Poll: Which of these do you consider facts about the Raptors?

[ConSarnit]

We just tanked for 2 seasons. How is that question even on the poll? Proven fact.

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

So basically what you are saying is our front office is grossly incompetent? Because if they had designs on tanking from day 1 in both 23/24 and 24/25 they did the absolute worst job in the world.

23/24: if you wanted to tank why would you keep all of OG/Siakam/Poeltl for the first half of the season? Why would you sign Schroder in the off-season? Why would the deals for OG or Siakam be better in-season? Tanking is supposed to help up their value? Playing them and risking injury is supposed to help up their value?

24/25: if you’re trying to tank why would you bring in starters like IQ and RJ from the OG deal? We started out terribly in 24/25 because of injury, not because we were trying to tank.

If our FO has been tanking the past 2 years they are horrible at it given their tanking model is to start the season trying to win. It makes no sense. We only tanked because of injury or unexpected poor play. You don’t retain all of OG/Barne/Siakam/Poeltl if you’re trying to tank. You don’t trade for more established players like IQ and RJ if you’re trying to tank.

If you believe we have been trying to tank since day 1 of both seasons then you should be calling for the heads of everyone in our front office given the strategy they tried to employ.

[ConSarnit]

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

maybe i should've explained in detail.

i was suggesting that 23/24 was not presented to ownership as a tanking season nor was it presented to the world as a tank year - this allowed for season ticket renewals and ad money being spent. dollar value expectations were already set for 23/24 and any change in direction midway would not have effected it.

once the moves were made, ownership knew that the following year 24/25 was going to be a re-building/tank one and it was presented that way in marketing and dollar expectations were shifted behind the scenes because of that.

so when i say ownership would only ok 1 tanking season, it means they would know tickets/ads/financials would only be impacted for 1 season barring an unforeseen event like drafting flagg.

My suspicion is they will not let us tank, at least from day 1. The only times we’ve really tanked was Tampa or seasons where the team we’ve assembled was just flat out bad due to incompetence. We also have Masai saying “play-in for what?” and then making a play-in trade (Poeltl).

There’s really no evidence ownership will let us fully tank from the get-go unless it’s a crazy season like Tampa (and even then we weren’t trying to lose at the start of that season). All of the moves suggest maintaining some level of competence (Poeltl, Schroder, OG for IQ/RJ) even in the face of Masai admitting he doesn’t care about the play-in. My guess is they never let us do a multi year tank unless the new FO is completely incompetent and we are forced into it because our talent level sucks.

[Basketball_Jones]

We’ve done multi year tanks in the past. And we’ve just had back to back 25-30 win seasons. It’s not necessarily they won’t allow it. Talent wise we had almost no choice.

[ATLTimekeeper]

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

So basically what you are saying is our front office is grossly incompetent? Because if they had designs on tanking from day 1 in both 23/24 and 24/25 they did the absolute worst job in the world.

23/24: if you wanted to tank why would you keep all of OG/Siakam/Poeltl for the first half of the season? Why would you sign Schroder in the off-season? Why would the deals for OG or Siakam be better in-season? Tanking is supposed to help up their value? Playing them and risking injury is supposed to help up their value?

24/25: if you’re trying to tank why would you bring in starters like IQ and RJ from the OG deal? We started out terribly in 24/25 because of injury, not because we were trying to tank.

If our FO has been tanking the past 2 years they are horrible at it given their tanking model is to start the season trying to win. It makes no sense. We only tanked because of injury or unexpected poor play. You don’t retain all of OG/Barne/Siakam/Poeltl if you’re trying to tank. You don’t trade for more established players like IQ and RJ if you’re trying to tank.

If you believe we have been trying to tank since day 1 of both seasons then you should be calling for the heads of everyone in our front office given the strategy they tried to employ.

No, it's already been reported Bobby wanted to re-sign Pascal and Masai wanted to trade him. Masai did get fired in part because he botched the rebuild.

