Hmmm.. so do we believe in Masai..

[dafan590]

It's not worth to go over luxury tax for this upcoming season when we all know that we are not a title contender.....that's why we were not able to keep ibaka and gasol.......

Let's just enjoy the moment and see how this season plays out as our younger players continue to grow.

Meanwhile we still need to re-sign Masai to a new deal.......

[ATLTimekeeper]

No one fires on all cylinders. Losing Ibaka didn't cost us the title this year. If Ibaka thought he could win a title with Toronto, he would have stayed and taken the bigger payout. So, why should Toronto throw in more money just to accomplish the same goal. Would have been nice to keep Serge, but he took less money. End of story. They pivoted to Marc Gasol, and it looks like he took significantly less money. Like, Chris Boucher is getting something like 2.5 times what Marc is taking from the Lakers.

If the Raptors need to clear cap next summer to make room for incoming stars, or whatever, they'll parcel picks and trade future drafts to do it. That's what all the competitive teams do these days.

The current info suggests that Ibaka took more money with LA, not less. Not sure about Gasol yet, but it doesn't look like he took much less (vet min of $5M/2yrs) if any to go to LA. Boucher got more annually (not 2.5X total) bc it's 1 year guaranteed only, so there's a premium.

He took more guaranteed money, but both those guys will be opting out. Marc can make the minimum next year, too. So, don't even bother trying to sell that to make your point

[Badonkadonk]

yeah still beleive in them obviously.

but this year is def being sacrificed in the giannis chase, hopefully it is worth it

I don't think it's Giannis alone. Everything lines up better for 2021 regardless - Lowry decision, OG extension (i.e. you know what he'll pay), Powell decision and most importantly, a more robust FA class beyond Giannis.

It just makes no sense to make big decisions this year.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

Yes. We putting a winning team out every year. We got a ring. Did I mention we won a chip? I had no problem being a critic when I was concerned, but I've been won over. I have trust. This is the Lowry era, probably the twilight, of the era. But I'm ok with that, it's been remarkable. Last year, even with Kawhi, I feel like we were right there. I think we'll be right there again, this year.

[bongmarley]

Masai has promised making Toronto a free agent destination so until he gets 1 key free agent hard to believe in Masai

[Pooh_Jeter]

You're not allowed to question any move Masai has ever made on this board. He is the best GM in the league and every decision he has made is the best one.

[brownbobcat]

No one fires on all cylinders. Losing Ibaka didn't cost us the title this year. If Ibaka thought he could win a title with Toronto, he would have stayed and taken the bigger payout. So, why should Toronto throw in more money just to accomplish the same goal. Would have been nice to keep Serge, but he took less money. End of story. They pivoted to Marc Gasol, and it looks like he took significantly less money. Like, Chris Boucher is getting something like 2.5 times what Marc is taking from the Lakers.

If the Raptors need to clear cap next summer to make room for incoming stars, or whatever, they'll parcel picks and trade future drafts to do it. That's what all the competitive teams do these days.

The current info suggests that Ibaka took more money with LA, not less. Not sure about Gasol yet, but it doesn't look like he took much less (vet min of $5M/2yrs) if any to go to LA. Boucher got more annually (not 2.5X total) bc it's 1 year guaranteed only, so there's a premium.

He took more guaranteed money, but both those guys will be opting out. Marc can make the minimum next year, too. So, don't even bother trying to sell that to make your point

I'm not sure what you're getting at, we both agree that Serge took more guaranteed money. At most he risked $3M in order to secure $10M more in case of injury or whatever, it's totally reasonable at this stage of his career. Would Gasol have been tempted by an extra $1-2M sweetener on top of whatever Toronto offered? Who knows, it sounds like he was on the fence.

[brownbobcat]

You get certainty. You also get to set the terms of the contract. By matching, we have to abide by the terms that the other team set (eg trade kickers, player options, etc...)

We literally lost nothing by extending him when we did, and we potentially gained something. THat's a win.

