Trade Deadline Rumours & Discussion Thread

[agkagk]

I never said FVV, Trent, OG, Siakam and Barnes were negative value contracts. Not one time.......



So if we follow your plan, we will invest ~$55M per year into just FVV and Trent. Then the following year, we have to pay Siakam and OG ...let's say OG gets $25M per and Siakam gets $40M per (these estimates are probably very conservative). We have ~$110M per locked up in 4 guys who are struggling to make the play-in and we still haven't paid Barnes.

Congratulations.

in your attempt to disprove that you said theyre negative value contracts im pretty sure you just said that theyre negative value contracts.



ps: the salary cap is going up, by a lot.

pps: raptors just need a back up point guard and an actual centre that can rim run and operate on the low block on the roster.

ppps: we can always keep them, get a late lotto pick, resign them and trade them at a more opportune time later.

Or we can just tank.
I personally would love to trade Siakim, OG, Fred and Trent for rookies and picks. Run with Scotty as our #1. If it takes a decade to get back into the playoffs, I am prepared to wait.

It is awesome seeing us grow a new team. I did a scientific poll and 95% of Raps fans agree with me. Trust me.

or we could just be good at winning basketball games for the next 10 years and develop scottie and who ever we draft this year.

[Rapsfan07]

There’s no way Barnes OG Siakam aren’t 3 starters on a championship team. You already have that.

It’s foolish to entirely restart and get rid of OG/Siakam.

Championship teams are built around 8 guys.

Starters
X/Barnes/OG/Siakam/x

Bench

GTJ/Precious/x

Is a championship team with the right Xs filled in. It’s Masai’s job to find the way to fill them.

X/Barnes/OG/Siakam/x


there in lies the problem, unless that guard is dynamic like lillard, having those 3 + center is going to bog down the offesne.

Correct.

[Oakvillehoops]

tbh, we put Scottie in PG and GTJR in SG, we good. Just need a centre

There’s no way Barnes OG Siakam aren’t 3 starters on a championship team. You already have that.

It’s foolish to entirely restart and get rid of OG/Siakam.

Championship teams are built around 8 guys.

Starters
X/Barnes/OG/Siakam/x

Bench

GTJ/Precious/x

Is a championship team with the right Xs filled in. It’s Masai’s job to find the way to fill them.

We are certainly wasting time by not developing Scottie as a point guard. We should be letting him run the offence this year, and let him play through big mistakes a turn overs.

He wants to be the PG. and as stated, the only way our core works is with Scottie developing at the 1, and FVV gone.

The team plays at a great pace with him at PG, and we seem to create transition opportunities in situations that should have been half court possessions

[Los_29]

this is amongst our best case scenarios.

fingers crossed.

You forgot the green front

ya youre right, hopefully we trade a bunch of all stars and high end role players for mid to late draft picks that have a flame out rate of like 80 something percent.

If we can convert trent and fred into 2 or 3 long term fringe bench pieces that would pacify my ego for 5 minutes. until next year when i crucify management for trading a bunch of all stars and high end role players for the very fringe prospects I was crying for them to be traded for.

cause draft picks are smart.

Honestly, I think the flame out rate of mid to late first round draft picks are much higher than 80%. I wouldn't be surprised if it was at like 95% or higher. LOL.

[bape_lovers]

why is GTJR/OG not a good core players? which "young prospect" would be better than those two

what would be a valuable piece that masai/bobby could get?

If I know Masai and Bobby the way I think I do, once the deadline has passed, they will come out and say they tried to get some things done but the market was slow, prices were too high blah blah blah. same thing they say every deadline.

Meanwhile, there will be a few valuable pieces that move. Us fans will look at those deals and say "why didn't our FO get in on this" or "why didn't we get in on that".

Then people will say Masai and Bobby must know something we don't and they did the right thing blah blah blah

Then in the offseason we sign FVV to $120M/4yrs and Trent to $100/4yrs.

The definition of value will depend highly on what direction the team wants to go.

If they want to do a hard reset, then I have to imagine that picks and young blue chip prospects will be valuable.
If they want to contend, then I have to imagine some bench depth as well as a starting quality 3&D C like Turner might be valuable.

The issue, at least for me, with investing in this core is that our most valuable contracts that we'd be willing to trade (FVV and Trent lets say for the purposes of this argument) already play a core role in this team. So in order for the trade to make us net better overall, we'd have to not only fill the hole we're creating by making the trade in the first place, but also get someone better back.

