Poll: Which of these do you consider facts about the Raptors?

[Raps Next GM]

Lol few... ummmm ok. None of the pro franchises can attract talent -- all things being equal. The Raptors have known this for a long time. A 10 + percent CANADIAN TAX Premium just to be in the conversation.. even then, most won't sign.

Look at the MASSIVE OVERPAYMENT for Vlad by the Jays, as well as the other names signed... all massive overpays.

Ww are worst than small market in the NBA, in the eyes of MOST TOP TIER NBA TALENT...ESP American born players.

For those of us old enough to remember the Blue Jays’ glory days, Toronto was a very attractive destination because it was a model franchise that was a perennial contender. From Molitor, Stewart, Morris and the biggest free agent signing of all, Roger Clemens, being in Canada wasn’t really a hurdle.
If Kawhi had resigned in 2020, I bet a lot of players would have wanted to come here.

Those 92-93 Jays teams were by FAR the highest payroll teams in the majors. And baseball is played in summer. And the Canadian dollar was over 90 cents, so the team could afford to pay such high salaries.

Jays were 3rd highest payroll in 1992; the highest in’93 by just under $3 million, which wasn’t insignificant at that time, but also not “by far”; and the Clemens signing came for 1997 when they had the 8th highest payroll. He signed in December ‘96, coming off the Jays being 16th in team payrolls.
Yes, there will always be other factors, but the Jays were not blowing every one else out of the water to get Free agents.

[DreamTeam09]

To clarify something about the 2nd poll option, ownership will pay tax only if the team is a contender, but a lot of posters here have fundamentally misunderstood what constitutes a contender from ownership's POV.

During the We The North era, ownership only approved tax spending in the season we had Kawhi. None of the other Raptors teams of that era (and there were 4 other 50+ win teams in there, including the 2019-20 season right after we won the chip) were allowed to spend above the tax threshold.

In that time period, repeater penalties were also nowhere near as harsh as they are about to become now. Some of you really need to come to grips with the fact that ownership will not allow the FO to start the repeater clock this year, for this team.

Part of the problem in the last five years has been that many teams (e.g. Warriors) were so deep into the tax, that the the tax sharing payments to non-tax teams were 10+ mill per season. So the opportunity cost of going into the tax was huge. Especially for the Raptors who missed a whole season of revenue during the Tampa tank season.

As teams like the Warriors, Suns, Celtics, Bucks and even the Clippers start to reduce or eliminate their tax liability, that tax-sharing amount will surely decrease going forward. And make it more appealing for a 50+ win team to spend up to the first apron, at least.

What's your reply to this post Jerry Lucas
.
*Not being snarky

[djsunyc]

We just tanked for 2 seasons. How is that question even on the poll? Proven fact.

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

[ATLTimekeeper]

We just tanked for 2 seasons. How is that question even on the poll? Proven fact.

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

[djsunyc]

We just tanked for 2 seasons. How is that question even on the poll? Proven fact.

we did not start the 23/24 season tanking. we shifted midway. still had pascal and og and signed dennis.

we started 24/25 tanking.

They were not trying to win, but trying to get better deals out of Pascal and OG. The decision to move both of them was made in the summer.

Then they shifted to hard losing to retain the pick and failed. Then they tanked again. Two seasons of tanking.

maybe i should've explained in detail.

i was suggesting that 23/24 was not presented to ownership as a tanking season nor was it presented to the world as a tank year - this allowed for season ticket renewals and ad money being spent. dollar value expectations were already set for 23/24 and any change in direction midway would not have effected it.

once the moves were made, ownership knew that the following year 24/25 was going to be a re-building/tank one and it was presented that way in marketing and dollar expectations were shifted behind the scenes because of that.

so when i say ownership would only ok 1 tanking season, it means they would know tickets/ads/financials would only be impacted for 1 season barring an unforeseen event like drafting flagg.

[Jerry Lucas]

To clarify something about the 2nd poll option, ownership will pay tax only if the team is a contender, but a lot of posters here have fundamentally misunderstood what constitutes a contender from ownership's POV.

