2012-13 Toronto Raptors Trade Idea Thread

[dagger]

Barg's and Demar's salaries cannot coexist going into next year hence the need for flexibility.

I have no idea what this means. We can open up $8-12m in cap space by amnestying Kleiza and waiving Lucas net summer. The free agent class is weak. There are a something like 10 teams with max cap space. I really don't know what you would do with $20m in cap space. Makes no sense to me, and Stephen Jackson has been a particularly bad teammate when he's been in what he considers bad situations. There is no argument for keeping Jackson longer term, into his mid-30s.

We're going to need to waive Lucas and amnesty Kleiza just to re-sign Lowry.


DeMar's contract is awful no matter how much you try to defend it.

If you are going to argue with me, at least get the facts right. A new deal for Lowry won't kick in until 2014-15 by which time Deals for Lucas, Gray, and Kleiza will be over. Acy would be entering his non guaranteed third year. There are perfectly legitimate arguments against DeMars deal, but the ability to add salary next summer AND keep Lowry long term is not one of them.

[Sterling_Archer]

I do not see us waiving Lucas. Jose contract will come off the books and I think he will go elsewhere unless he wants to sign here for cheap. Then amnesty Kleiza and that's another big contract coming off the books. That's roughly with Calderon 15 mil coming off then you factor other things like the gaurnteed contracts they handed out this preseason that come off. All in all we save a bit of money but with Derozan's contract and Bargs I still feel something has to give.

[OAKLEY_2]

I really don't know what you would do with $20m in cap space

We're going to need to waive Lucas and amnesty Kleiza just to re-sign Lowry.

Extending Lowry is going to be the difference between our success and failure going forward as is Jonas becoming a franchise player - no pressure Jonas. We'll need as much space as losing Jose, Bargs and Kleiza can muster. I know SJAX is a BADAZZ but that didn't stop us from re-upping an unhappy Charles Oakley. Ditto Antonio Davis. Granted it was VC parent support but we dealt with the attitudes/wives and they were always pros about it. If SJAX at his age is a starter and has an out he isn't going to go A-wall while under contract.

Lastly I doubt we'll waive Lucas any time soon.

[OAKLEY_2]

I also think bringing in Marion would help us a lot.

[OAKLEY_2]

Chandler is a fit but only if Fields goes the other way.

[dagger]

I really don't know what you would do with $20m in cap space

We're going to need to waive Lucas and amnesty Kleiza just to re-sign Lowry.

Extending Lowry is going to be the difference between our success and failure going forward as is Jonas becoming a franchise player - no pressure Jonas. We'll need as much space as losing Jose, Bargs and Kleiza can muster. I know SJAX is a BADAZZ but that didn't stop us from re-upping an unhappy Charles Oakley. Ditto Antonio Davis. Granted it was VC parent support but we dealt with the attitudes/wives and they were always pros about it. If SJAX at his age is a starter and has an out he isn't going to go A-wall while under contract.

Lastly I doubt we'll waive Lucas any time soon.

I'm talking about Lucas' team option next year. No need to pick it up if there is something better. And there is no impediment in re-signing Lowry even for the max - after the 2013-14 season, I just don;t buy any part of your argument here. I wouldn't touch that trade.

If you assume Lowry gets the max and the cap in 2013-14 is about $62 million and the tax kicks in around $73m, we project having about $51-52 million in commitments for eight guys including the QO for Ed Davis. If you add in one 2014 first round pick - and assume the worst financially, that it's Andrew Wiggins as first overall pick at $5 million, that's $58 million for eight guys. The pick is more likely to be half that, or less, so a conservative bet is that our cap obligations will total $55 million, with Lowry at the MAX. And the following year, Fields, Bargnani and Amir are off cap. Our current obligations for 2014-15 are about $9 million for DeMar, plus the Ross and Valanciunas options. In other words, bubkis, Bubbe!

[dagger]

Chandler is a fit but only if Fields goes the other way.

Fields can become a prime backup. DEN will want financial relief to part with Chandler, not an even larger contract because Chandler is on a de facto MLE level deal.

[Mr.Raptorsingh]

Calderon to Washington for Trevor Ariza.

FWIW, I think Dom McGuire can be an Ariza-type if given the chance.

[TheGoodDoctor]

If you are going to argue with me, at least get the facts right. A new deal for Lowry won't kick in until 2014-15 by which time Deals for Lucas, Gray, and Kleiza will be over. Acy would be entering his non guaranteed third year. There are perfectly legitimate arguments against DeMars deal, but the ability to add salary next summer AND keep Lowry long term is not one of them.

Not one of them?! Are you joking???