For example - if we dealt FVV, we'd be in need of a starting PG who's better than FVV to make the deal worth it. Who is that? And the only way I know how to do that without gutting our already shallow depth is by adding picks. Do we want to add future picks to add to this core? Does said player we're acquiring make us championship contenders?

[gpoon]

Read on Twitter

Insanity.

He's a free agent at the end of the season. And if they land Wembanyama, he's effectively useless. But I still respect it lol.

It's because the Celtics are the interested buyer. You can make the ask crazy high when the stakes are contending for a title. They will likely come off their price and it'll be 1 FRP and a prospect. I don't think the Raptors would bite at this point.

This year the league is wide open. No one is really even counting out Golden State, and they stink. After a torrid start, the Celtics look like one of the weaker front runners in recent years, so I think teams like Memphis, NOP, Brooklyn, Philly, Denver, GS, Miami, LAC, Milwaukee, Cleveland will all think they have a legit shot.

1 FRP + Flynn and Khem as filler?

[anotherhomer]

why is GTJR/OG not a good core players? which "young prospect" would be better than those two

what would be a valuable piece that masai/bobby could get?

The definition of value will depend highly on what direction the team wants to go.

If they want to do a hard reset, then I have to imagine that picks and young blue chip prospects will be valuable.
If they want to contend, then I have to imagine some bench depth as well as a starting quality 3&D C like Turner might be valuable.

The issue, at least for me, with investing in this core is that our most valuable contracts that we'd be willing to trade (FVV and Trent lets say for the purposes of this argument) already play a core role in this team. So in order for the trade to make us net better overall, we'd have to not only fill the hole we're creating by making the trade in the first place, but also get someone better back.

For example - if we dealt FVV, we'd be in need of a starting PG who's better than FVV to make the deal worth it. Who is that? And the only way I know how to do that without gutting our already shallow depth is by adding picks. Do we want to add future picks to add to this core? Does said player we're acquiring make us championship contenders?

OG and GTJ are good core players,

GTJ though is only a 2 lvl scorer, but really bad close to the RIM and gets picked on defense a bit
OG's really good though and entering his prime

Still 2 really good players you can move forward with

[islandboy53]

what would be a valuable piece that masai/bobby could get?

If I know Masai and Bobby the way I think I do, once the deadline has passed, they will come out and say they tried to get some things done but the market was slow, prices were too high blah blah blah. same thing they say every deadline.

Meanwhile, there will be a few valuable pieces that move. Us fans will look at those deals and say "why didn't our FO get in on this" or "why didn't we get in on that".

Then people will say Masai and Bobby must know something we don't and they did the right thing blah blah blah

Then in the offseason we sign FVV to $120M/4yrs and Trent to $100/4yrs.

The definition of value will depend highly on what direction the team wants to go.

If they want to do a hard reset, then I have to imagine that picks and young blue chip prospects will be valuable.
If they want to contend, then I have to imagine some bench depth as well as a starting quality 3&D C like Turner might be valuable.

The issue, at least for me, with investing in this core is that our most valuable contracts that we'd be willing to trade (FVV and Trent lets say for the purposes of this argument) already play a core role in this team. So in order for the trade to make us net better overall, we'd have to not only fill the hole we're creating by making the trade in the first place, but also get someone better back.

For example - if we dealt FVV, we'd be in need of a starting PG who's better than FVV to make the deal worth it. Who is that? And the only way I know how to do that without gutting our already shallow depth is by adding picks. Do we want to add future picks to add to this core? Does said player we're acquiring make us championship contenders?

We don't need that starting PG to be better than Fred TODAY. The current roster will be lucky to make the play-in, barring a major and unexpected turnaround. Getting a young PG with potential and a pick for Fred puts us in a potentially better position next year and moving forward, particularly when you consider Fred's potential new contract.

[WuTang_CMB]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=UqYk0iWT14p64rQP-6PMcA

[agkagk]

come june 7th

raptors trade:

scottie barnes
Precious Achuiwa
Otto Porter
Thad Young
Malachai Flynn

for

Karl Anthony towns
Jaylen Nowell

Trent-fred-og-pascal-kat
Nowell-nobody-nobody-boucher-koloko

STAND PAT AT THE DEADLINE!

TRADE ALL OUR PICKS!

RESIGN EVERYBODY!

