ImageImageImageImageImage

Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package?

Moderators: 7 Footer, Morris_Shatford, DG88, niQ, Duffman100, tsherkin, Reeko, lebron stopper, HiJiNX

#9 for #23 + 2026 unprotected 1st (Higher pick between Pels and Bucks) ?

yes
103
72%
no
40
28%
 
Total votes: 143

User avatar
MainEvent
Analyst
Posts: 3,220
And1: 2,856
Joined: Oct 02, 2004
Location: ottawa
   

Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#1 » by MainEvent » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:03 pm

Dumars said he offered the deal starting at #9 and worked down until he got a yes
User avatar
LoveMyRaps
RealGM
Posts: 28,207
And1: 48,650
Joined: Jun 10, 2013
       

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#2 » by LoveMyRaps » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:04 pm

Yes, I would've.

But again, this just goes to show how high the front office is on CMB.

Not only did they pass up on Maluach, Noa, etc., but they also passed up on #23 + a potential lotto pick in 2026.
In Masai We Trust :meditate:
Image
User avatar
Duffman100
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 47,815
And1: 72,155
Joined: Jun 27, 2002
   

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#3 » by Duffman100 » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:08 pm

Yeah I would have. Pelicans will likely be terrible again.
MessiahUjiri
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,929
And1: 4,508
Joined: Dec 16, 2014
Contact:

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#4 » by MessiahUjiri » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:12 pm

No. The FO rightfully declined.


RealGM fans have a tendency to overrate future picks and it shows.

With #9, they would have a better player than they got at 13, so the ‘26 pick wouldn’t be that good. And the ‘25 talent drop to #23 is massive. If you like a guy at 9, take him.
User avatar
artsncrafts
RealGM
Posts: 22,357
And1: 26,034
Joined: Feb 04, 2013
Location: Shambleland, Ont.
 

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#5 » by artsncrafts » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:26 pm

I mean the Raptors arent really in a position to kick the can down the road yet another year. Sure it is possible its a lottery pick and even a good one, but also possible its in the 10-16 range. So if you think CMB (or whoever you take at 9) is better than next years lets say #10, although obviously it could be higher or lower, its not really worth the risk/reward. We might not even be alive in a year! Time to get back on the...fun to watch basketball.
Harold_and_Kumar wrote:What if the 10 incher was overrated and the 4 incher was too small for any playing time, but the 7 incher was a perfect fit for our roster and the 5 incher was good for specific situations, like backdoor cuts?
User avatar
MainEvent
Analyst
Posts: 3,220
And1: 2,856
Joined: Oct 02, 2004
Location: ottawa
   

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#6 » by MainEvent » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:28 pm

MessiahUjiri wrote:No. The FO rightfully declined.


RealGM fans have a tendency to overrate future picks and it shows.

With #9, they would have a better player than they got at 13, so the ‘26 pick wouldn’t be that good. And the ‘25 talent drop to #23 is massive. If you like a guy at 9, take him.


One would think Queen was their target, it's not like they are sending out that package and then the #1 guy they wanted gets taken and then they are like okay lets run it for our 2nd choice!

The pick is different from the overrated ones or whatever, it's an unprotected pick next year from a bad team. Do you think they make the playoffs? they look like a bottom 3 team in the west
User avatar
artsncrafts
RealGM
Posts: 22,357
And1: 26,034
Joined: Feb 04, 2013
Location: Shambleland, Ont.
 

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#7 » by artsncrafts » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:34 pm

MainEvent wrote:
MessiahUjiri wrote:No. The FO rightfully declined.


RealGM fans have a tendency to overrate future picks and it shows.

With #9, they would have a better player than they got at 13, so the ‘26 pick wouldn’t be that good. And the ‘25 talent drop to #23 is massive. If you like a guy at 9, take him.


One would think Queen was their target, it's not like they are sending out that package and then the #1 guy they wanted gets taken and then they are like okay lets run it for our 2nd choice!

