Shams: Raps acquire Ingram for Brown + Olynyk + IND 1st

[DreamTeam09]

45-60M = all-star
35-45M = borderline allstar / very good starter
25-35M = good starter
15-25M = average starter / very good bench
5-15M = rotation player
<5M = depth player

My main problem with this is that they're paying near the top for the tier 2/3 guys, and have zero tier 1 players.

Is there a tier 1 player that we could've acquired or pay?
+ There's a big gap between 45m & 55-70m that superstars are getting, Even this post isn't caught up yet to the new salaries of the NBA. I wouldn't say we are paying near the top at all

[OakleyDokely]

45-60M = all-star
35-45M = borderline allstar / very good starter
25-35M = good starter
15-25M = average starter / very good bench
5-15M = rotation player
<5M = depth player

My main problem with this is that they're paying near the top for the tier 2/3 guys, and have zero tier 1 players.

Is there a tier 1 player that we could've acquired or pay?
+ There's a big gap between 45m & 55-70m that superstars are getting, Even this post isn't caught up yet to the new salaries of the NBA. I wouldn't say we are paying near the top at all

These ranges are just for this season. They get much higher after that.

[brownbobcat]

Is there a tier 1 player that we could've acquired or pay?

No, but the alternative to that is not overpaying a bunch of tier 2/3 guys.

+ There's a big gap between 45m & 55-70m that superstars are getting, Even this post isn't caught up yet to the new salaries of the NBA. I wouldn't say we are paying near the top at all

It's funny how they're not near the top and yet have a top-10 payroll. Weird.

>= 25%: All Star
20-25%: high-level starter to borderline All Star or guys with "potential" coming off their rookie scale
15-20%: average to high-level starter
10-15%: high-level bench player to borderline starter

Less than that is below MLE, and you can get a wide range there because it's rookie scale contracts, bag-fumblers, RFAs, ring-chasing vets, etc.

[DreamTeam09]

Is there a tier 1 player that we could've acquired or pay?

No, but the alternative to that is not overpaying a bunch of tier 2/3 guys.

+ There's a big gap between 45m & 55-70m that superstars are getting, Even this post isn't caught up yet to the new salaries of the NBA. I wouldn't say we are paying near the top at all

It's funny how they're not near the top and yet have a top-10 payroll. Weird.

>= 25%: All Star
20-25%: high-level starter to borderline All Star or guys with "potential" coming off their rookie scale
15-20%: average to high-level starter
10-15%: high-level bench player to borderline starter

Less than that is below MLE, and you can get a wide range there because it's rookie scale contracts, bag-fumblers, RFAs, ring-chasing vets, etc.

Spotrac has us at 221m - the 18th team in Houston is at 201m - difference of 20mill or a little more than MLE signings, plus a lot of these teams have players who signed extensions that will be kicked in next year

[brownbobcat]

Is there a tier 1 player that we could've acquired or pay?

No, but the alternative to that is not overpaying a bunch of tier 2/3 guys.

+ There's a big gap between 45m & 55-70m that superstars are getting, Even this post isn't caught up yet to the new salaries of the NBA. I wouldn't say we are paying near the top at all

It's funny how they're not near the top and yet have a top-10 payroll. Weird.

>= 25%: All Star
20-25%: high-level starter to borderline All Star or guys with "potential" coming off their rookie scale
15-20%: average to high-level starter
10-15%: high-level bench player to borderline starter

Less than that is below MLE, and you can get a wide range there because it's rookie scale contracts, bag-fumblers, RFAs, ring-chasing vets, etc.

Spotrac has us at 221m - the 18th team in Houston is at 201m - difference of 20mill or a little more than MLE signings, plus a lot of these teams have players who signed extensions that will be kicked in next year

The relevant figure would be active cap. Look at all the other top-10 teams, the majority are solid playoff teams and Toronto sticks out.

[OakleyDokely]

The difference in salary between most teams isn't a lot. Most teams spend just below the tax line. With a minor move, the Raps will be under by seasons end.

Imo, this is the most overrated talking point of the offseason. It's being discussed more than what the players will actually do on the court.

[djsunyc]

The difference in salary between most teams isn't a lot. Most teams spend just below the tax line. With a minor move, the Raps will be under by seasons end.

Imo, this is the most overrated talking point of the offseason. It's being discussed more than what the players will actually do on the court.

it ain't my money. just win baby!

[Smalltown]

Imo, this is the most overrated talking point of the offseason. It's being discussed more than what the players will actually do on the court.

It's the most ridiculous narrative surrounding this team. The worst part is the talking heads should know better. It's not new. Teams skirt the tax every year only to get under by the deadline.

