What's new
By:
Filters

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

Meh. I would wait. The Heat's offer isn't going anywhere.

The Knicks don't have the minerals to stand up to their own media/fans. They don't have the organizational strength at the top to hold out. They are going to bennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd to Ainge. They are going to lose this trade, and all Danny has to do is wait them out and not lose his nerve.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Again, everyone knows the Knicks can offer the best package. Doesn’t look like they are so far. I’d take the Heat’s A package over the Knicks B package.
Click to expand...
The package the Knicks are rumored to be offering is their D package. It’s ****ing trash.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Eventually these picks need to turn into something and 22 year old players who average 20 PPG do not grow on trees. We can accumulate all the picks we want but we eventually need actual players.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure. I think the eventual plan is just to have 100 draft picks and a G-League roster. Makes for an exciting 82 game season.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
The idea that the Jazz wouldnt want Barrett or Herro because of paying them doesnt really float to me. Who else they going to pay? Not like a 2nd year max is going to kill your books with how much the cap is going to up in 2025.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is one of the narratives that make no sense. If anything paying 1 or 2 young and really promising but still not having exploded stars is a good risk to take. While rebuilding, you will always have enough capspace simply because you won't be competing, you won't be signing expensive FAs in a push to eek out a few more wins. To me our willingness to get Barrett or Herro should be predominantly tied to our evaluation of them as players and not on the money we will have to give them. If we think they deserve the money and have the chance to be this good to justify that type of money - then do it! Buy low'ish on those types of players and see if you can strike gold with them. Worst case scenarios - they don't pan out and you more easily get to the salary floor over the length of the rebuild. And if the worry is that they will leave - you have tons of time until then... get them in the building, get a feel about them and about how much they like your franchise and city and if you get similar vibes to Mitchell over the last 2 years - sell them off for profit in a year or two time and add more picks.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
If the Jazz dont want Herro/Barrett it's because they want to tank hard for multiple years.
Click to expand...
That's the thing though... are Herro/Barrett really players that will make you win tons of games? If if they actually ARE that type of players - great, you've jumpstarted the rebuilt and shortcut the path from drafting your future superstar and developing him to actually having one.
 
stitches said:
That's the thing though... are Herro/Barrett really players that will make you win tons of games? If if they actually ARE that type of players - great, you've jumpstarted the rebuilt and shortcut the path from drafting your future superstar and developing him to actually having one.
Click to expand...

Spot on.
 
Flc said:
I feel bad for the guy. He so clearly wants to be a respected NBA Insider but he isn't, has no path to get there, and has to suffice with cosplaying as Shams.
Click to expand...
Yeah I would agree with this. He’s a long time radio host that currently has no show, so he’s hustling to try and build his own YouTube following. I can respect that - the problem is, he’s incentivized to throw out controversial crap so that people listen to him and he can build a following more quickly. And he’s really good at consistently reminding people that “he had this months ago” to build credibility even though he’s wrong 95% of the time
 
stitches said:
That's the thing though... are Herro/Barrett really players that will make you win tons of games? If if they actually ARE that type of players - great, you've jumpstarted the rebuilt and shortcut the path from drafting your future superstar and developing him to actually having one.
Click to expand...
Are they good enough to be the difference between the worst record and something better next year? Are they good enough to push the team just enough in 2024 or 2025 to convey a lottery pick to OKC?

I think they are. I want the very worst record next year and I don’t want that OKC pick conveying unless the Jazz already have a decent core in place.

And dumping all of the win-now guys might be harder than we think if the Jazz don’t consummate an LA deal. The roster is comically imbalanced right now but the Jazz are going to be able to win more games than many of us would like due to sheer firepower.

But if we’re betting on the deals happening that are getting rumored, then the Jazz might pick up a young 20+ ppg, pretty efficient scorer for scrap. And Conley will most likely still be here regardless, who will be very good in the early season.

On that point, if the question of “what are we supposed to use that cap space for anyway?” then that is one answer: value buys, renting out cap space for more draft capital, and rehabbing the distressed assets either for keeps or for trade. I really don’t think there will be a shortage of opportunity, but I think for this season specifically the Jazz need to grab most opportunities they can to get worse.

I get the argument for keeping either of those dudes, and I wouldn’t be mad to. But I just think the timing is slightly off.
 
Last edited:
I think that the Jazz are hanging onto the other role players until a decision is made with Don (imo). If others are cleared out then everyone knows we don't want to re-tool and run it back, and the negotiating price/tactics worsen.

