Transactions. We love ‘em, don’t we?
About half of the questions y’all submitted in my mailbag call were devoted to potential trades. I get it: Who wants to live in the present when the future might be slightly different?
Accordingly, I’m devoting the second half of the mailbag to trade queries, even if we’re still more than six weeks away from the Feb. 5 trade deadline. A few reminders.
• The Raptors are about $1 million over the luxury-tax threshold, and I think getting below that threshold will be their top priority, barring a trade for a star.
• Most trades require “matching” salary in return, although what is necessary depends on each team’s financial situation. The Raptors are currently below the first apron, which gives them a fair bit of flexibility in how much extra salary they could take on, although see the point above to explain why they will likely try to cut salary in the aggregate.
• Teams that are below the salary cap (only Brooklyn and Utah) can take players into their cap room without sending matching salary in return. Additionally, teams that have not used all of their midlevel exception ($14.1 million) can use it to acquire a player without outgoing matching salary, although they cannot exceed the first apron in total salary ($195.9 million) while doing so.
• The Raptors’ top five salaries are all in excess of $19.5 million (Jakob Poeltl). The rest of their salaries are all below $6.4 million (Ochai Agbaji). Unless they are willing to trade a starter, it will be complicated to make anything more than a trade that shores up the back end of their rotation.
Got it? No? It’s OK, that is mostly there to explain to people who suggested trades that were not CBA compliant why I didn’t answer their questions. In the words of Radioactive Man, up and at them!
Questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
What is the one realistic achievable goal or trade the Raps should aim for? Second round? A big man? — Anonymous
These are two largely unrelated questions, so I will tackle them separately.
1. Start with a top-six finish in the regular season, and then go from there. If the Raptors win around 45 games, finish in the top six and push their opponent in the first round, I’d consider that a successful year, while acknowledging that the long-term plan still needs refinement.
2. When the Raptors traded for Brandon Ingram last February, Bobby Webster said they were still in the talent acquisition phase of their development. I agree with that, and practically speaking, I’d be less concerned with fit than pure skill. A young big man to reliably back up (and maybe eventually replace) Poeltl would be great, but I wouldn’t get hung up on need, precisely because I don’t think this team is close to real contention. Overall talent is much more important.
What skill would make the most difference to the team if it were to acquire more of it, or upgrade what it has of it, and what trades would you consider to do so, if any at all. Off the top of my head, I worry about our rebounding, but I’ve also heard clever people talk about our lack of driving, especially when RJ (Barrett) isn’t playing. — Gregor M.
The flaws you mention are real ones. The Raptors can use rebounding, rim protection and more attackers.
I still can’t look past the shooting. Since a hot start to the season, the Raptors have slumped, becoming a league-average 3-point shooting team — in percentage. They are 25th in 3-point makes per possession and 26th in attempts. The other good teams with low 3-point volume: the Rockets, Lakers, Magic and Pistons. All of them make up for that with many more trips to the free-throw line than the Raptors manage, which is where the driving you mentioned comes into play.
Ideally, the Raptors would add a good shooter with the ability to do a little bit more off the bounce than, say, Ja’Kobe Walter. Would Philadelphia get off Quentin Grimes, considering he is going to be an unrestricted free agent and they have a max player and high lottery pick in the backcourt? At a lower level, can the Raptors pry Keon Ellis from the Kings, who seem uninterested in playing him? Charlotte’s Collin Sexton probably makes too much money (nearly $19 million) for the Raptors to get, but he would provide some much-needed offence off the bench. The Celtics likely aren’t trading Sam Hauser, who is having a down year, unless they can dump his contract while taking no money back, but he has a good enough track record that I’d be interested.
A lot of the fanbase seems convinced that getting a true backup centre would help this group a lot. I think people overrate most backup centres (they’re backups for a reason). Do you think a backup centre would make a big difference for this group, and, if so, is there anyone you think they should target? — Darrell C.
No single reserve makes that much of a difference. You definitely should not be trading a first-rounder for a role player unless you are very close to a championship. The Raptors could get away with using Scottie Barnes, Collin Murray-Boyles and Sandro Mamukelashvili as small-ball centres and get away with it.
Poeltl’s health is the problem. Poeltl missed Thursday’s game in Milwaukee after two off days (which followed the Raptors’ six-day post-Cup hiatus), which was a big warning sign to me. It makes sense: Bad backs don’t just, poof, turn into healthy backs. Darko Rajaković mentioned the possibility of Poeltl playing in both halves of a back-to-back set as the season goes on. That seems very far away, maybe even unrealistic, if that amount of time didn’t help him mend.
With no true centres behind Poeltl, who is frequently unavailable, the Raptors are limited in how they can play stylistically. It also creates a problem on the defensive glass, which more teams are prioritizing. (The Raptors collect 72.8 percent of potential defensive rebounds with Poeltl on the floor and 66.9 percent when he’s off.)
The biggest reason to trade for a backup centre would be to give Poeltl some sustained time in street clothes, assuming the medical staff thinks that could make a long-term difference. With that in mind, a backup centre would make a difference, if not the type that many think one would.
