Haynes: Damian Lillard Requests Trade

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Is there a difference between:

A player demanding to be traded to just one team and making it known he’d be unhappy anywhere else thereby lowering trade value

Versus

A player lowering their trade value by making it known he would refuse to sign an extension with any new team

???

Massive difference!

Scenario 1 is a guy who has a made a commitment and is requesting to break that commitment, but will only accept one resolution that is only helpful to himself.

Scenario 2 is a guy who will accept being put in a completely different situation but is simply saying that he is not prepared to commit to this unknown long term.

The first is basically like your wife telling you she wants out of the marriage, but wants the kids, the house, the cars… and you should accept whatever she is willing to let you have.
You want to find a win-win situation but she only wants it her way whether you like it or not.

The second is like you have a longtime girlfriend and your relationship is struggling. You think buying a home together will fix your problems but she doesn’t want to make that commitment given how precarious things are between you.
She tells you to buy a home if you want, but she is not ready to co-sign on the mortgage.

Thanks for your insights…sincerely.

Only thing I’d point out is both Lillard and Siakam’s actions have undermined their respective teams. Definitely a debate to be had about to what extent.

Your analogy made me think of the old joke:

Why are divorces so expensive?
Because they’re worth it! Lol

Good discussion. Interesting to compare the Siakam and Dame situation. I don't see Pascal as undermining the team. When you leaked your intentions to trade him the blame is on you for not handling your communications. It's not the responsibility of that employee to accommodate your error, especially when it impacts their life directly.

[Raps Next GM]

He's going to be making $63M in 2027.

Okay. And?

I’m not trying to be a dick, I just don’t understand the relevance of that

Lillard 's game might decline by then. It's like having Chris Paul at 50mil now.

Edit: I think this means his value should be less, due to age.

But I agree, this is Portland putting pressure to open trade possibilities with others and increase the return

Oh, sorry. I wasn’t sure where you were going with the salary.
I agree that he is a depreciating asset, my point is that Portland is giving Dame and the Heat an F-you by charging a premium for him.
If he opens up his wish list, then I think the offers will prove to be underwhelming for the very reason you point out and Portland will adjust their demands as necessary.
But right now there is only Miami and they need Dame every bit as much (maybe more) than Portland needs to trade him. Take the Heat to the Cleaners, I say!

[ArthurVandelay]

Massive difference!

Scenario 1 is a guy who has a made a commitment and is requesting to break that commitment, but will only accept one resolution that is only helpful to himself.

Scenario 2 is a guy who will accept being put in a completely different situation but is simply saying that he is not prepared to commit to this unknown long term.

The first is basically like your wife telling you she wants out of the marriage, but wants the kids, the house, the cars… and you should accept whatever she is willing to let you have.
You want to find a win-win situation but she only wants it her way whether you like it or not.

The second is like you have a longtime girlfriend and your relationship is struggling. You think buying a home together will fix your problems but she doesn’t want to make that commitment given how precarious things are between you.
She tells you to buy a home if you want, but she is not ready to co-sign on the mortgage.

Thanks for your insights…sincerely.

Only thing I’d point out is both Lillard and Siakam’s actions have undermined their respective teams. Definitely a debate to be had about to what extent.

Your analogy made me think of the old joke:

Why are divorces so expensive?
Because they’re worth it! Lol

Good discussion. Interesting to compare the Siakam and Dame situation. I don't see Pascal as undermining the team. When you leaked your intentions to trade him the blame is on you for not handling your communications. It's not the responsibility of that employee to accommodate your error, especially when it impacts their life directly.

I’m not sure the Raptors leaked they were shopping Siakam. That is the issue of dealing with other teams and why, I believe, Masai makes it so difficult for other teams to read him.

Did Masai/Raptors engage in trade talks on Siakam? Absolutely. They wouldn’t be doing their job if they didn’t.

Publicly announcing not signing an extension with any other team undermines the Raptors. We will have to agree to disagree on that.

[Raps Next GM]

The job of the Raptors is to do what is in the franchises best interests. A supermax for him isn’t that. Moving on from Siakam is also what I feel is in the best interest for the franchise

100% in agreement.

my issue is he’s actively lowering his trade value to the detriment of the team and fans.

