Everything Pascal Siakam

[golden]

Yup, 100%. That Thad trade allowed us to get under the tax that season. That was their #1 goal. Thad the player made no sense. Veteran leadership for the bench? Really? That premise was a joke. They wanted a contract that was basically expiring but cheaper than Goran's. They didn't really give the team help. They just wanted to save money. And worked with a team that had cap space, and an expiring contract they could send out as well.

Guys like Grange, Korean, Lewenberg, Doug, etc… absolutely know that these roster decisions are being made exclusively so ownership can keep more profits to themselves.

But none of those guys says a peep. Those decisions have dramatic implications to the on court product, yet nobody writes about it or even asks management about it. I guess it’s because most of them report up to Rogers or Bell, ultimately.

[The Claw Reborn]

Grange said the Raptors final offer was 3 years, $125M. He said no and now he's a Pacer. $$$ spoke louder than his home. And I don't blame him for that. I probably would have made the same decision. Especially knowing that I could get traded any minute even if I did take less money.

Do you think he would have agreed to a four year $180 million ($45M per) with the 4th year as an option?

Plus a NTC (likely Raps would oppose to this though)

[saints91]

I’m sorry, but if this team is not a contender, why would you expect ownership to go into the tax. I have no problem with ducking the tax until it’s actually necessary. They ponied up in the Championship year when it mattered.

[A.I]

I’m sorry, but if this team is not a contender, why would you expect ownership to go into the tax. I have no problem with ducking the tax until it’s actually necessary. They ponied up in the Championship year when it mattered.

It may make it a bit tougher to make a contender, but I get it. The team made the Playoffs twice since the championship. Hard to sell that as a team to go into the tax for.

[saints91]

Unless you have a LeBron, Curry, Durant, Giannis, Luka, Kawhi or Tatum, I don’t see the point in being a tax team. If Scottie can take that step, then maybe they will.

[golden]

I’m sorry, but if this team is not a contender, why would you expect ownership to go into the tax. I have no problem with ducking the tax until it’s actually necessary. They ponied up in the Championship year when it mattered.

It depends on how much tax, though. I don't know the numbers, but if paying say $5M in tax was the difference between getting Porzingis vs. forking over a FRP for Thad, just to duck the tax for 1 season, then you should pay the tax to acquire the asset and get back under the tax the next season.

And I have a hard time agreeing with a team that ducks the tax, when they also load up the cap with guys like Thad and Temple, and guys who don't play like McDaniels & Porter. That's $20M in dead cap space and 4 roster spots. A team like Toronto, that has limited ways to acquire talent, has to manage their money immaculately, like OKC or Orlando.

[G____Deane]

It depends on how much tax, though. I don't know the numbers, but if paying say $5M in tax was the difference between getting Porzingis vs. forking over a FRP for Thad, just to duck the tax for 1 season, then you should pay the tax to acquire the asset and get back under the tax the next season.

And I have a hard time agreeing with a team that ducks the tax, when they also load up the cap with guys like Thad and Temple, and guys who don't play like McDaniels & Porter. That's $20M in dead cap space and 4 roster spots. A team like Toronto, that has limited ways to acquire talent, has to manage their money immaculately, like OKC or Orlando.

I agree with this.

Paying Thad $8 has alway been a head scratcher never mind what you gave up for him. Adding Temple to that at $3.2 only added to it. Even Boucher at 11M and currently our 6th highest paid player for a guy that has trouble staying on the floor, really sticks out for a team that's careful with their money. What if we didn't have Thad and Boucher and instead another RJ Barrett?

[DanH]

The Thad trade was not made to duck the tax. They were already clear of the tax if they just rode out the year with Dragic on the team.

It's perfectly fine to critique the move but let's not make up fictional reasons why they did it.

[golden]

The Thad trade was not made to duck the tax. They were already clear of the tax if they just rode out the year with Dragic on the team.

It's perfectly fine to critique the move but let's not make up fictional reasons why they did it.

Raptors were never going to ride out the season with Dragic and let him stay at home, not playing for the contender of his choice, against his wishes.

Masai & Bobby always bend over forwards for players and their agents, so the only choices were to trade Goran, or eat his salary and waive him.

Raps didn’t want the optics of waiving Dragic, so they found a team that was willing to do it for a price and make the optics look like they were adding a useful piece to the core. It was a sham.

[DanH]

Raptors were never going to ride out the season with Dragic and let him stay at home, not playing for the contender of his choice, against his wishes.

Masai & Bobby always bend over forwards for players and their agents, so the only choices were to trade Goran, or eat his salary and waive him.

Raps didn’t want the optics of waiving Dragic, so they found a team that was willing to do it for a price and make the optics look like they were adding a useful piece to the core. It was a sham.

OK, see, lots of ways to critique this deal without pretending it was a tax issue. It wasn't.

[golden]

OK, see, lots of ways to critique this deal without pretending it was a tax issue. It wasn't.

You’re missing the point.

The alternative was to trade Dragic for Porzingis, which Bobby is on record saying they didn’t want to take on money that had future tax implications.

Option A: Thad + no tax
Option B: KP + tax

[golden]

"Originally I thought Porzingis was going to go to Toronto," Marks said. "That was my original thought just talking to people on Wednesday night that it was going to be a Porzingis, Dragic, and then kind of salary filler, and future one, and it was just going to be a salary dump for Dallas."

Raptors general manager Bobby Webster said the team looking at a number of different options leading up to Thursday's trade deadline including some major deals that would have taken on long-term money. One idea was moving Dragic's contract to a team looking to get off what they considered to be a bad contract. The problem for Toronto was just the length of Porzingis' deal.

"There were some options to take on additional money. Ultimately, those deals fell through, and then, a couple of other examples, the money went out so far it was sort of risky so we walked away from those," Webster said following the deadline.

https://www.si.com/nba/raptors/news/...taps-porzingis

[A.I]

https://www.si.com/nba/raptors/news/...taps-porzingis

Well in defense of Bobby, Dallas Porzingis was a super risky contract to take on. Tax aside, he was injury prone. So did it make sense to take on Porzingis' contract to go into the tax? It worked out on the Wizards where he was able to get healthier last season and brought his value back up, but thats hindsight now.

It looks good since it worked out and we can say why didn't the Raptors make that move, but if we did it and it didn't work, we'd be saying why the hell did we take on that contract.

[planetmars]

Porzingis got traded for Bertans terrible contract and Dindwiddie who nobody wanted. No picks were included in that trade. And at that time Luka wanted to play with Goran too. The pick would have been a soft pick in that trade. Porzingis however had a player option that would have taxed out the team if Fred stayed (he didn't) and Zinger picked up his option (he may not have).

EDIT - Dallas sent Washington a second round pick in that deal.

[DanH]

You’re missing the point.

The alternative was to trade Dragic for Porzingis, which Bobby is on record saying they didn’t want to take on money that had future tax implications.

Option A: Thad + no tax
Option B: KP + tax

Sure. But that's not ducking the tax. That's not making a different trade that would get them into the tax.

The way it's being framed is that we traded for Thad to get under the tax line. This did not happen and we should talk about deals in the way they actually happened.

I would like to live in your simplistic universe though where there were only ever two possible things to do at that trade deadline, and doing nothing wasn't even one of the options.