Everything Pascal Siakam

[Dvdvideo]

I agree completely, saying Toronto is home forever is great, but the actions don't meet the words stated. Saying the raptors didn't want him is total bs, if he had said this summer I'll sign 5 years for 125 the raptors would have tripped over themselves to find the pen.

Not a great look, just say you love Toronto but they wouldn't pay me enough to stay.

But yes, like you say, if you want to be in Toronto, it's not too late........actually, why is he talking like he's gone for good?

[Jclaw]

Hope he goes off in his debut. Pacers would beat Portland either way. Start cheering for the draft pick tomorrow

[Kagemusha]

The apples we are comparing here are money vs. loyalty to the team/city. The other stuff is meaningless, since Pascal said he wanted to stay here forever, i.e., loyalty. Raptors made an offer to keep him here. The only apple here is money. So, the relevant question here is if Pascal was in a position to take less than his full max.

By the end of Pascal's age 29 season, he will have have made $125M and if he accepted Masai's offer last year, he would be assured of $250M in career earnings surpassing Duncan, who retired at 39 and received cheques until age 42. Even adjusting for inflation, that's generational wealth.

So, Pascal was in a perfect position to take a bit less money and prove his loyalty, but more importantly, give Masai more flexibility to build a contender around him. That would've set a great example for Scottie. I think that's what Masai was hoping for with Fred, Pascal and OG.... that the loyalty he gave to them would be re-paid to the franchise (and Masai, personally) by helping him have some cap flexibility.

But Pascal wanted the security of 2 more years, so we can now put an actual price on loyalty. I don't want to hear any BS about "Raptors not wanting Pascal here anymore" and not being loyal to him. Masai made a solid offer to stay, and has already made Pascal wealthy beyond is wildest dreams. But it wasn't enough. It never is. The narrative is actual 180 the other way around. Pascal's loyalty will be to the highest bidder... and that was widely reported in the media.

100%
It's all bout that money

[Yuri Gagarin]

The apples we are comparing here are money vs. loyalty to the team/city. The other stuff is meaningless, since Pascal said he wanted to stay here forever, i.e., loyalty. Raptors made an offer to keep him here. The only apple here is money. So, the relevant question here is if Pascal was in a position to take less than his full max.

By the end of Pascal's age 29 season, he will have have made $125M and if he accepted Masai's offer last year, he would be assured of $250M in career earnings surpassing Duncan, who retired at 39 and received cheques until age 42. Even adjusting for inflation, that's generational wealth.

So, Pascal was in a perfect position to take a bit less money and prove his loyalty, but more importantly, give Masai more flexibility to build a contender around him. That would've set a great example for Scottie. I think that's what Masai was hoping for with Fred, Pascal and OG.... that the loyalty he gave to them would be re-paid to the franchise (and Masai, personally) by helping him have some cap flexibility.

But Pascal wanted the security of 2 more years, so we can now put an actual price on loyalty. I don't want to hear any BS about "Raptors not wanting Pascal here anymore" and not being loyal to him. Masai made a solid offer to stay, and has already made Pascal wealthy beyond is wildest dreams. But it wasn't enough. It never is. The narrative is actual 180 the other way around. Pascal's loyalty will be to the highest bidder... and that was widely reported in the media.

perfect summary

Good luck pascal now lets go raptors!

[G____Deane]

The apples we are comparing here are money vs. loyalty to the team/city. The other stuff is meaningless, since Pascal said he wanted to stay here forever, i.e., loyalty. Raptors made an offer to keep him here. The only apple here is money. So, the relevant question here is if Pascal was in a position to take less than his full max.

By the end of Pascal's age 29 season, he will have have made $125M and if he accepted Masai's offer last year, he would be assured of $250M in career earnings surpassing Duncan, who retired at 39 and received cheques until age 42. Even adjusting for inflation, that's generational wealth.

So, Pascal was in a perfect position to take a bit less money and prove his loyalty, but more importantly, give Masai more flexibility to build a contender around him. That would've set a great example for Scottie. I think that's what Masai was hoping for with Fred, Pascal and OG.... that the loyalty he gave to them would be re-paid to the franchise (and Masai, personally) by helping him have some cap flexibility.

But Pascal wanted the security of 2 more years, so we can now put an actual price on loyalty. I don't want to hear any BS about "Raptors not wanting Pascal here anymore" and not being loyal to him. Masai made a solid offer to stay, and has already made Pascal wealthy beyond is wildest dreams. But it wasn't enough. It never is. The narrative is actual 180 the other way around. Pascal's loyalty will be to the highest bidder... and that was widely reported in the media.