He doesn’t owe the fans $100 million, and he certainly owes nothing to the team — they’re getting rid of him in this scenario, not the other way around. He didn’t ask out of Toronto.
Why would he make it easier to cost himself a shot at $100 million to show loyalty to a franchise that wants to jettison him elsewhere?

At the end of the day he wants to get as much as possible AND choose where he plays. He wants BOTH options and he’s squeezing the Raptors to make it happen.

I don’t see how you come to that conclusion.
He isn’t choosing where he goes, he’s simply stated that he’s not committing long-term to a new situation. The only preference he has made is to remain here.
And again, why should he make things smoother for the Raptors to benefit from dealing him when doing so could cost him $100 million??
I do not understand how anyone can think he needs to shut his mouth and sacrifice that much for a team, particularly when it’s so that he can be rewarded for his loyalty by being sent elsewhere!

The thought (shared by many here) that he should stay quiet to benefit the Raptors (which would become his former employer) and cost himself a fortune is absolutely baffling to me.

Would you sacrifice a significant amount of money to make it easier for your employer to fire you? That’s essentially what you are expecting Siakam to do.

It reminds me of a line from The Sopranos:
“It's like, not only does he sh*t on our heads, we're supposed to say ‘Thanks for the hat.’”

[ArthurVandelay]

The job of the Raptors is to do what is in the franchises best interests. A supermax for him isn’t that. Moving on from Siakam is also what I feel is in the best interest for the franchise

100% in agreement.

my issue is he’s actively lowering his trade value to the detriment of the team and fans.

He doesn’t owe the fans $100 million, and he certainly owes nothing to the team — they’re getting rid of him in this scenario, not the other way around. He didn’t ask out of Toronto.
Why would he make it easier to cost himself a shot at $100 million to show loyalty to a franchise that wants to jettison him elsewhere?

At the end of the day he wants to get as much as possible AND choose where he plays. He wants BOTH options and he’s squeezing the Raptors to make it happen.

I don’t see how you come to that conclusion.
He isn’t choosing where he goes, he’s simply stated that he’s not committing long-term to a new situation. The only preference he has made is to remain here.
And again, why should he make things smoother for the Raptors to benefit from dealing him when doing so could cost him $100 million??
I do not understand how anyone can think he needs to shut his mouth and sacrifice that much for a team, particularly when it’s so that he can be rewarded for his loyalty by being sent elsewhere!

The thought (shared by many here) that he should stay quiet to benefit the Raptors (which would become his former employer) and cost himself a fortune is absolutely baffling to me.

Would you sacrifice a significant amount of money to make it easier for your employer to fire you? That’s essentially what you are expecting Siakam to do.

Keep in mind the original conversation started comparing Pascal leak with Lillard situation.

The situations are different but at the end of the day the core issue is both team’s maximizing the return on a major asset.

The Pascal $100m aka supermax is irrelevant in my opinion because he isn’t getting it. He doesn’t deserve it, despite possibly being eligible, and it would make him a less desirable asset imo.

So once supermax is ruled out, no one is costing him money. Again a team trading for him needs to be willing to offer full 5-year max…or they’re stupid for making the trade in the first place.

So the only question becomes where does he get his money because he isn’t losing any money as long as a team holds his Bird Rights.

As to why he should show raptors any loyalty when they are trying to get rid of him….well, they drafted him, developed him, gave him opportunity he likely wouldn’t have had elsewhere, won a championship together, made him the face of the franchise, hired coaches he had relationships with, hired his brother, and paid him nearly $150m already throughout it all.

[Raps Next GM]

The Pascal $100m aka supermax is irrelevant in my opinion because he isn’t getting it. He doesn’t deserve it, despite possibly being eligible, and it would make him a less desirable asset imo.

I wouldn’t give him that but he can easily qualify for it. No pro athlete is going to believe “yeah, I’m probably not good enough to get that contract.”
Who would’ve thought that FVV would get $43.3 million per year? If he has a monster year, the Raptors might have no choice but to pay him.
The Celtics will probably give that to Jaylen Brown even though he frankly doesn’t deserve it. But what choice do they have?

