Since Barrett’s injury Raptors offensive rating has plummeted to last in the league

[Indeed]

RJ clearly makes Darko's .5 offence roll. I think his fit with Scottie and BI is undeniable.

If there is a IQ trade that doesn't involve attaching picks to send away and upgrades the 5 or adds vet depth off the bench...you do it.

The logic behind trading Rj makes no sense. It’s the same **** they did with Powell… capitalize on rjs value by trading him for what exactly? A lesser version of himself? Why are people so insistent on the concept of value, instead of realizing you should build a team with good players instead of trading them the minute they show “value.”

Made a big mistake trading away Powell because we didn’t want to pay him. I hope they don’t do that with RJ. I’m starting to see it now.

Because we want to surround Barnes with shooting, so we traded for Trent, and Powell was not exactly a good fit to Nurse due to our defense being more complicated than Powell can adebt to (yet Trent was worse).

I doubt these are done by Ujiri and more with someone else, but it is what it is.

[C_Money]

It’s still a year away but somebody in the starting 5 is definitely getting traded because we cannot afford to re-sign RJ.

This wouldn’t be a problem if IQ and Poeltl had reasonable contracts.

[Boogie!]

RJ clearly makes Darko's .5 offence roll. I think his fit with Scottie and BI is undeniable.

If there is a IQ trade that doesn't involve attaching picks to send away and upgrades the 5 or adds vet depth off the bench...you do it.

The logic behind trading Rj makes no sense. It’s the same **** they did with Powell… capitalize on rjs value by trading him for what exactly? A lesser version of himself? Why are people so insistent on the concept of value, instead of realizing you should build a team with good players instead of trading them the minute they show “value.”

I was thinking the exact same thing. He is top 3 on the team in terms of importance/ impact on winning. He fits the coaches system & plays the way the coach wants him to play. He's still getting better & hasn't even hit his peak/ prime years. If you are trying to build a playoff team, why trade a valuable player like that? Makes zero sense.

Just to add to what you said, it’s not often you find a selfless guy that can score efficiently and doesn’t need the ball in his hands to do it. Rj is analytics basketball to t, open 3s and attack the paint for easy layups or fts. Most scorers need the ball in their hands, and Rj doesn’t, there’s no wasted movement or dribbles with him. I don’t think people realize how difficult it is to find players like that, getting rid of them makes no sense.

[Boogie!]

The logic behind trading Rj makes no sense. It’s the same **** they did with Powell… capitalize on rjs value by trading him for what exactly? A lesser version of himself? Why are people so insistent on the concept of value, instead of realizing you should build a team with good players instead of trading them the minute they show “value.”

Made a big mistake trading away Powell because we didn’t want to pay him. I hope they don’t do that with RJ. I’m starting to see it now.

Because we want to surround Barnes with shooting, so we traded for Trent, and Powell was not exactly a good fit to Nurse due to our defense being more complicated than Powell can adebt to (yet Trent was worse).

I doubt these are done by Ujiri and more with someone else, but it is what it is.

Powell has been one of the best shooters in the league constantly above 40, and was in his breakout year when we traded him. It was a mistake at the time, we just have to accept that. I just hope they don’t do the same with Rj.

[Indeed]

If there is a IQ trade that doesn't involve attaching picks to send away and upgrades the 5 or adds vet depth off the bench...you do it.

Any IQ trade needs to include a high volume 3 point shooting guard coming back.

Any trade that results in our PG rotation being Shead and Hepburn just is not realistic.

I do not understand this logic.

I do expect Barrett to play some PG and add a mid range if we are to pay him at a starting guad money. However, I am unsure why we need a high volume shooting guard (I assume you are not referring to shooting guard, but guard with shooting), and we might already have Battle or we shall have Walter.

[canada_dry]

People told me he was 25 and he is what he is as a player...

[YogurtProducer]

If there is a IQ trade that doesn't involve attaching picks to send away and upgrades the 5 or adds vet depth off the bench...you do it.

Any IQ trade needs to include a high volume 3 point shooting guard coming back.

Any trade that results in our PG rotation being Shead and Hepburn just is not realistic.

I do not understand this logic.

I do expect Barrett to play some PG and add a mid range if we are to pay him at a starting guad money. However, I am unsure why we need a high volume shooting guard (I assume you are not referring to shooting guard, but guard with shooting), and we might already have Battle or we shall have Walter.

