What to do with Bruce Brown

[HumbleRen]

I'm a believer in Grimes. Get him + a first pick.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Can't see Masai trading Siakam essentially for the 'you is not him' guy and 4 weak picks. The Lakers have nothing, either. Hopefully the offers get better. I don't even hate Grimes. I just would hope to get someone more established back.

[Los_29]

The impulsiveness of folks on this board never ceases to amaze. Keep him. We need defenders to challenge the core players on this roster.

Deal with it.

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.

I don’t think it would’ve made sense to trade Lowry when we had the 2nd best record in the league in 2019-20.

We got lucky with OG and Pascal because the rumoured deals last year were worse than the return we got this year. Especially OG.

[HiJiNX]

Can't see Masai trading Siakam essentially for the 'you is not him' guy and 4 weak picks. The Lakers have nothing, either. Hopefully the offers get better. I don't even hate Grimes. I just would hope to get someone more established back.

I wouldn’t mind taking a flyer on Max Christie if we trade with the Lakers.

[ArthurVandelay]

I just watch Pansare trade proposals and there is one that make some sense to me.

I am a bit sceptical that we can get Grimes + 1st pick + Fournier (filler) for Bruce Brown jr.

He did a little tweak that I found interesting.

Brown + OKC 2024 1st (our worst 1st) for Grimes, Fournier + 2025 MIL 1st

I like the flip b/w 2024 to 2025

Basically we would trade Brown for Grimes , a filler and arguably improving the value of our worst pick received in the Siakam trade.

This proposal is ****ing stupid

Brown is supposed to be the asset netting a benefit. All this trade does is downgrade our asset from Brown to Grimes and provide a 'fingers' crossed hope that Milwaukee's pick is worse than OKC's pick this year.

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.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Can't see Masai trading Siakam essentially for the 'you is not him' guy and 4 weak picks. The Lakers have nothing, either. Hopefully the offers get better. I don't even hate Grimes. I just would hope to get someone more established back.

I wouldn’t mind taking a flyer on Max Christie if we trade with the Lakers.

I would. He's been pretty bad and was awful at Michigan State. If we're getting a flyer that should be the second prospect added. That's what a flyer means to me.

[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.

[ThatClockWork]

The impulsiveness of folks on this board never ceases to amaze. Keep him. We need defenders to challenge the core players on this roster.

Deal with it.

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.

[Psubs]

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.

Accepting Brown's $23 million next summer vs Grimes' $4 million is $19 million to spend or take on extra salary dumped, like Kira Lewis' $5.7 million and 1st pick. By being active trading teams can piggyback onto trades and dump salary.

[ArthurVandelay]

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.

[TorontoBarneys]

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.

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.

[pharring]

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.

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.]

[Rapsobsessed7]

I do not think Brown fetches a young prospect + 1st. It will be one or the other.

I am good with Grimes as a Trent replacement assuming he/Boucher are moved.

[Lord_Zedd]

Houston apparently has shown some interest.

They have some expiring junk, some C tier prospects, and maybe we can get in on their 2025 1st swap bonanza too.

[hyper316]

Houston apparently has shown some interest.

They have some expiring junk, some C tier prospects, and maybe we can get in on their 2025 1st swap bonanza too.

I'm really high on Tari Eason

Bruce Brown + filler for Eason + Jeff Green + Oladipo+ pick

[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.

I don’t think it would’ve made sense to trade Lowry when we had the 2nd best record in the league in 2019-20.

We got lucky with OG and Pascal because the rumoured deals last year were worse than the return we got this year. Especially OG.

Agreed on Lowry. Didn’t make much sense to trade him. That’s probably too much hindsight on my part.

My thinking on Brown is: he’s proven to be a championship level rotation player and seems to be in demand. This team is going nowhere this year and probably next year too. While a good player, he’s also not a consistent shooter, so if we’re committed to him that puts us back in the Siakam position of not having enough shooting. Most signs point to Brown being at peak value (at least as far as on court play is concerned). We would be wise to capitalize on that. He’s a good player but we don’t need the couple extra wins he might produce, at least not this year or next year (most likely).

This also applies to almost everyone else who is a win now type player imo (Schroder, Poeltl, Trent and Boucher). If we’re gonna have a couple down years we should be open to moving anyone if the offer is good enough. Right now it seems like Brown is in the highest demand of all of our role players. If we could acquire a ‘25 1st that would put us in a really good spot of having 2 high upside guys (Barnes and IQ), some youth with upside (Barrett and Dick (tbd)), 2 picks in each of the next 3 drafts + cap space. That’s a pretty decent spot to be in. Brown is probably the best non-core asset to get us there.

[StopitLeo]

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.

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?

[ArthurVandelay]

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.

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).

[TorontoBarneys]

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.

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.

[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.

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.