$32M IQ Value

Thaddy · Post #1 » by **Thaddy** » Yesterday 3:47 am

IQ is having a rough start. It seems like the defense is better but his shooting has been overwhelmingly bad. He's off to a rough start and should normalize over the coming weeks.

It would be interesting to keep this thread alive. I think IQ will bounce back and play much better. The Raptors will need to decide between Ingram, Barrett and IQ. They just signed BI so I doubt it's him. RJ also looks like he's improved and back to being an elite 3rd option.

IQ kind of seems to be the odd man out. They have a capable back up in Shead ready to go and Hepburn doesn't look bad.

Question is, does IQ fetch anything? Would teams want to dump a bad contract and picks in exchange for him?

giannis and 1 · Post #2 » by **giannis and 1** » Yesterday 3:53 am

It would cost the Raptors first round picks to move him. Dude is stupidly overpaid.

jredsaz · Post #3 » by **jredsaz** » Yesterday 4:01 am

Rockets fans will hate me but I think he is a great fit in Houston and could push them back into a contender. That said, I don’t think Raps get a lot for him. The Raps and Rockets apron situation requires a third team so it gets complicated. FVV plus salary (Adams+?) and some value? Maybe the worst of HOU 3 firsts in 2027? Idk. I really like IQ and while he is overpaid he is really good

Post #4 » by **jbk1234** » Yesterday 4:05 am

IQ is probably on third worst contract in the NBA right now behind PG and Embiid. Maybe the Pelicans would swap Dejounte Murray for him.

LarsV8 · Post #5 » by **LarsV8** » Yesterday 4:18 am

Probably takes multiple firsts to dump him.

The vision in Toronto remains a mystery to me.

Maverick41 · Post #6 » by **Maverick41** » Yesterday 4:31 am

IQ for Gaff + C. Martin + Hardy.

Post #7 » by **Mr Swagtastic** » Yesterday 4:44 am

Maverick41 wrote:IQ for Gaff + C. Martin + Hardy.

Quick and Irving seem like a awful pairing. Also a bad direction for Toronto. Gafford becomes a very expensive backup C who gives you zero spacing on a team struggling to hit 3's.

Post #8 » by **jbk1234** » Yesterday 4:58 am

Mr Swagtastic wrote:
Maverick41 wrote:IQ for Gaff + C. Martin + Hardy.
Quick and Irving seem like a awful pairing. Also a bad direction for Toronto. Gafford becomes a very expensive backup C who gives you zero spacing on a team struggling to hit 3's.

The Raptors should do this, get Poeltl healthy, abd trade him, or just ship Gafford to the Hornets for Miles Bridges.

The Mavs shouldn't do it unless the Raptors take back Klay instead of Gafford.

babyjax13 · Post #9 » by **babyjax13** » Yesterday 5:06 am

Minnesota could be interested? Reid and Conley or DDV for Quickley + value?

Godaddycurse · Post #10 » by **Godaddycurse** » Yesterday 5:12 am

Let IQ bust his shooting slump then revisit.

Post #11 » by **Mr Swagtastic** » Yesterday 5:26 am

jbk1234 wrote:
Mr Swagtastic wrote:
Maverick41 wrote:IQ for Gaff + C. Martin + Hardy.
Quick and Irving seem like a awful pairing. Also a bad direction for Toronto. Gafford becomes a very expensive backup C who gives you zero spacing on a team struggling to hit 3's.

The Raptors should do this, get Poeltl healthy, abd trade him, or just ship Gafford to the Hornets for Miles Bridges.

The Mavs shouldn't do it unless the Raptors take back Klay instead of Gafford.

I feel like Miles is just a guy putting up good stats on a awful team. I don't see the fit with RJ/Gradey/Ingram/CMB/Barnes/Mogbo/Ochai and Walter. Obviously he's better than a few guys on the list but what's his role?

IMHO Raptors are stuck they overpaid Quickley about $5-$7 million a few and a extra year but the roster isn't constructed enough for a full scorched earth rebuild and CMB still looks like a reach of a pick.

winforlose · Post #12 » by **winforlose** » Yesterday 11:26 am

babyjax13 wrote:Minnesota could be interested? Reid and Conley or DDV for Quickley + value?

I see some potential here. But I value Naz above IQ, especially when you factor in the contracts. Naz is a full 10 mil cheaper than IQ. Naz also has one more year locked in at a reasonable price. There would need to be additional compensation coming back to Minnesota.