The logic is you need a high volume PG in a lineup with RJ/BI/Barnes/Poeltl. It’s just the reality of it. Also, RJ can’t play PG. he’s not a point guard by any stretch of the imagination.

The volume and type of shooting IQ provides is completely different than JKW and Battle. Not to mention IQ is a shooter who also has some in between game. Besides, you need multiple shooters.

In all honestly, losing IQ might be as impactful as losing Jakob has been. If we lost our only real off the dribble, ATB, 3-point threat, that would have devastating impacts on how teams defend us.

[YogurtProducer]

Made a big mistake trading away Powell because we didn’t want to pay him. I hope they don’t do that with RJ. I’m starting to see it now.

Because we want to surround Barnes with shooting, so we traded for Trent, and Powell was not exactly a good fit to Nurse due to our defense being more complicated than Powell can adebt to (yet Trent was worse).

I doubt these are done by Ujiri and more with someone else, but it is what it is.

Powell has been one of the best shooters in the league constantly above 40, and was in his breakout year when we traded him. It was a mistake at the time, we just have to accept that. I just hope they don’t do the same with Rj.

To be fair the crying about losing Powell is unnecessary.

Great offensive piece who blew up further than anyone could have imagined when we got rid of him… and yet he is still passed around the league for peanuts because he’s so bad defensively that he doesn’t really impact the game.

He’s not really a guy we should mourn that we lost.

The move for GTJ was good process at the time. If just didn’t work out.

[MEDIC]

The logic behind trading Rj makes no sense. It’s the same **** they did with Powell… capitalize on rjs value by trading him for what exactly? A lesser version of himself? Why are people so insistent on the concept of value, instead of realizing you should build a team with good players instead of trading them the minute they show “value.”

I was thinking the exact same thing. He is top 3 on the team in terms of importance/ impact on winning. He fits the coaches system & plays the way the coach wants him to play. He's still getting better & hasn't even hit his peak/ prime years. If you are trying to build a playoff team, why trade a valuable player like that? Makes zero sense.

Just to add to what you said, it’s not often you find a selfless guy that can score efficiently and doesn’t need the ball in his hands to do it. Rj is analytics basketball to t, open 3s and attack the paint for easy layups or fts. Most scorers need the ball in their hands, and Rj doesn’t, there’s no wasted movement or dribbles with him. I don’t think people realize how difficult it is to find players like that, getting rid of them makes no sense.

Yup. It's someting I noticed about him after he was traded here..He is an off the ball scorer. Doesn't rake a lot of dribbles & makes quick decisions. The ball doesn't stick with him, but somehow finds a way to score 20 every night..

That why I prefer his game to a guy like Derozan.

[Boogie!]

Because we want to surround Barnes with shooting, so we traded for Trent, and Powell was not exactly a good fit to Nurse due to our defense being more complicated than Powell can adebt to (yet Trent was worse).

I doubt these are done by Ujiri and more with someone else, but it is what it is.

Powell has been one of the best shooters in the league constantly above 40, and was in his breakout year when we traded him. It was a mistake at the time, we just have to accept that. I just hope they don’t do the same with Rj.

To be fair the crying about losing Powell is unnecessary.

Great offensive piece who blew up further than anyone could have imagined when we got rid of him… and yet he is still passed around the league for peanuts because he’s so bad defensively that he doesn’t really impact the game.

He’s not really a guy we should mourn that we lost.

The move for GTJ was good process at the time. If just didn’t work out.

How you described Powell is how people describe Rj, and I disagree with everything that you said. It was obvious Trent would never be as good and I stand by my stance then and stand by it now. There’s no hindsight in my argument because I knew it was a deficit in talent then. And that’s why I’m so adamant about defending Rj now.

[Indeed]

Any IQ trade needs to include a high volume 3 point shooting guard coming back.

Any trade that results in our PG rotation being Shead and Hepburn just is not realistic.

I do not understand this logic.

I do expect Barrett to play some PG and add a mid range if we are to pay him at a starting guad money. However, I am unsure why we need a high volume shooting guard (I assume you are not referring to shooting guard, but guard with shooting), and we might already have Battle or we shall have Walter.

The logic is you need a high volume PG in a lineup with RJ/BI/Barnes/Poeltl. It’s just the reality of it. Also, RJ can’t play PG. he’s not a point guard by any stretch of the imagination.

