OG Anunoby Traded to Knicks

[cgmw]

I really didn’t understand his size until seeing him lined up next to Randle yesterday. He’s able to standing dunk in traffic over bigs because he’s basically a big himself—similar size to Randle just longer and more agile. Major difference to the starting unit.

[duetta]

You win in the playoffs with defense and we got the best defensive player in the deal - who happens to be a perfect fit for our needs. Management was unlike to give IQ the 135m-5 year deal that he wanted and would not be happy to match even a four-year deal at those yearly numbers (which would make him temporarily more highly paid than Brunson).

And as for RJ, there are now likely to be enough shots for everyone else to go around. We didn't even have to give up a number one. So long as management is prepared to sign OG for what the market will bear, this deal was a no-brainer.

[Chanel Bomber]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10103244-report-rj-barretts-contract-called-toxic-asset-by-nba-insiders-after-knicks-trade



seems like i was being nice when i called him salary filler.

What we've said all along.

- There is likely a divergence of opinion among FOs about his value.

- A number of FOs probably view him as a negative asset (a kind word compared to "toxic") that would require draft assets to get rid of.

I never understood the pushback against those two assessments tbh.

I'm just relieved that we managed to get rid of the contract without trading away any first-round pick. I hope he restores his value in Toronto so he gets to stay home, but like you do I could easily see them dumping the contract quite rapidly if he doesn't show sustained progress over there.

if he continues to play the way he did here, i think it would be wise to get out of the contract sooner rather than later. the people who still value him do so not based on what he is but what he might be. and with each passing year there's less of those people. he's still got 3 years at a lot of money.

Might be completely untradable by next summer, barring a leap.

His value already plummeted from being seen by Ainge of all people as being worth 2 firsts, to a "toxic" contract by a number of FOs, within 15 months. It cratered fast.

I don't see this trend reversing with 3.5 years left on his deal, to say the least. Maybe that'll get him to stay in Toronto and we can be happy for him

[Deeeez Knicks]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10103244-report-rj-barretts-contract-called-toxic-asset-by-nba-insiders-after-knicks-trade

ESPN’s Zach Lowe revealed former New York Knicks wing R.J. Barrett’s contract was viewed as a “toxic asset” by some anonymous NBA front office members and coaches following his trade to the Toronto Raptors. “I’ve always said if there’s a continuum of RJ Barrett optimism and pessimism—and over here on the pessimistic side is like, ‘He just stinks, he’s a toxic asset.’ And that is a word that got thrown around yesterday in my conversations with front office people and coaches—toxic asset. Like you’re swallowing his contract,” Lowe said during the latest edition of The Lowe Post podcast (20:30 mark).

seems like i was being nice when i called him salary filler.

What we've said all along.

- There is likely a divergence of opinion among FOs about his value.

- A number of FOs probably view him as a negative asset (a kind word compared to "toxic") that would require draft assets to get rid of.

I never understood the pushback against those two assessments tbh.

I'm just relieved that we managed to get rid of the contract without trading away any first-round pick. I hope he restores his value in Toronto so he gets to stay home, but like you do I could easily see them dumping the contract quite rapidly if he doesn't show sustained progress over there.

I agree that some front offices may view RJ as a negative asset. On the other end some may view him as a positive.
My push back would come from saying that every front office views him as a negative untradable albatross contract. We should be thankful Toronto didn't view him that way.

I mean, there asking price was a player plus 3 firsts or something like that? And a lot of teams were interested in OG. Straight up, OG simply had more value then IQ and even a 2nd so RJ had to have some kind of value to Toronto. Its ok to say that too.

Maybe they will be wrong and RJs value craters from here but it's also possible that his value rises if he plays well.

[DOT]

I mean, there asking price was a player plus 3 firsts or something like that? And a lot of teams were interested in OG. Straight up, OG simply had more value then IQ and even a 2nd so RJ had to have some kind of value to Toronto. Its ok to say that too.

What people are arguing is essentially that had we not included RJ in the deal, Toronto would've either done OG for Quick straight up, or they would have given us picks instead

But when you lay it out like that, it's plain how ridiculous that argument is

But at the end of the day, it's just trolling so we shouldn't take it seriously.

[god shammgod]

i didn't say he was negative, i said he was salary filler. some gm's around the league called him toxic. not me.

i do think if the knicks included evan and sims instead or whatever the deal still happens. i don't think the raptors said we have to have rj or it's off.

