What to do with Bruce Brown

[ArthurVandelay]

You're really terrified of the incoming rebuild, aren't you? A significant chunk of this board is still operating under the delusion that we'll be bad for a year or so before we're back in the playoffs. It's genuinely sad to see. Tough years ahead for you guys.

At least Masai understands though and has commented how the rebuild process will likely take 5-6 years.

Masai's comments:

“And to be honest what does a rebuild take? I don’t know if to call this a rebuild or a reset or however we want to put it but a normal rebuild with other teams takes 6,5,6 years. Do we have the patience for that? Do we have the patience for 3-5 years building of our team? Someway somehow we are going to have to have patience. And one of the things that I’m telling you 100%, I’m not going to BS anybody on, is I am patient. I was maybe to a fault (with the last iteration of the Raptors),” he said.


I don't read that as he intends to take 5-6 years. A normal rebuild means trading everyone away and starting anew, like the Pistons. The Raptors are starting their rebuild with 3 core guys who are 22/23/24 years old. I could see 3 years being a possibility, but I truly believe if things play out well they are back to the playoffs for 2025/2026. Play out well means: good draft picks, continued internal growth, and finding value for their cap space either via trade(s) or signing(s).

The Pistons are literally on pace to be the worst team of all time. You guys are so insanely disingenuous when you keep comparing us to them. There have been literally hundreds of rebuilding rosters over the last few decades that have been genuinely bad and who could hoop cirlces around this Pistons squad.

This board has the dumbest arguments. And yes, his quote is telling you to be patient because it will obviously take multiple years. Nothing I said was contradicted.

Why is everyone so angry today?

2025/2026 is multiple seasons.

And the Kings from 2005 until last season. The hornets through 2012-2015 was absolutely awful. You could use that one. The Sixers took 5-6 years to be relevant with the Process. Lots of examples of teams tearing it down and swinging at draft picks taking a very long time.

All I'm saying is the approach Masai has taken is not a total rebuild, tear it down to the studs. You have Scottie, IQ, and RJ. It could take 2 full seasons of tanking to get that level of youth and talent, and here we are. So to steal a line from Colangelo, the rebuild has been accelerated just because they aren't waiting on draft picks to start with a foundation...its already there.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I disagree.

Grimes is a different player than Brown. At this point Brown is what he is and what he is is a guy who can do a bit of everything. Grimes is your traditional 3&D guard. Grimes plays solid D and would be an upgrade on Gary imo. He's locked in for one more year of his rookie deal, so he is cheap next year, and then you have the choice to keep him in RFA.

Grimes has taken a step back this year because of the number of guards on the knicks and he is in Thibs doghouse, apparently, for not playing in the playoffs with a shoulder injury. Grimes year 2 stats are really good, very very efficient. He's getting 10 less minutes per game this season but his per36 are fairly close but his percentages are down.

Going from 2 firsts and 31 this year to 1 first and 31 with 2 firsts in 2025 is not a bad thing imo, but ideally you keep all the picks and add another one. But even a late 2025 first should hold more value than a late 2024 first based on how everyone is slagging the 2024 draft.

Plus depending on when the trade is made, you still have Fournier's expiring contract that could be flipped again.

Anyways, all this is to say I'd be very happy turning Brown into Grimes and draft capital.

What are you disagreeing with? Grimes is worse than Brown and may never reach his level of elite role player? One more year of cheap contract to do what? If he works out he's getting paid. If he doesn't, he's being let go. Same stakes as Brown, essentially, although if Brown doesn't work out this year he's probably still retaining trade value.

The pick switch is so baffling to me. Teams will literally trade out of their slot for a future first down the road. This proposal takes the "benefit of Brown" for the exact same kind of trade. Yes, it's stupid to take all three picks this year, but Brown needs to bring back a first on his own for this to be worth it.

I disagree with your assessment that the proposal was, quote, "*****ing stupid"

I laid it out for you the reasons why on both Grimes and the pick. Grimes had a solid second year last season. On the pick, I agreed ideally you would get another pick and keep what they already had. Just to add to the idea of a pick swap though, swapping the worst of the 2024 for a 2025 would allow you to trade up to 4 draft picks in the next 3 drafts if a star player came along: 1 in 24, 2 in 25, and 1 in 26, while allowing you to keep your 2026 pick. With the potential cap space, you might not even have to trade out a player. Hopefully they would make any Raptor pick lottery protected.