Once Donovan is gone, Conley + Bojan + Clarkson will shortly follow.

- George
 
NUMBERICA said:
Are they good enough to be the difference between the worst record and something better next year? Are they good enough to push the team just enough in 2024 or 2025 to convey a lottery pick to OKC?

I think they are. I want the very worst record next year and I don’t want that OKC pick conveying unless the Jazz already have a decent core in place.

And dumping all of the win-now guys might be harder than we think if the Jazz don’t consummate an LA deal. The roster is comically imbalanced right now but the Jazz are going to be able to win more games than many of us would like due to sheer firepower.

But if we’re betting on the deals happening that are getting rumored, then the Jazz might pick up a young 20+ ppg, pretty efficient scorer for scrap. And Conley will most likely still be here regardless, who will be very good in the early season.

On that point, if the question of “what are we supposed to use that cap space for anyway?” then that is one answer: value buys, renting out cap space for more draft capital, and rehabbing the distressed assets either for keeps or for trade. I really don’t think there will be a shortage of opportunity, but I think for this season specifically the Jazz need to grab most opportunities they can to get worse.

I get the argument for keeping either of those dudes, and I wouldn’t be mad to. But I just think the timing is slightly off.
Click to expand...
Lets say the value of RJ Barrett right now is about 2 1st round picks. What would you rather do - rehab/develop his value into something similar to what Donovan's value is now or try to rehab/develop the value of someone like... Beasley? IMO there is much more value and potential in developing Barrett than there is in trying to rehab some random fringe rotational player into legit rotational player(aka one 1st round pick). IMO the return on someone like Barrett would be stronger than the random rehabilitation projects teams usually take on into 20-25M salary cap space.

I also think you are overestimating the impact of single players on really bad teams. Even players as good as SGA couldn't make OKC a competitive team. IMO if we trade most of our good vets for picks we would be bad enough for it to not affect our lottery odds a ton. And the little it will affect it will be worth it in case you actually hit big on one of those players.
 
stitches said:
Lets say the value of RJ Barrett right now is about 2 1st round picks. What would you rather do - rehab/develop his value into something similar to what Donovan's value is now or try to rehab/develop the value of someone like... Beasley? IMO there is much more value and potential in developing Barrett than there is in trying to rehab some random fringe rotational player into legit rotational player(aka one 1st round pick). IMO the return on someone like Barrett would be stronger than the random rehabilitation projects teams usually take on into 20-25M salary cap space.

I also think you are overestimating the impact of single players on really bad teams. Even players as good as SGA couldn't make OKC a competitive team. IMO if we trade most of our good vets for picks we would be bad enough for it to not affect our lottery odds a ton. And the little it will affect it will be worth it in case you actually hit big on one of those players.
Click to expand...
I would think asking for Barrett would be more of a negotiating tactic than a true desire to obtain him. It gives the Knicks something to hold out for. Similar to how the Jazz were reportedly interested in Jaden McDaniels and then came off that position in the final deal. Regardless, I still think the Knicks deal will come around to something acceptable to Danny Ainge and Donovan is most likely going to end up in New York this next season.
 
Coach Ellis said:
I would think asking for Barrett would be more of a negotiating tactic than a true desire to obtain him. It gives the Knicks something to hold out for. Similar to how the Jazz were reportedly interested in Jaden McDaniels and then came off that position in the final deal. Regardless, I still think the Knicks deal will come around to something acceptable to Danny Ainge and Donovan is most likely going to end up in New York this next season.
Click to expand...
That's possible and I'm not saying we should definitely go after Barrett(I personally am lower on him than most so I wouldn't do it)... but what I'm saying is - IF they actually have super high valuation on him and they think very highly of him and think he can actually be a star in this league, I'm good with getting him in the trade package.
 
stitches said:
Lets say the value of RJ Barrett right now is about 2 1st round picks. What would you rather do - rehab/develop his value into something similar to what Donovan's value is now or try to rehab/develop the value of someone like... Beasley? IMO there is much more value and potential in developing Barrett than there is in trying to rehab some random fringe rotational player into legit rotational player(aka one 1st round pick). IMO the return on someone like Barrett would be stronger than the random rehabilitation projects teams usually take on into 20-25M salary cap space.