The volume and type of shooting IQ provides is completely different than JKW and Battle. Not to mention IQ is a shooter who also has some in between game. Besides, you need multiple shooters.

In all honestly, losing IQ might be as impactful as losing Jakob has been. If we lost our only real off the dribble, ATB, 3-point threat, that would have devastating impacts on how teams defend us.

Disagree on this. We don't have the salary for a guard with these requirement, perhaps you can name a few non rookie players that fits into this category and not go over the tax.

And what fits with Barrett and Ingram would be 3 and D guard with some good ball handling.

[MEDIC]

I just looked it up. RJ has the 15th most field goals made per game with zero dribbles (3.5)

He is actually tied with Scottie. 90% of the players above him are Centers. Joker leads the league with 6 per game.

Another interesting tidbit, Ingram is in the top 10 with 1 or 2 dribbles.

Its a good place to be when your top 3 scorers can all score effectively without pounding the snot out of the ball.

[YogurtProducer]

Powell has been one of the best shooters in the league constantly above 40, and was in his breakout year when we traded him. It was a mistake at the time, we just have to accept that. I just hope they don’t do the same with Rj.

To be fair the crying about losing Powell is unnecessary.

Great offensive piece who blew up further than anyone could have imagined when we got rid of him… and yet he is still passed around the league for peanuts because he’s so bad defensively that he doesn’t really impact the game.

He’s not really a guy we should mourn that we lost.

The move for GTJ was good process at the time. If just didn’t work out.

How you described Powell is how people describe Rj, and I disagree with everything that you said. It was obvious Trent would never be as good and I stand by my stance then and stand by it now. There’s no hindsight in my argument because I knew it was a deficit in talent then. And that’s why I’m so adamant about defending Rj now.

Well except for that Powell is a worse defender, and if there was a similar RJ for a 21 year old SG trade (such as the Powell for GTJ one) we should jump on that to.

We traded a 27 year old expiring UFA averaging a career high 20/3/2 with bad defence and got back a 15/2/2 21-year old RFA. It was a clear move that any rebuilding team should take, as it removed any risk of losing an asset for nothing, and the team got 5 years younger in the middle of a rebuild. The fact Norman absolutely exploded at age 30+ does not really change anything.

But the fact Norman Powell has been trade three times in his career for

- Gary Trent Jr from TOR
- a salary dump from POR after 67 games
- John Collins

is all you need to know about his value. He is a pretty neutral piece in the grand scheme of things. If we kept him over GTJ I don't foresee our results being any different since 2021.

[YogurtProducer]

Disagree on this. We don't have the salary for a guard with these requirement, perhaps you can name a few non rookie players that fits into this category and not go over the tax.

What requirements? IQ is a player who does everything I said already. He shoots from ATB, off-the-dribble, etc.

And what fits with Barrett and Ingram would be 3 and D guard with some good ball handling.

So.. IQ? Despite what this board thinks, IQ is still a good defender at the 1, and is still one of the better players in the entire league.

Who is this mystical 3+D point guard who would be a better fit? I can think of better defenders, but it is difficult to say for certain who is a player that is both a better defender and a better shooter.

[MEDIC]

Among SG's, RJ is 2nd in the league making FG's with zero dribbles.

The only one above him is Mikal Bridges (who I will count as a SG due to being the same height)

[Indeed]

Disagree on this. We don't have the salary for a guard with these requirement, perhaps you can name a few non rookie players that fits into this category and not go over the tax.

What requirements? IQ is a player who does everything I said already. He shoots from ATB, off-the-dribble, etc.

And what fits with Barrett and Ingram would be 3 and D guard with some good ball handling.

So.. IQ? Despite what this board thinks, IQ is still a good defender at the 1, and is still one of the better players in the entire league.

Who is this mystical 3+D point guard who would be a better fit? I can think of better defenders, but it is difficult to say for certain who is a player that is both a better defender and a better shooter.

I asked for the salary that keeps us below the tax, we are not going to afford two near max (25% each) plus two starters (17.5% each) in salary, that would be 85% not including a C and rookie contracts and min salaries

[YogurtProducer]

Disagree on this. We don't have the salary for a guard with these requirement, perhaps you can name a few non rookie players that fits into this category and not go over the tax.

What requirements? IQ is a player who does everything I said already. He shoots from ATB, off-the-dribble, etc.