SHOWER FRED WITH PRAISE ON INSTAGRAM!!!!!!

[Ackshun]

If I know Masai and Bobby the way I think I do, once the deadline has passed, they will come out and say they tried to get some things done but the market was slow, prices were too high blah blah blah. same thing they say every deadline.

Meanwhile, there will be a few valuable pieces that move. Us fans will look at those deals and say "why didn't our FO get in on this" or "why didn't we get in on that".

Then people will say Masai and Bobby must know something we don't and they did the right thing blah blah blah

Then in the offseason we sign FVV to $120M/4yrs and Trent to $100/4yrs.

Not gonna lie. Reading this was depressing and ..likely to unfold.

Gotta ask myself ; will I support a team that continues to invest in this core ?

The answer is no. Time is scarce. I probably can’t bring myself to cheer for another team but maybe it’s NCAA strictly, at least til we get our **** together

[Rapsfan07]

what would be a valuable piece that masai/bobby could get?

The definition of value will depend highly on what direction the team wants to go.

If they want to do a hard reset, then I have to imagine that picks and young blue chip prospects will be valuable.
If they want to contend, then I have to imagine some bench depth as well as a starting quality 3&D C like Turner might be valuable.

The issue, at least for me, with investing in this core is that our most valuable contracts that we'd be willing to trade (FVV and Trent lets say for the purposes of this argument) already play a core role in this team. So in order for the trade to make us net better overall, we'd have to not only fill the hole we're creating by making the trade in the first place, but also get someone better back.

For example - if we dealt FVV, we'd be in need of a starting PG who's better than FVV to make the deal worth it. Who is that? And the only way I know how to do that without gutting our already shallow depth is by adding picks. Do we want to add future picks to add to this core? Does said player we're acquiring make us championship contenders?

We don't need that starting PG to be better than Fred TODAY. The current roster will be lucky to make the play-in, barring a major and unexpected turnaround. Getting a young PG with potential and a pick for Fred puts us in a potentially better position next year and moving forward, particularly when you consider Fred's potential new contract.

I agree with you. But that kind of thinking only works if you don't mind not being competitive immediately.

[Rapsfan07]

why is GTJR/OG not a good core players? which "young prospect" would be better than those two

what would be a valuable piece that masai/bobby could get?

The definition of value will depend highly on what direction the team wants to go.

If they want to do a hard reset, then I have to imagine that picks and young blue chip prospects will be valuable.
If they want to contend, then I have to imagine some bench depth as well as a starting quality 3&D C like Turner might be valuable.

The issue, at least for me, with investing in this core is that our most valuable contracts that we'd be willing to trade (FVV and Trent lets say for the purposes of this argument) already play a core role in this team. So in order for the trade to make us net better overall, we'd have to not only fill the hole we're creating by making the trade in the first place, but also get someone better back.

For example - if we dealt FVV, we'd be in need of a starting PG who's better than FVV to make the deal worth it. Who is that? And the only way I know how to do that without gutting our already shallow depth is by adding picks. Do we want to add future picks to add to this core? Does said player we're acquiring make us championship contenders?

I don't think they're not good core players, especially OG.

The issue is - paying them later. The only player I'm 100% comfortable paying out of the two of them is OG. Due to what he's shown so far on both sides of the ball, his age, size and position, I'm fairly certain that even with a significant pay raise, he will retain most, if not all of his value.

I can't say the same about GTJ. GTJ is young and a greater shooter, no doubt. But if his shots aren't dropping, he really doesn't offer much. I like him at this rate of pay but if I had to pay $25M per for the very same production/style of play, I can't say I like that for the future of this squad. Although it may not be an exact apples to apples comparison but I prefer Simons at that rate if I just want a guy who can score.

[WuTang_CMB]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nba/article/raptors-nba-trade-deadline-2023-primer-rules-assets-future-outlook-and-more/

Read on Twitter

The first important number is $148.68 million. That’s what the Raptors have committed if all three players with player options exercise their options to stay with the team, the Raptors hold on to the (projected) No. 7 pick, and they opt to walk away from Young’s small partial guarantee. The cap is currently projected to rise to $134 million next year, meaning that with adding just their first-round pick, the Raptors are well above the cap, with about $13 million in wiggle room beneath the luxury tax to round out the roster.

