better than Ingram and is probably the better athlete too.

I don't know what Ingram has that gives him "more upside" aside from his pedigree.

Ingram is a good NBA player. But he doesn't have more upside than Siakam. And Siakam is probably better right now too.

Yes, I think he does. Mainly because he's 3 years younger.

Siakam has a better overall field goal percentage, at least some of which is likely explained by more attempts in the paint. Ingram has a better 3 point shooting percentage (but only by 33% - 31%).

Imo, it's hard to make a true comparison right now because of Ingram losing a total of 53 games over the past 2 seasons. This year, he was starting to play at an all star level before he was shut down for the year because of the blood clot issue.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I don't think it's even close. Siakam is Light Years better than Ingram will ever be. Siakam hasn't even scratched his potential yet either

I dont know what Ingram can ever be "great" at-- his gmae is weird. He isnt that great an athlete, hes not a great 3 pt shooter....i mean i think his destiny is a poor mans DeRozan.

Siakam looks like a beast. Ingram looks soft.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Does INGram have more upside though?

Siakam is the 2nd best player on a top 5 team. He is scoring over 23 PPG so far in the playoffs and is just coming into his own. Siakam shoots better than Ingram and is probably the better athlete too.

I don't know what Ingram has that gives him "more upside" aside from his pedigree.

Ingram is a good NBA player. But he doesn't have more upside than Siakam. And Siakam is probably better right now too.

what is Ingram's end game?

hes not a great game changing athlete. Hes not a 3 pt shooter. Poor man's Derozan?

 

[msgkings322]

what is Ingram's end game?

hes not a great game changing athlete. Hes not a 3 pt shooter. Poor man's Derozan?

I think you need to post this a few more times before we get it.

 

[tlance]

what is Ingram's end game?

hes not a great game changing athlete. Hes not a 3 pt shooter. Poor man's Derozan?

Given his skills, I would like to see him handle the ball a little more and create. But that isn't happening in LA.

I don't know that he has a direct comp. But he is a good player.

 

[Black Adam]

Given his skills, I would like to see him handle the ball a little more and create. But that isn't happening in LA.

I don't know that he has a direct comp. But he is a good player.

not according to WiggityWack ,but then it MIGHT have something to do with the colors he's wearing...

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

I will take Siakam.

Doesn't mean I don't like Ingram.

I'm over this 2 - 3 year age difference nonsense.

Is it a factor in some cases?

Yes.

But, I go back to the Kyrie vs. Dame debate.

Older guys can still have upside.

I can't speak for anyone else.

But, I'd take Lillard over Kyrie and I wouldn't have to think about it long.

Has nothing to do with recency bias.

Wiggy and I have been having this argument for years.

At some point, you have to judge these guys based on what is, not what could be.

It's not a exact science.

For every Greek Freak, you have 20 Bruno Cabacol's.

That fucker is still 2 years away from being 2 years away.

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

Given his skills, I would like to see him handle the ball a little more and create. But that isn't happening in LA.

I don't know that he has a direct comp. But he is a good player.

Harrison Barnes