[Garbagelo]

I really didn’t understand his size until seeing him lined up next to Randle yesterday. He’s able to standing dunk in traffic over bigs because he’s basically a big himself—similar size to Randle just longer and more agile. Major difference to the starting unit.

underrated point

he is also a vertical threat which we needed to replace since Mitch went down

his agility lets him get to more impactful plays than any big or wing we've had for years

he helps on both ends

[Chanel Bomber]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10103244-report-rj-barretts-contract-called-toxic-asset-by-nba-insiders-after-knicks-trade



seems like i was being nice when i called him salary filler.

What we've said all along.

- There is likely a divergence of opinion among FOs about his value.

- A number of FOs probably view him as a negative asset (a kind word compared to "toxic") that would require draft assets to get rid of.

I never understood the pushback against those two assessments tbh.

I'm just relieved that we managed to get rid of the contract without trading away any first-round pick. I hope he restores his value in Toronto so he gets to stay home, but like you do I could easily see them dumping the contract quite rapidly if he doesn't show sustained progress over there.

I agree that some front offices may view RJ as a negative asset. On the other end some may view him as a positive.
My push back would come from saying that every front office views him as a negative untradable albatross contract. We should be thankful Toronto didn't view him that way.

I mean, there asking price was a player plus 3 firsts or something like that? And a lot of teams were interested in OG. Straight up, OG simply had more value then IQ and even a 2nd so RJ had to have some kind of value to Toronto. Its ok to say that too.

Maybe they will be wrong and RJs value craters from here but it's also possible that his value rises if he plays well.

I think the case for trading him was always to do so (trade him) before he becomes a negative asset in the eyes of every FO around the league. The point (from me anyway) was always based specifically on the hope/expectation that there is still a divergence of opinion among FOs regarding his value.

I think we got out of it just in time. But there is still time for him to salvage his value in Toronto. The trend though is pointing downwards.

How much Toronto valued him though. we don't know. Just as he may have been an asset that completes the IQ/pick package, maybe Toronto asked for the pick as compensation for taking on RJ's contract. Or Leon wasn't willing to do a IQ/Fournier/pick and requested them to take on RJ as compensation.

We don't know. It doesn't matter.

[Deeeez Knicks]

i didn't say he was negative, i said he was salary filler. some gm's around the league called him toxic. not me.

i do think if the knicks included evan and sims instead or whatever the deal still happens. i don't think the raptors said we have to have rj or it's off.

I don't think he was holding up the deal. But it's very possible Tor preferred RJ over Fournier and maybe we would have thrown in a better pick or another pick. If anything from a marketing standpoint to get the home town kid.

In terms of the Knicks, they probably did want to move on at this point.

[robillionaire]

ESPN’s Zach Lowe revealed former New York Knicks wing R.J. Barrett’s contract was viewed as a “toxic asset” by some anonymous NBA front office members and coaches following his trade to the Toronto Raptors. “I’ve always said if there’s a continuum of RJ Barrett optimism and pessimism—and over here on the pessimistic side is like, ‘He just stinks, he’s a toxic asset.’ And that is a word that got thrown around yesterday in my conversations with front office people and coaches—toxic asset. Like you’re swallowing his contract,” Lowe said during the latest edition of The Lowe Post podcast (20:30 mark).
Source: zach bachar @ Bleacher Report

Masai got bamboozled!

[duetta]

It's entirely possible that a coach unwilling to indulge RJ's problematic tendencies may get more out of him.

[Chanel Bomber]

It's entirely possible that a coach unwilling to indulge RJ's problematic tendencies may get more out of him.

I think RJ should be coached like we should approach our spending habits. Buy fewer clothes, but better quality clothes. Take fewer shots, but better shots. And play some defense too, would be nice.

[Jalen Bluntson]

i didn't say he was negative, i said he was salary filler. some gm's around the league called him toxic. not me.

i do think if the knicks included evan and sims instead or whatever the deal still happens. i don't think the raptors said we have to have rj or it's off.

Weak sauce anonymous source BS. It clearly doesn't matter what that guy thinks because he was traded to Toronto.

If the deal was for Evan and Sims then we would have had to send more picks. People trying to downplay RJs trade value are really doing a lot of mental gymnastics. Toronto clearly wanted him over expiring trash and more picks. RJ haters in shambles that we got decent value for him? He's gone! Let it go! (Not you)

[Stannis]

i didn't say he was negative, i said he was salary filler. some gm's around the league called him toxic. not me.

i do think if the knicks included evan and sims instead or whatever the deal still happens. i don't think the raptors said we have to have rj or it's off.