As to why he should show raptors any loyalty when they are trying to get rid of him….well, they drafted him, developed him, gave him opportunity he likely wouldn’t have had elsewhere, won a championship together, made him the face of the franchise, hired coaches he had relationships with, hired his brother, and paid him nearly $150m already throughout it all.

But they want to get rid of him! Where’s their loyalty to Siakam?

They wouldn’t have won the championship without him.
The didn’t make him the face of the franchise, he made himself the face by being easily our best player.
They hired his brother? fine, he can repay his brother’s salary.
The coaches hired that he had relationships with didn’t work exclusively with him. They didn’t hire his best friends as coaches, they hired established coaches that happen to work well with their star player, which is not unheard of in sports.

You are your company’s best performer and are in line to qualify for a huge bonus. You find out that they might fire you, costing you that bonus.
But they need you to stay quiet. If word gets out, then it will be harder for them to fire you and you can still be eligible for that major bonus.
Are you going to stay quiet (and sacrifice the bonus) to help the company that hired you, trained you, had success with and they gave your brother a job in the mailroom too?

[islandboy53]

But my point is this is about money and at the end of the day he wants to get as much as possible AND choose where he plays. He wants BOTH options and he’s squeezing the Raptors to make it happen.

This is a new take. What's your basis for this comment? Lots of folks have passed on the suggestion that Siakam has maintained he wants to stay in Toronto as an alleged "leak" by him/his camp that he refuses to sign an extension elsewhere. I've never seen any comment from him or the team confirming that, so I am skeptical as to the actual source of that "leak", but this is new.

Now I’m not in Siakam’s head or inner circle, I don’t know what he wants.

And yet, you just finished saying that he wants to get as much money as possible, AND choose where he wants to play.

But my issue is it seems he wants maximum money and control over where he plays and that is hurting the Raptors.

And reiterated that idea. So, do you think you know what's in his head or not?????? I'm going to suggest you actually know diddley squat about Siakam's plans, but, like many, you're making assumptions and trying to treat them as reality

[Mr.Raptorsingh]

Once Lillard is off the trade market, Siakam could be the best player available on the trade market, other than maybe LaVine from Chicago.

[ArthurVandelay]

But my point is this is about money and at the end of the day he wants to get as much as possible AND choose where he plays. He wants BOTH options and he’s squeezing the Raptors to make it happen.

This is a new take. What's your basis for this comment? Lots of folks have passed on the suggestion that Siakam has maintained he wants to stay in Toronto as an alleged "leak" by him/his camp that he refuses to sign an extension elsewhere. I've never seen any comment from him or the team confirming that, so I am skeptical as to the actual source of that "leak", but this is new.

Now I’m not in Siakam’s head or inner circle, I don’t know what he wants.

And yet, you just finished saying that he wants to get as much money as possible, AND choose where he wants to play.

But my issue is it seems he wants maximum money and control over where he plays and that is hurting the Raptors.

And reiterated that idea. So, do you think you know what's in his head or not?????? I'm going to suggest you actually know diddley squat about Siakam's plans, but, like many, you're making assumptions and trying to treat them as reality

You know chat boards are largely opinion based, right? I’ve made it very clear these are my opinions.

I believe he wants as much money as possible and determine where he plays. It’s the all-star NBA way.

[ArthurVandelay]

The Pascal $100m aka supermax is irrelevant in my opinion because he isn’t getting it. He doesn’t deserve it, despite possibly being eligible, and it would make him a less desirable asset imo.

I wouldn’t give him that but he can easily qualify for it. No pro athlete is going to believe “yeah, I’m probably not good enough to get that contract.”
Who would’ve thought that FVV would get $43.3 million per year? If he has a monster year, the Raptors might have no choice but to pay him.
The Celtics will probably give that to Jaylen Brown even though he frankly doesn’t deserve it. But what choice do they have?

As to why he should show raptors any loyalty when they are trying to get rid of him….well, they drafted him, developed him, gave him opportunity he likely wouldn’t have had elsewhere, won a championship together, made him the face of the franchise, hired coaches he had relationships with, hired his brother, and paid him nearly $150m already throughout it all.

