RealGM

Tor_Raps wrote:So now we got people cheering against Siakam just to make themselves feel better about the trade?

Unless Masai pays your salary, shame on you considering the story Siakam has had with this franchise from nothing to a massive part of our championship.

Absolutely...the agendas here on display are ridiculous.

Dude is a 2-time all-star and 2-time all-NBA. He made the game-winning basket to win us the championship and had some monster games throughout the playoff run. He deserves more respect from this fanbase. The hate that he is receiving around here now is shameful.

I didn't want him getting the max while in Toronto in the state that this team is in but doesn't mean he doesn't deserve it in the right situation.

Tor_Raps wrote:So now we got people cheering against Siakam just to make themselves feel better about the trade?

Unless Masai pays your salary, shame on you considering the story Siakam has had with this franchise from nothing to a massive part of our championship.

I really don’t get this as well. He’s got an incredible story and has a pretty impressive resume to date. NBA champion, 2x ALL-NBA, 2x All-Star and MIP. It’s actually a bit disturbing how some people enjoy seeing players struggle. That’s perhaps more of a reflection on them than anything else. Definitely not normal behaviour.

Tor_Raps wrote:So now we got people cheering against Siakam just to make themselves feel better about the trade?

Unless Masai pays your salary, shame on you considering the story Siakam has had with this franchise from nothing to a massive part of our championship.

Its tied together though - some feel we should have gotten way more for Pascal while others feel there was a limit to the interest for Pascal due to his limitations. The answer is always somewhere in between - Pascal can explode for some great games, but can also lay eggs in others. Is he the kind of player you want to throw max money for this off-season? This board always pulls one side to another, then back and forth we go.

Los_29 wrote:But it’s not true until we have a better idea of what was offered last year. I know one thing, I’d much rather have our current return than a deal centered around Kobe Bufkin and AJ Griffin. That was what was rumoured in the offseason. All that I’ve heard was that the offers for Pascal was just marginally better last year. And if that’s the case, can we really blame the FO for waiting? If we took that return last year, people would be claiming we should’ve waited. You said it, OG was a more tradeable asset. Pascal wasn’t. That is going to impact the return we get.

There's never going to be rock-solid proof of what else was on the table, all we can do is look at the actual return. No different than the Lowry situation.

Siakam is a top 20/30 player that reasonably could have been traded within the past 3 years. I happen to think you should get at least a single B level prospect out of that plus picks. As far as I can tell, the return was due to one of:

1) Waiting too long
2) Not holding out for more
3) Other GMs' low opinion of Siakam

Or all 3, who knows.

Tor_Raps wrote:So now we got people cheering against Siakam just to make themselves feel better about the trade?

Unless Masai pays your salary, shame on you considering the story Siakam has had with this franchise from nothing to a massive part of our championship.

Meh, on the flipside you have people cheering for Siakam, FVV, and OG's new teams, or in some cases becoming fans of their teams. That's so odd (to me), especially in OG's case where he didn't want to be on our favourite team anymore, and quit on them for the last 3 weeks. But hey, people are free to be fans in whichever way they want.

Me personally, I don't cheer for or against them once they are off my team (except in VC's case where I DID actively root for him to fail). They are no longer relevant to me.

I am, however, cheering for Siakam to get that 5/250., and I hope OG gets 5/200. And I will never stop saying that Siakam was probably as humble and classy as they come. You literally couldn't ask for a better person to represent your team as far as character goes. I couldn't care less that he thwarted many potential trades, as he and his agent were playing the card available to them. It's a ruthless business and that was a smart move on their part.

brownbobcat wrote:As far as I can tell, the return was due to one of:

1) Waiting too long
2) Not holding out for more
3) Other GMs' low opinion of Siakam

Or all 3, who knows.

Honestly, I think what weaked the market for Siakam was the value ratio. Would teams absolutely love to have him? Yes. Do they want him as a max player? No. Great teammate. Great player. But committing the max to him essentially means he's one of you top two players and you're limiting your moves going forward.