The stupid part is the pick swap.

[Psubs]

You’d think after seeing the trade value of 3 OF OUR TOP 4 PLAYERS decline (hell, chuck Lowry in that pile too) over the past 3 years because we waited too long to trade them our fanbase would have a come to Jesus moment about moving guys when their value is the highest. Yet here we are, talking about holding onto a guy who expires next year on a team that is currently going nowhere. Our fanbase has the memory of a goldfish.

On the other side of asset valuation: what other teams have to offer vs what they are willing to give up.
A large section of this fanbase does not actually understand how asset valuation and leverage work. They want to make moves for the sake of making moves. You would assume that this fanbase would understand this and manage their expectations however here we are making terrible judgement calls regarding what was actually on the table for our players at any given time.

Listening to many of the takes (like the ones above) = a fast track path to becoming the Detroit Pistons. Let's not do that.

Agreed.
And I think there are three "apex mountains" (Thank you Rewatchables!) to Brown's value. The first is at this year's trade deadline, when any of the teams trying to gear up for a deep run are going to want to fortify their bench with someone like Brown. The second is at the draft, when Brown can be combined with an existing roster player and/or some picks to entice a team that is looking to move up or down in the draft and also get off some salary. The third is late June, just before the option must be exercised, when a team staring at a large Luxury Tax Bill for 2024/25 would like to grab a player with one of the largest Team Options for 2024/25 salary to lower or duck the tax.

So if Brown is here past the trade deadline, do not sweat it. There are at least two more opportunities to grab max value.

[though as I write all of this, I realize this also described Thad Young this time last year... sigh.]

Once, the season ends, can they still do Bruce Brown for Fournier, Grimes and 1st pick? I always though, you could trade whatever free agent Bird rights and that the Knicks would have to trade salary to fit Brown who is held by the team option until June 30. The Knicks would have to trade another rotation player if obtained at the draft.

Also trading for Brown now get the Knicks at least 2 playoff runs with him if all goes to plan for them.

[Psubs]

The stupid part is the pick swap.

Trading into a "better" draft is a crapshoot, but also Lillard and Lopez would be 1 year older and could be an injury away from that pick being in the teens. Doing the swap during a draft day trade when the late 1st pick that Toronto owns would make sense to move out of the draft.

[ArthurVandelay]

What are you disagreeing with? Grimes is worse than Brown and may never reach his level of elite role player? One more year of cheap contract to do what? If he works out he's getting paid. If he doesn't, he's being let go. Same stakes as Brown, essentially, although if Brown doesn't work out this year he's probably still retaining trade value.

The pick switch is so baffling to me. Teams will literally trade out of their slot for a future first down the road. This proposal takes the "benefit of Brown" for the exact same kind of trade. Yes, it's stupid to take all three picks this year, but Brown needs to bring back a first on his own for this to be worth it.

I disagree with your assessment that the proposal was, quote, "*****ing stupid"

I laid it out for you the reasons why on both Grimes and the pick. Grimes had a solid second year last season. On the pick, I agreed ideally you would get another pick and keep what they already had. Just to add to the idea of a pick swap though, swapping the worst of the 2024 for a 2025 would allow you to trade up to 4 draft picks in the next 3 drafts if a star player came along: 1 in 24, 2 in 25, and 1 in 26, while allowing you to keep your 2026 pick. With the potential cap space, you might not even have to trade out a player. Hopefully they would make any Raptor pick lottery protected.

The stupid part is the pick swap.

Fair enough. I did initially say that wasn’t ideal but there still is value in it, in my opinion.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I disagree with your assessment that the proposal was, quote, "*****ing stupid"

I laid it out for you the reasons why on both Grimes and the pick. Grimes had a solid second year last season. On the pick, I agreed ideally you would get another pick and keep what they already had. Just to add to the idea of a pick swap though, swapping the worst of the 2024 for a 2025 would allow you to trade up to 4 draft picks in the next 3 drafts if a star player came along: 1 in 24, 2 in 25, and 1 in 26, while allowing you to keep your 2026 pick. With the potential cap space, you might not even have to trade out a player. Hopefully they would make any Raptor pick lottery protected.

