Knicks · OT article: Trading for O.G. Anunoby and Pascal Siakam (page 1)

I would do the OG trade in a heartbeat IF the FO got an offline feel he would want to be in NY and resign. It would also probably mean you need to start him and move RJ to bench, no way OG in a contract year would want to come off bench unless he was promised his contract asking price ahead of time.

Starting lineup gets a player with less usage and more size and defense, bench would get a offensive focal point player.

Brunson, Grimes, OG, Randle, Mitch lineup with IQ, RJ focus off bench would pummel teams with physicality.

Grimes would always take the best of the PG/SG matchup and OG would do the same for SF/PF. So much switchability and a team that mirrors Thibs.

Bottom line trade:

To Knicks: Anunoby, Khem Birch (two years, $13.65 million)
To Raptors: Obi Toppin (two years, $12.19 million, RFA in 2024), Evan Fournier (two years, $36.85 million, plus team option for 2024-25), better of Knicks or Mavericks 2023 first-round picks, 2024 Pistons second-round, 2025 Knicks first-round pick

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/ekoreen/status/1613903373518123011?s=20

Click here to view the Tweet

There are other players that go into it, but Pascal Siakam, O.G. Anunoby and Scottie Barnes are at the heart of Project 6-9. The idea that not only can you start all three of those players with similar heights and wingspans, but that they can thrive together and each log 35 or more minutes per game is at the foundation of who the Raptors have been over the last year and a half. They each have different offensive strengths — Siakam is the best paint scorer, Barnes is the best passer and Anunoby is the best spot-up shooter. The idea they can complement each other well on offense while helping each other defensively is what the Raptors have been hoping would be proven true.

This half-season has worked against that theory. It is easier to pick on Barnes than the other two, but just a year removed from the Raptors seeming like they were more than the sum of their parts, they now feel decidedly less. Given the Raptors’ position in the standings, it makes sense to consider trading Anunoby and/or Siakam.

Trading Anunoby would represent a retooling of the roster, while moving on from Siakam would constitute “blowing it up,” or as close as the Raptors will come. He has been one of the 15 best players in the league this year, and he doesn’t turn 30 until April 2024. The Raptors could get a haul for either of them.

As was the case with Fred VanVleet and Gary Trent Jr., I’ll make a disclaimer: These are not all trades I would execute if I were in charge of the Raptors. I tried to err on the side of asking for more versus asking for less in hypothetical trades, but the idea is to give you an idea of what potential returns for the Raptors’ core pieces could look like. (And, as importantly, these should help display what is unreasonable to expect.) Likewise, my colleagues who helped me out here are considering these trades in something of a vacuum as opposed to judging them on the entirety of the market.

...

O.G. Anunoby

(Two years, $36 million remaining, plus a player option in 2024-25 for $19.93 million; Anunoby is extension eligible this offseason, although unlikely to sign)

The Raptors hoped Anunoby would develop into a more solid offensive playmaker over the last few years. In his opportunities to do so, it hasn’t really happened. Considering the chances he gets, Anunoby is the most turnover-prone player above-average-usage player on the team. For such a strong player, he has trouble finishing through contact when he’s on the move.

With all of that said, Anunoby is, at the very least, an elite 3-and-D wing, with an emphasis on the “D.” He is at or near the league leaders in steals, deflections and loose balls recovered. When he dials back his aggressiveness, he is a tough, physical defender that is as versatile as anybody in the league. Since returning from hip and hand injuries last month, he was shooting 43.1 percent from 3 heading into Thursday’s game against Charlotte.

Anunoby has all-star upside, and any team would love to have him as a mid-usage starter. Excluding offensive creators at any size, his player type is the most coveted in the league. Due to his salary — about half of Siakam’s but twice Barnes’ — he should be the easiest of the three for the Raptors to move. For the Raptors to give him up, they would surely want some combination of multiple young rotation players and draft picks.

...

To Knicks: Anunoby, Khem Birch (two years, $13.65 million)
To Raptors: Obi Toppin (two years, $12.19 million, RFA in 2024), Evan Fournier (two years, $36.85 million, plus team option for 2024-25), better of Knicks or Mavericks 2023 first-round picks, 2024 Pistons second-round, 2025 Knicks first-round pick

The Knicks’ view: I’m intrigued, though I imagine the Knicks would grapple about that 2025 pick. This team still plans on star hunting, and if there’s one lesson to be learned from the Donovan Mitchell, Rudy Gobert and Dejounte Murray trades from this past summer, it’s that they’ll need unprotected picks to get one done. That said, such is the price of going after an excellent, two-way wing, and I could see Anunoby fitting in wonderfully to this roster. I think there could be something here. My greatest wonder is whether Toronto would do this right now, considering I think they could acquire similar value in the summer. — Fred Katz

I would 100% do that trade. It's impossible not to. I think that propels us into the type of team that can defend at a title level. We would still be crazy young and have enough draft picks to continue to add guys to the pipeline.