On the cheaper end of things, I am unreasonably high on Brooklyn’s Day’ron Sharpe as a potential innings eater. Plus, he has a $6.25 million team option for next year, which would be useful. The Mavericks’ Daniel Gafford is good when healthy, but paying another centre an eight-figure salary into 2028-29 is unwise. Orlando’s Goga Bitadze would also make sense. Plus, the Raptors could pair up the league’s two Georgian players with that move.
If the Raptors decide to go shopping at the trade deadline, list the positions of need in order and (if possible) your ideal targets. — Justin T.
As you hopefully understand by now, I would value overall talent (preferably under contract beyond this season) more than any specific position. This team could use every type of player save for another small guard.
I’ll also keep my targets to players making significantly less than $20 million, as anything else would require the Raptors trading a starter. The players are listed in no particular order.
1. Smaller wing: Ellis, Grimes, Hauser, Corey Kispert, Ayo Dosunmu, Naji Marshall, Ben Sheppard
2. Big: Sharpe, Gafford, Bitadze, Marvin Bagley, Robert Williams, Jericho Sims, Brandon Clarke, Bobby Portis, Jalen Smith, Nick Richards
3: Forward: Georges Niang, Saddiq Bey, Guerschon Yabusele
For more possibilities, see Sam Vecenie’s trade board.
Does it make sense to go all in with a huge trade? — Yossi R.
I’ll direct you to my recent column about this. Here is the shorter answer to your question: While the weaker Eastern Conference makes it intriguing, I don’t think the Raptors have the depth of talent to support such a move and become a genuine contender.
Can the Raptors upgrade at centre with Poeltl’s contract? Should they? Is this possible? — Rob H.
That’s going to be hard to do because of how Poeltl’s contract is viewed right now. It’s too long and too expensive for most teams that would be looking to give up talent, so the Raptors would likely have to incentivize a team with a first-round pick or more to make a meaningful upgrade. I don’t think I would kick in an extra first to get Myles Turner, on a long deal himself, for Poeltl, even if his shooting would help. I don’t think Nic Claxton is an upgrade, although he is on a shorter deal. Ivica Zubac would be great, but the Clippers aren’t going to take on a player with a longer contract.
In short, I don’t think that type of deal exists, although never say never.
How many two-way, stretch fives are in the league, and how can the Raptors attain one? — Anonymous
The Raptors never should have let NBA champion Branden Carlson go! Horrible mistake! Fire Masai again!
Just looking back at the overall Pascal Siakam-Brandon Ingram series of trades got me thinking …
Out: Siakam, 2031 second-round pick
In: Ingram, Ja’Kobe Walter, Ochai Agbaji
Would the Raptors have been better off just keeping Siakam? — Jonathan C.
I don’t think it was going to work, at least with the way negotiations with Siakam unfolded. I think the Raptors did fine, in the aggregate, in those two connected transactions, but ultimately didn’t get equal value in return for Siakam. Once the Raptors didn’t aggressively try to extend Siakam, which I said was the right call at the time, it was going to be hard to unring that bell.
I’m more curious about a hypothetical world in which OG Anunoby stuck around to pair with Barnes. The Raptors would have had to figure out the backcourt in that scenario, as Anunoby brought them Immanuel Quickley and RJ Barrett from New York. The Raptors’ front office’s priorities would have changed, but it would have presented an interesting alternative.
In order to get under the tax, what do the options look like and what type of return would we expect for, say, Ochai Agbaji? — Tim L.
If a team is making a move solely to save money, that team usually has to give up a pick to make it happen. That is what made the Celtics getting two second-round picks and Anfernee Simons for Jrue Holiday so impressive. Regardless of how good Holiday is, savings drove the Celtics to trade him. That they got picks in return was a nice bit of business.
The Raptors shouldn’t expect a return if they deal Agbaji, unless it’s a player making less money than Agbaji. (Even then, the Raptors might have to attach a pick, depending on the players and contracts involved.) Any tax-ducking move the Raptors make is likely to cost them a second-round pick. Agbaji will be a restricted free agent following the season if his team offers him an $8.9 million qualifying offer, and an unrestricted free agent otherwise.
It doesn’t necessarily have to be Agbaji, who is playing better of late, by the way. The Raptors could trade any player on a guaranteed deal (excluding those on two-way deals) and avoid paying the tax. However, since teams must have a minimum of 14 players on NBA contracts, the Raptors would have to add another player if they simply traded a player without getting one in return. Teams have two weeks’ leeway before they must get back to a minimum of 14, and can only be below 14 for four weeks total during the season. The Raptors currently have, you guessed it, 14 players on standard contracts.
That is why the idea of moving a player not on the minimum and taking a player back making less money makes sense — it would solve the Raptors’ tax issue in one swoop. For example, Michael Scotto of Hoopshype reported the Raptors have “expressed interest in” Phoenix’s Nick Richards, potentially trading Agbaji and a second-round pick(s). Since Richards makes $1.4 million less than Agbaji, such a trade would fill a need for the Raptors while allowing them to duck the tax.
The CBA is fun, huh?