By Vince Carter
Over the years, Toronto Raptors President Masai Ujiri has been praised for an approach akin to real estate investing: searching for underutilized players, “buying low,” and hoping to renovate them into cornerstone assets. But this year’s trade for Brandon Ingram has many questioning whether the Raptors have abandoned long-term prudence. Despite sitting at 16–35, Toronto surrendered major first-round capital to land Ingram, a midrange-heavy iso scorer who will need a new contract soon.
A recent piece titled “Toronto Raptors: Brandon Ingram & No Clear Direction” put it bluntly:
“The Raptors sit at 16–35 yet traded for Brandon Ingram, a star needing a new contract soon.”
What does this deal accomplish if the Raptors are already sliding in the standings? Is this a classic Ujiri real estate move—or a sign of a front office with no coherent direction?
1. The Trade: Giving Up Future Picks on a Losing Team
According to multiple reports, Toronto parted with at least two first-round picks (one unprotected) to acquire Brandon Ingram from New Orleans. While Ingram is a proven scorer who once averaged 23.8 points per game (2021–22), the Raptors’ record at 16–35 begs the question: Why push the chips in now?
In “Toronto Raptors: Brandon Ingram & No Clear Direction,” the author highlights:
“Ujiri gave up first-round assets for a midrange-heavy iso scorer on a sub-.500 team.”
The real estate logic traditionally argues:
Buy an undervalued player on the cusp of free agency.
Place him in a better system.
Sign him to a favorable deal long-term.
But in this case, Ingram is neither undervalued (he’s already recognized as a near-star) nor cheap (a significant extension looms). Meanwhile, the Raptors are far from contention.
2. Overlap with Barnes & Barrett: Cramped Floors, Duplication
One of the biggest knocks is how Ingram fits alongside Scottie Barnes and RJ Barrett (acquired in a previous deal). Each player does his best work around the foul line extended or in mid-post isolations. That’s a lot of overlapping midrange usage and ball dominance.
Midrange Frequency
Ingram took 42% of his field-goal attempts from midrange in 2022–23 (per Cleaning the Glass), ranking among the highest for forwards.
Barrett often attacks from midrange when he can’t get to the rim (26% frequency, synergy data).
Barnes, while versatile, also likes to operate near the paint, especially in short-midrange floaters and push shots.
“Overlap with Barnes & Barrett: Ingram thrives in the same midrange zone … The floor could get cramped with multiple ball-needy wings,”
from “Toronto Raptors: Brandon Ingram & No Clear Direction.”
The advanced stats show that when Barnes, Barrett, and Ingram share the floor, Toronto’s spacing issues become glaring. According to NBA Advanced Stats (small sample), the trio has an Offensive Rating of 107.8—well below league average—suggesting they haven’t yet found a seamless way to coexist.
3. Defensive Woes: A Bottom-Ranked Unit
Despite the Raptors’ reputation under former coach Nick Nurse for switching aggressively, the current iteration is severely underperforming defensively. They’re near the bottom in Defensive Rating (hovering around 27th in the league with a 116.8 DRTG).
“Ingram is not known for high-level defense, and the Raptors rank near the bottom in defensive efficiency,”
reads another snippet from the same article.
Ingram’s slight frame and inconsistent engagement on the defensive end could exacerbate these problems. While he can be a capable on-ball defender in spurts, he’s no lockdown wing stopper—especially not enough to single-handedly raise a bottom-tier defensive team.
4. Directionless? Short-Term Gain vs. Long-Term Pain
Perhaps the biggest question: why make this trade at 16–35? One might argue it’s akin to flipping a house in a declining market. You’re paying a premium for a property (Ingram) that requires more investment (a future max or near-max extension), all while your own “neighborhood” (the Raptors’ place in the standings) is in disrepair.
“Why trade first-round picks for a player who needs a big extension soon if you’re already losing?”
the article continues.