I would look for a more versatile big off the bench than IHart (long term) unless he levels up some

Brunson/RJ/OG/Randle/Mitch
IQ/Grimes/Hart would be my 8 guys... there's still pretty big upside imo w/ IQ/Grimes/RJ/Mitch being as young as they are as well

fishmike wrote:I would 100% do that trade. It's impossible not to. I think that propels us into the type of team that can defend at a title level. We would still be crazy young and have enough draft picks to continue to add guys to the pipeline.

I would look for a more versatile big off the bench than IHart (long term) unless he levels up some

Brunson/RJ/OG/Randle/Mitch
IQ/Grimes/Hart would be my 8 guys... there's still pretty big upside imo w/ IQ/Grimes/RJ/Mitch being as young as they are as well

Quite frankly I never thought about moving Grimes to bench but that may work too

fishmike wrote:I would 100% do that trade. It's impossible not to. I think that propels us into the type of team that can defend at a title level. We would still be crazy young and have enough draft picks to continue to add guys to the pipeline.

I would look for a more versatile big off the bench than IHart (long term) unless he levels up some

Brunson/RJ/OG/Randle/Mitch
IQ/Grimes/Hart would be my 8 guys... there's still pretty big upside imo w/ IQ/Grimes/RJ/Mitch being as young as they are as well

I agree with this lineup, as far as what Thibs would do.

But per my fan perspective, I rather have RJ off the bench n grimes starting. But with this new Thibs, who the hell knows!

I'm assuming OG will play both SF and Obi's 9-12 mins at PF.

i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

May I ask: why not?

Let's put aside Obi the player or maybe separate out the player traded and the picks.

Knicks would still have plenty of picks to give up if they needed to upgrade again, so realistically if they wanted to do a super star trade, IMO that would still be viable.

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

doesnt make us better enough... we need to keep RJ and make this an ADD not a SWAP.

I am certainly listening about OG. I might be looking at this weird, but I am just absolutely focused on 2024 offseason now. In theory, I'm not giving up picks for anyone available in the 2024 offseason, but if I have to make that move to get the guaranty we acquire these players, I get it. On my rating system, that gives additional weighting to wingspan, athleticism and 3 point shooting, I love these players. It also helps that this would be pulling key players from Eastern Conference teams. They might not cooperate for the same reason.

2024 "Perfect" Starting Lineup:

DaJaunte Murray (28) 6'10; 34% from 3
Jaylen Brown (28) 7'0 33% from 3(this is a career low)
OG Anonunby (27) 7'2 37% from 3
Pasquale Siakam (30) 7'3 35% from 3
Myles Turner (28) 7'4, 38% from 3

I think the above 5 are probably the best starting 5 you can create from free agents from the 2023 and 2024 FA classes. Emotion aside (love my Knicks players), if you are able to get to this lineup, I think you have to do it. I don't think there is a single player in our lineup that you can argue is better than the corresponding listed player. Especially when you consider added defense and added wingspan. RJ may end up better than Brown. Depends on the RJ. Randle may be better than Siakam. Depends on which JR. Brunson is better on offense than Murray, but the above guys all have better passing. I know I can't get directly to this 5, but anything that gets me closer is an option for me.

fishmike wrote:

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

doesnt make us better enough... we need to keep RJ and make this an ADD not a SWAP.

I am ALL IN on OG, but I believe any trade talks will have to include RJ Barrett. It doesn't make it sense for Toronto any other way...and if that's the case...I'm still 100% making this trade.

Adding OG, while only giving up RJ and maybe a pick or two, should give the Knicks one of the best starting 5 in the league.

Swishfm3 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

doesnt make us better enough... we need to keep RJ and make this an ADD not a SWAP.

I am ALL IN on OG, but I believe any trade talks will have to include RJ Barrett. It doesn't make it sense for Toronto any other way...and if that's the case...I'm still 100% making this trade.

Adding OG, while only giving up RJ and maybe a pick or two, should give the Knicks one of the best starting 5 in the league.

no way... why is OG an upgrade over RJ? RJ is better scorer and 3 year younger while OG is clearly the better defender and a bigger/better fit but OG isnt a clear talent upgrade to RJ imo, so why am I including picks/Obi? If its based around RJ I'm not including anything. I'm not even a sure I do that straight up. Point is to ADD him

fishmike wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

doesnt make us better enough... we need to keep RJ and make this an ADD not a SWAP.