[ATLTimekeeper]

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

maybe i should've explained in detail.

i was suggesting that 23/24 was not presented to ownership as a tanking season nor was it presented to the world as a tank year - this allowed for season ticket renewals and ad money being spent. dollar value expectations were already set for 23/24 and any change in direction midway would not have effected it.

once the moves were made, ownership knew that the following year 24/25 was going to be a re-building/tank one and it was presented that way in marketing and dollar expectations were shifted behind the scenes because of that.

so when i say ownership would only ok 1 tanking season, it means they would know tickets/ads/financials would only be impacted for 1 season barring an unforeseen event like drafting flagg.

It's semantics, but there's no way the Raptors were trying to win while cutting off contact with their best player and OG working behind the scenes to land in New York.

What they sold to the fans is another thing, but they weren't going into that season legitimately trying to make the playoffs. They were hoping to create leverage through the interested trading partners not doing as well as they hoped early on, and then pull the trigger after Dec 15.

[Merit]

I actually think it's a Raptors strategy to be a little more generous on contracts with their own players, especially the guys they draft and develop. Take care of your own first. You can be a hardass in negotiations but you're going to piss off a lot of players and their powerful agents. For the most part, they've created a culture that consists of players who are happy in Toronto (during good and bad times) who are more likely to re-sign when their deals are done.

I think the overpay thing is overblown as well. It's hard to pick out many NBA teams who don't have contracts that would be considered overpayments to some degree. Every team needs to do it with certain guys. As long as you can manage around the tax, I don't see it as much of a problem, unless you need to start trading valuable picks to get off the contracts.

The only one I believe is that ownership won’t spend into the tax unless it’s a contender. The rest is all perception. If the USA goes full blown yucky, I’d argue we are substantially better off than most NBA teams.

[Merit]

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

So basically what you are saying is our front office is grossly incompetent? Because if they had designs on tanking from day 1 in both 23/24 and 24/25 they did the absolute worst job in the world.

23/24: if you wanted to tank why would you keep all of OG/Siakam/Poeltl for the first half of the season? Why would you sign Schroder in the off-season? Why would the deals for OG or Siakam be better in-season? Tanking is supposed to help up their value? Playing them and risking injury is supposed to help up their value?

24/25: if you’re trying to tank why would you bring in starters like IQ and RJ from the OG deal? We started out terribly in 24/25 because of injury, not because we were trying to tank.

If our FO has been tanking the past 2 years they are horrible at it given their tanking model is to start the season trying to win. It makes no sense. We only tanked because of injury or unexpected poor play. You don’t retain all of OG/Barne/Siakam/Poeltl if you’re trying to tank. You don’t trade for more established players like IQ and RJ if you’re trying to tank.

If you believe we have been trying to tank since day 1 of both seasons then you should be calling for the heads of everyone in our front office given the strategy they tried to employ.

No, it's already been reported Bobby wanted to re-sign Pascal and Masai wanted to trade him. Masai did get fired in part because he botched the rebuild.

Masai getting fired because he botched a rebuild is like taking a cake out of the oven when it’s not finished baking and then blaming it on the chef.

[ontnut]

Ownership absolutely will go into the tax for a true contender. Maybe just not a fringe one.
The GM's job here isn't harder than everyone else's. It's about middle of the road. Sure there are issues with being the international team, but there are benefits too.

Everything else is probably true though.

what do you see as the benefits?

For players/GM recruiting:
Toronto based stuff, like being a multicultural metropolis, unlike a lot of smaller towns (esp some that may be extremely skewed to one race like Salt Lake). SLC and NO are smaller than Markham, population wise. Toronto is also safer than a lot of American towns, esp for players with families. If Kenyon Martin is afraid of Memphis, it's probably not a good place to be. Food and nightlife is clearly a step above cities like Indiana and Cleveland.

For a GM:
We have rich ownership, who have shown they're willing to pay the tax for a true contender. Some teams have poor owners who will outright decline. Ownership has invested in the team peripherally too, with practice facilities, high end staff, and lots of great amenities for both the FO and players.

For Canadians, there may be a sense of pride to play for TO, and for some International players, they may view the US negatively compared to Canada esp with the Trump administration.