During the We The North era, ownership only approved tax spending in the season we had Kawhi. None of the other Raptors teams of that era (and there were 4 other 50+ win teams in there, including the 2019-20 season right after we won the chip) were allowed to spend above the tax threshold.

In that time period, repeater penalties were also nowhere near as harsh as they are about to become now. Some of you really need to come to grips with the fact that ownership will not allow the FO to start the repeater clock this year, for this team.

Part of the problem in the last five years has been that many teams (e.g. Warriors) were so deep into the tax, that the the tax sharing payments to non-tax teams were 10+ mill per season. So the opportunity cost of going into the tax was huge. Especially for the Raptors who missed a whole season of revenue during the Tampa tank season.

As teams like the Warriors, Suns, Celtics, Bucks and even the Clippers start to reduce or eliminate their tax liability, that tax-sharing amount will surely decrease going forward. And make it more appealing for a 50+ win team to spend up to the first apron, at least.

This still doesn't explain why ownership would authorize the FO to start the repeater clock this year, for this team on paper.

What's your reply to this post Jerry Lucas
.
*Not being snarky

Alrighty then, SnarkyTeam09

[Raps in 4]

ownership will pay tax only if the team is a contender

Ed is too stupid to know what a contender looks like. A salesman-type executive can convince him to spend on mediocrity (see Shapiro).

[JB7]

On the question of whether ownership will go into the tax or not. I think what the aprons, plus tax penalties (and rewards for teams below the tax - being able to share in that revenue) means is pretty much all ownership groups across the NBA, are reluctant to go into the tax, and if they do, won't remain there for long. The only owners willing to do that are the Balmer types, that have endless amounts of wealth they are willing to spend to win.

Now the Raps current ownership (Rogers), is much different than the past ownership group (Tanenbaum, Bell & Rogers). Tanenbaum was big on competing, and Bell had a group that was smart enough to back him. I think Rogers is cheap, and will have almost zero interest in going into the tax. Especially if 3/4's of the teams in the NBA are below the tax.

I don't expect a lot of teams to go above the tax anymore, or the aprons, definitely not for a long period of time. And we are seeing that play out with GSW getting below the tax last summer, and Boston this summer.

With the gap between the tax and aprons being so narrow, and the benefits of being below the tax so great, I think the tax line will almost become a hard cap for 3/4's of the teams in the league.

It is playing out how the owners wanted it, when they created all of this.

[TheGeneral99]

Apart from a few franchises like Miami, LA or New York very few markets are getting top tier free agents unless they are a championship contender.

I remember in 2016 Aldridge was considering the Spurs and our team during free agency.

Just think about it...Durant joined Golden State because they were the best team in the league, but before that no free agents were joining Golden State.

The best free agent the Celtics signed in the last 30 years was Gordon Hayward in 2018.

What other franchises are able to sign all-star free agents? Please someone enlighten me...somebody prove to me that we are an outlier compared to 90% of the league who also can't sign top tier free agents.

[Raps Next GM]

I think Rogers is cheap, and will have almost zero interest in going into the tax.

I am perplexed by this belief held by so many here. Rogers’ ownership of the Blue Jays suggests the exact opposite.
The Jays have the fifth highest payroll in MLB. They were ninth highest last season and that’s with their failed attempt to sign Ohtani to the biggest contract in history.
They have cell phones to sell, they have a network to attract advertisers and viewers. The sports franchises are vehicles for that.
Being cheap hurts Rogers, they have every incentive to spend and put out a winning product and whatever the outcome of their decisions, it will not be as a result of being cheap.

[Johnny Bball]

Previous ownership and the last year and moving forward are going to be different. While I think the last ownership majority was much more liberal in not making basketball decisions and finicial decisions to hamstring the team, and that they were on Ujiri and he was being fiscally responsible (a presdent's fiduciary duty), this next one is going to be all over that poor management style.

[JB7]

I think Rogers is cheap, and will have almost zero interest in going into the tax.