Did Boston and Indy somehow get less certainty than Toronto? Were they less able to set the terms of the contract?

You're not dictating terms in any meaningful way when you're giving the maximum available and trade kickers are of almost zero significance when max contracts are involved. Masai could've gotten practically identical terms in 2020 instead of 2019 and I just don't buy the argument that Siakam was $40-70M better than some other guys that extended early.

All of your points could apply equally to Fred and yet Masai didn't give him $130M. Hopefully, it's because they got a little smarter.

[ATLTimekeeper]

The current info suggests that Ibaka took more money with LA, not less. Not sure about Gasol yet, but it doesn't look like he took much less (vet min of $5M/2yrs) if any to go to LA. Boucher got more annually (not 2.5X total) bc it's 1 year guaranteed only, so there's a premium.

He took more guaranteed money, but both those guys will be opting out. Marc can make the minimum next year, too. So, don't even bother trying to sell that to make your point

I'm not sure what you're getting at, we both agree that Serge took more guaranteed money. At most he risked $3M in order to secure $10M more in case of injury or whatever, it's totally reasonable at this stage of his career. Would Gasol have been tempted by an extra $1-2M sweetener on top of whatever Toronto offered? Who knows, it sounds like he was on the fence.

The Raptors offered 12. So he secured about 6 more guaranteed. He can make that up. If the Raptors wanted him that badly, they would have dumped Stanley Johnson or whatever to make up some of the difference. This isn't that big a deal.

We don't know the Gasol offer yet, but he was their plan B and they did give Baynes and Boucher much more. It's fair to assume Gasol took millions less to play in LA. And if that's the case, why should the Raptors keep throwing money at him? He didn't want to play here all that much.

[Parataxis]

You get certainty. You also get to set the terms of the contract. By matching, we have to abide by the terms that the other team set (eg trade kickers, player options, etc...)

We literally lost nothing by extending him when we did, and we potentially gained something. THat's a win.

Did Boston and Indy somehow get less certainty than Toronto? Were they less able to set the terms of the contract?

You're not dictating terms in any meaningful way when you're giving the maximum available and trade kickers are of almost zero significance when max contracts are involved. Masai could've gotten practically identical terms in 2020 instead of 2019 and I just don't buy the argument that Siakam was $40-70M better than some other guys that extended early.

All of your points could apply equally to Fred and yet Masai didn't give him $130M. Hopefully, it's because they got a little smarter.

Because Fred isn't a max contract player. Siakam is. And yes, look at the Celtics, who just extended Tatum; that's a great example.

This really isn't difficult.

[Par36]

Yes.

Next question?

[Skeezo]

The simple logic to our losing Ibaka due to restraints on the cap is that EVERY DOLLAR COUNTS... This is why I always flip when I see posters make comments like "What's the big deal if we pay FVV 25m versus 20m, it's not my money?" It's just wrong on so many levels...

Whether it is 2m-3m more per season we might have been able to save with Siakim or the decision to give Stanley Johnson a 2nd year at 4m. All these little small nuanced tweaks can add up to siginificant dollars that impact our ability of maintaining a gameplan for max cap flexibility for one season, staying under the tax, while also still having the ability to afford assests without losing them for nothing.

Now, who's to say where those savings tweaks could have been realized and where they couldn't? This is what we argue about in this forum. Will giving FVV, 21.5m per season rather than holding firm at the 19m-20m mark somewhere down the line hurt our ability to hold-on/sign a player, or maintain FVV as a viable trade asset? If we did attempt to call FVV bluff and stand firm at 19m-20m, would we have been able to sign or him or just potentially lose another asset for nothing?

These are the difficult decisions that Masai and Bobby have to make in real-time while we get to arm-chair GM those moves. I don't know that we could have gotten Siakim any cheaper, but I understand the point of the OP and others who are frustrated that we lost an asset in Ibaka because we couldn't afford a very reasonable contract while maintaining our gameplan. As a result, we end up looking for anywhere, where we might have been able to skimp or save.