DeRozan $10M
Bargnani $11M
Fields $8.5M
Amir $7M
Valaciunas $3.7M
Ross $2.8M
*Davis $4.3M
Lowry $13M (estimated but should be close or higher)

You're looking at $56 MILLION ($4M to fill out the remaining 4-5 roster spots, did you forget about this?) without Davis' QO and $60M with Davis which puts us right at the luxury tax and that is with only EIGHT players on our roster. I know you're proposing an imaginary scenario where we won't have to secure a backups at all of the SF and C positions and disregard a 3rd string PG to have this "capspace" to ADD salary but in reality if its not those names it will be other players (as in multiple).

So yes DeMar's salary is indeed a problem.

[OAKLEY_2]

I'm talking about Lucas' team option next year. No need to pick it up if there is something better.

Who might that be?

Well I guess your point is why go all silly clearing now when we are in good shape come 2014/15 when we need to re-up Lowry. Why would we wait until then and not try and lock him up sooner for longer term over his best years? Are we not just under the cap next year next year with Jose off the books and say no amnesty? I think the thin free agent class at small forward makes getting someone like SJAX even more of an imperative because no way is anybody going to pay him his previous 10 mil and BC is likely to pay the most. If he doesn't pass the partial season smell test audition you dump him and his salary off the books. At worst we get the serviceable big in Splitter and good guy Bonner. I realize 3 for 3 always looks the most unrealistic as opposed to say 1 for 1 with Chandler but with Chandler we might be stuck with mediocre player and contract going forward. SJAX gives us options.

[dagger]

If you are going to argue with me, at least get the facts right. A new deal for Lowry won't kick in until 2014-15 by which time Deals for Lucas, Gray, and Kleiza will be over. Acy would be entering his non guaranteed third year. There are perfectly legitimate arguments against DeMars deal, but the ability to add salary next summer AND keep Lowry long term is not one of them.

Not one of them?! Are you joking???

DeRozan $10M
Bargnani $11M
Fields $8.5M
Amir $7M
Valaciunas $3.7M
Ross $2.8M
*Davis $4.3M
Lowry $13M (estimated but should be close or higher)

You're looking at $56 MILLION ($4M to fill out the remaining 4-5 roster spots, did you forget about this?) without Davis' QO and $60M with Davis which puts us right at the luxury tax and that is with only EIGHT players on our roster. I know you're proposing an imaginary scenario where we won't have to secure a backups at all of the SF and C positions and disregard a 3rd string PG to have this "capspace" to ADD salary but in reality if its not those names it will be other players (as in multiple).

So yes DeMar's salary is indeed a problem.

You do understand (or maybe you don't) that

a) The salary cap is not the tax threshold - they are two separate numbers. The tax threshold is $10-11m higher than the cap.

b) You can go over the cap with Bird rights, right up to about the $72 million projected tax line, right?

c) The team can spend up to the tax line before tax is incurred, and can even go over the line a bit without paying the new Super taxes.

d) The Raptors have spent right up to the tax threshold many times.

e) You can go over the cap and you get various exceptions that allow you to keep spend. One of those is the minimum salary exception which says no matter how much you have spent (so long as you are not in the Super Tax territory), you can add as many minimum salary players as you can fit. The last few players on the roster should include some minimum salary types.

f) Ed Davis, if he is not part of the starting lineup by then, should be tradeable for value or a pick, and right now, I'm not pencilling him in for any money above his QO.

the way some of you project our finances, you'd think we're OKC with a Supermax, max and near max contract on the books already.

[OAKLEY_2]

DeRozan $10M
Bargnani $11M
Fields $8.5M
Amir $7M
Valaciunas $3.7M
Ross $2.8M
*Davis $4.3M
Lowry $13M (estimated but should be close or higher)

BC is hedging his bets with an Amir amnesty when Kleiza is the most obvious candidate. If I'm offloading Amir it is by trade not a salary dump. Yes a big deal for Lowry is staring us in the face sooner rather than at the end of his deal I mean c'mon. I expect near the max for Lowry if he continues to be their best player. If that happens see ya Bargs.

[TheGoodDoctor]

If you are going to argue with me, at least get the facts right. A new deal for Lowry won't kick in until 2014-15 by which time Deals for Lucas, Gray, and Kleiza will be over. Acy would be entering his non guaranteed third year. There are perfectly legitimate arguments against DeMars deal, but the ability to add salary next summer AND keep Lowry long term is not one of them.

Not one of them?! Are you joking???

DeRozan $10M
Bargnani $11M
Fields $8.5M
Amir $7M
Valaciunas $3.7M
Ross $2.8M
*Davis $4.3M
Lowry $13M (estimated but should be close or higher)

You're looking at $56 MILLION ($4M to fill out the remaining 4-5 roster spots, did you forget about this?) without Davis' QO and $60M with Davis which puts us right at the luxury tax and that is with only EIGHT players on our roster. I know you're proposing an imaginary scenario where we won't have to secure a backups at all of the SF and C positions and disregard a 3rd string PG to have this "capspace" to ADD salary but in reality if its not those names it will be other players (as in multiple).