I am ALL IN on OG, but I believe any trade talks will have to include RJ Barrett. It doesn't make it sense for Toronto any other way...and if that's the case...I'm still 100% making this trade.

Adding OG, while only giving up RJ and maybe a pick or two, should give the Knicks one of the best starting 5 in the league.

no way... why is OG an upgrade over RJ? RJ is better scorer and 3 year younger while OG is clearly the better defender and a bigger/better fit but OG isnt a clear talent upgrade to RJ imo, so why am I including picks/Obi? If its based around RJ I'm not including anything. I'm not even a sure I do that straight up. Point is to ADD him

Just my 2 cents but I think most here are pretty sure we want Brunson, Grimes, Randle and Mitch starting right... so I can't see RJ coming off the bench after recently signing this contract (+ Thibs love for him). I don't know OG's game well enough to say who has more potential but I think it's one or the other at the SF spot going forward... unless there's a massive shakeup type of trade. As much as I have been an RJ fan - if the consensus is that OG is projected better - we should def consider it. RJ and Randle do not seem like a great fit IMO. If OG is a better spot up shooter and better defensively - that could help shore up Randle's need for spacing and support defensively.

martin wrote:

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

May I ask: why not?

Let's put aside Obi the player or maybe separate out the player traded and the picks.

Knicks would still have plenty of picks to give up if they needed to upgrade again, so realistically if they wanted to do a super star trade, IMO that would still be viable.

I'm hearing that even Atlanta is buckling on their draft pick demands for Collins. I think three first rounds are too much for Anunoby based off the current Market. I'd give up no more than two, if the Knicks are giving up their own unprotected.

jskinny35 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

doesnt make us better enough... we need to keep RJ and make this an ADD not a SWAP.

I am ALL IN on OG, but I believe any trade talks will have to include RJ Barrett. It doesn't make it sense for Toronto any other way...and if that's the case...I'm still 100% making this trade.

Adding OG, while only giving up RJ and maybe a pick or two, should give the Knicks one of the best starting 5 in the league.

no way... why is OG an upgrade over RJ? RJ is better scorer and 3 year younger while OG is clearly the better defender and a bigger/better fit but OG isnt a clear talent upgrade to RJ imo, so why am I including picks/Obi? If its based around RJ I'm not including anything. I'm not even a sure I do that straight up. Point is to ADD him

Just my 2 cents but I think most here are pretty sure we want Brunson, Grimes, Randle and Mitch starting right... so I can't see RJ coming off the bench after recently signing this contract (+ Thibs love for him). I don't know OG's game well enough to say who has more potential but I think it's one or the other at the SF spot going forward... unless there's a massive shakeup type of trade. As much as I have been an RJ fan - if the consensus is that OG is projected better - we should def consider it. RJ and Randle do not seem like a great fit IMO. If OG is a better spot up shooter and better defensively - that could help shore up Randle's need for spacing and support defensively.

for me 100% no. Best scenario is where we move RJ to SG and get a stud SF. That puts IQ/Grimes on the bench... two guys Thibs is going to give 30 minutes to so a move like that rests the starters and deepens the rotation

I would wants us to look like this:
Brunson/RJ/OG/Randle/Mitch with a bench of: IQ/Grimes/Hart

If McBride isnt in the deal (If I'm Toronto I want him) maybe he gets burn, but those 8 are my rotation.

https://www.yardbarker.com/nba/articles/...
Knicks Considered Favorites to Land O.G. Anunoby if Raptors Make a Deal, Vegas Says

Toronto's most likely trade chip ahead of the trade deadline is O.G. Anunoby, according to oddsmakers at Bodog. He sits at -185 to remain with Toronto, conveying about a 35% probability he is traded at some point in the next month.

If the Raptors do swing a deal involving Anunoby, the New York Knicks currently sit as the frontrunners, oddsmakers say. New York is listed at +350 to land the 25-year-old 3-and-D forward, implying a 22% probability. A deal involving the Knicks would likely include some combination of Obi Toppin, Immanuel Quickley, Evan Fournier, and New York's multiple first-round picks.

fishmike wrote:

Swishfm3 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Chandler wrote:i wouldn't give up the firsts plus TOppin etc.

I'm an RJ fan but could imagine him going to Raptors as a centerpiece and OG being the centerpiece in return.

doesnt make us better enough... we need to keep RJ and make this an ADD not a SWAP.

I am ALL IN on OG, but I believe any trade talks will have to include RJ Barrett. It doesn't make it sense for Toronto any other way...and if that's the case...I'm still 100% making this trade.