But they want to get rid of him! Where’s their loyalty to Siakam?

They wouldn’t have won the championship without him.
The didn’t make him the face of the franchise, he made himself the face by being easily our best player.
They hired his brother? fine, he can repay his brother’s salary.
The coaches hired that he had relationships with didn’t work exclusively with him. They didn’t hire his best friends as coaches, they hired established coaches that happen to work well with their star player, which is not unheard of in sports.

You are your company’s best performer and are in line to qualify for a huge bonus. You find out that they might fire you, costing you that bonus.
But they need you to stay quiet. If word gets out, then it will be harder for them to fire you and you can still be eligible for that major bonus.
Are you going to stay quiet (and sacrifice the bonus) to help the company that hired you, trained you, had success with and they gave your brother a job in the mailroom too?

This is going around in circles now. Loyalty and partnerships go both ways. Until now both Siakam and Raptors have been in a great relationship. But most relationships eventually come to an end for whatever reason…. See DeRozan as a perfect example. I believe we’ve reached that point with Siakam led Raptors. The goal here is to win right? It’s a ruthless take but that is reality.

To your main points:

Celtic can trade Brown or let the year play out and see what his options are in FA when Boston will still be able to offer him more than anyone else. There are always choices. No one forcing them to sign him to a supermax.

Private business and pro sports are not good comparables. If they fire me, they hire someone else. My boss isn’t going to trade me to another company to get another worker(s) back.

[islandboy53]

But my point is this is about money and at the end of the day he wants to get as much as possible AND choose where he plays. He wants BOTH options and he’s squeezing the Raptors to make it happen.

This is a new take. What's your basis for this comment? Lots of folks have passed on the suggestion that Siakam has maintained he wants to stay in Toronto as an alleged "leak" by him/his camp that he refuses to sign an extension elsewhere. I've never seen any comment from him or the team confirming that, so I am skeptical as to the actual source of that "leak", but this is new.

Now I’m not in Siakam’s head or inner circle, I don’t know what he wants.

And yet, you just finished saying that he wants to get as much money as possible, AND choose where he wants to play.

But my issue is it seems he wants maximum money and control over where he plays and that is hurting the Raptors.

And reiterated that idea. So, do you think you know what's in his head or not?????? I'm going to suggest you actually know diddley squat about Siakam's plans, but, like many, you're making assumptions and trying to treat them as reality

You know chat boards are largely opinion based, right? I’ve made it very clear these are my opinions.

I have noticed that about chat boards. I've also noticed that many folks on chat boards tend to present their opinions as facts, which is what you did in the post I quoted from. You were very clear, "But my point is this is about money and at the end of the day he wants to get as much as possible AND choose where he plays. He wants BOTH options and he’s squeezing the Raptors to make it happen." There's absolutely nothing there to indicate that this staement is simply your take on the matter, your belief, your opinion. We can leave aside for now the fact that this perspective has no factual basis.

I believe he wants as much money as possible and determine where he plays. It’s the all-star NBA way.

This is clearly stated as an opinion, albeit one which is needlessly disrespectful to Pascal and professional athletes generally. I can't imagine you, or anyone on this board, saying, hey, you know what, I'm just doing this job 'cause I like it, boss, so pay me whatever you like. It's a theme that comes up here far too often, in my opinion, that these people should not be trying to maximize their earnings.

[ForeverTFC]

The job of the Raptors is to do what is in the franchises best interests. A supermax for him isn’t that. Moving on from Siakam is also what I feel is in the best interest for the franchise

100% in agreement.

my issue is he’s actively lowering his trade value to the detriment of the team and fans.

He doesn’t owe the fans $100 million, and he certainly owes nothing to the team — they’re getting rid of him in this scenario, not the other way around. He didn’t ask out of Toronto.
Why would he make it easier to cost himself a shot at $100 million to show loyalty to a franchise that wants to jettison him elsewhere?

At the end of the day he wants to get as much as possible AND choose where he plays. He wants BOTH options and he’s squeezing the Raptors to make it happen.

