How will blockbuster trade with Knicks affect Raptors' cap going forward?

After any trade in the NBA, there are a number of cap-related ripples to analyze. That’s particularly true of Saturday’s Toronto Raptors-New York Knicks trade, even if a lot of the answers on the Raptors side of things are… well, let’s wait and see what happens before the trade deadline. 

In moving OG Anunoby, Precious Achiuwa, and Malachi Flynn for Immanuel Quickley, RJ Barrett, and a second-round pick, the Raptors have cleaned up at least a few of their free agent question marks for this summer, while adding another. We won’t know how things look for this summer — or the summer of 2025-26 when a max extension for Scottie Barnes will kick in — until we see how Pascal Siakam’s situation plays out.

Still, there’s a lot to sort through immediately. Yesterday, I looked at the player side of the trade. Today’s piece focuses just on the cap and roster impact. 

The Raptors do not take any long-term money off the books in this deal, as all three players were set to be free agents.

Anunoby holds a $19.9-million player option he will almost certainly decline. Had the Raptors held on to him, he would have been an unrestricted free agent. The Raptors would have held his Bird rights, so they could exceed the cap to re-sign him, and he would have carried a cap hold of $28 million until he re-signed (at which point his new salary would replace the cap hold). The Raptors could have offered Anunoby a bit more money on a longer deal than other teams in free agency, but since he’s unlikely to command a full-term max, they may not have felt that advantage would be enough to keep him. 

Achiuwa is set to be a restricted free agent (RFA). The Raptors would have had to give him a $6.3-million qualifying offer to keep his RFA rights, and it’s possible Achiuwa would have signed that offer to bet on himself and become an unrestricted free agent in 2025. It’s likelier the Knicks look to work out a modest new deal with him in July, or use the rights on him to facilitate a sign-and-trade. 

Flynn is technically headed to restricted free agency, too, but it’s very unlikely the Knicks (or Raptors) would risk giving him the $5.8-million qualifying offer necessary to make him an RFA. He’ll likely be non-tendered and become an unrestricted free agent in July. The Knicks will still hold Bird rights on him, though it’s unlikely to matter. 

Both Achiuwa and Flynn will have cap holds significantly higher than their qualifying offers, limiting the value of their rights to some degree, since they don’t figure to earn more than their cap hold amount. (Teams often find value in delaying re-signing a player because of a smaller cap hold, as we’ll see with Quickley momentarily.) 

How you feel about the return for the Raptors in this deal probably depends on your comfort level with Barrett’s current contract and Quickley’s next contract. 

Quickley and the Knicks couldn’t come to terms on a rookie-scale extension before the season and reportedly weren’t close, with Quickley reportedly asking for about $25 million per year, possibly with some additional incentive-based upside. While he’s a pending free agent, the Raptors acquire his Bird rights, so they can exceed the cap to re-sign him this summer. They will also tender him a $6.1-million qualifying offer, making him a restricted free agent, meaning they can match any offer sheet he signs elsewhere. 

The Raptors probably don’t do this trade without a good idea of what it will take to keep Quickley. Quickley shares an agent with Achiuwa, so the Raptors have a familiarity there. If the reports are accurate that Quickley was seeking a starting salary of $25 million, a five-year deal could get up to $145 million. The five-year, incentive-laden, $135-million extension Devin Vassell signed with the San Antonio Spurs might be a better comparison point. Even that is a number that Quickley probably needs a really strong finish to the season to command, though some young teams with a need at guard should have cap space this summer to compete with Toronto.

The Raptors could also look to be creative with the annual structure of Quickley’s deal so he’s paid a bit more in 2024-25, before Scottie Barnes’ eventual max extension kicks in. The specifics are for the off-season, but for now, we can probably pencil Quickley for a first-year salary in the $20-25 million range, depending on the specific structure. 

Barrett, meanwhile, has three years left on his contract beyond this year, totalling $83.1 million and up to $13 million more in incentives. (Those incentives feel like long-shots right now, as they are based on All-Star, All-NBA and All-Defence nods each year.) Even without the incentives, an average of $27.7 million over the next three years is a big number for Barrett.  