Organizationally from top to bottom, we're viewed in a better light than teams like SAC, CHA, WAS, and other perennial bottom feeders. We also have a chip now - that's something to sell teams on. We've at least GOTTEN there before so we know what it takes now.

There are SOME benefits - not saying they're overwhelming. But I'd rather be a Owner/GM/Player here than in a lot of other NBA cities.

[Raps Next GM]

The final year was sunk money for Rogers. He had no intention of resigning Masai the moment he took over control, and he just let him go at the most opportunistic time.

The most opportunistic time would have been next summer. You’re already paying Masai for this year anyway; internally you have more time to consider replacements; you make him an offer that you know he won’t accept, and when he walks, you share half the blame from fans for not retaining him, but half the fans will blame Masai for walking away. Split the PR hit.
Plus, you avoid paying a replacement for this year not to mention raises for Bobby and others.
These are not the decisions made by a team that will supposedly be cheap when it comes to the front office.

Ohtani was never coming to the Jays, and neither was Soto. All the Jays did was drive up the cost for LA and the Mets.

Whether or not either player seriously considered Toronto, there are no reported claims that the Blue Jays interest and offers weren’t serious. So while it is possible that the players and their agents used the Blue Jays to drive up bids, there is no way you can blame the Blue Jays front office for their efforts. They can’t force a player to accept their offer.

In terms of Shapiro, the Jays already had one of the best in AA and Beeston. But Rogers decided to drop Beeston, and with him AA. Shapiro was probably brought in more for the Stadium piece than the team. Rogers just trying to sell the product. A successful team would sell more, but when you can’t build a winner, they look to sell other things.

Hindsight is painting a rosier picture of AA’s tenure here the there was at the time. There was a lot of frustration that the Jays couldn’t make the World Series with all their win-now moves for veterans while parting with top prospects, which had many fans and media concerned about the future once Batista and EE and Price, etc. would inevitably leave.

AA was good, but he became great after leaving here and joining the Dodgers as an assistant to the best GM in the sport, Andrew Friedman.

If the Jays had dealt Vlad, they would have been done. They have not been able to develop talent, and if they traded the one star they had, this would have been a dead franchise under this ownership.

Nonsense. Once or twice a decade, Blue Jays’ and Raptors’ fans have angst that if we lose X player or manager or owner that we’ll lose the team. “We’re doomed if we lose Vince Carter, the team will be sold and move to the US!”

The Jays could have traded Vlad for top prospects, there would be the initial cries from Jays’ fans, but then it would be forgotten and fans would get excited about the players/prospects we got in return.
As good as Vlad is, he is not so good as to suffer an unrecoverable backlash.

[Raps Next GM]

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

So basically what you are saying is our front office is grossly incompetent? Because if they had designs on tanking from day 1 in both 23/24 and 24/25 they did the absolute worst job in the world.

23/24: if you wanted to tank why would you keep all of OG/Siakam/Poeltl for the first half of the season? Why would you sign Schroder in the off-season? Why would the deals for OG or Siakam be better in-season? Tanking is supposed to help up their value? Playing them and risking injury is supposed to help up their value?

24/25: if you’re trying to tank why would you bring in starters like IQ and RJ from the OG deal? We started out terribly in 24/25 because of injury, not because we were trying to tank.

If our FO has been tanking the past 2 years they are horrible at it given their tanking model is to start the season trying to win. It makes no sense. We only tanked because of injury or unexpected poor play. You don’t retain all of OG/Barne/Siakam/Poeltl if you’re trying to tank. You don’t trade for more established players like IQ and RJ if you’re trying to tank.

If you believe we have been trying to tank since day 1 of both seasons then you should be calling for the heads of everyone in our front office given the strategy they tried to employ.

Agreed.