I don't like RJ either. But I don't think Raptors do Quickly, Evan, Sims for OG.

Even though I think they are wrong, I think the Raptors saw something in RJ. Maybe a potential home country hero. I dunno. But in their minds, they got 2 rotational players for 1.

I straight swap between Quickly and OG just doesn't make sense for the Raptors. OG is better. And both players are due for contract renewals this summer.

[Deeeez Knicks]

What we've said all along.

- There is likely a divergence of opinion among FOs about his value.

- A number of FOs probably view him as a negative asset (a kind word compared to "toxic") that would require draft assets to get rid of.

I never understood the pushback against those two assessments tbh.

I'm just relieved that we managed to get rid of the contract without trading away any first-round pick. I hope he restores his value in Toronto so he gets to stay home, but like you do I could easily see them dumping the contract quite rapidly if he doesn't show sustained progress over there.

I agree that some front offices may view RJ as a negative asset. On the other end some may view him as a positive.
My push back would come from saying that every front office views him as a negative untradable albatross contract. We should be thankful Toronto didn't view him that way.

I mean, there asking price was a player plus 3 firsts or something like that? And a lot of teams were interested in OG. Straight up, OG simply had more value then IQ and even a 2nd so RJ had to have some kind of value to Toronto. Its ok to say that too.

Maybe they will be wrong and RJs value craters from here but it's also possible that his value rises if he plays well.

I think the case for trading him was always to do so (trade him) before he becomes a negative asset in the eyes of every FO around the league. The point (from me anyway) was always based specifically on the hope/expectation that there is still a divergence of opinion among FOs regarding his value.

I think we got out of it just in time. But there is still time for him to salvage his value in Toronto. The trend though is pointing downwards.

How much Toronto valued him though. we don't know. Just as he may have been an asset that completes the IQ/pick package, maybe Toronto asked for the pick as compensation for taking on RJ's contract. Or Leon wasn't willing to do a IQ/Fournier/pick and requested them to take on RJ as compensation.

We don't know. It doesn't matter.

Agree, the Knicks needed to move on. RJ as is wasn't a good fit, and just wasnt playing well recently. OG is pretty much a perfect fit, plus right now a much much better player.

In terms of RJs future value? It can go in a number of different ways. If he remains inconsistent and inefficient then the contract does look bad and maybe he is better off as a 6th man or something. If he can put it together and be consistently good or even just consistently avg then his contract can be a plus. Its not that crazy a contract. Hes getting paid solid starter money so its entirely feasible he can live up to it. Maybe he gets better. Maybe not. We have been saying it for years, and hasnt improved enough. It is still possible with a change of scenary that something clicks and he puts it together.

In terms of his current value? We know the deal and it does seem pointless to argue. It keeps getting brought up though. If Toronto viewed him as a toxic they dont make that deal. So we know at least one team doesnt view him as toxic. Its done and doesn't really matter though.

[Capn'O]

Full list of RJ Knicks Tombstone engravings (quotes that were provided organically during yesterdays Raps game that succinctly describe his time here) from last night's Around thread.

Didn't pass when he should have

He made bad choices in the 2nd half

A mixed bag

I see the potential

I'm sure there were more but these were the ones I picked out.

[-NSX-]

I cannot comment on who won the trade, as these things take time to reflect. But I will say you got a heck of a SF to play with Brunson and Randle, and he will perfectly compliment both players.

OG is a LOCK DOWN Defender. Just watch.

Ill further add that yesterday's OG game is the benchmark, of course he'll have off days shooting but you will get this effort at the minimum every game. There also will be days where hell go 7/9 from 3 as well.

This guy is an animal and I am glad he will get the recognition he deserves, maybe DPOY?

[Capn'O]

I cannot comment on who won the trade, as these things take time to reflect. But I will say you got a heck of a SF to play with Brunson and Randle, and he will perfectly compliment both players.

OG is a LOCK DOWN Defender. Just watch.

Ill further add that yesterday's OG game is the benchmark, of course he'll have off days shooting but you will get this effort at the minimum every game. There also will be days where hell go 7/9 from 3 as well.

This guy is an animal and I am glad he will get the recognition he deserves, maybe DPOY?

Yup. A guy who plays great defense and moves the ball helps every game.

[Wildcat]

I really wish the Knicks tried the IQ/Brunson lineup.

[rajajackal]

Watch on YouTube

0:29 - this is what made me happiest about the trade. rj receives that pass and 100% tries to score through gobert, stuffed. it was somewhat risky to hand it off given the shot clock, but it allowed for a clean and easy layup