And what fits with Barrett and Ingram would be 3 and D guard with some good ball handling.

So.. IQ? Despite what this board thinks, IQ is still a good defender at the 1, and is still one of the better players in the entire league.

Who is this mystical 3+D point guard who would be a better fit? I can think of better defenders, but it is difficult to say for certain who is a player that is both a better defender and a better shooter.

I asked for the salary that keeps us below the tax, we are not going to afford two near max (25% each) plus two starters (17.5% each) in salary, that would be 85% not including a C and rookie contracts and min salaries

We currently have Barnes at 25.0%, Ingram at 24.6%, IQ at 21.0%, and RJ at 17.9%. Why is this suddenly going to be an issue going forward if it is not now? Again, what 3+D PG are we getting then if it is going to be cheaper than IQ?

We can easily shed Agbaji and duck below the tax. WE don't need to get crazy and trade away IQ for peanuts.

[Indeed]

What requirements? IQ is a player who does everything I said already. He shoots from ATB, off-the-dribble, etc.

So.. IQ? Despite what this board thinks, IQ is still a good defender at the 1, and is still one of the better players in the entire league.

Who is this mystical 3+D point guard who would be a better fit? I can think of better defenders, but it is difficult to say for certain who is a player that is both a better defender and a better shooter.

I asked for the salary that keeps us below the tax, we are not going to afford two near max (25% each) plus two starters (17.5% each) in salary, that would be 85% not including a C and rookie contracts and min salaries

We currently have Barnes at 25.0%, Ingram at 24.6%, IQ at 21.0%, and RJ at 17.9%. Why is this suddenly going to be an issue going forward if it is not now?

Again, what 3+D PG are we getting then if it is going to be cheaper than IQ?

Currently we are a tax team. Giving up assets to trade away Dick or Agbaji is no differnce than getting ride of an overpaid Quickley.

Barrett will probably in the 22% after next season. Meanwhile a starting C would be in the similar cost of Poeltl.

If we are keeping Quickley, are we trading Poeltl? Are our current lineup comparable to Celtics or Knicks to be in the Finals?

[YogurtProducer]

Currently we are a tax team.

We are a tax team that can easily dodge it if we want to. For all intensive purposes, the tax is not a concern this year.

Barrett will probably in the 22% after next season. Meanwhile a starting C would be in the similar cost of Poeltl

IQ is also a 17.8% guy by the last year of his deal.

If we are keeping Quickley, are we trading Poeltl? Are our current lineup comparable to Celtics or Knicks to be in the Finals?

Unless there are clear upgrade trades, we likely are keeping both.

It is way more likely we are trading IQ or Poeltl + a boat load of picks to try and make a future run with a bigger name guy than it is that we give them away for pennies.

Contrary to popular belief here, there is no rush to trade away all our "win now" pieces just because we are not a 60+ win team contender in 2025-26. That sort of thinking would have led us to trade away Lowry and Demar in 2015 or 2016 after we lost to Washington in the playoffs.

This team is like the 2013-14 Raptors. We didn't give players away after losing to BKN or WAS. We just kept incrementally improving.

[Tripod]

Currently we are a tax team.

We are a tax team that can easily dodge it if we want to. For all intensive purposes, the tax is not a concern this year.

Barrett will probably in the 22% after next season. Meanwhile a starting C would be in the similar cost of Poeltl

IQ is also a 17.8% guy by the last year of his deal.

If we are keeping Quickley, are we trading Poeltl? Are our current lineup comparable to Celtics or Knicks to be in the Finals?

Unless there are clear upgrade trades, we likely are keeping both.

It is way more likely we are trading IQ or Poeltl + a boat load of picks to try and make a future run with a bigger name guy than it is that we give them away for pennies.

Contrary to popular belief here, there is no rush to trade away all our "win now" pieces just because we are not a 60+ win team contender in 2025-26. That sort of thinking would have led us to trade away Lowry and Demar in 2015 or 2016 after we lost to Washington in the playoffs.

This team is like the 2013-14 Raptors. We didn't give players away after losing to BKN or WAS. We just kept incrementally improving.

Plus, NY and Boston cap hits are 9 and 12 million more than ours and have future 1sts traded away.

Would we be better trading 1sts and adding 9-12 million to our cap hit? Yes. But as you said, it's not the time to be doing those things.