I am perplexed by this belief held by so many here. Rogers’ ownership of the Blue Jays suggests the exact opposite.
The Jays have the fifth highest payroll in MLB. They were ninth highest last season and that’s with their failed attempt to sign Ohtani to the biggest contract in history.
They have cell phones to sell, they have a network to attract advertisers and viewers. The sports franchises are vehicles for that.
Being cheap hurts Rogers, they have every incentive to spend and put out a winning product and whatever the outcome of their decisions, it will not be as a result of being cheap.

Their first step was firing Masai.

The Toronto sports franchises generate a lot of money, and they can't be so cheap without damaging that market. But they will definitely not spend like they did when ownership was split 3 ways.

I think the chase of Ohtani and Soto was for appearances. I think the only reason they signed Vlad, was because they realized it could all fall apart if they didn't sign him.

While the team will appear to chase stars, behind the scenes, I can see them getting cheap, with what they spend on the FO and scouting. That is now the area where big market franchises have a huge advantage, with the revenue they can generate and no limits there by the leagues.

The NBA's structure, with the tax and aprons provides a convenient excuse for owners that are cheap. I imagine Rogers will take full advantage of that.

[Raps Next GM]

I think Rogers is cheap, and will have almost zero interest in going into the tax.

I am perplexed by this belief held by so many here. Rogers’ ownership of the Blue Jays suggests the exact opposite.
The Jays have the fifth highest payroll in MLB. They were ninth highest last season and that’s with their failed attempt to sign Ohtani to the biggest contract in history.
They have cell phones to sell, they have a network to attract advertisers and viewers. The sports franchises are vehicles for that.
Being cheap hurts Rogers, they have every incentive to spend and put out a winning product and whatever the outcome of their decisions, it will not be as a result of being cheap.

Their first step was firing Masai.

That’s presuming the firing was about money, which makes no sense. They have to pay Masai for this season anyhow, so why fire him AND pay his replacement, if they are just cutting corners money-wise?
They could have let him finish the season, let him walk next summer and spin the PR that Masai chose to leave.

I think the chase of Ohtani and Soto was for appearances.

I don’t think you get into negotiations for >$60 million per season “for appearances.” They could have traded Vlad, there was no reason to sign him to that contract if they were cheap. Deal him and get a few prospects.

While the team will appear to chase stars, behind the scenes, I can see them getting cheap, with what they spend on the FO and scouting.

Whatever one thinks of Shapiro, Rogers poached him from Cleveland where he was a highly respected and highly decorated executive. He was twice named Executive of The Year by Sporting News (MLB didn’t have such an award until 2018).
So ownership targeted one of the best in the game, which would not have been cheap.

[deeps6x]

I selected All of them and None of them.

[Indeed]

Apart from a few franchises like Miami, LA or New York very few markets are getting top tier free agents unless they are a championship contender.

I remember in 2016 Aldridge was considering the Spurs and our team during free agency.

Just think about it...Durant joined Golden State because they were the best team in the league, but before that no free agents were joining Golden State.

The best free agent the Celtics signed in the last 30 years was Gordon Hayward in 2018.

What other franchises are able to sign all-star free agents? Please someone enlighten me...somebody prove to me that we are an outlier compared to 90% of the league who also can't sign top tier free agents.

Basically, the salary structure prevented that. Most teams will extend their players ahead, and teams won't have the cap space to sign players outright for those make more than the MLE. This may change with the tax penalty, but shall see.

Meanwhile, we didn't overpay players to stay, the whole league overpay players to stay. Either you pay VanVleet or another team pays more for to him. Either you pay Anunoby or we trade him to another for the contract he wants. Players are being overpaid regardless, it is not just the Raptors.

The problem with the Raptors was our unwillingness to sign long term contracts, and let players go in free agency. In turns, we gave out player options, which is even worse. The way we handled restricted agents are also pretty bad (overpaid), particularly, after trading for them (eg. Trent, Quickley, etc).