I don’t see how you come to that conclusion.
He isn’t choosing where he goes, he’s simply stated that he’s not committing long-term to a new situation. The only preference he has made is to remain here.
And again, why should he make things smoother for the Raptors to benefit from dealing him when doing so could cost him $100 million??
I do not understand how anyone can think he needs to shut his mouth and sacrifice that much for a team, particularly when it’s so that he can be rewarded for his loyalty by being sent elsewhere!

The thought (shared by many here) that he should stay quiet to benefit the Raptors (which would become his former employer) and cost himself a fortune is absolutely baffling to me.

Would you sacrifice a significant amount of money to make it easier for your employer to fire you? That’s essentially what you are expecting Siakam to do.

Keep in mind the original conversation started comparing Pascal leak with Lillard situation.

The situations are different but at the end of the day the core issue is both team’s maximizing the return on a major asset.

The Pascal $100m aka supermax is irrelevant in my opinion because he isn’t getting it. He doesn’t deserve it, despite possibly being eligible, and it would make him a less desirable asset imo.

So once supermax is ruled out, no one is costing him money. Again a team trading for him needs to be willing to offer full 5-year max…or they’re stupid for making the trade in the first place.

So the only question becomes where does he get his money because he isn’t losing any money as long as a team holds his Bird Rights.

As to why he should show raptors any loyalty when they are trying to get rid of him….well, they drafted him, developed him, gave him opportunity he likely wouldn’t have had elsewhere, won a championship together, made him the face of the franchise, hired coaches he had relationships with, hired his brother, and paid him nearly $150m already throughout it all.

You’re making it sound like the Raptors gave him everything he has. I can easily switch it around to: Pascal put in the work to develop well beyond what anyone thought of him, brought a championship to Toronto, served as the face of the franchise when no one else could take the mantle, and stayed with the team through a rebuild.

Pascal has earned unrestricted free agency and choice. He is showing gratitude and loyalty for what the franchise has given him by making it clear he wants to stay here and if you listen to insiders, all indications are that he would take an extension this summer if it was offered. He’s not demanding a trade, he’s not pouting or sitting out games, he is 100% committed. All he’s saying is that he won’t commit to any other team today if the Raptors choose to trade him there; if the Raptors choose to move on, he wants some agency on where he commits the next stage of his career. He’s earned that right.

[ItsDanger]

People express their opinions here. It's 100% on you if you're interpreting them as someone posting facts.

[Los_29]

Thanks for your insights…sincerely.

Only thing I’d point out is both Lillard and Siakam’s actions have undermined their respective teams. Definitely a debate to be had about to what extent.

Your analogy made me think of the old joke:

Why are divorces so expensive?
Because they’re worth it! Lol

Isn't the whole thing with Siakam is that he refuses to commit to the team that trades for him? I don't see what the problem is with that. Why would anyone commit to a place and organization they have never played in and are unfamiliar with? That's actually not unusual. It's quite common.

Dame's situation is far worse and has completely damaged his reputation in my opinion. The guy was never loyal to the Blazers, just the money that they were paying him. LOL.

Leaking the information he won’t sign anywhere undermines the team and the FO.

That is a conversation that could be had privately.

Siakam could also provide teams where he would resign, and who knows, maybe he has. But to say he won’t resign with anyone is hurting the team get maximum value for him as a player.

I don’t like the situation because this isn’t about living on Toronto or wanting to stay forever, I truly believe it’s all about trying to secure a supermax which will turn into another Beal situation leading into the 2024-2025 season.

Of course money is a part of it but him wanting to control his future is also a big part of it, as it should be. He's 2 time ALL-NBA, MIP, NBA champion. Every player in his situation would do the same thing.

Dame on the other hand has completely screwed the team that he's played 10+ years for. That team is toast if he doesn't expand his list of teams. It's very unfortunate how that whole situation played out. Blazers got played.

[Raps Next GM]

I can't imagine you, or anyone on this board, saying, hey, you know what, I'm just doing this job 'cause I like it, boss, so pay me whatever you like. It's a theme that comes up here far too often, in my opinion, that these people should not be trying to maximize their earnings.