League economics make Barrett’s cap hit a bit more tolerable than the raw number might suggest. His 2024-25 salary is projected to be 18.2 per cent of the salary cap, significantly less than the 25 per cent or so it looked like when it was first signed. The opportunity cost is also not as extreme as the cost of acquiring Quickley because the Raptors didn’t project to be a heavy cap-space team in the near future, anyway. Most teams in the current CBA environment build via trade more than free agency, and while a bad deal is still a bad deal, overpaying a decent player by a bit isn’t the death knell it once was. Barrett is also young enough that his contract will probably be movable in subsequent deals, if necessary. 

In talking to a few people around the league after the trade, the consensus seems to be that Barrett’s remaining years are about “neutral” asset value. In other words, a team wouldn’t give you much to get him on that deal, but moving him also wouldn’t require attaching picks or prospects. He is roughly fair value, as far as market forces are concerned. 

So the downside here is Barrett is a bit overpaid and a neutral asset for future trades, while the upside is that he improves a bit on both ends and is reasonably priced under a rising cap through age 26. Where, on the value scale, he ends up is entirely up to Barrett and his progression from here.

The Raptors also acquired Detroit’s second-round pick this year, which will fall in the early 30s. You’ll hear that it’s “basically a late first” given how wide-open the draft will be at that point. An early second also has some flexibility advantages over a late first, as first-round picks earn a set contract structure with two guaranteed years and two escalating team option years, whereas you can negotiate with a second-rounder. A new CBA wrinkle also gives teams a bit more flexibility when signing second-round picks long-term, if they are willing to guarantee enough money.

The Raptors sent out $26.9 million in salary and up to (but probably not) $52.7 million in potential cap holds this summer. They took back $28.1 million in salary this year and a $25.8-million salary and a $12.5-million cap hold back for this summer. 

The extra $1.2 million in salary the Raptors took back trims their room under the luxury tax right now to almost exactly $2 million.

That’s enough room to sign a minimum-contract player for the remainder of the season, whether it’s a free agent or a promotion of one of the two-way players. The Raptors will probably be careful not to lock anyone into that spot just yet, as the roster flexibility could be needed between now and the trade deadline, and all three two-way players have significant NBA days left available to them. They’ll likely lean on two-ways and 10-days until post-deadline, when they’ll fill that spot, preferably with another developmental piece.

It should be noted here that the Raptors can’t be 100 per cent positive they’re $2 million below the tax. That’s because four of their players have what are called “unlikely incentives,” totalling $4.15 million. Those bonuses do not count against the cap, but they will count toward the luxury tax if the players achieve those incentives. I wouldn’t worry too much here — the incentives are for Barrett to make All-Star, All-NBA or All-Defence, for Jakob Poeltl if the Raptors make the second and third round of the playoffs, for Gary Trent Jr. if the Raptors hit a number of team-level qualifiers, or for Thad Young who won’t meet the games played requirement. For our purposes, we can pretty much lock these bonuses in as not achieved, other than maybe $75,000 for Trent if the Raptors were to unexpectedly sneak into the playoffs. 

The Raptors also created a $4.4-million trade exception in the deal. They will have a full year to use that exception to acquire a player in trade, outside of the normal trade rules. That exception can’t be combined with players or other exceptions, though, so it can only be used to add $4.5 million in salary or less, not as part of a larger trade.

This is where analyzing the post-trade cap situation gets messy enough that we will mostly say: "let’s wait and see." The Raptors probably aren’t done, with five weeks until the trade deadline and reports that they are still listening on Siakam offers. We will definitely revisit this before and again after the deadline, but let’s take a quick snapshot of how the future looks for Toronto right now.

The Raptors have seven players under contract for next year: Barrett, Poeltl, Dennis Schroder, Chris Boucher, Barnes, Gradey Dick, and Jalen McDaniels. (It’s entirely possible some of those names are moved, too.) They also have RFA rights on Quickley and a non-guaranteed pseudo-option on Christian Koloko. The seven players on guaranteed contracts are set to earn $88.8 million and Koloko’s non-guaranteed deal is for $2 million, so you’re at $90.8 million for eight players. 

The salary cap for next year is currently projected to be $142 million, with a luxury tax line of $172.5 million. Those estimates are a bit more conservative than they have been in the past, due to some uncertainty around TV-based revenue at the regional level. The cap could go as high as $149.6 million, which would mean a tax line of about $181.8 million. There’s some uncertainty there right now.

If the cap comes in at $142 million, the Raptors would have about $81.2 million beneath the tax to fill out their roster. That would be for Quickley’s next deal, possible new deals for Siakam and/or Trent, and any additional salary brought in via trade or tools like the mid-level exception.

