What's new
By:
Filters

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

I've been staunch that we need three unprotected 1sts as the foundation of the deal and I am not convinced that the Jazz should move off of that. I get the argument that we should take RJ and 2 of those picks instead but I just want every meaningful roll of the dice to land legit stars as possible and remain skeptical on RJ.

More protected picks are fine if they can be utilized to dislodge better odds on other high-pick opportunities (like pushing the Lakers to two unprotected if they're not already there). They are fine. But I prefer swaps. This entire exercise is about increasing the odds of turning out the greatest net opportunity to acquire true blue chip talent and I am absolutely laser focused on that. Protected picks are a 3rd or lower tier asset in that context (swaps are 2nd tier).
 
NUMBERICA said:
I've been staunch that we need three unprotected 1sts as the foundation of the deal and I am not convinced that the Jazz should move off of that. I get the argument that we should take RJ and 2 of those picks instead but I just want every meaningful roll of the dice to land legit stars as possible and remain skeptical on RJ.
Click to expand...

A few guys here prefer Grimes over an unprotected first which is where the compromise comes in.
 
Three unprotected is fair to me. If Knicks think they are going to be all that, they shouldn't worry about their picks in 2023, 2025 and 2027 if they've Barrett/Mitchell/Brunson for the majority of that time and expect to be 'good'. Getting four unprotected is a pipe dream.

Throw in a couple of their protected picks and some salary match with Grimes and it'd be enough. If they don't want to include Grimes, then pony up another pick that will be low-value like MIL 2025.
 
Elizah Huge said:
A few guys here prefer Grimes over an unprotected first which is where the compromise comes in.
Click to expand...
That is insanity to me. The Jazz will have no shortage of opportunity to find good role players which I think is how he projects.

If pieces like young players and protected picks fill in gaps between bigger pieces, that's fine. But an unprotected Knicks pick vs. Quentin Grimes? I don't understand how that's even a question (again, in the context of trading a mega-premium asset, we NEED to increase our chances at extracting a replacement level asset somewhere in the trove of the return).
 
NUMBERICA said:
That is insanity to me. The Jazz will have no shortage of opportunity to find good role players which I think is how he projects.

If pieces like young players and protected picks fill in gaps between bigger pieces, that's fine. But an unprotected Knicks pick vs. Quentin Grimes? I don't understand how that's even a question (again, in the context of trading a mega-premium asset, we NEED to increase our chances at extracting a replacement level asset somewhere in the trove of the return).
Click to expand...
I agree... if that is the trade off. We don't get the full benefit of Grimes in tank mode. I would take him over a protected pick though.
 
NUMBERICA said:
That is insanity to me. The Jazz will have no shortage of opportunity to find good role players which I think is how he projects.

If pieces like young players and protected picks fill in gaps between bigger pieces, that's fine. But an unprotected Knicks pick vs. Quentin Grimes? I don't understand how that's even a question (again, in the context of trading a mega-premium asset, we NEED to increase our chances at extracting a replacement level asset somewhere in the trove of the return).
Click to expand...

The replacement level asset is RJ. You’re WAY too low on him.

On the topic of Grimes it’s kind of hard to gauge. Would I rather have an unprotected first over him? Yes, but I’d be willing to take him over one if that was the hold up. I think that’s fair to say.
 
One thing that seems very apparent is the Lakers deal is going to happen. It is there for us. Locke talked about it today and mentioned Bogey and Beasley... said "we have the deal!"

Like it wasn't sourced but there is so much smoke on that and the fact he brough up Beasely and not JC or someone else leads me to believe this is leaking out a bit now. Said that trade is the sign of whether we are truly tanking or not... he wasn't reporting anything but he is generally horrible at trades/CBA etc. so the fact he mentioned it and was detailed leads me to believe its happening.

So there will be a trade next week. Final payment comes due bitches.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Then why would the Knicks have offered - if the rumors are to be believed and your asking price considered - RJ + 2 unprotected and 3 protected picks?
Click to expand...

Because he’s not Donovan Mitchell? Why did New Orleans trade Anthony Davis for Brandon Ingram?
 
Elizah Huge said:
The replacement level asset is RJ. You’re WAY too low on him.

On the topic of Grimes it’s kind of hard to gauge. Would I rather have an unprotected first over him? Yes, but I’d be willing to take him over one if that was the hold up. I think that’s fair to say.
Click to expand...
I think they are trying to sell Grimes like he is gonna blow up like Bane. It could happen. I like him a lot. He also might just be a decent 3 and D wing and we have no superstars to fully realize his current value.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
One thing that seems very apparent is the Lakers deal is going to happen. It is there for us. Locke talked about it today and mentioned Bogey and Beasley... said "we have the deal!"

Like it wasn't sourced but there is so much smoke on that and the fact he brough up Beasely and not JC or someone else leads me to believe this is leaking out a bit now. Said that trade is the sign of whether we are truly tanking or not... he wasn't reporting anything but he is generally horrible at trades/CBA etc. so the fact he mentioned it and was detailed leads me to believe its happening.

So there will be a trade next week. Final payment comes due bitches.
Click to expand...

I just want to throw it out there involving the Lakers makes an RJ trade a lot easier to get him to us lol.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Right, so why did New Orleans make that deal?
Click to expand...
Back up. I just made the point (that I think was clearly demonstrated in 2020, good injury luck or not) that Brandon Ingram wasn't AD replacement-level.

New Orleans made the deal to try and get another AD-level prospect back to the best of their ability and the conditions at the time.

I also don't think RJ is as good as Brandon Ingram.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Back up. I just made the point (that I think was clearly demonstrated in 2020, good injury luck or not) that Brandon Ingram wasn't AD replacement-level.
Click to expand...

He wasn’t but you take the chance on him becoming that while also getting a **** ton of other assets. You don’t make that deal unless you believe in Ingram.
 
Elizah Huge said:
He wasn’t but you take the chance on him becoming that while also getting a **** ton of other assets. You don’t make that deal unless you believe in Ingram.
Click to expand...
Or unless you kinda have no other choice and are left with the best of a sub-optimal situation.

In any event, I think we agree more than we disagree on the goals, I just think we have a night-vs-day difference of opinion on RJ Barrett. At best, I think he's the third best player on a legit contender, and that's if he continues to develop (becomes a lot more efficient and a significantly better shooter).
 
I think RJ at the same age is pretty comparable to Ingram. Ingram was a little more efficient but Donovan also isn’t Anthony Davis either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top