Right below that number is $94.25 million, which is how much the Raptors would have on the books if all the player options were declined and they traded away (or stashed) their top pick. This is your “max cap space” determinant. The Raptors would have a little under $40 million in cap space before accounting for minimum contracts (or roster charges) to meet the roster minimum. The smallest max contract for this summer projects to begin at $33.5 million in Year One and would start as high as $46.9 million for an experienced veteran.

In other words, even watching all the players with options walk away doesn’t leave the Raptors with space for a max contract unless they’re willing to make further aggressive concessions.

Because of that, one of the bigger questions facing any sell-off for the Raptors is whether they’d be willing to eat longer-term money to improve the asset return.

As an example, dealing Trent for expiring contracts probably won’t return as nice a pick or prospect as dealing Trent for a player owed money beyond 2023 would. Since the Raptors’ path to meaningful cap space this summer would require a large (and careful) dismantling of the current roster, the more fruitful path will likely be maximizing asset value and operating as an above-cap team again. The opportunity cost of that lost cap space is minimal the more difficult your path to cap space is to begin with.

The complicated question that flows from that cap-space reality is how the team would go about replacing outbound talent as they retool for next season. Draft picks are great but rarely contribute meaningfully to winning right out of the gate. If the goal is to return to being a legitimate playoff threat in 2023-24, the (potential) final years on contracts for Pascal Siakam and O.G. Anunoby, how will the Raptors complement that pair and Scottie Barnes without cap space? Trades are always a possibility, but we’ve seen that mid-level and minimum-type signings aren’t reliable enough supplementary chips.

Any deal involving Trent or VanVleet then, may prioritize young, rotation-ready players more than draft picks deeper into the future. It also somewhat paradoxically adds value to taking on longer-term money in some instances, as the Raptors could use those contracts for salary-matching in future deals (though we quickly get into a temporal trade loop chasing that logic too far).

All of that is to say that while Siakam, Anunoby, Barnes, Chris Boucher, Precious Achiuwa and Christian Koloko are a nice group to be building with, it’s not enough. Removing Trent and/or VanVleet from that core without the cap room to chase another star this summer or even replace the production of that starting backcourt puts significant pressure on the Raptors to nail these trades.

Then again, holding both and re-signing them to larger deals after they opt out in the summer would make the Raptors a borderline luxury-tax team with few paths to improving. (VanVleet and Trent re-signing with a combined 2023-24 salary of $50 million would basically have the Raptors at the tax after using a smaller exception and filling out the roster. The team is currently 19-24.)

Their situation is, uh, complicated.

[WuTang_CMB]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=UqYk0iWT14p64rQP-6PMcA

[DelAbbot]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nba/article/raptors-nba-trade-deadline-2023-primer-rules-assets-future-outlook-and-more/

Read on Twitter

The first important number is $148.68 million. That’s what the Raptors have committed if all three players with player options exercise their options to stay with the team, the Raptors hold on to the (projected) No. 7 pick, and they opt to walk away from Young’s small partial guarantee. The cap is currently projected to rise to $134 million next year, meaning that with adding just their first-round pick, the Raptors are well above the cap, with about $13 million in wiggle room beneath the luxury tax to round out the roster.

Right below that number is $94.25 million, which is how much the Raptors would have on the books if all the player options were declined and they traded away (or stashed) their top pick. This is your “max cap space” determinant. The Raptors would have a little under $40 million in cap space before accounting for minimum contracts (or roster charges) to meet the roster minimum. The smallest max contract for this summer projects to begin at $33.5 million in Year One and would start as high as $46.9 million for an experienced veteran.

In other words, even watching all the players with options walk away doesn’t leave the Raptors with space for a max contract unless they’re willing to make further aggressive concessions.

Because of that, one of the bigger questions facing any sell-off for the Raptors is whether they’d be willing to eat longer-term money to improve the asset return.

As an example, dealing Trent for expiring contracts probably won’t return as nice a pick or prospect as dealing Trent for a player owed money beyond 2023 would. Since the Raptors’ path to meaningful cap space this summer would require a large (and careful) dismantling of the current roster, the more fruitful path will likely be maximizing asset value and operating as an above-cap team again. The opportunity cost of that lost cap space is minimal the more difficult your path to cap space is to begin with.