Adding OG, while only giving up RJ and maybe a pick or two, should give the Knicks one of the best starting 5 in the league.

no way... why is OG an upgrade over RJ? RJ is better scorer and 3 year younger while OG is clearly the better defender and a bigger/better fit but OG isnt a clear talent upgrade to RJ imo, so why am I including picks/Obi? If its based around RJ I'm not including anything. I'm not even a sure I do that straight up. Point is to ADD him

You said right there. He would be a better fit.

We obviously view RJ Barrett and his potential differently. The fact that his game has not improved, tells me that he has reached his ceiling. Q. Grimes, in my opinion, has shown much more potential and view him as the Knicks future starting SG.

I would do RJ and add in FRP only because OG will probably be an All-Star this year.

If they're planning on moving RJ to the bench, they might as well try to trade him to Toronto.

Putting aside the merits of the trade. Im not so sure RJ would be ok with a demotion, at this point in his career. Especially with the numbers he has put up as a starter.

I get the feeling RJ would rather start in hometown Toronto, than come off the bench in NY

I remember some posts on a Raptors forum where the sentiment was that OG was overvalued.

I wonder what they’re seeing that we’re not aware of.

Could just be some grumpy hard to please fans. I’ve heard those exist.

ToddTT wrote:I remember some posts on a Raptors forum where the sentiment was that OG was overvalued.

I wonder what they’re seeing that we’re not aware of.

Could just be some grumpy hard to please fans. I’ve heard those exist.

He's not much of an intiator from what I've seen. Tough, straight line driver, but not anyone you want leading your offense. But there were rumors a year ago that he felt he should be an offensive focal point

BigDaddyG wrote:

ToddTT wrote:I remember some posts on a Raptors forum where the sentiment was that OG was overvalued.

I wonder what they’re seeing that we’re not aware of.

Could just be some grumpy hard to please fans. I’ve heard those exist.

He's not much of an intiator from what I've seen. Tough, straight line driver, but not anyone you want leading your offense. But there were rumors a year ago that he felt he should be an offensive focal point

I like OG for this team. Yes it feels like hes overpaid if you only look at his offensive output. He brings a lot more to the table. Plus a new environment would be good for him. Not sure how this impacts RJ, but in a vacuum he’s a nice fit next to JB and Jules.

fishmike wrote:I would 100% do that trade. It's impossible not to. I think that propels us into the type of team that can defend at a title level. We would still be crazy young and have enough draft picks to continue to add guys to the pipeline.

I would look for a more versatile big off the bench than IHart (long term) unless he levels up some

Brunson/RJ/OG/Randle/Mitch
IQ/Grimes/Hart would be my 8 guys... there's still pretty big upside imo w/ IQ/Grimes/RJ/Mitch being as young as they are as well

If it was up to me, I would go after Siakam. Watching Raptor games, he is their best player. The guy all teams plan to defend. IF these two are allegedly available, I would go after the alpha.
Imo, OG is too complacent. Does not have that dog mentality on offense.
Could be argued RJ has that more. Something I have always said is needed in NY. The kind of confidence that players need with all the loudmouth fans in the stands telling them how to play.
See OG as a better taller Frank. Just not confident enough to be elite.
Pascal is the guy. Just don't think Rapts would give their best player up.
Second issue for me is that, OG will be available in a couple of years. If you are giving up considerable assets now, it has to be for someone that can take you deep in the playoffs and someone who will not be attainable if you don't act now.

Also, if we were to trade for OG, I believe Rapts would absolutely want RJ in return along with youngins like IQ or Obi and three firsts. Think if not, they would stay out and give the Barnes, OG, Siakam experiment another year.

blkexec wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

ToddTT wrote:I remember some posts on a Raptors forum where the sentiment was that OG was overvalued.

I wonder what they’re seeing that we’re not aware of.

Could just be some grumpy hard to please fans. I’ve heard those exist.

He's not much of an intiator from what I've seen. Tough, straight line driver, but not anyone you want leading your offense. But there were rumors a year ago that he felt he should be an offensive focal point

I like OG for this team. Yes it feels like hes overpaid if you only look at his offensive output. He brings a lot more to the table. Plus a new environment would be good for him. Not sure how this impacts RJ, but in a vacuum he’s a nice fit next to JB and Jules.

New environment be good for him? How do you know this?

“He brings more to the table”? What is that? Im not being snarky, do you watch many Raptor games? I don’t so if your seeing somthing please describe it.
As for Moving RJ back to SG and OG at SF, how does that change the ball movement and chemistry?
RJ ball movement is inconsistent at times can be quite good, others he is going to the rim and thats it.
My point is how is OG to fit in?
Issue I see is Raptors put in a ceiling for him and not sure he hits it but now has to pay him.
ANd there is but so much a team can pay and they lock themselves up.

Im not pro or against, Im just not seeing a description for his game. As for “new scenery”, thats kind of subjective to the individual and whats in his head.