It’s reminiscent of Masai Ujiri’s real estate moves in past seasons—trading picks for Thad Young or Jakob Poeltl—but those came when the Raptors were flirting with playoff or play-in contention. Now, at 16–35, the rationale is murkier.
“Are the Raptors chasing a middling playoff run at best? Ingram’s good, but not enough to revive a 16–35 squad lacking identity. What’s the end game here?”
If the Raptors suddenly rattle off wins, maybe they squeak into the play-in. But is that really worth sacrificing multiple first-rounders for an uncertain future?
5. The Scottie Barnes Factor: Can a Connector Flourish?
When the Raptors drafted Scottie Barnes fourth overall in 2021, they envisioned him as a “point forward” with elite defensive tools and a team-first mentality. But how does Barnes—a natural connector—develop in an environment dominated by iso-oriented scorers like Ingram and Barrett?
Barnes’s Usage Rate: Remains in the low 20s, suggesting he’s often the secondary or tertiary option.
Barnes On/Off Splits: The team is typically better offensively when he’s on the floor (+3.2 in Offensive Rating), largely due to his unselfish play and passing vision.
Potential Stagnation: If Ingram and Barrett continue taking the bulk of midrange touches, Barnes’s unique skill set might be underutilized, delaying his evolution into a star.
In real estate terms, Barnes is like the “foundation” of a home. Adding new additions (Ingram, Barrett) can raise property value if done strategically. But if those additions overshadow or compromise the foundation, you risk structural issues.
6. Advanced Analytics Snapshot
Ingram’s Midrange Dependency
42% of attempts from midrange in 2022–23 (Cleaning the Glass).
0.91 points per possession on midrange pull-ups, according to Synergy (solid, but not elite).
Raptors’ Offensive Rating
With Barnes, Barrett, and Ingram together on the floor (small sample): ~107.8.
League average is ~114.0, indicating subpar efficiency when all three share touches.
Defensive Rating
Raptors rank 27th overall at 116.8.
Ingram’s Defensive Box Plus-Minus in 2022–23 hovered around -1.0 (per Basketball-Reference), underscoring that he doesn’t address the team’s primary weakness.
7. Conclusion: A Misapplied Real Estate Strategy?
Masai Ujiri’s real estate approach has worked in the past—buying undervalued players, developing them into key contributors, and then re-signing them to sustainable deals. The acquisition of Brandon Ingram, however, raises fundamental questions:
Valuation: Ingram isn’t undervalued; he’s already near-max money.
Market Conditions: The Raptors are 16–35, hardly the “prime location” you’d want if you’re investing in a so-called “finishing piece.”
Asset Depletion: Multiple first-round picks gone for a midrange scorer who overlaps with Barrett and Barnes.
Barnes’s Development: Could the team’s future cornerstone be forced into a role that diminishes his strengths?
At best, Ingram becomes a leading scorer who helps the Raptors surge toward a late-season push, setting them up for a retool next year. At worst, this is a short-term band-aid that mortgaged draft
capital, crowded the floor for Barnes and Barrett, and locked the Raptors into a directionless path.
“Are the Raptors chasing a middling playoff run at best? Ingram’s good, but not enough to revive a 16–35 squad lacking identity. What’s the end game here?”
Until Ujiri outlines a clear plan, fans and analysts alike will continue to debate whether Toronto just overpaid for a house with questionable resale value—and no guarantee it’ll look any better once the renovations are done.
References & Further Reading
Toronto Raptors: Brandon Ingram & No Clear Direction (cited quotes under fair use)
NBA Advanced Stats – Team offensive/defensive ratings
Cleaning the Glass – Midrange frequency data
Synergy Sports – Isolation PPP, midrange efficiency
Basketball-Reference – Ingram’s DBPM stats
(All quoted lines from “Toronto Raptors: Brandon Ingram & No Clear Direction” are presented verbatim under fair use. Other statistical data sourced from publicly available NBA analytics platforms.)