Pascal was in the enviable position of staying where he publicly said he wanted to stay, be the rare athlete (like he also said) that stays in one franchise for his entire career. Evidently, he chose not to.

He came from nothing, didn't even have the dream of playing in the NBA, odds say he should never have had the chance to reach the heights he did.

And he still chose not to.

Hey, maybe this is a brilliant plan to leave so we acquire assets and he re-signs here for Masai's original offer. If so, that's full gangsta

[golden]

exactly. duncan had 4 titles already and the team was still contending when he took his paycuts (in fact they went to the finals in the two years immediately following his first paycut in 2012 and won one of them).

comparing siakam's situation to duncan's is not really comparing apples to apples

The apples we are comparing here are money vs. loyalty to the team/city. The other stuff is meaningless, since Pascal said he wanted to stay here forever, i.e., loyalty. Raptors made an offer to keep him here. The only apple here is money. So, the relevant question here is if Pascal was in a position to take less than his full max.

By the end of Pascal's age 29 season, he will have have made $125M and if he accepted Masai's offer last year, he would be assured of $250M in career earnings surpassing Duncan, who retired at 39 and received cheques until age 42. Even adjusting for inflation, that's generational wealth.

So, Pascal was in a perfect position to take a bit less money and prove his loyalty, but more importantly, give Masai more flexibility to build a contender around him. That would've set a great example for Scottie. I think that's what Masai was hoping for with Fred, Pascal and OG.... that the loyalty he gave to them would be re-paid to the franchise (and Masai, personally) by helping him have some cap flexibility.

But Pascal wanted the security of 2 more years, so we can now put an actual price on loyalty. I don't want to hear any BS about "Raptors not wanting Pascal here anymore" and not being loyal to him. Masai made a solid offer to stay, and has already made Pascal wealthy beyond is wildest dreams. But it wasn't enough. It never is. The narrative is actual 180 the other way around. Pascal's loyalty will be to the highest bidder... and that was widely reported in the media.

[A.I]

The tough thing is that we kind of saw this coming. Yet we took to long to react. I mean Blake Murphy has a source that said that if we traded Pascal in the summer we could have netted one of those Pacer prospects. We waited until January and only got those picks instead.

That's the nitpick. We waited too long. And if we gave him that max, would his contract become too soured? I think a team like the Pistons would have still traded for him despite having a max value. And that's why I think we should have given him that extension but then kept the leverage for a future trade.

Either way it's a done deal and we can all move on. But I'm still not too stoked about the package we ultimately got. We really need to nail the next step here. Either with who we draft with these picks.. or who we get back in a trade if we move some of them.

Was it Blake or Shams that said Raptors could have gotten a prospect in the summer, but there wouldn't be 3 picks, maybe 1 or 2. Brown also wouldn't be in the deal since he hasn't signed there yet.

We'll never truly know. They definitely could have traded him earlier, but I'm okay with the return they got back considering he was an expiring contract.

[chris]

Because those all time greats are almost always in the Playoffs because they are too good, so give them whatever they want.

For Pascal, he would have loved to stay and retire here...at the small price of a max contract when the team isn't that good. Its tough for the front office to agree to that. I don't blame Pascal and will root for him in Indy, but it made sense to move on.

exactly. duncan had 4 titles already and the team was still contending when he took his paycuts (in fact they went to the finals in the two years immediately following his first paycut in 2012 and won one of them).

comparing siakam's situation to duncan's is not really comparing apples to apples

[planetmars]

That's not the problem. The problem is we didn't hang up the phone. I'm coming around to the trade because Brown is a nice piece and 3 1sts is nothing to scoff at, but it irks the hell out of me we couldn't get one of those Pacers prospects in that deal. And I'm starting to wonder if they only agreed to that package to do right by Pascal, who apparently preferred Indy. I would have told them to go get him in free agency if you can and hung up the phone. Kira Lewis? And they couldn't forward that 2nd round pick to us? The Pels shouldnt have been involved and we should have received a Smith or Nesmith or Nembhard at least. I would have been happier with less picks if Nesmith was involved. Still rubs me the wrong way. We probably could have done better doing a SnT in the summer.

I think they wanted some of that draft capital (and Brown's contract) to be used at the deadline for a different trade. If they waited on Pascal and did a S&T that flexibility would have been gone.

I do agree that they could have held out for more, but Pascal was silently quitting. I think the trade stuff got to him like it did with OG. He was dogging it on defense. And he had lost his smile.