The stupid part is the pick swap.

Fair enough. I did initially say that wasn’t ideal but there still is value in it, in my opinion.

For Brown, you should want to guarantee an advantage. So an extra pick at minimum. Grimes isn't garbage or anything, but his value should be depressed because of this year. Yeah, maybe Milwaukee's pick is higher next year, but how much higher? I think these draft slots are all in the range of 'the same.' We shouldn't have to tag our own assets to Brown to gain a marginal hypothetical advantage.

[TheGeneral99]

So I hear the Lakers are interested...

What about Brown + Dennis for Gabe Vincent, Hachimura and a 1st?

[ArthurVandelay]

The stupid part is the pick swap.

Fair enough. I did initially say that wasn’t ideal but there still is value in it, in my opinion.

For Brown, you should want to guarantee an advantage. So an extra pick at minimum. Grimes isn't garbage or anything, but his value should be depressed because of this year. Yeah, maybe Milwaukee's pick is higher next year, but how much higher? I think these draft slots are all in the range of 'the same.' We shouldn't have to tag our own assets to Brown to gain a marginal hypothetical advantage.

No, that is definitely not ideal.

But considering Fournier/Grimes/draft capital is being floated as Knicks bait in reports, the Knicks either don’t value Brown for that package or there is disagreement on what draft capital entails

[pharring]

So I hear the Lakers are interested...

What about Brown + Dennis for Gabe Vincent, Hachimura and a 1st?

Can't combine Brown with Dennis. Can combine Brown with picks or cash but not an existing roster player.

[WuTang_CMB]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[WuTang_CMB]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[ConSarnit]

Is 1.5 seasons of "challenging the core players" really gonna make a big difference compared to other possible future/long-term trade assets?

You’d think after seeing the trade value of 3 OF OUR TOP 4 PLAYERS decline (hell, chuck Lowry in that pile too) over the past 3 years because we waited too long to trade them our fanbase would have a come to Jesus moment about moving guys when their value is the highest. Yet here we are, talking about holding onto a guy who expires next year on a team that is currently going nowhere. Our fanbase has the memory of a goldfish.

On the other side of asset valuation: what other teams have to offer vs what they are willing to give up.
A large section of this fanbase does not actually understand how asset valuation and leverage work. They want to make moves for the sake of making moves. You would assume that this fanbase would understand this and manage their expectations however here we are making terrible judgement calls regarding what was actually on the table for our players at any given time.

Listening to many of the takes (like the ones above) = a fast track path to becoming the Detroit Pistons. Let's not do that.

I will agree that there is some question as to what Brown can return in a trade. A lot of the contending teams are asset poor at the moment and his salary likely doesn't make him as easy to move (though it is convenient if we were willing to take on a salary dump). What does seem apparent: of all our non-core assets Brown seems to be in the highest demand around the league. There are a lot of reasons not to keep Brown:

-proven key role player on title team. I'd say he's more valuable to playoff teams than he is to us
-expires in 1.5 years
-flexible contract that could be of value to many teams
-solid enough player to earn us a few extra wins per season. On our current path (at least for '24 and '25) those wins don't really do much for us

Brown is more valuable to other teams than he is to us. That suggests we are in an advantageous position when it comes to trading him.

It seems like we are entering some phase of a rebuild (even if just short term). Assuming our FO still has some capability to draft well we are not the Pistons. DET did about the worst job possible in their rebuild. They sent out real assets for players like Bagley and Wiseman, acquired no extra draft capital (and actually owe a protected 1st until 2027). We have made similar moves but we appear to have course corrected. We will enter the next 3 drafts with:

-5 1sts
-Barnes and IQ in place as young upside guys
-salary flexibility

If our FO has lost the ability to draft then we are screwed but that is TBD. Historically we have shown far more competence than the Pistons. Keeping a guy like Brown would be a very Pistons like move: chasing pointless wins in a lost season while the asset declines (sort of what they have done with Bojan). Regardless of how the future might work out, we know that the past (chasing the play-in) was not working out at all.

[aroc23]

So I hear the Lakers are interested...