The complicated question that flows from that cap-space reality is how the team would go about replacing outbound talent as they retool for next season. Draft picks are great but rarely contribute meaningfully to winning right out of the gate. If the goal is to return to being a legitimate playoff threat in 2023-24, the (potential) final years on contracts for Pascal Siakam and O.G. Anunoby, how will the Raptors complement that pair and Scottie Barnes without cap space? Trades are always a possibility, but we’ve seen that mid-level and minimum-type signings aren’t reliable enough supplementary chips.

Any deal involving Trent or VanVleet then, may prioritize young, rotation-ready players more than draft picks deeper into the future. It also somewhat paradoxically adds value to taking on longer-term money in some instances, as the Raptors could use those contracts for salary-matching in future deals (though we quickly get into a temporal trade loop chasing that logic too far).

All of that is to say that while Siakam, Anunoby, Barnes, Chris Boucher, Precious Achiuwa and Christian Koloko are a nice group to be building with, it’s not enough. Removing Trent and/or VanVleet from that core without the cap room to chase another star this summer or even replace the production of that starting backcourt puts significant pressure on the Raptors to nail these trades.

Then again, holding both and re-signing them to larger deals after they opt out in the summer would make the Raptors a borderline luxury-tax team with few paths to improving. (VanVleet and Trent re-signing with a combined 2023-24 salary of $50 million would basically have the Raptors at the tax after using a smaller exception and filling out the roster. The team is currently 19-24.)

Their situation is, uh, complicated.

Very well written.

This strategy of operating above cap AND punting draft picks for Thad is stupid as hell. When you are above cap, it's hard to add through FA to improve team meaningfully. So the only way is by adding FRP to upgrade your players via trade - yet FO threw away FRP like it's a liability (rookie contract cost)

[niQ]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=UqYk0iWT14p64rQP-6PMcA

If you told me Reggie Bullock was still on the Knicks I would've believed you.

[Rapsfan07]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nba/article/raptors-nba-trade-deadline-2023-primer-rules-assets-future-outlook-and-more/

Read on Twitter

The first important number is $148.68 million. That’s what the Raptors have committed if all three players with player options exercise their options to stay with the team, the Raptors hold on to the (projected) No. 7 pick, and they opt to walk away from Young’s small partial guarantee. The cap is currently projected to rise to $134 million next year, meaning that with adding just their first-round pick, the Raptors are well above the cap, with about $13 million in wiggle room beneath the luxury tax to round out the roster.

Right below that number is $94.25 million, which is how much the Raptors would have on the books if all the player options were declined and they traded away (or stashed) their top pick. This is your “max cap space” determinant. The Raptors would have a little under $40 million in cap space before accounting for minimum contracts (or roster charges) to meet the roster minimum. The smallest max contract for this summer projects to begin at $33.5 million in Year One and would start as high as $46.9 million for an experienced veteran.

In other words, even watching all the players with options walk away doesn’t leave the Raptors with space for a max contract unless they’re willing to make further aggressive concessions.

Because of that, one of the bigger questions facing any sell-off for the Raptors is whether they’d be willing to eat longer-term money to improve the asset return.

As an example, dealing Trent for expiring contracts probably won’t return as nice a pick or prospect as dealing Trent for a player owed money beyond 2023 would. Since the Raptors’ path to meaningful cap space this summer would require a large (and careful) dismantling of the current roster, the more fruitful path will likely be maximizing asset value and operating as an above-cap team again. The opportunity cost of that lost cap space is minimal the more difficult your path to cap space is to begin with.

The complicated question that flows from that cap-space reality is how the team would go about replacing outbound talent as they retool for next season. Draft picks are great but rarely contribute meaningfully to winning right out of the gate. If the goal is to return to being a legitimate playoff threat in 2023-24, the (potential) final years on contracts for Pascal Siakam and O.G. Anunoby, how will the Raptors complement that pair and Scottie Barnes without cap space? Trades are always a possibility, but we’ve seen that mid-level and minimum-type signings aren’t reliable enough supplementary chips.

Any deal involving Trent or VanVleet then, may prioritize young, rotation-ready players more than draft picks deeper into the future. It also somewhat paradoxically adds value to taking on longer-term money in some instances, as the Raptors could use those contracts for salary-matching in future deals (though we quickly get into a temporal trade loop chasing that logic too far).

All of that is to say that while Siakam, Anunoby, Barnes, Chris Boucher, Precious Achiuwa and Christian Koloko are a nice group to be building with, it’s not enough. Removing Trent and/or VanVleet from that core without the cap room to chase another star this summer or even replace the production of that starting backcourt puts significant pressure on the Raptors to nail these trades.