And even if the plan was to tank, then hindsight shows that was terrible mismanagement. Coming off the title, Siakam and FVV were 25; Norm was 26; OG was 22. This should still be the core of the current day roster, every one of those guys have had flashes of stardom with new teams and all are arguably as good or better now than they were when they left here.
Add the Tampa season which was a debacle that led to Scottie’s addition to that core, that is a good top five to build around.
Obviously roster fit, contract demands and other factors make it likely that at least one or two of those players would have had to have been moved, but either there never was an intentional tanking/rebuild, or it was misguided management to tank when you had a young core of very good players to build around.

Either way, I don’t see the “rebuild” as justified given the roster still isn’t very good, and that them team we have now might not be as good as what we had when the “tanking” began, which makes it kind of pointless.

Which top 6 is better today:

FVV
Scottie
Siakam
OG
Norm
Yak

or

IQ
Scottie
R.J.
B.I.
Yak
Dick

Even if an argument can be made that the current roster is better, it’s debatable and we might not have had to suffer through these past three seasons of irrelevance.
Maybe trading one of those holdovers to add to the core, rather than to “rebuild” makes the team considerably better than what we’ve had and currently have.

[JB7]

The final year was sunk money for Rogers. He had no intention of resigning Masai the moment he took over control, and he just let him go at the most opportunistic time.

The most opportunistic time would have been next summer. You’re already paying Masai for this year anyway; internally you have more time to consider replacements; you make him an offer that you know he won’t accept, and when he walks, you share half the blame from fans for not retaining him, but half the fans will blame Masai for walking away. Split the PR hit.
Plus, you avoid paying a replacement for this year not to mention raises for Bobby and others.
These are not the decisions made by a team that will supposedly be cheap when it comes to the front office.

Ohtani was never coming to the Jays, and neither was Soto. All the Jays did was drive up the cost for LA and the Mets.

Whether or not either player seriously considered Toronto, there are no reported claims that the Blue Jays interest and offers weren’t serious. So while it is possible that the players and their agents used the Blue Jays to drive up bids, there is no way you can blame the Blue Jays front office for their efforts. They can’t force a player to accept their offer.

In terms of Shapiro, the Jays already had one of the best in AA and Beeston. But Rogers decided to drop Beeston, and with him AA. Shapiro was probably brought in more for the Stadium piece than the team. Rogers just trying to sell the product. A successful team would sell more, but when you can’t build a winner, they look to sell other things.

Hindsight is painting a rosier picture of AA’s tenure here the there was at the time. There was a lot of frustration that the Jays couldn’t make the World Series with all their win-now moves for veterans while parting with top prospects, which had many fans and media concerned about the future once Batista and EE and Price, etc. would inevitably leave.

AA was good, but he became great after leaving here and joining the Dodgers as an assistant to the best GM in the sport, Andrew Friedman.

If the Jays had dealt Vlad, they would have been done. They have not been able to develop talent, and if they traded the one star they had, this would have been a dead franchise under this ownership.

Nonsense. Once or twice a decade, Blue Jays’ and Raptors’ fans have angst that if we lose X player or manager or owner that we’ll lose the team. “We’re doomed if we lose Vince Carter, the team will be sold and move to the US!”

The Jays could have traded Vlad for top prospects, there would be the initial cries from Jays’ fans, but then it would be forgotten and fans would get excited about the players/prospects we got in return.
As good as Vlad is, he is not so good as to suffer an unrecoverable backlash.

About Masai's firing, Rogers was doing that the moment he got control of the franchise. He didn't want to pay Masai's contract the last time. Coming off the season they just had was the justification Rogers needed. Had they waited, Raps could have turned it around, and it would be more difficult to fire Masai.

AA made all of the big trades at the end (Price & Tulo) because they were trying for one last big swing at winning. With Beeston's contract not renewed, it was obvious they were both out the door. AA might have learned a few more things from Friedman, but he was already great when he was here.

Not being able to sign FA's (Ohtani & Soto) is one thing. But if they could not retain their own star, they would clearly be viewed as a lesser franchise, and one that is just a feeder for real contenders. That would have been a disaster for a franchise trying to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox.

[Raps Next GM]

But if they could not retain their own star, they would clearly be viewed as a lesser franchise, and one that is just a feeder for real contenders. That would have been a disaster for a franchise trying to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox.