What about Brown + Dennis for Gabe Vincent, Hachimura and a 1st?

Raptors get 2 bad contracts in exchange for 2 good contracts and all they get is a 2029 first? Terrible for the Raptors.

[StopitLeo]

Since Fournier is just salary the whole premise of this "f-ing stupid" trade is that Grimes + 1st > Brown so NYK wouldn't accept that deal and it needs to be "tweaked".

That would mean when they swap picks in the "tweaked" trade the 2024 OKC pick is actually the one of higher value.

You are arguing that the value of the 2025 MIL pick is higher. Can you see how that doesn't make any sense?

I guess not.

I see the OKC 2024 pick is currently 27/28 in a weak draft.

The Milwaukee pick next year is unknown but it isn't going to be much worse than 27/28. Dame, Middleton, Lopez all another year older and if something (knock on wood) ever happened to Giannis, that pick could be much higher than 27/28. But even if it is around the same, if the 2025 draft is better or even if the perception is better, that 25 pick would have more value imo.

I'm missing something somewhere.

Also I'm not arguing Grimes + 1st > Brown. I'm saying Grimes + 1st fits the Raptors needs and timeline right now better than Brown does.

The main issue is the pick swap making little sense. Generally, I don't think there is much difference in the value between a late-1st round pick and a mid-1st round pick in the same draft let alone between drafts.

It's possible Grimes would be better long-term than Brown in the short-term but that's debatable depending on how much the team values Brown for how he can contribute to this young team's development. Without a question Brown can have a positive benefit in that regard with his experience and "glue guy" characteristics, whereas someone as young as Grimes cannot.

[ArthurVandelay]

So I hear the Lakers are interested...

What about Brown + Dennis for Gabe Vincent, Hachimura and a 1st?

Anything that adds money beyond this season needs to come with a hefty premium. I don't think Gabe and Rui are all that good to begin with so taking their contracts would require much more compensation than the 1 first you'd be looking for Brown anyways.

[alpngso]

Vincent has been injured for the whole year, Hachimura is worth 10M, not 16M.

Get DLo+picks or prospect and rerouting him would be the best

[WuTang_CMB]

So I hear the Lakers are interested...

What about Brown + Dennis for Gabe Vincent, Hachimura and a 1st?

Anything that adds money beyond this season needs to come with a hefty premium. I don't think Gabe and Rui are all that good to begin with so taking their contracts would require much more compensation than the 1 first you'd be looking for Brown anyways.

I dont see any deal with LA

[ConSarnit]

Fair enough. I did initially say that wasn’t ideal but there still is value in it, in my opinion.

For Brown, you should want to guarantee an advantage. So an extra pick at minimum. Grimes isn't garbage or anything, but his value should be depressed because of this year. Yeah, maybe Milwaukee's pick is higher next year, but how much higher? I think these draft slots are all in the range of 'the same.' We shouldn't have to tag our own assets to Brown to gain a marginal hypothetical advantage.

No, that is definitely not ideal.

But considering Fournier/Grimes/draft capital is being floated as Knicks bait in reports, the Knicks either don’t value Brown for that package or there is disagreement on what draft capital entails

Isn't the ideal asset to "grease the wheels" the 2024 2nd we got from the Knicks (DET)? As it stands right now we'd be drafting at 17, 28 and 31st. Having 3 picks in that type of range seems like diminishing returns. If that DET 2nd can be used to get us a '25 1st it seems logical to give it up. We get the higher upside of the '25 draft and try to disperse the logjam that comes with drafting 3 players in the same draft.

[OakleyDokely]

Lakers draft pick situation is a mess. NO's can take their 2024 or 2025 1st so they can't trade 2026 either. They traded their 2027 to the Jazz.

Unless you like JHS or you want to start scouting 13 year olds for the 2029 draft, they have nothing of value to offer.

[Rapsfan07]

This trade make sense:

Thunder receive: Bruce Brown

Raptors receive: Davis Bertans, 2025 top-six protected first-round pick via Sixers, 2027 first-round pick

Really don't think the Thunder need anymore guards/wings. If anything, they need a big that can bang with big bodies in the post instead of Chet.

Would really hold off dealing with the Thunder since they're the perfect place to extract value for Poeltl.