Then again, holding both and re-signing them to larger deals after they opt out in the summer would make the Raptors a borderline luxury-tax team with few paths to improving. (VanVleet and Trent re-signing with a combined 2023-24 salary of $50 million would basically have the Raptors at the tax after using a smaller exception and filling out the roster. The team is currently 19-24.)

Their situation is, uh, complicated.

Yeah this is the point of I've been in here trying to make.

[Rapsfan07]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nba/article/raptors-nba-trade-deadline-2023-primer-rules-assets-future-outlook-and-more/

Read on Twitter

The first important number is $148.68 million. That’s what the Raptors have committed if all three players with player options exercise their options to stay with the team, the Raptors hold on to the (projected) No. 7 pick, and they opt to walk away from Young’s small partial guarantee. The cap is currently projected to rise to $134 million next year, meaning that with adding just their first-round pick, the Raptors are well above the cap, with about $13 million in wiggle room beneath the luxury tax to round out the roster.

Right below that number is $94.25 million, which is how much the Raptors would have on the books if all the player options were declined and they traded away (or stashed) their top pick. This is your “max cap space” determinant. The Raptors would have a little under $40 million in cap space before accounting for minimum contracts (or roster charges) to meet the roster minimum. The smallest max contract for this summer projects to begin at $33.5 million in Year One and would start as high as $46.9 million for an experienced veteran.

In other words, even watching all the players with options walk away doesn’t leave the Raptors with space for a max contract unless they’re willing to make further aggressive concessions.

Because of that, one of the bigger questions facing any sell-off for the Raptors is whether they’d be willing to eat longer-term money to improve the asset return.

As an example, dealing Trent for expiring contracts probably won’t return as nice a pick or prospect as dealing Trent for a player owed money beyond 2023 would. Since the Raptors’ path to meaningful cap space this summer would require a large (and careful) dismantling of the current roster, the more fruitful path will likely be maximizing asset value and operating as an above-cap team again. The opportunity cost of that lost cap space is minimal the more difficult your path to cap space is to begin with.

The complicated question that flows from that cap-space reality is how the team would go about replacing outbound talent as they retool for next season. Draft picks are great but rarely contribute meaningfully to winning right out of the gate. If the goal is to return to being a legitimate playoff threat in 2023-24, the (potential) final years on contracts for Pascal Siakam and O.G. Anunoby, how will the Raptors complement that pair and Scottie Barnes without cap space? Trades are always a possibility, but we’ve seen that mid-level and minimum-type signings aren’t reliable enough supplementary chips.

Any deal involving Trent or VanVleet then, may prioritize young, rotation-ready players more than draft picks deeper into the future. It also somewhat paradoxically adds value to taking on longer-term money in some instances, as the Raptors could use those contracts for salary-matching in future deals (though we quickly get into a temporal trade loop chasing that logic too far).

All of that is to say that while Siakam, Anunoby, Barnes, Chris Boucher, Precious Achiuwa and Christian Koloko are a nice group to be building with, it’s not enough. Removing Trent and/or VanVleet from that core without the cap room to chase another star this summer or even replace the production of that starting backcourt puts significant pressure on the Raptors to nail these trades.

Then again, holding both and re-signing them to larger deals after they opt out in the summer would make the Raptors a borderline luxury-tax team with few paths to improving. (VanVleet and Trent re-signing with a combined 2023-24 salary of $50 million would basically have the Raptors at the tax after using a smaller exception and filling out the roster. The team is currently 19-24.)

Their situation is, uh, complicated.

Very well written.

This strategy of operating above cap AND punting draft picks for Thad is stupid as hell. When you are above cap, it's hard to add through FA to improve team meaningfully. So the only way is by adding FRP to upgrade your players via trade - yet FO threw away FRP like it's a liability (rookie contract cost)

That trade was definitely a head scratcher. Anyone could have told you that Young was not going to be the difference between a first or second round exit, much less a contender.

[tecumseh18]

This strategy of operating above cap AND punting draft picks for Thad is stupid as hell. When you are above cap, it's hard to add through FA to improve team meaningfully. So the only way is by adding FRP to upgrade your players via trade - yet FO threw away FRP like it's a liability (rookie contract cost)

So in your mind, drafting Koloko - who has the top net rating in this years' rookie class and is the only legit rim protector we've got - is the source of the Raptors' problems going forward?

Interesting.