I don’t want to continue to hijack a Raptors discussion with Jays’ debates, so I will only end it with the belief of them (and 2/3’s of MLB teams) essentially being feeder teams to the biggest spenders is 20 years in the making, it would be nothing new with losing Vlad.
From losing Alomar, to Clemens, to Donaldson, stars come and go and the franchise is fine.
As long as they get highly rated prospects back, it would have been merely a speed bump until the Jays are/were competitive again.

[ontnut]

But if they could not retain their own star, they would clearly be viewed as a lesser franchise, and one that is just a feeder for real contenders. That would have been a disaster for a franchise trying to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox.

I don’t want to continue to hijack a Raptors discussion with Jays’ debates, so I will only end it with the belief of them (and 2/3’s of MLB teams) essentially being feeder teams to the biggest spenders is 20 years in the making, it would be nothing new with losing Vlad.
From losing Alomar, to Clemens, to Donaldson, stars come and go and the franchise is fine.
As long as they get highly rated prospects back, it would have been merely a speed bump until the Jays are/were competitive again.

Not that familiar with the Jays and MLB discussion in general, but are Jays fans (or perhaps a subect of fans) perpetually clamoring for a rebuild and trading players for prospects a la Tampa?

[Raps Next GM]

But if they could not retain their own star, they would clearly be viewed as a lesser franchise, and one that is just a feeder for real contenders. That would have been a disaster for a franchise trying to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox.

I don’t want to continue to hijack a Raptors discussion with Jays’ debates, so I will only end it with the belief of them (and 2/3’s of MLB teams) essentially being feeder teams to the biggest spenders is 20 years in the making, it would be nothing new with losing Vlad.
From losing Alomar, to Clemens, to Donaldson, stars come and go and the franchise is fine.
As long as they get highly rated prospects back, it would have been merely a speed bump until the Jays are/were competitive again.

Not that familiar with the Jays and MLB discussion in general, but are Jays fans (or perhaps a subect of fans) perpetually clamoring for a rebuild and trading players for prospects a la Tampa?

No, not really. Baseball has multiple levels of minor leagues, so if you have a good team with promising prospects coming up, then no. You figure they’ll add to the team.
If you have a lousy team then sure, rebuild either to add to promising prospects (if you have them) or bring some in, if you don’t.
The other factor is that most baseball fans only know the names of a handful of prospects in their own organization, even less so about players in others. No one knows the draft eligible players. So there isn’t that “tank for top draft pick” mentality.

Having said all that, fans clamouring for tanking should have zero impact on the front office’s decisions anyhow.
As the old coaching line goes, “If I start listening to the fans, I will soon be sitting with them.”

[Merit]

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

So basically what you are saying is our front office is grossly incompetent? Because if they had designs on tanking from day 1 in both 23/24 and 24/25 they did the absolute worst job in the world.

23/24: if you wanted to tank why would you keep all of OG/Siakam/Poeltl for the first half of the season? Why would you sign Schroder in the off-season? Why would the deals for OG or Siakam be better in-season? Tanking is supposed to help up their value? Playing them and risking injury is supposed to help up their value?

24/25: if you’re trying to tank why would you bring in starters like IQ and RJ from the OG deal? We started out terribly in 24/25 because of injury, not because we were trying to tank.

If our FO has been tanking the past 2 years they are horrible at it given their tanking model is to start the season trying to win. It makes no sense. We only tanked because of injury or unexpected poor play. You don’t retain all of OG/Barne/Siakam/Poeltl if you’re trying to tank. You don’t trade for more established players like IQ and RJ if you’re trying to tank.

If you believe we have been trying to tank since day 1 of both seasons then you should be calling for the heads of everyone in our front office given the strategy they tried to employ.

Agreed.