The pick is different from the overrated ones or whatever, it's an unprotected pick next year from a bad team. Do you think they make the playoffs? they look like a bottom 3 team in the west


Well even if they are bad, you still need luck. So you need them to be bad and then get lucky to get a top 4 pick. Otherwise you are later in the lotto and you are trading #9 for mid lotto draft pick next year and #23 this year. Its not like its a guaranteed top pick. Obviously it depends on who you want to draft at 9. Do you think next years #7-10 is better? if you dont like anyone that much at #9 it make sense I guess. In that sense people are overrating the pick as we dont know where it will land (or who will be available). Its a risk/reward thing, there are no guarantees except for who you can draft at #9 when its your turn to pick.
Harold_and_Kumar wrote:What if the 10 incher was overrated and the 4 incher was too small for any playing time, but the 7 incher was a perfect fit for our roster and the 5 incher was good for specific situations, like backdoor cuts?
Ell Curry
Head Coach
Posts: 7,460
And1: 2,077
Joined: Oct 27, 2001
Location: Newfoundland

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#8 » by Ell Curry » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:40 pm

Absolutely. It's the best of the Pelicans/Bucks, right? If so, you have the Pels being a mess in a brutal conference and a Giannis injury/trade as possibilities.

A small chance at a star creator offensively is better than none, and I still think we aren't going anywhere without one.
Where's the D?
User avatar
WuTang_CMB
RealGM
Posts: 40,962
And1: 51,426
Joined: Sep 26, 2017
   

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#9 » by WuTang_CMB » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:40 pm

prob would
dumars is fried
his best player averages 40 games a year
wegotthabeet
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,504
And1: 3,043
Joined: Jun 29, 2021
 

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#10 » by wegotthabeet » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:40 pm

MessiahUjiri wrote:No. The FO rightfully declined.


RealGM fans have a tendency to overrate future picks and it shows.

With #9, they would have a better player than they got at 13, so the ‘26 pick wouldn’t be that good. And the ‘25 talent drop to #23 is massive. If you like a guy at 9, take him.


Yes.

Unprotected swaps are the most undervalued asset in the game. Three potential chances at the 1st overall. The asset could also be split in two. It’s a pick with two swaps attached. One of which belongs to a team with Giannis in the event he asks out this summer, during the season or leading into next. The team also saves $ next season.

I wasn’t crazy high on any of the prospects in our range though.
Lord_Zedd
RealGM
Posts: 15,144
And1: 20,306
Joined: Feb 21, 2004

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#11 » by Lord_Zedd » Thu Jun 26, 2025 10:42 pm

Zion is the only thing keeping that team afloat, and he's always injured.

I'd do it
User avatar
ForeverTFC
RealGM
Posts: 17,959
And1: 19,578
Joined: Dec 07, 2004
         

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#12 » by ForeverTFC » Thu Jun 26, 2025 11:17 pm

I find that people have a tough time with expected values.

Let's assume there is a 100% chance that either the Pels or Bucks finish in the bottom 5, with equal odds for worst to 5th worst. The expected pick at each spot is 3.7, 3.9, 4.1, 4.4 and 5. Multiply each for a 1/5th chance and the expected value of that pick is the 4.2. And keep in mind we are being generous by assuming a 100% of a bottom 5 finish. So even if you are convinced that one of those teams would SUCK next season, you are still trading for the 4th pick as the most likely outcome. If you assume BOTH have a 100% chance of finishing in the bottom 5, the most likely outcome becomes 3.1.