Post #13 » by **MoneyTalks41890** » Yesterday 11:42 am

FVV, DFS for IQ, Temple

brackdan70 · Post #14 » by **brackdan70** » Yesterday 12:10 pm

He is a good player but overpaid. He is a solid starter great role player on an all star contract.
Slow start doesn’t help his value but there certainly teams that could use him. Since his contract is static he does have a chance to grow into it/ or with increasing cap it might look better in a couple years. With this CBA you really can’t be paying a guy like IQ that much though. Tough spot.

jayjaysee · Post #15 » by **jayjaysee** » Yesterday 12:23 pm

I think Toronto needs to sit on IQ, understand that’s not the fun answer.. Just wait out a year or two of his contract and let the cap jump. His shot can’t be this broken..

I don’t think Houston should tie themselves to IQ. They need a better immediate upgrade or should just find a cheaper stopgap.

Minnesota.. I’d look at Randle to third team? But expect an asset back..

I would’ve thought Milwaukee could give up minor value, but I think their meh guards have done enough that the team needs to keep Kuzma’s contract for a different upgrade (and that’s what their fans were saying all offseason)

LarsV8 · Post #16 » by **LarsV8** » Yesterday 12:28 pm

Houston is very cap conscious. We simply can't overpay for mediocre impact guys, as it will eventually cost us a better player as a cap casualty. It would probably take like 3 firsts for us to take on that deal.

Post #17 » by **jbk1234** » Yesterday 1:01 pm

brackdan70 wrote:He is a good player but overpaid. He is a solid starter great role player on an all star contract.
Slow start doesn’t help his value but there certainly teams that could use him. Since his contract is static he does have a chance to grow into it/ or with increasing cap it might look better in a couple years. With this CBA you really can’t be paying a guy like IQ that much though. Tough spot.

He's not a solid starter. It's not just this season either. He's a good sixth man who can play spot minutes with the starters. The hope in trading for Ingram was to relieve some of the on ball pressure that came with being the lead guard, but thus far, he's looked worse in an off ball role.

Post #18 » by **oldncreaky** » Yesterday 2:53 pm

jayjaysee wrote:I think Toronto needs to sit on IQ, understand that’s not the fun answer.. Just wait out a year or two of his contract and let the cap jump. His shot can’t be this broken..

This

IQ's % cap hit according to [url]spotrac[/url]

2025-26: 21%

2026-27: 19.1%

2027-28: 17.4%

2029-29: 15.8%

Whatever someone thinks is a far salary for IQ, he becomes a better value as time goes on. In the meantime, a treadmill team like TOR should just wait it out and stop making the mess on the roster worse.

ReggiesKnicks · Post #19 » by **ReggiesKnicks** » Yesterday 2:57 pm

oldncreaky wrote:
jayjaysee wrote:I think Toronto needs to sit on IQ, understand that’s not the fun answer.. Just wait out a year or two of his contract and let the cap jump. His shot can’t be this broken..

This

IQ's % cap hit according to [url]spotrac[/url]

2025-26: 21%

2026-27: 19.1%

2027-28: 17.4%

2029-29: 15.8%

Whatever someone thinks is a far salary for IQ, he becomes a better value as time goes on. In the meantime, a treadmill team like TOR should just wait it out and stop making the mess on the roster worse.

The numbers aren't quite this good as Spotrac seems to assume 10% increases year-to-year and it is going to be closer to 5-8%.

A flat contract does have its value which seems to be undervalued around this board at times.

jayjaysee · Post #20 » by **jayjaysee** » Yesterday 3:47 pm

ReggiesKnicks wrote:
oldncreaky wrote:
jayjaysee wrote:I think Toronto needs to sit on IQ, understand that’s not the fun answer.. Just wait out a year or two of his contract and let the cap jump. His shot can’t be this broken..

This

IQ's % cap hit according to [url]spotrac[/url]

2025-26: 21%

2026-27: 19.1%

2027-28: 17.4%

2029-29: 15.8%

Whatever someone thinks is a far salary for IQ, he becomes a better value as time goes on. In the meantime, a treadmill team like TOR should just wait it out and stop making the mess on the roster worse.

The numbers aren't quite this good as Spotrac seems to assume 10% increases year-to-year and it is going to be closer to 5-8%.

A flat contract does have its value which seems to be undervalued around this board at times.

Yeah, I don’t expect the contract to age that well, as the salary jumps seem optimistic. But I also believe IQ can play a lot better than we’ve seen recently. W