Smalltown wrote:

brownbobcat wrote:As far as I can tell, the return was due to one of:

1) Waiting too long
2) Not holding out for more
3) Other GMs' low opinion of Siakam

Or all 3, who knows.

Honestly, I think what weaked the market for Siakam was the value ratio. Would teams absolutely love to have him? Yes. Do they want him as a max player? No. Great teammate. Great player. But committing the max to him essentially means he's one of you top two players and you're limiting your moves going forward.

The biggest factor is his age. IND is going to be paying close to 50 mill a year for his 30-34 years and teams, especially recently, have been reluctant to give huge money to guys in their 30s who aren't superstars. If we was in his mid 20s, there would've been a lot more teams interested.

Tor_Raps wrote:So now we got people cheering against Siakam just to make themselves feel better about the trade?

Unless Masai pays your salary, shame on you considering the story Siakam has had with this franchise from nothing to a massive part of our championship.

It's the same thing with the Poeltl trade. People have a hard time assessing players objectively vs what trade they were a part of.

Tor_Raps wrote:So now we got people cheering against Siakam just to make themselves feel better about the trade?

Unless Masai pays your salary, shame on you considering the story Siakam has had with this franchise from nothing to a massive part of our championship.

Let's be clear: the vocal contingent cheering against Siakam is also the vocal contingent that wants Masai fired. This group hasn't had a coherent argument in years.

I will always root for Siakam and OG....FVV....never cared for his game even if helped us with the chip. But I wont root against him.

ForeverTFC wrote:

Tor_Raps wrote:So now we got people cheering against Siakam just to make themselves feel better about the trade?

Unless Masai pays your salary, shame on you considering the story Siakam has had with this franchise from nothing to a massive part of our championship.

Let's be clear: the vocal contingent cheering against Siakam is also the vocal contingent that wants Masai fired. This group hasn't had a coherent argument in years.

Siakam is a meh player but should have got us a massive package.
Fred was awful and we'll be better without him - but also Masai missed out on getting anything for him and Houston got better because of him.
We should tank and lose but it's awful to watch us lose games by large margins.

etc
etc
etc

I say this....sometimes there are windows to trading a player and if you miss it, you miss it

artsncrafts wrote:I will always root for Siakam and OG....FVV....never cared for his game even if helped us with the chip. But I wont root against him.

Until OG and Siakam play each other, I am cheering for both of them. If they make me choose, I'm cheering for OG as he's my favorite Raptors post Lowry but I would not cheer against Siakam. With that said, I really do hope Siakam leaves this off-season because I cheer for the Raptors first and foremost, and I need that '26 pick to get as good as it can get.

anotherhomer wrote:I say this....sometimes there are windows to trading a player and if you miss it, you miss it

Lowe's reporting is that this was the return they would have gotten if they moved a year earlier. If folks are not satisfied with the return (I am one of those folks), they should have been advocating for Pascal to be re-signed (as I was during the whole season). The guy is criminally underrated and we could have moved his contract down the road for a similar haul if it came down to it.

I understand ripping the band aid off but I hate how little we were rewarded for it.

ForeverTFC wrote:

anotherhomer wrote:I say this....sometimes there are windows to trading a player and if you miss it, you miss it

Lowe's reporting is that this was the return they would have gotten if they moved a year earlier. If folks are not satisfied with the return (I am one of those folks), they should have been advocating for Pascal to be re-signed (as I was during the whole season). The guy is criminally underrated and we could have moved his contract down the road for a similar haul if it came down to it.

I understand ripping the band aid off but I hate how little we were rewarded for it.

I was so all over the place. I wanted to keep OG but also saw the logic in trading him. I wanted to keep Pascal if the offer was terrible but understood dealing him too.

I'm really happy I don't make these decisions for a living.

OakleyDokely wrote:

Smalltown wrote:

brownbobcat wrote:As far as I can tell, the return was due to one of:

1) Waiting too long
2) Not holding out for more
3) Other GMs' low opinion of Siakam

Or all 3, who knows.