[Indeed]

I am perplexed by this belief held by so many here. Rogers’ ownership of the Blue Jays suggests the exact opposite.
The Jays have the fifth highest payroll in MLB. They were ninth highest last season and that’s with their failed attempt to sign Ohtani to the biggest contract in history.
They have cell phones to sell, they have a network to attract advertisers and viewers. The sports franchises are vehicles for that.
Being cheap hurts Rogers, they have every incentive to spend and put out a winning product and whatever the outcome of their decisions, it will not be as a result of being cheap.

Their first step was firing Masai.

That’s presuming the firing was about money, which makes no sense. They have to pay Masai for this season anyhow, so why fire him AND pay his replacement, if they are just cutting corners money-wise?
They could have let him finish the season, let him walk next summer and spin the PR that Masai chose to leave.

If Ujiri is to give another year and make us a contender team, is there other reason they can fire him at that point?
No, if that is me, I would not let him finish the season and prove himself being worth that much.

[JB7]

Their first step was firing Masai.

That’s presuming the firing was about money, which makes no sense. They have to pay Masai for this season anyhow, so why fire him AND pay his replacement, if they are just cutting corners money-wise?
They could have let him finish the season, let him walk next summer and spin the PR that Masai chose to leave.

If Ujiri is to give another year and make us a contender team, is there other reason they can fire him at that point?
No, if that is me, I would not let him finish the season and prove himself being worth that much.

Yes it was about both money, and personal, because Rogers didn’t want to pay Masai’s last contract.

The final year was sunk money for Rogers. He had no intention of resigning Masai the moment he took over control, and he just let him go at the most opportunistic time.

[JB7]

I am perplexed by this belief held by so many here. Rogers’ ownership of the Blue Jays suggests the exact opposite.
The Jays have the fifth highest payroll in MLB. They were ninth highest last season and that’s with their failed attempt to sign Ohtani to the biggest contract in history.
They have cell phones to sell, they have a network to attract advertisers and viewers. The sports franchises are vehicles for that.
Being cheap hurts Rogers, they have every incentive to spend and put out a winning product and whatever the outcome of their decisions, it will not be as a result of being cheap.

Their first step was firing Masai.

That’s presuming the firing was about money, which makes no sense. They have to pay Masai for this season anyhow, so why fire him AND pay his replacement, if they are just cutting corners money-wise?
They could have let him finish the season, let him walk next summer and spin the PR that Masai chose to leave.

I think the chase of Ohtani and Soto was for appearances.

I don’t think you get into negotiations for >$60 million per season “for appearances.” They could have traded Vlad, there was no reason to sign him to that contract if they were cheap. Deal him and get a few prospects.

While the team will appear to chase stars, behind the scenes, I can see them getting cheap, with what they spend on the FO and scouting.

Whatever one thinks of Shapiro, Rogers poached him from Cleveland where he was a highly respected and highly decorated executive. He was twice named Executive of The Year by Sporting News (MLB didn’t have such an award until 2018).
So ownership targeted one of the best in the game, which would not have been cheap.

Ohtani was never coming to the Jays, and neither was Soto. All the Jays did was drive up the cost for LA and the Mets.

In terms of Shapiro, the Jays already had one of the best in AA and Beeston. But Rogers decided to drop Beeston, and with him AA. Shapiro was probably brought in more for the Stadium piece than the team. Rogers just trying to sell the product. A successful team would sell more, but when you can’t build a winner, they look to sell other things.

If the Jays had dealt Vlad, they would have been done. They have not been able to develop talent, and if they traded the one star they had, this would have been a dead franchise under this ownership.

[ontnut]

Ownership absolutely will go into the tax for a true contender. Maybe just not a fringe one.
The GM's job here isn't harder than everyone else's. It's about middle of the road. Sure there are issues with being the international team, but there are benefits too.

Everything else is probably true though.

[djsunyc]

Ownership absolutely will go into the tax for a true contender. Maybe just not a fringe one.
The GM's job here isn't harder than everyone else's. It's about middle of the road. Sure there are issues with being the international team, but there are benefits too.

Everything else is probably true though.

what do you see as the benefits?