RealGM

Not sure if this has been posted but what can we get for this guy?

https://raptorsnation.com/2024/12/04/raptors-rumors-toronto-will-look-to-trade-bruce-brown/

https://www.si.com/nba/raptors/toronto-raptors-will-trade-veteran-players-nba-insider-reports

His trade value will peak when he's an unrestricted free agent. Patience pays off.

That's based on Evan Sidery's tweet, so you can ignore that. That guy has no sources whatsoever and is just speculation.

I think Bruce Brown could be a great vet for this team.

RaptorLakerJay wrote:That's based on Evan Sidery's tweet, so you can ignore that. That guy has no sources whatsoever and is just speculation.

I think Bruce Brown could be a great vet for this team.

We already got a vet who doesn't play... we don't need Brown and Olynyk to sit on their asses and do nothing as well lol.

Get 1-2 2nds+ in 2027 and 28 + filler and call it a day.

Do the same with Boucher and Davion

I mean, duh, of course he's being shopped. Why wouldn't he be?

Tripod wrote:Get 1-2 2nds+ in 2027 and 28 + filler and call it a day.

Do the same with Boucher and Davion

Hate to say it but I think Masai/Bobby may have underappreciated how limiting the aprons are for the in-season trade market. I don't think we're getting much for our guys, but...hope remains. If we can somehow cumulatively get a under-20 1st rounder (hopefully in this year's draft) for all our vet trade assets combined, I'll be happy.

ontnut wrote:

Tripod wrote:Get 1-2 2nds+ in 2027 and 28 + filler and call it a day.

Do the same with Boucher and Davion

Hate to say it but I think Masai/Bobby may have underappreciated how limiting the aprons are for the in-season trade market. I don't think we're getting much for our guys, but...hope remains. If we can somehow cumulatively get a under-20 1st rounder (hopefully in this year's draft) for all our vet trade assets combined, I'll be happy.

I think they just had lots of picks last year so "punting" Brown down the road a year meant teams weren't trying to only offer 2024 picks. It kept flexibility for a future move going too.

If we end up with 3/4 2nds for those 3 I mentioned it's all good. I hope for a sneaky "filler" that MU identifies that we could re-hab value....like he did with Ochai.

He should be packaged alongside Boucher, there's just no playing time with these vets as guys comeback and their redundant to the roster. I would also entertain shopping Olynik around for a young C preferably that can shoot, we need guys that can grow with our young core. The only vet that J would keep is Poetl as he has been developing a rapport with Barnes and RJ and he's a a quiet presence on and off the court that lends stability in the locker room.

In a true rebuild, you can take back a 2 year crappy contract plus decent draft capital. As everyone is concerned about team vibes and winning every game possible, your options are more limited. Maybe they get lucky.

So he may actually have to play this season? Good to hear.

At least we know that only 2nd rounders were offered last year. So holding onto him ended up being the right move.

ItsDanger wrote:In a true rebuild

I'd love to hear the definition of "true rebuild".

Whether Brown, Boucher, Mitchell or Olynyk are traded is small beans. As a young team they don't have so many roster spots available that they can go about drafting 3-4 guys each year. They aren't getting any first round picks for these guys unless they take back a lot of bad contracts with years left.

If any or all of these four are traded, fine, if they walk as free agents, also fine. If management doesn't like what they might get at the deadline for trading the expiring guys, they don't have to trade them. They can even keep them for the balance of the season and use their current MLE or next year's to absorb a contract with draft comp.

Keeping the expiring around for the balance of the season would allow the rookies to get more 905 time, which can only benefit the team in the long run.

Duffman100 wrote:

ItsDanger wrote:In a true rebuild

I'd love to hear the definition of "true rebuild".

You bottom out and accumulate a lot of draft picks, limit players on 2nd contracts already. 2-3 years. Many sports teams do it with varying success.

ItsDanger wrote:

Duffman100 wrote:

ItsDanger wrote:In a true rebuild

I'd love to hear the definition of "true rebuild".

You bottom out and accumulate a lot of draft picks, limit players on 2nd contracts already. 2-3 years. Many sports teams do it with varying success.

What makes that the definition of 'true rebuild'. Who is the arbiter of that? What are the statistics of varying success? Would that impact the definition of true rebuild?

Duffman100 wrote:

ItsDanger wrote:

Duffman100 wrote:
I'd love to hear the definition of "true rebuild".

You bottom out and accumulate a lot of draft picks, limit players on 2nd contracts already. 2-3 years. Many sports teams do it with varying success.

What makes that the definition of 'true rebuild'. Who is the arbiter of that? What are the statistics of varying success? Would that impact the definition of true rebuild?

We both know you are never gonna get an example of a team.

Danger loves to spout his rhetoric with zero support

Duffman100 wrote:

ItsDanger wrote:

Duffman100 wrote:
I'd love to hear the definition of "true rebuild".

You bottom out and accumulate a lot of draft picks, limit players on 2nd contracts already. 2-3 years. Many sports teams do it with varying success.

What makes that the definition of 'true rebuild'. Who is the arbiter of that? What are the statistics of varying success? Would that impact the definition of true rebuild?

I think you can look to OKC who blew up their squad to bottom out for a few years and went after vets like Hartenstein/Caruso after they already built their foundation. You land guys like Chet by doing that, which is why a lot of folks want to tank this season. Guys like Poeltl/Brown/Olynyk should be targeted AFTER you got your building blocked in house.

Now obviously it's not a perfect science because you need to be able to draft properly or else you end up like Detroit. I think most have faith in Masai to pick the right players to not end up like that.

YogurtProducer wrote:

Duffman100 wrote:

ItsDanger wrote:You bottom out and accumulate a lot of draft picks, limit players on 2nd contracts already. 2-3 years. Many sports teams do it with varying success.

What makes that the definition of 'true rebuild'. Who is the arbiter of that? What are the statistics of varying success? Would that impact the definition of true rebuild?

We both know you are never gonna get an example of a team.

Danger loves to spout his rhetoric with zero support

The point made was if you're not concerned about winning, team culture, that kind of thing, you can take on bad contracts easily in short term. Raps may not want to do that currently. So it limits options in a Brown trade.

ItsDanger wrote:

YogurtProducer wrote:

Duffman100 wrote:
What makes that the definition of 'true rebuild'. Who is the arbiter of that? What are the statistics of varying success? Would that impact the definition of true rebuild?

We both know you are never gonna get an example of a team.

Danger loves to spout his rhetoric with zero support

The point made was if you're not concerned about winning, team culture, that kind of thing, you can take on bad contracts easily in short term. Raps may not want to do that currently. So it limits options in a Brown trade.

Ah perfect, a post with more ambiguity and no actual examples of anything

WTF does bad contracts have to do with team culture?

Who is saying we "wont" take on a bad contract? I would love for you to post even one example of a Bruce Brown for bad salaries trade you are interested in and wish we would do. PLEASE Danger, just once, give us an example of anything.

Edit: Didn't we take on RJ Barrett who was considered a bad contract?