In a scenario where Siakam is traded and the team brings back no 2024-25 salary, they could find their way to cap space. Assuming they let their other veteran free agents walk (or trade them with no salary coming back), you could clear the deck and get to about $37 million in space. That’s enough for one pretty good free agent, though you’d lose the mid-level exception and the rights on someone like Trent, for the purposes of re-signing or a sign-and-trading.

The reason they can do that, even if Quickley gets paid, is because his cap hold is relatively small. The Raptors could renounce their other free agents, keep Quickley’s rights on their books at $12.5 million (the amount of his cap hold), spend in free agency, then re-sign Quickley to his new number. They would still need to be aware of the luxury tax line, but that’s a really nice piece of flexibility that comes with Quickley, if the Raptors go down the path where they trade Siakam for a picks-and-expirings type deal.

In a scenario where the Raptors decide to keep Siakam, they have no path to cap space. Siakam’s max contract is projected to start at around $42.6 million, which is all the cap space and more. If the Raptors were keeping Siakam, they would operate as an above-the-cap team and add via trade and exceptions only. The Raptors might be more open to holding Trent’s rights, too, since there’s no opportunity cost of his cap hold while they explore a new deal or sign-and-trades. Even if Siakam signs a new deal below the max, any number he agrees to would basically force the Raptors to be an above-cap team.  

Re-signing Siakam to his max and Quickley to a more back-loaded style of deal would have the Raptors about $18 million beneath the tax with six roster spots to fill. That gets tighter if Quickley makes more or has a deal structured differently, and it gets looser if Siakam signs a little below his max. The mid-level exception projects to be about $13 million next year, so that would be almost Toronto's entire spending room beyond minimum contracts. It’s doable, just quite tight, and probably requiring subsequent moves.

In short, as things look right now, the decision would be Siakam or cap space, with each option changing the subsequent options around the margins.  

There are a number of in-between scenarios, too, where Siakam is traded for players who are under contract beyond this year, or someone else (e.g. Trent) is dealt for a longer-term piece, or any number of other options. This is why I’m oversimplifying a bit here.

Whatever path the Raptors choose by the deadline, and subsequently in free agency this summer, the key year to watch out for is 2025-26. Barnes will be eligible for a max extension this summer, which could get as high as 30 per cent of the 2025-26 salary cap, depending on if he meets certain award criteria this year and next. If Barnes earns 30 per cent of the cap and Quickley gets an extension in the $25 million-per-year range, there’s probably not room for both Barrett and Siakam long-term without being deep into the tax and/or running a very thin supporting cast. Using even conservative contract structure and cap estimates, a core of Barnes, Siakam, Quickley and Barrett, plus Poeltl’s 2025-26 salary, would have the Raptors at $160 million before factoring in any other players or picks added by then.

• The Raptors get some more summer clarity turning three free agents into a long-term contract in Barrett and a more projectable RFA in Quickley. Barrett’s deal is the cost of doing business here. He is a little overpaid, but if he improves in a rising cap environment, that should be fine, there’s just some opportunity cost if he doesn’t progress. 

• In a scenario where the Raptors continue selling and don’t take on long-term salary, Quickley’s small cap hold as an RFA offers some extra flexibility to be a cap-space team this summer.

• The Raptors can extend or re-sign Siakam if they’d prefer, but it will push them to operate as an above-cap team this summer. A lot of teams do that — the Raptors have done it almost every single year under this front office — and it’s manageable, sometimes even preferable to keep things like the mid-level exception available. 

• If Siakam is extended, he can’t be traded for six months. If he’s not extended or traded, he could be re-signed or sign-and-traded in the summer. 

• Extending or re-signing Siakam and re-signing Quickley pushes the Raptors pretty close to tax territory once they fill their roster out. It’s doable but may require subsequent moves to have enough breathing room and depth around that core. 

• Even if you want to keep Siakam rather than trade him, something will almost certainly have to give by 2025-26, as there will be too many big-money long-term contracts to build a balanced and deep enough team, unless multiple players take big leaps before then.

• A lot can change between now and the deadline, whether it’s a Siakam trade or one of the other multi-year vets (Schroder, Boucher, Poeltl) in a deal. We’ll be revisiting all of this with more specific summer scenarios after the deadline.