I also think you are overestimating the impact of single players on really bad teams. Even players as good as SGA couldn't make OKC a competitive team. IMO if we trade most of our good vets for picks we would be bad enough for it to not affect our lottery odds a ton. And the little it will affect it will be worth it in case you actually hit big on one of those players.
Click to expand...
I’m glad you brought up SGA and the Thunder. They sit him as much as they can get away with because they have to try really hard to lose. They are actually a pretty competitive team when they’re not pulling ****.

I’m not trying to pull **** on the actual floor. I think tanking starts becoming shameful when the coaching staff has to pull **** to lose games and I’m not looking for that, personally. I also think that’s where the arguments of how tanking has a negative influence on winning culture and habits starts to have merit.

OKC ****ed up when they didn’t go more scorched earth in the CP3 season. Their rebuild is taking longer than it had to because they missed their opportunity to lean into being organically bad and getting to the top of the draft earlier.

On the topic of RJ; he just isn’t in play. He probably costs two unprotected 1sts in the deal and that is an absolute, 1000% non-starter.
 
stitches said:
That's possible and I'm not saying we should definitely go after Barrett(I personally am lower on him than most so I wouldn't do it)... but what I'm saying is - IF they actually have super high valuation on him and they think very highly of him and think he can actually be a star in this league, I'm good with getting him in the trade package.
Click to expand...
Great thoughts, and I agree completely. I can see the concern in paying Barrett - even though the cap is going to go up - it’s still a lot of money to invest in a guy unless you’re 100% convinced he’s going to take the next step up in his development. If that’s the case, then you should absolutely try to get him and pay him.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I’m glad you brought up SGA and the Thunder. They sit him as much as they can get away with because they have to try really hard to lose. They are actually a pretty competitive team when they’re not pulling ****.

I’m not trying to pull **** on the actual floor. I think tanking starts becoming shameful when the coaching staff has to pull **** to lose games and I’m not looking for that, personally. I also think that’s where the arguments of how tanking has a negative influence on winning culture and habits starts to have merit.

OKC ****ed up when they didn’t go more scorched earth in the CP3 season. Their rebuild is taking longer than it had to because they missed their opportunity to lean into being organically bad and getting to the top of the draft earlier.

On the topic of RJ; he just isn’t in play. He probably costs two unprotected 1sts in the deal and that is an absolute, 1000% non-starter.
Click to expand...
Tanking should be a front office decision. As far as coaching goes, they can decided to emphasize young player development over winning with veterans - but that gets messy. Coaches should coach to win - players should play to win. Those two elements of a team should never actively try to lose.

If a front office is worried that a guy will help them win too many games instead of allowing the coach to develop young guys, then they should trade him for whatever they can get. You tank by bottoming out your talent level and then work to get the assets to build it back up again.

That’s what I think the Jazz are going to do.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I’m glad you brought up SGA and the Thunder. They sit him as much as they can get away with because they have to try really hard to lose. They are actually a pretty competitive team when they’re not pulling ****.

I’m not trying to pull **** on the actual floor. I think tanking starts becoming shameful when the coaching staff has to pull **** to lose games and I’m not looking for that, personally. I also think that’s where the arguments of how tanking has a negative influence on winning culture and habits starts to have merit.

OKC ****ed up when they didn’t go more scorched earth in the CP3 season. Their rebuild is taking longer than it had to because they missed their opportunity to lean into being organically bad and getting to the top of the draft earlier.

On the topic of RJ; he just isn’t in play. He probably costs two unprotected 1sts in the deal and that is an absolute, 1000% non-starter.
Click to expand...

I’d much rather have Barrett than two firsts. Our best case scenario is one of those picks end up in the top-3 and we get a player like Barrett. Come on here what are we even talking about guys. Let’s stop it with this crazy obsession with picks and zero functional players. They’re awesome but at some point we need to be realistic. We received plenty from Minnesota and we have our own too. We will have plenty more coming from a Donovan deal plus all of the other vets we have to deal. We do not pass on Barrett or Herro for two picks. That’s ridiculous.
 
Coach Ellis said:
I would think asking for Barrett would be more of a negotiating tactic than a true desire to obtain him. It gives the Knicks something to hold out for. Similar to how the Jazz were reportedly interested in Jaden McDaniels and then came off that position in the final deal. Regardless, I still think the Knicks deal will come around to something acceptable to Danny Ainge and Donovan is most likely going to end up in New York this next season.
Click to expand...

Except Barrett is much better than McDaniels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top