Depending on where the Raptors had CMB ranked, how they projected the Pels and Bucks next season, and how they projected the talent in the lottery next year, it's completely feasible that they thought the expected value of CMB was higher than the expected value of that pick.
User avatar
JShuttlesworth
RealGM
Posts: 10,194
And1: 13,376
Joined: Dec 09, 2013
Location: Toronto
 

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#13 » by JShuttlesworth » Thu Jun 26, 2025 11:40 pm

artsncrafts wrote:I mean the Raptors arent really in a position to kick the can down the road yet another year. Sure it is possible its a lottery pick and even a good one, but also possible its in the 10-16 range. So if you think CMB (or whoever you take at 9) is better than next years lets say #10, although obviously it could be higher or lower, its not really worth the risk/reward. We might not even be alive in a year! Time to get back on the...fun to watch basketball.


Bingo
TGM
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,160
And1: 1,053
Joined: Dec 19, 2004

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#14 » by TGM » Thu Jun 26, 2025 11:56 pm

Honestly I can totally see why they passed on trading down and instead took CMB. A lot of analyst had CMB at around 6. I don’t think you move down for just a potential gamble for a higher pick next year.
original fan
Sophomore
Posts: 143
And1: 89
Joined: Jul 06, 2019
         

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#15 » by original fan » Fri Jun 27, 2025 12:09 am

I would do it if they gave us Herb Jones and 23 for 9 and Agbadi
WhatsaTDot
RealGM
Posts: 11,286
And1: 7,222
Joined: May 16, 2010
Location: ♫ Whoa Black Betty Shambleland ♫

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#16 » by WhatsaTDot » Fri Jun 27, 2025 12:27 am

CMB doesn't seem to have a clear path to meaningful minutes right now. Why couldn't we kick the can down the road?
Image

This place is insufferable.
User avatar
Gold Dragon
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,024
And1: 4,605
Joined: Jul 02, 2006
Location: Oz
 

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#17 » by Gold Dragon » Fri Jun 27, 2025 12:28 am

If CMB was gone, then yes. But CMB was there so, no.
User avatar
Supermann98
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,017
And1: 681
Joined: May 09, 2003
Location: Toronto

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#18 » by Supermann98 » Fri Jun 27, 2025 1:06 am

Considering that pick is unprotected and could be a top 4 pick, yes I would've definitely taken that deal
kalel123
Head Coach
Posts: 6,276
And1: 4,665
Joined: Oct 19, 2004

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#19 » by kalel123 » Fri Jun 27, 2025 1:34 am

I would. Problem with Raptors though is that they needed somebody now. Someone more substantial than what #23 would provide. So I'm not mad at it even though it could come bite us in the ass down the road. Could be the big what-if.

On a separate note, Joe Dumars sure as heck isn't off to a great start though. What a terrible trade. I have no idea why they would think Derik Queen is worth giving up an unprotected pick in 2026, which is likely a high lotto. That's mind blowing when you really think about it. The man is showing why he stopped being relevant shortly after drafting Darko Milicic in 2003.
PushDaRock
RealGM
Posts: 12,525
And1: 9,637
Joined: Jun 22, 2011

Re: Would you have traded #9 for the Pelicans package? 

Post#20 » by PushDaRock » Fri Jun 27, 2025 1:42 am

ForeverTFC wrote:I find that people have a tough time with expected values.

Let's assume there is a 100% chance that either the Pels or Bucks finish in the bottom 5, with equal odds for worst to 5th worst. The expected pick at each spot is 3.7, 3.9, 4.1, 4.4 and 5. Multiply each for a 1/5th chance and the expected value of that pick is the 4.2. And keep in mind we are being generous by assuming a 100% of a bottom 5 finish. So even if you are convinced that one of those teams would SUCK next season, you are still trading for the 4th pick as the most likely outcome. If you assume BOTH have a 100% chance of finishing in the bottom 5, the most likely outcome becomes 3.1.

Depending on where the Raptors had CMB ranked, how they projected the Pels and Bucks next season, and how they projected the talent in the lottery next year, it's completely feasible that they thought the expected value of CMB was higher than the expected value of that pick.


lol not surprising considering how pissed people were that we didn't tank for a 14% at best chance at Wemby

Return to Toronto Raptors