[Psubs]

The difference in salary between most teams isn't a lot. Most teams spend just below the tax line. With a minor move, the Raps will be under by seasons end.

Imo, this is the most overrated talking point of the offseason. It's being discussed more than what the players will actually do on the court.

Who are we dumping? Why sign Temple? Just hire him as a coach. I don't want to attach a 1st pick or even a 2nd pick to dump a couple million.

[YogurtProducer]

No, but the alternative to that is not overpaying a bunch of tier 2/3 guys.



It's funny how they're not near the top and yet have a top-10 payroll. Weird.

>= 25%: All Star
20-25%: high-level starter to borderline All Star or guys with "potential" coming off their rookie scale
15-20%: average to high-level starter
10-15%: high-level bench player to borderline starter

Less than that is below MLE, and you can get a wide range there because it's rookie scale contracts, bag-fumblers, RFAs, ring-chasing vets, etc.

Spotrac has us at 221m - the 18th team in Houston is at 201m - difference of 20mill or a little more than MLE signings, plus a lot of these teams have players who signed extensions that will be kicked in next year

The relevant figure would be active cap. Look at all the other top-10 teams, the majority are solid playoff teams and Toronto sticks out.

Toronto also is at the backend of the top 10 (9th), and of the top 10 only 2 of then made the CFs, and 4 first round exits.

Not to mention, the difference between us and 20th is less than the total MLE is this year. It’s literally not worth being up in arms about.

If we were at 170M instead of 190M where we are now we STILL wouldn’t have any more significant cap flexibility - so honestly who gives a ****?

Why does anyone care if MLSE pays $20M in salaries when there is no real teams building benefits to bring $20M lower?

[DreamTeam09]

Spotrac has us at 221m - the 18th team in Houston is at 201m - difference of 20mill or a little more than MLE signings, plus a lot of these teams have players who signed extensions that will be kicked in next year

The relevant figure would be active cap. Look at all the other top-10 teams, the majority are solid playoff teams and Toronto sticks out.

Toronto also is at the backend of the top 10 (9th), and of the top 10 only 2 of then made the CFs, and 4 first round exits.

Not to mention, the difference between us and 20th is less than the total MLE is this year. It’s literally not worth being up in arms about.

If we were at 170M instead of 190M where we are now we STILL wouldn’t have any more significant cap flexibility - so honestly who gives a ****?

Why does anyone care if MLSE pays $20M in salaries when there is no real teams building benefits to bring $20M lower?

It's talking points being portrayed by the media who's just as ill-informed about the cap/tax as many regular posters/fans are. I get it but I don't get it at the same time.

[Smalltown]

Why does anyone care if MLSE pays $20M in salaries when there is no real teams building benefits to bring $20M lower?

Because they don't understand how the cap works and they're looking for something negative to latch on to.

[brownbobcat]

Toronto also is at the backend of the top 10 (9th), and of the top 10 only 2 of then made the CFs, and 4 first round exits.

8th actually. And of the top 15 payroll teams, the only other team that didn't even make the play-in was Philly - and missing Embiid was obviously a big part of that.

Not to mention, the difference between us and 20th is less than the total MLE is this year. It’s literally not worth being up in arms about.

If we were at 170M instead of 190M where we are now we STILL wouldn’t have any more significant cap flexibility - so honestly who gives a ****?

Why does anyone care if MLSE pays $20M in salaries when there is no real teams building benefits to bring $20M lower?

You're missing the point completely as usual. There is zero team-building benefit to being an overpaid, under-talented team. Yes, it can help to have salary ballast to complete trades but your entire team can't be ballast. When virtually all of the big money players on a team are overpaid, it hurts their trade value and they might even become negative assets. There's a reason they couldn't get a 1st for Brown when they were trying to flip him in 2024.

[mathgeek]

Don't underestimate salary inflation. It has changed a lot even as recent as this year. Rogers also wants us to be a treadmill team below the cap preferably. With Bobby at helm who is a salary cap expert as that was his previous job when he worked for the league, I have full confidence on this team to spend wisely and have a healthy balance.

[Los_29]

Toronto also is at the backend of the top 10 (9th), and of the top 10 only 2 of then made the CFs, and 4 first round exits.

8th actually. And of the top 15 payroll teams, the only other team that didn't even make the play-in was Philly - and missing Embiid was obviously a big part of that.

Not to mention, the difference between us and 20th is less than the total MLE is this year. It’s literally not worth being up in arms about.

If we were at 170M instead of 190M where we are now we STILL wouldn’t have any more significant cap flexibility - so honestly who gives a ****?

