Raps/Nets

[Texas Chuck]

Barrett
#9

for

Johnson
#26
#27

Nets move up to grab a future starter at 9 and bring in RJ to tank command for a year then slide into a 6th man role if they pivot to win now in 26/27 or he just keeps tank commanding.
Raptors make their lineup make more sense since they are committed to trying for the play-in, gain some much needed wiggle room under the tax while improving the team and taking two swings late in the draft.

[Godaddycurse]

we dont need to swap barrett for johnson to make the play in though? This doesnt raise our ceiling meaningfully. Rather keep the 9 and take a swing on someone with high(er) upside

Raptors are in a bit of boring spot right now/is pretty much a lock for play in spot as it stands. We really should just stand pat and see how this roster gel before making moves. If the team surprises then we can look for upgrades at the deadline. If they suck then rebuild around Barnes to try to dodge play in. No point burning a lotto pick now

[Texas Chuck]

we dont need to swap barrett for johnson to make the play in though? This doesnt raise our ceiling meaningfully. Rather keep the 9 and take a swing on someone with high(er) upside

I think it increases their chances pretty decently yes. I mean I've been pretty clear how much I hate that roster construction. And I would agree with you about keeping the pick rather than making the swap here if they were just going to use the year to evaluate pieces. But if the goal is competitiveness I want to make a meaningful change. And I want some room under tax and I;m not convinced a team will give a future first for Agbaji or Dick the way a lot of Raptors fans seem convinced.

So to sum up, yeah this idea feels kinda dumb for Toronto if it weren't for their own goals. And I don't see anyone at 9 who has an upside I'm that concerned about losing. If I want to see Barnes in the playoffs, I'm giving him a better chance.

[psman2]

I don't think Toronto fans are ready to give up on the hope of the 23/24 32 games of efficient Barrett comes back who was as near as good as Johnson has ever been. IMO I just draft BPA and get a good look at my team and make a swing for need at the deadline if it is coming together. Johnson wouldn't even be a starter for them behind Ingram and Barnes at the 3/4, while Barrett can still play SG minutes, Johnson makes little sense there as a 4/3.

I think targeting a SG upgrade is the direction you want with a 9/Barrett trade.

[Texas Chuck]

I don't think Toronto fans are ready to give up on the hope of the 23/24 32 games of efficient Barrett comes back who was as near as good as Johnson has ever been. IMO I just draft BPA and get a good look at my team and make a swing for need at the deadline if it is coming together. Johnson wouldn't even be a starter for them behind Ingram and Barnes at the 3/4, while Barrett can still play SG minutes, Johnson makes little sense there as a 4/3.

I think targeting a SG upgrade is the direction you want with a 9/Barrett trade.

Oh I'm starting Johnson/Barnes/BI and going full longboi. Johnson isn't any worse defensively against 2's than Barrett would be and his spacing really helps offensively more than RJ's act.

[Godaddycurse]

we dont need to swap barrett for johnson to make the play in though? This doesnt raise our ceiling meaningfully. Rather keep the 9 and take a swing on someone with high(er) upside

I think it increases their chances pretty decently yes. I mean I've been pretty clear how much I hate that roster construction. And I would agree with you about keeping the pick rather than making the swap here if they were just going to use the year to evaluate pieces. But if the goal is competitiveness I want to make a meaningful change. And I want some room under tax and I;m not convinced a team will give a future first for Agbaji or Dick the way a lot of Raptors fans seem convinced.

So to sum up, yeah this idea feels kinda dumb for Toronto if it weren't for their own goals. And I don't see anyone at 9 who has an upside I'm that concerned about losing. If I want to see Barnes in the playoffs, I'm giving him a better chance.

if this roster on its own isnt good enough to make the play in then there's no point adding a marginal upgrade like johnson for barrett. Masai is not sacrificing the 9th pick to guarantee a play in berth.

[Texas Chuck]

if this roster on its own isnt good enough to make the play in then there's no point adding a marginal upgrade like johnson for barrett. Masai is not sacrificing the 9th pick to guarantee a play in berth.

Huh? I mean there are no guarantees either way. Team might well be a top 10 team in the East right now. And we don't know if Toronto will get hit with injuries again or which other teams will.

So I'm about probabilities. Does Johnson in for RJ make the offense make a lot more sense? Yes. Does it hurt the defense in any meaningful way? No.

So for me it increases their chances not only to make the play-in but also potentially make the 8 teams that compete in the tournament.