No, they don't. And this argument just needs to die. Serge turned down the most money he was offered to play somewhere else. The extent of which the Raptors wanted to pay him what might have enticed him to stay is unknown, but if it's 2-3 million or Stanley Johnson's contract, then the Raptors would have dumped Stanley Johnson in a heartbeat.

They didn't value Serge enough to make that sacrifice (of attaching picks to clear the room). That's the end of the story. The mistakes that GMs routinely make are throwing huge contracts at players that then fall out of the rotation. That's an actual cap problem. Or, if a player gets hurt and is no longer viable on a max deal. That's a cap problem. Giving Stanley Johnson 4 million to not play for us is not a cap problem. It's not ideal, but that's how it breaks sometimes. They didn't intend for Stanley Johnson to not play at all.

Same deal with Siakam. Could have been an outright awful contract (still could) if he didn't improve at all. The extra padding doesn't make a lick of difference in team building. They still know that a few guys will make a lot, and that they're lining up their numbers to add a max slot next summer.

Sorry but what statement am I making that you are replying, "No they don't" to? And what argument am I making that needs to die? The argument that I am making is the, NBA is a salary cap driven league and every dollar counts to maintain or acquire talent... Making "potential" overpayments to some guys (Siakim, FVV, etc) or signing multi-year deals to players that don't pan out (S.Johnson) can ultimately add up to dollars where you are not able to maintain assets while holding on to cap flexibility, if that is your priority... This is not a controversial statment I am making

Of course they didn't value Serge enough... Why would it make sense to spend assets (draft picks) to get rid of a contract (Johnson) that IS a cap problem just so you can keep an asset (Ibaka) that might only be worth minimally more as an asset than what it cost you to keep them? My point is minimizing potential mistakes, and being as frugal as you possibly can so that it doesn't cost you assets to keep an asset in the future. At the same time, I recognized that this is not always the easiest thing to accomplish, so it's not as if I am lambasting Masai or Bobby for their decisions of Siakim's extension, Johnson's contract, or FVV's contract...

As I mentioned, I am not in a position to say if any of the team-building tweaks would have been possible or not, that's why Masai is paid the big bucks and I am not... However, to think that if 2m per year was saved on each of FVV/Siakim deals and Johnson not given a 2nd yr at 4m wouldn't have added up to the Raptors ability to offer a 1yr/20m deal for Ibaka, while still being able retain Boucher, stay out of the tax, keep max cap flexibility, and not have to give up additional assets in the process, well that is your choice to not pay attention to that math reality.

[OakleyDokely]

Ibaka is a nice player, but guys like him are available every offseason. He's a rotation player not an elite player.

Some people are acting like we lost Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

There honestly won't be much of a dropoff with Baynes, maybe no dropoff at all.

[Knucknbuc]

you come for theGOAT gm masai..you best not miss

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

[ratul]

The fandom is so wild here that people on here also will tell you they enjoy the smell of Masai's farts too.

The pascal contract is bad - it prob cost us ibaka and will hamper our competitiveness. The demarre Carroll contract was bad as was giving Javale Mcgee 60mn.

Love Masai, but he negotiated against himself for the Pascal contract and masai may prefer to be like the Pelicans now with Ingram restricted and pelicans don't have to do anything because ingram couldn't get a max - despite what I am sure is his handlers saying he would get one. Pelicans have leverage now

It's amazing how people look at a mistake and just refuse to accept it whilst still being a fan. Masai is the goat, but he doesn't strike gold 100% of the time. It's the same nonsense that gets people to believe AA was bad for the Jays because he traded Syndegaard. It's not zero or 100 people.

[Gold Dragon]

The simple logic to our losing Ibaka due to restraints on the cap is that EVERY DOLLAR COUNT

...

I don't know that we could have gotten Siakim any cheaper, but I understand the point of the OP and others who are frustrated that we lost an asset in Ibaka because we couldn't afford a very reasonable contract while maintaining our gameplan. As a result, we end up looking for anywhere, where we might have been able to skimp or save.