And even if the plan was to tank, then hindsight shows that was terrible mismanagement. Coming off the title, Siakam and FVV were 25; Norm was 26; OG was 22. This should still be the core of the current day roster, every one of those guys have had flashes of stardom with new teams and all are arguably as good or better now than they were when they left here.
Add the Tampa season which was a debacle that led to Scottie’s addition to that core, that is a good top five to build around.
Obviously roster fit, contract demands and other factors make it likely that at least one or two of those players would have had to have been moved, but either there never was an intentional tanking/rebuild, or it was misguided management to tank when you had a young core of very good players to build around.

Either way, I don’t see the “rebuild” as justified given the roster still isn’t very good, and that them team we have now might not be as good as what we had when the “tanking” began, which makes it kind of pointless.

Which top 6 is better today:

FVV
Scottie
Siakam
OG
Norm
Yak

or

IQ
Scottie
R.J.
B.I.
Yak
Dick

Even if an argument can be made that the current roster is better, it’s debatable and we might not have had to suffer through these past three seasons of irrelevance.
Maybe trading one of those holdovers to add to the core, rather than to “rebuild” makes the team considerably better than what we’ve had and currently have.

Fair point, but your missing age (youth) and salary cap expectations. The norm for GTJ flip did not age gracefully. GTJ never lived up to his hype. I for one was wrong about that.

[Raps Next GM]

So basically what you are saying is our front office is grossly incompetent? Because if they had designs on tanking from day 1 in both 23/24 and 24/25 they did the absolute worst job in the world.

23/24: if you wanted to tank why would you keep all of OG/Siakam/Poeltl for the first half of the season? Why would you sign Schroder in the off-season? Why would the deals for OG or Siakam be better in-season? Tanking is supposed to help up their value? Playing them and risking injury is supposed to help up their value?

24/25: if you’re trying to tank why would you bring in starters like IQ and RJ from the OG deal? We started out terribly in 24/25 because of injury, not because we were trying to tank.

If our FO has been tanking the past 2 years they are horrible at it given their tanking model is to start the season trying to win. It makes no sense. We only tanked because of injury or unexpected poor play. You don’t retain all of OG/Barne/Siakam/Poeltl if you’re trying to tank. You don’t trade for more established players like IQ and RJ if you’re trying to tank.

If you believe we have been trying to tank since day 1 of both seasons then you should be calling for the heads of everyone in our front office given the strategy they tried to employ.

Agreed.

And even if the plan was to tank, then hindsight shows that was terrible mismanagement. Coming off the title, Siakam and FVV were 25; Norm was 26; OG was 22. This should still be the core of the current day roster, every one of those guys have had flashes of stardom with new teams and all are arguably as good or better now than they were when they left here.
Add the Tampa season which was a debacle that led to Scottie’s addition to that core, that is a good top five to build around.
Obviously roster fit, contract demands and other factors make it likely that at least one or two of those players would have had to have been moved, but either there never was an intentional tanking/rebuild, or it was misguided management to tank when you had a young core of very good players to build around.

Either way, I don’t see the “rebuild” as justified given the roster still isn’t very good, and that them team we have now might not be as good as what we had when the “tanking” began, which makes it kind of pointless.

Which top 6 is better today:

FVV
Scottie
Siakam
OG
Norm
Yak

or

IQ
Scottie
R.J.
B.I.
Yak
Dick

Even if an argument can be made that the current roster is better, it’s debatable and we might not have had to suffer through these past three seasons of irrelevance.
Maybe trading one of those holdovers to add to the core, rather than to “rebuild” makes the team considerably better than what we’ve had and currently have.

Fair point, but your missing age (youth) and salary cap expectations. The norm for GTJ flip did not age gracefully. GTJ never lived up to his hype. I for one was wrong about that.

For sure, that’s why I said “Obviously roster fit, contract demands and other factors make it likely that at least one or two of those players would have had to have been moved.”

I was wrong too about how good Norm would become. I was wrong on FVV, Pascal and OG. I was wrong about all of them… but it’s not my job to be right about them, it was Masai’s and Bobby’s, and they played it poorly.
I actually like the OG deal, but the Siakam trade might have been a waste. FVV should have been dealt rather than letting him walk for nothing, and the Norm/GTJ deal was a mistake.

As much as I love Masai, the Raptors post-title management has been very subpar.