[JawsGT]

The tough thing is that we kind of saw this coming. Yet we took to long to react. I mean Blake Murphy has a source that said that if we traded Pascal in the summer we could have netted one of those Pacer prospects. We waited until January and only got those picks instead.

That's the nitpick. We waited too long. And if we gave him that max, would his contract become too soured? I think a team like the Pistons would have still traded for him despite having a max value. And that's why I think we should have given him that extension but then kept the leverage for a future trade.

Either way it's a done deal and we can all move on. But I'm still not too stoked about the package we ultimately got. We really need to nail the next step here. Either with who we draft with these picks.. or who we get back in a trade if we move some of them.

That's not the problem. The problem is we didn't hang up the phone. I'm coming around to the trade because Brown is a nice piece and 3 1sts is nothing to scoff at, but it irks the hell out of me we couldn't get one of those Pacers prospects in that deal. And I'm starting to wonder if they only agreed to that package to do right by Pascal, who apparently preferred Indy. I would have told them to go get him in free agency if you can and hung up the phone. Kira Lewis? And they couldn't forward that 2nd round pick to us? The Pels shouldnt have been involved and we should have received a Smith or Nesmith or Nembhard at least. I would have been happier with less picks if Nesmith was involved. Still rubs me the wrong way. We probably could have done better doing a SnT in the summer.

[planetmars]

Because those all time greats are almost always in the Playoffs because they are too good, so give them whatever they want.

For Pascal, he would have loved to stay and retire here...at the small price of a max contract when the team isn't that good. Its tough for the front office to agree to that. I don't blame Pascal and will root for him in Indy, but it made sense to move on.

The tough thing is that we kind of saw this coming. Yet we took to long to react. I mean Blake Murphy has a source that said that if we traded Pascal in the summer we could have netted one of those Pacer prospects. We waited until January and only got those picks instead.

That's the nitpick. We waited too long. And if we gave him that max, would his contract become too soured? I think a team like the Pistons would have still traded for him despite having a max value. And that's why I think we should have given him that extension but then kept the leverage for a future trade.

Either way it's a done deal and we can all move on. But I'm still not too stoked about the package we ultimately got. We really need to nail the next step here. Either with who we draft with these picks.. or who we get back in a trade if we move some of them.

[A.I]

Yeah its rare.. but on the other hand would Masai have kept Pascal for those 3 years? Or traded him after 1 if the team continued to stumble? It's a slipper slope both ways. These days players are looking out for themselves. It's only the super duper stars that have a bit more freedom. Because for example a guy like Steph would never get traded, even if he took a discount. And I'm sure he'd know that too. Tim was a super duper star.

Because those all time greats are almost always in the Playoffs because they are too good, so give them whatever they want.

For Pascal, he would have loved to stay and retire here...at the small price of a max contract when the team isn't that good. Its tough for the front office to agree to that. I don't blame Pascal and will root for him in Indy, but it made sense to move on.

[The Claw Reborn]

Jersey Retirement:

1. Kyle - GROAT
2. Pascal
3. VC - so many circumstances that surrounded his departure
4. Derozan - his loyalty to the City and Franchise is out of bounds so he deserves it, eventhough the claw still don’t like his game.

[planetmars]

Yeah, but the narrative that “Raptors didn’t want Pascal anymore” is completely false. If he truly wanted to be like Tim Duncan and retire a Raptor, there was a clear path to do so.

Masai tested Pascal’s love for Toronto vs love for money, and nobody is surprised who won.

Yeah its rare.. but on the other hand would Masai have kept Pascal for those 3 years? Or traded him after 1 if the team continued to stumble? It's a slipper slope both ways. These days players are looking out for themselves. It's only the super duper stars that have a bit more freedom. Because for example a guy like Steph would never get traded, even if he took a discount. And I'm sure he'd know that too. Tim was a super duper star.

[Shredder]

Yeah, but the narrative that “Raptors didn’t want Pascal anymore” is completely false. If he truly wanted to be like Tim Duncan and retire a Raptor, there was a clear path to do so.

Masai tested Pascal’s love for Toronto vs love for money, and nobody is surprised who won.

Ya they wanted him. They wanted him at a 41.5M a year. For a shorter term contract as he was 30 years old.

Pascal wanted a full 5 year Max. Sounds like he will get it. Good for him.

All the best Pascal. I always liked you. Pulled for you. Still will.

But I'm a Raptors fan first and a 35 year old Pascal, on a Max, will be a tough one to manage.