Why does anyone care if MLSE pays $20M in salaries when there is no real teams building benefits to bring $20M lower?

You're missing the point completely as usual. There is zero team-building benefit to being an overpaid, under-talented team. Yes, it can help to have salary ballast to complete trades but your entire team can't be ballast. When virtually all of the big money players on a team are overpaid, it hurts their trade value and they might even become negative assets. There's a reason they couldn't get a 1st for Brown when they were trying to flip him in 2024.

RJ is the only contract that is tougher to move but he’s worth a lot more to us than another team. He also just has two years left on it.

Samson brought up a good point just after the draft. Teams change so much now so just get the talent in and then if they need to pivot in 2-3 years they can. Majority of those teams with the highest payroll don’t have most of their picks. We have all of them.

The reality is these teams who aren’t spending aren’t doing anything. What are they saving money for? So they can get a late FRP for eating a bad contract? That will really change the trajectory of their franchise lol.

[OakleyDokely]

If IQ/RJ/Ingram/Barnes/Poeltl all made 3M less this year, the Raps all of a sudden go from being the 8th/9th highest payroll to the 19th/20th payroll.

Does IQ going from 33M to 30M all of a sudden make him a value contract? Ingram going from 38 to 35 makes him much more attractive? In the end, these small differences make little difference to their actual value. You either think these guys are good players or you don't. If they play well, they will be tradeable, if they don't play well or they are hurt, they will be hard to trade. That's why there should be a lot more discussion about the on court fit. That will largely determine their value.

If you believe that the Raps are taking the wrong approach to team building and should be stripped down like BRK so they can use their cap space to absorb bad deals instead of bringing in established players, that's a different argument. But there's really no functional difference between spending 170, 175, 180, 185 other than the owner paying a little more in salary.

[JB7]

Not that this discussion about overall team placement in salaries really matters, but are all teams done with their signings? Are their rosters all set? We know the Raptors roster is pretty much locked in, and therefore the team salary is pretty much set, aside from a couple players being waived, which will bring the Raps number down.

[brownbobcat]

If IQ/RJ/Ingram/Barnes/Poeltl all made 3M less this year, the Raps all of a sudden go from being the 8th/9th highest payroll to the 19th/20th payroll.

Does IQ going from 33M to 30M all of a sudden make him a value contract? Ingram going from 38 to 35 makes him much more attractive? In the end, these small differences make little difference to their actual value. You either think these guys are good players or you don't. If they play well, they will be tradeable, if they don't play well or they are hurt, they will be hard to trade. That's why there should be a lot more discussion about the on court fit. That will largely determine their value.

If you believe that the Raps are taking the wrong approach to team building and should be stripped down like BRK so they can use their cap space to absorb bad deals instead of bringing in established players, that's a different argument. But there's really no functional difference between spending 170, 175, 180, 185 other than the owner paying a little more in salary.

OK, let's say they do a better job with salary negotiation and shave $3M/contract here and there. Then you skip re-signing Temple and all of a sudden you have enough money to toss the full MLE at someone without going over the apron - you don't think that makes the team better?

When you don't have a superstar and are trying to win by committee, every little thing matters. You have to draft well, trade well, make smart decisions with money - all of it counts.

[tsherkin]

When you don't have a superstar and are trying to win by committee, every little thing matters. You have to draft well, trade well, make smart decisions with money - all of it counts.

So let's play that game. What MLE signing do you think could have happened, and would have significantly shifted this team's ceiling for 2026?

[YogurtProducer]

Toronto also is at the backend of the top 10 (9th), and of the top 10 only 2 of then made the CFs, and 4 first round exits.

8th actually. And of the top 15 payroll teams, the only other team that didn't even make the play-in was Philly - and missing Embiid was obviously a big part of that.

Not to mention, the difference between us and 20th is less than the total MLE is this year. It’s literally not worth being up in arms about.

If we were at 170M instead of 190M where we are now we STILL wouldn’t have any more significant cap flexibility - so honestly who gives a ****?

Why does anyone care if MLSE pays $20M in salaries when there is no real teams building benefits to bring $20M lower?

You're missing the point completely as usual. There is zero team-building benefit to being an overpaid, under-talented team. Yes, it can help to have salary ballast to complete trades but your entire team can't be ballast. When virtually all of the big money players on a team are overpaid, it hurts their trade value and they might even become negative assets. There's a reason they couldn't get a 1st for Brown when they were trying to flip him in 2024.

There is also zero benefit to cutting $20M salary.


And calling our entire team salary ballast is just ridiculous hyperbole.

And bringing up Brown as a negative when his contract was used perfectly as salary ballast is **** ridiculous