That is what simple logic might say but it is also the wrong logic.

We did not lose Serge because Pascal or Fred’s contract was a million or two too big. We lost Serge because we wanted to save for a max cap slot next year and can only offer a 1 year deal when he wanted more years. Most of us saw this happening a mile away and were prepared for Serge to be gone for this reason.

If folks understood the cap and CBA better they would be able to see these things that Bobby and masai see and not be so anxious and upset about near impossible hypothetical scenarios.

[ratul]

Also amazing the same people defending the Pascal contract are the ones who demanded not to overpay Freddie. I mean, ok.

[ratul]

The simple logic to our losing Ibaka due to restraints on the cap is that EVERY DOLLAR COUNT

...

I don't know that we could have gotten Siakim any cheaper, but I understand the point of the OP and others who are frustrated that we lost an asset in Ibaka because we couldn't afford a very reasonable contract while maintaining our gameplan. As a result, we end up looking for anywhere, where we might have been able to skimp or save.

That is what simple logic might say but it is also the wrong logic.

We did not lose Serge because Pascal or Fred’s contract was a million or two too big. We lost Serge because we wanted to save for a max cap slot next year and can only offer a 1 year deal when he wanted more years. Most of us saw this happening a mile away and were prepared for Serge to be gone for this reason.

If folks understood the cap and CBA better they would be able to see these things that Bobby and masai see and not be so anxious and upset about near impossible hypothetical scenarios.

Ok, do the cap when Pascal gets a Jaylen Brown contract - 4/110 - you'll find we would have max cap space and more for next year. It is likely as well that Baynes will be one and done because of our cap situation too you know.

[ATLTimekeeper]

As I mentioned, I am not in a position to say if any of the team-building tweaks would have been possible or not, that's why Masai is paid the big bucks and I am not... However, to think that if 2m per year was saved on each of FVV/Siakim deals and Johnson not given a 2nd yr at 4m wouldn't have added up to the Raptors ability to offer a 1yr/20m deal for Ibaka, while still being able retain Boucher, stay out of the tax, keep max cap flexibility, and not have to give up additional assets in the process, well that is your choice to not pay attention to that math reality.

Or they could have tagged 2nd rounders to Johnson (4 million) and Pat McCaw (4 million) and found that 8 to give to Ibaka. That's the math reality. Meaningless assets thrown out the door to correct small mistakes. That's an easier way of managing a team than squeezing the guys you intend to make a part of your long-term picture. It doesn't mean "go out and spend freely," but these problems are a lot easier to solve than you're making it out to be. Serge could have made more here than the Clippers, and Gasol could have made way more. They went for other reasons.

[Gold Dragon]

The simple logic to our losing Ibaka due to restraints on the cap is that EVERY DOLLAR COUNT

...

I don't know that we could have gotten Siakim any cheaper, but I understand the point of the OP and others who are frustrated that we lost an asset in Ibaka because we couldn't afford a very reasonable contract while maintaining our gameplan. As a result, we end up looking for anywhere, where we might have been able to skimp or save.

That is what simple logic might say but it is also the wrong logic.

We did not lose Serge because Pascal or Fred’s contract was a million or two too big. We lost Serge because we wanted to save for a max cap slot next year and can only offer a 1 year deal when he wanted more years. Most of us saw this happening a mile away and were prepared for Serge to be gone for this reason.

If folks understood the cap and CBA better they would be able to see these things that Bobby and masai see and not be so anxious and upset about near impossible hypothetical scenarios.

Ok, do the cap when Pascal gets a Jaylen Brown contract - 4/110 - you'll find we would have max cap space and more for next year. It is likely as well that Baynes will be one and done because of our cap situation too you know.

But pascal would have never gotten a jaylen brown contract. That hypothetical is pretty much impossible. He earned a max contract the season before and his poor performance in the bubble did not change that. In fact very little would outside of a career ending injury.