But this isn't a good idea and I feel dumb continuing to sell it so I'll stop here lol. I want Toronto to start over again. And I know that's a tough sell and not what they are going to do so I tried something else. And whiffed.

[james vincent]

The raptors should keep their pick, Barrett and either make the play in or tank again for next years draft. Cam Johnson’s good but he doesn’t raise the ceiling of their team along with late picks. Toronto should just take the bpa and run it back regardless of the next season’s outcome.

[wemby]

Cam Johnson doesn't matter this much to the Raptors, they should focus on selecting the highest ceiling prospect they can to get out of the treadmill, whoever that is, Maluach, Knueppel, or whomever. I'd rather move up than down if I were them.

[Texas Chuck]

I'd rather move up than down if I were them.

Oh I agree with you wholeheartedly here. But I don't like them attaching future 1sts to do so and they have nothing else to move up with. I don't see it as a particularly realistic path. Unless Washington specifically does Washington things and takes on a big contract fool's gold player as positive value in the way they did Kuzma and Poole. But the Kuzma deal suggests they might finally be learning from their mistakes.

[mademan]

Im not sure Cam-ingram-Barnes is a long term pairing and i would hate to trade down when the result is lineup imbalance

(I know RJ is also not a good fit)

[Texas Chuck]

Im not sure Cam-ingram-Barnes is a long term pairing and i would hate to trade down when the result is lineup imbalance

(I know RJ is also not a good fit)

Feels bad back to justifying any of this mess, but if you never played the 3 of them together 32/32/32 minutes are available just at the two forward spots. You want Barnes probably playing 36-38 mpg so could you steal 2-3 minutes a half with them all on the court? I'm going to say yes.

I don't think there is any issue at all with finding minutes for all of them even if you hate my idea of starting all of them. Though with the current roster, I don't see a better plan.

[mademan]

Im not sure Cam-ingram-Barnes is a long term pairing and i would hate to trade down when the result is lineup imbalance

(I know RJ is also not a good fit)

Feels bad back to justifying any of this mess, but if you never played the 3 of them together 32/32/32 minutes are available just at the two forward spots. You want Barnes probably playing 36-38 mpg so could you steal 2-3 minutes a half with them all on the court? I'm going to say yes.

I don't think there is any issue at all with finding minutes for all of them even if you hate my idea of starting all of them. Though with the current roster, I don't see a better plan.

That's the problem. The current roster has too many issues to invest into it. What's the upside here? We increase from a play in team to a better play in team? I can be convinced that RJ is a negative which makes this good value, but we lack too much talent not to go for upside in this draft.

[Texas Chuck]

That's the problem. The current roster has too many issues to invest into it. What's the upside here? We increase from a play in team to a better play in team? I can be convinced that RJ is a negative which makes this good value, but we lack too much talent not to go for upside in this draft.

I agree. Deal is simply based on both the FO and Raps posters here telling me the plan is to start winning next year. I would be looking to move off IQ,Barrett, and Ingram at a minimum even if my return was simply expiring contracts. I want to hard reset. But its clear the team has no interest. They intentionally took on Barrett and IQ and paid him and traded for BI.

So with that being the clear plan, I feel like they should try and upgrade. It can be done better than this failed attempt, but they should be trying to get better or they should fire Masai and get a new GM with a better plan in place.

[oldncreaky]

The current TOR roster has one star wing/forward (Barnes), one decent C (Poeltl), three other starters of questionable fit who can all play SG and 1 other position, and a 7 guys on rookie contracts who mostly play SG and may or may not ever amount to anything.

I don't really care if TOR can increase their odds of making the play-in because I think they'd be too small and too young anyway -- IMO thye'd be cannon fodder in the first round of the playoffs. I'm hoping that one or 2 of the youngsters develop enough to become rotation pieces, and that will allow one of BI/IQ/RJB can be moved at the TDL for a backup C and/or PF and some financial relief.

Over the last 5 years, Toronto's front office has frittered away a significant amount of draft capital on marginal upgrades that simultaneously neglect huge, glaring holes in the Raptor's line up to the great frustration of much of the fan base. Examples of prior trades like this are Thad Young and Ingram. At least with Ingram there's a small possibility that they can flip him for some value in the future. The OP is another trade of a good FRP for a minor upgrade that doesn't address the glaring problem in the roster (a lack of size outside of Poeltl and Scottie). Easy pass.

[Duffman100]

I think the Raptors justification is light here. I touched on this in another thread, but the 'wiggle room under the tax' is a good in concept, but obviously very vague in actual deliverable and execution.

I'm not sure that unknown deliverable is worth the big drop in draft position