So yes DeMar's salary is indeed a problem.

You do understand that

a) You can go over the cap with Lowry's Bird rights, right up to about the $72 million project tax line, right?

b) The team can spend up to the tax line before

c) The last few players on the roster should include some minimum salary types.

d) Ed Davis, if he is not part of the starting lineup by then, should be tradeable for value

the way some of you project our finances, you'd think we're OKC with a Supermax, max and near max contract on the books already.

Nothing which you list disputes the fact that DeMar's contract cripples our team's ability to ADD any significant talent (remember what you were arguing we could?)

You're making a case of how we can RETAIN our CURRENT roster AT the cap....

Do you think that's a good thing??? lol

You don't actually believe our ownership would ever pay $72M do you?!? Come on you're better than this...you just hopelessly defend our management as a biased fan.

[TheGoodDoctor]

What's even more depressing is adding a player of say Rudy Gay's caliber puts us well over and yet we would STILL need to improve from that point to be a legitimte threat.

ie/

Lowry ($13+M)
DeRozan ($10M)
Gay ($19M)
Bargnani ($11M)
Valanciunas ($3.7M)

$56.7M just in our starting lineup in the best case scenario...ya management would be down for that

I'm sure they would be willing to be amongst the top payrolls in the league for hopefully 4-5th best. Toronto management has shown their commitment before to winning franchises....greenfont.

Undoubtably the best line up we've had but we are maxed out with little depth and in reality to be a true contendor we need to swap DeRozan with a Harden type player....I think you're crazy if you believe our management will go anywhere beyond extending Lowry; DeMar's contract was an awful decision no matter how you try to spin it.

[Los Manos]

^^^^ The GoodDoc.....Apparently a few weeks ago BC got approval from the new Board to go over the luxury tax line if he needs to. It wasn't officially reported but an insider here with ties to the board reported it. So your assertions that this ownership will refuse to touch the luxury tax isn't true.

[TheGoodDoctor]

I'm willing to bet anyone on here that our management doesn't go anywhere near $72M....and will go around $60M at best which retains our current core with very little improvement; if any.


Anyone willing to take on that bet...dagger, Manos????


I respect you guys as some of the better posters on the board but you're only kidding yourselves if you think TO management is willing to spend to make ANY of their teams winners....you can throw out meaningless numbers as much as you want but the bottomline is they don't do it for their most important team the Leafs but will for a team that barely gets coverage in their own country like the Raptors?!?!

Let's be serious boys.

[dagger]

I'm willing to bet anyone on here that our management doesn't go anywhere near $72M....and will go around $60M at best which retains our current core with very little improvement; if any.


Anyone willing to take on that bet...dagger, Manos????


I respect you guys as some of the better posters on the board but you're only kidding yourselves if you think TO management is willing to spend to make ANY of their teams winners....you can throw out meaningless numbers as much as you want but the bottomline is they don't do it for their most important team the Leafs but will for a team that barely gets coverage in their own country like the Raptors?!?!

Let's be serious boys.

I honestly don't know where you get that idea. If spending up to the tax line, or close, had never happened before, it would be a matter of sheer speculation to assume that will be the case in the future, but for much of the team's history, we have spent above the cap and in most of those years we have come withing spitting distance of the tax line.

I'm not going to bet you on something that is 2-3 years in the future. But I do suggest you do a little research into the organization's spending philosophy because it doesn't bear out your concern. I'm being super-polite here with my wording. I think your argument hinges on an assumption of past practice that simply isn't borne out by historical fact, and the fact you don't seem to be able to move out of the corner you've painted yourself into is a bit distressing.

[Los Manos]

Thing is it doesn't hold any weight to cite how MLSE owned by the Teachers Pension Fund approached spending for the Raptors or Leafs as they no longer control it.

Will Colangelo take the Raptors into or at least approaching the luxury tax line in the future? I don't know but he's certainly been sniffing around for large contracts and if word is true, he has received approval to take on additional salary even if it does push the teams salary slightly over the luxury tax line.

[WalterCronkite]

Trade everyone not named Valanciunas or Lowry, for whatever, doesn't even matter. This team is turrible.

[HighOctane]

Something along the lines of:

Bargnani + Kleiza for Al Jefferson + Demarre Carrol

Demar Derozan + Terrence Ross for Luol Deng + Jimmy Butler

Roll out a line up of Lowry/Fields/Deng/Jefferson/Valanciunas.

No idea if that works, but we know Fields isn't getting traded anytime soon, either way he would be a defender at the 2.