Honestly, I think what weaked the market for Siakam was the value ratio. Would teams absolutely love to have him? Yes. Do they want him as a max player? No. Great teammate. Great player. But committing the max to him essentially means he's one of you top two players and you're limiting your moves going forward.

The biggest factor is his age. IND is going to be paying close to 50 mill a year for his 30-34 years and teams, especially recently, have been reluctant to give huge money to guys in their 30s who aren't superstars. If we was in his mid 20s, there would've been a lot more teams interested.

I get it, but he didn't suddenly turn 30 and his contract situation was a known entity. I'm not necessarily sure he will get paid $50M+ given aforementioned reluctance. Is he really in the position to turn down $160M/4yrs?

brownbobcat wrote:

OakleyDokely wrote:

Smalltown wrote:
Honestly, I think what weaked the market for Siakam was the value ratio. Would teams absolutely love to have him? Yes. Do they want him as a max player? No. Great teammate. Great player. But committing the max to him essentially means he's one of you top two players and you're limiting your moves going forward.

The biggest factor is his age. IND is going to be paying close to 50 mill a year for his 30-34 years and teams, especially recently, have been reluctant to give huge money to guys in their 30s who aren't superstars. If we was in his mid 20s, there would've been a lot more teams interested.

I get it, but he didn't suddenly turn 30 and his contract situation was a known entity. I'm not necessarily sure he will get paid $50M+ given aforementioned reluctance. Is he really in the position to turn down $160M/4yrs?

If he only wanted 40, I'm not sure the Raps would've dealt him. His deal might start around 40, probably won't end there though.

brownbobcat wrote:

OakleyDokely wrote:

Smalltown wrote:
Honestly, I think what weaked the market for Siakam was the value ratio. Would teams absolutely love to have him? Yes. Do they want him as a max player? No. Great teammate. Great player. But committing the max to him essentially means he's one of you top two players and you're limiting your moves going forward.

The biggest factor is his age. IND is going to be paying close to 50 mill a year for his 30-34 years and teams, especially recently, have been reluctant to give huge money to guys in their 30s who aren't superstars. If we was in his mid 20s, there would've been a lot more teams interested.

I get it, but he didn't suddenly turn 30 and his contract situation was a known entity. I'm not necessarily sure he will get paid $50M+ given aforementioned reluctance. Is he really in the position to turn down $160M/4yrs?

For Pascal, if Indy doesn't max him, which I'm sure was part of the conversation when the trade happened, then the Sixers or Pistons will probably max him.

OakleyDokely wrote:

brownbobcat wrote:

OakleyDokely wrote:
The biggest factor is his age. IND is going to be paying close to 50 mill a year for his 30-34 years and teams, especially recently, have been reluctant to give huge money to guys in their 30s who aren't superstars. If we was in his mid 20s, there would've been a lot more teams interested.

I get it, but he didn't suddenly turn 30 and his contract situation was a known entity. I'm not necessarily sure he will get paid $50M+ given aforementioned reluctance. Is he really in the position to turn down $160M/4yrs?

If he only wanted 40, I'm not sure the Raps would've dealt him. His deal might start around 40, probably won't end there though.

I'm sure he wants more, but who's going to give it to him? Indy has never shown any desire to be a luxury tax team.

brownbobcat wrote:

OakleyDokely wrote:

brownbobcat wrote:I get it, but he didn't suddenly turn 30 and his contract situation was a known entity. I'm not necessarily sure he will get paid $50M+ given aforementioned reluctance. Is he really in the position to turn down $160M/4yrs?

If he only wanted 40, I'm not sure the Raps would've dealt him. His deal might start around 40, probably won't end there though.

I'm sure he wants more, but who's going to give it to him? Indy has never shown any desire to be a luxury tax team.

PHI, DET, UTA, SA etc all have the room to max him and it only takes 1 team to do so.

Nobody thought VV would get the offer he did. When there are limited good options available, guys like Siakam, OG become a lot more attractive.