I get from a psychological aspect, we all wish we could be pro athletes and (think) we would love to play for free, so the idea of guys getting a fortune for “playing a game” creates a mental disconnect for most.

But nothing about sports fandom puzzles me more than the viewpoint from fans — probably 99% of whom are “labour” — to take the side of management and ownership in sports.

It gives me a headache to even try to figure out how Siakam could in any way be a “bad guy” in this situation.

[MiamiSPX]

Siakam should be trying to maximize his earnings. I would do the same. Nothing wrong with that at all.

On the flipside, there is also nothing wrong with the Raptors wanting to move him because they're leery of giving him another 250M (minimum).

Neither side is wrong for wanting their respective desired outcome, which conflict with each other (assuming Raps don't want to pay him, of course....who knows).

[ItsDanger]

I would guess 95% of comments regarding player salaries in salary cap era has to do with: the more Player A gets the less the rest of the players get and hence makes winning less likely. Unless Player A is a top 10 player. Insinuating otherwise isn't logical considering the minimum salary is probably well above most here.

[islandboy53]

And while we're at it, let's talk about this.

The Pascal $100m aka supermax is irrelevant in my opinion because he isn’t getting it. He doesn’t deserve it, despite possibly being eligible, and it would make him a less desirable asset imo.

I mean, it's fine to believe that Pascal won't be getting a supermax. In fact, I tend to agree because, assuming he stays with Toronto, it's not very likely that he'll meet the eligibility requirements. That said, it's certainly not impossible, particularly given his history of growth as a player. At the same time, if he meets the requirements, he will be eligible, period. Your opinion, and mine, as to whether he deserves it or not will be totally irrelevant. It would at that point be between him and the Raptors to determine whether they would agree on a supermax or some lesser amount. And, finally, would agreeing to pay him 35% of the salary cap make him a less desirable asset? Harder to move in the future, for sure, but not necessarily less desirable.

So once supermax is ruled out, no one is costing him money.

And, since a supermax can't be ruled out, a trade COULD end up costing him money. Importantly, though, the fact that the Raptors have not, apparently, engaged on extension talks, and are at least listening to trade offers for him should make it clear to anyone who wants to be thoughtful about the matter that Pascal has no particular leverage in these things. Ih he remains a Raptor, he will continue to bring the same passion and professionalism that he has since he was drafted to help his team be the best it can. If he's traded, he will do exactly the same thing in his new location.

[islandboy53]

People express their opinions here. It's 100% on you if you're interpreting them as someone posting facts.

You talking to me?

[ArthurVandelay]

And while we're at it, let's talk about this.

The Pascal $100m aka supermax is irrelevant in my opinion because he isn’t getting it. He doesn’t deserve it, despite possibly being eligible, and it would make him a less desirable asset imo.

I mean, it's fine to believe that Pascal won't be getting a supermax. In fact, I tend to agree because, assuming he stays with Toronto, it's not very likely that he'll meet the eligibility requirements. That said, it's certainly not impossible, particularly given his history of growth as a player. At the same time, if he meets the requirements, he will be eligible, period. Your opinion, and mine, as to whether he deserves it or not will be totally irrelevant. It would at that point be between him and the Raptors to determine whether they would agree on a supermax or some lesser amount. And, finally, would agreeing to pay him 35% of the salary cap make him a less desirable asset? Harder to move in the future, for sure, but not necessarily less desirable.

So once supermax is ruled out, no one is costing him money.

And, since a supermax can't be ruled out, a trade COULD end up costing him money. Importantly, though, the fact that the Raptors have not, apparently, engaged on extension talks, and are at least listening to trade offers for him should make it clear to anyone who wants to be thoughtful about the matter that Pascal has no particular leverage in these things. Ih he remains a Raptor, he will continue to bring the same passion and professionalism that he has since he was drafted to help his team be the best it can. If he's traded, he will do exactly the same thing in his new location.

Amazing how quickly what just transpired with Beal is forgotten.

Also incredible the hypocrisy. You know as much as I do except I try to present it without the condescending bs. My bad for forgetting to phrase an idea I’ve clearly made as opinion in numerous places as fact in another.