What's new
By:

Jazz and Knicks discussing Donovan Mitchell trade per Shams Charania and Tony Jones

Man, have you watched the Manti Te'o Netflix documentary yet? Some pretty wild stuff.

The whole situation 10 years ago, and now the documentary is likely a pretty revealing Rorschach test on all kinds of things: sports heroism, the media, sexuality, fame, the internet, religion/culture, etc.

(Yes I know I'm off topic; just didn't want this buried the General Discussion or General Sports forums. I'm not asking for a discussion of this, but just recommending as a documentary work watching.)
 
idiot said:
Man, have you watched the Manti Te'o Netflix documentary yet? Some pretty wild stuff.

The whole situation 10 years ago, and now the documentary is likely a pretty revealing Rorschach test on all kinds of things: sports heroism, the media, sexuality, fame, the internet, religion/culture, etc.

(Yes I know I'm off topic; just didn't want this buried the General Discussion or General Sports forums. I'm not asking for a discussion of this, but just recommending as a documentary work watching.)
Click to expand...
What's it called?
 
Of course the Jazz want RJ Barrett.

Do they want him more than the unprotected picks? Maybe not, but the idea that the Jazz would turn their nose up at RJ being in the deal is ludicrous and always has been.
 
Elizah Huge said:
RJ + 4 or 5 1sts would be ****ing amazing.

This is why I never bought the talk that we didn’t want RJ. I don’t know if we end up getting him but if we don’t we get extra added. I would love to get him though.
Click to expand...
Maybe just the Knicks managing fans' expectations about the trade. Easier to sell more picks + Grimes, etc if you can argue that you didn't give into Ainge's demands for Barrett. (Wouldn't be the worst outcome if that's what it is.)
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Of course the Jazz want RJ Barrett.

Do they want him more than the unprotected picks? Maybe not, but the idea that the Jazz would turn their nose up at RJ being in the deal is ludicrous and always has been.
Click to expand...
I think it’s actually a slight benefit that he is extension eligible. Sign him to a 5 year deal that starts at the max and stays flat or slightly declines and that deal will have a very low chance at being a bad contract given where the cap is headed. Have team control for 6 years. You can only use so much of your salary cap for dumping contracts. Not gonna be a whole lot of better uses for future and current space than that.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Of course the Jazz want RJ Barrett.

Do they want him more than the unprotected picks? Maybe not, but the idea that the Jazz would turn their nose up at RJ being in the deal is ludicrous and always has been.
Click to expand...
This is kind of the thing I don't fully buy when everyone talks about how much we fleeced Minnesota and how we're trying to fleece the Knicks.
  • SGA was part of the return for Paul George
  • Ingram and Ball were part of the AD trade
  • Deron Williams netted us two consecutive years' #3 draft picks (Favors & Kanter)
  • Gallinari was part of the Carmelo trade
  • even the Jrue Holiday trade brought back the productive/tradable Stephen Adams
There are no real studs in the Wolves deal and most of the proposed Knicks deals coming back to us (with all due respect to Grimes and Vanderbilt). Just a bunch of pieces that, as of now, have a likely outcome as useful role player or minor trade chip.

So without this highly regarded player, the "haul" isn't really as great as it's made out to be. It shouldn't be so surprising that we get more picks instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top